The Qur’anic Root Q Ṣ Ṣ (Qaṣṣ, Qaṣaṣ, and Qiṣāṣ)
Following traces, recounting events, and proportionate response: from following Moses and Qur’anic narratives to justice concerning killing and wounds
Qur’anic and lexical forms
قَصَّ
(qaṣṣa)
Form I perfect; Al-Qaṣaṣ 28:25
قَصَصْنَا
(qaṣaṣnā)
First-person plural perfect; Al-Nisāʾ 4:164
نَقُصُّ
(naquṣṣu)
First-person plural imperfect; Yūsuf 12:3
تَقْصُصْ
(taqṣuṣ)
Jussive imperfect after a prohibition; Yūsuf 12:5
قُصِّيهِ
(quṣṣīhi)
Feminine singular imperative with object pronoun; Al-Qaṣaṣ 28:11
قَصَص
(qaṣaṣ)
An account or following traces; six Qur’anic occurrences
قِصَاص
(qiṣāṣ)
Proportionate response; four Qur’anic occurrences
قُصَّة
(quṣṣah)
A forelock in the lexicons; not Qur’anic
قِصَّة
(qiṣṣah)
A narrative or account in the lexicons; this form is not Qur’anic
مِقَصّ
(miqaṣṣ)
A cutting tool in the lexicons; not Qur’anic
قُصَاص
(quṣāṣ)
The hairline in the lexicons; not Qur’anic
قُصَاصَة
(quṣāṣah)
Hair clippings in the lexicons; not Qur’anic
1. The root and its Qur’anic forms
In older Arabic, Q Ṣ Ṣ concerns following something and tracing its effects. Someone following footprints on the ground takes one sign after another to discover a route. Someone recounting an event likewise relates pieces of information in succession. In the juridical application qiṣāṣ, a response to previous harm is considered in proportion to that harm.
Alongside these meanings, قَصَّ (qaṣṣa) also concerns cutting hair, wool, or nails. This application involves cutting and shortening, though lexicographers have sought to connect it with following and bringing things’ limits into alignment.
This family merits particular study because the Qur’an presents three clear fields of application: following an actual trace, recounting statements and events, and proportionate response to killing or injury.
Q Ṣ Ṣ occurs 30 times in 25 Qur’anic verses, in three morphological groups:
- The basic form I verb قَصَّ (qaṣṣa), in perfect, imperfect, and imperative forms: 20 occurrences.
- قَصَص (qaṣaṣ), following traces or recounting reports: six occurrences.
- قِصَاص (qiṣāṣ), a proportionate response to injury or killing: four occurrences.
The four qiṣāṣ occurrences are in Al-Baqarah 2:178, Al-Baqarah 2:179, Al-Baqarah 2:194, and Al-Māʾidah 5:45. Qaṣaṣ occurs in Āl ʿImrān 3:62, Al-Aʿrāf 7:176, Yūsuf 12:3, Yūsuf 12:111, Al-Kahf 18:64, and Al-Qaṣaṣ 28:25. The remaining occurrences are verbs. These counts agree with the Qur’anic morphological index.
The Qur’anic verb concerns both recounting and following traces, but none of its verbal forms concerns cutting hair or nails.
This distinction matters in translation. قُصِّيهِ (quṣṣīhi) in Al-Qaṣaṣ 28:11 commands following Moses; لَا تَقْصُصْ رُؤْيَاكَ (lā taqṣuṣ ruʾyāka) in Yūsuf 12:5 prohibits recounting a dream. The consonants are the same, but the verb’s object identifies each sentence’s appropriate meaning.
Qaṣaṣ and qiṣāṣ must also be distinguished by their vowels and applications. The former concerns narration or following traces in the Qur’an; the latter is a term for a proportionate response to injury or killing.
2. The semantic core in older Arabic
Following one sign after another
Ibn Fāris writes in Maqāyīs al-Lughah:
«الْقَافُ وَالصَّادُ أَصْلٌ صَحِيحٌ يَدُلُّ عَلَى تَتَبُّعِ الشَّيْءِ»
al-qāfu wa-al-ṣādu aṣlun ṣaḥīḥun yadullu ʿalā tatabbuʿi al-shayʾi
Translation: “Qāf and ṣād have an established semantic basis indicating following something.”
He then gives اِقْتَصَصْتُ الْأَثَرَ (iqtaṣaṣtu al-athar): I followed the trace or tracks.
In such usage, the follower proceeds from one sign to the next. Footprints left in soil can reveal someone’s route when followed.
Yet قَصَّ الْأَثَرَ (qaṣṣa al-athar) does not mean seeing the person or certainly reaching them. Someone can follow tracks without ultimately finding the person sought.
Following traces, direct observation, and reaching the destination therefore require distinction.
The Qur’an also makes this distinction clear. Moses’ sister is told to follow him; another verb subsequently expresses her seeing him.
From following traces to recounting events
Al-Rāghib al-Iṣfahānī explains in Al-Mufradāt:
«الْقَصُّ: تَتَبُّعُ الْأَثَرِ»
al-qaṣṣu tatabbuʿu al-athari
He then adds:
«وَالْقَصَصُ: الْأَخْبَارُ الْمُتَتَّبَعَةُ»
wa-al-qaṣaṣu al-akhbāru al-mutatabbaʿatu
That is: “Qaṣṣ is following a trace; qaṣaṣ is reports followed in succession.”
The connection between these meanings is intelligible.
A tracker follows signs along the ground; a narrator recounts events or reports in speech.
Both involve some connection between successive parts. This does not mean that every narrative necessarily recounts every event of a life, from beginning to end, in exact chronological order.
A narrator may select part of an event, return to an earlier time, or mention only events relevant to the subject.
Connecting qaṣaṣ with following reports therefore does not require exhaustive detail or chronological order without exception.
Nor does qaṣaṣ by itself determine whether an account is true or false. Some verses state truth through the separate description الحق (al-ḥaqq).
Qaṣṣ in cutting hair and nails
Arabic قَصَّ الشَّعْرَ (qaṣṣa al-shaʿr) concerns cutting or trimming hair. مِقَصّ (miqaṣṣ) also names a cutting tool.
Lisān al-ʿArab explains this application through cutting. Ibn Fāris seeks to connect it with aligning the ends of hairs: trimming brings their ends to an even level.
That practical image is intelligible, but must not be treated as the word’s established historical origin.
Hair is not always cut to make every strand equally long. Only some hair or part of a nail may be removed.
Cutting is therefore an established Arabic application of qaṣṣ. Connecting every instance of cutting with tracing or equality remains a lexical analysis, rather than a fixed Qur’anic meaning.
For trimming hair, the Qur’an itself uses مُقَصِّرِينَ (muqaṣṣirīn) in Al-Fatḥ 48:27, from another root, Q Ṣ R. Similarity of application does not merge Q Ṣ Ṣ and Q Ṣ R.
Qiṣāṣ: following the effect of harm with a proportionate response
Ibn Fāris likewise explains qiṣāṣ for wounds through this semantic basis. When someone is injured and a corresponding act follows in response, it is as though the first act’s trace has been followed.
Lisān al-ʿArab explains qiṣāṣ as a response to killing or wounding based on what was previously done.
An important distinction nevertheless remains: following traces is a broader meaning of the family, while qiṣāṣ is a particular juridical application emphasizing reciprocity and proportion in responding to harm.
It should therefore not always be translated simply as “following footprints.” In juridical verses, proportionate response is an established meaning.
Conversely, qaṣaṣ in Joseph’s or Moses’ account must not be treated as vengeance or punishment.
The applications belong to one family, but each has a familiar meaning in its own setting.
3. Older usages: traces, narration, hair, and reciprocity
Tracking during travel and searching
Recognizing human and animal tracks had practical importance in desert Arab life. Footprints, hoofprints, marks in sand, and other traces could help identify a route or locate people and animals.
Early lexicons record قَصَّ الْأَثَرَ (qaṣṣa al-athar) for precisely this activity: following a trace, sign by sign.
In Tahdhīb al-Lughah, al-Azharī explains going after someone قَصًّا (qaṣṣan) or قَصَصًا (qaṣaṣan) as following their traces. He connects the usage with the verses about Moses’ sister and Moses returning with his companion in Sūrat al-Kahf.
Historical evaluation nevertheless requires caution. Recording such expressions in lexicons after the Qur’an establishes their place in classical Arabic, but does not by itself date each expression.
Desert life can help explain tracking imagery, but should not become an invented history claiming that the root originated exclusively in a particular occupation, such as tracking camels.
A poetic witness attributed to ʿAdī ibn Zayd: quṣṣah as a forelock
A poem attributed to ʿAdī ibn Zayd al-ʿIbādī describes a horse:
لَهُ قُصَّةٌ فَشَغَتْ حَاجِبَيْهِ وَالْعَيْنُ تُبْصِرُ مَا فِي الظُّلَمْ
lahu quṣṣatun fashaghat ḥājibayhi wa-al-ʿaynu tubṣiru mā fī al-ẓulami
Translation: “It has a forelock spread over its eyebrows, and its eye sees in the darkness.”
The verse appears in poetry attributed to ʿAdī ibn Zayd, and Tāj al-ʿArūs records quṣṣah as forelock hair. Lisān al-ʿArab also quotes this same verse, attributes it to ʿAdī ibn Zayd, and explicitly identifies its subject as a horse.
Lisān al-ʿArab, Q Ṣ Ṣ: the ʿAdī ibn Zayd witness
Here قُصَّة (quṣṣah), with ḍammah on qāf and doubled ṣād, means a forelock, rather than an account or story.
The example shows that similar written forms do not suffice to determine meaning. Quṣṣah, a forelock, and qiṣṣah, an account, have different applications.
The verse also does not establish that narration developed from trimming a horse’s hair.
The poet is known as pre-Islamic, and the verse is attributed to him. Nevertheless, the poetry’s transmitted attribution and later lexical explanations must remain distinct.
Recounting statements and responsibility
In Asās al-Balāghah, al-Zamakhsharī gives examples of recounting a matter or conduct for قَصَّ عَلَيْهِ الْحَدِيثَ (qaṣṣa ʿalayhi al-ḥadīth).
He quotes a verse by Hudbah ibn Khashram:
فَقَصُّوا عَلَيْهِ ذَنْبَنَا وَتَجَاوَزُوا ذُنُوبَهُمْ عِنْدَ الْقَصِيصَةِ وَالْأَثَرِ
fa-qaṣṣū ʿalayhi dhanbanā wa-tajāwazū dhunūbahum ʿinda al-qaṣīṣati wa-al-athari
Translation: “They recounted our offense to him, but passed over their own offenses when telling the story and following its traces.”
Here قَصُّوا (qaṣṣū) concerns narrating and presenting an account. The poet criticizes people who recounted his conduct while overlooking their own. The verb is a plural perfect: qaṣṣū, “they recounted,” fits the translation, rather than the imperative قُصُّوا (quṣṣū).
Hudbah’s verse in Umm al-Qura University’s poetry index
The witness makes an important semantic point: someone can recount events while highlighting only part of them or failing to be fair.
Narrating therefore does not itself guarantee truthfulness or impartiality. An account’s truth and precision require separate assessment.
Hudbah belongs to the early Islamic period; this is not a pre-Islamic witness.
Nor does qaṣṣū alone establish that the poet’s account included every chronological detail. What is clear is the act of recounting a matter to another person.
A witness attributed to Umayyah ibn Abī al-Ṣalt: caution about dating
Lisān al-ʿArab transmits a verse attributed to Umayyah ibn Abī al-Ṣalt concerning the instruction to Moses’ sister to follow him.
Its wording is very close to Al-Qaṣaṣ 28:11.
That proximity does not itself establish that the Qur’anic verse borrowed from the poem, or that the poem preceded the Qur’an. Such judgments require examination of composition dates, transmission, and the possible influence of Qur’anic wording on later poetic transmissions.
Without independent historical research, the verse therefore cannot serve as a securely pre-Qur’anic witness to quṣṣīhi.
The Qur’an’s own clear evidence and older lexical definitions suffice here to establish following traces.
Trimming hair and its growth boundary
Lexicons use قِصَاصُ الشَّعْر (qiṣāṣu al-shaʿr) for the hairline, especially at the forehead. They also record quṣāṣ and qaṣāṣ for this boundary; Lisān al-ʿArab prefers the pronunciation with ḍammah on qāf.
قُصَاصَةُ الشَّعْر (quṣāṣatu al-shaʿr) can also refer to hair that has been cut off.
These uses concern cutting and the hair’s limits or ends. They must not be conflated with qiṣāṣ for killing and wounds.
The written form can be the same in two applications, while the object and context make their meanings clear.
The hairline and a proportionate response to injury are different subjects. Only the juridical application of qiṣāṣ occurs in the Qur’an.
Does qaṣṣ always mean cutting?
No. Cutting is an established older Arabic application, but no cutting occurs in the two verses about following traces.
In Al-Qaṣaṣ 28:11, Moses’ sister is to follow him, rather than cut anything from him.
In Al-Kahf 18:64, Moses and his companion follow their previous route, rather than shorten it or cut part of it away.
Cutting therefore needs recognition in its own place, without being imposed on every Qur’anic form.
4. Quṣṣīhi and qaṣaṣan: following traces in the Qur’an
Moses’ sister: following without revealing the family connection
Al-Qaṣaṣ 28:11
وَقَالَتْ لِأُخْتِهِ قُصِّيهِ ۖ فَبَصُرَتْ بِهِ عَنْ جُنُبٍ وَهُمْ لَا يَشْعُرُونَ
wa-qālat li-ukhtihi quṣṣīhi fa-baṣurat bihi ʿan junubin wa-hum lā yashʿurūna
Translation: “She told his sister: ‘Follow him.’ Then she saw him from a distance, while they were unaware.”
This is among the clearest witnesses to following a trace.
Quṣṣīhi is an imperative addressed to a feminine singular, with the object pronoun ه (hu), referring to Moses.
Moses’ mother tells her daughter to follow him. The subsequent فَبَصُرَتْ (fa-baṣurat) expresses her seeing him.
Two separate acts are thus stated: following and seeing.
Al-Ṭabarī transmits from Mujāhid and others that quṣṣīhi concerns following Moses’ trace and learning what happens to him.
It should not be translated as “tell his story.” At this point, the mother is sending her daughter to follow the child, rather than requesting a narrative.
Conversely, quṣṣīhi does not inherently mean acting secretly. The independent وَهُمْ لَا يَشْعُرُونَ (wa-hum lā yashʿurūn) and the manner of observation establish that their family connection remained unrecognized.
Nor does the verb alone establish that Moses’ sister followed the whole route solely through physical footprints. She could have watched people’s movements, the chest’s route, or other signs.
Following and tracing are the principal meaning; the verse does not specify the precise method.
Moses and his companion: returning along the same route
Al-Kahf 18:64
قَالَ ذَٰلِكَ مَا كُنَّا نَبْغِ ۚ فَارْتَدَّا عَلَىٰ آثَارِهِمَا قَصَصًا
qāla dhālika mā kunnā nabghi fa-irtaddā ʿalā āthārihimā qaṣaṣan
Translation: “He said: ‘That is what we were seeking.’ So the two returned, retracing their earlier route.”
Here qaṣaṣan is an accusative verbal noun clarifying how Moses and his companion returned.
عَلَىٰ آثَارِهِمَا (ʿalā āthārihimā) likewise concerns the traces of their former route.
Unlike most Qur’anic uses of qaṣaṣ, this concerns following an actual route, rather than telling a story.
Al-Ṭabarī explains that they returned along the way they had traveled, following its earlier traces.
This verse is particularly important: qaṣaṣ, even in the same nominal form used for narratives, can retain the meaning of following traces.
It is therefore incorrect to say that Qur’anic qaṣaṣ always names a collection of stories.
Are following traces and recounting reports the same meaning?
They are connected, but their direct applications differ.
In Al-Qaṣaṣ 28:11, Moses’ sister follows an actual movement.
In Al-Kahf 18:64, Moses and his companion trace their route.
In Yūsuf 12:3, reports and events are recounted.
The shared element is connection and following successive parts; what is followed differs.
One case concerns a trace in the physical world; another concerns reports and events presented in speech.
This connection helps explain the lexical family, but does not turn every Qur’anic account into nothing more than a report of footprints or a geographical route.
5. Narration and explanation: naquṣṣu and qaṣaṣ in the Qur’an
Recounting a dream: narration is not always an external event
Yūsuf 12:5
قَالَ يَا بُنَيَّ لَا تَقْصُصْ رُؤْيَاكَ عَلَىٰ إِخْوَتِكَ فَيَكِيدُوا لَكَ كَيْدًا ۖ إِنَّ الشَّيْطَانَ لِلْإِنْسَانِ عَدُوٌّ مُبِينٌ
qāla yā bunayya lā taqṣuṣ ruʾyāka ʿalā ikhwatika fa-yakīdū laka kaydan inna al-shayṭāna li-al-insāni ʿaduwwun mubīnun
Translation: “He said: ‘My little son, do not recount your dream to your brothers, lest they devise a scheme against you. Satan is a manifest enemy to the human being.’”
Here تَقْصُصْ (taqṣuṣ) is a second-person singular imperfect made jussive by prohibitive لا (lā).
رُؤْيَاكَ (ruʾyāka) is the verb’s object, while عَلَىٰ إِخْوَتِكَ (ʿalā ikhwatika) identifies the possible audience.
The expression directly concerns recounting a dream.
This reveals an essential point about qaṣaṣ: what is recounted need not be an event that has already occurred in the external world.
A dream is an experience someone has seen and can later describe to another person. Joseph’s dream has a particular role in his account, but qaṣṣ here concerns recounting the experience’s contents.
Q Ṣ Ṣ must therefore not be confined to reporting external historical events.
Conversely, the possibility of recounting a dream does not make Qur’anic narratives mere fantasy or invented stories. Independent evidence establishes an account’s truth, source, and purpose.
The word itself expresses recounting.
Aḥsana al-qaṣaṣ: the finest account or the finest manner of narration?
Yūsuf 12:3
نَحْنُ نَقُصُّ عَلَيْكَ أَحْسَنَ الْقَصَصِ بِمَا أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْكَ هَٰذَا الْقُرْآنَ وَإِنْ كُنْتَ مِنْ قَبْلِهِ لَمِنَ الْغَافِلِينَ
naḥnu naquṣṣu ʿalayka aḥsana al-qaṣaṣi bi-mā awḥaynā ilayka hādhā al-qurʾāna wa-in kunta min qablihi la-mina al-ghāfilīna
Translation: “We recount to you the finest account through revealing this Qur’an to you, although before it you were unaware of this.”
Here نَقُصُّ (naquṣṣu) is a first-person plural imperfect. أَحْسَنَ الْقَصَصِ (aḥsana al-qaṣaṣ) concerns either the contents narrated or narration itself.
Two older analyses of al-qaṣaṣ are recorded.
In the first, it is a verbal noun. The expression then emphasizes excellence in recounting and presentation.
In the second, qaṣaṣ means the reports or events recounted. The expression then concerns the finest account or report.
Al-Qurṭubī reports both possibilities: if it is a verbal noun, excellence concerns the manner of presentation; if a substantive noun, it concerns what is narrated.
This matters in translation. “The best story” may suggest only one particular narrative, while the verbal-noun analysis also encompasses the manner of recounting.
Yet that possibility should not erase the connection with Joseph’s account, since the sūrah immediately proceeds to events concerning him.
“The finest account” is therefore suitable: it can identify the contents narrated without entirely losing sight of excellence in presentation.
A detailed analysis should preserve both possibilities.
Does excellence in qaṣaṣ mean including every detail?
No.
The Qur’an selects events relevant to Joseph’s narrative, without supplying every person’s name, every precise date, the interval between every event, or every conversation’s details. This does not mean it supplies no numerical periods at all: Yūsuf 12:47, Yūsuf 12:48, and Yūsuf 12:49, for example, mention particular periods.
Selection does not make the narrative incomplete or false. Nor does the lexical meaning of qaṣaṣ require every possible detail.
Just as following traces can focus on signs relevant to a route, narration can select events relevant to its subject.
That comparison is not a compulsory rule for every narrative technique, but an explanation of the two applications’ semantic connection.
Fa-uqṣuṣi al-qaṣaṣ: narration for reflection
After an example concerning someone who turned away from divine signs, Al-Aʿrāf 7:176 commands recounting the account so that the audience may reflect.
The purpose is expressed separately through لَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ (laʿallahum yatafakkarūn).
Recounting here is therefore more than entertaining listeners: it invites thought about what is presented.
Yet qaṣaṣ itself does not mean thinking. Reflection is a purpose expressed by a separate clause.
Al-Ṭabarī likewise connects the command with recounting past accounts and the audience learning from them.
The means and the purpose must remain distinct: qaṣaṣ is the recounting; reflection is one of its stated purposes.
Moses recounting his circumstances to another person
Al-Qaṣaṣ 28:25
فَجَاءَتْهُ إِحْدَاهُمَا تَمْشِي عَلَى اسْتِحْيَاءٍ قَالَتْ إِنَّ أَبِي يَدْعُوكَ لِيَجْزِيَكَ أَجْرَ مَا سَقَيْتَ لَنَا ۚ فَلَمَّا جَاءَهُ وَقَصَّ عَلَيْهِ الْقَصَصَ قَالَ لَا تَخَفْ ۖ نَجَوْتَ مِنَ الْقَوْمِ الظَّالِمِينَ
fa-jāʾathu iḥdāhumā tamshī ʿalā istiḥyāʾin qālat inna abī yadʿūka li-yajziyaka ajra mā saqayta lanā fa-lammā jāʾahu wa-qaṣṣa ʿalayhi al-qaṣaṣa qāla lā takhaf najawta mina al-qawmi al-ẓālimīna
Translation: “One of the two women came to him, walking modestly. She said: ‘My father invites you to reward you for watering for us.’ When Moses came to him and recounted what had happened, he said: ‘Do not fear; you have escaped the wrongdoing people.’”
This is a clear example of human narration.
وَقَصَّ (wa-qaṣṣa) is a perfect verb; الْقَصَصَ (al-qaṣaṣa) is its object; عَلَيْهِ (ʿalayhi) identifies the audience.
Moses recounts his circumstances to the person he has come to meet.
Verb and noun from the same family stand together, just as the imperative and qaṣaṣ occur together in Al-Aʿrāf 7:176.
Qaṣṣa ʿalayhi al-qaṣaṣ concerns recounting events, rather than following physical footprints or applying juridical qiṣāṣ.
The listener then reassures Moses that he has escaped the wrongdoing group.
Nevertheless, qaṣaṣ itself does not mean seeking asylum or receiving a guarantee of safety. Moses’ situation and the reply establish those matters.
Laqad kāna fī qaṣaṣihim ʿibrah
Yūsuf 12:111
لَقَدْ كَانَ فِي قَصَصِهِمْ عِبْرَةٌ لِأُولِي الْأَلْبَابِ ۗ مَا كَانَ حَدِيثًا يُفْتَرَىٰ وَلَٰكِنْ تَصْدِيقَ الَّذِي بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَتَفْصِيلَ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ وَهُدًى وَرَحْمَةً لِقَوْمٍ يُؤْمِنُونَ
laqad kāna fī qaṣaṣihim ʿibratun li-ulī al-albābi mā kāna ḥadīthan yuftarā wa-lākin taṣdīqa alladhī bayna yadayhi wa-tafṣīla kulli shayʾin wa-hudan wa-raḥmatan li-qawmin yuʾminūna
Translation: “In their accounts there is indeed a lesson for people of understanding. This is no fabricated discourse, but confirmation of what came before it, a detailed explanation of everything, and guidance and mercy for people who believe.”
Qaṣaṣihim here identifies the accounts recounted.
The following clauses make an additional important point.
The Qur’an speaks of عِبْرَةٌ (ʿibrah), a lesson, then denies fabrication.
Being instructive and not fabricated are thus characteristics affirmed of the particular account.
Lexically, qaṣaṣ should not be defined as a lesson or an invariably true account. If truth were inherent in the noun, the separate denial of fabrication would have a different semantic role. Nevertheless, adding a description alone cannot prove that its meaning is absent from the noun: distinguishing narration from truth must rest on the wider lexical evidence and usages.
Al-Ṭabarī connects the lesson with reflecting on Joseph’s experiences and those of the other people involved, emphasizing the account’s instructive force.
The verse thus presents Qur’anic qaṣaṣ as true and instructive. Truth and instruction are judgments and descriptions affirmed of this account, rather than the invariant meaning of every Arabic narrative.
Are all Qur’anic qaṣaṣ about the past?
Most narrative applications concern earlier prophets and communities, as in Al-Nisāʾ 4:164, Al-Aʿrāf 7:101, Hūd 11:100, Hūd 11:120, Al-Kahf 18:13, and Ṭā Hā 20:99.
Yet the verb is not always confined to a long historical narrative.
Al-Anʿām 6:130 and Al-Aʿrāf 7:35 describe messengers recounting divine signs to their audiences.
In Al-Naḥl 16:118, The God refers to what He had previously related to the prophet concerning particular provisions.
In Al-Naml 27:76, the Qur’an explains matters disputed by the Children of Israel.
The verb’s scope therefore extends from recounting past experiences to relating signs and clarifying a subject.
Confining qaṣṣa to historical storytelling would narrow its actual Qur’anic range.
Not every messenger’s account has been recounted
Al-Nisāʾ 4:164 and Ghāfir 40:78 distinguish messengers whose accounts have been related from messengers whose accounts have not.
The presence of messenger narratives therefore does not mean the Qur’an supplies every messenger’s complete biography.
Qaṣaṣnā means “We have recounted”; lam naqṣuṣ means “We have not recounted.”
The distinction shows selection in revealed narration. Failing to recount someone does not itself deny that person’s historical existence.
Conversely, these verses do not authorize inventing unsupported stories about unnamed messengers and attributing them to the Qur’an.
The limits of human knowledge must be recognized through the available evidence’s limits.
Yaquṣṣu al-ḥaqq: an important difference of recitation
Al-Anʿām 6:57
قُلْ إِنِّي عَلَىٰ بَيِّنَةٍ مِنْ رَبِّي وَكَذَّبْتُمْ بِهِ ۚ مَا عِنْدِي مَا تَسْتَعْجِلُونَ بِهِ ۚ إِنِ الْحُكْمُ إِلَّا لِلَّهِ ۖ يَقُصُّ الْحَقَّ ۖ وَهُوَ خَيْرُ الْفَاصِلِينَ
qul innī ʿalā bayyinatin min rabbī wa-kadhdhabtum bihi mā ʿindī mā tastaʿjilūna bihi ini al-ḥukmu illā li-Allāhi yaquṣṣu al-ḥaqqa wa-huwa khayru al-fāṣilīna
Translation according to yaquṣṣu: “Say: ‘I stand upon clear evidence from my Lord, and you have denied it. What you seek to hasten is not in my possession. Judgment belongs only to The God. He declares the truth, and He is the best of those who distinguish and judge.’”
Here yaquṣṣu belongs to Q Ṣ Ṣ and concerns declaring the truth.
There is, however, an important recitation difference.
Another recitation has يَقْضِ الْحَقَّ (yaqḍi al-ḥaqq) in place of يَقُصُّ الْحَقَّ (yaquṣṣu al-ḥaqq): judging truly or issuing the judgment of truth.
That form belongs to Q Ḍ Y, rather than Q Ṣ Ṣ.
Al-Ṭabarī reports both recitations and prefers the judgment reading in view of وَهُوَ خَيْرُ الْفَاصِلِينَ (wa-huwa khayru al-fāṣilīn). The familiar Ḥafṣ text nevertheless reads yaquṣṣu al-ḥaqq, with ṣād.
Al-Ṭabarī: the yaquṣṣu and yaqḍi recitations
The difference should remain visible, since changing the recitation changes the word’s root.
Yaquṣṣu concerns declaring or recounting the truth.
Yaqḍi concerns judgment and deciding truly.
Both fit the verse’s discussion of divine judgment, but they differ morphologically and lexically.
The study of Q Ṣ Ṣ must therefore preserve yaquṣṣu in the text examined and discuss the alternative separately, rather than silently replacing one with the other.
