Tafsir of An-Nisa' 4:22

"And do not marry what..."

They used to marry the wives of their fathers. Some among them, out of a sense of chivalry (muru'ah), detested this and called it "the marriage of hatred" (nikah al-maqti). The child born from such a union was called al-muqti. Hence, it is said: "And it is a hatred" (wa-maqtan), as if to say: It is an abomination in the religion of God, reaching the peak of ugliness; it is ugly and detested in terms of chivalry. There is nothing beyond that which combines both forms of ugliness.

It was read as "It is not lawful for you" (la tahillu lakum) with a ta’, meaning inheritance.

"And with aversion" (karhan): read with both fath and damm (on the kaf), meaning both dislike and compulsion.

It was read as "an evident immorality" (fahishatan mubayyanah), from abanat (to make clear), meaning it has become clear or has been made clear. It was also read as mubayyinah (with the ya kasrah and fathah).

"God places" (yaj'alu Allahu): in the nominative case, as it is in the position of a circumstantial qualifier (hal).

"And you have given one of them" (wa-ataytum ihdahunna): with the hamzat al-wasl in ihdahunna, just as it was read in "there is no sin upon him" (Al-Baqarah: 173).

If you ask: What is the grammatical parsing of "that you constrain them" (ta'duluhunna)? I say: It is in the accusative case, as a conjunction to "that you inherit" (an tarithu). The "no" (la) is for the emphasis of negation; meaning: It is not lawful for you to inherit women, nor to constrain them.

If you ask: What is the difference between the transitive use of dhahaba with bi- and its use with the hamza (adhhaba)? I say: When it is used with bi-, it means taking and accompanying, as in His saying: "So when they took him away" (fa-lamma dhahabu bihi - Yusuf: 15). As for idhhab, it is like removal (izalah).

If you ask: Regarding "Except if they commit" (illa an ya'tina - An-Nisa: 19), what is this exception? I say: It is an exception from the most general of general circumstances or the object for which the action is done. It is as if it were said: "Do not constrain them at any time, except at the time they commit an immorality," or "Do not constrain them for any reason, except for the reason that they commit an immorality."

If you ask: How is His saying "But perhaps you hate a thing" (fa-'asa an takrahu) a valid response to the conditional? I say: In the sense that the meaning is: "If you hate them, then be patient with them despite the hatred, for perhaps there is much good for you in what you hate that is not in what you love."

If you ask: How did He make an exception for "what has passed" regarding the marriage of your fathers? I say: Just as one makes an exception in "except that their swords..." from the saying "and there is no fault in them." It means: If it were possible for you to marry what has passed, then marry it, but it is not lawful for you otherwise. Since that is impossible, the purpose is to exaggerate its prohibition and block the path to its permissibility, just as one attaches a condition to the impossible for the sake of permanence, like their saying: "Until the pitch turns white" or "Until the camel enters the eye of a needle."