Tafsir of Al-Isra 17:57

(They seek): They strive earnestly for themselves.

(Unto their Lord): The Owner of their affair.

(The means): The proximity through obedience and worship. The pronoun in "they call upon" (yad‘ūn) refers to the polytheists, and the pronoun in "they seek" (yabtaghūn) refers to those referred to [the deities]. Ibn Furak said: Both pronouns refer to those referred to, and the intended meaning is the prophets who were worshipped besides Allah Almighty. The object of "they call upon" is omitted, meaning: they call people to the truth, or they call upon Allah, the Exalted, and implore Him, the Glorified and Majestic. According to this, it is not uniquely determined that those intended are the prophets, peace be upon them, as is not hidden, and it is as you see.

Ibn Mas’ud and Qatadah recited (tad‘ūn) with the ta as the third letter. Zayd ibn ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with both, recited (yud‘awn) with the ya as the last letter, in the passive voice. Ibn Mas’ud, may Allah be pleased with him, recited (ilā rabbika) with the kaf of address. The demonstrative pronoun is the subject, the relative clause is an adjective or an explanation, and the predicate is the sentence "(they) seek," or the relative clause is the predicate and "(they) seek" is a circumstantial state (ḥāl) or a substitute for the relative pronoun.

As for His saying, the Exalted: (Which of them is nearest), there are several ways of parsing it grammatically:

1. Al-Zamakhshari mentioned two views. The first is that "which" (ayyu) is a relative pronoun, a substitute for the pronoun in "(they) seek"—a partial-for-whole substitution. It is either indeclinable or declinable according to the differing opinions. Meaning: Which of those worshipped seeks for himself—whoever is nearer among them—the means to Allah Almighty through His obedience? So how much more so for the one who is further? It contains nothing but the omission of the head of the relative clause, and the estimation is "which of them is nearest [to Him]." This is something that is acceptable and does not contradict the plural "they hope and they fear" later on, as what was mentioned is not exclusive to the "nearest," or because the "nearest" might be multiple.

2. That "which" (ayyu) is interrogative, and it is the subject, while "nearest" is its predicate. The sentence is in the position of the accusative for the verb "they seek," which implies the meaning of "they are eager" (yaḥriṣūn). It is as if it were said: "They are eager [to know] which of them would be nearest to Allah Almighty," and that is through obedience and an increase in goodness and righteousness. It is said: Inclusion (taḍmīn) was considered to make the dependency (ta‘līq) valid, as it is specific to verbs of the heart, contrary to the opinion of Yunus.

Al-Tayyib said: It is necessary to assume a preposition, because "eagerness" (ḥirṣ) takes the preposition ‘alā (upon), as in His saying, the Exalted: "If you are eager for their guidance." And it is necessary to interpret the construction by saying: They are eager for that which is said about it: "Which of them is nearest to Allah Almighty because of it," namely, obedience. Then, His saying, the Exalted: "(To) their Lord," attaches to "nearest." And this is as you see.

The author of al-Kashshaf said in verifying this view: If the demands are shared, it necessitates rushing toward them by custom, and this is the very essence of eagerness, or that which is inseparable from it. Thus, it is appropriate for the seeking to include the meaning of eagerness, especially since an interrogation follows it, which would not be well-placed without that inclusion. For your saying, "Which of them is nearer to so-and-so through such-and-such," is a question about what distinguishes one of them from the rest by way of something through which one draws near, adding excellence despite equality in the essence of drawing near. When this appears as an initiation after a verb that is suitable for it to be its object, its estimation becomes necessary. For if you say, "They are eager for guidance," it is speech running according to the apparent meaning; but if you say, "They are eager [to know] which of them is more guided," it conveys that their eagerness for guidance is combined with them competing with one another in it, so it is more complete in describing their eagerness for it.

The aspect of this conveying [meaning] is its being followed by way of explanation, as if each one asks himself: "Am I more guided or someone else?" meaning, "Am I more eager for it or someone else?" since there is no meaning to this question about oneself except for knowing whether there is a shortcoming in that or not. Accordingly, if you said, "They are eager for guidance, which of you is more guided," it would be considered rejected, because the initiation fills the place of its connection... If Allah had willed, they would have believed... and he wished that he had done good... and so on. Thus, the seeking falls upon the means—which is obedience—and the eagerness for proximity through it and increasing in it. It is not possible to dispense with "they are eager" by treating "which of them is nearest" as the explanation for "they seek," according to what was pointed out, because "which of them is nearest" is not suitable as an answer that distinguishes between the seekers and others; it is only a differentiator among the seekers—that is, the ones drawing near—some to others. This suits eagerness and passion, and because the object of seeking—that is, the means—is mentioned, and you have known that the initiation suffices for that, and the combination is rejected.

I swear by my life, there is no room left for further refinement in its verification, but the view, despite this, is artificial.

Al-Ḥūfī and Al-Zajjāj permitted that "which of them is nearest" be a subject and predicate, and the sentence is in the position of an accusative governed by "they look," meaning: they think, "Which of them is nearest," then they use him as a means. It is as if the intention is that they use his supplication as a means; otherwise, using essences as a means is what it is. This was countered in al-Baḥr by stating that there is a consideration in omitting the verb that is conditioned. Despite this, it is a view that is not apparent. Abu al-Baqa permitted that "which of them is nearest" be an interrogative sentence in the position of an accusative governed by "they call upon," and that "which" be a relative pronoun, a substitute for the pronoun in "they call upon." The first was countered by saying it involves conditioning what is not a verb of the heart, and the majority forbid it. As for the second, Abu Hayyan said: It involves separation between the relative clause and its modifier by the circumstantial sentence, but it does not harm because it is modified by the relative clause. When you look at the meaning according to this, you will not be satisfied with attributing this [interpretation] to the verse.

His saying, the Exalted: (And they hope) is conjoined to "they seek," meaning: they seek proximity through worship and expect His mercy, the Exalted, (and they fear His punishment) as is the habit of all worshippers. So where are they [the deities] from the Owner of removing harm, let alone being gods?

(Indeed, the punishment of your Lord is ever to be avoided): Worthy of being avoided and guarded against by everyone, from the angels, the messengers, peace be upon them, and others. The sentence is an explanation for His saying, the Exalted: "(and) they fear His punishment." In specifically linking it with the explanation, there is an increase in warning the disbelievers against the punishment. The mention of hope is placed before fear because its object precedes its [fear's] object; in the Hadith Qudsi: "My mercy has preceded My wrath." In the unity of the styles of the two sentences is an indication of the equality of the hope of those who seek the means to Him, the Exalted, through obedience and worship, and their fear. Scholars have mentioned that the believer should have this, provided death has not approached him; when death approaches, he should let his hope outweigh his fear. The verse is evidence that hoping for mercy and fearing punishment are among those things that do not conflict with the perfection of the worshipper. It is famously related from some worshippers that he said: "I do not worship Allah, the Exalted, hoping for His paradise nor fearing His fire." People are divided between those who criticize the one who says this and those who praise him. The truth is a differentiation: he who says it to demonstrate self-sufficiency from the grace and mercy of Allah, the Exalted, is mistaken and a disbeliever. He who says it out of the belief that Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, is worthy of worship for His own essence—even if there were no paradise or fire, He would still be worthy of being worshipped—is a realized gnostic, as is not hidden.