The discussion regarding the definition of *i'rab*
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : *I'rab* in language means expressing something clearly. It is said: "He *i'rab*-ed what was in his heart," meaning he expressed it. Does *i'rab* relate to the beginnings of words, O 'Abd Allah? Does *i'rab* relate to the beginnings of words?
The student: It does not relate to their endings.
The Shaykh : To their endings, or their middles? It does not relate to their endings. Good. The author's statement: "the change of word endings due to differences". The *lam* here is *nasr* (indicative).
The student: It is explanatory.
The Shaykh : Explanatory means that if the change is due to a difference in the governing factor, then it is excluded by this.
The student: Differences in dialects.
The Shaykh : Yes, differences in languages. If there is a difference in languages, it is not considered *i'rab*.
The student: Or differences in ... .
The Shaykh : There is no difference in languages, so it is not considered *i'rab*. Good, for example.
The student: For example, *hithu*.
The Shaykh : *Hithu* has three dialects: *hithu*, *hitha*, and *hithi*. They differ in the *waw* (or *th* sound). This is a change in the letter's quality, so we do not say this is *i'rab*, because the difference in *dhammah*, *fathah*, and *kasrah* is a difference in dialects. Like this. Good.
The author's statement: "in form or in estimation". This means.
The student: In form ... in estimation, if it is ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, well done. It means that the change may be in form or in estimation. Is that clear, everyone? Good. The letters of *'illah* (vowel letters).
The student: Three.
The Shaykh : What is it?
The student: Alif, waw, and ya.
The Shaykh : Good. For alif, do we need to say "the one before it is open" (fathah), or do we not need to?
The student: We do not need to.
The Shaykh : Why? Does *Adam* require saying "the alif whose preceding letter is open"?
The student: Yes, indeed.
The Shaykh : It is necessary. It is necessary to say it this way. Yes, so this is stronger than the word "needs."
The student: It does not need it, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : It does not need it, correct. Because the letter before alif must be open. So we do not need to say it. For ya, we need to say "the one before it is kasrah."
The student: It does not need it.
The Shaykh : It does not need it. Good. So we have two opinions. Which is more correct? The second one: we need to say "the waw whose preceding letter is dhammah." Do we need to say "the waw whose preceding letter is dhammah"?
The student: It does not need it.
The Shaykh : It does not need it. Why?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : I mean, you have returned to the previous point.
The student: ... I mean, not dhammah.
The Shaykh : Good, so note, everyone: the letters of *'illah* are three. We do not need to say "the one before it is open" for alif, "the one before it is dhammah" for waw, or "the one before it is kasrah" for ya. Based on this, the waw in the word *dilu* (bucket) is not a letter of *'illah* because the letter before it is *sakin* (unvoweled). Therefore, the vowel movement appears on it. You say: I have a *dilu* (nominative), I bought a *dilu* (accusative), and I looked at a *dilu* (genitive). Good. For ya, we say "the one before it is kasrah" to avoid cases where the preceding letter is *sakin*, in which case it is not a letter of *'illah*. For example, *dhubi* (gazelle). What do we say? Is the ya a letter of *'illah*? No. Therefore, the vowel movements appear on it. You say: This is a *dhubi* (nominative), I hunted a *dhubi* (accusative), and I looked at a *dhubi* (genitive). Good. Do the letters of *'illah* allow *i'rab* in all cases? Yes.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: They allow it in estimation.
The Shaykh : The vowel movements are estimated on them. Good.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : As for the waw.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : How?
The student: The dhammah is estimated ...
The Shaykh : Good, the dhammah is estimated.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : And the kasrah is estimated, and the fathah appears. Good. What do we say, O Muhammad ibn Salama, if the letter of *'illah* is an alif? We say it is prevented from appearing due to impossibility.
The student: Impossibility.
The Shaykh : Or a waw or a ya.
The student: Heaviness.
The Shaykh : Heaviness, correct.
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Good. We say for alif it is due to impossibility because the vowel movements cannot appear on it. We say for waw and ya it is due to heaviness because the vowel movements can appear on them, but with heaviness. Like this, or not? But they become heavy.
The student: It does not relate to their endings.
The Shaykh : To their endings, or their middles? It does not relate to their endings. Good. The author's statement: "the change of word endings due to differences". The *lam* here is *nasr* (indicative).
The student: It is explanatory.
The Shaykh : Explanatory means that if the change is due to a difference in the governing factor, then it is excluded by this.
The student: Differences in dialects.
The Shaykh : Yes, differences in languages. If there is a difference in languages, it is not considered *i'rab*.
The student: Or differences in ... .
The Shaykh : There is no difference in languages, so it is not considered *i'rab*. Good, for example.
The student: For example, *hithu*.
The Shaykh : *Hithu* has three dialects: *hithu*, *hitha*, and *hithi*. They differ in the *waw* (or *th* sound). This is a change in the letter's quality, so we do not say this is *i'rab*, because the difference in *dhammah*, *fathah*, and *kasrah* is a difference in dialects. Like this. Good.
The author's statement: "in form or in estimation". This means.
The student: In form ... in estimation, if it is ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, well done. It means that the change may be in form or in estimation. Is that clear, everyone? Good. The letters of *'illah* (vowel letters).
The student: Three.
The Shaykh : What is it?
The student: Alif, waw, and ya.
The Shaykh : Good. For alif, do we need to say "the one before it is open" (fathah), or do we not need to?
The student: We do not need to.
The Shaykh : Why? Does *Adam* require saying "the alif whose preceding letter is open"?
The student: Yes, indeed.
The Shaykh : It is necessary. It is necessary to say it this way. Yes, so this is stronger than the word "needs."
The student: It does not need it, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : It does not need it, correct. Because the letter before alif must be open. So we do not need to say it. For ya, we need to say "the one before it is kasrah."
The student: It does not need it.
The Shaykh : It does not need it. Good. So we have two opinions. Which is more correct? The second one: we need to say "the waw whose preceding letter is dhammah." Do we need to say "the waw whose preceding letter is dhammah"?
The student: It does not need it.
The Shaykh : It does not need it. Why?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : I mean, you have returned to the previous point.
The student: ... I mean, not dhammah.
The Shaykh : Good, so note, everyone: the letters of *'illah* are three. We do not need to say "the one before it is open" for alif, "the one before it is dhammah" for waw, or "the one before it is kasrah" for ya. Based on this, the waw in the word *dilu* (bucket) is not a letter of *'illah* because the letter before it is *sakin* (unvoweled). Therefore, the vowel movement appears on it. You say: I have a *dilu* (nominative), I bought a *dilu* (accusative), and I looked at a *dilu* (genitive). Good. For ya, we say "the one before it is kasrah" to avoid cases where the preceding letter is *sakin*, in which case it is not a letter of *'illah*. For example, *dhubi* (gazelle). What do we say? Is the ya a letter of *'illah*? No. Therefore, the vowel movements appear on it. You say: This is a *dhubi* (nominative), I hunted a *dhubi* (accusative), and I looked at a *dhubi* (genitive). Good. Do the letters of *'illah* allow *i'rab* in all cases? Yes.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: They allow it in estimation.
The Shaykh : The vowel movements are estimated on them. Good.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : As for the waw.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : How?
The student: The dhammah is estimated ...
The Shaykh : Good, the dhammah is estimated.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : And the kasrah is estimated, and the fathah appears. Good. What do we say, O Muhammad ibn Salama, if the letter of *'illah* is an alif? We say it is prevented from appearing due to impossibility.
The student: Impossibility.
The Shaykh : Or a waw or a ya.
The student: Heaviness.
The Shaykh : Heaviness, correct.
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Good. We say for alif it is due to impossibility because the vowel movements cannot appear on it. We say for waw and ya it is due to heaviness because the vowel movements can appear on them, but with heaviness. Like this, or not? But they become heavy.