Badal and Mubdal minh

[Waleeja]

I'm having trouble understanding this.

Can the 'badal' be a full sentence?

Is the concept of mufassar & tafseer interchangeable with badal & mubdal minh?

E.g. اية المنافق ثلاث اذا حدث كذب الاخ

Is the first bit mubdal minh, and the second badal?

Or is it mufassar and the second bit tafseer?

Or are they both correct?

[Seekeress@0]

I'm having trouble understanding this.

Can the 'badal' be a full sentence?

Is the concept of mufassar & tafseer interchangeable with badal & mubdal minh?

E.g. اية المنافق ثلاث اذا حدث كذب الاخ

Is the first bit mubdal minh, and the second badal?

Or is it mufassar and the second bit tafseer?


Or are they both correct?

Aayat: Mudhaaf
Al-munaafiq: Mudhaaf ilayh ( Mudhaaf+Mudhaaf ilayhi =mubtada)
Thulaath:khabr

idha: kalima shart
hadasa: fail ba faail( altogether it is a shart)
kadhiba:fail ba faail ( altogether it is a jaza) shart and jaza together become a maatoof alayh
the other two sentences have the same tarkeeb as above except that they now become maatoof, the maatoof alayhi coupled with the two maatoofs form a jumla ismiya maatoofiyah.

I hope this helps, inshaAllah.
Remember me in your duas,
JazakumULLAH Khair
Wassalam

[Mubid al-Majus]

salam `alaykum wa rahmatullah,

I'm having trouble understanding this.

Can the 'badal' be a full sentence?

Yes, it can. The badal can be a full sentence regardless of whether:

[1] The mubdal minh itself is a sentence. An example of badl al-kull are the verses (قَالَ يَا قَوْمِ اتَّبِعُوا الْمُرْسَلِينَ اتَّبِعُوا مَنْ لَا يَسْأَلُكُمْ أَجْرًا وَهُمْ مُهْتَدُونَ), in which (اتَّبِعُوا مَنْ لَا يَسْأَلُكُمْ أَجْرًا وهُمْ مُهْتَدُونَ) is badal and (اتَّبِعُوا الْمُرْسَلِينَ) mubdal minh, and an example for badal al-ba`d is (أَمَدَّكُمْ بِمَا تَعْلَمُونْ أَمَدَّكُم بأنْعَامٍ وبَنِينَ) wherein (أَمَدَّكُمْ بأنْعَامٍ وبَنِينَ) is badal and (أَمَدَّكُمْ بِمَا تَعْلَمُونَ) is mubdal minh. It should be noted however that this is the majority opinion, as some latter-day scholars do not allow this, and it is with the condition that the badal sentence should be more elaborate and detailed than the mubdal minh sentence.

[2] The mubdal minh is not a sentence but mufrad. This is also allowed by the majority which includes al-Zamakhshari and Ibn Jinni. An example of this can be the verse (وَأَسَرُّوا النَّجْوَى الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا هَلْ هَذَا إِلَّا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُكُمْ أَفَتَأْتُونَ السِّحْرَ وَأَنْتُمْ تُبْصِرُونَ), wherein (النَّجْوَى) is mubdal minh and (هَلْ هَذَا إِلَّا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُكُمْ أَفَتَأْتُونَ السِّحْرَ وَأَنْتُمْ تُبْصِرُونَ) badal as mentioned by al-Zamakhshari in al-Kashshaf.

Is the concept of mufassar & tafseer interchangeable with badal & mubdal minh?

Yes and no. They both instigate their own conditions in application and if those conditions are met then they can interchange, if not, then they can’t. So there are three possibilities here with regard to the word/sentence and it’s being badal or tafsir:

[1] It can be badal but not tafsir. Such as saying (جاءني زيدٌ جعفرٌ) [Came to me Zayd; Ja`far]. Here, Ja`far is badal al-ghalat for Zayd mubdal minh and so Ja`far cannot obviously be the tafsir of Zayd.

[2] It can be tafsir but not badal. Such as the statement of Allah (هَلْ أَدُلُّكُمْ عَلَى تِجَارَةٍ تُنْجِيكُمْ مِنْ عَذَابٍ أَلِيمٍ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ وَتُجَاهِدُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ بِأَمْوَالِكُمْ وَأَنْفُسِكُمْ); in this (تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ وَتُجَاهِدُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ بِأَمْوَالِكُمْ وَأَنْفُسِكُمْ) can be tafsir but not badal because badal is interchangeable with mubdal minh and in this verse you cannot do that.

[3] It can be either badal or tafsir. An example of this can be the verse (ثُمَّ اسْتَوَى إِلَى السَّمَاءِ فَسَوَّاهُنَّ سَبْعَ سَمَاوَاتٍ) in which (سَبْعَ سَمَاوَاتٍ) can be either badal or tafsir, as stated by al-Baydawi and al-Iji in their commentaries.

E.g. اية المنافق ثلاث اذا حدث كذب الاخ

Is the first bit mubdal minh, and the second badal?

Or is it mufassar and the second bit tafseer?

Or are they both correct?

It can be either.