Surah Al-Baqarah, Ayah 258, by elucidating the debate of Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him) with Nimrod, represents a prominent example of the best discourse (Jidal al-Ahsan) in the Holy Quran, wherein the logic of monotheism is demonstrated against the false claim of lordship. This verse narrates a profound and meaningful dialogue in which Abraham (peace be upon him), employing logic and wisdom, challenges Nimrods deceitfulness and egocentrism. The purpose of this writing is to provide a comprehensive analysis of this ayah from logical, theological, rhetorical, and sociological perspectives, relying on Quranic principles to examine dialogue strategies, critique the misuse of the concept of divinity, and clarify various types of theism. This analysis, structured systematically and articulated in an elegant language, is designed for specialised audiences and research environments, exploring all dimensions of the verse in detail.
أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِي حَاجَّ إِبْرَاهِيمَ فِي رَبِّهِ أَنْ آتَاهُ اللَّهُ الْمُلْكَ إِذْ قَالَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ رَبِّيَ الَّذِي يُحْيِي وَيُمِيتُ قَالَ أَنَا أُحْيِي وَأُمِيتُ ۖ قَالَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ يَأْتِي بِالشَّمْسِ مِنَ الْمَشْرِقِ فَأْتِ بِهَا مِنَ الْمَغْرِبِ فَبُهِتَ الَّذِي كَفَرَ ۚ وَاللَّهُ لَا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ
Translation: Have you not seen the one who disputed with Abraham concerning his Lord, because Allah had granted him kingship? When Abraham said, "My Lord is He who gives life and causes death," he said, "I also give life and cause death." Abraham said, "Indeed, Allah brings the sun from the east; so bring it from the west." Then the one who disbelieved was utterly confounded. And Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people.
Surah Al-Baqarah, Ayah 258, with its rhetorical and logical structure, portrays a dynamic dialogue between Abraham (peace be upon him) and Nimrod. The use of the particle an instead of qla in the phrase an thu Allhu al-mulk employs the third-person narrative voice and indirectly reports Nimrods speech. This structure manifests the Qurans literary subtlety in depicting a debate where disbelief and monotheism confront each other face to face. The adjective alladh kafara placed before the noun it qualifies emphasises Nimrods disbelief prior to his bewilderment, which itself reflects the eloquence of the Quran in clarifying the precedence of disbelief over astonishment.
In logic and philosophy, discourse is divided into four categories: rhetorical, popular, demonstrative, and dialectical. Rhetorical speech targets the masses and aims to persuade the general public. Popular discourse is based on societal beliefs and commonly accepted notions. Demonstrative speech relies on intrinsic and objective principles that conform to reality and is suitable for scholars and insightful individuals. Dialectical discourse seeks to silence (scat) the opponent, even if the content does not necessarily align with absolute truth.
Demonstrative speech, known in the Quran as wisdom, is emphasised in the verse, Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom (An-Nahl: 125). This type of discourse is designed for scholars and people of insight, based on logical reasoning and conformity with reality. Nonetheless, this method is ineffective for those who are not accustomed to reasoning.
Good admonition, also mentioned in the same verse, and good exhortation (An-Nahl: 125), is appropriate for the believers and the pious. This method influences the heart and conscience, aiding spiritual training and strengthening faith. Good admonition employs a gentle and impactful language aiming to guide believers towards piety and devotion.
The best discourse, recommended in the verse, and argue with them in a way that is best (An-Nahl: 125), is a method for dialogue with non-believers and those unfamiliar with reasoning. The goal of this discourse is to silence the opponent through arguments acceptable to them, without requiring absolute logical correctness. Unlike contentious debate (jidal mukbara) which leads to quarrel, disrespect, and insult, the best discourse is a conventional and ethical approach, religiously permissible and commendable.
Contentious debate, prevalent in contemporary media and public discourse, is religiously forbidden and unethical due to its reliance on quarrels, disrespect, and insults. Such discourse, frequently observed in newspapers and magazines, causes moral decline in public debate and contradicts the spirit of the Holy Quran. The Quran, by emphasising wisdom, good admonition, and the best discourse, provides an exalted model for civilized dialogue.
The Holy Quran, by offering three types of discoursewisdom, good admonition, and the best discourseprovides a comprehensive framework to guide various audiences. Wisdom is for scholars, admonition for believers, and the best discourse for opponents. This diversity illustrates the Qurans comprehensiveness in addressing human needs. The critique of contentious debate underscores the necessity of returning to Quranic discourse in the contemporary era.
Nimrod, as a symbol of tyranny and egocentrism, is a powerful, wealthy, and domineering individual who asserts control over others through force and wealth. By claiming that Allah had granted him kingship, he presents himself as possessing divine legitimacy, whereas his rule is based on coercion and compulsion, not divine gift.
Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him), in confronting Nimrod, aims to silence him rather than provide logical proof. Realising that Nimrod is neither receptive to reasoning nor admonition, he employs the best discourse. This strategy, avoiding quarrel and disrespect, focuses on silencing Nimrod through arguments that ensnare him in contradiction.
Nimrod initiates the debate by claiming that Allah had granted him kingship (an thu Allhu al-mulk). This claim is an attempt to legitimise his sovereignty by misappropriating the concept of divinity. He presents himself as a lord by saying, I give life and cause death, asserting a power equivalent to God.
Abraham (peace be upon him), with humility and without personal claims, states: My Lord is He who gives life and causes death. This response challenges Nimrods claim by referring to divine lordship. When Nimrod responds fallaciously, I also give life and cause death, Abraham changes his strategy by directing the argument to Allah: Indeed, Allah brings the sun from the east; so bring it from the west.
Nimrod becomes utterly confounded (fabuhita alladh kafara), as he cannot bring the sun from the west. Although logically inaccuratesince the natural order does not permit such an eventthe question is effective in debate because it uses Nimrods apparent acceptance of Allah against him. If Nimrod denies Allah, his claim of divine kingship collapses; if he accepts, his incapacity before Allah is exposed.
Nimrods assertion that Allah had granted him kingship is logically refutable on two grounds. First, divine kingship is bestowed only upon prophets and Imams, not despotic rulers. Second, tyrannical reigns rest on coercion and force, not divine favour. The verse Thus do We give some of the wrongdoers power over others (Al-Anm: 129) denotes a dominion of oppressors over each other rather than divine gifting. Likewise, And He made you successors (Al-Midah: 20) is a general statement without specific reference to any individual.
The debate between Abraham and Nimrod exemplifies the best discourse, revealing Nimrods deceit while avoiding quarrel. Abrahams strategy, exploiting Nimrods apparent acceptance of Allah, trapped him in contradiction and showcased the triumph of monotheism. This section highlights the importance of ethics and prudence in discourse against tyranny and egocentrism.
Throughout history, rulers have used God as a tool to legitimise their power. By claiming divine representation, they portrayed themselves as Gods