Reading from Ibn Aqil’s commentary (may Allah have mercy on him), with the Shaykh’s annotations: " .
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The reader: " So an alif that accompanies more than two root letters *** is considered superfluous ".
The Shaykh : Accompanies.
The reader: " Accompanies a superfluous letter without a min ".
The Shaykh : Now the author (may Allah have mercy on him) has begun to explain the positions of superfluous letters. Once we have identified the superfluous letters, they have specific positions. The first point he stated is that any alif that accompanies more than two root letters is superfluous. Any alif that accompanies more than two root letters is superfluous. So what if it accompanies two root letters? Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Then it is not superfluous. For example, he said "alif," but it only accompanies two root letters. Which ones are they?
The student: The qaf and the lam.
The Shaykh : The qaf and the lam. But *qatal* (killed), *qatal* huh? The alif accompanies more than two root letters, because the qaf, the taa, and the lam are three root letters. So any alif that accompanies more than two root letters is superfluous. " Without a min ". What is a min? A lie. Is the rule clear? I think so? Good.
The reader: " If the alif is accompanied by three root letters, it is ruled to be superfluous, as in *dharib* (striker) and *ghadhab* (anger) "
The Shaykh : *Ghadhab* (anger).
The reader: " And *ghadhab* (anger). If it is accompanied by two root letters, it is not superfluous, but it is either a root letter, as in *ila* (to), or a substitute for a root letter, as in *qala* (he said) and *ba'a* (he sold). And the yaa is like this, and the waw ".
The Shaykh : *Ila* (to), *ila* means grace. *Ila* with a kasrah on the hamzah is on the pattern of *rida* (contentment), meaning grace. It is the singular of *al-ala'*. As in the saying of Allah the Exalted:[Ar-Rahman 55:13] Yes.
The reader: " And the yaa is like this, and the waw, if they do not occur *** as they do ".
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ... And otherwise *ila* (to)?
The Shaykh : For us, *ila* (to) is without tanween.
The student: With tanween, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Do you have it with tanween?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes.
The reader: " And the yaa is like this, and the waw "
The Shaykh : It appears that the author intends it in the language of Tamim, meaning if you say *ila* (to), you drop it. Yes.
The reciter: "And the yā' and the wāw, if they do not occur *** as they are in yu'yu'un and wa'wa'a
Meaning: Likewise, if the yaa or the waw is accompanied by three root letters, it is ruled to be superfluous, except in the case of a doubled biconsonantal word ".
The student: The doubled one.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: The doubled one.
The Shaykh : Now, he says:
" And the yaa is like this, and the waw, if they do not occur *** as they do in *yu'yu'u* (the cry of the owl) and *wa'wa'a* (the sound of a camel) "
Good, read the commentary: " Meaning: Likewise ".
The reader: " Meaning: Likewise, if the yaa or the waw is accompanied by three root letters, it is ruled to be superfluous, except in the case of a doubled biconsonantal word. So the first case: like *sayyir* (money changer), *ya'mal* (a strong camel), *jawhar* (essence), and *'ajuz* (old woman). And the second case: like *yu'yu'u* for a bird with talons, and *wa'wa'a* as the source of *wa'wa'a* when it makes a sound. So the yaa and the waw in the first case are superfluous, and in the second case they are root letters ".
The Shaykh : Is it clear now?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Good, we have the alif, the yaa, and the waw. If the yaa accompanies more than two root letters, the yaa is superfluous. If the yaa accompanies more than two root letters, the yaa is superfluous, and likewise the waw. An example of this is: *sayyir* (money changer). We say the yaa in *sayyir* is superfluous because it accompanies?
The student: More than two root letters.
The Shaykh : More than two root letters: the sad, the ra, and the fa. So the yaa in *sayyir* is superfluous. How do we know it is superfluous, other than what the author stated? If it is confusing to you, you conjugate it into other forms. So you say: *sayyir* is the one who exchanges dirhams and dinars. Where is it derived from?
The student: *Sarf* (exchange).
The Shaykh : From *sarf* (exchange). We now know that the yaa is superfluous, even if the author did not give us this rule, we know from the other conjugations. Likewise, *ya'mal* (a strong camel). What does *ya'mal* do?
The student: From *'amal* (to work).
The Shaykh : It is not from the present tense verb *ya'mal* (he works), because all the letters of the present tense are superfluous, including the alif, the taa, and the yaa. But *ya'mal* for me means the strong camel that is capable of work. And *al-ya'malat*? The she-camel. " O Zayd, Zayd, the *ya'malat* ". Or did you forget this?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: No.
The Shaykh :" The *ya'malat* are the *dhabil* (weary camels) *** The night has lengthened upon you, so dismount "
The important point now is that *ya'mal* is not the present tense verb, but *ya'mal* is a noun. We say the yaa in it is superfluous. Why? Because it accompanies more than two root letters. And we can know by another method as mentioned. Likewise, *'ajuz* (old woman) and *jawhar* (essence). *Jawhar* is on the pattern of *fa'ala* (he did).
The student: *Faw'il* (he was generous).
The Shaykh : *Faw'il* (he was generous). What tells us that the waw is superfluous? Because it accompanies more than two root letters. This might be difficult for you to know through conjugation that the waw is superfluous. *Jawhar* is not derived.
The student: From *jahar* (to be loud).
The Shaykh : From *jahar* (to be loud). What is *jahar*? You cannot do that. Yes, we need the rule mentioned by the author, so we say: because it accompanies more than two root letters. Good, and he says, *'ajuz* (old woman) is clear. Clear?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : And what is its pattern?
The student: *Fa'ul* (he was generous).
The Shaykh : *Fa'ul* (he was generous). So the waw accompanies more than two root letters, and also it is ... The author said: " Except in the doubled biconsonantal word ". In the doubled biconsonantal word, it does not become superfluous. Like?
The student: *Yu'yu'u* (the cry of the owl).
The Shaykh : *Yu'yu'u* (the cry of the owl). *Yu'yu'u* is said for a bird with talons. And *makhlab* (talon) does not mean *mahlab* (a place for talons) ... but it is a talon with which birds and rabbits and the like are hunted. And is the talon the ... that comes out on its leg, or are they its claws?
The student: Its claws.
The Shaykh : Its claws. It is a known bird. Whoever among you knows birds knows this *yu'yu'u*. Good, and *wa'wa'a*? What is the meaning of *wa'wa'a*? He says: " The source of *wa'wa'a* when it makes a sound ". Do we have a waw here or not? It accompanies more than two, but it is repeated. Repeated. This waw is repeated and preferred. In *yu'yu'u*, this yaa is repeated, the first yaa, so it does not become superfluous. For this reason, we say the pattern of *yu'yu'u* is what? *Fu'lul* (a pattern with a repeated letter), and we do not say its pattern is *fu'wul* (a pattern with a waw), huh? And in *wa'wa'a*, is it *fa'ala* (he did) huh? Or *fa'ul* (he was generous)?
The student: *Fa'ala* (he did).
The Shaykh : *Fa'ala* (he did). Good, move on.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Is there any superfluous letter here? There is no superfluous letter because the second is a repetition of the first.
The student: His intention in the first ...
The Shaykh : His intention in the first means *sayyir* (money changer), *ya'mal* (a strong camel), and *jawhar* (essence).
The student: The source of *wa'wa'a* when it makes a sound?
The Shaykh : So the yaa and the waw in the first case, which is *sayyir* (money changer), *ya'mal* (a strong camel), *jawhar* (essence), and *'ajuz* (old woman), and in the second case, because he said: " So the first is like *sayyir* and the second is like *yu'yu'u* ". Yes?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: The root letter here is repeated.
The Shaykh : Yes, there are no questions, brothers.
The Shaykh : Accompanies.
The reader: " Accompanies a superfluous letter without a min ".
The Shaykh : Now the author (may Allah have mercy on him) has begun to explain the positions of superfluous letters. Once we have identified the superfluous letters, they have specific positions. The first point he stated is that any alif that accompanies more than two root letters is superfluous. Any alif that accompanies more than two root letters is superfluous. So what if it accompanies two root letters? Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Then it is not superfluous. For example, he said "alif," but it only accompanies two root letters. Which ones are they?
The student: The qaf and the lam.
The Shaykh : The qaf and the lam. But *qatal* (killed), *qatal* huh? The alif accompanies more than two root letters, because the qaf, the taa, and the lam are three root letters. So any alif that accompanies more than two root letters is superfluous. " Without a min ". What is a min? A lie. Is the rule clear? I think so? Good.
The reader: " If the alif is accompanied by three root letters, it is ruled to be superfluous, as in *dharib* (striker) and *ghadhab* (anger) "
The Shaykh : *Ghadhab* (anger).
The reader: " And *ghadhab* (anger). If it is accompanied by two root letters, it is not superfluous, but it is either a root letter, as in *ila* (to), or a substitute for a root letter, as in *qala* (he said) and *ba'a* (he sold). And the yaa is like this, and the waw ".
The Shaykh : *Ila* (to), *ila* means grace. *Ila* with a kasrah on the hamzah is on the pattern of *rida* (contentment), meaning grace. It is the singular of *al-ala'*. As in the saying of Allah the Exalted:
So which of the favors of your Lord would you deny?
فبأيّ آلاء ربّكما تكذّبانThe reader: " And the yaa is like this, and the waw, if they do not occur *** as they do ".
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ... And otherwise *ila* (to)?
The Shaykh : For us, *ila* (to) is without tanween.
The student: With tanween, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Do you have it with tanween?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes.
The reader: " And the yaa is like this, and the waw "
The Shaykh : It appears that the author intends it in the language of Tamim, meaning if you say *ila* (to), you drop it. Yes.
The reciter: "And the yā' and the wāw, if they do not occur *** as they are in yu'yu'un and wa'wa'a
Meaning: Likewise, if the yaa or the waw is accompanied by three root letters, it is ruled to be superfluous, except in the case of a doubled biconsonantal word ".
The student: The doubled one.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: The doubled one.
The Shaykh : Now, he says:
" And the yaa is like this, and the waw, if they do not occur *** as they do in *yu'yu'u* (the cry of the owl) and *wa'wa'a* (the sound of a camel) "
Good, read the commentary: " Meaning: Likewise ".
The reader: " Meaning: Likewise, if the yaa or the waw is accompanied by three root letters, it is ruled to be superfluous, except in the case of a doubled biconsonantal word. So the first case: like *sayyir* (money changer), *ya'mal* (a strong camel), *jawhar* (essence), and *'ajuz* (old woman). And the second case: like *yu'yu'u* for a bird with talons, and *wa'wa'a* as the source of *wa'wa'a* when it makes a sound. So the yaa and the waw in the first case are superfluous, and in the second case they are root letters ".
The Shaykh : Is it clear now?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : Good, we have the alif, the yaa, and the waw. If the yaa accompanies more than two root letters, the yaa is superfluous. If the yaa accompanies more than two root letters, the yaa is superfluous, and likewise the waw. An example of this is: *sayyir* (money changer). We say the yaa in *sayyir* is superfluous because it accompanies?
The student: More than two root letters.
The Shaykh : More than two root letters: the sad, the ra, and the fa. So the yaa in *sayyir* is superfluous. How do we know it is superfluous, other than what the author stated? If it is confusing to you, you conjugate it into other forms. So you say: *sayyir* is the one who exchanges dirhams and dinars. Where is it derived from?
The student: *Sarf* (exchange).
The Shaykh : From *sarf* (exchange). We now know that the yaa is superfluous, even if the author did not give us this rule, we know from the other conjugations. Likewise, *ya'mal* (a strong camel). What does *ya'mal* do?
The student: From *'amal* (to work).
The Shaykh : It is not from the present tense verb *ya'mal* (he works), because all the letters of the present tense are superfluous, including the alif, the taa, and the yaa. But *ya'mal* for me means the strong camel that is capable of work. And *al-ya'malat*? The she-camel. " O Zayd, Zayd, the *ya'malat* ". Or did you forget this?
The student: No.
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: No.
The Shaykh :" The *ya'malat* are the *dhabil* (weary camels) *** The night has lengthened upon you, so dismount "
The important point now is that *ya'mal* is not the present tense verb, but *ya'mal* is a noun. We say the yaa in it is superfluous. Why? Because it accompanies more than two root letters. And we can know by another method as mentioned. Likewise, *'ajuz* (old woman) and *jawhar* (essence). *Jawhar* is on the pattern of *fa'ala* (he did).
The student: *Faw'il* (he was generous).
The Shaykh : *Faw'il* (he was generous). What tells us that the waw is superfluous? Because it accompanies more than two root letters. This might be difficult for you to know through conjugation that the waw is superfluous. *Jawhar* is not derived.
The student: From *jahar* (to be loud).
The Shaykh : From *jahar* (to be loud). What is *jahar*? You cannot do that. Yes, we need the rule mentioned by the author, so we say: because it accompanies more than two root letters. Good, and he says, *'ajuz* (old woman) is clear. Clear?
The student: Yes.
The Shaykh : And what is its pattern?
The student: *Fa'ul* (he was generous).
The Shaykh : *Fa'ul* (he was generous). So the waw accompanies more than two root letters, and also it is ... The author said: " Except in the doubled biconsonantal word ". In the doubled biconsonantal word, it does not become superfluous. Like?
The student: *Yu'yu'u* (the cry of the owl).
The Shaykh : *Yu'yu'u* (the cry of the owl). *Yu'yu'u* is said for a bird with talons. And *makhlab* (talon) does not mean *mahlab* (a place for talons) ... but it is a talon with which birds and rabbits and the like are hunted. And is the talon the ... that comes out on its leg, or are they its claws?
The student: Its claws.
The Shaykh : Its claws. It is a known bird. Whoever among you knows birds knows this *yu'yu'u*. Good, and *wa'wa'a*? What is the meaning of *wa'wa'a*? He says: " The source of *wa'wa'a* when it makes a sound ". Do we have a waw here or not? It accompanies more than two, but it is repeated. Repeated. This waw is repeated and preferred. In *yu'yu'u*, this yaa is repeated, the first yaa, so it does not become superfluous. For this reason, we say the pattern of *yu'yu'u* is what? *Fu'lul* (a pattern with a repeated letter), and we do not say its pattern is *fu'wul* (a pattern with a waw), huh? And in *wa'wa'a*, is it *fa'ala* (he did) huh? Or *fa'ul* (he was generous)?
The student: *Fa'ala* (he did).
The Shaykh : *Fa'ala* (he did). Good, move on.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed.
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Is there any superfluous letter here? There is no superfluous letter because the second is a repetition of the first.
The student: His intention in the first ...
The Shaykh : His intention in the first means *sayyir* (money changer), *ya'mal* (a strong camel), and *jawhar* (essence).
The student: The source of *wa'wa'a* when it makes a sound?
The Shaykh : So the yaa and the waw in the first case, which is *sayyir* (money changer), *ya'mal* (a strong camel), *jawhar* (essence), and *'ajuz* (old woman), and in the second case, because he said: " So the first is like *sayyir* and the second is like *yu'yu'u* ". Yes?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Huh?
The student: The root letter here is repeated.
The Shaykh : Yes, there are no questions, brothers.