Continuation of the explanation of Ibn Malik’s (may Allah have mercy on him) saying: “And after the one with the kasrah, the khabar is accompanied *** by the lam of inception, like ‘Inni lawazr.’”
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : The one with the kasrah
And his saying: “Like ‘Inni lawazr’” means “I am indeed strong,” for here the kasrah is on the letter, the yā’ is its subject, and “wazr” is its predicate, and the lam is for inception.
If someone asks: How or why do we call it the lam of inception when it is at the end of the predicate? We say: Because the original rule is that it occurs in the subject, meaning at the beginning of the sentence, but it was delayed due to the presence of inna and anna for emphasis, and the lam is for emphasis. They said: It is not befitting to combine two emphatic markers at the beginning of the speech. For this reason, they call it the “sliding lam” (al-lam al-muzhalqah), because it slid from the beginning of the speech to the end. Therefore, it is not permissible to say “Linni dhu wazr” (I am indeed a person of strength) [repeated for emphasis], as this is prohibited. It is also not permissible to say: “Inna li-Zaydin qā’im” (Indeed, for Zayd is standing), do you understand? Good. And it is permissible to say: “Inna Zaydan li-qā’im” (Indeed, Zayd is standing). So the positions of the lam are three: before inna, after it and before the subject, and after the subject and before the predicate. Which is the permissible position?
The student: The latter.
The Shaykh : The last one. And for this reason he said: “Accompanied by the lam of inception, like ‘Inni lawazr’”
Good. If someone asks: Is it permissible for me to say: “Layta Zaydan li-qā’im” (Would that Zayd were standing)?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : No. Do you know that Zayd is standing?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : No, Zayd did not stand, but ‘Amr is indeed standing.
The student: Likewise.
The Shaykh : Likewise, “Kadha Zaydan li-asad” (As if Zayd were a lion).
The student: It is not permissible
The Shaykh : It is not permissible, because the author restricted the permissibility to the one with the kasrah.
And his saying: “Like ‘Inni lawazr’” means “I am indeed strong,” for here the kasrah is on the letter, the yā’ is its subject, and “wazr” is its predicate, and the lam is for inception.
If someone asks: How or why do we call it the lam of inception when it is at the end of the predicate? We say: Because the original rule is that it occurs in the subject, meaning at the beginning of the sentence, but it was delayed due to the presence of inna and anna for emphasis, and the lam is for emphasis. They said: It is not befitting to combine two emphatic markers at the beginning of the speech. For this reason, they call it the “sliding lam” (al-lam al-muzhalqah), because it slid from the beginning of the speech to the end. Therefore, it is not permissible to say “Linni dhu wazr” (I am indeed a person of strength) [repeated for emphasis], as this is prohibited. It is also not permissible to say: “Inna li-Zaydin qā’im” (Indeed, for Zayd is standing), do you understand? Good. And it is permissible to say: “Inna Zaydan li-qā’im” (Indeed, Zayd is standing). So the positions of the lam are three: before inna, after it and before the subject, and after the subject and before the predicate. Which is the permissible position?
The student: The latter.
The Shaykh : The last one. And for this reason he said: “Accompanied by the lam of inception, like ‘Inni lawazr’”
Good. If someone asks: Is it permissible for me to say: “Layta Zaydan li-qā’im” (Would that Zayd were standing)?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : No. Do you know that Zayd is standing?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : No, Zayd did not stand, but ‘Amr is indeed standing.
The student: Likewise.
The Shaykh : Likewise, “Kadha Zaydan li-asad” (As if Zayd were a lion).
The student: It is not permissible
The Shaykh : It is not permissible, because the author restricted the permissibility to the one with the kasrah.