He is Yusuf, son of Yaqub, peace be upon them. It is said: He is Yusuf, son of Ibrahim. [The saying "It is said: He is Yusuf, son of Ibrahim" is the phrase of Al-Nasafi: Ephraim.] Son of Yusuf, son of Yaqub: He remained among them as a prophet for twenty years. It is said that the Pharaoh of Musa is the Pharaoh of Yusuf, who lived until his time. It is said that he is another Pharaoh. He reproached them that Yusuf came to you with miracles, yet you doubted them and continued to be doubtful and disbelieving until when he passed away, you said: 'Allah will not send after him a messenger,' a judgment from yourselves without proof and a prior determination from you to deny the messengers. So when a messenger came to you, you denied and disbelieved based on your false judgment which you established. And their saying: 'Allah will not send after him a messenger' is not a confirmation of the message of Yusuf; how could it be when they doubted it and disbelieved in it? Rather, it is a denial of the message after him, combined with the denial of his message. And it was read: 'Will not Allah send,' by inserting the interrogative hamzah on the letter of negation, as if some of them were confirming each other by denying the resurrection. Then he said: 'Thus Allah leads astray,' meaning: like this clear abandonment. [The phrase 'like this clear abandonment' is interpreted by the Mu'tazilah as leading astray by abandonment and neglect, based on their belief that Allah does not create evil. The people of the Sunnah interpret it as creating misguidance in the heart, based on the belief that He creates evil as He creates good, as explained in Tawhid.] Allah abandons every transgressor in his disobedience, doubtful in his religion. 'Those who argue' is a substitute for 'who is a transgressor.' If you say: How is it permissible to replace it when it is plural and that is singular? I say: Because he does not mean one transgressor, so it is as if he said: Every transgressor. If you say: What is the subject of 'is great'? I say: The pronoun of 'who is a transgressor.' If you say: Did I not say it is plural, and that is why 'those who argue' was substituted for it? I say: Yes, it is plural in meaning. As for the wording, it is singular, so the substitute is taken based on its meaning, and the pronoun referring to it is based on its wording, and this is not unusual. [Mahamud said: 'Those who argue' is a substitute for 'who is a transgressor' because the intended meaning is every transgressor. It is permissible to replace it based on the meaning of 'who,' not based on its wording. He said: If you ask what is the subject of 'is great'? It was answered that it is the pronoun of 'who is a transgressor.' So, the substitute is based on meaning, and the pronoun is based on wording, and this is not unusual.' Ahmad said: What he mentioned is treating the wording of 'who' after treating its meaning, and this is something that the people of Arabic find strange; it is preferable to avoid it in the grammar of the Qur'an, for it contains ambiguity after clarification. The customary in eloquent reading is the opposite, and the correct approach is to make the pronoun in 'is great' refer back to the source of the preceding action, which is 'those who argue,' with the estimate: 'Their argument is great in disdain,' and to make 'those' the subject, based on the interpretation of the omitted addition, estimating: 'The argument of those who argue in the signs of Allah,' and the pronoun in 'is great disdain' refers back to the omitted argument, and the sentence is a subject and a predicate. An example of this in omitting the added source and building the speech on it is His saying: 'Did you make the watering of the pilgrim and the maintenance of the Sacred Mosque like one who has believed in Allah,' according to one of its interpretations, and there are many similar cases. Besides that, there are other valid ways that do not lead to the previous interpretation. The preferable approach is to sometimes rely on the wording and at other times on the meaning, and there are parallels to this. It is permissible to raise 'those who argue' as a subject, and in this case, it is necessary to omit an addition to which the pronoun in 'is great' refers, estimating: 'The argument of those who argue is great disdain,' and it is possible that 'those who argue' is the subject, and 'without authority that has come to them' is the news, and the subject of 'is great' is the saying: 'Thus,' meaning: 'great disdain is like that argument.' And Allah seals [the hearts]. Those who say: 'Great disdain with Allah is their argument,' have omitted the subject, and the subject cannot be omitted. In 'is great disdain' there is a kind of astonishment and exaggeration regarding their argument, and it is a testimony to its exceeding the limits of its problem from the major sins.

And it is recited: Sultan with a dammah on the lam. And it is recited: Qalb with tanween. And the heart is described with arrogance and tyranny because it is their center and source, just as you say: the eye saw, and the ear heard. And similar is His saying, exalted is He: 'Indeed, his heart is sinful,' even though the sinful one is the whole. It may also be understood as an omission of the added word, meaning: for every arrogant-hearted person, the description is made for the owner of the heart.