وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمْ لَا تُفْسِدُوا۟ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ قَالُوٓا۟ إِنَّمَا نَحْنُ مُصْلِحُونَ

“And when it is said unto them: Make not mischief in the earth, they say: We are peacemakers only.” — M. M. Pickthall

Tafsirs

AI-generated
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified

Taberî relates the concepts of 'ifsad' (corruption) and 'islah' (reform) mentioned in this verse to the conduct of hypocrites; the hypocrites were rebelling against Allah and doing harm to believers while viewing themselves as reformers. He states that the verse was revealed about hypocrites living during the time of the Prophet, but it encompasses everyone with the same characteristics until the Day of Judgment. He also conveys the view transmitted from Ibn Abbas that exegesis is divided into four types, explaining that some of the meanings in this verse are known by the Arabs, some are known by scholars, and some are known only by Allah.

وأولى التأويلين بالآية تأويل من قال: إن قول الله تبارك اسمه: نزلت في المنافقين الذين كانوا على عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، وإن كان معنيا بها كل من كان بمثل صفتهم من المنافقين بعدهم إلى يوم القيامة.
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified

Zemahşerî addresses multiple verse segments consecutively in this text: the confused state of the lost person in the barren desert, the condition of those accompanying him, the variant readings (ضللنا/صللنا), the meaning of the word 'ومكر' expressing the disbelievers' arrogance and scheming, clarifying that its root is 've en mekerû es-seyyi', and the firm belief of the jinn group that they can never escape from Allah. The meanings of words are clarified through different reading variations and linguistic derivations.

فإن قلت : فما وجه قوله : { ومكر } ؟ قلت : أصله : وأن مكروا السيء ، ثم مكر السيء . والدليل عليه قوله تعالى
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified

According to this exegete, the questions in the verse - 'who said', 'what is corruption on earth', 'who are the speakers', and 'what is reform' - carry different possibilities; views are transmitted that the speaker could be Allah, the Prophet, or some believers. It is stated that hypocrites considered their actions according to their own beliefs as reform, or they viewed their dealings with disbelievers as an effort to reform relations between believers and disbelievers. Furthermore, based on this verse, it is conveyed that scholars derived the conclusion that the ruling of belief should be applied to one who manifests faith outwardly, and that the repentance of a heretic will be accepted.

واعلم أن العلماء استدلوا بهذه الآية على أن من أظهر الإيمان وجب إجراء حكم المؤمنين عليه ، وتجويز خلافه لا يطعن فيه ، وتوبة الزنديق مقبولة والله أعلم
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Kurtubî, the corruption mentioned in this verse is the opposite of reform and signifies deviation from the right path; it is explained that hypocrites caused corruption on earth through disbelief, befriending disbelievers, and preventing people from faith in Muhammad and the Qur'an. Furthermore, according to one view, corruption prevailed on earth before the Prophet was sent, and with his sending, the earth was reformed; now those who commit sins after this reform have caused corruption again. The hypocrites' saying 'we are only reformers' stems from their thinking that their own corruption is reform, because they consider accommodation with disbelievers as correcting relations between believers and disbelievers.

والمعنى في الآية : لا تفسدوا في الأرض بالكفر وموالاة أهله وتفريق الناس عن الإيمان بمحمد صلى الله عليه وسلم والقرآن
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified

According to this exegete, the hypocrites' response 'we are only reformers' to the command 'do not cause corruption on earth' interprets their situation in different ways: according to one view, disobedience to Allah is itself corruption on earth, because the reform of earth and heaven is obedience. According to another view, this is a claim of mediating/managing between believers and disbelievers. Ibn Kesîr also conveys the narration transmitted from Salmân al-Fârisî stating 'the people of this verse have not yet come,' and Ibn Jarîr's commentary on this narration.

لأنه من عصى الله في الأرض أو أمر بمعصيته فقد أفسد في الأرض لأن صلاح الأرض والسماء بالطاعة وهكذا قال الربيع بن أنس وقتادة
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Beydâwî, the concept of 'fasad' (corruption) means departure from balance and encompasses everything harmful; the hypocrites' corruption on earth consists of inciting war and discord, collaborating with disbelievers to expose Muslims' secrets, and violating the law through their indifference to religion. The hypocrites' response 'we are only reformers' is an exaggerated denial because the particle 'innema' signifies restriction (qasr); they saw corruption in the form of reform due to the sickness in their hearts.

