SOURCE: van Gelder, Geert Jan. “Rhyme in Maqāmāt or, Too Many Exceptions Do Not Prove a Rule.” ,Journal of Semitic Studies 44, no. 1 (spring 1999): 75-82.

[In the following essay, Van Gelder examines the nature of the rhymes in the works of two practitioners of Maqāmāt: al-Hamadhānī and al-Harīrī.]

Rhyme is ubiquitous in classical Arabic literature, obligatory in poetry and often employed in forms of more or less ornate prose. The rules of rhyme in poetry and rhymed prose (saj‘) are not wholly identical, since, as is well known, pausal forms may differ, prose normally requiring final short vowels to be dropped, whereas they are mostly lengthened in poetry. I‘rāb, or inflectional ending, has a shadowy, virtual existence in rhymed prose: it is often written, in carefully vowelled texts, but it is not supposed to be realized in actual speech. The matter has received little attention; neither in the recent entry on rhymed prose in The Encyclopaedia of Islam,¹ nor in ‘Alī al-Jundī's monograph on saj‘² is anything to be found. Recently there has appeared a study of the role of i‘rāb in the maqāmah, a genre always associated with saj‘.

In his article ‘On Rhyming Endings and Symmetric Phrases in al-Hamadhānī's Maqāmāt’,³ Tamás Iványi observes that the rhyming technique employed in al-Hamadhānī's Maqāmāt is remarkably similar to that of poetic rhyme. One of these similarities, he says, is the fact that, in contradistinction to early saj‘, ‘the i‘rāb endings are always identical in the rhyming pairs’, even though these endings are normally not pronounced when the text is read aloud:⁴

This being such an unequivocal feature of these rhymes … it can be relied on in deciding, for example, whether four phrases having the same consonantal endings are really a quadruplet or form only two (very similar but essentially different) couplets, because the i‘rāb endings differ.⁵

Here lurks something akin to circular reasoning, for if pairs with different i‘rāb are excluded a priori from being true rhyming pairs, then it is obvious that all rhymes have the same i‘rāb.

I intend to show that, although ‘true’ rhymes in Iványi's sense are overwhelmingly more common, there are in fact enough deviant cases to question his categorical statement about al-Hamadhānī's prose rhymes. Moreover, it will be shown that the Maqāmāt of his successful emulator al-Harīrī, even though his use of prose rhyme is far stricter and more pervasive than al-Hamadhānī's, show an even far greater incidence of rhymes with different i‘rāb, thus strengthening the distinction between poetic rhyme and prose rhyme. If only very few cases had been found, one might have conceded that Iványi's thesis were valid, but a rule must be considered disproved if there are too many exceptions.

In the following I discuss some instances, giving the rhymes in as much context as seems desirable, with full i‘rāb as if there were no question of rhyme.⁶

RHYMES IN AL-HAMADHāNī'S MAQāMāT⁷

p. 7 (al-Qarīḍiyyah) Fa-mā taqūlu fī Jarīrin wa-al-Farazdaqi wa-ayyuhumā asbaqu. The sentence being surrounded by other rhyming sentences it would be perverse to claim that here we have a non-rhyming pair. The choice of asbaq instead of a rather more normal afḍal or ash‘ar is surely no coincidence.

p. 10 (al-Azādhiyyah) Kuntu bi-Baghdādha waqta al-azādhi. Even Iványi will presumably not deny that we have a rhyme here. Perhaps he takes the similarity between prose rhyme and poetic rhyme to extremes here, in reading bi-Baghdādhī (for bi-Baghdādhin) because diptotes may be treated as triptotes in poetry.

p. 31 (al-Asadiyyah) Fa-arsalta al-abwāla wa-qaṭṭa‘tu al-ḥibāla wa-akhadhtu naḥwa al-jibāli. This is immediately followed by an unrhymed bit. Iványi presumably finds here a doublet rather than a triplet.

p. 34 (al-Asadiyyah) Fa-fāraqa al-jināna wa-haraba min Riḍwānin: it is a moot point whether Riḍwān, as a proper name, is diptote, in which case the rhyme would be a ‘true’ one. The edition gives Riḍwānin; Wright's Grammar (I, 242) also considers Riḍwān, when a proper name, as a triptote. But cf. the name of a mountain given in al-Fīrūzābādī's al-Qāmūs al-muḥīṭ as Dhū Riḍwāna. Perhaps al-Ma‘arrī hinted mockingly at the problem when he made his anti-hero Ibn al-Qāriḥ produce three qaṣīdahs for Riḍwān, heaven's guardian, rhyming in -ānī, -ānā and -ānū.⁸

p. 39 (al-Ghaylāniyyah) Fa-wallaytu zahriya al-arḍa wa-‘aynāya lā yamlikuhumā ghumḍun. It is true that this sentence is surrounded by unrhymed sentences, but the occurrence of arḍ and ghumḍ, with their relatively rare rhyme consonant, cannot be a coincidence.

p. 59 (al-Baghdādhiyyah) Wa-matā wāfayta wa-halumma ilā al-bayti. The passage is surrounded by ‘true’ rhymes and must be considered a perfect prose rhyme.

p. 66 (al-Baṣriyyah) Wa-laqad aṣbaḥna al-yawma wa-sarraḥna al-ṭarfa fī ḥayyin ka-maytin wa-baytin ka-lā baytin wa-qallabna al-akuffa ‘alā layta. A sound triplet.

p. 78 (al-Makfūfiyyah) Kuntu ajtāzu fī ba‘ḍi bilādi al-Ahwāzi. The rhyme is obviously no coincidence.

p. 84 (al-Bukhāriyyah) Wa-qad sami‘tum yā qawmu mā lam tasma‘ū qabla al-yawmi. Perhaps Iványi would like to read yā qawmi, spelled with a short i which is normal in poetry for yā qawmī. But Abū al-Fatḥ does not address his own people here, therefore qawmu, as in the edition, is likely to be correct.

p. 105 (al-Maḍīriyyah) Lam āmani al-maqta wa-iḍā‘ata al-waqti. It would be perverse to refuse to admit this rich rhyme.

p. 107 (al-Maḍīriyyah) Mā akbara hādhā al-ghalaṭa taqūlu al-kathīra faqaṭ. An obvious rhyme, even with different i‘rāb. A similar case on p. 108: Ittakhadhahū min kam? Qul: wa-min ayna a‘lamu?

p. 114 (al-Maḍīriyyah) Yā ghulāmu al-khuwāna fa-qad āna al-zamānu, wa-al-qiṣā‘a fa-qad ṭāla al-maṣā‘u, wa-al-ṭa‘āma fa-qad kathura al-kalāmu. Three pairs with neatly different i‘rāb endings. Reading nominatives instead of accusatives seems impossible.

p. 119 (al-Hirziyyah) Lā namliku ‘uddatan ghayra al-du‘ā'i wa-lā ḥīlatan illā al-bukā'a wa-lā ‘iṣmatan ghayra al-rajā'i. It would be unkind to exclude bukā' as a good rhyme.

p. 125 (al-Māristāniyyah) Mā hādhā wa-llāhi illā shayṭānun fī ashṭānin. Admittedly the second phrase is very short but many equally short ‘true’ rhymes may be found.

p. 158 (al-Ruṣāfiyyah) Wa-ahla al-kaffi wa-al-qaffi wa-man ya‘malu bi-al-ṭaffi wa-man yaḥtālu fī al-ṣaffi wa-man yakhnuqu bi-al-daffi wa-man yakmunu fī al-raffi ilā an yumkina al-laffu. The last word is the odd one out, i‘rāb-wise, but is naturally a perfect rhyme.

p. 160 (al-Ruṣāfiyyah) Wa-man yasriqu bi-al-bawli wa-man yanta-hizu al-hawla.

p. 161 (al-Ruṣāfiyyah) Wa-man yadkhulu fī al-dāri ‘alā ṣūrati man zāra.

p. 162 (al-Ruṣāfiyyah) Wa-man khālafa bi-al-kīsi wa-man zajja bi-tadlīsin wa-man a‘ṭā al-mafālīsa. Only the first two would count for Iványi.

p. 163 (al-Ruṣāfiyyah) Wa-man yadkhulu fī al-sirbi wa-man yantahizu al-naqba.

p. 164 (al-Mighzaliyyah) Fa-akhadha qabaja sunnārin bi-ra'sihi duwārun bi-wasṭihī zunnārun wa-falakun dawwārun.

p. 187 (al-Armaniyyah) A‘irnī ra'sa al-tannūri fa-innī maqrūrun.

p. 189 (al-Armaniyyah) Kāna hādhā al-labanu fī ghaḍāratin qad waqa‘āt fīhi fāratun fa-naḥnu nataṣaddaqu bihī ‘alā al-sayyārati.

p. 209 (al-Saymariyyah) Lammā aḥassū bi-al-qiṣṣati wa-ṣārat fī qulū-bihim ghuṣṣatun wa-da‘awnī burṣatan. No rhymes at all by Iványi's standards, a triplet by mine.

p. 209 (al-Saymariyyah) Wa-akhadhat'humu al-ḍujratu fa-nsallū qaṭratan qaṭratan wa-tafarraqū yamnatan wa-yasratan wa-baqītu ‘alā al-ājurrati wa-qad awrathūnī al-ḥasrata wa-shta-malat minhum ‘alā al-‘ibrati lā usāwī ba‘ratan. Iványi recognizes quintuplets but nothing beyond that;⁹ I am not sure how he would analyse this passage, a septet by my standards.

p. 209 (al-Saymariyyah) Fa-buddiltu bi-al-jamāli waḥshatan wa-ṣārat bī ṭurshatun.

p. 209 (al-Saymariyyah) Aqbaḥu min Rahṭati al-Munādī ka-annī rāhibun ‘Ubbādiyyun.

pp. 209-10 (al-Saymariyyah) Wa-baqiya al-ṭanzu wa-ḥaṣala bi-yadī dhanabu al-‘anzi.

p. 211 (al-Saymariyyah) Wa-juztu fī al-wasāwisi al-miqdāra wa-ṣirtu bi-manzilati al-‘ummāri wa-shayṭāni al-dāri … (Five rhymes in -āri or -ārin to follow).

p. 211 (al-Saymariyyah) Wa-shamalatnī al-dhillatu wa-kharajtu mina al-millati.

p. 211 (al-Saymariyyah) Qad ḍaliltu al-maḥajjata wa-ṣārat ‘alayya al-ḥujjatu.

p. 218 (al-Dīnāriyyah) Yā barda al-‘ajūzi yā kurbata tammūza yā wasakha al-kūzi yā dirhaman lā yajūzu.

p. 219 (al-Dīnāriyyah) Yā farwatan fī al-maṣīfi yā tanaḥnuḥa al-muḍīfi idhā kusira al-raghīfu.

p. 219 (al-Dīnāriyyah) Yā jushā'a al-makhmūri yā nak'hata al-ṣuqūri yā watida al-dūri yā khudhrūfata al-qudūri yā arbu‘ā'a lā tadūru yā ṭama‘a al-maqmūri.

p. 221 (al-Dīnāriyyah) Yā kalimata layta yā wakafa al-bayti yā kayta wa-kayta.

p. 225 (al-Shi‘riyyah) Wa-ayyu baytin dhāba taḥta al-‘idhābi wa-ayyu baytin shāba qabla al-shabābi. Either a quadruplet or an ABAB pattern, rare in al-Hamadhānī. It is followed immediately by Wa-ayyu baytin ‘āda qabla al-mī‘ādi, without further rhymes that would make up another ABAB pattern.

p. 227 (al-Shi‘riyyah) Fa-al-baytu lladhī ṭāla ḥattā balagha sittata arṭālin.

p. 230 (al-Mulūkiyyah) Wa-matā kāna malikun ya'nafu al-akārima in ba‘athta bi-al-darāhimi.

p. 234 (al-Sāriyyah) Zahruhū yamla'u al-‘ayna wa-lā thamara fī al-bayni.

p. 247 (al-Maṭlabiyyah) Aḥaduhumā bi-arḍi Tarsūsa tashrahu fīhi al-nufūsu.

p. 248 (al-Maṭlabiyyah) Wa-man ‘arafa mā yunālu hāna ‘alayhi badh-lu al-māli.

p. 248 (al-Maṭlabiyyah) Fa-lammā tafarraqat tilka al-jamā‘atu qa‘ad-tu ba‘dahum sā‘atan.

It is obvious that al-Hamadhānī's rhyming technique is by no means as rigid as Iványi would have us believe. Things are more complicated than they seem at first sight. There are even a few rhymes that do not work properly when the normal rules for prose rhyme (i.e. with pausal forms) are applied: (p. 111) Ishtaraytu hādhā al-ḥaṣīra fī al-munādāti wa-qad ukhrija min dūri āli al-Furāti, which suggest that either the pausal form munādāh was pronounced munādāt, or the i‘rāb was in fact pronounced (-āti or even -ātī as in poetry); similarly p. 201: wa-qiblata al-ṣilāti lā qiblata al-ṣalāti. Al-Harīrī not rarely employed such rhymes.¹⁰ An interesting ‘compound’ rhyme is strongly suggested on p. 110: Wa-sa'altuhū wathīqatan bi-aṣli al-māli fa-fa‘ala wa-‘aqadahā lī; it only works if the rules of poetic rhyme are followed.

According to Iványi, ‘it is hardly possible to imagine that these endings would have been pronounced in live recitation’ because ‘The maqāma being prose, not poetry; in waqf it would, of course lose its endings if read aloud.’¹¹ Again, this is put too categorically, it would seem. Critics and theorists writing on saj‘ do not have much to say on the matter of its i‘rāb. It is true that they agree that saj‘ is generally based on pausal rhyme;¹² one author explicitly says that observing the i‘rāb is not a condition of beautiful saj‘.¹³ Yet there is an interesting passage in the sixth/twelfth-century Andalusian author Muḥammad Ibn ‘Abd al-Ghafūr al-Kalā‘ī in his Iḥkām ṣan‘at al-kalām (where, incidentally, several maqāmāt by al-Hamadhānī are quoted). He remarks that Abū al-‘Alā' al-Ma‘arrī was fond of rich rhyme, luzūm mā lā yalzam (as ghafūr/kufūr, ghayad/mayad), in his saj‘:

but he did not observe the i‘rāb; whereas identical i‘rāb in saj‘ may be used to great effect (li-ttifāqi al-i‘rābi fī al-saj‘i ta'thīrun ‘azīmun). When writing prose in which the i‘rāb in saj‘ is different, one ought to indicate this with a mark (‘alāmah), showing the reader that he should read a pausal form. Then it will be good when pronounced and pleasing when heard.¹⁴

Apparently, reading saj‘ endings with full i‘rāb was by no means rare and readers had to be warned to read pausal forms when necessary.¹⁵

As said before, the overwhelming majority of rhymes are ‘true’ rhymes in Iványi's sense. One may agree with Iványi when he says that this demonstrates ‘the learned and basically written character of the Maqāmāt' and it ‘points to a form of highly artificial written prose’.¹⁶ However, identity of inflectional endings in rhymes is perhaps not so much sought after for its own sake as the result of a preference for syntactical and semantic parallelism. It could be abandoned for the sake of an interesting rhyming pair, a rare word, or, particularly in the case of al-Harīrī, for the sake of employing rich rhyme, luzūm. In general, identical endings are not necessary, as Ibn Hijjah al-Hamawī (d. 837/1434) says:

Saj‘ is built on pausal forms. The words in saj‘ should be read without final vowels, because the purpose is to match clausulas in pairs, which is possible only with pausal forms. For if the inflectional endings were heard, the purpose would be frustrated, and the writer would be restricted. But if one clausula rhymes in -a and the other in i, reading them without final vowels will make them equal, and the inflection will be hidden. If the endings were pronounced in, for instance, Mā ab‘ada mā fāt^a/wa-mā aqraba mā huwa ātⁱⁿ (‘How far is what is past, how near is what is coming!’), the first rhyme would end in -a and the second in -in, thus spoiling the author's intention.¹⁷

Al-Harīrī's rhyming technique in the maqāmah is rather more sophisticated and more consistent than al-Hamadhānī's. Yet I have counted more than 130 cases of discordant i‘rāb in his maqāmahs. A small sample must suffice; it will be seen that rich rhyme, here indicated as ‘r.r.’, is often sufficient justification for dispensing with inflectional identity.¹⁸

Notes

1. W. P. Heinrichs and Afif Ben Abdessalam, ‘Sadj‘’, The Encylopaedia of Islam, new edition, VIII (Leiden 1995), 732-8. The article on rhyme (‘Kāfiya’), by S. A. Bonebakker (IV, 411-14), is concerned with poetic rhyme only.

2. ‘Alī al-Jundī (or al-Gindī), Suwar al-badī‘, II: Fann al-asjā‘, balāghah, naqd, adab (Cairo 1951).

3. In J. R. Smart (ed.), Tradition and Modernity in Arabic Language and Literature (Richmond, Surrey 1996), 210-28.

4. pp. 215 and 226, n. 26. He also speaks (p. 224) of the ‘rigid compliance with the rules of i‘rāb after the rawī’.

5. p. 215.

6. I have not included cases where a nunated form rhymes with a non-nunated one (e.g. -i/-in), since these rhymes are normal in poetry (cf. Iványi, op. cit., p. 226, n. 25). Here I intend to concentrate on the difference between rhyme in prose and that in poetry.

7. Like Iványi I use Muḥammad ‘Abduh's edition, in a reprint of Beirut 1973. I have provided the names of the maqāmahs to facilitate the use of other editions.

8. Risālat al-Ghufrān, ed. ‘Ā’ishah ‘Abd al-Raḥmān, ṭab‘ah 4 (Cairo n.d.), 249-50.

9. p. 212.

10. Maqāmāt, ed. A. I. de Sacy, pp. 18 (-ṣilāti/-ṣalāti); 64 (-ṣafāti/-ṣifāti); 139 (-ghadāti/‘idāti); 253 (-su‘āti/-jamā‘āti); 324 (-qanāti/-miqlāti); 423 (-ṣalāta/-nfilāta); 439 (-muntaqāti/-thiqāti); 471 (-surāti/-khayrāti); 507 (-mujāzāti/-ṣilāti); 533 (mughādāti/-ghādāti/mulāqāti/-tuqāti); 534 (-mukāfāta/fāta); 658 (-awqāti/-ḥayāti).

11. pp. 215 and 226, n. 26.

12. See e.g. al-Khaṭīb al-Qazwīnī, Talkhīṣ al-Miftāḥ and the several commentaries on it in Shurūḥ al-Talkhīṣ, iv (Cairo AH 1343), 450-51.

13. Muḥammad Ibn ‘Alī Ibn Muḥammad al-Jurjānī (d. 729/1329), al-Ishārāt wa-al-tanbīhāt fi‘ilm al-balāghah, ed. ‘Abd al-Qādir Husayn (Cairo [1982]), 300.

14. Abū al-Qāsim Muḥammad Ibn ‘Abd al-Ghafūr al-Kalā‘ī, Iḥkām ṣan‘at al-kalām, ed. Muḥammad Riḍwān al-Dāyah (Beirut 1966), 244.

15. It ought to be investigated whether the signs recommended by al-Kalā‘ī are actually found in manuscripts.

16. pp. 215, 224.

17. Ibn Hijjah al-Hamawī, Khizānat al-adab (Būlāq AH 1291), 517, also in his Thamarāt al-awrāq, ed. Muḥammad Abū al-Faḍl Ibrāhīm (Cairo 1971), 413-14, and in al-Nawājī (d. 859/1455), Muqaddimah fī ṣinā‘āt al-nazm wa-al-nathr, ed. Muḥammad Ibn ‘Abd al-Karīm (Beirut n.d.), 73-4. The example, already used by al-Khaṭīb al-Qazwīnī (d. 739/1338) in his Talkhīṣ al-Miftāh (see Shurūḥ al-Talkhīṣ, iv, 451) is reminiscent of a famous pre-Islamic instance of saj‘, attributed to Quss Ibn Sā‘idah, which illustrates the same rhyme: Man māta fāt^a / wa-kulla mā huwa ātin ātⁱⁿ (‘He who dies, passes; everything that is to come will come’), see e.g. al-Jāḥiz, al-Bayān wa-al-tabyīn, ed. ‘Abd al-Salām Muḥammad Hārūn (Cairo 1968), i, 309.

18. al-Harīrī, al-Maqāmāt/Les séances, ed. Antoine Isaac Silvestre de Sacy, 2nd edn (Paris 1847-53, repr. Amsterdam 1968).

Rhymes in al-Harīrī's Maqāmāt

p. 11 (al-khuṭbah) maqāmatin/Qudāmata

p. 28 (al-Dumyāṭiyyah) Dumyāṭa/miyāṭin (r.r.)

p. 56 (al-Kūfiyyah) ithqāla/yuqālu (r.r.)

p. 75 (al-Barqa‘īdiyyah) wa-ntazama/bi-al-kazami (r.r.)

pp. 81-2 (al-Barqa‘īdiyyah) -ruq‘atilqiṭ‘atan

p. 194 (al-Qahqariyyah) wa-tajāwuzu al-ḥaddi yukillu al-ḥadda wa-ta‘addī al-adabi yuḥbiṭu al-quraba wa-tanāsī al-ḥuqūqi yunshi'u al-‘uqūqa wa-taḥāshī al-riyabi yarfa‘u al-rutaba

p. 279 (al-Qaṭī‘iyyah) -nawāḍiri/khawāṭira

p. 364 (al-Wāsiṭiyyah) -sarmadu/Muḥammadin (r.r.)

p. 394 (al-Ramliyyah) anshuduhā/anshadahā—an exceptional case, where the i‘rāb differs in spite of a following khurūj or suffix (r.r.)

p. 401 (al-Harbiyyah) ajib/yajibu (r.r.)

p. 431 (al-Zabīdiyyah) -kharaza/‘awazin

p. 434 (al-Zabīdiyyah) -qawīma/-ṣamīma/-na‘īmi/karīmun

p. 573 (al-Badawiyyah) -ḥintha/ḍighthun

p. 609 (al-Halabiyyah) Budayra/-dayri (r.r.)

p. 613 (al-Halabiyyah) -matā'īma/mashā'īmi (r.r.)

p. 613 (al-Halabiyyah) -muthaqqafa/yatawaqqaf (r.r.)

p. 621 (al-Halabiyyah) qu‘qā‘u/-biqā‘i (r.r.)

p. 674 (al-Baṣriyyah) -Sarūja/-surūji (r.r.)

p. 679 (al-Baṣriyyah) -Sarūja/-‘ulūju

p. 687 (al-khā¯timah) -matā‘i/yubtā‘a (r.r.)