The city of Al-Hijr. And it is permissible to distinguish the nine by the term 'rahṭ' because it is in the meaning of a group, as if it were said: nine souls. The difference between 'rahṭ' and 'nafar' is that 'rahṭ' is from three to ten, or from seven to ten.

And 'nafar' is from three to nine. Their names according to Wahb are: Al-Hudhail bin Abd Rabb, Ghanam bin Ghanam, Rabab bin Mahraj, Musda' bin Mahraj, Umair bin Kurda, Asim bin Makhrama, Sabeet bin Sadaqa, and Sim'an bin Safi.

Qadar bin Salif: They are the ones who rushed to slaughter the she-camel, and they were the tyrants of the people of Salih, peace be upon him, and they were from the sons of their nobles. وَلا يُصْلِحُونَ means that their affair is pure corruption that is not mixed with any goodness, as you see some corruptors may have a little goodness.

تَقاسَمُوا may imply a command or a report in the context of the situation by implying 'they said, dividing.' It has been read as تَقَسَّمُوا. It has also been read as لَتَبِيتُنَّهُ, with the 'ta' and 'ya' and 'noon,' so تَقَاسَمُوا - with the 'noon' and 'ta' - is valid in both ways. With the 'ya,' it is only valid if it is a report.

And the division and the splitting are like 'taẓāhar' and 'taẓahur': forming an alliance. And 'al-bayāt' is the surprise attack on the enemy at night. And from Al-Iskandar, it was suggested to him to perform a night raid, and he said: It is not from the ways of kings. The stealing of victory, and it has been read as مُهْلِك with the opening of the 'meem' and 'lam' and its breaking from هَلَكَ. And مُهْلِك with the 'meem' being closed from أَهْلَكَ. It can imply the source, time, and place. If you say: How can they be truthful when they denied what they did, so they brought the news contrary to what was reported?

I said: It is as if they believed that if they plotted against a righteous man and plotted against his family, and combined both plots, they would be truthful. In this is a decisive proof that lying is vile among the disbelievers who do not know the law and its prohibitions, nor does it occur to them. Do you not see that they aimed to kill the Prophet of Allah, and they did not accept for themselves to be liars until they devised a trick to escape from lying? Ahmad said: And al-Zamakhshari's trick to validate the principle of good and evil by reason is closer than their tricks, which Allah called plotting. His aim in laying the groundwork for their trick is to testify to the validity of the aforementioned principle by agreeing with the people of Lot on it, as they found lying repugnant by their intellects, not by the law. How can that be for him or for them, while they are openly lying in their saying, 'We did not witness the destruction of his people'? This is because they did both actions, and whoever does both actions and denies one of them is not in doubt about his lie. The trick would only be valid if they did one action and were accused of doing two actions, then they denied the total. Therefore, the scholars did not differ that whoever swore, 'I will not strike Zayd,' then struck Zayd and Amr, is a liar, unlike the one who swore, 'I will not strike Zayd and Amr,' then struck Amr, or 'I will not eat two loaves,' then ate one. For such a case is a matter of dispute among the scholars regarding lying and its absence. If it is established that these are outright liars in their saying, 'We did not witness the destruction of his people,' and that they have no trick to escape from lying, then their matter cannot be that they are rational. They do not agree on believing the truth with this trick, while it is certain that it is not a trick, nor is there any doubt due to their denial being close to the truth. This invalidates what al-Zamakhshari said to establish his principle of religion as he claims, for the principle of good and evil by reason is one of the principles of the beliefs of the Qadarites, in agreement with a people who are not rational about its validity. So let him be satisfied with what he accepted for his religion, and peace. I said: It is as if they believed that if they plotted against a righteous man and plotted against his family, then combined both plots and said, 'We did not witness the destruction of his people,' mentioning one of them, they would be truthful, because they did both plots, not just one. In this is a decisive proof that lying is vile among the disbelievers who do not know the law and its prohibitions, nor does it occur to them. Do you not see that they aimed to kill the Prophet of Allah, and they did not accept for themselves to be liars until they devised a trick in their report to escape from lying. Their plotting is what they concealed of the scheme to kill Saleh, peace be upon him, and his family. And Allah's plotting is their destruction from where they do not perceive. It is likened to the plotting of the plotter by way of metaphor. It is narrated that Saleh had a mosque in the rock where he prayed, and they said: Saleh, peace be upon him, claimed that he would be free of us by three, so we will be free of him and his family before the three. They went out to the valley and said: When he comes to pray, we will kill him, then we will return to his family and kill them. So Allah sent a rock from the hills towards them, and they rushed, and the rock fell upon them at the mouth of the valley. Their people did not know where they were, nor did they know what had happened to their people, and Allah punished each of them in his place, and saved Saleh and those with him. It is said: They came at night with their swords drawn, and Allah had sent the angels filling Saleh's house, and they pelted them with stones: they saw the stones but did not see the thrower. 'Indeed, We destroyed them' is a new statement. And whoever read it with an open vowel raised it as a substitute for the consequence, or as a news of an omitted subject, the estimation of which is: it is their destruction. Or it is read as a meaning: for indeed. Or as it is a news of 'was,' meaning: the consequence of their plotting was destruction. Empty, while it was acted upon what was indicated by that. And 'Khaawiyah' was read by Isa ibn Umar, raised as a news of the omitted subject.