Tafsir of Hud 11:98

His saying, Exalted is He: "He shall precede his people on the Day of Resurrection and lead them into the Fire."

According to the first [opinion regarding the previous context], this is a resumption occurring as an answer to whoever asks about the condition of the follower and the followed. According to the second, it is an interpretation and clarification of why his outcome is not righteous; that is, how can the affair of one whose outcome is this be guided correctly?

The sentence "And the command"—to the end of the verse—may be a circumstantial qualifier (hal) for the subject of "they followed," or it may be a circumstantial qualifier for its object. It has been said—and this is the choice of Al-Zamakhshari—that the intended meaning of "his people" includes the elite and others.

"He shall precede" (yaqdum) is conjugated like yansur, from qadama (to go before/advance), from which qadimatu al-rahl (the front part of the saddle) is derived. Similar to this is the expression qadamahu meaning taqaddamahu (he preceded him), from which muqaddimatu al-jaysh (the vanguard of the army) is derived. Aqdam also means to advance, as in muqaddam al-'ayn (the front of the eye)—which is exclusively with a kasra, as Al-Marzuqi stated—and likewise mu'akhkhar al-'ayn, as mentioned in al-Muzhir.

The intended meaning of "lead them" (fa-awradahum) is yuriduhum (he will lead them); the expression in the past tense is used to signify the certainty of its occurrence inevitably. The statement that it remains in its literal sense, implying that he led them into the Fire in this world—meaning that which causes it, which is disbelief—is of no account.

The word "Fire" (al-nar) is in the accusative case as the second object of awrada. It is a metaphorical, sarcastic allusion to its opposite, which is water. There are possibilities regarding its auxiliary, as is common in "they break the covenant of God." Upon the possibility of figurative speech, the act of "leading" (al-irad) is a consequential metaphor for driving them to the Fire. It is also permissible to say that he likened Pharaoh to a farit (one who goes ahead of a people to find water), containing a concealed metaphor; the depiction of his followers as the ones being led, and the affirmation of this leading for them, is a work of imagination. It is also permissible to treat the whole construct as a representation (tamthil). Some have permitted that yaqdum and awrada compete for the object "Fire," though the second is put into action and the object of the first is omitted, but this is not acceptable.

"And evil is the place to which they are led."

That is, evil is the place to which they are led, which is the Fire, because "the place of arrival" (al-wird) is only approached to quench thirst and cool the livers, whereas in the Fire, livers are severed and inflamed. Thus it is said, and the word wird in this context means a portion of water, and "the one led to" (al-mawrud) is its descriptor. The specific object of condemnation is omitted, which is the Fire.

This has been challenged by the argument that the agent of "evil" (bi'sa) and its specific object must correspond, and here they do not correspond. Furthermore, there is disagreement regarding the permissibility of describing the agent of ni'ma and bi'sa; Ibn al-Sarraj and Al-Farisi held it to be impermissible.

Ibn Atiyyah allowed for "the one led to" (al-mawrud) to be the descriptor, and the specific object to be the Fire, except that he posited the speech relies on the omission of a genitive noun (mudaf) with the genitive adjunct (mudaf ilayh) standing in its place. Thus, the correspondence is achieved in reality; that is, "Evil is the place of arrival, and the place led to is the Fire."

Others hold that "the one led to" is the specific object of condemnation, intended to be the Fire, and they hypothesize a genitive noun to achieve correspondence, meaning "Evil is the place of arrival, the Fire." Those who make wird (the arrival) the agent of bi'sa and interpret it as the collective of those arriving, and mawrud as their descriptor, consider the specific object of condemnation to be their omitted pronoun; that is, "Evil is the group led, which is them." This would be a condemnation of those arriving, not of the place of arrival.