Tafsir of Al-Mujadilah 58:3

"And those who declare their wives [to be as their mothers] then seek to retract what they said..." (the verse to the end) is a detailed explanation of the ruling on Zihar (injurious comparison) after stating that it is a detestable matter. This is by way of comprehensive legislation that regulates the incident in a primary manner. The noun phrase (al-ladhina) is the subject (mubtada'), and the Almighty’s saying: "then [for them] is the freeing of a slave" is another subject whose predicate is implicit—meaning: "It is upon them to free a slave," or it is the agent of an implied verb—meaning: "Freeing a slave becomes binding upon them," or it is the predicate of an implied subject—meaning: "The obligation upon them is the freeing of a slave." According to these three possibilities, the sentence is the predicate of the initial noun phrase; the letter fa (fa-tahrir) is included because the subject implies the meaning of a condition.

"What" (ma) is either relative or a source-particle (masdariyyah), and the preposition lam is connected to "retract" (ya'uduna); the verb is used with it just as it is used with ila (to) and ba' (by). Therefore, there is no need to interpret it as one of the two, as some have done. The "retraction" of what they said, according to the well-known view of the Hanafi school, is the resolution to have intercourse. It is as if the "retraction" were metaphorically applied to "remedy," because remedying is one of the causes of returning to a thing. Among such usages is the expression: "The rain returned to what it had damaged," meaning it remedied it with restoration. Thus, the meaning is: Those who speak that detestable statement, then remedy it by nullifying it, which is the resolve for intercourse; so the duty upon them is to emancipate a slave.

"Before they touch one another" means both the one who performed Zihar and the one upon whom it was performed. "Touching" is said to be a metonymy for intercourse, so it is forbidden before expiation, as the verse indicates. Likewise, its preliminaries, such as kissing and the like, are forbidden according to us. It is said that this is the view of Malik, al-Zuhri, al-Awza'i, and al-Nakha'i, and a narration from Ahmad, for the fundamental rule is that if a thing is forbidden, its preliminaries are also forbidden, since the path to the forbidden is forbidden. The lack of uniformity in this regarding fasting and menstruation is due to their frequency, so prohibiting the preliminaries would lead to excessive hardship.

The scholar Ibn al-Humam said: The truth is that the preliminaries are explicitly forbidden in Zihar, for there is no necessity to interpret "touching" in the verse metaphorically, as the literal meaning is possible. Intercourse is forbidden because it is a type of "touching," just as fondling and kissing are. Others have said: All forms of enjoyment are forbidden before expiation due to the generality of the word "touching," thus including them through textual implication. This is supported by the comparison in His saying: "like the back of my mother," for the object of comparison (the mother) is not permissible for enjoyment in any way, and so the one compared to her is likewise. According to the Shafi'is, intercourse is also forbidden before it, and so is fondling and the like, comprising any physical contact short of looking with desire, according to the most apparent view, as stated in al-Muharrar. Imam al-Nawawi—may God have mercy upon him—said: The more apparent view is that it is permissible because the prohibition is not due to a reason that invalidates the marriage, so it is like menstruation; hence, enjoyment during it is forbidden only between the navel and the knee.

Al-Baydawi recounted from Imam Abu Hanifa—may God be pleased with him—that the "retraction" intended by the statement is the nullification of the previous utterance by permitting enjoyment of her, even if only by a look with desire. He interpreted this as rendering the enjoyment of physical contact in any way permissible, short of considering it "permissible" without physical contact. Perhaps "physical contact in any way" refers to contact that is not of the "touching" which they deemed forbidden before expiation. In any case, the apparent reliance of the ruling on the relative pronoun (al-ladhina) indicates that what is within the scope of the adjunct clause—namely Zihar and the retraction of it—are both causes for the expiation. This is one of the views on the issue.

The scholar Ibn al-Humam said: There is a disagreement regarding the cause of its obligation. He said in al-Manafi': It becomes obligatory due to Zihar and the retraction, because Zihar is a major sin and therefore not suitable as a cause for expiation, for expiation is an act of worship—or the meaning of worship dominates it—and a forbidden act cannot be a cause for an act of worship. Thus, its obligation was linked to both of them to lighten the meaning of the prohibition, considering the retraction is a type of "retention with kindness," which fluctuates between prohibition and permission. Accordingly, it becomes suitable as a cause for an expiation that fluctuates between worship and punishment. It is said: The cause of its obligation is the "retraction," and Zihar is its condition. The wording of the verse—the aforementioned one—admits both, so it is possible that the order of obligation is based on both or on the latter. However, when simplicity is possible, one should lean toward it because it is fundamental compared to complexity. For this reason, he said in al-Muhit: The cause of its obligation is the resolution for intercourse, and Zihar is its condition. This is based on the interpretation that "retraction" in the verse means the resolution for intercourse. It was objected that a ruling is repeated with the repetition of its cause, not its condition, and expiation is repeated with the repetition of Zihar, not the resolution.

Many of our scholars hold that it is the resolution to permit intercourse, based on the intent of the added term in the verse—meaning they return to the opposite of what they said, or to remedy it. The same objections applied to the previous view apply here. The author of al-Mabsut stipulated that expiation is not established by mere resolution; even if he divorces her irrevocably or she dies after the resolution, there is no expiation. This is proof that it is not obligatory due to Zihar nor due to the retraction. If it were obligatory, it would not lapse. Rather, the effect of Zihar is the establishment of prohibition; when he wishes to lift it, expiation becomes incumbent upon him to lift it, just as you say to one who wants to perform voluntary prayer: "It is incumbent upon you, if you pray, to perform ablution."

It is not hidden that intending the added term is not definitive, based on what is recounted from many scholars, and that the apparent meaning of the verse indicates causality, as we mentioned earlier. The causes of the expiation are both things. Some Shafi'is stated this and used it as an analogy for the expiation of an oath. Then he said: This does not contradict its immediate obligation, even though one of its two causes—the retraction—is not a sin. Because when a permissible and a forbidden thing meet and one cannot be distinguished from the other, the forbidden dominates. The apparent view of Imam al-Nawawi—may God have mercy upon him—is that the cause is Zihar and the retraction is a condition for it, which is the opposite of what was quoted from al-Muhit.

"Those" (dhalikum) is a reference to the ruling of expiation, and the address is to the believers present at the time of revelation, or to them and others of the community. "You are exhorted thereby" means you are deterred by it from committing the detestable act, for penalties are deterrents against committing offenses. The intent is to clarify that the purpose of legislating this ruling is not to expose you to reward by your undertaking the emancipation of a slave—which is a sign of attaining great reward—but rather it is a deterrent and a restraint for you from undertaking what necessitates it.