Tafsir of Qaf 50:29

The phrase "with the threat" (bi-al-wa'id) relates to an omitted component that serves as a state (hal) of the object, placed before it, or of the subject. It means: "I have already presented this statement to you, accompanied by a threat," or "I presented it to you as a promise of what is to come for you, so do not covet that I should alter My threat." The most apparent view is that this sentence is a commencement (isti'naf).

Regarding "before Me" (ladayya), there are two interpretations: First, that it relates to "the word," meaning: "The word which is with Me is not changed." Second, that it relates to the verb before it, meaning: "The act of changing does not occur before Me."

Concerning the first view, there are several aspects regarding the "word" that is with the Exalted:

1. His saying, "Cast into Hell..." (50:24); they may offer excuses to have it altered, but the Exalted replies, "Do not cast..." (referring to the counter-response).
2. His saying to Iblis, "I will surely fill..." (38:85).
3. That it refers to the command being absolute and never retracted.
4. The previous decree on the day of the creation of the servants: "This is a fortunate one, and this is a wretched one."

Concerning the second view, there are also various meanings:

1. It is not belied before Me, for I am All-Knowing. I knew who transgressed and who was misguided, so your statement, "My devil misguided me," or the devil’s statement, "Our Lord, I did not make him transgress," will be of no benefit.
2. If you had intended that I should not say, "Cast him into Hell," you would have replaced disbelief with belief before you stood before Me; but now, "the word is not changed before Me."
3. Disbelief is not replaced by belief before Me, for faith at the time of hopelessness is not accepted. Thus, your saying, "Our Lord and our God," will not benefit you. Whoever speaks a word of disbelief is not helped by saying, "Our Lord, we did not associate partners," or "Our Lord, we have believed."

It is well-known that "before Me" relates to the verb, with the intent that "the word" encompasses both promise and threat. Some who hold the view that it is not permissible for these to be unfulfilled under any circumstances have used this as evidence. Those who hold the view that it is permissible to pardon some of the sinners have responded that such pardoning is not a "changing," for the evidence of pardon indicates that the threat was subject to specification (takhsis).

Some researchers have said: The intent is to negate that anyone can effect a change before the Exalted in His knowledge, or that the word which He, the Mighty and Majestic, has decreed can be changed. For that which is with Him, Blessed and Exalted, is that which is in the essence of the matter (nafs al-amr), and it does not accept change at all. Most threats are suspended upon the condition of the Will, in accordance with the demands of Generosity—even if it is not explicitly mentioned—in accordance with the demands of intimidation. Thus, whenever a pardon occurs due to the absence of the will to punish, there is no change in what is in the essence of the matter. Reflect upon this, for it is profound.

This is mentioned to establish the truth in the most eloquent manner. In it is an indication that the punishment of those among the servants who are punished is only by virtue of desert in the essence of the matter. The full discussion of this sentence has already been presented, so remember it.