An-Nur: (50) "Is there in their hearts a disease..."

(Is there in their hearts a disease, or have they doubted, or do they fear that Allah and His Messenger might act unjustly toward them?)

This is a repetition to signify the cause of the aforementioned turning away. The pivot of the interrogation is what is understood from the context, as if it were said: "Is the cause of their turning away from seeking judgment from him—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—that they are sick-hearted due to their disbelief and hypocrisy? Or is it that they have doubted and become skeptical regarding the matter of his prophethood—upon him be peace and blessings—despite the manifestation of its truth? Or is its cause that they fear that Allah, the Exalted in His Majesty, and His Messenger—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—might act unjustly and oppress them?"

This is similar to your saying, "Is he sick? Or has he been absent from the city? Or does he fear the slanderer?" after having said, for example, "The beloved has abandoned [me]." The meaning—"Is the cause of his abandonment that he is sick, or is it that he has been absent from the city, or is it that he fears the slanderer?"—is very apparent and common in conversation. However, the interrogation in the verse is one of denial, meant to negate the causality.

And His saying, the Almighty: (Nay, it is they who are the wrongdoers)

(Assigning the cause after invalidating the causality of all that preceded.)

In this is a confirmation of what the interrogation implies, as if it were said: "None of what was mentioned is a cause for that turning away." As for the first two [hypotheses], it is because if either of them were the cause, they would have turned away from seeking judgment from him—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—even when the truth was on their side, and they would not have come to him—upon him be peace and blessings—submitting to his judgment, for their hypocrisy and doubt would have been realized in that instance as well. As for the third, it is because it is negated entirely, as they did not fear injustice at all due to their knowledge of the details of his circumstances—upon him be peace and blessings—regarding his trustworthiness and steadfastness upon the truth. Rather, the cause of that is that they are the wrongdoers; they desire to commit injustice against those who have a rightful claim upon them, and their goal cannot be attained while submitting to judgment before him—upon him be peace and blessings—so they turn away from it because he—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—judges against them with the truth.

Therefore, the scope of the negation derived from the interrogative of denial and the oppositive-invalidating particle (bal) in the first two [cases] is merely the quality of their being causes for the turning away, while the qualities themselves are realized. In the third [case], the scope of the negation is both the essence and the quality together. If "doubt" is restricted to that which has a justifying aspect for its occurrence in them to some extent—as some have done by interpreting the meaning as, "Or have they doubted because they saw from him—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—a bias, such that their trust and certainty in him—upon him be peace and blessings—vanished"—then the scope of negation in the second case is the same as in the third. This is how some of the leading scholars have established it, and "or" (am) therein is conjunctive.

Az-Zamakhshari and Al-Baydawi have held that it is likewise, as they both made what preceded a categorization of the cause of the turning away. However, the former made the "turning away" (idrab) apply to the latter two of the three matters, arguing that it is more indicative of their state and more encompassing in its denial, in that it contradicts their hastiness to him—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—when the truth was in their favor against others. The latter made it a turning away from the latter two of them to establish the first category, saying: "The aspect of the categorization is that their refraining from seeking judgment from him—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—is either due to a defect in them or in the judge, and the second is either actual or expected." He interpreted the "doubt" as seeing something like a bias that removes their certainty, then said: "Both are false, so the first is necessitated. As for the first, it is apparent; and as for the second, the station of prophethood and the intensity of his trustworthiness—upon him be peace and blessings—forbids it," and their wrongdoing encompasses the defect of their belief and the inclination of their souls toward injustice.

Al-Allamah at-Tayyibi said: "The truth is that bal (nay) is an idrab (turning away) from the categorization itself. It is a transitive idrab, as if it were said: 'Leave the categorization aside, for they are the ones who are perfect in wrongdoing, the ones who combine those qualities; therefore, they turned away from your judgment.' This is indicated by the use of the demonstrative pronoun, the address, the defining of the predicate with the generic 'al' (the), and the insertion of the separation pronoun (dhamir al-fasl)."

He narrated from the Imam that which indicates that am (or) is disjunctive, saying: "He affirmed them upon each of these qualities; thus, there was a disease in their hearts (hypocrisy), so there was doubt in them, and so they feared injustice." The aspect of the idrab is that each is caused by the other, as a sign of its existence and more. It was objected that causality is not necessarily so unless it is claimed specifically in this instance. Abu Hayyan stated explicitly that it is disjunctive and that the interrogation is for the purpose of bringing to account and rebuking, so that they might confess to one of these aspects which are against them—in the admission of which lies their burden—and it is used for both blame and praise, as in the saying: "Are you not of the people who pledged to baseness and obscenity in the past of time?" and his saying: "Are you not the best of those who mounted beasts and the most generous of the worlds in the palms of [your] hands?"

It is not hidden that the more apparent view is that it is conjunctive and that the necessity between the three matters is denied, and that it does not harm [the argument], and that the meaning of the verse is what we mentioned first. The precedence of "upon them" over "the Messenger" is to emphasize that his judgment—upon him be peace and blessings—is the judgment of Allah, the Almighty. The aspect of the variation in the styles of the sentences is apparent to the slightest reflection.