ROOT و ص ي
20 verses • 13 derived words
📖 Lane's Lexicon
Classical definitions for root وصي
Morphology Tree
Lemmas and their derived stems found in the Quran.
Occurrences in Quran
Found 20 verses containing words derived from "w S y".
وَوَصَّىٰ بِهَآ إِبْرَٰهِۦمُ بَنِيهِ وَيَعْقُوبُ يَٰبَنِىَّ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ ٱصْطَفَىٰ لَكُمُ ٱلدِّينَ فَلَا تَمُوتُنَّ إِلَّا وَأَنتُم مُّسْلِمُونَ
3:103.
موت انسان کے اختیار میں نہیں۔ پس لَا تَمُوْتُنَّ اِلَّا وَاَنْتُمْ مُّسْلِمُوْنَ سے مراد یہ ہے کہ ہر وقت فرمانبردار رہنا‘ تاکہ موت بے وقت نہ آئے۔
3:103.
As there is no time fixed for death, one should pass every moment of his life in complete submission to God. The verse may also mean that a true believer should always be so perfectly resigned to God’s will and should so completely win His pleasure that God may, out of His limitless bounty, so arrange that death may come to him at a time when he is completely resigned to His will.
3:103.
Important Words:
وصی (did enjoin upon). وصی فلانا بکذا means, he enjoined this upon him, he ordered him to do this, he charged him with this. وصی علیه بالصلوة means, he exhorted him or enjoined him to observe Prayers. وصی له بماله means, he made a will in his favour, making him heir of his property after his death (Aqrab).
Commentary:
Abraham not only submitted himself to the will of God but also took special care that his children too should inculcate that spirit and lead lives of submission and resignation. The name of Jacob or Israel (grandson of Abraham) has been particularly added here to point to the fact that as Jacob also issued a similar injunction to his children, it becomes all the more binding on the Israelites to submit to the will of God and accept the Prophet who has come with the specific mission of اسلام i.e. submission to God’s will.
The words, so let not death overtake you except when you are in a state of submission, beautifully point to the fact that as nobody knows the time of his death, one should always lead a life of submission to God’s will so that whenever death comes, it may not find one in a state other than that of submission. The words may also mean that a true believer should be so perfectly resigned to God’s will and should so completely win His pleasure that He may, out of His limitless bounty, arrange that death may not come to him except at a time when he is resigned to His will.
This, as well as the preceding verse, forcefully brings out the important point that Islam really means absolute obedience and complete submission to the will of God. Only he who is completely resigned to the will of God is a true Muslim. Thus every true pre-Islamic religion that inculcated the spirit of submission will, within this meaning of the term, fall under the true definition of Islam, because previous to the religion preached by the Holy Prophet, to follow Islam was to obey the then expressed will of God, or, in other words, the revelation of the day. The point of difference between the religion brought by the Holy Prophet and the other true preceding faiths is—although they are Islamic in essence—those faiths were not called by the name of Islam, the reason for this being that they were not perfect and each of them was to be replaced by a succeeding one, and so, if all these had been given the name of Islam, there would have been great confusion. Hence, only the faith which was perfect in every way and was meant for all mankind and was to last forever was given that name so that its very name might be illustrative of its underlying purpose. The name Islam is "the new name" referred to in Isa. 62:2.
When the Quran calls the former Prophets Muslims, it obviously does not mean that they followed Quranic teachings. It simply means that, as explained above, they followed the true faith of their day and manifested in themselves, though partly of course, the spirit of اسلام i.e. submission to the will of God.
d
3:103.
4
موت انسان کے اختیار میں نہیں۔ پس لَا تَمُوْتُنَّ اِلَّا وَاَنْتُمْ مُّسْلِمُوْنَ سے مراد یہ ہے کہ ہر وقت فرمانبردار رہنا‘ تاکہ موت بے وقت نہ آئے۔
a
3:103.
139
Important Words:
وصی (did enjoin upon). وصی فلانا بکذا means, he enjoined this upon him, he ordered him to do this, he charged him with this. وصی علیه بالصلوة means, he exhorted him or enjoined him to observe Prayers. وصی له بماله means, he made a will in his favour, making him heir of his property after his death (Aqrab).
Commentary:
Abraham not only submitted himself to the will of God but also took special care that his children too should inculcate that spirit and lead lives of submission and resignation. The name of Jacob or Israel (grandson of Abraham) has been particularly added here to point to the fact that as Jacob also issued a similar injunction to his children, it becomes all the more binding on the Israelites to submit to the will of God and accept the Prophet who has come with the specific mission of اسلام i.e. submission to God’s will.
The words, so let not death overtake you except when you are in a state of submission, beautifully point to the fact that as nobody knows the time of his death, one should always lead a life of submission to God’s will so that whenever death comes, it may not find one in a state other than that of submission. The words may also mean that a true believer should be so perfectly resigned to God’s will and should so completely win His pleasure that He may, out of His limitless bounty, arrange that death may not come to him except at a time when he is resigned to His will.
This, as well as the preceding verse, forcefully brings out the important point that Islam really means absolute obedience and complete submission to the will of God. Only he who is completely resigned to the will of God is a true Muslim. Thus every true pre-Islamic religion that inculcated the spirit of submission will, within this meaning of the term, fall under the true definition of Islam, because previous to the religion preached by the Holy Prophet, to follow Islam was to obey the then expressed will of God, or, in other words, the revelation of the day. The point of difference between the religion brought by the Holy Prophet and the other true preceding faiths is—although they are Islamic in essence—those faiths were not called by the name of Islam, the reason for this being that they were not perfect and each of them was to be replaced by a succeeding one, and so, if all these had been given the name of Islam, there would have been great confusion. Hence, only the faith which was perfect in every way and was meant for all mankind and was to last forever was given that name so that its very name might be illustrative of its underlying purpose. The name Islam is "the new name" referred to in Isa. 62:2.
When the Quran calls the former Prophets Muslims, it obviously does not mean that they followed Quranic teachings. It simply means that, as explained above, they followed the true faith of their day and manifested in themselves, though partly of course, the spirit of اسلام i.e. submission to the will of God.
c
3:103.
149
As there is no time fixed for death, one should pass every moment of his life in complete submission to God. The verse may also mean that a true believer should always be so perfectly resigned to God’s will and should so completely win His pleasure that God may, out of His limitless bounty, so arrange that death may come to him at a time when he is completely resigned to His will.
كُتِبَ عَلَيْكُمْ إِذَا حَضَرَ أَحَدَكُمُ ٱلْمَوْتُ إِن تَرَكَ خَيْرًا ٱلْوَصِيَّةُ لِلْوَٰلِدَيْنِ وَٱلْأَقْرَبِينَ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ ۖ حَقًّا عَلَى ٱلْمُتَّقِينَ
4:12, 13, 177; 5:107.
4:12,13经文注定了对所有应该继承死者产业的那些人的分配份额。这些经文被有些注经家误解为废止本节经文的, 实际上本节经文对遗产继承权制订了一条附加而且十分必要的规定, 这种遗产仅指有利于在法律上不该分得遗嘱的遗产的人, 或是出于慈善目的, 或由于战争状况的遗产。它不指有利于合法继承者的遗产, 关于那种遗产在4:12,13中业已述及。因此本节经文为制定遗赠规章的几节经文所废止的问题是不应发生的, 而且那几节经文也承认任何遗产的合法性。是以每一节经文都在自己的范围内起其一定的作用而且相辅相成。所以这样所规定的遗产, 根据萨德•彬•阿比•瓦卡斯 (سَعْد بِنْ اَبِیْ وَقَاص, Sa‘d bin Abi Waqqas) 的见解, 像穆圣在讲话中所提到的那样, 不应超过所留产业的三分之一 (Bukhari, Kitabul-Jana’iz); 这是立遗嘱者可以行使自由支配的处理权的最高限制, 不过这种遗产继承权只有那留下像خَيْر (Khair, 许多财富) 这词所表示的大笔财产者
才能使用。根据经文5:107, 一个将死的穆斯林可以规定遗产。一般的看法, 这节经文是在4:12, 13之后下降的; 这进一步支持了这个看法, 事实上, 本节没有被4:12, 13所代替。一切经文废止的说法是没有根据的。
خَیْر کے معنے مطلق مال کے بھی ہوتے ہیں اور بہت سے مال کے بھی۔ اس جگہ آیت کے سیاق و سباق سے ظاہر ہوتا ہے کہ مالِ کثیر مراد ہے۔
یہاں والدین اور اقربین کو وصیت کرنا کہا ہے حالانکہ اولاد قلبی تعلقات کے لحاظ سے نہایت اہم ہے اس سے معلوم ہوتا ہے کہ یہ مال کی تقسیم کی وصیت نہیں ورنہ اولاد کا ذکر ضرور ہوتا۔ بلکہ وصیت سے مراد عام تاکید ہے کہ احکامِ الٰہیہ کے مطابق جائیداد تقسیم کی جائے۔ اور اگر مال کا کوئی حصہ صدقہ کرنا ہو تو اس کا اظہار کردے۔ اس آیت پر بہت بحث ہوئی ہے۔ اکثر مفسرین اسے منسوخ قرار دیتے ہیں کیونکہ اس میں وصیت واجب لکھی ہے اور احکام وراثت کے نزول کے بعد رشتہ داروں کے نام وصیت جائز نہیں۔ اور جنہوں نے جائز قرار دی ہے ان کے نزدیک بھی واجب نہیں‘ مگر یہ غلطی اس وجہ سے لگی ہے کہ وصیت کے معنے
4:12, 13, 177; 5:107.
Verses 4:12, 13 fix the shares of all those persons who should succeed to a deceased person’s property. These verses have been mistakenly understood by some Commentators to abrogate the verse under comment, which, in fact, lays down an additional and very necessary provision, and refers only to bequests made in favour of individuals not legally entitled to a share in the testator’s property, or for charitable purposes, or for war conditions. It does not refer to bequests made in favour of legal heirs which subject has been dealt with in 4:12, 13. There is no question, therefore, of the abrogation of this verse by those verses which lay down the rules of inheritance and also recognise the validity of any bequests that may have been made. Each operates in its own sphere and draws strength from the other. The bequests thus made, however, should not exceed one third of the property left as is mentioned in a saying of the Holy Prophet related by Sa‘d bin Abi Waqqas (Bukhari, Kitabul-Jana’iz); thi
4:12, 13, 177; 5:107.
Important Words:
خیر (much wealth) means: (1) good as opposed to evil; (2) wealth acquired or collected by fair and praiseworthy means; (3) much wealth or abundance of wealth; (4) a thing that all desire; (5) welfare and good fortune (Mufradat); (6) the existence of a thing in abundance and perfection; (7) horses, etc. (Aqrab).
حقا (obligation) is derived from حق and has been used in the verse in the accusative case, having something understood before it, the complete expression being حق ذالك حقا (Kashshaf). الحق means: (1) equity or justice; (2) right mode of acting; (3) an obligation or a duty; (4) a debt or anything that is owed; (5) a thing suitable to the requirements of justice, truth, duty, etc. (Lane). See also 2:148.
Commentary:
As disputes about inheritance are a fruitful source of quarrels, murders, etc., the Quran here suitably turns from the subject of retaliation to that of inheritance.
The word used here for "wealth" is خیر and not مال which is the ordinary word used in this sense. خیر means, "wealth acquired by fair and praiseworthy means". Thus by substituting the word خیر for مال, the Quran has also emphasized the necessity of being very circumspect in the acquisition of wealth which should be acquired only by fair and lawful means. Incidentally, therefore, it has been hinted that it is not lawful for a Muslim to make a will with regard to property that has been acquired by unlawful means; for such wealth does not really belong to him.
In 4:12, 13 the Quran fixes the shares of all those persons who should succeed to a deceased person’s property, according to the Islamic law of inheritance, and these in the first instance include parents, children, and wife or husband. In the presence of this law, the injunction given in the verse under comment would, at first sight, appear to be uncalled-for and unnecessary. As a matter of fact, those who believe in the abrogation theory, have actually declared this verse to be abrogated by the ones referred to above. But they are clearly mistaken; for the verse under comment makes an additional and necessary provision in regard to inheritance. Not seldom there come forward claimants who allege that a deceased person had bequeathed such and such portion of his property to them, and even witnesses are not wanting to support their claims. The rightful heirs, not knowing anything about it, naturally suspect the claim. The result is quarrel and litigation. Every Muslim is, therefore, enjoined to make a proper bequest at the time of his death that his property be divided among his heirs, i.e. parents, children, wives, etc., according to the Law of Islam, stating therein also the portion of any other individual who is not legally entitled to inherit from him but to whom he may wish to bequeath some of his wealth. Such a declaration made with the knowledge of his heirs and relatives is calculated to put a stop to much litigation. Such a provision is all the more essential in cases when the property or wealth is considerable.
The verse also throws out a hint that a Muslim should, before his death, bequeath a part of his property, not exceeding one-third, to such of his relations as have been debarred by Law from inheriting from him, for instance, distant but deserving relations, non-Muslim parents, non-Muslim children and so on. In such a case the remaining two-thirds will go to his lawful heirs. As to the restriction relating to one-third, it may be noted that the Holy Prophet has made it clear that no testator can bequeath more than one-third of his wealth to others than the lawful heirs. At least two-thirds of the property must go to the heirs (Bukhari).
Islam excludes non-Muslim relatives from the category of heirs to avoid complications. For instance, the near relatives of a deceased person might belong to a people who are at war with the Muslims or in open hostility toward them. In that case, to put money into their hands would be to damage the cause of Islam and injure one’s own interests. Non-Muslim relatives have, therefore, been excluded from lawful heirs so that they may not claim their part of the inheritance as of right. The Quran, however, instructs Muslims to leave to them a part of their property by a special will, so that, in case such property is not likely to be used against the interests of Islam, the former may in this way discharge the obligations they owe to the latter as kinsmen. Another reason for excluding non-Muslim relatives from the category of heirs is that generally non-Muslims do not in practice allow their Muslim relatives to succeed them as heirs. There is no sense, therefore, in allowing Muslim wealth to flow to non-Muslims where no such flow takes place the other way.
The verse serves yet another purpose. According to the Law of Islam, as generally accepted, the grandchild of a deceased Muslim is debarred from inheritance in case the former’s father has predeceased the latter. The Quran, therefore, directs that a portion of the property may be left by a special will by a dying Muslim for such of his relatives as are otherwise rightful heirs but cannot inherit owing to some of their near kinsmen having predeceased them.
The verse must not be understood to lend itself to the interpretation that the heirs whose portions have been definitely fixed by the Law, can be given more than their prescribed share. This is expressly forbidden by the Holy Prophet (Tirmidhi, ch. on Wasaya).
b
4:12, 13, 177; 5:107.
115
4:12,13经文注定了对所有应该继承死者产业的那些人的分配份额。这些经文被有些注经家误解为废止本节经文的, 实际上本节经文对遗产继承权制订了一条附加而且十分必要的规定, 这种遗产仅指有利于在法律上不该分得遗嘱的遗产的人, 或是出于慈善目的, 或由于战争状况的遗产。它不指有利于合法继承者的遗产, 关于那种遗产在4:12,13中业已述及。因此本节经文为制定遗赠规章的几节经文所废止的问题是不应发生的, 而且那几节经文也承认任何遗产的合法性。是以每一节经文都在自己的范围内起其一定的作用而且相辅相成。所以这样所规定的遗产, 根据萨德•彬•阿比•瓦卡斯 (سَعْد بِنْ اَبِیْ وَقَاص, Sa‘d bin Abi Waqqas) 的见解, 像穆圣在讲话中所提到的那样, 不应超过所留产业的三分之一 (Bukhari, Kitabul-Jana’iz); 这是立遗嘱者可以行使自由支配的处理权的最高限制, 不过这种遗产继承权只有那留下像خَيْر (Khair, 许多财富) 这词所表示的大笔财产者
才能使用。根据经文5:107, 一个将死的穆斯林可以规定遗产。一般的看法, 这节经文是在4:12, 13之后下降的; 这进一步支持了这个看法, 事实上, 本节没有被4:12, 13所代替。一切经文废止的说法是没有根据的。
2
خَیْر کے معنے مطلق مال کے بھی ہوتے ہیں اور بہت سے مال کے بھی۔ اس جگہ آیت کے سیاق و سباق سے ظاہر ہوتا ہے کہ مالِ کثیر مراد ہے۔
3
یہاں والدین اور اقربین کو وصیت کرنا کہا ہے حالانکہ اولاد قلبی تعلقات کے لحاظ سے نہایت اہم ہے اس سے معلوم ہوتا ہے کہ یہ مال کی تقسیم کی وصیت نہیں ورنہ اولاد کا ذکر ضرور ہوتا۔ بلکہ وصیت سے مراد عام تاکید ہے کہ احکامِ الٰہیہ کے مطابق جائیداد تقسیم کی جائے۔ اور اگر مال کا کوئی حصہ صدقہ کرنا ہو تو اس کا اظہار کردے۔ اس آیت پر بہت بحث ہوئی ہے۔ اکثر مفسرین اسے منسوخ قرار دیتے ہیں کیونکہ اس میں وصیت واجب لکھی ہے اور احکام وراثت کے نزول کے بعد رشتہ داروں کے نام وصیت جائز نہیں۔ اور جنہوں نے جائز قرار دی ہے ان کے نزدیک بھی واجب نہیں‘ مگر یہ غلطی اس وجہ سے لگی ہے کہ وصیت کے معنے
a
4:12, 13, 177; 5:107.
187
Important Words:
خیر (much wealth) means: (1) good as opposed to evil; (2) wealth acquired or collected by fair and praiseworthy means; (3) much wealth or abundance of wealth; (4) a thing that all desire; (5) welfare and good fortune (Mufradat); (6) the existence of a thing in abundance and perfection; (7) horses, etc. (Aqrab).
حقا (obligation) is derived from حق and has been used in the verse in the accusative case, having something understood before it, the complete expression being حق ذالك حقا (Kashshaf). الحق means: (1) equity or justice; (2) right mode of acting; (3) an obligation or a duty; (4) a debt or anything that is owed; (5) a thing suitable to the requirements of justice, truth, duty, etc. (Lane). See also 2:148.
Commentary:
As disputes about inheritance are a fruitful source of quarrels, murders, etc., the Quran here suitably turns from the subject of retaliation to that of inheritance.
The word used here for "wealth" is خیر and not مال which is the ordinary word used in this sense. خیر means, "wealth acquired by fair and praiseworthy means". Thus by substituting the word خیر for مال, the Quran has also emphasized the necessity of being very circumspect in the acquisition of wealth which should be acquired only by fair and lawful means. Incidentally, therefore, it has been hinted that it is not lawful for a Muslim to make a will with regard to property that has been acquired by unlawful means; for such wealth does not really belong to him.
In 4:12, 13 the Quran fixes the shares of all those persons who should succeed to a deceased person’s property, according to the Islamic law of inheritance, and these in the first instance include parents, children, and wife or husband. In the presence of this law, the injunction given in the verse under comment would, at first sight, appear to be uncalled-for and unnecessary. As a matter of fact, those who believe in the abrogation theory, have actually declared this verse to be abrogated by the ones referred to above. But they are clearly mistaken; for the verse under comment makes an additional and necessary provision in regard to inheritance. Not seldom there come forward claimants who allege that a deceased person had bequeathed such and such portion of his property to them, and even witnesses are not wanting to support their claims. The rightful heirs, not knowing anything about it, naturally suspect the claim. The result is quarrel and litigation. Every Muslim is, therefore, enjoined to make a proper bequest at the time of his death that his property be divided among his heirs, i.e. parents, children, wives, etc., according to the Law of Islam, stating therein also the portion of any other individual who is not legally entitled to inherit from him but to whom he may wish to bequeath some of his wealth. Such a declaration made with the knowledge of his heirs and relatives is calculated to put a stop to much litigation. Such a provision is all the more essential in cases when the property or wealth is considerable.
The verse also throws out a hint that a Muslim should, before his death, bequeath a part of his property, not exceeding one-third, to such of his relations as have been debarred by Law from inheriting from him, for instance, distant but deserving relations, non-Muslim parents, non-Muslim children and so on. In such a case the remaining two-thirds will go to his lawful heirs. As to the restriction relating to one-third, it may be noted that the Holy Prophet has made it clear that no testator can bequeath more than one-third of his wealth to others than the lawful heirs. At least two-thirds of the property must go to the heirs (Bukhari).
Islam excludes non-Muslim relatives from the category of heirs to avoid complications. For instance, the near relatives of a deceased person might belong to a people who are at war with the Muslims or in open hostility toward them. In that case, to put money into their hands would be to damage the cause of Islam and injure one’s own interests. Non-Muslim relatives have, therefore, been excluded from lawful heirs so that they may not claim their part of the inheritance as of right. The Quran, however, instructs Muslims to leave to them a part of their property by a special will, so that, in case such property is not likely to be used against the interests of Islam, the former may in this way discharge the obligations they owe to the latter as kinsmen. Another reason for excluding non-Muslim relatives from the category of heirs is that generally non-Muslims do not in practice allow their Muslim relatives to succeed them as heirs. There is no sense, therefore, in allowing Muslim wealth to flow to non-Muslims where no such flow takes place the other way.
The verse serves yet another purpose. According to the Law of Islam, as generally accepted, the grandchild of a deceased Muslim is debarred from inheritance in case the former’s father has predeceased the latter. The Quran, therefore, directs that a portion of the property may be left by a special will by a dying Muslim for such of his relatives as are otherwise rightful heirs but cannot inherit owing to some of their near kinsmen having predeceased them.
The verse must not be understood to lend itself to the interpretation that the heirs whose portions have been definitely fixed by the Law, can be given more than their prescribed share. This is expressly forbidden by the Holy Prophet (Tirmidhi, ch. on Wasaya).
a
4:12, 13, 177; 5:107.
205
Verses 4:12, 13 fix the shares of all those persons who should succeed to a deceased person’s property. These verses have been mistakenly understood by some Commentators to abrogate the verse under comment, which, in fact, lays down an additional and very necessary provision, and refers only to bequests made in favour of individuals not legally entitled to a share in the testator’s property, or for charitable purposes, or for war conditions. It does not refer to bequests made in favour of legal heirs which subject has been dealt with in 4:12, 13. There is no question, therefore, of the abrogation of this verse by those verses which lay down the rules of inheritance and also recognise the validity of any bequests that may have been made. Each operates in its own sphere and draws strength from the other. The bequests thus made, however, should not exceed one third of the property left as is mentioned in a saying of the Holy Prophet related by Sa‘d bin Abi Waqqas (Bukhari, Kitabul-Jana’iz); thi
فَمَنْ خَافَ مِن مُّوصٍ جَنَفًا أَوْ إِثْمًا فَأَصْلَحَ بَيْنَهُمْ فَلَآ إِثْمَ عَلَيْهِ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ
一个遗嘱可能遵照法定要求, 而也可能在它的某条款中是不公正的。例如, 假如某人留下很多继承者, 如果他出于施舍或其它合法的目的立下遗嘱, 花掉的数字高达足足有三分之一, 那么, 他就会给他们 (继承者) 带来困苦。或者, 立遗嘱者可能不公平地处理了可容许的三分之一之外的遗产, 不顾或忽略合法的要求。在这种情况下容许, 也的确值得在所有继承人与被偏袒的遗产承受人之间进行公平的调整。
یعنی وصیت کرنے والے اور ان رشتہ داروں کے درمیان جن کو نقصان پہنچانے یا نظر انداز کر دینے کا اس کا ارادہ ہو یا ان اشخاص میں جن کے حق میں وصیت ہے‘ باہمی سمجھوتے سے ان کو راضی کر دے کہ باوجود وصیت کے وہ ایک دوسرے کو اس کا حق ادا کر دیں۔ بعض دفعہ شریعت پر عمل کرنے کے باوجود وصیت کرنے کی صورت میں بعض نقصانات کا احتمال موجود ہوتا ہے۔ مثلاً اگر کوئی شخص ۳ /۱ کی وصیت کر دے مگر باقی وارث اتنے ہوں کہ بقیہ مال میں سے ان کو حصہ بہت کم ملتا ہو تو ایسی صورت میں اگر اصلاح کروادی جائے تو گناہ نہیں یعنی وصیت کرنے والے اور اس کے خاص محبوب یا خاص مبغوض میں صلح کرا دے۔
A will may comply with legal requirements and may yet be unfair in some of its provisions. For instance, if a person leaves a large number of heirs, it may entail a hardship on them if he wills away as much as the full one-third for charitable or other lawful purposes. Or, out of the permissible 1/3 the testator may have made unfair dispositions, neglecting or overlooking just claims. It would in such a case be permissible, indeed meritorious, to bring about a fair adjustment between the heirs and the legatees affected.
Important Words:
جنفا (partiality) is the infinitive noun from جنف. They say جنف عن الطریق meaning, he deviated from the right path. جنف فی وصیتهmeans, he acted wrongfully in his will. جانف اھله means, he kept away from his family out of anger and not for a just cause. تجانف لاثم means, he inclined towards sin. So جنف means: (1) inclining to sin, etc. (2) deviating from the right course; (3) acting unjustly or wrongfully; (4) keeping away from rightful things (Aqrab).
Commentary:
If someone should have reason to fear that the testator is showing undue favour to any particular person or party, or that he is acting contrary to Islamic Law, it would be no sin for him to bring about reconciliation between the parties concerned by removing the cause of displeasure or disagreement between the testator and his heirs and thereby having the will altered in accordance with the requirements of justice and Islamic Law. The words, it shall be no sin for him, do not mean that such pious intervention is simply an act of negative virtue. The expression has been used lest, in view of what has been said in the preceding verse regarding the sinfulness of the act of alteration in a will, some overcautious people should hold aloof even when they see an unjust inclination on the part of the testator. The verse thus really means that such an interference, far from being an act of sin, is an act of virtue which is sure to draw God’s mercy.
The concluding clause reminds the testator that God is Forgiving, so that if he mends his error, He will be pleased to forgive him. The declaration that God is Merciful, also serves as an inducement to other Muslims to intervene, if it is felt that the testator is unduly partial to one party, to the detriment of the other. In that case they should readily step in and set things right, for which God would give them an ample portion out of His mercy. Thus the word غفور (Most Forgiving) relates to such testators as return to the right course when reminded to do so, and the word رحیم (Merciful) relates to those persons who succeed in persuading the testator to revert to the path of rectitude and justice.
116
一个遗嘱可能遵照法定要求, 而也可能在它的某条款中是不公正的。例如, 假如某人留下很多继承者, 如果他出于施舍或其它合法的目的立下遗嘱, 花掉的数字高达足足有三分之一, 那么, 他就会给他们 (继承者) 带来困苦。或者, 立遗嘱者可能不公平地处理了可容许的三分之一之外的遗产, 不顾或忽略合法的要求。在这种情况下容许, 也的确值得在所有继承人与被偏袒的遗产承受人之间进行公平的调整。
2
یعنی وصیت کرنے والے اور ان رشتہ داروں کے درمیان جن کو نقصان پہنچانے یا نظر انداز کر دینے کا اس کا ارادہ ہو یا ان اشخاص میں جن کے حق میں وصیت ہے‘ باہمی سمجھوتے سے ان کو راضی کر دے کہ باوجود وصیت کے وہ ایک دوسرے کو اس کا حق ادا کر دیں۔ بعض دفعہ شریعت پر عمل کرنے کے باوجود وصیت کرنے کی صورت میں بعض نقصانات کا احتمال موجود ہوتا ہے۔ مثلاً اگر کوئی شخص ۳ /۱ کی وصیت کر دے مگر باقی وارث اتنے ہوں کہ بقیہ مال میں سے ان کو حصہ بہت کم ملتا ہو تو ایسی صورت میں اگر اصلاح کروادی جائے تو گناہ نہیں یعنی وصیت کرنے والے اور اس کے خاص محبوب یا خاص مبغوض میں صلح کرا دے۔
189
Important Words:
جنفا (partiality) is the infinitive noun from جنف. They say جنف عن الطریق meaning, he deviated from the right path. جنف فی وصیتهmeans, he acted wrongfully in his will. جانف اھله means, he kept away from his family out of anger and not for a just cause. تجانف لاثم means, he inclined towards sin. So جنف means: (1) inclining to sin, etc. (2) deviating from the right course; (3) acting unjustly or wrongfully; (4) keeping away from rightful things (Aqrab).
Commentary:
If someone should have reason to fear that the testator is showing undue favour to any particular person or party, or that he is acting contrary to Islamic Law, it would be no sin for him to bring about reconciliation between the parties concerned by removing the cause of displeasure or disagreement between the testator and his heirs and thereby having the will altered in accordance with the requirements of justice and Islamic Law. The words, it shall be no sin for him, do not mean that such pious intervention is simply an act of negative virtue. The expression has been used lest, in view of what has been said in the preceding verse regarding the sinfulness of the act of alteration in a will, some overcautious people should hold aloof even when they see an unjust inclination on the part of the testator. The verse thus really means that such an interference, far from being an act of sin, is an act of virtue which is sure to draw God’s mercy.
The concluding clause reminds the testator that God is Forgiving, so that if he mends his error, He will be pleased to forgive him. The declaration that God is Merciful, also serves as an inducement to other Muslims to intervene, if it is felt that the testator is unduly partial to one party, to the detriment of the other. In that case they should readily step in and set things right, for which God would give them an ample portion out of His mercy. Thus the word غفور (Most Forgiving) relates to such testators as return to the right course when reminded to do so, and the word رحیم (Merciful) relates to those persons who succeed in persuading the testator to revert to the path of rectitude and justice.
205B
A will may comply with legal requirements and may yet be unfair in some of its provisions. For instance, if a person leaves a large number of heirs, it may entail a hardship on them if he wills away as much as the full one-third for charitable or other lawful purposes. Or, out of the permissible 1/3 the testator may have made unfair dispositions, neglecting or overlooking just claims. It would in such a case be permissible, indeed meritorious, to bring about a fair adjustment between the heirs and the legatees affected.
وَٱلَّذِينَ يُتَوَفَّوْنَ مِنكُمْ وَيَذَرُونَ أَزْوَٰجًا وَصِيَّةً لِّأَزْوَٰجِهِم مَّتَٰعًا إِلَى ٱلْحَوْلِ غَيْرَ إِخْرَاجٍ ۚ فَإِنْ خَرَجْنَ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِى مَا فَعَلْنَ فِىٓ أَنفُسِهِنَّ مِن مَّعْرُوفٍ ۗ وَٱللَّهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ
وَصِیَّۃً مصدر ہے۔ اس کے پہلے یُوْصُوْنَ محذوف سمجھا جائے گا‘ یعنی وہ وصیت کر جائیں۔ مَتَاعًا دوسرا مصدر ہے۔ اس سے پہلے بھی اَنْ مَتِّعُوْھُنَّ محذوف ہے اور معنے یہ ہیں کہ یہ وصیت کر جائیں کہ بعد میں وہ لوگ جن کے ہاتھ میں وصیت کا اجرا ہے انہیں ایک سال تک فائدہ پہنچائیں۔ اس کے بعد غَیْرَ اِخْرَاجٍ کے الفاظ ہیں جو بدل ہیں متاع کا۔ پس معنے یہ ہوئے کہ فائدہ پہنچانے سے مراد ہماری یہ ہے کہ ان کو گھروں سے نہ نکالیں بلکہ باوجود اس کے کہ مکان کسی اور وارث کے حصہ میں آیا ہو بیویوں کو ایک سال تک اس میں رہنے کا حق حاصل رہے۔ اس کے یہ معنے نہیں کہ عورت خود بھی
مَعْرُوْف کے معنے قانون یا فطرت یا قومی رواج کے مطابق کے ہیں‘ یعنی جسے لوگ جانتے ہیں۔ اس جگہ اس کے معنے پسندیدہ کے اور بہتر کے ہیں۔ مطلب یہ ہے کہ خواہ عدت کے بعد عورتیں نکاح کریں خواہ اپنے والدین یا دوسرے رشتہ داروں کے ہاں چلی جائیں یا کوئی نوکری اختیار کریں تم پر کوئی اعتراض نہیں۔ اور اس حکم کے رو سے تمہیں نہیں چاہییٔ کہ انہیں روکو۔
2:235.
The period of waiting laid down for a widow in 2:235 is four months and ten days in which time she can, as of right, claim residence and maintenance from the heirs of her deceased husband. The period of one year mentioned here is only a concession or a favour for a widow in addition to her right of residence and maintenance mentioned in 2:235. The concession forms no part of her share in the inheritance, nor is it an obligatory injunction.
2:235.
Commentary:
The middle verses, which came in like the middle Prayer, having ended, the Quran reverts to the original subject of conjugal relations. The verse under comment is erroneously believed by some to have been abrogated by 2:235 and 4:13. Apart from the fact that the abrogation theory is based on lack of the knowledge of true teaching of the Quran, there is nothing in the verses referred to above which contradicts the provision contained in the present verse. The period of waiting laid down for a widow in 2:235 is four months and ten days in which time she can, as of right, claim residence and maintenance from the heirs of her deceased husband. The period of one year mentioned in the present verse has nothing to do with the above-mentioned period of waiting, as the words, but if they themselves go out, there shall be no blame upon you; clearly show. The present verse only contains a concession or a favour for a widow in addition to her right of residence and maintenance mentioned in 2:235. One year is about the time conveniently required by a widow for making suitable arrangements about her future. It is also the requisite time for a pregnant widow to be delivered of the child and relieved of the encumbrances attending thereto. Nor has this verse anything to do with the share of a widow in the property left by her husband as stated in 4:13. The concession about residence and maintenance for one year mentioned in the present verse forms no part of her share in the inheritance. The verse contains no obligatory injunction, but only an additional exhortation to the heirs of the deceased person to show special kindness to the widow for a period of one year, just as the following verse embodies an identical exhortation in favour of a divorced woman.
d
2:235.
190
2:235经文中为寡妇所制定的四个月零十天的待婚期中, 她有权要求她亡夫的那些继承人给她住所和生活费。这里谈的一年, 只是在2:235节经文中所提到她的住所和生活费权利以外为期一年的同样权利是特殊的优惠。
3
وَصِیَّۃً مصدر ہے۔ اس کے پہلے یُوْصُوْنَ محذوف سمجھا جائے گا‘ یعنی وہ وصیت کر جائیں۔ مَتَاعًا دوسرا مصدر ہے۔ اس سے پہلے بھی اَنْ مَتِّعُوْھُنَّ محذوف ہے اور معنے یہ ہیں کہ یہ وصیت کر جائیں کہ بعد میں وہ لوگ جن کے ہاتھ میں وصیت کا اجرا ہے انہیں ایک سال تک فائدہ پہنچائیں۔ اس کے بعد غَیْرَ اِخْرَاجٍ کے الفاظ ہیں جو بدل ہیں متاع کا۔ پس معنے یہ ہوئے کہ فائدہ پہنچانے سے مراد ہماری یہ ہے کہ ان کو گھروں سے نہ نکالیں بلکہ باوجود اس کے کہ مکان کسی اور وارث کے حصہ میں آیا ہو بیویوں کو ایک سال تک اس میں رہنے کا حق حاصل رہے۔ اس کے یہ معنے نہیں کہ عورت خود بھی
4
مَعْرُوْف کے معنے قانون یا فطرت یا قومی رواج کے مطابق کے ہیں‘ یعنی جسے لوگ جانتے ہیں۔ اس جگہ اس کے معنے پسندیدہ کے اور بہتر کے ہیں۔ مطلب یہ ہے کہ خواہ عدت کے بعد عورتیں نکاح کریں خواہ اپنے والدین یا دوسرے رشتہ داروں کے ہاں چلی جائیں یا کوئی نوکری اختیار کریں تم پر کوئی اعتراض نہیں۔ اور اس حکم کے رو سے تمہیں نہیں چاہییٔ کہ انہیں روکو۔
a
2:235.
247
Commentary:
The middle verses, which came in like the middle Prayer, having ended, the Quran reverts to the original subject of conjugal relations. The verse under comment is erroneously believed by some to have been abrogated by 2:235 and 4:13. Apart from the fact that the abrogation theory is based on lack of the knowledge of true teaching of the Quran, there is nothing in the verses referred to above which contradicts the provision contained in the present verse. The period of waiting laid down for a widow in 2:235 is four months and ten days in which time she can, as of right, claim residence and maintenance from the heirs of her deceased husband. The period of one year mentioned in the present verse has nothing to do with the above-mentioned period of waiting, as the words, but if they themselves go out, there shall be no blame upon you; clearly show. The present verse only contains a concession or a favour for a widow in addition to her right of residence and maintenance mentioned in 2:235. One year is about the time conveniently required by a widow for making suitable arrangements about her future. It is also the requisite time for a pregnant widow to be delivered of the child and relieved of the encumbrances attending thereto. Nor has this verse anything to do with the share of a widow in the property left by her husband as stated in 4:13. The concession about residence and maintenance for one year mentioned in the present verse forms no part of her share in the inheritance. The verse contains no obligatory injunction, but only an additional exhortation to the heirs of the deceased person to show special kindness to the widow for a period of one year, just as the following verse embodies an identical exhortation in favour of a divorced woman.
a
2:235.
298
The period of waiting laid down for a widow in 2:235 is four months and ten days in which time she can, as of right, claim residence and maintenance from the heirs of her deceased husband. The period of one year mentioned here is only a concession or a favour for a widow in addition to her right of residence and maintenance mentioned in 2:235. The concession forms no part of her share in the inheritance, nor is it an obligatory injunction.
يُوصِيكُمُ ٱللَّهُ فِىٓ أَوْلَٰدِكُمْ ۖ لِلذَّكَرِ مِثْلُ حَظِّ ٱلْأُنثَيَيْنِ ۚ فَإِن كُنَّ نِسَآءً فَوْقَ ٱثْنَتَيْنِ فَلَهُنَّ ثُلُثَا مَا تَرَكَ ۖ وَإِن كَانَتْ وَٰحِدَةً فَلَهَا ٱلنِّصْفُ ۚ وَلِأَبَوَيْهِ لِكُلِّ وَٰحِدٍ مِّنْهُمَا ٱلسُّدُسُ مِمَّا تَرَكَ إِن كَانَ لَهُۥ وَلَدٌ ۚ فَإِن لَّمْ يَكُن لَّهُۥ وَلَدٌ وَوَرِثَهُۥٓ أَبَوَاهُ فَلِأُمِّهِ ٱلثُّلُثُ ۚ فَإِن كَانَ لَهُۥٓ إِخْوَةٌ فَلِأُمِّهِ ٱلسُّدُسُ ۚ مِنۢ بَعْدِ وَصِيَّةٍ يُوصِى بِهَآ أَوْ دَيْنٍ ۗ ءَابَآؤُكُمْ وَأَبْنَآؤُكُمْ لَا تَدْرُونَ أَيُّهُمْ أَقْرَبُ لَكُمْ نَفْعًا ۚ فَرِيضَةً مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ ۗ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ عَلِيمًا حَكِيمًا
4:177.
这节经文规定一个死者的近亲不论男女或出生的先后应得他遗产的份额。儿女、双亲、丈夫与妻子是主要继承人, 如果他们活着, 不论在什么情况下应得自己的一份, 其他有名份的亲戚只能在特殊情况下得到他们的一份。男的比女的应得的份额要多一倍, 因为他们负责维持家计 (مَعَانِی, Ma‘ani, ii.P.32)。这节经文开始时制定关于子女所得份额的比例的一般法则。一个儿子应得等于两个女儿的份额。因此, 凡是儿子和女儿都有的情况下, 就按这一法则办事。如果只有女儿而没有儿子, 经文规定把遗产的三分之二分给两个以上的女儿; 把二分之一给独生女。如果是两个女儿那应该分得多少, 经文没明确说明。但此句中用一个连接词 ف (fa, 但是), “但是如果有两个以上的女儿”, 这清楚地指出两个女儿已包括在前面 “两个女儿” 这几个字中。而且两个女人应得的份数可以在这节经文开始时所说的男女应得份数的比例中推想出来。按照那个比例, 一个儿子可得两个女儿的份数。因此, 如果有一个儿子和一个女儿, 那个儿子可得三分之二的遗产。可是, 由于一个儿子可得等于 “两个女儿” 的份额, 因此没有儿子而有两个女儿的情况下可得三分之二, 即等于经文明确说明给三个女儿相同的份额。因此, 这节经文的结构表明, 如果死者有两个女儿而没有儿子, 她们像有三个女儿的情况那样也可得三分之二的遗产。假如 «古兰经» 的这一句并不指两个女儿应得的份额, 那么, 这句用字就应该像这样, “一个男人应得一个女人两倍的份额”, 而不是像现在那样的句子。关于双亲的份额经文中谈了三种情况: (1) 如果一个人死了留下一个或几个儿女, 那么, 父母亲中每个人应得六分之一。(2) 如果一个人死后无儿女, 他的父母是惟一继承人 (死者没有妻子或丈夫), 那么, 母亲应得三分之一的财产, 其馀的三分之二归父亲所有。(3) 还有第三种情况, 实际上是第二种情况的例外。一个人死后无嗣, 他的父母亲是惟一的继承人, 但他有兄弟姐妹, 那么, 虽然他的兄弟姐妹不能继承他的财产, 但他们的存在会影响他父母亲的份额, 因为, 在这种情况下, 母亲将得六分之一 (不是像第二种情况那样得三份之一), 其余的六分之五归父亲所有。父亲在这种情况下被授予较大的份额的理由是, 父亲还要负担死者兄弟姐妹的生活。关于继承权的这一论题, 在随后的经文中继续谈下去。
4:177.
Father and mother both (Lane).
Walad means, (1) a child, son, daughter or a young one; (2) children, sons, daughters, offspring or young ones. The word is used both as singular and plural, feminine and masculine (Lane).
The verse prescribes suitable shares for all near relatives in the property of a deceased person without distinction of sex or order of birth. Children, parents, husbands and wives are the principal heirs who, if alive, get suitable shares in all circumstances, other relations having a title only in special cases. A male has been given double the share of a female because he has been made responsible for the maintenance of his family (Ma‘ani, ii. p.32). The verse begins by laying down a general rule as to the proportion of shares between sons and daughters. A son is to have as much as two daughters. So, wherever there are both sons and daughters, this rule will come in force. When, however, there are only daughters and no son, the verse allots two- thirds of the legacy to the daughters, if there are more than two of them; and one-half if there is only one. The share of daughters in case there are two is not expressly stated. But the use of the conjunction fa’ (but) in the clause, but if there be
4:177.
Important Words:
ابویه (his parents) is really ابوینه, the letter ن being dropped owing to اضافة. The word ابوین is the genitive of ابوان which is the dual form of اب which is originally ابو meaning, father or grandfather or any male ancestor or paternal uncle. ابوانliterally meaning "two fathers" signifies "father and mother" (Lane).
ولد (child) is very general in its significance meaning: (1) a child, son, daughter or a young one; (2) children, sons, daughters, offspring or young ones. Thus the word is used both as singular and plural, feminine and masculine (Lane).
Commentary:
This and the succeeding verse combined with the last verse of the Surah give the Islamic law of inheritance in a nutshell.
Islam prescribes suitable shares for all near relatives in the property of a deceased person without distinction of sex or order of birth. Children, parents, husbands and wives are the principal heirs who, if alive, get suitable shares in all circumstances, other relations having a title only in special cases. A male has been given double the share of a female because he has been made responsible for the maintenance of the family (Ma‘ani, vol. ii, p. 32).
The Islamic law of inheritance is perfect and it safeguards against all evils that result from laws prescribed by, or in vogue in, other faiths and communities. It aims at a fair distribution of wealth and equal chances of progress for all. To give the property of a deceased parent to the firstborn son only or to exclude the female members from inheritance or to disinherit parents in the presence of children has proved a veritable curse for society in many ways—moral, social and economic. The Islamic law of inheritance, reinforced by the system of Zakah (prescribed alms) and by the injunction prohibiting the giving and taking of interest, provides a golden mean between capitalism and communism—the two evil extremes of the present-day economic system.
The verse begins by laying down a general rule as to the proportion of shares between sons and daughters. A son is to have as much as two daughters. So wherever there are both sons and daughters, this rule will come in force. When, however, there are only daughters and no son, the verse allots two-thirds of the legacy to the daughters if there are more than two of them, and one-half if there is only one. The share of daughters, in case there are two, is not expressly stated. But the use of the conjunction فا (but) in the clause, but if there be females only, numbering more than two, clearly points to the fact that the share of two females has been referred to in the preceding words "two females". Moreover, the share of two females can be gathered from what has already been said in the beginning of the verse about the ratio between the shares of the males and the females. According to that ratio, a son is to get as much as two daughters. Thus, if there be one son and one daughter, the son will have two-thirds. But as the share of one son has been made equal to that of "two daughters", the latter, in case there is no son, will have two-thirds, viz., the same share as has been expressly fixed for three daughters. Thus, the very construction of the verse shows that if there be two daughters and no son, they too, as in the case of three daughters, will get two-thirds. If it had not been the object of the Quran to point to the share of two daughters in the clause, it would have been something like this, "a male shall have twice as much as a female", and not as it is now.
The above meaning is corroborated by a saying of the Holy Prophet himself. It is related that when a Companion of the Holy Prophet named Sa‘d bin Rabi‘ah died in the Battle of Uhud, leaving two daughters and one widow, his brother took away the whole property, leaving nothing for the two daughters. Thereupon the widow of Sa‘d went to the Holy Prophet and said, "Here are the two daughters of Sa‘d. Their uncle has taken the whole of his property and has left nothing for them." The Holy Prophet told her to wait till God should decide the matter. Then this verse was revealed and the Prophet called upon Sa‘d’s brother to give two-thirds of Sa‘d’s property to his two daughters and one-eighth to their mother and keep the rest for himself (Tirmidhi & Dawud).
The verse speaks of three cases as regards the share of the parents: (1) If a person dies leaving one or more children, then each of his parents shall have one-sixth; (2) If a person dies issueless and his parents are the sole heirs (there being no wife or husband of the deceased person), then the mother will have one-third of the property and the remaining two-thirds will go to the father; (3) There is a third case, which is really an exception to the second case. A man dies without issue and his parents are his sole heirs, but he has brothers or sisters. Then, although his brother or sisters will not inherit from him, yet their presence will affect the share of the parents, for, in this case, the mother will have one-sixth (instead of one-third, as in the second case) and the remaining five-sixths will go to the father. The reason why the father is awarded a larger share in this case is that the father has also to support the brothers or sisters of the deceased. The subject of inheritance is continued in the succeeding verse.
b
4:177.
314
这节经文规定一个死者的近亲不论男女或出生的先后应得他遗产的份额。儿女、双亲、丈夫与妻子是主要继承人, 如果他们活着, 不论在什么情况下应得自己的一份, 其他有名份的亲戚只能在特殊情况下得到他们的一份。男的比女的应得的份额要多一倍, 因为他们负责维持家计 (مَعَانِی, Ma‘ani, ii.P.32)。这节经文开始时制定关于子女所得份额的比例的一般法则。一个儿子应得等于两个女儿的份额。因此, 凡是儿子和女儿都有的情况下, 就按这一法则办事。如果只有女儿而没有儿子, 经文规定把遗产的三分之二分给两个以上的女儿; 把二分之一给独生女。如果是两个女儿那应该分得多少, 经文没明确说明。但此句中用一个连接词 ف (fa, 但是), “但是如果有两个以上的女儿”, 这清楚地指出两个女儿已包括在前面 “两个女儿” 这几个字中。而且两个女人应得的份数可以在这节经文开始时所说的男女应得份数的比例中推想出来。按照那个比例, 一个儿子可得两个女儿的份数。因此, 如果有一个儿子和一个女儿, 那个儿子可得三分之二的遗产。可是, 由于一个儿子可得等于 “两个女儿” 的份额, 因此没有儿子而有两个女儿的情况下可得三分之二, 即等于经文明确说明给三个女儿相同的份额。因此, 这节经文的结构表明, 如果死者有两个女儿而没有儿子, 她们像有三个女儿的情况那样也可得三分之二的遗产。假如 «古兰经» 的这一句并不指两个女儿应得的份额, 那么, 这句用字就应该像这样, “一个男人应得一个女人两倍的份额”, 而不是像现在那样的句子。关于双亲的份额经文中谈了三种情况: (1) 如果一个人死了留下一个或几个儿女, 那么, 父母亲中每个人应得六分之一。(2) 如果一个人死后无儿女, 他的父母是惟一继承人 (死者没有妻子或丈夫), 那么, 母亲应得三分之一的财产, 其馀的三分之二归父亲所有。(3) 还有第三种情况, 实际上是第二种情况的例外。一个人死后无嗣, 他的父母亲是惟一的继承人, 但他有兄弟姐妹, 那么, 虽然他的兄弟姐妹不能继承他的财产, 但他们的存在会影响他父母亲的份额, 因为, 在这种情况下, 母亲将得六分之一 (不是像第二种情况那样得三份之一), 其余的六分之五归父亲所有。父亲在这种情况下被授予较大的份额的理由是, 父亲还要负担死者兄弟姐妹的生活。关于继承权的这一论题, 在随后的经文中继续谈下去。
b
4:177.
494
Important Words:
ابویه (his parents) is really ابوینه, the letter ن being dropped owing to اضافة. The word ابوین is the genitive of ابوان which is the dual form of اب which is originally ابو meaning, father or grandfather or any male ancestor or paternal uncle. ابوانliterally meaning "two fathers" signifies "father and mother" (Lane).
ولد (child) is very general in its significance meaning: (1) a child, son, daughter or a young one; (2) children, sons, daughters, offspring or young ones. Thus the word is used both as singular and plural, feminine and masculine (Lane).
Commentary:
This and the succeeding verse combined with the last verse of the Surah give the Islamic law of inheritance in a nutshell.
Islam prescribes suitable shares for all near relatives in the property of a deceased person without distinction of sex or order of birth. Children, parents, husbands and wives are the principal heirs who, if alive, get suitable shares in all circumstances, other relations having a title only in special cases. A male has been given double the share of a female because he has been made responsible for the maintenance of the family (Ma‘ani, vol. ii, p. 32).
The Islamic law of inheritance is perfect and it safeguards against all evils that result from laws prescribed by, or in vogue in, other faiths and communities. It aims at a fair distribution of wealth and equal chances of progress for all. To give the property of a deceased parent to the firstborn son only or to exclude the female members from inheritance or to disinherit parents in the presence of children has proved a veritable curse for society in many ways—moral, social and economic. The Islamic law of inheritance, reinforced by the system of Zakah (prescribed alms) and by the injunction prohibiting the giving and taking of interest, provides a golden mean between capitalism and communism—the two evil extremes of the present-day economic system.
The verse begins by laying down a general rule as to the proportion of shares between sons and daughters. A son is to have as much as two daughters. So wherever there are both sons and daughters, this rule will come in force. When, however, there are only daughters and no son, the verse allots two-thirds of the legacy to the daughters if there are more than two of them, and one-half if there is only one. The share of daughters, in case there are two, is not expressly stated. But the use of the conjunction فا (but) in the clause, but if there be females only, numbering more than two, clearly points to the fact that the share of two females has been referred to in the preceding words "two females". Moreover, the share of two females can be gathered from what has already been said in the beginning of the verse about the ratio between the shares of the males and the females. According to that ratio, a son is to get as much as two daughters. Thus, if there be one son and one daughter, the son will have two-thirds. But as the share of one son has been made equal to that of "two daughters", the latter, in case there is no son, will have two-thirds, viz., the same share as has been expressly fixed for three daughters. Thus, the very construction of the verse shows that if there be two daughters and no son, they too, as in the case of three daughters, will get two-thirds. If it had not been the object of the Quran to point to the share of two daughters in the clause, it would have been something like this, "a male shall have twice as much as a female", and not as it is now.
The above meaning is corroborated by a saying of the Holy Prophet himself. It is related that when a Companion of the Holy Prophet named Sa‘d bin Rabi‘ah died in the Battle of Uhud, leaving two daughters and one widow, his brother took away the whole property, leaving nothing for the two daughters. Thereupon the widow of Sa‘d went to the Holy Prophet and said, "Here are the two daughters of Sa‘d. Their uncle has taken the whole of his property and has left nothing for them." The Holy Prophet told her to wait till God should decide the matter. Then this verse was revealed and the Prophet called upon Sa‘d’s brother to give two-thirds of Sa‘d’s property to his two daughters and one-eighth to their mother and keep the rest for himself (Tirmidhi & Dawud).
The verse speaks of three cases as regards the share of the parents: (1) If a person dies leaving one or more children, then each of his parents shall have one-sixth; (2) If a person dies issueless and his parents are the sole heirs (there being no wife or husband of the deceased person), then the mother will have one-third of the property and the remaining two-thirds will go to the father; (3) There is a third case, which is really an exception to the second case. A man dies without issue and his parents are his sole heirs, but he has brothers or sisters. Then, although his brother or sisters will not inherit from him, yet their presence will affect the share of the parents, for, in this case, the mother will have one-sixth (instead of one-third, as in the second case) and the remaining five-sixths will go to the father. The reason why the father is awarded a larger share in this case is that the father has also to support the brothers or sisters of the deceased. The subject of inheritance is continued in the succeeding verse.
b
4:177.
573
Father and mother both (Lane).
574
Walad means, (1) a child, son, daughter or a young one; (2) children, sons, daughters, offspring or young ones. The word is used both as singular and plural, feminine and masculine (Lane).
574A
The verse prescribes suitable shares for all near relatives in the property of a deceased person without distinction of sex or order of birth. Children, parents, husbands and wives are the principal heirs who, if alive, get suitable shares in all circumstances, other relations having a title only in special cases. A male has been given double the share of a female because he has been made responsible for the maintenance of his family (Ma‘ani, ii. p.32). The verse begins by laying down a general rule as to the proportion of shares between sons and daughters. A son is to have as much as two daughters. So, wherever there are both sons and daughters, this rule will come in force. When, however, there are only daughters and no son, the verse allots two- thirds of the legacy to the daughters, if there are more than two of them; and one-half if there is only one. The share of daughters in case there are two is not expressly stated. But the use of the conjunction fa’ (but) in the clause, but if there be
۞ وَلَكُمْ نِصْفُ مَا تَرَكَ أَزْوَٰجُكُمْ إِن لَّمْ يَكُن لَّهُنَّ وَلَدٌ ۚ فَإِن كَانَ لَهُنَّ وَلَدٌ فَلَكُمُ ٱلرُّبُعُ مِمَّا تَرَكْنَ ۚ مِنۢ بَعْدِ وَصِيَّةٍ يُوصِينَ بِهَآ أَوْ دَيْنٍ ۚ وَلَهُنَّ ٱلرُّبُعُ مِمَّا تَرَكْتُمْ إِن لَّمْ يَكُن لَّكُمْ وَلَدٌ ۚ فَإِن كَانَ لَكُمْ وَلَدٌ فَلَهُنَّ ٱلثُّمُنُ مِمَّا تَرَكْتُم ۚ مِّنۢ بَعْدِ وَصِيَّةٍ تُوصُونَ بِهَآ أَوْ دَيْنٍ ۗ وَإِن كَانَ رَجُلٌ يُورَثُ كَلَٰلَةً أَوِ ٱمْرَأَةٌ وَلَهُۥٓ أَخٌ أَوْ أُخْتٌ فَلِكُلِّ وَٰحِدٍ مِّنْهُمَا ٱلسُّدُسُ ۚ فَإِن كَانُوٓا۟ أَكْثَرَ مِن ذَٰلِكَ فَهُمْ شُرَكَآءُ فِى ٱلثُّلُثِ ۚ مِنۢ بَعْدِ وَصِيَّةٍ يُوصَىٰ بِهَآ أَوْ دَيْنٍ غَيْرَ مُضَآرٍّ ۚ وَصِيَّةً مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ ۗ وَٱللَّهُ عَلِيمٌ حَلِيمٌ
4:177.
