What is the reason for the accusative case of *jadh'a* in his saying: (O would that I were a trunk in it), and what is the reason for the use of the pronoun in his saying: (or my expeller, they)?

The questioner : In his saying: Why: *jadh'a*?

The Shaykh : What?

The questioner : Why *jadh'a*?

The Shaykh : Yes, this is from the perspective of grammar; there are two issues in the grammar of this sentence:
The first issue: , and the more common view is to say: *jadh'a*, because *layta* makes the subject accusative and the predicate nominative. So either it is said that it is based on an implied deletion, "O would that I were a trunk in it," in which case it is the predicate of the implied *kana*.
Or it is said that it is based on the rare language in which both parts, the subject and the predicate, are made accusative with *inna*. From this is the saying of the poet:
"Indeed our guards are a lion".
And the common usage is to say *asadun* (a lion), as the predicate of *inna*. From this is the saying of the common people among the mu'adhdhins among us: "I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah," where these mu'adhdhins make the predicate of *inna* accusative.

The questioner : ...

The Shaykh : Yes, on a language, in a language, on their language. And our saying this is better than saying that "Messenger" is an apposition for "Muhammad," because if we said that, the sentence would be incomplete, and in that case the adhan would not be valid. But if we say the sentence is complete, but they spoke in the language of those who make both parts accusative, then their adhan is valid.
.
Just as it is also a linguistic feature to replace the hamza with a waw after a dammah, and on this are the common people among the mu'adhdhins who say: "Allah is the Greatest" (*Allahu akbar*), where the waw replaces the hamza. And we, whenever we can find a way to escape invalidating the adhan, it is obligatory for us to do so, because we know what the common people intend when they say: "Allah is the Greatest."
The students: The Greatest.

The Shaykh : The Greatest, without a doubt. And likewise: "That Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah," what do they intend?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : They intend the predicate. They say: I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah. Yes, that is right.
The second issue is his saying: , if we make "they" the doer of "expeller," then there is the use of the pronoun with the doer. This is on the language of: "The locusts ate them." As for you, O ..., "The locusts did not eat you." Yes, "The locusts ate them," and the well-known example is: "The locusts ate me."
And on the well-known language, one says: "The locusts ate me." Also, on the well-known language, he says: "Or my expeller, they," "Or my expeller, they," he does not use the yaa. But there is no doubt that the language is sometimes broad. Yes, O Shaykh.