before you, and those who establish prayer”: they say that “those who establish prayer” is in the genitive because the wāw introduces an oath. There are many times more examples of this than we have mentioned, and far weaker ones. Rather, the Quran has its own distinctive usage and established meanings. Interpreting it otherwise is inappropriate; indeed, it is impermissible to interpret it contrary to its own usage and established meanings. Its meanings stand in relation to other meanings as its words stand in relation to other words—indeed, their superiority is even greater. Just as its words are the sovereigns of words—the noblest and most eloquent, attaining the highest degrees of eloquence, beyond the powers of all creation—so too are its meanings the noblest, greatest, and most majestic. It must not be interpreted through meanings unworthy of it when other meanings are greater, nobler, and more majestic.
Thus, it is impermissible to construe it in terms of inadequate meanings merely because a grammatical or syntactic analysis allows them.
Reflect upon this principle and keep it firmly in mind. It will help you recognize the weakness and unsoundness of many commentators’ statements and know with certainty that they are not what the Speaker, Most High, intended by His words. Allah Most High willing, we shall explain and develop this further when discussing the principles of Quranic interpretation. This is one of its foundations—indeed, its most important foundation.
The third point: The feminine ending tā’ is omitted from tāliq (“divorced”), hā’id and tāmith (“menstruating”) simply because it is unnecessary. This ending was introduced only to distinguish masculine from feminine where confusion might arise. When an adjective applies exclusively to females, there is no ambiguity and thus no need for the ending. This is the correct explanation, and it is the position of the Kufan school.
If you say, “This contradicts Sībawayh’s position,” I reply: “So what?” Would any discerning scholar accept rejecting what sound evidence establishes merely because it contradicts the statement of a particular scholar? That is the way of bats. Those endowed with insight, however, never reject evidence and what it establishes on account of any particular person’s statement—and how few they are!
There is no doubt that Abū Bishr—may Allah have mercy on him—secured the greatest share in this discipline, carried off its prizes of precedence, and advanced along its course as no one else did. He is a frontrunner in this arena. Yet this does not require us to believe that he encompassed all Arab speech, or that nothing is true except what he said. How many explicit statements of Sībawayh have been opposed by the majority of his own followers