Surah Al-Qamar (54): Verse 20: They were snatched away as if they were...

Issues Discussed:

It can be interpreted in two ways:

1. As an adjective (Sifah): Meaning, "We sent against them a fierce wind, snatching the people."
2. As a circumstantial clause (Hal): Meaning, "We sent the wind snatching the people."

If one objects, asking how it can be a ḥāl (circumstantial clause) when the subject (riḥan - wind) is indefinite (nakirah), the response is:

• The situation here is less problematic than in the verse: {وَلَقَدْ جَاءَهُم مِّنَ الْأَنبَاءِ مَا فِيهِ مُزْدَجَرٌ} (Al-Qamar: 4), where the subject (mā) is indefinite. The scholars addressed that by saying mā is descriptive (qualified), thus specifying it and allowing it to be a dhū al-ḥāl (the one described by the ḥāl).
• Similarly here, the wind is qualified by ṣarṣar (fierce/icy), and its indefiniteness is for magnification. Since it is qualified, it is not far-fetched to treat it as the subject of a ḥāl.
• Another view: It is a new, independent clause (kalām musta’naf) following a verb and subject, similar to saying, "Zayd came, and he grabbed me" (تقديره: جاء فجذبني). Thus, the structure is: "We sent against them a wind," and then, "it snatched the people." This is supported by the verse in Al-Haqqah: {فَتَرَى الْقَوْمَ فِيهَا صَرْعَى} (Al-Haqqah: 7). The tā’ (in tanzuʿu) refers to what is indicated by ṣarʿā (fallen down).

There are several interpretations:

1. Simultaneous Action: The wind snatched them, and as a result, they became like uprooted trunks, just as stated in Al-Haqqah: {صَرْعَى كَأَنَّهُمْ أَعْجَازُ نَخْلٍ}.
2. Sequential Action (Closer Meaning): The wind snatched them, and after the snatching, they became like uprooted trunks. This is closer because uprooting (inqiʿār) precedes falling down. The wind snatches the individual, uproots him, he falls down, becoming slain (ṣarīʿ), and then the place becomes empty of him, and he collapses/lies still. The verse in Al-Haqqah: {فَتَرَى الْقَوْمَ فِيهَا صَرْعَى كَأَنَّهُمْ أَعْجَازُ نَخْلٍ خَاوِيَةٍ} refers to the state after uprooting, which is after snatching. This implies that the description here (in Al-Qamar) is summarized, as it does not explicitly mention their being slain or their dwellings being completely empty of them, since the state of being uprooted is like the beginning of departure, not the complete absence.
3. Intensity of Snatching: They were snatched with such violence that they became like uprooted palm trunks, indicating their strength and firm rooting in the earth.

Meanings implied by comparing them to uprooted trunks:

1. It refers to the greatness of their bodies and the height of their stature.
2. It refers to their firmness in the ground, as if they were digging their feet into the earth, intending to resist the wind.
3. It refers to their dryness and desiccation caused by the wind, killing and burning them with its extreme cold, causing them to fall like dry pieces of wood.

The commentators state that in Al-Haqqah, the rhyme/endings of the preceding verses required the feminine form (referring to {مُسْتَمِرٌّ} in Al-Qamar 19, 11, 7, which is a response to the previous verses). This is a good answer, as speech is adorned by beautiful wording just as it is adorned by beautiful meaning.

Alternative Explanation:

The word nakhl (palm trees) has the form of a singular noun (like baql or naml), but its meaning is plural. Therefore, it can be treated grammatically as singular or plural:

• Focusing on the form (singular): Nakhl munqaʿir, khāwin, bāsiq.
• Focusing on the meaning (plural): Nakhl munqaʿirāt, khāwiyāt, bāsiqāt.
• Combining both (feminine singular agreement): Nakhl munqaʿirah, khāwiyah, bāsiqah.

When Allah uses the masculine singular (munqaʿir), He focuses on the form. When He uses the feminine plural agreement (khāwiyah), He focuses on the meaning.

Allah mentioned nakhl in three contexts, describing it in these three ways:

1. {وَالنَّخْلَ بَاسِقَاتٍ} (Qaf: 10): Here, bāsiqāt is a circumstantial clause (ḥāl) describing them, acting as an adjective.
2. {نَخْلٍ خَاوِيَةٍ} (Al-Haqqah: 7).
3. {نَخْلٍ مُّنقَعِرٍ} (Al-Qamar: 20).

Where He said {مُّنقَعِرٍ}, it was preferred because al-munqaʿir (the uprooted one) is essentially like the passive participle (mafʿūl), as the action of uprooting has occurred to it (it is muqʿūr). Al-khāwī (the empty one) and al-bāsiq (the tall one) are active participles (fāʿil). This is like saying imra’ah kafīl (a guarantor woman) or imra’ah kafīlah (a guaranteeing woman).

As for {بَاسِقَاتٍ}, it is a true plural active participle (fāʿilāt), as towering (busūq) is an action inherent to them.

As for {خَاوِيَةٍ}, it is like saying "a palm tree of empty places" (nakhlu khāwiyat al-mawāḍiʿ). This represents the height of eloquence, as the word chosen corresponds appropriately to the preceding and succeeding words in terms of form, as dictated by the context, unlike the poet who might choose a weak word solely for meter and rhyme.

Then Allah Almighty said: