Explanation of the words of Ibn Malik (may Allah have mercy on him): In the plural of soundness or in the dual *** And the right of a broken word is completed by this.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : So if we find a word whose lam has been deleted, it is obligatory for us to restore it in the genitive, but with the condition:
"Permissibly, if its restoration is not alif
In the plural of soundness or in the dual *** And the right of a broken word is completed by this"
This means that we restore the lam permissibly, except if it is of the type whose lam is restored in the dual or in the plural of soundness, in which case it is obligatory to restore it, meaning it is obligatory to restore the lam. "What has been deleted from it" The deletion of the agent noun refers to what?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, to the lam, meaning: complete it by restoring the lam from which the lam was deleted, meaning: like what the lam was deleted from, complete it by restoring it, meaning restore the deleted lam, but is it permissibly or not? He (may Allah have mercy on him) stated that this is in two categories. He said "permissibly," this is one category. "If its restoration is not alif," meaning the restoration of the deleted letter is alif, meaning in the Arabic language, in the plural of soundness, and the intended meaning of the plural of soundness is the sound feminine plural and the sound masculine plural, or in the dual. If the restoration of this deleted letter is alif... then he says: "And the right of a broken word is completed by this"
This reference is to the plural and the dual.
"And the right of a broken word is completed by this"
This means that it is completed... and the summary of the two verses is that if the noun is trilateral and its ya is deleted.
The student: Its lam.
The Shaykh : Its lam, yes. If the lam is restored in the dual or the plural of soundness, it is obligatory to restore it in the genitive. And if it is not restored in the plural of soundness or the dual, then it is permissible to restore it and permissible not to restore it. For example, the word dam (blood), when you make it dual, do you say?
The student: Daman.
The Shaykh : Damwan or daman?
The student: Daman.
The Shaykh : Damaun without restoring the lam, without restoring the lam. When you make the genitive from it, you say: damawi and dami, damawi and dami. Why? Because it is not restored in the dual. And if it is not restored in the dual, then it is permissible for me in the genitive to restore the lam and not to restore it. What about ab (father)? If you make the genitive from it, let us see now in the dual we say: abwan, we do not say aban. But the Arabic language says?
The student: Abwan.
The Shaykh : Abwan. When we make the genitive from ab, what do we say?
The student: Abawi.
The Shaykh : Abawi, and we do not say: abi, we do not say: abi, because if the lam is restored in the dual, is it obligatory?
The student: To restore it.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : To be restored in the genitive. Okay, yad (hand)?
The student: Yadan.
The Shaykh : Yadan?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Do we say yadan or yadyan? We say yadah, Allah the Exalted said:[Al-Ma'idah 5:64] So how do we proceed if we want to make the genitive from yad?
The student: Yadi.
The Shaykh : Do we say yadi or?
The student: Yadi.
The Shaykh : Why did we give a choice? Because the lam is not restored in the dual, yes. And if it is not restored in the dual, then it is permissible for us to restore it in the genitive and not to restore it. Make the genitive from akh (brother)?
The student: Akhawi.
The Shaykh : In the dual?
The student: Akhwan.
The Shaykh : Do you say "my brother came to me"? Hmm?
The student: Akhwan.
The Shaykh : Did he die leaving a brother from the father or two brothers?
The student: Two brothers.
The Shaykh : ...
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Okay, make the genitive from it?
The student: Akhawi.
The Shaykh : ...
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Akhawi, why do we not say akhi? Because akh is hamza and kha, why do we not say akhi?
The student: Because the lam was restored.
The Shaykh : Because the lam is restored in the dual, so if it is restored in the dual, is it obligatory to restore it?
The student: In the genitive.
The Shaykh : In the genitive. Okay, ukht (sister)?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : The author says:
"And with akh, ukht, and with ibn, bint *** Attach"
...that what its lam was deleted, is it restored in the genitive or not?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : If it is restored in the dual or the plural of soundness, it is obligatory to restore it in the genitive. Therefore it is restored... and Allah knows best.
"Permissibly, if its restoration is not alif
In the plural of soundness or in the dual *** And the right of a broken word is completed by this"
This means that we restore the lam permissibly, except if it is of the type whose lam is restored in the dual or in the plural of soundness, in which case it is obligatory to restore it, meaning it is obligatory to restore the lam. "What has been deleted from it" The deletion of the agent noun refers to what?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : No, to the lam, meaning: complete it by restoring the lam from which the lam was deleted, meaning: like what the lam was deleted from, complete it by restoring it, meaning restore the deleted lam, but is it permissibly or not? He (may Allah have mercy on him) stated that this is in two categories. He said "permissibly," this is one category. "If its restoration is not alif," meaning the restoration of the deleted letter is alif, meaning in the Arabic language, in the plural of soundness, and the intended meaning of the plural of soundness is the sound feminine plural and the sound masculine plural, or in the dual. If the restoration of this deleted letter is alif... then he says: "And the right of a broken word is completed by this"
This reference is to the plural and the dual.
"And the right of a broken word is completed by this"
This means that it is completed... and the summary of the two verses is that if the noun is trilateral and its ya is deleted.
The student: Its lam.
The Shaykh : Its lam, yes. If the lam is restored in the dual or the plural of soundness, it is obligatory to restore it in the genitive. And if it is not restored in the plural of soundness or the dual, then it is permissible to restore it and permissible not to restore it. For example, the word dam (blood), when you make it dual, do you say?
The student: Daman.
The Shaykh : Damwan or daman?
The student: Daman.
The Shaykh : Damaun without restoring the lam, without restoring the lam. When you make the genitive from it, you say: damawi and dami, damawi and dami. Why? Because it is not restored in the dual. And if it is not restored in the dual, then it is permissible for me in the genitive to restore the lam and not to restore it. What about ab (father)? If you make the genitive from it, let us see now in the dual we say: abwan, we do not say aban. But the Arabic language says?
The student: Abwan.
The Shaykh : Abwan. When we make the genitive from ab, what do we say?
The student: Abawi.
The Shaykh : Abawi, and we do not say: abi, we do not say: abi, because if the lam is restored in the dual, is it obligatory?
The student: To restore it.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : To be restored in the genitive. Okay, yad (hand)?
The student: Yadan.
The Shaykh : Yadan?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Do we say yadan or yadyan? We say yadah, Allah the Exalted said:
Rather, both His hands are extended
بل يداه مبسوطتانThe student: Yadi.
The Shaykh : Do we say yadi or?
The student: Yadi.
The Shaykh : Why did we give a choice? Because the lam is not restored in the dual, yes. And if it is not restored in the dual, then it is permissible for us to restore it in the genitive and not to restore it. Make the genitive from akh (brother)?
The student: Akhawi.
The Shaykh : In the dual?
The student: Akhwan.
The Shaykh : Do you say "my brother came to me"? Hmm?
The student: Akhwan.
The Shaykh : Did he die leaving a brother from the father or two brothers?
The student: Two brothers.
The Shaykh : ...
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Okay, make the genitive from it?
The student: Akhawi.
The Shaykh : ...
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Akhawi, why do we not say akhi? Because akh is hamza and kha, why do we not say akhi?
The student: Because the lam was restored.
The Shaykh : Because the lam is restored in the dual, so if it is restored in the dual, is it obligatory to restore it?
The student: In the genitive.
The Shaykh : In the genitive. Okay, ukht (sister)?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : The author says:
"And with akh, ukht, and with ibn, bint *** Attach"
...that what its lam was deleted, is it restored in the genitive or not?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : If it is restored in the dual or the plural of soundness, it is obligatory to restore it in the genitive. Therefore it is restored... and Allah knows best.