Reading from Ibn Aqil’s commentary (may Allah have mercy on him), with the Shaykh’s annotations: " .
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The reader: " If it is suitable for a verb with its meaning to occur in its position, then it is valid to raise it explicitly by a consistent analogy, and this is in every place where the superlative form (af'ala) occurs after a negation or something similar to it ".
The Shaykh : It means that the superlative form (af'ala) occurred after a negation or something similar to it. I told you: " You will not see " a prophet that we need it for, or not?!
The reader: Yes.
The Shaykh : Do we need it now?
The reader: Yes.
The Shaykh : We need it, because it must be after a negation or something similar to it. What is similar to negation?
The reader: Prohibition and the interrogative of denial.
The Shaykh : Prohibition and the interrogative of denial mean negation, yes.
The reader: " And its raised noun was external and preferred over itself in two respects, such as: 'I did not see' ".
The Shaykh : Its raised noun was external, meaning from the people of America!! Is that so? Or not? External means not referring back to the preferred one, not referring back to the preferred one. Because if you say: "I passed by a man who is better than Zayd," then the word "better" contains a pronoun that refers to what? It refers to what?
The reader: To the man.
The Shaykh : It refers to the man, but here the raised noun must be external, meaning it does not refer back to the preferred one, yes. And the raised noun was external and preferred: meaning that external noun is preferred over itself in two respects —
The preference here is between two entities, or between one entity in two states. The preference is between one entity in two states, is that right, Ghanim?! How! Do you know that the first condition is that it must be preceded by a negation or something similar to it?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Okay, and do you know that the raised noun must be external?
The student: I did not understand.
The Shaykh : Meaning there is no pronoun referring back to the preferred one.
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Good. And this external noun was preferred over itself in two respects, meaning there is no preference between one person and another, is there? The preference is by what? The preference is between two states of one person, between two states of one person only, understood?!
The student: Complete.
The Shaykh : Good. In two respects, such as!
The reader: " Such as: 'I did not see a man whose kohl in his eye is better than the kohl in Zayd's eye, so the kohl is raised by 'better' because it is valid for a verb with its meaning to occur in its position, such as: 'I did not see a man whose kohl in his eye is good like Zayd's,' and similar to it is His saying: ".
The Shaykh : But but, let's look at this, let's apply the conditions to this example: " I did not see anyone ": Was a negation preceded it or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh :" Better in his eye is the kohl ": "Better" is the superlative form, and it was supposed to carry a pronoun referring back to the man, but now it has raised an external noun that is the preferred one, meaning it does not refer back to the preferred one. And his saying "the kohl is preferred and the preferred one" — the same kohl is both preferred and the preferred one. It is preferred in Zayd's eye, and it is the preferred one in the eye of someone else, in the eye of someone other than Zayd. So the kohl was preferred over itself in two respects: in the state of being in Zayd's eye, it is preferred, and in the state of being in the eye of someone else, it is the preferred one, yes, that's right.
The student: His saying (peace and blessings be upon him)
The Shaykh : Okay, can we make it about something other than kohl? "I did not see a man whose shemagh on his head is better," who is in the eye!!
The student: On Zayd's head.
The Shaykh : On Zayd's head, "than on Zayd's head," is that right or not?!
"I did not see a gathering where the blue color on its wall is better than the blue color on Zayd's wall," for example. The point is that it is not specific to kohl, but this example seems to be one the scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) used because of its clarity and ease, yes.
The Shaykh : It means that the superlative form (af'ala) occurred after a negation or something similar to it. I told you: " You will not see " a prophet that we need it for, or not?!
The reader: Yes.
The Shaykh : Do we need it now?
The reader: Yes.
The Shaykh : We need it, because it must be after a negation or something similar to it. What is similar to negation?
The reader: Prohibition and the interrogative of denial.
The Shaykh : Prohibition and the interrogative of denial mean negation, yes.
The reader: " And its raised noun was external and preferred over itself in two respects, such as: 'I did not see' ".
The Shaykh : Its raised noun was external, meaning from the people of America!! Is that so? Or not? External means not referring back to the preferred one, not referring back to the preferred one. Because if you say: "I passed by a man who is better than Zayd," then the word "better" contains a pronoun that refers to what? It refers to what?
The reader: To the man.
The Shaykh : It refers to the man, but here the raised noun must be external, meaning it does not refer back to the preferred one, yes. And the raised noun was external and preferred: meaning that external noun is preferred over itself in two respects —
The preference here is between two entities, or between one entity in two states. The preference is between one entity in two states, is that right, Ghanim?! How! Do you know that the first condition is that it must be preceded by a negation or something similar to it?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Okay, and do you know that the raised noun must be external?
The student: I did not understand.
The Shaykh : Meaning there is no pronoun referring back to the preferred one.
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Good. And this external noun was preferred over itself in two respects, meaning there is no preference between one person and another, is there? The preference is by what? The preference is between two states of one person, between two states of one person only, understood?!
The student: Complete.
The Shaykh : Good. In two respects, such as!
The reader: " Such as: 'I did not see a man whose kohl in his eye is better than the kohl in Zayd's eye, so the kohl is raised by 'better' because it is valid for a verb with its meaning to occur in its position, such as: 'I did not see a man whose kohl in his eye is good like Zayd's,' and similar to it is His saying: ".
The Shaykh : But but, let's look at this, let's apply the conditions to this example: " I did not see anyone ": Was a negation preceded it or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh :" Better in his eye is the kohl ": "Better" is the superlative form, and it was supposed to carry a pronoun referring back to the man, but now it has raised an external noun that is the preferred one, meaning it does not refer back to the preferred one. And his saying "the kohl is preferred and the preferred one" — the same kohl is both preferred and the preferred one. It is preferred in Zayd's eye, and it is the preferred one in the eye of someone else, in the eye of someone other than Zayd. So the kohl was preferred over itself in two respects: in the state of being in Zayd's eye, it is preferred, and in the state of being in the eye of someone else, it is the preferred one, yes, that's right.
The student: His saying (peace and blessings be upon him)
The Shaykh : Okay, can we make it about something other than kohl? "I did not see a man whose shemagh on his head is better," who is in the eye!!
The student: On Zayd's head.
The Shaykh : On Zayd's head, "than on Zayd's head," is that right or not?!
"I did not see a gathering where the blue color on its wall is better than the blue color on Zayd's wall," for example. The point is that it is not specific to kohl, but this example seems to be one the scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) used because of its clarity and ease, yes.