for an,
for un, and
for in. Secondly, we meet with the distinct assertion that the invention of the iʿjām or diacritical signs followed that of the nuqat̤ or vowel-points. Nöldeke thinks the reverse more probable, not only because the letter b (ب) is found already pointed on coins of ʿAbdu ʾl-Malik, but also because the diacritical signs are in the ancient manuscripts, like the letters themselves, written with black ink, while the vowel-points are always of a different colour. But the early use of a pointed b does not prove that the other letters were similarly marked at the same time. On the contrary, if such a distinction was once established for the b, which would be most liable to be confounded with one of its four sister-forms, the other characters of a like shape could for some time dispense with distinctive signs, as for an Arabian reader accustomed to hear, see, and think certain groups of consonants together, and deeply imbued with an instinctive consciousness of the phonetic laws of his language, the danger of mistaking one letter for another would not be by far so great as it appears to us. And as for the argument taken from the different colour of the ink, Nöldeke himself remarks that it was natural to use the same tint for the consonants and their distinctive signs, which form only a part of them, while the vowel-points are an entirely new element.
According to a third tradition, it was Yaḥyā ibn Yaʿmar (died A.H. 129) and al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī (died A.H. 110), by whom al-Ḥajjāj caused the Qurʾān to be pointed, and it is stated that Ibn Shīrīn possessed a copy of it, in which Yaḥyā ibn Yaʿmar had marked the vowel points. He was remarkable as a Shīʿah of the primitive class, to use Ibn K͟hallikān’s expression: one of those who, in asserting the superior merit of the People of the House, abstained from depreciating the merit of those Companions who did not belong to that family. It is related by ʿĀṣim ibn Abī ʾn-Najūd, the Qurʾān reader (died A.H. 127), that al-Ḥajjāj summoned Yaḥyā on that account into his presence and thus addressed him:—
“Do you pretend that al-Ḥasan and al-Ḥusain were of the posterity of the Apostle of God? By Allāh, I shall cast to the ground that part of you which has the most hair on it (that is: I shall strike off your head), unless you exculpate yourself.” “If I do so,” said Yaḥyā, “shall I have amnesty?” “You shall,” replied al-Ḥajjāj. “Well,” said Yaḥyā, “God, may His praise be exalted! said:
“‘And We gave him (Abraham) Isaac and Jacob, and guided both aright; and We had before guided Noah; and of his posterity, David and Solomon, and Job, and Joseph, and Moses and Aaron: Thus do We reward the righteous: And Zachariah, John, Jesus, and Elias: all were just persons.’ ([Sūrah vi. 84, 85]).
“Now, the space of time between Jesus and Abraham is greater than that which separated al-Ḥasan and al-Ḥusain from Muḥammad, on all of whom be the blessing of God and his salvation!” Al-Ḥajjāj answered, “I must admit that you have got out of the difficulty; I read that before, but did not understand it.” In the further course of conversation, al-Ḥajjāj said to him: “Tell me if I commit faults in speaking.” Yaḥyā remained silent, but as al-Ḥajjāj insisted on having an answer, he at length replied: “O Emir, since you ask me, I must say that you exalt what should be depressed, and depress what should be exalted.” This has the grammatical meaning: You put in the nominative (rafʿ) what should be in the accusative (naṣb), and vice versâ; but it is, at the same time an epigrammatical stricture on al-Ḥajjāj’s arbitrary rulership, which, it is said, won for Yaḥyā the appointment as Qāẓī in Marw, that is to say, a honorary banishment from the former’s court.
According to other sources, Yaḥyā had acquired his knowledge of grammar from Abū Aswad ad-Duʾilī. It is related that, when Abū Aswad drew up the chapter on the agent and patient (fāʿil, subject, and mafʿūl, object of the verb), a man of the tribe of Lais̤ made some additions to it, and that Abū Aswad, having found on examination that there existed, in the language of the desert Arabs, some expressions which could not be made to enter into that section, he stopped short and abandoned the work. Ibn K͟hallikān thinks it possible that this person was Yaḥyā ibn Yaʿmar, who, having contracted an alliance by oath with the tribe of Lais̤, was considered as one of its members. But it is equally possible that the before-mentioned Naṣr ibn ʿĀṣim, whose patronymic was al-Lais̤ī, may have been that man, and this supposition would enable us to bring the different statements which we have quoted into some harmony. To Abū Aswad the honour can scarcely be contested of having invented the simple vowel-points or nuqat̤. Naṣr ibn ʿĀṣim, walking in his track, may have added the double points to designate the Tanwīn. Lastly, Yaḥyā would have completed the system by devising the iʿjām, or diacritical signs of the consonants, and introduced it to a fuller extent into the writing of the Qurʾān, in which task he may have been assisted by al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī, one of the most learned and accomplished Qurʾān-readers amongst the Tābiʿūn.