Al-Qalam

See ayat 7 for tafseer.

See ayat 7 for tafseer.

See ayat 7 for tafseer.

See ayat 7 for tafseer.

See ayat 7 for tafseer.

See ayat 7 for tafseer.

This is the only sūrah that begins with the disjointed letter “ن”. It states: (ن). We have previously discussed the disjointed letters (ḥurūf al‑muqaṭṭaʿāt) in detail—particularly in connection with Sūrah al‑Baqarah, Āl ʿImrān, and al‑Aʿrāf (Tafsīr Namūnah, vols. 1, 2, 6). What needs to be mentioned here is that some have interpreted “ن” as an abbreviation of the word al‑Raḥmān, while others have understood it as meaning “tablet” or “inkwell,” or even as the name of a river in Paradise. However, none of these interpretations possess clear textual evidence or supporting indications. Therefore, the interpretation of this disjointed letter does not differ from that of other similar letters already discussed. It then proceeds, swearing by two important elements connected with human life: “By the pen and what they inscribe” (وَالْقَلَمِ وَمَا يَسْطُرُونَ). What a remarkable oath! At first glance, the object of the oath appears to be something small and simple: a reed pen or something comparable, some dark fluid, and lines written upon an ordinary page. Yet, in reality, it is the very source of all human civilizations, the advancement of sciences, the awakening of thought, the formation of religions, and the guidance and awareness of humankind. It is that which divides human life into two great eras: the “historical period” and the “pre‑historical period.” Human history properly begins when writing was invented and human beings became capable of recording the events of their lives. In other words, the time when humans took the pen in hand and left behind what “they inscribe.” The greatness of this oath becomes even clearer when we consider that, at the time of revelation, literacy was extremely rare. Even in Mecca, the religious, political, and economic center of Ḥijāz, the number of literate individuals did not exceed twenty. Thus, swearing by the pen in such an environment carries profound significance. It is noteworthy that in the earliest revealed verses—those revealed in the Cave of Ḥirāʾ—the elevated status of the pen is also emphasized: اقْرَأْ بِاسْمِ رَبِّكَ الَّذِي خَلَقَ ... عَلَّمَ بِالْقَلَمِ “Recite in the name of your Lord who created … who taught by the pen” (al‑ʿAlaq, 1–5). This is especially striking because these words were conveyed by one who himself had not formally learned, had not attended any school, and had not written anything. This itself is a clear proof that the message is nothing other than divine revelation. Some exegetes have interpreted “pen” here as the pen with which the angels write revelation or record human deeds. However, the verse clearly possesses a broader meaning, and such interpretations merely point to specific instances within its scope. Likewise, “what they inscribe” encompasses all writing that contributes to human moral, intellectual, and practical development, not only revelation or records of deeds. The verse then presents the conclusion of this oath: “By the grace of your Lord, you are not mad” (مَا أَنتَ بِنِعْمَةِ رَبِّكَ بِمَجْنُونٍ). Those who accuse you of madness are blind to the divine favors bestowed upon you: intellect, insight, truthfulness, knowledge, prophethood, and infallibility. It is they who are truly misguided, for they attribute madness to the very embodiment of wisdom and guidance. It then further states: “Indeed, for you is an unfailing reward” (وَإِنَّ لَكَ لَأَجْرًا غَيْرَ مَمْنُونٍ). Such a reward is deserved because of the Prophet’s steadfastness in the face of false accusations, his enduring concern for the guidance of others, and his tireless effort in this cause. The term “ghayr mamnūn” signifies an unending reward, one that will never be cut off. Thereafter, the verse praises another essential quality of the Prophet: “And indeed, you are upon an عظیم character” (وَإِنَّكَ لَعَلى خُلُقٍ عَظِيمٍ). This refers to an unparalleled moral excellence—limitless compassion, sincerity, patience, forbearance, and resilience. He invites others to worship God while himself excelling in worship; he forbids wrongdoing while abstaining from it personally; he endures harm from others yet responds with counsel and prayer. His life exemplifies the highest moral ideals. The term “khuluq” refers to deeply rooted traits inseparable from a person’s nature. Although some commentators have highlighted specific aspects—such as patience, generosity, wisdom, gentleness, forgiveness, and striving in God’s path—these represent only a portion of the Prophet’s comprehensive moral perfection. Others have interpreted “khuluq ʿaẓīm” as referring to the Qurʾān or Islam itself, which may be understood as a particular instance of this broader meaning. In any case, this عظیم character serves as a decisive refutation of all false accusations against the Prophet. It is then said: “You shall see, and they shall see” (فَسَتُبْصِرُ وَيُبْصِرُونَ), “which of you is afflicted” (بِأَيِّكُمُ الْمَفْتُونُ). That is, time will reveal the truth: who is rightly guided and who is astray. As people gradually become acquainted with the teachings of the Prophet and witness the spread and success of his mission, they will recognize that these teachings are divine and that he is endowed with profound wisdom. Ultimately, the truth will become even more manifest in the Hereafter. Finally, it is emphasized: “Indeed, your Lord knows best who has strayed from His path, and He knows best those who are guided” (إِنَّ رَبَّكَ هُوَ أَعْلَمُ…). Since the path belongs to God, He knows best who follows it and who deviates from it. This provides reassurance to the Prophet that he is firmly upon the path of guidance, while his opponents are upon misguidance. A narration reports that when Quraysh objected to the Prophet’s preference for ʿAlī, accusing him of being captivated by him, these verses were revealed, affirming that the Prophet was neither misguided nor enamored in the manner they alleged (Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, vol. 10, p. 334).

The most important stage in the life of the human species — as has been alluded to previously — was the emergence of writing and the movement of the pen across paper or stone. This was precisely the moment that separated the historical era from the prehistoric. The movement of the pen's nib across the surface of a page records the destiny of humanity — hence the success and failure of human societies is bound to the tip of the pen. The pen is the guardian of sciences and knowledge, the protector of the thoughts of thinkers, the link of intellectual continuity among scholars, and a bridge connecting the past and present of the human species — to the extent that even the connection between heaven and earth has been effected through the tablet and the pen. The pen joins those human beings who live separated from one another in time and space — as though all the thinkers of humanity throughout all of history and across the entire face of the earth could be gathered and seen in one great library. The pen is humanity's confidant and the treasurer of sciences; it gathers the experiences of ages and generations. If the Quran swears an oath by it, the reason is precisely this — for an oath is always sworn by something of very great worth and value. "Qalam" — the pen — is an instrument for "mā yasṭurūna" — the writings — and the Quran has sworn by both: by the instrument and by the product of the instrument. In certain narrations it is stated: "inna awwala mā khalaqa Allāhu al-qalam" — "The first thing God created was the pen." This hadith has been transmitted by Shia scholars on the authority of Imam al-Ṣādiq, peace be upon him. [Reference: Nūr al-Thaqalayn, vol. 5, p. 379, hadith 9.] It also appears in Sunni works as a well-known report. [Reference: Tafsīr Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, vol. 30, p. 78.] In another hadith it is stated: "awwalu mā khalaqa ta'ālā jawharatun" — "The first thing God Almighty created was a gem." [Reference: Tafsīr Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, vol. 30, p. 78.] And in certain reports it is also stated: "inna awwala mā khalaqa Allāhu al-'aql" — "The first thing God created was the intellect." [Reference: Tafsīr Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, vol. 30, p. 78.] Attending to the quality of connection that exists among "gem," "pen," and intellect clarifies the meaning of all three being the first. In the hadith transmitted above from Imam al-Ṣādiq, peace be upon him, it is stated that after God created the pen He commanded it: "Write!" — and it wrote all that was and all that would be until the Day of Resurrection. Although in this narration "pen" alludes to the Pen of Destiny and divine decree, whatever the case may be, it makes clear the influence and imprint of the pen upon the destiny and fate of the human being. The leaders of Islam in numerous hadith used to impress upon their companions not to rely upon their memories alone, but to commit Islamic hadith and divine sciences to writing and leave them as a bequest for future generations. [Reference: Wasā'il al-Shī'a, vol. 18, p. 56, hadith 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20.] Some scholars have stated: "al-bayānu bayānāni: bayānu al-lisāni wa-bayānu al-banāni, wa-bayānu al-lisāni tadrusuhu al-a'wāmu, wa-bayānu al-aqlāmi bāqin 'alā marri al-ayyāmi" — "Expression is of two kinds: the expression of the tongue and the expression of the pen. The expression of the tongue grows old and is effaced with the passage of time and years, but the expression of pens endures until eternity." [Reference: Tafsīr Majma' al-Bayān, vol. 10, p. 332.] It has also been said: "inna qiwāma umūri al-dīni wa-al-dunyā bi-shay'ayni: al-qalamu wa-al-sayfu, wa-al-sayfu taḥta al-qalam" — "The foundation of the affairs of religion and this world rests upon two things: the pen and the sword — and the sword stands under the shadow of the pen." [Reference: Majma' al-Bayān, vol. 10, p. 332.] Some Arab poets have given verse to this meaning as follows: كَذَا قَضَى اللهُ لِلأَقلَامِ مُذ بُرِيَت / أَنَّ السُّيُوفَ لَهَا مُذ أُرهِفَت خَدَمُ — "Thus has God decreed for pens, from the very day they were sharpened — that keen-edged swords, from the day they were whetted, are their servants." [This expression is a subtle allusion to the sharpening of the pen by a knife, and to the fact that swords have been in the pen's service since their very inception.] [Reference: Majma' al-Bayān, vol. 10, p. 332.] Another poet, citing the verses under consideration, states: إِذَا أَقسَمَ الأَبطَالُ يَوماً بِسُيُوفِهِم / وَعَدُّوهُ مِمَّا يَجلِبُ المَجدَ وَالكَرَمْ كَفَى قَلَمَ الكُتَّابِ فَخراً وَرِفعَةً / مَدَى الدَّهرِ أَنَّ اللهَ أَقسَمَ بِالقَلَمْ — "When brave warriors one day swear by their swords and count them among the causes of glory and nobility — then for the pens of writers, throughout all the ages of time, this honour and distinction alone suffices: that God swore an oath by the pen — and not by the sword." [Reference: Rūḥ al-Bayān, vol. 10, p. 102.] And truly this is so — for military victories, if not guaranteed by civilisation and culture, will never be lasting. The Mongols achieved a tremendous victory in the history of Iran, but since they were a people without civilisation, they were quickly absorbed into the civilisation of Islam and Iran and changed their direction entirely. Although this discussion is very broad, so as not to depart from the path of exegesis, the discussion is concluded with a most meaningful hadith from the Prophet of Islam, peace be upon him and his household: "ثَلَاثٌ تَخرِقُ الحُجُبَ وَتَنتَهِي إِلَى مَا بَينَ يَدَي اللهِ: صَرِيرُ أَقلَامِ العُلَمَاءِ، وَوَطءُ أَقدَامِ المُجَاهِدِينَ، وَصَوتُ مَغَازِلِ المُحصَنَاتِ" — "Three sounds are such as to pierce through the veils and reach before the majestic presence of God: the scratching of scholars' pens as they write, the sound of the feet of the mujāhidīn on the field of jihād, and the sound of the spinning wheels of chaste women." [Reference: al-Shihāb fī al-Ḥikam wa-al-Ādāb, p. 20.] All that has been set forth, of course, pertains to those pens that move upon the path of truth, justice, and the straight way — but poisoned, toxic, and misleading pens constitute the greatest calamity and most grave danger for human societies.

The success of the Prophet of Islam (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam), although supported by divine assistance, was also grounded in certain outward factors, among which the most important was his moral charisma. The noble human qualities and exalted virtues that were combined in him were such that they influenced even the most hardened enemies, inclined them toward submission, and created intense love and devotion among his followers. Indeed, if his ethical excellence were described as a miracle, this would not be an exaggeration. A striking example of this ethical miracle was manifested during the Conquest of Mecca, when the hostile and criminal polytheists of Mecca—who had for years expended all their strength in opposition to Islam and the Prophet—fell into the hands of the Muslims. Contrary to all expectations of both friends and foes, the Prophet issued a general amnesty, forgiving all their crimes. This act alone became the cause for them to enter Islam “in multitudes” (يدخلون في دين الله أفواجا). Numerous incidents concerning the Prophet’s moral excellence, forgiveness, compassion, altruism, piety, and restraint have been recorded in works of exegesis and history. To detail them all would take us beyond the scope of this discussion. However, it suffices to note a narration reported from Imam Ḥusayn ibn ʿAlī (ʿalayhimā al-salām), who said: “I asked my father, Amīr al‑Muʾminīn ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al-salām), about the characteristics and conduct of the Prophet, and he answered in detail. Among what he said was: ‘The conduct of the Prophet with those who sat in his company was such that he was cheerful, smiling, gentle, and kind. He was never harsh, hard‑hearted, quarrelsome, foul‑mouthed, fault‑finding, or inclined toward praise. No one despaired of him, and anyone who came to his door never departed disappointed. He kept himself free from three things: disputation in speech, excessive talk, and interference in matters that did not concern him. Similarly, with regard to people, he avoided three things: he did not reproach anyone, he did not rebuke anyone, and he did not seek out the hidden faults of others. He spoke only on matters in which there was hope of reward. When he spoke, those who listened became silent and attentive, not even moving from their places. When he became silent, they spoke, but did not argue in his presence. When an unfamiliar or inexperienced person spoke harshly or made a request, he responded with patience, and would say to his companions: when you see someone in need, help him. He never interrupted anyone’s speech until it concluded.’” (Maʿānī al‑Akhbār, p. 83, summarized). If such noble character and virtuous traits had not been present, that backward and unrefined society would never have embraced Islam; rather, they would have dispersed, as indicated by “لانفضوا من حولك.” It would indeed be desirable if such Islamic اخلاق were revived today, such that every Muslim reflected, even in part, the character and conduct of the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam). There are numerous Islamic traditions on this subject—both concerning the Prophet himself and the obligations of all Muslims. A few of them are as follows: 1. The Prophet said: «انما بعثت لاتمم مکارم الاخلاق» “I have been sent only to perfect noble character.” (Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, vol. 10, p. 332). 2. He also said: «انما المؤمن لیدرک بحسن خلقہ درجة قائم اللیل و صائم النہار» “A believer attains, through good character, the rank of one who stands in prayer at night and fasts during the day.” (Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, vol. 10, p. 332). 3. It is also reported: «ما من شيء اثقل في الميزان من خلق حسن» “Nothing will be heavier on the scale (of deeds) on the Day of Judgment than good character.” (Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, vol. 10, p. 333). 4. He further said: «احبكم الى الله احسنكم اخلاقا…» “The most beloved among you to God are those with the best character; those who are gentle and affectionate, who form bonds with others and are loved by them. The most disliked are those who spread slander, cause division among brethren, and seek out the faults of the innocent.” (Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, vol. 10, p. 410). 5. Another narration states: «اکثر ما يدخل الناس الجنة تقوى الله و حسن الخلق» “That which most often admits people into Paradise is God‑consciousness and good character.” (Safīnat al‑Biḥār, vol. 1, p. 410; also reported in Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿa, vol. 8, p. 504; Tafsīr al‑Qurṭubī, vol. 10, p. 6707). 6. Imam al‑Bāqir (ʿalayhi al-salām) said: «ان اکمل المؤمنين ايمانا احسنهم خلقا» “The most perfect believer in faith is the one with the best character.” (Rūḥ al‑Bayān, vol. 10, p. 108). 7. Imam ʿAlī ibn Mūsā al‑Riḍā (ʿalayhi al-salām) reported that the Prophet said: «عليكم بحسن الخلق…» “Adopt good character, for it surely leads to Paradise; and avoid bad character, for it surely leads to Hell.” (Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿa, vol. 8, p. 506, ḥadīth 21). From these traditions, it becomes clear that good character is the key to Paradise, a means of attaining divine pleasure, a sign of true faith, and equivalent in weight to continuous acts of worship. Provide your feedback on BizChat

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

After setting forth the great moral qualities of the Prophet, peace be upon him and his household, in the preceding verses, these verses describe the moral qualities of his enemies — so that by comparing the two, the difference between them may become fully apparent. First it states: "Do not obey those who deny — those who deny God, the Prophet, the Day of Resurrection, and the religion of God." (فَلَا تُطِعِ الْمُكَذِّبِينَ). They are themselves misguided and they mislead others, having trampled underfoot all the principles of truth. Obeying such people in even a single matter yields no result other than misguidance and wretchedness. Thereafter, alluding to their efforts to draw the Prophet toward themselves and attach him to their side, it further states: "They wish that you would be somewhat compliant so that they too might show some compliance." (وَدُّوا لَوْ تُدْهِنُ فَيُدْهِنُونَ). Compliance and yielding means overlooking a portion of God's commands. Exegetes have transmitted that these verses were revealed when the leaders of Mecca invited the Prophet to the religion of their ancestors — polytheism and idol-worship — and God forbade him from obeying them. [Reference: Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, vol. 30, p. 85; and al-Marāghī, vol. 29, p. 31.] Others have related that Walīd ibn Mughīra — one of the most prominent leaders of polytheism — presented a very large sum of wealth to the Prophet, swearing that if he abandoned his religion all this wealth would be given to him. [Reference: Tafsīr al-Qurṭubī, vol. 10, p. 6710.] From the tone of the verses and the events recorded in history it becomes clearly apparent that when the blind-hearted polytheists observed the rapid advance of Islam, they fell to scheming how to extract certain concessions from the Prophet and draw him toward themselves through conspiracy — as has been the way of all partisans of falsehood throughout history. At times they offered great wealth, at times beautiful women, and at times high position and station. In reality they were weighing the Prophet's soul on the scale of their own existence. But the Quran repeatedly warns the Prophet not to show even the slightest yielding in the face of deviant proposals and not under any circumstances to be compliant for the sake of the people of falsehood — as appears in verse 49 of Surah al-Mā'ida: "وَأَنِ احْكُم بَيْنَهُم بِمَآ أَنزَلَ اللهُ وَلاَ تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءَهُمْ وَاحْذَرْهُمْ أَن يَفْتِنُوكَ عَن بَعْضِ مَا أَنزَلَ اللهُ إِلَيْكَ" — "Judge among them by what God has revealed and do not follow their desires, and be wary lest they tempt you away from some of what God has revealed to you." "Yudhinūna" is derived from the root "mudāhana," originally taken from "dahn" — oil — and in such contexts is used in the sense of being compliant and yielding. This expression is generally employed in cases of reprehensible and hypocritical compliance. Thereafter, again prohibiting obedience to them, nine blameworthy qualities are enumerated — any one of which alone would suffice to prevent obedience and compliance. It states: "And do not obey one who is base and given to excessive oath-taking." (وَلَا تُطِعْ كُلَّ حَلَّافٍ مَّهِينٍ). "Ḥallāf" denotes one who swears oaths excessively and takes an oath for every minor or major matter — such persons are generally not truthful in their oaths. "Mahīn" from the root "mahānat" means contemptibility and baseness; some have interpreted it as referring to those of little reason, or liars, or those of very wicked character. Thereafter it further states: "One who is an incessant defamer and a bearer of slander." (هَمَّازٍ مَّشَّاءٍ بِنَمِيمٍ). "Hammāz" is derived from the root "hamz" (on the metrical pattern of "ṭanz"), meaning backbiting and fault-finding. "Mashshā'in bi-namīmin" denotes one who goes about spreading corruption and sowing enmity among people. (It should be noted that both these qualities appear in the form of exaggeration — conveying their extreme persistence in such reprehensible conduct.) In the fifth, sixth, and seventh qualities it states: "One who is a persistent preventer of good, a transgressor, and a sinner." (مَنَّاعٍ لِّلْخَيرِ مُعْتَدٍ أَثِيمٍ). Not only does he himself perform no good deed and point to no path of goodness, but he also stands as an obstacle before the good and welfare of others. Moreover, he is a person who transgresses the bounds of God and the rights that God has designated for every human being. Beyond these qualities he is also immersed in every kind of sin — to such a degree that sin has become a constituent part of his nature and character. Finally, alluding to their eighth and ninth qualities, it states: "He is, beyond all this, a gross person and of ignoble lineage." (عُتُلٍّ بَعْدَ ذلِكَ زَنِيمٍ). "Utull" — as Raghib states in the Mufradāt — denotes one who eats much, draws everything toward himself, and deprives others of it. Others have interpreted "utull" as meaning an ill-tempered, malicious, harsh person, or a shameless and wicked-charactered individual. "Zanīm" denotes one whose lineage is not clear and who is attributed to a people though he is not of them. The root "zanama" (on the metrical pattern of "qalama") denotes the hanging piece of skin on a sheep's ear — as though it is not part of the ear but has been attached to it. The expression "ba'da dhālika" alludes to the fact that these two qualities are even more reprehensible and blameworthy than the preceding qualities — as noted by a group of exegetes. In sum, God has here painted a portrayal of the deniers, their reprehensible qualities, and their vile moral character the like of which perhaps has no counterpart in the whole Quran. In this manner He wishes to make clear what kind of people the opponents of Islam, the Quran, and the person of the Prophet, peace be upon him and his household, actually were: liars, base, fault-finders, talebearers, transgressors, sinners, and persons of ignoble stock. And truly, none other than persons of this kind can be expected to oppose such a great reformer. The subsequent verse gives warning: "Lest you submit and obey them because they possess abundant wealth and sons." (أَن كَانَ ذَا مَالٍ وَبَنِينَ). There is no doubt that the Prophet would never obey and follow them — but these verses are in reality an emphasis upon this matter so that the path and practical conduct of his school may be made manifest to all, and so that no one — friend or enemy — may entertain such an expectation. Accordingly, the above sentence is a complement of the verse "wa-lā tuṭi' kulla ḥallāfin mahīn" — but some have said that this verse is in reality a statement of the cause of the emergence of those qualities: the arrogance and pride arising from wealth and numerical strength draws them toward those moral vices. Indeed, these qualities are apparent in many faithless wealthy and powerful persons. The tone of the verses, however, is more consonant with the first interpretation, which is also why the majority of exegetes have selected it. In the subsequent verse, showing the reaction of persons possessing such base qualities in the face of divine verses, it states: "When Our verses are recited to him he says: these are the useless fables of the people of the past." (إِذَا تُتْلَى عَلَيهِ آيَاتُنَا قَالَ أَسَاطِيرُ الأَوَّلِينَ). With this pretext and on account of this reprehensible attribution he distances himself from God's verses and forgets them — and likewise leads others astray. It is for this reason that such persons should not be obeyed — and this is a complement to the prohibition against obeying such persons. The final verse under consideration, lifting the veil from one of the punishments of this group, further states: "We shall soon brand him upon the snout." (سَنَسِمُهُ عَلَى الْخُرطُومِ). This is a most vivid expression for degrading them in the extreme. First, the description of the nose as "khurṭūm" — a term used only for the proboscis of a pig or elephant — is a clear contempt and humiliation for them. Second, in the Arabic lexicon the nose is generally a metonym for dignity and honour — just as in Persian when we say "rub his nose in the dirt," it means: destroy his honour. Third, branding and marking is specific to animals — and even in animals it is not done on their faces, especially not on their noses, and Islam has also prohibited this. All these things state with explicit clarity that God humiliates persons of this kind — transgressors, self-centred, transgressing, and rebellious — in this manner and makes their disgrace known everywhere, so that all may take heed. The history of Islam also bears witness to this meaning: that this group of obstinate opponents was humiliated and disgraced through Islam's advance in a manner without parallel or precedent. The disgrace of the Hereafter is even greater than this. Some exegetes have stated that most of the verses of this surah were revealed concerning Walīd ibn Mughīra — a well-known leading figure of polytheism. However, this does not preclude the generality, breadth, and comprehensiveness of the verses' expressions. [Explanatory note: Some have said that the branding upon the nose was realised practically at the Battle of Badr, where certain leaders of disbelief were struck upon the nose in such a manner that the mark remained. If Walīd ibn Mughīra is specifically intended, history records that he departed from this world before the Battle of Badr in humiliation and disgrace. But if some other person is intended, then what appears in Imam 'Alī ibn al-Ḥusayn's famous sermon in Syria is also possible: "Anā ibnu man ḍaraba kharāṭīma al-khalqi ḥattā qālū lā ilāha illā Allāh" — "I am the son of one who struck the noses of the polytheists until they said lā ilāha illā Allāh" — referring to Amir al-Mu'minin 'Alī, peace be upon him. (Biḥār al-Anwār, vol. 45, p. 138.) Attending to the verse under consideration, where God states "We shall brand him upon the snout" — this expression carries an excellent meaning, indicating that God's intention was fulfilled through His particular servant 'Alī, peace be upon him.]

In the preceding verses, although the focus is on the reprehensible traits of the severe opponents of the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam), they nonetheless provide a clear framework for recognizing such negative characteristics. These are qualities that distance a person from God and lead him toward misery and wretchedness. They are traits from which true believers must guard themselves and which they must avoid adopting. For this reason, Islamic traditions place great emphasis on this matter. Among them are the following: 1. n a narration from the Messenger of God (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam), it is stated: «الا انبئکم بشرارکم؟ قالوا بلی یا رسول اللہ، قال: المشاؤن بالنمیمة المفرقون بین الاحبة الباغون للبرءاء المعایب» “Shall I inform you of the worst among you?” They said: “Yes, O Messenger of God.” He said: “Those who frequently engage in tale‑bearing, sow division among loved ones, and search for faults in the innocent” (Uṣūl al‑Kāfī, vol. 2, Kitāb al‑Namīmah, ḥadīth 1). 2. The Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) would particularly emphasize this point in his counsel, saying: «لا يبلغني احد عن احد من اصحابي شيئا فاني احب ان اخرج اليكم وانا سليم الصدر» “Let none of you convey to me anything about my companions that would cause me to think ill of them, for I prefer to meet you with a heart free of resentment” (Sunan Abī Dāwūd; Ṣaḥīḥ al‑Tirmidhī, as cited in Fī Ẓilāl al‑Qurʾān, vol. 8, p. 230). 3. In another narration, the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) said: «لا يدخل الجنة جواظ ولا جعظري ولا عتل زنيم» “Three types of people will not enter Paradise: the ‘jawāẓ,’ the ‘jaʿẓarī,’ and the ‘ʿutul zanīm.’” When asked about their meanings, he explained: the “jawāẓ” is one who hoards wealth and withholds it from others; the “jaʿẓarī” is a harsh and ill‑tempered person; and the “ʿutul zanīm” refers to those who are indulgent, ill‑mannered, oppressive, and unjust (Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 5, p. 394). These traditions clearly demonstrate that moral corruption manifests in behaviors such as slander, division, harshness, greed, and oppression—qualities that are fundamentally destructive to both individual character and social cohesion. Consequently, they stand in direct opposition to the moral virtues emphasized in the Qur’anic description of the faithful.

One of the clear distinctions between the seekers of truth and opportunistic political manipulators lies in their respective attitudes toward principles. The latter group does not remain steadfast upon any fixed principle; rather, they are always prepared to compromise their positions in order to obtain additional advantages or preserve existing gains. Their goals and beliefs do not hold intrinsic sanctity for them; instead, they are treated as negotiable commodities, subject to adjustment and trade. This is precisely the meaning conveyed in the verse: (وَدُّوا لَوْ تُدْهِنُ فَيُدْهِنُونَ) — they desire that you should show compromise so that they too may compromise. In contrast, the former group—the steadfast seekers of truth—are never transactional in this manner. They do not relinquish their sacred aims for any price, nor do they engage in compromise or conciliatory dealings that undermine core principles. Such practices of opportunistic adjustment and political bargaining have no place among them. This distinction serves as a clear criterion by which professional manipulators may be identified and differentiated from the true servants of God.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

In keeping with the discussion in the preceding verses concerning the arrogant and self-centred wealthy — who on account of their abundance of wealth and children rejected everything — these verses recount a narrative concerning certain wealthy persons of earlier times who were the owners of a lush and flourishing garden and who were ultimately destroyed on account of their wilful arrogance. It appears that this narrative was well known and familiar among the people of that time, and for this reason it is presented as a testimony. First it states: "We tested them, just as We tested the owners of the garden." (إِنَّا بَلَوْنَاهُمْ كَمَا بَلَوْنَا أَصْحَابَ الْجَنَّةِ). Where this garden was — in the land of Yemen near the great city of Ṣan'ā', or in Abyssinia, or in the land of the Children of Israel in Syria, or in Ṭā'if — is a matter of disagreement, but Yemen is the well-known view. The account is as follows: this garden belonged to a believing old man who would take from it according to his needs and give the remainder to those who were deserving and in want. But when he closed his eyes on the world, his sons said: we are more entitled to the produce of this garden since our households and dependants are more numerous — we cannot therefore act as our father did. In this manner they resolved to deprive all those needy persons who had benefited from it each year. Accordingly their fate was what is set forth in these verses. It states: "We tested them when they swore to gather the fruits of the garden in the early morning while keeping the eyes of the needy away." (إِذْ أَقْسَمُوا لَيَصْرِمُنَّهَا مُصْبِحِينَ). [Explanatory note: "Yaṣrimunna" is derived from the root "ṣarm" (on the metrical pattern of "sharm"), meaning to pluck fruit — and in the absolute sense means to cut; it also carries the meaning of making something firm and settled.] "And they would make no exception and would leave nothing for the needy." (وَلَا يَسْتَثْنُونَ). This intention indicates that the act was not on account of necessity but on account of their miserliness and weakness of faith — for a person, however needy, if he wishes can always set aside some portion from a garden of abundant yield for those in want. Some have said that "no exception" means they did not say "if God wills" — that is, they were so arrogant that they said we will go and most certainly do this, to the extent that they regarded themselves as beyond the need of even saying "inshā' Allāh." But the first interpretation is more correct. [Explanatory note: In addition to the particular appropriateness that the first meaning bears to the actual narrative, if the second meaning were intended "wa-lam tastathnu" would have been said rather than "wa-lā yastathīnūna."] Continuing the same account, it further states: "Then at night, while they were asleep, a sweeping punishment from your Lord came upon their garden." (فَطَافَ عَلَيْهَا طَائِفٌ مِّن رَّبِّكَ وَهُمْ نَائِمُونَ). A burning fire and a deadly thunderbolt descended upon it in such a manner that the lush and flourishing garden became as black and dark as night. "And by morning it had become like harvested stubble." (فَأَصْبَحَتْ كَالصَّرِيمِ). "Ṭā'if" is derived from the root "ṭawāf," originally meaning one who circles around something — but it sometimes serves as a metonym for calamity and affliction that appears at night, and this is the meaning here. "Ṣarīm" is derived from the root "ṣarm" — meaning to cut — and here carries the meaning of "dark night," or a tree stripped of fruit, or "black ash" — since night is severed from the day by the day's arrival, just as day is severed from the night by the night's arrival, which is why night and day are sometimes called "ṣarīmān." In any case, what is meant is that this heavenly calamity — apparently a tremendous thunderbolt — descended upon the garden in such a manner as to set the entire garden ablaze all at once, leaving nothing save a handful of charcoal and black ash; for when thunderbolts and lightning strike anything, this is invariably their result. In any case, the owners of the garden, supposing that the laden trees were now ready for their fruit to be plucked, "called out to one another at the break of dawn." (فَتَنَادَوا مُصْبِحِينَ). [Explanatory note: "Tanādaw" — Raghib states in the Mufradāt that "nidā'" (on the metrical pattern of "'anā'") is originally derived from "nadā" meaning moisture — since those whose mouths contain sufficient moisture can speak with ease and comfort, their speech being eloquent and their voice clear.] They said: "Go early to your field and garden if you intend to pluck the fruit." (أَنِ اغْدُوا عَلَى حَرْثِكُمْ إِن كُنتُمْ صَارِمِينَ). "Ighdū" is derived from the root "ghadwa," meaning the early portion of the day — which is why the meal eaten early in the morning is called "ghadā'" (breakfast), even though in contemporary colloquial Arabic "ghadā'" refers to the midday meal. "And thus they set out toward their garden, speaking to one another in low voices." (فَانطَلَقُوا وَهُمْ يَتَخَافَتُونَ). "That today no poor person should come to you there." (أَن لَّا يَدْخُلَنَّهَا الْيَوْمَ عَلَيْكُم مِّسْكِينٌ). They were conversing thus in low voices so that their words would not reach another's ears — lest some poor person be informed and come to them to glean what remained of the fruit or to take a little for his sustenance. It appears that on account of their father's previous acts of righteousness, a group of the poor used to await such days — when the time for plucking the garden's fruit arrived — in the hope of receiving some portion. This is why these miserly and unworthy sons set out in concealment so that no one would suppose such a day had arrived, and by the time the poor were informed the matter would already be concluded. "And they set out in the early morning toward their field and garden with full resolve and strength of purpose to prevent the needy and the poor." (وَغَدَوْا عَلَى حَرْدٍ قَادِرِينَ). "Ḥard" (on the metrical pattern of "sard") means prevention combined with intensity and rage. Indeed, they were exasperated by the yearning and anticipation of the poor and the destitute and had made a firm resolve to prevent them with full force. (It is for this reason that this expression is also used for years of no rain and for a she-camel whose milk has dried up.) Now let us see what their end was.

See ayat 33 for tafseer.

See ayat 33 for tafseer.

See ayat 33 for tafseer.

See ayat 33 for tafseer.

See ayat 33 for tafseer.

See ayat 33 for tafseer.

See ayat 33 for tafseer.

These verses continue the narrative of the أصحاب الجنّة (the owners of the garden) mentioned earlier. The owners set out eagerly in the early morning, hoping to harvest their abundant produce and secretly gather it while preventing the needy from benefiting from it. Their intention was to reserve everything exclusively for themselves, ensuring that not a single poor person would share in the bounty granted by God. However, they were unaware that during the night, while they slept, a devastating calamity had struck their garden and reduced it to ashes. The Qur’an states: “فَلَمَّا رَأَوْهَا قَالُوا إِنَّا لَضَالُّونَ” “When they saw it, they said: indeed, we have lost our way.” The term “ضالون” may refer to losing their way to the garden, as previously indicated, or to deviating from the path of truth; however, the first meaning appears more appropriate in this context. They then declared: “بَلْ نَحْنُ مَحْرُومُونَ” “Rather, we are deprived.” They intended to deprive the needy, yet ultimately became the most deprived themselves—losing not only material benefits but also the spiritual blessings that arise from generosity and charity. At this point, the most discerning among them spoke: “قَالَ أَوْسَطُهُمْ أَلَمْ أَقُل لَّكُمْ لَوْلَا تُسَبِّحُونَ” “Did I not tell you: why do you not glorify God?” This reflects the presence of a righteous individual among them who had previously warned them against greed and miserliness. However, his advice was ignored. Now, after it became evident that calamity had struck, he reproached them for their failure to remember God, to express gratitude, and to act with righteousness toward those in need. The use of the term “أوسط” here signifies one who is balanced in intellect and wisdom rather than merely average in age. Likewise, “تسبّحون” refers fundamentally to recognizing and glorifying God, which includes gratitude for His blessings and acting accordingly. Awakened by the disaster, they confessed: “قَالُوا سُبْحَانَ رَبِّنَا إِنَّا كُنَّا ظَالِمِينَ” “Glory be to our Lord; indeed, we were wrongdoers.” Their glorification of God prior to confessing their wrongdoing indicates their recognition that the calamity was just and in accordance with divine wisdom. Similar expressions appear in other Qur’anic narratives, such as that of Yūnus (ʿalayhi al‑salām): “لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا أَنتَ سُبْحَانَكَ إِنِّي كُنتُ مِنَ الظَّالِمِينَ” (al‑Anbiyāʾ, 87). Despite this acknowledgment, they began to blame one another: “فَأَقْبَلَ بَعْضُهُمْ عَلَى بَعْضٍ يَتَلَاوَمُونَ” Each, while admitting fault, attempted to attribute primary blame to the others. This reflects a typical pattern among those guilty of wrongdoing: even when they confess, they seek to transfer responsibility. In reality, each played a role—one proposing, another agreeing, another executing, and others remaining complicit through silence. Recognizing the seriousness of their actions, they cried out: “قَالُوا يَا وَيْلَنَا إِنَّا كُنَّا طَاغِينَ” “Woe to us! Indeed, we were transgressors.” Here, “طاغين” indicates a degree of rebellion beyond ordinary wrongdoing, signifying not merely the violation of moral conduct but a disregard for the very principle of divine law. In their remorse, they turned to God: “عَسَى رَبُّنَا أَن يُبْدِلَنَا خَيْرًا مِّنْهَا إِنَّا إِلَى رَبِّنَا رَاغِبُونَ” They expressed hope that God might grant them something better in place of what they had lost and declared their renewed inclination toward Him. Exegetes differ on whether their repentance was fully accepted. Some suggest that it lacked the necessary conditions, while others report traditions indicating that it was sincere and accepted, resulting in the granting of a better باغ. Finally, the Qur’an concludes: “كَذَلِكَ الْعَذَابُ وَلَعَذَابُ الْآخِرَةِ أَكْبَرُ لَوْ كَانُوا يَعْلَمُونَ” Thus is the punishment, and indeed the punishment of the Hereafter is greater, if only they knew. The lesson is universal: if individuals become consumed by greed, monopolize wealth, and deprive others of their rightful share, their fate will not differ from that of these garden‑owners. While their punishment came in the form of a destructive calamity, the means may vary in different times—whether through natural disasters or upheavals that destroy material prosperity.

Human beings naturally develop an attachment to worldly wealth, since their livelihood depends upon it. Such attachment, when maintained within reasonable limits, is not blameworthy. What is essential, however, is that the needs of others are also considered and that they share in one’s resources. Not only should the obligatory rights ordained by God be fulfilled, but voluntary acts of charity and generosity should also not be neglected. In particular, with respect to gardens and agricultural produce, Islamic traditions emphasize that a portion should be given to those in need who are present at the time of harvest. This principle is derived from the verse: “وَآتُوا حَقَّهُ يَوْمَ حَصَادِهِ” — “and give its due on the day of harvest” (Sūrah al‑Anʿām, 141). This has come to be known as “ḥaqq al‑ḥiṣād,” a right distinct from the formal obligation of zakāt. It refers to what is given from the produce at the time of harvesting to those in need who are present, and it has no fixed limit (Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿa, vol. 6, Abwāb Zakāt al‑Ghallāt, bāb 13; Sunan al‑Bayhaqī, vol. 4, p. 133). However, when attachment to wealth exceeds moderation and takes on the form of excess and deviation, it transforms into possessiveness and exclusivity. A person may then desire that others remain deprived, even when he himself has no need. This is a serious moral affliction, one that can still be observed in many human societies today, and may be regarded as a dangerous social and psychological disease. The narrative of the أصحاب الجنّة (the owners of the garden), mentioned in the preceding verses, provides a vivid illustration of this exclusivist mentality among a group of the wealthy. They conspire together, hand in hand, to deprive the needy, planning to harvest their produce secretly in order to secure all its benefits for themselves. Yet, in many cases, the cries of the deprived are transformed into forces of destruction. Their lament becomes like a lightning that sets ablaze the very foundation of the lives of these possessive elites. Often, such consequences manifest in the form of social upheavals and revolutions, through which the deprived bring about conditions that the privileged never imagined possible. Their pleas and cries rise to the heavens, and only then do such individuals begin to regret their past actions and seek to atone for their wrongdoing. Yet, by that stage, the matter has already passed beyond their control.

From the preceding verse, it is implicitly understood that there exists a close relationship between sin and the deprivation of sustenance. Accordingly, a narration from Imam al‑Bāqir (ʿalayhi al‑salām) states: “A person may commit a sin, and as a result, his provision is withheld from him.” The Imam then recited the verse: “إِذْ أَقْسَمُوا لَيَصْرِمُنَّهَا مُصْبِحِينَ ۖ وَلَا يَسْتَثْنُونَ ۖ فَطَافَ عَلَيْهَا طَائِفٌ مِنْ رَبِّكَ وَهُمْ نَائِمُونَ” “They swore that they would surely harvest its produce in the morning and would not make any exception, but while they were asleep, a visitation from your Lord passed over it and destroyed it.” (Tafsīr Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 5, p. 395, ḥadīth 44). It is also reported from Ibn ʿAbbās that the connection between sin and the loss of sustenance is more evident than the connection of the sun, as indicated in this passage (Tafsīr al‑Mīzān, vol. 20, p. 37).

See ayat 41 for tafseer.

See ayat 41 for tafseer.

See ayat 41 for tafseer.

See ayat 41 for tafseer.

See ayat 41 for tafseer.

See ayat 41 for tafseer.

See ayat 41 for tafseer.

It is known that the Quran's method is to bring the conditions of the wicked and the good side by side so that they may be better recognised through comparison — a method that is educationally most effective. In accordance with this same approach, after recounting the painful fate of the "companions of the garden" in the preceding verses, the discourse turns to the condition of the God-fearing and states: "For the God-fearing, with their Lord, are the blessing-laden gardens of Paradise." (إِنَّ لِلمُتَّقِينَ عِندَ رَبِّهِم جَنَّاتِ النَّعِيمِ). Gardens of Paradise in which the most complete form of every conceivable blessing is present — and beyond these, there will be blessings that no human being will ever have imagined or dreamed of. Since the polytheists and a group of the wealthy were self-centred and claimed that just as their condition in this world was superior and elevated, so too in the Resurrection would it be excellent — God in the subsequent verse holds them to severe account, stating: "Shall We make the Muslims — those who bow their heads before truth and justice — equal to the criminals and polytheists?" (أَفَنَجعَلُ المُسلِمِينَ كَالمُجرِمِينَ). "What has come over you? What kind of judgments do you make?" (مَا لَكُم كَيفَ تَحكُمُونَ). Can any rational person accept that the fates of the just and the oppressor, the obedient and the criminal, the self-sacrificing and the monopolising, will be identical? — and that too before the God whose every act proceeds according to a measured and wise order. In verse 50 of Surah Fuṣṣilat as well, alluding to such persons, it states: (وَلَئِن أَذَقنَاهُ رَحمَةً مِّنَّا مِن بَعدِ ضَرَّاءَ مَسَّتهُ لَيَقُولَنَّ هَذَا لِي وَمَا أَظُنُّ السَّاعَةَ قَائِمَةً وَلَئِن رُّجِعتُ إِلَى رَبِّي إِنَّ لِي عِندَهُ لَلحُسنَى) — "When We give him a taste of Our mercy after adversity has touched him, he says: this was on account of my worthiness and merit, and I do not think the Hour will be established; and if it is, when I return to my Lord, I shall assuredly have the finest reward with Him." Indeed, this self-admiring and arrogant group regards both this world and the Hereafter as reserved for itself alone. Thereafter it further states: "If reason and rational reflection have not guided you in a judgment of this kind, do you at least possess some scriptural proof for it? Do you have a book from which you derive lessons?" (أَم لَكُم كِتَابٌ فِيهِ تَدرُسُونَ). "That whatever you choose and toward which you incline is exclusively yours." (إِنَّ لَكُم فِيهِ لَمَا تَخَيَّرُون). [Explanatory note: The sentence "inna lakum..." is the object of "tadrusūna." By grammatical rule it should be read with fatḥa on the hamza of "inna," but on account of the "lām" that comes over the noun of "inna," it is read with kasra — since the verb is connected to the action.] You expect that criminals such as yourselves will be placed on a par with Muslims — this is a matter that neither reason dictates nor any reliable scripture contains. In the subsequent verse, continuing the same questions that are closing off every avenue from them, it further states: "If you have no rational or scriptural proof for your claim, have you obtained from Us some binding covenant that will endure until the Day of Resurrection — that whatever you decide in your own favour, God will grant it to you?" (أَم لَكُم أَيمَانٌ عَلَينَا بَالِغَةٌ إِلَى يَومِ القِيَامَةِ إِنَّ لَكُم لَمَا تَحكُمُون). Who can claim to have taken from God such a covenant that whatever they wish God will accept, whatever station and position they desire He will give without question — to the extent that criminals become the equals of Muslims? [Explanatory note: The word "bāligha" has been interpreted by some as meaning "binding and emphatic," and by others as "ongoing and continuous." The second meaning is more appropriate, on which basis the prepositional phrase "ilā yawmi al-qiyāma" is connected to it.] Then, continuing these same questions that close off every direction from them, it further states: "Ask them which of them is the guarantor of this matter — that the criminals and the believers are equal, or that God will place whatever they desire in their hands." (سَلهُم أَيُّهُم بِذَلِكَ زَعِيمٌ). In the final stage, posing a remarkable question to them, it states: "Or do they have deities who will intercede and advocate for them before God? If they speak the truth, let them bring those deities forward and introduce them." (أَم لَهُم شُرَكَاءُ فَليَأتُوا بِشُرَكَائِهِم إِن كَانُوا صَادِقِينَ). Do they have even the most rudimentary proof that these worthless and mindless inanimate objects are partners of God and intercessors before Him? Some exegetes have taken "shurakā'" here in the sense of "shuhadā'" — witnesses. In this manner, from the above verses as a whole it can be concluded without any ambiguity that they would need to invoke one of four means to prove their claim — that they are equal to, or indeed superior and more excellent than, the believers: either a rational argument, or one of the heavenly scriptures, or a covenant from God's side, or the intercession of intercessors and the testimony of witnesses. Since the answer to all these questions is in the negative, the said claim is entirely groundless and without foundation.

See ayat 45 for tafseer.

See ayat 45 for tafseer.

See ayat 45 for tafseer.

Following the preceding verses, in which severe admonition was directed toward the polytheists and transgressors, the verses under discussion portray an aspect of their fate on the Day of Resurrection, so that it may become clear how utterly humiliated this self‑willed, boastful group will be. It is stated: “يَوْمَ يُكْشَفُ عَنْ سَاقٍ وَيُدْعَوْنَ إِلَى السُّجُودِ فَلَا يَسْتَطِيعُونَ” “Recall the Day when the ساق is uncovered, and they are called to prostrate, but they will not be able to do so.” The expression “يُكْشَفُ عَنْ سَاقٍ” (the ساق is uncovered) has been interpreted by a number of exegetes as a figurative expression denoting the شدت of fear and the gravity of the situation. Among the Arabs, it was customary that when someone encountered a severe difficulty, they would uncover their legs and prepare themselves with urgency. Hence, when Ibn ʿAbbās was asked about this verse, he explained that it indicates the شدت of crisis, as reflected in the expression of Arab poetry: “قامت الحرب بنا على ساق” — the war reached such intensity that it pressed upon us severely. Some have suggested that “ساق” refers to the essence or foundation of a thing, implying that realities will be exposed. However, the first interpretation appears more appropriate. On that Day, all will be called to prostrate before the Lord. The believers will immediately fall into prostration, but the wrongdoers will be unable to do so. The dispositions and hardened attitudes formed in this world will manifest themselves, preventing them from bowing in humility before God. A question may arise: since the Day of Resurrection is not a time of obligation, why is there a call to prostrate? The answer can be understood through narrations stating that the manifestation of divine greatness on that Day will compel the believers to prostrate, while the hypocrites will find their backs rigid and incapable of bending (Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 5, p. 395, ḥadīth 49). The next verse states: “خَاشِعَةً أَبْصَارُهُمْ تَرْهَقُهُمْ ذِلَّةٌ” The eyes of the wrongdoers will be cast downward in humiliation, and disgrace will envelop their entire being. This reflects the condition of one whose guilt has been exposed, leading to overwhelming shame and abasement. It is further stated: “وَقَدْ كَانُوا يُدْعَوْنَ إِلَى السُّجُودِ وَهُمْ سَالِمُونَ” “They were called to prostrate while they were sound and secure.” In worldly life, they were invited to submit—through prayer, revelation, and the teachings of the Prophet and the Imams—but they refused out of arrogance and heedlessness. Having carried this attitude into the Hereafter, they will now be incapable of submission. The discourse then turns to the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam): “فَذَرْنِي وَمَن يُكَذِّبُ بِهَذَا الْحَدِيثِ” “Leave to Me those who deny this message; I will deal with them Myself.” This is a strong divine warning. It conveys that there is no need for further intervention; God Himself will take account of these obstinate deniers. The statement reassures the Prophet and the believers, strengthening their confidence in the face of opposition. It continues: “سَنَسْتَدْرِجُهُم مِّنْ حَيْثُ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ” “We shall draw them gradually [toward punishment] from where they do not perceive,” “وَأُمْلِي لَهُمْ إِنَّ كَيْدِي مَتِينٌ” “And I give them respite; indeed, My plan is firm.” The concept of “استدراج” refers to a gradual drawing toward punishment. A narration from Imam Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq states: “When a servant commits a sin, God grants him a renewed blessing, causing him to neglect repentance; this is استدراج” (Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, vol. 10, p. 340). This indicates that sometimes God grants continued نعمت to those who persist in wrongdoing, leading them into غرور and غفلت. They interpret these blessings as signs of divine favor, while in reality they are being drawn closer to punishment. Ultimately, divine retribution descends suddenly and severely, making this form of punishment particularly painful. However, this applies to those who persist in rebellion to its extreme limits. For others, difficulties and trials may serve as a means of awakening and return. Thus, when a person sins, three possibilities emerge: either he repents voluntarily, or God disciplines him through hardship, or—if he lacks readiness—he is granted نعمت that leads to deeper heedlessness. Accordingly, one must be vigilant even in times of abundance, lest apparent blessings conceal “عذابِ استدراج.” As reported, Imam al‑Ṣādiq reassured a companion that if blessings are accompanied by gratitude, they are not استدراج but genuine reward (Uṣūl al‑Kāfī, as cited in Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 5, p. 397). The expression “وأملي لهم” indicates that God does not hasten punishment, for haste is a sign of weakness or fear of lost opportunity, and such limitations do not apply to divine power. Thus, these verses serve as a warning to all tyrants and transgressors: prosperity and security should never lead to complacency, for divine accountability remains ever imminent.

See ayat 50 for tafseer.

See ayat 50 for tafseer.

See ayat 50 for tafseer.

See ayat 50 for tafseer.

Continuing the interrogation of the polytheists and criminals that appeared in the preceding verses, these verses add two further questions. First it states: "Or do you ask of them some recompense that weighs heavily upon them?" (أَمْ تَسْأَلُهُمْ أَجْرًا فَهُم مِّن مَّغْرَمٍ مُّثْقَلُونَ). If their pretext is that listening to your call requires wealth and they would have to pay a very great recompense for it and lack the means, then this is an outright lie — for you demand no recompense from them whatsoever, nor has any other prophet among God's prophets ever demanded a recompense. "Mughram" is derived from the root "gharāmat," meaning the harm that comes to a person without any crime or betrayal on his part. "Muthqal" is derived from the root "thiql," meaning heavy and burdensome. In this manner yet another pretext is snatched from the hands of those who seek pretexts. The above verse and the one that follows it appear verbatim in Surah al-Ṭūr, verses 40 and 41. Continuing the same discourse it further states: "Or do they possess the secrets of the unseen, which they are writing down and transmitting to one another — as though it has come in these secrets that they are equal to the Muslims?" (أَمْ عِندَهُمُ الْغَيْبُ فَهُمْ يَكْتُبُونَ). This is in reality one of the most remote possibilities, which the disbelievers might have attempted to invoke — and hence the Quran has not overlooked it either. That is, the disbelievers might claim that through diviners they are connected with the unseen world, through this means they obtain the secrets of the unseen and write them down, then transmit them to one another — meaning that in this manner they have ascertained their superiority over the Muslims, or at least their equality with them. Assuredly they had no proof for such a claim, and this sentence carries the sense of a rhetorical negative interrogative. The interpretive possibility offered by some — that by "the unseen" is meant the Preserved Tablet and by "writing" is meant divine decree — appears very far-fetched, for they never claimed to have control over divine decree and the Preserved Tablet. Since the stubbornness and senselessness of the polytheists and enemies of Islam at times caused the Prophet, peace be upon him and his household, such grief that he might have invoked a curse against them, God in the subsequent verse comforts His Prophet and commands him to patience and forbearance. He states: "Be patient and await the judgment of your Lord." (فَاصْبِرْ لِحُكْمِ رَبِّكَ). Wait until God provides the means for your success and the success of your companions and the defeat of your enemies. Do not be hasty concerning their punishment — know that this respite being given to them is a form of gradual chastisement drawing them toward destruction. Accordingly, "ḥukm rabbika" means God's final decree concerning the success of the Muslims — although some have said that what is meant is: exercise patience and steadfastness on the path of conveying the Lord's commands. The possibility also exists that the meaning is: your Lord has commanded, therefore be patient. [Explanatory note: On this reading, the "lām" in "li-ḥukmi rabbika" is the lām of causation.] But the first interpretation is the most appropriate. Thereafter it further states: "And do not be like the companion of the fish — Jonah, peace be upon him — who was hasty in seeking punishment for his people and was seized in the punishment of a lesser omission." (وَلَا تَكُن كَصَاحِبِ الْحُوتِ). "When he called out while imprisoned in the belly of the fish, his breast filled with grief and anguish." (إِذْ نَادَى وَهُوَ مَكْظُومٌ). The call referred to is that which appears in verse 87 of Surah al-Anbiyā': فَنَادَى فِي الظُّلُمَاتِ أَن لَّا إِلَهَ إِلَّا أَنتَ سُبْحَانَكَ إِنِّي كُنتُ مِنَ الظَّالِمِينَ — "He called out from within the darknesses: there is no deity save You, You are transcendent, truly I was among the wrongdoers." In this manner he acknowledged his lesser omission and sought pardon and forgiveness from God. The interpretive possibility also exists that the call refers to the imprecation he had invoked against his people when he was filled with rage and fury — but exegetes have adopted the first interpretation, because the expression "nādā" in this verse is consonant with the expression appearing in verse 87 of Surah al-Anbiyā', and that is certainly connected with the period when Jonah, peace be upon him, was imprisoned in the belly of the fish. In any case, "makẓūm" is derived from the root "kaẓm" (on the metrical pattern of "haḍm"), meaning the throat. "Kaẓama al-siqā'" means tying the mouth of a water-skin when it is full. By this analogy those who are very angry or grief-stricken yet keep themselves in check are called "kāẓim." Then by extension this word has also been used in the sense of imprisonment and confinement. Accordingly "makẓūm" in the above verse can carry two meanings: being filled with anger and grief, or being imprisoned in the belly of the fish — but the first meaning, as stated, is more appropriate. In the subsequent verse it further states: "Had the mercy and grace of his Lord not come to his assistance, he would have been cast out upon the barren land in a state of blame and reproach." (لَوْلَا أَن تَدَارَكَهُ نِعْمَةٌ مِّن رَّبِّهِ لَنُبِذَ بِالْعَرَاءِ وَهُوَ مَذْمُومٌ). [Explanatory note: Despite "ni'ma" being feminine, its verb "tadārakahu" appears in the masculine form. The reason is that the feminine is grammatically feminine in form only, and the object pronoun has created a separation between verb and subject.] As is known, Jonah, peace be upon him, was ultimately cast out from the belly of the fish onto a barren wilderness — which the Quran refers to as "'arā'" — but this occurred in a state in which God had accepted his repentance and made him the recipient of His mercy. He was in no way deserving of blame. In verses 145 and 146 of Surah al-Ṣāffāt as well it is stated: فَنَبَذْنَاهُ بِالْعَرَاءِ وَهُوَ سَقِيمٌ وَأَنبَتْنَا عَلَيهِ شَجَرَةً مِّن يَقْطِينٍ — "We cast him upon the barren land while he was ill, and We caused a gourd plant to grow over him" — so that he might rest in the shade of its broad and moist leaves. And apparently the "grace" referred to in the above verse is precisely the granting of the capacity for repentance and being made the recipient of divine mercy. Two questions arise here. First: in verses 143 and 144 of Surah al-Ṣāffāt it is stated: فَلَوْلَا أَنَّهُ كَانَ مِنَ الْمُسَبِّحِينَ لَلَبِثَ فِي بَطْنِهِ إِلَى يَوْمِ يُبْعَثُونَ — "Had he not been among those who glorify God, he would have remained in the belly of the fish until the Day of Resurrection." This appears to conflict with what appears in the verse under consideration. The answer to this question becomes clear by attending to the point that two different punishments — one more severe and one less severe — awaited Jonah, peace be upon him. The first was that he would remain in the belly of the fish until the end of the world; but this was lifted through the blessing of his glorification and praise of God. The second was that when he emerged from the belly of the fish he would be deserving of blame and far from God's grace — and that punishment too was lifted through the blessing of the Lord's grace and His particular mercy. The second question: in verse 142 of Surah al-Ṣāffāt it is stated: فَالتَقَمَهُ الْحُوتُ وَهُوَ مُلِيمٌ — "A great fish swallowed him while he was deserving of blame." But the verse under consideration suggests that he was not under any blame or reproach. The answer to this question also becomes clear through attending to one point: this blame is connected to the time when he had newly entered the belly of the fish. But the lifting of the blame is connected to the time when he repented, God accepted his repentance, and he was delivered from the belly of the fish. It is for this reason that the subsequent verse states: "His Lord chose him and made him among the righteous." (فَاجْتَبَاهُ رَبُّهُ فَجَعَلَهُ مِنَ الصَّالِحِينَ). Thereafter he was assigned anew to the guidance of his people; he came to them, they all believed, and God bestowed upon them the blessings of life for a very long period. The account of Jonah and his people, and likewise the other matters connected with his lesser omission — his entering the belly of the fish and the various questions that arise in this connection — have been set forth in detail in Tafsīr-i Namūna, volume 19, under verses 139 to 148 of Surah al-Ṣāffāt, and likewise in volume 13, under verses 87 and 88 of Surah al-Anbiyā'.

See ayat 52 for tafseer.

These final verses of Sūrah al‑Qalam return to the same theme introduced at the beginning of the sūrah: the false accusation made by the opponents that the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa‑ālīhi wa‑sallam) was afflicted with madness. It first states: “وَإِن يَكَادُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا لَيُزْلِقُونَكَ بِأَبْصَارِهِمْ لَمَّا سَمِعُوا الذِّكْرَ وَيَقُولُونَ إِنَّهُ لَمَجْنُونٌ” “Those who disbelieve almost cause you to slip with their eyes when they hear the Reminder, and they say: indeed, he is mad.” The expression “لَيُزْلِقُونَكَ” is derived from the root “زلق” and signifies slipping or falling to the ground; here, it is used metaphorically for destruction or annihilation. Several interpretations have been offered with regard to this verse: First, many exegetes maintain that when the opponents hear the majestic verses of the Qur’an, they become so enraged and disturbed that they cast hostile and piercing glances toward the Prophet, as if attempting to bring him down and destroy him by the intensity of their hatred. Some have added that this may allude to the belief in the “evil eye,” wherein certain gazes are thought to possess a concealed influence capable of harming others. Second, some interpret the expression as a metaphor for extreme anger, similar to expressions in ordinary speech where it is said that someone looked in such a hostile manner as though intending to devour or kill the other person. Third, a further interpretation—arguably closer to the apparent sense—is that the verse exposes a striking contradiction in the attitude of the opponents: when they listen to the Qur’an, they are deeply affected, almost overwhelmed by its power and eloquence; yet despite this, they claim that the Prophet is mad. The contrast between the extraordinary, coherent, and compelling nature of the Qur’an and the accusation of madness reveals the irrationality of their claim. In any case, it may be observed that such contradictory statements reflect confusion and inconsistency among those who made them. The concluding verse then states: “وَمَا هُوَ إِلَّا ذِكْرٌ لِّلْعَالَمِينَ” “It is nothing but a reminder for all the worlds.” The Qur’an, with its illuminating teachings, meaningful parables, warnings, encouragements, and spiritual insights, serves as a source of awakening for the heedless and a means of recollection for those unaware. In light of these qualities, attributing madness to the bearer of such a message is manifestly unjustified. Here, “ذكر” is most appropriately understood in the sense of “reminder” or “admonition.” Some exegetes have suggested that it may also carry the meaning of “honor,” citing parallels such as: “وَإِنَّهُ لَذِكْرٌ لَّكَ وَلِقَوْمِكَ” However, even in such contexts, “ذكر” fundamentally conveys the notion of awakening awareness and imparting guidance. Additionally, “ذكر” is one of the well‑established names of the Qur’an, reinforcing this interpretation. Thus, the verses conclude by emphasizing that the Qur’an is a universal message of guidance and remembrance, and the claims of its opponents stand in clear contradiction to its evident truth and transformative power.

Many people hold the belief that certain eyes possess a particular kind of influence — that when they direct an attentive gaze toward something they may destroy or disrupt it, and if the object is a human being, may cause illness or derangement. This matter is not rationally impossible, for many contemporary specialists hold the view that certain eyes contain a particular kind of magnetic force that produces numerous effects — to the extent that it can be cultivated through practice. It is through this same magnetic force of the eyes that hypnotic sleep is induced in other persons. In a world where laser rays — which are invisible — can accomplish what even the most dangerous and devastating weapon cannot, accepting the existence of such a force in certain eyes, capable of affecting the person opposite through specific waves, will be no strange thing. Many people relate that they have themselves witnessed individuals who possessed this mysterious ocular energy and had rendered certain persons, animals, or other things ineffective through this hidden power of their eyes. Therefore not only should insistence upon denial of these matters be avoided, but the possibility of their existence ought to be accepted from the standpoints of both reason and science. In Islamic narrations as well, many varied expressions appear that broadly corroborate this matter. In one hadith it is related that Asmā' bint 'Umays presented herself before the Prophet, peace be upon him and his household, and said: "Sometimes the sons of Ja'far are affected by the evil eye — may I obtain a ruqya for them?" — "Ruqya" referring to the written supplications that some people keep with them as protection against the evil eye, also called a tawīdh. The Noble Prophet, peace be upon him and his household, replied: "Na'am, fa-law kāna shay'un yasbiqu al-qadara sabaqa al-'aynu" — "Yes, there is no harm in it; if anything can outstrip destiny, it is the affliction of the evil eye." [Reference: Majma' al-Bayān, vol. 10, p. 341.] In another hadith it is related that Amir al-Mu'minin, peace be upon him, stated: "The Prophet, peace be upon him and his household, made a tawīdh for Imam al-Ḥasan and Imam al-Ḥusayn, peace be upon them, and recited this supplication: 'U'īdhukumā bi-kalimāti al-tāmmati wa-asmā'i Allāhi al-ḥusnā kullihā 'āmmatan, min sharri al-sāmmati wa-al-hāmmati wa-min sharri kulli 'aynin lāmmatin, wa-min sharri ḥāsidin idhā ḥasada.' — 'I commend you both to the care of all the perfect words and all the most beautiful names of God, as protection against death, against harmful creatures, against every harmful eye, and against the evil of the envier when he envies.' Thereafter the Prophet, peace be upon him and his household, looked toward us and said: 'Abraham, peace be upon him, made a tawīdh for Ishmael and Isaac, peace be upon them, in the same manner.'" [Reference: Nūr al-Thaqalayn, vol. 5, p. 400.] In Nahj al-Balāgha it is also stated: "al-'aynu ḥaqqun wa-al-ruqā ḥaqqun" — "The evil eye is real, and recourse to supplication and tawīdh for its repulsion is also real." [Explanatory note: Nahj al-Balāgha, Kalimāt Qiṣār, saying 400. This hadith is also transmitted in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, vol. 7, p. 170, chapter "al-'Aynu Ḥaqqun," in the form "al-'aynu ḥaqqun." Al-Mu'jam al-Mufahras li-Alfāẓ al-Ḥadīth al-Nabawī transmits the same meaning from various sources, vol. 4, p. 451.] It is necessary to mention this point: there is no impediment to these supplications and means — by God's command — arresting the effect of the mysterious magnetic power and energy of certain eyes, just as supplications exert their influence upon many other destructive factors and render them ineffective by God's command. It is also necessary to recall that accepting the influence of the evil eye in a general and summary way does not mean taking refuge in absurd practices and popular acts that are contrary to the precepts of the law and that are also a cause of doubt and hesitation in the minds of those uninformed about the actual subject. As the contamination of many realities with such superstitions has left an undesirable impression in people's minds. O Lord, preserve us in Your refuge from the evil of evildoers and the machinations of enemies. O Sustainer, grant us that patience and steadfastness in whose shade we may attain Your pleasure. O God, bestow upon us the grace to benefit from Your boundless blessings before ingratitude causes them to be taken from us. Āmīn, yā Rabb al-'Ālamīn.