Tafsir of Ghafir 40:80

And for you in them are benefits (meaning other than riding and eating, such as milk, wool, and hides). It is said that this is in the sense of "and that you may derive benefits from them" or something similar.

And that you may reach upon them a need in your hearts (meaning a matter of importance that concerns you, such as carrying heavy loads from one land to another). This is a conjunction to [the earlier] "that you may ride upon them," structured in its same pattern. The apparent expectation would be to maintain consistency between the benefits derived from the cattle by either using the lam (the particle of purpose) for all, or leaving it out for all, but there was a shift in the sublime arrangement for a subtle point.

The author of al-Kashshaf stated: Since the term "cattle" (an’am) here is intended to mean camels specifically, riding and reaching a need were made the most perfect purposes for them; for among their benefits, riding and carrying loads upon them [are primary], while eating from them and benefiting from their wool and milk—compared to those two matters—are meager and small. Thus, the lam was introduced for those two [riding and reaching a need], and they were placed as encompassing the others to draw attention to the fact that [the latter] are also suitable for the sake of purpose, though lesser than the former. As for the exclusivity derived from His saying: "And from them you eat," it is because they are among the animals intended for riding and prepared for eating, so it is not invalidated by horses according to the view of one who permits eating them, nor by cattle.

The author of al-Fara'id said: It was stated "And from them you eat, and for you in them are benefits" and not "that you may eat from them and reach the benefits," because they are currently eating and taking the benefits. As for riding and reaching the need, they are two matters anticipated, so they were expressed with that which indicates the future. This was countered by the fact that everything is future in relation to the time of creation.

The Judge said: The change in structure regarding eating is because it falls within the realm of necessity. It was said in its justification: It means that that which is entered into the purpose does not necessarily have to follow from the action. Thus, the change to the form of a nominal sentence (jumla ismiyya), while employing the form of continuity, is to alert [the reader] to its distinction from riding, in that it is among the necessities of man. This approach also applies to His saying: "And for you in them are benefits," because the intended meaning is the benefit of milk and clothing, and this is what is attached to necessities. This is not harmful, though yes, there is a hesitation in it that is not hidden.

Al-Zamakhshari said: Riding and reaching a need can be the purpose of the Wise, Exalted is His Majesty, because they contain religious benefits, such as establishing a religion or seeking mandatory or recommended knowledge. Therefore, the lam was used for them, unlike eating and acquiring benefits, as these are of the class of permissible things (mubahat) which are not the "purpose of the Wise." This is based on his doctrine regarding the link between command and will. It is also not correct because permissible things that are blessings can be the purpose of the Wise, Great is His Majesty, in their view. And I wish I knew what he would say regarding His saying: "It is He who made the night for you so that you may rest in it." Yes, if he had mentioned that it is because of its inclusion of a religious purpose that the lam was entered, that would have been a sounder justification if it were established.

It was said: The change in the sublime arrangement regarding eating was to observe the rhythm of the verse-endings (fawasil), just as the fronting of the prepositional phrase was for that [same reason]. As for His saying "And for you in them are benefits," it is like a follower to the eating, so it was treated in the same way, and it is as you see.

His saying: And upon them is a prelude to His saying, Glorified is He: "And upon the ships you are carried." It is to bring together the ships of the land and the ships of the sea, as if it were said: "And upon them [the cattle] on land, and upon the ships on the sea you are carried," so there is no repetition.

In Irshad al-'Aql al-Salim, it is stated: Perhaps what is meant by this carrying is the carrying of women and children upon them in the hawdah (palanquin), and that is the secret behind separating it from riding. The fronting of the prepositional phrase, it is said, was to observe the rhythm of the verse-endings, just as its fronting previously. It is also said that the fronting here and what preceded it is for emphasis. It is also said: "Upon the ships" instead of "in the ships," as in His saying: "Carry in it of each pair two," because the meaning of containment and being upon are both present in them, so both expressions are correct; the factor favoring "upon" ('ala) here is congruity.

Many have maintained that what is meant by "cattle" are the eight pairs. Thus, the meaning of riding and eating from them relates to all of them, but not in the sense that each is restricted to a specific part of them such that it is not permissible to relate it to what the other is related to, but rather that some of them are only related to eating, like sheep, and some of them are related to both, like camels. Some of them also counted cattle [as part of the latter], and riding them is customary for some of the tent-dwellers. Some included horses, mules, and all other animals from which one benefits into the "cattle," but this is weak.

The view that what is intended is the eight pairs was favored over the view narrated from al-Zajjaj that what is intended is camels specifically, because the context is one of bestowing favor (imtinan), which necessitates generalization. The apparent meaning is that, but the fact that the context is one of bestowing favor is not conceded; rather, it is a context of argumentation, as in His saying: "Do they not look at the camels, how they were created?" As the sequence suggests, the mention of benefits does not oppose this, as it is parenthetical.