al-Aʿrāf 7:23

Qālā rabbanā ẓalamnā anfusanā wa in lam taghfir lanā wa tarḥamnā la-nakūnanna mina'l-khāsirīn

"They said: 'Our Lord! We have wronged ourselves. If You do not forgive us and have mercy on us, we shall surely be among the lost.'"

The structure of this prayer was treated at 2/37 in al-Baqara, and three elements of it were counted there:

1. Taking the fault on oneself (without producing an excuse) 2. Producing no excuse 3. An unconditional request

And it was compared there with Iblīs's sentence: "Iblīs too spoke, but he gave a ground and laid the blame on God (al-Aʿrāf 7/16)." I rely on that treatment and do not repeat it here.

Further, in al-Baqara the expression talaqqā Ādamu min rabbihī kalimāt was treated, and it was recorded that "Adam does not find the words himself, he receives them; the door of repentance had already been left open". Al-Aʿrāf does not give this piece of information; in al-Aʿrāf the prayer itself comes directly. This is a countable difference between the two sūras.

The same sentence occurs once more in the Qurʾān in the mouth of a prophet, and this comparison has been called for.

Three differences must be recorded.

One — number. In al-Aʿrāf the sentence is dual (ẓalamnā anfusanā), in al-Qaṣaṣ singular (ẓalamtu nafsī). At 2/35-36 in al-Baqara it was recorded that the coming of the verbs in the dual distributes the responsibility; I rely on that treatment.

Two — the form of the request. Moses asks directly: fa'ghfir lī (imperative). Adam and his wife build a conditional clause: wa in lam taghfir lanā… la-nakūnanna mina'l-khāsirīn — the request comes indirectly, by saying what will happen if forgiveness is withheld.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the grammatical structure of the two sentences: both prayers take the fault upon themselves; but one asks in the imperative, the other asks by stating the outcome. The second is more indirect, and a condition stands in between. This is an explanation, not a ruling.

Three — the answer. As was recorded at 28/16 in al-Qaṣaṣ, in al-Qaṣaṣ the answer is given at once in the same verse: fa-ghafara lahū. In al-Aʿrāf there is no such sentence. In al-Aʿrāf, in place of an answer, the command to go down comes (24).

I record this as an observation and rely on the table: al-Baqara 2/37 has an announcement of forgiveness that al-Aʿrāf does not have (fa-tāba ʿalayh); Ṭāhā 20/122 has one too (thumma'jtabāhu rabbuhū fa-tāba ʿalayhi wa hadā). Al-Aʿrāf does not give it.

This is a countable difference, and it does not break the frame recorded in al-Baqara — "the fall has been forgiven, it is not inherited, it is not a loss of standing but the beginning of a task" — because the announcement of that same event is expressly present in the other two sūras. The telling of al-Aʿrāf breaks off here and passes straight to the earth. I make no claim about the reason for this; I record only the datum.

The root خ-س-ر: diminution, loss. The root was treated in detail at 103/2 in al-ʿAṣr (inna'l-insāna la-fī khusr); I rely on that treatment.

And the same root had occurred in the ninth verse: fa-ulāʾika'lladhīna khasirū anfusahum. There is an overlap between the two verses, and it must be recorded:

In both verses the same two words stand side by side: nafs and khusrān. And in both, the loss is inflicted not on another but on the person himself.

I record this as an observation: in the ninth verse this is a verdict (a finding delivered from outside); in the twenty-third it is a fear (from the person's own mouth). The same word, in two different mouths.