Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And with the last, delete what followed *** If added, a soft letter, silent, completing: four or more..."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : He said: "And with the last, delete what followed"
What is it? We said, what is tarqim?
The student: Deleting its end.
The Shaykh : Deleting the end of the vocative. Now, is anything deleted with the last letter? The author says here: "
And with the last, delete what followed *** If added, a soft letter, silent, completing
four or more"
He says: with the last, delete what followed, meaning: what followed the last letter, what followed, i.e., the last letter, meaning: what followed the last letter. And what is what followed the last letter?
The student: The one before the last.
The Shaykh : The one before the last, the one before the last, meaning: the last letter and the one before it are deleted. And the one before it has these conditions: "If added" means if it is an extra letter, if the letter before the last is an extra letter, this is one. Second: that it be soft, soft means a soft letter. How many soft letters are there?
The student: Three.
The Shaykh : Three: the waw and the alif.
The student: And the ya.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: And the ya.
The Shaykh : And the ya.
The student: O Shaykh, they are not three.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: The waw and the ya.
The Shaykh : The waw and the ya?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Any correct one, yes, yes. Now, only the waw and the ya.
The student: No, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : No.
The student: For the grammarians, the alif is with them.
The Shaykh : No.
The student: As for the people of tajwid, it is known.
Another student : ...
The Shaykh : Look, what is the explanation in your book?
The student: The alif, the waw, and the ya.
The Shaykh : Look, what does the explanation say about softness?
The student: He gave the example of Uthman.
The Shaykh : Very well.
The student: It says: "It is necessary to delete with the last letter what is before it".
The Shaykh : ... soft and silent, silent: the alif must be silent, and he says:
"If added, a soft letter, silent"
This excludes the alif, because the alif is never anything but silent.
The student: He gave an example of softness, O Shaykh. For the people of tajwid, the waw and the ya are silent. He said: "It is necessary to delete with the last letter what is before it if it is extra, soft, i.e., a soft letter, silent, fourth or more, and this is like Uthman, Mansur, and Masakin. So you say: O Uthm, O Mans, and O Mask".
The Shaykh : Now it has become contrary to the famous view, meaning: so if it is a letter of weakness, is that so?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : If it is a letter of weakness or not a letter of weakness, because it cannot be a letter of weakness in a muqassar word except in the last letter or in a manqus word, meaning: if it is a ya or a waw or an alif, yes, even if what is before it is kasrah, like Masakin as you heard. Let us look at the conditions now: "Completing, four or more"
Meaning: it means it is the fourth and whatever is more, this soft letter is the fourth and whatever is more. "Completing, four" means with it the four are completed and whatever is more, to avoid the case where it is the third. Now, four or more to the end. So in tarqim, the last letter and the one before it are deleted with these conditions: that what is before it be extra, that it be a soft letter, that it be silent, and that it be fourth or more. Four conditions, four conditions. Its example: you say Mansur, Mansur. Hey, if you want to tarqim, what do you say?
The student: Mansu.
The Shaykh : O Mansu, O Mansu with dammah on the sad, and Masakin you say: O Mask, you say O Mask. But for Mask, there are two ways: the first way is to build it on dammah, and this is called the language of those who do not expect, so you say: O Masku. And the second way is to keep it with kasrah on the original, and this is on the language of those who expect. This is a convention among grammarians: the language of those who do not expect and the language of those who expect. The language of those who do not expect treats what is with us as if it were an independent name, and the language of those who expect treats it as if it were a cut-off name. Now, O Uthma, O Uthma is on the language of whom?
The student: Of those who expect.
The Shaykh : Of those who expect. O Uthmu is on the language of whom?
The student: Of those who do not expect.
The Shaykh : Of those who do not expect. Now, O Mansu.
The student: On both languages.
The Shaykh : Ah, the two languages agreed, the two languages agreed, because in Mansur, if you delete the waw and the ra, the sad remains with dammah. This is on the language of those who expect. And if you build it on dammah?
The student: Likewise.
The Shaykh : Likewise, you also say O Mansu, but the grammatical case differs. If you proceed on the language of those who expect, you say: O is the letter of vocative, Mansu is the vocative, built on a presumed dammah on its end, here?
The student: Prevented from appearing.
The Shaykh : Prevented from appearing by the occupation of the place with the movement of expectation, here?
The student: Yes, indeed.
The Shaykh : Why? Because this dammah was not brought for the sake of the vocative, this dammah is the original one. But O Masku and O Maski, O Masku is on the language of whom?
The student: Of those who do not expect.
The Shaykh : Of those who do not expect, and it treats the one being called as if it were an independent vocative, so it says: O is the letter of vocative, and Masku is the vocative, built on dammah in the place of accusative. And on the language of those who expect, O Maski, O is the letter of vocative, and Maski is the vocative, built on a presumed dammah on its end, prevented from appearing by the occupation of the place with the movement of expectation. Clear? And likewise we say for Uthma and Uthmu. So what is your opinion of Ghanfar? Is it permissible to delete the nun in Ghanfar?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: Because it is not a soft letter.
The Shaykh : It is not a soft letter, and it is not fourth or more, or is it?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : So it is not correct. Now, Asfar?
The student: It is permissible...
Another student: It is not correct.
Another student: This is the third.
The Shaykh : U-S-F, these are three, the waw.
The student: Fourth, fourth.
The Shaykh : Fourth, and extra?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Here? Extra or not?
The student: It is extra.
The Shaykh : Is the waw extra?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : The waw in Asfar?
The student: No, it is not extra.
The Shaykh : It appears to be extra because it is from 'asfar (safflower), or is it not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : This is what appears, it appears that the waw is extra in Asfar. Now, Qandil?
The student: Likewise.
The Shaykh : Is Qandil correct?
The student: ... Asafir.
The Shaykh : And what is it?
The student: Asfar, Asafir.
The Shaykh : No, even Masakin, Masakin, the same thing. Now, we said Qandil is correct, we delete the ya.
The student: Is it not original?
The Shaykh : No, it is not original.
The student: What is the rule, O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : The rule is morphology in the Arabic language. What is the origin of Qandil?
The student: Qandil.
The Shaykh : Qandil, yes, so the ya is extra, the ya is extra.
The student: A letter of elongation.
The Shaykh : And what is it?
The student: I say it was not elongation?
The Shaykh : ...
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, no, for this reason we say in Qandil, what is its pattern?
The student: Fi'ilil.
The student: Mandil like Qandil or not?
The Shaykh : We do not know, he is teaching us again.
The student: O Shaykh, O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: O Shaykh, the people of tajwid say: "And softness is a waw and a ya that are silent and what is before them is open".
The Shaykh : Correct.
The student: So the waw and the ya are silent and what is before them is open.
The Shaykh : But it seems the grammarians are contrary to this.
The student: ... softness from softness ... so why do we say layn (softness) among the grammarians?
The Shaykh : ...
The student: No, O Shaykh, I have it written as laynan (softly).
The Shaykh : No, no, I have it as laynan (softly), Ibn Malik.
The student: Because we consider it from the letters of elongation.
The Shaykh : The lam is open "If added, laynan (softly)"
The student: I have it as laynan (softly).
The Shaykh : Strange, I have it with fathah.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : We will review it, if Allah wills.
The student: This is half a verse...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Two letters are deleted. We start the new lesson now.
What is it? We said, what is tarqim?
The student: Deleting its end.
The Shaykh : Deleting the end of the vocative. Now, is anything deleted with the last letter? The author says here: "
And with the last, delete what followed *** If added, a soft letter, silent, completing
four or more"
He says: with the last, delete what followed, meaning: what followed the last letter, what followed, i.e., the last letter, meaning: what followed the last letter. And what is what followed the last letter?
The student: The one before the last.
The Shaykh : The one before the last, the one before the last, meaning: the last letter and the one before it are deleted. And the one before it has these conditions: "If added" means if it is an extra letter, if the letter before the last is an extra letter, this is one. Second: that it be soft, soft means a soft letter. How many soft letters are there?
The student: Three.
The Shaykh : Three: the waw and the alif.
The student: And the ya.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: And the ya.
The Shaykh : And the ya.
The student: O Shaykh, they are not three.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: The waw and the ya.
The Shaykh : The waw and the ya?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Any correct one, yes, yes. Now, only the waw and the ya.
The student: No, Shaykh.
The Shaykh : No.
The student: For the grammarians, the alif is with them.
The Shaykh : No.
The student: As for the people of tajwid, it is known.
Another student : ...
The Shaykh : Look, what is the explanation in your book?
The student: The alif, the waw, and the ya.
The Shaykh : Look, what does the explanation say about softness?
The student: He gave the example of Uthman.
The Shaykh : Very well.
The student: It says: "It is necessary to delete with the last letter what is before it".
The Shaykh : ... soft and silent, silent: the alif must be silent, and he says:
"If added, a soft letter, silent"
This excludes the alif, because the alif is never anything but silent.
The student: He gave an example of softness, O Shaykh. For the people of tajwid, the waw and the ya are silent. He said: "It is necessary to delete with the last letter what is before it if it is extra, soft, i.e., a soft letter, silent, fourth or more, and this is like Uthman, Mansur, and Masakin. So you say: O Uthm, O Mans, and O Mask".
The Shaykh : Now it has become contrary to the famous view, meaning: so if it is a letter of weakness, is that so?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : If it is a letter of weakness or not a letter of weakness, because it cannot be a letter of weakness in a muqassar word except in the last letter or in a manqus word, meaning: if it is a ya or a waw or an alif, yes, even if what is before it is kasrah, like Masakin as you heard. Let us look at the conditions now: "Completing, four or more"
Meaning: it means it is the fourth and whatever is more, this soft letter is the fourth and whatever is more. "Completing, four" means with it the four are completed and whatever is more, to avoid the case where it is the third. Now, four or more to the end. So in tarqim, the last letter and the one before it are deleted with these conditions: that what is before it be extra, that it be a soft letter, that it be silent, and that it be fourth or more. Four conditions, four conditions. Its example: you say Mansur, Mansur. Hey, if you want to tarqim, what do you say?
The student: Mansu.
The Shaykh : O Mansu, O Mansu with dammah on the sad, and Masakin you say: O Mask, you say O Mask. But for Mask, there are two ways: the first way is to build it on dammah, and this is called the language of those who do not expect, so you say: O Masku. And the second way is to keep it with kasrah on the original, and this is on the language of those who expect. This is a convention among grammarians: the language of those who do not expect and the language of those who expect. The language of those who do not expect treats what is with us as if it were an independent name, and the language of those who expect treats it as if it were a cut-off name. Now, O Uthma, O Uthma is on the language of whom?
The student: Of those who expect.
The Shaykh : Of those who expect. O Uthmu is on the language of whom?
The student: Of those who do not expect.
The Shaykh : Of those who do not expect. Now, O Mansu.
The student: On both languages.
The Shaykh : Ah, the two languages agreed, the two languages agreed, because in Mansur, if you delete the waw and the ra, the sad remains with dammah. This is on the language of those who expect. And if you build it on dammah?
The student: Likewise.
The Shaykh : Likewise, you also say O Mansu, but the grammatical case differs. If you proceed on the language of those who expect, you say: O is the letter of vocative, Mansu is the vocative, built on a presumed dammah on its end, here?
The student: Prevented from appearing.
The Shaykh : Prevented from appearing by the occupation of the place with the movement of expectation, here?
The student: Yes, indeed.
The Shaykh : Why? Because this dammah was not brought for the sake of the vocative, this dammah is the original one. But O Masku and O Maski, O Masku is on the language of whom?
The student: Of those who do not expect.
The Shaykh : Of those who do not expect, and it treats the one being called as if it were an independent vocative, so it says: O is the letter of vocative, and Masku is the vocative, built on dammah in the place of accusative. And on the language of those who expect, O Maski, O is the letter of vocative, and Maski is the vocative, built on a presumed dammah on its end, prevented from appearing by the occupation of the place with the movement of expectation. Clear? And likewise we say for Uthma and Uthmu. So what is your opinion of Ghanfar? Is it permissible to delete the nun in Ghanfar?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Why?
The student: Because it is not a soft letter.
The Shaykh : It is not a soft letter, and it is not fourth or more, or is it?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : So it is not correct. Now, Asfar?
The student: It is permissible...
Another student: It is not correct.
Another student: This is the third.
The Shaykh : U-S-F, these are three, the waw.
The student: Fourth, fourth.
The Shaykh : Fourth, and extra?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Here? Extra or not?
The student: It is extra.
The Shaykh : Is the waw extra?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : The waw in Asfar?
The student: No, it is not extra.
The Shaykh : It appears to be extra because it is from 'asfar (safflower), or is it not?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : This is what appears, it appears that the waw is extra in Asfar. Now, Qandil?
The student: Likewise.
The Shaykh : Is Qandil correct?
The student: ... Asafir.
The Shaykh : And what is it?
The student: Asfar, Asafir.
The Shaykh : No, even Masakin, Masakin, the same thing. Now, we said Qandil is correct, we delete the ya.
The student: Is it not original?
The Shaykh : No, it is not original.
The student: What is the rule, O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : The rule is morphology in the Arabic language. What is the origin of Qandil?
The student: Qandil.
The Shaykh : Qandil, yes, so the ya is extra, the ya is extra.
The student: A letter of elongation.
The Shaykh : And what is it?
The student: I say it was not elongation?
The Shaykh : ...
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, no, for this reason we say in Qandil, what is its pattern?
The student: Fi'ilil.
The student: Mandil like Qandil or not?
The Shaykh : We do not know, he is teaching us again.
The student: O Shaykh, O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: O Shaykh, the people of tajwid say: "And softness is a waw and a ya that are silent and what is before them is open".
The Shaykh : Correct.
The student: So the waw and the ya are silent and what is before them is open.
The Shaykh : But it seems the grammarians are contrary to this.
The student: ... softness from softness ... so why do we say layn (softness) among the grammarians?
The Shaykh : ...
The student: No, O Shaykh, I have it written as laynan (softly).
The Shaykh : No, no, I have it as laynan (softly), Ibn Malik.
The student: Because we consider it from the letters of elongation.
The Shaykh : The lam is open "If added, laynan (softly)"
The student: I have it as laynan (softly).
The Shaykh : Strange, I have it with fathah.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : We will review it, if Allah wills.
The student: This is half a verse...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Two letters are deleted. We start the new lesson now.