in (218) the chapter on the hamzah: "If it were for true interrogation, it would not be praise at all" (219), the text states: "It is in the sense of a definitive statement," said al-Raḍī (220): "And it is as if the lām in it originally signifies a specific known piece that has no doubt (221) in it." The estimation here is: I am certain about this matter, which is that if it were a true question, it would not be praise at all. The meaning is: there is no doubt in it such that I am certain of it, then it appears to me, then I am certain of it again so that it becomes (223) two pieces or more, rather it is a single piece that does not require (224) reconsideration. So al-battah means a piece, and it is set up as a verbal noun). End quote. And in this there is a clear indication that the hamzah [of] (225) waṣl, (17) rather al-Raḍī's words are almost explicit in that, except if it is based on what is the norm, it does not contradict what we have presented that the cutting (226) of its hamzah is against the norm. Then I saw this explicitly stated in the declaration of Shaykh Khālid al-Azharī (227) in the discussion of knowledge where he said: (al-battah: with the cutting of the hamzah by hearing, as stated by the commentator of al-Lubāb (228), and the norm is to connect it). End quote verbatim, so let it be considered.