Muḥammad 47:26

Dhālika bi-annahum qālū li'lladhīna karihū mā nazzala'llāhu sa-nuṭīʿukum fī baʿḍi'l-amr; wa'llāhu yaʿlamu isrārahum

"That is because they said to those who disliked what God sent down: 'We will obey you in some matters.' And God knows what they keep secret."

The fourth occurrence of the sūra's dhālika bi-anna pattern (3, 9, 11, 26, 28).

And this time the ground is a word: قَالُوا۟. Neither a behaviour, nor a feeling, nor a relationship — a sentence.

And the sentence spoken is itself the real matter of the verse.

سَنُطِيعُكُمْ — sīn + imperfect: the future. "We will obey."

And the root ط-و-ع was treated at verse 21: ṭāʿa carries in its root the idea of doing willingly.

فِى بَعْضِ ٱلْأَمْرِ — "in some of the matter".

And this qualification carries the whole weight of the sentence.

The sentence does not say "we will obey you". It says "in some matters". That is, a limit is set, a bargain is struck, a measure is kept.

And at first glance this appears to lighten the sentence: not a complete surrender but a partial compliance.

But the ruling the verse gives is heavy — and this is the place to dwell on.

The reason is to whom the sentence is spoken: li'lladhīna karihū mā nazzala'llāh — to those who disliked what God sent down.

That is, a word of limited obedience is given to an unlimited opposition.

I record a reading — it is my own inference: the qualification "in some matters" clears the speaker in his own eyes. The person has not changed sides completely; he has only fallen in on a part of it. The verse does not accept this qualification — and it says why in the next clause.

I do not present this as a binding exegesis; the verse does not write out explicitly why the qualification "in some matters" is not sufficient.

In this verse Form tafʿīl is used: نَزَّلَ. In the ninth verse, in the same context, ifʿāl was used: أَنزَلَ.

The distribution in the sūra as a whole:

Five occurrences, two forms. And 9 and 26 build the same expression (karihū mā … Allāh) with two different forms.

This confirms the caution I recorded at verse 20: the distinction of gradualness between the two forms is recorded in the classical sources, but it is not applied consistently everywhere in the Qurʾān. This sūra is an instance of that.

A variant reading is transmitted:

Both readings are transmitted. The difference of meaning is fine but real: one brings forward the act of concealing, the other the things concealed.

I make no preference.

Root: س-ر-ر. And the root has an interesting property: سِرّ (sirr — a secret) and سُرُور (surūr — joy) are from the same root. So too is سَرِير (sarīr — a throne, a couch).

The lexicographers make the connection thus: joy is something inside a person; a secret is also what is inside. The common core may be concealment and inwardness.

I transmit this as an explanation the lexicographers record; I do not present it as a settled relation of derivation.

And the work of the clause is clear: the word spoken was spoken in secret (li'lladhīna karihū — to a particular group, separately). The clause records that the secrecy served no purpose.

And this opens the subject of the next section of the sūra: verses 29-30 will recount how what is concealed comes out.