Tafsir LabMethodGitHubTürkçe

Ṣād 38:41-44

The Qurʾān · Sūra 38: Ṣād · verses 41-44

This commentary was written by Claude (Anthropic); it carries no religious authority and should be checked against the classical sources.

38/41-44

وَٱذْكُرْ عَبْدَنَآ أَيُّوبَ إِذْ نَادَىٰ رَبَّهُۥٓ أَنِّى مَسَّنِىَ ٱلشَّيْطَٰنُ بِنُصْبٍ وَعَذَابٍ · ٱرْكُضْ بِرِجْلِكَ هَٰذَا مُغْتَسَلٌۢ بَارِدٌ وَشَرَابٌ · وَوَهَبْنَا لَهُۥٓ أَهْلَهُۥ وَمِثْلَهُم مَّعَهُمْ رَحْمَةً مِّنَّا وَذِكْرَىٰ لِأُو۟لِى ٱلْأَلْبَٰبِ · وَخُذْ بِيَدِكَ ضِغْثًا فَٱضْرِب بِّهِۦ وَلَا تَحْنَثْ إِنَّا وَجَدْنَٰهُ صَابِرًا نِّعْمَ ٱلْعَبْدُ إِنَّهُۥٓ أَوَّابٌ

Wa'dhkur ʿabdanā Ayyūba idh nādā rabbahū annī massaniya'sh-shayṭānu bi-nuṣbin wa ʿadhāb · Urkuḍ bi-rijlika, hādhā mughtasalun bāridun wa sharāb · Wa wahabnā lahū ahlahū wa mithlahum maʿahum raḥmatan minnā wa dhikrā li-uli'l-albāb · Wa khudh bi-yadika ḍighthan fa'ḍrib bihī wa lā taḥnath, innā wajadnāhu ṣābirā, niʿma'l-ʿabd, innahū awwāb

"And remember our servant Job. When he called to his Lord: 'Satan has touched me with weariness and torment.' 'Strike the ground with your foot: here is a cool washing-place and a drink.' And We bestowed on him his family and the like of them with them — as a mercy from Us and an admonition for those who have a kernel. 'Take a handful of twigs in your hand, strike with it, and do not break your oath.' We found him patient. How excellent a servant! He was one who turned back often."

Two commands, two prophets

For the third time the sūra says wa'dhkur ʿabdanā. And what distinguishes this account from the earlier ones is that it begins not with what was given but with what was taken away.

AccountWhat stands at the opening
David (17)dha'l-aydstrength
Solomon (30)wa wahabnāa bestowal
Job (41)massaniya'sh-shayṭānu bi-nuṣbin wa ʿadhāban affliction

I record this as my own reading: in the first two accounts a test came after what was given; in the third the test stands at the beginning. The sūra shows that the same epithet (awwāb) is the same in all three states.

إِذْ نَادَىٰ رَبَّهُۥ — the manner of the calling

نَادَىٰ — root ن-د-ي: to call in a loud voice. And this root occurred in the third verse: fa-nādaw wa-lāta ḥīna manāṣ — "they cried out, but it was no longer the hour of escape."

VerseWhoWhenOutcome
3The generations destroyedAfter the hour had passedwa-lāta ḥīna manāṣ
41JobWhile the affliction lastedAn answer comes (42)

This is a shared wording that can be verified, and I record it as my own reading: the same verb in two places, with two opposite outcomes. What divides them is not the cry itself but its time. The third verse set up a question of hour; the forty-first shows the other face of that question.

مَسَّنِىَ ٱلشَّيْطَٰنُ بِنُصْبٍ وَعَذَابٍ — the wording of the complaint

مَسَّ — root م-س-س: to touch. And the distinguishing side of the word is its lightness: mass is to come into contact with a thing — not to strike, not to hit.

نُصْب — root ن-ص-ب. This word was treated in al-Ghāshiya at 88/3 and in al-Inshirāḥ, and this verse was named there: "Satan has touched me with weariness and torment" (Ṣād 38/41).

The concrete sense of the root: to set a thing up, to hold it upright. Naṣb — a standing stone; manṣib — the place where a person is set up. And from there: naṣab/nuṣb — to grow weary, exhaustion. The link the lexicographers make is this: standing upright for a long time wearies.

The word conveys not "pain", that is, but exhaustion.

WordWhat
نُصْبExhaustion, being spent — the withdrawal of strength
عَذَابDistress, affliction — what comes from outside

The two words together take in two directions: the exhaustion within and the distress without.

To whom the complaint is made and to what it is ascribed

And here there is a construction that must be read with care.

Job ascribes the affliction to Satan: massaniya'sh-shayṭān. But the one he calls to is his Lord: nādā rabbah.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the separation of the subjects of the sentence:

ElementWho
The one called toThe Lord
The one the affliction is ascribed toSatan

There is no reproach in the sentence, that is. Job calls to his Lord but does not ascribe the affliction to Him. And this prepares the verdict in the forty-fourth verse (innā wajadnāhu ṣābirā).

Satan's role here has been disputed in the classical commentaries, and the disagreement is real:

ViewExplanation
WhisperingSatan's touch is not the sickness but the whispering he gave during the sickness
The distress itselfAn effect of Satan's, by God's leave, is in question; the verse says this in its wording
Ascription out of courtesyJob ascribed the affliction, out of courtesy, to Satan rather than to his Lord

I convey all three and do not impose a preference. And in this discussion I do not enter into details resting on report — the kind of the illness, its duration, what befell his family; the verse says none of these things.

ٱرْكُضْ بِرِجْلِكَ — the form of the answer

رَكَضَ — root ر-ك-ض. Its concrete sense: to strike with the foot, to kick. The lexicographers record that the word is used in particular for a rider's striking with his foot to spur his horse. From here comes the sense "to run, to go swiftly" as well (al-Anbiyāʾ 21/12idhā hum minhā yarkuḍūn).

And the character of the command must be recorded: an act is asked for.

I record this as my own reading: the answer is not a sentence of glad tidings but a command to move. A sick and exhausted man is told to strike the ground with his foot. The healing, that is, comes after the person's own movement.

And this is a pattern that has a parallel in the Qurʾān: Mary too is given a command — wa huzzī ilayki bi-jidhʿi'n-nakhlati tusāqiṭ ʿalayki ruṭaban janiyyā (Maryam 19/25): she is asked to shake the trunk of the palm towards herself. In both places a small act is asked for in a situation that looks impossible. This link is one I make; the verses do not refer to one another.

هَٰذَا مُغْتَسَلٌۢ بَارِدٌ وَشَرَابٌ — what is given

مُغْتَسَل — root غ-س-ل: to wash. A noun of place or of instrument of Form VIII: a place to wash in, or the thing one washes with (water).

بَارِد — root ب-ر-د: cold, cool.

And two uses are given: to wash and to drink.

UseTo what
mughtasalOutward — the body
sharābInward — drinking

I record this as an observation: in the forty-first verse the affliction was given with two words (nuṣb — exhaustion from within, ʿadhāb — distress from without). In the forty-second the answer comes in a pair as well: drinking and washing. Two words fall to two afflictions.

And the epithet bārid must be recorded: in the fifty-seventh verse of the sūra the drink given to those in the Fire will be ḥamīm (boiling water). Two drinks in the same sūra: the one cool, the other boiling. This is a contrast that can be verified from the text.

وَوَهَبْنَا لَهُۥٓ أَهْلَهُۥ وَمِثْلَهُم مَّعَهُمْ

And the root و-ه-ب comes for the fourth and last time. It was tabulated above: al-Wahhāb (9) → wahabnā (30) → hab lī (35) → wahabnā (43).

وَمِثْلَهُم مَّعَهُمْ — "and the like of them with them".

The exegetes explain this expression in two ways:

ViewExplanation
His family was given back and as many again were addedAn increase in number
His family and their offspringThe later generations are included as well

I do not impose a preference.

رَحْمَةً مِّنَّا وَذِكْرَىٰ لِأُو۟لِى ٱلْأَلْبَٰبِ — and two grounds are given:

GroundTo whom
raḥmatan minnāTo Job — the event itself
wa dhikrā li-uli'l-albābTo the reader — the telling of the event

I record this as my own reading: the verse gives both the reason the event was lived and the reason it is told. And the second ground uses exactly the same words as the ground for the Book's being sent down in the twenty-ninth verse: wa li-yatadhakkara ulu'l-albāb. It was tabulated above.

وَخُذْ بِيَدِكَ ضِغْثًا فَٱضْرِب بِّهِۦ وَلَا تَحْنَثْ — the question of the oath

ضِغْث — root ض-غ-ث. And the lexicographers describe the word thus: a bundle of mixed grass, twigs or stalks, as much as a hand can grasp. A handful. There is a mixedness and a being held together at the root of the word; from the same root aḍghāthu aḥlām — confused dreams (Yūsuf 12/44).

تَحْنَثْ — root ح-ن-ث. Its concrete sense: a sin, a grave offence; and the breaking of an oath. Ḥinth — to break an oath. The original sense at the root of the word is "a heavy burden, a sin", and it passed to this meaning because the breaking of an oath was counted a sin.

Now the disagreement. The verse gives a command but does not state the background of the command (what the oath was).

QuestionViews
What the oath wasThe verse does not say. It is transmitted in the classical commentaries that an oath had been sworn and that this command was its fulfilment; I do not enter into the narratives about the content of the oath, because they have no support from the text
What is to be struckThe verse does not say. The person or thing to be struck is not named in the wording
What the ḍighth is(1) A handful of grass / a bundle of thin twigs — the description of the majority of the lexicographers; (2) A bundle of ears of grain; (3) Any mixed handful held together
The scope of the ruling(1) It is a dispensation particular to Job, from which no general ruling is derived; (2) It is a general dispensation: the wording of the oath is counted fulfilled by a single collective stroke. This verse has been discussed in the literature of jurisprudence and there is a difference of view among the schools. I issue no legal ruling; I confine myself to recording that the disagreement exists

In this question I certainly do not impose a preference, and my reason is this: the verse does not state two of the three elements of the matter (the content of the oath and the one it concerns). Where the text is silent I am silent.

The only thing verifiable in the wording is this: there is an oath, it is asked that it not be broken, and the manner of its fulfilment has been made lighter.

I record this as an observation: the choice of the word ḍighth — a handful of thin twigs — conveys lightness. What is recounted in the verse, that is, is not the cancellation of an obligation but the lessening of its weight. The oath stands; the manner of carrying it changes.

إِنَّا وَجَدْنَٰهُ صَابِرًا — patience as a verdict

And now the sūra's chain of patience closes. It was tabulated above; here I complete it.

VerseWhoMoodObject
6The leading men of MeccaCommandʿalā ālihatikum
17God → to the envoyCommandʿalā mā yaqūlūn
44God → about JobVerdict

Two commands and one verdict. And the form of the verdict must be recorded: innā wajadnāhu ṣābirā — "we found him patient."

وَجَدَ — root و-ج-د: to find. The verb is the pattern that announces the outcome of a test: something sought has been found where it was sought.

I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the choice of verb: the verse does not say "he was patient"; it says "we found him patient." Patience, that is, is given not as something claimed but as something established after a testing.

And this must be read together with the forty-first verse. Job had complained — massaniya'sh-shayṭānu bi-nuṣbin wa ʿadhāb. To have spoken one's affliction, that is, is no bar to being found patient.

I record this plainly as my own inference, because it corrects a widespread misunderstanding: the patience the verse describes is not silence. Job speaks, takes his affliction to his Lord, receives an answer — and is found patient. No contradiction is set up between these two in the verse.

نِّعْمَ ٱلْعَبْدُ إِنَّهُۥٓ أَوَّابٌ — the exact repetition of the thirtieth verse. Two prophets (Solomon and Job) close with the same two sentences.


The whole of Sūrat Ṣād