Tafsir of Al-Masad 111:5

The phrase "in her neck is a rope of twisted fiber" consists of a prepositional phrase acting as a predicate (khabar muqaddam) and a noun acting as a delayed subject (mubtada’ mu’akhkhar), occupying the position of a state (hal). It may be a state relating to the pronoun in "the carrier" (hammalatan), or to his wife—which is conjoined to that pronoun—or the prepositional phrase itself may be a state relating to her. The word "rope" (habl) is nominative because it is the subject. It is also said that "rope" is the predicate for "his wife," while "his wife" is the initial subject (and not conjoined to the pronoun), with "rope" being the subject [in a passive sense].

Regarding the reading of hammalatan in the nominative case (raf’), some say "his wife" is the subject and "carrier" is the predicate, while "in her neck is a rope" is a second predicate, or a state relating to the pronoun of "carrier," or the prepositional phrase is a state as well, with "rope" being the subject. Or, "his wife" is conjoined to the pronoun, and "carrier" is the predicate of an omitted subject—meaning: "she is a carrier"—and what follows is a second predicate or a state relating to the pronoun of "carrier," similar to what has passed. There are other aspects of parsing in this construction which will be mentioned, God willing. Some of what we have mentioned here is not consistent across all interpretations of the verse’s meaning, as is not hidden upon the contemplation of the observer.

Al-Masad is that which has been musad, meaning: twisted strongly from palm fiber, as Abu al-Fath stated. Or from any fiber, as has been said. It is also said to be from the bark of a tree in Yemen called al-masad; this is narrated from Ibn Zayd. It may also be, as stated in al-Bahr, from camel hides or their fur. From this is the saying: "A rope of twisted fiber for my camels."

The intent is to portray her in the image of a wood-gatherer who carries a bundle and ties it around her neck to demean her condition and despise her, so that she might be stung by it, and her husband would be stung by it—as they were in a house of glory, honor, and a position of wealth and prominence. Some people once reproached al-Fadl ibn al-Abbas ibn Utbah ibn Abi Lahab for the condition of his wood-gathering, so he said:

What do you intend by my revilement and disparagement? Or what is reproached of the carrier of firewood? A lady of noble lineage, shattering in glory, her splendor is evident. She was the offspring of a sheikh of piercing nobility.

This angered her. It is narrated that when she heard the Surah, she came to Abu Bakr (may God be pleased with him) while he was with the Messenger of God (may God bless him and grant him peace) in the mosque, holding a stone. She said, "Your companion has mocked me, and I will surely do such-and-such. Even if he is a poet, I am like him: I say 'the condemned' (madhmam)—we refuse, and his religion we despise, and his command we disobey."

God Almighty blinded her eyes to the Messenger of God (may God bless him and grant him peace). It is narrated that Abu Bakr said to her, "Do you see anyone with me?" She said, "Are you mocking me? I see no one but you." Abu Bakr fell silent, and she left saying, "Quraysh knows that I am the daughter of its master." The Messenger of God (peace and blessings be upon him) said, "Angels shielded me from her so she did not see me." Thus, God Almighty spared him from her evil.

It is said that this is a projection of the metaphorical, based on considering it in "the carrier of firewood." In al-Kashshaf, it is possible that the meaning is that she will be in the Hellfire in the state she was in when she used to carry a bundle of thorns; so there will always be a bundle of firewood from the Tree of Zaqqum or from al-Dari’ upon her back, and around her neck will be a rope of twisted fire-chains, just as every criminal is punished with that which resembles his state in his crime and transgression. The rope is a metaphor for the chain. This is narrated from Urwah ibn al-Zubayr, Mujahid, and Sufyan.

The matter of parsing, according to what is in al-Kashf, is that if hammalatan is in the accusative case (nasb), it is a state, and the sentence—meaning "in her neck is a rope"—is a state for the one conjoined to the pronoun in "he will burn," meaning: his wife will burn in this state. Or, hammalatan is in the accusative as an expression of blame, and the sentence alone is a state; or "his wife... in her neck is a rope" is a sentence that has occurred as a state for the pronoun. It is also possible that the sentence is conjoined to the [previous] sentence, though this is weak.

If in the nominative case (raf’), it is possible that the sentence is a state, and that "his wife" is conjoined to the subject [of "burn"], and "carrier of firewood, in her neck is a rope" is a sentence with no place in syntax, acting as a clarification of the manner of her burning; meaning: she is a carrier of firewood. This concludes the point, so reflect and do not be heedless.

Across all aspects and possibilities, why did He (Subhanahu) not say "in her nape" ('unuq)? It is known that the nape is mentioned with shackles and the like, where there is humiliation, as God Almighty said: "In their napes are shackles." The jid (neck) is used with jewelry, as in the saying: "Or more beautiful than the jid of a graceful woman, her jewelry."

If He had said "her nape," it would have been weak speech. Al-Rawd al-Unuf states that it is sarcasm, like "Give them tidings of a painful punishment," meaning: she has no neck to be adorned, or if it were adorned, this [rope] would be its jewelry, intended to disparage her. It is said, "His wife" was used, and not "his spouse" (zawjatu-hu), which is very ingenious, although the end of this is contradicted by His saying: "And his wife standing." Perhaps he drew upon the context here, as was said.

It is said from Qatadah that there was a necklace of seashells on her neck; in the same sense, al-Hasan said "of beads." Ibn al-Musayyab said it was a luxurious necklace of jewels, and that she said: "By al-Lat and al-Uzza, I will surely spend it in enmity toward Muhammad (may God bless him and grant him peace)." Perhaps the intent, according to this, is that she will be in the Hellfire wearing a necklace of twisted iron instead of the necklace about which she said "I will surely spend it." According to what precedes it, this is a debasement of her necklace to emphasize the blame for her stinginess, indicated by His saying "carrier of firewood," as we quoted earlier from Qatadah. Other possibilities exist, and the appropriateness of the expression "neck" (jid) for what has been mentioned is not hidden.

Some have claimed that the speech could be a supplication against her that she be strangled with the rope, but this is far from the mind. Indeed, it is mentioned that she died on the day she died strangled by a rope with which she carried a bundle of firewood, but this does not require interpreting what was mentioned as a supplication.

The matter of Abu Lahab's obligation to believe—given the saying of God Almighty "He will burn..."—has been viewed as problematic. For after God informed that he would burn in the Fire, he must necessarily burn, and he would not burn unless he were a disbeliever. Thus, informing of that entails informing that he will never believe. So when was he obligated to believe, and when did the Prophet (may God bless him and grant him peace) come with it? From this, it follows that he was obligated to believe that he would never believe, which is a combination of two contradictions outside the bounds of possibility.

It is answered that what he was obligated to do was to believe in everything the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) brought in general, not to believe in the details of what the Holy Quran uttered, such that it would be necessary for him to be obligated to believe in his own continuous disbelief. A similar answer is given regarding the obligation of the disbelievers mentioned in the saying of God Almighty "Say: O disbelievers..." to believe, based on their designation, while God said "...nor will you be worshippers of what I worship," based on its indication of the continuity of their not worshipping what he (peace and blessings be upon him) worshipped.

Others answered that His saying "He will burn..." is not definitive that he would never believe, for burning in the Fire is not exclusive to disbelievers; it is possible that Abu Lahab understood from it that his entering the Fire was due to his transgression and sins, not due to his disbelief. This does not apply to the response regarding the obligation of those disbelievers, based on their understanding of the Surah as intending continuity.

Others answered that whoever such a thing is mentioned about and comes to know of it is obligated to believe in what is other than it, from what he (peace and blessings be upon him) brought. Al-Ka'bi, Abu al-Husayn al-Basri, and likewise Qadi Abd al-Jabbar answered with other than what was mentioned, which the Imam rejected. It is said regarding this particular verse that the meaning is: "He will burn in a Fire of flame, and he will abide in it if he dies and does not believe." Thus, it is not a definitive proof that he would never believe. What pertains to these answers and the objections to them should be sought in the extensive works of Usul and Theology.

His saying "And his wife" is used as evidence for the validity of the marriages of disbelievers. And God Almighty knows best.