Tafsir at-Tabari: Jami' al-Bayan - Dar al-Tarbiyah wa al-Turath Edition

Volume 1 · Page 464

Translation · EN

AI translation

astonishment, it is a claim for which there is no evidence in the apparent meaning of the Revelation, nor is there any report of it from an authority that eliminates excuses. It is not permissible to speak concerning the interpretation of the Book of God with that for which there is no evidence from any of the aspects by which proof is established.

As for the angels' description of those whom they described—in their inquiring of their Lord about him—as causing corruption in the earth and shedding blood, what was narrated from Ibn ʿAbbās and Ibn Masʿūd in the statement narrated by al-Suddī, and upon which Qatāda agreed with them, is not impossible regarding its interpretation: which is that God—majestic be His praise—informed them that He was placing a vicegerent in the earth who would have offspring doing such and such, so they said: "Will You place therein one who will cause corruption therein," according to what I described of the inquiry.

If someone says to us: What is the meaning of their inquiry, when the matter is as you described, that they had been informed that this would happen?

It is said: The meaning of their inquiry then would be about their condition regarding the occurrence of that. And would that be from them? And their asking their Lord to make them the vicegerents in the earth so that they would not disobey Him. Also not invalid is what al-Daḥḥāk narrated from Ibn ʿAbbās, and in which al-Rabīʿ b. Anas followed him, that the angels said that because of the knowledge they had of the inhabitants of the earth—before Adam—from the jinn, so they said to their Lord: "Will You place therein a creation like them who will do the like of what they used to do?" by way of seeking information from their Lord, not by way of affirming that it would definitely be so, for that would be them giving information about the unseen knowledge they had not been apprised of. Also not incorrect is what Ibn Zayd said, that the angels' saying what they said of that was by way of their astonishment that God would have a creation that disobeys its Creator.

We only abandoned the view narrated by al-Daḥḥāk from Ibn ʿAbbās, and upon which al-Rabīʿ b. Anas agreed with him, and what Ibn Zayd said regarding the interpretation of that, because we have no report of what they said from a route whose transmission eliminates excuses and binds its listener with proof. And reports about what has passed and preceded, the knowledge of their authenticity cannot be attained except by their transmission in a manner that precludes dispute and collusion, and with which lying, error, and oversight are impossible (1). And that is not found as such in what al-Daḥḥāk related from Ibn ʿAbbās and upon which al-Rabīʿ agreed with him, nor in what Ibn Zayd said.

Thus, the most appropriate of interpretations for the verse—since the matter is so—is that for which there is evidence from the apparent meaning of the Revelation, from what is validly derived in understanding.

If someone says: If the most appropriate of interpretations for the verse is what you mentioned, that God informed the angels that the offspring of His vicegerent in the earth would cause corruption therein and shed blood therein, and for that reason the angels said: "Will You place therein one who will cause corruption therein," then where is the mention of God informing them of that in His Book?

Notes

(1) In the manuscript and printed edition: "it is impossible for him... and impossible from him", which is nothing. In the manuscript, in place of "al-tashāghub", it has "al-sāʿir" indistinctly written.
(2) The verse of poetry is by al-Shanfarā al-Azdī in a story. Sharḥ al-Ḥamāsa 2:24-26, al-Aghānī 21:89, and others. It is narrated: "Do not bury me, for my grave", "Rather rejoice". His saying "khāmirī": i.e., hide yourself, originating from al-khumra (with a kasra then sukun), which means hiding. They mean by that the approach of the hyena hiding itself and staying in its place until it mingles with the slain person and reaches him. Ummu ʿĀmir: nickname of the hyena. This is among what the hunter says to it when intending to hunt it, deceiving it thereby until he gets hold of it, saying to it: "Rejoice, O Ummu ʿĀmir, with emaciated sheep, dense locusts, and the broken bones of slain men", so the hyena turns to him and he hunts it.

This translation was produced with AI assistance and is part of an ongoing human-review process. Found a mistake? Use the feedback option in the reader menu.

Arabic (Source)

وجه التعجب، فدعْوَى لا دلالة عليها في ظاهر التنزيل، ولا خبر بها من الحجة يقطعُ العذرَ. وغير جائز أن يقال في تأويل كتاب الله بما لا دلالة عليه من بعض الوجوه التي تقوم بها الحجة.وأما وصفُ الملائكة مَن وصفت -في استخبارها ربَّها عنه- بالفساد في الأرض وسفك الدماء، فغير مستحيلٍ فيه ما رُوي عن ابن عباس وابن مسعود من القول الذي رواه السُّدّيّ، ووافقهما عليه قتادة - من التأويل: وهو أن الله جل ثناؤه أخبرهم أنه جاعلٌ في الأرض خليفة تكون له ذرية يفعلون كذا وكذا، فقالوا: "أتجعل فيها من يفسد فيها"، على ما وصفت من الاستخبار.فإن قال لنا قائل: وما وجه استخبارها، والأمر على ما وصفتَ، من أنها قد أخبرت أنّ ذلك كائن؟قيل: وجه استخبارها حينئذ يكون عن حالهم عن وقوع ذلك. وهل ذلك منهم؟ ومسألتهم ربَّهم أن يجعلهم الخلفاءَ في الأرض حتى لا يعصوه. وغيرُ فاسد أيضًا ما رواه الضحاك عن ابن عباس، وتابعه عليه الربيع بن أنس، من أن الملائكة قالت ذلك لما كان عندها من علم سكان الأرض -قبل آدم- من الجنّ، فقالت لربها:"أجاعل فيها أنت مثلهم من الخلق يفعلون مثل الذي كانوا يفعلون"؟ على وجه الاستعلام منهم لربهم، لا على وجه الإيجاب أنّ ذلك كائن كذلك، فيكون ذلك منها إخبارًا عما لم تطلع عليه من علم الغيب. وغيرُ خطأ أيضًا ما قاله ابن زيد من أن يكون قيلُ الملائكة ما قالت من ذلك، على وجه التعجب منها من أن يكون لله خلقٌ يعصي خالقه.وإنما تركنا القول بالذي رواه الضحاك عن ابن عباس، ووافقه عليه الربيع بن أنس، وبالذي قاله ابن زيد في تأويل ذلك، لأنه لا خبر عندنا بالذي قالوه من وجه يقطعُ مجيئُه العذرَ، ويُلزمُ سامِعَه به الحجة. والخبر عما مضى وما قد سلف، لا يُدرك علمُ صحته إلا بمجيئه مجيئًا يمتنع مَعه التشاغب والتواطؤ، ويستحيل مَعه الكذب والخطأ والسهو (١) . وليس ذلك بموجود كذلك فيما حكاه الضحاك عن ابن عباس ووافقه عليه الربيع، ولا فيما قاله ابن زيد.فأولى التأويلات -إذ كان الأمر كذلك- بالآية، ما كان عليه من ظاهر التنزيل دلالةٌ، مما يصح مخرجُه في المفهوم.فإن قال قائل: فإن كان أولى التأويلات بالآية هو ما ذكرتَ، من أن الله أخبر الملائكة بأن ذرّية خليفته في الأرض يفسدون فيها ويسفكون فيها الدماء، فمن أجل ذلك قالت الملائكة:"أتجعل فيها من يفسد فيها"، فأين ذكر إخبارِ الله إياهم في كتابه بذلك؟قيل له: اكتفى بدلالة ما قد ظهرَ من الكلام عليه عنه، كما قال الشاعر:فَلا تَدْفِنُونِي إِنَّ دَفْنِي مُحَرَّمٌ ... عَلَيْكُمْ، وَلَكِن خَامِرِي أُمَّ عَامِرِ (٢)فحذف قوله"دعوني للتي يقال لها عند صَيدها": خامري أمّ عامر. إذ كان فيما أظهر من كلامه، دلالة على معنى مراده. فكذلك ذلك في قوله:"قالوا