Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And like 'I have a dirham' and 'I have a camel' *** In which the advance of the predicate is obligatory."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Then the author (may Allah have mercy on him) moved on to what requires the advance of the predicate. After mentioning what prohibits the advance of the predicate, he mentioned what requires the advance of the predicate, meaning the opposite of the first issue. He said:
"And like 'I have a dirham' and 'I have a camel' *** In which the advance of the predicate is obligatory":
This is a complete verse. Its summary is: If the subject is an indefinite noun that has no justification for it other than being delayed, then its advance is prohibited. If the subject is an indefinite noun that has no justification for it other than being delayed, its advance is prohibited, because if we were to advance it in this case, we would violate the rule, and it is not permissible to violate the rule. Do you understand?
The student: Yes, yes.
The Shaykh : What is the point of this verse? It is that whenever the subject is an indefinite noun that has no justification for it other than being delayed, its advance is prohibited, because the original rule is that it is not permissible to begin with an indefinite noun. So, if it is permissible to begin with this indefinite noun because of its delay, and then we advance it, we have committed what is prohibited. Now, if it is an indefinite noun that has a justification other than delay, is its advance permissible?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: No.
The Shaykh :"A man of the noble ones is with us": This is an indefinite noun, and it is currently advanced, but what is the justification for its advance?
The student: The description.
The Shaykh : That it is a description. But: "I have a dirham", a dirham is an indefinite noun, and it has no justification other than what? Other than delay. Therefore, its advance is prohibited. Its advance is prohibited. The examples the author mentioned previously: "With Zayd is a lioness", is this like that or not? "With Zayd is a lioness": Does it fall under the rule or not? A lioness is a subject that has no justification other than what?
The student: In the chapter of the subject.
The Shaykh :"Oh, I wish I had a people for them *** Who, when they understand, do not forget"
Yes.
The student: It has a justification!
The Shaykh :"With Zayd is a lioness", a lioness is an indefinite noun. What justified beginning with it? Delay. Therefore, its advance is prohibited. It is not correct for me to say: "A lioness is with Zayd," correct? Its counterpart here is: "I have a dirham", I have a dirham, just like "With Zayd is a lioness" completely. If I said: "A dirham is with me", is it correct or not?
The student: No.
Another student: It is not correct.
The Shaykh : Why? Because it has no justification. Because the subject here is an indefinite noun that has no justification. Delaying it is a justification for the delay of the subject: "I have a dirham," is it permissible or not?
The student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : Now, "I have a dirham" is correct. Is its advance permissible or not?
The student: Its advance is permissible, because of the description, O Shaykh.
Another student: Described.
The Shaykh : O our brothers: "I have a dirham," is its advance permissible or not?
The student: It is not permissible.
The Shaykh : It is not permissible, because it has no justification other than delay. "I have a dirham" is correct?
The student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : Is it permissible? Why?
The student: Described.
The Shaykh : Because it is a description, so you say: "A good dirham is with me." There is no harm in it because it is a description. The important thing is the first rule regarding what requires delay: Delaying the subject if the subject is an indefinite noun that has no justification for it other than delay. In this case, its advance is prohibited.
The student: Meaning it must be advanced!
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: Meaning it has no justification?
The Shaykh : It has no justification for beginning with it. Any indefinite noun, its beginning is prohibited, except in the previous justifications. So, if it has no justification for beginning with it other than its delay from the predicate, its advance is prohibited.
The student: Can we say: Delaying the predicate, meaning there is no justification for advancing the subject?!
The Shaykh : No, no, because there is another justification other than delay. You must say: It has no justification other than delay. Now, the second one—hold on to it, because it is complicated:
"Such is if a hidden pronoun returns to it *** From what is made clear about it, it is reported".
The student: It remains, O Shaykh: "And I have a camel"!
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: "And I have a camel"!
"And like 'I have a dirham' and 'I have a camel' *** In which the advance of the predicate is obligatory":
This is a complete verse. Its summary is: If the subject is an indefinite noun that has no justification for it other than being delayed, then its advance is prohibited. If the subject is an indefinite noun that has no justification for it other than being delayed, its advance is prohibited, because if we were to advance it in this case, we would violate the rule, and it is not permissible to violate the rule. Do you understand?
The student: Yes, yes.
The Shaykh : What is the point of this verse? It is that whenever the subject is an indefinite noun that has no justification for it other than being delayed, its advance is prohibited, because the original rule is that it is not permissible to begin with an indefinite noun. So, if it is permissible to begin with this indefinite noun because of its delay, and then we advance it, we have committed what is prohibited. Now, if it is an indefinite noun that has a justification other than delay, is its advance permissible?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: No.
The Shaykh :"A man of the noble ones is with us": This is an indefinite noun, and it is currently advanced, but what is the justification for its advance?
The student: The description.
The Shaykh : That it is a description. But: "I have a dirham", a dirham is an indefinite noun, and it has no justification other than what? Other than delay. Therefore, its advance is prohibited. Its advance is prohibited. The examples the author mentioned previously: "With Zayd is a lioness", is this like that or not? "With Zayd is a lioness": Does it fall under the rule or not? A lioness is a subject that has no justification other than what?
The student: In the chapter of the subject.
The Shaykh :"Oh, I wish I had a people for them *** Who, when they understand, do not forget"
Yes.
The student: It has a justification!
The Shaykh :"With Zayd is a lioness", a lioness is an indefinite noun. What justified beginning with it? Delay. Therefore, its advance is prohibited. It is not correct for me to say: "A lioness is with Zayd," correct? Its counterpart here is: "I have a dirham", I have a dirham, just like "With Zayd is a lioness" completely. If I said: "A dirham is with me", is it correct or not?
The student: No.
Another student: It is not correct.
The Shaykh : Why? Because it has no justification. Because the subject here is an indefinite noun that has no justification. Delaying it is a justification for the delay of the subject: "I have a dirham," is it permissible or not?
The student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : Now, "I have a dirham" is correct. Is its advance permissible or not?
The student: Its advance is permissible, because of the description, O Shaykh.
Another student: Described.
The Shaykh : O our brothers: "I have a dirham," is its advance permissible or not?
The student: It is not permissible.
The Shaykh : It is not permissible, because it has no justification other than delay. "I have a dirham" is correct?
The student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : Is it permissible? Why?
The student: Described.
The Shaykh : Because it is a description, so you say: "A good dirham is with me." There is no harm in it because it is a description. The important thing is the first rule regarding what requires delay: Delaying the subject if the subject is an indefinite noun that has no justification for it other than delay. In this case, its advance is prohibited.
The student: Meaning it must be advanced!
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: Meaning it has no justification?
The Shaykh : It has no justification for beginning with it. Any indefinite noun, its beginning is prohibited, except in the previous justifications. So, if it has no justification for beginning with it other than its delay from the predicate, its advance is prohibited.
The student: Can we say: Delaying the predicate, meaning there is no justification for advancing the subject?!
The Shaykh : No, no, because there is another justification other than delay. You must say: It has no justification other than delay. Now, the second one—hold on to it, because it is complicated:
"Such is if a hidden pronoun returns to it *** From what is made clear about it, it is reported".
The student: It remains, O Shaykh: "And I have a camel"!
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: "And I have a camel"!