Appearance
Types of Qur'an-by-Qur'an Exegesis
The exegesis of the Qur'an by the Qur'an manifests in several forms, varying from the straightforward to the complex. While some methods are so elementary they hardly seem like Qur'an by the Qur'an exegesis, others demand the intellect and insight of a thorough scholar. Since the linkage between verses isn't always lexical, not all forms of exegesis are readily recognized under the category of explaining the Qur'an by the Qur'an. The term "Qur'an by the Qur'an" (Qurʾān bi al-Qurʾān) transcends linguistic and religious confines, hinging instead on the depth of the exegete's engagement with the Qur'an. It depends on the extent of their journey through the Qur'an's vastness, leveraging either acquired or presential knowledge.
Here are some approaches to Qur'an by the Qur'an exegesis:
In instances where a verse's commencement provides context for its conclusion, or vice versa, the exegesis involves linking segments within the same verse. This method elucidates a verse by connecting its parts internally or with external evidence. An example of this is found in the Verse of Mubahila, which states:
But whoever disputes with you in this matter after what has come to you of knowledge, then say, "Come, let us call our sons and your sons, our women and your women, ourselves and yourselves, then let us earnestly pray and invoke the curse of Allah upon the liars". (3:61)
From "our sons," the terms "our women" and "ourselves" can also be elucidated. "Our women" encompasses not just wives but daughters as well, a conclusion drawn from the broader Qur'anic context where the terms "sons" and "women" are employed together. For example, the verse detailing Pharaoh's actions:
...he [Pharaoh] slaughtered their sons and spared their women. Indeed, he was of the corruptors (28:4),
shows that "women" includes girls spared by Pharaoh, underlining that daughters fall under "our women." This interpretation aligns with the revelation's context, allowing for a broader understanding of familial terms.
In light of "our sons," it can be deduced that "ourselves" does not imply "our men." Should "ourselves" have been positioned opposite "women," it could have been interpreted as "men." However, the specification of "sons" in the verse implies that "ourselves" cannot signify "men," for if "ourselves" were to represent "men," then including "sons" separately would be unnecessary. Hence, within this context, "ourselves" cannot be construed as "men."
At times, the significance of a verse is illuminated through its broader context or ultimate aim, where the connection between the explaining and explained verses transcends lexical ties. Reflecting on the context of the Verse of Purification, we observe its specificity to a distinct group, excluding the Prophet's (a.s.) wives. This is evident in Sūrah al-Aḥzāb, verses 28 to 34, where feminine plural pronouns are consistently used, contrasting sharply with the masculine plural pronouns in the sole purification message. This discrepancy in pronoun usage and context underscores the verse's focus:
Indeed, Allah only wishes to remove all impurity from you, O People of the Household, and to purify you a thorough purification (33:33),
diverging from addressing the Prophet's (s.a.w.) wives. Had the wives been the intended subjects, the verse would have employed "from you [feminine plural]" and "to purify you [feminine plural]," matching their reference in adjacent verses, as corroborated by the revelation's circumstances.
Note
A sentence within the context of a verse or verses may be either clear in its meaning or ambiguous. If its intention is clear, there's no need to depend on the unity of the context for interpretation. However, if the purpose remains unclear, it is possible to determine from the context preceding and following the sentence whether it is integral to or independent from the overall message of those verses. The interpretation of the Verse of Purification hinges on recognizing that the sentence, "Indeed, Allah only wishes to remove all impurity from you...," stands as distinct and separate from the adjacent verses. Whether it was revealed independently or inserted within the existing verses is a matter beyond the current discussion's scope. (69)
Occasionally, the apparent context can help infer the connection of a doubtful word to a known one. Take, for example, the verse:
If you do not aid the Prophet—Allah has already aided him when those who disbelieved had driven him out [of Makkah] as one of two, when they were in the cave and he said to his companion, "Do not grieve; indeed Allah is with us." And Allah sent down His tranquillity upon him and supported him with angels you did not see and made the word of those who disbelieved the lowest, while the word of Allah—that is the highest. And Allah is Almighty, Wise. (9:40)
The central theme here is God's special protection of the Prophet (a.s.). The masculine singular pronouns in the phrases "you help him," "helped him," "driven him out," "he says," "to his companion" are clearly referring to the Prophet (a.s.). The pronoun in "upon him" and possibly in "supported him" presents an ambiguity: does it refer to the Prophet (a.s.) or to the person with him in the cave? Considering the verse's context, without external evidence from the Qur'an or traditions, suggests these ambiguous pronouns, like the preceding definite ones, refer to the Prophet (a.s.), not anyone else. Thus, the connection of these two pronouns to the previous ones is deduced from the apparent context, ensuring these two pronouns are not disconnected from the rest within the verse.
Occasionally, the mention of a subject, predicate, agent, verb, condition, consequence, antecedent, or consequent in one verse can clarify what is omitted in another verse. This approach to exegesis might not always be based on lexical links. For instance, if a verb is absent in a sentence and various verbs could fill the gap, a specific verb mentioned in another related sentence can indicate the intended omitted verb. In Sūrah al-Aʿrāf, the verse:
And to Thamud [We sent] their brother Salih (7:73)
leaves the action unspoken. By looking at an earlier verse in the same chapter:
Indeed, We sent Noah to his people... (7:59),
it becomes evident that the omitted verb in the first verse is "We sent," suggested by the word "to." This reasoning also applies to the verse:
And to ‘Ad [We sent] their brother Hud... (7:65),
indicating that the missing verb in this verse is likewise "We sent."
In the verse:
And Mary, the daughter of ‘Imran, who guarded her chastity... (66:12),
determining the omitted verb entails considering various possibilities. The most fitting verb to place "Mary" as the subject is "God presents an example," as mentioned in the preceding verse of the same chapter:
And Allah presents an example to those who believe: the wife of Pharaoh... (66:11)
This choice is influenced by the context of the surrounding verses, starting from verse 10, where "God presents an example..." is the primary verbal phrase.
Further analysis may be required in other instances where the evidence is not immediately obvious. For instance, in:
And Lot, when he said to his people... (7:80),
it's ambiguous whether the omitted verb should be "We sent," aligning with the narrative structure of surrounding verses about prophets, or "mention," echoing the structure found in "And mention the brother of ‘Ad" (214). The continuity of context in several chapters that recount prophets' stories before Lot, such as Sūrah al-Naml (45-54) and Sūrah al-‘Ankabūt (14-28), where "We sent" is frequently the leading action, suggests "We sent" as the intended action rather than "mention." This indicates a pattern of sending messengers, as highlighted in "We sent" (46:21), thereby integrating the action into the narrative flow of prophetic missions within the Qur'anic discourse.
Sometimes, by identifying a cause or effect, mentioning a sign or evidence, or considering the logical implications of one verse, it becomes clear what has been omitted in another verse. For instance, a description, judgment, state, or condition might be given for a person or group without stating the cause or reason. In another verse, this cause or rationale may be provided. For example, the verse:
And you see them looking at you, but they do not perceive (7:198)
indicates disbelievers' lack of perception without explaining why. Similarly, this verse states they lack hearing: "And if you invite them to guidance, they will not hear," without detailing the cause. Additionally, in other verses, they are labeled as misguided (Those are the ones who are astray (3:90)) without describing the reason behind their misguidance.
Misguidance, signifying deviation from truth, manifests with certain indicators, as seen in verses that articulate it through disbelief:
Indeed, those who disbelieve after their belief and then increase in disbelief—never will their repentance be accepted, and those are the ones astray. (3:90)
The cause behind this state, however, remains unspecified. Similarly, the disbelievers' misguided assertions against prophets are highlighted:
The eminent among his people said, ‘Indeed, we see you in clear error' (7:60);
Indeed, we see you in folly... (7:66)
Labeling a prophet as misguided reflects the accuser's own erroneous condition, though these verses do not delineate the reasons for such baseless accusations. Elsewhere, the scripture elucidates that the disbelievers' incapacity to recognize truth stems from their spiritual blindness, illustrating that one who is blind will inevitably stray:
Indeed, they were a people who were blind. (7:64)
This spiritual blindness underlies the mentioned flaws, serving as the root cause for not recognizing Satan and his followers as they engage in malevolence, plot, and disrupt:
Indeed, he sees you, he and his tribe, from where you do not see them (7:27)
The invisibility of Satan stems from his insinuations within the human heart, necessitating an awakened and lucid heart's eye to discern both the whisper and the whisperer:
Who whispers in the breasts of mankind (114:5)
However, when the heart's eye is veiled, it explains the failure to notice either the whispering or its source:
For it is not the eyes that are blinded, but blinded are the hearts within the chests. (22:46)
Sometimes verses elucidating each other occasionally share merely conceptual, not lexical, ties, which cannot be pinpointed through dictionary references. A case in point involves the use of "ab" and "wālid" for "father." While "ab" typically denotes a father, its Qur'anic application is broader, encompassing other male kin, such as uncles. This broader application is evident in the verse:
Or were you witnesses when death approached Jacob, when he said to his sons, "What will you worship after me?" They said, "We will worship your God and the God of your fathers, Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac, one God, and to Him we are Muslims". (2:133)
Here, Ishmael, referred to as one of Jacob's "fathers," is actually his uncle, illustrating the term "ab's" extended application beyond the literal father to include other paternal figures.
The usage of "father" in the Qur'an is flexible, extending beyond biological relations to include figures like uncles. This linguistic flexibility introduces ambiguity regarding whether Azar, identified as Abraham's father in verses such as:
And when Abraham said to his father Azar, ‘Do you take idols as deities?' (6:74),
was indeed his biological father. These verses present Abraham's "father" as an idolater, yet it remains unclear if this refers to his biological father. The distinction is clarified in another part of the Qur'an, where "wālid" is used instead of "ab," suggesting that Azar, the idolater, was not Abraham's biological father. This implies Abraham's real father, whose name is not specified in the Qur'an, was a monotheist, not a polytheist. This is because God said:
It is not appropriate for the Prophet and the believers to ask forgiveness for the polytheists, even if they are relatives,... (9:113)
Abraham's request for forgiveness for his father was only due to a promise he made, and when it became clear that his father was an enemy of God, he dissociated himself from him (9:114);
meaning, he no longer sought forgiveness for his father.
In his old age, Abraham said in his prayer:
"Our Lord, forgive me, my parents, and the believers on the Day of Reckoning." (14:41) (70)
This indicates two things: first, that Azar, the idolater, was not Abraham's father, as Abraham ceased seeking forgiveness for him after recognizing his hostility towards God. Second, he sought forgiveness for his parents in his old age, indicating they were worthy of such a request; they were believers, not polytheists.
This method of exegesis emphasizes the conceptual relationship between verses, focusing on the underlying ideas rather than direct lexical links. Despite the lexical relation that might exist between the words or verses involved, this approach is not considered part of explaining the Qur'an by the Qur'an based solely on shared vocabulary. This approach, which examines verses in light of each other's thematic and conceptual frameworks, is exemplified in works like Rūḥ al-Maʿānī and is thoroughly analyzed in al-Mīzān, highlighting the rich and multifaceted nature of Qur'anic exegesis.
Sometimes, verses that are not lexically connected can still explain each other through a conceptual link. An example of this is found in the verse:
Had there been within the heavens and earth gods besides God, they both would have been ruined. So exalted is God, Lord of the Throne, above what they describe (21:22).
This verse underpins the argument of mutual incompatibility (burhān al-tamānuʿ), pivotal in Islamic theology and philosophy. Critics of this argument suggest that if multiple gods, acting with perfect knowledge and devoid of self-interest, governed creation, conflict would not arise. They propose that cosmic ruin would only result from the deities' ignorance or selfishness. However, the premise that gods, free from ignorance and selfishness, could coexist and govern without issue challenges the foundational Islamic belief in the oneness of God, as articulated in the verse from Surah Anbiya.
In addressing critiques against the notion of multiple gods managing the universe harmoniously, some scholars reinterpreted the verse from Surah Al-Anbiya, employing the mutual hindrance argument. This approach posits the impracticality of multiple independent causes culminating in a singular effect, thereby reinforcing the verse's interpretation and validating the mutual hindrance rationale. Further scrutiny of verses that metaphorically depict mutual hindrance elucidates this verse's significance, enriching the mutual hindrance discourse without necessitating the premise of multiple independent causes leading to a single effect, thus navigating away from any potential misinterpretations or criticisms.
To elucidate the concept of divine unity, an allegorical verse is presented:
God presents an example: a man owned by quarrelling partners and a man belonging exclusively to one man—are they equal in comparison? Praise be to God! But most of them do not know. (39:29)
This analogy highlights a comparison between a servant under the authority of multiple conflicting masters and another who serves a singular master. The question posed is whether their states of life—efficiency, harmony, and order—could be equivalent. Evidently, the servant under a single master would experience a life of coherence and tranquility, unlike the one serving multiple quarreling owners, who would face continual turmoil and disarray. The implication here is clear: if the universe were governed by more than one deity, it would result in chaos rather than the observed order and unity. The inherent coherence and harmony of the world, therefore, testify to the existence of a single sovereign God.
Certainly, the analytical task to discern the nuanced meanings behind the allegory presented falls on the attentive listener, akin to a mind well-versed in the norms of discourse and logical reasoning. Yet, the pivotal notion extracted from the allegorical verse, which is integral for establishing the premise and conclusion within the verse from Sūrah al-Anbiyāʾ, posits that the existence of multiple gods would inherently lead to conflict and discord. This inherent discord is not due to ignorance, for it could be argued that God possesses all knowledge, nor can it be attributed to selfish desires or ambitions, as God transcends such human weaknesses. Rather, the source of inevitable disharmony is:
a. God is purely simple, without any complexity.
b. God possesses all intellectual and practical perfections.
c. Since God is simple and encompasses all intellectual and practical perfections, all these perfections, including eternal and infinite knowledge, are intrinsic to His essence, not separate or external.
d. As essences differ, their knowledge, intrinsic to their essence, will also differ.
e. Given that nothing pre-exists as a reference or standard for God to adjust His actions to, the emergence of reality or essence unfolds subsequent to divine emanation. Thus, it's not accurate to say that God fashioned the world in alignment with its intrinsic nature. This is because the notion of such a nature, perceived as independent of God, is itself a creation, contingent upon His will.
f. The essence of existence lies solely in God Himself. Thus, positing the existence of two gods implies the presence of two distinct essences, leading to divergent knowledge and perceptions, inevitably resulting in a world marked by conflict, contention, fragmentation, and a predisposition towards disintegration. This concept is underscored by the verse:
...each god would have taken away what he had created, and some would have tried to overcome others... (23:91)
The current world, free from these negative attributes as evidenced by:
Who created seven heavens in layers. You do not see any inconsistency in the creation of the Most Merciful. So return your vision [to the sky]; do you see any breaks? (67:3),
confirms divine unity and dispels any doubts regarding divine sovereignty. This elucidation underscores the argument of mutual incompatibility, negating the necessity to link it with the concept of multiple independent causes impacting a single effect. The verse from Sūrah al-Zumar serves as a foundational element in completing the argument of mutual incompatibility by presupposing the contentious and incompatible nature of two gods.
