وَمَآ أَمْوَٰلُكُمْ وَلَآ أَوْلَٰدُكُم بِٱلَّتِى تُقَرِّبُكُمْ عِندَنَا زُلْفَىٰٓ إِلَّا مَنْ ءَامَنَ وَعَمِلَ صَٰلِحًا فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ لَهُمْ جَزَآءُ ٱلضِّعْفِ بِمَا عَمِلُوا۟ وَهُمْ فِى ٱلْغُرُفَٰتِ ءَامِنُونَ
Wa mā amwālukum wa lā awlādukum bi'llatī tuqarribukum ʿindanā zulfā, illā man āmana wa ʿamila ṣāliḥan fa-ulāʾika lahum jazāʾu'ḍ-ḍiʿfi bimā ʿamilū wa hum fi'l-ghurufāti āminūn
"It is not your wealth nor your children that will bring you near to Us. Only the one who believes and does righteous deeds: for such there is a recompense many times over for what they did, and they are secure in the high chambers."
| People | What they had | What happened |
|---|---|---|
| The house of David and Solomon | Iron, copper, wind, buildings | They were commanded to give thanks (13) |
| Sabaʾ | Two gardens, safe roads | They turned away (16) |
| The mutrafs | Amwāl and awlād (35) | They took this for a proof |
And the thirty-seventh verse gives the measure of all three in a single sentence: what is in your hand does not bring you near.
I record this as my own reading, and its support is the structure of the sūra: the sūra had told of two peoples one after the other, and the same thing had been given to both — abundance. The difference lay not in what was given but in the stance taken towards it. The thirty-seventh verse names that difference.
And the word bi'llatī must be recorded: a singular feminine relative pronoun. Although two things are named (wealth and children), a singular relative has been used. The lexicographers explain this by taking the two as a single thing — that is, "what is owned". Another explanation is that the relative refers back to the plural al-amwāl (a broken plural, which is treated as feminine). Both explanations are transmitted; since they do not change the sense, I do not impose a preference.
The root was treated at al-Zumar 39/3 (mā naʿbuduhum illā li-yuqarribūnā ila'llāhi zulfā), where Qāf 50/31 and al-Wāqiʿa were relied on: to draw near, nearness. I do not repeat it here.
| al-Zumar 39/3 | Sabaʾ 34/37 | |
|---|---|---|
| Sentence | Mā naʿbuduhum illā li-yuqarribūnā ila'llāhi zulfā | Mā amwālukum … bi'llatī tuqarribukum ʿindanā zulfā |
| Who says it | Those who associate partners — a claim | The text itself — a ruling |
| What is taken to bring near | Intermediary beings | Wealth and children |
| Polarity of the sentence | Affirmative — they bring near | Negative — it does not bring near |
In both verses the same two words stand together: the verb ق-ر-ب and zulfā. And the sentence framed in al-Zumar as a claim comes in Sabaʾ in the form of a sentence that is rejected.
I record this as my own reading, and its support is the verbal overlap of the two verses: it was recorded at al-Zumar that the dispute is not over existence but over intermediaries. Sabaʾ carries the same dispute one step further: the intermediary is not only idols — wealth and children can be used as an intermediary too. To say "I have this, therefore my standing is good" is another form of leaning on an intermediary.
The lexicographers dwell on what the exception is made from, and this is a dispute about inflection:
| View | What the exception is from | Sense |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Disconnected (munqaṭiʿ) | "But the one who believes and does righteous deeds is another matter" — a fresh ruling |
| 2 | From an elided element | "What will bring you near is only faith and deeds" |
Both explanations are transmitted; I do not impose a preference. And both arrive at the same result: the criterion is not wealth but faith and deeds.
And what is striking is this, and I give it as an observation: the verse does not forbid wealth and children, nor count them evil. The only thing it says is that they do not bring near. The sentence, that is, is not a counsel of asceticism but a correction of the criterion.
جَزَآءُ ٱلضِّعْفِ — ḍiʿf: root ض-ع-ف, a fold, a multiple. The construction means "a recompense many times over". And the root of the word is the same as that of ustuḍʿifū (those made weak) in the thirty-first verse.
The two ends of one root: weakness and multiplication. The lexicographers record this relation: ḍiʿf is a thing's folding over on itself; what folds becomes double. And ḍaʿf (weakness) is strength's failure to fold over on itself. I give this as an observation about the language; I frame no ruling about the meaning.
ٱلْغُرُفَٰت — the plural of ghurfa; root غ-ر-ف: to scoop up in the hand, to take from above; and a room set high. The word is used for the upper-storey room of a house.
And the last word must be recorded: āminūn — in safety. The same word was used in the eighteenth verse for the roads of Sabaʾ: sīrū fīhā layāliya wa ayyāman āminīn.
| Verse | Where the amn is |
|---|---|
| 18 | On the roads — in this world, and it was lost |
| 37 | In the high chambers — as a recompense |
The same root at the two ends of the sūra: one a safety that slipped away, the other a safety that is given. This is an overlap that can be verified within the sūra, and I record it as my own reading.