Explanation of the saying of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And what of the described and the descriptor is understood *** is permissible to omit, and in the descriptor it is rare."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said:
"And what of the described and the descriptor is understood *** is permissible to omit, and in the descriptor it is rare":
The student: The rule?
The Shaykh : This rule is known from the chapter of the subject and the predicate, right?
The student: And the omission of what is known!
The Shaykh :"And the omission of what is known is permissible": This is, in reality, one of the principles of grammar: "And the omission of what is known is permissible".
"What of the described": Meaning, and what of the described and the descriptor is understood. "What" is a relative pronoun acting as the subject, and the clause "is understood" is the predicate of the subject. Meaning, and what is understood of the descriptor and the described. "Understood" here means "known," and this is from the style of poetry: using "understanding" to mean "knowledge." Yes, is it permissible to omit it, or is it obligatory?
The student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : It is permissible, but it is rare in the descriptor. It is rare in the descriptor. And what is frequent?
The student: The omission of the described.
The Shaykh : The omission of the described. The omission of the described is frequent in the Qur'an and outside the Qur'an, because the described, as soon as you read the descriptor, you know it. But the descriptor, if you omit it, who informs us that there is an omitted descriptor?!
And for this reason, the omission of the descriptor is rare, because it is intended to clarify the attribute of the described. And if it is intended to clarify the attribute, how can it be omitted?! An example of the omission of the described is His saying, the Exalted:[Al-Furqan 25:71] And what is the meaning of: ?
The student: Any work.
The Shaykh : Any righteous work. And like His saying:[Saba 34:11], and what is the meaning of "sabighat"?
The student: Armors.
The Shaykh : Armors, "sabighat" (comprehensive). So here the described was omitted: "Make comprehensive armors." And an example of where the descriptor was omitted is His saying, the Exalted:[Al-Kahf 18:79]. They said: This is an estimation of an omitted descriptor, and the estimation is: every sound ship. From where did we know that there is an omitted descriptor whose estimation is "sound"?
Because he made a hole in it. He made a hole in it:[Al-Kahf 18:71]. And making a hole is ruining. And why did he ruin it? So that it would not be taken. The king would take it. So what does the king take?
The student: He takes the sound one.
The Shaykh : He takes every sound ship. So by that, it is known that there is an omission taken from the context. Yes?
The student: We said: The predicate is a contract. It is permissible to omit the predicate, and it is replaced by the relative clause...
The Shaykh : Yes, yes, yes, yes. And the one who, yes, correct.
"And what of the described and the descriptor is understood":
"Understood" is the relative clause of the relative pronoun. Meaning, "what": this is a relative pronoun, correct? Well done. It is permissible to omit it in the predicate.
"And what of the described and the descriptor is understood *** is permissible to omit, and in the descriptor it is rare":
The student: The rule?
The Shaykh : This rule is known from the chapter of the subject and the predicate, right?
The student: And the omission of what is known!
The Shaykh :"And the omission of what is known is permissible": This is, in reality, one of the principles of grammar: "And the omission of what is known is permissible".
"What of the described": Meaning, and what of the described and the descriptor is understood. "What" is a relative pronoun acting as the subject, and the clause "is understood" is the predicate of the subject. Meaning, and what is understood of the descriptor and the described. "Understood" here means "known," and this is from the style of poetry: using "understanding" to mean "knowledge." Yes, is it permissible to omit it, or is it obligatory?
The student: It is permissible.
The Shaykh : It is permissible, but it is rare in the descriptor. It is rare in the descriptor. And what is frequent?
The student: The omission of the described.
The Shaykh : The omission of the described. The omission of the described is frequent in the Qur'an and outside the Qur'an, because the described, as soon as you read the descriptor, you know it. But the descriptor, if you omit it, who informs us that there is an omitted descriptor?!
And for this reason, the omission of the descriptor is rare, because it is intended to clarify the attribute of the described. And if it is intended to clarify the attribute, how can it be omitted?! An example of the omission of the described is His saying, the Exalted:
And he who repents and does righteousness does indeed turn to Allah with [accepted] repentance.
ومَن تابَ وعملِ صالحًا فإنه يتوب إلى الله متابًاRighteous work
عمل صالحاThe student: Any work.
The Shaykh : Any righteous work. And like His saying:
Make full coats of mail and calculate [precisely] the links
أن اعمل سابغاتٍ وقَدِّر في السردThe student: Armors.
The Shaykh : Armors, "sabighat" (comprehensive). So here the described was omitted: "Make comprehensive armors." And an example of where the descriptor was omitted is His saying, the Exalted:
as there was after them a king who seized every [good] ship by force.
وكان وراءهم ملكٌ يأخذ كل سفينة غصباًBecause he made a hole in it. He made a hole in it:
until when they had embarked on the ship, al-Khidh r tore it open
حتى إذا ركبا في السفينة خرقهاThe student: He takes the sound one.
The Shaykh : He takes every sound ship. So by that, it is known that there is an omission taken from the context. Yes?
The student: We said: The predicate is a contract. It is permissible to omit the predicate, and it is replaced by the relative clause...
The Shaykh : Yes, yes, yes, yes. And the one who, yes, correct.
"And what of the described and the descriptor is understood":
"Understood" is the relative clause of the relative pronoun. Meaning, "what": this is a relative pronoun, correct? Well done. It is permissible to omit it in the predicate.