Tafsir of An-Nisa' 4:4

An-Nisā’ (The Women): Verse 4

And give the women [their] ṣadaqāt (dower/marriage portions) willingly.

In this verse, there are several issues:

There are two opinions:

1. *To the women's guardians (awliyā’):* This is because in the pre-Islamic era (Jāhiliyyah), Arabs did not give women anything from their dowers. They would say to someone who had a daughter born, "Congratulations on your nāfijah," meaning you can take her dower as camels and add them to your herd, thus increasing your wealth. Ibn al-A‘rābī stated that an-nāfijah is what a man takes from the bride-price when he marries off his daughter. God forbade this and commanded that the right be given to its rightful owner. This is the view of al-Kalbī, Abū Ṣāliḥ, and the choice of al-Farrā’ and Ibn Qutaybah.
2. To the husbands: They are commanded to give the women their dowers. This is the view of ‘Alqamah, an-Nakh‘ī, Qatādah, and the choice of az-Zajjāj. The reason is that guardians are not mentioned here, whereas the preceding verses addressed the contracting parties, who are the husbands.

Al-Qaffāl (may God have mercy on him) suggested two possibilities for the meaning of al-ītā’ (giving):

1. Physical Handing Over (Munāwalah): Commanding them to pay the dowers that were stipulated.
2. Undertaking/Obligation (Iltizām): Similar to the verse: "until they pay the jizyah willingly by hand" (9:29), meaning until they guarantee and commit to it. Under this interpretation, the furooj (private parts) are not permissible except in exchange for an obligation, whether a specific amount was named or not, except for what the Prophet (PBUH) specified for the mawhubah (woman gifted in marriage without a dower).

He added that the statement might encompass both meanings.

The author of al-Kashshāf stated that ṣadaqāt means their dowers (muhūr). In a narration from Sharīḥ, Ibn ‘Abbās ruled in favor of the wife based on the word ṣadaqah (dower).

• It was recited as صَدَقَاتِهِنَّ (ṣadaqātihinna) with a fatḥah on the ṣād and sukūn on the dāl, as a shortened form of ṣadaqāt.
• It was recited as صُدُقَاتِهِنَّ (ṣudūqātihinna) with a ḍammah on the ṣād and sukūn on the dāl, as the plural of ṣadaqah.
• It was also recited as صَدُقَاتِهِنَّ (ṣadūqātihinna) with a ḍammah on the ṣād and dāl, which is an intensified singular form, like ẓulmah (darkness) for ẓulmatun.

Al-Wāḥidī said that the root ṣadaq in this context implies completeness and validity, hence the dower is called ṣidāq and ṣadaqah because the marriage contract is completed and perfected by it.

There are several interpretations for the word naḥlah:

1. A Religious Obligation/Ordinance (Farīḍah): This is the view of Ibn ‘Abbās, Qatādah, Ibn Jurayj, and Ibn Zayd. They interpret naḥlah as religion, creed, law, or doctrine, as one who adheres to something is said to yantaḥilu it. Thus, "Give the women their ṣadaqāt as a naḥlah" means give them their dowers, as it is a religious law, doctrine, and thus an obligation.
2. A Gift or Grant (‘Aṭiyyah or Hiba): This is the view of al-Kalbī. One says naḥaltu fulānan shay’an (I granted so-and-so something) as naḥlah or naḥlan. Al-Qaffāl noted that its origin is attributing something to someone other than its owner (e.g., shi‘r manḥūl—attributed poetry). Under this view, the question arises: A gift from whom?
   • From the Husband: Because the husband receives nothing in return that he owns; the wife's biḍ‘ (sexual access) remains her property after marriage as it was before. The husband gives the dower without receiving a property in exchange. What the husband gains is the permissibility of sexual relations, not ownership.
   • A Gift from God: Some scholars say that God made the benefits of marriage (sexual gratification and procreation) shared between the spouses, and then commanded the husband to give the wife the dower, making it an initial gift from God.
3. Willingly and Without Seeking Compensation (‘an ṭayyib nafsin): This is the view of Abū ‘Ubaydah. Naḥlah in language means a gift given without expecting anything in return, like what a man grants his children from his wealth. What is given without demanding compensation must come from a willing heart. Therefore, God commanded giving the dowers without the women having to demand or litigate for them, as what is obtained through litigation cannot be called a naḥlah.

