Commentary on Tafsir al-Jalalayn: “That” is the severe punishment and the worst retribution, “the retribution of the enemies of Allah,” with the realization of the second hamzah and its replacement with a waw.

The author (may Allah have mercy on him), the exegete, says:"That severe punishment, and the worst of retribution is the retribution of the enemies of Allah, by realizing the second hamzah and replacing it with a waw."This means that there are two readings in this: the first is realizing the hamzah: and the second is converting it to a waw. This is a consistent rule for every hamzah following a waw: it can either be pronounced as a hamzah or converted into a waw. An example of this is the mu'adhdhin's saying "Allahu akbar," meaning that it is permissible to either convert the hamzah to a waw or pronounce it clearly: "Allahu akbar." This linguistic usage makes it easy for us to accept what some mu'adhdhins do when they convert the hamzah to a waw, so you find them saying "Allahu akbar." Similarly, it makes it easy for us to accept the linguistic usage that puts both parts of the sentence in the accusative case with "inna" and its sisters, since some mu'adhdhins say: "I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah." The accusative case for both parts with is a fixed Arabic linguistic rule, Who are the enemies of Allah? The enemies of Allah the Exalted are those who declared enmity toward Him by fighting Him through disobedience. Among them are those who have been declared at war by Allah and His Messenger, the consumers of riba (usury or interest), as Allah Blessed and Exalted is He said:[Surat al-Baqarah: 278] The important point is that the enemy of Allah is the one who declared enmity toward Him by fighting Him through his sins. And his saying:"

the Fire

النار

an explanatory apposition to the reward about which the statement was made

that

ذلك

For them therein is the home of eternity

لهم فيها دار الخلد

[Fussilat 41:28]

"meaning that the word is an explanatory apposition to the reward about which the statement was made so it informed us that a subject and the predicate of the subject and an explanatory apposition to it as if the discussion regarding the author’s grammatical analysis has ended Then he said: an explanatory apposition to this reward, and it is possible that it be that it be a subject and an explanatory apposition to it, but what the author followed is closer to the rules.
“

the Fire. For them therein is the home of eternity

النار لهم فيها دار الخلد

[Fussilat 41:28]

means a residence from which there is no departure”. He attached the abode to eternity from the perspective of attaching the described to its attribute, meaning the abode of eternity in which there is no departure. It is also possible that it be from the perspective of attaching a thing to its type, because abodes are divided into categories: abodes that are abodes of transition, and abodes that are abodes of eternity. So the abodes of transition are: the womb, second: worldly life, third: the barzakh (the interval between death and resurrection), and the abode of eternity is the last one. It is mentioned that an Arab man heard a reciter reciting and said: “By Allah, the visitor is not a resident, and indeed there is another abode there.” This is undoubtedly from the strength of deduction and understanding.
“

As a recompense.

جزاءً

is in the accusative case as a verbal noun for its implied verb”. It is in the accusative case as a verbal noun, and a verbal noun must have a governor. The governor is sometimes from the word of the verbal noun and sometimes from its meaning. If you say: “I stood, standing,” the governor is from its meaning. And if you say: “I stood, standing,” the governor is from its word. The implied is implied from its word and not from its meaning, because we do not resort to implying the meaning unless we find before us something that differs in its word, {May Allah have mercy on you}. But if we do not find it, it is implied from its word. And on this basis, the implication is: “They will be recompensed with a retribution,” meaning by their being deniers, and on this basis here is a preposition and it is not correct for it to be a relative pronoun. And he said: “

for what injustice they were doing toward Our

بما كانوا بآياتنا

[Al-A'raf 7:9]

the Qur’an

Deny.

يجحدون

” meaning they used to lie, and we only implied “they used to lie” because of its transitivity with the preposition “ba,” because “jahada” (to deny) is transitive by itself, and it is said “I denied the thing,” meaning you rejected it. But when the object is made transitive with the preposition “ba,” the denial becomes implied with the meaning of lying, meaning: for what they used to lie about our verses.