Allah the Exalted said: << طس تلك ءايات القرءان و كتاب مبين >
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Allah the Exalted said: " [Surat al-Naml:1] Allah knows best what He intends by that ".
This is the path taken by the author and a group of scholars, namely that regarding these alphabetic letters found at the beginning of some surahs, our position is to say: Allah knows best what He intends by that.
It was previously mentioned in the night tafsir class that the stronger position is that these letters are alphabetic, and that by virtue of the Qur'an being in the Arabic language, it necessitates that they have no meaning. We mentioned that this was narrated from Mujahid, and that they are alphabetic letters with which Allah began, having no meaning. Based on this, we are certain that they have no meaning, because they have no meaning, but they have a significance, which is: that this Qur'an, which baffled these eloquent orators, is composed of these very alphabetic letters from which their speech is formed. That is, He did not bring new letters; for example, they would say: "By Allah, these are letters we do not know!" He brought the same letters they speak with.
This is supported by the fact that there are no alphabetic letters that do not have a mention of the Qur'an following them, except in two surahs or something similar to them. In those two surahs, such as:[Surat al-'Ankabut:1 - 2], [Surat al-Rum:1 - 2], there is what indicates the Qur'an, like the news in His saying: [Surat al-Rum:2 - 3]. This is one of the characteristics of revelation.
[Surat al-'Ankabut:2] also contains news about those who came before [Surat al-'Ankabut:3] and so on.
As for what the later deviants claimed, namely that these letters indicate a type of miraculousness related to numbers and rules, where they claimed that these alphabetic letters have counterparts in the surah they open, and that the total of this is divisible by nineteen, and they claim that this is the greatest proof that the Qur'an is the speech of Allah. They argue for this by saying that the first verse revealed, in their claim, is "In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy," and that it is composed of nineteen letters, and that this is the meaning of His saying, the Exalted:[Surat al-Muddaththir:29 - 30], and that this nineteen refers to these letters.
All of this, refuge with Allah, is a lie and does not hold up. It is also contradictory and not consistent. But they were pleased with this computer that produced the number of letters for them and showed that they are divisible by a certain number.
We say: It is not impossible that Allah, Glorified and Exalted, intended this, but we say: We are not certain that Allah intended this. Here there is a difference between being certain that this is a sign in the Qur'an, and saying: We do not say this.
First: because there is no miraculousness in that. People may hear a speech or words where the letters present in it are counted and divided by this number or any other number, and it is not miraculous.
Then, the Basmala is not the first thing revealed from the Qur'an. The first thing revealed was[Surat al-'Alaq:1]. Also, the letters of the Basmala are not as they said, that they are nineteen, because was the Qur'an revealed as recited or as written?
The students: As recited.
The Shaykh : As recited, and with its letters in terms of recitation, it is not so.
And writing, as you know, is a convention. It is possible that writing in the time of the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, and the time of the Caliphs, was not in this form. Is it possible or not possible? It is possible.
Now, in some writings in some languages, they make the vowel a letter, and make one letter two letters, or they abbreviate, making two letters one letter.
So the result is that the Qur'an was not revealed as written, but was revealed as recited, and there is no proof in that.
So we say: Allah knows best what He intends by that. This is one of the opinions in the issue.
The second opinion is that they are symbols for specific things, as the later scholars went, or as some mention that they are a reference to wars and battles that will occur in the end of times... and the like.
The third is to say: They have no meaning. And if it is asked of us how we are certain of that?
The answer is: This Qur'an was revealed in the language of the Arabs, and the language of the Arabs does not assign a meaning to these letters. But if we say that they have no meaning, then they have a significance, and Allah knows best that He intended that by them.
He said: " That is: these verses are verses from Him [Surat al-Naml:1], manifesting the truth from falsehood, with the addition of the attribute "He is" that is: guiding from misguidance ".
[Surat al-Naml:1] Is the one referred to previous or subsequent?
The student: Subsequent.
The Shaykh : The one referred to is subsequent, not previous.
This is an instance where the reference is to something later in both wording and rank, and this is permissible if the evidence indicates it.
And his saying: He says: " verses from Him ". The author resorted to saying: " verses from Him " because if we took the apparent meaning of the verse, "verses of the Qur'an," it would restrict the Qur'an to these verses [Surat al-Naml:1], meaning: this which it refers to. And it is known that this is not all the verses of the Qur'an, but only some of them.
It is permissible, for example, to take the verse at its apparent meaning, and there is no need for interpretation, and we say:[Surat al-Naml:1] refers to a part of the species by referring to the whole species, just as you might say: "This is humanity" while pointing to one man, or "This is a human" while pointing to one man.
So the meaning is that referring to a part of the species by the whole species is acceptable and does not require interpretation, as the author said.
And his saying:[Surat al-Naml:1] He says: " with the addition of the attribute "He is" ".
Conjunction, and what is it conjoined to?[Surat al-Naml:1]
The student: To "verses."
The Shaykh : To "verses." Good. Is this statement correct or not?
The student: It is correct. "Verses"... is a preposition and its object.
The Shaykh : A preposition and its object, so "upon the Qur'an"[Surat al-Naml:1] and those are verses of a Book.
And this Qur'an was described as "the Qur'an" and "the Book" because it is recited and written. It is written in the Preserved Tablet, it is recited by tongues, and it is also written in the mushafs. So its writing is prior and subsequent, and its recitation is subsequent or prior?
The student: Subsequent.
The Shaykh : Subsequent, because it is after Allah spoke it and Jibril brought it down[Surat al-Qiyamah:17 - 18].
Is the Qur'an a derived word or a verbal noun? It is a verbal noun, because it is like "forgiveness" and "thanksgiving," so it is a verbal noun from "to read" meaning: to recite.
And it is said: It means gathering, because the qaf and ra indicate gathering, and from this is "the village" because it is the gathering of people.
In reality, the Qur'an combines both descriptions; it is recited and it is also gathered.
As for his saying:[Surat al-Naml:1] it is "fa'al" in the meaning of "maf'ul," that is: written. "Fa'al" in the meaning of "maf'ul" occurs frequently in the Arabic language, like "bina'" in the meaning of "built," and "ghiras" in the meaning of "planted," and "firas" in the meaning of "ridden"... and its examples are many.
And it was named "Book" for what we indicated before.
And his saying:[Surat al-Naml:1] that is: " manifesting the truth from falsehood ".
The word "mubin," its verb is "abana," and "abana" comes as intransitive and as transitive, that is: it comes with the meaning "revealed" and it comes with the meaning "became clear."
For this reason, you find the exegete sometimes interpreting "mubin" with the meaning "clear," and with this interpretation, is it from the intransitive or the transitive?
The student: From the intransitive.
The Shaykh : From the intransitive, and he sometimes interprets it with the meaning "revealer," so it is from the transitive.[Surat Ali 'Imran:164] What is the meaning of "mubin"?
The student: Clear.
The Shaykh : That is: clear... in clear error, so it is from the intransitive "abana." As for a verse like this: that the Qur'an is "mubin," it means "revealer." Does it necessitate that being a revealer means it is clear?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes. It necessitates it, or we say: It is from the category of using a common word in two meanings.
The correct view is that it is permissible, and this has passed us: Is it permissible to use a common word in two meanings? And the common word is... from before, which is what has one form and multiple meanings. This is the common word, and it was named so because the meanings... are shared in one word.
The correct view regarding the common word is that it is permissible to use it in two meanings with a condition, or two conditions we mentioned two nights ago, which are: that there be no contradiction between them, and that it be capable of bearing both. Yes, if it cannot bear them, it cannot be attributed to it, or if there is a contradiction between them, it cannot be, one of them must be the intended meaning.
Here, for example, if we say: "Mubin" is from the intransitive "abana" and from the transitive "abana." Is it permissible or not? It is permissible, and even though this is a common word, when it is used in two meanings, it is used in a way that has no contradiction, so the Qur'an is clear and the Qur'an is also a revealer.
And with this estimation, is the indication of "mubin" that the Qur'an is clear an indication of correspondence or an indication of implication?
The student: An indication of correspondence.
The Shaykh : The indication is one of correspondence, if we consider *mubin* (clear) to be used in both meanings; the indication is then one of correspondence. But if we say that *mubin* means *muharir* (manifesting), then its indication that it is *bayyinan* (clear) is from the category of the indication of commitment.
[Surat al-Naml:1] "a manifester of the truth from falsehood" Is this in its generality, or is it specific to what the Qur'an was revealed with?
Allah the Exalted says:[Surat al-Nahl:89] And it is general in everything, but the clarification may be a clarification of the thing in a way of specification, and it may be a clarification of its causes and its ways...
So the Qur'an is, in reality, a clarification of everything, even in matters other than the legal ones, it clarifies them, but it does not clarify their details, because these non-legal matters are subject to time and place, and the understanding and capacity of people, but it mentions the causes and the ways, and that you should employ them in yourself.
And for this reason, if someone says: How is this statement from you correct, when we do not see in the Qur'an the number of rak'ahs of the prayer, nor do we see that it is five prayers, nor do we see the nisab of zakah, nor the measures... in it. What is the answer?
The student: We say that in the Qur'an, Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, says, as Ibn Mas'ud said:[Surat al-Hashr:7] This includes what the Messenger clarified.
And also His saying, the Exalted:[Surat al-Nahl:89], [Surat Ali 'Imran:7], [Surat al-Nahl:44] meaning...
The Shaykh :[Surat al-Nahl:44].
So: the Qur'an indicates this by clarifying its cause and its way. So now, the way of knowing this thing is what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) interpreted, that this is it, and the Qur'an clarified it, and it is not necessary that this Qur'an must write down all the details[Surat al-Nisa:80].
And Ibn Mas'ud, whom Ibrahim referred to in the story of the woman who shaved her eyebrows and the one who had them shaved, when a woman came to him and said: "We do not find this in the Book of Allah" He said: "Yes, it is in the Book of Allah" Then he recited to her this verse.
The result is that the Qur'an is a clarifier of everything, but the clarification may be detailed, and this is found in some matters, as in inheritance, for example, in the cases of divorce. You will find that nothing deviates from this except very few issues, and even so, their clarification is found upon reflection.
The detailing of the fara'id (law of inheritance shares) is such that nothing deviates from it, nothing deviated except one issue, which is the grandmother; this is not mentioned in the Qur'an, but it came through the Sunnah. As for what is other than that, even the disputed issues, like the *mushrifah* (the one who is in a state of uncertainty regarding her status) and the *'umriyyatayn* (the two lifetime inheritors), we find that they are present in the Qur'an, and like the grandfather and the brothers, we find that their clarification is present in the Qur'an, but it requires reflection.
Ta-Sin
طسThis is the path taken by the author and a group of scholars, namely that regarding these alphabetic letters found at the beginning of some surahs, our position is to say: Allah knows best what He intends by that.
It was previously mentioned in the night tafsir class that the stronger position is that these letters are alphabetic, and that by virtue of the Qur'an being in the Arabic language, it necessitates that they have no meaning. We mentioned that this was narrated from Mujahid, and that they are alphabetic letters with which Allah began, having no meaning. Based on this, we are certain that they have no meaning, because they have no meaning, but they have a significance, which is: that this Qur'an, which baffled these eloquent orators, is composed of these very alphabetic letters from which their speech is formed. That is, He did not bring new letters; for example, they would say: "By Allah, these are letters we do not know!" He brought the same letters they speak with.
This is supported by the fact that there are no alphabetic letters that do not have a mention of the Qur'an following them, except in two surahs or something similar to them. In those two surahs, such as:
(1) Alif, Lam, Meem (2) Do the people think that they will be left
الم * أَحَسِبَ النَّاسُ أَنْ يُتْرَكُوا(1) Alif, Lam, Meem. (2) The Byzantines have been defeated
الم * غُلِبَتِ الرُّومُ(2) The Byzantines have been defeated (3) In the nearest land. But they, after their defeat, will overcome.
غُلِبَتِ الرُّومُ * فِي أَدْنَى الأَرْضِ وَهُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِ غَلَبِهِمْ سَيَغْلِبُونَDo the people think that they will be left to say, "We believe" and they will not be tried?
أَحَسِبَ النَّاسُ أَنْ يُتْرَكُوا أَنْ يَقُولُوا آمَنَّا وَهُمْ لا يُفْتَنُونَBut We have certainly tried those before them
وَلَقَدْ فَتَنَّا الَّذِينَ مِنْ قَبْلِهِمْ ...As for what the later deviants claimed, namely that these letters indicate a type of miraculousness related to numbers and rules, where they claimed that these alphabetic letters have counterparts in the surah they open, and that the total of this is divisible by nineteen, and they claim that this is the greatest proof that the Qur'an is the speech of Allah. They argue for this by saying that the first verse revealed, in their claim, is "In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy," and that it is composed of nineteen letters, and that this is the meaning of His saying, the Exalted:
(29) Blackening the skins. (30) Over it are nineteen [angels].
لَوَّاحَةٌ لِلْبَشَرِ * عَلَيْهَا تِسْعَةَ عَشَرَAll of this, refuge with Allah, is a lie and does not hold up. It is also contradictory and not consistent. But they were pleased with this computer that produced the number of letters for them and showed that they are divisible by a certain number.
We say: It is not impossible that Allah, Glorified and Exalted, intended this, but we say: We are not certain that Allah intended this. Here there is a difference between being certain that this is a sign in the Qur'an, and saying: We do not say this.
