Al-Ma'idah (The Table Spread): Verse 6

{Today, the good things have been made lawful for you...}

The Almighty informed us in the preceding verse that He made the tayyibāt (good, pure things) lawful.

The purpose of mentioning this ruling again here is related to His statement: {This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you} (5:3). Thus, just as He perfected religion and completed His favor in all matters related to the faith, He also completed His favor in all worldly matters, including the permissibility of tayyibāt. The repetition serves to highlight this point.

{And the food of those who were given the Scripture is lawful for you...}

There are three interpretations regarding what is meant by "food" (ta'ām) here:

1. The Slaughtered Animals: This means the permissible slaughter of the People of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) is lawful for us. As for the Zoroastrians (Majūs), the ruling applied to them is that of the People of the Scripture regarding the jizyah (poll tax), but their slaughtered animals are not permitted, nor are their women permissible for marriage.
   • `Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) made an exception for the Christians of Banu Taghlib, stating they were not truly Christian, having only adopted the drinking of wine. Al-Shafi'i followed this view.
   • Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) permitted the slaughter of Arab Christians, which Abu Hanifa followed.

2. Bread, Fruits, and things not requiring ritual slaughter: This view is narrated from some Imams of the Zaydiyyah.

3. All edible things.

The majority hold the first opinion (slaughtered animals) and support it with several points:

• Slaughtered animals become food specifically through the act of the slaughterer; thus, applying the term "food of the People of the Scripture" to them is more appropriate.
• Other foods were lawful even before they belonged to the People of the Scripture and remain so afterward, so specifying them in relation to the People of the Scripture offers no added benefit.
• The verse preceding this one discussed hunting and ritual slaughter, making it more fitting for this verse to also concern slaughter.

{...and your food is lawful for them...}

This means it is permissible for you to feed them from your food. It is not impossible that Allah might have prohibited us from feeding them from our own sacrifices. Furthermore, the benefit of mentioning this mutual permissibility is that the permissibility of marriage is not mutual (Muslim men can marry their women, but Muslim women cannot marry their men), whereas the permissibility of food is mutual. Allah mentioned this to distinguish between the two types of rulings.

{...and the chaste women among the believing women...}

There are two interpretations regarding al-muḥṣanāt (chaste women):

1. They are the free women (al-ḥarā'ir).
2. They are the virtuous/chaste women (al-'afā'if), which would include female slaves (imā'āt).

The first interpretation (free women) is preferable for several reasons:

• This verse follows the statement: {Today, the good things have been made lawful for you}. The dowry (mahr) for a female slave is given to her master, not to her.
• We previously explained (in the exegesis of 4:25) that marrying a believing female slave is only permissible under two conditions: the inability to marry a free woman and the fear of falling into sin ('anāt).
• Restricting permissibility to virtuous women seemingly implies the prohibition of marrying a fornicatress, which is not the case (as marrying a repentant fornicatress is permissible). If we interpret al-muḥṣanāt as free women, it necessitates the prohibition of marrying a female slave, which we permit under certain conditions.
• We established that the root of iḥṣān is taḥaṣṣun (fortification/protection). This description is more firmly established for a free woman than for a slave woman, as even if a slave woman is chaste, she is not free from going out, mixing with people, and exposure, unlike a free woman. Therefore, interpreting al-muḥṣanāt as free women is more appropriate.

{...and the chaste women among those who were given the Scripture before you...}

There are several issues concerning this part of the verse:

The majority of jurists permit marrying Jewish or Christian women (dhimmiyyāt), relying on this verse. Ibn 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) disagreed, citing the verse: {And do not marry polytheistic women until they believe} (2:221), arguing that no polytheism is greater than claiming Jesus is God.

Those who permit marriage offer rebuttals to Ibn 'Umar's argument:

1. The intended meaning of {those who were given the Scripture} is those among them who believed (in the true message). It was possible some might wonder if a Jewish woman who converts to Islam is permissible for marriage; this verse clarifies that she is.
2. It is narrated from 'Ata' that this permission was granted at a time when Muslim women were few. Now that they are numerous, the need has ceased, and thus the concession is lifted.
3. The verses commanding distance from disbelievers, such as {Do not take My enemy and your enemy as allies} (60:1) and {Do not take as intimate advisors others than your own people} (3:118), suggest prohibition. Furthermore, marriage can lead to affection, potentially causing the husband to incline toward her religion, and the children might follow her religion—all leading to harm without necessity.
4. The end of this verse states: {And whoever disbelieves in faith, his deeds have become worthless, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers}. This severe warning against disbelief strongly argues against marrying a disbelieving woman. If the verse permitted marrying women of the Scripture, mentioning this warning immediately after would be contradictory, which is impossible.

