يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ ٱتَّقُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ وَذَرُوا۟ مَا بَقِىَ مِنَ ٱلرِّبَوٰٓا۟ إِن كُنتُم مُّؤْمِنِينَ
“O ye who believe! Observe your duty to Allah, and give up what remaineth (due to you) from usury, if ye are (in truth) believers.” — M. M. Pickthall
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified
According to this exegete, the verse commands the believers to have piety towards Allah and to abandon the remaining interest (riba); this requires that the attestation of faith in words and hearts be confirmed also through deeds. Furthermore, it is reported that the verse was revealed concerning an incident between the Thaqif tribe, who wished to collect interest debts remaining from the pre-Islamic period after entering Islam, and Amr b. Umayyah in Mecca and the sons of al-Mughira.
يعني جل ثناؤه بذلك: يا أيها الذين آمنوا صدقوا بالله وبرسوله، اتقوا الله، يقول: خافوا الله على أنفسكم فاتقوه بطاعته فيما أمركم به، والانتهاء عما نهاكم عنه، وذروا يعني ودعوا ما بقي من الربا، يقول: اتركوا طلب ما بقي لكم من فضل على رءوس أموالكم التي كانت لكم قبل أن تربوا عليها إن كنتم مؤمنين، يقول: إن كنتم محققين إيمانكم قولا، وتصديقكم بألسنتكم بأفعالكم
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Râzî, the address in this verse is directed at believers who insist on interest transactions; alternatively, it is mentioned that it could be directed at the disbelievers who deem interest lawful and say 'commerce is like interest.' The Judge (meaning al-Bâqillânî/Qâdi Abd al-Jabbâr) said that the first possibility is more preferable.
خطاب مع المؤمنين المصرين على معاملة الربا ، أو هو خطاب مع الكفار المستحلين للربا ، الذين قالوا إنما البيع مثل الربا ، قال القاضي : والاحتمال الأول أولى ، لأن قوله { فأذنوا } خطاب مع قوم تقدم ذكرهم
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Kurtubî, the apparent meaning of the verse shows that interest which has not yet been seized (taken) is made invalid, even if contracted before the prohibition verse was revealed; however, interest that has been seized will not be returned through annulment. Furthermore, it is reported that the verse was revealed concerning the dispute over interest debt between the Thaqif tribe and the sons of al-Mughira, by virtue of the letter that the Prophet wrote to Attâb b. Asîd.
ظاهره أنه أبطل من الربا ما لم يكن مقبوضا وإن كان معقودا قبل نزول آية التحريم ولا يتعقب بالفسخ ما كان مقبوضا
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Ibn Kesîr, this expression commands the abandonment of the excess added to the principal capital (riba) from debts upon people; after this warning, He commanded piety towards Allah. The concept of piety carries a general meaning encompassing both doing what is commanded and refraining from what is forbidden.
أي اتركوا مالكم على الناس من الزيادة على رؤوس الأموال بعد هذا الانذار أمر بتقواه وهو يشمل فعل ما به أمر وترك ما عنه زجر
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Beydâwî, this verse states that abandoning what remains of interest is the true sign of faith, and it must be known that those who do not do this are in a state of war with Allah and His Messenger. For those who repent, only the principal capital (rüus al-amwâl) will be taken, without injustice either by taking excess or by delaying and giving less. Furthermore, it is stated that those who do not repent will not have any right even to the principal capital, because whoever insists on deeming interest lawful is considered an apostate (murtadd) and his property becomes fay' (state spoils).
إذ المصر على التحليل مرتد وماله فيء
Comparison
Common ground
Taberî, Kurtubî and Beydâwî all report that the verse was revealed concerning the dispute over pre-Islamic riba debt between the Thaqif tribe and the sons of al-Mughira in Mecca, and the names such as Ibn Jurayj and al-Suddî are common in their chains of narration. Ibn Kesîr and Taberî are united in that the verse addresses piety in command together with abandoning what remains of interest, and that faith must be integrated through both words and deeds.
Differences
While Taberî focuses on a narration-heavy account of the circumstances of revelation, Râzî addresses the question of to whom the address in the verse is directed (insistent believers or disbelievers who deem interest lawful) on the ground of theological debate. Kurtubî provides a juristic solution through linguistic analysis by distinguishing between seized and unseized interest; Beydâwî, through rhetorical examination of word roots (أذن-آذن, the ambiguity of حرب), reaches an advanced juristic conclusion such as that the one who does not repent is considered an apostate and his property becomes state spoils. These differences stem from Taberî's adherence to the narration school, Râzî's theological/methodological approach, and Kurtubî and Beydâwî's synthesis of linguistics and jurisprudence.
Historical context
In the process from Taberî to Beydâwî, while the narration of the circumstances of revelation remains fixed, the focus of interpretation gradually shifted from mere narration to linguistic analysis and juristic inferences; Râzî's theological debate and Beydâwî's detailed juristic conclusions show that exegetical activity became more systematic and multilayered within the period.
Modern connection
This comparative reading reminds us that faith must not remain in words alone but must be validated in behaviors, particularly through honesty in economic relations and staying away from unjust gains. The emphasis on piety in the verse points to the need for individuals to balance their own interests with social justice and the balance of conscience, which can nourish awareness of sincerity and equity in relations today. The way different exegetes address the same event with different methods demonstrates that multidimensional thinking and respectful diversity are possible in the scholarly tradition.
AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar