Allah the Exalted said: << So when he was about to strike down the one who was an enemy to both of them, he said, "O Musa, do you intend to kill me as you killed a soul yesterday? You only intend to be a tyrant in the land...

"extra" His statement: means that the word is extra, and this is a linguistic and grammatical addition, not a semantic one, because it serves to emphasize. All the extra letters in the Qur'an in terms of wording are original in meaning, because they convey the meaning of emphasis. It is consistent for "an" to be added after "lamma," and likewise before "law," yes, as in the poet's saying: And I swear that if we met, you and... And as Allah the Exalted said: As for , it was mentioned earlier that it is a light form of the heavy form, meaning: "And if they had been steadfast." Now, here he says: extra with Musa and the one seeking refuge. The one seeking refuge said, when he was about to strike, "Do you intend to kill me?" How did he know that he intended it, when intention is a matter of the heart? He prepared himself and intended to do it, so he must have relied on something apparent to know this, otherwise the intention resides in the heart. His statement: "He intended," meaning Musa, to strike. What is the meaning of "batsh" (striking)? It is seizing with force. Yes, he intended to seize him with force. The one seeking refuge thought he would strike him because of what he said to him: "O Musa, do you intend to kill me as you killed a soul yesterday?" His statement: means the doer in "the one seeking refuge said." And two things distance this interpretation: a semantic matter and a linguistic matter. As for the linguistic matter, the pronoun in refers to the nearest mentioned, and the nearest mentioned is what? The Copt. And the second is that he said: "O Musa, do you intend to kill me," and Allah says: So we interpret the second intention with the first intention, because the Copt is the one who said: "Do you intend to kill me as you killed a soul yesterday?" If someone says: This is distant because the Copt has no knowledge of it. From where did he know? It is said: Either he deduced it from his statement to the Israelite: "You are indeed a clear transgressor," and the story of the killing became famous in the city and became known, and people started talking about it. So this Copt knew that the Israelite was his enemy, is that not so? And this is for Musa, who said: "You are indeed a clear transgressor," so he deduced from that that the one who killed the Copt yesterday was Musa, so he said: , and this opinion is the stronger of the two opinions of the exegetes. The exegetes have two opinions on this: The first is that the one who said that was the Israelite, even though Musa prepared to strike the Copt, but he thought he would strike him, so he said: "You are indeed a clear transgressor." The second opinion, which we mentioned, is that the speaker is the Copt. This is preferred because when he said: "You are indeed a clear transgressor," and it is known that the Israelites are enemies of the Copts, he knew that Musa (peace and blessings be upon him) was the one who... He deduced from this story that he was the one who killed the Copt yesterday. For this reason, he said: "Do you intend to kill me?" because I am a Copt, just as you killed the Copt yesterday. Yes.
The student: ... You are indeed a clear transgressor.

The Shaykh : But he did not say... Do you intend to kill me....
The student: ... The Copt deduced that he killed the other Copt ...

The Shaykh : Yes, yes, he deduces this, but when Musa prepared to kill, and this had caused him to cry out, he knew that the one who would kill him was Musa, and that this was his cry for help... yesterday, so the killing happened.
The student: Is it not possible that the one who said it to him was the Israelite... Perhaps when he was informed before he arrived, or when he saw Musa, he said that he would kill him as he killed a soul yesterday?

The Shaykh : In any case, this is not present in the Qur'an that the Israelite informed the Copt that Musa would kill him or threatened him with it. This is not present. What is possible is deduction.
The student: Well, what... about the killing

The Shaykh : No, because when he said to him: , he knew that there was something prior, which was the Copt. He knew that there was something prior for this Israelite. The matter was famous, and it is known that the Copts' enemies are the Israelites. So, the fact that this Israelite sought refuge with Musa, and Musa prepared to kill, led the Copt to deduce from that that the one who killed the Copt yesterday was Musa, and that the matter is similar to today's matter.
The student: There is no connection between his saying "You are indeed a clear transgressor" and then preparing for him, because the implication of is that he should not respond to that.

The Shaykh : In any case, he is from his followers and he rebuked him, even if he supported him, as happens now. Now, no one leaves a relative or a companion who has caused a problem, and then did it the next day, he rebukes him, and yet he supports him. This does not prevent him from rebuking him and supporting him. For this reason, it was reported that this boy is our burden and has tired us, and he is going to the authorities... and he is rebuking him while supporting him.
The student: ...

The Shaykh : The first matter is that the pronoun refers to the nearest mentioned. This is a rule in the Arabic language. He who wanted to be struck said: "Do you intend to kill me as you killed a soul yesterday?" And the second matter is in his statement: that the man said: "Do you intend to kill me as you killed a soul yesterday." And Allah says: He intended to strike. He said: "Do you intend to kill me?" So the intention to kill was not directed at the Israelite at all. The Qur'an indicates that the intention to kill was directed at whom? At the Copt. So the Copt said this: "Do you intend to kill me as you killed a soul yesterday."
He said: "Inna" means "ma." What is the meaning of ? It means that means "ma," and it is a negator. And his statement: "al-Jabbar" means the One who is exalted and elevated above others. It is one of the names of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He), and others are described with it, but it is one of the names of Allah with three meanings: "Al-Jabbar" is one of the names of Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) with three meanings: The first is the One who is magnified and possesses power and force. The second is: In... Al-Jabbar who mends the broken one and has mercy on him and shows compassion to him. The third is: Ibn al-Qayyim says in the "Al-Nuniyyah":
And it has a third name, which is elevation, so no human approaches Him
From their saying "Jabbarah" for the tall palm tree...
And "Jabbar" means elevation. From this is their saying "a tall palm tree," meaning a tall, elevated one. But when it comes in the attributes of other than Allah, it is for blame. Allah the Exalted said: This accusation What is the basis for it? His killing yesterday and his intention to kill today. Second: He also took it from his killing yesterday and that he will kill today. The reconciler usually does not transgress against either of the two disputing parties. What does he do? He tries to reconcile between them. So he says: "You, by your intention to kill, and having killed yesterday, mean that you want to be a tyrant and do not want reconciliation. Because the one who wants reconciliation seeks to reconcile between people, he does not seek to incite one against the other." And what he said, does it truly apply to Musa? Yes? No, it does not apply to him, because Musa (peace and blessings be upon him) did not intend anything but reconciliation. But this man thought that he did not intend anything but tyranny and transgression against those who were not from his followers.
So the Copt heard that and knew that the killer was Musa, so he went to Pharaoh and informed them of it. So Pharaoh ordered the executioners to kill Musa, and they set out on the road to him." This is what he interpreted based on what he chose, that the one who said: "Do you intend" was the Israelite. As for the second opinion, when the Copt saw that Musa intended to kill him, he deduced that he was the killer yesterday, so he left the dispute and went to the family of Pharaoh and informed them. And if he informed them, they would avenge themselves. They sent someone to ask for Musa, or they did not send, but they were consulting as is apparent in the man's speech. And based on this, we do not assert that they sent someone to Musa to slaughter him, because the man who came, and he was an advisor, did not say: "The elite sent someone to slaughter him," but he said: "They are plotting against you to kill you." Meaning they are consulting among themselves about what to do.