إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا۟ وَمَاتُوا۟ وَهُمْ كُفَّارٌ أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ عَلَيْهِمْ لَعْنَةُ ٱللَّهِ وَٱلْمَلَٰٓئِكَةِ وَٱلنَّاسِ أَجْمَعِينَ

“Lo! Those who disbelieve, and die while they are disbelievers; on them is the curse of Allah and of angels and of men combined.” — M. M. Pickthall

Tafsirs

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

According to this exegete, the curse in the verse encompasses the curse of Allah, the angels, and all people upon those who die as disbelievers; the term 'people' here does not refer specifically to believers, but indicates a general curse that encompasses every disbeliever through statements such as 'may Allah curse the wrongdoer.' Furthermore, the 'raf' reading in the transmission regarding the disbeliever's encounter with the angels on the Day of Judgment is preferred over the 'hafd' reading because it is more suitable to the Prophet's reports and the apparent meaning of the Qur'an.

وأولى هذه الأقوال بالصواب عندنا قول من قال: عنى الله بذلك جميع الناس بمعنى لعنهم إياهم بقولهم: لعن الله الظالم أو الظالمين، فإن كل أحد من بني آدم لا يمنع من قيل ذلك كائنا من كان
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified

This text addresses the question of how it is possible for the angels/creatures to be engaged in both glorification and cursing; it transmits Ka'b al-Ahbar's answer based on the analogy of breath and speech, then Râzî demonstrates the invalidity of this analogy and provides two alternative answers: that Allah may have created many tongues for them, and that the curse means 'expulsion/removal' while glorification means praise to Allah, and praise of Allah necessarily requires the removal (curse) of the one whom it is unbecoming for to believe. Furthermore, the scope of the verse (does it refer to the People of the Book, apostates, or those who conceal the verses) and the implications of the ruling established upon the disbeliever at death (curse, eternal residence in Hell) are discussed.

أجاب كعب الأحبار فقال : التسبيح لهم كالتنفس لنا فكلما أن اشتغالنا بالتنفس لا يمنعنا من الكلام فكذلك اشتغالنا بالتسبيح لا يمنعهم من سائر الأعمال . وأقول : لقائل أن يقول الاشتغال بالتنفس إنما لم يمنع من الكلام لأن آلة التنفس غير آلة الكلام أما اللعن والتسبيح فهما من جنس الكلام فاجتماعهما في الآية الواحدة محال .
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Kurtubî, the curse expressed by the lam in the verse means the expulsion and removal of disbelievers from Allah's mercy; the curse by the servant means removal, while by Allah it means punishment. Scholars have disagreed regarding the cursing of a specific disbeliever: some do not permit it because it is not known that he will die upon disbelief, while Ibn al-'Arabi argues that it may be permissible by looking at the outward state and because fighting or killing him is permissible. Furthermore, the verse is characterized as a report that the disbeliever will be cursed by all people on the Day of Judgment, including his own people, and that this is not a command.

والصحيح عندي جواز لعنه لظاهر حاله ولجواز قتله وقتاله وقد روي عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه قال : ( اللهم إن عمرو بن العاص هجاني وقد علم أني لست بشاعر فالعنه واهجه عدد ما هجاني ( فلعنه وإن كان الإيمان والدين والإسلام مآله
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Ibn Kasir, this verse informs that disbelievers are under curse until the Day of Judgment and thereafter in the Fire of Hell this curse will accompany them. A group of scholars said that cursing a specific/particular disbeliever is permissible, and Abu Bakr Ibn al-'Arabi al-Maliki preferred this view. This view is based on a report regarding a man who cursed someone who drank wine, and the Prophet said to him, 'Do not curse him, for he loves Allah and His Messenger,' from which the conclusion was drawn that one who does not love Allah and His Messenger may be cursed.

وقالت طائفة أخرى بل يجوز لعن الكافر المعين واختاره الفقيه أبو بكر بن العربي المالكي ولكنه احتج بحديث فيه ضعف واستدل غيره بقوله عليه السلام في قصة الذي كان يؤتي به سكران فيحده فقال رجل لعنه الله ما أكثر ما يؤتي به فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم لا تلعنه فانه يحب الله ورسوله فدل على أن من لا يحب الله ورسوله يلعن
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Baydawi, the verse informs that the curse of Allah, the angels, and people is established upon those who conceal the truth and die without repenting. The pronoun in the expression 'khalidun fiha' refers to a noun not explicitly mentioned before it; this is either the curse or the fire, intended to emphasize the severity of the matter. Furthermore, the expression 'la yunzarun' can have several meanings: that they will not be given respite, that they will not be given the opportunity to make excuses, or that they will not be regarded with mercy.

خالدين فيها أي في اللعنة، أو النار

Comparison

Common ground

Taberî, Kurtubî, Ibn Kasir, and Baydawi agree that the curse in the verse encompasses disbelievers who die as such, and that it includes the joint curse of Allah, the angels, and people; furthermore, Kurtubî and Ibn Kasir discuss the permissibility of cursing a specific/particular disbeliever with similar transmitted reports (the view of Ibn al-'Arabi, hadith traditions).

Differences

While Taberî addresses the matter primarily through transmission (views of the Successors) and differences in reading (raf-hafd), Râzî transforms the verse into a theological/rational problem and discusses through linguistic-logical solutions how creatures can be engaged in both glorification and curse. While Kurtubî and Ibn Kasir discuss the permissibility of cursing a specific disbeliever from a jurisprudential perspective, Baydawi addresses the matter entirely on the plane of language/rhetoric (pronoun ambiguity, grammar) and does not engage in jurisprudential discussion. These differences stem from each exegete's predominant methodology (transmission, theology, jurisprudence, rhetoric).

Historical context

The earliest exegete Taberî offers a reading focused on transmission and reading variants, while in subsequent periods Râzî made theological inquiries more prominent, Kurtubî and Ibn Kasir brought jurisprudential discussions (the permissibility of cursing a specific person) into sharper focus, and Baydawi simplified the previous accumulation with a summary and linguistic approach. The fundamental message—the cursing of the disbeliever—remains constant, but the methods of explanation have diversified according to the scholarly inclinations of the period.

Modern connection

This comparative reading reminds us that concealing the truth or persisting in denial carries grave moral responsibility, while at the same time the caution shown by the exegetes in pronouncing definite judgments about a specific person can encourage the use of cautious and tolerant language in making judgments about others in contemporary times. Furthermore, the enrichment of the same verse by different methodologies (transmission, language, reason, jurisprudence) can be presented as an example of the harmonious and multifaceted thinking effort between knowledge and faith.

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