Tafsir of An-Naml 27:13

(When Our signs came to them) means when they appeared to them at the hands of Musa, peace be upon him. The "coming" is a metaphor for "appearing," and attributing it to the signs is literal. Some eminent scholars have said that the "coming" is literal and its attribution to the signs is metaphorical; it is, however, literal in relation to Musa—peace be upon him—and due to the connection between them, as they were his miracles, this attribution is permissible.

Perhaps the point behind shifting from "When Musa came to them with Our signs" to the structure in this glorious arrangement is an indication that those signs were beyond his capacity—as is the case with all miracles—and that he had no influence over some of them. His status as a miracle-worker is established by his foretelling them and their occurrence through his supplication and the like. This does not contradict the attribution to him in the Almighty's saying elsewhere, "When Musa came to them with Our signs," because they occurred at his hands for the purpose of demonstrating his miraculous nature. Some have explained the specificity of each to its context by noting that there [in the other verse], his dialogue and their disputation with him are mentioned, so attribution to him was appropriate. Here, since that is not the case, attribution to the signs is appropriate, as the intent is to highlight their rejection of them. The genitive construction of the "signs" refers to their specific nature, and their attribution to the Pronoun of Majesty (Our signs) holds an obvious glorification of their status.

(Visible) is a circumstantial qualifier for the "signs," meaning manifest and clear. The act of "seeing" is attributed to the signs—while it is, in reality, for those who contemplate them—due to the connection between the signs and the observers, for they only see them because of their contemplation. Thus, the attribution is metaphorical, from the category of attribution to the cause. It is also possible that "visible" is intended to mean "causing one to see," derived from the verb abṣara (to make see), which is transitive through the causative hamza; here, the attribution is also metaphorical.

It is further permissible to consider the signs as if they possess the faculty of sight, thereby guiding others, because the blind cannot be guided, let alone guide others. In this speech, there is a metaphorical, imaginary, and reinforced trope (isti'ara makniyya takhyiliyya murashaha). The author of al-Kashf said: "This interpretation is the most eloquent." It has also been said that the active participle (fa'il) is used in the sense of the passive participle (maf'ul), so the metaphor is either in the term or in the attribution; reflect upon this.

Qatada and Ali ibn al-Husayn—may Allah be pleased with them—recited "mabsarah" (with a fatha on the mim and the sad), on the pattern of masba'ah. The root of this form is, for the most part, used to denote a place where the source of the derivation abounds; thus, one would not say masba'ah except for a place where predatory beasts abound, not merely where there is one beast. Then, it was used metaphorically to denote that which is a cause for the multiplicity of insight for those who look at it. Abu Hayyan said: "It is an infinitive standing in the place of a noun, and it is also in the accusative case as a circumstantial qualifier."

(They said: This) meaning that which we see or something similar, (is clear magic), i.e., its magical nature is manifest, assuming that "mubin" (clear) is derived from the intransitive verb abana (to become clear).