Tafsir of Ash-Shu`ara' 26:99

"And none led us astray except the criminals."

The apparent meaning, based on what has preceded regarding the contention with the idols and the devils, is that the intended meaning of "the criminals" is the devils, so that this remains a continuation of the contention with them, even if it is not presented in the mode of direct address. Similarly, what preceded regarding the contention with the idols—and the fact that they are the ones intended—is narrated from Muqatil.

In Irshad al-'Aql al-Salim, it is stated that this is an explanation of the cause of their misguidance after they have confessed that it originated from them. The intended meaning of "the criminals" is their leaders and grandees, as in His saying: "Our Lord, indeed we obeyed our masters and our grandees, and they led us astray from the [right] path." According to al-Suddi, they are the first ones who were followed by others. It is also said: [They are] those among the jinn and mankind who invited them to idol worship. Ibn Jurayj stated that they are Iblis and the son of Adam who committed murder, because he was the first to establish murder and acts of disobedience.

The restriction [in the verse] is said to be in relation to the idols. Perhaps they intended, by denying the leading astray [attributed] to them, to demean them, signifying that they have no power; this emphasizes that they were in manifest misguidance. Perhaps it is more appropriate that it is an absolute restriction, by claiming that they [the criminals] are the sole causes of misguidance, to the extent that the causality of others is as if it were no causality at all. This is clear regarding the devils, because the leading astray caused by others—such as the grandees—is through the mediation of their [the devils'] leading astray, as they are the ones who adorn falsehood for both the follower and the followed. It is possible to consider this regarding others through a type of interpretation, if one intends by "the criminals" someone other than them. Furthermore, the polytheists will remain in confusion on the Day of Resurrection, not knowing what to cling to; thus, it does not harm their attribution of misguidance at one time to one thing and at another time to something else, given that the attribution to each is in consideration of this [the aspect of their confusion].

It is also permitted that the contention is between the worshippers themselves, and the address in "We used to make you [equal to the Lord of the worlds]" is to the idols, without necessitating that they be considered worthy of such address; rather, it is like the address of a desperate person to a stone or a tree, containing hyperbole in grief and remorse. The meaning is that the worshippers, despite contending with one another—where one says to the other, "You are the beginning of my misguidance, and were it not for you, I would have been a believer"—confessed their crime, marveled [at their state], and explained its cause.

It is also permitted that [the contention] is from the idols, as Allah, the Exalted, makes them speak, and they contend with the worshippers. Thus, the pronoun "they" refers to them [the idols]. The meaning is that the worshippers said—confessing their misguidance, marveling at it, and explaining its cause: "If we were..." [i.e., in clear error], while the idols were contending with them, saying: "We are inanimate objects, free from all sins, and you took us as gods, so you cast us into this predicament."

All of this is based on the assumption that the sentence "They said" is a new statement, as is apparent. It is also permitted that "the soldiers of Iblis" is the subject (mubtada') and the sentence "They said..." is its predicate (khabar), with the pronoun in "They said" and what follows returning to it. You know that, while this is contrary to the apparent meaning, it is not tenable if "the soldiers of Iblis" is intended to mean the devils, since the aforementioned statement cannot be from them. If they are intended to be his followers from the disobedient of the two realms—the idol worshippers and others—then the objection arises that the statement is the speech of only one faction among them (the worshippers), so attributing it to everyone is contrary to the apparent meaning and is extremely far-fetched; indeed, if one were to claim it is invalid, it would not be far-fetched.

The possibility exists that every person—whether an idol worshipper or otherwise—contends with whomever they encounter, even if the other has no capacity for contention, and says what was mentioned to the idols out of the intensity of confusion and distress. Yes, if "the soldiers of Iblis"—on the assumption that it is the subject—were meant to be "the misguided" themselves, and the addition [the genitive construction] is for the sake of specific reference ('ahd), and they were expressed by this title after being expressed by the previous title in order to abase them, it would not be very far-fetched.

Some have permitted the aforementioned subject and predicate, interpreting "the soldiers" as the disobedient in an absolute sense, making the pronoun in "they said" refer to the misguided, and the pronoun in "they" and "they contend" refer to the soldiers or the idols. In this, apart from the verse departing from elegant structure, there is that which is not hidden from those of understanding.