# صلوا عليه وآله



## Babil

Hi,

Can someone tell me if صلوا عليه وآله is grammatically correct? It is contained in بلغ العلى بكماله كشف الدجي بجماله حسنت جميع خصاله صلوا عليه وآله. I think that one must say صلوا عليه وعلى آله.


----------



## elroy

Although it's more common to repeat the preposition, I don't think it's required, strictly speaking.


----------



## whenu

وعود خافض لدى عطف على ... ضمير خفض لازمًا قد جعلا

(ألفية ابن مالك)


----------



## Abbe

The line above is followed by this

وليس عندي لازمًا، إذ قد أتى ... في النثر والنظم الصحيح مثبتا

An example from one of the readings of the Quran where it's not repeated

وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ الَّذِي تَسَاءَلُونَ بِهِ وَالْأَرْحَامِ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ عَلَيْكُمْ رَقِيبًا


----------



## fdb

Also relevant: ص / ع / صع / صلع (abbreviation)


----------



## Supee

Abbe said:


> The line above is followed by this
> 
> وليس عندي لازمًا، إذ قد أتى ... في النثر والنظم الصحيح مثبتا
> 
> An example from one of the readings of the Quran where it's not repeated
> 
> وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ الَّذِي تَسَاءَلُونَ بِهِ وَالْأَرْحَامِ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ عَلَيْكُمْ رَقِيبًا



What do you mean by one of the readings? Hasn’t the Quran been fully preserved?


----------



## Mahaodeh

Supee said:


> What do you mean by one of the readings? Hasn’t the Quran been fully preserved?


The aya is the same everywhere, however, there are two interpretations of the use of والأرحام in this way. Some say that it means: اتقوا الله واتقو الأرحام and the verb تسائلون is related to God only and has nothing to do with الأرحام. While others say that it means: اتقوا الله الذي تسائلون به وبالأرحام meaning that تسائلون is related to both الأرحام and the هاء (which is, of course, referring to God).

What abbe was saying is that only one of the two interpretations is similar to your case, the other one is not.


----------



## fdb

It is called قراءات . But is any of this relevant to the present question?


----------



## JAN SHAR

The rule generally taught in Arabic grammar books is that a pronoun that is majrour can never be معطوف عليه.
This applies to both 1. a pronoun that is a مضاف اليه and 2. a pronoun that is مجرور بحرف جر


----------



## Mahaodeh

JAN SHAR said:


> The rule generally taught in Arabic grammar books is that a pronoun that is majrour can never be معطوف عليه.


Actually, that’s not accurate. Most grammarians say that you have it as معطوف عليه without limitations, some say you never can and some say you can in certain cases and can’t in others.

The truth is, this is not a rule generally taught because classical literature is full of examples of this case, making it a natural occurrence in CA. A couple of contested examples in the Quran is not considered enough evidence for most grammarians. In fact. Even if these examples were not contested, not having a case of ضمير متصل مجرور معطوف عليه is not evidence that it’s not allowed in CA.

I recently looked up the rule and found this out. I looked it up because I don’t recall this being part of my grammar education.


----------



## Ali Smith

Mahaodeh said:


> Actually, that’s not accurate. Most grammarians say that you have it as معطوف عليه without limitations, some say you never can and some say you can in certain cases and can’t in others.
> 
> The truth is, this is not a rule generally taught because classical literature is full of examples of this case, making it a natural occurrence in CA. A couple of contested examples in the Quran is not considered enough evidence for most grammarians. In fact. Even if these examples were not contested, not having a case of ضمير متصل مجرور معطوف عليه is not evidence that it’s not allowed in CA.
> 
> I recently looked up the rule and found this out. I looked it up because I don’t recall this being part of my grammar education.


Could you please provide an example of a ضمير مجرور that is معطوف عليه other than that verse from the Qur'an?


----------



## Romeel

ذهبتُ إلى المدرسةِ والبيتِ


----------



## Ali Smith

Romeel said:


> ذهبتُ إلى المدرسةِ والبيتِ


Where's the ضمير مجرور in this sentence?


----------



## Romeel

ذهبتُ إلى مدرستهِ وبيتهِ

الوعاء الذي تشربون بهِ وملحقاتهِ


----------



## Mahaodeh

This Hadith for example:
إنما مثلكم واليهود والنصارى كرجل استعمل عمالا فقال … الخ

There is very little pre-Islamic prose that has been documented, but I believe سيبويه mentioned a narration saying ما فيها غيره وفرسه. I can’t think of anything else.

In poetry it has been mentioned extensively, and not for الضرورة الشعرية, for example:

فاليومَ قرَّبتَ تهجونا وتشتمُنا —— فاذهبْ فما بك والأيامِ من عجب

Also
لو كان لي وزهيرٍ ثالثٌ ورَدَتْ —— مِن الحِمامِ عِدَانا شرَّ مَورودِ

and
بنا أبدًا لا غيرِنا يُدرَكُ المنى —— وتُكشَف غمَّاء الخطوب الفوادح


P.S. in the last one, لا is حرف جر, and المعطوف عليه is the نا in بنا.


----------



## Ali Smith

The Qur'an says:

قَالَ فِرْعَوْنُ وَمَا رَبُّ الْعَالَمِينَ (23) قَالَ رَبُّ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَمَا بَيْنَهُمَا ۖ إِن كُنتُم مُّوقِنِينَ (24) قَالَ لِمَنْ حَوْلَهُ أَلَا تَسْتَمِعُونَ (25) قَالَ رَبُّكُمْ وَرَبُّ آبَائِكُمُ الْأَوَّلِينَ (26)

As you can see, the خافض has been repeated. Otherwise, it would have been قال ربكم وآبائكم الأولين. Doesn't this prove that it is necessary to repeat the خافض?

As for صلوا عليه وآله, I don't think its author was around at the time of classical Arabic. It seems to have been written by a post-classical author.


----------

