أَتَأْمُرُونَ ٱلنَّاسَ بِٱلْبِرِّ وَتَنسَوْنَ أَنفُسَكُمْ وَأَنتُمْ تَتْلُونَ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ أَفَلَا تَعْقِلُونَ
“Enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while ye yourselves forget (to practise it)? And ye are readers of the Scripture! Have ye then no sense?” — M. M. Pickthall
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified
Taberî explains this verse as a rhetorical (istifham) questioning style that queries whether the polytheists or disbelievers are using their intellect. The verse expresses that despite witnessing and hearing the destruction and punishment that befell previous nations, the disbelievers could not grasp the truth; although they observed the transience of worldly life and death, they did not take heed. It is emphasized that those possessed of intellect should draw lessons from this situation and refrain from associating partners with Allah.
أفلا يعقل هؤلاء المكذبون بالبعث حقيقة ما نخبرهم به من أن الحياة الدنيا لعب ولهو، وهم يرون من يخترم منهم، ومن يملك فيموت، ومن تنوبه فيها النوائب وتصيبه المصائب وتفجعه الفجائع؟ ففي ذلك لمن عقل مدكر ومزدجر عن الركون إليها واستعباد النفس لها
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Zemahşerî, this expression is a response to the accusation hidden beneath the addressees' words of 'bring another Quran besides this'; it is emphasized that the Prophet does not demand any remuneration from anyone other than Allah for this notification, and that the recompense he receives is solely the reward of the Hereafter. This situation is presented as the clearest evidence for removing the shadow of suspicion from the accusation (slander) directed at him.
إذ تردون نصيحة من لا يطلب عليها أجرا إلا من الله . وهو ثواب الآخرة ، ولا شيء أنفي للتهمة من ذلك
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Râzî, the rhetorical question in the verse (command people to do good) carries the meaning of affirmation (taqrîr) and wonder at their state; the contradictory behavior of one who commands others to goodness while forgetting himself is a conduct unbecoming those possessed of intellect. Furthermore, 'nisyan' (forgetting) here means heedlessness that comes after knowledge, since a forgetful person is not held responsible; what is truly meant is the person being heedless of their own benefit and turning away from it. In this context, the issue of whether a disobedient person can perform commanding to good (amr bi'l-ma'ruf) has also been discussed based on this verse.
اعلم أن الهمزة في أتأمرون الناس بالبر للتقرير مع التقرير والتعجب من حالهم ، وأما البر فهو اسم جامع لأعمال الخير
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified
Kurtubî in this section conveys the different readings (readings with te and ye) of the expression 'do you not then understand' and bases the linguistic origin of the word intellect on the meaning of 'men' (prevention/restraint). He states that understanding means preventing oneself from situations that would cause destruction, and for this reason the word 'intellect' is also named after the rope by which a camel is tethered (iqal) and blood money (aqal). He also transmits from Zajjaj that an intelligent person is one who fulfills what Allah has made obligatory, otherwise he will be considered ignorant.
أي أفلا تمنعون أنفسكم من مواقعة هذه الحال المردية لكم والعقل : المنع ومنه عقال البعير لأنه يمنع عن الحركة ومنه العقل للدية لأنه يمنع ولي المقتول عن قتل الجاني
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Ibn Kesîr, this verse censures the Children of Israel (or the People of the Book and hypocrites) for commanding people to do good while not doing it themselves. The censure is not because they command goodness, but because they do not themselves do what they command; for commanding goodness is in itself good and obligatory for the learned, but the learned person must not only command it but also implement it along with those to whom he commands it.
والغرض أن الله تعالى ذمهم على هذا الصنيع ونبههم على خطئهم في حق أنفسهم حيث كانوا يأمرون بالخير ولا يفعلونه وليس المراد ذمهم على أمرهم بالبر مع تركهم له بل على تركهم له فإن الأمر بالمعروف معروف وهو واجب على العالم
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Beydâvî, this verse is intended to censure and express bewilderment at those who command people to do goodness while forgetting themselves. The concept of goodness refers to breadth and kindness shown in worship to Allah, in conduct towards relatives and strangers. The verse censures those who recite the Book and know it but do not act according to what they say, with the blame of not understanding; the true purpose is not to prevent the one who admonishes another from preaching, but to encourage him to reform himself as well.
والآية ناعية على من يعظ غيره ولا يتعظ بنفسه سوء صنيعه وخبث نفسه، وأن فعله فعل الجاهل بالشرع أو الأحمق الخالي عن العقل
Comparison
Common ground
Taberî, Râzî, Ibn Kesîr, and Beydâvî come together in their understanding that the verse carries a rhetorical questioning and wondering style that censures those who command others to do goodness while neglecting themselves, and that this situation is related to not using one's intellect. Kurtubî also supports the emphasis on 'not using intellect' through linguistic etymology. With the exception of Zemahşerî, all others agree that the verse contains a censure of the addressees and a call for self-reformation.
Differences
Zemahşerî places the verse in an entirely different context, arguing that the Prophet's notification does not demand remuneration and that the response is to an accusation of slander; this separates him fundamentally from the others (possibly due to a different verse/context interpretation or choice of textual sequence). While Taberî and Beydâvî focus on broad contextual/moral censure, Râzî carries the issue into a juridical discussion (the authority of the disobedient person to command to good) - his theological and methodological aspect is dominant. Kurtubî, on the other hand, addresses the subject through linguistic and variant reading differences, focusing on the etymology of the word 'intellect', with moral censure emphasis relatively in the background. Ibn Kesîr, using a transmission-heavy method (from Suddî, Ibn Abbas, etc.), provides a specific historical-social reference of the verse to the context of the Children of Israel/People of the Book; others do not highlight this historical attribution.
Historical context
In the earliest exegete Taberî, language/rhetoric and contextual reading are present together with a simple emphasis on censure, while in later periods (Zemahşerî, Râzî) rhetorical analysis became more systematic and in Râzî theological-juridical discussions (the matter of commanding to good) were added to the verse; this shows that exegesis evolved over time into an interdisciplinary nature. In Kurtubî, variant reading science and linguistic etymology come to the foreground, tracing the marks of juridically-weighted approaches. Ibn Kesîr represents a return to transmission-based exegesis, giving renewed weight to early period transmissions. Beydâvî, with a summarizing and synthesizing approach, combines previous linguistic and transmission contributions. In conclusion, while the basic censure theme remained constant, methodological tools (linguistic analysis, transmission, theology, jurisprudence) diversified and deepened according to periods; Zemahşerî's different context forms an exceptional example outside this line.
Modern connection
Since this verse draws attention to a contradictory behavior between what one says and how one lives, it can be read in our time as a reminder of the need for consistency between words and deeds. Not neglecting oneself while giving advice to others in education, family, or social sphere still provides a valuable measure in terms of both moral integrity and sincerity. This connection is in the nature of a cautious reminder that does not overlook the verse's diverse historical interpretations.
AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar