Sura-4 [Al Nissa Medina 92]

4: 29

Asad O you who have attained to faith! Do not devour one another’s possessions wrongfully-not even by way of trade based on mutual agreement [note 38] –and do not destroy one another: for, behold, God is indeed a disperser of grace unto you!

The Quranic Text & Ali’s version:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ ...

4:29. O ye who believe!

... لاَ تَأْكُلُواْ أَمْوَالَكُمْ بَيْنَكُمْ بِالْبَاطِلِ إِلاَّ أَن تَكُونَ تِجَارَةً عَن تَرَاضٍ مِّنكُمْ...

eat not up your property among yourselves in vanities: but let there be amongst you traffic and trade by mutual goodwill:

C541. Let me paraphrase this verse, for there is profound meaning in it.

1. All your property you hold in trust, whether it is in your name, or belongs to the community, or to people over whom you have control. To waste is wrong.

2. In 2:188 the same phrase occurred, to caution us against greed.

Here it occurs, to encourage us to increase property by economic use (traffic and trade), recalling Christ's parable of the Talents (Matt. 25:14-30), where the servants who had increased their master's wealth were promoted and the servant who had hoarded was cast into darkness.

3. We are warned that our waste may mean our own destruction ("nor kill or destroy yourselves").

But there is a more general meaning also:

we must be careful of our own and other people's lives. We must commit no violence.

This is the opposite of "trade and traffic by mutual good-will."

4. Our violence to our own brethren is particularly preposterous, seeing that Allah has loved and showered His mercies on us and all His creatures.

... وَلاَ تَقْتُلُواْ أَنفُسَكُمْ إِنَّ اللّهَ كَانَ بِكُمْ رَحِيمًا ﴿٢٩﴾

nor kill (or destroy) yourselves:

for verily Allah hath been to you Most Merciful.

وَمَن يَفْعَلْ ذَلِكَ عُدْوَانًا وَظُلْمًا فَسَوْفَ نُصْلِيهِ نَارًا...

4:30. If any do that in rancor and injustice, soon shall We cast them into the fire:

... وَكَانَ ذَلِكَ عَلَى اللّهِ يَسِيرًا ﴿٣٠﴾

and easy it is for Allah.

إِن تَجْتَنِبُواْ كَبَآئِرَ مَا تُنْهَوْنَ عَنْهُ نُكَفِّرْ عَنكُمْ سَيِّئَاتِكُمْ ...

4:31. If ye (but) eschew the most heinous of the things which ye are forbidden to do, We shall expel out of you all the evil in you,

... وَنُدْخِلْكُم مُّدْخَلاً كَرِيمًا ﴿٣١﴾

and admit you to a Gate of great honor.

Other versions:

Yusuf Ali O ye who believe! eat not up your property among yourselves in vanities: but let there be amongst you traffic and trade by mutual good-will: nor kill (or destroy) yourselves: for verily Allah hath been to you Most Merciful.

Pickthall O ye who believe! Squander not your wealth among yourselves in vanity, except it be a trade by mutual consent, and kill not one another. Lo! Allah is ever Merciful unto you.

Yuksel O you who acknowledge, do not consume your money between you unjustly, except through a trade, which is mutually agreed by you. Do not kill yourselves; God is Compassionate towards you.

Transliteration Ya_ ayyuhal lazina a_manu_ la_ ta'kulu_ amwa_lakum bainakum bil ba_tili illa_ an taku_na tija_ratan 'an tara_dim minkum, wa la_ taqtulu_ anfusakum, innalla_ha ka_na bikum rahima_(n).

4: 30

Yusuf Ali If any do that in rancor and injustice soon shall We cast them into the fire: and easy it is for Allah.

Pickthall Whoso doeth that through aggression and injustice, We shall cast him into Fire, and that is ever easy for Allah.

Yuksel Whoever does so out of animosity and transgression, We will cast him into a fire; and this for God is very easy.

Transliteration Wa may yaf'al za_lika'udwa_naw wa zulman fa saufa nuslihi na_ra_(n), wa ka_na za_lika 'alalla_hi yasira_(n).

4: 31

Yusuf Ali If ye (but) eschew the most heinous of the things which ye are forbidden to do We shall expel out of you all the evil in you and admit you to a Gate of great honor.

Pickthall If ye avoid the great (things) which ye are forbidden, We will remit from you your evil deeds and make you enter at a noble gate.

Yuksel If you avoid the major sins that you are forbidden against, then We will cancel your existing sins and admit you to a generous entrance.

Transliteration In tajtanibu_ kaba_'ira ma_ tunhauna 'anhu nukaffir'ankum sayyi'a_tikum wa nudkhilkum mudkhalan karima_(n).

[[ Asad’s note 38 – If the particle “illa” preceding the above clause is given its usual meaning of ‘except’ or ‘unless it be’, the phrase ought to be rendered thus: “unless it be [an act of] trade based on mutual agreement”. This formulation, however, has baffled many a commentator: for, if taken literally, it would imply that wrongful profits from trading based on mutual agreement are excepted from the general prohibition, “Devour not one another’s possessions wrongfully” – a supposition impossible to maintain in view of the ethics postulated by the Quran.

To obviate this difficulty, most of the commentators express the opinion that the particle ‘illa’ has in this context the meaning of ‘but’, and that the clause ought to be understood as follows: “but it is lawful for you to profit form one another’s possession by way of legitimate trade based on mutual agreement”. However, quite apart from the fact that this interpretation is highly labored and artificial, it does not explain why “legitimate trade” should have been singled out here as a sole means of lawfully deriving economic benefits form one another – for, as Razi rightly points out in his commentary on this verse, “it is no less lawful to benefit economically through a gift, a bequest, a legal inheritance, alms, a dower, or an indemnity for injuries received: for there are , aside form trade, many ways of acquiring possessions [lawfully]”. Why, then should trade alone have been stressed?

A really satisfactory answer to the puzzle can, in my opinion, be obtained only through a linguistic consideration of the particle ‘illa’. Apart from its usual consideration of ‘except’ or ‘unless it be’, is has sometimes – as has been pointed out in both Qamus and Mighni – the meaning of the simple conjunction ‘and’ (wa); similarly, if it is preceded by a negative clause, it can be synonymous with ‘not or ‘and neither’ (wa-la): as, for instance, in 27:10-11, “no fear need the message-bearers have in My Presence, and neither (illa) need he who ……….” etc.

Now, if we apply this particular use of illa to the passage under consideration, we arrive at the reading, “nor [shall you do it] by means of trade based on mutual agreement”, or simply, “not even by way of trade based on mutual agreement” –whereupon the meaning immediately becomes obvious: the believers are prohibited form devouring another person’s possessions wrongfully even if that other person – being the weaker party –agrees to such a deprivations or exploitation under the stress of circumstances. The reading adopted by me logically connects, moreover, with verse 32, which admonish the believers no to covet one another’s possessions. ]]

[Ali’s note - 541 Let me paraphrase this verse, for there is profound meaning in it. (1) All your property you hold in trust, whether it is in your name, or belongs to the community, or to people over whom you have control. To waste is wrong. (2) In ii. 188 the same phrase occurred, to caution us against greed. Here it occurs, to encourage us to increase property by economic use (traffic and trade), recalling Christ's parable of the Talents (Matt. xxv. 14-30), where the servants who had increased their master's wealth were promoted and the servant who had hoarded was cast into darkness. (3) We are warned that our waste may mean our own destruction ("nor kill or destroy yourselves.") But there is a more general meaning also: we must be careful of our own and other people's lives. We must commit no violence. This is the opposite of "trade and traffic by mutual good-will." (4) Our violence to our own brethren is particularly preposterous, seeing that Allah has loved and showered His mercies on us and all His creatures. (4.29) ]]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry for this delay as I have been extremely busy finishing the article [a part of the bood I am writing now]. This one is almost 19 pages long, would you have time to read. I would like to have your feed back. Lt me know.

Regarding the Quranic topic on 4:29 I think I disagree with you. May be it is about semantic and not in the essence.

Yuksel O you who acknowledge, do not consume your money between you unjustly, except through a trade, which is mutually agreed by you. Do not kill yourselves; God is Compassionate towards you.

Your translation is conveying the idea that it is alright to consume UNJUSTLY in trade which is mutually agreed upon. I think Islam does not prescribe such idea

even in agreements. Receiving property or concessions from others when others are doing it willingly does not constitute injustice.

The idea of injustice lies when there are various types of manipulations and exertion of power to procure unfair deals and agreements. These kinds of coercion and hand twisting by the stronger parties at the serious and unfair loss of the weaker parties take place in the business world. And the stronger parties using the extreme unfair leverage due to circumstances know that the other weaker parties signed the agreement not because they wanted to but they had to. The injustice is in the degrees and the type of coercion. An agreement does not mean it is a fair agreement. There are also Quranic verses to be fair in negotiations and in dealings. This falls within the bigger context of justice.

I respectfully disagree with your version.

Regards,

Ruby

----- Original Message -----

From: Edip Yuksel

To: General Networking Limited

Sent: Friday, February 16, 2007 11:40 AM

Subject: Re: I have a question - Ruby

Dear Ruby:

Though, I do not disagree with the basic moral concern expressed by Asad and you, I think Asad's unconvetional translation is needless.

The exceptional phrase starting with ILLA makes the exception not from BATIL (unjust) but from benefitting each other's production/money. Thus the exception is QUALIFIED with the word MUTUAL AGREEMENT, which makes it impossible to be BATIL. A person, might gave half of his or her wealth to a stranger and draft a contract for it. This will be okay as long as there is realy a mutual agreement.

The negative circumstancesyou are referring to contradicts the exceptional phrase, since it is NOT REALLY mutual (TARADIN). There is adhesion in those kinds of contracts, and they can be voided by the court when the prensence of adhesion or duress is reasonably inferred or demonstrated.

Peace,
Edip

On 2/16/07, General Networking Limited <gnl@gnlusa.com> wrote:

Asslamu Alaikum

Dear Brother:

I have some question regarding the following verse 4:29. I also included your translation in it to compare.

I think Asad's translation of this verse goes with my senses of the spirit of the Quran of justice and fairness.

As a businessperson I have witnessed some dealings where under the tremendous pressure the weaker parties agree with a price or a term that were extremely unfair and unjust and the stronger parties took full advantage of it. Those situations take place all the time.

Please note Asad's note 38 on this verse and please let me know about your idea on it.

Thank you

Ruby

--------------------------------

4: 29 [an-Nisa, Medina 92]

Asad O you who have attained to faith! Do not devour one another's possessions wrongfully-not even by way of trade based on mutual agreement [ note 38] –and do not destroy one another: for, behold, God is indeed a disperser of grace unto you!

Pickthall O ye who believe! Squander not your wealth among yourselves in vanity, except it be a trade by mutual consent, and kill not one another. Lo! Allah is ever Merciful unto you.

Yuksel O you who acknowledge, do not consume your money between you unjustly, except through a trade, which is mutually agreed by you. Do not kill yourselves; God is Compassionate towards you.

[[ Asad's note 38 – If the particle "illa" preceding the above clause is given its usual meaning of 'except' or 'unless it be', the phrase ought to be rendered thus: "unless it be [an act of] trade based on mutual agreement". This formulation, however, has baffled many a commentator: for, if taken literally, it would imply that wrongful profits from trading based on mutual agreement are excepted from the general prohibition, "Devour not one another's possessions wrongfully" – a supposition impossible to maintain in view of the ethics postulated by the Quran.

To obviate this difficulty, most of the commentators express the opinion that the particle 'illa' has in this context the meaning of 'but', and that the clause ought to be understood as follows: "but it is lawful for you to profit form one another's possession by way of legitimate trade based on mutual agreement". However, quite apart from the fact that this interpretation is highly labored and artificial, it does not explain why "legitimate trade" should have been singled out here as a sole means of lawfully deriving economic benefits form one another – for, as Razi rightly points out in his commentary on this verse, "it is no less lawful to benefit economically through a gift, a bequest, a legal inheritance, alms, a dower, or an indemnity for injuries received: for there are , aside form trade, many ways of acquiring possessions [lawfully]". Why, then should trade alone have been stressed?

A really satisfactory answer to the puzzle can, in my opinion, be obtained only through a linguistic consideration of the particle 'illa'. Apart from its usual consideration of 'except' or 'unless it be', is has sometimes – as has been pointed out in both Qamus and Mighni – the meaning of the simple conjunction 'and' (wa); similarly, if it is preceded by a negative clause, it can be synonymous with 'not or 'and neither' (wa-la): as, for instance, in 27:10-11, "no fear need the message-bearers have in My Presence, and neither (illa) need he who ………." etc.

Now, if we apply this particular use of illa to the passage under consideration, we arrive at the reading, "nor [shall you do it] by means of trade based on mutual agreement", or simply, "not even by way of trade based on mutual agreement" –whereupon the meaning immediately becomes obvious: the believers are prohibited form devouring another person's possessions wrongfully even if that other person – being the weaker party –agrees to such a deprivations or exploitation under the stress of circumstances. The reading adopted by me logically connects, moreover, with verse 32, which admonish the believers no to covet one another's possessions. ]]

[Ali's note - 541 Let me paraphrase this verse, for there is profound meaning in it. (1) All your property you hold in trust, whether it is in your name, or belongs to the community, or to people over whom you have control. To waste is wrong. (2) In ii. 188 the same phrase occurred, to caution us against greed . Here it occurs, to encourage us to increase property by economic use (traffic and trade), recalling Christ's parable of the Talents (Matt. xxv. 14-30), where the servants who had increased their master's wealth were promoted and the servant who had hoarded was cast into darkness. (3) We are warned that our waste may mean our own destruction ("nor kill or destroy yourselves.") But there is a more general meaning also: we must be careful of our own and other people's lives. We must commit no violence. This is the opposite of "trade and traffic by mutual good-will." (4) Our violence to our own brethren is particularly preposterous, seeing that Allah has loved and showered His mercies on us and all His creatures. ( 4.29) ]]