Tafsir of Al-Mu'minoon 23:44

(Then We sent Our messengers): This is a conjunction linked to "We created" (ansha’na), yet not in the sense that their sending was delayed after the creation of all the aforementioned generations, but rather in the sense that the sending of each messenger was subsequent to the sending of a specific generation designated for that messenger. It is as if it were said: "Then We created after them other generations, and We sent to each generation among them a messenger specific to them." The separation between the two conjoined phrases by an intervening sentence serves to hasten the exposition of the destruction of those generations in a summarized manner. Attributing the "sending" to "messengers" is analogous to attributing "killing" to "a killed person" in the phrase "whoever kills a killed person" (man qatala qatilan), and scholars have provided various interpretations for this.

(Tatran): Derived from muwatara, which means succession with a separation and an interval, as stated by al-Asma‘i and chosen by al-Hariri in al-Durrah. In al-Sihah, it states that mutawatira means succession, and muwatara cannot occur between things unless there is a period between them; otherwise, it is mudarakah (consecutive attainment), and the same is mentioned in al-Qamus. Abu ‘Ali said: "The muwatara is for one piece of news to follow another, and one book to follow another, such that there is not a long interval between them." It is narrated in al-Bahr from some that muwatara is succession without an interval. It is also said that it is succession generally. The first ta is a substitute for the waw, as in turath and tajah; this is evidenced by its derivation. The majority of reciters and Arabs maintain that it is not nunated (tanwin), so its alif is for the feminine gender, like the alif in da‘wa (claim) and dhikra (remembrance). It is a verbal noun (masdar) acting in the place of a state (hal), and the apparent meaning—as stated by Abu Hayyan, al-Raghib, and others—is "Then We sent Our messengers successively (mutawatirin)." It is also said that it is a state of the agent (fa‘il), meaning "We sent them while being successive." It is also said that it is a description of an implicit verbal noun, meaning "a successive sending." It is also said that it is a cognate accusative (maf‘ul mutlaq) for "We sent," because it carries the meaning of "We made them follow one another."

Ibn Kathir, Abu ‘Amr, Qatadah, Abu Ja‘far, Shu‘bah, Ibn Muhaysin, and Imam al-Shafi‘i (may Allah have mercy upon him) read it as (tatran) with tanwin, which is the dialect of Kinana. It is stated in al-Bahr: For those who nunate it, the alif should be for the purpose of attachment (ilhaq), as in artani and ‘alaqi, though the attachment alif is rare in verbal nouns, and some say it does not exist in them at all. Al-Farra’ said: It is said tatar in the nominative, tatar in the genitive, and tatran in the accusative; it is like sabr and nasr, and its weight is fa‘l, not fu‘la. When it is said tatra with an alif, its alif is a substitute for the tanwin, as in "I waited patiently (sabartu sabran)" when stopping. This has been refuted by the fact that it has not been heard to have all three movements (harakat) on the ra’, and the claimant of such must prove it; furthermore, the presence of the ya’ rejects that. The aforementioned explanation that tatra is a verbal noun is the most well-known. It is also said to be a plural, or a collective noun; according to both these views, it is also a state (hal).

His saying: (Whenever its messenger came to a nation, they denied him) is an initiating sentence clarifying the arrival of every messenger to his nation, as to what emanated from them upon the communication of the message. The "arrival" (maji’) means either the communication or the actual physical arrival, to signify that they denied him at the very beginning of the meeting. The annexation of the "messenger" to the "nation," along with the annexation of "all" of them therein, is a continuation of the use of the "We" of Majesty (nun al-‘azamah) to establish that every messenger came to his own specific nation, not that all of them came to all the nations. It is also to intimate the extreme heinousness of those who deny and their misguidance, in that they denied the specific messenger sent to them. It is said: The Almighty annexed the messenger—together with the sending—to Himself, and—together with the arrival—to those to whom he was sent, because the sending, which is the beginning of the matter, is from Him, and the arrival, which is the end of it, is to them.

(So We made them follow one another) in destruction, just as they followed one another in committing the cause of it, which is the denial of the messenger.

(And We made them narratives): The plural of uhduthah, which is that which is talked about for the sake of wonder and diversion, like a‘ajib (marvels), the plural of u‘jubah (a wonder), which is that which one wonders at. Meaning: We made them narratives that are spoken of by way of wonder and diversion. According to al-Akhfash, uhduthah is not used except in the context of evil. It is permitted that it be a plural of hadith, a irregular plural that violates the rules, like qati‘ and aqati‘; al-Zamakhshari calls it a collective noun. The meaning is that We destroyed them, and nothing remains except their account.

(So away with a people who do not believe!) Here, it is restricted to describing them by the lack of belief, just as it was restricted to narrating their denial in a summarized fashion. As for the first generations, since what was narrated regarding them was the aforementioned excess and transgression in disbelief and aggression, they were described as wrongdoers.