Ṣād 38:71-74

Idh qāla rabbuka li'l-malāʾikati innī khāliqun basharan min ṭīn · Fa-idhā sawwaytuhū wa nafakhtu fīhi min rūḥī fa-qaʿū lahū sājidīn · Fa-sajada'l-malāʾikatu kulluhum ajmaʿūn · Illā Iblīs, istakbara wa kāna mina'l-kāfirīn

"When your Lord said to the angels: 'I am creating a man from clay. When I have shaped him and breathed into him of My spirit, fall down before him in prostration.' All the angels prostrated, every one of them — except Iblīs. He grew proud and was among the disbelievers."

This account was treated in detail in al-Baqara at 2/30-34. I rely on that and do not repeat it here.

A summary of what was treated in al-Baqara:

• That the prostration is not a prostration of worship is widely agreed; the one who gave the command is God, and so obedience or disobedience is directed to Him. "What Iblīs rejected was not Adam (Ādam) but the command."
• Istikbār is not being great but counting oneself great. Form X (istifʿāl) conveys seeking a thing or reckoning it so. "The word itself says that pride is not a reality but a supposition."
• Iblīs's being counted a disbeliever is not from a lack of knowledge: "disbelief is not a lack of knowledge but the covering of what is known… Iblīs knows and rejects nonetheless."
• Whether Iblīs is an angel: on the basis of al-Kahf 18/50 the majority of the exegetes say he is a jinn.

Now I pass to what is particular to Ṣād. And the difference is, verifiably, large.

The two sūras, that is, take hold of the same event from two different places.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the table above: al-Baqara tells the account by way of what man is (viceroy, the one who knows the names). Ṣād tells it by way of what Iblīs did — and the name of what he did is an error of reasoning.

And this accords with the whole subject of the sūra: Ṣād is a sūra of giving judgment. David judged on one-sided knowledge; those in the Fire quarrelled without outcome; Iblīs judges by an analogy of his own.

And now we come to one of the most striking returns of a word in the sūra. It was treated above in the discussion of 38/7; here I complete it.

In the seventh verse the other side had said: in hādhā illā ikhtilāq — "this is nothing but a fabrication."

In the seventy-first verse God names Himself thus: innī khāliqun basharan min ṭīn — "I am creating a man from clay."

The two words are from one root: خ-ل-ق. The two branches of the root (to create / to fabricate) were treated above as the lexicographers record them.

And the root occurs five times in the sūra:

One root, five occurrences, and only the first in the sense of "fabrication". This is a distribution that can be verified from the text.

بَشَر — root ب-ش-ر. Its concrete sense: skin, the outer surface of the hide. Bashara — the skin. And from there: bashar — man, the being whose skin is visible. The Qurʾān uses this word for man's material side; insān and ādam name other sides.

طِين — clay: earth mixed with water.

Worth recording: in telling of the creation, the material is named. And Iblīs's analogy will be built on exactly this material (76).

سَوَّىٰ — root س-و-ي: to make even, to set straight, to complete the form of. This word was treated in al-Infiṭār at 82/7 and in al-Shams.

What was recorded in the discussion of al-Infiṭār was this, and this verse was named there:

"In telling of the creation of man the Qurʾān follows the order first creating, then taswiya, then the giving of a capacity (al-Sajda 32/9, al-Ḥijr 15/29, Ṣād 38/72, al-Aʿlā 87/2). That is, taswiya is the stage in which the raw material is brought into working order."

I rely on that.

نَفَخْتُ فِيهِ مِن رُّوحِى — and this expression was treated in al-Taḥrīm at 66/12. The note there: "This expression is used in the Qurʾān of the creation of Adam as well (al-Ḥijr 15/29; Ṣād 38/72). The same verb, the same construct." I rely on that.

A note of tanzīh is necessary, and the note entered for the throne in Ghāfir (al-Muʾmin) at 40/7 holds here too: the expression "I breathed of My spirit" cannot be understood in a way that ascribes body, part or division to God. Two attitudes are transmitted in the classical commentaries for expressions of this kind: to accept the wording as it stands and refer its manner to God (tafwīḍ), or to say that the construct conveys honour and attribution (iḍāfat al-tashrīf) — as in the construct "the House of God" (baytu'llāh). I convey both and do not impose a preference.

وَقَعَ — root و-ق-ع: to fall, to come down somewhere. The imperative: qaʿū — fall, go down.

And the choice of verb must be recorded: it does not say "prostrate", it says "fall down as prostrators". Both a movement (falling) and a state (sājidīn) are commanded together, that is.

I record this as my own reading: the command carries an immediacy that leaves no room for hesitation. And it is joined with fāʾ: the moment the breathing is over.

Three separate reinforcements one upon another in the sentence:

In Arabic the use of these two emphatics (kull + ajmaʿ) together closes off exception entirely.

And immediately afterwards an exception comes: illā Iblīs.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is this construction: the sentence first shuts every door, then opens a single exception. This is a construction that makes the singularity and the strangeness of the exception visible.

These two verbs were treated in al-Baqara 2/34. I rely on that.

The construction in al-Baqara: abā wa'stakbara wa kāna mina'l-kāfirīn — three verbs. The construction in Ṣād: istakbara wa kāna mina'l-kāfirīn — two verbs.

Abā (he refused) is absent in Ṣād. This is a difference that can be verified, and I record it as my own reading: al-Baqara counts the act and its ground separately; Ṣād begins directly with the ground. Because Ṣād will shortly give that ground in Iblīs's own mouth as well.

And the diagnosis treated in Ghāfir (al-Muʾmin) at 40/56 connects here directly. The note there was this:

"The verse names not the apparent subject of the dispute but the wish behind it… in fī ṣudūrihim illā kibrun mā hum bi-bālighīh — in their breasts there is nothing but a greatness they will not attain."

Ghāfir had said that beneath those who dispute lies kibr. Ṣād shows the same thing with an account: in the first instance of dispute, what lies beneath is istikbār.

And the table set up in Ghāfir gains one further link here:

Four occurrences, the same structure: a claim of ascent and its non-fulfilment. This table is one I set up; the verses do not refer to one another. But all four are inside the same two sūras, and their wordings are partly shared (asbāb, bulūgh, ʿālīn).