al-Ṣāffāt 37:158-163

Wa jaʿalū baynahu wa bayna'l-jinnati nasaban, wa laqad ʿalimati'l-jinnatu innahum la-muḥḍarūn · Subḥāna'llāhi ʿammā yaṣifūn · Illā ʿibāda'llāhi'l-mukhlaṣīn · Fa-innakum wa mā taʿbudūn · Mā antum ʿalayhi bi-fātinīn · Illā man huwa ṣāli'l-jaḥīm

"They have set up a kinship between Him and the jinn — while the jinn know well that they themselves will be brought. Glory be to God above what they describe — except God's chosen servants. Neither you nor what you serve · can lead anyone astray against Him — save the one who is to enter the blaze."

Nasab — root ن-س-ب: to attach a thing to a thing, to attribute. Nisba — a relation; nasab — a tie of blood, lineage.

Al-jinna — root ج-ن-ن: to cover, to hide. The root was analysed in detail in al-Jinn. I rely on that treatment.

And there is disagreement over the sense of the word al-jinna here:

All three are transmitted in the classical commentaries. I do not impose a preference.

And a note of word order: baynahu wa bayna'l-jinnati — "between Him and the jinn". The pronoun (hu) refers to God, and His name is not mentioned. This is a choice that increases the weight of the sentence: not even the subject of the claim is written out.

Wa laqad ʿalimati'l-jinnatu innahum la-muḥḍarūn — a point of word order.

Whom the sentence concerns can be read in two ways:

Both are transmitted by the grammarians. The first is the more widespread, and its logic is this: a being that is to be called to account cannot have a kinship with God. The proof, that is, comes from the state of the very party who is claimed.

I record this as my own reading: the first reading gives the sentence the value of a testimony. The party claimed refutes the claim by its own condition — in Sūrat al-Jinn it was the jinn themselves who said that the sky was closed (al-Jinn). The same method: the knowledge comes from the subject of the claim.

Muḥḍarūn — for the third and last time in the sūra (57, 127, 158). The table was given in the section on the fifty-seventh verse.

Subḥān — root س-ب-ح, a verbal noun: declaring free of all unworthiness. The root was analysed in the section on the hundred and forty-third verse, and the table of the four occurrences in the sūra was given there.

Yaṣifūn — root و-ص-ف: to qualify and describe a thing. Ṣifa is from the same root. This root is analysed here for the first time in this commentary.

The sense the lexicographers give: waṣf is to speak of a thing by a property found in it. Waṣafa'sh-shayʾ — he described it.

And a point of word order must be recorded: ʿammā yaṣifūn — "above what they describe". The verse does not say "above what they say" or "above their lies"; it says above what they describe.

I record this as my own reading: waṣf is to describe a thing — that is, to draw its bounds. And declaring God free is set exactly against this: what is described has been bounded; God is outside the bound the describer draws. The choice of the word suggests that the matter is not merely a false claim but the very attempt at description. This is an explanation.

And the sentence occurs twice in the sūra — this is a textual datum:

The second is the expanded form of the first, and it is the closing of the sūra. The sūra closes by repeating in a longer form, in the hundred and eightieth verse, the sentence it said in the hundred and fifty-ninth.

The sentence for the fourth time in the sūra (40, 74, 128, 160). It was analysed in the section on the fortieth verse.

And the dispute of word order here must be recorded:

Both are transmitted by the grammarians. The second reading is worth noting because it turns the exception into a praise: there is a company that can describe rightly. I do not impose a preference.

And the address turns once more to the second person: innakum — "you".

Wa mā taʿbudūn — "and what you serve". And the particle is again mā. The same choice was present in the twenty-second and ninety-fifth verses. The sūra is consistent in this, and it is a countable datum of the language.

Fātin — root ف-ت-ن, an active participle. The root was analysed in the section on the sixty-third verse: to put gold into fire and separate it; to test, to lead astray.

Its sense here: one who leads astray, who turns another from his way.

A point of word order: mā antum ʿalayhi bi-fātinīn — the preposition ʿalayhi has been brought forward. The grammarians divide over the referent of the pronoun:

Both are transmitted. I do not impose a preference.

And the letter bi- has been added at the head of fātinīn — in Arabic this bāʾ, coming on the predicate in negative sentences, announces reinforcement: "you are in no way leaders astray".

Ṣālī — root ص-ل-ي: to enter the fire, to be scorched in fire. Ṣalā — he cast into / entered the fire. In the Qurʾān: wa taṣliyatu jaḥīm (al-Wāqiʿa 56/94) — treated in al-Wāqiʿa.

A point of word order: ṣāli'l-jaḥīm — the construct of an active participle; the final yāʾ has dropped (ṣālī → ṣāli). This is a regular dropping in Arabic in the construct state.

Al-jaḥīm — for the sixth and last time in the sūra (23, 55, 64, 68, 97, 163).

And the sense of the exception is worth noting — as my own reading: after saying "you cannot lead anyone astray", the verse sets a group apart: those who are to enter the blaze in any case. Leading astray, that is, works upon one who deserves to be led astray. This accords with the thirty-second verse of the sūra: there too those who led astray said "we ourselves had gone astray", and those led astray were told "you were not believers to begin with" (29). Both places say the same thing: an influence coming from outside does not work without finding a response within.