# ﯨﯩﺼﺮﻩ أَشْكَالُ مَـحَارِيب رَائِقَة



## dgwp

Still plugging away at the Travels of Ibn Jubayr and his description of the outside of the Kaaba in Mecca (see "The Travels of Ibn Jubayr" - Wright and de Goeje, 1907, page 83) - full context given below - and have encountered a mysterious sentence which contains a word ﯨﯩﺼﺮﻩ with no dots on the letters in Wright and de Goeje's text. They give no indication as to how this should be read. Here is the passage:

قَدْ ﺷُﻜﱢﻞَ فِـي هٰذِهِ ٱلسُّتُورِ مِنَ ٱلصَّنْعَةِ ٱلْغَرِيبَةِ ٱلَّتِـي ﯨﯩﺼﺮﻩ أَشْكَالُ مَـحَارِيب رَائِقَة وَرُسُوم مقروءة مرسومة بِذِكْرِ ٱللهِ

It seems that it could be a passive verb, with ﻩ being perhaps a "pronoun of general reference", referring back somehow to the previous clause? Or maybe بِبَصَرِهِ? I would welcome any advice on this. And whichever is the case, does رُسُوم then agree with ٱلصَّنْعَةِ ٱلْغَرِيبَةِ or ُأَشْكَال ?

Full passage for context:

وَسَقْفُ ٱلْبَيْتِ مُـجَلَّلٌ بِكِسَاءٍ مِنَ ٱلْـحَرِيرِ ٱلْمُلَوَّنِ وَظَاهِرُ ٱلْكَعْبَةِ ﻛُﻠﱢﻬَﺎ مِنَ ٱلْأَرْبَعَةِ جَوَانِبَ مَكْسُوٌّ بِسُتُورٍ مِنَ ٱلْـحَرِيرِ ٱلْأَخْضَرِ وَسَدَاهَا قُطْنٌ وَفِـي أَعْلَاهَا رَسْمٌ بِٱلْـحَرِيرِ ٱلْأَحْـمَرِ فِيهِ مَكْتُوبٌ ﴿إِنَّ أَوَّلَ بَيْتٍ وُضِعَ لِلنَّاسِ لِلَّذِي بِبَكَّةَ مُبَارَكًا﴾ وَٱسْمُ ٱلْإِمَامِ ٱلنَّاصِرِ لِدِينِ ٱللهِ فِـي سَعَتِهِ قَدْرُ ثَلَاثِ أَذْرُعٍ يُطِيفُ بِـهَا ﻛُﻠﱢﻬَﺎ قَدْ ﺷُﻜﱢﻞَ فِـي هٰذِهِ ٱلسُّتُورِ مِنَ ٱلصَّنْعَةِ ٱلْغَرِيبَةِ ٱلَّتِـي ﯨﯩﺼﺮﻩ أَشْكَال مَـحَارِيب رَائِقَة وَرُسُوم مقروءة مرسومة بِذِكْرِ ٱللهِ​


----------



## I.K.S.

a typo ,It is التي تبصرها  in my copy of the book
Cf [URL='https://books.google.co.ma/books?id=yHgM3soVBgkC&pg=PT223&dq=%D8%A3%D9%8E%D8%B4%D9%92%D9%83%D9%8E%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%8F+%D9%85%D9%8E%D9%80%D8%AD%D9%8E%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%90%D9%8A%D8%A8+%D8%B1%D9%8E%D8%A7%D8%A6%D9%90%D9%82%D9%8E%D8%A9&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwitxdXcpafgAhXI66QKHYhQDUMQ6AEIPTAD#v=onepage&q=%D8%A3%D9%8E%D8%B4%D9%92%D9%83%D9%8E%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%8F%20%D9%85%D9%8E%D9%80%D8%AD%D9%8E%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%90%D9%8A%D8%A8%20%D8%B1%D9%8E%D8%A7%D8%A6%D9%90%D9%82%D9%8E%D8%A9&f=false']Link[/URL]



dgwp said:


> does رُسُوم then agree with ٱلصَّنْعَةِ ٱلْغَرِيبَةِ or ُأَشْكَال ?


Yes, the wondrous craftsmanship includes the readable drawings


----------



## Sun-Shine

dgwp said:


> وَسَقْفُ ٱلْبَيْتِ مُـجَلَّلٌ بِكِسَاءٍ مِنَ ٱلْـحَرِيرِ ٱلْمُلَوَّنِ وَظَاهِرُ ٱلْكَعْبَةِ ﻛُﻠﱢﻬَﺎ مِنَ ٱلْأَرْبَعَةِ جَوَانِبَ مَكْسُوٌّ بِسُتُورٍ مِنَ ٱلْـحَرِيرِ ٱلْأَخْضَرِ وَسَدَاهَا قُطْنٌ وَفِـي أَعْلَاهَا رَسْمٌ بِٱلْـحَرِيرِ ٱلْأَحْـمَرِ فِيهِ مَكْتُوبٌ ﴿إِنَّ أَوَّلَ بَيْتٍ وُضِعَ لِلنَّاسِ لِلَّذِي بِبَكَّةَ مُبَارَكًا﴾ وَٱسْمُ ٱلْإِمَامِ ٱلنَّاصِرِ لِدِينِ ٱللهِ فِـي سَعَتِهِ قَدْرُ ثَلَاثِ أَذْرُعٍ يُطِيفُ بِـهَا ﻛُﻠﱢﻬَﺎ قَدْ ﺷُﻜﱢﻞَ فِـي هٰذِهِ ٱلسُّتُورِ مِنَ ٱلصَّنْعَةِ ٱلْغَرِيبَةِ ٱلَّتِـي ﯨﯩﺼﺮﻩ أَشْكَال مَـحَارِيب رَائِقَة وَرُسُوم مقروءة مرسومة بِذِكْرِ ٱللهِ​


"إِنَّ أَوَّلَ بَيْتٍ وُضِعَ لِلنَّاسِ *لَلَّذِي* بِبَكَّةَ "

The word is تبصرها

I'm not sure whether رسوم agrees with أشكال or محاريب .
but I think it agrees  with ُأَشْكَال .


----------



## dgwp

إتحادية قبائل الشاوية said:


> a typo ,It is التي تبصرها  in my copy of the book
> Cf Link



It is not a typo - Wright and de Goeje have a footnote which mentions that this is exactly how it is written in the original manuscript they base their translation on. The word has been modified in your book.


----------



## Sun-Shine

It's تبصرها in my book too.
I wonder why did he say ثَلَاثِ أَذْرُعٍ not ثَلَاثة أَذْرُعٍ?


----------



## I.K.S.

dgwp said:


> It is not a typo - Wright and de Goeje have a footnote which mentions that this is exactly how it is written in the original manuscript they base their translation on. The word has been modified in your book.


a copyist's mistake? manuscripts are usually edited based on several copies of the same work.


----------



## dgwp

I've no idea - can we get back to my original question please?


----------



## Sun-Shine

dgwp said:


> Can we get back to my original question please?


Do you mean رسوم ?
I think it agrees with أشكال because it is معطوفة عليها .


----------



## dgwp

No, I meant the interpretation of ﯨﯩﺼﺮﻩ


----------



## Sun-Shine

It maybe التي تُبْصِرها which means تراها (which you see).


----------



## ayed

رسوم  " figures"
اشكال محاريب = could it be " shapes of notches"


----------



## dgwp

sun_shine 331995 said:


> It maybe التي تُبْصِرها which means تراها (which you see).



If this is the case, would the voweling be as follows (i.e. with أَشْكَالَ in the accusative)?

ٱلَّتِـي تُبْصِرهَا أَشْكَالَ


----------



## Sun-Shine

dgwp said:


> If this is the case, would the voweling be as follows (i.e. with أَشْكَالَ in the accusative)?
> 
> ٱلَّتِـي تُبْصِرهَا أَشْكَالَ


No, it's not accusative
أَشْكَال will stay as نائب فاعل with ضمة


----------



## dgwp

I see - and رَائِقَة agrees with أَشْكَالُ, so is also in the nominative case?


----------



## Sun-Shine

dgwp said:


> I see - and رَائِقَة agrees with أَشْكَالُ, so is also in the nominative case?


No,
شكل is the verb
أشكال :نائب فاعل
محاريب :مضاف اليه
رائقة is the adjective of محاريب so it is نعت مجرور

You can rephrase the sentence as :
ﺷُﻜﱢﻞَ أَشْكَال مَـحَارِيب رَائِقَة وَ رُسُوم مقروءة مرسومة بِذِكْرِ ٱللهِ فِـي هٰذِهِ ٱلسُّتُورِ مِنَ ٱلصَّنْعَةِ ٱلْغَرِيبَةِ ٱلَّتِـي تبصرها


----------



## dgwp

It doesn't make much sense for رائقة to be the adjective of محاريب though... "clear niches (mihrabs)" in English. It makes more sense for it to be the adjective of أشكال - "clear shapes"


----------



## Sun-Shine

dgwp said:


> It doesn't make much sense for رائقة to be the adjective of محاريب though... "clear niches (mihrabs)" in English. It makes more sense for it to be the adjective of أشكال - "clear shapes"


Why do you think that?
To me it seems to be the adjective of محاريب.


----------



## dgwp

You are probably right. Here is the full sentence, with what I think is now the correct vowelling:

قَدْ ﺷُﻜﱢﻞَ فِـي هٰذِهِ ٱلسُّتُورِ مِنَ ٱلصَّنْعَةِ ٱلْغَرِيبَةِ ٱلَّتِـي تُبْصِرهَا أَشْكَالُ مَـحَارِيبَ رَائِقَةٍ وَرُسُومٌ مَقْرُوءَةٌ مَرْسُومَةٌ بِذِكْرِ ٱللهِ


----------



## dgwp

Hmm... I also found this version of the first part of the sentence in the 2011 book "ابن جبير في مصروالحجاز" (page 54):

قد شُكِّل في هذهِ السُّتُورِ من الصَّنْعَةِ الغرِيبَةِ التي تَرَى فيها أَشْكالَ مَحارِيبَ رائِقَةً


----------



## Sun-Shine

dgwp said:


> Hmm... I also found this version of the first part of the sentence in the 2011 book "ابن جبير في مصروالحجاز" (page 54):
> 
> قد شُكِّل في هذهِ السُّتُورِ من الصَّنْعَةِ الغرِيبَةِ التي تَرَى فيها أَشْكالَ مَحارِيبَ رائِقَةً



Here, as you wrote, أَشْكالَ is accusative because of the verb ترى
Where is the rest of the sentence? Where is نائب الفاعل of the verb شكل?
is this sentence with this vowelling ?


----------



## dgwp

I am not sure - here is the whole passage in case it helps:

وظاهِرُ الكَعْبَةِ كلِّها — من الأرَبعةِ الْجَوانِبِ — مَكْسوٌّ بِسُتُورٍ من الحريرِ الأخَضرِ،
وسَداها (خُيوطُها الْمُمْتَدَّةُ طُولًا) قُطْنٌ. وفي أَعلاها رسم بالحرير الأحَمرِ مكتوبٌ فيه
الآيَةُ الْكَرِيمَةُ: ﴿إِنَّ أَوَّلَ بَيْتٍ وُضِعَ لِلنَّاسِ لَلَّذِي بِبَكَّةَ مُبَارَكًا وَهُدًى لِّلْعَالَمِينَ * فِيهِ آيَاتٌ
بَيِّنَاتٌ مَّقَامُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَۖمَن دَخَلَهُ كَانَ آمِنًا وَۗلِلهِ عََّلَى النَّاسِ حِجُّ الْبَيْتِ مَنِ اسْتَطَاعَ إِلَيْهِ
سَبِيلًا﴾.
في سَعَةٍ مِقْدارُها ثَلاثَةُ أَذْرُعٍ، يطِيفُ بها « الناصرِ لدينِ للهِ » وقد كُتِبَ اسم الإمامِ
كلِّها.
قد شُكِّل في هذهِ السُّتُورِ من الصَّنْعَةِ الغرِيبَةِ التي تَرَى فيها أَشْكالَ مَحارِيبَ رائِقَةً،
وكتابَةً مقروءَةً مَرْسُومَةً بِذِكْر للهِ — تعالى — وبالدُّعاءِ لِلنَّاصِرِالعَبَّاسِيِّ، الآمِرِ بإقامَتِها.
وكلُّ ذلك لا يُخالِفُ لَوْنَها.​


----------



## Sun-Shine

dgwp said:


> قد شُكِّل في هذهِ السُّتُورِ من الصَّنْعَةِ الغرِيبَةِ التي تَرَى فيها أَشْكالَ مَحارِيبَ رائِقَةً،
> وكتابَةً مقروءَةً مَرْسُومَةً بِذِكْر للهِ — تعالى — وبالدُّعاءِ لِلنَّاصِرِالعَبَّاسِيِّ، الآمِرِ بإقامَتِها.
> وكلُّ ذلك لا يُخالِفُ لَوْنَها.​


Here, he wrote رائقة as an accusative
If so, it would be an adjective for أشكال.
No "، "after  ترى فيها .
I feel that there is something wrong, where is  نائب الفاعل of the verb شُكِّل?

Edit:


dgwp said:


> في سَعَةٍ مِقْدارُها *ثَلاثَةُ* أَذْرُعٍ​


Here, he wrote ثلاثة أذرع as I mentioned before that it should be ثلاثة not ثلاث but
he put ضمة not كسرة , I don't know the إعراب exactly.


----------



## I.K.S.

sun_shine 331995 said:


> Here, he wrote ثلاثة أذرع as I mentioned before that it should be ثلاثة not ثلاث


الذراع مؤنثة


----------



## Sun-Shine

إتحادية قبائل الشاوية said:


> الذراع مؤنثة


Right.
Thank you


----------



## dgwp

ذراع can be masculine or feminine


----------



## Mahaodeh

sun_shine 331995 said:


> I feel that there is something wrong, where is نائب الفاعل of the verb شُكِّل?


It seems to me that it's omitted. I mean it seems to be: نائب الفاعل محذوف وتقديره رَسْم. I'm basing the تقدير on the previous context where he said في أعلاها رسم من الحرير.


----------



## ayed

Mahaodeh said:


> It seems to me that it's omitted. I mean it seems to be: نائب الفاعل محذوف وتقديره رَسْم. I'm basing the تقدير on the previous context where he said في أعلاها رسم من الحرير.


Agree with Mahaodeh:

قَدْ *ﺷُﻜﱢﻞَ *فِـي هٰذِهِ ٱلسُّتُورِ مِنَ ٱلصَّنْعَةِ ٱلْغَرِيبَةِ ٱلَّتِـي تُبْصِرهَا *أَشْكَالُ *مَـحَارِيبَ رَائِقَةٍ
فِـي هٰذِهِ ٱلسُّتُورِقَدْ *ﺷُﻜﱢﻞَ (شكلت) أَشْكَالُ مَـحَارِيبَ رَائِقَةٍ *


----------



## Sun-Shine

Mahaodeh said:


> It seems to me that it's omitted. I mean it seems to be: نائب الفاعل محذوف وتقديره رَسْم. I'm basing the تقدير on the previous context where he said في أعلاها رسم من الحرير.



Could be 
في أعلاها *رسمٌ .......*قد* شُكِّل *


----------

