Discussion of the phrase (those of good character).

The Shaykh : What Allah willed, the famous hadith has been difficult for me from an Arabic or grammatical perspective. I think our brother Abu Ubaydah did not find anything for you, and I called you by phone after I had also called Professor Ahmad al-Salik, and he also did not find a way to explain it. So what do you say about the famous hadith in the narration but it came in some sources, and some of them from some of the noble scholars from the scholars of India, what is this yā’ in ? "I was only sent to perfect those of good character" is clear, but "those of good character" — is there a way to explain it?
Shuqara: It has a way, and Allah knows best.

The Shaykh : What is it?
Shuqara: Of course, the way is either that the intended meaning is "I was sent to perfect those of good character" with the good character they possess.
Mashhur: "Salih" is an active participle.
Shuqara: "Salih" is an active participle, of course, and when an active participle is made possessive...

The Shaykh : But he did not come to reform all people, but rather he came to reform all character.
Shuqara: No, I understand this; this is a way. That is, when it is "those of good character," because the people closest to goodness, those through whom others are reformed, are those of good character. That is, if those people are reformed by the character they possess and they respond to the true call with which he came, then they will be the foundation of reform for others. This is a way.

The Shaykh : This is a way that involves a distant interpretation. The second way.

The questioner : It is not distant, my Shaykh; this is the close one. As for the second way, the intended meaning here is the character itself, and the plural here treats the non-rational as the rational, and this is common in the language.

The Shaykh : This is known in examples as you said, but if the narrations were like this, we would say, by Allah, there is no power or strength to explain them. But the famous narrations in the books are with the yā’ omitted. This has not been found except in some Indian books.
Shuqara: And the third way, my Shaykh, is an error.

The Shaykh : And that is the way.
Shuqara: We left the way for the last one, meaning.
Mashhur: In al-Muwatta... Qadi Iyad... I looked at Mashariq al-Anwar.

The Shaykh : Shaykh, did you work with Mashariq?
Mashhur: I looked at Mashariq because in Mashariq it brings all the narrations with all the wordings, so he omitted it, which indicates that it is not a narration.

The Shaykh : No, in terms of narration, it is not a narration.
Mashhur: It is a scribal error, perhaps.
Shuqara: But if we wanted to explain it, how would we explain it? As long as it is like this, the error remains. This is it.

The Shaykh : There is no god but Allah.