Title:
The Implication of the Word ‘Kalaalah’
Article:
Note: This article was basically written in reply to some
comments/criticisms that I received from a brother, on my article: “Understanding
the Law of Inheritance of the Qur’an”**.
It may kindly be noted that in contrast to the general writings on this web
site, this article is of a comparatively technical nature and knowledge of the
Arabic language may be necessary to fully comprehend it.
Mr. Salim Morgan, in his letter to Mr. Sultan writes:
“Kalaala has the two meanings as you have said.
However, the meaning in the verse is the first one (no parents OR offspring)
because that is the only way it makes sense in that context. In the area
of inheritance law, I don’t believe this is an area of any difference of
opinion among the scholars.”
Mr. Morgan, when he says that “the meaning in the verse is the first one
(no parents OR offspring)” actually means that the word “Kalaalah”
has been used in the Qur’an for such a person who leaves behind EITHER no
parents OR no offspring. I must confess here that almost all Arabic dictionaries
give one of the meanings of the word “Kalaalah“, as “a
person who leaves behind NEITHER parents NOR offspring”, but unfortunately
I could not come across even a single authentic Arabic dictionary which gives
the meaning of the word “Kalaalah” as is stated by Mr. Morgan. I would
therefor be quite interested in finding out what exactly is the source of Mr.
Morgan’s opinion.
Now, let us try to analyse the meaning of the word “kalaalah”
as used in the Qur’an. The related part of the verse under consideration (Al-Nisaa
4: 12) should be translated as:
And if a man or a woman is made an heir on account of being a Kalaalah
[relative] and he [or she] has one brother or sister, the brother and sister
shall each receive a sixth and if they be more than two, they shall then share
in one-third, after carrying out any will that had been made or payment of any
debt owed — without harming anyone. This is a command from Allah and Allah is
all-knowing, most forbearing.”
Rather than give my comments on Mr. Morgan’s
observation, I present the meaning of the word “Kalaalah“, as
it has been used in the Qur’an, basing my opinion on some of the most authentice
and recognized sources of the Arabic language. The word “Kalaalah”
is used in three (not two) meanings. Zamukhsharee in his commentary on
the Qur’an, “Al-Kashaaf“, while explaining Al-Nisaa
4: 12 writes:
… Kalaalah is used in three meanings: It is used as an adjective
for such a person who leaves behind [as inheritors] neither parents nor
offspring; it is also used for those who are left behind [as inheritors] and
who are neither parents nor offspring of the deceased; and it is also used for
any relationship besides that of parent or offspring. Arabs say: “Maa
waris al-majd `an kalalatin” [i.e. ‘he did not inherit nobility from
a far off relation’]. This is the same as you would say: “Maa samata
`an `ayyin” [i.e. ‘it was not due to incapacity that he remained
silent in the discussion’] or: “Maa kaffa `an Jubnin” [i.e.
‘it was not cowardice that stopped him’]. “Kalaalah” is
actually a verbal noun in the meaning of “Kalaal“, and
“Kalaal” means: ‘loss of power due to incapacity’. A line
of one of Aa`shaa‘s verses reads as: “fa aalaito la
arthee lahaa min kalaalatin” [i.e. ‘then I swore that I shall not be
kind to him due to his weaknesses’]. Then, in figurative speech the word was
used for relations other than those of parent and child. The reason was that
such relationship was weak as compared to the relations of parent and child.
And when the word is used as an adjective for the person whose wealth is being
inherited or for the inheritors, it is then used in the meaning of “Zu
Kalaalah“. As you would say: “Fulaanun min qaraabatee”
implying “fulaanun min zawee qaraabatee“. This word, like
the words “Hajaajah” and “Faqaaqah” used
in the meaning of ‘idiot’, can also be used as an adjective…”
It is worth mentioning here that the first meaning mentioned by Zamukhsharee
[i.e. a person who leaves behind [as inheritors] neither parents nor offspring],
although is not against the principles of Arabic language [i.e. the meaning of a
verbal noun may be used for both the active and the passive participles] , but
it could not be found in any original source of the classical Arabic literature.
As far as the second meaning mentioned by Zamukhsharee [i.e. those who are
left behind [as inheritors] and who are neither parents nor offspring of the
deceased] is concerned, the word is abundantly used in this meaning in the
classical Arabic literature. For instance, Yazeed ibn al-Hakam al-Thaqafiyy,
advising his son, says:
A person is miserly in fulfilling his [financial] obligations [toward his
bretheren] and [after his death] his herds that graze in the forests are taken
away by his Kalaalah relatives.
Azharee has quoted a poet as saying:
[When a person is wronged,] then his father is the first one to defend him,
his Kalaalah relatives [in such cases] are not [as] furious [as his
father]
A Bedouin has been quoted in “Lisaan al-Arab” as saying:
I possess a great amount of wealth, but my inheritors are only Kalaalah
relatives.
According to a narrative reported by Muslim, Jaabir (ra) is reported to have
said to the Prophet:
O Messenger of Allah, my inheritors are only Kalaalah
relatives.
In a number of narratives used by the commentators of the Qur’an, the word
“Kalaalah” has been used in this meaning. For instance, Abu
Bakr Jassaas in “Ahkaam al-Qur’an” writes:
In this connexion, one of the two opinions ascribed to Abu Bakr, `Ali
and Ibn Abbaas is that “all relatives of a person except parents
and offspring are Kalaalah relatives”. Mohammad ibn Saalim
reports from Sha`bee and Sha`bee from Ibn Masood
that Ibn Masood said that “Besides parents and offspring, all
relatives are Kalaalah“. The same meaning is also narrated from Zayd
ibn Thaabit.
As far as the third meaning mentioned by Zamukhsharee [i.e. any
relationship besides that of parent or offspring] is concerned, the usage of the
word in this meaning in the classical Arabic literature is also quite common.
For instance, Tarmaah says:
He swings his arms, which he has not inherited on the basis of a distant
relation. With it he ruptures the hidden parts of her thighs
A line of one of `Aamir ibn Tufail‘s verse reads as:
And the tribe of `Aamir did not make me their leader on the basis of my
distant relation
The most elaborate Arabic dictionary, “Lisaan al-Arab“,
while explaining the meaning of the word, writes:
Arabs say: “lum yarith ho Kalaalatan” to imply that he
did not inherit [something] on the basis of a distant relation, rather he has
received the inherotance on the basis of a close relation [with the deceased]
and a rightful claim.
Thus, relying on the sources quoted above, it is quite obvious that the word
“Kalaalah“, in the classical Arabic language was used in three
(not two) different meanings. These meanings are:
-
A person, who leaves behind neither parents nor offspring;
-
Those relatives of a person who are neither his parents nor offspring; and
-
Any relationship of a person besides parents and offspring.
Now, let us try to ascertain in which of the three stated meanings is the
word “Kalaalah” used in the Qur’anic verse under
consideration (Al-Nisaa 4: 12). For this purpose, we shall once again
have to take a close look at the verse. The verse reads as:
Although the Muslim jurists are more or less unanimous in their opinion that
the word “Kalaalah” has been used in the first meaning stated
above [i.e. , A person, who leaves behind neither parents nor offspring], but
there is a clear evidence in the verse itself that proves that such is not the
case. In fact, if all the words of the verse are fully considered, it becomes
impossible to say that the word “Kalaalah” is used in the
first meaning stated above.
A close look at the verses [Al-Nisaa 4:
11, 12] in which the inheritance law has been laid down, shows that after
the shares of the deceased’s offspring and parents has been given [end of verse Al-Nisaa
4: 11], the Qur’an has stressed carrying out the will of the deceased in the
words:
after carrying out any will [of the deceased]…
And then again, after the shares of the husband has been laid down [Al-Nisaa
4: 12], the Qur’an has stressed that the will of the deceased wife should be
carried out, using the words:
after carrying out any will that they [i.e. the wives’] have
made…
And then after the share of the wives has been laid down [Al-Nisaa
4: 12], the Qur’an has stressed that the will of the deceased husband should be
carried out, using the words:
after carrying out any will you have made…
In all these three cases, the Qur’an has used these verbs in active form [
and 
The antecedent of each of these three verbs is clearly stated in the respective
sentences. On the other hand, in the verse that lays out the directive regarding
“Kalaalah” the same verb has been used in the passive form [
In this case, the Qur’an says:
after carrying out any will that has been made
this change is a clear evidence that in the sentence
the subject of the verb
— the deceased person, whose property is being distributed — is not stated.
Thus, in this verse, “Kalaalah” can in no way be interpreted
as an adjective for the deceased. This change from active to passive verbs in
the Qur’an leaves no ground to take the word “Kalaalah” in
its first stated meaning [i.e. A person, who leaves behind neither parents nor
offspring].
As far as the preference between the second and the third stated meanings of
the word “Kalaalah” is concerned, because of the fact that
the implication of the verse remains the same in either case, this preference
shall be made on the basis of a judgment regarding which of the two stated
meanings helps in giving the sentences a better literary sense.
Thus, the verb 
according to this interpretation shall be a passive verb from the category of 
The word “kalaalah” is used in the verse as the causative
object of the verb
The word
is used in the sentence in its deficient form (naaqisah) and
is its predicate. The words
and
are the nouns for 
The translation of the related part of the verse, according to this
interpretation, shall either be:
And if a man or a woman is made an heir on account of being a Kalaalah
[relative]…
or:
And if a man or a woman is made an heir on account of his/her Kalaalah
relationship [with the deceased]…
This is the basis of the interpretation of the verse under consideration,
mentioned in my original
article. I do acknowledge the fact that the meaning of the word “Kalaalah”
according to this interpretation is not the one that has generally been taken by
the Muslim jurists. But the fact remains that the ultimate criteria for us —
Muslims — is not the opinion of any one or more jurists but the Qur’an. I have
stated above that the words and the construction of the related sentences of the
Qur’an do not allow us to accept the the meaning that has generally been
ascribed to this word. I do submit that the opinion expressed in this article
can be incorrect, and the one expressed by the jurists can be correct. But any
meaningful comment or criticism on my article or in defense of the opinion
expressed by the jurists should primarily concentrate on the liguistic errors in
my interpretation of the meaning of the word “Kalaalah“; or
any other linguistic error in my interpretation and ascription of the meaning of
the word “Kalaalah“, as it has been used in the Qur’an.
© Copyright June, 1999. All Rights Reserved with the Author
**- The original article, as well as the reply
to this criticism and comment is primarily based on the research work of my
teacher, Javed Ahmad Ghamidi.
***- The verse reads as:
