Tafsir of Maryam 19:6

His saying: "He inherits from me and inherits from the family of Ya'qub (Jacob)" is an adjective for "a successor" (waliyyan), as is common with sentences that follow indefinite nouns. It is said: warithahu (he inherited him) and waritha minhu (he inherited from him)—they are two linguistic variants. It has also been said that "from" (min) is for partitive sense, not for transitivity. The "family" (al) of a man are his kin to whom his affairs return due to kinship, companionship, or agreement in religion. Ya'qub, according to what is narrated from al-Suddi, is Ya'qub bin Ishaq bin Ibrahim. For Zakariyya was from the offspring of Harun, who was from the offspring of Lawi bin Ya'qub; and he was married to the sister of Maryam bint 'Imran, who was from the offspring of Sulayman bin Dawud (peace be upon them both), who was also from the offspring of Yahudha bin Ya'qub. Al-Kalbi and Muqatil said: He is Ya'qub bin Mathan, and his brother is 'Imran bin Mathan, the father of Maryam. It is also said: He is the brother of Zakariyya (peace be upon him). The intent behind "inheritance" in both places is "knowledge," as has been said.

Al-Kalbi said: The sons of Mathan were the chiefs and kings of the Children of Israel, and Zakariyya (peace be upon him) was the chief of the priests (al-ahbar) at that time. He wanted his offspring to inherit his priesthood and inherit the kingship from the sons of Mathan, so the inheritance would be of different types in the two places. This is supported by the fact that he did not choose to conjoin it to the pronoun in the accusative (i.e., yarithuni), but sufficed with the first "inherits" (yarith). It is also said that the first inheritance is the inheritance of Prophethood, and the second is the inheritance of kingship, thus they are also different. However, his saying: "And make him, my Lord, pleasing [to You] (6)"—meaning, pleasing to You in word and deed. It is said [it means]: "contented." The first is more appropriate, and in this view, it serves as a confirmation, for a Prophet’s state is such. According to what we said, it is a prayer for his success in action, just as the first contained a prayer for his success in knowledge; it is as if he requested that his son be a learned, practicing individual. It is said: The intent is "make him pleasing among Your servants," meaning, to be followed; so there is no confirmation here at all. The placing of "my Lord" between the two objects of "make" in all views is to emphasize the great concern for the matter he is requesting.

Al-Sakkaki chose the view that the two sentences are independent, initiated sentences (musta'nafat) by way of explanation, because he argues that the adjectival view would necessitate that Zakariyya (peace be upon him) was not granted what he was promised regarding the destruction of Yahya (peace be upon him) before his own destruction—before the killing of Yahya (peace be upon him). This was countered in al-Kashf by stating that it is refuted because the reports are contradictory, and the majority hold that Zakariyya perished before him (peace be upon them both). He then said: As for the response that there is no disgrace in a Prophet having some of his prayers answered and others not—do you not see the supplication of our Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) regarding his nation, where he said: "I asked Him that they not inflict hardship upon one another, but He forbade it for me." And the supplication of Ibrahim (peace be upon him) regarding his father—this would only be sound if the warned-against outcome were that, but the warned-against outcome is the necessity of a breach of promise in the word of the Almighty. For He (Glorified and Exalted be He) said regarding the Prophets: "So We responded to him," which indicates that he (peace be upon him) was given what he asked for without distinguishing between one part and another, and the same applies to the context of other verses. You may also use the apparent meaning of this verse to argue against the weakness of the report of those who claim that Yahya perished before his father (peace be upon them both). As for the objection that what was chosen—interpreting it as an independent sentence—does not remove the difficulty because the logical connection remains, that is nothing, for the connection is established but is not part of the request; it is an explanation of the cause that prompted the request, and it does not follow that the cause of the request must itself be requested.

Some answered that since the intent of inheritance here is the inheritance of knowledge, his perishing before his father (peace be upon them both) does not cause harm, as the purpose is achieved, which is the reception of that [knowledge] and adding it to others so that its traces remain long after Zakariyya (peace be upon him). It is not hidden that what is known is the remaining of the inheritor after the one inherited from.

Abu 'Amr, al-Kisa'i, al-Zuhri, al-A'mash, Talha, al-Yazidi, Ibn 'Isa al-Asfahani, Ibn Muhaysin, and Qatada recited the two verbs as jussive (jazm), as they are the answer to the prayer. The meaning is: "If You grant me that, he will inherit from me..." The intent is that this is how it is in my expectation and hope. Ali (may Allah honor his face), Ibn 'Abbas, Ja'far bin Muhammad (may Allah be pleased with them), al-Hasan, Ibn Ya'mar, al-Jahdari, Abu Harb bin Abi al-Aswad, and Abu Nahik recited "inherits" (yarithuni) in the nominative and "and I inherit" (wa-arithu) as an imperfect verb from waritha. This is explained by the meaning: "He inherits from me knowledge, and I inherit by him the kingship from the family of Ya'qub." This is by making the heir's inheritance of kingship an inheritance for Zakariyya (peace be upon him), for the loftiness of the child is the loftiness of the parent, and the waw is for absolute conjunction. Some said: The waw is for the state (hal), and the sentence is a state from one of the two pronouns. The author of al-Lawami' said: There is a transposition, and its meaning is: "Grant me a successor from the family of Ya'qub who inherits the Prophethood from me if I die before him, and I inherit his wealth if he dies before me." In this, there is what you will know, Allah willing, soon. It is reported from Ali (may Allah honor his face) and a group that they recited "he inherits" and "I inherit" with the nominative, with "I inherit" (arith) in the measure of fa'il as the agent of "he inherits" through the method of tajrid (abstraction), as Abu al-Fath and others said. That is, a successor inherits from me from that successor, or by him. He has abstracted from the successor a successor, just as you say: "I saw in him/by him a lion." From al-Jahdari, it is reported that he recited "and I inherit" (wa-arith) with imala of the waw. Mujahid recited "or he inherits" (aw yarith) as a diminutive of warith (heir). Its origin is wuyarith with two waws: the first is the radical fa of the word, and the second is a replacement for the alif of fa'il, because it turns into a waw in the diminutive, like duwayrib. When the waw occurred with a damma before another in the beginning, it was changed into a hamza, as established in morphology. It is also reported from him that he said the diminutive is for his youth; for when he requested him in his old age, he knew, even by intuition, that he would inherit from him in his young age. It is also said: It is for praise, but that is not strong.

Here, the Shi'a argued from the verse that the Prophets (peace be upon them) have their wealth inherited from them, for inheritance is literal in the inheritance of wealth, and there is no impetus to deviate from the literal meaning. Jalal al-Suyuti mentioned in al-Durr al-Manthur from Ibn 'Abbas, Mujahid, 'Ikrimah, and Abu Salih that they said regarding the verse: "Inherits from me my wealth." 'Abd al-Razzaq, 'Abd bin Humayd, Ibn Jarir, and Ibn Abi Hatim narrated from al-Hasan that he (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said regarding the verse: "May Allah have mercy on my brother Zakariyya, what he possessed of inheritance," and in another narration: "What he possessed of those who inherit his wealth." Some said: The inheritance is apparent in that, and it is not permissible here to interpret it as the inheritance of Prophethood, lest his saying: "And make him, my Lord, pleasing" be an exaggeration. Nor as the inheritance of knowledge, because that is acquired, and the inherited is obtained without acquisition. The doctrine of the Sunnis is that the Prophets (peace be upon them) do not bequeath wealth, nor are they inherited, due to the authentic reports they hold.

This has also come through the path of the Shi'a; for al-Kulayni narrated in al-Kafi from Abu al-Bakhtari from Abu 'Abd Allah Ja'far al-Sadiq (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: "Verily, the scholars are the inheritors of the Prophets, for the Prophets did not bequeath a dirham or a dinar, but they bequeathed traditions from their traditions; so whoever takes something of them has taken a great share." The word "only" (innama) is restrictive, by the admission of the Shi'a. The inheritance in the verse is to be interpreted as you have heard. We do not concede that it is a literal linguistic term for the inheritance of wealth; rather, it is literal for what encompasses the inheritance of knowledge, status, and wealth. It only became exclusively associated with wealth in the custom of jurists due to frequent usage, like customary moveables. Even if we concede that it is a metaphor in that, it is a well-known, conventional metaphor, especially in the usage of the Glorious Qur'an, such that it equals the literal. Among these are His saying (Exalted be He): "Then We caused to inherit the Book those We have chosen of Our servants," and His saying: "And there succeeded them successors who inherited the Scripture," and His saying: "Verily, the earth belongs to Allah; He inherits it to whom He wills of His servants, and to Allah is the inheritance of the heavens and the earth." To their saying that there is no impetus to turn away from the literal meaning, we say: The impetus is realized, which is protecting the speech of the Infallible from lying, and to interpret it otherwise is like "cutting thorns" (i.e., extremely difficult). The narrations indicating that they bequeath wealth are not relied upon by critics. Some claimed that it is not permissible to interpret the inheritance here as the inheritance of Prophethood lest his saying: "And make him, my Lord, pleasing" be an exaggeration; we have already presented what makes one aware of the flaw in that. The claim that the "acquisitive nature" of a thing prevents it from being inherited is nothing; for inheritance has been linked to what is not acquisitive in the speech of al-Sadiq. Among that is also what al-Kulayni narrated in al-Kafi from Abu 'Abd Allah (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: "Verily, Sulayman inherited Dawud, and Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) inherited Sulayman (peace be upon him)." For the inheritance of the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) of Sulayman (peace be upon him) cannot be imagined to be anything other than the inheritance of knowledge, Prophethood, and the like. What supports interpreting the inheritance here as the inheritance of knowledge and the like—rather than wealth—is that in the high perspectives and lofty aspirations of the holy souls that have severed themselves from the attachments of this changing, fleeting world and connected to the enduring world, there is no inclination for worldly goods even equal to the wing of a gnat. Especially the presence of Zakariyya (peace be upon him), for he was famous for the perfection of detachment and abstraction. It is habitual-impossible for him to fear the inheritance of wealth and goods for which he has not the slightest regard in his high perspective, or to show anxiety, sadness, or fear on their account, and to request that type of request from the Presence of the Truth (Glorified and Exalted be He), for that would indicate complete love and attachment of the heart to the world. The Shi'a said: He (peace be upon him) feared that his cousins would spend his wealth after his death in what is not appropriate, so he asked for a pleasing heir for that. The response is that this is something not to be feared; for when a man dies and his wealth transfers by inheritance to another, the wealth becomes the wealth of that other person, so he spends it on his own responsibility, rightly or wrongly, and there is no blame on the deceased for that spending, nor is there even reproach. Moreover, preventing this fear was easy for him (peace be upon him) by spending it before his death and giving it all away in charity in the path of Allah, leaving his evil cousins disappointed due to their bad conditions and ugly deeds. For the Prophets (peace be upon them), according to the Shi'a, have knowledge of the time of their death and choice regarding it, so he had no fear of sudden death either. Thus, his (peace be upon him) intent from the request for a child was nothing but the execution of Allah’s commands, the promotion of the Shari'a, and the remaining of Prophethood in his offspring, for that necessitates the multiplication of reward to wherever Allah wills of time. Whoever is fair will not hesitate in accepting this, and Allah is the Guide to the most upright paths.