Tafsir of Saba' 34:37

This is a resumed statement from His side—Exalted is He—with which mankind is addressed through a shift in tone (tlawwun) and redirection (iltifat), by way of hyperbole in establishing the truth and confirming what preceded. This is how it is stated in Irshad al-'Aql al-Salim.

It is permitted that the preceding passage serves to negate the notion that proximity and honor are a criterion or cause for the abundance of provision; and this serves to negate that the abundance of provision is a cause for proximity and honor. The address here is to the disbelievers, and the pronoun allati (the feminine singular) refers to wealth and children. Since broken plurals—whether for rational or non-rational beings—are treated equally under the rule of feminine singular agreement, and since the collective group is understood as a unified whole, both singular and feminine usage are linguistically sound. That is: "The collective of your wealth and children is not the collective that brings you near to Us in proximity." There is no need to assume an added noun (mudaf) in the noble arrangement of the text; what is mentioned is a clarification of the meaning, not of the grammatical parsing.

Al-Zajjaj held that there is an ellipsis at the beginning of the statement, indicated by what follows it, with the estimated structure: "Your wealth is not that which brings you near to Us in proximity, nor are your children that which [brings you near]," and so on. You know that there is no need for this either.

It is also permissible that allati is an adjective for a singular feminine noun, such as "through piety" or "through the quality that..." Al-Zamakhshari permitted allati to be a metonym for "piety," because that which draws one near to Allah, the Exalted, is nothing but that—meaning: "Your wealth and children are not that which is intended for drawing one near." Al-Hasan recited it as al-lati (plural), referring back to the wealth and children, just as al-lati (singular) did, as you heard previously. It has also been recited as al-ladhi (masculine singular), meaning "the thing that draws you near."

Zulfan is a verbal noun, like al-qurba, and its accusative case is due to its function as a verbal noun derived from the meaning. Al-Dahhak recited it as zulfa, with a fatha on the lam and a tanwin on the fa, as the plural of zulfa, meaning proximity.

{Except for those who believe and do righteous deeds} This is an exception from the object of tuqarribukum (that which draws you near), according to the view of a group. It is a connected exception if the address is general to both believers and disbelievers, and a disconnected exception if it is specific to disbelievers. The relative pronoun (man) is in the accusative case, or the nominative, assuming it is the subject of an implied predicate—that is: "But as for those who believe and do righteous deeds, their faith and their deeds draw them near."

Abu Hayyan favored it being a disconnected exception. He stated in al-Bahr that Al-Zajjaj considered it a substitute (badal) for the aforementioned object, but Al-Nahhas refuted this, arguing that the second-person pronoun cannot have a substitute—one does not say "I saw you, Zayd." The schools of al-Akhfash and the Kufans hold that it is permissible to use a substitute for the second and first-person pronouns, but the substitution in this verse is not correct. Do you not see that it is not permissible to empty the verb functioning as the relative clause for what follows illa? If you were to say, "Zayd is not the one who beats illa Khalid," it would be incorrect.

Some eminent scholars mentioned that making it an exception from the object is incorrect if allati is taken as a metonym for piety, because it would entail that wealth and children are considered "piety" in the case of those who do not believe and do righteous deeds, even though they do not draw one near. It was said that there is no objection to this, as it is valid to say, "Your wealth and children are not piety, except for the believers." The result is that wealth and children do not function as piety or a means of drawing near for anyone except the believers. If the exception is disconnected, it is valid and clear. It is also permissible that it is an exception from "your wealth and your children" with an implied noun—that is: "Except for the wealth of those who believe and do righteous deeds, and their children." If allati is taken as a metonym for piety, this is hyperbolic, in that it equates the wealth and children of the righteous believer with piety itself. Furthermore, the drawing near of the righteous believer’s wealth is through spending it in what pleases Allah, and the drawing near of children is through teaching them good, instructing them in religion, and grooming them for righteousness and obedience.

{For those, there is the reward of double} This refers to "those" (the believers), and the plural is used in consideration of the meaning of man (who), just as the singular was used previously in consideration of its wording. The "distance" implied in the demonstrative ula'ika (those) is to signal their high rank and distant status in virtue. That is: those described by faith and righteous deeds, {for them is the reward of the double}—meaning, Allah, the Exalted, will reward them twofold, i.e., a multiplied reward. He will reward them for a good deed with ten times its like, or up to seven hundred times. The annexation (genitive construction) of jaza' (reward) to al-du'f (the double) is the annexation of a verbal noun to its object. Qatada recited {jaza'u al-du'fu} with both in the nominative; al-du'f here is a substitute (badal). Al-Zajjaj allowed for it to be the predicate of an implied subject, i.e., "it is the double." Ya'qub, in one narration, recited it with the accusative of jaza' and the nominative of al-du'f; here, jaza' is a specifier (tamyiz) or a state (hal) from the agent of lahum, if al-du'f is the subject, or it is in the accusative as a verbal noun for its verb, which is indicated by lahum—that is: "they shall be rewarded a reward." It was also recited as jaza'un (nominative with tanwin) and al-du'fa (accusative) by acting as a verbal noun.

{For what they used to do} ...of righteous deeds.

{And they, in the high chambers, will be secure} That is, in the chambers of Paradise and its lofty abodes, {secure} from all worldly and otherworldly adversities. Al-Hasan, 'Asim (with a variation from him), al-A'mash, and Muhammad ibn Ka'b recited ghurufat with the ra quiescent (sukūn). Some reciters read it with a fatha on the ra. Ibn Wathab, al-A'mash, Talha, Hamza, and Khalaf read it as ghurfa (the chamber) in the singular with a quiescent ra. Ibn Wathab also read it in the singular with a damma on the ra. The singular form is used to intend the genus, because not everyone is in the same single room; the singular is more concise while remaining free from ambiguity.