Continuation of the explanation of the saying of Allah the Exalted: << إذ قال موسى لأهله إني ءانست نارا سئاتيكم منها بخبر أو ءاتيكم بشهاب قبس لعلكم تصطلون >>

[Surah al-Naml: 7] to the end of the story.
This is part of what the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) received from the Qur'an, namely the stories of the prophets. The benefit of mentioning these stories is what Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) mentioned in Surat Yusuf: [Surah Yusuf: 111] a lesson by which we take heed regarding their rulings and their outcomes.
Therefore, the correct view is that it is permissible for us to follow and emulate the rulings mentioned in these stories, based on the saying of Allah the Exalted: [Surah al-An'am: 90].
Likewise, we take heed of the outcomes that befell the messengers and their followers, and the outcomes that befell those who opposed them. It is well known that the outcome of the former was praiseworthy, and the outcome of the latter was bad.
Among the stories frequently mentioned in the Qur'an is the story of Musa. It is no surprise that it is frequent in the Medinan surahs, because there was a group of Jews in Madinah until their matter became clear. For this reason, their conditions were detailed extensively in Surat al-Baqarah. As for the mention of the story of Musa in the Meccan surahs, like this one, its benefit is preparation and groundwork for the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) so that he would be fully aware of his affair.
This guidance, which is preparation for the future, was the path taken by the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) by following the guidance of the Qur'an when he said to Mu'adh ibn Jabal: .
[Surah al-Naml: 7] And I think we have spoken about Musa (peace be upon him) and that he is Musa ibn Imran, and that he is the most excellent of the prophets of the Children of Israel.
"

to his family

لِأَهْلِهِ

His wife was at a journey from Madyan to Egypt ".
He says: " His wife " Is it possible that it refers to his wife, his mother, his father, and the like?
The student: Unlikely.

The Shaykh : Why?
The student: Because he left Makkah alone

The Shaykh : Because he left Makkah alone, he left alone, then he met the two women, then he contacted their father, then he married him on the condition that he would hire him for eight journeys, and the journeys ended.
" Then he traveled

to his family

لِأَهْلِهِ

His wife was at a journey from Madyan to Egypt ".
On this occasion, some people think that the man of Madyan is the Prophet Shu'ayb, but that is not the case, for there was a period of time between him and Musa. Rather, the man of Madyan was a man from the people of Madyan; this is the correct view without doubt. He said: "

I perceived

إِنِّي آنَسْتُ

I saw from afar

a fire

نَارًا

[Surah al-Naml: 7] ".
The student: ... Is the man a prophet?

The Shaykh : No. He is not a prophet. When he said: [Surah al-Naml: 7] the phrase "I have perceived" is the quoted speech, which is why the "in" was broken. And he said: " 'Anasat: I saw from afar ".
'Anas means to see, and the fact that it was from afar is not indicated by the word itself, unless it is said that perception does not indicate closeness because it indicates obscurity, and obscurity in fire only occurs if it is far away.
And his saying: [Surah al-Naml: 7]. The "sin" is for easing, and we have mentioned previously that when it enters a clause, and it naturally only enters the present tense, it conveys two things: nearness and certainty.
[Surah al-Naml: 7] "I will come to you" or "I will come to you"?
The student: "I will come to you" (Ati).

The Shaykh : What is the difference between "Ati" (I will give) and "Ati" (I will come)? "Ati" means: I will give you, and "Ati" means I will come to you. Do we say it this way, or is it wrong? Or does "Ati" mean I will come to you?
The student: "Ata" means gave, and "Ata" means .....

The Shaykh : And "Ati" means I will give you. We are conjugating it now, outside of the verse. "Atat" (I came), its present tense is "Uti" (I come), "Ati" (I give), "Atat" (I gave), "Uti" (I am given).
So: "Ati" means I will come to you in any case. And the first thing that comes to mind...
"Ati" means I will come to you, and here he said: [Surah al-Naml: 7] and in another verse: [Surah Ta-Ha: 10] Is there a difference between them, or are they the same meaning? And if we say there is a difference, how do we reconcile them?
The student: Perhaps "La'all" here is for hope, and here it is for certainty .....

The Shaykh : So: there is a difference between them, what is the reconciliation? The story is one.
The student: Yes. But there is hope with a belief of certainty.

The Shaykh : Yes
The student: The phrase ....

The Shaykh : Fine. Waleed!
The student: His saying: [Surah al-Naml: 7] when he was .... As for his saying: [Surah Ta-Ha: 10] when he approached it.

