Commentary on Tafsir al-Jalalayn: “Or did they take besides Him” meaning the idols “as awliya (close friends of Allah)?” The “am” is disconnected, meaning “bal” (but) which indicates transition.

The commentator (may Allah have mercy on him) says: “meaning the idols” This is a reference to the fact that the first object of “took” is omitted, and the implied meaning is “Or did they take besides the idols awliya (close friends of Allah)?” because “took” requires two objects, as in the saying of the Exalted: , this verse: Before our eyes is only one object: We say: Rather, the first object is omitted, and the implied meaning is “Or did they take the idols as awliya (close friends of Allah)?” : meaning supporters to whom they call for aid, from whom they seek help, with whom they form alliances, and to whom they draw near as if they were a Lord.
The author, the commentator, said: “The ‘am’ is disconnected, meaning ‘bal’ (but) which indicates transition, and the hamza indicates negation, meaning that those who are taken are not awliya (close friends of Allah)” This means that these people took the idols as awliya (close friends of Allah), and the idols are some trees, some stones, some created entities like the sun and the moon, and some human creations. All of these do not benefit their owner. Therefore, you find that when the polytheists fall into dire necessity, whom do they call? They call upon Allah (Mighty and Majestic). When a wave covers them like dark clouds, they call upon Allah, sincere to Him in religion. So they do not benefit, and they also acknowledge this, saying: .
“

But Allah - He is the Protector

فالله هو الولي

[Ash-Shuraa 42:9]

meaning the supporter of the believers, and the fa is merely for conjunction” The fa in His saying: means that it is not the answer to a condition, but it is merely for conjunction. Pay attention to the grammatical parsing of this sentence: “Allah” is the subject (mubtada), “huwa” is the particle of separation (damir al-fasl), and “al-wali” is the predicate (khabar) of the subject. Know that the particle of separation is a particle (harf) and not a noun. This is one point. Yes, and it has three benefits:
The first benefit: restriction (hasr).
The second benefit: separating the predicate from the attribute. For example, if I say: “So-and-so the noble,” “So-and-so” is the subject and “the noble” is the predicate. It is possible that “So-and-so” is the subject and “the noble” is its attribute, with the predicate omitted, meaning “So-and-so the noble is present.” So if I say: “So-and-so is the noble,” it becomes necessary that “the noble” is the predicate and not an attribute. For this reason, they call it the particle of separation because it distinguishes between the predicate and the attribute. It has no place in the grammatical parsing. For this reason, we say: “Allah” is the subject, “al-wali” is its predicate, and “huwa” is the particle of separation which has no place in the grammatical parsing. It provides restriction and emphasis, and distinguishes between the predicate and the attribute. Is that clear? Good, let us add to that with an example: “Muhammad the Messenger.” It is possible that “the Messenger” is an attribute of Muhammad, and the implied meaning is “Muhammad the Messenger is truthful.” Good, if I bring in “huwa” and say: “Muhammad is the Messenger,” it becomes necessary that “the Messenger” is the predicate. This is one point. Also, “is the Messenger” provides restriction, meaning no one else. And there is no doubt that Muhammad ibn Abdullah (peace and blessings be upon him) is the Messenger for this Ummah, and there is no Messenger other than him.
The third benefit: emphasis. “Is the Messenger.” This is the benefit of the particle of separation. As for its grammatical parsing, it has no place in the grammatical parsing because it is a particle.
His saying: The author says: “meaning the supporter of the believers” There is a consideration here because the author is now restricting the wilayah (guardianship) to the specific wilayah. The correct view is that it is general. He is the wali (close friend of Allah) for everyone in the general wilayah and the specific wilayah. The general wilayah is for everyone, for no one manages the affairs of creation except Allah (Mighty and Majestic). The specific wilayah is the wilayah of support and assistance. Accordingly, the author’s (may Allah have mercy on him) restriction to the specific wilayah is subject to consideration. So He is the wali (close friend of Allah) for everyone in the general wilayah and the specific wilayah. The difference between the general wilayah is that the general wilayah includes everyone, so for everyone, Allah is their wali (close friend of Allah) and manages their affairs, even the disbelievers; Allah is their wali (close friend of Allah). The specific wilayah entails support and assistance. From this is the saying of the Exalted: [al-Baqarah: 257] Does this sentence contain restriction or not? It contains restriction. What is its method? The particle of separation. And no one else can give life to the dead, because giving life is making a thing alive after it was dead, and this is not possible for anyone except Allah. Indeed, if Allah (Mighty and Majestic) intends to kill someone, no one can prevent death, as He (Mighty and Majestic) said: meaning “Why don’t you return it?” Is the answer possible or not possible? Not possible. So Allah gives life to the dead and kills the living. (Mighty and Majestic): Over every thing. Any non-existent thing, Allah is competent to bring it into existence. Any existing thing, Allah is competent to remove it from existence. Every thing, Allah the Exalted is competent over it. The opposite of competence is inability. For this reason, Allah (Mighty and Majestic) said: [Fatir: 44]