Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): . . . And of the addition to what follows it, and what *** did not lack, it is by permissibility and elevation.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : And for this reason he said:
"And of the addition to what follows it, and what *** did not lack, it is by permissibility and elevation"
That is, what did not lack the article "al," and what is meant by "did not lack it" is that "al" was found in it. In that case, it is permissible and elevated. The summary is: it is permissible for its object to be in the nominative or accusative case absolutely. The nominative is for the role of the subject, and the accusative is for the role of the object if it is adorned with "al," or for the role of the qualifier or the object if it is bare of "al." As for the genitive case, it is permissible if the adjective is adorned with "al" and the object is adorned with "al," or if it is added to something adorned with "al" — may Allah reward you. However, if it is bare of "al" and not added to something containing "al," then the genitive case is impermissible. The genitive case is impermissible. For example, you say: "This is good of face." Is it permissible or not?
The student: This?
The Shaykh : "This is good of face," is it permissible? Yes, it is permissible. Because if you strip it of "al," if you strip it of "al," then all three cases are permissible for its object without distinction. You say: "This is good of face" (nominative), "This is good of face" (nominative), "This is good of face" (accusative). However, if you pair it with "al," the genitive case is impermissible, unless "al" is present in the object or it is added to something containing "al." And Allah knows best.
The student : Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Which one?
The student: The one added to "al."
The Shaykh : For example, you say: "The good one came, the face of the father" — peace and mercy of Allah be upon you.
"And of the addition to what follows it, and what *** did not lack, it is by permissibility and elevation"
That is, what did not lack the article "al," and what is meant by "did not lack it" is that "al" was found in it. In that case, it is permissible and elevated. The summary is: it is permissible for its object to be in the nominative or accusative case absolutely. The nominative is for the role of the subject, and the accusative is for the role of the object if it is adorned with "al," or for the role of the qualifier or the object if it is bare of "al." As for the genitive case, it is permissible if the adjective is adorned with "al" and the object is adorned with "al," or if it is added to something adorned with "al" — may Allah reward you. However, if it is bare of "al" and not added to something containing "al," then the genitive case is impermissible. The genitive case is impermissible. For example, you say: "This is good of face." Is it permissible or not?
The student: This?
The Shaykh : "This is good of face," is it permissible? Yes, it is permissible. Because if you strip it of "al," if you strip it of "al," then all three cases are permissible for its object without distinction. You say: "This is good of face" (nominative), "This is good of face" (nominative), "This is good of face" (accusative). However, if you pair it with "al," the genitive case is impermissible, unless "al" is present in the object or it is added to something containing "al." And Allah knows best.
The student : Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ... .
The Shaykh : Which one?
The student: The one added to "al."
The Shaykh : For example, you say: "The good one came, the face of the father" — peace and mercy of Allah be upon you.