Ṭāhā 20:38-39

Idh awḥaynā ilā ummika mā yūḥā · Ani'qdhifīhi fi't-tābūti fa'qdhifīhi fi'l-yammi fa'l-yulqihi'l-yammu bi's-sāḥili yaʾkhudhhu ʿaduwwun lī wa ʿaduwwun lah, wa alqaytu ʿalayka maḥabbatan minnī wa li-tuṣnaʿa ʿalā ʿaynī

"'When We revealed to your mother what was revealed: · "Cast him into the chest, then cast it into the water; let the water throw it onto the shore, and let one who is My enemy and his enemy take him." And I cast upon you a love from Me, that you might be reared before My eye.'"

This section was treated in detail at al-Qaṣaṣ on 28/7-13. There the five elements of the announcement given to the mother (suckle him — when you fear — cast him into the water — do not fear and do not grieve — We shall return him) were tabulated; fārigh, rabaṭnā ʿalā qalbihā and ḥarramnā ʿalayhi'l-marāḍiʿ were analysed; and what was recorded there was this: "the promise comes about through an ordinary chain of causes." I rely on that treatment and do not repeat it here.

What belongs here is the difference between the two tellings, and the whole of it can be verified from the text:

Three differences are worth recording.

One — the addressee changes. al-Qaṣaṣ tells the story; Ṭāhā tells the hero of the story his own history. All the verbs are ʿalayka, ummika, tuṣnaʿa — second person.

Two — Ṭāhā names the water's own act separately. Fa'l-yulqihi'l-yammu bi's-sāḥil — an imperative, and its subject is the water. In Arabic this is a third-person command built with the lām al-amr. That is, the sentence commands the water.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the subject of the imperative: the command given to the mother and the command given to the water are ranged in the same sentence, in the same mood. A human act and the act of the water are given as links in a single chain. This is the grammatical counterpart of the observation recorded at al-Qaṣaṣ, that "the promise comes about through an ordinary chain of causes".

Three — there are two sentences in Ṭāhā that are not in al-Qaṣaṣ: the love, and the being reared. These are treated separately below.

The root ق-ذ-ف — occurs here for the first time in the series. The sense the lexicographers give: to hurl a thing far, to throw it. The word conveys a forceful throw; from the same root comes qadhf (to hurl an accusation — al-Nūr 24/4).

The choice of word is worth recording, and it is easily missed: the verse uses the same verb twice — the child is "hurled" into the chest, the chest is "hurled" into the water. No softened verb has been used.

I record this as an observation: the text records how hard the command was by not softening the word. The same honesty was recorded at Maryam on 19/23-25 (Mary's words yā laytanī mittu qabla hādhā given as they stand); I rely on that treatment.

ٱلتَّابُوت — a chest, a box. The word occurs once more in the Qurʾān, at al-Baqara 2/248 (the chest returning to the Children of Israel). No connection is drawn between the two verses; I record only the distribution of the word.

ٱلْيَمّ — the sea, or a great river. The word occurs four times in this sūra (twice in 39, then 78 and 97) and the fourth is worth recording: in the ninety-seventh verse the calf will be flung into the yamm. That is, the sūra brings back the water that set the story going as the water that swallows the idol at the story's end. This is a repetition that can be verified within the sūra.

Every word of the sentence is worth recording.

أَلْقَيْتُ — "I cast, I laid down". The verb gives the love as something placed. And its subject is the first person singular: "I".

مَحَبَّة is indefinite — "a love". And minnī follows: "from Me". That is, its source is stated separately.

عَلَيْكَ — "upon you". The preposition is worth recording: not laka (for you) or fī qalbika (in your heart) — but ʿalā, that is, something laid on top, seen from outside.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the joint construction of the three words: the verse tells the love not as a quality of Moses's own but as a covering laid over him. And the verb is in the past tense: the thing is done.

And at al-Qaṣaṣ on 28/9 the result of this was told: qurratu ʿaynin lī wa lak lā taqtulūh — the words of Pharaoh's wife. That is, Ṭāhā gives the cause and al-Qaṣaṣ the result. Read together the two sūras yield a chain, and I record this as my own reading: the reason for being protected in the enemy's house is not a power but a feeling.

The root ص-ن-ع: to make something with skill, with labour spent on it. Ṣināʿa — a craft; ṣunʿ — work made with skill. What distinguishes the root, as the lexicographers record, is that the work is done with care — fiʿl (to do) is general, ṣunʿ particular.

And the verb is passive: tuṣnaʿa — "that you might be made, be reared".

عَلَىٰ عَيْنِى — "upon My eye". In Arabic the idiom conveys being under watch and protection. I enter a note per the method (Method): this expression cannot be understood in a way that ascribes an organ to God. The note entered at al-Baqara on 2/115 for wajh and at Ghāfir (al-Muʾmin) on 40/7 for the throne holds here as well: in the classical tradition two positions are transmitted — accepting the wording as it stands and committing its modality to God (tafwīḍ), or interpreting it in the sense of watchful care (taʾwīl). I transmit both and do not impose a preference.

And the distribution of the root in the sūra is a datum of the text:

The same root three times: twice the work made lasts, once it is swallowed.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is this distribution: the sūra tells Moses as a thing "made", and names the thing the other side "made" with the same root and does away with it. Two ṣunʿs are set against one another.