Tafsir of Az-Zukhruf 43:52

Am ana khair (Am I not better), with this abundance and expansion in kingdom and wealth, min hadha alladhi (than this one who) huwa mahin—meaning weak, contemptible, or vulgar and abased; for it derives from al-mahanah, which is scarcity or ignominy—wa la yakadu yubinu (and he can hardly make anything clear).

That is, in speech. The majority hold that he—peace be upon him—had in his tongue some remnants of the live coal. However, the cursed one exaggerated. As for those who went so far as to say that Allah Almighty had answered his prayer by untying the knot in his tongue so that no trace of it remained, they say: the meaning is that he can hardly clarify the argument indicating his truthfulness in what he claims, except that He empowered him to articulate the words—and this is a fabrication against him, peace be upon him. Do you not see his debate with him, his rebuttal of him, and his silencing of him? It is said: he faulted him for what he, peace be upon him, suffered from stuttering during the days he was with him, and the cursed one meant that he, peace be upon him, did not possess the numbers, instruments of royalty, and politics to be supported by, and that he himself was deficient in what men are characterized by, namely eloquence and clarity of speech.

Am (or), according to what is transmitted from Sibawayh and Al-Khalil, is connective. The consequence is placed after the cause according to the view of Al-Zamakhshari, and the meaning is: "Do you not see? Or do you see?" except that he placed "Am I better" in the position of "Do you see?" The clarification of this is that when Pharaoh—upon him be the curse—presented the causes of abundance and politics by his saying, "Is not mine..." etc., and followed it by saying, "Do you not see?" to belittle them and alert them that he was so manifest that it would not be hidden from anyone with eyes, he said in contrast: "Am I not better," meaning "Do you see that I am the leader to be followed?" In this shift, there is an alert that this part is the undeniable concession among you; it is as if he is narrating it from their tongues after they have seen—a wonderful style and a strange art.

Al-Zamakhshari made it a case of placing the cause in the position of the effect, because his being better in himself—meaning, possessing the causes of precedence and kingship—is a cause for it to be said, "I am better than him," and their saying, "You are better," is a cause for them being discerning. The cause of a cause may be called a cause, so it does not refute what is said: that the cause is their saying "You are better," not his saying "I am better."

Al-Qadi Al-Baydawi said: It is a case of placing the effect in the position of the cause, because their knowledge that he is better is derived from seeing. The objection to this is that the stated text is "I am better," not "Do you know that I am better." It may be said: "That suffices," because he made it a conceded, known matter among them, so he said, "Am I better," not "Do you know," as preceded. It is not hidden that what Al-Zamakhshari mentioned is more apparent, as stated in Al-Kashf. The second scholar said in explaining this: His saying, "I am better," is a cause for their saying, from the aspect of it provoking them to consider his states and his preparedness for what he claimed, and his saying, "You are better," is a cause for them being discerning in his view; so "I am better" is a cause for it indirectly. However, it is not hidden that it is a cause for the knowledge of that through him, but regarding existence, the matter is the opposite, because their seeing is the cause for their saying "You are better." So reflect.

In sum, what comes after am is interpreted as a verbal sentence necessitated in wording and meaning by what you have heard. Similar to that in terms of interpretation is: "Do you call upon them, or are you silent?" meaning, "Or have you been silent?" And his saying: "Are his hands short, or are they complete?"—that is, "Or are they complete?" It is said that the counterpart was omitted because the meaning indicates it; the estimation is: "Do you not see? I am better..." It is countered that this is not permissible unless it is after am la (or not), such as: "Does Zayd say 'No'?" (meaning: he does not say). As for omitting it without la, it is not part of their speech.

It is permitted that there is an elision in the speech following the method of ihtibak (mutual ellipsis), and the meaning is: Is he better than me, so you do not see what I have reminded you of? Or am I better than him, so you see him? And it is not worth paying attention to. Many have allowed am to be disjunctive, interpreted as bal (nay) and the interrogative hamzah of estimation, as if the cursed one said—after he enumerated the causes of his merit and the principles of his excellence—"Is it established among you and settled with you that I am better, and this is my state compared to this one...?" Some preferred this because it avoids the affectation regarding the necessary counterpart, which is primarily for the good in the connective [sense].

Al-Suddi and Abu Ubaydah said: Am is in the meaning of bal (nay), so he has moved from that speech to informing them that he is better, like the saying of the poet: "She appeared like the horn of the sun in the brightness of the forenoon / And her form—or are you the more beautiful to the eye?" Abu al-Baqa' said: It is disjunctive in wording and connective in meaning, and he intended the interpretation that preceded, and there is no contradiction in it to what the grammarians agreed upon, as was imagined. The sentence "he can hardly make anything clear" is a coordinate to the silah (conjunctive clause), or a new sentence, or a circumstantial clause. It was recited A-ma ana khair (Am I not better) by inserting the hamzah upon the negative ma. Al-Baqir—may Allah be pleased with him—recited yubinu with a fatha on the ya, from bana when it appears.