Exegesis of the verse: ((The Day every soul will find what it has done of good present, and what it has done of evil...)).

Then Allah (Mighty and Majestic) said: Is this the beginning of today's lesson? His saying: is a temporal adverb, and the well-known rule among grammarians is that an adverb and a prepositional phrase must have a dependent, because an adverb and a prepositional phrase are like an object, or like a predicate if it functions as a predicate, or like a relative clause if it functions as a relative clause; the important point is that it does not stand on its own; it must have a governing word, as the author of the *Jumal* poem said:
A preposition must attach to a verb or its meaning, like "one who ascends"
Except for every superfluous one that has a function, like the *ba*, *min*, *ka*, and also *la'all*
So every original preposition must have a dependent.
His saying: Here there is a temporal adverb, and it must have a dependent. Where is its dependent? The dependent is omitted; its implied meaning is: "Remember the Day you will find." I remind the people and warn them of this great Day. The intended meaning of "every soul" here is every accountable soul, namely humans and jinn, for these are obligated to worship Allah, by the saying of Allah the Exalted: As for animals, they do not find what they have done, but they are compensated for injustice if they are wronged, as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) informed us: And as for them, they are not obligated; they are not commanded nor forbidden. So is restricted by what? By being accountable; every soul that is commanded and forbidden. The *ma* here is a relative pronoun, the first object; is the second object; is a prepositional phrase specifying the *ma* in his saying: And the clause is the relative clause, and the resumptive pronoun of the relative pronoun is omitted, and its implied meaning is: "what you have done of good, present." And his saying: includes everything done, whether little or much. Allah the Exalted said: Everything done. And his saying: Who makes it present? The one who makes it present is Allah (Mighty and Majestic), either by His command or by His angels; the angels make it present, or He (Exalted and Majestic is He) commands and it is made present. And his saying: It may come to mind that this deed becomes a body, becoming a body to be made present just as dirhams are made present for one who collects them. If this is the intent of Allah (Mighty and Majestic), it is not strange that deeds, which are a conceptual matter, are made into bodies. It is apparent in the Noble Qur'an that deeds are weighed, and weighing is only for a dense body. So deeds are weighed and placed in the scale of good and evil deeds. This is not strange for the power of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He). Here is death, described as the departure of life, represented on the Day of Resurrection by a ram and placed between Paradise and the Fire. It is said, "O people of Paradise, and O people of the Fire," and they look at it and are asked, "Do you know this?" They say, "Yes, this is death." It is slaughtered, and it is said, "O people of Paradise, eternal abode and no death, and O people of the Fire, eternal abode and no death." And at that time, the people of Paradise increase in joy to their joy, and the people of the Fire increase in sorrow to their sorrow — may Allah protect us from that. And his saying: This *waw* may be introductory, in which case *ma* is the subject, or it may be a conjunction, in which case *ma* is conjoined to the first *ma*, meaning "what you have done of good is present, and you will find what you have done of evil present likewise." So in the first case, *ma* is the subject and is its predicate. In the second case, *ma* is conjoined to *ma* in the first instance, and there is an omission in the speech, with the implied meaning: "And what you have done of evil is present, you wish that there were a long distance between it and it." But the first meaning is more apparent, because the default is the absence of restriction, and introductory sentences are common in the Arabic language and are also more eloquent, because what one has done of evil may be made present, or a person may be confronted with it without it being made present. The speech here is general, general speech that includes believers and disbelievers. The believer in his reckoning does not have his evil deeds made present to him; rather, he is confronted with his sins, confronted and told, "You did such and such, you did such and such, you did such and such." He says, "Yes." Then Allah says to him, "I have concealed it from you in the world, and I am forgiving it for you today." As for the disbelievers, their deeds are made present to them. Allah the Exalted said: Because the evil deeds of disbelievers are not erased; they are made present and they are reckoned for them. And by this it becomes clear that parsing the *waw* as introductory and *ma* as the subject is more apparent than it being a conjunction and *ma* being conjoined to what came before. So do not rejoice in it meaning a long time or a distant place. You wish that you had not done it and had not been reminded of it and had not had it made present to you, if you are among those for whom evil deeds are made present. *Wad* is pure love. So you love intensely, with all your heart, that there were a long distance between it and it. Now, how do we parse this *law*? Yes? Do we say it is a particle of the verbal noun, or a particle of prevention? If we say it is a verbal noun, or do we say it is superfluous, because *law* when it comes after *wad* is a verbal noun particle, as in the saying of Allah the Exalted: Yes? Meaning they wished that you would be intoxicated, meaning that they would drive them back. But here there is a problem, which is that the *an* after it is a verbal noun particle. However, one can escape this objection by saying that *law* enters upon an omitted verb, with the implied meaning: "If it were established that there was a long distance between it and it," or "If it happened, you wish that it happened that there was a long distance between it and it." And at that time, it is a verbal noun particle and the verb is omitted; the verb to which it connects is omitted, and the implied meaning is: "If it happened that there was a long distance between it and it." Otherwise, we say it is superfluous, and the implied meaning is: "You wish that there was a long distance between it and it." And if *law* were omitted from the Qur'an and you said "if you wish that there was," the speech would be correct. So we have two directions for parsing it: the first direction is that it is superfluous for emphasis, or for emphasis; and the second is that it is a verbal noun particle and the verb is omitted, with the implied meaning: "If it happened that there was a long distance between it and it." And his saying: *amdan* in the accusative case. He said it is a noun, the noun of *an* postponed. Allah the Exalted said: He repeated that because the context requires it; it requires warning. So fear Allah (Mighty and Majestic), fear Allah that He may strike you with His punishment if you disobey Him and contradict His command. The first is in the deed, and the second is in the retribution. The first is in the deed, in allying with disbelievers; the second is in the retribution, because he mentioned it after mentioning the retribution that will be on the Day of Resurrection. Then he said: There are two readings in it. The first reading is: And the second reading is: without the *waw* *Ru'afah* is from *ra'fah*, which is the most intense mercy, the most intense mercy, and the most tender mercy, because *ra'fah* has something of softness and gentleness more than what is in *rahmah*. And his saying: is the plural of *'abd* (servant), and the intended meaning is the creation, so it is from general servitude. Some scholars found it difficult that his saying: comes after his saying: and said: The context required that it be said, "And Allah warns you of Himself, and Allah is severe in punishment," because the context of warning requires a threat. The answer to that is that from His (Mighty and Majestic) *ra'fah* (tenderness) toward the servants is that He warned them of Himself and informed them that the matter is great, because informing a person of the truth of the situation is undoubtedly from *ra'fah* toward him, from *ra'fah* toward him. Otherwise, it is not appropriate to threaten a person with a warning and then say, "And there is *ra'fah* and mercy for you." But they said that the *ra'fah* toward the servants returns to informing the servants of the truth of the matter and warning them of their heedlessness, and this is undoubtedly a good and beautiful aspect.