If al-muḥṣanāt means free women, then the Jewish or Christian slave woman is not included. If al-muḥṣanāt means chaste women, she is included. This point caused disagreement between Al-Shafi'i and Abu Hanifa:

• Al-Shafi'i: It is not permissible to marry a Jewish or Christian slave woman because she combines two deficiencies: disbelief and slavery.
• Abu Hanifa: It is permissible, relying on this verse under the interpretation that al-muḥṣanāt means chaste women (as discussed earlier).

Sa'id ibn al-Musayyab and Al-Hasan held that {the chaste women among those who were given the Scripture} includes both dhimmiyyāt (protected non-Muslim citizens) and ḥarbiyyāt (enemy non-Muslim women), making marriage permissible with all of them.

The majority of jurists restrict this to dhimmiyyāt only. This is the view of Ibn 'Abbas, who said that some women of the People of the Scripture are permissible for us, and some are not. He cited the verse: {Fight those who do not believe in Allah... until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled} (9:29). Whoever pays the jizyah is permissible; whoever does not is not.

They unanimously agreed that the ruling for the Zoroastrians is that of the People of the Scripture regarding the jizyah (they are taxed), but their slaughtered animals are not permitted, nor are their women permissible for marriage.

It is narrated from Ibn al-Musayyab that if a Muslim is ill and instructs a Zoroastrian to invoke God's name during slaughter, it is permissible. Abu Thawr said it is permissible even if done while healthy.

Many jurists state that only those women who followed the Torah or the Gospel before the revelation of the Qur'an are permissible. They argue that the phrase {before you} indicates that anyone who adopted the Scripture after the revelation of the Criterion (Qur'an) falls outside this ruling.

{Today, the good things have been made lawful for you...}

Restricting the permissibility to the present time implies the strong obligation of paying the dowry (ajr). Whoever marries a woman and intends not to pay her dowry is in the position of an adulterer. Naming the dowry as ajr (wage/fee) implies that the dowry is not subject to a minimum limit, just as the minimum wage is not fixed in rental contracts.

{...chaste, not committing fornication, nor taking secret paramours...}

Al-Sha'bi stated that fornication (zinā) has two types:

1. Sifāḥ: Open, public fornication.
2. Ittikhādh al-khidn: Taking a secret paramour.

Allah prohibited both in this verse and permitted enjoyment of women through iḥṣān, which means marriage.

{...And whoever disbelieves in faith, his deeds have become worthless...}

There are several issues concerning this final clause:

There are two views on how this clause relates to what came before:

1. It serves as an encouragement regarding the preceding religious obligations and rulings. Meaning: Whoever disbelieves in God's laws and obligations has failed and lost in this world and the Hereafter.
2. Al-Qaffal said the meaning is: Even though the People of the Scripture have the worldly concession of permissible marriage and food, this does not distinguish them from polytheists regarding the Hereafter, reward, or punishment. Rather, whoever disbelieves in God, their deeds are worthless in this world, and they attain none of the ultimate felicities in the Hereafter.

The phrase {And whoever disbelieves in faith (al-īmān)} presents a difficulty, as disbelief is usually directed toward God or the Messenger, making disbelief in faith itself seemingly impossible. Scholars offered interpretations:

1. Ibn 'Abbas and Mujahid interpreted it as: {And whoever disbelieves in God}. This is justified metaphorically because God is the Lord of Faith; the Lord of a thing can sometimes be referred to by the name of that thing.
2. Al-Kalbī interpreted it as: {And whoever disbelieves in the testimony of 'There is no god but Allah'}. He equates the testimony of Tawhid with īmān. Since believing in it is obligatory, īmān becomes a necessary consequence according to Sharia, and applying the name of a thing to its necessary consequence is a common metaphor.
3. Qatadah said that some Muslims questioned how they could marry women of other religions. Allah revealed this verse, meaning: whoever disbelieves in what was revealed in the Qur'an will face this consequence. The Qur'an is called īmān because it contains the necessary explanation for all aspects of faith.

Those who affirm the concept of nullification (iḥbāṭ) say it means: the punishment for his disbelief removes any reward he previously earned through his faith.

Those who deny iḥbāṭ say it means: the deeds he performed after his faith are now destroyed and lost. He performed those deeds believing they were better than faith, but since that is not the case (i.e., his subsequent action is void), those deeds themselves become void. This is what is meant by {his deeds have become worthless}.

The statement {and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers} is conditional upon an unstated condition: that he dies upon that state of disbelief. If he repents from disbelief, he will not be among the losers in the Hereafter. Proof for this necessary condition is found in the verse: {And whoever reverts among you from his religion and dies while he is a disbeliever...} (2:217).

Al-Ma'idah (The Table Spread): Verse 7