Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "From the direct emphatic nun and from *** the feminine nun, as in 'ir'una' from 'fitan'"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"From the emphatic nun and from the feminine nun".
The student: Direct.
The Shaykh : Yes, "the direct emphatic nun". His saying: "direct" is to distinguish it from the indirect emphatic nun. The word "direct" with respect to the phrase we mentioned, when the emphatic nun is attached to it, we do not need it; we do not need it, as will become clear from the explanation.
"From the direct emphatic nun" is to distinguish it from the indirect emphatic nun. So if it is not attached to the direct emphatic nun, it is built, meaning if the emphatic nun is attached to it, it is built.
An example of this is that you say: "Zayd stands up." "Zayd stands up." The verb now, ah, is inflected, or is it not? There is no emphatic nun and no feminine nun. Then you say: "Let Zayd stand up." "Let Zayd stand up." Now the emphatic nun is attached to it, ah, direct. "Let Zayd stand up." If the present tense verb is attributed to a singular and it has the emphatic nun, it is direct in all cases. Okay, stay with me. "Let Zayd stand up." At first we said: "Zayd stands up" is in the nominative case. And here we said: "Let Zayd stand up" is not in the nominative case, nor is it in the accusative case. It is not nominative nor accusative, but it is built on the fathah. So when the emphatic nun is attached to it, it becomes built on the fathah.
Allah the Exalted said in the Noble Qur'an:[Yusuf 12:32]. What was said was "laysajannanna." He said: . And he did not say: "wa liyakunna." Why? Because the emphatic nun is attached to it. Okay.
"Laysajannanna" they call it the heavy one, and "liyakunna" they call it the light one. The first is called heavy because it is shaddah (doubled). Every letter with shaddah is heavy. And the second is called light because it is not shaddah; it is sakin (unvoweled). So if the emphatic nun is attached to the present tense verb, ah, it becomes built on the fathah. Okay. Do you say: "Let Zayd stand up" or "Let Zayd stand up"?
The student: Let Zayd stand up.
The Shaykh : Why? Because the emphatic nun is attached to it. And you say: "Except if you do it, O Zayd." "Except if you do it" with a fathah on the lam, although the conditional inna entered it. Why? Because it is built and does not change with the grammatical markers. Like this. And you say: "It pleases me that you do it." Like this, if the expression is correct, "that you do it." Why? Because it is built on the fathah. And you say: "You did not do it." Like this, its building is on the fathah. The summary, my brothers, do not strain your minds.
Now, the present tense is inflected except in two cases: The first case is if the direct emphatic nun is attached to it. And the word "direct" is not apparent, meaning if we deleted it, because if we said "attached to it," that is sufficient, but it is an addition for clarification. Or the feminine nun, and what is meant is the feminine nun. And he did not say "the nun of women" because some of the feminine is women, like the daughters of Adam, and some of it is not women, like sheep. Correct, or not? Yes. Okay. For this reason, the author said: "the feminine nun" and did not say "the nun of women." If he had said "the nun of women," it would have been narrower.
Its example is: "as in 'ir'una' from 'fitan'". May Allah help us. "Ir'una" from whom? From the women. "From 'fitan'" from those who were tempted by them. "From 'fitan'" means they terrify those who were tempted by them. The one who is tempted by them is terrified by them because he fears what they will do to him? They take his heart. They take his heart. He walks behind them. Yes.
And indeed, this is the reality. We ask Allah for safety. Whoever is tempted by women, his heart is taken and he walks like a beast. For this reason, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) warned against the fitnah of women. He said:. And he informed that the majority of the fitnah of the Children of Israel was in women. And Ibn Malik says: "they terrify those who were tempted" to distinguish from being tempted by them, as a warning. I intend to warn against being tempted by them. Okay. Where is the emphatic nun? Ah.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : The author did not give an example for the emphatic nun; he only gave an example for the feminine nun. He said: "as in 'ir'una' from 'fitan'". The original of "ir'una" is "yuru'u" with a waw, but when the verb was built on sukun due to its attachment to the nun of women, two sukun letters met: the waw and the 'ayn. And when two sukun letters meet and the first is a letter of lenition, it must be deleted. The rule is: when two sukun letters meet and the first is a letter of lenition, it must be deleted. And to this rule, Ibn Malik refers in *Al-Kafiyyah* by saying:
"If two sukun letters meet, break what precedes *** And if it is lenition, its deletion is due"
I repeat it a second time, O you who memorize.
"If two sukun letters meet, break what precedes *** And if it is lenition, its deletion is due"
Memorize. Thirdly, it is as if you are arguing that it is better that you repeat the speech three times. Yes. And the Arabs come with a poem of sixty verses or more once, and the people leave and they have memorized it. But we repeat it a third time.
"If two sukun letters meet, break what precedes *** And if it is" meaning the sukun letter.
"And if it is lenition, its deletion is due". And lenition is three letters: the waw, the alif, and the ya. So here, "ir'una," "ir'una," the one before the 'ayn is a waw, a letter of lenition. Delete it. Delete it. Read... Read the verse.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : What?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : No, that is a mistake.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Incorrect.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Wrong. Break...
The student: ... .
The Shaykh :"And if it is, its deletion is due" "lenition, its deletion is due". Okay. So let us now take the rule of the present tense.
The present tense is inflected except in two cases: The first.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : If the direct emphatic nun is attached to it.
And the second: If the feminine nun is attached to it. Okay.
"as in 'ir'una' from 'fitan'". We parse "ir'una." We say: "Ir'una" is a present tense verb built on sukun in the position of nominative. Built on sukun due to its attachment to the feminine nun. And the nun in "ir'una" is a connected pronoun, the subject, built on fathah in the position of nominative. Correct. And "min" is the object, built on sukun in the position of accusative. And "fitan" is a past tense verb, and the clause is the relative clause of the relative pronoun. Okay.
We said regarding the emphatic nun that it must be direct to distinguish from what? From if it is not direct. And when is it not direct? If the verb is attributed to the waw of the group. If the verb is attributed to the waw of the group, or the alif of the dual, or the ya of address, then in this case it is inflected and not built.
Allah the Exalted said:[At-Takathur 102:8]. "Latas'alanna." Ah, is it inflected or built? Okay. And He said the Exalted: . "Falnas'alanna." Ah.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Why? We ask, "Is it built (mabni) or inflected (mu'rab)?" because in "nas'alun" (we ask), the nun is direct, whereas in "tasa'alun" (you ask), the nun is indirect. How is it indirect? Because the original form, my brothers, is "tasa'alunna" (you ask, emphatic). "Tasa'alunna." How many nuns do we have now? Three. The grammarians say, in their reasoning—which is sometimes flawed: "Three letters of the same type cannot come together." In "tasa'alunna," there are three nun letters. We must delete one. So we delete it. Why? To avoid the succession of similar letters (tawali al-mathal). We delete the first nun. The first nun. We delete it to avoid the succession of similar letters. What is the succession of similar letters? The nun is like the nun. We now have three similar letters: the first nun and the shaddah nun (which counts as two). How many is that? Three. Delete the first nun. Delete the first nun. Is that correct or not? Fine. The first nun objects and says: "Why are you deleting me? And you, heavy nun, you are the one who came upon me. You are the one who entered. I am attached to the verb." Look at its objection: Is it attached to the verb or not? Its original form is "tasa'alun," so it is closer to the verb than the nun. So it objects to it and raises a commotion against it, saying: "The nun of emphasis: I came for a specific purpose, which is emphasis. If I came for a specific purpose, which is emphasis, then I am more deserving of the place than you. And you, O nun, are often deleted when a case marker (nasib) enters the verb, it expels you, and when a jussive marker (jazzim) enters, it expels you. So you are light and cowardly. And I came here for what? For emphasis. So I remain, and none of my parts are taken. I remain with my shaddah, emphatic. So the nun of the nominative case, in which three similar letters occurred, is more deserving of deletion. We deleted it. Are you with us? Fine. The nun of emphasis came with a shaddah, and the first letter of the shaddah is a sukun (silent). So it came with the waw. Now a second dispute occurred. What is the second dispute? The waw and the nun. The waw and the nun. The waw said to the nun: "You are an intruder. You are an intruder. Get out, or at least part of you should get out. The first letter of you, yes. Let me remain in my place, and the verb becomes what? It becomes 'tasa'alun.' If we delete the first silent nun, the open nun remains, and it becomes 'tasa'alun.' If it is 'tasa'alun,' the emphasis has not occurred. So the nun of emphasis says to the waw of the verb: "If you delete the first part of me, which is my silent half, the purpose of emphasis is lost, and the verb becomes what? Not emphatic. So the emphasis is lost. I must remain. Then I object to you by quoting Ibn Malik:
"If two silent letters meet, break what precedes them, *** And if it is soft, its deletion is deserved"
And you are soft now. Go ahead. It will remain. Now, the speech: the verb is what? "Tasa'alunna." "Tasa'alunna." Like this or not? We made it like a story to make the understanding clearer, otherwise the matter is less than this. We say: The original of "tasa'alunna" is what? "Tasa'alunna." So the first nun was deleted to avoid the succession of similar letters, and the waw was deleted due to the meeting of two silent letters, and the sentence became "tasa'alunna." Like this or not? And without dispute and without anything. Yes.
