Tafsir of Al-Qiyamah 75:33

"Then he went to his family, walking with tamattu'," meaning: walking with vanity and pride over that [what he had committed]. One who acts in such a way should fear the descent of the wrath of Allah, the Exalted, upon him; he should walk in fear and humility, not in joy and vanity.

"Thumma" (then) is used here for denoting distance. "Yatamatta" (walking with vanity) is derived from al-madd (stretching), for the vain person stretches his strides. Its origin is yatamattat; the ta was changed into a vowel letter due to the dislike of clustering similar letters, just as they said tazanna (to think) from al-zann, which originated as tazannan. Alternatively, it is from al-mata, which is the back, because the vain person twists his back while walking with vanity; thus, it is essentially defective [in its root]. In the Hadith: "When my Ummah walks with the matita’ (the vain, swinging gait) and the Persians and Byzantines serve them, then their might will be placed among themselves, and their worst will be given power over their best."

Some consider the "fa" (in fa-la saddaqa) to be for expressing wonder, meaning: does he ask, "When is the Day of Resurrection?" while he has not prepared for it anything other than what necessitates his ruin and destruction?

It has been said that the saying of the Exalted, "So when the sight is dazzled..." (Qiyamah: 7) is the answer to the question [of the disbeliever], inserted between the conjoined clause and the one it is joined to due to the importance of the matter. It is also said that the saying of the Exalted, "Do not move your tongue..." (Qiyamah: 16) is a digression, according to what you have heard.

Regarding the interpretation of saddaqa (in "He did not believe") as being from al-tasdiq (to believe/confirm the truth), this is what is narrated from Qatadah. Others said it is from al-tasaadaq (to give charity), meaning: "He did not give charity, nor did he pray." Abu Hayyan said: "This is what is apparent: denying him both Zakah (charity) and prayer, and affirming for him the denial of the truth, as in the saying of the Exalted: 'They will say, "We were not of those who prayed, nor did we used to feed the poor. And we used to engage in vain discourse with those who engaged [in it], and we used to deny the Day of Recompense."'" Interpreting it as a negation of tasdiq (belief) necessitates that "But he denied" (wa-lakin kadhdhaba) becomes repetitive, and it would necessarily be a remedial clause (istidrak) after "nor did he pray," not after "he did not believe," because both [the latter two] are synonymous; and in that there is a view known from what we have established.

Then, he deemed the conjunction [of this verse] to the saying of the Exalted, "Does man think..." (Qiyamah: 3) unlikely. He mentioned that the verse was revealed concerning Abu Jahl, and it nearly declares this explicitly in the saying of the Exalted, "walking with vanity," for that was his habit among his people, the Banu Makhzum, and he would do it frequently. He did not clarify the status of the conjunction given this. You know that the conjunction does not negate the report that it was revealed about Abu Jahl. It has been said that the saying of the Exalted, "Does man think that We will not assemble his bones?" (Qiyamah: 3) also refers to him. Judging the [entire] species by rulings does not harm the specification of some of its individuals in one of those rulings. Yes, there is no doubt about the remoteness of this conjunction linguistically, but regarding its remoteness in meaning—perhaps there is something further on that strengthens the possibility of it being a conjunction to that.