Continuation of the explanation of Ibn Malik’s (may Allah have mercy on him) saying: “And they broke the kasrah after fa‘l ‘alaqa *** with the lam, like ‘alim, for it is truly one of piety.”

The Shaykh : Who is the doer (fa‘il)?
The student: The Arabs.

The Shaykh : The Arabs, yes, the Arabs are those who speak and judge the pronunciation as being open (fathah), broken (kasrah), or closed (dammah). Yes, he said: “And they broke” meaning the Arabs, “after fa‘l ‘alaqa *** with the lam” even though when Inna is the object of a verb, what is required in it? When Inna is the object of the verb, the fathah is required; its hamzah is opened. But when the verb is suspended by the lam, the kasrah of the hamzah becomes obligatory; it is obligatory to break the hamzah. Why? Because whenever the lam is found in its khabar (predicate) or ism (subject), its kasrah is obligatory in all cases.
Its example is: “Know that he is truly one of piety.” And if it were not for the word “ladhū” (truly), if it were not for the existence of the lam in “ladhū,” it would have been obligatory to say: “Know that he is one of piety.” Know that he is one of piety.
Allah the Exalted said: But when the verb was suspended by the lam, Allah the Exalted said: What? And the result is that when Inna is the object of the verb, but the verb’s effect is suspended by the lam, what is required? Its kasrah is required; it is obligatory to break it, even if, were it not for the lam, the fathah would have been obligatory. For this lam prevents, prevents the fathah. “Like ‘alim, for it is truly one of piety” We can make this a sixth position, which is that Inna comes, what? After a verb suspended by the lam, in which case its kasrah is obligatory.
Now, if someone asks: What is the reason for the obligation of the kasrah, even though the verb has authority over it? We say: The reason for the obligation of the kasrah is that the lam does not allow the fathah of the hamzah. And if we convert it to a masdar (verbal noun), we lose the emphasis indicated by the lam. Therefore, they convert it.
The student: ...

The Shaykh : Yes, how?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : Now, he said: “So break it at the beginning and at the beginning of a relative clause”
“At the beginning”: A preposition and its object, attached to “break.”
“And at the beginning of a relative clause” is conjoined by repeating the preposition, or if you wish, say by repeating the governing word. “At the beginning of a relative clause” means: And break it at the beginning of a relative clause.
And “where”: The waw is a conjunction particle, and “where” is an adverb of place, conjoined to his saying “at the beginning.” That is, break it where, and it is added to Inna, intended by it, what? The word (lafz).
“For a complete right hand”: “For a right hand” is attached to “mukammalah” (complete). And “mukammalah” may be in the accusative case as a hal (state) from Inna, and it may be in the genitive case. Yes, it is not correct for it to be in the genitive case, and I mentioned to you at the beginning that “where” is added to Inna considering the word (lafz), and this is one of the opinions in grammar that it is permissible to add “where” to a singular noun. But the famous opinion is that “where” is not added except to sentences. Based on this famous opinion, we say that Inna is the mubtada (subject) and “mukammalah” is its khabar (predicate). The mubtada is Inna.
But the majority of the expressions of the fuqaha (jurists) (may Allah have mercy on them) regarding the addition of “where” to what follows it is contrary to the famous opinion in the Arabic language. And that has occurred in the Arabic language, as the poet or composer said:
“Have you not seen where Suhayl has risen *** A star shining like a bright meteor”
“Have you not seen where Suhayl has risen ***”
Therefore, we say: The famous opinion in the grammatical analysis of the second hemistich is that “where” is conjoined to his saying “at the beginning,” and that Inna is the mubtada and “mukammalah” is the khabar of the mubtada, and “right hand” is attached to “mukammalah.”
He said: “Or was narrated by speech” “Hukiya” (was narrated) is a past tense verb, passive voice, and “by speech” is attached to it.
“Or took the place of” A state, or this is conjoined to “or was narrated.” Yes, to his saying “was narrated,” or otherwise, to his saying: “Inna for a complete right hand”?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : Yes, it appears that it is attached to his saying: “Inna for a complete right hand,” meaning: Or where it was narrated by speech, or where it took the place of a state. Now.
And “place” may be an adverb of place, meaning “in a place,” and it may be a masdar with the mim, meaning “took the place of a state.” The meaning does not differ in either case. And his saying: “Like you visited me and I am one of hope” The kaf is a preposition, and “you visited me and I am one of hope” is in the genitive case by the kaf, and the implied meaning is “like this example.” For this reason, the kaf entered upon the sentence.
“And they broke the kasrah after fa‘l ‘alaqa *** with the lam”
“After fa‘l suspended by the lam”: “After fa‘l” is attached to “they broke.”
And “they broke” does not need grammatical analysis because it is a verb and a doer. And “‘alaqa” (suspended): The sentence is a description (sifat) for “fa‘l” because it is an indefinite noun, and the rule among grammarians is that sentences occurring after indefinite nouns are descriptions, and after definite nouns they are states (ahwal).
“With the lam”: Attached to “suspended.”
“Like ‘alim, for it is truly one of piety”
The kaf is a preposition.
“And know that he is truly one of piety”: The name is in the genitive case by the kaf, and the sign of its genitive case is a hidden kasrah on its end, prevented from appearing by the narration (hikayah).
We stop here because until we start the new lesson after... and the section in which both positions are permissible. Yes.