Response: Muslimah Marrying a Kafir, What is “Kufr” “Shirk” and “Iman” and the Tafsir of Verse 2:69

 Written by Abul Layth & Edited by Abu Usamah

The following is a response I wrote regarding several issues raised within a post by Umm Yasmin on her blog. I have posted it here for several reasons: a) I am not certain that all of the response would go through on her blog b) there are many points of creed and law that I have made within it that may benefit others that may be interested in these issues c) It is going to take up to much space on her comments, May Allah bless her with good Amin!

 

Salamu ‘Alaykum Sister Umm Yasmīn,

I thank you for the article and the research presented, and now I would like to respond to some of the statements made throughout your post as well as some of your comments.

I have long suspected the scholarly censure of interreligious marriage, came out of the notion that to marry your daughter to a non-Muslim would be to set up an unequal relationship implying the woman in a higher position than her husband (i.e. non-Muslims not carrying the same status as Muslims), but I imagine in colonized India, where non-Muslims were in a higher position of status this may not have been a problem, hence a Muslim nobleman and land-owner giving permission for his daughter to marry a British Christian. Fascinating!!

 

I am certain that you have misunderstood the divine law in this regards Sr. Umm Yasmīn and I would like to set the record straight. I will be restricting my discussion to the legal issue of a Muslimah marrying a non-Muslim man, and not that of a Muslim man marrying a mushrikah, though at times I may briefly cover the issue.

A Reason Why Muslim Women Do not Marry Mushrik Men

A  “reason“, though not the sole reason,  for the forbiddance of a marrying a Mushrik is within the verse 2:221, wherein Allah ta’alaa states,

وَلاَ تَنْكِحُواْ ٱلْمُشْرِكَاتِ حَتَّىٰ يُؤْمِنَّ وَلأَمَةٌ مُّؤْمِنَةٌ خَيْرٌ مِّن مُّشْرِكَةٍ وَلَوْ أَعْجَبَتْكُمْ وَلاَ تُنْكِحُواْ ٱلْمُشِرِكِينَ حَتَّىٰ يُؤْمِنُواْ وَلَعَبْدٌ مُّؤْمِنٌ خَيْرٌ مِّن مُّشْرِكٍ وَلَوْ أَعْجَبَكُمْ أُوْلَـٰئِكَ يَدْعُونَ إِلَى ٱلنَّارِ وَٱللَّهُ يَدْعُوۤاْ إِلَى ٱلْجَنَّةِ وَٱلْمَغْفِرَةِ بِإِذْنِهِ وَيُبَيِّنُ آيَاتِهِ لِلنَّاسِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَذَكَّرُونَ

 

“Do not marry unbelieving women (idolaters), until they believe: A slave woman who believes is better than an unbelieving woman, even though she allures you. Nor marry (your girls) to unbelievers until they believe: A man slave who believes is better than an unbeliever, even though he allures you. Unbelievers do (but) beckon you to the Fire. But Allah beckons by His Grace to the Garden (of bliss) and forgiveness, and makes His Signs clear to mankind: That they may celebrate His praise.”

“Unbelievers do (but) beckon you to the fire…”

Az-Zamakhsharī (d. 538 A.H) states in his tafsīr commenting on this,

أي يدعون إلى الكفر

“Meaning they call you to disbelief…”

Imām At-Tabarī states in his tafsīr explaining this part of the verse,

يعنـي يدعونكم إلـى العمل بـما يدخـلكم النار، وذلك هو العمل الذي هم به عاملون من الكفر بـالله ورسوله

“Meaning, They will call you to the actions which will enter you into the fire. And that is the actions that involve kufr in Allāh and His Messenger (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam).”

So the reason is not worldly status. Rather, it is post-worldly status that is involved in this discussion. One may argue, ‘but what if the non-Muslim husband says he will respect her dīn and not give da’wah to her etc.’ The answer is obvious from this verse. Da’wah is not only by tongue, or by hand, it can be by example and precedent.

To explain this point further, one necessarily must look to other verses, example:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ لاَ تَتَّخِذُواْ الْيَهُودَ وَالنَّصَارَى أَوْلِيَاء بَعْضُهُمْ أَوْلِيَاء بَعْضٍ وَمَن يَتَوَلَّهُم مِّنكُمْ فَإِنَّهُ مِنْهُمْ إِنَّ اللّهَ لاَ يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ

“O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.”

The statement of the Nabī (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) makes the reasons all the more obvious:

الرَّجُلُ عَلَى دِينِ خَلِيلِهِ فَلْيَنْظُرْ أَحَدُكُمْ مَنْ يُخَالِلُ

“A man is upon the dīn of his friend, so each of you look carefully to who you befriend.”

Dīn here, refers to the customs, behaviors, characteristics etc. of someone, as stated in Tuhfat Al-Ahwadhī and elsewhere. In other words, if one befriends someone they will begin to pick up attributes and characteristics of the other. It is obvious to the one who reflects. One will notice how they will begin to use words or phrases that may be particular to your friend. Many times you will even adopt their behaviors or mannerisms. Or, one could look to the sociological effect of “peer pressure“. One will begin to imitate the behaviors and mannerisms of his friends. If the friend is evil, or shameless, it may be that one begins to adopt those behaviors as well. This is the main reason for such, as stated by Allāh. He is the Wise and All-Knowing, and it is to Him we submit. There are other reasons, though the Muslim is satisified with the reason Allah gives.

 

Response to An Attempt to Distinguish Between Kufr, Shirk, Nifāq etc.

Sister Umm Yasmīn then states in a comment to this article,

“The Qur’an prohibits marriage to the muskhrikun (polytheists) and kufar (ingrate truth-concealers), which is not the same thing as saying non-Muslim. This is because the Qur’an does speak of righteous people who do not carry the socio-historical label of Muslim i.e. the hanif, “those who believe in Allah and the Last Day and do good”, the righteous from ahl al-kitab. (It also speaks of bad people who do carry the label Muslim i.e. the munafiq).

So the question I find myself asking - is if the Qur’an describes categories of people based on their descriptors (i.e. a kafir does X, a munafiq does Y, a hanif does A, a muslim (in the generic sense) does B etc.) then I think it is more complex than simply dividing the world up into Muslim/non-Muslim.

So, if we take a righteous Christian who believes in Allah , the Last Day and lives a righteous life, how can we say that he is worse than a munafiq who might accept Islam outwardly but whose soul is corrupted?”

This argument is also a mistaken one. A Mushrik, Jew, Christian, Kāfir, Magian, and anyone who is not Muslim is judged in the Islamic law as one and the same. Their ruling takes the same in this world, though their Hereafter is up to Allāh the exalted.

This was in fact pointed out by Imām Zamakhsharī in his tafsīr when he said there is no difference between the Mushrikīn and Ahlul-Kitāb (the people of the book). He quotes as evidence the verses from 9:30-33:

وَقَالَتِ الْيَهُودُ عُزَيْرٌ ابْنُ اللّهِ وَقَالَتْ النَّصَارَى الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ اللّهِ ذَلِكَ قَوْلُهُم بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ يُضَاهِؤُونَ قَوْلَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ مِن قَبْلُ قَاتَلَهُمُ اللّهُ أَنَّى يُؤْفَكُونَ اتَّخَذُواْ أَحْبَارَهُمْ وَرُهْبَانَهُمْ أَرْبَاباً مِّن دُونِ اللّهِ وَالْمَسِيحَ ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ وَمَا أُمِرُواْ إِلاَّ لِيَعْبُدُواْ إِلَـهاً وَاحِداً لاَّ إِلَـهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ سُبْحَانَهُ عَمَّا يُشْرِكُونَ يُرِيدُونَ أَن يُطْفِؤُواْ نُورَ اللّهِ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَيَأْبَى اللّهُ إِلاَّ أَن يُتِمَّ نُورَهُ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْكَافِرُونَ هُوَ الَّذِي أَرْسَلَ رَسُولَهُ بِالْهُدَى وَدِينِ الْحَقِّ لِيُظْهِرَهُ عَلَى الدِّينِ كُلِّهِ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْمُشْرِكُونَ

“The Jews call ‘Uzair a son of Allah , and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah . That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. Allah ’s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of Allah , and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary; yet they were commanded to worship but One Allah: there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him: (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him). Fain would they extinguish Allah ’s light with their mouths, but Allah will not allow but that His light should be perfected, even though the Unbelievers may detest (it). It is He Who hath sent His Messenger with guidance and the Religion of Truth, to proclaim it over all religion, even though the Pagans may detest (it).”

• 1) Allah uses the term “kufr” for their calling Jesus the son of Allah .
• 2) He says they took their priests, rabbis, and Jesus as Arbāb (lords) other than Allah and continues by saying they have committed “Shirk“.

He also labels the Christians as Kuffār when he says:

لَقَدْ كَفَرَ الَّذِينَ قَالُواْ إِنَّ اللّهَ هُوَ الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ

They have certainly disbelieved (kafara) who say, ” Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary” [5:72]

Again the term is used interchangeably for a clear action of association (shirk).

Yet Allāh, the mighty, uses it interchangeably in another place within the Qur’ān,

لَّقَدْ كَفَرَ الَّذِينَ قَالُواْ إِنَّ اللّهَ ثَالِثُ ثَلاَثَةٍ وَمَا مِنْ إِلَـهٍ إِلاَّ إِلَـهٌ وَاحِدٌ وَإِن لَّمْ يَنتَهُواْ عَمَّا يَقُولُونَ لَيَمَسَّنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ مِنْهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ

“They have certainly disbelieved who say, ” Allah is the third of three.” And there is no god except one God. And if they do not desist from what they are saying, there will surely afflict the disbelievers among them a painful punishment.

All of these terms he used to describe the Jews and the Christians. So they are 1) Kuffār and 2) Mushrikīn interchangeably.

Though you have linguistically defined “kufr“, you have not legally defined the term as utilized in Islām. Kufr, in Islamic law is the opposite of īmān. Allah , the mighty and majestic, uses the two terms as opposites throughout the Qur’an:

تِلْكَ الرُّسُلُ فَضَّلْنَا بَعْضَهُمْ عَلَى بَعْضٍ مِّنْهُم مَّن كَلَّمَ اللّهُ وَرَفَعَ بَعْضَهُمْ دَرَجَاتٍ وَآتَيْنَا عِيسَى ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَأَيَّدْنَاهُ بِرُوحِ الْقُدُسِ وَلَوْ شَاء اللّهُ مَا اقْتَتَلَ الَّذِينَ مِن بَعْدِهِم مِّن بَعْدِ مَا جَاءتْهُمُ الْبَيِّنَاتُ وَلَـكِنِ اخْتَلَفُواْ فَمِنْهُم مَّنْ آمَنَ وَمِنْهُم مَّن كَفَرَ وَلَوْ شَاء اللّهُ مَا اقْتَتَلُواْ وَلَـكِنَّ اللّهَ يَفْعَلُ مَا يُرِيدُ

 ”Those messengers - some of them We caused to exceed others. Among them were those to whom Allah spoke, and He raised some of them in degree. And We gave Jesus, the Son of Mary, clear proofs, and We supported him with the Pure Spirit. If Allah had willed, those [generations] succeeding them would not have fought each other after the clear proofs had come to them. But they differed, and some of them (āman) believed and some of them disbelieved (kafar). And if Allah had willed, they would not have fought each other, but Allah does what He intends.” (2:253)

So this was not used in the old linguistic form, it was used in the Islamic view.

Another example:

مَن كَفَرَ بِاللّهِ مِن بَعْدِ إيمَانِهِ إِلاَّ مَنْ أُكْرِهَ وَقَلْبُهُ مُطْمَئِنٌّ بِالإِيمَانِ وَلَـكِن مَّن شَرَحَ بِالْكُفْرِ صَدْراً فَعَلَيْهِمْ غَضَبٌ مِّنَ اللّهِ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ

“Whoever disbelieves in Allah after his belief… except for one who is forced [to renounce his religion] while his heart is secure in faith. But those who [willingly] open their breasts to disbelief, upon them is wrath from Allah , and for them is a great punishment;” [16:106]

Again, īmān and kufr are used as opposites in this verse - belief and disbelief.

And a verse that sums up Islām’s view on the world:

 

هُوَ الَّذِي خَلَقَكُمْ فَمِنكُمْ كَافِرٌ وَمِنكُم مُّؤْمِنٌ وَاللَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرٌ

“It is He who created you, and among you is the disbeliever, and among you is the believer. And Allah , of what you do, is Seeing.” [64:2]

As for the Munāfiq, then he is one who professes faith in this world, and is thus judged as a believer by the law. However, in the Hereafter his abode, is the same as a Kāfir, as Allāh says:

وَعَدَ الله الْمُنَافِقِينَ وَالْمُنَافِقَاتِ وَالْكُفَّارَ نَارَ جَهَنَّمَ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا هِيَ حَسْبُهُمْ وَلَعَنَهُمُ اللّهُ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ مُّقِيمٌ

“Allah has promised the hypocrite men and hypocrite women and the disbelievers the fire of Hell, wherein they will abide eternally. It is sufficient for them. And Allah has cursed them, and for them is an enduring punishment.”

Now that we have proven that Kufr is the opposite of īmān, and that if one does not have īmān then he is a kāfir, we must define īmān.

What is īmān? Jibrīl asked the Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and he said it was:

أَنْ تُؤْمِنَ بِاللَّهِ وَمَلَائِكَتِهِ وَكُتُبِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ وَتُؤْمِنَ بِالْقَدَرِ خَيْرِهِ وَشَرِّهِ

“To believe in Allah , his Angels, his Books, His Messengers, the last day, and Qadar the good of it and the bad of it.” [This is the wording of Sahīh Muslim and it is reported from others]

So anyone who disbelieves (kafara) in any of the above tenets is in fact a kāfir. Do the Christians believe in the message, prophetic status etc of the Nabī Muhammad? That is in fact what makes them disbelievers (kuffār).

The upshot of all of this is that the scholars made no difference between “Mushrik” and “Kāfir” or someone who was simply “non-Muslim”. If you do not have īmān in the tenets, then you disbelieve in them, it is that simple. It is black and white, as Allāh says:

هُوَ الَّذِي خَلَقَكُمْ فَمِنكُمْ كَافِرٌ وَمِنكُم مُّؤْمِنٌ وَاللَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرٌ

“It is He who created you, and among you is the disbeliever, and among you is the believer. And Allah , of what you do, is Seeing.” [64:2]

One is either a believer or disbeliever in the eyes of the divine Islāmic law. I always hear from westerners etc. asking about one who has not heard about the message etc. The scholars state that he is judged by our law as a kāfir, though he still may enter Jannah if he passes the test. The following narration substantiates our claim:

حديث الْأَسْوَدِ بْنِ سَرِيعٍ أَنَّ نَبِيَّ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ أَرْبَعَةٌ [يحتجون] يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ رَجُلٌ أَصَمُّ لا يَسْمَعُ شَيْئًا وَرَجُلٌ أَحْمَقُ وَرَجُلٌ هَرَمٌ وَرَجُلٌ مَاتَ فِي فَتْرَةٍ فَأَمَّا الأَصَمُّ فَيَقُولُ رَبِّ لَقَدْ جَاءَ الإِسْلَامُ وَمَا أَسْمَعُ شَيْئًا وَأَمَّا الأَحْمَقُ فَيَقُولُ رَبِّ لَقَدْ جَاءَ الإِسْلَامُ وَالصِّبْيَانُ يَحْذِفُونِي بِالْبَعْرِ وَأَمَّا الْهَرَمُ فَيَقُولُ رَبِّي لَقَدْ جَاءَ الإِسْلامُ وَمَا أَعْقِلُ شَيْئًا وَأَمَّا الَّذِي مَاتَ فِي الْفَتْرَةِ فَيَقُولُ رَبِّ مَا أَتَانِي لَكَ رَسُولٌ فَيَأْخُذُ مَوَاثِيقَهُمْ لَيُطِيعُنَّهُ فَيُرْسِلُ إِلَيْهِمْ أَنْ ادْخُلُوا النَّارَ قَالَ فَوَالَّذِي نَفْسُ مُحَمَّدٍ بِيَدِهِ لَوْ دَخَلُوهَا لَكَانَتْ عَلَيْهِمْ بَرْدًا وَسَلامًا

وفي رواية : فَمَنْ دَخَلَهَا كَانَتْ عَلَيْهِ بَرْدًا وَسَلامًا وَمَنْ لَمْ يَدْخُلْهَا يُسْحَبُ

 

 Al-Aswad ibn Saree’, who reported that the Prophet of Allaah  (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “There are four (who will protest) to Allah on the Day of Resurrection: the deaf man who never heard anything, the insane man, the very old man, and the man who died during the fatrah [the interval between the time of ‘Eesaa Jesus, upon whom be peace) and the time of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)]. The deaf man will say, ‘O Lord, Islam came but I never heard anything.’ The insane man will say, ‘O Lord, Islam came but the children ran after me and threw stones at me.’ The very old man will say, ‘O Lord, Islam came but I did not understand anything.’ The man who died during the fatrah will say, ‘O Lord, no Messenger from You came to me.’ He will accept their promises of obedience, then word will be sent to them to enter the Fire. By the One in Whose hand is the soul of Muhammad, if they enter it, it will be cool and safe for them.”

According to another report, he said: “Whoever enters it, it will be cool and safe for him, and whoever does not enter it will be dragged to it.”

This hadith was reported by Imam Ahmad and Ibn Hibban in his Sahih. The scholars of hadith have declared it Sahih.

 

Misusing āyāt: And My Response

 

Umm Yasmin quoted the following verses:

“We have ordained a law [shir`ah] and a path for each of you. Had Allah willed, He could have made you one nation but that He might try you by that which He has bestowed upon you. Race with one another in good works, to Allah you shall all return and He will declare to you what you were at variance. (Al-Ma’idah 5:48)

“Those who believe, Jews, Christians and Sabaeans - whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does good deeds - shall be rewarded by their Lord; they have nothing to fear nor are they saddened. (Al-Baqarah 2:62 my emphasis)

 Then you used the above two verses in order to justify your approach of “righteousness” applied to the Jews and Christians. The scholars of Islāmic law, and the scholars of Qur’anic exegesis (tafsīr) have agreed that this refers to those who believe completely in Allāh by accepting Islām, or that it refers to those prior to the advent of Islam, or that this verse was abrogated.

This was stated by Az-Zamakhsharī in his Kashshāf. Imām Fakhrud-Dīn Ar-Rāzī mentions three basic opinions of the Muslims regarding this verse:

The first view and it is the view of Ibn ‘Abbās (radhiya Allahu ‘anhu):

المراد الذين آمنوا قبل مبعث محمد بعيسى عليهما السلام مع البراءة عن أباطيل اليهود والنصارى مثل قس بن ساعدة، وبحيرى الراهب وحبيب النجار وزيد بن عمرو بن نفيل وورقة بن نوفل وسلمان الفارسي وأبي ذر الغفاري ووفد النجاشي فكأنه تعالى قال: إن الذين آمنوا قبل مبعث محمد والذين كانوا على الدين الباطل الذي لليهود والذين كانوا على الدين الباطل الذي للنصارى كل من آمن منهم بعد مبعث محمد عليه السلام بالله واليوم الآخر وبمحمد فلهم أجرهم عند ربهم،

That what is intended by “those who believe” is that there were Christians and Jews prior to the advent of the Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) who believed in Jesus (‘alayhis salām) while having disavowal from their religious bātil (worthless things that were innovated etc) of the Jews and the Christians. He gives examples such as Qs ibn Sā’idah, Bahīrah the Monk, Habīb An-Najjār, Zayd ibn ‘Amrū ibn Nufayl, Waraqah ibn Nawfal, Salmān Al-Fārisī, Abū Dharr Al-Ghifārī, the King An-Najāshī. So Allāh is really saying that those who believed prior to the advent of the Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and yet they now believe in the Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and in the last day, then they will have a good reward with their Lord. [This is an abridged translation by me]

The second view:  That Allah mentions in prior to this the status of the Munāfiqīn, then the Yahūd and the Nasāra and Sābi’īn saying that if they have true faith, i.e. in what is revealed to Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), their reward will be good in the Hereafter etc. This was the view of Sufyān Ath-Thawrī. The third view: They are those who believe in Muhammad truly, and they continue on their path, while believing in Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and following his words, and this is the view of the Mutakallimīn.

So in each of these views, all of them believe in the Message of Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), and they act according to it. The last view is simply stating that they do not name themselves “Muslims” or the likes. The third view is in fact in line with the other views, because as we know, a Muslim is a true Christian, and true Jew and a true Sabian (as it is said that they are followers of Noah), in that they follow the TRUE principles of tawhīd (Islamic monotheism).

