سُوْرَةُ النِّسَآءِ
Surah An-Nisaa (4) — Ayah 14
وَمَن يَعْصِ ٱللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُۥ وَيَتَعَدَّ حُدُودَهُۥ يُدْخِلْهُ نَارًا خَـٰلِدًا فِيهَا وَلَهُۥ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ ﴿14﴾
Translation by Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan & Dr. Taqi-ud-Din al-Hilali
And whosoever disobeys Allâh and His Messenger (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم), and transgresses His limits, He will cast him into the Fire, to abide therein; and he shall have a disgraceful torment.
Word by Word — Arabic, Transliteration & Meaning
وَمَن
waman
And whoever
يَعْصِ
yaʿṣi
disobeys
ٱللَّهَ
l-laha
Allah
وَرَسُولَهُۥ
warasūlahu
and His Messenger
وَيَتَعَدَّ
wayataʿadda
and transgresses
حُدُودَهُۥ
ḥudūdahu
His limits
يُدْخِلْهُ
yud'khil'hu
He will admit him
نَارًا
nāran
(to) Fire
خَـٰلِدًۭا
khālidan
(will) abide forever
فِيهَا
fīhā
in it
وَلَهُۥ
walahu
And for him
عَذَابٌۭ
ʿadhābun
(is) a punishment
مُّهِينٌۭ
muhīnun
humiliating
Tafsir al-Quran al-Karim — Hafiz Abdus Salam Bin Muhammad Bhutvi
Tafsir al-Quran al-Karim is a 4-volume Quran commentary by Hafiz Abdus Salam bin Muhammad Bhutvi, a renowned Salafi (Ahl al-Hadith) scholar and Sheikh ul-Hadith from Pakistan. Based on over 45 years of teaching and research, this tafsir follows the methodology of Tafsir bil-Ma'thur — interpreting the Quran through authentic Hadith, statements of the Companions, and the understanding of the early generations (Salaf). It is distinguished by its complete avoidance of Israeliyyat (Judeo-Christian narratives) and unverified reports. The tafsir is originally written in Urdu, translated to English by tohed.com.
The tafsir of this verse may be read with the following verses.
Tafsir Ahsan al-Bayan — Hafiz Salahuddin Yusuf
Tafsir Ahsan al-Bayan is a well-known Quran commentary by Hafiz Salahuddin Yusuf, a renowned Salafi (Ahl al-Hadith) scholar from Pakistan. This tafsir explains the meanings of the Quran in accordance with the methodology of the Salaf (early righteous generations), relying on authentic sources and straightforward language. Due to its reliability and adherence to sound Islamic scholarship, the Saudi government publishes and distributes this tafsir among the Hujjaj (pilgrims) visiting the Haramain. The tafsir is originally written in Urdu, translated to English by tohed.com.
The exegesis of this verse has been done along with the previous verse.
Tafsir Taiseer ul-Quran — Maulana Abdul Rahman Kilani
Tafsir Taiseer ul-Quran (Facilitation of the Quran) is a comprehensive Quran commentary by Maulana Abdul Rahman Kilani, a renowned Salafi (Ahl al-Hadith) scholar from Pakistan. Known for his eloquent and accessible writing style, Kilani authored this tafsir with a focus on clarity — making Quranic meanings understandable to the common reader. The tafsir provides detailed historical context for verses related to battles and expeditions, and firmly refutes modernist ideologies using strong scriptural evidence. It is widely regarded as an invaluable resource for understanding the Quran and countering deviant interpretations. The tafsir is originally written in Urdu, translated to English by tohed.com.
14. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger and transgresses His limits [26], Allah will admit him to the Fire, to abide therein forever, and he will have a humiliating punishment.
[26]
Those Who Do Not Distribute According to the Commands:
Although the laws of inheritance are being discussed here, the command is general. Whether it concerns the rights of orphans, matters related to women, wills, or any other regulations—whatever limits Allah Almighty has set, if anyone transgresses them, he will be subjected to the torment of Hell forever. In the context of the subject, it means that whoever breaks this law of inheritance, deprives women of their share, considers only the eldest son as entitled to inheritance, gives equal shares to men and women, or does not distribute the property at all and declares it as joint family property—such people are all transgressors of Allah’s limits and deserving of this painful punishment.
The Issue of Inheritance for the Orphaned Grandson:
Allah Almighty has emphasized in detail in this Surah the well-wishing for orphans, justice towards them, and the protection of their rights. However, it is not mentioned that an orphaned grandson is also entitled to inheritance. The importance of this issue is that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ himself was an orphaned grandson at the time of Abdul Muttalib’s death, but he did not receive a share of the inheritance. Nor did Allah mention it anywhere. Whereas, if Allah had intended for the orphaned grandson to receive a share in inheritance, He would have revealed a clear command about it in the Quran. The very absence of such a command is strong evidence that an orphaned grandson is not entitled to inheritance in the presence of his uncles, aunts, etc. Rather, he is only entitled to the inheritance of his deceased father.
Inheritance Is Only Given to Those Present at the Time of Death:
Now, it is our misfortune that, due to the outcry of some of our modernists, our government of Pakistan has declared the orphaned grandson as an heir in the law of inheritance. This is wrong both logically and textually. Logically, it is like this: the fruit of a tree receives nourishment from the earth through the tree only as long as it remains attached to the tree. When it falls from the tree, it can no longer receive nourishment. Textually, there are two principles of inheritance, both derived from the Book of Allah. The first is that only the one who is alive at the time of the deceased’s death will receive a share in the inheritance. Whoever died during the lifetime of the deceased has no share.
The Principle of “The Nearest, Then the Next Nearest”:
The second is the principle of “the nearest, then the next nearest,” which means that in the presence of a close relative, distant relatives are deprived of inheritance. By “close,” it means there is no intermediary between them, such as the direct offspring of the deceased. In this respect, too, the orphaned grandson is not entitled to inheritance in the presence of his uncles and aunts. Those who try to prove the orphaned grandson’s entitlement to inheritance attempt to explain the matter with a rare and emotional example. For instance, Zaid has two sons: Bakr and Umar. At the time of Zaid’s death, Bakr is alive, but Umar has already died. However, Umar’s son Khalid is alive. The question is raised: what kind of justice is it that Bakr receives the entire estate, and Umar’s son Khalid receives nothing, even though he is an orphan and more in need of wealth? Is his only crime that his father has died? Then, these people devised the principle of “representation” to make the orphaned grandson an heir, meaning Khalid, as the representative of his father Umar, is entitled to half the inheritance from his grandfather’s estate.
The Principle of Representation:
Consider whether you find this “principle of representation” anywhere in the entire Islamic law of inheritance. In fact, the originator of this principle is Mr. Parwez’s respected teacher, Hafiz Aslam Jairajpuri. Then Mr. Parwez himself nurtured this idea. Before this, you will not find this principle anywhere in the entire Islamic Shariah or Islamic history. The reason is that the right of inheritance ends with death. When the right of inheritance itself has ended, what is the basis for representation? There are countless harms in accepting this principle. For example, if the deceased’s wife had already died, then according to this principle of representation, the wife’s relatives would rightfully claim a share of the estate. Similarly, if the deceased is a woman whose husband had already died, then the husband’s relatives, as representatives, could claim a share of the estate. Moreover, the heirs are not only sons but also daughters. And under this principle of representation, the children of any deceased daughter (i.e., nephews and nieces) would also have the right to claim inheritance. And this chain would continue indefinitely. Then, by what rule can it be limited only to the orphaned grandson? The second harm of this principle is, for example, both of Zaid’s sons, Bakr and Umar, have died. Bakr has only one son, but Umar has five sons. And in terms of being the closest to the deceased, all are on the same level and are all equally representatives. So, should the inheritance be divided equally among them? Or should Bakr’s son get half and Umar’s sons only one-tenth each? Which division is correct and why? The argument of those in favor of the principle of representation is that if the grandfather, in the event of the father’s death, can become the representative and receive a share of the inheritance, then why can’t the grandson, as the representative of his deceased father, receive a share from the grandfather? The answer is that this division does not occur under the principle of representation, but rather under the principle of “the nearest, then the next nearest.” On the paternal or ancestral side, after the father, only the grandfather can be the nearest, whereas on the filial side, the deceased’s nearest are his sons, not his grandsons. Yes, if there are no direct offspring alive, then grandsons can also be heirs. The real aim of these people is not the well-wishing of the orphan, but to find faults in the Sunnah and oppose it—and that too, not based on any verse of the Quran, but on their self-invented principle of representation, whose fundamental error is that they consider deceased relatives as alive and establish the right of representation. Otherwise, there are many ways of showing compassion to the orphan in the Book and Sunnah. For example, the deceased himself has the right to bequeath up to one-third of his estate for him, because the orphaned grandson is not an heir, and a bequest is only for a non-heir. A bequest cannot be made for an heir. And if the deceased could not make a bequest, or did not want to make a bequest in his favor, then the remaining heirs can, of their own accord, include him in the inheritance. In fact, if they see fit, they can give him the entire estate of their own will, and they have as much right to do so as the deceased had to make a bequest. Then, if the deceased grandfather also had no compassion for him, nor did the other heirs, it means that such a grandson was not deserving of compassion. It is possible that he received so much wealth from his deceased father that the others did not see any need to give him more. In such a case, how can your compassion benefit him?
[26]
Those Who Do Not Distribute According to the Commands:
Although the laws of inheritance are being discussed here, the command is general. Whether it concerns the rights of orphans, matters related to women, wills, or any other regulations—whatever limits Allah Almighty has set, if anyone transgresses them, he will be subjected to the torment of Hell forever. In the context of the subject, it means that whoever breaks this law of inheritance, deprives women of their share, considers only the eldest son as entitled to inheritance, gives equal shares to men and women, or does not distribute the property at all and declares it as joint family property—such people are all transgressors of Allah’s limits and deserving of this painful punishment.
