Tafsir of Ghafir 40:9

(And protect them from the evil deeds): That is, the punishments, as narrated from Qatada. The application of "evil" (sayyi'ah) to mean punishment is because it is evil in itself. It is also permissible that the intended meaning is the well-known one, namely, sins. The speech, in this case, would be based on an elliptical genitive construction—meaning: protect them from the recompense of evil deeds—or it is a figurative use of the cause for the effect. In either case, this does not result in redundancy with [their prayer] "and protect them from the punishment of the Blaze," but rather it is a generalization following a specification, as it encompasses both worldly and otherworldly punishment. Alternatively, the first supplication is for the followed (matbu'in), and this one is for the followers (tabi'in).

It is also possible that "evil deeds" refers to the well-known meaning without an elliptical genitive or figurative shift, namely: sins. That is, "protect them from sins in this world." Their protection from them is their preservation from committing them. This is a supplication for preservation from the cause of punishment, following the supplication for preservation from the effect, which is the punishment. This has been criticized by arguing that, according to this interpretation, it would be more appropriate to present this supplication before the other.

(And whoever You protect from the evil deeds on that Day): That is, the Day of Recompense. It is also said, regarding the latter interpretation, "Whoever You protect from evil deeds on the day of action"—meaning in this world—"You have surely shown him mercy" in the Hereafter. This view is supported by the fact that the immediate connotation of "that Day" (yawma'idhin) is this world, since idh (when/then) indicates the past; however, this contains an obvious prohibition. The pronoun [in "You have shown him mercy"] refers to the mercy understood from "You have shown him mercy," or to the protection understood from the verb "protect," or to both collectively. The masculine gender in the pronoun [if referring to mercy] is based on the first two possibilities, and the singular form [if referring to the collective] is based on the last possibility; both are apparent.

(That is the great success): That is, the attainment, which has no pursuit left for a pursuer.

That the intended meaning of "those who have repented" is repentance from sins absolutely is the position of Al-Zamakhshari. He stated that "evil deeds," under the assumption of the omitted genitive, refers to minor sins or major sins from which one has repented. He mentioned that protection from them is forgiveness (takfir) or the acceptance of repentance, and that these people for whom forgiveness is sought are repentant and righteous, like the angels in their purity. He argued that the intercession for them is akin to a formal intercession, and its benefit is the increase of honor and reward; thus, it is not harmful that they are [already] recipients of forgiveness, for Allah does not break His promise.

This has been criticized by saying there is no benefit in mentioning mercy and emphasizing it if the one forgiven is like the angels, upon them be peace, in purity. What need is there for intercession, let alone emphasis? Furthermore, what he said regarding "evil deeds" is not permissible, for the dropping of the punishment for a major sin after repentance is obligatory in his [Mu'tazili] school of thought; and whatever is already obligatory by action, requesting it through supplication is futile and ugly, according to the Mu'tazila. The same applies to the punishment for minor sins, so requesting it through supplication is not appropriate. Nor can it be said that it is for an increase in benefit, for that is not called "forgiveness." Al-Tibi narrated this from the Imam [Al-Razi], then said: Therefore, one must hold that the intended meaning of repentance is repentance from polytheism (shirk), as Al-Wahidi said: "So forgive those who have repented from polytheism and followed Your way," i.e., Your religion, Islam.

If you say: "If repentance from sins were not intended, it would have sufficed for them to say: 'So forgive those who have believed,' to match the preceding phrase," I would say: And Allah knows best; it is close to the placement of the noun in place of the pronoun without [the use of] the preceding phrasing. The explanation is that His saying, "Our Lord, You have encompassed all things in mercy and knowledge, so forgive those who have repented," comes separated from His saying, "And they ask forgiveness for those who have believed." Thus, the verse explains the manner of supplication, not the state of those for whom forgiveness is sought. Their distinguishing description is known through intuition (dhawq). As for the benefit of diverging from the pronoun—that it did not say "forgive them" but rather "for those who have repented"—it is that the angels, just as they justified forgiveness regarding the Granter of Bounties, Glorified be His Majesty, through [His] all-encompassing knowledge and vast mercy, they also justified the receiver of the bounty through repentance from polytheism and following the way of Islam.

If you say: "This repentance is only valid for one whose polytheism preceded his Islam, not for one who was born a Muslim and remained so," I say: The verse was revealed in the time of the Companions, most of whom transitioned from polytheism to Islam. Had it been said, "Forgive those who did not associate partners with Allah," they would have been excluded. Thus, the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, took precedence over the general rules of all judgments. This is the end of the matter, and by my life, the research into this has ample scope.

In al-Kashf, it is stated that Al-Zamakhshari chose what he chose, following Al-Wahidi, because repentance, when used absolutely, refers to repentance from sins without qualification. Moreover, it [the contrary view] contains redundancy, as the one who repents from polytheism is already a Muslim; and the "follower of the way" in this interpretation has been explained as such. If the righteousness of the Throne-bearers and those around them, and the righteousness of the follower (the offspring), is a condition—along with what has been narrated: "We have joined their offspring with them in faith"—what then of the followed? You know that righteousness is one of the most specific qualities of the believer, and the supplication of Abraham and Joseph, upon them both be peace, to be joined with the righteous is a sufficient witness. As for the claim that they are not in need of supplication, it is answered that it is not necessary that there be a "need." Do you not see our saying: "O Allah, bless our master Muhammad"? Despite the favors and the known attainment [of status] from Allah, requesting it is virtuous, for supplication itself is an act of worship and bestows upon the supplicant and the one supplicated for an honor that does not fall short of the attainment of the fundamental reward.

Furthermore, if "protection from evil deeds" means forgiveness, there is discussion regarding what these "forgiven evil deeds" are. It is not hidden that the texts indicate that repentance brings about the forgiveness of all evil deeds, and that minor sins are forgiven as long as major ones are avoided; thus, it must be specifically applied as mentioned. If the meaning is that they are pardoned and not taken to task for them, as is the view of Al-Wahidi and the choice of the Imam and those who followed him, then one should look at which of the two meanings "protection" is more apparent in. Also, His saying, "And whoever You protect from the evil deeds on that Day, You have surely shown him mercy," and the emphasis it conveys—similar to [the saying]: "Whoever reaches the grazing land of Al-Summan has reached [the goal]"—and the subsequent criticism by His saying, "That is the great success," in regard to those who were deficient or those who were forgiven, is more apparent. This interpretation clarifies that this perspective is consistent with this context and agrees with the principles of both groups. It does not contain the claim that He, the Exalted, forgives major sins without repentance, nor that He does not forgive, so it does not contradict the possibility of [forgiveness] from other evidences. This is what was said, and it is sound speech, even if parts of it, such as the discussion of redundancy and the status of "righteousness" being one of the most specific qualities of a believer, are subject to some debate.

It is possible that "repentance from sins" absolutely is preferred over "repentance from polytheism alone," because the immediate connotation of "protect them from the punishment of the Blaze" is that each one of them is protected from it. It is known that the execution of the threat must occur upon a group of sinful believers, and they will be punished in the Fire; therefore, the supplication for the protection of every believer from the punishment would be prohibited. They have explicitly stated the prohibition of saying: "O Allah, forgive all the sins of all believers" for this reason. This is not necessitated by the interpretation that the supplication is for the repentant, righteous ones. Carrying the genitive [of "their sins"] to refer to the well-known [sins]—meaning the punishment of the Blaze that is by way of eternal dwelling—is a matter whose state is clear. The objection regarding the necessity of supplicating for what is already a "known outcome" regarding this interpretation of repentance has been answered in al-Kashf, even though there is a difference of opinion regarding whether forgiveness for the repentant is a "known outcome," as we indicated at the beginning of the Surah. Indeed, this necessity is apparent in their saying: "And admit them to the gardens of Eden which You have promised them." Similar to this is what is narrated in the supplication after the Adhan: "And raise him to the praised station which You have promised him." This has been answered with more than what was indicated: that the existence of a promise does not necessitate the attainment of the promised thing without the mediation of supplication.

In summary, there is no harm in interpreting repentance as repentance from sins absolutely, and it does not necessitate the acceptance of any of the doctrines of the Mu'tazila. So contemplate and be fair. And His saying, "..."