Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "Al-hamz for the near, and waw for the one who is lamented *** or ya, other than waw, is avoided in case of ambiguity"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"Al-hamz for the near, and waw for the one who is lamented ***":
So the letters become eight; the letters become eight; thus the letters of the vocative became eight: ya, and ay, and ayy, and aa, and ayya, and hiya, and a, and waw. Good: "Al-hamz for the near": The near means the close one. Al-hamz is for the close one. We say: the attentive one, and not the inattentive one, right?
The student: The inattentive one.
The Shaykh : No, we say the attentive one, because we said a little while ago: "or like the sleeper": So we said that the heedless one is like the distant one. Therefore, al-hamz is for the near, attentive one who is not heedless, the awake one who is not sleeping. For him, it is a. You say: Ayyid, Ayyid. When he becomes close, why? Because he does not need to prolong the sound. Close and attentive. Yes. And know that the distant one may be treated as the near one, and the near one may be treated as the distant one. A person may call his friend who is far away using the letter hamza, as the poet said:
"O Fatima, hold back some of this coquetry *** And if you have resolved to sever ties, then be gentle":
"Al-hamz for the near, and waw for the one who is lamented": Waw is for the one who is lamented, for the one who is mourned. The original meaning of nadb is calling out, but nadb here, according to the grammarians, is: "the one who is called out to, upon whom grief is expressed, or from whom pain is felt". This is the one who is lamented according to the grammarians. It is the one who is called out to, what? The one upon whom grief is expressed or from whom pain is felt. A person whose back hurts says: Wadhahra. And a person whose house collapses, what does he say?
The student: Wabita.
The Shaykh : Wabita. Is that right? His camel died? Wanaqta. And what is this? Is it pain felt from it or grief expressed upon it?
The student: Upon it.
The Shaykh : Grief expressed upon it. This point: the Arabs chose waw because its indication of pain is very clear, clearer than ya, clearer. Therefore, even among people now, if I tell you something that frightens you, what do they say? They say: "Waw", or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Because it is used for things that frighten or cause pain or the like.
"And waw for the one who is lamented *** or ya":
Or ya: meaning it is permissible to use ya in lamentation, so you say: Ya dhahra. And this is common in our colloquial language. The colloquial language does not know: waw, or not? Do they know waw?
The student: We have waw.
The Shaykh : Strange. And we, here, use: ya. He says: Ya dhahri, dhahra. Yes, and so on. But ya is suitable for lamentation, but with a condition, they said:
"And other than waw, in case of ambiguity, is avoided":
So ya is used in the place of waw, on the condition that there is no ambiguity. If there is ambiguity, then we return to the original, which is: waw. Yes. A person laments over his camel and says: Wanaqta. Correct?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : If he said: Ya naqta, is that acceptable? Because we have an indicator: Ya naqta. If you prolong it and connect it, this is for lamentation. But if he said: Ya naqti, ya naqti, is it lamentation or not?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : No. So it is not permissible to make: Ya naqti, a lamentation, because of the ambiguity. Yes. He says:
"And other than waw, in case of ambiguity, is avoided": What does it mean? What is other than waw?
The student: Ya.
The Shaykh : Ya. So now these letters, the letters of the vocative, are divided into categories: First: what is for the distant one. Second: what is for the near one. Third: what is for lamentation, or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : The hamza is for the near one, waw is for lamentation, and the rest are for the distant one. And ya is used for lamentation on the condition that there is no ambiguity. Where do we take this from?
From his saying: "or ya", then he said: "and other than waw": which is: ya, "in case of ambiguity, is avoided". Good. Is hiya used for lamentation?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : No. Ayya?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : No. Ayy?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : No. Aa?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : No. Good. He said: "And other than waw, in case of ambiguity, is avoided".
Then the author (may Allah have mercy on him), when he mentioned the letters of the vocative which are divided into three categories as you know, mentioned another issue: Is the letter of the vocative deleted or not deleted? Is it deleted and its effect remains or not?
