Tafsir of Ya seen 36:12

"Indeed, it is We who bring the dead to life..." This is a general epilogue for both groups—those who persist in disbelief and those who have been admonished through intimidation, encouragement, threats, and promises. The repetition of the pronoun [We] is to signify exclusivity (restriction) or for emphasis. How subtle this pronoun is, which is mirrored here just as it is in its deployment; the pronoun of majesty indicates the grandeur of the act, and the emphasis expresses the significance of the news or serves to refute denial. For the disbelievers used to say: "There is only our life of this world; we die and we live, and we are not to be resurrected." It means: Indeed, it is We who will bring all the dead to life by resurrecting them on the Day of Resurrection, "and We record what they have put forth," which is the good and evil deeds they sent ahead, "and their traces," which are the remnants they left behind after them. This includes good deeds, such as knowledge they taught, a book they authored, a charitable endowment (waqf) they established, a building constructed in the cause of Allah, and other acts of virtue. It also includes evil deeds, such as establishing oppressive and aggressive laws, or laying the foundations of evil and corruption among servants, and other forms of wickedness that they initiated and established for the corrupt to follow after them.

Ibn Abi Hatim narrated from Jarir ibn Abdullah al-Bajali, who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: "Whoever introduces a good practice (Sunnah) has its reward and the reward of those who act upon it after him, without any of their rewards being diminished in the slightest. And whoever introduces an evil practice carries its burden and the burden of those who act upon it after him, without their burdens being diminished in the slightest." Then he recited: "...and We record what they have put forth and their traces." Anas said regarding this verse: "This refers to the footsteps taken to the mosque on Friday." Others interpreted "traces" as the footsteps to the mosques in general, based on what Abd al-Razzaq, Ibn Jarir, Ibn al-Mundhir, and al-Tirmidhi (who classified it as hasan) narrated from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri. He said: The Banu Salama lived in a part of the city and wanted to move closer to the mosque, so Allah Almighty revealed: "Indeed, it is We who bring the dead to life and record what they have put forth and their traces." The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) called them and said: "Indeed, your traces are recorded," then he recited the verse to them, and they desisted.

Imam Ahmad in al-Zuhd, Ibn Majah, and others narrated from Ibn Abbas that the Ansar lived far from the mosque and wanted to move closer, so "...and We record what they have put forth and their traces" was revealed, and they said: "Rather, we shall remain where we are."

You know that there is no evidence in what was mentioned that the "traces" are only footsteps. The most that can be argued is that footsteps are part of the traces, so "traces" should be interpreted as that which includes them and other things as well. These two reports and their likes are used as evidence that the verse is Medinan.

Abu Hayyan stated: "That is not a correct assumption," and he criticized the view based on what has been reported to the contrary. Al-Khafaji defended him, arguing that the tradition indicating it is Medinan is contradicted by the report in the two Sahihs that the Prophet (peace be upon him) recited this verse for them without mentioning that it was revealed specifically for them; and his recitation (peace be upon him) does not negate the possibility of it having been revealed earlier. The intent of Abu Hayyan is this—not that he denied the authenticity of the tradition itself. It is not hidden that the two aforementioned traditions are apparent in that the verse was revealed on that day, and there is nothing in the hadith of the two Sahihs that contradicts that. It is surprising how this escaped al-Khafaji. It has been said that "what they have put forth" refers to intentions, and "their traces" refers to deeds. The apparent meaning is that the recording takes place in the scrolls of the noble recording angels, and because it is by His command (Almighty and Exalted is He), it is attributed to Him (Subhanahu). It is mentioned after "bringing to life," even though it chronologically precedes it, because its effect only becomes manifest thereafter. Based on this, the interpretation of "what they have put forth" as "intentions" is weakened, founded upon certain reports indicating that the angels (peace be upon them) do not perceive intentions and are not commanded to record them.

Some interpreted the "recording" as preservation—meaning we preserve that and fix it in our knowledge, neither forgetting nor neglecting it, just as the written text is preserved. Perhaps you would prefer that the recording of what they have put forth and their traces is a metonymy for their requital: if good, then good; if evil, then evil. In that case, the reason for mentioning it after "bringing to life" is evident.

Hasan and al-Dahhak said that Allah’s bringing the dead to life means taking them out of polytheism into faith, interpreting "death" as a metaphor for ignorance, and the definition (using the definite article) for the "dead" as referring to a specific group. The discourse on this is to emphasize the promise being heralded; as if it were said: "Your warning only benefits these people because We will give them life, and We record their righteous deeds and their traces." The remoteness of this interpretation is obvious. Zur and Masruq read wa yuktabu (in the passive voice) with a ya prefix, with āthāruhum in the nominative case. "And every thing" (of all things, whatever it may be)—the accusative case being due to ishtighāl (preoccupation)—meaning: And We have enumerated every thing, "in a clear record," meaning: We have elucidated it and preserved it. The root of iḥṣā' (enumeration) is counting, then it was used metaphorically for what was mentioned, because counting is done for the sake of it.

"In a clear record" means: An original, momentous, and esteemed source that is used as a model, followed, and not contradicted. It "manifests" what has been and what will be. According to what is in al-Bahr, citing Mujahid, Qatadah, and Ibn Zayd, it is the Preserved Tablet (al-Lawḥ al-Maḥfūẓ). The elucidation of every thing within it—if we take the generalization in its literal sense to include the events of Paradise and what will be renewed for its people without interruption—is like what is narrated about the manifestation of cosmic events in the Jafr al-Jami', though in a higher and more noble style. Similar to this is what is said by more than one scholar regarding the comprehensiveness of the Holy Quran for everything, even the names of kings and the duration of their reigns. Or, it is said that the manifestation of that within it is not all at once, but in stages: that a portion of things is clarified within it—such as the events of a thousand years, for instance—then it is erased upon the completion of the thousand, and another portion is clarified, such as the events of the next thousand, and so on. The motive for what was mentioned is that the Tablet, in the view of the Muslims, is a physical body, and every physical body has finite dimensions, as the evidence testifies. The manifestation of "every thing" within it in the manner known to us all at once would necessitate that the finite contain the infinite, which is impossible by intuition.

If by "every thing" it is intended the things in this created realm, the deeds of servants, and their conditions therein, then there is no difficulty in the manifestation occurring in the known manner all at once.

What I find most plausible is that what is written in the Tablet is what has been and what will be until the Day of Resurrection, and it is finite. Some traditions testify to this, and the absolute [statements] are to be interpreted by the qualified ones. The true nature of the Tablet, regarding which nothing of certainty has reached us—and that is why some refrained from defining it, and the claim that one of its faces is red ruby and the other green emerald comes from some traditions, but we have no certainty of its correctness—is not, as some philosophers and their followers imagine, that it is one of the abstract entities, nor that there is nothing but that He knows it in act. No Muslim has ever held such a view. Some interpreted the "clear record" as His (Almighty) eternal knowledge, just as they interpreted the "Mother of the Book" in His saying: "...and with Him is the Mother of the Book" as such. It is an origin, and nothing that contradicts it can occur among the various categories of possibilities, as alluded to by the statement of al-Shafi'i: "The servants were created according to what I knew, so in the knowledge, the young and the old proceed." Describing it as "clear" [manifest] is because it is a manifestation; for they have said: Knowledge is an attribute by which the mentioned object is made manifest to the one who possesses it, or because the manifestation of things from the treasuries of non-existence occurs after His connection [to them]. For power only connects to a thing after knowledge; so a thing is known first, then willed, then power connects to its creation, and so it exists. It is not hidden that this interpretation involves departing from the apparent meaning, and according to it, there is no debate regarding the generalization. Yes, there is a long discussion regarding the mode of existence of things in His (Almighty) knowledge, the place for which is the books of theology (Kalam). Hasan related that it is intended as the scrolls of deeds, but that is not strong. It was narrated to me from some of the extremist Shi'a that the "clear record" refers to Ali (may Allah honor his face), and the enumeration of every thing in it is like the saying: "It is not inconceivable for Allah to gather the world into one." Some of them claim that this is in the sense of making him (may Allah honor his face) a repository for information in the manner of the Preserved Tablet. The profound ignorance of the Majestic Book in this is not hidden; we ask Allah Almighty for forgiveness and well-being. It is possible to say: they intended by that something similar to what the Sufis intended in their application of "the clear book" to the "Perfect Human" (al-Insān al-Kāmil) as a convention of theirs, so the gravity of the ignorance is mitigated; and the perfection of Ali (may Allah honor his face) is denied by no one except those deficient in intellect and lacking in religion.

Abu al-Summal read wa kullun in the nominative case as an initial subject.