Supplementary Practice 25 — Comparative Rhetoric of Sūrat az-Zalzalah and Sūrat al-ʿĀdiyāt

1. Two surahs and the theme of accountability

إِذَا زُلْزِلَتِ الْأَرْضُ زِلْزَالَهَا
When the earth is shaken with its appointed shaking. (99:1)

وَالْعَادِيَاتِ ضَبْحًا
By the swift racers, panting. (100:1)

Az-Zalzalah opens with idhā, a time expression with conditional force, and takes the listener into the final convulsion. Al-ʿĀdiyāt begins with an oath and a scene of intense movement before asserting human ingratitude. Their openings differ but both lead toward the disclosure and assessment of human deeds.

A rhetorical reading should therefore relate the opening frame, the links between clauses and the closing conclusion. Naming isolated devices without examining the passage’s sequence would miss the design of each surah.

2. Idhā, passive verb and cognate accusative

إِذَا زُلْزِلَتِ الْأَرْضُ زِلْزَالَهَا
When the earth is shaken in its great shaking. (99:1)

Zulzilat is a passive perfect verb; al-arḍu is its passive subject, and zilzālahā is a cognate accusative (mafʿūl muṭlaq). Bringing the verbal noun after its own verb intensifies the presentation of the event. The possessive pronoun points back to the earth and helps convey an extraordinary, distinctive convulsion.

The passive construction does not imply ignorance of the ultimate agent. Here it places the shocking occurrence and its effect on the earth in the foreground. That rhetorical function follows from the complete eschatological context.

3. Repetition of al-arḍ and progression of the scene

وَأَخْرَجَتِ الْأَرْضُ أَثْقَالَهَا
And the earth brings out its burdens. (99:2)

The first verse concentrates on the earth’s shaking; the second explicitly repeats al-arḍu and adds a fresh predicate, akhrajat. Repeating the noun keeps the same subject in focus while marking a distinct stage. Athqālahā portrays the bringing forth of what had been contained within.

This repetition is not empty redundancy. It allows two independent but connected events to unfold in a sequence. Nor should every repeated noun be called tadhyīl: this clause does not merely generalize the previous assertion, but advances the event.

4. The astonished question: mā lahā?

وَقَالَ الْإِنْسَانُ مَا لَهَا
And the human being says: What has happened to it? (99:3)

Mā is interrogative; lahā refers to the earth’s condition. Following the violent shaking and the emergence of burdens, the question expresses a naturally arising response of bewilderment. Its effect is wonder and alarm, not merely the request for ordinary information.

Al-insān can function generically for humankind. The rhetorical portrait does not require every individual to pronounce precisely the same words; the verse captures the human response to the extraordinary event.

5. Where the opening idhā is answered

إِذَا زُلْزِلَتِ الْأَرْضُ زِلْزَالَهَا ... يَوْمَئِذٍ تُحَدِّثُ أَخْبَارَهَا
When the earth is shaken ... on that day it will report its news. (99:1, 4)

Idhā marks a future time with conditional force. Classical grammatical analyses differ over what governs or answers this opening: tuḥaddithu or the later yaṣduru may be linked to it; another analysis supplies an implied command such as udhkur ('remember').

These alternatives do not remove the scene’s rhetorical unity. They differ in the syntactic connection between the initial temporal expression and the later assertions. An advanced analysis must mark the alternatives rather than assert one as the sole possible parsing.

6. Yawmāʾidhin and explanatory resumption

يَوْمَئِذٍ تُحَدِّثُ أَخْبَارَهَا
On that Day the earth will recount its reports. (99:4)

Yawmāʾidhin recalls the time already described. Tuḥaddithu is imperfect, presenting the future scene with vivid immediacy; akhbārahā is its object. The reporting of what the earth has witnessed now becomes central.

Read against the question mā lahā, this new statement may be heard as an explanatory reply—one rhetorical route to understanding istiʾnāf bayānī. It is not enough to call every independent clause a resumption; the earlier question and the reply must actually fit.

7. Bi-anna rabbaka: explanation of the cause

بِأَنَّ رَبَّكَ أَوْحَىٰ لَهَا
Because your Lord has directed it to do so. (99:5)

Bi-anna makes the causal relation explicit: the earth’s report occurs by divine direction. Rabbaka is the subject of anna, and the verbal clause awḥā lahā supplies its predicate. The pronoun in lahā refers to the earth.

The explanation does more than offer a mechanical account of an uncanny event. It relates the entire disclosure to divine command. This shows how an apparently brief causal phrase can carry a crucial part of a passage’s rhetorical argument.

8. Ash-tātan and li-yuraw: state and purpose

يَوْمَئِذٍ يَصْدُرُ النَّاسُ أَشْتَاتًا لِيُرَوْا أَعْمَالَهُمْ
That Day people will emerge in separate groups to be shown their deeds. (99:6)

Ashtātan serves as a circumstantial accusative, indicating the state in which people emerge. The lām in li-yuraw expresses purpose, and the verb is passive: the point is that their deeds will be made visible to them. Reporting by the earth and disclosure to people now belong to the same scene.

Repeating yawmāʾidhin situates successive events on a single decisive day. Its value is temporal linkage and renewed focus, not necessarily a bare repetition with no further function.

9. A general condition and the smallest deed

فَمَنْ يَعْمَلْ مِثْقَالَ ذَرَّةٍ خَيْرًا يَرَهُ
Whoever performs an atom’s weight of good will see it. (99:7)

Man is a conditional noun; yaʿmal is the jussive conditional verb and yarahu its jussive response. Mithqāla dharratin represents an extremely small measure; khayran specifies the good under discussion. The pronoun of yarahu can refer to that deed or its disclosed consequence.

The force comes from the combination of a general conditional principle with the smallest imaginable example. This is not mere brevity; it is a comprehensive proposition: even minor deeds fall within accountability.

10. Good and evil: balance and comprehensiveness

فَمَنْ يَعْمَلْ مِثْقَالَ ذَرَّةٍ خَيْرًا يَرَهُ
Whoever does an atom’s weight of good will see it. (99:7)

وَمَنْ يَعْمَلْ مِثْقَالَ ذَرَّةٍ شَرًّا يَرَهُ
And whoever does an atom’s weight of evil will see it. (99:8)

The syntax of the two verses is closely parallel, while khayran and sharran supply the principal contrast. The symmetry makes the judgment comprehensive: accounting is not limited to one moral category. The wāw joins two distinct, semantically matching rules.

The second clause is not superfluous repetition. Without it, the explicit statement would concern good deeds only; the complementary clause makes the corresponding rule for evil deeds equally clear.

11. Oath and motion in al-ʿĀdiyāt

وَالْعَادِيَاتِ ضَبْحًا
By the racers, panting. (100:1)

فَالْمُورِيَاتِ قَدْحًا
Then those striking sparks. (100:2)

فَالْمُغِيرَاتِ صُبْحًا
Then those charging at dawn. (100:3)

The initial wāw marks an oath, while the repeated fāʾ of the following verses suggests rapid succession in a connected scene. The familiar exegetical reading describes galloping horses; some early reports differ about the referent. The rhetorical force is the escalating visual and auditory sequence, preparing the audience for the eventual response to the oath.

12. Panting, striking and dawn

وَالْعَادِيَاتِ ضَبْحًا ... فَالْمُورِيَاتِ قَدْحًا ... فَالْمُغِيرَاتِ صُبْحًا
By the racers panting, the spark-strikers and the dawn-chargers. (100:1–3)

Ḍabḥan evokes breathing or panting, qadḥan the act of striking sparks, and ṣubḥan specifies the time of the raid. These accusatives should not be assigned a single grammatical function merely because their endings match: they have different relations to action, manner and time.

Together they form a sequence of sound, motion and timing. The listener experiences the pace of the scene and is prepared for the following assertion. The effect cannot be explained by rhyme alone.

13. The fāʾ sequence: dust and penetration

فَأَثَرْنَ بِهِ نَقْعًا
Then they raised dust thereby. (100:4)

فَوَسَطْنَ بِهِ جَمْعًا
Then they reached into the midst of an assembled group. (100:5)

The fāʾ of fa-atharna and fa-wasaṭna ties the actions together. Raised dust followed by arrival among the gathered ranks gives the impression of swift progress and completion. Exegetes discuss how bihi refers back within the scene, so a single referent need not be imposed without considering the context.

