The Grammar of Absence: The Particle אֵין in Nominal Clauses

וְעַתָּ֕ה הֵנִ֨יחַ יְהוָ֧ה אֱלֹהַ֛י לִ֖י מִסָּבִ֑יב אֵ֣ין שָׂטָ֔ן וְאֵ֖ין פֶּ֥גַע רָֽע׃

Biblical Hebrew often surprises us not just with what is said—but with what is not. The verse above, from 1 Kings 5:18 (Hebrew versification), contains a seemingly simple phrase: אֵין שָׂטָן וְאֵין פֶּגַע רָע. But hidden in these words is a rich grammatical phenomenon: the syntax of negation in verbless clauses using the existential particle אֵין.

This article explores how Biblical Hebrew expresses non-existence, the distinction between אֵין and לֹא, and the special structure of negative nominal clauses. It also traces the theological and narrative weight this carries in the biblical imagination.

Dissecting the Verbless Structure

The clause אֵין שָׂטָן וְאֵין פֶּגַע רָע translates literally as:

“There is no adversary and there is no evil occurrence.”

Notice: no verbs are present.

Hebrew often constructs nominal (or verbless) clauses without the verb to be, especially in the present tense. In negative constructions, the word אֵין functions as the negator for existence, effectively meaning “there is not.”

This is distinct from the word לֹא, which negates actions or verbal predicates.

Compare:

• לֹא עָנָה – “He did not answer” (verbal negation)
• אֵין עוֹנֶה – “There is no one answering” (existential negation)

Morphology of the Clause

Clause: אֵ֣ין שָׂטָ֔ן וְאֵ֖ין פֶּ֥גַע רָֽע

1. אֵ֣ין (ʾên) –
   Root: אַיִן;
   Form: particle of non-existence;
   Translation: “there is not”;
   Notes: Used only in nominal clauses to negate existence; distinct from לֹא which negates verbal clauses.
2. שָׂטָ֔ן (śāṭān) –
   Root: שׂ־ט־ן;
   Form: masculine singular noun;
   Translation: “adversary”;
   Notes: Not necessarily referring to a supernatural figure; often used of political or military opponents.
3. וְאֵ֖ין (wəʾên) –
   Root: אַיִן;
   Form: conjunction וְ + particle אֵין;
   Translation: “and there is not”;
   Notes: Reinforces parallelism in Hebrew syntax; often used to extend negation.
4. פֶּ֥גַע (pegaʿ) –
   Root: פ־ג־ע;
   Form: masculine singular noun;
   Translation: “harm,” “injury,” or “mishap”;
   Notes: Occurs rarely in this nominal form; most often seen in the verbal root context (to encounter, to strike).
5. רָֽע (rāʿ) –
   Root: ר־ע־ע;
   Form: masculine singular adjective;
   Translation: “evil”;
   Notes: Functions as an attributive adjective modifying פֶּ֥גַע.

אֵין vs לֹא: A Tale of Two Negations

The choice of negator shapes the clause. אֵין brings out existential or circumstantial absence—often critical in theological or royal proclamations.

Echoes in the Text: Where אֵין Rules

The use of אֵין in our verse resonates with several other proclamations of peace and divine protection:

• אֵין כָּשֵׁל בָּהּ – “There is none stumbling in her” (Isaiah 35:8)
• אֵין מַעֲשֶׂה וְחֶשְׁבּוֹן וְדַעַת וְחָכְמָה בִּשְּׁאוֹל – “There is no work or planning or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol” (Ecclesiastes 9:10)

Such constructions often appear at climactic points in speeches or songs, where the absence of a thing (danger, evil, wisdom) becomes a rhetorical presence.

In 1 Kings 5:18, the dual negation—אֵין שָׂטָן וְאֵין פֶּגַע רָע—presents peace as something measurable by what is not. The silence of harm becomes the sound of divine favor.

The Poetry of Peace through Absence

Solomon’s proclamation—“there is no adversary and no evil mishap”—is not only a political statement but a grammatical one. The use of אֵין frames peace as a state of being where danger has been so thoroughly removed that it cannot even be linguistically anchored to a verb.

Biblical Hebrew, ever elegant and efficient, gives us a way to speak peace without action. Just existence—and, in this case, its negation.

Thus, in the hush that follows war, in the quiet of security promised by the LORD, grammar itself bends to reflect stillness.