كَلَالَةْ (Kalalah) 是 (1) 一个身后没有父母, 也没有子女的人; (2) 一个既没有父亲, 也没有儿子的人。根据伊本•阿巴斯的解释, 他是一个没有儿子的人, 不管他的父亲是否活着。因此这里是该词的第三个词义 (Lane & مُفْرَدَات, Mufradat) Kalalah 的兄弟姐妹归三类: 第一类, 真正的兄弟姐妹--------同父母的子女 (这类兄弟姐妹从法律方面说称之为 اَعْيَانِی --------A‘yani); 第二类, 单属父亲一方的兄弟姐妹, 这类兄弟姐妹 (法律上称之为 عَلَّاتِی --------‘Allati); 第三类, 单属母亲一方的兄弟姐妹, 他 (她) 们的父亲与死者的父亲不是同一父亲 (这类兄弟姐妹法律上称之为 اَخْيَافِی --------Akhyafi)。在本节经文中所列举的指令正是属于上述最后一类;关于前两类兄弟姐妹的法律将在本章的最后一节经文中提到。分配给上述最后一类兄弟姐妹的份额比分配给前二类兄弟姐妹的份额要少, 理由是这一类兄弟姐妹单属母亲一方, 而另两类兄弟姐妹则属于与死者同一父亲的子女。在作为 كَلَالَةْ (Kalalah) 死去的人的财产中, 兄弟姐妹享有相等的分配份额, 在此情况下, 通常不按二比一之比例。
“不要立意损害任何人” 这句话很重要。意思是偿还债务不应由于分配遗产而受到损害。换句话说, 在分配遗产之前要先偿还债务。
کلالہ کے جن بہن بھائیوں کے وارث ہونے کی صورت بیان کی گئی ہے‘ وہ بہن بھائی ہیں جو ماں کی طرف سے ہوں۔
4:177.
Kalalah is (1) a person who leaves behind neither parent nor child, male or female; (2) a person who leaves behind neither father nor son. According to Ibn-e-‘Abbas he is a person who leaves no son irrespective of the fact whether his father is living or not. This would thus be the third meaning of the word (Lane & Mufradat). The brothers and sisters of a Kalalah fall under three heads: first, real brothers or sisters—offspring of the same parents (such brothers or sisters are technically known as A‘yani): secondly, brothers and sisters on the side of the father only (these are technically known as ‘Allati); thirdly, brothers and sisters on the side of the mother only, their father being not the same as that of the deceased (such brothers and sisters are technically called Akhyafi). It is to the last mentioned class that the commandment given in the present verse pertains; the law with regard to the first two classes of brothers and sisters having been given i
The words. "without intent to cause injury to any one" are important. They mean that the payment of debts should not suffer by the payment of bequests. In other words, debts are to be paid prior to the payment of bequests.
4:177.
Important Words:
کلالة (one who has neither parent nor child) is derived from کل i.e. he was or became fatigued, tired or wearied and could proceed no further; he was or became one having no child and no parent, the latter meaning being based on the former, as a person having no child or parent becomes, as it were, too fatigued for the racial march. کلالة is (1) a person who leaves behind neither father nor child, male or female; or (2) a person who leaves behind neither father nor son. According to Ibn ‘Abbas, کلالة is a person who leaves no son irrespective of the fact whether his father is living or not. This would thus be the third meaning of کلالة (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat).
Commentary:
The first part of this verse determines the share of the husband and the wife in inheritance and needs no comment. The latter part deals with the case of a Kalalah, i.e. one who leaves neither parent nor child and whose property is inherited by his or her brother and sister. Now, if there is only one brother and one sister, each of them will get one-sixth. But if they are more than that, they will be sharers in one-third.
It should, however, be noted that in this respect brothers and sisters fall under three heads; firstly, real brothers or sisters, offspring of the same parents (such brothers or sisters are technically known as اعیانی a‘yani); secondly, brothers and sisters on the side of the father only (these are technically known as علاتی ‘allati); thirdly, brothers and sisters on the side of the mother only, their father being not the same as that of the deceased (such brothers and sisters being technically called اخیافی akhyafi). It is to the last-mentioned class that the commandment given in the present verse pertains; the law with regard to the first two classes of brothers and sisters being given in the last verse of this Surah.
The reader will further note that the shares allotted to the brothers and sisters of the last-mentioned class are smaller than those allotted to the brothers and sisters of the first two classes, the reason being that the brothers and sisters of this class are on the side of the mother only, while the brothers and the sisters of the other two classes are the children of the same father as the deceased.
It is also noteworthy that in the property of a person who dies as a Kalalah, as mentioned in the present verse, both brothers and sisters have equal shares, the usual ratio of two to one not being observed in their case.
The words, "without prejudice to the debt", are important. They mean that the payment of debts should not suffer by the payment of bequests. In other words, debts are to be paid prior to the payment of bequests. It was in compliance with this Quranic injunction that the Holy Prophet used to have the debts paid before the payment of bequests. The rights of other people must be safeguarded before any bequest made by the deceased is complied with. So strict was the Holy Prophet in these matters that he refused to perform the funeral service of the man whose debts were likely to remain unpaid.
It may incidentally be noted here that heirs are divided into two main groups:
1. ذووالفرائض (Dhawul-Fara’id), i.e. persons to whom Islam allots a fixed and definite share (1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 2/3, 1/3 or 1/6), or in the estate of a deceased person.
2. عصبات (‘Asabat), i.e. the heirs who receive the residue after the Dhawul-Fara’id have received their allotted shares.
It is, however, not necessary that a member of the first group should always remain a Dhul-Faridah. In certain cases, he may be both a Dhul-Faridah (sharer) and an ‘Asaba (residuary) and in other cases he may be simply an ‘Asaba.
The Dhawul-Fara’id (sharers) are 12 in number, four males and eight females. The males are: 1. father, 2. paternal grandfather, 3. husband and 4. half-brother on the maternal side. The females are: (1) daughter, (2) son’s daughter, (3) mother, (4) wife, (5) full sister, (6) half-sister on paternal side, (7) half-sister on maternal side, and (8) grandmother whether paternal or maternal.
The ‘Asabat (residuaries) are of four kinds: (1) ascendants of the deceased, i.e. father, paternal grandfather, etc. (2) descendants of the deceased, i.e. son, son’s son, etc. (3) descendants of the father of the deceased, i.e. full brother, brother’s son, etc. (4) descendants of the grandfather, i.e. full paternal uncle, paternal uncle’s son, etc.
a
4:177.
315
كَلَالَةْ (Kalalah) 是 (1) 一个身后没有父母, 也没有子女的人; (2) 一个既没有父亲, 也没有儿子的人。根据伊本•阿巴斯的解释, 他是一个没有儿子的人, 不管他的父亲是否活着。因此这里是该词的第三个词义 (Lane & مُفْرَدَات, Mufradat) Kalalah 的兄弟姐妹归三类: 第一类, 真正的兄弟姐妹--------同父母的子女 (这类兄弟姐妹从法律方面说称之为 اَعْيَانِی --------A‘yani); 第二类, 单属父亲一方的兄弟姐妹, 这类兄弟姐妹 (法律上称之为 عَلَّاتِی --------‘Allati); 第三类, 单属母亲一方的兄弟姐妹, 他 (她) 们的父亲与死者的父亲不是同一父亲 (这类兄弟姐妹法律上称之为 اَخْيَافِی --------Akhyafi)。在本节经文中所列举的指令正是属于上述最后一类;关于前两类兄弟姐妹的法律将在本章的最后一节经文中提到。分配给上述最后一类兄弟姐妹的份额比分配给前二类兄弟姐妹的份额要少, 理由是这一类兄弟姐妹单属母亲一方, 而另两类兄弟姐妹则属于与死者同一父亲的子女。在作为 كَلَالَةْ (Kalalah) 死去的人的财产中, 兄弟姐妹享有相等的分配份额, 在此情况下, 通常不按二比一之比例。
316
“不要立意损害任何人” 这句话很重要。意思是偿还债务不应由于分配遗产而受到损害。换句话说, 在分配遗产之前要先偿还债务。
1
کلالہ کے جن بہن بھائیوں کے وارث ہونے کی صورت بیان کی گئی ہے‘ وہ بہن بھائی ہیں جو ماں کی طرف سے ہوں۔
a
4:177.
495
Important Words:
کلالة (one who has neither parent nor child) is derived from کل i.e. he was or became fatigued, tired or wearied and could proceed no further; he was or became one having no child and no parent, the latter meaning being based on the former, as a person having no child or parent becomes, as it were, too fatigued for the racial march. کلالة is (1) a person who leaves behind neither father nor child, male or female; or (2) a person who leaves behind neither father nor son. According to Ibn ‘Abbas, کلالة is a person who leaves no son irrespective of the fact whether his father is living or not. This would thus be the third meaning of کلالة (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat).
Commentary:
The first part of this verse determines the share of the husband and the wife in inheritance and needs no comment. The latter part deals with the case of a Kalalah, i.e. one who leaves neither parent nor child and whose property is inherited by his or her brother and sister. Now, if there is only one brother and one sister, each of them will get one-sixth. But if they are more than that, they will be sharers in one-third.
It should, however, be noted that in this respect brothers and sisters fall under three heads; firstly, real brothers or sisters, offspring of the same parents (such brothers or sisters are technically known as اعیانی a‘yani); secondly, brothers and sisters on the side of the father only (these are technically known as علاتی ‘allati); thirdly, brothers and sisters on the side of the mother only, their father being not the same as that of the deceased (such brothers and sisters being technically called اخیافی akhyafi). It is to the last-mentioned class that the commandment given in the present verse pertains; the law with regard to the first two classes of brothers and sisters being given in the last verse of this Surah.
The reader will further note that the shares allotted to the brothers and sisters of the last-mentioned class are smaller than those allotted to the brothers and sisters of the first two classes, the reason being that the brothers and sisters of this class are on the side of the mother only, while the brothers and the sisters of the other two classes are the children of the same father as the deceased.
It is also noteworthy that in the property of a person who dies as a Kalalah, as mentioned in the present verse, both brothers and sisters have equal shares, the usual ratio of two to one not being observed in their case.
The words, "without prejudice to the debt", are important. They mean that the payment of debts should not suffer by the payment of bequests. In other words, debts are to be paid prior to the payment of bequests. It was in compliance with this Quranic injunction that the Holy Prophet used to have the debts paid before the payment of bequests. The rights of other people must be safeguarded before any bequest made by the deceased is complied with. So strict was the Holy Prophet in these matters that he refused to perform the funeral service of the man whose debts were likely to remain unpaid.
It may incidentally be noted here that heirs are divided into two main groups:
1. ذووالفرائض (Dhawul-Fara’id), i.e. persons to whom Islam allots a fixed and definite share (1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 2/3, 1/3 or 1/6), or in the estate of a deceased person.
2. عصبات (‘Asabat), i.e. the heirs who receive the residue after the Dhawul-Fara’id have received their allotted shares.
It is, however, not necessary that a member of the first group should always remain a Dhul-Faridah. In certain cases, he may be both a Dhul-Faridah (sharer) and an ‘Asaba (residuary) and in other cases he may be simply an ‘Asaba.
The Dhawul-Fara’id (sharers) are 12 in number, four males and eight females. The males are: 1. father, 2. paternal grandfather, 3. husband and 4. half-brother on the maternal side. The females are: (1) daughter, (2) son’s daughter, (3) mother, (4) wife, (5) full sister, (6) half-sister on paternal side, (7) half-sister on maternal side, and (8) grandmother whether paternal or maternal.
The ‘Asabat (residuaries) are of four kinds: (1) ascendants of the deceased, i.e. father, paternal grandfather, etc. (2) descendants of the deceased, i.e. son, son’s son, etc. (3) descendants of the father of the deceased, i.e. full brother, brother’s son, etc. (4) descendants of the grandfather, i.e. full paternal uncle, paternal uncle’s son, etc.
a
4:177.
575
Kalalah is (1) a person who leaves behind neither parent nor child, male or female; (2) a person who leaves behind neither father nor son. According to Ibn-e-‘Abbas he is a person who leaves no son irrespective of the fact whether his father is living or not. This would thus be the third meaning of the word (Lane & Mufradat). The brothers and sisters of a Kalalah fall under three heads: first, real brothers or sisters—offspring of the same parents (such brothers or sisters are technically known as A‘yani): secondly, brothers and sisters on the side of the father only (these are technically known as ‘Allati); thirdly, brothers and sisters on the side of the mother only, their father being not the same as that of the deceased (such brothers and sisters are technically called Akhyafi). It is to the last mentioned class that the commandment given in the present verse pertains; the law with regard to the first two classes of brothers and sisters having been given i
575A
The words. "without intent to cause injury to any one" are important. They mean that the payment of debts should not suffer by the payment of bequests. In other words, debts are to be paid prior to the payment of bequests.
وَلِلَّهِ مَا فِى ٱلسَّمَٰوَٰتِ وَمَا فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ ۗ وَلَقَدْ وَصَّيْنَا ٱلَّذِينَ أُوتُوا۟ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ مِن قَبْلِكُمْ وَإِيَّاكُمْ أَنِ ٱتَّقُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ ۚ وَإِن تَكْفُرُوا۟ فَإِنَّ لِلَّهِ مَا فِى ٱلسَّمَٰوَٰتِ وَمَا فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ ۚ وَكَانَ ٱللَّهُ غَنِيًّا حَمِيدًا
See 4:127.
42:14.
See 4:127.
42:14.
Important Words:
حمید (Praiseworthy) is derived from حمد which means, he praised or eulogized him; or he praised him for something depending on the latter’s will. Thus the describing of a pearl as lustrous is not حمد but مدح (see also 1:2). حمید or محمود with which it is almost synonymous, means, praised, eulogized or commended; praise-worthy or laudable. الحمید which is one of the names of God, means, He Who is praised or is praiseworthy in every case (Lane).
Commentary:
See the next verse.
a
4:127.
b
42:14.
a
See 4:127.
b
42:14.
597
Important Words:
حمید (Praiseworthy) is derived from حمد which means, he praised or eulogized him; or he praised him for something depending on the latter’s will. Thus the describing of a pearl as lustrous is not حمد but مدح (see also 1:2). حمید or محمود with which it is almost synonymous, means, praised, eulogized or commended; praise-worthy or laudable. الحمید which is one of the names of God, means, He Who is praised or is praiseworthy in every case (Lane).
Commentary:
See the next verse.
c
See 4:127.
d
42:14.
يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ شَهَٰدَةُ بَيْنِكُمْ إِذَا حَضَرَ أَحَدَكُمُ ٱلْمَوْتُ حِينَ ٱلْوَصِيَّةِ ٱثْنَانِ ذَوَا عَدْلٍ مِّنكُمْ أَوْ ءَاخَرَانِ مِنْ غَيْرِكُمْ إِنْ أَنتُمْ ضَرَبْتُمْ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ فَأَصَٰبَتْكُم مُّصِيبَةُ ٱلْمَوْتِ ۚ تَحْبِسُونَهُمَا مِنۢ بَعْدِ ٱلصَّلَوٰةِ فَيُقْسِمَانِ بِٱللَّهِ إِنِ ٱرْتَبْتُمْ لَا نَشْتَرِى بِهِۦ ثَمَنًا وَلَوْ كَانَ ذَا قُرْبَىٰ ۙ وَلَا نَكْتُمُ شَهَٰدَةَ ٱللَّهِ إِنَّآ إِذًا لَّمِنَ ٱلْءَاثِمِينَ
2:141, 284.
2:141, 284.
An incident is reported to have occurred in the time of the Holy Prophet which throws some light on this and the following two verses. A Muslim who died far from home entrusted his goods to two Christian brothers—Tamim Dariy and ‘Adi—before his death and asked them to deliver the same to his heirs at Medina. On receiving the goods the heirs found that a silver bowl was missing. The two men were thereupon called to explain the loss of the bowl, but they denied all knowledge of it on oath. Later, the heirs of the deceased person happened to see the bowl with some persons at Mecca who told them that it had been sold to them by the two men to whom the deceased had entrusted his belongings. Thereupon the two men were again summoned, and in their presence the heirs of the belongings stated on oath that the bowl was theirs, whereupon it was handed over to them (Manthur).
The Prayer should preferably be the ‘Asr (Late Afternoon) Prayer, because it was after this Prayer that the Holy Prophet summoned the two witnesses to whom reference has been made above and who were believed to have stolen the silver bowl. The time after Prayer has been chosen with a view to inspiring the witnesses with God-fearingness and inclining their minds to truthfulness. If the witnesses be non-Muslims, then they may be called upon to swear after the time of their own worship, so that the solemnity of the hour may incline them to make true statement.
2:141, 284.
Commentary:
See collective note on 5:109 below.
a
2:141, 284.
a
2:141, 284.
734
Commentary:
See collective note on 5:109 below.
a
2:141, 284.
800
An incident is reported to have occurred in the time of the Holy Prophet which throws some light on this and the following two verses. A Muslim who died far from home entrusted his goods to two Christian brothers—Tamim Dariy and ‘Adi—before his death and asked them to deliver the same to his heirs at Medina. On receiving the goods the heirs found that a silver bowl was missing. The two men were thereupon called to explain the loss of the bowl, but they denied all knowledge of it on oath. Later, the heirs of the deceased person happened to see the bowl with some persons at Mecca who told them that it had been sold to them by the two men to whom the deceased had entrusted his belongings. Thereupon the two men were again summoned, and in their presence the heirs of the belongings stated on oath that the bowl was theirs, whereupon it was handed over to them (Manthur).
801
The Prayer should preferably be the ‘Asr (Late Afternoon) Prayer, because it was after this Prayer that the Holy Prophet summoned the two witnesses to whom reference has been made above and who were believed to have stolen the silver bowl. The time after Prayer has been chosen with a view to inspiring the witnesses with God-fearingness and inclining their minds to truthfulness. If the witnesses be non-Muslims, then they may be called upon to swear after the time of their own worship, so that the solemnity of the hour may incline them to make true statement.
وَمِنَ ٱلْإِبِلِ ٱثْنَيْنِ وَمِنَ ٱلْبَقَرِ ٱثْنَيْنِ ۗ قُلْ ءَآلذَّكَرَيْنِ حَرَّمَ أَمِ ٱلْأُنثَيَيْنِ أَمَّا ٱشْتَمَلَتْ عَلَيْهِ أَرْحَامُ ٱلْأُنثَيَيْنِ ۖ أَمْ كُنتُمْ شُهَدَآءَ إِذْ وَصَّىٰكُمُ ٱللَّهُ بِهَٰذَا ۚ فَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنِ ٱفْتَرَىٰ عَلَى ٱللَّهِ كَذِبًا لِّيُضِلَّ ٱلنَّاسَ بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍ ۗ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يَهْدِى ٱلْقَوْمَ ٱلظَّٰلِمِينَ
6:22; 7:38; 11:19.
6:22; 7:38; 11:19.
The idolaters are asked whether they were present when Allah forbade the eating of oxen and camels. They are called upon to produce a Divine authority showing that the cow and the camel were really forbidden. This is so because eating of the flesh of cows and the camel is regarded as forbidden by some people on Scriptural authority—the cow by the Hindus and the camel by some Jews.
6:22; 7:38; 11:19.
Commentary:
Speaking of the laws devised by man, the Quran had referred to some pagan customs with regard to animals (6:140, 141). Now it gives its own laws with regard to them.
While speaking of sheep and goats in 6:144 above, the Holy Prophet is made here to ask the idolaters to inform him if these animals were unlawful, i.e. not fit for eating, and to bring forward (as hinted in the words نبٔونی بعلم i.e. inform me with knowledge) some rational argument or scientific reason to show that they should not be eaten. When, however, it speaks of oxen and camels in the present verse, the Quran asks idolaters whether they were witnesses when Allah forbade the eating of these animals. In other words, the verse here calls upon them to produce a religious authority showing that the cow and the camel were really forbidden. This is so because the cow and the camel are looked upon as forbidden by some on religious authority. For instance, the Hindus think it unlawful to eat beef for religious reasons and the Jews look upon the camel as forbidden by their scriptures.
This restriction is, however, unjustified; for, as regards beef, it is clearly allowed by the Vedas and was freely used in ancient India not only as ordinary food but also as an essential part of many religious ceremonies (Indo-Aryans by R. Mitra, LL.D., C.I.E.; The Review of Religions for 1923). As regards the camel, it is indeed forbidden by the Bible, but that prohibition is not meant for all time, for the Bible announces the advent of another Lawgiver whose Law was to abrogate the Law of the Bible (Deut. 18:18).
The words, Were you present when Allah enjoined, signify that when pagans do not believe in any revelation, they cannot possibly know that anything was forbidden by God.
d
6:22; 7:38; 11:19.
b
6:22; 7:38; 11:19.
884
Commentary:
Speaking of the laws devised by man, the Quran had referred to some pagan customs with regard to animals (6:140, 141). Now it gives its own laws with regard to them.
While speaking of sheep and goats in 6:144 above, the Holy Prophet is made here to ask the idolaters to inform him if these animals were unlawful, i.e. not fit for eating, and to bring forward (as hinted in the words نبٔونی بعلم i.e. inform me with knowledge) some rational argument or scientific reason to show that they should not be eaten. When, however, it speaks of oxen and camels in the present verse, the Quran asks idolaters whether they were witnesses when Allah forbade the eating of these animals. In other words, the verse here calls upon them to produce a religious authority showing that the cow and the camel were really forbidden. This is so because the cow and the camel are looked upon as forbidden by some on religious authority. For instance, the Hindus think it unlawful to eat beef for religious reasons and the Jews look upon the camel as forbidden by their scriptures.
This restriction is, however, unjustified; for, as regards beef, it is clearly allowed by the Vedas and was freely used in ancient India not only as ordinary food but also as an essential part of many religious ceremonies (Indo-Aryans by R. Mitra, LL.D., C.I.E.; The Review of Religions for 1923). As regards the camel, it is indeed forbidden by the Bible, but that prohibition is not meant for all time, for the Bible announces the advent of another Lawgiver whose Law was to abrogate the Law of the Bible (Deut. 18:18).
The words, Were you present when Allah enjoined, signify that when pagans do not believe in any revelation, they cannot possibly know that anything was forbidden by God.
a
6:22; 7:38; 11:19.
923
The idolaters are asked whether they were present when Allah forbade the eating of oxen and camels. They are called upon to produce a Divine authority showing that the cow and the camel were really forbidden. This is so because eating of the flesh of cows and the camel is regarded as forbidden by some people on Scriptural authority—the cow by the Hindus and the camel by some Jews.
۞ قُلْ تَعَالَوْا۟ أَتْلُ مَا حَرَّمَ رَبُّكُمْ عَلَيْكُمْ ۖ أَلَّا تُشْرِكُوا۟ بِهِۦ شَيْـًٔا ۖ وَبِٱلْوَٰلِدَيْنِ إِحْسَٰنًا ۖ وَلَا تَقْتُلُوٓا۟ أَوْلَٰدَكُم مِّنْ إِمْلَٰقٍ ۖ نَّحْنُ نَرْزُقُكُمْ وَإِيَّاهُمْ ۖ وَلَا تَقْرَبُوا۟ ٱلْفَوَٰحِشَ مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا وَمَا بَطَنَ ۖ وَلَا تَقْتُلُوا۟ ٱلنَّفْسَ ٱلَّتِى حَرَّمَ ٱللَّهُ إِلَّا بِٱلْحَقِّ ۚ ذَٰلِكُمْ وَصَّىٰكُم بِهِۦ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ
6:121; 7:34.
17:32.
The injunctions which follow the word "forbidden" are what God commands us to carry out. The injunctions are expressly mentioned but the converse of them which is forbidden is implied. Thus, on the one hand, by using the word "forbidden" and, on the other, by following it up with positive commandments, the verse combines in itself both the direct injunctions and their converse. The verse may be construed in another way also. The first sentence should be taken as having ended with the words what your Lord has forbidden, and the next sentence as beginning with the word ‘Alaikum which would in this case mean, "It is enjoined on you." The verse will then read as follows: "Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. It is enjoined on you that you associate not anything as partner with Him..."
4:37; 17:24.
17:32.
6:121; 7:34.
Important Words:
املاق (poverty) is derived from ملق. They say ملق الشیء i.e. he erased the thing. ملقه بالعصا means, he beat him with a stick. ملق الولد امه means, the child sucked from the breasts of his mother. املق الرجل means, the man spent all his money and became poor. املاق means, poverty or destitution (Aqrab).
Commentary:
The Quran has already given the commandments and prohibitions of the Islamic Law with regard to the fruits of the earth and the flesh of animals, in opposition to the laws devised by men. Now it gives general commandments and prohibitions.
It should be noted that the injunctions which follow the word "forbidden" are what God requires us to do, and not what He forbids us to do. Thus, it is the contrary of the injunctions given in the verse that is forbidden. The injunctions have been expressly mentioned and the converse of them which is forbidden is implied. Thus, on the one hand, by using the word "forbidden" and, on the other, by following it up with positive commandments, the verse combines in itself both the direct injunctions and their converse, and the attention of the reader has been drawn to both.
The verse may also be construed in another way. The first sentence should be taken as having finished with the words ما حرم ربکم i.e. what your Lord has forbidden, and the next sentence should be taken as beginning with the words علیکمwhich would in this case mean, "it is enjoined upon you or it is incumbent on you." The verse will then read as follows:"Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. It is incumbent on you that you associate not anything as partner with Him…"
The order in which the injunctions are given in this verse is noteworthy. The injunctions begin with the words, Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. The Arabic word for "Lord" is رب which means "Creator, Sustainer, and Nourisher" (see 1:2), and it is the very idea of "sustaining and nourishing" that governs the order of the injunctions here given. The first injunction, i.e. associate not anything as partner with Him, pertains to the Great Nourisher, Allah. The second injunction pertains to the lesser nourishers, viz. parents. The word احسان (doing good) expresses the idea that the service of the parents enjoined in the words, do good to parents, is to be performed in the best way possible, for احسان literally signifies "doing a thing very well." Next come those who are nourished and sustained by the "lesser nourishers", viz. children. Parents are bidden to nourish and bring up their children well, as implied in the words, kill not your children for fear of poverty. Indeed, he who neglects to bring up his children properly for fear of poverty virtually "kills" them. If it is the duty of the children to serve their parents well, it is equally the duty of the parents to bring up their children well.
The pronoun "you" in the clause, it is We Who provide for you and for them, refers to parents and the pronoun "them" refers to children, the former being put before the latter in order to draw our attention to the fact that God’s providing for the parents is a proof of the fact that He will also provide for the children.
The next injunction is contained in the words, approach not foul deeds. The word فواحش (foul deeds) is the plural of فاحشه one meaning of which is "fornication or adultery" (see 4:16), which is another form of killing one’s children; for the man who forms immoral connection with a woman other than his wife, not only destroys his seed but also neglects his own wife, which cannot but affect his begetting children in lawful wedlock. Similarly, illegitimate children born of a woman other than one’s wife are not one’s own children, nor are they properly looked after.
The words, whether open or secret, used in connection with فواحش (foul deeds) refer respectively to openly going in to prostitutes and to forming secret connections with women other than one’s wife.
Next to the relations between parents and children come brotherly and friendly relations which are referred to in the words, kill not the life which Allah has made sacred. This injunction requires us to treat our brethren and friends as well as members of our society with fairness and justice. The word "killing," it will be noted, pertains not only to actually killing but to an attempt at killing as well as causing serious injury and boycotting etc. (see meaning of قتل i.e. killing under 2:62; 3:155 & 4:158). The expression, save by right, used with regard to "killing" means "except when a man has made himself deserving of the treatment to be meted out to him." For instance, in case of murder a person will be put to death only by order of proper authority. Similarly, in case of "boycotting" a person will be boycotted only under the orders of the person or the body that possesses that power. It will not be right for any man to take the law in his own hands.
d
4:37; 17:24.
e
17:32.
f
6:121; 7:34.
a
4:37; 17:24.
b
17:32.
c
6:121; 7:34.
891
Important Words:
املاق (poverty) is derived from ملق. They say ملق الشیء i.e. he erased the thing. ملقه بالعصا means, he beat him with a stick. ملق الولد امه means, the child sucked from the breasts of his mother. املق الرجل means, the man spent all his money and became poor. املاق means, poverty or destitution (Aqrab).
Commentary:
The Quran has already given the commandments and prohibitions of the Islamic Law with regard to the fruits of the earth and the flesh of animals, in opposition to the laws devised by men. Now it gives general commandments and prohibitions.
It should be noted that the injunctions which follow the word "forbidden" are what God requires us to do, and not what He forbids us to do. Thus, it is the contrary of the injunctions given in the verse that is forbidden. The injunctions have been expressly mentioned and the converse of them which is forbidden is implied. Thus, on the one hand, by using the word "forbidden" and, on the other, by following it up with positive commandments, the verse combines in itself both the direct injunctions and their converse, and the attention of the reader has been drawn to both.
The verse may also be construed in another way. The first sentence should be taken as having finished with the words ما حرم ربکم i.e. what your Lord has forbidden, and the next sentence should be taken as beginning with the words علیکمwhich would in this case mean, "it is enjoined upon you or it is incumbent on you." The verse will then read as follows:"Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. It is incumbent on you that you associate not anything as partner with Him…"
The order in which the injunctions are given in this verse is noteworthy. The injunctions begin with the words, Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. The Arabic word for "Lord" is رب which means "Creator, Sustainer, and Nourisher" (see 1:2), and it is the very idea of "sustaining and nourishing" that governs the order of the injunctions here given. The first injunction, i.e. associate not anything as partner with Him, pertains to the Great Nourisher, Allah. The second injunction pertains to the lesser nourishers, viz. parents. The word احسان (doing good) expresses the idea that the service of the parents enjoined in the words, do good to parents, is to be performed in the best way possible, for احسان literally signifies "doing a thing very well." Next come those who are nourished and sustained by the "lesser nourishers", viz. children. Parents are bidden to nourish and bring up their children well, as implied in the words, kill not your children for fear of poverty. Indeed, he who neglects to bring up his children properly for fear of poverty virtually "kills" them. If it is the duty of the children to serve their parents well, it is equally the duty of the parents to bring up their children well.
The pronoun "you" in the clause, it is We Who provide for you and for them, refers to parents and the pronoun "them" refers to children, the former being put before the latter in order to draw our attention to the fact that God’s providing for the parents is a proof of the fact that He will also provide for the children.
The next injunction is contained in the words, approach not foul deeds. The word فواحش (foul deeds) is the plural of فاحشه one meaning of which is "fornication or adultery" (see 4:16), which is another form of killing one’s children; for the man who forms immoral connection with a woman other than his wife, not only destroys his seed but also neglects his own wife, which cannot but affect his begetting children in lawful wedlock. Similarly, illegitimate children born of a woman other than one’s wife are not one’s own children, nor are they properly looked after.
The words, whether open or secret, used in connection with فواحش (foul deeds) refer respectively to openly going in to prostitutes and to forming secret connections with women other than one’s wife.
Next to the relations between parents and children come brotherly and friendly relations which are referred to in the words, kill not the life which Allah has made sacred. This injunction requires us to treat our brethren and friends as well as members of our society with fairness and justice. The word "killing," it will be noted, pertains not only to actually killing but to an attempt at killing as well as causing serious injury and boycotting etc. (see meaning of قتل i.e. killing under 2:62; 3:155 & 4:158). The expression, save by right, used with regard to "killing" means "except when a man has made himself deserving of the treatment to be meted out to him." For instance, in case of murder a person will be put to death only by order of proper authority. Similarly, in case of "boycotting" a person will be boycotted only under the orders of the person or the body that possesses that power. It will not be right for any man to take the law in his own hands.
a
6:121; 7:34.
e
17:32.
928
The injunctions which follow the word "forbidden" are what God commands us to carry out. The injunctions are expressly mentioned but the converse of them which is forbidden is implied. Thus, on the one hand, by using the word "forbidden" and, on the other, by following it up with positive commandments, the verse combines in itself both the direct injunctions and their converse. The verse may be construed in another way also. The first sentence should be taken as having ended with the words what your Lord has forbidden, and the next sentence as beginning with the word ‘Alaikum which would in this case mean, "It is enjoined on you." The verse will then read as follows: "Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. It is enjoined on you that you associate not anything as partner with Him..."