So the letters become eight; the letters become eight; thus the letters of the vocative became eight: ya, and ay, and ayy, and aa, and ayya, and hiya, and a, and waw. Good: "Al-hamz for the near": The near means the close one. Al-hamz is for the close one. We say: the attentive one, and not the inattentive one, right?
The student: The inattentive one.
The Shaykh : No, we say the attentive one, because we said a little while ago: "or like the sleeper": So we said that the heedless one is like the distant one. Therefore, al-hamz is for the near, attentive one who is not heedless, the awake one who is not sleeping. For him, it is a. You say: Ayyid, Ayyid. When he becomes close, why? Because he does not need to prolong the sound. Close and attentive. Yes. And know that the distant one may be treated as the near one, and the near one may be treated as the distant one. A person may call his friend who is far away using the letter hamza, as the poet said:
"O Fatima, hold back some of this coquetry *** And if you have resolved to sever ties, then be gentle":
"Al-hamz for the near, and waw for the one who is lamented": Waw is for the one who is lamented, for the one who is mourned. The original meaning of nadb is calling out, but nadb here, according to the grammarians, is: "the one who is called out to, upon whom grief is expressed, or from whom pain is felt". This is the one who is lamented according to the grammarians. It is the one who is called out to, what? The one upon whom grief is expressed or from whom pain is felt. A person whose back hurts says: Wadhahra. And a person whose house collapses, what does he say?
The student: Wabita.
The Shaykh : Wabita. Is that right? His camel died? Wanaqta. And what is this? Is it pain felt from it or grief expressed upon it?
The student: Upon it.
The Shaykh : Grief expressed upon it. This point: the Arabs chose waw because its indication of pain is very clear, clearer than ya, clearer. Therefore, even among people now, if I tell you something that frightens you, what do they say? They say: "Waw", or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Because it is used for things that frighten or cause pain or the like.
"And waw for the one who is lamented *** or ya":
Or ya: meaning it is permissible to use ya in lamentation, so you say: Ya dhahra. And this is common in our colloquial language. The colloquial language does not know: waw, or not? Do they know waw?
The student: We have waw.
The Shaykh : Strange. And we, here, use: ya. He says: Ya dhahri, dhahra. Yes, and so on. But ya is suitable for lamentation, but with a condition, they said:
"And other than waw, in case of ambiguity, is avoided":
So ya is used in the place of waw, on the condition that there is no ambiguity. If there is ambiguity, then we return to the original, which is: waw. Yes. A person laments over his camel and says: Wanaqta. Correct?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : If he said: Ya naqta, is that acceptable? Because we have an indicator: Ya naqta. If you prolong it and connect it, this is for lamentation. But if he said: Ya naqti, ya naqti, is it lamentation or not?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : No. So it is not permissible to make: Ya naqti, a lamentation, because of the ambiguity. Yes. He says:
"And other than waw, in case of ambiguity, is avoided": What does it mean? What is other than waw?
The student: Ya.
The Shaykh : Ya. So now these letters, the letters of the vocative, are divided into categories: First: what is for the distant one. Second: what is for the near one. Third: what is for lamentation, or not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : The hamza is for the near one, waw is for lamentation, and the rest are for the distant one. And ya is used for lamentation on the condition that there is no ambiguity. Where do we take this from?
From his saying: "or ya", then he said: "and other than waw": which is: ya, "in case of ambiguity, is avoided". Good. Is hiya used for lamentation?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : No. Ayya?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : No. Ayy?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : No. Aa?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : No. Good. He said: "And other than waw, in case of ambiguity, is avoided".
Then the author (may Allah have mercy on him), when he mentioned the letters of the vocative which are divided into three categories as you know, mentioned another issue: Is the letter of the vocative deleted or not deleted? Is it deleted and its effect remains or not?