Surah al-Baqarah

Khalid ibn Ma'dan used to call it "the Pavilion (Fustat) of the Quran," which is mentioned in a marfu' hadith in Musnad al-Firdaws. This is due to its greatness and the rulings it contains which are not mentioned in others, to the extent that some scholars have said: "It contains a thousand commands, a thousand prohibitions, and a thousand pieces of information." It is said it also contains fifteen parables. For this reason, Ibn Umar (may Allah the Exalted be pleased with them both) spent eight years learning it.

In the hadith of al-Mustadrak, it is called "the Hump (Sanam) of the Quran," and the sanam of everything is its top; it is as if it is for that reason as well. It is narrated that the Messenger of Allah (may Allah the Exalted bless him and grant him peace) said: "Which part of the Quran is best?" They said, "Allah and His Messenger know best." He said, "Surah al-Baqarah." Then he said, "And which is best?" They said, "Allah and His Messenger know best." He said, "The Verse of the Chair (Ayat al-Kursi)."

It is Medinan, and its verses are two hundred and eighty-seven according to the well-known opinion; it is also said two hundred and eighty-six. It contains the last verse to be revealed, which is His saying (the Exalted): "And fear a Day when you will be returned to Allah." It was revealed during the Farewell Pilgrimage on the Day of Sacrifice, and it does not depart from being Medinan by that, as is not hidden.

The aspect of its connection to Surah al-Fatiha is that the Fatiha comprises an explanation of Lordship first, servitude second, and the request for guidance in religious objectives and certain demands third. Likewise, Surah al-Baqarah comprises an explanation of the knowledge of the Lord first, as in "who believe in the unseen" and its likes; acts of worship and what relates to them second; and the request for what is needed in the immediate and the hereafter last. Also, at the end of the Fatiha is the request for guidance, and at the beginning of al-Baqarah is an allusion to that with His saying, "Guidance for the God-fearing." And since He (glorified be He) opened the Fatiha with the manifest matter, and behind every manifest is a hidden one, He opened this Surah with what He has concealed its secret and hidden it except from whom Allah the Exalted wills, so He (glorified be He and Exalted) said:

(In the name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful. Alif-Lam-Mim)

These and all other letters that are spelled out (like ba, ta, tha) are proper names for the extended letters from which the words are constructed. This is due to the consensus on the definition of a "noun" and the application of its universally agreed-upon characteristics to each of them. It is reported from al-Khalil that he asked his companions, "How do you pronounce the ba in daraba and the kaf in laka?" They replied, "Ba, Kaf." He said, "You have produced the name, not the letter."

I say: ka, ha, ya, ‘ayn, sad—and regarding what is reported from Ibn Mas‘ud (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: "I heard the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) saying: 'Whoever recites a letter from the Book of Allah has a good deed for it, and the good deed is worth ten like it. I do not say Alif-Lam-Mim is a letter, but Alif is a letter, Lam is a letter, and Mim is a letter.'"

The intended meaning here is not the conventional terminology, as that is a new convention. Rather, it is the linguistic meaning, which is one of the "letters of construction." Thus, the meaning of "Alif is a letter," etc., is "the entity named Alif," and so on. Perhaps the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) called it a "letter" by the name of its referent, making it a literal meaning for it. The claim that he called it a letter metaphorically because it is the name of a letter—and that applying one of two correlated terms to the other is a famous metaphor—is baseless.

If one intends by "Alif-Lam-Mim" the opener of Surah al-Fil, then the intended meaning is also its referent, and the good deeds would be thirty. The benefit of the negation is to prevent the illusion that the term "letter" in the statement "whoever recites a letter" refers to the entire word. If one intends something like what is here, then the referent is the letter itself, and the number of good deeds would then be ninety. The benefit of the start of a new sentence is to prevent the term "letter" from being taken as an independent phrase, as in al-Ibanah by Abu Nasr ibn ‘Abbas, who said: "The final letter with which Gabriel reviewed the Quran with the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) was (Alif-Lam-Mim. That is the Book, in which is no doubt, a guidance for the righteous)."

The meaning is: I do not say the collection of the three names is a letter, but rather the referent of each of them is a letter. The reason these letters are not mentioned as parts—by saying Alif is a letter and Lam is a letter—is to alert that what counts in the number of good deeds are the recited letters which are the referents, whether they are parts of these [three-letter names] or other words, not that they are parts of those names. Thus, the number of good deeds in a word like daraba would be thirty.

