Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And the one with clarification is a dependent resembling the attribute *** The reality of the intended meaning is thereby revealed."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : What is the apposition of clarification? He said:
"And the one with clarification":
That is: So the definition of the apposition of clarification is:
"A dependent resembling the attribute":
Is this dependent a genus, or not?
The student: A genus.
The Shaykh : Because it was presented to us in the al-Safarini creed that a definition must contain a genus and a differentiator. So when we say "dependent" as the genus, it includes all dependents. It includes the attribute, for it is a dependent; it includes emphasis, for it is a dependent; it includes the apposition of coordination, for it is a dependent; and it includes the substitute, for it is a dependent.
And when we say: "resembling the attribute": this excludes the attribute, because what resembles a thing is not the thing itself, or is it?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : What resembles a thing is not the thing itself. So it resembles the attribute in clarifying its antecedent, but it differs from the attribute in that it is a static noun, whereas the attribute is a derived noun or interpreted as derived. As for this, it is a static noun. This becomes clear by example. You say: "Abu Hafs al-Farouq came." "Abu Hafs al-Farouq came." So al-Farouq is an attribute for Abu Hafs. And you say: "Abu Hafs 'Umar came." So 'Umar is an apposition of clarification and not an attribute, because 'Umar is a proper name, a static noun. But al-Farouq is a derived noun, so it is an attribute. For this reason, the author said:
"A dependent resembling the attribute", and not an attribute, because it differs from it in that it is a static noun, while the attribute is derived or interpreted as derived.
"The reality of the intended meaning is thereby revealed":
By this, the remaining dependents are excluded, because in the other dependents, the reality of the intended meaning is not revealed. Every dependent is independent. The attribute may reveal the reality of the intended meaning, but it is a derived noun as mentioned before. As for the remaining dependents, they are not so.
"The reality of the intended meaning is thereby revealed": So the reality is that the apposition of clarification, in terms of meaning, is like the attribute, except that the attribute is a derived noun or interpreted as derived, while this is a static noun. This is a static noun and not a derived noun.
"And the one with clarification":
That is: So the definition of the apposition of clarification is:
"A dependent resembling the attribute":
Is this dependent a genus, or not?
The student: A genus.
The Shaykh : Because it was presented to us in the al-Safarini creed that a definition must contain a genus and a differentiator. So when we say "dependent" as the genus, it includes all dependents. It includes the attribute, for it is a dependent; it includes emphasis, for it is a dependent; it includes the apposition of coordination, for it is a dependent; and it includes the substitute, for it is a dependent.
And when we say: "resembling the attribute": this excludes the attribute, because what resembles a thing is not the thing itself, or is it?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : What resembles a thing is not the thing itself. So it resembles the attribute in clarifying its antecedent, but it differs from the attribute in that it is a static noun, whereas the attribute is a derived noun or interpreted as derived. As for this, it is a static noun. This becomes clear by example. You say: "Abu Hafs al-Farouq came." "Abu Hafs al-Farouq came." So al-Farouq is an attribute for Abu Hafs. And you say: "Abu Hafs 'Umar came." So 'Umar is an apposition of clarification and not an attribute, because 'Umar is a proper name, a static noun. But al-Farouq is a derived noun, so it is an attribute. For this reason, the author said:
"A dependent resembling the attribute", and not an attribute, because it differs from it in that it is a static noun, while the attribute is derived or interpreted as derived.
"The reality of the intended meaning is thereby revealed":
By this, the remaining dependents are excluded, because in the other dependents, the reality of the intended meaning is not revealed. Every dependent is independent. The attribute may reveal the reality of the intended meaning, but it is a derived noun as mentioned before. As for the remaining dependents, they are not so.
"The reality of the intended meaning is thereby revealed": So the reality is that the apposition of clarification, in terms of meaning, is like the attribute, except that the attribute is a derived noun or interpreted as derived, while this is a static noun. This is a static noun and not a derived noun.