وَنَظِيرُAnd similarذَٰلِكَto thatلَفْظٌthe wordالْإِنْسَانُthe humanيَتَنَاوَلُencompassesالْجَسَدَthe bodyوَالرُّوحَand the spirit,,ثُمَّthenالْأَحْكَامَthe rulingsتَتَنَاوَلُaddressهَذَاthisتَارَةًsometimesوَهَذَاand thisتَارَةًsometimesلِتَلَازُمِهِمَاdue to their interdependence,,فَكَذَٰلِكَsimilarlyالْقَرْيَةُthe villageإِذَاifعُذِّبَتْwas punishedأَهْلُهَاits peopleخَرِبَتْwas destroyed,,وَإِذَاand ifخَرِبَتْit was destroyedكَانَتْit wasعَذَابًاpunishmentلِأَهْلِهَاfor its people,,فَمَاso whatأَحَدُهُمَاone of themيُصِيبُafflictsمِنَofالشَّرِّevil,,يَنَالُaffectsالْآخَرَthe other,,كَمَاjust asيَنَالُlikewise affectsالْبَدَنَthe bodyوَالرُّوحَand the spiritمَاwhatيُصِيبُafflictsأَحَدُهُمَاone of them,,فَقَوْلُهُthus his saying:: ﴿وَاذْكُرِ الْقَرْيَةَ﴾"and mention the village"[يُوسُفَ: ٨٢][Joseph: 82].مَثَلٌis likeقَوْلِهُhis saying:: قَرْيَةًa villageكَانَتْthat wasعَامِنَةًsecureمُطْمَئِنَّةًtranquil))[النَّحْلِ[the Bee:: ١١٢]112].فَاللَّفْظُSo the wordهُنَاhereمُرَادٌis intendedبِهِby itالسُّكَّانَthe inhabitantsمِنْofغَيْرِwithoutإِضْمَارِimplied meaningوَلَاorحَذْفٍomission,,فَهَذَاthis isبِتَقْدِيرٍpresumedأَنْthatيَكُونَit isفِيinاللُّغَةِthe languageمَجَازٍmetaphor,,فَلَاthere is noمَجَازٍmetaphorفِيinالْقُرْآنِthe Quran.بَلْRatherوَتَقْسِيمَand the divisionاللُّغَةَof languageإِلَىintoحَقِيقَةٍreal meaningوَمَجَازٍand metaphorتَقْسِيمٌis a divisionمُبْتَدَعٌinnovativeمُحْدَثٌrecently introducedلَمْnotيَنْطِقْspeakبِهِby itالسَّلَفُthe predecessors,,وَالْخَلَفُand the successorsفِيin itعَلَىhaveقَوْلَيْنِtwo opinions.وَلَيْسَAnd it is notالنِّزَاعُthe disputeفِيin itلَفْظِيًّاverbal,,بَلْbutيُقَالُit is said:: نَفْسُthe sameهَذَاthisالتَّقْسِيمُdivisionبَاطِلٌis voidلَاnoيَتَمَيَّزُdistinctionهَذَاthisعَنْfromهَذَاthis,,وَلِهَذَاand for this reasonكَانَthere wereمَاwhatيُذْكَرُونَهُthey mentionمِنَofالْفُرُوقِthe differencesتَبَيَّنَis shownأَنَّهَاthat they areفُرُوقٌdifferencesبَاطِلَةٌvoid.وَكُلَّمَاAnd wheneverذُكِرَmentionedبَعْضُهُمْsome of themفَرْقًاa differenceأَبْطَلَهُthe second nullifiedالثَّانِيthe second oneكَمَاasيَدَّعِيclaimsالْمَنْطِقِيُّونَthe logiciansأَنْthatالْمَصَافَاتُattributesالْقَائِمَةُthat persistبِالْمَوْصُوفَاتِwith the described.تَنْقَسِمُdivideاللَّازِمَةُnecessaryلَهَاfor themإِلَىintoدَاخِلَinsideفِيinمَاهِيَّتِهَاits essenceالثَّابِتَةُthat is fixedفِيinالْخَارِجِthe external,,,وَإِلَىand toخَارِجٍoutsideعَنْهَاof itلَازِمٌnecessaryلِلْمَاهِيَّةِfor the essence,,وَلَاand noزَمَانٌexternal necessityخَارِجِيٌfor existence..وَذَكَرُواAnd they mentionedثَلَاثَةَthreeفُرُوقٍdifferences.كُلَّهَاAll of themبَاطِلَةٌare void,لِأَنَّbecauseهَذَاthisالتَّقْسِيمُdivisionبَاطِلٌis void,لَاthere is noحَقِيقَةٌtruthلَهُto it.بَلْRatherمَاwhatيَجْعَلُونَهُthey makeدَاخِلًاinsideيُمْكِنُcanجَعْلَهُmake itخَارِجًاoutside,,,وَبِالْعَكْسِand vice versaكَمَاasقَدْhas beenبُسِطَelaboratedفِيinمَوْضِعِهِits place.وَقَوْلُهُمْAnd their statement:: اللَّفْظُthe termإِنْifدَلَّindicatesبِلَاwithoutقَرِينَةٍcontextفَهُوَthen it isحَقِيقَةٌtrue meaningوَإِنْand ifلَمْnotيَدُلِّindicatesإِلَّاexceptمَعَهَاwith itفَهُوَthen it isمَجَازٌmetaphor.قَدIt hasتَبَيَّنَbecome clearبَاطِلُهُits invalidity.وَأَنَّAnd thatلَيْسَthere is notفِيinالْأَلْفَاظِthe wordsالدَّالَّةِthat indicateمَاwhatيَدُلُّindicatesمُجَرَّدًاaloneعَنْfromجَمِيعِallالْقَرَائِنِcontexts.وَلَاand noفِيَهَاin themمَاwhatيَحْتَاجُneedsإِلَىtoجَمِيعِallالْقَرَائِنِcontexts..وَأَشْهَرُAnd most famousأَمْثِلَةٌexamplesالْمَجَازِof metaphorلَفْظٌthe termالْأَسَدُlionوَالْحِمَارُand donkeyوَالْبَحْرُand sea,,,وَنَحْوُand similarذَٰلِكَto itمِمَّاof whatيَقُولُونَthey say:: إِنَّهُthat it isاسْتَعِيرَborrowedلِلشُّجَاعِfor the braveوَالْبَلِيدِand dull,وَالْجَوَادِand generous.