إِنَّ هَٰذِهِۦٓ أُمَّتُكُمْ أُمَّةً وَٰحِدَةً وَأَنَا۠ رَبُّكُمْ فَٱعْبُدُونِ · وَتَقَطَّعُوٓا۟ أَمْرَهُم بَيْنَهُمْ كُلٌّ إِلَيْنَا رَٰجِعُونَ
Inna hādhihi ummatukum ummatan wāḥidatan wa anā rabbukum fa'budūn · Wa taqaṭṭaʿū amrahum baynahum, kullun ilaynā rājiʿūn
"This community of yours is one single community, and I am your Lord; so serve Me. · Yet they cut their affair into pieces among themselves. All of them will return to Us."
And the ninety-second verse is the conclusion of a series that has run for forty-four verses. I record this as my own reading, its ground being the verse's place in the sūra: sixteen names have been ranged one after another, and for none of them is a separate religion or a separate call mentioned. And when the series ends, one single sentence comes.
The verse points back by saying hādhihi (this). There is disagreement about what the demonstrative refers to:
| View | What hādhihi is |
|---|---|
| 1 | The company of the prophets named — "this company is your company" |
| 2 | This religion or way — umma here means "a path, a religion followed" |
| 3 | The call to oneness — the one call repeated across the series |
Umma — root أ-م-م. The core sense of the root: to be in front, to be that towards which one turns. Imām (a leader), amām (in front), umm (a mother) are from the same root. And umma, by the lexicographers' definition, is a company gathered around something — or a way that is followed.
And a point of grammar: ummatan wāḥidatan is in the accusative, and the grammarians count it a circumstantial qualifier. That is, the sentence is not "this is your community and it is one" but "this is your community in the state of being one". Unity is given not as an attribute but as a state.
وَأَنَا۠ رَبُّكُمْ فَٱعْبُدُونِ — and this sentence repeats the close of the twenty-fifth verse: annahu lā ilāha illā ana fa'budūn.
| Verse | The sentence | Where |
|---|---|---|
| 25 | lā ilāha illā ana fa'budūn | Before the series — the revelation given to all the messengers |
| 92 | wa anā rabbukum fa'budūn | After the series — the verdict |
The same command, at the two ends of the series. This is a frame that can be verified within the sūra, and I record as my own reading: the series has been set between these two sentences.
Taqaṭṭaʿū — root ق-ط-ع, Form V (tafaʿʿul). And the burden of the form must be recorded: Form V here conveys multiplicity and gradualness — qaṭaʿa is to cut, qaṭṭaʿa is to cut much, and taqaṭṭaʿa is to fall or break into pieces.
And the verb is used transitively here: taqaṭṭaʿū amrahum — "they cut their affair into pieces". It has an object.
I record this as an observation about the structure: the sentence does not say "they parted"; it says "they cut their affair into pieces". That is, what is cut into pieces is not the community but the affair — and the community splits after it.
This subject was treated in detail at al-Shūrā on 42/13-14 and at al-Baqara on 2/213, and the two verses were compared point by point. I rely on those treatments.
"What is shared: the note of time — min baʿdi mā jāʾahum, 'after it had come to them'; the cause — baghyan baynahum, 'the envy among them'."
"That is, the cause of the division is not presented as ignorance. The text says it plainly: min baʿdi mā jāʾathumu'l-bayyināt — after the clear proofs had come."
| al-Baqara 2/213 | al-Shūrā 42/14 | al-Anbiyāʾ 21/92-93 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| What comes before | kāna'n-nāsu ummatan wāḥidah | sharaʿa lakum mina'd-dīn… — a command | inna hādhihi ummatukum ummatan wāḥidah |
| The verb | ikhtalafa — they fell into difference | tafarraqū — they broke apart | taqaṭṭaʿū — they cut into pieces |
| The note of time | min baʿdi mā jāʾathumu'l-bayyināt | min baʿdi mā jāʾahumu'l-ʿilm | Absent |
| The cause | baghyan baynahum | baghyan baynahum | Absent |
| What follows | God guided the believers to the truth | The judgement was deferred | kullun ilaynā rājiʿūn |
I record this as my own reading, its ground being the structure of the sūra: al-Baqara and al-Shūrā say within the sentence that the disagreement arose after the proof. al-Anbiyāʾ does not say it in the sentence, because the sūra itself says it: verses forty-eight to ninety-one are the proof itself. Sixteen names have been ranged, and in all of them the same call has been shown. And the sentence about the breaking apart has been set immediately after that list.
That is, three sūras give the same fact in three different ways: two by wording, one by structure. I offer this as a reading; the wording of the three verses is verifiable, the interpretation of the structure is mine.
كُلٌّ إِلَيْنَا رَٰجِعُونَ — kull with nunation, followed by a predicate in the plural of rational beings. And the verb occurred in the sūra's thirty-fifth verse: wa ilaynā turjaʿūn. The same root (ر-ج-ع), one a verb and one a noun. And the same root occurred in the sixty-fourth verse too (fa-rajaʿū ilā anfusihim). The root is in three places in the sūra: 35, 64, 93. It is a countable fact.