الأُمُّthe motherشَفَقَتُهَاher compassionعَلَىtowardsابْنِهَاher sonلاnoأَحَدٌoneيَتَصَوَّرُهَا؛imagines it;
No one can imagine the compassion of the mother towards her son;
قِيلَIt was saidلَهَا:to her:اجْعَلِيputابْنَكِyour sonفِيinصُنْدُوقٍa boxوَأَلْقِيهِand throw himفِيinالْبَحْرِ،the sea,وَسَيَأْتِيand he will comeإِلَيْكَ.to you.
It was said to her: 'Put your son in a box and throw him into the sea, and he will come to you.'
لَوْلَاIf it were not forالإِيمَانُthe faithالَّذِيthatمَعَwithهَذِهِthisالْمَرْأَةِ؛woman;مَاwould notفَعَلَتْhave doneهَذَاthisالشَّيْءَ!thing!
If it were not for the faith that this woman has, she would not have done this thing!
تَلْقَىShe throwsابْنَهَاher son;فِيinالْبَحْرِ!the sea!
She throws her son into the sea!
لَوْIfأَنَّthatابْنَهَاher sonسَقَطَfellفِيinتَابُوتِهِhis coffinفِيinالْبَحْرِ؛the sea;لَجَرَّهُshe would drag it
If her son fell in his coffin into the sea; she would drag it,
فَكَيْفَso howوَهِيَand sheالَّتِيwhoتَلْقِيَهُ؟throws him?
so how could she throw him?!
لَكِنَّButلِثِقَتِهَاdue to her confidenceبِالرَّبِّin the Lordعَزَّ وَجَلَّthe Exaltedوَوْعَدِهِand His promiseأَلْقَتْهُshe threw himفِيinالْيَمِّ.the sea.
But due to her confidence in the Lord the Exalted and His promise, she threw him into the sea.
وَقَوْلِهِAnd His saying:وَلِتُصْنَعَAnd to be madeعَلَىonعَيْنِي؛My eyes;بِالْإِفْرَادِ؛in the singular;هَلْDoesيُنَافِيit contradictمَاwhatسَبَقَhas precededمِنْfromذِكْرِهَاits mentioningبِالْجَمْعِ؟in the plural?
And His saying: 'And to be made on My eyes;' in the singular; does it contradict what has preceded from its mentioning in the plural?!
الْجَوَابُThe answer:لاis: noتُنَافِي،it does not contradict,وَذَلِكَand thatلِأَنَّbecauseالْمُفْرَدَthe singularالْمُضَافَthe addedيَعُمُّcoversفَيَشْمَلُtherefore includesكُلَّallمَاwhatثَبَتَis establishedلِلَّهِfor GodمِنْofعَيْنٍeyeوَحِينَئِذٍAnd thenلاnoمُنَافَاةٌcontradictionبَيْنَbetweenالْمُفْرَدِthe singularوَبَيْنَand betweenالْجَمْعِthe pluralأَوْorالتَّثْنِيَةِthe dual.
The answer is: no, it does not contradict, and that is because the singular added covers all that has been established for God in terms of eyes, and then there is no contradiction between the singular and the plural or the dual.
إِذًا؛So;يَبْقَىit remainsالنَّظَرُto lookبَيْنَbetweenالتَّثْنِيَةِthe dualوَالْجَمْعِ؛and the plural;كَيْفَhowنَجْمَعُwe can combineبَيْنَهُمَا؟!between them?!
So; it remains to look between the dual and the plural; how can we combine between them?!
الْجَوَابُThe answerأَنْis thatنَقُولُ:we say:إِنَّIfكَانَit isأَقَلَّthe leastالْجَمْعَthe pluralاثْنَيْنِ؛it is two;فَلَاthere is noمُنَافَاةٌ؛contradiction;لِأَنَّنَاbecause weنَقُولُ:say:هَذَاthisالْجَمْعُpluralدَالٌّindicatesعَلَىthatاثْنَتَيْنِthere are twoفَلَاso there is noيُنَافِيَهَا.contradiction.
The answer is that we say: If the least plural is two; then there is no contradiction; because we say: this plural indicates that there are two; so there is no contradiction.
وَإِنْAnd ifكَانَit isأَقَلُّthe leastالْجَمْعَthe pluralثَلاثَةٍ؛three;فَإِنَّthenهَذَاthisالْجَمْعُpluralلَاnotيُرَادُis intendedبِهِby itالثَّلاثَةَ،three;وَإِنَّمَاbut ratherيُرَادُis intendedبِهِby itالتَّعْظِيمَthe glorificationوَالتَّنَاسُبَand the proportioningبَيْنَbetweenضَمِيرِthe pronounالْجَمْعِthe pluralوَبَيْنَand betweenالْمُضَافَthe addedإِلَيْهِ.to it.
And if the least plural is three; then this plural is not intended to mean three, but rather it is intended for glorification and proportioning between the pronoun of the plural and the added to it.
وَقَدْAnd indeedفُسِّرَتit has been interpretedأَهْلُby the peopleالتحْرِيفِof deviationوَالتَّعْطِيلِand negationالْعَيْنِthe eyeبِالرُّؤْيَةِby sightبِدُونِwithoutعَيْنٍ،an eye;وَقَالُوا:And they said:بِأَعْيُنِنَا :By Our eyes:بِرُؤْيَةٍby sightمِنَّاfrom usوَلَكِنَّbutلَاnotعَيْنٌ،an eye;وَالْعَيْنُand the eyeلَاnotيُمْكِنُcanأَنْthatتُثْبَتَbe establishedلِلَّهِfor God;عَزَّ وَجَلَّ؛the Exalted;لِأَنَّbecauseالْعَيْنَthe eyeجُزْءٌis partمِنْofالْجَسَدِ؛the body;فَإِذَاso ifأَثْبَتْنَاwe affirmالْعَيْنَthe eyeلِلَّهِ؛for God;أَثْبَتْنَاwe assertتَجْزِئَةًdivisionوَجَسَدًا،and a body,وَهَذَاand thisشَيْءٌis a thingمُمْتَنِعٌ؛impossible;فَلَاSo it does notيَجُوزُ،permit,
And indeed, it has been interpreted by the people of deviation and negation that 'the eye' is by sight without an eye, and they said: 'By Our eyes: by sight from us', but it is not an eye; and the eye cannot be established for God, the Exalted; because the eye is a part of the body; so if we affirm the eye for God, we affirm division and a body, and this is impossible; thus, it is not permissible.