ʻAmr

If every part is a knower, then there are knowing souls, like the soul of Zayd and ʻAmr and Khālid — whereas our discourse is of a single knower and a single knowing of the known.

And the beasts, since ignorance encompasses them and poverty pervades them, you see committing ugly deeds — such as copulating without covering, and eating the property of Zayd and ʻAmr.

and in both states it admits of multiplicity according to individuals, as with the form of Zayd and of ʻAmr and of Bakr.

And there is no doubt that when it is said that Zayd is qualified by ʻAmr's attributes, what is meant thereby is not his being qualified by those attributes together with the determinations which those attributes acquire from ʻAmr's essence — such as their individuation by reason of their subsisting in him, and the other determinations consequent upon that reality's subsisting in ʻAmr — but rather …

And they say that the name of al-Mukhabbal's satan (1) is ʻAmr, and the name of al-Aʻshā's satan is Misḥal (2), and likewise the name of al-Farazdaq's satan is ʻAmr.

The jinnī of al-Farazdaq was no pattern to follow — and grant that there was among them the like of al-Mukhabbal's stallion There is not among the concealed ones the like of ʻAmr and his shaykh — nor after ʻAmr any poet like Misḥal