, in utter despair,” this is among the most difficult examples adduced, and people have found it exceedingly hard to understand. Many scholars of grammar and Quranic commentary have therefore said that it is simply repetition for emphasis. Al-Zamakhsharī said:

“‘Before it’ serves to reinforce the statement, as in His saying, Most High: ‘Thus the outcome for both was that they would be in the Fire, abiding in it forever.’ The purpose of the emphasis here is to indicate that so much time had passed since they last experienced rain that their despair had become entrenched and their despondency prolonged. Their joy at the rain was therefore proportionate to their concern over it.”

Such were his words. They contain two false claims: first, his assertion that this is repetition; and second, his illustrating it with His saying, Most High:

“Thus the outcome for both was that they would be in the Fire, abiding in it forever.”

The first “in” functions as it does when you say, “Zayd is in the house,” meaning that he is present or situated there. The second, however, is governed by “abiding forever,” which conveys a meaning distinct from mere presence. Since the two governing expressions differ, both prepositions are mentioned. Had only one been used, this would have been an instance of omission, with the other indicating what had been omitted. Such a construction is not called repetition. A parallel is your saying, “Zayd is in the house, sleeping in it,” or “residing in it,” and similar expressions consisting of two clauses, each with its own distinct qualification.

As for His saying:

“Before it was sent down upon them, before it,”

this is not repetition. Rather, it contains a subtle meaning. The meaning is: Although they had been, before it was sent down