Allah the Exalted said: << و إلى مدين أخاهم شعيبا فقال ياقوم اعبدوا الله وارجوا اليوم الأخر ولا تعثوا في الأرض مفسدين >

Then He, the Exalted, said: The author says: "And We sent to Madyan..." So according to this, is the object of a deleted verb, estimated to be: And he said and did not say "his brother," why?
The student: It is one of the five names.

The Shaykh : Because it is one of the five names, if we are among the people of al-Ajrumiyyah or the six for the people of al-Alfiyyah. Now, the brotherhood here is certainly not in religion, because disbelievers are not brothers to believers. So it is brotherhood; it was said by some people that it is human brotherhood, and they said that the disbeliever and the believer are brothers in humanity, because this one is not a donkey and this one is a human being; they are all human beings. So the intended meaning of brotherhood is humanity. And it was said that it is permissible for you to say, "This disbeliever is my brother," because you share humanity with him. What is your opinion of this? In any case, without emotion, we want to examine it with reason, without emotion. There is no doubt that we reject this from the very beginning, but if he says, "My brother in humanity," because we heard a man speaking in one of the mosques, preaching to the people and saying, "These are our brothers in humanity," it is not appropriate for us to be harsh with them and do this and that.
The student: First, it is refuted from Surat al-Bayyinah: "The believers are the best of creation, and the disbelievers are the worst of creation, and they are brothers to the monkeys and the pigs." So how can they be our brothers? His saying, the Exalted, in Surat al-Mumtahanah regarding Ibrahim: How can there be brotherhood when he has disbelieved in them, and enmity has become apparent between us and them? And he says:

The Shaykh : Those who disbelieved, so they do not believe.
The student: They might say that the intended meaning is not the known brotherhood... but rather the brotherhood that pertains to... humanity... equality.

The Shaykh : Does that mean absolute agreement and similarity? In any case, we refute them by saying that this is Shu'ayb (peace be upon him). Allah said here: And He said in Surat al-Shu'ara: He did not say "their brother." The scholars said: Because the people of Madyan, Shu'ayb was one of them, and he was their brother in lineage. But the people of the Thicket were not from them; it is a town around Madyan to which Allah sent him. For this reason, He did not say "their brother." Yes, rather He said: If brotherhood were humanity, in cases like and the like, if the intended meaning of brotherhood were humanity, it would also be said regarding the people of the Thicket that he is their brother. Then, brotherhood in the Arabic language is not absolute human agreement. If we trace it, we find that it is either in lineage, where the common origin between them is lineage, and this is..., or the common origin between them is a single goal that everyone strives for. And it is known that the disbeliever and the Muslim differ in goal, and it is not possible for one of them to agree with the other in goal. We do not agree with this opinion no matter what, because in reality it leads to the fact that any person who says, "This disbeliever is my brother," becomes soft, lenient, and agreeable, and the hatred of disbelievers in the hearts becomes easy. As many of you know, when a Christian or a Jew is mentioned, the hair stands on end, and a person fears and is wary. But now the matter passes through the heart like cold water, and no one is affected except whom Allah wills. And this has its great danger. We ask Allah for safety.
The student: If he says, "This is my companion"?

The Shaykh : By Allah, I prefer that he avoids every word that indicates... and in any case, the companion is the Shaytan, who is the companion of man and his enemy, but in the present time it indicates companionship, agreement, and company. So it is better to distance oneself from every word that indicates agreement with these people.
The student: He is a companion, meaning...

The Shaykh : Yes, if we refer them to Adam, do we say, "You are our brothers"?... No, in any case, we mentioned it because truly this happened, and one of the brothers spoke—the brothers we know are zealous, meaning he is a good man, but he spoke on this issue and claimed that they are brothers and asserted that it is human brotherhood. Now, is it the name of the tribe or the name of the town?
The student: ... And when he turned toward Madyan.

The Shaykh : Now, is Shu'ayb a brother to the town? Now, is it said "the towns of Madyan" or is it said "Madyan"?... And what is the verse?
The student: ... And the people of Ibrahim and the people of Lut * And the people of Madyan and Moses was denied.

The Shaykh : Yes, this evidence is clear that the intended meaning is the place. So this is from the category of mentioning the town and intending the people, meaning like mentioning the town and intending the people. And also the verse mentioned by the brother , although the verse is not explicit; "toward" means that a person also turns toward the people, it is not explicit.
The student: ....

The Shaykh : There is a possibility, and if we say this, it also falls into the problem. This is a vocative, and is a vocative that is built or inflected?
The student: Inflected.

The Shaykh : Now, the vocative is in the accusative case due to the call, and the sign of its accusative is a visible kasrah at its end.
The student: A fathah estimated at its end.

The Shaykh : A fathah estimated on the deleted yaa.
The student: ...

The Shaykh : So, a fathah estimated on what precedes the deleted yaa of the first person, because the meeting of two statics prevented its appearance, and the engagement of the position with the movement of appropriateness. Repeat the parsing, O Ghanim. The vocative is in the accusative case, yes, with a fathah.
The student: Estimated, on what precedes the yaa.

The Shaykh : On what precedes the deleted yaa.
The student: Deleted for lightness.

The Shaykh : For lightness, the engagement of the position with the movement of appropriateness prevented its appearance. Now, he said: Meaning, humble yourselves to him in obedience, because worship is derived from humility, and from this is their saying: "A paved road," meaning humbled for the travelers. So worship is then humility to Allah, the Exalted, in obedience to Him, and obedience is complying with the command and avoiding the prohibition. When used in an absolute sense, but when it is paired and it is said: obedience and disobedience, then obedience becomes in the commands and disobedience in the prohibitions. He said Meaning, purify for Him worship alone, due to His saying, the Exalted: [Al-Anbiya: 25] So the intended meaning here of worship is its purification, the purification of worship for Allah, Subhanahu wa Ta'ala. He said: "Fear Him, and it is the Day of Resurrection" Is hope used for the desire for the beloved or not? Correct, this is the original meaning: the desire for the beloved. For this reason, it is said: wishing and hope. And hope is used in the meaning of fear, so it is from the category of antonyms, because in the Arabic language there are words that indicate a meaning and its opposite, called antonyms. And the linguists have compiled books on this, and you will find one word that is suitable for this and for the thing and its opposite. So is hope here in the meaning of fear, or is hope in the meaning of the desire for the beloved? The author took it to mean that the intended meaning is fear, and that is because the context is a context of warning. And it is possible that the intended meaning is hope, which is the desire for the beloved, because the Last Day has what is beloved and what is disliked, or not? Allah, the Exalted, said: If someone asked us: Is it not permissible to take it to mean both meanings, hope in fear of punishment and desire for reward? Is that appropriate? It is appropriate that it be comprehensive of both matters. And it has been mentioned to us that the stronger opinion in my view, and it is the opinion of some scholars, is the permissibility of using a word with two meanings if there is no conflict, if there is not a conflict between them such that the word is capable of both in a way that does not contradict. So what prevents it from being used in two meanings? And Allah knows best.
An explanation or clarification of what he was sent with. And in His saying: there is an evident softness, because the people of a man must support him and accept what he brought.