Verses 47–57
These verses discuss the following points: (1) It is obligatory to obey God’s Messenger. (2) Obeying him is inseparable from obeying God. (3) It is incumbent to refer to his judgment and decree. (4) Turning away from him is a sign of hypocrisy. The verses end by giving a good promise to the believers, and threatening the disbelievers.
Commentary
وَ يَقُولُونَ آمَنَّا بِاللَّهِ وَ بِالرَّسُولِ وَ أَطَعْنا ثُمَّ يَتَوَلَّى فَرِيقٌ مِنْهُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِ ذلِكَ وَ ما أُولئِكَ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ ٤٧
(24:47) And they say: We believe in Allah and in the Messenger and we obey; then a party of them turn back after this, and these are not believers.
This verse describes the state of some hypocrites, who first declared that they are believers and are obedient, but then they defected. “Belief in God” is to accept His unity and the religion that He has legislated. “Belief in the Messenger” is to accept that he is sent from God, that his commands and prohibitions are the commands and prohibitions of God, and that his judgment is God’s judgment, without anything of himself. “Obeying God” is to act according to what He has legislated and prescribed. “Obeying the Messenger” is to do what he has commanded, to refrain from what he has prohibited, and to accept his rulings and judgments.
Thus, “believing in God and obeying Him” pertain to the religion itself and being committed to it, while “believing in the Messenger and obeying him” pertain to what the Messenger informs us about the religion in the sense that he is the informant, as well as what he rules and judges in disputes. One must comply with him in all of that.
Therefore, the two forms of belief and obedience differ in terms of the breadth of their applications. The verse indicates this multiplicity [of belief and obedience] by differentiating between them, as it says, “We believe in Allah and in the Messenger,” instead of dropping the letter bāʾ in bil-rasūl [that is, instead of saying “We believe in God and the Messenger” without saying “in” before “the Messenger”]. Nevertheless, the two beliefs are not separable from one another. He says [reprovingly]: And (those who) desire to make a distinction between Allah and His messengers ().
… We believe in Allah and in the Messenger and we obey…: It means: We have tied our hearts to God’s religion and have committed ourselves to it, and to the fact that the Messenger only says the truth and judges by the truth.
… then a party of them turn back after this…: That is, some of these people—who claim that “We believe in Allah and in the Messenger and we obey”—deviate from the implications of their speech after saying it.
… and these are not believers: That is, those who make the above claim are disbelievers. The demonstrative pronoun “these” refers to all of those who made the above claim, not just those who turn back, because the theme and context suggests a rebuke of them all.
وَ إِذا دُعُوا إِلَى اللَّهِ وَ رَسُولِهِ لِيَحْكُمَ بَيْنَهُمْ إِذا فَرِيقٌ مِنْهُمْ مُعْرِضُونَ ٤٨
(24:48) And when they are called to Allah and His Messenger that he may judge between them, lo, a party of them turn aside.
The theme and tone of the verse suggests that these verses were revealed about a certain hypocrite who was referred to the Prophet’s judgment in some dispute that had occurred between him and someone else, but he refused to consult the Prophet. The verse was therefore revealed about him.
The Prophet’s judgment among the people was only based on God’s rule and according to what God revealed to him, as He says: Surely We have revealed the Book to you with the truth that you may judge between people by means of that which Allah has shown you (). Therefore, in addition to being directly attributable to him, the Prophet’s judgments are also attributable to God, in the sense that his judgements were made in the light of God’s law and His appointment of the Prophet for judgment and ruling.
Given the above explanation, being “called to Allah” means being told to follow what God’s religion necessitates with respect to the case of the dispute, while being “called to His Messenger that he may judge between them” means being told to follow what the Prophet directly rules. Apparently, the pronoun “he” in “that he may judge between them” refers to the Messenger [not God]. A single pronoun [“he,” instead of “they” in dual form] is used here to show that the Messenger’s judgment is the same as God’s judgment.
The relationship between this verse and the last one is that of a particular to a universal. This verse describes a specific case of aversion [from the judgment of God’s Messenger] while the aversion mentioned in the last verse was absolute and unconditional, referring to the disbelievers in general.
وَ إِنْ يَكُنْ لَهُمُ الْحَقُّ يَأْتُوا إِلَيْهِ مُذْعِنِينَ ٤٩
(24:49) And if the truth be on their side, they come to him quickly, obedient (mudhʿinīn, from idhʿān).
Idhʿān is synonymous with inqiyād (obedience, compliance). The phrase “they come to him” suggests that “the truth” in this verse refers to the Messenger’s judgment. This also matches the context of the verse. The Prophet’s judgment is “the truth” in the sense that it is never separable from truth, because he always judges according to the truth. The meaning of the verse is: “If the truth—which is the Messenger’s judgment—is in their favor and not against them, then they would go obediently toward his judgment. Thus, their aversion from his rule is because of it being against them and not in their favor.” The implication of this is that they are followers of their desires instead of the truth.
أَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ مَرَضٌ أَمِ ارْتابُوا أَمْ يَخافُونَ أَنْ يَحِيفَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِمْ وَ رَسُولُهُ بَلْ أُولئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ ٥٠
(24:50) Is there in their hearts a disease, or are they in doubt (irtābū, from irtiyāb), or do they fear that Allah and His Messenger will be unjust (yaḥīfa, from ḥayf) toward them? Nay! They themselves are the unjust.
Ḥayf means jawr (injustice, oppression, wrong). The context of the verses suggests that “the heart’s disease” here means “weakness of faith,” which is also what is meant in many other verses. For example: Be not soft in (your) speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease may desire (), and: If the hypocrites and those in whose hearts is a disease and the agitators in the city do not desist, We shall most certainly set you over them ().
Some exegetes have said that “the heart’s disease” here means “hypocrisy.” However, this cannot be true because their hypocrisy was already stated at the beginning of these verses: and these are not believers (). Therefore, it does not make sense to ask whether they are hypocrites [by saying “Is there in their hearts a disease…?”], and then make a transition from that by saying: Nay! They themselves are the unjust.
Irtiyāb means shakk (doubt, uncertainty). Since it is mentioned unconditionally, it apparently includes having any doubts in religion after believing in it. The meaning should not be confined to only having doubts in the Prophet’s qualification for judgment, having doubts in his justice, or other similar doubts, because such restriction of meaning would inherently call for some sign and evidence [in the text or context of the verse].
… or do they fear that Allah and His Messenger will be unjust toward them?: Turning away from the Prophet’s judgment according to God’s religion implies either of two things: (1) the divine law which the Prophet follows in his judgment is unjust and fails to pay the due right of each side; and/or (2) the Prophet does not observe the truth and rights in his judgment. That is why the verse is effectively saying: “Or is it that they turn aside from the Prophet’s judgment because they fear that God and His Messenger may wrong them?” Referring to the rule of a judge can only be scary if there is a possibility that he may be unjust in his rule and may deviate from the truth to falsehood. However, there is no such likelihood in the rule of God and His Messenger. That is why there is no room for such fear.
… Nay (bal)! They themselves are the unjust: The word bal (nay, rather) shows a transition to a final conclusion that replaces the previous three possibilities. It means that their aversion is not due to having a doubt or a disease in their hearts [the first two possibilities], because if that were the case, then they should not have ever gone to the Prophet obediently, even in cases when his judgment was in their favor. Rather, they would have turned away from his rule regardless of it being for them or against them. Also, there is no reason to fear being wronged by God and His Messenger [the third possibility], because God and His Messenger are free from injustice. Therefore, the only cause for their behavior—of refusing to refer to the judgment of God and His Messenger—is that they are unjust.
Given the above explanations, the three factors mentioned as possible causes for their aversion are exhaustive and mutually exclusive, stating three causes other than hypocrisy. The verse is effectively saying that they are hypocrites and not true believers, because otherwise their aversion would have been due to one of three things: (1) their weakness of faith; (2) their loss of belief because of doubt; or (3) an unwarranted fear.
Therefore, “injustice” here apparently means “hypocrisy.” It is called injustice in the sense that the person violates the conditions and implications of īmān (belief, faith) in practice, in spite of admitting it verbally. This is what we also saw above: and these are not believers (). It could also be that “injustice” here specifically refers to being unjust with respect to non-financial rights [as opposed to all rights]. It cannot mean injustice in its absolute and unconditional sense, because that would include the previous three possibilities, and therefore stating “they themselves are the unjust” as a substitute for them would not be correct.
The exegetes have had extended discussions about the possibilities and the transition in the verse, however, what we mentioned above should be sufficient. Those who want to read more than this should refer to the elaborate books of tafsīr.
إِنَّما كانَ قَوْلَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ إِذا دُعُوا إِلَى اللَّهِ وَ رَسُولِهِ لِيَحْكُمَ بَيْنَهُمْ أَنْ يَقُولُوا سَمِعْنا وَ أَطَعْنا وَ أُولئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ ٥١
(24:51) The response of the believers, when they are invited to Allah and His Messenger that he may judge between them, is ever (kāna) only to say: We hear and we obey; and those are the successful.
This verse describes one of the necessary consequences and implications of īmān (belief, faith). This is inferred from the use of the attribute “believers” in the verse, as well as the explicit mention of the verb kāna (lit. “was, has been, is”) where it says: The response of the believers…is ever (kāna) only to say. Belief in God and His Messenger means the heart’s commitment to follow what God and His Messenger decree. Its practical implication is to respond positively when one is called to the judgment of God and His Messenger, as opposed to rejecting the call.
“Invitation” in this verse—where it says, “when they are invited to Allah and His Messenger that he may judge between them”—refers to one side of a disagreement inviting and asking the other side to refer to God and His Messenger to settle their dispute. This interpretation is deduced from the word idhā (when), at the beginning of the phrase. This “invitation” in the verse cannot refer to the call of God and His Messenger, meaning the religious order that the believers must refer to the rule of God and His Messenger in their disputes, because that is an eternal law and is not limited to any particular time [indicated by “when”].
Some exegetes have said that the subject of “when they are invited” is God and His Messenger, meaning: When God and His Messenger call them… However, our explanation above should clarify the problem with this view. Nevertheless, the call and invitation of others [to the judgment of God and His Messenger] ultimately traces to the call of God and His Messenger.
Either way, the verse is saying that whenever the believers are called to the ruling of God and His Messenger, their response is only: We hear and we obey. They always give ear to and obey the divine call, which, in this verse, can be interpreted in three ways: (1) It refers to when one side of the dispute calls the other side to refer to the ruling of God and His Messenger. (2) It is refers to the command of God and His Messenger to refer to their ruling. (3) It means that they hear and submit to the ruling of God and His Messenger—albeit this possibility is unlikely.
Restricting the response of the believers to “We hear and we obey” implies that they never reject such a call. Rejecting this call would be stepping out of the boundaries of belief, which was the message of “Nay! They themselves are the unjust” (), as we discussed above. Therefore, this verse is an explanation and justification for the final transition in the last verse.
The verse ends by saying: and those are the successful. This means that success is only for them, not that they only have success.
وَ مَنْ يُطِعِ اللَّهَ وَ رَسُولَهُ وَ يَخْشَ اللَّهَ وَ يَتَّقْهِ فَأُولئِكَ هُمُ الْفائِزُونَ ٥٢
(24:52) And he who obeys Allah and His Messenger, and fears Allah, and is careful of (his duty to) Him, these it is that are the felicitous (al-fāʾizūna, from fawz).
Fawz (felicity, happiness) is the same as falāḥ (salvation, success, deliverance). Given the context of the previous verses, this verse serves as a proof and rationale—like a universal—for the last verse. The last attributed success to those who are believers, and who respond positively when they are called to the ruling of God and His Messenger. Then, it is as if this verse is providing the following syllogism in order to prove that:
If one accepts the ruling of God and His Messenger while being a true believer, it means that he obeys God and His Messenger, is fearful of God inwardly, and is conscious of Him outwardly.
If one obeys God and His Messenger in their judgments, and is fearful and conscious of God, then he is felicitous.
Thus, these believers [who accept the ruling of God and His Messenger] are felicitous, meaning successful.
This verse applies to both sides of the dispute, including the caller and the called. It describes those who invite others to the ruling of God and His Messenger, as well as those who respond positively to this call. Hence, in addition to explaining and justifying the previous verse, it generalizes the good promise [of success and felicity] to both the caller and the called.
وَ أَقْسَمُوا بِاللَّهِ جَهْدَ أَيْمانِهِمْ لَئِنْ أَمَرْتَهُمْ لَيَخْرُجُنَّ قُلْ لا تُقْسِمُوا طاعَةٌ مَعْرُوفَةٌ إِنَّ اللَّهَ خَبِيرٌ بِما تَعْمَلُونَ ٥٣
(24:53) And they swear by Allah with the most energetic (jahd) of their oaths (aymānihim) that if you command them they would certainly go forth. Say: Swear not; (it is) known obedience; surely Allah is aware of what you do.
Jahd means ṭāqah (ability, capacity, effort). Jahda aymānihim means “the heaviest and strongest of their vows.” The meaning is: “They swear by God to the extent and utmost degree of their effort and ability,” where a word like mablagh (extent, the utmost degree) is implied in the verse.
Apparently, “going forth” means leaving [their homes and/or Medina] for jihad, as used in several other verses, such as: And if they had intended to go forth, they would certainly have provided equipment for it, but Allah did not like their going forth, so He withheld them, and it was said (to them): Hold back with those who hold back. Had they gone forth with you, they would not have added to you aught save corruption ().
… Say: Swear not…: They are prohibited from swearing.
… known obedience (ṭāʿah maʿrūfah)…: This is a predicate for an omitted subject, which is a pronoun that refers to “going forth.” This statement [“(it is) known obedience”] is mentioned to explain and justify the previous prohibition: Swear not. That is why there is no conjunction [such as “and” (wāw) or “so” (the letter fāʾ)] between these two parts of the verse. This explanation and justification is further complemented by saying: surely Allah is aware of what you do.
The meaning of the verse is: They swear to God by their most emphatic vows that if you order them to leave for jihad, they would go forth. But tell them not to swear, because leaving for jihad is a known act of obedience in the religion [of Islam]. It is already something obligatory, so you do not need to make it incumbent upon yourselves by emphatic oaths. And if you are making these oaths in order to satisfy God and His Messengers, then God is well aware of what you do; He is not deceived by how much you stress your vows.
Some exegetes have said: “Going forth” means handing over their homes and possessions if the Messengers judges so. Ṭāʿah maʿrūfah means “good and honorable obedience.” It is a subject for an omitted predicate which is implied: “honorable obedience to the Prophet is better than your oaths.” Therefore, the meaning of the verse is: They swear to God by their most emphatic vows that if you rule in their disputes that they should let go of their homes and possessions, they would do so. Tell them: “Do not to swear, because your good obedience of the Prophet is better than your vows by God, and God is well aware of what you do.”
This interpretation better connects to the previous verse than our suggested interpretation. However, the problem with it is that it does not comply with what was explicitly mentioned above, that they reject “when they are invited to Allah and His Messenger that he may judge between them” (). Since it was already said that they turn aside and deviate from the ruling of God and His Messenger, it does not make sense that they swear to leave their homes and possessions if the Prophet orders them to do so in his ruling and judgment. That is obvious. The only other possibility is that “those who swear” [that is, the subject in this verse] are different from “those who reject the call and turn aside from the ruling.” However, in that case there would be no evidence to warrant the interpretation of “going forth” as this meaning [of submitting one’s home and possessions].
قُلْ أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَ أَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ فَإِنْ تَوَلَّوْا فَإِنَّما عَلَيْهِ ما حُمِّلَ وَ عَلَيْكُمْ ما حُمِّلْتُمْ وَ إِنْ تُطِيعُوهُ تَهْتَدُوا وَ ما عَلَى الرَّسُولِ إِلاَّ الْبَلاغُ الْمُبِينُ ٥٤
(24:54) Say: Obey Allah and obey the Messenger; but if you turn back, then on him rests that which is imposed on him and on you rests that which is imposed on you; and if you obey him, you will be guided; and nothing rests on the Messenger but clear delivering (of the message).
This verse orders the audience to obey God in the religion that He has sent down, and to obey the Messenger in what he has brought to the people from God, as well as in his commands with regards to any matter, whether religious or worldly. Starting the verse by “say” indicates that all obedience is due to God. This idea is then reasserted by saying, “obey the Messenger” instead of “obey Me” because obeying a person as a “messenger” is the same as obeying the one who has sent him. This completes the argument. That is why the verse continues to say three things:
(1) But if you turn back, then on him rests that which is imposed on him and on you rests that which is imposed on you. That is: If you turn away and refrain from obeying the Messenger, it will not harm the Messenger, because he is only responsible for what he has been charged with, and you are only responsible for what you have been charged with. What is imposed on each of you does not touch the other side, for all obedience is due to God.
(2) And if you obey him, you will be guided. That is: Even though each of you is responsible for what has been imposed on you, if you obey the Messenger, you will be guided. This is because what he has brought to you is a message from God, and what he orders you to do is by God’s command. Therefore, if you obey him, you are obeying God, and guidance rests in obeying God.
(3) And nothing rests on the Messenger but clear delivering (of the message). This sentence serves as an explanation and justification for the previous two points. What is imposed on the Messenger is only to deliver the message. Hence, he bears no blame if you deviate from his message. Also, since he is a messenger who only delivers a message, it follows that obeying him is equal to obeying his Sender, and there is guidance in obeying his Sender (that is, God, swt).
وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنْكُمْ وَ عَمِلُوا الصَّالِحاتِ لَيَسْتَخْلِفَنَّهُمْ فِي الْأَرْضِ كَمَا اسْتَخْلَفَ الَّذِينَ مِنْ قَبْلِهِمْ وَ لَيُمَكِّنَنَّ لَهُمْ دِينَهُمُ الَّذِي ارْتَضى لَهُمْ وَ لَيُبَدِّلَنَّهُمْ مِنْ بَعْدِ خَوْفِهِمْ أَمْناً يَعْبُدُونَنِي لا يُشْرِكُونَ بِي شَيْئاً وَ مَنْ كَفَرَ بَعْدَ ذلِكَ فَأُولئِكَ هُمُ الْفاسِقُونَ ٥٥
(24:55) Allah has promised to those of you who believe and do good that He will most certainly make them successors in the land as He made successors those before them, and that He will most certainly establish for them their religion which He has approved for them, and that He will most certainly, after their fear, give them security in exchange; they shall serve Me, not associating aught with Me; and whoever is ungrateful after that, they are the transgressors.
This verse was apparently revealed in Medina, not in Mecca before the migration, because it appears in a Medinite chapter. This is confirmed by the tone of the verse, and especially by its subsequent part. Given this, the verse offers a good promise to those who believe and do righteous deeds, saying that God shall soon bless them with a righteous society that is exclusive to them. He shall make them successors in the land, establish their religion for them, and exchange their fear for security. As a result, they will not fear the plot of the hypocrites or the obstructions of the disbelievers; thus they will worship God without associating anything with Him.
Key Debate: The Promise of Succession →
Allah has promised to those of you (minkum) who believe and do good…: This statement addresses all Muslims universally, including both the hypocrites and the believers, including those who do good deeds and those who do not. Then, the particle min (lit. “of”) in minkum is partitive, not descriptive, meaning that the verse’s promise is specifically for those individuals among the Muslims who believe and do good deeds, but not others.
… that He will most certainly make them successors (la-yastakhlifannahum, from istikhlāf) in the land as He made successors those before them…: There are two possibilities for the meaning of istikhlāf here:
(1) It means giving them divine khilāfah (caliphate, vicegerency, vicariate), as used in the stories of Adam, David and Solomon, where God says: I am going to place in the land a khalīfah (), O David ! Surely We have made you a khalifah in the land (), and: And Solomon inherited David (). Given this meaning, “those before them” would be the previous prophets and saints who were vicegerents and representatives of God. However, this meaning is unlikely, as we shall explain below.
(2) It means making a group of people inherit the land and giving them authority and dominion over it after another group, as He says: Surely the land is Allah’s; He causes such of His servants to inherit it as He will, and the end is for those who guard (against evil) (), and: (As for) the land, My righteous servants shall inherit it (). Given this meaning, “those before them” would be the believers among the nations of the previous prophets such as the people of Noah, Hūd, Ṣāliḥ and Shuʿayb (Jethro, Reuel). God obliterated the disbelievers and evildoers among them, but He saved their pure believers. He describes them collectively as follows: And those who disbelieved said to their messengers: We will most certainly drive you forth from our land, or else you shall come back into our religion. So their Lord revealed to them: Most certainly We will destroy the unjust. And most certainly We will settle you in the land after them; this is for him who fears standing in My presence and who fears My threat (). They were those who subscribed to God alone, and thus He rescued them. Then they formed righteous societies and lived there, until “time took its toll on them and so their hearts were hardened” [].
Some exegetes have said that “those who were made successors before them” refers to the Israelites. When God killed Pharaoh and his hosts, he made the Israelites inherit the lands of Egypt and the Levant, and He established them there, as He says about them: And We desired to bestow a favor upon those who were deemed weak in the land, and to make them the Imams, and to make them the heirs, and to grant them power in the land ().
The problem with this view is that the society of Israelites that was formed after their delivery from Pharaoh and his hosts was not free from disbelief, hypocrisy and iniquity. It was not purely composed of those who believe and do righteous deeds. According to the explicit text of the Noble Qur’an in several verses, such a society—composed of only believers who do righteous deeds—has never existed. Therefore, there is no connection between giving succession to those who believe and do righteous deeds, and the succession of the Israelites, because the latter were not composed of righteous people alone, but they were mixed with disbelievers, hypocrites and evildoers.
One may say that the comparison is only concerned with their very succession, where the succession of the believers is compared to the succession of the Israelites as a case of those who were before, regardless of how they were. However, if that were the purpose, then there is no reason to confine the comparison to the Israeli societies, because there were much stronger and more populated people during the time of revelation and before that [who would have been a better match for such comparison]. For example, there were the Romans, the Persians, the Chaldeans and others. Similarly, God says concerning [the tribes] ʿĀd and Thamūd: And remember when He made you successors after Noah’s people (), and: And remember when He made you successors after ʿĀd (). He also addresses the disbelievers in this nation [of Prophet Muḥammad]: And He it is Who has made you successors in the land (), and: He it is Who made you successors in the land ().
You might say: Perhaps the verse is first making a comparison with the Israelites, then it amends the comparison for the intended righteous society by adding: and that He will most certainly establish for them their religion… Is there anything wrong with this?
The answer is: That is fine [to interpret a part of the verse as a clarification and elaboration], but then there would be no reason to restrict the comparison to the succession of the Israelites alone, as we stated above.
… He will most certainly establish (la-yumakkinanna, from tamkīn) for them their religion which He has approved for them…: Tamkīn is “to make something fixed, firm and established in a place (makān).” It is a metaphorical expression for stability without loss, agitation or shaking, in which case the fixed object can function properly and effectively, without being obstructed or prevented by anything. The establishment (tamakkun) of a religion would be a situation where the religion is practiced across the society, without it being denied or disparaged. It is when its principle teachings are adopted without any disagreement or dispute. God states in several places in His Book that disagreement in religion is a result of transgression; for example: And none but the very people who were given it [the Scripture] differed about it after clear arguments had come to them, revolting among themselves ().
The religion “which He has approved for them” is the religion of submission (islām). It is ascribed to them [by saying “their religion”] because of two points: (1) in order to honor them; and (2) in order to show that this religion it is what they need and call for by their innate human nature (fiṭrah).
… and that He will most certainly, after their fear, give them security in exchange…: The conjunction “and” joins this sentence to: He will most certainly make them successors. The same holds for the conjunction in the previous statement: and that He will most certainly establish for them. The verse literally says “He will exchange them” (la-yubaddilannahum), meaning that they will be exchanged. There are a few possible explanations for this usage: (1) It is a metaphorical expression. (2) It involves an omission that is implied by “after their fear.” The implied meaning would be: He will exchange their fear. (3) “Security” (amn) here means “secure” (āmmīn, in plural). Either way, “fear” refers to the difficulties that were inflicted upon the believers in the early years of Islam by the disbelievers and hypocrites.
