Tafsir of Sad 38:85

"I will surely fill Hell" (لأملأن جهنم): This is based on the premise that the word "Truth" (الحق) refers either to Allah Almighty or to the opposite of falsehood. Allah Almighty exalted it by swearing by it. This is supported by the hadith regarding the repetition of the name in its definite form, or it means "I am the Truth," or "My speech is the Truth." In this case, "I will surely fill..." is the response to an omitted oath; i.e., "By Allah, I will surely fill..."

The saying of Allah Almighty, "And I speak the truth" (والحق أقول), is considered a parenthetical clause that reinforces the content of the preceding oath-sentence, or, according to the third interpretation, the preceding sentence, i.e., "My speech is the truth."

Regarding "The truth" (فالحق) as the subject whose predicate is "I will surely fill" (لأملأن), the meaning is that the filling is absolute and certain, not insignificant.

The majority read "The truth" (فالحق) and "The truth" (الحق) in the accusative (nasb) case. This is explained by the second being a fronted object (as previously mentioned), and the first being an object of the oath where the oath particle is omitted, hence it is in the accusative as in the line of the Kitab: "Upon you is Allah (by Allah) that you pledge..." and the phrase, "Allah, I shall certainly do." Its response is "I will surely fill," and what is between them is a parenthetical clause. Others say it is in the accusative as an encouragement (ighra'), meaning: "Adhere to the Truth," and "I will surely fill" is the response to an omitted oath.

Al-Farra' said: It is like saying "Truly (haqqan), I will come to you," and the presence or absence of the definite article (al) is the same; meaning, "I will surely fill Hell, truly (haqqan)." Thus, in his view, it is an accusative verbal noun (masdar) emphasizing the content of the sentence. It is not hidden that most grammarians do not permit fronting this verbal noun, and that it is reserved for sentences whose two parts are both definite nouns that are rigidly fixed in their forms.

The author of al-Basit said: It is sometimes permissible for the predicate to be indefinite while the subject is a pronoun (like "He is Zayd, known") or for it to be explicit (like "Zayd is your father, sympathetic"). Thus, it is as if Al-Farra' does not require the conditions that they require.

Ibn Abbas, Mujahid, and al-A'mash read both in the nominative (raf'). The nominative of the first is explained as above, and the nominative of the second as a subject whose predicate is the following sentence, with an implied connector, i.e., "My saying of it."

Hasan, Isa, and Abd al-Rahman bin Abi Hammad from Abu Bakr read both in the genitive (jarr). This is explained by the first being in the genitive due to an omitted oath particle (waw), i.e., "By the Truth," and the second being in the genitive due to conjunction with the first, just as one says, "By Allah, by Allah, I will surely stand." "I say" is a parenthetical clause between the oath and its response. Al-Zamakhshari considered it a fronted object for "I say," and the genitive case as the citation of the wording of that which is sworn by. He said: "Its meaning is emphasis and intensification, a benefit that exceeds what the original parenthetical clause provides, because shifting from the expected case (i.e., accusative) to citation for the sake of preserving the initial form indicates that it occupies a high degree of concern. This applies to every citation without a verb of saying or its equivalent. Thus, in the present context, it indicates special concern for the matter of the oath and serves to intensify and emphasize it."

"With you" (منك): That is, from your species, the devils. "And whoever follows you" (وممن تبعك) in deviation and misguidance from among them, "from the offspring of Adam" (من ذرية آدم عليه السلام), all of them.

"All of them" (أجمعين) is an emphasis for the pronoun in "with you" and the pronoun governed by the second preposition "from." The meaning is: "I will surely fill Hell with the followed and the followers, all of them; I will not leave any of them." Or, it is an emphasis for the followers only. The meaning is: "I will surely fill it with the devils and whoever followed them from among all people," without distinction between person and person once there are followers among them, including the children of prophets and others. The emphasis is placed on the followers rather than the followed because, when the situation reaches the point of reaching the children of prophets, what then of the followed?

The author of al-Kashf said: The holder of this view considered proximity, and that the discourse is between the Truth—exalted is His majesty—and the accursed one regarding the followers, so he emphasized what is intended and omitted emphasizing the other out of sufficiency.

Know that this story has been mentioned in several surahs. In some of them, parts of what was mentioned in others were omitted for the sake of brevity, relying on what was mentioned elsewhere. Sometimes there are two identical expressions in two places that mean different things in wording to observe stylistic variation. Sometimes the difference is attributed to multiple occurrences; for instance, it is said that the accursed one swore once by [Allah's] might—and this is narrated in one surah—and another time by the misguidance of Allah Almighty, which is an effect of His power and might and a decree of His authority—and this is narrated in Surah al-A'raf.

Sometimes the difference is attributed to the difference in the contexts, such as the omission of the fa' in "Reprieve me until the day they are resurrected," and the omission of it in "You are of those reprieved" in al-A'raf, while including it elsewhere. What must be considered in transmitting speech is the core of its meaning and the essence of its signified content. As for the manner in which it provides that meaning, it is not something that must be strictly observed during transmission. Rather, it may be observed or not, according to the requirements of the context. Stripping it of the original expression does not diminish the original speech. Indeed, sometimes qualities and specifics are attributed to the transmission that the original speaker did not consider at all, because the context of the narration required it, and this is the crux of the matter. This does not impair the fact that what is transmitted is the core meaning, as the Sadr al-Muftin Abu al-Su'ud has verified and discussed at length, so let it be referred to.