Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:237

(And if you divorce them before you have touched them, and you have already appointed for them a dower): This is an explanation of the ruling regarding the woman for whom a dower was specified and who was divorced before consummation. The clause (and you have already...) is either a state (hal) of the subject of (you have divorced them) or a state of its object. The very act of "appointing" (the dower)—whether derived from a verb in the active or passive voice—even if it did not coincide with the moment of divorce, the state of the divorcer being one who has "appointed" in the past is undeniably concurrent with the divorce. The same applies to the state of the divorced woman being one for whom a dower was appointed in the past.

(Then half of what you appointed): That is, they are entitled to half of what you estimated and named for them as a dower; or, what is incumbent upon you is that amount. This is explicit that the obligation negated in the previous scenario (divorce before dower is named) is solely the liability for the dower. It was read as fanisfa (in the accusative case), implying "then pay half." Perhaps the delay in mentioning the ruling of naming the dower—even though it is the original intent in a contract and the most frequent occurrence—is a matter of gradual enactment of rulings, mentioning the more difficult cases first. The claim that this verse was revealed regarding an Ansari man who married a woman from the tribe of Banu Hanifa—whom he had designated a dower but divorced before consummation, and they disputed before the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), who said to him, "Give her a gift (mu'tah)," to which he replied, "I have nothing," so he said, "Give her your headpiece (qalansuwah), though I do not see it as worth anything"—is a report that has some debate; indeed, the Hafiz Wali al-Din al-Iraqi said, "I have not found it."

(Unless they forgo): This is an exception from the most general of states; that is, they are entitled to half of the appointed dower in every state, except for the state of their forgoing it. Thus, the right lapses after having been established. The morphological form itself allows for both the masculine and feminine plural; the difference lies in the consideration: in the first, the waw is a pronoun and the nun is a sign of the nominative case, whereas in the second, the waw is the radical letter of the verb, the nun is the pronoun, and the verb is indeclinable (mabni). For this reason, (an) here—which is an infinitive particle and not a softened anna—does not affect the verb, evidenced by the conjunction of the accusative case upon it in His saying: (or he forgoes). Al-Hasan read it with a quiescent (silent) waw, following the pattern: "God refused that I should be elevated by a mother or a father."

(He in whose hand is the marriage knot): This is the husband, who possesses the marriage contract and its dissolution. This is the interpretation transmitted from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), as narrated by Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim, Al-Tabarani in Al-Awsat, and Al-Bayhaqi with a hasan chain from Ibn Umar, in marfu' form. A group of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) held this view. His "forgoing" means his abandoning, out of nobility, that which returns to him—namely the half of the dower he had provided in full, as is customary; or, it means his giving the full dower that was previously appointed after the divorce, as interpreted by Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both). Calling this "forgoing" ('afw) is a matter of linguistic assimilation (mushakalah). It is sometimes interpreted as "surplus and abundance," as in His saying: "They ask you what they should spend; say: The 'afw (surplus)." And as the poet Zuhair said: "...firmness, piety to God, and a disposition that surpasses (ta'fu) the character of the offender." The reference of the exception, in that case, is to the prevention of increase in the exempted object, just as in the first interpretation it is to the prevention of decrease. That is, they are entitled to this amount without increase or decrease in all states, except in the state of their forgoing, in which case they do not receive the aforementioned amount (it is negated or diminished), or in the state of the husband's forgoing, in which case they receive the increase. This is based on the first interpretation of (then half...) where the mandatory nature is not being considered. As for the second interpretation, one must conclude that the exception is disconnected (munqati'), because in the scenario of the husband's forgoing, obligation upon him is inconceivable. This is what was said, so let it be pondered.

Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) in one of his narrations, along with Aisha, Tawus, Mujahid, 'Ata, Al-Hasan, Alqamah, Al-Zuhri, and Al-Shafi'i (may Allah be pleased with them) in his old opinion, held that (he in whose hand is the marriage knot) is the guardian (wali), without whose permission a woman cannot be married. For he has the right to forgo the dower if the married woman is a minor (in the opinion of some) or absolutely (in the opinion of others), even if she refuses. The relied-upon opinion is the transmitted one, which is more appropriate to His saying: (And to forgo is nearer to piety), for the dropping of another’s right does not constitute piety at all. This is an address to men and women alike; the masculine is used due to its precedence. The lam is for the purpose of transmission (ta'diyah). Among their rules—which few master—is that the superlative and the verb of wonder take the same preposition as their corresponding verbs, such as azhadu fihi (more ascetic regarding it) than such and such, even if the verb is originally transitive. If the verb implies knowledge or ignorance, it takes ba’ (e.g., a'lamu bil-fiqh); if it does not, it takes lam (e.g., anta adrabu li-Amr), except in the category of love and hatred, where it takes the object with ba’ (e.g., ahabbu fi Bakr). It was also read as wa-an ya'fu with a ya'.

(And do not forget the bounty between you): This is a conjunction to the nominal sentence, intended as an imperative in the most eloquent manner; that is, do not leave the showing of bounty to one another as if it were a forgotten thing. The prepositional phrase is either attached to "forget" or to an elided term acting as a hal of "bounty." Interpreting "bounty" as "increase" is an allusion to what preceded: (But men have a degree over them), in the lowest reaches of weakness. It is said the phrase is attached to an elided term acting as an adjective for "bounty," according to those who hold that the relative pronoun is elided along with part of its connective. "Bounty" here means "kindness"—that is, do not forget the kindness that exists between you; let it be in your remembrance so that each may desire to forgo in exchange for the other's kindness. But this is weak, for as it stands, it is objected that there is usually no kindness between a woman and her husband before consummation. Ali (may Allah honor his face) read: wa-la tanasaw (do not feign forgetfulness of), and some read: wa-la tansaw with a quiescent waw.

(Indeed, Allah is All-Seeing of what you do): Thus, what you do is almost never lost.