… they shall serve Me, not associating aught with Me…: Given the theme of the verse, it is most appropriate to interpret this expression as an adverbial clause, implying the conjunction “while” at its beginning. In other words, this sentence describes the state and condition (ḥāl) of the pronoun “them” in “give them security.” The meaning is: He will exchange their fear for security, while they will worship Me, not associating anything with Me.
This expression implies an absolute negation of shirk (polytheism, associating others with God) altogether, because of the following points: (1) It involves a transition from the third person to the first person [from “He will” to “serve Me” and “with Me”]. (2) It emphasizes “serve Me” by adding “not associating aught with Me.” (3) It involves the use of indefinite (nakirah) in a negative expression.
All of these emphases show that the believers serve and worship God sincerely and without any apparent or hidden association. In short, God will change their society to a secure one, where God is worshiped alone and no one else is adopted as a lord.
… and whoever is ungrateful (kafara) after that (dhālika), they are the transgressors (al-fāsiqūn, from fisq): Fisq (iniquity, evildoing, transgression) means “stepping out of the boundaries of servitude.” Apparently, the demonstrative pronoun “that” (dhālika) refers to what is promised [that is, the establishment of the righteous society]. Given this, it would be most appropriate to interpret kafara as a verb that is derived from kufrān (ingratitude, ungratefulness), which is the opposite of shukr (gratitude, gratefulness) [as opposed to being derived from kufr, meaning disbelief]. The meaning is: After the fulfilment of this promise, those who are ungrateful to God—through their denial, hypocrisy or other heinous sins—are perfect in transgression.
The exegetes have disagreed very much over this verse. Some have said: The verse refers to the Companions of the Prophet. God fulfilled His promise—of making them successors in the land, establishing their religion for them, and exchanging their fear for security—by making Islam victorious after the death of the Prophet during the time of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs (al-Khulafāʾ al-Rāshidīn). The word istikhlāf (giving succession, making inheritors, replacement) here refers to the succession of the four caliphs after the Prophet, or the succession of the first three of them. It is attributed to all the Companions, even though only a few of them were inheritors, based on attributing the properties of a part to the whole. For example, sometimes when a person from tribe X is murdered it is said, “Tribe X was murdered.”
Some have said: The verse refers to the entire nation of Muḥammad. “Giving them succession” refers to making them inherit the land, as God gave the land in inheritance to their previous nations. According to some, it refers to the succession of the caliphs who came after the Prophet. “Establishing their religion and exchanging their fear for security” refer to the establishment and stability of Islam, and the defeat of the enemies of religion. God fulfilled His promise by helping Islam and the Muslims after the Prophet’s death. As a result, many cities they gained, and over many lands they reigned.
According to both of the above interpretations, the verse would be among the future predictions of the Qur’an, forecasting an event before its occurrence.
Some have said: The verse refers to the promised Mahdi, who will fill the land with justice and equity after it is filled with injustice and inequity, as mentioned in mutawātir (repeatedly reported, mass-transmitted) narrations. Those “who believe and do good” are the Prophet and the Imams of his Household (Ahl al-Bayt).
However, what can be understood from the tone and theme of this noble verse—given our discussions above, and keeping away from the neglectful and compromising views that certain exegetes have fallen into—is that the promise in this verse pertains to only a subset of the Muslim community (ummah), not to all of them, and not to any specific individuals among them. The subset of Muslims that is explicitly mentioned in the verse is: those who believe and do good. Beyond that, there is no indication in the text of the verse, nor in any rational evidence, saying that these are the Companions, the Prophet, or the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt. There is also no evidence for the view that “those who believe and do good” include the entire ummah, and the emphasis on a specific group of them is only to show them a special regard and honor. All of these are unwarranted impositions on the verse.
What is meant by istikhlāf (succession, inheritance)—in “He will most certainly make them successors in the land as He made successors those before them”—is the formation of a righteous and faithful society from them, which will inherit the land as the previous powerful and strong nations inherited it. The fulfilment of this succession will depend on the righteousness of their society collectively, not on the righteousness of any specific person individually, just as it was the case with “those before them.”
We also mentioned the possibility that istikhlāf here means divine kingdom or khilāfah (caliphate, vicegerency, vicariate), as used in the stories of David, Solomon and Joseph. However, it is unlikely that the verse refers to the holy prophets of God as “those before them.” This expression, and other similar expressions in meaning, have appeared more than fifty times in the Qur’an, but none of them refer to the previous prophets, despite their frequent mention in the Qur’an. Instead, God refers to them with expressions like “messengers before you” () or “messengers before me” (), where the pronoun refers to the Prophet [not the Muslims or believers].
The “establishment” (tamkīn) of their religion refers to the stability of the religion on its stem, such that it is neither shaken by their disagreement over its roots, nor by their negligence in executing its laws and practicing its branches [that is, injunctions]. Their society shall be free from the defilement of hypocrisy, as we discussed above.
“Exchanging their fear for security” means the spread of peace and security through their society, such that they fear no enemy whatsoever; whether internally or externally, whether overt or covert, and whether concerning their religious affairs or concerning their worldly well-being.
One exegete has said: It means that they will have no fear of external enemies from outside their society, unlike the Muslims [at the onset of Islam] who were afraid of the disbelievers and polytheists who wanted to put down the light of God and efface the call of religion.
The problem with this interpretation is that it involves an unwarranted qualification of the meaning which contravenes the unconditional wording of the verse, without any evidence to support such qualification. Moreover, the verse has a tone of showing God’s grace and favor (imtinān). How is that compatible with promising a society which is merely secure from external enemies, but not necessarily secure internally? Given the interpretation above, this society could be filled by corruption and disaster from within; where individuals do not feel secure about their life, honor or property; where only the ruling government has freedom; and where only the extravagant transgressors prosper.
“Serving God without associating anything with Him” is meant in the true sense of these words. It means that God alone shall be served and worshiped with sincerity throughout the entire society. It means the obliteration of every distinction and advantage other than taqwā (God-fear, piety, God-wariness).
The gist of all the above points is: God has promised those who believe and do righteous deeds among the Muslims that He will form a righteous society out of them that will be free from the defilement of disbelief, hypocrisy and evildoing. They will inherit the land, where the beliefs and practices of its members will be governed only by the true religion. They will live in security, without fear of any enemy within or without, free from the schemes of the plotters, the injustice of the oppressors, and the tyranny of the tyrants.
Such a pure and perfect society, with these excellent and holy qualities, has not occurred ever since the time of the Prophet. If it were to be fulfilled by any society, it would only match the time of the appearance of the Mahdi, as described in mutawātir (repeatedly reported, mass-transmitted) narrations from the Prophet and the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt. However, the verse would refer to the righteous society [at that time], and not to him alone.
One may object: What is the point of revealing this verse at a time when neither the Mahdi, nor any of those with him were alive? How does this promise encourage “those who believe and do good” among the audience [at the time of revelation]?
The answer is: This objection is based on confusing individual and collective addresses. Some speeches are directed at individuals, intending those specific individuals in particular. Some other speeches are directed at individuals, but in the sense that they exhibit certain qualities. In the first type of address, the promise, threat or any other message in the speech does not go beyond those specific individuals. In the second type of address, the message would also be applicable to anyone who demonstrates the mentioned qualities in the speech. The address in this verse is of the second type, as we discussed above.
This is the type of address in most of Qur’anic speeches that are directed at both believers and disbelievers. It is in this sense that the Qur’an rebukes the People of the Book, particularly the Jews, for what their predecessors did, and censures the polytheists for the actions of their fathers [because they had the same qualities].
Another specific example of this address is the following promise of God: “So when the second promise came that they may bring you to grief” (), because the audience of this promise did not live to see its fulfilment. Another example is what God narrates from Dhū al-Qarnayn: But when the promise of my Lord comes to pass He will make it level with the ground, and the promise of my Lord is ever true (). Likewise is His promise of the Hour [that is, the Resurrection], where the carpet of worldly life shall be rolled up by the blow of the Trumpet, as He says: It will be momentous in the heavens and the earth; it will not come on you but of a sudden (). Thus this verse [] gives a promise to righteous believers, in the sense that they are righteous believers. None of those who were alive at the time of revelation of the verse would live to witness the fulfilment of this promise, but there is no problem with that as long as there will be some members of such a society with the same qualities to observe its fulfilment.
Given the above, if we want to give due justice to the verse, it would only match the promised society that will be formed after the appearance of the Mahdi. However, if we interpret its terms and phrases loosely and not literally, then “the succession of those who believe and do good among them” could refer to the succession of the entire Muslim nation (ummah), justified by some form of generalization (taghlīb) or other similar considerations.
Based on this loose and broader interpretation, “the establishment of the religion that God has approved for them” would refer to being known in the world as Muslims. It means that Islam is counted as their religion formally, even though they may be divided into 73 denominations, where some of them declare others as heretics and do not see them entitled to life, honor and property. “The exchange of their fear for security, where they worship God without associating anything with Him” would refer to the victory and dominance of Islam in the world, its spread across most of the inhabited lands, and the performance of apparent rituals like prayer, fasting and pilgrimage. Again, this would only describe the appearance; otherwise, they may have no security within themselves, and truth and rights may have departed from amongst them. Overall, those who are promised would be the entire Muslim nation, and their succession would be the victory and dominance that God bestowed upon them gradually after the Prophet’s migration, which continued after his death.
Even based on this interpretation we cannot limit the verse to the time of the Four Rightly-Guided Caliphs. Rather, the verse’s promise would apply to the subsequent times until the fall of the Islamic caliphate [in 13th century CE]. Similarly, there are no grounds for saying that the verse is only about the Four Rightly-Guided Caliphs [individually], the first three of them, or only ʿAlī.
وَ أَقِيمُوا الصَّلاةَ وَ آتُوا الزَّكاةَ وَ أَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُرْحَمُونَ ٥٦
(24:56) And keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate and obey the Messenger, so that mercy may be shown to you.
This verse complements the previous verses, because its content is similar to the theme and context of the above.
And keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate…: This is equivalent to commanding the readers to obey God in what He has legislated for His servants. The specific mention of prayer and the poor-rate is because they are two of the major pillars in religious duties. Prayer and poor-rate represent duty to God and duty to the people, respectively.
… and obey the Messenger…: This refers to the Prophet’s authority in judicial and governmental matters.
… so that mercy may be shown to you: This expression justifies the verse’s command by referring to the welfare and benefit that it involves. The meaning deduced from the context is: Obey God and obey the Messenger, because by these two forms of obedience it is hoped that God’s mercy may cover you. In other words, if you obey God and the Messenger, God He will fulfil His promise for you, or He will hasten its fulfilment for you.
If hypocrisy is lifted from among the Muslims, if they all become righteous, and if they unitedly support the message of truth, then that would be a key to the formation of a righteous society that will shower every good upon them.
لا تَحْسَبَنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مُعْجِزِينَ فِي الْأَرْضِ وَ مَأْواهُمُ النَّارُ وَ لَبِئْسَ الْمَصِيرُ٥٧
(24:57) Think not that those who disbelieve shall escape in the land, and their abode is the fire, and certainly evil is the resort!
This verse complements the previous verses. It emphasizes the above promise of succession in the land, establishment of religion, and exchange of fear for security.
God addresses His Prophet with an emphatic address, that he should not think that the disbelievers can render God defeated and weak. They should not suppose that they can ever prevent God from fulfilling His promise because of their power and strength. This is particularly a good news to the Prophet, because it assures him of God’s grace upon his nation, and the defeat and domination of his enemies. That is why the verse addresses him exclusively in second person singular.
The first part of the verse is a prohibition [in the imperative form], but it is equivalent to a negative statement [in the declarative mood], implying that the disbelievers will cease to oppose the religion. That is why it is then complemented by “and their abode is the fire…” [in a declarative form]. The verse is effectively saying: They shall be defeated in this world, and their abode in the hereafter shall be the fire, which is an evil resort.
Examining Narrations
- Concerning “And they say: We believe in Allah…” (ff) Majmaʿ al-bayān says: It is said that these verses were revealed about one of the hypocrites who had a dispute with a Jewish man. The Jew invited the hypocrite to the Messenger of God (s.w.a.) [for judgment], but the hypocrite invited the Jew to Kaʿb b. al-Ashraf [a prominent Jew in Medina].
Al-Balkhī says: Once there was a dispute between ʿAlī and ʿUthmān. ʿUthmān had purchased a land from ʿAlī, but then he found some rocks coming out of it, and so he decided to return the land on the account of having a flaw. ʿAlī refused to take it back and said, “Let the Messenger of God judge between me and you.” Then al-Ḥakam b. Abī al-ʿĀṣ said [to ʿUthmān], “Don’t set him [the Prophet] as your judge, because if you take this case to him, then he will judge in favor of his cousin [ʿAlī].” That is when these verses were revealed. This, or a similar account to it, has been narrated from Imam al-Bāqir.
Author’s comment: It is narrated from al-Ḍaḥḥāk that the dispute was between ʿAlī and al-Mughīrah b. Wāʾil, with the rest of the story being similar to the above.
- Concerning “The response of the believers…” (), Imam al-Bāqir said: The verse refers to the Commander of the Faithful [Imam ʿAlī].
- Concerning verse (but if you turn back, then on him rests that which is imposed on him and on you rests that which is imposed on you…) Salamat b. Yazīd al-Juhanī said: Once I asked, “O Messenger of God! If there come rulers after you who demand from us the right that is incumbent upon us but deprive us of the right that God has given us, should we fight and oppose them?” The Prophet replied, “On them rests that which is imposed on them, and on you rests that which is imposed on you.”
Author’s comment: There are other narrations along these lines. However, one should have no doubt that given Islam’s spirit of reviving the truth and putting down falsehood, it would never approve the government and authority of oppressors who openly deny the people their rights. Islam does not deem it permissible to remain silent and bear the injustice and oppression of tyrants and transgressors if one is capable of making reform. Modern sociological studies have also shown that if authoritarian rulers follow their own views and desires in executive and judicial matters, it has far more dangerous and destructive results than the kindling of upheaval and war in order to make such rulers observe the rights and justice.
- Concerning verse (Allah has promised to those of you who believe…) Majmaʿ al-bayān says: There is disagreement over this verse [among the exegetes]. What is narrated from the Ahl al-Bayt is that it is about the Mahdi from Muḥammad’s family.
- ʿAlī b. al-Ḥusayn recited this verse () and said: By God, these are the followers (shīʿah) of us Ahl al-Bayt. He [God] will fulfil this about them through the hands of a man from us, and that is the Mahdi of this nation (ummah). That is the one about whom the Messenger of God said: “If there remains of the life of this world but one day, God will extend that day until a man from my progeny appears whose name is my name, and who shall fill the earth with justice and equity just as it is filled with injustice and inequity.”
A similar account to this has been narrated from Imams al-Bāqir and al-Ṣādiq.
Author’s comment: This is what the narrations from the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt say. We explained above how the verse matches this interpretation.
After narrating the above, Majmaʿ al-bayān says, “Hence, ‘those who believe and do good’ would be the Prophet and his Household (Ahl al-Bayt).” However, the reader should know that this title [“those who believe and do good”] is more general and inclusive than that. The above narration does not limit it either, because the Imam says: “By God these are the followers of us Ahl al-Bayt. He [God] will fulfil this about them through the hands of a man from us…”
- Concerning verse (Allah has promised to those of you who believe…) al-Barāʾ said: It was revealed about us [the Companions] when we were in intense fear.
Author’s comment: Apparently this implies that “those who believe” are the Companions [of the Prophet, s.a.w.]. However, you should know by now that there is no evidence in the verse to indicate this meaning. Rather, the evidence is against it [as discussed above in exposition of the verse].
- Ubayy b. Kaʿb said: When the Messenger of God and his Companions [that is, Muhājirīn, the Meccan immigrants] came to Medina and were given shelter by the Anṣār (Medinite supporters), all Arabs started firing at them from the same bow [that is, they all united against the Muslims]. As a result, the Muslims had to be armed and on the watch day and night. At that point, they said [amongst themselves, and/or to the Prophet], “Would you ever perceive a day when we may pass the night in peace and security, without fearing anyone but God?” That is when this verse was revealed: Allah has promised to those of you who believe and do good… ().
Author’s comment: This account only identifies the verse’s context and cause of revelation. It neither defines the meaning of “those who believe” nor the time when God shall fulfil this promise. The same is true about another narration as follows:
- When it was revealed to the Prophet “Allah has promised to those of you who believe and do good…” (), he said: This nation should rejoice with the promise of eminence, superiority, [freedom to practice their] religion, support, and establishment in the land. However, if any of you does otherworldly acts for worldly gain and interest, then he shall have no share in the hereafter.
Author’s comment: Giving good news of succession to the nation does not necessarily and decisively mean that “those who believe” in the verse are the entire nation, the Companions in particular, or some of them specifically.
- When the Persians had gathered their forces for war, ʿUmar sought advice and consultation from Imam ʿAlī about whether or not he should move with the army to fight with them. The Imam said: Victory or defeat in this matter does not depend on abundance or scarcity [of forces]. This is God’s religion which He has supported [against the other faiths], and it is His army which He has strengthened and aided, until it has reached the point that it has reached, and has risen as it has today. We hold a promise from God, where He says: Allah has promised to those of you who believe and do good that He will most certainly make them successors in the land as He made successors those before them, and that He will most certainly establish for them their religion which He has approved for them, and that He will most certainly, after their fear, give them security in exchange (). God shall fulfil His promise and support His army.
The head of the government in Islam is like the thread which connects the beads. If it is broken, the beads will disperse; and sometimes when something disperses, it will never come together again. Notwithstanding their small number, the Arabs today count as many because of Islam, and are mighty due to their unity. Thus stay [here in Medina] as the axis, and rotate the mill [of battle] with [the help of] the Arabs. Let them—not yourself—get into the fire of war. If you leave this place [Medina], then the Arabs from the country and all sides will breach [their agreement] against you. You will end up worrying more about what you have left behind yourself unguarded than what you face ahead of you.