The Issue of Inheritance for the Orphaned Grandson:
Allah Almighty has emphasized in detail in this Surah the well-wishing for orphans, justice towards them, and the protection of their rights. However, it is not mentioned that an orphaned grandson is also entitled to inheritance. The importance of this issue is that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ himself was an orphaned grandson at the time of Abdul Muttalib’s death, but he did not receive a share of the inheritance. Nor did Allah mention it anywhere. Whereas, if Allah had intended for the orphaned grandson to receive a share in inheritance, He would have revealed a clear command about it in the Quran. The very absence of such a command is strong evidence that an orphaned grandson is not entitled to inheritance in the presence of his uncles, aunts, etc. Rather, he is only entitled to the inheritance of his deceased father.
Inheritance Is Only Given to Those Present at the Time of Death:
Now, it is our misfortune that, due to the outcry of some of our modernists, our government of Pakistan has declared the orphaned grandson as an heir in the law of inheritance. This is wrong both logically and textually. Logically, it is like this: the fruit of a tree receives nourishment from the earth through the tree only as long as it remains attached to the tree. When it falls from the tree, it can no longer receive nourishment. Textually, there are two principles of inheritance, both derived from the Book of Allah. The first is that only the one who is alive at the time of the deceased’s death will receive a share in the inheritance. Whoever died during the lifetime of the deceased has no share.
The Principle of “The Nearest, Then the Next Nearest”:
The second is the principle of “the nearest, then the next nearest,” which means that in the presence of a close relative, distant relatives are deprived of inheritance. By “close,” it means there is no intermediary between them, such as the direct offspring of the deceased. In this respect, too, the orphaned grandson is not entitled to inheritance in the presence of his uncles and aunts. Those who try to prove the orphaned grandson’s entitlement to inheritance attempt to explain the matter with a rare and emotional example. For instance, Zaid has two sons: Bakr and Umar. At the time of Zaid’s death, Bakr is alive, but Umar has already died. However, Umar’s son Khalid is alive. The question is raised: what kind of justice is it that Bakr receives the entire estate, and Umar’s son Khalid receives nothing, even though he is an orphan and more in need of wealth? Is his only crime that his father has died? Then, these people devised the principle of “representation” to make the orphaned grandson an heir, meaning Khalid, as the representative of his father Umar, is entitled to half the inheritance from his grandfather’s estate.
The Principle of Representation:
Consider whether you find this “principle of representation” anywhere in the entire Islamic law of inheritance. In fact, the originator of this principle is Mr. Parwez’s respected teacher, Hafiz Aslam Jairajpuri. Then Mr. Parwez himself nurtured this idea. Before this, you will not find this principle anywhere in the entire Islamic Shariah or Islamic history. The reason is that the right of inheritance ends with death. When the right of inheritance itself has ended, what is the basis for representation? There are countless harms in accepting this principle. For example, if the deceased’s wife had already died, then according to this principle of representation, the wife’s relatives would rightfully claim a share of the estate. Similarly, if the deceased is a woman whose husband had already died, then the husband’s relatives, as representatives, could claim a share of the estate. Moreover, the heirs are not only sons but also daughters. And under this principle of representation, the children of any deceased daughter (i.e., nephews and nieces) would also have the right to claim inheritance. And this chain would continue indefinitely. Then, by what rule can it be limited only to the orphaned grandson? The second harm of this principle is, for example, both of Zaid’s sons, Bakr and Umar, have died. Bakr has only one son, but Umar has five sons. And in terms of being the closest to the deceased, all are on the same level and are all equally representatives. So, should the inheritance be divided equally among them? Or should Bakr’s son get half and Umar’s sons only one-tenth each? Which division is correct and why? The argument of those in favor of the principle of representation is that if the grandfather, in the event of the father’s death, can become the representative and receive a share of the inheritance, then why can’t the grandson, as the representative of his deceased father, receive a share from the grandfather? The answer is that this division does not occur under the principle of representation, but rather under the principle of “the nearest, then the next nearest.” On the paternal or ancestral side, after the father, only the grandfather can be the nearest, whereas on the filial side, the deceased’s nearest are his sons, not his grandsons. Yes, if there are no direct offspring alive, then grandsons can also be heirs. The real aim of these people is not the well-wishing of the orphan, but to find faults in the Sunnah and oppose it—and that too, not based on any verse of the Quran, but on their self-invented principle of representation, whose fundamental error is that they consider deceased relatives as alive and establish the right of representation. Otherwise, there are many ways of showing compassion to the orphan in the Book and Sunnah. For example, the deceased himself has the right to bequeath up to one-third of his estate for him, because the orphaned grandson is not an heir, and a bequest is only for a non-heir. A bequest cannot be made for an heir. And if the deceased could not make a bequest, or did not want to make a bequest in his favor, then the remaining heirs can, of their own accord, include him in the inheritance. In fact, if they see fit, they can give him the entire estate of their own will, and they have as much right to do so as the deceased had to make a bequest. Then, if the deceased grandfather also had no compassion for him, nor did the other heirs, it means that such a grandson was not deserving of compassion. It is possible that he received so much wealth from his deceased father that the others did not see any need to give him more. In such a case, how can your compassion benefit him?