The conclusion is that the mentioned letters, as referents of those names, are parts of all words when read individually, and as parts of those names, they are not individual except when those names are read. The counting of good deeds relies on the first consideration, not the second. Some researchers have mentioned that they observed a subtlety in this naming, where they made the referent the beginning of each name for it, as Ibn Jinni said. This is so that the production of it by the referent is the first thing that strikes the ear. Do you not see that when you say Jim, the first of its letters is Jim? When you say Alif, its first letter is the Alif you pronounced, which is a hamzah. Since the originator could not begin with the Alif that is a silent elongation, he supported it with a Lam before it that is vocalized so that it could be started, so they said Lam. It is not as the teachers say, "Lam-alif," for that is an error. He specified the Lam for the support because they reached the Lam through its sister in the definite article (al-), as if they intended a type of contest. Thus, the Alif is the first letter of the alphabet in form, and the Hamzah in reality.

This resembles the inclusion in the utterance of a significance of the meaning, such as the Basmalah, al-Hamdalah, al-Hawqalah, and the naming by the grammarians. As for the ruling on the names of letters, they are vowelled with a sukun at the ends unless they are functioning. Whether they are declinable (mu‘rab) or indeclinable (mabni), or neither, the disagreement is based on the difference in interpreting "declinable" and "indeclinable," so the dispute is merely terminological. People have various paths regarding what they love, and the research is exhaustive in our grammatical books.

There has been much talk regarding the status of the opening letters of the surahs. What the majority has settled upon—and it is the position of Sibawayh and other predecessors—is that they are names for them. They were named as such to indicate that they are well-known constructed words. If they were not revelation from Allah, their ability [to oppose the Quran] would not have been diminished. This is just as they named Lam [the father of] Harithah ibn Lam al-Ta’i, and Sad [the name of] the copper-smith, and Qaf [the name of] the mountain. It is argued that if they were not intelligible, then addressing [people] with them would be like addressing them with nonsense, or speaking Zanj to an Arab, and the entire Quran would not be a clear exposition and guidance, and challenging [the Arabs] with it would not be possible.

If they are intelligible, then either the surahs they begin are intended as titles for them based on that indication, or something else. The second is void because it would mean either what they were assigned in the Arabic language—and it is obvious that is not the case—or something else, which is void because the Quran was revealed in a clear Arabic tongue.

This was opposed with several points:

1. We find many surahs opened with "Alif-Lam-Mim" and "Ha-Mim," and the intent is to remove confusion.
2. If they were names, they would have been repeated and become famous by them, but fame is otherwise, such as Surat al-Baqarah and Al ‘Imran.
3. The Arabs did not exceed what they named by a combination of two names, like Ba‘labakk; none of them named by a combination of three, four, or five. So, the claim that they are names of the surahs is a departure from their language.
4. It leads to the union of the name and the named.
5. These utterances are included within the surahs, and the part of a thing is prior to the thing in rank, while the name of a thing is posterior to it; thus, it would be prior and posterior simultaneously, which is impossible.

Answers were given: To the first: By what is answered regarding shared proper nouns—that they are not from one assignment. To the second: It has been narrated from the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) that "Ya-Sin is the heart of the Quran," and "Whoever recites Ha-Mim is protected until morning." In the Sunan, it is stated that the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) prostrated in Sad. If it is proven for some, it is proven for all, as there is no differentiator. Furthermore, the fame of one proper noun does not harm the proper-noun status of another; how many a named person is not known by his name until investigation, due to his fame by another, like Abu Hurayrah and Dhu al-Yadayn. Lack of fame for some is due to being shared, so it was left because it requires an appendage, such as Alif-Lam-Mim here. To the third: Naming by three names, for example, is only impossible if they are synthesized and made into one name. If they are dispersed like the names of numbers, then it is not, as it is a case of naming by what is meant to be mentioned. Naming by three words has occurred, like Shab Qarnaha, Sur man Ra’a, and Dar Bajird. Sibawayh equated naming by a phrase, a line of poetry, and a group of names of the alphabet. To the fourth: This naming is a case of naming a composite by a single [name], and the single is not the composite; thus, there is no union. Do you not see that they made the name of the letter composed of it and others (like Sad), so they are different in essence and description. To the fifth: A thing being posterior that is prior based on another consideration is not impossible. The part is prior regarding its essence and posterior regarding its description—which is the "naming." So there is no impediment.

Some said: That they are names of the disjointed letters is closer to the truth due to its clarity, the lack of metaphor in it, its safety from what is brought against others, and because it is the confirmed matter and is more consistent with the subtleties of the revelation due to its indication of the miracle. The occurrence of sharing in proper nouns from one assigner returns as a refutation against what is the intended purpose of proper-noun status. The words of Sibawayh and others are not a text regarding this, as they likely meant they operate in the manner of [proper nouns], as they say "I read Banat Su‘ad" and "Qul Huwa Allahu Ahad," meaning "what begins with that." When their usage became prevalent on the tongues, they became equivalent to dominant proper nouns, so they were mentioned in the chapter of proper nouns, and their rulings were established.

Furthermore, what was mentioned in the third objection is something there is no escaping, as the non-existence of naming by three, four, or five names in the speech of the Arabs is something of which there is no doubt. What is narrated from Sibawayh is mere analogy needing proof, as mentioned by the Master, the Authority.

Beyond these two opinions are others I fear to mention, lest they cause weariness. What predominates in thought is that the investigation of this is a hidden science and a veiled secret that scholars, as Ibn ‘Abbas said, have been unable to grasp, and the horses of imagination have fallen short of reaching. Therefore, the Truthful One (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "Every book has a secret, and the secret of the Quran is the opening of the surahs." Al-Sha‘bi said: "It is the secret of Allah, so do not seek it."

Among the lovers is a secret that no speech or pen can divulge, For the creation to narrate, so none knows it after the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) except the inheriting saints.

They know it from that Presence, and the letters might speak to them of what is within them, just as the pebbles spoke in his hand, and the lizard and the gazelle spoke to him—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—as is verified in the narrations of our ancestors, the People of the House (may Allah be pleased with them). Indeed, whenever the servant reaps the fruit of the tree of proximity through supererogatory acts, he knows it and other things through the knowledge of Allah, from whose knowledge not even an atom's weight in the earth or in the heaven is hidden.

What the reasoner mentioned previously—that if they were not intelligible, the address would be like addressing with nonsense—is a trivial statement, even if its speaker is grand. If he intended the understanding of all people, we do not concede that this exists in proper-noun status. If he intended the understanding of the one addressed—who is the Messenger (may Allah bless him and grant him peace)—then this is something no believer doubts. If he intended a group of people, then welcome! For the masters of "taste" (spiritual intuition) know them, and they are many among the Muhammadans. All praise is to Allah: stars in the sky; whenever one planet sets, another appears to which its planets find shelter.

The ignorance of people like us regarding the intended meaning does not harm, for among the actions we are tasked with are some whose wisdom we do not know, such as throwing the pebbles, the sa‘i between Safa and Marwah, the raml, and the idtiba‘. Obedience in such matters is more indicative of complete submission and the limit of surrender. Why is it not permitted that He who is not asked about what He does—Glorified is His Majesty—commands us with things whose meaning we have not grasped? The intent of that could be the manifestation of the complete submission of the commanded to the Commander, and the limit of surrender and compliance to the Wise, the Capable. If He said "in arrogance, stand on the embers of the ghada," I would stand in compliance and would not stop [to ask why]. There is another benefit: when a human stands upon a meaning and encompasses it, its impact on the heart falls away. But when he does not stand upon the intended purpose, while being certain that the One who spoke it is Wise, his heart remains forever attached to it, gazing toward it eternally, thinking upon it, flying to its nest with the pinions of his mind and its feathers. The door of obligation is the preoccupation of the inner self with remembering the Beloved and reflecting upon Him and His speech. It is not far-fetched that Allah knows there is a great benefit in the servant remaining with his mind attached and his thoughts preoccupied with that forever, and a heavy favor upon him by which he might ascend to the enclosures of the Sacred and the stations of intimacy. The beginning of love is imagination. This does not contradict the fact that the Quran is a "clear Arabic" [book], for example, because it is so in relation to the one who has been taught. As for the challenge, it is not with all its parts, and the fact that the beginning of a surah is part of what should be challenged is not conceded.

Among the wonders of these openings is that they are half of the alphabet letters according to one opinion, and they exist in twenty-nine surahs, the number of all letters according to one opinion. They contain halves of their categories: the whispered and the voiced, the plosive, the emphatic, the elevated and the lowered, and the letters of qalqalah. The Greatest Sheikh (may his secret be sanctified) spoke on the secret of the number of their letters with repetition, and their number without repetition, their collection in the surahs, their individual occurrences in Sad, Qaf, and Nun, their doubling in Ya-Sin, Ta-Ha, and their sisters, and their grouping from three upwards. Why did they reach five letters? Why were some joined and some disjointed?

He (may his secret be sanctified) said in his Futuhat—may Allah return to us from the sweetness of its wafts: "Know that the realities of the unknown beginnings of the surahs are known only to those of the intelligible forms. Thus, the Blessed and Exalted made them twenty-nine surahs, and this is the perfection of the form ('And the moon, We have decreed for it phases'). Twenty-nine is the pole upon which the stability of the celestial sphere rests, and it is the cause of its existence, and it is Surah Al ‘Imran 'Alif-Lam-Mim Allah.' Were it not for that, the twenty-eight would not have been fixed. Their total, upon the repetition of letters, is seventy-eight letters. Seventy-eight is the reality of the bid‘ (the number between 70 and 80). The Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: 'Faith is seventy-odd branches.' These letters are seventy-eight, so a servant does not complete the secrets of faith until he knows the realities of these letters in their surahs. Just as when he knows them without repetition, he knows the alerting of Allah within them to the reality of creation and the uniqueness of the Eternal—Glorified be He—in His primordial attributes. So He sent them down in His Quran as fourteen letters, individual and ambiguous. He made the eight for the knowledge of the Essence, and the seven [for] the attributes of us, and He made the four for the composed natures. Thus came twelve existing [letters]. This human is from this sphere and from another sphere composed of eleven, and ten, and nine, and eight, until it reaches the sphere of two, and it never dissolves into the Oneness, for that is something in which the Truth—Glorified be He—is unique.

Then, He—the Exalted—made their beginning the Alif in writing and the Hamzah in utterance, and their end the Nun. The Alif is for the existence of the Essence in its perfection because it is not in need of motion. The Nun is for the existence of the portion of the world, which is the world of composition. That is half of the circle apparent to us from the celestial sphere, and the other half is the Nun intelligible upon it, which, if it appeared to the senses and transferred to the world of the spirit, would be a circle encompassing [all]. But He hid this spiritual Nun—by which is the perfection of existence—and made the dot of the tangible Nun an indication of it. The Alif is perfect in all its aspects, and the Nun is deficient because it is a vanishing. So the attribute of its light is borrowed, and it is the trust which it bore. According to the measure of its vanishing and its hiding is its fixing and its appearing—three for three. Three are the setting of the divine, spiritual moon in the Oneness Presence, and three are the rising of the divine, spiritual moon in the Lordly Presence. What is between them in outgoing and returning, step by step, never falters.

Then He—Glorified and Exalted be He—made these letters on ranks: among them is joined and disjointed, individual, doubled, and grouped. Then He alerted that in every joining there is a cutting, and not in every cutting is there a joining. So every joining indicates a separation, but not every separation indicates a joining. Joining and separation are in the grouping and non-grouping, and separation alone is in the eye of differentiation. What He individualized of this is a sign of the passing away of the servant's form—that there is no "I"—or what He established is a sign of the existence of the form of servitude presently. What He grouped is a sign of eternity with the resources that have no end. Individualization is for the Eternal Sea, and grouping is for the Everlasting Sea. The doubled is for the Muhammadan human barrier (barzakh).

