فَرَضَHe presumedمَالَاwhat is notيَتَنَاهَىlimitedمُطْلَقًا،at all,وَجَعَلَهُand made itقَاضِيًّاa judgeمَنْقَضِيًّاthat is ended.جَمَعَHe combinedبَيْنَbetweenالنَّقِيضَيْنِthe opposites.
He presumed what is not limited at all, and made it a judge that is ended. He combined between the opposites.
وَلِهَذَاAnd for this reason,كَانَتwereأَدِلَّتُهُمْtheir evidencesعَلَيْهِagainst itجَامِعَةًcomprehensiveبَيْنَbetweenالنَّقِيضَيْنِ،the opposites,مِثْلَlikeقَوْلِهِم:their saying:يَلْزَمُit is required thatأَنْto beيَكُونَthere beالْيَوْمَ،the day,وَمَاand whatسِوَاهُis other than itمِنَofالحَوَادِثِthe incidentsمُتَوَقِّفًاmust dependعَلَىonانْقِضَاءِthe end ofمَاwhatنِهَايَةًhas an endلَهُ،to it,وَانْقِضَاءِand the end ofمَاwhatلَاnotنِهَايَةًhas an endلَهُto itمُحَالٌ.is impossible.
And for this reason, their evidences against it were comprehensive between the opposites, like their saying: it is required that there be the day, and what is other than it from the incidents must depend on the end of what has an end to it, and the end of what does not have an end is impossible.
فَإِنَّهُIndeed,يُقَالُit can be said to themلَهُمto themنَعَم،yes,مَاwhatلَاnotيَتَنَاهَىis limitedلَاneitherفِيinالاِبْتِدَاءِ،the beginning,وَلَاnorفِيinالْانْتِهَاءِ،the ending,فَانْقِضَاؤُهُits endمُحَالٌ،is impossible,أَمَّاbut ifإِذَاyou are limitedقَدَّرْتُمُوهُyou estimated itحَتَّىuntilمَضَى،it has passed,وَانْتَهَىand reachedإِلَىtoحَدٍّ.a limit.
Indeed, it can be said to them yes, what is not limited is neither in the beginning, nor in the ending, its end is impossible, but if you estimated it until it has passed, and reached to a limit.
فَقَوْلُهُمْSo their sayingبَعْدَafterذَلِكَ:that:أَنَّthatانْقِضَاءَهُits endمُحَالٌ،is impossible,كَلَامٌis speechمُتَنَاقِضٌ،that is contradictory,فَإِنَّكُمْfor youفَرَضْتُمُوهُpresumed itقَدْhasانْقَضَىendedوَانْتَهَىand has reachedمِنْfromهَذَاthisالْجَانِب،side,جَانِبِthe sideالنِّهَايَة،of the end,دُونَwithoutجَانِبِthe side ofالْبِدَايَة،the beginning,وَمِثْلَand likeقَوْلِهِمْtheir sayingفِيinدَلِيلِproofذَلِكَof thatالتَّطْبِيقِ،application,إِذَاifفَرَضْنَاwe assumeالْحَوَادِثَthe incidentsإِلَىtoحِينَthe time ofالطُّوفَان،the Flood,وَالْحَوَادِثَand the incidentsإِلَىtoحِينَthe time ofالْهِجْرَة،the Migration,ثُمَّthenطَبَّقْنَاwe appliedبَيْنَهُمَا:between them:فَإِمَّاeitherأَنْto beيَتَمَاثَلَا،similar,وَإِمَّاorأَنْto beيَتَفَاضَلَا،different,وَالْتَّمَاثُلُand similarityمُمْتَنِعٌ،is impossible,وَالتَّفَاضُلُand differenceيَقْتَضِيnecessitatesوُقُوعَthe occurrence ofالتََفَاضُلِthe differenceفِيماin whatلَاnotيَتَنَاهَى،is limited,وَهُوَand it isمُحَالٌ،impossible,فَإِنَّهُfor it can be said to them:يُقَالُis said.لَهُم:to them:هَذِهِtheseالْحَوَادِثُ،incidents,هِيَareبِعَيْنِهَاthe same,لَكِنَّهَاbut theyزَادَتْincreasedبِمَاby whatبَيْنَbetweenالْوَقْتَيْن:the two times:وَقْتِthe time ofالطُّوفَان،the Flood,وَوَقْتِand the time ofالْهِجْرَة،the Migration,وَسَوَاءٌand whetherقَدَّرَتْit is estimatedأَنَّهَاthat it isهِيَ،or it is not.فَذَاتَانِSo these twoأَكْثَرُare more thanمِنْfromهَذِهِ،this,وَهَذَاand thatتَفَاضُلٌis differenceفِيماin whatانْتَهَى،has ended,وَهُوَand it isالْمَاضِي،the past,فَهُوَit isتَفَاضُلٌa differenceفِيمَاin whatتَنَاهَىhas ended
So their saying after that: that its end is impossible, is contradictory speech, for you presumed it had ended and reached from this side, the side of the end, without the side of the beginning, and like their saying in the proof of that application, if we assume the incidents to the time of the Flood, and the incidents to the time of the Migration, then we applied between them: either to be similar, or to be different, and the similarity is impossible, and the difference necessitates the occurrence of the difference in what is not limited, and it is impossible, for it can be said to them: these incidents, they are the same, but they increased by what is between the two times: the time of the Flood, and the time of the Migration, and whether it is estimated that it is, or it is not, these two are more than this, and that difference is in what has ended, and it is the past, it is a difference in what has ended.
فَإِنْIfكَانَit isتَنَاهَىlimitedمَاwhatلَاnotابْتِدَاءًbeginningلَهُto itفِيinالْمُسْتَقْبَلِthe futureمُمْكِنًا،possible,فَالتَّفَاضُلُthen the differenceوَقَعَoccurredمِنْfromجِهَةِthe side ofكَوْنِهِits beingمُتَنَاهٍ،limited,لَاnotمِنْfromجِهَةِthe side ofكَوْنِهِits beingغَيْرَnotمُتَنَاهٍ -limited - أَي -that is -لَاnotبِدَايَةًbeginning.وَإِنْAnd ifكَانَit isتَنَاهَىlimitedمَاwhatلَاnotابْتِدَاءًbeginningلَهُغَيْرَآمُمْكِنًا،هِيَ،بَاطِلٌ،فَقَوْلُكُمْ:تَنَاهَىالْحَوَادِثُإِلَىزَمَانِ(٢)الطُّوفَان،أَوْالْهِجْرَة،مُمْكِنًا،فَقَوْلُكُمْ:then your saying:تَنَاهَىlimitedالْحَوَادِثُthe incidentsإِلَىtoزَمَانِthe time of(٢)(2)الطُّوفَان،the Flood,أَوْorالْهِجْرَة،the Migration,بَاطِلٌ،is void,وَذَلِكَand thatأَنَّهُit isإِذَاifقِيلَ:it is said:إِنَّهُthatلَمْhas notيَزَلْceaselessالرَّبُّthe Lordمُتَكَلِّمًاspeaking.
If what does not have a beginning to it in the future is possible, then the difference occurred from the side of its being limited, not from the side of its being not limited - that is - not having a beginning. And if what does not have a beginning is not possible, then your saying: the incidents ended to the time of the Flood or the Migration, is void, and that is if it is said: that the Lord has not ceased speaking.