Unattributive

If Isth. 1, 14, τὸ μέν ἅρματι τεθρίππῳ γέρας be construed according to Heyne, as I understand him, a difficulty is presented; because he deems it an unattributive dative placed between article and noun without attributive.

The unattributive quality of God’s name is not, of course, subject to debate.

Formally/functionally and synchronically, we face here one of the most difficult and intriguing phenomena of syntax, viz. the junction and interdependence of noun and unattributive clause, that is (at least in languages with which I have a degree of familiarity) resolvable into the dichotomy of adnexal (“nexus-adjoining”) and “conjunctional” roles.

Since the hadiths of “the three lies” are not dubious but well-established in the two Ṣaḥīḥs, this might be an example of Bayḍāwī’s use of the unattributive passive voice in introducing a report without conveying dubiousness (tamrīḍ)—not as assumed by Munāwī in the Fatḥ (1:142) or per the convention of latter-day hadith scholars, but indifferently, as in al-Tirmidhī’s practice in his Sunan.