One can only try arguing for an inconsistency if the exception never repeats in a similar grammatical context. It isnt the case here. All throughout the Quran, there are similar appeals to exceptional grammatical rules in order to eloquently convey an idea. In 38:21-3 the singular khasmi/litigant is used for 2 litigants. One of the reasons is that, in this deeply intricate story, the litigants were both one in principle and objective, even physically synchronized. Jesus and Mary are qualified as a singular sign from God 23:50,21:91.
The prophet Ibrahim is described to be by himself an ummat/nation 16:120 because of embodying the qualities that could make an entire nation to succeed, being the leader/imam of mankind 2:124. There is a prophetic saying similar to it, where the righteous hanif, Zayd ibn Amr is an ummah by himself. In 22:19 ikhtasamu/they dispute, is in the 3rd person plural instead of the dual form like its subject. This is because, it refers to 2 composite groups; believers and non-believers, are composed of many individuals. The same occurs in 49:9. In 41:11 Heaven and earth prior to being shaped and formed, were scattered elements. We thus see again the dual and plural.
As to 66:4 it is permissible to use the plural instead of the dual when appended to a pronoun. In addition, as noted in tafsir al Jalalayn, from the viewpoint of eloquence, in this specific case it helps create more fluidity in the verse
"the use of the plural qulub instead of the dual qalbayn is on account of the cumbersomeness of putting two duals together in what is effectively the same word".
No comments:
Post a Comment