“These two are nothing but sorcerers” OR “Truly, these two are sorcerers”
إِنۡ هَٰذَآنِّ
in hādhānni
“These two are nothing but sorcerers” OR “Truly, these two are sorcerers”
In these two readings, the negating particle in is used with the lām in the predicate denoting an exception. Alternatively, in is a lightened form of inna and this reading has the meaning(s) of the majority reading.
إِنَّ هَٰذَيْنِ
inna hādhāyni
“Truly, these two are sorcerers”
In this reading, the emphatic particle inna has its usual accusative effect on the subject, and the lām is for further emphasis.
إِنَّ هَٰذَانِ
inna hādhāni
"Yes, these two are sorcerers" OR “Truly, these two are sorcerers”
In this reading, inna has the meaning of 'Yes', i.e. they agreed upon this statement after conferring. The reading may also accord with dialects which retained alif for the dual in the accusative state, hence it is like the reading of Abū ʿAmr.
Shpjegim:
These readings provide near-identical meanings, and are based upon the same skeletal form [Ibn 'Ashur].
He has revealed to you ˹O Prophet˺ the Book in truth, confirming what came before it, as He revealed the Torah and the Gospel
Shpjegim:
These readings provide near-identical meanings, and are based upon the same skeletal form [Ibn 'Ashur].