al-Ṣāffāt 37:6-10

Innā zayyanna's-samāʾa'd-dunyā bi-zīnatini'l-kawākib · Wa ḥifẓan min kulli shayṭānin mārid · Lā yassammaʿūna ila'l-malaʾi'l-aʿlā wa yuqdhafūna min kulli jānib · Duḥūrā, wa lahum ʿadhābun wāṣib · Illā man khaṭifa'l-khaṭfata fa-atbaʿahu shihābun thāqib

"We have adorned the nearest sky with an adornment, the stars; and guarded it against every rebellious satan. They cannot give ear to the highest assembly; they are pelted from every side, driven off, and theirs is a lasting punishment. Except one who snatches a fragment — a piercing flame pursues him."

This subject was treated in detail in the section on al-Jinn 72/8-9, and these verses (37/6-10) were already cited there. I do not repeat the findings; here I write only what is peculiar to al-Ṣāffāt.

But the note of limitation set out there must be repeated here in bold as well, because these verses are among the most strained passages of the modern period:

The verse describes no heavenly body. It recounts no physical event. It gives no astronomical information.

That road is not taken in this commentary. No matching will be made with notions such as meteorites, meteors or cosmic radiation. As was written in the section on al-Jinn: this group of verses is part not of a lesson in cosmology but of a dispute about a source. One of the accusations levelled at the Prophet in Mecca was that what he said came from a jinn; these passages are the answer to that accusation.

Sūrat al-Jinn recounted the same scene from the mouths of the jinn — "we sought the sky and found it filled". Al-Ṣāffāt recounts the same scene from outside and puts it in an order:

And the first two steps in the order are worth noting: the adornment first, the guarding after. Two different pieces of work are laid upon the same thing.

Root ز-ي-ن: to adorn, to make appear beautiful. The root was treated at al-Mulk 67/5 (wa laqad zayyanna's-samāʾa'd-dunyā bi-maṣābīḥ) and at Qāf 50/6. I do not repeat it.

al-samāʾa'd-dunyā — "the nearest sky". The root د-ن-و and the sense of the word dunyā as "what is near" were analysed in detail at al-Mulk 67/5. I rely on that treatment. The note there holds here too: the word is not the name of something bad but the name of what is near.

كَوَاكِب — the plural of kawkab: a star, a heavenly body. In al-Mulk, in the same place, maṣābīḥ (lamps) was said; here, kawākib. The same sky is named with two different words — one looking to the function (what gives light), one to the body.

A variant reading: the readings bi-zīnatini'l-kawākib (with nunation, then an appositive) and bi-zīnati'l-kawākib (in a genitive construct) are transmitted. The difference of sense is not marked: in the first, "with an adornment — that is, the stars"; in the second, "with the adornment of the stars". I give no reciter's name.

Root ح-ف-ظ: to guard, to preserve. The root was treated in Qāf (kitābun ḥafīẓ, awwābin ḥafīẓ).

A point of word order: ḥifẓan is in the accusative, and the grammarians count it either as an object of cause (mafʿūl li-ajlih) or as a cognate accusative attached to an elided verb: "…and We guarded, with a guarding".

But the real point is that the word has been set beside zīna. Two accusatives are attached to the same sentence: an adornment and a guarding.

I record this as my own reading: the same thing is seen as two different things from two sides. To one who looks from below, an adornment; to one who tries to climb, an obstacle. The text sets up this distinction itself — by attaching two accusatives to a single sentence.

مَارِد — root م-ر-د. The lexicographers give its concrete sense thus: a thing's having no down, leaf or bark left upon it; becoming bare. Amrad — a youth whose beard has not come; shajaratun mardāʾ — a tree without leaves; ṣarḥun mumarrad — a smooth, plastered tower (in the Qurʾān: al-Naml 27/44 — ṣarḥun mumarradun min qawārīr).

From this a second sense arises: one on whom no trace of good is left, stripped bare in rebellion. Marada — he overstepped the bound, he went far in disobedience.

The Qurʾān uses the same root of the hypocrites as well: wa min ahli'l-madīnati maradū ʿala'n-nifāq (al-Tawba 9/101) — "they have gone far in hypocrisy".

A mārid, then, does not mean "bad"; it means "one on whom there is no longer any hold". This is the picture of the word.

Root س-م-ع. The verb here is the assimilated form of the تَسَمَّعَ (Form V) pattern: yatasammaʿūn → yassammaʿūn. Form V announces "to listen with one's own effort, straining the ear" — not ordinary hearing, that is, but listening in which effort is spent.

A variant reading and the sense:

There is a difference of sense, and it is worth noting: the first negates the attempt itself, the second the outcome. Both are transmitted; I give no reciter's name and impose no preference.

ila'l-malaʾi'l-aʿlā — "to the highest assembly". The root مَلَأ is م-ل-أ (to fill): the company of leading men who fill an assembly. The Qurʾān uses the word of Pharaoh's circle too (malaʾi firʿawn). This construct occurs in only a few places in the Qurʾān, and what it means is not plainly described. The widespread explanation is that it is the assembly of angels above. I issue no firm ruling; the verse does not describe it.

And note the preposition: ilā. Not "they do not listen to it" but "they cannot give ear toward it". Ilā announces a direction. What is blocked, then, is not hearing but turning toward.

قَذَفَ — root ق-ذ-ف: to hurl something from a distance, to throw. The Qurʾān uses the same root of Moses' being placed in a chest and cast into the water (Ṭāhā 20/39), and of casting a slander as well (qadhf in Sūrat al-Nūr).

The verb is passive: yuqdhafūn — they are pelted. The agent is not named.

min kulli jānib — "from every side". Not one door, that is, has been closed; the whole perimeter has been closed.

دُحُورًا — root د-ح-ر: to push away, to drive off. In the Qurʾān it occurs in the form madḥūr (driven off) (al-Aʿrāf 7/18; al-Isrāʾ 17/18).

Word order: duḥūran is in the accusative and the grammarians count it either as an object of cause ("they are pelted so as to be driven off") or as the cognate accusative of an elided verb. Both are transmitted; it does not markedly change the sense.

وَاصِب — root و-ص-ب. The lexicographers record two branches of sense:

• Continuance: waṣaba — it continued, it did not break off. In the Qurʾān: wa lahu'd-dīnu wāṣibā (al-Naḥl 16/52) — "and religion is His lastingly".
• Weariness / exhaustion: waṣab — sickness, an ache that wears one out.

Most of the lexicographers bring the first sense forward here; the second is also transmitted. If the two senses are joined: unbroken and wearying.

The word occurs in only two places in the Qurʾān (here and al-Naḥl 16/52), and in both occurrences the same attribute is given to two opposite things: the one the lastingness of religion, the other the lastingness of the punishment. This is a textual datum.

The word shihāb was analysed at al-Jinn 72/8 — root ش-ه-ب: the brightness of fire, a grizzled colour; shihāb = a blazing piece of fire, an ember. The most important note there must be repeated: the word is not the name of a heavenly body; it means "flame".

ثَاقِب — root ث-ق-ب: to pierce. Thiqāb — a hole; mithqab — a drill. From the same root the Qurʾān has al-najmu'th-thāqib (al-Ṭāriq 86/3), treated in al-Ṭāriq.

The lexicographers give two senses for thāqib:

In this context both are at work: a flame that both pierces the darkness and burns.

There is a balance worth noting, and it is read off the text:

I record this as my own reading: the one is slippery, the other piercing. The two attributes are set against one another in the same scene. This is an observation about word choice; I do not claim that the text sets up a deliberate contrast.

خَطِفَ — root خ-ط-ف: to snatch a thing away suddenly. In the Qurʾān: yakādu'l-barqu yakhṭafu abṣārahum (al-Baqara 2/20) — "the lightning almost snatches away their sight".

The object is definite: al-khaṭfa — "that snatching". The definiteness here indicates the kind: a known, described act of snatching.

And a point of word order must be recorded: the sentence comes with illā — the absolute obstacle in the eighth verse, that is, is not fully absolute. A gap is left, but immediately behind the gap comes the pursuit: fa-atbaʿahu — with fāʾ, without interval.

The scene, then, is this: the snatching is possible, the escape is not. This says the same thing as the expression shihāban raṣadā ("a watching flame") in Sūrat al-Jinn — there waiting, here pursuing.

The two sūras show the same scene from two different moments.

What is the work of these five verses in the sūra? In the fourth verse it had been said "your God is one". The sixth verse gives its first proof: the sky is built by a single ordering and guarded by a single management.

And there is a further link: the second of the attributes sworn by in the first three verses was al-zājirāt (those who drive). Verses six to ten are a scene of driving: they are pelted, driven off, pursued. The second word of the oath turns into a scene five verses later. This is a textual observation; it is not a ruling about who is sworn by.

The "measure of knowledge" recorded in the section on al-Jinn holds here too and I do not repeat it. I add only one thing here:

The two words the sixth and seventh verses set side by side — zīna and ḥifẓ — describe a bearing: the same thing is beauty to one and a limit to another. The limit itself is not ugly. That an order looks like an adornment from outside and like a wall when one presses against it from within is something with a counterpart in everyday life too.