Tafsir of An-Nisa' 4:23

Surah An-Nisa (The Women), Verse 23

The Verse:

{ Ḥurrimat ʿalaykum ummahātu-kum wa-banātukum wa-akhawātukum wa-ʿammātukum wa-khālātukum wa-banātu-l-akh wa-banātu-l-ukht }

Forbidden to you are your mothers, your daughters, your sisters, your paternal aunts, your maternal aunts, the daughters of your brother, and the daughters of your sister.

Know that Allah (Exalted is He) has explicitly forbidden fourteen categories of women:

1. Seven due to Consanguinity (Nasab): Mothers, daughters, sisters, paternal aunts (ʿammāt), maternal aunts (khālāt), the daughters of the brother (banātu-l-akh), and the daughters of the sister (banātu-l-ukht).
2. Seven due to other reasons (not consanguinity): Mothers by suckling (ummahāt bi-l-riḍāʿa), sisters by suckling (akhawāt bi-l-riḍāʿa), the mothers of one's wives (ummahātu-n-nisāʾ), the daughters of one's wives (banātu-n-nisāʾ)—provided consummation with the wives has occurred—the wives of one's sons (azwāj al-abnāʾ), the wives of one's fathers (mentioned in the preceding verse), and marrying two sisters simultaneously (al-jamʿ bayna al-ukhtayn).

The View of Al-Karkhi: Al-Karkhi held that this verse is ambiguous (mujmal). He argued that the prohibition is attributed to specific entities (mothers, daughters), but prohibition cannot be attributed directly to concrete objects (aʿyān); it must be attributed to an action. Since that specific action is not mentioned in the verse, the attribution of this prohibition to some unspecified action is no clearer than attributing it to another, rendering the verse ambiguous.

The Response (Twofold):

1. Contextual Indication: The preceding verse, { And do not marry that which your fathers married... } (4:22), indicates that the intended meaning of { Forbidden to you are your mothers... } is the prohibition of marrying them (taḥrīm nikāḥihinna).
2. Necessity of Religious Knowledge (Darūrat al-Dīn): It is necessarily known from the Muhammadan faith (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) that the prohibition refers to their marriage. The principle is that when ḥurmah (prohibition) or ibāḥah (permissibility) is attributed to objects, the intended meaning is the prohibition or permission of the action customarily sought from those objects. For example, when one says, "Carrion and blood are forbidden to you," everyone understands this means forbidding their consumption. Similarly, when one says, "Your mothers and daughters and sisters are forbidden to you," everyone understands this means forbidding their marriage. When the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) said, "The blood of a Muslim is not lawful except for one of three reasons," everyone understood this meant forbidding the spilling of his blood. Raising doubts about such self-evident matters is akin to attacking axiomatic truths or sophistry, and is thus extremely weak.

Further Scrutiny (My Own Discussion): I have other points of discussion regarding the apparent meaning of the verse:

1. Unspecified Agent: The phrase { Ḥurrimat ʿalaykum } (It has been forbidden to you) uses an unspecified passive verb form (mā lam yusamma fāʿiluhu). It does not explicitly state that Allah (taʿālā) is the agent of this prohibition. Without establishing this premise (which requires consensus (ijmāʿ)), the verse alone yields no further meaning.
2. Permanence of Prohibition: The phrase { Ḥurrimat ʿalaykum } does not explicitly state that the prohibition is eternal (taʾyīd). The mentioned prohibition could be divided into temporary (muʾaqqat) or eternal. If the scope allows for this division, the verse is not explicit about permanence; this permanence must be derived from a separate indication.
3. Audience Specificity: If this verse was addressed directly to specific individuals present (khiṭāb mushāfaha), establishing this prohibition for all people requires a separate proof.
4. Temporal Scope: { Ḥurrimat ʿalaykum } implies a past action (it has been forbidden). The apparent meaning does not cover the present or future, requiring a separate proof for those times.
5. Scope of Universality: The apparent meaning suggests that Allah has forbidden all mothers and all daughters to everyone. This is clearly not the case. Rather, the verse implies a correspondence: Allah forbade the collective (mothers/daughters) to the collective (men), implying a one-to-one correspondence: Allah forbade each man his own mother and his own daughter. This involves a deviation from the literal surface meaning.
6. Implication of "Ḥurrumāt": The term ḥurrumāt (plural of ḥurmah) implies a prior state of permissibility (sabaq al-ḥill). If they were eternally prohibited, stating "forbidden" would imply creating something already existing, which is impossible. Therefore, the meaning must be reporting the occurrence of the prohibition, not initiating a new one.

Based on these points, the apparent meaning of the verse alone is insufficient to establish the required rulings.

It is established that the prohibition of marrying mothers and daughters has existed since the time of Adam (ʿalayhi al-salām) and was upheld in all divine religions. Only Zarathustra, the prophet of the Magians, permitted it, though most Muslims consider him a liar.

Regarding the marriage of sisters, it is narrated that it was permissible during Adam's time, permitted out of necessity. Some scholars reject this, suggesting Allah sent wives for Adam's sons from Paradise. This is deemed unlikely, as it would mean the lineage is not solely from Adam's offspring, which contradicts consensus.

The Rationale for Prohibition (as cited by scholars): Sexual intercourse (waṭʾ) is inherently a form of humiliation and degradation (idhāl wa-ihāna); people are shy to mention it and only engage in it in private. Since the mother's favor to her child is the greatest form of beneficence, she must be protected from this humiliation. The daughter is considered a part of the person (as the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) said, "Fāṭimah is a piece of me"); therefore, she must be protected from this humiliation, as intimacy with her is akin to degradation. The same applies to the rest of the prohibited kin.

We now proceed to the specifics:

Category 1: Mothers (al-Ummahāt)

Issue 1: Linguistic Usage Al-Wāḥidī stated that Ummahāt is the plural of Umm. The singular form originally was Umm-ah (with a tāʾ marbūṭah), from which the tāʾ was dropped in the singular form (as seen in poetry). The plural Ummahāt can also be formed without the tāʾ (i.e., Ummahāt), though this is more common for non-human animals.

Issue 2: Definition of "Mother" Every woman to whom your lineage traces back through your father or your mother, by one or more degrees, whether through female or male links, is considered your mother.

The Debate on Grandmothers: Is the term "mother" (Umm) a literal truth (ḥaqīqa) only for the direct mother, or is it also literal or metaphorical (majāz) for grandmothers?

• If Literal for Both (Homonymous or Shared Meaning):
  • If the term is used for a shared underlying concept (mutawāṭiʾ), then { Forbidden to you are your mothers } explicitly prohibits marrying the direct mother and all grandmothers.
  • If the term is shared (mushtarak) between the direct mother and grandmothers, this depends on whether a shared term can be used simultaneously for both meanings. If yes, the prohibition covers all. If no, then:
    1. The term is intended only for the direct mother, and the prohibition of grandmothers comes from consensus (ijmāʿ).
    2. If the term is literal for the direct mother and metaphorical for grandmothers, using a single word simultaneously for its literal and metaphorical meaning is generally disallowed. This leads back to the two paths mentioned above.

Issue 3: Marriage to One's Mother (Legal Ruling) Al-Shāfiʿī ruled that if a man marries his mother and consummates the marriage, he incurs the prescribed legal punishment (ḥadd). Abū Ḥanīfah ruled that no ḥadd is due.

• Al-Shāfiʿī's Argument: The existence and non-existence of this marriage contract are equivalent. Therefore, the intercourse is pure adultery (zinā maḥḍa), incurring the ḥadd mentioned in (24:2). We say the existence and non-existence are equivalent because the verse establishes the prohibition of marriage. If the contract occurs, it is either valid in reality or valid in legal ruling (ḥukm al-sharʿ). The first is false because the offer/acceptance (ījāb wa-qabūl) is an accident (ʿaraḍ) that does not persist, and acceptance follows the offer, making a contract between the existent and non-existent impossible. The second is false because the Lawgiver explicitly nullified this contract in this verse. Since the contract is definitively void by Sharia, how can one claim it is legally established? Thus, its existence and non-existence are equivalent, leading to the ḥadd.

Category 2: Daughters (al-Banāt)

Issue 1: Definition Every female whose lineage traces back to you through birth, by one or more degrees, through females or males, is your daughter. Whether the daughter of one's son or the daughter of one's daughter are considered true daughters or metaphorical is the same debate as discussed for mothers.

Issue 2: Daughter Born of Adultery Al-Shāfiʿī ruled that a daughter conceived from adulterous semen is not forbidden to the adulterer. Abū Ḥanīfah ruled that she is forbidden.

