Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And do not add a noun to that with which it is unified *** in meaning, and interpret what is ambiguous if it occurs."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Then the author said:
"And do not add a noun to that with which it is unified *** in meaning, and interpret what is ambiguous if it occurs"
It is known that the noun being added (mudaf) is different from the noun to which it is added (mudaf ilayh), is that not so? You say "the slave of Zayd," "the horse of Muhammad," and "the book of the student," and you say "the owner of the house," "the owner of the shop," so the noun being added is different from the noun to which it is added. Therefore, it is not permissible, as the author says: "Do not add a noun to that with which it is unified in meaning" "Do not add a noun to that with which it is unified in meaning" meaning: to that which is its meaning. So, for example, do not say: "This is a book of a book," that is not valid, and "This is a mosque of a mosque," and "This is a slave of a slave," intending the second to be the first. However, in the Arabic language, there are instances of adding a thing to itself, so what do we do? The author says: "Interpret what is ambiguous" "Interpret" meaning: divert it from its apparent meaning if it occurs. Among such instances is their saying: "The mosque of al-Jami'." It is known that the mosque is al-Jami', so how is a thing added to itself? They say: you interpret it and make "the mosque of al-Jami'" mean the name of this name, for example: "mosque" means the name and "al-Jami'" means the name. And they say: "Sa'id Kura," this has passed us, I think, in the chapter of proper names.
"And if they are both singular, add necessarily *** otherwise follow what is appended"
Sa'id Kura, Sa'id is the noun being added and Kura is the noun to which it is added, even though Kura is Sa'id, so how is a noun added to that with which it is unified? He says: we interpret it and say the meaning is: the name of this name. And the summary is: that the noun being added and the noun to which it is added are two distinct things, each one of them is other than the other, so a thing is not added to itself. A thing is not added to itself, though it may be made feminine so that the verb attributed to it is feminine, or the description of the attributed thing is feminine, but on the condition that the meaning is valid without it. For this reason he said: "If it is for the omission of what is ambiguous" and the example, O Muhammad?
"And do not add a noun to that with which it is unified *** in meaning, and interpret what is ambiguous if it occurs"
It is known that the noun being added (mudaf) is different from the noun to which it is added (mudaf ilayh), is that not so? You say "the slave of Zayd," "the horse of Muhammad," and "the book of the student," and you say "the owner of the house," "the owner of the shop," so the noun being added is different from the noun to which it is added. Therefore, it is not permissible, as the author says: "Do not add a noun to that with which it is unified in meaning" "Do not add a noun to that with which it is unified in meaning" meaning: to that which is its meaning. So, for example, do not say: "This is a book of a book," that is not valid, and "This is a mosque of a mosque," and "This is a slave of a slave," intending the second to be the first. However, in the Arabic language, there are instances of adding a thing to itself, so what do we do? The author says: "Interpret what is ambiguous" "Interpret" meaning: divert it from its apparent meaning if it occurs. Among such instances is their saying: "The mosque of al-Jami'." It is known that the mosque is al-Jami', so how is a thing added to itself? They say: you interpret it and make "the mosque of al-Jami'" mean the name of this name, for example: "mosque" means the name and "al-Jami'" means the name. And they say: "Sa'id Kura," this has passed us, I think, in the chapter of proper names.
"And if they are both singular, add necessarily *** otherwise follow what is appended"
Sa'id Kura, Sa'id is the noun being added and Kura is the noun to which it is added, even though Kura is Sa'id, so how is a noun added to that with which it is unified? He says: we interpret it and say the meaning is: the name of this name. And the summary is: that the noun being added and the noun to which it is added are two distinct things, each one of them is other than the other, so a thing is not added to itself. A thing is not added to itself, though it may be made feminine so that the verb attributed to it is feminine, or the description of the attributed thing is feminine, but on the condition that the meaning is valid without it. For this reason he said: "If it is for the omission of what is ambiguous" and the example, O Muhammad?