al-Nāziʿāt 79:22-24

Thumma adbara yasʿā · Fa-ḥashara fa-nādā · Fa-qāla ana rabbukumu'l-aʿlā "Then he turned his back, hurrying. He gathered and called out. And he said: 'I am your most high lord.'"

أَدْبَرَ — Root: د-ب-ر. And this root occurred in the fifth verse of the sūra as مُدَبِّرَات.

What was recorded above was this: the concrete sense of the root is the back; tadbīr is acting with a view to the end of a matter.

Now let us set the two uses side by side:

The same root, in two opposite directions. One advances with a view to the end; the other turns his back and goes.

I record this as an observation. The shared root is a linguistic datum that can be verified; I do not claim that there is a deliberate link between the two verses.

يَسْعَىٰ — Root: س-ع-ي. To run, to walk quickly, to exert oneself.

The word stands as a circumstantial accusative: "running, in a state of running".

In the Qurʾān this root is used both positively and negatively:

• "When the call to prayer is made on the day of congregation, hasten to the remembrance of God." (al-Jumuʿa 62/9)
• "And a man came running from the far side of the city." (Yāsīn 36/20)
• "When he turns away, he strives to spread corruption in the land." (al-Baqara 2/205)

That is, running is not in itself good or bad; it depends on where one runs.

And this root will come back later in the sūra:

"On that day man remembers what he strove for." (79/35 — mā saʿā)

The link between the two verses is worth recording:

The sūra first shows one person's running; then it says that everyone's running will be remembered.

I record this as an observation; the repetition of the word is in the text.

The function of ثُمَّ. This verse is joined with the only thumma in the series — the others are fāʾ.

Thumma, unlike fāʾ, announces an interval: not immediately after, but after some time.

That is, a period of time has passed between the denial and the turning of the back. Some of the grammarians read this also as a difference of rank (treated in the section on al-Nabaʾ): the second verb is graver than the first.

حَشَرَ — Root: ح-ش-ر. To gather together, to drive and assemble.

And this is a word-choice worth recording.

In the Qurʾān حَشْر is almost always used of the gathering on the Day of Resurrection:

"On that day We gather them and leave not one of them." (al-Kahf 18/47)

"Warn with it those who fear that they will be gathered before their Lord." (al-Anʿām 6/51)

"The day We shall gather them all…" (Yūnus 10/28)

And the word has become the name of a sūra: al-Ḥashr (59).

Now let us come back to this verse: the agent is Pharaoh.

Pharaoh gathers — that is, he does on his own scale the thing God will do on the Day of Resurrection: he assembles the people, comes out before them, makes his proclamation.

I record this as my own reading and I must state its limit as well: the word ḥashr is not used in Arabic only of the Resurrection; it means "to gather" generally and occurs in the Qurʾān in other contexts too (for instance at al-Shuʿarāʾ 26/36-53, Pharaoh's gathering of the magicians). That is, the use of the word here is not by itself an allusion.

What I record is this: the thing Pharaoh does — gathering, coming out before them, proclaiming a verdict — is in its structure an imitation of a courtroom scene. And this agrees with the description of ṭughyān recorded in the section on al-ʿAlaq: putting oneself in that place.

فَنَادَىٰ — he called out. As recorded above, the same verb was used in the sixteenth verse of the Lord's calling to Moses.

The difference between the two callings:

An observation: the calling that is real is made to a single person and in a solitude; the calling that is a claim is made to a crowd and in a public place.

I record this as my own reading. But the elements of the two verses are in the text.

The most extreme claim the Qurʾān records.

And the most striking word of the sentence is ٱلْأَعْلَىٰ.

Root: ع-ل-و. Height. أَعْلَىٰ — an elative: higher, highest.

And an elative requires a comparison.

That is, Pharaoh does not say "I am lord." He says "I am your most high lord." This does not deny the existence of other lords — it claims to be above them.

This is the exact description of the structure of pre-Islamic associationism and it was recorded in the section on al-Fātiḥa: "The Arab of the age of ignorance was no stranger to the concept of 'lord'; but the lords were divided — every tribe, every oasis, every trade route had its own lord."

In Egypt the situation was similar: there was a polytheistic system and the pharaoh was positioned at the top of that system.

That is, Pharaoh's claim is not a claim of "one god"; it is a claim of hierarchy.

And this explains why the Qurʾān calls him ṭāghī (one who runs beyond bounds). According to the description in the section on al-ʿAlaq, ṭughyān is exceeding the limit. Pharaoh does not invent godhood; he exceeds his own limit and enters that category.

The Qurʾān records this claim elsewhere as well:

"Pharaoh said: 'O chiefs! I know of no god for you other than myself.'" (al-Qaṣaṣ 28/38)

The difference between the two sentences is worth recording and will be taken up in the twenty-fifth verse.

And the sequel of the finding in the section on al-Fātiḥa is completed here. What was recorded there was: "When Moses spoke to him of the 'Lord of all the worlds', Pharaoh's answer is a question: 'And what is the Lord of all the worlds?' (al-Shuʿarāʾ 26/23). The question is not a request for information but a rejection — because if the worlds have a Lord, Pharaoh's lordship falls."

Al-Nāziʿāt 79/24 and al-Shuʿarāʾ 26/23 are two sentences of the same man and they explain one another: one proclaims his own position, the other rejects the concept that would abolish that position.

A note on the sound. The word ٱلْأَعْلَىٰ is used in the Qurʾān of God as well: "Glorify the name of your Lord, the Most High" (al-Aʿlā 87/1); "…except him who seeks the pleasure of his Lord, the Most High" (al-Layl 92/20 — treated in the section on al-Layl in this commentary).

That is, the same epithet occurs in the Qurʾān both for God and in Pharaoh's claim. The difference is that for the one it is an attribute and for the other a claim.

I record this as an observation; the shared word is a datum that can be verified.