As to those who reject faith, it is the same to them whether you warn them or do not warn them; they will not believe (Inna alladhīna kafarū sawā’un ‘alayhim a’ andhartahum am lam tundhirhum lā yu’minūn)
This verse’s positioning [and relationship with what precedes it]:
Consider this: In the world of His pre‑eternal attributes, the Unique Being has two manifestations, those pertaining to His glory (jalālī) and those pertaining to His beauty (jamālī).
Through their manifestation in the world of the attributes of actions, they appear as grace and wrath, and goodness and majesty.
Then inclining to the world of actions, adornment and embellishment (taḥliya, tazyīn) arise, and demonstrate that the Creator is exempt from the attributes of creatures (takhlīya, tanzīh).
Then, being imprinted on the world of the hereafter, which is one of the worlds of works (‘ālam al‑āthār), grace is manifested as Paradise and light, and wrath is manifested as Hell and fire.
And being reflected in the world of remembrance, recollection is divided into praise (al‑ḥamd) and glorification (al‑tasbīḥ).
And being represented in the world of speech, they diversify into command and prohibition. And being depicted in the world of guidance, they divide into encouragement and restraint, and reassurance and warning.
And through their manifestation in the conscience, hope and fear are born. And so on.
Moreover, it is the mark of guidance to preserve the balance between hope and fear, in order that hope may induce striving and work, and fear may restrain from transgression, and a person will not despair of divine mercy and opt out in blameworthy fashion, or feel sure he will not be punished so unconcernedly go astray.
It is because of this successive wisdom that the Qur’an does not encourage without restraining, nor praise the righteous without censuring sinners.
If You Were to Ask: Why is there no conjunction here, between this and the previous verse, as there is in the verse, As for the righteous, they will be in bliss ❋ And the wicked, they will be in the Fire.?
You Would Be Told: A conjunction is apt in so far as the relationship [between the two parts of speech it is joining] is apt, and the aptness of the relationship depends on [both parts being congruent and] following the same aim. But because different aims are being followed here [in this verse and the previous one], the conjunction was not deemed fitting. For the praise of the believers leads to and is preliminary to praise of the Qur’an, and it is its result and is driven to it. While the censure of the unbelievers is in order to restrain and frighten, and is not the prelude to praise of the Qur’an.
Now consider the subtleties in the positioning of the parts of this verse:
Firstly familiarize yourself with [the intensive particle] inna and [the relative pronoun] those who (alladhīna), for they are the most itinerant and roaming of whatever you will encounter in the Qur’an in the way stations of revelation. For some reason or other, the Qur’an mentions them frequently, for besides the fine points they express particular to the places they are used, they comprise two general subtleties from the jewels of eloquence:
It is characteristic of inna to pierce the surface and delve into the truth, and fasten the purport of its sentence to it, as though it is itself the root and sinks into the truth. For example, “Indeed, it is thus:” that is, what is being stated is not imaginary, or contrived, or subjective, or newly invented; it is a constant truth. [The grammarians] say that [the purpose of] inna is to establish or confirm facts (li’l‑taḥqīq) and therefore denotes this fact and characteristic.
The particular point here is that inna repels doubt and denial, although these were completely lacking in the Prophet (UWBP), who was being addressed; it alludes therefore to his overwhelming desire that [the deniers] should come to believe.
Now for those who (alladhīna); know that it is characteristic of [the relative pronoun] alladhī to indicate something new and strange that the mind perceives before the eyes, which is not emphatic but born of a combination of things. For this reason you will see that among the particles and pronouns of demonstration alladhī, the relative pronoun, is the easiest on the tongue and the one most used in denoting the change and renewal of subjects.
For when that which was to establish truth and reality, that is the Qur’an, appeared, some things (anwā‘ pl. of naw‘) were cancelled and vanished, and others were formed and new truths were born. Consider the Era of Ignorance, how social relations (anwā‘) were based on national ties, and social mores (lit. truths – ḥaqā’iq) were based on tribalism. Then when the Qur’an came, it severed those ties and destroyed those mores, and established other relations (anwā‘) in their place: the bonds of religion.
Now reflect on this! When the Qur’an rose shining over humankind, hearts bloomed and became fruitful through its light, and a luminous truth was produced, which was the class (naw‘) of believers. Then because of their iniquity, some souls putrified in the face of that light and a venomous truth was born, the particular characteristic of the class of unbelievers.
Between the who (alladhīna) in this verse and that [in verse 3] there is also reciprocity, [because they both point to a truth which is the reverse of the other].
Know that like the definite article, the relative pronoun is used to express five meanings, the best known of which is its denoting something known (al‑‘ahd). The who (alladhīna) here alludes to notable unbelievers like Abu Jahl, Abu Lahab, and Umayya ibn Khalaf, who died in a state of unbelief. In this respect therefore, the verse gives news about the unseen realm [it is a prophecy of the future]. Born of these flashes, and others like them, is a sort of miraculousness, there being four sorts of miraculousness or inimitability pertaining to the Qur’an’s meanings (al‑i‘jāz al-ma‘nawī).
If You Were to Ask: The Qur’an is one of the essentials of religion, yet there has been dispute over its meanings?
You Would Be Told: In every passage of the Qur’an there are three propositions:
The First: This is the Word of Allah the Most High.
The Second: Its intended meaning is the truth. It is unbelief to deny these two.
The Third: Its intended meaning is this.
If this last proposition is incontestable or expounded [by other verses of the Qur’an], it is compulsory to believe in it once one is informed about it and to deny it is unbelief. If it is clear (ẓāhir) or is a verse that has another possible meaning, it is not unbelief to deny it since it is open to interpretation. Interpretation however should not be based on personal whims.
Unanimously reported Hadiths are the same as Qur’anic verses in this regard. However, where there is denial of the first proposition in connection with Hadiths, these should be considered care‑ fully. [That is, the Hadith’s authenticity and the unanimity concerning it should be considered carefully.]
If You Were to Ask: Unbelief is ignorance yet in the Qur’an it says: The People of the Book know this as they know their own sons. How can these two statements be reconciled?
You Would Be Told: There are two sorts of unbelief. The first is due to ignorance; a person denies because he does not know. The second is obstinate rejection; a person knows but does not accept; he is certain but does not believe; he affirms but his conscience does not submit.
If You Were to Ask: Does Satan know Allah in his heart?
You Would Be Told: No, because due to his innate disposition his heart is continuously preoccupied with leading people astray, and his mind continuously thinks of unbelief and inculcating it in others. He never ceases doing this. The idea of unbelief never quits his head so that knowledge of Allah might become established in it.
If You Were to Ask: Unbelief is an attribute of the heart, so how can wearing the ‘zunnar’ and the hat, which has been compared to it, be unbelief?
You Would Be Told: The Shari‘a acknowledges the outward signs of hidden matters. It even recognizes apparent causes that have no reason (‘illa) as the reason. So since some girdles hinder bowing in prayer and some hats prevent full prostration, it deems the wearing of them a reason for unbelief. For they both infer the renouncing of worship and imitation of unbelievers, betokening appreciation of their outlook and nationality. Thus, so long as the hidden matter is not decisively disproved, judgement is made according to its outward signs.
If You Were to Ask: If they have no warning, why should people be held accountable?
You Would Be Told: To rebut their arguments and excuses. [For they could say: We weren’t told that we would be held to account, and did not know about it. And this could save them from punishment.]
If You Were to Ask: Since their obstinate rejection is foretold, it means they are prevented from believing. Isn’t it therefore impossible to hold them responsible?
You Would Be Told: Neither the prediction, nor divine knowledge or will are connected to their unbelief independently of the cause. They are connected to it only through their wills (ikhtiyār). There is detailed discussion of this below. It is because of this that it is said: “An obligation [imposed by] will is not inconsistent with [or opposed to] will.”
If You Were to Ask: Isn’t it reasonably possible for them to believe in the verse that states they will not believe? So isn’t this a contradiction in terms?
You Would Be Told: They are not being ordered to believe in every detail of the Qur’an, that it should be impossible.
Also, the verb “(who) reject faith (lit. disbelieved) (kafarū)" being in the perfect tense infers that they chose unbelief after the truth had become clear, so the warning was futile. [As the word sawā’un – it is the same/ – indicates.] Now for the same (sawā’un); it is a figure of speech meaning: whether it is futile or has the desired result, it makes no difference whether or not you warn them. That is, there’s no reason for you either to warn them or to not warn them.
To (lit. on) them (‘alayhim): in this is a sign that they shall remain on the earth but not raise their heads and heed their leaders.
It also implies: But it is not the same for you, [O Muhammad!, whether you warn them or not], for it is meritorious for you to convey the message; indeed, ‘The Messenger’s duty is but to proclaim [the Message].’
Whether you warn them or do not warn them (a’ andhartahum am lam tundhirhum): the whether (a’ – hamza) and or (am) here are like letters signifying the same (sawā’un), and corroborate “the same” in the first [phrase of the verse]. Or [their purpose] is to direct attention to the two meanings of it mentioned above.
If You Were to Ask: Why is this ‘sameness’ expressed in interrogative form (ṣūra al‑istifhām)? [That is, the a’ of a’ andhartahum.]
You Would Be Told: If you want to alert the person you are addressing subtly yet convincingly to the fact that what he is doing is futile, you have to question him so as to draw his attention to it. [Then] he can switch mentally from the act to its result and feel certain.
There is also a connection between the interrogative form and the sameness, because the question comprises it. For as far as the questioner knows, it is the same whether or not the thing about which he is asking exists. Moreover, very often the answer also implies this sameness.
If You Were to Ask: Why is the warning expressed by you warn (lit. warned) them (andhartahum) in the perfect tense?
You Would Be Told: So that it might proclaim: “You’ve tried it before, O Muhammad! So you know what’ll happen!”
If You Were to Ask: Why does it say or whether you do not warn them (am lam tundhirhum) although it is clearly pointless not to warn them?
You Would Be Told: Warning a person may increase his obstinacy, but remaining silent may induce him to think fairly.
If You Were to Ask: Why, although the Prophet (UWBP) is both a bringer of glad tidings and a warner, does this verse only warn and intimidate?
You Would Be Told: Because intimidation is fitting for unbelief; and because repelling harm is preferable to attracting benefits and more effective; and because the intimidation here causes the imagination to tremble and makes it realize that after the words they will not believe (lā yu’minūn), it will be faced with “whether or not you give them glad tidings [it is the same for them].”
Know that all speech has a literal meaning and a hidden purpose.
This too has subtle hovering meanings, and a purpose that unfolds, which is to alleviate the Prophet’s difficulties and relieve his stress, and to console him and advise him to follow the earlier prophets. For most of them were addressed similarly. Noah, even, said after receiving such an address: … Leave not of the unbelievers a single one on the earth! Also, because the Qur’an’s verses resemble mutually reflecting mirrors, and the stories of the prophets are like a halo around the moon, they look to the Prophet’s (Upon whom be blessings and peace) situation. It is as though this passage is saying: “This is a natural divine law that has to be obeyed.”
Having made this analysis, know that with all their parts this verse and the next one up to great is the penalty they incur (wa la‑hum ‘adhābun ‘aẓīm) are so delivered that they infer the abomination of unbelief and scorn of it, and cause aversion to it and implicitly deter from it, and humiliate the unbelievers and mark them out, and scare others away from it and threaten them. With their words these verses proclaim that unbelief is a terrible calamity, the loss of vast bounties, the onset of severe suffering, and the cessation of elevated pleasures. They state explicitly that unbelief is the most repulsive of things, and the most harmful. As follows:
The replacement of they did not believe (lam yu’minū) with they disbelieve or reject faith (kafarū) indicates that due to their lack of belief they have fallen into the darkness of disbelief, which is a calamity that corrupts the very substance of man’s spirit, and implies that it is a source of suffering.
And the replacement of they do not give up unbelief (lā yatrukūna al‑kufr) with they will not believe (lā yu’minūn) indicates that due to this loss they have lost their belief, the source of all happiness.
With the phrase Allah has set a seal on their hearts (Khatama Allāhu ‘alā qulūbihim) it indicates that having come to disbelieve, their hearts and consciences, which receive life, joy, happiness, and attain to perfection only through the manifestation of the divine truths through the light of belief, become like ruined buildings desolate and swarming with vermin and noxious things. So their doors are locked and sealed up, and they are shunned. They are abandoned and left to the scorpions and monsters.
With the phrase and on their hearing (wa ‘alā sam‘ihim) it indicates that due to their unbelief they have lost the immense bounty of hearing, for when the light of belief constantly [shines] behind and informs his ear, it is affected by the cries of all the world and understands the invocations of its beings. It hears the universe’s vociferations and understands its glorifications. Indeed, when the ear hears the dominical speech in the sighing of the blowing wind, the peals of the rolling thunder‑clouds, the refrains of the billowing sea, the clamour of the throbbing stones, the pattering of the falling rain, and the songs of the twittering birds, and understands their lofty glorifications, the universe becomes a vast orchestra for him. It arouses in his heart an elevated sorrow and excites passion in his spirit. He feels sad on recalling his friends and companions, but it is a pleasurable sadness at their absence. It is not that he has no friends, so is distraught.
But when the ear is blocked up by disbelief, it becomes deaf to these delightful sounds and it hears nothing from the universe except cries of mourning and the lamentations of death. This arouses in the heart the pathetic sorrow of the orphan; that is, the lack of friends; and the desolation of alienation; that is, being without owner or guardian.
It is for this reason that the Shari‘a deems lawful such sounds as excite an elevated love and the sorrow of love, and it declares unlawful any that inflame the carnal appetites and produce the sorrow of the orphan. Any the Shari‘a does not specify for you, judge for yourself according to the effect they have on your spirit and conscience.
The phrase and on their eyes is a veil (wa ‘alā abṣārihim ghishāwatun) alludes to the loss of a huge bounty in consequence of their unbelief. For when the eye is illuminated with the light of belief dwelling behind its pupil, the light assists and impels it, and the whole universe becomes a garden for it bedecked with flowers and houris. The eye’s pupil becomes a bee, flying hither and thither gathering from the blooms the juices of reflection, thought, familiarity, friendliness, love, and felicitation. It takes up its load, which in the conscience is transformed into the honey of perfections.
But if, God forbid!, the eye becomes dimmed and lustreless through disbelief, the world becomes a prison in its view, its truths are hidden from it, and the universe becomes a wasteland, causing such pain to the heart that it overwhelms the conscience completely.
Moreover, with the phrase great is the penalty they incur (wa la‑hum ‘adhābun ‘aẓīm) it indicates a fruit of the Zaqqum tree of unbelief in the next world, which is the torment of Hell and the terrible punishment of divine wrath.
While they will not believe (lā yu’minūn) corroborates the same (sawā’un), explicating the manner of the sameness.