Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And they raise a hidden pronoun that is explained by a *muyassar*, like *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu*."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"And they raise a hidden pronoun that is explained by a *muyassar*"
When he (may Allah have mercy on him) said that they do not raise anything except what is qualified by *al* or what is attached to something qualified by *al*, he also mentioned that they "raise a hidden pronoun that is explained by a *muyassar*". *Muyassar* means: a *tamyiz* (distinguishing noun), meaning it is permissible for their subject to be a pronoun explained by a *tamyiz*. This is the rule: it is permissible for their subject to be a pronoun explained by a *tamyiz*. The example is: *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu*. The grammatical analysis of the verse is: *yurfi'ani* is a present tense verb with the *nun* present and the *alif* as the subject; *mudmanan* is the object, a hidden pronoun explained by a present tense verb and an object; *muyassar* is the subject that is explained; and the clause "that is explained by a *muyassar*" is an attribute to what?
The student: To the hidden pronoun.
The Shaykh : To the hidden pronoun, it is an attribute to the hidden pronoun. And his saying: "like *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu*", I am looking at how we analyze it because it is repeated often. A preposition enters a clause, and we say: we analyze this as a *hikayah* (narrative). The *kaf* is a preposition, and *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu* is a noun in the genitive case due to the *kaf*, and the sign of its genitive is a *kasrah* estimated on its end, prevented from appearing by the *hikayah*. Because the meaning of our saying "like *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu*" is "like this example," so it is a clause in the position of a singular noun. Some grammarians said that the *kaf* enters a deleted genitive, and the estimation is: "like saying *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu*, like saying." And although this has a perspective, it is weak, because it requires estimating a deleted word, and the original rule is no deletion. For this reason, we say in the words of Ibn Malik:
"Muhammad said, he is Ibn Malik *** I praise my Lord, Allah is the best of masters"
He said: "It is a past tense verb, and Muhammad is the subject, and Ahmad is the object, and may Allah be the best of your masters," to the last word of the entire *Alfiyyah*. The entire *Alfiyyah* is one hundred verses, all in the position of the object.
The student: The object of the speech.
The Shaykh : The object of the speech, the entire *Alfiyyah*, yes.
The student: This is more comfortable.
The Shaykh : More comfortable, we do not want to elaborate. Okay, "like *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu*", let us see if the example applies to the rule or not?
"They raise a hidden pronoun that is explained by a *muyassar*" Yes, "like *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu*". Now, *ni'ma* is a past tense verb, and *qawman* is the subject.
The student: A specification (tamyiz).
The Shaykh : No, it is a *tamyiz*. *Tamyiz* is in the accusative case due to *tamyiz* with a visible *fathah*. The subject is hidden, and the estimation is: "like *ni'ma al-qawm qawman*." It is a pronoun for *ni'ma*, and its estimation is "like *ni'ma hum* (they), meaning *al-qawm* (the people)." We spoke about the explanation: *ni'ma hum* means: *al-qawm*. And his saying: "ma'ashirahu", *ma'ashirahu*, what is the grammatical analysis of *ma'ashirahu*?
The student: *Ma'ashirahu* is the subject.
The Shaykh : No, it is not the subject. We did not say the subject is hidden. *Ma'ashirahu* is a *mubtada'* (subject of a nominal sentence), and it is the *makhassas* (specific thing), and it is the *makhassas* by praise. So, *ma'ashir* is a *mubtada'* in the nominative case due to being a *mubtada'*, and the sign of its nominative is a *dammah* on its end. *Ma'ashir* is a *mudaf* (possessed noun), and the *ha* is a *mudaf ilayh* (possessor) built on *dammah* in the position of the genitive. The clause from *ni'ma qawman* is a *khabar muqaddam* (preceding predicate). The clause is a preceding predicate, because *ni'ma* and *bi'sa* and what follows their pattern require a subject, and they require something else, which is the *makhassas* by praise or blame. It must be a subject and a *makhassas* by praise or blame.
The student: And it is not permissible, Shaykh...
The Shaykh : No, it is not permissible. For this reason, he says: "They raise a hidden pronoun that is explained by a *muyassar*". If we said that *ma'ashirahu* is the subject, it would be a visible raising, not a hidden one. Then the meaning would be corrupted: *ni'ma ma'ashirahu qawman*. No, I am praising a group of people. *Ni'ma al-qawm qawman*, who are they? *Ma'ashirahu*. For this reason, it is said that *ni'ma* and *bi'sa* indicate generality and then specificity. Indicating generality means if I say *ni'ma al-qawm qawman*, this is generality, like: *ni'ma al-rajul Zaydan* (What a good man Zayd is). *Ni'ma al-rajul*, you see that the man is not Zayd. *Ni'ma al-rajul* is common in all men. For this reason, *al* is considered here for the exhaustion of the genus. Then this man is specified as being Zayd. So it is as if he mentioned it twice: once in the way of generality and once in the way of specificity. For this reason, we must say that the estimation is: *ni'ma al-qawm qawman* in the way of generality, then we specify and say: *ma'ashirahu*.
The student: Is *al* for the known?
The Shaykh : Which one?
The student: *Al*.
The Shaykh : No, no, no. The correct view is that it is for generality, for the exhaustion of the genus. He said: "like *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu*".
When he (may Allah have mercy on him) said that they do not raise anything except what is qualified by *al* or what is attached to something qualified by *al*, he also mentioned that they "raise a hidden pronoun that is explained by a *muyassar*". *Muyassar* means: a *tamyiz* (distinguishing noun), meaning it is permissible for their subject to be a pronoun explained by a *tamyiz*. This is the rule: it is permissible for their subject to be a pronoun explained by a *tamyiz*. The example is: *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu*. The grammatical analysis of the verse is: *yurfi'ani* is a present tense verb with the *nun* present and the *alif* as the subject; *mudmanan* is the object, a hidden pronoun explained by a present tense verb and an object; *muyassar* is the subject that is explained; and the clause "that is explained by a *muyassar*" is an attribute to what?
The student: To the hidden pronoun.
The Shaykh : To the hidden pronoun, it is an attribute to the hidden pronoun. And his saying: "like *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu*", I am looking at how we analyze it because it is repeated often. A preposition enters a clause, and we say: we analyze this as a *hikayah* (narrative). The *kaf* is a preposition, and *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu* is a noun in the genitive case due to the *kaf*, and the sign of its genitive is a *kasrah* estimated on its end, prevented from appearing by the *hikayah*. Because the meaning of our saying "like *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu*" is "like this example," so it is a clause in the position of a singular noun. Some grammarians said that the *kaf* enters a deleted genitive, and the estimation is: "like saying *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu*, like saying." And although this has a perspective, it is weak, because it requires estimating a deleted word, and the original rule is no deletion. For this reason, we say in the words of Ibn Malik:
"Muhammad said, he is Ibn Malik *** I praise my Lord, Allah is the best of masters"
He said: "It is a past tense verb, and Muhammad is the subject, and Ahmad is the object, and may Allah be the best of your masters," to the last word of the entire *Alfiyyah*. The entire *Alfiyyah* is one hundred verses, all in the position of the object.
The student: The object of the speech.
The Shaykh : The object of the speech, the entire *Alfiyyah*, yes.
The student: This is more comfortable.
The Shaykh : More comfortable, we do not want to elaborate. Okay, "like *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu*", let us see if the example applies to the rule or not?
"They raise a hidden pronoun that is explained by a *muyassar*" Yes, "like *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu*". Now, *ni'ma* is a past tense verb, and *qawman* is the subject.
The student: A specification (tamyiz).
The Shaykh : No, it is a *tamyiz*. *Tamyiz* is in the accusative case due to *tamyiz* with a visible *fathah*. The subject is hidden, and the estimation is: "like *ni'ma al-qawm qawman*." It is a pronoun for *ni'ma*, and its estimation is "like *ni'ma hum* (they), meaning *al-qawm* (the people)." We spoke about the explanation: *ni'ma hum* means: *al-qawm*. And his saying: "ma'ashirahu", *ma'ashirahu*, what is the grammatical analysis of *ma'ashirahu*?
The student: *Ma'ashirahu* is the subject.
The Shaykh : No, it is not the subject. We did not say the subject is hidden. *Ma'ashirahu* is a *mubtada'* (subject of a nominal sentence), and it is the *makhassas* (specific thing), and it is the *makhassas* by praise. So, *ma'ashir* is a *mubtada'* in the nominative case due to being a *mubtada'*, and the sign of its nominative is a *dammah* on its end. *Ma'ashir* is a *mudaf* (possessed noun), and the *ha* is a *mudaf ilayh* (possessor) built on *dammah* in the position of the genitive. The clause from *ni'ma qawman* is a *khabar muqaddam* (preceding predicate). The clause is a preceding predicate, because *ni'ma* and *bi'sa* and what follows their pattern require a subject, and they require something else, which is the *makhassas* by praise or blame. It must be a subject and a *makhassas* by praise or blame.
The student: And it is not permissible, Shaykh...
The Shaykh : No, it is not permissible. For this reason, he says: "They raise a hidden pronoun that is explained by a *muyassar*". If we said that *ma'ashirahu* is the subject, it would be a visible raising, not a hidden one. Then the meaning would be corrupted: *ni'ma ma'ashirahu qawman*. No, I am praising a group of people. *Ni'ma al-qawm qawman*, who are they? *Ma'ashirahu*. For this reason, it is said that *ni'ma* and *bi'sa* indicate generality and then specificity. Indicating generality means if I say *ni'ma al-qawm qawman*, this is generality, like: *ni'ma al-rajul Zaydan* (What a good man Zayd is). *Ni'ma al-rajul*, you see that the man is not Zayd. *Ni'ma al-rajul* is common in all men. For this reason, *al* is considered here for the exhaustion of the genus. Then this man is specified as being Zayd. So it is as if he mentioned it twice: once in the way of generality and once in the way of specificity. For this reason, we must say that the estimation is: *ni'ma al-qawm qawman* in the way of generality, then we specify and say: *ma'ashirahu*.
The student: Is *al* for the known?
The Shaykh : Which one?
The student: *Al*.
The Shaykh : No, no, no. The correct view is that it is for generality, for the exhaustion of the genus. He said: "like *ni'ma qawman ma'ashirahu*".