بِسمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحمٰنِ الرَّحيمِ
يا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ لِمَ تُحَرِّمُ ما أَحَلَّ اللَّهُ لَكَ ۖ تَبتَغي مَرضاتَ أَزواجِكَ ۚ وَاللَّهُ غَفورٌ رَحيمٌ
O Prophet! Why do you prohibit [yourself] what Allah has made lawful for you, seeking to please your wives? And Allah is all-forgiving, all-merciful.
EXEGESIS
Taḥrīm (to prohibit) has the meaning of announcing that something is prohibited (ḥarām). Ḥarām is defined in legal terms as an evil thing that has been forbidden through proscription. In general, though, it can have several meanings. It can be something that is forbidden by making it unattainable through divine or mundane means. For example, when God caused the infant Prophet Moses (a) to refuse to be suckled by anyone but his own mother: We had forbidden him to be suckled by any nurse (28:12). This act of forbidding was not a legal one, but a causal one. Similarly, paradise has been made unattainable for the wicked: Indeed whoever ascribes partners to Allah, Allah shall forbid him [entry into] paradise (5:72).
Sometimes, the servants of God may forbid things to themselves that were not forbidden by God. For example, the polytheists would refuse to eat some animals: and there are cattle whose backs are forbidden (6:138), even though God had not commanded them to do so.
The Prophet of God is not comparable to regular people though, and his act of forbidding something makes it legally binding. In this verse, however, prohibit does not mean the Prophet forbade something as a legal proscription per his status as a prophet, but rather that he forbade it to himself through taking an oath. This is evidenced by the next verse that talks about expiating oaths. There was a precedent for that with Prophet Jacob (a) as in 3:93: All food was lawful to the Children of Israel except what Israel had forbidden himself before the Torah was sent down.
Aḥalla (made lawful) means made something permissible, or ḥalāl. Ḥalāl, in a legal sense, means the general good that has been allowed. Literally, ḥall means to undo a knot or a contract (ʿaqd). We read in the prayer of Prophet Moses (a): Remove (uḥlul) the knot from my tongue (20:27). Based on this, the usage is then generalised for removing the constraints and ties placed upon a person who is bound by a contract or oath. Hence, the verse means that the Prophet should not restrict himself from that which God has allowed him to enjoy in an unrestricted manner.
Ibtighāʾ (seeking to) means to strive to reach something.
EXPOSITION
The fact that the surah starts with the address O Prophet suggests that the matter is an important one that has to do with Prophet Muhammad’s (s) status as a prophet and it is a matter that concerns all the believers. This is why a seemingly private event is mentioned in the Quran for all believers to read for centuries to come. The details are not given because that is not important, but as the fourth verse of this chapter shows, God wishes to make it clear to those annoying the Prophet that if they did not desist there would be dire consequences.
This teaches an important lesson to all the believers about respecting Prophet Muhammad (s). It also teaches us how we should conduct ourselves in our family life, seeking to make the people we share our home with comfortable, rather than bothering and troubling them. This immediately introduces us to the central theme of the surah, namely the responsibilities a believer has towards his family, a continuation of the themes of the previous surah.
The verse informs us that the Holy Prophet had forbidden for himself something that God had allowed, and for this God reproves him. The verse does not explicate exactly what the Prophet forbade to himself, nor does it explain what exactly led him to do so (although the third verse most likely relates to this), only mentioning that he did it seeking to please his wives. God reproves him for this, saying that this decision was an unnecessary imposition on himself. He should not have sworn such an oath for the sake of pleasing his wives, and should not have constrained himself in such a manner. The fault, however, was theirs, and they should realise that, rather than he making concessions because of his gentle character.
This reprove does not mean that he had committed a sin, for a reprove can occur for doing anything which is contrary to the best recourse. It has also been argued that the verse is not a reprove at all, but rather an expression of sympathy and advice, similar to telling someone who is working hard: ‘Why do you work so hard? You should give yourself a rest.’
It should be noted that when the Prophet forbade something to himself, he was not acting in his official capacity as a Messenger of God. In fact, to truly forbid something that is allowed would be as objectionable as allowing something that is forbidden, which equates to disbelief (kufr); and to attribute something like that to an infallible is not possible. Rather, he swore an oath to avoid something to settle a dispute amongst his wives.