وَهَذِهِAnd theseلَاdo notتُسْتَعْمَلْusedإِلَّاexceptمُؤَلَّفَةًcompositeمُرَكَّبَةًassembledمُقَيَّدَةًrestrictedبِقُيُودٍby conditionsلَفْظِيَّةٍlinguistic,,,كَمَاasتُسْتَعْمَلُusedالْحَقِيقَةُthe literal meaning,,,كَقَوْلِlike the statementأَبِيof AbuبَكْرٍBakrالصِّدِّيقِthe truthfulعَنْaboutأَبِيof AbuقَتَادَةَQatadaلَمَّاwhenطَلَبَhe askedغَيْرَهُother than himسَلَبَthe spoilsالْقَتِيلِof the slain:لَاMay the Lord punishهَااللَّهُGodإِذًاthenلَاnotيَعْمَدُhe would attackإِلَىtoأَسَدٍa lionمِنْfromأَسَدٍthe lionاللَّهِof Godيُقَاتِلُwho fightsعَنْforاللَّهِGodوَرَسُولِهِand His Messengerيُعْطِيكَwill give youسَلَبَهُhis spoils.فَقَوْلُهُThus his saying:: يَعْمَدُhe attacksإِلَىtoأَسَدٍa lionمِنْfromأَسَدٍthe Lionاللَّهِof Godيُقَاتِلُwho fightsعَنْforاللَّهِGodوَرَسُولِهِand His Messenger,,وَصَفَdescribesلَهُfor himبِالْقُوَّةِwith strengthلِلْجِهَادِfor Jihad.فِيInسَبِيلِهِHis path.وَقَدْAnd it hasعَيَّنَهُspecified.
And similar to that, the word human encompasses the body and the spirit. Then the rulings address this sometimes and that sometimes due to their interdependence; similarly, when the village's people are punished, it is destroyed, and when it is destroyed, it becomes punishment for its people. So what afflicts one of them, the other also affects, just as what afflicts the body and the spirit, the same applies to one of them. His saying: "and mention the village" [Joseph: 82] is like his saying: "a village that was secure and tranquil" [the Bee: 112]. So here, the word is intended to mean the inhabitants without implication or omission; this is assuming it is metaphorical in language, but there is no metaphor in the Quran. Rather, the division of language into real meaning and metaphor is an innovative division that the predecessors did not express, and the successors have two opinions; and the dispute is not verbal, but it is said: this division itself is false; there is no distinction between this and that, and hence the differences they mention are shown to be void differences. And whenever one of them mentions a difference, the other nullifies it as logicians claim that the attributes associated with the described are divided into those that are within their essence fixed in the external, and those that are outside it, necessary for the essence, and external necessities for existence. They mentioned three differences, all of which are void because this division is false; it has no reality; rather, what they make as implied can be made as outside, and vice versa, as has been elaborated in its proper place. Their statement: if the term indicates without context, then it is a true meaning, and if it indicates only with it, then it is metaphor; its invalidity has become clear, and that there is no word that indicates without all contexts, nor any that needs all contexts. The most famous examples of metaphor are the terms lion, donkey, and sea, and similar to these, which they say are borrowed for the brave, the dull, and the generous. These are not used except as composite, assembled, and bound by linguistic constraints, just as the literal meaning is used, as in the statement of Abu Bakr as-Siddiq about Abu Qatada when he requested someone else for the spoils of the slain: 'May God punish, then he does not attack a lion from the lions of God who fights for God and His Messenger and gives you his spoils.' Thus his saying: he attacks a lion from the lions of God who fights for God and His Messenger describes him as having strength for Jihad in His path, and it has been specified.