Tafsir of Al-Haqqah 69:32

"Then in a chain, its length"—meaning its measure and the extent of its length—"is seventy cubits"—It is permissible for the literal meaning to be intended, according to the known number. And Allah, the Exalted, is most knowing of the wisdom behind it being this specific number. It is also permissible for it to imply multiplication (hyperbole), for the numbers seven and seventy are frequently used to express abundance and exaggeration. It is argued that this is more profound than restricting it to its literal meaning. The dhirā' (cubit) is feminine; Ibn al-Shihna stated that some of the tribe of 'Ukl treat it as masculine, so one might say "the garment is five adhru' (feminine)" or "five adhru' (masculine)." What is meant by it is what was known to the Arabs: the cubit of the hand, for Allah, the Exalted, only addressed them in terms they understood. Ibn Abbas, Ibn Jurayj, and Muhammad ibn al-Munkadir said: "The cubit of the [Angel] Malik." Ibn al-Mubarak and a group narrated from Nawf al-Bikali, who said—while he was in Kufa at the time—"The cubit is seventy ba' (fathoms), and the ba' is the distance between you and Mecca," though this requires a reliable transmission. Al-Hasan said: "Allah, the Exalted, is most knowing of which cubit it is."

The silsilah (chain) consists of links inserted into links along a length, as if it were derived from the tasalsul (continuous agitation) of a thing. Its nunation signifies grandeur. It is narrated from Ibn Abbas that he said: "If a single link of it were placed upon a mountain, it would melt like lead."

"Then insert him"—meaning: "Then put him into it," as in the verse of the Exalted, “Then He inserts it as springs into the earth.” Inserting him into it means that it is wrapped around his body and coiled upon him from all directions, so he remains constrained within it, unable to make any movement. It is narrated from Ibn Abbas that the people of the Fire will be within it like the tha'lab (fox/spike) in the jubbah (sheath), where the tha'lab is the tip of the spear shaft, and the jubbah is the iron ferrule. Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Abi Hatim recorded from Ibn Jurayj that Ibn Abbas said: "The chain enters his anus and exits through his mouth, then they are threaded onto it just as locusts are threaded onto a twig, then he is roasted." In another narration, it is recorded from them that it is inserted into his posterior until it emerges from his nostrils. From this, it is said that the verse contains an inversion, and the original is: "Then thread them onto it." However, the majority follow the apparent meaning.

The fa (in faslukuhu) is consequential, as in the verse of the Exalted, “And your Lord, glorify [fa-kabbir].” The estimation is: "Whatever may happen, then insert him into a chain," etc. The prepositional phrase and what accompanies it are brought forward in place of the omitted clause, to place the fa in its middle position as is its right, and to indicate specification—as if it were said: "Do not insert him into anything except this chain," as if it is more horrific than all other places of constraint in the Hellfire.

It is also permissible for the estimation to be: "Then, whatever may happen, then in a chain, its length is seventy cubits, insert him." In this, there are two frontings: the fronting of the prepositional phrase over the verb to indicate specification, and its fronting over the fa after the elision of the conditional particle (for compensation), and the placement of the fa in the middle. The "then" (thumma) in both instances is for the sake of the disparity between the types of things with which they are punished, from the shackles to the roasting, to the insertion—according to what a group has chosen. Some have permitted that it remain upon its literal meaning of indicating delay, though the first [view] is stronger as it is more befitting to the context of threat.

Some have claimed that the second "then" (thumma) is for the conjunction of an implied statement to what was implied before it—"seize him"—to intimate the disparity between the two matters. The fa in "insert him" is for the conjunction of the spoken to the spoken, so that two conjunctions do not coincide upon a single conjunctive target. This necessitates that the fronting of the chain before the fa [occurred] after the elision of the word "saying," so that the aforementioned coincidence does not occur. The basis of this affected interpretation stems from negligence regarding what we have mentioned; so do not be negligent. From this, one knows the frailty of what has been said: that there is nothing in the verse indicating specification because "in a chain" is not an object of "insert him" lest it necessitate the combination of two conjunctions. Rather, it is an object of an elided [verb], so it is estimated as being fronted according to the original, given that the fronting of "the Hellfire" serves as a context for "in a chain" being fronted before its operative.