Verses 109–119

Chapter 11: Hūd · Printed edition: Volume 21, pp. 50–85

In the previous sections of verses, God recounted the stories of past nations to the Prophet and explained how their idolatry, transgression, denial of God’s signs, and arrogance towards the truth to which their prophets summoned them led them to face destruction and eradication and then to the eternal Fire on a day when people will be gathered together. He summarized their situation in the preceding verses.

In the present section of verses, God commands His Prophet and those with him, to draw lessons from this. If they do this, they will be certain that associating others with God and causing corruption on earth only leads humankind to ruin and disaster. Hence, they should adhere to the path of servanthood, hold fast to patience and prayer, and not incline towards those who have done wrong, lest they also be touched by the Fire. They have no protectors apart from God and will not be helped by anyone else. They should know that the word of God is supreme, while the word of those who disbelieve is abased. Even if they are granted respite in what God allows them, it is only to fulfil the word of truth that has been foreordained, and it will be fulfilled as they are judged on the Day of Resurrection.

فَلَا تَكُ فِي مِرْيَةٍ مِمَّا يَعْبُدُ هَٰؤُلَاءِ ۚ مَا يَعْبُدُونَ إِلَّا كَمَا يَعْبُدُ آبَاؤُهُمْ مِنْ قَبْلُ ۚ وَإِنَّا لَمُوَفُّوهُمْ نَصِيبَهُمْ غَيْرَ مَنْقُوصٍ ١٠٩

(11:109) So do not be in doubt about what these worship: they worship just as their fathers worshipped before, and We shall surely pay them their full share, undiminished.

This is presented as a conclusion drawn from what has been discussed in the detailed stories of past nations who wronged themselves by associating partners with God and causing corruption on earth before God seized them with divine punishment. The reference to ‘these’ refers to the people of the Prophet , particularly his saying, … they worship just as their fathers worshipped before …, which means that they worship their idols out of imitation, just like their fathers. Therefore, the later generations follow the path of the first without any valid proof. The reference to their ‘share’ means their share in respect to their polytheism and transgressions.

“… undiminished” (ghayr manqūṣ) is an adverbial qualifier of their full share. It serves to emphasize the meaning of the phrase, ‘We shall surely pay them’ (innā la-muwaffū-hum), as the verb tawfiya (from whence the active participle muwaffūn is derived) means ‘to pay someone in full.’ This also hints at the fact that the disbelievers have no hope of God’s pardon.

Therefore, the meaning of the verse is: ‘Hear the stories of the ancients: That they worshipped deities besides God and denied His signs and learn how God dealt with them by destroying them in this world and consigning them to eternal Fire in the Hereafter. When you have become aware of all of this, you will not be in any doubt about the fact that those who worship idols among your own people do so only the same way as their forefathers, out of blind imitation, without any proof or evidence. We will certainly give them the full recompense for their deeds, without diminishing it in the least on account of intercession or forgiveness, no matter what.’

The reference to their ‘fathers’ could mean the destroyed nations of the past, rather than their Arab ancestors descended from Ishmael, for example. God refers to those ancient nations as their ‘fathers’ or ‘predecessors’, as in His saying, Have they not contemplated the discourse, or has anything come to them that did not come to their forefathers? (). This explanation seems more appropriate to the context of the verse. So, the meaning, according to this reading, is: ‘Do not be in doubt about the worship of your people. They worship only as those doomed nations, who are their spiritual forefathers, worshipped. And We will surely give them their fair share of recompense, just as we did with these forefathers of theirs.’

وَلَقَدْ آتَيْنَا مُوسَى الْكِتَابَ فَاخْتُلِفَ فِيهِ ۚ وَلَوْلَا كَلِمَةٌ سَبَقَتْ مِنْ رَبِّكَ لَقُضِيَ بَيْنَهُمْ ۚ وَإِنَّهُمْ لَفِي شَكٍّ مِنْهُ مُرِيبٍ ١١٠

(11:110) Certainly We gave Moses the Book, but differences arose about it, and were it not for a prior decree of your Lord, a decision would have been made between them; indeed they are in grave doubt concerning it.

These verses are intended to call to mind the stories already mentioned in this chapter, and the stories themselves are narrated for people to learn from them and make a fair judgement about the idolaters association of partners with God, their denial of God’s signs, and their claim that the Qur’an is a fabrication against God.

These verses discuss the matter of their worship of deities and their denial of the Qur’an. God mentions that the people’s worship of the deities besides God is just like the worship of their ancestors from the past nations, and they will receive punishment just like their ancestors did. Their disagreement about the Book of God is like the disagreement of Moses’ nation about what God gave them from the Book, and that God will judge between them in what they disagreed about. Therefore, His saying, Certainly We gave Moses the Book, but differences arose about it …, is a reference to the Israelites disagreement about the Torah after Moses.

The phrase, and were it not for a prior decree of your Lord, a decision would have been made between them, affirms a recurring theme throughout the Qur’an: Human disagreement about worldly matters is natural, yet their disagreement about matters of faith after knowledge has come has no basis except in selfish desires. This is affirmed in the following verses: Mankind were but a single community; then they differed … (); … and those who were given the Book did not differ except after knowledge had come to them, out of envy among themselves (); Mankind were a single community; then Allah sent the prophets as bearers of good news and as warners, and He sent down with them the Book with the truth, that it may judge between the people concerning that about which they differed, and none differed in it except those who had been given it, after the manifest proofs had come to them, out of envy among themselves ().

God has decreed that He will compensate people for their actions and recompense them for what moral worth they have earned in this worldly life. This decree necessitates that He judge among them in their disagreements. However, He has also decreed that they will enjoy life on earth until the Day of Judgement, building the world and acquiring deeds for their hereafter, as stated: On the earth shall be your abode and sustenance for a time (). These decrees imply that God’s judgement between those who dispute God’s religion and His Book out of selfishness will be postponed until the Day of Resurrection.

Poser: ‘Why did God destroy previous nations for their injustice? Could He not have postponed their destruction until the Day of Resurrection in accordance with His decree?’

Reply: Their destruction was not simply due to their disbelief, disobedience, or mere disagreement about religious matters, which is addressed by the other decree and whose judgement is postponed it until the Day of Resurrection. Instead, a third decree is indicated by the verse: There is an messenger for every nation; so when their messenger comes, judgement is made between them with justice, and they are not wronged ().

Therefore, the phrase in the present verse, … and were it not for a prior decree of your Lord, a decision would have been made between them, indicates that people’s disagreement about the Book is a point of intersection between two divine decrees. One decree necessitates that God judge among people in their disagreements, while the other mandates that God should grant them respite until the Day of Judgement and not requite them for their actions straight away. The implication of all this is that their punishment is postponed until the Day of Judgement.

As for the phrase, indeed they are in grave doubt (shakk murīb) concerning it: the adjective murīb is derived from irāba, which means for doubt to be cast into one’s heart. Therefore, describing their doubt as murīb is akin to expressions such as ‘a shading shadow’ (ẓill ẓalīl), ‘a covered veil’ (ḥijāb mastūr), or ‘an ossified stone’ (ḥijr maḥjūr), whereby the adjective re-emphasizes the meaning of the noun in qualifies—in this case, the meaning of doubt.

It appears that the pronoun ‘they’ in the phrase, indeed they, refers to the followers of Moses, who are the Israelites. And they have a right to harbour doubts, since the existing Torah’s chain of transmission ends with a man from their priesthood named Ezra, who wrote it for them when they returned from Babylon to the Holy Land after their period of captivity. The Torah had been burned years before, when the Temple in Jerusalem was burnt, so having its chain of transmission end with one individual naturally breeds suspicion about it. Something similar can be said about the Gospel in terms of its chain of transmission.

Moreover, the current Torah contains things that human nature would not accept as being attributed to a divine book, which naturally causes one to doubt it.

As for reading the pronoun in the phrase, indeed they, as a reference to the Arab polytheists and the word it in concerning it to the Qur’an, as some exegetes have done, seems unlikely. For God has already established His argument against them at the beginning of the chapter that it is His book revealed from Him to His Prophet , and challenged them to produce the like of it: Do they say, ‘He has fabricated it?’ Say, ‘Then bring ten chapters like it, fabricated, and invoke whomever you can, besides Allah, should you be truthful’ (). Therefore, it is meaningless to attribute doubt to them in this context.

وَإِنَّ كُلًّا لَمَّا لَيُوَفِّيَنَّهُمْ رَبُّكَ أَعْمَالَهُمْ ۚ إِنَّهُ بِمَا يَعْمَلُونَ خَبِيرٌ ١١١

(11:111) Your Lord will indeed recompense everyone fully for their works (wa inna kullan lammā la-yuwaffiyanna-hum rabbu-ka aʿmālahum). Indeed He is well aware of what they do.

Grammatically, the noun of inna (‘indeed’) in this sentence is kullan (‘everyone’), its predicate is la-yuwaffiyanna-hum (‘will recompense fully’), where the the lām and nūn (la-yuwaffianna-hum) are for emphasis. Meanwhile lammā is composed of a lām to signify an oath (qasm) and a mā, which functions as a separator between the two lāms (lammā la-yuwaffiyanna-hum) while also providing further emphasis. The object of this oath is left implicit, but indicated by the predicate of inna.

Therefore, the meaning is: ‘Indeed, all of these differing persons, your Lord swears that He will give them, that is, recompense them in full, for their deeds. He is well aware of what they do, whether good or bad.’

In the commentary Rūḥ al-Maʿānī, al-Ālūsī relates from Abū Ḥayyān from Ibn al-Ḥājib that lammā in this verse is the jussive lammā (al-jāzima, meaning ‘not yet’) and that it is common to leave its object implicit in usage. One might say: Kharajtu wa lammā or sāfartu wa lammā. Then he writes: ‘The most appropriate reading of this object in this context is lammā yuwaffū-hā (“they have not yet been paid”), meaning: “Your Lord will indeed recompense everyone fully for their works who has not yet been recompensed.”’ And this is explanation has merit.

For scholars of exegesis, there are extensive literary discussions about the vocabulary and structure of this verse. We have not expanded beyond what is necessary for our purposes. For those who wish to delve deeper, they are advised to consult the comprehensive commentaries on the Qur’an.

فَاسْتَقِمْ كَمَا أُمِرْتَ وَمَنْ تَابَ مَعَكَ وَلَا تَطْغَوْا ۚ إِنَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرٌ١١٢

(11:112) So go aright (fa-istaqim), just as you have been commanded—and whoever has turned with you—and do not overstep the bounds. Indeed He sees best what you do.

According to al-Rāghib and others, the verbs qāma (‘stand’, the root from whence is derived the Form X imperative verb istaqim), thabata (‘be firm’) and rakaza (‘to fix’) all share the same meaning. It appears that the original sense of this word is derived from the ‘standing’ (qiyām) of a human being. That is to say, in all states and positions of human beings other than standing—like sitting, lying, kneeling, reclining, or bending—they are not able to perform all the tasks they intend to do, such as seizing, reaching out, taking, or returning. This is in contrast to when a person stands upright on their feet, they are in their most balanced state, which allows them to perform the widest range of tasks, whether it is to plant their feet, move, take, return, give, withhold, pull, or push. They remain stable and in control over the power and actions at their disposal. Thus, when a human being stands, this embodies their human character with all of its attendant affairs.

From this, the term ‘standing’ was extended metaphorically to other entities in their most balanced state (i.e. ‘upright’), where they have control over their effects and functions. For instance, the standing of a column means it remains upright, a tree stands by anchoring its trunk deep into the earth, a container filled with liquid stands when it rests on its base without spilling its contents, and a ruler stands when he or she spreads justice on earth, just like a law or tradition stands when it is implemented across the lands.

The verb iqāma is the transitive Form IV conjugation of qāma, it literally means ‘to make something stand’ and, in everyday speech, it means ‘to establish something.’ In other words, it means to put something in a state where it has all of its effects without losing any of them, such as establishing justice, establishing the tradition (sunna), establishing prayer, establishing testimony, establishing the bounds (ḥudūd), and establishing religion, among other things.

As for istiqāma, this is the Form X conjugation of the verb qāma, and it means to pursue the ‘uprightness’ of something and to seek the manifestation of all of its effects and benefits. Therefore, istiqāmat al-ṭarīq (‘the path going aright’) denotes all the qualities that are sought from the path, such as straightness, clarity, and its not leading the traveller astray. Meanwhile, istiqāmat al-insān (‘the human being going aright’) means that they seek to reform and make upright their own self, in such a way that no corruption or deficiency affects it, and it comes to complete fruition: Say, ‘I am just a human being like you. It has been revealed to me that your God is the One God. So go aright with regard Him …’ ()—meaning: ‘Observe the right of His oneness.’ Elsewhere, God says: Indeed those who say, ‘Our Lord is Allah!’ and then go right…’ ()—this means they stayed steadfast in all matters of their lives based on what they professed. They do not swerve in their beliefs, morals, and actions except towards what is in line with monotheism and what is compatible with it. In other words, they respect and preserve it in all that they face internally and externally. So set your countenance on the religion as a people of pure faith … (), the meaning of ‘to set one’s countenance’ is to turn the self towards performing an action and orient it towards it. The act of a person setting themselves in a matter is their istiqāma (‘going aright’) in it. Understanding this concept is crucial.

The phrase, So go aright, just as you have been commanded …, means: ‘Be steadfast in your religion and observe its dues fully, in accordance with God’s command that you go aright.’ He has commanded the faithful to go aright in the verses: … and that: ‘’Dedicate yourself to the religion, as a hanif, and never be one of the polytheists’ (); So set your countenance on the religion as a people of pure faith, the origination of Allah according to which He originated mankind There is no altering Allah’s creation; that is the upright religion, but most people do not know ().

In Rūḥ al-Maʿānī, al-Ālūsī writes: ‘God commanded his Messenger go aright just as He had ordered him to previously. This implies that the Messenger was directed by another revelation, even if it was not recited, as several sources suggest. This is apparent evidence that God commanded continuous steadfastness, which involves strictly adhering to the right path, the middle way between excess and negligence. This term encompasses everything related to knowledge, action, and all ethical matters.’

In other words, al-Ālūsī believes there is a possibility that there was another non-recited revelation, as indicated by the phrase, just as you have been commanded (meaning to go aright as you have previously ordered). This explanation, however, is unlikely, considering the Qur’anic approach, and it is improbable to rely on an unknown or undisclosed principle in order to explain the Qur’an.

In addition, the reader is already aware that just as you have been commanded refers to what God has ordered elsewhere in His revelation: to set one’s countenance upon the religion in an upright manner. The act of setting one’s countenance upon the religion is equivalent to going aright in the faith. As the reader will have noted, this phrase, So set your countenance on the religion …, appears in two Meccan surahs, and Sūrah Yūnus, which was one of them, was revealed before this chapter, without any doubt, even though it is not certain when the other chapter, which is Sūrah al-Rūm, was revealed in relation to this one.

As for his claim that, go aright means ‘strictly adhering to the right path, the middle way between excess and negligence’, you are already aware that the meaning of a person going aright in some matter is about steadfastness in preserving it and fulfilling his responsibilities towards it perfectly and completely. The steadfastness (istiqāma) of a person in this sense is focused on fulfilling all of their duties with all of their faculties and abilities, such that they do not leave any of their energy for trivial matters that are of no importance.

If the command to be steadfast meant to adhere to moderation between excess and negligence, it would have been more appropriate to pair this command with prohibition against both excess and negligence. However, God only prohibited against excess by saying, and do not overstep the bounds, which is equivalent to an explanatory clause for the phrase, So go aright, just as you have been commanded—and whoever has turned with you … This is the best piece of evidence that the phrase, So go aright and similar commands to it mean to be firm in one’s divine servanthood and to strictly observe the responsibilities associated with this. Then, the verse prohibits transgressing beyond this stage by disdaining submission to God and casting off the mantle of servanthood by saying, ‘do not overstep the bounds’ in the same as past nations did. They were afflicted only on account of excess, not negligence, and arrogance, not humility.

The phrase, and whoever has turned with you, is joined to the implicit pronoun in to command to go aright, meaning: ‘you should remain upright, and so should those who turned toward God with you.’ In other words, ‘All of you should remain upright.’ The Prophet is only singled out from the group and given a specific mention out of respect for the status of prophethood. This is a consistent feature of God’s discourse, as seen in verses like The Messenger has faith in what has been sent down to him from his Lord, and all the faithful (), and on the day when Allah will not let the Prophet down and the faithful who are with him ().

However, the command that qualifies the phrase ‘go aright’—that is, just as you have been commanded—appears to have been directed specifically to the Prophet and no one else shares in this. After all, the command expressed in phrases like So set your countenance on the religion … is exclusive to him. And if God had said instead, ‘All of you, go aright’, it would not be correct to refer back to the previous command.

Those who ‘turned with’ the Prophet are the believers who turned back to God through faith. The word tawba is used to describe faith here because faith means turning away from idolatry and back to God, and this usage occurs frequently in the Qur’an. For example, see the verse: … and they plead for forgiveness for the faithful: ‘Our Lord! You comprehend all things in mercy and knowledge. So forgive those who repent and follow Your way … ().

The phrase, and do not overstep the bounds, means not to transgress the limit set for you by your innate nature (fiṭra) and creation (khilqa), which is to serve God alone, as those before you overstepped and strayed into idolatry, leading them to ruin. The word ‘overstep’ (ṭughyān) that is used here literally means for water to overflow, as when a river or body of water breaks its banks. It is then metaphorically used for this moral issue, which is a person’s transgression in his life, due to the similarity of the effects of the two scenarios, namely corruption and ruin.

The phrase, indeed He sees best what you do provides a rationale for everything that preceded it in the verse. Therefore, the meaning of the verse is: ‘Be steadfast in the religion of monotheism, adhere to the path of divine servanthood without wavering, and let those who believe with you be likewise steadfast. Do not exceed the limit that has been set for you, because God sees what you do and, if you violate His command, He will take you to task. This verse conveys an unmistakable tone of severity. There is no hint of mercy or trace of gentleness in it. It follows verses that include the accounts of the previous nations being held accountable for their actions and God’s needlessness toward them, a topic that would indeed fill souls with terror and make hearts flutter.

However, the passage, So go aright, just as you have been commanded singles out the Prophet by mentioning him separately from the believers. As we have already discussed, this is out of respect and reverence for his prophetic status. However, this also indicates an intensified emphasis on his moral responsibility because, by identifying him separately, the weight and awe of the divine address is directed towards him alone, equal—in fact, to the weight and awe directed towards the entire community until the Day of Judgement. This is similar to the intensity found in another verse, Had We not fortified you, certainly you might have inclined toward them a bit. Then We would have surely made you taste a double punishment in this life and a double punishment after death ().

Therefore, many exegetes note that when the Prophet said, ‘Sūrah Hūd has turned me grey’, he was referring to this verse. We will discuss this further in our study of the relevant narrations, below.

وَلَا تَرْكَنُوا إِلَى الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا فَتَمَسَّكُمُ النَّارُ وَمَا لَكُمْ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ مِنْ أَوْلِيَاءَ ثُمَّ لَا تُنْصَرُونَ ١١٣

(11:113) And do not incline (lā tarkanū) toward the wrongdoers, lest the Fire should touch you, and you will not have any friend besides Allah, then you will not be helped.

According to the classical lexicon of Arabic al-Siḥāḥ, the verb rakn means to rely on someone or something, while rukūn means to incline towards and rest upon them or it. Rukn refers to the strongest side of a thing, or to something of great honor or dignity. Similarly, in Lisān al-ʿArab, we read that rukūn means to lean on something.

Al-Rāghib says:

‘A thing’s rukn is the side upon which it rests, and this came metaphorically to refer to strength or power, as per the verse: If only I had some power through you, or could take refuge in a mighty support (rukn shadīd). Rakn can also mean to lean or incline, as per the verse: And do not incline (lā tarkanū) toward the wrongdoers (). A she-camel is called a markana when it has large veins in its udder that make its udder appear larger. Marakun refers to a small bowl. The arkān al-ʿibādāt are those parts of the acts of worship upon which they are based and without which the acts of worship become null and void.’

This is similar to what has been mentioned in al-Ṣiḥāḥ.

Therefore, rakn means not merely to lean on something, but to lean on something because you have inclined towards it. This is why we see the verb rakn made transitive with the preposition ilā (‘to …’) rather than ʿalāʾ (‘upon …’). The explanation given by linguists is the meaning of the word in its broadest form, as is often their tendency.

Based on this, to ‘incline’ towards the wrongdoers implies a kind of trust arising from an partiality towards them. Whether this inclination is in the realm of faith, as when one shares those parts of religious truths that are of benefit to them while concealing those that are not to avoid their dissemination, or in religious life, such as allowing wrongdoers to interfere in the administration of religious community as they please, granting them authority in public affairs, or even showing them affection which leads to association and influence that could adversely impact societal or individual life.

In short, approaching the matter of religion or religious life with a kind of inclination towards or support from the wrongdoers moves religion or religious life away from its independence and diverts it from its pure purpose by subjecting it to their influence. This leads to people pursuing the truth through the path of falsehood or reviving the truth by reviving falsehood, which ultimately results in the death of the truth in an effort to revive it.

The evidence for what we mentioned is that God Almighty in this verse, which is a continuation of the previous verse, links the Prophet and the believers from his community with the affairs that belong to him and his community, such as religious knowledge, morals, and Islamic traditions in terms of their propagation, preservation, and implementation, as well as fostering a social life that is in harmony with them, the governance of the Islamic community, and the individual’s adherence to religion and taking refuge in the religious lifestyle. Neither the Prophet nor his community should rely on those who are wrongdoers in any of these aspects.

However, it is also evident that these two verses are like a conclusion drawn from the stories of the sinful towns that God seized with divine retribution on account of their wrongdoing. The wrongdoing of these destroyed nations was not only in their association of partners with God and their worship of idols but also included following tyrants and spreading corruption in the earth after it had been reformed. They relied on the wrongful practices established by tyrannical rulers and followed by their people and, by doing so, they become wrongdoers themselves.

It is also evident from the context that the two verses are sequential in their purpose: The first forbids the believers from being amongst the wrongdoers, and the second prohibits them from approaching them, inclining towards them, and relying on their falsehoods in their pursuit of the truth. Therefore, His saying, And do not incline toward the wrongdoers, is a prohibition against inclining towards them, relying on them, and using their falsehoods as a foundation for the religion or of religious life.

Furthermore, the fact that these two verses serve as a conclusion derived from the aforementioned stories of past nations and prophets indicates that what God means by ‘the wrongdoers’ (alladhīna ẓalamū) in this verse is not just anyone who has been proven to have done wrong, or else it would include all people except the Infallibles, and then the prohibition would have relying on such persons would be meaningless. Nor does it mean those who are wrongdoers in the sense that they are characterized by this description and persist in their wrongdoing. This is because the use of the verbal construction alladhīna ẓalamū (lit. ‘those who do wrong’) would need some additional elements to indicate that this was something they were continuously doing or that was part of their character, and such elements are absent here.

Therefore, the wrongdoers here refers to those people whose state of wrongdoing is similar to that of those destroyed nations whose stories God has recounted in the previous verses of this chapter. According to these narratives, God addressed these peoples collectively following a divine call that was directed towards them, then He divided them into those who accepted it and those who rejected it. In several places of the aforementioned stories, those who accept are referred to as ‘those who believed’ (alladhīna āmanū), and those who reject it as ‘those who did wrong’ (alladhīna ẓalamū). Such references occur in more than ten places. For example: … and do not plead with Me for those who are wrongdoers … (); The Cry seized those who were wrongdoers (); Such were ʿĀd: they impugned the signs of their Lord and disobeyed His messengers, and followed the dictates of every obdurate tyrant (); Indeed Thamūd defied their Lord (); Away with Midian!—just as Thamūd was done away with! ().

Note that God expressed their rejection or acceptance of the divine call, and in contrast to the and construction, with a past tense verb, which indicates the mere fact of its occurrence in objective reality. Outside the scope of comparison and relation with other things, however, it is expressed as an adjective, as in Then it was said, ‘Away with the wrongdoing lot!’ (), and never far from the wrongdoers (), and So do not turn your backs as guilty ones (), among many others.

The context of this comparison and its relation to accepting or rejecting the divine call means that it is sufficient to acknowledge that this is something that has occurred. It also shows that they were labelled either believers or wrongdoers, and there was no need to mention being characterized by or persisting in either of these traits. Therefore, saying ‘they wronged’, ‘they disobeyed’, and ‘they followed Pharaoh’s dictates’ implies they were labelled with the trait of wrongdoing, disobedience, and following Pharaoh’s dictates, respectively. The meaning of ‘And We delivered those who had faith’ is ‘We saved those who were labelled with the trait of faith and were known by its marks.’

Using a past tense verb is sufficient to indicate the basic act of labelling mentioned, even if it implies being characterized by it. To put it another way, ‘those who did wrong’ (alladhīna ẓalamū) among Noah’s people thereby became wrongdoers (ẓālimīn), but the focus here, based on the context of the verse, is on the occurrence of their wrongdoing, not on it becoming an inseparable characteristic of them thereafter. Hence, whenever the speech moves away from the context of comparison and relation, it reverts to expressing a characteristic, such as: ‘Away with the wrongdoing lot!’ (), and … and do not be with the faithless! (). Pay attention to this point.

From this, the reason for the differing explanations of the phrase, the wrongdoers, becomes clear. Some have taken it to signify merely the commission of any wrongdoing, while others interpret it as a descriptive term, meaning ‘do not incline towards the wrongdoers.’ In his commentary al-Manār, Rashīd Riḍā explains that al-Zamakhsharī understood the wrongdoers as referring to ‘those from whom wrong has been experienced’, instead of merely saying ‘the wrongdoers’ using the active participle, al-ẓālimīn. It is narrated that al-Muwaffaq prayed behind the imām and recited this verse, and subsequently fainted. When he regained consciousness, he was asked about it, and he remarked, ‘If this pertains to those who incline towards doing wrong. Then how will it be for the actual wrongdoer?’

The implication here is that the threat in the verse encompasses those who incline, no matter how slightly, towards someone who has committed a minor wrong, or any form of injustice. However, this understanding is also flawed. The intended meaning of the wrongdoers in the verse refers to the group of wrongdoers among the enemies of the believers; those who harm them and try to turn them away from their religion, primarily the idolaters. They are akin to the faithless () in many other verses, which are intended to target a specific group of disbelievers, not every individual who has disbelieved in the past. An apt example is the verse from Surah Al-Baqarah (): As for the faithless, it is the same to them whether you warn them or do not warn them, they will not have faith.

Now, the people addressed by this prohibition are the same as those mentioned in the preceding verse which states, So go aright, just as you have been commanded—and whoever has turned with you ().

In this chapter, these idolatrous enemies are referred to as the wrongdoers, just as they are described in relation to the earlier messengers in this chapter, as in verses 37, 67, and 94. They are also referred to as wrongdoers like in the verse, Then it was said, ‘Away with the wrongdoing lot!’ (). There is no distinction in these verses between using an adjectival construction (like al-ẓālimīn) and a verbal construction (like alladhīna ẓalamū), for they both convey the same meaning in this context.

As for the explanation given by al-Zamakhsharī in al-Kashshāf, namely that what is meant by alladhīna ẓalamū is ‘those from whom wrong has been experienced’, instead of merely saying ‘the wrongdoers’ using the active participle, al-ẓālimīn: While this is correct, it does not benefit his argument. For, even if there is a verbal construct at work, as we have established in this context, it doesn’t provide more than the realization of the event it describes, and, therefore, it still aligns with the adjectival meaning, as we can observe in the verse from Sūrah al-Nāziʿāt (), where it uses a verb that also serves the function of an adjective.

As for the claim made by the author of al-Manār, that ‘the intended meaning of “the wrongdoers” in the verse is the group of wrongdoers from among the enemies of the believers who harm and turn them away from their faith, namely the idolaters’ this is a mere assertion. What evidence suggests that the verse is limited to the idolaters and doesn’t include the People of the Book, when God has recently mentioned them among the wrongdoers in various instances in His Book where He describes them differing about the Book of God out of envy amongst themselves. Indeed, God has prohibited befriending them and emphasized this in verses such as, Any of you who allies with them is indeed one of them (), and in reference to befriending any disbeliever, and whoever does that Allah will have nothing to do with him ().

But what prevents the verse from encompassing the wrongdoers of this community, among whom are those more wretched than the tyrants of ʿĀd and Thamūd, and more rebellious than Pharaoh, Haman, and Korah?

Just because Islam, at the time of this chapter’s revelation, was afflicted by the Quraysh and the idolaters of Mecca and its surroundings, tis does not necessitate a limitation in the meaning of these words. After all, it is an accepted principle that the specifics of a context do not restrict the general wording of a text. Thus, the verse forbids inclining towards anyone characterized by the trait of wrongdoing, be it an idolater, monotheist, Muslim, or someone from the People of the Book.

As for the verse, As for the faithless, it is the same to them whether you warn them or do not warn them, they will not have faith (), its meaning is adjectival, even if it is phrased verbally: In other words, it does not mean all individuals, but rather those who have committed disbelief in the past. We have previously commented on this verse and others in the Qur’an, clarifying that it specifically addresses the leaders of Quraysh who opposed the Prophet from the onset, until God protected the Prophet from them and vanquished them at Badr and elsewhere. They are referred to as ‘those who disbelieved’ (alladhīna kafarū—translated as ‘the faithless’). The verse is not general, for had it been so, and if it referred to all disbelievers as some claim, the verse would not hold true given the numerous conversions of people from a state of disbelief to belief, even among the disbelievers of Mecca after the revelation of this verse.

Now, if one were to argue that the verse refers to those who did not believe until the end of their lives, the verse becomes redundant, as saying ‘disbelievers who do not believe until the end of their lives will not believe’ is self-evident. Thus, the only option left is to read it as a specific verse rather than a general one, with ‘those who disbelieved’ (translated as the faithless) referring to a particular group rather than every individual disbeliever.

We have previously mentioned that ‘those who have believed’ (translated as the faithful), unless evidence suggests otherwise, is an honorary title for those who believed in the Prophet at the onset of his call to the truth. They are specifically addressed in the Qur’anic verses beginning with ‘O you who have believed …,’ even if others share in the rulings with them.

Regarding the statement at the end of the discussion: The adversaries, the polytheists, are referred to as ‘the wrongdoers’ just as previous communities in their stories within this chapter were. They are also referred to as ‘the wrongdoers.’ There is no distinction between the two expressions. The conclusion is that referring to them sometimes as ‘those who have wronged’ and sometimes as ‘the wrongdoers’ indicates that both terms aim to convey the same meaning.

In this, it seems the subtlety of linguistic attention, previously hinted at, eluded the author of al-Manār as, just because these two terms refer to the same things, this does not necessitate that they refer to them with the same concern.

The verse essentially instructs the Prophet and his community to avoid relying on or seeking support from those characterized by wrongdoing. They incline lean towards them or rely on their wrongdoing in matters of their religion or religious lives. This is what is meant by the saying: And do not incline toward the wrongdoers.

The phrase, lest the Fire should touch you, follows as a consequence of inclining toward the wrongdoers. The implication is that the result of leaning towards the wrongdoers is being touched by the fire. The outcome of relying on the injustice of the wrongdoers is being touched by the fire, whereas the direct act of committing injustice itself leads to the fire. This distinguishes between approaching wrongdoing and being enmeshed in the act of wrongdoing itself.

The phrase, and you will not have any friend besides Allah, is an adverbial qualifier for the phrase, lest the Fire should touch you. It suggests that when the fire touches you, you’ll have no friend to protect you besides God, especially on the Day of Judgement when all other allies apart from Him will be absent. Alternatively, in the context of leaning towards the wrongdoers, if the fire here signifies punishment, then the phrase means there will be no divine assistance in such a state.

The use of the preposition then in the phrase then you will not be helped indicates a conclusion to the matter, highlighting a fate of disappointment and abandonment. This is as if to say: ‘The fire will touch you, and with no one but God to turn to, you will call upon Him and He will not respond; you will seek His aid and He will not help. This culminates in a state of loss, disappointment, and abandonment.’

From the analysis of the verse, several points arise:

Firstly, what is actually prohibited in the verse is inclining towards or seeking support from the wrongdoers in matters of religion or religious life. This could manifest as remaining silent about the truths of the religion regarding issues that might upset them, neglecting to perform religious duties they disapprove of, allowing them to lead the community, emulating their general practices, or conducting religious affairs with their help and power, and the like.

However, relying on them in mundane transactions or day-to-day interactions such as buying and selling, trusting them, or relying on them in certain matters is not included in the prohibition of this verse. This is because this does not entailing on them in matters of religion or religious life. For instance, when the Prophet left Mecca by night and took refuge in the cave, he relied on an idol-worshipper by hiring a mount for the journey and trusted him to deliver it to the cave after three days. Moreover, the Muslims, within the sight and hearing of the Prophet , continued to interact and trade with the idol worshippers and disbelievers.

The second point is that the form of inclination (rukūn) prohibited in the verse is more specific than the allegiance (wilāya) cautioned against in many other verses. Allegiance refers to drawing near to those who might influence Muslims with their religion, their morals, or the wrongful practices prevalent in their societies, given that they are enemies of the faith. In contrast, inclining towards them only refers to basing one’s religion or religious life on their wrongdoing. Therefore, inclination is more specific than allegiance. In essence, in every instance where there is inclination, there is also an aspect of allegiance, but not vice versa. The difference is that the influence expressed by inclination is active, while in allegiance, it is not always so.

However, other commentators argue that the inclination prohibited in this verse is, in fact, synonymous with the allegiance (wilāya) with the disbelievers warned against in other verses. In al-Manār, Rashīd Riḍā, after quoting al-Zamakhsharī, explains: ‘The prohibition in the verse covers various behaviors: Acceding to their desires, breaking away from the community to be with them, associating and socializing with them, visiting them, appeasing them, approving of their actions, imitating them, adopting their attire, admiring their allurements, and any act that elevates their status. Considering the phrase, do not incline, it is worth noting that inclination (rukūn) implies a slight leaning towards them. Furthermore, when the verse (literally) states, “those who did wrong” instead of “wrongdoers”, it specifies those recognized for their wrongdoings.

While all these behaviors Rashīd Riḍā associates with inclination are naturally unsuitable and should be avoided by believers, it is not accurate to treat them as direct explanations of the verse’s intent. The primary addressees of this verse are the Prophet Muḥammad and the early converts to Islam who first renounced idol worship to embrace faith alongside him. None of them ever showed any inclination to align with the wrongdoers of the idol worship or to indulge in their desires or approve of their deeds.’

There is a further contradiction in Rashīd Riḍā’s interpretation. On the one hand, he acknowledges that some of these behaviors are part of what inclination entails, but then down plays them and denies that the verse includes them. Every sinful act is significant and should not be taken lightly. However, many commentators have a tendency to attribute certain leniencies to God’s pronouncements. Even more problematic is Riḍā’s claim that the primary audience of this warning was the Prophet Muḥammad and the early Muslims, since it implies that this address is exclusively for them. However, the message of this verse is universal, directed at the Prophet and his entire community, with no differentiation between earlier and later followers. The temporal precedence of some over others does not limit the message’s comprehensiveness, especially when the language of the text includes all of them.

Secondly, the fact that the addressee is not expected to commit a sin does not preclude God prohibiting it, especially prohibitions that come from a legislative perspective. However, this does prevent excessive emphasis or insistence upon it. The Prophet was forbidden from acts greater than inclining towards those who do wrong, such as associating partners with God and neglecting the proclamation of some of His commands and prohibitions. God said: Certainly it has been revealed to you and to those before you: ‘If you ascribe a partner to Allah your works shall fail and you shall surely be among the losers (). And He said O Messenger! Communicate that which has been sent down to you from your Lord, and if you do not, you will not have communicated His message, and Allah shall protect you from the people. Indeed Allah does not guide the faithless lot (). And He said: And follow that which is revealed to you from your Lord. Indeed Allah is well aware of what you do (). It is unimaginable to think that the Prophet would associate partners with his Lord, neglect what was revealed to him, obey the disbelievers and hypocrites, or not follow what was revealed to him, among other prohibitions.

Similarly, the earliest Muslims were forbidden from acts greater or equal to the mentioned act of inclining towards the wrongdoers. For instance, He said: And beware of a punishment which shall not visit the wrongdoers among you exclusively (), which revealed about the Battle of Badr participants, including the earliest predecessors. God even refers to some of them as ‘those who have done wrong’ (alladhīna ẓalamū), which is a more severe phrasing than and do not incline toward the wrongdoers. Other prohibitions in the Qur’an about the Battles of Badr, Uḥud, and Ḥunayn, as well as those directed at the Prophet’s wives, all concerned deeds that were not expected of the earliest predecessors, though some of them faced some of these challenges later.

Thirdly, given the context of the verse, it prohibits inclining towards the wrongdoers in matters in which they do wrong. That is, no part of elevating the true religion of Muslims, or their religious life should be based on any part of their wrongdoing. This means being mindful in proclaiming the truth and acting in accordance with it of the wrongs and falsehoods of the unjust, to the extent that it might rejuvenate the truth because of the revival of falsehood, or it might lead to reviving one truth by suppressing another, as previously indicated. However, inclining towards some of their wrongdoings, incorporating it into the religion, or practicing it within the Muslim community or personal life, is not just leaning towards the wrongdoers, but actually becoming one of them.

This matter has a source of confusion to many commentators, leading them to discuss topics unrelated to the verse in question. We have chosen to omit those explanations and discussions about their accuracy and relevance for the sake of brevity. Those interested in further details should consult the works of these exegeses.

وَأَقِمِ الصَّلَاةَ طَرَفَيِ النَّهَارِ وَزُلَفًا مِنَ اللَّيْلِ ۚ إِنَّ الْحَسَنَاتِ يُذْهِبْنَ السَّيِّئَاتِ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ ذِكْرَىٰ لِلذَّاكِرِينَ ١١٤

(11:114) Maintain the prayer at the two ends of the day, and during the early hours of the night (zulfan). Indeed good deeds efface misdeeds. That is an admonition for the mindful.

The two ends of the day refers to the morning and evening, and the word zulaf is the plural form of zulfā, just as qurb is the plural of qurbā. It denotes a period close to the described entity, like hours and the like. Hence, the intended meaning is the hours of the night that are closest to the day.

Therefore, the meaning is: ‘Maintain the prayer in the morning and evening and during the hours of the night that are closest to the day. This aligns with the five daily prayers, specifically the fajr (dawn) prayer, ʿaṣr (late afternoon) prayer—which is the evening or masāʾ prayer—and maghrib (sunset) and ʿishāʾ (night) prayers. The latter two are considered part of the early hours of the night, as some scholars have proposed. Alternatively, it could refer to the fajr, maghrib—which fall at the two ends of the day—and ʿishāʾ, which falls during the early hours of the night, as others have suggested. There are other interpretations as well.

However, since this investigation has jurisprudential implications, the primary reference point is the clarifications provided by the Prophet , and the Imams from his household . Therefore, these will be discussed further in our analysis of the narrations.

Indeed good deeds efface misdeeds … explains the rationale for the command to Maintain the prayer …, by explaining that prayers are virtuous acts that eliminate the negative traces of sins—those imperfections that afflict souls. Discussion on this topic has been covered earlier in the chapter on the failure of deeds (ḥabṭ).

That is an admonition for the mindful … means that the aforementioned principle—that good deeds counteract bad ones—is a form of admonition for those devoted to the remembrance of God.

وَاصْبِرْ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يُضِيعُ أَجْرَ الْمُحْسِنِينَ ١١٥

(11:115) And be patient; indeed Allah does not waste the reward of the virtuous.

God then commands the faithful to patience after commanding them to maintain the prayer, much like the pairing found in His statement: And take recourse in patience and prayer … (). This is because both commands, in their respective realms, reflect the most fundamental pillars of Islam: Prayer in terms of acts of worship (ʿibādāt) and patience in terms of moral virtues (akhlāq). God has said about prayer: and the remembrance of Allah is surely greater () and about patience: that is indeed the steadiest of courses (). Combining both is the best means to seek God’s support during adversities and hardships. While patience safeguards the soul from distress and despair, prayer directs it towards God, making it forget the hardships it faces. An elaboration on this can be found in our commentary on verse .

The directive to be patient suggests a broader connotation of patience: Patience in the sense of steadfastness in worship, patience in the sense of refraining from sins, and patience in the sense of enduring adversities. Thus, it implies patience with regard to all the preceding directives and prohibitions, referencing commands such as So go aright, and do not overstep, do not incline, and Maintain the prayer.

However, the specificity of the command and the fact it is addressed specifically to the Prophet indicates that this patience pertains to something unique to him. If not, one might say the command be patient is consistent with the general context. This supports the view of those who argue that what was meant is: ‘be patient by enduring the harm you receive from your people as you call them to God and against the oppression of the wrongdoers amongst them.’ As for the command, Maintain the prayer, it is not a directive for a specific prayer unique to the Prophet . Instead, it is a command for the collective prayer alongside the believers. Hence, it is a command for all of them to pray collectively, and the verse should be understood in this fashion.

The statement, … indeed Allah does not waste the reward of the virtuous, provides a rationale for the command to be patient.

فَلَوْلَا كَانَ مِنَ الْقُرُونِ مِنْ قَبْلِكُمْ أُولُو بَقِيَّةٍ يَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْفَسَادِ فِي الْأَرْضِ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا مِمَّنْ أَنْجَيْنَا مِنْهُمْ ۗ وَاتَّبَعَ الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا مَا أُتْرِفُوا فِيهِ وَكَانُوا مُجْرِمِينَ ١١٦

(11:116) Why were there not among the generations before you a remnant (of the wise) who might forbid corruption in the earth, except a few of those whom We delivered from among them? Those who were wrongdoers pursued that in which they had been granted affluence, and they were a guilty lot.

The phrase, Why were there not …, can be understood as expressing surprise and conveying a rebuke. The meaning is: ‘Would that there were people, from the generations before you that we destroyed, who remained and prevented corruption on the earth, thereby reforming it and preserving their communities from extinction.’

The phrase, except a few of those whom We delivered, is an exception from the preceding negation, meaning: ‘It is surprising that from amongst the past generations, despite witnessing God’s signs and punishments, there were not many who prevented corruption on the earth, except a few whom God saved from His punishment; they were the ones who did prevent corruption.’

And in saying, Those who were wrongdoers pursued that in which they had been granted affluence, and they were a guilty lot, God describes the condition of the remaining majority after the exception of the previous passage. They are primarily identified as the wrongdoers, who immersed themselves in worldly pleasures and were also the guilty lot.

This distinction between the saved and the remaining majority, whose condition is described, effectively classifies people into two contrasting groups: those saved by God’s mercy and the criminals. Thus, it follows with, “Had your Lord willed, He could have made mankind one community; but they will continue to differ except whom your Lord has given mercy.”

وَمَا كَانَ رَبُّكَ لِيُهْلِكَ الْقُرَىٰ بِظُلْمٍ وَأَهْلُهَا مُصْلِحُونَ ١١٧

(11:117) Your Lord would never destroy the townships unjustly while their inhabitants were bringing about reform.

This means that it is not part of God’s divine precedent to destroy towns where its inhabitants were people who sought to bring about good and reform. Such an act would be an injustice, and your Lord does not wrong anyone. Therefore, when God says ‘unjustly’, it serves as a clarifying qualification (qayd tawḍīḥī), not a restrictive one (qayd iḥtirāzī), meaning that it illustrates that God’s divine practice is not to destroy towns that seek good because that would be an injustice: … and your Lord is not tyrannical to the servants ().

وَلَوْ شَاءَ رَبُّكَ لَجَعَلَ النَّاسَ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً ۖ وَلَا يَزَالُونَ مُخْتَلِفِينَ ١١٨ إِلَّا مَنْ رَحِمَ رَبُّكَ ۚ وَلِذَٰلِكَ خَلَقَهُمْ ۗ وَتَمَّتْ كَلِمَةُ رَبِّكَ لَأَمْلَأَنَّ جَهَنَّمَ مِنَ الْجِنَّةِ وَالنَّاسِ أَجْمَعِينَ ١١٩

(11:118-119) Had your Lord wished, He would have made mankind one community; but they continue to differ (lā yazālūna mukhtalifīn) except those on whom your Lord has mercy—and that is why He created them—and the word of your Lord has been fulfilled: ‘I will surely fill hell with jinn and humans, all together!’

The word khalf (‘back’, from whence mukhtalifīn is derived) is the opposite of quddām (‘fore’) and this meaning can be observed in its various derivatives. For instance, when one says ‘khalafa abā-hu,’ meaning ‘he succeeded his father,’ it signifies that he sat in his father’s place or continued living after his father passed away. Similarly, when it is said ‘akhlafa waʿda-hu’, meaning ‘he broke his promise’, it implies that he threw his promise behind him. And when one says ‘fulān māt wa khalafa ibnan’—meaning ‘so-and-so died and left a son behind’—it suggests that he left a child in his wake, and departed. Also, when it is said ‘fulān istakhlafa fulānan’—meaning ‘one appointed another as his successor’—it conveys the idea that he wanted him to be his representative following his absence or death, much like when Adam was made God’s representative (khalīfa) on Earth. Additionally, when one says ‘fulān khālaf fulana’ or ‘takhālufā’—meaning ‘one opposed the other’ or ‘they opposed each other’—it denotes that they parted ways in opinion or deed, as if each turned their back on the other. The meaning of ‘takhallaf ʿan amri-hi’ is ‘he neglected his command’, implying that he left behind his order and did not act upon it. The meaning of ‘ikhtalaf al-qawm fi kadhā’—or ‘people disagreed on such-and-such a matter’—is that they turned their backs on each other. Lastly, ‘ikhtalaf fulān ilā fulān’ means ‘one frequented the another’ indicating a regularly coming and going to him.

This ikhtilāf (difference or divergence), which stands in contrast to the meaning of ittifāq (agreement or convergence), is something which a healthy temperament disapproves of. Indeed, all natural inclinations recognise that with divergence, people’s energy becomes dispersed and weakened. Certainly, other negative consequences such as disputes, altercations, brawls, killings, animosities, and hostilities also arise from it. Each of these, in turn, significantly undermines peace and well-being.

There exists a type of disagreement which is inevitable in the realm of humanity: the divergence of temperaments that ultimately leads to differences in structures. Indeed, physical compositions vary among individuals, and this difference in physical make-up results in differences in people’s physical and mental capacities. Coupled with the variations in environments and climates, differences in tastes, traditions, etiquettes, goals, and individual and collective behaviors emerge within human societies. Research in the field of social sciences have all but confirmed that without these differences, humans would not thrive for even a blink of an eye.

God has called attention to this in His book and attributed it to Himself, saying, It is We who have dispensed among them their livelihood in the present life, and raised some of them above others in rank, so that some may take others into service, and your Lord’s mercy is better than what they amass (). God does not criticize this kind of differentiation in His words unless it is driven by human desires in a direction that contradicts the guidance of reason.

Disagreement in religion is not from God. He mentions that He has innately designed humans to recognise Him and believe in His Oneness. He has fashioned the human soul, inspiring both its wickedness and righteousness. The pure religion aligns with this innate disposition upon which He created humans; God’s creation does not change. Therefore, the Qur’an attributes any religious disagreements to the hostility and wrongdoing of those who differ, as stated, But they did not differ except after knowledge had come to them, out of envy among themselves ().

God encapsulated both types of differences when He said: Mankind were a single community; then Allah sent the prophets as bearers of good news and as warners, and He sent down with them the Book with the truth, that it may judge between the people concerning that about which they differed …—this refers to the first kind of disagreement, which occurs between people, namely in everyday life—… and none differed in it except those who had been given it, after the manifest proofs had come to them, out of envy among themselves. Then Allah guided those who had faith to the truth of what they differed in, by His will ()—this refers to the second kind of disagreement, which occurs in matters of religion. Thus, God clarifies the nature of differences in His words.

What He means by saying, Had your Lord wished, He would have made mankind one community, is that He would have eliminated their differences and united them upon a single creed. It is evident that this is a response to their religious disputes that are mentioned in the preceding verses and their division into groups, some being saved by God, though they are few, and others are the wrongdoers. This implies that even though they differ in religion, they cannot hope to challenge God. If God willed, He would have made them one nation without differences in religion. This is similar to His statement, With Allah rests guidance to the straight path, and some of them are devious, and had He wished He would have guided you all () and Have not the faithful yet realized that had Allah wished He would have guided mankind all together? ().

Based on this, His saying, but they continue to differ, specifically refers to differences in religion. That is the only thing He mentions could be eliminated if He so willed. The implied meaning is: ‘if God had willed, He would have removed their differences, but He did not will it, so they will continue to differ.’

However, His statement, except those on whom your Lord has mercy, explicitly indicates that He has removed such disagreements from amongst those to whom He has shown mercy. As for non-religious differences, God did not remove them even from the group that received His mercy. Only the religious differences, which He disapproves of and associates with enmity after acquiring true knowledge, are lifted from them.

The statement, except those on whom your Lord has mercy, is an exception to the phrase, but they continue to differ. This means people will perpetually differ with one another concerning the truth, except those whom God has shown mercy. For they do not differ concerning the truth, nor do they deviate from it. This mercy refers to divine guidance, as indicated by the verse, Then Allah guided those who had faith to the truth of what they differed in, by His will ().

If one argues that people differing amongst themselves means that some affirm a belief while others deny it, making the meaning of but they continue to differ suggest that they are perpetually divided into right and wrong, then the exception would only pertain to certain times and not individuals. According to this reading, the implication of the phrase except those on whom your Lord has mercy is that there are always those who are wrong and those who are right, except for those whom God has mercy upon. These individuals are not divided, but are solely on the path of truth. It is understood that those exempted are on the side of truth, which makes the statement analogous to saying that among them, there are those in error and those who are correct, and the correct ones are entirely correct, without any error. However, this is a redundant statement.

Exempting those who are correct from the principle that they will continue to differ makes no sense, as they would still be counted among the people who differ, as both the people in the right and those in the wrong engaged in disagreement.

To this, I respond: The disagreement mentioned in this verse and in other verses that criticize those who disagree, specifically refers to those who differ concerning the truth and oppose one another about it. Although this implies that some of them are on the right path and possess insight, when disagreement is attributed to the collective body or community, it highlights the community’s doubt, their deviation from the truth, their failure to unify upon it, and their abandonment of it. This leads to the truth being concealed from them and their doubt in it.

God Almighty criticizes such disagreement because of its inherently negative qualities, such as division and turning away from the truth. The verses attest to this, as God condemns all of those who differ because of their disagreement, not just those among them who are wrong. If the intended meaning of those who differ was just those with differing opinions or actions that deviate from the truth, then this would not be valid.

The most compelling evidence for this position is His statement, He has prescribed for you the religion which He had enjoined upon Noah and which We have (also) revealed to you, and which We had enjoined upon Abraham, Moses and Jesus, declaring, ‘Maintain the religion, and do not be divided in it’ (), where He equates disagreement with division. Similarly, the verse, ‘This indeed is my straight path, so follow it, and do not follow (other) ways, for they will separate you from His way (), provides even clearer evidence. This places those who adhere to the truth and stay on His path outside the realm of division and disagreement.

Hence, you will notice that, in many instances, when God mentions their disagreements in the Qur’an, He couples it with their doubt about it. This is exemplified in His statement in the previously mentioned verses: Certainly We gave Moses the Book, but differences arose about it, and were it not for a prior decree of your Lord, a decision would have been made between them; indeed they are in grave doubt concerning it (). This message is reiterated in various parts of His discourse.

God also says: What is it about which they question each other?! About the great tiding, the one about which they differ? () Meaning, each person presents an opinion that diverts them from the truth, leading to their division. God proclaims: indeed you are of different opinions! He is turned away from it who has been turned away. Perish the liars (). This refers to statements that are not based on understanding or grounded in knowledge. Instead, conjecture and suspicion are the source of these views that lead to disagreement.

In this context, God says: O People of the Book! Why do you mix the truth with falsehood, and conceal the truth while you know? (). Their blameworthy act in this verse is presenting views resembling the truth, but devoid of it. This act brings about disagreement which obscures the real truth.

Their disagreements are manifested as differing opinions and views that divert them from the truth, resulting in doubt. Because they follow their desires that run contrary to the truth, they present their false opinions in various forms, mirroring the appearance of truth. This is done with the aim of clouding people’s understanding out of envy and hostility, even though they are aware of what the truth is. It is their contention with the truth, despite their knowledge of it, that is driven by these internal animosities.

From the above, it is evident that when God says, and that is why He created them, He is referring to the mercy mentioned in except those on whom your Lord has mercy. The fact that the Arabic word raḥma (‘mercy’) is grammatically feminine does not preclude the use of the masculine demonstrative pronoun dhālika (‘that’) to refer to it, because verbal nouns can be treated as both masculine and feminine, as in God’s saying: indeed Allah’s mercy (raḥma) is close (qarīb) to the virtuous ().

God says this because their disagreements arise out of malice amongst themselves, causing them to deviate from the truth, while also obscuring it and magnifying falsehood. It is inconceivable that falsehood is the actual purpose of God’s creation. There is no rationale for God to create a human world where they oppress one another, extinguish the truth, and promote falsehood, only to then destroy and eternally punish them. The Qur’an refutes this with all of its statements, as does the present verse, emphasizing as it does that God compassionately and mercifully calls people towards their own welfare and happiness. He does not wish harm or injustice for them. However, due to their own oppression and disagreements with the truth, they reject His call, deny His signs, worship others, and cause corruption on earth, thus becoming deserving of His punishment. God says He would not destroy the communities unjustly while their people are reformers, nor would He create them for them to commit injustice and corruption, then destroy them. What emanates from Him is mercy and guidance, while the malice, discord, and oppression stem from people’s own selves, a sentiment that is encapsulated within the context of these verses.

God’s mercy, by which I mean humankinds guidance, is the primary purpose of creation because of its connection to the humankinds ultimate goal, which is happiness and felicity (saʿāda). This is evident in the verse that relates the words of the people of Paradise: All praise belongs to Allah, who guided us to this (). This is similar to considering worship an end in itself due to its connection to felicity and human flourishing, as stated in: I did not create the jinn and the humans except that they may worship Me ().

… and the word of your Lord has been fulfilled: ‘I will surely fill hell with jinn and humans, all together!’ This means that God’s decree has been realized and His promise has been validated by those who wronged themselves and disagreed about the truth after knowledge came to them out of enmity among themselves. And the term ‘word’ (kalima) here refers to: ‘I will surely fill hell …’

This verse is similar in meaning to: Had We wished We would have given every soul its guidance, but My word became due: ‘Surely I will fill hell with all the jinn and humans.’ (). The origin of this statement is what God Almighty said to Iblis, the Accursed, when he stated: ‘By Your might, I will surely pervert them, except Your exclusive servants among them.’ He said, ‘The truth is that—and I speak the truth—I will surely fill hell with you and all of those who follow you’ (). These verses are consistent in their content and clarify one other’s meaning.

Reflecting on the meanings of these verses, we can derive the following conclusions:

Firstly, when God says, Had your Lord wished, He would have made mankind one community, it means uniting them by eliminating differences and disagreements among them. Some say it refers to compelling everyone to submit and removing free will. However, this would have contradicted the principle of moral accountability (taklīf), and hence God did not do it. Some attribute this view to Qatāda. Others say the meaning is that if He willed, He could have gathered everyone together in Paradise, but He wanted to reward you for your deeds, a viewpoint attributed to Abū Muslim. It is evident, based on their context, that the present verses do not support either interpretation.

Secondly, when He says, … but they continue to differ, He means they will persistently disagree concerning the religion, implying a departure from the truth, which is then masked and depicted in various false images resembling the truth. Some interpret this to mean differences in livelihoods and conditions, essentially differences that are non-religious, a viewpoint attributed to al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī. However, the reader will be well aware from our previous discussions that this does not match the context of the preceding verses. Others argue that ‘differ’ here implies that some follow their predecessors blindly and engage in the same falsehoods as they did, an explanation that, like the previous one, is at odds with the context of the verses. This is further elucidated in the verse, Certainly We gave Moses the Book, but differences arose about it … ().

Thirdly, the statement, except those on whom your Lord has mercy is a reference to those whom God has guided among the believers.

Fourthly, the demonstrative pronoun ‘that’ in the phrase, and that is why He created them, refers to mercy, which is the ultimate goal God intended for His creation, so they might find true happiness and felicity. Some have argued that the intended meaning is that God created humankind for discord and disagreement, attributing this opinion to al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī and ʿAtāʾ. However, the reader will note that this reading is rather superficial and weak. Yes, if the pronoun ‘them’ in ‘He created them’ is taken to refer to the rest of humankind after the exception of those on whom your Lord has mercy, then, considering discord as a purpose of the remainder’s creation would be plausible. This would make the verse somewhat parallel in meaning to His statement, Certainly We have created for hell many of the jinn and humans ().

Others have argued that the demonstrative pronoun refers to the entirety of what the discourse indicates about God’s will in creating them, namely that they are predisposed to disagreements and divisions in their knowledge, perceptions, opinions, feelings, and everything that follows, such as their will and choices in practice. This includes matters of religion, faith, obedience, and disobedience. In essence, the primary objective is disagreement and difference in general, whether it is religious or otherwise.

This view has been attributed to Ibn ʿAbbās based on what has been narrated from him, namely that he said: ‘God created them as two groups: One group He has mercy upon and they do not differ, and another group He does not have mercy upon and they do differ.’ Malik b. Anas is reported to have said concerning the meaning of the verse: ‘God created them so that there would be a group in paradise and a group in hellfire.’ However, the foolishness of such explanations should be plain to the discerning reader. Therefore, we will not waste time by dwelling on them further.

Fifthly, the meaning of and the word of your Lord has been fulfilled refers to its realization and its actualization in objective reality.

Examining Narrations

1. In Tafsīr al-Qummī, regarding the verse, Your Lord will indeed recompense everyone fully for their works (), it is said that Imām ʿAlī commented, ‘It pertains to the Day of Resurrection.’
2. In al-Durr al-manthūr, both Ibn Abī Ḥātim and Abū al-Shaykh narrate from al-Ḥasan, who narrated regarding the verse, So go aright, just as you have been commanded—and whoever has turned with you (): ‘When this verse was revealed, he exclaimed, ‘Be firm! Be firm!’ and from then on, he was never seen to laugh.’
3. In Majmaʿ al-bayān, regarding the verse, So go aright, just as you have been commanded: Ibn ʿAbbās remarked, ‘No verse was revealed to the Prophet that was harder or more demanding on him than this one. This is why, when his companions noted, “Your hair has turned grey so quickly, O Messenger of God,” he responded, “The chapters Hūd and al-Wāqiʿa have turned my hair grey!”

Author’s comment: The well-known phrasing of the tradition is, ‘Hūd and its sisters have turned my hair grey’, though the lack of content in al-Wāqiʿa that mirrors the verse, So go aright, just as you have been commanded, suggests it may not have been this verse being specifically referred to in the narration. The theme common to both chapters is their discourse about the Day of Resurrection.

4. In Tafsīr al-Qummī, about the verse, And do not incline toward the wrongdoers (), it is said that Imām ʿAlī commented: ‘To incline means to show them affection, give them sincere advice, and to obey them.”

Author’s comment: This tradition is also narrated Majmaʿ al-bayān, with a disconnected chain from the Infallibles .

5. In Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, it is narrated from ʿUthmān b. ʿĪsā, from a man, from Imām al-Ṣādiq about the verse, And do not incline toward the wrongdoers, lest the Fire should touch you, He said: ‘Indeed, He did not make it an eternal punishment for them, but a deterrent lest the Fire should touch you, so do not incline towards them.’

Author’s comment: Instead of saying ‘the Fire will seize you’, He said it will ‘touch you’, making it a brief touch.

6. In the same source, it is narrated from Jarīr from Imām al-Ṣādiq , about the verse, Maintain the prayer at the two ends of the day (): ‘The two ends refer to dusk and dawn, and during the early hours of the night pertains to the final evening prayer (ʿishāʾ).’
7. In Tahdhīb al-Ahkām, Shaykh al-Ṭūsī narrates via a chain of narrators from Zurāra from Imām al-Bāqir , discussing the five daily prayers, God’s statement, Maintain the prayer at the two ends of the day, and during the early hours of the night: ‘it is the final evening prayer.’

Author’s comment: I would note that the tradition clearly suggests the explanation of the two ends of the day as the period before noon and after, encompassing the five daily prayer times.

8. In Maʿānī al-Akhbār, al-Ṣadūq transmits via his chain of narration from Ibrāhīm b. ʿUmar, who heard from someone, who reported from Imām al-Ṣādiq regarding the words of God Almighty, Indeed good deeds efface misdeeds: ‘The believer’s night prayer (salāt al-muʾmin bi al-layl) erases the sins committed during the day.’

Author’s comment: This tradition is also narrated in al-Kāfī, Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, the Amālī of Shaykh al-Mufīd, and the Amālī of Shaykh al-Ṭūsī.

9. In Majmaʿ al-bayān, al-Ṭabrisī narrates from al-Wāḥidī, with a chain of transmitters going back to Ḥammād b. Salama, who heard from ʿAlī b. Zayd, who reported from Abū ʿUthmān, who said: ‘I was with Salmān under a tree when he took a dry twig from it and shook it until its leaves fell off. He then said, “O Abū ʿUthmān, won’t you ask me why I did that?” I said, “Why did you do that?” He replied, “The Messenger of God , did the same when I was with him under a tree. He took a dry twig, shook it until its leaves fell off, and then asked, “Won’t you ask me, O Salmān, why I did this?” I asked, “Why did you do it?” He said, “When a Muslim performs ablution properly and then prays the five daily prayers, his sins fall from him just as these leaves fell from the twig.” He then recited this verse Maintain the prayer… to the end of it.’

Author’s comment: This narration is also quoted in al-Durr al-manthūr, narrated by al-Ṭayālīsī, Aḥmad, al-Dāramī, Ibn Jarīr, al-Ṭabarānī, al-Baghawī in his Muʿjam, and Ibn Mardawayh, without a complete chain.

10. In Majmaʿ al-bayān, with a chain going back to al-Ḥārith, it is reported from ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib who said: ‘We were with the Messenger of God in the mosque waiting for the prayer when a man stood up and said, “O Messenger of God, I have committed a sin.” The Prophet ignored him. But after the Prophet completed the prayer, the man repeated his statement. The Prophet said, “Didn’t you just pray with us and perform a proper ablution?” The man replied, “Yes.” The Prophet said, “That prayer has atoned for your sin.”’

Author’s comment: This narration is transmitted through many chains from Ibn Masʿūd, Abī Umāma, Muʿādh b. Jabal, Ibn ʿAbbās, Burayda, Wāthila b. al-Asqaʿ, Anas, and others, although the precise details of the story differ from one person to another. It is narrated by al-Tirmidhī and others from Abū al-Yusr, who is the main person in the story.

11. In Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, it is narrated from Abū Hamza al-Thumālī that he said: ‘I heard one of the two of them , say that ʿAlī once asked the people, “Which verse in the Book of God is the most hopeful in your eyes?” Some of them replied, Indeed Allah does not forgive that any partner should be ascribed to Him, but He forgives anything besides that to whomever He wishes. He said, “It is good, but it is not the one I had in mind.” Others said, ‘O My servants who have committed excesses against their own souls, do not despair of the mercy of Allah …’ He said, “It is good, but it is not the one I had in mind.” Yet others mentioned, and those who, when they commit an indecent act or wrong themselves, remember Allah, and plead for forgiveness for their sins. He said, “It is good, but it is not the one I had in mind.”’

The narrator continued: ‘Then the people fell silent. He asked, “What is the matter with you, O assembly of Muslims?” They responded,”’By God, we have nothing else.” He replied, “I heard the Messenger of God say: The most hopeful verse in the Book of God is: Maintain the prayer at the two ends of the day, and during the early hours of the night. He recited the whole verse and said, ‘O ʿAlī, by He who sent me with the truth as a giver of glad tidings and a warner—when one of you goes for his ablution, sins fall from his limbs. When he turns his face and his heart to the prayer, he is as free from sins as he was when his mother gave birth to him. If something occurs between the prayers, it is the same until the five prayers are completed.’

He continued, ‘O ʿAlī, the status of the five daily prayers for my community is like a flowing river at the doorstep of one of you. What would you think if a person had dirt on his body and bathed in that river five times a day? Would there be any dirt left on him? Similar to this, by God, are the five daily prayers are for my community!’”’

Author’s comment: The analogy mentioned at the end of the narration has been reported through various Sunnī sources from several companions, including Abū Hurarra, Anas, Jābir, and Abū Saʿīd al-Khudrī from him .

12. In Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, it is narrated from Ibrāhīm al-Karkhī: ‘I was with Abū ʿAbd Allāh (al-Ṣādiq) when a man from the people of Medina entered. Abū ʿAbd Allāh asked him, Where have you come from?’ The man did not answer, so Abū ʿAbd Allāh said, ‘You have come from here and there. Reflect on what you do in your day. An angel is assigned to you, recording what you do. Do not belittle a sin even if it seems small, for one day it will harm you. Also, do not belittle a good deed; nothing is more eagerly sought after than a good deed. It reaches even the oldest and greatest of sins, erasing them, and making them fall away and leaving you free from them. This is God’s statement, Indeed good deeds efface misdeeds. That is an admonition for the mindful.’
13. In the same source, it is narrated from Sumāʿa b. Mihrān: ‘A man from the people of Jibāl (Western Iran) asked Abū ʿAbd Allāh about someone who acquired wealth through working for the ruler. He donates from it, maintains ties of kinship, and goes on pilgrimage hoping to be forgiven for what he earned, quoting the verse, Indeed good deeds efface misdeeds. Abū ʿAbd Allāh replied, “A sin does not atone for a sin. But a good deed can atone for a sin.”

Then Abū ʿAbd Allāh said, “If lawful and forbidden are mixed together, becoming indistinguishable, and one cannot differentiate between the lawful and the forbidden, then there is no problem.”’

14. In al-Durr al-manthūr, al-Suyūṭī reports from Aḥmad and al-Ṭabarānī, who transmit from Abū Umāma who said, ‘The Messenger of God , stated: “There is no Muslim man who has a prescribed prayer to perform and stands to perform ablution, perfecting it, and then prays, perfecting his prayer, except that God forgives his sins between that prayer and the previous one.”’

Author’s comment: Narrations on this topic are numerous. Whoever wishes to carry out a detailed examination should refer to the compilations of traditions.

15. In al-Durr al-manthūr, it is narrated from al-Ṭabarānī, Abū al-Shaykh, Ibn Mardawayh, al-Daylamī, from Jarīr that: ‘I heard the Messenger of God being asked about the explanation of this verse: Your Lord would never destroy the townships unjustly while their inhabitants were bringing about reform (). The Messenger of God responded: “It means their people treated each other fairly.”’
16. In al-Kāfī, it is transmitted from ʿAbd Allāh b. Sinān, who asked Imām al-Ṣādiq , about the verse: Had your Lord wished, He would have made mankind one community; but they continue to differ, except those on whom your Lord has mercy (). He replied: “They were one community, and then God sent prophets to establish a conclusive proofs for them.”’

Author’s comment: A similar narration has been cited by al-Ṣadūq in Maʿānī al-Akhbār.

17. In Maʿānī al-Akhbār, Shaykh al-Ṣadūq transmits via his chain of narrators from Abū Baṣīr, that he asked Imām al-Ṣādiq about the verse, I did not create the jinn and the humans except that they may worship Me (). He said: ‘God created them to command them to worship.’ And he asked about the verse, but they continue to differ, except those on whom your Lord has mercy—and that is why He created them (). He said: ‘He created them to perform acts that make them deserving of His mercy, so He may have mercy on them.’
18. In Tafsīr al-Qummī, it is narrated from Abū al-Jārūd, from Abū Jaʿfar : ‘But they continue to differ, except those on whom your Lord has mercy—it refers to the family of Muḥammad and their followers. And as for the verse, and that is why He created them, it means that the people of mercy do not differ about religion.’
19. In Tafsīr al-ʿAyyāshī, it is narrated from Yaʿqūb b. Saʿīd, from Imām al-Ṣādiq , about the verse, I did not create the jinn and the humans except that they may worship Me (). He replied: ‘God created them for worship.’ And about the verse, but they continue to differ, except those on whom your Lord has mercy—and that is why He created them, he said: ‘This verse was revealed after the former one.’

Author’s comment: This points to the notion that the second verse, which says except those on whom your Lord has mercy—and that is why He created them, serves as a specific verse that abrogates the general meaning of the previous verse. It has been previously discussed in our treatment of abrogation that, according to the teachings of the Prophet’s Household , the concept of abrogation is broader than what is conventionally understood by scholars of Islamic legal theory. The specific verses, in their formative essence, overrule the meaning of the general verses, as specific contexts and factors have a more direct effect than general stipulations. Understand this well.

---

1. Translator’s note: The adjective qarīb used to qualify the verbal noun raḥma is grammatically masculine, even while raḥma appears grammatically feminine. This substantiates the author’s point that verbal nouns can be treated as both masculine and feminine. ↩︎