The Qur’anic Root ʾ J J

1. Introducing the root and its Qur’anic forms

The Arabic root أ ج ج has several recognized semantic branches. The principal ones concern intense salinity and the biting taste of water, the blazing and sound of fire, intense heat, and, in some uses, rapid movement accompanied by noise.

Concerning water, أُجاج (ujāj) describes water whose salinity is so intense that drinking it is unpleasant or difficult. Early lexical explanations sometimes associate the word with bitterness and sometimes with a sharp, biting taste.

أَجيج (ajīj) concerns the blazing and sound of fire and its intense flaring. أَجَّتِ النَّارُ (ajjat al-nār) is said when fire blazes and the sound of its flames can be heard.

A figurative relationship can be recognized between these branches: just as intense fire burns, very salty water can irritate the mouth and taste biting. This similarity alone, however, does not establish that the description of salty water necessarily developed historically from the blazing of fire.

In the Qur’an, the root’s securely identified use is confined to describing water.

In the Qur’anic morphological index, أ ج ج occurs three times, in three verses, only as أُجاج (ujāj):

• Al-Furqān, 25:53: مِلْحٌ أُجَاجٌ (milḥun ujāj), intensely salty water contrasted with fresh, palatable water.
• Fāṭir, 35:12: مِلْحٌ أُجَاجٌ (milḥun ujāj), intensely salty water compared with fresh water that is easy to drink.
• Al-Wāqiʿah, 56:70: أُجَاجًا (ujājan), intensely salty water that The God, if He wills, can provide instead of palatable water.

These three occurrences share the same morphological form. In the first two verses, أُجاجٌ (ujājun) is descriptive in مِلْحٌ أُجاجٌ (milḥun ujāj); in the third, أُجاجًا (ujājan) is accusative in جَعَلْنَاهُ أُجَاجًا (jaʿalnāhu ujājan).

Forms recognized in Arabic

The following forms are also recorded for the أ ج ج family. Apart from ujāj describing water, the other forms and uses in this list do not occur in the Qur’an:

أَجَّ، يَئِجُّ and يَؤُجُّ (ajja, yaʾijju and yaʾujju): concerning fire, to blaze and make a sound; in some uses, to hurry or move rapidly.

أَجِيج (ajīj): the sound of fire, its blazing, and its intense flaring.

أَجَّة (ajjah): intense heat and scorching warmth; also, in some uses, commotion or a crowd mingling together.

أُجاج (ujāj): intensely salty, biting water; in another lexical branch, intense heat.

أَجُوج (ajūj): in an early use, bright or radiant.

أَجَّ الماءُ (ajja al-māʾ): the water became intensely salty or biting.

أَجَّ في سيره (ajja fī sayrihi): he hastened and moved quickly.

أَجَّجَ النارَ (ajjaja al-nār): he made the fire blaze.

تَأَجَّجَتِ النارُ (taʾajjajat al-nār): the fire flared up and blazed.

اِئْتَجَّ الحرُّ (iʾtajja al-ḥarr): the heat intensified.

تَأْجِيج (taʾjīj): making a fire blaze; figuratively, stirring up and intensifying conflict or enmity.

The names يَأْجُوج (Yaʾjūj) and مَأْجُوج (Maʾjūj) also occur in the Qur’an. Some lexicographers proposed an Arabic derivation from the أ ج ج family; others regarded them as non-Arabic names.

These four occurrences of proper names should therefore not be added to the three securely identified occurrences of ujāj without establishing their etymology. The issue is examined separately below.

2. Early Arabic evidence: from the sound of fire to salty water

Ajīj: the sound and blazing of fire

In Arabic, أَجِيجُ النَّارِ (ajīju al-nār) concerns the blazing and sound of fire.

As a fire intensifies, its flames move and a crackling or roaring sound is heard. Early Arabic expresses this condition through ajīj.

In Lisān al-ʿArab, Ibn Manẓūr, quoting Ibn Sīdah, includes الأَجَّة (al-ajjah) and الأَجيج (al-ajīj) among names for the sound of fire. He also identifies blazing and flaring as recognized meanings of the family.

Ajīj therefore means more than “heat” alone. With fire, sound, the movement of flames, and intense flaring can occur together.

Not every derivative necessarily includes all these features, however.

For example, ujāj concerning water principally describes its taste and salinity, not a requirement that the water make a sound like fire.

An example from Arabic poetry

A verse transmitted in early lexical sources reads:

أَصْرِفُ وَجْهِي عَنْ أَجِيجِ التَّنُّورِ
كَأَنَّ فِيهِ صَوْتَ فِيلٍ مَنْحُورِ

aṣrifu wajhī ʿan ajīji al-tannūri / ka-anna fīhi ṣawta fīlin manḥūr

“I turn my face away from the roar of the oven’s fire, as though it contained the sound of a slaughtered elephant.”

Here ajīj refers to the sound of the oven’s fire.

The poet uses an exaggerated comparison to describe the loud, frightening sound of the fire.

The example matters because it clarifies the auditory use of ajīj.

The poet and the precise date of composition are not securely identified in the account examined, however. Without independent evidence, the verse should therefore not be presented as pre-Islamic poetry.

Nor is an elephant’s sound part of the meaning of ajīj. The poet supplies this image to characterize the sound.

Intense heat

Arabic recognizes أَجَّةُ الصَّيْفِ (ajjatu al-ṣayf) for the intense heat of summer.

اِئْتَجَّ الْحَرُّ (iʾtajja al-ḥarr) is likewise said when heat becomes intense and oppressive.

A line of Ruʾbah ibn al-ʿAjjāj reads:

وَحَرَّقَ الْحَرُّ أُجَاجًا شَاعِلًا

wa-ḥarraqa al-ḥarru ujājan shāʿilā

“And the heat scorched with a burning, flame-like intensity.”

Here ujāj belongs to the field of intense heat.

This use shows that ujāj was not absolutely confined to water in Arabic.

In the Qur’an, however, all three occurrences describe water.

Its use for heat in a poem therefore does not justify translating مِلْحٌ أُجاجٌ (milḥun ujāj) as “hot water.”

The verses’ meaning must be understood through the word’s association with water and its contrast with fresh water.

Ruʾbah was a poet of the Umayyad and early Abbasid periods. This example belongs to the Islamic period, not the pre-Islamic period.

Ajūj: bright and radiant

Early Arabic also records أَجُوج (ajūj) for something bright.

Abū ʿAmr transmits this use, and lexical sources cite a verse of Abū Dhuʾayb al-Hudhalī in which lightning is compared to a shining lamp and described as ajūj.

Flame and brightness are prominent in this use.

أَجُوج (ajūj), with fatḥah on the hamzah and ḍammah on the jīm, nevertheless differs in vocalization from أُجاج (ujāj), salty water.

The two should therefore not replace one another in translation.

This example also shows that the family was used in the field of brightness and blazing. Its Qur’anic use nevertheless remains concerned with water.

Rapid movement accompanied by noise

Some Arabic evidence records أَجَّ في سيره (ajja fī sayrihi) for hurrying and moving quickly.

Forms of this family are also used of camels and ostriches moving rapidly with an accompanying sound.

Lexical explanations sometimes compare an ostrich’s rapid movement to the movement and sound of fire.

The figurative connection is understandable: rapid, noisy movement can be compared with the sound of flaring flames.

“Haste” should nevertheless not be treated as the meaning of ujāj itself in the verses about water.

Nor does this lexical branch alone establish that every similar word, including the name Yaʾjūj, necessarily has a historical connection with speed or haste.

Ujāj water: intense salinity and a biting taste

Lexical sources describe مَاءٌ أُجَاجٌ (māʾun ujāj) as intensely salty water.

Other explanations call this water مُرّ (murr) or شَديد المرارة (shadīd al-marārah), bitter or intensely unpleasant in taste.

These differences matter.

Saltiness and bitterness are not identical taste qualities. Very salty water may taste sharp and biting, but that does not establish that all salty water must also possess a distinct bitterness as a separate taste.

In ordinary language, murr can also describe an unpleasant or irritating taste.

Ujāj in its Qur’anic use can therefore be explained as intense salinity and an unpleasant, biting taste, without requiring a separate kind of bitterness in every instance of salty water.

Tāj al-ʿArūs also transmits an explanation connecting ujāj with the ajīj of fire: intense saltiness or bitterness irritates the mouth, as heat burns.

This explanation offers an understandable figurative relationship.

It should not, however, be treated as the established history of the word’s formation.

For Qur’anic usage, the important point is that ujāj describes water contrasted with fresh, palatable water.

3. Milḥun ujāj: contrasting fresh and salty water in Al-Furqān and Fāṭir

Two waters with different characteristics

Al-Furqān, 25:53

وَهُوَ الَّذِي مَرَجَ الْبَحْرَيْنِ هَٰذَا عَذْبٌ فُرَاتٌ وَهَٰذَا مِلْحٌ أُجَاجٌ وَجَعَلَ بَيْنَهُمَا بَرْزَخًا وَحِجْرًا مَحْجُورًا

wa-huwa alladhī maraja al-baḥrayni hādhā ʿadhbun furātun wa-hādhā milḥun ujājun wa-jaʿala baynahumā barzakhan wa-ḥijran maḥjūrā

“And He is the One who released the two bodies of water and placed them alongside one another: this one fresh and palatable, and that one intensely salty and biting; and He placed between them a partition and a restraining barrier.”

This verse introduces two kinds of water with different descriptions.

The first is عَذْبٌ فُرَاتٌ (ʿadhbun furāt).

The second is مِلْحٌ أُجَاجٌ (milḥun ujāj).

Understanding ujāj requires distinguishing these words.

ʿAdhb concerns water’s freshness and pleasant taste.

Furāt expresses its marked sweetness and palatability.

Milḥ indicates that the water is salty.

Ujāj emphasizes its intense salinity and biting taste.

مِلْحٌ أُجَاجٌ (milḥun ujāj) can therefore be translated as “intensely salty and biting water.”

The two words should not simply be rendered indistinguishably as “salty” and “salty,” since this would make the phrase’s emphasis and descriptive character less apparent.

Nor does milḥ here mean a mass of solid salt. The context of two bodies of water makes clear that the subject is the water’s salinity.

Maraja al-baḥrayn and the boundary between the waters

The same verse contains مَرَجَ (maraja), بَرْزَخ (barzakh), and حِجْر (ḥijr).

These words belong to other roots and should be examined separately.

Contextually, however, the verse introduces two bodies of water that retain different characteristics while having a spatial relationship.

Separation, a boundary, or the prevention of mixing should not be extracted from ujāj itself.

Ujāj simply describes intensely salty water.

Nor can this description alone support a definitive theory that any mixing of fresh and salt water is impossible.

In nature, river water and seawater can meet in estuaries and mix to varying degrees under different conditions, while areas with different salinities also exist.

Understanding maraja and barzakh requires examining the verse’s complete construction and the other uses of those roots.

The meaning of ujāj does not depend on that discussion, however: the verse concerns intensely salty water.

Is salty water here evil or wholly harmful?

No.

The verse contrasts salty water with fresh water, but does not say that one is inherently good and the other inherently evil.

Salty water is unsuitable for ordinary human drinking. Nevertheless, seas and salty waters can support abundant living organisms and provide various benefits for human life.

Sūrat Fāṭir makes this distinction clearer.

Ujāj should therefore not be translated as “bad,” “spoiled,” or “polluted.”

Intense salinity is a characteristic of the water. Its value and usefulness depend on the purpose and circumstances of use.

Fresh and salty water in Sūrat Fāṭir

Fāṭir, 35:12

وَمَا يَسْتَوِي الْبَحْرَانِ هَٰذَا عَذْبٌ فُرَاتٌ سَائِغٌ شَرَابُهُ وَهَٰذَا مِلْحٌ أُجَاجٌ ۖ وَمِنْ كُلٍّ تَأْكُلُونَ لَحْمًا طَرِيًّا وَتَسْتَخْرِجُونَ حِلْيَةً تَلْبَسُونَهَا ۖ وَتَرَى الْفُلْكَ فِيهِ مَوَاخِرَ لِتَبْتَغُوا مِنْ فَضْلِهِ وَلَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُونَ

wa-mā yastawī al-baḥrāni hādhā ʿadhbun furātun sāʾighun sharābuhu wa-hādhā milḥun ujājun; wa-min kullin taʾkulūna laḥman ṭariyyan wa-tastakhrijūna ḥilyatan talbasūnahā; wa-tarā al-fulka fīhi mawākhira li-tabtaghū min faḍlihi wa-laʿallakum tashkurūn

“The two bodies of water are not alike: this one is fresh and very palatable, easy and pleasant to drink; and that one is intensely salty and biting. From both you eat fresh flesh and extract ornaments that you wear; and you see ships cleaving through the water, so that you may seek provision and benefit from the bounty of The God, and perhaps give thanks.”

This verse repeats the contrast between ʿadhbun furāt and milḥun ujāj.

There is an important difference, however: the fresh water is additionally described as سَائِغٌ شَرَابُهُ (sāʾighun sharābuhu).

This phrase makes explicit the ease and pleasure of drinking it.

Ujāj water, by contrast, receives no such description.

The difference between these waters in relation to human drinking is therefore prominent.

But the verse does not stop there.

It goes on to say that fresh food comes from both bodies of water, that ornaments are extracted from aquatic resources, and that ships travel on water.

This continuation is fundamental.

The Qur’an does not say that salty water has no benefit because it is unsuitable for drinking.

On the contrary, the sea and salty water are also included among the world’s blessings.

Wa-min kullin: benefiting from both

وَمِنْ كُلٍّ تَأْكُلُونَ لَحْمًا طَرِيًّا (wa-min kullin taʾkulūna laḥman ṭariyyan) expresses benefit from both kinds of water.

In the context of waters, laḥm ṭarī concerns fresh food such as fish.

Ujāj itself does not mean fish or seafood, however.

Early explanations also differ over whether وَتَسْتَخْرِجُونَ حِلْيَةً (wa-tastakhrijūna ḥilyatan) refers precisely to both bodies of water or mainly to salty water.

Details concerning the extraction of ornaments should therefore not be determined from the meaning of ujāj alone.

For this root, what is clear is the difference between intensely salty water and fresh, palatable water. The verse as a whole indicates different benefits in both aquatic environments.

The different purposes of the two verses

Al-Furqān 25:53 emphasizes the relationship between the two waters and the boundary between them.

Fāṭir 35:12 describes their different characteristics and human benefit from both.

Both verses use milḥun ujāj, but their argumentative structures are not identical.

Explanations of the boundary between waters in Al-Furqān should therefore not be incorporated into the meaning of ujāj itself. Nor should every maritime benefit mentioned in Fāṭir be treated as an independent meaning of this word.

In both, ujāj describes the water’s intense salinity and biting taste.

4. Jaʿalnāhu ujājan: the importance of palatable water in Al-Wāqiʿah

Al-Wāqiʿah, 56:68

أَفَرَأَيْتُمُ الْمَاءَ الَّذِي تَشْرَبُونَ

a-fa-raʾaytumu al-māʾa alladhī tashrabūn

“Have you considered the water that you drink?”

Al-Wāqiʿah, 56:69

أَأَنْتُمْ أَنْزَلْتُمُوهُ مِنَ الْمُزْنِ أَمْ نَحْنُ الْمُنْزِلُونَ

a-antum anzaltumūhu mina al-muzni am naḥnu al-munzilūn

“Is it you who brought it down from the clouds, or are We the Ones who bring it down?”

Al-Wāqiʿah, 56:70

لَوْ نَشَاءُ جَعَلْنَاهُ أُجَاجًا فَلَوْلَا تَشْكُرُونَ

law nashāʾu jaʿalnāhu ujājan fa-lawlā tashkurūn

“If We will, We can make it intensely salty and biting; why, then, do you not give thanks?”

This is the root’s third and final securely identified Qur’anic occurrence.

A different construction from the preceding two verses

In Al-Furqān and Fāṭir, ujāj water was introduced as one of two kinds of water.

Al-Wāqiʿah, however, concerns the water people drink, which comes down from the clouds.

The Qur’an invites its audience to reflect on drinking water and how it comes into being.

It then says that The God, if He wills, can make that water ujāj.

Here ujājan occurs in the construction جَعَلْنَاهُ أُجَاجًا (jaʿalnāhu ujājan).

Grammatically, the pronoun hu refers back to the water mentioned, while ujājan is the quality attributed to it in the stated hypothetical situation.

The verse does not say that the drinking water actually available is necessarily salty.

It compares the condition from which people now benefit with another condition that could have arisen for them.

Law nashāʾ: a hypothesis inviting reflection

In this context, لَوْ نَشَاءُ (law nashāʾ) recalls the power of The God to change the water’s condition.

The construction should not, however, lead us to conclude that rainwater ordinarily falls intensely salty and then always becomes fresh on its way to the ground.

The verse itself does not explain such a specific scientific process.

It concerns the possibility of drinking water being placed in a condition unsuitable for drinking.

This reminder connects with the closing words فَلَوْلَا تَشْكُرُونَ (fa-lawlā tashkurūn).

The verse’s message thus concerns recognizing the blessing of palatable water and giving thanks. The lexical meaning of ujāj nevertheless remains intensely salty, biting water.

Does ujāj mean any undrinkable water?

In Qur’anic usage, ujāj water has extremely intense salinity.

Such water is unsuitable for ordinary human drinking.

Not every kind of water unsuitable for drinking is necessarily called ujāj, however.

Water may, for example, be dangerous to drink because of microbial contamination, toxic substances, or deterioration, without being intensely salty.

“Undrinkable” can therefore describe a practical consequence or characteristic of ujāj water, but it is not its direct lexical meaning.

Nor does this verse establish that no living organism can inhabit salty water.

In Fāṭir 35:12, the Qur’an itself also describes human benefit from salty waters.

We should therefore distinguish suitability for human drinking from usefulness for other forms of life and use.

5. Yaʾjūj and Maʾjūj: do they belong to this root?

The names يَأْجُوج (Yaʾjūj) and مَأْجُوج (Maʾjūj) occur in two Qur’anic verses, appearing together each time.

Al-Kahf, 18:94

قَالُوا يَا ذَا الْقَرْنَيْنِ إِنَّ يَأْجُوجَ وَمَأْجُوجَ مُفْسِدُونَ فِي الْأَرْضِ فَهَلْ نَجْعَلُ لَكَ خَرْجًا عَلَىٰ أَنْ تَجْعَلَ بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَهُمْ سَدًّا

qālū yā dhā al-qarnayni inna yaʾjūja wa-maʾjūja mufsidūna fī al-arḍi fa-hal najʿalu laka kharjan ʿalā an tajʿala baynanā wa-baynahum saddā

“They said: O Dhū al-Qarnayn, Yaʾjūj and Maʾjūj cause corruption in the land. May we provide you with payment so that you place a barrier between us and them?”

Al-Anbiyāʾ, 21:96

حَتَّىٰ إِذَا فُتِحَتْ يَأْجُوجُ وَمَأْجُوجُ وَهُمْ مِنْ كُلِّ حَدَبٍ يَنْسِلُونَ

ḥattā idhā futiḥat yaʾjūju wa-maʾjūju wa-hum min kulli ḥadabin yansilūn

“Until, when the way for Yaʾjūj and Maʾjūj is opened, they hasten down from every elevation.”

In outward form, the two names resemble the أ ج ج family, particularly in the readings with hamzah.

But similarity of form alone does not establish Arabic derivation.

Lexical disagreement over the names’ origins

Early Arabic sources contain two principal views about these names.

One regards Yaʾjūj and Maʾjūj as non-Arabic names.

On this view, no certain meaning can be constructed for them solely through Arabic derivational rules.

The other considers the possibility that the names derive from Arabic roots associated with the ajīj of fire, rapid and noisy movement, or ujāj meaning intensely salty water.

These interpretations sometimes compare the groups’ movement and commotion to blazing fire or rapid movement.

These are, however, proposed derivations.

The lexicographers transmitting them explicitly state that if the names are non-Arabic, they cannot be derived from Arabic verbs in the same way as native Arabic words.

Readings with and without hamzah

Among the ten canonical readings, ʿĀṣim, including Ḥafṣ’s transmission, reads both names with hamzah: يَأْجُوج (Yaʾjūj) and مَأْجُوج (Maʾjūj). The other readers of the ten replace the hamzah with alif: يَاجُوج (Yājūj) and مَاجُوج (Mājūj). This difference applies at both Al-Kahf 18:94 and Al-Anbiyāʾ 21:96.

On the basis of the forms with hamzah, some morphologists sought to explain them through patterns such as يَفْعُول (yafʿūl) and مَفْعُول (mafʿūl).

For the forms without hamzah, they also proposed easing the hamzah or alternative morphological structures.

The difference in reading hamzah does not by itself establish the names’ historical origin.

A non-Arabic name may have entered Arabic and been adapted to Arabic phonology and writing.

The form Yaʾjūj alone should therefore not lead us to conclude that the name certainly derives from أَجَّتِ النَّارُ (ajjat al-nār).

Do their names mean corruption or fire?

Al-Kahf 18:94 describes Yaʾjūj and Maʾjūj as مُفْسِدُونَ فِي الْأَرْضِ (mufsidūna fī al-arḍ), causing corruption in the land.

Mufsidūn, however, belongs to ف س د (F S D), not أ ج ج (ʾ J J).

In Al-Anbiyāʾ 21:96, their movement from elevated ground is expressed through يَنْسِلُونَ (yansilūn).

This verb likewise belongs to another root.

Even if an Arabic derivation of the names is considered possible, corruption and haste should therefore not be presented without evidence as their certain meanings.

The Qur’an itself expresses their conduct or condition through separate words.

Their names alone likewise cannot establish their ethnicity, language, bodily appearance, precise location, or particular historical identity.

These issues require an independent study of the verses concerning Yaʾjūj and Maʾjūj.

Implications for classifying roots

For Forqan’s study, the three occurrences of ujāj in Al-Furqān, Fāṭir, and Al-Wāqiʿah are the securely identified forms of أ ج ج.

Yaʾjūj and Maʾjūj, however, should be examined separately as names whose derivational origins are disputed.

They should not be added without explanation to the count of this root’s securely established derivatives.

If a separate article on Yaʾjūj and Maʾjūj is written in the future, it should begin with the Qur’anic verses and their actual names, rather than a prior assumption that they derive from fire or salty water.

6. Comparison with related words and roots

ʾ J J (ujāj) and M L Ḥ (milḥ): saltiness and intense salinity

Study of M L Ḥ (Not yet published)

In the verses considered, milḥ indicates that the water is salty.

Ujāj emphasizes its intense salinity and biting taste.

The two words therefore complement one another in مِلْحٌ أُجَاجٌ (milḥun ujāj).

Ujāj should not be treated merely as an indistinguishable synonym of milḥ: in this construction, the second description makes the intensity and unpleasant quality of the salinity clearer.

“Intensely salty and biting” is appropriate in translation.

ʾ J J (ujāj) and ʿ DH B (ʿadhb): salty and fresh water

Study of ʿ DH B

In its use for water, ʿadhb concerns freshness and pleasant taste.

Ujāj concerns intense salinity.

The two are contrasted in the Qur’an.

This contrast should not, however, become an absolute moral judgment.

Fresh water is more suitable for human drinking, while salty water can also be beneficial in nature and human life.

Freshness and saltiness in these verses are therefore characteristics of water, not fixed names for good and evil.

ʾ J J (ujāj) and F R T (furāt): biting salinity and palatability

Study of F R T (Not yet published)

Furāt in Arabic concerns very sweet, palatable water.

Al-Furqān 25:53 and Fāṭir 35:12 contrast عَذْبٌ فُرَاتٌ (ʿadhbun furāt) with مِلْحٌ أُجَاجٌ (milḥun ujāj).

On both sides of the contrast, the second word gives greater prominence to the water’s quality.

Furāt should not, however, be taken to mean absolutely anything pleasant, nor ujāj absolutely anything unpleasant.

In these verses, both concern the description of water.

ʾ J J (ujāj) and M R R (murr): saltiness and bitterness

Study of M R R (Not yet published)

Murr concerns bitterness.

Some lexical explanations also gloss ujāj as bitter water.

Saltiness and bitterness are nevertheless distinct taste qualities.

The basic translation should therefore retain intense salinity, with bitterness or a biting quality supplied in explanation.

“Intensely salty and bitter water” is also defensible, but a separate bitterness should not be required of every instance of salty water.

ʾ J J (ajīj) and L H B (lahab): flame and the sound of blazing

Study of L H B (Not yet published)

Lahab concerns a flame of fire.

Ajīj can express the sound of blazing and its intense flaring.

The two are close in the field of fire, but are not identical.

In the Qur’anic use of ujāj, there is no need to assume an actual flame or fire in the water.

The resemblance between the biting taste of very salty water and the burning of fire is figurative explanation. It does not mean that Qur’anic ujāj water is necessarily hot or burning.

ʾ J J (ajīj) and S ʿ R (saʿīr): blazing and a blazing fire

Study of S ʿ R (Not yet published)

Saʿīr in the Qur’an concerns blazing fire.

Arabic likewise records ajīj for the blazing and sound of fire.

The form ajīj itself does not occur in the Qur’an, however.

Verses containing saʿīr should therefore not be counted among the Qur’anic occurrences of أ ج ج.

Nor should the meaning of punishment by fire be imposed on milḥun ujāj.

ʾ J J and ʾ J N: salinity and a change in water quality

The Arabic root أ ج ن (ʾ J N) concerns water whose smell or taste has changed through standing.

Ujāj, however, concerns intense salinity and a biting taste.

Water can be salty without being spoiled or stagnant.

Fresh water may likewise acquire an unpleasant smell through contamination or standing, without becoming salty.

The two families should therefore not be conflated merely because their letters resemble one another and some of their referents are unpleasant.

7. Translation proposals for Forqan and conclusion

Al-Furqān, 25:53

Proposed translation of مِلْحٌ أُجَاجٌ (milḥun ujāj):

“Intensely salty and biting.”

Within the sentence:

“This one is fresh and palatable, and that one intensely salty and biting.”

This rendering preserves the distinction between milḥ and ujāj to a suitable extent.

If a shorter translation is needed, “intensely salty” is also appropriate.

“Hot water” or “polluted water,” however, does not accurately render the phrase.

Fāṭir, 35:12

Proposed translation:

“This one is fresh and very palatable, easy and pleasant to drink; and that one is intensely salty and biting.”

In this verse, sāʾighun sharābuhu emphasizes the fresh water’s quality.

An explanation can therefore say that, in contrast, ujāj water is unsuitable for ordinary human drinking.

This contrast should not imply that salty water is useless for every purpose: the verse continues by describing human benefit from both kinds of water.

Al-Wāqiʿah, 56:70

Proposed translation:

“If We will, We can make it intensely salty and biting; why, then, do you not give thanks?”

Here the sentence’s hypothetical character should be preserved.

The Qur’an speaks of the water people drink and reminds them that it could have possessed a different quality.

The verse should therefore not become a statement that rainwater is always salty.

Brief meanings for the word-by-word boxes

أُجَاجٌ (ujājun): intensely salty and biting; describing water with intense salinity and an unpleasant taste.

أُجَاجًا (ujājan): intensely salty and biting; in Al-Wāqiʿah 56:70, describing water in a stated hypothetical situation.

A root explanation can add that ajīj in Arabic concerns the blazing and sound of fire, and ajjah intense heat.

These meanings should not, however, serve as direct translations of ujāj in the three Qur’anic verses.

Conclusion

The Arabic root أ ج ج has several branches: the blazing and sound of fire, intense heat, rapid and noisy movement, and intensely salty, biting water.

Lexical sources recognize a figurative relationship between the burning of fire and the irritating taste of very salty water. This resemblance does not, however, establish a definitive derivational history for all the meanings.

The root has three securely identified Qur’anic occurrences, all as ujāj and all describing water.

Al-Furqān 25:53 and Fāṭir 35:12 contrast ujāj water with fresh, palatable water.

In Al-Wāqiʿah 56:70, the Qur’an speaks of the possibility of drinking water becoming salty and biting, inviting its audience to recognize the blessing of water and give thanks.

These verses show that Qur’anic ujāj is a particular characteristic of water, not a name for moral evil, corruption, heat, or fire.

Nor does the Qur’an present salty water as wholly useless. After distinguishing fresh and salty water, Fāṭir 35:12 mentions food, ornaments, and benefits associated with the waters.

Early sources propose a possible derivation of Yaʾjūj and Maʾjūj from the أ ج ج family, but also report a non-Arabic origin for both names. Their Arabic derivation is uncertain, so they should not be included without explanation among the root’s established derivatives.

For Forqan, the basic definition of this family is as follows: in Qur’anic usage, ujāj describes water whose salinity is extremely intense and whose taste is biting and unpleasant. In other branches of Arabic, the أ ج ج family also concerns the blazing and sound of fire, intense heat, and rapid movement. These meanings should not, however, replace the particular Qur’anic sense of intensely salty water.

Accordingly, “intensely salty and biting” is the principal equivalent, and “intensely salty” a suitable shorter equivalent, for all three Qur’anic occurrences.