Tafsir of An-Nisa' 4:19

"O you who have believed, it is not lawful for you to inherit women by compulsion..."

After Allah, Glorified be He, prohibited in the preceding passages the customs of the people of Ignorance regarding orphans and property, He followed it by prohibiting them from adopting a type of their customs regarding the women themselves or their wealth. Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim recorded, via Ali, from Ibn Abbas, that he said: "When a man died and left a bondwoman, his kinsman would cast his garment over her, preventing her from others. If she were beautiful, he would marry her; and if she were ugly, he would keep her until she died, and then he would inherit her." In a narration by Al-Bukhari and Abu Dawood: "When a man died, his guardians had more right to his wife; if some of them wished, they would marry her; if they wished, they would marry her off to someone else; and if they wished, they would not marry her off. They had more right to her than her own family." This verse was revealed concerning that.

Ibn al-Mundhir recorded from Ikrimah that this verse was revealed concerning Kabishah bint Ma'n ibn Asim from the tribe of Aws. She was married to Abu Qays ibn al-Aslat, and when he passed away, his son sought to claim her. She came to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and said: "I neither inherited my husband nor was I left to marry." Then this verse was revealed. Similar accounts were reported from Abu Jafar. Ibn Abi Hatim recorded from Zayd ibn Aslam that he said: "The people of Yathrib, when a man among them died during the Era of Ignorance, his heir would inherit his wife. He would constrain her until he married her or married her off to whomever he pleased." Allah the Exalted prohibited the believers from that.

It is reported from Az-Zuhri that it was revealed concerning a man who keeps a woman whom he has no need for, waiting for her death so that he might inherit her.

"Women" (al-nisa) may be the second object of "inherit" (tarithu), assuming they are the ones inherited. "By compulsion" (karhan) is a source in the accusative case, acting as a state of "women." It is also said it is a state of the pronoun in "you inherit." The meaning is: It is not lawful for you to take the women of your deceased ones by way of inheritance, according to your assumption, just as it was lawful for you to take property, while they are averse to that, or forced into it, or you are averse to them. It may also be the first object, and the meaning is: "It is not lawful for you" to take property from women by way of inheritance "by compulsion." The intent here is to command the husband to divorce a woman whose companionship he dislikes, rather than detaining her by compulsion until she dies so that he may inherit her property.

Hamza and Al-Kisa'i read kurhan with a damma in its instances, and Asim, Ibn Amir, and Yaqub agreed with them in Surah al-Ahqaf. The others read it with a fatha in all instances. They are similar in meaning, like du'f and di'f. It is said that kurh (with damma) is compulsion, and karh (with fatha) is aversion.

It was read la tahillu with a ta (feminine prefix) because "that you inherit" (an tarithu) is in the sense of inheritance (al-wiratha), just as it was read "their trial was not but that they said" (illa an qalu) because it is in the sense of "the saying" (al-maqala). This is the inverse of masculinizing a feminine source by interpreting it as "that" (an) and the verb. Both are current in eloquent speech.

"And do not constrain them in order to take away part of what you have given them..."

The root of al-'adl is constriction and confinement. From this, one says "the woman was constrained by her child" ('udilat) if he was difficult for her. 'Adl (the woman's husband) is to prevent her unjustly. It is said: 'adala the woman, ya'duluha, like the verb forms with a kasra or fatha [on the middle letter].

"Do not" (wa la) is either prohibitory, the verb being jussive by it, and the sentence being a new beginning as Abu al-Baqa said; or it is conjoined to the preceding sentence, based on the permissibility of conjoining a prohibitory sentence to a declarative one—as attributed to Sibawayh—or because the first sentence is in the meaning of a prohibition, for its meaning is: "Do not inherit women by compulsion," as it is not lawful for you. Or it is an additional negative for the sake of emphasis, and the verb is in the accusative by being conjoined to "inherit," as if it were said: "The inheritance of women by compulsion is not lawful, nor is constraining them." Ibn Mas'ud’s reading "nor that you constrain them" supports this. As for making "do not" a non-additional negative and the verb conjoined to the accusative before it, some rejected it, stating that if a negative verb via "do not" is conjoined to an affirmative verb and both are in the accusative, the rule is that the governor (the nasib) is assumed after the conjunction, not after "do not." If you were to assume it here after the conjunction, the meaning would be corrupted, as is obvious.

The address in these two conjoined parts is either to the heirs—other than the husbands—who would prevent the widow from remarrying so that she would ransom herself with what she inherited from her husband, or give them the dowry she had received, just as they used to inherit them by compulsion. In this case, "what you have given them" refers to what your gender gave them, otherwise the speech would not be coherent, as the heirs did not give them anything. Or, the address is to the husbands, for as they used to do as mentioned, they would detain women for whom they had no need, harming them and restricting them to take away some of what they had given them by compelling them to surrender their dowries via khul'. Many commentators have gone this way, and it is what is reported from Abu Jafar (may Allah be pleased with him), and the consistency of the text upon this is clear.

It is permissible that the first address is to the heirs and this address is to the husbands, as the speech was completed with His saying "by compulsion," so it does not count against it—once the rule is accepted that two people are not addressed in one utterance without a vocative—for one does not say "Stand up and sit down" addressing Zayd and Amr; rather, one says "Stand up, O Zayd, and sit down, O Amr." It is also said this is an address to the husbands but after their separation from their spouses, for Ibn Jarir recorded from Ibn Zayd that he said: "The Quraish in Mecca, when one of them would marry a noble woman and they would not get along, he would separate from her on the condition that she not marry except with his permission. He would bring witnesses and have that written against her. Then, if a suitor proposed to her, if she gave him something and pleased him, he would permit her; otherwise, he would constrain her."

The intent of His saying "to take away" is that they should pay you back some of what you have given them, and you take it from them. He did not mention their action because it is caused by their necessity, and is as if it were non-existent. He expressed it as "going away with it" rather than "taking it" to emphasize its ugliness, by clarifying that it contains two actions, both of which are heinous: taking and going away. He mentioned "part" so it may be known that going away with all of it is even more heinous.

"...unless they should commit a clear immorality."

...Active participle from bana (intransitive), meaning "it became clear," or transitive. The object is omitted, meaning: "clear to its doer." Ibn Kathir and Abu Bakr from Asim read it as a passive participle. It is narrated from Ibn Abbas that he read it as an active participle from abana (intransitive), meaning "it became clear," or transitive. The "immorality" (fahisha) here means nushuz (rebellion) and bad character; this was said by Qatada, Ad-Dahhak, Ibn Abbas, and others. The reading of Ubayy "unless they are immoral (yafhusha) against you" supports this. In Ad-Durr al-Manthur, this reading is attributed to Ubayy and Ibn Mas'ud, but without "against you." Ibn Jarir recorded from Al-Hasan that the intent is adultery. This is also narrated from Abu Qilabah and Ibn Sirin.

The exclusion is said to be munqati' (disjointed), or muttasil (connected). It is a general temporal scope, meaning: do not constrain them at any time except the time of them committing, etc. Or it is a general state, or a general reason, meaning: do not constrain them for any reason except for them committing [immorality].

"...and live with them in kindness..."

Meaning, associate with them in kindness, which is what the law and decency do not reject. The intent here is fairness in division and maintenance, and moderation in speech and deed. It is said: kindness is that he does not harm her, does not speak ill to her, and is cheerful in countenance toward her. It is said: it is that he adorns himself for her as she adorns herself for him. Those who obligate service for the wives from the husband—if they are of those who do not serve themselves—have used the generality of this for their argument.

"...For if you dislike them, perhaps you dislike a thing and Allah makes therein much good."

Meaning, if you dislike their companionship and detaining them, by nature, without there being anything on their part that necessitates it: "perhaps you dislike a thing," such as companionship and retention, "and Allah makes therein much good," such as offspring or the harmony that occurs after the dislike. This is what Ibn Abbas and Mujahid said. This sentence is the reason for the recompense and is placed in its stead, signaling the strength of its necessity. For "perhaps" ('asa), being for the creation of hope, is not suitable for being a response, and it is a complete verb, raising what comes after it and having no need for a predicate. The meaning is: if you dislike them, then be patient with them and do not separate from them due to the dislike of the soul alone, for perhaps there is "much good" for you in what you dislike. For the soul may dislike what is praiseworthy and love what is otherwise. He made "thing" and "good" indefinite and described them as he did to emphasize the urge to refrain from separation and to generalize the guidance. For this reason, the verse is used as evidence that divorce is disliked.

It was read "and He makes" (wa yaj'alu) in the indicative as the predicate of an omitted subject, and the sentence is a state, meaning: and He—that very thing—"makes Allah therein much good." It is said the estimation is "And Allah makes," putting the noun in place of the pronoun. The waw in this case is for the state (haliyya).