Tafsir of Al Imran 3:130

(O you who have believed, do not consume interest). This is the commencement of a discourse containing a command, a prohibition, an incentive, and a warning, serving as a completion to the preceding guidance regarding that which is most beneficial in religious matters and in the sphere of Jihad. Perhaps the reason for mentioning the prohibition of interest specifically here is that the incitement to spend in times of ease and adversity—the core of which is spending in the cause of Jihad—inherently entails an incitement to acquire wealth. Consequently, it becomes a point of suspicion that people might hasten toward [various] methods of earning, among which—indeed, the easiest of which—is interest; thus, they were forbidden from it. The prohibition was placed before the command [that follows] out of care for it, and so that the command might arrive after the obstruction of that which would tarnish it.

Al-Qaffal stated: It is possible that this discourse is connected to what preceded it in that the wealth of the polytheists had largely been amassed through interest, and they would spend that wealth upon their armies. It was possible that this might have become a motive for the Muslims to venture into it [interest] so that they might amass wealth, spend it upon the armies, and gain the ability to take revenge upon their enemy. Thus, the prohibition of it was revealed as a mercy to them and an act of kindness toward them.

It is also said: When He, the Almighty, mentioned that He has the power to punish whom He wills and forgive whom He wills, He linked this to a prohibition of that which, if they were to commit it, they would deserve punishment—namely, interest. It was singled out for prohibition because it was widespread at that time, and due to the importance of this, it was not deemed sufficient to rely on that which indicated its prohibition in Surat al-Baqarah. Rather, He explicitly stated the prohibition and presented the discourse for its sake primarily and essentially, signaling the severity of the interdiction.

The intent of "consuming" is taking; it is expressed this way because it is the primary objective of such activity, and because of its prevalence regarding food, along with the added sense of reproach it conveys. Discourse on interest has already preceded.

(Doubled and multiplied): This is a state [grammatical hal] of interest. Ad'af (multiplied/doubled) is the plural of da'f (double/multiple). The da'f of a thing is its equivalent, and its two da'fs are its two equivalents, and its ad'af are its multiples. Some researchers have said: Da'f is the name for that which doubles a thing, just as thani is the name for that which makes it two. Based on what Al-Raghib transmitted, from the verb da'aftuhu (I doubled it)—which is the same as da'aftuhu—it is a noun applied to a number on the condition that another number be present with it, or more. Its focus is toward what is above, unlike the term zawj (pair/even), where the focus is toward what is below it. Therefore, if it is said "the da'f of ten," it necessitates making it twenty without dispute, as that is the first level of its doubling. If one says, "He owes me the da'f of a dirham," he is obligated to pay two dirhams due to the aforementioned condition, just as if it were said, "He is the brother of Zayd," which implies that Zayd is his brother. Once the pairing is necessary, it enters into the category of legal admission. Based on this, "two da'fs of a dirham" is interpreted as three dirhams. This is not based on the common delusion that the da'f of a thing is its equivalent and its two da'fs are its two equivalents, but rather because its subject is the equivalent given the aforementioned condition.

This is the stance of the jurists in admissions and bequests. It is clear that they have mandated three equivalents for the "two da'fs" of a thing. If the subject of da'f were the two equivalents, then the "two da'fs" would be four equivalents. Its basis is not the language of the masses, but the linguistic subject, as Al-Azhari stated.

From this, it is evident that if one says, "He owes me the two da'fs—a dirham and a dirham," or "the two da'fs of dirhams," he is not obligated to pay more than two dirhams, just as if one said "the two brothers." In conclusion, doubling a thing is the joining of another number to it. Sometimes it is increased, and sometimes the focus is on its first levels, because that is what is certain. Furthermore, sometimes the doubled thing is included with it—making its two da'fs equal to three—and sometimes it is not, making it equal to two. All of this is its subject in the language, not in common usage. This state [doubled and multiplied] is not intended to restrict the prohibition so that the core of interest remains permitted; rather, it is in observance of the reality. It has been narrated by more than one that a man would practice interest until a deadline; when it arrived, he would say to the debtor: "Increase me in wealth, and I will increase you in time." He would do this again and again at every deadline until he consumed the debtor's wealth entirely. Thus, they were forbidden from this, and the verse was revealed. It has also been recited as muḍa'afah (with a shaddah on the 'ayn).

(And fear Allah), meaning in that which you have been forbidden, among which is the consumption of interest.

(That you may succeed), meaning so that you may succeed, or hoping for success; in which case the clause is in the position of a state [hal]. It is said: It is not hidden that the combination of hope with fear implies that the servant should be between hope and fear. These are the two wings with which he flies to the enclosures of holiness.