Tafseer of The Opening · Al-Faatiha · 1:1
In the name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful.
Important: The Arabic source text is always authoritative. This translation is a study aid and has not been verified by scholars — do not use it as a basis for religious proof or for deriving rulings (ahkam). When in doubt, always consult the Arabic text and a qualified scholar.
The exposition on seeking refuge (al-istiʿādha)
The exposition of His word: "I seek refuge" (aʿūdhu).
Abū Jaʿfar said: Seeking refuge (al-istiʿādha) means: seeking protection (al-istijāra). The exposition of the saying of the one who says: "I seek refuge with Allah against the accursed satan" (aʿūdhu bi-llāhi mina l-shayṭāni l-rajīm) is: I seek protection with Allah — and with no one else of His entire creation — against the satan, that he might harm me in my religion, or hold me back from a right that I am obliged to fulfill toward my Lord.
The exposition of His word: "against the satan" (mina l-shayṭān).
Abū Jaʿfar said: The satan (al-shayṭān), in the language of the Arabs, is every rebellious being among the jinn, mankind, the animals, and all things. So too our Lord — exalted is His praise — has said: وكذلك جعلنا لكل نبي عدوا شياطين الإنس والجن [Surah Al-Anʿām: 112] ("And thus We have made for every prophet an enemy: satans from among mankind and the jinn"). So He made satans from among mankind, just as He made them from among the jinn.
ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb — may Allah's mercy be upon him — mounted a riding horse (birdhawn), and it began to strut proudly, and he began to strike it, but it only increased in its proud gait. Then he dismounted from it and said: "You have made me mount nothing other than a satan! I did not dismount from it until I no longer recognized myself."
136 — Yūnus ibn ʿAbd al-Aʿlā related this to us, saying: Ibn Wahb informed us, saying: Hishām ibn Saʿd related to me, on the authority of Zayd ibn Aslam, on the authority of his father, on the authority of ʿUmar.
Abū Jaʿfar said: The rebellious being among all things is called a satan only because of the deviation of its character traits and deeds from the character traits and deeds of the rest of its own kind, and because of its distance from the good. It has been said that the [word] is derived from the saying of the one who says: "shaṭanat dārī min dārika" — by which he means: it has become far away. To this also belongs the saying of al-Nābigha of Banū Dhubyān:
Suʿād has become distant from you by a far-off destination; thus she departed, while the heart remained held in pledge with her.
Al-nawā is the direction that one intends and aims for. And al-shaṭūn means: the far. It is as though "shayṭān" — according to this exposition — is the form "fayʿāl," derived from "shaṭana." And what indicates that it is indeed so is the saying of Umayya ibn Abī al-Ṣalt:
Every satan (shāṭin) that disobeyed him, he bound, and then cast him into the dungeon and the fetters.
Had it been the form "faʿlān," derived from "shāṭa yashīṭu," he would have said: "ayyumā shāʾiṭ"; but he said: "ayyumā shāṭin," because it is derived from "shaṭana yashṭunu, fa-huwa shāṭin."
The exposition of His word: "the accursed" (al-rajīm).
As for "al-rajīm": that is a form "faʿīl" with the meaning of "mafʿūl" (passive participle form), like the saying of someone: "a dyed hand" (kaffun khaḍīb), "an oiled beard" (liḥyatun dahīn), and "a cursed man" (rajulun laʿīn), by which is meant: dyed, oiled, and cursed. The exposition of "al-rajīm" is: the accursed, the reviled. Everyone who is reviled with an evil word or an insult is "marjūm" (stoned). The original meaning of "al-rajm" is throwing, whether with a word or with a deed. To throwing with the word belongs the saying of Abraham's father to Abraham — Allah's blessings be upon him —: لئن لم تنته لأرجمنك [Surah Maryam: 46] ("If you do not desist, I shall surely stone you").
It is also possible that the satan was named "rajīm" because Allah — exalted is His praise — drove him out of His heavens and stoned him with the piercing flames.
It has been transmitted from Ibn ʿAbbās that the first thing Gabriel revealed to the Prophet ﷺ was that he taught him the seeking of refuge.
137 — Abū Kurayb related to us, saying: ʿUthmān ibn Saʿīd related to us, saying: Bishr ibn ʿUmāra related to us, saying: Abū Rawq related to us, on the authority of al-Ḍaḥḥāk, on the authority of ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbbās, who said: The first thing Gabriel revealed to Muhammad was that he said: "O Muhammad, seek refuge, say: I seek refuge with the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing, against the accursed satan." Then he said: Say: "In the name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful (Bismi-llāhi l-raḥmāni l-raḥīm)." Then he said: اقرأ باسم ربك الذي خلق [Al-ʿAlaq: 1] ("Read in the name of your Lord who created"). ʿAbd Allāh said: And this is the first Surah that Allah revealed to Muhammad through the tongue of Gabriel.
Thus He commanded him to seek refuge with Allah and not with His creation.
The exposition on "In the name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful"
The exposition of His word: "In the name of" (bismi).
Abū Jaʿfar said: Indeed, Allah — exalted is His mention and hallowed are His names — educated His Prophet Muhammad ﷺ by teaching him to precede all his actions with the mention of His beautiful names, and brought him to describe Him therewith before all his affairs. And He made that with which He educated him and what He taught him a custom (sunna) for His entire creation, which they adhere to, and a path that they follow therein. Therewith one opens the beginning of speech, and the opening of letters, writings, and requests, until the manifest of the saying of the one who says "In the name of Allah" gives sufficient indication of the hidden of his intention that has been omitted.
That is because the "bāʾ" in "Bismi-llāh" requires a verb that introduces it, while no verb is visibly present therein. Thus the knowledge that the hearer of the one who says "Bismi-llāh" has of the intention of the speaker makes it unnecessary for the speaker to make known his intention thereof in words — since everyone who utters it at the commencing of an action has, by his utterance — whether simultaneously, or preceding it without interruption — brought forward that which makes it unnecessary for the hearer to have any further indication concerning that for which he opened his utterance therewith. Thus the unnecessariness for the hearer that he make known that which has been omitted became equivalent to the unnecessariness — when he hears someone to whom it is said: "What have you eaten today?" and who answers: "Food" — that the one asked repeats, alongside his word "food": "I have eaten," because of the indication already clear to him that this is his meaning, through the preceding question of the questioner about what he has eaten. It is thus understandable that, when someone says: "Bismi-llāhi l-raḥmāni l-raḥīm" and then begins to recite a Surah, the following of the recitation of the Surah upon "Bismi-llāhi l-raḥmāni l-raḥīm" indicates the meaning of his word "Bismi-llāhi l-raḥmāni l-raḥīm," and it is understood therefrom that he means thereby: "I read in the name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful." Likewise his word "Bismi-llāh" when he rises to stand, or when he sits down, and in all his other actions, indicates the meaning of his intention with his word "Bismi-llāh," and that by his utterance "Bismi-llāh" he means: "I rise in the name of Allah, and I sit in the name of Allah." And so it holds for the remaining actions.
And this which we have said about its exposition is the meaning of the saying of Ibn ʿAbbās, who:
138 — Abū Kurayb related to us, saying: ʿUthmān ibn Saʿīd related to us, saying: Bishr ibn ʿUmāra related to us, saying: Abū Rawq related to us, on the authority of al-Ḍaḥḥāk, on the authority of ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbbās, who said: Indeed, the first thing with which Gabriel descended to Muhammad was that he said: "O Muhammad, say: I seek refuge with the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing, against the accursed satan." Then he said: "Say: In the name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful." He said: Gabriel said to him: Say "In the name of Allah," O Muhammad, that is to say: read with the mention of Allah, your Lord, and rise and sit with the mention of Allah.
Abū Jaʿfar said: If someone were to say to us: If the exposition of his word "Bismi-llāh" is that which you have described, and the introducing verb of the "bāʾ" in "Bismi-llāh" is that which you have mentioned, how then is it said "Bismi-llāh" with the meaning "I read in the name of Allah," or "I rise or I sit in the name of Allah"? While you indeed know that everyone who reads the Book of Allah reads it by Allah's help and assistance, and that everyone who stands or sits or performs an action performs his standing, sitting, and action by Allah. Why is it — if that is so — not said "in Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful" and not "Bismi-llāh"? For the saying of someone: "I rise and I sit in Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful," or "I read in Allah," is clearer in meaning for its hearer than his word "Bismi-llāh," since his word "I rise or I sit in the name of Allah" creates in his hearer the appearance that his standing and sitting occur by something other than Allah.
He is answered — and with Allah lies the assistance —: Indeed, what is intended by its meaning is something other than what you have imagined. The meaning of his word "in the name of Allah" is only: "I begin with the naming and mention of Allah before all else," or: "I read with my naming of Allah," or: "I rise and sit with my naming and mention of Allah" — not that by his utterance "Bismi-llāh" he means: "I rise by Allah," or "I read by Allah," such that the saying of someone: "I read by Allah," or "I rise or I sit by Allah," would therein be nearer to the correct meaning than his word "Bismi-llāh."
If he says: If the matter concerning it is as you have described, how then is it said "Bismi-llāh" while you indeed know that "al-ism" (the name) is a noun, and that "al-tasmiya" (the naming) is a verbal noun (maṣdar) of your saying "sammaytu" (I named)?
He is answered: Indeed, the Arabs sometimes produce the verbal nouns undifferentiated in various noun forms, such as their saying: "akramtu fulānan karāmatan" (I honored someone with honoring), while the form of the verbal noun of "afʿaltu" — when it is produced in accordance with its verb — is properly "al-ifʿāl." And such as their saying: "ahantu fulānan hawānan" (I humiliated someone with humiliation), and "kallamtuhu kalāman" (I spoke to him with speech), while the form of the verbal noun of "faʿʿaltu" is properly "al-tafʿīl." To this belongs the saying of the poet:
Ingratitude, after I averted death from you, and after your gift of a hundred grazing camels?
He means: "iʿṭāʾika" (your giving). To this also belongs the saying of another:
And if this stinginess is a trait of yours, then I was, in my long hoping in you, an Ashʿab.
He means: "in my prolonging of my hope in you." To this also belongs the saying of another:
O Ẓulaym, indeed, your striking of a man who brought the salutation of peace as a greeting, is injustice.
He means: "iṣābatakum" (your striking). The testimonies in this meaning are numerous, and in what we have mentioned there is sufficiency, for whoever is granted to understand it.
Since the matter now — as we have described, namely that the Arabs produce the verbal nouns of the verbs in a form other than that of their verbs — occurs frequently, and their production of them in the forms of nouns is established and widespread, the correctness has thereby become clear of what we have said about the exposition of the saying of the one who says "Bismi-llāh," namely that its meaning at the commencing of an action or utterance is: "I begin with the naming of Allah, before my action, or before my utterance."
Likewise the meaning of the saying of the one who, at the commencing of reciting the Qurʾān, says "Bismi-llāhi l-raḥmāni l-raḥīm" is only this: "I read, beginning with the naming of Allah," or: "I begin my reading with the naming of Allah." Thus "al-ism" (the name) was put in the place of "al-tasmiya" (the naming), just as "al-kalām" (the speech) was put in the place of "al-taklīm" (the addressing), and "al-ʿaṭāʾ" (the gift) in the place of "al-iʿṭāʾ" (the giving).
And in accordance with what we have said about its exposition, the transmission has been reported on the authority of ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbbās.
139 — Abū Kurayb related to us, saying: ʿUthmān ibn Saʿīd related to us, saying: Bishr ibn ʿUmāra related to us, saying: Abū Rawq related to us, on the authority of al-Ḍaḥḥāk, on the authority of ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbbās, who said: The first thing Gabriel revealed to Muhammad ﷺ was that he said: "O Muhammad, say: I seek refuge with the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing, against the accursed satan." Then he said: "Say: In the name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful."
Ibn ʿAbbās said: "Bismi-llāh" — Gabriel says to him: O Muhammad, read with the mention of Allah, your Lord, and rise and sit with the mention of Allah.
And this exposition of Ibn ʿAbbās indicates the correctness of what we have said — namely that by the saying of the one who commences his reading: "Bismi-llāhi l-raḥmāni l-raḥīm," is meant: "I read with the naming and mention of Allah, and I commence the reading with the naming of Allah, with His beautiful names and His exalted attributes" — and it makes clear the incorrectness of the saying of the one who claims that its meaning, from the side of the speaker, is: "by Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful, before all else" — while the servants have only been commanded at the commencing of their affairs to begin with the naming of Allah, not with reporting about His greatness and His attributes — just as they have been commanded with the naming [of His name] over slaughtered animals and hunted game, and at food and drink, and in their remaining actions. Likewise holds that which they have been commanded concerning the naming of Him at the commencing of the recitation of Allah's revelation, and the opening of their letters and writings.
There is no disagreement among all the scholars of the community (ʿulamāʾ) over the fact that if someone, at the slaughtering of any livestock, were to say "by Allah" (bi-llāh), and were not to say "in the name of Allah" (bismi-llāh), he acts in contradiction — by his omitting to say "Bismi-llāh" — with that which has been prescribed to him as the lawful utterance at slaughtering. By this it is known that by his word "Bismi-llāh" he did not mean "bi-llāh," as has been claimed by the one who claims that the name of Allah in Allah's word "Bismi-llāhi l-raḥmāni l-raḥīm" is Allah Himself. For if it were as he claims, it would be necessary that the one who, at the slaughtering of his sacrificial animal, says "bi-llāh," says that which has been prescribed to him as the lawful utterance over the sacrificial animal. And in the consensus of all that the one who says that omits that which has been prescribed to him as the lawful utterance over his sacrificial animal — since he did not say "Bismi-llāh" — lies a clear proof of the incorrectness of that which has been advanced as the exposition of the saying of the one who says "Bismi-llāh," namely that thereby "bi-llāh" is meant, and that the name of Allah is Allah Himself.
This place is not one of the places to be extensive in the exposition about the name: whether it is the named, or something other, or an attribute thereof — such that we would lengthen the Book therewith. This is rather one of the places to expound about the name that is annexed to Allah: whether it is a name, or a verbal noun with the meaning of the naming (al-tasmiya).
If someone says: What then have you to say about the verse of Labīd ibn Rabīʿa:
Until the end of the year; and then may the name of peace be upon you both — and whoever weeps a full year has presented his excuse.
A leading authority in the knowledge of the Arabic language has indeed expounded it as though thereby were meant: "and then peace be upon you both," and that "the name of peace" is peace itself?
He is answered: If that were permissible and his exposition therein were correct as he has expounded, then it would be permissible to say: "I saw the name of Zayd," "I ate the name of the food," and "I drank the name of the drink." And in the consensus of all the Arabs over the impermissibility thereof lies that which indicates the incorrectness of the exposition of the one who expounded the saying of Labīd: "and then may the name of peace be upon you both" as though he meant: "and then peace be upon you both," and the incorrectness of his claim that the inserting of "the name" therein and the annexing of it to "peace" was only permissible because the name of the named is the named itself.
And to those who adhere to the saying of him whose saying we have here rendered, it is asked: Do you deem it admissible in Arabic to say: "I ate the name of the honey," by which is meant: "I ate the honey," just as it is permissible for you [to say]: "The name of peace be upon you," while you mean: "Peace be upon you"?
If they say: Yes! — then they depart from the language of the Arabs, and they deem permissible in its language what all the Arabs deem erroneous in their language. And if they say: No — then they are asked about the distinction between the two. And they will not pronounce upon the one without being compelled to say the same for the other.
If someone says to us: What then, according to you, is the meaning of this saying of Labīd?
He is answered: That admits two possibilities, both other than what he has said whose saying we have rendered.
The first of them is: that "al-salām" (peace) is one of the names of Allah, so that it is possible that Labīd, by his saying: "and then may the name of peace be upon you both," meant: "hold fast after that to the name of Allah and His mention," and thereby exhorted to my remembrance and to weeping over me, by way of exhortation (ighrāʾ). Thus he put "al-ism" in the nominative (rafʿ), because he placed after [it] the particle that brings the meaning of the exhortation. The Arabs do that sometimes, when they place the exhortation after and put first that to which one is exhorted, although they sometimes place it in the accusative when it comes after. To this belongs the saying of the poet:
O drawer of water, my bucket is yours! Indeed, I see the people praising you!
Thus he exhorted with "dūnaka" (take it), while this comes after; the meaning is only: "dūnaka dalwī" (take my bucket). That then is the saying of Labīd:
Until the end of the year; and then may the name of peace be upon you both
by which is meant: "upon you both be the name of peace," that is to say: "hold fast to the mention of Allah and to my remembrance and the grief over me" — for whoever weeps for a year over a dead person has presented his excuse. This is one of his two possibilities.
And the other possibility thereof is: "and then may my naming of Allah be upon you both," just as someone says, over something he sees and that pleases him: "The name of Allah be upon you" (ism Allāh ʿalayka), by which he protects it against evil; as though he said: "and then may the name of Allah be upon you both against evil." And it seems that the first possibility is the most in agreement with the intention of the saying of Labīd.
And to the one who expounds this verse of Labīd as though its meaning were: "and then peace be upon you both," it is said: Do you deem what we have said — of these two possibilities — permissible, or one of them, or something other than what you have said about it?
If he says: No! — then he has brought to light the paucity of his knowledge of the turns and aspects of the language of the Arabs, and he has made it unnecessary for his opponent to dispute further with him.
And if he says: Yes!
Then it is said to him: What then is your proof for the correctness of that which you have advanced as exposition, namely that it is the correct one, and not that which you have mentioned as possible meanings thereof — by way of an argument which we would be obliged to concede to you? To that there is no way.
As for the transmission that:
140 — Ismāʿīl ibn al-Faḍl related to us, saying: Ibrāhīm ibn al-ʿAlāʾ ibn al-Ḍaḥḥāk — who bears the nickname Zibrīq — related to us, saying: Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAyyāsh related to us, on the authority of Ismāʿīl ibn Yaḥyā, on the authority of Ibn Abī Mulayka, on the authority of the one who related to him, on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd — and [likewise] Misʿar ibn Kidām, on the authority of ʿAṭiyya, on the authority of Abū Saʿīd — who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ has said: "Indeed, ʿĪsā ibn Maryam — his mother delivered him to the writing-school so that he might be taught, and the teacher said to him: Write 'bism.' Then ʿĪsā said to him: And what is 'bism'? The teacher said to him: I do not know! Then ʿĪsā said: The 'bāʾ' stands for the splendor (bahāʾ) of Allah, the 'sīn' for His sublimity (sanāʾ), and the 'mīm' for His kingdom (mamlaka)."
I fear, however, that this is an error of the transmitter, and that he meant the [separate] letters "b–s–m," in the manner in which a beginning child at the writing-school is taught the letters of the alphabet (abī jād), and that he made an error therein by writing them joined together and thus saying "bism." For this exposition has no meaning when "Bismi-llāhi l-raḥmāni l-raḥīm" is recited in the manner in which the reader recites it in the Book of Allah, because of the impossibility of that meaning according to that which is understood by it among all the Arabs and the masters of their language, if his exposition is applied to it.
The exposition of His word — exalted is His praise —: "Allah."
Abū Jaʿfar said: As for the exposition of the word of Allah — exalted is His mention — "Allah": that is in accordance with the meaning of what has been transmitted to us from ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbbās: He is the One who is worshipped (yaʾlahuhu) by everything and who is served by all creatures.
141 — That is because Abū Kurayb related to us, saying: ʿUthmān ibn Saʿīd related to us, saying: Bishr ibn ʿUmāra related to us, saying: Abū Rawq related to us, on the authority of al-Ḍaḥḥāk, on the authority of ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbbās, who said: "Allah" — possessor of the divinity (al-ulūhiyya) and of being worshipped by His entire creation.
If someone says to us: Is there for that [word] a root in [the verb forms] "faʿala" and "yafʿalu" from which this name is formed?
It is answered: As for hearing it directly from the Arabs: no; but [it is derived] by reasoning.
If he says: What then indicates that "al-ulūhiyya" is worship, and that "al-ilāh" is the worshipped, and that it has a root in "faʿala" and "yafʿalu"?
It is answered: There is no contradiction among the Arabs over the validity of the saying of the one who describes a man with worship and with the seeking of that which is with Allah — exalted is His mention —: "taʾallaha fulān" — as correct, and there is no disagreement [thereon]. To this belongs the saying of Ruʾba ibn al-ʿAjjāj:
Excellent are the beautiful, proud women, who praised [Allah] and spoke the "istirjāʿ" because of my piety (taʾalluhī).
He means: because of my worship and my seeking of Allah by my deed. And there is no doubt that "al-taʾalluh" is the "tafaʿʿul" form of "alaha yaʾlahu," and that the meaning of "alaha" — when it is uttered — is: he worshipped Allah. And a verbal noun of it has been transmitted which indicates that the Arabs uttered it in the form "faʿala yafʿalu" without augmentation.
142 — That is what Sufyān ibn Wakīʿ related to us, saying: My father related to us, on the authority of Nāfiʿ ibn ʿUmar, on the authority of ʿAmr ibn Dīnār, on the authority of Ibn ʿAbbās: that he read ويذرك وآلهتك [Surah Al-Aʿrāf: 127] ("and that he would leave you and your worship/your gods") — he said: "your worship" (ʿibādataka), and it is said: he [Pharaoh] was worshipped and did not himself worship.
