The Dimyāṭī Maqāmah: Neighbours, Companions and Generous Conduct

1. A conversation emerges at the campsite

The previous level ended with the description of a night halt. Al-Ḥārith ibn Hammām now turns his attention to two men talking among the travel equipment. One asks about social conduct, and the other begins a long succession of claims about his generosity and forbearance.

At this point the narrator is a listener, not a judge. The man is describing what he says he does; the narrative has not yet shown independent proof of all those virtues.

The appeal of this section lies in its rhymed prose and linked wordplay. Short, memorable expressions describe responses to neighbours, friends, guests, acquaintances and adversaries.

2. What exactly was asked?

«كَيْفَ حُكْمُ سِيرَتِكَ مَعَ جِيلِكَ وَجِيرَتِكَ؟»
What is the character of your conduct toward your people and neighbours?

Sīrah concerns habitual conduct; jīl denotes a group or class of people, while jīrah means neighbours. The question asks about practical treatment of others, rather than social reputation alone.

Kayfa asks about quality or manner. Rather than answer with a general adjective, the speaker gives a succession of concrete claims. That structure lends movement to the prose.

3. Respecting a neighbour despite wrongdoing

«أَرْعَى الْجَارَ وَلَوْ جَارَ»
I respect the neighbour even if he acts unjustly.

The first al-jār is the noun “neighbour”; the second jāra is a past-tense verb meaning “acted unjustly.” Their similar sound and different functions create paronomasia (jinās).

Arʿā is a first-person imperfect verb: “I care for / regard.” The speaker claims not to abandon courtesy because of another's bad conduct. This should not be read as approval of injustice or a demand to give up reasonable self-protection.

4. Offering connection instead of retaliation

«وَأَبْذُلُ الْوِصَالَ لِمَنْ صَالَ»
I offer connection even to someone who charges against me.

Abdhulu means to offer or give generously. Wiṣāl denotes maintaining connection; ṣāla means to rush against or assail someone.

The shared sound in al-wiṣāl / ṣāla contrasts a gentle response with hostile behaviour. The poetic claim is that reconciliation and connection are preferred to immediate retaliation.

5. Bearing confusion in companionship

«وَأَحْتَمِلُ الْخَلِيطَ وَلَوْ أَبْدَى التَّخْلِيطَ»
I bear with a companion even when he shows disorder or confusion.

Al-khalīṭ denotes a close associate or one who mixes with others; al-takhlīṭ means mixing things up or creating disorder. Both share the root kh-l-ṭ, yielding a verbal and semantic connection.

Aḥtamilu is a first-person imperfect from form VIII. Here patience is presented as maintaining fellowship despite another person's imperfections.

6. One word, two worlds: ḥamīm

«وَأَوَدُّ الْحَمِيمَ وَلَوْ جَرَّعَنِي الْحَمِيمَ»
I cherish a close friend even if he makes me swallow, as it were, scalding water.

The first al-ḥamīm means an intimate friend; the second means intensely hot water. The form is identical but the senses differ, a striking example of complete verbal wordplay.

Jarraʿanī means “made me swallow in draughts.” Pain is portrayed as something one is forced to drink. The context makes this an image of suffering caused by a friend, not a report of actual boiling water being served.

7. Compassion and the bond of kinship

«وَأُفَضِّلُ الشَّفِيقَ عَلَى الشَّقِيقِ»
I give preference to a genuinely compassionate person over someone who is merely close by blood.

Al-shafīq is a caring, compassionate person; al-shaqīq is a full brother or close blood relative. The change of one consonant produces partial paronomasia together with an ethical comparison.

Ufaḍḍilu is a first-person imperfect in form II. The point values genuine compassion, not the denial of one's duties toward relatives.

8. The first five claims compared

ExpressionClaimed responseArʿā al-jār wa-law jāraRespecting even an unjust neighbourAbdhulu al-wiṣāl li-man ṣālaOffering connection amid hostilityAḥtamilu al-khalīṭBearing a companion's disorderAwaddu al-ḥamīmPreserving affection despite painUfaḍḍilu al-shafīqValuing sincere care

These are the speaker's claims about his own virtues. The narrator has not observed each action independently; the contrast between declared character and tested conduct remains open for the following events.

9. A companion and a tenth

«وَأَفِي لِلْعَشِيرِ وَإِنْ لَمْ يُكَافِئْ بِالْعَشِيرِ»
I remain faithful to a companion even if he does not repay a tenth of my kindness.

The first al-ʿashīr is a close associate, while the second denotes one tenth. The identical form with distinct meanings links fidelity and meagre repayment through wordplay.

Afī is a first-person imperfect meaning “I fulfil / remain faithful”; lam yukāfiʾ is a negated jussive imperfect. The ethical point is refusing to measure every friendship by equal compensation.

10. A generous gift that still feels insufficient

«وَأَسْتَقِلُّ الْجَزِيلَ لِلنَّزِيلِ»
I consider even a large gift too little for a guest.

Al-jazīl signifies something abundant or generous; al-nazīl is a guest who has stopped at one's lodging. Astaqillu means “I reckon it little.” The speaker is not reporting that the gift is objectively small; he is declaring exceptional standards of hospitality.

The matching sound of al-jazīl / al-nazīl enhances the line, while the meaning centres on honouring a guest beyond a merely adequate payment.

11. Overwhelming a fellow traveller with kindness

«وَأَغْمُرُ الزَّمِيلَ بِالْجَمِيلِ»
I shower a fellow traveller with kindness.

Al-zamīl is a companion on the road; al-jamīl is beautiful conduct, goodness or favour. Aghmuru conveys covering or overwhelming, suggesting benefits so plentiful that they surround the companion.

The line depicts abundant practical generosity rather than a vague benevolent feeling. The similar ending of zamīl and jamīl contributes to its memorable cadence.

12. Treating a night companion like a prince

«وَأُنْزِلُ سَمِيرِي مَنْزِلَةَ أَمِيرِي»
I give my companion in night conversation the station of my prince.

Samīrī is “my companion in evening conversation”; amīrī is “my ruler / prince.” Though the roles differ socially, the speaker professes equal respect and honour.

Manzilah is rank or position, sharing a root with unzilu, “I place / assign a station.” The verbal connection makes the social comparison especially compact.

13. Honouring an intimate associate

«وَأُحِلُّ أَنِيسِي مَحَلَّ رَئِيسِي»
I place my intimate companion in the position of my chief.

Anīsī is the person whose company brings familiarity and ease; raʾīsī is “my chief”; maḥall is a place or position. After honouring a night companion like a prince, the speaker likewise honours an intimate associate like a leader.

Uḥillu / maḥall share a root, while anīsī / raʾīsī produce a sound connection. The paired lines place dignity in companionship rather than in rank alone.

14. Turning acquaintance into benefaction

«وَأُودِعُ مَعَارِفِي عَوَارِفِي»
I entrust my acquaintances with my benefactions.

Maʿārifī are those I know; ʿawārifī are my favours or benefactions. The similar forms connect acquaintance with active kindness: social recognition is not meant to remain mere greeting.

Ūdiʿu means to deposit or entrust. It makes benefaction something valuable that is deliberately placed in the hands of one's acquaintances.

15. The two senses of marāfiqī

«وَأُولِي مَرَافِقِي مَرَافِقِي»
I give those who accompany me the benefits and conveniences I possess.

The first marāfiqī designates people associated with or accompanying me; the second refers to my facilities and beneficial resources. Their identical form carries two related but distinguishable meanings.

Ūlī means “I grant or bestow.” Following “maʿārifī / ʿawārifī,” the expression builds a sequence: goodness for acquaintances and useful help for companions.

16. Four relationships, four forms of generosity

PersonClaimed actionAl-nazīl (guest)No gift seems ample enoughAl-zamīl (traveller)Lavishing kindnessAl-samīr / al-anīsHonouring like a prince or chiefAl-maʿārif / al-marāfiqOffering favours and practical benefit

The central idea is respect made practical. The speaker offers gifts, assistance or social honour according to the relationship. The artistic language is richly rhymed and deliberately heightened.

17. Gentle speech toward one who dislikes you

«وَأَلِينُ مَقَالِيَ لِلْقَالِي»
I soften my speech even for someone who dislikes me.

Alīnu expresses being gentle in speech; maqālī is “my speech,” and al-qālī denotes one who detests or turns away. The echo between maqālī / al-qālī juxtaposes a soft response with a harsh disposition.

Unlike giving gifts or rank, this is kindness expressed through the tone of conversation. The claim does not require approving another's hostility; it describes choosing gentleness in one's response.

18. Checking on someone who has forgotten you

«وَأُدِيمُ تَسَآلِي عَنِ السَّالِي»
I continue to inquire after the person who has forgotten me.

Udīmu means “I keep doing,” tasāʾulī is “my inquiries,” and al-sālī is someone who has become forgetful or detached. Where the previous line answers dislike with a gentle tone, this one answers neglect with continued concern.

The linked endings maqālī / qālī and tasāʾulī / sālī maintain the prose's rhyme while developing a coherent social ethic.

19. Accepting a meeting as sufficient loyalty

«وَأَرْضَى مِنَ الْوَفَاءِ بِاللِّقَاءِ»
I am content with a meeting as my share of another's fidelity.

Al-wafāʾ is loyalty and keeping faith; al-liqāʾ is a meeting or encounter. Arḍā is a first-person imperfect: “I am satisfied.”

The speaker sets a high standard for what he gives others, but low expectations for what he receives. The rhymed endings of wafāʾ / liqāʾ make the contrast easy to hear.

20. Contentment with a small return

«وَأَقْنَعُ مِنَ الْجَزَاءِ بِأَقَلِّ الْأَجْزَاءِ»
I am content with the smallest portion of repayment.

Al-jazāʾ is recompense; al-ajzāʾ means parts or portions; aqall is a comparative/superlative form meaning “least.” Aqnaʿu means “I am satisfied with.”

The pair jazāʾ / ajzāʾ combines soundplay with an image of return divided into tiny portions. It intensifies the earlier willingness to accept a mere meeting as loyalty.

21. A claim of restraint under injustice

«وَلَا أَتَظَلَّمُ حِينَ أُظْلَمُ»
I do not complain of injustice even when I am wronged.

Atazallamu is a first-person imperfect in form V, referring to complaining of wrongdoing. Uẓlamu is first-person passive imperfect: “I am wronged.” The shared root ẓ-l-m contrasts voicing a complaint with being the victim of harm.

This is highly emphatic self-description, expressing the speaker's ideal of forbearance. It does not prove that injustice is acceptable or that seeking one's rights is always improper.

22. The serpent's bite and refusal of revenge

«وَلَا أَنْقِمُ وَلَوْ لَدَغَنِي الْأَرْقَمُ»
I do not seek revenge even if a deadly serpent bites me.

Anqimu concerns resentment or taking revenge; ladaghanī means “it bit me”; al-arqam names a kind of serpent. The serpent's bite presents extreme injury in a vivid physical image.

The two closing claims are distinct: not complaining of harm and not taking revenge. Together they bring the long self-portrait to an extreme claim of forbearance.

23. Rhyme versus wordplay

DeviceExampleEffectSajʿ (rhymed prose)Al-jazīl / al-nazīlMatching cadence at phrase endingsComplete jināsAl-ḥamīm / al-ḥamīmSame word-form, distinct sensesPartial jināsAl-shafīq / al-shaqīqNear-identical sounds, different meaningsRoot-based linkageAl-khalīṭ / al-takhlīṭRelated words from one root

Not every sound-alike pair is complete jinās. Rhymed prose depends on cadence at phrase endings; complete jinās involves identical word forms with distinct senses; shared roots can contribute a separate type of verbal linkage.

24. First-person claims and contrasting conditions

«أَرْعَى ... أَبْذُلُ ... أَحْتَمِلُ ... أُفَضِّلُ ... أَقْنَعُ»
I respect, give, endure, prefer, and remain content.

The reply repeatedly uses first-person imperfect verbs. The speaker assumes agency in every claim, while wa-law introduces an adverse circumstance which, he says, does not change his conduct.

«وَلَوْ جَارَ» — even if he acts unjustly.
«وَلَوْ أَبْدَى التَّخْلِيطَ» — even if he behaves chaotically.
«وَلَوْ لَدَغَنِي الْأَرْقَمُ» — even if the serpent bites me.

The grammatical recurrence holds the unusually long response together.

25. The gap between declaration and proof

A striking feature of this long reply is how brilliantly someone can describe their own conduct. Neighbours, companions, guests, hostile people, and forgetful friends all receive ideal responses—but these are still spoken claims, not actions verified by the narrator.

The maqāmah invites two questions: does the speaker really behave in this manner, and how will the other man respond to such extraordinary self-praise? That uncertainty propels the next movement of the story.

This level ends with «وَلَا أَنْقِمُ وَلَوْ لَدَغَنِي الْأَرْقَمُ». The other companion's astonished response begins the following section.