Al-Ahzab: (50) O Prophet...

"O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due (meaning their dowries)"

As Mujahid and others have stated, the "due" (ajr) is used for the dowry because it is compensation for the enjoyment of the private parts and other things by which enjoyment is permissible. The restriction of making them lawful upon the giving of the dowry—as is apparently understood from the meaning of "you have given"—is not because the lawfulness is contingent upon it; rather, it is to prefer what is best for him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. For in immediate payment lies the clearing of one's liability and the pleasure of the soul; thus, it was the tradition (Sunnah) of the predecessors, and nothing else is known of them. The Imam [al-Razi] said: Some people have argued that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was obligated to give the dowry first, because a woman has the right to withhold herself until she receives the dowry. The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, would not exact that which he was not entitled to, and intercourse before the payment of the dowry is not a right, even if it is lawful. Furthermore, when the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, requested something, it was forbidden to refuse him; therefore, if he requested the consummation before the payment of the dowry, it would necessitate that it is simultaneously obligatory and not obligatory, which is impossible. This is not the case for any of us. There is a discussion here that is not hidden.

Interpreting "giving" as "actual payment"—and that which is in its ruling, such as the specification [of a dowry] in the contract—and making the restriction [of the verse] a preference for what is best, is also possible. For specifying [a dowry] is better than leaving it, even if the contract is valid without it (in which case a "dowry of the like" becomes mandatory). [To say otherwise] is contrary to the apparent meaning.

Abu al-Hasan al-Karkhi, from our school, used His saying, "Indeed We have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have given their due," as evidence that marriage is contracted with the word "hire" (ijara), just as it is contracted with the word "marriage" (tazwij), and that the word "hire" is a metaphor for it, because that which is established by both is the ownership of the usufruct; thus, the common factor is present. This was refuted by saying that it does not necessarily follow from calling the dowry a "due" (ajr) that the marriage is valid using the word "hire." What was mentioned regarding the metaphor is groundless, because "hire" is not a cause for the ownership of usufruct such that it could be used metaphorically for it; this is stated in al-Hidayah. Some have said: "Hire" is only contracted as a temporary arrangement, while marriage stipulates its negation (permanence), so they are opposites and one cannot be borrowed for the other. This was countered by saying: If the "opposites" are the two properties that cannot coexist in one subject, you would face the same [problem] in trade, which does not coexist with marriage, despite the permissibility of contracting with it according to the scholars. The truth is that limitation (temporality) is not a concept of the word "hire," nor is it a part of it, but rather a condition for its consideration; thus, it is external to it. It is merely the ownership of usufruct for compensation, except that if it occurs unconditionally, it is not considered legally valid—like the example of prayer, which is the well-known words and actions; if they occur without purity, they are not considered. One does not say: "Purity is part of the definition of prayer."

This is so. Just as the lawfulness of the wives is restricted by what was mentioned, the lawfulness of the slave woman is restricted—according to what has been said—to the fact that he was the one who personally oversaw her capture. Its evidence is in the words of the Almighty: "and those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you [as spoils of war]," for the purchased [slave] does not have the beginning of her situation and what befell her verified, because it is possible that the capture was not in its rightful place. Therefore, some of the pious performed a contract over slave girls after purchasing them, despite the opinion that a contract over slave women is not valid.

This was problematized by Maria the Coptic, may Allah be pleased with her, for she was not captured in war; rather, the Prince of the Copts, Jurayj bin Mina, the ruler of Alexandria and Egypt, gifted her to him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. It was answered that this is not valid because gifts from the people of war to the Imam have the ruling of fay' (spoils acquired without fighting). It may be said that it is further problematized by another concubine of his, may Allah bless him and grant him peace: a girl gifted to him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, by Zaynab bint Jahsh, may Allah be pleased with her. He had abandoned her [his wives] regarding the affair of Safiyyah bint Huyayy for the months of Dhu al-Hijjah, Muharram, and Safar. When the month of Rabi' al-Awwal came—the month in which he passed away—he was pleased with her, and entered upon her. She said: "I do not know how to reward you," so she gifted her [the slave girl] to him. They have counted her among his concubines, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. The aforementioned answer does not apply to her. Perhaps the answer to that is that he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, took her as a concubine to demonstrate the permissibility, and it is not unlikely that the beginning of her affair and what befell her were realized in such a way that it was as if he had overseen her capture. Evidence for this is that it is possible she was among those whom Allah gave him as fay', and then Zaynab acquired her through some means of ownership, and then gifted her to him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.

Notwithstanding this, the lawfulness of the slave woman was granted to him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, later on, and—according to the apparent meaning—it was not restricted to being from what Allah gave him as spoils in the verse: "It is not lawful for you to take other women after [this], nor to replace them with other wives, even if their beauty pleases you, except what your right hand possesses."

Furthermore, the gifting of this girl happened in the month of his passing, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, while the verse was revealed before that, for it was revealed either in the year of the Confederates (the fifth year of the Hijrah) or shortly after the Conquest (the eighth year). According to this, what happened regarding Maria was prior to the revelation of the verse, for she was gifted to him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, in the seventh year of the Hijrah, as he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, sent his messengers to the kings in that year—among them Hatib bin Abi Balta'ah al-Lakhmi, whom he sent to the Muqawqis, the aforementioned prince of the Copts—and he returned with Maria, her sister Sirin, and a eunuch cousin of hers called Mabur, along with a mule called Duldul, a donkey called Ya'fur or 'Ufayr, a thousand mithqals of gold, and other things. Reflect on this.

