Tafsir of Ghafir 40:79

(Allah is the One Who made for you the livestock) — the intended meaning here is exclusively camels, as narrated from al-Zajjaj and chosen by the author of al-Kashshaf. The lam (in lakum) is for causality, not for exclusive possession, for that is what is known in the parallels of the verse; meaning, He created them for your sake and for your benefit. His saying, the Exalted: (that you may ride upon some of them), etc., is a detailed explanation of what the speech indicated in a general sense. Hence, some have considered it an appositional substitute (badal) for what preceded it; a substitute of a detail from a generalization, with the repetition of the preposition. The min (in minha) is for the beginning of the end-point—that is, the beginning of the attachment of the riding to them—or it is partitive (tab’idiyyah). The same applies to the min in His saying, the Exalted: (And from them you eat).

It is not intended by the connotation of partitivity that each of the riding and the eating is restricted to a specific part of them, such that it is not permissible for it to relate to what the other relates to; rather, it is that every part of them is suitable for each of the two actions. Indeed, they often designate the noble camels for riding.

The sentence, according to what al-Jalabi held, is a conjunction based on the meaning; for His saying: (that you may ride upon some of them) is in the meaning of "and from them you ride," or "and from them you eat" is in the meaning of "that you may eat from them," but it was not brought in that form due to a subtle point.

The esteemed al-Taftazani said: This sentence is in the state of being a circumstantial clause (haliyyah). However, an objection is raised against its apparent meaning: that it involves the conjunction of a circumstantial clause to a motive-based object (maf'ul lahu). There is no escape from this except by assuming a conjoined element, meaning: "He created for you the livestock, [and] from them you eat," so that it becomes a conjunction of a sentence to a sentence. Al-Khafaji pursued this, saying: It has not become clear to me how this waw (and) is made a conjunction requiring the aforementioned assumption, while the apparent meaning is that it is the waw of state, whether we consider it a state of the subject or the object. What is readily apparent to my mind is conjunction according to the meaning; and perhaps considering it in the aspect of the conjoined is easier, so it is also considered in His saying, the Exalted:...