The Meaning of the Poet's Statement: "He says this is general and the wording is *** ambiguous, and this is one of the greatest lies, and by this every science in the world is corrupted *** and understanding comes from reports and from the Qur'an"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"He says this is general and the wording is *** ambiguous" Ibn al-Qayyim said: "and this is one of the greatest lies"
How? Because in its context, it is neither general nor ambiguous.
"And by this every science in the world is corrupted *** and understanding comes from reports and from the Qur'an"
He means that by the path this innovator has taken, every word in the Arabic language is corrupted. Because if we want to tear apart every word and break down its words one by one, saying that this word implies such and such, then all words would remain such that nothing can be inferred from them. Why? Say it because everyone is able to dissect speech and say that this word implies such and such. We say, yes, it implies that in a context other than this one. But in this context, it is a single sentence that cannot be broken down. Even if we followed what you are going toward, the speech of every person who speaks would be corrupted. Even if a man said to his wife, "You are divorced," we would say, break it down: "You" is the subject, where is the predicate? What is "divorced"? "You are beautiful, divorced." Does "divorced" mean divorced from a bond? Divorced from marriage? Divorced from worry? Is that right or not? Would this sentence, "You are divorced," have any benefit now? It would not. So if we wanted to dissect people's speech piece by piece, all speech would be corrupted and understanding would be corrupted, and no sound understanding would remain for people.
How? Because in its context, it is neither general nor ambiguous.
"And by this every science in the world is corrupted *** and understanding comes from reports and from the Qur'an"
He means that by the path this innovator has taken, every word in the Arabic language is corrupted. Because if we want to tear apart every word and break down its words one by one, saying that this word implies such and such, then all words would remain such that nothing can be inferred from them. Why? Say it because everyone is able to dissect speech and say that this word implies such and such. We say, yes, it implies that in a context other than this one. But in this context, it is a single sentence that cannot be broken down. Even if we followed what you are going toward, the speech of every person who speaks would be corrupted. Even if a man said to his wife, "You are divorced," we would say, break it down: "You" is the subject, where is the predicate? What is "divorced"? "You are beautiful, divorced." Does "divorced" mean divorced from a bond? Divorced from marriage? Divorced from worry? Is that right or not? Would this sentence, "You are divorced," have any benefit now? It would not. So if we wanted to dissect people's speech piece by piece, all speech would be corrupted and understanding would be corrupted, and no sound understanding would remain for people.