Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And fa'ila is rare in it, and fa'ala *** and by other than the active participle, fa'ala may suffice"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"And fa'ila is rare in it"
"Fa'ila in it" means: in the trilateral verb with a dammah on the 'ayn, the form fa'ila occurs, but it is rare. He said:
"And fa'ila is rare in it, and fa'ala"
Like batil, batula, he is a batil. He said:
"And by other than the active participle, fa'ala may suffice"
How does "by other than the active participle, fa'ala may suffice" work? The active participle of fa'ala is on the pattern fa'il, but he says that sometimes it is not on the pattern of the verb, but rather by other than the active participle, fa'ala may suffice, so the active participle from it is not on the pattern of fa'il. And by this, we know that the active participle of the trilateral verb is not that consistent, or is it? In the first case, he said: The original rule is that it should be on the pattern of fa'il, and he excepted what was excepted from it. Then he said:
"And by other than the active participle, fa'ala may suffice"
So even the rule is not consistent, it is not consistent. And this is what I have been repeating to you: grammar has now become of no benefit to us, because if we were to sit down and establish the rules, the language, the language, the language... would rule over us. The grammarians (may Allah have mercy on them) have two answers for this: sometimes they say this is rare, and sometimes they say this is anomalous, to be memorized and not used as a basis for analogy. This means that now you cannot say anything. So the result is: the active participle of the trilateral verb is not fixed, not fixed means it is not a confirmed rule, but rather it is majority rules or guidelines, not just majority rules or guidelines.
"Fa'ila in it" means: in the trilateral verb with a dammah on the 'ayn, the form fa'ila occurs, but it is rare. He said:
"And fa'ila is rare in it, and fa'ala"
Like batil, batula, he is a batil. He said:
"And by other than the active participle, fa'ala may suffice"
How does "by other than the active participle, fa'ala may suffice" work? The active participle of fa'ala is on the pattern fa'il, but he says that sometimes it is not on the pattern of the verb, but rather by other than the active participle, fa'ala may suffice, so the active participle from it is not on the pattern of fa'il. And by this, we know that the active participle of the trilateral verb is not that consistent, or is it? In the first case, he said: The original rule is that it should be on the pattern of fa'il, and he excepted what was excepted from it. Then he said:
"And by other than the active participle, fa'ala may suffice"
So even the rule is not consistent, it is not consistent. And this is what I have been repeating to you: grammar has now become of no benefit to us, because if we were to sit down and establish the rules, the language, the language, the language... would rule over us. The grammarians (may Allah have mercy on them) have two answers for this: sometimes they say this is rare, and sometimes they say this is anomalous, to be memorized and not used as a basis for analogy. This means that now you cannot say anything. So the result is: the active participle of the trilateral verb is not fixed, not fixed means it is not a confirmed rule, but rather it is majority rules or guidelines, not just majority rules or guidelines.