Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): "And if it was named by it, or by what is attached to it, then preventing its declension is what is right."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : And they gave the reason for this by saying that it is the original substitute for the subject in the position of what?
The student: Accusative.
The Shaykh : In the position of the object of the verb, and the object of the verb is permitted to be placed before the verb.
"if it was named by it"
The pronoun refers to what was likened to the pattern of *mifa'ala* or *mifa'ila*. "By it" means by the pattern likened to *mifa'ala* or *mifa'ila*. "Named" means made a proper name. That is, if you name a person with these plural forms, even if they do not indicate more than one, they prevent declension. They prevent it because the form was constructed upon it. An example of this is: a man named *Masajid*, a man we named *Masaj*. "Come with me, *Masajid*, we have decided." Now, what does the word *Masajid* indicate here?
The student: Knowledge.
The Shaykh : A singular name or a plural?
The student: One.
The Shaykh : A singular name, but because it was named with a form of the ultimate plural, it retains the ruling of the form of the ultimate plural. For this reason, he said:
"So the prevention of its declension is what is right". If you name a single person with a form of the extreme of plurals, it is prevented from declension. You say: "I passed by *Masajid* and bought bread from him." If a common person heard this, what would he say? He would say, "This man is crazy. What do you mean, *Masajid* buys bread from you?" Yes, but we named this man *Masajid*. You say: "I passed by" is a verb and a subject, and the *ba* is a preposition, and *Masajid* is a noun in the genitive case by the *ba*, and the sign of its genitive is the fatha in place of the kasrah because it is a noun that does not decline. And what prevents it from declension? Here?
The student: The ultimate plural.
The Shaykh : No, its being attached to the ultimate plural, because he did not say "the ultimate plural" in reality. Yes, this is attached to the ultimate plural for the sake of the form. For the sake of the form. So if you name with a form of the ultimate plural, Ibn Malik says:
"So the prevention of its declension is what is right"
The prevention of its declension is the correct position. And by his saying "is what is right", he indicated that there is a difference of opinion, because some grammarians say it is not prevented from declension, because now its indication of plurality has been removed and it has become indicative of the singular, so it declines because its meaning has ceased, or because of what has attached to it. What also attaches to the form of the extreme of plurals, if you name with it, is that it is prevented from declension. If you name a person *Sira'il*? Here, this is not originally a form of the extreme of plurals; it is a singular noun, and yet it is prevented from declension because it is attached to what?
The student: The ultimate plural.
The Shaykh : To the form of the ultimate plural. And likewise *Sharaha'il*. *Sharaha'il* is a name, a well-known name among the Tabi'un and the Companions, *Sharaha'il*. Yes, *Sharaha'il* is not a plural; it is not a plural at all, and yet it is prevented from declension because it resembles a plural.
The student: *Maharib*.
The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: *Maharib*?
The Shaykh : No, *Maharib* is a plural.
The student: *Muharib*?
The Shaykh : No, *Muharib* is an active participle. But if you said *Maharib*, that is correct. As for *Muharib*, it is an active participle; it is not from this category. So, if it was named with a form of the ultimate plural, or named with what is attached to the form of the ultimate plural, then Ibn Malik says:
"So the prevention of its declension is what is right"
The *fa* here in his saying "the declension" is a connector for the answer, the answer to the condition. Where is the condition? His saying: "and if it was named by it". And "the declension" is the subject, and "prevention" is the subject, and "is right" is the sentence that is the predicate of the second subject. And the sentence of the second subject and its predicate is in the position of the predicate of the first subject, and the sentence of the subject and its predicate is the answer to the condition.
The student: Accusative.
The Shaykh : In the position of the object of the verb, and the object of the verb is permitted to be placed before the verb.
"if it was named by it"
The pronoun refers to what was likened to the pattern of *mifa'ala* or *mifa'ila*. "By it" means by the pattern likened to *mifa'ala* or *mifa'ila*. "Named" means made a proper name. That is, if you name a person with these plural forms, even if they do not indicate more than one, they prevent declension. They prevent it because the form was constructed upon it. An example of this is: a man named *Masajid*, a man we named *Masaj*. "Come with me, *Masajid*, we have decided." Now, what does the word *Masajid* indicate here?
The student: Knowledge.
The Shaykh : A singular name or a plural?
The student: One.
The Shaykh : A singular name, but because it was named with a form of the ultimate plural, it retains the ruling of the form of the ultimate plural. For this reason, he said:
"So the prevention of its declension is what is right". If you name a single person with a form of the extreme of plurals, it is prevented from declension. You say: "I passed by *Masajid* and bought bread from him." If a common person heard this, what would he say? He would say, "This man is crazy. What do you mean, *Masajid* buys bread from you?" Yes, but we named this man *Masajid*. You say: "I passed by" is a verb and a subject, and the *ba* is a preposition, and *Masajid* is a noun in the genitive case by the *ba*, and the sign of its genitive is the fatha in place of the kasrah because it is a noun that does not decline. And what prevents it from declension? Here?
The student: The ultimate plural.
The Shaykh : No, its being attached to the ultimate plural, because he did not say "the ultimate plural" in reality. Yes, this is attached to the ultimate plural for the sake of the form. For the sake of the form. So if you name with a form of the ultimate plural, Ibn Malik says:
"So the prevention of its declension is what is right"
The prevention of its declension is the correct position. And by his saying "is what is right", he indicated that there is a difference of opinion, because some grammarians say it is not prevented from declension, because now its indication of plurality has been removed and it has become indicative of the singular, so it declines because its meaning has ceased, or because of what has attached to it. What also attaches to the form of the extreme of plurals, if you name with it, is that it is prevented from declension. If you name a person *Sira'il*? Here, this is not originally a form of the extreme of plurals; it is a singular noun, and yet it is prevented from declension because it is attached to what?
The student: The ultimate plural.
The Shaykh : To the form of the ultimate plural. And likewise *Sharaha'il*. *Sharaha'il* is a name, a well-known name among the Tabi'un and the Companions, *Sharaha'il*. Yes, *Sharaha'il* is not a plural; it is not a plural at all, and yet it is prevented from declension because it resembles a plural.
The student: *Maharib*.
The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: *Maharib*?
The Shaykh : No, *Maharib* is a plural.
The student: *Muharib*?
The Shaykh : No, *Muharib* is an active participle. But if you said *Maharib*, that is correct. As for *Muharib*, it is an active participle; it is not from this category. So, if it was named with a form of the ultimate plural, or named with what is attached to the form of the ultimate plural, then Ibn Malik says:
"So the prevention of its declension is what is right"
The *fa* here in his saying "the declension" is a connector for the answer, the answer to the condition. Where is the condition? His saying: "and if it was named by it". And "the declension" is the subject, and "prevention" is the subject, and "is right" is the sentence that is the predicate of the second subject. And the sentence of the second subject and its predicate is in the position of the predicate of the first subject, and the sentence of the subject and its predicate is the answer to the condition.