Hūd 11:64-65

wa yā qawmi hādhihī nāqatu'llāhi lakum āyatan fa-dharūhā taʾkul fī arḍi'llāhi wa lā tamassūhā bi-sūʾin fa-yaʾkhudhakum ʿadhābun qarīb · fa-ʿaqarūhā fa-qāla tamattaʿū fī dārikum thalāthata ayyām, dhālika waʿdun ghayru makdhūb

"'My people! This is the she-camel of God, a sign for you. Let her be, to eat in the earth of God, and do not touch her with harm, or a punishment close at hand will seize you.' · But they hamstrung her. So he said: 'Enjoy yourselves in your homes for three days. That is a promise that will not be belied.'"

The she-camel is mentioned in several sūras of the Qurʾān (al-Shuʿarāʾ 26/155, al-Aʿrāf — not yet in this series, al-Qamar 54/27, al-Shams 91/13). It was treated in al-Shuʿarāʾ and al-Shams; I rely on that treatment.

And the construction must be recorded: nāqatu'llāh — "the she-camel of God".

This is what in Arabic is called the genitive of honour (iḍāfat al-tashrīf): attributing a thing to God in order to raise it (baytu'llāh, nāqatu'llāh). The she-camel, that is, is attributed not in point of ownership but in point of standing.

And immediately afterwards comes a second genitive construction: fī arḍi'llāh — "in the earth of God".

I record this as an observation about the word order: the two genitives stand one after the other. Both the camel and the ground are attributed to the same place — that is, the people are left with no claim of right either to the camel or to the ground she grazes on.

Āya here means "sign, proof". And why the she-camel is a sign — the Qurʾān does not explain this in Hūd.

A note, per the rule: in the classical commentaries detailed reports are transmitted about how the she-camel appeared, how much water she drank, which rock she came out of. None of this is in the Qurʾān; it is not passed on in this commentary.

What the Qurʾān gives is three items, and all of them are here: the she-camel is a sign, she is to be left free in the earth of God, and she is not to be touched. A fourth item is given at al-Qamar 54/28: the turns at the water (al-māʾu qismatun baynahum) — treated in al-Qamar.

The command is not a command to do but a command to leave alone: dharūhā — "let her be".

I record this as an observation: what is asked of the people is not an act of worship, a building or a payment; it is not to interfere. And the test lies exactly there.

The root ع-ق-ر: to wound, to cut the legs; to bring an animal down by cutting its legs before slaughtering it. From the same root come ʿāqir (barren) and ʿuqr (the root, the base of a thing).

And the economy of the verse is worth recording: after a long sentence of command, the verse answers with a single verb — fa-ʿaqarūhā. In between there is nothing at all: no argument, no reason, no interval.

And the verb is plural: "they hamstrung her". In another place the Qurʾān reports that the act was done by a single person (fa-nādaw ṣāḥibahum fa-taʿāṭā fa-ʿaqar — al-Qamar 54/29; idhi'nbaʿatha ashqāhā — al-Shams 91/12). These two verses were treated in al-Qamar and al-Shams.

And the difference between the two tellings is attached to a principle, and I record it relying on al-Shams: one person committed the act and the responsibility is ascribed to the community — because the community did not prevent him. And Sūrat al-Shams says this outright: fa-kadhdhabūhu fa-ʿaqarūhā.

And the span given must be recorded: three days.

This is on the same line as ummatin maʿdūda ("a numbered span") in the eighth verse of the sūra. This is an overlap that can be verified from the text.

ذَٰلِكَ وَعْدٌ غَيْرُ مَكْذُوبٍ — and the expression is built with a passive participle: ghayru makdhūb — "not belied / not to be belied".

I record this as a grammatical observation: the sentence does not say ghayru kādhib ("not lying"). The passive form reports that the promise cannot be belied from the other side. The truth of the word, that is, does not depend on the addressee's acceptance.