Similarly to what was mentioned, according to what has been said, is the restriction of the female relatives to the fact that they migrated with him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, in His saying, the Almighty: "and the daughters of your paternal uncle and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncle and the daughters of your maternal aunts who migrated with you." They are better than others. The accompaniment (ma'iyyah) is for participation in the Hijrah, not for comparison in time, like "I accepted Islam with Sulayman." Abu Hayyan said: It is said, "So-and-so entered with me and left with me," meaning his action was like my action, even if we did not coincide in time. If you say, "We left together," it necessitates both meanings: participation in the act and coincidence in time. This is sound speech.

Al-Mawardi recounted an opinion that the Hijrah is a condition for the lawfulness of the wives absolutely, but this is very weak. Another opinion states that it is a condition for the lawfulness of his female relatives, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, mentioned. He used as evidence what was reported by Ibn Sa'd, 'Abd bin Humayd, al-Tirmidhi (who classified it as hasan), Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim, al-Tabarani, al-Hakim (who authenticated it), Ibn Mardawayh, and al-Bayhaqi from Umm Hani, Fakhitah bint Abi Talib, who said: "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, proposed to me, and I apologized to him, and he excused me. Then Allah, the Almighty, revealed: 'O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives' up to His saying, '...who migrated with you.' She said: So I was not lawful to him because I did not migrate with him; I was among the Tulaqa (those freed at the Conquest)." It was answered that the lack of lawfulness due to the absence of Hijrah was only understood from the statement of Umm Hani; perhaps she only said that according to her own understanding of the verse, and this does not constitute a proof against us unless it comes via a narration from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. It should not be said: Ibn Sa'd reported from Abu Salih, the freedman of Umm Hani, who said: "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, proposed to Umm Hani bint Abi Talib, and she said: 'O Messenger of Allah, I am a woman with orphans and my children are young.' When her children matured, she offered herself to him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. He said: 'As for now, no. Allah, the Almighty, revealed to me: "O Prophet, indeed We have made lawful to you your wives... to those who migrated with you," and she was not among the female emigrants.'" This indicates that he himself, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, understood the prohibition; otherwise, he would have married her. We reply—after conceding the authenticity of the report—we do not concede that he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, understood the prohibition, and the failure to marry could be because it was contrary to what is best. The report of Umm Hani indicates that this verse was revealed after the Conquest, so do not be heedless. Some have claimed that the prohibition of marrying a non-emigrant for him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, existed at first and was then abrogated. From Qatadah, it is said that the meaning of "who migrated with you" is "who accepted Islam with you." It is said: According to this, it would not be unlawful for him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, except for the disbelieving women, and this is in the extreme of being far-fetched, as is not hidden.

The apparent [meaning] is that "your wives to whom you have given their due" are his wives, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who were in his wedlock and to whom he had given their dowries, such as 'A'ishah, Hafsah, and Sawdah. "And those your right hand possesses from what Allah has returned to you" refers to those like Rayhanah, based on what Muhammad ibn Ishaq said, that when he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, conquered Qurayzah, he chose her for himself, and she remained with him until she passed away in his care, and she was in his possession. Others agreed with him on this. Al-Waqidi reported with his chain of transmission to Ayyub bin Bashir, who said that he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, sent her to the house of Salma bint Qays, Umm al-Mundhir, and she remained with her until she had one menstrual cycle, then was purified from her menses. Umm al-Mundhir came and informed him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, so he went to her at Umm al-Mundhir's house and said to her: "If you wish, I will emancipate you and marry you, I will do so; and if you wish, you may remain in my possession as a slave and I will have intercourse with you by right of ownership, I will do so." She said: "O Messenger of Allah, I would like to make it easy for you and to remain in your possession." So she remained in the possession of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and he had intercourse with her until she died. Some held the view that he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, emancipated her and married her. Al-Waqidi also reported this from Ibn Abi Dhi'b from al-Zuhri, then said: "And this hadith is more established in our view." It was narrated from her that she said: "When the Banu Qurayzah were taken captive, the captives were presented to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and I was among those presented to him. He ordered me to be set aside, and he had the privilege of safiy (the first choice of spoils). When I was set aside, Allah, the Almighty, chose for me, and I was sent to the house of Umm al-Mundhir bint Qays for some days until the captives were killed and the captives divided. Then he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, entered upon me, and I drew away from him out of modesty. He called me and sat me before him and said: 'If you choose Allah and His Messenger, the Messenger of Allah will choose you for himself.' I said: 'I choose Allah, the Almighty, and His Messenger.' When I accepted Islam, the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, emancipated me and married me, and gave me a dowry of twelve ounces of gold, just as he gave his wives a dowry. He held the wedding feast in the house of Umm al-Mundhir and allocated shares for me just as he did for his wives, and he placed the veil upon me." Ibn al-Athir did not mention any opinion other than her emancipation and marriage. Some are of the view that she accepted Islam, so he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, emancipated her, and she joined her family, observing the veil in their presence and saying: "No one shall see me after the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace." Some have recounted her joining her family from al-Zuhri. Some claimed she remained alive after him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and that she passed away in the year sixteen, during the Caliphate of 'Umar, may Allah be pleased with him.