The Shaykh : No. He was addressing his family.
The student: When he approached the fire?

The Shaykh : No.
The student: That ....

The Shaykh : What contradicts the meaning differs now, if we say this is for hope and this is for certainty.
The student: .... He said: [Surah al-Naml: 7] .... He said: [Surah Ta-Ha: 10].

The Shaykh : Or the reverse.
The student: If it was .....

The Shaykh : It was with "La'all" at first, then it strengthened, as some of them said.
But it is possible that they have the same meaning without difference, because "La'all" comes for expectation. We mentioned previously in grammar that "La'all" can be for hope, fear, causation, and expectation. If it becomes an expectation for you, its meaning becomes affirmation.
As for if we say that "La'all" is for hope. It was hope at first, then it strengthened and he was certain of it and decided upon it.
And his saying: "

I will bring you from there information

سَآتِيكُمْ مِنْهَا بِخَبَرٍ

[Surah al-Naml: 7] regarding the state of the road, and he had lost it ".
It is clear that the news he wanted was news from someone who would guide him to the road, because he (peace be upon him) had lost his way.
"

or will bring you a burning torch

أَوْ آتِيكُمْ بِشِهَابٍ قَبَسٍ

[Surah al-Naml: 7] with the addition for clarification and its omission " Omitting the addition means two readings.
Or "I will come to you with a flame of a spark," or "with a flame of a spark." As for "with a flame of a spark" (without addition), it is for clarification as the author said, and if the addition is for clarification, it is on the assumption of "min" (from), like it is said: "an iron ring," meaning: a ring of iron.
So here, "a flame of a spark" means: a flame from a spark, because it is for clarification. And if we make it "a flame of a spark" (with addition), "spark" becomes a description of "flame," a clarifying description as well, so the addition and the separation have the same meaning.
And in his saying: [Surah al-Naml: 7] Is this "or" a preventer of combination or a preventer of emptiness?
The student: Preventer of emptiness.

The Shaykh : What is the difference between them, O Muhammad?
The student: Preventer of combination means: that one of these two things must happen.

The Shaykh : That only one of the two things will happen, either this or that. And preventer of emptiness?
The student: Preventer of emptiness: that the matter does not remain without one of them, and may ...

The Shaykh : Or both of them, its meaning is that the matter does not remain without this, or one of them, or both of them. It is similar to what the grammarians say: "or" comes for permissibility and for choice, and there they said permissibility and choice. If it is in the context of a request, you say for example: "Marry Hind or her sister." This "or" is for choice, it does not come for permissibility.
Sit with so-and-so or so-and-so. This is for permissibility.
Eat bread or rice. For permissibility.
The one for permissibility does not prevent combination, and the one for choice prevents combination, and if "or" is in a statement, they call it preventer of emptiness or preventer of combination.
So it is a preventer of emptiness, meaning that he may come to them with both things, the guidance and the flame of the spark.
And it is understood from this statement [Surah al-Naml: 7] that the night was cold, and how much the one who has lost his way in a cold night needs a fire to warm himself by and people of a fire to inform him about the road, because it is known that fire does not exist alone, there must be someone near it who is burning.
He said: " Meaning: a flame of fire on the tip of a wick or a stick ".
This is the flame of the spark, the spark from which it is taken, and this is as the author said: " a flame of fire on the tip of a wick or a stick ".
[Surah al-Naml: 7] What is the meaning of "La'all" here?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : No. It is for causation. Meaning: in order that you may warm yourselves by it.
" And the "ta" is a substitute for the "ta" of the "ifta'l" pattern ". "Istala" (warmed himself) is originally "Istala" with a "ta" on the pattern of "ifta'l", but the "ta" was substituted with a "ta" (pronounced "t") for a morphological reason.
"

So that you may warm yourselves.

لَعَلَّكُمْ تَصْطَلُونَ

[Surah al-Naml: 7] And the "ta" is a substitute for the "ta" of the "ifta'l" pattern from "sala" (to warm) with a kasrah on the "lam" and its fathah -sala- to warm yourselves from the cold ".
And the people of the fire by which a person warms himself are in the cold, for this reason the proverb says: "Fire is the fruit of winter, and the liar warms himself." Correct, and this is observed.
Musa (peace be upon him) went and his family remained in this place, and he went alone to the fire, perhaps they would come to him with the news or with the flame.