Adoption And Issue Of Mahram
The Quranic verse 33:4 (the one in which adopted sons are mentioned) can be better understood in light of its context that is presented in verses 33:1–3. The latter verses indicate that the faithless and the hypocrites were scheming against Islam and its final Messenger P.b.u.H. Hence, God ordered the Messenger and the true believers to only rely on Him by following His revelation and by not paying attention to the schemes of the faithless and the hypocrites. In this context, God distinguishes the hypocrites from the true believers by firstly saying “God has not put two hearts within any man…”. Essentially, how can the Messenger and the true believers who strictly follow Allah out of taqwa also follow agents that may pull them away from Allah, and vice versa. Therefore, the schemers who may have insinuated that the Messenger or His followers were breaching moral codes ought to be ashamed and worry about their own ill acts and the resulting fate. The Quranic verse 33:4 then creates another distinction between the two groups; namely, the Messenger and the true believers vs the hypocrites/faithless. It does so by referring to the pre-Islamic practices which the hypocrites couldn’t let go of. Possibly, these practices may have been the reference tools to spread hurtful and hateful propaganda against the Prophet and the believers. Allah specifically mentions the pre-Islamic practice of repudiating the marital contract by uttering words to the effect of ‘be as my mother’s back’. Unfortunately, similar (but not exact) practices exist among certain Muslim communities to this very date. Importantly, and more relevant to the subject matter, Allah also refers to the practice within the tribal setting whereupon persons became the guardian of other children or individuals out of economic necessity, tribal honour, or adherence to cultural norms. In such settings, noblemen and/or tribal leaders may have generally regarded the “adopted sons” as biological sons for different reasons such as morality, the honour of one’s clan/tribe, or elevating adopted sons since they were assets for future battles, societal pride and power-play (Individuals with more sons were considered powerful). Such settings may have created an opportunity for the hypocrites in Madina to spread rumours against the Messenger after He married a divorced Muslimah who happened to be an ex-wife of Zaid. If taking the responsibility of Zaid’s financial and other needs meant that he was the Messenger’s permanent son in accordance with the tribal norms, what about so many of the other early Muslims who left everything to take refuge in the first mosque in Madina? The Messenger took it upon Himself to meet their needs while His own family members remained hungry on many occasions. Hence, Allah says that such norms are not Divinely instructed. I may be wrong but it does not appear that such norms are being criticised or condemned by Allah. The issue did not primarily revolve around a divine prohibition necessitating the end of a prevalent pre-Islamic practice of marrying the divorced wives of adopted sons. Instead, the essence of these verses is to restore tranquillity for the Messenger and His true followers in response to agitation created by fitna mongers. This can be implied from the previous verse where Allah had instructed the believers to have faith in Him as He is sufficient as their trustee. It was a confirmation from the All-Knowing and All-Wise that He was not only well aware of their intentions but that His followers had not breached any sense of morality. Since societal norms are subject to change and can easily be manipulated to cause fitna, the Divine instruction made a reference to an undeniable reality; a fact that adopted sons always had a right of lineage, reference, and association to their biological fathers even though they may have been raised by someone else. Therefore, they ought to be treated as such in situational agitation by schemers and fitna mongers. Therefore, if a modern-day individual were to successfully imagine the ancient tribal settings in which an adopted son married and later divorced his partner. Allah has clarified in response to the schemers, the hypocrites and fitna mongers that the divorced Muslimah does not become prohibited to the guardian of her ex-husband. This example may seem odd in a modern-day setting. But it appears normal in the context of ancient and some of the present-day tribal settings. May Allah forgive me for errors.