Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And they used the present tense for awshaka *** and kaad, and nothing else, and they added mushaka."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He explained, saying: "And they used the present tense for awshaka ***"
The subject in the phrase "they used" is the Arabs, and it is a verb and a subject. "They used" is a verb and a subject. "the present tense" is the object of "they used." "for awshaka" is a preposition and a noun in the genitive case, attached to "they used," meaning they used a present tense verb for awshaka. "and kaad" the waw is a conjunction, and kaad is conjoined to what?
The student: Awshaka
The Shaykh : To awshaka, so for these two verbs only, for kaad and awshaka, "and nothing else" "and nothing else" la is a conjunction, and ghayr is conjoined to what?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, yes, awshaka is conjoined to awshaka, and accordingly the meaning is: not for other than them, meaning not for other than awshaka and kaad. So we understand then that awshaka and kaad are used with the present tense. Now, an example of that in kaad is His saying, the Exalted: What is it? And the past tense is [Al-Baqarah 2:71] Now, awshaka
"And if people were asked for the earth, they would awshaka *** when it was said, 'Bring it,' to be weary and refuse"
La-awshakoo is a past tense verb for awshaka. La-awshakoo is a past tense verb. And an example of the present tense is:
"Yushak who flees from his death *** in some of his dark nights to meet it" Is it clear now? Now
His saying "and kaad, and nothing else" means not other than awshaka and kaad. It is possible that his intention is that Ibn Malik means not other than the present tense, so the imperative is not used, such as saying: Awshaka that you do such and such. This is not correct; that did not occur in the Arabic language.
He said: "and they added mushaka" They added, meaning the Arabs, mushaka, and mushaka is the active participle of awshaka. So awshaka is used with the past tense, the present tense, and the active participle. The evidence is the saying of the poet:
"And our land is mushaka to return *** to the opposite of the companion, a desolate wilderness"
"And our land is mushaka to return *** to the opposite of the companion, a desolate wilderness"
Empty, with no one in it. Yes, so awshaka is used for it, Ya Jamal. Where did you get to? Where did you get to when you were distracted? Correct, now, say yes.
The student: And the present tense
The Shaykh : And the present tense only
The student: And the past tense
The Shaykh : And the past tense, three. Now, the apparent meaning of Ibn Malik's words here is that kaad is not used with the active participle, because he said: "and they added mushaka" But he explicitly stated in the original al-Afiliyyah that the active participle is used from awshaka and from kaad. And on this basis, the active participle of kaad is what?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, kaaid. Kaad yakid, so he is kaaid, like ba' who sells, so he is ba'i'. Now, then he said: after 'asa, to the end of it.
The student : Shaykh
The Shaykh : Yes
The student: What is the original al-Afiliyyah?
The subject in the phrase "they used" is the Arabs, and it is a verb and a subject. "They used" is a verb and a subject. "the present tense" is the object of "they used." "for awshaka" is a preposition and a noun in the genitive case, attached to "they used," meaning they used a present tense verb for awshaka. "and kaad" the waw is a conjunction, and kaad is conjoined to what?
The student: Awshaka
The Shaykh : To awshaka, so for these two verbs only, for kaad and awshaka, "and nothing else" "and nothing else" la is a conjunction, and ghayr is conjoined to what?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, yes, awshaka is conjoined to awshaka, and accordingly the meaning is: not for other than them, meaning not for other than awshaka and kaad. So we understand then that awshaka and kaad are used with the present tense. Now, an example of that in kaad is His saying, the Exalted:
The lightning almost
يكاد البرقSnatches their eyesight
يخطف أبصارهمbut they could hardly do it.
وما كادوا يفعلون"And if people were asked for the earth, they would awshaka *** when it was said, 'Bring it,' to be weary and refuse"
La-awshakoo is a past tense verb for awshaka. La-awshakoo is a past tense verb. And an example of the present tense is:
"Yushak who flees from his death *** in some of his dark nights to meet it" Is it clear now? Now
His saying "and kaad, and nothing else" means not other than awshaka and kaad. It is possible that his intention is that Ibn Malik means not other than the present tense, so the imperative is not used, such as saying: Awshaka that you do such and such. This is not correct; that did not occur in the Arabic language.
He said: "and they added mushaka" They added, meaning the Arabs, mushaka, and mushaka is the active participle of awshaka. So awshaka is used with the past tense, the present tense, and the active participle. The evidence is the saying of the poet:
"And our land is mushaka to return *** to the opposite of the companion, a desolate wilderness"
"And our land is mushaka to return *** to the opposite of the companion, a desolate wilderness"
Empty, with no one in it. Yes, so awshaka is used for it, Ya Jamal. Where did you get to? Where did you get to when you were distracted? Correct, now, say yes.
The student: And the present tense
The Shaykh : And the present tense only
The student: And the past tense
The Shaykh : And the past tense, three. Now, the apparent meaning of Ibn Malik's words here is that kaad is not used with the active participle, because he said: "and they added mushaka" But he explicitly stated in the original al-Afiliyyah that the active participle is used from awshaka and from kaad. And on this basis, the active participle of kaad is what?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, kaaid. Kaad yakid, so he is kaaid, like ba' who sells, so he is ba'i'. Now, then he said: after 'asa, to the end of it.
The student : Shaykh
The Shaykh : Yes
The student: What is the original al-Afiliyyah?