The questioner : The inflection (i'rab).
The student: Direct.
The Shaykh : Yes, "the direct emphatic nun". His saying: "direct" is to distinguish it from the indirect emphatic nun. The word "direct" with respect to the phrase we mentioned, when the emphatic nun is attached to it, we do not need it; we do not need it, as will become clear from the explanation.
"From the direct emphatic nun" is to distinguish it from the indirect emphatic nun. So if it is not attached to the direct emphatic nun, it is built, meaning if the emphatic nun is attached to it, it is built.
An example of this is that you say: "Zayd stands up." "Zayd stands up." The verb now, ah, is inflected, or is it not? There is no emphatic nun and no feminine nun. Then you say: "Let Zayd stand up." "Let Zayd stand up." Now the emphatic nun is attached to it, ah, direct. "Let Zayd stand up." If the present tense verb is attributed to a singular and it has the emphatic nun, it is direct in all cases. Okay, stay with me. "Let Zayd stand up." At first we said: "Zayd stands up" is in the nominative case. And here we said: "Let Zayd stand up" is not in the nominative case, nor is it in the accusative case. It is not nominative nor accusative, but it is built on the fathah. So when the emphatic nun is attached to it, it becomes built on the fathah.
Allah the Exalted said in the Noble Qur'an:
and if he will not do what I order him, he will surely be imprisoned
ولئن لم يفعل ما آمره ليسجننّHe will surely be imprisoned and will be among the humble
ليسجنَنّ وليكونَن من الصاغرين"Laysajannanna" they call it the heavy one, and "liyakunna" they call it the light one. The first is called heavy because it is shaddah (doubled). Every letter with shaddah is heavy. And the second is called light because it is not shaddah; it is sakin (unvoweled). So if the emphatic nun is attached to the present tense verb, ah, it becomes built on the fathah. Okay. Do you say: "Let Zayd stand up" or "Let Zayd stand up"?
The student: Let Zayd stand up.
The Shaykh : Why? Because the emphatic nun is attached to it. And you say: "Except if you do it, O Zayd." "Except if you do it" with a fathah on the lam, although the conditional inna entered it. Why? Because it is built and does not change with the grammatical markers. Like this. And you say: "It pleases me that you do it." Like this, if the expression is correct, "that you do it." Why? Because it is built on the fathah. And you say: "You did not do it." Like this, its building is on the fathah. The summary, my brothers, do not strain your minds.
Now, the present tense is inflected except in two cases: The first case is if the direct emphatic nun is attached to it. And the word "direct" is not apparent, meaning if we deleted it, because if we said "attached to it," that is sufficient, but it is an addition for clarification. Or the feminine nun, and what is meant is the feminine nun. And he did not say "the nun of women" because some of the feminine is women, like the daughters of Adam, and some of it is not women, like sheep. Correct, or not? Yes. Okay. For this reason, the author said: "the feminine nun" and did not say "the nun of women." If he had said "the nun of women," it would have been narrower.
Its example is: "as in 'ir'una' from 'fitan'". May Allah help us. "Ir'una" from whom? From the women. "From 'fitan'" from those who were tempted by them. "From 'fitan'" means they terrify those who were tempted by them. The one who is tempted by them is terrified by them because he fears what they will do to him? They take his heart. They take his heart. He walks behind them. Yes.
And indeed, this is the reality. We ask Allah for safety. Whoever is tempted by women, his heart is taken and he walks like a beast. For this reason, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) warned against the fitnah of women. He said:
Fear the women
اتقوا النساءThe student: ... .
The Shaykh : The author did not give an example for the emphatic nun; he only gave an example for the feminine nun. He said: "as in 'ir'una' from 'fitan'". The original of "ir'una" is "yuru'u" with a waw, but when the verb was built on sukun due to its attachment to the nun of women, two sukun letters met: the waw and the 'ayn. And when two sukun letters meet and the first is a letter of lenition, it must be deleted. The rule is: when two sukun letters meet and the first is a letter of lenition, it must be deleted. And to this rule, Ibn Malik refers in *Al-Kafiyyah* by saying:
"If two sukun letters meet, break what precedes *** And if it is lenition, its deletion is due"
I repeat it a second time, O you who memorize.
"If two sukun letters meet, break what precedes *** And if it is lenition, its deletion is due"
Memorize. Thirdly, it is as if you are arguing that it is better that you repeat the speech three times. Yes. And the Arabs come with a poem of sixty verses or more once, and the people leave and they have memorized it. But we repeat it a third time.
"If two sukun letters meet, break what precedes *** And if it is" meaning the sukun letter.