Ibn Kamal mentioned in his exegesis that the Mawsul (relative clause) refers to Safiyyah and Juwayriyah. That which is mentioned in most authoritative sources regarding their affair is that when the spoils of Khaybar were gathered, Dihyah took Safiyyah, and he [the Prophet], may Allah bless him and grant him peace, had already said to him: "Go and take a slave girl." Then he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was informed that she was only suitable for him, as she was the daughter of the leader of her people. So he said to Dihyah: "Take another." The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, took her, emancipated her, and married her, and her dowry was her [own] freedom. Regarding Juwayriyah, in the expedition of Banu al-Mustaliq, she fell into the share of Thabit bin Qays bin Shammas al-Ansari. She entered into a kitaba (contract of manumission) with him for herself, then came to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and said: "O Messenger of Allah, I am Juwayriyah bint al-Harith, and my situation is not hidden from you. I fell into the share of Thabit bin Qays, and I have entered into a kitaba contract for myself, so I have come to ask you regarding my kitaba." The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: "Would you like something better?" She said: "What is it, O Messenger of Allah?" He said: "I will pay your kitaba on your behalf and marry you." She said: "I have done so." Ibn Hisham said: It is said he bought her from Thabit, emancipated her, married her, and gave her a dowry of four hundred dirhams.

It is not hidden from you that if the intention is the lawfulness of what his right hand possessed, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, at the time of ownership by virtue of it being his property—even if intercourse did not actually occur—it includes all the slave girls he owned at the time of ownership, and emancipation and marriage thereafter do not harm [the validity of the description]. The lawfulness of intercourse is due to the marriage, not the ownership. But if the intention is the lawfulness of that along with the occurrence of intercourse while the description of ownership is still standing, then the Mawsul can only be explained by a slave woman with whom he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, had intercourse while she was his property—like Rayhanah, according to one opinion, or a slave girl he acquired in some of the spoils, whom they counted among his concubines, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, though most did not mention her name. Al-Jalabi counted among his concubines, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, a girl he named Zulaykha al-Quraziyah; perhaps she is the one who was not named. As for Maria the Coptic, and the girl gifted to him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, by Zaynab, you have heard the discussion regarding them earlier.

The intention by "daughters of your paternal uncle and... paternal aunts" are the daughters of the Qurayshi men and the daughters of the Qurayshi women, for it is said to Qurayshi men, whether near or far, "paternal uncles of the Messenger of Allah," and to Qurayshi women, whether near or far, "paternal aunts of the Messenger of Allah." The intention by "daughters of your maternal uncle and... maternal aunts" are the daughters of the Banu Zuhrah, both males and females. This is the view held by al-Tabarsi in Majma' al-Bayan, and he did not mention any other. The application of "paternal uncles and aunts" to a person's relatives from the father's side, male or female, whether near or far, and "maternal uncles and aunts" to his relatives from the mother's side likewise, is common in convention and frequent in usage.

As for those among the Qurayshi women whom he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, married and consummated with, they were six. His marriage to some of them was definitely before the revelation of the verse, and his marriage to others is potentially before or after, as is not hidden to anyone who refers to the books of biography and hears what was said about the time of the revelation of the verse. We have not come across that he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, married anyone from the Zuhriyyin at all, so the intention behind making the marriage of those [women] lawful is merely its permissibility, which does not require it to have occurred. If "paternal uncle" is carried to mean the father's brother, "paternal aunt" the father's sister, "maternal uncle" the mother's brother, and "maternal aunt" the mother's sister, then the apparent meaning of the verse requires that he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, have such a paternal uncle, paternal aunt, maternal uncle, and maternal aunt, and that they have daughters. That is well-known regarding the paternal uncles and aunts and their daughters; most of the biographers mentioned several paternal uncles for him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and several of their daughters, such as al-'Abbas—among his daughters was Umm Habibah, whom Aswad al-Makhzumi married; the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, had proposed to her according to what is said, but he found her father was his foster-brother, as Thubaybah, the freedwoman of Abu Lahab, had breastfed both of them—and like Abu Talib—among his daughters was Umm Hani, and you have heard what was said regarding her, and Jumanah, who was one of those who pledged allegiance to him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and was the wife of Abu Sufyan bin al-Harith, her cousin—and like Abu Lahab—among his daughters were Khalidah, whom 'Uthman bin Abi al-'As al-Thaqafi married and who bore him children, Durrah, who accepted Islam and migrated and was the wife of al-Harith bin Nawfal and then Dihyah al-Kalbi, and 'Izzah, whom 'Awf bin Umayyah married—and like al-Zubayr—among his daughters was Duba'ah, the wife of al-Miqdad bin al-Aswad, and Umm al-Hakam, and it is said she was his foster-sister, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and he used to visit her in Medina—and like Hamzah—among his daughters was Umamah; when the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, returned from the 'Umrat al-Qada, he brought her from Mecca and married her to Salamah bin Umm Salamah. The implication of al-Qastallani's statement is that Hamzah was his foster-brother, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, as Thubaybah breastfed both of them with the milk of her son Masruh, meaning they were not lawful for him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace; in fact, he also mentioned that she was offered to him, and he said: "She is the daughter of my foster-brother"—and like al-Harith—among his daughters was Arwa, the wife of Abu Wada'ah—and like al-Muqawwim—among his daughters was one named Arwa also, the wife of her cousin Abu Sufyan bin al-Harith. They also mentioned several paternal aunts for him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and several of their daughters, among them Umaymah—among her daughters was Zaynab, the Mother of the Believers, and she is the one about whom Allah, the Almighty, revealed: "So when Zayd had no longer any need of her, We married her to you"—and Umm Habibah, who was the wife of 'Abd al-Rahman bin 'Awf, and Hamnah, who was with Mus'ab bin 'Umayr then with Talhah, one of the ten promised Paradise—and among them al-Bayda'—among her daughters were Arwa, the mother of 'Uthman, may Allah be pleased with him, and Umm Talhah, the daughters of Kurayz bin Rabi'ah—and among them 'Atikah—among her daughters was Quraybah bint Zad al-Rakib, Abu Umayyah bin al-Mughirah—and among them Safiyyah—among her daughters were Safiyyah bint al-Harith bin Harithah and Umm Habibah bint al-'Awwam bin Khuwaylid. As for the maternal uncle and maternal aunt, their mention is not famous. Indeed, it is mentioned in al-Isabah that Fari'ah bint Wahb al-Zuhriyyah—the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, raised her and said: "Whoever wants to look at the maternal aunt of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, let him look at this one." In it also is Fakhitah bint 'Amr al-Zuhriyyah, the maternal aunt of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.

Al-Tabarani reported through the path of 'Abd al-Rahman bin 'Uthman al-Waqqasi from Ibn al-Munkadir from Jabir, "I heard the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, saying: 'I gifted my maternal aunt Fakhitah bint 'Amr a slave boy, and I ordered her not to make him a butcher, a jeweler, or a cupper.'" Al-Waqqasi is weak.

And it says: regarding Safiyyah bint 'Abd al-Muttalib, she is the full sister of Hamzah; their mother is Halah, the maternal aunt of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, meaning Halah bint Wahb, as in al-Mawahib. We have not come across a daughter for this maternal aunt other than Safiyyah, his paternal aunt, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Likewise, we have not come across daughters for those we mentioned before her. We have come across one maternal uncle for him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and he is 'Abd Yaghuth bin Wahb, and we have not come across a daughter for him. We only came across two sons: one of them is al-Arqam, and he has a son called 'Abdullah; he was a Companion who wrote for the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and his two Companions, and he was in charge of the treasury during the Caliphate of 'Umar, may Allah be pleased with him. He was dear to him, such that Hafsah narrated from him that he said to her: "Were it not that I fear my people might object, I would have appointed 'Abdullah bin al-Arqam as my successor." It is said he is the son of 'Abd Yaghuth, and al-Arqam is 'Abd Yaghuth; al-Bukhari holds our view. He accepted Islam on the day of the Conquest. Some have said regarding him: "The maternal uncle of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace." Some people mentioned for this 'Abdullah a brother they named 'Abd al-Rahman bin al-Arqam and confirmed his companionship, but there is discussion on that. The second is al-Aswad, and the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, applied the title of "maternal uncle" to him. It is reported that he was one of those who mocked him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, so Jibril, peace be upon him, intended to destroy him, but he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: "O Jibril, my maternal uncle!" He said: "Leave him alone for you." He has a son who is 'Abd al-Rahman and a daughter who is Khalidah, and she was among the righteous female emigrants, and the title of "maternal aunt" was also applied to her.

Al-Mustaghfiri reported through the path of Abu 'Umayr al-Jurmi from Ma'mar from al-Zuhri from 'Ubaydullah, in a mursal manner: "The Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, entered his house and saw a woman with 'A'ishah. He said: 'Who is this, O 'A'ishah?' She said: 'This is one of your maternal aunts.' He said: 'Indeed, my maternal aunts in this city are strangers.' She said: 'This is Khalidah bint al-Aswad bin 'Abd Yaghuth.' He said: 'Exalted is He who brings the living from the dead'"—he recited it with a shaddah [for emphasis].

Musa bin Ibrahim reported from his father from Abu Salamah from 'A'ishah, connected, in a similar fashion. In this report and the one before it is the application of "maternal uncle" and "maternal aunt" to relatives of the mother even if the maternal uncle is not her brother and the maternal aunt is not her sister. With this, what we mentioned earlier is reinforced, so remember that, and may Allah, the Almighty, take charge of your guidance. And beware of thinking the matter is hypothetical, or that the address—even if specific in the apparent [meaning]—is general in reality. It is sufficient that there exist daughters of a maternal uncle and daughters of maternal aunts for others besides him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, as this is thought by one who witnesses the paternal uncle in his ignorance and believes the maternal uncle in his intellect. This is it; much has been asked about the wisdom of individualizing the "paternal uncle" and "maternal uncle" and collecting the "paternal aunt" and "maternal aunt," such that al-Subki, according to what is said, authored a part on it, which he named al-Himmah fi Ifrad al-'Amm wa Jam' al-'Ammah.

Al-Khafaji said: I have seen weak words by them on it, such as the statement of al-Razi: "The paternal uncle and maternal uncle are on the pattern of the infinitive (masdar), and that is why they are not collected, unlike the paternal aunt and maternal aunt." It is said they were not collected to imply generality when they are annexed, while the paternal aunt and maternal aunt do not imply generality due to the ta' of unity; and if [the ta'] does not prevent generality in reality, it rejects it in the apparent [meaning]. His saying in Surah al-Nur, "the houses of your paternal uncles and the houses of your paternal aunts," does not contradict this, because it is based on the primary usage. Then he said: "Better than it is what has been said: his paternal uncles, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, were al-'Abbas and Hamzah, may Allah be pleased with them; they were his foster-brothers, and their daughters were not lawful for him. And Abu Talib's daughter, Umm Hani, was not an emigrant." As for what he claimed to be weak, it is as he said, and what he presumed to be better than it—if it is as we have quoted to this extent, free from omitting anything as we found it in our copy—is something that has no goodness in it, let alone being "better." If it has a continuation, the consideration of it is left to you after becoming acquainted with it, and I think, despite its flaws, it is nothing.

Some of the contemporary eminent scholars, who remain the masters of their time and precede their peers in virtue, said: "It is possible that the paternal uncle is singularized because he is in the position of the father, or he may even be called 'father,' as in the saying: 'And when Ibrahim said to his father, Azar.' The father cannot be but one, so singularization was more appropriate for one who stands in his place. The collection of the paternal aunt is based on the primary usage. The singularization of the maternal uncle is to be in accordance with the paternal uncle, and the collection of the maternal aunt—even if she is in the position of the mother—is to be in accordance with the paternal aunts. It is also possible that the singularization of the masculine and the collection of the feminine is due to the paucity of males and the abundance of females; it has been reported in the traditions that women are more numerous than men."

Another of those eminent scholars, may the schools of knowledge continue to be adorned by him and be grateful for his virtue, said: "That is because of the aesthetic beauty it contains, for there is a kind of paronomasia between the paternal uncle and paternal aunts, and the maternal uncle and maternal aunts. Also, his paternal uncles, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, were—according to what the author of Dhaka'ir al-'Uqba mentioned—twelve in number, and his paternal aunts were six. If 'your paternal uncles' were said, it would be imagined that they are fewer than twelve, because it is a plural of paucity, and the maximum it applies to is nine or ten according to one opinion. If 'your paternal aunt' were said, it would not verify the indication of their paucity. Therefore, the paternal uncle was singularized and the paternal aunt was collected, and 'your maternal uncle and your maternal aunts' was said to conform to what preceded."

I say: What prevails in my mind on that is what Abu Hayyan recounted from the Qadi Abu Bakr bin al-'Arabi, that what was mentioned is a linguistic convention, in the sense that the custom of the linguists in such cases was to singularize the paternal uncle and maternal uncle and collect the paternal aunt and maternal aunt. We have tracked many of the poems of the Arabs and have not seen the paternal uncle added to "son" or "daughter" in the singular or plural except in the singular, such as his saying: "Your paternal uncle's sons have spears in them," and his saying: "A young man, the son of the paternal uncle is not like the wolf; if he sees blood on his companion one day, he devours him," and his saying: "The daughters of the paternal uncle said, 'O Salma, even if he is poor and destitute,' she said, 'Yes,'" and his saying: "O daughter of a paternal uncle, do not blame me and rest, for my resting place will not be empty of you one day"—to an extent that cannot be counted. As for the consistency of singularizing the maternal uncle and collecting the paternal aunt and maternal aunt when that which was mentioned is added to them, I am not confident about it. If the matter in the mentioned cases is like the matter in the paternal uncle, then there is no answer above this answer. The presumption regarding the Qadi is that he did not rule what he ruled except based on evidence, although I do not explicitly state the non-acceptance of a Qadi's ruling based on his own knowledge, nor do I issue a fatwa on it. Indeed, this Qadi has a famous ruling regarding the affair of al-Husayn, may Allah be pleased with him, and may He curse whoever was pleased with his killing—a [ruling] not accepted by any except Yazid, may Allah, the Exalted, increase upon him his severe punishment.

On the premise that the matter regarding the paternal uncle and those with him is as he said, it is possible the reason for singularizing the paternal uncle and maternal uncle is to return to a single origin, along with the mutual support and assistance among the males from the side of the paternal and maternal lineage for the person who refers to them. Therefore, you see a person rushing to defend against his misfortune to the males of his paternal and maternal relatives, and that mutual support makes the multiple in the position of the one. This consideration is strengthened there by the addition of the branch, such as sons and daughters, to that. Perhaps in the singularization with the collection of the aforementioned annexed, there is an indication that sons and daughters, even if they are sons and daughters of multiple people in reality, are in the position of sons and daughters to one; and that each of the paternal uncles and maternal uncles, for the sake of his increased compassion for the sons and daughters of each, is as if he were a father to the sons and daughters of each. This which we have mentioned is not found in the paternal aunts and maternal aunts, and the collection of the paternal uncle and maternal uncle in the verse of Surah al-Nur does not contradict this, as is not hidden to anyone who has the slightest light to be guided by when matters are confusing.

