قَالُوا۟ مَآ أَنتُمْ إِلَّا بَشَرٌ مِّثْلُنَا وَمَآ أَنزَلَ ٱلرَّحْمَٰنُ مِن شَىْءٍ إِنْ أَنتُمْ إِلَّا تَكْذِبُونَ · قَالُوا۟ رَبُّنَا يَعْلَمُ إِنَّآ إِلَيْكُمْ لَمُرْسَلُونَ · وَمَا عَلَيْنَآ إِلَّا ٱلْبَلَٰغُ ٱلْمُبِينُ
Qālū mā antum illā basharun mithlunā wa mā anzala'r-Raḥmānu min shayʾin in antum illā takdhibūn · Qālū rabbunā yaʿlamu innā ilaykum la-mursalūn · Wa mā ʿalaynā illa'l-balāghu'l-mubīn
"They said: 'You are only human beings like ourselves; the Merciful has sent down nothing. You are doing nothing but lying.' The messengers said: 'Our Lord knows that we are indeed messengers sent to you. Nothing lies upon us but the plain delivery of the message.'"
| Step | Expression | Kind of objection |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mā antum illā basharun mithlunā | About the person — the nature of the messengers |
| 2 | Wa mā anzala'r-Raḥmānu min shayʾ | About the principle — the sending down itself |
| 3 | In antum illā takdhibūn | A verdict — the charge of lying |
A point of word order: all three sentences are in the pattern of restriction (ḥaṣr) — mā … illā, mā … min, in … illā. All three sentences, that is, say "only"; none of them leaves a possibility open.
I record this as my own reading, and its ground is this threefold pattern: the objection asks no question. It builds three closed sentences. And precisely for that reason the argument does not grow in what follows — it turns into a threat (verse 18).
This objection is recorded many times in the Qurʾān, and the way it is recorded in Yāsīn is worth recording: the messengers do not reject it.
The answer given to the same matter at Fuṣṣilat 41/6 was treated there: qul innamā anā basharun mithlukum yūḥā ilayya — "I too am only a human being like you; it is revealed to me." There, that is, the premise of the objection is accepted and the ground is shifted.
The same move is made in Yāsīn, but more briefly: the messengers do not claim not to be human. The only thing they say is that they have been charged — innā ilaykum la-mursalūn.
| Place | Objection | Answer |
|---|---|---|
| Fuṣṣilat 41/6 | (The same objection, implicitly) | Innamā anā basharun mithlukum — acceptance, then yūḥā ilayya |
| Yāsīn 36/15-16 | Mā antum illā basharun mithlunā | Silence at this point, then innā ilaykum la-mursalūn |
My own reading: both texts take the argument out of the messenger's kind and carry it over to his charge. For the objection in fact states not a proof but an expectation: a messenger ought to have been of another kind. And an expectation has no evidential value — the very distinction set up for "astonishment" in Qāf at 50/2 is at work here.
A point of word order, and it matters: the messengers do not swear. They say rabbunā yaʿlamu — "our Lord knows".
The sentence does the work of an oath but is not one: it produces a witness. And the witness produced is the witness the other side does not accept.
I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the structure of the sentence: the messengers do not produce a proof. The other side said "you are lying"; the messengers do not say "here is the evidence", they say who it is that knows. And immediately afterwards they draw the boundary of their responsibility.
ب-ل-غ — the root: a thing's arriving at the place it is going to. Bulūgh — maturity (the body's arriving at the point it is going to); balāgha — a word's arriving fully at its aim. Balāgh — the act of delivery itself.
The work of the word is worth recording: balāgh is the delivering of the word, not the getting of it accepted. Where the act ends is the word's arrival at the one addressed.
ٱلْمُبِين — not one of the sūra's six occurrences of mubīn; here it comes definite, al-mubīn, and it is an attribute of balāgh. The delivery, that is, must also be plain: a delivery that cannot be understood does not count as delivery.
I record this as an observation: the sentence limits the responsibility from two sides at once. From above: they are not responsible for the outcome. From below: the delivery is required to be plain. The responsibility is neither widened nor lifted.