فَإِن لَّمْ تَفْعَلُوا۟ وَلَن تَفْعَلُوا۟ فَٱتَّقُوا۟ ٱلنَّارَ ٱلَّتِى وَقُودُهَا ٱلنَّاسُ وَٱلْحِجَارَةُ أُعِدَّتْ لِلْكَٰفِرِينَ
“And if ye do it not - and ye can never do it - then guard yourselves against the Fire prepared for disbelievers, whose fuel is of men and stones.” — M. M. Pickthall
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified
Taberî indicates that the 'stones' in the verse are sulfur stones; he reports that these stones were created by Allah in the sky or in Hell, and when heated they possess the most intense heat. He also explains that the fuel of the fire (waqûd) consists of both humans and these sulfur stones, and that the Hell fire has been prepared for the disbelievers in this manner. He supports this view with reports from Ibn Masud, Ibn Abbas and other Companions.
قال: هي حجارة من كبريت خلقها الله يوم خلق السموات والأرض في السماء الدنيا يعدها للكافرين
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Zamakhsharî, the indefinite form of the word 'sa'îran' indicates that this fire is a special fire prepared for the disbelievers; however, the reason this address is directed at believers is that although the levels of the wicked are above the levels of the disbelievers, they are together in the same place, and therefore believers are commanded to avoid wickedness and refrain from association with disbelievers. Furthermore, it is also possible that this address is a command to avoid apostasy or is directed at hypocrites whose faith is only on their tongues.
قلت : الفساق وإن كانت دركاتهم فوق دركات الكفار ، فإنهم مساكنون الكفار في دار واحدة فقيل للذين آمنوا : قوا أنفسكم باجتناب الفسوق مساكنة الكفار الذين أعدت لهم هذه النار الموصوفة
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to this exegete, the 'people' referred to in the verse are those who worship idols, and the 'stones' referred to are carved idols. Regarding the benefit of being cast into Hell despite being lifeless, according to one view Allah resurrects them and torments them, thereby providing an exaggeration in reproaching the disbelievers; however, this exegete raises the issue of the permissibility of tormenting a thing that commits no sin, and states that the more accurate view is that Allah does not resurrect the idols but preserves their lifelessness and casts them into Hell, for this would increase the shame upon the disbelievers. Furthermore, the reason the stones are fuel together with humans is that in the world they took them as idols and associated them with Allah, thereby joining themselves with those stones.
واوقرب أن يقال إن الله تعالى لا يحيي تلك الأصنام بل يتركها على الجمادية . ثم يلقيها في جهنم لأن ذلك مما يزيد في تخجيل الكفار
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified
Qurtubî conveys that the advance notification that the challenge will definitely not be accomplished (lan tafʿalû) both incites the addressees' effort and makes their powerlessness more evident, and that this is one of the unseen knowledge of which the Qur'an informed before it came to pass. He also reports from Ibn Kaisân that this expression carries the purpose of establishing to them that they are not truthful in their claims (sorcery, poetry, tales of the ancients). It is stated in the continuation of the verse that the word 'nâr' (fire) is truly created and existing, which is the view of the people of truth, contrary to the view of innovators who say that fire was not yet created.
وفي قوله : ولن تفعلوا إثارة لهممهم وتحريك لنفوسهم ليكون عجزهم بعد ذلك أبدع وهذا من الغيوب التي أخبر بها القرآن قبل وقوعها
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Ibn Kathîr, the word 'lan' in the verse indicates a definitive and eternal impossibility regarding the future; that is, humans and jinn will never be able to bring forth a like of this Qur'an until the Day of Resurrection. This is because the Qur'an is the speech of Allah and possesses unique eloquence that does not resemble the speech of created beings. It is also stated that the fuel of Hell consists of humans and stones, these stones are made of sulfur, and Hell is currently in existence and has been prepared for the disbelievers.
ولن لنفي التأبيد في المستقبل أي ولن تفعلوا أبدا وهذه أيضا معجزة أخرى وهو أنه أخبر خبرا جازما قاطعا مقدما غير خائف ولا مشفق أن هذا القرآن لا يعارض بمثله أبد الآبدين ودهر الداهرين
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Baydâwî, this verse came as a conclusion (faslakah) to the challenge that a like of the Qur'an cannot be brought: since humans cannot accomplish this, it becomes evident that the Qur'an is a miracle and confirmation of the Prophet is obligatory, and therefore they are asked to believe and avoid the fire. The stones that are fuel (waqûd) are interpreted as the idols which the polytheists worshipped hoping for intercession, thus the disbelievers are tormented with the very things that are the source of their sins. Furthermore, the grammatical functions of the particles 'lem' and 'lan' in the verse, the subtlety of the conditional clause beginning with 'in', and the fact that this is a mocking form of address toward the addressees are explained in detail.
ظهر أنه معجز والتصديق به واجب، فآمنوا به واتقوا العذاب المعد لمن كذب، فعبر عن الإتيان المكيف بالفعل الذي يعم الإتيان وغيره إيجازا
Comparison
Common ground
All exegetes agree that the verse concerns either the fuel of Hell fire (waqûd) and/or the challenge that a like of the Qur'an cannot be brought. The necessity for a concrete explanation of the word 'stones' is a shared concern: Taberî, Ibn Kathîr and Baydâwî (through reports) adopt the interpretation of sulfur stones, while Râzî and Baydâwî also raise the interpretation of idols. Taberî and Ibn Kathîr are methodologically very close to each other; both rely on Companion reports (Ibn Abbas, Ibn Masud) to transmit the interpretation of sulfur stones. Linguistic/rhetorical analysis (indefinite-definite forms, the function of particles, i'rab) is used as a common method in nearly all exegetes (Zamakhsharî, Râzî, Qurtubî, Baydâwî). There is a shared emphasis by Ibn Kathîr, Qurtubî and Baydâwî regarding the miraculous/unique nature of the Qur'an and the definitiveness of the challenge (particles lan/lem).
Differences
While Taberî and Ibn Kathîr follow a method emphasizing reports (transmitted), Zamakhsharî and Baydâwî place greater weight on linguistic-rhetorical analysis (the use of indefinite/definite forms, the subtleties of particles); this points to Zamakhsharî's Mu'tazilite and rhetoric-focused school, and Baydâwî's method synthesizing both linguistic and exegetical traditions. Râzî, on the other hand, brings theological/rational argumentation to the fore, interpreting 'stones' as idols and conducts a philosophical discussion on the rational permissibility of tormenting lifeless beings; this reflects the theological emphasis of Râzî's school. Qurtubî enters into a discussion of a creedal matter, whether Hell currently exists or not, and rejects the views of innovators (pointing to the Mu'tazilites) in a manner indicating his concern to defend Sunni creed. The fundamental divergence regarding what the 'stones' are: while Taberî/Ibn Kathîr speak of sulfur stones, Râzî and Baydâwî foreground the interpretation of idols—this difference relates to how the context of the verse (whether criticism of idol-worship or a general depiction of Hell) is read.
Historical context
The earliest exegete Taberî (3rd/9th century) employs a purely report/transmission-focused method, whereas with Zamakhsharî (6th/12th century) who comes after him, linguistic-rhetorical analysis and rational argumentation enter into exegesis more systematically. With Râzî (6th-7th/12th-13th centuries), theological discussions (such as the problem of tormenting lifeless beings) become part of exegesis, which shows parallelism with the development of theological science. Qurtubî (7th/13th century) uses exegesis as a tool for defending against creedal deviations (innovations) with creedal/jurisprudential concerns. Ibn Kathîr (8th/14th century) returns to a more report-focused line continuing Taberî's tradition, but harmonizes this with more systematic hadith criticism. Baydâwî (7th/13th century, but can be considered contemporary with Qurtubî and Ibn Kathîr) represents a summary and linguistic-subtlety-focused exegetical tradition, presenting earlier interpretations (sulfur stones and idols) together. In conclusion, the interpretation of sulfur stones remains stable from the early period (Taberî) to the late period (Ibn Kathîr), while the interpretation of idols and linguistic-theological analyses appear as layers added to exegesis over time; this shows that the methodology of exegesis expanded from transmission toward linguistically and rationally-based methods, though in no period was transmission entirely abandoned.
Modern connection
The balanced reading these exegetes established between transmission, language and reason over centuries can serve as an example for a harmonious approach that can be established between science and faith in our own time. The fact that the challenge regarding the uniqueness of the Qur'an can be interpreted through different methods (transmission, rhetoric, theology), reminds us that it is possible to approach the same truth from different disciplines and that this can be counted as an enrichment. This diversity can offer measured inspiration in our time as well regarding the value of approaching knowledge with caution, patience and openness to different perspectives.
AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar