al-Mursalāt 77:38-39

Hādhā yawmu'l-faṣl · Jamaʿnākum wa'l-awwalīn · Fa-in kāna lakum kaydun fa-kīdūn

"This is the day of separation · We have gathered you and the former peoples · So if you have a scheme, then scheme against Me!"

The construct yawm al-faṣl occurs three times in the sūra:

The three occurrences trace a line of distance. In the thirteenth verse the day is a point ahead; in the fourteenth it is too far to be known; in the thirty-eighth it is near enough to be pointed at.

This is the sūra's narrative technique: within the text the day draws towards the reader. And verse 35 too had begun with the same demonstrative (hādhā yawmu lā yanṭiqūn). Two hādhās show that we have entered the scene.

I record this as my own reading; the wordings of the three verses are plain in the text.

And the name keeps its link with the fourth verse of the sūra. The link between the oath's al-fāriqāt and the day's al-faṣl was framed at verse 13. Here we are inside that day.

Root: ج-م-ع. To gather, to bring together. This root was treated in the section on al-ʿĀdiyāt (jamʿan — a company).

The verb is in the perfect: jamaʿnā — "We have gathered". The past tense for an event that has not yet happened — the taḥaqquq pattern recorded above at verses 8-11. But there is a difference here: there the verbs were passive, here they are active and the agent is the first person plural. The scene is now told from the agent's own mouth.

وَٱلْأَوَّلِينَ — and the former peoples.

This word occurred in the sixteenth verse of the sūra: a lam nuhliki'l-awwalīn.

The two verses close a circle. Destruction was not the end of the matter: those destroyed too are gathered. The sūra's first proof (history) is here tied to the hereafter.

And this completes the argument of the first proof: the end of those destroyed in the past was not merely to disappear; they too are summoned to the same day. That is, the destruction in history was not an end but a sign.

I record this as my own reading.

A change of address. Jamaʿnākum — "you". The addressee is the second person plural. But al-awwalīn is third person. In one sentence two groups are named with two different grammatical persons: the listeners are "you", the others "they". And both are gathered in the same place.

The sūra's harshest sentence, and a typical example of the Qurʾān's manner of taʿjīz (demonstrating incapacity).

كَيْد — root: ك-ي-د. This root was treated twice in this commentary: in the section on al-Fīl (a lam yajʿal kaydahum fī taḍlīl) and in the section on al-Ṭāriq (innahum yakīdūna kaydā wa akīdu kaydā). What is to be taken from there:

The root k-y-d: to try to do something secretly and by indirect means; to prepare an arrangement the other side cannot see. The word's most defining feature is secrecy — an open attack is not called kayd. This is why the Qurʾān generally uses the word kayd of the scheme the strong lays against the weak.

And what was added in the section on al-Ṭāriq: when kayd is ascribed to God it is "not a malicious trick; it is the response that turns a scheme back upon its author."

Here the word's position is different. In al-Fīl the kayd was brought to nothing; in al-Ṭāriq kayd was answered with kayd. Here, by contrast, they are invited to scheme.

And the invitation is plainly a mockery.

Why? Because the definition of kayd is secrecy; and on that day no secrecy remains. Verses 35-36 of the sūra said that even speech is not possible. For someone who cannot speak to lay a secret plan is impossible in the word's own logic.

That is, the challenge is not an empty threat but is made by definition: a scheme cannot be laid where the ground on which it is laid has disappeared.

I record this as my own reading.

فَكِيدُونِ — the kasra at the end. At the end of the verb there is a نِ with a kasra beneath it; this is the dropped form of يَاء المتكلم (the first person singular pronoun). Its original is fa-kīdūnī — "scheme against me". The yāʾ has been dropped to fit the verse-ending, and the kasra has remained.

This is a preference often seen at verse-ends in the Qurʾān; there are parallels in Sūrat al-Fajr and elsewhere. And the dropped letter does not change the meaning: the object is still the first person singular.

And the object's being first person singular is striking. The preceding sentence was plural: jamaʿnākum — "We gathered". In this sentence it moves to the singular: fa-kīdūnī — "scheme against Me".

Transitions between the plural of majesty and the singular are ordinary in the Qurʾān. But the transition here has a function: the challenge is directed to a single addressee, and directly. I record this as an observation.

The same pattern in the Qurʾān:

"Then scheme against me, all of you, and give me no respite." (Hūd 11/55) — fa-kīdūnī jamīʿan thumma lā tunẓirūn. The words of Noah to his people. "Call your partners, then scheme against me, and give me no respite." (al-Aʿrāf 7/195) — thumma kīdūni fa-lā tunẓirūn.

In both verses there is the same verb and the same pattern — and in both the speaker is a prophet, the addressee his own people.

In al-Mursalāt, by contrast, the speaker is God. The same challenge, spoken by a prophet, is an expression of courage; here it is a verdict.

I record this difference as an observation.

Let us read the two verses together:

1. This is the day of separation. 2. We have gathered you and the former peoples. 3. If you can scheme, then scheme.

The third sentence is the consequence of the first two. When the gathering is complete, the only remaining means of escape is kayd — because kayd is the one thing the weak has against the strong: secrecy.

And that too is gone.

The finding recorded in the section on al-Fīl finds its exact place here: "There is no battle scene in the sūra at all. The army does not resist, does not flee, does not fight. This is a judgement the telling frames by its own means: the other side never found the chance to be the subject of the event."

Al-Mursalāt frames the same judgement by another route: the other side is invited to be the subject, and the invitation goes unanswered.