President Beji Caid Essebsi of Tunisia has recently lifted the ban on Muslim Tunisian women who want to marry Christian or Jewish men without the need for those men to convert to Islam as a prerequisite. That is something that had reportedly once been introduced in Tunisia by the late president Bourguiba. The decision has caused a massive uproar which has reverberated throughout the region of the Middle East and North Africa, with countless Muslims- men and women- expressing their consternation at the thought of Muslim women marrying Christian or Jewish men. Many Muslims have used the mass media to try and dissuade any Muslim women who may be thus tempted from even entertaining such thoughts, arguing that what President Essebsi had advocated was a clear and blatant violation of Islam in general and of the Quran in particular.

The opponents of interfaith marriage often cite verses from certain suras (chapters) of the Quran to justify their position: One of those (Al Mumtahana 10) states that believing women are not lawful for disbelieving men, and vice versa, while another tells Muslims not to marry idol worshippers, be they male or female (Al Baqara 221). Proponents of the prohibition on interfaith marriage also point to a third verse (Attouba 30) which accuses Christians and Jews of idol worship; it condemns Christians for claiming that Jesus is the Son of God, and it denounces Jews for alleging that Ezra is the Son of God. Moreover, objectors to interfaith marriage assert that the Quran categorically denigrates as disbelievers Christians who believe that Jesus is God and who accept the doctrine of the Trinity (Al Ma’ida 72 and 73). Therefore, conclude the foes of the idea of interfaith marriage, it only stands to reason that both the Christians and the Jews are disbelievers and, consequently, they cannot lawfully marry Muslim women.

On the face of it, the above-mentioned arguments seem to present a rather persuasive case for the prohibition of interfaith marriage in Islam; however, closer examination of this issue reveals otherwise: First of all, the Quran does allow the marriage of Muslim men to Christian or Jewish women (Al Ma’ida 5). If all Christians and Jews were idol worshippers and disbelievers, and if Islam did not allow intermarriage with them, as numerous Muslims have claimed, why would the Quran permit the marriage of Muslim men to Christian and Jewish women? In fact, Muhammad himself kept a Jewish mistress (or, concubine) by the name of Rihana whom he had captured in the wake of the conflict with the Jewish tribe of Banu Quraytha. Muhammad also kept a Coptic mistress (or, concubine) by the name of Maria who had ostensibly been sent to him as a gift by the governor of Egypt; Maria was the mother of one of Muhammad’s children, Ibrahim. There is no solid evidence in Muslim literature to show that either woman converted to Islam. How would one then explain away such an inconsistency?

Defenders of the prohibition on interfaith marriage retort that the crucial difference between a Muslim man marrying a Christian or Jewish woman and the opposite is that the man is the head of the household and can successfully pressurize his wife and children into following his religion, something which they maintain is very likely to happen if the husband is Christian or Jewish, especially when considering a Quranic verse which states that Christians and Jews will never be pleased with Muslims until the latter follow the former’s creeds (Al Baqara 120). Needless to say, this viewpoint is archaic; nowadays in open societies, men and women have their own independent beliefs and are normally far from being brainwashed or coerced into changing their religions by their spouses; in addition, open societies give children the opportunity to grow up and develop their own personal opinions and beliefs, religious or otherwise. In fact, the unease which many Muslims feel about a Christian or Jewish father influencing the religious beliefs of his children may also be dismissed without too much difficulty when one takes into account that when a divorce takes place in many countries, it is the mother who mostly wins custody of her children, which means that from Islam’s point of view, it would be better for the mother to be Muslim and the husband not than the other way around.

The aforementioned citation by Muslims of Quranic verses denouncing Christians as disbelievers because they regard Jesus as the Son of God and believe in the truth of the Trinity overlooks the fact that not all Christians hold such beliefs; the Unitarians, for example, do not. Therefore, it could be argued, Unitarian men can marry Muslim women. The aforementioned Muslim argument becomes even weaker when it is applied to the Jews: While it is true that the Quran accuses the Jews of claiming that Ezra is the Son of God, renowned Muslim exegetes such as Al Qurtubi and Attabari maintain that this did not apply to all Jews, but only to a small number of them, most likely only four people who had lived in the Arabian Peninsula at the time of Muhammad. This explanation seems more reasonable in view of the fact that Jewish Scripture states that Ezra was the son of Seraiah, and it traces his ancestry all the way back to Aaron (Book of Ezra 7:1-5). Besides, if the Jews had wanted to designate one of their prophets as the Son of God, they would in all likelihood have chosen their most important prophet of all for that privilege, namely Moses. Furthermore, when one considers the perennial polemics between Christianity and Judaism, one finds that even though Jews have consistently criticized Christians for believing that Jesus was the Son of God, there does not appear to be any evidence showing Christians retaliating by saying that Jews regard Ezra as the Son of God. It therefore stands to reason that if Jews had ever made such a claim, Christians would have wasted no time in pouncing on that admission.

The fact remains that religions are considerably dependent on how they are perceived and interpreted. There is not one single verse in the Quran which explicitly forbids Muslim women to marry Christian or Jewish men. An intelligent analysis of pertinent Quranic verses and their contexts cannot reasonably lead us to reach such a conclusion; on the contrary, an enlightened comprehension of the Quranic subtext seems to indicate that a Muslim woman can indeed marry a Christian or Jewish man. This finding may be a small advance, yet it is a very significant step towards the abandonment of the old shibboleths of tradition and in the direction of the gradual acceptance of liberal and pluralistic values. That is what the Muslim world desperately needs right now.

About the author

Husam Dughman comes from a family that is historically descended from Europeans on his father’s side and Middle Easterners on his mother’s side. He was born in Libya and educated in Libya and the United Kingdom. Before Qaddafi came to power, Husam Dughman’s father had been the president of the University of Libya and his maternal grandfather had been a prime minister. Immediately following Qaddafi’s military coup d’état in 1969, both stood up to the Qaddafi regime and were consequently imprisoned: Husam Dughman’s father was incarcerated for a period of 10 years, during which he was subjected to regular torture by the Qaddafi regime, and his grandfather was incarcerated for five years.

In the 1990s, Husam Dughman returned to Libya and worked as a university professor of political science. Due to conflicts with the Qaddafi regime, he resigned from his university position in 1997 and subsequently worked in legal translation. Years later, Husam Dughman left Libya for North America, where he has been working as a newcomer specialist, helping new immigrants and refugees with their settlement.

Husam Dughman has published a book, Tête-à-tête with Muhammad, and he has also published various articles about the Middle East. He is currently working on a new book on the Abrahamic religions and scepticism. You can find out more by visiting his website at http://www.husamdughman.com