daughter of al-Mughirah, Umm Salamah’s sister, who was married to Umar ibn al-Khattab. When Umar wished to emigrate, she refused and apostatized; Barwa, daughter of Uqbah, who was married to Shammas ibn Uthman; Azzah, daughter of Abd al-Aziz ibn Nadlah, whose husband was Amr ibn Abd Wudd; Hind, daughter of Abu Jahl ibn Hisham, who was married to Hisham ibn al-As ibn Wail; and Umm Kulthum, daughter of Jarwal, who was married to Umar ibn al-Khattab. All of them abandoned Islam, so the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, gave their husbands the dowries they had paid for their wives from the spoils of war. (1)

“And fear Allah, in whom you believe.” There is disagreement over whether returning the dowry of a woman who embraced Islam to her husband was obligatory or recommended.

The basis of this disagreement is whether the treaty stipulated the return of women. There are two views. The first is that it stipulated the return of both men and women, based on what has been narrated to us: “No one from among us shall come to you—even if he follows your religion—unless you return him to us.” Thereafter, the ruling concerning the return of women was abrogated by His saying: “Do not return them to the disbelievers.” According to this view, returning the dowry was obligatory.

The other view is that the treaty did not stipulate the return of women, because it is narrated from Ali: “No man from among us shall come to you—even if he follows your religion—unless you return him to us.” This is because, in returning a man, there is no fear of trial such as is feared for a woman: that a polytheist might violate her, or that she might apostatize if intimidated and coerced into it, due to the weakness of her resolve and her limited ability to find a way out of it by uttering words of disbelief while intending otherwise and concealing her faith. Such is not feared for a man because of his strength and his ability to practice prudent concealment. According to this view, returning the dowry was recommended.

They further differed over whether this ruling must still be acted upon today in returning wealth, if this is stipulated in a treaty with the disbelievers. One group held that it is not obligatory, claiming that the verse has been abrogated. This was the view of Ata, Mujahid, and Qatadah. Another group held that it has not been abrogated and that they must be returned what they had spent.