Verses 66–72
These verses complement the previous verses by asserting that God answers the calls and removes distress, as opposed to their idols and objects of worship that cannot do so, as stated in the verses above. The previous set of verses started with Say: Call on those whom you assert besides Him, so they shall not control the removal of distress from you nor (its) transference (), and this set of verses starts with: Your Lord is He Who speeds the ships for you in the sea… ()
Each of the two sets of verses is a complete argument in proving their intended conclusions. The first set refutes the divinity of their gods, and the second set proves the divinity of God. Yet, we describe the second set as a complement to the first as the first set starts with “Say” () but not the second set. It seems that both sets together compose one line of debate that the Prophet was ordered to deliver to the polytheists to make them accept monotheism.
This objective [of proving monotheism] can also be seen in the trend of the set of verses before the last, starting with: Say: If there were with Him gods as they say, then certainly they would have been able to seek a way to the Lord of the Throne (), followed by: And they say: What! when we shall have become bones… Say: Become stones or iron ().
The current set of verses end with, The day when We will call every people by their Imam… (), indicating that what is discussed here about the guidance and misguidance of the people will accompany them in the Hereafter. That is, the second realm matches the first realm; thus, whoever sees in this world will see in the Hereafter, and whoever is blind in the first realm will be blind in the Hereafter and more erring from the way.
Commentary
رَّبُّكُمُ ٱلَّذِى يُزْجِى لَكُمُ ٱلْفُلْكَ فِى ٱلْبَحْرِ لِتَبْتَغُوا۟ مِن فَضْلِهِۦٓ ۚ إِنَّهُۥ كَانَ بِكُمْ رَحِيمًا ٦٦
(17:66) Your Lord is He Who speeds (yuzjī, from izjāʾ) the ships (al-fulk) for you in the sea that you may seek of (min) His grace (faḍlihi); surely He is ever Merciful to you.
According to Majmaʿ al-bayān, izjāʾ means to move and drive something from one state to another. What is meant here is making the ships to flow in the seas by sending winds and other forces, and making water wet and liquid such that it opens up and can be flown on. Fulk is the plural of falkah, which means safīnah (ship).
“Seeking God’s grace” means seeking sustenance and livelihood. The faḍl (bounty, grace) of something is what is excess to it and remains of it extra. It is called seeking God’s excess because a generous giver usually gives what remains beyond his own needs. Particle min (lit. “from” or “of”) is ibtidāʾiyyah, but it could also be held as tabʿīḍiyyah. The end of the verse justifies what is said in the verse by God’s mercy. The meaning of the verse is clear, and the verse serves as an introduction and preparation for the next verse.
وَإِذَا مَسَّكُمُ ٱلضُّرُّ فِى ٱلْبَحْرِ ضَلَّ مَن تَدْعُونَ إِلَّآ إِيَّاهُ ۖ فَلَمَّا نَجَّىٰكُمْ إِلَى ٱلْبَرِّ أَعْرَضْتُمْ ۚ وَكَانَ ٱلْإِنسَـٰنُ كَفُورًا ٦٧
(17:67) And when distress (al-ḍurr) afflicts you in the sea, away go those whom you call on except He; but when He brings you safe to the land, you turn aside; and man is ever ungrateful.
Ḍurr means harm. Being afflicted by distress in the sea means coming close to drowning due to violent waves, turbulent winds and so on.
…away go (ḍalla, from ḍalāl) those whom you call on (tadʿūna, from duʿāʾ) except He…: As the exegetes have said, ḍalāl (going away) here does not mean losing the way and being misled from the path, but it means going away from one’s mind. It has also been said that it means loss. When it is said that something ḍalla from so-and-so it means that he missed and lost it. Either way, it means to forget.
“Calling” (duʿāʾ) here means calling to request something, not necessarily calling as a form of worship. Therefore, “those whom you call on” includes both the true God and the false gods that the polytheists used to call on and request from. This makes the exception connected (muttaṣil). The implied meaning is: When things become difficult to you in the sea by coming close to drowning, you forget every god that you ask and request your needs from except for God.
Some exegetes have suggested that calling here means worship, not request, which the polytheists used to make only to their gods, not to God. Therefore, the exception would be a disconnected one and the implied meaning would be: When distress afflicts you in the sea you forget every god that you used to worship besides God, yet God will not slip from your minds and you do not forget him.
However, it seems that ḍalāl has its usual meaning, which is the opposite of guidance. Its usage here involves an elegant symbolism. When distress afflicts someone in the sea and it occurs to him to call for help, then it is as if the gods whom he used to call on before and constantly request from aim toward his heart, rushing toward him and competing with one another to reach him first so that he may remember them, call them and ask them for help. However, in doing so they all miss their path and fail to reach his memory. Thus, the person forgets all of them, and, as a result, his attention is drawn to God, Who is ever witnessed by the heart and present in the mind, except that the person had turned away from Him. Then God answers his call and rescues him to the land.
Based on this meaning, ḍalāl has its usual meaning (that is, misguidance, losing the way), and “those whom you call on” only includes their false gods that they call on besides God. This makes the exception disconnected, because the implied analogy that makes the basis of the verse does not befit God’s sanctity for He is clear from rushing, following a path and so on.
