Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "kiyḥisnāni wa yasi'u ibnākā *** wa qad bagha wa i'tadīa 'abdakā"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said:
"kiyḥisnāni wa yasi'u ibnākā *** wa qad bagha wa i'tadīa 'abdakā"
(May Allah have mercy on him) provided an example that applies to the opinion of the Kufans and the opinion of the Basrans. "Yiḥsanāni wa yasi'u ibnākā" is according to the opinion of whom?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : According to the opinion of whom?
The student: The Kufans.
The Shaykh : According to the opinion of the Kufans or the Basrans? Or both of their opinions? Or is it not according to the opinion of either one of them?
The student: According to the opinion of the Kufans.
The Shaykh : Did we not say that the Basrans make the second verb the governing verb? The Basrans make the second verb the governing verb. So in this example: "yiḥsanāni wa yasi'u ibnākā", what is the governing verb?
The student: The second.
The Shaykh : The second one; the second one is the governing verb. That is why the pronoun was found in the first one. "Yiḥsanāni": a present tense verb, raised by the retention of the nun; the alif: the subject; the waw: a conjunction; and "yasi'u": a present tense verb, raised by the visible dammah; and "ibnā": the subject of "yasi'u," and it is a possessive noun; the kaf: the possessed noun; and the alif is for generality. "wa qad bagha wa i'tadīa 'abdakā" is according to the opinion of whom?
The student: The Kufans.
The Shaykh : According to the opinion of the Kufans, because "bagha" is a past tense verb, and its subject is "'abdakā." "Bagha" is a past tense verb, built on a presumed fathah on its last letter. And "i'tadīa" is a past tense verb and a subject. "'Abda" is the subject of what?
The student: "Bagha."
The Shaykh : The subject of "bagha." "'Abda": the subject of "bagha," raised by the alif in place of the dammah because it is dual, and it is a possessive noun to the kaf, but the alif in it is for generality.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Which of them.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Parse it, parse it.
The student: "Yiḥsan": a present tense verb.
The Shaykh : "Yiḥsanāni" is a present tense verb; this is one of the five verbs. "Yiḥsanāni": a present tense verb, raised by the retention of the nun; the alif is the subject; the waw is a conjunction; "yasi'u" is a present tense verb, raised by the visible dammah; and "ibnāk," "ibnā" is a subject, raised, and its sign of raising is the alif in place of the dammah because it is dual, and it is a possessive noun; the kaf is the possessed noun, built on the fathah in the position of the genitive; and the alif is for generality.
The student: This is according to the opinion of the Basrans.
The Shaykh : Because the Basrans say: make the second verb the governing verb. That is why we said "ibnā" is the subject of "yasi'u." As for the subject of "yiḥsan," it is the alif. Is that clear? The second one says: "bagha wa i'tadīa 'abdakā". "Bagha" is a past tense verb, and it has no subject. "I'tadīa" is a past tense verb and it has a subject, which is the alif. "'Abda" is the subject of whom?
The student: "Bagha."
The Shaykh : The subject of "bagha," raised by the alif in place of the dammah because it is dual; the kaf is the possessed noun; and the alif is for generality. And the summary of the matter is this: there is no strangeness in one verb transiting to more than one object. Second: if the governing verbs are multiple and the object is one, this is called what? Mutual contention (tanāza'), because each of the governing verbs contends with the other for this object. So which one is made the governing verb? The first verb or the second? The first governing verb or the second? There is disagreement among the scholars on this. Some said: the first is made the governing verb because of its precedence. And some said: the second is made the governing verb because of its proximity. Who said the first is made the governing verb because of its precedence?
The student: The Kufans.
The Shaykh : And who said the second is made the governing verb because of its proximity?
The student: The Basrans.
The Shaykh : The Basrans. This is the summary of what preceded. If we make it the governing verb, and if the pronoun is a nominative pronoun, then it is omitted in the one that is left ungoverned. If the pronoun is a nominative pronoun, then it is omitted in the one that is left ungoverned. If the first is left ungoverned, according to the opinion of whom? The Basrans. Then make it the governing verb in the pronoun. And if the second is left ungoverned, likewise, make it the governing verb in the pronoun. And the example from Ibn Malik is clear.
