the preposition "with" but rather stands on its own. This category may be preferred, and this objection can be addressed by saying: the preposition "for" is implied, as in "a drink for him" (304), meaning it is related to an omitted phrase estimated as: "I mean for him," or: "my intention for him." Do you not see that it does not relate to "a drink" because "to give a drink" is transitive by itself? The second perspective: it could be a circumstantial clause, with the estimation: I say that in opposition to so-and-so, meaning (305): opposing him. The omission of the verb "to say" is very common, to the extent that Abū ʿAlī said: it is like the expression "speak about the sea, and there is no harm" (306). This is indicated by the fact that every ruling mentioned by the authors is one they adhere to, so it is as if (307) the verb "to say" is implied before every issue. This reasoning is similar to the reason they mentioned for their exclusive use of adverbial expansions, which is that they said: adverbials are considered as the things themselves because they occur within them and are inseparable from them, [and Allāh, the Exalted, knows best] (308).

The scholar al-Damāminī said at the beginning of his extensive commentary on "al-Mughnī" (309) at his statement: "And I was in the year seven hundred and forty-nine" (310) the following: This construction often