Continuation of the explanation of Ibn Malik’s (may Allah have mercy on him) saying: “And raise with waw, and with ya’ decline and accuse *** a sound plural of a male who is prosperous and sinful.”
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
The author (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“And raise with waw, and with ya’ decline and accuse *** a sound plural of a male who is prosperous and sinful”
Yes, good. What is in the exception is that what follows is built upon it. This is an exception to what is raised with the dammah, accused with the fathah, and declined with the kasrah. It is excepted from chapters, among which is this chapter, the chapter of the sound plural of the masculine. So when we say: “the sound plural of the masculine”, it is to exclude the plural of the feminine. And when we say: sound, sound means that the construction of the singular is preserved. This is the meaning of sound. Sound is that the construction of the singular is preserved, meaning it did not change. This excludes the plural in which the singular changes. So this is not raised with waw, nor accused with fathah, nor declined with ya’.
An example of that is al-Arabb, al-Rijal, al-Aqwaam. These are not accused, not raised with waw, nor declined with ya’. Why? Because they are not a sound plural. And the author says: “sound plural”. Good.
'Aamir and Muthnib. The word 'Aamir refers to a proper name, and Muthnib refers to a description, because Muthnib is a description and 'Aamir is a proper name. A name, a man’s name. You do not intend, the author does not intend with the word 'Aamir the active participle, like one who built the house, for example. He intends the man’s proper name, like 'Uqbah ibn 'Aamir. His father’s name is 'Aamir. Does it mean that his father built houses? No, but this is a proper name. So he indicated with these two examples the proper name and the description.
So we benefit from this that the sound plural of the masculine is not a proper name or a description except in that it is a proper name or a description. And it is so, it is not a proper name or a description except in that it is a proper name or a description. If it is not a proper name nor a description, then it is annexed to the sound plural of the masculine in giving it its ruling in inflection, even if it is not truly of it. I hope you are paying attention now.
What is the sound plural of the masculine? It is that in which the construction of its singular is preserved. Rijal is a plural of the masculine, but it is not sound, because Rijal is the plural of Rajul. Look now, Rajul changed. Rajul was with an open ra’ and a dammed jim. So when it was pluralized, it became what? A kasred ra’ and an open jim, and an alif was added to it: Rijal. As for the sound plural of the masculine, it does not change. The singular in it does not change. 'Aamir, you say in it: 'Aamirun. Muthnib, Muthnibun. So now the singular did not change at all. The most that happens is that the marker is attached to it, which is the waw and the nun only. Complete. Good.
And for this we say: Sannah, its plural is Sunun. Is it a sound plural of the masculine? No, because the singular changed. But it is annexed to the sound plural of the masculine.
Ardh, we say in it: Ardhun. Is it a sound plural of the masculine? No, why? Because the singular changed. So it is annexed to the sound plural of the masculine, it is inflected with its inflection, even if it is not of it.
We return a second time. Now we investigated 'Aamir and Muthnib, and we found that 'Aamir is a proper name and Muthnib is a description. So it is not possible for the sound plural of the masculine to be a proper name or a description except in that it is a proper name or a description.
We return a second time in the investigation of 'Aamir and Muthnib. 'Aamir is a proper name for a masculine, correct, for a masculine. Is it a proper name for a feminine, rational or non-rational?
The student: Rational.
The Shaykh : Rational. It is not like Lahiq, a name for a horse, and the like. So it is a proper name for a rational, free from the taa?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Or is there a taa in it?
The student: Free.
The Shaykh : Free from the taa. 'Aamir has no taa. It is not said 'Aamirah. Free from composition?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes, free from composition. What is composition? Composition is either lexical composition, or possessive composition, or attributive composition. The important thing is that it is free from composition. So it is a proper name for a masculine rational, free from the taa and from composition. How many conditions? Five. Good. If it is not a proper name, if it is not a proper name, but it is for a masculine.
The author (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“And raise with waw, and with ya’ decline and accuse *** a sound plural of a male who is prosperous and sinful”
Yes, good. What is in the exception is that what follows is built upon it. This is an exception to what is raised with the dammah, accused with the fathah, and declined with the kasrah. It is excepted from chapters, among which is this chapter, the chapter of the sound plural of the masculine. So when we say: “the sound plural of the masculine”, it is to exclude the plural of the feminine. And when we say: sound, sound means that the construction of the singular is preserved. This is the meaning of sound. Sound is that the construction of the singular is preserved, meaning it did not change. This excludes the plural in which the singular changes. So this is not raised with waw, nor accused with fathah, nor declined with ya’.
An example of that is al-Arabb, al-Rijal, al-Aqwaam. These are not accused, not raised with waw, nor declined with ya’. Why? Because they are not a sound plural. And the author says: “sound plural”. Good.
'Aamir and Muthnib. The word 'Aamir refers to a proper name, and Muthnib refers to a description, because Muthnib is a description and 'Aamir is a proper name. A name, a man’s name. You do not intend, the author does not intend with the word 'Aamir the active participle, like one who built the house, for example. He intends the man’s proper name, like 'Uqbah ibn 'Aamir. His father’s name is 'Aamir. Does it mean that his father built houses? No, but this is a proper name. So he indicated with these two examples the proper name and the description.
So we benefit from this that the sound plural of the masculine is not a proper name or a description except in that it is a proper name or a description. And it is so, it is not a proper name or a description except in that it is a proper name or a description. If it is not a proper name nor a description, then it is annexed to the sound plural of the masculine in giving it its ruling in inflection, even if it is not truly of it. I hope you are paying attention now.
What is the sound plural of the masculine? It is that in which the construction of its singular is preserved. Rijal is a plural of the masculine, but it is not sound, because Rijal is the plural of Rajul. Look now, Rajul changed. Rajul was with an open ra’ and a dammed jim. So when it was pluralized, it became what? A kasred ra’ and an open jim, and an alif was added to it: Rijal. As for the sound plural of the masculine, it does not change. The singular in it does not change. 'Aamir, you say in it: 'Aamirun. Muthnib, Muthnibun. So now the singular did not change at all. The most that happens is that the marker is attached to it, which is the waw and the nun only. Complete. Good.
And for this we say: Sannah, its plural is Sunun. Is it a sound plural of the masculine? No, because the singular changed. But it is annexed to the sound plural of the masculine.
Ardh, we say in it: Ardhun. Is it a sound plural of the masculine? No, why? Because the singular changed. So it is annexed to the sound plural of the masculine, it is inflected with its inflection, even if it is not of it.
We return a second time. Now we investigated 'Aamir and Muthnib, and we found that 'Aamir is a proper name and Muthnib is a description. So it is not possible for the sound plural of the masculine to be a proper name or a description except in that it is a proper name or a description.
We return a second time in the investigation of 'Aamir and Muthnib. 'Aamir is a proper name for a masculine, correct, for a masculine. Is it a proper name for a feminine, rational or non-rational?
The student: Rational.
The Shaykh : Rational. It is not like Lahiq, a name for a horse, and the like. So it is a proper name for a rational, free from the taa?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Or is there a taa in it?
The student: Free.
The Shaykh : Free from the taa. 'Aamir has no taa. It is not said 'Aamirah. Free from composition?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes, free from composition. What is composition? Composition is either lexical composition, or possessive composition, or attributive composition. The important thing is that it is free from composition. So it is a proper name for a masculine rational, free from the taa and from composition. How many conditions? Five. Good. If it is not a proper name, if it is not a proper name, but it is for a masculine.