Continuation of the explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And the original order is obligatory for a bare affirmative *** And abandoning that original order is certainly seen."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said:
"And the original order is obligatory for a bare affirmative *** And abandoning that original order is certainly seen"
The original order, which is placing the subject first in meaning, is obligatory for a bare affirmative, meaning: it was found. So if a reason for the obligation of the original order is found, it is obligatory to adhere to the original order. What is the reason? The reason is ambiguity. If there is ambiguity in placing something other than the subject first in meaning, then it is obligatory to remain with the original order. And its example is what we mentioned a little while ago: "I gave Zayd to 'Umar." Which one is the slave?
The student: 'Umar.
The Shaykh : 'Amr is the slave, the one who was given. So if I said, "I gave 'Umar to Zayd," on the condition that the slave is 'Amr, that would be an error because it becomes ambiguous now. All right.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Brothers, "And abandoning that original order is certainly seen" means: it is seen that that original order is abandoned, for example: "I clothed the garment with its owner." Is this construction according to the original order, O Adam?
The student: Yes?
The Shaykh : "I clothed the garment with its owner"?
The student: Yes, it is according to the original order.
The Shaykh : According to the original order of arrangement?
The student: It is not according to the original order; it is contrary to the original order.
The Shaykh : It is contrary to the original order, because the one who is clothed is the owner, not the garment.
"And the original order is obligatory for a bare affirmative *** And abandoning that original order is certainly seen"
The original order, which is placing the subject first in meaning, is obligatory for a bare affirmative, meaning: it was found. So if a reason for the obligation of the original order is found, it is obligatory to adhere to the original order. What is the reason? The reason is ambiguity. If there is ambiguity in placing something other than the subject first in meaning, then it is obligatory to remain with the original order. And its example is what we mentioned a little while ago: "I gave Zayd to 'Umar." Which one is the slave?
The student: 'Umar.
The Shaykh : 'Amr is the slave, the one who was given. So if I said, "I gave 'Umar to Zayd," on the condition that the slave is 'Amr, that would be an error because it becomes ambiguous now. All right.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Brothers, "And abandoning that original order is certainly seen" means: it is seen that that original order is abandoned, for example: "I clothed the garment with its owner." Is this construction according to the original order, O Adam?
The student: Yes?
The Shaykh : "I clothed the garment with its owner"?
The student: Yes, it is according to the original order.
The Shaykh : According to the original order of arrangement?
The student: It is not according to the original order; it is contrary to the original order.
The Shaykh : It is contrary to the original order, because the one who is clothed is the owner, not the garment.