Tafsir of Al-Ahzab 33:5

(Call them by their fathers) meaning: attribute them to them and designate them by them. The two Sheikhs (al-Bukhari and Muslim), al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa'i, and others recorded from Ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both) that Zaid bin Harithah, the freedman of the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), was not called by us anything but "Zaid bin Muhammad" until the Quranic verse was revealed: (Call them by their fathers), etc. Then the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: "You are Zaid bin Harithah bin Sharahil."

Regarding his story (may Allah be pleased with him), Ibn Marduwayh recorded from Ibn Abbas that he was with his maternal uncles among the Banu Ma'n of the Banu Tha'l of Tayy' when he was captured during a raid on Tayy'. He was brought to the market of 'Ukaz. Hakim bin Hizam bin Khuwaylid set out to 'Ukaz to trade, and his aunt Khadijah instructed him to buy her a clever Arab slave if he could find one. When he arrived, he found Zaid being sold there; his cleverness impressed him, so he bought him and brought him to her. He said to her: "I have bought you a clever Arab slave; if he pleases you, take him, and if not, leave him, for he has pleased me." When Khadijah saw him, she was pleased and took him. Then the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) married her while Zaid was with her. The Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) was impressed by Zaid's cleverness and asked her to give him to him. She said: "I give him to you. If you wish to manumit him, the patronage (wala') is mine." The Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) declined, so she gave him to him, to manumit or keep as he wished. He remained with the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) as he grew up.

Later, he went out with some camels belonging to Abu Talib in the land of Syria, and passed by the land of his people. His uncle recognized him, approached him, and said: "Who are you, boy?" He said: "A slave from the people of Mecca." He said: "Are you one of them?" He said: "No." He said: "Are you free or enslaved?" He said: "Enslaved." He said: "To whom?" He said: "To Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Abdul-Muttalib." He said: "Are you an Arab or a non-Arab?" He said: "An Arab." He said: "From whom is your origin?" He said: "From Kalb." He said: "From which Kalb?" He said: "From the Banu 'Abd Wadd." He said: "Woe to you, whose son are you?" He said: "The son of Harithah bin Sharahil." He said: "Where were you taken?" He said: "From among my maternal uncles." He said: "And who are your maternal uncles?" He said: "Tayy'." He said: "What is your mother's name?" He said: "Sa'da." He embraced him and said: "The son of Harithah!" He called his father, saying: "O Harithah, this is your son." Harithah came, and when he saw him, he recognized him. He said: "How has your master treated you?" He said: "He prefers me over his own family and children." His father, uncle, and brother rode with him until they reached Mecca and met the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace). Harithah said to him: "O Muhammad, you are the people of the sanctuary of Allah and His neighbors; at His house, you release the captive and feed the prisoner. My son is with you, so show us favor and be kind to us in his ransom, for you are the son of the leader of his people, and we will offer you as much ransom as you wish." The Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said to him: "I will offer you something better than that." They said: "What is it?" He said: "I will give him the choice; if he chooses you, take him without ransom, and if he chooses me, then refrain from interfering." He said: "May Allah reward you well; you have been kind."

The Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) called him and said: "O Zaid, do you recognize these?" He said: "Yes, this is my father, my uncle, and my brother." The Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: "They are whom you have known. If you choose them, go with them; and if you choose me, then I am whom you know." Zaid said: "I will never choose anyone over you; you are to me in the place of a father and an uncle." His father and uncle said: "O Zaid, do you choose slavery?" He said: "I will never part with this man." When the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) saw his attachment to him, he said: "Bear witness that he is free, and that he is my son; he inherits from me and I inherit from him." His father and uncle were satisfied when they saw the honor he held with him (peace be upon him). He continued to be called Zaid bin Muhammad during the Pre-Islamic era until the Quran was revealed: (Call them by their fathers), so he was called Zaid bin Harithah. In some narrations, his father heard that he was in Mecca, so he came to him with his uncle and brother, and what transpired took place.

(It is more just in the sight of Allah): This is a justification for the command, and the pronoun refers to the verbal noun "calling" (du'a'akum), as in the Almighty’s saying: (Be just; that is nearer to righteousness). (Aqsatu - more just) is an elative noun intended to denote the increase of qist (justice) absolutely, meaning "perfect in honesty." This dispels the misconception that the context requires mentioning "honesty" rather than "justice." That is, your calling them by their fathers is perfect in justice and honesty, and exceeds in that according to the judgment and decree of Allah Almighty.

It is permitted that it be an elative in its common usage, meaning "more just than what they (the polytheists) said." Attributing justice to it—even though it is a falsehood with no inherent justice—is by way of sarcasm.

(But if you do not know their fathers), meaning: do not recognize them so as to attribute them to them, (then they are your brothers in religion and your mawali), meaning: your allies in it. Call them by [the terms] "brotherhood" and "patronage" by interpreting them as brotherhood and alliance in religion. Because of this meaning, it was said to Salim after the revelation of the verse: "the mawla (ally/client) of Hudhayfah," although he had adopted him before. It is also said that (mawalikum) means "your cousins," or "your freedmen." It seems the command to call them by such terms was to soothe their hearts; hence, there was no command to call them by their names alone.

(And there is no sin upon you in that wherein you erred), meaning: in what you did of that [adoption] while erring and ignorant before the prohibition. (But what your hearts have intended), meaning: but the guilt and sin lies in what you intentionally persisted in after the prohibition. This is based on the idea that (ma) is in the genitive case, conjunctive to the (ma) in (fi ma akhta'tum - in what you erred). This has been objected to, stating that a conjunctive genitive cannot have a separation between it and that which it is conjunctive to. Thus, Sibawayh said regarding the phrase "There is no one like Abdullah, and [not] his brother": he omitted the genitive noun (the mudaf) from the perspective of the conjunct and kept the genitive noun (the mudaf ilayh) in its grammatical state, the original being "and not [like] his brother," so that the conjunction is on the nominative. A reply was given by distinguishing between the instance here and the example, as there is no separation here because the conjunct is the relative pronoun with its relative clause—i.e., (ma ta'ammadat)—following the likeness of its counterpart, (ma akhta'tum). Or, the meaning is: "But that which your hearts have intended is the sin," with (ma) in the nominative case as an initial subject, and its predicate being an implied sentence. The attribution of intention to the hearts is akin to the attribution in the Almighty’s saying: (...and his heart is sinful). That the first [part of the verse] refers to the time before the prohibition and the second to after it was recorded by al-Firyabi, Ibn Abi Shaybah, Ibn Jarir, Ibn al-Mundhir, and Ibn Abi Hatim from Mujahid.

It is also said: both instances refer to the time after the prohibition, and "error" is the opposite of "intentionality." The meaning is: there is no sin upon you if you call someone else's son "my son" by way of error and lack of intention, such as a slip of the tongue or forgetfulness, but the sin is upon you if you say that intentionally. Ibn Jarir, Ibn al-Mundhir, and Ibn Abi Hatim recorded from Qatadah that he said regarding this verse: "If you call a man by other than his father's name while you believe he is his father, there is no harm upon you; but [the sin is in] what your hearts have intended and aimed at by calling him by other than his father's name."

It is permitted that the Almighty's saying (And there is no sin upon you), etc., intends the pardon of error as opposed to intentionality by way of generalization, due to the hadith of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her): "The Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: 'I do not fear error for you, but I fear intentionality for you.'" And the hadith of Ibn Abbas: "The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: 'My nation has been excused for error, forgetfulness, and what they are coerced into.'" Then, due to its generality, it encompasses the error of adoption and the intentional act. The sentence, upon the assumption of specification or generalization, is stated as a parenthetical remark to confirm compliance with what was commanded, while incorporating a ruling intended in itself. Some have treated it as a conjunction interpreted as a mandatory sentence, meaning: "Call them by their fathers—it is more just for you—and do not call them [your sons] by your own selves intentionally, lest you sin," upon the assumption of specification, or as a digressive sentence upon the assumption of generalization. This has been objected to as being an unnecessary affectation. The literal meaning of the verse indicates the prohibition of intentionally calling a person by other than his father. Perhaps this applies when the call is in the manner of the Pre-Islamic era. As for when it is not so, such as when an elder says to a youth, by way of affection and compassion, "O my son"—and this happens often—it appears that there is no prohibition.

In the footnotes of al-Khafaji on the Tafsir of al-Baydawi, it is mentioned that "prophecy"—even if interpretation is valid for it just as it is for "brotherhood"—was prohibited by way of analogy to the disbelievers, and the prohibition is for tanzih (avoidance of the disliked). Perhaps he did not intend by this prohibition what the aforementioned verse indicates, for what the verse indicates is the prohibition of tahrim (strictly forbidden) regarding the call in the manner of the Pre-Islamic era. It is better to say in explaining the prohibition: "to close the door to total imitation of the disbelievers." This view, which al-Khafaji mentioned—that it is disliked for a person to say to another's child "O my son"—was recounted to me by one I approve of from the Fatawa al-Kubra of Ibn Hajar. As for the ruling of adoption by saying "He is my son," if he is a slave to the speaker, manumission occurs in any case. His lineage is not established from him unless he was of unknown lineage and was such that one like him could be born to one like him, and he had not previously acknowledged his lineage to someone else. According to al-Shafi'i, adoption has no legal weight; it neither results in manumission nor the establishment of lineage. The verification of this is in its proper place. Furthermore, it appears there is no difference—if the father is unknown—between saying "O my brother" and saying "O my mawla," as both are absolutely permissible in that case. However, some have explicitly stated the prohibition of saying to a sinner "O my mawla," due to a hadith regarding that. It is said that this is because it involves glorifying him, which is forbidden. The implication of this is that the phrase "O my brother," if it involves glorification—such as if it is addressed to someone of high status—is also forbidden. Perhaps calling someone whose father is unknown by what was mentioned is restricted to when he is not a sinner. The evidence for the restriction is the same as the evidence for the prohibition of glorifying a sinner. Reflect on this. Similarly, it is apparent that there is no difference in the command of calling regarding whether the called person is male or female, but we have not come across the occurrence of adoption of females in the Pre-Islamic era. Allah Almighty knows best.

(And Allah is ever Forgiving)—so He forgives the one who acts intentionally if he repents—(Merciful)—and for this reason, He, the Exalted, lifted the sin from the one who errs. It is known from the verse that it is not permissible for a person to attribute himself to other than his father. Some have counted this among the major sins due to what the two Sheikhs and Abu Dawud recorded from Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas that the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: "Whoever claims to be the son of someone other than his father, while knowing that he is his father, then Paradise is forbidden to him."

The two Sheikhs also recorded: "Whoever claims someone other than his father, or belongs to other than his masters, upon him is the curse of Allah, the angels, and all mankind; Allah will not accept from him any obligatory or supererogatory deed." They also recorded: "There is no man who claims to be the son of other than his father, while he knows it, but he has disbelieved."

Al-Tabarani recorded in al-Saghir from the hadith of 'Amr bin Shu'ayb from his father from his grandfather—and his hadith is hasan—that he said: The Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: "He has disbelieved, the one who disavows his lineage, even if it is minor, or claims a lineage that is not known," in addition to other reports.

As for the relevance of the Almighty’s saying: (Allah has not made...), etc., to what precedes it: it is the beginning of mentioning some of the revelation that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was commanded to follow. So it is said. It is also said: since the Almighty commanded piety (taqwa), it is fitting that there should not be in the heart piety for other than Allah Almighty, for a person does not have two hearts, to fear Allah with one and someone else with the other, except by turning the heart away from the direction of Allah to other than Him, and that is not fitting for one who fears Allah as He should be feared.

Abu Muslim said that it is connected to the Almighty’s saying: (And do not obey the disbelievers and the hypocrites), as it was brought to refute them, and the meaning is: no one has two hearts, to believe with one and disbelieve with the other; rather, it is a single heart, so either one believes or one disbelieves. It is also said: it is connected to "Do not obey" and "Follow," and the meaning is that it is not possible to combine two contradictory kinds of following: following the revelation and the Quran, and following the people of disbelief and tyranny. This was alluded to by mentioning the two hearts, because following stems from belief, which is an action of the heart. Just as two hearts cannot be joined in one chest, two contradictory beliefs cannot be joined in one heart.

It is also said: it is connected to the Almighty’s saying: (And rely upon Allah; and sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs), in that it implies His—the Exalted and Majestic—oneness. It is as if it was said: "And rely upon Allah, and sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs," for He, the Exalted and Majestic, alone is the manager of the affairs of the universe. Then He, the Exalted and Majestic, pointed out that the affairs of one man cannot be organized while he has two hearts; how then could the affairs of the universe be organized if it had two gods?

It is also said: that it is driven by the desire to alienate from obeying the disbelievers and hypocrites by recounting their falsehoods, and it is mentioned that the Almighty’s saying (Allah has not made), etc., serves as a parable for zihar (the pre-Islamic practice of saying to one's wife, "You are like my mother's back") and adoption. Meaning: just as a man does not have two hearts, there cannot be zihar or adoption [making someone a true son]. The three mentioned were made a whole parable for that which has no reality. This was approved of by more than one.

Al-Tayyibi said: This is more suitable for the structure of the Quran, because the Almighty arranged the three negated things in one order, and He, the Exalted, made His saying—the Exalted and Majestic—(That is your saying) a conclusion for them. Then the Almighty judged that it is a saying with no reality, and then He concluded everything with His saying: (And Allah says the truth, and He guides to the [straight] way). This was objected to in al-Kashf, stating that the occasion of revelation and the Almighty's statement after the conclusion: (Call them by their fathers) is a witness that the first [the parable] is specifically for adoption. Furthermore, they did not make wives [actually] mothers, but rather made the expression [like] divorce, so including it alongside the issue of adoption by way of digression is the approach, not that it is a saying with no reality like the first.

Al-Khafaji supported the group, saying: If it were a parable for adoption only, it would not have been separated from it. The existence of two hearts for a man and making the adopted son a son in all legal rulings is something that has no reality in the essence of the matter nor in the apparent Sharia. Similarly, making wives like mothers in absolute permanent prohibition is from their inventions, which they had no legal basis for; thus, it has no reality either. So what he claimed is not valid against them, especially since it contradicts what was narrated from them. The hand of Allah is with the group.

Al-Tayyibi explained the structure of the verses from the beginning of the Surah to this point: He said that the opening with the Almighty’s saying (O Prophet, fear Allah) indicates that the address includes the commencement of an affair of concern, in which the meaning of incitement and excitation is apparent. From there, he conjoined (And do not obey), just as the specific is conjoined to the general. He followed the prohibition with a command, like your saying "Do not obey he who abandons you, and follow your helper." It is not far-fetched to call this "repulsion and attraction." Then He commanded reliance to encourage opposition to the enemies of religion and to seek refuge in the sanctuary of Allah Almighty’s majesty to suffice him against their evils. Then He followed each of those commands, by way of completion and conclusion, with what corresponds to it. He justified the Almighty’s saying (And do not obey the disbelievers and the hypocrites) with His saying (And indeed, Allah is ever Knowing, Wise) to complete the deterrence, meaning: fear Allah in what you do and abandon in your secret and public life, because He is knowledgeable of all conditions—one must be cautious of His wrath—and Wise—He does not love that His beloved follow His enemies. He justified the Almighty’s saying (And follow what is revealed to you from your Lord) with His saying (Indeed, Allah is ever, with what you do, Acquainted), also as a completion, meaning: follow the truth and do not follow their vain desires and deviant opinions, because Allah Almighty knows your deed and their deed, and He will reward each with what he deserves. He concluded His saying—the Blessed and Exalted—(And rely upon Allah) with His saying (And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs) as an affirmation and confirmation in the style of "Why should the truth not be spoken? The truth is manifest." Meaning, it is the right of the One who is sufficient for all affairs that affairs be delegated to Him and reliance be placed upon Him. He separated the Almighty’s saying (Allah has not made for a man two hearts in his interior) as an isti'naf (commencement) to alert [the reader] to some of their falsehoods and fabrications. His saying (That is your saying), etc., is a conclusion for those sayings, signaling that they are worthy of being judged as invalid, and the one who says them is worthy of being disparaged, let alone obeyed. Then the Almighty connected (And Allah says the truth), etc., to this conclusion by the unifying element of contradiction, following the style of what preceded in (Do not obey and follow). He separated the Almighty’s saying (Call them by their fathers; it is more just in the sight of Allah), and His saying (The Prophet), etc., and so on to the end of the Surah, as a detail of "speaking the truth" and "guidance to the straight way." Consider this, and do not be negligent.