al-Sajda 32:1-3

Alif-lām-mīm · Tanzīlu'l-kitābi lā rayba fīhi min rabbi'l-ʿālamīn · Am yaqūlūna'ftarāh, bal huwa'l-ḥaqqu min rabbika li-tundhira qawman mā atāhum min nadhīrin min qablika laʿallahum yahtadūn

"Alif-lām-mīm. The sending down of this Book — there is no doubt in it — is from the Lord of all the worlds. Or do they say, 'he has fabricated it'? No: it is the truth from your Lord, that you may warn a people to whom no warner came before you — that they may perhaps find the way."

The note on the disconnected letters has already been entered in this series: at length in al-Baqara 2/1, in summary in Qāf, and mentioned again in al-Jāthiya and al-Aḥqāf. I do not repeat it here.

Its summary was this: the meaning of these letters is not known with certainty; one group of scholars refers the meaning to God (tafwīḍ); among the views that seek an explanation, the one that finds the most support from within the text is the explanation that the letters, by pointing to the raw material of the Qurʾān, make the challenge meaningful. And, as was written there plainly: no numerical reckoning, no abjad, no counting of letters is carried out over these letters.

The only thing that belongs here is that the regularity recorded in Qāf holds here too: immediately after the group of letters there comes an expression that speaks of the Book — tanzīlu'l-kitāb. This is a verifiable fact and not a claim.

In Fuṣṣilat 41/2 and in al-Jāthiya 45/2 it was tabulated how this sentence changes from sūra to sūra. The occurrence here is added to that table:

The difference is worth recording and is verifiable: in the other five places the One who sends down is named by two attribute-names. Here, in place of the pair of attributes, a construct comes: min rabbi'l-ʿālamīn — from the Lord of all the worlds.

I record this as my own reading; its ground is the continuation of the third verse: the third verse says that those addressed are a people who had never received a warner before. That is, the address is built for a hearer meeting the Book for the first time. For such a hearer, to introduce the One who sends down by His scope rather than by His attributes — the Lord of all the worlds — fits the work of the sentence. This is an observation; I do not impose a preference.

Further, the transition between the construct rabbi'l-ʿālamīn and the min rabbika (your Lord) that comes immediately after must be recorded: in the second verse the widest relation (the worlds), in the third verse the narrowest relation (you). Two verses one after the other, moving forward by narrowing the scope.

The same construct was analysed in al-Baqara 2/2 (dhālika'l-kitābu lā rayba fīh), and the link in the word rayb between "doubt" and "the unease of doubt" was treated there. I do not repeat it here.

What belongs here is its place in the sentence. In al-Baqara the construct came in the flow of the sentence, as the predicate of the subject dhālika'l-kitāb. Here, on the other hand, it enters between the subject and the predicate:

Tanzīlu'l-kitābi — [lā rayba fīhi] — min rabbi'l-ʿālamīn

In Arabic a sentence that comes in like this is called a jumla muʿtariḍa (a parenthetical sentence): without severing the elements of the main sentence from one another, it enters a note in between.

I record this as an observation about the word order: the absence of doubt is not counted at the end as an attribute of the Book; it comes in the middle, before the statement of the source is complete. The sentence itself meets the objection without waiting to be finished.

Am as a particle here states a transition, not a question — the usage the lexicographers call am munqaṭiʿa: "or do they say…?" That is, the sentence is built as though it were changing addressee: a moment ago the source of the Book was stated; now the objection raised against that statement is being reported.

ٱفْتَرَىٰ — root ف-ر-ي. The concrete sense given by the lexicographers: to cut leather, to cut it out. Farā'l-jilda — he slit the hide, he cut it. And from here two branches divide: one to make, to cut out and sew (useful work), the other to fabricate, to cut out and set forth what does not exist.

Iftirāʾ is Form VIII and runs along the second branch only: to cut out and bring into being a thing that does not exist. The picture in the word is worth recording: the charge is not "he told a lie" but "he cut and shaped". That is, the other side is saying that the text was manufactured.

بَلْ هُوَ ٱلْحَقُّ — the answer comes with bal: the particle that cancels what precedes and puts something in its place. And what is put in its place is al-ḥaqq — definite (maʿrifa). In Arabic a predicate that comes definite conveys restriction (ḥaṣr): "it is the truth itself."

"That you may warn a people to whom no warner came before you."

More than one reading of this sentence is transmitted in the classical works of exegesis, and the disagreement must not be concealed:

Both readings are transmitted; I do not impose a preference.

And in Fāṭir 35/24 the other end of this question was treated: wa in min ummatin illā khalā fīhā nadhīr — "there is no community but a warner has come and gone among it." There the verb was in the perfect: khalā — "came and passed".

When the two verses are read together, the second reading (the interval) is seen to have a ground within the text: Fāṭir says that the warning reached everywhere in the past, while al-Sajda says that none came to this people before you. The distance between the two is time. I record this as an observation and do not turn it into a preference.

لَعَلَّهُمْ يَهْتَدُونَ — and the purpose clause ends with laʿalla, that is, with the pattern of hope: the outcome is not guaranteed.