143 — Sufyān related to us, saying: Ibn ʿUyayna related to us, on the authority of ʿAmr ibn Dīnār, on the authority of Muḥammad ibn ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥasan, on the authority of Ibn ʿAbbās: ويذرك وآلهتك, he said: Indeed, Pharaoh was worshipped and did not himself worship.
And so ʿAbd Allāh [ibn Masʿūd] also read it, and Mujāhid.
144 — Al-Qāsim related to us, saying: Al-Ḥusayn ibn Dāwūd related to us, saying: Ḥajjāj informed me, on the authority of Ibn Jurayj, on the authority of Mujāhid: his word ويذرك وآلهتك, he said: "and your worship." And there is no doubt that "al-ilāha" — according to the exposition of Ibn ʿAbbās and Mujāhid — is a verbal noun of the saying of the one who says: "alaha llāha fulānun ilāhatan" (someone worshipped Allah with worship), just as it is said: "ʿabada llāha fulānun ʿibādatan" (someone served Allah with service), and "ʿabara l-ruʾyā ʿibāratan" (he interpreted the dream with interpretation). Thus this saying of Ibn ʿAbbās and Mujāhid has made clear: that "alaha" means "to worship," and that "al-ilāha" is its verbal noun.
If he says: If it is permissible to say of the one who worships Allah: "alahahu" — according to the exposition of Ibn ʿAbbās and Mujāhid — how then must it be said, when the reporter wishes to report that Allah requires that of His servant as His due?
It is answered: As for the transmission: there is no transmission on this with us. But the correct view is — by analogy with that which the transmission from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ has brought, which:
145 — Ismāʿīl ibn al-Faḍl related to us, [saying:] Ibrāhīm ibn al-ʿAlāʾ related to us, saying: Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAyyāsh related to us, on the authority of Ismāʿīl ibn Yaḥyā, on the authority of Ibn Abī Mulayka, on the authority of the one who related to him, on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd — and [likewise] Misʿar ibn Kidām, on the authority of ʿAṭiyya al-ʿAwfī, on the authority of Abū Saʿīd — who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ has said: "Indeed, ʿĪsā — his mother delivered him to the writing-school so that he might be taught, and the teacher said to him: Write 'Allah.' Then ʿĪsā said to him: Do you know what 'Allah' is? Allah is the God of gods (ilāh al-āliha)."
— [the correct view is] that it be said: Allah, exalted is His majesty, "alaha l-ʿabd" [made the servant a worshipper / required worship of the servant], and the servant "alahahu" [worshipped Him]. And that the saying of the one who says "Allah" — in the language of the Arabs — is originally "al-ilāh."
If he says: How can that be so, despite the difference between the two utterances of them?
It is answered: Just as it is possible that His word لكنا هو الله ربي [Surah Al-Kahf: 38] ("But as for me: He, Allah, is my Lord") is originally: "lākin anā, huwa llāhu rabbī," just as the poet said:
And you cast glances at me as though you were the transgressor, and you despise me, but — as for me — you I do not despise.
He means: "lākin anā iyyāka lā aqlī"; thus he dropped the hamza of "anā," whereupon the "nūn" of "anā" and the "nūn" of "lākin" — which is unvocalized — came together, and it was assimilated into the "nūn" of "anā," so that the two became one doubled "nūn." So too "Allah" is originally "al-ilāh": the hamza, which is the first radical (fāʾ) of the name, was dropped, whereupon the "lām" — which is the second radical (ʿayn) of the name — and the augmented "lām" that was brought in with the augmented "alif" and is unvocalized came together, and it was assimilated into the other, which is the second radical of the name, so that the two became, in pronunciation, one doubled "lām," just as we described concerning Allah's word لكنا هو الله ربي.
The exposition of His word — exalted is His praise —: "the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful" (al-Raḥmān al-Raḥīm).
Abū Jaʿfar said: As for "al-Raḥmān": that is a form "faʿlān," derived from "raḥima"; and "al-Raḥīm" is a form "faʿīl" thereof. The Arabs frequently form the nouns of "faʿila yafʿalu" in the form "faʿlān," such as their [form] of "ghaḍiba" (to be angry): "ghaḍbān," and of "sakira" (to be drunk): "sakrān," and of "ʿaṭisha" (to be thirsty): "ʿaṭshān." So too is their [form] "raḥmān" of "raḥima," because its verb is "raḥima yarḥamu." And "raḥīm" was said, although the second radical of its verb has a kasra, because it is praise. For it is the custom of the Arabs that they bring the noun forms — when there is praise or blame in them — into the form "faʿīl," even though the second radical of their verb has a kasra or a fatḥa, just as they say of "ʿalima": "ʿālim" and "ʿalīm," and of "qadara": "qādir" and "qadīr." That, however, is with them not a formation in accordance with their verbs, for the form of "faʿala yafʿalu" and "faʿila yafʿalu" is "fāʿil." If "al-Raḥmān" and "al-Raḥīm" had been formed in accordance with the form of their verbs, their shape would have been "al-Rāḥim."
If someone says: If "al-Raḥmān" and "al-Raḥīm" are both names derived from mercy (al-raḥma), what then is the sense of that repetition, while the one expresses the meaning of the other?
