# جار ومجرور متعلقان بمحذوف خبر



## Ibn Nacer

Hello,

الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعالَمِينَ

ا(الْحَمْدُ) مبتدأ (لِلَّهِ) جار ومجرور متعلقان بمحذوف خبر​
I want to understand the expression "بمحذوف " :

- Does it mean that the Khabar is محذوف (omitted) ? as if we had "بخبر محذوف"
- Or not, the khabar is not omitted, the khabar is لِلَّهِ ? :e  "لِلَّهِ = جار ومجرور =  خبر"

Merci.


----------



## abdulwahid

It means that the khabr is omitted. Generally the omitted khabr is كائن  or ثابت or something similar

It is as he is saying

متعلق بمحذوف والمحذوف هو خبر


----------



## berac

لِلَّهِ (جار ومجرور متعلقان بمحذوف) خبر

This is saying that لِلَّهِ is the khabr not that the khabr is mahzoof; what is omitted is the mutallaq.


----------



## abdulwahid

I don't agree. It's quite clear that the jaar and the majrur are not the khabr. Here is a similar example where the wording is a little bit clearer:
(أنس في الدار) فأنس مبتدأ وفي الدار جار و مجرور يفيدان استقرار أنس في الدار وصحيح أن المعنى واضح لكن من جهة الصناعة النحوية ليس منضبطا ولذلك قدر النحاة المتعلق فقالوا: إن في الدار جار ومجرور متعلقان بخبر محذوف وجوبا تقديره مستقر أو كائن​


----------



## إسكندراني

لله certainly _seems to me_ to be the خبر. I don't quite get how you're reading the sentence abdulwahid?


----------



## abdulwahid

الحمد: مبتدأ مرفوع.
لله: جار ومجرور متعلقان بخبر محذوف تقديره (الحمد كائن لله).
أعراب سورة الفاتحة
Is this clearer? The word كائن is clearly the khabr and the jar and majrur are connected  (how do you say متعلق in English?) to it

Berac interpreted the sentence like this
لِلَّهِ (جار ومجرور متعلقان بمحذوف) خبر

As you can see he put محذوف between the brackets. I think that  محذوف خبر is an idafa, and as you have seen in the examples above it can be expressed بخبر محذوف wich is clearer.

My guess is that محذوف خبر  is an idafa of the type that is called إضافة الشيء إلى نفسه In this case it means
محذوف هو خبر

i.e. والجار والمجرور متعلقان بمحذوف هو خبر
الله أعلم


----------



## berac

The tarkeeb is done as follows, lillahi (jaar majroor mutalliq bi mahzoof)

mahzoof: kaainun(ism faail, faailhu dameerun mustatirun fihi)

then kaainun and lillahi together are a shib jumlah ismiyyah which is the khabr as a whole for al hamdu.

Therefore kaainun by itself is not regarded as the khabr so I do not think it is correct to maintain the reading bi-mahzoofi khabarin.

To regard lillahi as the khabr is fine because its parsing amounts to the same (it and its mutaallaq (fil, shib fil or mana fil and its faail) form a shib jumulah ismiyyah etc.).


----------



## abdulwahid

If I understand you correctly the i'rab of the following sentence 

زيد موجود في البيت

should be:
Zayd mubtada. 
mawjud fi al-bayt is a shibh jumlah that, as a whole, is khabr (and not mawjud by itself)? 

If you don't agree then whats the difference between this sentence and the one we are discussing?


----------



## berac

Yes, the irab of the sentence is done as you have done it, fi al bayt is the mafool fi hi, its aamil is mawjood, mawjood and its naaib faail huwa mustatirun fi hi and its mafool fihi are a shib jumlah ismiyyah which altogether is the khabr of zaydun.

In zaydun mawjood, of course mawjoodun by itself is the khabr( not withstanding that am ism mafool has to have a naaib faail (dameer mustatir) but this is usually not mentioned to make things shorter).


----------



## abdulwahid

I really don't agree and I would like to ask you for a reference saying that mawjud by itself is not the khabr when the jar and majrur are mentioned.

As for the sentence الحمد لله you can look in different commentaries to Alfiyyah ibn Malik verse 123. There they will mention the omitted khabr. This part is from al-Khudaris hashiyah on Ibn Aqils commentary:
...قوله متعلق بمحذوف أي هو الخبر على الصحيح لا الظرف وحده كما هو ظاهر النظم

And this is from awdah al-masalik
* {الْحَمْدُ لِلَّه} 3، والصحيح أن الخبر في الحقيقة مُتَعَلَّقُهُما المحذوف4، وأن
**تقديره كائن أو مستقر*

http://shamela.ws/browse.php/book-11825/page-223#page-201
http://shamela.ws/browse.php/book-11825/page-223#page-202

If you look at the footnote on the second link (note number 4) you will see other opinions, but I think that the answer to the initial question, i.e. how are we to understand this sentence:
(الْحَمْدُ) مبتدأ (لِلَّهِ) جار ومجرور متعلقان بمحذوف خب

​is clear now. The jar and the majrur are muta'alliq with the real khabr that has been omitted. This is what I learned when I studied grammar in Morocco and this is clearly what is meant by بمحذوف خبر or بالخبر المحذوف


----------



## berac

The word mawjood and kaain are both shib jumlahs anyway because gramatically they have to have a naaib faail and faail respectively, now whether there is or is not a mutaaliq the irab will be that the khabr comprises of a shib jumla ismiyyah, if there is a mutalliq then it becomes a part of that shib jumlah ismiyyah, it cannot be otherwise. If so how is the irab of the following sentence?

زيد موجود في البيت

Zayd: mubtada
mawjood: khabar

mubtada-khbar jumlah ismiyyah

fi al bayt: would be unconnected

you quoted 
قوله متعلق بمحذوف أي هو الخبر على الصحيح* لا الظرف وحده

*which is saying the zarf on its own is not the khabr, meaning it is a part of it, that cannot be excluded from the khabr.

Just as it can be said mawjood is the khabr in زيد موجود wheras fi al haqeeqah the khabar is mawjoodun(huwa) similarly in alhamdu lillah, lillah can be said to be the khbar wheras fi al haqeeqah it is kaainun(huwa) lillah, but I think it is clear that to say just mawjood or just kaainun are the inchoatives (khabars) is incorrect.


----------



## abdulwahid

> The word mawjood and kaain are both shib jumlahs anyway because gramatically they have to have a naaib faail and faail respectively, now whether there is or is not a mutaaliq the irab will be that the khabr comprises of a shib jumla ismiyyah, if there is a mutalliq then it becomes a part of that shib jumlah ismiyyah, it cannot be otherwise. If so how is the irab of the following sentence?
> 
> زيد موجود في البيت
> 
> Zayd: mubtada
> mawjood: khabar
> 
> mubtada-khbar jumlah ismiyyah
> 
> fi al bayt: would be unconnected


Its unconnected because you didn't finish the i'rab! The correct way to proceed would be:
*في *حرف جار مبني على الفتح 
*بيت *مجرور بفي وعلامته جره الكسرة الظاهارة
والجار والمجرور متعلقان *بموجود*



> قوله متعلق بمحذوف أي هو الخبر على الصحيح* لا الظرف وحده
> 
> which is saying the zarf on its own is not the khabr, meaning it is a part of it, that cannot be excluded from the khabr.*


No, that's not what it means, but it's my fault. I couldn't find the reference online so I just wrote part of the commentary from a book. Anyway he states the opinion of some scholars that the dharf by itself (and not together with the omitted word) is the khabr. But this opinion is not considered to be relied upon. 



> but I think it is clear that to say just mawjood or just kaainun are the inchoatives (khabars) is incorrect.


I find it hard to understand how you can claim that it's incorrect in spite of the quotes I showed you! If you aren't interested in what Arabic grammar scholars has said about this, then it's going to be hard to hold a conversation, because I rely on them when I discuss a subject.


----------



## berac

This irab is found in Darwish's Irab all quran, word for word. (It is available on the internet archive)

الْحَمْدُ) مبتدأ (لِلَّهِ) جار ومجرور متعلقان بمحذوف خبر)​
Now is the ibaarah bi mahzoofi khabarin or bi mahzoofin khabarun. If you look at his iraab of *lillahi al mulk* (surah noor), he says 

lillahi: khabar muqaddam
almulku: mubtada muakkhar
He directly makes lillahi the khabar, I would suggest that this points conclusively that the correct tashkeel of his ibaarah above is* bi mahzoofin khabarun.*
As for zaydun mawjoodun fi al bayt, surely, either fi al bayt is part of the jumlah or not. Once the irab has reached zaydun: mubtada and mawjoodun: khabar then we have a complete sentence, if you want to parse fi al bayt as a part of this sentence then it must be a part of the khabar. If you previously determine mawjood as the khabar then there is an obvious problem.
 zayd: mubtada
mawjoodun: khabar
fi al bayt: mutaaliq bi mawjood
mubtada +khabar= jumlah ismiyyah
jumlah ismiyyah + mutalliq=????
I have read Iraabs which say as Darwish mutaaliq bi mahzoof khabar and others which make a shib jumlah ismiyyah as the khabar for sentences of this kind. I have also read that the basriyyoon are unanimous that the khabar is the zarf and the mutaalaq *together*, others scholars have said just the zarf or just the mutaalaq is the real khabar; we can agree it is an issue of contention.
But in any case, I think you will agree if the original ibaarah was from Darwish, having considered his irab of lillahi al mulk it is safe to presume that bi mahzoofin khabarun was the intent of the author.


