A discussion from the chapter on the state of being occupied.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : 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 upon his family and his Companions, and upon those who follow them with excellence until the Day of Judgment.
It has been mentioned previously that in the chapter on the state of being occupied, the five rulings apply regarding permissibility and impermissibility. The first is where the nominative case is obligatory, and the second is where what is obligatory?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : The accusative case, and the third is where the nominative case is preferred, the fourth is where the accusative case is preferred, and the fifth is where both the nominative and accusative cases are equal. What was mentioned previously?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : Yes, the obligation of the accusative case, and the obligation of what?
The student: The nominative case.
The Shaykh : The nominative case, the obligation of the accusative case and the obligation of the nominative case. So when is the accusative case obligatory, Sami?
The student: When what is specific to the verb follows the name.
The Shaykh : When what is specific to the verb follows the name. What is an example?
The student: Zayd (accusative) his father strikes him.
The Shaykh : What?
The student: Zayd (accusative) his father strikes him.
The Shaykh : No.
The student: Zayd (accusative) I came to him, he honors you.
The Shaykh : He honors you?! It is obligatory if you came, he honors you.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, no, we wish it to be correct in meaning and correct in example.
The student: If Zayd (accusative).
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.
The student: I came to him.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: Let him honor you.
The Shaykh : Let him honor you, is the example correct?
The student: If Zayd (accusative) I came to him.
The Shaykh : Huh? If Zayd (accusative) I came to him, is correct. Good, the author (may Allah have mercy on him) gave the example with "in" (if) and we brought the example where "wherever" (hithma) is used?
The student: Wherever Zayd (accusative) you meet him, then honor him.
The Shaykh : Wherever Zayd (accusative) you meet him, then honor him. Why did the author give examples with two particles?
The student: Because under each particle there are particles; "in" (if) is one of the conditional particles.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: And "wherever" (hithma) is also one.
The Shaykh : Very well.
The student: But perhaps "in" (if) is a jussive particle and "wherever" (hithma) is not a jussive particle.
The Shaykh : No, "wherever" (hithma) makes the verb jussive.
The student: But from the chapter of...
The Shaykh : Wherever you are upright, Allah will grant you success in the ages to come.
The student: From the chapter of praise, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: Because "in" (if) and "wherever" (hithma) are conditional particles.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: According to the Basrans, if a name follows it, then it becomes a described name with a verb that is estimated and omitted obligatorily.
The Shaykh : No, 'Abdullah?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : A mistake.
The student: Because "in" (if) is a particle, and "wherever" (hithma) is a name.
The Shaykh : Yes, he gave the example with "in" (if) which is a particle, and "wherever" (hithma) which is a name, as if he is saying there is no difference whether the conditional particle is a name or a particle. Good, when is the nominative case obligatory, Hani?
The student: When what is specific to the name follows the name, such as interrogation.
The Shaykh : How?
The student: If what is specific to it precedes the name.
The Shaykh : If what is specific to the name precedes it?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: An example?
The Shaykh : No, I don't want an example.
The student: What is specific to the beginning.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: Like "idha" (when) of suddenness.
The Shaykh : If what is specific to the beginning precedes it, meaning if a particle follows that is only followed by a beginning, then the nominative case is determined, like "idha" (when) of suddenness. Good, what is its example, Mansur?
The student: Zayd (nominative) when I honored him...
The Shaykh : A mistake.
The student: Zayd (nominative) when.
The Shaykh : Let them be quiet, everyone, you see these hands are like brigands, it is frightening.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh, are you done? Did you forget it? Ishaq.
The student: I went out, and then Zayd (nominative) his father strikes him.
The Shaykh : What do you say, is it correct?
The student: Correct.
The Shaykh : It is correct, but his father strikes him to discipline him, meaning?
The student : Yes, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : For the sake of discipline, good.
The student: His father strikes him?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: What is the grammatical analysis of "his father"?
The Shaykh : His father: The subject (fa'il).
The student: And the pronoun?
The Shaykh : The object of the preposition (mudaf ilayh).
The student: No, the pronoun in "strikes him"?
The Shaykh : The object (maf'ul bih).
The student: Occupied?
The Shaykh : ... Good, come on, 'Abd al-Rahman al-Raddadi, 'Abdullah 'Awad?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : What is the meaning of Ibn Malik's saying:
"Thus, if the verb follows what was not intended *** as an object for what before, when what after was found"
The student: They say that this is what we mentioned.