He is answered: The matter concerning it is not as you supposed; rather, each word of it has a meaning that the other does not express.
If he says: What then is the meaning that each of the two has for itself, such that the one does not express the meaning of the other?
It is answered: As for the Arabic language: there is no contradiction among the experts of the languages of the Arabs that the saying of someone "al-Raḥmān" — measured against the noun forms of "faʿila yafʿalu" — is a stronger deviation [from the base form] than his saying "al-Raḥīm." And alongside this there is no disagreement among them that every name that has a root in "faʿila yafʿalu" — and that then exhibits a stronger deviation from its root in "faʿila yafʿalu" — [is such that] the one who is described therewith is more excellent than the one who is described with the name formed in accordance with its root in "faʿila yafʿalu," when the naming therewith is praise or blame. This then is that which lies in the saying of someone "al-Raḥmān" of added meaning above his saying "al-Raḥīm" in the language.
As for the side of the transmission and the report: there is disagreement on this among the people of exposition (ahl al-taʾwīl):
146 — Al-Sarī ibn Yaḥyā al-Tamīmī related to me, saying: ʿUthmān ibn Zufar related to us, saying: I heard al-ʿArzamī say: "al-Raḥmān al-Raḥīm," he said: "al-Raḥmān" toward the entire creation; "al-Raḥīm," he said: toward the believers.
147 — Ismāʿīl ibn al-Faḍl related to us, saying: Ibrāhīm ibn al-ʿAlāʾ related to us, saying: Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAyyāsh related to us, on the authority of Ismāʿīl ibn Yaḥyā, on the authority of Ibn Abī Mulayka, on the authority of the one who related to him, on the authority of Ibn Masʿūd — and [likewise] Misʿar ibn Kidām, on the authority of ʿAṭiyya al-ʿAwfī, on the authority of Abū Saʿīd — that is to say al-Khudrī — who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ has said: "Indeed, ʿĪsā ibn Maryam said: al-Raḥmān is the Most Compassionate of the Hereafter and the worldly life, and al-Raḥīm is the Most Merciful of the Hereafter."
These two transmissions have thus reported about the distinction between naming Allah — exalted is His praise — with His name which is "Raḥmān," and naming Him with His name which is "Raḥīm," and about the difference in meaning between the two words — even though they [the transmissions] differ over the meaning of that distinction, for the one indicates that it is in the worldly life, and the other indicates that it is in the Hereafter.
If he says: Which of these two expositions is, according to you, nearer to correctness?
It is answered: For both there is, according to us, a way out to correctness, so that there is no ground for the saying of someone: which of the two is nearer to correctness? That is because the meaning that lies in naming Allah with "al-Raḥmān," and not in naming Him with "al-Raḥīm," is this: that by the naming with "al-Raḥmān" He is described with the universality of mercy toward His entire creation, and that by the naming with "al-Raḥīm" He is described with the particularity of mercy toward a portion of His creation, whether in all states, or in some states. And there is no doubt — if that is so — that that particularity which lies in His being described with "al-Raḥīm" does not depart from its meaning, whether that is in the worldly life, or in the Hereafter, or in both together.
Since, then, what we have said about it is correct — and since Allah, exalted is His praise, has favored His believing servants in the hastening worldly life with that with which He has been well-pleased toward them, namely His assistance to them to obey Him, to believe in Him and in His messengers, to follow His command and to avoid disobedience toward Him — that which He withheld from whoever ascribes partners to Him (ashraka), whoever disbelieves and acts in contradiction with what He commanded and goes to excess in disobedience toward Him; and since He has alongside this — exalted is His praise — destined that which He has prepared in the coming Hereafter in His gardens of lasting bliss and clear triumph for whoever believes in Him, declares His messengers truthful, and acts in obedience to Him — exclusively, and not for whoever ascribes partners and disbelieves in Him — it is clear that Allah has favored the believers with His mercy in the worldly life and the Hereafter, alongside that with which He has favored them and the disbelievers jointly in the worldly life of favors and benefits toward them all: in the ample provision, the making subservient of the clouds with the rain, the bringing forth of the crops from the earth, the soundness of the bodies and the intellects, and the remaining countless blessings in which the believers and the disbelievers jointly share.
Our Lord — exalted is His praise — is thus "Raḥmān" toward His entire creation in the worldly life and the Hereafter, and "Raḥīm" toward the believers in particular in the worldly life and the Hereafter. As for that with which He has favored them all jointly in the worldly life of His mercy, whereby He was for them "Raḥmān" — that is what we have mentioned, with its likenesses for which no one of His creation has any way to count them, just as He — exalted is His praise — has said: وإن تعدوا نعمة الله لا تحصوها [Surah Ibrāhīm: 34, and Surah Al-Naḥl: 18] ("And if you were to count the favor of Allah, you would not be able to enumerate it").
And as for the Hereafter: that with which He has favored them all therein jointly of His mercy, whereby He was for them "Raḥmān," is that He — exalted is His mention — treats them all equally in His justice and His judgment: so that He does not wrong any of them, even by the weight of a speck of dust, and if there is a good deed, He multiplies it and bestows from Himself a tremendous reward, and to every soul is recompensed what it has earned. That then is the meaning of His general favoring of them all in the Hereafter with His mercy, whereby He was "Raḥmān" in the Hereafter.
