(32)
She said, “O you Nobles! Counsel me in my decision. I have not decided anything until you ratify it.”
قَالَتْ يَاأَيُّهَا المَلَأُ أَفْتُونِي فِي أَمْرِي مَا كُنتُ قَاطِعَةً أَمْرًا حَتَّى تَشْهَدُونِ
The key word here is amr, which, depending on the context, can mean ‘thing’, ‘affair’, ‘business’, ‘order’, ‘authority’ or, as in this case, ‘thing to be ordered’, hence a ‘decision’. A leader with authority is an amir, from the same root. The most common title for the early successors to the authority of the Prophet (may GOD bless him and give him peace) was Amirul-mu’minin – ‘Leader of the Believers’.
For the active intellect, valid authority constitutes the root of its power and function, which is why the first speech of Sulaiman (peace be upon him) is Praise is due to GOD, Who gave us excellences . . . (Q27:15). There can be no doubt or question about the Source of any kind of authority, be it political, moral, or intellectual. For the confused intellect, however, authority – who has it and how to use it – is a problem. In the lead-up to the Battle of Uhud (Q3:154), the hypocrites expressed both their confusion and their problem with the authority of GOD and His Messenger thus:
A faction was concerned about themselves; in thinking wrongly of AL-LAH, they entertained the thoughts of ignorance. They said, “Do we have any share in the affair?” Say, “Truly all of the affair [or the authority] belongs to GOD.” They hid within themselves what they would not reveal to you.
وَطَائِفَةٌ قَدْ أَهَمَّتْهُمْ أَنْفُسُهُمْ يَظُنُّونَ بِاللَّهِ غَيْرَ الْحَقِّ ظَنَّ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ يَقُولُونَ هَلْ لَنَا مِنْ الأَمْرِ مِنْ شَيْءٍ قُلْ إِنَّ الأَمْرَ كُلَّهُ لِلَّهِ يُخْفُونَ فِي أَنْفُسِهِمْ مَا لاَ يُبْدُونَ لَكَ
The message of Sulaiman (peace be upon him) has, from the outset, called the authority of the queen into question. Her first comment reveals this confusion. Does her authority come from the sun she worships? The sun has nothing to say to her. From her throne? It symbolizes some kind of authority, but where is the power backing that symbol? Does authority reside in her? She does not feel it, but she cannot admit it outright. She turns, consequently, to her nobles, and defers to them.
The wording here is crucial to understanding her situation and state of mind. I have translated ma kuntu qati’an amran as I have not decided anything, but an extremely literal translation would read I have not been cutting an affair, in which “cutting” is deciding, just as de + caedere (to cut) is the Latin origin of our English “decide”. The queen is inclined, with the consent of her nobles, to ‘cut off’ this communication with Sulaiman (peace be upon him), thus preserving her authority, but she knows, from the very moment she read In the Name of GOD, the Gracious, the Compassionate that she does not really have that authority.
When a confused intellect encounters signs of an active intellect, such as what the queen encounters in this message or what today’s reader finds in the Qur’an, its first instinct is to hide or flee, to protect its habitual way of life.
If you had looked at them, you would have fled from them, and would be filled with fear because of them. (Q18:18)
لَوِ اطَّلَعْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ لَوَلَّيْتَ مِنْهُمْ فِرَارًا وَلَمُلِئْتَ مِنْهُمْ رُعْبًا
Cast down your staff. Then when he saw it writhing as if it were possessed, he turned away headlong. “O Musa! Do not fear! Indeed the messengers are not afraid with me.” (Q27:10)
وَأَلْقِ عَصَاكَ فَلَمَّا رَآهَا تَهْتَزُّ كَأَنَّهَا جَانٌّ وَلَّى مُدْبِرًا وَلَمْ يُعَقِّبْ يَا مُوسَى لاَ تَخَفْ إِنِّي لاَ يَخَافُ لَدَيَّ الْمُرْسَلُونَ
A ruler may run or hide from what she fears, but at the cost of her authority and power. If she wants to remain queen, her only options, it seems, are to submit or resist. She lacks the motivation to submit – and Sulaiman (peace be upon him) has promised her nothing – but does she have sufficient power to resist? So she turns to her grandees. Might they have another way in mind?
(33)
They said, “We are endowed with strength and capable of violent force, and yet authority belongs to you. Consider what you will command.”
قَالُوا نَحْنُ أُوْلُوا قُوَّةٍ وَأُولُوا بَأْسٍ شَدِيدٍ وَالأَمْرُ إِلَيْكِ فَانظُرِي مَاذَا تَأْمُرِينَ
When in doubt, the confused intellect consults its coterie of impulsive and turbulent desires. But without the sense of direction that only authority, even if a counterfeit one, can provide, the passions are in fact passive; they have no sense of where to go. Unlike the forces Sulaiman (peace be upon him) commands, they have free rein, but that very freedom leaves them with a feeling of vacuity and aimlessness. They recognize the threat that Sulaiman’s authority poses, but they too see no way out. Unlike the exploratory yet disciplined power of observation and inquiry in Sulaiman’s army, symbolized by the birds, these nobles are not used to seeing, but only feeling. And so they ‘pass the buck’ back to the queen. It is, in fact, their incoherent need for both power and guidance that has been influencing the queen, which is why they are mentioned here. They kept their place by feeding her pretensions, but now are leaving her nervous, hesitant, and perplexed.
(34)
She said, “Indeed when kings invade a town they ruin it, and make the noblest of its folk the most debased. And that is what they do.”
قَالَتْ إِنَّ الْمُلُوكَ إِذَا دَخَلُوا قَرْيَةً أَفْسَدُوهَا وَجَعَلُوا أَعِزَّةَ أَهْلِهَا أَذِلَّةً وَكَذَلِكَ يَفْعَلُونَ
Here we have an example of the inversion of values that occurs whenever a community or individual substitutes for the rule of GOD the mores of the so-called nobility or high society, which could be a class based on military valour, wealth, or worldly knowledge (e.g., science). When that illegitimate power structure is finally confronted with the Word of GOD and the imperatives of the active intellect, it only thinks of what it will lose – not of what it will gain in terms of truth, wisdom, mercy, and peace.
And say, “The Truth has come, and falsehood has departed. Verily the false has ever been departing.” (Q17:81)
وَقُلْ جَاءَ الْحَقُّ وَزَهَقَ الْبَاطِلُ إِنَّ الْبَاطِلَ كَانَ زَهُوقًا
It cannot imagine anything better than what it has, which is why the active intellect’s job when confronting that structure is to give it a jolt and declare its own authority in the clearest terms.
By saying when kings invade a town they ruin it the queen of Saba’ is insinuating, of course, that Sulaiman (peace be upon him) is just like other kings, and will therefore act like all the other famous criminals who have been glorified for the scale of their atrocities (Alexander, Genghis Khan, Timur Lenk, Napoleon, et al). By maligning GOD’s messenger and His message in this way,* she has only managed to confuse herself by ignoring what the active intellect wants – a wholesome relationship with GOD, the Gracious, the Compassionate – and concealing what she wants, which is little more than the comfortable illusion of being the noblest of its folk and hence deserving the power she has. And so, given what she is implying about the character of Sulaiman, she comes up with a plan.
* If we reinterpret this comment by the queen to mean what the confused intellect believes to be the case rather than what is actually true, then her words are apposite. When the active intellect intrudes upon the fantasies of the confused intellect, it does indeed ruin those illusions, and upsets the inverted values that had been in place so that what was once considered noblest (i.e. the love of power, money, etcetera) is debased, and vice versa.
(35)
I am sending them a gift, and seeing what the messengers will bring as a reply.
وَإِنِّي مُرْسِلَةٌ إِلَيْهِمْ بِهَدِيَّةٍ فَنَاظِرَةٌ بِمَ يَرْجِعُ الْمُرْسَلُونَ
By issuing a command, Sulaiman (peace be upon him) has asserted his authority. That authority is derived from the Authority Who commands him, namely GOD. Rather than submitting to it, the queen decides to bargain, offering some of her wealth as a substitute for relinquishing the lie on which her and her nobles’ power has been founded.
This is a common tactic among people or conceptual systems that have a ‘problem with authority’. The issue of who has the authority is ‘off the table’ of discussion because it is bound to provoke vehement disagreement. Tacit suspension of judgement in such matters is, of course, a wise policy where clarity would produce conflict. We can refer to the actions of the Messenger of AL-LAH (may GOD bless him and give him peace) at the Treaty of Hudaybiyah. He did not insist upon his GOD-given authority in negotiating with the leaders of the Quraish, who would not acknowledge it. And so, in this correspondence between Sulaiman (peace be upon him) and the queen, a gift would be a natural first step toward diplomatic relations between sovereigns.
But as I have pointed out before, this story is concerned with much more than the case of independent kingdoms or international diplomacy in the ancient world. We are being shown the constituents, both actual and potential, that inform our own character – a character that demands unity as one of the basic features of a healthy existence. GOD demands that we regard Him as One, and reveals to us the story of Sulaiman (peace be upon him) as a parable pertaining to our own quest for oneness.
So how should our active intellect respond to bribes or flattery from our confused intellect, desperate as it is to maintain a semblance of power in our life?
The GOD You Already Know 