al-Māʾida 5:8

Yā ayyuha'lladhīna āmanū kūnū qawwāmīna li'llāhi shuhadāʾa bi'l-qisṭ · Wa lā yajrimannakum shanaʾānu qawmin ʿalā allā taʿdilū · Iʿdilū huwa aqrabu li't-taqwā · Wa'ttaqu'llāh · Inna'llāha khabīrun bimā taʿmalūn

"O you who believe! Be those who stand up for God, who bear witness in equity. Let the hatred of a people never drive you into injustice. Be just — that is nearer to mindfulness of God. Be mindful of God; God is aware of what you do."

This verse is the second and sharper form of the command given six verses earlier (5/2). The two verses must be set side by side, because the differences between them are no coincidence.

What the differences mean — I record this as my own reading; its ground is the words in the table:

1. At 5/2 the cause was written down; at 5/8 it is not. In the first a particular situation is named; in the second the rule is cut loose from its cause and opened out to every case. That is, the concrete instance comes first, then the principle.

2. The forbidden act changes, and this is the most important difference. Taʿtadū (ع-د-و) forbids doing too much: aggression, going beyond the bound. The negative of taʿdilū (ع-د-ل) forbids doing too little: withholding what is due, not keeping the scales level.

Together the two close off both ends of the same axis:

That is, rancour pushes a person in one of two directions: either he does the other party extra harm, or he does not give him what he owes him. The sūra closes both doors.

3. The closing attributes too are chosen to fit the function: 5/2 ends with shadīdu'l-ʿiqāb (severe in punishment) — the subject there is the trampling of inviolabilities, that is, a visible act. 5/8 ends with khabīrun bimā taʿmalūn (aware of what you do) — the subject here is bearing witness, that is, a disposition known from within. The root خ-ب-ر conveys knowing the inside of a thing, its hidden side; khabīr is one who knows not the outside but the inside. The closing is chosen to fit its subject.

قَوَّام — root ق-و-م, an intensive form (فَعَّال). The root has been treated in many places in this collection (al-Baqara, al-Fatḥ, al-Qiyāma): to rise to one's feet, to stand up, to keep a matter standing.

In Arabic the pattern فَعَّال conveys two things: (a) multiplicity and continuity — one who does a thing constantly; (b) a trade or occupation — khayyāṭ (tailor), najjār (carpenter), khabbāz (baker).

That is, a qawwām is not "one who acts justly on one occasion" but one who makes it his business to keep justice standing. The command asks not for a behaviour but for a character. And the verb's coming as kūnū (be) supports this: not "do" but "be".

A point of word order: the sentence runs kūnū + qawwāmīna + shuhadāʾa, with no conjunction between the two descriptions. The absence of a conjunction shows that the second is an explanation or an instance of the first: the concrete form of standing up for God is bearing witness in equity.

There is another, very similar form of this command in the Qurʾān, and when the two sentences are set side by side an exchange of places appears:

The two phrases have changed places: bi'l-qisṭ and li'llāh have taken one another's position.

The classical commentaries dwell on this difference and explain it by context. What follows the verse in al-Nisāʾ speaks of bearing witness against one's family and near kin; what follows the verse in al-Māʾida speaks of a people towards whom enmity is felt. Two explanations are given from this:

I transmit these two explanations; I do not impose a preference. That the second is the safer of the two so far as the text goes I add as my own reading; its ground is that the same four elements are present in both verses.

The root ش-ه-د has been treated in many places in this collection (al-Baqara 2/282, al-Nūr, al-Burūj): to be present, to see; and to report what one has seen. Bearing witness, at its root, means being there. I rely on that treatment.

The root ق-س-ط was treated in detail at al-Ḥujurāt 49/9, and what was recorded there was this:

Its primary sense is a portion, a share; and from there, giving a portion in full. Qisṭ — a share; muqsiṭ — one who gives shares rightly. The interesting side of the root: in Form IV (aqsaṭa) it conveys acting justly, while in its bare form (qasaṭa) it conveys acting wrongfully — it is one of the instances of aḍdād, words bearing opposite senses.

And the difference between ʿadl and qisṭ was given there in a table as well: ʿadl is the picture of scales and looks to the whole; qisṭ is the picture of a share and looks to a party. I rely on that treatment and do not repeat it here.

What belongs here is this: the verse uses both words. Bearing witness comes with bi'l-qisṭ, the command with iʿdilū.

I record this as my own reading; its ground is the presence of both words in the same verse: bearing witness has to do with giving each party its share (qisṭ), while the judgement issued has to do with the scales coming level (ʿadl). The one looks to the parts, the other to the whole; the verse asks for both.

It is among the most cited sentences of the verse and of the sūra.

The root ع-د-ل was treated in al-Ḥujurāt, al-Shūrā and al-Infiṭār: to make equal, to level, to set straight. The two pans of the scales coming level. I rely on that treatment.

There is a subtlety in the case structure of the sentence, and it should be recorded. The pronoun huwa is masculine, and the word ʿadl is masculine too. But in the sentence iʿdilū is an imperative verb, and a pronoun cannot return directly to it. The classical explanation is this: the pronoun returns to the verbal noun the command conveys — that is, "justice is nearer to mindfulness of God."

And aqrab is an elative: "nearer". This choice of word deserves attention, because the sentence does not say "justice is mindfulness of God".

The difference between the two sentences is not small. I record this as my own reading:

• Had it said "justice is mindfulness of God", the person who carried out justice would have finished his business.
• When it says "it is nearer to mindfulness of God", justice is laid down not as a destination but as the road that leads there. The approach continues.

And the particle li conveys direction. In the sentence a distance and a direction are set between justice and mindfulness of God: justice is what carries a person towards mindfulness of God.

There is one more question: "nearer than what?" An elative asks for a comparison. Two answers are given in the classical commentaries:

I do not impose a preference.

What is done in this verse shows in its plainest form something recorded in many places in this collection: the measure of piety is laid down not by way of a list of acts of worship but by way of a behaviour.

This was the finding recorded in the introduction to al-Ḥujurāt: "The Qurʾān establishes piety not as a list of acts of worship but as an order of behaviour." This verse is among the densest instances of that finding — because the behaviour shown here as what brings one nearer to mindfulness of God is the behaviour required towards someone one detests.

And the difficulty of the command lies exactly here: the verse asks for justice not where it is easy but where it is hardest.

The verse does not say "feel no rancour". It grants that the feeling exists and names it as an agent (shanaʾānu qawmin, treated at 5/2). What it forbids is the feeling's turning into behaviour.

This distinction must be recorded, because reading the verse as a sentence that forbids a feeling does not fit the text. The verse is not a command about inward purity but a limit on behaviour: whatever you feel, when you judge, when you bear witness, when you apportion, the scales will be level.

And it must be recorded that the word qawm comes indefinite: shanaʾānu qawmin — "hatred of a people". Which people is not said. The rule is laid down not for a particular party but for any party at all. This agrees with the measure this commentary has kept from the beginning: a ruling is tied not to a community but to an attribute and an act.