It is possible to say regarding the wisdom here specifically: when the singular is the origin and the collective is its branch, and the masculine is the origin and the feminine is its branch, He brought the masculine paternal uncle and maternal uncle in the singular and the feminine paternal aunt and maternal aunt in the collective; so in the first two, two origins were gathered, and in the last two, two branches [were gathered], by the rule that the like of a thing is attracted to it, and "birds fall upon their likes." How subtle this gathering is in the place of the marriage context, for it contains an indication of equality, and that it is appropriate to join the gender to its gender, as some verses require. This, by my life, is subtler than collecting the masculine and singularizing the feminine so that each contains an origin and a branch, for it is void of the indication of that appropriate joining, which is deemed good by every person of sound opinion. Moreover, in the collection of two origins in the paternal uncle, there is conformity with what is in marriage of gathering the two spouses, who are two origins for what is born from them. If one considers their collection in the maternal uncle, whose lineage is from the side of the mother—which is not considered in [patriarchal] kinship—the whole conforms to what is in marriage of gathering an origin and a branch, so this is not missed entirely in the glorious arrangement.

Also, in the transition from the singular to the collective in both sides of paternal and maternal lineage, there is an indication of what is in marriage of the transition of each spouse from the state of singleness to the state of gathering. So, to Allah, the Almighty, belongs the excellence of the Revelation. This is what I have; it is a spring blossom that cannot endure being rubbed. Nevertheless, compare it to what you have heard from our contemporary masters and choose for yourself what is sweet. Allah, the Almighty, knows best the secrets of His Book.

"And a believing woman" (in the accusative, as a conjunction to the object of "We have made lawful" according to a group). The meaning of "We have made lawful" is not the inception of an immediate lawfulness, nor is it reporting about a past lawfulness, but rather informing about an absolute lawfulness that encompasses what has preceded and what will follow; therefore, the condition [that follows] does not invalidate it. This is like your saying: "I have permitted you to speak to so-and-so if he greets you." Due to the discussion on this, some said: It is in the accusative by a verb clarified by what precedes it, i.e., "And He makes lawful for you a woman," or "And We have made lawful for you a woman," and it is future tense because of the condition. Abu Haywah read it in the nominative, as an initial subject with the predicate omitted, i.e., "And a believing woman [is] also made lawful to you."

"If she gifted herself to the Prophet" (meaning, she granted him the enjoyment of her without a dowry, by any expression).

Ubayy, al-Hasan, al-Sha'bi, 'Isa, and Salam read "an wahabat" with a fatha on the hamza, meaning "because she gifted" (li-anna). It is said: i.e., "at the time that she gifted" or "for the duration that she gifted," so "an" and what follows it is interpreted as an infinitive in the accusative by the temporal adverbial sense. Most grammarians do not permit this other than for the explicit infinitive like "I will come to you [at] the setting of the star," and what is not the infinitival "ma." It was permitted that the infinitive be a substitute for "a woman." Zayd bin 'Ali, may Allah be pleased with them both, read: "Idh wahabat" (when she gifted), and "idh" is an adverb for the past. It is said: It is like its usage in His saying: "And it will not benefit you today, since you have wronged, that you are partners in the punishment."

"If the Prophet desires to marry her" (meaning, to take the enjoyment of her by any expression without a dowry). This is a condition for the first condition regarding the necessity of lawfulness; thus, her gifting herself to him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, does not necessitate her lawfulness to him except with his desire to marry her, and this desire acts in the position of the acceptance of the gift. Ibn Kamal said: The aforementioned desire is an expression of acceptance; there is no way to carry it to the literal meaning, because His saying "to marry her" (yastankihaha) suffices for the desire in its conventional meaning, and it indicates that the "sin" is for seeking. The speech of some eminent scholars is based on this, where he said: The desire to seek marriage is a metonymy for acceptance.

It is said: "Istaf'ala" here is in the meaning of "fa'ala," so "istinkah" is in the meaning of "nikah," so that it is not imagined that there is repetition, but there is a view on this. The author of this view favored carrying the desire to the desire preceding the gifting, based on the fact that the construction requires this condition to be prior. They have said: If two conditions meet, the second is a condition for the first—late in the wording, early in the occurrence, and it is in the position of a state (hal). Hence, the jurists said: If he says, "If you mount, if you eat, you are divorced," she is not divorced unless the eating precedes the mounting, to verify the restriction of the state of occurrence.

Al-Samin problematized this rule with what is here, based on the fact that they made that condition in the position of acceptance because the reality requires it. Then he mentioned that he presented it to the scholars of his time, and they found no escape from it except that this rule is not universal but specific to cases where no indication of the delay of the second has been established, as in "If I marry you, if I divorce you, my slave is free," for divorce does not precede marriage, and what we are dealing with is of this type. Then he said: So whoever made the second condition here prior has not been correct. I saw in the seventh art of al-Ashbah wa al-Naza'ir al-Nahwiyah by al-Jalal al-Suyuti, may mercy be upon him, words by Ibn Hisham in which he mentioned that making the verse like the [hypothetical] example and organizing them into the thread of the issue of the "interjection of a condition upon a condition" is what a group of them went to, including Ibn Malik. He went to the view that the example is from the issue of the aforementioned interjection, unlike the verse, and he argued for it with what he argued. Then he mentioned the disagreement on the validity of the construction of what the interjection occurred in, like the example, and that the majority are on its permissibility, and that it is the correct one. And those who permitted it disagreed on the realization of that by which the content of the answer—which occurs after the two conditions—is realized, [split] into three sects:

The first: It only occurs with the sum of two matters: the fulfillment of each of the two conditions, and the second condition occurring before the occurrence of the first. So in the example, divorce does not occur except with the occurrence of mounting and eating, provided eating precedes mounting. He mentioned that this is the view of the majority.

The second: It occurs with the fulfillment of the two conditions absolutely. He mentioned that some scholars narrated it to him from the Imam of the Two Holy Mosques, and that he saw it narrated from others later.

The third: It occurs with the occurrence of the two conditions in order; so in the example, she is only divorced if she mounts first and then eats.

He invalidated both of the latter sects and mentioned in guiding the construction on the first sect—the sect of the majority—two ways: the first is the sect of the majority, that the aforementioned answer is for the first condition, and the answer to the second is omitted due to the indication of the first and its answer to it, and because that suffices for it and stands in its place; so it was necessary in the occurrence of the suspended [divorce] upon that, that the second occurs before the first, necessarily because the answer must be late relative to the condition, and thus the matter is the same for that which stands in the position of the condition. The second is the sect of Ibn Malik, that the aforementioned answer is for the first, and the second has no answer—neither mentioned nor assumed—because it is a restriction of the first, restricting it to a state occurring in its place; so the meaning in the example is "If you mount eating, you are divorced." It is said against this that it is outside the analogy and that it does not hold in "If I stand, if I sit, you are divorced," and that the condition is far from the sect of the hal (state) because of the future tense.

In short, the discussion has been prolonged on this issue, and it is a famous issue that the jurists and others have mentioned. In what we have mentioned here, there is sufficiency of the least that is necessary, so contemplate.

Most scholars are on the occurrence of the gifting, but they disagreed on identifying the one who gifted. From Ibn 'Abbas, Qatadah, and 'Ikrimah, it is Maymunah bint al-Harith al-Hilaliyah. In al-Mawahib, it is said: Maymunah gifted herself to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and that was because his proposal, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, reached her while she was on her camel, and she said: "The camel and what is on it are for Allah and His Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace." That was in the year seven, after the expedition of Khaybar, and he married her, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, at Sarif, ten miles from Mecca. According to this, the desire for marriage is prior to the gifting, which weakens the statement of al-Samin. From 'Ali bin al-Husayn, may Allah be pleased with both, al-Dahhak, and Muqatil, it is Umm Sharik, Ghaziyah bint Jabir bin Hakim al-Dawsi. He said in al-Safwah: The majority are on the fact that she is the one who gifted herself to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, but he did not accept her, so she did not marry until she died. In al-Durr al-Manthur from Munir bin 'Abdullah al-Dawsi, he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, accepted her. From 'Urwah and al-Sha'bi, it is Zaynab bint Khuzaymah from the Ansar; she was called in the Age of Ignorance "Mother of the Poor" for her feeding them, and that was in the year three, and she did not stay with him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, for long until she passed away, may Allah be pleased with her.

Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn Mardawayh, and al-Bayhaqi reported in al-Sunan from 'A'ishah, may Allah be pleased with her, who said: "She who gifted herself to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was Khawlah bint Hakim, and he postponed her, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and she married 'Uthman bin Maz'un with his permission, may Allah bless him and grant him peace." Some said: It is permissible for the givers to be multiple. The two Shaykhs and others reported from 'Urwah bin al-Zubayr, who said: "Khawlah bint Hakim was among those who gifted themselves to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace." 'A'ishah said: "Is a woman not ashamed to gift herself to a man?" When "You may put off whom you will of them" was revealed, 'A'ishah said: "O Messenger of Allah, I see nothing but that your Lord hastens to fulfill your desire." His saying "among those who gifted themselves" is explicit that they were multiple. Some denied the occurrence of the gifting, and it is said: His saying, the Almighty, "If she gifted," indicates that it did not occur and that it is a hypothetical matter, and likewise the indefiniteness of "a woman." So the intention is informing of the lawfulness in this case if it should happen. Some denied the acceptance.

Ibn Sa'd reported from Ibn Abi 'Awn that Layla bint al-Hatim gifted herself to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and women gifted themselves, but we have not heard that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, accepted any of them. What was reported by Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim, al-Tabarani, Ibn Mardawayh, and al-Bayhaqi in al-Sunan from Ibn 'Abbas, who said: "There was no woman with the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, who gifted herself to him," permits the negation of acceptance and permits the negation of the gifting. His mentioning, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, in both places by the title of "Prophethood" by way of iltifat (shift in person) is for honor and to announce that it is the basis for the confirmation of the ruling, so it is specific to him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, according to its specificity to him, as His saying, the Almighty, "exclusively for you, excluding the believers," pronounces. This includes the indication that the gifting of whoever gifted was not for the sake of lust for men and satisfying a desire, but rather for winning the honor of serving him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and descending into the mine of virtue. Thereby it is known that 'A'ishah's statement, "There is no goodness in a woman who gifts herself to a man," and her aforementioned objection, were issued out of the intensity of her jealousy, may Allah be pleased with her, for the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. And no wonder, for the lover is jealous. Some lovers have said: "I am jealous if I hear a moan in the neighborhood, fearing and dreading that it might be for his love."

The accusative of "exclusively" (khalisatan) is as an infinitive emphasizing the sentence before it; the active participle in infinitives, according to what al-Zamakhshari said, is not like "wholesomeness" (al-'afiyah) and "falsehood" (al-kadhibah). Abu Hayyan claimed it is a state (hal), and the majority are on that being attached to the lawfulness of the one who gifted, i.e., "the lawfulness of her for you is finalized, exclusively," meaning "finality." Al-Zajjaj said: It is a state from "a woman" because of its specificity by description, i.e., "We have made her lawful to you, exclusively, not lawful to anyone other than you in this world and the Hereafter." Abu al-Baqa' said: It is a state from the pronoun of "gifted" or an adjective for an omitted infinitive, i.e., "a gifting exclusively." It was read in the nominative as a predicate for an omitted subject, i.e., "That is a finality for you and a specialty," or it—that woman or the gifting—is exclusively for you, it does not extend to the believers.

The Shafi'is, may Allah be pleased with them, used it as evidence that marriage is not contracted with the word "gift," because the wording follows the meaning, and he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was specified with the meaning, so he is specified with the wording. Some of our eminent scholars said regarding that: "The intention by 'gifting' in the verse is the transfer of enjoyment without compensation by any word, not the transfer of it by the word 'I gifted myself.' So where that is not a text on the transfer with this wording, it is not fit to be the basis for the disagreement on the contraction of marriage with the word 'gift,' positively or negatively. The meaning of the exclusivity of lawfulness mentioned for him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, excluding the believers, is its being realized in his case and not realized in theirs, for in the lawfulness for them, there must be a dowry of the like."

The apparent statement of the scholar Ibn al-Humam is the consideration of the word "gift," where he said in al-Fath: "Marriage has been reported with the word 'gift'," and he cited the verse, then said: "The original state is the absence of exclusivity until its evidence is established. His saying, the Almighty, 'exclusively for you' returns to the absence of a dowry, by the indication of its being followed by the justification of negating embarrassment—it is not in the leaving of a word to another, especially relative to the most eloquent of the Arabs, but in the necessity of wealth—and by the indication of its occurring in contrast to 'to whom you have given their due.' So the result became: 'We have made lawful to you the wives to whom you have given their dowries, and the one who gifted herself to you, so you took no dowry. This trait is exclusive to you, excluding the believers. As for them, we have known what We have made obligatory upon them regarding their wives,' etc., from the dowry and other things." Sadr al-Shari'ah suggested the permissibility of it being attached to "We have made lawful," as a restriction in the lawfulness of his wives for him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, for the benefit of the non-lawfulness of them for anyone else after him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. It ended. Some permitted it being a restriction in the lawfulness of slave women also, for the benefit of the non-lawfulness of his slave women like his wives for anyone after him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Another group permitted it being a restriction for the lawfulness of all that preceded upon the mentioned restrictions, i.e., "The lawfulness of what We have made lawful to you from the mentioned things, upon the mentioned restrictions, has been finalized, their finality excluding the believers." For the lawfulness of all upon the mentioned restrictions is not realized in their case; rather, what is realized in it is the lawfulness of some of the counted things upon the customary way. Al-Zamakhshari chose this.

However it may be, His saying, the Almighty: "We have known what We have made obligatory upon them regarding their wives and what their right hands possess" is an interjection between the attached and the attachment. The first, on all views, is His saying: "so that there may be no embarrassment upon you," and the second, on the final view—which is the attachment of "exclusively" to all that preceded of the four lawfulnesses—is His saying: "exclusively." It is an emphatic confirmation of the meaning of his specialization, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, with what he was specialized with, that each of the specializations is from knowledge, and that this favor is something befitting the station of Prophethood only. So the meaning is that Allah, the Almighty, has known what is appropriate from the perspective of wisdom to make obligatory upon the believers regarding wives and slave women, and upon what limit and description it is appropriate to be made obligatory upon them, so He made it obligatory, and He, the Almighty, specialized you with purity and choosing what is more appropriate and better in your worldly life, for He, the Glorious, made lawful for you the genres of those to be married and increased for you the one who gifted herself to you without compensation, "so that there may be no embarrassment upon you" in your religion. On the first view which we mentioned—that "exclusively" is attached to the one who gifted herself only—is His saying: "Indeed We have made lawful," and it is that which Abu Hayyan favored, and the matter of the interjection upon it is in its state. Some make the attachment of "exclusively" to all the other views, and the attachment to it [is done] considering what it contains of the meaning of the confirmation of lawfulness and its attainment for him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, not considering his specialization with it, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, because the pivot of the negation of embarrassment is the former, not the latter, which is an expression of its non-attainment for others besides him, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.

Ibn 'Atiyyah said: "so that there may be no embarrassment" etc., is attached to an omitted [predicate], i.e., "We have explained this explanation and interpreted this interpretation so that there may be no embarrassment upon you and it is thought about you that you have sinned before your Lord, the Almighty and Majestic." There is no interjection upon this, but it is not free from objection, so reflect and do not be heedless.

"And Allah is Forgiving" (meaning, of much forgiveness, so He forgives what He wills from that which is difficult to avoid, and other things) "Merciful" (meaning, of abundant mercy. From His mercy, the Almighty, is that He expanded the matter in the places of embarrassment).