"Ibn Al-Jazari and his Verbal Opinions on Meaning."

The research explores the notion that as long as an adjective remains noticeable without the addition of the letter "taa", if the phonetics dominate to the extent that the meaning becomes unnoticed due to its description, the "taa" is introduced. When this term becomes a noun for the referred object, such that the confirmation or negation of its existence is not noticeable, they considered it to be true. The study addresses that the words introduced by religious law are few, and their inclusion in the Qur'an does not disqualify it from being labeled as Arabic, just as someone who composes a poem in Persian containing a few Arabic words, the poem is still considered Persian despite the inclusion of those few Arabic words. The significance of the research lies in demonstrating that the Qur'an contains no non-Arabic words, as evidenced by words found in the Qur'an that are not Arabic, such as "al-Mashka" which is Abyssinian, "al-Qistas" which is Roman, and "al-Istibraq" and "al-Sajeel" which are Persian. The research emphasizes the validation of the four truths, including their legitimacy. It is known that, aside from linguistic truth from the perspective of transmission, deviation from the original is a point of contention. If the wording fluctuates between being transmitted or remaining consistent with linguistic truth, the originality is to remain because what was fixed in the past remains the default. It is a continuation, and it is an assumption of the current situation, which is evidence indicating the continuation of what was before. The study concludes that if metaphorical usage is established, it indicates deviation from the original because it relies on many prerequisites, leading to its improbability. It requires the original context, alignment between the topic with its wording, and the metaphorical meaning, as well as the transfer of the word to that meaning. Its indication is contingent upon circumstantial or conditional evidence, and the implication of such evidence is obscure, possibly causing misunderstanding due to its ambiguity.