# كَانَت تَّأْتِيهِمْ



## puffins

Salam,

I had a question about ذَٰلِكَ بِأَنَّهُ كَانَت تَّأْتِيهِمْ رُسُلُهُم بِالْبَيِّنَاتِ فَقَالُوا أَبَشَرٌ يَهْدُونَنَا فَكَفَرُوا وَتَوَلَّوا ۚ وَّاسْتَغْنَى اللَّـهُ ۚ وَاللَّـهُ غَنِيٌّ حَمِيدٌ ﴿٦﴾. Surat at-Taghabun, verse 6)
What is the ism of كَانَت and what is its khabar?

Thanks.


----------



## Sun-Shine

Ism: مستتر
Khabar: جملة تأتيهم رسلهم


----------



## maddu

I believe كانت تأتيهم is to be construed as a single فعل, not as two separate ones. This type of فعل is called الماضي الاستمراري. Here, the فعل's فاعل is رُسُلُ and its مفعول به is هِمْ; there is no اسم and خبر. Another example of الماضي الاستمراري is:

عن ابن عمر : « أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم كان يلبس قلنسوة بيضاء » (أخرجه البيهقي)


----------



## Sun-Shine

I don't think so.
in this sentence كان يلبس
ism: ضمير مستتر
khabar: يلبس


----------



## Matat

The term الماضي الاستمراري is not used in Arabic grammar. This seems like a translation of grammatical term "past continuous" which is used to describe English grammar and perhaps other languages. Perhaps certain books which teach English to Arabic speakers might use terms like "الماضي الاستمراري", but it's not a نحوي term as far as Arabic is concerned.


----------



## maddu

sun_shine: Well, it _is_ possible to parse كان + فعل مضارع the way you did if the ضمير مستتر in كان (its اسم) refers to something. However, in كانت تأتي, there is nothing for it to refer to.


----------



## Sun-Shine

"كانت تأتي"
Ism :ضمير مستتر تقديره هي  (كانت هي
Khabar: (جملة تأتي (جملة فعلية في محل نصب خبر كان


----------



## maddu

Sure, but what does the ضمير مستتر تقديره هي refer to?
إلام يرجع؟
In كان يلبس قلنسوة بيضاء we could say that the ضمير in كان refers to رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم.


----------



## Sun-Shine

كَانَت تَّأْتِيهِمْ رُسُلُهُم
ضمير refers to رسلهم


----------



## maddu

How can a ضمير refer to something that has not been mentioned yet? You can't say ضرب غلامُه زيدًا (Zayd's slave hit him.), can you?


----------



## Sun-Shine

That is what I know.
The ism of كان is ضمير مستتر .
The holy quran has i3rab on the internet.


----------



## Matat

I don't know if sun_shine 331995's i3raab is valid or not, so I won't comment on it. However, one alternative i3raab which I think is valid would be that رسلهم is اسم كانت and تأتيهم is جملة في محل نصب خبر كانت. The فاعل of تأتيهم would be ضمير مستتر تقديره هي يعود على رسلهم. I find this acceptable since the خبر of كان can precede اسم كان (e.g. ولم يكن له كفواً أحدٌ - some i3raab books describe كفواً as a خبر here).

Even with this i3raab, the فاعل which is a hidden pronoun still comes before رسلهم, so as for whether a pronoun can refer to what's after it, I found this:


> وعوده على متقدم رتبة لا لفظا فكقولك : ( ضرب غلامَه زيدٌ ) فالضمير في ( غلامه ) عائد على ( زيد ) وهو متأخر لفظا لكنه متقدم رتبة ؛ لأنه فاعل ورتبة الفاعل قبل رتبة المفعول .
> أما عود الضمير على متأخر لفظا ورتبة فلا يجوز .



Assuming the above quote is correct, my proposed i3raab would be fine since the رتبة of اسم كانت is that it comes before خبر كانت, despite the fact that it comes after it in this particular sentence.


----------



## maddu

Yeah, I guess that would make sense. However, ضرب غلامُه زيدًا would not work, would it?
By the way, where did you get that quote from?


----------



## Sun-Shine

Matat said:


> I don't know if sun_shine 331995's i3raab is valid or not, so I won't comment on it. However, one alternative i3raab which I think is valid would be that رسلهم is اسم كانت and تأتيهم is جملة في محل نصب خبر كانت. The فاعل of تأتيهم would be الضمير المستتر تقديره هي. I find this acceptable since the خبر of كان can precede اسم كان (e.g. ولم يكن له كفواً أحدٌ - some i3raab books describe كفواً as a خبر here).


No, that's wrong.
If you say كانت رسلهم تأتيهم then رسلهم is اسم كانت
but if you say كانت تأتيهم رسلهم then رسلهم is the فاعل of تأتيهم
e.g.  كان الولد يلعب بالكرة  
اسم كان is الولد

كان يلعب الولد بالكرة
الولد is the فاعل of يلعب


----------



## Sun-Shine

maddu said:


> ضرب غلامُه زيدًا would not work, would it?


ضرب غلامُه زيدًا :-
غلام here is فاعل
زيدا is مفعول به
غلام is the one who hit زيدا
This is the meaning of this sentence.


----------



## Matat

maddu said:


> By the way, where did you get that quote from?


I posted the link. Here it is again.


maddu said:


> However, ضرب غلامُه زيدًا would not work, would it?


You could not consider the pronoun is عائد على زيداً according to what I quoted in the previous comment.



sun_shine 331995 said:


> If you say كانت رسلهم تأتيهم then رسلهم is اسم كانت


I agree with this.



sun_shine 331995 said:


> but if you say كانت تأتيهم رسلهم then رسلهم is the فاعل of تأتيهم


I don't agree with this. Why are you stating this would require رسلهم to be the فاعل? As I showed above, the خبر can precede the اسم. Perhaps your i3raab works where you may consider رسلهم the فاعل of تأتيهم, but what makes you say that this must be the case? A sentence can have numerous correct i3raabs. You didn't provide a good reason why mine couldn't work.


----------



## Sun-Shine

Matat said:


> I don't agree with this. As I showed above, the خبر can precede the اسم. Why are you stating this would require رسلهم to be the فاعل? Perhaps your i3raab works where you may consider رسلهم the فاعل of تأتيهم, but what makes you say that this must be the case? A sentence can have numerous correct i3raabs. You didn't provide a good reason why mine couldn't work.


If as you say then where is the فاعل of تأتيهم
Yes, the خبر can precede the اسم but not here because of the verb.
I know there maybe more than one اعراب in some cases.


----------



## Matat

sun_shine 331995 said:


> If as you say then where is the فاعل of تأتيهم


I mentioned this above:





Matat said:


> The فاعل of تأتيهم would be ضمير مستتر تقديره هي يعود على رسلهم.





sun_shine 331995 said:


> Yes, the خبر can precede the اسم but not here because of the verb.


The خبر here is تأتيهم. If I understand you correctly, you're saying that the خبر may precede the اسم, but you're making an exception in the case that the خبر is a جملة and saying that in that case, it wouldn't work. What's your rationale behind this? The type of خبر shouldn't matter, regardless whether it's a مفرد or a جملة or a شبه جملة.


----------



## Sun-Shine

Matat said:


> The خبر here is تأتيهم. If I understand you correctly, you're saying that the خبر may precede the اسم, but you're making an exception in the case that the خبر is a جملة and saying that in that case, it wouldn't work. What's your rationale behind this? The type of خبر shouldn't matter, regardless whether it's a مفرد or a جملة or a شبه جملة.


You can't say that رسلهم is اسم كانت because it's the فاعل of تأتيهم
In some cases if you precede the خبر the اعراب will differ as here.
another example:
 كان أستاذي رفيقي
اسم كان is أستاذي and خبر كان is رفيقي.
but if you say كان رفيقي أستاذي 
then اسم كان is رفيقي and خبر كان is أستاذي


----------



## Matat

sun_shine 331995 said:


> You can't say that رسلهم is اسم كانت because it's the فاعل of تأتيهم


That's circular reasoning. Why does رسلهم have to be the فاعل of تأتيهم? Why can't رسلهم be اسم كانت and the فاعل of تأتيهم be a hidden pronoun?


sun_shine 331995 said:


> another example:
> كان أستاذي رفيقي
> اسم كان is أستاذي and خبر كان is رفيقي.


Actually, both i3raabs are correct. You could say that أستاذي is اسم كان and رفيقي is خبر كان or you can say أستاذي is خبر كان المقدم and رفيقي is اسم كان المؤخر. From the order, most people would describe it as the former and that's generally what it would be understood as, but the second i3raab actually works as well.


----------



## Sun-Shine

I can't say more .You are determined on your opinion and I'm determined too.
Again ,If the فاعل is after the verb then it's فاعل and you can't say it's ضمير مستتر
ضمير مستتر means that the فاعل is not present.
Really really (التكرار للتأكيد)  I can't say more but I will search about that.


----------



## Matat

sun_shine 331995 said:


> Again ,If the فاعل is after the verb then it's فاعل and you can't say it's ضمير مستتر


Again, this is circular. This is faulty because you are starting by assuming رسلهم must be the فاعل of تأتيهم. I think you are doing so because you are assuming that because it's a nominative noun and because it comes right after تأتيهم, then it must be the فاعل. Just because a nominative noun comes right after a verb does not stipulate that this noun must be the فاعل.


----------



## Sun-Shine

Matat said:


> Just because a nominative noun comes right after a verb does not stipulate that this noun must be the فاعل.


Can you give me an example ?


----------



## Matat

sun_shine 331995 said:


> Can you give me an example ?


قال آيتُك ألا تكلم الناس ثلاث ليال سويا
Quran 19:10


----------



## Sun-Shine

Matat said:


> قال آيتُك ألا تكلم الناس ثلاث ليال سويا
> Quran 19:10


هذه تسمى جملة مقول القول يأتي بعدها مبتدأ وخبر
مثال آخر : قال هي عصاي
هنا الجملة بعد قال مبتدأ وخبر
واعرابات أخرى في أمثلة أخرى
فهذه قاعدة مختلفة

الفاعل هو من قام بالفعل
كانت تأتيهم رسلهم
من تأتي؟
رسلهم
اذا هي الفاعل

قال
من الذي قال؟
(هو( ضمير مستتر
اذا الفاعل ضمير مستتر


----------



## Matat

sun_shine 331995 said:


> هذه تسمى جملة مقول القول يأتي بعدها مبتدأ وخبر


نعم. أنا قلت ليس كل اسم مرفوع يأتي بعد فعل فاعل ذلك الفعل، ثم سألتني عن مثال وهذا مثال على ذلك. الخلاصة أنك لا تستطيعين أن تقولي إن (رسلهم) يجب أن يكون فاعلا لسبب إيتائه بعد (يأتيهم) فقط.


sun_shine 331995 said:


> الفاعل هو من قام بالفعل


نعم.


sun_shine 331995 said:


> كانت تأتيهم رسلهم





sun_shine 331995 said:


> من تأتي؟


هي تأتي. الفاعل هنا هي. وإذا قلت (كانت رسلهم تأتي)، فمن تأتي؟ هي تأتي. الفاعل هنا (هي).الضمير في كلتا الحالتين يعود على (رسلهم) سواء أتقدم (رسلهم) على (تأتي) أم تأخر.


----------



## Sun-Shine

يشرح المعلم الدرس
If what you say is true then المعلم is مبتدأ and الفاعل is ضمير مستتر as من يشرح؟ هو
But this is not true. 
This is a grammatical rule.


