Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "Likewise, the news precedes the negating ma *** So bring it following, not preceding."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said: "Likewise, the news precedes the negating ma *** So bring it following, not preceding"
This means that if the negating ma comes with one of the particles, it is impermissible for the news to precede it, whether the particle is one in which it is required that a negation or its like precede it, or not. No one precedes the negating ma.
If I were to say: "Ma kana Zaydun dhaluman" (Zayd was not a wrongdoer).
Then if I said: "Dhaluman ma kana Zaydun" (A wrongdoer, Zayd was not), it is not permissible because the news does not precede the negation. Do you understand? Good.
"Ma dhaluman kana Zaydun" (Not a wrongdoer was Zayd), "Ma dhaluman kana Zaydun" is permissible.
"Ma kana dhaluman Zaydun" (Not a wrongdoer was Zayd) is permissible.
"Ma kana Zaydun dhaluman" (Zayd was not a wrongdoer) is also permissible.
For this reason he says: "Likewise, the news precedes the negating ma ***" Yes, we will parse it.
"Kadha" (Likewise): A preceding news, meaning like what preceded. And "dha" is a demonstrative noun for what preceded, meaning like that which we mentioned regarding the prohibition.
"Sabaqa" (Preceded): A postponed subject, and it is attached to "khabar" (news).
And "khabar" (news): Is tanweened, "sabaqa khabarin" (preceded a news), and it is attached, I mean preceded to its subject, and "ma" is the object of "sabaqa" (preceded), and "ma" is attached.
And "al-nafiyyah" (the negating): Is the attached-to, and it is permissible for "al-nafiyyah" (the negating) to be a description of "ma".
This means it is impermissible for the news to precede the negating ma, whether that is from what is required, whether the particle is one in which the precedence of negation and its like is required, or not.
Then he said: "*** So bring it following, not preceding" Bring it with what? With the negating ma, following, not preceding.
"Ji'" (Bring): A verb of command.
And "biha" (with it): A preposition and its object, attached to it.
And "mutallawwah" (following): A state of the "ha" in "biha" (with it).
And "la" (not): A negation, and not a conjunction, and not a conjunction.
And "taliyyah" (preceding): Conjoined to "mutallawwah" (following), so it is in the accusative case as a state, meaning bring with the negating ma following, meaning it is preceding, and what comes after it is following it, not preceding it. I think, if Allah wills, the topic is clear.
The first: The news is positioned between the particle and the noun, the ruling.
The student: Permissible.
The Shaykh : By consensus.
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Good, the news precedes the particle.
The student: In other than "daam" (as long as) it is permissible.
The Shaykh : It is permissible in other than "daam" (as long as), for the apparent meaning of Ibn Malik's words is that it is prohibited, but the correct view is that it is permissible, and that what is prohibited is the precedence of the news over "ma" only, whether "ma" is the source particle or the negating "ma", and whether it is from what requires the precedence of negation and its like, or not. And Allah knows best. Is the time over? No.
Read, good.
In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and may Allah send prayers and blessings upon our Prophet Muhammad and his family and all his Companions.
This means that if the negating ma comes with one of the particles, it is impermissible for the news to precede it, whether the particle is one in which it is required that a negation or its like precede it, or not. No one precedes the negating ma.
If I were to say: "Ma kana Zaydun dhaluman" (Zayd was not a wrongdoer).
Then if I said: "Dhaluman ma kana Zaydun" (A wrongdoer, Zayd was not), it is not permissible because the news does not precede the negation. Do you understand? Good.
"Ma dhaluman kana Zaydun" (Not a wrongdoer was Zayd), "Ma dhaluman kana Zaydun" is permissible.
"Ma kana dhaluman Zaydun" (Not a wrongdoer was Zayd) is permissible.
"Ma kana Zaydun dhaluman" (Zayd was not a wrongdoer) is also permissible.
For this reason he says: "Likewise, the news precedes the negating ma ***" Yes, we will parse it.
"Kadha" (Likewise): A preceding news, meaning like what preceded. And "dha" is a demonstrative noun for what preceded, meaning like that which we mentioned regarding the prohibition.
"Sabaqa" (Preceded): A postponed subject, and it is attached to "khabar" (news).
And "khabar" (news): Is tanweened, "sabaqa khabarin" (preceded a news), and it is attached, I mean preceded to its subject, and "ma" is the object of "sabaqa" (preceded), and "ma" is attached.
And "al-nafiyyah" (the negating): Is the attached-to, and it is permissible for "al-nafiyyah" (the negating) to be a description of "ma".
This means it is impermissible for the news to precede the negating ma, whether that is from what is required, whether the particle is one in which the precedence of negation and its like is required, or not.
Then he said: "*** So bring it following, not preceding" Bring it with what? With the negating ma, following, not preceding.
"Ji'" (Bring): A verb of command.
And "biha" (with it): A preposition and its object, attached to it.
And "mutallawwah" (following): A state of the "ha" in "biha" (with it).
And "la" (not): A negation, and not a conjunction, and not a conjunction.
And "taliyyah" (preceding): Conjoined to "mutallawwah" (following), so it is in the accusative case as a state, meaning bring with the negating ma following, meaning it is preceding, and what comes after it is following it, not preceding it. I think, if Allah wills, the topic is clear.
The first: The news is positioned between the particle and the noun, the ruling.
The student: Permissible.
The Shaykh : By consensus.
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Good, the news precedes the particle.
The student: In other than "daam" (as long as) it is permissible.
The Shaykh : It is permissible in other than "daam" (as long as), for the apparent meaning of Ibn Malik's words is that it is prohibited, but the correct view is that it is permissible, and that what is prohibited is the precedence of the news over "ma" only, whether "ma" is the source particle or the negating "ma", and whether it is from what requires the precedence of negation and its like, or not. And Allah knows best. Is the time over? No.
Read, good.
In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and may Allah send prayers and blessings upon our Prophet Muhammad and his family and all his Companions.