The Shaykh : And he?
The student: The nominative case.
The Shaykh : The obligation of the nominative case.
The student: The obligation of the nominative case, he said likewise if the verb came following the thing that, "if the verb follows what was not intended" if the verb follows a thing that does not act as an operator for what comes after it.
The Shaykh : For what comes after it?
The student: It does not act as an operator.
The Shaykh : For what comes after it?!
The student: "Thus, if the verb follows what was not intended *** as an object for what before"
If the verb follows a thing that does not operate on what comes before it, then the damma (nominative case) is determined, which is the obligation of the nominative case.
The Shaykh : Good, meaning if the verb does not operate?
The student: If the verb does not operate on what.
The Shaykh : Before it.
The student: On what comes before it.
The Shaykh : Then it is determined?
The student: The nominative case is determined.
The Shaykh : Yes, good, what is its example?
The student: For example, we say: How good Zayd (accusative) is.
The Shaykh : This is an expression of wonder!
The student: If Zayd (accusative) honored me, then I honor him.
The Shaykh : How?
The student: Zayd (nominative) if he honored me.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: Then I honor him.
The Shaykh : It is not correct.
The student: Oh, the second example.
The Shaykh : Be patient, no, no, it passed you by.
The student: Zayd (nominative) if you meet him, then honor him.
The Shaykh : Zayd?
The student: If you meet him, then honor him.
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: Because "in" (if) separates between Zayd and the verb, so what comes after it does not operate on what comes before it.
The Shaykh : Is it correct, everyone?
The student: Correct.
The Shaykh : It is correct, or you say Zayd (nominative) have you seen him? The interrogative hamza does not make what comes after it operate on what comes before it. Zayd (nominative) have you seen him, it is not suitable to say: Zayd (accusative) have you seen him. Good, this verse is actually complex, and for this reason our brother 'Abdullah ibn 'Awad struggled to understand it, and it seems Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) made it difficult for himself to compose this in verse for the sake of meter.
The student: ... for example Zayd ...
The Shaykh : Good, the author (may Allah have mercy on him) says in explaining the preference of the accusative case without its being obligatory.
Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and may Allah send prayers and blessings upon our Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and his Companions, and upon those who follow them with excellence until the Day of Judgment.
It has been mentioned previously that in the chapter on the state of being occupied, the five rulings apply regarding permissibility and impermissibility. The first is where the nominative case is obligatory, and the second is where what is obligatory?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : The accusative case, and the third is where the nominative case is preferred, the fourth is where the accusative case is preferred, and the fifth is where both the nominative and accusative cases are equal. What was mentioned previously?
The student: The accusative case.
The Shaykh : Yes, the obligation of the accusative case, and the obligation of what?
The student: The nominative case.
The Shaykh : The nominative case, the obligation of the accusative case and the obligation of the nominative case. So when is the accusative case obligatory, Sami?
The student: When what is specific to the verb follows the name.
The Shaykh : When what is specific to the verb follows the name. What is an example?
The student: Zayd (accusative) his father strikes him.
The Shaykh : What?
The student: Zayd (accusative) his father strikes him.
The Shaykh : No.
The student: Zayd (accusative) I came to him, he honors you.
The Shaykh : He honors you?! It is obligatory if you came, he honors you.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, no, we wish it to be correct in meaning and correct in example.
The student: If Zayd (accusative).
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.
The student: I came to him.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: Let him honor you.
The Shaykh : Let him honor you, is the example correct?
The student: If Zayd (accusative) I came to him.
The Shaykh : Huh? If Zayd (accusative) I came to him, is correct. Good, the author (may Allah have mercy on him) gave the example with "in" (if) and we brought the example where "wherever" (hithma) is used?
The student: Wherever Zayd (accusative) you meet him, then honor him.
The Shaykh : Wherever Zayd (accusative) you meet him, then honor him. Why did the author give examples with two particles?
The student: Because under each particle there are particles; "in" (if) is one of the conditional particles.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: And "wherever" (hithma) is also one.
The Shaykh : Very well.
The student: But perhaps "in" (if) is a jussive particle and "wherever" (hithma) is not a jussive particle.
The Shaykh : No, "wherever" (hithma) makes the verb jussive.
The student: But from the chapter of...
The Shaykh : Wherever you are upright, Allah will grant you success in the ages to come.
The student: From the chapter of praise, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: Because "in" (if) and "wherever" (hithma) are conditional particles.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: According to the Basrans, if a name follows it, then it becomes a described name with a verb that is estimated and omitted obligatorily.
The Shaykh : No, 'Abdullah?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : A mistake.
The student: Because "in" (if) is a particle, and "wherever" (hithma) is a name.
The Shaykh : Yes, he gave the example with "in" (if) which is a particle, and "wherever" (hithma) which is a name, as if he is saying there is no difference whether the conditional particle is a name or a particle. Good, when is the nominative case obligatory, Hani?
The student: When what is specific to the name follows the name, such as interrogation.
The Shaykh : How?
The student: If what is specific to it precedes the name.
The Shaykh : If what is specific to the name precedes it?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: An example?
The Shaykh : No, I don't want an example.
The student: What is specific to the beginning.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: Like "idha" (when) of suddenness.
The Shaykh : If what is specific to the beginning precedes it, meaning if a particle follows that is only followed by a beginning, then the nominative case is determined, like "idha" (when) of suddenness. Good, what is its example, Mansur?
The student: Zayd (nominative) when I honored him...
The Shaykh : A mistake.
The student: Zayd (nominative) when.
The Shaykh : Let them be quiet, everyone, you see these hands are like brigands, it is frightening.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh, are you done? Did you forget it? Ishaq.
The student: I went out, and then Zayd (nominative) his father strikes him.
The Shaykh : What do you say, is it correct?
The student: Correct.
The Shaykh : It is correct, but his father strikes him to discipline him, meaning?
The student : Yes, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : For the sake of discipline, good.
The student: His father strikes him?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: What is the grammatical analysis of "his father"?
The Shaykh : His father: The subject (fa'il).
The student: And the pronoun?
The Shaykh : The object of the preposition (mudaf ilayh).
The student: No, the pronoun in "strikes him"?
The Shaykh : The object (maf'ul bih).
The student: Occupied?
The Shaykh : ... Good, come on, 'Abd al-Rahman al-Raddadi, 'Abdullah 'Awad?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : What is the meaning of Ibn Malik's saying:
"Thus, if the verb follows what was not intended *** as an object for what before, when what after was found"
The student: They say that this is what we mentioned.
The Shaykh : And he?
The student: The nominative case.
The Shaykh : The obligation of the nominative case.
The student: The obligation of the nominative case, he said likewise if the verb came following the thing that, "if the verb follows what was not intended" if the verb follows a thing that does not act as an operator for what comes after it.
The Shaykh : For what comes after it?
The student: It does not act as an operator.
The Shaykh : For what comes after it?!
The student: "Thus, if the verb follows what was not intended *** as an object for what before"
If the verb follows a thing that does not operate on what comes before it, then the damma (nominative case) is determined, which is the obligation of the nominative case.
The Shaykh : Good, meaning if the verb does not operate?
The student: If the verb does not operate on what.
The Shaykh : Before it.
The student: On what comes before it.
The Shaykh : Then it is determined?
The student: The nominative case is determined.
The Shaykh : Yes, good, what is its example?
The student: For example, we say: How good Zayd (accusative) is.
The Shaykh : This is an expression of wonder!
The student: If Zayd (accusative) honored me, then I honor him.
The Shaykh : How?
The student: Zayd (nominative) if he honored me.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: Then I honor him.
The Shaykh : It is not correct.
The student: Oh, the second example.
The Shaykh : Be patient, no, no, it passed you by.
The student: Zayd (nominative) if you meet him, then honor him.
The Shaykh : Zayd?
The student: If you meet him, then honor him.
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: Because "in" (if) separates between Zayd and the verb, so what comes after it does not operate on what comes before it.
The Shaykh : Is it correct, everyone?
The student: Correct.
The Shaykh : It is correct, or you say Zayd (nominative) have you seen him? The interrogative hamza does not make what comes after it operate on what comes before it. Zayd (nominative) have you seen him, it is not suitable to say: Zayd (accusative) have you seen him. Good, this verse is actually complex, and for this reason our brother 'Abdullah ibn 'Awad struggled to understand it, and it seems Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) made it difficult for himself to compose this in verse for the sake of meter.
The student: ... for example Zayd ...
The Shaykh : Good, the author (may Allah have mercy on him) says in explaining the preference of the accusative case without its being obligatory.