----------



## abdulwahid

> This irab is found in Darwish's Irab all quran, word for word. (It is available on the internet archive)
> 
> الْحَمْدُ) مبتدأ (لِلَّهِ) جار ومجرور متعلقان بمحذوف خبر)
> Now is the ibaarah bi mahzoofi khabarin or bi mahzoofin khabarun. If you look at his iraab of *lillahi al mulk* (surah noor), he says
> 
> lillahi: khabar muqaddam
> almulku: mubtada muakkhar
> He directly makes lillahi the khabar, I would suggest that this points conclusively that the correct tashkeel of his ibaarah above is* bi mahzoofin khabarun.*


Yes, I agree it seems that he holds the position that the jar and the majror are khabr, and not the omitted word.

I think, and this is just a thought, that the distinction between متعلقان بخبر محذوف and متعلقان بمحذوف خبر might reflect the different schools, i.e. the ones that hold the position that the omitted word is khabr use the first expression, and the others use the second.


> As for zaydun mawjoodun fi al bayt, surely, either fi al bayt is part of the jumlah or not. Once the irab has reached zaydun: mubtada and mawjoodun: khabar then we have a complete sentence, if you want to parse fi al bayt as a part of this sentence then it must be a part of the khabar. If you previously determine mawjood as the khabar then there is an obvious problem.
> zayd: mubtada
> mawjoodun: khabar
> fi al bayt: mutaaliq bi mawjood
> mubtada +khabar= jumlah ismiyyah
> jumlah ismiyyah + mutalliq=????


There is a difference between being a part of the khabr and being mutaaliq to it. Look at the following sentence:
زيد أكل في البيت
The verb akala is khabar. Fii al-bayt is not khabar but it's mutaalliq to the verb. Would you say that the khabar is أكل alone or أكل في البيت. In meaning they belong to eachother but in terms of i'rab they do not.


----------



## Ibn Nacer

Hello,

Sorry for the delay.

Thank you for your helpful discussion.

I know there is divergence between the grammarian on this issue : some consider that the shibhu jumlah is the khabar and others consider that the khabar is omitted.

I wanted to know which of these two opinions is the analysis I posted.


berac said:


> لِلَّهِ (جار ومجرور متعلقان بمحذوف) خبر
> 
> This is saying that لِلَّهِ is the khabr not that the khabr is mahzoof; what is omitted is the mutallaq.


Yes it is a possible reading.


abdulwahid said:


> الحمد: مبتدأ مرفوع.
> لله: جار ومجرور متعلقان بخبر محذوف تقديره (الحمد كائن لله).
> أعراب سورة الفاتحة
> Is this clearer? The word كائن is clearly the khabr and the jar and  majrur are connected  (how do you say متعلق in English?) to it
> 
> Berac interpreted the sentence like this
> لِلَّهِ (جار ومجرور متعلقان بمحذوف) خبر
> 
> As you can see he put محذوف between the brackets. I think  that محذوف خبر is an idafa, and as you have seen in the examples above  it can be expressed بخبر محذوف wich is clearer.
> 
> My guess is that محذوف خبر  is an idafa of the type that is called إضافة الشيء إلى نفسه In this case it means
> محذوف هو خبر
> 
> i.e. والجار والمجرور متعلقان بمحذوف هو خبر
> الله أعلم


Yes it is possible that is an annexation (idhafah lafdiyyah). I also thought about that, but why he does not simply say : * بخبر محذوف*?

Merci.


----------



## Ibn Nacer

I see this passage (source : http://www.taimiah.org/index.aspx?function=Printable&id=965&node=6775 ) 

 كائن هو الخبر. لأن قلنا: إن الجار والمجرور متعلق بمحذوف خبر. إذن المحذوف هو الخبر​What do you think ?


----------



## Mazhara

This is a Prepositional Phrase, relating to the elided Predicate of the Nominal Sentence. The predicate/خبر of a nominal sentence can be indicated through a prepositional phrase, resembling like a sentence [شبه الجملة ] but is not a sentence. The learned grammarians lay the principle that a prepositional phrase is neither the Subject nor the predicate of a sentence. Therefore, a verb - verbal noun is estimated before this phrase.
01:2-4


----------



## Adilpower

According to grammarians, both can be متعلق.

ٱلرجل في ٱلمسجد 
If you say "في ٱلمسجد" is متعلق, then the خبر could be موجود, which is محذوف. If you say في ٱلمسجد is the خبر, then موجود becomes the متعلق. 
I have seen ustādh Nouman Ali Khan (BayyinahTv) calling في ٱلمسجد a متعلق بٱلخبر while ustādh Hashim Mohamed (Al Qalam Institute, UK) calling it a خبر. The majority of tarkīb on furqan.co for لله in ٱلحمد لله considers this a متعلق.


----------



## Mazhara

Ayah 2 to 4 comprising of 9 words constitute one simple nominal sentence- الْجُمْلَةُ الاِسْمِيَّةُ; the addition of adjectives, prepositional, possessive and adjectival phrases to a simple sentence does not change it into a complex sentence. Semantically, it is declarative expressing a fact that is not bound in time and space. It is as such even before the physical realm was made to take existence.

Quran corpus - Word by Word Grammar, Syntax and Morphology of Quran


----------



## Qureshpor

Ibn Nacer said:


> ا(الْحَمْدُ) مبتدأ (لِلَّهِ) جار ومجرور متعلقان بمحذوف خبر


What's the reason for متعلقان? What two elements of the sentence does this word refer to?


----------



## Mazhara

Qureshpor said:


> What's the reason for متعلقان? What two elements of the sentence does this word refer to?


ٱلْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ :یہ ایک اسم اورایک مرکب(جار و مجرور۔ ) پر مشتمل جملہ اسمیہ ہے۔عربی زبان میں جملے کی تقسیم اُس کی ابتدا کے لحاظ سے بھی ہے، اگر ابتدا میں اسم ہے تو جملہ اسمیہاور اگر ابتدا میں فعل ہے تو جملہ فعلیہ کہلاتا ہے۔ قرء انِ مجید میں یہ جملہ تیئس [23]بار موجود ہے۔

ٱلْحَمْدُ ۔اسم،معرفہ باللام،واحد،مذکر، مرفوع بالضمۃ  یعنی آخر میں پیش۔یہ مبتداء ہے یعنی جس موضوع پر گفتگو کی جانے لگی ہے، جس کے متعلق کوئی خبر  بتائی جانی ہے۔*جو اسم جملے میں مبتدا کا کردار ادا کرتا ہے ہمیشہ مرفوع ہوتا ہے*۔یہ معرفہ باللام ہے جو استغراق جنس کے معنوں میں ہے،یعنی منسلک اسم میں پنہاں معنی کی تمام تر وسعتوں اور اس کے تمام زمان و مکان پر محیط ہونے کو ظاہر کرتا ہے۔

۔ لِلَّهِ۔ یہ مرکب جار و مجرورہے۔”لِ“ حرف جر ہے۔استحقاق اور اختصاص کااظہار کرتا ہے یعنی کسی شئے اوربات کااخلاص اور تکمیل سے کسی سے مخصوص اور منسوب ہونا۔اور لفظ الجلالۃ اللہ کے آخر میں حرف جر کی وجہ سے زیر ہے یعنی اسم مجرور ہے،اور اللہ تعالیٰ کے اسم پر اعراب کی حالت کیلئے ہم کہتے ہیں للتعظیم : تعظیم کیلئے۔
یہ جار و مجرور،جسے ماہرین گرائمر”جملہ نما“بھی کہتے ہیں یعنی بظاہر جملہ لگتا ہے مگر درحقیقت جملہ نہیں، جملہ اسمیہ کی خبر کے متعلق ہے جو محذوف ہے کیونکہ حرف جر سے واضح اور متعین ہے۔ اور اگرجملہ اسمیہ میں خبر،بجائے واحد لفظ کے، مرکب یا جملہ ہے تو گرائمر کے ماہرین کہتے ہیں ”فی محل رفع“ یعنی وہ حالت رفع میں ہے کیونکہ *خبر،مبتداء کی مانند، جب ایک لفظ پر مشتمل ہو تو وہ مرفوع ہوتا ہے*۔
Quran corpus - Word by Word Grammar, Syntax and Morphology of Quran​


----------



## Mazhara

https://haqeeqat.pk/06. UrduTafsir/01/Sura 1 pdf.pdf


----------



## Qureshpor

abdulwahid said:


> I think that the answer to the initial question, i.e. how are we to understand this sentence:
> (الْحَمْدُ) مبتدأ (لِلَّهِ) جار ومجرور متعلقان بمحذوف خب
> ​is clear now. The jar and the majrur are muta'alliq with the real khabr that has been omitted. This is what I learned when I studied grammar in Morocco and this is clearly what is meant by بمحذوف خبر or بالخبر المحذوف


I agree with what you have said and this is exactly how I've been taught about xabar that is ma7zuuf in jumlah ismiyyah with jaarr-majruur component. In the sentence that has been quoted, the mubtada2a is *al-Hamdu* and the ma7zuuf xabar (*maujuud*) is muta3alliq to the jaarr-majruur *lillaahi*.


----------

