Tafsir of Al-Kahf 18:93

That is, the two mountains. It is said in the Qamus: "The Sadd is the mountain and the barrier." It is termed Sadd because it blocks a gap (fajj) in the earth. It is also said that applying this term here is due to the proximity of the two, though this is not a strong position.

Nafi’, Ibn ‘Amir, Hamza, al-Kisa’i, Abu Bakr, and Ya’qub recited it with a damma on the sin (al-Suddayn). According to al-Kisa’i, the meaning of both [the fatha and damma] is one. Al-Khalil and Sibawayh said: "Al-Sudd" with the damma is the noun, while "al-Sadd" with the fatha is the infinitive (masdar). Ibn Abi Ishaq said: The first is what your eyes see, and the second is what you do not see. ‘Ikrimah, Abu ‘Amr ibn al-‘Ala’, and Abu ‘Ubaydah said: The first refers to that which is from the creation of Allah the Exalted, in which human craftsmanship has no input, and the second is that in which human craftsmanship does have input.

The indication of the word with the damma (Sudd) toward the former is that it is in the sense of the passive participle (maf’ul). Since its agent is not mentioned, it implies a specificity, directing the mind to no one else, thus requiring that it be Allah the Exalted. As for the indication of the word with the fatha (Sadd) toward it being the work of servants, it is because of the consideration of the indication of origination and the depiction that "here it is, he is doing it, so let it be witnessed." This suits that which has human input, provided that the loss of that glorification suffices. You know that the recitation with both is apparent in their compatibility, and that neither mentioning the agent nor origination are issues unique to one over the other.

Some have reversed this, saying: The one with the fatha is what Allah the Exalted created, since the infinitive does not mention the agent, and the one with the damma is what is of the work of the servants because it is in the sense of maf’ul, and what is immediately understood from it is what the servants have done; but its weakness is apparent.

The word bayna (between) is in the accusative case as an object because it is a location reached, and it is among the declinable adverbs as long as it is not compounded with another like it. It is said: It is an adverb, and the object of the verb is omitted—that is, "what he intended" or similar.

These two barriers are in the vicinity of the 90th degree of longitude in the north, and this is what is intended by the "end of the north" (Jirbiya’) in the book of Ezekiel. Some Jewish scholars have mentioned that Gog and Magog are in the furthest north, where no one else can inhabit, and they are in a corner of that region, though it has not been verified for them whether they are in the eastern part of the north or the western part. This aligns with what we have mentioned regarding the location of the two barriers, and it is the view toward which Katib Chelebi leaned.

It is said: They are the two mountains of Armenia and Azerbaijan. This is attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas—may Allah be pleased with them—and the action of al-Baydawi leans toward this. However, this is challenged by the fact that it is a conjecture. Perhaps the attribution to the scholar is not authentic. Whoever claims this often assumes that the barrier of Dhu al-Qarnayn is the famous barrier in Bab al-Abwab (Derbent). Besides requiring that Gog and Magog be the Khazars and the Turks—which is contrary to what the historians hold, for the builder of that barrier according to them was Chosroes Anushirvan, or as some say, Esfandiyar—it has also not remained until today; rather, it was destroyed long before this. The claim that the barrier, along with Gog and Magog, is still there and that everything has become so refined that it cannot be seen—as is seen by our contemporary, the leader of the sect known as the Kashfiyyah, Sayyid Kazim al-Rashti—is a type of delirium and one of the signs of abandonment by Allah.

Ibn Sa’id said: That location is where the longitude is 163 degrees and the latitude is 40 degrees. The objection to this is that in this longitude and latitude lie the lands of Al-Khana and Al-Jin, and Gog and Magog are not there. Yes, there is a great barrier there, close to 250 hours in length, but it is not between the "two barriers," nor was its builder Dhu al-Qarnayn, nor can what has come down in the description of his barrier be accurately applied to it. Furthermore, there is that which is not hidden regarding the prevention of making such a statement.

It is said: They are in a place on earth we do not know. How much unknown land is there? Perhaps there are great waters between us and that place. The claim of having surveyed all the wildernesses and seas is not conceded. Reason allows that there could be land in the ocean like America that has not been reached until now. Not finding something does not necessitate its non-existence. Once the Truthful One [the Prophet] informed us of the existence of these two barriers and what follows them, it is incumbent upon us to believe in that, just as with all other possible things he has informed us of. Turning to the speech of the deniers stems from a lack of religion.

Found before them—meaning before the two barriers—a people—a nation of humans. It is said they are the Turks. Some claimed that the people were from the Jinn; this is a false claim, though not far-fetched, as Abu Hayyan said.

Who could hardly understand speech—any of the statements of the followers of Dhu al-Qarnayn or of anyone else. This is due to the strangeness of their language and its distance from the languages of others, and its lack of suitability to them, along with their lack of intelligence; for if [the languages] were close, they would have understood, and if their intelligence were great, they would have understood what was intended by the speech through context, and thus learned it. The manifest [meaning] is to keep the "speech" to its immediate, apparent meaning.

Some claimed that al-Zamakhshari made it a metaphor for understanding generally, or for that which is the nature of what is said, so that it includes gestures and the like, where he said: "Meaning they hardly understand it except with effort and difficulty, with a gesture or similar." There is a view regarding this. The manifest [meaning] is that from the negation of yakad (hardly), he understood an affirmation of understanding for them, but with difficulty. This is based on the saying of some: that the negation of it is an affirmation, and the affirmation of it is a negation, but this is not the preferred view.

Al-A’mash, Ibn Abi Layla, Khalaf, Ibn ‘Isa al-Asbahani, Hamza, and al-Kisa’i recited yufaqqihun (from al-af’al)—meaning: they hardly make people understand because of their stammering and their lack of clarity in articulating letters.