وَٱلَّذِينَ يُتَوَفَّوْنَ مِنكُمْ وَيَذَرُونَ أَزْوَٰجًا يَتَرَبَّصْنَ بِأَنفُسِهِنَّ أَرْبَعَةَ أَشْهُرٍ وَعَشْرًا فَإِذَا بَلَغْنَ أَجَلَهُنَّ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِيمَا فَعَلْنَ فِىٓ أَنفُسِهِنَّ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ وَٱللَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ خَبِيرٌ

“Such of you as die and leave behind them wives, they (the wives) shall wait, keeping themselves apart, four months and ten days. And when they reach the term (prescribed for them) then there is no sin for you in aught that they may do with themselves in decency. Allah is informed of what ye do.” — M. M. Pickthall

Tafsirs

AI-generated
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified

According to this exegete, the term 'habîr' (the All-Knowing) in the verse expresses that Allah is aware of all deeds performed by His servants, whether hidden or open (such as giving charity, spending, warfare, obedience or disobedience), that nothing is concealed from Him, and that everyone will receive the full recompense of their deeds on the Day of Judgment. Taberî explains the comprehensiveness of this divine knowledge in a way that encompasses both righteous and evil deeds.

والله بأعمالكم أيها الناس ذو خبرة محيط بها، محص جميعها، لا يخفى عليه منها شيء، وهو مجازيكم على جميعها.
Zemahşerî12. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Zemahşerî, when a woman approaches the end of her waiting period (idda), her husband faces two options: either he returns to her with goodness (ric'at) and retains her kindly, or he refrains from return and chooses separation while avoiding the intention of harm. Harm (dırar) is defined as the husband returning to the woman at the end of her waiting period and then divorcing her again, thereby prolonging her suffering and causing her distress. Furthermore, he who performs the return or separation is commanded to have witnesses, and according to Abû Hanîfa, taking witnesses is considered mustahab (recommended).

فأنتم بالخيار : إن شئتم فالرجعة والإمساك بالمعروف والإحسان ، وإن شئتم فترك الرجعة والمفارقة واتقاء الضرار وهو أن يراجعها في آخر عدتها ثم يطلقها تطويلا للعدة عليها وتعذيبا لها
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified

In this text, Râzî addresses multiple issues related to the verse: the waiting period of a pregnant woman ends with childbirth, the reason why the word 'aşran' is used in the feminine form, to whom the address regarding women's authority over their own affairs is directed, and to whom the ruling of forbidding marriage at the end of the waiting period belongs. Furthermore, legal matters such as ash-Shâfi'î's justification for not specifying this verse against the verse about the waiting period for the deceased's widow, and the derivation of the ruling of mourning (ihda) from this verse are discussed.

أن مدة عدة الحمل تنقضي بوضع الحمل سواء حصل وضع الحمل بسنة أو أقل أو أكثر فجعل السنة العدة يكون زائلا بالكلية
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified

In this section, Kurtubî explains that the waiting period mentioned in the expression 'yetrabbasne bi anfusihinne' (they shall wait by themselves) is four months and ten days, which is the end of the waiting period, and that marriage can only be considered after the completion of the waiting period. He also clarifies that the expression 'lâ junâha alaikum' (there is no blame upon you) refers to marriage and beautification, abandoning the state of mourning; according to some exegetes' views, he reports that the former ruling of the widow remaining in her deceased husband's house for one year and receiving maintenance was abrogated by this verse to four months and ten days, and the maintenance ruling was abrogated by the inheritance verse in Sûrat an-Nisâ'.

ذهب جماعة من المفسرين في تأويل هذه الآية أن المتوفي عنها زوجها كانت تجلس في بيت المتوفي عنها حولا وينفق عليها من ماله ما لم تخرج من المنزل فإن خرجت لم يكن على الورثة جناح في قطع النفقة عنها ثم نسخ الحول بألاربعة ألاشهر والعشر ونسخت النفقة بالربع والثمن في سورة النساء
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified

In this text, Ibn Kesîr mentions that it is obligatory for a widow to observe mourning (ihda, refraining from adornment) during the waiting period; he also reports the views of scholars regarding whether the verse contains the ruling of a one-year waiting period and whether this is abrogated by the ruling of four months and ten days. According to the view transmitted from Ibn Abbâs, Mujâhid and Atâ', the verse does not express a one-year waiting period but rather a bequest regarding widows being able to remain in their husbands' houses for one year; according to the majority opinion, this ruling was abrogated by four months and ten days.

فهذا القول الذي عول عليه مجاهد وعطاء من أن هذه الآية لم تدل على وجوب الاعتداد سنة كما زعمه الجمهور حتى يكون ذلك منسوخا بالأربعة الأشهر وعشر وإنما دلت على أن ذلك كان من باب الوصاة بالزوجات أن يمكن من السكنى في بيوت أزواجهن بعد وفاتهم حولا كاملا إن اخترن ذلك
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Beydâvî, the verse commands women whose husbands have died to wait for four months and ten days; the reason why the word 'aşran' is used in the feminine form rather than masculine is that the Arabs regard nights as the standard. The wisdom in fixing this period as four months and ten days is that a fetus generally begins to move in three months if male or four months if female, so the longest period is taken as the basis, and ten days are added for precaution. The generality of the wording requires that this ruling apply without distinction between Muslim and non-Muslim women, or between free and enslaved women; however, for pregnant women this period is specified by consensus to be 'until she delivers her burden' according to the verse.

وعموم اللفظ يقتضي تساوي المسلمة والكتابية فيه، كما قاله الشافعي والحرة والأمة كما قاله الأصم، والحامل وغيرها، لكن القياس اقتضى تنصيف المدة للأمة، والإجماع خص الحامل منه لقوله تعالى: وأولات الأحمال أجلهن أن يضعن حملهن

Comparison

Common ground

Zemahşerî, Râzî, Kurtubî, Ibn Kesîr and Beydâvî collectively emphasize the duration of the waiting period ruling (in the context of death or divorce), its wisdom and legal consequences (return, mourning, issues of abrogation); all of them employ linguistic analysis together with legal and textual materials. Taberî, by contrast, addresses the name 'habîr' in a different verse context and focuses on the comprehensiveness of Allah's knowledge, so he does not directly share the same subject with this group.

Differences

Zemahşerî emphasizes the intent to cause harm (dırar) and the issue of witnesses; Râzî addresses multi-dimensional legal discussions such as the waiting period of pregnant women and the addressee of the command; Kurtubî focuses on abrogation and linguistic structural analysis; Ibn Kesîr emphasizes chains of transmission and discussions of abrogation; while Beydâvî prioritizes grammatical subtleties (feminine-masculine forms) along with medical and wisdom-based explanations. These differences stem from the methodological priorities of the exegetes (grammar, jurisprudence, transmission). Taberî's subject is separate, so direct comparison is limited.

Historical context

While the early period exegete Taberî emphasizes transmission-focused contextual reading, in later periods with Zemahşerî and Beydâvî linguistic and rhetorical analysis becomes more systematically integrated with legal inferences; with Râzî, issues are opened to multi-faceted discussion, while with Kurtubî and Ibn Kesîr, discussions of abrogation and transmission are handled in greater detail. In general, the fundamental rulings (such as the duration of the waiting period and the comprehensiveness of Allah's knowledge) remain constant, but the depth of justification and discussion has become richer over time.

Modern connection

This comparative reading demonstrates how rulings regarding family law are addressed with careful consideration for both social order and individual rights; this also makes it possible to draw a general lesson about the importance of patience, justice and mutual respect in family relationships. Additionally, the emphasis that Allah is aware of every deed provides a foundation that can remind one of acting with sincerity and a sense of responsibility in daily life. The multifaceted approach of different exegetes to the same subject matter can be seen as an example that could be referred to regarding the value of meticulousness and multidimensional thinking in the scholarly tradition.

AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar