Commentary on Tafsir al-Jalalayn: “And they did not differ” meaning the people of the religions in the religion, in that some affirmed the oneness of Allah and some disbelieved, “except after knowledge had come to them”
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :“ meaning the people of the religions in the religion, in that some of them affirmed the oneness of Allah and some disbelieved [Ali 'Imran 3:19] regarding the oneness of Allah from the disbelievers ”
The author says: “ meaning the people of the religions ” This is a good interpretation, and Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) mentioned in Surat al-Bayyinah His saying: [Al-Bayyinah 98:4] So do we say that this general verse is specified by the verse of al-Bayyinah, and the intended meaning is “and those who were given the Scripture did not differ,” or do we say it is general [Al-Bayyinah 98:4] some of the individuals, and if some of the individuals are mentioned with a ruling that matches the ruling of the general, it is not considered a specification?
The second answer: This is a principle of usul al-fiqh: if some of the individuals of a general statement are mentioned with a ruling that matches the general, this is not a specification. For example, I said: “Honor the students,” then I said: “Honor Muhammad,” and he is one of them. Does this imply that you should not honor the others? No. So mentioning him with a ruling that agrees with the ruling of the general does not imply specifying it with him. But if it contradicts it, then it is a specification. If I said: “Honor the students,” then I said: “Do not honor Muhammad,” then in that case his ruling is excluded from the ruling of the general.
[Ash-Shuraa 42:14] And the author’s saying: “ in that some of them affirmed the oneness of Allah and some disbelieved ” This is appropriate to His saying: [Ash-Shuraa 42:13] Otherwise, the difference is broader than being a difference in the oneness of Allah and disbelief, [Ali 'Imran 3:19] so their differing is with knowledge, the proof has been established against them. And His saying: is the object for the sake of which, meaning that their differing is for arrogance and aggression.
“[Yunus 10:19] regarding the postponement of the punishment [Ash-Shuraa 42:14] ” to the end of it [Ash-Shuraa 42:14] And the word that preceded from Allah is the postponement of the punishment until they meet Allah (Mighty and Majestic) “ ” meaning a specific one “ and it is the Day of Resurrection by punishing the disbelievers in this world ” meaning to judge and rule between them, and He destroyed the disbelievers and left the monotheists. The commentator says: “ [Ash-Shuraa 42:14] namely the Jews and the Christians [An-Nisa 4:157] concerning Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) a state of being in doubt ” His saying (Mighty and Majestic): [Yunus 10:19] The word is that He (Mighty and Majestic) decreed the postponement of the punishment from them as a trial and test. And Allah the Exalted indicated this trial and test by His saying: [Muhammad 47:4] If Allah had avenged them and destroyed them, there would have been no place for jihad, and no trial and test would have remained for the believers. For this reason He said: [Muhammad 47:4].
And His saying: meaning a specific, determined one, and that is the Day of Resurrection. The Day of Resurrection is determined in the knowledge of Allah; it does not come earlier or later, just as the death of a person is determined by Allah; it does not come earlier or later.
[Ash-Shuraa 42:14] And those who inherited the Scripture, meaning: they were given it. For free or for a price? For free, meaning without effort, just as an heir inherits the wealth of his deceased without effort, for free. [Ash-Shuraa 42:14] Is the intended meaning of the Scripture here the Torah and the Gospel, or is the intended meaning of the Scripture the Qur'an, and the meaning is [Ash-Shuraa 42:14] and it is the Qur'an meaning after those who differed from the People of the Book and others [An-Nisa 4:157] meaning from this Scripture ? This is what I say is better than what the author (may Allah have mercy on him) went to. The author implies by his saying that the intended meaning of the Scripture is the Torah and the Gospel, because he said: “ they are the Jews and the Christians ” So the Jews have the Torah and the Christians have the Gospel. But it appears that the intended meaning of the Scripture is this Qur'an [An-Nisa 4:157] meaning from this Scripture a state of being in doubt. And doubt (shakk) is stronger than suspicion (shakk) because it is uncertainty and anxiety. The one who doubts may have a cool heart and not have anxiety, but the one who is in a state of doubt (murtab) is stronger. And the common case is that uncertainty occurs with conflicting evidence, each of which implies that his destiny is to it, so the person becomes uncertain, hesitates, and is anxious. But pure doubt is a doubt; there is no doubt in this, but it does not lead to uncertainty unless it becomes great and strong and the evidence conflicts. Then the person remains in severe uncertainty.
And they did not differ
وما تفرقواexcept after knowledge had come to them
إلا من بعد ما جاءهم العلمout of arrogance
بغياbetween them
بينهمAnd they did not differ
وما تفرقواNor did those who were given the Scripture become divided until after there had come to them clear evidence.
وما تفرق الذين أوتوا الكتاب إلا من بعد ما جاءتهم البينةAnd they did not differ
وما تفرقواNor did those who were given the Scripture
وما تفرقوا الذين أوتوا الكتابThe second answer: This is a principle of usul al-fiqh: if some of the individuals of a general statement are mentioned with a ruling that matches the general, this is not a specification. For example, I said: “Honor the students,” then I said: “Honor Muhammad,” and he is one of them. Does this imply that you should not honor the others? No. So mentioning him with a ruling that agrees with the ruling of the general does not imply specifying it with him. But if it contradicts it, then it is a specification. If I said: “Honor the students,” then I said: “Do not honor Muhammad,” then in that case his ruling is excluded from the ruling of the general.
And they did not become divided until after knowledge had come to them - out of jealous animosity between themselves
وما تفرقوا إلا من بعد ما جاءهم العلم بغيا بينهمDifficult for those who associate others with Allah is that to which you invite them
كبر على المشركين ما تدعوهم إليهexcept after knowledge had come to them - out of jealous animosity between themselves
إلا من بعد ما جاءهم العلم بغيا بينهمout of envy, among themselves
بغيا بينهم“
And if not for a word that preceded from your Lord
ولولا كلمة سبقت من ربكuntil a specified time, it would have been concluded between them
إلى أجل مسمى لقضي بينهمuntil after knowledge had come to them - out of jealous animosity between themselves. And if not for a word that preceded from your Lord
إلا من بعد ما جاءهم العلم بغيا بينهم * ولولا كلمة سبقت من ربكto a specified term
إلى أجل مسمىjudgment would have been rendered between them
لقضي بينهمjudgment would have been rendered between them
لقضي بينهمAnd indeed, those who were granted inheritance of the Scripture after them
وإن الذين أورثوا الكتاب من بعدهمin doubt about it
لفي شك منهa doubt that is troubling
مريبAnd if not for a word that preceded from your Lord
ولولا كلمة سبقت من ربكAnd if Allah had willed, He could have taken vengeance upon them [Himself], but [He ordered armed struggle] to test some of you by means of others
ولو شاء الله لانتصر منهم ولكن ليبلوا بعضكم ببعضbut [He ordered armed struggle] to test some of you by means of others. And those who are killed in the cause of Allah - never will He waste their deeds.
ولكن ليبلوا بعضكم ببعض والذين قتلوا في سبيل الله فلن يضل أعمالهمAnd His saying: