Because they used this word so frequently in their speech, they came to apply it sometimes to the inhabitants and sometimes to the dwelling, according to the context and circumstances. They do this only where no ambiguity arises; nothing is implied or omitted here.

Reflect on this point, which escaped these scholars despite its clarity.

Once you understand this, consider His words: “Indeed, the mercy of Allah is near to those who do good.” Nothing in the wording indicates that a location or place is intended at all. It is therefore impermissible to claim that such a word is implicitly understood; indeed, that claim is certainly mistaken. For it amounts to asserting that the speaker intended the omitted word without providing any indication of that intention, either explicitly or by necessary implication. The claim that he intended it is therefore unfounded.

As for the phrase “Baradā is mingled,” this is likewise not an instance of omitting the head noun of a genitive construction. Rather, by Baradā the poet meant the river, and the word for “river” is masculine. He therefore described it using the masculine form, saying yusaffaq (“is mingled”). His use of the masculine was not based on an omitted head noun, but on Baradā being intended to mean the river.

If you say, “There must still be an omitted head noun, since they give people the water of Baradā to drink, not the river itself,” I reply: Even if that was the poet’s intention, it would not establish the claim that he used the masculine form yusaffaq on account of the omitted word ‘water.’ Its masculine form is accounted for by his intending the river, which is masculine. Thus, it does not support their claim.

As for the Prophet’s statement—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—

“These two are forbidden,”

the singular form of the predicate conveys a remarkably subtle point: it draws attention to the fact that each of the two, individually, is forbidden. Had he used the dual form of the predicate, it would not have drawn attention to this meaning. That is why he used the singular, as though he had said, “Each of these two is forbidden.” The singular predicate thus indicates that the statement is intended to apply to each one individually.

Reflect on this, for it is one of the subtleties of the language. This has already been explained earlier in this commentary, in the discussion of: