Tafsir of Az-Zumar 39:56

"That a soul should say" is in the position of a maf‘ul lahu (an object denoting cause), with a suppressed noun added—which the Zamakhshari estimated as "hatred" (karahatan). It is in the accusative case due to a deleted verb indicated by what preceded it, meaning: "I warn you and command you with the best of what has been sent down to you, out of hatred that a soul should say..." For those who do not require unity of the subject for the accusative case, it is permissible that the governor be "return in repentance" (anibu) or "follow" (ittabi‘u). Regardless of which it is, this "hatred" corresponds to disapproval, not the intent (al-iradah), so there is no conflict in estimating it. This is more appropriate than estimating "fear" (makhafah), as al-Hawfi did, where he said: "I warned you out of fear that a soul might say." Ibn Atiyyah made the governor "return in repentance" (anibu) without estimating any "hatred" or "fear," stating: "That is, return in repentance so that a soul might not say." Some grammarians have taken the position that the implied meaning is "lest a soul should say."

The indefiniteness of "a soul" (nafs) is for the purpose of multiplication (takthir), justified by the context, as in the saying of al-A‘sha: "And many a noble one, if I had cried out in his valley, would have come to me, shaking his head in anger." For he meant hosts of noble ones to aid him, not a single noble one. It is also permitted that it be for partitivity (tab‘id), as the speaker is only one of the souls; Abu Hayyan favored this, adding that this is sufficient for the warning, because every soul is a candidate to be that one. It is also permitted that it be for glorification (ta‘zim), meaning a soul distinguished among souls, either by intense persistence or by severe punishment—though this is not particularly strong.

"Oh, my regret" (ya hasrati): with an alif instead of the ya of possession. The meaning, as Sibawayh stated, is: "O my regret, come forth, for this is your time." Ibn Kathir read it with the ha of silence (hata) during a pause. Abu Ja‘far read it with the ya of possession. From him also is "ya hasrati" with an alif and an undotted ya (with the ya being either vocalized or quiescent), combining the substitute and the substituted, as has been said. It is not hidden that such a form is not permitted, except as an anomaly in usage and analogy. Therefore, the most appropriate view is that it is a dualization of "regret" for the sake of hyperbole, similar to labbayka and sa‘dayka, and the phrase "he stood between their backs" (bayna zahrayhim and zahraynayhim) according to the dialect of Banu al-Harith bin Ka‘b, which retains the dual alif in all states. The author of al-Kashf favored this. Abu al-Fadl al-Razi permitted in his book al-Lawami‘ that the dualization be taken literally according to that dialect, the intended meaning being the regret of missing Paradise and the regret of entering Hell. Considering the multiplication is better, given the abundance of their regrets on the Day of Resurrection.

"For what I neglected" (ala ma farrattu): meaning, "because of my negligence." ‘Ala here is causative, and ma is a particle forming a masdar (infinitive), as in His saying: "And that you may glorify Allah for what He has guided you." Tafrit means negligence/shortcoming.

"In the side of Allah" (fi janbi Allah): meaning, in His proximity. Al-Raghib said: The original meaning of janb is a limb, then it is metaphorically used for the side and the direction that is adjacent to it, following their custom of using the names of all limbs for such things—like "right" and "left." The intended meaning here is "direction" metaphorically. The speech contains a deleted noun, meaning: "in the side of the obedience to Allah" or "in His right," meaning what is due to Him, Glory be to Him, which is His obedience. To this effect is the saying of Sabiq al-Barbari, one of the poets of the Hamasa: "Do you not fear Allah regarding the side of a lover, who has a liver that, for your sake, is being cut?" Negligence in the direction of obedience is a metonym for negligence in the obedience itself, because whoever wastes the direction of a thing wastes what is within it, a fortiori—an argument more eloquent because it is demonstrative.

A parallel to this is the saying of Ziyad al-A‘jam: "Verily, generosity, chivalry, and munificence are in a tent pitched over Ibn al-Hashraj." There is no objection to it being "obedience," and likewise "the right of Allah" means His obedience; it is a "side" (janb) in a subordinate sense to the one who obeys, just like the place of generosity and what accompanies it in the poem. From what we have mentioned, it is known that there is no objection to the metonymy, contrary to what was imagined. The Imam said: "It is called janb because it is a side of the sides of a thing; and a thing that is among the necessities and appendages of a thing is as if it were a legion of its soldiers and a side of its sides. When similarity was established between the janb (the limb) and that which is necessary and subordinate to a thing, it was undoubtedly appropriate to apply the word janb to right, command, and obedience." Some have made it a tasrihiyyah (explicit) metaphor, without any implied deleted noun, but that is not strong.

The sayings of Ibn Abbas—"He intends: regarding what I wasted of the reward of Allah"—and Muqatil—"regarding what I wasted of the remembrance of Allah"—and Mujahid and al-Suddi—"regarding what I neglected in the command of Allah"—and al-Hasan—"in the obedience of Allah"—and Sa‘id bin Jubayr—"in the right of Allah"—are all explanations of the result of the meaning. It is also said that janb is a metaphor for the Self/Essence, just as "side" or "presence" is used metaphorically for a Lord; thus the meaning would be "for what I neglected in the Essence of Allah." This is weakened by the fact that janb is not appropriate to apply to Him, even metaphorically, and by its clumsiness. It is also said that it is a metaphor for "nearness," i.e., "for what I neglected in the nearness of Allah." This is weakened by its need for another metaphor. The matter in the Afterlife returns to the obedience of Allah and the like. In sum, it is impossible to keep the speech in its literal sense, due to His transcendence, Exalted be He, from a janb in the literal sense.

I have not encountered any of the Salaf who interpreted it as one of the auditory attributes, and I do not rely on what is in al-Mawaqif (on that subject). Upon the assumption of it being considered (as such), their speech regarding it is famous, and they are all in agreement upon transcendence (tanzih). Exalted is He to whom there is nothing like unto Him, and He is the Hearing, the Seeing. In the codex of Abdullah [ibn Mas‘ud], it is [recited as]: "in the remembrance of Allah."

"And indeed, I was among the mockers" (56): that is, those who mocked the religion of Allah and His people. Inna is the mukhaffafah (lightened form) from the muthaqqalah (heavy) form, and the lam is the fariqah (distinguishing particle). The sentence is in the position of the accusative as a state (hal) according to al-Zamakhshari, meaning: "I was negligent while in the state of my mocking."

In al-Bahr, it says: "It appears that it is an inception (isti'naf), an informing about himself of what he was upon in the worldly life, not a state (hal). The purpose of that is reporting and expressing regret and sorrow."