Benefits of the Hadith of al-Dhab.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : And on this basis, it is said that this is a caution against what is feared and a measure of precaution. It is also evidence of the scrupulousness of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), because when the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) raised his hand, Khalid asked him: "Is al-dhab forbidden, O Messenger of Allah?" And its grammatical parsing is: "O Chosen One."
The student: The hamzah is for interrogation. "Haram" is the subject (mubtada'), not a fronted predicate. Both "al-dhab" and "haram" work: is al-dhab haram, or is haram al-dhab?
The Shaykh : If you parse it in every way.
The student: Okay, the hamzah is for interrogation. "Haram" is the subject, raised, and its sign of raising is the visible dammah. "Al-dhab" is the predicate...
The Shaykh : No, no, no one speaks, everyone. If you parse it this way, you say "Haram" (with a dammah).
The reader: "Haram" is the subject and "al-dhab" is the doer (fa'il)?
The Shaykh : Yes, the doer suffices for the predicate. The doer suffices for the predicate. Okay, what is the second way?
The reader: The second way: "Al-dhab" is the subject and "haram" is a fronted predicate.
The Shaykh : A fronted predicate, is that right? Yes, where is the proof from Ibn Malik's words? Who can recall it? Yes, Tariq.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, no, yes, Abdullah.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Well done. The first is the subject and the second is the doer, which suffices in "Asar thani," is that right? In "Asar thani," are both ways permissible? No, there is only one way in it, due to the lack of agreement, which is that "Asar" is the subject and "thani" is the doer, which suffices for the predicate, is that right? Okay, and for this reason, if they are both singular, both ways are permissible:
And the second is the subject, and this description is the predicate *** If in anything other than the singular, agreement is established.
Do not forget the rules that pass before you, yes.
The student: The hamzah is for interrogation. "Haram" is the subject (mubtada'), not a fronted predicate. Both "al-dhab" and "haram" work: is al-dhab haram, or is haram al-dhab?
The Shaykh : If you parse it in every way.
The student: Okay, the hamzah is for interrogation. "Haram" is the subject, raised, and its sign of raising is the visible dammah. "Al-dhab" is the predicate...
The Shaykh : No, no, no one speaks, everyone. If you parse it this way, you say "Haram" (with a dammah).
The reader: "Haram" is the subject and "al-dhab" is the doer (fa'il)?
The Shaykh : Yes, the doer suffices for the predicate. The doer suffices for the predicate. Okay, what is the second way?
The reader: The second way: "Al-dhab" is the subject and "haram" is a fronted predicate.
The Shaykh : A fronted predicate, is that right? Yes, where is the proof from Ibn Malik's words? Who can recall it? Yes, Tariq.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, no, yes, Abdullah.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Well done. The first is the subject and the second is the doer, which suffices in "Asar thani," is that right? In "Asar thani," are both ways permissible? No, there is only one way in it, due to the lack of agreement, which is that "Asar" is the subject and "thani" is the doer, which suffices for the predicate, is that right? Okay, and for this reason, if they are both singular, both ways are permissible:
And the second is the subject, and this description is the predicate *** If in anything other than the singular, agreement is established.
Do not forget the rules that pass before you, yes.