كُتِبَ عَلَيْكُمْ إِذَا حَضَرَ أَحَدَكُمُ ٱلْمَوْتُ إِن تَرَكَ خَيْرًا ٱلْوَصِيَّةُ لِلْوَٰلِدَيْنِ وَٱلْأَقْرَبِينَ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ حَقًّا عَلَى ٱلْمُتَّقِينَ
“It is prescribed for you, when death approacheth one of you, if he leave wealth, that he bequeath unto parents and near relatives in kindness. (This is) a duty for all those who ward off (evil).” — M. M. Pickthall
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified
Taberî argues that the word 'hayr' (good) mentioned in the verse concerning slaves refers not to wealth, but to qualities found in the slave such as working capacity, earning ability, commitment to keeping promises, and honesty. He also mentions that scholars have differed on whether the verse of bequest has been abrogated by the verse of inheritance, and he indicates that he is inclined toward the view that this verse is muhkam (not abrogated), because the claim of abrogation is not based on decisive evidence.
وأولى هذه الأقوال في معنى ذلك عندي قول من قال: معناه فكاتبوهم إن علمتم فيهم قوة على الاحتراف والاكتساب ، ووفاء بما أوجب على نفسه وألزمها، وصدق لهجة
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified
In this text, Râzî explains the wisdom behind the order of heir groups mentioned in relation to verse 180 of al-Baqara and verse 180 of Âl-i 'Imrân; he also discusses that approaching death does not prevent the acceptance of repentance, the obligation of bequest, and that the word 'hayr' means wealth. Different views from the Companions and Successors are transmitted regarding the amount of wealth upon which bequest is considered necessary (such as 700, 800, 1000, 1500 dirhams), and it is discussed whether this changes with a fixed limit or according to circumstances.
فإذا ثبت أن المراد ههنا من الخير المال الكثير ، فذاك المال هل هو مقدر بمقدار معين محدود أم لا فيه قولان : القول الأول : أنه مقدر بمقدار معين
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified
In this verse, Kurtubî transmits that making a bequest to relatives is more preferable than making it to strangers, and according to some scholars, if relatives are available and the bequest is made to a stranger, this bequest would revert to the relatives. He also states that the word 'hayr' means wealth, but there is disagreement regarding the minimum amount of wealth to be bequeathed (according to some it is great wealth, according to others it is between 500-1000 dinars). The majority, however, holds the view that making a bequest outside of relatives—even if relatives are left in hardship—is a bad deed but still valid and binding; Kurtubî also indicates his own preference for the first view (that it is more preferable to relatives) being more excellent.
قال قوم : الوصية للأقربين أولى من الأجانب لنص الله تعالى عليهم حتى قال الضحاك : إن أوصى لغير قرابته فقد ختم عمله بمعصية
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified
Ibn Kesîr transmits that the verse of bequest has been abrogated by the verse of inheritance, based on reports from Ibn Abbas and other exegetes. The view is transmitted that bequest is only lawful when a significant amount of wealth is left behind; scholars have disagreed about how much this amount should be. He also states that bequest must be done in a manner that is 'ma'ruf' (customary/proper), not harming the heirs and not going to extremes, and based on the hadith of Sa'd, that one-third is the maximum limit.
والمراد بالمعروف أن يوصى لأقربيه وصية لا تجحف بورثته من غير إسراف ولا تقتير
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Beydâvî, the phrase 'when he is near death' refers to the appearance of causes of death and the signs of it becoming visible; 'if he leaves something good' refers to wealth, or even according to some reports, great wealth. He transmits that the ruling of bequest was initially applicable to parents and relatives, and was later abrogated by the verse of inheritance and the hadith 'there is no bequest for an heir'; however, he finds this abrogation problematic and points out that the verse of inheritance actually precedes the bequest, and that the hadith is khabar wāhid (a report from a single chain), stating that some exegetes have interpreted the verse differently to avoid this contradiction.
وكان هذا الحكم في بدء الإسلام فنسخ بآية المواريث وبقوله عليه الصلاة والسلام «إن الله أعطى كل ذي حق حقه، ألا لا وصية لوارث» . وفيه نظر: لأن آية المواريث لا تعارضه بل تؤكده من حيث إنها تدل على تقديم الوصية مطلقا، والحديث من الآحاد
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified
According to this exegete, the word 'shadîd' here means 'stingy, one who withholds his wealth'; the person is a miser who avoids spending due to love of wealth. Alternatively, the word 'shadîd' can also mean 'strong': while the person is strong and firm in love of wealth and pursuit of the worldly life, he is weak and lazy in worship and gratitude to Allah. In addition, the interpretation that he is 'not open and spread toward good things, but rather tight-fisted/closed' is also transmitted.
والشديد : البخيل الممسك . يقال : فلان شديد ومتشدد
Comparison
Common ground
Taberî, Râzî, Kurtubî, and Beydâvî largely converge on the point that the word 'hayr' means wealth (particularly a significant amount of wealth); the transmission of different numbers from the Companions and Successors regarding the amount of bequest is also a shared element. The question of whether the verse of bequest has been abrogated by the verse of inheritance (toward abrogation in Ibn Kesîr and Beydâvî, and toward it being muhkam in Taberî) is also a common problematic issue that multiple exegetes discuss.
Differences
Taberî addresses 'hayr' in a different interpretation not as wealth but as qualities such as working capacity and honesty found in the slave; this is a distinctive reading that sets him apart from the others. Whereas Ibn Kesîr transmits the view of abrogation based on reports, Taberî and Beydâvî find this claim problematic and emphasize that the evidence is not conclusive. Kurtubî makes a juridical preference by emphasizing the preferability of bequest to relatives, while Zemahsharî focuses entirely on a different verse part and discusses the linguistic meanings of the word 'shadîd' (stinginess/strength); these differences arise both from the change in the verse portions being addressed and from the methodological preferences of the exegetes in matters of language, report transmission, and jurisprudence.
Historical context
The earliest exegete Taberî uses report transmission and linguistic analysis together and approaches a cautious muhkam view on the matter of abrogation, while in later periods Zemahsharî and Râzî made linguistic and rhetorical analysis more systematic, Kurtubî and Ibn Kesîr connected the issue to broader jurisprudential discussions through juridical inference and report-focused synthesis, and Beydâvî transmitted all of these discussions briefly in a summary exegesis format. The fundamental issue (the nature of bequest, its amount, its abrogation status) remains constant, but methodological depth and synthesizing approach have developed over time.
Modern connection
This comparative reading shows that both legal precision and moral responsibility (treating relatives and those in need fairly) have been valued in every period. In our time as well, principles such as justice, transparency, and not harming family members in family divisions can still offer meaningful reference in terms of social solidarity and strengthening family bonds. Furthermore, respectfully including different views of scholars serves as an example of tolerance and a culture of multi-faceted thinking in the intellectual tradition.
AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar