Tafsir of Ya seen 36:29

(It was not but one shout, and behold! They were extinguished.)

In this is a belittlement of them and their destruction, and an indication of the exaltation of the Prophet’s status—may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Abu Hayyan interpreted "jund" (host) in a way that includes the angels, saying: "Like stones, the wind, and so forth," though the most apparent meaning is what preceded. It is said: The "host" refers to the angels of revelation who descend upon the Prophets, peace be upon them; meaning, We cut off the message from them when they did what they did, and We did not care for them, so We destroyed them. From Al-Hasan and Mujahid, it is said: Allah the Exalted cut off the message from them when they killed His messengers. This interpretation is very far-fetched, and the killing of the three messengers is only related in Al-Bahr as an opinion, while the apparent meaning of these well-known reports is that they were not killed, but rather only Habib was killed.

A group went [to the view] that the "ma" in His saying, "And We were not senders," is a relative pronoun (ma al-mawsula) conjoined to "jund," and the intent is: "We did not send down upon his people after him a host from the heaven, nor did We send down what We were senders of upon those before them, such as stones, wind, and so forth."

Abu Hayyan criticized this by stating that it necessitates the addition of "min" (from) in a definite context, and hence it was said that it is better to treat it as an indefinite noun modified by an adjective. It was answered that what is excused in a follower is not excused in that which is followed; it is not hidden that this does not repel its remoteness. Among the most far-fetched [interpretations] is the statement of Abu al-Baqa: It is permissible for "ma" to be redundant (za’idah), meaning "And We had indeed sent down upon others a host from heaven." Indeed, this is nothing.

Rather, [the correct view is]: "Ma" is negative (nafiyah), "kana" is an incomplete verb whose noun is hidden, and "sayhah" is its predicate; meaning, "It was not—i.e., the punishment—but one shout." It is reported that Allah the Exalted sent Gabriel, peace be upon him, until he took hold of the two doorposts of the city and shouted at them a single shout, and they all died. "Idha" (behold!) is for suddenness, and in it is an indication of the speed of their destruction, such that it occurred alongside the shout. They are likened to fire by way of implied metaphor (isti’arah makniyyah), and "extinguished" (khamidun) is a metaphorical projection (takhayyul). In this is a symbol that the living is like the flame of a fire, and the dead is like ash, as Labid said: "A man is but like a spark and its light; it turns to ash after it was blazing."

It is also permissible that the metaphor be an explicit dependent metaphor (isti’arah tasrihiyyah taba’iyyah) in the word "extinguished," meaning coldness and stillness, because the soul, due to its terror at the shout, pushes to the interior all at once and then becomes confined, so the innate heat is extinguished due to its confinement. Perhaps in shifting from "hamidun" (become silent/dead) to "khamidun" (extinguished/cold ash), there is a hidden symbol of the resurrection after death. The apparent meaning is that none of them believed except Habib, and that they perished to the last of them. In some traditions, it is said that the King believed, as did a group of his entourage, and those who did not believe perished by the shout. This is far-fetched, for the apparent meaning would have been that those believers would support the messengers as Habib did, and they would have had some mention in the Glorious Quran in one way or another. Unless it is said: They believed in secret and had what excused them from overt support; yet even this is not free from being far-fetched.

Abu Ja’far, Shaybah, and Mu’adh bin al-Harith al-Qari recited "sayhah" in the nominative case (raf’), on the basis that "kana" is a complete verb, meaning: "No shout happened or occurred except one." It is appropriate that the feminine marker (ta) not be attached to the verb in such a construction; one should not say "Ma qamat illa Hind" (There stood not except Hind), but rather "Ma qama illa Hind," because the speech is on the meaning of "No one stood except Hind," and the agent is masculine. Many grammarians did not permit the attachment [of the feminine marker] except in poetry, such as the saying of Dhu al-Rumma: "...and nothing remained except the dulu’ (ribs) which were jarash (thick)," and the saying of another: "None were cleared of suspicion and blame in our war except the daughters of the paternal uncle." Hence, many—as Abu Hatim said—rejected this reading. Some permitted this in speech, albeit rarely, as in the reading of Al-Hasan, Malik bin Dinar, Abu Raja, Al-Jahdari, Qatadah, Abu Haywah, Ibn Abi ‘Ablah, and Abu Bahriyyah: "La tura illa masakinuhum" (You will not see except their dwellings) with the top-dotted ta (feminine), and its orientation is the observation of the mentioned agent. It is as if I see you inclining toward this view.

Ibn Mas’ud recited "illa zaqiyah" (except for one zaqiyah), from the bird zaqa (crying out) when it shouts. From this is the proverb concerning al-zawwaqi (the roosters), because they used to stay up talking until the roosters zaqu (cried out), and when they crowed, they would disperse.