The saying is omitted. [Madhud said: "The saying is omitted... etc."] Ahmad said: "In this grammatical analysis, there is consideration, because the answer then would be a report from Allah, the Exalted, that if He said to them this saying, they would comply with its implications, so they established prayer and spent. However, they have been told, yet many of them did not comply. And the report of Allah, the Exalted, is free from contradiction. This point is what has led many grammarians to deviate from this way of analysis, which initially seems apparent. It can be corrected by interpreting the general as the predominant rather than exhaustive. This is supported by two subtle points. The first is that this structure was intended only for those described with true faith, as indicated by their faith when commanded, like this verse and His saying: 'And say to My servants to say that which is best.' And say to the believers to lower their gaze and guard their private parts, and say to the believing women to lower their gaze. The second is that it frequently comes for those described as the servants of Allah, honored by their association with the name of Allah. They have said that the term 'servants' has not appeared in the Noble Book except as praise for the believers, especially when it is associated with Him in a manner of honor. The conclusion from this is that the commanded in these verses are those who are in a state of compliance and eager to obey. Thus, the report regarding them is true and accurate, either in general if intended, or predominantly. And Allah knows best."] For the answer 'Say' indicates it, and its estimation is: 'Say to My servants who have believed, establish prayer and spend.' They allowed that 'they establish' and 'they spend' could mean: 'that they establish' and 'that they spend,' and this would be the saying. They said: "It was permissible to omit the 'lam' because the command which is 'Say' substitutes for it. If it were said: 'They establish prayer and spend' beginning with the omission of the 'lam,' it would not be permissible.

If you say: 'What is the reason for the accusative of 'secretly and openly'?' I say: 'It is for the state, meaning: those who are secret and open, in the sense of: keeping secret and announcing. Or it is for the time, meaning: a time of secrecy and openness, or for the source, meaning: spending secretly and spending openly. The meaning is: concealing voluntary charity and announcing the obligatory: and the 'khilal' is the mingling.

If you say: 'How does the command to spend correspond with the description of the day as having no trade in it and no mingling?' [The saying 'that there is no trade in it and no mingling' is this reading based on the opening.] I say: 'Because people spend their wealth in contracts of exchange, giving a substitute to take a similar one, and in acts of kindness and gifting friends to obtain gifts like them or better than them. As for spending purely for the sake of Allah, as His saying: 'And there is for no one with him any favor to be repaid except seeking the countenance of his Lord, the Most High,' only the sincere believers do it. They were urged to do so to receive its equivalent on a day in which there is no trade and no mingling, meaning: no benefit in transactions or mingling, nor in what they spend from their wealth in exchanges and acts of kindness, but rather, benefit is only in spending for the sake of Allah. And it has been read: 'There is no trade in it and no mingling,' in the nominative.