Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And it is rare for the bare noun to be accompanied by it *** and the reverse is with the one accompanied by al"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said:
"And it is rare for the bare noun to be accompanied by it *** and the reverse is with the one accompanied by al"
And it is rare for it to be accompanied by what? What is accompanied? In the copy I am reading to you, the second copy, it says: "And it is rare for the bare noun to be accompanied by it" As I think, is the meaning clear?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : What does the pronoun refer back to?
The student: The object for which the action is done.
The Shaykh : No, "accompanied by it" means the letter is accompanied, "accompanied by it" means: the letter is accompanied, ... he said:
"So decline it with the letter, and it is not prevented *** with the conditions, every Zuhd, this Qana'"
He said: "And it is rare for the bare noun to be accompanied by it" meaning that the letter accompanies the bare noun, bare from what?
The student: From the letter.
The Shaykh : No, bare from al, and the evidence is his saying: "and the reverse is with the one accompanied by al" Now that the conditions are complete, leave the example the author mentioned, which is the pillar, "Qana' this with Zuhd," "Qana' this with Zuhd," clear? The conditions are complete, it is permissible to add the lam, so I say: Qana' this?
The student: For Zuhd.
The Shaykh : For Zuhd, no no, "Qana' this with Zuhd," "Qana' this with Zuhd" because it does not have an alif, "Qana' this with Zuhd," did you understand, good now? Okay, but "Qana' this with Zuhd" is rare, rare, "Qana' this with Zuhd" is rare, because he said: "And it is rare for the bare noun to be accompanied by it" It is rare for the letter to accompany the object for which the action is done if it is bare from al, "and the reverse is with the one accompanied by al" What is the reverse?
The student: It is frequent.
The Shaykh : That it is frequent for the letter to be accompanied by al, it is frequent for the letter to be accompanied by al, for example: "Qana' this for Zuhd," this is the frequent one, "Qana' this for Zuhd," this is the frequent one, and it is permissible to say "Qana' this Zuhd," "Qana' this Zuhd," it is permissible, but it is rare, because he said "and the reverse is with the one accompanied by al" "and the reverse is with the one accompanied by al" I hope you are paying attention now.
The student: The reverse ... O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : No, the reverse of being bare, the reverse of being accompanied, the reverse of being accompanied, if the conditions are not met, what is obligatory?
The student: The letter must come.
The Shaykh : The letter must come, if the conditions are not met, the letter must come whether the verbal noun is bare from al or not bare from al, if the conditions are not met, a letter is necessary, if the conditions are met, two ways are permissible: coming with the letter and accusative case, is that right or not? Okay, which is more? If it is bare from al, the accusative case is more, the accusative case if it is bare from al, "Qana' this with Zuhd," this is more than "Qana' this for Zuhd," is that right or not? Because the author says: "And it is rare for the bare noun to be accompanied by it" If it is accompanied by al?
The student: The more is the genitive case.
The Shaykh : Then the more is the genitive case because of his saying: "and the reverse is with the one accompanied by al" So you say for example: "Qana' this for Zuhd," is more than saying: "Qana' this Zuhd," "Qana' this Zuhd," yes, do you understand, O Abd al-Rahman?
The student: I did not understand the last one.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: "Qana' this Zuhd"?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: Salim?
The Shaykh : Salim, the author brought it as the witness, he did not leave you, okay now the issue is simple, you see, if the condition is disrupted, what is your answer?
The student: The letter is obligatory.
The Shaykh : Coming with the letter is obligatory, if the condition is disrupted, coming with the letter is obligatory, if the conditions are met, two ways are permissible: coming with the letter and the accusative case, is that right or not? Okay, which is more? If it is bare from al, the accusative case is more, and if it is accompanied by al, the genitive case is more, is it clear now?
The student: It is clear.
The Shaykh : I think there is no problem, you say: "Qana' this with Zuhd," is more than saying: "Qana' this for Zuhd," more, and you say: "Qana' this for Zuhd," is more than saying: "Qana' this Zuhd," but Salih says it is permissible to say: "Qana' this Zuhd"? Is this permissible?
The student: Yes.
"And it is rare for the bare noun to be accompanied by it *** and the reverse is with the one accompanied by al"
And it is rare for it to be accompanied by what? What is accompanied? In the copy I am reading to you, the second copy, it says: "And it is rare for the bare noun to be accompanied by it" As I think, is the meaning clear?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : What does the pronoun refer back to?
The student: The object for which the action is done.
The Shaykh : No, "accompanied by it" means the letter is accompanied, "accompanied by it" means: the letter is accompanied, ... he said:
"So decline it with the letter, and it is not prevented *** with the conditions, every Zuhd, this Qana'"
He said: "And it is rare for the bare noun to be accompanied by it" meaning that the letter accompanies the bare noun, bare from what?
The student: From the letter.
The Shaykh : No, bare from al, and the evidence is his saying: "and the reverse is with the one accompanied by al" Now that the conditions are complete, leave the example the author mentioned, which is the pillar, "Qana' this with Zuhd," "Qana' this with Zuhd," clear? The conditions are complete, it is permissible to add the lam, so I say: Qana' this?
The student: For Zuhd.
The Shaykh : For Zuhd, no no, "Qana' this with Zuhd," "Qana' this with Zuhd" because it does not have an alif, "Qana' this with Zuhd," did you understand, good now? Okay, but "Qana' this with Zuhd" is rare, rare, "Qana' this with Zuhd" is rare, because he said: "And it is rare for the bare noun to be accompanied by it" It is rare for the letter to accompany the object for which the action is done if it is bare from al, "and the reverse is with the one accompanied by al" What is the reverse?
The student: It is frequent.
The Shaykh : That it is frequent for the letter to be accompanied by al, it is frequent for the letter to be accompanied by al, for example: "Qana' this for Zuhd," this is the frequent one, "Qana' this for Zuhd," this is the frequent one, and it is permissible to say "Qana' this Zuhd," "Qana' this Zuhd," it is permissible, but it is rare, because he said "and the reverse is with the one accompanied by al" "and the reverse is with the one accompanied by al" I hope you are paying attention now.
The student: The reverse ... O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : No, the reverse of being bare, the reverse of being accompanied, the reverse of being accompanied, if the conditions are not met, what is obligatory?
The student: The letter must come.
The Shaykh : The letter must come, if the conditions are not met, the letter must come whether the verbal noun is bare from al or not bare from al, if the conditions are not met, a letter is necessary, if the conditions are met, two ways are permissible: coming with the letter and accusative case, is that right or not? Okay, which is more? If it is bare from al, the accusative case is more, the accusative case if it is bare from al, "Qana' this with Zuhd," this is more than "Qana' this for Zuhd," is that right or not? Because the author says: "And it is rare for the bare noun to be accompanied by it" If it is accompanied by al?
The student: The more is the genitive case.
The Shaykh : Then the more is the genitive case because of his saying: "and the reverse is with the one accompanied by al" So you say for example: "Qana' this for Zuhd," is more than saying: "Qana' this Zuhd," "Qana' this Zuhd," yes, do you understand, O Abd al-Rahman?
The student: I did not understand the last one.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: "Qana' this Zuhd"?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: Salim?
The Shaykh : Salim, the author brought it as the witness, he did not leave you, okay now the issue is simple, you see, if the condition is disrupted, what is your answer?
The student: The letter is obligatory.
The Shaykh : Coming with the letter is obligatory, if the condition is disrupted, coming with the letter is obligatory, if the conditions are met, two ways are permissible: coming with the letter and the accusative case, is that right or not? Okay, which is more? If it is bare from al, the accusative case is more, and if it is accompanied by al, the genitive case is more, is it clear now?
The student: It is clear.
The Shaykh : I think there is no problem, you say: "Qana' this with Zuhd," is more than saying: "Qana' this for Zuhd," more, and you say: "Qana' this for Zuhd," is more than saying: "Qana' this Zuhd," but Salih says it is permissible to say: "Qana' this Zuhd"? Is this permissible?
The student: Yes.