Tafsir of Al-A'raf 7:164

(And when a community said...) This is conjoined to (And when they were transgressing); it is presented to demonstrate their persistence in transgression and their lack of restraint therefrom despite the exhortations and warnings.

The two masters, al-Tayyibi and al-Taftazani, stated: It is not permissible for it to be conjoined to (And when they come to them), even if it is closer in wording, because that (the latter) is either a substitute (badal) or an adverbial modifier (zarf). Consequently, it would necessitate that these speakers be included under the ruling of the transgressors, which is not the case. Regarding the assumption of it being an adverbial modifier, this is clear. Regarding the assumption of it being a substitute, it is because a substitute is closer to independence. It has been argued in explanation of this that the time of the speaking is after the time of the transgression and distinct from it, and considering it to be extended—like a year, for instance—in which all of this occurs, is an affectation without necessity. The assertion that conjoining it to that (the former) suggests or implies that the speakers were from among those who transgressed the Sabbath, and not from the general people of the town, is debatable.

(A community from them) meaning: A group from their righteous ones who did not spare any effort in exhorting them, and when they despaired of the possibility of the others accepting, they did not cease reminding them, hoping for benefit and influence.

(Why do you exhort a people whom Allah is about to destroy) meaning: To completely eradicate them and cleanse the face of the earth of them, (or punish them with a severe punishment) short of total eradication. It has been said: "Destroying them" in the world, or "punishing them" in the Hereafter, because of their persistence in the immorality they were upon. The alternation is to prevent any void (of possibility) under this interpretation. Choosing the active participle form (ism al-fa'il) in both parts is to indicate the certainty of both the destruction and the punishment, and their confirmation—as if they had already occurred. They said this solely to exaggerate that the exhortation would not benefit them, as the intended meaning is: "Do not exhort them," or "Do you exhort them?"—but they shifted to questioning the reason for the sake of expressing astonishment, for the reason for an astonishing matter is unknown; or it is a question regarding the wisdom and benefit of the exhortation.

It has been said: This was a discourse that took place among the righteous exhorters themselves, as if some said to others: "Why do we busy ourselves with what does not profit?" It is possible, based on both sayings, that this was uttered by someone among the people, and thus it includes an urging for them to be exhorted; for the definitive statement regarding their destruction or punishment is something that casts fear and dread into their hearts. It has also been said: Those who said this were the ones who transgressed the Sabbath, saying it as mockery of the advisers who were frightening them with destruction and punishment—though there is remoteness in this, as you will soon see, God willing.

(They said) meaning: Those to whom it was said: (As an excuse to your Lord) meaning: We exhort them as an excuse to Him, the Exalted. This is a verbal noun functioning as the cause (ma'ful lahu), which is the most appropriate according to the apparent meaning of their saying "Why do you exhort?" Or, we are making an excuse (ma'dhara), as a cognate accusative (ma'ful mutlaq) for an omitted verb. It has been said: It is the object (ma'ful bihi) of the speech, and even though it is singular, it is in the meaning of a sentence, because it is the speech through which one excuses oneself. Ma'dhara, in origin, is in the meaning of excuse, which is the act of absolving oneself of a sin. Al-Azhari said: It is in the meaning of apologizing, and he connected it with the particle ila (to) because it contains the meaning of informing and conveying. In attributing the "Lord" to the pronoun of the addressees, there is a type of implication towards the questioners. This answer, according to the first two sayings, is clear; according to the last, it is said that it is receiving the questioner with something other than what is expected, making it a "wise style" (al-uslub al-hakim).

Those other than Hafs and al-Mufaddal read (ma'dharatun) in the nominative case as the predicate of an omitted subject, meaning: "Our exhortation is an excuse to Him, the Exalted," so that we are not attributed with any type of negligence in forbidding the wrong.

(And perhaps they will fear [Him]) is conjoined to "excuse," meaning: and in the hope that they might fear, at least to some degree of fear; for absolute despair does not occur except through destruction. The Sheikh al-Islam said: This is explicit that those who said "Why do you exhort?" are not from the destroyed faction; otherwise, the address would have been mandatory.

This may be reconciled with that saying by interpreting it as an act of turning (iltifat) or assimilation (mushakala) because they expressed themselves in the question using the word "a people," or by attributing it to other than the group of speakers. However, all of that is contrary to the apparent meaning.