The point is that “people” (nās) is a designation for the children of Adam. The jinn are therefore not included in its meaning. Thus, “from among jinn and people” cannot explain what is meant by “in the breasts of people.” This is perfectly clear.

If it is said: “There is no difficulty in this, for the jinn have been called ‘men,’ as in the words of Allah Most High:

‘And there were men among humankind who sought refuge in men among the jinn.’ [72:6]

If they can be called ‘men,’ why should they not be called ‘people’?”

I reply: This is precisely what misled those who said that “people” in this verse designates both jinn and humans.

The answer is that the designation “men” was applied to them only with an explicit qualification, in parallel with the mention of men among humankind. It does not follow that the terms “people” and “men,” when used without qualification, apply to them.

If you say “a human being made of stone,” “a man made of wood,” or something similar, it does not follow that the unqualified terms “man” and “human being” apply to stone and wood.

Moreover, calling a jinn a “man” does not entail calling him one of the “people.” This is because “people” and “jinn” are contrasting categories, as are “humankind” and “jinn.” Allah, glorified be He, sets the two terms in contrast, as in His words:

“O company of jinn and humankind!” [55:33]

This occurs frequently in the Quran. Likewise, His words “from among jinn and people” imply that these are contrasting categories, neither of which includes the other. This differs from “men” and “jinn,” which are not used as contrasting categories: one does not say “jinn and men” as one says “jinn and humankind.”

Thus, the verse provides the clearest proof against their view that jinn are included in the term “people,” for it contrasts jinn with people. It is therefore clear that neither category includes the other.