Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "So conjunction is absolutely by waw, then fa *** until am, aw, ka in you, truth and fidelity."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said:
"So conjunction is absolutely":
The scholars say: If you see in people's speech the speech of the scholars absolutely, then look at what comes before it, not what comes after it, because it is absolute from a preceding or following restriction. It is absolute from a preceding or following restriction. Here, it is absolute from a following restriction, because his saying:
"And you followed a word, that is enough":
clarifies for us what the meaning of absoluteness is. So, "conjunction is absolutely" means: in word and meaning. This is the meaning of absoluteness. How did we know that it is in word and meaning?
From his saying later:
"And you followed a word, that is enough, nay, and not".
Now, conjoin:
"So conjunction is absolutely by waw": Waw, like what?
The student: Zayd and 'Amr came.
The Shaykh : Yes, Zayd and 'Amr came, I saw Zayd and 'Amr, I passed by Zayd and 'Amr. Good.
The student: This!
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: It was not mentioned previously.
The Shaykh : We said it was not mentioned in the verse, yes:
"By waw, then fa":
By waw, then fa: "Thumma" is a conjunction particle.
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes, but is it in the context of the author a conjunction particle?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Or is it an explanation of the conjunction particle?
The student: An explanation.
The Shaykh : An explanation of the conjunction particle. So, "thumma" is conjoined to the waw, by omitting the conjunction particle, meaning: by waw and thumma.
The student: For the sake of waw and fidelity?
The Shaykh : No, by waw then fa. Do you not have thumma?
The student: Except, but thumma means a conjunction particle!
The Shaykh : No, it is not thumma as a conjunction particle. Thumma is among those that have been explained to be from the particles of conjunction.
The student: He intended its word!
The Shaykh : He intended its word. It is not intended that it is a conjunction particle, meaning its meaning is that thumma is a conjunction particle, and fa is conjoined to waw. This waw is a waw, and thumma is like... I think we do not need to give an example because it is clear. Good. Fa is three, until is four, am is five, aw is six?
The student: Am?
The Shaykh : Yes, until, am, aw. But for the sake of the necessity of poetry, he said: "until am aw", so he moved the vowel of the hamza to the mim, and made the mim silent, yes, and lightened the hamza. "until am aw", six, is that apparent?
The student: These are seven!
The Shaykh : No, it is not permissible with waw, but they are six now. The example: by waw, then fa, until, am, aw, look!
"Like in you, truth and fidelity": He praised the truthful one, yes? He praised him with fidelity:
"In you, truth and fidelity": The evidence is his saying: "and fidelity." For his saying: "and fidelity": the waw is a conjunction particle, and "fidelity" is conjoined to "truth." And what is conjoined to the nominative is nominative, and the sign of its nominative is a visible dammah at its end.
The student: What is the intended meaning?
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: I mean...
The Shaykh : Yes? No, no.
The student: It can become this.
The Shaykh : No, no, and it is not possible.
The student: Glory be to Allah, meaning...?
The Shaykh : No, no, no. Fidelity does not become... if one is absent, one is present.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, no. If the kaf is a preposition, this is not suitable, but he brought it as a point. This kaf is a preposition. "And in you, truth and fidelity": All of it is in the genitive case by the kaf. With the intention of what? With the intention of the word. And I think this has passed us, brothers, and we said: The grammarians have two opinions on that: One opinion says the kaf is a preposition, then it says the whole sentence is in the genitive case. It says: "In you, truth and fidelity" is in the genitive case by the kaf, and the sign of its genitive is a hidden kasrah at its end, prevented from appearing by the narration. This is one opinion.
And another opinion says: It is on the assumption of an omitted word, and the assumption is: like your saying "in you, truth and fidelity." Good, so the kaf is a preposition, "in you" is a preposition and its object, connected to an omitted predicate that is advanced, and "truth" is a delayed subject.
"So conjunction is absolutely":
The scholars say: If you see in people's speech the speech of the scholars absolutely, then look at what comes before it, not what comes after it, because it is absolute from a preceding or following restriction. It is absolute from a preceding or following restriction. Here, it is absolute from a following restriction, because his saying:
"And you followed a word, that is enough":
clarifies for us what the meaning of absoluteness is. So, "conjunction is absolutely" means: in word and meaning. This is the meaning of absoluteness. How did we know that it is in word and meaning?
From his saying later:
"And you followed a word, that is enough, nay, and not".
Now, conjoin:
"So conjunction is absolutely by waw": Waw, like what?
The student: Zayd and 'Amr came.
The Shaykh : Yes, Zayd and 'Amr came, I saw Zayd and 'Amr, I passed by Zayd and 'Amr. Good.
The student: This!
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: It was not mentioned previously.
The Shaykh : We said it was not mentioned in the verse, yes:
"By waw, then fa":
By waw, then fa: "Thumma" is a conjunction particle.
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes, but is it in the context of the author a conjunction particle?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Or is it an explanation of the conjunction particle?
The student: An explanation.
The Shaykh : An explanation of the conjunction particle. So, "thumma" is conjoined to the waw, by omitting the conjunction particle, meaning: by waw and thumma.
The student: For the sake of waw and fidelity?
The Shaykh : No, by waw then fa. Do you not have thumma?
The student: Except, but thumma means a conjunction particle!
The Shaykh : No, it is not thumma as a conjunction particle. Thumma is among those that have been explained to be from the particles of conjunction.
The student: He intended its word!
The Shaykh : He intended its word. It is not intended that it is a conjunction particle, meaning its meaning is that thumma is a conjunction particle, and fa is conjoined to waw. This waw is a waw, and thumma is like... I think we do not need to give an example because it is clear. Good. Fa is three, until is four, am is five, aw is six?
The student: Am?
The Shaykh : Yes, until, am, aw. But for the sake of the necessity of poetry, he said: "until am aw", so he moved the vowel of the hamza to the mim, and made the mim silent, yes, and lightened the hamza. "until am aw", six, is that apparent?
The student: These are seven!
The Shaykh : No, it is not permissible with waw, but they are six now. The example: by waw, then fa, until, am, aw, look!
"Like in you, truth and fidelity": He praised the truthful one, yes? He praised him with fidelity:
"In you, truth and fidelity": The evidence is his saying: "and fidelity." For his saying: "and fidelity": the waw is a conjunction particle, and "fidelity" is conjoined to "truth." And what is conjoined to the nominative is nominative, and the sign of its nominative is a visible dammah at its end.
The student: What is the intended meaning?
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: I mean...
The Shaykh : Yes? No, no.
The student: It can become this.
The Shaykh : No, no, and it is not possible.
The student: Glory be to Allah, meaning...?
The Shaykh : No, no, no. Fidelity does not become... if one is absent, one is present.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, no. If the kaf is a preposition, this is not suitable, but he brought it as a point. This kaf is a preposition. "And in you, truth and fidelity": All of it is in the genitive case by the kaf. With the intention of what? With the intention of the word. And I think this has passed us, brothers, and we said: The grammarians have two opinions on that: One opinion says the kaf is a preposition, then it says the whole sentence is in the genitive case. It says: "In you, truth and fidelity" is in the genitive case by the kaf, and the sign of its genitive is a hidden kasrah at its end, prevented from appearing by the narration. This is one opinion.
And another opinion says: It is on the assumption of an omitted word, and the assumption is: like your saying "in you, truth and fidelity." Good, so the kaf is a preposition, "in you" is a preposition and its object, connected to an omitted predicate that is advanced, and "truth" is a delayed subject.