Exegesis of the saying of Allah the Exalted: “And those who strive against Our verses to render them ineffective”

He says , The author said “in refuting Our verses, the Qur'an”, so he inserted an implied phrase in the verse, namely “in refuting them.” The meaning of is that they walked with intensity; this is the original meaning, and from it comes *sa'y* (striving), which means running. The intended meaning is that these people race and hasten to refute the verses of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He). Refuting them, as far as they themselves are concerned, means they do not act upon them; and refuting them, as far as others are concerned, means they turn people away from the religion of Allah. Allah the Exalted said: . So these people strove to the utmost in the verses of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) to refute and frustrate them. His saying did not specify why they strove, because these people strive to refute the verses of Allah sometimes through armed conflict, meaning they attack homes and fight them until they turn them away from their religion. And sometimes through intellectual weapons, by spreading doubts among them regarding their religion, their Prophet, and their Lord, as far as they are able to do so. And sometimes they strive in this through desires, by spreading among people the love of amusement and lust. This includes what the malicious media in disbeliever states and those who imitate them broadcast. You find them calling for the lowest morals, calling through the pen and the image, depicting alluring women in a deplorable manner, and seek refuge in Allah, and they also write calling for that. Do you think this matter affects only the body or the creed? In reality, it affects the creed, because when a person becomes a beast, having nothing but the satisfaction of his stomach and his instinct, he remains with no connection to Allah (Mighty and Majestic), and the most important thing for him is the lusts and amusements in which he is immersed. You find him turning away from the religion of Allah and not caring about it. Therefore, the most harmful thing for Islamic lands, after the spread of intellectual poisons, is the spread of lustful poisons, because humans are inclined toward lust by their *fitrah* (innate natural disposition), which the soul that commands evil dictates to them. They enter into it unwillingly, and if they become immersed in it—may Allah grant us safety from it—it becomes difficult for them to pull themselves out of it. So the important point is that those who disbelieve strive earnestly to refute the verses of Allah, so that they are not spread, or acted upon, or that people do not turn to them, using all the power they have, either through armed conflict, or by spreading doubtful and misleading ideas, or by spreading lusts, until people turn away from their religion. And his saying “

Our verses

آياتنا

either the Qur'an”, the correct view is that “Our verses” is broader than the Qur'an, because those who strive against the verses of Allah are not only from this Ummah (Muslim community); even in previous nations, there were those who strove against the verses of Allah, is that not so? For example, Pharaoh threatened his people, saying , and urged them to disbelieve in Moses (peace be upon him), and so on from other nations. All of them strive against the verses of Allah, meaning in refuting them and turning people away from them. And based on this, we say that the intended meaning of “the verses of Allah” here is broader than the Qur'an, encompassing striving against any verse of the verses of Allah. And his saying “*mu'ajizin* (rendering ineffective), and in a reading here and what follows”, so *mu'ajizin* is the original form, , and in a reading here and what follows it is *mu'ajizin* (striving to outdo), meaning they estimate our inability or race against us so that they outpace us, thinking that there is no harm or punishment. Yes, there are two canonical readings, or one of them is anomalous. They are two canonical readings because it is the convention of the author (may Allah have mercy on him) that if he says “in a reading,” it is a canonical reading, and if he says “and it was read,” it is an anomalous reading. This is a specific convention of the author. If you find “in a reading” in this book of tafsir (exegesis), know that it is a canonical reading, and if you find “and it was read,” it is an anomalous reading. The difference between them is that a canonical reading is permissible for a person to recite in his prayer and to worship Allah with it, whereas the anomalous one is named as such. But is it used as evidence in rulings or not? There is disagreement among scholars. So there are two readings: *mu'ajizin* or *mu'ajizin*. *Mu'ajizin* means the one who intends to render another ineffective without there being a counterpart from the other. This *mu'ajizin* means the rendering ineffective is from one side, meaning they intend by this to render Allah (Mighty and Majestic) ineffective in not holding them accountable and in punishing them, because they are safe from the stratagem of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He). *Mu'ajizin* is from two sides, each one wanting to render the other ineffective, so as if, due to their tyranny and aggression, they placed themselves in a position of conflict with Allah (Mighty and Majestic), even though Allah (Mighty and Majestic) intends to render them ineffective, they intend to render Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) ineffective. And it has been mentioned previously that the two readings may each indicate a meaning that complements the other reading. So which is more eloquent, *mu'ajizin* or *mu'ajizin*?
The students: *Mu'ajizin*.

The Shaykh : *Mu'ajizin* is more eloquent in terms of tyranny, because he intended to make himself a war against Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He), opposing Him. What is its reward? He said: ,