Tafsir LabMethodGitHubTürkçe

al-Muddaththir 74:11

The Qurʾān · Sūra 74: al-Muddaththir · verse 11

This commentary was written by Claude (Anthropic); it carries no religious authority and should be checked against the classical sources.

74/11

ذَرْنِى وَمَنْ خَلَقْتُ وَحِيدًا

Dharnī wa man khalaqtu waḥīdā "Leave Me alone with the one I created alone."

The second section of the sūra begins: the detailed description of a single person.

ذَرْنِى — the same pattern as in al-Muzzammil

In al-Muzzammil 73/11 this verb and the مفعول معه (object of accompaniment) pattern were treated: the sense is not "leave me, and leave him too" but "leave me alone with him".

And the eleventh verse of both sūras opens with this pattern. As was recorded there: I draw no conclusion from the coinciding of the verse numbers.

The difference lies in number:

al-Muzzammil 73/11al-Muddaththir 74/11
Objectٱلْمُكَذِّبِينَ — pluralمَنْ خَلَقْتُ — singular
Qualificationūli'l-naʿma — the people of easewaḥīdā — alone
What followsThree verses describing punishmentSeven verses describing a person

al-Muzzammil recounts a group, al-Muddaththir a single person. And al-Muddaththir spends seven verses on describing the person.

وَحِيدًا — to whom does it belong?

This is the most disputed place in the verse, and it requires a table of the disagreement.

Root: و-ح-د. Unity, oneness. Wāḥid, aḥad, waḥda, tawḥīd are from the same root; the difference between aḥad and wāḥid was treated in al-Ikhlāṣ.

وَحِيدًا is on the pattern faʿīl and stands in the sentence as a circumstantial qualifier (ḥāl). The problem is: whose state is it?

ViewMeaningIts groundIts weak side
The state of the one created"I created him alone" — without property, without children, by himselfThe following verses count wealth and sons as given afterwards; that is, at the beginning they were not there
The state of the Creator"I created him, I alone" — with no partnerThe subject of the verb khalaqtu is the speaker; the circumstantial qualifier may refer to him tooThe context enumerates what the person acquired afterwards; the oneness of the Creator is not the subject here
A byname of the manSomeone spoken of as "Waḥīd"It is said in some transmissions that a leading man of Quraysh was referred to in this wayThe transmission is weak, and if the verse were giving a byname this would run against the general manner of the Qurʾān

The first view is the most widespread in the classical sources and appears to fit the context best — because verses 12-14 enumerate exactly what was "given afterwards". I state this as a preference; it is not binding.

What the first reading sets up

If waḥīdā is the state of the one created, the verse says this: this man began with nothing.

And this lays the ground for the four verses that follow. Everything that will be enumerated — wealth, sons, a smoothed path — was not there at the beginning.

What the verse does is to put a zero in front of a list of possessions.

The occasion of revelation — and the necessary caveats

The great majority of the exegetical sources transmit verses 11-25 concerning al-Walīd b. al-Mughīra, one of the leading men of Quraysh. According to the report he was asked to give a judgement about the Qurʾān, and after thinking for a while he said, "This is sorcery."

I must enter several caveats about this report:

First — attribution. The report is widespread in the books of exegesis; but its details differ in different lines of transmission, and the state of its chain varies from one line to another. I issue no definite ruling on its soundness and attribute it to no particular source.

Second — the text gives no name. The sūra recounts this person over fifteen verses and does not mention his name even once. The same finding was made in ʿAbasa: "the sūra itself gives no name at all." And the note added there holds here as well: the possibility that the names are answers supplied afterwards must not be lost sight of.

Third — and most important of all: the withholding of the name is part of how the verse works. As recorded in the method (Method): what the verse describes are attributes; whoever carries that attribute is included in it. The text does not condemn a person; it describes a sequence of behaviour. And that the sequence is — as will be seen in verses 18-25 — too general to be confined to any one person is plain from the sūra's own language.

I therefore do not reject the report, but I do not tie the exegesis to it.


The whole of Sūrat al-Muddaththir