Arabic Grammar – Chapter 1 – الْفِعْلُ (The Verb) and وأَقسَامُهُ (and Its Parts) Section 1

Section 1 – The Discussion Aboutالْـمَاضِـي‮ ‬(The Past Tense Verb), الْـمُضَارِعُ‮ ‬(The Present Tense Verb), الأَمْرُ‮ ‬ (The Command Tense Verb)

With respect to time, the verb is divided into: the الْـمَاضِـي‮ ‬ (the present tense verb), الْـمُضَارِعُ‮ ‬ (the past tense verb), الأَمْرُ‮ ‬ (the command tense verb).

 الْـمَاضِـي‮ ‬ (The past tense verb) is a word which in itself shows the meaning of something which has occurred in past time, like the words: اِجْتَحَـدَ‮ ‬,‮ ‬جَـاءَ and تَـعَلَّمَ. The signs that distinguish the past tense verbs are: تَـاء التَّأنِـيثِ‮ ‬السَّاكِـنَةِ‮ ‬ (the feminine taa which bears sukuun), like when you say:كَتَـتْ‮ ‬ or تَـاء الضَّمير‮ ‬ (the taa of the pronoun doer), like when you say:‮ ‬كَتَـبْـتُمْ‮ ‬,كَتَبْـتُمَا‮ ‬,كَتَـبْـتِ‮ ‬,كَتَـبْـتَ‮  ‬,كَتَبَـتْ‮ ‬and كَتَبْـتُـنَّ.

الْـمُضَارِعُ‮ ‬ (The Present Tense Verb) is that which in itself shows the meaning of something which most likely will occur in the present or in the future, like the words: يَجْتَحِـدُ‮ ‬,‮ ‬يَـجِـيءَُ and يَـتَـعَلَّمُ. Among the signs that distinguish the present tense verbs are: لَنْ  , لَمْ , سَوفَ , سَ , like when you say: لَنْ‮ ‬أَتَأَخَّرْ  , لَمْ‮ ‬أَكْسِلْ , سَوفَ‮ ‬يَـجِـيءَُ.

الأَمْـرُ‮ ‬ (The Command Tense Verb) is the verb which demonstrates that an action is sought from the second person doer (you) by way of a command or order, like when you say: اِجْتَحِـدْ‮ ‬,‮ ‬جِـيءَْ and تَـعَلَّمْ. The signs that distinguish the command tense verbs depends on the form pattern of the verb, and in addition, the affixing of ي to the end of the verb to denote the second person feminine doer, like when you say: اِجْتَحِـدي.

Arabic Grammar – Preliminary Matters: Point 1 – Letters, Words and Sentences
and The Meaning of الْـكَلاَمُ(Speech) in the Arabic Language

Arabic Grammar – Chapter 1 – الْفِعْلُ (The Verb) and وأَقسَامُهُ (and Its Parts) Section  2 – الْـمْتَعَدِّي‮ ‬ (The Transitive Verb) ‮ ‬واللاَّزِم(and Intransitive Verb)

‮ ‬ Arabic Grammar – Preliminary Matters: Point 6 -أحْكَام ‬الإعْرَاب ‬ (Rules of Inflection)

أحْكَام ‬الإعْرَاب ‬ (Rules of Inflection)

الْـمُعْرَبُ‮ ‬بالْـحَرَكَة ‬ (The Word  That is Inflected with the Vowel) and الْـمُعْرَبُ‮ ‬بِالْـحَرْف (The Word That is Inflected with the Letter)

 There are two kinds of الْـمُعْرَبَـات (Inflected words): words that are inflected with vowels and words that are inflected with letters. There are four kinds of words that are inflected with vowels: الْإِسْمُ الْـمُفْرَدُ (the singular noun), جَمْعُ التَّكْسِيرِ (the broken plural noun), جَمْعُ الْـمُؤَنِثِ السَّالِمِ  (the sound feminine plural noun), and الْفِعْلُ الْـمُضَارُ الَّذِي لَمْ يَتَّصِلْ بِآخَرِهِ شَيْءٌ (the present tense verb which does not have anything affixed to its end [that is necessary for its construction]).

All of the above mentioned words are in the case of rafʿ by ḍammah, in the case of naṣb by fatḥah, in the case of jarr by kasrah and in the case of jazm by sukuun. The exception to this rule is: the noun which is not fully inflective which is in the case of jarr by fatḥah, like when you say: صَـلَّى اللهُ‮ ‬عَـلَى إِبْرَاهِمَ; and the sound feminine plural which is in the case of naṣb by kasrah, like when you say: أَكْرِمْتُ‮ ‬الْـمُجْتَحِدَاتِ‮ ‬, and‮ ‬the present tense verb which has a weak letter affixed to its end. It is caused to be in the case of jazm by dropping the weak letter, like when you say لَمْ‮ ‬يَخْشَ‮  (‬يَخْشَــى‮)‬ ‮ ‬ولَمْ‮ ‬يَـمْشِ‮  (‬يَـمْشِــي‮)‬  ولَمْ يَغْزُ)‮ (‬يَغْزُو‮)‬ا.

There are also four kinds words which are inflected with letters: الْـمُثَنّى وَالْـمُلْحَق بِهِ (the dual noun and what is annexed to [follows] it), جَمْعُ‮ ‬الْـمُذَكِّرِ‮ ‬السَّالِمِ‮ ‬وَالْـمُلْحَقُ بِهِ (the sound masculine plural and what is annexed to [follows] it), الْأَسْـمَاءُ‮ ‬الْـخَـمْسَةُ (the five nouns) and الأَفْعَالُ‮ ‬الْـخَـمْسَةُ  (the five verbs).  The five nouns are: أَبُو وَأخُو وَحَمُو وَفُو وَذُو. The five verbs are: يَذْهَبَانِ‮ ‬وَتَذْهَبْانِ‮ ‬وَيَذْهَبُونَ‮ ‬وَتَذْهَبُونَ‮ ‬وَتَذْهَبِينَ. More explanation of all of these in the sections that explain the inflection of verbs and nouns.

  The Divisions of الإعْرَابُ‮ ‬ (the Inflection of Words)

There are three types ofالإعْـرَابُ‮ ‬ (word inflection): اللَـفْظِيّ ‬(expressed inflection), تَـقْدِيريّ‮ ‬ (implied inflection) and ‮ ‬مَحَـلْيّ (inflection due to the word’s location).

 الإعْـرَابُ‮ ‬اللَـفْظِيّ‮ ‬ (Expressed Inflection)

 الإعْـرَابُ‮ ‬اللَـفْظِيّ‮ ‬ (Expressed inflection) is a clear signed placed at the end of the word due to the governor that precedes it. Expressed inflection is found in inflective words that are not weak at the end.  For example: يُكْرِمُ‮ ‬الأُسْتَاذُ‮ ‬الْـمُجْتَحهِدَ.

 الإعْـرَابُ‮ ‬التَّـقْدِيريّ‮ ‬ (Implied Inflection)

 الإعْـرَابُ‮ ‬التَّـقْدِيريّ‮ ‬ (Implied inflection) is a sign not clearly seen at the end of the word due to the governor that precedes it. The vowel at the end of the word is implied because it can’t be expressed. They are words which are weak because they have alif, waaw or yaa affixed to their end. andالإعْـرَابُ‮ ‬التَّـقْدِيريّ‮ ‬ (implied inflection) is also found in the nouns that are in iḍaafah with the yaa of the first person masculine pronoun, and in a word used for illustration or example when  not a sentence.الإعْـرَابُ‮ ‬التَّـقْدِيريّ‮ ‬(Implied inflection) is also found in any fixed word or sentence that is said to haveالإعْـرَابُ‮ ‬التَّـقْدِيريّ‮ ‬(implied inflection).

‮ ‬إعْرَابُ‮ ‬الْـمُعْتِلِّ‮ ‬الآخَرِ‮ ‬(Inflection of Words That are Weak at the End)

It is not possible to affix any of the three vowels to alif maqsuurah, for example: يَقْضِي‮ ‬الْقَاضِي‮ ‬عَلَى الّهُدَى لِلعُلَى. The meaning of not possible is that it is not possible for the three signs of inflection: ḍammah, fatḥah, and kasrah, to be affixed to alif maqṣuurah.

As for the case of jazm, alif maqṣuurah is  dropped as a sign of jazm, like when you say: لَمْ‮ ‬يَخْشَ‮ ‬إِلاَّ‮ ‬اللهَ.

As for waaw and yaa, ḍammah and kasrah are impicit for them because they are burdensome on the tongue if expressed, and so you say: يَقْضِي‮ ‬الْقَاضِي‮ ‬عَلَى الْـجَانِي‮ ‬ and ‮ ‬يَدْعُو الدَّاعِي‮ ‬إِلَى النَّادِي

What is meant by the term burdensome on the tongue is that the affixing of ḍammah and kasrah to waaw and yaa is possible, like  if you say: يَقْضِيُ‮ ‬الْقَاضِيُ‮ ‬عَلَى الْـجَانِي‮ ‬ and‮ ‬يَدْعُوُ‮ ‬الدَّاعِيُ‮ ‬إِلَى النَّادِي‮ ‬but it is a burden on the tongue  that is greatly disliked. This is the reason why both ḍammah and kasrah are implied rather than expressed. That is to say, that the possibility of their expression is understood, but not done.

إعْرَابُ‮ ‬الْـمُضَافِ‮ ‬إِلَى‮ ‬يَاءِ‮ ‬الْـمُتَكَلَّمِ‮ ‬ (The Inflection of the Noun That is in an Iḍaafah Construction with the Yaa First Person Pronoun)

The noun that is in an iḍaafah construction with the first person pronoun is inflected (as long as it doesn’t end with alif maqṣuurah, or  it is not a defective noun, or a dual noun or a sound masculine plural noun). It is in the case of rafʿ or naṣb by either an implied ḍammah or fatḥah the end which cannot appear at the end of the nouns in the case of rafʿ or naṣb, because the kasrah (which is the vowel that corresponds with yaa)  must be used, like when you say: ‮ ‬رَبِّيَ‮ ‬اللهُ and أَطَعْتُ‮ ‬رَبِّي.

As for the case of jarr, it is known by placing kasrah clearly at the end of a noun according to what is most correct, like when you say:  الزِّمْتُ‮ ‬طَاعَةَ رَبِّي. This is the opinion/view of a group of the recognized/competent grammarians, among whom is Ibnu Mālik, while The majority of them agree that it is inflected, and also in the case of jarr at the end by an implied kasrah. This is because they are of the opinion that the kasrah which appears at the end is not a sign of jarr, but rather, it is the kasrah which accompanies the yaa of the first person singular pronoun when it is affixed to a noun, while the kasrah of the case of jarr is implied.

If the noun in an iḍaafah with the yaa of the first person singular pronoun is affixed with alif maqṣuurah as a final vowel, the alif remains in its condition, and is inflected with implied vowels on the alif maqsuurah in the same manner it would have been inflected before the yaa of the first person singular pronoun would have been affixed to it, and so you say: هَـذِه عَـصَايَ‮ ‬ and تَـوَكَّأَْتُ‮ ‬عَـلى عَـصَايَ. If the noun is defective, then its yaa is assimilated into the yaa of the first person singular pronoun.

The noun in the case of naṣb is inflected with an implied fatḥah because the sukuun of assimilation is prevented from appearing on it, and so you say: حَـمِدْتُ‮ ‬اللهَ‮ ‬مُـعْطِيّ‮ ‬الرِزْقَ

The noun in the case of rafʿ and jarr is inflected by implied ḍammah and kasrah on its yaa, which are prevented from appearing on either of them because the first is heavy on the tongue and the second is the sukuun of assimilation, and so you say: ‮ ‬اللهَ‮ ‬مُـعْطِيّ‮ ‬الرِزْقَ and ‮ ‬شَكَرْتُ‮ ‬لِـمُـعْطِيّ‮ ‬الرِزْقَ.

Some of the recognized/competent grammarians are of the opinion/view that the appearance of ḍammah and kasrah on the defective letters that are in an iḍaafah with the yaa of the first person singular pronoun are prohibited whenever it is the sukuun of assimilation, and  it’s a similar case when it is the case of naṣb.

Aṣ-Ṣibaan has said in the chapter about the yaa of the first person singular pronoun, according to the one explaining the point of grammar about هَـذَا رَامِـي, that رَامِـي is in the case of rafʿ by an implied ḍammah on the the letter that precedes the yaa of the first person singular pronoun which is prevented from appearing on letter, because its place is occupied by the sukuun that is required because of assimilation and not because of the weightiness of expression. It would be same even if this wasn’t the case. This is due to the fact that prosody necessitates sukuun in this case with what is stronger than the burdensome vowels, which is the assimilation of the letters.

 It would be same even if this weren’t the case, due to the fact that prosody necessitates sukuun in this case, with of what is stronger than burdensome vowels, which is the assimilation of the letters.

As for the dual noun, its alif remains in its condition, like when you say: هَـذَانِ‮ ‬كِتَابَايَ,  the yaa of the dual noun, it is assimilated into the yaa of the first person singular pronoun like when you say: عَلَّمْتُ‮ ‬وَلَدَىَّ.

If is the sound masculine plural, its waaw [like in the word مُـعَلِّمُــونَ] is converted to a yaa which is assimilate into the yaa of the first person singular pronoun, like when you say: مُـعَلِّمِــيَّ‮ ‬يُـحِبُّونَ‮ ‬أَدَبِـي.

As for its yaa,  [like in the word مُـعَلِّمـيــنَ], it is also assimilated into the yaa of the first person singular pronoun also. like when you say: أَكْرِمْتُ‮ ‬مُـعَلِّمِـيَّ.

The dual noun and the sound masculine plural noun are inflected when they are in an iḍaafah construction with the yaa of the first person singular pronoun by the letters in the same manner they were inflected before they were put in an iḍaafah construction with it. As you saw.

إعْرَابُ‮ ‬الْـمَحْكِيِّ‮  ‬ (The Inflection of The Exact Quotation)

الـحِـكَايَـة (The exact quotation) is the quotation of what you have heard or read. It is the exact quotation of a word or a sentence, and the speech from either of these is repeated exactly as it has been expressed, even if it’s a grammatical mistake and the exact quotation of it is necessary in order to point out the mistake.

 الـحِـكَايَـة (The exact quotation) is like when some has said: كَـتَبْتُ‮  ‬يَـعلَمُ‮ ‬(I wrote, “يَـعلَمُ”), meaning I wrote this word.

يَـعلَمُ  is  normally a present tense verb in the case of rafʿ, and therefore ungoverned  by the particles of naṣb and jazm.  In the above example يَـعلَمُ is a exact quotation and therefore it is the object of the verb  كَـتَبْتُ, but its inflection is implied because the real vowels of inflection cannot appear on a exact quotation.

If you say: كَـتَبَ‮ ‬فِـعْلٌ‮ ‬مَاضِـي, the word كَـتَبَ in this case is a exact quotation, and it is the subject of the sentence in the case of rafʿ by an implied ḍammah which cannot appear on a exact quotation.

If it is said to you  give an explanation of the inflection of the word سَـعِيدًا ‬ when you have said: رَأَيْـتُ سَـعِيدًا, in turn you say:‮ ‬سَـعِيدًا الْـمَفْعُولُ‮ ‬بِـهِ, you quote the expression exactly in the case of naṣb, even though in your statement سَـعِيدًا is the subject of the sentence and الْـمَفْعُولُ‮ ‬بِـهِ is the predicate, except that سَـعِيدًا has an implied ḍammah at its end, because a vowel of inflection cannot appear at the end of a exact quotation, That is to say, whatever is exactly quoted by you remains fixed in the construction on the way it was quoted.

The word is quoted exactly  after  من الإستفهامية‮ ‬ (man which is used for clarification) if it is not preceded by a conjunction like when you say: رَأَيْتُ‮ ‬خَالِدًا and someone says: مَـن خَـالِـدًا, however if it preceded by a conjunction the exact quotation of it is not permitted, rather you should say: وَمَن خَالِدٌ؟

The sentence that is exactly quoted is like when you say: قُـلْتُ‭:‬‮ ‬لاَ‮ ‬إِلـاـه إِلاَّ‮ ‬الله‮ ‬(I said),‮ ‬, سَمِعْتُ‭:‬حَيِّ‮ ‬عَلَى الصَّلاةِ‮ ‬(I heard), قَرَأْتُ‭:‬قُلْ‮ ‬هُوَ‮ ‬اللهُ‮ ‬أَحَدٌ (I read), كَتَبْتُ‭:‬اسْتَقِمْ‮ ‬كَمَا أُمِـرْتَ(I wrote). These sentences are exact quotations standing in the place of a noun in the case of naṣb due to the verbs that precede them, and therefore they are inflected according to their position in the sentence.

The rule regarding a sentence is that it is fixed in its construction, and if it is governed by a governor, then it is standing in the place of a noun that is either in the case of rafʿ, naṣb or jarr, depending on the governor, unless it can’t be inflected.

إعْرَابُ‮ ‬الْـمَسَمَى بِهِ‮  ‬ (The Inflection of a Word That Has Been Given a Name)

When you mention a word that is fixed in its construction, then you should leave it in its case, and its inflection is implied for all three cases.

If you name a man رُبَّ or مَنْ or حَيْثُ, and so you say: جَاء رُبَّ‮ . ‬أَكْرِمْتُ‮ ‬حَيْثُ‮ . ‬أَحْسَنْتُ‮ ‬إِلَـى مَـنْ, the vowels of inflection are implied at the end of them. A vowel of inflection is prohibited from appearing  on a word that has a fixed vowel as part of its root construction.

It is similar if you name a sentence like: تَأْبِطَ‮ ‬شَرًا‮ ‬and جَادُ‮ ‬الْـحَقُّ‮ ‬ you‮ ‬didn’t change it because of the unusual inflection and so you say: جَاءَ‮ ‬تَأْبِطَ‮ ‬شَرًا‮ . ‬أَكْرِمْتُ‮ ‬جَادَ‮ ‬الْـحَقُّ‮ ‬the inflection of the unusual construction is implied. A vowel of inflection is prohibited from appearing  on a word that has a fixed vowel as part of its root construction.‮ ‬

إعْرَابُ‮ ‬الْـمَحَلِّي‮ ‬ (The Inflection of a  Part of Speech By Virtue of its Location in the Grammatical Construction)

The inflection of a part of speech by virtue of its location in the grammatical construction is a relative change due to the governor that proceeds that part of speech, but this change is neither expressed or implied, because it is found in words fixed in their construction, like when you say:  جَاءَ‮ ‬هَؤُلاَءِ‮ ‬التِّلْمِيذُ‮ ‬،‮ ‬وأَكْرَمْتُ‮ ‬مَنْ‮ ‬تَعَلَّمَ‮ ‬وَأَحْسَنْتُ‮ ‬إِلَى الذِينَ‮ ‬احْتَهَدُوا لَمْ‮ ‬يَنْحَجّنَّ‮ ‬الْكَسْلاَنُ.

It is also found in sentences that are exactly quoted. There has already been a discussion about it. The vowels of inflection do not appear at the end of the fixed construction because they are fixed in a specific case.

When word fixed in its construction is in the case of rafʿ, naṣb, jarr, or jazm, its case of rafʿ, naṣb, jarr, or jazm is in consideration of its location.  It’s inflection is called the inflection of location in view of the fact that the word is standing in the place of a word that would either be in the case of rafʿ, naṣb, jarr, or jazm. and therefore it is said that the case of rafʿ, naṣb, jarr, or jazm is due to the location. That is to say, with respect to its location in the sentence), in as much as if its location is permitted to be inflected in the case of rafʿ, naṣb, jarr, or jazm.

The particles, the command tense verb, the past tense verb which is not preceded by a conditional sign of the case of jasm, the verbal nouns and the interjections do not have an expressed, implied or locational change at their end, and it is for this reason, it is said, that there is no form of inflection for them.

As for the present tense verb which is fixed in its construction, its inflection  which is based on its location is either rafʿ, naṣb or jazm, like when you say: هَـلْ‮  ‬يَكْتُبَنَّ‮ ‬وَيَكْتُبْنَ‮ ‬وَاللهُ‮ ‬لَنْ‮ ‬يَكْتُبَنَّ‮ ‬وَلَنْ‮ ‬يَكْتُبْنَ‮ ‬لَمْ‮ ‬يَكْتُبَنَّ‮ ‬وَلَمْ‮ ‬يَكْتُبْنَ.

As for the past tense verb which is preceded by a conditional sign of the case of jasm, it is in the case of jasm due to its location, like when you say: إِنَ‮ ‬اجْتَهَدَ‮ ‬عَـلِيٌّ‮  ‬اكْرَمَهُ‮ ‬مُعَلِّمُهُ.

Inflection Summary

There are four kinds of inflectional words: مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬إِلَـيْهِ‮ ‬ (subject), مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬ (predicate), فَـضْلَة‮ ‬ (The word that is used in addition to words normally used), and أَدَاة‮ ‬ (particle).

مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬إِلَـيْهِ‮ ‬ (Subject) and مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬ (predicate) have been previously discussed. Each of them is called a support word because it is one of the parts of speech which cannot under any condition stand independently from it, nor is a sentence complete without it. the example of مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬إِلَـيْهِ‮ ‬ (predicate) and مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬ (subject) is like when you say: الصِّدْقُ‮ ‬أَمَانَة.

مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬ (The predicate) is always a noun, like the word: نَافِعٌ‮ ‬ when you say: الْعِلْمُ‮ ‬نَافِعٌ‮ ‬ and the verbal noun, like when say: هيَهَاتَ‮ ‬الْـمَزَارُ‮ ‬ and a verb: جَاء الْـحَقُّ‮ ‬وَزَهَقَ‮ ‬الْبَاطِلُ.

إعْرَابُ‮ ‬الْـمُسْنَدِ‮ ‬إِلَيّهِ‮ ‬  (Inflection of the Subject)

The rule for مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬إِلَـيْهِ‮ ‬ (subject) is that it is always in the case of rafʿ if occurs without a governor, like when you say: فَازَ‮ ‬الْـمُجْتَهِدُ‮ . ‬الْـحَقُّ‮ ‬مَـنْصُورُ‮ . ‬كَـانَ‮ ‬عُـمْرُ‮ ‬عَـادِلاً, unless it occurs after the particle إِنَّ and its sisters. As for when that occurs, the rule is that مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬إِلَـيْهِ‮ ‬ (subject) should be in the case of naṣb, like when you say: إِنَّ‮ ‬عُمْرَ‮ ‬عَادِلٌ‮ .‬

إعْرَابُ‮ ‬الْـمُسْنَدِ‮ ‬ (Inflection of the Predicate)

The rule for مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬(predicate) is that it is always in the case of rafʿ also, like when you say: السَّبِقُ‮ ‬فَائِزٌ‮ . ‬إِنَّ‮ ‬الْحَقَّ‮ ‬غَالِبٌ, ‮ ‬unless it occurs after the particle كَـانَ and its sisters.‮ ‬As for when that occurs, the rule is that مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬إِلَـيْهِ‮ ‬(subject) should be in the case of naṣb, like when you say:‮  ‬كَـانَ‮ ‬عَلِيٌّ‮ ‬بَابَ‮ ‬مَدِينَةِ‮ ‬الْعِلْمِ.

If the مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬ (predicate) is a past tense verb, then it is always fixed in its construction on the vowel fatḥah, like: انْـتَصَرَ, unless the waaw of the of the third person plural, fixed in its construction on ḍammah is affixed to the end of it, like: انْـتَصَرُوا‮ ‬or when the past tense verb has affixed to its end, a doer pronoun fixed in its construction on sukuun, like: انْـتَصَرْتُ‮ . ‬انْـتَصَرْتُمْ‮ . ‬انْـتَصَرْنَا.

If the مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬ (predicate) is a present tense verb, then it is always in the case of rafʿ, like: يَـنْـصُرُ, unless it is preceded by a particle of naṣb, in which case it will be in the case of naṣb, like when you say: لَـنْ‮ ‬تَـبْلُغَ‮ ‬الْـمَجْدَ‮ ‬إِلاَّ‮ ‬بِالْـجِدِّ,‮ ‬or it is preceded by a particle of jazm, in which case it will be in the case of  jazm, like when you say:  ((لَـمْ‮ ‬يَلدْ‮ ‬وَلَمْ‮ ‬يُولَدْ)), and if it is preceded by one of the nuuns used for emphasis, it is constructed on fatḥah, like  when you say: يَجْتَحِـدْنَ‮ ‬and‮ ‬يَجْتَحِـدَنَّ, or if it is preceded by the nuun of femininity, it is constructed on sukuun, like when you say: الْفَتيَاتُ‮ ‬يَجْتَحِدْنَ.

If the مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬ (predicate) is a command tense verb, it is always constructed on sukuun, like: أُكْـتُبْ, unless it is weak at the end, then is fixed in its construction on the dropping of the last letter, like when you say: إِسْـعَ‮ ‬and أَدْعُ‮ ‬and إِمّـشِ, or if the alif of the dual doer or the waaw of the plural doer or yaa of the second person doer is affixed to it, then the command tense verb is constructed with the dropping of nuun, like when you say:  أُكْـتُبَا‮ ‬ and‮ ‬أُكْـتُبُوا‮ ‬and‮ ‬أُكْـتُبِي.

الْفَضْلَةُ‮ ‬وَإعْرَابُهَا‮ ‬ (The Additional/Surplus Word in a Sentence and the Inflection of It )

الْـفَـضْلَة‮ ‬ (The word that is used in addition to the words normally used) is any noun that is used to complete the meaning of a sentence, and it is not a principle or support word for the sentence. That is to say, it is not مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬ (predicate) or مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬إِلَـيْهِ‮ ‬ (subject), like  أُكْـتُبْ‮ ‬ when you say:  آَرْشَـدَ‮ ‬الأَنبِيَاءُ‮ ‬النَّاسَ, and so آَرْشَـدَ is مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬(predicate) and الأَنبِيَاءُ is مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬إِلَـيْهِ‮ ‬ (subject)‮ ‬and النَّاسَ is الْـفَـضْلَة‮ ‬ (the word that is used in addition to words normally used). That is because النَّاسَ is noun that is used to complete the meaning of a sentence. This type of noun is referred to as الْـفَـضْلَة (the additional word), because it is an increase of  a word to مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬(predicate) or مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬إِلَـيْهِ‮ ‬(subject).  In the Arabic language الْـفَـضْل (surplus /additional amount) means الزِّيَادَة‮ ‬(increase/ addition/more than what is needed).

The rule in regards to الْـفَـضْلَة is that it is always in the case of naṣb when it occurs, like when you say: يَحْتَرَمُ‮ ‬النَّاسُ‮ ‬العُلَمَاءَ‮ . ‬أَحْسَنْتُ‮ ‬إِحْسَانًا‮ . ‬طَلَعْتُ‮ ‬الشَّمْسُ‮ ‬صَفِيَةً‮ . ‬جَاءَ‮  ‬التَّلاَمِيذُ‮ ‬إِلاّ‮ ‬عَلِيًّا‮ . ‬سَفَرْتُ‮ ‬يَوْمَ‮ ‬الْـخَمِيسِ‮ . ‬وَجَلَسْتُ‮ ‬أَمَامَ‮ ‬الْـمِنْـمبَرِ‮ . ‬وَقَفَ‮ ‬النَّاسُ‮ ‬احْتِرَامًا لِلعُلَمَاءِ, unless it occurs after the particle of jarr or as  the second member of an iḍaafah construction, then the rule is that الْـفَـضْلَة is in the case of jarr, like when you say:  كَتَبْتُ‮ ‬بِالْقَلَمِ‮ ‬and‮ ‬قَرَأْتُ‮ ‬كَُتُبَ‮ ‬التَّارِيخِ.

A noun is not permitted to be both فـضْلَة (a surplus word) and عْـمْدَة (a support word). However, it is permitted to be in the case of rafʿ and naṣb, like in the case when الْـمُستَثْنَى (the exclude now) is part of a negative statement in whichالْـمُستَثْنَى مِـنْهُ‮ ‬ ‬(the noun from which another noun is excluded) has been mentioned like when you say:مَـا جَـاءَ‮ ‬أَحَـدٌ‮ ‬إِلاَّ‮ ‬سَـعِيدٌ‮ ‬وَإِلاِ‮ ‬سَـعِيدًا.‮ ‬ If you take in to account the meaning of this sentence, you could put what comes after إِلاَّ in the case of rafʿ, in order to trace it back to the action, because there is no arriver if it is traced back to‮ ‬أَحَـدٌ. The arrival is traced to the noun سَـعِيد and connected to it. If you consider the expression another time, you can also put سَـعِيد in the case of naṣb, because when it is expressed it is also فَـضْلَة (a surplus word), because the sentence has a subject and predicate without it.

If الْـمُستَثْنَى مِـنْهُ is mentioned and the statement is affirmative, then the  noun  that comes after إِلاَّ must be in the case of naṣb, because it is فَـضْلَة (an additional word), like when you say: جَـاءَ‮ ‬الْقَوْمُ‮ ‬إِلاَّ‮ ‬سَـعِيدًا.

