Tafsir of Al-Qari`ah 101:7

The well-known interpretation is that this is of the category of relational adjectives (al-nisbah), meaning a life that possesses satisfaction. It is also permitted that radiyah (satisfying) is in the sense of a passive participle (maf‘ul), meaning "satisfactory," based on figurative usage within the word itself, or that the attribution (isnad) is figurative, whereas in reality, it belongs to the one who experiences the life. Furthermore, it is permitted that the discourse contains a metaphorical or imaginative construction (isti‘arah makniyyah wa takhyiliyyah) according to what has been established in the books of rhetoric.

However, some eminent scholars have offered a profound psychological analysis here, which is: what is intended for relation (nisbah) usually denotes "possessor of such-and-such," and thus it should not be feminized because it does not flow from a qualified noun (mawsuf), being instead grouped with the rigid nouns (al-jawamid). It is narrated from al-Sirafi that he said this undermines what they provided as a reason for the omission of the ha in ‘ishatin radiyah.

There are two perspectives regarding this: The first is that it is in the sense that the life is "satisfying" to its people, meaning it adheres to them and they are satisfied with it. The second is that the ha is for intensification, like in ‘allamah (very knowledgeable) or rawiyyah (expert narrator). It has been suggested that the ha was necessary so that the ya would not be dropped, which would disturb the structure of the word, similar to naqatin mishlat (a she-camel that raises its tail) or kalbatin mujriyat (a bitch that is in heat). They say zabyat mutfil (a gazelle with a fawn) and mushdan (a gazelle that has borne a fawn), and the category of muf‘al and mif‘al is not typically feminized, yet they have added the ha to some of it, such as musakkah (a blow).

The analysis concludes: This is worthy of acceptance, and its essence is answered in several ways:

1. That radiyah here is not of the category of relational adjectives, but is an active participle intended for its necessary meaning; for whoever wills something and is satisfied with it remains with it, thus it is a loose metaphor (majaz mursal) or a metaphor (isti‘arah). It is also permissible that it is a metaphor in attribution, and what was mentioned is an explanation of its meaning.
2. That the ha is for intensification and is not restricted to fa‘‘al, which is why he also cited rawiyyah as an example.
3. That it is permissible to attach the ha to a defective verb (al-mu‘tall) to preserve the structure, and musakkah is either anomalous or due to the assimilated verb (al-muda‘af) resembling the defective verb.

Store this well, for it is precious and absent from most books.