Al-Baqarah: (240) And those who die among you...

There are several issues discussed here:

Issue 1: Grammatical Analysis of the Verse

There are differing recitations regarding the word {وصية} (a bequest/recommendation):

**Recitation with Nominative Case (رفع - Raf')**: Read by Ibn Kathir, Nafi', Al-Kisai, and Abu Bakr from 'Asim.

1. {وصية} is the subject (Mubtada'): And {لازواجهم} (for their wives) is the predicate (Khabar). It is permissible to start with an indefinite noun because it is specified by the context (the situation described), similar to saying Salamun 'alaykum (Peace be upon you) or Khabarun bayna yaday (News before me).
2. {وصية لازواجهم} is the subject: With an implied predicate. The implied meaning is: F 'alayhim wasiyyatun li-azwajihim (There is a bequest for their wives). This is analogous to verses like: {Fa-nisfu ma faradtum} (Half of what you have stipulated) or {Fidyahtun musallamatun} (A ransom being delivered).
3. Implied Subject: The implied subject is Al-amru wasiyyatun (The command is a bequest), or Al-mafrudu wasiyyatun (The obligatory matter is a bequest), or Al-hukmu wasiyyatun (The ruling is a bequest).
4. Implied Subject: The implied meaning is: Kutiba 'alaykum wasiyyatun (A bequest was prescribed for you).
5. Implied Subject: The implied meaning is: Li-yakuna minkum wasiyyatun (So that there may be a bequest from you).
6. Implied Subject: The implied meaning is: Wa wasiyyatul-ladhina yatawaffawna minkum wasiyyatun ila al-hawl (And the bequest of those who die among you is a bequest for a year). All these interpretations are permissible and sound.

Recitation with Accusative Case (نصب - Nasb): Read by the rest of the reciters.

1. Implied Verb: The implied meaning is: Fa-l-yawsaw wasiyyatan (So let them make a bequest).
2. Implied Verb: The implied meaning is: Tawsuna wasiyyatan (You make a bequest), similar to saying: Innaka sayyirul-bareed (You are traveling the journey of the courier).
3. Implied Verb: The implied meaning is: Alzama alladhina yatawaffawna wasiyyatan (Make it incumbent upon those who die to make a bequest).

Regarding the phrase {متاعا} (provision/enjoyment):

1. It implies the meaning: Matti'uhunna mata'an (Provide them enjoyment with provision). The implied preceding command would be: Fa-l-yawsaw lahunna wasiyyatan wa-l-yamatti'uhunna mata'an (So let them make a bequest for them, and let them provide them enjoyment).
2. It implies that Allah made that provision for them, as the preceding context suggests this.
3. It is in the accusative case as a circumstantial adverb (Hal).

Regarding the phrase {غير إخراج} (without expulsion):

1. It is in the accusative case, functioning as a Hal (circumstantial adverb), as if saying: Matti'uhunna muqeematun ghayra mukhrajat (Provide them enjoyment while they remain, without being expelled).
2. It is in the accusative case by dropping the preposition (Naz' al-Khafid), meaning: Min ghayri ikhraj (From without expulsion).

Issue 2: Abrogation (Naskh) of the Verse

There are three main opinions regarding this verse:

Opinion 1: It is abrogated (The view of the majority of commentators)

• In the beginning of Islam, when a man died, his widow was not entitled to inheritance from his estate, only maintenance (Nafaqah) and lodging (Sukna) for one year.
• This one-year waiting period ('Iddah) was obligatory for her to abstain from remarriage, but she had the choice: she could observe the Iddah in her husband's house, or she could leave before the year ended. If she left, her maintenance rights ceased.
• Whether we read {وصية} in the nominative or accusative case, this bequest (maintenance and lodging for a year) was obligatory.
• This bequest was further clarified by two things: (1) Provision/maintenance for a year, and (2) Lodging for a year.
• Then Allah revealed that there is no blame (Junaah) if they leave early. This confirms that the verse initially mandated two things: (1) Obligatory maintenance and lodging from the deceased husband's wealth for a year, and (2) Obligatory Iddah for a year (since maintenance and lodging from the deceased's wealth for a year prevents her from marrying another man during that year).
• Abrogation: Allah abrogated both rulings. The bequest for maintenance and lodging was abrogated because the Quran established her right to inheritance, and the Sunnah established that there is no bequest for an heir. Thus, the combination of Quran and Sunnah abrogated the bequest of maintenance and lodging for a year. The obligatory Iddah of one year was abrogated by the verse: {Yatarabbasna bi-anfusihinna arba'ata ashhurin wa 'ashra} (They should keep themselves waiting for four months and ten days). This is the view agreed upon by most early and later commentators.

Opinion 2: Reconciliation based on choice (The view of Mujahid)

• Allah revealed two verses concerning the Iddah of a widow: the one mentioned previously (four months and ten days) and this verse.
• These two verses must apply to two different situations:
  • If she chooses not to reside in her husband's house and not to take maintenance from his estate, her Iddah is four months and ten days (as per the earlier verse).
  • If she chooses to reside in his house and take maintenance from his estate, her Iddah is one year.
• Applying the two verses to these two scenarios is preferable so that both are acted upon.

