Al-Humazah

See ayat 9 for tafseer.

See ayat 9 for tafseer.

See ayat 9 for tafseer.

See ayat 9 for tafseer.

See ayat 9 for tafseer.

See ayat 9 for tafseer.

See ayat 9 for tafseer.

See ayat 9 for tafseer.

A group of exegetes has stated that the verses of this sūrah were revealed concerning al‑Walīd ibn al‑Mughīrah, who would backbite the Messenger of God PBUH & His Pure Progeny in his absence and openly vilify and ridicule him in his presence. Other exegetes have understood the verses to refer to leading figures of polytheism and other well‑known enemies of Islam, such as al‑Akhnas ibn Sharīq, Umayyah ibn Khalaf, and ʿĀṣ ibn Wāʾil. However, even if these specific occasions of revelation are accepted, the generality of the meaning of the verses is not restricted thereby; rather, they encompass all those who possess the same characteristics.

This sūrah begins with a piercing and severe warning, declaring: “Woe to every backbiter and slanderer” (وَيْلٌ لِّكُلِّ هُمَزَةٍ لُّمَزَةٍ). These are people who, through sharp words, gestures of the hands and feet, and signals of the eyes and eyebrows, mock others both behind their backs and to their faces, engage in fault‑finding and backbiting, or make them targets of ridicule, taunts, and accusations. The terms “هُمَزَة” and “لُمَزَة” are both intensive forms. (Explanatory note: intensive forms are not limited to the well‑known six patterns; they also occur in other patterns, including this one, for which parallels exist in Arabic usage, such as “ضُحَكَة”, meaning one who laughs excessively.) The root “هَمْز” originally signifies “to break.” Since those who backbite and slander break the dignity and personality of others, the term “هُمَزَة” is applied to them. The term “لُمَزَة”, derived from “لَمْز” (on the pattern of ramz), originally denotes fault‑finding and backbiting. Exegetes have proposed many possibilities regarding whether these two terms carry the same meaning or whether there is a distinction between them. Some have held that they are synonymous and that their pairing serves to emphasize the condemnation. Others have said that “هُمَزَة” refers to one who backbites, while “لُمَزَة” refers to one who openly finds fault. Some have interpreted “هُمَزَة” as referring to those who use gestures of the hands or head to demean others, and “لُمَزَة” as those who do so verbally. Others have suggested that the former refers to face‑to‑face fault‑finding and the latter to fault‑finding behind one’s back, or that the first indicates open mockery while the second refers to concealed mockery through subtle gestures of the eyes and eyebrows. It has also been said that both terms refer to those who habitually label people with offensive and hurtful nicknames. Finally, a report from Ibn ʿAbbās states that he interpreted both terms as referring to: “هُمُ الْمَشَّاؤُونَ بِالنَّمِيمَةِ، الْمُفَرِّقُونَ بَيْنَ الْأَحِبَّةِ، النَّاعِتُونَ لِلنَّاسِ بِالْعَيْبِ”, that is, those who spread malicious gossip, sow discord between loved ones, and search out people’s faults. This understanding appears to be derived from a Prophetic report in which the Messenger of God PBUH & His Pure Progeny said: “أَلَا أُنَبِّئُكُمْ بِشِرَارِكُمْ؟ … الْمَشَّاؤُونَ بِالنَّمِيمَةِ، الْمُفَرِّقُونَ بَيْنَ الْأَحِبَّةِ، الْبَاغُونَ لِلْبُرَآءِ الْمَعَايِبَ”—“Shall I inform you of the worst among you? … Those who engage excessively in gossip, separate loved ones, and seek out faults in the innocent.” Taken together, the statements of lexicographers indicate that both terms convey a broad and comprehensive meaning that includes all forms of fault‑finding, backbiting, mockery, taunting, slander, ridicule through gestures or speech, malicious gossip, and abusive language. In any case, the expression “وَيْل” with regard to this group constitutes an extremely severe threat. Qur’anic verses, as a rule, criticize and condemn such individuals with a harshness rarely seen for other sins. For example, concerning hypocrites who mocked the believers, the Qur’an declares: اسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ أَوْ لَا تَسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ إِن تَسْتَغْفِرْ لَهُمْ سَبْعِينَ مَرَّةً فَلَن يَغْفِرَ اللَّهُ لَهُمْ—even if forgiveness were sought for them seventy times, God would not forgive them (al‑Tawbah 80). A similar meaning appears regarding those hypocrites who ridiculed the Messenger of God PBUH & His Pure Progeny in Sūrat al‑Munāfiqūn, verse 5. In principle, Islam accords the utmost respect to human dignity and status, and any act that leads to humiliation or degradation of others is regarded as a grave sin. A hadith from the Messenger of God PBUH & His Pure Progeny states: “أَذَلُّ النَّاسِ مَنْ أَهَانَ النَّاسَ”—the most contemptible of people is one who humiliates others. Afterward, the sūrah points to the root of this reprehensible behavior—often arising from arrogance generated by wealth—and states: “The one who amasses wealth and counts it repeatedly” (الَّذِي جَمَعَ مَالًا وَعَدَّدَهُ). Such a person is so attached to wealth that he continually counts it, delights in the shine of coins, and treats each unit of currency as an idol. He confines both his own worth and the worth of others to material possessions. It is therefore natural that such a misguided and deluded individual mocks the poor and the believers. The term “عَدَّدَهُ” derives from “عَدّ”, meaning to count or enumerate. Some have suggested a derivation from “عُدَّة”, implying preparing or storing wealth for future hardships, while others have interpreted it as hoarding and safeguarding. The first meaning, however, is the most appropriate. In essence, this verse addresses those who view wealth not as a means but as an ultimate goal, accumulating it without restriction, whether through lawful or unlawful means, honorable or ignoble methods, and considering it the sole marker of dignity and status. They do not seek wealth to meet legitimate needs; hence, the more wealth they accumulate, the more their greed intensifies. Wealth acquired within reasonable limits and lawful means is not blameworthy; indeed, the Qur’an sometimes refers to it as “فضل الله”, as in وَابْتَغُوا مِن فَضْلِ اللَّهِ (al‑Jumuʿah 10), and elsewhere describes it as good in the context of bequest. Such wealth does not lead to tyranny, arrogance, or mockery. By contrast, wealth that becomes an object of worship and an ultimate aim—driving its possessor to arrogance like Qārūn—is disgrace, humiliation, and calamity, leading to distance from God and eternal punishment. Excessive accumulation of wealth is rarely possible without moral corruption. Hence, Imam ʿAlī b. Mūsā al‑Riḍā (peace be upon him) stated: “لَا يَجْتَمِعُ الْمَالُ إِلَّا بِخَمْسِ خِصَالٍ: بُخْلٍ شَدِيدٍ، وَأَمَلٍ طَوِيلٍ، وَحِرْصٍ غَالِبٍ، وَقَطِيعَةِ رَحِمٍ، وَإِيثَارِ الدُّنْيَا عَلَى الْآخِرَةِ”—wealth does not accumulate except through five traits: intense miserliness, prolonged hopes, dominant greed, severing of kinship ties, and preferring this world over the Hereafter. The next verse adds: “He imagines that his wealth will make him immortal” (يَحْسَبُ أَنَّ مَالَهُ أَخْلَدَهُ). The use of the past tense “أَخْلَدَهُ” conveys the delusion that wealth has already rendered him eternal—immune to death, illness, and worldly calamities—since he views wealth as the ultimate solver of all problems. How utterly false this illusion is. The immense wealth of Qārūn, whose storehouse keys could barely be carried by strong men, could not delay his death for a moment; God caused him and his treasures to be swallowed by the earth in an instant: فَخَسَفْنَا بِهِ وَبِدَارِهِ الْأَرْضَ (al‑Qaṣaṣ 81). Likewise, the riches of the Pharaohs, described as gardens, springs, crops, and splendid dwellings (al‑Dukhān 25–27), were inherited by others in a single moment (al‑Dukhān 28). When the veils are lifted on the Day of Resurrection, such people will cry out: مَا أَغْنَى عَنِّي مَالِيَهْ • هَلَكَ عَنِّي سُلْطَانِيَهْ (al‑Ḥāqqah 28–29). Human beings naturally recoil from annihilation and yearn for permanence, a tendency that itself points toward the reality of the Hereafter. Yet the arrogant, self‑centered, world‑obsessed person seeks permanence in the very things that ensure his destruction, mistaking wealth and status—often enemies of true survival—for means of immortality. The Qur’an responds decisively: كَلَّا—No indeed. Such people will be cast with humiliation into the crushing fire (لَيُنبَذَنَّ فِي الْحُطَمَةِ). The sūrah then explains: “And what will make you know what the crushing fire is?” (وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا الْحُطَمَةُ). It is “the fire of God, kindled” (نَارُ اللَّهِ الْمُوقَدَةُ), “which reaches the hearts” (الَّتِي تَطَّلِعُ عَلَى الْأَفْئِدَةِ). The verb “لَيُنبَذَنَّ”, from “نَبَذَ”, denotes casting something away in contempt and worthlessness. Thus, God will hurl these arrogant and self‑exalting individuals into Hell as despicable and valueless beings. “الحُطَمَة”, an intensive form from “حَطَمَ”, indicates severe crushing and breaking. Some narrations suggest that it refers not to all of Hell, but to its most intensely burning region. The notion of fire that crushes rather than merely burns may have seemed difficult to comprehend in earlier times, but today the destructive shockwaves of powerful explosions—capable of shattering steel structures—are well understood. The expression “نَارُ اللَّهِ” signifies the fire’s majesty, while “الْمُوقَدَةُ” indicates its perpetual kindling. Remarkably, unlike worldly fire that burns from the outside inward, this fire ignites first in the hearts, consuming the inner being before manifesting outwardly. This is fitting, since their hearts were the centers of disbelief, arrogance, and love of wealth, and divine justice demands recompense in accordance with their deeds. The final verse states that this fire will be closed over them (إِنَّهَا عَلَيْهِم مُّؤْصَدَةٌ). The term “مُّؤْصَدَةٌ”, from “إيصاد”, means firmly shut and sealed, just as strong rooms carved into mountains were called “وَصِيد”. Just as they secured their wealth in sealed chests, they will be confined in a sealed punishment from which there is no escape. Finally, it adds: “In extended pillars” (فِي عَمَدٍ مُّمَدَّدَةٍ). Some exegetes interpret this as massive iron bars sealing the gates of Hell, others as instruments of restraint akin to shackles, and some as columns of blazing flames overwhelming them. Among these interpretations, the first is the most fitting, though others remain possible depending on whether the phrase describes the state of Hell itself or that of its inhabitants.

Considering oneself superior is a grave affliction that serves as the root and foundation of many sins. Heedlessness of God, ingratitude for blessings, immersion in luxury and lust, the humiliation and degradation of others, and mocking the believers are all ominous and destructive consequences of this reprehensible trait. When small‑minded individuals attain a position of authority or reach some favorable station, they become afflicted with such arrogance and pride that they cease to recognize any value or worth in others. This very attitude leads to their alienation from society and society’s estrangement from them. They become immersed in a world of their own imaginings, begin to consider themselves a distinct and superior category of being, and may even count themselves among those specially favored by God. As a result, the dignity, honor, and even the lives of others come to appear worthless in their eyes. They engage in همز and لمز, that is, fault‑finding and disparagement of others, believing that in doing so they enhance their own stature and greatness. It is noteworthy that in some narrations such individuals have been likened to scorpions. Although a scorpion’s sting is not motivated by malice, the stinging of such people is driven by spite and rancor. In one hadith it is reported that the Messenger of God PBUH & His Pure Progeny said: “On the night of ascension, I saw a group of people in Hell whose sides were being cut off and fed to them. I asked Gabriel who they were, and he replied: ‘هٰؤلاء الهمّازون من أمتك، اللمّازون’, that is, ‘These are the fault‑finders and mockers from among your community.’” As previously mentioned, a more detailed discussion of this subject has been presented under the verses of Sūrat al‑Ḥujurāt.

With respect to wealth and material possessions, widely divergent attitudes exist, often marked by extremes of excess and neglect. Some people attribute such overwhelming importance to wealth that they regard it as the solution to all problems. So convinced are adherents of this view that they have eloquently expressed it in poetry. One Arab poet, for example, states that even if eloquence like that of Sahbān, calligraphy like Ibn Muqlah, wisdom like Luqmān, and asceticism like Ibrāhīm b. Adham were all combined in a person who nonetheless lacked wealth, such a person would not be valued even as much as a single dirham. It is therefore unsurprising that proponents of this view remain constantly engaged in accumulating wealth, never resting even momentarily, recognizing no boundaries between lawful and unlawful, and treating all means of acquisition as equal. At the opposite extreme is a group that assigns almost no value at all to wealth. They glorify poverty and deprivation and even consider material possessions an obstacle to piety and nearness to God. However, in contrast to both of these excessive views, the Qur’an and Islamic traditions present a balanced position: wealth is good, but only under specific conditions. The first condition is that wealth must be a means rather than an end. The second is that wealth should not enslave a person; rather, the person must remain its master. The third condition is that wealth be acquired through lawful means and expended for the pleasure of God. Affection for such wealth is not worldliness; rather, it is itself evidence of concern for the Hereafter. Accordingly, a narration from Imam Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq explains that when gold and silver were condemned, the intent was not their physical form, but what they can become: “ليست حيث تذهب إليه؛ إنما الذهب الذي ذهب بالدين، والفضة التي أفاضت الكفر”, meaning that blameworthy “gold” is that which destroys religion, and blameworthy “silver” is that which becomes the source of disbelief. In another narration, Imam ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib states that intoxication takes four forms: intoxication by drink, intoxication by wealth, intoxication by sleep, and intoxication by power. Likewise, a man once asked Imam Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq for exhortation, and the Imam replied that if belief in divine reward is genuine, then hoarding wealth is senseless, and if confidence in divine compensation is true, then miserliness has no justification. Many people accumulate wealth throughout their lives only to leave it behind for others. They bear the burden of accountability, while others reap the benefit. For this reason, when asked who would suffer the greatest regret, Imam ʿAlī replied that it would be the person who sees his wealth weighed in another’s scale of deeds—he himself entering Hell because of it, while his heir enters Paradise through its use. Similarly, in interpreting the verse كذلك يريهم الله أعمالهم حسرات عليهم, the Imam explained that it refers to one who hoards wealth and refuses to spend it in obedience to God, only to leave it to someone who may expend it either in righteousness or in disobedience—incurring regret in either scenario. Ultimately, wealth may become either a dangerous idol or a means to great felicity. This discussion concludes with a profound narration attributed to Ibn ʿAbbās, who states that when the first dirham and dīnār were minted, Iblīs gazed upon them, embraced them, and exclaimed that they were the delight of his eyes and the fruit of his heart, declaring that it sufficed for him if human beings loved them—even if they did not worship physical idols—because attachment to wealth surpasses all idol‑worship. O God, protect us from enslavement to wealth, anger, worldly desire, and lust. Our Lord, liberate us from the dominion of Satan and the servitude of gold and silver. O God, the fire of Hell is devastating, and salvation from it is impossible without Your grace; therefore, encompass us in Your mercy. Āmīn, O Lord of all the worlds.