Explaining the rule in the previous verse along with its grammatical analysis.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Now, the rule in the first verse is that *min* comes for three meanings: for partiality, for clarification, and for beginning, or not? For beginning in places and times, and it is more common in places than in times. Now, is "be partial" the predicate of "be partial"?
The student: It is a command verb.
The Shaykh : It is a verb of command. "and clarify": the *waw* is a conjunction particle, and *bayyin* is also a verb of command. "and begin" is a verb of command. The original ruling for a command is obligation. Now, his saying:
"in places" is attached to *ibtada'*.
"with *min*"?
The student: It is a preposition and its object in the genitive case.
The Shaykh : A preposition and its object in the genitive case, attached to what?
The student: To *ba'id*.
Another student: No, to *min kullahum*.
The Shaykh : To *min kullahum*?
The student: Yes, indeed.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: To *bi ba'id*.
The Shaykh : Yes, to *ba'id*?
The student: To *bi kullahum*, all three.
The Shaykh : Did we not pass through this in the chapter on *tana'uz* (conflict of verbs)?
The student: To *ba'id*, because it is the earliest.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: There is no *tana'uz*.
The Shaykh : How is there no *tana'uz*? Its *tana'uz* is between *ba'id*, *bayyin*, and *ibtada'*. So what is the opinion of the Kufans and what is the opinion of the Basrans?
The student: The second is more appropriate.
Another student: The Basrans say the earliest.
The Shaykh : No, on the contrary, the second is more appropriate according to the people of Basra. This is the statement of Ibn Malik: "And he chose the opposite of what others chose, and this he concealed"
Now, we return to the pronoun.
"And make the neglected verb active in the pronoun of what *** they conflicted over, and adhere to what you adhered to"
Yes, "make the neglected verb active in the pronoun"
Here we know that the one who
"And do not come with the first, which was neglected, *** with a hidden pronoun for other than nominative case, neglected"
We now know that the one who makes it active is
"And do not come with the first, which was neglected, *** with a hidden pronoun for other than nominative case, neglected
But adhere to its deletion"
This is what we linked to this in the chapter on *tana'uz*, brothers. We read it. What do you say? Which one is the active verb? I do not exempt you from answering this question. Which of the three is active?
The student: It is not clear.
Another student: There is no pronoun.
The Shaykh : Now, how is it if we make the first active and we hide in the second everything it needs? For example, we say: *ba'id* and *bayyin* with it, and *ibtada'* with it in places with *min*. If we make the first active, it is obligatory to hide in what follows it. For this reason, Ibn Malik said:
"And make the neglected verb active in the pronoun of what *** they conflicted over, and adhere to what you adhered to"
Then it said:
"And do not come with the first, which was neglected, *** with a hidden pronoun for other than nominative case, neglected"
Based on this, we say: the active verb is the last one in this verse. The active verb is the last one, which is his saying: "ibtada'". Because if we made the first active, it would be obligatory for us to hide in the second and the third. Here, we did not hide, so the activity is for the last one. Is that clear? And this is a rule: if verbs come that require a later object, and you do not find pronouns, for which one is the activity?
The student: The later one.
The Shaykh : For the later one, because if the active verb is later, what comes before it does not need a pronoun for other than the nominative case. And I think it passed us in the chapter on *tana'uz* that there is a statement by the grammarians, which is what we chose, and it is: the easiest is that they are all directed at this, so they all make it active. They all make it active, so we say: *min* is attached to what? To *ba'id*, *bayyin*, and *ibtada'*. And it is better if it is attached to three than if it is attached to one. It might fall with one and be cut off, but with three, it is fine. Now, as for when it comes for the beginning of times, its grammatical analysis is clear.
The student: It is a command verb.
The Shaykh : It is a verb of command. "and clarify": the *waw* is a conjunction particle, and *bayyin* is also a verb of command. "and begin" is a verb of command. The original ruling for a command is obligation. Now, his saying:
"in places" is attached to *ibtada'*.
"with *min*"?
The student: It is a preposition and its object in the genitive case.
The Shaykh : A preposition and its object in the genitive case, attached to what?
The student: To *ba'id*.
Another student: No, to *min kullahum*.
The Shaykh : To *min kullahum*?
The student: Yes, indeed.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: To *bi ba'id*.
The Shaykh : Yes, to *ba'id*?
The student: To *bi kullahum*, all three.
The Shaykh : Did we not pass through this in the chapter on *tana'uz* (conflict of verbs)?
The student: To *ba'id*, because it is the earliest.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: There is no *tana'uz*.
The Shaykh : How is there no *tana'uz*? Its *tana'uz* is between *ba'id*, *bayyin*, and *ibtada'*. So what is the opinion of the Kufans and what is the opinion of the Basrans?
The student: The second is more appropriate.
Another student: The Basrans say the earliest.
The Shaykh : No, on the contrary, the second is more appropriate according to the people of Basra. This is the statement of Ibn Malik: "And he chose the opposite of what others chose, and this he concealed"
Now, we return to the pronoun.
"And make the neglected verb active in the pronoun of what *** they conflicted over, and adhere to what you adhered to"
Yes, "make the neglected verb active in the pronoun"
Here we know that the one who
"And do not come with the first, which was neglected, *** with a hidden pronoun for other than nominative case, neglected"
We now know that the one who makes it active is
"And do not come with the first, which was neglected, *** with a hidden pronoun for other than nominative case, neglected
But adhere to its deletion"
This is what we linked to this in the chapter on *tana'uz*, brothers. We read it. What do you say? Which one is the active verb? I do not exempt you from answering this question. Which of the three is active?
The student: It is not clear.
Another student: There is no pronoun.
The Shaykh : Now, how is it if we make the first active and we hide in the second everything it needs? For example, we say: *ba'id* and *bayyin* with it, and *ibtada'* with it in places with *min*. If we make the first active, it is obligatory to hide in what follows it. For this reason, Ibn Malik said:
"And make the neglected verb active in the pronoun of what *** they conflicted over, and adhere to what you adhered to"
Then it said:
"And do not come with the first, which was neglected, *** with a hidden pronoun for other than nominative case, neglected"
Based on this, we say: the active verb is the last one in this verse. The active verb is the last one, which is his saying: "ibtada'". Because if we made the first active, it would be obligatory for us to hide in the second and the third. Here, we did not hide, so the activity is for the last one. Is that clear? And this is a rule: if verbs come that require a later object, and you do not find pronouns, for which one is the activity?
The student: The later one.
The Shaykh : For the later one, because if the active verb is later, what comes before it does not need a pronoun for other than the nominative case. And I think it passed us in the chapter on *tana'uz* that there is a statement by the grammarians, which is what we chose, and it is: the easiest is that they are all directed at this, so they all make it active. They all make it active, so we say: *min* is attached to what? To *ba'id*, *bayyin*, and *ibtada'*. And it is better if it is attached to three than if it is attached to one. It might fall with one and be cut off, but with three, it is fine. Now, as for when it comes for the beginning of times, its grammatical analysis is clear.