The Alif in what we are in is a sign of the Oneness, and the Mim is a sign of the Kingdom that does not perish. The Lam between them is a medium so that there is a connection between them. Look at the line upon which the writing of the Lam falls; you will find the Alif is the end of its origin toward it, and you will find the Mim is the beginning of its development from it. Then it descends from the "best of forms," which is the place of the line, to the "lowest of the low," the end of the definition of the Mim. The descent of the Alif to the line is like His saying: 'Our Lord descends to the lowest heaven,' and it is the first of the world of composition, for it is the heaven of Adam (peace be upon him). The sphere of fire follows it; that is why it descended to the beginning of the line. For He—Glorified and Exalted be He—descended from the station of Oneness to the station of creating the Caliph, a descent of sanctification and transcendence, not a descent of representation and comparison. The Lam was a medium, and it is a deputy for the "Causer" and the "Caused," and the form of the power from which the world found existence. So it resembled the Alif in the descent to the beginning of the line. Since it was mixed from the "Causer" and the "Caused"—for He—Glorified and Exalted be He—is not described as having power over Himself, but rather He is powerful over His creation—the face of power was directed toward the creation, so it must relate to them. Since its reality is not completed by reaching the line, so it and the Alif are on one rank, its reality sought the descent below the line or upon it, just as the Mim descended. So it descended to its creation and could not descend in its form; thus, nothing could exist from it except the Mim. It descended as a half-circle until it reached the line from a side other than that from which it descended. It became a half-sphere that is tangible, seeking a half-sphere that is intelligible. From them was a rotating sphere, and the whole world was in six days, in genera from the first day, Sunday, to the last day, Friday. Saturday remained for the transition from a station to a station, and from a state to a state. So Alif-Lam-Mim became an encompassing sphere, from behind which is the knowledge of the Essence, the Attributes, the Acts, and the Objects of Acts. Whoever reads it with this reality is present with all for all, with all..." to the end of what he said.

He mentioned in the Book of Secrets to the station of the Night Journey what points to the subtleties of thoughts and the hidden secrets based on the number of the letters, which are three thousand, five hundred, and thirty-two. The beginning of the detailing is from Noah to the radiance of Nuh, then to the end of the composition in which the Word and the Spirit descended. After its number, you multiply it, sum it, subtract from it, and place it; the completion of the Shari‘ah will appear to you, even unto the corruption of nature.

Among what gives comfort to this is what al-‘Izz ibn ‘Abd al-Salam narrated, that ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) extracted the battle of Mu‘awiyah from (Ha-Mim-‘Ayn-Sin-Qaf), and Abu al-Hakam ‘Abd al-Salam ibn Barjan extracted in his commentary the conquest of Jerusalem in the year five hundred and eighty-three from His saying—the Exalted: (Alif-Lam-Mim. The Romans have been defeated). The Sheikh (may his secret be sanctified) mentioned the manner of extracting that by a path other than the one he mentioned: that you take the number of (Alif-Lam-Mim) by the small calculation (al-jazm al-saghir), which is eight, and add them to the eight of the bid‘ in the verse, making sixteen. You remove the one belonging to the Alif for the foundation, leaving fifteen; hold them with you. Then return to the operation in that by the large calculation, and multiply the eight of the bid‘ by seventy-one. Make all of that years; the multiplication will yield five hundred and sixty-eight years. Add to it the fifteen that you held, and it becomes five hundred and eighty-three years, which is the time of the conquest of Jerusalem, according to the reading (ghulibat—passive) and (sayaghlibun—active). Finished.

When you know that these openings are the greatest secret, the immense sea, the most perfect light—purity without water, gentleness without air, light without fire, spirit without body—then know that all that people have mentioned regarding them is a sip from the seas of their meanings. Whoever claims a limitation does so because of his own limitation, and whoever pretends that he has brought a lot does so because of the scarcity of his light. The gnostic says that all they have mentioned is merged into the shells of their benefits, and all they have written is mixed into the deep of their benefits. If you wish, say that just as they contain those secrets, each letter of them points to one of His names—the Exalted. If you wish, say He brought them thus to be like a wake-up call and a striking of the rod for those who challenged the Quran. If you wish, say they came thus so that the opener of what is recited to them is independent with a type of strangeness, a sample of what is in the rest of the arts of the miracle. For pronouncing the letters themselves in the folds of speech, even if on the tip of the tongue, is accessible to the elite and the common, but the pronunciation of their names is only possible for one who has studied and written. As for one who has never hovered around that at all, it is rarer than the eggs of the ‘anuq (phoenix) and more distant than the reaches of the Pleiades. Especially when it is on a wondrous pattern and a strange style, indicating a hidden secret based on a brilliant method, such that the masters of intellect are bewildered by it and the masterminds of the elite are unable to grasp it.

If you wish, say that in them is a drawing of the listening of minds and a bridling of every one of the disbelievers who talks nonsense when the Quran descends, because when they hear what they do not understand of this wondrous pattern, they cease their clamor and their motivations become abundant to look into the matter that is appropriate between the letters of the alphabet that came disjointed and the words that neighbor them, in the hope that perhaps speech will come that explains that ambiguous part and clarifies that problematic part. In that is a rebuttal of much of their stubbornness, arrogance, and nonsense that used to appear from them at that time. In that is mercy from Him—the Exalted—for the believers, and a favor for those who have insight.

