Tafsir of Fussilat 41:15-16

{Then as for ‘Ad, they grew arrogant in the land} Meaning: They acted haughtily toward its inhabitants without deserving such exaltation, relying on what they possessed of strength and massive physical stature. Or, they exalted themselves in the land and seized control over its people without any right to authority.

{Who is mightier than us in strength?} They were people of tall stature and immense physical build. Their strength reached such a point that a man could pull a boulder from a mountain and uproot it with his hand.

If you ask: Strength is intensity and firmness in physical structure, which is the opposite of weakness. Ability (qudra), however, is that by which an action becomes possible for an agent, whether through essence or physical health, and it is the opposite of incapacity (‘ajz). Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, is not described as having "strength" except in the sense of "ability." So, how is the statement {He is mightier than them in strength} valid, given that it is only correct if "strength" is intended in the same sense in both instances?

I say: Ability in a human is the health of the body, its balance, and its strength, intensity, and firmness. Its reality is an increase in ability. Just as it is correct to say "Allah is more capable (aqdar) than them," it is permissible to say "He is stronger (aqwa) than them," meaning: He is able by His essence to do what they cannot do, due to the increase in His power.

{They used to deny} They knew that [the signs] were the truth, yet they denied them just as a person entrusted with a deposit denies it. This is conjoined to {they grew arrogant}, meaning: they were disbelievers and transgressors.

{The Sarsar (the howling wind)} The storm that tusarsir, meaning: it makes a sound (taḍwi) in its blowing. It is also said: it is the cold wind that burns with the intensity of its cold. It is a repetition of the root ṣar, which is the cold that yaṣurr, meaning: it gathers and constricts.

{Ill-omened (naḥisāt)} It is read with a kasra on the ḥā’ and with a sukun. Naḥasa (to be ill-omened) is the opposite of sa‘ada (to be fortunate). As for naḥs, it is either a lightened form of naḥis, or an adjective on the pattern of fa‘l (like ḍakhm), or it is an infinitive used as an adjective.

It is also read: {That We may make them taste}, implying that the "tasting" is attributed to the wind or the ill-omened days.

He attributed the punishment to "disgrace" (khizy), which is humiliation and submissiveness, as a description of the punishment. It is as if He said: "a punishment of disgrace," just as you say "the act of evil" (fi‘l al-su’), meaning "the evil act." The evidence for this is His saying: {And the punishment of the Hereafter is more disgraceful}. This is a metaphorical attribution; describing the punishment as "disgrace" is more eloquent than describing them as such. Do you not see the difference between your saying "He is a poet" and "He has a poetic poem"?

{And as for Thamud, We guided them, but they preferred blindness over guidance, so the thunderbolt of humiliating punishment seized them for what they used to earn. And We saved those who believed and used to fear Allah.}