Islamic Fiqh > Marriage and family > The pillars and conditions of nikah > Religious statuses of the spouses: Muslim, People of the Book, apostate
Contents
Updated on 27 September 2026 at 3:52 AM
These sheets determine which women are lawful to the Muslim husband according to religion: the Muslim woman and the Woman of the Book (kitabiyya) are lawful, the idolater (mushrika) is not; they then deal with the kitabiyya from the land of war (harbiyya), with the status of the apostate woman's marriage (murtadda), and with the designation of the spouses in the contract.
The sheet opens with the preceding reminder. Ibn Qattan al-Fasi: the scholars agree that it is not lawful for a woman to marry more than one man at one time; and that Islam forbade making an explicit proposal to her, all the more marriage (al-Iqna' fi Masa'il al-Ijma', 3/1171, no. 2156). Al-Qurtubi reports from Ibn Atiyya: the community agrees that speech addressed to the woman in her waiting period (mu'tadda) that constitutes an explicit proposal of marriage is forbidden, as is indecent speech, mention of intercourse or incitement to it and the like; everything else is permitted (Tafsir al-Qurtubi, 3/188).
Ad-Damiri: the explicit proposal to the mu'tadda is forbidden by consensus, whether she is in the period for death, for irrevocable divorce, revocable divorce or ambiguity (an-Najm al-Wahhaj, 7/37). Ibn Muflih: explicit speech, speech that can only mean marriage, is forbidden toward the mu'tadda by consensus (al-Mubdi', 7/13). Al-Kasani: the stranger may not make an explicit proposal to the mu'tadda, divorced or widowed (Bada'i' as-Sana'i', 3/204).
Third condition for the wife: to be lawful to the husband, that is, a Muslim woman or a Woman of the Book, never an idolater. The people of science agree on the lawfulness of the Muslim's marriage with the kitabiyya, without disagreement except a report from Ibn Umar; and they did not permit marriage with the mushrika.
Abu Bakr al-Jassas: the lawfulness of marriage with their free women when they are dhimmi women is disputed by none among the early generations and the fuqaha of the lands, except a report from Ibn Umar who disliked it (Ahkam al-Qur'an, 3/324). Ibn Abd al-Barr: they agree on the lawfulness of marriage with the kitabiyya (al-Istidhkar, 5/299). Ibn Batal: the mass of the scholars holds that Allah forbade the mushrikat by surah al-Baqara 221, then excepted from that rule the women of the People of the Book, making them lawful in surah al-Ma'ida 5, and the other mushrikat remained on the original prohibition. Abu Ubayd: this opinion is reported from Ibn Abbas, and the traditions of the companions, the tabi'in and the scholars after them go in this direction: marriage with the kitabiyyat is lawful; it is the opinion of Malik, al-Awza'i, ath-Thawri, the Kufans, al-Shafi'i and the mass of the fuqaha.
Others: the contrary opinion is reported only from Ibn Umar, who departed from the opinion of the mass of the companions and tabi'in, not permitting marriage with the Jewish woman or the Christian woman, against the apparent meaning of surah al-Ma'ida 5; no scholar followed his opinion (Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari of Ibn Batal, 7/434-435).
Abu Ubayd: the Muslims of today follow the dispensation regarding the women of the People of the Book, holding that rendering lawful abrogates the prohibition: Uthman ibn Affan married Naila bint al-Farafisa al-Kalbiyya, a Christian, in addition to his wives; Talha ibn Ubaydillah married a Jewish woman; Hudhayfa married a Jewish woman while he had two free Muslim wives; Umar ibn al-Khattab, for his part, commanded prudence without forbidding them. Shuqayq ibn Salama reports that Hudhayfa married a Jewish woman and that Umar wrote to him: part from her; is she forbidden? Umar wrote: no, but I fear that you frequent the dissolute ones among them, that is, the prostitutes; Umar therefore read surah al-Ma'ida 5 as a condition of chastity: Allah only requires chastity of them, and the prostitute is not guaranteed to be chaste; whereas the opinion held by the fuqaha is that surah al-Baqara 221 aims at forbidding idolatresses and Magians, with no abrogation by any book or sunna.
Abu Thawr departed from the rank: he permitted marriage with the Magians and eating their slaughtered animals, defeated by the community and the revelation (Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari of Ibn Batal, 7/434-435).
Ibn Abd al-Barr: the opinion of Ibn Umar is a singularity against the mass of the companions and against the apparent meaning of the Book of Allah (surah al-Ma'ida 5); no scholar of the lands, ancient or modern, followed it, for neither of the two verses is more worthy of application than the other and one cannot abrogate one by the other: the verse of surah al-Baqara bears, among the scholars, on idolatresses and Magians, and that of surah al-Ma'ida on the kitabiyyat; Uthman married Naila the Christian, Talha a Jewish woman, Hudhayfa a Jewish woman while he had two free Arab Muslim wives. There is no disagreement about the marriage of free kitabiyyat after that, provided they are not women from the land of war (al-Istidhkar, 5/496).
Ibn Rushd: they agree that the Muslim cannot marry the idolater, per surah al-Mumtahana 10; they disagreed about marrying her by ownership; they agree that he may marry the free kitabiyya, except the report from Ibn Umar (Bidayat al-Mujtahid, 2/33). Al-Kasani: the woman must not be a mushrika when the man is a Muslim: the Muslim cannot marry the mushrika, per al-Baqara 221; he may marry the kitabiyya, per al-Ma'ida 5. The difference: the basis is that the Muslim may not marry the unbelieving woman, for marriage to an unbelieving woman, with association with her and the religious enmity that persists, produces neither the tranquility nor the affection that are the purposes of marriage; but Allah permitted marriage with the kitabiyya in the hope of her conversion: she believed, in a general way, in the books of the prophets and messengers, and denied the details only on information contrary to reality: as soon as she is enlightened, she brings faith in the details.
The husband calls her to Islam and enlightens her: his marriage therefore carries the hope of her conversion, the good outcome for which her marriage was permitted; unlike the mushrika who chose association although the proof was established against her, out of imitation and pride, without the information reaching her from the one who must be listened to and followed, the Messenger: she does not consider the proof when called; the marriage of the unbelieving woman therefore remains, with the religious enmity that prevents tranquility and affection, without a good outcome: her marriage is not permitted; and the kitabiyya, free or slave, in our school. Reference: Bada'i' as-Sana'i' (2/270). Al-Shafi'i: marriage with the kitabiyya slave woman is not permitted; intercourse with her is permitted by ownership (Bada'i' as-Sana'i', 2/270).
Ibn Qudama: there is no disagreement among the people of knowledge on the lawfulness of the free women of the People of the Book; it is reported from Umar, Uthman, Talha, Hudhayfa, Salman, Jabir and others; Ibn al-Mundhir: no sound statement from the early generations forbade them; al-Khallal reports that Hudhayfa, Talha, al-Jarud ibn al-Mu'alla and Udhayna al-Abdi married women of the People of the Book; all the people of knowledge hold this. The People of the Book to whom this ruling applies are the people of the Torah and the Gospel, per surah al-An'am 156: people of the Torah, the Jews and the Samaritans; people of the Gospel, the Christians and those resembling them in the origin of their religion, such as the Franks and the Armenians.
As for the Sabians, the early generations disagreed greatly: Ahmad holds them to be a kind of Christians, as al-Shafi'i textually stated, suspending the opinion elsewhere; Ahmad also said: I was informed that they take captives, so they resemble the Jews; the correct view is: if they join the Christians or the Jews in the origin of their religion while differing in the branches, they are among them; if they differ in the origin of the religion, they are not of them. Those who hold other books, such as the scrolls of Ibrahim and of Shith and the Zabur of Dawud, are not People of the Book: their marriage and their slaughtered animals are not lawful, the opinion of al-Shafi'i; the qadi reports another opinion: they are People of the Book, their slaughtered animals and the marriage of their women are lawful, and they pay the jizya, for they held to a book of Allah, resembling the Jews and the Christians. Our proof: surah al-An'am 156; and those books were exhortations and parables without rulings, hence without the status of books containing rulings. Reference: al-Mughni (7/99-100).
Asked about surah al-Baqara 221 although the scholars permitted marrying the Christian woman and the Jewish woman: are they polytheists? Ibn Taymiyya answers: marriage with the kitabiyya is permitted by the verse of surah al-Ma'ida, and this is the madhhab of the mass of the early and later generations among the four imams and others; it is reported from Ibn Umar that he disliked marriage with the Christian woman, saying: I know of no association greater than that of the one who says: her lord is Isa ibn Maryam; this is today the madhhab of a part of the people of innovation. They argued with surah al-Baqara 221 and with surah al-Mumtahana 10: do not hold to the marriage bonds of disbelieving women.
Answer to surah al-Baqara in three points: the People of the Book were not included among the polytheists, surah al-Hajj 17 distinguishing them; if they are described with association in surah at-Tawba 31, it is for the association they innovated, not for the origin of their religion, which is the following of the books that brought monotheism; Allah did not call the People of the Book polytheists by name, but said: from what they associate, by deed, whereas in surah al-Baqara He said: and the polytheist men and the polytheist women, by name, the name being stronger than the deed; or the term polytheists in surah al-Baqara includes them when it stands alone, not when it is juxtaposed with the People of the Book, as with the name of the poor and the needy: surah al-Baqara is general and this one specific, the specific taking precedence over the general; or surah al-Ma'ida abrogates surah al-Baqara, revealed later by the scholars' agreement, the hadith stating that surah al-Ma'ida is among the last revealed: make lawful its lawful and forbid its forbidden.
As for surah al-Mumtahana 10, revealed after the truce of al-Hudaybiyya concerning the emigrant women put to the test, it addresses the one who had an unbelieving woman within his marital bond; the defining al marks knownness, and the unbelieving women designated are the known polytheist women, the unbelievers being in fact distinguished from the People of the Book in other places, as in surah an-Nisa 51; whoever goes beyond the People of the Book remains on the apparent meaning of the prohibition. References: Majmu' al-Fatawa (32/187 and following), Ahkam Ahl adh-Dhimma (1/302).
The majority of the fuqaha, the Hanafis, the Malikis, the Shafi'is and the Hanbalis in the madhhab, permit marriage with the harbiyya kitabiyya: consideration is given to the Book, not to the land, per surah al-Ma'ida 5, without distinction between women of the land of war and dhimmi women; nothing permits restricting without proof; freedom in their lawfulness comes from the Book, not from the land; and since intercourse with them is permitted through captivity, all the more through marriage; and the woman whose marriage is lawful in the land of Islam has lawful marriage in the land of war, like the Muslim woman. As for surah at-Tawba 29, it has no bearing on the lawfulness or invalidity of marriage: if the obligation to fight annulled marriage, marriage with the women of the Kharijites and the rebels would be forbidden, per surah al-Hujurat 9; it is thus established that the obligation to fight does not affect marriage.
They nevertheless agree on the disapproval: per surah al-Mujadala 22, you will find no people believing in Allah and the Last Day who feels affection for those who oppose Allah and His Messenger, even if they are their fathers, their sons, their brothers or their kin; yet marriage produces affection, per surah ar-Rum 21: He placed between you affection and mercy; affection being forbidden toward the people of war, and marriage being its cause, it is disapproved. And the statement: they feel affection for those who oppose Allah, only concerns the people of war, not the protected people: the word derives from the fact that they are in one camp and we in another, as with the severing of ties, and this is the mark of the people of war, not of the dhimmis. It is also feared that a child be born and raised upon the ways of the people of war without the Muslim being able to detach him from it; that he be tempted in his religion by her or by her people, the man being strongly inclined toward his wife; and that their number grow through his dwelling among them.
References: Ahkam al-Qur'an of al-Jassas (2/18), Sharh Fath al-Qadir (3/228-229), al-Bahr ar-Ra'iq (3/111), Hashiyat Ibn Abidin (3/45), Ahkam al-Qur'an of Ibn al-Arabi (2/46), al-Hawi al-Kabir (9/246), al-Bayan (9/264), Zad al-Masir (2/297), al-Insaf (8/135).
The Hanbalis in one report: marriage with the harbiyya is forbidden absolutely. Al-Mirdawi: it was said: permitted in the land of Islam, not in the land of war (al-Insaf, 8/135).
The fuqaha of the four schools agree that the marriage of the apostate woman (murtadda) is not lawful: it has no benefit, the purposes of marriage not being met; the apostate is put to death; and there is no shared religion for the two, having left Islam without remaining upon what they turned to.
The Hanafis: marriage with the murtadda is not permitted with anyone: she is commanded to reflect in order to return to Islam, and kept from occupying herself with anything else; through apostasy she has become forbidden, and marriage is specific to a lawful subject from the outset. References: al-Mabsut (5/49), al-Ikhtiyar (3/139), al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya (1/282). Al-Kasani: the spouses must have a shared religion to remain upon; if one of the two is an apostate, the marriage is invalid from the outset, with a Muslim as with a non-apostate unbeliever; the apostate is the same: he abandoned the religion of Islam and is not left upon apostasy, he is compelled to Islam: put to death if a man, by consensus; imprisoned and beaten if a woman, in our school, until she dies or enters Islam.
Apostasy is therefore in the meaning of death as a cause leading to it: the dead person is not a subject of marriage; and the ownership of marriage is an inviolable ownership, yet there is no inviolability with the murtadda; the apostate's marriage does not lead to the sought purposes either, since he is compelled to Islam. Proof: if apostasy occurs upon a marriage, it removes it; if it accompanies it from the outset, it prevents it from existence by the stronger path, like breastfeeding: preventing is easier than removing. Reference: Bada'i' as-Sana'i' (2/270).
The Malikis: neither the marriage of the apostate man nor that of the apostate woman: every meaning that, occurring upon a marriage, obliges its annulment, prevents the contract if present from the outset, like another's ownership and breastfeeding. Reference: al-Jami' fi Masa'il al-Mudawwana (9/396).
The Shafi'is: marriage with the murtadda is lawful to no one: not to the Muslims, for she is an unbelieving woman who is not left alone, like the idolater; not to the unbelievers, for the bond of Islam remains in her; not to the apostates, for the aim of marriage is permanence and she is not kept. References: al-Umm (5/57), Asna al-Matalib (3/162).
The Hanbalis: marriage with the murtadda is forbidden whatever religion she has taken: the rule of the religion toward which she turned is not established for her in leaving her be; forbidding her is therefore sounder. Reference: al-Mughni (7/101).
Final point of the sheet: the designation of each of the two spouses is required in the marriage contract. If the wali says: I married you to one of my daughters, or: I married my daughter to one of you two, the contract is void: the purpose of marriage is designation, it is not valid without it; the woman is married by the name by which she is known, without requiring that she be seen. If the wali says: I married you to my daughter while he has no other daughter, or if he designates her by gesture, the marriage is valid; and if he names the designated daughter by another name than hers, the marriage is valid.
For the reader: a Muslim man marries a Muslim woman or a chaste Woman of the Book; the idolater, the Magian and the apostate woman are not lawful; marrying a Woman of the Book from the land of war is permitted by the four schools but disapproved, forbidden in one of the Hanbali reports; and apostasy bars every marriage from the outset and removes the marriage already concluded.