Abd al-Rahman al-Muallimi al-Yamani
Irab Qawlihi: An Kana Dha Mal wa Banin - Dimna Athar al-Mualimi
- Author died
- 1386 AH
- Editions
- Dar Alam al-Fawa'id lil-Nashr wa-al-Tawzi'
I'rab Qawlihi: An Kana Dha Mal wa Banin (Arabic: إعراب قوله: ﴿أن كان ذا مال وبنين﴾) is a short grammatical treatise by Abd al-Rahman al-Mu'allimi al-Yamani (1313–1386 AH / 1896–1966 CE) dedicated to the syntactic analysis of the particle أَنْ (an) in Surah al-Qalam (68:14) . It is published as the twelfth treatise within his collection of exegetical writings (Majmu' Rasa'il al-Tafsir), forming part of the seventh volume of his collected works (Athar al-Mu'allimi) .
Composition and Context
The original text spans two manuscript folios (fol. 14–15) in a codex of al-Mu'allimi's writings . He composed it during the period of his association with the ruler Imam Ibn Idris . The work was prompted by a scholastic debate between al-Mu'allimi and some contemporary scholars regarding the status of the particle an in the verse أَنْ كَانَ ذَا مَالٍ وَبَنِينَ ( Because he is a possessor of wealth and children ) . His interlocutor argued that the particle was mukhaffafa min al-thaqila (the lightened form of anna), contending that subjunctive-governing particles (nawasib) are specific to the imperfect verb and that the infinitive/subordinating particle (an al-masdariyya) enters only upon fully inflected verbs .
Content and Method
Al-Mu'allimi refines the grammatical question by citing the positions and debates of classical Arabic grammarians to prove that an in the verse is masdariyya (infinitive/subordinating) and nothing else . His arguments and references include:
- Exegetical precedent: He cites the concise gloss in Tafsir al-Jalalayn—which interprets it as li-an (لأن)—and Sulayman al-Jamal's marginal gloss confirming that an is masdariyya with an implied preposition of cause (lam), as well as poetical witnesses discussed by Sibawayh and majority grammarians regarding the elision of the lam and kan .
- Entry upon past and defective verbs: He addresses the claim that kana (كَانَ) does not take an infinitive noun, citing contrary grammatical evidence, and engages discussions from al-Radi al-Astarabadhi, Ibn Jinni, and the supercommentary of Muhammad al-Amir .
- Syntactic rules of an: Citing al-Radi, he highlights that an unvocalized an (أَنْ) not preceded by verbs of certainty (ilm) or conjecture (zann) is definitively masdariyya .
- Principle against presumption of elision: He asserts that the default rule for unvocalized an is to be inherently light, whereas claiming it to be mukhaffafa requires positing an omitted pronoun of the fact (damir al-shan); because positing omission (hadhf) opposes the default rule, it cannot be claimed without proof .
- Syntactic status of the past tense: Concluding with a grammatical benefit (fa'ida), he quotes Ibn Hisham al-Ansari's Mughni al-Labib and al-Amir's commentary to establish that a past-tense verb following an al-masdariyya has no inflectional locus (la mahalla lahu) .
Answer updated