Tafsir of Al-Infitar 82:19

(The Day when a soul shall not possess for another soul anything, and the command on that Day is for Allah.) This is a summary explanation regarding the affair of the Day of Recompense, following its being veiled and indicating its exit from the sphere of human comprehension. It has been said that this is by way of fulfilling a promise, for the negation of the "knowing" (of what that Day is) implies the noble promise of making it known. This is based on what is narrated from Ibn Abbas, who said: "Everything in the Quran where the Almighty says, 'What makes you know (ma adraka)?' He has indeed made it known to him; and everything in it where He says, 'What makes you know (ma yudrika)?' He has kept it hidden from him."

"Day" (Yawm) is in the accusative case (mansub) due to the implied verb "Remember" (udhkur). It is as if it were said—after magnifying the affair of the Day of Recompense and exciting the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, to know it—"Remember the Day when a soul—any soul—shall not possess for another soul—any other soul, absolutely, not just for the disbeliever, as is narrated from Muqatil—anything at all," etc., for this (the verse) makes you know what it is.

Or, it is indeclinable (mabni) upon the fatha, with its position being in the nominative (rafa') as the predicate of an omitted subject, according to the view of those who permit the indeclinability of a temporal noun (zaraf) when it is attributed to something non-established, and they are the Kufans; i.e., "It is a Day when..."

It has been said that it is in the accusative case as a temporal adverb (zaraf) due to an implied verb such as "they shall be judged," or "the terror shall intensify," or similar expressions indicated by the context. Or, it is indeclinable upon the fatha in the position of the nominative as a substitute (badal) for "the Day of Recompense." Both of these are not quite right, as they lack the benefit provided by what preceded them.

Ibn Abi Ishaq, Isa, Ibn Jandab, Ibn Kathir, and Abu 'Amr read "Yawmu" with a nominative (rafa') without tanwin, as a predicate of an omitted subject; i.e., "It is a Day when..." There is no substitute for what I heard just now. Mahbub from Abu 'Amr read "Yawmun" with a nominative and tanwin; thus, the sentence "shall not possess" is in the position of an adjective (sifah) for it, and the referent (pronoun) is omitted; i.e., "in it."

"And the command" (wa al-amr)—as stated in al-Kashf—is one of the commands (al-awamir), because of the Almighty's saying: "To whom belongs the kingdom this day?" For the command is a matter of the king who is obeyed. The "lam" denotes exclusivity; i.e., the command belongs to Him, the Exalted, not to anyone else, neither by partnership nor by independence. That is, all disposition is within the grasp of His power, the Mighty and Majestic, and no one else’s.

In the verification of the Almighty's saying, "a soul shall not possess for another soul anything," it indicates that all are subjects, obedient, preoccupied with their own state, and subdued by their servitude to the might of Lordship. It has been said that "amr" means "affairs," i.e., the business, but this is not sound. Qatada’s statement, in what 'Abd ibn Humayd and Ibn al-Mundhir recorded from him—that is, "There is no one there who decrees anything nor creates anything except the Lord of the worlds"—is an explanation of the result, not a lexical interpretation of that word.

However, his statement—alone—is not an argument for which the apparent meaning should be abandoned, and disputing the apparent meaning is stubbornness. Regardless, there is no evidence in the verse to negate intercession on the Day of Resurrection, as is not hidden. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.