And as for that with which He has favored the believers in the hastening worldly life of His mercy, whereby He was for them therein "Raḥīm" — just as He, exalted is His mention, has said: وكان بالمؤمنين رحيما [Surah Al-Aḥzāb: 43] ("And He is toward the believers Most Merciful") — that is that which we have described of benevolence toward them in their religion, with which He has favored them, and not whoever of the people of disbelief in Him He has forsaken.
And as for that with which He has favored them in the Hereafter, whereby He was for them "Raḥīm" and not for the disbelievers — that is what we have just described of that which is prepared for them and not for others of bliss and honor that wishes fall short of.
And as for the other saying about its exposition, that is what:
148 — Abū Kurayb related to us, saying: ʿUthmān ibn Saʿīd related to us, saying: Bishr ibn ʿUmāra related to us, saying: Abū Rawq related to us, on the authority of al-Ḍaḥḥāk, on the authority of ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbbās, who said: "al-Raḥmān" is the "faʿlān" form of mercy, and it belongs to the language of the Arabs. He said: "al-Raḥmān al-Raḥīm": the tender, the kindly toward whom He wishes to show mercy, and the distant, the severe toward whom He wishes to treat harshly. And so are all His names.
And this exposition of Ibn ʿAbbās indicates that that whereby our Lord is "Raḥmān" is the same as that whereby He is "Raḥīm," even though His saying "al-Raḥmān" has a meaning that His saying "al-Raḥīm" does not have. For he made the meaning of "al-Raḥmān" the meaning of "the tender toward whom He is tender," and the meaning of "al-Raḥīm" the meaning of "the kindly toward whom He is kindly."
And the saying which we have transmitted about its exposition from the Prophet ﷺ and which we have mentioned from al-ʿArzamī agrees better with its [linguistic] exposition than this saying which we have transmitted from Ibn ʿAbbās. Even though this saying agrees in its meaning with the meaning thereof, in [the point] that "al-Raḥmān" has a meaning that "al-Raḥīm" does not have, and that "al-Raḥīm" has an exposition that is other than the exposition of "al-Raḥmān."
And the third saying about its exposition is what:
149 — ʿImrān ibn Bakkār al-Kalāʿī related to me, saying: Yaḥyā ibn Ṣāliḥ related to us, saying: Abū al-Azhar Naṣr ibn ʿAmr al-Lakhmī, of the inhabitants of Palestine, related to us, saying: I heard ʿAṭāʾ al-Khurāsānī say: "He was [already] al-Raḥmān; and when 'al-Raḥmān' was cut off from His name, He was [named] al-Raḥmān al-Raḥīm."
And what ʿAṭāʾ meant by this saying of his — if Allah wills — is: that "al-Raḥmān" was one of the names of Allah with which no one of His creation names himself, and when the liar Musaylima named himself therewith — and that is its "cutting off," that is to say his taking away [one] of His names for himself — Allah, exalted is His praise, reported that His name is "al-Raḥmān al-Raḥīm," in order thereby to distinguish for His servants His name from the name of whoever names himself with His names, since no one is named "al-Raḥmān al-Raḥīm" such that these two names would be combined for him, except He — exalted is His mention. Rather, a portion of His creation names itself either as "Raḥīm," or names itself as "Raḥmān." But "Raḥmān Raḥīm" were never combined for anyone other than Him, and will not be combined for anyone other than Him. It is thus as though the meaning of this saying of ʿAṭāʾ is: that Allah, exalted is His praise, made a distinction only by the repetition of "al-Raḥīm" upon "al-Raḥmān" between His name and the name of others of His creation, whether their two meanings differ or agree.
And what ʿAṭāʾ has said about it is not incorrect in meaning; rather, it is possible that He, exalted is His praise, reserved for Himself the naming with both names combined together, by way of distinguishing Him from His creation, so that He might cause His servants, by their mention of [the names] combined, to know that He is meant by the mention thereof, and not whoever is besides Him of His creation — alongside what lies in the exposition of each of the two of meaning that does not lie in the other of the two.
Some simpletons have claimed that the Arabs did not know "al-Raḥmān," and that it did not occur in their language, and that the polytheists (mushrikīn) therefore said to the Prophet ﷺ: وما الرحمن أنسجد لما تأمرنا [Surah Al-Furqān: 60] ("And what is al-Raḥmān? Shall we prostrate ourselves to that which you command us?"), as a denial on their part of this name. As though it were impossible for him that the people of ascribing partners (ahl al-shirk) deny something whose validity they know, or do not [know]; and as though he had not recited from the Book of Allah the word of Allah: الذين آتيناهم الكتاب يعرفونه — that is to say: Muhammad — كما يعرفون أبناءهم [Surah Al-Baqara: 146] ("Those to whom We have given the Book know him as they know their sons"), while they nevertheless deny him therein and reject his prophethood! From this one knows that they repelled the truth whose validity was established with them and the knowledge of which was firmly fixed with them. And to one of the ignorant ones of the Jāhiliyya is attributed:
Oh, would that that girl had struck her base-born donkey; oh, would that the Raḥmān, my Lord, had cut off her right hand!
And Salāma ibn Jandal al-Saʿdī said:
You hastened against us, just as we hastened against you; and what the Raḥmān wills, He binds fast and He loosens.
