Tafsir of Ya seen 36:32

Surah Ya-Sin (36): Verse 32

وَإِن كُلٌّ لَّمَّا جَمِيعٌ لَّدَيْنَا مُحْضَرُونَ

After establishing the destruction (of the disbelievers), it is clarified that those whom God destroyed were not simply left alone; rather, after them comes gathering, reckoning, detention, and punishment. If those whom God destroyed were merely left, then death would have been a comfort.

As the poet aptly said:

If we, upon dying, were left alone, Death would be the comfort of every living being. But rather, when we die, we are resurrected, And questioned afterward about everything.

On the phrase: {وَإِن كُلٌّ لَّمَّا}

There are two interpretations regarding the particle إن (Inna):

1. It is the shortened form of the emphatic Inna (the heavy Inna).
   • The لَّمَّا (Lamma) here is separated from the negative particle (which would make it lam for negation), and مَا (Ma) is an extra particle used for emphasis in meaning.
   • The recitation in this case would be with the takhfif (lightening) of the Lamma.

2. It is a negative particle, and Lamma means Illā (except).
   • Sibawayh stated that one says: "I adjure you by God, Lamma you do it," meaning "You must do it (Illā you do it)."
   • The recitation in this case would be with the tashdīd (doubling/emphasis) of the Lamma.
   • This interpretation is supported by the narration that Ubayy (ibn Ka'b) recited it as: {وَمَا كُلٌّ إِلَّا جَمِيعٌ} (And all are not except gathered).

The meaning implied by Sibawayh's statement—that Lamma means Illā—is appropriate because Lamma seems to combine two negative particles: لم (Lam) and ما (Ma), thus reinforcing the negation. This is why one responds to someone who says, "He has done it," with "لما يفعل" (He has not done it), and to someone who says, "He has not done it," with "لم يفعل" (He has not done it). Illā seems to combine the negative particles إن (Inna, when used negatively) and لا (La), so one is substituted for the other.

On the phrase: {كُلٌّ لَّمَّا جَمِيعٌ}

Al-Zamakhshari raised an objection: Since Kull (all) and Jamīʿ (gathered/total) have the same meaning, how can Jamīʿ be the predicate of Kull when the لَّام (Lam) enters it (i.e., Inna Kulla la-Jamīʿun)?

The Response: The meaning of جَمِيع (Jamīʿ) here is "a collection/aggregate," while the meaning of كُلّ (Kull) is "every individual member," such that no single entity is excluded from the ruling. Thus, the meaning becomes: Every individual member is aggregated with the others, joined to them.

Alternatively, it can mean مُحْضَرُونَ (being brought forth/present). This is because if one said: {وَإِنَّ جَمِيعًا لَّجَمِيعٌ مُحْضَرُونَ} (And verily, the aggregate is an aggregate brought forth), the statement would be sound, but it would not yield the intended response (which is the predicate muḥḍarūn).

Rather, the correct interpretation is that مُحْضَرُونَ acts as an adjective for جَمِيع. It is as if the statement means: "Every individual is a total aggregate, an aggregate that is muḥḍarūn (brought forth)," similar to saying, "The man is a man who is learned," or "The Prophet is a Prophet who is sent."

The Conjunction وَ (Wa)

The وَ (Wa) in {وَإِنَّ كُلٌّ} is for the conjunction of narration following narration. It is as if God is saying: "I have clarified what you mentioned (regarding destruction), and I clarify that every one of them is gathered before Us."

Similarly, the وَ in the following verse (33) connects the narrative of resurrection to the previous context: