Tafsir of Maryam 19:82

“Nay! They will deny their worship...”

“Nay” is a deterrent and a reprimand for them. It contains a refutation of the occurrence of that upon which they have pinned their empty hopes.

“They will deny their worship” means the gods will disavow the worship of these disbelievers towards them. Allah, the Exalted, will cause those among them who were not previously endowed with speech to speak, and they will all say, “You did not worship us,” just as He, the Exalted, said: “And when those who associated partners with Allah see their ‘partners,’ they will say, ‘Our Lord, these are our partners whom we used to invoke besides You.’ But they will throw back at them the word, ‘Indeed, you are liars.’” Alternatively, it means the disbelievers themselves will deny their own worship of them when they witness the evil consequences of their disbelief, as He, the Exalted, said: “Their only plea will be that they will say, ‘By Allah, our Lord, we were not idolaters.’”

The meaning of His saying, “And they will be for them an adversary,” is:

On the first interpretation—as has been stated—the gods whom they hoped would be a source of honor (‘izzan) for them will become a source of humiliation (dhullan)—an adversary or helpers against them—as is narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with both of them). This is more apparent than the previous interpretation. They are helpers against them because they will curse them. It is also said: because their worship was the cause of their punishment. This has been challenged on the grounds that this does not occur on the Day of Resurrection, whereas the apparent meaning of the verse is that this occurs on that day. The matter is simple, however. It is also said: because they will be instruments of their punishment, as they will be made fuel for the Fire and gravel for Hell. This only holds if “gods” is understood to mean idols. The term “adversary” (didd) is applied to “helper” because a person’s helper stands against his enemy and contradicts him by assisting against him.

On the second interpretation, the disbelievers will be for the gods—i.e., enemies to them—based on the idiom, “The people are against you (‘alaykum),” meaning they are your enemies. From this is the prayer, “O Allah, be for us and do not be against us.” They will be an adversary, meaning opposing what they used to be, having disbelieved in them after having worshipped them. Thus, ‘alayhim (against them), according to one view, is the predicate of “will be” (yakunun), and diddan (adversary) is a state (hal) acting as an intensive; enmity is intended by the preceding term. It is also said that diddan is the predicate, and ‘alayhim is in the position of a state. Al-Dahhak explained it as “enemies.” According to what is reported from al-Akhfash, didd is used for both singular and plural, just like ‘aduww (enemy). Al-Qamus author concurred with this, treating it as a plural here. Some, however, rejected that it can be applied to both singular and plural, saying it is for the singular only. The reason it is singular here is because of the unity of the concept around which their opposition revolves; they are, in that regard, like a single thing, as in the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) as narrated by al-Nasa’i: “They are a united hand against all others.” The author of al-Fara’id said: It was made singular because it was mentioned in contrast to His saying, “honor” (‘izzan), which is a verbal noun (masdar) that can serve as a collective. Even if this is not a verbal noun, it can serve as a collective in view of what is intended by it—namely, humiliation. If this reasoning is sound, it only works under the first interpretation. It has been explicitly stated in al-Bahr that, in this context, it is a verbal noun used to describe a collective just as it is used to describe an individual.

Abu Nahik read kullan here and previously with a fatha on the kaf and with tanwin. It is said that this is the particle of deterrence, but a stop was intended upon it, so its alif became like the alif of poetic release (itlaq), then it was replaced with tanwin. It is also permissible that no stop was intended, but rather the alif was treated as the alif of release because the alif of the word itself had no original root and could not be a rhyme. This is called the "tanwin of the extremist" (ghali), which attaches to particles and other words, and co-exists with the definite article al-, as in your saying, “Cease the blame, O censurer, and the reproach,” and “Say, if I have struck, I have indeed struck.” This is not like qawarira (in the Quran), as is self-evident, contrary to those who claim otherwise.

In Ibn Jinni’s al-Muhtasab, it is stated that kullan is a verbal noun from kalla (the sword) when it becomes blunt, and it is in the accusative case due to an implied verb of the same root. The estimation here is: “All of this opinion and belief is blunted.” It is also said: It is a direct object on the assumption of “They bore a burden” (hummilu kullan). A similar explanation is offered for the previous occurrence. Ibn ‘Atiyyah said: It is an attribute of the gods, meaning “the heavy thing in which there is no good.” The singular form is used because it is on the scale of a verbal noun, though this is clearly contrived. The most consistent interpretation is the first one, even if it entails some verbal strain and the necessity of writing the tanwin orthographically, as is the case in similar instances.

Abu ‘Amr al-Dani recounted from Abu Nahik that he read kullan with a damma on the kaf and with tanwin. According to this, it is in the accusative governed by an omitted verb indicated by sayakfuruna (they will deny), similar to the category of ishtighal (preoccupation), such as: “Zayd, I passed by him”—meaning, “They will deny all [worship] of the gods.” A genitive addition is implied here, though it may not be. Al-Tabari mentioned from him that he read kullun with a damma on the kaf and the nominative, and according to this, it is an incipient (mubtada') and the following sentence is its predicate.