intended good for him. Since the necessary consequence is absent in his case, that which entails it is also absent.

Likewise, His words:

“Had Allah known any good in them, He would have made them hear.”

He explains that the former is a condition for the latter—a condition in the grammatical sense, which entails the latter and is its cause. This means that everyone in whom Allah knows good is made to hear in this way. Thus, anyone whom He has not made to hear in this way is someone in whom He has not known any good. Reflect, then, on how this hearing and this understanding necessarily follow. Such is the state of the believers, unlike those who speak of hearing without understanding, or understanding without hearing—by which I mean this particular kind of hearing.

As for His words:

“But even if He had made them hear, they would have turned away in aversion.”

Many people may find this difficult to understand. They suppose that the hearing posited in this conditional clause is the same hearing negated in the first sentence, which would have occurred had He known any good in them. Yet nothing in the verse requires this interpretation; rather, both its apparent and underlying meanings contradict it.

For the pronoun in His words:

“Even if He had made them hear”

refers to the same people as the two pronouns in His words:

“Had Allah known any good in them, He would have made them hear.”

The statement indicates that Allah did not know any good in these people and therefore did not make them hear, since law (“if”) always indicates that the condition is not fulfilled. Since Allah did not know any good in them, even if He had made them hear, they would have turned away in aversion. They are like the Jews who said, “We hear and disobey.” These constitute “the third category.” The verse also indicates that not everyone who hears and understands has good in him;