Convincing the followers of Satan by parsing: “Indeed, these two are magicians.”

     Praise be to God, Lord of the worlds, and may blessings and peace be upon the Messenger of God, the best of all God’s creation, and upon his family and pure, good companions .

And then :
One of the crying jokes is that the missionaries who slander Islam and those who doubt it take the position of criticizing the Holy Qur’an from the linguistic standpoint, as if they were language experts and grammarians, despite the fact that their grammatical knowledge stopped - if it rose at all - at the borders of the elementary stage .

Despite the fact that they are not good at reading the verses - let alone parsing and understanding them - you see them claiming that there are linguistic errors in some of the Qur’anic verses, including :
the claim of these ignorant slanderers that there is a grammatical error in His saying - the Most High -: { Indeed, these are two magicians } [ Taha: 63], where They claimed that the verse should be : ( Indeed, these two are magicians ) ; Because “these two” is a noun (in) and must be accusative with a yā’, and since it is an alif in the verse, it is in the nominative case, and this is an error. Because it is not permissible for the noun “if ” to be raised!

The answer to this is two-fold: general and detailed :
As for the general,  it is by stating the impossibility of a grammatical error occurring in the Holy Qur’an. For several reasons, including :
First :  The Qur’an is the source of grammar rules,  and it is the main source upon which the founders of grammar relied in determining their rules and inferring them. Because the people of Arabic as a whole, believers and infidels alike, have agreed on the eloquence and eloquence of the Qur’an, and that it is free of melody or error, and that it came in agreement with the different languages ​​of the Arabs in their prose and poetry, and thus the Qur’an became the main source that is used as evidence in determining the theoretical rules of grammar that It came after it, was based on it, and built on it. Rather, these rules were originally established to serve the Book of God Almighty .

How can it be said that  the Qur’an violates the rules of grammar, when it is its main source? !
How can this be said when everything in the Qur’an is considered an argument in itself that is used as evidence for the rule and cited as evidence of its authenticity? !

Second :  The Messenger - may God bless him and grant him peace - was the most eloquent of the Arabs.  Where  he grew up in places of eloquence and eloquence; He was a Qurayshi Arab, father and grandfather, and most of his companions were pure Arabs, and among them were great Arab poets such as Hassan bin Thabit, Al-Khansa’, Ka’b bin Zuhair, Bujayr bin Zuhair, Ka’b bin Malik, and others .

If we assume for the sake of argument that a grammatical error occurred in the Qur’an,  how could they not have noticed it?! How did they make this mistake?! Or do you think they are ignorant of the origins of the language and its rules that those missionaries taught? !

Third :  No one among the infidels of Quraish or the Arabs has claimed that he made a mistake in the Qur’an,  or said that it violates any of the rules of the Arab language. Rather, they all bore witness to his eloquence and the greatness of his statement, despite their intense need to prove any deficiency in the Qur’an, which continues to challenge them, making them unable to come up with a surah like it .

Do these so-called Christian missionaries think that they are more knowledgeable about Arabic than its people? ! Do they know Arabic more than the infidels of Quraish, such as Abu Jahl, Ubayy bin Khalaf, and Al-Walid bin Al-Mughirah, who said in the Qur’an - despite his lack of belief in it -: “By God, it has sweetness, but it has sweetness, and the above is fruitful, and the bottom is full of water, and indeed it is high and not It rises above it, and it destroys what is beneath it, and no human being says this . ” [1]

By God, the idol-worshipping infidels of Quraysh were more honorable in their hostility to Islam than those contemporary mercenary Christians who doubted Islam through satellite channels and the international network .

Fourth : None of the grammarians and language masters has been reported to have made a mistake in the Qur’an in a single word.  Rather,  they all acknowledge his eloquence, bear witness to his eloquence, and consider him an argument for them in determining their rules, and a witness and evidence in establishing their doctrines .

On what did these Christian missionaries base their mistakes in the Qur’an?! What  are the sources of their grammatical knowledge in which they surpassed the major grammar scholars? Yes, Arab poets and rhetoricians? !
As for the detailed answer : it will be by explaining the correct grammatical interpretations of His saying - the Most High -: { Indeed, these are two magicians } [ Taha: 63 ].

It is appropriate, before we begin to mention these grammatical explanations, to clarify the frequent correct readings of this verse, summarized in the following table :

It was stated in Al-Shatibiyyah :

The commentator Abdel Fattah Al-Qadi said: “Hafs and Ibn Katheer recited ( They said,  ‘Indeed, these two’ ) with the Nūn (in) lightened and silent, and others recited with the Nūn being stressed as open .

