Is Ibn Malik's statement that "khilafan" is a ma'ful li-ajli (object for the sake of which) correct?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Is it a ma'ful li-ajli (object for the sake of which), O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Which of them?
The questioner : The three?
The Shaykh : No, it is not a ma'ful bihi (direct object).
The questioner : Does it mean "for the sake of the disagreement"?
The Shaykh : No, no, I mean its meaning is: "devoid of disagreement": meaning you will not find any disagreement, yes.
The questioner : It is assumed to be a fa'il (subject), O Shaykh!
The Shaykh : No, it is not a fa'il bihi (subject with it), I mean its meaning is that he is the one who intended.
The Shaykh : Which of them?
The questioner : The three?
The Shaykh : No, it is not a ma'ful bihi (direct object).
The questioner : Does it mean "for the sake of the disagreement"?
The Shaykh : No, no, I mean its meaning is: "devoid of disagreement": meaning you will not find any disagreement, yes.
The questioner : It is assumed to be a fa'il (subject), O Shaykh!
The Shaykh : No, it is not a fa'il bihi (subject with it), I mean its meaning is that he is the one who intended.