al-Nūr 24:26

Al-khabīthātu li'l-khabīthīna wa'l-khabīthūna li'l-khabīthāt, wa'l-ṭayyibātu li'l-ṭayyibīna wa'l-ṭayyibūna li'l-ṭayyibāt, ulāʾika mubarraʾūna mimmā yaqūlūn, lahum maghfiratun wa rizqun karīm

"The corrupt are for the corrupt, and the corrupt for the corrupt; the good are for the good, and the good for the good. Those are free of what is said. For them there is forgiveness and a generous provision."

This verse is one of the verses in the Qurʾān most disputed as to how it is to be understood, and the cause of the disagreement is that what the subjects of the sentence are is not stated.

Al-khabīthāt and al-ṭayyibāt — feminine plural adjectives. But what they are adjectives of is not said. In Arabic this pattern can answer to persons, to words, or to acts.

Three main readings are transmitted in the classical commentaries:

No preference is imposed in this section, and none is binding.

But a note of method needs to be entered, and it is a direct requirement of the method (Method): no ruling about persons can be drawn from this verse.

The reason lies within the verse and can be shown from the arrangement:

• The second half of the verse itself states the conclusion to be drawn from the first: ulāʾika mubarraʾūna mimmā yaqūlūn — "they are free of what is said." The point the sentence arrives at, that is, is not the classifying of anyone; it is the announcing of the invalidity of something that has been said.
• And the verse comes at the end of a whole section (11-26). The subject of that section, from beginning to end, is what it is to lay down a ruling about people without evidence.

To use the verse in order to divide people into two groups, then, is the very thing the section it stands in forbids.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the second half of the verse.

And there is one further practical consequence: to establish which group a person falls into, the condition of proof the sūra itself has laid down (four witnesses, 24/4 and 24/13) is required. The verse, that is, cannot be read apart from the sūra's own procedure.

This root is analysed here for the first time in this commentary.

The sense the lexicographers record: a thing's being corrupt, foul, useless in its substance. Khubth — badness, filth. Khabath — the dross that rises to the top when a metal is melted, the part that is thrown away.

And this last usage gives the concrete picture of the root: the scum that rises to the surface when gold or silver is melted, and is discarded, is called khabath.

At the centre of the word, then, there is an idea of separating out: the part that separates under fire and is thrown away.

I record this as an observation about the root and add this: this picture in the word agrees with the structure of the verse's sentence. The verse describes a separation — but does not say how the separation comes about.

This root was analysed at al-Baqara, 2/168; I rely on that treatment. The note there: what is pleasant, clean, good; the word answers both to what is pleasant to the senses and to what is clean in its substance.

The opposition of the two roots:

That both roots are used in the same fields is one of the reasons for the indefiniteness in the verse. The words do not, by themselves, settle what they are adjectives of.

Root: ب-ر-أ. Its concrete sense is to part from a thing, to slip free of it, to be delivered. Barāʾa — a slipping free of an obligation. Bāriʾ — the Maker (who separates a thing out of nothing); this name was taken up at al-Ḥashr, 59/24. Bariʾa mina'l-maraḍ — he recovered from the illness.

The form is worth noting: mubarraʾūn — the passive participle of Form II.

It is not said "they cleared themselves". It is said "they have been held clear". The agent is not named, but it is understood from the sentence's context.

And this is the answer given to the matter of buhtān in the sixteenth verse, and I record it as my own reading:

It was recorded there: the one slandered cannot defend himself, because a thing that did not happen leaves no trace. The twenty-sixth verse takes that defence out of the man's hands and puts it elsewhere: the passive voice.

Acquittal, that is, comes not by being proved but by being announced.

The verse names in a single word the thing they are held clear of: mā yaqūlūn — "what they say".

At the end of the section, that is, the whole matter is reduced to one word: speech.

And this forms a ring with the section's opening:

The same root (ق-و-ل) three times in the section, and the section closes with it.

I record this as an observation about the word order.

The section closes with two promises: maghfira and rizqun karīm.

كَرِيم — root ك-ر-م: precious, generous, noble. The word was analysed at al-Ḥujurāt, 49/13 (akramakum).

And the placing of the word rizq here is worth noting. The subject of the section was a matter of standing; at its close a word of material favour comes. In the classical commentaries it is recorded that the attribute karīm qualifies the kind of the provision: provision given without being kept waiting for, without reproach, without deficiency.