Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *** So bring it following, not succeeding.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :" *** So bring it following, not succeeding"
This verse—this is the beginning of the lesson now—someone might say: there is no benefit in it, because if the advancement of the predicate over the negating *ma* is prevented, then it necessarily follows that it is following, not succeeding. It is said: No, it has a benefit; in fact, it has two benefits:
The first benefit: pointing out that the negating *ma* at the beginning of the sentence does not come except as following. And if it does not come except as following, it becomes the beginning of the sentence, so it is not permissible for anything else that is within the scope of its sentence to precede it.
The second benefit: confirming the previous ruling. Confirming the previous ruling. There is no objection to a person bringing a sentence after mentioning one of the rulings to confirm and establish that ruling.
" *** So bring it following, not succeeding "
Then he said: "And prevented precedence." I think we parsed "So bring it following" here; did we parse it?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes
" And prevented the precedence of the predicate of *laysa* *** And that which is complete is not satisfied by raising"
The first verse: "Prevented" is the subject (mubtada').
And "precedence" is the predicate of the subject, and "prevented" is a dependent noun, and "precedence" is the noun it depends on.
This verse—this is the beginning of the lesson now—someone might say: there is no benefit in it, because if the advancement of the predicate over the negating *ma* is prevented, then it necessarily follows that it is following, not succeeding. It is said: No, it has a benefit; in fact, it has two benefits:
The first benefit: pointing out that the negating *ma* at the beginning of the sentence does not come except as following. And if it does not come except as following, it becomes the beginning of the sentence, so it is not permissible for anything else that is within the scope of its sentence to precede it.
The second benefit: confirming the previous ruling. Confirming the previous ruling. There is no objection to a person bringing a sentence after mentioning one of the rulings to confirm and establish that ruling.
" *** So bring it following, not succeeding "
Then he said: "And prevented precedence." I think we parsed "So bring it following" here; did we parse it?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes
" And prevented the precedence of the predicate of *laysa* *** And that which is complete is not satisfied by raising"
The first verse: "Prevented" is the subject (mubtada').
And "precedence" is the predicate of the subject, and "prevented" is a dependent noun, and "precedence" is the noun it depends on.