First: because there is no miraculousness in that. People may hear a speech or words where the letters present in it are counted and divided by this number or any other number, and it is not miraculous.
Then, the Basmala is not the first thing revealed from the Qur'an. The first thing revealed was
Recite in the name of your Lord who created -
اقْرَأْ بِاسْمِ رَبِّكَ الَّذِي خَلَقَThe students: As recited.
The Shaykh : As recited, and with its letters in terms of recitation, it is not so.
And writing, as you know, is a convention. It is possible that writing in the time of the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, and the time of the Caliphs, was not in this form. Is it possible or not possible? It is possible.
Now, in some writings in some languages, they make the vowel a letter, and make one letter two letters, or they abbreviate, making two letters one letter.
So the result is that the Qur'an was not revealed as written, but was revealed as recited, and there is no proof in that.
So we say: Allah knows best what He intends by that. This is one of the opinions in the issue.
The second opinion is that they are symbols for specific things, as the later scholars went, or as some mention that they are a reference to wars and battles that will occur in the end of times... and the like.
The third is to say: They have no meaning. And if it is asked of us how we are certain of that?
The answer is: This Qur'an was revealed in the language of the Arabs, and the language of the Arabs does not assign a meaning to these letters. But if we say that they have no meaning, then they have a significance, and Allah knows best that He intended that by them.
He said: "
Those
تِلْكَThe verses of the Qur'an
آيَاتُ الْقُرْآنِAnd a clear Book
وَكِتَابٍ مُبِينٍA guidance
هُدًىThese are the verses of the Qur'an
تلك آيَاتُ الْقُرْآنِThe student: Subsequent.
The Shaykh : The one referred to is subsequent, not previous.
This is an instance where the reference is to something later in both wording and rank, and this is permissible if the evidence indicates it.
And his saying:
The verses of the Qur'an
آيَاتُ الْقُرْآنِThe verses of the Qur'an
آيَاتُ الْقُرْآنِIt is permissible, for example, to take the verse at its apparent meaning, and there is no need for interpretation, and we say:
These are the verses of the Qur'an
تِلْكَ آيَاتُ الْقُرْآنِSo the meaning is that referring to a part of the species by the whole species is acceptable and does not require interpretation, as the author said.
And his saying:
And a clear Book
وَكِتَابٍ مُبِينٍA guidance
هُدًىConjunction, and what is it conjoined to?
And a Book
وَكِتَابٍThe student: To "verses."
The Shaykh : To "verses." Good. Is this statement correct or not?
The student: It is correct. "Verses"... is a preposition and its object.
The Shaykh : A preposition and its object, so "upon the Qur'an"
These are the verses of the Qur'an
تِلْكَ آيَاتُ الْقُرْآنِAnd this Qur'an was described as "the Qur'an" and "the Book" because it is recited and written. It is written in the Preserved Tablet, it is recited by tongues, and it is also written in the mushafs. So its writing is prior and subsequent, and its recitation is subsequent or prior?
The student: Subsequent.
The Shaykh : Subsequent, because it is after Allah spoke it and Jibril brought it down
(17) Indeed, upon Us is its collection [in your heart] and [to make possible] its recitation. (18) So when We have recited it [through Gabriel], then follow its recitation.
إِنَّ عَلَيْنَا جَمْعَهُ وَقُرْآنَهُ * فَإِذَا قَرَأْنَاهُ فَاتَّبِعْ قُرْآنَهُIs the Qur'an a derived word or a verbal noun? It is a verbal noun, because it is like "forgiveness" and "thanksgiving," so it is a verbal noun from "to read" meaning: to recite.
And it is said: It means gathering, because the qaf and ra indicate gathering, and from this is "the village" because it is the gathering of people.
In reality, the Qur'an combines both descriptions; it is recited and it is also gathered.
As for his saying:
And a Book
وَكِتَابٍAnd it was named "Book" for what we indicated before.
And his saying:
Clear
مُبِينٍThe word "mubin," its verb is "abana," and "abana" comes as intransitive and as transitive, that is: it comes with the meaning "revealed" and it comes with the meaning "became clear."
For this reason, you find the exegete sometimes interpreting "mubin" with the meaning "clear," and with this interpretation, is it from the intransitive or the transitive?
The student: From the intransitive.
The Shaykh : From the intransitive, and he sometimes interprets it with the meaning "revealer," so it is from the transitive.
although they had been before in manifest error.
وَإِنْ كَانُوا مِنْ قَبْلُ لَفِي ضَلالٍ مُبِينٍThe student: Clear.