The erudite Shāfi’ī exegete Imām Al-Baydāwī (d. 791 A.H) said that this means, “It may refer to those who practiced their religion truthfully before their religion was abrogated by Islam, and it is also said by the scholars that it refers to those who sincerely practiced their religion prior to their coming to Islām, and then they entered the fold of Islām sincerely.” (Anwār At-Tanzīl beneath this verse)

As for abrogation then this was mentioned by numerous scholars including the companion Ibn ‘Abbas (radhiya Allahu ‘Anhu). Imām Ibn Al-Jawzī (d. 597) mentions that many scholars of tafsīr deemed this verse truly abrogated. He says,

أنها منسوخة بقوله: { ومن يبتغ غير الإسلام ديناً فلن يُقبل منه } ، ذكره جماعة من المفسرين

“That it is abrogated by the verse ‘and whoever seeks a religion other than Islām then it will never be accepted from him’, and this has been mentioned by a group of the Mufassirīn.” [Zād al-Masīr fi ‘īlm At-tafsīr]

This was also mentioned by Ibn ‘Atiyyah (d. 546) in his Muharrar Al-Wajīz reporting it from the companion Ibn ‘Abbās (radhiya Allahu ‘anhu). Also mentioned by Sultān-Al-‘Ulamā’ Al-‘Izz ibn Abdus-Salām (d. 660) in his tafsīr. Also mentioned by Abu Hayyān (d 754) in Al-Bahr Al-Muhīt. It was also the view of Imām Ibn Kathīr in his tafsīr as he reported through Ali Ibn Abi Talhah from Ibn ‘Abbās (radhiya Allahu ‘anhu) as well as many others.

There is yet another response to the usage you have brought forth that is based upon the reason for the revelation of this verse. It is reported that this was revealed regarding Salmān Al-Fārisī, who was at one time with the Christians and with the Jews.

Imam Ibn Kathir quotes in tafsir that Imam As-Suddi said the the verse was revealed in regards to the companions of Salmaan (al-farisi). When the Prophet Muhammad  mentioned them, he (salman)  said: “they used to pray , and fast, and they believed in you, and bore witness that you would be sent as a prophet” so when he finished relating about them, the Prophet Muhammad  said to him: “Oh Salman (they are) from the people of the Fire” so that was hard on salman, so Allah revealed this aayah.¹ Thus Allāh ta’alā would be saying those companions of his of the past, before the advent of the Nabī (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) would enter Jannah. This is mentioned in both Shi’ī ² and Sunnī tafsīrs.

 

Addendum

One of the complaints from “westerners” and anyone else who thinks outside of the Muslim mind set, is that Muslim men are allowed to marry women of the book. So they argue, it is thus impossible for Ahlul-Kitab to be considered from the “Mushrikin”.

Our response to this is via several arguments:

1) The scholars of tafsir say that this verse is general, whereas the verse allowing Muslim men to marry Kitabi women is khaas (specific) in ruling. The specific supercedes the general according to the principles of law. This was the argument of Imam Ash-Shafi’i who said:

 “And it is said regarding this aayah [5:5] that all Mushrikaat were forbidden, then Allah revealed the rukhsah (dispensation) that it is halaal to marry the free women of the people of the book specifically.”

2) There is not consensus on the permissibility of marrying a Kitabi woman. Some believe the verse in Surat Baqarah abrogated the verse in Ma’idah. Imam An-Nahhaas quotes Is-haaq Al-Harbi as saying,

“A group of the scholars forwarded the view that the verse in Surat Al-Baqarah abrogated the verse in Maa’idah. So they deemed it haraam (prohibited) to marry every Mushrikah, whether she be a Kitaabiyah (person of the book) or a non-kitaabiyah.”

3) If it is permitted, then it is due to the fact that Islamic Law gives authority to the man. In this case, according to the law, just as his name is taken, so is his religion.

To read more on this specific topic read the following article: http://seekingilm.com/archives/277

May Allah send his abundant blessings on the Prophet, his family, his companions, and his followers. Amin!

Footnotes (Click ↩ at the end of the note to Go Back to Original Place in the article) :

1. this was also reported by Imām Al-Bayhaqī and others [↩]
2. such as At-Tibyān of Imām At-Tūsī - d. 460 A.H who also mentions the view of it being abrogated as reported from ibn ‘Abbās [↩]