وَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّن مَّنَعَ مَسَٰجِدَ ٱللَّهِ أَن يُذْكَرَ فِيهَا ٱسْمُهُۥ وَسَعَىٰ فِى خَرَابِهَآ أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ مَا كَانَ لَهُمْ أَن يَدْخُلُوهَآ إِلَّا خَآئِفِينَ لَهُمْ فِى ٱلدُّنْيَا خِزْىٌ وَلَهُمْ فِى ٱلْـَٔاخِرَةِ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ
“And who doth greater wrong than he who forbiddeth the approach to the sanctuaries of Allah lest His name should be mentioned therein, and striveth for their ruin. As for such, it was never meant that they should enter them except in fear. Theirs in the world is ignominy and theirs in the Hereafter is an awful doom.” — M. M. Pickthall
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified
Taberî prefers that the 'mesâcid' (places of worship) mentioned in this verse refers to Beytü'l-Makdis (the Mosque of Jerusalem), and that those who destroyed it and prevented the mention of Allah there were the Nasârâ (Christians). He presents this view as the most correct among three different views transmitted on the subject; the other views concern Nebuchadnezzar and his army, as well as the polytheist Quraysh closing the Masjid al-Haram to the Prophet. He notes that the polytheist Quraysh did not engage in the destruction of the Masjid al-Haram; rather, they built and developed it, therefore this view is weak.
وأولى التأويلات التي ذكرتها بتأويل الآية قول من قال: عنى الله عز وجل بقوله: النصارى؛ وذلك أنهم هم الذين سعوا في خراب بيت المقدس، وأعانوا بختنصر على ذلك، ومنعوا مؤمني بني إسرائيل من الصلاة فيه بعد منصرف بختنصر عنهم إلى بلاده.
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified
Zemahşerî transmits three views regarding the word 'mesacid' (places of worship) in the verse: According to a report from Katade, when Jews and Christians entered their churches, they associated partners with Allah; therefore, Muslims were commanded to make their worship purely for Allah when they entered mosques. According to the second view, mosques refer to the seven organs of prostration, and a hadith is transmitted on this matter. According to the third view, the word 'mesacid' is the plural of 'mescid' (mosque) and is a verbal noun form meaning prostration.
كان اليهود والنصارى إذا دخلوا بيعهم وكنائسهم أشركوا بالله ، فأمرنا أن نخلص لله الدعوة إذا دخلنا المساجد . وقيل : المساجد أعضاء السجود السبعة
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to this exegete, different views are transmitted regarding the scope of the expression 'mesâcid' (mosques) in the verse: some refer to all mosques, some to the Masjid al-Haram and other mosques in Mecca (such as the mosque of Abû Bakr), while Abû Muslim said it refers specifically to the Masjid al-Haram in reference to the event of Hudaybiyyah. Regarding the question of whether it is permissible to apply a plural form to a singular mosque, the answer given is that since the mosque means a place of prostration and the Masjid al-Haram is not actually a single mosque but rather a collection of mosques, this is acceptable.
ومنهم من حمله على المسجد الحرام فقط وهو قول أبي مسلم حيث فسر المنع بصد الرسول عن المسجد الحرام عام الحديبية ، فإن قيل : كيف يجوز حمل لفظ المساجد على مسجد واحد ؟ قلنا : فيه وجوه . أحدها : هذا كمن يقول لمن آذى صالحا واحدا : ومن أظلم ممن آذى الصالحين . وثانيها : أن المسجد موضع السجود فالمسجد الحرام لا يكون في الحقيقة مسجدا واحدا بل مساجد
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Beydâvî, the verse applies to everyone who destroys mosques or attempts to nullify a place dedicated to worship; however, the verse may also be understood concerning the Romans who destroyed Beytü'l-Makdis or the polytheists at Hudaybiyyah who prevented the Prophet from entering the Masjid al-Haram. The expression 'They can only enter it in fear' signifies that these preventers either have no right to enter with reverence, or that they can enter only in fear of the believers, or that Allah has promised in His knowledge and decree that the believers will be victorious and will restore the mosques to them—a promise that was indeed fulfilled. Furthermore, this expression is also said to carry the meaning of forbidding the polytheists from entering the mosque; the imams have disagreed on this matter: Abû Hanîfah permitted it, Mâlik forbade it, and Shâfi'î made a distinction between the Masjid al-Haram and other mosques.
أولئك أي المانعون ما كان لهم أن يدخلوها إلا خائفين ما كان ينبغي لهم أن يدخلوها إلا بخشية وخشوع فضلا عن أن يجترئوا على تخريبها، أو ما كان الحق أن يدخلوها إلا خائفين من المؤمنين أن يبطشوا بهم
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Kurtubî, the expression 'khâifîn' (in fear) in the verse describes a situation in which the Muslims have dominance over the Mosque; in this situation, the disbeliever can only enter it out of fear that the Muslims will drive him out and punish him. This is considered evidence that the disbeliever has no right whatsoever to enter the mosque. Even according to those who interpret the verse as referring to Christians or to Quraysh, the meaning is that they can only enter it in fear and humiliation.
خائفين حال يعني إذا استولى عليها المسلمون وحصلت تحت سلطانهم فلا يتمكن الكافر حينئذ من دخولها
Comparison
Common ground
All exegetes agree that 'mesâcid' refers to places of worship such as Beytü'l-Makdis or the Masjid al-Haram, and that the destruction of these places and their closure to worship is a grave injustice. Furthermore, there is a common tendency for the verse to point to a historical event (the Romans' destruction of Jerusalem or the polytheists' prevention of the Prophet from entering the Masjid al-Haram at Hudaybiyyah).
Differences
While Taberî emphasizes the Christian interpretation through his preference among transmitted reports, Zemahşerî opens up the meaning of 'mesacid' in a linguistic sense to also include the organs of prostration or verbal noun forms; Râzî compares different views (all mosques, Meccan mosques, or only the Masjid al-Haram) and discusses the grammatical issue of plural versus singular. Beydâvî ties the verse to a general principle (preventing a place of worship is forbidden) and adds jurisprudential disagreements (Abû Hanîfah, Mâlik, Shâfi'î); Kurtubî reads the verse more through the idea of Muslim dominance over the Mosque and that the disbeliever can only enter it in fear. These differences stem from methodological differences between: reporting-focused exegesis (Taberî), linguistic and rhetorical exegesis (Zemahşerî, Râzî), and juridical and legal approaches (Beydâvî, Kurtubî).
Historical context
In the early period (Taberî), emphasis is placed on a historical event based on transmitted reports; in subsequent periods (Zemahşerî, Râzî), linguistic and theological discussions enter the field; later (Beydâvî, Kurtubî), interpretation of the verse in accordance with jurisprudential conclusions and general principles gained prominence. While the fundamental historical reference (Beytü'l-Makdis or Hudaybiyyah) remains constant, the focus of interpretation has gradually expanded from reports to language, and from language to law.
Modern connection
This comparative reading reminds us that respect for places of worship and socially shared sacred spaces has been a delicate matter of balance between different religions and communities throughout human history. Based on this, one may point to the importance of respect for freedom of worship and the protection of places of worship in terms of social harmony and tolerance. Furthermore, the fact that exegetes approached the same subject using different methods (transmission, language, jurisprudence) may be evaluated as an example of multifaceted thinking in the scholarly tradition and respect for interpretive plurality.
AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar