Tafsir of Al-Fajr 89:8

The words of the Exalted, “The likes of which have not been created in the cities,” constitute another attribute of it [the city of Iram]. This means that the likes of them [the people of Iram] were not created in terms of the magnitude of their bodies and strength in the lands of the world. You have already heard what was narrated earlier from al-Kawashi, and what was mentioned therein regarding the fact that one of them was [of such and such stature], etc. It has appeared in a marfu’ (elevated) hadith recorded by Ibn Abi Hatim and Ibn Mardawayh on the authority of al-Miqdam ibn Ma'di Karib.

It is said that Iram is the name of a city belonging to them. Muhammad ibn Ka'b said it is Alexandria; al-Musayyib and al-Maqburi said it is Damascus; and it is also said that it is the name of their land, namely Oman and Hadhramaut, which is a land of sands and ahqaf (dunes). Indeed, the Sublimely Exalted has said: “And remember the brother of 'Ad, when he warned his people at the Ahqaf.” This has been used to object to the claim that their city is Alexandria or Damascus, as neither of them is among the lands of the Ahqaf and sands—unless one argues that the 'Ad mentioned here is the "First 'Ad," while the one in the verse of al-Ahqaf is the "Last 'Ad," and one remains committed to the non-identity of their dwellings.

According to the view that it is the name of their city or the name of their land, it is in a genitive construction (idafa) for the sake of grammatical dependency—that is, "the people of Iram." It is also said that an implied noun is placed on the side of the headword, such as "with the city of" or "the land of the 'Ad of Iram." This, as you can see, is forced. The prohibition of sarf (diptote) in both cases is due to what you have already heard. The majority hold that it is the name of a magnificent city in the land of Yemen, and the two descriptions ('Ad and Iram) apply to it. The intent is that it possessed lofty structures or columns, the likes of which—in terms of spaciousness and the beauty of its houses and gardens—were not created in the lands of the world.

It is narrated that 'Ad had two sons, Shaddad and Shadid. They ruled and conquered, then Shadid died and authority was left entirely to Shaddad. He ruled the world and its kings submitted to him. He heard mention of Paradise and said, "I will build the likes of it." So he built Iram in some of the deserts of Aden over three hundred years, and he lived for nine hundred years. It was a magnificent city whose walls were of gold and silver, and its columns were of chrysolite and ruby, containing various types of trees and flowing rivers. When its construction was completed, he set out toward it with his kingdom's people. When he was a distance of a day and a night's travel from it, Allah the Exalted sent upon them a sayhah (blast) from the sky, and they perished.

It is narrated from Abdullah ibn Qilabah that he went out in search of his camels and stumbled upon it, carrying away what he could from there. His news reached Mu'awiyah, who summoned him, and he recounted the story to him. Mu'awiyah sent for Ka'b and asked him, and Ka'b said, "It is Iram of the Columns. A man from the Muslims in your time will enter it; he will be red, blonde, short, with a mole on his eyebrow and a mole on his heel, going out in search of his camels." He then turned and saw Ibn Qilabah and said, "This, by Allah, is that man!" The account of Shaddad mentioned is weak; indeed, its chain of narration is not authentic, as the Hafiz Ibn Hajar has mentioned, and it is a fabrication, just like the report of Ibn Qilabah.

It is narrated from Mujahid that Iram is the verbal noun (masdar) of arama-ya'rimu, meaning "to perish." Thus, Iram in the sense of "destruction" is in the accusative case as a figurative verbal noun, and it is genitive to dhat (possessor of). Allati (which) is an attribute for dhat al-'imad (the possessor of columns), intending by it the city. How then does it function in the context of: “Have you not seen how your Lord dealt with 'Ad [and] Iram of the Columns?” It is as if it were said: "Have you not seen how your Lord dealt with 'Ad, like the destruction of the possessor of columns, the likes of which were not created in the lands?" This is a strange and distant view.

Al-Hasan read bi-'Adin Rama by adding 'Ad to Iram, making it possible for Iram to be a grandfather, with the two descriptions applying to 'Ad, or for it to be a city, with the two descriptions being lazim (indispensable attributes). It is also permitted that they refer to 'Ad. Ibn al-Zubayr read bi-'Adin Iram as a genitive construction, except that Iram is vocalized with a fathah on the hamzah and a kasrah on the ra'. It is said that this is a dialect for "the city" and nothing else. From al-Dahhak, it is narrated that he read bi-'Adin (fully declined and undeclined) Iram with a fathah on the hamzah and a sukūn on the ra' for ease of pronunciation, originating from Iram (like fakhdh).

It has been read as Arrama by adding Iram to dhat, interpreted as "the markers [al-a'lam] of the possessor of the columns." This is their city, and allati is an attribute for dhat al-'imad according to the most apparent view. It is narrated from Ibn Abbas that he read arrama with a shaddah (doubled letter) as a past-tense verb, with dhat in the accusative as the direct object. That is: "Allah the Exalted made the possessor of the columns into decayed remains (ramiman)." Iram, according to what is in al-Bahr, is a substitute for the verb or an elucidation of it. The intent behind "possessor of the columns" is either 'Ad itself—wherein there is the placing of the noun in the place of the pronoun, the logic of which is clear—or it refers to their city, and making it "decayed remains" (destruction) is a metonymy for making them likewise. Ibn al-Zubayr read lam yakhluq (active voice), where the doer is His pronoun—Majestic is He—and mithlaha (the likes of it) is in the accusative as the direct object. From him also is the reading lam nakhluq (we have not created) with the nun of majesty.