A reading from Ibn 'Aqil's commentary on the derivation of the verse: "Indeed, those who believed and those who were Jews and the Sabians..." with the Shaykh's annotations.

The reader: He says: "And there are two verses in the Noble Qur'an whose apparent meaning is like the apparent meaning of these two..."

The Shaykh : Yes, in order to...
The reader: He says: "The first is the saying of the Exalted:

Indeed, those who believed and those who were Jews or Christians or Sabeans [before Prophet Muhammad] - those [among them] who believed in Allah and the Last Day and did righteousness - will have their reward with their Lord, and no fear will there be concerning them, nor will they grieve.

إن الذين آمنوا والذين هادوا والصابئون

[Al-Baqarah 2:62]

And the second is the recitation of some:

Indeed, Allah confers blessing upon the Prophet

إن الله وملائكته يصلون

[Al-Ahzab 33:56]

with the raising of 'mala'ikatahu' (His angels)."
The grammarians have differed on how to analyze this. Al-Kisa'i held that the raised noun is conjoined to the name of *in* (the particle of restriction), considering it a subject before the entry of *in*. The majority of the Basran school held that this raised noun is a subject whose predicate is omitted, or whose predicate is the one mentioned later, and that the predicate of *in* is the omitted part, with the sentence of the subject and its predicate conjoined to the sentence of *in*, its name, and its predicate.

The Shaykh : Yes
The reader: "And al-Muhaqqiq al-Radi held that the sentence of the subject and predicate, in that case, has no grammatical position; it is an interjection between the name of "inna" and its predicate, and this is good."

The Shaykh : And by Allah, it is not good.
The reader: Complete the annotation, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Yes
The reader: "Because if it is made conjoined to the sentence of "inna," its name, and its predicate, it necessitates the precedence of the conjoined element over part of what it is conjoined to, because the predicate of "inna" is later in wording or estimation than the sentence of the subject and predicate, and the predicate of "inna" is part of the sentence to which it is conjoined."

The Shaykh : All of this is based on contextual indicators. We say: *al-Sabi'un* (the Sabians) is conjoined to the position of the name of *in*, or to the position of *in* and its name, because their original state is the nominative case, and we accept this. Or do we say: *al-Sabi'un* is the predicate of "whoever among them believed in Allah and the Last Day," and the predicate of is omitted? This would mean we have omitted something before knowing its estimated value. And if we make the predicate of his saying: , and the predicate of *al-Sabi'un* is also omitted, this would make the speech awkward. The estimated meaning of the speech would be: "Indeed, those who believed, and those who were Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever among them believed in Allah and the Last Day, whoever among them believed in Allah and the Last Day." This is awkward, and the Qur'an is free from such awkwardness. But if we say *al-Sabi'un* is conjoined to the position of the name of *in*, the difficulty is resolved. This is the view of Al-Kisa'i, the imam of the people of Kufa. And we told you that our path in matters where grammarians differ is to follow the easiest option.