Meccan, and its verses are 40 [revealed after Al-Qari'a] 'In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful'.

The introduction of the negation 'no' into the oath is widespread in their speech and poetry. Imru' al-Qais said:

'No, by your father, daughter of Al-Amiri... No, the people do not claim that I flee.' [[The explanation of this evidence has been previously mentioned in the first part, page 692, so refer to it if you wish, the corrector said.]]

And Ghoutha ibn Salma said:

'Oh, Umama called out with the possibility... to make me sad, so I do not care about you.' [[When Umama called out with the possibility... to make me sad, so I do not care about you.

So see what appears to you or stay... for whatever you do is in my dislike.]]

Ghoutha ibn Salma ibn Rabia says: If Umama, my beloved, shows signs of departing from me to make me sad, then I metaphorically released the call. It is narrated that 'Oh' is instead of 'if', and 'no' is extra before the oath, because the meaning is 'by your right and your life, I do not care and I am not saddened', and the addition is good: it is usually directed against the claim of the opponent, negating it. In the oath by his beloved, not caring about her distance from him is a kind of mockery of her. It was said: the meaning is that 'I do not care about the invocation', and this only appears in the narration: 'so I do not care about you', and its origin is 'it will not happen', meaning: it will not occur, so the 'n' was dropped in the case of the jussive for ease. And 'what' is relative. It is narrated: 'so may Allah distance you', meaning: may Allah keep you away, also an invocation. And 'dislike' means mutual aversion, meaning: so see as long as it appears to you to depart, or stay, for both are the same from you, and whatever you do is arising from mutual aversion between me and you, and yet I do not care about you because I am preoccupied with something more important than you: the death of my relatives, and I turned to her in addressing her to compel her to respond.]]

Its benefit is the confirmation of the oath, and they said it is a connection like in 'so that the people of the Book do not know' and in the saying:

'In a well, no horror has passed, and what has been known.' [[In a well, no horror has passed, and what has been known... until the morning was gathered.]]

'No' is extra between the added and the addition, which is an anomaly. And 'horror' - with a damma - means destruction, the plural of 'hayer', meaning doomed, like 'bazzal' and 'bazzil', 'nazal' and 'nazil'. And it was said: 'horror' means destruction, and its plural is 'ahwar', meaning: it passed in a well of destruction and did not know that. And the saying 'by what has been known' can be connected to 'known', and it can be connected to 'passed', and it likens the cause of destruction to the well in a way that expresses confusion and harm from falling into everything, and that is why it said: 'passed', which is suitable for darkness and confusion, because it means to travel at night. And 'afk' means falsehood, and the morning is borrowed as the truth in a way that expresses clarity, and 'gathered' means it illuminated and became clear, so then his lies became apparent, meaning: he persisted in his lies until the truth appeared.]]

They objected to him that it is only added in the middle of speech, not at the beginning, and they answered that the Qur'an is like a single surah, some of it is connected to another. And the objection is correct, because it has not occurred as an addition except in the middle of speech, but the answer is not valid. Do you not see how Imru' al-Qais added it at the beginning of his poem? The correct view is that it is for negation. The meaning of this is that one does not swear by something except to magnify it, as indicated by His saying: 'So I swear by the positions of the stars, and indeed it is a great oath if you only knew.' So it is as if by introducing the letter of negation he says: 'My magnification of it by swearing by it is not enough magnification,' meaning that it deserves more than that. And it was said that 'no' negates a statement that was made before the oath, as if they denied resurrection, so it was said: 'No', meaning: the matter is not as you mentioned, then it was said:

'I swear by the Day of Resurrection.' If you say: His saying 'So, by your Lord, they do not believe' and the verses I recited: the object of the oath in them is negated, then why do you not claim that 'no' which is before the oath was added as a negation after it and confirming it, and you assumed the omitted object of the oath here to be negated, like saying: 'I do not swear by the Day of Resurrection, will you not leave them in vain?'

I said: If the matter were limited to negation without affirmation, this saying would have merit, but it is not limited. Do you not see how it is met with 'I do not swear by this city' by His saying 'Indeed, We created man'? Likewise, 'I do not swear by the positions of the stars' is met with His saying 'Indeed, it is a Noble Qur'an.' And it has been recited as 'I will swear,' with the 'lam' indicating the beginning. 'And I swear' is the news of a deleted subject, meaning: 'Indeed, I swear.' They said: And it is supported by the fact that it is in the Imam without the 'alif' in 'the self-reproaching soul,' meaning the soul that reproaches itself on the Day of Judgment for its shortcomings in piety, or the one that continually reproaches itself even if it strives for good. And from Al-Hasan: The believer is not seen except reproaching himself, while the disbeliever moves forward without reproaching himself. It was said: It is the soul of Adam, which has never ceased to reproach itself for the act that caused it to exit Paradise. The answer to the oath is indicated by His saying 'Does man think that We will not gather his bones?' and 'You will certainly be resurrected.' And Qatadah read: 'That We will not gather his bones,' in the passive form. The meaning is: We will gather them after they have scattered and returned as dust and mixed with the earth, after the winds have blown them and scattered them in distant lands. It was said that 'Uddai ibn Abi Rabi'ah was the brother-in-law of Al-Akhnas ibn Shariq, and they were the ones whom the Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace be upon him, used to say about: 'O Allah, suffice me from the evil neighbor.' He said to the Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace be upon him: O Muhammad, tell me about the Day of Resurrection, when will it be and what will happen? The Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace be upon him, informed him. He said: If I were to witness that day, I would not believe you, O Muhammad, nor would I accept it, or that Allah will gather the bones. Then 'Indeed' was revealed, which affirmed what was negated, which is the gathering, as if it were said: 'Indeed, We will gather them.' 'And We are able' is a state of the pronoun in 'We will gather,' meaning: We will gather the bones, capable of reassembling them all and returning them to their original formation, until We make his fingers equal, meaning: his fingers which are his extremities, and the last part of his creation. Or that We make his fingers equal and join his phalanges, despite their smallness and delicacy, to each other as they were before without loss or difference, so how about the larger bones? It was said: Its meaning is 'Indeed, We will gather them, and We are able to make the fingers of his hands and feet equal,' meaning We will make them uniform as one, like the hoof of a camel and the hoof of a donkey, with no distinction between them, so he cannot perform any action with them like he does with his separated fingers that have joints and knuckles for various tasks, and for grasping and holding, and for what he needs from necessities. And it has been read as 'capable,' meaning: 'We are capable.' 'But he wants' is an addition to 'Does man think,' and it may be similar to a question, or it may be an affirmation that shifts from what is being asked about to another. Or it shifts from what is being asked about to an affirmation, 'So that he may persist in his immorality in what lies before him of times and what he will face of time, without turning away from it.' And from Sa'id ibn Jubair, may Allah be pleased with him: He brings forth sin and delays repentance. He says: I will repent, I will repent, until death comes to him in the worst of his conditions and the worst of his deeds. He asks a question that is obstinate and unlikely regarding the establishment of the Hour in His saying 'When will the Day of Resurrection be?' and similar to it: 'And they say, when is this promise?'