Surah Al-Waqi'ah

It is Meccan, as reported by Al-Bayhaqi in al-Dala'il and others from Ibn Abbas, and by Ibn Marduwayh from Ibn al-Zubayr. Some have excepted the words of the Almighty: "A company of the first, and a company of the last" (56:39-40), as mentioned in al-Itqan. Likewise, they excepted His words: "So I swear by the positions of the stars..." (56:75) to "...you deny" (56:82), due to what Muslim recorded regarding the occasion of its revelation, which will be discussed later, God Almighty willing. In Majma' al-Bayan, there is a report from Ibn Abbas and Qatadah excepting the words of the Almighty: "...and make the provision of your denial your livelihood" (56:82).

Its number of verses is ninety-nine in the Hijazi and Syrian counts, ninety-seven in the Basran, and ninety-six in the Kufan. The details of this are found in what is prepared for such matters. It and Surah al-Rahman are counterparts, in that both describe the Resurrection, Paradise, and Hell. It is stated in al-Bahr: Its relevance to what precedes it is that it [the preceding Surah] contained the torment for the criminals and the bliss for the believers, and the Almighty distinguished between the two gardens of some believers and the two gardens of others; thus, the accountable beings were divided into disbelievers, superior believers, and inferior believers. On this basis came the beginning of this Surah, with their division into the Companions of the Right, the Companions of the Left, and the Foremost.

Some eminent scholars have noted the connection between the words of the Almighty, "When the Event (al-Waqi'ah) comes to pass," and His words, "And when the heaven splits asunder" (55:37). They observed that in al-Rahman, He limited the description to the splitting of the heaven, while in al-Waqi'ah, He limited it to the shaking of the earth. Thus, the two Surahs, due to their association and unity, are like a single Surah; for He mentioned everything in each, while reversing the order—mentioning in the beginning of this what was in the end of that, and in the end of this what was in the beginning of that. He opened Surah al-Rahman with the mention of the Quran, then the sun and the moon, then the vegetation, then the creation of man and Jinn, then the description of the Day of Resurrection, then the description of the Fire, then the description of Paradise. This one begins with the mention of the Resurrection, then the description of Paradise, then the description of the Fire, then the creation of man, then the vegetation, then the water, then the fire. Then it mentioned the stars, which were not mentioned in al-Rahman, just as the sun and moon were not mentioned here. Then it mentioned the Balance. Thus, this one serves as a counterpart to that one, and as a reflection of the end back to the beginning.

There have come reports regarding its merit:

Abu Ubayd in Fada'il, Ibn al-Durays, al-Harith ibn Abi Usamah, Abu Ya'la, Ibn Marduwayh, and al-Bayhaqi in al-Shu'ab recorded from Ibn Mas'ud that he said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) saying: "Whoever recites Surah al-Waqi'ah every night, poverty shall never afflict him." Ibn 'Asakir recorded a similar report from Ibn Abbas in marfu' (attributed to the Prophet) form. Ibn Marduwayh recorded from Anas from the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) that he said: "Surah al-Waqi'ah is the Surah of Wealth; so recite it and teach it to your children." Al-Daylami recorded from him in marfu' form: "Teach your women Surah al-Waqi'ah, for it is the Surah of Wealth."

Al-Waqi'ah: (1) When the Event befalls

"When the Event befalls"

That is, when the Resurrection occurs, given that waqa'at (the Event befalls) means "has occurred" and al-Waqi'ah (the Event) is a proper name by prevalence, or transferred specifically to signify the Resurrection. Ibn Abbas explicitly stated that it is one of its names, and it was named thus to signal the certainty of its occurrence inevitably, as if it is already occurring in itself, regardless of the occurrence placed within the scope of the conditional. Thus, the attribution is not like [the phrase] "He came to me, a comer," for that is redundant, as every verb implies a non-specific agent for itself. Al-Dahhak said: "The Event" is the Shrill Cry, which is the blowing of the Trumpet. It is also said: "The Event" is the rock of Bayt al-Maqdis, which will fall on the Day of Resurrection, but this is baseless.

Idha (when) is an adverb containing the meaning of a condition, as is apparent. According to Abu Hayyan, the operator for it is the verb that follows it; thus, it is in the position of an accusative governed by waqa'at, like all other conditional nouns, and it is not in a genitive construction with the sentence. The majority, however, hold that it is in a genitive construction. It was said: Here it has been stripped of its adverbial function and has become an object for an omitted [verb such as] "remember." It was also said: It has not been stripped of that [function] and is in the accusative governed by laysa (there is not), and the approach of al-Zamakhshari suggests he favors this. It was also said: It is governed by an omitted [verb] which is the answer [to the condition], meaning: "When the Event befalls, such and such will happen."

The author of al-Kashf said: This is the eloquent, robust Arabic approach. The accusative by the implicit [verb] "remember" only became common with idh (when/since). Regarding laysa, it is only valid if it is treated as purely adverbial, otherwise the fa (particle) would be mandatory in laysa. Abu Hayyan critiqued the [accusative] governance by laysa, stating that no grammarian would hold this view, because laysa in negation is like ma, and ma does not govern; thus, laysa is the same, as it is devoid of any implication of an event or time. The statement that it is a verb is merely metaphorical, and the operator of an adverb is only the event that occurs within it; therefore, where there is no event in it, it has no governance. He then mentioned what the author of al-Kashf said regarding the necessity of the fa in laysa if it is not stripped of its conditional nature. He objected to the claim that ma does not govern by stating that they explicitly allowed the attachment of the adverb to it, based on the interpretation of it as inta'afa (it is negated), and that the "scent" of a verb is sufficient for it; laysa is to be compared to it in this regard. Likewise, he objected to the claim of the necessity of the fa in laysa if idha is not stripped of its conditional nature, arguing that the necessity of the fa with rigid verbs only applies in the answer to the conditional in, due to its functionality as they have explicitly stated. As for idha, they included the fa in its answer contrary to the fundamental rule.

Two other views regarding it will come, God willing. After all the back and forth, the most primary view is that the operator is omitted and is the answer [to the condition], as you have heard; in its ambiguity lies a terrifying and grand depiction of the state of the Event. And His saying, Exalted is He...