Tafsir of Al-Kahf 18:38

"But He is Allah, my Lord": The original form is Lākin anā (but I). Abi and Al-Hasan have recited it as such. Ibn Atiyyah narrated this from Ibn Mas'ud; the vowel of the hamza in anā was transferred to the nūn of lākin, the hamza was then elided, the vowel was then removed, and the nūn was assimilated into the nūn. It is also said that the hamza was elided along with its vowel, and then one of the two identical letters was assimilated into the other—this is shorter in distance, though the aforementioned elision deviates from analogy (qiyās). This elision and assimilation have appeared in the poetry: wa tarmīnanī bil-tarfi ("and you shoot at me with a glance"), meaning tarmi-anani (you are guilty), and taqlīnanī lākin iyyāka lā aqlā, for he intended lākin anā lā aqlāka (but I do not hate you). This is more appropriate than those who interpret the estimate as lākinnahu iyyāka, assuming the omission of the "pronoun of state" (ḍamīr al-sha'n). More remote than that is making the original form lākinnanī iyyāka while omitting the name of lākin, as in the verse: "If I were of Dabba, I would have known my kin, but a Zanjī with large lips" (meaning lākinnaka), with the protective nūn.

Regarding the preservation of the alif at the end: it is preserved in pausing and elided in connection, just as it is in anā (pausing and connecting). The Kufans, Abu 'Amr, Ibn Kathir, and Nafi' (in the transmission of Warsh and Qalun) read it this way. Abu 'Amr, in a transmission, replaced it with a hā' during a pause, saying Lākinna-hu. Ibn Khalawayh mentioned this, and Ibn Atiyyah said: Harun narrated from Abu 'Amr: (Lākinna-hu huwa Allāhu rabbī) with a pronoun attached to lākin. Ibn 'Amir, Zayd ibn 'Ali, Al-Hasan, and Al-Zuhri read it with the alif preserved in both pausing and connection; this is a narration from Nafi', Ya'qub, Abu 'Amr, Warsh, Abu Ja'far, and Abu Bahriyyah. This follows the dialect of Banū Tamīm, for they preserve the alif of anā originally as a choice, whereas others preserve it only out of necessity. Some said that preserving it in connection is not eloquent, but it is acceptable here due to the similarity of anā—after the elision of its hamza—to our attached pronoun, and because the alif was made a compensation for the elided hamza.

It is also said that it was preserved to treat the connection like the pause, and its preservation removes confusion with the nūn-doubled lākin. Among the proofs of its preservation in connection is the poet's saying: "I am the sheikh of the clan, so know me as Praiseworthy / I have reached the heights." In the transmission of Al-Hashimi from Abu Ja'far, it is elided in both connection and pause; this is also narrated from Abu 'Ablah, Abu Haywah, and Abu Bahriyyah.

He read (Lākinanā) with the elision of the hamza and the lightening of the two nūns. Lākin in all these readings is a particle of rectification (istidrāk) that has no grammatical operation. Anā is the first subject (nominative), huwa is the pronoun of state (second subject), and Allāhu Rabbī is a subject and predicate. The sentence forms the predicate of the pronoun of state and is independent of a connector. The sentence of the pronoun of state and its predicate is the predicate of the first subject, and the connector is the first-person suffix pronoun. The structure is similar to saying: Hindun huwa Zaydun ḍāribuhā ("Hind, it is Zayd [who is] her striker").

It is permitted that huwa be a second subject, the Exalted Name a substitute (badal) for it, and Rabbī its predicate, with the sentence being the predicate of the first subject; the connector is also the yā'. In Al-Baḥr, it is stated that huwa is the pronoun of state and there is a hidden verbal noun—meaning, "But I say: He is Allah, my Lord." It is also possible that it refers back to "He who created you," meaning "But I say: He who created you is Allah, my Lord," where the predicate is the Exalted Name and Rabbī is an epithet, a 'aṭf bayān, or a substitute. (End).

Then he permitted the non-estimation of the verb "to say," and limited himself to making huwa a pronoun of state according to what you heard. It is not hidden that the possibility of estimating the verb is remote in this reading. Perhaps the possibility that the Exalted Name is a substitute is closer in meaning than it being a predicate, and that the pronoun returns to "He who created you." Abu 'Ali permitted the possibility that nā is the collective pronoun like that in kharajnā (we went out) and ḍarabnā (we hit), and that assimilation occurred due to the meeting of two identical letters; however, he intended by it the pronoun of the exalted individual himself, so he singularized Rabbī based on the meaning. Had he followed the wording, he would have said Rabbunā—the remoteness of which is clear.

Ibn Atiyyah said regarding the verse: It is possible that lākinna is the operative particle (from the sisters of inna), and its noun is elided. Its elision is eloquent because the speech indicates it; the estimate is lākinna qawlī Wallāhu Rabbī ("but my statement is: Allah is my Lord"). However, that is only completed if it were read with the elision of the alif in pause and connection, and I do not know anyone who read it as such. (End). You already know who read it that way, and others have also mentioned that they read it, such as Abu al-Qasim Yusuf ibn 'Ali al-Hudhalī in his book Al-Kāmil fī al-Qirā'āt, although I do not think you would approve of the derivation based on that.

'Isa al-Thaqafi read (Lākin huwa Allāhu) with the sukūn of the nūn in lākin, and Ibn Khalawayh narrated it from Ibn Mas'ud, and Al-Ahwazi from Al-Hasan; its parsing is very evident. It was also read (Lākin anā huwa Allāhu lā ilāha illā huwa Rabbī), and its parsing is known from what has passed. Abu Hayyan derived the reading of Abu 'Amr, based on the transmission of Harun, as (huwa) being an emphasis for the objective pronoun in (lākinnahu), and made it return to "He who created you," with the Exalted Name being its predicate and Rabbī an epithet, 'aṭf bayān, or substitute; the sentence is the predicate of the pronoun of state, which is in the accusative case due to lākin. Or, huwa is a subject, the Exalted Name is a substitute for it, Rabbī is the predicate, and the sentence is the predicate of the pronoun.

Furthermore, his saying: "And I do not associate anyone with my Lord" is conjoined to one of the two sentences, and the rectification (istidrāk) is against "Do you disbelieve?" The summary of the meaning, because of the interrogative—which is for confirmation by way of negation—is: "Are you a disbeliever in Allah the Exalted? But I am a believer and a monotheist." Due to the evident contrast between the two sentences, lākin was placed in its position, for they have said that it is placed between two contrasting statements, such as: "Zayd is present, but 'Amr is absent."

Al-Zamakhshari and others adopted the view that the meaning is what was mentioned. It is mentioned in Al-Kashf that there is an indication in this that disbelief in Allah is countered by belief and monotheism; therefore, it is permissible to rectify it with either of them, or both together, as is the case here. For belief is the meaning of "He is Allah, my Lord," and monotheism is the meaning of "I do not associate anyone with my Lord." You also know that shirk (polytheism) is often applied to absolute disbelief, and they have included in this His saying: "Indeed, Allah does not forgive that partners be associated with Him." It is possible that the intent of the entire speech is to affirm faith in the surest way, and perhaps the shirk of its companion—which was alluded to in the second sentence, as more than one has explicitly stated—is for this meaning.

It is also said that shirk here is in the standard sense, and affirming it for its companion is an allusion in the sense that when he denied resurrection, he rendered the Creator—glorified be His Majesty—incapable; and whoever deems Him, Exalted be He, incapable has equated Him with His creation in incapability, which is shirk. It is also said that it is because when he was deluded by his worldly life and claimed personal merit and attributed what he attributed to himself, it was as if he committed shirk. So the believer alluded to it with what he alluded to, as if he said: "But I am a believer, and I do not see wealth and poverty except from Allah; He impoverishes whom He wills and enriches whom He wills, and I do not see personal merit contrary to what you are upon." The fairness is that each of the two sayings is labored. It is also said that the speech contains an allusion to the nobility of its speaker, and it is not required that it be indicated by his previous speech, but rather it is sufficient that he be a polytheist in reality, and in what follows is what is apparent regarding it—so reflect.

Then know that what the verse contains is a magnificent mention. Ibn Abi Hatim narrated from Asma' bint 'Umays, who said: "The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, taught me words that I say in times of distress: 'Allah is my Lord, and I do not associate anything with Him.'"