Al-Anfal: (50-51) And if you could but see...

Know that after Allah the Exalted described the state of these disbelievers, He then described the state of their death and the punishment that befalls them at that time. There are several issues in this verse:

Ibn 'Amir alone recited إذ (idh) with a tā’ (إذت) to feminize the word malā’ikah (angels) and the plural form. The rest recited it with a yā’ (إذ) based on the meaning (i.e., referring to the angels).

The response to the conditional clause (ولو ترى) is omitted. The implied meaning is: "You would have seen a terrifying sight, a dreadful matter, and severe punishment."

It means: "And if you could but witness and observe." This is because law (لو) turns the present tense verb into the past tense, just as in (إن) turns the past tense verb into the present tense (in some contexts).

The angels (الملائكة) are raised (nominative) by the verb (يتوفى), and ويضربون (and they strike) is a circumstantial clause (حال) describing them. Alternatively, the pronoun in يتوفى (takes away) could refer to Allah the Almighty, making الملائكة the subject of a nominal sentence (مبتدأ), and ويضربون the predicate (خبر).

Al-Wāḥidī said that the meaning of يتوفى الذين كفروا (takes away the souls of those who disbelieved) is that they seize their souls completely (استيفاء). This indicates that the human being is something distinct from the body, and that it is only the soul. This is because saying "He takes away the disbelievers" implies that He took away the disbelieving essence from this body, which is clear proof that the human being is something other than the body.

Regarding يضربون وجوههم وأدبارهم (striking their faces and their backsides): Ibn 'Abbās said that the polytheists, when they faced the Muslims, struck their faces with swords, and when they turned away, they struck their backs. Therefore, it is fitting that Allah met them with the like at the time of the soul's departure.

I offer a more subtle meaning: When the soul of the disbeliever leaves his body, he is turning away from the world of this life and turning towards the Hereafter. Due to his disbelief, he only witnesses darkness in the Hereafter. Because of his intense love for corporeal things and his separation from them, his distancing from them brings only pain and regret. Thus, the cause of his departure from the world brings him pain after pain and regret. Due to his turning toward the Hereafter without light or knowledge, he moves from darkness to darkness. These two aspects are what is intended by يضربون وجوههم وأدبارهم.

Then Allah the Exalted said: وذوقوا عذاب الحريق (And taste the punishment of the burning). There is an implied statement here; the meaning is: "And We say: Taste the punishment of the burning." Similar instances are numerous in the Qur'an, such as when Allah says about Abraham and Ishmael: ربنا تقبل منا (Our Lord, accept from us) (Al-Baqarah: 127), meaning "and they say, 'Our Lord...'" Likewise, ولو ترى إذ المجرمون ناكسوا رؤوسهم عند ربهم ربنا أبصرنا (And if you could but see when the criminals hang their heads before their Lord, [saying], "Our Lord, we have seen...") (As-Sajdah: 12), meaning they say, "Our Lord..."

Ibn 'Abbās said that the angels saying وذوقوا عذاب الحريق to them is correct because the angels had maces (مقَامِع), and whenever they struck with them, fire ignited in the parts and limbs, hence the saying: وذوقوا عذاب الحريق. Al-Wāḥidī said the correct view is that the angels say this to them in the Hereafter.

I say: The physical punishment is true and real. The spiritual punishment is also true, as intellect indicates it. We have explained that when the ignorant person departs the world, intense sorrow befalls him due to leaving the beloved world, and intense fear due to the accumulation of darkness upon him in the realm of fear and sorrow. Both fear and sorrow necessitate spiritual burning and a spiritual fire.

Then Allah the Exalted said: ذالك بما قدمت أيديكم (That is because of what your hands have put forth). It is said that this is a statement from the angels, and there are issues concerning it:

Al-Wāḥidī said it is permissible for ذالك to be the subject (مبتدأ), and its predicate (خبر) is بما قدمت أيديكم. Alternatively, if ذالك is in the nominative case, then the phrase بما قدمت أيديكم is in the accusative case, implying: "We did that because of what your hands have put forth."

The meaning of ذالك here is "this," referring to this punishment, the punishment of burning. It occurred because of what your hands put forth. We previously explained in the exegesis of الم * ذالك الكتاب (Alif, Lām, Mīm. That is the Book...) that the meaning of ذالك can be "this," and this meaning is permissible here.

The apparent meaning of ذالك بما قدمت أيديكم suggests that the hand is the agent of this action, which is impossible for several reasons:

1. This punishment reaches them because of their disbelief, and the locus of disbelief is the heart, not the hand.
2. The hand is not a locus for knowledge or cognition, so legal accountability (تكليف) cannot be directed towards it, making it impossible for punishment to be attributed to it.

Therefore, the hand must be interpreted metaphorically as a reference to power/ability (القدرة). The reason for this metaphor is that the hand is the instrument of action, and power is what influences the action, so it is appropriate to use the hand as a metaphor for power.

Know that the verified view is that the human being is a single essence—the essence that acts, perceives, believes, disbelieves, obeys, and sins. These limbs are instruments and tools for this essence. Thus, the action is outwardly attributed to the instrument, but in reality, it is attributed to the essence of the human being.

The phrase بما قدمت أيديكم implies that this punishment is like a consequence generated from the action performed. We have already established that punishment is generated from the false beliefs that a person writes down (internalizes) and the firm dispositions (الملكات الراسخة) that a person acquires. Thus, this statement conforms to rational understanding.

Then Allah the Exalted said: وأن الله ليس بظلام للعبيد (And that Allah is not unjust to His servants). There are issues regarding the grammatical position of أن:

There are two possibilities for the position of أن:

1. It is in the accusative case (نصب) due to the omission of a preposition, meaning: "and [saying] that Allah is not unjust..."
2. If you take ذالك as being in the nominative case (رفع), then أن is also in the nominative case, meaning: "And that is because Allah..." Al-Kūsā’ī suggested that breaking the alif of أن (making it إنّ) would also be correct, in which case this would be a new, independent statement preceding it.

The Mu'tazilites argued: If Allah creates disbelief in the disbeliever and then punishes him for it, He would be unjust. Furthermore, the verse ذالك بما قدمت أيديكم وأن الله ليس بظلام للعبيد indicates that Allah is not unjust in this punishment because the servant put forth what deserved this punishment. This implies that if the servant had not put forth that action, Allah would have been unjust in inflicting this punishment. If Allah were the creator of disbelief and disobedience, not the servant, then Allah would necessarily be unjust. Moreover, this verse indicates that He is capable of injustice, because if injustice were impossible for Him, boasting about its negation would be meaningless.

Know that this issue has been discussed exhaustively in Sūrat Āl 'Imrān, so there is no benefit in repeating it here. And Allah knows best.