Appearance
Who Frowned at the Blind Man
“He frowned and turned away, because the blind man approached him. And how do you know? Maybe he would purify himself, or take admonition, and the admonition would benefit him” ()
These verses narrate an incident where a blind man, identified in traditions as Ibn Umm Maktūm, approaches a gathering seeking knowledge. The Qur’an then reproaches someone for frowning and turning away from him. While many commentators attribute this action to the Prophet Muḥammad (s.a.w.), ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī challenges this view, arguing that the reprimand is directed at someone other than the Prophet. His reasoning is firmly grounded in textual analysis, theological principles, and the Qur’anic portrayal of the Prophet’s impeccable character.
At the outset, ʿAllāmah acknowledges that the majority of Sunni exegetes interpret these verses as addressing the Prophet, claiming that he frowned when interrupted by Ibn Umm Maktūm while conversing with prominent Quraysh leaders. The rationale behind this position is that the Prophet was intent on convincing these influential individuals to embrace Islam, hoping their acceptance would lead to the broader spread of the faith. According to this narrative, Ibn Umm Maktūm’s sudden interruption diverted the Prophet’s attention, prompting an expression of displeasure, albeit momentary.
However, ʿAllāmah argues that this interpretation presents several theological, rational, and textual inconsistencies. To attribute such behavior to the Prophet, who is divinely upheld as the embodiment of moral excellence, contradicts both the spirit of the Qur’anic message and the Prophet’s established character. Sūrah al-Qalam () unequivocally states: “Indeed, you are upon a great moral character.” This declaration affirms that the Prophet possessed unparalleled compassion, humility, and sensitivity—traits that are incompatible with the alleged act of frowning at a sincere seeker of guidance. For ʿAllāmah, the Prophet’s mission was rooted in mercy and justice, particularly for those marginalized by society, such as Ibn Umm Maktūm, a blind and vulnerable individual. Any interpretation that portrays the Prophet as disregarding someone in need of spiritual counsel runs counter to the Qur’an’s depiction of his role as a guide and source of mercy for humanity.
Further, ʿAllāmah points out that the reprimanding tone of the verses, which begins with the impersonal pronoun “he” (ʿabasa—he frowned), is not typical of Qur’anic rebukes addressed to the Prophet. Elsewhere in the Qur’an, when God gently reproaches the Prophet, the tone is markedly direct and personal, such as in Sūrah al-Tawbah (): “May God pardon you! Why did you grant them permission?” or Sūrah al-Anfal (): “It is not for a prophet to take captives…” These verses maintain an intimate and respectful tone befitting the Prophet’s elevated status. By contrast, the impersonal and indirect opening of Sūrah ‘Abasa suggests that the reproach is aimed at someone other than the Prophet, reinforcing ʿAllāmah’s argument.
Moreover, ʿAllāmah highlights the Qur’an’s unwavering stance on human equality and social justice, principles the Prophet embodied throughout his life. Islam rejects favoritism based on social status, wealth, or influence, emphasizing instead the spiritual worth of individuals. The Qur’an declares: “Indeed, the most noble of you before God is the most God-conscious” (). The Prophet, as the epitome of Qur’anic ethics, was particularly known for uplifting the weak, the poor, and the marginalized, never showing partiality toward the elite at their expense. To attribute the act of frowning to him would undermine this core Qur’anic value and misrepresent his mission. Historical accounts of the Prophet’s interactions further affirm his compassion toward Ibn Umm Maktūm. On multiple occasions, the Prophet appointed him as the mu’adhdhin (caller to prayer) and entrusted him with leadership responsibilities, illustrating his deep respect for the blind man’s faith and character.
To further strengthen his argument, ʿAllāmah addresses some Shia narrations that identify the one who frowned as a member of the Prophet’s gathering, possibly from the Umayyad clan. According to these reports, this individual displayed disdain toward Ibn Umm Maktūm due to his social standing, prompting the Qur’an’s reprimand. ʿAllāmah finds this interpretation more consistent with the ethical and theological framework of the Qur’an. It avoids implicating the Prophet in behavior unbefitting his character while preserving the chapter’s moral lesson: that spiritual sincerity outweighs social status or influence.
Some have argued that the Prophet’s action (of frowning) was not sinful, as God had not yet prohibited it prior to the revelation of the verses. However, this view is challenged by ʿAllāmah on three key grounds: first, this is not true and moreover, implicit Qurʾanic guidance had already discouraged such behavior; second, the act in question contravenes the rule of reason, which inherently guides moral conduct; and third, it is incompatible with the Prophet’s exalted character, described in the verse, “And indeed you possess a great character” (). This depiction of khuluq (character, manners, disposition) underlines a deeply ingrained and unchanging moral disposition, making such behavior inconceivable for the Prophet.
Another important element in ʿAllāmah’s analysis is the Qur’an’s rhetorical and moral objective. The chapter serves as a powerful reminder to prioritize those who seek spiritual purification and guidance, regardless of their worldly status. Ibn Umm Maktūm’s blindness symbolizes his vulnerability, yet his earnest desire for knowledge and self-purification elevates his rank in God’s sight. In contrast, the Quraysh leaders, despite their power and influence, remain spiritually unresponsive. The verses implicitly critique societal tendencies to favor the wealthy and influential while neglecting those seen as insignificant. This critique aligns perfectly with the Prophet’s mission to dismantle such hierarchies and establish a community where moral and spiritual worth reign supreme.
ʿAllāmah further argues that attributing such behavior to the Prophet would undermine the Qur’an’s intended lesson. If the reprimand were directed at the Prophet, it might inadvertently imply that such behavior is excusable or minor. However, by addressing the act impersonally, the Qur’an universalizes the lesson, making it a timeless ethical principle applicable to all believers. This approach emphasizes the importance of recognizing and honoring those who seek truth, regardless of their status, and warns against the arrogance or neglect that often accompanies worldly preoccupations.
In conclusion, ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī’s interpretation of Sūrah ‘Abasa offers a coherent and consistent understanding of the verses, rooted in the Qur’an’s portrayal of the Prophet’s character and the ethical principles it upholds. By rejecting the notion that the Prophet frowned at Ibn Umm Maktūm, ʿAllāmah preserves the integrity of the Prophet’s moral excellence and highlights the Qur’an’s universal message of justice, humility, and spiritual equality. The reprimand serves as a reminder for all believers to honor the sincere seekers of guidance, irrespective of their worldly circumstances, and to prioritize spiritual growth over superficial distinctions. Through this analysis, ʿAllāmah not only defends the Prophet’s dignity but also reveals the profound moral and social teachings embedded in these verses, ensuring their relevance for all generations.
Allāmah’s reasoning begins with a meticulous examination of the verse’s structure, focusing particularly on the shifts in grammatical person and tone, which he identifies as crucial to grasping the severity of the reproval. The transition from the third person in “He frowned and turned away” () to the second person in “But for the one who is self-sufficient, you attend him” () emphasizes the escalating nature of the criticism. Allāmah argues that this shift reflects God’s profound dissatisfaction, expressed both implicitly and explicitly. Based on this analysis, he concludes that the reprimand cannot be directed at the Holy Prophet. ↩︎
This verse was revealed prior to the chapter currently under discussion. It is found in Sūrah Nūn, the second chapter of the Qurʾan to be revealed, following Chapter 96 (Iqraʾ bismi rabbika), as unanimously agreed upon by narrations regarding the chronological order of revelation. How could God unreservedly venerate the Prophet’s morality at the very outset of his mission, only to later contradict this by reprimanding him for behavior unbecoming of his noble character—such as attending to the affluent despite their disbelief and disregarding the poor despite their faith and desire for guidance? Such a retreat would be incongruous with the Qurʾanic portrayal of the Prophet’s exalted character. ↩︎
The severe tone of reprimand in verses , particularly in verses —“But as for someone who is self-sufficient you attend him”—is directed at those who possess wealth and affluence, which grant them societal prominence and a sense of superiority. This self-sufficiency often breeds arrogance, causing them to resist submission to the truth. The Qurʾan highlights this psychological dynamic in another verse: “Indeed man becomes rebellious, when he considers himself without need” (), highlighting the spiritual peril of affluence when it leads to pride and a rejection of divine guidance. ↩︎
Majmaʿ al-bayān, from Imām al-Ṣādiq (a.s.). ↩︎
The verses present a detailed account explaining why the person frowned and turned away, and why that is blameworthy. In short, the verses are saying: “You show concern and attend to those who are too affluent and arrogant to accept the truth, while you are not responsible if they do not purify themselves. At the same time, you disregard and turn away from those who strive to purify themselves while they are fearful (of their Lord).” ↩︎