al-Maʿārij 70:26-28

Wa'lladhīna yuṣaddiqūna bi-yawmi'd-dīn · Wa'lladhīna hum min ʿadhābi rabbihim mushfiqūn · Inna ʿadhāba rabbihim ghayru maʾmūn "And those who affirm the day of reckoning. And those who go in dread of their Lord's punishment — for of their Lord's punishment none can be secure."

And this is the cleanest opposition between the two sūras.

Sūrat al-Māʿūn opened with this sentence:

"Have you seen the one who denies the religion?" (al-Māʿūn 107/1 — alladhī يُكَذِّبُ بِٱلدِّينِ)

Al-Maʿārij here says:

"And those who affirm the day of reckoning." (70/26 — alladhīna يُصَدِّقُونَ بِيَوْمِ ٱلدِّينِ)

Let us set the two sentences side by side:

The same form, the same particle, the same object, the opposite verb.

In the section on al-Māʿūn the following was recorded of these two sūras: "Those praised in al-Maʿārij are exactly the contrary of those blamed in al-Māʿūn… the two sūras can be read as negatives of one another."

This verse is the clearest evidence for that finding, and it had not yet been framed in the section on al-Māʿūn. There the comparison was made by way of the verses on prayer; here it is made by way of the opening sentence.

Root: ص-د-ق. Ṣidq — truthfulness, a statement's matching reality. صَدَّقَ (tafʿīl) — "he called it true, he affirmed it."

The distinction recorded for kadhdhaba in the section on al-Māʿūn works here exactly in reverse:

Kadhaba (Form I) means "he lied" — the one performing the act is the liar. Kadhdhaba means "he called another's true word a lie".

In the same way: ṣadaqa is "he spoke truly" (the one performing the act is truthful); ṣaddaqa is "he called another's word true".

So taṣdīq is not your own truthfulness; it is the response you give to a report.

And the measure recorded in the section on al-Māʿūn holds here too: "Denial is an active stance, a taking of a position." So is affirmation. Neither is a silent acceptance or refusal; both are a taking of a position.

And from the same root comes ṣadaqa (the wealth given). The link the lexicographers draw: alms is what shows the truthfulness of a person's faith — the act that confirms the word.

I transmit this explanation; I do not present it as a settled etymological ruling. But it should be recorded that it accords with the ordering of the list: the twenty-fourth verse gives a right in wealth, the twenty-sixth affirmation. The root relation binds the two items to one another.

The word ٱلدِّين was treated in detail in the section on al-Māʿūn 107/1: the root د-ي-ن, at whose centre stands requital (dayn a debt, dāna lahū he submitted, dānahu he called to account, dīn a way/law). And there three views were discussed and the reading "the day of reckoning / the day of requital" was preferred. I do not repeat it.

And note: in al-Māʿūn there was a reading that had to be preferred; in al-Maʿārij no preference is needed — because the verse adds the word يَوْم: yawmu'd-dīn, "the day of requital."

So al-Maʿārij closes for itself the place al-Māʿūn left open.

I record this as an observation; the wordings of the two verses are in the text.

Root: ش-ف-ق. And this root yields one of the finest words for feeling in the Qurʾān.

The two branches of the root:

• إِشْفَاق — the state in which fear is mixed with tenderness: anxiety that something bad may happen to something.
• شَفَق — twilight, the redness left on the horizon after sunset.

The second branch was treated in this commentary. In the section on al-Inshiqāq 84/16 al-shafaq was taken up and the disagreement over redness/whiteness was recorded; I do not repeat it.

And the link between the two branches explains the sense of the word.

The explanation the lexicographers give is this: shafaq is neither full day nor full night — it is a mixture of two states. And so is ishfāq: neither pure fear nor pure love; a mixture of the two.

That is, beneath the root lies the idea of mixture, an intermediate state, impurity.

I transmit this explanation; I do not present it as a settled etymological ruling. But it clarifies the sense at work in the verse.

The difference between ishfāq and khawf (fear):

The closest English word is "dread" in the older sense, or "apprehension"; "fear" comes out too hard.

And this changes what the verse says. The verse does not say "they fear the punishment". It says "they go in dread of the punishment" — that is, a fear with a concern, a bond, inside it.

Indeed what is feared is named accordingly: ʿadhābi rabbihim — "their Lord's punishment." As recorded in the section on al-Fajr, the word Rabb carries the weight of nurture and care. The authority feared is not a foreign authority.

The Qurʾān's use of ishfāq confirms this:

• "They tremble in awe of Him." (al-Anbiyāʾ 21/28 — of the angels)
• "Those who go in dread of their Lord's punishment…" (al-Maʿārij 70/27, and its parallel al-Muʾminūn 23/57)
• "You will see the wrongdoers in dread because of what they have earned." (al-Shūrā 42/22)
• "We offered the trust to the heavens, the earth and the mountains, and they shrank from bearing it." (al-Aḥzāb 33/72)

Al-Anbiyāʾ 21/28 is particularly worth noting, because there ishfāq is ascribed to the angels. The angels do not rebel; their fear is not the fear of a crime. So ishfāq is not a fear that results from a fault — it is a state that comes with one's position.

I record this as an observation; the wording of the verse is in the text.

And the twenty-eighth verse is the ground of the twenty-seventh.

This is the only sentence of grounds in the list. In a list of thirteen verses no item is explained — that this item is explained is worth noting.

مَأْمُون — Root: أ-م-ن. And this is one of the finest word-choices of the list.

The root was treated in detail in the section on al-Baqara 2/3: at its centre stand trust and security; amān, amāna, amīn, al-Muʾmin (the giver of security). And what was recorded there: "faith is not a one-way acceptance but a bond of mutual trust."

مَأْمُون is the passive participle: that of which one can be secure, that which is trusted. Ghayru maʾmūn — "that of which one cannot be secure."

And now read the verse together with the root.

The people counted in the list are muʾmin — that is, they are named with a word from the root أ-م-ن: those who make a bond of trust.

And what is said about them is this: there is one thing they cannot be secure of — with a word from the same root.

So faith is a bond of trust made towards something of which one cannot be secure.

I record this as my own reading. The shared root is a linguistic datum beyond dispute; the conclusion I draw from it is my own.

And this establishes a theological balance. The Qurʾān rejects both the believer's being secure from punishment and his despairing of mercy:

• "Did they then feel secure from God's plan? None feels secure from God's plan but a people who are lost." (al-Aʿrāf 7/99)
• "Do not despair of God's mercy." (al-Zumar 39/53)

Both doors are left open. And the ishfāq of the twenty-seventh verse is exactly the state between the two doors: neither security nor despair — dread.

And the sense of "mixture" in the root of the word carries this: ishfāq is the place where two states mix; like shafaq, neither day nor night.

I record this as my own reading. The two branches of the root and the wordings of the two verses are data that can be verified.