Mukhtasar al-Ma'ani by al-Taftazani, Vol. 2 (مختصر المعاني) — Page 19

Arabic text · النص

Line-by-line translation · المعاني

اَلْفَنُّ اَلثَّانِي.

The second art: Simile.

اَلتَّشْبِيهُ.

Simile.

نَحْوُ: رَأَيْتُ أَسَدًا فِي اَلْحَمَّامِ وَلَا عَلَى وَجْهِ اَلِاسْتِعَارَةِ بِالْكِنَايَةِ نَحْوُ: أَنْشَبَتِ اَلْمَنِيَّةُ أَظْفَارَهَا، وَلَا عَلَى وَجْهِ اَلتَّجْرِيدِ اَلَّذِي يُذْكَرُ فِي اَلْعِلْمِ اَلْبَدِيعِ مِنْ نَحْوِ لَقِيتُ بِزَيْدٍ أَسَدًا وَلَقِيَنِي مِنْهُ أَسَدٌ، فَإِنَّ فِي هَذِهِ اَلثَّلَاثَةِ دَلَالَةً عَلَى مُشَارَكَةِ أَمْرٍ لِأَمْرٍ فِي مَعْنًى مَعَ أَنَّ شَيْئًا لَا يُسَمَّى تَشْبِيهًا اِصْطِلَاحًا، وَإِنَّمَا قَيَّدَ اَلِاسْتِعَارَةَ بِالتَّحْقِيقِيَّةِ وَالْكِنَايَةِ؛ لِأَنَّ اَلِاسْتِعَارَةَ اَلتَّخْيِيلِيَّةَ نَعَمْ هُوَ تَشْبِيهٌ لُغَوِيٌّ كَإِثْبَاتِ اَلْأَظْفَارِ لِلْمَنِيَّةِ فِي اَلْمِثَالِ اَلْمَذْكُورِ لَيْسَ فِيهِ شَيْءٌ مِنَ اَلدَّلَالَةِ عَلَى مُشَارَكَةِ أَمْرٍ لِأَمْرٍ عَلَى رَأْيِ اَلْمُصَنِّفِ؛ إِذِ اَلْمُرَادُ بِالْأَظْفَارِ مَعْنَاهُ اَلْحَقِيقِيُّ عَلَى مَا سَيَجِيءُ عِنْدَهُ.

Such as: 'I saw a lion in the bathhouse,' and not by way of metonymical metaphor, such as: 'Death has dug in its claws,' nor by way of abstraction (tajrid) which is mentioned in the science of rhetoric, such as: 'I met a lion in Zayd' and 'A lion met me from him,' for in these three there is an indication of one thing sharing a meaning with another, even though none of them is called a simile by convention. He only qualified the metaphor with the 'real' (tahqiqiyyah) and the 'metonymical' (kinayah) because the imaginative metaphor—yes, it is a linguistic simile—such as attributing claws to death in the mentioned example, contains nothing of the indication of one thing sharing with another according to the author's opinion; for what is meant by 'claws' is its literal meaning, according to what will come later from him.

وَلَا عَلَى وَجْهِ اَلتَّجْرِيدِ كَانَ اَلْمُنَاسِبُ لِلْمُصَنِّفِ أَنْ يَقُولَ بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ بِالْكَافِ وَنَحْوِهَا لِيُخْرِجَ نَحْوَ: قَاتَلَ زَيْدٌ عَمْرًا، وَجَاءَنِي زَيْدٌ وَعَمْرٌو، إِلَّا أَنْ يُقَالَ: أَرَادَ بِالدَّلَالَةِ اَلْوَاقِعَةِ فِي اَلتَّعْرِيفِ اَلدَّلَالَةَ اَلصَّرِيحَةَ اَلْمَقْصُودَةَ، فَخَرَجَ مَا ذُكِرَ مِنَ اَلْمِثَالَيْنِ؛ لِأَنَّ اَلدَّلَالَةَ عَلَى اَلْمُشَارَكَةِ فِيهِمَا لَيْسَتْ صَرِيحَةً.

