Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "Who is that one who, if he accompanies our father, *** and the mouth where the mīm from it became distinct."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : And his saying: "Who is that one who, if he accompanies our father" — "Who is that one" refers to what he is describing among the names, so the reference here points to "dhu," which means "possessor." For this reason, he said: "if he accompanies our father", meaning if the accompaniment is made apparent and clear, then it is one of the five names.
And his saying: "if he accompanies our father" — if someone were to ask: Why did he specify this condition, "if he accompanies our father"? The answer is that we say: "Dhu" can come with a meaning other than "possessor"; it can be used as a relative pronoun, as the poet al-Tai said:
"For the water is the water of my father and my grandfather, *** And my well is the one I dug and the one I covered"
"My well, dhu which I dug" — meaning "my well which I dug," and it does not mean "dhu" as in "possessor of a well." Therefore, the author (may Allah have mercy on him) specified his statement with the phrase: "if he accompanies our father", to exclude the "dhu" that is a relative pronoun in the language of the Tai.
"Who is that one who, if he accompanies our father, *** and the mouth where the mīm from it became distinct"
The mouth is known, but he conditioned it with "where the mīm from it became distinct," meaning it is separated. That is, it is required that the mouth not be joined with the mīm, but rather be separated. If it is not joined with the mīm, its pronunciation is "fu" in the state of nominative case. "Fu" in the state of nominative case. And here he says: "Who is that one, dhu, and who is that one, fu." This is the meaning of the verse. Now, how did he say: "Who is that one"? "Man" is for partiality. We say: Yes, because he mentioned only two names, which are "dhu" and "fu." For this reason, he used "man" which indicates partiality. Then after that.
And his saying: "if he accompanies our father" — if someone were to ask: Why did he specify this condition, "if he accompanies our father"? The answer is that we say: "Dhu" can come with a meaning other than "possessor"; it can be used as a relative pronoun, as the poet al-Tai said:
"For the water is the water of my father and my grandfather, *** And my well is the one I dug and the one I covered"
"My well, dhu which I dug" — meaning "my well which I dug," and it does not mean "dhu" as in "possessor of a well." Therefore, the author (may Allah have mercy on him) specified his statement with the phrase: "if he accompanies our father", to exclude the "dhu" that is a relative pronoun in the language of the Tai.
"Who is that one who, if he accompanies our father, *** and the mouth where the mīm from it became distinct"
The mouth is known, but he conditioned it with "where the mīm from it became distinct," meaning it is separated. That is, it is required that the mouth not be joined with the mīm, but rather be separated. If it is not joined with the mīm, its pronunciation is "fu" in the state of nominative case. "Fu" in the state of nominative case. And here he says: "Who is that one, dhu, and who is that one, fu." This is the meaning of the verse. Now, how did he say: "Who is that one"? "Man" is for partiality. We say: Yes, because he mentioned only two names, which are "dhu" and "fu." For this reason, he used "man" which indicates partiality. Then after that.