وَلَتَجِدَنَّهُمْ أَحْرَصَ ٱلنَّاسِ عَلَىٰ حَيَوٰةٍ وَمِنَ ٱلَّذِينَ أَشْرَكُوا۟ يَوَدُّ أَحَدُهُمْ لَوْ يُعَمَّرُ أَلْفَ سَنَةٍ وَمَا هُوَ بِمُزَحْزِحِهِۦ مِنَ ٱلْعَذَابِ أَن يُعَمَّرَ وَٱللَّهُ بَصِيرٌۢ بِمَا يَعْمَلُونَ
“And thou wilt find them greediest of mankind for life and (greedier) than the idolaters. (Each) one of them would like to be allowed to live a thousand years. And to live (a thousand years) would be no means remove him from the doom. Allah is Seer of what they do.” — M. M. Pickthall
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified
Taberî explains this verse in relation to the Jews' attachment to worldly life and their excessive fear of death; the reason for this fear is that they know the humiliation and punishment awaiting them in the afterlife. The polytheists, on the other hand, do not fear death to this degree because they do not believe in the afterlife, which is why the Jews are described as being more attached to life and more fleeing from death than even the polytheists. Furthermore, it is reported that some polytheists (Magians) desired to live for a thousand years to such a degree that they were attached to life, and they even prayed to one another saying 'may you live for ten thousand years'.
وإنما وصف الله جل ثناؤه اليهود بأنهم أحرص الناس على الحياة لعلمهم بما قد أعد لهم في الآخرة على كفرهم بما لا يقر به أهل الشرك، فهم للموت أكره من أهل الشرك الذين لا يؤمنون بالبعث
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Zemahşerî, this expression is compensation from those polytheists who abandoned/left their religion; 'fârakū dînehum' means they abandoned the religion of Islam. Furthermore, there is also a reading with strengthening 'ferrakū dînehum', which means that due to the differences in their desires, they made religion into separate religions from one another. The expression is independent from what precedes it (munkatı') and its meaning is 'from those who abandoned their religion, each group rejoicing in what is with them'; the word 'ferihûn' is brought in the nominative as an adjective to the word 'küll'.
بدل من المشركين ( فارقوا دينهم ) تركوا دين الإسلام . وقرىء : ( فرقوا دينهم ) بالتشديد ، أي : حعلوه أديانا مختلفة لاختلاف أهوائهم منقطعا مما قبله
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to this exegete, in the verse the Jews' attachment to life is characterized as being greater than both all mankind and the polytheists; the reason for this is that the Jews are People of the Book and believe in the afterlife and punishment, yet they cling to the world so much that their attachment deserves greater reproach than the greed of polytheists who do not believe in the afterlife. Furthermore, the question of whether the waw letter in the expression 'min al-ladhîn ashrakû' in the text is a conjunction or a resumption has been debated, and Râzî preferred the conjunction view because the story is specifically about the Jews and this reading is more eloquent in refuting their claims.
والقول الأول أولى لأنه إذا كانت القصة في شأن اليهود خاصة فالأليق بالظاهر أن يكون المراد : ولتجدن اليهود أحرص على الحياة من سائر الناس ومن الذين أشركوا ليكون ذلك أبلغ في إبطال دعواهم وفي إظهار كذبهم في قولهم
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Kurtubî, the identity of those described by the phrase 'ahrass al-nâs 'alâ al-hayâh' in the verse is debated; according to one view, these are Arab polytheists who do not believe in the afterlife, according to another view they are Magians, and according to yet another view they are Jews. Furthermore, different views of grammarians are conveyed regarding the original form of the verb 'yawwad' and what the pronoun 'huwa' refers to, and it is explained that the word 'bimuzhazhahuh' means 'removing' or 'distancing'.
وذهب الحسن إلى أن الذين أشركوا مشركو العرب خصوا بذلك لأنهم لا يؤمنون بالبعث فهم يتمنون طول العمر
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Ibn Kesîr, this verse explains that attachment to worldly life is greater among those counted as People of the Book such as Jews and Magians than among polytheists, because although they know the evil outcome awaiting them in the afterlife, they desired a long lifespan like a thousand years. This request is concretized in reports through special Persian and non-Arab expressions (such as hezâr sâl). Furthermore, the pronoun 'yeved' in the verse refers by context to one of the Jews or Magians.
قال هو كقول الفارسي ده هزارسال يقول عشرة آلاف سنة وكذا روى عن سعيد بن جبير نفسه أيضا
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Beydâvî, the coming of the word life with indefiniteness in the verse points to a long-lasting life, and including the meaning of 'Jew' over the polytheists carries a purpose of exaggeration and rebuke. Their greed becomes the subject of more severe reproach because they are excessively attached to worldly life despite knowing and acknowledging the punishment of the afterlife. Furthermore, it is explained that the word 'law' is used in the meaning of 'leyte' (wish) and the sentence is transformed into the third person form.
وإفراده بالذكر للمبالغة، فإن حرصهم شديد إذ لم يعرفوا إلا الحياة العاجلة، والزيادة في التوبيخ والتقريع، فإنهم لما زاد حرصهم. وهم مقرون بالجزاء على حرص المنكرين. دل ذلك على علمهم بأنهم صائرون إلى النار
Comparison
Common ground
Taberî, Râzî, Ibn Kesîr, and Beydâvî share the view that the verse describes the Jews' (sometimes along with Magians) excessive attachment to worldly life, and that this is considered more deserving of reproach than that of polytheists despite their belief in the afterlife. Kurtubî presents these different identity discussions together. Zemahşerî, on the other hand, focuses on a different verse portion (fârakū dînehum) and addresses a separate topic.
Differences
Taberî, Ibn Kesîr, and Beydâvî concretize those characterized by greed primarily as Jews/Magians and support their interpretations with reports (such as the wish to live for a thousand years); Râzî, on the other hand, emphasizes linguistic discussion (whether the waw is a conjunction or resumption) as the foundation of their interpretation. Kurtubî presents the matter as an identity discussion with plural views without making a definite choice. Zemahşerî focuses entirely on a different expression (the readings fârakū/ferrakū) and addresses the theme of the division of religions; this difference stems from changes in the verse portion or context being addressed.
Historical context
Taberî, an early-period exegete, bases his work on the reporting method of transmitted reports, while later-period exegetes (Zemahşerî, Râzî, Beydâvî) gave more emphasis to linguistic and rhetorical analysis, and Kurtubî and Ibn Kesîr combined reports with linguistic interpretation. While the basic finding (that attachment to the world is reprehensible) remained constant throughout the periods, the methods of linguistic justification and the question of to whom this attachment belongs diversified over time.
Modern connection
This comparative reading can point to the importance that possession of knowledge and belief makes one more accountable in terms of responsibility, and thus the need to seek consistency between knowledge and conduct. Its reminder of the balance between attachment to worldly life and awareness of the afterlife can be associated with the theme of a measured lifestyle and patience. Furthermore, the way different exegetes address the same verse from various angles can be considered an example of tolerant pluralism and a spirit of dialogue in scholarly matters.
AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar