Explanation of the author's (may Allah have mercy on him) statement: " . . .
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Clear. The accusative case is caused by *la* (the negator of genus). I ask Allah, who brought us out of the exception, to bring us out of *la* (the negator of genus). Yes, because there is some difficulty in it, but Allah will help. Now he says: “Know”. The author (may Allah have mercy on him) began this chapter with “Know” so that you would pay attention. “Know that *la* puts indefinite nouns in the accusative case without tanwin”. From the word “puts in the accusative” (tanṣib), we take its function. So the function of *la* (the negator of genus) is the accusative case, just like the function of *inna* (that) is complete. *Inna* puts the name in the accusative and the predicate in the nominative. This is the function of *la* (the negator of genus). But he says: “indefinite nouns”. It does not put definite nouns in the accusative. So if I said, for example, “*La* Zayd is standing,” I cannot put Zayd in the accusative. Why? Because it is a definite noun. And if I said, “*La* the people are coming,” I cannot put “the people” in the accusative. Why?
The student: Because it is a definite noun.
The Shaykh : Because it is a definite noun. It does not function except with indefinite nouns. Write this down as a condition of its function: the accusative case. Its object must be an indefinite noun. Now, the third point: without tanwin. Its name is never tanwinated. Yes, so you say, for example, “*La* rajulan qayyum” (No man is standing), and you do not say “*La* rajulan qayyum” with tanwin. But if *inna* came and you said, “*Inna* rajulan qayyum” (Indeed, a man is standing), do you tanwin or not?
The student: You tanwin.
The Shaykh : You tanwin. But with *la*, you do not tanwin. Say: “*La* rajulan qayyum” and do not tanwin. Because the author says: “without tanwin”. So *la* (the negator of genus), yes, it puts in the accusative, it does not put in the nominative, and it does not put in the genitive. It is with indefinite nouns, not definite nouns. Without tanwin, not with tanwin. It is not possible to tanwin. It is not possible to tanwin its name. Now, what is the third condition?
The student: The indefinite noun if it is directly touched.
The Shaykh : If it directly touches the indefinite noun. The fourth is that *la* is not repeated. So, regarding the conditions: its name must be an indefinite noun, it must directly touch it, and it must not be repeated. As for its function, it is the accusative case without tanwin. Are you with me now? So, the conditions for the function of *la* (the negator of genus) are three. Count them?
The student: It is not repeated.
The Shaykh : Yes, and it directly touches.
The student: And it directly touches ...
The Shaykh : And that it be with indefinite nouns. Now, so the conditions are three, right?
The student: That it directly touches, that it be with indefinite nouns, and that it is not repeated.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: That its name be an indefinite noun.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: That it directly touches it.
The Shaykh : And that it not be repeated. That it not be repeated, yes. Now, for example: “*La* rajulan fi al-dar” (No man in the house). *La* rajulan: *la* is the negator of genus. *Rajulan* is its name. And *rajulan* is an indefinite noun or a definite noun?
The student: Indefinite.
The Shaykh : An indefinite noun. Do you tanwin or not?
The student: No tanwin.
The Shaykh : No tanwin. *La* rajulan. *Fi al-dar* is its predicate. Now, we say: *La ilaha illa Allah* (There is no god but Allah). Which chapter is this from?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : What? *La* is the negator of genus? And *ilaha* is its name. Is *ilaha* directly touching it or separated from it?
The student: Direct.
The Shaykh : Directly touching. Is it tanwinated? No. Now, so we can give an example other than this. You say: “*La* kitaban mufattah” (No book is open), correct?
The student: Correct.
The Shaykh : Now, “*La* jabanan mahmud” (No coward is praiseworthy).
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : What? *La* jabanan mahmud. Now, “*La* waladan 'aqq” (No son is disobedient)?
The student: Correct grammatically.
The Shaykh : What? Correct grammatically, but not in meaning, because there are disobedient sons. Now, the grammar. The author says: “*La* rajulan fi al-dar.” We say: *La* is the negator of genus. *Rajulan*: its name is built on the fathah (open vowel) in the position of the accusative. We do not say it is in the accusative case by it. We say: it is built on the fathah in the position of the accusative. *Fi al-dar*: a preposition and its object, connected to a deleted predicate. If I said: “*La* rajulan qayyum” (No man is standing), is that correct? What? *La* rajulan qayyum, is that correct?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Now, its grammar. *La* is the negator of genus. You must specify this, because there is a *la* that is not the negator of genus. *La* is the negator of genus. *Rajulan*, yes, it puts the name in the accusative and the predicate in the nominative. *Rajulan*: its name is built on the fathah in the position of the accusative. *Qayyum*: its predicate is in the nominative case by it, and the sign of its nominative case is the visible dammah (closed vowel) at its end. Clear?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Now, if I said: “*La* al-rajul qayyum” (No the man is standing)?
The student: It is not correct, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: Definite.
The Shaykh : Because it is a definite noun. If I said: “*La* rajul al-qayyum” (No the standing man)?
The student: An error.
The Shaykh : Incorrect. Why? Because the predicate is a definite noun. For this reason, we do not parse our saying *La ilaha illa Allah*. We do not parse *Allah* as the predicate of *la*. Why?
The student: Because it is a definite noun.
The Shaykh : Because it is a definite noun. But if I said: “*La* rajul illa qayyum” (No man but a standing one), we parse *qayyum* as its predicate. How do we parse what comes after *illa* in “*La* rajul illa qayyum” as its predicate, but we do not parse the name *Allah* which comes after *illa* as a predicate? Why?
The student: Because it is a definite noun.
The Shaykh : Because this is a definite noun and that is an indefinite noun. Complete. Now, so someone might say: Where is the predicate? I say, my brother, the answer is with you. You mention Allah every day. Is this the first time you mention Allah?
The student: It is omitted.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: Its estimation is: *La ilaha haqq* (There is no god that is true).
The Shaykh : Yes. So the predicate is deleted, and its estimation is *La ilaha haqq* (There is no god that is true). *La ilaha haqq*. Did you understand? Now, some people might have studied and said: The estimation is *La ilaha mawjud illa Allah* (There is no existing god but Allah).
The student: An error.
The Shaykh : This is incorrect. A great error. Because you said *La ilaha mawjud illa Allah* (There is no existing god but Allah), right?
The student: You negated the existing gods.
The Shaykh : You negated the existing gods. There are gods other than Allah. In fact, this statement might imply the unity of existence. If you say *La ilaha mawjud illa Allah* (There is no existing god but Allah), you made the existing thing be Allah. Every existing thing. And this is a great danger. For this reason, it is necessary that we say: The estimation of the predicate is, what? *Haqq* (True). And *Allah* is a substitute for *haqq*. Because the statement is complete and negated. So *Allah* is a substitute for *haqq*. Now, grasp the conditions. We return to the conditions. The conditions for the function of *la* are three: that its name and its predicate be indefinite nouns. The second: that it directly touches the name. The third: that it not be repeated. The conditions are three. As for the function, it is the accusative case without tanwin. This is the function.
The student: Because it is a definite noun.
The Shaykh : Because it is a definite noun. It does not function except with indefinite nouns. Write this down as a condition of its function: the accusative case. Its object must be an indefinite noun. Now, the third point: without tanwin. Its name is never tanwinated. Yes, so you say, for example, “*La* rajulan qayyum” (No man is standing), and you do not say “*La* rajulan qayyum” with tanwin. But if *inna* came and you said, “*Inna* rajulan qayyum” (Indeed, a man is standing), do you tanwin or not?
The student: You tanwin.
The Shaykh : You tanwin. But with *la*, you do not tanwin. Say: “*La* rajulan qayyum” and do not tanwin. Because the author says: “without tanwin”. So *la* (the negator of genus), yes, it puts in the accusative, it does not put in the nominative, and it does not put in the genitive. It is with indefinite nouns, not definite nouns. Without tanwin, not with tanwin. It is not possible to tanwin. It is not possible to tanwin its name. Now, what is the third condition?
The student: The indefinite noun if it is directly touched.
The Shaykh : If it directly touches the indefinite noun. The fourth is that *la* is not repeated. So, regarding the conditions: its name must be an indefinite noun, it must directly touch it, and it must not be repeated. As for its function, it is the accusative case without tanwin. Are you with me now? So, the conditions for the function of *la* (the negator of genus) are three. Count them?
The student: It is not repeated.
The Shaykh : Yes, and it directly touches.
The student: And it directly touches ...
The Shaykh : And that it be with indefinite nouns. Now, so the conditions are three, right?
The student: That it directly touches, that it be with indefinite nouns, and that it is not repeated.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: That its name be an indefinite noun.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: That it directly touches it.
The Shaykh : And that it not be repeated. That it not be repeated, yes. Now, for example: “*La* rajulan fi al-dar” (No man in the house). *La* rajulan: *la* is the negator of genus. *Rajulan* is its name. And *rajulan* is an indefinite noun or a definite noun?
The student: Indefinite.
The Shaykh : An indefinite noun. Do you tanwin or not?
The student: No tanwin.
The Shaykh : No tanwin. *La* rajulan. *Fi al-dar* is its predicate. Now, we say: *La ilaha illa Allah* (There is no god but Allah). Which chapter is this from?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : What? *La* is the negator of genus? And *ilaha* is its name. Is *ilaha* directly touching it or separated from it?
The student: Direct.
The Shaykh : Directly touching. Is it tanwinated? No. Now, so we can give an example other than this. You say: “*La* kitaban mufattah” (No book is open), correct?
The student: Correct.
The Shaykh : Now, “*La* jabanan mahmud” (No coward is praiseworthy).
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : What? *La* jabanan mahmud. Now, “*La* waladan 'aqq” (No son is disobedient)?
The student: Correct grammatically.
The Shaykh : What? Correct grammatically, but not in meaning, because there are disobedient sons. Now, the grammar. The author says: “*La* rajulan fi al-dar.” We say: *La* is the negator of genus. *Rajulan*: its name is built on the fathah (open vowel) in the position of the accusative. We do not say it is in the accusative case by it. We say: it is built on the fathah in the position of the accusative. *Fi al-dar*: a preposition and its object, connected to a deleted predicate. If I said: “*La* rajulan qayyum” (No man is standing), is that correct? What? *La* rajulan qayyum, is that correct?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Now, its grammar. *La* is the negator of genus. You must specify this, because there is a *la* that is not the negator of genus. *La* is the negator of genus. *Rajulan*, yes, it puts the name in the accusative and the predicate in the nominative. *Rajulan*: its name is built on the fathah in the position of the accusative. *Qayyum*: its predicate is in the nominative case by it, and the sign of its nominative case is the visible dammah (closed vowel) at its end. Clear?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Now, if I said: “*La* al-rajul qayyum” (No the man is standing)?
The student: It is not correct, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: Definite.
The Shaykh : Because it is a definite noun. If I said: “*La* rajul al-qayyum” (No the standing man)?
The student: An error.
The Shaykh : Incorrect. Why? Because the predicate is a definite noun. For this reason, we do not parse our saying *La ilaha illa Allah*. We do not parse *Allah* as the predicate of *la*. Why?
The student: Because it is a definite noun.
The Shaykh : Because it is a definite noun. But if I said: “*La* rajul illa qayyum” (No man but a standing one), we parse *qayyum* as its predicate. How do we parse what comes after *illa* in “*La* rajul illa qayyum” as its predicate, but we do not parse the name *Allah* which comes after *illa* as a predicate? Why?
The student: Because it is a definite noun.
The Shaykh : Because this is a definite noun and that is an indefinite noun. Complete. Now, so someone might say: Where is the predicate? I say, my brother, the answer is with you. You mention Allah every day. Is this the first time you mention Allah?
The student: It is omitted.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: Its estimation is: *La ilaha haqq* (There is no god that is true).
The Shaykh : Yes. So the predicate is deleted, and its estimation is *La ilaha haqq* (There is no god that is true). *La ilaha haqq*. Did you understand? Now, some people might have studied and said: The estimation is *La ilaha mawjud illa Allah* (There is no existing god but Allah).
The student: An error.
The Shaykh : This is incorrect. A great error. Because you said *La ilaha mawjud illa Allah* (There is no existing god but Allah), right?
The student: You negated the existing gods.
The Shaykh : You negated the existing gods. There are gods other than Allah. In fact, this statement might imply the unity of existence. If you say *La ilaha mawjud illa Allah* (There is no existing god but Allah), you made the existing thing be Allah. Every existing thing. And this is a great danger. For this reason, it is necessary that we say: The estimation of the predicate is, what? *Haqq* (True). And *Allah* is a substitute for *haqq*. Because the statement is complete and negated. So *Allah* is a substitute for *haqq*. Now, grasp the conditions. We return to the conditions. The conditions for the function of *la* are three: that its name and its predicate be indefinite nouns. The second: that it directly touches the name. The third: that it not be repeated. The conditions are three. As for the function, it is the accusative case without tanwin. This is the function.