Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And if it resembles the verb in its action, *** as a description, it is not separated from its indefiniteness"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : it is not separated from its indefiniteness
"If it resembles the verb in its action"
This is the first part in the chapter on addition (idafah). It resembles the verb "fa'ala" (to do). "Fa'ala" is a present tense verb, and the meaning is: it resembles the present tense verb. This is what is intended, whether it is "fa'ala," "yaf'tala," or "yaf'ala." The important point is that it resembles the present tense verb in its action, even if it does not resemble it in its meter. Yes, in its action and meaning, even if it does not resemble it in its meter.
"If it resembles the verb in its action"
This applies to the active participle, the passive participle, and the descriptive adjective. This is the resemblance to "fa'ala." An example of the active participle is: "I am one who understands the lesson." "Fahim" (understanding) is an active participle. Perhaps we should wait until the author illustrates with it, because he illustrated with it.
"As a description, it is not separated from its indefiniteness"
What does "from its indefiniteness" mean? It means that it does not become definite by addition, and it does not become specific by it. Unlike the first type, which does not resemble "fa'ala," which becomes definite or specific. As for this one, it does not become definite. For this reason, he said:
"It is not separated from its indefiniteness". Write it down, my brothers. If it is not separated from its indefiniteness, then it is permissible for it to be a circumstantial phrase (hal), and it is permissible for it to be a description of an indefinite noun, even if it is added to a definite noun. Allah the Exalted said:[Al-Ma'idah 5:95] [Al-Ma'idah 5:95]. Is "hadyan" (a sacrifice) indefinite or definite?
The student: Indefinite.
The Shaykh : Indefinite. Is "baligh" (reaching) a circumstantial phrase or a description?
The student: Description.
The Shaykh : Can it serve as a circumstantial phrase?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : It cannot serve as one, because "hadyan" is an indefinite noun that is not specified. Therefore, it is not permissible for a circumstantial phrase to come from it. So "baligh al-Ka'bah" is a description of "hady," and "baligh" is added to "al-Ka'bah," and "al-Ka'bah" is the noun to which it is added. Do we all know that "al-Ka'bah" is definite or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : And "baligh" is added to it. And the requirement of the previous rule is that the noun added to a definite noun becomes definite. If "baligh al-Ka'bah" had become definite, it would not have been permissible for it to be a description of "hadyan," which is indefinite, because an indefinite noun cannot be described by a definite noun. Is that clear, or is it foreign speech?
The student: It is clear.
The Shaykh : Ghannam and the group?
The student: It is not clear.
The Shaykh : It is not clear. Okay, first: "baligh" is an active participle. "Baligh" is an active participle because it is on the pattern of the active participle. Did you write it down? Good. "Baligh al-Ka'bah" is added to a definite noun or an indefinite noun?
The student: Definite.
The Shaykh : Definite. Is it now definite or not definite? Is "baligh al-Ka'bah" now definite or not definite?
The student: Not definite.
The Shaykh : Not definite. It is now not definite, even though it is added to a definite noun, because it is an active participle. An active participle that means the present state or the future does not become definite by addition. An active participle that means the present state or the future does not become definite by addition. Did you write it down? If someone asks: What is your evidence that it is not definite? We say: Our evidence is that it was a description of an indefinite noun, and an indefinite noun is never described by a definite noun in the Arabic language. An indefinite noun cannot be described by a definite noun, ever. Therefore, "baligh al-Ka'bah," despite being added to a definite noun, is not definite. Do you understand, my brothers?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : And based on this, we say: "hadyan baligh al-Ka'bah." "Baligh" is a description of "hady." The description of an accusative noun is accusative, and the sign of its accusative case is an explicit fathah at its end. And "baligh" is added to "al-Ka'bah." Is that clear, my brothers? Okay, this is the meaning of his saying:
"It is not separated from its indefiniteness". Where is the answer to the condition in his saying: "And if it resembles"?
The student: "From its indefiniteness."
The Shaykh : Yes, the answer is his saying: "It is not separated from its indefiniteness". So the "fa" here is a connector for the answer, and "min" (from) is a preposition, and "tankir" (indefiniteness) is in the genitive case due to "min," and it is added to the "ha" (pronoun), and it is connected to his saying: "is not separated". Meaning: rather, it remains as it is, indefinite, even if it is added to a definite noun. What is the example?
"If it resembles the verb in its action"
This is the first part in the chapter on addition (idafah). It resembles the verb "fa'ala" (to do). "Fa'ala" is a present tense verb, and the meaning is: it resembles the present tense verb. This is what is intended, whether it is "fa'ala," "yaf'tala," or "yaf'ala." The important point is that it resembles the present tense verb in its action, even if it does not resemble it in its meter. Yes, in its action and meaning, even if it does not resemble it in its meter.
"If it resembles the verb in its action"
This applies to the active participle, the passive participle, and the descriptive adjective. This is the resemblance to "fa'ala." An example of the active participle is: "I am one who understands the lesson." "Fahim" (understanding) is an active participle. Perhaps we should wait until the author illustrates with it, because he illustrated with it.
"As a description, it is not separated from its indefiniteness"
What does "from its indefiniteness" mean? It means that it does not become definite by addition, and it does not become specific by it. Unlike the first type, which does not resemble "fa'ala," which becomes definite or specific. As for this one, it does not become definite. For this reason, he said:
"It is not separated from its indefiniteness". Write it down, my brothers. If it is not separated from its indefiniteness, then it is permissible for it to be a circumstantial phrase (hal), and it is permissible for it to be a description of an indefinite noun, even if it is added to a definite noun. Allah the Exalted said:
as an offering [to Allah] delivered to the Ka'bah
هديًا بالغ الكعبةas an offering [to Allah] delivered to the Ka'bah
هديًا بالغ الكعبةThe student: Indefinite.
The Shaykh : Indefinite. Is "baligh" (reaching) a circumstantial phrase or a description?
The student: Description.
The Shaykh : Can it serve as a circumstantial phrase?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : It cannot serve as one, because "hadyan" is an indefinite noun that is not specified. Therefore, it is not permissible for a circumstantial phrase to come from it. So "baligh al-Ka'bah" is a description of "hady," and "baligh" is added to "al-Ka'bah," and "al-Ka'bah" is the noun to which it is added. Do we all know that "al-Ka'bah" is definite or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : And "baligh" is added to it. And the requirement of the previous rule is that the noun added to a definite noun becomes definite. If "baligh al-Ka'bah" had become definite, it would not have been permissible for it to be a description of "hadyan," which is indefinite, because an indefinite noun cannot be described by a definite noun. Is that clear, or is it foreign speech?
The student: It is clear.
The Shaykh : Ghannam and the group?
The student: It is not clear.
The Shaykh : It is not clear. Okay, first: "baligh" is an active participle. "Baligh" is an active participle because it is on the pattern of the active participle. Did you write it down? Good. "Baligh al-Ka'bah" is added to a definite noun or an indefinite noun?
The student: Definite.
The Shaykh : Definite. Is it now definite or not definite? Is "baligh al-Ka'bah" now definite or not definite?
The student: Not definite.
The Shaykh : Not definite. It is now not definite, even though it is added to a definite noun, because it is an active participle. An active participle that means the present state or the future does not become definite by addition. An active participle that means the present state or the future does not become definite by addition. Did you write it down? If someone asks: What is your evidence that it is not definite? We say: Our evidence is that it was a description of an indefinite noun, and an indefinite noun is never described by a definite noun in the Arabic language. An indefinite noun cannot be described by a definite noun, ever. Therefore, "baligh al-Ka'bah," despite being added to a definite noun, is not definite. Do you understand, my brothers?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : And based on this, we say: "hadyan baligh al-Ka'bah." "Baligh" is a description of "hady." The description of an accusative noun is accusative, and the sign of its accusative case is an explicit fathah at its end. And "baligh" is added to "al-Ka'bah." Is that clear, my brothers? Okay, this is the meaning of his saying:
"It is not separated from its indefiniteness". Where is the answer to the condition in his saying: "And if it resembles"?
The student: "From its indefiniteness."
The Shaykh : Yes, the answer is his saying: "It is not separated from its indefiniteness". So the "fa" here is a connector for the answer, and "min" (from) is a preposition, and "tankir" (indefiniteness) is in the genitive case due to "min," and it is added to the "ha" (pronoun), and it is connected to his saying: "is not separated". Meaning: rather, it remains as it is, indefinite, even if it is added to a definite noun. What is the example?