Tafsir of Al-A'raf 7:147

"And those who denied Our signs and the meeting of the Hereafter"—that is, their meeting of the abode of the Hereafter, considering it an infinitive acting upon the object, with the agent omitted; or their meeting of what Allah the Exalted promised in the Hereafter regarding recompense, considering the genitive construction to be based on the extension of the adverb, with the object being implied just as the agent is. The place of the relative pronoun [the subject] in both possibilities is nominative as the beginning of a sentence.

His saying, the Exalted: "have their deeds become worthless"—this is its predicate. It means that the nullity of the deeds they had performed, such as maintaining kinship ties and aiding the distressed, became apparent after they had been hoped to be beneficial, provided they had believed. The essence of this is that they derive no benefit from their deeds; otherwise, deeds are accidents [incidents] that do not truly become "worthless" [in terms of existence].

"Are they being recompensed?"—that is, they are not being recompensed on the Day of Resurrection, "except for what they used to do"—that is, except for the recompense of that which they persisted in doing of disbelief and acts of disobedience. This addition [of the word "recompense"] is necessitated because it is evident that what is being recompensed is not the act itself. It has been said that their deeds appear in the forms of that which they are being recompensed for, so there is no need for such an implication. This sentence is an independent clause; it has also been said that it is the predicate, and the previous sentence is in the position of a state [hal], with an implied "qad."

The Ash'aris have argued using this verse against the claim of Abu Hashim, who maintained that one who neglects an obligation deserves punishment even if no contrary action proceeds from them; for this verse indicates that there is no recompense except for an action, and neglecting an obligation is not an action. Abu Hashim responded by saying: "I do not call that punishment a 'recompense'." This was refuted by stating that a "recompense" is that which compensates—that is, suffices to prevent the prohibited and urge the commanded; and punishment for neglecting an obligation is sufficient to deter that neglect, therefore it is a recompense.