The lesson that may be derived is that gentleness can cause people to take advantage of another person, and sometimes the best solution is not to give in to their demands, but instead to assert one’s rights. Although in today’s self-centred societies the problem is often the contrary, people are quick to demand their own rights and less interested in taking the rights of others into consideration.
Another important lesson is that God has supreme authority when it comes to declaring things lawful or unlawful. We must be extremely wary of someone who claims to make the prohibited allowed, or the lawful forbidden.
The verse ends with the statement and Allah is all-forgiving, all-merciful, meaning that one should return to that which is better and more appropriate. God is forgiving and He will turn to the one that seeks to come to Him, and anyone that does so will come closer to the mercy of God.
INSIGHTS FROM HADITH
The surah has the exegetes and scholars divided as to the reason of its revelation and as to exactly what events the first five verses are referring. These can be divided roughly into two categories: the first category links the verses to the bonds-woman of the Prophet, Māriyah Qibṭiyyah, who was sent to him by the king of Egypt; the second category links it to a honeyed drink.
Hadiths relating to the first category include the following:
- From Imam al-Ṣādiq (a): ‘ʿĀʾishah and Ḥafṣah came upon the Prophet (s) and he was with Māriyah, and the Prophet (s) said: “By God, I will not come close to her,” so God commanded him to expiate his oath.’
Ṭūsī attributes a similar opinion to early commentators. They state that Ḥafṣah was simply jealous of Māriyah which led the Prophet to forbid her to himself to please Ḥafṣah, without adding any such details about events such as what is related in Tafsīr al-Qummī. He then adds that Hasan al-Baṣrī says Ḥafṣah told ʿĀʾishah about what the Prophet (s) had promised.
- Ṭabrisī narrates the same event, but with a different ending: ‘The Messenger of God (s) had divided his days amongst his wives. When it was the day of Ḥafṣah, she said to him: “O Messenger of God, I have something I need with my father; if you permit, I shall go visit him.” He permitted her. When she had left, the Messenger of God (s) sent for Māriyah Qibṭiyyah. She had been gifted to him by Muqawqis. He allowed her to enter Ḥafṣah’s house and then embraced her. Ḥafṣah came and noticed the door was locked and sat near the door. The Messenger of God (s) came out and his face was dripping with sweat. Ḥafṣah said: “You let me leave because of this? You brought your servant girl into my house, and then embraced her on my day and on my bed? Do you not think I have any respect (ḥurmah) or rights?” He (s) replied: “Is she not my bonds-woman? God has permitted that to me. But be silent, for it is forbidden to me [to approach her from now on]. I wish to placate you with that. Do not inform any one of those women about this. This is something I entrust to you.” When the Messenger of God (s) left, Ḥafṣah knocked on the wall that was between her and ʿĀʾishah, and said: “Should I not give you good news? The Messenger of God has forbidden to himself his bonds-woman Māriyah, and God has ridden us of her burden.” She then informed ʿĀʾishah of what she had seen.’
A similar report with only slight variation is also mentioned by al-Nasāʾī.
Ṭabrisī also reports the same with the roles of Ḥafṣah and ʿĀʾishah reversed.
This report suffers from many of the same flaws as the previous one. Also, it is not clear why ʿĀʾishah should be censured for her actions (and commanded by God in the Quran that she should repent as is related in verse 3), for merely being informed of something by Ḥafṣah.
Ṭūsī relates the same event but with less detail, saying that some have said that the Prophet relayed in secret to Ḥafṣah that he had been with Māriyah on the day that he was supposed to be with ʿĀʾishah and said that he had forbidden Māriyah to himself, but ʿĀʾishah then found out. Or, according to some reports, the roles of Ḥafṣah and ʿĀʾishah were reversed in the story. In any case, word about the event spread and then the verses were revealed.
Similar reports with some variations are mentioned in various other sources. Suyūṭī has collected the various reports, mostly shorter ones, that claim the same thing (that the verses were revealed about the Prophet forbidding Māriyah to himself).
Some of these variants claim that the secret the Prophet relayed to his wife was that first Abū Bakr and then ʿUmar would succeed him in the position of leadership of the Muslims. Other reports indicate that he confided that he would appoint Imam Ali (a) as his successor. However, Anṣārī argues that all of the narrations that talk about the secret relating to succession are weak in their chain and that they are all fabricated. Furthermore, if these narrations were true, it would be very strange indeed that no report has reached us that Abū Bakr or ʿUmar used this event as proof of their priority to rule, either in the events of Saqīfah or later.
Tabatabai points out another problem with this narration, arguing that the verse says the Prophet revealed some of the secret and kept some. If the secret was about forbidding Māriyah to himself, then what was the kept portion? As for the versions that say he talked about succession, Tabatabai argues it makes little sense. If he did say something like that, it is a social issue that he should have told everyone and not confided only to his wives.
Additionally, it makes no sense that the Prophet should react to an argument and this event by telling Ḥafṣah such a thing as the narration claims he did. Furthermore, there seems to be no good explanation as to why he should give such information out to one of his wives in such a situation except to appease her, which he had already done by forbidding Māriyah to himself. This portrays the Prophet in a very poor light, where he attempts to deflect blame from himself in the situation by offering this kind of information.
In fact, the narrations truly do the Prophet a disservice by portraying him as a husband that cares little for the feelings of his wife, who is hasty in swearing oaths, who foolishly hands out sensitive information to his wives to appease them, and in general is shown to be of very poor character.
All in all, the narrations in this category are so inconsistent, confusing, and in some cases contradictory that they cannot portray a clear picture of the event.
The second category of hadiths state that the Prophet drank some honeyed drink and his wives pretended in a conspiracy that it made his breath smell. As a result, the Prophet made an oath not to drink it anymore:
- Ṭūsī narrates on the authority of ʿAbd-Allāh ibn Shaddād: ‘The Prophet (s) used to drink a honeyed drink while with Zaynab that she used to make for him, so he used to spend a long time with her. This annoyed ʿĀʾishah and Ḥafṣah, so she said to him: “We smell maghāfīr on you.” So the Prophet (s) forbade drinking the honey that he used to drink with his wife, Zaynab bint Jaḥsh.’
This narration with some variations (some of which are mentioned below) is in many other sources as well.
The same opinion is attributed to Ibn Abbas and Hasan al-Baṣrī.
- Ṭabrisī mentions a more detailed version: ‘Ḥafṣah bint ʿUmar had been gifted a container of honey. When the Messenger of God (s) would come to her she would keep him and give him to drink from it. ʿĀʾishah used to resent him being kept with her, so she told Juwayriyah: “When the Messenger of God (s) comes to Ḥafṣah, go to her and see what she is doing.” She then informed her about the issue relating to the honey which made ʿĀʾishah jealous, and who then sent for her friends, and told them: “If the Messenger of God (s) comes to you he hates it and cannot stand it if he smells bad, because the angel comes to him.” The Messenger of God came to Sawdah, who said: “I did not want to say that to the Messenger of God (s), but I was scared of ʿĀʾishah, so I said: ‘O Messenger of God, what is this smell that I find upon you? Have you eaten maghāfīr?’ He said: ‘No, but Ḥafṣah gave me honey to drink.’” He then visited his wives who, one after another, told him the same. He then came to ʿĀʾishah and she grabbed her nose. He said to her: “What is with you?” She replied: “I smell maghāfīr. You have eaten it, O Messenger of God.” He said: “No, rather Ḥafṣah has given me honey to drink.” She said: “Its bees must have gotten this honey from the tree of ʿarfaṭ.” He said: “By God I will never eat it again.” He then forbade it to himself.’
Approximately the same event has been mentioned in many other sources as well, with some of the characters in different roles. Ṭabrisī mentions that according to some reports it was Umm Salamah that was giving the Prophet honey, and according to others it was Zaynab bint Jaḥsh. Ḥafṣah and ʿĀʾishah then agreed amongst each other that they should tell the Prophet his breath smells. According to some other reports it was Ḥafṣah who gave the Prophet honey, and it was Sawdah or Ṣafiyyah who told the Prophet about his breath.
It is unclear in this category of narrations what the secret being divulged by the Prophet is. It has been suggested that the secret was the Prophet asking his wife not to tell anyone that he had forbidden the honey to himself, either because he feared it would upset Zaynab, or that people should be confused as to why the Prophet forbade something to himself, or that people should similarly forbid things to themselves.
Like the first category, the narrations in this second category also suffer from many problems. Firstly, one would immediately question if such an event truly warranted a whole chapter of the Quran, and would it warrant the Prophet to withdraw from his wives for a month? Would it warrant the threat of divorce from God? Would it warrant the promise of God that He, the pious believer, Gabriel, and the angels would all come to the aid of the Prophet?
Secondly, would the Prophet truly be so upset about this situation that he would swear an oath by God to forbid something to himself so quickly and readily? Even a regular, pious Muslim is careful not to swear an oath about something trivial.
Thirdly, as we pointed out earlier, this story has many gaps in it, and aside from logical flaws, it does not properly explain what this refers to: When the Prophet confided to one of his wives a matter, but when she divulged it, and Allah apprised him about it, he announced [to her] part of it and disregarded part of it (verse 3). In some versions it is mentioned that he tells his wife not to tell Zaynab that he had forbidden the honey to himself, but this makes little sense with the verses. In that case, nevertheless, the question remains: what was the part that he kept to himself?
What is most likely is that the true details of the event that unfolded were more than the narrations of the second category would suggest.
According to some reports, the Prophet then divorced Ḥafṣah as a consequence of her actions, but then by the command of God took her back during her waiting period. However, most reports indicate that he only intended or considered to divorce Ḥafṣah but did not actually divorce her. In any case, the Prophet withdrew from all of his wives for twenty-nine days until the surah was revealed.
So what actually happened that prompted the revelation of these verses? What is clear is that reports of the first and second category contradict one another and are thus mutually exclusive. What is also clear is that the verses themselves do not give much indication as to what happened. They simply state that the Prophet forbade to himself something that was permitted to him by God, and that thing was somehow displeasing to his wives. There was also some secret that was partially divulged, which the wife to whom it was divulged did not manage to keep.
Rationally, we know that if people do not know the details of some event they will quickly begin circulating rumours about it. We also know that vile rumours about the Prophet and his family were unfortunately not something unheard of in the Muslim community in Medina. As both categories of reports are widely reported, reason dictates that at least one of the two versions of events should be based on rumours circulating at the time. Especially if, as some of the narrations indicate, the Prophet divorced his wife or withdrew from all of them, it would have sparked an immense amount of rumour in Medina. People would have immediately started speculating about what had happened that could have caused such disagreements, and speculation upon events would have certainly commenced.
It may help us to better understand what was going on in Medina by pointing out one final narration about the events that does not fit into either of the previous categories. It is reported in various sources, including Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī from Ibn Abbas, as follows:
‘I was still looking for a chance to ask ʿUmar – may God be pleased with him – about the two women from amongst the wives of the Prophet (s) about whom God had said, If the two of you repent to Allah, for your hearts have certainly swerved [verse 4]. So [it was that] I was performing pilgrimage with him and he veered away from the path and I veered with him towards the watering place. He went to see to his needs until he then returned, so I poured water on his hands with the watering jug, and he then performed ablutions. I then said: “O commander of the faithful, who were the two women amongst the wives of the Prophet (s) to whom it was said, If the two of you repent to Allah?” He said: “This is surprising coming from you, O Ibn Abbas. It was Ḥafṣah and ʿĀʾishah.”
‘He then began to recount the events to me, saying: “I used to have a neighbour from the Anṣār amongst the Banī Umayyah ibn Zayd, and they were a Medinan family. We used to take turns with regards to the revelation the Prophet (s) would receive. He would go [to the Prophet] one day, and I would go on another day. When it was my turn to go, I would take the news to him about that day regarding revelation and other matters, and he would do likewise when he would go [to the Prophet]. We, the Quraysh, used to govern our women, but when we came to the Anṣār, lo they were a people governed by their women! So it was that our women began to take influence from the behaviour of the women of the Anṣār. [One day] I yelled at my wife and she talked back to me and it displeased me that she talked back to me. She said: ‘Why should you be upset that I talked back to you? By God, the wives of the Prophet (s) talk back to him. One of them has withdrawn from him today until the night.’ This shocked me, so I said: ‘Whoever from amongst them has done so has truly failed!’ I then straightened my dress and went to Ḥafṣah and said to her: ‘Has one of you women angered the Messenger of God (s), today until the night?’ She said: ‘Yes.’ I said: ‘You have failed and lost! How can you be safe whilst God is angered when His Messenger (s) is angered? You will be destroyed. Don’t be overbearing with the Messenger of God (s), and don’t talk back to him in any issue, and don’t withdraw from him. Ask me whatever you want. Also, don’t get jealous if your neighbour is closer or more beloved to the Messenger of God (s) (he intended ʿĀʾishah).’ I used to talk [with my neighbour with whom I had the arrangement] that [the tribe of] Ghassān were shodding their horses in order to attack us. So it was that my neighbour went [to the Prophet] on the day that it was his turn and returned at night knocking on my door, frantically. He said: ‘Is he sleeping?’ I was surprised and I came out to him, and he said: ‘Something grave has occurred!’ I said: ‘What is it? Has Ghassān come?’ He said: ‘No, something worse and more far-reaching than that! The Messenger of God (s) has divorced his women!’ I said: ‘Ḥafṣah has failed and lost!’ I had always thought it probable this would happen [that the Prophet would divorce Ḥafṣah]. So I gathered my garment and prayed the dawn prayer with the Prophet (s). He then went to the garden [which was the residing place of Māriyah] and withdrew to there. So I went to Ḥafṣah and found her crying. I said: ‘Why are you crying? Did I not warn you …? Did the Messenger of God (s) divorce you?’ She said: ‘I don’t know. He is in the garden.’ I then left and came to the pulpit and saw a group of people around it, some of them crying. I sat with them for a while, [but my emotions about] the issue overcame me, so I went to the garden in which he was. I said to his black servant boy: ‘Ask permission for ʿUmar [to enter].’ He then went in and talked to the Prophet (s) and then came out and said: ‘I mentioned you, but he was quiet, so I left.’ So I went to the side and sat with the group of people by the pulpit. [But again my emotions about] the issue overcame me, so I went and he said the same thing. So I sat with the group of people by the pulpit, [but my emotions about] the issue overcame me, so I came to the boy and said: ‘Ask permission for ʿUmar [to enter].’ He then said the same thing, but as I turned away to leave, lo the boy called out to me, saying: ‘The Messenger of God (s) has permitted you [to enter].’ I then went to him and saw him leaning on a straw cushion without any carpet between him and it. The straws had left marks on his side with which he had been leaning, due to the harshness of the fibre stuffing. I then greeted him and said whilst standing: ‘You have divorced your women?’ He lifted his gaze to me and said: ‘No.’ I then said whilst still standing: ‘Be kind, O Messenger of God. If you had seen me [back then], we the Quraysh used to govern our women, but now we have come to a people governed by their women.’ I mentioned it and the Prophet (s) smiled. Then I said: ‘If you had seen me when I came to Ḥafṣah and told her: “Don’t get jealous if your neighbour is closer or more beloved to the Messenger of God (s) (he meant ʿĀʾishah).’ He then smiled again. Seeing him smiling, I sat down next to him and looked around at his house, and by God I did not see anything in his house worth looking at except three tanned animal hides. I said: ‘Pray to God that he increases your nation in sustenance. Verily the Persians and the Romans have been increased in these things and have been given from the worldly goods and they don’t even worship God.’ He was leaning as he said: ‘Are you having doubts, O son of Khaṭṭāb? They are people for whom the bestowal of goodly things has been hastened for this world.’ I said: ‘O Messenger of God, seek forgiveness for me!’”’
The hadith then continues, but the rest does not relate directly to our discussion here.
This narration is significant and can be used to fill many gaps in the story and can help us understand why rumours began to circulate. But first, allow us to alleviate some concerns that have been raised regarding it. Tabatabai argues that this narration is not satisfactory for the following reasons:
- It seems to indicate that the Prophet forbade all his wives to himself, whilst the verse clearly states that the Prophet had forbidden something to himself in order to please his wives.
- It does not mention what the secret was.
- It does not indicate why only two of the Prophet’s wives should repent for their actions.
However, perhaps the most important detail the narration mentions is about the Prophet withdrawing to the house of Māriyah. It would explain why the rumours began to circulate about Māriyah (that were described in the first category of narrations). Furthermore, the hadith confirms our theory about rumours. It explicitly mentions that by the time news reached ʿUmar, rumours were already circulating about the Prophet divorcing his wives. It is ʿUmar’s neighbour who informs him of the situation. At the mosque, people are sitting and crying by the Prophet’s pulpit.
The hadith also confirms that it was the actions of Ḥafṣah and ʿĀʾishah that upset the Prophet and which prompted the verses to be revealed, whilst still affirming that the Prophet withdrew from all his wives.
The hadith is also interesting in that ʿUmar actually reveals nothing to Ibn Abbas about what had caused the argument, neither when he describes his conversation with Ḥafṣah, nor when he describes his conversation with the Prophet. The hadith is otherwise long and detailed, where he talks about his conversations with his wife, and daughter, and neighbour, but then omits critical details of the actual event. It is highly unlikely that after ʿUmar had heard news that had set the town of Medina ablaze with rumour (and it was considered a bigger event than an attack on Medina) and he finds out that his own daughter is at the centre of it, but when he goes to visit her to talk about it, he would then make no attempt to find out what had actually happened. He already established himself earlier in the hadith that he cares about his daughter’s marriage to the Prophet and was invested in her life and in advising her. When he then comes to her, would he not ask his own daughter what she did to cause the Prophet to be upset? Similarly, when he relates his conversation with the Prophet, he purposefully deflects it to some general talk they had about his furniture. ʿUmar himself says he could not contain himself and repeatedly insisted to see the Prophet despite the Prophet turning him away indirectly. When he then finally gets to see the Prophet, would he not talk about the actual issue at hand?
In both cases, he apparently quite purposefully glosses over those details, although he readily admits to Ibn Abbas that it was his daughter who was one of the two who had upset the Prophet. Yet he apparently does not want to share what the argument was actually about. This is a significant point, because if this final narration is true, it shows that ʿUmar, as Ḥafṣah’s father, perhaps had some idea about what had happened, probably having asked his daughter about it when he went to talk to her and saw her crying, but was not willing to share that information with Ibn Abbas, most likely because it was a private matter relating to the life of the Prophet that should not have been shared with anyone. For more on this, see verse 3.
In the end, the final hadith feels very much like a genuine conversation that would have taken place between Ibn Abbas and ʿUmar, unlike the traditions in the first and second categories, which are very difficult to accept and believe.
In conclusion, we earlier pointed out that the two stories are mutually exclusive and that at least one must be untrue, however, what seems more correct is that they are both in fact untrue and that we do not know the actual details of the events that prompted the revelation of Sūrat al-Taḥrīm. The situation was certainly severe enough to warrant the harsh reprimands of the surah and the revelation of Quranic verses, and perhaps exactly because of that the parties involved did not wish to let the details be known to anyone outside those involved. What seems to be unanimous amongst the narrations is that it somehow involved Ḥafṣah and ʿĀʾishah doing something to upset the Prophet. What they did exactly to upset the Prophet we do not know, but the best indication is given in the third verse of the surah, where God tells us that the Prophet confided a secret to one of his wives and that she betrayed that trust by imparting that information to others.
In any case, even without the details, the verses still impart an important lesson about family life and conduct, about piety and relationships, and about the important role that anyone who is closely associated to the Prophet has in trying to be exemplary in their behaviour.
- Zurārah narrates from Imam al-Bāqir (a): ‘I asked him concerning a man who says to his wife: “You are forbidden to me.” He told me: “If I had power over him I would strike his head, and would have told him: ‘God has permitted her to you, then what has made her forbidden to you?’ He has not gained anything except a lie, thinking that what God has allowed is forbidden, nor has he divorced, nor is he responsible for expiation (kaffārah).” I said: “And what about the word of God, exalted and glorious: O Prophet! Why do you prohibit what Allah has made lawful for you, did He not obligate an expiation in it?” He replied: “He merely forbade to himself his servant girl Māriyah, and swore not to approach her. The expiation was made obligatory for the sake of the oath and not because of the prohibition.”’
- Zurārah narrates from Imam al-Bāqir (a): ‘I asked him: “What do you say about a man who says to his wife: ‘You are forbidden to me?’ We narrate in Iraq that Ali (a) considered it three [divorces].” He said: “They have lied; he did not consider it a divorce and if I had any power over him I would have struck his head. Then I would have told him that God – exalted and glorious – has permitted her to you, then what has made her forbidden to you? You have not gained anything except that you lied and said to a thing that God has permitted to you that it is forbidden.”’
There is also a relevant narration from the Prophet himself. He was known for his gentle character towards all, especially his wives.
- The Holy Prophet: ‘The best of you is the best with regards to his women, and I am the best of you with regards to my women.’
Note: As we mentioned earlier, it was this gentleness that sometimes caused others to try and take advantage of him.
REVIEW OF TAFSĪR LITERATURE
Ibn Abī Ḥātim narrates from Ibn Abbas that this verse was revealed about ‘the woman who gave herself to the Prophet’. This event is referred to in the verse, O Prophet! Indeed We have made lawful to you your wives whom you have given their dowries … and a faithful woman if she offers herself to the Prophet and the Prophet desires to take her in marriage, a privilege exclusively for you, not for [the rest of] the faithful (33:50).
Ibn Kathīr considers this report extremely isolated (gharīb).
Tabatabai notes that the expression nabī (Prophet) is used in the verse, instead of rasūl (Messenger) to indicate that his act of forbidding something was not done in his capacity as Messenger, but rather as an individual. This, Tabatabai argues, is evidence that the matter was a personal one.
Rāzī relates the argument of al-Jurjānī, the author of al-Naẓm that the Prophet is actually being reprimanded in the verse by God, and that a reprimand from God equates some form of proscription regarding that action. The reprimand here according to him is that ‘prohibiting something lawful is a disliked (makrūh) action, and the lawful is not made unlawful except by the proscription of God’. However, Rāzī himself points out the Prophet was not prohibiting something per se, but rather swore an oath not to engage in that action. This is very different from the action described in Sūrat al-Naḥl: Do not say, asserting falsely with your tongues, ‘This is lawful, and this is unlawful’, to fabricate lies against Allah (16:116), which is more akin to what Rāzī relates, and should not be considered merely disliked, but rather outrightly forbidden. Hence, the sentence should not and need not be understood as a reprimand, but rather, as we argued, pointing out a better course of action.
Ṭabarī says the following regarding the final portion of the verse, And Allah is all-forgiving, all-merciful: ‘God is forgiving, O Muhammad, with regards to the sins of those who repent from amongst His servants for their sins. He has forgiven you prohibiting to yourself what God has made permissible. He is merciful to His servants, forgoing punishing them after they have repented from their sins.’ This view is highly problematic as it would ascribe sin to the Prophet, especially since, as we already argued, there is no real grounds for viewing the Prophet’s prohibiting of something as a sinful act.
On the other hand, Tabatabai and others argue that the final sentence is in fact more likely addressed to the wives of the Prophet, since before it mention is made of the Prophet seeking to please his wives and later we read that God commands them they should repent (verse 3). Faḍl-Allāh argues that it means that God is forgiving to those who stray into the forbidden, whether that thing has been forbidden to them by God, or by themselves.
INSIGHTS FROM OTHER TRADITIONS
- And Shechaniah the son of Jehiel, one of the sons of Elam, answered and said unto Ezra, We have trespassed against our God, and have taken strange wives of the people of the land: yet now there is hope in Israel concerning this thing. Now therefore let us make a covenant with our God to put away all the wives, and such as are born of them, according to the counsel of my lord, and of those that tremble at the commandment of our God; and let it be done according to the law.
[1] Tibyan, 10/45. [2] Raghib, pp. 229-230. [3] Tibyan, 10/45. [4] Raghib, pp. 251-252. [5] Tantawi, 14/468. [6] See verse 33:53. [7] Tibyan, 10/44. [8] Nemuneh, 24/273; Fadlallah, 22/308. [9] Alusi, 14/343 [10] Tibyan, 10/46. [11] Qummi, 2/375. [12] Tibyan, 10/44-45. [13] Muqawqis was a ruler of Egypt at the time of Prophet Muhammad (s), and one of the rulers to whom the Prophet wrote letters, inviting them to Islam. [14] His other wives. [15] Tabrisi, 10/471-472. [16] Nasai, 7/353. [17] Tabrisi, 10/471-472. [18] Tibyan, 10/46; see also Suyuti, 6/239. [19] Tabari, 28/100-102; Zamakhshari, 4/563; Nasai, 7/353; Ibn Sad, 8/185-187; Haythami, 5/178; Tabarani, 12/91-92; Ibn Asakir, 44/234-235. [20] Suyuti, 6/239-240. The reports are varied and through different chains and from different sources, including: al-Nasāʾī, al-Ḥākim, Ibn Mardawayh, al-Tirmidhī, Ṭabarānī, Ṭabarī, Ibn al-Mundhir, Ibn Saʿd, and ʿAbd al-Razzāq. Suyūṭī considers many of these reports authentic. [21] Tibyan, 10/46; Qurtubi, 18/186. [22] Tibyan, 10/46. [23] Anṣārī, Muʿjam al-Rijāl wa al-Ḥadīth, 1/11. [24] Mizan, 19/568. [25] Mizan, 19/569. [26] Maghāfīr is the hardened sap of ʿarfaṭ, or the vachellia oerfota tree, a tree native to the Middle East. The gum resin extracted from it is somewhat similar to the more well-known gum arabic derived from acacia trees. [27] Tibyan, 10/45. [28] See for example Bukhari, 6/68-69, 6/167, 7/232, 8/64; Ahmad, 6/221; Muslim, 4/184-185; Abu Dawud, 2/192; Nasai, 7/13, 7/71; Suyuti, 6/239. [29] Tibyan, 10/45. [30] Vachellia oerfota. [31] Tabrisi, 10/471. [32] See for example Suyuti, 6/239; Ahmad 6/221; Bukhari 6/68-69, 6/167, 7/232; Muslim, 4/184-185; Abu Dawud, 2/191-192; Nasai, 6/151-152. [33] Tabrisi, 10/471; such variants are also mentioned in Suyuti, 6/239. [34] Tantawi, 14/467. [35] Nemuneh, 24/271-272. [36] Tibyan, 10/47; Razi, 30/568. Some have narrated the following tradition with regards to that: ‘ʿUmar said to her [Ḥafṣah]: “Had there been any good in the family of Khaṭṭāb he would not have divorced you.” So Gabriel (a) descended and said: “Take her back, for she fasts during the day and stands in prayer during the night, and is of your wives in paradise.”’ (See Mustadrak.S, 4/15; Haythami, 9/244. Haythami criticises most of the variations of this report for having weak chains. This narration is probably of sectarian origin and is meant to try and alleviate the damage done to the reputation of Ḥafṣah in this surah – and to some people’s minds via extension to her father – by portraying her and him in a positive light. What is most likely true is that the Prophet did not divorce any of his wives, but simply withdrew from them. [37] Razi, 30/568; Haythami, 9/244. [38] Tabrisi, 10/472; Razi, 30/568; Bukhari, 2/229, 7/230; Muslim, 3/125, 4/190-191. This is often quoted in the sources as proof that a month can be twenty-nine days, as the Prophet is claimed to have promised to withdraw from them for a month, and then when asked he replied that ‘a month can be twenty-nine days’. [39] Alusi (14/346) has tried to assert that it could be possible to combine the two, although his attempt makes little sense. [40] See for example verse 24:11, or the various narrations about how Imam Ali (a) was given the title Abū Turāb, or some of the unfortunate narrations about how the Prophet came to marry Zaynab bint Jaḥsh. [41] According to some reports the rumours were running so wild about the events that ʿUmar went to stand at the door of the Masjid al-Nabī and shouted in his loudest voice: ‘The Messenger of God (s) did not divorce his wives!’ (Muslim, 4/188-189). [42] Because Ibn Abbas was famed for his knowledge of the Quran, ʿUmar seems taken aback that he does not know. However, the fact that Ibn Abbas had long planned to ask ʿUmar is clear indication he was aware it involved ʿUmar’s daughter Ḥafṣah. [43] Bukhari, 3/133-135. A somewhat similar narration is found in Muslim, 4/188-190. It is too long to also recount here, however it has some significant differences in the details and does not seem to be as authentic a transmission as the one in Bukhari. The reader may refer to it themselves in the chapter of withdrawing from women in Muslim. [44] Mizan, 19/571-572. [45] It should be pointed out that the chain of this hadith includes the problematic Sahl ibn Ziyād. [46] Kafi, 6/134-135; Tahdhib, 8/41; Faqih, 3/549. [47] Kafi, 6/135. [48] Faqih, 3/443; Wasail, 20/171; a similar narration is also in Suyūṭī, al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaghīr, 1/632; Kanz, 16/371; Alusi, 14/347. [49] Ibn Abi Hatim, 10/3362. He himself mentions that it is reported through a weak chain but does not provide the chain. [50] Ibn Kathir, 4/413. Gharīb is a technical term meaning that this report has only come through one narrator. [51] Mizan, 19/552-553. [52] Abū al-Hasan ibn Yaḥyā al-Jurjānī. [53] Razi, 30/568-569. Qurtubi, 18/185, describes it as tark awlā, or abandoning the optimal decision to a given problem. [54] Tabari, 28/103. [55] Mizan, 19/330; Nemuneh, 24/274. [56] Fadlallah, 22/308. [57] Ezra 10:2-3.