And if you could see and witness, for 'if' returns the present tense to the meaning of the past, just as 'indeed' returns the past to the meaning of the future. And when it is in the accusative case, it indicates a circumstance. And it is recited: 'he takes the soul' with a yā and a tā.

And the angels are raised by the action, and they strike as a state of them. It is permissible that in 'he takes' there is a pronoun referring to Allah, glorified and exalted is He, and the angels are raised as a subject, and 'they strike' is the predicate. And from Mujahid: 'and their backs':

I mean their backs, but Allah is Generous in His allusion, and He specified them with striking. Because the disgrace and punishment in striking them is more severe. I have been informed by the people of China that the punishment for the fornicator among them is that he is made to endure, then a strong man is given a tool made of iron shaped like a plate with a handle, and he strikes him on his back with one blow with his strength, and he freezes in place. And it was said: they strike what comes from them and what goes away, and 'taste' is connected to 'they strike' with the intended saying: and they say, 'taste the punishment of the fire,' meaning the precursor to the punishment of the Fire, or 'taste the punishment of the Hereafter': a glad tidings for them. And it was said: they had iron rods, and whenever they struck with them, the fire would ignite, or they would be told on the Day of Resurrection: 'taste.' And the response to 'if' is omitted: meaning you would have seen a terrible and monstrous matter. That is because of what your hands have sent forth; it is possible that it is from the words of Allah and from the words of the angels, and that is raised as a subject, and 'because of what your hands have sent forth' is its predicate, and 'and that Allah' is connected to it, meaning that punishment is due to two reasons: due to your disbelief and your sins, and because Allah is not unjust to the servants. For the punishment of the disbelievers is from justice, just as the reward for the believers is. And it was said: 'unjust' is for the sake of abundance for the servants. [Mawlid said: 'And it was said: 'unjust' is for the sake of abundance for the servants... etc.' Ahmad said: 'And with this point, the statement of the one who said that the negation of the lesser is more eloquent than the negation of the greater is answered, so why was there a shift from the more eloquent? The intended meaning is the glorification of Allah, and He is worthy of exaggeration, so these two responses are established in this question.'] Or because the punishment is so great that were it not for the deserving, the one being punished would be an exceedingly unjust oppressor.