Tafsir of At-Tawbah 9:34

"O you who have believed..."

The meaning of "consuming wealth" (أكل الأموال) is twofold:

1. It is a metaphor for "taking," as in the expression "he took the food and consumed it."
2. It refers to the fact that wealth is the means by which one consumes, as in the verse: We have lean donkeys / That eat every night a saddle-cloth. Meaning: fodder purchased with the price of a saddle-cloth.

Their "consuming by falsehood" means they accepted bribes in legal judgments and granted leniency in religious laws.

{And those who hoard gold and silver...} It is possible this refers to many of the rabbis and monks, indicating two blameworthy traits in them: taking bribes and hoarding wealth, while being stingy with spending it in the path of goodness. It is also possible that it refers to Muslims who hoard and do not spend, equating them with the bribe-taking Jews and Christians to emphasize that both those who take illicit gain (suht) and those who do not give from the good of their wealth are equal in deserving the tidings of a painful punishment.

Some say the verse of hoarding was abrogated by the verse of Zakat. Others say it remains, and that "neglecting to spend in the path of Allah" refers to withholding Zakat. The Prophet (ﷺ) said: "Whatever has had its Zakat paid is not a hoard, even if it is buried; and whatever has reached the threshold of Zakat and is not paid, it is a hoard, even if it is apparent."

Umar (ra) said to a man who asked about land he sold: "Secure the wealth you received; bury it under your wife’s bed." When asked if that was hoarding, he replied: "Whatever has had its Zakat paid is not a hoard." Ibn Umar (ra) said: "Everything that has had its Zakat paid is not a hoard, even if it is under seven earths; and whatever has not had its Zakat paid is what Allah mentioned, even if it is on the surface of the earth."

If you ask: How do you reconcile this with the narration of Salim ibn Abi al-Ja‘d that when this verse was revealed, the Prophet (ﷺ) said three times, "Woe to gold, woe to silver!" and when asked what wealth to acquire, he replied, "A remembering tongue, a grateful heart, and a wife who helps one in his religion," and his saying, "Whoever leaves behind yellow or white [gold or silver] will be branded with it"?

I say: This was before Zakat was made obligatory. After the obligation of Zakat, Allah is too just and generous to allow His servant to gather wealth from where He permitted, pay what He obligated upon it, and then punish him for it. Many Companions, such as ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Awf and Talhah ibn ‘Ubayd Allah, possessed wealth and managed it, and no one among those who abstained from possession criticized them. Abstaining is a choice of the superior path, falling under piety and asceticism, while possession is a broad, permissible matter. Everything has its limit. The report from ‘Ali (ra)—that four thousand and below is maintenance, and anything above is hoarding—is a discussion on what is superior.

If you ask: Why is it said "and they do not spend it" (singular pronoun), when two things (gold and silver) were mentioned? I say: It refers to the meaning rather than the wording, as each is a collective sum, a large amount of dinars and dirhams. It is like the verse: {And if two factions among the believers fight}. Others say it refers to "hoards" or "wealth."

If you ask: Why were these two specifically mentioned? I say: Because they are the standard of wealth and the prices of things. Only those who have excess beyond their needs hoard them, and whoever has so much that he hoards them does not lack other types of wealth. Thus, mentioning their hoarding is evidence for all else.

If you ask: What is the meaning of {on it} (عليها)? And why was it not said "it will be heated" (تحمى), from the verb hamayta (you heated)? I say: It means the Fire is heated upon them—that is, it is kindled with intense heat, from the verse: {a scorching Fire}. If it were said "the day it is heated," it would not convey this meaning. The verb is attributed to the prepositional phrase because the original is "the day the Fire is heated upon them." When "Fire" is omitted, it is said "it is heated upon them," as when you say "the petition was raised to the Prince"—if you omit "petition," you say "it was raised to the Prince."

If you ask: Why were these specific body parts (foreheads, sides, backs) singled out? I say: Because they did not seek with their wealth—by failing to spend it in the path of Allah—anything but worldly ends: status among people, advancement, keeping their faces preserved (honor), being greeted with kindness, and being respected. They fill their bellies with good things, puff out their sides, and wear soft garments on their backs—just as you see the wealthy of your time. They do not let the Prophet’s (ﷺ) words cross their minds: "The wealthy have taken away the rewards." Others say it is because when they saw the poor, they would frown, and if a gathering brought them together, they would turn away and present their backs.

{This is what you hoarded} implies an unspoken "It will be said to them." {For yourselves} means you hoarded it so your souls could benefit and enjoy the ends they circled around, not knowing you were hoarding it for your souls to be harmed and tormented. This is a rebuke. {So taste what you used to hoard}—it is also read with a damma on the nun (tukunzun), meaning the calamity of the wealth you were hoarding, or the calamity of your being hoarders.