Reading from Ibn Aqil’s commentary (may Allah have mercy on him), with the Shaykh’s annotations: " .
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Very well.
The reader: " And so, the substitute for the 'ayn of the verb, if *** it reduces to *filit* "
The Shaykh : It reduces, if it reduces.
The reader: " And so, the substitute for the 'ayn of the verb, if *** it reduces to *filit* like the past tense of *khaf* and *dan* ".
The Shaykh :" Like the past tense of *khaf* and *dan* ".
The reader: " And so, the substitute for the 'ayn of the verb, if *** it reduces to *filit* like the past tense of *khaf* and *dan* ".
The Shaykh : Yes.
The reader: " That is, just as the alif is reduced ".
The Shaykh : Be patient, now you have the substitute for the 'ayn of the verb; if it reduces to *filit*, in *khaf* its 'ayn is an alif that reduces when conjugated with the first-person singular pronoun to *filit*, so you say: *khift*, *nam* becomes *namt*, *dan* is an imperative?
The student: From *dana*.
The Shaykh : From *dana*, *yadina*; when you add the active pronoun suffix, you say *dant*, so the 'ayn of the verb, the substitute for the 'ayn of the verb, is also reduced, yes.
The reader: " That is, just as the final alif is reduced as previously mentioned, the alif that occurs as a substitute for the 'ayn of the verb, when it is conjugated with the pronoun suffix, becomes on the pattern of *filit* "
The Shaykh : *Filit*, what is its vowel marking in your view? Yes.
The reader: " It becomes, when conjugated with the pronoun suffix, on the pattern of *filit* with a kasrah on the fa, whether the 'ayn is a waw, like *khaf*, or a ya, like *ba'* and *dan*, in which case it is permissible to reduce it, as in saying: *khift* and *dant* and *ba't*. If the verb, when conjugated with the suffix, becomes on the pattern of *filit* with a dammah on the fa, then reduction is prohibited, such as *qala* and *jala*, so do not reduce it, as in saying: *qult* and *jalt* ".
The Shaykh : Yes, ... reduction is generally with a fathah or a kasrah, but there is no reduction with a dammah. We have *qala*, *ba'*, and *khaf*. Did you hear *qala* ... why? Because when it is conjugated with the active pronoun suffix, it is on the pattern of?
The student: *Fult*.
The Shaykh : *Fult*, it is on the pattern of *fult*, is it correct to say because it is a waw verb?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Huh? No, yes, no, because *khaf* is a waw verb. *Khaf* is a waw verb; the alif in *khaf* is a waw, as evidenced by the fact that its source is *khaf*, *yakhaf*, *khawf*. But when it is *yakhaf*, its original form is *yakhuf*, and when conjugated with the suffix, we say: *khift*, just as *nam* becomes *namt*, even though it is a waw verb. So we say, as the author stated, if the alif in a hollow verb, when the verb is conjugated with the active pronoun suffix, is on the pattern of *filit*, then reduction is permissible. If it is on the pattern of *fult* — are you with us, Ghanim? — then reduction is not permissible. Is the rule clear?
The student: It is clear.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: Is reduction when it is conjugated with the suffix or when it is in its bare form?
The Shaykh : No, the alif, when you conjugate it with the suffix, is not an alif.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : But there is no alif to be reduced, and what is reduced? Yes.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : This is an explanation of the pattern, an explanation of its pattern, yes.
The reader: " And so, the substitute for the 'ayn of the verb, if *** it reduces to *filit* "
The Shaykh : It reduces, if it reduces.
The reader: " And so, the substitute for the 'ayn of the verb, if *** it reduces to *filit* like the past tense of *khaf* and *dan* ".
The Shaykh :" Like the past tense of *khaf* and *dan* ".
The reader: " And so, the substitute for the 'ayn of the verb, if *** it reduces to *filit* like the past tense of *khaf* and *dan* ".
The Shaykh : Yes.
The reader: " That is, just as the alif is reduced ".
The Shaykh : Be patient, now you have the substitute for the 'ayn of the verb; if it reduces to *filit*, in *khaf* its 'ayn is an alif that reduces when conjugated with the first-person singular pronoun to *filit*, so you say: *khift*, *nam* becomes *namt*, *dan* is an imperative?
The student: From *dana*.
The Shaykh : From *dana*, *yadina*; when you add the active pronoun suffix, you say *dant*, so the 'ayn of the verb, the substitute for the 'ayn of the verb, is also reduced, yes.
The reader: " That is, just as the final alif is reduced as previously mentioned, the alif that occurs as a substitute for the 'ayn of the verb, when it is conjugated with the pronoun suffix, becomes on the pattern of *filit* "
The Shaykh : *Filit*, what is its vowel marking in your view? Yes.
The reader: " It becomes, when conjugated with the pronoun suffix, on the pattern of *filit* with a kasrah on the fa, whether the 'ayn is a waw, like *khaf*, or a ya, like *ba'* and *dan*, in which case it is permissible to reduce it, as in saying: *khift* and *dant* and *ba't*. If the verb, when conjugated with the suffix, becomes on the pattern of *filit* with a dammah on the fa, then reduction is prohibited, such as *qala* and *jala*, so do not reduce it, as in saying: *qult* and *jalt* ".
The Shaykh : Yes, ... reduction is generally with a fathah or a kasrah, but there is no reduction with a dammah. We have *qala*, *ba'*, and *khaf*. Did you hear *qala* ... why? Because when it is conjugated with the active pronoun suffix, it is on the pattern of?
The student: *Fult*.
The Shaykh : *Fult*, it is on the pattern of *fult*, is it correct to say because it is a waw verb?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Huh? No, yes, no, because *khaf* is a waw verb. *Khaf* is a waw verb; the alif in *khaf* is a waw, as evidenced by the fact that its source is *khaf*, *yakhaf*, *khawf*. But when it is *yakhaf*, its original form is *yakhuf*, and when conjugated with the suffix, we say: *khift*, just as *nam* becomes *namt*, even though it is a waw verb. So we say, as the author stated, if the alif in a hollow verb, when the verb is conjugated with the active pronoun suffix, is on the pattern of *filit*, then reduction is permissible. If it is on the pattern of *fult* — are you with us, Ghanim? — then reduction is not permissible. Is the rule clear?
The student: It is clear.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: Is reduction when it is conjugated with the suffix or when it is in its bare form?
The Shaykh : No, the alif, when you conjugate it with the suffix, is not an alif.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : But there is no alif to be reduced, and what is reduced? Yes.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : This is an explanation of the pattern, an explanation of its pattern, yes.