ٱللَّهُ ٱلَّذِى خَلَقَ ٱلسَّمَٰوَٰتِ وَٱلْأَرْضَ وَمَا بَيْنَهُمَا فِى سِتَّةِ أَيَّامٍ ثُمَّ ٱسْتَوَىٰ عَلَى ٱلْعَرْشِ مَا لَكُم مِّن دُونِهِۦ مِن وَلِىٍّ وَلَا شَفِيعٍ أَفَلَا تَتَذَكَّرُونَ · يُدَبِّرُ ٱلْأَمْرَ مِنَ ٱلسَّمَآءِ إِلَى ٱلْأَرْضِ ثُمَّ يَعْرُجُ إِلَيْهِ فِى يَوْمٍ كَانَ مِقْدَارُهُۥٓ أَلْفَ سَنَةٍ مِّمَّا تَعُدُّونَ
Allāhu'lladhī khalaqa'l-samāwāti wa'l-arḍa wa mā baynahumā fī sittati ayyāmin thumma'stawā ʿala'l-ʿarsh, mā lakum min dūnihī min waliyyin wa lā shafīʿ, a-fa-lā tatadhakkarūn · Yudabbiru'l-amra mina'l-samāʾi ila'l-arḍi thumma yaʿruju ilayhi fī yawmin kāna miqdāruhū alfa sanatin mimmā taʿuddūn
"It is God who created the heavens, the earth and what is between them in six days, then established Himself upon the Throne. You have, apart from Him, neither a friend nor an intercessor. Will you still not reflect? He directs the affair from the sky down to the earth; then the affair ascends to Him in a day whose measure is a thousand years of what you count."
This verse is one of those most often made the subject of a claim about physics in the modern period. Per the method (Method) I draw the line at the outset:
From here I do not go to the theory of relativity, to the relativity of time, to the speed of light, or to any modern proposition of physics. I draw no such connection, and I do not support those that have been drawn.
The ground was written in detail in al-Maʿārij, and I rely on that treatment. It was summarised in three items: (1) the verse states not a proposition of physics but a measure; (2) the principle recorded in the method (Method) is that modern information is not to be forced onto a verse; (3) when such a connection is drawn, the truth of the text is made to hang on the fate of the connection drawn.
What the verse says is enough in itself, and that much I record: man's measure of time and the measure of time of this working are not the same. The verse says this itself: mimmā taʿuddūn — "of what you count". That is, the sentence keeps expressly on record by whose reckoning the measure is taken.
The root was analysed in detail in Muḥammad 47/24 on the occasion of tadabbur. I rely on that treatment and do not repeat it here.
The core recorded there was this: the concrete sense of the root is "the back, the rear of a thing" (dubur). And the family of meanings comes out of this picture: to look at the back of an affair, that is, to think of its end.
| Pattern | Place | Who does it | What |
|---|---|---|---|
| تَدَبُّر — Form V | Muḥammad 47/24 | Man | To think through the back of the text, to carry it to its end |
| تَدْبِير — Form II | al-Sajda 32/5 | God | To order the affair with an eye to its end |
Form V is reflexive: work a person does upon himself. Form II, on the other hand, is transitive: work done upon an object. Yudabbiru'l-amra — "He orders the affair".
The same root, in two forms, with two different subjects. I record this as my own reading: when the two verses are read together, the act asked of man and the act ascribed to God share the same picture — looking to the back, to the end. The difference lies in the one carrying a text to its end and the other an order. This is an observation about the language; I set up no theological equation.
ٱلْأَمْر — the word means both affair/event and command/order, and in the classical works of exegesis its sense here is dwelt on:
| Reading | What al-amr is |
|---|---|
| 1 | Command — the ruling/revelation that comes down from the sky and returns |
| 2 | Affair, event — the running order of the universe |
Both readings are transmitted; I do not impose a preference. Both senses of the word are live in Arabic, and the word order of the sentence is open to either.
The root was analysed in detail in al-Maʿārij on the occasion of that sūra's name: to ascend, to climb step by step along a sloping way. Miʿrāj — a ladder; and the second branch the lexicographers record is lameness (aʿraj), where the link lies in the picture of "a movement that does not go straight, that slopes". I do not repeat it here.
| Place | Who or what ascends | Verb |
|---|---|---|
| al-Maʿārij 70/4 | The angels and the Spirit | Taʿruju'l-malāʾikatu wa'l-rūḥ |
| al-Sajda 32/5 | Al-Amr — the affair / the command | Thumma yaʿruju ilayh |
In al-Maʿārij what ascends is beings; in al-Sajda what ascends is the affair. I record this as an observation: the sentence of al-Sajda sets up a cycle — mina'l-samāʾi ila'l-arḍ (from the sky to the earth) … thumma yaʿruju ilayh (then it ascends to Him). Descent and ascent in a single sentence, the same road in two directions.
And the note recorded in al-Maʿārij holds here too: the expression ilayhi (to Him) states no place; what is reached is not a position but the centre of the command and the ruling. The common principle is al-Shūrā 42/11: "There is nothing like Him."
This comparison was already made and tabulated in al-Maʿārij 70/4. I carry that table over here, because the question belongs in this verse's own place:
| Verse | Expression | Context |
|---|---|---|
| al-Sajda 32/5 | "…in a day whose measure is a thousand years of what you count" | The command's going down and coming back |
| al-Ḥajj 22/47 | "A day with your Lord is like a thousand years of what you count" | The demand that the punishment be hastened |
| al-Maʿārij 70/4 | "…in a day whose measure is fifty thousand years" | The ascent of the angels |
The principal explanations of the classical exegetes about these three — as transmitted in al-Maʿārij:
| Explanation | How it is put |
|---|---|
| Different days | The "day" in al-Sajda and the "day" in al-Maʿārij are not the same day: one speaks of the down-and-up cycle of the command, the other of the day of resurrection. A different event, a different measure |
| Different stations of the same day | The day of resurrection has stages called mawqif; the measure of each stage is separate. The whole must not be confused with the part |
| Different distances of ascent | The level from which the ascent sets out, and so the distance, differ |
| The number states weight, not duration | In Arabic large numbers most often state magnitude rather than an exact count |
I do not impose a preference. In comparing the two measures, the one verifiable difference that belongs here is this, and I record it: in al-Sajda what the measure is tied to is the affair that goes down and comes up, in al-Maʿārij the beings that ascend, in al-Ḥajj the punishment that is held back. Three verses speak of three separate events; two different numbers are not given for the same event. This is an observation that supports the first explanation from within the text — but it is not a preference, because the other explanations are not contrary to the wording either.
On this construct I enter a note per the method (Method) and do not open the discussion.
| Position | What it says |
|---|---|
| Tafwīḍ | The wording is accepted as it stands and the manner is referred to God; the question "how" is not asked |
| Taʾwīl | The wording is interpreted in the sense of sovereignty being established / the affair being taken in hand |
Both positions are transmitted; I do not impose a preference. The same distinction was treated in al-Fajr (wa jāʾa rabbuk) and was mentioned again in al-Maʿārij. I rely on that treatment. The common principle is again al-Shūrā 42/11.
And what is to be recorded in the word order is this: immediately after the sentence thumma'stawā ʿala'l-ʿarsh comes the fifth verse: yudabbiru'l-amr. That is, the sentence continues not with a halt but with a directing. I record this as an observation about the word order: the verse does not recount creation as a finished work and leave it at that; it goes on to name an ordering that continues. The same line was recorded in Fāṭir 35/3 — there too creating was asked about together with an ongoing providing of sustenance.
The place of the sentence is worth recording. Immediately after the creation of the universe has been recounted, the address turns to the hearer, and what is said is the absence of an intermediary.
Two words are chosen: walī (a friend, one who takes on your affair) and shafīʿ (one who intercedes). I record this as an observation: both are words of relation. That is, what is rejected is not a being but a form of connection.
And the sūra will come back to this word: in the thirteenth verse it will be said that the ruling has already been given, and in the twenty-ninth that faith which does not come in time will be of no use. Being without an intermediary is a line carried through to the end of the sūra.