Tafsir of Hud 11:78

(And his people came to him rushing towards him). That is, Lot (peace be upon him) while he was in his house with his guests. Abu Ubaidah said: Meaning they were urging one another, as if each was urging the other, or their leader was urging them and driving them on out of greed for the indecency. The general public reads it in the passive voice, while a group read (yuhra'una) with a fatha on the ya, in the active voice from har'a. Its root is from al-har' (blood flowing intensely, as if parts of it are pushing others). It is said "ahra'a al-qawm" when they rush. Some interpreted ihra' as walking between trotting and running. Ibn Abbas was asked about what is in the verse, and he said: "The meaning is that they came to him in anger." Then he recited the poetry of Muhalhil: "They came rushing while they were captives, driven forward despite their noses." In another narration from him, he interpreted it as "they were hurrying," which is an explanation of the intended meaning that holds true for both readings.

The clause (yuhra'una) is in the position of a state (hal) from "his people," meaning: they came rushing to him. It is reported that when Lot brought his guests, no one knew except his household. His wife went out until she reached the gatherings of her people and said: "Lot has hosted a group tonight, the likes of whose beauty has never been seen." Then they came rushing to him.

(And from before), that is, before the time of their arrival—some say, before Lot sent a messenger to them—(they used to commit evils). It is said the intended meaning is the evil of committing sodomy with males, though it is pluralized in consideration of its repetition or its perpetrators. It is also said that it covers that as well as having intercourse with women in their anuses, clapping, whistling, playing with pigeons, gambling, mocking people, and other such acts. The mention of their committing evils from before is intended to show that they were accustomed to indecency, hence they felt no shame; thus, they hastened to seek indecency from his guests openly, not caring. The sentence is parenthetical to emphasize what preceded it. Some say it is an explanation of the reason for his distress, given what he knew of their habits. The Shaykh al-Islam placed it in the position of a hal like the one preceding it, meaning: they came rushing while they were engrossed in committing evils.

(He said, "O my people, these are my daughters, they are purer for you"). So marry them. They used to seek them before, and he would not grant them access due to their wickedness and lack of worthiness, not because the marriage of believing women to disbelievers was not permissible, as it was permissible then. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) married his daughter Zaynab to Abu al-'As ibn al-Rabi', and his daughter Ruqayyah to Utbah ibn Abi Lahab before the revelation; both were disbelievers. However, Utbah did not consummate the marriage and separated from her at his father's request when "May the hands of Abu Lahab be ruined" was revealed; then Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him) married her. Abu al-'As had consummated the marriage, but when he was taken prisoner at Badr and ransomed himself, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) took a covenant from him that he would return her if he returned. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) sent Zayd ibn Harithah and a man from the Ansar to retrieve her, and they brought her back. Later, he accepted Islam and came to Medina, and the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) returned her to him with a new marriage contract or without one, according to the difference of opinion.

Al-Hasan ibn al-Fadl said: He (peace be upon him) offered his daughters to them on the condition of Islam; al-Zajjaj held this view, and it is based on the premise that the marriage of Muslim women to disbelievers was not permissible at that time. It is said they had two masters who were obeyed, so he wanted to marry them to his two daughters, and he had no others. The name of one, according to some narrations, was Za'wa' and the other was Zita'. It is also said he had three daughters—al-Hakim recorded this and authenticated it from Ibn Abbas, and the apparent plural form supports this, even if it is used for two. Regardless, by this, he (peace be upon him) intended to protect his guest, which is the pinnacle of hospitality. Therefore, it should not be said: "How is it fitting for him (peace be upon him) to offer his daughters to his enemies to marry them?"

Indeed, the offering of his daughters has been deemed problematic, based on the view that there were only two of them, as is well known, or three, as has been said, offered to those rushing toward them to marry them, while they were more numerous. It is not permissible to claim the legality of a group marrying fewer than them at one time. Hence, some major exegetes said: This statement from him (peace be upon him) was not intended as a reality of seeking marriage, but rather it was an exaggeration in humility toward them and a display of his intense indignation at what they brought upon him, hoping that if they heard this, they would feel shame and soften toward him, thus leaving his guests alone, given that the matter was apparent and the knowledge was settled—and among them, there is no marriage between him and them. This is more appropriate for their reply that follows.

Abu al-Shaykh recorded from Ibn Abbas, and Ibn Abi Hatim from Ibn Jubayr and Mujahid, and Ibn Abi al-Dunya and Ibn 'Asakir from al-Saddi, that the meaning of "his daughters" is the women of his nation, and the reference "these" is to bring them into the status of those present before him. He attributed them to himself because every prophet is a father to his nation. In the reading of Ibn Mas'ud (may Allah be pleased with him): "The Prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves, and he is a father to them, and his wives are their mothers." Ubayy (may Allah be pleased with him) read the same, but he placed "and his wives are their mothers" before "and he is a father to them."

By saying "(They are purer for you)," he (peace be upon him) meant cleaner in act, or less indecent—like saying "carrion is better/purer than that which is brought under wrath." Purity on the first reading refers to sensory purity—being pure from the filth and wickedness inherent in sodomy—and on the second, it refers to moral purity, which is being exempt from indecency and sin. The superlative form (af'al) here is metaphorical. The apparent reading is that "these are my daughters" is a subject and predicate, as is "(they are purer for you)." Abu al-Baqa' allowed "my daughters" to be a substitute or appositive, with "they" (hunna) as a pronoun of separation, and "purer" as the predicate. Another view is that "they" (hunna) is a second subject and "purer" is its predicate, and the sentence is the predicate of "these."

Al-Hasan, Zayd ibn 'Ali, 'Isa al-Thaqafi, Sa'id ibn Jubayr, and al-Saddi read "(purer)" (athar) in the accusative case. Its basis was hidden, to the point that 'Amr ibn al-'Ala' said: "Whoever reads (purer) in the accusative has sat squarely in his grammatical error." This is because its accusative state would be as a hal (state), operated upon by the pointing or alerting force in "these," or that "these" is in the accusative by an implied verb—as if to say "Take these," and "my daughters" is a substitute, and this implied verb operates on the hal. In both scenarios, "they" (hunna) is a pronoun of separation. This is not permissible because separation only occurs between the predicate and the subject, not between the state and its owner. This is what is reported from Sibawayh. Al-Akhfash differed in this and permitted the pronoun of separation to come between the state and its owner, saying: "Zayd came, he was laughing." He cited this verse under this reading as an example. It is also said to occur as an anomaly, as in their saying: "My most eating of the apple is [when] it is ripe." Those who forbid this explain it as an implied "was" (kana). The noble verse, assuming "they" (hunna) is the subject and "for you" is the predicate, would have "purer" as a state of the pronoun in the predicate. This was objected to on the grounds that it involves placing the hal before its operative prepositional phrase, and the majority forbid this. Or [it is parsed] such that "these" is the subject, "my daughters they [are]" is a sentence in the position of the predicate, like saying "This is my brother, he [is]," and "purer" is a hal. This is reported from al-Mubarrad and Ibn Jinni.

It was criticized for lacking meaningful depth, and it was defended that the intended meaning is the hal, as in your saying: "This is your father, [being] affectionate." It was claimed in al-Kashshaf that the best approach is to estimate "Take these, [they are] purer for you," and his saying "my daughters they [are]" is a parenthetical sentence as a justification for the command. They were presented for emphasis; as if it were said: "Take these chaste ones, [they are] purer for you, if my daughters they are, and you know my purity and the purity of my daughters." It is also permissible to say that "they" (hunna) is an emphasis for the hidden pronoun in "my daughters" because it is a derivative description, especially according to the Kufan school. So understand this and do not be heedless.

(So fear Allah) by abandoning indecencies or by preferring them over them, (and do not disgrace me regarding my guests). That is, do not scandalize me regarding them, for disgracing a man's guest is a disgrace to him, or do not shame me regarding them. The verbal noun for the first is al-khizy, and for the second, al-khazayah. The root meaning of khizy is the occurrence of humiliation, whether from within—which is extreme shyness—or from another, which is belittling and exposure. "Guest" (dayf) is a collective noun; hence, when it is described with a dual or plural, it does not match according to the famous rule, though "guests" (duyuf, adyaf, dayfan) are heard. "(Do not)" is prohibitive, and the verb is jussive by the omission of the nun (in takhzunani), and the remaining nun is the nun of protection, while the ya is omitted due to the kasra. It has been read with its inclusion according to the original. (Is there not among you a righteous man?) Who is guided to clear truth and refrains from ugly falsehood. Abu al-Shaykh recorded from Ibn Abbas that he said: "Who commands good or forbids evil." It is either in the meaning of "possessing righteousness" or "a guide," like hakim (wise) in the meaning of muhkam (firm/decisive). The interrogation is for wonderment, and carrying it to its literal meaning does not suit the context.