Tafsir of Ta-Ha 20:101

(Abiding eternally therein)—that is, in the wizr (burden/sin), by which the punishment is intended.

It is also permitted that the pronoun refers to the infinitive of yahmilu (they bear), and khalidina (abiding) is in the accusative case as a state (hal) of the hidden pronoun within yahmilu. The plural is used in consideration of the meaning of man (whoever), since eternal abiding in the Fire is something realized when its inhabitants are gathered, just as the singular forms in the preceding three pronouns were used in consideration of its literal wording.

(And evil it is for them on the Day of Resurrection as a burden)

Saa’a is for dispraise, in the sense of bi’sa (how wretched), which is one of its two well-known meanings. Its agent in this context is hidden, referring back to hamlan (as a burden), which serves as the tamyiz (specifier). It cannot refer back to wizran (a burden) because the agent of bi’sa must be an ambiguous pronoun explained by the tamyiz that refers back to it, even if the latter is delayed, as this is one of the specific characteristics of this linguistic category. The makhsus bil-dham (the specific object of dispraise) is omitted; the implied meaning is: Saa’a hamluhum hamlan wizruhum (Evil is their bearing as a burden, their sin). The lam in lahum (for them) is for clarification, as in the phrases suqya laka (drink for you) and hayta laka (come here for you). It is connected to an omitted predicate; it is as if it were said: "To whom is this said?" and the reply was: "It is said to them and regarding their affair." The repetition of "Day of Resurrection" is for further confirmation and to increase the terror of the situation.

It is also permissible that saa’a means "to sadden," which is the other of its two meanings. The implication, according to some, is: "The burden saddens them, while it is a burden upon them."

This was criticized in al-Kashf on the grounds that there is no benefit in it, for al-wizr (the burden/sin) is more indicative of heaviness than the restriction "as a burden" (hamlan). Furthermore, there is the addition of the restriction lahum (for them) when it is unnecessary, its placement which does not suit the context, and the omission of the object. Above all, it does not harmonize with the preceding discourse, nor does it contain any hyperbole regarding the threat after what has already passed. It further states: The same applies to what the scholar al-Tibi said—that the meaning is "the bearing of the burden saddens them," with hamlan being the tamyiz and the lam in lahum being for clarification. This is rejected due to the loss of the grandeur of the meaning. If the clarification is for the sake of specifying that the bearing is theirs, there is no need for it; if it is for the location of the sadness, it is not expressed in that way; and if it is to imply that this threat is for them, its placement is not appropriate before the Day of Resurrection. The suitable phrasing would then be wizran saa’a lahum hamlan as a description, not inserted in this manner as a confirmation.

There is no room to justify the inclusion of the lam by considering "inclusion" (tadmin), as there is no verb that suits the aforementioned verb in a way that makes it appropriate, for the lam is manifest in denoting beneficial possession, whereas the action in the event is harmful. To claim it is an expletive (extra), as in the phrase radafa lakum, or to interpret it as sarcasm, is an affectation to validate the wording without any necessity for it, and the issue of the grandeur of the meaning remains unresolved. In summary, neither the wording nor the meaning supports what has been mentioned.

It is also permissible that saa’a means "to be ugly/loathsome," for it has been mentioned that it is used with this meaning, though there is debate as to whether it is a primary meaning. In this case, hamlan is tamyiz (specifier), lahum is hal (state), and yawm al-qiyamah (Day of Resurrection) is connected to the circumstantial condition. The meaning is: "That burden is loathsome by virtue of being a burden upon them on the Day of Resurrection." There is much to be said regarding this interpretation.