Explanation of the author's (may Allah have mercy on him) statement: "… the beneficial by convention …"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"The beneficial" By "the beneficial," we mean what benefits the listener such that he does not look for anything else after it. Yes, what benefits the listener with a benefit for which he does not look for anything else. If I say, "The student succeeded," does it benefit or not? Yes, it benefits the listener now, and he does not look for anything else. But if I say, "If the student succeeded," "If the student succeeded," this is a compound, no doubt, of three words: "if," "succeeded," and "the student." Three words, but it did not benefit. So if I say to the listener, "If the student succeeded," he looks for more. "If the student succeeded, then what?" What happens? So we do not call this speech. Why? Because it did not benefit. It did not provide a benefit for which the listener does not look for anything else.
Now, if I say, "If the boy succeeded, Abdullah, the good, the pure," many words, is it speech or not? Yes. Why?
The student: It did not benefit.
The Shaykh : It did not benefit. The listener now says, "Give us the benefit, give us the benefit."
So there must be a benefit for which the listener does not look for anything else. There is no difference whether the benefit is new or known. If I say, "The sky is above us," is that speech, yes or no? "The sky is above us" is speech, even though it is known. "The earth is below us," is that speech or not speech? It is beneficial speech.
"As if we and the water around us *** are a people sitting with water around them"
Is it beneficial or not beneficial?
The student: Beneficial.
The Shaykh : Even though this is a tautology. If the water is around you, then you are sitting around the water.
Now, in any case, what do we say about "the beneficial"? A benefit for which the listener does not look for anything else, whether this benefit was known to the listener before or is new. There is no difference.
His statement: "by convention". By "by convention," he means one of two things, or if you wish, say two matters.
The first: that the one who coined it intended to coin it. This excludes the speech of the drunkard, the insane, the sleeper, and the delirious. This is not called speech; it is not called speech because its coiner did not intend it.
Another meaning of "by convention" is: by Arabic convention, by Arabic convention. If speech comes to us that provides a benefit for which the listener does not look for anything else, but the Arab does not understand it, yes, then it is not called speech. And for that reason, we ask our brother, Hidayatullah, to give us a beneficial sentence in his language, not in the language of the Arabs.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : What?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: This … .
The Shaykh : Yes, how does he say it?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : ... .
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, we do not understand it in this sense. Rather, we understand "Zayd is raging" to mean he is foaming, as a camel foams. Now, in any case, it must be in the language, meaning by Arabic convention, meaning that it conforms to the Arabic language. Otherwise, it is not speech according to the grammarians. So how many conditions are there? The compound, beneficial, by convention.
Speech is not speech except with these four conditions:
"The utterance" What is excluded by this?
The student: Writing and gesturing …
The Shaykh : Writing and gesturing, even if understood.
"The compound" What is not compounded. The compound includes what is compounded of two words, whether in reality or by estimation.
"The beneficial" This excludes what does not benefit. Even if it is compounded of a thousand words, as long as it does not benefit, it is not speech.
"By convention" I said: it may carry two meanings. By convention from the speaker, meaning that he intended it. By convention from the perspective of the Arabic language, meaning that it conforms to the Arabic language, because our speech is according to the grammar by which we want to apply our speech to the Arabic language.
If someone says: "In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy," is it speech or not speech?
The student: Speech.
The Shaykh : Now, is it a compound of two words or more, in reality or by estimation?
The student: In reality.
The Shaykh : Not by estimation, because the estimation is "In the name of Allah, I read." If you do not estimate "I read," it does not become speech. It was not speech. You understand? I mean, if I do not estimate "I read" in "In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy, I read," it does not become speech. And for this reason, if you say, "The powerful, skilled, understanding man," and you bring many descriptions, it does not become speech until you bring the beneficial thing, because the listener keeps looking or seeking for something.
Now, if I say, "If the boy succeeded, Abdullah, the good, the pure," many words, is it speech or not? Yes. Why?
The student: It did not benefit.
The Shaykh : It did not benefit. The listener now says, "Give us the benefit, give us the benefit."
So there must be a benefit for which the listener does not look for anything else. There is no difference whether the benefit is new or known. If I say, "The sky is above us," is that speech, yes or no? "The sky is above us" is speech, even though it is known. "The earth is below us," is that speech or not speech? It is beneficial speech.
"As if we and the water around us *** are a people sitting with water around them"
Is it beneficial or not beneficial?
The student: Beneficial.
The Shaykh : Even though this is a tautology. If the water is around you, then you are sitting around the water.
Now, in any case, what do we say about "the beneficial"? A benefit for which the listener does not look for anything else, whether this benefit was known to the listener before or is new. There is no difference.
His statement: "by convention". By "by convention," he means one of two things, or if you wish, say two matters.
The first: that the one who coined it intended to coin it. This excludes the speech of the drunkard, the insane, the sleeper, and the delirious. This is not called speech; it is not called speech because its coiner did not intend it.
Another meaning of "by convention" is: by Arabic convention, by Arabic convention. If speech comes to us that provides a benefit for which the listener does not look for anything else, but the Arab does not understand it, yes, then it is not called speech. And for that reason, we ask our brother, Hidayatullah, to give us a beneficial sentence in his language, not in the language of the Arabs.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : What?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: This … .
The Shaykh : Yes, how does he say it?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : ... .
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, we do not understand it in this sense. Rather, we understand "Zayd is raging" to mean he is foaming, as a camel foams. Now, in any case, it must be in the language, meaning by Arabic convention, meaning that it conforms to the Arabic language. Otherwise, it is not speech according to the grammarians. So how many conditions are there? The compound, beneficial, by convention.
Speech is not speech except with these four conditions:
"The utterance" What is excluded by this?
The student: Writing and gesturing …
The Shaykh : Writing and gesturing, even if understood.
"The compound" What is not compounded. The compound includes what is compounded of two words, whether in reality or by estimation.
"The beneficial" This excludes what does not benefit. Even if it is compounded of a thousand words, as long as it does not benefit, it is not speech.
"By convention" I said: it may carry two meanings. By convention from the speaker, meaning that he intended it. By convention from the perspective of the Arabic language, meaning that it conforms to the Arabic language, because our speech is according to the grammar by which we want to apply our speech to the Arabic language.
If someone says: "In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy," is it speech or not speech?
The student: Speech.
The Shaykh : Now, is it a compound of two words or more, in reality or by estimation?
The student: In reality.
The Shaykh : Not by estimation, because the estimation is "In the name of Allah, I read." If you do not estimate "I read," it does not become speech. It was not speech. You understand? I mean, if I do not estimate "I read" in "In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Bestower of Mercy, I read," it does not become speech. And for this reason, if you say, "The powerful, skilled, understanding man," and you bring many descriptions, it does not become speech until you bring the beneficial thing, because the listener keeps looking or seeking for something.