Opinion 3: No Abrogation (The view of Abu Muslim al-Asfahani)

• The meaning of the verse is: "And those who die among you and leave behind wives—if they made a bequest for their wives concerning maintenance and lodging for a year—if they leave before that, having fulfilled the period Allah set for them, then there is no blame upon them for what they do for themselves in righteousness (i.e., a valid marriage)."
• Under this interpretation, staying based on this bequest is not obligatory. The reason is that in the Jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic era), people used to bequeath maintenance and lodging for a full year, and the woman was required to observe an Iddah of a year. Allah clarified in this verse that this is not obligatory.
• Under this interpretation, abrogation is removed. His evidence:
  1. Abrogation is contrary to the default principle, so avoiding it, if possible, is necessary.
  2. The abrogating text must be revealed after the abrogated text. If it is later in revelation, it is better if it is also later in recitation order. Preceding the abrogated text in recitation, while permissible generally, is considered poor ordering, and Allah's speech should be protected from this as much as possible. Since this verse appears later in recitation than the other, it should not be ruled as abrogated by it.

Further Argument for Non-Abrogation (Rajiḥ - Preference):

• In Usul al-Fiqh, when there is a conflict between abrogation and specification (Takhsis), specification takes precedence.
• If we specify the two verses for the two situations (as Mujahid suggests), abrogation is avoided, making Mujahid's view preferable over affirming abrogation without proof.
• The argument is even stronger based on Abu Muslim's view: You (the abrogators) claim the meaning is: "There is a bequest for their wives," attributing this ruling to Allah. Abu Muslim claims the meaning is: "And those who die among you, and they have made a bequest for their wives," attributing the statement to the husband. If an omission (Idmar) is necessary, why is your omission preferable to his? Furthermore, your interpretation necessitates abrogation, which is an unsupported claim, especially given the poor ordering it implies, which should be avoided in the Divine Text.

Conclusion on Structure (Supporting Abu Muslim's view):

• The entire verse is a conditional sentence: The condition (Shart) is: {And those who die among you and leave behind wives, a bequest for their wives, provision until the end of the year without expulsion}. The consequence (Jaza') is: {Then if they leave early, there is no blame upon you concerning what they do for themselves in righteousness}. This structure is sound and supports Abu Muslim's position.

Issue 3: Maintenance and Lodging for the Widow

• The widow observing Iddah due to the husband's death is not entitled to maintenance (Nafaqah) or clothing (Kiswah), whether she is pregnant or not.
  • It is narrated from Ali (RA) and Ibn Umar (RA) that she is entitled to maintenance if she is pregnant.
  • Jabir and Ibn Abbas (RA) said she has no maintenance, as her inheritance suffices her.
• Regarding lodging (Sukna), there are two opinions:
  1. No right to lodging: The view of Ali (RA), Ibn Abbas (RA), Aisha (RA), Abu Hanifa, and Al-Muzani.
  2. Right to lodging: The view of Umar (RA), Uthman (RA), Ibn Mas'ud (RA), Umm Salamah (RA), Malik, Al-Thawri, and Ahmad.
• The basis for the second opinion is the Hadith of Fari'ah bint Malik (sister of Abu Sa'id al-Khudri), whose husband was killed. She asked the Prophet (PBUH) if she could return to her family since her husband left her no house he owned. The Prophet (PBUH) initially said yes, but later called her back and said: "Stay in your house until the prescribed term reaches its end."
  • Scholars differ on this Hadith: Some say the initial permission was abrogated by the later command to stay. Others say the command to stay was one of recommendation (Istihbab), not obligation.
• Al-Muzani argued against lodging: Since everyone agrees she has no maintenance (as ownership is severed by death), lodging should also be severed, just as maintenance and lodging owed by a father or son to a man cease upon his death because his wealth becomes inheritance.
• The Reply: Lodging cannot be analogized to maintenance. The divorced woman (in triple divorce) is entitled to lodging but not maintenance (according to Al-Muzani), because maintenance is compensation for the right to sexual enjoyment, which is absent here. However, lodging is established for the protection (Tahsin) of women, which is present here. Thus, the two differ.

Connection to Abrogation: Those who hold the verse is abrogated must differ on this issue: Since the verse mandates both maintenance and lodging, and maintenance is abrogated, is the obligation of lodging also abrogated, or not? (This is the point discussed above).

Issue 4: The Timing of the Bequest

• Those who affirm the obligation of this bequest raise a question: Allah mentions death, then commands the bequest. How can the deceased make a bequest?
• Answer 1: The meaning is that those approaching death should do this; death here refers to being on the verge of dying.
• Answer 2: This bequest can be attributed to Allah, meaning His command/obligation, as if it were said: "A bequest from Allah for their wives," similar to {Yusikumullahu fi awladikum} (Allah instructs you concerning your children). This interpretation is best suited for those who recite {وصية} in the nominative case.

Regarding {فلا جناح عليكم} (There is no blame upon you):

• This means: No blame upon you, O guardians of the deceased, for what they do for themselves regarding adornment or entering into marriage.
• There are two interpretations for lifting the blame:
  1. No blame in stopping their maintenance if they leave before the year ends.
  2. No blame in allowing them to leave, as their staying for a year in the husband's house is not obligatory upon her.

The Eighteenth Ruling: Concerning Divorced Women

{And for the divorced women is a provision according to what is equitable, a duty upon the righteous. Thus does Allah make clear to you His verses that you may understand.} (Al-Baqarah 2:241)