وَلَمَّا جَآءَهُمْ رَسُولٌ مِّنْ عِندِ ٱللَّهِ مُصَدِّقٌ لِّمَا مَعَهُمْ نَبَذَ فَرِيقٌ مِّنَ ٱلَّذِينَ أُوتُوا۟ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ كِتَٰبَ ٱللَّهِ وَرَآءَ ظُهُورِهِمْ كَأَنَّهُمْ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ
“And when there cometh unto them a messenger from Allah, confirming that which they possess, a party of those who have received the Scripture fling the Scripture of Allah behind their backs as if they knew not,” — M. M. Pickthall
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Taberî, this verse explains that the scholars of the People of the Book—Jews and Christians—despite knowing the truth of the Torah in their hands, rejected the Prophet out of envy and malice and turned away from Allah's command in the Torah. They abandoned the Torah and turned to the book of Asaf and the sorcery of Hârût and Mârût, thus knowingly and consciously breaking the covenant that Allah had made with them.
لما جاءهم محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم عارضوه بالتوراة فخاصموه بها، فاتفقت التوراة والقرآن، فنبذوا التوراة وأخذوا بكتاب آصف وسحر هاروت وماروت
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Zemahşerî, this verse indicates that the People of the Book, from whom the jizya would be taken, do not truly believe in Allah and the Day of Judgment, because the Jews hold to dualism (tesniye) and the Christians hold to the Trinity (teslis), and furthermore, they do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful. Regarding the naming of the jizya, it is explained that it received this name either because it is a compensation that the dhimmis are obligated to pay or because it is a recompense for their exemption from execution. The expression 'an yed' is interpreted in multiple ways from both the perspective of the one giving and the one receiving: it can mean given obediently and submissively, given in advance, or given in submission before a dominant and commanding hand.
نفى عنهم الإيمان بالله لأن اليهود مثنية والنصارى مثلثة . وإيمانهم باليوم الآخر لأنهم فيه على خلاف ما يجب وتحريم ما حرم الله ورسوله ؛ لأنهم لا يحرمون ما حرم في الكتاب والسنة
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Kurtubî, the verb 'nebeze/threw' mentioned in the verse refers to the Torah; the People of the Book's rejection and denial of the Prophet means their abandonment of the Torah. In this context, as the opinion of Suddî is reported, their turning to the book of Asaf and the sorcery of Harut-Marut; as the opinion of Sha'bî is reported, their reading the Qur'an but not acting upon it; and as the opinion of Sufyân b. Uyeyna is reported, their beautifying the Book but not following its lawful and unlawful rulings. This behavior is likened to the action of an ignorant person who does not know, yet the wording shows that they entered into disbelief knowingly.
قال السدي : نبذوا التوراة وأخذوا بكتاب آصف وسحر هاروت وماروت وقيل : يجوز أن يعني به القرآن قال الشعبي : هو بين أيديهم يقرءونه ولكن نبذوا العمل به
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Ibn Kesîr, this verse points to the fact that the Jews opposed Hz. Muhammad with the Torah when he came, but when they saw that the Torah and the Qur'an agreed, they abandoned the Torah and turned to the book of Asaf and the sorcery of Harut and Marut. It is narrated that the devils extracted writings that they had buried beneath Solomon's throne after his death and mixed sorcery and disbelief among them, and that the ignorant accused Solomon of disbelief for this reason. Furthermore, it is related that the Jews asked the Prophet five questions to test him, and finally, upon saying that Gabriel was their enemy and that they would believe if it were Michael, this verse was revealed.
فلما مات سليمان أخرجته الشياطين فكتبوا بين كل سطرين سحرا وكفرا وقالوا هذا الذي كان سليمان يعمل بها قال فأكفره جهال الناس وسبوه ووقف علماء الناس
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Beydâvî, the 'Book of Allah that confirms what is with them' mentioned in the verse refers to the Torah, and a group from the People of the Book, by denying the Messenger who came to them (the Prophet), have also rejected the Torah which actually confirms him; for the Torah requires belief in messengers supported by miracles. Their 'throwing the Book behind their backs' is a figurative expression of complete turning away from it and paying it no attention; the expression 'as if they did not know' shows that their knowledge was actually sound but they stubbornly acted as if they did not know. From these two verses, Beydâvî states that the Jewish nation was divided into four sects: those who believe in the Torah and fulfill its rights, those who openly break their covenants and transgress bounds, those who reject it unknowingly due to ignorance, and those who outwardly adhere to it but secretly abandon it out of stubbornness.
وراء ظهورهم مثل لإعراضهم عنه رأسا، بالإعراض عما يرمي به وراء الظهر لعدم الالتفات إليه. كأنهم لا يعلمون أنه كتاب الله، يعني أن علمهم به رصين ولكن يتجاهلون عنادا.
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to this exegete, the expression 'nebeze ferikun' in the verse shows that a group from the People of the Book abandoned the Torah knowingly and consciously; for this phrase is only used regarding people who know. Accordingly, they knew the evidences in the Torah regarding the prophethood of Hz. Muhammad but denied it; however, such deniers should belong to a minority rather than a large group.
فدلالة على أنهم نبذوه عن علم ومعرفة لأنه لا يقال ذلك إلا فيمن يعلم
Comparison
Common ground
Taberî, Kurtubî, Ibn Kesîr, Beydâvî, and Râzî agree on the point that the verse emphasizes the People of the Book (particularly Jewish scholars) consciously and deliberately rejecting the truth of the Torah in their possession and the evidences regarding the Prophet's prophethood. The narration about turning to the book of Asaf and the sorcery of Harut-Marut is also a shared transmission among most exegetes (Taberî, Kurtubî, Ibn Kesîr).
Differences
Zemahşerî shifts the context of the verse to jizya and dhimmi law, emphasizing linguistic analysis (the expression 'an yed'), thereby distinguishing itself from the others. Kurtubî presents different views from earlier scholars (Suddî, Sha'bî, Sufyân b. Uyeyna) side by side, making a pluralistic collection of narrations. Beydâvî introduces a systematic classification dividing the Jewish community into four sects and gives importance to figurative and metaphorical analysis. Râzî, based on linguistic evidence, particularly emphasizes that denial must belong to a minority; this is a nuance that is not stated in this way in the others. These differences stem from the exegetes' methodological preferences between narration-heavy approaches (Taberî, Ibn Kesîr) and language/rhetoric-heavy approaches (Zemahşerî, Râzî, Beydâvî).
Historical context
Early exegete Taberî gathers narration material and relies on reasons for revelation, while later exegetes (Zemahşerî, Râzî, Beydâvî) have given more place to linguistic and rhetorical analyses. Kurtubî and Ibn Kesîr, on the other hand, present a synthesis by systematically compiling and comparing narrations. The core meaning (deliberate denial/abandonment) remained constant throughout all periods, but the method of explanation and emphasis points have diversified over time.
Modern connection
This comparative reading reminds us that using knowledge sincerely and without prejudice is as important as possessing knowledge itself; when a person overlooks the knowledge they possess out of envy, self-interest, or stubbornness, it can damage the harmony between knowledge and faith. Even today, the difference between possessing knowledge and evaluating it honestly and constructively remains a thought-provoking point in terms of social trust and solidarity.
AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar