خَتَمَ ٱللَّهُ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبِهِمْ وَعَلَىٰ سَمْعِهِمْ وَعَلَىٰٓ أَبْصَٰرِهِمْ غِشَٰوَةٌ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ
“Allah hath sealed their hearing and their hearts, and on their eyes there is a covering. Theirs will be an awful doom.” — M. M. Pickthall
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified
This text conveys the disagreement among exegetes regarding whom the expression 'muhsanat' (chaste women) in Surat al-Nur is attributed to: some say it applies only to Aisha and those who slandered her, not encompassing other believing women, while the view transmitted from Ibn Abbas indicates that it was revealed concerning the slander made by hypocrites regarding the Prophet's wives. Additionally, the text addresses the topic of the sealing of hearts (hatm), explaining that since hearts are vessels that accept knowledge and recognition, the sealing of hearts resembles the sealing of external vessels perceived by the external senses.
واختلف أهل التأويل في المحصنات اللاتي هذا حكمهن، فقال بعضهم: إنما ذلك لعائشة خاصة، وحكم من الله فيها وفيمن رماها، دون سائر نساء أمة نبينا صلى الله عليه وسلم
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified
This passage contains many scattered issues concerning various verses of Surat al-Baqara; particularly regarding the topic of 'hatm' (sealing), Razî states that after Allah has declared in the previous verse that they will not believe, He explains in this verse the reason for this (the sealing of hearts). Furthermore, two views transmitted from Zamakhsharî are presented: that the indefinite (nakira) mention of hearts either points to hearts being qualified with a specific attribute or indicates partiality (tib'îza). The text also discusses why the order of hearing-heart-sight differs in their giving and reception.
اعلم أنه تعالى لما بين في الآية الأولى أنهم لا يؤمنون أخبر في هذه الآية بالسبب الذي لأجله لم يؤمنوا ، وهو الختم
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Qurtubî, the expression 'hatm' (sealing) in this verse means to cover something and strengthen it so that nothing can enter within it; like the sealing of a book or a door. According to this exegete, the scholars of meanings (ehl-i meânî) have stated that Allah qualifies the hearts of disbelievers with ten different attributes: sealing, covering, narrowness, sickness, rust, death, hardness, deviation (inhiraf), fanaticism (hamiyye), and denial. Mention is also made of the heart's superiority over all other organs and its being the most noble organ of the human, and the fact that it received this name due to thoughts flowing into it rapidly and its continuous change (taklib).
قال اهل المعاني : وصف الله تعالى قلوب الكفار بعشرة أوصاف : بالختم والطبع والضيق والمرض والرين والموت والقساوة والانصراف والحمية والإنكار
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified
Ibn Kathîr states that the expression 'ختم' (sealing) applies to the heart and hearing, while the expression 'غشاوة' (veil/covering) applies to the eyes; he clarifies that the pause in the verse occurs exactly after the phrase 'وقوله', because the nature belongs to the heart and ear while the veil belongs to the eye. He also transmits narrations explaining how the heart becomes sealed as sins are committed, and he rejects Zamakhsharî's reinterpretation of this verse according to Mu'tazilî understanding, emphasizing that Allah Himself has informed that He seals the hearts.
واعلم ان الوقف التام على قوله تعالى وقوله جملة تامة فإن الطبع يكون على القلب وعلى السمع والغشاوة وهي الغطاء يكون على البصر
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Baydâwî, the sealing of hearts and the veil over the eyes should be understood not in their literal sense but through metaphor; in reality, a state has come into being in the souls of disbelievers that makes disbelief and disobedience seem attractive and faith and obedience seem repugnant. This condition manifests as their persistence in deviation, their falling into blind imitation, and their turning away from sound thought resulting in truth not penetrating their hearts, their ears avoiding hearing the right, and their eyes not being able to see the signs; this state is metaphorically called sealing and covering through metaphorical extension (istiara). Baydâwî also summarizes how the Mu'tazilites reinterpret this verse due to the problem of attributing actions to Allah in seven ways.
ولا ختم ولا تغشية على الحقيقة، وإنما المراد بهما أن يحدث في نفوسهم هيئة تمرنهم على استحباب الكفر والمعاصي، واستقباح الإيمان والطاعات بسبب غيهم، وانهماكهم في التقليد، وإعراضهم عن النظر الصحيح
Comparison
Common ground
All five exegetes address the concept of 'hatm' (sealing) in relation to the heart and sensory organs; it is seen that this is a consequence/punishment and the linguistic-lexical analysis method is commonly employed. Qurtubî, Ibn Kathîr, and Baydâwî particularly discuss the semantic layers of the word (literal-metaphorical), while all of them relate the topic to previous verses (in the context of disbelief/denial). Furthermore, figures like Taberî and Ibn Kathîr convey predecessor interpretations by relying on transmission chains (Ibn Abbas, Mujahid, etc.).
Differences
Taberî, the earliest exegete (3rd-4th century), presents a simple approach based primarily on transmission and lexical analysis, adding the discussion of 'muhsanat' while providing a scattered compilation of narrations. Razî addresses the issue through rhetorical and grammatical angles (the difference between indefinite and definite, word order) and transmits Zamakhsharî's views but does not directly refute them. Qurtubî creates an encyclopedic language/meaning map by relating the concept of 'hatm' to ten different attributes. Ibn Kathîr, on the other hand, takes a creedal stance, explicitly rejecting Zamakhsharî's Mu'tazilî reinterpretation and arguing that hatm occurs in the literal (actual) sense—this is a position within the framework of Ash'arite theological discourse. Baydâwî, conversely, interprets hatm as metaphor/metaphorical extension and summarizes seven different reinterpretations of the Mu'tazilites; this comes closer to the approach that Ibn Kathîr rejected. Thus, there is a direct methodological and substantive conflict between Ibn Kathîr (the Ash'arite/hadith school) and Baydâwî (the theological/philosophical interpretation school).
Historical context
While the earliest exegete Taberî (3rd-4th century) employs a predominantly transmission and linguistic-based simple approach, in subsequent periods (Razî, Qurtubî, Ibn Kathîr, Baydâwî—6th-8th centuries) it is observed that theological discussions (particularly the Mu'tazilî-Ash'arite dispute) come into play. This shows that the tradition of exegesis gradually expanded from transmission to theological/philosophical interpretation; however, this expansion is not unidirectional but evolves in different directions depending on the exegete's school (Ibn Kathîr's predecessor/hadith-centered position vs. Baydâwî's theological/metaphorical position). Thus, the issue of 'hatm' has transformed from a simple lexical explanation, as periods advanced, into a theological problem such as the attribution of actions to Allah; yet this change is not a linear 'progression' but rather an ongoing debate characterized by the opposing positions of different schools even within the same period.
Modern connection
This verse can be understood today as a warning that the heart and senses can become insensitive as a result of conscious choices; the idea that an attitude of constant closure to truth can over time prevent a person from seeing and hearing reality constitutes a meaningful reminder in terms of personal ethics and self-examination. The fact that exegetes have discussed this concept deeply on both linguistic and creedal grounds shows the value of a careful and open-minded reading approach to different interpretive methods. In this context, an attitude that respects the harmony between knowledge and faith, that encourages thinking and questioning, can be seen as a reflection of the same careful effort in our contemporary times.
AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar