Verses 27–35

Chapter 13: Al-Ra’d (The Thunder) · Printed edition: Volume 22, pp. 185–213

Once again, the discussion turns to the disbelievers, who said: ‘Why has not some sign been sent down to him from his Lord?’ meaning, why has no sign been revealed to him from his Lord so that we may see it, be guided by it, and turn from worshipping ours idols to the true faith? God responds that guidance and misguidance are not dependent on signs, but rather on God Himself. It is God who guides whomever He wishes and misguides whomever He wishes.

This is because the Divine modus has been to guide those who turn to Him with hearts that find peace and reassurance in His remembrance. These are the ones who ultimately find lasting happiness and enjoy the outcome of the abode. But He misguides those who persistently reject and defy His clear signs, for they face punishment in this world, with an even harsher punishment in the hereafter, and they have no protector other than God.

If guidance were possible without His will, what could be more effective than a miraculous sign like the Qurʾan? Yet, as we can see, even with such a clear miracle, some people remain unguided. This is the best evidence that guidance is in the hands of God, and He has chosen not to guide some people whose fate has been sealed for misguidance. He Himself has stated: Whomever Allah leads astray has no guide (). Therefore, those whom God has led astray due to disbelief and deception cannot be guided.

وَيَقُولُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ لَوْلاَ أُنزِلَ عَلَيْهِ آيَةٌ مِّن رَّبِّهِ قُلْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُضِلُّ مَن يَشَاء وَيَهْدِي إِلَيْهِ مَنْ أَنَابَ ٢٧

(13:27) The faithless say, ‘Why has not some sign been sent down to him from his Lord?’ Say, ‘Indeed Allah leads astray whomever He wishes, and guides to Himself (yahdī ilay-hi) those who turn penitently—

The disbelievers’ argument is revisited here and addressed. The reason why they said, ‘Why has not some sign been sent down to him from his Lord?’ was to show that they do not consider the Qurʾan that was sent down to the Prophet a sign, because if it was a sign from God, they would have followed it and been guided.

The evidence for understanding their intentions thus can be found in the subsequent verses. For example, immediately after this God, tells the Prophet: Say, ‘Indeed Allah leads astray whomever He wishes…’; Then, He says: If only it were a Qurʾan whereby the mountains could be moved, or the earth could be toured, or the dead could be spoken to … Rather all dispensation belongs to Allah (); And: … and they have been barred from the way … ().

Hence, God responds to them by telling the Prophet to answer: Say, ‘Indeed Allah leads astray whomever He wishes, and guides to Himself those who turn penitently…’ From this, it is understood that the issue of guidance is not connected to a revealed sign, as if they would definitely be guided if a sign were sent down and only misguided if it were not. Rather, guidance and misguidance are dependent on God, who guides or misguides as He pleases.

However, because this could be read as suggesting that guidance and misguidance revolve around an arbitrary and inscrutable divine will, God clarified the meaning of this by saying, ‘and guides to Himself those who turn penitently’ instead of ‘and guides to Himself whoever He wills.’ In other words, He guides to Himself anyone who turns back to Him, and from this, it becomes clear that the basis for this divine guidance is the divine will, which follows a consistent modus operandi and conforms to a flawless, perfect system. Indeed, God desires to guide those who turn back to Him, and His will is to lead astray those who turn away from Him and do not return.

Therefore, if one possesses the qualities of repentance and seeking the truth, and their thoughts and beliefs are not bound by the shackles of their desires, God will guide them through this true invitation (the Qurʾan), while those whose thoughts and beliefs are not free from the bondage of desires become misguided, even if the verses are clear and straightforward—in fact they will not benefit from any signs, even if they are miraculous. Indeed, neither signs nor warnings avail a people who have no faith ().

From this, it can be deduced that the phrase, Allah leads astray whomever He wishes, is to be understood as: ‘God leads astray, by His will, those who do not turn to Him and guides to Himself, by His will, those who turn to Him.

Moreover, this explanation clarifies that the referent of the pronoun ilay-hi (‘to Himself’) in the phrase He guides to Himself (yahdī ilay-hi) is indeed God. It is incorrect, as some have suggested, that it refers to the Qurʾan, and equally unfounded is the notion put forward by others that it refers to the Messenger of God.

الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ وَتَطْمَئِنُّ قُلُوبُهُم بِذِكْرِ اللَّهِ أَلاَ بِذِكْرِ اللَّهِ تَطْمَئِنُّ الْقُلُوبُ٢٨

(13:28)—those who have faith, and whose hearts find rest (taṭmaʾinnu) in the remembrance of Allah.’ Look! The hearts find assurance in Allah’s remembrance!

Itmiʾnān here means tranquility and peace. One finds assurance in something when one is reconciled to it.

From the context, it is apparent that the beginning of the verse serves to explain the reason behind latter part of the previous verse, meaning that the act of repentance is synonymous with faith and the assurance of one’s heart through the remembrance of God. This assurance, from the believer’s perspective, prepares and disposes them for receiving divine attention and gifts, just as wickedness and turning away from the truth create the necessary circumstances for divine misguidance. As such, God says, and He leads no one astray thereby except the transgressors (), and He also says, So when they swerved Allah made their hearts swerve, and Allah does not guide the transgressing lot ().

Belief or faith in God is not simply knowing and understanding that God is real, for mere knowledge and comprehension is not synonymous with faith. Rather, such knowledge can coexist with arrogance and denial, as God has said Himself: They impugned them—though they were convinced in their hearts—wrongfully and defiantly (). Since we know that faith does not coincide with denial, we conclude that faith is not mere cognition or assent, but rather a specific acceptance and acknowledgment by the soul of what it has understood. This acceptance causes the soul to submit to the recognition and the consequences it entails, and the sign of having such acceptance is that all the faculties and limbs of a person also accept and submit to it.

Here, we observe that many people, despite recognizing the repulsiveness and immorality of certain actions, find themselves addicted and unable to refrain. This occurs because they only intellectually grasp the action’s ugliness without truly internalizing it. Consequently, they fail to adhere to their own understanding. In contrast, there are those who not only understand the vile nature of such actions but also fully embrace this understanding. Once they commit to this realization, abandoning the act becomes significantly easier—this embodies the essence of faith.

This is the meaning that is derived from the noble verse: ‘Whomever Allah desires to guide, He opens his breast to Islam, and whomever He desires to lead astray, He makes his breast narrow and straitened as if he were climbing to a height ().

Hence, guidance from God necessarily concerns an aspect within a person’s heart, or breast, or soul that relates to accepting and responding passively to the accepted matter. In the verse quoted from Sūrah al-Anʿām above, this is expressed as the expansion of the chest and widening of the heart, while in the verse at hand, it is referred to as faith and assurance in the heart. This means that a person should view themselves as accepting the matter and be secure in their acknowledgment, so their heart finds tranquility and serenity with it, allowing that matter to find a place in their heart and be fixed within, without the heart becoming troubled or turning away.

Based on the above, it is evident that the statement, and whose hearts find assurance in the remembrance of Allah, is an explanatory clause to the statement, those who have faith. Therefore, having faith in God necessarily involves the heart finding assurance in the remembrance of God.

This does not contradict what has been said in the verse, The faithful are only those whose hearts tremble when Allah is mentioned (). The fear described here is an emotional state that comes before the assurance mentioned in the verse presently under discussion. This is further indicated by the verse, Allah has sent down the best of discourses, a scripture of similar motifs, whereat quiver the skins of those who fear their Lord, then their skins and hearts soften to Allah’s remembrance. That is Allah’s guidance, by which He guides whomever He wishes ().

This is because whatever comes from Him, the Exalted, is a blessing, whereas an adversity, whatever form it might take, is in essence a withholding of the bestowal of such a blessing or of the sending down of a mercy, rather than an actual affirmative act emanating from Him. This is supported by the verse, Whatever mercy Allah unfolds for the people, no one can withhold it; and whatever He withholds no one can release it after Him ().

If fear and awe only arise because one expects evil to come to them, and there is no evil with Him, the Exalted, then the true fear of God is, in actuality, a person’s fear of their own bad deeds that cause divine mercy to be withheld from them and God’s abundant goodness to be cut off from them. When the human soul is reminded of God the Exalted, the first thing it turns to is the shortcomings and deficiencies by which it is surrounded, causing the person’s skin to shiver and their heart to tremble with fear. Then, the soul turns to its Lord, who is the ultimate goal of its innate desire, and finds tranquility and reassurance in His remembrance.

In Majmaʿ al-bayān, al-Ṭabrisī writes: ‘God has described the believer here as someone whose heart finds solace in the remembrance of Him. In another context, God mentions that hearts shudder (or tremble) at the mention of His name. This is because the purpose of remembrance in the first case is to recall the rewards and blessings of God, which are innumerable, and to which there is no limit or end for anyone. When a person remembers God’s blessings, their heart becomes at ease. The purpose of remembrance in the second instance, which causes fear and anxiety, is to recall God’s punishment and vengeance, which, upon remembering, deprives one of their peace.’

However, this reading fits better with the view of someone who understands the term ‘remembrance’ (dhikr) to mean the Qurʾan, as it appears in several instances in the Qurʾan. For example, it says, This is a blessed reminder which We have sent down () and also, Indeed We have sent down the Reminder, and indeed We will preserve it (), and other similar verses besides these.

However, it appears that the intended meaning of ‘remembrance’ encompasses verbal recitation and, more broadly, the act of focusing one’s thoughts and engaging one’s heart, whether this involves contemplating a sign, coming across an argument, or hearing a particular claim. After stating, those who have faith, and whose hearts find assurance in the remembrance of Allah, the Qurʾan then invokes a universal principle by saying, Look! The hearts find assurance in Allah’s remembrance!, which posits a universal rule that includes all aspects of remembrance, whether verbal or otherwise, and whether it refers to the Qurʾan or not.

In the statement, Look! The hearts find assurance in Allah’s remembrance!, there is a reminder for people to be conscious of their Creator and to find solace in His remembrance, for a person’s only aim in life is salvation, happiness, and blessings, and their only fear is the sudden occurrence of misery and punishment. The only factor controlling happiness, misery, blessings, and punishment is God Himself, as all affairs are ultimately dependent on Him. He is the sovereign Lord and subjugator of His creation, acting as He wishes and being the protector and refuge of the believers. Therefore, remembering God offers a sense of relief and tranquility for a soul that is a prisoner of life’s trials, constantly in search of a reliable anchor to guarantee its happiness, and for a soul that is uncertain of its own path, not knowing where it is headed or what its purpose is, much like an antidote providing comfort and calmness to a bitten person. Just as the bitten person relies on and trusts the antidote, using it to alleviate their pain and restore their health, so too does the soul find comfort in the remembrance of God.

Thus, every heart, in the collective sense indicated by the Arabic word al-qulūb (‘the hearts’), finds tranquility and relief from anxiety through the remembrance of God. Indeed, this is a general rule that applies to all hearts, except for those that have degenerated to such an extent that they can no longer be called hearts due to the loss of their insight and growth. Such hearts will avoid the remembrance of God and will be deprived of the blessings of tranquility and peace, as stated: Indeed it is not the eyes that turn blind, but the hearts turn blind—those that are in the breasts!, and also: they have hearts with which they do not understand,, and also: They have forgotten Allah, so He has forgotten them ().

From the wording of the verse under discussion, it appears that a meaning of exclusivity is intended, as the object of the verb, meaning in Allah’s remembrance comes before the verb, find assurance (Arabic: alā bi dhikr Allāh taṭmaʾinnu al-qulūb). Consequently, it indicates that the hearts find tranquility and peace only through remembering God and not through anything else. Our previous explanation also clarifies this point, as we said that the ultimate purpose of human hearts, which are the seat of consciousness (al-nafs al-mudrika), is to attain happiness and safety from misery. They strive for this end though various means, but since every means is dominant over others in one way and dominated by others in another, only the sublime, self-sufficient, and all-compassionate God can represent the means that are solely dominant and undominated by anything else. Therefore, it is only through remembering God that human hearts can find tranquility, and if a heart finds peace in remembering anything other than God, it is a heart that is oblivious to its true state; if it were to become aware of its condition, it would, without delay, succumb to trembling and anxiety.

As for the various explanations put forth by some commentators concerning the verse —those who have faith, and whose hearts find assurance in the remembrance of Allah, one reading is that this verse is a new statement (istiʾnāf), which is independent in its meaning from the preceding verse. According to this view, the phrase those who have faith, becomes the subject, and the clause, happy are they and good is their destination () in the subsequent verse is the predicate. Meanwhile, the clause ‘Those who have faith and do righteous deeds is considered a permutation for the original clause, and the clause ‘Look! The hearts find assurance in Allah’s remembrance! is an interpolation (jumla muʿtariḍa) placed between the subject and predicate of a complete sentence. However, this reading is tortuous and does not fit the context of the verse.

الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ وَعَمِلُواْ الصَّالِحَاتِ طُوبَى لَهُمْ وَحُسْنُ مَآبٍ ٢٩

(13:29) Those who have faith and do righteous deeds—happy are they (ṭūbā la-hum) and good is their destination (ḥusn maʾāb).

The word ṭūbā is a noun on the comparative pattern of fuʿlā, being the feminine form of aṭyab (from ṭayyib), literally meaning ‘more pure’ or ‘more virtuous.’ Ṭūbā is an adjective for an implicit noun which, as it appears from the context, carries the meaning of ‘life’ or ‘livelihood’. For any blessing, no matter what it might be, is deemed pleasant and enviable because it is a source of happiness in life. And it is only a source of happiness and contentment when it helps the heart finds tranquility and frees it from anxiety. Such peace and tranquility are only attainable by those who believe in God and perform righteous deeds. Thus, it is only God who provides a reason for inner peace and happiness in life.

Indeed, such a person is protected from evil and loss in whatever lies ahead, and how could it be otherwise when they have leaned on a pillar that cannot be destroyed? They have placed themselves under the protection of Almighty God—whatever is destined for them is a source of their happiness. If they are granted something, it is for their good, and if something is withheld, it is still for their good.

