Continuation of the commentary on Tafsir al-Jalalayn: “And those who disbelieved will say” in the Fire, “Our Lord, show us those who led us astray from among the jinn and mankind,” meaning Iblis.

The one from whom [the sacrifice] was accepted is Habil, and the second is Qabil, from whom it was not accepted, so he envied him and said, “I will surely kill you.” Why? Out of envy, because Allah accepted [the sacrifice] from him. So his brother Habil said to him, “Indeed, Allah only accepts from the righteous,” as if saying to him, “Fear Allah so that He may accept from you.” Then he said to him, “Even if you extend your hand to kill me, I will not extend my hand to you to kill you, for I fear Allah, the Lord of the worlds,” meaning that if you intend to kill me, I fear Allah. Perhaps this was in the law of those who came before, where it was not permissible for a person to defend himself, or perhaps he feared a greater harm, and it is known that repelling a greater harm is obligatory. meaning He made it easy for him, so he killed him. So Qabil became the first to initiate killing without right, and thus every soul that is killed without right, a portion of its sin is upon Qabil, may Allah protect us, because he was the first to initiate killing, and whoever initiates a bad practice bears its sin and the sin of everyone who acts upon it until the Day of Resurrection. But is the matter as the author stated, that it is the devil, meaning Iblis who refused and was arrogant about prostrating to Adam, and Qabil, or is the meaning the general category? The correct view is the second, without doubt, because many of the disbelievers do not even cross their minds that they disbelieved by following the example of the devil who refused and was arrogant, and many of the killers do not even cross their minds that they did so by following the example of Qabil. So if the verse indicates generality by its wording and the meaning requires it, there is no reason for us to restrict it to what? To... {Be careful, my son!} And this is a rule we must understand from the rules of exegesis: a general wording cannot be restricted to some of its individuals except with evidence. If there is no evidence, the obligation is generality. Here we say: the obligation is generality, because the wording is general and because the meaning requires it, because every disbelieving person may not even cross their mind that they are following the example of Iblis, and every person who kills intentionally without right does not even cross their mind that they killed by following the example of Qabil. And thus, the wording does not support [restriction] and the meaning does not support it, meaning they do not support restricting it to Iblis and Qabil.
And his saying: According to the author’s view, it is Iblis, and the human is Qabil, but the correct view is generality. If someone says, “We know that humans mislead humans; a bad person comes and misleads him, but how can it be from the jinn?” We say: because the jinn, and at their head is Satan, command humans to do obscenity, command them to do evil, and command them to disbelieve, so by that they mislead them. Have you not seen what happened to Adam and his wife? Did not Satan mislead them? Yes, he did mislead them. Allah forbade them from eating from the tree, so Satan came and lured them with deception, and he kept swearing to them that he was a well-wisher, and he whispered to them until they ate from the tree. Yes.
The indicative mood is the answer to the command in his saying: meaning: If You show us them, we will make them beneath our feet in the Fire. And there is no doubt that the one whom a person places under his foot has humiliated him with the greatest humiliation. For this reason, among the common proverbs, if a person wants to honor someone, he says, “You are above my head,” and if he wants to humiliate him, he says, “You are under my foot.” So they are saying: Show us these two who misled us, we will make them beneath our feet