Tafsir of Al-Qiyamah 75:5

The ultimate excellence lies in the particle of transition (idrab) in His, the Almighty’s, saying: "Nay, man wishes..." It is a conjunction to "Does he think?" brought to transition from the denial of his assumption to informing about the state of this presumptuous man in a manner more piercing in its reproach and rebuke than the former. It is as if it were said: "Leave off rebuking him, for he is more insolent than that. How can he be restrained when he desires to persist in his wickedness in the times that lie before him and in the future, never desisting from it?"

Alternatively, it is a conjunction to "think" (yahsab), with the interrogation extending over it, or to "does he think" (ayahsabu), with the interrogation implied therein—meaning: "Nay, does he wish?" It is brought forth as an intensified denial of this desire of his, alerting that it is more heinous than the first, to indicate that this very assumption is in itself the desire for wickedness. It is like our saying in threatening a group who have caused havoc in a land: "Do they think the Commander will not enter? Nay, they wish to speak ill of him." You would not say this unless you had escalated the denial, treating their triviality as being equivalent to a desire for dominion and a lack of concern for the Commander's status. To these two perspectives, Jar Allah (al-Zamakhshari) alluded to, as established in al-Kashshaf. The first perspective is more eloquent, for it is based on escalation, whereas the first is a transition from denial while implying that the matter is more dreadful and severe.

Both contain an allusion that this man is aware of the occurrence of the Resurrection, yet he is defiant. The notion of permanence is considered in "to commit lewdness" (liyafjur), for it reports the state of the wicked person, that he wishes to commit lewdness in the future, given that his assumption and his desire are the very essence of wickedness. It has been said that "before him" (amama-hu) is a spatial metaphor borrowed here for future time, thus signifying continuity.

In repeating the manifest noun ("man") a second time, there is an evident threat and condemnation of the ugliness of what he has committed, suggesting that true humanity rejects such an assumption and desire. The return of the pronoun in "before him" to this manifest noun is the most apparent interpretation. From Ibn Abbas, there is that which suggests its return to the Day of Resurrection, but the first is what the discourse of many of the predecessors necessitates.

It is clear, however, in the generality of wickedness. Mujahid, al-Hasan, Ikrimah, Ibn Jubayr, al-Dahhak, and al-Suddi said regarding the verse that man only desires his lusts and sins so that he may proceed in them forever, headlong, following his hopes and procrastinating his repentance. This is a sound interpretation that does not reject the aforementioned transition. It contains an indication that the object of "wishes" (yureed) is elided, indicated by "to commit lewdness." Some have said it is treated as a grammatical particle (lam), with its source estimated as a definite noun, meaning: "He directs all his will to commit lewdness." From al-Khalil, Sibawayh, and those who followed them, it is held that the verb is estimated as an infinitive elevated by being an initial subject, and "to commit lewdness" serves as the predicate; thus, the estimation here is: "Nay, man’s desire is for the sake of committing lewdness."