Part 45

may be seen in Adam and Eve’s words, Allah says: “. . . Our Lord! we have wronged ourselves. If you forgive us not, and if you do not bestow Your Mercy on us, we shall certainly be the losers” (7:23); and in Noah’s statement: “. .. Oh my Lord! I seek refuge with You from asking You that of which I have no knowledge. And unless You forgive me and have Mercy on me, I would indeed be one of the losers” (11:47), and numerous other examples. Moses said to al-Khidr, Allah says: “... If | ask you anything after this, keep me not in your company . . .” (18:76), thus indicating that he has asked him the three questions before thereby disobeying the prohibition which was implied in his assertion: Allah says: “... And I will not disobey your command” (18:69). And as we have seen, whoever disobeys a prohibition has also disobeyed a command. This may also be seen in the following. Allah says: “. . . Surely, His is the Creation and Commandment . . .” (7:54), where the giving of prohibitions is implied in the giving of commands. The same may be inferred from the following verses. Allah says: “. . . And let those who oppose his [Muhammad’s] commandment beware . . .” (24:63) and “It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision . . .” (33:36).

Islamic jurists have been in disagreement over the most correct interpretation of a man’s statement to his wife: “if you disobey my command, you shall be divorced.” The question being: if he forbids her to do something and she disobeys him, is this situation included in the conditional statement above? Two different answers have been proposed to this question. Some have held that the situation described here is not covered by the man’s statement on the grounds that a command is one thing, and a prohibition is another. Others, however, have insisted that it is indeed covered by it, since it is customarily understood from a command that it implies some prohibitions. [I hold that] the latter view is the correct one; for the customary understanding referred to here is consistent with both linguistic usage and Islamic law. For if it is said: “obey so-and-so’s command,” or “so-andso obeyed so-and-so’s command,” or “he does not disobey his command,” these all encompass prohibitions. After all, the one who forbids is commanding that one abandon that which is forbidden. Thus, Allah says: “And mix not truth with falsehood, nor conceal the truth while you know it” (2:42). He did not say: “do not conceal the truth.” There was no need for two prohibitions to be stated, since each prohibition was necessarily implied by the other. The “and” in the verse quoted is not a waw al-jam‘, conjunction of addition, referred to by Kiifan linguists as a

ASSOCIATION OF WORDS AND PHRASES 187

waw al-sarf, morphological conjunction, as some might assume it to be. For if it were, then the meaning of the verse would have been: “do not combine these two activities [that is, confusing the truth with falsehood and concealing the truth],” the implication of which would be that engaging in either of them by itself would not be forbidden.

Moreover, this only comes into play if the distinction becomes apparent. Allah says: “. . . Before Allah tests those of you who fought and tests those who remained patient” (3:142); and “Or He may destroy them because of that which their [people] have earned. And He pardons much. And those who dispute with regard to Our Signs may know that there is no place of refuge for them” (42:34-35). An example of the conjunction of two terms where one of the two is necessarily implied in the other is an ‘atf al-malziim, binding conjunction. Allah says: “. . . Obey Allah and obey the Messenger, and those of you who are in authority .. .” (4:59), for if they obey the Prophet, they have obeyed Allah. Allah also says: “He who obeys the Messenger has indeed obeyed Allah...” (4:80), and if whoever has received Muhammad’s message has obeyed Allah, then he must necessarily have obeyed the Messenger. For there is no obedience to Allah apart from obedience to His Messenger. As for the third level of distinction, it is the conjunction of two terms in which one of the two forms part of the other. Allah says: “Guard your prayers, especially the middle prayer . . .” (2:238); and “And when We took from the Prophets their Covenant, and from you [Oh, Muhammad] and from Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, son of Mary . . .” (33:7); and “Whoever is an enemy to Allah, His Angels, His Messengers, Gabriel and Michael . . .” (2:98); and ‘And He caused you to inherit their lands, and their houses and their properties, and a land which you had not trodden [before] . . .” (33:27). And lastly we have the fourth level of distinction, which involves the conjunction of different terms in order to bring out a distinction among two or more qualities in a single entity. Allah says: “Glorify the name of your Lord, the Most High; Who has created, then proportioned it; And Who has measured, then guided; And Who brings out the [green and luscious] pasture” (87: |-4) and “Those who believe in the unseen and offer their prayers, and spend out of what We have provided for them; And those who believe in that which has been revealed to you [Oh, Muhammad] and in that which has been revealed before you [i.e., the Torah and the Gospel] and they believe in the Hereafter” (2:3-4). There are examples in poetry of conjunctions between terms that are said by some to be for the purpose

of highlighting a distinction in pronunciation only [as opposed to a distinction in meaning]. For example, we have a verse of poetry that reads: wa alfa qawlaha kadhiban wa mina, And he found what she said to be a falsehood and a lie.

There are some who claim that this sort of thing is also found in the Book of Allah. For example, Allah says: “. . . [We have prescribed] a law and a clear way ...” (5:48). However, they are mistaken, for this type of conjunction never occurs in the Quran, nor, for that matter, in any type of eloquent speech. Rather, the purpose behind instances of this type of conjunction is to bring out a distinction in meaning between the conjoined terms. As an example of a conjunction for the purpose of highlighting a mere distinction in pronunciation, some have cited the following verse of poetry:

wa hindun ’ata min duniha al-na’yu wal-bu‘du

Ah, how lovely is Hind, and how beautiful is any land in which she is to be found, yet remoteness and distance have come without her.

They have claimed that the two words al-na’yu and al-bu‘du, translated as remoteness, and distance, have the same meaning. And in support of their view they have cited the Qur’anic phrase quoted above, namely, shir‘atan wa minhajan, saying that these two words, which convey the senses of “law” and “way,” “road,” “method,” or “program,” respectively, mean basically the same thing. However, those who disagree with this view have objected, saying that al-na”yu, remoteness, has a broader, more inclusive meaning than al-bu‘du, distance. The first term encompasses the notions of contrast, dissimilarity, parting, leave taking, and departure, and may or may not involve geographical distance; the latter term, on the other hand, is used only to speak of those entities separated by a great geographical distance. Allah says: “And they prevent others from him [from following Muhammad] and they themselves keep away from him . . .” (6:26); those people referred to are considered blameworthy for avoiding and distancing themselves from Him whether they happen to be near or far away. And in fact, not all of them were far away from him, especially one who says: “I stayed with Abu Talib.” As the poet al-Nabighah said: “The trench around the al-nu’i, tent, is like a basin.” The word nu’ wiyun, used to refer to the trench one digs around a tent so as to catch water that otherwise would have gone inside the tent, is derived from. the same root as the verb na’4, meaning fo be or become remote. Moreover, this trench is said to be like a basin that flanks the tent yet without being far away from it.

Connotations of Absolute Iman

What has been stated previously indicates that the word Iman, if applied in an absolute sense in the Qur’an and the Sunnah, implies birt, piety, taqwa, righteousness, and din, religion. For example, the Prophet (pbuh) stated that: “Iman has over seventy branches, the most excellent of which is the declaration that there is no god but Allah, and the humblest of which is the removal of what is injurious from the road.” Hence, Iman implies all of what Allah loves. So too do the words “righteousness” and “religion,” if applied in an absolute sense. It has been reported that some people asked about Iman, and Allah reveals the following verse: “It is not of piety that you turn your faces towards east or west; but it is piety to believe in Allah and the Last Day, and the Angels, and the Book, and the Prophets . . .” (2:177). Thus piety was interpreted through Iman, as was righteousness also. The Prophet (pbuh) interpreted “piety” both as Iman and as the work that takes one nearer to Allah; and these interpretations are true.

Ishaq Ibn Ibrahim Ibn Rahawiyah (7-853 A.D.) was a compiler of hadith and a mathematician. Both al-Bukhari and Muslim studied hadith with him. [Al-Fihrist, vol. 2, p. 1082 and al-Zirkili,

2 Al-Mugri?, “Abd Allah Ibn Yazid (2-213 A.H.), was scholar of hadith and a teacher of Qur’an. [Kitab al-Iman MZ, p. 170.)

Al-Mas‘idi, ‘Abd al-Rahman (?-160 A.H.), was a compiler of hadith. [Kitab al-Iman MZ, p. 170.)