al-Mursalāt 77:14

Wa mā adrāka mā yawmu'l-faṣl "And what will make you know what the day of separation is?"

The وما أدراك pattern was treated in detail in this commentary in the section on al-Humaza, and applied in the sections on al-Qāriʿa, al-Qadr, al-Infiṭār, al-Balad, al-Ṭāriq and al-Muṭaffifīn. What is to be taken from there:

Root د-ر-ي (dirāya — to know, to be aware); adrā (the afʿala form) — he made known. Mā adrāka, literally "what made you know?" — its sense: "your knowledge cannot grasp this; had you known it, you would have known it from one who informed you." And there is a consistent distinction within the Qurʾān: after the مَا أَدْرَاكَ (perfect) pattern an explanation follows; after the مَا يُدْرِيكَ (imperfect) pattern it does not — the knowledge is left closed to man.

And what was added in the section on al-Muṭaffifīn: "the pattern declares, before giving any knowledge, that knowledge will not suffice."

The pattern here is in the perfect (adrāka), so by the rule an explanation ought to follow.

And it does not.

The next verse is waylun yawmaʾidhin li'l-mukadhdhibīn; this is not an explanation but a judgement. And after it, not a description of the day but the section of three proofs begins. What the day is is not told — not until verse 29.

This is an exception that should be recorded. Two explanations may be given:

First: the explanation comes with a delay. Verses 29-40 of the sūra are the scene of that day; that is, the question is asked, three sections intervene, and then the answer is given. On this reading the rule is not broken, only a distance is inserted.

Second: the name of the day has already been given in the preceding verse (yawm al-faṣl), and mā adrāka comes in order to declare the insufficiency of a name already given. That is, the explanation came first, and the pattern afterwards magnifies it.

The second reading accords with the pattern's use in Sūrat al-Qadr: there too the name laylat al-qadr was given first and mā adrāka came after. In the section on al-Qadr this was recorded: "The verse uses the construct laylat al-qadr a second time. A pronoun would have sufficed… but the whole name is repeated."

Here too there is the same repetition: in verse 13 li-yawmi'l-faṣl, in verse 14 again mā yawmu'l-faṣl. A pronoun would have sufficed; the construct is repeated.

In al-Qadr the function of this was magnification. It seems to be the same here.

In this commentary the pattern has so far occurred with both positive and negative objects:

The last row is striking: yawm al-faṣl is not a one-sided day. The day of separation separates both sides. In verse 41 of the sūra the tableau of the godwary will come — that is, this day is a disaster for one side and an arrival for the other.

This explains why the object of the pattern has been left so broad: the day is not the day of a single group.