View Full Version : subject. وَالنَّهَارِ إِذَا جَلَّاهَا

23-02-06, 07:10 PM
salam alaikum.

i would want to know does the subject of the scentance always have to be a noun.

And can anyone tell me the subject of this Quranic verse:

وَالنَّهَارِ إِذَا جَلَّاهَا

.: Anna :.
23-02-06, 10:02 PM
Well this sentence is not a basic simple verbal sentence.
In the normal verbal sentences, we have the order of VSO (verb subject object) and the subject and object will always be a noun.
Here this sentence is started off by a qasm (an oath), which has caused the noun to take the kasra. However it is still the noun, an-nahaar which does this verb jalaa which is mentioned in the sentence.
So in that sense I would say that yes it is the subject of jalaa, but also it is serving in another sense as an object of the qasm.

Maybe some others can also add their views into this? Al-nasser? Moayyid? what do you think?

26-02-06, 11:38 PM
Inspite of i do understand that there are constructions wherein verb has a different position. But, is it "Idha" that gave the verb a shift in this example?


.: Anna :.
27-02-06, 12:28 PM
Idha here just means "when".
In this structure you have to have the noun first because when there is a qasm of course the noun must come directly after the waw al qasm.
The Idha is needed to bring the sense of the sentence. You couldn't just have (i'll make another example, I dnt wna make stupid examples from quran)
something like this:

wal waladi yamshee
but if you make it
wal waladi idha mashaa
or even wal waladi alladhy yamshee
then i think it makes sense (although yes, weird example)
it's disjointed if you dnt have some connecting word between the noun and the verb, like in a relative clause... just like that really, you need something (like there u use the alladhy)

01-03-06, 07:36 PM
Coming back to your point, "Nahaar" is the subject of "Jallaaha". This means the object isn't explained explicitly. correct?


.: Anna :.
02-03-06, 09:24 AM

I decided to have a look at the 3 diff translations on islamicity site to see how it has been dealt with.
We have the following:

And the day when it revealeth him, (pickthall)
By the Day as it shows up (the Sun's) glory; (Yusuf Ali)
Consider the day as it reveals the world (Asad)

I think I am more drawn to prefer Yusuf Ali. I'm not sure how Asad has got the meaning of the world, from where?
Yusuf Ali I think is good because the sun is the most likely thing here, because it is refered to and then referred back with the pronoun haa, which fits nicely. But he has put in brackets to acknoledge this is not written explicitly as "idha jallaa ash-shams" but "idha jallaahaa"
Pickthall's is keeping it a bit unknown, following with just keeping the pronoun, although I dnt know why he hasn't put "her" instead of "him" just to keep the sense of the feminine? I wna have a look n compare in a few more trans, dno where online to get them all oh well lol

03-03-06, 09:02 AM
Salam Alykom,
I've been looking for the "Tafseer" and "Irab (I3rab)" of this Quranic verse and I found a good explanation in "Tafseer Ibn Hayyan", i.e. "Al Bahr Al Muheet".

وَالشَّمْسِ وَضُحَاهَا وَالْقَمَرِ إِذَا تَلَاهَا وَالنَّهَارِ إِذَا جَلَّاهَا

Waalshshamsi waduhaha Waalqamari itha talaha Waalnnahari itha jallaha

The important thing to note here is that the "ha" in every verse is refering to "Ash-Shams". In the first verse, there are two "Qasam", one for "Shams" and the second for "Duhaha". In the second and third verses, there is one "qasam" in each, "Al-Qamar" and "An-Nahar".
What comes after "Idha" in the second and third verses is a complete sentence consisting of verb, subject, and object.
The subject in both verses (2-3) is implicit and it refers to the "noune" that is under "qasam", while the object in both verses (2-3) is the 'dameer' "Ha" that refers to the "Ash-Shams", that is, the first word in the Sura.

To make it more understandable, we can extend the sentences like this:
(*) Waalqamari itha talaha
It could be written like this:
Waalqamari itha tala alqamar[o] ash-shamsa
'tala' is the verb
'alqamar[o]' is the subject (implicit)
'Ash-shams[a]' is the object ( the dameer 'ha' )

(*) Waalnnahari itha jallaha
It could be written like this:
Waalnnahari itha jalla alnnahar[o] ash-shamsa
'jalla' is the verb
'alnnahar[o]' is the subject (implicit)
'Ash-shams[a]' is the object ( the dameer 'ha' )

.: Anna :.
03-03-06, 10:39 AM
Jazak Allah khayr bro :)
This seems like a good book :up: Does it explain like this for each ayah? (well whatever necessary?)

03-03-06, 10:50 AM
Jazak Allah khayr bro :)
This seems like a good book :up: Does it explain like this for each ayah? (well whatever necessary?)
well.. Ibn Hayyah's Book is a tafseer book, i.e. interpretation. However, the author sometimes elaborates more into "I3rab" than other authors of other Tafseer books, which is good :)

.: Anna :.
04-03-06, 09:41 AM
Yeah, tafseer books which I have come accross are simply the explanation and interpretation, as usual. But this i3rab thing seems useful for those learning Arabic and interested in understanding an ayah in it's totallity :up:

24-11-07, 09:28 PM
Jazak Allah khayr bro :)
This seems like a good book :up: Does it explain like this for each ayah? (well whatever necessary?)

You can view it online here (in Arabic): http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=0&tSoraNo=1&tAyahNo=1&tDisplay=no&LanguageID=1

Look for the one which is dated as 754 in the second drop down menu.

.: Anna :.
24-11-07, 09:38 PM
jazakallah khayr :D

14-03-08, 07:56 PM
* { وَٱلنَّهَارِ إِذَا جَلاَّهَا } *

This is how TABARI explained this verse:

وكان بعض أهل العربية يتأوّل ذلك بمعنى: والنهار إذا جَلاَّ الظلمة، ويجعل الهاء والألف من جلاَّها كناية عن الظلمة، ويقول: إنما جاز الكناية عنها، ولم يجر لها ذكر قبل، لأن معناها معروف، كما يعرف معنى قول القائل: أصبحت باردة، وأمست باردة، وهبَّت شمالاً، فكنى عن مؤنثات لم يجر لها ذكر، إذ كان معروفاً معناهن.

Some of the Arabic scolars explained this as: The day reveals the darkness ( the HA and ALIF ( هــا ) to refer to the darkness ) and they say: it is allowed to refer to the darkness without using it in the text in the first place, BECAUSE the meaning is known and obvious, as the meaning of : it was cold this morning, and cold this afternoon, and it weaved north, and all that about something we didn't talk about because the meaning is known. ///End of translation///

Obviously there is no meaning for saying that the HA in JALLA(HA) refers to the SUN, because its a common knowledge that the SUN reveals the day and makes it clear and not the other way round.
So it makes more sense to admit that the (HA) refers to the DARKNESS not to the SUN.