al-Muʾminūn 23:75-76

wa law raḥimnāhum wa kashafnā mā bihim min ḍurrin la-lajjū fī ṭughyānihim yaʿmahūn · wa laqad akhadhnāhum bi'l-ʿadhābi fa-ma'stakānū li-rabbihim wa mā yataḍarraʿūn

"Were We to have mercy on them and lift the affliction that is upon them, they would persist in their transgression, wandering blindly. We seized them with the punishment, assuredly; and they did not bow to their Lord, nor do they entreat."

The word order must be recorded, and this is the most striking place in the two verses: the seventy-fifth verse tries the case of mercy, the seventy-sixth the case of punishment. In both cases the outcome is the same.

And the difference must be recorded: the seventy-fifth verse is hypothetical (law — a condition that did not occur); the seventy-sixth reports something that did happen (wa laqad).

I record this as my own reading, its ground being the setting of these two moods side by side: one tells an untried possibility, the other a tried fact. And the two come out at the same result. The verse, that is, shows that the bearing does not depend on outward circumstances.

The concrete sense of the root: to hold out in a matter and keep at it; and the mingling of sounds, a din. Lajja — he persisted; lujja — the deep middle of the sea (where the waves mingle together; at al-Naml 27/44, lujjatan); lajāj — obstinacy.

The root is worked out here for the first time in this series.

The link between the two branches of the root is worth recording, and I give this as an observation about the language: both the middle of the sea and obstinacy come from the same root. The lexicographers build the link by way of mingling and being sunk into. The word describes a person's sinking deeper into the state he is already in.

The root ط-غ-ي / ط-غ-و: to exceed the bound, to overflow. Ṭughyān — the overflowing of water (al-Ḥāqqa 69/11 — lammā ṭagha'l-māʾ; treated in al-Ḥāqqa). The root was treated at al-Nāziʿāt 79/17 and 79/37, and at al-ʿAlaq 96/6.

The root ع-م-ه: to flounder in bewilderment, not to know what to do. The lexicographers record a distinction between ʿamā (blindness of the eye) and ʿamah (bewilderment of discernment).

And the construction occurs regularly in the Qurʾān: al-Baqara 2/15 (wa yamudduhum fī ṭughyānihim yaʿmahūn), al-Anʿām 6/110, al-Aʿrāf 7/186, Yūnus 10/11.

And the link between al-Baqara 2/15 and this verse is worth recording: there the verb is yamudduhum (We extend), here la-lajjū (they would persist). That verse was treated in al-Baqara.

The lexicographers differ over which root the word comes from:

Both views are transmitted; I do not impose a preference. On both the sense is close: to submit, to be brought low.

And the root س-ك-ن occurred in the eighteenth verse of this sūra (fa-askannāhu fi'l-arḍ). If the first view is right, the same root is used twice in the sūra, once for water and once for a human being. I give this as an entry; since the disagreement over the root is unresolved, I draw no conclusion from it.

The root ض-ر-ع: to be brought low, to be weak and submissive. Ḍarʿ — the hanging of the udder; taḍarruʿ — Form V: to entreat by lowering oneself.

And the word order must be recorded, and this is the finest point of the verse: the two verbs come in two different tenses.

I record this as my own reading, its ground being this difference of mood: the verse reports first the reaction at that moment and then the ongoing state. The punishment has passed, that is, but the bearing has not stopped.

And the same line is treated at al-Anʿām 6/43 (fa-lawlā idh jāʾahum baʾsunā taḍarraʿū). In this commentary a similar word order was treated at al-Mulk 67/21 (bal lajjū fī ʿutuwwin wa nufūr) — there too the obstinacy came after an opportunity. I rely on that treatment.