Appearance
Sūrah al-Qiyāmah, verses 22-24
وُجُوهٌ يَوْمَئِذٍ نَّاضِرَةٌ
إِلَى رَبِّهَا نَاظِرَةٌ
وَوُجُوهٌ يَوْمَئِذٍ بَاسِرَةٌ
Wujūhun yawma’idhin nāḍirah, Ilā rabbihā nāẓirah. Wa wujūhun yawma’idhin bāsirah
Some faces on that day will be radiant, looking at their Lord. And (some) faces on that day will be scowling.
Context and significance
Verses appear in Sūrat al-Qiyāmah, a chapter devoted to the certainty of resurrection and the unveiling of ultimate destinies. After vivid descriptions of the upheaval of the Last Day and the accountability of human beings, the surah turns to a moment of promise: “Faces that Day will be radiant, looking toward their Lord.”
The verse encapsulates the climax of eschatological hope—the transformation of the faithful into beings of light and their orientation toward God as the source of all joy. Yet the meaning of “looking toward their Lord” has been one of the most debated questions in Qur’anic exegesis. Does it affirm a direct vision of God with the physical eye, or does it describe a deeper, presential encounter that transcends sensory perception?
The significance of these verses lies in their theological weight. They crystallize the believer’s ultimate reward—not material pleasures, but nearness to the Divine—while simultaneously testing the boundaries of Islamic thought on God’s transcendence, human perception, and the reality of the hereafter.
What the exegetes say
At a glance
The question: Does “looking toward their Lord” mean believers will actually see God in the Hereafter, or something other than sensory sight?
ʿAllāmah ṬabāṭabāʾīRejects physical sight as impossible by reason and 42:11; reads it as the heart’s unmediated vision of God, the faces wholly oriented to Him, seeing all of Paradise as His signs.
Al-QurṭubīTakes it as actual vision (ruʾyah) of God, following most early authorities and the full-moon ḥadīth, without likeness, form or direction; notes the “awaiting His reward” reading but finds it weaker.
Fakhr al-Dīn al-RāzīAffirms a real vision of God beyond bodily form: naẓar followed by ilā means sight, and radiant faces reflect attainment, not waiting; rebuts the Muʿtazilī reading of expectation.
How each exegete answers the question, in one line. Click a name to read his reading in full.
ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī
Regarding these verses, ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī explains that the Qur’an continues its depiction of the Day of Resurrection by dividing people into two groups: the radiant and the scowling. The term nāḍirah (radiant) conveys freshness, brightness, and beauty, and in this context signifies faces beaming with joy and satisfaction. These verses contrast with those that follow—“and some faces on that day will be scowling” ()—thus highlighting the distinction between the blissful and the wretched. Other Qur’anic passages describe this radiance as the “resplendence of bliss” () and as God greeting them with “resplendence and joy” ().
The phrase “looking toward their Lord” is not, according to Ṭabāṭabāʾī, a reference to physical sight of God, which reason and revelation alike render impossible. Rather, it refers to an inner vision of the heart grounded in the reality of faith—an unmediated perception of God’s presence. This type of seeing is supported by rational proofs and by transmitted reports, as well as verses such as Moses’ plea, “My Lord, show Yourself to me so that I may look at You!” (), and “The heart did not deny what it saw” ().
The people described here are those whose hearts are entirely oriented toward their Lord, free of distraction by worldly means and causes. On that day, when all apparent instruments and intermediaries are severed, they will encounter God’s mercy at every stage. Even as they enjoy the pleasures of paradise, their gaze will remain fixed upon God, for everything they behold will be seen as His sign. And to look at a sign as a sign is, in reality, to look at what it signifies. Thus, their vision is constantly directed toward their Lord.
A question arises: if the verse states “toward their Lord” before “looking” in Arabic, does it imply that they see only God and nothing else, while we know they also behold the delights of paradise? Ṭabāṭabāʾī responds that since they are not veiled from God, everything they see is transparently a sign of Him. Signs, insofar as they are signs, never obscure what they indicate; rather, they disclose it. Hence, even while perceiving the blessings of paradise, their faces are in truth oriented solely toward God.
Some exegetes suggest the phrasing is for rhetorical rhyme and does not imply exclusivity. Others argue that exclusivity applies only at certain times. Ṭabāṭabāʾī rejects these views as forced qualifications, pointing out instead that the verse attributes the looking to “faces,” not “eyes.” This shows that the people of paradise will be constantly oriented toward God in their very being, not merely in fleeting acts of vision, leaving no room for their orientation to be directed elsewhere.
In concluding, Ṭabāṭabāʾī makes it clear that this “looking” must be interpreted in light of the Qur’an’s decisive verses. In his tafsīr of , he explains that ambiguous verses (mutashābihāt) such as “looking toward their Lord” must be returned to decisive ones (muḥkamāt) like “There is nothing like unto Him” (), which establish God’s transcendence. Thus, the verse cannot be understood as literal sight. Moreover, in his detailed treatise on —the encounter of Moses with God—he explains that Moses, already knowing the impossibility of sensory vision, expressed instead the yearning to “encounter” God in this life in the same way that people will encounter Him in the hereafter. God’s response, “You shall not see Me,” therefore reminded him that such an encounter is not possible in this world. The collapse of the mountain under divine disclosure dramatized the incapacity of creation to endure even a trace of divine majesty in this life.
Source: Tafsir al-Mizan, Eng. Vol. 39, Chapter 75 under Verses 22-24 (Tawheed Institute, Australia)
Read ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī’s full commentary in Tafsir al-Mizan: 75:16–40 on almizan.org ↗
Al-Qurṭubī
Al-Qurṭubī interprets these verses as among the clearest Qur’ānic proofs of the believers’ vision of Allah (s.w.t.) in the Hereafter. He explains that the radiance of the faces refers to their brightness and joy on the Day of Resurrection, reflecting the delight and bliss of the righteous as they are graced with divine reward. The phrase “looking toward their Lord” is understood by the majority of exegetes, including Ibn ʿAbbās, al-Ḥasan, and Ibn Masʿūd, as a direct reference to the radiant vision (ruʾyah).
This understanding, according to al-Qurṭubī, is supported by numerous traditions. Among them is the well-attested ḥadīth in which the Prophet (s.a.w.) said: “You shall see your Lord just as you see the moon on the night it is full, you will not be crowded in seeing Him.” For al-Qurṭubī, this is decisive evidence that the believers will indeed be granted the privilege of seeing Allah in the Hereafter. He stresses, however, that such a vision does not imply any likeness between Allah and His creation, nor does it entail physical form or direction. Rather, it is a unique vision granted by Allah as a special honor to His chosen servants.
Al-Qurṭubī also notes that some have interpreted “looking toward their Lord” as meaning “awaiting His reward.” This is based on the wider Arabic usage of the verb naẓara (to look), which can signify expectation as well as direct sight. To support this, he cites Arabic poetry in which naẓara is used to mean “to wait” or “to anticipate,” such as the verse: “I look to you with longing, though you may not return.” Yet, while acknowledging this linguistic possibility, al-Qurṭubī maintains that the stronger and more literal interpretation is that of direct vision, because the structure of the verse contrasts radiant faces with the faces of disbelievers mentioned later in the sūrah, whose expressions are marked by gloom and misery.
He further highlights that the word nāẓirah in the verse (“faces radiant”) is linked with nāẓirah (“looking”) to show cause and effect: their brightness derives from their vision of their Lord. This is consistent with the Qur’ānic style of pairing concepts, and it reinforces the idea that the ultimate joy and honor of the righteous will be the vision of Allah.
Thus, al-Qurṭubī presents the verse as both a theological cornerstone and a linguistic masterpiece. Theologically, it establishes the doctrine of the believers’ vision of their Lord in the Hereafter, a matter affirmed by the Qur’an, the Sunnah, and the consensus of the majority of scholars. Linguistically, it demonstrates the richness of Qur’ānic expression, where a single word encompasses layers of meaning—expectation, vision, and longing—all of which deepen the spiritual reality of the promise.
In conclusion, the tafsīr of al-Qurṭubī presents verses as a declaration of the supreme honor awaiting the righteous: their faces will shine with joy, illuminated not only by the pleasures of Paradise but, above all, by the vision of their Lord, a gift that crowns all other blessings.
Source: Al-Qurṭubī, Al-Jāmiʿ li-Aḥkām al-Qur’ān (Tafsīr al-Qurṭubī), vol. 21, under Chapter 75:22-24, Pub. by Al-Risalah Foundation, Beirut.
Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī
In his commentary on verses , al-Rāzī presents one of the most significant theological discussions in his Tafsīr al-Kabīr, focusing on whether the Qur’ān affirms the believers’ direct vision of God on the Day of Resurrection. The verses declare that on that Day, faces will be radiant, “looking toward their Lord”. For al-Rāzī, the key lies in the interpretation of *naẓar ilā rabbihā—*does it mean actual vision (ruʾyah) or mere expectation (intidār) of God’s mercy?
Al-Rāzī begins by exploring the linguistic dimensions of naẓar. He acknowledges that in Arabic usage, naẓar can denote different states: it can mean looking with the eye, contemplating with the heart, or awaiting something hoped for. However, he emphasizes that whenever naẓar is followed by the preposition ilā (toward), the primary meaning is vision with the eyes. Numerous examples from poetry and Arabic expression confirm this point. In contrast, when the Qur’ān uses naẓar in the sense of expectation, it is not accompanied by ilā. This grammatical distinction alone, he argues, makes the most apparent reading of the verse an affirmation of direct sight.
The Muʿtazilah, however, denied the possibility of seeing God, interpreting the verse to mean that the believers will be waiting expectantly for His reward. Al-Rāzī carefully examines their objections. They argue that God is not a physical body and cannot be encompassed by vision. To this, al-Rāzī replies that vision does not necessitate physical limitations; rather, it is simply the perception of what truly exists. God’s reality transcends bodies, but that does not negate the possibility of Him being seen by a mode of perception God Himself creates for His servants in the hereafter.
He also critiques the expectation-based reading. Expectation of mercy, he notes, is already the condition of believers in this world. It would not explain why their faces on the Day of Judgment are especially radiant. Radiance (naḍrah) here signals the joy of attainment, not the uncertainty of waiting. Just as worldly happiness brightens the countenance when one beholds something cherished, so too the believers’ faces shine with the supreme joy of beholding their Lord. Expectation alone cannot account for this description, but vision does.
Al-Rāzī further supports his case by distinguishing between the joy of hope and the bliss of fulfillment. If the verse meant only that they would hope for God’s mercy, there would be no reason to single out this condition as one of the great rewards of the Day of Judgment. The Qur’ān, in his view, uses exalted and eloquent language to mark a reality of utmost magnificence: the direct vision of God.
At the same time, al-Rāzī does not ignore the philosophical and theological concerns. He acknowledges that terms like naẓar and ruʾyah are sometimes metaphorical, denoting knowledge, understanding, or waiting. Yet he insists that to depart from the obvious meaning without compelling necessity would undermine the Qur’ān’s clarity. Thus, the most consistent and eloquent reading is that God has promised His righteous servants the honor of seeing Him*—*a vision that is beyond bodily form and unlike worldly sight, but nonetheless real.
In summary, al-Rāzī affirms the doctrine of ruʾyat Allāh upheld by Ahl al-Sunnah: that the believers will behold their Lord in the hereafter, and that this vision will be the pinnacle of joy, reflected in the radiance of their faces.
Source: al-Tafsīr al-Kabīr aw Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb, vol. 15 (Cairo: Dār al-Ḥadīth), commentary on Q. 75:22-24.
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 three exegetical traditions on verses reveal a striking divergence in theology and method. Al-Qurṭubī and al-Rāzī, each in his own way, affirm the Sunni doctrine of ruʾyat Allāh—that the believers will behold God directly in the Hereafter. Their arguments rely heavily on the apparent sense of the verb naẓara ilā, supported by hadith such as the famous report likening the vision of God to beholding the full moon. For them, the radiance of the believers’ faces derives from the joy of seeing their Lord, a privilege beyond all other delights of Paradise. In their reading, the grammar, context, and transmitted traditions all converge on the reality of vision, while philosophical objections are met by asserting that God can be seen without implying corporeality or direction.
ʿAllāmah Ṭabāṭabāʾī, however, decisively rejects this line of interpretation. For him, both reason and Qur’anic principle render physical vision of God impossible: “There is nothing like unto Him” () cannot be reconciled with a doctrine that assumes God can be perceived by the eye. He therefore reads “looking toward their Lord” as a presential, spiritual encounter—a vision of the heart unmediated by material faculties, in which every blessing of Paradise is seen transparently as a sign of God. The radiance of the faces is not from ocular vision but from the certainty, intimacy, and nearness of divine presence unveiled. By pointing out that the verse attributes looking to “faces” rather than “eyes,” Ṭabāṭabāʾī highlights that the whole being of the believer is oriented toward God, not merely their gaze.
Critically examined, the Sunni readings appear to flatten the Qur’an’s metaphysical depth into an affirmation of sensory sight, straining against both reason and the Qur’an’s decisive verses of transcendence. Al-Rāzī’s grammatical argument that naẓara ilā normally implies vision is compelling in Arabic usage, but his dismissal of the expectation-based reading is too hasty, since the Qur’an itself elsewhere employs naẓar for non-visual states, including anticipation. More significantly, neither al-Rāzī nor al-Qurṭubī fully accounts for the theological incoherence of positing vision without corporeality, leaving the doctrine suspended in paradox.
By contrast, Ṭabāṭabāʾī’s interpretation not only resolves these tensions but also situates the verse within a coherent Qur’anic theology: verses such as (distinguishing decisive from ambiguous texts) and (Moses’ request to see God) show that sensory vision is categorically impossible, yet unmediated encounter is promised to the faithful in the hereafter. His tafsīr preserves both the majesty of God’s transcendence and the intimacy of the believer’s joy, articulating a doctrine of divine encounter that is intellectually rigorous, spiritually profound, and textually consistent.
In conclusion, while al-Qurṭubī and al-Rāzī elevate the verse as proof of the radiant vision in the Sunni sense, their readings remain vulnerable to philosophical critique and Qur’anic counterevidence. Ṭabāṭabāʾī, on the other hand, demonstrates that the Qur’an does not promise sensory sight of God, but rather the supreme joy of presential awareness: radiant faces oriented wholly toward their Lord, unclouded by veil or distraction. This interpretation both safeguards divine transcendence and offers a richer account of the believer’s ultimate felicity, making it the most theologically and hermeneutically compelling.
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