Tafsir of Al-Mulk 67:9

They said: "Yes, indeed a warner had come to us," acknowledging that He, the Exalted and Majestic, had completely removed their excuses. They combined the affirmative particle (balā) with the very sentence that answers the inquiry, in order to exaggerate their admission of the warner’s arrival, to express regret over the happiness they missed by failing to believe, and to prepare the way for their subsequent expression of negligence, remorse, and sorrow. That is, every group of those multitudes said: "A warner had come to us," meaning one who is a warner in reality or in effect, as the warners of the Children of Israel were in the position of a single warner. "So he warned us and recited to us what Allah the Exalted had revealed of His signs."

"But we denied" that warner regarding his status as a messenger from His side, "and we said," regarding the verses he recited—out of excessive denial and persistent rejection—"Allah has not revealed anything," from any of the things, let alone revealing verses to a human being like you.

"You are," meaning you are not—in claiming what you claim—"but in great error," far from truth and correctness. The plural form of address is used, even though each group was addressed by their own warner, to give precedence to the group as a whole over their counterparts, even hypothetically, so as to include the very first group that a warner warned. The implication is: "You and your likes—those who have claimed or claim what you claim," as an exaggeration in denial and a continuation in accusing [others] of misguidance. This is signaled by the generalization of what was "revealed" while omitting the one to whom it was revealed, for it hints at its absolute universality.

As for placing the denial of one in the position of the denial of all, it has been said that this is a verification-based matter that is resorted to in order to emphasize the gravity of the crime they committed. However, there is no scope for considering it from their perspective, nor for including it under their statement; how could there be, when it depends on observing the consensus of the warners upon what does not differ in terms of laws and rulings across eras and years? And how far they are from that, for the bitterness of death has choked their speech!

This applies if what is mentioned is treated as a narrative from each of the groups individually, as is apparent. But if it is treated as a narrative from all of them collectively, then "warner" (nadhīr) is either in the sense of a plural—because it is a fa‘īl form, which is used for both the singular and others—or it is an infinitive interpreted with a general genitive, i.e., "people of warning," or it is used as an adjective for hyperbole. Thus, both sides of the address agree in plurality. Some expressions suggest the possibility of considering the plurality through one of the aforementioned modes even in the first interpretation, though there is debate on this.

It has been permitted that the address might be from the keepers [of Hell] to the disbelievers, implying an omitted "saying," with the intention that by "error," they meant what they were upon in the worldly life, or their destruction, or the punishment for their error—naming the effect by the name of its cause. This is contrary to the apparent meaning, as is not hidden. Similarly, regarding what was said about the possibility of it being from the speech of the warner to the disbelievers, which they recounted to the keepers—in al-Kashf, it is noted that this view involves clear artificiality.

Rather, it is either the object of an omitted "saying" demanded by "a warner had come to us"—as if it were said: "Yes, a warner had come to us; he said: 'You are but in great error,' so we denied and said..."—and "so we denied and said" is placed forward as an indication that the denial was not limited to this statement of theirs. Or, the denial occurred regarding the entire sentence, meaning "You are but in great error," and His saying, glory be to Him, "And we said: 'Allah has not revealed anything'" is a conjunction to "we denied," placed before its connective to function as a parenthetical clause, reinforcing the judgment of denial and indicating that it was not limited. The former is more appropriate.

The verse is cited as evidence that there is no religious obligation before the coming of a messenger. To interpret the "warner" as the evidence that exists within the intellects is something no fair-minded person of reason would accept.