Appearance
Story of Prophet Yūnus
وَذَا النُّونِ إِذ ذَّهَبَ مُغَاضِبًا فَظَنَّ أَن لَّن نَّقْدِرَ عَلَيْهِ فَنَادَى فِي الظُّلُمَاتِ أَن لّا إِلَهَ إِلاَّ أَنتَ سُبْحَانَكَ إِنِّي كُنتُ مِنَ الظَّالِمِينَ فَاسْتَجَبْنَا لَهُ وَنَجَّيْنَاهُ مِنَ الْغَمِّ وَكَذَلِكَ نُنجِي الْمُؤْمِنِينَ
وَإِنَّ يُونُسَ لَمِنَ الْمُرْسَلِينَ إِذْ أَبَقَ إِلَى الْفُلْكِ الْمَشْحُونِ فَسَاهَمَ فَكَانَ مِنْ الْمُدْحَضِينَ فَالْتَقَمَهُ الْحُوتُ وَهُوَ مُلِيمٌ فَلَوْلا أَنَّهُ كَانَ مِنْ الْمُسَبِّحِينَ لَلَبِثَ فِي بَطْنِهِ إِلَى يَوْمِ يُبْعَثُونَ فَنَبَذْنَاهُ بِالْعَرَاء وَهُوَ سَقِيمٌ وَأَنبَتْنَا عَلَيْهِ شَجَرَةً مِّن يَقْطِينٍ وَأَرْسَلْنَاهُ إِلَى مِائَةِ أَلْفٍ أَوْ يَزِيدُونَ فَآمَنُوا فَمَتَّعْنَاهُمْ إِلَى حِينٍ
Wa dhā an-nūni idh dhahaba mugāḍiban fa-ẓanna an lan naqdira ʿalayh, fanādā fī aẓ-ẓulumāti an lā ilāha illā anta, subḥānaka innī kuntu mina aẓ-ẓālimīn.
Wa inna Yūnusa lamina al-mursalīn. Idh abaqa ilā al-fulki al-mashḥūn. Fasāhama fakāna mina al-mudḥaḍīn. Faltaqamahu al-ḥūtu wa huwa mulīm. Falawl ā annahu kāna mina al-musabbiḥīn. La-labitha fī baṭnihi ilā yawmi yubʿathūn. Fa-nabadhnāhu bil-ʿarā’i wa huwa saqīm. Wa anbatnā ʿalayhi shajaratan min yaqṭīn. Wa arsalnāhu ilā mi’ati alfin aw yazīdūn. Fa-āmanū fa-mattaʿnāhum ilā ḥīn.
And (mention) Dhu’l-Nūn, when he left in a rage, and thought that We would not put him to hardship. Then he cried out in the darkness, "There is no god except You! You are immaculate! I have indeed been among the wrongdoers!" ()
And Jonah was indeed one of the apostles, when he fled toward the laden ship. He drew lots, and was among the losers. Then the fish swallowed him while he was blameworthy. Had he not been one of those who celebrate Allah’s glory, he would have surely remained in its belly until the day they will be resurrected. Then We cast him on the bare shore while he was sick. And We made a gourd plant grow over him. Then We sent him to a a hundred thousand, or more. And they believed, so We provided them for a while. ()
Context and significance
The Qur’an recounts the story of Prophet Yūnus (a.s.) only in brief passages—most prominently in Sūrah al-Anbiyāʾ () and Sūrah al-Ṣāffāt (). It tells of his departure from his people in anger, his being swallowed by a great fish, his supplication from the depths, and his eventual deliverance by God’s mercy. His people, uniquely, were spared when they repented, unlike other nations who rejected their prophets.
This compressed narrative raises important questions that have long occupied exegetes: Was Yūnus guilty of disobedience or only of haste? What does it mean that he was “among the wrongdoers”? How can we reconcile prophetic infallibility with divine reproach? And why were his people the only community saved from impending punishment?
The significance of the story lies precisely in these questions. It presents a delicate interplay between divine discipline and divine compassion, between the refinement of prophets and the salvation of communities. Yūnus’s cry—“There is no god but You; glory be to You; indeed I was among the wrongdoers”—has become the model of repentance, not only for prophets but for all believers.
What the exegetes say
At a glance
The question: Did Yūnus sin in leaving his people, and what does his confession 'I was among the wrongdoers' mean for a prophet?
ʿAllāmah ṬabāṭabāʾīHolds he committed no sin, since God had not forbidden his leaving, but it resembled a slave fleeing his master, unbefitting a prophet; his confession repudiates that appearance rather than admitting sin.
Abul Aʿlā MawdūdīSees a real lapse in prophetic duty: he left his mission before God permitted it; not deliberate disobedience, yet blameworthy by his own fault, showing even prophets face divine reproach.
Al-ṬabarsīCalls it haste, not sin: leaving his people without divine permission; for prophets even small shortcomings weigh heavily given their station, and his prayer expressed humility and need.
Fakhr al-Dīn al-RāzīCalls it leaving what was better, not rebellion, since prophets must stay until instructed; 'among the wrongdoers' confesses falling short of the higher station required of prophets.
How each exegete answers the question, in one line. Click a name to read his reading in full.
ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī
The Qur’an recalls: “And (mention) Dhu’n-Nūn, when he went off in anger and thought that We would not constrain him” (). Ṭabāṭabāʾī explains that “al-Nūn” means the whale and “Dhu’n-Nūn” refers to Yūnus, son of Matta, sent to Nineveh. When the punishment he had invoked approached, his people, seeing it with their own eyes, turned back in repentance and faith. God, in His mercy, lifted the chastisement from them. But Yūnus, discovering that the punishment had been averted, continued on his way, infuriated at them, as though unaware of their repentance. His departure, Ṭabāṭabāʾī says, resembled a slave fleeing from his master in anger, though in truth he had not disobeyed any divine command, since God had not forbidden him from leaving. It was this resemblance that led God to take him to task and discipline him.
The verse “when he went off in anger and thought We would not constrain him” thus does not imply literal disbelief or defiance. Rather, the similitude likens his leaving to one who imagines he has escaped his master’s authority. This was an appearance unbefitting a prophet, though no sin in essence. Hence Yūnus found himself tried by God’s decree: “When he left to a laden ship” (). The verb abaqa here conveys the sense of turning away, as a runaway slave might.
The Qur’an continues: “And they drew lots (sāhama), and he was among the losers (mudḥaḍīn)” (). Ṭabāṭabāʾī clarifies that sāhama means casting lots, while mudḥaḍ indicates “losing.” At that moment, a whale had risen against the ship, burdening it and threatening its safety. The sailors, compelled to appease the whale by casting one of their own into the sea, drew lots three times, and each time Yūnus’ name was chosen. Thus “the fish swallowed him while he was blameworthy” ().
Within the darkness of the sea, the night, and the whale’s belly, Yūnus called out: “There is no god save Thee! Glory be to Thee! Truly, I have been among the wrongdoers” (). Ṭabāṭabāʾī explains that though Yūnus had not sinned intentionally, his departure implied—symbolically—turning away from God. His prayer repudiated this suggestion, affirming God’s oneness and confessing his own weakness. This confession was not admission of sin but of an action that required divine correction for a prophet’s elevated rank.
The Qur’an affirms: “Had he not been among those who glorify, he would have tarried in its belly until the day they are raised” (). Ṭabāṭabāʾī concludes that his tasbīḥ in the whale was the cause of his salvation, for glorification erased the implication of turning aside. Without it, he would have remained there as though in a grave until resurrection.
Finally, “We cast him forth on the barren shore while he was sick” (). God caused the whale to release him, casting him out upon an exposed coast, weakened but alive. His trial ended in salvation, and he was returned to his mission.
For Ṭabāṭabāʾī, the story of Yūnus illustrates divine discipline, not sin. He had not disobeyed God, but his act bore a resemblance to flight from divine authority, and thus God refined him. His cry in the darkness—affirming tawḥīd, glorifying God, and confessing dependence—became the model of deliverance, enshrined in the promise: “Thus We deliver the believers” ().
Source: Tafsir al-Mizan, Eng. vols. 27 and 33 under Chapters 21 and 37 (Tawheed Institute, Australia).
Read ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī’s full commentary in Tafsir al-Mizan: 21:78–91 on almizan.org ↗ and 37:133–148 on almizan.org ↗
Abul Aʿlā Mawdūdī
Mawdūdī presents the story of Prophet Yūnus (a.s.) as both a historical account and a moral lesson on prophetic responsibility, divine trial, and repentance.
He begins by explaining that Dhun-Nūn, “the man of the fish,” refers to Jonah, who was swallowed by a fish by Allah’s command. The Qur’an recounts that Jonah left his people “in anger,” but crucially, he did so before Allah had granted him permission to depart. While his reasoning was that divine punishment was imminent upon his people, Mawdūdī stresses that for a Prophet, the true error lay in leaving the place of mission without Allah’s sanction. Thus, even though Jonah’s action might appear understandable, it constituted a lapse in prophetic duty.
The Qur’an describes Jonah as being engulfed in “the depths of darkness”—the belly of the fish, the sea, and the night above. From within this trial, he called upon Allah with a prayer of glorification and confession of error: “There is no god but You; Glory be to You; indeed I was of the wrongdoers” (). Mawdūdī highlights that Jonah’s salvation came through this constant glorification of Allah. Without it, the Qur’an affirms, the fish’s belly would have remained his grave until the Day of Resurrection. This, Mawdūdī notes, teaches that even great Prophets are not exempt from divine accountability, though their repentance is met with Allah’s immense mercy.
Mawdūdī carefully analyzes the sequence of events: Jonah boarded an already overloaded ship, lots were drawn to decide who should be cast overboard, and the lot fell upon him. The terms abaqa (“to flee like a runaway slave”) and muleem (“blameworthy by one’s own fault”) highlight that Jonah’s suffering was directly tied to his own premature flight. After being swallowed by the fish, he repented sincerely, and Allah commanded the fish to release him. He was cast upon a barren shore, sick and frail, and Allah caused a creeper to grow over him, providing nourishment and shade until his recovery. (vide )
Beyond the immediate story, Mawdūdī situates Jonah’s mission historically. He was sent to the people of Nineveh in Mosul, who were polytheists and rejecters of his message. When Jonah announced that punishment would descend after three days, he departed before Allah’s command. As the signs of punishment appeared, the people searched for him in vain and, realizing their fate, turned collectively in repentance. They brought even their cattle into the wilderness, humbling themselves before Allah. In an exceptional instance, Allah accepted their repentance and withheld the punishment. This made the people of Jonah unique, for no other community is recorded to have been spared after the scourge had approached.
In Mawdūdī’s interpretation, the story of Jonah conveys two enduring lessons. First, Prophets themselves are held to the highest standards of obedience: even a lapse in judgment is subject to divine reproach. Second, Allah’s mercy is vast, encompassing even those communities on the brink of destruction if they turn back in sincere repentance. The narrative thus illustrates both divine justice and divine compassion—warning against haste and error in carrying out divine missions, while also offering hope that sincere glorification and humility can reverse the course of punishment.
Source: The Meaning of the Qur’an, vols. 7 & 12, trans. Ch. Muhammad Akbar, ed. A. A. Kamal (Lahore: Islamic Publications), commentary on Q. 21:87-88 & Q. 37:139-148.
Al-Ṭabarsī
Al-Ṭabarsī explains that Yūnus (a.s.), also known as Dhū al-Nūn (“the one of the fish”), was sent as a messenger to his people. When they rejected his call, he departed angrily from them without waiting for Allah’s command, fearing punishment might descend upon them. He boarded a ship that was overloaded with people and goods. According to custom, when a ship was too heavy, the passengers would cast lots to decide who should be thrown off. The lots were drawn, and each time Yūnus’s name appeared. Realizing this was decreed, he threw himself into the sea.
Allah commanded a great whale to swallow him but instructed it not to break his bones or consume his flesh. Yūnus remained alive in its belly, enveloped by three layers of darkness: the darkness of the night, the sea, and the whale’s belly. In that state he called upon Allah with the prayer: “There is no god except You, glory be to You; surely I was among the wrongdoers.”
Al-Ṭabarsī notes that his “wrongdoing” was not disobedience in the sense of sin but rather leaving his people without divine permission. It was an act of haste, and for prophets even small shortcomings are significant due to their elevated status. His supplication reflected humility, submission, and recognition of his need for Allah’s mercy.
Allah accepted his prayer, as he had been among those who constantly remembered Allah in times of ease. Al-Ṭabarsī emphasizes that those who are consistent in worship during ease find their prayers more readily answered in hardship. The angels, upon hearing his voice from the depths, recognized it as the same voice that used to glorify Allah, and Allah responded to him.
Yūnus was cast out of the whale onto the shore in a weakened, sickly state, like a new born chick. Allah caused a gourd tree with broad leaves to grow over him, giving shade and protection. After recovering, he was sent back to his people, who were about one hundred thousand or more. This time, they believed in his message, so Allah spared them and allowed them to enjoy their lives for a period.
Source: Majmaʿ al-Bayān fī Tafsīr al-Qurʾān, vols. 7 & 8 (Qom: Dār al-ʿIlm), commentary on Q. 21:87-88 & 37:139-148.
Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī
In his tafsīr of verses and , al-Rāzī recounts the story of Prophet Yunus (a.s.) with careful attention to the language of the Qur’an as well as the theological lessons that flow from it. The Qur’an affirms that Yunus was one of the messengers, sent by Allah to his people, who are identified in reports as the people of Nineveh. When they rejected his call, he departed from them in anger and distress. This departure, al-Rāzī explains, was not a rebellion against God but rather a case of leaving what was better, for prophets are bound to remain with their people until receiving divine instruction. It was this hastiness that the Qur’an refers to when Yunus later confesses, “Indeed, I was among the wrongdoers.” His wrong was not disobedience in the ordinary sense, but falling short of the higher station required of prophets.
After leaving his people, Yunus boarded a heavily laden ship. When the ship was threatened by its weight, the sailors cast lots to decide who should be sacrificed to lighten it, and Yunus’ name was drawn. Though reluctant, he accepted the result and was thrown into the sea, where he was swallowed by a great fish. This event was decreed by Allah, and in the darkness of the whale’s belly Yunus remembered his Lord and turned to Him in supplication, saying: “There is no god but You, glory be to You, I was indeed among the wrongdoers.” Al-Rāzī highlights the importance of this supplication, noting that had Yunus not been among those who glorify Allah in both ease and hardship, he would have remained in the whale until the Day of Resurrection. His prior devotion and constant remembrance became the cause of his deliverance, showing that acts of worship in times of prosperity are a safeguard in times of adversity.
The Qur’an then describes how Yunus was cast out by the fish, sick and weakened, upon the shore. In this state of frailty, Allah’s mercy enveloped him, and a gourd-like plant was made to grow over him, providing shade from the sun and nourishment for his body. This detail, which al-Rāzī remarks upon, illustrates the intimate care of Allah for His servant even in the most desperate circumstances. Having recovered, Yunus was sent once more to his people. Unlike many other nations who denied their prophets until punishment overtook them, the people of Yunus repented and believed after initially rejecting him. The Qur’an concludes their story by stating that they believed, and Allah granted them enjoyment for a time, lifting from them the punishment that had been destined. Al-Rāzī considers this an extraordinary case, for it stands in contrast to the fate of most other nations, demonstrating that sincere repentance can reverse the course of destruction.
Source: al-Tafsīr al-Kabīr aw Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb, vols. 11 & 13 (Cairo: Dār al-Ḥadīth), commentary on Q. 21:87-88 & 37:139-148.
Our reflection
This is our own reflection on the readings above. It is one way of reading the comparison, offered to encourage further thought rather than as the final word.
The Qur’anic narrative of Prophet Yūnus (a.s.)—compressed yet weighty—has long been a locus for exegetical meditation on prophetic responsibility, divine mercy, and the delicate balance between human fallibility and prophetic impeccability. The four commentaries of Ṭabāṭabāʾī, Mawdūdī, Ṭabarsī, and Rāzī illustrate both convergence and divergence in how scholars understood this episode. Their interpretations collectively raise fundamental questions about the nature of prophetic conduct, the meaning of “wrongdoing,” and the scope of God’s mercy.
For Ṭabāṭabāʾī, the story is best read not as one of disobedience but of divine discipline. He emphasizes linguistic nuance: the Qur’an’s choice of abaqa ()—to flee like a runaway slave—does not mean actual rebellion but a resemblance to it. Yūnus left his people in anger, not against God’s command, but in ignorance of their repentance. It was the semblance of fleeing divine authority, unbecoming for a prophet, that invited correction. His commentary is careful to preserve the infallibility (ʿiṣmah) of prophets while still recognizing the gravity of prophetic conduct: even symbolic appearances that might mislead require divine refinement. Ṭabāṭabāʾī’s reading turns Yūnus’s prayer—“I was among the wrongdoers”—into an act of affirming human dependence before God rather than confessing sin. This approach aligns with his broader theological method, which refuses to compromise prophetic sanctity but also insists on the moral seriousness of prophetic actions.
Mawdūdī, by contrast, is less cautious about identifying fault. For him, the core issue lies in Yūnus departing without divine permission. While he does not accuse Yūnus of deliberate disobedience, he interprets the flight as a lapse in prophetic duty, a premature abandonment of the mission field. His reflection highlights the immense standard to which prophets are held: even an understandable action, taken out of frustration and haste, becomes subject to divine reproach. This interpretation widens the moral lesson to the prophetic office itself—prophets cannot take initiative in matters of mission without God’s command, and even great messengers are held accountable. At the same time, Mawdūdī stresses God’s compassion. The salvation of both Yūnus and his people highlights divine mercy as overriding, provided there is sincere repentance and humility. He uniquely frames the repentance of the Ninevites as a rare historical moment in which an entire community, even on the brink of punishment, was spared—a testimony to God’s unparalleled forgiveness.
Ṭabarsī’s account lies somewhere between Ṭabāṭabāʾī and Mawdūdī. Like Ṭabāṭabāʾī, he interprets Yūnus’s “wrongdoing” not as sin but as haste. Prophets, by virtue of their elevated station, are disciplined for even small shortcomings. Ṭabarsī underscores the role of Yūnus’s past devotion: the angels recognized his voice from the depths, for he had been among those who glorified God in times of ease. This recognition becomes a theological point: worship in prosperity secures divine aid in adversity. His tafsīr adds vivid imagery—the whale instructed not to harm Yūnus, his weakness on the barren shore, and the growth of the gourd tree—presenting God’s mercy as tenderly protective. Ṭabarsī thus frames the episode as a lesson in both humility and the consistency of worship.
Rāzī, with his characteristic focus on language and theological implication, reads the departure of Yūnus as leaving “the better.” Like Ṭabarsī, he refuses to call it disobedience but stresses the elevated bar for prophets. His analysis of Yūnus’s supplication is particularly striking: the confession “I was among the wrongdoers” is not ordinary repentance but an acknowledgment of not fully actualizing the prophetic station. Rāzī, too, highlights the causal link between worship in ease and deliverance in hardship, but he pushes the point further—turning it into a universal principle for believers. The unusual salvation of Yūnus’s people, he stresses, shows that sincere repentance can alter destiny itself. Unlike the doom that befell other nations, Nineveh’s redemption illustrates that the door of divine mercy remains open until the very end.
Placed side by side, these four readings show both overlap and tension. All agree that Yūnus’s act was not rebellion against God but an action that, relative to his station, was blameworthy. Yet they diverge on how sharply to frame that blame. Ṭabāṭabāʾī minimizes it to a matter of appearance, Mawdūdī heightens it to a breach of prophetic duty, while Ṭabarsī and Rāzī situate it in between—as a lapse of haste or leaving the better. The theological stakes are clear: how one interprets this event reflects one’s doctrine of prophetic infallibility, divine justice, and mercy.
The critical reflection, therefore, is twofold. First, the story functions as a mirror for prophetic responsibility: even small lapses are magnified, not to diminish prophets, but to preserve the integrity of their role as exemplars. Second, the story expands into a universal lesson of repentance and glorification: no matter the depth of darkness—personal, communal, or existential—deliverance is possible through turning wholeheartedly to God. The tension between divine discipline and divine mercy, far from being contradictory, is precisely what sustains the moral force of the narrative.
What is your reflection?
How do you read this comparison? Do you see it differently, or have other ideas to add? We would like to hear from you.
Email your reflectionor write to info@tafsircompare.com