Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "Sell him a mudd for such a price, hand to hand *** And Zayd returned as a lion, meaning like a lion."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Its example is:
"Sell him a mudd for such a price"
"Sell him a mudd for such a price": "Sell" is a verb of command, and the haa is an object built on dam in the position of accusative. "Mudd" is a state (haal) of the haa because of his saying: "Sell him". Is the word mudd derived?
The student: No, it is static.
The Shaykh : It is static, because mudd is not derived, so it is a static noun, but it is a price, since the meaning of "sell him a mudd" is: sell him at a price of a mudd, sell him at a price, the mudd for such a price, the mudd for such a price. For this reason he said:
"And staticness is frequent in price"
Good, is "sell him a rital for such a price" like it?
The student: Like it.
The Shaykh : It is like it, but this is by weight and that is by volume. Measuring is by volumes, and weighing is by weights. Good, it is also like it: sell him a tan, sell him a dir'a, sell him a ba', and the like. We say all of them are static, but they are interpreted as derived because they are a price. Good.
"Sell him a mudd for such a price, hand to hand"
"Hand to hand". Is the word "hand to hand" a state (haal), even though "hand" is derived and not static?
The student: It is static.
The Shaykh : It is static; it is not derived from anything, but it is interpreted as derived, since the meaning of "hand to hand" is: immediate exchange, immediate exchange, meaning: take and give. So it means immediate exchange. So we say: this is not a price, but it has a close interpretation. Everyone knows the meaning of "sell him hand to hand," meaning: no, it is not a price, meaning: immediate exchange. Immediate exchange is derived from taking (qabdh). Immediate exchange is derived from taking.
"And Zayd returned as a lion"
What Allah willed, I see, Ghani, good. "And Zayd returned as a lion". "Returned" means: went back. "Returned" means: went back. "Returned" means: went back or set out. "As a lion": the word "lion" is a state (haal) of Zayd. Is "lion" derived or static?
The student: It is static.
The Shaykh : It is static, a name for a type of beast of prey, so it is static. Yes, but it is interpreted as derived. For this reason the author said:
"Meaning like a lion"
Meaning like a lion. And the kaa is for comparison, meaning: resembling the lion. Zayd returned resembling the lion. For this reason the author used the kaa of comparison, because when you derive "resembling" from the comparison, it becomes a derived word.
The summary of this rule is: that the norm for the state (haal) is that it is transitive, not intransitive, and derived, not static. This is the norm, yes?
The student: The rule.
The Shaykh : The rule is that the norm for the state (haal) is that it is transitive, not intransitive, and derived, not static. Yes.
The second rule: staticness is frequent in two places: in what indicates a price, and in what means a derived word. The first is like saying, yes?: "Sell him a mudd for such a price." And the second is like saying: "hand to hand," and "Zayd returned as a lion," meaning: like a lion, meaning: resembling the lion. Is that clear?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Very well.
The student: What is this interpreted as, O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Which one?
The student: A lion, brave. That is not correct.
The Shaykh : No, for this reason the author said: "Meaning like a lion", meaning: it is interpreted as resemblance, meaning: resembling the lion. Good, if I said: "He came to me with a heart of stone," yes?
The student: It is derived.
The Shaykh : Like stone, meaning: like stone. Yes, yes. He came to me with a heart of stone, or with a heart of stone. It comes to me, it is not sound. He came to me with a heart of stone, meaning: like stone, meaning: resembling it. Because is stone static or derived?
The student: Non-derived.
The Shaykh : It is static.
The student: It means a derived word.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: It means a derived word.
The Shaykh : But it means a derived word. Yes, who is asking?
"Sell him a mudd for such a price"
"Sell him a mudd for such a price": "Sell" is a verb of command, and the haa is an object built on dam in the position of accusative. "Mudd" is a state (haal) of the haa because of his saying: "Sell him". Is the word mudd derived?
The student: No, it is static.
The Shaykh : It is static, because mudd is not derived, so it is a static noun, but it is a price, since the meaning of "sell him a mudd" is: sell him at a price of a mudd, sell him at a price, the mudd for such a price, the mudd for such a price. For this reason he said:
"And staticness is frequent in price"
Good, is "sell him a rital for such a price" like it?
The student: Like it.
The Shaykh : It is like it, but this is by weight and that is by volume. Measuring is by volumes, and weighing is by weights. Good, it is also like it: sell him a tan, sell him a dir'a, sell him a ba', and the like. We say all of them are static, but they are interpreted as derived because they are a price. Good.
"Sell him a mudd for such a price, hand to hand"
"Hand to hand"
Sell gold for silver hand to hand
بع الذهب الفضة يدا بيدThe student: It is static.
The Shaykh : It is static; it is not derived from anything, but it is interpreted as derived, since the meaning of "hand to hand" is: immediate exchange, immediate exchange, meaning: take and give. So it means immediate exchange. So we say: this is not a price, but it has a close interpretation. Everyone knows the meaning of "sell him hand to hand," meaning: no, it is not a price, meaning: immediate exchange. Immediate exchange is derived from taking (qabdh). Immediate exchange is derived from taking.
"And Zayd returned as a lion"
What Allah willed, I see, Ghani, good. "And Zayd returned as a lion". "Returned" means: went back. "Returned" means: went back. "Returned" means: went back or set out. "As a lion": the word "lion" is a state (haal) of Zayd. Is "lion" derived or static?
The student: It is static.
The Shaykh : It is static, a name for a type of beast of prey, so it is static. Yes, but it is interpreted as derived. For this reason the author said:
"Meaning like a lion"
Meaning like a lion. And the kaa is for comparison, meaning: resembling the lion. Zayd returned resembling the lion. For this reason the author used the kaa of comparison, because when you derive "resembling" from the comparison, it becomes a derived word.
The summary of this rule is: that the norm for the state (haal) is that it is transitive, not intransitive, and derived, not static. This is the norm, yes?
The student: The rule.
The Shaykh : The rule is that the norm for the state (haal) is that it is transitive, not intransitive, and derived, not static. Yes.
The second rule: staticness is frequent in two places: in what indicates a price, and in what means a derived word. The first is like saying, yes?: "Sell him a mudd for such a price." And the second is like saying: "hand to hand," and "Zayd returned as a lion," meaning: like a lion, meaning: resembling the lion. Is that clear?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Very well.
The student: What is this interpreted as, O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Which one?
The student: A lion, brave. That is not correct.
The Shaykh : No, for this reason the author said: "Meaning like a lion", meaning: it is interpreted as resemblance, meaning: resembling the lion. Good, if I said: "He came to me with a heart of stone," yes?
The student: It is derived.
The Shaykh : Like stone, meaning: like stone. Yes, yes. He came to me with a heart of stone, or with a heart of stone. It comes to me, it is not sound. He came to me with a heart of stone, meaning: like stone, meaning: resembling it. Because is stone static or derived?
The student: Non-derived.
The Shaykh : It is static.
The student: It means a derived word.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: It means a derived word.
The Shaykh : But it means a derived word. Yes, who is asking?