[That occurred] when the messengers had come to them before them and after them
إذ جاءتهم الرسل من بين أيديهم ومن خلفهم
to the end of it.
When
إذ
This is an adverb of cause, meaning regarding the cause of the thunderbolt that destroyed them. The reason for that is that the messengers came to them from before them and from behind them. The commentator said:
"Meaning facing them and turning away from them, so they disbelieved, as will come later, and the destruction was only in their time." Yes.
[That occurred] when the messengers had come to them before them and after them
إذ جاءتهم الرسل مِن بين أيديهم ومن خلفهم
His statement:
from before them and from behind them
من بين أيديهم ومن خلفهم
The author says:
"Meaning facing them and turning away from them" means that at times they would face them and call them, and at times they would turn away and threaten them if they did not believe. It is also possible that the meaning of "from before them and from behind them" is that they came to them with past signs and future signs, so they did not fall short in explaining the truth, but rather they came with an explanation of the truth from every angle. And his statement:
"So they disbelieved" this is the purpose of the warning: that they disbelieved, so they were destroyed. For this reason he said:
"And the destruction was only in their time" meaning in the time of their disbelief, not in the time of the messengers' arrival, because the messengers came first, then they called and called, so when they persisted in their disbelief, they were destroyed.
"that
أن
Meaning by Do not worship except Allah
لا تعبدوا إلا الله
" The author (may Allah have mercy on him) informed us that
that
أن
here is a preposition of source, and the implied meaning is: by not worshipping. Meaning they came to them with the command not to worship other than Allah. It is also possible that
that
أن
is explanatory, because the meaning of speech preceded it without its words, because the messengers' coming came with speech and revelation with which they spoke, so it contains the meaning of speech without its words. Whenever
that
أن
comes after something that contains the meaning of speech without its words, they call it explanatory, like the saying of Allah the Exalted:
So We inspired to him, "Construct the ship under Our observation, and Our inspiration
وأوحينا إليه أن اصنع الفلك بأعيننا ووحينا
We revealed: "Make the ship"
أوحينا أن اصنع الفلك
And your Lord inspired to the bee, "Take for yourself
وأوحى ربك إلى النحل أن اتخذي
So
that
أن
here is explanatory. So whenever
that
أن
comes after something that contains the meaning of speech without its words, it is explanatory, O Usamah. So
that
أن
here is possible to be a preposition of source, as the commentator followed, or it is possible to be explanatory. This disagreement affects how we parse
No.
لا
? If we parse
that
أن
as a preposition of source, then
No.
لا
is a negation and the verb is in the accusative case due to
that
أن
. And if we parse it as explanatory, then
No.
لا
is a prohibition and the verb is in the jussive case due to
No.
لا
. So the parsing of
You worship
تعبدوا
thus depends on the disagreement regarding
that
أن
. Say, O brother! If we make it explanatory, the verb is in the jussive case due to what? How do you parse the verb if
that
أن
is explanatory? ... Well done. A present tense verb in the jussive case due to the prohibitive particle
No.
لا
. And if we parse
that
أن
as a preposition of source, Zaki? It is in the accusative case due to
that
أن
. Perfect. And in this case,
No.
لا
is a negation with the fa, and in the first case it is a prohibitive particle.
Worship not except Allah." They said,
ألا تعبدوا إلا الله قالوا
to the end of it.
Do not worship except Allah
لا تعبدوا إلا الله
It is the meaning of the statement of
, because
There is no deity
لا إله
means there is no true deity except Allah, and this says: Do not worship except Allah, so it is the meaning of "There is no deity except Allah," and it is the meaning of the saying of Allah the Exalted:
And We sent not before you any messenger except that We revealed to him that, "There is no deity except Me, so worship Me."
وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِنْ قَبْلِكَ مِنْ رَسُولٍ إِلَّا نُوحِي إِلَيْهِ أَنَّهُ لا إِلَهَ إِلَّا أَنَا فَاعْبُدُونِ
[Al-Anbiya: 25]. And when a person truly affirms this word,
he must, he must, obey Allah. As long as you testify that there is no deity except Allah, you must adopt the means that lead you to this deity whom you testified that there is no deity but Him.
They said
قالوا
Who is the subject? The people of 'Ad and Thamud.
"They said, "If our Lord had willed, He would have
قالوا لو شاء ربنا لَأنزل
upon us. the angels, so indeed we, in that with which you have been sent
ملائكة فإنَّا بما أرسلْتم به
In your claim. disbelievers
كافرون
" This is the answer, an answer of the utmost baseness: If our Lord had willed that we would be guided and not worship except Him, He would have sent down angels. And according to this interpretation that I told you, the object of
willed
شاء
is omitted, meaning: If our Lord had willed that we not worship except Him, He would have sent down angels. Be aware that
if
لو
is a conditional particle, and
willed
شاء
is the verb of the condition, and the answer to the condition is
He would have sent down angels
لأنزل ملائكة
, and the object of
willed
شاء
is omitted. The implied meaning is: If He had willed that we not worship except Him, He would have sent down angels. This argument is a false argument, because are those to whom the message was sent angels or humans? Humans, there is no doubt. So how would Allah send down angels to humans? Then Allah said in response to this: And if We had sent down an angel, We would have made him a man [so] meaning in the form of a man. It is not possible for an angel to descend in the form of an angel to humans. If it were assumed that Allah sent down an angel, He would make him in the form of humans, and in that case, the doubt returns.
and We would have covered them with that in which they cover themselves.
ولَلَبَسْنَا عليهم ما يلْبِسُون
Have you seen if Allah sent Jibril to the children of Adam, and he had six hundred wings that blocked the horizon, would this be compatible with people? Absolutely not, they would flee from him and not stand before him. So if that is the case, this argument is false, because we say to these people and to whoever said like their saying: If Allah had sent down an angel, He would have made him a man, and in that case, the doubt returns. So, the argument is false.
He would have sent down angels
لأنزل ملائكة
And his statement:
If our Lord had willed, He would have sent down the angels, so indeed we, in that with which you have been sent, are disbelievers."
لو شاء ربنا لأنزل -علينا- ملائكة فإنا بما أرسلتم به كافرون
The fa here is for branching, meaning: So based on the fact that angels were not sent down, we are, by what you have sent us with, disbelievers. We ask Allah for safety. They affirmed their disbelief and said:
in that with which you were sent, are disbelievers."
بما أرسلتم به كافرون
So the object was brought forward, because
by what you have sent
بما أرسلتم
is connected to what? To
disbelievers
كافرون
. Why was it brought forward before it? For two reasons: The first reason is to consider the rhymes of the verses. If he had said: So we are disbelievers by what you sent us with, the rhymes would not be suitable. But when he said: By what you sent us with, we are disbelievers, the rhymes were suitable. And considering suitability is a fixed matter. Have you seen Moses and Aaron, which of them is better, and who is mentioned first in the Qur'an? Moses, except in one verse. For the sake of suitability, in Surah Ta-Ha, Allah mentioned that the magicians said:
They said, "We have believed in the Lord of Aaron and Moses."
قالوا آمنا برب هارون وموسى
Although they had said:
We believe in the Lord of Moses and Aaron
آمَنَّا برَبِّ موسى وهارون
This is the statement of the magicians, but when Allah quoted it from them in Surah Ta-Ha, the mention of Aaron was brought forward, to suit the verses, even though Moses is better, and Moses is the one whom the magicians mentioned first in several verses, but Allah the Mighty and Majestic quoted their speech in Surah Ta-Ha bringing Aaron forward, to suit the rhymes. Here,
so indeed we, in that with which you have been sent, are disbelievers."
فإنا بما أرسلتم به كافرون
the connected phrase, which is
by what you have sent
بما أرسلتم
, was brought forward before the connected phrase, for two reasons: The first reason: considering the rhymes. The second reason: restriction. As if these deniers and obstinate ones said: If we believed in everything, we would disbelieve in what you sent us with. So it is as if they are saying: We do not disbelieve in anything except what you sent us with. Bringing forward what is properly delayed indicates restriction. Look at the obstinacy.
in that with which you were sent, are disbelievers."
بما أرسلتم به كافرون
As if they said: We do not disbelieve except in what you sent us with. This is the meaning of restriction, so this is more eloquent in obstinacy, as if they are saying: If we believed in everything, we would not believe in what you sent us with. Then, his statement:
with which you have been sent
بما أرسلتم به
They said it by way of concession. For this reason, the commentator said:
"In your claim". And we said that they said it by way of concession because if they had said it by way of acknowledgment, they would have believed, and they would have been believers. But they said it by way of concession: By what you sent us with, we are disbelievers.
