Explanation of the author's (may Allah have mercy on him) statement: " . . .

The Shaykh : He says: "And the present tense is what has one of the four additional letters at its beginning, gathered in the word 'anayt'". The present tense has a connected marker and a disconnected marker; it has a connected marker and a disconnected marker. The disconnected marker is *lam* (the negative particle). So any word that accepts *lam* is a present tense verb. Ibn Malik said:
"A present tense verb follows *lam*, like 'kiya shams'" "A present tense verb follows *lam*, like 'kiya shams'". So any word that accepts *lam* is a present tense verb. Did you understand? Good. If we say *yaqum* (he stands), does it accept *lam*? *Lam yaqum* (he did not stand). *Qama* (he stood).
The student: It does not accept it.

The Shaykh : Yes, *qama* does not accept *lam*. But they say some students were studying with the professors, and one said, "*lam* never enters the past tense." So one of the students, who had, praise be to Allah, a strong memory, raised his finger and said, "What do you have to say?" He said, "What do you say about the poet's line: 'And they permitted *lam* to enter the past tense'?" He said, "Well, what do you say about this speech? ... 'A word came, and *lam* did not strive, and *lam* did not be pleased'." He said, "It is not valid." He said, "What do you say about this verse? Is this verse fabricated or not?" "Fabricated, fabricated, and false." In any case, *lam* does not enter except on the present tense verb; it does not enter except on the present tense verb. Did you understand? There is a connected marker. The author says in it: "What has one of the additional letters at its beginning". Pay attention to the phrase "one of the four additional letters gathered in the word 'anayt.'" The author chose *anayt* because it is better than *na'ayt*. *Na'ayt* means "I went far away," but *anayt* is from *ana* (I).
So, these four additional letters, if they are in the word, it is a present tense verb. Whenever you see one of these four additional letters in a word, it is a present tense verb. Did you understand? This is the author's statement. Let us give examples to see if it is consistent or not. *Aqumu* (I stand). *Aqumu*.
The student: Present tense.

The Shaykh : Present tense. What is at the beginning of this word from these letters?
The student: The hamza.

The Shaykh : The hamza. The hamza. Good. *Naqumu* (we stand).
The student: Present tense.

The Shaykh : Present tense. What is at the beginning of it from the additional letters? The *nun*. *Naqumu* is present tense, and what is at the beginning of it is the *ya*. *Ta'umu* (you stand).
The student: Present tense.

The Shaykh : Present tense, and what is at the beginning of it is the *ya*.
The student: The *ta*.

The Shaykh : The *ta*. Good. *Ta'abba* (he labored).
The student: Past.

The Shaykh : It has a *ta* at the beginning.
The student: ...

The Shaykh : It is not an additional letter; it is original. And the author says: "One of the additional letters". As for *ta'abba*, the *ta* is original because you say the pattern of *ta'abba*, and its pattern is *fa'ila*... a measure for morphology, but we do not want to bring you into the measures; I am afraid you will get lost. The important thing is that in *ta'abba*, the *ta* is original, and the author says: "One of the additional letters". Good. *Yabasa* (it dried) is a present tense verb.
The student: Past

The Shaykh : It has a *ya* at the beginning, brothers, but it is original, and the author says: "One of the four additional letters". *Aysa* (it dried).
The student: Past.

The Shaykh : Ah.
The student: Past.

The Shaykh : It has a hamza.
The student: Original.

The Shaykh : Original, and the author says: additional. *Na'aqa* (it brayed). Was there one of you who brayed? It is original. It does not become a present tense. Why? Because the *nun* is original, and the author says: one of the additional letters, one of the four additional letters. Is it clear now? Good. Someone might say: What do you say about *akrama* (he honored)? *Akrama*.
The student: Present tense.

The Shaykh : *Akrama*.
The student: Past.

The Shaykh : Past tense. Yes, the hamza is additional because it is from *karam* (generosity), because it is from *karam*. Yes.
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : How?
The student: ... .

The Shaykh : No, *karama* (was generous) so-and-so became generous. Good. We say: except if the additional letter is for transitivity. If the additional letter is for transitivity, like *akrama* and like *anjada* (he entered Najd) and the like, it does not indicate that it is a present tense, because there is a marker of the past tense that has entered it, which is the *ta* of femininity, so you say: *Akramat Hind* (Hind honored) or the *ta* of the doer, *akramta* (you honored). This prevents it from being a present tense verb. But as I said, or as you understood, this book is concise for whom? For beginners. For beginners. And the beginner takes knowledge bit by bit. If he takes it all at once, he will choke. The common people, for example, truly say: "Whoever makes the mouthful big chokes, and whoever makes it small is satisfied". What do you say, Adam? Good. In any case, now the present tense is what has at its beginning what?
The student: One of the four additional letters.

The Shaykh : One of the four additional letters gathered in the word *anayt*. And you know the examples. The ruling of the present tense. What is the disconnected marker? *Lam*, *sin*, and *sawfa*. So if you find a word beginning with *lam*, it is a present tense; beginning with *sin*, it is a present tense; beginning with *sawfa*, it is a present tense. Good. And there are other markers, but there is no need to mention them.
He said: "And it is always in the nominative case". Pay attention so that your tongue does not change. Always in the nominative case. Every present tense is in the nominative case, but do not forget the markers of the nominative case, either by word, or by estimation, or by movement, or by letter. Did you understand? Note this. So the present tense is always in the nominative case, and the markers of the nominative case have been mentioned before... because this book is built part upon part. So it ends with *sahih* (valid) and nothing is connected to its end, so it is raised by what?
The student: With a *dammah*.

The Shaykh : By the visible *damma*. The visible *damma*. It is feared that nothing is connected to its end, but it is defective, so it is raised by what? By an estimated *damma*. By an estimated *damma*. Good. *Yaf'alan* (they two do) has the *alif* of the dual connected to it, so it is not raised by the *damma*. It is raised by what?
The student: By the presence of the *nun*.

The Shaykh : By the presence of the *nun* and the *alif* is the doer in *yaf'alan*, and the *waw* is the doer in *yaf'alun* (they do), and the *ya* is the doer in *taf'alina* (you two, masculine, do). And the author's statement: "It is always in the nominative case". The apparent meaning of his words is that even the built (verb) is in the nominative case, but this is not correct because it is not the famous view among grammarians. So two issues are excluded from our statement: "And it is always in the nominative case". Two issues are excluded: if the *nun* of emphasis or the *nun* of women is connected to it. If the *nun* of emphasis is connected to it, it becomes built on the *fathah*. And if the *nun* of women is connected to it, it becomes built on the *sukun*. Did you understand? So it is in the nominative case by visible or estimated movements, or by letters. This is one. Second, two issues are excluded from that. Two issues are excluded, brothers: if the *nun* of emphasis is connected to it.
The student: Or the *nun* of women.

The Shaykh : Or the *nun* of women. If the *nun* of emphasis is connected to it, it is built on the *fathah*. Or the *nun* of women, it is built on the *sukun*. Allah the Exalted said: . *Yatrabisna* (they wait). Is it a present tense or a command?
The student: Present tense.

The Shaykh : Why was it not raised? Its end is *sad*. *Yatrabisna*, its end is *sad*. Why was it not raised?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : Because the *nun* of women is connected to it, right? The *nun* of women is also connected to it. That is why it was not made accusative by the *fathah*. Good. Or if the *nun* of emphasis is connected to it. If the *nun* of emphasis is connected to it, it is built on what? On the *fathah*. Whether the *nun* of emphasis is heavy or light. Heavy or light. Heavy means emphatic, light means lightened. Allah the Exalted said: . In this verse, the light *nun* of emphasis and what? And the heavy or thick one are gathered. Good. Which of the two *nun*s is this?
The student: The heavy one.

The Shaykh : Light. Correct. Good. Which of the two *nun*s?
The student: The heavy one.

The Shaykh : The heavy one. Good. This is a problem. ... It is built on the *fathah*, and this is with a *damma*. Ah. It appears that this is a difficult issue. We will leave it. Leave it. Yes, because it is a difficult issue and will confuse you, and you are beginners. So we return to examples of the light and heavy *nun* of emphasis. If I say: *Liyaqumna Zayd* (Let Zayd stand), *Liyaqumna Zayd* (Let Zayd stand), light. And the verb is built on the *fathah*. *Liyadribanna Zayd* (Let Zayd strike), ah. *Liyadribanna Zayd*, heavy or emphatic. It is all the same, and it is built on the *fathah*. Good.
The student: The nun of the women.

The Shaykh : Yes, the *nun* of women. The *nun* of women. That is why the verb was built on the *sukun*. And Allah knows best.