Is it Permissible to Marry a Woman From Ahlul Kitaab?
Compiled by Abul Layth
There is disagreement regarding the permissibility of marrying a woman from the people of the Book. The following research is a collection of quotes and opinions ranging from permissibility to Makruh to Haraam.
Allah, the exalted, says in the Qur’an:
وَلا تَنْكِحُوا الْمُشْرِكَاتِ حَتَّى يُؤْمِنَّ
“And do not marry pagan women (Mushrikaat) until they believe.” [2:221]
This is a general verse declaring that the pagan women are forbidden to marry Muslim men, and vice versa. However, there is a specific (khaas) verse wherein Allah ta’alaa states,
الْيَوْمَ أُحِلَّ لَكُمُ الطَّيِّبَاتُ وَطَعَامُ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ حِلٌّ لَكُمْ وَطَعَامُكُمْ حِلٌّ لَهُمْ وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ مِنْ قَبْلِكُمْ إِذَا آتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُن
“This day [all] good foods have been made lawful, and the food of those who were given the Scripture is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them. And [lawful in marriage are] chaste women from among the believers and chaste women from among those who were given the Scripture before you…” [5:5]
Imam Ash-Shafi’i stated in explanation of this verse: “And it is said regarding this aayah [5:5] that all Mushrikaat were forbidden, then Allah revealed the rukhsah (dispensation) that it is halaal to marry the free women of the people of the book specifically.”
However, Imam An-Nahhaas quotes Is-haaq Al-Harbi as saying, “A group of the scholars forwarded the view that the verse in Surat Al-Baqarah abrogated the verse in Maa’idah. So they deemed it haraam (prohibited) to marry every Mushrikah, whether she be a Kitaabiyah (person of the book) or a non-kitaabiyah.”
Imam An-Nahhaas states,
ومن الحجة لقائل هذا مما صح سنده أن عبد الله بن عمر كان إذا سئل عن نكاح الرجل النصرانية أو اليهودية قال: حرم الله المشركات على المؤمنين ولا أعرف شيئاً من الإشراك أعظم من أن تقول المرأة ربها عيسى .
“And support for those who say this [i.e. that it is forbidden to marry a kitaabi] is what is authentically reported that Abdullah ibn ‘Umar was asked about a man marrying a Christian or Jewish woman to which he stated, ‘Allah forbade the believing men from marrying the female pagan, and I do not know of any greater shirk that for a woman to say her “Rabb” is Jesus.”
The response of the majority of the ‘Ulamaa’ to this is that
-
Baqarah was revealed prior to Maa’idah, so it is impossible for an aayah in Baqarah to abrogate a verse in Maa’idah.
-
The Sahaabah and Taabi’in deemed this act Halaal. From among the authentic reports regarding this there is ‘Uthman Ibn ‘Affan, Talhah, Ibn ‘Abbas, Jaabir, Hudhayfah, and from the Taabi’in Sa’id ibn Al Musayyab, Sa’id ibn Jubayr, Mujaahid, Taawus, ‘Ikrimah, Ash-Sha’bi, and Ad-Dahhaak.
-
They also argue that the narrative of Ibn ‘Umar is not proof, as it is possible he was not informed of the abrogation.
After Imam Al-Bukhaari records the narrative of Ibn ‘Umar, Hafith Ibn Hajr states in his Fat-hul Baari,
[The report being in Sahih Al-Bukhari:
باب قول الله تعالى: ﴿ وَلا تَنْكِحُوا الْمُشْرِكَاتِ حَتَّى يُؤْمِنَّ وَلَأَمَةٌ مُؤْمِنَةٌ خَيْرٌ مِنْ مُشْرِكَةٍ وَلَوْ أَعْجَبَتْكُمْ ﴾ (البقرة: من الآية 221): حدثنا قتيـبة، حدثنا الليث، عن نافع أن ابن عمر كان إذا سئل عن نكاح النصرانية واليهودية قال: إن الله حرم المشركات على المؤمنين، ولا أعلم من الإشراك شيئاً أكبر من أن تقول المرأة ربها عيسى وهو عبد من عباد الله
]
“Imam Al-Bukhaari did not clarify the ruling of this issue [in his Sahih] due to the standing probability. The majority of scholars hold that the verse in Surat Al-Baqarah is general (العموم ) whereas the verse in Surat Al-Maa’idah is Khass (specific). And it is reported from a group of the Salaf that what is intended by the term “mushrikaat” is the slave girl of the idols and the Magian women, this was forwarded by Ibn Al-Mundhir and other than him.”
Interestingly Ibn Al-Mundhir stated:
لا يحفظ عن أحد من الأوائل أنه حرم ذلك
“It is not preserved from anyone from the earliest [generations] that it was forbidden (i.e. marrying Ahlul-Kitaab.”
In other words, Ibn Al-Mundhir disregarded the report of Ibn Umar totally, deeming it irregular and thus baseless.
Some scholars maintained that it was Makruh to marry a Kitaabiyah. In the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah it is reported via a good (hasan) chain that Abdul Maalik said:
عن عبد الملك قال: سألت عطاء عن نكاح اليهوديات والنصرانيات فكرهه وقال: كان ذلك والمسلمات قليل .
“I asked ‘Ataa’ regarding the marriage to Jewish and Christian women and he stated that he hated such. He said, “That was when the Muslim women were few.”
In other words, ‘Ataa’ deemed it hated in the law, and that the rukhsah (dispensation) was given in the case when the Muslim women were few and the disbelievers many. This allowed men to protect their chastity.
Similar was reported from Abiz Zubayr in the Sunan of Imam Al-Bayhaqi in which he stated that it used to be difficult to find a Muslim woman to marry, so they were compelled into marrying the people of the book. The exact narration is as follows:
وروى الشافعي ومن طريقه البيهقي في السنن عن أبي الزبير أنه سمع جابر بن عبد الله يُسأل عن نكاح المسلم اليهودية والنصرانية فقال: تزوجناهن زمن الفتح بالكوفة مع سعد بن أبي وقاص ونحن لا نكاد نجد المسلمات كثيراً، فلما رجعنا طلقناهن .
There is yet another report from Imam ‘Umar ibn Al-Khattab (‘alayhis Salaam) in the Musannaf of Abdur-Razzaq that states:
عن قتادة قال: إن حذيفة نكح يهودية في زمن عمر فقال عمر: طلقها فإنها جمرة، قال: أحرام هي ؟ قال: لا، فلم يطلقها حذيفة لقوله، حتى إذا كان بعد ذلك طلقها
From Qatadah who said, “Hudhayfah married a jewish woman in the time of Umar. So ‘Umar said, ‘Divorce her for verily she is jamrah‘ [Note: Jamrah literally means coal, or embers. 'Umar is asserting that she is "coal for the fire of Hell".] Hudhayfah asked, “Is she Haraam?” Umar said, “No!” So Hudhayfah did not divorce her due to Umar’s words, until eventually he ended up divorcing her.”
Imam Al-Bayhaqi reports regarding this issue a narration from Abi Wa’il:
تزوج حذيفة رضي الله عنه يهودية فكتب إليه عمر رضي الله عنه أن يفارقها فقال: إن أخشى أن تدعوا المسلمات وتنكحوا المومسات .
Hudhayfah married a Jewish women and so ‘Umar wrote to him telling him to seperate from her. Also, it is reported by Abdur-Razzaq from ‘Aamir ibn Abdur-Rahman An-Nastaas that Talhah ibn ‘Ubaydullah married a noble from the Jewish women. So ‘Umar told him to divorce her.
However, Abu ‘Ubayd stated,
المسلمون اليوم على الرخصة
“The Muslims, today, are upon the Rukhsah (i.e. that it is permitted).”
Imam Ash-Shafi’i stated, “It is beloved by me that one does not marry them [i.e. women of the book], and marries a Muslim woman.”
Ibn Al-Habib, the Imam of the Maalikis in Andalus, stated, “Marriage to a christian or jewish woman, though Halal, it is blameworthy (madhmum).”
The scholars further placed conditions to marrying them:
Ibn Abi Shaybah reports from Ibn ‘Abbas that he said,
لا يحل نكاح نساء أهل الكتب إذا كانوا حرباً
“It is not permissible to marry women from the people of the Book when they are at war [with the Muslims].”
It is also reported from Abi ‘Ayyad that he stated:
نساء أهل الكتاب لنا حلال إلا أهل الحرب فإن نساءهم وذبائحهم عليكم حرام
“The women of the people of the Book are Halal for us, save for the people of war, for their women and meat are haraam for you!”
The Jurist and Muhaddith, Al-Hakim, stated,
إن من أهل الكتاب من لا يحل لنا مناكحته ولا ذبيحته: أهل الحرب
“Verily, there are those from the people of the Book who it is not Halaal for you to marry or eat from their food: The people of war.”
Al-Hafith Abdullah ibn As-Siddiq Al-Ghumaari wrote a detailed treatise called: دفع الشك والارتياب عن تحريم نســــاء أهل الكتاب wherein he released the fatwa that it was haraam to marry the English, for they were fighting the Muslims in India. It was Haraam to marry the women of Eastern Europe as they were fighting the Khalif of the Ottomans in Albania, at the time he wrote the fatwa. He stated the same regarding the Palestinians marrying the Jewish Zionists, The french because of their wars in Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria as well as the Spanish for their wars against the Moroccans.
The Shaykh also forbade marriage to them if the children would be raised under their religion, or the possibility existed where such would be applied. He used the principle of “Sadd-Adh-Dhar’i” or stopping the means to a greater harm.
Ibn Al-Jawzi’s tafsir explains 5:5 as follows:
“And this ayah permits marrying the Kitaabiyah. It is reported from ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan that he married Naa’ilah bint Al-Firaafisah and she was a christian. Talhah ibn Ubaydullah married a Jewess. It is reported from Umar that he disliked that. There is disagreement regarding the Kitaabiyah that is at war with the Muslims. Ibn ‘Abbas said that it was not Halal. The majority (jumhur) disagree with him. Rather, they deem it makruh. The proof for those who forbade it is the verse of Mujaadilah that states:
‘You will not find a people who believe in Allah and the Last Day having affection for those who oppose Allah and His Messenger, even if they were their fathers or their sons or their brothers or their kindred.’ As marriage necessitates love.” [Zad Al-Masir]
Regarding the word “Muhsinaat” there are two issues that are dealt with by the scholars:
1) It is generally interpreted to mean the free women of the people of the Book. That is because the slaves were whores and prostitutes in the days of the Muslims. However, Abu Hanifah, as reported by Fakhr-ud-Din Ar-Raazi in his tafsir, stated that the meaning here is chastity not freedom. The Shaaf’iyyah disagree however, and state that it is not permitted to marry the slaves of the kitaabiyah (that they must be believers).
2) Al-’Afeefah العفيفة: Sexual chastity. Ibn Kathir states, “And the thaahir (apparent) intended meaning of this phrase is that it is a woman who is chaste from fornication (zinaa). Just as Allah the exalted has said in the Qur’an,
مُحْصَنَـٰت غَيْرَ مُسَـٰفِحَـٰتٍ وَلاَ مُتَّخِذَاتِ أَخْدَانٍ
“They should be [muhsinaat]chaste, not lustful, nor taking paramours” [Yusuf Ali Translation]
And May Allah bless our master Muhammad, his family, and followers. Amin!
9 Responses to “Is it Permissible to Marry a Woman From Ahlul Kitaab?”
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
- Response: Muslimah Marrying a Kafir, What is “Kufr” “Shirk” and “Iman” and the Tafsir of Verse 2:69: Seeking Ilm (Knowledge) - [...] To read more on this specific topic read the following article: http://seekingilm.com/archives/277 [...]
jazakallahu khair this was very beneficial
jazakallahu khair brother. Rarely we find infos on this matter. May Allah reward you for your efforts.
JazakAllah Khair, loved it.
So is it haram to marry christian/jewish women in the UK or USA as they are at war with Muslims in Iraq etc?
According to Ibn ‘Abbas, yes.
Bismillah
Wasn’t Imam Hasan al-Basri married to a Christian?
Also in this video Sh. Hamza comments that slave women used to walk around bare-breasted in the time of the Sahabas…and if that goes with what you said about them being prostitutes and whores (and the Quran permits marrying slaves) then what is the ruling for them? Or for the believing slaves?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SM-qUSVzmp8
Salam. Since Islam allows marriage with Christian and Jews, doesn’t this contradict:
Sahih Muslim, Book 008, Number 3457
“Abu Huraira (Allah be pleased with him) reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: A WOMAN may be married for four reasons: for her property, her status, her beauty and her religion, so TRY TO GET ONE WHO IS RELIGIOUS, may your hand be besmeared with dust.”
What do scholars say about this?
I would hold Sayyidina Umar’s stand on this matter, because our prophet Sayyidina Muhammad ever said about Sayyidina Umar:
“If there was a prophet after me then it would be Omar” Tarmidhi/Hakim/Ahmad.
How serious Sayyidina Umar on this issue – not only one but two tomes that he asked sahabi to divorce – as you can see from the quote:
Imam Al-Bayhaqi reports regarding this issue a narration from Abi Wa’il:
تزوج حذيفة رضي الله عنه يهودية فكتب إليه عمر رضي الله عنه أن يفارقها فقال: إن أخشى أن تدعوا المسلمات وتنكحوا المومسات .
Hudhayfah married a Jewish women and so ‘Umar wrote to him telling him to seperate from her. Also, it is reported by Abdur-Razzaq from ‘Aamir ibn Abdur-Rahman An-Nastaas that Talhah ibn ‘Ubaydullah married a noble from the Jewish women. So ‘Umar told him to divorce her.
The problem, from a fiqhi perspective, is the fatwa of Ibn Umar or Umar are not binding – but do represent a valid stance in the law and certainly their valid Ijtihad. Personally, especially within today’s environment, I would agree. But what these aathaar do support is the ruling of Makruh – not haraam. Azrul – could you please provide the isnaad for the athar from the Sunan of Imam Al-Bayhaqi.
was-salam
Salam,
yes they definitely proove that he cosidered it makruh and NOT haram, because otherwise there would be no need to divorce, since the contract (of marriage) would have been invalid to begin with, but the athar state, that he asked to sahabi to divorce, so…