And he was arrogant, he and his soldiers, in the land, without right
وَاسْتَكْبَرَ هُوَ وَجُنُودُهُ فِي الأَرْضِ بِغَيْرِ الْحَقِّ
[Surah al-Qasas:39]
He was arrogant
استكبر
from *kibr* (arrogance), which is greatness. The meaning is that he and his troops became elevated and magnified. The addition of the hamza, sin, and ta is for intensification, not for seeking, because the norm is that the hamza, sin, and ta indicate seeking, such as *istaghfara* for him, meaning he sought his forgiveness, or *istirahama* from him, meaning he sought his mercy. However, it sometimes comes for intensification, such as *istakbara*, meaning he exaggerated in arrogance and greatness. Who are his troops? *Junud* (troops) originally refers to a person’s retinue and supporters, and it is applied to everyone who follows him, so he is from his troops. And His saying:
In the ground.
في الأرض
is connected to
He was arrogant
استكبر
and
al-
ال
. The *al* in "in the land" is for mental reference. The author said: "the land of Egypt." It is not the entire land, because he had no authority over the remaining territories, but the intended meaning is the land of Egypt. So, on this basis, what is the purpose of the
al-
ال
here? It is for mental reference, not for generality. And His saying:
without right
بغير الحق
is a description of reality, because all arrogance is contrary to the truth. However, it is a description of reality, and an addition to its condemnation. Arrogance is ugly, so when it is described as being against the truth, it becomes uglier and uglier. The parallel to this is His saying, the Exalted:
killed the prophets without right
ويقتلون النبيين بغير الحق
Could the killing of the prophets have been with right? No, the killing of the prophets is always without right, but that was mentioned for the intensification of its condemnation, because the reality is that it was not with right. Allah, Glorified and Exalted, says:
without right
بغير الحق
The truth (*al-haqq*) originally is the established thing. When it is added to speech, the intended meaning is truthfulness. When it is added to rulings, the intended meaning is justice, as in His saying, the Exalted:
And the word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice
وَتَمَّتْ كَلِمَةُ رَبِّكَ صِدْقًا وَعَدْلًا
[Surah al-An'am:115]. Thus, the truth was negated regarding them due to their arrogance from two aspects: they adopted falsehood and distortion through what they were arrogant about, and it was not the truth.
and they thought that they would not be returned to Us.
وظنوا أنهم إلينا لا يرجعون
They supposed
ظنوا
Is the intended meaning of *zann* (supposition) probability or certainty? Are we certain about what they denied? Do we say that it was probable to them that they would not be returned, or were they certain? In reality, both contradict His saying, the Exalted:
And they rejected them, while their [inner] selves were convinced thereof
وجحدوا بها واستيقنتها أنفسهم
, because if a person is certain of something, does he suppose the opposite? If he is certain that what Moses brought is the truth, is he certain of the opposite or does he suppose the opposite? No, because the one who is certain of a thing believes in it. But it appears to me that *zann* here means either claim, meaning they claimed that they would not be returned to Us, or that the intended meaning is
