al-Aʿrāf 7:187-188

Yasʾalūnaka ʿani's-sāʿati ayyāna mursāhā, qul innamā ʿilmuhā ʿinda rabbī, lā yujallīhā li-waqtihā illā hū, thaqulat fi's-samāwāti wa'l-arḍ, lā taʾtīkum illā baghtatan, yasʾalūnaka ka-annaka ḥafiyyun ʿanhā, qul innamā ʿilmuhā ʿinda'llāhi wa lākinna akthara'n-nāsi lā yaʿlamūn · Qul lā amliku li-nafsī nafʿan wa lā ḍarran illā mā shāʾa'llāh, wa law kuntu aʿlamu'l-ghayba la'stakthartu mina'l-khayri wa mā massaniya's-sūʾ, in ana illā nadhīrun wa bashīrun li-qawmin yuʾminūn

"They ask you about the Hour: when will it come to anchor? Say: 'Its knowledge is with my Lord alone. Only He will bring it out at its time. It weighs heavy on the heavens and the earth. It will not come upon you but suddenly.' They ask you as though you had searched it out. Say: 'Its knowledge is with God alone; but most people do not know.' · Say: 'I hold for myself neither benefit nor harm, except what God wills. Had I known the unseen, I would have gained much good, and no ill would have touched me. I am only a warner and a bringer of good news to a people who believe.'"

The root ر-س-و: to be fixed, to settle into place. And the lexicographers use the root for a ship's dropping anchor: arsati's-safīnatu — the ship came to anchor. From the same root comes rawāsī (the firm mountains).

And at 11/41 in Hūd the same root had occurred of a ship (bismi'llāhi majrāhā wa mursāhā). I rely on that treatment.

I give this as a note about the word, and its ground is the concrete sense of the root: the question asks about the Hour not as something that "comes" but as something that drops anchor. That is, what is asked about is the moment at which the event will settle.

This verse is part of a limit kept consistently throughout the index. I rely on two places:

And what al-Aʿrāf adds must be recorded, and it is a datum of the text: al-Aʿrāf builds the sentence twice, and there is a difference between the two:

The same sentence twice in the same verse; in the first rabbī, in the second Allāh.

I record this as an observation about word order, and its ground is the two sentences themselves. The first answer is given with the messenger's own relation, the second with the name itself.

And between them stands a sentence: yasʾalūnaka ka-annaka ḥafiyyun ʿanhā.

The root ح-ف-ي: to search a thing out thoroughly, to press on it and come to know it well. Ḥafiyy means "one who knows a thing well by inquiring into it". I record this so that it is not confused with the sense "hidden": the sense given by the majority of the lexicographers here is "one who knows well".

And the sentence thaqulat fi's-samāwāti wa'l-arḍ must be recorded. The root ث-ق-ل: weight. Several explanations are transmitted of the sense of the sentence (that its knowledge weighs heavy in the heavens and the earth; that the event itself weighs heavy upon the heavens and the earth). I convey them as transmitted and impose no preference.

A point of word order must be recorded, and this is the work of the verse: the limit is set first for the messenger himself.

Qul lā amliku li-nafsī nafʿan wa lā ḍarran

That is, the sentence does not say "I can bring you no benefit"; it says "I can bring myself none". The widening comes afterwards.

And the second sentence is a conditional pattern, and it counts two results:

The two results run in opposite directions: one gaining, the other avoiding. And the particle law states an unfulfilled condition — it was treated at the ninety-sixth verse.

I record this as an observation about word order, and its ground is the particle: the sentence shows that the unseen is not known by way of two concrete results.