And when he mentioned this punishment that cannot be endured, he followed it with its cause, as a warning from it and an appeal to repentance, and a caution against joy in the abode of sorrow. He said, affirming to alert that it should not be believed that a sane person can have joy in this world: "Indeed, he was" meaning by what is for him like a natural disposition and character, "in his family" meaning in the abode of action, "joyful" meaning that joy is firmly established for him, indulging in wealth and status, rejoicing in it, permanently attached to it, living luxuriously with idleness and fleeing from the remembrance of the reckoning of the Hereafter, as he said in the one before it: "And when they returned to their families, they returned joyfully" [Al-Mutaffifin: 31]. None of them is saddened by a sin they committed or by an evil they perpetrated, rather they rejoice in the fact that it comes to them. So he will be held to account in the Hereafter with a severe reckoning, and he will return to his enemies distressed and broken-hearted. It has become clear that the statement is from the interplay: the mention of the easy reckoning, which is the fruit and the cause, first indicates the omission of its opposite secondly, and the mention of joy in the family, which is the cause, secondly indicates the omission of its opposite, which is the cause of happiness, which is grief and self-accountability in the first. So it is an interplay within an interplay. Then he explained the permanence of his joy, saying, affirming to alert also that it should not be believed that anyone denies resurrection with what he has of the evidences that surpass enumeration.