al-Zukhruf 43:28-30

Wa jaʿalahā kalimatan bāqiyatan fī ʿaqibihi laʿallahum yarjiʿūn · Bal mattaʿtu hāʾulāʾi wa ābāʾahum ḥattā jāʾahumu'l-ḥaqqu wa rasūlun mubīn · Wa lammā jāʾahumu'l-ḥaqqu qālū hādhā siḥrun wa innā bihi kāfirūn

"He made it an abiding word among those who came after him — that they might return. But I let these and their forefathers enjoy their portion, until the truth and a plain messenger came to them. And when the truth came to them they said: 'This is sorcery, and we reject it.'"

The verb comes for the fourth time in the sūra, and the agent has changed again: this time it is God, and the object is a word.

What does the pronoun hā refer to? Here the exegetes transmit two readings:

Both come out at the same place, and I do not impose a preference.

The root ب-ق-ي: to remain, to be left over, to continue. Bāqī — that which remains.

The expression is worth recording, and the arrangement should be dwelt on:

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is that the three elements stand together: what remains of Abraham is not named as a building, a piece of land or a fortune. It is named as a sentence.

And this is directly related to the sūra's question of measure: the sūra will shortly be speaking of silver ceilings, golden stairways and gold bracelets. Here, what the abiding thing is, is stated — and it is not material.

There is also a reversal, and I record it: in the twenty-second verse the other side said they had inherited something from their forefathers — āthārihim (traces). In the twenty-eighth verse too there is a handing down, but what is handed down is not the shape of a footprint but the content of a word.

The last row matters: the ground the verse gives is yarjiʿūn (they may return) — that is, not to follow but to return. The word does not set them on a road, it leaves open a possibility of turning back.

The root ر-ج-ع: to turn back. And the root will come again at the end of the sūra: wa ilayhi turjaʿūn (85) — "and to Him you will be returned". The same root, in one place for a person's own returning, in another for the return that is not chosen.

The root ع-ق-ب occurred in the twenty-fifth verse as ʿāqiba; here it comes as ʿaqib. The concrete sense of the root: the heel. ʿAqib — the heel, and from there descent, the generation that comes after.

The concrete picture of the word is worth recording, and I give it as an observation: the word used for descent is the part of the foot that stays behind. A generation, that is, is named not as something that goes in front but as a trace left behind.

And in the twenty-second verse the other side too said āthār (traces). Both words come from the same picture: the foot and its print. The difference lies in what the print carries.

Something happens in the twenty-ninth verse and must be recorded: the verb shifts to the first person singular.

Mattaʿtu — "I let them enjoy". Throughout the sūra the first person plural had been used (jaʿalnā, arsalnā, ansharnā, ahlaknā, intaqamnā).

This shift is a known Qurʾānic device, and the lexicographers explain it thus: the plural pattern conveys majesty and breadth; the shift to the singular attaches the act directly.

I record this as an observation about the structure; I do not present it as a fixed rule.

The root م-ت-ع: to benefit from something, to draw profit from it; and matāʿ — a passing benefit, provision for the road, goods. The word will return in the thirty-fifth verse: matāʿu'l-ḥayāti'd-dunyā.

And the work of the sentence must be recorded: bal mattaʿtu hāʾulāʾi wa ābāʾahum — "but I let these and their forefathers enjoy their portion."

Bal here makes a correction: the word Abraham left was a possibility of return; but what happened was not return, it was the continuation of enjoyment.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is that the sentence is linked with ḥattā: ḥattā jāʾahumu'l-ḥaqq — "until the truth came to them". The verse, that is, sets a long period of ease and the arrival of a warning one after the other. And in the twenty-third verse the mutrafūn had already been named. The two verses say the same thing: the longer the period of enjoyment, the harsher the way the warning that comes is met.

The answer is two sentences, and the relation between them must be recorded:

This double structure was present in the twenty-fourth verse of the sūra too: there also the answer did not touch the content, and a position was announced outright (innā bimā ursiltum bihi kāfirūn). The same pattern twice.

The charge of "sorcery" is the objection the Qurʾān records most often, and it was treated in al-Aḥqāf at 46/7. The finding recorded there was this: "the other side does not say 'we do not understand'; it accepts the effect and rejects the source."

And the same stance was recorded in al-Qamar (siḥrun mustamirr).

I add here what is particular to al-Zukhruf: what is here called "sorcery" is, by the verse's own naming, al-ḥaqq. The sentence is built thus: wa lammā jāʾahumu'l-ḥaqqu qālū hādhā siḥrun.

After putting the name to what has come, that is, the verse reports the name the other side puts to it. Two names side by side: the truth and sorcery. This is an observation about the arrangement, and it can be verified.