والفساد: خروج الشيء عن الاعتدال. والصلاح ضده وكلاهما يعمان كل ضار ونافع. وكان من فسادهم في الأرض هيج الحروب والفتن بمخادعة المسلمين، وممالأة الكفار عليهم بإفشاء الأسرار إليهم

Comparison

Common ground

Taberî, Kurtubî, Ibn Kesîr, and Beydâwî connect the concepts of 'ifsad' (corruption) and 'islah' (reform) in the verse to the conduct of hypocrites and agree that these people view their own corruption - due to sickness in their hearts or misconception - as reform. Moreover, many of them (Taberî, Kurtubî, Ibn Kesîr) relate the hypocrites' attempts at friendship/accommodation with disbelievers to their claim of 'correcting' relations between believers and disbelievers. Râzî and Beydâwî also emphasize that this claim of 'reform' is a form of deception or self-justification containing restriction/exaggeration. In general, all exegetes read the verse not as limited to a historical incident alone, but as a universal principle encompassing people with similar characteristics.

Differences

While Taberî presents a reading more centered on narrations and consensus, he conveys the information that exegesis transmitted from Ibn Abbas is divided into four types, stating that some aspects of the verse can only be known by Allah; this introduces an epistemological limitation not seen in others. Zemahşerî stands apart in content because he addresses a different verse segment (the lost person, the jinn group, variant readings), showing that the comparison is not being made directly on the same passage. Râzî addresses the question-answer structure in the verse (who said, what is corruption, what is reform) as systematic possibilities and arrives at jurisprudential conclusions (the ruling for one who manifests faith outwardly, the repentance of a heretic); this is a jurisprudential-theological extension not found in other exegetes. Kurtubî adds a historical-theological framework, stating that the earth was reformed with the Prophet's sending, and subsequent sins corrupted this reform. Ibn Kesîr brings forward the narration of Salmân al-Fârisî ('the people of this verse have not yet come'), emphasizing the idea that the verse points to future generations as well; this resembles Taberî's general scope emphasis but contains a more specific future interpretation. Beydâwî emphasizes linguistic/rhetorical analysis, highlighting the restrictive function of the particle 'innema' and defining corruption more broadly in a philosophical framework as 'departure from balance.'

Historical context

Taberî, the earliest representative, reflects the narration-focused classical exegetical method while also addressing the linguistic origins of concepts. Zemahşerî (Mu'tazilî school) adopts a philological and rhetorical approach, concentrating on variant readings and grammatical analysis; this reflects the period's linguistic exegetical movement. Râzî follows a logical method through possibilities by incorporating theological and jurisprudential discussions into exegesis; this shows the influence of the Ash'arî theological tradition and rational argumentative culture. Kurtubî and Ibn Kesîr represent a more classical Sunni synthesis that combines narrations and linguistic analysis; Ibn Kesîr particularly continues the Taberî tradition by relying on narrations from Companions and Successors. Beydâwî, coming in a later period, transforms the accumulated knowledge of earlier exegeses (particularly Zemahşerî's and Râzî's) into a summarizing linguistic and rhetorical synthesis. Thus, while the verse's fundamental message - that hypocrites mistake their own corruption as reform - remains constant throughout all periods, the method has evolved from narration-focused to linguistic/rhetorical and theological analysis.

Modern connection

This verse is thought-provoking in modern times in that it reminds us that claiming an action is done with 'good intentions' does not mean the action is actually constructive; in this context, it is important for individuals to continuously question their own attitudes and review them with sincerity and integrity. To understand whether initiatives taken in the name of social peace or reconciliation are truly constructive, it is necessary to carefully evaluate not only declarations of intention but also the actual outcomes produced. Within this framework, the verse can be read as a cautious invitation to a healthy culture of self-criticism at both individual and social levels.

AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar