al-Zukhruf 43:84-86

Wa huwa'lladhī fi's-samāʾi ilāhun wa fi'l-arḍi ilāh · Wa huwa'l-ḥakīmu'l-ʿalīm · Wa tabāraka'lladhī lahu mulku's-samāwāti wa'l-arḍi wa mā baynahumā wa ʿindahu ʿilmu's-sāʿati wa ilayhi turjaʿūn · Wa lā yamliku'lladhīna yadʿūna min dūnihi'sh-shafāʿata illā man shahida bi'l-ḥaqqi wa hum yaʿlamūn

"He is God in the heaven and God on the earth. He is wise, knowing. Blessed is He to whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them! The knowledge of the Hour is with Him, and to Him you will be returned. Those they call upon besides Him have no power of intercession — except those who bear witness to the truth, and know it."

The word comes twice: ilāh, ilāh.

The sentence could have been built as "He is God in the heaven and on the earth". It is not: the two places are enumerated separately, and the word is repeated in each.

I record this as an observation about the arrangement and propose a ground for it as my own reading: what was argued throughout the sūra was the question of position — who stands where, who is above, who below. This sentence abolishes position: the place changes, the attribute does not.

And this connects with the fourth verse: there, of the Book, it was said both fī ummi'l-kitābi ladaynā (above, with Us) and qurʾānan ʿarabiyyan (below, in a language). The tension at the opening of the sūra is met at its close with a single sentence.

I mark this as my own reading.

Al-ḥakīmu'l-ʿalīm — two attributes. In the fourth verse there was ʿaliyyun ḥakīm; in the ninth, al-ʿazīzu'l-ʿalīm. Three pairs in three places, then, and ḥakīm and ʿalīm are joined here.

The concrete sense of the root: a camel's kneeling down, settling in a place and staying there. Baraka'l-baʿīr — the camel knelt. Mubārak — one on whom blessing has settled. Birka — a pool; the place where water gathers and stays.

And tabāraka is in Form VI; the lexicographers explain this pattern here as "He is exalted indeed, blessed indeed", and record that the verb is used of God alone.

The picture of the root is worth recording: blessing, in the picture of the root, is not increase but staying. Kneeling in a place and remaining there.

al-Mulk opens with this verb (tabāraka'lladhī bi-yadihi'l-mulk), and verse 85 of this sūra was cited there:

"'Blessed is He to whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth' (al-Zukhruf 43/85)… the verse does not say of what the dominion is. It does not say 'the dominion of the heavens and the earth'; it says only 'al-mulk'. In al-Zukhruf 43/85 a construct was made; here none is."

I rely on that treatment and complete the link.

And the word mulk comes for the second time in the sūra: in the fifty-first verse it was in Pharaoh's mouth — a-laysa lī mulku Miṣr.

I set the two occurrences side by side, and this is one of the clearest oppositions in the sūra:

The same word, two scales. And the sūra compares them, thirty-four verses apart, with the same word. This is a verifiable datum of the text.

And the comparison itself is the sūra's main question: the real weight of what is placed on a scale.

The question of the sixty-first verse closes here. I complete the link I set out above: a sign is given, a time is not.

This verse was cited in al-Nāziʿāt; I rely on that treatment.

And the root malik comes for the third time — this time as a verb: lā yamlikū — "they have no power over it, it is not in their hands".

The choice of word is worth recording: the verse does not say "they cannot intercede". It says "they are not mālik of intercession" — that is, intercession is not at their disposal.

This accords with the line treated in places such as al-Burūj and al-Muddaththir; I rely on those treatments.

The concrete sense of the root ش-ف-ع: to make double, to pair what is single. Shafʿ — even (its opposite being witr — odd; it occurs in al-Fajr 89/3 and was treated in al-Fajr). Intercession, then, in the picture of the root: someone joining the one who is alone.

The exegetes differ over whom the exception refers to:

I do not impose a preference.

But the condition must be recorded, and it has two heads:

The second condition is worth recording, and I give it as an observation: testimony is not enough; knowing testimony is made the condition.

And this connects with the twentieth verse of the sūra: there it was said of the other side mā lahum bi-dhālika min ʿilm (they have no knowledge of this). The same word at the two ends of the sūra: in one place its lack, in the other the condition.