They denied that he should be distinguished with honor among their nobles and leaders, and that the Book should be revealed to him from among them. As they said: "If only this Qur'an had been revealed to a man from the two great cities!" This denial is a reflection of what their hearts were boiling with, from envy over what he was granted of the honor of prophethood among them. Rather, they are in doubt about the Qur'an, saying to themselves: "Either this or that." Their saying, "This is nothing but a fabrication," is a statement contrary to their belief in it, which they say out of envy. Rather, they have not yet tasted the punishment; when they taste it, what they have of doubt and envy will be removed from them. [Mahamud said: "Its meaning is that they have not yet tasted it, and when they taste it, what they have will be removed..." I said: It is understood from this that 'lam' is suitable for the answer, and it negates an action that is expected to exist, as Sibawayh says. It differs from 'lam' in that 'lam' negates an action that is expected to exist but does not accept its affirmative 'qad'. 'Lama' negates what is expected to exist and is introduced on its affirmative 'qad'. I mentioned this because I was recently discussing his saying, blessings and peace be upon him: "The right of preemption is in what has not been divided." I used it as evidence that preemption is specific to what can be divided. I was told: Its limit is that he affirmed preemption in what he denied division. Either it does not accept division, or it does accept and division did not occur. I refuted that by saying that the negation mentioned is 'lam', and its implication is the acceptance of the place of the negated action and the expectation of its existence. Do you not see that you say: "The stone does not speak"? If you said: "The stone did not speak," it would be awkward to say, as it implies its acceptance of speech.] At that time, it means that they will not believe in it unless they are struck by punishment, compelled to believe it. Or do they have the treasures of the mercy of your Lord? It means they do not have the treasures of mercy so that they can bestow it upon whomever they wish and withhold it from whomever they wish, and choose for prophethood some of their leaders, elevating themselves above Muhammad, blessings and peace be upon him. The one who possesses mercy and its treasures is the Mighty, the Conqueror over His creation, the Bestower of many gifts, who grants them to their rightful places, who distributes them according to what His wisdom and justice require. As He said: "Do they distribute the mercy of your Lord? We have distributed it." Then this meaning was emphasized when He said: "Or do they have the dominion of the heavens and the earth?" So that they may speak about divine matters and the divine decrees that belong exclusively to the Lord of Glory and Majesty. Then He mocked them to the utmost, saying: "And if they were suitable for managing the creation and controlling the distribution of mercy, and if they had the wisdom to distinguish between who is deserving of being granted prophethood and who is not, let them ascend through the means! Let them rise through the paths that lead to the Throne, until they reach it and manage the affairs of the world and the Kingdom of Allah, and bring down revelation to whom they choose and approve." Then He dismissed them with disdain. [The saying "Then He dismissed them with disdain" in the dictionaries: I dismissed the dog with disdain: I drove it away. And 'khasa' by itself can be transitive or intransitive.] He then said: "A host there defeated from the confederates," meaning they are nothing but a army of disbelievers united against the messengers of Allah, defeated and broken soon.

He said: Then he humiliated them with his saying, "A host there is defeated from the confederates." Its meaning is: These are nothing but a party united against the Prophet, blessings and peace be upon him, who will soon be defeated and will turn their backs." Ahmad said: The rising attributed to Allah is not something that can be reached by ascending through the heavens and reaching the Throne and settling upon it and being established above it, because the rising attributed to Allah, glorified and exalted is He, is not a rising of settling with a body—glorified is Allah above that—but rather it is a quality of action, meaning it is an action in which He performed a rising. This is the interpretation of the judge Abu Bakr.

And the phrase of al-Zamakhshari in this section does not correspond to the detailed explanation according to his usual habits in clarifying the phrase according to his intent. So do not care about what they say, and do not be concerned with what they babble. And "what" is extra, and it has the meaning of exaggeration, as in the saying of Imru' al-Qais:

"And the talk of 'what' despite its brevity [is generous with the connection for one longing for its company... If you do not find, then the talk of 'what' despite its brevity."

The intended meaning of 'connection' is companionship. And the pronoun 'its company' refers to the one longing or to the connection. And 'talk' is the subject, and its predicate is omitted, meaning: it is generous.

And 'what' is an extra for generalization. And it may be for exaggeration. But the first is more suitable for the context. And 'with' means 'together with,' and the pronoun 'its brevity' refers to the talk.

However, it is in a mocking manner, and 'there' refers to where they placed themselves in volunteering for such a great saying, from the saying to someone who volunteers for a matter that is not suitable for him: 'You are not there.'