in Sūrat al-Mā’idah.

The occasion for the revelation of Sūrat al-Tahrīm was that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade himself something lawful: either his slave woman Māriyah the Copt, or honey, or both. Likewise, the verse in Sūrat al-Mā’idah concerned a group of Muslims who had forbidden themselves wholesome things, either in pursuit of celibacy and monastic asceticism—as ‘Uthmān ibn Maz‘ūn and those Companions who agreed with him had resolved to do, until the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade them—or for other reasons. Allah explained to them that He had provided a way out for anyone of this community who forbade himself something lawful, and that an oath involving such a prohibition could be discharged through the expiation Allah had prescribed.

They were unlike those before them, who, when they forbade themselves something, found it made forbidden to them, with no possibility of offering expiation. Allah Most High said:

“All food was lawful for the Children of Israel, except what Israel had forbidden himself before the Torah was revealed.”

Accordingly, it has been said that when they swore to do something, they were bound to do it and could not offer expiation instead. Thus ‘Ā’ishah said: “Abū Bakr al-Siddīq would not break an oath until Allah revealed the expiation for oaths.” This is also why Allah commanded Job to do what would release him from his oath, since no expiation was available to them.

An oath concerning something may serve to urge and oblige, or to prevent and prohibit. Likewise, the covenant of Allah and His Messenger, and His ruling concerning His creation, fall into these two categories. Thus, in the pre-Islamic era and the early days of Islam, “zihār” constituted divorce, until Allah revealed an expiation for it. Similarly, “īlā’” constituted divorce until Allah revealed His ruling concerning it. This was because zihār is a form of prohibition, so it entailed the dissolution of the marital bond, since a wife cannot be permanently forbidden to her husband. In their understanding, “īlā’” entailed the prohibition of intercourse, which was incompatible with marriage.