Furthermore, the subsequent part of the verse (but when He brings you safe to the land, you turn aside) clearly shows that what is meant by “calling” is request, because in normal conditions—other than the state of distress—the polytheists are neglectful of God and do not call Him to request anything from Him. Tadʿūna in present tense indicates continuous calling, which applies only to their gods whom they used to call besides God. That is why the exception is a disconnected one.
…but when He brings you safe to the land, you turn aside…: That is: When He saves you from drowning and removes your distress by bringing you safely to the land, you turn aside from Him or from calling Him anymore. This involves a subtle hint that God is never absent from mankind’s inmost conscience under no circumstance whatsoever, and that one’s primordial nature (fiṭrah) leads him to call Him equally in sorrow, happiness, difficulty and ease. This is because “turning aside” (iʿrāḍ) is only perceivable when there is something present but the person turns aside from it. Saying that “mankind call God in distress but then turn aside from Him after His removal of the distress” is equivalent to saying that mankind’s primary nature is always pointing to His direction.
…and man is ever ungrateful: That is: Ingratitude is a custom of mankind because their human nature is tied to the apparent means and instruments, such that they forget the real Cause and Creator of these means. As a result they fail to thank Him despite being immersed in His apparent and hidden blessings.
Ending the verse with this statement clarifies that mankind’s turning aside from their Lord at times when they are not in distress is not their normal state as dictated by their primary nature. Therefore, this forgetfulness cannot be used as evidence for denying God’s Lordship, because it is an evil habit of mankind that makes them ungrateful to God’s blessings.
This verse involves a proof for God’s unity in Lordship. It is essentially saying that when mankind are cut off from all apparent means and despair of them all, they are still not cut off from all causes in reality and do not completely despair of the chance of being saved. Instead, their heart inclines and clings to a cause that is capable of what no other means is capable of. This natural inclination does not make sense unless there is indeed a cause that is above all other causes, to Whom all affairs return, and that is God. It is only that one is turned aside from Him by his engagement with the ornaments of this life, his attachment to the apparent means of this world, and his heedlessness of what is beyond them.
أَفَأَمِنتُمْ أَن يَخْسِفَ بِكُمْ جَانِبَ ٱلْبَرِّ أَوْ يُرْسِلَ عَلَيْكُمْ حَاصِبًا ثُمَّ لَا تَجِدُوا۟ لَكُمْ وَكِيلًا ٦٨
(17:68) What! Do you then feel secure that He will not cause a tract of land to engulf (yakhsifa, from khusūf) you or send on you a tornado (ḥāṣiban)? Then you shall not find a protector for yourselves.
The khusūf of moon is when its disc is covered by darkness and shadow (that is, lunar eclipse). If the earth is to yakhsifa someone it means that it covers him (that is, swallows him). According to Majmaʿ al-bayān, ḥāṣib is a wind that comes with tiny pebbles and gravel. It has also been said that ḥāṣib is a deadly wind in land, as opposed to qāṣif which is a deadly wind in sea [mentioned in the next verse].
The question in this verse is a rhetorical one with a tone of rebuke. God censures them for ceasing to call Him in land even though they have no clue about what will happen to them later, and they have no protector against the perils of the land just as they do have no protector against the perils of the sea. It is very well possible that God may cause a tract of land to engulf and swallow them, or to send a tornado upon them and thus destroy them. If so, then they will not have any protector to deflect that distress and affliction from them, and to restore their peace and safety.
أَمْ أَمِنتُمْ أَن يُعِيدَكُمْ فِيهِ تَارَةً أُخْرَىٰ فَيُرْسِلَ عَلَيْكُمْ قَاصِفًا مِّنَ ٱلرِّيحِ فَيُغْرِقَكُم بِمَا كَفَرْتُمْ ۙ ثُمَّ لَا تَجِدُوا۟ لَكُمْ عَلَيْنَا بِهِۦ تَبِيعًا ٦٩
(17:69) Or, do you feel secure that He will (not) take you back into it (fīhi) another time, then send on you a fierce gale (qāṣifan, from qaṣf) and thus drown you on account of your ungratefulness? Then you shall not find any aider (tabīʿan) against Us in the matter (bihi).
Qaṣf is to break and shatter something severely. Qāṣif is a wind that breaks the ships and buildings. It has also been said that qāṣif is a deadly wind in the sea. Tabīʿ is the same as tābiʿ (lit. “follower”), which is something or someone that follows another. Fīhi (“into it”) refers to the sea, and bihi (“in the matter”) refers to “drowning” or to “the sending of a wind”—or to both of them in the sense that they are both things that happened before. Each of these views is held by some of the exegetes. This verse completes the rebuke above.
The implied meaning is: What makes you feel so assured and secure when you are rescued to the land that God will not take you back to the sea once again and send a deadly wind or a fierce gale upon you that would break your ship and thus drown you for your ingratitude? In that case, you will not find anyone who would follow and prosecute God on the case of your drowning and ask Him why He did this to you, or would blame Him for what He has done.
…Then you shall not find any aider against Us in the matter: This sentence involves switching from the third person to the majestic plural as a way of showing glory and grandeur to the audience that fits the context here. It is also a preparation for the following verses that are in majestic plural.
وَلَقَدْ كَرَّمْنَا بَنِىٓ ءَادَمَ وَحَمَلْنَـٰهُمْ فِى ٱلْبَرِّ وَٱلْبَحْرِ وَرَزَقْنَـٰهُم مِّنَ ٱلطَّيِّبَـٰتِ وَفَضَّلْنَـٰهُمْ عَلَىٰ كَثِيرٍ مِّمَّنْ خَلَقْنَا تَفْضِيلًا ٧٠
(17:70) And surely We have honored the children of Adam, and We carry them in the land and the sea, and We have provided them with good things, and We preferred them greatly over many of those whom We have created.
This verse is to be read in a context of describing God’s favor and grace, coupled with a sense of admonition. It adds to God’s abundant and consecutive bounties, blessings and mercy upon mankind, such as carrying them in the sea so that they may seek of His grace and sustenance, and giving them security in the land. Yet mankind ungratefully forget their Lord and turn aside from calling Him once He saves them and removes their distress, despite being continuously immersed in His countless blessings. This verse summarizes God’s grace and favor upon mankind in order to show how much care and kindness He has for the people, and how ungrateful they are despite the abundance and extent of His blessings.
Based on the above explanation, it should be clear that the verse describes all mankind. It is not about the specific divine honor, excellence and proximity of some of the people who have excelled in purely spiritual matters. Rather, the verse includes the polytheists, the unbelievers and the sinners; otherwise it would not complement the context of both showing favor and rebuke
And surely We have honored (karramnā, from takrīm) the children of Adam…: Honor (takrīm) here means to have a special care and attention for something, to give it a particular grace and position that is not found in other things. This marks the difference between takrīm (honor) and tafḍīl (preferment), because the former is an absolute act but the latter is relative. Takrīm is to endow someone with value and status in of himself, while tafḍīl is to give someone an endowment more than the others in a context where everyone receives some level of endowment. Mankind are exclusively endowed with the power of intellection (ʿaql), while they are also endowed with more in all other qualities, states and actions that are common between them and the other beings. To see this difference, it suffices to compare mankind with the other beings in terms of diversity of food, drink, clothes, housing and marriage. Furthermore, human beings are endowed with social organization, and they employ other beings in the universe as means to their ends. Compared to this, other beings—animals, plants, and so on,—are devoid of these qualities, except for a simple and limited degree of planning and direction which is and has been fixed in them since they were created without any observable evolution. This is while mankind has excelled in all aspects of their life to very far frontiers and is ever striving and advancing.
In short, the children of Adam are honored by what God has exclusively bestowed upon them among all other existents in the universe. This bestowment that makes them stand out among others is the intellect, by which they distinguish between true and false, good and evil, beneficial and harmful.
Other points of difference mentioned by the exegetes or the narrations are rather specific examples and illustrations [of their honor and preferment]. For example, it has been said that God has honored mankind by the power of speech, an upright posture [standing on too feet], fingers by which they can perform a variety of tasks, eating by the hand, writing, facial beauty, dominance over other creatures, the subservience of other beings for the benefit of mankind, the creation of their father Adam by God’s hand, and Muḥammad being chosen from among them.
Some of these are consequences of the power of intellection, such as the ability to speak and write, or dominance over other creatures. Some others are examples of tafḍīl (preferment) as opposed to takrīm (honor)—the difference between the two was discussed above. Some others are beyond the scope of the verse, such as the creation of their father Adam by God’s hand, and the assignment of Muḥammad from among them, because these are otherworldly honors and spiritual favors, which fall outside the context of the verse, as we clarified above.
This also clarifies the claim that honor in this verse includes all of the above examples. After reporting a list of proposed interpretations, Rūḥ al-maʿānī says:
All of these are examples and applications of this honor. Those who have claimed that honor here means only one of these meanings—such as Ibn ʿAṭiyyah who says that mankind’s honor is only by the intellect and nothing else—have made an erroneous claim, have missed the meaning, and have opposed the clear rule of reason (ʿaql) and authentic traditions (naql).
The problem with this view should be clear given the above discussions.
…and We carry them in the land and the sea: That is: We carry them on the back of ships, animals, and so on, which they ride in order to seek the grace and sustenance of their Lord. This is one of the manifestations of their honor.
…and We have provided them with good things: That is: We have given them of things that they find pleasing such as a variety of fruits and crops, and anything else that they enjoy and benefit from, including all forms of sustenance (rizq). This is another manifestation of their honor. An analogy for this honor is the case of someone who has been invited to a hospitable reception, which is itself an honor; then the host sends an animal that he can mount and ride to the reception, which is a further honor; and then he is offered a variety of delicious foods and enjoyable dishes, which is yet another honor.
This shows that when the verse adds “and We carry them… and We have given them” to “surely We have honored,” it is a case of stating a general concept and then adding its specific instances and examples that are derived from it.
…and We preferred them greatly over most (kathīr) of those whom We have created: It is possible that “those whom We have created” refers to different species of intelligible animals and the jinn—which has been asserted [to exist] by the Qur’an. This is because God counts different species of animals as communities (sing. ummah), much like human communities, and talks about them as it talks about intelligible beings. For example He says: And there is no animal that walks upon the earth nor a bird that flies with its two wings but (they are) genera like yourselves; We have not neglected anything in the Book, then to their Lord shall they be gathered (). This complies more with the meaning of the verse [than including the angels among “those whom We have created”]. As we said, the verse intends to explain how God has honored the children of Adam and preferred them over the other beings in the physical world, which, to the extent that we know, consists of animals and the jinn. As with the angels, they are not among existential beings that are subject to the material system that governs the physical world and the realm of nature.
The implied meaning is: We have preferred the children of Adam over many of those whom We have created, which are the animals and the jinn. The creatures that do not fall under “many” (kathīr) would be the angels, and they are not really a subject of discussion in this verse because they are transcendent and immaterial beings that do not fall under the material system of the world. The verse only concerns mankind in the sense that they are one of the species in the physical world, and in this context God has graced them with both absolute and relative blessings.
Two points should be clear by now given the above discussions:
The first point is that both honor (takrīm) and preferment (tafḍīl) in this verse pertain to a divine gift to mankind. His honoring of mankind is by giving them something that has not been given to the other creatures, and that is the intellect which tells apart good from evil, beneficial from harmful, and virtue from vice. This consequently leads to other blessings such as dominance over the other creatures, employment of other beings in the way of their own goals, speech, writing, and so on. His preferment of mankind is what He has given mankind more relative to the other beings in things that are common between them. For example, what animals eat is the meat, fruit, grains or herbs that they find in its simple and unprocessed form. However, while human beings eat these things, they excel that by the variety of cooked and uncooked foods that they have developed in different, original and creative ways. They indulge in pleasant and delicious dishes that are innumerable and are ever being added to in terms of type and variety. Likewise is the case of their drinks, clothes, housing, mating, family organization, social systems, and so on.
Majmaʿ al-bayān says:
It could be that takrīm and tafḍīl are the same. Then one might question: If that is so, then would it not make the verse repetitive? The answer is: “We have honored” only refers to the bestowal of blessings (inʿām) but it does not express preferment (tafaḍḍul). That is why the verse then says tafḍīl to convey that meaning as well. Another suggested meaning is that takrīm pertains to worldly blessings, while tafḍīl pertains to otherworldly blessings. Another suggested view is that takrīm refers to the bestowal of blessings that could be set as a basis for [religious and devotional] responsibility, while tafḍīl refers to the actual imposed injunctions that make them rise to lofty stations.
The point that there is an additional element in tafḍīl than takrīm— which is the bestowal being beyond what one deserves—is not true, because while tafḍīl is applicable to cases where the preferred individual has no desert it is also applicable to situations where the recipient deserves the conferment. As with the other views that he has narrated from the exegetes, they are mere claims without any proof.
Rāzī has discussed the difference between takrīm and tafḍīl in his Tafsīr as follows:
The most plausible view is to maintain that He preferred mankind over the rest of the animals by the natural and intrinsic creation of the human being such as the intellect, speech, writing, beautiful form and upright posture. Then He enabled mankind to acquire true beliefs and moral virtues by means of intellection and understanding. The first one is takrīm and the second one is tafḍīl. Therefore, it is as if the verse is saying: We have preferred them by enabling them to acquire what would cause their salvation and proximity [to God] through the means with which We have honored them. Hence, it is incumbent on them to be grateful and use what has been created for them in what they have been created for, meaning that they should serve God alone, not associate anyone with Him, and forsake their current practice of worshipping others.
What he is essentially saying is that takrīm refers to intrinsic matters and what pertains to them such as instincts, while tafḍīl refers to acquired perfections. It is true that the divine favors and existential perfections of mankind include both intrinsic matters and acquired perfections—as he has said—but the reader would certainly admit that matching takrīm with the former and tafḍīl with the latter does not comply with their lexical meaning or their common usage. Hence, the difference between the two terms is as we stated above [that is, absolute vs. relative].
The second point is that the verse is about human perfection in terms of their natural existence and their honor and preferment compared to the other natural beings that are found in the physical world. Hence the angels are not a subject of discussion in this verse as they do not belong to the physical world. Therefore, what is meant by mankind’s preferment over many of the creatures is their preferment over creatures “other than the angels”—that is, all beings in the physical world. The verse is silent about the angels [and mankind’s relative superiority or inferiority to them] because they belong to a different realm of existence.
This should clarify the flaw with what some exegetes have argued based on this verse, that the angels are superior to mankind—including the prophets. Some have said that “We preferred them greatly over many of those whom We have created” indicates that there is some creature over whom mankind have not been preferred, and that can only be angels because everyone concurs that the children of Adam are preferred to all animals.
The flaw with this view is that the subject of the verse is preferment in the context of natural and material existence, and the angels are nonexistent in this context. Some have answered the above claim by saying that preferment in this verse does not pertain to spiritual reward and merit (thawāb). Being preferred by acquired reward is not applicable here because the verse is talking about initial and unprecedented preferment [that is, preferment not preceded by desert and action]. The verse is about God’s preferment of mankind by various blessings that they have been given in this world. This answer essentially reduces to ours.
Some have said that “many” (kathīr) in this verse means “all” (jamīʿ), and the particle min (lit. “of”) is to elucidate what this “all” is (called min bayāniyyah). Hence, the implied meaning is: We have preferred them over those whom We have created, which are many. This is an implausible interpretation, they have not provided any evidence for it, and it does not match the context of the verse.
Another suggested view is that this verse is like when one says, “I spent my credible reputation for him” or “I let him on the vastness of my property,” which do not mean that the person has some reputation that is credible and some that is not, or that the person let him on the vast portion of his property but not on the narrow side! Instead, what is meant is that “I spent my reputation—which is very credible—for him” and “I let him on my property which is vast.” This interpretation, however, is not applicable to the current verse. In these two examples, reputation and property are not split into two divisions; rather, the person’s reputation is entirely credible and his property is a vast whole. This is not the same as what is being claimed about the verse: That the verse is saying “some” (that is, “many”) but it means “all.” Another possible interpretation based on the above examples is that “I spent my most credible reputation for him, let alone my less credible reputation,” and “I permitted him to enter my vast property, let alone entering my smaller property.” However, there is no doubt that this interpretation is also not applicable to this verse, because it would imply that if something holds for a part of a group then it should necessarily hold for the whole [which is clearly not true].
Some have answered the above problem as follows: If “many” does not include the angels and the particle min (lit. “of”) is a discriminatory one (tabʿīḍiyyah), then all that can be said is that the verse is silent about the relative preferment of mankind over the angels. This does not necessarily mean that the angels are superior to mankind, because it could be that the two are equal. Even if we say that the verse implies that the angels are superior to mankind, then that only means that angels as a genus are superior to mankind as a genus, which does not contradict having individual human beings—like the prophets—who are superior to the angels.
However, the correct view is what we presented to you above, that the verse does not concern preferment in the sense of reward and otherworldly excellence to begin with. Instead, it concerns preferment in terms of physical existence. Therefore, “many of those whom We have created” does not include the angels. Moreover, the particle min is a discriminatory one, which means that We have preferred mankind over many out of all, where all includes angels and others—like human beings, animals and the jinn. [All that this verse is saying is that] the human being is superior to the animals and the jinn with regards to his physical existence. As with mankind’s superiority over angels, we shall discuss it below by the will of God.
Discourse
The discussion “Discussion on the Superiority of Mankind vs. Angels” appears here in the printed volume. Read it in the Al-Mizan App.
يَوْمَ نَدْعُوا۟ كُلَّ أُنَاسٍۭ بِإِمَـٰمِهِمْ ۖ فَمَنْ أُوتِىَ كِتَـٰبَهُۥ بِيَمِينِهِۦ فَأُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ يَقْرَءُونَ كِتَـٰبَهُمْ وَلَا يُظْلَمُونَ فَتِيلًا ٧١
(17:71) (Remember) the day when We will call every people by their Imam; then whoever is given his book in his right hand, these shall read their book; and they shall not be dealt with a whit unjustly.
“The day” is the Day of Resurrection, and it involves an omitted verb: “Remember the day when…” Imam is a leader; one who is followed. God has used this title to describe certain groups of mankind who guide the people by God’s command. For example: He said: Surely I will make you an Imam of men (), and: And We made them Imams who guided (people) of our command (). This title is also used for another group who is followed in the way of error and misguidance, as He says: Then fight the leaders (aʾimmah, plural of imām) of unbelief (). In addition, He has called the Torah as an Imam: And before it [the Qur’an] (is) the Book of Moses, a leader (imām) and a mercy (). Perhaps one can infer that all divine books that comprise of a divine code (shariah) are Imams, including the books of Noah, Abraham, Jesus and Muḥammad.
The title has also been applied to the Guarded Tablet (al-lawḥ al-maḥfūẓ), which is the apparent sense of Imam in the verse: We have recorded everything in a clear writing (Imamin mubīn) (). The current verse clearly implies that every group of people will have an Imam of its own that is different from the Imam of the other groups, because the word “Imam” has been added to the pronoun “their” which refers to “every people.” Hence, Imam here cannot mean the Guarded Tablet, for there is only one of that and it does not belong to any group of people exclusively.
Moreover, what this verse is saying apparently applies to all of the people from the beginning to the end. Under the verse, “(All) People were a single nation; so Allah raised prophets as bearers of good news and as warners, and He revealed with them the Book” (), we said that the first divine scripture that consisted of a divine law was Noah’s Book, and there was no such book before him. This shows that Imam in this verse cannot mean book (that is, scripture) because the verse asserts that every people will have an Imam while the nations before Noah did not have a scripture.
