A Clarification Regarding a Verse of the Qur’an (Aal Imraan 3: 110)

I would like for you to review the following and comment on its grammatical significance if any:

In the Qur’an the conjunctions "In" and "Lauw" are both translated as "If"; however, a clear distinction is that "Lauw" is used to introduce a hypothetical situation whereas "In" is not used this way. In Surah 3:110,
Allah uses "Lauw" to introduce the statement "...If only the People of the Book had faith, it were best for them...." What, if anything, is the implication of "Lauw" used here and not "In"?

Could you comment on the stress, style and grammatical usage in this Ayah.

I will await your response.

Islamically Yours

Raqueeb

Reply

It would not be very accurate to say that a conditional statement beginning with “lauw” is “used to introduce a hypothetical situation”. A more accurate distinction between the conditional statements that begin with “in” and “lauw” respectively, as is also mentioned by Ibn Hashaam in his book “Al-Mughnee”, is that the former literally refers to the future while the latter to the past.

For instance, consider the following two conditional statements:

1. in je’tanee ghadan, akramtuka

2. lauw je’tanee amsi, akramtuka

The two statements should literally be translated as follows respectively:

1. If you come to me tomorrow, I shall honor you.

2. Had you come to me yesterday, I would have honored you.

I hope the above example would have clarified the connotation and implication of the conditional statements that begin with “in” and “lauw” respectively.

Keeping the above explanation in perspective, let us now consider the implication of the referred verse. A more accurate translation of the referred verse, in the light of the above explanation should be:

“Had the people of the book believed, it would have been better for them. Among them are [true] believers but most of them are disobedient.”

This should clarify the grammatical usage of the verse. As far as the stress and the style is concerned, the conditional statement in the past tense has induced an element of remorse and sorrow in the statement and has thus induced an element of emotion in it. Had the statement been in the future tense, it would only have been a statement of fact. To appreciate this style, consider the aforementioned example again. “I shall honor you, if you visit me tomorrow” is a statement of fact with an element of stimulation and prompting. That is, the addressee is not only being informed of the plans of the speaker, but [if the context and content of the statement permits] he is also being prompted and stimulated to visit the speaker. On the other hand, the statement: “I would have honored you, had you visited me yesterday”, entails an element of remorse and sorrow on the part of the speaker. In this statement [if the context and content of the statement permits], the speaker is also expressing his sorrow for the addressee’s not visiting him yesterday. In the same manner, the statement of the Qur’an, in my opinion, has an element of remorse and sorrow in it for the lack of submission of the people of the book.

I hope this helps. In case any aspect of my answer remains unclear, please feel free in writing back to me at your own convenience.

May the Almighty guide us all to the path of His liking.

Regards

The Learner