Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And if it is its meaning, suffice with it *** as my saying: 'Allah is sufficient for me' and it suffices."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Then he said: — and this is the beginning of the lesson tonight — "And if it is its meaning, suffice with it ***".
"And if it is": The pronoun refers back to the sentence that was reported about the subject.
"It": That is, the subject.
"Meaning": That is, in meaning.
"Suffice with it ***": That is, without a connector; suffice with the sentence alone without a connector. This means: if the sentence is the meaning of the subject, then one suffices with it instead of the connector. For example: "My saying: 'Allah is sufficient for me'":
"My saying": This is a subject. "Saying" is a subject raised by the nominative case, and its sign of elevation is a dammah estimated on the letter before the first-person pronoun, prevented from appearing by the occupation of the position with the movement of agreement. "Saying" is a possessive noun, and the "ya" is a possessed noun, built on sukun in the position of genitive.
"And Allah": A second subject, a second subject raised by the nominative case, and its sign of elevation is a visible dammah at its end.
"And sufficient for me": The predicate of the second subject, raised by a dammah estimated on the letter before the first-person pronoun, prevented from appearing by the occupation of the position with the movement of agreement. "Sufficient" is a possessive noun, and the "ya" is a possessed noun, built on sukun in the position of genitive. The sentence consisting of the second subject and its predicate is in the position of the predicate of the first subject. If someone asks you: Where is the connector? I say: There is no need for a connector here, because this sentence is the meaning of the subject. If it is asked: Is there a rule that clarifies this? We say: Yes, the rule is that it can replace the demonstrative pronoun; that it can replace the demonstrative pronoun. If it can replace the demonstrative pronoun, it becomes the meaning of the subject. For example: "My saying: 'Allah is sufficient for me'". Remove "Allah is sufficient for me" and say: "My saying is this," "My saying is this," meaning: this statement. If the demonstrative pronoun can replace it, this means that this sentence is the meaning of the subject, so it does not need a connector. However, some grammarians have said: This is a single word, not a sentence; that is, this is not from the chapter of reporting with a sentence, but from the chapter of reporting with a single word. Why? Because the wording of this sentence is intended; I intend its wording. Based on this opinion, we say regarding his statement: "My saying: 'Allah is sufficient for me'": "Saying" is the subject, and "Allah is sufficient for me" is all the predicate of the subject, raised by a dammah estimated on its end, prevented from appearing by what? By quotation (hikayah). It is prevented from appearing by quotation. And this is, in reality, the actual case, because your saying: "My saying: 'Allah is sufficient for me'" means: "Saying" is the subject, and "Allah is sufficient for me" is the predicate. So it is one sentence in reality. The parallel to this is what came to us at the beginning of the Alfiyyah, which is:
"Muhammad said: 'I am Ibn Malik *** Praise be to my Lord, and Allah is the best Master'":
We said: "Ahmad" is not the quoted speech. From "Ahmad" to the last letter of the Alfiyyah, it is all quoted speech, in the position of the object of the verb of speech. So: if the sentence that is the predicate is the meaning of the subject, then it does not need a connector, and its rule is that the demonstrative pronoun can replace it. This is what the author adopted. The grammatical analysis according to the author's view is that we say: "Saying" is the subject, "And Allah" is a second subject, and "Sufficient for me" is the predicate of the second subject, and the sentence is the predicate of the first subject. And we said: Some grammarians say: There is no need to analyze the second as an independent sentence, but we say: The second is the predicate of the subject in its entirety, raised by the subject, and its sign of elevation is a dammah estimated on its end, prevented from appearing by quotation. And this opinion, as you know, is easier. All right:, in the authentic hadith: Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3585Da’if (Darussalam), Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3585Da’if (Darussalam), so "Best" is the subject, and it is a possessive noun attached to the relative pronoun "ma," meaning the best of what I said. Then the grammatical analysis; the analysis of the rest is clear. Yes? Sunan Abi Dawud 3117Sahih (Al-Albani), "There is no god but Allah" is the predicate. Do we analyze it in detail and say: "La" is a negator of genus, "Ilah" is its noun, and its predicate is omitted, and the noble name is a substitute for it? Or do we say: Sunan Abi Dawud 3117Sahih (Al-Albani) is the predicate of "Best," raised? Yes, raised by a dammah estimated on its end, prevented from appearing by quotation, according to the opinion of Ibn Malik. And most grammarians are on the first opinion, not the second?
The student: The first.
The Shaykh : On the first opinion. And according to the second opinion, it is said: What is the need to estimate? There is no need to analyze the second as a sentence. We say: It is the quoted speech, and its sentence is analyzed as if it were quoted, but it is the predicate. And this is undoubtedly easier. This is easier.
And the summary now: If a sentence occurs as a predicate, it must have a connector that connects it to what?
The student: To the subject.
The Shaykh : To the subject. And the connectors are four: the pronoun, the demonstrative pronoun, repeating the subject with its wording, and generality.
And if the sentence is the meaning of the subject, then it does not need a connector, because the purpose of the connector is to connect the predicate to the subject. And if the predicate is the subject itself, there is no need for connection. But do we analyze this sentence in detail and say: It is a subject and a predicate, and the sentence of the subject and predicate is the predicate of the first subject? Or do we say: It is all, in its entirety, a predicate raised by a dammah estimated on its end, prevented from appearing by quotation? There are two opinions among the scholars: the first is the famous one, and the second was adopted by some grammarians and is easier. And as we told you from the beginning: "Following the easier is easier". All right, then the author moved on to the single-word predicate. Does it carry a pronoun that refers back to the subject? As we said: in a sentence, if it occurs as a predicate, it must contain a pronoun or what takes the place of the pronoun. Is it the same if it is a single word?
"And if it is": The pronoun refers back to the sentence that was reported about the subject.
"It": That is, the subject.
"Meaning": That is, in meaning.
"Suffice with it ***": That is, without a connector; suffice with the sentence alone without a connector. This means: if the sentence is the meaning of the subject, then one suffices with it instead of the connector. For example: "My saying: 'Allah is sufficient for me'":
"My saying": This is a subject. "Saying" is a subject raised by the nominative case, and its sign of elevation is a dammah estimated on the letter before the first-person pronoun, prevented from appearing by the occupation of the position with the movement of agreement. "Saying" is a possessive noun, and the "ya" is a possessed noun, built on sukun in the position of genitive.
"And Allah": A second subject, a second subject raised by the nominative case, and its sign of elevation is a visible dammah at its end.
"And sufficient for me": The predicate of the second subject, raised by a dammah estimated on the letter before the first-person pronoun, prevented from appearing by the occupation of the position with the movement of agreement. "Sufficient" is a possessive noun, and the "ya" is a possessed noun, built on sukun in the position of genitive. The sentence consisting of the second subject and its predicate is in the position of the predicate of the first subject. If someone asks you: Where is the connector? I say: There is no need for a connector here, because this sentence is the meaning of the subject. If it is asked: Is there a rule that clarifies this? We say: Yes, the rule is that it can replace the demonstrative pronoun; that it can replace the demonstrative pronoun. If it can replace the demonstrative pronoun, it becomes the meaning of the subject. For example: "My saying: 'Allah is sufficient for me'". Remove "Allah is sufficient for me" and say: "My saying is this," "My saying is this," meaning: this statement. If the demonstrative pronoun can replace it, this means that this sentence is the meaning of the subject, so it does not need a connector. However, some grammarians have said: This is a single word, not a sentence; that is, this is not from the chapter of reporting with a sentence, but from the chapter of reporting with a single word. Why? Because the wording of this sentence is intended; I intend its wording. Based on this opinion, we say regarding his statement: "My saying: 'Allah is sufficient for me'": "Saying" is the subject, and "Allah is sufficient for me" is all the predicate of the subject, raised by a dammah estimated on its end, prevented from appearing by what? By quotation (hikayah). It is prevented from appearing by quotation. And this is, in reality, the actual case, because your saying: "My saying: 'Allah is sufficient for me'" means: "Saying" is the subject, and "Allah is sufficient for me" is the predicate. So it is one sentence in reality. The parallel to this is what came to us at the beginning of the Alfiyyah, which is:
"Muhammad said: 'I am Ibn Malik *** Praise be to my Lord, and Allah is the best Master'":
We said: "Ahmad" is not the quoted speech. From "Ahmad" to the last letter of the Alfiyyah, it is all quoted speech, in the position of the object of the verb of speech. So: if the sentence that is the predicate is the meaning of the subject, then it does not need a connector, and its rule is that the demonstrative pronoun can replace it. This is what the author adopted. The grammatical analysis according to the author's view is that we say: "Saying" is the subject, "And Allah" is a second subject, and "Sufficient for me" is the predicate of the second subject, and the sentence is the predicate of the first subject. And we said: Some grammarians say: There is no need to analyze the second as an independent sentence, but we say: The second is the predicate of the subject in its entirety, raised by the subject, and its sign of elevation is a dammah estimated on its end, prevented from appearing by quotation. And this opinion, as you know, is easier. All right:
The best of what I and the prophets before me have said is: There is no god but Allah
خير ما قلتAnd the best of what I and the Prophets before me have said is: None has the right to be worshipped but Allah
خيرُ ما قلتُ أنا والنبيون مِن قبلي لا إله إلا اللهAnd the best of what I and the Prophets before me have said is: None has the right to be worshipped but Allah
خير ما قلتُ أنا والنبيون من قبلي لا إله إلا اللهThere is no god but Allah.
لا إله إلا اللهThere is no god but Allah.
لا إله إلا اللهThe student: The first.
The Shaykh : On the first opinion. And according to the second opinion, it is said: What is the need to estimate? There is no need to analyze the second as a sentence. We say: It is the quoted speech, and its sentence is analyzed as if it were quoted, but it is the predicate. And this is undoubtedly easier. This is easier.
And the summary now: If a sentence occurs as a predicate, it must have a connector that connects it to what?
The student: To the subject.
The Shaykh : To the subject. And the connectors are four: the pronoun, the demonstrative pronoun, repeating the subject with its wording, and generality.
And if the sentence is the meaning of the subject, then it does not need a connector, because the purpose of the connector is to connect the predicate to the subject. And if the predicate is the subject itself, there is no need for connection. But do we analyze this sentence in detail and say: It is a subject and a predicate, and the sentence of the subject and predicate is the predicate of the first subject? Or do we say: It is all, in its entirety, a predicate raised by a dammah estimated on its end, prevented from appearing by quotation? There are two opinions among the scholars: the first is the famous one, and the second was adopted by some grammarians and is easier. And as we told you from the beginning: "Following the easier is easier". All right, then the author moved on to the single-word predicate. Does it carry a pronoun that refers back to the subject? As we said: in a sentence, if it occurs as a predicate, it must contain a pronoun or what takes the place of the pronoun. Is it the same if it is a single word?