One of the scholars has held that the form tafil is not used...

One of the scholars has held that the form tafil is not used in the sense of qualification of the object ( maful ) and that it is also wrong to impart such a sense to takfir and tafsiq, because they rather mean calling someone to fisq and kufr, and that [in the sense of qualifying the object] ikfar should be used instead of takfir. Hence, the Qamus, too, under the entry on k.f.r, does not mention takfir in the sense of attribution of kufr.

This author says: Although I too have not seen in the Qamus that takfir means attribution of kufr, and even Jawhari, the most erudite of the lexicographers, has not mentioned this sense for takfir and, in consonance with the statement of the above-mentioned scholar, has considered ikfar to be the proper word for this sense, but the books on grammar have considered one of the meanings of the form taf’il as qualification of the object ( maful ) with the quality implied in the verb, and they have cited tafsiq as an example.

In any case, the meaning of tawhid is attribution of unity ( wahdaniyyah ) . As to the word mut’ammiqun, ‘amq and ‘umq (with fathah or dammah on the ‘ayn ) means the bottom of a well and a pit. For the same reason mathematicians use the term ‘umq (height) in the sense of the third dimension of bodies which begins at its top surface and ends at the bottom surface, in the same way that they use length as the first dimension and breadth as the second.

Also for the same reason a person possessing a piercing vision is called muta’ammiq and a perspicacious vision is called ‘amiq (deep) and a vision that does not have depth is called superficial ( sathi ) . It is as if matters pertaining to knowledge have a depth and a bottom and the muta’ammiq person is one who goes to their depth ( ‘umq ) from where he draws out the truths, and someone with a superficial vision remains at the surface and fails to fathom the depth of any matter.

As to the expression, fa man rama-rama and yarumu are in the sense of seeking, and maram is that which is sought. As to the expression wara’a dhalika, wara’ is in the sense of ‘behind’ ( khlaf ) , and at times, it is used in the sense of ‘in front of ( quddam ) . Hence it has contrary meanings and its use in the first sense is appropriate to cases such as the present one.