And regarding 'nor by way of abstraction,' it would have been appropriate for the author to say after that 'with the kaf (particle of comparison) or similar' to exclude examples like: 'Zayd fought Amr,' and 'Zayd and Amr came to me,' unless it is said: He meant by the 'indication' occurring in the definition the explicit, intended indication, so what was mentioned of the two examples is excluded; because the indication of sharing in them is not explicit.

اَلَّذِي يُذْكَرُ إِلَخْ وَالتَّجْرِيدُ اَلْمَذْكُورُ فِي اَلْبَدِيعِ مَا كَانَ اَلْمُجَرَّدُ غَيْرَ اَلْمُجَرَّدِ مِنْهُ كَمَا مَثَّلَ اَلشَّارِحُ، وَأَمَّا مَا كَانَ اَلْمُجَرَّدُ هُوَ نَفْسَ اَلْمُجَرَّدِ مِنْهُ فَلَيْسَ دَاخِلًا فِي اَلدَّلَالَةِ حَتَّى يَخْرُجَ، وَتَوْضِيحُ ذَلِكَ أَنَّ اَلتَّجْرِيدَ قِسْمَانِ:

'Which is mentioned, etc.' The abstraction mentioned in rhetoric is that where the abstracted is other than the one from whom it is abstracted, as the commentator exemplified. As for that where the abstracted is the very same as the one from whom it is abstracted, it is not included in the indication so as to need exclusion. The clarification of this is that abstraction is of two types:

اَلْأَوَّلُ: أَنْ يُنْتَزَعَ مِنَ اَلشَّيْءِ شَيْءٌ آخَرُ مُسَاوٍ لَهُ فِي صِفَاتِهِ لِلْمُبَالَغَةِ فِي ذَلِكَ اَلشَّيْءِ، حَتَّى صَارَ بِحَيْثُ يُنْتَزَعُ مِنْهُ شَيْءٌ آخَرُ مُسَاوٍ لَهُ فِي صِفَاتِهِ كَقَوْلِهِ تَعَالَى: ﴿وَلَهُمْ فِيهَا دَارُ الْخُلْدِ﴾، فَإِنَّهُ لِانْتِزَاعِ دَارِ اَلْخُلْدِ مِنْ جَهَنَّمَ، وَهِيَ عَيْنُ دَارِ اَلْخُلْدِ لَا شَبِيهَةٌ بِهَا، وَهَذَا لَيْسَ فِيهِ مُشَارَكَةُ أَمْرٍ لِأَمْرٍ آخَرَ حَتَّى يُحْتَاجَ لِإِخْرَاجِهِ.

The first: That another thing equal to it in its attributes is extracted from a thing for the sake of hyperbole in that thing, until it becomes such that another thing equal to it in its attributes is extracted from it, like His saying, the Almighty: 'And for them therein is the Abode of Eternity,' for it is the extraction of the Abode of Eternity from Hell, and it is the very Abode of Eternity, not something similar to it; and this does not contain the sharing of one thing with another so as to need its exclusion.

وَالثَّانِي: أَنْ يُنْتَزَعَ اَلْمُشَبَّهُ بِهِ مِنَ اَلْمُشَبَّهِ لِلْمُبَالَغَةِ فِي اَلتَّشْبِيهِ حَتَّى صَارَتِ اَلْمُشَبَّهُ بِحَيْثُ يَكُونُ أَصْلًا يُنْتَزَعُ مِنْهُ اَلْمُشَبَّهُ بِهِ، نَحْوُ لَقِيتُ بِزَيْدٍ أَسَدًا، فَإِنَّهُ لِتَجْرِيدِ أَسَدٍ مِنْ زَيْدٍ وَأَسَدٌ مُشَبَّهٌ بِهِ لِزَيْدٍ لَا عَيْنُهُ فَفِيهِ تَشْبِيهٌ مُضْمَرٌ فِي اَلنَّفْسِ، فَهَذَا اَلَّذِي لِإِخْرَاجِهِ قَيَّدَ اَلشَّارِحُ اَلتَّجْرِيدَ بِقَوْلِهِ: اَلَّذِي يُذْكَرُ فِي اَلْعِلْمِ اَلْبَدِيعِ، وَإِخْرَاجُ اَلتَّجْرِيدِ اَلْمَذْكُورِ مَبْنِيٌّ عَلَى أَنَّهُ لَا يُسَمَّى تَشْبِيهًا اِصْطِلَاحًا، وَهُوَ اَلْأَقْرَبُ.

The second: That the 'likened-to' (mushabbah bihi) is extracted from the 'likened' (mushabbah) for the sake of hyperbole in the simile, until the 'likened' becomes such that it is a source from which the 'likened-to' is extracted, such as 'I met a lion in Zayd,' for it is the abstraction of a lion from Zayd, and the lion is the 'likened-to' for Zayd, not his very self, so there is a simile hidden in the mind. This is what the commentator qualified the abstraction for, by his saying: 'which is mentioned in the science of rhetoric,' and the exclusion of the mentioned abstraction is based on the fact that it is not called a simile by convention, and that is the most likely view.

لَا يُسَمَّى: خِلَافًا لِصَاحِبِ اَلْمِفْتَاحِ فِي اَلتَّجْرِيدِ.

'Is not called': Contrary to the author of Al-Miftah regarding abstraction.

وَإِنَّمَا قَيَّدَ إِلَخْ حَاصِلُهُ أَنَّهُ إِنَّمَا قَيَّدَ اَلِاسْتِعَارَةَ بِالتَّحْقِيقِيَّةِ وَالْمَكْنِيِّ عَنْهَا، وَاكْتَفَى بِذِكْرِهِمَا وَلَمْ يُخَرِّجِ اَلتَّخْيِيلِيَّةَ؛ لِأَنَّهَا حَقِيقِيَّةٌ عِنْدَ اَلْمُصَنِّفِ، فَلَفْظُ اَلْأَظْفَارِ مَثَلًا عِنْدَ اَلْمُصَنِّفِ مُسْتَعْمَلٌ فِي مَعْنَاهُ اَلْحَقِيقِيِّ، وَلَيْسَ مَجَازًا أَصْلًا، وَإِنَّمَا اَلتَّجَوُّزُ فِي إِثْبَاتِهَا لِلْمَنِيَّةِ عَلَى مَا يَأْتِي، فَلَا دَلَالَةَ فِيهَا عَلَى مُشَارَكَةِ أَمْرٍ لِآخَرَ، فَلَا حَاجَةَ لِإِخْرَاجِهَا؛ لِأَنَّهَا لَمْ تَدْخُلْ فِي اَلْجِنْسِ اَلَّذِي هُوَ اَلدَّلَالَةُ اَلْمَذْكُورَةُ.

'He only qualified, etc.' The gist of it is that he only qualified the metaphor with the 'real' and the 'metonymical,' and sufficed with mentioning them, and did not exclude the 'imaginative' (takhyiliyyah); because it is 'real' according to the author. So the word 'claws,' for example, according to the author, is used in its literal meaning and is not a metaphor at all. The metaphorical usage is only in attributing them to death, according to what will come, so there is no indication in it of one thing sharing with another, so there is no need to exclude it; because it did not enter into the genus which is the mentioned indication.

اَلدَّلَالَةُ فَلَا حَاجَةَ إِلَى إِخْرَاجِهَا؛ لِأَنَّهَا غَيْرُ دَاخِلَةٍ إِذِ اَلْمُرَادُ أَيْ عِنْدَ اَلْمُصَنِّفِ، وَحِينَئِذٍ فَالْتَّجَوُّزُ إِنَّمَا هُوَ فِي اَلْإِسْنَادِ، فَالْتَّخْيِيلِيَّةُ عَلَى رَأْيِهِ مَجَازٌ عَقْلِيٌّ، وَلِذَا لَمْ يُخْرِجْهَا، أَمَّا عِنْدَ اَلسَّكَّاكِيِّ: فَالْتَّجَوُّزُ فِي نَفْسِ اَلْأَظْفَارِ فَهِيَ دَاخِلَةٌ فِي اَلْجِنْسِ وَهُوَ اَلدَّلَالَةُ اَلْمَذْكُورَةُ، فَيُحْتَاجُ إِلَى إِخْرَاجِهَا.

'The indication,' so there is no need to exclude it; because it is not included, since the intended meaning—that is, according to the author—is that the metaphorical usage is only in the predication. Thus, the imaginative metaphor, according to his opinion, is a rational metaphor, and that is why he did not exclude it. As for according to Al-Sakkaki: the metaphorical usage is in the 'claws' themselves, so it is included in the genus, which is the mentioned indication, and thus it needs to be excluded.

سَيَجِيءُ: مِنَ اَلْخِلَافِ بَيْنَ اَلسَّكَّاكِيِّ وَغَيْرِهِ.

'Will come': Regarding the disagreement between Al-Sakkaki and others.

Vocabulary · المفردات (19 verbs · 57 nouns)

• رَأَى — to see
• أَنْشَبَ — to sink/embed
• ذَكَرَ — to mention
• لَقِيَ — to meet
• سَمَّى — to name
• قَيَّدَ — to restrict
• أَثْبَتَ — to prove
• جَاءَ — to come
• قَالَ — to say
• خَرَجَ — to exit
• مَثَّلَ — to exemplify
• اِنْتَزَعَ — to derive
• صَارَ — to become
• اِحْتَاجَ — to need
• أَضْمَرَ — to conceal
• اِكْتَفَى — to suffice
• اِسْتَعْمَلَ — to use
• أَتَى — to come
• دَخَلَ — to enter
• فَنّ — art
• تَشْبِيه — simile
• أَسَد — lion
• حَمَّام — bath
• وَجْه — face
• اِسْتِعَارَة — metaphor
• كِنَايَة — metonymy
• مَنِيَّة — death
• أُظْفُر — nail
• تَجْرِيد — abstraction
• عِلْم — science
• بَدِيع — rhetoric
• دَلَالَة — indication
• مُشَارَكَة — participation
• أَمْر — matter
• مَعْنًى — meaning
• شَيْء — thing
• اِصْطِلَاح — terminology
• تَحْقِيقِيَّة — real (feminine)
• تَخْيِيلِيَّة — imaginative (feminine)
• لُغَوِيّ — linguistic
• مِثَال — an example
• رَأْي — opinion
• مُصَنِّف — author
• مُرَاد — intended
• حَقِيقِيّ — real
• مُنَاسِب — appropriate
• كَاف — letter kaf
• وَاقِعَة — occurring (feminine)
• تَعْرِيف — definition
• صَرِيح — explicit
• مَقْصُود — intended
• شَارِح — commentator
• قِسْم — part
• مُسَاوٍ — equal
• صِفَة — attribute
• مُبَالَغَة — exaggeration
• دَار — house
• خُلْد — eternity
• جَهَنَّم — hell
• شَبِيهَة — similar (feminine)
• مُشَبَّه — likened
• نَفْس — soul
• مُضْمَر — hidden
• أَقْرَب — closer
• مِفْتَاح — key
• مَكْنِيّ — metonymic
• حَقِيقِيَّة — real (feminine)
• لَفْظ — word
• مُسْتَعْمَل — used
• مَجَاز — metaphor
• تَجَوُّز — figurative usage
• إِثْبَات — affirmation
• جِنْس — genus
• إِسْنَاد — attribution
• عَقْلِيّ — intellectual
• خِلَاف — disagreement