His saying, exalted and majestic is He: "And they said, 'Allah has taken a son.' Glorified is He! Rather, to Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and the earth. All are submissive to Him." "The Originator of the heavens and the earth. And when He decrees a matter, He only says to it, 'Be,' and it is." "And those who do not know said, 'Why does Allah not speak to us or there come to us a sign?' Thus said those before them, like their saying. Their hearts resemble each other. We have certainly made clear the signs to a people who are certain." (p-330) The generality of the reciters read this verse: "And they said" with a 'wa' that connects the sentence to the previous sentence, or that it is an addition to "strived." Ibn 'Amir and others read: "They said" without a 'wa.' Abu Ali said: And so it is in the Mushafs of the people of the Levant. The 'wa' has been omitted for two reasons: One is that this sentence is meaningfully connected to the one before it, so that suffices for the 'wa.' The other is that this sentence can be initiated without regard to its connection to what preceded it. There is disagreement about to whom the pronoun in "they said" refers. It is said: to the Christians because they said: 'The Messiah is the son of Allah,' and their mention is more similar to the context of the verse. It is said: to the Jews because they said: 'Uzair is the son of Allah.' It is said: to the disbelievers of the Arabs because they said: 'The angels are the daughters of Allah.' "Glorified is He" is a source meaning to declare Him free from what they said, and "whatever" is raised by the beginning and the news is in the genitive, or by the estimated stability, meaning all of that belongs to Him. And what they said, that Allah has taken a son, is included in the totality of what is in (the heavens and the earth), and a son can only be from the same kind as the father, not from the created beings that are owned. And "submissive" in the language means obedience, and "submissive" is the length of standing in worship, and from it is the submissiveness in (p-331) prayer. So the meaning of the verse is that all created beings are submissive to Allah, meaning they submit and obey, and the disbelievers and inanimate objects' submission is evident in the manifestation of the craftsmanship upon them and in them. It is said: the disbeliever prostrates his shadow while he is unwilling. "Originator" is a noun derived from 'originator,' like 'seeing' from 'seer,' and similar is the saying of Amr ibn Ma'adi Karib: 'Is it from the fragrance of the caller, the Hearing One...' meaning the One who makes heard. The originator is the inventor, the creator, and from it are the people of innovations, and from it is the saying of Umar ibn al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, regarding the prayer of Ramadan: 'What a good innovation this is.' The (heavens and the earth) are specifically mentioned because they are the greatest of what we see from His creations, glorified and exalted is He. And "decreed" means: determined, and it may come in the meaning of enforced. In this verse, both meanings are applicable. According to the methodology of the people of the Sunnah, there is a determination in the eternal past and He enforced it, and according to the methodology of the Mu'tazila, He enforced it at the time of creation and existence. And "the matter" is one of the matters, and it is not here in the source of a command that commands. "And it is" is raised on the basis of initiation. Sibawayh said: Its meaning is 'so it is.' Others said: "it is" is coordinated with "He says," and this was preferred by al-Tabari and established. And this is an error in terms of meaning because it implies that the saying is with the creation and existence. (p-332) And Abu Ali al-Farisi spoke on this matter with what is invalid from the totality of the Mu'tazila, not from the perspective of the Arabic language.

Ibn 'Amir read "fa yakoonu" with the accusative, and Abu Ali weakened it. Its aspect, despite its weakness, is that the similarity of the wording may intercede for it. Ahmad ibn Musa said regarding the reading of Ibn 'Amir: "This is a grammatical error."

Qadi Abu Muhammad, may Allah have mercy on him, said: This is because the "fa" does not work in the response to the command unless there are two verbs that consistently carry the meaning of condition. You say: "Honor Zayd, so he will honor you," and the meaning is: "If you honor Zayd, he will honor you." In this verse, this does not apply, because its estimation is: "If it were to be, it would be," and there is no meaning to this. What consistently carries the meaning of condition is that the two subjects or verbs differ. The first is: "Honor Zayd, so he will honor you," and the second is: "Honor Zayd, so you will prevail."

