Studying Qatr an-Nada before Alfiyyah?

[wonderingsunni]

Assalaamu alaykum

For someone who is going to study Alfiyyah of ibn Malik in arabic grammar,
is it necessary to complete the qatr an-nada beforehand?

Keeping in mind that one would have completed study of al-Ajrumiyyah, would it be beneficial to go straight to the Alfiyyah?

[MRahman]

Assalaamu alaykum

For someone who is going to study Alfiyyah of ibn Malik in arabic grammar,
is it necessary to complete the qatr an-nada beforehand?

Keeping in mind that one would have completed study of al-Ajrumiyyah, would it be beneficial to go straight to the Alfiyyah?

One has 2 choices - 1) go straight to alfiyyah - but studying ibn aqeel (commentary) with it -

2) study qatr nada and then move to alfiyyah

I say this because - ibn aqeel has nearly if not all of qatr nada in it.

Allah knows best!

[Sunni_Student786]

MRahman,

Don't you think that there'd be a bit of a "jump" going from the Ajrumiyyah to the Alfiyyah?

And when you say that ibn Aqeel contains nearly all of Qatru an Nada, what do you mean by this?

I ask because I would think, in my own unqualified opinion, that Alfiyyah itself, irrespective of which commentary is read with it, would contain what is in Qatru an Nada because of the huge scope of the work (i.e. Alfiyyah) itself. Am I incorrect in understanding this? Or is there something peculiar to the Qatru an Nada that goes beyond covering grammatical points that one may not necessarily find in more "advanced" texts?

[MRahman]

MRahman,

Don't you think that there'd be a bit of a "jump" going from the Ajrumiyyah to the Alfiyyah?

And when you say that ibn Aqeel contains nearly all of Qatru an Nada, what do you mean by this?

I ask because I would think, in my own unqualified opinion, that Alfiyyah itself, irrespective of which commentary is read with it, would contain what is in Qatru an Nada because of the huge scope of the work (i.e. Alfiyyah) itself. Am I incorrect in understanding this? Or is there something peculiar to the Qatru an Nada that goes beyond covering grammatical points that one may not necessarily find in more "advanced" texts?

Salaam, Sorry for the late reply - Firstly - ajrumiyyah to both qatrun nada and alfiyyah is a big jump - what I meant by alfiyyah containing all of qatr is that in terms of rules - it is very comprehensive.

secondly - Alfiyyah to students is nothing without its commentray - example -


والاسم منه معرب ومبنى لشبه من الحـروف مـدنى

كالشبه الوضعى فى اسمى جئتنا والمعنوى فى متى وفى هنا


couplet from alfiyyah - depending on the sharh you will get the detailed understanding of it - yes you are right due to the scope of alfiyyah it does cover everything - but remember it is in poetry form - so who will derive the rules.

Qatrun nada is a good book to cover as it divides things in differ ways - the commentray I have "sabilul huda" also has charts to make life easier.

So if you have time - study qatr than alfiyyah - i would reccomend ibn malik as the sharh.

Allah Knows Best!

[Amr]

Salaam, Sorry for the late reply - Firstly - ajrumiyyah to both qatrun nada and alfiyyah is a big jump - what I meant by alfiyyah containing all of qatr is that in terms of rules - it is very comprehensive.

secondly - Alfiyyah to students is nothing without its commentray - example -


والاسم منه معرب ومبنى لشبه من الحـروف مـدنى

كالشبه الوضعى فى اسمى جئتنا والمعنوى فى متى وفى هنا


couplet from alfiyyah - depending on the sharh you will get the detailed understanding of it - yes you are right due to the scope of alfiyyah it does cover everything - but remember it is in poetry form - so who will derive the rules.

Qatrun nada is a good book to cover as it divides things in differ ways - the commentray I have "sabilul huda" also has charts to make life easier.

So if you have time - study qatr than alfiyyah - i would reccomend ibn malik as the sharh.

Allah Knows Best!

Wa 'alaykum as-salam

I think what you mean by Qatr al-Nada is the Matn and Sharh together, and not just the Matn, in which case it is better to say: Sharh Qatr al-Nada. I know of only two classical commentaries (and I'm not talking supercommentaries or glosses), namely: a sharh by Ibn Hisham himself, and another by al-Fakihi who also did a sharh of the Mutammimah al-Ajurrumiyyah.

Yes, after the Sharh of the Qatr al-Nada it would be that big a jump then going into the al-Alfiyyah. Ibn Malik is himself the authr of the al-Alfiyyah, and I don't know of an available sharh by him. His son, Badruddin Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Malik, who is simply known as Ibn al-Naathim (i.e. the son of the one who versified the al-Alfiyyah) has written a sharh on the al-Alfiyyah. There are numerous commentaries on the al-Alfiyyah, classical and modern, short and long, easy and difficult, etc. While there are commentaries shorter and easier than that of Ibn 'Aqil I think it is by far the most popular, and he has a good way of laying out the rules rather than just giving an explanation. In other words, he somewhat organises the material for you at crucial places, and puts everything sort of into perspective. There have been many attempts at writing simplified and more accessible version of Sharh Ibn 'Aqil as if it is not simplified and accessible enough. The only problem with these watered-down versions is that you feel that they are trying to take make the Sharh Ibn 'Aqil so simple that the student is left with no challenge, and you sometimes feel that it is not the Sharh Ibn 'Aqil that you're reading but some other book. Theyare literally trying to take the bite of Sharh Ibn 'Aqil and with the result they are destroying its essence.

The other good thing is that there are complete audio commentaries available on the al-Alfiyyah. I know of a Mauratanian Shaykh that did a 45 cassette commentary of the al-Alfiyyah and is now available on CD as well as the internet.

O yes, regarding the edited commentary "Sabil al-Huda" which is an edited version of Ibn Hisham's commentary on his Qatr, there are some serious flaws in some of the tables. The particular table under discussion is the one on page 56, which if you compare it with Ibn Hisham's own explanation in the main body of the text you will find that there is some serious disconnect at places. I personally don't have any qualms if certain works contain certain errors because it makes the reader more vigilant, and he is forced to make sense of the material in light of the facts. This does not mean that I prefer works that are error-laiden, rather it only means that when there are errors you are able to spot them. Sometimes, it does take away a little bit from the credibility of the editor as well as the publishers. In fact, there are some publishing houses that are notorious for their printing errors so much so that some learning centers in Damascus do not accept as research references books printed by these publishing houses because they cannot be trusted, and passing on 'Ilm is an amanah.

I'm sorry for having digressed somewhat. This then is my feedback on the Qatr al-Nada (or rather Sharh Qatr al-Nada) and the al-Alfiyyah.

[mr. kit kat]

"The other good thing is that there are complete audio commentaries available on the al-Alfiyyah. I know of a Mauratanian Shaykh that did a 45 cassette commentary of the al-Alfiyyah and is now available on CD as well as the internet."

Would it be possible for you to provide some more information about the audio lectures on the Alfiyya? Any information about where to find them would be very appreciated.

[Abu Gangsta]

"The other good thing is that there are complete audio commentaries available on the al-Alfiyyah. I know of a Mauratanian Shaykh that did a 45 cassette commentary of the al-Alfiyyah and is now available on CD as well as the internet."

Would it be possible for you to provide some more information about the audio lectures on the Alfiyya? Any information about where to find them would be very appreciated.

I think these are the ones Bro Amr was referring to: http://www.esnips.com/web/alfiyya

[MRahman]

Wa 'alaykum as-salam

I think what you mean by Qatr al-Nada is the Matn and Sharh together, and not just the Matn, in which case it is better to say: Sharh Qatr al-Nada. I know of only two classical commentaries (and I'm not talking supercommentaries or glosses), namely: a sharh by Ibn Hisham himself, and another by al-Fakihi who also did a sharh of the Mutammimah al-Ajurrumiyyah.

Yes, after the Sharh of the Qatr al-Nada it would be that big a jump then going into the al-Alfiyyah. Ibn Malik is himself the authr of the al-Alfiyyah, and I don't know of an available sharh by him. His son, Badruddin Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Malik, who is simply known as Ibn al-Naathim (i.e. the son of the one who versified the al-Alfiyyah) has written a sharh on the al-Alfiyyah. There are numerous commentaries on the al-Alfiyyah, classical and modern, short and long, easy and difficult, etc. While there are commentaries shorter and easier than that of Ibn 'Aqil I think it is by far the most popular, and he has a good way of laying out the rules rather than just giving an explanation. In other words, he somewhat organises the material for you at crucial places, and puts everything sort of into perspective. There have been many attempts at writing simplified and more accessible version of Sharh Ibn 'Aqil as if it is not simplified and accessible enough. The only problem with these watered-down versions is that you feel that they are trying to take make the Sharh Ibn 'Aqil so simple that the student is left with no challenge, and you sometimes feel that it is not the Sharh Ibn 'Aqil that you're reading but some other book. Theyare literally trying to take the bite of Sharh Ibn 'Aqil and with the result they are destroying its essence.

The other good thing is that there are complete audio commentaries available on the al-Alfiyyah. I know of a Mauratanian Shaykh that did a 45 cassette commentary of the al-Alfiyyah and is now available on CD as well as the internet.

O yes, regarding the edited commentary "Sabil al-Huda" which is an edited version of Ibn Hisham's commentary on his Qatr, there are some serious flaws in some of the tables. The particular table under discussion is the one on page 56, which if you compare it with Ibn Hisham's own explanation in the main body of the text you will find that there is some serious disconnect at places. I personally don't have any qualms if certain works contain certain errors because it makes the reader more vigilant, and he is forced to make sense of the material in light of the facts. This does not mean that I prefer works that are error-laiden, rather it only means that when there are errors you are able to spot them. Sometimes, it does take away a little bit from the credibility of the editor as well as the publishers. In fact, there are some publishing houses that are notorious for their printing errors so much so that some learning centers in Damascus do not accept as research references books printed by these publishing houses because they cannot be trusted, and passing on 'Ilm is an amanah.

I'm sorry for having digressed somewhat. This then is my feedback on the Qatr al-Nada (or rather Sharh Qatr al-Nada) and the al-Alfiyyah.

Yeah - forgot to mention about the arrors in sabilul huda - the ones i have spotted arent major - like the istisna diagram - there is a missing category or something - its a got a few mistakes - from experience this is done by the publishing houses or editors.

[mr. kit kat]

I think these are the ones Bro Amr was referring to: http://www.esnips.com/web/alfiyya

Jazakallahu Kulla Khair for this awesome link. The website says that this sharh of the Alfiyyah is by Sheikh Hasan as-Shanqiti.

[mr. kit kat]

Also in regards to the original question, after I finished the matn of al-Ajarumiyyah, I wanted to jump into an advanced book of grammar right away. My teacher suggested that I first do a commentary on the Ajarumiyyah. I went along with the idea, and it turned out to be very beneficial. It gave me practice on reading a sharh and learning more grammatical terminology. Reading a book that I thought was going to be too easy didn't give my nafs as much of a boost, but it was actually very helpful and I would recommend studying a commentary on al-Ajarumiyyah first before moving on. It will make it much easier to study more advanced books.

[abootaariq_810]

As for an-Nahw (Arabic Syntax)then a person should start with the easiest of what is easy to learn such as for example al-Aajuroomiyyah. Some of the Scholars said after al-Aajuroomiyyah is Qatar-un-Nadaa then Alfiyyah of Ibn Maalik but I do not deem it necessary to study Qatar-un-Nadaa and Alfiyyah, rather one should limit his study to one or the other and it will be sufficient.

Shaykh Muhammad bin Saalih al-`Uthaymeen


Source : http://www.ibnothaimeen.com/all/noor/article_3201.shtml

Translation by : Aboo 'Imraan al-Mekseekee

[Assaalik]

Assalaamu alaykum

For someone who is going to study Alfiyyah of ibn Malik in arabic grammar,
is it necessary to complete the qatr an-nada beforehand?

Keeping in mind that one would have completed study of al-Ajrumiyyah, would it be beneficial to go straight to the Alfiyyah?

Even though one studies addition in elementary school he still does it in high school!
The idea is you go to second grade only after completing the first. I have only heard of very very few people who went from Ajrumia to Alfia and they were native Arab speakers and they memorized both books. Not only that there were other Arabs who couldn't make the jump. Even if you could make the jump how firm would it be, besides Qatr a nada is a mammoth book on it's own.
Wa salam

[seeking]

Bismi Allahi al-Rahmaan al-Raheem

Assalaamu alaykum

As for studying Alfiyah before Qatr Nada, I myself do not see a problem with it. However, on the condition that you have a good teacher who can make you understand the book.

Why don't you see for yourself if you can make the jump? Take the classes and see if you are understanding and benefiting, if so continue if not then go to another book.

Wa Salaam