like the saying of "al-Muṭawwal" (156): "the knowledge of each and every individual aspect of the conditions." The scholar al-Fanārī said: the closest [interpretation] is that it is a form of verbal emphasis, and it may be considered as describing a thing by itself with the intention of perfection, or (157) the intended meaning is: each individual separate from the other, and the essence is the knowledge (12) of each individual in detail and isolation without conjunction. The word "each" may be omitted in such cases, even though generality is intended, as it is said: "the knowledge of each individual," and it appears that generality is derived from the context, for the indefinite in affirmation may imply generality, and it is possible to consider it as the omission of the added word, which is "each" by that context. Among them is their saying: especially such-and-such, as the scholar al-Fanārī said (158): "lā" is for negating the genus, and "sī" is like "mithl" in weight and meaning, its name according to the majority. Its origin is: "siwy" or "sīw," and what follows it, if it is definite, is either in the genitive (159) as it is added (160) to it (161), and "mā" is additional, as in His saying: "whichever of the two terms I fulfill" (162), or a substitute for "mā," which is an indefinite not described, meaning: there is nothing like the science of rhetoric. Or it is nominative as the predicate of an omitted subject, and the sentence is a relative clause if "mā" is made relative, or an adjective if it is made descriptive. The genitive (163) is preferable to this (164) aspect due to the rarity of omitting the beginning of a sentence that is a relative clause or an adjective, as stated by al-Raḍī (165), as it undermines its consistency by necessitating the application of "mā" to a rational being, which they reject. In both cases, the movement of "sī" is grammatical because it is added. Or it is accusative on the estimation of "I mean," or as a specification if it is indefinite because "mā" is estimated with tanwīn, and it is (166) preventing addition, and the fatḥah is constructive like it in "rajul," and it is said on the exception in both cases, so the non-permission of the accusative, if it is definite, is an error from the Andalusian (167). In all cases, the predicate of "lā" is omitted according to those other than al-Akhfash (168), meaning: there is nothing like the science of rhetoric present among the sciences, for adorning oneself with its truths is more deserving of estimation than adorning oneself with the truths of others.

like the saying of "al-Muṭawwal": "the knowledge of each and every individual aspect of the conditions." The scholar al-Fanārī said: the closest [interpretation] is that it is a form of verbal emphasis, and it may be considered as describing a thing by itself with the intention of perfection, or the intended meaning is: each individual separate from the other, and the essence is the knowledge of each individual in detail and isolation without conjunction. The word "each" may be omitted in such cases, even though generality is intended, as it is said: "the knowledge of each individual," and it appears that generality is derived from the context, for the indefinite in affirmation may imply generality, and it is possible to consider it as the omission of the added word, which is "each" by that context. Among them is their saying: especially such-and-such, as the scholar al-Fanārī said: "lā" is for negating the genus, and "sī" is like "mithl" in weight and meaning, its name according to the majority. Its origin is: (siwy) or (siw), and in reality