al-Nāziʿāt 79:25-26

Fa-akhadhahu'llāhu nakāla'l-ākhirati wa'l-ūlā · Inna fī dhālika la-ʿibratan li-man yakhshā "So God seized him with the punishment of the last and of the first. Surely in that there is a lesson for whoever feels awe."

And this is the only place in the sūra where the name Allāh occurs.

Through forty-six verses the sūra uses Rabb (five times), pronouns and verbal subjects; al-Raḥmān does not occur. The name ٱللَّه occurs in this verse alone.

And precisely immediately after the verse in which Pharaoh said "I am your most high lord."

This is an observation and a datum that can be verified. Its interpretation is this, and it belongs to me: the claim is met with a name. Pharaoh claims lordship; in the very next sentence the name God appears.

أَخَذَ — Root: أ-خ-ذ. To take, to seize, to grasp.

In the Qurʾān this verb is often used in the context of destruction and the word announces a sudden and inescapable seizing:

"I seized them; and how was My retribution!" (al-Raʿd 13/32; al-Ḥajj 22/44)

"Such is the seizing of your Lord when He seizes the towns while they are doing wrong. His seizing is painful and severe." (Hūd 11/102)

Root: ن-ك-ل. And the sense of the root separates this word from an ordinary "punishment".

نَكَلَ عَنْ — he held back, he shrank, he did not dare. نِكْل — a fetter, a bit, a hobble; the iron that holds an animal or a captive. نَكَال — a punishment that deters others.

That is, nakāl is not the punishment itself but the deterrent function of the punishment.

A punishment given to an offender does two things: the first pays what is owed, the second deters others. Nakāl names the second.

Another verse of the Qurʾān says this explicitly:

"We made it a nakāl for those before it and those after it, and an admonition for those who guard themselves." (al-Baqara 2/66)

There the word plainly means "a lesson for others": "for those before it and those after it."

And this prepares the next verse: "Surely in that there is a lesson."

Two verses say the same idea with two words: nakāl and ʿibra. The punishment is not only about Pharaoh; it is about those who see.

There are two views on this construction:

The first view is the most widespread.

The second view is striking and deserves recording, because the Qurʾān really does record two distinct claims of Pharaoh and there is an escalation between them:

• al-Qaṣaṣ 28/38: "I know of no god for you other than myself." — This is a sentence not about himself but about his knowledge. An implicit claim.
• al-Nāziʿāt 79/24: "I am your most high lord." — A direct claim.

That is, the claim has become open with time. And this agrees with the description of ṭughyān recorded in the section on al-ʿAlaq: the limit is not crossed at one stroke but by degrees.

I prefer the first view; it is not binding. My ground: the verse speaks not of an interval of time but of two punishments, and the pair ākhira/ūlā is widely used in the Qurʾān for this world and the hereafter.

The escalation the second view records, however, is separately valuable and can be verified by comparing the two verses.

عِبْرَة — Root: ع-ب-ر. And the concrete sense of the root is to cross over.

Its derivatives:

• عَبَرَ ٱلنَّهْرَ — he crossed the river. عُبُور — a crossing.
• عَابِرُ سَبِيلٍ — a traveller; one passing along a road. In the Qurʾān: "…except while passing along a way" (al-Nisāʾ 4/43).
• تَعْبِيرُ ٱلرُّؤْيَا — the interpretation of dreams. It occurs in the narrative of Joseph (Yūsuf 12/43: "if you can interpret dreams"). To interpret a dream is to cross from the image to the meaning.
• عِبَارَة — an expression; speech that carries a meaning across.
• عَبْرَة — a tear; the drop that overflows and crosses from the eye.

The common core of the root: to cross from one bank to the other.

And ʿibra is exactly this: to cross from the event to the verdict.

An event is not by itself a lesson. A lesson arises when one crosses from the visible face of the event to its invisible face. Pharaoh's drowning is an event; to draw a measure from it is a lesson.

The Qurʾān uses this word in several places and it always does the same work:

"O you who have insight! Take the lesson." (al-Ḥashr 59/2 — fa'-ʿtabirū)

"Surely in their stories there is a lesson for those who have insight." (Yūsuf 12/111)

"And in the cattle there is surely a lesson for you." (al-Naḥl 16/66; al-Muʾminūn 23/21)

The last example is worth recording: the lesson is taken not only from a narrative but from nature as well. And this prepares the next section (79/27-33, the table of creation).

And the verdict of the narrative is limited by a qualification.

The verse does not say "in that there is a lesson"; it says "in that there is a lesson for whoever feels awe."

That is, the lesson is not in the event; it is in the eye of the one looking.

When the same event is told to two people, it becomes a lesson to one and not to the other. The difference is not in the event but in the one looking.

This is the same as the finding recorded at al-Baqara 2/26. There, in the discussion of the example of the gnat, this was treated: "the same text, two results" — the same verse was a cause of guidance for one and of straying for another.

And this prepares the last verses of the sūra:

"You are only a warner to whoever feels awe of it." (79/45)

The two verses set the same qualification: the lesson to whoever feels awe, the warning to whoever feels awe.

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

A question and an honest answer. This qualification may look as though it sets up a vicious circle: if awe is needed in order to take a lesson, how is awe to arise?

The verse answers this question — but elsewhere in the sūra. In the nineteenth verse the order was: guiding → knowing → awe. That is, awe is not a precondition; it is the result of a process.

I record this connection as my own reading. But the words of the two verses (19 and 26) are in the text.

The "question of the vicious circle" recorded at al-Baqara 2/2-5 holds here too and the answer given there may be repeated: the text opens to the one who is open to it; it stays closed to the one who is closed. This is not a decree of destiny but a description of reading.