And it is recited: 'Rather, he has attained.' 'Rather, he has attained.' 'Rather, he has attained.' 'Rather, he has attained.' 'Rather, has he attained?' with two hamzahs. 'Rather, has he attained?' with an alif between them. 'Rather, he has attained,' with lightening and transfer. 'Rather, he has attained,' with a fatha on the lam and a shadda on the dal. Its origin is: 'Rather, has he attained?' in the form of a question. 'Yes, he has attained.' 'Yes, has he attained?' Or 'has he attained?' Or 'has he attained?' So these are twelve readings. And 'has attained' is originally 'has attained,' so the ta was merged into the dal. And 'has attained' is a form of Iftial. And the meaning of 'he has attained' is: it has ended and completed. And 'has attained' means: it has followed and become firm. And it has two aspects. One of them is that the causes of the firmness of knowledge and its completion, that the Day of Resurrection is certainly going to happen, has been established for them, and they have been enabled to know it, while they are doubtful and ignorant. This is His saying: 'Indeed, they are in doubt about it; rather, they are blind to it.' He means the polytheists among those in the heavens and the earth, because when they were in generality, their actions were attributed to all, as it is said: 'The sons of so-and-so did such-and-such,' whereas only some of them did it. If you say: The verse was revealed to specify Allah's knowledge of the unseen, and that the servants have no knowledge of anything of it, and that the time of their resurrection and revival is among the unseen, and they do not perceive it, how does this meaning fit with the description of the polytheists denying the resurrection while the causes of knowledge and the ability to know are firm? I say: When it was mentioned that the servants do not know the unseen, nor do they perceive the resurrection that is to come and the time in which it will occur, and this was a clarification of their incapacity and a description of the deficiency of their knowledge, it was connected with the fact that they have a greater incapacity than this, which is that they say to the inevitable event that must occur - which is the time of the recompense for their deeds - 'It will not happen,' while they have the causes of knowing its occurrence and the firmness of knowledge about it. The second aspect is that their description of the firmness and completion of knowledge is mockery of them, as you would say to the most ignorant of people: 'How knowledgeable you are!' in a mocking manner, especially since they doubted and were blind to the proof of it, the path to knowing it is traversed, let alone knowing the time of its occurrence, for which there is no way to know it. And in: 'he has attained their knowledge,' and 'he has attained their knowledge,' there is another aspect, which is that 'he has attained' means it has ended and perished, from your saying: 'I have attained the fruit,' for that is its limit at which it ceases to exist. Al-Hasan, may Allah be pleased with him, interpreted it as the fading of their knowledge and 'has attained,' from 'the sons of so-and-so,' if they have followed one another in destruction. If you say, what is the meaning of the reading of the one who recited: 'Rather, has he attained?' in the form of a question? I say: It is a question in the form of denial of their attainment of knowledge. Likewise, for the one who recited: 'Or has he attained?' and 'Or has he attained?' because it is 'or' which means 'rather' and the hamzah. If you say: As for the one who recited: 'Yes, he has attained,' and 'Yes, has he attained?' I say: When 'yes' came after His saying: 'And they do not perceive,' its meaning was: 'Yes, they perceive,' then he explained the perception by saying: 'He has attained their knowledge in the Hereafter' in a manner of mockery, which means an exaggeration in negating knowledge, as if he said: Their perception of the time of the Hereafter is that they do not know its occurrence, thus it returns to the negation of perception in the most emphatic manner. As for the one who recited: 'Yes, has he attained?' in the form of a question, its meaning is: 'Yes, they perceive when they will be resurrected,' then he denied their knowledge of its occurrence. And if he denied their knowledge of its occurrence, they did not attain any perception of the time of its occurrence, because knowledge of the time of the inevitable is dependent on knowledge of its occurrence in the Hereafter regarding the Hereafter and its meaning. If you say, what do these three variations mean? I say: They are nothing but a depiction of their states: first describing them as not perceiving the time of resurrection, then as not knowing that the Day of Resurrection is going to happen, then as they stumble in doubt and suspicion without removing it, while removal is possible. Do you not see that one who has not heard the differences of the sects and the misguidance of their leaders against one another: his situation is easier than one who has heard of it while he is sitting, not moving to seek the distinction between truth and falsehood, then he is in a worse state, which is blindness, and to be like an animal that is preoccupied with its belly and its private parts, not thinking of truth or falsehood. And he does not reflect on the consequences. And he has made the Hereafter the origin of their blindness and its source, and that is why He addressed it without 'from,' because disbelief in the consequences and recompense is what made them like animals, not contemplating or discerning.