And some whose knowledge of the exposition of the people of exposition was weak, and whose transmission of the sayings of the predecessors (al-salaf) among the people of exegesis (al-tafsīr) was scant, have also claimed that the meaning of "al-Raḥmān" is: "possessor of mercy" (dhū al-raḥma), and that the meaning of "al-Raḥīm" is: "the merciful one" (al-rāḥim). Then he said: Sometimes they form two expressions from [one and the same] expression, while the meaning is one, and that because of the breadth of the language with them. He said: And they have already done the like, and said: "nadmān" and "nadīm" (drinking-companion). Then he advanced as testimony the verse of Burj ibn Mushir al-Ṭāʾī:
And many a drinking-companion for whom the cup heightens the taste the sweeter — I gave him to drink when the stars had already set.
And he advanced as testimony verses that are similar to it concerning "al-nadīm" and "al-nadmān." Thus he made a distinction between the meaning of "al-Raḥmān" and "al-Raḥīm" in the exposition by his saying: "al-Raḥmān is the possessor of mercy, and al-Raḥīm is the merciful one," even though he failed to expound the exposition of their two meanings properly. Then he set that equal to two expressions that come with one meaning, and thus he returned to that which he had [first] made into two meanings, and made it into an example of that which has one meaning despite the difference in expressions.
And there is no doubt that "possessor of mercy" is the one for whom it is established that mercy belongs to him, and that it is correct that it is an attribute for him; and that "the merciful one" is the one who is described as though he would show mercy, or [as] having already shown mercy such that it is completed from him, or [as] being therein [at this moment].
And there lies for him then no indication in it that mercy is an attribute for him, like the indication that it is an attribute for him when he is described as "possessor of the mercy." Where then is the meaning of "al-Raḥmān al-Raḥīm" according to his exposition, in relation to the meaning of two words that come formed from one expression with difference in expressions and agreement in meanings? But when a saying does not rest on a reliable foundation, its weakness is clear.
And if someone says to us: Why is the name of Allah which is "Allah" placed first before His name which is "al-Raḥmān," and His name which is "al-Raḥmān" before His name which is "al-Raḥīm"?
It is answered: Because it is the custom of the Arabs, when they wish to report about something about which a report is made, that they place its name first and then let its attributes and qualifications follow. And this is the obligatory in the ruling: that the name be placed first before its qualification and attribute, so that the hearer of the report knows about whom the report is. Since that, then, is so — and since Allah, exalted is His mention, has names that He has forbidden His creation to bear as their appellation, [names] that He has reserved for Himself and not for them, and that is, for example, "Allah," "al-Raḥmān," and "al-Khāliq" (the Creator); and [other] names that He has permitted them, that some of them name one another therewith, and that is, for example, "al-Raḥīm," "al-Samīʿ" (the All-Hearing), "al-Baṣīr" (the All-Seeing), "al-Karīm" (the Generous), and the like of these names — it was obligatory that His names which belong specifically to Him and not to His entire creation be placed first, so that the hearer might know to whom the praise and the glorification are directed, and that this then be followed by His names with which others have also named themselves, after the one addressed or the hearer knows to whom that is directed of the meanings that follow upon it. Thus Allah, exalted is His mention, began with His name, because the divinity (al-ulūhiyya) belongs to no one other than Him — exalted is His praise — in any way, neither as regards the naming therewith, nor as regards the meaning. That is because we have already expounded that the meaning of "Allah" — exalted is His mention — is the worshipped, and there is no worshipped other than Him — majestic is His majesty — and that Allah, exalted is His praise, has forbidden the naming therewith, even though the one who names himself therewith intends that which the one intends who [names himself] with "Saʿīd" (happy one) while he is wretched, and with "Ḥasan" (beautiful one) while he is ugly.
Do you not see that Allah — majestic is His majesty — in many a verse of His Book has said: أإله مع الله ("Is there a god alongside Allah?"), and deemed grave that of the one who acknowledged that, and that He — exalted is He — about His reserving of [the names] Allah and al-Raḥmān to Himself has said: قل ادعوا الله أو ادعوا الرحمن أيا ما تدعوا فله الأسماء الحسنى [Surah Al-Isrāʾ: 110] ("Say: Call upon Allah, or call upon al-Raḥmān; by whichever you call [Him], to Him belong the beautiful names")? Then He let His name which is "al-Raḥmān" follow as second, since He has also forbidden His creation the naming therewith, even though there is among His creation one who [somewhat] deserves the naming with a portion of its [i.e., that name's] meanings. That is because it is permissible that many of those who are below Allah among His creation be described with a portion of the attributes of mercy. But it is not permissible that anyone other than Him deserve a portion of the divinity. Therefore "al-Raḥmān" came as second after His name which is "Allah."
And as for His name which is "al-Raḥīm": we have already mentioned that it belongs to that with which it is permissible to describe one other than Him. And mercy is one of His attributes — exalted is His mention —; thus it fell — since the matter is as we have described — in the place of the qualifications of the names that are their followers, after the precedence of the names over them. This then is the reason for the placing first of the name of Allah which is "Allah," before His name which is "al-Raḥmān," and of His name which is "al-Raḥmān" before His name which is "al-Raḥīm."
And al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī used to say about "al-Raḥmān" the same as what we have said, namely that it is one of the names of Allah of which He has forbidden the servants the naming therewith.
150 — Muḥammad ibn Bashshār related to us, saying: Ḥammād ibn Masʿada related to us, on the authority of ʿAwf, on the authority of al-Ḥasan, who said: "al-Raḥmān" is a forbidden name.
Alongside this there lies, in the consensus of the community which forbids all people the naming therewith, that which makes it unnecessary to advance as testimony, for the correctness of what we have said about it, the saying of al-Ḥasan and others.
