Al-Mafʿūl Lahu: Expressing the Reason for an Action

1. The Source Definition

فَصْلٌ: الْمَفْعُولُ لَهُ: هُوَ اسْمُ مَا لِأَجْلِهِ يَقَعُ الْفِعْلُ الْمَذْكُورُ قَبْلَهُ، وَيُنْصَبُ بِتَقْدِيرِ اللَّامِ.
Translation: Al-mafʿūl lahu is the noun expressing the reason for the preceding action; it appears in the accusative with an explanatory lām understood in meaning.

Ask why or for what purpose the event took place. The verb reports the event; this accusative complement explains its motivation.

2. Three Keys in the Definition

Ismu mā li-ajlihi: an expression of cause or purpose.
Yaqaʿu l-fiʿlu: the action takes place.
Al-madhkūru qablahu: the action has already been mentioned.

Identify the reason–action relationship, not merely an accusative ending.

3. First Source Example

نَحْوُ: «ضَرَبْتُهُ تَأْدِيبًا» أَيْ لِلتَّأْدِيبِ.
Translation: For example: I struck him with the aim of disciplining him—that is, for discipline.

This is a grammatical example from the book, not an endorsement of the act. The grammatical contrast is that the verb phrase states the act and its object, while taʾdīban states the reason.

4. Parsing the First Source Example

ضَرَبْتُهُ تَأْدِيبًا
Translation: I struck him for discipline.

ضَرَبْتُ: past-tense verb built on sukūn with the subject suffix -tu (nominative position).
هُ: attached object pronoun, accusative position.
تَأْدِيبًا: accusative purpose/reason complement.

The suffix -hu answers “whom?”, but taʾdīban answers “why?”. They are not two direct objects.

5. A Verbal Noun Used as Mafʿūl Lahu

تَأْدِيبًا is the verbal noun of أَدَّبَ. The expressed verb in the sentence, however, is ضَرَبَ.
The verbal noun explains the purpose of that act and functions as mafʿūl lahu in the author’s analysis.

A word’s morphological type (verbal noun) and its syntactic function (reason complement) are different questions.

6. Expressing the Lām Overtly

ضَرَبْتُهُ لِلتَّأْدِيبِ
Translation: I struck him for discipline.

ضَرَبْتُهُ: past verb, subject suffix, and object pronoun.
لِـ: causal preposition.
التَّأْدِيبِ: genitive noun governed by the expressed lām.

This teaching expansion makes the book’s “ay li-t-taʾdīb” explicit. With a pronounced lām, the noun is genitive, not accusative.

7. Implied versus Expressed Lām

Without an expressed lām, taʾdīban is accusative, while lām is understood semantically.
With overt lām, at-taʾdībi becomes genitive.

The explanatory “understood lām” expresses the causal relationship; do not parse the accusative noun as though an actual written preposition governed it.

8. Second Source Example

وَ«قَعَدْتُ عَنِ الْحَرْبِ جُبْنًا» أَيْ لِلْجُبْنِ.
Translation: And: I stayed away from war out of cowardice—that is, because of fearfulness/cowardice.

Here jubnan expresses an inner cause/motive, not necessarily an outcome being pursued. “Why?” can ask about motivation as well as intention.

9. Parsing the Second Source Example

قَعَدْتُ عَنِ الْحَرْبِ جُبْنًا
Translation: I stayed away from war out of cowardice.

قَعَدْتُ: past verb built on sukūn with -tu as its subject.
عَنْ: preposition.
الْحَرْبِ: genitive after ʿan; the phrase relates to qaʿadtu.
جُبْنًا: accusative complement expressing the reason.

The phrase ʿani l-ḥarbi states what was avoided; jubnan states why.

10. The Morphology and Syntax of Jubnan

جُبْنًا is a verbal noun connected to the root ج ب ن, meaning cowardice.
In the author’s example the expressed verb is قَعَدَ, so the noun does not reinforce that same verb as a typical cognate accusative would.

Under the book’s stated analysis it is mafʿūl lahu: the reason for staying away.

11. The Lām Construction of the Second Example

قَعَدْتُ عَنِ الْحَرْبِ لِلْجُبْنِ
Translation: I stayed away from war because of cowardice.

قَعَدْتُ: verb with subject.
عَنِ الْحَرْبِ: prepositional phrase.
لِـ: causal preposition.
الْجُبْنِ: genitive after lām.

This is an added explicit reconstruction of the book’s “ay li-l-jubn”, not a verbatim full sentence from the source.

12. Two Source Examples, Two Kinds of Motivation

Taʾdīban expresses an intended purpose; jubnan expresses a motive or cause.

Both are accusative reason complements in the source’s treatment. The semantic nuance differs; the syntactic “why?” relationship is shared.

13. Al-Zajjāj’s Analysis in the Book

وَعِنْدَ الزَّجَّاجِ: هُوَ مَصْدَرٌ، تَقْدِيرُهُ: أَدَّبْتُهُ تَأْدِيبًا، وَجَبُنْتُ جُبْنًا.
Translation: Al-Zajjāj treats it as a verbal noun and gives this reconstruction: “I disciplined him—disciplining,” and “I acted cowardly—cowardice.”

The author records an alternative grammatical analysis attributed to al-Zajjāj. Keep it distinct from the initial cause-complement analysis.

14. Parsing al-Zajjāj’s First Reconstruction

أَدَّبْتُهُ تَأْدِيبًا
Translation: I disciplined him—an act of disciplining.

أَدَّبْتُ: past verb; -tu is the subject.
هُ: direct-object pronoun.
تَأْدِيبًا: cognate verbal noun of أَدَّبَ, parsed as an absolute object in this reconstruction.

In the first source wording taʾdīban states the reason; in the al-Zajjāj reconstruction the verb and its verbal noun share a root.

15. Parsing al-Zajjāj’s Second Reconstruction

جَبُنْتُ جُبْنًا
Translation: I acted cowardly—an instance of cowardice.

جَبُنْتُ: past verb with first-person subject, root ج ب ن.
جُبْنًا: cognate verbal noun, an accusative absolute object.

Compare with qaʿadtu ... jubnan: the reconstructed verb is jabuna, not qaʿada, so the relationship of verbal noun to verb changes.

16. What Differs Between the Two Analyses?

Author’s initial account: the accusative explains the preceding action’s reason.
Al-Zajjāj’s reconstruction: supply a verb cognate with the verbal noun, yielding an absolute-object relation.

The reconstruction is an analytical device, not a claim that the original wording literally contains those replacement verbs.

17. Verbal Noun Does Not Automatically Mean Mafʿūl Lahu

A verbal noun is a morphological category; mafʿūl lahu is a syntactic role.
The same word taʾdīban may express the purpose of one verb but function as the cognate accusative of another.

Identify the actual verb and relationship before assigning a role.

18. A Three-Step Recognition Method

1. Find the stated verb.
2. Ask which accusative expression answers why or for what purpose.
3. Test whether a causal lām gives the intended meaning.

Finally distinguish it from a direct object, an adverbial and an absolute object.

19. Added Example: Coming to Seek Knowledge

جِئْتُ طَلَبًا لِلْعِلْمِ
Translation: I came in pursuit of knowledge.

جِئْتُ: past verb with first-person subject.
طَلَبًا: accusative expression of purpose.
لِـ: preposition.
الْعِلْمِ: genitive complement of the expressed lām.

This is an added teaching example, not a source quotation. Ṭalaban is accusative while al-ʿilmi is genitive.

20. Added Example: Standing out of Respect

وَقَفْتُ احْتِرَامًا لِلْمُعَلِّمِ
Translation: I stood out of respect for the teacher.

وَقَفْتُ: past verb with first-person subject.
احْتِرَامًا: accusative purpose/reason complement.
لِلْمُعَلِّمِ: prepositional phrase specifying who is respected.

Iḥtirāman supplies the motivation for standing, rather than being the cognate verbal noun of waqafa.

21. Added Example: Closing the Door out of Fear

أَغْلَقْتُ الْبَابَ خَوْفًا مِنَ الْبَرْدِ
Translation: I closed the door out of fear of the cold.

أَغْلَقْتُ: past verb plus first-person subject.
الْبَابَ: accusative direct object.
خَوْفًا: accusative expression of cause.
مِنَ الْبَرْدِ: prepositional phrase describing the object of fear.

An added example contrasting what was closed (object) with why it was closed (reason).

22. Direct Object versus Reason Complement

أَغْلَقْتُ الْبَابَ خَوْفًا: al-bāba is the direct object and khawfan the reason complement.

The object answers “what was closed?”; the reason answers “why was it closed?”.

Both may be accusative in one sentence but perform different functions.

23. Absolute Object versus Reason Complement

In أَدَّبْتُهُ تَأْدِيبًا the verbal noun shares a root with the verb and can be parsed as a cognate/absolute object.
In ضَرَبْتُهُ تَأْدِيبًا it gives the reason for striking.

The same written ending does not establish the same syntactic role.

24. Adverbial versus Reason

سَافَرْتُ صَبَاحًا: ṣabāḥan is a time adverbial answering when.
سَافَرْتُ طَلَبًا لِلْعِلْمِ: ṭalaban is a reason complement answering why.

These are added examples comparing time and purpose.

25. Why the Case Changes with Lām

طَلَبًا لِلْعِلْمِ: ṭalaban is an accusative reason complement; al-ʿilmi is genitive after lām.
لِطَلَبِ الْعِلْمِ: ṭalabi is genitive after lām, and al-ʿilmi is its genitive iḍāfa complement.

Similar meaning does not imply identical parsing.

26. Added Example: Lām with Iḍāfa

جِئْتُ لِطَلَبِ الْعِلْمِ
Translation: I came to seek knowledge.

جِئْتُ: past verb and first-person subject.
لِـ: causal preposition.
طَلَبِ: genitive noun after lām, first term of iḍāfa.
الْعِلْمِ: genitive second term.

Added teaching example: here ṭalabi is not accusative, because an overt lām governs it.

27. Correcting Common Errors

Not every taʾdīban is an absolute object; inspect the verb and meaning.
A noun after expressed lām is genitive, not accusative.
ʿAni l-ḥarbi is a prepositional phrase; jubnan is the accusative reason complement.

Always separate the grammatical function of each phrase.

28. Final Review of Both Source Sentences

ضَرَبْتُهُ تَأْدِيبًا: verb + subject suffix + object pronoun + accusative reason.
قَعَدْتُ عَنِ الْحَرْبِ جُبْنًا: verb + subject suffix + prepositional phrase + accusative reason.

The first expresses purpose and the second motive; both are analysed in this chapter as mafʿūl lahu.

29. Key Takeaway

A mafʿūl lahu expresses why an action occurs. The book describes its accusative with the semantic lām of causation understood.
Taʾdīban expresses the purpose of the first action; jubnan the cause of the second.

Al-Zajjāj’s reconstructions use verbs cognate with those verbal nouns. Distinguish the author’s original constructions from the alternative grammatical reconstructions.