Chapter: And if both spouses embrace Islam together, or if a man marries a woman from the People of the Book, their marriage remains valid. However, if she, or one of the spouses who are not from the People of the Book, embraces Islam before consummation, the marriage is void.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah, Lord of the worlds, and may Allah send prayers and blessings upon our Prophet Muhammad, and upon his family and all his Companions.
This chapter is important in this era, for it is common, praise be to Allah, for a married person to enter Islam. So, if a person embraces Islam, is his marriage annulled, or what? This chapter clarifies the ruling. The author says: "And if both spouses embrace Islam together", their marriage remains valid. If they embrace Islam together, meaning at the same time, both of them saying "I have embraced Islam" and finishing this word together, then they remain in their marriage because the religion of one has not differed from the other. But tell me, is it possible for them to embrace Islam together at the same time, such that the husband says "As" and she says "As," he says "Lam" and she says "Lam" together, in this order? It is conceivable that they could start with the hamza together and end with the ta together, but there is a distance in this. Therefore, some authors, including al-Muqaffa' the author of al-Mughni, held that their embracing Islam in the same session is like their embracing Islam together. Pay attention to this. So, if a man marries a woman and they are both disbelievers, and before consummation, before he enters upon her, they embrace Islam together at the same time, do they need to renew the contract? No, because they remain in their marriage since one of them was not a disbeliever and the other a Muslim; both embraced Islam together, so they remain in their marriage. And if he says "I have embraced Islam" and she says "I have embraced Islam," what do we say? We say the marriage is annulled and it needs to be renewed, because when he said "I have embraced Islam," he differed from her in Islam, for she is still upon disbelief. So the marriage is annulled and needs to be renewed, except according to the opinion of al-Muqaffa', where if they both say "I have embraced Islam" in the same session, whether the husband starts and then she, or she starts and then the husband, they remain in their marriage. Is there a difference between the two opinions? Yes, there is a difference between them, because if we say the first one is annulled, it means it needs to be renewed, and if the wife or the husband dies at this moment, one does not inherit from the other. That is, none of the rulings of marriage apply to it because it was annulled, and no waiting period is required because it was before consummation. An exception to this is if the wife is Jewish or Christian and the husband embraces Islam before her. Does the marriage remain or not? It remains. Why? Because it is permissible for a Muslim to marry a woman from the People of the Book. So if the initial marriage is permissible, its continuation is permissible. For this reason, the author says: "or if a man marries a woman from the People of the Book, their marriage remains valid". "Or if a man marries a woman from the People of the Book" means even if her embracing Islam is delayed, because it is permissible for a Muslim to marry a woman from the People of the Book. Are you with me and do you understand? Good. We have finished this issue. Is it before or after consummation? No, my brothers, "And if both spouses embrace Islam together, or if a man marries a woman from the People of the Book, their marriage remains valid" includes what happens before consummation and what happens after consummation. "However, if she, meaning before the husband, or one of the spouses who are not from the People of the Book, embraces Islam before consummation, it is void." If she precedes him, there is no mahr; if he precedes her, she is entitled to half of it, and so on. If she embraces Islam, who is she? The wife, or one of the spouses who are not from the People of the Book, because the ruling for the People of the Book was mentioned earlier. Before consummation, it is void. If the woman embraces Islam before consummation, the marriage is void because she preceded him in Islam, and a Muslim woman is not lawful for a disbeliever. So as soon as she embraces Islam, the contract is void, and there is no need to say we will wait until the waiting period ends. Why? Because there is no waiting period for her, since the Islam was before consummation. I think this is clear. An example is if a man marries a woman and they are both disbelievers, and before he consummates the marriage, before the seclusion, she embraces Islam before consummation. The marriage is annulled immediately. Why? Because a Muslim woman is not lawful for a disbeliever in any case. Good. If they embrace Islam together, it has been mentioned that the marriage remains and is not annulled. Good. He says: "or if one of the spouses who are not from the People of the Book embraces Islam before consummation, it is void". His statement "or if one of the spouses who are not from the People of the Book embraces Islam before consummation, it is void" is clear, because if they were both Jewish or Christian and they embraced Islam in sequence, meaning one before the other, the marriage is void. Why? They embraced Islam before consummation, so it is void because their religions differed, and no waiting period is to be waited for. And his statement "who are not from the People of the Book" involves a detail, because if it is before consummation and one of the spouses is from the People of the Book, if the one from the People of the Book is the husband, the ruling does not differ, because a Muslim woman is not lawful for one from the People of the Book. But if the one from the People of the Book is the wife, the marriage remains and is not void, because it is permissible for the Muslim husband to marry a woman from the People of the Book. So if the initial marriage is permissible, its continuation is all the more so. The consideration remains regarding the issue of the mahr: does the mahr become fixed or not? The discussion now is before or after consummation? Before consummation. Up to now, the discussion is before consummation.
This chapter is important in this era, for it is common, praise be to Allah, for a married person to enter Islam. So, if a person embraces Islam, is his marriage annulled, or what? This chapter clarifies the ruling. The author says: "And if both spouses embrace Islam together", their marriage remains valid. If they embrace Islam together, meaning at the same time, both of them saying "I have embraced Islam" and finishing this word together, then they remain in their marriage because the religion of one has not differed from the other. But tell me, is it possible for them to embrace Islam together at the same time, such that the husband says "As" and she says "As," he says "Lam" and she says "Lam" together, in this order? It is conceivable that they could start with the hamza together and end with the ta together, but there is a distance in this. Therefore, some authors, including al-Muqaffa' the author of al-Mughni, held that their embracing Islam in the same session is like their embracing Islam together. Pay attention to this. So, if a man marries a woman and they are both disbelievers, and before consummation, before he enters upon her, they embrace Islam together at the same time, do they need to renew the contract? No, because they remain in their marriage since one of them was not a disbeliever and the other a Muslim; both embraced Islam together, so they remain in their marriage. And if he says "I have embraced Islam" and she says "I have embraced Islam," what do we say? We say the marriage is annulled and it needs to be renewed, because when he said "I have embraced Islam," he differed from her in Islam, for she is still upon disbelief. So the marriage is annulled and needs to be renewed, except according to the opinion of al-Muqaffa', where if they both say "I have embraced Islam" in the same session, whether the husband starts and then she, or she starts and then the husband, they remain in their marriage. Is there a difference between the two opinions? Yes, there is a difference between them, because if we say the first one is annulled, it means it needs to be renewed, and if the wife or the husband dies at this moment, one does not inherit from the other. That is, none of the rulings of marriage apply to it because it was annulled, and no waiting period is required because it was before consummation. An exception to this is if the wife is Jewish or Christian and the husband embraces Islam before her. Does the marriage remain or not? It remains. Why? Because it is permissible for a Muslim to marry a woman from the People of the Book. So if the initial marriage is permissible, its continuation is permissible. For this reason, the author says: "or if a man marries a woman from the People of the Book, their marriage remains valid". "Or if a man marries a woman from the People of the Book" means even if her embracing Islam is delayed, because it is permissible for a Muslim to marry a woman from the People of the Book. Are you with me and do you understand? Good. We have finished this issue. Is it before or after consummation? No, my brothers, "And if both spouses embrace Islam together, or if a man marries a woman from the People of the Book, their marriage remains valid" includes what happens before consummation and what happens after consummation. "However, if she, meaning before the husband, or one of the spouses who are not from the People of the Book, embraces Islam before consummation, it is void." If she precedes him, there is no mahr; if he precedes her, she is entitled to half of it, and so on. If she embraces Islam, who is she? The wife, or one of the spouses who are not from the People of the Book, because the ruling for the People of the Book was mentioned earlier. Before consummation, it is void. If the woman embraces Islam before consummation, the marriage is void because she preceded him in Islam, and a Muslim woman is not lawful for a disbeliever. So as soon as she embraces Islam, the contract is void, and there is no need to say we will wait until the waiting period ends. Why? Because there is no waiting period for her, since the Islam was before consummation. I think this is clear. An example is if a man marries a woman and they are both disbelievers, and before he consummates the marriage, before the seclusion, she embraces Islam before consummation. The marriage is annulled immediately. Why? Because a Muslim woman is not lawful for a disbeliever in any case. Good. If they embrace Islam together, it has been mentioned that the marriage remains and is not annulled. Good. He says: "or if one of the spouses who are not from the People of the Book embraces Islam before consummation, it is void". His statement "or if one of the spouses who are not from the People of the Book embraces Islam before consummation, it is void" is clear, because if they were both Jewish or Christian and they embraced Islam in sequence, meaning one before the other, the marriage is void. Why? They embraced Islam before consummation, so it is void because their religions differed, and no waiting period is to be waited for. And his statement "who are not from the People of the Book" involves a detail, because if it is before consummation and one of the spouses is from the People of the Book, if the one from the People of the Book is the husband, the ruling does not differ, because a Muslim woman is not lawful for one from the People of the Book. But if the one from the People of the Book is the wife, the marriage remains and is not void, because it is permissible for the Muslim husband to marry a woman from the People of the Book. So if the initial marriage is permissible, its continuation is all the more so. The consideration remains regarding the issue of the mahr: does the mahr become fixed or not? The discussion now is before or after consummation? Before consummation. Up to now, the discussion is before consummation.