Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "To three they counted seeing and knowing *** when they became seeing and knowing more."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : And for this reason, he said:
"To three they counted seeing and knowing *** when they became seeing and knowing more"
You say: Fine, let us parse it. His saying: "To three they counted seeing and knowing *** when they became". "To three": a preposition and its object, connected to what?
The student: To "counted."
The Shaykh : To "counted," and "seeing" and "knowing" are the objects of "counted." So if a person asks how they can be objects when they are verbs? We say: The intended meaning is the word. "When they became," meaning: seeing and knowing became seeing and knowing more. So when they became seeing and knowing more, they extended to three objects. And his saying: "counted" could mean: the grammarians, and this is the correct interpretation, or it could mean?
The student: The Arabs.
The Shaykh : The Arabs. And which is more appropriate?
The student: The Arabs.
The Shaykh : The Arabs. Here, the Arabs are more appropriate, because the discussion is about their language. Fine, the example, as I said: "Zayd knew 'Umar to be standing." So here, in the parsing, we say: "Knew": a past tense verb, "Zayd": the subject, "'Umar": the first object, and "standing": the second object. Fine, "I informed Zayd that 'Umar was standing"? Now it extended to three objects, so did the subject become the first? Did it?
The student: An object.
The Shaykh : An object, because of the extension. Fine, "ra'a" (saw) is the same. You say: "Zayd saw 'Umar standing." "Saw" here means: he knew him, not that he saw him with his own eyes. He saw him, meaning he knew him, like His saying, the Exalted:[Al-Ma'arij 70:6]. Fine, we say: "Zayd saw 'Umar standing." If I want to extend it to three objects, I say: "I showed Zayd that 'Umar was standing," meaning: I made him see him as standing. This is its meaning in colloquial language: "I made him see him as standing." So you find that it now extended to three objects. Fine, what is the ruling of these three objects? He (may Allah have mercy on him) explained it by his saying.
"To three they counted seeing and knowing *** when they became seeing and knowing more"
You say: Fine, let us parse it. His saying: "To three they counted seeing and knowing *** when they became". "To three": a preposition and its object, connected to what?
The student: To "counted."
The Shaykh : To "counted," and "seeing" and "knowing" are the objects of "counted." So if a person asks how they can be objects when they are verbs? We say: The intended meaning is the word. "When they became," meaning: seeing and knowing became seeing and knowing more. So when they became seeing and knowing more, they extended to three objects. And his saying: "counted" could mean: the grammarians, and this is the correct interpretation, or it could mean?
The student: The Arabs.
The Shaykh : The Arabs. And which is more appropriate?
The student: The Arabs.
The Shaykh : The Arabs. Here, the Arabs are more appropriate, because the discussion is about their language. Fine, the example, as I said: "Zayd knew 'Umar to be standing." So here, in the parsing, we say: "Knew": a past tense verb, "Zayd": the subject, "'Umar": the first object, and "standing": the second object. Fine, "I informed Zayd that 'Umar was standing"? Now it extended to three objects, so did the subject become the first? Did it?
The student: An object.
The Shaykh : An object, because of the extension. Fine, "ra'a" (saw) is the same. You say: "Zayd saw 'Umar standing." "Saw" here means: he knew him, not that he saw him with his own eyes. He saw him, meaning he knew him, like His saying, the Exalted: