as hypocrisy in the Prophet’s ﷺ lifetime.” (1)

When, therefore, you intend the word for one of the two kinds, its restriction may be prompted by an explicit textual marker such as the definite article of prior acquaintance (lam al-ʿahd) or by annexation (idāfa). This does not deprive the word of its univocity, just as when a man says, “The judge has come,” while meaning the judge of his own town—the definite article signals the particular individual. Likewise, the Exalted says, “So Pharaoh disobeyed the messenger” (Q 73:16): it is the definite article that confines “messenger” to Moses, not the term “messenger” itself.

Alternatively, the limitation may result from the predominance of usage, so that the expression becomes shared between the general word and the specific meaning. The same holds for His words, “When the hypocrites come to you…” (Q 63:1). Here the term’s confinement to unbelievers is either because the definite article conveys prior familiarity—so that the well-known “hypocrite” is the unbeliever—or because the name has, in the language of the Law, come to be used predominantly for hypocrisy of disbelief.(2) By contrast, the Prophet’s ﷺ saying, “Three traits—whoever possesses them is a hypocrite…,” (3) refers to hypocrisy in the broader sense: outwardly displaying a feature of the religion while concealing the opposite.

Accordingly, applying the word nifāq to both the unbeliever and the flagrant sinner: if you apply it in view of the overarching meaning, the usage is univocal; but if you apply it to the unbeliever on the basis of (4) what distinguishes him from the sinner, then employing it for both becomes a case of homonymy. Likewise, it is permissible that