Continuation of the explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "Like *tuluk*, *layt*, *ka-anna*, and *nadar* *** Like Sa'id, settled in Hijaz."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : All right, is it not permissible?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : What is the reason? Because *tuluk* is an operator, but it contains the meaning of a verb without its letters, so it is not permissible for the *hal* (state) to precede it.
"Ka-anna Zayd is a moon," is that correct?
The student: There is no *hal*.
The Shaykh : There is no *hal*, all right. "Ka-anna Zayd is a lion, leaping," "Ka-anna Zayd is a lion, leaping," is "leaping" correct?
The student: This is the principle.
The Shaykh : This is the natural order, "Ka-anna Zayd is a lion, leaping," meaning: Ka-anna in his leaping he is a lion.
The student: Leaping?
The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: Is "leaping" a *hal* of the lion?
The Shaykh : No, it is a *hal*, a *hal* of Zayd. I am not describing the lion; I am describing Zayd in the state of his leaping, like a lion. "Ka-anna Zayd is a lion, leaping," do you understand or not? All right, is it permissible for me to say: "Leaping, ka-anna Zayd is a lion"?
The student: It is not suitable.
The Shaykh : It is not permissible, and that is because *ka-anna* is a valid operator that contains the meaning of a verb, so it compares Zayd to the lion, but it does not contain the letters of the verb. Therefore, it is not permissible for the *hal* to precede it. It is not permissible for the *hal* to precede it. Yes.
"Like *tuluk*, *layt*, *ka-anna*, and *nadar* *** Like Sa'id, settled in Hijaz"
*Nadar* means: it is rare. And his saying: Sa'id is the subject, *mustaqiran* (settled) is the *hal*, and *fi Hijaz* (in Hijaz) is the prepositional phrase serving as the predicate of the subject. Why? Because *fi Hijaz*, although it is attached to a deleted word estimated to be *kayn* (existing), in reality it did not appear or manifest. The operator here, the *hal*, did not appear, so it is as if it contains the meaning of a verb without its letters. So Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) says: This is permissible to precede, but it is rare. And some grammarians said: Rather, this is not rare, and it is permissible with no blame on the person to say "Zayd is settled in Hijaz," "Zayd is diligent in his house," and the like. Yes?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : What is the reason? Because *tuluk* is an operator, but it contains the meaning of a verb without its letters, so it is not permissible for the *hal* (state) to precede it.
"Ka-anna Zayd is a moon," is that correct?
The student: There is no *hal*.
The Shaykh : There is no *hal*, all right. "Ka-anna Zayd is a lion, leaping," "Ka-anna Zayd is a lion, leaping," is "leaping" correct?
The student: This is the principle.
The Shaykh : This is the natural order, "Ka-anna Zayd is a lion, leaping," meaning: Ka-anna in his leaping he is a lion.
The student: Leaping?
The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: Is "leaping" a *hal* of the lion?
The Shaykh : No, it is a *hal*, a *hal* of Zayd. I am not describing the lion; I am describing Zayd in the state of his leaping, like a lion. "Ka-anna Zayd is a lion, leaping," do you understand or not? All right, is it permissible for me to say: "Leaping, ka-anna Zayd is a lion"?
The student: It is not suitable.
The Shaykh : It is not permissible, and that is because *ka-anna* is a valid operator that contains the meaning of a verb, so it compares Zayd to the lion, but it does not contain the letters of the verb. Therefore, it is not permissible for the *hal* to precede it. It is not permissible for the *hal* to precede it. Yes.
"Like *tuluk*, *layt*, *ka-anna*, and *nadar* *** Like Sa'id, settled in Hijaz"
*Nadar* means: it is rare. And his saying: Sa'id is the subject, *mustaqiran* (settled) is the *hal*, and *fi Hijaz* (in Hijaz) is the prepositional phrase serving as the predicate of the subject. Why? Because *fi Hijaz*, although it is attached to a deleted word estimated to be *kayn* (existing), in reality it did not appear or manifest. The operator here, the *hal*, did not appear, so it is as if it contains the meaning of a verb without its letters. So Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) says: This is permissible to precede, but it is rare. And some grammarians said: Rather, this is not rare, and it is permissible with no blame on the person to say "Zayd is settled in Hijaz," "Zayd is diligent in his house," and the like. Yes?