The Qur’anic Root W L D

1. The root’s core in pre-Islamic Arabic

Ibn Fāris traces the core of W L D to najl and nasl—offspring and progeny: the coming forth of descendants and children. وَلَدَت المرأة (waladat al-marʾah) means that a woman gave birth to a child, while وَلَد الرجل (walada al-rajul) was also used of a man becoming a father and a child coming from him.

This meaning was thoroughly familiar in Arabic before the Qur’an.

Al-Nābighah al-Dhubyānī says:

مَهْلًا فِدَاءٌ لَكَ الْأَقْوَامُ كُلُّهُمُ
وَمَا أُثَمِّرُ مِنْ مَالٍ وَمِنْ وَلَدِ

Mahlan fidāʾun laka l-aqwāmu kulluhumu / Wa-mā uthammiru min mālin wa-min waladi.

In this verse of poetry, the poet places his wealth beside his walad: what has come to him in the form of property, children, and offspring.

An early Arabic proverb also said:

وَلَدُكِ مَنْ دَمَّى عَقِبَيْكِ

Waladuki man dammā ʿaqibayki.

That is, your own child is the one whose birth caused blood to run over your heels. This proverb is reported in the context of distinguishing a child born to someone from a child taken in adoption.

These usages show how clearly the early core of walad was connected with the actual relationship of birth and descent.

Arabic also used this family for broader concepts. Something was said to have undergone tawallud from something else: to have arisen from it. These later extensions, however, should not displace the primary core of birth and descent in the Qur’an.

2. Walad and awlād: a child, not only a son

One of the most important points about this root is that walad in Arabic is not restricted to males.

Early lexicographers explicitly stated that walad can apply to one or more individuals, male or female.

Establishing this point does not even require relying solely on dictionaries. The Qur’an itself provides very clear evidence:

يُوصِيكُمُ اللَّهُ فِي أَوْلَادِكُمْ لِلذَّكَرِ مِثْلُ حَظِّ الْأُنثَيَيْنِ

Yūṣīkumu llāhu fī awlādikum li-dh-dhakari mithlu ḥaẓẓi l-unthayayn.

The God instructs you concerning your children: for the male, the equivalent of the share of two females.

An-Nisa 4:11

If أَوْلَادِكُمْ (awlādikum) meant only “your sons,” the subsequent distinction between الذَّكَر (al-dhakar) and الْأُنثَيَيْن (al-unthayayn) would make no sense.

The Qur’an itself therefore makes clear that awlād includes male and female children.

The same understanding is natural in many other verses:

وَلَا تَقْتُلُوا أَوْلَادَكُمْ خَشْيَةَ إِمْلَاقٍ

Wa-lā taqtulū awlādakum khashyata imlāq.

Do not kill your children for fear of poverty.

Al-Isra 17:31

There is no indication that the command concerns sons alone.

Likewise:

إِنَّ مِنْ أَزْوَاجِكُمْ وَأَوْلَادِكُمْ عَدُوًّا لَّكُمْ

Inna min azwājikum wa-awlādikum ʿaduwwan lakum.

Indeed, among your spouses and children are those who are enemies to you.

At-Taghabun 64:14

And:

إِنَّمَا أَمْوَالُكُمْ وَأَوْلَادُكُمْ فِتْنَةٌ

Innamā amwālukum wa-awlādukum fitnah.

Your wealth and children are only a trial.

At-Taghabun 64:15

In all these constructions, “children” is more precise than “sons.”

Walad can be singular or collective

In early Arabic, walad could denote one child or refer collectively to children and offspring. Alongside it, the explicit plural أَوْلَاد (awlād) also existed.

Some Qur’anic readings also differ in pronunciation between وَلَد (walad) and وُلْد (wuld), including verses where wealth and children appear together. Lexicographers disagreed about these two forms: some treated them as two linguistic variants with the same meaning, while others regarded wuld as plural and walad as singular in certain dialects.

A definite semantic conclusion should therefore not be drawn solely from the vowel on the wāw.

لَيْسَ لَهُ وَلَدٌ — Laysa lahu walad

This point also has lexical importance in inheritance verses:

إِنِ امْرُؤٌ هَلَكَ لَيْسَ لَهُ وَلَدٌ وَلَهُ أُخْتٌ

Ini mruʾun halaka laysa lahu waladun wa-lahu ukht.

If a man dies, having no walad, and has a sister…

An-Nisa 4:176

At the level of the word itself, walad is not restricted to “son.” Translating لَيْسَ لَهُ وَلَدٌ (laysa lahu walad) as “he has no son” therefore adds, lexically, something that the word itself has not specified.

How different kinds of children or descendants affect a ruling within the full system of inheritance provisions is a separate question, to be examined through the verses together. The root itself, however, does not permit making walad exclusively male from the outset.

3. Giving birth, wālid, wālidah, and mawlūd

The W L D family expresses the relationship of birth from several angles.

وَلَدَ — Walada: giving birth

It is said of Abraham’s wife:

قَالَتْ يَا وَيْلَتَىٰ أَأَلِدُ وَأَنَا عَجُوزٌ

Qālat yā waylatā a-alidu wa-anā ʿajūz.

She said: “Woe to me! Shall I give birth when I am an old woman?”

Hud 11:72

أَلِدُ (alidu) refers directly to giving birth.

Concerning mothers, the Qur’an also says:

إِنْ أُمَّهَاتُهُمْ إِلَّا اللَّائِي وَلَدْنَهُمْ

In ummahātuhum illā llāʾī waladnahum.

Their mothers are only the women who gave birth to them.

Al-Mujadilah 58:2

This verse matters for understanding the relationship between أم (umm) and ولادة (wilādah). Umm can have broader uses in the language, but here, in the discussion of ẓihār—the marital declaration likening a wife to one’s mother—the Qur’an identifies the actual mother by referring to the women who gave birth to them.

In Maryam, concerning Yaḥyā, it states:

وَسَلَامٌ عَلَيْهِ يَوْمَ وُلِدَ وَيَوْمَ يَمُوتُ وَيَوْمَ يُبْعَثُ حَيًّا

Wa-salāmun ʿalayhi yawma wulida wa-yawma yamūtu wa-yawma yubʿathu ḥayyā.

Peace be upon him the day he was born, the day he dies, and the day he is raised alive.

Maryam 19:15

And Jesus says:

وَالسَّلَامُ عَلَيَّ يَوْمَ وُلِدتُّ وَيَوْمَ أَمُوتُ وَيَوْمَ أُبْعَثُ حَيًّا

Wa-s-salāmu ʿalayya yawma wulidtu wa-yawma amūtu wa-yawma ubʿathu ḥayyā.

Peace be upon me the day I was born, the day I die, and the day I am raised alive.

Maryam 19:33

In these two verses, وُلِدَ / وُلِدتُّ (wulida / wulidtu) are passive forms: being born.

والِد and والِدة — Wālid and wālidah

In its formation, wālid is someone from whom a child has come, and in ordinary usage it denotes the father.

Wālidah is a woman who has given birth to a child and refers to the mother.

The Qur’an says:

وَوَالِدٍ وَمَا وَلَدَ

Wa-wālidin wa-mā walad.

By a wālid and what he begot.

Al-Balad 90:3

Early commentaries proposed figures such as Adam or Abraham as the referent of wālid, but the expression itself names no one. At the linguistic level, it remains a parent and what has come from that parent.

When the Qur’an speaks of الوالدين (al-wālidayn), father and mother together are intended:

وَبِالْوَالِدَيْنِ إِحْسَانًا

Wa-bi-l-wālidayni iḥsānan.

And goodness toward parents.

“Parents” is therefore one of the closest English equivalents, expressing father and mother together.

والِدات — Wālidāt

Al-Baqarah states:

وَالْوَالِدَاتُ يُرْضِعْنَ أَوْلَادَهُنَّ حَوْلَيْنِ كَامِلَيْنِ

Wa-l-wālidātu yurḍiʿna awlādahunna ḥawlayni kāmilayn.

Mothers shall nurse their children for two complete years.

Al-Baqarah 2:233

Here, wālidāt are the mothers who gave birth to the children, and أولادهن (awlāduhunna) are their children.

مَوْلود — Mawlūd

Mawlūd is a passive participle: someone who has been born.

Luqman states:

لَا يَجْزِي وَالِدٌ عَن وَلَدِهِ وَلَا مَوْلُودٌ هُوَ جَازٍ عَن وَالِدِهِ شَيْئًا

Lā yajzī wālidun ʿan waladihi wa-lā mawlūdun huwa jāzin ʿan wālidihi shayʾā.

No parent can avail his child in anything, nor can any child who has been born avail his parent in anything.

Luqman 31:33

The contrast here is very clear:

Wālid → the one from whom the child comes.
Mawlūd → the one who has been born.

The two look at the relationship from its two directions.

مَوْلودٌ لَهُ — Mawlūd lahu

Al-Baqarah 2:233, however, has a particular construction:

وَعَلَى الْمَوْلُودِ لَهُ رِزْقُهُنَّ وَكِسْوَتُهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ

Wa-ʿalā l-mawlūdi lahu rizquhunna wa-kiswatuhunna bi-l-maʿrūf.

Their provision and clothing, according to maʿrūf—what is recognized as right—are the responsibility of the one for whom the child has been born.

المولود له (al-mawlūd lahu) here is not the child. The complete construction means the one for whom a child has been born, and in the verse’s context it refers to the father.

A little later, it says:

لَا تُضَارَّ وَالِدَةٌ بِوَلَدِهَا وَلَا مَوْلُودٌ لَّهُ بِوَلَدِهِ

Lā tuḍārra wālidatun bi-waladihā wa-lā mawlūdun lahu bi-waladih.

No mother should suffer harm on account of her child, nor should the one for whom the child has been born suffer harm on account of his child.

Al-Baqarah 2:233

This is a good example of the importance of syntactic construction. Mawlūd alone means “one who has been born,” but mawlūd lahu in this sentence refers to the person to whom the child is related by descent.

4. Walad in relation to The God: the relationship of offspring and begetting itself

One of this root’s most important Qur’anic fields is the rejection of attributing walad to The God.

Several constructions must be distinguished to understand these verses precisely.

اتَّخَذَ وَلَدًا — Ittakhadha waladan

The Qur’an repeatedly speaks of the claim that:

اتَّخَذَ اللَّهُ وَلَدًا

Ittakhadha llāhu waladan.

The God has taken a child.

Or:

اتَّخَذَ الرَّحْمَٰنُ وَلَدًا

Ittakhadha r-raḥmānu waladan.

Al-Raḥmān has taken a child.

Al-Baqarah states:

وَقَالُوا اتَّخَذَ اللَّهُ وَلَدًا سُبْحَانَهُ بَل لَّهُ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ

Wa-qālū ttakhadha llāhu waladan subḥānahu bal lahu mā fī s-samāwāti wa-l-arḍ.

They said, “The God has taken a child.” Exalted is He; rather, whatever is in the heavens and the earth belongs to Him.

Al-Baqarah 2:116

And in Maryam:

وَقَالُوا اتَّخَذَ الرَّحْمَٰنُ وَلَدًا

Wa-qālū ttakhadha r-raḥmānu waladan.

They said, “Al-Raḥmān has taken a child.”

Maryam 19:88

A few verses later:

وَمَا يَنبَغِي لِلرَّحْمَٰنِ أَن يَتَّخِذَ وَلَدًا

Wa-mā yanbaghī li-r-raḥmāni an yattakhidha waladan.

It is not fitting for Al-Raḥmān to take a child.

Maryam 19:92

The verb اتخذ (ittakhadha) does not itself mean “to beget.” It means taking, placing, or choosing something within a relationship. In its construction, اتخذ ولدا (ittakhadha waladan) can therefore indicate assigning or accepting someone in the position of a child; it does not necessarily describe the physical act of begetting directly.

This difference must not be lost, because elsewhere the Qur’an also denies begetting itself separately.

وَلَدَ اللَّهُ — Walada Allāhu

In As-Saffat, a more explicit claim is reported:

أَلَا إِنَّهُم مِّنْ إِفْكِهِمْ لَيَقُولُونَ ۝ وَلَدَ اللَّهُ وَإِنَّهُمْ لَكَاذِبُونَ

Alā innahum min ifkihim la-yaqūlūn. Walada llāhu wa-innahum la-kādhibūn.

Indeed, out of their falsehood they say, “The God has begotten”; and they are liars.

As-Saffat 37:151–152

Here, ittakhadha is absent. The verb وَلَدَ (walada) itself is attributed to The God, and the Qur’an immediately calls this statement a lie.

The Qur’an therefore rejects both the claim of having or taking a child and the claim of begetting.

لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ — Lam yalid wa-lam yūlad

The most concise expression appears in Al-Ikhlas:

لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ

Lam yalid wa-lam yūlad.

He has not begotten, and He has not been born.

Al-Ikhlas 112:3

The construction of the verse is entirely symmetrical:

لَمْ يَلِدْ (lam yalid): He is not a parent or begetter;
وَلَمْ يُولَدْ (wa-lam yūlad): He Himself is not one who has been born.

The Qur’an thus denies both directions of the chain of birth concerning The God: nothing has come from Him through birth, nor has He Himself come from another parent.

This is sufficient for understanding the root itself. Later philosophical explanations concerning beginninglessness, body, composition, or Divine nature can be examined in their own place, but should not replace the verse’s simple and clear construction.

أَنَّى يَكُونُ لَهُ وَلَدٌ — Annā yakūnu lahu walad

Al-Anam states:

بَدِيعُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ أَنَّىٰ يَكُونُ لَهُ وَلَدٌ وَلَمْ تَكُن لَّهُ صَاحِبَةٌ وَخَلَقَ كُلَّ شَيْءٍ

Badīʿu s-samāwāti wa-l-arḍi annā yakūnu lahu waladun wa-lam takun lahu ṣāḥibatun wa-khalaqa kulla shayʾ.

The Originator of the heavens and the earth: how could He have a child when He has had no female companion, and He created everything?

Al-Anam 6:101

In this verse, the Qur’an places walad within the familiar framework of birth: walad, ṣāḥibah, and khalq—child, female companion, and creation—appear together in one argument.

This verse likewise shows that walad, in its linguistic core, is an actual relationship of descent and birth, rather than merely an honorary title.

Walad contrasted with ʿabd and fard

The continuation of Surah Maryam forms one of the most important networks of meaning in this discussion.

After rejecting اتخذ الرحمن ولدا (ittakhadha al-Raḥmānu waladan), it says:

إِن كُلُّ مَن فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ إِلَّا آتِي الرَّحْمَٰنِ عَبْدًا

In kullu man fī s-samāwāti wa-l-arḍi illā ātī r-raḥmāni ʿabdā.

Everyone in the heavens and the earth comes to Al-Raḥmān only as a servant.

Maryam 19:93

And:

وَكُلُّهُمْ آتِيهِ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ فَرْدًا

Wa-kulluhum ātīhi yawma l-qiyāmati fardā.

All of them will come to Him on the Day of Resurrection individually.

Maryam 19:95

Within the surah’s own structure, the claim of walad is set against the condition of ʿabd and fard. Those attributed to Al-Raḥmān are not presented in the Qur’anic text as Divine offspring; they are servants and come to Him individually.

5. Walīd and wildān: children and the early stage of life

Another branch of this root is وَليد (walīd).

Pharaoh says to Moses:

قَالَ أَلَمْ نُرَبِّكَ فِينَا وَلِيدًا وَلَبِثْتَ فِينَا مِنْ عُمُرِكَ سِنِينَ

Qāla a-lam nurabbika fīnā walīdan wa-labithta fīnā min ʿumurika sinīn.

He said: “Did we not raise you among us as a child, and did you not remain among us for years of your life?”

Ash-Shuara 26:18

وليدا (walīdan) here refers to Moses during childhood. The word therefore does not necessarily mean only the first moment after birth; it can also include a young child.

Its plural وِلْدان (wildān) appears in several different contexts.

In An-Nisa:

وَالْمُسْتَضْعَفِينَ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ وَالنِّسَاءِ وَالْوِلْدَانِ

Wa-l-mustaḍʿafīna mina r-rijāli wa-n-nisāʾi wa-l-wildān.

And the oppressed among men, women, and children.

An-Nisa 4:75

Here, wildān, alongside men and women, constitutes the group of children.

Al-Muzzammil states:

يَوْمًا يَجْعَلُ الْوِلْدَانَ شِيبًا

Yawman yajʿalu l-wildāna shībā.

A day that makes children white-haired.

Al-Muzzammil 73:17

The severity of that day is expressed through an image that makes even children old and white-haired.

In Al-Waqiah and Al-Insan, we also read:

يَطُوفُ عَلَيْهِمْ وِلْدَانٌ مُّخَلَّدُونَ

Yaṭūfu ʿalayhim wildānun mukhalladūn.

Wildān who are mukhalladūn circulate among them.

Al-Waqiah 56:17

And:

وَيَطُوفُ عَلَيْهِمْ وِلْدَانٌ مُّخَلَّدُونَ

Wa-yaṭūfu ʿalayhim wildānun mukhalladūn.

Al-Insan 76:19

In this context, wildān refers to the young attendants in the setting of the Garden. The caution established in the study of KH L D must be retained concerning مخلدون (mukhalladūn); its precise quality should not be derived from the word walad itself.

Lexicographers report disagreement over whether walīd was exclusively male in all early usages or was sometimes also said of a girl. In general Qur’anic passages, it is therefore preferable to let context determine whether “child,” “children,” or “young boys” is most appropriate.

6. Differences from related words

و ل د (وَلَد) and ب ن ي (ابن) — W L D (walad) and B N Y (ibn)

Walad emphasizes the relationship of birth and descent and can be a male or female child.

ابن (ibn) basically means “son” and is male in gender. Arabic also uses it in broader relational and figurative fields. For example, the Qur’an speaks of ابن السبيل (ibn al-sabīl), which does not mean a physical “son of the road.”

This distinction matters for translating verses concerning The God. In some passages, the Qur’an reports:

عُزَيْرٌ ابْنُ اللَّهِ

ʿUzayrun ibnu llāh.

ʿUzayr is the son of The God.

Or:

الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ اللَّهِ

Al-masīḥu ibnu llāh.

The Messiah is the son of The God.

Here, ibn is used, and “son” is the natural equivalent.

But when it says:

اتَّخَذَ اللَّهُ وَلَدًا

Ittakhadha llāhu waladan.

The God has taken a child.

The word walad itself does not specify gender. “Child” is therefore more precise than “son.”

The Qur’an also brings claims concerning male and female offspring together within the broader category of walad.

و ل د and ذ ر ر (ذُرِّيَّة) — W L D and DH R R (dhurriyyah)

ذرية (dhurriyyah) refers more to descendants and the continuation of a lineage, and can encompass children and subsequent generations together.

Walad has a closer relationship with being born and being someone’s child.

A person’s walad may begin a dhurriyyah, but the two words are not complete synonyms.

و ل د and ط ف ل (طِفْل) — W L D and Ṭ F L (ṭifl)

طفل (ṭifl) expresses the stage of childhood.

Walad expresses the relationship of descent: even after growing up, a person remains the walad of his or her parents.

Someone may therefore no longer be a ṭifl, while still being a walad.

Walīd is closer to ṭifl in this respect, because the early stage of life is more prominent in it.

والِد and أَب — Wālid and ab

Wālid comes from the root of begetting itself and highlights the direct relationship of producing offspring.

أب (ab) has a broader field. In Arabic and the Qur’an, in some constructions it can refer to ancestors or broader paternal relationships as well as the immediate father.

The two should therefore not be treated as identical in every discussion of root meanings.

والِدة and أُمّ — Wālidah and umm

The same distinction appears on the other side of the relationship.

Wālidah is a woman who has given birth.

Alongside a human mother, أم (umm) has broader usages in Arabic and the Qur’an, such as أم القرى (umm al-qurā) and أم الكتاب (umm al-kitāb).

Wālidah is therefore a more direct word for the relationship of birth, while umm has a broader conceptual field.

7. Challenges of understanding and suggested translations

The most important point in translating walad is that it should not be translated as “son” by default.

The Qur’an itself shows in An-Nisa 4:11 that awlād includes males and females. Thus, in constructions such as:

اتخذ الله ولدا (ittakhadha Allāhu waladan)

“Child” is more precise than “son.”

The same caution is necessary with:

ليس له ولد (laysa lahu walad)

The word itself does not restrict gender.

The second point is the difference between ittakhadha waladan and walada. The first concerns taking or placing someone in the relationship of a child; the second expresses begetting itself. The Qur’an rejects both concerning The God, but the two verbs should not be translated identically.

The third point is that mawlūd lahu should not be translated as simply mawlūd. In Al-Baqarah 2:233, the complete construction refers to the father: the one for whom a child has been born.

The fourth point concerns substituting ab for wālid, and umm for wālidah, without considering their different roots. In natural translation, “father” and “mother” are sometimes unavoidable, but root analysis should make clear that wālid and wālidah are formed directly from the act of begetting and the relationship of birth.

Suggested translations for Forqan

وَلَدَ (walada):
“Gave birth,” “begot,” or “brought forth a child,” according to the subject and context.

يَلِدُ (yalidu):
“Gives birth” or “begets a child.”

وُلِدَ / يُولَدُ (wulida / yūladu):
“Was born” or “is born.”

وَلَد (walad):
“Child,” “offspring,” and in some contexts “children” or “progeny.”

Not invariably “son.”

أَوْلَاد (awlād):
“Children.”

لَيْسَ لَهُ وَلَدٌ (laysa lahu walad):
“He has no child.”

مَالًا وَوَلَدًا (mālan wa-waladan):
“Wealth and a child”; where the context is collective, “wealth and children.”

والِد (wālid):
“Parent,” “father,” or “the one from whom a child comes,” according to context.

والِدة (wālidah):
“Mother,” “wālidah,” or “the woman who gave birth to the child.”

الوالدان / الوالدين (al-wālidān / al-wālidayn):
“Parents” or “father and mother.”

مَوْلود (mawlūd):
“One who has been born” or “child.”

المَوْلودُ لَهُ (al-mawlūd lahu):
“The one for whom a child has been born”; in Al-Baqarah 2:233, the father.

وَليد (walīd):
“Child” or “young child.”

وِلْدان (wildān):
“Children”; in contexts where their gender and role are clearer, “young boys.”

اتَّخَذَ وَلَدًا (ittakhadha waladan):
“He took a child” or “he placed someone in the position of a child.”

لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ (lam yalid wa-lam yūlad):
“He has not begotten, and He has not been born.”

وَلَدَ اللَّهُ (walada Allāhu):
“The God has begotten,” as a claim that the Qur’an itself immediately calls a lie.

وَوَالِدٍ وَمَا وَلَدَ (wa-wālidin wa-mā walad):
“By a parent and what he begot.”

A basic translation need not replace wālid with Adam or Abraham, because the verse itself makes no such specification.

Conclusion

The root و ل د (W L D) signifies one of the most fundamental natural relationships in human language: giving birth, being born, and the relationship between a parent and what has come into the world from that parent.

In pre-Islamic Arabic, walad was thoroughly familiar as a word for children and offspring. Al-Nābighah’s poetry places wealth beside walad, and early proverbs distinguish a child born to someone from a child taken as one’s own. Before the Qur’an’s theological and legal usages, the core of this family was therefore the relationship of birth and descent.

In Arabic, walad is neither restricted to males nor always limited to one individual. The Qur’an itself establishes this in An-Nisa 4:11: أَوْلَادِكُمْ (awlādikum) are subsequently distinguished as الذَّكَر (al-dhakar) and الْأُنثَيَيْن (al-unthayayn). At the lexical level, then, walad and awlād include male and female children. This is also why an expression such as لَيْسَ لَهُ وَلَدٌ (laysa lahu walad) cannot be restricted to “he has no son.”

The root family also shows the relationship of birth from two directions. Wālid is the one from whom a child comes, wālidah is the woman who has given birth, and mawlūd is the one who has been born. In Al-Baqarah 2:233, the Qur’an even uses the particular expression المولود له (al-mawlūd lahu): the one for whom a child has been born, who in the verse’s context is the father.

Walīd and wildān place more emphasis on childhood and youth. Moses was a walīd in Pharaoh’s household, and the Qur’an speaks of al-wildān among oppressed groups and of wildān mukhalladūn in the Garden.

One of the root’s most important applications concerns attributing walad to The God. The Qur’an distinguishes several constructions. Ittakhadha waladan expresses taking or placing someone in the position of a child; walada Allāhu directly states the claim of begetting; and lam yalid wa-lam yūlad denies both directions of the relationship of birth: He neither begets nor has Himself been born.

In Al-Anam 6:101, the question أَنَّىٰ يَكُونُ لَهُ وَلَدٌ وَلَمْ تَكُن لَّهُ صَاحِبَةٌ (annā yakūnu lahu waladun wa-lam takun lahu ṣāḥibah) also places walad in the familiar field of producing offspring. In Maryam, after the rejection of ittakhadha al-Raḥmānu waladan, all beings are presented before Al-Raḥmān as ʿabdan—servants—and, on the Day of Resurrection, fardan—individually.

For translation, the difference between walad and ibn is particularly important. Ibn is male, and “son” can be its direct equivalent; walad, however, does not specify gender. When the Qur’an says ittakhadha Allāhu waladan, “child” is therefore more precise than “son.”

A cautious account of this root is:

W L D: Giving birth and offspring coming forth from a parent. Walad is the individual or progeny arising from this relationship and can be male or female, singular or, in some constructions, collective. Wālid and wālidah are the two parental sides of this relationship; mawlūd is someone who has been born; and walīd highlights childhood. The precise meaning of each form is determined by the construction and context of the particular verse.