Tafsir LabMethodGitHubTürkçe

al-Anbiyāʾ 21:26-29

The Qurʾān · Sūra 21: al-Anbiyāʾ · verses 26-29

This commentary was written by Claude (Anthropic); it carries no religious authority and should be checked against the classical sources.

21/26-29

وَقَالُوا۟ ٱتَّخَذَ ٱلرَّحْمَٰنُ وَلَدًا سُبْحَٰنَهُۥ بَلْ عِبَادٌ مُّكْرَمُونَ · لَا يَسْبِقُونَهُۥ بِٱلْقَوْلِ وَهُم بِأَمْرِهِۦ يَعْمَلُونَ · يَعْلَمُ مَا بَيْنَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَمَا خَلْفَهُمْ وَلَا يَشْفَعُونَ إِلَّا لِمَنِ ٱرْتَضَىٰ وَهُم مِّنْ خَشْيَتِهِۦ مُشْفِقُونَ · وَمَن يَقُلْ مِنْهُمْ إِنِّىٓ إِلَٰهٌ مِّن دُونِهِۦ فَذَٰلِكَ نَجْزِيهِ جَهَنَّمَ كَذَٰلِكَ نَجْزِى ٱلظَّٰلِمِينَ

Wa qālu'ttakhadha'r-Raḥmānu waladan subḥānahu bal ʿibādun mukramūn · Lā yasbiqūnahu bi'l-qawli wa hum bi-amrihi yaʿmalūn · Yaʿlamu mā bayna aydīhim wa mā khalfahum wa lā yashfaʿūna illā li-mani'rtaḍā wa hum min khashyatihi mushfiqūn · Wa man yaqul minhum innī ilāhun min dūnihi fa-dhālika najzīhi jahannam, kadhālika najzi'ẓ-ẓālimīn

"They said: 'The Merciful has taken a child!' Glory be to Him. No — they are honoured servants. · They do not go before Him in speech; they act by His command. · He knows what is before them and what is behind them, and they do not intercede except for one with whom He is pleased, and they tremble in awe of Him. · Whoever of them says 'I am a god besides Him' — him We recompense with Hell. Thus do We recompense the wrongdoers."

بَلْ عِبَادٌ مُّكْرَمُونَ — the changing of the word

And the technique of the answer must be recorded: the claim says walad (child); the answer says ʿibād (servants).

The two words are not two names for the same relation — they are of different kinds:

What is claimedWhat is put in the answerThe difference
وَلَد — a childعِبَاد — servantsServitude in place of descent
Requires being of the same kindRequires a difference of kind

And the attribute mukramūn is added: "honoured". That is, the answer does not lower the valueit changes the source of the value. Honour is bestowed; descent is shared.

I record this as my own reading, its ground being the kind of the two words.

This debate was treated in detail at al-Ṣāffāt on 37/149-160 (the question of daughters and sons, and ʿibādu'llāhi'l-mukhlaṣīn). I rely on that treatment and do not repeat it here.

ٱلرَّحْمَٰن — and the choice of the name is worth recording. The same technique was recorded at al-Shuʿarāʾ on 26/5: al-Raḥmān is set over against the turning away. So it is here too: the claim is directed at the widest name of mercy.

And the name occurs four times in the sūra: 26, 36, 42, 112. The last verse of the sūra also ends with this name: wa rabbuna'r-Raḥmānu'l-mustaʿān. This is a countable fact.

لَا يَسْبِقُونَهُۥ بِٱلْقَوْلِ — the order of speaking

Yasbiqūnahu bi'l-qawl — "they do not go before Him in speech". The root س-ب-ق: to get ahead in a race.

And a point of word order: the boundary is set not by way of obedience but by way of speech. First not speaking, then acting by command. That is, the description puts the mouth on record before conduct.

I record this as an observation about the structure.

وَلَا يَشْفَعُونَ إِلَّا لِمَنِ ٱرْتَضَىٰ

Intercession is bound to a condition of leave. The same note was treated at al-Najm on 53/26: wa kam min malakin fi's-samāwāti lā tughnī shafāʿatuhum shayʾan illā min baʿdi an yaʾdhana'llāhu li-man yashāʾu wa yarḍā. I rely on that treatment.

The element the two verses share is in the root ر-ض-و: in al-Najm yarḍā, here irtaḍā (Form VIII). That is, the condition is sought not in the intercessor but in the one interceded for. This is a note about word order.

وَهُم مِّنْ خَشْيَتِهِۦ مُشْفِقُونَand two words for fear stand together:

WordRootWhat it conveys
خَشْيَةخ-ش-يThe fear of reverence felt through knowing the greatness
مُشْفِقش-ف-قA trembling warinessshafaq, the thinned redness between day and night

Shafaq, as the lexicographers record, is the thin and transitional; ishfāq takes from this the sense "to fear that a thing will thin out and snap". That is, the second word, unlike the first, carries a picture of thinness.

And the word occurs twice in the sūra: 28 (of the angels) and 49 (wa hum mina's-sāʿati mushfiqūn — of those who guard themselves). The same attribute, two different companies. It is a repetition that can be verified within the sūra.

21/29 — the hypothetical force of the condition

The verse is a conditional sentence: wa man yaqul minhum… — "whoever of them says". The particle of condition is man and the verb is in the jussive.

And what is to be recorded is this: a conditional sentence does not report that the event has occurred. That is, the verse does not say that any of the angels said this; it says that the rule covers everyone.

I record this as an observation about the structure. And the scope of the ruling is widened by the last sentence: kadhālika najzi'ẓ-ẓālimīnthe punishment is attached not to a name but to an attribute.


The whole of Sūrat al-Anbiyāʾ