(17:72) (وَمَن) (wa-man) (ওয়া মান) (And whoever) // (كَانَ) (kāna) (কানা) (was) // (فِى) (fī) (ফী) (in) // (هَـٰذِهِۦٓ) (hādhihī) (হা-যিহী) (this [life]) // (أَعْمَىٰ) (aʿmā) (আ‘মা) (blind) (Root: ع م ي (ʿ-M-Y). Core meaning: To be obscured, dark, unable to perceive. It primarily signifies metaphorical or intellectual blindness—a lack of insight or guidance—rather than just physical blindness. Its Semitic cognates include Hebrew עִוֵּר (ʿiwwēr) and Aramaic/Syriac עַמְיָא (ʿamyā), both meaning 'blind'. The Qur'anic usage elevates this to a spiritual condition. A derived word is عَمَاء (ʿamāʾ), meaning a state of utter confusion or, in early cosmological thought, a primordial, undifferentiated state.) // (فَهُوَ) (fa-huwa) (ফাহুওয়া) (then he) // (فِى) (fī) (ফী) (in) // (ٱلْـَٔاخِرَةِ) (al-ākhirati) (আল-আ-খিরাতি) (the Hereafter) (Root: ء خ ر (ʾ-KH-R). Core meaning: To be last, final, other. It denotes posteriority in time or space. The term al-ākhirah is a specialized eschatological concept for the life to come, contrasted with al-dunyā (the nearer world). Cognates include Hebrew אַחֲרוֹן (ʾaḥaron, 'last, final') and Aramaic ܐ̱ܚܪܹנܳܐ (ʾāḥrēnā, 'other'). A key derived word is تَأَخَّرَ (taʾakhkhara), 'to be delayed'.) // (أَعْمَىٰ) (aʿmā) (আ‘মা) (blind) // (وَأَضَلُّ) (wa-aḍallu) (ওয়া আদাললু) (and more astray) (Root: ض ل ل (Ḍ-L-L). Core meaning: To be lost, to stray, to err. It is the antithesis of guidance (hudā). The elative form أَضَلُّ (aḍallu) signifies 'more' or 'most' astray. Cognates are less direct, but Hebrew צ-ל-ל (Ṣ-L-L) can mean 'to sink/be submerged,' implying being lost. A derived noun is ضَلَالَة (ḍalālah), 'misguidance'.) // (سَبِيلًا) (sabīlā) (সাবীলা) ([from the] path.) (Root: س ب ل (S-B-L). Core meaning: Path, way, road, means. It is often used metaphorically for a course of action or way of life. Cognates include Hebrew שְׁבִיל (šǝḇīl, 'path') and Akkadian šiblu ('track'). Sabīl Allāh ('the Path of God') is a central Qur'anic concept. A derived verb سَبَّلَ (sabbala) means to dedicate something for public use, making it a 'public way'.) | Early exegetes like al-Ṭabarī, citing Ibn ʿAbbās, interpreted the first "blindness" as being blind to God's signs and bounties in this world, and the second as both literal blindness and being blind to one's own legal proof (ḥujjah) in the Hereafter. The state of being "more astray" (aḍallu sabīlā) is because in this world, one could still find guidance, but in the next, all paths to repentance or rectification are sealed (Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ al-Bayān). Al-Zamakhsharī stresses the rhetorical force: the repetition of aʿmā indicates that the blindness of the heart (ʿamā al-qalb) in this life is the very cause of being blind to the path of salvation in the next. Al-Rāzī frames it rationally: the faculties of perception, if not used for their ultimate purpose (recognizing the Creator), become defunct and even more disoriented when faced with the unveiled reality of the Hereafter. Sayyid Quṭb sees it existentially: the inner spiritual blindness cultivated in this life is simply carried over and magnified post-mortem. There is no specific ḥadīth on the verse's occasion of revelation, but its theme is supported by general Prophetic traditions on the "blindness of the heart being worse than the blindness of the eyes." | Canonical Scripture: The verse's theme of spiritual blindness as a culpable state finds profound parallels in the Bible. In Isaiah 6:9-10, the prophet is told to declare that the people will be "ever seeing, but never perceiving" because their hearts are calloused. This idea of chosen blindness to divine communication is a direct analogue. The New Testament intensifies this metaphor. Jesus declares, "For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind" (John 9:39). Here, acknowledging one's spiritual blindness is the prerequisite for sight, while the claim to sight (self-righteousness) confirms one's blindness. The concept of being "more astray" in the next life echoes Jesus' parable of the blind leading the blind, where both end up in a pit (Matthew 15:14). <br> Philosophical Analogues:<br> • Plato (=): This strongly resonates with Plato's Allegory of the Cave (Republic VII). The individual who is "blind" in this world is akin to the prisoner who mistakes shadows for reality and refuses to turn towards the light of the Good. This chosen ignorance in the sensory world ensures their utter disorientation and inability to perceive true reality (the World of Forms), paralleling the Qur'anic link between worldly spiritual blindness and being lost (aḍallu) in the Hereafter. <br> • Empiricism (≠): For an empiricist like John Locke, the mind is a tabula rasa (blank slate), and all knowledge derives from sensory experience. "Blindness" would be a lack of data, not a willful misuse of an innate spiritual faculty. The verse posits a perceptive faculty (the heart/intellect) that can become blind, a concept alien to strict empiricism, which recognizes no such a priori spiritual organ of perception. | In medieval Islamic thought, influenced by Aristotelian and Neoplatonic philosophy, the verse was understood through cognitive and psychological lenses. Ibn Sīnā (Avicenna) distinguished between sensory perception and rational intellection. The "blindness" (aʿmā) of the verse would be located in the rational soul (al-nafs al-nāṭiqah), which fails to abstract universal truths from sensory particulars—specifically, the truth of God's existence. It is a failure of intellection, not optics. Contemporary cognitive science offers a modern analogue in the concept of "inattentional blindness," where a person fails to see what is plainly before them if their attention is directed elsewhere. The verse can be framed in this context: if an individual's cognitive framework is conditioned to perceive only the material, they may develop an inattentional blindness to signs of the transcendent. The verse's claim that such a person will be "more astray" in the Hereafter suggests a catastrophic cognitive dissonance when their predictive model of reality, built on flawed worldly priors, completely fails to match the new experiential data of the afterlife. This aligns with theories of predictive processing, where a deeply entrenched, erroneous belief system would lead to profound disorientation when faced with a contradictory reality. |