Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And a name that came, and a kunya, and a laqab *** And delay this if its companion is present."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Then he said: "And a name that came, and a kunya, and a laqab",
"A name that came": "A name" here is a preceding *hal* (circumstantial phrase), meaning that the proper name came as a name. And "kunya" is coordinated with "name," meaning that it came as a kunya. And "laqab" is coordinated with "name," meaning that it came as a laqab. Thus, the author clarified in this verse of this poem that a proper name is divided into three categories: a name, a kunya, and a laqab. So the name is what is made a marker for the named entity without indicating praise or blame; it is what is made a marker for the named entity without indicating praise or blame, such as Zayd, Bakr, Khalid, and most proper names are of this type, names. And the laqab is what is made a proper name indicating praise or blame, indicating praise or blame, such as Quffah: the name of a man, a man named Quffah. Does this indicate praise or blame?
The student: Blame.
The Shaykh : Blame, yes, what?
The student: What is the meaning of Quffah?
The Shaykh : The meaning of Quffah, as it appears to me, is the thing in which things are placed, a vessel, yes?
The student: A vessel made from palm trees.
The Shaykh : Yes, yes, things are placed in it. Zayn al-Abidin: this is a laqab, because it indicates praise. So whatever is a proper name or whatever is made a proper name indicating praise or blame is a laqab. The third is the kunya: and it is what is prefixed with "Abu" (father of) or "Umm" (mother of), and some said: or "Am" (uncle) or "Khal" (maternal uncle), such as Abu Bakr, Abu Hurayrah, Umm al-Fadl, the wife of?
The student: Al-Abbas.
The Shaykh : Who is al-Abbas? 'Abd al-Muttalib, al-Fadl ibn al-Abbas, yes, the wife of al-Abbas. This is called a kunya. And the kunya can be a kunya and a laqab, if one is given a kunya that indicates praise, such as Abu al-Jud (father of generosity), Abu al-Jud, this is a kunya in one respect, and a laqab in another respect. A kunya because it is prefixed with "Abu," a laqab because it indicates praise. Good, if it indicates blame? We say: it is a kunya and a laqab, it is a kunya and a laqab. Like what?
The student: Abu Lahab.
The Shaykh : Abu Lahab, Abu Lahab, there is no doubt that this indicates blame, so this is a kunya from one angle, and a laqab from another angle. Good, is it possible for a name and a laqab to be combined?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : No, because if it indicates praise or blame, it transitions from being a name to being a laqab. But it is possible for a kunya and a laqab to be combined. Good, Ibn al-Abbas, is Ibn al-Abbas a kunya?
The student: A kunya.
The Shaykh : A kunya, yes?
The student: A name, a name, not a kunya.
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : They say: or "Ibn" (son of), or "Akh" (brother), or "Khal" (maternal uncle), or "Umm" (mother), according to the correct view. Ah, yes, for "Abu" or "Umm," it is well known, the famous ones are father and mother, but the correct view is that even other than this, even if it is not prefixed with "Abu" or "Umm" or "Khalah" (maternal aunt) or "'Ammah" (paternal aunt) or "Khal" (maternal uncle), it is a kunya. Good, Ibn al-Abbas is a proper name for whom?
The student: For 'Abd Allah.
The Shaykh : For 'Abd Allah, Ibn 'Umar?
The student: For 'Abd Allah.
The Shaykh : For 'Abd Allah, this is a proper name, and it is a kunya. He says:
"And a name that came, and a kunya, and a laqab *** And delay this if its companion is present"
"Delay this": the thing referred to is the nearest thing, and what is the nearest thing?
The student: The laqab.
The Shaykh : The laqab. "And delay this if its companion is present": meaning if these three are combined, which one is prioritized? The author clarified that it is obligatory to delay, it is obligatory to delay the laqab from its two brothers, from the name and the kunya. So you would say, for example: Muhammad Zayn al-Abidin came. Is this correct or not?
The student: Correct.
The Shaykh : Good, this is a laqab. If I said: Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad came!!
The student: It is not permissible.
The Shaykh : So according to the author's statement, it is not permissible, because he said: "Delay this," and this is a command verb, and the command here does not contain a command of recommendation, the command is entirely for obligation. Yes, but they made an exception for when a person is famous by his laqab, in which case it is permissible to prioritize the laqab, such as al-Masih 'Isa ibn Maryam,[An-Nisa 4:157], so here the laqab was prioritized over the name. The name is 'Isa, and al-Masih is the laqab. Why? Because he was famous by it. And the laqab must be delayed from the name, because the laqab is in the position of a description, and a description does not come except after the described entity is known. And at that time, it is necessary to prioritize what?
The student: The name.
The Shaykh : The name, so that the laqab comes as a description of it. For this reason, if the named entity is famous by the laqab, it is permissible to prioritize it. Good, Imam Ahmad, Imam al-Shafi'i, and the like, do we say: Imam Ahmad said, or: Ahmad the Imam said?
The student: The first.
The Shaykh : The first is the customary one, because he became famous with this laqab, so it was prioritized. But if someone said: Is "Imam" a proper name? Can we make "Imam" a description? We say: Yes, but "Imam" among his followers, if mentioned alone, what is intended by it?
The student: A proper name.
The Shaykh : A proper name, so it is a proper name for their Imam. For this reason, in the books of the Shafi'is, if it says: "The Imam said," it is al-Shafi'i. In the Hanbalis, it is Ahmad. In the Hanafis, it is Abu Hanifah. In the Malikis, it is Malik. And the apparent meaning of the author's statement: "And delay this if its companion is present":
That it is obligatory to order the kunya and the laqab, so the laqab is delayed. So it is not permissible according to the author's statement: "Al-Siddiq Abu Bakr said," rather it is obligatory to say: "Abu Bakr al-Siddiq said." But there is a consideration in this!! And the correct view is that there is no order between the kunya and the laqab. The correct view is that there is no order between the kunya and the laqab, because the kunya resembles *'atf al-bayan* (explanatory apposition), so it is close in meaning to a description. So it is permissible for the laqab to precede, and it is permissible for it to follow. So the author's statement: "If its companion is present": is not absolute, as the commentators said. But we may say: that this is the author's opinion, and that he holds that the laqab must be delayed in all cases. Good, according to the author's order, do we start first with what?
The student: The name.
The Shaykh : Then?
The student: The kunya.
The Shaykh : Then?
The student: The laqab.
The Shaykh : The laqab, so we say: "'Abd Allah Abu Bakr al-Siddiq said," is that right?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Good, but the reality is that Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) became famous as al-Siddiq, so based on the exception we mentioned, it is permissible to say: "Al-Siddiq Abu Bakr 'Abd Allah said," or "'Abd Allah Abu Bakr said," because he is famous by it. Who is al-Farouq?
The student: 'Umar.
The Shaykh : 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, we say: "'Umar ibn al-Khattab al-Farouq said," and if he is famous by it, we say: "Al-Farouq 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) said," and this is what is practiced. All those who mention Abu Bakr or 'Umar say: "Al-Siddiq Abu Bakr said," and "Al-Farouq 'Umar ibn al-Khattab said."
"And delay this if its companion is present".
"A name that came": "A name" here is a preceding *hal* (circumstantial phrase), meaning that the proper name came as a name. And "kunya" is coordinated with "name," meaning that it came as a kunya. And "laqab" is coordinated with "name," meaning that it came as a laqab. Thus, the author clarified in this verse of this poem that a proper name is divided into three categories: a name, a kunya, and a laqab. So the name is what is made a marker for the named entity without indicating praise or blame; it is what is made a marker for the named entity without indicating praise or blame, such as Zayd, Bakr, Khalid, and most proper names are of this type, names. And the laqab is what is made a proper name indicating praise or blame, indicating praise or blame, such as Quffah: the name of a man, a man named Quffah. Does this indicate praise or blame?
The student: Blame.
The Shaykh : Blame, yes, what?
The student: What is the meaning of Quffah?
The Shaykh : The meaning of Quffah, as it appears to me, is the thing in which things are placed, a vessel, yes?
The student: A vessel made from palm trees.
The Shaykh : Yes, yes, things are placed in it. Zayn al-Abidin: this is a laqab, because it indicates praise. So whatever is a proper name or whatever is made a proper name indicating praise or blame is a laqab. The third is the kunya: and it is what is prefixed with "Abu" (father of) or "Umm" (mother of), and some said: or "Am" (uncle) or "Khal" (maternal uncle), such as Abu Bakr, Abu Hurayrah, Umm al-Fadl, the wife of?
The student: Al-Abbas.
The Shaykh : Who is al-Abbas? 'Abd al-Muttalib, al-Fadl ibn al-Abbas, yes, the wife of al-Abbas. This is called a kunya. And the kunya can be a kunya and a laqab, if one is given a kunya that indicates praise, such as Abu al-Jud (father of generosity), Abu al-Jud, this is a kunya in one respect, and a laqab in another respect. A kunya because it is prefixed with "Abu," a laqab because it indicates praise. Good, if it indicates blame? We say: it is a kunya and a laqab, it is a kunya and a laqab. Like what?
The student: Abu Lahab.
The Shaykh : Abu Lahab, Abu Lahab, there is no doubt that this indicates blame, so this is a kunya from one angle, and a laqab from another angle. Good, is it possible for a name and a laqab to be combined?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : No, because if it indicates praise or blame, it transitions from being a name to being a laqab. But it is possible for a kunya and a laqab to be combined. Good, Ibn al-Abbas, is Ibn al-Abbas a kunya?
The student: A kunya.
The Shaykh : A kunya, yes?
The student: A name, a name, not a kunya.
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : They say: or "Ibn" (son of), or "Akh" (brother), or "Khal" (maternal uncle), or "Umm" (mother), according to the correct view. Ah, yes, for "Abu" or "Umm," it is well known, the famous ones are father and mother, but the correct view is that even other than this, even if it is not prefixed with "Abu" or "Umm" or "Khalah" (maternal aunt) or "'Ammah" (paternal aunt) or "Khal" (maternal uncle), it is a kunya. Good, Ibn al-Abbas is a proper name for whom?
The student: For 'Abd Allah.
The Shaykh : For 'Abd Allah, Ibn 'Umar?
The student: For 'Abd Allah.
The Shaykh : For 'Abd Allah, this is a proper name, and it is a kunya. He says:
"And a name that came, and a kunya, and a laqab *** And delay this if its companion is present"
"Delay this": the thing referred to is the nearest thing, and what is the nearest thing?
The student: The laqab.
The Shaykh : The laqab. "And delay this if its companion is present": meaning if these three are combined, which one is prioritized? The author clarified that it is obligatory to delay, it is obligatory to delay the laqab from its two brothers, from the name and the kunya. So you would say, for example: Muhammad Zayn al-Abidin came. Is this correct or not?
The student: Correct.
The Shaykh : Good, this is a laqab. If I said: Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad came!!
The student: It is not permissible.
The Shaykh : So according to the author's statement, it is not permissible, because he said: "Delay this," and this is a command verb, and the command here does not contain a command of recommendation, the command is entirely for obligation. Yes, but they made an exception for when a person is famous by his laqab, in which case it is permissible to prioritize the laqab, such as al-Masih 'Isa ibn Maryam,
the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah
إنما المسيح عيسى بن مريمَ رسولُ اللهThe student: The name.
The Shaykh : The name, so that the laqab comes as a description of it. For this reason, if the named entity is famous by the laqab, it is permissible to prioritize it. Good, Imam Ahmad, Imam al-Shafi'i, and the like, do we say: Imam Ahmad said, or: Ahmad the Imam said?
The student: The first.
The Shaykh : The first is the customary one, because he became famous with this laqab, so it was prioritized. But if someone said: Is "Imam" a proper name? Can we make "Imam" a description? We say: Yes, but "Imam" among his followers, if mentioned alone, what is intended by it?
The student: A proper name.
The Shaykh : A proper name, so it is a proper name for their Imam. For this reason, in the books of the Shafi'is, if it says: "The Imam said," it is al-Shafi'i. In the Hanbalis, it is Ahmad. In the Hanafis, it is Abu Hanifah. In the Malikis, it is Malik. And the apparent meaning of the author's statement: "And delay this if its companion is present":
That it is obligatory to order the kunya and the laqab, so the laqab is delayed. So it is not permissible according to the author's statement: "Al-Siddiq Abu Bakr said," rather it is obligatory to say: "Abu Bakr al-Siddiq said." But there is a consideration in this!! And the correct view is that there is no order between the kunya and the laqab. The correct view is that there is no order between the kunya and the laqab, because the kunya resembles *'atf al-bayan* (explanatory apposition), so it is close in meaning to a description. So it is permissible for the laqab to precede, and it is permissible for it to follow. So the author's statement: "If its companion is present": is not absolute, as the commentators said. But we may say: that this is the author's opinion, and that he holds that the laqab must be delayed in all cases. Good, according to the author's order, do we start first with what?
The student: The name.
The Shaykh : Then?
The student: The kunya.
The Shaykh : Then?
The student: The laqab.
The Shaykh : The laqab, so we say: "'Abd Allah Abu Bakr al-Siddiq said," is that right?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Good, but the reality is that Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) became famous as al-Siddiq, so based on the exception we mentioned, it is permissible to say: "Al-Siddiq Abu Bakr 'Abd Allah said," or "'Abd Allah Abu Bakr said," because he is famous by it. Who is al-Farouq?
The student: 'Umar.
The Shaykh : 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, we say: "'Umar ibn al-Khattab al-Farouq said," and if he is famous by it, we say: "Al-Farouq 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) said," and this is what is practiced. All those who mention Abu Bakr or 'Umar say: "Al-Siddiq Abu Bakr said," and "Al-Farouq 'Umar ibn al-Khattab said."
"And delay this if its companion is present".