Tafsir of Al-Munafiqun 63:10

(And spend out of what We have provided for you): Meaning, some of what We have given you and favored you with from wealth, as a provision for the Hereafter, (before death comes to one of you): Meaning, its signs and precursors. Thus, the speech is based on the estimation of an added noun [i.e., the onset of death]. For this reason, His saying, the Exalted, is a consequence of it: (then he says, "My Lord, if only You would delay me"): Meaning, if only You would grant me respite, ("for a short term"): Meaning, a brief period, ("so I would give charity"): That is, so I would give alms. Ubai, Abdullah [ibn Mas’ud], and Ibn Jubayr recited it this way. The verb is in the accusative case [nasb] as an answer to the wish [tamanni], while it is in the jussive [jazm] in His saying, the Exalted: (and I would be among the righteous).

[The latter] is by conjunction to the position of "so I would give charity," as if it were said: "If You delay me, I will give charity and I will be." Abu Ali al-Farisi and al-Zajjaj held this view. Sibawayh narrated from al-Khalil that it is due to the illusion of a conditional [clause] implied by the wish, for the condition is not explicit and is not estimated until conjunction to the position is considered, as in His saying, the Exalted: "Whomever Allah leads astray, there is no guide for him," followed by "and He leaves them" (wa-yadharuhum), for those who read it in the jussive. This is sound, although the expression of "illusion" here results in an ugly illusion. The difference between conjunction to the position and conjunction to the illusion is that the operative factor in the former exists but its effect is missing, whereas in the latter, the operative factor is missing but its effect is present. It has been suggested that the dispute is merely verbal; the intent of Abu Ali and al-Zajjaj is conjunction to the "implied position," meaning the estimated [condition], for there is no position here in reality, but they avoided the ugliness of the expression.

Al-Hasan, Ibn Jubayr, Abu Raja’, Ibn Abi Ishaq, Malik ibn Dinar, al-A’mash, Ibn Muhaysin, Abdullah ibn al-Hasan al-Anbari, and Abu ‘Amr recited "and I would be" (wa-akuna) in the accusative, which is clear. ‘Ubayd ibn ‘Umayr recited it in the nominative (wa-akunu) as a resumption [isti’naf]. The grammarians and masters of meanings estimated the subject in such instances of resumed verbs, saying here: meaning, "and I would be." You do not see them neglecting this. It is justified by the fact that the verb is not suited for resumption with the resumptive "wa" (and) as it is here, nor without it. This was challenged on the grounds that no grammarian has ever held it to be unsuitable for that. It seems that for this reason, the scholar al-Taftazani stated that the obligation of estimation is what has a clear justification for it. It was also said: the justification is that resumption with the nominal sentence is more apparent, and it is as you see. It was permitted for the verb in this recitation to be in the nominative by conjunction to "I would give charity," similar to the two aforementioned views regarding the jussive.

Regarding His saying, the Exalted, (And spend out of what We have provided for you), al-Dahhak said: He means Zakat and spending for Hajj. Ibn Abbas held this view as well, as narrated by Ibn al-Mundhir: "So I would give charity" means "I would pay Zakat," and "and I would be among the righteous" means "I would perform Hajj." Al-Tirmidhi, Ibn Jarir, al-Tabari, and others also narrated from him that he said: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: "Whoever possesses wealth that reaches the amount required for the Hajj of his Lord’s House, or upon whom Zakat is obligatory, and he does not do so, he will ask for a return at the time of death." A man said to him: "O Ibn Abbas, fear Allah! Only the disbelievers ask for a return." He replied: "I will recite a Quranic verse to you regarding that: 'O you who have believed, let not your wealth and your children divert you from the remembrance of Allah...' until the end of the Surah." This is how it appears in al-Durr al-Manthur.

In Ahkam al-Quran, it is Tirmidhi's narration from him, attributed to him (mawquf). In al-Bahr and elsewhere, it is narrated from him that he said: The verse was revealed regarding the one who withholds Zakat, and by Allah, if he saw goodness, he would not ask for a return. It was said to him: "Do you not fear Allah? [Only] the believers ask [this] of the disbelievers?" He answered in a manner similar to what was mentioned. It is not hidden that the objection to him, as well as the response, is more consistent with the fact that he himself claimed [the verse] asks for a return and did not elevate the Hadith to the Prophet (ﷺ) with that. If His saying, the Exalted, "if only You would delay me," etc., is a request for a return in the sense of returning to the world after death, then His saying, the Exalted, "before death comes to one of you," does not require the estimation of an added noun, as you have just heard.