Is this true?

[psyah]

Re: Is this true?

@ZeeshanParvez

Ok bro I do not even think you read the references I gave you. So, before preceding further, lets go through one. Tell me what you understand from the following regarding this issue

**يجيء النفي في معنى النهي ] وقد يجيء النفي في معنى النهي ، ويختلف حاله بحسب المعاني : منها أن يكون نهيا وزجرا ، كقوله تعالى { ما كان لأهل المدينة ومن حولهم من الأعراب أن يتخلفوا } ومنها : أن يكون تعجيزا ، كقوله تعالى : { ما كان لكم أن تنبتوا شجرها } . ومنها أن يكون تنزيها ، كقوله تعالى : { ما كان لله أن يتخذ من ولد } ذكره ابن عطية في سورة مريم

اعلم أولا أن لفظ " ما كان " يدل على النفي ، فتارة يدل ذلك النفي من جهة المعنى على الزجر والردع
وتارة يدل على التنزيه
وتارة يدل على التعجيز

**Its time to move beyond the Madinah Books to advanced Arabic now.

What I understand from the given is that some commentary is being given about negation assuming the meaning as though it were prohibition.

In other words it supports what I was saying the Laam Alif is translated with negation but the sentence as a whole may be taken as prohibitive. This is in the realm of ilm-ul-ma’aani rather than nahuw.

The famous hadith you gave about laa-darara … From Imam Nawawis collection I believe is not laa of negation … That is Laa of prohibition, but the difference cannot be seen since the verb is mabniy. Right? But the state of the verb is in majzuum, that is what shows it is prohibitive in translation.