Tafsir of Ya seen 36:33

And a sign for them is the dead earth (read with light tashdīd, while Nafi‘ read it with heavy tashdīd). Ayah (a sign) is a predicate placed at the beginning for emphasis, and its indefiniteness is for aggrandizement. Lahum (for them) is either connected to it because it carries the meaning of an indication, or it is connected to an implied element that serves as its adjective. The plural pronoun refers to the disbelievers of the people of Mecca and those who follow their path in denying the Resurrection. Al-ardu (the earth) is the subject, and al-maytatu (the dead) is its adjective. His saying, the Exalted, ahyaynaha (We have given it life), is a new sentence explaining how it serves as a sign. It has been said that it is in the position of a state (hal), and its operator is ayah due to the meaning of "informing" contained within it—though this is a flimsy affectation.

It has also been said that ayah is the first subject, and lahum is its adjective or is connected to it; both options justify starting with an indefinite noun. Al-ardu al-maytatu is the second subject and its adjective, and the sentence ahyaynaha is the predicate of the second subject, while the sentence of the second subject and its predicate form the first subject. Because it is identical to the subject—like the predicate of the pronoun of state (damir al-sha’n)—it does not require a connector. Al-Khafaji said: "This is very good, except that the grammarians have not explicitly permitted it for anything other than the pronoun of state." It is said that it is interpreted by the meaning of this statement, thus it does not require that, though its remoteness is not hidden.

It is also said that ayah is the subject and al-ardu is its predicate, and the sentence ahyaynaha is an adjective for al-ardu because it is not intended to be a specific land, but rather the genus; thus, there is no violation in qualifying a definite noun with a sentence that has the status of an indefinite. An example of this is the saying: "I pass by the vile person [who is] insulting me, then I depart, saying: He does not mean me." Abu Hayyan denied the permissibility of this, opposing al-Zamakhshari and Ibn Malik in al-Tashil, and he treated the sentence "insulting me" as a state from "the vile person." You know that the meaning is the persistence of his passing by whoever insults him and his overlooking of it; this is why he said "I pass" and conjoined it with "then I depart," and the restriction of a state does not produce this meaning. Furthermore, the basis of the predication is the intended genus, so there is no informing about a definite noun with an indefinite one such that it would contradict the rules, as has been claimed. Yes, the most preferred of the perspectives is what was established first, and the intended meaning of the death of the earth and its revival has already passed, so remember it.

Wa akhrajna minha habban (And We brought forth from it grain)—meaning the genus of grain, such as wheat, barley, rice, and others. The indefinite can be general, as when it is in the context of bestowing favor or the like. In the bringing forth, as well as the creation, is a reminder of the perfection of giving life. Faminhu (and from it)—meaning from the grain after bringing it forth. The fa is connected to the resultant action, and min is for initiation or partition; the prepositional phrase is connected to His saying, the Exalted, ya’kulun (they eat).

The advancement [of the object] is to signify that grain is the majority of what is eaten and lived upon, due to what that contains of the illusion of restriction for the sake of its importance, as if there is no food other than it.