وَلَا تَلْبِسُوا۟ ٱلْحَقَّ بِٱلْبَٰطِلِ وَتَكْتُمُوا۟ ٱلْحَقَّ وَأَنتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified
Taberî explains the verse 'do not mix truth with falsehood and do not hide the truth' from two perspectives. According to the first view, the verse is addressed to the scholars of the People of the Book, prohibiting them from mixing truth with falsehood and hiding it, even though they know of the coming of Prophet Muhammad and his prophethood; in this case, the verb 'taktumū' is connected as a prohibition to the preceding [prohibition]. According to the second view, the first part of the verse is a prohibition, while the second part ('taktumū') is a report about their hiding [the truth] even though they knew of Prophet Muhammad, and in this case the verb comes with nasb.
وفي قوله: وجهان من التأويل
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified
This text passage conveys a reading difference transmitted from Mujāhid rather than presenting a direct exegetical view regarding the verse: it is noted that the word meaning 'your trusts' is read in the singular form (amānatakum) instead of the plural. Since the text appears very brief and incomplete in this form, it does not contain a detailed explanation concerning the actual content of the verse.
وقرأ مجاهد : ( وتخونوا أمانتكم ) ، على التوحيد
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to this exegete, the verse prohibits mixing truth with falsehood (telbis) and concealing reality (kitman); these two verbs represent two ways of leading others astray: either confusing the proofs or preventing access to the proofs. Ar-Rāzī notes that the letter 'bā' is a bā' of instrumentality (istiāna), explaining that the proofs concerning Prophet Muhammad in the Torah and Gospel are hidden/require inference, and that the People of the Book also cloud the understanding of these proofs by raising doubts. Furthermore, he states that the condition of the prohibition being 'knowingly' is intended to indicate that in a state of ignorance these acts are not permissible, but rather that harm committed with knowledge is more despicable.
واعلم أن الأظهر في الباء التي في قوله : { بالباطل } أنها باء الاستعانة كالتي في قولك : كتبت بالقلم والمعنى ولا تلبسوا الحق بسبب الشبهات التي توردونها على السامعين
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified
Al-Qurtubī linguistically analyzes the word 'lebs' (mixing) in the expression 'lā talbasū'l-haqqa bi'l-bātil' and notes that exegetes hold different views regarding what is meant by this expression. According to Ibn Abbās, this is the People of the Book mixing the truth they possess with falsehood through distortion and alteration; Mujāhid and Qatāda, however, understood this as not mixing Judaism and Christianity with Islam. Al-Qurtubī finds Ibn Abbās's view more correct because this view is general and encompasses all other views as well.
قلت : وقول أبن عباس أصوب لأنه عام فيدخل فيه جميع الأقوال والله المستعان
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Ibn Kathīr, this verse prohibits the People of the Book from both mixing truth with falsehood and concealing the reality they know, and commands them to clearly expound the truth. According to views transmitted from the earlier exegetes, this is interpreted as knowing the description of the Prophet and that the religion is Islam, yet mixing this with Judaism and Christianity or concealing what they found written in their scriptures. Furthermore, a linguistic analysis has been conducted regarding the possibility of the verb 'taktumū' being in the subjunctive or accusative form, and it has been noted that both verbs are prohibited together.
فنهاهم عن الشيئين معا وأمرهم بإظهار الحق والتصريح به ولهذا قال الضحاك عن ابن عباس لا تخلطوا الحق بالباطل والصدق بالكذب
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Baydāwī, the word 'lebs' (mixing) means not mixing the truth revealed to you with the falsehood you invented and concealed, so that the two do not become indistinguishable. The verb 'taktumū'l-haqq' can be read as a subjunctive falling under the rule of prohibition, or it can be read as an accusative where the conjunction 'wa' (and) carries the meaning of accompaniment; in this case the meaning is not to do both mixing truth with falsehood and concealing it together. Finally, the expression 'wa antum ta'lamūn' emphasizes that this mixing and concealment is done knowingly, and therefore while the ignorant may be excused, the one who knows commits an even more despicable act.
والمعنى لا تخلطوا الحق المنزل عليكم بالباطل الذي تخترعونه وتكتمونه حتى لا يميز بينهما، أو ولا تجعلوا الحق ملتبسا بسبب خلط الباطل الذي تكتبونه في خلاله، أو تذكرونه في تأويله.
Comparison
Common ground
Taberî, Ar-Rāzī, Al-Qurtubī, Ibn Kathīr, and Baydāwī agree that the verse prohibits the People of the Book from mixing truth with falsehood (telbis/lebs) and concealing the reality they know (kitman). Moreover, most exegetes (Taberî, Ibn Kathīr, Baydāwī) discuss the possibilities of the verb 'taktumū' from the perspective of grammar in terms of being in the subjunctive form (connection to/prohibition) or accusative form (accompaniment/different function of the conjunction); this linguistic issue creates a common technical ground. Reports from the Companions and Successors (especially Ibn Abbās, Mujāhid, Qatāda) are used as fundamental evidence in nearly every exegete's work, and the emphasis that the condition of acting 'knowingly' ('wa antum ta'lamūn') does not excuse ignorance, but rather makes the knowingly committed act more despicable, is common in Ar-Rāzī and Baydāwī.
Differences
Zamakhsharī here transmits mainly a brief reading note (the singular reading of the word for 'your trusts') rather than the actual exegetical content, and therefore cannot be directly compared with the others; this difference likely stems from the transmitted text being incomplete or fragmentary. In terms of content, the main divergence concerns what is being mixed with falsehood: according to Ibn Abbās, this is the People of the Book mixing the truth in their own scriptures with falsehood through distortion, while Mujāhid and Qatāda interpret it as not mixing Judaism and Christianity with Islam—Al-Qurtubī compares these reports and prefers Ibn Abbās's view because it is more comprehensive. Ar-Rāzī, however, offers a different contribution from a linguistic perspective: by arguing that the letter 'bā' carries the meaning of instrumentality (istiāna), he addresses the matter in the context of the proofs concerning Prophet Muhammad in the Torah and Gospel being hidden/requiring inference, and the People of the Book clouding the understanding of these proofs with doubts—this is an original perspective from a theological/logical standpoint that is not found in the others. Baydāwī directly uses the reading difference in the mushaf of Ibn Masʿūd to support the grammar discussion.
Historical context
While the earliest exegete, Taberî (3rd/9th century), bases the matter largely on transmission and basic grammatical analysis, in later periods (Zamakhsharī, Ar-Rāzī, Al-Qurtubī, Baydāwī—6th-7th/12th-13th centuries), linguistic and rhetorical elements (the instrumentality meaning of the letter 'bā', subjunctive-accusative possibilities, reading differences) began to be processed more systematically and subtly; this reflects the increasingly dominant role of grammar and rhetoric in the exegetical tradition over time. Ibn Kathīr (8th/14th century), however, largely returns to the Taberî approach by offering a transmission-focused synthesis, yet also transmits linguistic explanations from Zamakhsharī—this shows that Salafi-oriented exegetes did not completely exclude linguistic analyses, but rather used them as supporting elements while prioritizing transmission. The fundamental theme of prohibition and concealment has remained constant throughout all periods, but how this theme is explained (transmission-focused or linguistics-focused) has become more varied over time.
Modern connection
The warning inherent in this verse regarding 'concealing known truth' and 'mixing truth with falsehood' can serve as a reminder of the importance of honesty and transparency in contemporary individual and social relationships. The emphasis that possessing knowledge increases responsibility provides a conceptual foundation for acting with sincerity in education and knowledge sharing, emphasizing the value of conveying what one knows constructively rather than concealing it. Furthermore, evaluating different interpretations together can encourage a tolerant dialogue understanding in social matters, avoiding fixation on a single perspective.
AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar