Tafsir of An-Nur 24:3

(The adulterer does not marry except an adulteress or an idolatress): This is a disparagement of the adulterer’s status, in the strongest possible terms. It explains that once he has consented to adultery, it is not fitting for him to marry a chaste, believing woman; for they are as far apart as the star Suhayl and the Pleiades—you see the latter in the northern sky when it rises, while you see the former in the southern sky when it rises. It is only fitting for him to marry an adulteress, for she is his match, as the saying goes: "A pot finds its lid," or an idolatress, who is in a worse state and of more repulsive deeds than he.

(Does not marry): This is a declarative sentence intended to mean "it is not fitting for him to marry," similar to when you say, "The Sultan does not lie," meaning it is not befitting for him to lie. The action’s fitness (or lack thereof) is placed in the position of the act itself, which is common in speech. Furthermore, the intent is fitness and lack thereof in terms of the state of adultery; thus, it contains the disparagement of adultery that it does.

This does not invalidate the marriage of a Muslim adulterer to a Muslim adulteress, or to a chaste Muslim woman, nor does it invalidate the marriage of an adulterer to an idolatress mentioned in the verse (if interpreted as a polytheist) by consensus. This is because the issue is not one of "fitness or lack thereof" in terms of adultery itself, but rather in terms of another consideration known to the Lawgiver, as is not hidden. On this pattern is the Almighty’s saying: (And the adulteress—none marries her except an adulterer or an idolater). That is, the adulteress, after she has consented to adultery and the "dog" of the adulterer’s lust has lapped at her, it is not fitting—insofar as she is such—that she be married except by one who is her equal, namely the adulterer, or one worse in state than she, namely the idolater. As for the chaste Muslim, the severity of his sense of honor refuses to enter her watering hole; "The lions avoid the water source if the dogs have lapped from it." This does not invalidate the validity of his marriage to her, nor the invalidity of the idolater’s marriage—whether interpreted as a polytheist or a person of the Book—such that it would require an answer, for the matter is manifest.

The reference in His saying, Exalted is He, (And that is forbidden to the believers):

(It is possible that 'that' refers to the adultery understood from what preceded, and the prohibition upon the believers is apparent, and likewise for the believers). Perhaps this clause, and the one preceding it, contains the justification for the preceding command and prohibition. For this reason, His saying, Exalted is He, (The adulterer does not marry...), was not conjoined to it, unlike how He conjoined the later saying, (And those who accuse chaste women...). The fact that what preceded implies prohibition is clear. Restricting the prohibition to the believers, according to the opinion of those who hold that disbelievers are not obligated to fulfill the branches (of the Law), is clear. As for those who hold they are obligated, as they are to the foundations (of faith), even if those acts are not valid from them except after faith, then the restriction to them (the believers) is to honor them.

It is also possible that "that" refers to marrying the adulteress. On that interpretation, the prohibition means prevention, and "the believers" refers to the perfect believers. The meaning of preventing them from marrying adulteresses is to make their souls refuse to incline toward them, so it is not fitting for them. This does not prevent interpreting the verse according to the reason for its revelation as reported by Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi (who classified it as hasan), al-Hakim (who authenticated it), al-Bayhaqi, Ibn al-Mundhir, and others, from ‘Amr ibn Shu‘ayb, from his father, from his grandfather, who said: "There was a man named Marthad who used to carry prisoners from Mecca until he brought them to Medina. There was a prostitute in Mecca named ‘Anaq, and she was a friend of his. He had promised a man from the prisoners of Mecca to carry him. I came until I reached the shade of a wall in Mecca on a moonlit night. ‘Anaq came and saw the shadow of a figure under the wall. When she reached me, she recognized me and said: 'Marthad?' I said: 'Marthad.' She said: 'Welcome, come, spend the night with us.' I said: 'O ‘Anaq, Allah has forbidden adultery.' She cried out: 'O people of the tents! This man is carrying your prisoners!' Eight men followed me, and I took the path of the Khandama until I reached a cavern or cave. I entered it, and they came and stood over my head. They urinated over my head, and Allah blinded them from me. Then they returned, and I returned to my companion, carried him until I arrived in Medina, and came to the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him. I said: 'O Messenger of Allah, may I marry ‘Anaq?' He stayed silent and did not respond to me, until there was revealed: (The adulterer does not marry except an adulteress or an idolatress...). Then the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said: 'O Marthad! (The adulterer does not marry except an adulteress or an idolatress, and the adulteress—none marries her except an adulterer or an idolater, and that is forbidden to the believers). Do not marry her.'"

The derivation of the prohibition in this report from the marriage to that prostitute is something whose correctness is beyond doubt, on the assumption that the verse from which it is derived serves to disparage the state of the adulterer and adulteress. It is as if it were said: "When you have known the state of the adulteress, and that she has reached such a level of corruption that none should marry her except one like her or one worse, then do not marry her." Yes, this report is more consistent with making the reference in what preceded the marriage of the adulteress, and from it, one learns the reason for prioritizing "(The adulterer...)" and informing about the adulteress that none marries her except an adulterer or idolater, contrary to what the usual correspondence would dictate.

Scholars have much to say regarding this sublime verse. It is not amiss to transmit what is possible and state some of what has been said, then look into it and what we have presented, and choose for yourself what you find pleasing. I say: It is narrated from al-Dahhak and al-Qaffal, and al-Naysaburi said that it is the best of the viewpoints on the verse, that His saying, Exalted is He, (The adulterer does not marry...), is a ruling established on the usual custom, brought to deter believers from marrying adulteresses after deterring them from adultery. This is because the corrupt, wicked person who habitually commits adultery and prostitution does not generally desire to marry righteous women who are contrary to his traits; he only desires a corrupt, wicked woman of his type, or an idolatress. And the corrupt, wicked, prostitute woman similarly does not desire to marry righteous men; they are repelled by her, and she only desires one who is of her type among the corrupt or idolaters. A parallel to this speech is "None does good except the pious," for it is based on the general case.

The meaning of the prohibition upon the believers, according to this view, is said to be tanzih (dislike/discouragement), expressed as a prohibition for emphasis. The reasoning for this is that marrying adulteresses involves imitating the corrupt, exposing oneself to suspicion, and causing slander and insults regarding lineage, along with many other corruptions. Others said the prohibition is literal, and the act involves forbidden things; the prohibition does not return to the contract itself such that it would be void. According to both opinions, the verse is muhkam (firm/established).

It is not hidden that interpreting the adulterer and the adulteress as those who habitually commit these acts is not free from distance, for they did not carry this meaning in what preceded. Also, it is difficult to accept that the general case is that those who habitually commit adultery do not desire chaste women, or that they desire adulteresses or idolatresses; we have often witnessed that many adulterers are more particular in marriage than others, so that one of them would not marry someone whose relatives have a suspicion of adultery, let alone the woman herself. Furthermore, we rarely hear of an adulterer desiring to marry an adulteress or an idolatress. Likewise, interpreting the prohibition as tanzih has a degree of distance, as does interpreting it literally while committing to the idea that the prohibition does not return to the contract itself.

In al-Bahr, it is narrated from Ibn ‘Umar, Ibn ‘Abbas, and his companions that the verse is about specific people who used to commit adultery in their Jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic) days with well-known prostitutes. When Islam came and they accepted it, they could not commit adultery, so they wanted, due to their poverty, to marry those women, since it was their custom to spend on those who married them. So the verse was revealed for that. The reference by "the adulterer" is to one of those people, applying the name of the adultery that existed in Jahiliyyah as a rebuke. The meaning of (does not marry except an adulteress or an idolatress) is "he does not desire to marry except an adulteress or an idolatress," meaning his soul does not incline except to these base people due to his lack of self-control. The reference there is to the marriage of those prostitutes, and the prohibition is literal. An objection to this is that there is consensus that an adulteress is not permitted to be married by an idolater.

You know that this does not stand after interpreting the negation of marriage as the negation of the desire to marry; for the meaning would then be: "The adulteress does not desire to be married except by an adulterer or an idolater," and there is nothing in the consensus that rejects this.

You also know that the idea that "the adulterer" is a reference to one of those people—and they are among the Emigrants, may Allah be pleased with them all—as mentioned in many reports, is open to doubt, for it is very far-fetched that Allah the Almighty would label a Companion—who had committed adultery before his Islam and then became Muslim and repented, departing from his sins like the day his mother bore him—with this shameful description, which the Blessed and Exalted has forgiven, merely because he inclined to marry an adulteress due to the poverty he was in, before knowing of the prohibition, especially since they were determined to separate from those they were marrying if they found means of sustenance other than them.

Ibn Abi Hatim reported from Muqatil: "When the Emigrants came to Medina, they came in great hardship, except a few of them, and Medina had high prices and severe hardship. In the market were adulteresses, clearly known as such, from the People of the Book and slave girls of some of the Ansar. Each woman had placed a sign on her door to be known as an adulteress, and they were among the most prosperous people of Medina and had the most wealth. Some of the Muslim Emigrants desired what they earned because of the hardship they were in. Some suggested to others: 'If we were to marry some of these adulteresses, we would gain from the surplus of what they earn.' Some said: 'Let us ask the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him.' They came to him and said: 'O Messenger of Allah, the hardship has burdened us, and we find nothing to eat. In the market are prostitutes, women of the People of the Book and their slave girls, and slave girls of the Ansar, who earn for themselves. Is it permissible for us to marry them, so we may gain from the surplus of what they earn, and if we find wealth beyond them, we will leave them?' Then Allah the Almighty revealed the verse."

Furthermore, applying "the adulterer" to him in this sense does not align with applying "the adulteress" to one of those women who hoisted banners, nor does it align with applying "the adulterer" to one to whom it is applied in His saying: (The adulteress and the adulterer—lash each...) etc.

Abu Muslim and Abu Hayyan—and it was reported by Abu Dawud in his Nasikh (Abrogating/Abrogated), al-Bayhaqi in his Sunan, al-Diya in al-Mukhtara, and a group via Ibn Jubayr from Ibn ‘Abbas—said that "marriage" (nikah) means intercourse, i.e., adultery, and "(that)" is a reference to it. The meaning is: "The adulterer does not have intercourse during the time of his adultery except with an adulteress among the Muslims or one even lower than her, an idolatress, and the adulteress is not approached during her adultery except by an adulterer among the Muslims or one even lower than him, an idolater. And Allah the Almighty forbade adultery to the believers."

This was objected to on the grounds that nikah is not known in the Book of Allah except to mean marriage, and that it leads to saying: "The adulterer does not commit adultery except with an adulteress, and the adulteress does not commit adultery except with an adulterer," which is not true, for an adulterer may commit adultery with a non-adulteress—where one knows of the adultery and the other is ignorant of it, thinking it is lawful. If he claims that this is an informational statement meant to reflect the general case, it would be stating the obvious. If the negation is interpreted as a prohibition, the meaning would be forbidding the adulterer from adultery except with an adulteress and vice-versa, which is visibly corrupt.

It was answered regarding the first objection that most scholars hold that nikah in His saying: (Until she marries another husband) means intercourse, not the contract, and they refuted those who interpreted it as the contract and claimed that a woman divorced three times becomes lawful for her first husband by the second contracting with her, without intercourse. Regarding the second, it is an informational statement intended to reflect the general case, meant to stigmatize the act of adultery, and that is why the idolatress was added. The objection regarding "stating the obvious" is of no consequence.

The learned Sari al-Din al-Misri has a long discussion on this. As for what is said—that it would then be like His saying: (Corrupt women are for corrupt men...), thus resulting in repetition—you will know, if Allah wills, that this only holds for one opinion. It is said that nikah means marriage and the negation means prohibition, used for emphasis, supported by the recitation of ‘Amr ibn ‘Ubayd: "(does not marry)" with a jazm (jussive). The prohibition is taken literally.

Ibn al-Musayyib said: "The ruling was general for adulterers, that none of them marry except an adulteress. Then came the concession, and that was abrogated by His saying: (And marry the unmarried among you), and His saying: (Then marry such of the women as please you)." This view of abrogation is also narrated from Mujahid, and it is the view favored by Imam al-Shafi‘i. He said in al-Umm: "Interpreters have differed in His saying: (The adulterer does not marry except an adulteress...), etc., in a divergent way. It is said: It is general, but it has been abrogated. We were informed by Sufyan, from Yahya, from Sa‘id ibn al-Musayyib, that he said: 'It is abrogated; it was abrogated by (And marry the unmarried among you).' So she—the adulteress—is among the unmarried Muslims, as Ibn al-Musayyib said, if Allah wills. We have proofs from the Book and the Sunnah regarding the corruption of anything other than this statement."

This was transmitted from Imam al-Shafi‘i by al-Biqa‘i, then he said: "Shafi‘i did not mean that this ruling was abrogated by the verse of the unmarried alone, but rather with what was joined to it of consensus and other verses and hadiths, such that its indication regarding what it covered became certain, like the indication of the specific on what it covers. Thus, it is not said that he contradicted his principle that the specific is not abrogated by the general; rather, the later general is interpreted in light of the specific because what it covers is certain and what the general covers is probabilistic."

Al-Jubba'i claims that the abrogation is by consensus, meaning that it is an indicator of an abrogator; otherwise, consensus itself cannot be an abrogator, as explained in the science of Usul. Yes, there is debate regarding the realization of consensus here. This view was objected to on the grounds that it necessitates the lawfulness of an idolater's marriage to a Muslim woman. I say: The marriage of an unbeliever to a Muslim woman was lawful before the Hijrah and after it until the sixth year, and in that year, after Hudaybiyyah, the verse of prohibition was revealed, as stated by the scholar Ibn Hajar al-Haytami and others. It has been authenticated that the Prophet, peace be upon him, married his daughter Zaynab, may Allah be pleased with her, to Abu al-‘As ibn al-Rabi‘ before the revelation and then after it. Then he migrated, and she migrated with him, and she was in the marriage of Abu al-‘As, and he was not a believer at that time. The matter continued thus until the sixth year. When the verse of prohibition was revealed, it was not long before he came and declared his Islam, and the Prophet, peace be upon him, returned her to him with their first marriage.

It is possible that the mentioned marriage was lawful at the time of the revelation of the verse that prohibited it, by that revelation being before the sixth year. In this Surah, there are verses that they stated were revealed before that, which is His saying: (Those who brought the slander...). He said: "It was revealed in the year of the raid of Banu al-Mustaliq, which was in the year five, two nights having passed in Sha‘ban." Perhaps this verse is of that type. Indeed, in a report narrated by Ibn Abi Shaybah from Ibn Jubayr—and mentioned by al-‘Iraqi and Ibn Hajar—it has the appearance of this verse being Meccan. If this is added to what is narrated from Ibn al-Musayyib and what al-Shafi‘i held, then there would be two abrogation events in it. However, I have not seen anyone who has pointed this out. If it is correct, this approach would be less burdensome than the previous ones, and I seem to see you preferring none other over it.

A group held that the prohibition of marrying an adulteress or by an adulterer, if repentance from adultery has not become apparent, remains to this day. Among them are those who say: If one of the spouses commits adultery, the marriage between them is corrupted. Some said: It is not dissolved, but the man is commanded to divorce his wife if she commits adultery, and if he keeps her, he sins. According to some scholars, adultery is a defect among the defects for which the option of annulment is granted. If she marries a man and it turns out he is known for adultery, she is granted the option to remain with him or to separate. From al-Hasan, the prohibition of the adulterer marrying a chaste woman is only if he has been lashed, and likewise the prohibition of the chaste marrying an adulteress is only if she has been lashed. So, the lashed one, according to him, does not marry except a lashed one. This agrees with what is in some reports. Abu al-Darda and Ibn al-Mundhir and a group reported from Abu Hurayrah: "The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said: 'The lashed adulterer does not marry except his equal.'" Sa‘id ibn Mansur and Ibn al-Mundhir reported that a man married a woman, then he committed adultery and the penalty was carried out, so they brought him to ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, and he separated him from his wife and said to him: "Do not marry except a lashed woman like yourself." From Ibn Mas‘ud and al-Bara’ ibn ‘Azib, that whoever commits adultery with a woman, it is not permissible for him to marry her at all. Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, Ibn ‘Umar, Ibn ‘Abbas, Jabir, and a group of the Followers and Imams are of the contrary view. They cited as evidence what al-Tabarani and al-Daraqutni reported from the hadith of ‘Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her, who said: "The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, was asked about a man who committed adultery with a woman and wanted to marry her, and he said: 'The forbidden does not make the lawful forbidden.'" This is among the weakest things said about the verse: that it is possible its meaning is what is in the hadith—that whoever commits adultery, his wife will commit adultery, and whoever commits adultery, her husband will commit adultery. Reflect upon all of that, and Allah the Almighty is the guarantor of your guidance.

Abu al-Barahim read "(And has forbidden)" as an active verb, referring to Allah the Almighty, and Zayd ibn ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with them both, read "(And has forbidden)" with the fath of the ha and the damm of the ra.