al-Naml 27:48-51

wa kāna fi'l-madīnati tisʿatu rahṭin yufsidūna fi'l-arḍi wa lā yuṣliḥūn · qālū taqāsamū bi'llāhi la-nubayyitannahū wa ahlahū thumma la-naqūlanna li-waliyyihī mā shahidnā mahlika ahlihī wa innā la-ṣādiqūn · wa makarū makran wa makarnā makran wa hum lā yashʿurūn · fa'nẓur kayfa kāna ʿāqibatu makrihim annā dammarnāhum wa qawmahum ajmaʿīn

"In that city there were nine men who spread corruption in the land and set nothing right. They said: 'Swear to one another by God: we shall fall upon him and his household by night, and then we shall say to his next of kin: we did not witness the killing of his household, and we are telling the truth.' They plotted a plot, and We plotted a plot — and they did not notice. Look, then, how the end of their plot came about: We destroyed them and their whole people."

The root ر-ه-ط: the close kin around a person, a small group. The lexicographers describe a rahṭ as a group of between three and ten men, and record that the word is a collective noun with no singular of its own.

How the number is stated is worth recording: tisʿatu rahṭin — nine rahṭ.

Two readings of the phrase are transmitted in the classical commentaries:

I do not impose a preference.

And it must be recorded that the number occurs here for the second time in this sūra:

The same number, in two different blocks of the sūra. This is a repetition that can be verified from the text. I build no link of meaning on it, and per the method (Method) I do not enter into numerical reckoning; what I record is only the repetition itself.

The sentence is built with two verbs, and the second is not a completion of the first but a separate qualification.

The root ف-س-د: a thing's going out of its own working order, its going bad. The root ص-ل-ح: to be fit, to be in working order.

An observation about the word order must be recorded: the sentence does not stop at "they spread corruption" — it adds wa lā yuṣliḥūn. Two separate things are thus said: they break, and they do not mend.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is that the second clause has been added: a community could be one that "does not mend" without the first clause holding of it as well. The second leaves the first no door of excuse: the one who breaks has no side to him that repairs what he has broken.

And the frame recorded in al-Qaṣaṣ should be recalled: that sūra was built on the pair ʿuluww and fasād, and verse 14 of al-Naml carried the same pair (ʿuluwwā … al-mufsidīn). Here the same root occurs for the third time.

Three occurrences, in three different blocks. This is a weave that can be verified within the sūra.

The root ق-س-م: to divide, to apportion; and from this, to swear an oath (qasam). The lexicographers make the connection thus: the one who swears binds his word to a surety that cannot be divided.

From Form VI, taqāsum: to swear oaths to one another. The oath is thus not one-sided; it is given by each to the others.

And what the oath is sworn by must be recorded: bi'llāh — by God.

I record this as an observation, and its ground is the verse itself: the plan for a killing is bound with an oath in God's name. The text does not go on to name this as a contradiction — it reports the sentence as it stands. And its force comes from that.

The root ب-ي-ت: to pass the night, to do something by night. Bayt (house) is from the same root — the place where the night is passed. And tabyīt: to make a raid by night.

The choice of word is worth recording: the verb names not the killing but its hour. The plan thus rests less on the act itself than on its being unseen.

The third stage must be recorded, and I give it as my own reading: the plan contains not only the killing but the account to be given afterwards. Mā shahidnā mahlika ahlih — "we did not witness the killing of his household." And to this a claim of truthfulness is added: wa innā la-ṣādiqūn.

Two of the three stages thus belong to speech. This is a structure that can be verified from the text, and it shows what the verse's corruption (yufsidūn) is described by: the deed and the account built on top of it are planned together.

The root م-ك-ر: the core sense the lexicographers give is to do a thing secretly and by a roundabout way, to wind about. The word is not pejorative in itself; its character comes from the qualification it carries in the sentence.

The sharpest expression of this root was treated in Fāṭir at 35/43: wa lā yaḥīqu'l-makru's-sayyiʾu illā bi-ahlih — "an evil plot closes in on none but its author." And the finding about word order recorded there was this: the sentence is built with a negation plus an exception, so that the possibility of the plot going anywhere else is shut off. I rely on that treatment.

And there was one further qualification there, and it works here: in the sentence of Fāṭir the plot was qualified by the adjective al-sayyiʾ (evil). The verdict was carried not by the word itself but by its adjective.

The verse of al-Naml settles the same matter by another route, and this is one of the most striking points of word order in the sūra:

The two sentences are word for word the same; only their subjects differ.

The classical commentaries dwell on how this usage is to be understood, and the disagreement is not concealed:

All three explanations are transmitted, and they do not contradict one another; I do not impose a preference.

And the finding recorded for this pattern in al-Humaza works here too, and I rely on it: there the name of the Fire (Ḥuṭama) was given on the same pattern as the name of the offender (humaza / lumaza), and it was recorded thus: the penalty is described in the grammar of the offence. This verse of al-Naml does the same thing not by the pattern but by the very same word.

وَهُمْ لَا يَشْعُرُونَ — and the sentence closes with the sūra's third spine.

This phrase had occurred at verse 18 in the ant's speech, and there it conveyed an excuse. Here the same phrase conveys a heedlessness.

The same three words, in two different blocks, in two opposite functions.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the two verses themselves: in the first, not noticing lightens the fault; in the second it does not save. The difference lies in what it is that goes unnoticed: in one, a living thing beneath one's foot; in the other, the outcome of a plot one laid oneself.

And the sentence is the same as the sentence at verse 14 — only its last word has changed:

The same pattern three times, with three different endings. This is a repetition that can be verified within the sūra.

دَمَّرْنَٰهُمْ — root د-م-ر: to destroy, to root out. The root was treated in al-Aḥqāf at 46/25 (tudammiru kulla shayʾin bi-amri rabbihā) and in al-Ṣāffāt. I do not repeat it here.

And its extent must be recorded: wa qawmahum ajmaʿīn — "and their whole people." The plan of nine men thus does not bind those nine alone.