The Lā of Absolute Negation
The lā of categorical negation governs like inna: it puts its noun in the accusative, leaves its predicate nominative, and denies the ruling of the whole class: lā ilāha illā llāh. It governs only when its noun and predicate are indefinite, its noun follows it directly, and no preposition precedes it.
This lā governs like inna and denies its predicate of a whole class rather than of an individual. It is a short chapter with strict conditions, and it matters more than its length suggests, because the sentence a Muslim says most often is built on it. The lesson ends by parsing the testimony of faith completely, which turns out to combine this chapter, an omitted predicate, and an emptied exception.
Learn: denying a whole class
It governs as inna does, putting its noun in the accusative and leaving its predicate nominative, and it denies the predicate of the entire genus named by that noun.
By the end of this lesson
- Say what "negating the genus" adds over ordinary negation.
- Check the four conditions before treating lā as governing.
- Decide whether its noun is built or declined.
- Parse the testimony of faith completely, clause by clause.
The contrast with ordinary negation is the point of the chapter. Mā rajulun fī l-dāri denies that a man is in the house and leaves the question open for others. Lā rajula fī l-dāri denies it of the class: no man at all.
لَا رَجُلَ فِي الدَّارِ
lā rajula fī l-dāri
There is no man in the house.
Show the i‘rāb
لا نافية للجنس تعمل عمل إنّ، رجلَ اسم لا مبني على الفتح في محل نصب، في حرف جر، الدارِ اسم مجرور وعلامة جره الكسرة الظاهرة، والجار والمجرور متعلقان بمحذوف خبر لا.
Read the wording precisely: built on fatḥa, in the position of accusative. Not 'accusative by fatḥa'. The noun of this lā, when it is a single word, is built rather than declined, and the analysis must say both things.
Understand: the four conditions
Its noun must be indefinite, immediately following, not governed by a preceding preposition, and free of al-. Fail one and lā is neutralised.
- Indefinite noun. lā rajula, not lā al-rajula.
- Immediately following. Nothing may come between them.
- No preceding preposition. In jiʾtu bi-lā zādin the preposition governs, so lā does not.
- No al- on the noun. This is really the first condition restated, and it is listed separately because the error is common.
لَا فِي الدَّارِ رَجُلٌ وَلَا امْرَأَةٌ
lā fī l-dāri rajulun wa-lā imraʾatun
There is neither a man nor a woman in the house.
Show the i‘rāb
لا نافية مهملة، في حرف جر، الدارِ اسم مجرور، والجار والمجرور متعلقان بمحذوف خبر مقدم، رجلٌ مبتدأ مؤخر مرفوع وعلامة رفعه الضمة الظاهرة.
The noun does not immediately follow lā, so the second condition fails and lā governs nothing. rajulun is an ordinary postponed subject, nominative. Compare the first card, where the same idea produced an accusative position.
Check yourself
Does lā govern here, and what case is the noun?
لَا الطَّالِبُ حَاضِرٌ
Show the answer
No. al-ṭālibu is a mubtadaʾ, nominative.
The noun carries al-, so it is definite and the first condition fails. lā is neutralised and the sentence is an ordinary nominal one being negated. Writing lā l-ṭāliba would be an error.
See: built or declined
A single noun is built on whatever would have marked its accusative. An annexed noun or one resembling an annexed noun is declined and genuinely accusative.
لَا طَالِبَ عِلْمٍ مَمْلُولٌ
lā ṭāliba ʿilmin mamlūlun
No seeker of knowledge is wearisome.
Show the i‘rāb
لا نافية للجنس، طالبَ اسم لا منصوب وعلامة نصبه الفتحة الظاهرة وهو مضاف، علمٍ مضاف إليه مجرور وعلامة جره الكسرة الظاهرة، مملولٌ خبر لا مرفوع وعلامة رفعه الضمة الظاهرة.
Here the wording is 'accusative by fatḥa', not 'built on fatḥa', because an annexed noun is declined. The visible letter is the same; the analysis is different, and examiners ask for exactly this distinction.
The testimony, parsed completely
Three chapters meet in four words: this lā, an obligatorily omitted predicate, and an emptied exception.
لَا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا اللهُ
lā ilāha illā Llāhu
There is no god except Allah.
Show the i‘rāb
لا نافية للجنس تعمل عمل إنّ، إلهَ اسم لا مبني على الفتح في محل نصب، وخبر لا محذوف وجوبًا تقديره حقٌّ أو موجودٌ، إلا أداة استثناء، لفظ الجلالة بدل من محل اسم لا مرفوع وعلامة رفعه الضمة الظاهرة.
Three points worth dwelling on. ilāha is built, not accusative. The predicate is obligatorily omitted, and many scholars prefer estimating it as ḥaqqun, 'rightful', rather than mawjūdun, since the denial concerns rightful worship rather than mere existence. And lafẓ al-jalāla is nominative because it substitutes for the position of the noun of lā, which as a subject-like element would be nominative.
Where learners go wrong
Three errors, and the third is about telling three different lās apart.
- Putting tanwīn on a single noun. It is built on fatḥa: lā rajula, never lā rajulan.
- Leaving it nominative while intending class negation. If you mean "no man at all", the noun must be built on fatḥa.
- Confusing the three lās. Prohibition is followed by a verb and makes it jussive; coordination joins two nouns; this one is followed by an indefinite noun and governs it.
Sources
The conditions and the parsing of the testimony follow these texts.
- Ibn Hishām al-Anṣārī, أوضح المسالك: the conditions and the states of the noun.
- Ibn ʿAqīl, شرح ابن عقيل على ألفية ابن مالك: the omitted predicate and the substitution in the testimony.
- Al-Ashmūnī, شرح الأشموني على الألفية: lā siyyamā and its readings.
Quranic evidence
A rule is clearest in a text you already know by heart. Each ayah below contains the very construction this lesson teaches, and every one has a full word-by-word i'rab on this site. Read the ayah first and try to find the construction yourself, then open its i'rab to check.
- ذَٰلِكَ ٱلْكِتَٰبُ لَا رَيْبَ ۛ فِيهِ ۛ هُدًۭى لِّلْمُتَّقِينَ
- مَن يُضْلِلِ ٱللَّهُ فَلَا هَادِىَ لَهُۥ ۚ وَيَذَرُهُمْ فِى طُغْيَٰنِهِمْ يَعْمَهُونَ
- هُوَ ٱللَّهُ ٱلَّذِى لَآ إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ ۖ عَٰلِمُ ٱلْغَيْبِ وَٱلشَّهَٰدَةِ ۖ هُوَ ٱلرَّحْمَٰنُ ٱلرَّحِيمُ
- وَإِن نَّشَأْ نُغْرِقْهُمْ فَلَا صَرِيخَ لَهُمْ وَلَا هُمْ يُنقَذُونَ
- لَا شَرِيكَ لَهُۥ ۖ وَبِذَٰلِكَ أُمِرْتُ وَأَنَا۠ أَوَّلُ ٱلْمُسْلِمِينَ
- ٱللَّهُ لَآ إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ ۖ لَهُ ٱلْأَسْمَآءُ ٱلْحُسْنَىٰ
Common questions
Frequently asked
Why is it called the lā that negates the genus?
Because it denies the predicate of the entire class named by its noun, not of one member. lā rajula fī l-dāri means there is no man at all in the house. Compare mā rajulun fī l-dāri, ordinary negation, which denies it of a particular man and leaves room for others.
What are the conditions for it to govern like inna?
Four: its noun must be indefinite, must follow it immediately with nothing in between, must not be preceded by a preposition governing it, and must not carry al-. If any fails, lā is neutralised and what follows is parsed as an ordinary subject and predicate.
When is its noun built and when declined?
Built when it is a single word, meaning not annexed and not resembling an annexed noun: lā rajula, built on fatḥa in the position of accusative. Declined and genuinely accusative when it is annexed or resembles an annexed noun: lā ṭāliba ʿilmin mamlūlun.
Where is the predicate in lā ilāha illā Llāh?
Omitted, and obligatorily so. It is estimated as mawjūdun, "existing", or ḥaqqun, "rightful", the second being preferred by many scholars because the point is not that no other gods exist in name but that none is rightfully worshipped.
How do I tell it from the lā of prohibition and the lā of coordination?
By what follows. The lā of prohibition is followed by a verb and makes it jussive: lā takdhib. The lā of coordination joins two nouns: jāʾa Zaydun lā ʿAmrun. This lā is followed by an indefinite noun and governs it.
How is lā siyyamā parsed?
lā is the lā that negates the genus, siyya is its noun built on fatḥa in the position of accusative, and mā is either extra or a relative. What follows may be genitive by annexation, or nominative as the predicate of an omitted subject. Both readings are current.