If الْـمُستَثْنَى مِـنْهُ is dropped from the statement, it should be put in the case of rafʿ, like when you say: مَـا جَـاءَ‮ ‬إِلاَّ‮ ‬سَـعِيدٌ, because it is مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬إِلَـيْهِ‮ ‬(subject), and it should be put in the case of naṣb, like when you say: مَـا رَأَيْتُ‮ ‬إِلاَّ‮ ‬سَـعِيدًا, because it is فَـضْلَة (a additional word), and it should be put in the case of jarr like when you say: مَـا مَرَرْتُ‮ ‬إِلاَّ‮ ‬بِسَـعِيدٍ, because it is occurs after a particle of jarr.

الأَدَاة‮ ‬ (The Auxiliary Particle)

الأَدَاة‮ ‬ (The auxiliary particle) is a word which is inserted between two parts of a sentence or between the parts and الْـفَـضْلَة (additional words) or between two sentences, like the conditional particle, the interrogative particle, particle of specification, particle of desire, particle of hope/anticipation, the particles that cause the present verb to be in the cases of of naṣb and jazm, and the particles of jarr and others.

The rule for الأَدَاة‮ ‬(the auxiliary particle) is that its end stays in one condition, because it is fixed in its construction at the end.

When الأَدَاة‮ ‬ (the auxiliary particle) it is a noun, it can be the مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬إِلَـيْهِ‮ ‬ (a subject), like when you say: مَـنْ‮ ‬مُجْتَهِـدٌ؟, and  it can be the مَسْـدٌ‮ ‬ (predicate) ‮ ‬like when you say: خَـيْرُ‮ ‬مَالِـكِ‮ ‬مَا أَنْفَقْتَهُ‮ ‬فِي‮ ‬سَـبِيل الْمُصْلَحَة الْعامَة, and  it can be فَـضْلَة (an additional word), like when you say:  احْترِمِ‮ ‬الَّذِي‮ ‬يَطْلُبُ‮ ‬الْعِلمَ،‮ ‬اتق شَرَّ‮ ‬مَنْ‮ ‬أَحْسَنْتَ‮ ‬إِلَيْهِ.

Sometimes, the inflection ofالأَدَاة‮ ‬ (the auxiliary particle) is the case of rafʿ, naṣb and jarr due to its location in the sentence.

and The Meaning of الْـكَلاَمُ(Speech) in the Arabic Language

Section 2 – الْـمْتَعَدِّي‮ ‬ (The Transitive Verb) ‮ ‬واللاَّزِم(and Intransitive Verb)

Published in: on April 24, 2012 at 14:17  Leave a Comment  

Al Ajurruumiyyah – Chapter 23 – (The Chapter About Al-Munaadaa [The Noun in Direct Address])

بَابُ‏‮ ‬‬الـْمُنَادَى

23 – (The Chapter About Al-Munaadaa [The Noun in Direct Address])

ʿArabic Text:

‏‮(‬‬الـْمُنَادَى خَمْسَةُ‏‮ ‬‬أَنْوَاعٍ‏‮ ‬‬الْـمُفْرَدُ‏‮ ‬‬الْعَلَمُ‏‮ ‬‬وَالنَّكِرَةُ‏‮ ‬‬الـْمَقْصُودَة وَالنَّكِرَةُ‏‮ ‬‬غَيْرُالـْمَقْصُودَةِ‏‮ ‬‬وَالْـمُضَافُ‏‮ ‬‬وَالـْمُشَبَّهُ‏‮ ‬‬بِالـمُضَافِ‏‮ ‬‬فَأَمَّاالـْمُفْرَدُ‏‮ ‬‬العَلَمُ‏‮ ‬‬وَالنَّكِرَةُ‏‮ ‬‬الْـمَقْصُودَةُ‏‮ ‬‬فَيُبْنَيَانِ‏‮ ‬‬عَلَى الضَّمِّ‏‮ ‬‬مِنْ‏‮ ‬‬غَيْرِ‏‮ ‬‬تَنْوِينٍ‏‮ ‬‬نَحْوُ‏‮ ‬‬يَا زَيْدُ‏‮ ‬‬وَ‏‮ ‬‬يَا رَجُلُ‏‮ ‬‬وَالثَّلاَثَةُ‏‮ ‬‬الْبَاقِيَةُ‏‮ ‬‬مَنْصُوبَةٌ‏‮ ‬‬لاَ‏‮ ‬‬غَيْرُ‏‮)‬‬

English Translation:

الْـمُنَادَى (The noun in direct address)خَمْسَةُ‏‮ ‬‬أَنْوَاعٍ‏‮ ‬‬ (is of five kinds) الْـمُفْرَدُ‏‮ ‬‬الْعَلَمُ (the singular proper noun) وَالنَّكِرَةُ‏‮ ‬‬الْـمَقْصُودَةُ and (the indefinite noun for whom the call is intended) وَالنَّكِرَةُ‏‮ ‬‬غَـيْرُ‏‮ ‬‬الْـمَقْصُودَةِ and (the designated indefinite‏‮ ‬‬noun for whom the call is not intended)‏‮ ‬‬وَالْـمُضَافُ and (the constructed noun) الـْمُشَّبَه‏‮  ‬‬بِالْـمُضَافِ and (the noun which resembles الـمضاف [the construct noun]).  As for‏‮ ‬‬فَأَمَّاالـْـمُفْرَدُ‏‮ ‬‬العَلَمُ (the singular proper noun) وَالنَّكِرَةُ‏‮ ‬‬الْـمَقْصُـودَةُ‏‮ ‬‬ and (the indefinite noun for whom the call is intended), فَيُبْنَيَانِ‏‮ ‬‬عَلَى الضَّـــمِّ (it is constructed on the ḍammah) مِنْ‏‮ ‬‬غَيْرِ‏‮ ‬‬تَنْوِيـــنٍ (without tanwiin)  –  نَحْوُ (like when you say): يَا زَيْــــــدُ‏‮ ‬‬(Oh Zayd!) وَيَا رَجُلُ. and (Oh man!). وَالثَّلاَثَةُ‏‮ ‬‬الْبَاقِيَةُ (And the remaining three) are in the case of naṣb لاَ‏‮ ‬‬غَيْرُ (only).

Explanation of Text in ʿArabic:

الـمنادي‏‮ ‬‬هو الـمطلوب إِقباله بِيَا النّداء أو بإحدى أخواتها وهو خمسة أنواع أوّلها الـمفرد العلم نحو‏‮ ‬‬يَا زَيْدُ‏‮ ‬‬والثّاني‏‮ ‬‬النّكرة الـمقصودة بالنّداء دون‏‮ ‬‬غيرها وإن كان‏‮ ‬‬يرفع بضمَّة نحو‏‮ ‬‬يَا رَجُلُ‏‮  ‬‬تريد به رجلاً‏‮ ‬‬مْعيّـنـًا‏‮  ‬‬و إن كان‏‮ ‬‬يرفع بألاف أو بالواو نحو‏‮ ‬‬يَا زَيْدَانِ‏‮ ‬‬و‏‮ ‬‬يَا زَيْدُونَ

‏‬الثّالث النّكرة الغير الـمقصودة بالنّداء نحو‏‮ ‬‬يَا رَجُلاً‏‮ ‬‬لغير مُعيَّن والرّابع الـمضاف نحو‏‮ ‬‬يَا عَبْدَ‏‮ ‬‬اللَّهِ‏‮ ‬‬والخامس الـمشَّبه بالـمضاف نحو‏‮ ‬‬يَا طَالِعًا جَبَلاً‏‮ ‬‬وهذه الأنواع الخمسة‏‮  ‬‬التي‏‮ ‬‬ذكرت تنقسم إلى قسمين أحدهما‏‮ ‬‬يكون مـبْـنِيّـًا على الضّمّ‏‮ ‬‬بغير تنوين والآخر‏‮ ‬‬يكون منصوبًا فالذي‏‮ ‬‬يبنى على الضم هو الـمفرد العَلَم والنّكرة الـمقصودة نحو‏‮ ‬‬يَا زَيْدُ‏‮ ‬‬و يَا رَجُلُ إذا قصدت به رجلاً‏‮ ‬‬مُعَـيَّـنًا والذي‏‮ ‬‬يُنصَب هو النّكرة الغير الـمقصودة نحو‏‮ ‬‬يَا رَجُلاً إذا أردت به فردًا من أفراد الرجال‏‮ ‬‬غير معيّن والـمضاف نحو‏‮ ‬‬يَا عَبْدَاللَّهِ‏‮ ‬‬والـمشبه بالـمضاف نحو‏‮ ‬‬يَا طَالِعًا جَبَلاً‏‮  ‬‬

وأمَّا الـمشبه بالـمضاف فهو ما اتّصل به شيء من تمام معناه نحو‏‮ ‬‬يَا حَسَـنًا فِعْـلُهُ‏‮ ‬‬و يَا سَامِيًا بِرُّهُ‏‮ ‬‬فإنَّ‏‮ ‬‬حسنًا وسَامِيًا‏‮ ‬‬يَتَعلَّقُ‏‮ ‬‬معناهما بما بعدهما أي‏‮ ‬‬بفعله وبِرُّهُ‏‮ ‬‬إذ لو لم‏‮ ‬‬يُذكر ما بعدهما لم‏‮ ‬‬يكن معناهما كلامًا بخلاف الـمضاف فإنه ليس كذلك لأنّ‏‮ ‬‬الغلام في‏‮ ‬‬قولك‏‮ ‬‬غُلاَمُ‏‮ ‬‬زَيْدٍ‏‮ ‬‬لا‏‮ ‬‬يتعلَّق معناه بما بعده‏‮ ‬‬

Explanation of Text in English: 

الـْمُنَادَى (The noun in direct address) is the noun which represents someone or something being summoned.  It is precede byحَرْفُ‏‮ ‬‬النِّدَاءِ‏‮ ‬‬‏‭:‬‬ (the particle of summoning‏‮ ‬‬= يَا) or أَخْوَاتِه (its sisters).  الْـمُنَادَى (The noun in direct address) is of five kinds: the first is الـْمُفْرَدُ‏‮ ‬‬الْعَلَمُ (the singular proper noun) – like when you say: يَا زَيْدُ (Oh Zayd!), the second  is النَّكِرَةُ‏‮ ‬‬الـْمَقْصُودَة (the indefinite noun intended) by the call  /  summoning  and  no  one  else.  If it is in the case of rafʿ by ḍammah,  it like when  you  say: يَا رَجُلُ (Oh Man!) – when you wish to call a particular man, and if it is in the case of rafʿ with alif or waaw, it is like when you say: يَا زَيْدَانِ ( Oh two Zayds!) and يَا زَيْدُونَ (Oh Zayds! – three or more), the third  is النَّكِرَةُ‏‮ ‬‬الغَيْرُ‏‮ ‬‬الـْمَقْصُودَةُ (the designated  indefinite  noun  unintended) – like when you say: يَا رَجُلاً  – when .you are not calling a particular person, the fourth is الـمضاف (the construct noun) like when you say:  يَا عَبْدَ‏‮ ‬‬اللَّهِ  (Oh! Abdullaahi), the fifth is that which resembles الـْمُضَاف (the construct noun) like when you say:  يَا طَالِعًا جَبَلاً (Oh! Mountain climber).

These five kinds of الْـمُنَادَى  are (further) divided into two types. One of them is مَـبْـنِيّـًا عَلَى الضَّمِّ‏‮ ‬‬بِغَيْرِ‏‮ ‬‬تَنْوِينٍ  (constructed on a fixed ḍammah without tanwiin at its end) and the other is ‏‮ ‬‬مَنْصُوبًا (in the case of naṣb [without tanwiin].  As for the one that is constructed on ḍammah it is الْـمُفْرَدُ‏‮ ‬‬اْلعَلَمُ (the singular definite noun) and النَّكِرَةُ‏‮ ‬‬الْـمَقْصُودَةُ (the indefinite noun for whom the call is intended) – like when you say: يَا زَيْدُ and يَا رَجُلُ  if you intend to summon a particular man.

As for الـمُنَادَى (noun in direct address) in the case naṣb, they are النَّكِرَةُ‏‮ ‬‬الْغَيْرُ‏‮ ‬‬الْـمَقْصُـــودَةُ (the unspecified indefinite noun) – like when you say: يَا رَجُلاً  if you are summoning any man – no one in particular and  الـْمُضَــــــافُ (the constructed noun)- like when you say: يَا عَبْدَ‏‮ ‬‬اللَّهِ.

As for الْــمُشْبِه بالْـمُضَــافُ (what resembles the constructed noun), it is like when you say: يَا طَالِعًا جَبَلاً (Oh Climber of a mountain), and  like when you say: يَا حَسَنًا فِعْـلُهُ‏‮ ‬‬ (Oh he whose actions are good) and  يَا سَامِيًا بِرُّهُ (Oh he whose righteousness is high).

And so حَسَنًا and سَامِيًا, their meanings are connected to the nouns that follow them, which are فِعْـلُهُ and بِرُّهُ.  If these words are not mention, then the meaning of what is being stated is not speech. .Unlike الْـمُضَاف, it is not like that, because the word  غُلاَم ( for instance) in the phrase غُلاَمُ‏‮ ‬‬زَيْدٍ is not linked in meaning to the word coming after it.

Published in: on April 24, 2012 at 01:55  Leave a Comment  
Tags: ,

Shaykh Al Hussary Reciting Suratu-l-Hāqah in the Warsh Reading

Click here for: The Recitation of the Entire Holy Qur’an by Shaykh Al Hussary in the Warsh Reading

The Role of Scholars on the Jihad Leaders of the Sokoto Caliphate

The Role of Scholars on the Jihad Leaders of the Sokoto Caliphate

By S.S.Muhammad

Department of Political Science – Usmanu Danfodiyo University, Sokoto


Allah, the exalted, has ordained to send forth, to the ummah, at the end of every century, a scholar who would revive the religion for her. Such a scholar would take upon himself the duty of enjoining the good and forbidden the evil. He would call for the regulation of the affairs of the people and the establishment of justice amongst them. He would support the truth against falsehood, revive the Sunnah, suppress innovation, and denounce bad customs.

As a result of his activities, his conditions will be different from those of the Ulama of his age and he will find himself a stranger amongst them, because his qualities are different from their own and men like him are few … 1

In conformity with the above hadith, Shehu Uthman b. Fodio undertook a jihad, which transformed the early 19th century Hausa land and saw the establishment of the Sakkwato caliphate. The Sakata jihad of the early 19th century was preceded by important intellectual as well as political and social developments and might even be argued that the intellectual pre-history of the revolution has been crucial to the course it has taken.

This paper basically examines the role of scholars on the jihad leaders of 1804 in Hausa land. These include Shaikh Uthman b. Muhammad b. Fodio (1754-1817) his brother Abdullahi b. Muhammad b. Fodio (1776-1828) and Shaikh Uthman’s son Muhammad Bello. The paper also examines the role of scholars in shaping the kind of polity that came to be established, the Sakata Caliphate. It first shows the link between scholarship and revolution, the different scholars that influenced the Jihadists of the caliphate as well as the pattern of such influences and concludes the study by pointing the way forward.

Scholarship as foundation of Change:

There are consensuses among scholars, classical or contemporary about the interconnectedness of scholarship and change in societies. Particular scholastic traditions culminate into the establishment of particular kinds of societies based on certain recognized principles. The jihad leaders were very clear on this. According to Muhammad Bello, one of the key architects of the caliphate, everything has a foundation and the foundation of this caliphate is knowledge. The Shehu himself has clearly captured the place of scholarship. He wrote:

A man without learning is like a country without inhabitants. The finest (qualities) in a ruler, in particular and of people in general are the love of learning, the desire to listen to it and holding the bearers of knowledge in great respect-this is the surest way for a ruler to be loved by his subjects. On the other hand, if the king is devoid of learning, he follows his whims and lead his people astray, like a riding beast with no halter, wandering off the path and perhaps spoiling what it passes over.  2

The Shehu has also asserted in his Kitāb al-Farq that acquisition of knowledge by study and the teaching of that knowledge is one of the objectives of Muslims in their government. The very serious concern with scholarship by the Sakata triumvirate is in recognition of its place in the progress and development of humankind and the societies in which they live in. The Shehu, Abdullah and Muhammad Bello thus become preoccupied with the acquisition of knowledge such that they have together over 300 scholarly works to their credit. These were written at different times, including in battle fronts and dealt with a variety of subjects from jurisprudence, political theory, economics, history, tafsir, to virtually every field of human endeavour. They were so concerned with learning and scholarship such that this becomes the most pronounced and lasting tradition the caliphate came to be associated with. The Sokoto caliphate was thus clearly a product of learning, a product of decades of preaching and enlightenment campaigns aimed clearly at establishment of a just socio-economic and political entity.

Role of Scholars on the Jihad Leaders

Of the many factors and forces that shaped the thought of the jihad leaders, that of the scholars is the most important. All the jihadists were greatly influenced by a number of prominent scholars that are contemporary with them. They have testified to this in a number of their works through the expression of opinions and the experiences of scholars before them from the prophetic era through the first four caliphs of Islam, through the Abbasid and the North African scholars to those of the Bilād as-Sudāan.

One of the greatest influences exercised upon the jihad leaders is that by scholars contemporary to the jihadists. The Shehu, Abdullah and Bello have testified to this in the numerous works they authored. Abdullahi has listed vast number of scholars as some of his teachers in Idā an-Nusukh. Ten of those are related to him by blood. But of greater prominence of the scholars mentioned was Shaikh Jibril b. Umar who was both Shehu’s and Abdullah’s teacher and significantly noted for his radical views in matters of Islam as it applied to society. He was in fact viewed to have engineered the Sakkwato revolution. So significant were his contribution that the Shehu stated thus, “I wonder whether we would have been guided to the right path, had it not been for the Sheikh for the destruction of customs contrary to Islam in our Sudanese country was initiated by him and it was completed by us”. Similarly, Abdullah composed several poems of eulogy for Jibril in his Tazyin, which show his reverence for him.

Through these scholars, the jihad leaders studied the Qur’an and its Tafsir (exegesis), Tawhid (the science of the unity of Allah), Fiqh, (Jurisprudence), and Hadith (the traditions of the prophet) and a variety of other branches of scholarship. They thus became men of very deep learning. It is this breadth and depth of learning possessed by the Sakkwato Mujahidun that greatly prepared the intellectual phase of the Sakkwato jihad. But there are other set of scholars whose philosophy and practise the jihadists worked to counter. Abdullahi described them as those who:

…Neglect their prayers and obey, in procuring pleasures their own souls. And the majority of them have traded their faith for the world, preferring what they desire; their minds are full of temptations. They are bold in eating forbidding food, they eat like beasts … they do not listen to commands and they disobey their Imam, and they ridicule anyone who stands and who stands and forbids they from evil… 3

The Shehu in his Tanbīh Al lkwān also noted that:

one of the habits of many scholars of the Bilād as-Sudān is that they leave their wives, daughters and slaves neglected like a grazing livestock without teaching them what Allah makes obligatory on them; they consider them like a container which they use; when it breaks they throw it in dung and rubbish pieces. 4

Muslim Scholars and the Jihadist

The works of several scholars who were not their contemporaries profoundly influenced the jihad leaders. It has been viewed that:

The triumvirate, their supporters have consistently stressed the link between them and the preceding generations of Islamic scholars. In their works on constitutional matters, for instance, they frequently quoted or referred to the works of Ibn AI-Arabi Ibn. Jama’a, AI-Suyuti, al-Gazzali, Ibn Khaldun, Ibn Arafa and al-Maghili. Thus Shehu, Abdullahi and Bello drew their inspiration from a remarkable and enduring academic tradition… 5

AI-Mawardi, the Abbasid political theorist, to begin with, is one such scholar whom Abdullahi referred to in his works, particularly in DiyaalHukkam. AI-Mawardi argued that religion and politics are not separate as far as Islam is concerned. He also viewed the institution of the imamate is a necessary requirement of the shariah and not of reason. The imamate, to al-Mawardi, is established to replace prophecy in the defence of the faith and the administration of the world. Consequently, he discusses the means of instituting the imamate-and the qualifications required of an Imam as well as those who are empowered to elect him.

Now, there is close correlation between Abdullah’s ideas with those of AI-Mawardi as outlined above. Murray last confirmed this when he noted that Abdullahi follows the arguments made familiar by AI-Mawardi in his AI-Aḥkām as-Sultaniyyah. 6

AI-Ghazzali, a prominent Muslim political thinker, is also one of the important personalities who have greatly influenced the thought of the jihadists. His Kitab al-Halal wal Haram, which is a part of his famous work, Ihyā Ulumuddīn , was one of Abdullahi’s main sources in delineating what is permissible and what is not in an Islamic state. The jihadists views on the need of calling a corrupt and unjust regime to order is also logically connected to AI-Gazzali’s view, as discussed in his “Min hunā Na alam“. His view too that religion and politics cannot be separated has also been expressed by Abdullahi in his Diya -al-Siyasat. AI-Maghili was one such scholar to have exercised tremendous influence on the Sakata jihadists, It has stated that by Abdullah Smith:

All the leaders of the Sakkwato Jihad great attention to the writings of Muhammad b. Abdal Karīm al-Maghīlī who seems to have exerted an important and lasting influence on learned Muslim opinion in this region, particularly on potitics. 7

AI-Maghili (d. 1503/04), a Muslim jurist noted for his scholarship, held great revolutionary ideas on a wide range of issues of religion, society and leadership. Many of those were expressed in his public teachings and the scholarly works he authored, many of which were in circulation in North and West Africa since the 16th century. The radical nature of his ideas was partly instrumental in his falling apart with many ulama of his period and his subsequent leaving for the Bilad-al-Sudan.

AI-Maghili’s ideas however found a fertile ground in the Bilād as-Sudān. In Kano, he was warmly accepted by the then Amir of Kanø, Muhammad Rumfa (1493-1499). It was here that al-Maghili wrote his famous Tajuddīn Fī Mā Yajib alā al-Mulk (On the Obligation of Princes). The work is a constitutional treatise that laid down details of administration, court procedures, defence and foreign policy. In brief, its main focus is on how best a state could be administered. The jihadists drew a lot from this scholar. A study of Abdullahi’s Oiya aI-Sultan will reveal that it consisted of a summary of four works. The first two works belong to al Maghili and they were those written respectively for Muhammad Rumfa of Kano and Askia of Songhai. The other two works were Shehu Uthman’s. In addition, the entire section dealing with the question of the Imamate and the duties of the Supreme Imam’ contained in Abdullahi’s Diyā al-Hukkām 8 is based on the views of AI-Maghili. Abdullahi himself stated at the end of that section, “know that all I mention in this section is an extract from a book written by Muhammad b. Abdalkarim al Tilmi Sani”. The book referred to here is the Tajuddin fi rna yajib ala al-Muluk. Mentioned earlier while the name was al-Maghili’s full name. It is also to be noted that Shehu’s Siraj al-Ikhwan adopted some of the views of AI Maghili as contained particularly in his al-Ajwiba.

The jihadists also made significant references to al-Nafarawai, Ibn Arabi, as-Suyūti and Ibn Farhum. They all have discussed in varying details the nature of the Imamate institution, its role as well as the supportive institutions like Wazir, Qadi, Muhtasib and the like. Abdullahi, following al-Nafarawi’s held “It is unanimously disallowed to have more than one Imam at a time in one country unless the two places are far from each other such that the jurisdiction of one of them cannot reach the place of the other.9 In the case of Ibn AI-Arabi, Abdullahi relied on him in his Diyā-al-Hukkām in enumerating the essential offices that make up the state. As-Suyuti’s ideas have similarly found their way into the jihad leaders. Suyuti’s work on the caliphate of the four rightly guided Caliphs entitled Tārīkh al-Khulafā was the main work on which Abdullahi based his Diyā al-Muqtadīn lil Khulafā al Rashīdūn. As-Suyuti is also severally quoted in Abdu’lahi’s Diyā al-Hukkām, Diya as-Siyasat and Sabilu-s-Salamah fil Imamah. It is thus not surprising that Zahradeen noted that a figure of the jihad, Abdullahi derived his constitutional ideas from the Kitab al Ahkām of Ibn AI-Arabi, the Tārīkh al-Khulafā of al-Suyuti and the Tabsīrat al-Hukkām of Ibn Farhum since quotations from these works are numerous.

It is now apparent that the scholars discussed to this point and many others, have through their various works aided in various degrees in the shaping of the Sokoto Mujahidun’s thought. Their scholarship and the inspiration they drew from both classical scholars and those contemporary to them as well as their extensive travel to spread that knowledge had the singular effect of preparing the intellectual phase of their revolution.

Although the Jihadists borrowed extensively from constitutional theorists such as al Mawardi, AI-Gazzali, AI-Maghīlī, Ibn Farhun and others yet, they were not mere imitators. Far from that, the jihadists sifted their writing, simplified them and made them applicable to the environment they lived in. In other words, their originality lies in the fact that they studied the teachings of the predecessors, sifted. and simplified them and above all made those ideas the living ideology of the Sakkwato Jihad movement.

The Effect of the Influences on the Bases, Nature and Outcome of the Jihad

The impact of the scholars on the jihadist could be seen on the bases, nature and outcome of the jihad. The first of these is to be seen on the jihadist philosophy and the bases of the jihad. They embarked on the jihad mainly for the sake of Islam. Schoiars of the jihad have agreed on the establishment of a state system based on the principles of Islam is what the jihadists strived for. Nowhere does any member of the triumvirate indicate that they were fighting a ‘national war’ for the domination of one ethnic group over the other. Nor were they fighting for material motives as some writers have tried to portray. They were preoccupied with creating of Dar al-Islam and a system of government that will facilitate the realisation of Islam.

In Abdullah’s poem, the purpose of their campaigns were more succinctly stated:

We went for the sake of Allah; we hoped for His reward and the raising up of Islam so that all should benefit. And he whose aim is wealth or the demonstration of his courage or the assuaging of his anger, has not waged holy war,’ that is the true judgment. 10

Abdullahi who further stated in his Tazyin al-waraqat reinforced the above:

then we rose up with the Shaikh, helping him in his mission work for the religion. He travelled for that purpose to the East and West, calling the people to the religion of Allah by his preaching and his qasidas (pamplets) in other languages and destroying customs contrary to Islamic law.11

Their travels covers Zamfara, Kebbi territories, Gulma, Daura and across the present day River Niger where they taught and preached in local languages, mainly Hausa and Fulfulde to facilitate understanding. Another impact is to be seen in the kind of state they established as well as the values to govern its conduct. Different set of values informed the new polity. These, according to Tukur include justice, impartiality, consuItation/advice, kindness/flexibility, abstinence/moderation/asceticism, truth/integrity/probity etc.12 Tukur concludes, “That under the Shehu and Bello, at least public business was conducted within the framework of the accepted value system in tune with the ideals which inspired the revolution and created a noble political order” in which unity, welfare, and primacy of public interest” occupied the center.

As individuals, the jihadists come to personify high moral values, gentleness, forgiveness, humbleness, generosity, self satisfaction, keeping good company with relations, honesty and fulfillment of promise were some of the virtues that were zealously nurtured by the jihadists.

They were traits which nurtured the revolutionary furvour of the caliphate that was established, a state based on justice and devoid of corruption, favouritism, nepotism and sectionalism. Their intellectualism was clearly translated into reality.

The influence of scholars and political thinkers could also be clearly seen in the jihadist conception of the nature and essence of the state. All the jihadists have agreed that a state has both spiritual and temporal roles. According to late Professor Abdullah Smith, this involves raising the moral tone of society and providing a societal ideology in accordance with Islamic ideas …. General education reform … to be accomplished by then training of teachers, economic reform to be brought about by the improvement of markets, the development of communications (by opening roads and bridges) transactions of the government (and undertaking) all good works. 13

The role is also captured in the Diyā al Waliyat and the first few pages of Diyā al-Umara of Abdullahi when he wrote:

The state should look to their citizens’ education in matters of their religion in principle and detail, the performance of prayers in all its details, all matters relating to fasting, the pilgrimage and all the obligations connected with it … the state should similarly look at the institution of marriage and all that is connected with it, their commercial transactions and such matters, the affairs of their markets and all that is necessary relating to them, the maintenance of their roads, the protection of their water supplies, the maintenance of their graves,’ the affairs of their treasury …No person is made a ruler over the people to become their master; (Rather) he is to serve their religious and temporal interests. 14

In the words of Bello, it is also the duty of a ruler to commission craftsmen and provide for people in various occupations which are necessary for mankind such as farmers, blacksmith, tailors, dyers, physicians, drapers, butchers, carpenters and all the professions which are the basis of life in this world. He should set them up in every town and locality. At the same time he should make the people busy themselves with the production and storing of food, settle the urban and rural areas … He should seek to achieve everything conducive to their general welfare that the proper order of life in this world may be restored. Encouragement of all virtuous acts, the protection of the poor and the weak, etc. At the end, the jihadists were able to establish the largest and most organised polity in Africa south of the sahara, a state based on the – ideals of justice and equity and the realisation of the interests of the people.


The jihadists were greatly influenced by the different scholars with whom they have studied and associated with. From them they learnt and eventually mastered different fields of scholarship. The Shehu was himself nicknamed Fodio for his great learning and piety. The writings of great Muslim jurist and thinkers such as al-Mawardi, ai-Mag hili, Ibn alArabi, as-Suyuti to mention but a few, have exerted great influence on the thought of the jihadists. They left an indelible mark on them and remained for them a source of inspiration. This is as evidenced by their frequent quotations from their works.

However, far from being mere initiators, the jihadists never succumb to the views and opinions of others without question except they are clearly grounded in law. Although they made references to the preceding generations of scholars, their originality lies in the fact that he sifted, selected and simplified their works and made them the living ideology of the Sakkwato jihad movement. The jihadists were quite aware that the scholars they quoted wrote taking into consideration the problems and circumstances of their times. They must have therefore addressed themselves to those problems. It is thus the case that the jihadists did not unduly idealize the works and ideas of the scholars that influenced them.

End Notes

1. Uthman b. Fodiyo, Ifhām al-Munkirīn, cited in Bugaje U., The Sakkwato Model: A Study of origin, Development and Fruition of the jihad of Uthman b. Fodiyo 1754-1817‘ (paper presented at International Islamic Conference, Bayero University, Kano, 16th– 22nd April, 1980).

2. Uthman 8. Fodiyo, Bayan wujūb al Hijrah Cited in Bugaje, Usman, The Caliphate in Modern Nigeria: Ending It. Mending It. or Reinventing It, Text of a public lecture organised to commemorate the 18t anniversary of the installation of the 19th sultan of Sokoto, Alh. Muhammadu Maccido, April 21, 1997, p.9

3. Cited in Ayegere. P.O. The Life and Works of Abdullahi b. Fudi. Unpublished Ph. D Thesis, University of Ibadan, 1974

4 Uthman b Fodiyo, Tanbīh al-Ikhwān

5 Mahmud Tukur, Philosophy. Goals and institutions of the Sokoto Caliphal Administration: A Preliminary Review in Nigerian Administration Research Project. 1972, pp.16-17

6 Murray, Last. The Sokoto Caliphate

7 Smith, Abdullahi A Neglected Theme in West African History, 1961

8 Abdullahi b. Fodiyo, Diyā aI Hukkām

9 Ibid

10 Ibid

11 Abdullahi b, Fodiyo. Tazyīn al-Waraqāt. p.85

12 Tukur, Mahmud, Values and Public Affairs, Ph. D theses, ABU.

Zaria. pp59-62

13 Smith, opt.cit.

14 Abdullahi b. Fodiyo. Diyā al- Umara

Al Ajurruumiyyah – Chapter 22 – (The Chapter About Laa)

بَابُ‏‮ ‬‬لاَ

22 – (The Chapter About Laa)

‏‮ ‬‬ʿArabic Text: 

‏‮(‬‬إِعْلَمْ‏‮ ‬‬أَنَّ‏‮ ‬‬لاَ‏‮ ‬‬تَنْصِبُ‏‮ ‬‬النَّكِرَاتِ‏‮ ‬‬بِغَيْرِ‏‮ ‬‬تَنْوِينٍ‏‮ ‬‬إِذَا بَاشِرَتِ‏‮ ‬‬النَّكِرَةَ‏‮ ‬‬وَلَمْ‏‮ ‬‬تَتَكَرَّرْ‏‮ ‬‬لاَ‏‮ ‬‬نَحْوُ‏‮ ‬‬لاَ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلَ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ‏‮ ‬‬فَإِنْ‏‮ ‬‬لَمْ‏‮ ‬‬تُبَاشِرْهَا وَجَبَ‏‮ ‬‬الرَّفْعُ‏‮ ‬‬وَوَجَبَ‏‮ ‬‬تَكْرَارُ‏‮ ‬‬لاَ‏‮ ‬‬نَحْوُ‏‮ ‬‬لاَ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلٌ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬امْرَأَةٌ‏‮ ‬‬فَإِنْ‏‮ ‬‬تَكَرَّرَتْ‏‮ ‬‬لاَ‏‮  ‬‬جَازَ‏‮ ‬‬إِعْمَالُهَا وَإِلْغَاؤُهَا فَإِنْ‏‮ ‬‬شِئْتَ‏‮ ‬‬قُلْتَ‏‮ ‬‬لاَ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلَ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬امْرأَةَ‏‮ ‬‬وَإِنْ‏‮ ‬‬شِئْتَ‏‮ ‬‬قُلْتَ‏‮ ‬‬لاَ‏‮ ‬‬رجُلٌ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬امْرَأَةٌ‏‮)‬‬

English Translation:

إِعْلَمْ (Know), that لاَ (laa) تَنْصِبُ‏‮ ‬‬النَّكَرَاتُ (causes the indefinite nouns to be in the case of naṣb) بِغَيْرِ (without) التَّنْوِيــــنِ (adding the nuun sound to the end of the noun),  إِذَا بَاشِرَتِ (when it [لا – laa] comes in contact with) النّكرة (the indefinite noun) وَلَمْ‏‮ ‬‬تَتَكَرَّرْ‏‮ ‬‬لاَ (and is not repeated) – نَحْوُ‏‮ ‬‬ like when you say: لاَ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلَ فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ (there is no man in the house).

‏‮ ‬‬فَإِنْ‏‮ ‬‬لَمْ‏‮ ‬‬تُبَاشِرْهَا (If it [لَا – laa]) does not come in contact with it [النّكرة – the indefinite noun]), وَجَبَ‏‮ ‬‬الرَّفْعُ (the case of rafʿ is required) وَوَجَبَ‏‮ ‬‬تَكْرَارُ‏‮ ‬‬لاَ (and لاَ must  be  repeated)  نَحْـــــوُ  (like when you  say): لاَ‏‮ ‬‬فِــي‏‮ ‬‬الــدَّارِ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلٌ‏‮ ‬‬وَ‏‮ ‬‬لاَ‏‮ ‬‬امْرَأَةٌ (No man nor woman are in the house).

‏‮ ‬‬ فَإِنْ‏‮ ‬‬تَكَـــرَّرَتْ‏‮ ‬‬لا(If لاَ is repeated),  جَازَ‏‮ ‬‬إِعْمَالُهَا وَإِلْغَاؤُهَا (the use and non-use of [the case of naṣb] is permitted.  فَإِنْ‏‮ ‬‬شِئْتَ (So if you wish), قُلْتَ (you can say): لاَ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُـــلَ‏‮ ‬‬فِـي‏‮ ‬‬الــدَّارِ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬امْرأَةَ (No man nor woman are in the house);  وَإِنْ‏‮ ‬‬شِئْتَ (and if you wish),  قُلْتَ (you can say): لاَ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلٌ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬امْرَأةٌ.

Explanation of Text in ʿArabic:

لاَ‏‮ ‬‬النَّافِيَة هي‏‮ ‬‬الحرف التي‏‮ ‬‬يُرادَُ‏‮ ‬‬بها نفي‏‮ ‬‬الجنس على سبيل التـنصيص أي‏‮ ‬‬أنها تنفي‏‮ ‬‬الجسم الدّاخلة عليه نفيًا عامًا حتى لا‏‮ ‬‬يجوز أنْ‏‮ ‬‬يُستـثـنى واحد من أفـراده كقولك لاَ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلَ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ فإنّ‏‮ ‬‬لا فيه نافية لجسم الرّجال حتى لا‏‮ ‬‬يجوز أنْ‏‮ ‬‬تقول بل رجلان وهي‏‮ ‬‬تعمل عمل إِنَّ‏‮ ‬‬فتنصب الـمبتدأ إسمًا لها وترفع الخبر خبرًا لها ولا فرق في‏‮ ‬‬هذا العمل بين الـمفردة وهي‏‮ ‬‬التي‏‮ ‬‬لم تتكرّر نحو لاَ‏‮ ‬‬غُلاَمَ‏‮ ‬‬سَفَـرٍ‏‮ ‬‬حَاضِرٍ‏‮ ‬‬وَ‏‮ ‬‬بين الـمُكرَّرة نحو لاَ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلَ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬امْرأَةَ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ‏‮ ‬‬غير أنّها متي‏‮ ‬‬تتكرّرت مع مباشرتها النكرة جاز الغاؤها نحو لاَ‏‮ ‬‬حَوْلٌ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬قُوَّةٌ‏‮ ‬‬إِلاّ‏‮ ‬‬بِاللَّهِ‏‮ ‬‬بالرفع في‏‮ ‬‬الحول والقوّة‏‮ ‬‬

Explanation of Text in English: 

لاَ‏‮ ‬‬النَّافِيَة (The laa of negation) is the particle by which the negation of a specific category of noun is desired according to the way it is quoted – that is to say لاَ (laa) negates the category of noun by preceding it with a total negation of (it) to the point of not allowing anything from it (the category) to be excluded (in the negation) – like when you say:لاَ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلَ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ (there is not (one) man in the house).  And so لاَ (laa) negates the category of men in it (the house) until it is impossible for you to (even) say: بلْ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلاَنِ (except two men).  It operates in the same manner as إِنَّ.  It (laa) causes الْــمُبْتَدَأ (the  subject) which is  referred to as إِسْمًا لَهَا (its noun) to be in the case of naṣb and it causes the predicate which is refer to as خَبْرًا لَهَا (its predicate) to be in the case of rafʿ.  There is no differentiation made in this function between the لا that is expressed  only once – which is the لا that is not repeated,  like when you say: لاَ‏‮ ‬‬غُلاَمَ‏‮ ‬‬سَفَرٍ‏‮ ‬‬حَاضِــــرٌ (there is no traveling servant here) –  and the لا which is repeated,  like when you say :لاَ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلَ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬امْرأَةَ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ (there is no man nor woman in the house).  However, if it (لا – [laa)] is repeated, while having the indefinite noun coming in direct contact with it, then the cancellation of the naṣb case is allowed – like when you say: لاَ‏‮ ‬‬حَوْلٌ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬قُوَّةٌ‏‮ ‬‬إِلاّ‏‮ ‬‬بِاللَّهِ (there is no power nor might except with Allah) with حَوْلٌ and قُوَّةٌ being in the case of rafʿ.

