al-Munāfiqūn 63:3

Dhālika bi-annahum āmanū thumma kafarū fa-ṭubiʿa ʿalā qulūbihim fa-hum lā yafqahūn

"That is because they believed, then denied. So their hearts were sealed; and now they cannot grasp."

The verse builds a chain, and the connectives between the links of the chain differ — this shows how the process works:

The two connectives say two different things.

ثُمَّ (thumma) stands between the first and second steps: there is time in between. A period passed between the believing and the denying. That is, what is related is not a sudden turn but an erosion.

فَ (fāʾ) stands between the second and third and between the third and fourth steps: there is no interval. As soon as the denial comes, the seal comes; as soon as the seal comes, the grasping goes.

This difference of connectives describes how the process works: the beginning slow, the end fast. A person moves away little by little, then a threshold is crossed and the rest happens of itself.

At al-Jumuʿa 62/5 the same connective did the same work: ḥummilū thumma lam yaḥmilūhā — they were loaded with it, then did not carry it. There too there was a period in between, and what was related was not a refusal but a wearing down. Two neighbouring sūras describe the same process with the same connective.

This expression is the most disputed place in the verse, and one must be honest: had they really believed?

In the classical commentaries there are three views:

I adopt no preference. But this must be recorded: whichever view is taken, the result is the same. The verse is not writing a psychological history; it is announcing a result. And the cause of that result is the same in both cases: at some point contact was made, and then it was cut.

The first comparison at al-Baqara 2/17 appears to support this reading. There too a light was seen for a moment: "when the fire lit up what was around him…" As was recorded there: "so there had been a moment of light." That is, in describing this type the Qurʾān does not picture him as someone who never made contact.

The root ط-ب-ع: to press on a thing so as to leave a mark, to stamp, to take an impression. From the same root come ṭabʿ (an impression, and also character — what has been stamped upon a person), ṭabīʿa (nature, disposition) and maṭbaʿa (a printing house).

At al-Baqara 2/7 a different root was used for the same work: خ-ت-م (khatama — to seal).

The distinction the lexicographers make between the two words is this:

I do not present this distinction as a firm rule; there are places in the sources where the two words are counted as synonyms. But that the root ṭabʿ also carries the sense of "character" is meaningful: the stamp pressed onto a thing becomes that thing's lasting shape.

The balance recorded for the seal at al-Baqara 2/7 holds here too: this is not an arbitrary obstruction but the consequence of a choice. The word order of the verse shows this openly — the seal comes after the verb kafarū, and with the connective fāʾ. The cause first, the consequence after.

Moreover the verb is in the passive: ṭubiʿa. The agent is not stated. This is a structure the Qurʾān uses often in places of this kind, and it does not make responsibility vague — on the contrary, the contrast with the verb in the preceding clause (kafarū, active) shows which side did what.

The root ف-ق-ه: to go down into the depth of a thing, to grasp its subtlety, to understand what lies beneath a word.

This root differs from ʿilm and fahm, and the difference matters:

The lexicographers most often describe fiqh thus: to draw out from a word what that word does not say openly but requires. That Islamic law carries this name comes from here: fiqh is the work of drawing out the ruling that lies beneath the texts.

Now return to the verse: fa-hum lā yafqahūn — "they cannot grasp".

The verse does not say "they do not know". They do know. We saw it in the first verse: they utter the true sentence. The knowledge is in place.

What is missing is the capacity to see behind the knowledge. The condition of not being able to see what a word amounts to, where it arrives, what it asks of them.

And this fits the metaphor of the seal exactly. A surface that has been stamped is not fit for something new to be stamped upon it — its shape has been fixed. The knowledge comes but changes nothing, because the place that would change has already taken the mould.

And the sūra will use this word once more. The seventh verse will again end with lā yafqahūn. The eighth verse, on the other hand, with lā yaʿlamūn. Two different words, for two different subjects — this distinction will be taken up at the eighth verse.

At al-Baqara 2/12-13 there was a distinction of the same kind: verse 12 ended with lā yashʿurūn (they do not sense), verse 13 with lā yaʿlamūn (they do not know). As was recorded there, the change of word was not idle. Sūrat al-Munāfiqūn uses the same technique.

The third verse gives the ground of the first two. Dhālika bi-annahum — "that is because they…"

So the sequence is this:

1. 63/1 — What they say (and the gap between what they say and their condition). 2. 63/2 — What they do (turning an oath into a shield). 3. 63/3 — What the cause of this is (a contact cut at some point, and the seal that comes as its consequence).

And the fourth verse will relate how all this looks from outside. The sūra moves from the inside outwards: word, act, cause, appearance.