Abu Amr recited  ( These two ) with a silent yā’ in the place of the alif in the recitation of others .
And Ibn Kathir recited with the stressing of the Nūn ( These two ).” And others recited it in a light way . ” [2]

Ibn Ashour said: “Know that all the considered reciters read by affirming the alif in the demonstrative noun from his saying ( these two ) , with the exception of Abu Amr from the ten, and with the exception of Al-Hasan Al-Basri from the fourteen, and that necessitates certainty that the affirmation of the alif in the pronunciation of these two is more frequent, with categorical Considering how to pronounce the word ( in ) whether it is stressed or lightened, and that most of the famous frequent readings read with the stressed nūn ( inn ) , with the exception of Ibn Kathir and Hafs on the authority of Asim, who read ( inn ) with the sukūn of the nūn as being lightened from the heavy one ” [3] .

The demonstrative noun came with the yā’ in the reading of Abu Amr ibn al-Ala, and the parsing of the verse according to this reading is as follows :
( Indeed, these two are magicians ): ( Indeed ) is an abrogation, and ( These two ) is in the accusative case with the yā’, and the lam is in the ḥalīqa, and ( two magicians ) is the predicate that is in the nominative case with the alif. .

As for the other readings in which the demonstrative noun appears as an alif, they have several grammatical interpretations and forms, among which we mention the following :
The first aspect :  ( if ) is lightened from the heavy one and neglected, so it has no function; That is: it does not put the subject in the accusative case, and ( these two ) is a demonstrative noun in the nominative case with the beginning, and its nominative sign is the alif, and the lam is the difference, and ( two magicians ) is the predicate of ( these two ) in the nominative case with the alif .

This is the opinion of a number of grammarians, including Ali bin Issa [4] .

Ibn Aqeel said in his explanation of Al-Alfiyyah: “If you lighten ‘in’, then most of the Arabs neglect it, so you say: ‘Indeed, Zaid will rise ’” [5] . 

Ibn Malik said in his Alfiyah :

If it is said: It came with a heavy burden in a correct reading, then the response is as Al-Alusi said : “( Indeed ) is cancelled, even if it is heavy, as a burden on it over the light one, just as the light one was made as a burden on it in His saying : { And indeed, all are for that; your Lord will fully repay them for their deeds } [ Hud: 111]. ], it is attenuated in the reading of Nafi’, Ibn Kathir, and Shu’bah ” [6] .

The second aspect :  “The” here is not the copying; Rather, it means "yes", and the meaning is: Yes, these two are magicians, and it is the opinion of a group of grammarians, including Al-Mubarrad and Al-Akhfash Al-Saghir, and Abu Ishaq Al-Zajjaj mentioned it in his interpretation, and he mentioned that he presented this opinion to Al-Mubarrad and Ismail Al-Qadi, and they accepted it .

Does "in" mean "yes" in Arabic?
The answer :  Yes, and the evidence for that is the saying of the poet - Abdullah bin Qais Al-Ruqayat -: 

That is: I said: Yes .

Another evidence for this is that  a man said to Ibn al-Zubayr: May God curse a camel that carried me to you, and Ibn al-Zubayr replied: Yes, and its rider, ( i.e., yes, and its rider as well ) .
In this manner : ( These two are magicians ) is a subject and a predicate in the nominative case, like the previous aspect [7] .

The third aspect :  “ In” here is negative, and the lam used for ( two magicians ) means: except, so the meaning is: These are nothing but two magicians, and this is the saying of the Kufan ​​grammarians, and according to this saying ( these two ) is a nominative subject [8] .

The fourth aspect :  “ In” is nasikh and nasib, and ( these ) is its name, and the demonstrative noun appears in the alif even though it is in the accusative position based on the language of some Arabs from the dual procedure and what is always attached to it with the alif, and this is the saying of Abu Hayyan, Ibn Malik, Al-Akhfash, and Abu Ali Al-Farsi [9] ] .

Is this possible in the Arabic language? Is it possible for the dual to be in the accusative case and still be in the alif? The answer
: Yes , and this is the language of Kinana, Balharith bin Ka’b, Banu Anbar, Banu Hajim, and clans of Rabia, Khath’am, Hamdan, and Adhar . Evidence of this is the saying of the poet Abu Al-Najm Al-Ajli : 

The word ( her eyes ) in the first verse is the noun “I wish” in the accusative case and is dual, and despite that it was written with the alif ( her eyes ), and not with the yā’ ( her eyes ) . 

Likewise, the word ( her legs ) in the second verse is in the genitive case with whom, and it is a dual form, and despite that, it was written with the alif ( her legs ), and not with the yā’ ( her legs ) .

And the poet says :

The word ( his ears ) is in the genitive position in addition to the adverb between, and despite that, it is in the alif ( his ears ), not the yaa ( his ears ), and examples of this in the Arabic tongue are many .

Ibn Aqeel said in Sharh al-Malifiya: “Among the Arabs are those who make the double and its suffix with the alif absolute: nominative, accusative, and genitive, so he says: Both Zaydān came, I saw both Zaydān, and I passed by both Zaydān ” [10] . 

Ibn Katheer said in his interpretation of this verse: “This is the language of some Arabs, and this reading was based on its parsing ” [11] .

Fifth aspect :  “ Inna” is in the accusative case, its nominative pronoun is omitted, and ( these are two magicians ) is a subject and a predicate, and the sentence is in the nominative case of the predicate that .

The meaning is that ( i.e., the situation and the affair ) are magicians, and this is what the ancient grammarians said [12] . 

Someone might say :  What is the secret to the multiple aspects of readings and parsing in this verse? Does this indicate difference and disorder?
The answer to that is: shameful disagreement and reprehensible confusion occur if the meanings contradict such that it is not possible to combine and reconcile them, and something like that cannot occur in the Book of God - the Almighty - which says : { Will they not contemplate the Qur’an? If it had been from other than God, they would have found in it much discrepancy } [ Women: 82 ]. 

As for the multiplicity of aspects of reading and parsing,  it is one of the secrets of the power of the Qur’an and evidence of its miraculousness. Parsing is a branch of meaning, and in the multiplicity of grammatical aspects without disturbance, there is a multiplicity of meanings. They are meanings - despite their multiplicity and diversity - united in their purpose, agreed in their content, and thus we find that the phrase with few letters has It has many meanings .

Al-Tahir bin Ashour said: “The revelation of the Qur’an in these eloquent forms of usage is a type of its miraculousness, so that its compositions take place in two forms with different meanings, united in purpose ” [13] .

The sentence : “ These two are magicians ” has multiple meanings according to every grammatical aspect. But these meanings ultimately lead to one purpose, and this is explained as follows :

So contemplate the eloquence of the Qur’an,  and look at the greatness of its statement,  then look at that helper who returned disappointed and dejected. He wanted to prove  a shortcoming, but lo and behold, it was veiled. He claimed that there was an error, and then it was an aspect of clarification and a type of  eloquence that made the rhetoricians and poets incapable .

Thus,  every time missionaries try to prove a flaw or deficiency in Islam, it becomes clear upon research and consideration that what they tried to show as a flaw is a great advantage, and a great praise. Glory be to Him who sent down this book and made mankind and the jinn incapable of it! And damn those who are atheists in this book. For whoever defeats God will be victorious .

We ask God to make us among those who take proper care of His Book,  contemplate it as it should be contemplated,  do justice to it, fulfill its conditions, and do not seek guidance in anything else, and to guide us to its  apparent signs and its conclusive and brilliant rulings, and to bring together for us through it the good of this world and the hereafter,  for he is the people of piety and the people of forgiveness .

May God’s peace and blessings be upon Muhammad, his family and companions, and those guided by his guidance until the Day of Judgment .
 
---------------------------------
[1]  “ The Beginning and the End” (3/61), “Al-Shifa bi Definition of the Rights of the Chosen One,” p. 262 .
[2]  See: “Al-Shatibiyyah” and its explanation by “Al-Wafi,” p. 262 .
[3]  “ Al-Tahrir wa Al-Tanwir” (8/251)
[4]  See: “Tafsir Al-Alusi” (9/325)
[5]  “ Explanation of Ibn Aqeel” (1/346)
[6]  “ Tafsir Al-Alusi” (9/325) )
[7]  “ Al-Kashshaf”, by Al-Zamakhshari (p. 660), and “Al-Lam’”, by Ibn Jinni, with “Tawjih Al-Lam’” (p. 155). Ibn Ashour said in “Al-Tahrir wa Al-Tanwir” (16/253): “The lam was added to the predicate: either According to the assessment that the predicate is a sentence whose subject has been deleted, which is the subject of the “lam” in the estimation, and the presence of the “lam” indicates that the sentence that occurred as a predicate of the demonstrative noun is a subjunctive sentence ;
[8]  “ Tafsir al-Alusi”: “Ruh al-Ma’ani” (9/323)
[9]  “ Tafsir al-Alusi” (9/325). Accordingly, the demonstrative noun is built in the accusative position of the noun “in .”
[10]  “ Explanation of Ibn Aqeel” (1/60), and see: “Al-Tahrir wa Al-Tanweer” (8/253)
[11]  “ Tafsir Ibn Kathir” (3/251)
[12]  “ Al-Tahrir wa Al-Tanweer” (8/253) And see: “Ruh Al-Ma’ani” (9/325)
[13]  “ Al-Tahrir wa Al-Tanweer” (8/254)

Source: Alaloka website..