Further Explanation of Text in ʿArabic:

يشترط في‏‮ ‬‬عمل لا أمران أحدهما أن‏‮ ‬‬يكون إسمها وخبرها نكرتين والثاني‏‮ ‬‬أنْ‏‮ ‬‬يكون الإسم مقدّمًا والخبر مؤخرًا وذلك كقولك لاَ‏‮ ‬‬صَاحِبَ‏‮ ‬‬عِلْمٍ‏‮ ‬‬مَمْقُوتٌ‏‮ ‬‬ولاَ‏‮ ‬‬طَالِعًا جَبَلاً‏‮ ‬‬حَاضِرٌ‏‮ ‬‬فلو دخلت على معرفة أو على خبر مقدّم وجب إما إِهْمَالِها أو تكرارها فمثال دخولها على الـمعرفة قولك‏‮ ‬‬لاَ‏‮ ‬‬زَيْـــدٌ‏‮ ‬‬فِـي‏‮ ‬‬الــدَّارِ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬عَمْرٌو بِتكرارها ومثال تقدّم خبرها قولك لاَ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلٌ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬امْرَأةٌ‏‮ ‬‬بإِهْمَالِها‏‮ ‬‬

Further Explanation of Text in English:

Two conditions have been made prerequisite for the function of لاَ (laa).  The first of them is that إِسْمُهَا (its noun) and خَبْرُهَا (its predicate) must both be indefinite.  The second condition is that the noun comes first and the predicate comes last – like when you say: لاَ‏‮ ‬‬صَاحِبَ‏‮ ‬‬عِلْمٍ‏‮ ‬‬مَمْقُوتٌ‏‮ ‬‬ (no owner of knowledge is hated) and ‏‮ ‬‬لاَ‏‮ ‬‬طَالِعًا جَبَلاً‏‮ ‬‬حَاضِرٌ (there is no mountain climber present).  If لاَ (laa) comes in front of a definite noun or a predicate that comes before its noun, either its omission or its repetition is required.  The  example of لاَ (laa) coming in front of the definite noun is like when you   say: ‏‮ ‬‬لاَ‏‮ ‬‬زَيْـــدٌ‏‮ ‬‬فِـي‏‮ ‬‬الــدَّارِ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬عَمْرٌو (there is know Zayd nor ʿAmr in the house) with لاَ (laa) being repeated.  The example of the predicate of لاَ coming first is like when you  say: لاَ‏‮ ‬‬فِــي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلٌ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬امْرَأةٌ (there is no man nor woman in the house) with لاَ‏‮ ‬‬(laa) being omitted.

Further Explanation of Text in ʿArabic:

أعلم‏‮ ‬‬أوّلاَ‏‮ ‬‬إن لا إنْ‏‮ ‬‬لم تباشر النكرة أي‏‮ ‬‬إنْ‏‮ ‬‬فصل بينهما فاصل فحينئذ لا‏‮ ‬‬يجوز نصب النكرة بها‏‮ ‬‬يجب رفعها ويجب مع ذلك تَكْرار لا نحو لاَ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلٌ‏‮ ‬‬ولا امْرَأَةٌ‏‮ ‬‬ثانيا إن لاَ‏‮ ‬‬إنْ‏‮ ‬‬تَكَرَّرَتْ‏‮ ‬‬مع مباشرتها النكرة جَازَ‏‮ ‬‬إعمالها والغاؤها أي‏‮ ‬‬جاز أن تنصب بها النكرة الواقعة بعدها أو تُبْقِيهَا مرفوعة وتُبْطِل عمل لا نحو لاَ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلَ‏‮ ‬‬أَوْ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلٌ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬امْرَأَةَ‏‮ ‬‬أَوْ‏‮ ‬‬امْرَأَةٌ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدّارِ‏‮ ‬‬بفتح الإسمين أو رفعهما

Further Explanation of Text in English: 

Know, firstly, that if لاَ (laa) doesn’t come in direct contact with the indefinite noun  –  that is to say, if something is standing between them, then it is not permissible for the indefinite noun to be in the case of naṣb.  The case of rafʿ is required for it and in addition to that, لاَ must be repeated. – like when you say: لاَ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلٌ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬امْرَأَةٌ.

Secondly, if لاَ (laa) is repeated due to contact with the النَّكِرَة (the indefinite noun), its application and its omission is permitted. – that is to say, النَّكِرَة (the indefinite noun) which comes after لاَ (laa) can be in the case or naṣb or it can remain in the case of rafʿ and the function of لاَ (laa) will be cancelled – like when you say: لاَ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُـــــلَ‏‮ ‬‬أَوْ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُـــلٌ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬امْرَأَةَ‏‮ ‬‬أَوْ‏‮ ‬‬امْرَأَةٌ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدّارِ with fat-ḥah placed on both nouns or the case of rafʿ (that is to say, ḍammah is place on the end of the each noun).

Further Explanation of Text in ʿArabic:

فاسم لا‏‮ ‬‬،‏‮ ‬‬إلّا‏‮ ‬‬يخلو من ثلاثة أحوال الأوّل أن‏‮ ‬‬يكون مضافًا نحو لاَ‏‮ ‬‬غُلاَمَ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلٍ‏‮ ‬‬حَاضِرٌ‏‮ ‬‬الثّاني‏‮ ‬‬أن‏‮ ‬‬يكون مشابهًا للمضاف والـمراد به كل إسم تعلّق بما بعده إما بعمل نحو لاَ‏‮ ‬‬طَالِعًا جَبَلاً‏‮ ‬‬حَاضِرٌ‏‮ ‬‬ولاَ‏‮ ‬‬حَسَـنًا فِعْـلُهُ‏‮ ‬‬مَوْجُودٌ‏‮ ‬‬ولاَ‏‮ ‬‬مَارًّا بِزَيْدٍ‏‮ ‬‬مُقْبِلٌ‏‮ ‬‬وإمّا بعطف نحو لاَ‏‮ ‬‬ثُـلُـثًا وَثُـلُثَيْنِ‏‮ ‬‬عِنْدَنَا وحكم الـمضاف والـمشبّه به النّصب لفظًا كما مُثـّل والحال الثّالث أن‏‮ ‬‬يكون مفردًا والـمراد به هنا ما ليس بمضاف ولا مشبَّه بالـمضاف فيدخل فيه الـمثنى والـمجمع وحكم البناء على ما كان‏‮ ‬‬يُنصب به نحو لاَ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلَ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ‏‮ ‬‬في‏‮ ‬‬حال الـمفرد ولاَ‏‮ ‬‬قَمَرَيْنِ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬السَّمَاءِ‏‮ ‬‬في‏‮ ‬‬حال الـمثنى ولاَ‏‮ ‬‬مُومِنينَ فِي‏‮ ‬‬الـْمَدِينَةِ‏‮ ‬‬وَلاَ‏‮ ‬‬مُسْلِمَاتِ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الْبَلَدِ في‏‮ ‬‬حال الجمع

Further Explanation of Text in English: 

The noun of لاَ (laa) does not function outside of three cases.  The first case is: that it is مُضَافٌ (annexed to another noun) like when you say: لاَ‏‮ ‬‬غُلاَمَ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلٍ‏‮ ‬‬حَاضِرٌ (there is no servant of [any] man present).

The second case is that it is  مُشَابَهًا لِلْمُضَافِ  (what  resembles الْـمُـضَاف).  What is desired is that every noun which is connected to what comes after it is connected either by function – like when you say: لاَ‏‮ ‬‬طََالِعًا جَبَلاً‏‮ ‬‬حَاضِرٌ (there is no mountain climber here) and لاَ‏‮ ‬‬حُسَـنًا فِعْـلُهُ‏‮ ‬‬مَوْجُودٌ (there is no good which he has done in existence) and لاَ‏‮ ‬‬مَارّ‏‮ ‬‬ًا بِزَيْدٍ‏‮ ‬‬مُقْبِلٌ (there is no one who passed by Zayd coming) or connected to what comes after it by a conjunction – like when you say:  لاُ‏‮ ‬‬ثُـلُـثًا وَثُـلُـثَيْنِ‏‮ ‬‬عِنْدَنَا (there is not one third nor two thirds with us – that is to say, we do not have one third or two thirds).  The rule for الـمُضَافُ and مُشَابَهًا‏‮ ‬‬ِللْمُضَافِ (what resembles الْـمُـضَاف) is that the case of naṣb is expressed as shown in previous examples.

The third case is that the noun following لاَ (laa) is مُفْـرَدًا (singular) and what is desired here is not مُضَاف or مُشَابَهًا‏‮ ‬‬ِللْمُضَافِ (what resembles الْـمُـضَاف).  And when الـْمُثَـنَّى (the dual) or الـمْجَمْــعُ (the plural) are joined to it (لاَ [laa]), the rule for its construction is in accordance with that for a noun in the a case of naṣb – like when you: لاَ‏‮ ‬‬رَجُلَ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الدَّارِ  (there is no man in the house) in the case of the singular noun; and لاَ‏‮ ‬‬قَمَرَيْنِ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬السَّمَاءِ (there are not two moons in the sky) in the case of the dual noun and لاَ‏‮ ‬‬مُومِنينَ فِي‏‮ ‬‬الـْمَدِينَةِ (there are no believers in the city) and لاَ‏‮ ‬‬مُسْلِمَاتِ‏‮ ‬‬فِي‏‮ ‬‬الْبَلَدِ (there are no female Muslims in the  country) in the case of the plural noun.

Published in: on April 10, 2012 at 01:50  Leave a Comment  
Tags: ,

Journey to the Empire of Knowledge – Narrated By Dr. Abdullah Hakim Quick

%d bloggers like this: