For those who have believed, it is for them. This is the speech of the disbelievers of Mecca. They said: Most of those who follow Muhammad are the lowly, meaning the poor, like Ammar, Suhayb, and Ibn Mas'ud. If what he brought was good, these people would not have preceded us to it. It was said: When Juhaynah, Muzaynah, and Ghifar embraced Islam, the tribes of Banu Amir, Ghatafan, Asad, and Ashja' said: If it were good, the shepherds of the sheep would not have preceded us to it. It was also said: A nation of 'Umar embraced Islam, and 'Umar would harm them until he would tire, then he would say: If I had not tired, I would have struck you more. The disbelievers of Quraysh would say: If what Muhammad calls to is true, so-and-so would not have preceded us to it. It was said that the Jews said this when Abdullah ibn Salam and his companions embraced Islam. If you say: There must be an agent for the condition, [Mahamud said: 'There must be an agent for the condition, and it is not correct for it to work in it... etc.' Ahmad said: If there is no hindrance to its working, they will say in the condition that it does not contradict the indications of the past and the future. This is not a hindrance, for the future here is merely an expression of the continuity of what has occurred and passed, because the people have denied guidance and said: This is old falsehood, and the legends of the ancients, and so on. The meaning of the verse is: And they said, since they were not guided by it, this is old falsehood, and they persisted in that and insisted upon it. Thus, it was expressed in the future tense to indicate its occurrence and then its continuity, as Ibrahim said: Except for He who created me, for indeed He will guide me. Guidance had indeed occurred and passed, but he informed of its occurrence and then its continuity, thus expressing it in the future tense. This is the way to reconcile between His saying: 'He will guide me' and His saying in another verse: 'He guides me.' If it were not for the conjunction 'fa' on the verb, what I mentioned would be the correct interpretation. However, the conjunction indicates a deleted cause, and it separated the verb from the preceding condition. Thus, it is necessary to estimate the deleted as an agent in it to unify the estimation of two matters: the coincidence of the condition with the agent and the action being justified by its reason. Therefore, what Al-Zamakhshari mentioned is necessary due to the conjunction, not due to the contradiction of the indications. And Allah knows best.