al-Ṭūr 52:15

A-fa-siḥrun hādhā am antum lā tubṣirūn "Is this magic, or is it you who do not see?"

The harshest sentence in the sūra. And it carries one of the strongest cross-links in this commentary.

In the discussion of al-Muddaththir 74/24-25 the verdict a man gave at the end of a long process of deliberation was treated:

فَقَالَ إِنْ هَـٰذَآ إِلَّا سِحْرٌ يُؤْثَرُ — "He said: 'This is nothing but magic handed down.'"

And what was recorded there: that the restrictive pattern in … illā is one of the strongest patterns of limitation in Arabic; the analysis of the root siḥr; the two variant readings of the word yuʾthar; and an observation — "the most categorical sentences most often come after the longest hesitations."

I do not repeat it here. What is to be added here is the return of the word.

In this world a verdict was given: "this is magic."

In the hereafter a question is asked with the same word: "is this magic?"

And the force of the comparison is here: the word is handed back.

The man had used a word in this world and with that word had made the text void. Now the same word is put to him — but the object has changed. He had called revelation "magic"; now he is asked of the fire, "is this magic?"

And the logic of the question is this: magic is the deceiving of the eye — a thing that is not real appearing real. Then: is this fire you now see also a deception?

The question sets up a dead end. If he says "yes, magic", he has repeated what he said in this world but he is now inside the fire. If he says "no", he has admitted how easily his verdict in this world was framed.

I record this as my own reading. The wordings of the two verses were given above; that the word occurs in the two places is plain in the text.

And the second half of the sentence offers an alternative: "or is it you who do not see?"

This is the structure called muʿādala (balancing) in Arabic: أ … أَمْ — "is it this, or is it that?" Two options are offered and the one addressed is asked to choose.

And the two options are the counterparts of two accusations made in this world:

The second option is the first turned inside out. Counting a thing magic claims that the problem lies in the object. The question recalls that the problem may lie in the one who sees.

And this joins with the diagnosis this sūra and its neighbour set up. The same verb had occurred at al-Dhāriyāt 51/21: a-fa-lā tubṣirūn — "do you not see?" And there the proof had been shown "in yourselves".

The same verb, in two sūras, at two times. In this world it is asked "do you not see?"; on that day the same question is asked with its answer already settled.

I record this as a reading drawn from a comparison of the two sūras.

And the echo of the word siḥr within the sūra: in the twenty-ninth verse the accusations levelled at the Prophet will be counted (kāhin, majnūn), and in the thirtieth a third will be added (shāʿir). The word siḥr stands here at the very head of that chain of accusations — and the word sāḥir had occurred at al-Dhāriyāt 51/52.