Session Fifteen, Verses 58 and 59, The Five Parts of Verse 58, Part Four

Session Fifteen

Verses 58 and 59 – The Five Parts of Verse 58 – Part Four: “And Say, ‘Hittah'” – Point One: An Obligatory Command – Point Two: The Meaning of “Hittah” – The Five Possibilities and Their Examination

November 20, 2024

Part Four: “And Say, ‘Hittah'”

The fourth part of verse 58 consists of no more than two words: “and say, ‘Hittah‘” («وَقُولُوا حِطَّةٌ») — say, hittah. What the meaning of hittah is, and which meaning we ought to take it to bear, involves several possibilities, which we shall now set forth. This part does not contain a great many points.

Point One: An Obligatory Command

The first point is whether this command is obligatory or non-obligatory. We have noted that this command is obligatory. Among the four commands in this noble verse, the only command that was not obligatory was the command to eat of the blessings; we noted that the command to eat of the blessings and to make use of them was a non-obligatory command. This command, however, is certainly an obligatory command, since the matter at hand concerns seeking forgiveness, repentance, and the request for the remission of past sins.

Point Two: The Meaning of “Hittah”

In any case, the principal matter is what exactly is commanded. There are several possibilities regarding what is commanded, namely, that they should utter this statement.

The Five Possibilities

Five possibilities have been put forward. Some of these possibilities may, in fact, reduce to others, but we shall, in summary, set forth these five possibilities and these five meanings, and shall then indicate which of these five meanings carries the greater weight.

First possibility: God, Blessed and Exalted, has commanded repentance by means of a specific term; that is, God states that they should enter in a state of prostration (in the sense we have discussed) and utter this statement — that they should utter a specific term, and that this specific term be a Hebrew word; that is, its meaning is not known in the Arabic language. They were to bind themselves devotionally to uttering “hittah.”

This is a possibility that carries little support or evidence, and it seems unlikely that this is what is intended. ‘Asim, however, has adopted this view, stating that this is among the terms of the People of the Book — that is, of the Jews — and is, for instance, in the Hebrew language, its meaning in Arabic being unknown. At most, we might say that it carries a meaning somewhat close to this very meaning of forgiveness and the like.

Second possibility: the second possibility is that God, Blessed and Exalted, has asked of them that they utter something indicative of repentance — that is, a request for forgiveness and the remission of sins. The reason God asked this of them is that they had certainly fallen into disobedience and rebellion; they had committed sin, and indeed had done so in full view of one another; when they opposed the divine commands, this opposition occurred in plain sight. God wished that their return and repentance should likewise be made manifest in some manner. For repentance is an inward state — an intention to turn back from the path of error and not to repeat the sin. This quality of the heart is, at times, given verbal expression and made manifest, and at times is not given verbal expression. A person may commit a sin and repent inwardly, with no one becoming aware of it at all; but when a sin is committed openly, manifestly, and in plain view of others, then naturally its reversal, too, must be made manifest in some manner. Since they had committed this sin before God, and since this sin and rebellion occurred, in effect, in plain view of others — that is, they had all committed this act together, and all had witnessed it — God asked of them that they seek forgiveness and request pardon, and that their inward intention of return and repentance of the heart be joined to this verbal request, so that all might see that they had turned back from that path of error.

Thus, according to this possibility, “say, ‘Hittah‘” is, in fact, a request for repentance and a request for forgiveness, and, according to this possibility, “hittah” becomes a term denoting repentance.

Third possibility: the third possibility is that this is the predicate (khabar) for an omitted subject (mubtada), following the pattern of fa’lah, like jalsah; it is as though the implied form were: “mas’alatuna hittatun” or “amruka hittatun” — our request is remission; the subject, mas’alatuna, has been omitted; amruka has been omitted. In fact, although the word here is in the nominative case, it was originally in the accusative, its original form being: “hutta ‘anna,” “dhunubana hittatan” — O God, remit our sins, and grant us pardon and forgiveness; but it has been rendered in the nominative form so as to convey a sense of permanence and stability. This too is a possibility which some, including the author of al-Kashshaf, have held.

Fourth possibility: the fourth possibility, put forward by Abu Muslim al-Isfahani, is that the meaning is “amruna hittatun,” that is, “that we should descend (nahuttu) into this town and settle within it.” That is, God, Blessed and Exalted, has said that you should say this, so that We may forgive you; it is as though the verse reads: “and say, ‘Hittah,’ so that We may forgive you your sins” — since this is indeed what follows in the text; that is, this view holds that the forgiveness and remission of sins came about precisely on account of this statement they made and this request they put forward. This possibility may perhaps be a weak one, and is not particularly consistent with the apparent meaning of the verse.

Fifth possibility: the fifth possibility is that the meaning of “say, ‘Hittah‘” is the utterance of this statement: “O God, remit our sins from us, for we have only bowed down for Your sake and out of a desire for self-abasement before You; so remit our sins from us” («اللهم حُطّ عنّا ذنوبنا فإنّا إنّما انحططنا لوجهک و إرادة التذلّل لک فحُطّ عنّا ذنوبنا»).

These five possibilities are set forth by al-Razi in al-Tafsir al-Kabir; these possibilities, however, are not all on the same level, even though he has presented them as five possibilities, stating that “say, ‘Hittah‘” admits of several aspects — he sets forth five aspects for it; but some of these are reducible to others. What matters principally is the word “hittah” itself, and what meaning this construction conveys. One possibility is that this is a specific Hebrew term, and that God wished for them to utter this term — a term whose meaning is not known to us; it has no meaning in the Arabic language, but may, for instance, have an equivalent. One possibility is that “hittah” is a term denoting a request for pardon and forgiveness. Another possibility is that this is the predicate for an omitted subject, which was, in fact, originally in the accusative case — that is, “we request from You [the remission of] our sins” or “remit our sins from us.” The other two possibilities present here are, in some manner, close to this latter possibility.

Examination of the Five Possibilities

In effect, then, we have here no more than three possibilities. The disagreement concerns how this forgiveness and pardon was requested; what is fundamentally commanded here is the verbal request for forgiveness, and not the utterance of one specific term in particular. What is intended is: seek forgiveness, and request pardon from God.

Hence, the possibilities are several; perhaps the possibility that they were commanded to request forgiveness and pardon from God is certain. As to why this matter was not left to a mere inward, heartfelt request — in light of the explanation we have had from al-Razi, who regarded this as the best of the views — since they had engaged in sin and rebellion, and all were aware of it, God wished that this, too, should be expressed verbally, and that this state of humility, while manifesting itself within their hearts as they repented, should also be given voice — that the acts of the limbs and the acts of the heart should be completed together and overlap with one another.

It thus appears that a specific verbal utterance was intended by God, and that this was not a matter of a purely inward, heartfelt act; nor, however, was it a term belonging to the Hebrew language, one that would convey nothing comprehensible in Arabic.