{O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and do not invalidate your deeds.}

It has been said: The tribe of Banu Asad accepted Islam and said to the Messenger of Allah (may Allah exalt him and grant him peace), "We have preferred you, and we have come to you with our souls and our families," as if they were doing him a favor by that. Thus, this verse was revealed concerning them, as well as His saying, the Exalted, {They consider it a favor to you that they have accepted Islam}. Hence, it was said that the meaning is: Do not invalidate your deeds by boasting (al-mann) and by Islam.

It is reported from Ibn Abbas that it means: by showing off (riya') and seeking reputation (sum'ah). Also from him: by doubt and hypocrisy. It has also been said: by self-admiration ('ujb), for it consumes good deeds just as fire consumes firewood. It is also said: The intent by "deeds" is charity, meaning do not invalidate them by boasting and injury. Others said: Do not invalidate your acts of obedience with your acts of disobedience.

'Abd ibn Humayd and Ibn Jarir recorded from Qatadah regarding the verse: Whoever among you is able not to invalidate a righteous deed with an evil deed, let him do so, and there is no power except by Allah the Exalted.

'Abd ibn Humayd, Muhammad ibn Nasr al-Marwazi in Kitab al-Salah, and Ibn Abi Hatim recorded from Abu al-'Aliyah, who said: The companions of the Messenger of Allah (may Allah exalt him and grant him peace) used to believe that no sin could cause harm alongside the declaration "There is no god but Allah," just as no deed could be of benefit alongside polytheism, until {Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and do not invalidate your deeds} was revealed. Then they feared that a sin might invalidate a deed. The wording of 'Abd ibn Humayd is: They feared that major sins might nullify their deeds.

Ibn Nasr, Ibn Jarir, and Ibn Marduyah recorded from Ibn 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with both of them) who said: We, the companions of Muhammad (may Allah exalt him and grant him peace), used to believe that no good deed would go unaccepted, until {Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and do not invalidate your deeds} was revealed. When this verse was revealed, we said: What is this that invalidates our deeds? We said: The major sins (al-kaba'ir) that entail punishment, and indecencies. So, whenever we saw one of our companions commit any of these, we would say: "He has perished," until the revelation of the verse: {Indeed, Allah does not forgive associating others with Him, but He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills}. When that was revealed, we refrained from speaking on that matter, and when we saw someone who had committed one of those sins, we feared for him, and if he had not committed any, we held hope for him.

The Mu'tazilah argued from this verse that major sins nullify acts of obedience; indeed, even a single major sin invalidates all deeds if persisted upon, even if they were as numerous as the stars in the sky. They mentioned in support of this such narrations as they mentioned. In al-Kashf, it is stated that it is necessary in this context to refine the discussion by saying: If the Mu'tazilah intend that an act like adultery, if committed after prayer, invalidates the reward of that prayer, for example, there is no evidence for this in transmitted or intellectual sources. Rather, they are equal [in weight], as indicated by the authentic hadiths. It suffices as a conclusive proof His saying, the Exalted: {So whoever does an atom's weight of good will see it, and whoever does an atom's weight of evil will see it}.

If they intend that its punishment may become so great that it is not outweighed by minor good deeds, then this is correct. The discussion then becomes one of terminology regarding whether to label this as "nullification" (ihbat). There is no harm in this, but according to us, this "nullification" is not necessary, while according to them, it is necessary, and it is built upon the permissibility of pardon, which is another issue.

As for the major sin that is specific to that deed—such as self-admiration, or boasting and injury after giving charity—it is nullifying without doubt, by consensus. It is upon this that the reported traditions are interpreted. As for the one who does not call it "nullification"—because he considers it a condition for acceptance, and nullification implies the disappearance of an already existing reward—this does not apply if the reward was never established in the first place. That is a matter of terminology.

This concludes the passage, and it is most excellent. The repetition of the verb in {and obey the Messenger} is for the sake of emphasizing the importance of obeying him, upon him be blessings and peace.