Tafsir of Saba' 34:51

This terror, according to what Ibn Abi Hatim recorded from Mujahid, is on the Day of Resurrection, and it is apparent that it is the terror of the Resurrection; this is also narrated from al-Hasan. Ibn al-Mundhir and others recorded from Qatadah that it is in this world at the time of death, when they behold the angels, peace be upon them. ‘Abd ibn Humayd recorded from al-Dahhak that it is on the Day of Badr; thus it is said to be the terror of war. From al-Suddi and Ibn Zayd, it is the terror of having their necks struck and beholding the punishment. It is also said that it is at the end of time when the Mahdi appears and sends an army to the Sufyani, which defeats them; the Sufyani then marches toward him until, when he is in a desert plain of the earth, he and those with him are swallowed up by the earth, and none of them escape except the one who reports about them; thus the terror is the terror of what befalls them on that day.

{And there is no escape} Meaning: they shall not escape Allah, the Almighty and Majestic, by flight or similar means, from what He, Glorified be He, intends for them.

{And they were seized from a near place} From the standing place to the Fire, or from the surface of the earth to its depths, or from the desert of Badr to the pit, or from beneath their feet when the earth swallowed them. The intent of mentioning the proximity of the place is the speed of the descent of the punishment upon them, and the belittling of them and their destruction; otherwise, there is neither proximity nor distance relative to Allah, the Almighty and Majestic.

The sentence is a conjunction to "they were terrified," according to a group of scholars. It is stated in al-Kashf: "It is as if the benefit of the delay is to estimate 'there is no escape' a second time, either for emphasis or because one [clause] is different from the other, alerting that the absence of escape is the cause of the seizure, and the seizure is the cause of its realization in existence; therein lies an excellent hyperbole." It is also said that it is a conjunction to "no escape," with the meaning: they did not escape, and they were seized. Ibn Jinni favored this, objecting to what preceded by stating that it does not mean "if you could see the time of their terror and their seizure," but rather "if you could see when they were terrified, and they did not escape, and they were seized." With what is narrated from al-Kashf, the answer to this is obtained.

It is permissible for it to be a state (hal) from the subject of "they were terrified," or from the predicate of "no" (la) which is omitted—namely, "for them"—with or without the estimation of "already" (qad). The fa in "and there is no escape," it is said, if it is causal, then it enters upon the caused effect, since their lack of escape is from their terror and confusion. If it is explanatory, it enters upon the cause, because its mention follows the mention of the caused effect. If "they were seized" is conjoined to it, or made a state of the predicate, then it is the object intended by the branching.

‘Abd al-Rahman mawla Bani Hashim, from his father, and Talha read "no escape (fawt) and seizure (akhdh)" as two indefinite masdars (verbal nouns).

Ubayy read "no escape" as indeclinable and "seizure" as an indefinite verbal noun. If akhdh is in the nominative, it is the predicate of an omitted subject, meaning: "and their state is a seizure," or it is a subject whose predicate is omitted, meaning: "and there is a seizure [there]." Abu Hayyan inclined toward this and said: Al-Zamakhshari said it is read akhdh in the nominative as being conjoined to the place of "no escape," and its meaning is: "There is no escape there, and there is a seizure there."