Verses 16–33

Chapter 21: Al-Anbiyāʾ (The Prophets) · Printed edition: Volume 28, pp. 23–60

وَمَا خَلَقْنَا السَّمَاءَ وَالأَرْضَ وَمَا بَيْنَهُمَا لاعِبِينَ ١٦ لَوْ أَرَدْنَا أَنْ نَتَّخِذَ لَهْواً لاتَّخَذْنَاهُ مِنْ لَدُنَّا إِنْ كُنَّا فَاعِلِينَ ١٧ بَلْ نَقْذِفُ بِالْحَقِّ عَلَى الْبَاطِلِ فَيَدْمَغُهُ فَإِذَا هُوَ زَاهِقٌ وَلَكُمْ الْوَيْلُ مِمَّا تَصِفُونَ ١٨ وَلَهُ مَنْ فِي السَّمَوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ وَمَنْ عِنْدَهُ لا يَسْتَكْبِرُونَ عَنْ عِبَادَتِهِ وَلا يَسْتَحْسِرُونَ ١٩ يُسَبِّحُونَ اللَّيْلَ وَالنَّهَارَ لا يَفْتُرُونَ ٢٠ أَمْ اتَّخَذُوا آلِهَةً مِنْ الأَرْضِ هُمْ يُنشِرُونَ ٢١ لَوْ كَانَ فِيهِمَا آلِهَةٌ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ لَفَسَدَتَا فَسُبْحَانَ اللَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَرْشِ عَمَّا يَصِفُونَ ٢٢ لا يُسْأَلُ عَمَّا يَفْعَلُ وَهُمْ يُسْأَلُونَ ٢٣ أَمْ اتَّخَذُوا مِنْ دُونِهِ آلِهَةً قُلْ هَاتُوا بُرْهَانَكُمْ هَذَا ذِكْرُ مَنْ مَعِي وَذِكْرُ مَنْ قَبْلِي بَلْ أَكْثَرُهُمْ لا يَعْلَمُونَ الْحَقَّ فَهُمْ مُعْرِضُونَ ٢٤ وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِنْ قَبْلِكَ مِنْ رَسُولٍ إِلاَّ نُوحِي إِلَيْهِ أَنَّهُ لا إِلَهَ إِلاَّ أَنَا فَاعْبُدُونِ ٢٥ وَقَالُوا اتَّخَذَ الرَّحْمَنُ وَلَداً سُبْحَانَهُ بَلْ عِبَادٌ مُكْرَمُونَ ٢٦ لا يَسْبِقُونَهُ بِالْقَوْلِ وَهُمْ بِأَمْرِهِ يَعْمَلُونَ ٢٧ يَعْلَمُ مَا بَيْنَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَمَا خَلْفَهُمْ وَلا يَشْفَعُونَ إِلاَّ لِمَنْ ارْتَضَى وَهُمْ مِنْ خَشْيَتِهِ مُشْفِقُونَ ٢٨ وَمَنْ يَقُلْ مِنْهُمْ إِنِّي إِلَهٌ مِنْ دُونِهِ فَذَلِكَ نَجْزِيهِ جَهَنَّمَ كَذَلِكَ نَجْزِي الظَّالِمِينَ ٢٩ أَوَلَمْ يَرَى الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا أَنَّ السَّمَوَاتِ وَالأَرْضَ كَانَتَا رَتْقاً فَفَتَقْنَاهُمَا وَجَعَلْنَا مِنْ الْمَاءِ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ حَيٍّ أَفَلا يُؤْمِنُونَ ٣٠ وَجَعَلْنَا فِي الأَرْضِ رَوَاسِيَ أَنْ تَمِيدَ بِهِمْ وَجَعَلْنَا فِيهَا فِجَاجاً سُبُلاً لَعَلَّهُمْ يَهْتَدُونَ ٣١ وَجَعَلْنَا السَّمَاءَ سَقْفاً مَحْفُوظاً وَهُمْ عَنْ آيَاتِهَا مُعْرِضُونَ ٣٢ وَهُوَ الَّذِي خَلَقَ اللَّيْلَ وَالنَّهَارَ وَالشَّمْسَ وَالْقَمَرَ كُلٌّ فِي فَلَكٍ يَسْبَحُونَ ٣٣

16. And We did not create the heavens and the earth and what is between them for sport.
17. Had We wished to make a diversion, We would have made it from before Ourselves—if We were to do (so).
18. Nay! We hurl the truth against falsehood, so that it breaks its head, and lo! It vanishes; and woe to you for what you describe;
19. And whoever is in the heavens and the earth is His; and those who are with Him are not too proud to serve Him, nor do they grow weary.
20. They glorify (Him) by night and day; they are never languid.
21. Or have they taken gods from the earth who raise (the dead)?
22. If there had been in them any gods except Allah, they would both have certainly been in a state of disorder; therefore glory be to Allah, the Lord of the Throne, above what they attribute (to Him).
23. He is not questioned concerning what He does, but they shall be questioned.
24. Or, have they taken gods besides Him? Say: Bring your proof; this is the reminder of those with me and the reminder of those before me. Nay! most of them do not know the truth, so they turn aside.
25. And We did not send before you any but We revealed to him that there is no god but Me; therefore, serve Me.
26. And they say: The Beneficent has taken to Himself a son. Glory be to Him. Nay! They are honored servants.
27. They do not precede Him in speech and (only) according to His command do they act.
28. He knows what is before them and what is behind them, and they do not intercede except for him whom He approves of, and for fear of Him they tremble.
29. And whoever of them should say: Surely I am a god besides Him, such a one do We recompense with Hell; thus do We recompense the unjust.
30. Do not those who disbelieve see that the heavens and the earth were closed up, but We have opened them; and We have made of water everything living; will they not then believe?
31. And We have made great mountains in the earth lest it might be convulsed with them, and We have made in it wide ways that they may follow a right direction.
32. And We have made the heaven a guarded canopy and (yet) they turn aside from its signs.
33. And He it is Who created the night and the day and the sun and the moon; all (orbs) travel along swiftly in their celestial spheres.

Introduction

These verses begin by justifying the punishment of the unjust nations before by stating that God’s creation was not an act of sport. God was not amusing Himself by creating the heavens, the earth and what is between them. Thus, human beings are not left with their own desires to act as they please and play as they wish, without being held to account for their deeds. On the contrary, they were created to return to their Lord and be reckoned and requited in accordance with their deeds, meaning that they are accountable servants. If they transgress the bound of servitude, they will be punished as divine wisdom dictates. Verily God is on the watch.

Since this justification is itself a proof for Resurrection, the verses turn to the topic of the Hereafter and arguments that prove the Resurrection. They also include arguments for prophethood in the light of that, because prophethood is a necessary requirement of serving God, and is concomitant to the truth of Resurrection. These verses involve an innovative explanation to prove the Resurrection, and they leave no room for any possible arguments against the Resurrection, as you shall see below. The first two verses link the theme of the previous set of verses to what follows next.

Commentary

وَمَا خَلَقْنَا السَّمَاءَ وَالأَرْضَ وَمَا بَيْنَهُمَا لاعِبِينَ ١٦ لَوْ أَرَدْنَا أَنْ نَتَّخِذَ لَهْواً لاتَّخَذْنَاهُ مِنْ لَدُنَّا إِنْ كُنَّا فَاعِلِينَ ١٧

(21:16-17) And We did not create the heavens and the earth and what is between them for sport (lāʿibīna, from laʿib). Had (law) We wished to make a diversion (lahwan), We would have made it from before Ourselves—if We were to do (so).

The two verses explain [why] punishment came down upon the iniquitous towns, the demolition of which God mentioned above []. Following the context of the previous verses, these verses are at the same time a demonstrative proof for the truth of Resurrection, and in the light of that the truth of prophethood—which is the primary aim and theme of the verses in this chapter.

A summary of the previous set of verses is: There will be a resurrection in which people’s deeds will be reckoned. Thus, it is necessary to distinguish between good and evil, and between righteous and unrighteous deeds through divine guidance, and that would be a true call that hinges on prophethood. Were it not for that, creation would be futile and God would be sporting and amusing Himself through it. Far be He from that.

As you can see, the two verses are structured as an argument to prove the reality of Resurrection in order to then prove the truth of the prophetic call, because the prophetic call is a necessary implication of the Resurrection, but not vice versa.

The argument of the two verses, as one can see, depends on the concepts of laʿib (sport) and lahw (distraction, diversion). Laʿib is a coherent act that has an imaginary purpose without any real goal to it, such as the games that children play. The results of their games—such as taking the lead, falling behind, making a profit, incurring a loss, winning and losing—are things that are limited to their imagination. They are all based on supposition and fantasy. In the sense that laʿib attracts one’s attention to it and distracts the soul from real works, it is also an example of lahw (distraction, diversion).

If the creation of the world that we see were not pursuing any purpose, it would imply that God simply continues to bring things to existence and then to non-existence, to give life and then death, to build and then destroy, without any purpose consequential to these actions and without any goal behind these acts. This would mean that God does these acts only for the sake of doing them; to see these beings and stages come one after another; all to keep Himself busy with these acts, to dispel frustration, boredom and idleness from Himself, to flee from loneliness, and as a means of coming out from seclusion. That would be like us when we take up an activity in order to amuse and engage ourselves, as a solution to get rid of some discomfort, deficiency or unpleasant feeling that bothers us such as boredom, fatigue, idleness, failure and so on.

Given the above, laʿib (sport, game, play) is also lahw (diversion, amusement) from one point of view. That is why we see that He refers in the first verse to “sport”: And We did not create the heavens and the earth and what is between them for sport (), but then changes it to “diversion” in the second verse, which serves as a justification for the first verse. He has exchanged diversion for sport to complete the argument.

There is no sensible meaning for God’s distraction and amusement by His creation. That is impossible because diversion is what a person engages in so as to solve a problem and fulfill a need. Hence, it is an effective cause with regards to the person. However, it makes no sense for His creation to have an effect on Him, and for Him to be in need of something that is dependent on Himself in every respect. Thus, hypothetically speaking, if He were to distract Himself with a diversion, it would not be permissible for it to be something external to His Self [that is, His Essence]. His creation is His act and work, which is external to His Self, while God’s diversion cannot be by anything external to His Essence.

This completes the argument that God did not create the heavens and the earth and what is between them for sport or diversion; He did not create them in vain and without any aim or purpose to them. This is why He says: Had We wished to make a diversion, We would have made it from before Ourselves ().

As for diverting Himself with something not external to His Essence, that is also inherently impossible because it would necessitate a need in His Self for something that would distract and divert Him from what He finds in His Self. This entails that His Essence is composed of a real need within itself and something that fulfills and removes that need. However, there cannot be any deficiency or need in His Holy essence. Yet, the argument in these verses does not depend on this [that is, God’s essential absoluteness and sufficiency]. Instead, the verses embark upon a proof that there is no sport or diversion in His action, meaning in His creation. As for there being no sport or diversion in His Essence, that is beyond the purpose of these verses. Verse has negated this possibility only indirectly by using the word law (lit. “if,” but specifically used for an impossible condition) which shows impossibility. This is then reinforced again by saying: if We were to do (so) (). Contemplate this.

Given the above explanation, it should be clear that Had We wished… () is meant to justify the negation in And We did not create… (). Also, from before Ourselves () means: in Our selves; in the stage of Our essence as opposed to the stage of creation which belongs to Our actions and is external to Our essence. Then, if We were to do (so) () is a further independent reference to what is implied by the word law [at the beginning of the sentence], meant as a form of emphasis.

With this exposition, the argument is completed for the Resurrection and subsequently for prophethood, and these verses are linked to the previous thread. The gist of the verses is: People will return to God and be reckoned for their deeds to be requited for them by either reward or punishment. Thus, there should necessarily be prophethood and a call that guides the people to what will be the basis of their requital in terms of belief and action. Therefore, the Resurrection is what gives purpose to creation, and it in turn entails prophethood. If there were no Resurrection, there would be no aim or purpose to creation, and creation would be a sport and diversion on His part, which is impossible. If it were possible for Him to take up a diversion, it would have to be something within His Self, not something through His creation which is His action and external to His Self. This is because it is impossible for something other than Him to have an effect on Him, and for Him to need something besides Himself in any way. Because creation is not sport, there is a purpose for it—namely Resurrection, which itself implicates prophethood. Resurrection also comes with the punishment of some wrongdoers for their transgression and trespass, which requires the revival of the truth. That is why the next verse says: Nay! We hurl the truth against falsehood, so that it breaks its head, and lo! It vanishes ().

Here are some other interpretations by the exegetes for: Had We wished to make a diversion, We would have made it from before Ourselves ():

From before Ourselves (min ladunnā) means “by Our power (qudrah).” The meaning would be: “If We wished to take up a diversion, We would have done so by Our power because it is above everything; however, We do not wish to do so.” The negation is understood from the term law which indicates impossibility. This summarizes the view offered in al-Kashshāf.

The problem with this interpretation is that “power” is not applicable to impossibilities. Diversion means something that distracts one from what concerns the person in one way or another, and this is impossible for Him. Furthermore, it is not clear how “from before Ourselves” refers to God’s power.

From before Ourselves means “from Our presence such that no one sees it,” because that would be a defect that should preferably remain hidden.

The problem with this view is that one hides a defect out of fear of being criticized for it. Fear is a characteristic of one who has some weakness, not One Who has power over all things. If God can remove one defect through diversion, then He should also be able to remove another defect [that is, that of fear of blame] in its own appropriate way. Furthermore, if it is impossible for Him to show [a desire for] diversion because it is a defect, then it should be impossible for Him to have a deficiency in the first place. The impossibility of having an imperfection takes precedence over the impossibility of its disclosure. The above interpretation ultimately means: “If We did that impossible thing, We would hide it from you because showing it is impossible.” This statement is obvious self-contradictory.

Lahw (diversion, amusement) means “wife and children.” Arabs call wife and children lahw because they are a source of relief and composure, and lahw (diversion, amusement) has the same effect on the soul. The meaning is: “If We wanted to take up a wife and a child, or one of the two, then We would take one from among those who are closest to Us (al-muqarrabūn).” This meaning is similar to His words: If Allah desired to take a son to Himself, He will surely choose those He pleases from what He has created (). Some have interpreted this as follows: “Had we wanted a wife and/or child, We would take one of the sublime non-material beings, not one of the lowly bodies or corporeal beings.” Others have interpreted: “We would take one of pure houris [of Paradise].” Either way, the verse would be a response to Christians and those who believe that God has a spouse and a child, namely Mary and Christ.

The problem with this interpretation is that even if its claimed lexical meaning [of lahw] is true, it disconnects the verse from the thread of the previous verses.

From before Ourselves means “on Our part,” meaning a divine diversion that is wise [in reality and from Our point of view], although it may seem to be vainness and diversion from your point of view. Such a divine diversion would be nothing but wisdom. It is equivalent to saying, “Even if We wanted to take up a diversion, it would be impossible.” In short: What is on His part can only be wise and significant. If He wished diversion, even that would turn out to be something wise and significant. In other words, it is impossible that He would ever wish diversion.

The problem with this view is that although it is inherently correct and subtle, it is clearly not the apparent meaning that is understood from the wording of the verse.

… if We were (in kunnā) to do (so): The Arabic particle in is apparently conditional (meaning “if”) as we said above. Its apodosis is omitted but understood from His words: We would have made it from before Ourselves (). Some exegetes have suggested that the Arabic particle in here is a negative particle, and this phrase [at the end of the verse] is a conclusion of the first part of the verse. Others have answered that in as a negative particle is normally used with illā [which is not the case here]. Based on our explanations above, it should be clear that using a conditional article in is more expressive in this context than a negative one.

بَلْ نَقْذِفُ بِالْحَقِّ عَلَى الْبَاطِلِ فَيَدْمَغُهُ فَإِذَا هُوَ زَاهِقٌ ۚ وَلَكُمُ الْوَيْلُ مِمَّا تَصِفُونَ١٨

(21:18) Nay! We hurl (naqdhifu, from qadhf) the truth against falsehood, so that it breaks its head (fa-yadmaghuhu, from damgh), and lo! It vanishes (zāhiq, from zuhūq); and woe to you for what you describe;

Qadhf means “to cast and throw far.” Damgh, according to Majmaʿ al-bayān, means “to split and cut the head to the brain.” One says damaghahu, yadmaghuhu when someone strikes another person’s brain (dimāgh) [that is, a strike on the head that reaches the brain]. Zuhūq means “to die and perish.” One says zahaqa, yazhaqu when something perishes.

Truth and falsehood are two opposing concepts. Truth is a fixed entity whereas falsehood does not have a fixed entity, but it looks like the truth such that one would mistake it. Then, when the two confront each other, truth remains while falsehood perishes. It is like water, which is a real thing, versus a mirage, which is not really water, but looks like it in the sight of the onlooker. One who is thirsty thinks that it is water—until, when he comes to it, he finds it to be naught [].

God has enumerated several examples and applications of truth and falsehood in His Book. He has referred to beliefs that match the reality as truth, and to other beliefs as falsehood. He has referred to the life of the Hereafter as truth, and to the life of this world—along with everything that humankind assumes to possess and strives to acquire, such as its kingdom, wealth, power, children, supporters and so on—as falsehood. He has referred to His transcendent essence as truth, and to all other means and forces besides Him—which deceive the people to rely on them—as falsehood. There are numerous verses on these which would be too long to cite here.

That which is primarily attributable to God is the truth, not falsehood. He says: The truth is from your Lord (, ), and: And We did not create the heavens and the earth and what is between them in falsehood ().

Falsehood cannot be attributed to God in the sense that it is falsehood. In other words, He cannot be deemed as the source and backbone of it. Rather, falsehood is a necessary consequence of limitation and deficiency in certain things when they are compared against something that is more perfect. For example, false beliefs are a consequence of deficiency in understanding. Similarly, all other false things are a consequence of things when they are compared against something more perfect. They are only attributable to Him by way of “permission” (idhn). For instance, He has created the earth with smooth saline lands that seem like water in the vision of an onlooker in terms of color and clarity. This creation of His is a “permission” from Him for the occurrence of a mirage—which is an illusion in one’s imagination.

The above should clarify that there is nothing in existence unadulterated by falsehood apart from God. He is a truth without any mix of falsehood. There is no way for falsehood to reach Him. He says: Allah is the evident Truth. ().

This also shows that the entire system of creation is a mixture of truth and falsehood. He says, setting forth the parable of creation: He sends down water from the clouds, then watercourses flow (with water) according to their measure, and the torrent bears along the swelling foam, and from what they melt in the fire for the sake of making ornaments or apparatuses, arises a scum like it; thus does Allah compare truth and falsehood; then as for the scum, it passes away as a worthless thing; and as for that which profits the people, it tarries in the earth (). There is much knowledge underlying this parable.

It has been God’s custom to grant respite to falsehood until it confronts the truth and comes to invalidate and destroy it. At that point He casts the truth at falsehood and falsehood perishes. True beliefs are never eradicated even if those who bear them are sometimes few or weak. True perfection never dies out at the root even if its opponents are many. God’s assistance never misses His messengers even if the state of affairs may lead them to despair and to think that they have been rejected. This is what He means by saying: Nay! We hurl the truth against falsehood, so that it breaks its head, and lo! It vanishes (). This statement is a transition from the idea that the creation of the universe was not for sport, nor did God want to take up a diversion by so doing, as implied by the last verse: Had We wished to make a diversion… ().

The use of the present continuous verb naqdhifu (We hurl) shows that this is an ongoing custom of God. The expression “We hurl… so that it breaks its head” indicates the truth’s supremacy and elevation above falsehood. And lo! It vanishes: This indicates the unexpectedness and suddenness of the casting. It occurs when it is least expected for the truth to overcome and falsehood to be defeated.

The verse does not qualify or restrict truth and falsehood to arguments, conduct, customs or creation. There is no reason why the unconditional sense of the verse should be restricted to any of these aspects.

The meaning is: We have not created the world for sport, and We did not want to take up a diversion. On the contrary, it is Our custom to hurl the truth at the falsehood such that it is suddenly destroyed with total loss and disappearance. If falsehood is an argument or belief, then the true argument will refute it. If falsehood is an action or a custom—like the practice of the people in iniquitous and extravagant towns—then exterminatory punishment will eradicate and defeat it. And if falsehood is something else, then the truth will be something else [in accord to that].

Some exegetes have interpreted the verse as: “We do not wish to take up a diversion. Rather, it is Our concern to make truth prevail over falsehood, and part of this is the prevailing of earnestness over diversion.” This, however, is wrong, because it implicitly acknowledges the existence of diversion, while the previous verse only talked about the ascription of diversion to God—which He negated from Himself. The truth is that the verse is not applicable to the idea of earnestness vs. diversion because God’s diversion has no existence so that the verse would apply to it and its opposite [that is, His earnestness].

… and woe to you for what you describe: Given our explanation of the context above, this is a threat to those who deny the Resurrection and it clearly refers to the return to God.

It means: He continues to cast the truth at falsehood and thereby establishes the truth and purifies it from the falsehood which adulterates it or hides it, until nothing remains except sheer truth. That is God, Who is the Truth, as He says: And they shall know that Allah is the evident Truth (). On that day, all independent effects that were thought to belong to the apparent causes and what was claimed to belong to other-than-Him in terms of power, possession and authority, will all fade away. As He says: Certainly the ties between you are now cut off and what you asserted is gone from you (); That the power is wholly Allah’s (); To whom belongs the kingdom this day? To Allah, the One, the Subduer (of all) (); And the command on that day shall be entirely Allah’s (). There are many more verses that convey the same meaning.

وَلَهُ مَنْ فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ ۚ وَمَنْ عِنْدَهُ لَا يَسْتَكْبِرُونَ عَنْ عِبَادَتِهِ وَلَا يَسْتَحْسِرُونَ ١٩

(21:19) And whoever is in the heavens and the earth is His; and those who are with Him are not too proud to serve Him, nor do they grow weary.

This refutes a possible argument against the Resurrection, namely that He may not be in charge of some or all of the people, so those who are not owned by Him are saved from returning to Him and from being reckoned and requited. The verse answers this by saying that His ownership is universal, covering everything in the heavens and earth. He has full authority to dispose of them however He wishes.

This is obviously about real ownership which is concomitant to His creation of things. What has been existentiated relies on its Existentiator for its existence, and thus it has no escape from His command and control. Bringing things into existence is exclusive to God. Nothing is a partner to Him in it, not even according to the idolaters who attest to other gods as regulators and directors that should be worshiped. Thus, everyone in the heavens and earth belongs to God, not to any other owner.

… and those who are with Him are not too proud to serve Him, nor do they grow weary (lā yastaḥsirūna, from istiḥsār): Majmaʿ al-bayān says:

Istiḥsār means “to stop out of weariness.” Baʿīrun ḥasīrun means “a weary camel.” It is derived from the saying ḥasara ʿan dhirāʿayhi (he uncovered his forearms) which means: “he revealed his capacity by weariness” [that is, his demonstration of weariness showed that he has run out of strength].

“Those who are with Him” are those who are blessed with a special degree of proximity to God and feeling His presence. It may apply to the favored angels.

يُسَبِّحُونَ اللَّيْلَ وَالنَّهَارَ لَا يَفْتُرُونَ ٢٠

(21:20) They glorify (Him) by night and day; they are never languid.

This serves as an interpretation of: nor do they grow weary (). It means: They are not overcome by weariness and exhaustion; on the contrary, they glorify God by night and day without any lassitude. Glorifying “by night and day” is an allusion to their incessant glorification.

He describes the state of His favored servants and His honored angels as being immersed in servitude to Him, devotedly serving Him without any distraction or diversion. Apparently this description is meant to explain the exclusivity of His ownership and dominion mentioned at the beginning of the verse [].

That is in contrast to the case of conventional lordship between human masters and servants. The custom there is that as servants advance and becomes closer to their master, the master lightens their load compared to the many duties and rites that are imposed upon his ordinary slaves, and exempts them from being held accountable and punished. That is because human societies and civilizations are based on cooperation through the exchange of benefits according to mutual need. All people are always in need, and a master needs those who are closest to him more than others, just as a king needs his closest courtiers more than others. As a master benefits more from some servants than others, he bestows more grace upon them, according to the benefits that he derives from their service. That is why he lifts up from them much of the burden that he requires from others, and excuses them from what others are held accountable for. After all this is also a trade and exchange.

This is different from His Lordship over His servants, because His Lordship is a real one [as opposed to a conventional one], where the Owner is in no need of the owned whatsoever, while the owned is completely in need of the Owner. There is no difference in this regard whether a servant holds a position of proximity and has a high status or not. Not only that, but the more favored a servant is, the Master’s greatness, grandeur, strength and glory will be more manifest to him, and he will feel his own lowliness, wretchedness and need more. This would cause him to immerse himself more in humble worship and submissive service.

It was mentioned previously [under verses ] that His Lordship necessitates service, reckoning and retribution. Then, when it says, and those who are with Him are not too proud to serve Him, nor do they grow weary (), it serves as a reference to the fact that His Lordship is different from common forms of ownership and lordship in human societies. Therefore, no one should want to be relieved from any aspect of duty, reckoning or requital.

It could also be that the sentence is an escalation in meaning. That is: Everyone in the heavens and the earth belongs to Him. Thus they must serve Him, and they will all be reckoned without exception. That is why even His favored servants and His honored angels are not too proud to serve Him, nor do they grow weary of it. On the contrary, they glorify Him continuously and never cease.

We mentioned in the exegesis of the last verse of Sūrah al-Aʿrāf—Surely those who are with your Lord are not too proud to serve Him, and they declare His glory and throw themselves down in humility before Him ()—that “those who are with your Lord” are not limited to the favored angels. Do not overlook this point!

أَمِ اتَّخَذُوا آلِهَةً مِنَ الْأَرْضِ هُمْ يُنْشِرُونَ ٢١

(21:21) Or have they taken gods from the earth who raise (the dead) (yunshirūna, from inshār)?

Inshār is “to raise the dead”; that is, resurrection. This verse refutes another possible argument against the Resurrection and reckoning, and that is to reply to God’s argument as follows: There are other gods apart from Him who resurrect the dead and reckon them. This means that Resurrection is not up to God and there is no reason why we should fear Him and answer the call of His messengers and their followers. Rather we should worship these other gods, and there is no harm in doing so.

The verse talks about taking gods “from the earth.” It is said that this qualification conveys another argument against them: Earthly gods are equally subject to the rules which apply to all people of the earth, which are death and then resurrection. So who would cause them to die then resurrect them?

It could also be that “from the earth” refers to “earthly material,” meaning idols made of stone, wood or metals. This involves a sense of disparagement and derision. The implied meaning would be: The angels that they have adopted as gods are themselves servants and worshipers of God. Therefore, these people are cut off from them and should despair of receiving help from them as gods in afterlife. If so, would they then turn to earthly idols and figures as representations of transcendent lords and figures, and adopt them as gods besides God?

لَوْ كَانَ فِيهِمَا آلِهَةٌ إِلَّا اللَّهُ لَفَسَدَتَا ۚ فَسُبْحَانَ اللَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَرْشِ عَمَّا يَصِفُونَ ٢٢

(21:22) If there had been in them any gods except Allah, they would both have certainly been in a state of disorder; therefore glory be to Allah, the Lord of the Throne, above what they attribute (to Him).

We discussed in the exegesis of Sūrah Hūd (and have repeatedly referred to it) that the disagreement between the polytheists and the monotheists was not over the unity or plurality of God as the Necessary Being Who exists because of His own essence and gives existence to everything else. There was no disagreement that the Necessary Being is One and has no partner. Instead, the disagreement was over the unity vs. plurality of God as a lord (rabb) and an object of worship (maʿbūd, ilāh). The polytheists believed that the different layers and divisions of the universe had been delegated to transcendent beings by God, and those are the ones who should be worshiped so that they would intercede for their servants before God and bring them closer to Him. Thus they believed in other gods like the lord of the heavens, the lord of the earth, the lord of humankind and so on. They are gods for inferior beings [like human beings], while God is the God of gods and the Creator of everything. He says regarding what they say: And if you should ask them who created them, they would certainly say: Allah (); and And if you should ask them, Who created the heavens and the earth? They would most certainly say: The Mighty, the Knowing One, has created them ().

It is in this sense that this noble verse negates gods-other-than-God in the heaven and the earth [that is, as directors of affairs and as lords that should be worshiped], not in the sense of being creators that have brought things to existence, because no one believed in multiple gods in this sense. Also, what it means by being a god in the heaven and in the earth is being a god whose divine authority applies to the heaven and the earth, not being a god who resides in them. This is similar to His words: And He it is Who is Allah in the heavens and Allah in the earth ().

The verse’s argument can be presented as follows: (a) Real multiplicity is when two or more things differ from one another in terms of their essence and reality. Therefore, if the universe had more than one god, then they would be distinct from each other in terms of essence and reality. (b) This distinction of essence and reality would entail distinction and difference in how they manage and direct the universe, which would spoil the order of the heavens and earth [that is, the universe]. (c) However, the different parts and aspects of the system in place in the universe are consistent, ordered and compatible with one another, all serving the same goal. (d) Hence, the universe does not have more than one god. This is the desired conclusion.

You might object: This is not true, because we already witness disorder in the world due to the competing causes and forces that prevent the acts and effects of one another.

The answer is: Two causes thwarting each other under two different forms of management is not the same as them vying with one another under the same system, where one factor may limit the effect of another, and where the end result is the sum total of both. This latter scenario is the case of the competing causes in the system which governs the universe. Even though the means and causes that constitute the general system of the world compete, interfere and go against one another, they do not cancel the effect and function of one another such that the general rules that govern the whole system are nullified. It is never the case that the impact of a cause is lost or canceled despite the realization of all conditions and the removal of all impediments. That would be the case if there were two regulators, and one cancelled the act of the other. Instead, two contending causes are akin to the scales on a balance, which oppose one another in rising and falling. However, despite their opposition, they actually work together in achieving what the owner of the balance desires, which is measuring weights by the indication of the needle or pointer on the balance.

You might object: One can evidently see that the system in place in the universe is governed by a wise and knowledgeable director. In other words, the Lord of the universe regulates it on the basis of knowledge. If this is the case, then why is not possible to presume that there are multiple gods who have arrived at a logical agreement amongst themselves to regulate the affairs of the universe without any interference or thwarting one another to maintain its welfare and order?

The answer is: This is inconceivable because acting logically means acting according to what rational laws dictate such that all the different aspects of one’s action would be in harmony and would lead to the desired goal. These rational laws are derived from external realities and the system which governs them. Thus, our rational acts follow logical rules, which are in turn deduced from the real world outside. However, when talking about a lord who is the regulator of the universe, the outside world is his very act and the rational rules in turn follow that. Hence, it is logically impossible for His actions to follow the rational rules because the rational rules are subsequent to and dependent on his actions. Contemplate this.

The above was an account of the verse’s argument which is a demonstrative proof composed of definite premises. It proves that the general system governing the universe—with all the specific systems and regulations within it—issues from a single source and involves no inconsistency. The exegetes, however, have interpreted the verse’s argument as being a refutation of there being more than one creator. Then they have elaborated this in different ways and have plunged into discussion, sometimes adding premises that are not deducible from the text of the verse. One exegete has claimed that the verse’s argument is rather a persuasive one (iqnāʿiyyah) not a demonstrative one (burhāniyyah); that is, it is an argument intended to persuade and convince the masses.

… therefore glory be to Allah, the Lord of the Throne, above what they attribute (to Him) (ʿammā yaṣifūna): This is to clear and glorify God of what they attribute to Him, which is the idea that there are other gods with Him who raise the dead, or that there are other gods besides Him in charge of regulating His Kingdom. The word “Throne” represents His dominion. The particle mā (lit. “what”) in ʿammā (“of what”) is maṣdariyyah (that is, it turns the subsequent verb into an infinitive). Therefore, ʿammā yaṣifūna means “above their attribution.” There is more to come on this subject below.

لَا يُسْأَلُ عَمَّا يَفْعَلُ وَهُمْ يُسْأَلُونَ ٢٣

(21:23) He is not questioned concerning what He does, but they shall be questioned.

The pronoun “he” in He is not questioned undoubtedly refers to God. The pronoun “they” in they shall be questioned could refer to either their worshiped gods, both the gods and the people, or only the people. The first possibility is the most plausible one given the context, because the discussion above was about the gods that they worship instead of Him. These gods will be held accountable, whereas God cannot be held accountable for what He does.

Questioning one concerning what he has done means asking him, “Why did you do this?” It means asking about the benefit, advantage or welfare (maṣlaḥah) of an act. Otherwise, if it is known that an action is beneficial, then rational agents would not ask about it. Now, God is absolutely Wise—as He has described Himself in numerous places in His Book—it means that there is certainly an outweighing benefit and wisdom in whatever He does. A necessary implication of this is that it is not meaningful to question such an actor about what He does, unlike others. In the case of others, what they do may be possibly right or wrong, and may involve either benefit or harm. Hence it is possible to question them about their actions. If there is no justifiable benefit or wisdom behind their actions, they would be condemned by reason and perhaps penalized for it.

This is what a number of exegetes have said in interpreting the verse. Overall, it is a sound explanation, but there remain two issues with it:

(1) The verse is unqualified and there is no evidence in the text of the verse that would restrict it to this meaning. Even if a meaning is correct in its own right, it does not entail that it is the intent of the verse.

That is why some exegetes have said: He is not questioned concerning what He does shows that His actions are not explicable and justifiable by gharaḍ (purpose, objective, goal). A purpose (gharaḍ) is what drives a subject to do an act in order to achieve a type of perfection and benefit from it. However, He is too sublime to need anything external to Himself, or to become perfect by drawing any benefit from anyone else. Hence one cannot ask Him “Why did you do so?” as a question about the purpose that aroused Him to an action.

Some exegetes have refuted the above claim by saying that the acts of a perfect agent emanate from him due to his very essence. His goal is his own essence and there is no purpose beyond himself for his actions. For instance, a miserly person has to practice donating repeatedly in order to achieve a disposition of generosity, but once that became second nature, donations would issue forth from the person due to his new inherent disposition, not in order to achieve a goal by this act.

For this reason some other exegetes have interpreted the verse as follows: His Greatness, Magnificence and Might render everything powerless to ask about His actions or to object to Him regarding anything related to His will. All other beings are too insignificant and abject to even consider asking about His actions or reproaching Him for what He does. He, on the other hand, is entitled to ask any doer about what they have done and punish anyone who deserves to be punished.

This explanation again is refuted because there is a difference between not being questioned due to people being scared of His might—as in the case of tyrannical rulers and despotic pharaohs—and not being questioned because of His action being completely free from any flaw, defect or shortcoming. What is understood from His Book in general is the latter not the former. For example He says: Who made good everything that He has created (); His are the most excellent names (); and: Surely Allah does not do any injustice to people ().

In short, the interpretation that He is not questionable about His actions because He is absolutely Wise means that His actions are not subject to question due to something other than the very actions; something external to them. He is not questioned about His actions not because of any inherent merit in His actions per se, but because there is an overweighing benefit and wisdom in what He does, for He is a Wise Actor. The text of the verse—He is not questioned concerning what He does, but they shall be questioned—bears no indication that it should be restricted to wisdom. Therefore, those who have interpreted the verse according to God’s wisdom should provide evidence for this qualification and restriction.

If we were to look outside this phrase for evidence to explain the inapplicability of questions to God, then the closest phrase would be the last part of the previous verse: Therefore glory be to Allah, the Lord of the Throne, above what they attribute (to Him) (). This sentence ascribes absolute dominion and kingdom to God. A king’s command should be followed because he is a king. That is, his orders are binding inherently and due to his essence [which, in this case, means his position as a ruler], not because they conform to some overweighing benefit and wisdom. Otherwise there would be no difference between Him and the lowest of his citizens, because at the end of the day it would be that aspect of welfare, benefit and interest that would determine what is binding and authoritative. If that were the case, then in some cases it would not be mandatory to obey the ruler [that is, in cases where there is no overweighing benefit in his orders]. Similarly, a human master is followed and obeyed by his slave because of his position as a master. The slave has no right to question him about the benefit and wisdom behind his orders. This is because lordship and ownership in general grant the owner the right to manage, rule and manipulate what he owns as he wishes.

God is the Lord and Owner of everything; all things are His absolute property. He is entitled to do as He pleases and rule as He wishes, while no one else has such right. He is entitled to question them concerning what they do but no one is entitled to question Him concerning what He does. At the same time, He has told us that He is Wise and whatever He does and wishes is only that which is wise, beneficial and good. Hence, we should not even suspect any evil in the actions that are attributable to Him based on our overall knowledge of His absolute wisdom, let alone questioning Him concerning what He does. A very elegant verse that points to this idea what is narrated from Jesus son Mary: If Thou should chastise them, then surely they are Thy servants; and if Thou should forgive them, then surely You are the Mighty, the Wise (). The verse explains and justifies their chastisement on the account of their being His property, and His forgiveness on the account of His being Wise.

It should be clear that interpreting the verse based on God’s wisdom is more general and less specific than interpreting it based on His Lordship and dominion. Thus, the latter is a more plausible explanation for: He is not questioned concerning what He does ().

(2) Based on the above interpretation of the verse suggested by the exegetes [that is, interpreting the verse based on the wisdom and benefit in God’s actions], the verse would have no clear connection to the previous thread of verses. The most they have said to show a connection is what is mentioned in Majmaʿ al-bayān: “Since God explained His oneness (tawḥīd) above, He now turns to explaining His justice (ʿadl).” However, the reader would agree that this boils down to the verse being a separate statement on the side, while there is no need to take it as such. Similarly it is narrated from Abū Muslim:

This verse is linked to what He says in the beginning of the chapter: Their reckoning has drawn near to men… (). “Reckoning” there means questioning them about what God bestowed upon them, to see whether they were grateful or ungrateful for His blessings.

The problem with this view is that the following verses are clearly connected to the verses that came before, so it would make no sense for a single verse in the middle to be connected to the beginning of the chapter. Moreover, even if we accept this connection, it would only explain the connection of the second half of the verse [that is, “but they shall be questioned”] but not the first.

Meanwhile, you would agree that explaining the verse according to God’s dominion as opposed to His wisdom would clearly link the verse to what precedes it: Therefore glory be to Allah, the Lord of the Throne (al-ʿarsh), above what they attribute (to Him) (). As we mentioned above, “the Throne” (al-ʿarsh) represents dominion and rule, which connects the two verses. In fact, this verse—He is not questioned concerning what He does, but they shall be questioned ()—is a proof for His all-encompassing dominion. Similarly, His dominion and the inapplicability of questions to Him are a proof for His Lordship and ownership of everyone and everything as His property. Finally, the facts that they are owned by God and are accountable to Him prove that they are not lords.

An agent (fāʿil) who cannot be questioned about what he does whatsoever must be one who is entitled to act as he wills. On the other hand, an agent who is accountable for his actions is one who does not have the authority to act unless it is according to some benefit and advantage (maṣlaḥah). Therefore, it is that benefit [and not the agent] which rules over the act and removes accountability and blameworthiness from it. This is while the Lord of the universe—or a lord of anything in the world—inherently has independent dominion over what He owns by virtue of His Essence, not due to being given rule by someone else. Thus God is the Lord of the Throne (that is, dominion), and everything else is subject to Him.

Discourse

The discussion “Philosophical and Qur’anic Discussion: God’s Wisdom and the Meaning of His Actions Being Beneficial” appears here in the printed volume. Read it in the Al-Mizan App.

أَمِ اتَّخَذُوا مِنْ دُونِهِ آلِهَةً ۖ قُلْ هَاتُوا بُرْهَانَكُمْ ۖ هَٰذَا ذِكْرُ مَنْ مَعِيَ وَذِكْرُ مَنْ قَبْلِي ۗ بَلْ أَكْثَرُهُمْ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ الْحَقَّ ۖ فَهُمْ مُعْرِضُونَ ٢٤

(21:24) Or, have they taken gods besides Him? Say: Bring (hātū) your proof (burhānakum); this is the reminder (dhikr) of those with me and the reminder of those before me. Nay! most of them do not know the truth, so they turn aside.

Hātū is a verbal noun (ism al-fiʿl) that means “bring it.” Burhān is “a proof which produces knowledge.” As can be inferred from the context, dhikr (reminder) means “divinely revealed Book.” The reminder of those with me means the Qur’an that was revealed to him and which is a reminder for his nation until the Day of Resurrection. The reminder of those before me means the Books of the previous prophets such as the Torah, the Gospel, the Psalms and so on. “Reminder” could also mean what has been revealed about divinity and worship. Thus, the reminder of those with me [or “the reminder that is with me”] would be the revelation that that was sent to him in the Qur’an, and the reminder of those before me would be the revelation that was sent to the previous prophets in this regard. According to both of these revelations, divinity and worship exclusively belong to God. Hence, the demonstrative pronoun “this”—in “this is the reminder”—refers to the Qur’an’s content, which is the command to monotheism in worship. This command was revealed both to him and to the previous prophets. Some have interpreted “reminder” as “report” (khabar) and other meanings which should be dismissed.

This verse refutes another possible argument against the aforementioned Resurrection and reckoning. It was said that their return to God and His reckoning of their deeds necessitates that they worship God, submit to His guardianship and accept the call of His prophets. A counter-argument could be that they adopt and serve other gods instead of Allah, and thereby would be needless of serving Him. The refutation of this claim is that there is no proof for it. God argues against them by commanding the Prophet to ask them for a proof: Say: Bring your proof….

… Say: Bring your proof; this is the reminder of those with me and the reminder of those before me: This is an example of denying the rival’s argument and at the same time providing a counter argument, as discussed in the art of debate. In brief, it is when one asks his rival to bring an argument for his unsupported claim, and backs this request by providing an argument against his opponent’s claim.

He says to His Prophet: Say to those who adopt other gods instead of God: Bring your proof for your claim, because it is irrational to accept and rely on a claim for which there is no proof. The Prophet’s basis for asking for a proof is that the heavenly books revealed by God do not agree with what their claim, but are opposed to it. The counter-argument is: Here, see the Qur’an and all other scriptures such as the Torah or Gospel—which are the reminder for those with me and the reminder for those before me: they all say that divinity exclusively belong to God and He is the only One Who must be worshiped. Put differently, the counter-argument is: What has been revealed concerning divinity and worship—including that which is revealed to me in the Qur’an, which is the reminder that is with me, and what was revealed to the prophets who preceded me, which is the reminder of those before me—says that God is the sole divinity and He alone should be worshiped.

… Nay! most of them do not know the truth, so they turn aside: The address here is directed at the Prophet. He is told that most of them cannot differentiate between truth and falsehood; they are not people of distinction who only follow proof. That is why they turn away from the truth and its followers.

وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِنْ قَبْلِكَ مِنْ رَسُولٍ إِلَّا نُوحِي إِلَيْهِ أَنَّهُ لَا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا أَنَا فَاعْبُدُونِ ٢٥

(21:25) And We did not send before you any messenger but We revealed to him that there is no god but Me; therefore, serve Me.

This reaffirms what was said in the previous verse, that “the reminder” states His unity and the necessity to serve Him alone. This verse supports the second of the two meanings offered above for “the reminder” (al-dhikr).

… We revealed (nūḥī) to him that there is no god but Me; therefore, serve Me: The verb nūḥī [in the present continuous tense] shows that this revelation was ongoing and continuous. “Therefore, serve Me” is addressed to the messengers and their nations. The rest is clear.

وَقَالُوا اتَّخَذَ الرَّحْمَٰنُ وَلَدًا ۗ سُبْحَانَهُ ۚ بَلْ عِبَادٌ مُكْرَمُونَ ٢٦

(21:26) And they say: The Beneficent has taken to Himself a son. Glory be to Him. Nay! They are honored servants.

The context is evidence that the verse is quoting the idolaters’ claim that the angels are the children of God. Thus, “honored servants” are the angels. God first clears Himself of this claim by saying: subḥānahu (glory be to Him, be it far from Him). He then states the reality of their condition by way of transition.

Here He describes them as “servants,” and in the next verse He describes their excellence in servitude by stating the signs, effects, traits, characteristics and outcomes of their servitude: They do not precede Him in speech… (). Hence, what is meant by their “honor” here is being honored by means of servitude, not because of something else. The meaning boils down to: They are servants in the real sense of servitude, and the evidence for this is that one can see the signs of perfect servitude in them.

All intelligent beings are God’s “servants,” but the angels are specifically called “servants” because they find it an honor within themselves to serve God; they do not see themselves as anything other than servants. What is meant by being “honored” is that God has honored them by bestowing perfect servitude upon them. This is similar to when a servant chooses to be purely for God (making him mukhliṣ, sincere), to which God responds by choosing him purely for Himself (making him mukhlaṣ, chosen). The difference between honor (karāmah) among angels and mankind is that honor is an acquired property among human beings but not among angels. However, God’s act of honoring (ikrām) is a matter of His grace and effusion for both creatures. Contemplate this.

لَا يَسْبِقُونَهُ بِالْقَوْلِ وَهُمْ بِأَمْرِهِ يَعْمَلُونَ ٢٧

(21:27) They do not precede Him in speech and (only) according to His command do they act.

“Someone not preceding another in speech” means that one person does not say anything before the other person does; that is, one person follows the other person in what he says. This expression could be an allusion to will and wish, implying that a person’s will is pursuant to another person’s will. According to His command should have come after “they act,” but it is mentioned earlier to indicate exclusivity. That is: “They act only according to His command, not according to anything else.” It is not meant to say: “They act according to the command of Him alone, not according to the command of anyone else.” In other words, in their actions they follow His command, just as in their speech they follow His speech. Hence, they are obedient to their Lord both in words and in action.

Alternatively: Their will and their action are pursuant to His will—on the account that “speech” in the verse denotes will (irādah). Therefore, they do not want anything apart from what He wants, and do not do anything apart from what He wants. This is complete servitude, because servitude entails that a servant’s will and actions belong to his master.

This is the apparent meaning of the verse, which assumes “command” (amr) to be the opposite of “prohibition” (nahy). It implies that angels do not know any prohibition, because prohibition is consequential to the possibility of performing a forbidden act, whereas they only act upon command.

The true meaning of God’s command can be inferred from His words: His command, when He intends anything, is only to say to it: Be, so it is. Therefore glory be to Him in Whose hand is the kingdom of all things, and to Him you shall be brought back (), and His words: And Our command is but one, as the twinkling of an eye (). We have already mentioned a few points about this in some of our previous discussions, and a full discussion about the Qur’an’s view of the angels will follow.

يَعْلَمُ مَا بَيْنَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَمَا خَلْفَهُمْ وَلَا يَشْفَعُونَ إِلَّا لِمَنِ ارْتَضَىٰ وَهُمْ مِنْ خَشْيَتِهِ مُشْفِقُونَ ٢٨

(21:28) He knows what is before them and what is behind them, and they do not intercede except for him whom He approves of, and for fear of Him they tremble.

The exegetes have interpreted “what is before them and what is behind them” as their past and future acts. That is: “He knows what they have done so far and what they will be doing from now on.” Based on this meaning, what is said here is a new statement that justifies the previous point that: They do not precede Him in speech and (only) according to His command do they act (). It is as if it is said: They do not say or do anything without His command because He knows everything that they have done and will do, and they constantly watch their affairs because they are aware of this.

This is a good explanation in and of itself, but it is suitable for justifying why they do not disobey, not why they only act according to God’s command. The latter is what is required in this context. Furthermore, this interpretation assumes that they know that “He knows what is before them and what is behind them,” but the verse bears no indication to this.

In the exegesis of the verse, And we do not descend but by the command of your Lord; to Him belongs whatever is before us and whatever is behind us and whatever is between these, and your Lord is not forgetful (), it was stated that the best interpretation is that “whatever is before us” means the acts and effects that are subsequent to their existence, and “whatever is behind us” means the causes of their existence which take precedence to them and exist before them. If we interpret this verse in a like manner, then it would be a clear explanation for everything from Nay! They are honored servants until (only) according to His command do they act (). This would explain why their essence, as well as the speeches and actions that emanate from their essence, are all noble and honored. The meaning would be: God has honored their essences and praised their works because He knows their deeds and words (“what is before them”) as well as the cause and origin of their existence (“what is behind them”). It is similar to saying, “So-and-so has a noble character and praiseworthy conduct because his deeds are admirable and he is from a noble family.”

… and they do not intercede except for him whom He approves of: This concerns their intercession for others, which is what the idolaters depended upon in their worship of the angels. They used to say: These are our intercessors with Allah (), and: We do not serve them save that they may make us nearer to Allah (). God refutes them by saying that the angels only intercede for one whom God approves of, which refers to the approval of “one’s religion” because He says elsewhere: Surely Allah does not forgive that anything should be associated with Him, and forgives what is besides that to whomsoever He pleases (). This means that in order to be “approved of,” one should believe in God without associating any partners with Him, as opposed to the idolaters who associated partners with Him. It is amazing that the partners whom they associated with God were the very same angels who intercede only for monotheists, not polytheists!

… and for fear of Him they tremble: That is: They fear His wrath and punishment in spite of being safe from it since they do not disobey Him. Since God is the One Who has secured them from His punishment by bestowing infallibility upon them, His power is not limited and His dominion is not wrested from His hand. Thus, He still has the same dominion after giving them security as He had before, and He has power over all things. This explanation also sets the meaning of the next verse right.

وَمَنْ يَقُلْ مِنْهُمْ إِنِّي إِلَٰهٌ مِنْ دُونِهِ فَذَٰلِكَ نَجْزِيهِ جَهَنَّمَ ۚ كَذَٰلِكَ نَجْزِي الظَّالِمِينَ٢٩

(21:29) And whoever of them should say: Surely I am a god besides Him, such a one do We recompense with Hell; thus do We recompense the unjust.

That is: Whoever makes this claim is unjust and We will recompense him with Hell because that is the recompense of the unjust. The verse is a conditional proposition, and a conditional does not necessitate the occurrence of the condition.

أَوَلَمْ يَرَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا أَنَّ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ كَانَتَا رَتْقًا فَفَتَقْنَاهُمَا ۖ وَجَعَلْنَا مِنَ الْمَاءِ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ حَيٍّ ۖ أَفَلَا يُؤْمِنُونَ ٣٠

(21:30) Do not those who disbelieve see that the heavens and the earth were closed up (ratqan), but We have opened them (fa-fataqnāhumā, from fatq); and We have made of water everything living; will they not then believe?

“Seeing” here means mental and intellectual observation. It is referred to as “seeing” (ruʾyah) because it is an evident observation that results from thinking about a tangible phenomenon.

Ratq and fatq are two opposites. Al-Rāghib says in al-Mufradāt:

Ratq means “joining and cleaving together, whether by nature and creation or by fashioning and manufacturing.” He says: were closed up, but We have opened them… (). Fatq means “separating two things that are joined together.” It is the opposite of ratq.

The dual pronoun in kānatā (“were”) refers to the heavens and the earth. The heavens are counted as one group and the earth as another group, so they compose two. The predicate ratqan (“closed up”) is an infinitive (maṣdar) that is used an object (mafʿūl) in the verse. That is why it is in the singular form. The meaning is: These two were joined and connected together, but then We separated them.

This verse and the three which follow it are rational arguments for His exclusive Lordship over the entire universe. They are mentioned because the previous discourse led to the topic of God’s unity (tawḥīd) and the negation of the gods that they had assumed instead of God and the angels whom they deemed to be His children. Their claims were based on the idea that God is the One Who has created and brought things into existence, the angels are responsible for lordship and direction of affairs. In response, in these verses God refers to certain creatures whose creation is blended with the direction of their affairs. This shows that direction and regulation are inseparable from creation, so He Who created them must also be the One Who regulates their affairs. In these verses God refers to the creation and condition of things such as the heavens, the earth, all living things, the mountains, the passages between the mountains, the night, the day, the sun and the moon.

Do not those who disbelieve see that the heavens and the earth were closed up, but We have opened them: Given the context, those who disbelieve are the idolaters. They made a separation between the creation and direction of affairs by attributing the former to God and the latter to other gods. Their error in this separation is made clear by drawing their attention to something that is beyond doubt: the opening up of the heavens and the earth after being closed up. Creation and direction are jointly present in this phenomenon, so how could it be that their creation is by one being and their direction by another?

We constantly see the detachment of earthly and atmospheric compounds from each other, the separation of different plant species from the earth as they grow, and the separation of animals from animals, and humans from humans, as they are born. We see that what is detached from another being develops into a new form with new properties and qualities that were not present previously when it was connected to its origin. Its existence, properties and characteristics are not distinct, apparent or visible prior to its separation. This means that these actualities are initially stored as potentialities in their original matter in a joined and undifferentiated form. Then the new creation “opens up” after being “closed” and thereby its essence and properties are actualized.

This is not limited to living species, but it also applies to the earth and the heavenly bodies. The shortness of our lives does not permit us to see the life cycle of the celestial bodies and the earth as we see it in particular beings, and that is why we cannot observe their creation and destruction. Nevertheless, they are of the same matter and what governs material things is the same across all of them, without any object being exempted or any rule being replaced.

This continuous separation and production of particular elements from compounds in the earth and the atmosphere suggests to us that there must have been a day when everything was united and joined, without having separated yet from the earth. It also directs us to a stage when there was no separation between heaven and earth. Everything was joined together, but then God rent it asunder through an organized plan and a robust direction that made everything manifest its essence and properties in an actualized form.

This is what we can conclude by a simple observation of the visible world, including its earthly and heavenly components. Its existence is mixed with its regulation, and the entire universe is governed by a single system.

New scientific discoveries also confirm this observation, as they explain that physical bodies are made up of a limited number of common elements, each of which has a limited period of time and lifespan, although they vary in length.

The above explanation is assuming that the heavens and the earth being “closed up” means that they were not distinct from one another, and their being “opened up” means that one became distinct from the other. However, it could also be that they were “closed up” in the sense that each of them was closed within itself, such that nothing would fall from the heaven and nothing would grow from the earth. Then they were “opened up,” which means the opposite of that. The meaning would be: “The heavens were closed up and did not rain, but then We opened them up with rain. The earth was also closed up without sprouting anything, but then We opened it up by making it grow things.” This would also be a complete proof. This interpretation may be supported by what He says thereafter: And We have made of water everything living (); however, it would only pertain to rain and the growth of plants out of all events, unlike the argument based on the first explanation.

Some exegetes have stated, and others have approved of it, that the heavens and the earth being “closed up” means their being indistinct from each other in pre-existence. Then their being “opened up” means coming to existence as distinct beings from each other after their non-existence. Thus, the verse would be proving the existence of the Originator—that is, God—by drawing on the origination of the heavens and earth.

Although proving the existence of the Originator on the basis of the origination of things is correct in itself, directing such an argument to the idolaters would be pointless, because they already acknowledged His existence and ascribed the origination of things to Him. What one needs to do when debating with them is to prove that the regulation of the universe also belongs to Him, because they used to ascribe the regulation to their gods and worship them on this basis.

… and We have made of water everything living: Based on the context, “to make” (jaʿl) in this verse means “to create,” and its object is “every living thing.” It means that water plays an important role in the creation of living beings, as He says: And Allah has created from water every living creature (). The positioning of this sign among visible signs might be an indication that this statement does not concern the angels and other similar creatures. The link between water and life has become more than clear today with modern science.

وَجَعَلْنَا فِي الْأَرْضِ رَوَاسِيَ أَنْ تَمِيدَ بِهِمْ وَجَعَلْنَا فِيهَا فِجَاجًا سُبُلًا لَعَلَّهُمْ يَهْتَدُونَ٣١

(21:31) And We have made great mountains (rawāsiya) in the earth lest it might be convulsed (tamīda, from mayd) with them, and We have made in it wide ways (fijājan subulan, from fajj) that they may follow a right direction.

Majmaʿ al-Bayān says:

Rawāsī means “mountains” (jibāl). The root meaning is to become fixed and established, whereby they are called rāsiyah. It is also used for a ship when it comes to a full rest and stop. Mayd means to stir and move in all directions. A fajj is a wide road between two mountains.

The meaning is: “We made fixed mountains in the earth so that the earth would not shake and stir them. We also made wide roads in these mountains, which they can follow as paths that take them to their destinations and homes.” The verse suggests that there is a close connection between mountains and earthquakes: were it not for mountains, the earth’s crust would convulse.

وَجَعَلْنَا السَّمَاءَ سَقْفًا مَحْفُوظًا ۖ وَهُمْ عَنْ آيَاتِهَا مُعْرِضُونَ ٣٢

(21:32) And We have made the heaven a guarded canopy and (yet) they turn aside from its signs.

Apparently what is meant by “the heaven being guarded” is that they are protected against the devils, as He says: And We guard it against every accursed devil (). The “signs of the heaven” are various heavenly events which show that the universe is subject to a single regulation and there is a single source behind it.

وَهُوَ الَّذِي خَلَقَ اللَّيْلَ وَالنَّهَارَ وَالشَّمْسَ وَالْقَمَرَ ۖ كُلٌّ فِي فَلَكٍ يَسْبَحُونَ ٣٣

(21:33) And He it is Who created the night and the day and the sun and the moon; all (orbs) travel along swiftly (yasbaḥūna) in their celestial spheres.

This verse clearly states that there is a sphere (falak) for each of the night, the day, the sun and the moon. That is the orbit of each. The night is the conic shadow bound to the earth on the opposite side that faces the sun, and the day is the opposite of the night.

The verse is particularly concerned with the earth and the events and conditions that occur in its atmosphere; the other heavenly bodies have their own conditions. For example, the sun and other fixed luminary bodies have no day or night, and the day and night of the moon and other planets that acquire their light [from elsewhere] is different from our day and night on earth.

Yasbiḥūna is from the root sabḥ, which is “to pass through water by splitting it open” [that is, “to swim”]. It has been said that since “swimming” is an act of rational beings, the verb has used the conjugated form yusbiḥūna [with a verb ending that is used for rational beings], as it is said elsewhere: Surely I saw eleven stars and the sun and the moon—I saw them making obeisance to me ().

Examining Narrations

1. Imam al-Ṣadiq said: No falsehood ever stands up to a truth without the truth defeating the falsehood. That is God says: Nay! We cast the truth against the falsehood, so that it breaks its head, and lo! It vanishes ().
2. Imam al-Ṣadiq told Ayyūb b. al-Ḥurr: O Ayyūb! There is none who is not faced with the truth so that his heart may cleave open and show whether he adopts it or leaves it, for indeed God says in His Book: Nay! We cast the truth against the falsehood, so that it breaks its head, and lo! It vanishes; and woe to you for what you describe ().

Author’s comment: These two narrations are based on a generalization of the verse.

3. Imam al-Riḍā said: Verily the angels are infallible and safeguarded from disbelief and evil acts by God’s grace. God says about them: They do not disobey Allah in what He commands them, and do as they are commanded (), and He says: And whoever is in the heavens and the earth is His; and those who are with Him are not too proud to serve Him, nor do they grow weary. They glorify (Him) by night and day; they are never languid (). Those who are with Him mean the angels.
4. Imam ʿAlī describes the angels as follows: They glorify God without getting tired. They are never overcome by the sleep of eyes, the slip of wits, the languor of bodies, and the negligence of forgetfulness.

Author’s comment: The above words weaken certain narrations that ascribe sleep to the angels. The next narration is one example, which also suffers from a weak chain of transmission.

5. Imam al-Ṣādiq was once asked whether the angels sleep. He said, “There is no living thing which does not sleep except for God alone.” The narrator inquired, “But how come God says: They glorify (Him) by night and day; they are never languid ()?” He said, “Their breaths [in sleep] are glorification.”
6. Hishām b. al-Ḥakam says: Once I asked Imam al-Ṣādiq, “What is the proof for the oneness of God?” He said: “The uniformity of regulation and the perfection of creation, as He says: If there had been in them any gods except Allah, they would both have certainly been in a state of disorder ().”

Author’s comment: This confirms what we was said above in analyzing the verse’s argument.

7. Jābir b. Yazīd al-Juʿfī says: “I asked Imam Muhammad b. ʿAlī al-Bāqir, “O son of God’s Messenger! We see some children are stillborn; some are miscarried before their full development; some are born blind, deaf or dumb; some die the very moment they are born; some survive until puberty; and some live long till they become old. How can this be? What is the explanation for it?”

He said, “Verily God has more authority than His creatures to direct their affairs, for He is their Creator and Owner. When He prevents one from longevity, He is preventing the person from something that does not belong to him; and when He grants longevity to someone, He is giving the person something does not belong to him. Hence, He is Gracious when He gives and He is Just when He deprives. He is not questioned concerning what He does and they shall be questioned ().”

Jābir says: I asked, “O son of God’s Messenger! How is it that He is not questioned concerning what He does?”

He replied, “Because He does not do anything which is not wise and appropriate. He is the Grandiose (al-Mutakabbir), the Overpowering (al-Jabbār), the One (al-Wāḥid), the Subduer (al-Qahhār). Hence, whoever feels any constriction regarding anything that He has decreed, has fallen into disbelief; and whoever rejects any of His actions is a denier.”

Author’s comment: This is a noble narration which gives a general rule about good and evil: good things are existential matters that trace back to God’s bestowal and grace, while evil things are non-existential matters that trace back to His abstention from giving what does not belong to the servant. The Imam’s statement that “God has more authority than His creatures in what they have” is explained by the fact that He is the Owner by the virtue of His very essence, while the servants own what they have only by God’s conferment. Not only that, but even when He bestows something upon s servant, He retains His ownership and authority over it. Thus, a servant’s ownership is hierarchically and vertically below His ownership.

His words, “because He does not do anything which is not wise and appropriate” correspond to our first explanation given above [in the exposition of the verse]. His words, “He is the Grandiose, the Overpowering, the One, the Subduer” correspond to our second explanation above in the exposition of the verse.

8. God says: O son of Adam! It is by My will that you desire what you desire for yourself; it is through My power that you fulfil My prescribed duties for Me; and it is by My bounties that you gain strength to disobey Me. I have made you hearing, seeing and strong. Whatever good befalls you is from Allah, but whatever evil befalls you is from yourself (). That is because your good deeds are closer in attribution to Me than to yourself, while your evil deeds are closer in attribution to you than to Me. That is because I am not questioned concerning what I do, but they shall be questioned ().
9. Concerning This is the reminder of those with me and the reminder of those before me () Imam al-Ṣādiq said: The reminder of those with me means what shall happen [from now on], and the reminder of those before me means what has happened [before].
10. Al-Ḥusayn ibn Khālid says: ʿAlī b. Mūsā al-Riḍā narrated from his forefathers up to the Commander of the Faithful [Imam ʿAlī], that the Messenger of God said: “If one does not believe in my pool (ḥawḍ) [in the Hereafter], God will not bring him to it; and if one does not believe in my intercession (shafāʿah), God will not let him obtain it.”

He then said, “My intercession is only for those of my nation who commit major sins. As for the good-doers, there is no way [of blame] against them.”

11. Al-Ḥusayn b. Khālid says: I then asked al-Riḍā: “O son of God’s Messenger! Then what does it mean when God says: And they do not intercede except for him whom He approves of ()?” He replied: “[It means”] they do not intercede except for him whom He approves of his religion.”
12. The Messenger of God recited the verse And they do not intercede except for him whom He approves of () and said: “Verily my intercession is for those of my nation who commit major sins.”
13. It is narrated that ʿAmr b. ʿUbayd once went to Muḥammad b. ʿAlī al-Bāqir to test him through a question. He asked: “May I be your ransom! What is the meaning of His words: Do not those who disbelieve see that the heavens and the earth were closed up, but We have opened them ()? What does it mean to be ‘closed up’ and ‘opened up’?”

Abū Jaʿfar replied: “The heavens were closed up, not sending down rain; and the earth was closed up, not sprouting any plants. Thereafter God opened up the heaven with rain and opened up the earth with vegetation.”

Given this answer, ʿAmr b. ʿUbayd had nothing to say, could not find any objection, and went on his way.

Author’s comment: A similar narration from the Imam is narrated in Rawḍat al-kāfī through two chains of narration.

14. Imam ʿAlī says in Nahj al-balāghah: “…He then opened up its [the heaven’s] doors after having been shut…”

---

1. The main clause of a conditional sentence. (Ed.) ↩︎

2. In other words, the particles in and law in this verse both mean “if” and emphasize the same meaning. If the particle in is negative, then the meaning would be: Had We wished to make a diversion, We would have made it from before Ourselves; but by no means would We do (so). (Trans.) ↩︎

3. The reason for this is that everything other than God has some aspect of limitation and deficiency. (Trans.) ↩︎

4. This is because the expression corresponds to the truth being cast from above onto the head of falsehood. (Trans.) ↩︎

5. Under verses . (Trans.) ↩︎

6. See verses and . (Trans.) ↩︎

7. This part of the argument—that is, negation of disorder—is implicit in the verse. It is stated explicitly in . (Trans.) ↩︎

8. This argument is in the form of modus tollens, which disproves a statement by denying its consequence. (Trans.) ↩︎

9. The translation “above what they attribute” also reduces to the same meaning. The overall message is: “God is far above their act of attribution.” Also note that ʿammā is a contraction of two particles: ʿan-mā. (Trans.) ↩︎

10. The concept of mulk (dominion, kingdom, sovereignty) is implied by the word “Throne.” (Trans.) ↩︎

11. That is: You have every right to punish them because they are servants and slaves that belong to You; and if You forgive them, then that is also undoubtedly wise. (Trans.) ↩︎

12. The first meaning offered for dhikr was “divinely revealed Book.” The second meaning was “what has been revealed about divinity and worship.” (Trans.) ↩︎

13. That is, human beings have to acquire honor through their effort and actions. (Trans.) ↩︎

14. What the author is saying here is about the focus and emphasis of the verse. The central theme and message of the verse is not a comparison between God and others, but it is about their absolute devotion to God, such that every aspect of their life and being is submissive to Him. Otherwise, it is correct in its own place that “they act according to the command of Him alone, not according to the command of anyone else.” (Trans.) ↩︎

15. The above interpretation says that they do not disobey God’s commands because they know they are under His watch. However, the message of the previous verse [] was that they exclusively act in line with God’s command, which is not exactly the same as a negation of their disobedience. As the author explains below, they do not take any step except according to God’s command because they are have a noble nature and conduct. (Trans.) ↩︎

16. Al-Maḥāsin, via its chain of narration, on the authority of Yūnus, with an unconnected chain of narration (marfūʿ). ↩︎

17. Al-Maḥāsin, via its chain of narration, on the authority of Ayyūb b. al-Ḥurr. ↩︎

18. ʿUyūn-i akhbār al-Riḍā, as a part of a narration by the Imam about Hārūt and Mārūt. ↩︎

19. Nahj al-balāghah. ↩︎

20. Kamāl al-dīn, via its chain of narration, on the authority of Dāwūd b. Farqad, on the authority of “one of our companions.” ↩︎

21. Al-Tawḥīd, via its chain of narration. ↩︎

22. Al-Tawḥīd, via its chain of narration. ↩︎

23. The first explanation was based on God’s wisdom; the second one was based on His dominion. (Trans.) ↩︎

24. Nūr al-thaqalayn, on the authority of al-Riḍā. ↩︎

25. Majmaʿ al-bayān. ↩︎

26. ʿUyūn-i akhbār al-Riḍā, via its chain of narration. ↩︎

27. Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of al-Ḥākim—who has authenticated it—and al-Bayhaqī’s al-Baʿth, on the authority of Jābir. ↩︎

28. Al-Iḥtijāj. ↩︎