Moreover, if the Persians see you tomorrow [in the battlefield], they will say [among themselves], “He is the root of the Arabs. If you cut him, you will be relieved.” This will intensify their determination and ambition against you…
As what you said about their [large] number, [you should know that] in the past we did not use to fight relying on number and abundance, but we used to fight relying on support and assistance [from God].
Author’s comment: In Rūḥ al-maʿānī, the author has used this narration to prove his preferred view that “succession” in the verse refers to the rise of Islam during the time of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs. However, this narration does not show this, but in fact it shows the opposite. The apparent meaning of the Imam’s speech—where he says, “God shall fulfil His promise”—is that God’s promise has not yet been fulfilled, but it will materialize in the future. This suggests that neither the religion had been established, nor the fear [of believers] had been replaced with security. How could it be otherwise when they were surrounded by two fears: the breach of Arabs from the inside, and the assail of enemies from the outside?!
- Abū al-Shaʿthāʾ said: Once I was sitting with Ḥudhayfah and Ibn Masʿūd. Ḥudhayfah said, “Hypocrisy is now over. Hypocrisy was only at the time of the Messenger of God. What there is today is kufr (disbelief, heresy, unfaithfulness) after īmān (belief, faith).” Ibn Masʿūd laughed and then asked, “Based on what do you say this?” He answered, “Based on this verse: Allah has promised to those of you who believe and do good… ().”
Author’s comment: I wish I could know [and ask Ḥudhayfah]: Where did the hypocrites at the time of the Prophet go? Evidence from the Holy Book and history suggests that they were no less than one third of the people of Medina, where most of them used to be. Did they sincerely accept Islam on the day when the Prophet passed away? Or did they change their mind and ceased their duplicity and anticipation of calamities [for the believers]?!
The author’s discussion in the above four paragraphs is entirely centered on the word bal (nay, rather), which shows that what follows this term is an alternative which replaces what was said before it. The author has applied this substitution to all three points mentioned before this term. However, it could be that it only applies to the last point (or do they fear that Allah and His Messenger will be unjust toward them?). In such cases, the application of the alternative to the last point is certain (mutayaqqan), while its application to more distant points is speculative: it cannot be taken for granted, but it needs proof and evidence. The most apparent and primary meaning—especially given the synonymy between ẓulm and ḥayf—is that the last part of the verse is only meant as a clarification for the previous point. This is in line with the Qur’an’s language when presenting an erroneous belief, especially one that contravenes God’s sanctity. In such cases, the Qur’an often interjects an aside or parenthetical remark right away to clarify that error, and then continues the previous discussion. In this case, the verse is saying that God and His Messenger are free from ḥayf (injustice, oppression) but they themselves are characterized by ẓulm (injustice, oppression). Therefore, the last part of the verse does not reject the first two possibilities, and hence we can maintain the apparent unconditional sense of it, which suggests that “being unjust” includes “having disease in the heart” and “having doubts in religion.” (Trans.) ↩︎
The meaning would have been complete even without saying kāna. Its explicit mention here shows that this is an ongoing and inseparable feature of belief in God and His Messenger. (Trans.) ↩︎
In the last possibility there is no element of invitation or calling, but only the ruling. It is unlikely because it is not consonant with the wording of the verse. (Trans.) ↩︎
There is a slight difference between fawz and falāḥ, where the former has a positive meaning while the latter has a negative meaning. Fawz means making a gain, while falāḥ means avoiding a loss. Fawz means winning a goal or pleasure that is desired, while falāḥ means being spared from an evil or pain that is feared. Therefore, fawz can be translated as “triumph, felicity, happiness,” and falāḥ can be translated as “salvation, deliverance, saving.” Both of them are forms of “success,” and one can include the other by implication. (Trans.) ↩︎
Therefore, the implied meaning of this part is: Do not swear because going forth is a known act of obedience (Trans.). ↩︎
One of the meanings of maʿrūf (lit. “known”) is “good.” (Trans.) ↩︎
In other words, the suggested meaning here is particular and specific, while “going forth” in the verse is universal and unconditional. (Trans.) ↩︎
“Say” indicates that even the Messenger is subject to following God’s orders. The argument here shows why one should obey the Messenger: because of his attribute of being a messenger. (Trans.) ↩︎
That is, the verse does not literally mean that they will be exchanged, but it is a way of saying that their state of fear will be exchanged for security. (Trans.) ↩︎
The meaning would be: He will change them to be secure after their fear. (Trans.) ↩︎
“Not associating aught with Me” is a negative expression, and shayʾan (aught, anything) is in the indefinite from. Such usage implies a universal negation, meaning: Not associating with Me anything whatsoever. (Trans.) ↩︎
Ḥakam b. Abī al-ʿĀṣ was the cousin of both ʿUthmān and Abū Sufyān. The Messenger of God was the cousin of ʿAlī. (Trans.) ↩︎
Rūḥ al-maʿānī. ↩︎
Majmaʿ al-bayān. ↩︎
Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of Ibn Jarīr, Ibn Qāniʿ and al-Ṭabarānī, on the authority of ʿAlqamat b. Wāʾil al-Ḥaḍramī. ↩︎
Majmaʿ al-bayān, on the authority of al-ʿAyyāshī, via his chain of narration. ↩︎
Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of Ibn Abī Ḥātim and Ibn Mardawayh. ↩︎
Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of Ibn al-Mundhir, al-Ṭabarānī’s al-Awsāṭ, al-Ḥākim (who has authenticated it), Ibn Mardawayh, al-Bayhaqī’s al-Dalāʾil, and al-Ḍiyāʾ’s al-Mukhtārah. ↩︎
Al-Durr al-manthūr. ↩︎
Nahj al-balāghah. ↩︎
See verses and for reference to the hypocrites’ duplicity and anticipation of calamities, respectively. The one third figure is based on the story of Battle of Uḥud, where the Prophet left Medina with a thousand soldiers, but one third (or three hundred) of them returned and deserted the Prophet. See verse , and the author’s discussion of traditions in volume 7, pp. 18-19 of the English translation. (Trans.) ↩︎