God Himself has described this virtuous life as follows: Whoever acts righteously, (whether) male or female, should he be faithful,—We shall revive him with a good life and pay them their reward by the best of what they used to do () And in describing those who do not find inner peace through the remembrance of God, He has said: But whoever disregards My remembrance, his shall be a wretched life, and on the Day of Resurrection We shall raise him blind ().

It is not unlikely that in the verse under discussion, the life and livelihood of the believers is referred to as being ‘more pure,’ such that a greater degree of purity is attributed to them, to suggest that life is not entirely devoid of purity. What exists is that for those who remember God and possess inner peace, their life has greater purity, as their life is removed from the contamination of unpleasant experiences.

Based on this, the phrase ṭūbā la-hum means: ‘For them is a life, or a livelihood, that is more virtuous—meaning that for them is a life or a livelihood that is more pure.’ Thus, the word ṭūbā is the subject and the word la-hum is the predicate. If the subject in the indefinite form is placed prior to the predicate, which is the prepositional phrase la-hum (translated as ‘are they’), it is because the context of the speech was congratulatory. In such a situation, the cause of congratulations is brought forward to be mentioned more immediately, in order that the listener becomes happy as soon as possible. Similarly, in glad tidings, instead of saying ‘the good news is for you’ (la-kum bushrā) it is said: ‘Good news for you’ (bushrā la-kum).

In short, the verse under discussion promises those who believe in God and perform righteous deeds, and as a result, attain lasting peace of heart through the remembrance of God, a life of goodness and a felicitous outcome. Moreover, it becomes clear how the verse connects to the previous verses. Indeed, as we have mentioned before, a good life is one of the effects of having a tranquil heart.

In Majmaʿ al-bayān, under the phrase ṭūbā la-hum, al-Ṭabrisī states that the meaning of this phrase has several explanations:

‘The first explanation is that it signifies joy and delight for them, as narrated from Ibn ʿAbbās.

The second explanation is that it means happiness and envy for them, as related by al-Ḍaḥḥāk.

The third explanation is that it implies goodness and honor for them, as reported from Ibrāhīm al-Nakhāʿī.

The fourth explanation is that it indicates paradise for them, as conveyed by Mujāhid.

The fifth explanation is that it denotes a pleasant life for them, as stated by al-Zajjāj and a desirable state for them, as mentioned by Ibn al-Anbārī because it is derived from the word for goodness—ṭayyib. It is also said that it means the best things will be for them, which refers to paradise, as related from al-Jubāʾī.

The sixth explanation is that it implies a pleasant life for them.

The seventh explanation is that it signifies goodness for them, as reported by Qatāda.

The eighth explanation is that it means what a blessing they have, as narrated by ʿIkrima.

The ninth explanation is that it stands for a continuous state of goodness and blessings for them.

The tenth explanation is that ṭūbā is the name of a tree in Paradise, the roots of which are in the abode of the Prophet and the branches of which extend into the homes of each and every believer. This is reported by ʿUbayd b. ʿUmayr, Wahb, Abū Hurayra, Shahr b. Ḥawshab, and it is also narrated by Abū Saʿīd al-Khudrī as a saying traced back to the Prophet.’

Most of these meanings are derived by analogy rather than being understood from the apparent meaning of the verse.

كَذَلِكَ أَرْسَلْنَاكَ فِي أُمَّةٍ قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهَا أُمَمٌ لِّتَتْلُوَ عَلَيْهِمُ الَّذِيَ أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْكَ وَهُمْ يَكْفُرُونَ بِالرَّحْمَنِ قُلْ هُوَ رَبِّي لا إِلَهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ عَلَيْهِ تَوَكَّلْتُ وَإِلَيْهِ مَتَابِ ٣٠

(13:30) Thus (kadhālik) have We sent you to a nation before which many nations have passed away, that you may recite to them what We have revealed to you. Yet they defy the All-beneficent. Say, ‘He is my Lord; there is no god except Him; in Him I have put my trust, and to Him will be my return (matāb).’

The word matāb is an infinitive derived from tawba, which means ‘to return.’ The demonstrative pronoun at the beginning of the verse, kadhālik, refers to what God has already mentioned in previous verses about the Divine modus of inviting all nations to the religion of monotheism, then misguiding whoever He wills and guiding whoever He wills according to the cosmic order that dictates that all things must return to God, as well as having faith in Him, hearts finding assurance in His remembrance, and not turning away from Him.

Therefore, the meaning of the verse is as follows: ‘We sent you to a nation before which other nations have passed away and perished, and we sent you in the same manner as we sent earlier messengers, according to the Divine modus that has always operated in the world. Your mission was to recite what We revealed to you upon your nation and to propagate the contents of this Book for them even though they disbelieve in the All-beneficent.

Note that in this verse God says, Yet they defy the All-beneficent rather than ‘Yet they defy Us,’ even though, at first glance, the context would seem to suggest the latter was more fitting. The reason for this is to indicate that their rejection of the revelation that the Messenger of God recites to them—which is the Qurʾan—and their lack of attention to its ordinances and their objection to why a sign has not been sent down by their Lord to the Prophet, actually constitutes disbelief in the very principle of divine mercy, a mercy that if they accepted and acted upon it would result in their happiness in this world and the hereafter.

Say, ‘He is my Lord; there is no god except Him; in Him I have put my trust, and to Him will be my return.’ In this sentence, the Messenger is instructed to explicitly remind them of the principle of monotheism. God instructs him to tell them: ‘He is my Lord; there is no other deity but Him; I place my trust only in Him and my return is only toward Him.’ This means that He alone is my Lord without any partner, as opposed to what they believe, and only He has Lordship over me; I see that He alone looks after all my affairs and I ask for my needs only at His threshold.

From this, it becomes clear that having trust in God and considering the return to be only to Him are the logical consequences of believing in God’s Lordship and emanate from it, as the Lord means the owner and the one who governs the affairs of others. So, the meaning of this is: ‘He is my trustee and to Him I shall return.’

Some have said that the meaning of the word matāb refers to repentance from one’s sins, because if we take it in its primary meaning (‘the place of return’), it would serve as emphasis for the phrase, in Him I have put my trust, but this contradicts the apparent meaning.

However, we do not accept that matāb simply serves as emphasis in this context, nor do we believe that emphasizing it contradicts its apparent meaning, as should be clear to the reader.

Others interpret to Him will be my return as implying ‘both mine and your return is to Him,’ suggesting a mutual return towards God for both the speaker and the audience. However, this meaning assumes an implicit meaning without any textual basis. Simply because the Messenger of God and his followers envision their return to God, it doesn’t validate the assumption of such an implicit meaning in the absence of clear textual evidence.

