For those who were oppressed by the leaders of the disbelievers and were humiliated, and for whoever among them believed is a substitution for those who were oppressed. If you say: To what does the pronoun in 'them' refer? I say: To his people... etc. Ahmad said: His saying 'for whoever' in the first instance is a substitution of one thing for another, and they are of one essence. In the second instance, it is a substitution of part for the whole. If you say: Does the difference in references have an effect on the difference in meaning? I say: Yes, because if the reference returns to his people, then 'for whoever believed' has clarified who was oppressed among them, indicating that their oppression was limited to the believers. If it returns to those who were oppressed, then the oppression was not limited to them, indicating that the oppressed included both believers and disbelievers. Do you not know that Salih was sent by his Lord? This is something they said in jest and mockery, just as you would say to the anthropomorphists: Do you know that Allah is above the Throne? If you say: How did their saying 'Indeed, we believe in what was sent with him' become a response to it? I say: They were asked about the knowledge of his sending, and they made his sending a known, clear matter accepted without doubt, as if they said: The knowledge of his sending and what he was sent with is something beyond dispute and there is no ambiguity in it due to its clarity and illumination. The discussion is about the obligation of believing in him, so we inform you that we believe in him. Therefore, the response of the disbelievers was 'Indeed, we are disbelievers in what you have believed in.' If they had matched the two statements, the implication of the match would have required them to say: 'Indeed, we are disbelievers in what was sent with him.' However, they refrained from that, fearing what it would imply about affirming his message while they deny it. Such a statement may arise in mockery, as Pharaoh said: 'Indeed, your messenger who was sent to you is certainly insane,' affirming his sending in mockery. This is not a place for mockery, as the aim is for each group, the believers and the deniers, to inform about their state. For this reason, the disbelievers expressed their words to avoid implying belief in the message, out of caution for disbelief and a desire to persist in it. They placed 'you have believed in him' in place of 'was sent with him' in response to what the believers had made known and accepted. They slaughtered the she-camel, attributing the slaughter to all of them because it was with their consent, even if only some of them carried it out. It may be said to a large tribe: You did such and such, even if only one of them did it. And they rebelled against the command of their Lord and turned away from it and were arrogant in disobedience. The command of their Lord refers to what He commanded through the tongue of Salih, peace be upon him, in his saying: 'Let her graze in the land of Allah.' Or it could refer to their Lord's matter, which is His religion. It is also possible that the meaning is: Their rebellion stemmed from the command of their Lord, as if the command of their Lord to leave her was the reason for their rebellion. Similar to this is what is in His saying: 'And I did not do it of my own accord.' They sought from the punishment. The use of the term was permissible because it was known.

Their hastening for it is due to their denial of it. Therefore, they linked it to what they disbelieve in, which is his being one of the messengers. The shaking is the cry that caused the earth to tremble, and they were disturbed in their homes or in their dwellings, sitting still, motionless, as if dead. It is said: the people are jathm, meaning sitting without movement and not uttering a word. From it comes the term 'al-majthamah,' which is forbidden. As for the prohibition, it was narrated by the authors of the Sunan, Ibn Hayan, and Al-Hakim from the hadith of Qatadah from Ikrimah from Ibn Abbas that the Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace be upon him, prohibited drinking from the mouth of the water skin, riding the jallalah, and the majthamah. Al-Bazzar narrated it through the route of Al-Warraq from Qatadah from Anas similarly. He also said, and Al-Bazzar reported it and said: its chain is good. From the hadith of Al-Arbad ibn Sariah, it is reported that the Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace be upon him, prohibited the majthamah, which was narrated by Al-Tirmidhi and graded as good from the narration of Sa'id ibn Al-Musayyib from Abu Al-Darda who said: the Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace be upon him, prohibited eating the majthamah, which is the animal that is tied and its legs are gathered to be shot at. And from Jabir, that the Prophet, blessings and peace be upon him, when he passed by Al-Hijr said: 'Do not ask for signs, for the people of Salih asked for them and the cry seized them, and none remained of them except one man who was in the sanctuary of Allah.' They asked: who is he? He said: 'That is Abu Righal. When he left the sanctuary, what befell his people befell him.' It was narrated by Ibn Hibban, Al-Hakim, Ahmad, Ishaq, and Al-Tabari from the narration of Abdullah ibn Uthman ibn Khaytham from Abu Al-Zubair from Jabir - and he added: 'in the battle of Tabuk.' He stood and addressed the people. It was narrated that Salih sent him to his people, but he disobeyed his command. It was narrated that he, peace be upon him, passed by the grave of Abu Righal and said: 'Do you know who this is?' They said: 'Allah and His Messenger know best.' He mentioned the story of Abu Righal, that he was buried here and a branch of gold was buried with him. They rushed to it and searched for it with their swords and extracted the branch. It was narrated by Abu Dawood, Ibn Hibban, Al-Tabarani, Al-Bayhaqi, and Abu Nu'aym in Al-Dala'il from the narration of Bujair ibn Abu Bujair from Abdullah ibn Amr ibn Al-As, and its wording is: 'So the people rushed to it and extracted the branch.' As for the statement 'they searched for it with their swords,' it was narrated by Abdul Razzaq from Ma'mar as an unbroken chain. So he turned away from them. It appears that he was witnessing what happened to them, and he turned away from them after he saw them sitting still. He turned away, grieved and regretful for what he missed of their faith, saddened for them, and saying: 'O my people, I have exerted myself for you and have not spared any effort in conveying to you and advising you, but you do not love those who advise.' It is possible that he turned away from them, distancing himself from them, rejecting their insistence when he saw the signs before the punishment descended. It was narrated that they hamstrung the she-camel on Wednesday, and the punishment descended upon them on Saturday. It was narrated that he went out with one hundred and ten of the Muslims while he was crying. He turned and saw the smoke rising, so he knew that they had perished, and they were one thousand five hundred houses. It was narrated that he returned with those with him and they settled in their homes.

If you say: how is it correct to address the dead and his saying 'but you do not love those who advise'? I say: a man may say to his friend who is dead, and he had advised him while he was alive, but he did not listen to him until he threw himself into destruction: 'O my brother, how many times have I advised you and how many times have I told you, yet you did not accept from me?' And his saying 'but you do not love those who advise' is a narration of a past state.