If a sign comes to them from their proposals, they will surely believe in it. Say, "The signs are only with Allah, and He is capable of them. However, He does not send them down except in accordance with wisdom." [Mawood said: "This means that Allah, glorified and exalted is He, is capable of sending down signs, but He does not send them down except in accordance with wisdom..." Ahmad said: "The essence of the verse becomes clear through an example. We say: If someone says to you, 'Honor so-and-so, for he will reward you,' and you know that he will not reward you, if you deny the suggestion to honor him, you say: 'What do you know that if I honor him, he will reward me?' You deny his assertion of the reward while you know it is false. If the situation is reversed and he says to you, 'Do not honor him, for he will not reward you,' and you know that he will reward you, you deny the suggestion of withholding honor and say: 'What do you know that he will not reward me?' You mean: 'I know that he will reward me.' Thus, the implication of denying the believers who had good expectations of the obstinate ones, believing that they would believe upon the descent of the proposed sign, is that it could be said: 'What do you know that when it comes, they will not believe?' Just as you would say in the example, denying the one who affirmed the reward while you know the opposite. And what do you know that he will reward me? By dropping 'not,' and if you affirm it, the meaning is reversed, to the extent that what is known to you is true, and you deny the one who negates it. So when the verse came, it was understood at first glance that Allah, glorified and exalted is He, knew of their disbelief and denied the believers' denial of it, while the reality is contrary to that. The scholars differed; some interpreted 'not' as an addition, some interpreted 'that' as 'perhaps,' and some made the statement a response to an omitted oath. 'That' can be opened after an oath, so the meaning would be: 'By Allah, if it comes, they will not believe.' As for al-Zamakhshari, he realized that the verse remains in its apparent form and its established status without omission or interpretation, as he stated previously. We clarify its consistency in the mentioned example to make it clear in both aspects in the verse. We say: If you denied Zayd because you knew he would not reward, and you were advised to honor him based on the advisor's assumption of the reward, there are two situations: one in which you deny him for claiming knowledge of what contradicts the truth, and another in which you excuse him for not knowing what you are aware of. If you denied him, you would say: 'What do you know that he will reward?' And if you excused him for not knowing that he will not reward, you would say: 'What do you know that he will not reward?' This means: 'From where do you know what I know about his lack of reward, while you have not informed me of his situation as I have?' Likewise, in the verse, the statement was made as an excuse for the believers in their lack of knowledge of the unseen in Allah's knowledge, which is the disbelief of these people. Thus, the entry of 'not' is appropriate and it becomes clear that the cause of confusion is the intertwining of denial with the establishment of excuses. And Allah is the guide to what is correct." Or the signs are only with Allah, not with me. So how can I respond to you with it and bring it to you? And what do you know, and what do you know that the sign you propose, if it comes, they will not believe? This means: 'I know that if it comes, they will not believe in it, and you do not know that.' This is because the believers were hopeful of their belief if that sign came and wished for its coming. So Allah, exalted is He, said: 'And what do you know that they will not believe?' meaning: 'You do not know what has been decreed regarding their disbelief.' Do you not see His saying: 'As they did not believe in it the first time?' It was said: 'That' means 'perhaps' from the saying of the Arabs: 'Go to the market, perhaps you will buy meat.' And the poet Imru' al-Qais said:

It is a deviation towards the ruin, for we weep over the abodes just as Ibn Khudham wept. [The term 'al-‘awja' refers to the bending of the camel's neck with the rein. 'Al-muhil' is that which has changed from the state of newness to the state of decay, or that which has been afflicted by drought and desolation. In the Sahih, it is said that something is 'ahala' when a year has passed over it. Hence, 'al-tall al-muhil' is a participle and it is the one that is significant. 'Wa-l'anna' with the opening of the 'lam' and the 'hamzah' means 'perhaps we.' It is said in 'al-tasheel': there are ten dialects for 'la' and among them is the opened one, and 'wa-l'anna.' Ibn Khudham, with two 'dhammas,' was the first to weep over the abodes among the poets of the Arabs, and he was a skilled physician, used as an example in medicine.]

And the reading of Abu: 'Perhaps when it comes, they will not believe.' It is also read with a kasrah, on the basis that the speech has been completed before it, meaning: 'And what makes you aware of what will happen to them?' Then he informed them of his knowledge of them, saying: 'That when it comes, they will not believe at all.' Some of them considered 'la' to be an addition in the reading with the opening, and it was read: 'And what makes them aware that when it comes, they will not believe.' That is, they swear that they will believe upon its coming. And what makes them aware that their hearts at that time will be as they were at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an and other signs, sealed upon them so they will not believe in them.