Sometimes, verses that share thematic connections don't necessarily have conceptual links for analyzing their premises, meaning one verse doesn't explicitly clarify the meaning of another. Instead, their connection is sequential and historical. For instance, by comparing certain verses, one can determine the chronological order of their revelation—identifying which verses were revealed in Mecca before the Hijrah and which were revealed in Medina afterward. While such historical analysis derived from comparing two verses offers new exegetical insights, it primarily enhances our understanding of the verses' revelation order—an external factor. For example, juxtaposing the verse "Or He makes for them a way" (4:15) with "Then lash each one of them with a hundred lashes..." (24:2) clarifies not just the meaning of the "way" mentioned in Sūrah al-Nisāʾ but also indicates that Sūrah al-Nūr was revealed after Sūrah al-Nisāʾ, or at least that the specific part of Sūrah al-Nūr came after that particular part of Sūrah al-Nisāʾ.
Verses with an exegetical relationship don't always connect conceptually to illuminate one verse's premises through another, as noted previously. Instead, their link can emerge from the sequence and arrangement of events in the universe's narrative arc. This sequence can either trace from the universe's origin to its end or follow the unfolding of divine grace emanating from God towards the disassembly of the cosmic order, as creation returns to its origin in God.
An example of this can be seen in how the Qur'an describes the dissolution of mountains as a prelude to the Day of Judgment. The verses sequentially depict mountains first as "like sandhills" (73:14), then "like carded wool" (101:5), followed by becoming "a levelled plain" (20:106), and ultimately disappearing like "a mirage" (78:20). This progression reveals not just the sequence of events leading to the Day of Judgment but also the stages of divine grace and the cosmic order's dismantling, drawing everything back to God.
Sometimes, comparing pairs of harmonious verses can yield a profound insight, for which the majority of exegetes, who have devoted themselves to the discipline of Qurʾanic studies, hold such readings and explanations of the Qur'an by the Qur'an in high regard. However, such illuminations are extremely rare, concealed only in the esoteric writings of those dedicated to the sanctum of revelation, the pilgrims to the realm of inspiration, the servants of the family of the Prophet, and those who prostrate at the threshold of divine authority. Indeed, such interactions that exist between the verses of the Qur'an also exist between the verses and narrations, and among the narrations themselves.
If a commentator attains such a comprehensive level of understanding, then proximity to the source of divine speech becomes their reward. Referring narrations to each other is a rational and widely accepted practice among scholars of traditions, jurists, and scholars. The author of Jawāhir has hinted at this matter, saying: "The words of all of them [the Imāms] are like one speech, and all those sacred persons are like one speaker. Thus, their words explain each other: After considering that all their words are like a single speech, one part of which explains the other." (71)
Sometimes, a verse is revealed, bringing with it many questions. Some of these questions find their answers in the explicit or apparent meanings of other verses that serve as explanations, detailing the generalities of that text. However, other questions aren't answered directly by the apparent meanings of subsequent verses. Instead, they find their answers through logical implication. This means that the explanation of the main text becomes clear through a combination of what is mentioned and what is omitted, or through what is explicitly stated and what is implied or left unsaid.
For instance, the verse:
Indeed, your Lord is Allah, Who created the heavens and the earth in six days (7:54)
prompts questions beyond the mere interpretation of "six days". Among these questions are:
a. Is the reference limited to the heavens and the earth, or does it encompass everything between them?
b. If it encompasses all between the heavens and the earth, over how many days were the heavens made, the earth formed, and everything in between brought into existence?
Answers to these inquiries are derived from correlating various verses on cosmic creation with the initial verse. The first question is resolved by including entities between heaven and earth within the scope of the original verse, as indicated in verses like:
Who created the heavens and the earth and what is between them in six days. (25:59)
The creation of the heavens in two days addresses the second question:
Then He directed Himself to the heaven while it was smoke and said to it and to the earth, "Come [into being], willingly or by compulsion." They said, "We come willingly." So He completed them as seven heavens within two days... (41:11-12)
The creation of the earth in two days answers the third question:
Say, "Do you indeed disbelieve in He who created the earth in two days and attribute to Him equals? That is the Lord of the worlds." (41:9)
Regarding the fourth question, the creation of what lies between the heavens and the earth took two days, as implied by subtracting the four days allocated for the heavens and the earth from the total six days.
This last category does not identify a verse that directly or implicitly, either through its explicit meaning or implication, addresses the topic. Instead, understanding is gleaned from the meaningful silence of related verses. The inference drawn from:
He placed therein [the earth] firmly set mountains over its surface, and He blessed it and determined therein its [creatures'] sustenance in four days without distinction—for [the information] of those who ask (41:10)
appears to allude to the provision of sustenance throughout the four seasons, primarily for the regions inhabited by people. It does not imply that the entire earth and what lies between it and the heavens were created in four days, with the heavens themselves created in two days, totaling six days, as suggested by some commentators. (72)
Sometimes, a verse emerges as the primary directive for education and morality, with no other verse explicitly expanding upon its content. There's no subsequent verse that delves into its details, elaborates, limits, restricts, or specifies the initial message. Yet, the broad and profound essence of all or nearly all Qur'anic verses serves to sketch, illustrate, clarify, refine, deepen, and affirm the message conveyed by this principal verse.
This type of exegesis of the Qur'an by the Qur'an does not obviously fall within this category of exegesis. For instance, the verse:
And [mention], when your Lord said to the angels, "Indeed, I will make upon the earth a successive authority." They said, "Will You place upon it one who causes corruption therein and sheds blood, while we declare Your praise and sanctify You?" Allah said, "Indeed, I know that which you do not know". (2:30)
This verse hints at the exalted status of the divine vicegerent, and no other verse has descended as a detailed explanation or a simple exposition of the high position of vicegerency (khilāfa), which is in dire need of straightforward explanation. In this regard, not only has no detailed explanation descended, neither a moderate nor even a brief report is seen.
This form of Qur'anic exegesis (Qur'an by the Qur'an) does not typically fall into this category of exegesis. Consider the verse:
And [mention], when your Lord said to the angels, "Indeed, I will make upon the earth a successive authority." They said, "Will You place upon it one who causes corruption therein and sheds blood, while we declare Your praise and sanctify You?" Allah said, "Indeed, I know that which you do not know". (2:30)
This verse suggests the elevated role of the divine vicegerent on Earth, yet no verse explicitly elaborates on the profound nature of this vicegerency (khilāfa) that is in urgent need of clear exposition. Despite this, there is neither a detailed explanation, a moderate description, nor even a succinct commentary provided in subsequent revelations.
What can be deduced from the verse:
O David, indeed We have made you a vicegerent upon the earth, so judge between the people in truth and do not follow [your own] desire, as it will lead you astray from the way of Allah. Indeed, those who stray from the way of Allah will have a severe punishment for having forgotten the Day of Account (38:26),
is a part of the comprehensive divine vicegerency that includes being prostrated to by angels. The vicegerency bestowed upon David is significantly different from the universal, absolute, and enduring vicegerency designated for the perfect and immaculate human. Although Prophet David (a.s.) shares in this honor in a certain capacity, the vicegerency referred to in Sūrah al-Baqarah diverges from that mentioned in Sūrah Ṣād. Nevertheless, a central theme and deep guidance present across many verses aim to instruct on the beautiful names of God and foster the refinement and purification of the soul, aspiring towards the noble status of divine vicegerency. This is because at the heart of perfect human vicegerency lies the capability to embody the truths of the cosmos as manifested through the beautiful names of God.
The divine names are interwoven throughout the Qur'an, akin to fruits on branches, clustered shades, and flowing waters, nestled within the complexities, folds, and margins of its verses. This distribution allows every individual, according to their capacity, to progress towards embodying the reality of divine vicegerency. Consequently, asserting that the Qur'an's ultimate purpose—the cultivation of the perfect human and the nurturing of the monotheistic individual—sheds light on the essence of perfect human vicegerency through its verses, aligns with its overarching objectives. Though this approach may not traditionally fall under the category of explaining the Qur'an by the Qur'an, it undeniably contributes to a deeper understanding of the text's intent.