Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And they informed with two or more *** about one, as they are the nobles of poetry."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Then he said:
"And they informed with two or more *** about one":
"They informed": The pronoun refers to the Arabs.
"With two or more *** about one, as they are the nobles of poetry":
"They" is the subject, "the nobles" is the predicate, and "poets" is a second predicate. The nobles are the honorable ones, and poets are well known. This means that the Arabs informed with two or more predicates about a single subject. The permissibility of multiple predicates is by analogy, just as multiple attributes are permissible. Is it not permissible to say: "Zayd, the knowledgeable, the wealthy, the generous, came to me"? Is this permissible or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : It is permissible. The predicate is, in reality, a description of the subject. So if multiple attributes are permissible, multiple predicates are permissible. But here we ask: Is it permissible to separate the two predicates with the conjunction "wa" (and), so that I say "They are the nobles and poets"? We say: Yes, it is permissible, just as it is permissible to separate two attributes with a conjunction.[Al-A'la 87:1-4] Just as multiple attributes are permissible with a conjunction, multiple predicates are permissible with a conjunction. Did you understand or not?
But we must know that the issue here has three aspects: The first aspect is the prohibition of conjunction, the second aspect is the obligation of conjunction, and the third aspect is the permissibility of conjunction. How many categories are there?
The student: Three.
The Shaykh : Three categories: The first is the prohibition of conjunction, the second is the obligation of conjunction, and the third is permissibility. If the two predicates mean a single predicate, then conjunction is not permissible, because if you conjoin them, you make each predicate independent of the other, whereas their combination expresses a single attribute. For example: "I have sweet sour orange." Yes, my orange is sweet and sour. "My orange is sweet and sour": There are two predicates here, namely "sweet" and "sour." Here, it is not permissible for me to say "sweet and sour," because if I said "sweet and sour," the meaning would be corrupted. I want to say "sweet sour," meaning its taste is a mixture of sour and sweet. What is the difference between "sweet sour" and "sweet and sour"? The meaning would be mixed. "Sweet sour" means mixed. So instead of saying "my orange is mixed," you say "my orange is sweet sour." Conjunction is not permissible here. Why is it not permissible? Because the meaning changes. If you say "my orange is sweet and sour," it means you have two types of orange, one sweet and one sour. This is not permissible. So, if the two predicates have a single meaning, what is the ruling? Conjunction is not permissible, because that would disrupt the meaning. If each of the two predicates refers to a different person, then conjunction is obligatory. For example: "Your sons are a poet, an engineer, a grammarian, and a jurist." How many sons do you have now?
The student: Four.
The Shaykh : Four sons. So yes, a poet. The second?
The student: An engineer.
The Shaykh : An engineer.
The student: A grammarian.
The Shaykh : A grammarian.
The student: A jurist.
The Shaykh : A jurist. Here, if we omit the conjunction, these predicates would apply to each one of them, meaning each one is a poet, an engineer, a grammarian, and a jurist. Is that right or not?
The student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : But that is not the case. The case is that one son is a poet, the second is an engineer, the third is a grammarian, and the fourth is a jurist. So it is necessary to use the conjunction, because the conjunction implies what? Difference. If it is omitted, they become unified.
And the summary is: Multiple predicates are permissible, but is it permissible to separate these multiple predicates with a conjunction? We say: This falls into how many categories?
The student: Three.
The Shaykh : Three categories: One where it is not permissible, one where it is obligatory, and one where it is permissible. If you wish, conjoin; if you wish, do not conjoin. Good: "My son is a poet, a writer, a jurist, a Salafi."
The student: Both options are permissible.
The Shaykh : Both options are permissible. Good, that is correct. It is permissible to conjoin with "wa," and it is permissible to leave each predicate separate. So I say: "Poet" is the predicate of the subject, "writer" is a second predicate, "grammarian" is a third predicate, "jurist" and "Salafi" are the fourth and fifth predicates. Allah the Exalted said: What? [Al-Buruj 85:14-15]. Here, it is not permissible to make "the Most Loving" an attribute of "the Forgiver," because it does not refer back to "the Forgiver"; it refers back to the described one, who is Allah (Mighty and Majestic), meaning it refers to the pronoun: "He."
The student: The time is up, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: It has ended.
The Shaykh : The time is up.
"And they informed with two or more *** about one":
"They informed": The pronoun refers to the Arabs.
"With two or more *** about one, as they are the nobles of poetry":
"They" is the subject, "the nobles" is the predicate, and "poets" is a second predicate. The nobles are the honorable ones, and poets are well known. This means that the Arabs informed with two or more predicates about a single subject. The permissibility of multiple predicates is by analogy, just as multiple attributes are permissible. Is it not permissible to say: "Zayd, the knowledgeable, the wealthy, the generous, came to me"? Is this permissible or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : It is permissible. The predicate is, in reality, a description of the subject. So if multiple attributes are permissible, multiple predicates are permissible. But here we ask: Is it permissible to separate the two predicates with the conjunction "wa" (and), so that I say "They are the nobles and poets"? We say: Yes, it is permissible, just as it is permissible to separate two attributes with a conjunction.
(1) Exalt the name of your Lord, the Most High, (2) Who created and proportioned (3) And who destined and [then] guided (4) And who brings out the pasture
سبح اسم ربك الأعلى ، الذي خلق فسوى ، والذي قدّر فهدى والذي أخرج المرعىBut we must know that the issue here has three aspects: The first aspect is the prohibition of conjunction, the second aspect is the obligation of conjunction, and the third aspect is the permissibility of conjunction. How many categories are there?
The student: Three.
The Shaykh : Three categories: The first is the prohibition of conjunction, the second is the obligation of conjunction, and the third is permissibility. If the two predicates mean a single predicate, then conjunction is not permissible, because if you conjoin them, you make each predicate independent of the other, whereas their combination expresses a single attribute. For example: "I have sweet sour orange." Yes, my orange is sweet and sour. "My orange is sweet and sour": There are two predicates here, namely "sweet" and "sour." Here, it is not permissible for me to say "sweet and sour," because if I said "sweet and sour," the meaning would be corrupted. I want to say "sweet sour," meaning its taste is a mixture of sour and sweet. What is the difference between "sweet sour" and "sweet and sour"? The meaning would be mixed. "Sweet sour" means mixed. So instead of saying "my orange is mixed," you say "my orange is sweet sour." Conjunction is not permissible here. Why is it not permissible? Because the meaning changes. If you say "my orange is sweet and sour," it means you have two types of orange, one sweet and one sour. This is not permissible. So, if the two predicates have a single meaning, what is the ruling? Conjunction is not permissible, because that would disrupt the meaning. If each of the two predicates refers to a different person, then conjunction is obligatory. For example: "Your sons are a poet, an engineer, a grammarian, and a jurist." How many sons do you have now?
The student: Four.
The Shaykh : Four sons. So yes, a poet. The second?
The student: An engineer.
The Shaykh : An engineer.
The student: A grammarian.
The Shaykh : A grammarian.
The student: A jurist.
The Shaykh : A jurist. Here, if we omit the conjunction, these predicates would apply to each one of them, meaning each one is a poet, an engineer, a grammarian, and a jurist. Is that right or not?
The student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : But that is not the case. The case is that one son is a poet, the second is an engineer, the third is a grammarian, and the fourth is a jurist. So it is necessary to use the conjunction, because the conjunction implies what? Difference. If it is omitted, they become unified.
And the summary is: Multiple predicates are permissible, but is it permissible to separate these multiple predicates with a conjunction? We say: This falls into how many categories?
The student: Three.
The Shaykh : Three categories: One where it is not permissible, one where it is obligatory, and one where it is permissible. If you wish, conjoin; if you wish, do not conjoin. Good: "My son is a poet, a writer, a jurist, a Salafi."
The student: Both options are permissible.
The Shaykh : Both options are permissible. Good, that is correct. It is permissible to conjoin with "wa," and it is permissible to leave each predicate separate. So I say: "Poet" is the predicate of the subject, "writer" is a second predicate, "grammarian" is a third predicate, "jurist" and "Salafi" are the fourth and fifth predicates. Allah the Exalted said:
And He is the Forgiver
وهو الغفورthe Affectionate, (15) Honorable Owner of the Throne,
الودود ذو العرش المجيدThe student: The time is up, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: It has ended.
The Shaykh : The time is up.