Al-Tafsīr al-Qayyim - Ibn al-Qayyim - (623)

Al-Tafsīr al-QayyimIbn al-Qayyim

Another parallel is his statement concerning ‘Alī, Fātimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn—may Allah be pleased with them all:

“O Allah, these are the members of my household.”

This does not exclude other members of his household from that designation. Rather, these have the greatest claim to inclusion in it.

Another parallel is his statement:

“The needy person is not the one who goes around begging and is turned away with a morsel or two, or a date or two. Rather, the needy person is one who asks people for nothing and whose plight goes unnoticed, so that he receives no charity.”

This does not deny that the person who goes around begging is needy. Rather, it denies that the designation applies exclusively to him. Indeed, someone who does not beg has a greater claim to being called needy than someone who does.

Another parallel is his statement:

“The strong man is not the one who overpowers others in wrestling, but the one who controls himself when angry.”

This does not mean that someone who overpowers other men cannot be called strong. Rather, it means that someone who controls himself when angry has a greater claim to that description.

The same applies to darkness, its settling, and similar expressions. Thus, his statement about the moon:

“This is the darkness when it settles,”

does not deny that night is darkness; rather, both are.

If it is asked: What do you say about the view held by some that this refers to the moon when it is eclipsed and turns dark, and that “when it settles” means that it enters an eclipse or disappears while eclipsed?

The answer is: This view is weak, and we know of no early authority who held it. When the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) pointed to the moon and said, “This is the darkness when it settles,” it was not eclipsed at that time. Rather, it was shining. Had it been eclipsed, ‘Ā’ishah would have mentioned that. She merely said: “He looked at the moon and said, ‘This is the darkness.’”

Had it been eclipsed, it would not have been correct to omit that description from the account. For if something is called “the darkness” because of a particular quality, it cannot be given that designation without that quality, as this would be misleading.

Moreover, the language does not support this interpretation. We know of no one who has said that “the darkness” means:

ونظيره أيضا: قوله في على وفاطمة والحسن والحسين ﵃ أجمعين «اللهم هؤلاء أهل بيتي» فإن هذا لا ينفي دخول غيرهم من أهل بيته في لفظ أهل البيت، ولكن هؤلاء أحق من دخول في لفظ أهل بيته. ونظير هذا: قوله: «ليس المسكين بهذا الطواف الذي ترده اللقمة واللقمتان، والتمرة والتمرتان، ولكن المسكين الذي لا يسأل الناس شيئا، ولا يعطن له فيتصدّق عليه» وهذا لا ينفي اسم المسكنة عن الطواف، بل ينفي اختصاص الاسم به، وتناول المسكين لغير السائل أولى من تناوله له. ونظير هذا: قوله: «ليس الشديد بالصّرعة، ولكن الذي يملك نفسه عند الغضب» فإنه لا يقتضي نفي الاسم عن الذي يصرع الرجال، ولكن يقتضي أن ثبوته للذي يملك نفسه عند الغضب أولى. ونظيره: الغسق، والوقوب، وأمثال ذلك. فكذلك قوله في القمر «هذا هو الغاسق إذا وقب» لا ينفي أن يكون الليل غاسقا، بل كلاهما غاسق. فإن قيل: فما تقولون في القول الذي ذهب إليه بعضهم: أن المراد به القمر إذا خسف واسودّ. وقوله: «وقب» أي دخل في الخسوف، أو غاب خاسفا؟. قيل: هذا القول ضعيف. ولا نعلم به سلفا. والنبي ﷺ لما أشار إلى القمر، وقال: «هذا الغاسق إذا وقب» لم يكن خاسفا إذ ذاك. وإنما كان مستنيرا، ولو كان خاسفا لذكرته عائشة. وإنما قالت «نظر إلى القمر، وقال: «هذا هو الغاسق» ولو كان خاسفا لم يصح أن يحذف ذلك الوصف منه. فإن ما أطلق عليه اسم الغاسق باعتبار صفة لا يجوز أن يطلق عليه بدونها، لما فيه من التلبيس. وأيضا: فإن اللغة لا تساعد على هذا. فلا نعلم أحدا قال: الغاسق: