Qur’anic Root SH R DH M — Shirdhimah: A Detached Piece and a Small Group
Qur’anic and lexical forms
لَشِرْذِمَةٌ
(la-shirdhimatun)
Al-Shuʿarāʾ 26:54; certainly a small group
شِرْذِمَة
(shirdhimah)
Noun; piece or small group
شَرَاذِم
(sharādhim)
Plural; pieces and groups
شَرَاذِيم
(sharādhīm)
Lexical plural; not used in the Qur’an
شِرْدِمَة
(shirdimah)
Lexical dāl variant; not used in the Qur’an
تَشَرْذَمَ
(tashardhama)
Verb in modern use; not used in the Qur’an
تَشَرْذُم
(tashardhum)
Verbal noun; fragmentation
مُتَشَرْذِم
(mutashardhim)
Modern descriptive form; fragmented
1. Root Meaning and Word Structure
Arabic shirdhimah (شِرْذِمَة) denotes a piece of something or a small group of people. Early uses concern both detached pieces of an object and a group limited in number relative to a larger whole.
Al-ʿAyn applies shirdhimah to a piece of fruit, such as quince, and to a small human group. Lisān al-ʿArab likewise states: “الشِّرْذِمَةُ: القِطْعَةُ مِنَ الشَّيْءِ”—shirdhimah is a piece of something.
The same source also defines it as al-qalīlu mina al-nās and al-jamāʿatu mina al-nāsi al-qalīlah: a small group of people.
Al-ʿAyn, Al-Ṣiḥāḥ, and Lisān al-ʿArab: piece and small group
The two uses are closely related but not identical.
When something is divided into pieces, each is part of the earlier whole. Applied to people, shirdhimah can likewise be a group separated or distinguished from a larger population.
Being a piece does not establish its precise size. A piece may be relatively large yet small in relation to the whole.
Small numbers become more prominent in the human use. Lexicographers accordingly define shirdhimah both as a piece and as a small group.
Qur’anic morphological indexes register SH R DH M (ش ر ذ م) as a quadriliteral entry. Ibn Fāris proposes a different historical analysis, treating dhāl as additional.
The quadriliteral classification should therefore be distinguished from a theory of historical derivation.
Only the noun shirdhimah occurs in the Qur’an. No verb or other derivative from this family appears in the text.
2. Fragmentation and Arabic Evidence
Shirdhimah as a Piece of Something
In tangible Arabic uses, shirdhimah can denote a detached piece of something.
Al-ʿAyn gives qiṭʿatun mina al-safarjalah (قِطْعَةٌ مِنَ السَّفَرْجَلَةِ), a piece of quince.
The simple example clarifies the physical meaning.
If a fruit is divided, each piece belongs to that fruit. The word here concerns a portion of a whole, rather than the fruit’s kind, value, or quality.
The same feature appears in uses concerning clothing.
Thawbun sharādhimu (ثَوْبٌ شَرَاذِمُ) describes a garment in tatters. Thiyābun sharādhimu likewise describes worn, torn clothes.
Sharādhim is the plural of shirdhimah, denoting pieces or separated portions.
The tangible use can therefore name a detached piece or, in the plural, describe something reduced to multiple pieces.
A Witness from Sāʿidah ibn Juʾayyah
An important poetic witness comes from Sāʿidah ibn Juʾayyah al-Hudhalī:
فَخَرَّتْ وَأَلْقَتْ كُلَّ نَعْلٍ شَرَاذِمًا
يَلُوحُ بِضَاحِي الْجِلْدِ مِنْهَا حُدُورُهَا
fa-kharrat wa-alqat kulla naʿlin sharādhiman / yalūḥu bi-ḍāḥī al-jildi minhā ḥudūruhā
Explanatory rendering: “Then she fell, casting every sandal in fragments; upon her exposed skin, swellings and raised marks were visible.” The image concerns a mourning woman. In its skin-related use, ḥudūr concerns swelling and raised marks, rather than simply naming all natural features of skin.
Al-Ṣiḥāḥ and Al-Muḥkam, ḤDR: skin swelling and raised marks
Sharādhiman here means pieces and fragments.
The witness matters because it uses the word in a tangible sense independently of its Qur’anic occurrence.
The verse concerns pieces of a thing, rather than a small number of people.
It thus supports the family’s meaning “piece.”
Sāʿidah ibn Juʾayyah belongs to the Hudhalī poets close to Islam’s emergence. The particular verse’s date is nevertheless uncertain; it should not be presented without qualification as certainly preceding the Qur’an.
Lisān al-ʿArab and Tāj al-ʿArūs: Sāʿidah’s witness
A Witness Describing a Tattered Garment
Lisān al-ʿArab also quotes this rajaz:
جَاءَ الشِّتَاءُ وَقَمِيصِي أَخْلَاقْ
شَرَاذِمُ يَضْحَكُ مِنِّي التَّوَّاقْ
jāʾa al-shitāʾu wa-qamīṣī akhlāq / sharādhimu yaḍḥaku minnī al-Tawwāq
“Winter has come, and my shirt is worn and in tatters, so that al-Tawwāq laughs at me.” The explanation in Lisān al-ʿArab identifies al-Tawwāq as the speaker’s son.
Lisān al-ʿArab: the tattered shirt and identification of al-Tawwāq
Sharādhimu describes the shirt’s condition here.
The shirt remains one garment, but is so worn and torn that its parts have lost their earlier intact connection.
The use directly fits tearing and separating parts of something.
It does not follow that every human group called shirdhimah must be dispersed or lack cohesion.
Piece and separation are established meanings, but a small group need not have internal disagreement or lack organization.
This distinction is especially important for the Qur’anic use.
3. Does Shirdhimah Derive from Sharama?
In Maqāyīs al-Lughah, Ibn Fāris examines shirdhimah among words with more than three letters and treats dhāl as additional.
He connects it with sharamtu al-shayʾa (شَرَمْتُ الشَّيْءَ), “I tore something.”
He pictures shirdhimah as a group separated from a larger whole.
Maqāyīs al-Lughah, vol.3, p.273: the analysis of an additional dhāl
The analysis is semantically understandable.
Sharama concerns cutting and tearing; tangible shirdhimah denotes a piece of something.
The proximity does not itself prove that quadriliteral SH R DH M necessarily arose by adding dhāl to triliteral SH R M.
First, a semantic explanation should remain distinct from a demonstrated historical derivation.
Second, shirdhimah is recorded as an independent Arabic word with its own plurals and uses.
Third, tearing and a detached piece can have a clear semantic connection without the exact phonological and morphological history being established.
Al-Rāghib al-Isfahānī also defines shirdhimah as a separated group and connects it with thawbun sharādhimu, a tattered garment.
Al-Rāghib’s Al-Mufradāt: a separated group and thawbun sharādhimu
The explanation resembles Ibn Fāris’s, but both require distinguishing observable meaning from a hypothesis about historical origin.
Qur’anic morphological classification, meanwhile, identifies the word through the four letters SH R DH M.
A useful research approach retains the quadriliteral Qur’anic entry and discusses its possible connection with SH R M separately.
Other Forms
The basic noun is shirdhimah, with the familiar plural sharādhim.
Lexical evidence also records sharādhīm (شَرَاذِيم), which does not occur in the Qur’an.
Some accounts report shirdimah (شِرْدِمَة), with dāl rather than dhāl. This is a lexical variant; the Qur’anic form is shirdhimah with dhāl.
Modern Arabic uses tashardhum (تَشَرْذُم) and mutashardhim (مُتَشَرْذِم) for fragmentation and a group’s division into smaller parts.
For example, tashardhama al-qawmu (تَشَرْذَمَ الْقَوْمُ) can describe a community breaking apart or fragmenting.
The use fits tearing and separation, but the modern forms should not all be assigned to Qur’anic-era Arabic without historical evidence.
The Qur’an itself does not use tashardhama.
4. Qur’anic Use in Pharaoh’s Speech
SH R DH M occurs only once in the Qur’an, in Al-Shuʿarāʾ.
Quranic Arabic Corpus: the sole occurrence in Al-Shuʿarāʾ 26:54
Al-Shuʿarāʾ 26:54
إِنَّ هَٰؤُلَاءِ لَشِرْذِمَةٌ قَلِيلُونَ
inna hāʾulāʾi la-shirdhimatun qalīlūna
Proposed Persian translation, rendered here in English:
“Indeed, these people are a small group.”
The Word’s Place in the Sentence
La-shirdhimatun (لَشِرْذِمَةٌ) comprises the emphatic lām, known grammatically as al-lām al-muzaḥlaqah, and the noun shirdhimatun.
Shirdhimatun is indefinite and nominative, serving as the predicate of inna.
The lām adds emphasis.
The sentence therefore does more than introduce a group: the speaker makes an emphatic claim about its condition.
It is followed by qalīlūna (قَلِيلُونَ).
Qalīlūna belongs to Q L L and is a sound masculine plural. Grammatically, it describes shirdhimah.
One might ask why shirdhimah is singular and feminine in form while its description is masculine plural.
The answer lies in the distinction between grammatical form and collective meaning.
Shirdhimah is formally singular and feminine, but denotes a collection of people.
Qalīlūna therefore takes a plural form with reference to the individuals composing the group.
The description agrees semantically with the group’s members, rather than merely following the noun’s grammatical form.
Al-Ṭabarī: the plural description and shirdhimah’s collective meaning
Why Does Qalīlūna Accompany Shirdhimah?
Because shirdhimah can itself denote a small group, accompanying it with qalīlūna may appear repetitive.
The expressions nevertheless do not have exactly the same function.
Shirdhimah introduces a limited group or portion; qalīlūna makes the small number of its members more explicit and emphatic.
The sentence thus emphasizes the group’s small numbers.
Smallness of a group is also relative.
A group can be small against a large population while appearing numerous beside a smaller group.
Shirdhimatun qalīlūna therefore gives no exact head count.
Some commentaries report particular numbers for Moses’ companions. The verse itself states none; shirdhimah does not yield a figure such as a hundred, a thousand, or several hundred thousand.
For the root study, the distinction is enough: the noun identifies a limited group or portion, while qalīlūna describes its members as few.
Who Is Speaking?
The Qur’an reports this statement as Pharaoh’s speech.
The preceding verse says:
Al-Shuʿarāʾ 26:53
فَأَرْسَلَ فِرْعَوْنُ فِي الْمَدَائِنِ حَاشِرِينَ
fa-arsala firʿawnu fī al-madāʾini ḥāshirīna
Proposed Persian translation, rendered here in English:
“Then Pharaoh sent gatherers through the cities.”
The next verse reports Pharaoh’s words about the people who have gone out with Moses.
The sentence “Indeed, these people are a small group” is thus the Qur’an’s report of Pharaoh’s statement, rather than an independent judgment about their actual number or value.
The distinction matters.
Pharaoh may judge them few relative to his forces, or use the expression to diminish their importance and ability in his audience’s eyes.
The word alone does not establish that he deliberately lied about their number.
Nor does this verse state the actual number of Moses’ companions against which to test Pharaoh’s numerical assessment.
What the context makes clear is that the statement belongs to speech following the command to assemble forces.
Al-Ṭabarī: Pharaoh’s speech within the mobilization narrative
Connection with the Following Two Verses
The Qur’an then reports two further statements from the same speech:
Al-Shuʿarāʾ 26:55
وَإِنَّهُمْ لَنَا لَغَائِظُونَ
wa-innahum lanā la-ghāʾiẓūna
Proposed Persian translation, rendered here in English:
“And they provoke us to anger.”
Al-Shuʿarāʾ 26:56
وَإِنَّا لَجَمِيعٌ حَاذِرُونَ
wa-innā la-jamīʿun ḥādhirūna
Proposed Persian translation, rendered here in English:
“And we are an alert, prepared company.”
Pharaoh first describes the opposing group as few, then speaks of anger at them, and finally emphasizes the preparedness and vigilance of his own forces.
The sequence places the speech within mobilization and confrontation with Moses’ group.
In this context, shirdhimatun qalīlūna can serve to belittle the opponents against Pharaoh’s assembled force.
This possible disparaging function should not become an invariant lexical meaning of shirdhimah.
Arabic can use the word simply for a small group. Disparagement or exaggeration depends on the speaker’s purpose and context.
Later in the narrative, the apparently less powerful group escapes Pharaoh and his troops.
The outcome distinguishes Pharaoh’s assessment from what actually happens, without altering the word’s lexical meaning.
Being Few versus Being Powerless
A small group may have little power, but that is not an invariable consequence.
Head count is only one factor in a group’s capacity. Resources, organization, position, purpose, and the circumstances of confrontation matter too.
Shirdhimah alone therefore cannot be translated as “a weak group,” “a defeated group,” or “a powerless company.”
Pharaoh’s minimizing language may accompany a sense of his own superiority, but that comes from the speech’s context.
The direct meaning is a limited, small company.
Translation should preserve the distinction: adding “wretched,” “worthless,” or “powerless” introduces more than the word itself expresses.
6. Conclusion and Suggested Translation
Arabic shirdhimah denotes a piece of something and a small human group.
Tangible uses describe detached pieces and clothing tatters; human uses identify a limited group or part of a larger population.
The fields can be connected through a detached portion, without requiring every group called shirdhimah to have arisen through internal disagreement or collapse.
Ibn Fāris treats dhāl as additional and connects shirdhimah with sharama, “to tear.”
The proposal is semantically defensible, but should not be presented as certain historical derivation.
The family occurs only once in the Qur’an, as la-shirdhimatun in Al-Shuʿarāʾ 26:54.
Pharaoh is the speaker: after sending out gatherers of forces, he describes Moses’ company as few.
The context permits understanding this as minimizing the opponents and emphasizing his forces’ superiority.
That function arises from the speech’s setting, rather than every lexical use of shirdhimah intrinsically meaning disparagement or worthlessness.
Brief root meaning: A piece or detached portion of something; in human usage, a small company or limited group within a larger whole.
Meaning of Qur’anic la-shirdhimatun: Certainly a small group or limited company, in Pharaoh’s speech about Moses’ companions.
Suggested translation:
إِنَّ هَٰؤُلَاءِ لَشِرْذِمَةٌ قَلِيلُونَ
inna hāʾulāʾi la-shirdhimatun qalīlūna
“Indeed, these people are a small group.”
This rendering preserves both the group and its small number without adding contempt or powerlessness as the word’s direct meaning.
The key point is that shirdhimah names a limited group or portion of a whole, rather than a group intrinsically powerless, worthless, or false.
The Qur’an places the word in Pharaoh’s speech as he minimizes Moses’ company, while the narrative’s outcome fails to match his confidence in his own superiority.
Lexical meaning, the speaker’s assessment of a referent, and that referent’s actual reality are three distinct questions.
The root study clarifies the word’s meaning; context explains how the speaker uses it.