أَفَتَطْمَعُونَ أَن يُؤْمِنُوا۟ لَكُمْ وَقَدْ كَانَ فَرِيقٌ مِّنْهُمْ يَسْمَعُونَ كَلَٰمَ ٱللَّهِ ثُمَّ يُحَرِّفُونَهُۥ مِنۢ بَعْدِ مَا عَقَلُوهُ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ
“Have ye any hope that they will be true to you when a party of them used to listen to the word of Allah, then used to change it, after they had understood it, knowingly?” — M. M. Pickthall
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified
Taberî addresses the qiraa difference regarding 'كلمه/كلم الله' in the verse and points out that both readings are widespread and semantically close to each other, mentioning that he himself is more inclined toward the reading with alif (كلمه). He also explains that the address 'أفتطمعون' is directed at Muhammad's (peace be upon him) companions, clarifying that they should not expect the Jews to believe in them. Regarding the identity of those who distorted, he transmits different reports from scholars (العلماء) about whether learned people or a specific group who distorted the Torah are meant.
وهما عندنا قراءتان مستفيضتان في قراءة الأمصار، متقاربتا المعنى، فبأيتهما قرأ القارئ فمصيب، وإن كنت إلى قراءته بالألف أميل
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Zemahşerî, the hypocrites' oaths serving as a shield means that the news they gave did not correspond to the truth at all, and therefore they deliberately lied even in their reports; this situation is likened to the condition of someone who swears falsely while knowing it (yemîn-i gamûs). To support this view, he includes an anecdote about Abdullah b. Nebtel al-Munafiq from among Abdullah b. Ubayy's close associates: this person attended the Prophet's gathering and conveyed what he heard to the Jews; the Prophet informed of his hypocrisy, and he and his companions denied it by swearing in Allah's name, whereupon this verse was revealed.
الكذب : أن يكون الخبر لا على وفاق المخبر عنه ، سواء علم المخبر أو لم يعلم ، فالمعنى : أنهم الذين يخبرون وخبرهم خلاف ما يخبرون عنه ، وهم عالمون بذلك متعمدون له ، كمن يحلف بالغموس
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to this exegete, the address in the verse is primarily directed at the Prophet (Ibn Abbas's view) or at the believers together with the Prophet (Hasan's view); according to al-Qadi, the second view is more in accordance with the apparent meaning because there were those among the companions who responded to the call. Furthermore, it is noted that those addressed in the phrase 'hoped for faith' are not those from the time of Moses but the Jews of Muhammad's era, because hope makes sense only for something that will be realized in the future. The text also explains that distortion means deviation from something and alteration.
المسألة الثانية : المراد بقوله : هم اليهود الذين كانوا في زمن الرسول عليه السلام لأنهم الذين يصح فيهم الطمع في أن يؤمنوا وخلافه لأن الطمع إنما يصح في المستقبل لا في الواقع .
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Kurtubî's view, the reason for the revelation of this verse is that Nadr b. Haris and a group of Quraysh claimed that if the Prophet's words are true, it would be more appropriate to turn to the angels, because the angels are more worthy of intercession. In response to this, Allah informed that those invoked besides Him would not possess intercession, but only those who bear witness to the truth could intercede. Furthermore, the text mentions that the seventy people who heard Allah's speech distorted the word when they did not obey Moses and reported it to their people; this is also linked to how Jewish scholars distorted the Torah by making the forbidden permissible and the permissible forbidden.
قيل : إنها نزلت بسبب أن النضر بن الحارث ونفرا من قريش قالوا : إن كان ما يقول محمد حقا فنحن نتولى الملائكة وهم أحق بالشفاعة لنا منه فأنزل الله : ولا يملك الذين يدعون من دونه الشفاعة إلا من شهد بالحق
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Ibn Kesîr, this expression describes how those who distort and reinterpret Allah's speech by removing it from its original meaning are in error. According to the transmitted account, when Moses conveyed Allah's commands to his people, a group from among them, after hearing what Allah said, deliberately changed the command and conveyed it differently. This distortion is also explained as the alteration of rulings regarding permissible and forbidden, truth and falsehood in the Torah in exchange for bribes and personal benefits.
فلما جاءوهم حرف فريق منهم ما أمرهم به وقالوا حين قال موسى لبني إسرائيل إن الله قد أمركم بكذا وكذا قال ذلك الفريق الذين ذكرهم الل ينقاد لكم بالطاعة
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Beydâvî, this verse describes how a portion of the Jews (especially some of their forefathers or the chosen seventy people) deliberately distorted Allah's speech (the Torah or what was said to Moses on the Mount) even after hearing it and fully understanding and grasping it with their minds. This distortion took the form of turning the text or interpretation to suit their own wishes regarding matters such as the description of Muhammad and the verse on stoning. The real meaning of the verse shows that even the rabbis and leaders of this community were in this condition, and therefore the situation of the ignorant and ordinary people would be even worse, their disbelief and distortion being a habit that already existed within them.
وقيل هؤلاء من السبعين المختارين سمعوا كلام الله تعالى حين كلم موسى عليه السلام بالطور، ثم قالوا سمعنا الله تعالى يقول في آخره: إن استطعتم أن تفعلوا هذه الأشياء فافعلوا وإن شئتم فلا تفعلوا.
Comparison
Common ground
Most exegetes read the verse as describing how a portion of the Jewish community (especially those in positions of knowledge and leadership) deliberately distorted Allah's speech even after hearing and fully understanding it. The concrete example of distortion includes ruling changes in the Torah (permissible and forbidden, stoning, the Prophet's description) and the account of the seventy people who incorrectly conveyed Moses's command from the Mount to their community, which serve as common reference points in nearly all exegetes. Additionally, the matter of whom the address is directed at (the Prophet, the companions, or the believers) and the diversity of reports regarding the identity of those who distorted is a shared point of attention across virtually all exegetes.
Differences
While Taberî primarily emphasizes qiraa differences (كلمه/كلم) and linguistic analysis, Zemahşerî focuses on rhetoric-centered approach by placing the hypocrites' false oath at the center and presents a different report (the story of Ibn Nebtel). Râzî dwells on the addressee of the speech and discusses Ibn Abbas-Hasan views; Kurtubî, on the other hand, connects the reason for revelation to Nadr b. Haris and the Quraysh's request for intercession, establishing a different context. Ibn Kesîr and Beydâvî, meanwhile, are more report-focused and emphasize the moral-religious dimension of distortion (bribery, personal interest, disbelief that has become a habit). These differences stem from each exegete being closer to either the linguistic/qiraa school (Taberî), the rhetorical school (Zemahşerî, Beydâvî), theological-jurisprudential discussions (Râzî), or report/history-focused exegesis (Kurtubî, Ibn Kesîr).
Historical context
From the earliest exegete Taberî to the latest Beydâvî, the fundamental meaning of the verse—intentional distortion and lying in reporting—remained constant, yet the methodology changed: in the early period, reports and linguistic analysis were used alongside each other in a simpler fashion, while in later periods (Râzî, Beydâvî) logical-theological analysis and contextual interpretation became more systematic. In Kurtubî and Ibn Kesîr, the richness of reports increased, and different reasons for revelation and accounts were evaluated together.
Modern connection
This comparative reading reminds us that hearing and understanding information, but then distorting it with personal interests or prejudices, carries great responsibility; this points to the importance of the balance between knowledge and sincerity. At the societal level, it can be considered that correctly conveying information is a requirement in both education and daily communication, necessitating acting with honesty and a sense of trust. When conveying information between different communities, not departing from tolerance and correctness could serve as an example of the careful moral lesson offered by this verse.
AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar