Continuation of the commentary on Tafsir al-Jalalayn: “And your Lord is not unjust to the servants” meaning not one who commits injustice, due to His saying, the Exalted: “Indeed, Allah does not wrong [anyone] by [even] an atom’s weight” [40

The author explained it as a form of attribution, not a form of exaggeration, because is used for attribution, like *najjar* (carpenter), *haddad* (blacksmith), *khashshab* (woodworker), and the like, and it is used for exaggeration. So here, is here for exaggeration or for attribution? It must be for attribution, because if you made it for exaggeration, the negation would apply to the exaggeration of injustice, not to the essence of injustice. And it is known that Allah the Exalted is negated of the essence of injustice and its exaggeration. So it is necessary for us to say: that is a form of attribution, not a form of exaggeration. For this reason, he explained it by saying: “meaning not one who commits injustice” and he cited as evidence His saying, the Exalted: And whoever is negated of injustice by an atom’s weight cannot possibly have injustice by more, nor by an atom’s weight, nor by less than an atom’s weight. If someone says: “The meaning of ‘Allah does not wrong by an atom’s weight’ is that what is less than it is possible,” we say: No, because was mentioned by way of exaggeration; it is not a literal representation of exaggeration. And whatever is a condition for exaggeration has no implication. Have you not seen the saying of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him): ? Do we say: Whoever cuts off half a *shibr* is not punished for it? No, but it was mentioned by way of exaggeration. Yes, meaning not one who commits injustice. And his saying: which servants, in terms of the Shari'ah or in terms of existence? In terms of existence. “To the servants” in terms of existence means He will not wrong even the disbeliever; Allah the Mighty and Majestic does not wrong him. If someone says: “Allah the Exalted—may He be far from that—wronged the disbeliever. The disbeliever was given respite in this world, and let it be a thousand years of disbelief—and I think 'Abdullah al-Afghani is thinking about this—then he will be immortalized in the Fire. For how long? Forever, thousands and millions of years, even though he did not disbelieve except for a thousand years. So the punishment is in excess of the deed, and this is injustice.” If someone said this, we would say: No, by Allah, Allah the Exalted has been more just to this man by sending the messengers and sending down the books, and He gave him intellect and said: “If you do such-and-such, I will discipline you for eternity.” So he proceeded by his own choice. And if he did what necessitates this punishment by his own choice and was then punished with it, is it said that he was wronged? Absolutely not. It is not said that he was wronged. If he had been ignorant of the punishment, we would say: Yes, it is obligatory that he not be punished except to the extent of his sin, in quantity and quality. But we say: This man knew and was made clear to him by the sending of the messengers and the explanation of what he would be punished with, and yet he persisted. It is as if he is saying: “I do not care if I am tormented for eternity.” And in that case, it is he who has wronged himself and done what necessitates this eternal punishment.