وَلَوْ أَنَّ قُرْآنًا سُيِّرَتْ بِهِ الْجِبَالُ أَوْ قُطِّعَتْ بِهِ الأَرْضُ أَوْ كُلِّمَ بِهِ الْمَوْتَى بَل لِّلَّهِ الأَمْرُ جَمِيعًا أَفَلَمْ يَيْأَسِ الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ أَن لَّوْ يَشَاء اللَّهُ لَهَدَى النَّاسَ جَمِيعًا وَلاَ يَزَالُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ تُصِيبُهُم بِمَا صَنَعُواْ قَارِعَةٌ أَوْ تَحُلُّ قَرِيبًا مِّن دَارِهِمْ حَتَّى يَأْتِيَ وَعْدُ اللَّهِ إِنَّ اللَّهَ لاَ يُخْلِفُ الْمِيعَادَ ٣١

(13:31) If only it were a Qurʾan whereby the mountains could be moved (suyyirat bi-hi al-jibāl), or the earth could be cut (quṭṭiʿat bi-hi al-arḍ), or the dead could be spoken to (kullima bi-hi al-mawtā). Rather all dispensation belongs to Allah. Have not the faithful yet realized that had Allah wished He would have guided mankind all together? The faithless will continue to be visited by catastrophes because of their doings—or they will land near their habitations—until Allah’s promise comes to pass. Indeed Allah does not break His promise.

To say that mountains could be moved by it (suyyirat bi-hi al-jibāl) means that they could be uprooted and transferred from one place to another, as for the earth could be cut by it (quṭṭiʿat bi-hi al-arḍ), this means splitting the earth into pieces (qiṭʿa qiṭʿa), while the dead could be spoken to (kullima bi-hi al-mawtā) means they could be brought back to life, endowed with speech, and questioned about what happened to them after their death so that the listeners might grasp the reality of the hereafter thereby. This is because these were the demands of the disbelievers and the reason for which they were demanding divine signs.

These are wondrous and extraordinary matters that are posited as the effects of the Qurʾan (and even if we assume that the Qurʾan produced such effects, these disbelievers would not have been guided). The phrase, If only it were a Qurʾan … is a hypothetical conditional clause, whose antecedent is … Rather all dispensation belongs to Allah. In other words, as we have already discussed in relation to these verses, God is saying that the matter of guidance does not depend on providing the disbelievers with the signs they demand—‘Why has not some sign been sent down to him from his Lord?’ ()—but rather the matter of guidance and misguidance devolves solely to God. He misguides whomsoever He wishes, just as He has misguided them, and He guides to Himself those who turn to Him.

The subsequent verses follow in the same vein. For example, see:

Rather their scheming is presented as decorous to the faithless, and they have been barred from the way; and whomever Allah leads astray, has no guide (); Thus We have sent it down as a dispensation in Arabic; and should you follow their desires… (); … and, and a messenger may not bring a sign except by Allah’s leave ().

As are the previous verses, which are all in this context and serve to expound the same meaning.

Therefore, as we have already mentioned, the antecedent for the hypothetical conditional clause, If only it were a Qurʾan whereby … is left implicit. Its meaning is akin to us saying: ‘They would still; not be guided it unless God wishes.’ Therefore, the meaning is: ‘Even if we assume that the Qurʾan had such an effect that it would uproot mountains, break the earth into pieces, and bring the dead to speak, they still would not be guided by seeing such wonders unless God wishes. The matter in its entirety is in the hands of God, and no one else has any say in it, so no one should think that if such a great, strange, and astonishing sign had been revealed, it would have been possible to guide these disbelievers with it. No, the entire matter is in the hands of God, and even guidance is completely dependent upon His will, to which all matters ultimately return.’

Based on this, the meaning of this verse becomes similar to the verse, And even if We had sent down to them angels and the dead spoke to them, and We gathered before them all things face to face, they would not believe unless God wills ().

Some have said that the implicit antecedent for If only it were a Qurʾan whereby … is along the lines of: ‘It would be this Qurʾan,’ the purpose being to proclaim the greatness of the Qurʾan: Namely that the Qurʾan has the highest degree of power of expression and penetration of speech, and it is the ignorance of the disbelievers to turn away from the Qurʾan and demand another miracle instead. What miracle is higher than this Qurʾan that has reached such a level of dignity and greatness that, if any recitation were to have the power to uproot mountains or break the earth into pieces or make the dead speak, it would certainly be this very Qurʾan. Yet, God has not revealed the Qurʾan in this way.

Based on this understanding, the present verse would have had a similar meaning to the verse: Had We sent down this Qurʾan upon a mountain, you would have surely seen it humbled (and) go to pieces with the fear of Allah ().

However, this explanation is not consistent with the overall context of the verses that have already been discussed, especially the phrase: Rather (bal) all dispensation belongs to Allah, and also the subsequent phrase Have not the faithful yet realized that had Allah wished He would have guided mankind all together? The reasons for this inconsistency will be explained momentarily. Therefore, the commentators who have explained the verse in this way have had difficulties in showing how the phrase Rather all dispensation belongs to Allah fits into this and connects with what came before. For example:

Some have said that it means that if a Qurʾan is hypothetically assumed to have such an effect, it would be this Qurʾan, but God Almighty does not do such a thing with this Qurʾan; instead, He has revealed it in the form that it is, because the dispensation of all things is in His hands and no one else’s.

Others have said that the use of bal in Rather (bal) all dispensation belongs to Allah … conveys the meaning that these kinds of extraordinary events are not performed with the Qurʾan, and if they are done, they are done through another means that is under God’s will, because all affairs are in His hands and only His.

Yet others have said that it is preferable to read that the phrase in question, Rather all dispensation belongs to Allah as connected to an implicit phrase with the meaning: ‘But the choice of any matter is not in your hands, rather all dispensation belongs to Allah.’

However, the esteemed reader can see for themselves that the context does not support any of these readings, and the correct understanding, which is consistent with the overall context, is that the clause ‘rather …’ should be understood as a rejection of the preceding conditional sentence and its implicit consequent. As we have said, the implied conditional sentence and its consequence would mean something like this: ‘Even if a Qurʾan were to be revealed that could displace mountains, fragment the earth, and make the dead speak, these people would not be guided unless God so willed.’

Have not the faithful yet realized (a fa-lam yayʾasi) that had Allah wished He would have guided mankind all together? This sentence is a continuation of the previous discussion, and there are three opinions about its meaning:

First, some have stated that the word yayʾasi is from Hawāzin dialect and means ‘knowledge.’ Others have said it belongs to the Ḥayy dialect of the Nakhʿ tribe. In support of this, they quote a verse from Suḥaym b. Wathīl al-Rabāḥī, a poet from the Nakhʿ tribe, who said:

‘I say to them in the ravine when they captured me / Do you not know (a lam tayʾasū) that I am the son of Fāris Zahdam?’

And they also quoted Rabāḥ b. ʿAdī:

‘Do people not know (a lam yayʾasa) that I am his son / even if I am far from the tribe’s land?’

Based on this linguistic explanation, the verse emphasizes that when the means for guidance are unavailable, even if the Qurʾan could move mountains and tear the earth apart, or make the dead speak, it still would not be able to guide them. Since the matter is entirely in God’s hands, the believers should know that God has not willed the guidance of the unbelievers; had He willed it, He could have guided all people, both believers and unbelievers. But He did not guide the unbelievers, and as a result, they did not, nor will they ever, find the way.

Second, others have said that the word yayʾasi is derived from yaʾs, which means ‘hopelessness,’ but that the phrase a fa-lam (have not … yet …?) implicitly includes the notion of knowledge. The intention of this verse is to inform the believers that they must know that God does not will the guidance of the unbelievers; if He had so desired, He could have guided all people. Consequently, the believers must always be hopeless about unbelievers ever being guided.

