Commentary on Tafsir al-Jalalayn: “Lord of the heavens and the earth and what is between them, and Lord of the easts” meaning and the wests of the sun; it has an east and a west every day.

He said, "And the rising points," meaning the setting points of the sun, for the sun has a rising point and a setting point every day. The rising points, he said, meaning the setting points. So it is as if it is from the category of sufficing with mentioning the counterpart for its counterpart, similar to His saying, meaning the cold, for the garments are the shirts and the like that protect against heat and cold. Here he said, The author said, meaning the setting points. In any case, the rising points is the plural of rising point. So what is intended by the rising points? Is the intention, as the author said, the rising points of the sun, because it has a rising point every day? Or do we say that the rising points is more general, including the rising points of the sun, the rising points of the moon, the rising points of the stars, and the rising points of every rising thing? Which is it? The second is more general, so we say "the Lord of the rising points" means the rising points of the sun, the rising points of the moon, the rising points of the stars, and the rising points of everything that rises. And Allah mentioned the rising points without the setting points because the rising points are more indicative of power than the setting points, for the rising is a beginning and the setting is an end. And in the rising, especially in the rising of the sun, there is illumination and light in which the perfection of the blessing is fully apparent.
And His saying “the easts” here is in the plural. In some verses it came in the dual, such as His saying, “Lord of the two easts and Lord of the two wests” . And in some verses it came in the singular, “Lord of the east and the west” , as He said, “Lord of the east and the west, there is no god but Him, so take Him as your protector” . Is this a contradiction or what? The answer is no. There is nothing in the Qur'an of contradiction. If it had been from other than Allah, they would have found much inconsistency in it. The Qur'an cannot contradict itself, nor can it contradict the authentic Sunnah, for the Sunnah may come weak and contradict the Qur'an, and its contradiction of the Qur'an indicates its weakness. But with the authentic Sunnah, it is impossible.
So if something is found whose apparent meaning is conflict, it must be that there is a way to reconcile the conflict, either by way of combining them, which is the first rank for dealing with texts whose apparent meaning is conflict.
Or by way of abrogation, if the chronology is known and the text is of the kind that abrogation applies to.
The third is preference, where one is stronger than the other. These three ranks are necessary. But sometimes it may not be possible for the investigator to find a way from these ways. He may be unable to combine them, may not know the abrogation, or may not be able to make a preference. What is his position then? Suspension. We say, “Allah knows best.” It is not permissible to believe, in any case, that there is a contradiction in the Qur'an or the authentic Sunnah, ever. But is it permissible for him to try to know these ranks, or if it is difficult for him the first time, should he suspend? He must try to look again until it becomes clear, so that doubt does not enter his heart and he does not deviate, may Allah protect us from that. This benefit came incidentally, and it is that there is no contradiction in the Qur'an, neither in itself nor with the authentic Sunnah. If something is found whose apparent meaning is conflict and contradiction, it is obligatory to use the three ranks: first, combining. If that is not possible, then abrogation. If that is not possible, then preference. If we do not reach that, then suspension, but with an attempt to reach one of these ranks.
So based on this rule, we can apply the difference mentioned in the east and the west. We say the east, in terms of direction, means the direction of the east. “And to Allah belongs the east and the west” , meaning the direction of Allah, according to one of the interpretations.
As for the two easts and the two wests, “Lord of the two easts and Lord of the two wests,” the intention is the easts of summer and winter and the wests of summer and winter. The sun has an extreme in its rising in summer, which is the Tropic of Cancer, and it has an extreme in its orbit in winter, which is the Tropic of Capricorn. For the difference between the two easts is a great difference that no one of the created beings can move the sun from the Tropic of Cancer to the Tropic of Capricorn, nor shift it by a hair's breadth. And we say the same regarding the moon, because it revolves around the two easts and the two wests.
Now, if someone asks, “Lord of the two easts and Lord of the two wests,” in which place of the Qur'an did the dual form occur?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : In Surat al-Rahman. In others?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : No, no. This is not in al-Isra. This is in Surat al-Muzzammil. I am asking about the dual form. Did it occur in anything other than al-Rahman? In any case, the appropriateness of mentioning it in the dual in al-Rahman is that this surah addressed two groups: the jinn and the humans. So this is a semantic appropriateness with the context of the entire surah.
The easts and the wests: the plural is clear in them, either in terms of the easts of everything that rises and the wests of everything that sets, from the sun, the moon, the stars, and the planets. Or it is the daily easts of the sun, because it has an east every day. And this rank, what is it from the three ranks? It is the rank of combining. So the combining between them is that we say the easts, in terms of the easts of everything that rises, or in terms of the easts of the sun every day. The two easts, in terms of the easts of summer and winter and their wests. The east and the west, in terms of direction. He said, “And Lord of the easts,” meaning and the wests.