And said
وقال
Ibrahim:
You have only taken, other than Allah, idols
إِنَّمَا اتَّخَذْتُمْ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ أَوْثَانًا
[al-Ankabut :25] you worship them, and
not
ما
a source particle
affection between you
مَوَدَّةَ بَيْنِكُمْ
the predicate
Indeed
إِنَّ
and in the accusative reading, it is the object for the sake of which, and
not
ما
the meaning is complete: you showed affection for their worship. "The author (may Allah have mercy on him) has now clarified to us that his statement:
affection
مودَّة
in it, there are two canonical readings, or not? Two canonical readings: the nominative reading. We are now going to parse the verse before we talk about its meaning. The nominative reading
You have only taken, other than Allah, idols as [a bond of] affection among you
إِنَّمَا اتَّخَذْتُمْ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ أَوْثَانًا مَوَدَّةُ بَيْنِكُمْ
in the nominative reading, the author parsed
not
ما
as a source particle, not a negation particle and not a relative pronoun; it is a source particle, and the implied meaning in his view is: that your taking idols besides Allah is affection between you, so the source derived from
not
ما
the name of *inna* and *yaku*
affection
مودَّة
the predicate
Indeed
إن
, and
You took idols
اتخذتم أوثانًا
... we will complete the grammatical analysis
Indeed
إنّ
and what is related to it, and in the case of the accusative reading, he says that it is the object for the sake of which, and what is the object?
The student: An object for the sake of which the action is done.
The Shaykh : That is, they call it an object for the sake of which the action is done. That is, you only took idols other than Allah as gods for the sake of the affection between you. Yes. But in this reading,
not
ما
is a restrictive particle, so it applies to
Indeed
إن
and
not
ما
. When the restrictive particle applies to
Indeed
إن
, it implies restriction, meaning: You did not take the idols except for the sake of the affection between you ... Now,
not
ما
according to the first opinion, we say:
not
ما
in the author's opinion, this
not
ما
is a particle of nominalization, and
and you took
واتخذتم
is a verb construed as a noun, and the implied meaning is: "Indeed, your taking idols other than Allah as gods is affection between you," which is the predicate of
Indeed
إن
. In the reading with the accusative case, we say:
Actions are only
إنما
is a restrictive particle, and
and affection
ومَوَدَّة
is the object for the sake of which the action is done, meaning: You took them for the sake of the affection. Yes, this is what the author said. It was also said that
not
ما
is a relative pronoun in the reading with the nominative case. If
not
ما
is a relative pronoun, and the resumptive pronoun is omitted, the implied meaning is: "Indeed, the one whom you took other than Allah as idols is affection between you." And on this implied meaning, the object of
Took.
اتخذ
is omitted, its first object, and its second object is
idols
أوثانُا
... And on this basis, we say:
Indeed
إن
is a particle of emphasis that makes the subject accusative and the predicate nominative, and
not
ما
is its name, meaning "the one who," and
and you took
واتخذْتُم
is the relative clause, and the resumptive pronoun is omitted, and the implied meaning is: "You took him," and
and idols
وأوثانًا
is the second object of
Took.
اتخذ
because
Took.
اتخذ
makes two objects accusative, as in the saying of Allah the Exalted:
And Allah took Abraham as an intimate friend.
وَاتَّخَذَ اللَّهُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ خَلِيلًا
[Al-Nisa :125]. Yes, is it clear? That is, the one whom you took as idols is the affection between you. Yes, and this is also the implied meaning we mentioned where the name is a relative pronoun, which is valid even in the reading with the accusative case: "The one whom you took as idols for the sake of the affection between you does not benefit you." And the predicate in the reading with the accusative case is omitted, and the implied meaning is: "It does not benefit you." Now, let us return to
took
اتَّخذ
, which makes two objects accusative. On the assumption that
not
ما
is a relative pronoun, where is its first object? It is omitted: "You took him," which is the resumptive pronoun referring back to
what
مَا
, and
idols
أوثانًا
is the second object. And according to the opinion that
not
ما
is a particle of nominalization or a restrictive particle, we say: The second object is also omitted, and the implied meaning is "gods," as in the saying of Allah the Exalted:
an offering, gods
قُرْبَانًا آلِهَةً
[Al-Hijr :28]. The meaning is: They took these idols as gods, out of affection between them.
The student: ...... ?
The Shaykh : ... a second object. Yes, it appears that it is a circumstantial phrase from "idols" because it was placed before them.
The student: ...?
The Shaykh : No, it is not valid, because it is clear that it is for the sake of causation. That is, they took them for the affection because they gathered on this so that they would not be separated. So they said: We will support the gods to seek the affection between us, so that these gods will unite us in affection. I think the time is up.
