Tafsir of Ad-Dukhan 44:5

(Amran min 'indina) is in the accusative case due to ikhtisas (specification), and the prepositional phrase min 'indina is in the position of an adjective for it. Its attachment to yufraqu is not established. What is intended by "from Us" is that it is in accordance with wisdom and providence; that is, "by this command, a momentous command occurring according to the requirements of Our wisdom and management." This is an explanation of its grandeur and a praise for it.

It is permitted that it be a hal (state) from the hidden pronoun within hakim (wise), which is an adjective for amr (command), or from amr itself. The arrival of the hal from it is valid—even though it is indefinite—due to its specification by the adjective, given that the generality of the indefinite noun to which it is added is a justification for the statehood without the need for an adjective. The statement of al-Samin, that this involves the position of the hal from the mudaf ilayh (possessor) in instances other than those mentioned in grammar, stems from a weak perspective. This is because it is like the jaza' (result/response) in the possibility of dispensing with it, by saying: yufraqu amrun hakimun (a wise command is distinguished), intending the generality of the indefinite noun in an affirmative context, as in His saying—Exalted is He—(Every soul shall know what it has presented).

It has been said: It is a hal from kull (every). In any case, it differs from the hal [that is restricted] by its description in His saying—Exalted is He—(from Us); thus, its occurrence as a hal is valid without redundancy. Its being an intensive (mu’akkidah) is not feasible alongside the adjectival nature, as is not hidden from one of sound mind. It is, according to these aspects, one of the affairs (umūr).

It is also permitted that it be intended as the command which is the opposite of prohibition, such that it is one of the orders (awāmir). In that case, it is in the accusative as a masdar (infinitive) for a suppressed verb of its own root; that is, "We ordered a command from Us." The sentence is an explanation of His saying—Exalted is He—(is distinguished) etc.

It has been said: Either it is in the accusative as a masdar for yufraqu, because the writing of Allah—Exalted is He—of a thing is a decree of it, just as His ordering of it—Mighty and Majestic is He—is. It is as if it were said: "Every required affair is ordered, in a manner of wisdom, as a command." Thus, the word "command" is placed in the position of "differentiation" (furqan), which is used to mean "command." Or, it is a hal from the agent of (We revealed) or its object; that is, "We revealed it while commanding a command," or while the Book is a command that must be enacted. In making the Book itself the "command" due to its containment of it, there is metaphor and grandeur.

Al-Kashf critiqued this, saying: It is weak due to the separation by two sentences and its possessor in the second case, and because the commands issued by Him—Exalted is He—are not exclusive to that night in the first case. The way to address this is to specify the Quran and not make His saying—Exalted is He—(In it, every wise affair is distinguished) a cause for the revelation on that night, but rather a detail regarding His saying—Exalted is He—(Indeed, We revealed it in a blessed night), meaning: In it, the Manifest Book was revealed, which is what contains every wise commanded thing. It is as if the entire Book were made a command, or that all commanded things were commanded [within it]. There is a good degree of hyperbole in this, though it is not hidden that there is affectation in understanding it from the verse.

Al-Khafaji said in Amr al-Fasl: That separator does not harm you, whether it is an interruption (i'tirad) or for the sake of cause (ta'lil), because it is not extraneous. Some permitted—upon the estimation that "command" means the opposite of prohibition—that it be maf'ul lahu (an object for the sake of which), and the agent acting upon it is (is distinguished, or We revealed, or warners).

Zayd ibn 'Ali—may Allah be pleased with them both—recited amrun in the nominative case. This supports the notion that its accusative case in the reading of the majority is due to ikhtisas (specification), because the nominative case for it is [the default] therein, and [in accordance with] His saying—Exalted is He—(Indeed, We have been messengers).