• Al-Shāfiʿī's Argument: She is not his daughter, so she is not forbidden based on that ground.
  1. Falsity of Paternity based on Semen: Abū Ḥanīfah cannot establish paternity based on the physical creation from his semen, nor based on Sharia ruling.
     • Tard (General Rule): If Abū Ḥanīfah held that paternity is established by semen alone, he would accept the child of a slave girl he bought and deflowered (but did not marry) as his, even without formal claim (istilḥāq). He does not hold this.
     • ʿAks (Inverse Rule): If a man from the East marries a woman from the Maghreb and has a child, Abū Ḥanīfah establishes paternity even when certain the man's semen was not involved. Thus, paternity based on semen alone is invalid according to his school.
  2. Falsity of Paternity by Sharia: Muslims agree that the child of adultery has no established lineage to the adulterer. If the lineage is not established, marriage is permissible.
  3. Hadith Evidence: The saying, "The child belongs to the bed (al-firāsh), and the adulterer gets the stone (al-ḥajar)," restricts lineage to the marital bed.
  4. Consequences of Paternity: If she were his daughter, she would inherit (27:11), he would have authority over her marriage (wilāyat al-ijbār), he would be obligated to support her, and seclusion with her would be lawful. Since none of these apply, her status as his daughter is negated, and marriage becomes permissible. The prohibition based on affinity (muṣāhara) due to adultery is also negated (as explained elsewhere).

Category 3: Sisters (al-Akhawāt)

This includes sisters shared by both father and mother, sisters by father only, and sisters by mother only.

Category 4 & 5: Paternal Aunts (al-ʿammāt) and Maternal Aunts (al-khālāt)

Al-Wāḥidī stated: Any male to whom your lineage traces back—his sister is your paternal aunt (ʿammah). This includes the sister of your mother's father. Any female to whom your lineage traces back through birth—her sister is your maternal aunt (khālah). This includes the sister of your father's mother.

Category 6 & 7: Daughters of the Brother and Daughters of the Sister

The ruling regarding the daughters of the brother and the daughters of the sister is the same as the ruling for one's own daughters (banāt al-ṣulb).

Conclusion on Consanguinity: These seven categories are forbidden by explicit text based on lineage and kinship (al-ansāb wa-al-arḥām). Commentators state that any woman forbidden due to lineage/kinship has a permanent prohibition (taʾbīd). Those whose marriage becomes forbidden due to a subsequent event are mentioned later in the verse.

Category 8 & 9: Suckling Kinship (al-Riḍāʿa)

Issue 1: Naming by Association Al-Wāḥidī noted that suckling women are named mothers due to the prohibition, just as the Prophet's wives are named Mothers of the Believers (Ummahāt al-Muʾminīn) due to the prohibition of marrying them (33:6).

Issue 2: Scope of Suckling Prohibition The verse explicitly names mothers and sisters by suckling, but the prohibition is not limited to them. The Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) said: "What is forbidden by lineage is forbidden by suckling."

We know this because when Allah named the suckling woman a mother and a sister, He signaled that suckling takes the place of lineage. Lineage prohibits seven categories: two by direct birth (mothers and daughters) and five by sibling relationship (sisters, paternal aunts, maternal aunts, brother's daughters, sister's daughters). When Allah subsequently legislated on suckling, He mentioned only one example from each of the two main divisions: the mother (from birth relations) and the sister (from sibling relations). By mentioning these two examples, He indicated that the rule for suckling mirrors the rule for lineage. The Prophet's explicit statement then confirms the implication of the verse.

Issue 3: Defining Suckling Kinship The suckling mother is the one who nursed the child. Similarly, any woman related to that nurse by motherhood (through lineage or suckling) becomes a suckling mother. The ruling for the father follows the mother. Once the mother and father are known, the daughter is known by the same method.

Suckling sisters are three types:

1. Sister by both father and mother: A foreign young woman whom your mother nursed with milk derived from your father's semen, whether she nursed alongside you, before you, or after you.
2. Sister by father only: One nursed by your father's wife using your father's milk.
3. Sister by mother only: One nursed by your mother using milk from another man.

Once these are known, determining suckling aunts, uncles' daughters, and aunts' daughters becomes easy.

Issue 4: Quantity of Suckling Al-Shāfiʿī required five sucklings for the prohibition to take effect. Abū Ḥanīfah held that one suckling is sufficient. (This issue was discussed in Surah Al-Baqarah).

Abū Bakr Al-Rāzī argued for Abū Ḥanīfah using this verse: Allah tied the name (motherhood/sisterhood) to the act of suckling, so wherever the act occurs, the ruling must follow. He then questioned himself: { Your mothers who have suckled you } is like saying, "Your mothers who have clothed you." This implies the status of motherhood precedes the act of suckling. If Allah had said, "Those who have suckled you are your mothers," the intended meaning would be clear.

• Rebuttal: Suckling is what bestows the attribute of motherhood. Since the name is deserved upon the existence of suckling, the ruling is tied to it, unlike clothing, where the name "mother" is not derived from being clothed.
• Evidence Cited by Al-Rāzī: It is narrated that a man asked Ibn ʿUmar about Ibn Al-Zubayr's view that one or two sucklings suffice. Ibn ʿUmar replied, "The judgment of Allah is better than the judgment of Ibn Al-Zubayr," citing { and your sisters by suckling }, implying that minimal suckling suffices for prohibition based on the apparent wording.

• Critique of Al-Rāzī's Response: This response is very weak. The dispute is precisely whether the name comes from the act. I hold the name comes from five sucklings; you hold it comes from the mere act of suckling. If you use this verse to prove your premise, you are proving the proof by the conclusion (a circular argument, invalid). Furthermore, Ibn ʿUmar's understanding based on the apparent wording is contradicted by Ibn Al-Zubayr's understanding, and both were leading Companions and experts in Arabic. Why should one's understanding be evidence against the other? This weakness is only hidden by extreme bias. Moreover, Al-Rāzī relied on Hadith and analogy to support his view, which is inappropriate for a work focused on deriving rulings solely from the verse itself.

Category 10: Wives' Mothers (Ummahātu Nisāʾikum)

Issue 1: Scope This includes the direct mothers and all their ascending grandmothers, as explained regarding lineage.

Issue 2: Condition of Consummation The majority of Companions and Successors held that marrying a woman immediately prohibits her mother, regardless of whether consummation with the daughter occurred. A group of Companions (including ʿAlī, Zayd, Ibn ʿUmar, Ibn Al-Zubayr, and Jābir, and the most apparent narration from Ibn ʿAbbās) argued that the mother is only prohibited upon consummation with the daughter, just as the stepdaughter (rabība) is only prohibited upon consummation with the wife (the mother).

• Argument for Conditionality (Ibn ʿUmar et al.): Allah mentioned two rulings: { and the mothers of your wives } and { and your stepdaughters who are in your laps }, and then mentioned one condition: { of your wives whom you have entered upon } (i.e., consummated). This condition must apply to both rulings.
• Argument Against Conditionality (Majority): { And the mothers of your wives } is an independent clause. No evidence indicates that the condition applies to it.
  1. A condition must be attached to something previously mentioned. Attaching it only to the second clause without reason is abandoning the apparent meaning without proof.
  2. The generality of this clause is established, while the return of the condition is merely possible, not necessary. Attributing the condition to both clauses abandons the apparent generality based on a doubtful specification, which is impermissible.
  3. If the condition applied only to the first clause, it would imply that stepdaughters are forbidden absolutely (which is false by consensus). If it applied to both, the structure would be: "Mothers of your wives from your wives whom you have entered upon," making the preposition min (from) one of specification. Then, "and your stepdaughters... from your wives whom you have entered upon," making min one of origin (like "The Prophet's daughters from Khadījah"). This requires using the same shared word (min) with two different meanings simultaneously, which is impermissible. (A counter-argument suggests min means connection, as in other verses/Hadith, applying to both wives and stepdaughters).

• Evidence for Unconditionality: The Hadith narrated by ʿAmr ibn Shuʿayb from his father, from his grandfather, from the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam): "If a man marries a woman, it is not lawful for him to marry her mother, whether he has entered upon the daughter or not. If he marries the mother but does not enter upon her, and then divorces her, he may marry the daughter. But if she dies, he may not marry the daughter."
  • Scholars differentiate between divorce before consummation and death: Divorce before consummation carries none of the effects of consummation (no waiting period required). Death, however, is treated like consummation regarding the waiting period, hence it causes the prohibition of the mother.

Category 11: Stepdaughters (Rabāʾibukum)

Issue 1: Linguistic Meaning Rabāʾib is the plural of Rabība (stepdaughter), meaning one who is raised (murabbah). Ḥujūr (laps) has two pronunciations. The meaning { in your laps } (fī ḥujūrikum) means "in your upbringing/care" (fī tarbiyatukum), derived from the custom of placing a raised child in one's lap. Abū ʿUbaydah interpreted it as "in your houses."

Issue 2: The Condition of Being "In the Lap" ʿAlī (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhu) narrated that if the stepdaughter was not in the husband's lap (i.e., living in another land) and he divorced the mother after consummation, he may marry the stepdaughter. His proof was that the verse stipulated being "in your laps"; if this condition is absent, the prohibition is not established.

• Majority Response: If he has entered upon the wife, her daughter is forbidden, whether she was in his care or not. The proof is the second part: { But if you have not entered upon them, then there is no blame upon you }. Lifting the blame is tied solely to the absence of consummation, implying that consummation alone is the cause of the prohibition. The phrase "in your laps" is descriptive of the most common scenario, not a restrictive condition.

Issue 3: Zina and Affinity Abū Bakr Al-Rāzī used this verse to argue that adultery with the mother establishes affinity prohibition with the daughter, claiming that "entering upon them" (al-dukhūl bihinna) means absolute sexual intercourse, whether lawful (marriage) or unlawful (adultery).

• Critique: This argument is extremely weak. This verse is specific to legally married women (manqūḥa) for two reasons:
  1. The verse addresses women who were "from your wives" before consummation. A woman committed to adultery is not considered "one of his wives" in the same contractual sense. Marriage makes her one of his wives by contract, whether consummated or not. Adultery does not create this status before intercourse.
  2. If one swore an oath concerning "the wives of so-and-so," the adulteress would not be included.

Category 12: Wives of Sons (Ḥalāʾil Abnāʾikum)

Issue 1: Son's Slave Girl Al-Shāfiʿī ruled that a father cannot marry his son's slave girl. Abū Ḥanīfah permitted it.

• Al-Shāfiʿī's Argument: The son's slave girl is a ḥalīlah (a term related to the wife/one who cohabits). The ḥalīlah of the son is forbidden to the father.
  • Defining Ḥalīlah: The term can mean one who is permitted (muḥallilah) or one who dwells/cohabits (maḥall al-ḥulūl). In either case, the son's slave girl fits the definition, as she is permitted to the son or is the place where he dwells.
  • The second premise—that the son's ḥalīlah is forbidden to the father—is based on this verse. The claim that ḥalīlah only means "wife" is rejected because the linguistic derivations show it encompasses the slave girl.

Issue 2: Exclusion of Adopted Sons The phrase { who are from your loins } (allazīna min aṣlābikum) excludes adopted sons (mutabannā). In early Islam, adopted sons held the status of real sons. Allah revealed (33:4) { And Allah has not made your adopted sons your [real] sons } and (33:37) { ...so that there would be no difficulty for the believers concerning the wives of their adopted sons } when the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) married Zaynab bint Jaḥsh, who was the former wife of his adopted son Zayd ibn Ḥārithah.

Issue 3: Sons by Suckling The apparent meaning of this verse does not include the wives of sons by suckling. However, the subsequent phrase { And lawful to you are all [women] beyond those } (4:24) seems to permit marrying the wives of suckling sons. This is resolved by the Hadith: "What is forbidden by lineage is forbidden by suckling." This Hadith specializes the general permission of the latter part of the verse, thus prohibiting marriage to the wife of a suckling son, as the general permission covers both lineage and suckling relationships.

Issue 4: Consummation Requirement There is consensus that the prohibition of marrying a son's wife takes effect upon the marriage contract itself, whether the son has consummated the marriage or not. This is because the verse's generality covers the son's ḥalīlah regardless of consummation. Ibn ʿAbbās, when asked about this ambiguity, said: "Leave ambiguous what Allah has left ambiguous." This ambiguity implies permanence (taʾyīd), similar to the seven categories related to lineage.

Issue 5: Grandson's Wives The verse implies the prohibition of marrying the wives of one's grandsons to the grandfather. This confirms that the grandson is considered "from the loins" of the grandfather, establishing lineage through the grandson.

Category 13: Marrying Two Sisters Simultaneously

Issue 1: Grammatical Position The phrase { and that you take in marriage two sisters simultaneously } is in the nominative case (maḥall al-rafʿ) because the implied structure is: "Forbidden to you are your mothers... and the simultaneous taking in marriage of two sisters."

Issue 2: Forms of Simultaneous Combination (Jamʿ) The combination can occur in three ways: marrying both, owning both (as concubines), or marrying one while owning the other.

• Combination in Marriage (Contracting Both):
  • If one contracts both simultaneously, the ruling is either combination (forbidden), specification (choosing one), option (choice), or nullification. Combination is forbidden by this verse. This poses a problem for Abū Ḥanīfah's principle that prohibition does not necessitate nullification (e.g., combining divorce counts is forbidden but occurs).
  • Rebuttal to the Objection: There is a subtle difference between this case and the divorce case, which is detailed elsewhere. Thus, combination is void.
  • Specification is void because favoring one without a deciding factor is invalid.
  • Option is void because it implies the contract remains valid until the choice is made, which we have already refuted.
  • Therefore, only the nullification of both contracts remains.
• Combination in Marriage (Marrying One, then the Other): The second contract is void, as preventing the later action is easier than undoing the earlier one.
• Combination by Ownership (Concubinage): Companions differed. ʿAlī, ʿUmar, Ibn Masʿūd, Zayd ibn Thābit, and Ibn ʿUmar ruled that combining ownership is forbidden absolutely, based on the apparent meaning of the verse. ʿUthmān argued that one verse permits it (iḥlāl) and another forbids it (taḥrīm), and the permission (referring to 4:24, regarding concubines) should prevail.
  • Response: The verses cited for permission (4:24, 70:5-6) also imply prohibition of combination, as Muslims agree one cannot have intercourse with two sisters simultaneously. If combination in ownership were allowed, combination in intercourse would follow, which is forbidden. Thus, these verses are stronger evidence for prohibiting combination in ownership.
  • Alternatively, if permission is granted, the presumption favors prohibition (al-ḥurmah), based on the Hadith: "When the forbidden and the lawful meet, the forbidden prevails," and the principle of precaution (Hadith: "Leave that which causes you doubt...").

• The Majority View (Famous in Fiqh): It is permissible to own two sister concubines. If he has intercourse with one, the other becomes forbidden, and this prohibition remains until ownership of the first is relinquished (by sale, gift, manumission, etc.).

Issue 3: Sister's Waiting Period Al-Shāfiʿī ruled that marrying a sister whose husband has divorced her irrevocably (bāʾin) is permissible. Abū Ḥanīfah ruled it is not permissible.

• Al-Shāfiʿī's Argument: Since combination (jamʿ) does not exist (as the divorced woman's marriage is void, and intercourse with her incurs ḥadd), the prohibition should not apply. The subsequent verse { And lawful to you are all [women] beyond those } (4:24) applies when all stated impediments are absent, except the combination of sisters.
• Objection: The marriage still exists in some respects, evidenced by the requirement of a waiting period (ʿidda) and maintenance (nafaqa).
• Response: A single legal reality (ḥaqīqa) cannot be simultaneously existent and non-existent. While the waiting period and maintenance are established by other means, asserting the marriage contract itself persists while its core elements are negated is irrational.

Issue 4: Conversion to Islam If a non-Muslim marries two sisters simultaneously, Al-Shāfiʿī ruled he must choose one and separate from the other. Abū Ḥanīfah differentiated: if married simultaneously, he chooses; if married sequentially, he keeps the first and separates from the second.

• Al-Rāzī's Argument for Abū Ḥanīfah: The command { And that you take in marriage two sisters simultaneously } is a general address that includes the non-Muslim (kāfir). Since the prohibition applies to him, the marriage must be void, as prohibition implies nullification.
• Response: This argument rests on two premises Abū Ḥanīfah rejects: (1) Non-Muslims are addressed by the secondary rulings (furūʿ al-sharāʾiʿ), and (2) Prohibition implies nullification.
  • Regarding (1): We only mean that non-Muslims are accountable for secondary rulings in the Hereafter. In this world, if a non-Muslim marries without a guardian or by force, the marriage is validated upon his conversion to Islam (as happened with Fīrūz Al-Daylamī, whom the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) told to choose four of his eight wives). This shows the address does not affect worldly rulings for the non-Muslim.

Issue 5: The Exception { Except for what has already passed } (illā mā qad salaf) This raises the famous issue: The structure implies an exception for the past regarding a prohibition meant for the future, which is logically problematic. The answer is the same as discussed regarding the prohibition of marrying the fathers' wives (4:22): the meaning is that what occurred previously is excused, confirmed by the concluding phrase, { Indeed, Allah is ever Forgiving and Merciful }.

Category 14: Women Who Are Already Married (al-Muḥṣanāt)

(The text transitions here to the next verse, 4:24, which details the remaining categories and permissions.)