Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And a time noun cannot be a predicate *** of a body, but if it conveys meaning, then predicate it."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : We begin by saying: The lesson for today, is a preposition used as a predicate for everything, or is there a detail in that? The author says: "And a time noun cannot be a predicate *** of a body":
Meaning, of a thing, of a person, a distinct entity. As for place, it can be a predicate for the body, and for the action, and for everything. An example of that is: "Zayd is with you." The preposition here is a preposition of time or place.
The student: A place.
The Shaykh : And the subject: is it a body? "Knowledge is with you." Is the predicate a preposition of place or time?
The student: A place.
The Shaykh : "Knowledge is with you"?
The student: A place.
The Shaykh : Good, and is the subject a body or a meaning?
The student: A meaning.
The Shaykh : A meaning. So, a preposition of place occurs as a predicate for the body and for the meaning, and there is no problem in that.
A preposition of time occurs as a predicate for the meaning, and does not occur as a predicate for the body. You say: "The fighting is today," "The Hajj is today," and the like. Is that correct or not? It is correct.
"The man is today"? It is not correct. "The man is today": It is not correct. It is not possible for a time noun to be a predicate for a body. Is that clear? And Ibn Hisham expressed the word: body, with "self," and he said: "And do not predicate with time about the self", and his wording is more refined than the words of Ibn Malik, because with "body" the reader or listener might imagine a dead sheep around him. Yes, is that not so? Meaning, it is a term that is not the term that the soul finds comfortable. Rather, the self is not predicated with time. It is not predicated. If something occurs that indicates a predicate, a preposition of time about a self, then it is to be interpreted. And Ibn Malik says:
"If it conveys meaning, then predicate": If it conveys meaning, then predicate. Even if it is a preposition of time about a body, or about a self. As for Ibn Hisham, he holds that it is not permissible to predicate with time about the self, and that if it occurs, interpretation is obligatory. His example is their saying: "Tonight is the crescent moon," "Tonight is the crescent moon," or "The crescent moon is the night of Monday." Is the crescent moon a body or a meaning?
The student: A meaning.
Another student: A body.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: A body.
The Shaykh : A body. "Night": is it time or place?
The student: Time.
The Shaykh : Time. But this word is common among the Arabs. They say: "Tonight is the crescent moon," or: "The crescent moon is the night of yesterday," or: "The crescent moon is the night of Monday," or the like. This is common. So Ibn Malik says: If it conveys meaning, there is no harm. Then predicate with time about the body, without interpretation, because the intended goal is understanding the meaning. And if the context conveys meaning, there is no need for estimation. And this is an easy school of thought. As for Ibn Hisham (may Allah have mercy on him), he says: No, it is not possible to predicate with time about the self. If something of that occurs in the speech of the Arabs, it is interpreted. So their saying: "Tonight is the crescent moon" is interpreted as: "Tonight is the rising of the crescent moon." It is not the crescent moon tonight. Tonight is the rising. As for the crescent moon, it is not possible for time to be a predicate for it. In any case: they agree that whenever it conveys meaning, whether by interpretation or without interpretation, it occurs as a predicate for the self. And the summary of this verse is: "That a place noun occurs as a predicate for the self and the meaning". Where did we take that from? From his saying previously: "And predicate with a preposition or a preposition of genitive".
Then he excepted that a time noun cannot be a predicate for a body. So, predication with a preposition of place for the body and for the meaning falls under his saying: "And predicate with a preposition".
As for the second verse, which is our lesson tonight, he says: It is not predicated with a preposition of time about the body, meaning about the self. As for the meaning, it is predicated. And if it conveys meaning, is it permissible or not?
The student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : It is permissible. It is permissible according to the opinion of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him). And what Ibn Malik held is more appropriate, because the intended goal of speech is benefit.
Meaning, of a thing, of a person, a distinct entity. As for place, it can be a predicate for the body, and for the action, and for everything. An example of that is: "Zayd is with you." The preposition here is a preposition of time or place.
The student: A place.
The Shaykh : And the subject: is it a body? "Knowledge is with you." Is the predicate a preposition of place or time?
The student: A place.
The Shaykh : "Knowledge is with you"?
The student: A place.
The Shaykh : Good, and is the subject a body or a meaning?
The student: A meaning.
The Shaykh : A meaning. So, a preposition of place occurs as a predicate for the body and for the meaning, and there is no problem in that.
A preposition of time occurs as a predicate for the meaning, and does not occur as a predicate for the body. You say: "The fighting is today," "The Hajj is today," and the like. Is that correct or not? It is correct.
"The man is today"? It is not correct. "The man is today": It is not correct. It is not possible for a time noun to be a predicate for a body. Is that clear? And Ibn Hisham expressed the word: body, with "self," and he said: "And do not predicate with time about the self", and his wording is more refined than the words of Ibn Malik, because with "body" the reader or listener might imagine a dead sheep around him. Yes, is that not so? Meaning, it is a term that is not the term that the soul finds comfortable. Rather, the self is not predicated with time. It is not predicated. If something occurs that indicates a predicate, a preposition of time about a self, then it is to be interpreted. And Ibn Malik says:
"If it conveys meaning, then predicate": If it conveys meaning, then predicate. Even if it is a preposition of time about a body, or about a self. As for Ibn Hisham, he holds that it is not permissible to predicate with time about the self, and that if it occurs, interpretation is obligatory. His example is their saying: "Tonight is the crescent moon," "Tonight is the crescent moon," or "The crescent moon is the night of Monday." Is the crescent moon a body or a meaning?
The student: A meaning.
Another student: A body.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: A body.
The Shaykh : A body. "Night": is it time or place?
The student: Time.
The Shaykh : Time. But this word is common among the Arabs. They say: "Tonight is the crescent moon," or: "The crescent moon is the night of yesterday," or: "The crescent moon is the night of Monday," or the like. This is common. So Ibn Malik says: If it conveys meaning, there is no harm. Then predicate with time about the body, without interpretation, because the intended goal is understanding the meaning. And if the context conveys meaning, there is no need for estimation. And this is an easy school of thought. As for Ibn Hisham (may Allah have mercy on him), he says: No, it is not possible to predicate with time about the self. If something of that occurs in the speech of the Arabs, it is interpreted. So their saying: "Tonight is the crescent moon" is interpreted as: "Tonight is the rising of the crescent moon." It is not the crescent moon tonight. Tonight is the rising. As for the crescent moon, it is not possible for time to be a predicate for it. In any case: they agree that whenever it conveys meaning, whether by interpretation or without interpretation, it occurs as a predicate for the self. And the summary of this verse is: "That a place noun occurs as a predicate for the self and the meaning". Where did we take that from? From his saying previously: "And predicate with a preposition or a preposition of genitive".
Then he excepted that a time noun cannot be a predicate for a body. So, predication with a preposition of place for the body and for the meaning falls under his saying: "And predicate with a preposition".
As for the second verse, which is our lesson tonight, he says: It is not predicated with a preposition of time about the body, meaning about the self. As for the meaning, it is predicated. And if it conveys meaning, is it permissible or not?
The student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : It is permissible. It is permissible according to the opinion of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him). And what Ibn Malik held is more appropriate, because the intended goal of speech is benefit.