“For divorced women a provision in kindness: a duty for those who ward off (evil).” — M. M. Pickthall
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified
Taberî maintains that the phrase 'for every divorced woman there is a gift' mentioned in the verse is not limited to women whose dower was not fixed and who were not consummated in previous verses, but rather encompasses all divorced women whether before or after consummation. He states that this verse was revealed to complete a ruling that was incomplete in other verses concerning gifts, meaning it establishes a general rule. He rejects the view that it applies specifically only to widows (women who were consummated) and prefers the view of Said b. Jubayr.
والصواب من القول في ذلك ما قاله سعيد بن جبير، من أن الله تعالى ذكره. أنزلها دليلا لعباده على أن لكل مطلقة متعة؛ لأن الله تعالى ذكره ذكر في سائر آي القرآن التي فيها ذكر متعة النساء خصوصا من النساء
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to this commentator, the word 'mataa' (gift) mentioned in verse 241 means 'gift' and the apparent meaning of the verse requires that giving a gift is obligatory for all divorced women. Said b. Jubayr, Abu al-Aliyah, and al-Zuhri adopted this view by adhering to the apparent meaning of the verse and regarded the gift as obligatory for all divorced women. Ash-Shafi'i, however, considered this applicable to every divorced woman except one whose dower was determined and with whom sexual intercourse had not taken place.
أحدهما : أنه هو المتعة ، فظاهر هذه الآية يقتضي وجوب هذه المتعة لكل المطلقات ، فمن الناس من تمسك بظاهر هذه الآية وأوجب المتعة لجميع المطلقات ، وهو قول سعيد بن جبير وأبي العالية والزهري قال الشافعي رحمه الله تعالى : لكل مطلقة إلا المطلقة التي فرض لها مهر ولم يوجد في حقها المسيس
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified
Ibn Kathir reports that some scholars used this verse as evidence to rule that it is obligatory to give a gift to every divorced woman—whether her dower was determined or not, whether she was divorced before or after consummation. He mentions that this view is one position of Ash-Shafi'i, that some of the early scholars including Said b. Jubayr held this view, and that Ibn Jarir also preferred it. On the other hand, he conveys that those who do not regard the gift as generally obligatory restrict this general ruling through the implication of another verse.
وقد استدل بهذه الآية من ذهب من العلماء إلى وجوب المتعة لكل مطلقة سواء كانت مفوضة أو مفروضا لها أو مطلقة قبل المسيس أو مدخولا بها وهو قول عن الشافعي رحمه الله وإليه ذهب سعيد بن جبير وغيره من السلف واختاره ابن جرير
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified
According to Baydawi, this verse generalizes the right to a gift that was previously made obligatory only for a group of divorced women, thus establishing it for all divorced women. Some scholars regarded this as obligatory for every divorced woman, while others interpreted it to encompass both obligatory and recommended gifts, and some understood the gift as maintenance during the waiting period. It is noted that the repetition of the verse came either with the letter of covenant or to emphasize the repetition of the previous ruling.
أثبت المتعة للمطلقات جميعا بعد ما أوجبها لواحدة منهن، وإفراد بعض العام بالحكم لا يخصصه إلا إذا جوزنا تخصيص المنطوق بالمفهوم ولذلك أوجبها ابن جبير لكل مطلقة، وأول غيره بما يعم التمتيع الواجب والمستحب.
Comparison
Common ground
All four commentators center on the phrase 'for every divorced woman there is a gift' in the verse and, in connection with the view of Said b. Jubayr, convey the opinion that this ruling is a general rule encompassing all divorced women—whether their dower was fixed or not, whether they were consummated or not. Taberî, Ibn Kathir, and Baydawi report this generalizing view as one position of Ash-Shafi'i and the view of early scholars (Abu al-Aliyah, al-Zuhri), and they mention that there are also restrictive and limiting views against this.
Differences
Taberî explicitly rejects the limiting view and prefers the general reading; Ar-Razi presents both the general reading based on apparent meaning and Ash-Shafi'i's conditional view without taking sides. Ibn Kathir, while reporting the generalizing view, also conveys that the opposing view restricts it through the implication of another verse, providing a balanced presentation. Baydawi broadens the matter further and adds additional layers of interpretation such as whether the gift is obligatory or recommended, and even whether it can be understood as maintenance during the waiting period; these differences largely stem from differences in juridical schools and methodology (narration-based versus language and rhetoric-based).
Historical context
From the earliest commentator Taberî to the latest commentator Baydawi, the fundamental point of discussion (whether the gift is general or specific) has remained constant, yet over time the matter has been examined by placing it within more systematic jurisprudential categories (obligatory/recommended, general/particular, explicit/implied). The effort of Ibn Kathir and Baydawi to summarize previous reports and classify different views is a reflection of the maturation of exegetical knowledge.