Reading a research paper on *al-Ishtighal* with the Shaykh’s commentary on it.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The reader: In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
And Ibn Ya’sh said in *al-Sharh al-Mufassal*, volume one, page 77: “Al-Farra’ held the view that if you say: ‘Zayd stood and sat,’ then both verbs govern Zayd. Then he said: This is weak. Al-Ashmuny mentioned this issue in volume two, page 76, and Ibn al-Nazzam on page 256, and others likewise. This is one of the opinions in the issue of *al-Tanazuz* (competition for governance). Al-Kisa’i said: If you attach Zayd to the second verb, then the subject of the first verb is omitted, contrary to those who imply it. The evidence for its omission is the saying of the poet:
And how many a blood-stained garment, whose hem *** flowed over it, and you were adorned with a color of departure”
The evidence is *jara* (flowed), which has no apparent subject, so it is omitted according to their view, and implied according to the view of those who do not see the omission of the subject because the verb necessitates it. Ibn Mada’ al-Qurtubi chose Al-Kisa’i’s opinion in his book *al-Radd ‘ala al-Nahwiyin*, page 95, and mentioned among the evidence for it the saying of Allah the Exalted: He refuted their reasoning, meaning: the majority, if the verb and the subject are inseparable, why do you permit the omission of the verb and the retention of the subject, as is known in its place?”
The Shaykh : This has preceded us in the chapter of *al-Tanazuz* (competition for governance), that it is not possible for two governors to govern one governed, and there must be an implication in one of the verbs, if the pronoun is fundamental in the sentence, such as the subject, the substitute for the subject, and the like.
And Ibn Ya’sh said in *al-Sharh al-Mufassal*, volume one, page 77: “Al-Farra’ held the view that if you say: ‘Zayd stood and sat,’ then both verbs govern Zayd. Then he said: This is weak. Al-Ashmuny mentioned this issue in volume two, page 76, and Ibn al-Nazzam on page 256, and others likewise. This is one of the opinions in the issue of *al-Tanazuz* (competition for governance). Al-Kisa’i said: If you attach Zayd to the second verb, then the subject of the first verb is omitted, contrary to those who imply it. The evidence for its omission is the saying of the poet:
And how many a blood-stained garment, whose hem *** flowed over it, and you were adorned with a color of departure”
The evidence is *jara* (flowed), which has no apparent subject, so it is omitted according to their view, and implied according to the view of those who do not see the omission of the subject because the verb necessitates it. Ibn Mada’ al-Qurtubi chose Al-Kisa’i’s opinion in his book *al-Radd ‘ala al-Nahwiyin*, page 95, and mentioned among the evidence for it the saying of Allah the Exalted:
He frowned and turned away, because there came to him the blind man
عبس وتولى * أن جاءه الأعمىThe Shaykh : This has preceded us in the chapter of *al-Tanazuz* (competition for governance), that it is not possible for two governors to govern one governed, and there must be an implication in one of the verbs, if the pronoun is fundamental in the sentence, such as the subject, the substitute for the subject, and the like.