Tafsir of Al-Kahf 18:101

"Those whose eyes" — while they were in the world — "were under a cover" — a dense and thick veil, surrounded by it on all sides — "from My remembrance," meaning from the signs that lead those endowed with insight, who contemplate them, to My remembrance through monotheism and glorification. Thus, "remembrance" is a metaphor for the aforementioned signs, based on the principle of mentioning the effect and intending the cause. The implication is that whoever does not observe with a gaze that leads him to the remembrance of exaltation is as if he had no gaze at all; this is the benefit of the metaphorical usage.

It is said: The discourse contains the omission of an added word, meaning "from the signs of My remembrance," but this is not strong. It is possible that what is meant by "eyes" are the insights of the heart, and the meaning is that their insights were under a cover against remembering Me in a manner befitting My majesty, or from My remembrance that I revealed to the prophets, peace be upon them. It is also permissible to restrict it to the Noble Quran.

"And they were" — along with that — "unable to hear" — a negation of their hearing in the most complete sense. For this reason, the text deviated from the more concise "and they were deaf." The intent is that they were, despite that, like those who have lost the sense of hearing entirely; this is an exaggeration in depicting their turning away from hearing what would guide them to what benefits them, after depicting their blindness to the signs witnessed by the eyes.

Thus, there is no need to estimate "of My remembrance," whether intended as the Quran or the absolute divine laws, for after specifying the "remembrance" mentioned in the noble arrangement [of the verse] first as the witnessed signs, it does not become a context for this omission. Ibn Hisham said in Al-Mughni: The verbal evidence must correspond to the omitted term in meaning. Therefore, it is not valid to say "Zayd is a striker, and 'Amr," meaning "striker," if the first is in its known meaning and the second means "a traveler." Estimating that, and intending the meaning of "signs" from it metaphorically—due to the realization of the signs within the miraculous speech—the situation is not hidden; and the situation of intending the signs, then intending the miraculous speech from it metaphorically—a metaphor upon a metaphor—is even more apparent.

Some researchers have said: The estimation of that is only by the context of His saying, the Almighty, "to hear," and that the disbelievers are in this state, not by the context of mentioning "remembrance" earlier, so that Ibn Hisham’s statement remains valid. It is not hidden that this is a discussion regarding estimating "remembrance" to mean the Quran or divine laws if that is what is intended by the previously mentioned "remembrance." The relative pronoun [those] is an attribute of the disbelievers, or a substitute for them, or an explanation brought to condemn them for what is contained within the scope of the relative clause, and to indicate its causality for the affliction of Hellfire that has come upon them.