Al-Ma'idah: (71) And they thought that there would be no trial...

(And they thought that there would be no trial): That is, the Children of Israel imagined that no tribulation or punishment would befall them from Allah the Exalted on account of what they did, due to their claim—as Al-Zajjaj stated—that they were the children of Allah the Exalted and His beloved ones, or because of Allah’s respite for them, or something similar. Muqatil narrated an interpretation of "trial" as hardship and drought. It is more appropriate to interpret it in a general sense, and in either case, the intended meaning is not the well-known one.

Abu Amr, Hamza, Al-Kisa'i, and Ya'qub read an la takuna with the nominative (raising) of the verb takuna, on the basis that an (that) is the "lightened" form of the "heavy" anna. Its origin is annahu la takuna; then anna was lightened to an, and the pronoun of state (the damir al-sha'n) which acts as its subject was omitted. The verb of "thinking" (hasb) is made to govern it, and it is here for the purpose of certainty, treating it as knowledge due to the completeness of its strength. The clause of an along with its content occupies the place of its two objects. It is also said that hasb here carries the meaning of "knew," and an is only lightened after that which implies certainty. Others have said that the second object is omitted, meaning: "And they thought the absence of trial was existent," a view attributed to Al-Akhfash. In every interpretation, takuna is a "complete" verb (intransitive).

His saying, the Exalted: (So they became blind) is a conjunction linked to hasibu (they thought), and the fa denotes the sequential order of what follows to what precedes. That is, they felt secure from the punishment of Allah the Exalted, so they persisted in varieties of error and corruption and became blind to the religion after the messengers had guided them to its landmarks and clarified its paths. (And [they became] deaf) to listening to the truth which they cast toward them. This refers to the first of the two instances of the corruption of the Children of Israel, when they opposed the rulings of the Torah, committed forbidden acts, and killed Isaiah and—it is said—Jeremiah, peace be upon them.

(Then Allah turned to them in forgiveness) when they repented and returned from the corruption they were in, after they had been in Babylon for a long time under the subjugation of Nebuchadnezzar as captives in the utmost humiliation and disgrace. Then Allah, the Exalted and Majestic, directed a great king among the kings of Persia toward Jerusalem, so he rebuilt it and returned those who remained of the Children of Israel under Nebuchadnezzar’s captivity to their homeland, and those who had dispersed to the surrounding regions returned, so they settled and multiplied and were in the best state they had ever been in. It is said that when Bahman ibn Asfandyar inherited the kingdom from his grandfather Kausaf, Allah the Exalted cast compassion into his heart for them, so he returned them to the Levant and installed Daniel, peace be upon him, over them. They overcame those who were there from the followers of Nebuchadnezzar, the prophets (peace be upon them) arose among them, and they returned to the best condition they had ever been in; this is the meaning of His saying: "Then We gave you back the turn against them." He, Glory be to Him, did not attribute the repentance to them—as He did with their other states of thinking, blindness, and deafness—shunning the explicit attribution of goodness to them. Rather, it was pointed to within the context of explaining Allah’s repentance toward them, as a prelude to stating their breaking of it by His saying: (Then they became blind and deaf), which refers to the second instance of their two corruptions: their audacity in killing Zechariah and John, and their intent to kill Jesus, peace be upon them.

Al-Zamakhshari considered the first instance of blindness and deafness to refer to what issued from them regarding the worship of the Calf, and the second to what occurred from them regarding their demanding to see Allah. However, the worship of the Calf—even if it was a great sin arising from total blindness and deafness—occurred in the era of Moses (peace be upon him) and has no relation to what was recounted about them regarding their actions toward the messengers who came to them ages after him. The same applies to his claim regarding the demand to see Allah, given that the demand to see Allah came from the group that was with Moses (peace be upon him) when he went for the private discourse, while the worship of the Calf was from the people who stayed behind, so it cannot be claimed that it followed the other. Furthermore, interpreting "then" (thumma) for rank-based delay rather than temporal delay is something for which there is no necessity.

It is said that the first blindness and deafness refer to what happened in the time of Zechariah and John (peace be upon them), and the second to what happened in the time of our Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) regarding disbelief and disobedience. He began with blindness because it is the first thing that affects one who turns away from the laws; he does not see the one who brought them from Allah the Exalted, nor does he pay attention to His miracles. Then, even if he were to see him, he would not hear his words, so the occurrence of deafness follows the occurrence of blindness.

It is read 'ummu wa summu with a damma (vocalized as passive/active effect), based on the assumption that "Allah blinded them and made them deaf," meaning He struck them with blindness and deafness. This is like saying nazaktuhu (I struck him with a spear—nizek) and rakabtuhu (I struck him with my knee—rukbah).

His saying, the Exalted: (Many of them) is a substitute (badal) for the pronoun in the two verbs. It is also said that it is the subject (fa'il), and the waw is a sign of plurality, which is not harmful; this is a dialect of some Arabs that grammarians refer to as "they ate me, the fleas." Or it is a predicate of an omitted subject, meaning: "The blind and the deaf are many among them." It is also said that "blindness and deafness are many among them," meaning they proceeded from them frequently, but this is contrary to the apparent meaning. It is also permissible that it is a subject, and the sentence preceding it is its predicate; this is weakened by the fact that a verbal predicate does not precede the subject due to its potential confusion with the agent. This was refuted by stating that the prohibition of such precedence is conditional upon the agent being an implicit pronoun, since there is no confusion when it is explicit. They did not consider the confusion with the agent in the "they ate me, the fleas" dialect a disqualifying factor because that dialect is weak and not to be relied upon. Hence, grammarians have stated the permissibility of precedence in examples like "the two Zayds stood," but they have stated the impermissibility of the predicate preceding when the subject is suitable to be an emphasis for the agent, such as "I stood"—for if the "I" were delayed, it would be confused with the emphasis of the agent. What we are dealing with is similar, except that the confusion here is with another follower, namely the substitute (badal); so ponder this. He, the Exalted, said "Many of them" because some of them were not like that.

(And Allah is All-Seeing of what they do)—that is, of what they have done. The imperfect tense is used to recount the past state, bringing its horrific image to mind, while also observing the cadence of the verses. The sentence is a concluding one, through which the invalidity of their aforementioned thinking is signaled, and the occurrence of the punishment from where they did not anticipate is signaled in a summarized way, sufficient in reliance upon what was detailed to some extent in Surah Bani Isra'il. The appropriateness of "All-Seeing" here, alongside His saying "they do," is not hidden.