Tafsir of Sad 38:26

Either this is a narrative of how he (peace be upon him) was addressed, indicating his closeness to Him—Mighty and Majestic is He—or it is the content of an implied speech conjoined to "We forgave him." Or, it may be a circumstantial qualifier of its subject, meaning: "And We said to him," or "Being those who said to him: 'O David, indeed We have made you a successor upon the earth.'"

That is: We have appointed you as a successor over the dominion within it and to judge among its people; or, We have made you a successor to those who came before you from among the prophets who upheld the truth. Regarding the first interpretation, it is like saying: "So-and-so is the successor of the Sultan," if he was appointed by him to execute what he desires. Regarding the second, it is like the saying: "This son is a successor to his father," meaning he fills his place and performs what he used to perform, without consideration for life, death, or otherwise. The first is more apparent, and the favor is greater. Thus, he (peace be upon him) is the successor of Allah Almighty in the sense you have heard.

Ibn Atiyyah said: "One does not say 'successor of Allah Almighty' except for His Messenger. As for the caliphs, each one of them is a successor of the one who preceded him. Whatever appears in poetry about calling one of them the 'successor of Allah' is a metaphorical usage," as Qays ibn al-Ruqayyat said: "The successor of Allah in His creation, the pens and books have confirmed that." The Companions said to Abu Bakr: "O successor of the Messenger of Allah," and by that he was called until he passed away. When he (Umar) took power, they said: "O successor of the successor of the Messenger of Allah," so he turned away from that out of brevity to "Commander of the Faithful." The Great Sheikh, Muhyiddin—may his secret be sanctified—held that the successor among the messengers is the one to whom legislation has been delegated. Perhaps this is among his technical terminologies, and there is no dispute in terminology.

Some have argued through this verse that the earth is in need of a successor from Allah Almighty. This is the statement of those who hold that it is incumbent upon Allah Almighty to appoint an Imam, because it is (part of the) wording, and it is obligatory upon Him—Glorified be He. The [Sunni] community does not say this; for them, the Imamate is among the branches [of jurisprudence], even if they mention it in books of creed. There is nothing in the verse that necessitates that, as is not hidden, and the verification of the matter is in its proper place.

(Therefore, judge between the people with truth)

That which Allah Almighty has legislated for you. "Truth" (al-haqq) is the opposite of falsehood (al-batil). The definite article (al) here is for reference to the established truth. It is also permissible that it is intended as one of His names—Almighty and Majestic is He—meaning: "Judge by the judgment of The Truth (Allah)," because it is known that entities cannot be judged by. This was countered by the claim that its opposition to "desire" (hawa) refutes that. Perhaps he who states that considers the opposed term to be an implied added noun, and the opposition is based on the fact that the judgment of Allah Almighty cannot be anything but truth.

The imperative to judge is based on what preceded, because succession, in both meanings, necessitates righteous judgment, especially according to the first meaning, due to the apparent implication that being a successor of Allah Almighty requires that his judgment not contradict the judgment of the One who appointed him, but rather be in accordance with His will and pleasure.

It is said that what is entailed is absolute judgment because of its apparent necessity following his status as a successor. "Truth" was mentioned because through it is the rectification of judgment. Others said that this follows because succession is a great blessing, and its gratitude is justice. In al-Bahr [al-Muhit], it states that this is a command for persistence and an alert to others who have been entrusted with the affairs of the people that they must judge between them with truth; otherwise, he [David], in his capacity as one who is infallible (ma'sum), does not judge except by the truth. On this order, I classify the prohibition in His statement—the Almighty and Exalted:

(And do not follow desire)

For the following of desire is something that almost never occurs to the infallible. The apparent context is that it means: "Do not follow the desire of the soul in matters of judgment." Some have generalized it, saying: "That is, in judgments and other matters of religion and world." This prohibition is used to support the claim that his—peace be upon him—sin was the haste to believe the claimant and declare the other oppressed before questioning him, not an inclination toward the wife of Uriah. It is as if it were said: "Do not follow desire in judgment as you followed it initially." However, following desire and judging by other than what Allah has legislated for him is inappropriate for his station, especially since Allah Almighty had already informed him—before informing him of the matter of the disputants—that He had given him judgment and the final word. This is nothing but guidance for what the station of succession necessitates, and an alert to those beneath him (peace be upon him).

The origin of "desire" (hawa) is the inclination of the soul toward lust. It is also applied to the soul that inclines toward it, and it can mean "the object of desire," as in the saying: "My desire (haway) is with the Yemeni caravan, ascending / While my body is bound in Mecca." Some have interpreted it here accordingly, saying: "That is, do not follow what the souls desire."

(lest it lead you astray from the way of Allah)

In the accusative case, as it is the response to the prohibition. It is also said to be in the jussive case as a conjunction to the prohibition, with the vowel opened to avoid the meeting of two vowelless letters. Meaning: "Then the desire, or the following of it, will be a cause for your straying from the evidences He has established for the truth." This is broader than both intellectual and transmitted evidences. This straying from the evidences is either due to not understanding them or not acting according to their requirements.

His statement—the Almighty:

(Indeed, those who go astray from the way of Allah will have a severe punishment)

This is a justification for what preceded by explaining its disastrous consequence. The manifestation of "the way of Allah" instead of the pronoun is to increase the confirmation and indicate the complete repulsiveness of straying from it. The predicate of "indeed" is either the sentence "(they) will have a punishment," given that "(for them) is a punishment" is a fronted predicate and "a punishment" is the delayed subject; or [it is] the prepositional phrase, and "punishment" is in the nominative case as the agent of the implicit "being" (istaqrar).

Ibn Abbas, al-Hasan—with a different report from them—and Abu Haywah read it as yudilluna (to lead others astray) with a damma on the ya. Abu Hayyan said: "This reading is more general, because none leads others astray unless he is already astray himself." The reading of the majority is clearer, because the intended meaning is the "straying" of those whom the following of desire led astray; after it led them astray, they became the straying ones.

His statement—the Almighty:

(because they forgot the Day of Reckoning)

It is connected to the [implicit] "being." The ba is causal, and ma is an infinitive particle.

The object of "forgot" is—as is apparent—"the Day of Reckoning." Meaning: That punishment is confirmed for them because of their forgetting and their lack of mention of the Day of Reckoning. Accordingly, it is an explicit justification for the confirmation of the severe punishment for them due to their forgetting the Day of Reckoning, after having already indicated the causality of what it entails and necessitates—that is, straying from the way of Allah, for that is in itself a requirement for forgetting the Day of Reckoning entirely; rather, this is a subset of it.

Ibn Jarir extracted from Ikrimah that the speech contains a transposition (taqdim wa ta'khir), meaning: "For them on the Day of Reckoning is a severe punishment, because they forgot." Thus, "the Day of Reckoning" is the time/place for "for them." The forgetting is then made a metaphor for their straying from the way of Allah by the relationship of causality. Of necessity, this makes the object of "forgetting" the way of Allah. Thus, the explicit justification becomes the same as the implied justification, merely different in phrasing. So reflect.