This fāʾ should be distinguished from fa-man in the closing rules of az-Zalzalah: here the verses sequence a scene, whereas there a general moral conclusion follows the previous disclosure.

14. The oath response: human ingratitude

إِنَّ الْإِنْسَانَ لِرَبِّهِ لَكَنُودٌ
Truly the human being is profoundly ungrateful toward his Lord. (100:6)

This is the response to the preceding oath. Inna and the emphatic lām reinforce the assertion. Fronting li-rabbihi foregrounds the very relationship in which ingratitude is reprehensible: the person’s duty toward the Lord who provides. Kanūd conveys marked thanklessness.

Generic al-insān describes a human propensity; it does not require that every individual at all times exhibit it. The passage shifts from a vivid oath scene to a moral judgment, and the emphatic answer gives the opening imagery its argumentative destination.

15. Degrees of reinforcement: inna and lām

إِنَّ الْإِنْسَانَ لِرَبِّهِ لَكَنُودٌ
Indeed the human being is deeply ungrateful to his Lord. (100:6)

Inna is an emphatic particle; the lām of la-kanūd reinforces the predicate further. After the oath, the combined emphasis signals the gravity of the assertion. It does not prove that the audience is necessarily an active denier; significance, inattention or urgent warning can also call for strong reinforcement.

ElementRhetorical contribution
OathPrepares attention for a weighty assertion
InnaConfirms the predicative relation
Predicate lāmAdds further assurance and force

16. Wa-innahu ... la-shahīd: two referents

وَإِنَّهُ عَلَىٰ ذَٰلِكَ لَشَهِيدٌ
And indeed he is a witness to that. (100:7)

Two well-attested analyses identify the pronoun -hu differently. On one, the human being bears witness to his own ingratitude through evident conduct or recognition. On another, God is the witness, making divine scrutiny and warning especially prominent.

Inna and the lām of la-shahīd reinforce the assertion in either reading. The disagreement concerns which antecedent the pronoun refers to, not a defect in the wording. One should identify the interpretive alternative and then discuss the effect it produces.

17. Ḥubb al-khayr: meaning and fronting

وَإِنَّهُ لِحُبِّ الْخَيْرِ لَشَدِيدٌ
And he is intensely attached to wealth. (100:8)

Al-khayr here is a familiar expression for material wealth. Li-ḥubb al-khayr is brought before the later predicate la-shadīd, clearly relating the intensity to love of wealth. Exegetes discuss strong attachment, greed and miserliness as related aspects, but not every moral nuance follows from the adjective shadīd in isolation.

Verses 6–8 develop related aspects of human conduct: ingratitude, testimony concerning it, and intense love of possessions. Their unity rests on the moral subject, not simply on the repeated opening particles.

18. Afalā yaʿlam: a question of rebuke

أَفَلَا يَعْلَمُ إِذَا بُعْثِرَ مَا فِي الْقُبُورِ
Does he not realize when what lies in graves is scattered out? (100:9)

Afalā yaʿlam is not merely a request for information: it rebukes negligent failure to recognize the coming judgment. Buʿthira is passive and portrays the opening of graves and the bringing forth of what they contain. Idhā points to the decisive future moment.

Classical analyses differ in how the object of yaʿlam is understood or supplied and how it connects to the temporal clause. Across these readings, the rhetorical thrust is stable: the inattentive person is confronted with the reality of disclosure and reckoning.

19. Graves and breasts: outward and inward

وَحُصِّلَ مَا فِي الصُّدُورِ
And what is held within hearts is brought out and distinguished. (100:10)

Ḥuṣṣila is also passive. The previous verse describes the uncovering of what lies in graves; this verse turns to concealed inner dispositions and intentions. Mā fī al-ṣudūr is broad, covering what is hidden in the breasts.

The wāw joins two connected disclosures: the removal of outward coverings and the exposure of inward states. This pairing of external and internal disclosure broadens the picture of accountability. Treating the two assertions as unrelated would ignore their clear semantic link.

20. The closing emphatic report

إِنَّ رَبَّهُمْ بِهِمْ يَوْمَئِذٍ لَخَبِيرٌ
Indeed their Lord will be fully aware of them on that Day. (100:11)

Inna, the lām of la-khabīr, and the fronting of bihim reinforce divine awareness and its object. Yawmāʾidhin singles out the day when the consequences of deeds are manifested. It does not mean that God first acquires knowledge on that day; divine knowledge is not limited to the Day of Judgment.

The surah has moved from rapid external motion to the hidden moral state of human beings and finally to resurrection. The emphatic closing assertion gathers those themes under divine knowledge and brings the passage to a forceful conclusion.

21. Contrasting grammatical methods

Az-Zalzalah begins with a future temporal-conditional frame and closes with general rules expressed through man. Al-ʿĀdiyāt begins with an oath and linked rapid scenes, then employs inna ... la- for the oath response, and finally the rebuking question afalā yaʿlam.

AspectAz-ZalzalahAl-ʿĀdiyāt
OpeningTemporal and conditional sceneOath and rapid movement
EmphasisCognate accusative and contrastOath, inna and lām
ConclusionTwo general conditionalsEmphatic report of divine knowledge

The comparison shows that eloquent speech can reach a related moral conclusion through markedly different structures.

22. Faṣl and waṣl at two distinct levels

وَمَنْ يَعْمَلْ مِثْقَالَ ذَرَّةٍ شَرًّا يَرَهُ
And whoever does an atom’s weight of evil will see it. (99:8)

وَإِنَّهُ عَلَىٰ ذَٰلِكَ لَشَهِيدٌ
And he is assuredly a witness to that. (100:7)

In the first passage, wāw joins parallel conditionals that together cover contrasting kinds of deeds. In the second, it joins a further assertion to the report of human ingratitude. The jāmiʿ differs: comprehensive moral contrast in one case and a related testimony in the other.

By comparison, an explanatory answer can stand without wāw while remaining strongly connected to the question implied by the context. Thus faṣl and waṣl are not reducible to the presence or absence of a particle alone; their justification rests in discourse relations.

23. Concision, ellipsis and semantic completeness

فَمَنْ يَعْمَلْ مِثْقَالَ ذَرَّةٍ خَيْرًا يَرَهُ
Whoever does an atom’s weight of good will see it. (99:7)

أَفَلَا يَعْلَمُ إِذَا بُعْثِرَ مَا فِي الْقُبُورِ
Does he not realize when what is in graves is brought forth? (100:9)

The first verse expresses a very broad moral rule in few words, illustrating the value of ījāz al-qaṣr. In the second, some grammatical accounts supply an unexpressed complement of yaʿlam, understood from context; on that analysis, ellipsis operates. The mechanism of brevity is not the same in both cases.

Concision without omission allows the expressed wording itself to bear rich meaning. Concision by omission depends on a contextual indication that safely restores what is left unspoken.

24. An integrated rhetorical exercise

يَوْمَئِذٍ تُحَدِّثُ أَخْبَارَهَا
On that Day the earth will report its accounts. (99:4)

إِنَّ رَبَّهُمْ بِهِمْ يَوْمَئِذٍ لَخَبِيرٌ
Indeed their Lord will be fully aware of them on that Day. (100:11)

Both verses employ yawmāʾidhin, but the first pictures the earth reporting, whereas the second emphatically asserts divine knowledge. In one, the imperfect verb lends vividness to a future scene; in the other, inna and the lām reinforce a predicative relation.

Sharing a word does not make two verses rhetorically identical. Sound analysis first identifies syntax, then the contextual aim, and finally the effect achieved by that structure.

25. Final synthesis and grounds for interpretation

In az-Zalzalah, the external scene of resurrection unfolds and ends with universal conditional rules for good and evil. In al-ʿĀdiyāt, the vivid oath prepares a strongly reinforced judgment on ingratitude, followed by the exposure of graves and hearts and a closing affirmation of divine knowledge.

Interpretive questionEvidence required
What does a pronoun refer to?Candidate antecedents, context and recognized alternatives
What does fāʾ or wāw add?The relation between the linked events or judgments
When is ellipsis justified?Syntactic need and a reliable contextual indication

A persuasive rhetorical judgment rests not on terminology alone but on the actual wording, syntax, context and intended meaning considered together.