Brains Confounded by the Ode of Abū Shādūf Expounded. Yūsuf al-Shirbīnī

has it that his mother gave birth to him next to an abū shādūf and he was therefore named after it, but this is refuted by what has already been said, to the effect that his original name was ʿUjayl. The two versions may be reconciled by saying that after his mother had given birth to him next to the abū shādūf, she took him and placed him in the trough and the calf licked him and he became known as described above. Thus there is no contradiction between the accounts. It is also said that he was so named because he did so much scooping of water with this device—so much, indeed, that it got to the point that anyone who asked after him would be told, “he’s busy shadf-ing” that is, “scooping”; then they added the alif and waw to the word and said shādūf.⁵⁵ With constant repetition, they have come to think of the crossbeam as though it were the child and the pillars as though they were the father, so that now they call the device “the father of the crossbeam (abū shādūf)”; and they applied the name to the poet himself because he was always next to the device and they identified him with it, and thus it became a proper name by which he was addressed, as already explained. End.

      ٨،١،١١

11.1.8

      (مسألة هباليّة) ما الحكمة في أنّ الدلو أو القطوة لا يفارق الخشبة التي هي في حكم قصبة الميزان وهل هى حكم الأب له كما سبق من أنّ النواطير في حكم مقام الأب للشادوف وأن الدلو أو القطوة إنّما لازما هذه الخشبة بالضرورة لها ومتى انفكّ عنها بطل عمله فهو مجاور لها في وقت الحاجة لا غير قلنا (الجواب الفشرويّ) أنّ الخشبة لا تستغني عن الدلو أو القطوة وهما لا يستغنيان عنها فكان كلاهما في حكم الولد للخشبة وكانت الخشبة في حكم الأب لما ذكر لأنّ كلًّا من الدلو أو القطوة مرتبط بالخشبة فاتّجه المقال عن وجه هذا الهبال

      A Silly Debate: What is to be learned from the fact that the bucket or scoop never leaves the beam, which resembles the arm of a pair of scales; and does the latter play the role of father to the former, just as, as pointed out earlier, the two pillars play the role of father to the crossbeam of the shādūf; and is it the case that the bucket or scoop adheres to the beam merely out of necessity and, once disconnected from it, ceases to perform its function; and, as such, may it be said to be attached to it only when needed and not otherwise? We declare: the fatuous response is that the beam cannot dispense with the bucket or the scoop and neither can dispense with the beam, and so together they play the role of child to the beam, and the beam plays the role of father for the reason given, since both of them—the bucket and the scoop—are in a stable relationship with the beam. Now the contention’s straightened out, the silliness shown up for what it’s about.

      ٩،١،١١

11.1.9

      (فائدة) الأب مشتقّ من آب إذا رجع قال ابن زُرَيْق رحمه الله في قصيدة له [بسيط]

ما آبَ مِن سَفَرٍ إِلّا وأَزعَجَه

رَأيٌ إلى سَفَرٍ بالعَزمِ يَمنَعُهُ

      أي ما رجع من سفر إلّا وأزعجه رأيه إلى سفر ثاني وكذلك الأب لأنّه في كلّ ساعة يرجع إلى ولده ويفتقده وينظر إليه وقيل مشتقّ من الأُبُوّة كما أنّ الأخ مشتقّ من الأُخُوّة قال الشاعر [طويل]

أبو المَرءِ مَن آبَ اشتِقاقًا لإسمِهِ

وَاخو المَرءِ أَيضًا قَد أتَى مِن أخوّه

      ومصدره آب يأوب أَوْبًا فهو آبٍ

      A Useful Note: the word ab (“father”) is derived from āba, meaning “he returned.”⁵⁶ Ibn Zurayq,⁵⁷ God have mercy on him, says in an ode:

      He never returns (āba) from one journey but feels an urge

      To be on his way again, that only his will can purge.

      That is, “he never comes back from one journey but the urge to undertake a second disturbs him.” It is the same with a father, because he is always coming back to his child and missing him and looking about for him. Others say that the word is derived from ubuwwah (“fatherhood”), just as akh (“brother”) is derived from ukhuwwah (“brotherhood”). Says the poet:

      A man’s ab from āba derives,

      And a man’s akh from ukhuwwah likewise.

      The paradigm is āba, yaʾūbu, awban, active participle ābin.⁵⁸

      ١٠،١،١١

11.1.10

      وقال ابن سودون إنّ أبو هذا فعل ماض ناقص وأصله أبوس ويدلّ على ذلك قول الشاعر [بسيط]

قَالوا حَبيبُكَ وارَى ثَغرَهُ صَلَفاً

ماذا تُحاوِلُ إِن أَبداه قلتُ أبو

      أي أبوس وإنّما حُذِفت السين لوجهين الأوّل لقصد حصول اللبس على السامع إذ هو اللائق بهذا عند الأدباء والأقرب إلى السلامة من الواشين والرقباء والثاني حُذِفت السين لأنّها في الجُمَّل بستّين والستّون في البوس إسراف عند البعض * هذا كلامه المصرَّح به في ديوانه انتهى

      Ibn Sūdūn⁵⁹ claims that abū, the construct form of ab, is really a perfect-tense defective verb,⁶⁰ being originally abūsu (“I would kiss”), and he cites as evidence the verse that says:

      “They said, ‘Your sweetie hides his mouth affectedly from view;

      What would you attempt, if he should show it?’ Said I, ‘abū. . .’⁶¹

      “that is, abūs (‘I would kiss’), the s having been dropped for two reasons, the first being to deceive the listener, this being the proper thing to do in literary opinion and the more conducive to safety from tattletales and nosy parkers, and the second because its numerical value is sixty,⁶² and sixty kisses, according to some, is excessive.”

      These are his words as explicitly