Is this true?

[psyah]

Re: Is this true?

@ZeeshanParvez

And while you are at it, here is another Hadith in which there is a negation but it is understood as a prohibition. This usage of negation whether with a masdar or passive is used in lots of works

لا ضرر ولا ضِرار

That is a very famous Hadith. Note there is negation of masdar but it is actually a prohibitive command meaning

لا يضر الرجل أخاه بأن ينقصه شيئا من حقوقه

Source

**حمل النفي على النهي

معنى نفي الضرر ومحامل حمل النفي

معنى الضرار](http://arabic.tebyan.net/index.aspx?pid=31143&BookID=24616&PageIndex=109&Language=2)**

Interesting … I see the word darara as f’il maadiy mubniyyun … Fee mahallie jazmin bi laa… whereas this source is calling the word Al-dararu an ism … I.e. The masdar.

You see I thought if the laam-Alif takes the prohibitive meaning it should be putting the verb into majzuum, otherwise it takes the negating meaning … In the case of the Hadith you mentioned the verb is past tense and it does not show 'iraab.

Can you find an example of a mudaari’ verb being used with LA and not taking majzuum but still meaning prohibitive? Please correct me where I am wrong …