Sūrat al-⁠Fātiḥah, Verse 7

1. The Questions This Verse Raises §

Is غَيْرِ (ghayri) a description or a substitute? §

The question begins with the ending of غَيْرِ (ghayri). It has a kasrah, giving the final i sound. Al-Ṭabarī reports agreement among the qurrāʾ on this ending: the word is مَجْرُور (majrūr). What does it describe or depend upon?

The strongest explanation treats it as a صِفَة (ṣifah), a description of “those You favored.” Read the two phrases together: those You favored, who are neither under anger nor astray. Favor and protection describe the same people. Allah guided them to faith and thereby protected them from the two ways that follow.^⁠[53]

A grammatical difficulty needs an answer. A description normally agrees with what it describes in being definite or indefinite. الَّذِينَ (alladhīna), “those who,” is definite. Yet غَيْر (ghayr), “other than,” normally leaves its subject unspecified: saying what something is not need not tell us exactly what it is. How can the two be joined here?

Al-Ṭabarī answers by examining “those You favored.” It is not a name for a fixed set of individuals already identified to the listener. It admits everyone who possesses the stated quality. In this respect, the relative expression resembles an indefinite description, allowing غَيْرِ to describe it. There is also something special about غَيْر here. It is joined to the definite expression “those under anger” and stands between two opposites: the favored and those under anger. These features reduce its vagueness, allowing it to describe the favored. Ibn Hishām speaks of its vagueness being weakened; Ibn al-Sarrāj understands it as becoming definite, an explanation adopted by Ibn al-Qayyim. These are distinct grammatical accounts of why the description works.^⁠[54]

A second analysis supplies an unspoken repetition of “road”: the road of those You favored, not the road of those under anger. Now the contrast falls directly between the roads. Al-Ṭabarī accepts this alongside the descriptive explanation:

A third possibility makes غَيْرِ a بَدَل (badal), a substitute for الَّذِينَ. The phrase “other than those under anger” then stands in place of the earlier expression identifying the travelers. This differs from supplying a second “road”: one replaces an expression already present; the other understands a word left unspoken. The descriptive analysis remains stronger.^⁠[56]

These alternatives bring different parts of the sentence into focus. One describes the favored people through their protection; another contrasts their road with the road to avoid. This is the connection between grammar and interpretation that al-Ṭabarī explains:

A more distant explanation treats the phrase as an اِسْتِثْنَاء مُنْقَطِع (istithnāʾ munqaṭiʿ), an exception outside the preceding class. On that account, those under anger are mentioned after the favored even though they were never actually members of the favored group.

Al-Ṭabarī records the explanation from some Baṣran grammarians. They compared it with these lines by al-Nābighah of Banū Dhubyān:

The poet says that no one remains, then makes an exception for the traces of the abandoned dwelling. Those traces are not people. The exception therefore brings in something outside the class first mentioned. On the proposed explanation of the verse, those under anger are likewise mentioned after the favored even though they do not belong to that class.^⁠[58]

Ibn Kathīr prefers the explanation that supplies an unspoken “road.” He illustrates the omission of a noun with a different line, identified by his editor as al-Nābighah’s:

The Arabic leaves “a camel” unspoken before describing it as one of that tribe’s camels. Ibn Kathīr explains that the description supplies what the omitted noun would have said. In the verse, the surrounding mention of the path similarly allows “road” to remain unspoken: not the road of those under anger. The Kūfan response to the exceptive analysis is developed in the grammatical discussion below.^⁠[59]

Conclusion §

The strongest analysis is that غَيْرِ describes “those You favored.” It shows that protection from anger and straying belongs to the very character of the favored road. Al-Ṭabarī also accepts an implied repetition of “road” because it produces a closely related meaning. The badal remains a reported possibility, while the disjoined-exception analysis is weaker.

Why does the verse say وَلَا ٱلضَّآلِّينَ (wa-lā l-ḍāllīn)? §

The word غَيْرِ has already introduced negation: “not those upon whom anger has fallen.” Why, then, does the verse add لَا (lā) before “those who went astray”?

The addition prevents the two condemned ways from becoming confused. It makes clear that the worshipper seeks protection from each of them separately. “Those who went astray” cannot be joined to “those You favored,” nor can it be reduced to another description of the people already mentioned under anger. The sentence names two corrupt ways, not one.

The Baṣran and Kūfan grammarians agreed upon this reinforcing effect but explained it differently. The Baṣrans called لَا additional in the grammatical construction. “Additional” does not mean meaningless. It means that the word reinforces the negation already understood from غَيْرِ without introducing an entirely new grammatical relationship.

The Kūfans understood لَا as expressing the meaning of a second غَيْر. On their explanation, the sense unfolds as:

A wording reported from ʿUmar رضي الله عنه, places غَيْر exactly where the canonical wording has لَا. It therefore gives particular support to the Kūfan explanation. Ibn Kathīr regards its isnad as sound but explains that ʿUmar spoke by way of interpretation. The athar supplies grammatical evidence, not a separate qirāʾah.^⁠[60]

Conclusion §

لَا is not empty repetition. It separates and emphasizes the two dangers. The Baṣran explanation emphasizes its reinforcing function, while the Kūfan explanation makes its meaning equivalent to a second غَيْر. The wording reported from ʿUmar supports the latter account.

Why are the Jews named before the Christians? §

The order begins with the failure most directly opposed to the favor just mentioned. Allah’s favor provides knowledge and guidance. Anger follows when truth has been recognized but deliberately abandoned.

This explains why the Jews are named first. Their most prominent failure was not that guidance had never reached them, but that known truth was resisted. They abandoned truth after knowing it, showed boldness toward what Allah had forbidden, and became harder of heart. Anger is therefore the more fitting primary description.

The same order also fits the history surrounding the verse. The Jews preceded the Christians in time, and the Jewish communities of Madīnah were nearer to the Prophet ﷺ than the principal Christian lands. The audience encountered the nearer and earlier community first.

Ibn al-Qayyim then connects the order to the structure of al-Fātiḥah itself. The verse has just mentioned those whom Allah favored, and anger is the opposite of favor. Al-Fātiḥah is السَّبْعُ الْمَثَانِي (al-Sabʿ al-Mathānī), the Seven Oft-Repeated, in which realities are clarified by placing them beside their opposites.^⁠[61]

These are not rival explanations. They illuminate different levels of the same order: the moral reason anger is especially fitting, the historical order in which the communities appeared, their proximity to the first audience, and the contrast created within the verse itself.

Conclusion §

The Jews are named first because knowingly abandoning truth makes anger especially fitting, because they preceded the Christians and were nearer to the Prophet’s community, and because anger forms the immediate opposite of the divine favor named just before it.

How firmly established is the identification of the Jews and Christians? §

The identification does not rest on a later commentator’s inference. It is stated in hadith from the Prophet ﷺ, supported by athars from the Companions and early exegetes. Ibn Abī Ḥātim also explicitly records the agreement of the commentators.

1. The Prophetic hadiths §

ʿAdī b. Ḥātim رضي الله عنه narrates the Prophet’s ﷺ explanation:

Each community is identified by its foremost historical failure, while both failures occurred within both communities. The descriptions also reach others who follow either way.^⁠[63]

Al-Tirmidhī transmitted this identification and graded the hadith ḥasan gharīb. Ibn Kathīr gathered several asanid from ʿAdī and noted the hadith’s many wordings.

The incident at Wādī al-Qurā supplies further hadith evidence. Some asanid are mursal, meaning that they do not name the Companion between the early narrator and the Prophet ﷺ. A connected isnad, however, comes through Abū Dharr رضي الله عنه, who said that he asked the Prophet ﷺ about the verse and received the same answer. Ibn Ḥajar judged that isnad ḥasan.^⁠[64]

2. The understanding of the early generations §

The same interpretation was transmitted from a broad group of the earliest Muslims. The athars collected by al-Ṭabarī and Ibn Kathīr include explanations from Ibn ʿAbbās رضي الله عنهما, Ibn Masʿūd رضي الله عنه, Mujāhid, al-Rabīʿ b. Anas, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Zayd, Zayd b. Aslam, al-Ḍaḥḥāk, and Ibn Jurayj. Al-Suddī also transmitted it through Abū Mālik, Abū Ṣāliḥ from Ibn ʿAbbās, Murrah al-Hamdānī from Ibn Masʿūd, and other Companions.

Their explanations do more than attach historical names to the verse. Ibn ʿAbbās رضي الله عنهما reads it as a continuing prayer:

The identification therefore serves as a warning to the worshipper. Knowledge must not be abandoned, and worship must not be separated from revealed guidance.

3. The reported agreement of the commentators §

After presenting the Christian identification, Ibn Kathīr quotes Ibn Abī Ḥātim:

This is the explicit statement of exegetical agreement preserved in the cited evidence. Al-Ṭabarī’s and Ibn Kathīr’s separate collections reinforce its breadth by documenting the interpretation through Prophetic hadiths and athars from the Companions and early exegetes. Their lists should not be presented as separate claims of consensus, but they demonstrate that this was the widely received interpretation from the earliest period.

The agreement concerns the verse’s principal historical identification. It does not mean that every Jew possesses only the first condition, that every Christian possesses only the second, or that Muslims can never fall into either failure. The verse warns against knowingly rejecting the truth and against worshipping without sound knowledge.^⁠[65]

Does Allah bestow favor upon someone who does not believe? §

The verse describes people upon whom Allah has bestowed favor. Yet food, health, understanding, and other gifts also reach people who do not believe in Him. Does the verse mean that they have received no favor at all?

The answer depends on what is meant by favor. A particular gift and the blessing that brings a person to lasting success are not the same thing. Ibn al-Qayyim distinguishes مُطْلَق النِّعْمَة (muṭlaq al-niʿmah), favor in some respect, from النِّعْمَة الْمُطْلَقَة (al-niʿmah al-muṭlaqah), the complete blessing of lasting success. Favor in the first sense reaches believers and unbelievers. The complete blessing belongs to the people of faith who attain salvation.^⁠[66]

This distinction answers the question directly. Yes, Allah bestows favors upon an unbeliever. Those gifts are real, and their Giver is Allah. But possessing them does not by itself establish that a person has received the favor sought in al-Fātiḥah: guidance to the truth, righteous action, and the success to which that guidance leads.^⁠[67]

The same distinction applies to إِحْسَان (iḥsān), beneficence. Allah’s beneficence reaches the righteous and the wicked, believers and unbelievers. Its complete and enduring form belongs to those who fear Him and do good. Calling a particular benefit His gift does not require calling its recipient successful in every respect.^⁠[68]

This changes the measure of a fortunate life. Faith and righteous action are the greatest blessing; they come through Allah’s favor and enabling help. A believer who lacks lesser gifts has not thereby lost the greater one. A person surrounded by lesser gifts has not thereby gained it. Receiving the blessing of faith is also a cause of receiving lesser blessings; being deprived of it is a cause and sign of deprivation of those blessings. This is a relationship of causes, not a promise that every believer will possess every lesser gift. The comparison begins by allowing both possibilities: a believer may lack lesser blessings, and an unbeliever may possess them.^⁠[69]

When the worshipper asks for the road of those Allah favored, the request reaches beyond a comfortable present. It asks for the gift through which a life reaches its true success.

Does the verse establish a divine name meaning “the Angry”? §

The verse affirms Allah’s anger. It is a real attribute, affirmed in the manner that befits His majesty and greatness. It belongs to الصِّفَات الْفِعْلِيَّة (al-ṣifāt al-fiʿliyyah), attributes of action connected with His will.^⁠[70]

An attribute, however, does not automatically furnish a divine name. The conclusion “Allah becomes angry, so He may be named الْغَضْبَان (al-Ghaḍbān) or الْغَاضِب (al-Ghāḍib)” does not follow. Neither name is to be derived from this attribute and applied to Him. The verse shows the attribute; it does not suggest those names.^⁠[71]

How is Abū Bakr’s leadership connected with this verse? §

Al-Shinqīṭī draws a connection between this verse and Abū Bakr’s rightful leadership. He begins with the people whom Allah favored. Al-Fātiḥah teaches us to ask for their path, and Qurʾān 4:69 includes the الصِّدِّيقُون (al-ṣiddīqūn), those of complete truthfulness, among them. The Prophet ﷺ identified Abū Bakr رضي الله عنه as belonging to this class.^⁠[72]

Abū Bakr therefore belongs to the people whose path the worshipper asks Allah to follow. Al-Shinqīṭī applies this commendation of Abū Bakr’s path to his leadership as well. He concludes that Abū Bakr

Why say Āmīn after al-Fātiḥah? §

Al-Fātiḥah ends in supplication. آمين (āmīn) asks Allah to answer it. The majority of scholars recommend a slight pause after the sūrah and then saying Āmīn. This applies within prayer and outside it; in prayer it includes the imam, the follower, and the person praying alone, whether the prayer is audible or silent. Āmīn itself is not part of al-Fātiḥah, by scholarly consensus.^⁠[74]

The instruction and the promise §

Abū Hurayrah رضي الله عنه narrates that the Prophet ﷺ said:

Another wording begins with the imam’s own Āmīn:

The two openings teach the follower when to respond: at the conclusion of al-Fātiḥah, with the imam’s Āmīn. Both wordings attach the promise to agreement with the angels.

What does that agreement involve? Three explanations are recorded: agreement in being answered, in time, or in the quality of sincere supplication. The first concerns Allah’s answer, the second when the Āmīn is said, and the third the sincerity with which it is said. The instruction itself is clear: the follower joins in the supplication as the imam completes the sūrah.^⁠[77]

Abū Mūsā al-Ashʿarī رضي الله عنه also narrates the Prophet’s ﷺ instruction that, when the imam reaches the verse’s end, the followers should say Āmīn:

The Prophet ﷺ was heard saying it §

Wāʾil b. Ḥujr رضي الله عنه describes praying behind the Prophet ﷺ and hearing him say Āmīn when he reached the end of al-Fātiḥah. Al-Tirmidhī’s wording adds:

ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib رضي الله عنه likewise said that he heard the Messenger of Allah ﷺ say Āmīn after وَلَا الضَّالِّينَ, “nor of those who went astray.”^⁠[80]

Another hadith draws attention to the value of this shared response. ʿĀʾishah رضي الله عنها narrates that the Prophet ﷺ told his Companions:

Here the Prophet ﷺ speaks to his Companions about the greeting and supplication given to them. The hadith commends those gifts; it does not necessarily imply assigning an inner motive to every Jewish person in another time or place.

The pause and the follower’s recitation §

The recommendation of a slight pause does not settle every question about a pause after al-Fātiḥah. Some scholars do not consider such a pause established. Those who affirm it give two explanations of its purpose.^⁠[82]

On one explanation, it is brief, like a pause at the end of a verse or between sūrahs. It is not long enough for a follower to recite al-Fātiḥah. Another explanation makes room for the follower’s recitation; athars to this effect are recorded from Saʿīd b. Jubayr and ʿUmar b. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz.^⁠[83]

Most scholars, including Abū Ḥanīfah, Mālik, and Aḥmad, do not prescribe a pause specifically for the follower to recite al-Fātiḥah. This concerns the purpose of making such a pause, not a rejection of every brief pause. Al-Awzāʿī and Abū Thawr, by contrast, regard giving the follower this opportunity as an obligation upon the imam.^⁠[84]

The preferable course is for the follower to recite al-Fātiḥah during the imam’s pauses, as many scholars recommend. Taking the opportunities that occur in the imam’s recitation is different from requiring him to create a designated interval long enough for the whole sūrah. These explanations concern the pause after al-Fātiḥah; they do not establish two separate pauses there.^⁠[85]

The two Arabic forms §

Grammatically, Āmīn is an اِسْم فِعْل (ism fiʿl): a word that performs the work of a verb. Here it means اللهم استجب, “O Allah, answer.” Arabic preserves a long form, آمين (āmīn), on the pattern فاعيل (fāʿīl), and a short form, أمين (amīn), on the pattern فعيل (faʿīl). The short form is the original. Both forms are recognized; identifying the original does not rule out the long form.^⁠[86]

Poetry illustrates the two forms. The following line, attributed to Jubayr b. al-Aḍbaṭ, uses the short one:

The long form appears in a line attributed to Majnūn Laylā:

Abū Wajzah uses it while addressing ʿAbdullāh b. al-Zubayr رضي الله عنهما:

These are examples of Arabic usage. In prayer, the word takes its place after the sūrah as the request that Allah answer its supplication.

How does this supplication answer false beliefs? §

The worshipper asks for a path defined by knowledge of the truth and faithful action. Every explanation or practice that contradicts what the Messenger ﷺ brought must therefore be measured against that path. This is the general force of the supplication: asking for true guidance includes asking to be kept from falsehood.^⁠[90]

Ibn al-Qayyim also develops the answer in detail across al-Fātiḥah. His discussion addresses atheism, association of partners in Allah’s lordship or worship, and the denial of His attributes. It addresses the Majūs and the Qadariyyah, the Jahmiyyah and the Jabriyyah; the account of an unchoosing first cause; the denial that Allah knows particulars; the denial of prophethood; and the claim that the world is eternal. It also affirms Allah’s speech.^⁠[91]

The reasons belong with the words that establish them. “Lord of the worlds” concerns creation and governance. “You alone we worship” excludes partners in worship; “You alone we ask for help” expresses the servant’s need for Allah’s enabling power. Asking for guidance would be empty if a servant possessed all the power needed independently of Him. Yet the command to worship and seek help also addresses a servant who acts, rather than a creature with no choice or action of his own. These relationships are developed in the explanations of verses 2, 5, and 6.^⁠[92]

The front matter develops the related arguments concerning revelation, Allah’s speech, His power and will, and His knowledge of every detail. Verse 6’s Deeper Study, under “What is the straight path?”, gives Ibn al-Qayyim’s application of the knowledge-and-action criterion to the Companions, the Rāfiḍah, and the Khawārij. The final verse brings the criterion together in a prayer: guide us among those who knew Your truth and followed it, and keep us from the ways that depart from it.^⁠[93]

2. How the Commentators Read This Verse §

These commentators explain the same verse from connected points of attention: its language, the hadith and athar that identify its people, the relation of knowledge to action, and the warning addressed to the person reciting it.

Al-Ṭabarī (d. 310 AH / 923 CE): establishing the language and early explanation §

Al-Ṭabarī begins with the grammatical structure because the relationship between the phrases affects their meaning. He prefers غَيْرِ as a description of “those You favored,” while also accepting an implied repetition of “road.” Both explanations separate the favored road from the two condemned ways.

He then establishes the historical identification through the hadith of ʿAdī b. Ḥātim رضي الله عنه and the explanations of the early Muslims. The hadith gives the identification; the grammar shows how that identification fits the sentence.

This distinction between sound grammar and established recitation also shapes his treatment of غَيْرَ with نَصْب (naṣb), a final fatḥah. He recognizes that the form has a possible grammatical explanation but declines to recite it because it departs from the recitation transmitted widely by the community. For him, grammatical possibility does not by itself establish a qirāʾah.^⁠[94]

Ibn al-Qayyim (d. 751 AH / 1350 CE): relating knowledge to action §

Ibn al-Qayyim asks what happens when knowledge and action become separated. He explains that each condemned group shares something of the other’s failure. A person who abandons known truth also strays by failing to act, while a person who strays through ignorance may perform actions that deserve anger.

The distinction concerns which failure is more prominent. The person who recognizes the truth and then leaves it is more deserving of the description of anger. This connects the verse to the two faculties required for guidance: sound knowledge and faithful action.

His explanation also accounts for the order of the verse. The Jews preceded the Christians historically, lived nearer to the Prophet ﷺ in Madīnah, and represent the condition most directly opposed to the divine favor mentioned immediately before it.^⁠[95]

Ibn Kathīr (d. 774 AH / 1373 CE): connecting the road, its travelers, and its opposites §

Ibn Kathīr begins with the people upon the favored road. Qurʾān 4:69 names the prophets, the truthful, the martyrs, and the righteous. He records several descriptions of these people: the prophets, from al-Rabīʿ b. Anas; the believers, from Ibn ʿAbbās through Ibn Jurayj and also from Mujāhid; the Muslims, from Wakīʿ; and the Prophet ﷺ and those with him, from ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Zayd b. Aslam. He then prefers the broader explanation reported from Ibn ʿAbbās رضي الله عنهما through al-Ḍaḥḥāk because it includes Allah’s angels and prophets together with the truthful, the martyrs, and the righteous. He calls this interpretation:

The two condemned ways become clear by contrast. The way of faith joins knowledge of the truth to action upon it. The Jews are especially associated with the loss of action, while the Christians are especially associated with the loss of knowledge. Yet each community experienced both conditions. The descriptions identify what became most prominent, not everything true of every individual.

After gathering several asanid, Ibn Kathīr quotes Ibn Abī Ḥātim’s statement that the commentators agreed upon the Prophetic identification.^⁠[96]

Al-Lāḥim (contemporary): turning the warning upon the reciter §

Al-Lāḥim gathers these earlier strands into a deliberate progression. He defines the two conditions before naming any community. He then presents the Jews and Christians as the foremost examples of those conditions, while making clear that both failures occurred within both communities.

The decisive issue is therefore not ancestry but a person’s response to guidance. An ignorant Jew may fit the pattern of straying, while a learned Christian who knowingly rejects the truth may fit the pattern of anger. The same standards apply to Muslims.

This is where the commentary reaches the person reciting the verse. A Muslim scholar may possess knowledge but refuse its demands. A Muslim worshipper may be devoted but act without sound knowledge. Al-Lāḥim supports this application with Qurʾānic passages threatening members of the Muslim community with anger and describing some of them as astray.

His presentation draws upon the earlier explanations of al-Ṭabarī and Ibn Kathīr. It brings their interpretation together and directs its warning toward the present worshipper.^⁠[97]

The explanations return to the same two needs: knowledge that governs action, and devotion that accepts guidance.

3. Iʿrāb: Grammatical Structure§

The final verse continues the request begun in ٱهۡدِنَا ٱلصِّرَٰطَ ٱلۡمُسۡتَقِيمَ, “Guide us to the straight path.” It first identifies that path through the people who walk it, then distinguishes them from two ways that lead away from it.

Part A: How the sentence is constructed §

The construction moves in a clear sequence:

1. صِرَٰطَ repeats and explains “the straight path.”
2. ٱلَّذِينَ أَنۡعَمۡتَ عَلَيۡهِمۡ identifies that path through the people favored by Allah.
3. غَيۡرِ ٱلۡمَغۡضُوبِ عَلَيۡهِمۡ describes those people by their freedom from the first condemned way.
4. وَلَا ٱلضَّآلِّينَ completes the distinction by excluding the second way.

The grammar therefore does more than attach one phrase to another. It defines guidance through the people who received it and then completes that definition by identifying the two failures from which they were protected.^⁠[98]

Part B: Where the grammatical choices affect the meaning §

The descriptive analysis brings two qualities together: those Allah favored with faith are also protected from anger and straying. Al-Ṭabarī explains that the analysis providing an unspoken “road” remains close in meaning, since being guided to Allah’s true religion entails that protection. The full comparison with badal and the explanations of Ibn Hishām and Ibn al-Sarrāj appear in the first question above.^⁠[99]

A further question arises from the proposed اِسْتِثْنَاء مُنْقَطِع (istithnāʾ munqaṭiʿ), an exception mentioning something outside the preceding class. The poem cited earlier shows how such a construction can work in Arabic. But is that what happens in this verse?

Al-Ṭabarī records the analysis from some Baṣran grammarians in connection with غَيْرَ (ghayra), with naṣb. The Kūfan response turns to the final لَا. In the usage they adduce, negation is joined to negation; an exception takes an exceptive continuation. They compare two sentences:

In the first, إِلَّا (illā), “except,” governs both exclusions. In the second, لَا (lā), “nor,” continues a negation. Because al-Fātiḥah continues with وَلَا الضَّالِّينَ, the Kūfans understand غَيْر here as negation rather than exception. Their answer gives a grammatical reason to prefer the description: the sentence continues to exclude two ways, rather than removing a member from a previously named class.^⁠[100]

The omission of anger and straying from the favored people also affirms a positive perfection. They have the knowledge and faithful action opposed to those two failures. Verse 6’s Deeper Study, “What is affirmed when anger and straying are excluded?”, develops this relation between a negative description and the perfection of its opposite.^⁠[101]

And Allah knows best.

4. Ṣarf: Roots and Word Formation §

The words of this verse move from a road that gathers its travelers, to favor conferred upon them, to two conditions from which they seek protection. Their forms help create that movement.

The contrast between the last two forms is especially significant. ٱلۡمَغۡضُوبِ is passive: it describes people upon whom anger has fallen. ٱلضَّآلِّينَ is active: it describes people characterized by straying. The first directs attention to a judgment received, while the second directs attention to a condition present in those who have lost the road.

The range of ضَلَّ also explains why context matters. It may refer to wandering, ignorance, distance from truth, forgetting, or something becoming hidden or lost. In this verse, the surrounding contrast with the straight path determines the meaning: these are people who have departed from revealed guidance.^⁠[102]

نِعْمَة (niʿmah), “favor,” is an اِسْم جِنْس (ism jins), a general noun that can apply to little or much. When joined to a definite expression, it can embrace favors of religion, this life, and the Hereafter. The discussion of complete favor above explains why the favor of guidance remains the decisive blessing sought here.^⁠[103]

Likewise, أَنۡعَمۡتَ is more specific than a general act of kindness. Al-Lāḥim explains:

He illustrates the restriction by saying:

The word therefore suits a verse about conscious servants receiving guidance from their Lord. Allah’s favor reaches them, they walk the road He has shown, and they ask to be protected from the conditions represented by the two participles at the verse’s end.^⁠[104]

5. Balāghah: Rhetorical Analysis §

The verse distinguishes the favored road from two corrupt roads. It also changes how the persons responsible for favor and anger are expressed.

Whose path is it? §

The Qurʾān calls it Allah’s path because He established and prescribed it for His servants (42:53; 6:126; 6:153). Here it is “the path of those You favored” because they travel it. One expression names its Author; the other names its travelers. The two relationships belong to the same road.^⁠[105]

The wording الَّذِينَ أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ, “those You favored,” also gives the request breadth. It asks for the way of all those whom Allah favored with obedience to Him and His Messenger ﷺ, in all its details. Their mention honors their rank and sets them before the worshipper as people to follow. Choosing good examples is part of seeking the road they walked.^⁠[106]

Favor is attributed directly to Allah §

The verse says:

The verb أَنْعَمْتَ addresses Allah directly. The worshipper therefore recognizes that guidance, faith, and steadfastness are favors given by Him. The request recalls a generosity already shown: You guided them; grant me a share in that guidance. Acknowledging Allah’s previous gifts becomes part of asking Him for another. The same relationship appears in “O Allah, guide me among those You have guided.”^⁠[107]

There is also an obligation of gratitude in naming the Giver. Every blessing comes from Allah (16:53), and His favors exceed our ability to count them (14:34; 16:18). “You favored” recognizes whose gift guidance is.^⁠[108]

The wording changes when the verse mentions anger:

Here, the sentence does not directly name the one who is angry. Ibn Kathīr draws attention to the beauty of this contrast:

The omission does not deny that the anger is Allah’s. Elsewhere, the Qurʾān states this explicitly:

The difference is rhetorical. Favor is attributed directly to its generous Giver, while the passive wording places attention on the terrible condition into which the recipients of anger have fallen.

Three ways of speaking about favor, anger, and straying §

The sentence uses a different form for each of its three groups. In أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ, “You favored them,” the act is attributed directly to Allah. The favor is His alone, and its recipients are honored by that attribution. In الْمَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ, “those under anger,” the recipients are named while the one who is angry remains unspoken. This emphasizes their humiliation. It also allows the expression to include the anger of Allah’s angels, prophets, and messengers, who become angry because of His anger. In الضَّالِّينَ, “those who went astray,” the condition is attributed to the people in whom it occurs.^⁠[110]

Together these forms teach an etiquette of speech with Allah. Good and favor are attributed to Him. When the opposite is mentioned, the agent may remain unspoken, or the condition may be attributed to the creature in whom it is found. The Prophet ﷺ said in his opening supplication:

How can this be said while everything remains under Allah’s power? The distinction is between Allah’s act and what exists in the things He creates. Evil may be present in those created things; it does not make His act evil. His action is entirely good and wise. The statement denies evil of His action, rather than placing part of creation outside His rule.^⁠[112]

Ibrāhīm’s words show this etiquette:

He names Allah as the One who feeds, gives drink, and heals. When speaking of illness, he says, “I become ill.” The difference lies in how he speaks of his Lord.^⁠[113]

The two corrupt roads remain distinct §

The verse could have excluded both groups by joining them under a single negative expression. Instead, it reinforces the exclusion with وَلَا, “and not”:

The repeated negation indicates:

The additional وَلَا prevents the two failures from being collapsed into one. The first is the road of recognizing the truth but refusing to follow it. The second is the road of seeking devotion without sound guidance. Both must be rejected separately, because avoiding one does not guarantee safety from the other.

An invitation joined to a warning §

The favored road is named before the two ways of leaving it. The worshipper is drawn toward the company Allah honors, then warned against what would take him away from them. Encouragement and warning serve the same request.^⁠[115]

Asking for the right road also includes asking for protection from the wrong ones. Ibn Taymiyyah describes this as the best, most obligatory, and most beneficial supplication a servant makes to his Lord. It gathers the good one needs to reach and the evil one needs to escape.^⁠[116]

6. Qirāʾāt: Transmitted Forms of Recitation §

The pronunciation of صِرَاطَ continues the forms explained in Verse 6’s Qirāʾāt section. Here the further questions concern عَلَيْهِمْ and the ending of غَيْرِ.^⁠[117]

The established qirāʾāt of عَلَيْهِمْ §

Two parts of the pronoun vary among the qurrāʾ, the recognized authorities of Qurʾānic recitation: the vowel of the hāʾ and the treatment of the final plural mīm.

1. The vowel of the hāʾ §

Most of the qurrāʾ pronounce the hāʾ with kasrah:

Ḥamza and Yaʿqūb pronounce it with ḍammah:

Al-Bannāʾ explains that the faint sound of the hāʾ is given the strongest vowel, ḍammah, in this form. This pronunciation follows the speech of Quraysh and the people of the Ḥijāz, while the pronunciation with kasrah follows the speech of Qays, Tamīm, and Banū Saʿd. In his coverage beyond the Ten, he also records al-Muṭawwiʿī agreeing in عَلَيْهِمْ, إِلَيْهِمْ, and لَدَيْهِمْ, and al-Shanabūdhī agreeing in عَلَيْهِمْ alone.^⁠[118]

2. Connecting the plural mīm to a pronounced wāw §

Qālūn, according to one established account of his recitation, Ibn Kathīr, and Abū Jaʿfar join the plural مِيم (mīm) to a pronounced وَاو (wāw) in continuous recitation. Their hāʾ retains kasrah:

Al-Bannāʾ also records Ibn Muḥayṣin agreeing with this treatment of the plural mīm. The hāʾ vowel and the connection after the mīm are separate features; agreement in the latter does not by itself establish the former.^⁠[119]

The written Qurʾānic text does not change. The difference belongs to the transmitted pronunciation.

Forms preserved among the shādhdh qirāʾāt §

The term shādhdh describes a reported form that does not belong to the established qirāʾāt used for Qurʾānic recitation. Such forms may still preserve early Arabic usage and assist scholars in explaining grammar, pronunciation, and meaning.

Ibn Jinnī’s al-Muḥtasab, a specialist work on shādhdh qirāʾāt, discusses several forms attributed to early authorities. He reports that Ibn Mujāhid had counted seven ways of pronouncing this pronoun and that al-Akhfash added three:

Five have ḍammah on the hāʾ, and five have kasrah.

Among the forms Ibn Jinnī discusses are the following:

The appearance of a form in al-Muḥtasab does not make it an established qirāʾah. It records the form for linguistic study. The connecting wāw must be distinguished from the full combination of vowels: the established examples just given have عَلَيْهِمُو with kasrah on the hāʾ, whereas Ibn Jinnī’s first form here is عَلَيْهُمُو with ḍammah. A feature may be shared without the entire form receiving the same status.^⁠[120]

The established غَيْرِ and the reported غَيْرَ §

The established qirāʾāt have kasrah on the final letter:

Al-Ṭabarī states that the qurrāʾ agreed upon this ending. He nevertheless recognizes that the form غَيْرَ with نَصْب (naṣb) has a possible grammatical explanation. He then separates grammatical possibility from an established qirāʾah:

Al-Ṭabarī is stating his own refusal to recite this form. He is not assigning it a later technical classification.

In his notes to this edition, the muḥaqqiq ʿAbdullāh b. ʿAbd al-Muḥsin al-Turkī reports غَيْرَ with نَصْب (naṣb), a final fatḥah from Ibn Kathīr. Among the Companions, he attributes it to ʿUmar, ʿAlī, Ibn Masʿūd, and Ibn al-Zubayr رضي الله عنهم. Al-Lāḥim transmits the same attribution from works on qirāʾāt.

The form also appears in a dedicated qirāʾāt work. Al-Bannāʾ reports غَيْرَ ٱلْمَغْضُوبِ from Ibn Muḥayṣin through al-Mubhij. He explains it as a حَال (ḥāl), a word describing the condition of someone already mentioned. He records two ways of connecting it to the sentence:

1. It may describe ٱلَّذِينَ, “those,” although al-Bannāʾ calls this explanation weak.
2. It may describe the pronoun in عَلَيْهِمْ, “upon them.”

Through Ibn Muḥayṣin’s Mufradah, however, al-Bannāʾ reports the usual form غَيْرِ, agreeing with the majority. He explains that form as badal either from الَّذِينَ, an indefinite expression substituting for a definite one, or from the pronoun in عَلَيْهِمْ.^⁠[121]

ʿUmar’s wording is explanatory, not a qirāʾah §

The following wording is attributed to ʿUmar رضي الله عنه:

Ibn Kathīr reports that its isnad is sound, but he explains that ʿUmar expressed it:

It therefore helps explain what وَلَا means in the canonical wording. It is grammatical evidence and an early explanation of the verse, but it should not be presented as an established qirāʾah.^⁠[122]