al-Baqara 2:174-176 — Those who fill their bellies with fire

"Those who conceal anything of the Book God has sent down and sell it for a small price — they fill their bellies with nothing but fire. God will not speak to them on the day of resurrection, nor will He purify them; and for them is a painful punishment. They are the ones who have bought straying at the price of guidance and punishment at the price of forgiveness. How enduring they are of the fire! That is because God has sent the Book down with the truth. And those who differ about the Book are in a far-off breach."

These three verses come immediately after the rulings about food (172-173) and use the same verb: eating.

In the previous verse what may be eaten had been regulated — carrion, blood, the flesh of swine, what is slaughtered in the name of other than God. Now a fifth thing is added, but not to the list: مَا يَأْكُلُونَ فِى بُطُونِهِمْ إِلَّا ٱلنَّارَ — "they fill their bellies with nothing but fire."

I record this as an observation about the word order: in changing the subject the sūra does not change the word. After what is forbidden to eat comes something not forbidden to eat but corrupt in the way it is earned. The discussion of food turns into a discussion of gain.

And the same transition will be made once more in the sūra: at verse 188 it will say "do not eat one another's property wrongfully". The Qurʾān uses the verb "to eat" insistently for unlawful gain — at verse 275 "those who eat ribā" is the same verb.

فِى بُطُونِهِمْ — "into their bellies." In the grammar of the sentence it is a superfluous detail; everyone knows that what is eaten goes to the belly. It is placed there for emphasis — just like "with their hands" at verse 79. The comparison is not left in the abstract; a body and a stomach are pictured.

The sūra's chain of katm (concealment) was given in a table at verse 140. This verse is the heaviest sentence of that chain, and it adds a second verb beside concealment: وَيَشْتَرُونَ بِهِۦ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا — "they sell it for a small price."

Concealment here, that is, does not stand alone; it is named together with a gain. This is the continuation of the threefold sequence at verse 79 (writing — ascribing — selling).

ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا — "a small price." The adjective states not the smallness of the sum but the ratio of the value: whatever is received in return, it is small beside what is given. The same expression had occurred at verse 41.

Two negations are listed, and both had occurred earlier in this sūra in their positive form:

What is enumerated as punishment, that is, is the withdrawal of what is enumerated elsewhere in the sūra as favour. I record this as my own reading: the description of the torment is made by the taking back of what has been given.

That the root ز-ك-و carries the senses "to purify" and "to make grow" together was treated in detail in the discussion of al-Jumuʿa (62/2); I do not repeat it.

Verse 175 sets up once more the comparison the sūra uses most often — trade. Its occurrences in the sūra are these: 16 (those who buy straying with guidance), 86 (those who exchange the hereafter for this world), 90 (those who sell themselves), 102 (those who sell their share in the hereafter), 108 (those who exchange faith for unbelief), 175 (here).

And here two exchanges at once are enumerated: straying at the price of guidance, punishment at the price of forgiveness. Both the road and the outcome, that is, have been exchanged.

The word order is built in reverse, and this is Arabic's own logic: in the verb ishtarā the particle bāʾ marks the price (what is paid). "They bought straying with guidance" — the straying is what is taken, the guidance what is paid. What is left in hand is worse than what is given.

This sentence is one of the most disputed short expressions in the Qurʾān.

The pattern in Arabic is the verb of wonder (mā afʿalahū — "how … they are!"). But what the sentence states is disputed:

I do not impose a preference. What is common to all three is this: the sentence expresses an astonishment, and what is wondered at is that this road should be chosen with the outcome known.

The choosing of the root ص-ب-ر is striking in its own right. At verse 153 the sūra had commanded patience, and at 155-157 had given good news to the patient. The same word is used here in reverse: there is a power of endurance, but it is spent in the wrong place. The word itself is not praise; the praise comes from what is endured for.

Verse 176 gives the ground of the three verses: ذَٰلِكَ بِأَنَّ ٱللَّهَ نَزَّلَ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ بِٱلْحَقِّ — "that is because God has sent the Book down with the truth."

The ruling, that is, is attached not to the character of those who conceal but to the character of what they conceal. The weight comes not from the act but from its subject.

شِقَاق — root ش-ق-ق: to split, to divide in two. This word was treated at verse 137; the finding there holds here too: the pattern shiqāq conveys reciprocity and its picture is concrete — each standing on one side of the split.

The difference is in the adjective added here: بَعِيد — far. The split, that is, has widened; the two sides have opened so far apart that they cannot see one another.

And the subject of the division is worth recording: ikhtalafū fi'l-kitāb — the division is about the Book. The parties, that is, are disputing not about different books but about the same book. The sūra had recorded this at verse 113 as well: both sides were reading the book and annulling one another.

This will be attached to a principle at verse 213 of the sūra: it will be said there that disagreement arose after the book came, and by reason of baghy (passing the bound). The source of the disagreement, that is, is not a lack of knowledge.