لَئِنۢ بَسَطتَ إِلَىَّ يَدَكَ لِتَقْتُلَنِى مَآ أَنَا۠ بِبَاسِطٍ يَدِىَ إِلَيْكَ لِأَقْتُلَكَ ۖ إِنِّىٓ أَخَافُ ٱللَّهَ رَبَّ ٱلْعَٰلَمِينَ
La-in basaṭta ilayya yadaka li-taqtulanī mā ana bi-bāsiṭin yadiya ilayka li-aqtulak · Innī akhāfu'llāha rabba'l-ʿālamīn
"Even if you stretch out your hand against me to kill me, I am not one to stretch out my hand against you to kill you. I fear God, the Lord of all the worlds."
This is one of the most carefully built sentences in the Qurʾān in point of word order. Its two halves must be set side by side:
| The first half (the condition) | The second half (the answer) | |
|---|---|---|
| Verb | Basaṭta — perfect (as though done) | Mā ana bi-bāsiṭin — a nominal sentence |
| Mood | A verbal sentence | A nominal sentence + the emphatic bāʾ |
| Sense | "If you stretch out" | "I am not one to stretch out" |
The other party's act is given with a verbal sentence — in Arabic a verbal sentence conveys occurrence and renewal; a thing that happens once, that comes about.
His own stance is given with a nominal sentence — in Arabic a nominal sentence conveys fixity and continuity. Moreover an emphatic bāʾ has been placed at the head of the predicate (bi-bāsiṭin), and it is negated with mā.
That is, the sentence does not say "I shall not kill you". It says "I am not a man who stretches out his hand against you". What is refused is not an act but a position.
I record this as my own reading, and its ground is that the two halves are built as different kinds of sentence.
| Verse | Expression | Who | Sense |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5/11 | An yabsuṭū ilaykum aydiyahum | A people | Attack |
| 5/28 | Mā ana bi-bāsiṭin yadiya ilayk | The son of Adam | Refusal to attack |
| 5/64 | Bal yadāhu mabsūṭatān | — | Generosity |
The same root, in the same sūra, in three different directions. I record this as a repetition within the sūra; each time, the value of the word is settled by its preposition and its agent.
The sentence does not say "you are my brother", "killing is wrong", "I am afraid of you". The ground is drawn not from his relation to the man before him but from his own relation to God.
I record this as my own reading; its ground is the form of the reasoning: had the reason for not striking back been laid down as incapacity or as an emotional bond, both of these are things that can change. When the ground is tied to a place that does not change, the stance too is fixed. This agrees with the sentence's having been built as a nominal sentence.
رَبَّ ٱلْعَٰلَمِينَ — and the name is invoked in its widest form. It was treated in al-Fātiḥa. That the Owner of all the worlds is invoked while something done to one's brother is being spoken of settles the scale of the matter.