"kiyḥisnāni wa yasi'u ibnākā *** wa qad bagha wa i'tadīa 'abdakā"
(May Allah have mercy on him) provided an example that applies to the opinion of the Kufans and the opinion of the Basrans. "Yiḥsanāni wa yasi'u ibnākā" is according to the opinion of whom?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : According to the opinion of whom?
The student: The Kufans.
The Shaykh : According to the opinion of the Kufans or the Basrans? Or both of their opinions? Or is it not according to the opinion of either one of them?
The student: According to the opinion of the Kufans.
The Shaykh : Did we not say that the Basrans make the second verb the governing verb? The Basrans make the second verb the governing verb. So in this example: "yiḥsanāni wa yasi'u ibnākā", what is the governing verb?
The student: The second.
The Shaykh : The second one; the second one is the governing verb. That is why the pronoun was found in the first one. "Yiḥsanāni": a present tense verb, raised by the retention of the nun; the alif: the subject; the waw: a conjunction; and "yasi'u": a present tense verb, raised by the visible dammah; and "ibnā": the subject of "yasi'u," and it is a possessive noun; the kaf: the possessed noun; and the alif is for generality. "wa qad bagha wa i'tadīa 'abdakā" is according to the opinion of whom?
The student: The Kufans.
The Shaykh : According to the opinion of the Kufans, because "bagha" is a past tense verb, and its subject is "'abdakā." "Bagha" is a past tense verb, built on a presumed fathah on its last letter. And "i'tadīa" is a past tense verb and a subject. "'Abda" is the subject of what?
The student: "Bagha."
The Shaykh : The subject of "bagha." "'Abda": the subject of "bagha," raised by the alif in place of the dammah because it is dual, and it is a possessive noun to the kaf, but the alif in it is for generality.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Which of them.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Parse it, parse it.
The student: "Yiḥsan": a present tense verb.
The Shaykh : "Yiḥsanāni" is a present tense verb; this is one of the five verbs. "Yiḥsanāni": a present tense verb, raised by the retention of the nun; the alif is the subject; the waw is a conjunction; "yasi'u" is a present tense verb, raised by the visible dammah; and "ibnāk," "ibnā" is a subject, raised, and its sign of raising is the alif in place of the dammah because it is dual, and it is a possessive noun; the kaf is the possessed noun, built on the fathah in the position of the genitive; and the alif is for generality.
The student: This is according to the opinion of the Basrans.
The Shaykh : Because the Basrans say: make the second verb the governing verb. That is why we said "ibnā" is the subject of "yasi'u." As for the subject of "yiḥsan," it is the alif. Is that clear? The second one says: "bagha wa i'tadīa 'abdakā". "Bagha" is a past tense verb, and it has no subject. "I'tadīa" is a past tense verb and it has a subject, which is the alif. "'Abda" is the subject of whom?
The student: "Bagha."
The Shaykh : The subject of "bagha," raised by the alif in place of the dammah because it is dual; the kaf is the possessed noun; and the alif is for generality. And the summary of the matter is this: there is no strangeness in one verb transiting to more than one object. Second: if the governing verbs are multiple and the object is one, this is called what? Mutual contention (tanāza'), because each of the governing verbs contends with the other for this object. So which one is made the governing verb? The first verb or the second? The first governing verb or the second? There is disagreement among the scholars on this. Some said: the first is made the governing verb because of its precedence. And some said: the second is made the governing verb because of its proximity. Who said the first is made the governing verb because of its precedence?
The student: The Kufans.
The Shaykh : And who said the second is made the governing verb because of its proximity?
The student: The Basrans.
The Shaykh : The Basrans. This is the summary of what preceded. If we make it the governing verb, and if the pronoun is a nominative pronoun, then it is omitted in the one that is left ungoverned. If the pronoun is a nominative pronoun, then it is omitted in the one that is left ungoverned. If the first is left ungoverned, according to the opinion of whom? The Basrans. Then make it the governing verb in the pronoun. And if the second is left ungoverned, likewise, make it the governing verb in the pronoun. And the example from Ibn Malik is clear.