Topic: Bequests (Wasiyyah), Enjoined
View Aspects
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
فَمَنۢ بَدَّلَهُۥ بَعْدَمَا سَمِعَهُۥ فَإِنَّمَآ إِثْمُهُۥ عَلَى ٱلَّذِينَ يُبَدِّلُونَهُۥٓ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ سَمِيعٌ عَلِيمٌ
فَمَنْ بَدَّلَہٗ کے الفاظ سے معلوم ہوتا ہے کہ کسی قرآنی حکم کی طرف اشارہ ہے اور وہ حکم وراثت کا ہی ہے ورنہ اس کا کیا مطلب کہ بدلنے کا گناہ بدلنے والوں پر ہوگا۔ وصیت کرنے والے پر نہ ہوگا۔ کیونکہ اگر اس وصیت کی تفصیلات شرعی نہیں بلکہ وصیت کرنے والے کی مرضی پر ہیں تو ان کے بیان نہ کرنے سے مرنے والے کو گناہ کیوں ہو۔ اس کے گنہگار ہونے کا سوال تبھی ہو سکتا ہے جبکہ کسی شرعی حکم کی خلاف ورزی ہو رہی ہو اور وہ اسی طرح ہو سکتی ہے کہ اس آیت میں احکام وراثت بھی شامل ہوں اور مطلب یہ ہو کہ مرنے والا یہ وصیت کر جائے کہ احکام اسلام کے مطابق عمل کیا جائے اس صورت میں وہ گناہ سے بچ جائے
This indicates that the previous verse contemplates some directions which are obligatory and a contravention of which would be sinful. Obviously, what is meant is a direction that the estate shall be administered in accordance with the law of inheritance. If the testator gives such a direction, then the sin of any contravention would lie on those who are guilty of the contravention.
Commentary:
If a person makes a will in compliance with the above commandment, but his heirs, finding it to be prejudicial to their interests, alter it or hinder its execution, the blame and the responsibility for consequences will lie on those who tamper with the will and not on the maker of the will. Apparently, the verse seems to be superfluous; for what it says is obvious, i.e. the responsibility of any subsequent alteration cannot lie on the testator. But deeper consideration would show the futility of such an idea. In fact, the verse serves three important purposes. Firstly, it warns the testator that fear of any subsequent alteration should not deter him from making the will. Secondly, that he should act intelligently and cautiously and should try to foresee and forestall all possible mischief by his heirs. Thirdly, the verse warns the heirs and their friends that any alteration made by them in the will will bring them under the wrath of God Who is All-Knowing.
1
فَمَنْ بَدَّلَہٗ کے الفاظ سے معلوم ہوتا ہے کہ کسی قرآنی حکم کی طرف اشارہ ہے اور وہ حکم وراثت کا ہی ہے ورنہ اس کا کیا مطلب کہ بدلنے کا گناہ بدلنے والوں پر ہوگا۔ وصیت کرنے والے پر نہ ہوگا۔ کیونکہ اگر اس وصیت کی تفصیلات شرعی نہیں بلکہ وصیت کرنے والے کی مرضی پر ہیں تو ان کے بیان نہ کرنے سے مرنے والے کو گناہ کیوں ہو۔ اس کے گنہگار ہونے کا سوال تبھی ہو سکتا ہے جبکہ کسی شرعی حکم کی خلاف ورزی ہو رہی ہو اور وہ اسی طرح ہو سکتی ہے کہ اس آیت میں احکام وراثت بھی شامل ہوں اور مطلب یہ ہو کہ مرنے والا یہ وصیت کر جائے کہ احکام اسلام کے مطابق عمل کیا جائے اس صورت میں وہ گناہ سے بچ جائے
188
Commentary:
If a person makes a will in compliance with the above commandment, but his heirs, finding it to be prejudicial to their interests, alter it or hinder its execution, the blame and the responsibility for consequences will lie on those who tamper with the will and not on the maker of the will. Apparently, the verse seems to be superfluous; for what it says is obvious, i.e. the responsibility of any subsequent alteration cannot lie on the testator. But deeper consideration would show the futility of such an idea. In fact, the verse serves three important purposes. Firstly, it warns the testator that fear of any subsequent alteration should not deter him from making the will. Secondly, that he should act intelligently and cautiously and should try to foresee and forestall all possible mischief by his heirs. Thirdly, the verse warns the heirs and their friends that any alteration made by them in the will will bring them under the wrath of God Who is All-Knowing.
205A
This indicates that the previous verse contemplates some directions which are obligatory and a contravention of which would be sinful. Obviously, what is meant is a direction that the estate shall be administered in accordance with the law of inheritance. If the testator gives such a direction, then the sin of any contravention would lie on those who are guilty of the contravention.
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.
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.