The Shaykh : That is: clear... in clear error, so it is from the intransitive "abana." As for a verse like this: that the Qur'an is "mubin," it means "revealer." Does it necessitate that being a revealer means it is clear?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes. It necessitates it, or we say: It is from the category of using a common word in two meanings.
The correct view is that it is permissible, and this has passed us: Is it permissible to use a common word in two meanings? And the common word is... from before, which is what has one form and multiple meanings. This is the common word, and it was named so because the meanings... are shared in one word.
The correct view regarding the common word is that it is permissible to use it in two meanings with a condition, or two conditions we mentioned two nights ago, which are: that there be no contradiction between them, and that it be capable of bearing both. Yes, if it cannot bear them, it cannot be attributed to it, or if there is a contradiction between them, it cannot be, one of them must be the intended meaning.
Here, for example, if we say: "Mubin" is from the intransitive "abana" and from the transitive "abana." Is it permissible or not? It is permissible, and even though this is a common word, when it is used in two meanings, it is used in a way that has no contradiction, so the Qur'an is clear and the Qur'an is also a revealer.
And with this estimation, is the indication of "mubin" that the Qur'an is clear an indication of correspondence or an indication of implication?
The student: An indication of correspondence.
The Shaykh : The indication is one of correspondence, if we consider *mubin* (clear) to be used in both meanings; the indication is then one of correspondence. But if we say that *mubin* means *muharir* (manifesting), then its indication that it is *bayyinan* (clear) is from the category of the indication of commitment.
And a clear Book
وَكِتَابٍ مُبِينٍAllah the Exalted says:
And We have sent down to you the Book as clarification for all things
وَنَزَّلْنَا عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ تِبْيَانًا لِكُلِّ شَيْءٍSo the Qur'an is, in reality, a clarification of everything, even in matters other than the legal ones, it clarifies them, but it does not clarify their details, because these non-legal matters are subject to time and place, and the understanding and capacity of people, but it mentions the causes and the ways, and that you should employ them in yourself.
And for this reason, if someone says: How is this statement from you correct, when we do not see in the Qur'an the number of rak'ahs of the prayer, nor do we see that it is five prayers, nor do we see the nisab of zakah, nor the measures... in it. What is the answer?
The student: We say that in the Qur'an, Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, says, as Ibn Mas'ud said:
And whatever the Messenger has given you - take; and what he has forbidden you - refrain from
وَمَا آتَاكُمُ الرَّسُولُ فَخُذُوهُ وَمَا نَهَاكُمْ عَنْهُ فَانْتَهُواAnd also His saying, the Exalted:
And We have sent down to you the Book
وَنَزَّلْنَا عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَIt is He who has sent down to you, [O Muhammad], the Book
هُوَ الَّذِي أَنْزَلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَthat you may make clear to the people what was sent down to them
لِتُبَيِّنَ لِلنَّاسِ مَا نُزِّلَ إِلَيْهِمْThe Shaykh :
And We revealed to you the message that you may make clear to the people what was sent down to them
وَأَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الذِّكْرَ لِتُبَيِّنَ لِلنَّاسِ مَا نُزِّلَ إِلَيْهِمْSo: the Qur'an indicates this by clarifying its cause and its way. So now, the way of knowing this thing is what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) interpreted, that this is it, and the Qur'an clarified it, and it is not necessary that this Qur'an must write down all the details
He who obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah
مَنْ يُطِعِ الرَّسُولَ فَقَدْ أَطَاعَ اللَّهَAnd Ibn Mas'ud, whom Ibrahim referred to in the story of the woman who shaved her eyebrows and the one who had them shaved, when a woman came to him and said: "We do not find this in the Book of Allah" He said: "Yes, it is in the Book of Allah" Then he recited to her this verse.
The result is that the Qur'an is a clarifier of everything, but the clarification may be detailed, and this is found in some matters, as in inheritance, for example, in the cases of divorce. You will find that nothing deviates from this except very few issues, and even so, their clarification is found upon reflection.
The detailing of the fara'id (law of inheritance shares) is such that nothing deviates from it, nothing deviated except one issue, which is the grandmother; this is not mentioned in the Qur'an, but it came through the Sunnah. As for what is other than that, even the disputed issues, like the *mushrifah* (the one who is in a state of uncertainty regarding her status) and the *'umriyyatayn* (the two lifetime inheritors), we find that they are present in the Qur'an, and like the grandfather and the brothers, we find that their clarification is present in the Qur'an, but it requires reflection.