وَإِذَا قِيلَ لَهُمْ ءَامِنُوا۟ بِمَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ قَالُوا۟ نُؤْمِنُ بِمَآ أُنزِلَ عَلَيْنَا وَيَكْفُرُونَ بِمَا وَرَآءَهُۥ وَهُوَ ٱلْحَقُّ مُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا مَعَهُمْ قُلْ فَلِمَ تَقْتُلُونَ أَنۢبِيَآءَ ٱللَّهِ مِن قَبْلُ إِن كُنتُم مُّؤْمِنِينَ

“And when it is said unto them: Believe in that which Allah hath revealed, they say: We believe in that which was revealed unto us. And they disbelieve in that which cometh after it, though it is the truth confirming that which they possess. Say (unto them, O Muhammad): Why then slew ye the prophets of Allah aforetime, if ye are (indeed) believers?” — M. M. Pickthall

Tafsirs

AI-generated
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Taberî, this expression is a conditional clause that questions the addressees whether they believe in Allah's promise, His threat, the lawful and the unlawful. Furthermore, the expression 'and in what He sent down before it' refers to other scriptures that Allah sent to His prophets besides the Torah, particularly the Qur'an; because Allah's scriptures confirm one another. The text also discusses the linguistic matter of expressing past tense with the form of future tense from a grammatical perspective.

وإنما قال جل ثناؤه: لأن كتب الله يصدق بعضها بعضا؛ ففي الإنجيل والقرآن من الأمر باتباع محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم والإيمان به وبما جاء به، مثل الذي من ذلك في توراة موسى عليه السلام
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified

According to this exegete, what the verse 'when a covenant was taken from you' requires of true faith is that a believer only fears his Lord and pays no heed to anyone other than Him. Allah's verses are only clear and constitute proof; this situation is for the purpose of urging them to take admonition and reminding them of what requires abandoning turning back (to disbelief or corruption), which is being characterized by faith that prevents from every evil. Allah clarifies to you from His signs the proofs of His knowledge and wisdom, which He has sent down from the Shari'ah, teaches you good morals, and admonishes you with healing admonitions.

يعني أن قضية الإيمان الصحيح أن لا يخشى المؤمن إلا ربه ، ولا يبالي بمن سواه ، كقوله تعالى : لأن آيات الله لا تكون إلا واضحة وحججا فيه تهييج لهم ليتعظوا ، وتذكير بما يوجب ترك العود ، وهو اتصافهم بالإيمان الصاد عن كل مقبح
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified

According to this exegete, the verse shows the inconsistency of the People of the Book's claims of faith in the Torah; because the Torah informed that the miracle is a proof of truthfulness and that killing someone who is true in claiming prophethood is disbelief. Accordingly, the attempt to kill Yahya, Zechariah, and Jesus is considered disbelief, and therefore there is a contradiction between their claims of faith in the Torah and these actions. Furthermore, it is stated that part of the verse indicates the necessity of belief in the prophethood of Muhammad, that the Torah must confirm the Qur'an, and that this must necessarily contain his prophethood.

وذلك لأن التوراة دلت على أن المعجزة تدل على الصدق ودلت على أن من كان صادقا في ادعاء النبوة فإن قتله كفر ، وإذا كان الأمر كذلك كان السعي في قتل يحيى وزكريا وعيسى عليهم السلام كفرا فلم سعيتم في ذلك إن صدقتم في ادعائكم كونكم مؤمنين بالتوراة
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified

Kurtubî conveys different interpretations of the conditional structure in the expression 'kuntem mu'minîn' (if you were believers) in this section: according to some, it is a real condition (for those whose faith was not yet firmly established), and according to others, it is a figurative condition for the purpose of exaggeration directed at those who have believed. Furthermore, he reports that according to some views, the particle 'in' is used in the meaning of 'iz' (at that time), and according to others, it refers to belief in proofs/miracles/the Qur'an. According to yet another view, this is addressed to a group that believed and then broke the covenant that the Prophet took by turning back.

وإذا قدرنا الآية فيمن قد تقرر إيمانه فهو شرط مجازي على جهة المبالغة كما تقول لمن تريد إقامة نفسه : إن كنت رجلا فافعل كذا وحكى النقاش عن مقاتل بن سليمان أنه قال : إن إن في هذه الآية بمعنى إذ
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Ibn Kesîr, this verse presents a proof against the Jews who have the Torah and the Gospel in their hands: if they were sincere in claiming to truly believe in what was sent down to them, they would not kill the prophets who came confirming the Torah. Their killing of prophets shows only that they follow their desires, their own opinions and pleasures, and that their claims of faith are false. Furthermore, a narration regarding the prohibition of ribâ (usury) is transmitted, and it is noted that the matter of pre-Islamic ribâ between the Sakif and the sons of Mahzum is mentioned in this context.

أي إن كنتم صادقين في دعواكم الإيمان بما انزل إليكم فلم قتلتم الأنبياء الذين جاءوكم بتصديق التوراة التي بأيديكم والحكم بها وعدم نسخها وأنتم تعلمون صدقهم قتلتموهم بغيا وعنادا واستكبارا على رسل الله فلستم تتبعون إلا مجرد الأهواء والآراء والتشهي
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Beydâvî, the expression 'bi mâ verâehû' (in what was sent down before it) encompasses all scriptures sent down other than the Torah; the Jews claimed to believe only in the Torah and denied what came after it (including the Qur'an). Since the word 'verâe' is a word with opposite meanings that can be attributed to both agent and object, it here refers to what is beyond the Torah; it is stated that the Qur'an confirmed the Torah that was with them, and their denial of it despite this confirmation actually means denying the Torah as well. Furthermore, it is explained that although the act of killing prophets belonged to their ancestors, because they were pleased with this act and adopted it, it is attributed to them.

ووراء في الأصل جعل ظرفا، ويضاف إلى الفاعل فيراد به ما يتوارى به وهو خلفه، وإلى المفعول فيراد به ما يواريه وهو قدامه، ولذلك عد من الأضداد

Comparison

Common ground

Most exegetes read the verse as a logical proof based on the contradiction between the People of the Book's (especially the Jews') claims of faith and their actual conduct; the emphasis that the expression 'in what was sent down before it' encompasses scriptures revealed after the Torah (including the Qur'an) and that the Torah must confirm the Qur'an is common among Taberî, Râzî, Ibn Kesîr, and Beydâvî.

Differences

While Taberî and Beydâvî emphasize linguistic details (tense aspect, the antonymous property of the word 'verâe'), Zemahşerî elevates the verse more to the moral-educational dimension of faith, to admonition and wisdom. Kurtubî presents a pluralistic table by systematically compiling different interpretations of the conditional particle (is it a real condition or a figurative exaggeration for emphasis); Râzî and Ibn Kesîr emphasize theological/logical reasoning and add historical context with narrations about the cause of revelation (ribâ, the letter story). These differences stem from methodological and school differences among the linguistic (Taberî, Zemahşerî, Beydâvî), theological-exegetical (Râzî), hadith/narration-focused (Ibn Kesîr), and compilatory-encyclopedic (Kurtubî) approaches.

Historical context

From Taberî to Beydâvî, there is an enrichment from narration-focused interpretation (Taberî, Ibn Kesîr) toward linguistic and rhetorical subtlety-based reading (Zemahşerî, Beydâvî) and multi-faceted compilation of views (Kurtubî); however, the fundamental line of proof—questioning consistency between claims of faith and conduct—has remained constant from the earliest period onward.

Modern connection

This comparative reading reminds us of the importance of consistency between belief and conduct; the idea that values embraced in words must also be lived in daily attitudes and relationships can be considered a moral criterion even today. Furthermore, different scriptures/sources of knowledge being viewed as complementary to one another can be considered an example of a harmonious perspective between knowledge and faith. In this context, the verse can also be read as an opportunity for self-examination in which a person patiently and sincerely tests his own claims.

AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar