أَرَأَيتَ إِن كَذَّبَ وَتَوَلّىٰ
Have you seen whether he denies the truth and turns away from it?
EXPOSITION
This is the last verse where the interrogative phrase araʾayta occurs. The narrative continues to address the Prophet in reference to the bully, and says: Have you seen whether he denies the truth and turns away from it? So tell me about such a person who covers the truth with falsehood, turns away from believing the truth, and forbids God’s servant from prayers? What should be his fate? Does he deserve anything save punishment? And again the response is elided since it is self-evident.
REVIEW OF TAFSĪR LITERATURE
There is an alternative understanding of this tranche of verses in the Quran commentary literature where verses 11-12 are interpreted differently (while the interpretation of verses 9-10 and 12-13 remains the same).
It is argued that verses 11-12 address the bully in reference to the Prophet, rather than addressing the Prophet in reference to the bully. Thus it is as if the verses intend to say: Have you, O bully, seen whether he who is engaged in prayer is rightly guided, or encourages true piety? So tell me about such a person in that if he is truly such, what will be the fate of the one forbidding him from such a deed of righteousness, that is, what will be your fate? Again, it is suggested that the response is elided since the response is self-evident.
It is explained that this interpretation of verses 9-13 is as if God is sitting in judgement with the plaintiff and the defendant before Him and so it is as if God addresses one and then turns to the other and finally reverts to the former. Thus in verses 9-10 God addresses the Prophet regarding the miscreant, and then in 11-12 He turns to the miscreant, addressing him by saying: Have you considered whether Muhammad’s prayers are rightly guided and his supplicating to God as encouraging piety? (And the answer is obviously in the affirmative, thus) are you creating obstacles despite the righteousness of his acts? Finally, in verse 13 He once again turns to the Prophet.
However, this interpretation suffers from a problem which is that it causes a disjunction or a disruption in the narrative even though it has been argued that such disjunction does no harm. Nevertheless, the disjunction does appear arbitrary and is not at all apparent, in addition to which the change in referent raises the question: what is the justification for considering a switch in the referent of verses 11-12 from that of the two preceding verses and the following verse? After all, no proper noun has been mentioned and only pronouns occur. The change in referent, it appears, may be due to the occurrence of the two positive character traits in verses 11-12, namely guidance and enjoining piety, in contrast to the other verses in this tranche of verses which mention negative character traits whereby it may be felt that the two positive character traits are more suitable as references to Prophet Muhammad (s) and unsuitable for his adversary; however, the alternative reading which considers the referent of all five verses to be one person, which is the one censured, while the addresses are all made to the Prophet, is argued to be better and more suitable since it does not suffer from a disruption in the flow of the narrative, is more apparent, and occurs spontaneously to the reciter than the former reading. It is also more germane to yet another meaning or perspective for the interrogative phrase araʾayta, the meaning of which may be considered complimentary to the meanings mentioned above. This additional meaning or perspective is nicely explained by Iṣlāḥī, which he does in his work Tadabbur al-Qurʾān, in the context of his commentary of this surah. He writes: ‘We have explained at various places in this commentary that the [interrogative] style araʾayta is used to direct the attention of people to something very inappropriate, or to criticise someone. Expressions such as “just look at him!”, “have you seen him?!”, and “take a look at what he is doing!” are its equivalents in the English language.’ Indeed, this meaning for the interrogative phrase araʾayta is most congruent with the overall tenor of this tranche of verses and with the remaining verses of this surah, which continue to harshly condemn the Prophet’s unnamed adversary throughout. Hence this phrase may be concluded to denote, in addition to the sense of surprise, amazement, and astonishment, a strong sense of criticism, disapproval, condemnation, derision, and censure. In the field of linguistics the interrogative phrase araʾayta is identified as a discourse marker. A discourse marker is a word that plays the role of conveying the speaker’s attitude towards the topic of conversation. Its importance in understanding oral discourse such as the Quran can hardly be overestimated. It is argued, on the basis of an examination of the contexts in which this phrase in its various morphological forms occurs in the Quran, that in most of them it is used when the speaker expresses disapproval of the referents or the topic of discourse, and there is a pattern of blame (10:59, 11:28, 11:63, 11:88, 26:75), threats (6:40, 6:46, 6:47, 10:50, 17:62, 19:77, 26:205, 28:71, 28:72, 41:42, 56:58, 56:63, 67:28, 67:30), and belittling (35:40, 39:38, 45:23, 46:4, 46:10, 53:19, 53:33) that occurs in the relevant verses. Thus this phrase’s occurrence in the Quran reveals that it is an attitudinal marker whose main function is to express the speaker’s dissatisfaction with, resentment at, or disapproval and objection of the topic of conversation, and thus it denotes a negative attitude. Since the best part of this surah is highly critical in its tone and clearly appears critical of a specific unnamed person (which does not in any way inhibit these verses being applied retrospectively to other people who engage in similar diabolical acts) it would consequently be arbitrary to suggest a disjunction in the narrative with regards to verses 11-12, especially since no reason is given for such a disjunction by those who espouse it. Rather, in light of the general tenor of this surah and the meaning of the interrogative phrase araʾayta outlined above, all five verses are in reference to the unnamed adversary and not to Prophet Muhammad (s), since this phrase of disapproval recurs in them all and it cannot be possible that the Prophet is the focus of disapproval in verses 11-12 where this negative attitudinal marker also occurs.
This tranche of verses is finally brought to a close by a final piece of threatening censure in verse 14 directed at the miscreant described in the preceding verses with disapproving qualities.
[1] Tafsīr Muqātil ibn Sulaymān, 4/763; Maʿānī al-Qurʾān, 3/278; Tibyan, 10/382; Tabari, 30/164; Mizan, 20/326; Munyat al-Ṭālibīn fī Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-Mubīn, 30/511; Furqan, 30/368; Daqaiq, 14/349; Amthal, 20/329; Irshād al-Adhhān, 1/603; al-Aṣfā fī al-Tafsīr, 2/1460; Qummi, 2/431. [2] Munyat al-Ṭālibīn fī Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-Mubīn, 30/511. [3] Tafsīr Muqātil ibn Sulaymān, 4/763; Tibyan, 10/382; Mizan, 20/326; Munyat al-Ṭālibīn fī Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-Mubīn, 30/511; Daqaiq, 14/349; Amthal, 20/328; Tabari, 30/164; Ibn Kathir, 8/422-423; al-Balāgh fī Tafsīr al-Qurʾān bil-Qurʾān, 1/597; al-Aṣfā fī al-Tafsīr, 2/1460; Irshād al-Adhhān, 1/603; Furqan, 30/368. [4] Munyat al-Ṭālibīn fī Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-Mubīn, 30/511. [5] Razi, 32/222-223. [6] Mizan, 20/326. [7] Jawāmiʾ al-Jāmiʿ, 4/514; Zamakhshari, 4/777-778; Amthal, 20/329; Mizan, 20/326; Thalabi, 10/246; Mubin, 1/864-865; Kashif, 7/589; Daqaiq, 14/349. [8] http://www.al-mawrid.org/index.php/articles/view/suurah-alaq. [9] Araʾaytum: The Exegetical Implications of a Qurʾānic Stance Marker, p. 174. [10] Araʾaytum: The Exegetical Implications of a Qurʾānic Stance Marker, p. 174. [11] Araʾaytum: The Exegetical Implications of a Qurʾānic Stance Marker, p. 170.