Ibn ‘Abbās narrated the same point in Tanwīr-ulmiqbās (p.318)
- Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr-ul-Qur’ān al-‘azīm (3:364).
- The following scholars also narrated that Āsif bin Barakhyā had the knowledge of the Book and he brought the throne of Queen Balqīs to Sulaymān :
- Ibn Abī Hātim Rāzī, Tafsīr-ul-Qur’ān al-‘azīm (9:2885-6#16376-16381).
- Ibn Jarīr Tabarī, Jāmi‘-ul-bayān fī tafsīr-il-Qur’ān (19:103).
- Ibn-ul-Jawzī, Zād-ul-masīr fī ‘ilm-it-tafsīr (6:174).
- Baydāwī, Tafsīr (3:280).
- Rāzī, at-Tafsīr-ul-kabīr (24:197).
- T ha‘ālabī, Jawāhir-ul-hisān fī tafsīr-il-Qur’ān (3:162).
- Nasafī, al-Madārik (3:213).
- Khāzin, Lubāb-ut-ta’wīl fī ma‘ānī at-tanzīl (3:385-6).
- Abū Hayyān Andalusī, Tafsīr-ul-bahr-il-muhīt (7:75).
- Mahallī, Tafsīr-ul-jalālayn (p.320).
- Suyūtī, ad-Durr-ul-manthūr (5:109).
- Sābūnī, Qabas min-nūr-il-Qur’ān al-karīm (9:176).
- Ibrāhīm bin ‘Umar Biqā‘ī, Nazm-ud-Durar fī tanāsub-il-āyāt was-suwar (14:164-5).
The Qur’ānic verse furnishes a contrastive study of two kinds of creatures: on the one hand are the jinns who pride in their extraordinary power, on the basis of which he expresses his sense of determination to bring to him the throne placed at a distance of hundreds of miles before the rising of the council; and on the other hand is being described the glory and nature of the man of Allāh who possesses the power to perform this job in the blinking of an eye. In this situation, Sulaymān speaks up:
So that He should test me whether I am grateful or ungrateful, and whosoever expressed gratitude (to Allāh), so he offers gratitude for his personal benefit, and whosoever was ungrateful, then my Lord is All-Transcending, Merciful.
Their goony explanation of the unseen sometimes takes on a different configuration. They say that it is not valid to demand from a creature the performance of an act which is beyond his creaturely stat us. In order to justify their contention they suggest that to demand from the prophets, the saint s and the pious something, which is not in their control and which is only in Allāh’s control is an expression of disbelief. The answer to this quest ion has already been provided at length. The fact is that this mode of reasoning is based on a misunderstanding of the meaning of the word istighāthah. No Muslim, when he is
- Abū Sa‘ūd ‘Amādī, Irshād-ul-‘aql-is-salīm ilā mazāyā al- Qur’ān al-karīm (6:287).
- Ismā‘īl Haqqī, Tafsīr rūh-ul-bayān (6:349).
- Shawkānī, Fath-ul-qadīr (4:139).
- Qadī T hanā’ullāh Pānīpatī, at-Tafsīr-ul-mazharī (7:117).
- Zamakhsharī, al-Kashshāf ‘an haqā’iq ghawāmid-ittanzīl (3:289).
- Khatīb Shurbīnī, as-Sirāj-ul-munīr (3:60). (xx) Ālūsī, Rūh-ul-ma‘ānī (19:203).
an-Naml, the Ants) 27:40.
beseeching the prophets and the saints for help, believes in his heart that our helpers (the prophets and the saints) will help us on their own, but we believe that they will serve only as a means of fulfilling our needs before Allāh, as has been explained in the case of the blind Companion and the request for rain. The Companions in these traditions had based their appeal for help on the absolute power of Allāh and mediated it through the qualities and attributes of the Prophet. And as a result, the Prophet who was, better groomed in the secrets of divine unity, did not discourage them by saying that in this way they were committing disbelief but prayed for them and, Allāh in response to his supplication, fulfilled their needs. If beseeching help from not-Allāh had been disbelief, then,
first, the Companions would never have implored the Prophet to perform this act,
second, the Prophet would have discouraged them by telling them it was disbelief, and would have forbidden them to press him with such imploring,
third, Allāh would have forbidden His beloved to help them and protected him against committing disbelief.
The Companions, beseeching the Prophet for help, the act of the Prophet and Allāh’s approval of the act all these three factors collectively prove that istighāthah is not only valid, but is a practice of the Companions and popular with Allāh. Demand for miracles also falls in this category. When the non-believers and the infidels demanded from the holy Prophet a miraculous expression of his power, he did not call it disbelief. Instead, he performed the required miracles with his hand (splitting the moon etc). If these supernat ural acts had been disbelief, how could the Prophet have possibly perpetrated them? When the act of the Prophet does not amount to disbelief (even to think of it expels one from the fold of Islam), then how can the act of Ummah, in conformity to the practice of the Companions, be declared a form of shirk (polytheism).
The Muslims only expect mediation for help from the saints and the prophet s, and not their help because Allāh is the only true Helper. They can only recommend us to Allāh, they can’t help themselves. When they do help, it is only with divine sanction behind it and God has given power to His favourites over supplication and recommendation, though this power is only derivatively used, as Allāh says in the holy Qur’ān: Pure is He Who has created couples of everything which the earth causes to grow.
Allāh Himself in the Qur’ān has attributed the growth of grass to the earth although to cause the grass to grow is not in earth’s power because in this act of growth it serves only as an instrument and a means. This Qur’ānic verse proves that there is no harm in referring to the means or instrument of mediation as subject because it cannot lead to any misunderstanding or confusion as both the Qur’ān and the traditions contain countless references to the difference bet ween real and derivative power. Statements made by the Muslims in this sense are as devoid of disbelief as are the holy Qur’ān and the traditions of the Prophet .