Likewise, they say ajja of a calf when it lows; if it keeps lowing, they say aj‘aja. Similarly, thajja denotes pouring water; if this is repeated, they say thajthaja. The point is that, because the whisperer repeats his whispering and persists in it, the verb used is waswasa.
Section
With this understood, grammarians have differed over the word waswās: is it an adjective or a verbal noun? There are two views. We shall present the argument for each, then explain which is correct, with Allah’s help and grace.
Those who hold that it is a verbal noun argue that its verb follows the fa‘lala pattern, whose adjective can only take the mufa‘lil pattern, as in mudahrij, musarhif, mubaytir, and musaytir. The same principle applies to other verbal forms: their adjectives take the corresponding mu- form, as in muqatti‘, mukhrij, and the like. If waswās were an adjective, the form would therefore be muwaswis. Do you not see that the active participle of zalzala is muzalzil, not zalzāl? Likewise, that of dakdaka is mudakdik. This rule is consistent. Thus, waswās is a verbal noun used adjectivally for emphasis. Alternatively, an omitted governing noun may be understood, giving the sense: “one possessed of whispering.”
They say that further evidence is found in the poet’s words:
“You hear the whispering of the jewelry upon her.”
Here, waswās is a verbal noun with precisely the same meaning as waswasa.
Those who hold the other view say: The evidence that it is an adjective is that fa‘lala is of two kinds.
The first is the sound type without reduplication, as in dahraja, sarhafa, and baytara. Its verbal noun regularly follows the fa‘lala pattern, as in dahraja, sarhafa, and baytara, or fi‘lān—with i as the first vowel—as in sirhāf and dihrāj. Its adjective follows the mufa‘lil pattern, as in mudahrij and mubaytir.
The second is fa‘‘ala, the reduplicated two-consonant type, as in zalzala, dakdaka, and waswasa. This is a derivative of fa‘lala without reduplication, since the basic form is free of reduplication. The verbal noun of