Tafsir of Luqman 31:18

Surah Luqman (31): Verse 18

When [Luqman] commanded him [his son] to be complete in himself and to perfect others, he feared two things that might arise after these commands:

1. Arrogance towards others due to being one who perfects them (i.e., commanding good).
2. Conceit in oneself due to being complete in oneself (i.e., establishing prayer).

Therefore, He said:

• Conceited (مختال): One who possesses arrogance (khuyala), meaning he sees the greatness of himself in relation to others. This is arrogance (takabbur).
• Boaster (فخور): One who boasts about himself, meaning he sees greatness belonging to himself in his own eyes.

There is a subtlety in the order of the commands:

1. In the affirmative commands (establishing perfection): Allah preceded establishing perfection in oneself over perfecting others. He said: {Establish prayer} (perfection in self), then {and enjoin what is right} (perfecting others). This is because someone who is not complete in himself cannot perfect others.
2. In the negative commands (avoiding vice): Allah preceded negating what results from perfecting others over negating what results from perfection in oneself. He said: {And do not turn your cheek} (negating arrogance towards others, which stems from enjoining good), then {and do not walk upon the earth exultantly} (negating conceit in self).

The reason for this order in the negative commands is that one who is arrogant toward others necessarily believes he is superior to them in some way. However, one who is conceited in himself might think he is being humble toward people, so the negation of arrogance toward others is mentioned first.

Furthermore, if the negation of conceit (tabakhtur) were mentioned first, the negation of arrogance (takabbur) would be implied, making the latter unnecessary.

Analogy: It is not permissible to say, "Do not break your fast, and do not eat," because whoever does not eat will not break their fast. However, it is permissible to say, "Do not eat, and do not break your fast," because one who does not eat might still break their fast by other means.

Some might argue that such phrasing is meant for clarification, meaning: "Do not break your fast by eating," making it a single prohibition rather than two separate ones.