Surah An-Nisa (4): Verse 59

Commentary by Fakhr al-Din al-Razi

After commanding the rulers and authorities to be just toward the populace, the Almighty commanded the populace to obey the rulers, saying: {O you who have believed, obey Allah...}. This is why Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "It is incumbent upon the Imam to rule by what Allah has revealed and to fulfill the trust. If he does that, it is incumbent upon the populace to listen and obey."

In this verse, there are several issues:

The Mu'tazilah argue that obedience is conformity to will (irādah). Our scholars (Ahl al-Sunnah) maintain that obedience is conformity to the command (amr), not conformity to the will.

Argument for Ahl al-Sunnah: There is no dispute that conforming to the command is obedience. The dispute is whether what is commanded must be willed by the Commander. If we prove that what is commanded may not be willed, then obedience is not merely conformity to will.

We say that Allah may command what He does not will. For instance, Allah’s knowledge and report have determined that faith will never originate from Abu Lahab. This knowledge and report cannot cease or turn into ignorance. The existence of faith from Abu Lahab contradicts and opposes this knowledge and report. Combining two opposites is impossible, so the occurrence of faith from Abu Lahab is impossible. Since Allah Almighty knows all states, He knows that this outcome is impossible. One who knows something to be impossible does not will it. Thus, it is established that Allah does not will faith from Abu Lahab, yet He commanded him to have faith. This proves that a command can exist without a corresponding will. If this is established, it must be concluded that obedience to Allah means conformity to His command, not conformity to His will.

The Mu'tazilah Argument: They argue that obedience is the name for conformity to will, citing the poet:

“O Lord, whose chest’s anger You have inflamed, He wished for my death, yet he did not obey.” They base obedience on wishing (tamannī), which is a type of will.

The Reply: A rational person knows that the decisive proof we mentioned cannot be countered by such a weak argument.

This noble verse encompasses most of the principles of Usūl al-Fiqh. The jurists claim that the foundations of Sharia are four: the Book (Qur'an), the Sunnah, Ijma' (Consensus), and Qiyās (Analogy). This verse establishes these four principles in this specific order.

1. The Book and the Sunnah: Indicated by the command: {Obey Allah and obey the Messenger}.
   • Objection: Is obedience to the Messenger not obedience to Allah? Why the conjunction?
   • Reply (Al-Qadi): The benefit lies in clarifying the two sources of guidance. The Book indicates Allah's command, from which we necessarily deduce the Messenger's command. The Sunnah indicates the Messenger's command, from which we necessarily deduce Allah's command. Thus, {Obey Allah and obey the Messenger} indicates the obligation to follow the Book and the Sunnah.

The phrase {and those in authority among you} (wa ūlī al-amr minkum) indicates to us that the consensus of the Ummah is authoritative proof.

The Proof: Allah commanded absolute obedience to Ūlī al-Amr. Anyone whose obedience is commanded absolutely by Allah must be infallible (ma'sūm) from error. If they were not infallible, and they erred, Allah would have commanded us to follow that error. This would mean Allah commanded an act that is inherently wrong (an error), leading to the impossible situation of a single act being simultaneously commanded and forbidden under the same consideration. Therefore, the Ūlī al-Amr mentioned in this verse must be infallible.

This infallible authority must be either the entire Ummah or a part of the Ummah. It cannot be only a part of the Ummah, because we established that Allah commanded obedience to Ūlī al-Amr absolutely. This absolute command requires that we know who they are and are capable of reaching them and learning from them. Necessarily, in our current time, we are incapable of knowing the infallible Imam, reaching them, or learning the religion from them. Therefore, the infallible authority commanded by Allah is not a specific part or faction of the Ummah.

Since this is ruled out, the infallible authority referred to by {and those in authority} must be the Ahl al-Hall wa al-'Aqd (the people who loosen and bind, i.e., the consensus-makers of the Ummah). This necessitates the certainty that the consensus of the Ummah is authoritative proof.

Objection (Regarding other interpretations of Ūlī al-Amr): Commentators mentioned other meanings for Ūlī al-Amr:

1. The Rightly Guided Caliphs.
2. The commanders of military expeditions (e.g., the incident involving 'Abdullah ibn Hudhafah or Khālid ibn al-Walīd).
3. The scholars who issue religious rulings and teach the people their religion (reported from Ibn 'Abbās, al-Hasan, Mujāhid, and al-Ḍaḥḥāk).
4. The Imams whom the Rāfiḍah (Shi'a) believe to be infallible.

Since the interpretations are limited to these views, and our view (consensus) is outside them, our view must be invalid by the consensus of the Ummah.

Rebuttal to the Objection:

1. The interpretation referring to rulers/sultans is more appropriate than the others mentioned:
   • Rulers' commands are enforceable upon the populace; they are truly Ūlī al-Amr. Consensus-makers have no enforceable command over the populace.
   • The beginning and end of the verse suit this interpretation. The beginning commands rulers to fulfill trusts and uphold justice, and the end commands referring disputes to the Book and Sunnah. This suits rulers more than consensus-makers.
   • The Prophet (PBUH) strongly encouraged obedience to commanders, saying: "Whoever obeys me has obeyed Allah, and whoever obeys my commander has obeyed me. And whoever disobeys me has disobeyed Allah, and whoever disobeys my commander has disobeyed me."

Reply to the Rebuttal:

1. There is no dispute that many Companions and Successors interpreted Ūlī al-Amr as the scholars. If we say Ūlī al-Amr means all scholars capable of Ahl al-Hall wa al-'Aqd, this is not an interpretation outside the Ummah's views; rather, it is the selection and validation of one of their views with decisive proof. Thus, the first objection is repelled.
2. The second objection (favoring rulers) is repelled because the views they cited are weak, whereas our proof is decisive. Furthermore, we offer stronger counter-arguments:
   • The Ummah agrees that obedience to rulers is only obligatory in what is known by evidence to be right (i.e., what conforms to the Book and Sunnah). Thus, obedience to rulers is included within obedience to the Book and Sunnah, just as a wife's obedience to her husband is included in obedience to Allah. If we interpret Ūlī al-Amr as consensus, this category might not be included, as consensus might establish a ruling where the Book and Sunnah offer no explicit indication. Thus, making it a separate category (consensus) is preferable.
   • Interpreting it as rulers requires adding a condition (that they are upon truth), which is absent in the verse. Interpreting it as consensus does not require adding a condition.
   • The subsequent phrase {then if you dispute over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger} implies a preceding authority whose ruling differs from the ruling of dispute.
   • Obedience to Allah and His Messenger is absolutely obligatory. Obedience to consensus is absolutely obligatory according to us. Obedience to rulers is not absolutely obligatory; often, it is forbidden because they command injustice. Thus, interpreting it as consensus is preferable, as it groups the Messenger and Ūlī al-Amr in one structure: {Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and Ūlī al-Amr from among you}. It is more appropriate to associate Ūlī al-Amr (who is conjoined with the Messenger) with the infallible (consensus) than with the sinful ruler.
   • The actions of rulers depend on the fatwas of scholars. Scholars are, in reality, the commanders of the commanders. Thus, interpreting Ūlī al-Amr as scholars is preferable.

Refuting the Rāfiḍah View (Infallible Imams): This view is extremely distant for several reasons:

1. Their obedience is conditional upon knowing them and being able to reach them. Obligating obedience before knowledge is imposing what is beyond capacity. If obligation is conditional upon knowing them, the apparent meaning of the verse, which implies absolute obedience ({Obey...}), is violated. Since the command regarding the Messenger is absolute, the command regarding Ūlī al-Amr must also be absolute.
2. Ūlī al-Amr is a plural form, but they hold that only one Imam exists at any time. Applying a plural term to a singular entity contradicts the apparent meaning.
3. The verse states: {then if you dispute over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger}. If Ūlī al-Amr meant the infallible Imam, it should have been stated: "If you dispute, refer it to the Imam."

Therefore, the correct interpretation is what we have established.

The phrase {then if you dispute over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger} indicates to us that Qiyās is authoritative proof.

The Proof: If a dispute arises over something, its ruling is either: A. Explicitly mentioned in the Book, Sunnah, or Ijma'. B. Not explicitly mentioned in any of these three.

Case A is false because if the ruling were explicit, obedience would fall under the previous command: {Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and Ūlī al-Amr from among you}. In this case, the phrase {then if you dispute... refer it...} would be a mere repetition of what preceded, which is impermissible.

Therefore, Case B must be true: the dispute is over something whose ruling is not explicitly mentioned in the Book, Sunnah, or Ijma'. In this case, referring it to Allah and the Messenger cannot mean seeking the ruling from their explicit texts. It must mean referring the ruling of the case to rulings established for similar, analogous cases. This is precisely Qiyās. Thus, the verse commands Qiyās.

Objections to this interpretation:

1. Could {refer it to Allah and the Messenger} mean: "Entrust its knowledge to Allah and remain silent"?
2. Could it mean: "Refer the non-explicit matter to the explicit principle that nothing is judged except by explicit text"?
3. Could it mean: "Refer these rulings to the principle of original innocence (al-barā’ah al-aṣliyyah)"?

Replies:

1. The first objection is repelled. The verse divides events into two categories: those with explicit rulings (where obedience is commanded) and those without (where referral is commanded). Silence is not permissible in the second category, as the dispute requires resolution (affirmation or negation). Thus, "referral" cannot mean silence. This also refutes the third objection (referral to original innocence).
2. Original innocence is known by rational judgment, so referring a case to it is not a referral to Allah in the sense intended here. Referring the ruling of the case to the established rulings of Allah is a true referral to Allah.

This verse indicates that the Book and Sunnah take precedence over Qiyās absolutely. It is impermissible to abandon working by them due to Qiyās, or to restrict their general meaning due to Qiyās, whether the Qiyās is clear or subtle, and whether the text was previously restricted or not.

Proof: We established that {Obey Allah and obey the Messenger} is an absolute command to follow the Book and Sunnah. This obligation stands whether a conflicting or specifying Qiyās exists or not.

Further Reinforcements:

1. The word In (if) implies conditionality for many scholars. Thus, {then if you dispute... refer it...} explicitly states that Qiyās is only resorted to when the primary sources are absent.
2. Allah postponed the mention of Qiyās after the three primary sources (Book, Sunnah, Ijma'), indicating its secondary status.
3. The Prophet (PBUH) confirmed this order in the story of Mu'ādh, where he made Ijtihād (which includes Qiyās) conditional upon not finding the ruling in the Book or Sunnah.
4. Allah commanded the angels to prostrate to Adam. Iblīs did not reject the text entirely but restricted its generality through Qiyās: {You created me from fire, and him you created from clay} (7:12). Scholars agree that prioritizing Qiyās over the explicit text resulted in his curse, proving that restricting the text by Qiyās is impermissible.
5. The Qur'an is established by definitive transmission (Tawātur), while Qiyās is conjectural from all aspects. The definitive outweighs the conjectural.
6. {And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, then those are the wrongdoers} (5:45). If the general ruling of the Book applies to an event, and we judge by Qiyās instead, we fall under this verse.
7. {O you who have believed, do not put yourselves forward before Allah and His Messenger} (49:1). If the general meaning of the Qur'an is present, prioritizing a specifying Qiyās means putting oneself forward before Allah and His Messenger.
8. Allah describes those who follow conjecture (Dhann) as disbelievers (e.g., 6:148). Since Qiyās is conjectural, we must adhere to the explicit text when present, as Qiyās is only permissible in the absence of texts.
9. It is narrated that the Prophet (PBUH) said: "If a Hadith is narrated from me, present it to the Book of Allah. If it conforms, accept it; otherwise, discard it." A Hadith is stronger than Qiyās; if a Hadith contradicting the Book is rejected, Qiyās is more deserving of rejection when it contradicts the Book.
10. The Qur'an is the word of Allah, which falsehood cannot approach. Qiyās is subject to the weakness of human intellect. Any sound mind knows the former is stronger and more worthy of adherence.

This verse indicates that anything other than these four principles—Book, Sunnah, Ijma', and Qiyās—is rejected and void.

Proof: The verse divides events into two categories:

1. Those with explicit rulings, where obedience is commanded ({Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and Ūlī al-Amr from among you}).
2. Those without explicit rulings, where Ijtihād (referral) is commanded ({then if you dispute over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger}).

Since there is nothing beyond these two categories, and Allah commanded a specific duty for each, it proves that the obligated person must adhere only to these four principles.

If this is established, then the view of Istihsān (Juristic Preference) held by Abu Hanifa, and Istislāh (Public Interest) held by Malik, if they refer to one of these four, it is merely a change in terminology. If they are different from these four, they are certainly void, as this verse indicates their invalidity.

Many jurists claim that {Obey Allah and obey the Messenger} indicates that the apparent meaning of a command implies obligation (wujūb). The theologians objected, saying that {Obey Allah} does not imply obligation unless it is first established that the command form implies obligation—this leads to circular reasoning.

Two Replies for the Jurists:

1. Commands regarding specific events often imply recommendation (nadb). If {Obey} meant recommendation, the verse would be pointless, as the recommendation was already known from those specific commands. Therefore, it must imply obligation, meaning that performing these commanded acts is preferable to abandoning them, and this verse prohibits abandoning them, thus giving the verse a unique benefit.
2. The verse concludes with a threat: {if you truly believe in Allah and the Last Day}. This threat could relate to both the command to obey and the command to refer disputes. Caution dictates assuming it relates to both. If the threat applies to the entire structure, then {Obey Allah} implies obligation. Thus, the verse indicates that the apparent meaning of a command implies obligation, which is a recognized principle in Sharia.

What is transmitted from the Prophet (PBUH) is either speech or action.

1. Speech: Obedience is obligatory due to {Obey Allah and obey the Messenger}.
2. Action: The Ummah must emulate his actions unless evidence specifies otherwise. This is because we established that {Obey} implies obligation. Furthermore, Allah says elsewhere regarding the Prophet (PBUH): {Follow him} (fāttabi'ūhu), which is a command, thus implying obligation. Emulation (Iqtidā’) means performing an action because someone else performed it. Thus, {Obey Allah} obligates emulation of Allah's commands, and {Obey the Messenger} obligates emulation of the Messenger in all his sayings. These are two recognized principles in Sharia.

Although the apparent meaning of a command does not inherently imply repetition or immediacy (fawr), in the usage of Sharia, it does.

Proofs:

1. An exception can be made at any time to {Obey Allah}. The rule of exception is to exclude what would have been included otherwise. Therefore, {Obey Allah} must encompass all times, which implies repetition, and repetition implies immediacy.
2. If it did not imply repetition/immediacy, the verse would be ambiguous (mujmal), as the specific time and manner are not mentioned. If we take the general meaning, the verse becomes clear (mubayyan). It is preferable to interpret Allah's word in a way that makes it clear rather than ambiguous.
3. The command {Obey Allah} links obedience directly to the name of Allah. This implies that the obligation of obedience stems from our status as His servants and His Lordship, which necessitates the perpetual obligation of obedience upon all accountable persons until the Day of Judgment.

Allah mentioned {Obey Allah} singularly, then said: {and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you}. This teaches the etiquette of not conjoining His sacred name with the names of others in mention. However, when referring to created beings, it is permissible, as evidenced by {and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you}.

It is narrated that someone mentioned Allah and the Messenger together, saying: "Whoever obeys Allah and the Messenger is guided, and whoever disobeys them is misguided." The Prophet (PBUH) corrected him, saying: "What a bad speaker you are! Why didn't you say: 'Whoever disobeys Allah and disobeys the Messenger'?" Conjoining the two names in speech suggests a kind of equality or similarity, which Allah is exalted above.

Since the verse indicates that Ijma' is authoritative, it also indicates many subsidiary rulings concerning Ijma':

Branch 1: Who constitutes Ijma'? Our position is that consensus is only established by the scholars capable of deriving Allah's rulings from the texts of the Book and Sunnah—the Ahl al-Hall wa al-'Aqd. The verse mandates obedience to Ūlī al-Amr. Those who have authority in Sharia are only this class of scholars. A theologian without knowledge of deriving rulings from texts has no authority. Similarly for a commentator or traditionist incapable of deriving rulings. Thus, the consensus of this group is authoritative. It is clear that the common folk (al-'āmmī) are not included, as they are not Ūlī al-Amr.

Branch 2: Consensus after Disagreement. The soundest view is that consensus reached after a disagreement (khilāf) is authoritative. This verse mandates obedience to the totality of the Ahl al-Hall wa al-'Aqd, which includes consensus reached after dispute and that reached without prior dispute.

Branch 3: Extinction of the Era. The soundest view is that the extinction of the scholars of that era (inqirāḍ ahl al-'aṣr) is not a condition for Ijma'. The verse mandates obedience to the consensus-makers, which applies whether the era has ended or not.

Branch 4: Consensus of the Believers. The verse indicates that the criterion is the consensus of the believers, as the verse begins by mentioning the disbelievers ({That is because those who disbelieve...}) and then commands obedience to Ūlī al-Amr {from among you}. This implies that the consensus of the believers is what counts, not that of other groups whose faith is doubtful.

Since the verse indicates the validity of Qiyās through {refer it to Allah and the Messenger}, it also indicates subsidiary rulings concerning Qiyās:

Branch 1: The Nature of Referral. Referring the matter means referring it to an event whose ruling is established by Allah (i.e., by text). This must mean referring it to a similar event in form and attribute. If it meant referring it to a dissimilar event, then referring it to one dissimilar case would be no more valid than referring it to any other, making referral impossible. Thus, it must mean referring it to a similar case. This is supported by tradition: the Prophet (PBUH) used analogy when asked about a fasting person kissing (comparing it to rinsing the mouth before eating) and when asked about Hajj debt (comparing it to a financial debt). 'Umar (RA) also said: "Know the similarities and parallels, and measure matters by your opinion." This confirms that {refer it} commands referring the matter to its like, establishing similarity in form and attribute as the basis for ruling in a non-textual case—this is what al-Shafi'i calls Qiyās al-Ashbāh (Analogy of Similarities) or Qiyās al-Ṭard (Analogy of Consistency).

Branch 2: Condition for Qiyās. The verse implies that Qiyās is only used when there is no explicit text from the Book or Sunnah, as {if you dispute over anything, refer it} suggests this conditionality.

Branch 3: Scope of Qiyās. If no text from the Book, Sunnah, or Ijma' exists for an event, Qiyās is permissible in any form. This refutes those who say Qiyās is impermissible in matters of expiations or prescribed punishments, as the term {if you dispute over anything} is general for any case lacking a text.

Branch 4: Basis of Analogy. One who establishes a ruling by Qiyās must base it on a case whose ruling was established by explicit text. It is impermissible to base it on a case whose ruling was established by Qiyās, because {refer it to Allah and the Messenger} implies referral to a ruling established by the text of Allah and His Messenger.

Branch 5: Priority in Conflicting Analogies. If an analogy supported by an indication in the Book conflicts with an analogy supported by an indication in the Sunnah, the analogy based on the Book takes precedence, as Allah is mentioned before the Messenger in {Obey Allah and obey the Messenger} and {refer it to Allah and the Messenger}, and similarly in the Hadith of Mu'ādh.

Branch 6: Priority in Conflicting Analogies (Subtle Indications). If two analogies conflict, one supported by a subtle indication in the Book and the other by a subtle indication in the Sunnah, the former takes precedence, as explained above.

We have derived these Usūl principles from this verse in less than two hours. Perhaps deeper contemplation could yield more Usūl principles from this single verse.

{and Ūlī al-Amr from among you}: Ūlī is the plural of Dhū (possessor), but it is irregular, similar to nisā’ (women) and ibil (camels), which are plural nouns without a singular form in the word itself.

Al-Zajjāj said it means "if you differed." Each party claims their saying is correct. The root of munāza'ah (dispute) is naz', meaning pulling or dragging. Dispute means each opponent pulls the argument supporting their view, or attempts to pull their own statement away from what invalidates it.

Conclusion of the Verse

Then the Almighty said: {if you truly believe in Allah and the Last Day}.

This threat potentially relates both to the command to obey ({Obey Allah and obey the Messenger}) and the command to refer disputes ({refer it to Allah and the Messenger}). Allah knows best.

The apparent meaning of {if you truly believe in Allah and the Last Day} implies that one who does not obey Allah and the Messenger is not a believer. This suggests that a sinner is expelled from faith, but this is interpreted as a threat/warning (tahdīd).

{ذَلِكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَحْسَنُ تَأْوِيلًا} (That is better and best as an outcome/interpretation.)

This means what I have commanded you in this verse is better for you and has a better consequence (ʿāqibah), because ta’wīl refers to the ultimate destination, return, and consequence of a matter.

Verses 62-63 (Contextual Continuation)

(Have you not seen those who claim that they believe in what was revealed to you and what was revealed before you? They wish to seek judgment from the Taghūt, while they have been commanded to disbelieve in it. And Satan wishes to lead them far astray. And when it is said to them, "Come to what Allah has revealed and to the Messenger," you see the hypocrites turning away from you completely.)