The discussion of marriage is extensive and varied, including both general statements and detailed regulations. Considered together, the verses exhibit an unresolved tension between mutuality and hierarchy. Marriage is for purposes of love and intimacy, and is characterized by mercy. It furthers the divine creative plan through procreation and establishes the kin relationships that are the basis of social organization. Marriage bestows rights and obligations on spouses. However, the reciprocity of claims does not imply sameness of husbands and wives. Husbands have greater rights in certain areas, including divorce, polygamy and the settlement of marital conflicts.
Creation and pairing
God created the first human being and its mate (zawj) out of a single soul (nafs) (4.1; 7.189; 39.6). Drawing on biblical and hadith accounts, traditional exegesis assumes that the first human being was male, and that its mate was female, but this is not explicitly indicated in the The term zawj is grammatically masculine, but can apply equally to a specifically male or female spouse; likewise, its plural, azwaj, is used for both wives and husbands (2.232; 21.90; 33.28). Amina Wadud (1992), among others, has convincingly argued that most scriptural usages of these terms should be read as gender-neutral.
The pairing of man and woman in marriage has both individual and social aims, including the safeguarding of chastity and the protection of lineage. God created spouses from the same nature (16.72), and placed ‘love and mercy’ between them, in order for them to dwell together in tranquillity (7.189; 30.21). Spouses are garments for one another (2.187). Marriage facilitates chastity, which is an important virtue for Muslim men and women alike (33.35). Those who can marry are exhorted to do so, but those who cannot fulfil its obligations should wait until they have the resources, which God will provide (24.32–33).
Beyond the channelling of sexual desires, there is a larger purpose to the joining of male and female in pairs: procreation of the human species (7.189; 16.72; 25.54; 35.11; 49.13). God created the first human being (and its mate) directly, but populates the earth through human reproduction (25.54). As 4.1 states of the first pair, ‘[God] brought forth from them many men and women’. The kin relationships established by marriage lead to the formation of tribes and nations, and thus serve as the basis for all of human society.
Impediments to marriage
A number of verses address the question of who can marry whom. Impediments to marriage can be based on of kinship, number or religion. Those a man cannot marry because they are too closely related by blood include his mother (understood to include grandmothers, and so on up); daughters (including granddaughters, and so on down); sisters; maternal and paternal aunts; and maternal and paternal nieces. Foster relationships created by wet nursing give rise to the same prohibitions that blood kinship does (4.23).
Ties of affinity create other barriers to marriage. Two sisters cannot be combined in marriage to the same man (4.23); a hadith, on the Prophet’s authority, extends this prohibition to the combining of aunt and niece. In both cases the prohibition only pertains to concurrent marriage, disappearing once the first marriage is dissolved. However, marriage with ascendants or descendants of a potential spouse can create permanent impediments. A man cannot marry a woman who was married to his father or his son, nor can he marry the mother of a woman he has married. However, with the daughter of a previous wife, the prohibition only exists if the first marriage was consummated (4.22–23).
Religion is another a factor in determining who can marry. Muslims, of course, may marry one another and Muslim men are permitted to marry women from among the People of the Book (ahl al-kitab) (5.5). The text makes no explicit mention of Muslim women marrying Christian or Jewish men, but juristic consensus has held it forbidden. Muslims may not marry polytheists (mushrikun) (2.221); marriage ties between believers and unbelievers (kuffar) are not lawful and should be dissolved (60.10–11).
Sexual immorality creates another barrier to marriage. Committing zina, fornication or adultery, renders a Muslim an inappropriate marriage partner for a Muslim who has not done so; pure women and men are suited for each other, just as impure women and men are suited for each other (24.26). A Muslim guilty of zina should only marry another Muslim who is similarly guilty, or a polytheist (24.3). However, most interpreters have held that sincere repentance on the part of the offender (24.5) removes this impediment to marriage.
Because women must be monogamous, married Muslim women fall into that category of women whom it is not permissible for anyone to marry (4.24). Being married does not automatically constitute an impediment to marriage for a Muslim man, since he is allowed to practise polygyny. However, if he already has four wives, the maximum number he is permitted by 4.3, any additional marriage he contracts cannot be valid.
The permitss laves, with the permission of their owners, to marry other slaves or free persons (2.221; 4.25; 24.32). This sanction of full legal marriage by slaves in Islamic scripture and law is unusual in comparison to other slave-holding systems. Most discussions of marriage between slaves and free people assume that a free man is marrying an enslaved woman. Such a marriage is permissible when the man cannot afford to marry a free woman and fears committing sexual sin (4.25). While some Muslim jurists interpreted these conditions strictly, holding that marriage to a female slave was only acceptable when both conditions were satisfied, others saw the verse as providing guidance, not binding legal direction.
Contracting a marriage
Marriage is established by mutual agreement. discussions of marriage usually assume the involvement of kin, particularly that of the wife, in making arrangements. Some verses presume that a female will be married off by male relatives (2.221) or that her relatives will have a role in deciding whether or not she can marry a particular man (2.232). Legal arguments over whether women may contract their own marriages, as one doctrine holds they can, have sometimes hinged on the use of active and passive verbs in these verses. Most jurists have held that women require a male agnate or a judge to conclude marriage on their behalf.
In addition to consent, marriage requires payment of dowry in the form of monetary consideration from the husband to the wife. Payment of dowry correlates with the husband seeking chastity, not lewdness, from his partner (4.24, 5.5). Dowry is given freely on marriage (4.4); it becomes the wife’s property and none of it should be taken back, even in case of divorce, unless the wife is guilty of ‘clear lewdness’ (4.19–20). If she is not thus guilty, she need only give back part of the dowry if she is divorced before consummation (2.236), or if she wants to ransom herself from her husband (2.229).
The does not explicitly discuss temporary marriage a form contractual union where the spouses part, without divorce, after a stipulated time period, though some have held that 4.24 alludes to this type of union. Permitted at various times during the life of the Prophet, Sunni Muslims have held that Muhammad permanently forbade before his death. Muslims, on the other hand, continue to regard it as legal.
Spousal rights and obligations
Marriage establishes rights and obligations between spouses. Inheritance is a mutual right, though the husband receives twice the share of his wife’s assets that she does of his (4.12). For the most part, though, claims established by marriage are gender-differentiated. A wife has rights to receive dowry and support (4.34) and to be treated with fairness (4.19; 4.129) or released with kindness (2.231). Correspondingly, a husband has the right to approach his wife sexually as he wishes (2.223), to have a greater say than her in matters of divorce (2.228), and—according to most interpreters—to expect obedience from her and to correct disobedience (4.34).
Two of these verses enumerating male marital privileges have become central in recent attempts to reinterpret and explain views of marriage. The first, which discusses male divorce prerogatives, states that women ‘have [rights] due to them like [the duties] they owe [to men] according to what is equitable and men have a degree over them’ (2.228). Those Muslims who argue for female rights in marriage tend to focus on the clause establishing that men and women have similar rights and duties. Those who argue for male superiority in marriage highlight the degree that men are given over women, as do some non-Muslim polemicists. What, though, is this degree that husbands have over their wives? Most clas-sical exegetes, and many contemporary ones, have understood it to imply both authority and responsibility.
The husband’s role is further elabo-rated in 4.34, where men are declared to be ‘in charge of or ‘responsible for’ women, in part due to their financial expenditures. Righteous women, accord-ing to this verse, are qanitat, which most commentators understand simply as ‘obedient’ to their husbands. However, the term is used elsewhere in the only for obedience to God, and qanit(a) is used for both men and women alike (33.35). Therefore, some argue, there is no reason for considering a woman’s righteousness to be defined by obedience to her husband rather than to God. In fact, all commentators and jurists, clas-sical and contemporary, agree that a husband’s authority over his wife does not translate into absolute control. A Muslim woman’s first loyalty and obli-gation are always to God. Where tradi-tional interpretations and reformist or feminist ones diverge is over whether the husband is owed obedience in anything that does not contravene his wife’s reli-gious obligations.
The most controversial portion of 4.34 addresses the measures to be taken by men who fear women’s nushuz. While nushuz is not specifically defined in the text, women’s nushuz has gen-erally been understood as disobedience, rebelliousness or sexual refusal toward their husbands. (In contrast, male nushuz is viewed as antipathy or rejec-tion: 4.128 permits a woman who fears her husband’s nushuz to arrive at a set-tlement with him by abandoning some of her rights.) Men who fear women’s nushuz may ‘admonish them, and abandon them in bed, and strike them’. The verb translated here as ‘strike’ (daraba) appears numerous times in the with other meanings, leading a number of contemporary thinkers to question why it must be understood as hitting or beating in this context. They have argued that the depiction of women in other verses as full human beings and partners in the relationship of marriage cannot be reconciled with scriptural permission for physical chastisement. Most Muslim scholars, though, accept a husband’s right to discipline a disobedient wife, if admonition and abandonment in bed have had no effect. However, they place strict limits on the number, severity and location of any disciplinary blows.
A Muslim wife is not without recourse in marital disputes. Where spouses cannot come to an agreement between them-selves, arbiters from both families should attempt to repair the breach (4.35). However, efforts at reconciliation or settlement may fail. Because marriage is intended for purposes of intimacy and companionship, it can be dissolved when it no longer fulfils those purposes.
References and further reading
Ali, K. (2003) ‘Gen der, Ta’a (Obedie and Nushuz (Disobedience) in Islamic Discourses’, in Suad Joseph (ed.), Ency-clopedia of Women and Islamic Cultures, Leiden: E.J.Brill.
Barlas, A. (2002) ‘Believing Women’ in Islam: Unreading patriarchal interpretations of the Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Farah, M. (1984) Marriage and Sexuality in Islam: A translation of al-Ghazali’s book on the etiquette of marriage from the Ihya, Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press.
Wadud, A. (1992) and Woman, Kuala Lumpur: Penerbit Fajar Bakti.
discussion of marriage is extensive and varied, including both general statements and detailed regulations. Considered together, the verses exhibit an unresolved tension between mutuality and hierarchy. Marriage is for purposes of love and intimacy, and is characterized by mercy. It furthers the divine creative plan through procreation and establishes the kin relationships that are the basis of social organization. Marriage bestows rights and obligations on spouses. However, the reciprocity of claims does not imply sameness of husbands and wives. Husbands have greater rights in certain areas, including divorce, polygamy and the settlement of marital conflicts.
The term zawj is grammatically masculine, but can apply equally to a specifically male or female spouse; likewise, its plural, azwaj, is used for both wives and husbands (2.232; 21.90; 33.28). Amina Wadud (1992), among others, has convincingly argued that most scriptural usages of these terms should be read as gender-neutral.
verses address the question of who can marry whom. Impediments to marriage can be based on of kinship, number or religion. Those a man cannot marry because they are too closely related by blood include his mother (understood to include grandmothers, and so on up); daughters (including granddaughters, and so on down); sisters; maternal and paternal aunts; and maternal and paternal nieces. Foster relationships created by wet nursing give rise to the same prohibitions that blood kinship does (4.23).
text makes no explicit mention of Muslim women marrying Christian or Jewish men, but juristic consensus has held it forbidden. Muslims may not marry polytheists (mushrikun) (2.221); marriage ties between believers and unbelievers (kuffar) are not lawful and should be dissolved (60.10–11).
permitss laves, with the permission of their owners, to marry other slaves or free persons (2.221; 4.25; 24.32). This sanction of full legal marriage by slaves in Islamic scripture and law is unusual in comparison to other slave-holding systems. Most discussions of marriage between slaves and free people assume that a free man is marrying an enslaved woman. Such a marriage is permissible when the man cannot afford to marry a free woman and fears committing sexual sin (4.25). While some Muslim jurists interpreted these conditions strictly, holding that marriage to a female slave was only acceptable when both conditions were satisfied, others saw the verse as providing guidance, not binding legal direction.
discussions of marriage usually assume the involvement of kin, particularly that of the wife, in making arrangements. Some verses presume that a female will be married off by male relatives (2.221) or that her relatives will have a role in deciding whether or not she can marry a particular man (2.232). Legal arguments over whether women may contract their own marriages, as one doctrine holds they can, have sometimes hinged on the use of active and passive verbs in these verses. Most jurists have held that women require a male agnate or a judge to conclude marriage on their behalf.
does not explicitly discuss temporary marriage 
a form contractual union where the spouses part, without divorce, after a stipulated time period, though some have held that 4.24 alludes to this type of union. Permitted at various times during the life of the Prophet, Sunni Muslims have held that Muhammad permanently forbade 
before his death. 
Muslims, on the other hand, continue to regard it as legal.
views of marriage. The first, which discusses male divorce prerogatives, states that women ‘have [rights] due to them like [the duties] they 
and men have a degree over them’ (2.228). Those Muslims who argue for female rights in marriage tend to focus on the clause establishing that men and women have similar rights and duties. Those who argue for male superiority in marriage highlight the degree that men are given over women, as do some non-Muslim polemicists. What, though, is this degree that husbands have over their wives? Most clas-sical exegetes, and many contemporary ones, have understood it to imply both authority and responsibility. 
only for obedience to God, and qanit(a) is used for both men and women alike (33.35). Therefore, some argue, there is no reason for considering a woman’s righteousness to be defined by obedience to her husband rather than to God. In fact, all commentators and jurists, clas-sical and contemporary, agree that a husband’s authority over his wife does not translate into absolute control. A Muslim woman’s first loyalty and obli-gation are always to God. Where tradi-tional interpretations and reformist or feminist ones diverge is over whether the husband is owed obedience in anything that does not contravene his wife’s reli-gious obligations.
text, women’s nushuz has gen-erally been understood as disobedience, rebelliousness or sexual refusal toward their husbands. (In contrast, male nushuz is viewed as antipathy or rejec-tion: 4.128 permits a woman who fears her husband’s nushuz to arrive at a set-tlement with him by abandoning some of her rights.) Men who fear women’s nushuz may ‘admonish them, and abandon them in bed, and strike them’. The verb translated here as ‘strike’ (daraba) appears numerous times in the 
with other meanings, leading a number of contemporary thinkers to question why it must be understood as hitting or beating in this context. They have argued that the 
depiction of women in other verses as full human beings and partners in the relationship of marriage cannot be reconciled with scriptural permission for physical chastisement. Most Muslim scholars, though, accept a husband’s right to discipline a disobedient wife, if admonition and abandonment in bed have had no effect. However, they place strict limits on the number, severity and location of any disciplinary blows. 
Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
and Woman, Kuala Lumpur: Penerbit Fajar Bakti.
