'In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful'

The saying of the Exalted and Majestic:

﴿The example of them is like the example of one who kindled a fire. When it illuminated what was around him, Allah took away their light and left them in darkness, unable to see﴾ ﴿Deaf, dumb, and blind; they will not return﴾.

"The example, and the likeness, and the similar" are one. Its meaning is: the resemblance. Thus, the scholars of language have stated. The two resembling things are similar. It may be that the likeness of a thing is a substance like it. It may also be that what the soul comprehends and imagines of a thing is an example for it. So, His saying, the Exalted, ﴿The example of them is like the example of﴾ means that what is realized in the soul of the observer regarding them is like what is realized in the soul of the observer regarding the one who kindled the fire. This removes the ambiguity found in the interpretation of His saying, the Exalted, ﴿The example of Paradise﴾ [Ar-Ra'd: 35], and in the interpretation of His saying, the Exalted, ﴿There is nothing like Him﴾ [Ash-Shura: 11]. Because what is realized for the intellect from oneness and eternity, and the negation of what is not permissible for Him, does not have anything that resembles Him in it. And that which is realized is the highest example, which is in His saying, the Exalted, ﴿And to Allah belongs the highest example﴾ [An-Nahl: 60]. It has been explained in its interpretation: "There is no deity except Allah," thus it is interpreted in the context of oneness.

And His saying: "Their example" is a nominative by way of beginning, and the news is in the 'kaf'. In this way, it is a noun, as it is in the saying of Al-A'sha:

"Will you cease when those of excessive pride do not cease, like a stab that the oil and the fat go into."

And it is permissible that the news is omitted, its estimation being: Their example is established like the example. Thus, the 'kaf' in this case is a letter. And this is not permissible in the verse of Al-A'sha, because the omitted is a subject, its estimation being: something like a stab, and the subject cannot be omitted according to the majority of the Basri scholars. It is permissible to omit the news of the beginning if the speech indicates it. Al-Akhfash permitted the omission of the subject and that the 'kaf' in the verse of Al-A'sha be a letter.

He used the singular "the one who" because he did not intend to compare the group with the group. Rather, the intention is that each one of the hypocrites acts like the one who kindled the fire. And "the one who" is also not a reference to one necessarily, but rather to this action: it occurred from one or from a group. The grammarians said: "the one who" is an ambiguous noun that applies to the singular and the plural. And "kindled" has been said to mean ignited. Thus, it is like amazed and astonished in meaning. Abu Ali said: And it is like mocked and ridiculed, and scorned and made fun of, and honored and established. And it has come that "Ista'fal" means "Afa'la": he answered and he responded. From it is the saying of the poet:

"And a caller called, O you who responds to the call of generosity, ∗∗∗ and no responder answered him at that time."

And "he brought forth for a people" and "he brought forth for them water" means he supplied them with water. From it is the saying of the poet:

"And things brought forth from a land that is abundant, ∗∗∗ the yellow jaws of the red beaks."

And from it is the saying of another poet:

"...................................... ∗∗∗ he watered it and quenched it with water."

(p-134) And from it, 'awqada' and 'istawqada'. Abu Zayd said this. It is said that 'istawqada' means to request from another to ignite for him, as is well-known from the form 'istaf'al'. This implies his need for fire. Thus, its extinguishing while he needs it is more painful for him. There is a difference of opinion regarding 'ada'at'. It is said that it is transitive, because it has been transferred with the hamzah from 'da'a'. From this is the saying of Al-Abbas ibn Abd al-Muttalib regarding the Prophet ﷺ:

And when you were born, the earth shone *** and the horizons were illuminated by your light.

Accordingly, 'ma' in His saying 'ma hawlahu' is an object. It is said that 'ada'at' is not transitive, because it is said: 'da'a' and 'ada'a' with the same meaning, so 'ma' is extra, and 'hawlahu' is an adverbial phrase.

The interpreters differed regarding the action of the hypocrites that resembles the action of one who has ignited a fire. A group said: It is in reference to one who believed and then disbelieved through hypocrisy. His belief is like the fire when it illuminates, and his disbelief afterwards is like its extinguishing and the departure of light. Al-Hasan ibn Abi al-Hasan and others said: What the hypocrite shows in this world of belief protects his blood and secures his wealth, and he marries and mingles, like the fire that illuminated what (p-135) was around it. When he dies, he goes to painful punishment, and that is like its extinguishing and his remaining in darkness. Another group said: The approach of the hypocrites to the Muslims and their speaking with them is like the fire, while their turning back to their allies and their retreat from them is like its departure. Another group said: The hypocrites were in a position with the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and the believers based on what they showed. When Allah exposed them and made known their hypocrisy, their status fell. All of this was like the fire and its extinguishing. A group among them, including Qatadah, said: Their utterance of 'there is no god but Allah' and the Qur'an is like the illumination of the fire, while their belief in disbelief in their hearts is like its extinguishing. The majority of grammarians said: The answer to 'li-ma' has gone, and the pronoun from 'nurihim' in this saying refers back to 'al-ladhi', and the similarity of the verse is correct with the saying of the poet:

And indeed, those whose blood has become due in a flood *** they are the people, all the people, O Um Khalid.

According to this saying, the metaphor of the hypocrite is completed with the one who ignites, because the remaining of the igniter in darkness where he does not see is like the remaining of the hypocrite, despite the previous differences. Some said: The answer to 'li-ma' is implied, which is 'tufiyat', and the pronoun in 'nurihim' here refers to the hypocrite, and the report of this is about a state that will be in the Hereafter, as His saying, 'Then a wall will be placed between them with a door' [Al-Hadid: 13] indicates. This saying is not strong.

Al-Hasan ibn Abi al-Hasan and Abu al-Sammal read 'fi dhulumat' with a sukoon on the lam, while some read 'dhulamat' with a fatha on the lam.

(p-136) Abu al-Fath said: In 'dhulumat' and 'kisrat', there are three languages: following the damma with damma, and the kasra with kasra, or lightening by switching to fatha in the second, or lightening by making the second silent. All of this is permissible and good. As for the action with fatha, it must be with emphasis, following the pattern, so you say 'tamrah' and 'tamrat'. A group went with 'dhulumat' with a fatha on the lam to indicate that it is the plural of 'dhulm', thus it is the plural of the plural.

'The deaf' is one who does not hear. 'The mute' is one who does not speak and does not understand. If he understands, then he is the 'dumb' one. It is said that the mute and the dumb are one. He described them with these attributes because their actions are of error and lack of response, like the actions of one who has these attributes. 'Deaf' is raised as a subject, either on the assumption of repeating those, or on the implication of 'they'. Abdullah ibn Mas'ud and Hafsah, the Mother of the Believers, may Allah be pleased with them, read: 'deaf, mute, blind' in the accusative case. Its accusative is as a state of the pronoun in 'guided'. It is said that it is an accusative for blame, and there is weakness in it. As for one who made the pronoun in 'their light' refer to the hypocrites and not to those who are lighting, then the accusative of these attributes is as a state of the pronoun in 'He left them'. Some of the interpreters said: His saying, the Exalted, 'So they do not return' is a statement from Him that they do not believe in any way. Qadi Abu Muhammad, may Allah have mercy on him, said: This is only valid if the verse is about specific individuals. Others said: Its meaning is that they do not return as long as they are in the state which He described them with. This is the correct view, because the verse did not specify, and all of them are exposed to returning, invited to it.