Ruling out the above possibilities, it becomes evident the Imam of every people means the person whom they follow in the path of either truth or falsehood. As we said above, the Qur’an calls both of such leaders “Imams.” Another possibility is that Imam only refers to a true leader, which is one individual in every era whom God chooses to guide the people of his time. Sometimes this Imam is a prophet, as was the case with Abraham and Muḥammad, and sometimes he is not. This was discussed in detail in the exposition of the verse: And when his Lord tried Ibrahim with certain words, he fulfilled them. He said: Surely I will make you an Imam of men. Ibrahim said: And of my offspring? My covenant does not include the unjust, said He ().
However, this last possibility is unlikely because one of the leaders of misguidance was Pharaoh about whom God says: He shall lead his people on the resurrection day, and bring them down to the fire (). And He says: That Allah might separate the impure from the good, and put the impure, some of it upon the other, and pile it up together, then cast it into hell (). What is inferred from these and other similar verses—which are many—is that the misguided folk will not separate from their leaders on the Day of Resurrection. An implication of this is that they will be called and summoned with their [evil] leaders.
Furthermore, “their Imam” is mentioned in an absolute form. It is not conditioned by the Imam being a true and rightful one that has been assigned by God to guide the people by His command, and the leaders of misguidance have been called Imams just like the leaders of guidance. The subsequent part of the verse and the following verse also suggest that what is meant by the Imam by whom people are called is a person that people took to as their leader in their lives and the role model that they followed in this world, as opposed to someone that God chose for leadership and assigned to guide by His command, irrespective of the people following him or forsaking him.
Therefore, apparently what is meant by the leader of every people is whoever they followed, whether he was a true leader or a false one. It is not as some have thought that the people will be called by the names of their leaders such as, “O nation of Abraham,” “O nation of Muḥammad,” “O people of Pharaoh,” and so on. This does not comply with what follows next as a consequence of this: Then whoever is given his book in his right hand… And whoever is blind in this (). There is no connection between calling people by the names of their leaders—as suggested in this interpretation—and giving them their books in their right hands or being blind.
Rather, based on what follows, what is meant by “calling” is to be gathered and summoned. That is, they will be gathered with their leaders, then those who subscribed to a true leader will be given their books in their right hands, and the blindness of those who failed to see, recognize and follow their true Imam in this world will manifest. This is what can be inferred by contemplating the verse.
The exegetes have interpreted Imam in this verse in a variety of different ways. Some of them are as follows:
It has been said: Imam here means the scriptures that people subscribed to such as the Torah, the Gospel and the Qur’an. On the Day of Resurrection it will be announced, “O people of the Torah,” “O people of the Gospel” and “O people of the Qu’ran.” This view and the problem with it were discussed above.
It has been said: For those who were on the right path, their Imam will be their prophet; and for those who pursued falsehood, their Imam will be Satan and the leaders of misguidance. It will be said, “Bring the followers of Abraham,” “Bring the followers of Moses” and “Bring the followers of Muḥammad,” whereby their followers—that is, the followers of truth— will rise and will be given their books in their right hands. Then it will be said, “Bring the followers of Satan” and “Bring the followers of chiefs of misguidance.” The problem with this view is that it interprets Imam in the verse according to its lexical definition, which is an intelligible leader that is followed. However, there is no reason to adopt this definition when the term has its own definition in the language of the Qur’an, which includes those who guide by God’s command as well as those who are followed in the path of error and misguidance.
It has been said: Imam means their records of deeds. It will be said, “O people with books of good deeds” and “O people with books of evil deeds.” The books of deeds are called Imam (lit. “leader”) because people follow their rule about whether the person must go to Paradise or Hell.
The problem with this view is that there is no justification for calling the book of deeds an Imam. Rather, one’s book of deeds follows his actions in terms of being good or evil. Therefore, it is more appropriate to be called a follower (tābiʿ) than a leader (matbūʿ). Furthermore, what the people follow is God’s judgment after the opening of the books, questioning, weighing, and witnessing. As with the records of deeds, they only include a report of good and evil deeds but not the final judgment.
This also shows that Imam here means neither the Guarded Tablet, nor the record of deeds of every nation as a whole—which has been referred to in the verse: Every nation shall be called to its book (). This is because such a meaning does not comply with the subsequent part of the verse, which is apparently about individuals and not nations as a whole: then whoever is given his book in his right hand ().
It has been said: Imam is the plural of umm (mother), so people will be called by the names of their mothers. It will be said, “O son of fulānah [feminine so-and-so]” instead of “O son of fulān [masculine so-and-so].” They have also reported a narration to this effect.
The problem with this view is that it does not match the wording of the verse, because the verse says, “We will call every people by their Imam.” The suggested interpretation above corresponds to “We will call people by their mothers” or “We will call every person by his mother (ummihi).” As with what they have narrated, even if it is authenticated it would be an independent narration, not a narration pertaining to the interpretation of this verse in particular. This is not to mention that using imām as the plural of umm is very rare and uncommon, and one cannot interpret God’s Book according to such definitions. Al-Kashshāf has referred to this view as an innovation (bidʿah) in interpretation.
It has been said: Imam means any intelligible or unintelligible being that is followed and subscribed to, including true leaders like prophets and saint, as wells as false ones like Satan and chiefs of misguidance; true religions and false ones; divine scriptures and misleading books; righteous traditions and unrighteous ones. Perhaps calling people in this fashion alludes to the idea that on the Day of Resurrection every follower will accompany his leader. The letter bāʾ in bi-imāmihim (lit. “by their Imam”) conveys accompaniment (muṣāḥabah).
This view suffers from the problem that we mentioned about the second view—that Imam means the prophets for some and the leaders of misguidance for others. Such lexical interpretations are plausible when the word is not a Qur’anic term with its own usage and meaning in Qur’an’s language. This is while Imam in the Qu’ran refers to one who guides by God’s command or one who is a leader of misguidance. It is also possible that the letter bāʾ is an instrumental particle.
Furthermore, it should be noted that the guidance of scriptures, traditions, religions and so on reduces to the guidance of leaders (sing. al-imām). The same is true about the prophets, for they guide by the virtue of being Imams; otherwise, in the sense that they inform the people about hidden realities or propagate their message, they are not Imams but they are prophets or messengers. Likewise is the misguidance of false religions, misleading books and innovated traditions, for their misguidance really belongs to their founders and innovators.
…then whoever is given his book in his right hand, these shall read their book; and they shall not be dealt with a whit (fatīlan) unjustly: Fatīl means the narrow thread that is in the small split on date stones. It has also been said that fatīl is the thread that is inside a date stone, naqīr is the thread that is outside, and qiṭmīr is the split on the stone.
The word “then…” shows that what is said here is a consequence of being called by their Imam. That is, their followership of their Imams will cause them to be divided and separated into two groups: those whom will be given their books in their right hands, and those who will be blind and more erring from the way. This shows that there are two types of Imams: the leaders of guidance and the leaders of misguidance. The subsequent part of these verses [that is, the second half of verse and verse ] is a consequence of the first part of the verse [], and this shows that Imam here includes both leaders of guidance and leaders of misguidance. This confirms what we said above. This can also be inferred from the fact that instead of talking about those whom are given their books in their left hands or from their backs—as mentioned elsewhere in the Qur’an— the first group is contrasted by “whoever is blind in this, he shall (also) be blind in the hereafter” ().
Given the context of these verses, the implied meaning is: They will be divided into two groups. One group is given their records of deeds in their right hands, and they shall read their books with delight, pleasure and happiness because they are felicitous. They shall not be wronged even as much as a date-thread, but they will be given their rewards fully and completely.
وَمَن كَانَ فِى هَـٰذِهِۦٓ أَعْمَىٰ فَهُوَ فِى ٱلْـَٔاخِرَةِ أَعْمَىٰ وَأَضَلُّ سَبِيلًا ٧٢
(17:72) And whoever is blind (aʿmā) in this, he shall (also) be blind (aʿmā) in the hereafter; and more erring from the way.
The contradistinction between “this” and “hereafter” shows that “this” means “this world” (al-dunyā). Likewise, since the verse serves to match and correspond between the current life and the hereafter, “blindness in this world” and “blindness in the hereafter” both refer to lack of insight and inner perception (baṣīrah). God says: For surely it is not the eyes that are blind, but blind are the hearts which are in the breasts (). This is confirmed by the addition of “and more erring from the way” to blindness in the hereafter.
The implied meaning is: Those who do not recognize the true Imam and do not follow the true path in the life of this world will not find salvation and felicity in the life of hereafter and will not achieve forgiveness and mercy.
Our explanation should show the weakness of a view proposed by some exegetes, that “in this” refers to the bounties and blessings mentioned above, so the meaning is: Whoever is blind with regard to the blessings that he has been granted—meaning that he does not recognize them as blessings and does not thank God for them—will be blind in the hereafter.
Likewise is another interpretation, that blindness in this world means lack of insight and perception, while blindness in the hereafter means lack of physical sight (baṣar). In addition to what we said above about this, it should be noted that lack of physical sight in the hereafter essentially reduces to lack of insight, because God says: On the day when hidden things shall be made manifest ().
The words of one exegete seem to suggest that the second aʿmā [used for the hereafter] is a comparative, for he has interpreted it as more intense blindness and more misguided from the path. The context of the verse complies with this view.
Examining Narrations
(1) Concerning verse , Zayd b. ʿAlī narrated from his father: “And surely We have honored the children of Adam” means: We have preferred the children of Adam over the rest of the creatures. “And We carry them in the land and the sea” means: on the wet and the dry. “And We have provided them with good things” means: of every good fruit. “And We have made them to excel” means: all animals and birds eat and drink [directly] by their mouth without raising their food or drink to their mouths by their hands, except for the son of Adam who raises his food to his mouth by his hand. This is one preferment.
(2) Concerning verse (And We preferred them greatly over many of those whom We have created) Imam al-Bāqir said: All creatures have been created bent except for the human being who has been created upright.
Author’s comment: These two narrations mention some examples and instances of preferment, as evidenced by the Imam’s expression at the end of the first hadith: “This is one preferment.”
(3) Al-Fuḍayl said: I asked Imam al-Bāqir about God’s words: (Remember) The day when We will call every people by their Imam (). He said: “The Messenger of God will come with his people, ʿAlī will come with his people, al-Ḥasan with his people, al-Ḥusayn with his people—and anyone who has died during the time of any Imam will come with him.”
(4) Imam al-Ṣādiq said: Aren’t you grateful to God? For indeed when it is the Day of Resurrection, every people will be called to whom they subscribed to. There we will take resort to the Messenger of God and you will take resort to us.
Author’s comment: This has also been narrated from the Imam in Majmaʿ al-bayān. This narration shows that the Messenger of God is the Imam of the Imams, just as he is a witness over all witnesses. It also shows that being called by one’s Imam is a rule that also applies to the Imams themselves.
(5) Majmaʿ al-bayān says: Both Shias and Sunnis have narrated via authentic chains of transmission from ʿAlī b. Mūsā al-Riḍā, that he narrated from his fathers up to the Prophet: Every people will be called by the Imam of their time, the book of their Lord, and the tradition (Sunnah) of their prophet.
Author’s comment: Tafsīr al-burhān has also narrated this on the authority of Ibn Shahr-Āshūb, from Imam al-Riḍā, from his fathers up to the Prophet with the same words, and has also ascribed it to both Shia and Sunni narrations.
(6) Concerning verse (The day when We will call every people by their Imam) the Messenger of God said: Every people will be called by the Imam of their time, the book of their Lord, and the tradition (Sunnah) of their prophet.
(7) Imam al-Ṣādiq said: “The earth will never be left without an Imam that legalizes what God has made lawful and illegalizes what God has made unlawful. This is what God says: (Remember) the day when We will call every people by their Imam ().” The Imam then said, “The Messenger of God said: Whoever dies without having an Imam has died the death of the pre-Islamic era (jāhiliyyah)…”
Author’s comment: The reason why this verse is evidence to what the Imam is saying here is that the verse asserts the call of all people by their Imam without exception.
(8) Concerning verse (The day when We will call every people by their Imam) Imam al-Ṣādiq said: On the Day of Resurrection God will say, “Does the justice of your Lord not require that every people should follow whomever they subscribed to?” They [the people] will say, “Yes!” So He will say, “Separate from one another” and thus they will separate and classify.
Author’s comment: This narration confirms what we said above—that calling by an Imam means gathering and summoning them with him, not shouting his name. There are several narrations with the same meaning as the above narrations.
(9) Concerning fatīlan in verse —And they shall not be dealt with a whit (fatīlan) unjustly—one of the Infallibles said: It is the skin that covers a date stone.
(10) Al-Muthannā narrates: Abū Baṣīr asked Imam al-Ṣādiq while I was listening: “[What do you say about] a man who had 100,000 and every year he said, ‘This year I will go to the hajj! This year I will go to the hajj!’ until death overtook him before he performed the obligatory pilgrimage.” The Imam said: “O Abū Baṣīr, have you not heard God’s words: And whoever is blind in this, he shall (also) be blind in the hereafter; and more erring from the way ()? It means being blind from performing any of the duties that God has made obligatory.”
In other words, “Say” marks the beginning of a new discussion, which continues into the current set of verses. (Trans.) ↩︎
The current translation is based on min being ibtidāʾiyyah. It indicates the source of grace that is sought: That you may seek of or from His grace. Min tabʿīḍiyyah (lit. “discriminatory”) would mean: That you may seek some part and share of His grace. (Trans.) ↩︎
A connected exception (al-istithnāʾ al-muttaṣil) is when what is excepted is one of the members of what is excepted from. This is in contrast to a disconnected exception (al-istithnāʾ al-munfaṣil), which has the form of an exception but it can be broken into two independent statements. (Trans.) ↩︎
In other words, this verse explicitly splits God’s creatures into two groups, as opposed to the above examples that assert a trait and quality for the subject without dividing it. (Trans.) ↩︎
In other words, if Imam were the plural of umm, then the verse would be saying: We will call every group of people by their mothers, which does not make sense as it suffers from singular-plural mismatch. (Trans.) ↩︎
The meaning would be: We will call every people by the means of their Imam. (Trans.) ↩︎
Fatīl is used in , , ; naqīr is used in and ; qiṭmīr is used in verse . (Trans.) ↩︎
See verses and . (Trans.) ↩︎
In other words, if the two groups were described by how they will receive their record of deeds, then Imam could be interpreted as the record of deeds, but the second group is described by blindness and error, which are more compatible with following misleading leaders. (Trans.) ↩︎
Shaykh Ṭūsī’s al-Amālī, via its chain of narration. ↩︎
Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, on the authority of Jābir. ↩︎
Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī. ↩︎
Tafsīr al-burhān, on the authority of Ibn Shahr-Āshūb. ↩︎
Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of Ibn Mardawayh, from ʿAlī. ↩︎
Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, on the authority of ʿAmmār al-Sābāṭī. ↩︎
Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, on the authority of Ismāʿīl b. Hammām. ↩︎
Tafsīr al-Qummī. ↩︎
Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī. ↩︎