If you wish, say that some of their combinations, by the meaning that the People of Allah understand from them, are correctly applied to Him—the Exalted—so what is narrated from ‘Ali (may Allah honor his face) occurs, that he said: "O Ka-Ha-Ya-‘Ayn-Sad, and O Ha-Mim-‘Ayn-Sin-Qaf," taken literally. If you refuse, say the intent is "O He who sent them down." If you wish, say other than that. Speak of the sea and do not be bashful.

In my view regarding what we are in, there are subtleties. Glory be to Him whose secrets of speech have no end. He—the Exalted—indicated in the opening of the Fatihah, where He brought it clearly, His "Manifest" name, and in the beginning of Surat al-Baqarah, His "Hidden" name. He is the First and the Last, the Manifest and the Hidden. He indicated by placing the First first that the Manifest is prior, and by it is the universality of the mission: "We judge by the outward, and Allah takes charge of the secrets." Also, in the first is an indication of the station of "Grouping," and in the second is a symbol of "Differentiation" after "Grouping." Also, the opening of this surah with the ambiguous, then following it with the clear, has the most perfect suitability to the story of the cow for which the surah was named ("And when you killed a soul and disputed over it, but Allah was to bring out that which you were concealing").

Also, in the letters is a symbol of three things: the Alif to the Shari‘ah (Law), the Lam to the Tariqah (Way), and the Mim to the Haqiqah (Truth). There, the servant is like the circle whose end is the essence of its beginning, and it is the station of annihilation in Allah—the Exalted—entirely. Also, the Alif is from the furthest part of the throat, the Lam is from the tip of the tongue—which is the middle of the articulation points—and the Mim is from the lips, which is the last of them. So it indicates that the beginning of the servant's remembrance, its middle, and its end should be only for Allah—the Exalted and Majestic.

Also, in that is an indication of the secret of the Trinity: the Alif points to Allah—the Exalted, the Lam to Gabriel, and the Mim to Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace). Ja‘far al-Sadiq (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "In the Alif are six attributes of the attributes of Allah—the Exalted: The Beginning—and Allah—the Exalted—is the First. The Straightness—and Allah—the Exalted—is the Just who does not oppress. The Uniqueness—and Allah—the Exalted—is the One. The lack of connection to a letter—and He—Exalted is He—is distinct from His creation. The need of the letters for it while it has no need ('And you are the poor to Allah, and Allah is the Rich'). And its meaning is the affection (alfah), and through Allah—the Exalted—is the union (i’tilaf)." Secrets remain, and what secrets they are! The jealous gnostic is jealous for them against the strangers.

Among the curiosities is that some of the Shi‘a found comfort in these letters for the caliphate of the Amir ‘Ali (may Allah honor his face), for if you remove the repeated letters from them, what remains can yield (Siratu ‘Aliyyin haqqun namsuku—the path of ‘Ali is the truth we hold). You, O Sunni, may find comfort in them for what you are upon, for after the removal, what remains can yield what would be an address to the Shi‘a and a reminder to him of what has been narrated regarding the rights of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them all), which is (Turriqu sam‘aka al-nasihati—bring advice to your hearing). This is like what they mentioned, letter by letter. If you wish, you can say (Sahha tariquka ma‘a al-Sunnah—your path is correct with the Sunnah), and perhaps it is more appropriate and subtler. In summary, the wonders of these openings do not run out, and counting them does not encompass them. "Every one claims a connection to Layla, and Layla does not acknowledge that for them."

People have differed in their parsing according to how their opinions differed. If they were made names for the surahs, for example, they would have a share of parsing in the nominative, accusative, and genitive. The nominative is by being the predicate of a deleted subject, or a subject whose predicate is deleted. The accusative is by estimating a verb of swearing or a verb suitable for the context. The accusative is permitted by estimating a verb of swearing in what occurs after it in the genitive with the waw, like Qaf and the Quran, even though it necessitates disagreement between the conjoined in parsing if the waw is made for conjunction, and the meeting of two oaths on one thing if it is made for swearing, which is disliked, as al-Khalil and Sibawayh said, because the conjoined is in a place where the genitive occurs, so the conjunction is on the position. The answer is estimated from the genus of what is after it if it were for swearing, or there is no need for estimation, and one answer suffices as there is no prohibition in making one of the two oaths an emphasis for the other without conjunction. Or it is said: when they are both emphasizes for one thing—which is the answer—that is permitted, and there is no weighty reason for the dislike. If there is a father for misguidance, then imitation is its mother.