6. Qiṣāṣ: proportionate response, rather than unlimited vengeance
Qiṣāṣ appears in four Qur’anic verses, with a use distinct from narration and following traces.
The initial act here is harm done to another person; the response is considered in proportion to that harm and within its limits.
Lexically, qiṣāṣ connects with reciprocity and following the effect of a prior act. That does not authorize harming any person or causing any amount of harm.
The Qur’anic verses place qiṣāṣ alongside pardon, doing good, reverence, and prohibition of transgression. These accompanying ideas matter in understanding the juridical application’s limits.
Qiṣāṣ concerning those killed
Al-Baqarah 2:178
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا كُتِبَ عَلَيْكُمُ الْقِصَاصُ فِي الْقَتْلَى ۖ الْحُرُّ بِالْحُرِّ وَالْعَبْدُ بِالْعَبْدِ وَالْأُنْثَىٰ بِالْأُنْثَىٰ ۚ فَمَنْ عُفِيَ لَهُ مِنْ أَخِيهِ شَيْءٌ فَاتِّبَاعٌ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَأَدَاءٌ إِلَيْهِ بِإِحْسَانٍ ۗ ذَٰلِكَ تَخْفِيفٌ مِنْ رَبِّكُمْ وَرَحْمَةٌ ۗ فَمَنِ اعْتَدَىٰ بَعْدَ ذَٰلِكَ فَلَهُ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ
yā ayyuhā alladhīna āmanū kutiba ʿalaykumu al-qiṣāṣu fī al-qatlā al-ḥurru bi-al-ḥurri wa-al-ʿabdu bi-al-ʿabdi wa-al-unthā bi-al-unthā fa-man ʿufiya lahu min akhīhi shayʾun fa-ittibāʿun bi-al-maʿrūfi wa-adāʾun ilayhi bi-iḥsānin dhālika takhfīfun min rabbikum wa-raḥmatun fa-mani iʿtadā baʿda dhālika fa-lahu ʿadhābun alīmun
Translation: “You who believe, qiṣāṣ is prescribed for you concerning those killed: the free for the free, the enslaved for the enslaved, and the female for the female. If anything is pardoned to someone by his brother, there should be pursuit of what is due in a recognized good manner, and payment to him with kindness. This is an alleviation and mercy from your Lord. Whoever transgresses thereafter will have a painful punishment.”
Here al-qiṣāṣ is definite and functions as the nominative passive subject of كُتِبَ (kutiba).
فِي الْقَتْلَى (fī al-qatlā) identifies the provision’s domain: those killed.
Three constructions then express correspondence through the preposition bi: the free for the free, the enslaved for the enslaved, and the female for the female.
Lexically, this construction connects with reciprocity and proportion.
Q Ṣ Ṣ alone, however, cannot decide every juridical question concerning these three groups.
Early commentaries differ about why this classification is mentioned and its scope. Some reports place it amid tribal hostilities in which a stronger group demanded someone of higher social standing from the other group in place of the person responsible for a killing.
Al-Ṭabarī emphasizes that qiṣāṣ must not extend from the person responsible for killing to someone innocent. He also explains that the following possibility of pardon excludes compulsory killing without exception in every case.
This matters to the concept: the response must remain connected with the act and responsibility, rather than become vengeance against a family, tribe, or social group.
Does qiṣāṣ mean vengeance?
Vengeance may arise from anger, hostility, or a desire to inflict further harm, potentially exceeding the original injury.
Juridical qiṣāṣ, however, concerns a proportionate response to a particular harm.
“Vengeance” is therefore not a precise equivalent for every occurrence.
Ordinary speech may call any punishment vengeance, but Qur’anic study needs to distinguish proportionate punishment, personal revenge, and transgression against others’ rights.
Nor should qiṣāṣ simply mean paying money. Al-Baqarah 2:178 places the provision, the possibility of pardon, and payment together, each with its own role.
Pardon belongs to ʿ F W, and should not become part of the brief lexical definition of qiṣāṣ.
Nevertheless, placing qiṣāṣ and pardon together shows that this verse does not present only one unalterable response.
Fa-ittibāʿun bi-al-maʿrūf: proper pursuit following pardon
After mentioning pardon, Al-Baqarah 2:178 adds فَاتِّبَاعٌ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ (fa-ittibāʿun bi-al-maʿrūf).
Ittibāʿ belongs to T B ʿ, rather than Q Ṣ Ṣ.
Nevertheless, the two families are close in the meaning of pursuing and following.
In context, ittibāʿun bi-al-maʿrūf concerns properly pursuing a right or the arrangement accepted after pardon. The following وَأَدَاءٌ إِلَيْهِ بِإِحْسَانٍ (wa-adāʾun ilayhi bi-iḥsān) emphasizes payment or discharge of responsibility with kindness.
Even after foregoing qiṣāṣ and accepting another course, the parties’ conduct must therefore remain within recognized goodness and kindness.
Yet qiṣāṣ alone cannot determine the amount paid, the agreement’s form, or every condition of pardon.
Those require independent examination of the construction and related verses.
Wa-lakum fī al-qiṣāṣi ḥayāh: life in a system of proportionate response
Al-Baqarah 2:179
وَلَكُمْ فِي الْقِصَاصِ حَيَاةٌ يَا أُولِي الْأَلْبَابِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَتَّقُونَ
wa-lakum fī al-qiṣāṣi ḥayātun yā ulī al-albābi laʿallakum tattaqūna
Translation: “In qiṣāṣ there is life for you, people of understanding, so that you may be reverent.”
The verse connects qiṣāṣ with life.
Punishment for killing and preserving life may initially seem opposed. Following the preceding provision, however, this verse speaks of an effect that qiṣāṣ can have in society.
Proportionate response, confined to the responsible person, can prevent vengeance from expanding into chains of reciprocal killings.
A proportionate juridical response can also deter, rather than leaving punishment to unlimited violence.
Lexical meaning must nevertheless be distinguished from social consequence.
Qiṣāṣ does not lexically mean life. A separate statement expresses their relationship.
Q Ṣ Ṣ must therefore not be defined as giving life.
Nor does this verse alone establish that every implementation of punishment necessarily reduces killing in every society and circumstance. Assessing contemporary social effects requires empirical data and juridical study.
The verse concerns the life-preserving wisdom of qiṣāṣ within its Qur’anic presentation, rather than every historical implementation of punishment.
Qiṣāṣ concerning sanctities and responding to aggression
Al-Baqarah 2:194
الشَّهْرُ الْحَرَامُ بِالشَّهْرِ الْحَرَامِ وَالْحُرُمَاتُ قِصَاصٌ ۚ فَمَنِ اعْتَدَىٰ عَلَيْكُمْ فَاعْتَدُوا عَلَيْهِ بِمِثْلِ مَا اعْتَدَىٰ عَلَيْكُمْ ۚ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّهَ مَعَ الْمُتَّقِينَ
al-shahru al-ḥarāmu bi-al-shahri al-ḥarāmi wa-al-ḥurumātu qiṣāṣun fa-mani iʿtadā ʿalaykum fa-iʿtadū ʿalayhi bi-mithli mā iʿtadā ʿalaykum wa-ittaqū Allāha wa-iʿlamū anna Allāha maʿa al-muttaqīna
Translation: “The sacred month for the sacred month, and sanctities are subject to proportionate response. Whoever attacks you, respond against him in proportion to his attack upon you. Be reverent toward The God, and know that The God is with the reverent.”
This verse is particularly important to the scope of qiṣāṣ.
The immediate subject is not an individual killing, but the sacred month, sanctities, and response to aggression.
بِمِثْلِ مَا اعْتَدَىٰ عَلَيْكُمْ (bi-mithli mā iʿtadā ʿalaykum) sets the response’s limit: correspondence and proportion to what was done to you.
Qur’anic qiṣāṣ therefore extends beyond killing and wounding. Here it also concerns a proportionate response to violated sanctities and aggression.
That breadth does not make every personal discomfort or unpleasant act grounds for a physical response.
The verse concerns aggression and sanctities, with the response limited by mithl, correspondence.
Its ending also recalls reverence. Permission to respond must not become permission to exceed limits.
Why is fa-iʿtadū repeated for the response to aggression?
In فَمَنِ اعْتَدَىٰ عَلَيْكُمْ فَاعْتَدُوا عَلَيْهِ (fa-mani iʿtadā ʿalaykum fa-iʿtadū ʿalayhi), the second verb belongs to the same family as the first aggressor’s action.
That repetition does not make the two acts identical in moral responsibility.
The first is initiating aggression; the second is a response immediately limited by بِمِثْلِ (bi-mithli).
Repeating the verb therefore does not authorize unlimited aggression.
Nor is that repetition itself part of the meaning of qiṣāṣ: it is a way of expressing proportionate response in this verse.
Lexically, qiṣāṣ here concerns reciprocity and proportion; other phrases clarify its extent and limits.
Wa-al-jurūḥa qiṣāṣ: proportion concerning wounds
Al-Māʾidah 5:45
وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَا أَنَّ النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ وَالْعَيْنَ بِالْعَيْنِ وَالْأَنْفَ بِالْأَنْفِ وَالْأُذُنَ بِالْأُذُنِ وَالسِّنَّ بِالسِّنِّ وَالْجُرُوحَ قِصَاصٌ ۚ فَمَنْ تَصَدَّقَ بِهِ فَهُوَ كَفَّارَةٌ لَهُ ۚ وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ
wa-katabnā ʿalayhim fīhā anna al-nafsa bi-al-nafsi wa-al-ʿayna bi-al-ʿayni wa-al-anfa bi-al-anfi wa-al-udhuna bi-al-udhuni wa-al-sinna bi-al-sinni wa-al-jurūḥa qiṣāṣun fa-man taṣaddaqa bihi fa-huwa kaffāratun lahu wa-man lam yaḥkum bi-mā anzala Allāhu fa-ulāʾika humu al-ẓālimūna
Translation: “We prescribed for them in it: a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and wounds are subject to qiṣāṣ. Whoever relinquishes that right as charity, it is an expiation for him. Those who do not judge by what The God has sent down are the wrongdoers.”
Qiṣāṣ here accompanies particular examples of bodily injury.
The construction وَالْجُرُوحَ قِصَاصٌ (wa-al-jurūḥa qiṣāṣ) places wounds within the domain of proportionate response.
The opening phrase also matters: وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَا (wa-katabnā ʿalayhim fīhā).
The pronoun fīhā, “in it,” refers to the Torah introduced in the preceding verse. The Qur’an is describing a provision prescribed for those people within it.
That setting must remain part of the study.
The verse also presents relinquishing the right. Qiṣāṣ therefore occurs alongside pardon and forgoing a claim here as well.
Al-Ṭabarī explains the wounds expression through a corresponding wound in response to the injury inflicted, and reports disagreement over the pronoun’s referent in the pardon clause.
Two points are clear for this root study: qiṣāṣ can concern a proportionate response to wounds, and a right of response does not erase pardon from the sentence.
Does qiṣāṣ mean perfectly identical injury in every situation?
Lexically, it concerns proportionate response.
In practice, establishing exact equality between injuries may be difficult. Differences between bodies, injury sites, or possible consequences can make certain wounds difficult to reproduce precisely.
The lexical meaning alone therefore cannot resolve every medical, judicial, or practical question.
If a response causes greater or disproportionate harm, the limits of correspondence and prohibition of transgression become relevant.
These require independent juridical and ethical examination, rather than deduction solely from an etymological image of following a trace.
Across the four qiṣāṣ occurrences, the shared focus is proportionate response limited to the harm or aggression, rather than unlimited vengeance.
8. Translation proposals for Forqan
The family has three principal Qur’anic domains; translations should fit them.
For tracing, “following” and “following traces” are suitable.
Quṣṣīhi in Al-Qaṣaṣ 28:11 can be translated as “follow him,” naturally conveying the mother’s command to her daughter.
Qaṣaṣan in Al-Kahf 18:64 concerns following their traces or retracing the previous route. “So the two returned, retracing their earlier route” is a natural rendering.
For narration, “recount,” “relate,” and “narrate” are suitable.
Lā taqṣuṣ ruʾyāka in Yūsuf 12:5 approaches “do not recount your dream.”
In Yūsuf 12:3, “We recount” suits naquṣṣu and “the finest account” suits aḥsana al-qaṣaṣ. The possible verbal-noun analysis should remain in the research explanation.
Wa-qaṣṣa ʿalayhi al-qaṣaṣ in Al-Qaṣaṣ 28:25 naturally reads “and he recounted what had happened.”
Al-qaṣaṣu al-ḥaqq in Āl ʿImrān 3:62 can be “the true account.” The description al-ḥaqq must remain visible.
For Al-Anʿām 6:57 according to yaquṣṣu al-ḥaqq, “He declares the truth” is suitable. The alternative yaqḍi al-ḥaqq must not be concealed by silently changing the text.
For the juridical application, retain qiṣāṣ as a technical term, with its sense of proportionate response explained for English readers.
Retaining qiṣāṣ in Al-Baqarah 2:178 and Al-Baqarah 2:179 preserves a recognized provision whose relations and limits the following text explains.
For Al-Baqarah 2:194, “sanctities are subject to proportionate response” clarifies wa-al-ḥurumātu qiṣāṣ, while “sanctities have qiṣāṣ” stays closer to the expression’s surface structure.
In Al-Māʾidah 5:45, wa-al-jurūḥa qiṣāṣ can be translated as “wounds are subject to qiṣāṣ.”
However, qiṣāṣ should not always mean execution, vengeance, blood revenge, or payment of compensation.
Execution may in particular circumstances be one response to killing, while compensation can arise within another arrangement. The Qur’anic word concerns proportionate response, rather than being lexically confined to one such instance.
Brief root meaning and meaning in a verse
For consistently distinguishing these two fields in Forqan’s lexicon:
| Qur’anic form | Brief root meaning | Meaning in the verse |
|---|---|---|
| قُصِّيهِ (quṣṣīhi) | Following and tracing | Follow him |
| قَصَصًا (qaṣaṣan) in Al-Kahf 18:64 | Following traces | Retracing the earlier route |
| نَقُصُّ (naquṣṣu) | Following and recounting | We recount or narrate |
| تَقْصُصْ (taqṣuṣ) | Recounting | Relating a dream |
| الْقَصَص (al-qaṣaṣ) | Connected recounting of reports | An account or narrative |
| يَقُصُّ الْحَقَّ (yaquṣṣu al-ḥaqq) | Recounting and declaring | He declares the truth |
| الْقِصَاص (al-qiṣāṣ) | Following an act’s effect with a proportionate response | Qiṣāṣ concerning killing or injury |
The distinction matters because the family has a connected semantic basis, but each verse uses a particular form and application.
A word box cannot assign one fixed equivalent to every form and disregard differences between narration, tracing, and qiṣāṣ.
9. Conclusion
In older Arabic, Q Ṣ Ṣ concerns following something’s traces.
Its physical application concerns tracing a person’s or animal’s route. Its linguistic application extends to recounting reports and events. Juridical qiṣāṣ concerns a proportionate response to particular harm.
The lexical family also records trimming hair and nails and names for parts of the hair or body. Ibn Fāris seeks to connect these with following traces and aligning components’ limits; that explanation must not be treated as the established historical origin of every meaning.
The Qur’an has 30 occurrences of the root.
Al-Qaṣaṣ 28:11 and Al-Kahf 18:64 clearly illustrate following traces in a concrete setting.
In Yūsuf 12:3 and Yūsuf 12:5, the verb concerns recounting an account or dream. In Al-Qaṣaṣ 28:25, Moses recounts his experiences to another person.
In verses concerning earlier messengers and communities, qaṣaṣ presents their experiences and recalls events. The Qur’an nevertheless explicitly states that not every messenger’s account has been recounted.
In certain verses, including Al-Anʿām 6:130 and Al-Naml 27:76, the verb also concerns recounting signs and explaining disputed matters. Its meaning therefore extends beyond a long historical story.
Yūsuf 12:111 and Āl ʿImrān 3:62 affirm an account’s truth and instructiveness. These must remain distinct from qaṣaṣ itself: the word concerns narration, while truth and lessons come from separate descriptions and contextual indications.
The four qiṣāṣ occurrences foreground proportionate response.
Al-Baqarah 2:178 and Al-Baqarah 2:179 concern killing; Al-Baqarah 2:194 concerns sanctities and proportionate response to aggression; Al-Māʾidah 5:45 also applies the term to bodily injuries and wounds.
These applications must not be equated with unlimited vengeance. Proportion, preventing transgression, and possible pardon are important subjects accompanying the term within the verses.
A suitable final definition for Forqan:
Q Ṣ Ṣ concerns following something’s traces. Connected with this is recounting reports and events in succession. Qur’anic qaṣaṣ can identify tracing a route or an account and narrative. Juridical qiṣāṣ expresses a proportionate response to killing, wounding, or aggression. These three domains connect through following and responding to what came before, but are not synonymous. The root itself neither guarantees every account’s truth, includes every event’s detail, nor authorizes unlimited vengeance. Each form’s precise meaning comes from the verb’s object, the sentence’s structure, and the verse’s context.