Continuation of the commentary on Tafsir al-Jalalayn: “And who is better in speech” meaning no one is better in speech “than one who calls to Allah” through tawhid (the oneness of Allah) “and does righteous deeds

So you are not sincere. The sincere one must worship Allah (Glorified and Exalted is He) in the manner He has prescribed. Thus, righteous deeds consist of two things: first, sincerity (ikhlas), and second, following the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).
He said: Did he say it with his tongue or his heart? With both. If someone were to ask: “His saying: is undoubtedly part of righteous deeds, so what is the benefit of that?” We say: The benefit is that he declares this statement and does not care about opposition, because some people do righteous deeds but you find them hiding, lacking the courage to declare it. As for this person, he declares it and says with his tongue, without caring: “Indeed, I am one of the Muslims.” And the sentence, as you know, is emphasized by . Some scholars mentioned that the intended meaning is the mu'adhdhin (the one who calls to prayer), because the mu'adhdhin calls to Allah, saying to people: “Hasten to prayer, hasten to success,” and because he is a believer who does righteous deeds, and because he says: “I bear witness that there is no god but Allah,” declaring it, and “I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah,” which is the meaning of his saying: “Indeed, I am one of the Muslims.” But the correct view is that the verse is general and includes the mu'adhdhin and others. The preacher on the minbar falls under the verse, does he not? He falls under the verse. The teacher in his teaching circle falls under it. So the verse is broader than what was mentioned. But know that some of the Salaf (the earliest generations) mention a specific meaning for the verse, not intending to restrict it to that meaning, but intending to give an example. This is a point that may be missed by some people. We always look at Ibn Kathir or Ibn Jarir, and he says so-and-so did such-and-such for a part of the meaning, but they do not intend to restrict the general to the specific, because they are too knowledgeable to restrict themselves to some instances of the general, for example. But what do they intend? An example. For instance, some scholars said: He said: “The one who is unjust to himself is the one who delays the prayer from its time, the moderate one is the one who prays it at the end of the time, and the one who hastens to good deeds is the one who prays it at the beginning of the time.” Now, this is undoubtedly a restriction, and undoubtedly a specification of the general, so we say: They intended by this an example.