And the meaning is: If Allah were to remove this harm from them, which is the weakness and drought that has afflicted them by His mercy upon them, and they found abundance, they would revert to what they were upon of arrogance and enmity towards the Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace be upon him, and the believers, and their excess therein. And this despair and flattery before Him would leave them, and they would seek His mercy. And it is evidenced by the fact that we first took them with swords and what happened to them on the Day of Badr from the killing of their leaders and their capture. After that, I did not find in them any humility or supplication, until we opened upon them the door of hunger, which is more severe than captivity and killing, and it is the greatest of punishments. They despaired immediately, and their necks humbled. And the most stubborn and strongest among them in obstinacy came to you seeking your favor. Or we afflicted them with every trial of killing and hunger, yet no softness was seen in them while they were like that. Until when they are punished by the fire of Hell, then they will despair, as His saying: 'And the Day the Hour will be established, the criminals will despair.' There will not be lightened for them, and they will be in despair. And despair is: the loss of all good. It was said: silence with confusion. If you say: What is the root of 'istakana'? I say: It is derived from 'kawn' [being]. [Mahrud said: 'Istakana' is derived from 'kawn', meaning: to transition from one state to another, as it is said: 'istihala', if one transitions from one condition to another.] Ahmad said: This interpretation is safer and more accurate than the interpretation of those who derived it from 'sukoon' and made it 'ift'ala', then the opening was emphasized, and the 'alif' was generated as it is generated in the saying: 'Yinba'u min dhafra ghadub jasrah.' For this emphasis is not eloquent, and it is one of the necessities of poetry. The status of the Qur'an should be elevated above the occurrence of such in it. However, Al-Zamakhshari's analogy to it with 'istihala': And if 'istakana' is, according to his interpretation, one of the categories of 'istaf'al', which means transformation, as they say: 'istihjar al-tin', 'istanuq al-jamal'. As for 'istihala', its trilateral root is 'hal' which means to transition from one state to another. If the trilateral conveys the meaning of transformation, then the form 'istaf'al' has no effect in it, so 'istihala' is not derived from 'istaf'al' for transformation. Rather, it is from 'istaf'al' meaning 'to do', and it is one of its categories, as the hexagonal form does not add meaning to the trilateral. And Allah knows best. Then we return to its interpretation and say: The meaning of it is: They did not transition from the state of arrogance and tyranny to the state of humility and supplication to Allah, the Exalted. And one may say: 'Istakana' implies, according to the mentioned interpretation, the transition from one state to another, so it is not more appropriate to interpret it as a transition from arrogance to humility than the opposite. And you see that this form does not convey understanding except for one of the transitions. If it were derived from the absolute 'kawn', it would be ambiguous and applicable to both transitions. The answer is that its origin is indeed so in general, but the custom has prevailed in its use for the specific transition, as it has prevailed in others, and Allah knows best. My grandfather, Abu Abbas Ahmad ibn Faris, the jurist and minister, may Allah have mercy on him, used to mention to me that when he entered Baghdad during the time of Imam Al-Nasir, may Allah be pleased with him, he displayed among his many honors: that the minister gathered all the scholars of Baghdad and held a gathering for debate with them. He used to mention to me that among the topics that arose at that time was this verse, and that one of them, who was known for his linguistic knowledge, was specifically asked by the minister about it, and he said: It is derived from the saying of the Arabs: 'I was for you if you humbled yourself,' and this is a language of Hudhayl, and the minister found it commendable. Ahmad said: I later found it in the 'Gharib' of Abu Ubaid, which is the best interpretation of the verse and the safest, and Allah knows best. And on this basis, it is from 'istaf'al' meaning 'to do', as they say: 'istiqrar' and 'ist'ala', and 'hal' and 'istihala' as mentioned.

Some of them said to me one day: Why do you not make it according to this interpretation of the form of 'ifta'al' which is used for exaggeration, like 'istahsar' and 'ista'sama' from 'hasara' and 'asama'? I said: I cannot do that, because the meaning rejects it. This is because it came in the context of negation, and the intent behind it is to blame these people for their harshness, severity, and lack of submission, along with what necessitates the utmost humility from their being taken by punishment. If I were to consider it as a form of exaggeration, it would imply a deficiency in exaggeration, because negating the more eloquent is less than negating the lesser. It is as if they were blamed for the negation of much submission, and that they did not reach the end of humility. This is not the case, for they did not possess humility nor any trace of it. So how can the end, which implies the beginning, be negated from them? And Allah knows best. That is: they transitioned from one state to another, as it was said: 'istihala', when one transitions from one condition to another. It may be that 'iftal' is derived from stillness, where the opening of its 'ain' is emphasized, as it came: 'bimuntazah'. If you say: Why was it not said: 'And they did not humble themselves'? Or: 'So they do not submit'? I say: Because the meaning is: We tested them, but I found no humility from them following the test. It is not customary for these people to humble themselves and to plead until the door of severe punishment is opened upon them. And it has been recited: 'We opened'.