If we take naḥlah to mean religion/ordinance:

1. It is an object of the verb (maf‘ūl lah): Meaning, give them their dowers as a matter of religion (diyānah).
2. It is an adverbial accusative (ḥāl) describing the ṣadaqāt: Meaning, the dowers are a religious ordinance legislated and imposed by God.

If we take naḥlah to mean a gift:

1. It is an accusative of the verbal noun (maṣdar): Since naḥlah and ītā’ mean giving, it is as if it were said: "And grant the women their ṣadaqāt as a grant (naḥlah)," meaning give them willingly.
2. It is an adverbial accusative (ḥāl), with two sub-possibilities:
   • Describing the addressees: "Give them their ṣadaqāt while you are willingly giving (nāḥilīn)."
   • Describing the ṣadaqāt: "Given willingly (manḥūlah) out of good will."

Abū Ḥanīfah (may God be pleased with him) held that valid seclusion (khulwah ṣaḥīḥah) establishes the full dower. Al-Shāfi‘ī (may God be pleased with him) held that it does not establish it.

Abū Ḥanīfah argued based on this verse, which implies the obligation of giving the full dower absolutely. If the ruling is suspended when consummation and seclusion do not occur, then when they do occur, the ruling must revert to what the verse mandates.

The Aṣḥāb (Shafi‘i scholars) responded that this verse is general, whereas the verse: "And if you divorce them before you have touched them and you have already stipulated a dower for them, then [you owe them] half of what you stipulated" (2:237) indicates that only half the dower is due if there is no consummation. This verse is specific, and the specific always takes precedence over the general.

His statement: {But if they give up willingly to you anything of it, then consume it in lawful, wholesome enjoyment.}

When God commanded them to give the ṣadaqāt, He immediately followed it by mentioning the permissibility of accepting their voluntary relinquishment or gift, lest one think that the dower must be paid even if the woman willingly gives it up.

In this part of the verse, there are several issues:

It is in the accusative case as a specification (tamyīz). The meaning is: If their souls willingly give up something of the dower for you. The verb (ṭābat) is transferred from the souls (al-anfus) to the women themselves. Thus, an-nafs functions as a specification, similar to saying, "You are handsome in face" (ḥasan wajhan), where the verb originally relates to the face.

The word nafs is singular because it serves to explain the context of the action, which is achieved even with the singular form, similar to "twenty dirhams." Al-Farrā’ said that using the plural (anfus) would also have been correct, like the verse: "the most deficient in deeds" (18:103).

The mīm in minhu is not for partiality (tab‘īḍ), but for clarification (tabyīn). The meaning is: willingly give up something of this category, which is the dower. This is like the verse: "So shun the impurity of idols" (22:30). This is because if the woman willingly gave up the entire dower, it would be permissible for the husband to take it all.

Minhu refers to the ṣadaqāt (dowers) or that [dower]. This is like the verse: "Say, 'Shall I inform you of something better than that?'" (3:15) after mentioning desires.

It is narrated that when Ru’bah recited poetry:

Therein are lines of black and white, As if the skin had the markings of the white antelope.

He was asked: If the pronoun in ka’annahu (as if it is) refers to the lines (al-khuṭūṭ), you should have said ka’annahā (as if they are). If it refers to the black and white (as-sawād wal-baqa‘), you should have said ka’annahumā (as if they both are). He replied: I meant ka’anna dhāka (as if that is so).

Another view is that aṣ-ṣadaqāt (plural) is used in the sense of the singular ṣidāq (dower), because if you said, "And give the women their ṣidāq," the meaning would be achieved. A third view is that the singular pronoun serves to indicate that the relinquishment is of some of the dower, encouraging her to only give up a portion.

The meaning is: If they grant you something of the dower willingly, without the reason being your bad character or poor treatment of them, then consume it and spend it.

This verse indicates the strictness required in this matter and the necessity of caution, as the condition is based on the willingness of the soul (ṭīb an-nafs). God said: {If they give up willingly} and did not say, "If they grant or permit," to signify that the criterion is the soul’s genuine detachment from what is given away.

These two words are derived from hanu’a and mari’a the food, meaning it is easy to swallow without obstruction. It is also said: al-hanī’ is what the eater relishes, and al-marī’ is what has a good outcome. Another view: what passes easily through the throat to the stomach is marī’, as the food passes through it easily. Al-Wāḥidī narrated from some that the origin of hanī’ is al-hanā’ (treating scabies with tar), so al-hanī’ is a cure for scabies.

The commentators say the meaning is: If they willingly give up their dowers to their husbands, the husbands bear no blame for it, neither in this world nor the Hereafter. In essence, it is an expression of complete permissibility and removal of liability.

1. They are adjectives describing the verbal noun (maṣdar): Meaning, consuming it in a wholesome and enjoyable manner (aklan hanī’an marī’an).
2. They are an adverbial accusative (ḥāl) describing the implied pronoun: Meaning, consume it while it is wholesome and enjoyable.
3. One may pause at {so consume it} and then begin {wholesome, enjoyable} as a form of supplication. Or, they stand in place of two verbal nouns, as if it were said: "May it be wholesome, may it be enjoyable" (hanā’a marā’a).

This verse indicates several points:

1. The dower belongs to the wife, and the guardian has no right to it.
2. It is permissible for the wife to gift the dower to the husband, and permissible for the husband to accept it, as {so consume it in lawful, wholesome enjoyment} implies both meanings.
3. It is permissible for her to gift the dower before receiving it, as God did not differentiate between the two states.

There is a discussion here: If the dower was a debt (dayn), does {so consume it in lawful, wholesome enjoyment} apply? One cannot say "consume it" regarding a debt owed in one's liability.

The response is that {so consume it} does not strictly mean physical eating, but rather the permissibility of disposition (ḥill al-taṣarrufāt). Eating was mentioned specifically because most wealth is intended for consumption, similar to the verse: "Indeed, those who devour the property of orphans unjustly" (4:10) and "Do not consume your wealth among yourselves unjustly" (2:188).

Some scholars said that if she gifts it and then demands it back after the gift, it is known that she was not truly willing (lam taṭib nafsuhā).

Al-Sha‘bī narrated that a woman came before Sharīḥ with her husband regarding a gift she had given him, seeking to revoke it. Sharīḥ told the husband to return it. The man argued, "Hasn't God said, {If they give up willingly of it}?" Sharīḥ replied, "If her soul had been truly willing, she would not have sought to take it back."

It is also narrated that he said: "I permit her to revoke what she gifted, but I do not permit him [to refuse the return], because women are easily deceived."

It is narrated that a man from the family of Abū al-Mu‘ayṭ had his wife give him one thousand dinars of her dower. He stayed a month and then divorced her. She sued him before ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Marwān. The husband argued, "She gave it to me willingly." ‘Abd al-Malik said: "The following verse is: {and do not take from them anything} [referring to the next verse's context about taking back gifts], so return it to her."

It is narrated from ‘Umar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb (may God be pleased with him) that he wrote to his judges: "Women give out of desire or fear. If any woman gives something and then wishes to take it back, that is her right." And God knows best.

*Verse 5: {And do not give the foolish (sufahā’) your property which God has made for you a means of subsistence. But provide for them and clothe them therefrom and speak to them in a kind manner.}*