وَمِنَ ٱلنَّاسِ مَن يَقُولُ ءَامَنَّا بِٱللَّهِ وَبِٱلْيَوْمِ ٱلْـَٔاخِرِ وَمَا هُم بِمُؤْمِنِينَ
“And of mankind are some who say: We believe in Allah and the Last Day, when they believe not.” — M. M. Pickthall
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified
Taberî in this section states that the words of the hypocrites 'We believe in Allah and the Last Day' are a confession spoken with their tongues, but there is no confirmation of this in their hearts; therefore Allah does not count them among the people of faith and has denied them. He also expresses that this verse refutes the view of the Jahmiyyah, which claims that faith consists only of a confession spoken with the tongue.
وفي هذه الآية دلالة واضحة على بطول ما زعمته الجهمية من أن الإيمان هو التصديق بالقول دون سائر المعاني غيره. وقد أخبر الله جل ثناؤه عن الذين ذكرهم في كتابه من أهل النفاق أنهم قالوا بألسنتهم: ثم نفى عنهم أن يكونوا مؤمنين، إذ كان اعتقادهم غير مصدق قيلهم ذلك.
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified
This short text fragment does not contain a meaningful exegetical view on its own; the given expression is a decontextualized phrase meaning 'from different people' and it is unclear from the text which verse or topic it belongs to or what Zamakhshari intended with this expression.
من أناس مختلفين
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified
In this text, al-Razi explains the reason for the mention of animals (dâbbe) in the verse with two possibilities: either that their benefits emerge during their lifetime (just as the benefit of livestock is in eating them), or that 'dâbbe' in common usage is attributed to the horse (feres) and the horse is the most noble being after humans. He also states that the expression 'yukazzibûn' conveys exaggeration and indicates excess in the denial of the hypocrites. The text also conveys the view narrated from Ibn Abbas regarding the etymology of the word 'human' and other views as well.
ثم ذكر الدواب ، لأن منافعها في حياتها والأنعام منفعتها في الأكل منها ، أو لأن الدابة في العرف تطلق على الفرس وهو بعد الإنسان أشرف من غيره
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Qurtubi, this verse was revealed about the hypocrites who say with their tongues 'We believe in Allah' while not believing with their hearts.
الآية نزلت في المنافقين كانوا يقولون آمنا بالله
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Ibn Kathir, this verse describes the hypocrites of Aus and Khazraj and those who follow their way; Abu al-Aliyah, al-Hasan, Qatadah and al-Suddi interpreted it in the same manner. Allah has clarified their characteristics so that people are not deceived by their outward appearance, otherwise great corruption would result such that people believe them to be believers when in fact they were disbelievers. Moreover, different narrations from Ikrimah and al-Dahhak regarding the reason for the verse's revelation have been transmitted, and it is stated that the verse generally encompasses those who remained among the polytheists and were unable to emigrate even though they could not practice their religion.
يعني المنافقين من الأوس والخزرج ومن كان على أمرهم وكذا فسرها بالمنافقين من الأوس والخزرج أبو العالية والحسن وقتادة والسدي ولهذا نبه الله سبحانه على صفات المنافقين لئلا يغتر بظاهر أمرهم المؤمنون
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified
Baydawi states that after believers and disbelievers are mentioned at the beginning of Surah al-Baqarah, a third category is described: the hypocrites who believe with their tongues but not with their hearts. He expresses that these are worse than those who openly declare their disbelief and are more displeasing to Allah, because they conceal their disbelief through cunning and mockery. He says that the particular selection of the expression 'We believe in Allah and the Last Day' in the verse points to the fact that they contained the two most important pillars of faith in order to try to present themselves as complete believers.
لما افتتح سبحانه وتعالى بشرح حال الكتاب وساق لبيانه، ذكر المؤمنين الذين أخلصوا دينهم لله تعالى وواطأت فيه قلوبهم ألسنتهم، وثنى بأضدادهم الذين محضوا الكفر ظاهرا وباطنا ولم يلتفتوا لفتة رأسا، ثلث بالقسم الثالث المذبذب بين القسمين، وهم الذين آمنوا بأفواههم ولم تؤمن قلوبهم تكميلا للتقسيم، وهم أخبث الكفرة وأبغضهم إلى الله لأنهم موهوا الكفر وخلطوا به خداعا واستهزاء
Comparison
Common ground
Taberî, Qurtubi, Ibn Kathir and Baydawi are in agreement that the verse describes the hypocrites: these are people who say with their tongues 'We believe in Allah and the Last Day' while their hearts do not confirm this. These exegetes emphasize the distinction between outward confession and heart's confirmation and use narration-based and causes-of-revelation-based reading as a common method. Al-Razi also indirectly indicates that the expression 'yukazzibûn' conveys exaggeration, pointing to the insistence of the hypocrites in their denial, which aligns with the other exegetes' emphasis on the heart-tongue distinction.
Differences
Taberî directly connects this verse to a theological discussion and uses it to refute the Jahmiyyah view that 'faith is only tongue confession'; this adds a theological/doctrinal layer of inference that is not found in the others with such clarity. Ibn Kathir collects the narrations (Abu al-Aliyah, al-Hasan, Qatadah, al-Suddi, Ikrimah, al-Dahhak) more broadly and deepens the discussion of whether the verse refers specifically to the Aus-Khazraj hypocrites or generally to polytheists who could not emigrate; he also makes a juridical inference regarding 'the generality of the verse' which is absent in the others. Baydawi, on the other hand, addresses the matter more through language/rhetoric and the structural composition of the surah (the triple division of believer-disbeliever-hypocrite), places emphasis on word analyses (the alif-lam, repetition of the ba particle); adds an assessment that the hypocrites are worse than open disbelievers, which adds a moral-theological nuance. Al-Razi in the given text fragment focuses on a detail that appears independent of the subject (the reason for the mention of the word dâbbe, the etymology of the word human); this is not directly related to the theme of hypocrisy and is based on language/linguistic etymology discussions, thus it differs methodologically from the others. Zamakhshari's view cannot be included in the comparison because the text is disconnected from context.
Historical context
The earliest exegete Taberî (3rd/9th century) employs a narration-focused method along with early theological discussions (refutation of Jahmiyyah), while Ibn Kathir (8th/14th century) continues a similar narration-based line by collecting predecessor narrations more systematically and discussing the diversity of causes of revelation; this shows that the fundamental understanding of hypocrisy remained constant throughout the period. Qurtubi (7th/13th century) repeats this common narration-based reading in summary form and adds no new method. Baydawi (late 7th/13th century), in accordance with later exegetical tradition, places emphasis on language/rhetoric and surah coherence analysis, offering a methodological diversification; this may reflect how the methodology of exegesis expanded over time from narration towards personal reasoning. Al-Razi's (6th/12th-13th century) turn in the given section towards a different detail (dâbbe, human etymology) demonstrates that theological-reasoned exegesis could extend to various subjects (language, logic, nature), but this passage is not directly comparable. Generally, the theme of the hypocrites' 'tongue confession-heart denial' remained constant from the early period (Taberî) to the late period (Baydawi, Ibn Kathir), with differences appearing more in methodology (narration/theology/language analysis) and points of emphasis (theological refutation, juridical generality, rhetoric).
Modern connection
This verse can offer today's person an opportunity for self-examination by drawing attention to the importance of harmony between words and essence; for the concept of sincerity is related not only to what is said with the tongue but also to what is carried in the heart. In social relations and family life, the alignment of words with deeds builds trust, while the absence of this consistency can damage solidarity. The exegetes' emphasis on the tongue-heart distinction can provide a cautious framework today that reminds us of the value of sincerity in personal and social relations.
AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar