Reading from Ibn Aqil’s commentary (may Allah have mercy on him), with the Shaykh’s annotations: " .
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The reader: In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
: " And if it is with a following 'min' " .
The Shaykh : We corroborated this.
The reader: We did not corroborate it,
" And its raising of an explicit noun is rare, and when *** it follows a verb, it is often established
Do you not see among people a companion *** more deserving of honor than "
The noon is sakin (unvoweled)!
The Shaykh : Which one?
The reader: Min!
The Shaykh : Min al-sadiq, no, it is moved with a fathah like al-sadiq.
The reader: " Min al-sadiq:
The superlative form (af'ala) is not free from being suitable for a verb with its meaning to occur in its place, or not,
If it is not suitable for a verb with its meaning to occur in its place, it does not raise an explicit noun, but rather raises a hidden pronoun, such as: 'Zayd is better than 'Amr.' In 'better,' there is a hidden pronoun referring back to Zayd. So do not say: 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' raising 'his father' with 'better,' except in a weak language reported by Sibawayh " .
The Shaykh : This is the permissible case, the one that says: it is permissible. This is the meaning of Ibn Malik's statement: " And its raising of an explicit noun is rare " . Now listen: 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' is it correct for us to make 'his father' a delayed subject?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: It is brought, his father is better than him.
The Shaykh : His father is better than him, is it suitable?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' yes.
The student: The estimated sentence, O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : The estimated sentence: I passed by a man whose father is better than him.
The student: And after it?
The Shaykh : And after it.
The student: Does the pronoun refer back to 'I passed'?
The Shaykh : Yes, this is it. Its original form is: 'a man whose father is better than him,' meaning its meaning is that his father is better than him. This is the meaning of the sentence.
I say: It is not suitable for us to make 'his father' a subject, it is not suitable, because 'better,' as you see, has a fathah on it, so it is an attribute for 'man,' or not? But if we said: 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' it is correct, if we make it a subject and a predicate. But on the assumption that the wording is: 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' it is not correct, and the reason is that 'better' has now become an attribute?
The student: For the man.
The Shaykh : For the man, an attribute for the man, so it is not correct to make it a subject and a predicate.
The student: And the more appropriate?
The Shaykh : Good, and in this is evidence that this issue is an exception to the rule, which is: " That every pronoun whose estimation is 'he' is hidden by permission " , except this issue, because it is a pronoun hidden by obligation, because the explicit noun does not take its place, yes.
The student: His father!
The Shaykh : Where?
The student: Better than him, his father!
The Shaykh : On the assumption of the correctness of this language.
The student: No...
The Shaykh : We must say: 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' on the assumption of 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' not that he is better than his father, yes.
: " And if it is with a following 'min' " .
The Shaykh : We corroborated this.
The reader: We did not corroborate it,
" And its raising of an explicit noun is rare, and when *** it follows a verb, it is often established
Do you not see among people a companion *** more deserving of honor than "
The noon is sakin (unvoweled)!
The Shaykh : Which one?
The reader: Min!
The Shaykh : Min al-sadiq, no, it is moved with a fathah like al-sadiq.
The reader: " Min al-sadiq:
The superlative form (af'ala) is not free from being suitable for a verb with its meaning to occur in its place, or not,
If it is not suitable for a verb with its meaning to occur in its place, it does not raise an explicit noun, but rather raises a hidden pronoun, such as: 'Zayd is better than 'Amr.' In 'better,' there is a hidden pronoun referring back to Zayd. So do not say: 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' raising 'his father' with 'better,' except in a weak language reported by Sibawayh " .
The Shaykh : This is the permissible case, the one that says: it is permissible. This is the meaning of Ibn Malik's statement: " And its raising of an explicit noun is rare " . Now listen: 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' is it correct for us to make 'his father' a delayed subject?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: It is brought, his father is better than him.
The Shaykh : His father is better than him, is it suitable?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' yes.
The student: The estimated sentence, O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : The estimated sentence: I passed by a man whose father is better than him.
The student: And after it?
The Shaykh : And after it.
The student: Does the pronoun refer back to 'I passed'?
The Shaykh : Yes, this is it. Its original form is: 'a man whose father is better than him,' meaning its meaning is that his father is better than him. This is the meaning of the sentence.
I say: It is not suitable for us to make 'his father' a subject, it is not suitable, because 'better,' as you see, has a fathah on it, so it is an attribute for 'man,' or not? But if we said: 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' it is correct, if we make it a subject and a predicate. But on the assumption that the wording is: 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' it is not correct, and the reason is that 'better' has now become an attribute?
The student: For the man.
The Shaykh : For the man, an attribute for the man, so it is not correct to make it a subject and a predicate.
The student: And the more appropriate?
The Shaykh : Good, and in this is evidence that this issue is an exception to the rule, which is: " That every pronoun whose estimation is 'he' is hidden by permission " , except this issue, because it is a pronoun hidden by obligation, because the explicit noun does not take its place, yes.
The student: His father!
The Shaykh : Where?
The student: Better than him, his father!
The Shaykh : On the assumption of the correctness of this language.
The student: No...
The Shaykh : We must say: 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' on the assumption of 'I passed by a man whose father is better than him,' not that he is better than his father, yes.