Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And add the dammah or make it accusative, what the necessity of the nun is *** from what has a clear right to the dammah."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"And add the dammah or make it accusative, what the necessity of the nun is *** from what has a clear right to the dammah":
Yes, "and add the dammah or make it accusative": the "or" here is for choice, and the meaning of "add the dammah" is: build it on the dammah.
And his saying: "or make it accusative" means: inflect it with the fathah as accusative.
"What": a relative pronoun, the object, right?
The student: Make it accusative.
The Shaykh : The object of "add the dammah" or "make it accusative," and there is a point of engagement here, and the known rule is that in such a case, is it the object of which one? The object of the second, or the object of the first?
The student: For the second.
The Shaykh : The object of the second, yes, he said:
"What the necessity of the nun is":
"Necessity" is the object for the sake of which, its operator is "nun," and the alif in it is for generality, meaning: add the dammah or make accusative what nun is necessitated, meaning for the sake of necessity, right? So when a name that is entitled to be built on the dammah comes, and the poet is necessitated to add the nun, and you know that what is built on the dammah is not nunated, is it?
The student: It is not nunated.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: It is not nunated.
The Shaykh : It is not nunated, you say: O Zayd, O 'Amr, O Bakr, O Khalid, you do not say: O Zayd-un, O 'Amr-un, and so on, but when it is nunated for the sake of necessity, it is permissible for you to make it accusative, and it is permissible to add the dammah, meaning: to inflect it as if it were built on the dammah in the position of accusative, or to make it accusative as if it were an accusative vocative, so the author's saying includes:
"What the necessity of the nun is *** from what has a right to the dammah": it includes the vocative that is built on the dammah because it is a specific indefinite noun, or built on the dammah because it is a proper name, for it is permissible in its inflection to say: it is accusative by the yaa of the vocative, for example, or that it is built on the dammah, and it was nunated for necessity, do you have the evidence?
The student: Peace of Allah.
The Shaykh :"The peace of Allah, O rain, upon it *** and not upon you, O rain, is the peace":
The evidence in the first: "The peace of Allah, O rain": and he should have said: O rain, upon it, but he nunated it for necessity for the necessity of poetry, because if he had not nunated it, the verse would have been broken, so he nunated it for necessity.
The second: "and not upon you, O rain"? Right?
The student: On the original rule.
The Shaykh : This is on the original rule because there is no nunation, it is permissible to say: The peace of Allah, O rain, upon it, and The peace of Allah, O rain, upon it, because Ibn Malik gave us a choice: "add the dammah or make it accusative".
And the reason it is permissible to make it accusative is that when the nunation entered it, it became as if it were not specific, and therefore the specific indefinite noun is built on the dammah, so when the nunation entered it, it became as if it were not specific, not specific, and the vocative indefinite noun that is not specific, what is its ruling?
The student: It is accussed.
The Shaykh : It is made accusative, and on this basis, it is permissible in the inflection as follows:
"The peace of Allah": "Peace" is the subject, and it is added to the Name of Allah, and the yaa is the letter of the vocative, and "rain" is a vocative built on the dammah in the position of accusative and it was nunated for necessity, "upon it" is a preposition and its object, the predicate of "peace," and it is permissible for me to say: The peace of Allah, O rain, upon it, and its inflection is: the yaa is the letter of the vocative, and "rain" is a vocative made accusative by the yaa of the vocative, and the sign of its accusative is the visible fathah at its end, or not?
The student: The problem with this is that!
The Shaykh : There is no problem, there is no problem, meaning its meaning is that one is not wrong in the chapter of necessity, it is not wrong if he wishes to make it accusative and if he wishes to make it nominative.
"From what has a clear right to the dammah":
He said: from what has a right to the dammah, why did he not say, in the first place, that it is built on what it is raised with, which includes: the dual, and the sound masculine plural, here he did not say on what it is raised with, because the discussion is about what is entitled to be built on the dammah, as for the plural, it remains as it is, and so does the dual, he gave another example, I think?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Another evidence.
The student: He says: "She struck her chest to me and said *** O 'Adi, indeed the hours have appointed you".
The Shaykh : Yes, this also: "O 'Adi, indeed the hours have appointed you", and he should have said, were it not for the necessity: "O 'Adi", because it is a proper name, so the result is that what is built on the dammah is permissible to be nunated for the necessity of poetry, and when it is nunated, it is permissible for it to remain on its dammah, and it is permissible to make it accusative.
Yes, "and add the dammah or make it accusative": the "or" here is for choice, and the meaning of "add the dammah" is: build it on the dammah.
And his saying: "or make it accusative" means: inflect it with the fathah as accusative.
"What": a relative pronoun, the object, right?
The student: Make it accusative.
The Shaykh : The object of "add the dammah" or "make it accusative," and there is a point of engagement here, and the known rule is that in such a case, is it the object of which one? The object of the second, or the object of the first?
The student: For the second.
The Shaykh : The object of the second, yes, he said:
"What the necessity of the nun is":
"Necessity" is the object for the sake of which, its operator is "nun," and the alif in it is for generality, meaning: add the dammah or make accusative what nun is necessitated, meaning for the sake of necessity, right? So when a name that is entitled to be built on the dammah comes, and the poet is necessitated to add the nun, and you know that what is built on the dammah is not nunated, is it?
The student: It is not nunated.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: It is not nunated.
The Shaykh : It is not nunated, you say: O Zayd, O 'Amr, O Bakr, O Khalid, you do not say: O Zayd-un, O 'Amr-un, and so on, but when it is nunated for the sake of necessity, it is permissible for you to make it accusative, and it is permissible to add the dammah, meaning: to inflect it as if it were built on the dammah in the position of accusative, or to make it accusative as if it were an accusative vocative, so the author's saying includes:
"What the necessity of the nun is *** from what has a right to the dammah": it includes the vocative that is built on the dammah because it is a specific indefinite noun, or built on the dammah because it is a proper name, for it is permissible in its inflection to say: it is accusative by the yaa of the vocative, for example, or that it is built on the dammah, and it was nunated for necessity, do you have the evidence?
The student: Peace of Allah.
The Shaykh :"The peace of Allah, O rain, upon it *** and not upon you, O rain, is the peace":
The evidence in the first: "The peace of Allah, O rain": and he should have said: O rain, upon it, but he nunated it for necessity for the necessity of poetry, because if he had not nunated it, the verse would have been broken, so he nunated it for necessity.
The second: "and not upon you, O rain"? Right?
The student: On the original rule.
The Shaykh : This is on the original rule because there is no nunation, it is permissible to say: The peace of Allah, O rain, upon it, and The peace of Allah, O rain, upon it, because Ibn Malik gave us a choice: "add the dammah or make it accusative".
And the reason it is permissible to make it accusative is that when the nunation entered it, it became as if it were not specific, and therefore the specific indefinite noun is built on the dammah, so when the nunation entered it, it became as if it were not specific, not specific, and the vocative indefinite noun that is not specific, what is its ruling?
The student: It is accussed.
The Shaykh : It is made accusative, and on this basis, it is permissible in the inflection as follows:
"The peace of Allah": "Peace" is the subject, and it is added to the Name of Allah, and the yaa is the letter of the vocative, and "rain" is a vocative built on the dammah in the position of accusative and it was nunated for necessity, "upon it" is a preposition and its object, the predicate of "peace," and it is permissible for me to say: The peace of Allah, O rain, upon it, and its inflection is: the yaa is the letter of the vocative, and "rain" is a vocative made accusative by the yaa of the vocative, and the sign of its accusative is the visible fathah at its end, or not?
The student: The problem with this is that!
The Shaykh : There is no problem, there is no problem, meaning its meaning is that one is not wrong in the chapter of necessity, it is not wrong if he wishes to make it accusative and if he wishes to make it nominative.
"From what has a clear right to the dammah":
He said: from what has a right to the dammah, why did he not say, in the first place, that it is built on what it is raised with, which includes: the dual, and the sound masculine plural, here he did not say on what it is raised with, because the discussion is about what is entitled to be built on the dammah, as for the plural, it remains as it is, and so does the dual, he gave another example, I think?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Another evidence.
The student: He says: "She struck her chest to me and said *** O 'Adi, indeed the hours have appointed you".
The Shaykh : Yes, this also: "O 'Adi, indeed the hours have appointed you", and he should have said, were it not for the necessity: "O 'Adi", because it is a proper name, so the result is that what is built on the dammah is permissible to be nunated for the necessity of poetry, and when it is nunated, it is permissible for it to remain on its dammah, and it is permissible to make it accusative.