Therefore, the ultimate meaning of the verse is: ‘Have the believers not yet attained the knowledge that God has not willed the guidance of the unbelievers, and had He so willed, He could have guided all people?’ And ‘Have the believers not yet despaired of the guidance and faith of the unbelievers?’ Then, for the sake of brevity, the meaning of knowledge has been implicitly included in the verb for despair, and only the conditional sentence—meaning ‘if God wills, He would guide all people’—is connected to this verb.

Third, yet others have said that the sentence ‘Do they not despair?’ has its own literal meaning and does not convey any sense of knowledge, and the phrase ‘if God wills’ is not related to it, but rather belongs to the phrase ‘the faithful.’ However, the predicate of despair is left implicit, and the full meaning of the passage is as follows: ‘Have not those who believe yet despaired that if God wills, He would guide all people to believe?’ In other words: ‘Have they not yet despaired of the disbelievers ever finding faith?’

These are the three possible meanings of the verse, and the middle one is the most appropriate from all aspects. In any case, the verse contains a subtle reference to the fact that the believers hoped that perhaps the disbelievers would come to believe, and perhaps their hope stemmed from the statement of the disbelievers who said: ‘Why has not some sign been sent down to him from his Lord?,’ so they hoped in themselves that perhaps a sign in addition to the Qurʾan would be revealed, as a result of which the disbelievers would come to believe, and thus they implored the Messenger of God to respond to the demand of the disbelievers. However, God, in the verse under discussion and in other verses of the Qurʾan, made them despair of the disbelievers ever coming to believe. Such verses have been revealed both in Mecca and Medina, such as the verse of Sūrah Yāsīn, which is Meccan, and which says, It is the same to them whether you warn them or do not warn them, they will not have faith (), and the verse of Sūrah al-Baqarah, which is Medinan and says, As for the faithless, it is the same to them whether you warn them or do not warn them, they will not have faith ().

The context of the verses indicates that the meaning of the sentence, because of their doings, refers to their disbelief in the All-beneficent in opposition to the truth of Islam. And the word calamity (qāriʿa) means a disaster that strikes a person in such a way that suggests that there is yet worse to come.

The verse contains a clear warning to those who practice disbelief of a torment that cannot be repelled, and it also mentions the signs and precedents of that torment that appear one after the other until the promised torment itself arrives.

Therefore, the meaning of the verse is as follows: ‘Undoubtedly, they will be continue to be struck by calamities close to home because of what they have done—the disbelief towards the All-beneficent in the face of the call to the truth of Islam—until the torment that God has warned them of descends, and God does not break His promise and His words do not change.’

Considering that this chapter of the Qurʾan is Meccan—as evidenced by the content of the verses—and also taking into consideration the events that took place after the Prophetic mission and before the migration of the Messenger of God, and examining the incidents that took place after the migration until the conquest of Mecca, it conveys the meaning that ‘the faithless’ refers to the disbelievers of the Arabs, including the people of Mecca and others who initially rejected the invitation of Islam and reached the peak of denial and stubbornness, and incited persecution and corruption in the land.

The meaning of those who were afflicted with calamities refers to the disbelievers around Mecca, who were affected by wars, killings, and plundering. And the meaning of those who had calamities befall them near their homes refers to the people of Mecca, who experienced unpleasant incidents around their city; smoke irritated their eyes, and fear, grief, and other evil effects deprived them of sleep and sustenance. The meaning of the promised torment refers to the torment of the sword which the disbelievers faced during the Battle of Badr, the Battle of Uhud, and others.

It must be understood that the torment that God threatens the disbelievers with in this verse is different from the kind of torment mentioned in Sūrah Yūnus, which has already been explained previously, where it states: There is a messenger for every nation; so when their messenger comes, judgment is made between them with justice, and they are not wronged … and judgment will be made between them with justice and they will not be wronged (). This verse from Sūrah Yūnus is a general threat to all nations, while the current verses are specific threats to the disbelievers of Quraysh and others who stood against the call of the Messenger of God in the early days of Islam.

We also mentioned earlier in the first volume of this commentary, in regard to the verses of Sūrah al-Baqarah, specifically the verse, As for the faithless, it is the same to them whether you warn them or do not warn them, they will not have faith (), that wherever the phrase ‘the faithless’ is used in the Qurʾan, without any sort of qualification, it refers to the opponents of the Arab polytheists who initially opposed the call of Islam. By the same token, the meaning of ‘the faithful,’ wherever it is mentioned without qualification, refers to the early Muslims who believed in Islam upon receiving the call.

It is important to know that the commentators have offered various explanations of the verse under discussion, however we have omitted them here because we do not believe they have anything beneficial to contribute to our understanding of it. Furthermore, what we have selected for discussion is sufficient for those interested in knowing more, and we shall return to these points in our treatment of the narrations.

وَلَقَدِ اسْتُهْزِئَ بِرُسُلٍ مِّن قَبْلِكَ فَأَمْلَيْتُ لِلَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ ثُمَّ أَخَذْتُهُمْ فَكَيْفَ كَانَ عِقَابِ ٣٢

(13:32) Messengers were certainly derided before you. But then I gave respite to those who were faithless, then I seized them; so how was My retribution?

This verse emphasizes the same unequivocal threat that was made in the previous one, by citing precedents to indicate that the threat in the previous verse is not merely a threat, and it is not such that there is no evidence for its prior occurrence. On the contrary, it has occurred more times than can possibly be denied, and it is not as the disbelievers imagined when they said: Certainly we and our fathers were promised this before. These are just myths of the ancients ().

This is because before you—O Prophet of Islam—the pattern of disbelief and mockery faced by previous messengers mirrors the skepticism you encounter. Like your contemporaries who doubt your message and seek different signs despite the Quran’s miraculous nature, earlier communities also demanded miracles tailored to their whims from their messengers. In dealing with disbelievers, My approach has always been one of (giving them) initial respite, followed by inevitable divine retribution. Consider My past punishments—were they mere threats, or something escapable, or even bearable? With the destruction that befell previous nations, the idolaters of your time must recognize the certainty of My punishment. They should learn from history, altering their deeds to avoid the fate that consumed those before them.

From this, it becomes clear that what some commentators have said about the verse under discussion being a consolation and a source of encouragement for the Messenger of God is not correct.

Note that the verse treats derision as interchangeable disbelief when it says, Messengers were certainly derided before you. But then I gave respite to those who were faithless …—this shows that their mockery was grounded in disbelief and that their disbelief was a form of mockery. Therefore, they were disbelievers who mocked the signs of God and who behaved in a similar manner to the contemporaries of the Messenger of God, who denied the Qurʾan, which was itself a sign of God, and mockingly asking: ‘Why has not some sign been sent down to him from his Lord?’

أَفَمَنْ هُوَ قَائِمٌ عَلَى كُلِّ نَفْسٍ بِمَا كَسَبَتْ وَجَعَلُواْ لِلَّهِ شُرَكَاء قُلْ سَمُّوهُمْ أَمْ تُنَبِّئُونَهُ بِمَا لاَ يَعْلَمُ فِي الأَرْضِ أَم بِظَاهِرٍ مِّنَ الْقَوْلِ بَلْ زُيِّنَ لِلَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ مَكْرُهُمْ وَصُدُّواْ عَنِ السَّبِيلِ وَمَن يُضْلِلِ اللَّهُ فَمَا لَهُ مِنْ هَادٍ٣٣

(13:33) Is He who sustains every soul (qāʾim ʿalā kulli nafs) in accordance with what it earns …? And yet they ascribe partners to Allah! Say, ‘Name them!’ Will you inform Him of something He does not know about on the earth, or of (what are) mere words? Rather their scheming is presented as decorous to the faithless, and they have been barred from the way; and whomever Allah leads astray, has no guide.

Being a qāʾim ʿalā for something means to have control over it, and to be a qāʾim bi for something means to be a kind of custodian for it or a manager of its affairs. God, the Almighty, is both a qāʾim ʿalā for every soul and for what it earns. He is a qāʾim ʿalā for every soul, because He is the One who surrounds its essence, has power over it, and is the witness of and watcher over it. As for His being a qāʾim ʿalā of what it does, it is because He is the director of its actions and transforms it from a state of motion or stillness to a state of action, recording its deeds in the registers of actions, and then transforming them into the rewards and punishments of this world and the hereafter, proximity and distance, guidance and misguidance, blessings and curses, Paradise and Hellfire.

This verse follows logically from the previous verses, in terms of stating that God, the Almighty, guides whomever He wills, and rewards with the best of rewards, misguides whomever He wills, and punishes with the severest punishment. And since all affairs are in His hands, He is responsible for every soul and its actions, has authority over it, and manages the system of its actions. In this context, is there anyone remotely equal to Him to be counted as His partner in divinity?

From this, it can be understood that part of the initial statement, Is He who sustains every soul in accordance with what it earns …? has been left implicit, and the phrase, And yet they ascribe partners to Allah! refers to that omission (its implied meaning is: ‘Is there anyone equal to Him who is responsible for every soul... is there anyone worthy of being His partner?’).

Among the baseless and ridiculous explanations that have been mentioned about this verse, is one that is attributed to Ḍaḥḥāk, who claims that the intended meaning of ‘who’ in the sentence ‘Is He who sustains every soul in accordance with what it earns …? refers to angels, not God Almighty, because angels are the ones who are entrusted with the deeds of people. Then the meaning of the verse would be: ‘Are the angels who are entrusted with people’s deeds by the command of God then His partners?’ The absurdity of this reading stems from the fact that it is entirely alien to the context of the verses under discussion.

‘Name them!’ Will you inform Him of something He does not know about on the earth, or of mere words?—After stating, And yet they ascribe partners to Allah!, God then nullifies their claim with another expression that is derived from the previous explanation.

Therefore, God commands His Prophet to argue with them in a way that is wondrous and unprecedented in its context, to oblige them to describe these partners, as attributes are what make everything determined and define their affairs and effects. And if these idols are indeed God’s partners and intercessors at His court, they must have attributes that have allowed them to achieve such a status and position, just as God Almighty is worshipped because He is alive, knowing, able, creator, a sovereign, and a director, and for this reason, He is the Lord of everything. However, when these idols are mentioned and introduced, nothing is counted for them except the names Hubal, Lāt, and ʿUzza, and no attribute or merit is mentioned that would make them worthy of becoming partners of God.

Then, he is commanded to ask them, Will you inform Him (am tunabbiʾūna-hu) of something He does not know about on the earth …? (Note that the preposition am here is detached, meaning ‘or’ or ‘rather’). That is, the logical implication of your idolatry and polytheism is that you will inform God of something of which He is not aware, because if He had a partner on earth, He would certainly know about it Himself, and it is not possible for one partner in the management of creation to remain unaware of the other partner, because he would eventually realize that someone else is exercising a different influence on creation and, therefore, there must be another manager to the cosmos besides Himself.

However, the reality is that God Almighty is the sole planner of all affairs, and He has seen no other influence or effect from anyone but Himself, whether in opposition to his will or conforming to it.

The proof that God has no partner for Himself is that He is an authority (qāʾim ʿalā) over all souls and is well aware of what they do. In other words, both creation and command are from Him, and He is a witness and observer on everything according to conclusive arguments that leave no room for doubt.

In summary, this verse is similar to another verse that says: Say, ‘Will you inform Allah about something He does not know in the heavens or on the earth?’ ()

Then he adds the phrase, … or of mere words? (ẓāhir min al-qawl) In fact, this information you provide that there are partners for God is merely an empty statement that is completely devoid of reality. This sentence is similar to the verse that says: These are but names which you have coined—you and your fathers—for which Allah has not sent down any authority (). Some commentators have said that the meaning of ‘ẓāhir min al-qawl’ is actually a revealed book from God, in which these idols are named and described. The conclusion of the verse is that you have no rational nor transmitted evidence for the divinity of these idols or of their being partners with God Almighty. However, this reading does not accord with the phrasing of the verse in question.

The source of the connection between these three arguments is that the idolaters, in worshipping idols and considering them as partners of God, faced objections from three angles. First, if they claim that these idols are partners to God, they have no evidence for this, because they cannot point to any attributes in their idols that would indicate their divinity. Second, if they claim that they have seen such attributes in their idols, they have lied, because it means that they have discovered the existence of God’s partners, while God is unaware of their existence. And third, if they simply speak meaningless words without there being any truth behind them, they have actually attempted to deceive God, and God is far greater than these words, much greater indeed.

In his commentary al-Kashshāf, al-Zamakhsharī writes: ‘This argument and its methods are very strange, and it itself cries out in a fluent and elegant language that it is not from a human source—unless one is ignorant or biased.’

Rather their scheming is presented as decorous to the faithless, and they have been barred from the way; and whomever Allah leads astray, has no guide: The word ‘rather’ represents an expression of contempt, and this verse is meant to dismiss the aforementioned arguments of the disbelievers and their implications. The meaning of the verse is: ‘Leave these arguments aside, because if they consider God to have partners, it is not due to any of the reasons we have mentioned. Instead, Satan has made idolatry appear attractive to them and has thereby hindered them from God’s path.

The disbelievers know that there is no argument to support the association of these partners with God, and they also know that simply claiming that does not make the idols genuine partners to God, their goal for promoting idolatry and the divinity of idols and drawing the public’s attention to them is solely to obtain money and worldly embellishments. Since your prophecy blocks their path to gain these benefits, they stubbornly and hostilely adhere to idolatry, trying to mislead people.

Satan has made this scheme and plan appear attractive to them, and there is no other reason for their idolatry, neither have they any evidence nor a motive from any other direction. Although Satan has adorned these schemes to them and led them astray, and they have also misled people, God in the meantime has misled them and deprived them of the blessing of guidance, and whoever God misleads will have no guide.

لَّهُمْ عَذَابٌ فِي الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَلَعَذَابُ الآخِرَةِ أَشَقُّ وَمَا لَهُم مِّنَ اللَّهِ مِن وَاقٍ ٣٤

(13:34) There is a punishment for them in the life of this world, and the punishment of the Hereafter will surely be harder (ashaqq), and they have no defender (wāqq) against Allah.

The word ashaqq (‘harder’) is a comparative form derived from the root word mashaqqa, meaning ‘hardship’. The term wāqq comes from the root wiqāya, meaning protection.

In this verse, the punishment that God threatened the faithless with in the previous verses is briefly described. The purpose of the statement, ‘and they have no defender against Allah,’ is to negate the possibility of intercession or any of its benefits for them. The meaning of this statement is that they will have no one to intercede on their behalf under any circumstances.

مَّثَلُ الْجَنَّةِ الَّتِي وُعِدَ الْمُتَّقُونَ تَجْرِي مِن تَحْتِهَا الأَنْهَارُ أُكُلُهَا دَائِمٌ وَظِلُّهَا تِلْكَ عُقْبَى الَّذِينَ اتَّقَواْ وَّعُقْبَى الْكَافِرِينَ النَّارُ ٣٥

(13:35) A description (mathal) of the paradise promised to the Godwary (muttaqīn): streams run in it, its fruits and shade are everlasting. Such is the requital of those who are Godwary; and the requital of the faithless is the Fire.

The word mathal refers to a description that perfectly represents and embodies the thing it describes.

This verse invokes the beautiful promise that is reserved for the righteous believers, in contrast to the threats made against the disbelievers; this helps to clarify the ultimate outcomes of both groups, and sets the stage for the conclusion of the discourse that summarizes the results of the efforts of believers and disbelievers in their journey toward God and their return to Him.

Note that the verse juxtaposes the faithless with the muttaqīn (‘Godwary’), rather than the faithful. This serves to point out that those who will attain this excellent outcome have both faith and righteous deeds together; for if they have faith in God but do not perform righteous deeds, they will be considered believers in God but disbelievers in His signs.

Among the subtle allusions employed in this verse is the contrasting of the terms the Godwary and the faithless in the first instance, followed by those who are Godwary and those who are faithless in the latter instance. This perhaps implies that the past actions of restraint and disbelief, as well as the qualities of being righteous or being a disbeliever, have the same connotation in this context, as their collective deeds in this world become their defining acts. The necessary implication of this is that good deeds must be consistently performed; the expressions the faithless and the Godwary, which indicate the occurrence of such actions, convey the same meaning as the terms those who are faithless and those who are Godwary, which signify the continuous performance of such acts.

This passage emphasizes that there are two distinct groups: one consistently engages in disbelief, while the other firmly follows the path of faith. However, those who vacillate between disbelief and faith, whose deeds and beliefs are inconsistent and change frequently, sometimes leaning toward disbelief and then turning to faith, or vice versa, have not firmly committed to either path. As a result, they fall outside the purview of these verses. This distinction is an important point to note.

It should be mentioned that the previous verses employed various forms of reference to God, such as, Thus have We sent you (), wherein God is speaking directly to others, and Rather all dispensation belongs to Allah (), where He is referred to in the third person. Furthermore, in the sentence But then I gave respite to those who were faithless (), He is again regarded as the sole speaker, and in the phrase And yet they ascribe partners to Allah!, He is again mentioned in the third Person. The reason for this variation is clear: reference to Thus have We sent you … in relation to others points to the involvement of intermediaries, such as angels and divine revelation; the reference to Rather all dispensation belongs to Allah in absentia indicates that every matter, whether mediated or unmediated, ultimately returns to the divine status of God, who is the sustainer of all things.

Moreover, the expression But then I gave respite to those who were faithless, then I seized them signifies that, in reality, God has no partner or intercessor, contrary to the claims made by the disbelievers.

Finally, the phrase, Such is the requital of those who are Godwary; and the requital of the faithless is the Fire (), highlights the ultimate outcomes of both groups, and with this statement, the discussion concerning the believers and the idolaters in terms of the effects of truth and falsehood on their beliefs and deeds comes to an end.

Note that we have said that these correlated verses are a continuation of the previous set of ten verses, which began with: He sends down water from the sky … ().

Examining Narrations

1. In Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, Khālid b. Nujayḥ narrates from Jaʿfar b. Muḥammad regarding the verse, Look! The hearts find assurance in Allah’s remembrance! (): ‘Hearts also find assurance in Muḥammad b. ʿAbd Allāh, for he is the Remembrance (dhikr) of God and the Veil (ḥijāb) of God.’

Author’s comment: See also the verse: God has sent a remembrance (dhikr) to you, a messenger (), in which the Prophet of God is also called a dhikr.

In fact, there are several narrations regarding the statement, Look! The hearts find assurance in Allah’s remembrance, that explain that the Prophet and his Household are the true embodiments of God’s remembrance.

2. In Al-Durr al-manthūr, al-Suyūṭī relates that Abū al-Shaykh narrated from Anas that the Prophet, when the verse, Look! The hearts find assurance in Allah’s remembrance, was revealed, turned to his Companions and said:

‘Do you know the meaning of this verse?’ They replied, ‘God and His Messenger know better.’ He said, ‘It refers to someone who loves God, His Messenger, and my companions.’

3. In Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, it is narrated that when the Prophet recited the verse, those who have faith, and whose hearts find assurance in the remembrance of Allah.’ Look! The hearts find assurance in Allah’s remembrance, he asked, ‘O son of Umm Salīm, do you know who they are?’ I said, ‘Who are they, O Prophet of God?’ He replied, ‘We, the Household of the Prophet, and our followers.’
4. In Al-Durr al-manthūr, al-Suyūṭī cites Ibn Mardawayh, who narrates from ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib that, when this verse was revealed, the Prophet said: ‘These are the ones who love God, His Messenger, and the family of His Messenger truthfully, not falsely, and love the believers, whether present or absent. Indeed, it is by the remembrance of God that they love one another.’

Author’s comment: All these narrations are examples of analogizing the specific to the general. Yes, the Prophet of God, his pure family, the chosen ones among his companions, and the believers are true embodiments of God’s remembrance because God is remembered through them. However, the noble verse is general in meaning and applies to any form of remembrance.

There are also several narrations regarding the Tree of Ṭūbā and the phrase, happy are they (ṭūbā la-hum) and good is their destination ().

5. In Tafsīr al-Qummī, it is narrated from his father, from Muḥammad b. Abī ʿUmayr, from Hishām b. Sālim, from Abī ʿAbd Allāh as part of the hadith of the Miʿrāj, that the Prophet said:

‘Suddenly, I saw a tree, and if a bird were sent to fly around it and kept flying for seven hundred years, it would not manage to circle around it fully. In paradise, there is no house except that a branch from the tree has entered it. I asked Gabriel, “What tree is this?” He replied, “It is the Tree of Ṭūbā, about which God Almighty has said, ‘happy are they and good is their destination.’

Author’s comment: This meaning has been narrated in multiple ways. In some of these narrations, it is mentioned as follows:

‘Gabriel plucked a fruit from that tree, gave it to me, and I ate it. The Lord transferred it to my back, and when I descended to the earth, I bedded with Khadīja and she became pregnant with Fāṭima. Then after that, whenever I saw Fāṭima, I smelled the scent of the Tree of Ṭūbā from her.’

6. In Kitāb al-Kharāʾij, it is mentioned that the Messenger of God said to Fāṭima: ‘O Fāṭima, I have received glad tidings from my Lord concerning my brother and cousin, and it is that God has married Fāṭima to ʿAlī and has ordered Riḍwān, the keeper of Paradise, to shake the Tree of Ṭūbā, and it bore pieces equal in number to the friends of my household. Then He created angels from light and gave each angel a piece, and when the Resurrection sets in and people are scattered, no one remains as a friend to us unless one of those pieces is given to him, which is a voucher for their salvation from the hellfire.’

Author’s comment: In Tafsīr al-Burhān by Muwaffaq b. Aḥmad, which also mentions a similar narration from Bilal b. Ḥumāma, from the Messenger of God. The same narration has been reported from Umm Salama, Salmān al-Fārsī, and ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib. In these versions, we read:

‘When God took the angels as witnesses to the marriage of Fāṭima to ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib, He ordered the Tree of Ṭūbā to shed its fruits and ornaments. The tree did so, and the angels and the heavenly maidens collected these and gifted them to one another as a token of honor until the Day of Resurrection.’ A similar narration has been reported from Imām al-Riḍā.

7. In Majmaʿ al-bayān, al-Thaʿlabī narrates from his own chain of transmission that al-Kalbī quotes Ibn ʿAbbās and Abū Ṣāliḥ as saying: ‘Ṭūbā is a tree whose roots are in ʿAlī’s house in heaven, and in every believer’s house, there is a branch of it.’ Then he said Abū Baṣīr also quoted this from Imām Sadiq.
8. In the Tafsīr al-Burhān, from Tafsīr al-Thaʿlabī, it is narrated from Jābir, from Abū Jaʿfar that the Messenger of God was asked about the meaning of Ṭūbā, and he said: ‘It is a tree in Heaven whose roots are in ʿAlī’s house, and its branches cast shade upon the people of Heaven.’ They asked, ‘O Messenger of God! We already asked you before, and you said its roots were in your house and its branches are over the people of Heaven, and now you are saying its roots are in ʿAlī’s house and its branches are over the people of Heaven?’ He replied, ‘Yes, my house and ʿAlī’s house in Heaven are one and in the same place.’

Author’s comment: In Majmaʿ al-bayān, al-Ṭabrisī also narrates a similar narration via his own chain, from al-Ḥākim Abī al-Qāsim al-Ḥaskānī, from Mūsā b. Jaʿfar, from his father, from his ancestors, from the Messenger of God.

Numerous narrations on this subject have been reported from both Shiʿa and Sunni sources, and it appears that they are not related to the exegesis of the verse, but rather to its interior meaning, as the Tree of Ṭūbā represents the divine vicegerency (wilāya) of Almighty God, which is the office of ʿAlī in this nation, who was its first holder and its institutor, and the believers who are the followers of his vicegerency. Furthermore, ʿAlī’s house in the Paradise of Bliss, which is the paradise of vicegerency, is one and the same as the house of the Messenger of God, without competition or dispute—consider this carefully.

9. In Al-Durr al-manthūr, al-Suyūṭī says that Ibn Jarir and Ibn Mundhir report from Ibn Jurayḥ, in connection with the phrase, Yet they defy the All beneficent (), that this was revealed when the Messenger of God made a treaty with the Quraysh at Ḥudaybiyya. He wrote, ‘In the name of God, the All beneficent, the Most Merciful,’ but they objected, saying they did not recognize ‘the All beneficent’ and only wrote ‘In Your name, O God’ in their documents. He had to write in the same way. That was when this phrase was revealed.
10. In Al-Durr al-manthūr al-Suyūṭī cites this narration from Ibn Jarīr, Ibn Abī Ḥātim, and Abū al-Shaykh, as well as from Qatāda. However, the discerning reader will have noted that the verses, as they appear in their context, are Meccan, while the Peace of Hudaybiyya is one of the events that took place after the Emigration to Medina. Moreover, the context of the verse under discussion does not match these narrations, as it makes no sense for one part of the verse to be about the Peace of Hudaybiyya, and the other parts to be about other events.
11. In Al-Durr al-manthūr, it is narrated from Ibn Abī Ḥātim, Abū Al-Shaykh, and Ibn Mardawayh, who quoted ʿAtiyya al-Awfī as saying that the polytheists said to the Messenger of God: ‘Why are the mountains of Mecca not moved for us and why is our land not smoothed out so that we can cultivate it? Or, why has the distance of the earth not been shortened for us, just as Solomon could shorten the earth for his people using the wind? Or, why have not the dead been brought to life for us, just as Jesus brought his people back to life?’ In response to them, God sent the following verse: ‘If only it were a Qurʾan whereby the mountains could be moved, or the earth could be toured, or the dead could be spoken to . . . Have not the faithful yet realized… ? ().

ʿAtiya al-Awfī was asked: ‘Do you attribute this narration to one of the companions of the Messenger of God?’ He replied, ‘Yes, I narrate it from Abū Saʿīd al-Khudrī, from the Messenger of God.’

Author’s comment: There are other narrations with similar content.

12. In Tafsīr al-Qummī, it is stated that the Imām said: ‘If there were a Qurʾan with such attributes, it would be this Qurʾan.’
13. In al-Kāfī, al-Kulaynī narrates from Muḥammad b. Yaḥyā from Aḥmad b. Abī Zāhir or another person, from Muḥammad b. Ḥammād, from his brother Aḥmad b. Ḥammād from Ibrāhīm, from his father, from Abū al-Ḥasan al-Awwal, who in the course of a tradition, said: ‘God Almighty says in His Book, If only it were a Qurʾan whereby the mountains could be moved … And we are the inheritors of the Book, the Book that contains things that can move the mountains, the earth could be toured, and bring the dead back to life...’

Author’s comment: The chains of the narration for this tradition are weak.

14. In Al-Durr al-manthūr, it is narrated from Ibn Jarīr that ʿAlī recited the verse in this way: ‘Is it not yet clear to the believers …? (a fa-lam yatabayyan alladhīna āmanū).’

Author: This recitation is also narrated from Ibn ʿAbbās.

15. In Majmaʿ al-bayān, it is mentioned that ʿAlī, Ibn ʿAbbās, ʿAlī b. al-Ḥusayn, Zayd b. ʿAlī, Jaʿfar b. Muḥammad, Ibn Abī Malīka, al-Jaḥdarī, and Abū Yazīd al-Madanī have recited the verse as, a fa-lam yatabayyan … However, the most well-known mode of recitation is a fa-lam yayʾas…
16. In Tafsīr al-Qummī, it is narrated from Abū Jafar, from Abū al-Jārūd that, in the explanation of the verse, The faithless will continue to be visited by catastrophes (qāriʿa) because of their doings … () he explained that the word qāriʿa means punishments, and the phrase or they will land near their habitations means that the punishment descends upon another community, but they suffer from seeing and hearing it. These disbelievers are the same as those whose punishment has reached them, and although they should learn from seeing and hearing the fate of others and refrain from disbelief and disobedience, they do not learn their lesson and persist in their disbelief until the promise that God has given to the believers comes, that is, He supports them and humiliates the disbelievers.