The summary of the belief in this verse is that Allah, glorified and exalted is He, has always been commanding the non-existent things on the condition of their existence, capable despite the delay of the decreed matters, knowing despite the delay of the occurrence of the known matters. Everything in the verse that necessitates the future is according to the commanded matters, as the newly created things come after they did not exist. Everything that is based on Allah, the Exalted, from ability, knowledge, and command is ancient and has always been.

Whoever among the interpreters made "qadha" mean to execute in the presence of creation and existence, it is as if the manifestation of the created things at their delayed times is a saying to them: "Be," as contemplation necessitates that, similar to the saying of the poet:

And the relatives said to the womb of truth.

All of this aligns with the saying of the Mu'tazila, and the meaning that the phrase "Be" necessitates is ancient, existing by itself. Complete clarity in this matter requires more than this elaboration.

And His saying, the Exalted: "And those who do not know said..." The verse, Al-Rabi' and Al-Suddi said: They are the disbelievers of the Arabs. Abdullah ibn Abi Umayyah and others requested from the Prophet, blessings and peace be upon him, something like this, so He denied knowledge from them because they have no scripture with them nor do they follow a prophecy. Mujahid said: They are the Christians, because they are mentioned in the verse first, and Al-Tabari favored this view. Ibn Abbas said: The intended ones are those who were in the time of the Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace be upon him, from the Jews, because Rafi' ibn Huraymila said to the Prophet, blessings and peace be upon him: "Let us hear the words of Allah." It was said: The reference in His saying: "do not know" is to all of these functions, because all of them said this statement or something like it, and "those who were before them" refers to the people of Nuh, 'Aad, Thamud, and others. And "lawla" is an exhortation meaning "why not" as Al-Ashhab ibn Rumaylah said:

You count the slaughter of the she-camel the best of your glory,

O sons of Dawtar, if not for the concealed spear.

And this "lawla" is not the one that gives prohibition of something for the necessity of another. He distinguished between them that in exhortation it is followed only by an explicit or estimated verb, and in its prohibition for necessity it is followed by the beginning, and the custom has been to omit the news.

And the verse here: is the sign indicating, and the saying regarding its wording has preceded. And ﴿those who were before them﴾ refers to the Jews and Christians in the saying of one who made ﴿those who do not know﴾ the disbelievers of the Arabs - and they are the previous nations in the saying of one who made ﴿those who do not know﴾ the disbelievers of the Arabs and Christians - and they are the Jews in the saying of one who made ﴿those who do not know﴾ the Arabs, Christians, and Jews. The first 'kaf' in 'kathalika' is an adjective for a presumed source. And 'mithl' is an adjective for a deleted source, and it is permissible for 'qala' to act upon it. The similarity of hearts here is in seeking what is not correct, or in disbelief even if their appearances differ. Ibn Abi Ishaq and Abu Haywah read: 'tashabahat' with a strong 'sheen'. Abu Amr al-Dani said: and that is not permissible because it is a past verb.

And His saying, the Most High: ﴿We have certainly made clear the verses for a people who are certain﴾ is for what has preceded in mentioning those whom Allah has misguided until they disbelieved in the prophets and sought what is not permissible for them. He followed that by mentioning those to whom He made clear what benefits them and establishes the proof. However, the clarification occurred and was obtained for the certain ones, and for that reason He specified them in the mention. It is possible that the meaning is: We have made clear the clarification which is the creation of guidance, as if the speech is: We have guided whom We have guided.

And certainty, when it is characterized by knowledge, specifies it and reaches the end of trustworthiness.

And His saying, the Most High: 'We have made clear' is an indication that certainty is a quality of their knowledge, and another indication is that the speech is praised for them. As for certainty in the usage of the jurists when it is not characterized by knowledge, it is lesser than knowledge because knowledge for them is the recognition of the known as it is, and certainty is a belief that occurs for the certain one regarding his right and the thing contrary to his belief. An example of that is the certainty of the existence of the creator. And from it is the saying of Malik, may Allah have mercy on him, in the Muwatta regarding the matter of the one swearing about something he is certain of, while the thing in itself is otherwise. As for the reality of the matter, certainty is the most specific, and it is what is known in a way that cannot be other than it.