Text copied Link copied

Al-Fatawa – home

﴿ فَاسْأَلُوا أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِن كُنتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ ﴾

Scholar
Search mode

Allah the Exalted said: << فلما جآءت قيل أهكذا عرشك قالت كأنه هو وأوتينا العلم من قبلها وكنا مسلمين >

Machine translationRead the Arabic original
"
When she came, it was said: Is this like your throne? فَلَمَّا جَاءَتْ قِيلَ أَهَكَذَا عَرْشُكِ
[naml:42] That is: Is this like your throne?
She said, "[It is] as though it was it." قَالَتْ كَأَنَّهُ هُوَ
[naml:42] That is: So she recognized it "
.
When she came فَلَمَّا جَاءَتْ
[naml:42] Meaning: to Sulayman, and she looked at the throne
It was said: Is this like your throne? قِيلَ أَهَكَذَا عَرْشُكِ
[naml:42] and the one who said it was either Sulayman or one of his soldiers, and it was not specified, because the intended meaning is the sense of this statement, not its speaker.
And his saying:
Is this like your throne? أَهَكَذَا عَرْشُكِ
[naml:42] The interrogation here is in its literal sense, and what is intended by it is seeking information. The haa is for emphasis, and the kaa is a preposition that came between the haa of emphasis and the demonstrative noun, even though the haa of emphasis is paired with the demonstrative noun, but the kaa intervened between it and the demonstrative noun because the preposition is directly connected to the genitive,
Is this like your throne? أَهَكَذَا عَرْشُكِ
[naml:42] but also, it is specific to the kaa; if you had come with a preposition other than the kaa, it would not have been permissible to separate it from the demonstrative noun. If you said, for example: "Did you come for this?" it is not correct to say: "Did you come for this?" (using a different preposition), it does not work, meaning: no preposition separates the demonstrative noun from the haa of emphasis except the kaa alone. So we say:
Is this like your throne? أَهَكَذَا عَرْشُكِ
[naml:42] The prepositional phrase is a fronted predicate. And "your throne" is a delayed subject, and fronting the predicate here is permissible, or is it obligatory?
The student: Obligatory.

The Shaykh : Obligatory because of the interrogation, because it has the priority. And here they did not say: "Is this your throne?" but they said: "Is it like this, your throne?" Meaning: Is your throne like this? She answered with what she was asked, so she said:
It is as if it is it. كَأَنَّهُ هُوَ
[naml:42] And "ka-anna" is for comparison, and she did not say that it is it. Yes. And she did not deny it. Yes. The reason is that it resembles her throne in its essence but differs from it in its attributes, because it was altered. And this is also part of her intelligence; when it occurred to her that it was her throne but its attributes had changed, she said: "It is as if it is it," and the answer corresponds to the question, and the author took an unusual path in this, saying: " So she compared it, meaning: so she recognized it and compared it to him as they compared it to her, since he did not say: 'Is this your throne?' If it had been said, she would have said: Yes ". We... we do not know if she would say yes or say "it is as if it is it"; rather, her answer corresponds to the question and to the requirements of the situation. As for its correspondence to the question, it is because it was said to her: "Is it like this?" meaning: Is it like this? So the answer was: "It is as if it is it."
And as for its correspondence to the requirements of the situation, it is because the woman saw that the throne had been altered, so she did not affirm its denial and did not affirm its existence. If one looks at the essence of the throne or the footstool, it is it; and if one looks at its attributes, it is not it. Therefore, her answer was very good and does not contain comparison as the author said; this does not contain comparison.
If they had said: "Is this your throne?" we do not know if she would say yes or say: "It is as if it is it." And the author's assertion that she would say yes is not correct, because the woman is very intelligent, and when a person is in such a situation, does he affirm that what he saw is what he knew before? He does not affirm it. Rather, the requirement of prudence and caution is to say. And what does he say?
The student: It is as if it is.

The Shaykh : It is as if it is; this is the requirement of prudence, especially with the circumstances that make it unlikely that it is it, as in this story, for it is a throne surrounded and guarded from a distant place, so it is unlikely that it would be presented to her in this state. The important thing, people, now! is that we take from her answer this: we take from it her intelligence from two aspects:
First: that she answered with an answer corresponding to the question. This is one.
And second: that she answered with an answer corresponding to the requirements of the situation, since affirming this with certainty would be haste, and denying it would also be slowness; there is a possibility that it is it.
She said, "[It is] as though it was it." قَالَتْ كَأَنَّهُ هُوَ
[naml:42].
The student: ...?

The Shaykh : "Ka-anna" is for comparison.
The student: ...?

The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...?

The Shaykh : No, we say: she confused them, meaning: she made it confusing for them; she did not say she compared it.
Then he said: " Sulayman said, when he saw her knowledge and wisdom:
And we were given knowledge before her, and we have been Muslims [in submission to Allah]. وَأُوتِينَا الْعِلْمَ مِنْ قَبْلِهَا وَكُنَّا مُسْلِمِينَ
[naml:42] "
The address here, which we mentioned previously, is that he intended to speak about what Allah had bestowed upon him of knowledge. Knowledge includes religious knowledge, and includes knowledge of the rules of kingship and its foundations, and the like. Meaning: as if the assembly of his people, when they saw what they saw of her intelligence, knowledge, caution, and steadiness, saw a great matter, so Sulayman (peace and blessings be upon him) wanted to remind them of what is greater than that, which is what Allah the Exalted gave them of prior knowledge and Islam:
And we were given knowledge before her, and we have been Muslims [in submission to Allah]. وَأُوتِينَا الْعِلْمَ مِنْ قَبْلِهَا وَكُنَّا مُسْلِمِينَ
[naml:42].
And some exegetes see that his saying:
And we were given knowledge before her وَأُوتِينَا الْعِلْمَ مِنْ قَبْلِهَا
[naml:42] is from the woman's speech, meaning: "It is as if it is it, and We have been given knowledge," and that the matter is connected...? from before her, meaning: from before this case, meaning: that we have knowledge from before this case, so do not be amazed by our knowledge of this, for we have prior knowledge. But this possibility - although it was mentioned - is weak, and the correct view is: that this is from the speech of Sulayman (peace and blessings be upon him), in which he speaks about the blessing of Allah the Exalted upon him and his people prior to the knowledge of this woman. Yes.
The student: ...?

The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: ...?

The Shaykh : Where?
The student: It was said: Is it like this, your throne?
Source alathar.net

The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.

Similar fatwas