al-Mīzān⌕

Sūrah 4 · An-Nisa ٱلنِّسَاء

Verses 7–10

Verses

Now begins the legislation of inheritance laws, after paving the way for it. These verses give a precis of the said laws in its basic form, to let the people know that nobody can be deprived of inheritance after the proof of his birth or relation, as they used to debar minor heirs and women. Further it warns them against depriving the orphans from inheritance, as it would result in swallowing by others, heirs of the orphans’ share unjustly, and God has very severely prohibited it. The verses also recommend giving something from the estate to relatives, orphans and poor who, although not included among the heirs, might be present at the time of dividing the property.

لِّلرِّجَالِ نَصِيبٌ مِّمَّا تَرَكَ ٱلْوَٰلِدَانِ وَٱلْأَقْرَبُونَ وَلِلنِّسَآءِ نَصِيبٌ مِّمَّا تَرَكَ ٱلْوَٰلِدَانِ وَٱلْأَقْرَبُونَ مِمَّا قَلَّ مِنْهُ أَوْ كَثُرَ ۚ نَصِيبًا مَّفْرُوضًا ۝٧

7:2594:7 Men shall have a share of what the parents and the near relatives leave, and women shall have a share of what the parents and the near relatives leave, whether there is little or much of it;

a decreed share.

al-Naṣīb (share, portion) is derived from al-Naṣb (to make something stand, to lift up, to raise); this name points to the fact that at the time of division, every share is put separately to prevent its mixing with the others’. al-Tarikah means (the heritage, the property left by the deceased); it is as though he goes away leaving it; thus initially it was an allegorical usage, then became common. al-Aqrabūn (the nearer ones) refers to nearer relatives; choice of this word [of comparative degree] in preference to al-aqribāʾ (the near ones) and ulu al-qurba (relatives), etc., gives an indication that it is the essential pre-requisite of inheritance that the deceased should be nearer to the heir, as will be explained under the verse, your parents and your children, you know not which of them is nearer to you in usefulness [4:11]. al-Farḍ originally meant to cut a hard thing and to detach its parts from one another; that is why it is used for obligatory rules, because to follow and obey it is ‘‘determined’’ without any doubt; ‘‘a decreed share’’ means a determined and fixed portion or ratio.

7:260The verse ordains a comprehensive law and legislates a new system which was unfamiliar to the people. The people had never known any system similar to this inheritance law, as ordained in Islam. Traditionally they used to deprive many heirs of inheritance, and it had become a second nature to them; so much so that if anything was said against it, the minds were agitated and feelings hurt.

Islam paved the way for this new system, first by strengthening the ‘‘love in God’’ and giving preference to religion among the believers. Thus it established ‘‘brotherhood’’ between the believers and then made one ‘‘brother’’ inherit the other. This wiped out the previous succession rules, and the believers abandoned the old pride and prejudice. When the religion became strong and could stand on its feet, this final system of inheritance between the relatives was introduced—at a time when they were enough believers to accept this law with open arms.

The above discussion shows that this verse aims at clear description, and removal of all possible misunderstandings, by giving a fundamental and comprehensive basis of the law. Thus it says: ‘‘Men shall have a share of what the parents and the near relatives leave.’’ The rule is general and unrestricted, it is not qualified by any condition, attribute or other such things. Likewise the subject, that is, ‘‘men’’, is general and not qualified in any way; therefore the minors shall inherit like the adults.

Then it says: ‘‘and women shall have a share of what the parents and the near relatives leave.’’ Like the preceding sentence it is a general statement, without any shade of restriction; thus it covers all women without any qualification or condition. The clause, ‘‘of what the parents and the near relatives leave’’, has been repeated, although it could be replaced by a pronoun; the reason is to make the topic as clear as possible. It is followed by the clause, ‘‘whether there is little or much of it’’; it makes the matter even more clear, and shows that there is no room for any indulgence or negligence in this matter thinking that the deceased’s estate was very small or the value negligible. The verse ends on words, ‘‘a decreed share’’; it is a circumstantial clause, related to the preceding word, ‘‘a share’’, as it contains a connotation of masdar; it gives a double emphasis and makes the declaration even more clear that the shares are definitely fixed, and there is no room for any confusion or ambiguity.

It has been proven with this verse that the general law of inheritance covers the estate of the Prophet as well as of other Muslims, and that the doctrine of al-taʿṣīb (giving preference of agnates1) is invalid.

وَإِذَا حَضَرَ ٱلْقِسْمَةَ أُو۟لُوا۟ ٱلْقُرْبَىٰ وَٱلْيَتَـٰمَىٰ وَٱلْمَسَـٰكِينُ فَٱرْزُقُوهُم مِّنْهُ وَقُولُوا۟ لَهُمْ قَوْلًا مَّعْرُوفًا ۝٨

7:2614:8 When there are present at the division the relatives and the orphans and the needy, give them (something) out of it and speak to them kind words.

Apparently the verse refers to these people’s presence at the time when the heirs are dividing the estate among themselves, and not to their presence near the dying person when he is bequeathing his estate—as someone has written.

Accordingly, ‘‘the relatives’’, would refer to the poor among them; it is also proved from the fact that they have been mentioned with the orphans and the needy. The tone of the clauses, ‘‘give them (something) out of it and speak to them kind words,’’ obviously exhorts the hearers to mercy and kindness, and therefore it is addressed to the heirs and executors of the will.

There is a difference of opinion whether the order given in this verse (to give those people something from the estate) is obligatory or only a desirable act. It is a matter of jurisprudence beyond the scope of this book. Also there is disagreement whether the verse is decisive or has been abrogated by the verse of inheritance. But the relation between the two verses is not that of contradiction, because the verse of inheritance fixes the shares of the heirs, and this verse speaks about the non-heirs—either as obligation or recommendation—without fixing any share; therefore there is no ground for saying that it was abrogated, and especially if the described ‘‘giving’’ is only a recommendation—as the verse somewhat apparently shows.

وَلْيَخْشَ ٱلَّذِينَ لَوْ تَرَكُوا۟ مِنْ خَلْفِهِمْ ذُرِّيَّةً ضِعَـٰفًا خَافُوا۟ عَلَيْهِمْ فَلْيَتَّقُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ وَلْيَقُولُوا۟ قَوْلًا سَدِيدًا ۝٩

4:9 And let those fear who, should they leave behind them weakly 7:262offspring, would fear on their account; so let them fear Allah, and let them speak right words.

Fear is a psychological effect caused by nearness of a somewhat great danger or evil; al-sadād and al-sadad of a talk means its being right, correct, straight, relevant.

Probably the verse has a sort of connection with the previous one, ‘‘Men shall have …’’, because that verse with its generality contains the laws of the orphans’ inheritance; now this one in a way is a warning and a threat to him who wants to follow the old system of depriving small heirs of inheritance. In that case, the clause, ‘‘and let them speak right words’’, will be an adverse and unfavorable allusion to their habit as they did not give any share to, and swallowed the rights of the minor orphans. The allegorical use of ‘‘word’’ for ‘‘deed’’ is very common because of their mutual association. God has said: … and speak to men good (words) … [2:83]. This idea is also supported by the use of the adjective, ‘‘right’’ for ‘‘words’’ instead of ‘‘kind’’ or ‘‘gentle’’; apparently a word may be called right when it can be believed and acted upon—not when it can only preserve people’s dignity and honor.

In any case, the clause, ‘‘And let those fear who, should they leave behind them weakly offspring, would fear on their account’’, is obviously a simile to animate and stimulate mercy and compassion for small weakly children who have lost their guardian and protector (who could have looked after their welfare and saved them from humiliation and disgrace). The implied threat and warning is not directed to only him who may at the material time be actually having some weakly offspring; it uses the conjunction law (if) [which as a rule introduces hypothetical conditional clauses], and does not say, ‘should they leave behind their weakly offspring’. It is rather a simile to present a clear image of the situation. The connotation therefore would be as follows: Let those fear who have in their hearts mercy for humanity and compassion and sympathy for those weakly small children who have lost their fathers and are orphaned—only such people are real Muslims who are imbued with divine characteristics and graced with God’s manners. In other words: Let those people fear and be afraid of God in matters of the orphans, because they are like their own orphans, small and weak; the people must fear for them and care for their welfare; these helpless children should not be oppressed nor their rights usurped. The style is the same as we say: ‘‘Let him who fears dishonor and humiliation, try his level best to earn his livelihood’’—and who does not fear it?

7:263People have not been ordered here to show mercy and compassion, etc.; they have been told to fear and be afraid of God. It is a threat that whatever they do to other people’s orphans by usurping their rights and swallowing their property unjustly, would befall their own orphans after them; whatever misfortunes and miseries they cause to others’ orphans would return to their own orphans after their passing away.

As for the clause, ‘‘so let them fear God and let them speak right words’’, we have already explained that apparently the ‘‘words’’ connotes practical behavior; also possibly it may mean views, ideas and advice.

  1. An agnate is a person descended from the same male ancestor as another specified or implied person, especially through the male line. (Pub.) ↩

The Deed Returns to its Doer

Whoever deals unjustly with an orphan in his property, his injustice will surely return to his own orphans, to the orphans from his offspring. It is one of the marvellous Qur’anic realities. It branches from a divinely revealed reality that there is a connection between the good and bad deeds and the natural phenomena. We have thrown some light on it while discussing the Rules Governing Actions in the second volume of this book.1

People, on the whole, believe that man reaps what he sows, that he harvests the fruits of his deeds; a benevolent good-doer gets bliss and felicity in his life, while an oppressive evil person has to taste the evil consequences of his misdeeds. There are many verses in the Qur’an which prove this fact with their unrestricted style. God says:

Whoever does good, it is for his own soul, and whoever does evil, it is against it [41:46].

So, he who has done an atom’s weight of good shall see it. And he who has done an atom’s weight of evil shall see it [99:7–8].

He said: ‘‘I am Joseph and this is my brother; Allah has indeed been gracious to us; surely he who guards (against evil) and is patient (is rewarded) for surely Allah does not waste the reward of those who do good’’ [12:90]. … for him is disgrace in this world … [22:9].

And whatever affliction befalls you, it is on account of what your hands have wrought [42:30].

There are many such verses which show that good and evil deeds react on, and return to, their doer in this world too.

7:264Our thoughts are conditioned by our experiences in the society; and when we hear such statements, the first thought that comes to our minds is that the doer himself reaps the fruits of his actions. But there are verses that show that the affair is much wider and more encompassing; that man’s deeds—good or bad—sometimes return to his progeny. God says: And as for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the city, and there was beneath it a treasure belonging to them, and their father was a righteous man; so your Lord desired that they should attain their maturity and take out their treasure, a mercy from your Lord [18:82].2 It is obvious from the verse that their father’s righteousness had some hand in what God intended for them as a mercy from Him. On the other hand, God says in the verse under discussion: ‘‘And let those fear who, should they leave behind them weakly offspring, would fear on their account.’’

Therefore, the matter of the effects of deeds is wider and more general; and the blessing of misfortune that befalls a man results sometimes from his own actions and sometimes from what his progenitors had done.

Meditation on the divine words leads us to the basic cause of this phenomenon. We have described in the second volume3 on the topic of Invocation, under the verse: And when My servants ask you concerning Me, then verily I am very near [2:186], that according to the divine words, whatever comes to man from God is because of an invocation which he addresses to his Lord; whatever preliminaries and causes a servant prepares, are in reality a sort of supplication and invocation addressed by him to his Lord; and it brings to him the effects and results from the Lord. God says: All those who are in the heavens and the earth do beseech Him; every day He is in a (new) state (of glory) [55:29]; And He gives you of all that you ask Him; and if you count Allah’s bounties, you will not be able to number them [14:34]. It should be noted that God has not said, ‘and if you count it, you will not be able to number it.’ [In other words, He has not used pronouns which would refer to all that they had asked for and was consequently given to them by God; instead, He has used the clear expression, ‘‘God’s bounties’’] because not all that they had [practically] asked for was a bounty (and the verse aims at showing His favors to them and admonishing them for their ungratefulness]; that is why He mentioned only a part of what they had asked for, and that is the bounties.

7:265Whatever man opts for himself, or whatever he does to another person—whether good or bad—shows that he is pleased that it should befall the other person who is a human being like himself. In this way he practically asks for that thing for himself and shows his pleasure that it should befall him—because he too is a human being like his victim. It clearly means that when a man does good to someone else, he in reality asks God to do exactly the same good to himself—an invocation that is bound to be answered and cannot be rejected. Also when he does an evil or injustice to someone, he in effect asks for it for himself and shows his pleasure with it. Thus whatever he is pleased to do with others’ children and orphans, in effect he is pleased that it be done to his own children, and practically asks it to be done to his own orphans—be it good or bad.

God says: And every one has a direction to which he would return; therefore hasten to (do) good works [2:148]; that is, hasten towards good works so that your direction should be good.

All human beings have a common blood in their veins and have come out from the same womb. It makes the descent, that is, progeny, a single unit. Whatever condition affects any side of this unit, and whatever misfortune befalls it, in reality affects and befalls the main body and reaches through it to all sides [including the doer’s]. We have thrown some light on womb (relationship) at the beginning of this chapter.

Now it is clear without any doubt that whatever a man does to another person or to that person’s progeny, is bound to come back to him or his progeny, except that God should decide otherwise. We have inserted this exception because there are many causes and factors affecting one’s existence which we are not even aware of, and possibly some of them might exert an opposite influence on one’s affairs. Some hint of it may be found in the divine words, And whatever affliction befalls you, it is on account of what your hand have wrought, and (yet) He pardons most (of your faults) [42:30].

Commentary continues:

إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ يَأْكُلُونَ أَمْوَٰلَ ٱلْيَتَـٰمَىٰ ظُلْمًا إِنَّمَا يَأْكُلُونَ فِى بُطُونِهِمْ نَارًا ۖ وَسَيَصْلَوْنَ سَعِيرًا ۝١٠

4:10 (As for) those who swallow the property of the orphans 7:266unjustly, surely they only swallow fire into their bellies and soon they shall enter burning fire.

The sentences, ‘He swallowed it’, and, ‘He swallowed it into his belly’, both have the same meaning, but the latter is clearer and more emphatic. This verse too, like the preceding one, is related in theme with the opening sentence, ‘‘Men shall have a share …’’ It threatens people and deters them from swallowing the orphans’ shares of inheritance.

The verse is one of those which prove the embodiment of deeds, as was explained in the first volume4, under the verse: Surely Allah is not ashamed to set forth any parable … [2:26]. Perhaps it is this idea which an exegete had in mind when he wrote that the words, surely they only swallow fire into their bellies, have been used in their literal, not metaphorical, sense.

Another exegete has unjustifiably taken exception to this statement. He has said: The verb, ‘‘they only swallow’’, is used here as a present, not future, tense, because the future is described by the subsequent clause, ‘‘and soon they shall enter burning fire.’’ (Note the word, ‘‘soon.’’) Now if swallowing the fire is taken in its literal meaning and it is to happen on the Day of Resurrection—then this sentence too should have contained the word, ‘‘soon.’’ Therefore, the clause is, in fact, used in allegorical sense and means that in swallowing the orphans’ property they resemble someone who swallows fire into his belly.

This is the gist of his objection; but it shows that the objector was oblivious of the import of embodiment of deeds.

The end clause, and soon they shall enter burning fire, points to the chastisement in the hereafter. al-Saʿīr (burning fire) is one of the names of the fire of the hereafter; [yaṣlawna, (translated here as ‘‘they shall enter’’, ) is derived from] ṣaliya al-nār, yaṣlā, ṣalyan (that is, he broiled and burned into fire; he underwent ordeal of fire).

  1. Vide al-Mīzān [Eng. trans.], vol. 3. (Trans.) ↩

  2. This verse also proves that the progeny of the Prophet (the ahl al-Bayt) deserve and have the right to be honored and dignified by the believers since he (the Prophet) was the most righteous in the sight of God. (Pub.) ↩

  3. Vide al-Mīzān [Eng. trans.], vol. 3. (Trans.) ↩

  4. Vide al-Mīzān [Eng. trans.], vol. (Trans.) ↩

Examining Narrations

(1) Majmaʿ al-bayān says about the verse, Men shall have a share of what the parents and the near relatives leave: ‘‘People have two views about this verse; one is that it is decisive and not abrogated; and this has been narrated from al-Bāqir.’’

Author’s comments: It is narrated from al-Tafsīr of al-Qummī that this verse was abrogated by the verse, God enjoins you concerning your children. But there is no justification for this view. We have explained in the above commentary that this verse gives a precis of the coming inheritance laws; and there is no contradiction at all between this and the other decisive verses of inheritance, so that it could be said to have been abrogated. (2) Ibn Jarīr, Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Abī Ḥātim have narrated from ʿIkrimah about this verse: ‘‘It was revealed about Umm Kulthūm and daughter of Umm Kuḥlah or Umm Kuḥḥah herself and Thaʿlabah b. Aws and Suwayd (all of them from the Anṣār). One was her husband and the other the paternal uncle of her child. She said: ‘O Messenger of God! My husband died leaving me and his daughter, but we were not given anything from his inheritance.’ The uncle of her child said: ‘O Messenger of God! (How can she get his inheritance when) she neither rides a horse nor attacks an enemy, and while she needs others to earn for her and she does not earn? Then the verse was revealed: Men shall have a share … (al-Durru al-manthūr)

7:267Author’s comments: Some other traditions say that it was revealed about a man from the Anṣār who died leaving two daughters. Then his two cousins came and they were his agnates [to take his inheritance]. His wife told them: ‘‘Marry these two (girls)’’—and they were not beautiful. So they refused. Then she brought the matter before the Messenger of God; then the verses of inheritance were revealed … As we have repeatedly said, there could be more than one reason for revelation of a verse. (3) Majmaʿ al-bayān says about the verse, And when there are present …‘‘People have two different opinions about this verse; one is that it is decisive, not abrogated, and it is narrated from al-Bāqir.’’ (4) al-Shaybānī says that the above is narrated from both al-Bāqir and al-Ṣādiq (peace be on them). (Nahju al-bayān)

Author’s comments: Some traditions say that it is abrogated by the verses of inheritance; but we have mentioned earlier that it is not repealable.

(5) Abū ʿAbdillāh and Abu al-Ḥasan (peace be on them) have said: ‘‘God has threatened two punishments concerning the orphan’s property: One is the punishment of the hereafter, (and that is) the fire; and as for the other, it is the punishment of this world, (and it is) His words: And let those fear who, should they leave behind them weakly offspring, would fear on their account; so let them fear Allah and let them speak right words.’’ (Then) he said: ‘‘He means that he should fear that God would requite him in his offspring as he had done with these orphans.’’ (al-Tafsīr, al-ʿAyyāshī)

7:268Author’s comments: A similar tradition is narrated in al-Kāfī from al-Ṣādiq, and in Maʿāni al-akhbār from al-Bāqir.

(6) ʿAbd al-Aʿlā, mawlā (freed-slave) of Āl Sām, says: ‘‘Abū ʿAbdillāh said (without anybody asking him): ‘Whoever does injustice, God shall give someone power over him, who will oppress him; or over his children or over his grandchildren.’ So I thought and said in my heart: ‘Injustice is committed by him and someone is imposed on his children and grandchildren?!’ The Imām then said to me before I could speak: ‘Surely God says: And let those fear who, should they leave behind them weakly offspring, would fear on their account; so let them fear Allah, and let them speak right words.’ ’’ (al-Tafsīr, al-ʿAyyāshī)

(7) ʿAbd b. Ḥamīd has narrated from Qatādah that he said: ‘‘We have been told that the Prophet of God said: ‘Fear God regarding to weaklings: the orphan and the woman; (God) made him orphan, then urged (people) to take care of him; and put him to test, and put (others) to test through him.’ ’’ (al-Durru al-manthūr)

Author’s comments: There are a lot of almost mutawātir traditions narrated through the chains of both sects, in condemnation of swallowing the orphan’s property, showing that it is a major and mortal sin.