(Series of Answers by the Great Scholar Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashta, Ameer of Hizb ut-Tahrir, to the questions of visitors to his Facebook page "Fiqhi")
To: Tamer Al-Haj Muhammad
Question:
Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi, a note to the page admin: You used the phrase "la zala." This is not used with the present tense, and with the past tense, it carries the meaning of a "dua (supplication) for something not to cease," which is a common mistake... The correct form is "ma zala" for the past and "la yazalu" for the present... I hope you accept my critique... May your efforts and endeavors be blessed, and may Allah protect you and protect our leader, the Sheikh, granting him strength and victory.
Answer:
Wa Alaikum Assalam wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh,
I have reviewed your note regarding the entry of la onto the verb zala and your statement that the negative la does not enter the past tense verb except in the context of dua. Initially, it is a good thing for a young man to be concerned with the language, but it is better to cover the subject from all its aspects. In response to your observation, I say:
The verb zala and its present tense yazalu differ from other past tense verbs. The entry of the negative la onto the past tense verb zala produces the same meaning as its entry onto the present tense verb yazalu. That is, the issue is not simply the entry of the negative la onto a past tense verb, but rather it acts as if it entered a present tense verb. If you say, "Zaid la zala sitting," the past meaning is shifted to the present, as if you are saying "Zaid la yazalu sitting." This characteristic of the verb zala with the negative la is almost unique compared to other past tense verbs—and I repeat, I am talking about zala-yazalu. Accordingly, the negative la enters zala in a normal fashion for both dua and other than dua:
a- As for dua, it is like saying to your companion: "La zalta bi-khayr" (May you remain well).
b- As for other than dua, it is as mentioned in the hadith: Abu Bakr al-Faryabi (d. 301 AH) narrated in his book Al-Qadar the hadith of Nafi' from Ibn Umar, who said: Umm Salama said: O Messenger of Allah:
لَا زَالَ يُصِيبُكَ فِي كُلِّ عَامٍ وَجَعٌ مِنْ تِلْكِ الشَّاةِ الْمَسْمُومَةِ الَّتِي أَكَلْتَ
"A pain from that poisoned sheep which you ate still afflicts you every year."
He said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:
مَا أَصَابَنِي شَيْءٌ مِنْهَا إِلَّا وَهُوَ مَكْتُوبٌ عَلَيَّ وَآدَمُ فِي طِينَتِهِ
"Nothing of it afflicted me except that it was written for me while Adam was still in his clay."
It is clear here that "la zala" is not for dua.
It is worth mentioning that the khabar (predicate) of la zala remains attached to its ism (subject) according to the requirement of the situation, whether that attachment is long or short. Ahmad al-Hazmi says in his book Sharh Alfiyyat Ibn Malik (Ibn Malik d. 672 AH): ("The meaning of zala and its sisters indicates the attachment of the attribute to the described as long as it is capable of it. The grammarians agreed that these four—zala, baraha, fati'a, and infakka—all carry one meaning: indicating the attachment of the attribute, which is its khabar, to the described, which is its ism. However, every attachment is according to the sentence. 'La zala Zaidun 'aliman'—the origin of being described with knowledge is for the duration of his existence, from the time he smelled the scent of knowledge until he dies; this is the origin. 'La zala Zaidun qa'iman'—this detaches at one time or another... 'La zala Zaidun sa'iman'—during the time of fasting, but when sunset comes, the time ends...") End quote.
As you can see, the people of the language use "la zala" in a normal usage for both dua and other than dua.
Other past tense verbs:
a- Dua is predominant when la enters them; for example, you pray against an enemy by saying: "La nasarahullah" (May Allah not grant him victory).
b- Its use for negation with la is rare on the basis that the past has already occurred, so there is no meaning in negating it. In this, it differs from zala because the entry of negative la onto zala shifts it to the present/continuous, meaning lam yazal. As for other past tense verbs, they remain in the past upon the entry of la, which is why their use for negation with la is rare. However, it occurs for negation in specific cases, including:
- It is for negation if it is repeated, such as:
فَلَا صَدَّقَ وَلَا صَلَّى
"And he did not believe, nor did he pray." (QS Al-Qiyamah [75]: 31)
- It fluctuates between negation and exhortation (tahdeed) if preceded by the fa and not repeated literally, where context is sought for preference, such as:
فَلَا اقْتَحَمَ الْعَقَبَةَ
"But he has not attempted the steep path." (QS Al-Balad [90]: 11)
It can be understood in the following ways:
For negation, as stated in Ma'ani al-Qur'an by Al-Akhfash (d. 215 AH): (He, Glory be to Him, said ﴿فَلَا اقْتَحَمَ الْعَقَبَةَ﴾ meaning فَلَمْ يَقَتْحِمْ)... And as stated in the tafsir of Al-Kashshaf by Al-Zamakhshari (d. 538 AH), where he considered it for negation and that it is repeated in meaning, saying: (...If you say: Rarely does the la entering the past occur except as repeated, so why was it not repeated in the most eloquent speech? I say: It is repeated in meaning, because the meaning of ﴿فَلَا اقْتَحَمَ الْعَقَبَةَ﴾ is that he did not free a slave, nor did he feed the poor. Do you not see that he explained the 'attempting of the steep path' with that?)... And as stated in Mughni al-Labib by Abdullah bin Yusuf "Ibn Hisham" (d. 761 AH) where he says: (As for His saying, Glory be to Him, ﴿فَلَا اقْتَحَمَ الْعَقَبَةَ﴾, the la in it is repeated in meaning because the meaning is that he did not free a slave and did not feed the poor, as that is the explanation of the 'aqabah, as said by Al-Zamakhshari)...
For exhortation (tahdeed):
It was stated in the book Ma'ani al-Qur'an by Al-Kisa'i (d. 189 AH), page 248, regarding Surah Al-Qiyamah: (...And His saying ﴿فَلَا اقْتَحَمَ الْعَقَبَةَ﴾... its meaning is: afala iqtahama al-'aqabah, meaning: why did he not attempt, thus the interrogative alif was omitted.) End quote.
It was stated in the tafsir of Abu Muhammad Sahl al-Tustari (d. 283 AH): (His saying: ﴿فَلَا اقْتَحَمَ الْعَقَبَةَ﴾ he said: meaning, why did he not cross the Sirat and the 'aqabah before it...) It also appeared in the tafsir of Al-Tabari and Ibn Kathir with the same meaning, i.e., "why not" (halla). Al-Qurtubi cited both meanings in his tafsir: meaning "lam" (did not) and meaning "halla" (why not).
Summary:
La enters zala-yazalu in a normal fashion for both dua and other than dua.
La rarely enters other past tense verbs on the basis that the past has already occurred, so there is no meaning in negating it.
However, it does enter past tense verbs in specific, defined cases. Among these cases are when it is repeated or when it is preceded by the fa.
Based on this, what the admin mentioned in saying "The conflict la zala ongoing in Turkey" is correct.
This is the extent of my knowledge on the matter, and above every possessor of knowledge is the All-Knowing.
Your brother, Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashta
19 Dhu al-Hijjah 1437 AH Corresponding to 21/09/2016 CE
Link to the answer from the Ameer's page on Facebook
Link to the answer from the Ameer's page on Google Plus
Link to the answer from the Ameer's page on Twitter
Link to the answer from the Ameer's website