Tafsir of Az-Zalzala 99:7-8

This is a detailed explanation of [the people] "seeing their deeds." The dharr (atom) is a small, thin, red ant. It is said that it crawls when a year has passed for it, and it is a standard of measurement for insignificance. Imru’ al-Qays said:

It is also said that dharr refers to what is seen in the sun’s rays, such as dust particles. Hannad narrated from Ibn Abbas that he placed his hand on the earth, lifted it, blew into it, and said: "Each one of these is an atom’s weight."

The accusative case of "good" (khayran) and "evil" (sharran) is for the purpose of specification (tamyiz), because "atom's weight" (mithqal dharr) implies an indeterminate amount. Others say it is in the nominative case as a substitute (badal) for "atom's weight."

The apparent meaning is that the "whoever" (man) in both instances is general, applying to both the believer and the disbeliever, and that the meaning of "seeing" what is equivalent to an atom’s weight of good or evil is witnessing its recompense by having it bestowed upon one.

This has been challenged by the argument that it necessitates rewarding the disbeliever for his good deeds, even though it is said that the deeds of disbelievers are nullified. The Sharh al-Maqasid claims consensus on this, asking: "How could it be otherwise when the Exalted One said: 'And We shall approach what they have done of deeds and make them as scattered dust' [25:23], and the Almighty said: 'Those are they who have no portion in the Hereafter except the Fire; and what they did there is null, and void is what they were doing' [11:16], and the Almighty said: 'The example of those who disbelieved in their Lord: their deeds are like ashes...' [14:18]?"

Furthermore, the idea that the good which they "see" is a mitigation of their punishment is refuted by the Almighty’s saying: "The punishment will not be lightened for them," and His saying: "We will increase them in punishment upon punishment for the corruption they were causing" [16:27]. It also implies that the believer will be punished for his minor sins if he avoids major ones, even though it is said that minor sins are expiated in such a case, due to the verse: "If you avoid the great sins of which you are forbidden, We will expiate for you your minor sins" [4:31]. The statement of Ibn al-Munir that "avoidance does not necessitate expiation according to the community, but rather repentance or the will of God," is nothing, because repentance and avoidance are the same in the ruling of the text, and the will of God is the fundamental cause.

Consequently, some have maintained that the "whoever" in the first instance refers to the fortunate ones, and the "whoever" in the second instance refers to the wretched ones, based on the fact that “So whoever does...” is a detail of “...that the people may be shown [the results of] their deeds” [99:6], which was interpreted as meaning a party in Paradise and a party in the blazing fire. Therefore, it is appropriate that each clause returns to a specific party so that the detail matches the general, and because the explicit repetition of the conditional particle in the Almighty’s saying "Whoever does... and whoever does..." necessitates a distinction between the two doers.

Others have argued for generality, though some among them say there is an implied constraint in the speech that was omitted due to its obviousness and knowledge of it from other verses. Thus, the meaning is: "Whoever does an atom's weight of good will see it—if it is not nullified—and whoever does an atom's weight of evil will see it—if he is not forgiven."

Others have made the "seeing" more general, occurring both in this world and the Hereafter. The disbeliever sees the recompense for his good in this world, and the recompense for his evil in the Hereafter; the believer sees the recompense for his evil in this world, and the recompense for his good in the Hereafter. Al-Baghawi, Ibn Jarir, Ibn al-Mundhir, and others narrated from Muhammad ibn Ka'b al-Qurazi that he said: "Whoever does an atom's weight of good while he is a disbeliever, he sees the reward for that in this world in himself, his family, and his wealth, until he reaches the Hereafter, where he has no good [waiting] for him. And whoever does an atom's weight of evil while he is a believer, he is compensated for that in this world in himself, his family, and his wealth, until he reaches the Hereafter, where he has no evil [waiting] for him."

At-Tabarani (in al-Awsat), al-Bayhaqi (in al-Shu'ab), Ibn Abi Hatim, and others narrated from Anas: While Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him) was eating with the Prophet (peace be upon him), this verse was revealed. Abu Bakr raised his hand and said, "O Messenger of Allah, will I see what I have done of an atom's weight of evil?" The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "O Abu Bakr, have you not seen what you suffer in this world of things you dislike? These are the atom-weights of evil, and the atom-weights of good are stored for you until you are fully repaid on the Day of Resurrection." In a narration by Ibn Marduyah from Abu Ayyub, he says that the Prophet (peace be upon him) told him when he raised his hand: "Whoever among you does good, his reward is in the Hereafter, and whoever among you does evil, he sees it in this world as calamities and illnesses. And whoever possesses an atom's weight of good will enter Paradise."

Others said that the meaning of "seeing" what is equivalent to that is the act of witnessing the deed itself, without regard for recompense or lack thereof, but rather referring each case to other evidence. This evidence dictates that minor sins are pardoned for the believer who avoids major sins, that he is rewarded for all his good deeds, that the disbeliever's good deeds are nullified, and that he is punished for all his sins. This is indicated by what Ibn Jarir, Ibn al-Mundhir, and al-Bayhaqi (in al-Ba'th) narrated from Ibn Abbas regarding the verse: "There is no believer or disbeliever who did good or evil in this world but that Allah (Exalted be He) will show it to him. As for the believer, He shows him his good deeds and his sins; then He forgives him his sins and rewards him for his good deeds. As for the disbeliever, He shows him his good deeds and his sins; then He rejects his good deeds and punishes him for his sins."

Al-Tayyibi chose this, saying: "It is supported by the structure, the meaning, and the style." As for the structure, the Almighty’s saying “So whoever does...” is a detail of what preceded it, namely: “That the people may be shown their deeds” [99:6]. Therefore, there must be conformity. "Deeds" is a plural noun that, when annexed, implies inclusion and comprehensiveness. "The people may be shown" is constrained by the Almighty’s saying “...in scattered groups” [99:6], implying they are on different paths to descend into their stations in Paradise and Hell according to their varying deeds. Hence, Paradise has degrees and Hell has levels. As for the meaning, it was revealed to manifest the thoroughness in the presentation of deeds and the recompense for them, like His saying: "And We place the scales of justice for the Day of Resurrection, so no soul will be treated unjustly at all. And if there is [even] the weight of a mustard seed, We will bring it. And sufficient are We as accountant" [21:47]. As for the style, it is among the comprehensive verses containing the benefits of religion, fundamentally and branch-wise. We have narrated from al-Bukhari and Muslim from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was asked about donkeys—meaning about their zakat—and he said, "Nothing has been revealed to me regarding them except this comprehensive, unique verse in its meaning," and he recited it.

I say: The apparent meaning is the generality of "whoever" and that the intent is seeing the recompense, as previously mentioned. Likewise, it is apparent that this occurs in the Hereafter, and there is no difficulty in this. This is because the first clause is a promise and the second is a threat. Our school is that a promise must necessarily occur as a matter of grace and generosity, while a threat is not necessarily so. Thus, the matter of the evil in the second clause is referred back to the [overarching] evidence, which states that if it is disbelief, it is not forgiven; if it is a minor sin from a believer who avoids major ones, it is expiated; and if it is a major sin from a believer, or a minor one from a believer who does not avoid major ones, it is left to the will [of God]. The narrations of Anas and Abu Ayyub mentioned previously do not contradict this after reflection.

It is not far-fetched, in my view, that what is other than disbelief for the disbeliever may be treated similarly [regarding mitigation]. As for the matter of good, it remains as its apparent meaning requires, which is obvious regarding the believer. Regarding the disbeliever, it refers to the mitigation of punishment, due to authentic traditions. It has been reported that Allah (Exalted be He) will lighten the punishment for Hatim due to his generosity, and likewise for Abu Lahab due to his joy at the birth of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his freeing his maidservant Thuwaybah when she brought him the good news of it. The hadith regarding the mitigation of the punishment of Abu Talib is famous. What indicates the non-mitigation of punishment is construed as the punishment of disbelief according to its ranks; that is what will not be lightened. The punishment that the reports indicate is mitigated is something else. The meaning of the "nullification" of the deeds of disbelievers is that they do not save them from the eternal punishment, just as the deeds of others [do not save them, implying they are useless]. The claim of consensus that they are nullified in their entirety is not sound; for they are addressed by obligations regarding interactions and crimes by consensus. The disagreement only exists regarding their being addressed by other branches [of the law]. There is no doubt that there is no meaning to being addressed by them other than punishment for the one who leaves them and reward for the one who does them, and the least [of that reward] is mitigation. This is the view held by the scholar Shihab al-Din al-Khafaji (may Allah have mercy on him).

He then said: "What is in al-Tabsirah, Sharh al-Mashariq, and Tafsir al-Tha'labi—that the good deeds of disbelievers which do not require faith, such as saving a drowning person, extinguishing a fire, or feeding a traveler, are recompensed in this world and not stored for them in the Hereafter like the believers—is by consensus because it is explicitly stated in the hadiths. If one of them performs good deeds while in disbelief and then embraces Islam, there is disagreement as to whether he is rewarded for them in the Hereafter, based on whether the condition of faith for counting deeds and preventing their nullification means the existence of faith at the time of the deed, or its existence even afterward, due to the Prophet's (peace be upon him) saying in the hadith: 'You have embraced Islam along with your previous good deeds' [as a Muslim]. The claim of consensus on this is not sound, because the view that their recompense occurs in this world rather than the Hereafter, like the believers, is held by some. Others held the view that the recompense is mitigation. Al-Kirmani said that the mitigation occurs, but not because of their deeds, rather due to another matter, such as the intercession of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his hope. From this is what happens to Abu Lahab, as al-Zarkashi said."

Someone might say that intercession is also an effect of the good deeds of the one being interceded for. Reflect on this.

The cause of the revelation of the verse, according to what Ibn Abi Hatim narrated from Sa'id ibn Jubayr, is that when “And they give food in spite of love for it...” [76:8] was revealed, the Muslims thought they would not be rewarded for a small thing if they gave it. So a poor person would come to their doors, and they would deem it insignificant to give him a date or a dried date, so they would turn him away, saying, "This is nothing; we are only rewarded for what we give while we love it." Others thought they would not be blamed for a small sin—a lie, a look, backbiting, and the like—saying, "Allah (Exalted be He) only promised the Fire for major sins." So the verse was revealed, encouraging them to perform even a little bit of good and warning them against committing even a small amount of evil. It contains a "signification of address" (dalalat al-khitab) that is not hidden.

After that, the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) would give in charity, whether little or much. It is narrated that Ibn al-Zubayr sent 'Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her) one hundred and eighty thousand dirhams in two bags. She called for a platter and began distributing it among the people. When evening came, she said to her maid, "Bring me my breaking-of-the-fast meal," and she was fasting. She brought bread and oil. She said, "Did you not hold back a dirham for us to buy meat to break our fast with?" The maid said, "If you had reminded me, I would have done so."

It is mentioned in several narrations that she once gave a beggar a single grape, and it was remarked to her, upon which she said, "This is heavier than many atoms," and then she recited the verse. Similar things are narrated from Umar, Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf, and Sa'd ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with them). Their purpose was to teach people that there is no harm in giving little in charity. They had an example in the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Al-Zajjaji narrated in his Amali from Anas ibn Malik that a beggar came to the Prophet (peace be upon him), and he gave him a date. The beggar said, "A Prophet of the prophets gives a date in charity?" The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "Do you not know that in it are many weights of atoms?" And it came that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "Protect yourselves from the Fire, even with half a date," and then he recited [the verse].

The prioritization of "doing good" is because it is the nobler of the two divisions, and it is the primary intent. The goodness of its placement is obvious, and one learns from it that this enumeration does not contradict His absolute generosity (the Exalted and Majestic). As for the story told that a Bedouin reversed the verse [“Whoever does evil will see it, and whoever does good will see it”], and it was said to him, "You have put the last first and the first last," he replied: "Take the belly of Harsha or its back, for..."

This is either an act of heedlessness regarding the Quranic subtleties, or perhaps he meant that regarding the action, there is no harm whether it is put first or last, not that it is permissible to recite it that way.

Al-Husayn ibn Ali (upon him and his grandfather be peace), Ibn Abbas, Abdullah ibn Muslim, Zayd ibn Ali, Abu Haywah, al-Kalbi, Khulayd ibn Nashit, and Aban from Asim and al-Kisa'i (in a narration of Humayd ibn al-Rabi' from him) recited yarahu (يرَهُ) with the ya vocalized with damma in both places. Hisham and Abu Bakr recited yarahu (يرَهْ) with the ha silent in both places. Abu Amr recited it with the ha fully vocalized with damma (يرَهُ). The rest of the seven recited it with full vocalization in the first and silence [in the ha] in the second. Silence during connection is a dialect narrated by al-Akhfash; Sibawayh did not narrate it, though al-Kisa'i narrated it from the tribes of Banu Kilab and Banu Aqil. Ikrimah recited yarahu (يراه) with an alif in both, according to the dialect of those who consider the jussive "seeing" to be the deletion of the vowel estimated on the weak letter, as al-Akhfash narrated, or based on what is said outside the Quran—that "whoever" (man) is relative, not conditional, as was said regarding the Almighty's saying, "that he who fears and is patient" (yattaqi wa yasbir) in the reading of those who confirmed the ya in yattaqi and used the jussive for yasbir. It is also possible the alif is for lengthening. The first view is more appropriate. And Allah (Exalted be He) knows best.