سَبَّحَ لِلَّهِ مَا فِي ٱلسَّمَٰوَٰتِ وَٱلْأَرْضِ ۖ وَهُوَ ٱلْعَزِيزُ ٱلْحَكِيمُ
Sabbaḥa li'llāhi mā fi's-samāwāti wa'l-arḍ, wa huwa'l-ʿAzīzu'l-Ḥakīm "Whatever is in the heavens and the earth has declared God free of all imperfection. He is al-ʿAzīz, al-Ḥakīm."
The analysis of the root was made in the section on al-Naṣr: س-ب-ح, whose concrete sense is to swim in water or in air, to move swiftly through a medium; in Form II (tafʿīl) it takes on the sense of tanzīh — to hold God far from everything that does not befit Him. It was also noted there that the function of tasbīḥ is negative: it does not say "He is such", it says "He is far from such".
I do not repeat it here. What is to be taken up in this section is not the meaning of the root but the tense of the pattern.
The sūra opens with سَبَّحَ — the past tense. Yet the imperfect of the same expression (yusabbiḥu — glorifies / is glorifying) exists in the Qurʾān, and two sūras (al-Jumuʿa and al-Taghābun) open with exactly that.
This difference is not accidental, and the classical commentaries have dwelt on it. The views may be gathered thus:
| Reading | What the perfect conveys | Ground |
|---|---|---|
| Completedness | The glorification has already happened, is happening and will happen; the matter is closed | In Arabic the perfect conveys what has come to pass and is no longer in dispute |
| Priority | The glorification began before the existence of the one addressed | The subject is "whatever is in the heavens and the earth"; their existence begins together with the glorification |
| Emphasis of certainty | Telling of something that will happen in the future with a perfect conveys the certainty of its happening | A widespread usage in the Qurʾān ("The trumpet was blown", "The Garden was brought near") |
| No difference | No difference of meaning was intended between the two patterns | The same expression occurs in both patterns |
In this commentary I find the last line weak, and I set out my ground — this is my own assessment and is not binding:
If the Qurʾān builds the same sentence in two patterns, it has built both deliberately. A language does not change a pattern for nothing in a structure that has patterns. And the function of the two patterns is well established in Arabic: the perfect is a record, the imperfect a depiction. The perfect says "it happened" and closes the matter; the imperfect says "it is happening" and shows the flow.
We saw this in the section on al-Takāthur as well: alhākumu't-takāthur is a perfect, and there too its function was the same — not a warning but a record. The same logic works here, but its direction is reversed. There the perfect was the record of an offence; here it is the record of a state.
The practical consequence of the difference is this: a sūra that opens with yusabbiḥu says to the reader "the universe is glorifying at this moment", and calls him to join that flow. A sūra that opens with sabbaḥa does something else: the matter is settled already, whether you join in or not. The decision of the one addressed adds nothing to what has taken place.
And this accords with the sūra as a whole. Al-Ḥadīd is a sūra of spending; it asks the one addressed to give of his property. That such a sūra should open by saying "the universe is already His and has already glorified Him" sets the frame for what will be asked from the outset: what is to be given is not the giver's contribution. This idea will be repeated in verse 7 with the word mustakhlafīn, and in verse 10 with the sentence "to God belongs the inheritance of the heavens and the earth".
One more note: all three of the sūras that open with the perfect (al-Ḥadīd, al-Ḥashr, al-Ṣaff) are Medinan, and all three contain a heavy demand made upon a community — al-Ḥadīd spending, al-Ḥashr the order of exile and spoils, al-Ṣaff standing in rank and fighting. The two that open with the imperfect (al-Jumuʿa, al-Taghābun) are weighted more towards invitation and description. This may be a pattern; but the sample is small and I do not present it as a fixed rule.
The difference between these two relative pronouns in Arabic is well known: man is used for rational beings (human, angel, jinn), mā for non-rational beings and for "thing" in general. In the verse mā has been chosen.
The consequence of this is a widening of scope. For mā does not exclude rational beings; in Arabic mā can be used so as to include rational beings too, in the sense of "whatever there is" — especially when a mixed group is meant and the dominant element is non-rational.
That is, the verse does not confine the one who glorifies to rational beings. Stone, tree, star, animal, human — all are the subject of the same verb.
From this arises a familiar question: how does a non-rational being glorify? In the classical commentaries there are two main answers:
| View | Explanation |
|---|---|
| By the language of its state (indication) | Every being, by its own constitution, indicates the perfection of its maker. Glorification here is figurative: the being says something to whoever looks at it. |
| In the literal sense | Beings have a glorification we do not know of; the utterance lies outside our apprehension. |
The ground of the second view is another verse where the subject occurs: "The seven heavens and the earth and all that is in them glorify Him. There is nothing that does not glorify Him with praise; but you do not understand their glorification." (al-Isrāʾ 17/44). The last clause of this verse — "you do not understand" — is the strongest evidence supporting the second view; for a glorification in the sense of "indication" is not something that cannot be understood, but on the contrary exists in order to be understood.
In this commentary I impose no preference. Both views are found in the classical sources and neither runs against the text. But this must be recorded: the function of the verse is the same on either reading. The sūra builds this sentence in order to say to the one addressed, "you are an exception." Everything that exists is inside an order; what is peculiar to the human being is the possibility of stepping outside that order.
The verb has not been construed as directly transitive. Not "glorified God" but, literally, "glorified for God." The ل at the head here conveys either emphasis (taʾkīd) or particularisation (ikhtiṣāṣ).
As we shall see in verse 24 of this same sūra, this particle is frequently used in the Qurʾān to convey ownership and direction. The tone it adds here is this: glorification is an act directed towards God — not a praise left hanging in the air but an act with a definite address.
عزيز — root ع-ز-ز. Its concrete sense: to be hard, to be difficult to come by, to be unconquerable. From the same root come ʿizza (honour, strength) and aʿazz (stronger). In Arabic something rarely found is also called ʿazīz — this is the fineness in the Turkish expression aziz dostum, "my dear friend": the one who is hard to come by.
The three senses of the word are recorded together in the classical lexicons, and all three complete one another: 1. Prevailing, unconquered — the one who cannot be withstood 2. Strong — possessed of power 3. Rare, unattainable — the one who has no like
حكيم — root ح-ك-م. Its concrete sense is interesting: ḥakama is the bit put in a horse's mouth — the piece that guides and reins in the animal. From this derive ḥukm (a decision), ḥikma (putting a thing in its proper place), iḥkām (making firm).
That is, ḥikma carries in its root restraint and direction: to hold a thing in the place where it belongs, not to let it scatter.
The coming together of the two names is a pair met with very often in the Qurʾān, and it is not idle. ʿAzīz is power; ḥakīm is the right use of that power. When power is named alone the possibility of arbitrariness arises; when wisdom is named alone the possibility of ineffectiveness arises. The two together close off both possibilities.
And that this pair should stand at the head of the sūra is meaningful: in verse 25 al-Ḥadīd will tell of the sending down of iron — that is, of power — and will bind it to the condition that justice should stand. The ʿazīz-ḥakīm pair in the first verse of the sūra stands like a summary of that verse: power, and its right use.