تلك حدود الله ومن يطع الله ورسوله يدخله جنات تجري من تحتها الأنهار خالدين فيها وذلك الفوز العظيم · ومن يعص الله ورسوله ويتعد حدوده يدخله نارا خالدا فيها وله عذاب مهين
Tilka ḥudūdu'llāh, wa man yuṭiʿi'llāha wa rasūlahū yudkhilhu jannātin tajrī min taḥtiha'l-anhāru khālidīna fīhā, wa dhālika'l-fawzu'l-ʿaẓīm · Wa man yaʿṣi'llāha wa rasūlahū wa yataʿadda ḥudūdahū yudkhilhu nāran khālidan fīhā wa lahū ʿadhābun muhīn
"These are the limits set by God. Whoever obeys God and His Messenger, He will admit him into gardens beneath which rivers flow, to dwell there for ever. That is the great triumph. And whoever disobeys God and His Messenger and oversteps His limits, He will admit him into a fire, to dwell there for ever; and for him there is a humiliating punishment."
| 13 | 14 | |
|---|---|---|
| Condition | Wa man yuṭiʿi — the one who obeys | Wa man yaʿṣi — the one who disobeys |
| Addition | — | Wa yataʿadda ḥudūdah — and oversteps the limits |
| Outcome | Yudkhilhu jannāt | Yudkhilhu nār |
| Duration | Khālidīna fīhā (plural) | Khālidan fīhā (singular) |
| Quality | Al-fawzu'l-ʿaẓīm | ʿAdhābun muhīn |
The difference in the fourth row is worth recording and is a datum of the text: for the garden the plural is used (khālidīn), for the fire the singular (khālidan).
Several explanations of this difference are given in the classical commentaries: the flow of the sentence and the harmony of the verse-ending; or that the garden is shared while the fire is solitary. I impose no preference; the one certain thing is that the difference is there in the text.
The root ح-د-د: the place where a thing ends, an edge. Ḥadīd — iron (a sharp edge); ḥadd — a limit; ḥidād — sharpness.
The word occurred many times in the section on divorce in al-Baqara, and it was recorded there that it is given in two different patterns:
"تِلْكَ حُدُودُ ٱللَّهِ فَلَا تَعْتَدُوهَا — 'these are the limits set by God, do not overstep them.' The word حُدُود recurs many times in this section; in verse 187 it said fa-lā taqrabūhā (do not approach them), here fa-lā taʿtadūhā (do not overstep them). Two patterns in two separate places: one of distance, one of a boundary."
And one observation must be recorded: in al-Baqara the words ḥudūdu'llāh were placed at the end of the rulings on divorce; in al-Nisāʾ they are placed at the end of the rulings on inheritance. In both places the word closes a block in which sharing within the family is regulated. This is a similarity of structure between two sūras that can be verified.
The verses of inheritance (11-12) are a wholly technical text: proportions, conditions, exceptions. The thirteenth and fourteenth verses set a frame over that technique.
I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the order of the verses: having finished the reckoning, the sūra says what the reckoning is. The shares are not an arithmetic but a limit; and the overstepping of the limit is named not as an error in calculation but as an act of disobedience.
And the choice of the verb yataʿadda must be recorded. The root ع-د-و: to exceed the bound, to pass over onto something. The verse does not say "the one who miscalculates"; it says "the one who oversteps the limit". Injustice in the division of an estate is named not as a mistake in arithmetic but as a breach of a boundary.
The root ه-و-ن: lightness, worthlessness, lowness. Hūn — ease and lightness; hawān — abasement; muhīn — the one who abases.
And the placing of the word here is worth recording: what is done in a quarrel over an estate is to leave the other party out of the reckoning — that is, to count him as worth nothing. The name of the recompense is given from the same root: muhīn.
I record this as my own reading; its ground is the root of the word together with the subject of the block.
One. That the bequest and the debt come first. What is most often forgotten in the discussion of an estate is the qualification the verse repeats four times: what is to be shared out is what remains after the obligations are taken out. This is still today the point most often skipped — when the division of an estate is being discussed, the debts of the deceased usually come to mind last. The verse puts them first.
Two. The rejection of the calculus of benefit. The sentence lā tadrūna ayyuhum aqrabu lakum nafʿā closes the argument over "who deserved more". That argument is still where an inheritance does the most damage, and it usually runs on things that cannot be measured: who cared for him more, who was closer to him. The verse ties the measure to what can be measured.
Three. And a limit. How an actual estate is to be divided does not follow from here. This section is not a text of farāʾiḍ; it analyses the wording and the terms of the verse. Application belongs to the law and the jurisprudence competent in it.