The genitive is on the suppression of the oath particle. Ibn Hisham's statement that it is a mistake is because that, according to the Basrans, is exclusive to the name of Allah—the Exalted—and because there is no answer to the oath in Surat al-Baqarah and its like. It is not correct to make what is after it the answer, and the Lam was suppressed like its suppression in his saying: "By the Lord of the high heavens, their constellations, the earth, and what is in it." The estimated [verb] is "is" (ka'in), because that, despite its scarcity, is exclusive to the lengthening of the oath. It is not hidden from the student, for our school is Kufan, and following the Basran is not mandatory. Often, there is no need for the answer, as what points to it is sufficient, and what is sworn upon is the content of what is after it, and it is a close indicator. This was explicitly stated in al-Tashil and its commentaries, and the hadith of lengthening is not binding, but rather it is the most common, as Ibn Malik explicitly stated.

Then, what was individual among these openings, like Sad, or balanced with it, like Ha-Mim (the weight of Qabil), parsing is possible for it in pronunciation or position by making it vowelled with sukun as a narration of its state before, and its parsing is estimated, and it is undeclinable due to proper-noun status and feminine gender. What contradicts them, like Ka-Ha-Ya-‘Ayn-Sad, is only narrated [in its current state]. Narration was permitted in these names—even though they are exclusive to proper nouns moved from phrases—like Ta’abbata Sharra, to observe their forms which indicate their move to proper-noun status. And in the words that occurred as proper nouns for themselves—like daraba is a past verb—to preserve the homogeneity with the referent, in the sense that they were not moved from their origin entirely. Because their frequent usage is counted and stopped, this state became as if it were the origin, so when they were made proper nouns, their narration was permitted on that established state, alerting that in them is a mark of observing the origin, which is the extended letters. The intent is the wake-up call and the striking of the rod, so permitting the narration is exclusive to these names as proper nouns for the surahs. Otherwise, narration would not be permitted—this is in the noble Sharifiyah annotations. The unanimity of grammarians that individuals are narrated after min and ayya (interrogative) and without them—as in their saying "leave us alone from tamratan"—contradicts the claim of exclusivity which he narrated, as is not hidden.

If you keep them on their meanings, recited in the manner of enumeration, they are not parsed due to the lack of the requirement and the operator. Likewise, if they were made parts, according to the correct view, or added for separation, for example. Yes, if you estimated them by what is composed of these letters, they would be in the realm of the nominative according to what passed. If they were made as that by which an oath is taken, each word of them would be accusative or genitive according to the two languages in "By Allah, I will surely do." Is that collection, like (Alif-Lam-Mim) and (Ha-Mim), or for the Alif and the Ha, for instance, on the path of "the pomegranate is sweet, sour"—that is a dispute. The apparent is the first. Some permitted the nominative by the beginning, and the predicate is my oath, suppressed. The explicit statement of al-Radi on the exclusivity of that when the subject is explicit in oath-status by making it not accepted is [debatable]. Some made the accusative in some exclusive to when no preventer prevents it, as in Sad and the Quran, so the genitive is determined due to the necessity of disagreement between the conjoined and the meeting of the two oaths then. In that is what has passed, so do not be heedless.

Opinions remained based on opinions that I do not think are hidden from you if you have gained knowledge of what we have presented to you, so reflect. Whether these openings are a verse is a matter of dispute. The Kufans said: (Alif-Lam-Mim) is a verse wherever it occurs, and likewise Sad, Ta-Sin-Mim, and their sisters, and Ta-Ha, Ya-Sin, Ha-Mim and its sisters, and Ka-Ha-Ya-‘Ayn-Sad is a verse, and Ha-Mim-‘Ayn-Sin-Qaf are two verses. As for Alif-Lam-Mim-Ra and its five sisters, they are not verses. Likewise Ta-Sin, Sad, Qaf, and Nun. The Basrans said: None of that is a verse. In al-Murshid is that the openings in all surahs are verses according to the Kufans without differentiation, and it is not a strong view, like the saying of some that Alif-Lam-Mim in Al ‘Imran is not a verse.