أَزْوَٰجِ

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.

Commentary:

The verse refers to another absurd custom of the Arabs. The Divine attributes "Wise" and "All-Knowing" have been mentioned here to point out that the people got entangled in these foolish beliefs and practices because they turned away from the Wise and Knowing God and followed false deities and their foolish devotees.

40:9.

Commentary:

This verse enunciates a great truth which has been mentioned by the Quran only viz. any good or bad act that a man does is shared by many other persons. The success of a tradesman in his trade or of a farmer in his farming or of an industrialist in his industry is due to the intentional or unintentional cooperation of a good many other individuals. It is for this reason that the Quran has laid down the institution of Zakah and has thereby given to the poor what is due to them in the property of the rich. What is true of a tradesman or an industrialist or an agriculturist is also true of others. Similarly, the wife of a religious missionary who goes to preach in a foreign country is a sharer in his work, for she looks after his children and performs his sundry other duties connected with his household. In the same way his parents and children rightfully have a share in his good work. As, therefore, a man does good works or wins credit with the intentional or unintentional help of his relatives and kinsmen, they all are made to participate proportionately in his rewards, and the Wise and Merciful God has laid down the law that in Heaven all members of the family of a person who has excelled others in virtue, will be placed with him, provided, of course, they have earned a place in Heaven, by their own righteous deeds.

The words, angels shall enter unto them from every gate, are not here used to point out that there will be many gates of Heaven but that the various classes of good deeds of the believers will, in the next world, be represented as so many gates.

4:2; 7:190; 30:22; 39:7.

29:68.

Important Words:

حفدة (grandsons) is derived from حفد which means, he was quick or went quickly; was continuous in his course or pace. حفد فی العمل means, he was quick and active, agile or prompt, in work. حفدہ means, he served him. حفدة means, assistants, helpers, or auxiliaries and servants; a man’s grandchildren or sons’ children or a son’s children; children or daughters who serve their parents in the house or a man’s children or grandchildren who serve him (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

In this and the adjoining verses the two themes of the need of a revealed Law and the Unity of Godhead have been dealt with from various points of view, not at random, but in support of each other, and it has been made clear that while on the one hand man is apt to fall a victim to polytheistic beliefs and practices without a revealed Law, on the other the Unity of God requires that God should make provision for man’s guidance. As there is no other god except Him, He Himself must provide for the guidance of His creatures. The Oneness of God implies His perfection and that perfection demands that the creation of man must have a purpose, for a purposeless creation suggests a defective Creator. Again, if man were considered to have been created with a purpose, the fulfilment of that purpose would necessarily require an afterlife, for evidently such a purpose is incapable of being fulfilled in the brief span of man’s terrestrial existence. Now the purpose which requires limitless and infinite life for its fulfilment must be highly noble and sublime and so the Law which is intended to accomplish it must also proceed from God Himself. Thus the subjects of the Unity of God and the need of revealed guidance have been mentioned in support of each other in different forms in these verses and just as in the physical world we see that things receive support from one another, similarly in the spiritual realm various parts of the spiritual edifice support one another in order to establish the one supreme truth of the Oneness of God and the Unity and uniformity of creation.

The verse adduces another argument in support of the Unity of Godhead, viz. the human instinct of private possession. It was pointed out in the previous verse that the exclusive possession of wealth and power by certain individuals makes it necessary that there should be a revealed Law to maintain equality and justice between different classes. In this verse it is stated that the instinct of private possession prompts man to transmit his property to his natural heirs and not to strangers. How then can he, in fairness to God, dare set up 'partners' who should share Godhead with Him and thus set the seal on his ingratitude to Him? The way in which man displays his ingratitude to God is dealt with in the next verse.

70:31.

Important Words:

ما ملکت أیمانھم (what their right hands possess). أیمان is the plural of یمین which is derived from یمن یمین. They say یمن الرجل i.e. he came from the right hand of the man. یمن اللّٰه فلاناً means, God blessed such a one.

یمین means, good luck; the right hand; power and strength; a covenant confirmed by an oath; a good position. They say فلان عندنا بالیمین i.e. such a one possesses high position with us. An Arab would say ھذا ملک یمینی i.e. he or it is in the possession of my right hand, meaning, he or it is in my possession (Lisan & Aqrab). The expression ما ملکت ایمانھم generally signifies prisoners of war whether men or women, who are in the custody and control of their Muslim captors because they had taken part in a war which was waged to destroy Islam. The term has been used in the Quran in preference to عباد and اماء (slaves and bondwomen) to point to a just and rightful possession. It includes both slaves and bondwomen, but it is only the context which determines what the expression signifies in a particular place. See also 4:25.

Commentary:

Much misunderstanding prevails as to what the expression "their right hands possess" signifies, and what are the rights and status of the persons to whom it applies.

It should be clearly understood that Islam has condemned slavery in unequivocal terms. According to it, it is a mortal sin to deprive a person of his liberty by kidnapping him, i.e. to make him a slave, unless, of course, he renders himself liable to deprivation of it by taking part in a war waged to destroy Islam or an Islamic state. It is also a grievous sin to buy or sell slaves. All human beings as such are equal in the sight of God and enjoy equal human rights. Islamic teaching on this point is quite clear, unequivocal and emphatic. According to it a person who makes another person his slave commits a grave sin against God and man (Bukhari, Kitabul-Bai’ & Abu Dawud as quoted by Fathul-Bari). It is also worthy of note that when Islam came into the world slavery was a part and parcel of the human social system and there existed large number of slaves in every country. It was therefore not feasible, nor even wise, to abolish with a stroke of the pen, an institution which had become so inextricably interwoven into the whole texture of human society, without doing serious injury to its moral tone. Islam, therefore, sought to abolish it gradually but effectively and surely. The Quran has laid down the following very sound principles for the speedy and complete abolition of slavery:

(1) Prisoners of war (i.e. ما ملکت أیمانھم) can only be taken after a regular battle.

(2) They cannot be retained after the war is over.

(3) They are to be set free either as a mark of favour or by exchange of prisoners.

The Quran says:

And when you meet in regular battle those who disbelieve, smite their necks; and when you have overcome them; bind fast the fetters—then afterwards either release them as a favour or by taking ransom—until the war lays down its arms. That is the ordinance (47:5).

Those unfortunate persons however, who, may fail to gain their freedom through any of these means, or should choose to remain with their Muslim masters can purchase it by entering into a contract called mukatabat (24:34). Now if a woman is taken prisoner in a war of the nature mentioned above and thus loses her liberty and becomes ملک یمین and she fails to get her release by exchange of prisoners of war, and the exigencies of government also do not justify her immediate release as a mark of favour, nor do her own people or government get her ransomed and she does not even seek to buy her freedom by entering into mukatabat and her master, in the interest of morality marries her, whether she likes it or not, in what way, it may be asked, can this arrangement be regarded as objectionable and the great hue and cry raised over it as justified or justifiable?

Let it be clearly understood that as regards establishing sexual relations with a female prisoner of war or a slave-wife, which is the real significance of the expression ما ملکت أیمانھم used in the present verse, without first marrying her, neither this nor any other verse of the Quran lends any support whatsoever. Not only does the Quran not give any sanction for the treatment of female prisoners of war as wives without first taking them into proper wedlock, but there are clear and positive injunctions to the effect that these prisoners of war, like free women, should be married if they are to be treated as wives, the only difference between the two being a difference of social status inasmuch as prior consent of prisoners of war to their marriage is not considered necessary as in the case of free women. The fact that the expression ما ملکت أیمانھم signifies female prisoners lends no support whatsoever to the untenable view that Islam has upheld and encouraged concubinage. Besides the present verse, at least in as many as four other verses of the Quran, the injunction has been laid down in clear and unambiguous terms that female prisoners of war should not remain unmarried. These verses are as follows:

1. And marry widows from among you and your male-slaves and female-slaves who are fit for marriage (24:33).

2. And those of you who cannot afford to marry free believing women, let them marry what your right hands possess, namely your believing handmaids—so marry them with the leave of their masters and give them their dowries according to what is fair (4:26).

3. And if you fear that you will not be fair in dealing with the orphans, then marry of women as may be agreeable to you, two or three or four; and if you fear you will not deal justly, then marry only one or (if you cannot afford to marry even one free wife then marry) what your right hands possess (4:4).

The verse may also be rendered as "then marry of women as may be agreeable to you two or three or four or what your right hands possess;" the words "and if you fear you will not deal justly, then marry only one," forming a parenthetical clause. According to this rendering also slave-girls are to be married before they are treated as wives.

4. And marry not idolatrous women until they believe; even a believing bondwoman is better than an idolatrous woman, although she may highly please you (2:222).

The sense being that a believing slave wife should be preferred to a non-believing free wife. The Holy Prophet is also very explicit on this point. He is reported to have said, "He who has a slave girl, and gives her proper education and brings her up in a becoming manner and then frees and marries her, for him is double reward" (Bukhari, Kitabul-‘Ilm). This hadith implies that if a Muslim wishes to have a slave girl as wife, he should first set her free and then marry her. The Holy Prophet’s own practice was quite in harmony with his precept. Two of the Holy Prophet’s wives, Juwairiyyah and Safiyyah, came to him as prisoners of war. They were his ملک یمین. But he married them according to Islamic Law. Mariyah was sent to him by the King of Egypt. He also married her and she enjoyed the status of a free wife like his other wives. She observed "purdah" and was included among "the Mothers of the Faithful."

Another verse of the Quran, viz. O Prophet We have made lawful to thee thy wives whom thou hast paid their dowries, and those whom thy right hand possesses from among those whom Allah has given thee as gains of war, and the daughters of thy paternal uncle, and the daughters of thy paternal aunts, and the daughters of thy maternal uncle, and the daughters of thy maternal aunts who have migrated with thee (33:51), points to the fact that the commandment regarding marriage applies to ما ملکت أیمانکم (whom your right hands possess) as much as it does to daughters of the Holy Prophet’s paternal and maternal uncles and aunts. Both are to be legally wedded before they are treated as wives. All the three categories mentioned above were made lawful to the Holy Prophet through marriage.

The verse 4:25 viz. And forbidden to you are married women, except such as your right hands possess, seems to present some difficulty. But in reality there is no such difficulty. The verse along with its predecessor deals with women whom it is unlawful for a man to marry and among these are included married women. But it makes one exception. Those married women who are taken prisoner in a religious war and then choose to remain with Muslims, can be married to their masters. The fact that they choose not to go to their former husbands is considered as tantamount to the annulment of their former marriage.

It may also be noted in passing that it is not permitted to take in marriage such female relations of a slave as correspond to the relations of a free woman within the prohibited degree. For instance, the mothers, sisters, daughters etc., of a slave wife cannot be taken in marriage. This also shows that the Quranic commandments with regard to marriage and in-laws apply as much to bondwomen as they apply to free women.

It may further be stated here that in view of circumstances obtaining at the time of its revelation the Quran had to make a distinction between the social status of two classes of women. That distinction was expressed by the word زوج (a free woman taken in marriage) and ملک یمین (bondwoman taken in marriage). The former word connotes a sense of equality between husband and wife while the latter implies an inferior status of the wife. The Quran and the Holy Prophet, however, desired and encouraged that bondwomen should first be given full freedom and full status and then married as the Holy Prophet himself did.

Besides, Islam does not allow women taken prisoner in ordinary wars to be treated as wives. This exceptional injunction comes into operation only when a hostile nation wages a religious war against Islam in order to extirpate it and to compel Muslims to abandon their religion at the point of the sword and then treats their prisoners—men and women, as slaves, as was done in the time of the Holy Prophet. At that time the enemy took away Muslim women as prisoners and treated them as bondwomen. The Islamic injunction was thus only a retaliatory measure and served also the additional purpose of protecting the morals of captive women. Those conditions have ceased to exist now. There are no religious wars now and hence no prisoners of war to be treated as slaves and bondwomen. For a fuller note on slavery see 24:34.

Commentary:

The word إمام meaning "leader" and "model" (2:125 & 15:80), the verse purports to say that a truly righteous man is not satisfied with only becoming righteous himself but aims at being a model and pattern for other righteous men to copy.

Commentary:

The expression بل انتم قوم عادون besides the meaning given in the text signifies, "You contravene the laws of nature".

Important Words:

وطرا (want) has no verb. It means, a want, a need, an object of want or need; or that which one proposes to accomplish or of which one is desirous. They say قضی منه وطرہ i.e. he accomplished or obtained his want from him (Lane & Aqrab).

Commentary:

As the verse deals with an incident of very great historical importance, it demands and deserves a somewhat detailed explanation. Zaid bin Harith, to whom the words "on whom Allah had bestowed favours and on whom thou also had bestowed favours" refer, belonged to the tribe of Kalb. In his childhood he was kidnapped and sold as a slave in Mecca where he was bought by Khadijah’s brother and given over to her. On her marriage with the Holy Prophet Khadijah presented Zaid to him who at once emancipated him. Zaid was so much attached to the Prophet that when later his father and uncle begged of the Holy Prophet to let him go with them as the grief of his separation from home had almost killed his mother, the Prophet readily gave his permission. But Zaid himself flatly refused to part company with the Holy Prophet, exclaiming that he was dearer to him than his father and mother. The Prophet was so deeply touched by Zaid’s fidelity and love for him that he at once declared him (Zaid) to be his son and henceforward Zaid came to be known as the Prophet’s son. Zaid remained throughout his life a most beloved and faithful disciple of the Holy Prophet and sealed his fidelity to Islam and the Prophet with his blood on the battlefield of Mu’tah.

Zainab was the daughter of the Holy Prophet’s aunt, hence a full-blooded Arab, intensely proud of her ancestry and exalted social status. Islam had envisaged and given to the world a civilization and culture in which there were to be no class divisions, no hereditary nobility, no vested interests. All men were to be free and equal in the sight of God. The Holy Prophet wanted to start with his own family the carrying into actual effect of this noble ideal of Islam. He wished to marry Zainab to Zaid, who in spite of having been liberated by the Prophet and called his son, unfortunately still carried the stigma of slavery in the minds of some people. It was exactly this stigma of slavery, this invidious distinction between 'free' and 'slave' which the Holy Prophet sought to remove by Zainab’s marriage to Zaid. In deference to the Holy Prophet’s wish Zainab agreed to the proposal. The purpose of the Holy Prophet was achieved. The marriage levelled to the ground all class distinctions and divisions. It was a practical demonstration of Islam’s noble ideal. The marriage, however, ended in failure, not so much due to a difference in the social status of Zainab and Zaid as to the incompatibility of their dispositions and temperaments and also due to a feeling of inferiority from which Zaid suffered. The failure of the marriage naturally grieved the Holy Prophet. But it also served a very useful purpose. In pursuance of Divine command, as mentioned in the latter part of the verse under comment, the Prophet himself married Zainab, thus cutting at the very root of another obnoxious and deep-seated Arab custom, viz. that it was a sacrilege to marry the wife of one’s adopted son. The custom of adoption was abolished and with it went also this foolish notion. Thus Zainab’s marriage with Zaid served one very noble object and its failure another highly useful purpose.

The words "fear Allah" signify that Zaid wanted to divorce Zainab, and as divorce according to Islam is very hateful in the sight of God, the Holy Prophet exhorted him not to do so.

The clause, "And then…thou shouldst fear Him," may apply to both Zaid and the Holy Prophet. Applying to Zaid it would mean that Zaid did not like that the cause of his separation from Zainab should come to light, perhaps because as the words "fear Allah," indicate the fault lay more with him than with Zainab. As, however, applying to the Holy Prophet, the words would signify that as the marriage between Zaid and Zainab was arranged at his instance and wish, he naturally did not like its breaking. The clause also shows that the Prophet feared that the break-down of the marriage which was arranged by him and which had been entered into in deference to his special wish, but which resulted in an ostensible failure of the experiment in Islamic brotherhood, would cause some mental confusion and uneasiness among people whose faith was weak. This was the anxiety that lay heavy on the Prophet’s heart. The words, "thou didst fear men," seem to point to this fear of his. But, as mentioned above, God had His own purpose in the failure of this marriage. He wanted to show that there was nothing in this failure to be afraid of. On the contrary, it was a blessing in disguise and was intended to serve a great purpose and therefore the Prophet’s fear was unfounded.

Christian and other hostile Critics of Islam pretend to find in the Holy Prophet’s marriage to Zainab a basis for mean attacks on him. It is stated that the Prophet, having by chance seen Zainab, became enamoured of her beauty and Zaid, having come to know of his desire to marry her, sought divorce from her. The fact that the Holy Prophet’s most inveterate enemies, before whose eyes the whole affair had actually taken place, dared not attribute the base motives ascribed to him by these critics after so many centuries, completely knocks the bottom from under this base and totally unfounded charge. Zainab was the Prophet’s own cousin and being so closely related to him he must have seen her many times, for "Purdah" had not as yet been enjoined. Besides, it was in deference to his own persistently expressed wish that Zainab had reluctantly agreed to marry Zaid. It is on record that she and her brother had desired before her marriage with Zaid that she should be taken in marriage by the Holy Prophet himself. What wasit that prevented the Holy Prophet from marrying her when she was a virgin and when she herself ardently desired to get married to him? The whole story evidently seems to be a figment of the "fertile" imagination of the Holy Prophet’s hostile critics and it is an insult to human intellect to give the least credence to it. But while there are some Christian critics like Muir and Margoliouth who find fault with the Holy Prophet for having married Zainab, there are others better informed and more honest like the good and noble Rev. Bosworth Smith who found nothing in this marriage to cavil at. The Rev, gentleman says:

"It should be remembered, however, that most of Mohammed’s marriages may be explained, at least, as much by his pity for the forlorn condition of the persons concerned, as by other motives. They were almost all of them widows who were not remarkable either for their beauty or their wealth, but quite the reverse. May not this fact, and his undoubted faithfulness to Khadijah till her dying day, and till he himself was fifty years of age, give us additional ground to hope that calumny or misconception has been at work in the story of Zainab" - ("Mohammed and Mohammedanism").

Commentary:

As a result of the Battle of the Ditch and of the subsequent banishment of the Banu Quraizah, large booty fell into the hands of Muslims. They were also promised more conquests and wealth (see v. 28 above). From a persecuted and economically very poor minority they had grown into a rich, powerful and prosperous community. Material wealth, however, brings in its train worldly-mindedness, and a desire for ease and comfort and a disinclination to render acts of service and sacrifice. This is a state of affairs which a Reformer has especially to guard against. As love of ease and comfort, generally makes its appearance first in the domestic circle, and as the members of the Holy Prophet’s household were to serve as a model in social behaviour, it was in the fitness of things that they should have been required to set an example in self-denial. Not that the use of money was altogether taboo or that amenities of life were completely forbidden to them, but they were, no doubt, expected to set a very high standard of self-abnegation. It is to this high standard of the sacrifice of material benefits and of an affluent and easy living, to which the present and the following few verses refer. The companionship of the Holy Prophet demanded this sacrifice, and his wives were told to make a choice between comfortable life and his companionship, and it should be said to their credit that they chose the latter alternative and that even when, afterwards, in the time of the Caliphate of ‘Umar and ‘Uthman, very high stipends were paid to them, they lived extremely simple lives and spent most of the money in charity.

The words, "I will provide for you and send you away in a handsome manner" imply that the Holy Prophet’s wives were allowed a free choice and if anyone of them had elected to part company with him, it would have entailed no displeasure of God, on the contrary she would have been handsomely provided.

It may also be noted that just as the Holy Prophet was a perfect exemplar for all sections of humanity, his wives were expected to serve as model for women in their special sphere. This is why they have been called "the Mothers of the Faithful." Naturally, a very strict and high standard of self-discipline and self-denial is demanded of them in this and the next few verses.

Commentary:

This verse should be read along with vv. 29 and 30 above. In those verses the wives of the Holy Prophet were offered a choice between the companionship of the Holy Prophet and the material benefits and comforts of life, but they preferred the Prophet’s company. The present verse by implication refers to that reply of the Prophet’s consorts which is recorded in the books of history but expressly nowhere in the Quran. Till they gave their reply, the marital relations between them and the Holy Prophet remained, as it were, in a state of suspension. The verse shows that while the wives of the Holy Prophet preferred his company to material goods and amenities of life, he too had great consideration for their feelings, and though he was given the choice to retain such of them as he liked (v. 52) he did not exercise the choice and in deference to his wishes God permitted him in the present verse to retain all his wives.

The verse refers to three kinds of women whom the Holy Prophet could marry in addition to his already wedded wives: (1) Women who were taken prisoner in wars against Islam; (2) women who had migrated to Medina with the Holy Prophet, and (3) a woman who should offer herself for marriage to him. This shows that the Holy Prophet’s marriages were motivated by considerations other than sensuous gratification as his ignorant and mischievous critics try to depict. Those who had left their hearths and homes for the sake of Islam and those whose husbands had been killed in wars fighting in defence of Islam had special claim on the Holy Prophet’s consideration. It is in view of these considerations that he married most of his wives. He married Hafsah whose husband was killed in the Battle of Badr; Zainab bint Khuzaimah whose husband was killed in the Battle of Uhud; Ummi Salmah whose husband died in 4 A.H., and Ummi Habibah, daughter of Abu Sufyan, who became a widow in 5 or 6 A.H. (in exile in Abyssinia). He married Juwairiyyah and Safiyyah, both widows, in 5 A.H. and 7 A.H. respectively, seeking a union with and pacification of their tribes. It is worthy of note that a hundred families of the Banu Mustaliq were liberated by Muslims when the Holy Prophet married Juwairiyyah. Maimunah, another widow, it is said, offered herself to be taken in marriage by the Holy Prophet which offer he condescended to accept in the interest of the education and training of Muslim women. He married Zainab, the divorced wife of Zaid in 5 A.H. in order to put a stop to a foolish custom prevailing among the Arabs and in order also to assuage her wounded feelings as the respected lady had felt deeply humiliated at being divorced by Zaid. He married Mariah in 7 A.H., and thus by raising a freed slave girl to the highly eminent spiritual status of the "Mother of the Faithful", he gave a death blow to slavery. Such were the pious and righteous motives of our noble Master in marrying widows and divorced women, by no means noted for their youth or beauty, and yet his cruel and mean traducers vainly try to depict him as a person who was given to gratifying his carnal desires. They deliberately ignore the patent fact that up to the age of 25 he lived the spotless life of a celibate. Then in the prime of his youth he married a lady fifteen years his senior and lived with her a most happy life till he was an old man of fifty and she about sixty-five. After her death he married Saudah, another lady of a very advanced age. He married all his other wives, to which exception has been taken by evil-minded carpers, between 2 A.H. and 7 A.H., a period when he was constantly engaged in active fighting and his life was perpetually in danger and the fate of Islam itself hung in the balance. Could any sane person in such situation of danger and uncertainty conceive of contracting marriage after marriage from motives attributed to the Holy Prophet? After this he lived for about three years as virtual ruler of the whole of Arabia when all the comforts and amenities of life were at his disposal and yet he entered into no further marriage. Does not this fact alone establish the honesty and sincerity of the Holy Prophet’s motives in marrying his wives?

The words "if she entrusts herself to the Prophet" have been taken as specially referring to Maimunah who is reported to have offered herself to be taken into marriage by the Holy Prophet. The clause, "This provision is only for thee as against other believers," means that it was a special privilege of the Holy Prophet and was due to the special nature of his duties as a Divine Prophet. In fact, marriages of the Holy Prophet were dictated by much higher and nobler considerations than merely personal ones. The clause may also refer to the special permission granted to the Holy Prophet, to retain all his wives, after the commandment contained in 4:4 was revealed, limiting to four the number of wives allowed to Muslims at one time.

The words, "We have already made known what We have enjoined on them concerning their wives," refer to the commandment contained in 4:4.