----------



## Matat

sun_shine 331995 said:


> If what you say is true then المعلم is مبتدأ and الفاعل is ضمير مستتر as من يشرح؟ هو


No!!!!!!!!! This is not a logical implication from what I said and has nothing to do with anything I spoke about.


----------



## Sun-Shine

Matat said:


> No!!!!!!!!! This has absolutely nothing to do with anything I spoke about.


Yes ,it has.


----------



## Sun-Shine

Can you tell me where did you find the  إعراب of (كانت تأتيهم رسلهم)?


----------



## Matat

sun_shine 331995 said:


> Yes ,it has.


No, it's a false equivalency. I never said anything about a "مبتدأ" in the first place. I'm talking about تأخر اسم كان على خبرها.


sun_shine 331995 said:


> Can you tell me where did you find this إعراب?


 I didn't find it. I rationally and logically deduced it based on what is known about Arabic language grammar and supported it with reasoning. You haven't provided a valid argument for what's problematic about it.


----------



## Matat

Do you at least accept that the فاعل of تأتيهم in كانت رسلهم تأتيهم is not رسلهم, but an omitted pronoun understood as هي?


----------



## Sun-Shine

Matat said:


> Do you at least accept that the فاعل of تأتيهم in كانت رسلهم تأتيهم is not رسلهم, but an omitted pronoun understood as هي?


Sorry, I don't accept that.


----------



## Sun-Shine

القرآن الكريم - إعراب سورة التغابن - الآية 6
اعراب لكن غير مفصل


----------



## Matat

sun_shine 331995 said:


> Sorry, I don't accept that.


So you think that the فاعل is رسلهم in كانت *رسلهم تأتيهم*? Why? رسلهم here comes before تأتيهم, not after?
ًWhat about إن كان اللهُ يريد in Quran 11:34? Would the فاعل of يريد be ضمير مستتر تقديره هو or would its فاعل be الله?


----------



## Sun-Shine

Matat said:


> So you think that the فاعل is رسلهم in كانت *رسلهم تأتيهم*? Why? رسلهم here comes before تأتيهم, not after?
> ًWhat about إن كان اللهُ يريد in Quran 11:34? Would the فاعل of يريد be ضمير مستتر تقديره هو or would its فاعل be الله?


No, I didn't say that.
Sorry I didn't see it clearly
كانت رسلهم تأتيهم 
الفاعل is ضمير مستتر

كانت تأتيهم رسلهم
الفاعل is رسلهم


----------



## Sun-Shine

إن كان الله يريد
Theفاعل is ضمير مستتر
الله :اسم كان


----------



## Matat

sun_shine 331995 said:


> كانت رسلهم تأتيهم
> الفاعل is ضمير مستتر


Great! So you agree that كانت [رسلهم] [تأتيهم (هي)]ـ is a valid sentence with [رسلهم] as اسم كان and [تأتيهم (هي)ـ] as its خبر (I put (هي) in parenthesis simply to see the فاعل). 

Now, earlier, you said:



sun_shine 331995 said:


> Yes, the خبر can precede the اسم


From both of these statements, if we take
كانت [رسلهم] [تأتيهم (هي)]ـ
and apply the change switching the order of the اسم and خبر, we get:
كانت [تأتيهم (هي)] [رسلهم]ـ 
where nothing has changed except the placement. [رسلهم] is still اسم كان and [تأتيهم (هي)ـ] is still the خبر. Everything has remained as is including the فاعل of تأتيهم. The فاعل of تأتيهم has not changed when we changed the order!
Do you agree? If so, great!! If not, please be *specific on what Arabic grammatical principle* is being violated.


----------



## Sun-Shine

So, you think that in كان يشرحه المعلم 
الفاعل is ضمير مستتر and المعلم is اسم كان?


----------



## Matat

sun_shine 331995 said:


> So, you think that in كان يشرحه المعلم
> الفاعل is ضمير مستتر and المعلم is اسم كان?


Yes!! That's a viable i3raab as far as I see. It's the same i3raab as كان المعلم يشرحه, but simply with the order of the اسم and خبر switched. Similarly, كان شارحاً إياه المعلمُ would have the same i3raab as كان المعلم شارحاً إياه but with the order switched.


----------



## Sun-Shine

Matat said:


> Yes!! That's a viable i3raab as far as I see. It's the same i3raab as كان المعلم يشرحه, but simply with the order of the اسم and خبر switched.


What if I used أن و أخواتها
Is it the same ? 
كأن لم يشرحه المعلم
What is the اعراب of المعلم


----------



## Matat

sun_shine 331995 said:


> Is it the same ?


No, I don't think so. اسم إنّ must always precede خبر إنّ, I believe, unless it's some sort of شبه جملة like إنّ في المدرسة معلماً. You couldn't say إنَّ جميلٌ المعلمَ. The rules of كان وأخواتها don't apply to إنّ وأخواتها.


sun_shine 331995 said:


> What if I used أن و أخواتها





sun_shine 331995 said:


> كأن لم يشرحه المعلم


أنّ وأخواتها only enter on a جملة اسمية, not a جملة فعلية. So you can't say كأنّ لم يشرحه المعلم; you'd have to do use أنَّ المخففة غير العاملة, so you'd use كأنْ, not كأنَّ. 
In كأنْ لم يشرحه المعلم, it must be the case that المعلمُ is the فاعل of يشرح; it has no other function than as a فاعل.


----------



## Abbe

﴿ كَانَتْ ﴾ فعل ماض ناسخ واسمها مستتر هي، وجملة تأتيهم خبرها ﴿ تَأْتِيهِمْ ﴾ فعل مضارع والهاء مفعول به مقدم، ﴿ رُسُلُهُمْ ﴾ فاعل، "*ويجوز أن يتنازع *"رسلهم" "كانت" و"تأتيهم" على أنها اسم كانت وفاعل تأتيهم" ﴿ أَبَشَرٌ ﴾ الهمزة للاستفهام مبتدأ، وجملة يهدوننا خبر

رابط الموضوع: إعراب سورة التغابن


----------



## Sun-Shine

Matat said:


> أنّ وأخواتها only enter on a جملة اسمية, not a جملة فعلية. So you can't say كأنّ لم يشرحه المعلم; you'd have to do use أنَّ المخففة غير العاملة, so you'd use كأنْ, not كأنَّ.
> In كأنْ لم يشرحه المعلم, it must be the case that المعلمُ is the فاعل of يشرح; it has no other function than as a فاعل.


Abbe said رسلهم can be both فاعل أو اسم كان
So, let's say it can be both.
About أن and كأن المخففة
both can be عاملة
كأن لم يشرحه here it's عاملة (it's كأن المخففة والعاملة because I put نفي لم )


----------



## Matat

Abbe said:


> "*ويجوز أن يتنازع *"رسلهم" "كانت" و"تأتيهم" على أنها اسم كانت وفاعل تأتيهم"


I like this even better! Thanks Abbe!


sun_shine 331995 said:


> كأن لم يشرحه here it's عاملة (it's كأن المخففة والعاملة because I put نفي لم )


No. أنَّ +لم is not possible because أنَّ+جملة فعلية never works. Consider Quran 31:7
وَإِذَا تُتْلَىٰ عَلَيْهِ آيَاتُنَا وَلَّىٰ مُسْتَكْبِرًا *كَأَن لَّمْ يَسْمَعْهَا كَأَنَّ فِي أُذُنَيْهِ وَقْرًا* ۖ فَبَشِّرْهُ بِعَذَابٍ أَلِيمٍ
In the first كأنْ is used while in the second كأنّ is. كأنّ لم wouldn't work.


----------

