Commentary on Tafsir al-Jalalayn: “Indeed, to Allah belongs the pure religion” — none other is worthy of it — “and those who took” idols “as awliya (close friends of Allah)”

And for this reason he says “and they are the disbelievers of Makkah”. Specifying this with the disbelievers of Makkah is a deficiency, and it is not permissible to interpret the general with what is more specific except by way of illustration. As for specifying the meaning such that the word in the Qur'an is general and then we interpret it with a more specific meaning, then this is a deficiency in reality, is it not? But: yes, if a person intends by this interpretation, if he intends illustration, meaning: like the disbelievers of Makkah, then there is no harm in it. But the reader who reads such an expression from the author's words does not doubt that the author intended this specification, and in this there is an apparent consideration. So it is obligatory to keep the indication of the generality of the verses and likewise the hadiths as they are, until there is rational evidence or a linguistic indication that the specific meaning is intended.
Now he says: “and they are the disbelievers of Makkah who said:

We do not worship them

ما نعبدهم

” This sentence is omitted because it is known from the context, and it is correct that we estimate and perhaps it is more appropriate than the author's saying: “they said” as a narration of the state in which they are, and in any case the omitted sentence is the predicate of what? The predicate of the subject, which is his saying: and it is not permissible for us to make the sentence the predicate, due to the corruption of the meaning.
He said: And this is an admission and confession from them that they worship the idols, due to their saying: and that this worship is a means to a higher goal, which is nearness to Allah, Mighty and Majestic. And this is from their ignorance, because now if they worshipped them, they made them the goal, because the intended thing is reaching Allah, Mighty and Majestic, and reaching Allah does not happen except with what? Except with worshipping Him. So if they worshipped them, they made them... the goal. And for this reason we will explain, if Allah wills, that this is from their foolishness. Qurbah is a verbal noun meaning approximately, The author says it is a verbal noun, but it is a conceptual verbal noun, because it agrees with the operator in meaning without the word, did you understand? Because the verbal noun can be verbal or conceptual. If it agrees with its operator in the word, then it is verbal, like “I stood, standing.” And if it differs from it in the word without the meaning, it becomes conceptual, like your saying: “I stood, standing,” “I sat, sitting”?
The student: Verbal

The Shaykh : I sat, sitting?
The student: Semantic

The Shaykh : Conceptual. Now he says: “Draw near to Allah in rank.” He says it means nearness, and nearness is also intended to mean drawing near. And the author said it is intended to mean drawing near in order to match the verb. The verb qarraba, its present tense is: yuqarrib. The matching verbal noun is what? Taqriban, taqriban, not qurbah. But it is known that the verbal noun may agree with its operator in the word but not match it in the letters, and such is called by them the name of a verbal noun, called the name of a verbal noun, like His saying, Exalted is He: If it were a verbal noun, He would have said: Inbatan. So when He said: Nabatan and its letters were fewer than the letters of its verb, it was called the name of a verbal noun. The important thing is that they say: We do not worship these idols except in order that they bring us near to Allah, Exalted is He, in nearness. Allah, Mighty and Majestic, says: The sentence is introductory to explain the end of those who took the idols as awliya (close friends of Allah), meaning so what will be their end? Allah, Mighty and Majestic, says: Now The author said: “and between the Muslims” So he indicated that the other party of the betweenness — or of the separation, more correctly — is omitted, and between the Muslims — put it down for you — and this estimation is not indicated in the context, there is nothing in the context that indicates it. If he had said: between you, it would have been correct that the intended meaning is: between you and them. But he said: meaning between these disbelievers, and it is as if the author, may Allah have mercy on him, thought that there is no disagreement among the disbelievers, and that is not the case. Rather, the disagreement among them is present in this world and in the Hereafter. Allah, Exalted is He, said: to the end of the verses, a dialogue, a dispute, a litigation, so Allah will judge between them. And Allah mentioned that in several verses. So the correct thing is that the pronoun “between them” refers back to the disbelievers, and that the disagreement or difference is present among themselves. The Christians and the Jews have disagreement among them and this disagreement is established among the disbelieving nations. So Allah will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection in that in which they differ regarding the matter of religion, so He will admit the believers into Paradise and the disbelievers into the Fire. This is based on what the author went to, but according to the opinion which is the apparent meaning of the noble verse He will place every person in his station. And Allah, Exalted is He, explained that in His saying: when He mentioned the dialogue between the oppressed and the arrogant.