Skip to content
HikmahLearn home HikmahLearn
Menu
Sign in

Learn › Tafsīr al-Ṭabarī The Source Commentary › Lesson 104

Tafsīr al-Ṭabarī The Source Commentary · Juzʾ Tabārak and Juzʾ ʿAmma Surahs 67–114
Lesson 104

Sūrah Al-Humazah The Scorner

سورة الهمزة

Al-Ṭabarī examines Al-Humazah's condemnation of the humazah lumazah the backbiter-slanderer type investigating competing chains naming specific Makkī individuals while arguing via grammatical analysis that the surah targets a general moral type rather than any single person, then analysing the unique description of Hellfire as "muʾṣadah" (sealed shut).

Surah Overview

DetailInformationClassificationSignificance
SurahالهمزةMakkī 9 versesWoe pronounced on the backbiter-slanderer who hoards wealth; the Crushing Fire sealed over extended columns
Key DisagreementIs the "humazah lumazah" a general moral type or a reference to specific Makkī individuals (al-Walīd ibn al-Mughīrah, Umayyah ibn Khalaf, al-Akhnas)?General vs. particularAl-Ṭabarī: general type the grammatical construction "kullī waylun li-kulli" (woe to every) shows the surah addresses a category, not individuals
Competing OpinionsMultiple chains naming al-Walīd, Umayyah, al-Akhnas, and others; grammarians point to "kulli humazatin" (every backbiter) as generalAsbāb chains vs. grammarAl-Ṭabarī: grammar of "kulli" (every) is decisive specific individuals may have been the trigger, but the warning is universal
MethodologyGrammatical particle "kull" (every) used to override particularist occasion-of-revelation chains grammar determines scopeGrammar overrides occasionAl-Ṭabarī's explicit principle: when grammar makes a ruling general, no chain about a specific individual can restrict it

Key Themes from Al-Ṭabarī

Al-Ṭabarī analyses the two paired words "humazah" and "lumazah" noting via an Ibn ʿAbbās chain that "hamz" refers to backbiting in one's absence while "lamz" refers to slander to one's face. Alternatively, Mujāhid's chain reads "humazah" as gesturing and sneering with the eye, eyebrow, or face, while "lumazah" refers to verbal mockery. Al-Ṭabarī records both traditions without forcing a single resolution, noting that Arabic intensifying noun patterns (faʿʿāl/fuʿalah) indicate habitual, repeated action the humazah lumazah is not a one-time slanderer but someone defined by this behaviour.

On the wealth-hoarding verses (104:2–3), al-Ṭabarī reads "yaḥsabu anna mālahuhu akhladah" he thinks his wealth will make him immortal as a psychological diagnosis of the idolater's relationship with wealth. The Arabic "akhladah" = "has made him immortal" creates a false equation: wealth accumulation becomes a substitute for confronting mortality. Al-Ṭabarī then examines "al-Ḥuṭamah" (the Crushing Fire, 104:4–5) via an Ibn ʿAbbās chain: named for "ḥaṭm" (crushing, smashing) this fire crushes everything thrown into it to pieces. The sealing of the fire "ʿalayhim muʾṣadah" (in extended columns) receives a Mujāhid chain interpreting "ʿamad mumaddadah" as iron pillars sealing the fire's gates.

وَيْلٌ لِّكُلِّ هُمَزَةٍ لُّمَزَةٍ ۝ الَّذِي جَمَعَ مَالًا وَعَدَّدَهُ Waylun li-kulli humazatin lumazah alladhī jamaʿa mālan wa ʿaddadah Woe to every habitual backbiter-slanderer who amasses wealth and counts it. Al-Ṭabarī: "kulli" (every) establishes that the woe is universal for the type specific chains naming al-Walīd or Umayyah are records of the trigger occasion, but the grammar extends the condemnation to every person who habitually combines slander with wealth-hoarding.
كَلَّا لَيُنبَذَنَّ فِي الْحُطَمَةِ ۝ وَمَا أَدْرَاكَ مَا الْحُطَمَةُ ۝ نَارُ اللَّهِ الْمُوقَدَةُ Kallā la-yunbadhanna fī l-ḥuṭamah wa mā adrāka mā l-ḥuṭamah nāru llāhi l-mūqadah No indeed he will be hurled into the Crushing Fire. And what will make you know what the Crushing Fire is? It is the fire of Allah, set ablaze. Al-Ṭabarī via Ibn ʿAbbās: "ḥuṭamah" is named from "ḥaṭm" (crushing/smashing) this fire reduces everything thrown into it. The rhetorical question-then-definition pattern amplifies the horror of the destination.
  • Grammar overrides occasion: Al-Ṭabarī explicitly states that "kulli humazatin" (every backbiter) overrides all specific-individual occasion chains a formal methodological statement.
  • Double meaning preserved: Al-Ṭabarī records both Ibn ʿAbbās (absence/presence) and Mujāhid (gesture/verbal) interpretations of hamz/lamz without forcing resolution both may be correct.
  • Intensifying pattern: The faʿʿāl/fuʿalah noun patterns are read as indicating habitual behaviour the person is characterised by this as a lifestyle, not a one-time act.
  • Wealth-as-immortality: Al-Ṭabarī's psychological reading of "akhladah" (made him immortal) diagnoses a spiritual error: treating wealth accumulation as a substitute for confronting death and divine accountability.
  • Iron columns: The Mujāhid chain on "ʿamad mumaddadah" as iron pillars sealing fire gates is recorded al-Ṭabarī's literalist methodology allows this vivid physical description of the Hereafter.

Finished this lesson?

Sign in to keep your place across devices. Every lesson stays free and open.

Sign in to keep your place