"And if it is lenition, its deletion is due". And lenition is three letters: the waw, the alif, and the ya. So here, "ir'una," "ir'una," the one before the 'ayn is a waw, a letter of lenition. Delete it. Delete it. Read... Read the verse.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : What?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : No, that is a mistake.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Incorrect.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Wrong. Break...
The student: ... .
The Shaykh :"And if it is, its deletion is due" "lenition, its deletion is due". Okay. So let us now take the rule of the present tense.
The present tense is inflected except in two cases: The first.
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : If the direct emphatic nun is attached to it.
And the second: If the feminine nun is attached to it. Okay.
"as in 'ir'una' from 'fitan'". We parse "ir'una." We say: "Ir'una" is a present tense verb built on sukun in the position of nominative. Built on sukun due to its attachment to the feminine nun. And the nun in "ir'una" is a connected pronoun, the subject, built on fathah in the position of nominative. Correct. And "min" is the object, built on sukun in the position of accusative. And "fitan" is a past tense verb, and the clause is the relative clause of the relative pronoun. Okay.
We said regarding the emphatic nun that it must be direct to distinguish from what? From if it is not direct. And when is it not direct? If the verb is attributed to the waw of the group. If the verb is attributed to the waw of the group, or the alif of the dual, or the ya of address, then in this case it is inflected and not built.
Allah the Exalted said:
Then you will surely be asked that Day about pleasure.
ثم لتسألنّ يومئذ عن النعيمSo We will surely ask those who were sent
فلنسألن الذين أرسلThe student: ... .
The Shaykh : Why? We ask, "Is it built (mabni) or inflected (mu'rab)?" because in "nas'alun" (we ask), the nun is direct, whereas in "tasa'alun" (you ask), the nun is indirect. How is it indirect? Because the original form, my brothers, is "tasa'alunna" (you ask, emphatic). "Tasa'alunna." How many nuns do we have now? Three. The grammarians say, in their reasoning—which is sometimes flawed: "Three letters of the same type cannot come together." In "tasa'alunna," there are three nun letters. We must delete one. So we delete it. Why? To avoid the succession of similar letters (tawali al-mathal). We delete the first nun. The first nun. We delete it to avoid the succession of similar letters. What is the succession of similar letters? The nun is like the nun. We now have three similar letters: the first nun and the shaddah nun (which counts as two). How many is that? Three. Delete the first nun. Delete the first nun. Is that correct or not? Fine. The first nun objects and says: "Why are you deleting me? And you, heavy nun, you are the one who came upon me. You are the one who entered. I am attached to the verb." Look at its objection: Is it attached to the verb or not? Its original form is "tasa'alun," so it is closer to the verb than the nun. So it objects to it and raises a commotion against it, saying: "The nun of emphasis: I came for a specific purpose, which is emphasis. If I came for a specific purpose, which is emphasis, then I am more deserving of the place than you. And you, O nun, are often deleted when a case marker (nasib) enters the verb, it expels you, and when a jussive marker (jazzim) enters, it expels you. So you are light and cowardly. And I came here for what? For emphasis. So I remain, and none of my parts are taken. I remain with my shaddah, emphatic. So the nun of the nominative case, in which three similar letters occurred, is more deserving of deletion. We deleted it. Are you with us? Fine. The nun of emphasis came with a shaddah, and the first letter of the shaddah is a sukun (silent). So it came with the waw. Now a second dispute occurred. What is the second dispute? The waw and the nun. The waw and the nun. The waw said to the nun: "You are an intruder. You are an intruder. Get out, or at least part of you should get out. The first letter of you, yes. Let me remain in my place, and the verb becomes what? It becomes 'tasa'alun.' If we delete the first silent nun, the open nun remains, and it becomes 'tasa'alun.' If it is 'tasa'alun,' the emphasis has not occurred. So the nun of emphasis says to the waw of the verb: "If you delete the first part of me, which is my silent half, the purpose of emphasis is lost, and the verb becomes what? Not emphatic. So the emphasis is lost. I must remain. Then I object to you by quoting Ibn Malik:
"If two silent letters meet, break what precedes them, *** And if it is soft, its deletion is deserved"
And you are soft now. Go ahead. It will remain. Now, the speech: the verb is what? "Tasa'alunna." "Tasa'alunna." Like this or not? We made it like a story to make the understanding clearer, otherwise the matter is less than this. We say: The original of "tasa'alunna" is what? "Tasa'alunna." So the first nun was deleted to avoid the succession of similar letters, and the waw was deleted due to the meeting of two silent letters, and the sentence became "tasa'alunna." Like this or not? And without dispute and without anything. Yes.
The questioner : The inflection (i'rab).