al-Shuʿarāʾ 26:224-226

Wa'sh-shuʿarāʾu yattabiʿuhumu'l-ghāwūn · A-lam tara annahum fī kulli wādin yahīmūn · Wa annahum yaqūlūna mā lā yafʿalūn

"As for the poets, those gone astray follow them. · Do you not see that they wander bewildered in every valley · and that they say what they do not do?"

Three verses. And the sūra takes its name from the first of these three: al-shuʿarāʾ.

And the position of the section must be recorded: since the two hundred and twenty-first verse the sūra has taken the source of speech as its subject. First upon whom the satans come down (221-223), then the poets (224-226), then the exception (227).

I record this as an observation about the context: the section is not an independent "discussion of poetry" but the last link of an answer given to a claim. The claim the sūra answers was this: "this man is a poet, his speech is poetry." And the Qurʾān touches on this claim in many sūras — bal qālū aḍghāthu aḥlāmin bali'ftarāhu bal huwa shāʿir (al-Anbiyāʾ 21/5), wa mā huwa bi-qawli shāʿir (al-Ḥāqqa 69/41 — treated in al-Ḥāqqa), am yaqūlūna shāʿirun natarabbaṣu bihi rayba'l-manūn (al-Ṭūr 52/30 — treated in al-Ṭūr).

The core sense of the root is not "poetry".

The root ش-ع-ر: to sense, to become aware of something fine, hidden or not easily noticed.

By the sense of the root, then, a shāʿir is not "one who makes rhymes" but one who senses what is fine and says it. This is the dictionary value of the word, and it carries no negative sense.

And the root had occurred twice more in the sūra, and this must be recorded:

The sūra, that is, has used the root from which it takes its name twice in the sense of "to perceive", and in the third place as the name of a group. This is a repetition that can be verified from the text.

The word order of the two hundred and twenty-fourth verse must be recorded, because the judgement comes out of it.

Wa'sh-shuʿarāʾu — yattabiʿuhumu'l-ghāwūn

The sentence, that is, gives no attribute directly about the poets. It does not say "poets are liars" or "poets are astray". What it says is who goes after them.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the construction of the sentence: the predicate is not about the poets themselves but about their followers. This also determines how the next two verses (225-226) are to be understood — because those two verses are attached by the pronoun annahum, and the referent of the pronoun is disputed.

The root was analysed in al-Najm, and its three occurrences in the sūra (91, 94, 224) were tabulated in the section on 26/90-95; I do not repeat it.

What is to be added here is this: the word occurs the first two times in the scene of the gathering in the account of Abraham, and the third time here. The sūra, that is, uses the word that names the side to whom the fire is shown, at the end, for a group of followers.

This is a repetition that can be verified from the text; what it means is interpretation, and two readings are possible:

I do not impose a preference.

The root ه-ي-م was analysed at al-Wāqiʿa 56/55 and I rely on that treatment. The description there: hīm is the plural of ahyam/haymāʾ and means a camel afflicted with a disease that leaves it never satisfied by water. Huyām — a condition found in camels that makes the animal drink continually while its thirst never passes.

And what was recorded there was this: the work of the comparison is to give not a measure but a state — a thirst that does not pass with drinking.

What is to be added here is the verb itself.

The senses the lexicographers give for the verb يَهِيمُ:

The core shared by the three senses must be recorded: to move without being bound to a direction and without reaching satisfaction.

And the expression fī kulli wādin ("in every valley") must be recorded. و-د-ي — a valley: the hollow between two rises, a watercourse.

The explanation the lexicographers give: wādī is used in Arabic figuratively for "a subject, a field" as well. The English "to range over every subject" is close to it.

The construction can therefore be understood in two ways, and both are transmitted:

And both readings accord with the core of the verb yahīmūn: directionlessness.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the picture the root of the word and the construction build together: what is criticised is not speaking but the speech's not being bound to a direction. The hīm camel is not one that does not drink — it drinks and is not satisfied. The matter, that is, is not inactivity but the absence of satisfaction and of direction.

And the centre of gravity of this three-verse section is here.

The sentence is short and complete: yaqūlūna mā lā yafʿalūn — "they say what they do not do."

And the same measure is set up once more in the Qurʾān, this time directly upon the believers. It was treated at al-Ṣaff 61/2-3 and I rely on that treatment.

Al-Ṣaff 61/2-3: yā ayyuha'lladhīna āmanū lima taqūlūna mā lā tafʿalūn · kabura maqtan ʿinda'llāhi an taqūlū mā lā tafʿalūn — "You who believe! Why do you say what you do not do? It is greatly hateful in the sight of God that you should say what you do not do."

I set the two verses side by side:

And what the two verses build together must be recorded, and this is my own reading:

Al-Shuʿarāʾ describes a group by this attribute. Al-Ṣaff forbids the same attribute to the believers. The measure, that is, is not peculiar to one group. The fit between what one says and what one does is in al-Shuʿarāʾ a measure of description, in al-Ṣaff a command.

And this measure is set up within the sūra itself as well: five messengers said five times "I ask you no wage" (109, 127, 145, 164, 180) — and the sūra gives this not as a claim but as a record of conduct. And the attribute of the messengers was amīn (107, 125, 143, 162, 178): trustworthy, that is, one whose word and state hold together.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the sūra as a whole: from beginning to end the sūra separates the messenger and the other side by the same measure — the distance between speech and act. The two hundred and twenty-sixth verse names that measure.

And this is the most important grammatical question of the section: to whom does the pronoun annahum in the two hundred and twenty-fifth and twenty-sixth verses refer?

The first reading is the widespread one, and the exception in the verse that follows (227) supports it: the exception is in the form illā'lladhīna āmanū, and it is understood to set apart a portion of the poets.

The second reading is also transmitted, and its ground is that the last word of the two hundred and twenty-fourth verse is al-ghāwūn — a pronoun refers to the nearest noun.

I do not impose a preference. What is to be recorded is this: whichever reading is taken, the two hundred and twenty-seventh verse sets an exception and prevents the description from being generalised to a whole group.