# إِن تَتُوبَآ إِلَى ٱللَّهِ فَقَدْ صَغَتْ قُلُوبُكُمَا



## Jamal31

Hello,

It is well known from both Tafseer of Hadiths, historical Tafseer, as well as the suffix كما, that this Ayah is talking to two people, A'ishah and Hafsah. So I was wondering why the word for heart used is not the dual plural of قَلبَاكُمَا instead of plural of قُلُوبُكُمَا

66:4
إِن تَتُوبَآ إِلَى ٱللَّهِ فَقَدْ صَغَتْ قُلُوبُكُمَا


----------



## Drink

I don't know the answer to your question, but I will just correct you that the dual would be قَلْبَاكُمَا. The ن is dropped in the construct state and with possessive suffixes.


----------



## Jamal31

Yes that is correct, my mistake.


----------



## Matat

Whenever a dual noun relating to the body or self is in idaafa to another dual, the Arabs used to use the plural noun with the dual possessors. For example, Arabs used to say أنفسهما instead of نفساهما/نفسيهما. However, that doesn't mean the latter is incorrect. It's still acceptable, but the more 'pure' Arabic is أنفسهما.


----------



## Jamal31

Ah I see, thanks for the clarification. Does the same apply to the body of non-humans, such as angels, jinns, animals, etc?


----------



## Matat

Yes, it could apply to non-human, but living, things as well. However, it has to involve their own possessive bodies or selves. You can't say, for example, سياراتهما if you are referring to "their (dual) two cars." It would have to be سيارتاهما/سيارتيهما.


----------



## Drink

I think the key point here is that these are things that a person (or other being) could only have one of. Therefore, you know that قلوبهما refers to two hearts because each of them can only have one heart. Am I right about this?


----------



## analeeh

In modern usage that applies because MSA follows many dialects in using a singular in these contexts: قلبكم قلبكما.


----------



## Matat

I also should have mentioned, that what I said only applies to a dual noun to a dual idaafa. As in, you're referring two selves of two people. Had you said "his two eyes" for example, you are not referring to two people. You are only referring to one person. So it would be عيناه (you couldn't say أَعْيُنُهُ). It's basically only for a dual to dual idaafa.


----------



## Jamal31

Isn't the plural of Ayn the word Uyoun عُيُون?

Also going on what Drink said, everyone has one heart, however other body parts, like eyes, people normally have two of, so the eyes of two people would be four eyes in total. In this case, would 3+ plural be necessary, or could you still use the dual, i.e. عيناهما / عيناكما?


----------



## Matat

Jamal31 said:


> Isn't the plural of Ayn the word Uyoun عُيُون?



Both أعين and عيون are plurals of عين.



Jamal31 said:


> In this case, would 3+ plural used be correct if dual, i.e. عيناهما / عيناكما?



No. In this case, it would be أعينهما, since you are referring to four eyes, so you use the plural أعين.


----------



## Jamal31

I see. Thanks again


----------



## analeeh

Though again, in modern usage you will probably find _3aynaa-hum_ because this is how it generally works in dialects.


----------



## Drink

analeeh said:


> Though again, in modern usage you will probably find _3aynaa-hum_ because this is how it generally works in dialects.



Not _3aynay-hum_?


----------



## analeeh

_3aynaa-hum _or _3aynay-him_. I'm not talking about dialects here, I'm talking about MSA usage. Obviously in dialect you get e.g. _3eeneehum_ because nobody distinguishes case but in MSA marking for case (even if people often make mistakes in e.g. media outlets) is still very much the norm, of course.


----------



## Matat

analeeh said:


> _3aynaa-hum _or _3aynay-him_. I'm not talking about dialects here, I'm talking about MSA usage.



It's not that common in MSA. I searched أعينهم on Google News here and عيونهم here, and got over 37,000 and 31,000 results respectively for each. I searched عيناهم here and عينيهم here, but only got 100 and 700 hits respectively, and some of those hits were articles quoting someone saying something in dialect.


----------



## Drink

analeeh said:


> _3aynaa-hum _or _3aynay-him_. I'm not talking about dialects here, I'm talking about MSA usage. Obviously in dialect you get e.g. _3eeneehum_ because nobody distinguishes case but in MSA marking for case (even if people often make mistakes in e.g. media outlets) is still very much the norm, of course.



I sorry, I misinterpreted your post that you were talking about dialects.


----------



## Jamal31

One additional question I have is whether or not the 3+ plural would be used in place of the dual for things like vision or hearing. For example everyone has two eyes but normally vision is refereed to singularly and not dual to account for both eyes. So for example if you were to talk about the vision of two people, would you say بصريكما / بصراكما, or the plural of أبصاركما ?


----------



## Matat

You can say أبصاركما and بصراكما/بصريكما and بصركما. All would be correct.
For plural, both أبصاركم and بصركم are correct.


----------



## Jamal31

Ok thanks.


----------



## Ali Smith

Do you think the same principle is at play here?

وَالسَّارِقُ وَالسَّارِقَةُ فَاقْطَعُوا أَيْدِيَهُمَا جَزَاءً بِمَا كَسَبَا نَكَالًا مِّنَ اللَّهِ ۗ وَاللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ


----------



## Matat

Yes, it is. According to Ibn Uthaymeen, it means cut one hand from each, not both hands from each.



> نقول: لا، لا نقطع الأربع الأيدي، إنما يُقطع من السارق والسارقة يدانِ اثنتانِ، لكن الأفصح في اللغة العربية أنه إذا أُضيفَ المثنى إلى ما يفيد التعدد فإنه يُجمع كراهةَ أن تجتمع تثنيتان فيما هو كالكلمة الواحدة؛ لأن المضاف والمضاف إليه كأنهما كلمة واحدة، ولهذا قال الله تعالى: ﴿إِنْ تَتُوبَا إِلَى اللَّهِ﴾ اثنتانِ ﴿فَقَدْ صَغَتْ قُلُوبُكُمَا﴾


----------



## Ali Smith

In إِن تَتُوبَآ إِلَى ٱللَّهِ the word إن is the أداة الشرط, while the rest is the شرط (protasis), but where is the جواب الشرط (apodosis)?


----------



## Drink

Ali Smith said:


> In إِن تَتُوبَآ إِلَى ٱللَّهِ the word إن is the أداة الشرط, while the rest is the شرط (protasis), but where is the جواب الشرط (apodosis)?


It's immediately after it in text: فقد صغت قلوبكما.


----------

