Surah Al-A'raf 7:34
ﲎ ﲏ ﲐ ﲑ ﲒ ﲓ ﲔ ﲕ ﲖ ﲗ ﲘ ﲙ
And for every nation is a [specified] term. So when their time has come, they will not remain behind an hour, nor will they precede [it].
Tafsir of Al-A'raf 7:34
Tafsir
Ruh al-Ma'ani
Verse range: 7:34
{And for every nation is a term} Meaning, a specific, allotted time fixed for their eradication. As Al-Hasan said, and it is narrated from Ibn Abbas and Muqatil. This is, as has been said, a warning to the people of Makkah of the punishment that will descend at a time known to Allah, the Exalted, just as it descended upon the nations before them. It is also a return to urging [the people] to follow [the truth] after the digression which some have mentioned. A subtle point has been observed in following the prohibition of indecencies with this [verse], for it is also appropriate to it.
Some have interpreted the "term" here as the specific duration they were granted as a respite before the punishment descended, while others interpreted it as the time of death. Some said the estimation is: "And for every individual of a nation." According to the first view, there is no need for such an estimation.
{So when their term comes} The pronoun—as some investigators have said—refers either to the nations indicated by "every nation," or to each nation. According to the first, the manifestation of "term" in addition to that pronoun is to convey the intended meaning, which is the arrival of each nation at its own specific term. Its arrival to them is by means of acquiring the term through the [genitive] annexation (idafah), generally conveying the sense of collective plurality, as if it were said: "When their terms come," in that the specific term for each one of those nations arrives.
According to the second view, which is the apparent one, the manifestation [of the noun] is in the place of concealment (pronoun) for the sake of increased confirmation, and the annexation is to convey the most complete distinction. Ibn Sirin recited it as ajāluhum (in the plural), and Ibn Jinni considered this view stronger, explaining the singular as intended for the genus (generic noun); and the genus is of the category of the verbal noun, and the annexation [of the singular] refers to the collective group.
The fa (so) is, as has been said, faṣīḥah (eloquent/explanatory), and it is omitted in the verse of [Surah] Yunus, for reasons we will mention there, Allah willing. The meaning of "coming" is its nearness or its completion; that is, when it is due and near, or [when it has] expired and finished.
{They will not remain behind} From it, by a "moment" (*sa'ah*): a portion of time of the utmost brevity. It does not refer to the "hour" in the terminology of astronomers, which is divided into an equal (equinoctial) hour—called astronomical, being a duration of fifteen degrees—and a curved (unequal) hour—called temporal, being a duration of one-twelfth of the day or night. The former is used mostly by calculators, and the latter by jurists, talisman experts, and their like. The total of the night and day for them is always twenty-four hours, whether the hour is equal or unequal, except that neither the night nor the day ever exceeds twelve unequal hours; that is why they lengthen and shorten, and the equal hour may coincide [with the unequal] when the day and night are equal. The meaning is that they will not be delayed at all. The form of seeking postponement is to signal their incapacity and their deprivation of that [postponement] despite their request for it.
{Nor will they precede [it]} That is, they will not advance before it. It is apparent that it is a conjunction following "they will not remain behind," as Al-Hufi and others parsed it. It has been objected that "preceding" is not conceivable upon its arrival, so there is no benefit in negating it. Rather, it is of the category of informing of the necessary (obvious), like your saying: "If you stand in the future, your standing in the past will not have preceded it."
It has been said that it is a conjunction to the conditional sentence, not the consequential (resultant) one, and thus it is not restricted by the condition. The meaning of the verse is: "For every nation is a term, so when their term comes, they will not remain behind it; and for every nation is a term, they will not precede it." The scholar Sialkoti objected to this, saying that it is not hidden that the benefit of restricting the Almighty’s saying "they will not remain behind" only to the condition is not apparent, even if it is grammatically correct. Rather, the meaning that readily comes to a sound understanding is what preceded. It contains a warning that just as it is impossible to precede the term by the shortest duration—the moment—it is likewise impossible to remain behind it, even if that were theoretically possible. For that which Allah, the Exalted, has ordained and known is impossible to contravene.
Combining the two matters here is like combining the person who delays repentance until the presence of death, and the person who dies in a state of disbelief, in the negation of repentance in His saying: "And repentance is not for those who do evil..."
Perhaps this is the intent of those who said it is a conjunction to the consequential sentence, based on the meaning of His saying: "They will not remain behind nor precede it," being "they are unable to change it," in the style of His saying: "And there is nothing moist or dry but that it is in a clear record," and their saying: "I spoke to him, so he did not respond with black or white [i.e., nothing]." Thus, the objection is not valid. You are well aware that this meaning is obtained by mentioning the consequence without mentioning "nor precede it."
The truth is that it is a conjunction to the conditional sentence. In the Sharh al-Miftah, it is stated that if a restriction is made part of the conjoined-to, the conjoined [part] does not share in it, and he used this verse as an example. On this basis, there is no impediment to the conjunction to "they will not remain behind," due to the lack of participation in the restriction. You know that they have mentioned in this field that if something is conjoined to another and a restriction precedes it, the conjoined inevitably shares in that restriction with the conjoined-to. But if it is conjoined to something that has a restriction attached to it, the participation is possible. Conjunction to the restricted has two considerations: the first is that the restriction is prior in consideration and the conjunction is posterior; the second is that the conjunction is prior and the restriction is posterior. According to the first, the two conjoined parts are not required to share in the mentioned restriction, as the restriction is a part of the components of the conjoined-to. According to the second, participation is mandatory, as it is a judgment of the rulings of the first in which participation is required.
Some have built the conjunction here on the idea that "coming" refers to the drawing near, such that it is possible to advance in a general sense, like the coming of the day appointed for their destruction, a moment of which [one might try to advance]. But this is not the case. The priority of stating the negation of remaining behind, as has been said, is because the primary intention is to state their inability to escape from the punishment. As for in His saying: "No nation can precede its term, nor can they remain behind," the "preceding" was mentioned first because the intention there is to state the secret of delaying their destruction despite their deserving it, as indicated by His saying: "Leave them to eat and enjoy themselves and let [false] hope divert them; they will soon know." Therefore, the most important thing there is the statement of the negation of preceding.