In the study of Islamic jurisprudence, questions frequently arise regarding how specific verses of the Quran apply across genders, particularly when text is framed using masculine pronouns. A prominent inquiry recently addressed by prominent Islamic scholar Shaykh Faraz Rabbani tackles the foundational rules of marriage prohibitions, specifically addressing whether restrictions outlined for men regarding unmarriageable kin—known as mahrams—apply equally to women.
The question stems from how familial prohibitions are structured in the Quran. While the sacred text explicitly lists which female relatives are forbidden for men to marry, readers sometimes wonder how legal scholars prove that these same restrictions bind women reciprocally. For instance, if a son is forbidden from marrying his mother according to the text, how is it legally established that a mother is likewise forbidden from marrying her son?
Addressing this query, Shaykh Faraz Rabbani, a recognized specialist in Islamic sciences and founder of SeekersGuidance, clarified that these legal prohibitions bind women precisely as they bind men. According to established legal frameworks, such as the Hanafi school of jurisprudence, a mother is permanently unlawful for her son to marry, and he is likewise unlawful for her. This permanence stems from the mutual nature of the familial bond itself rather than resting on one side of the relationship alone. In classical texts such as Tabyin al-Haqa’iq by Imam Zayla‘i, an unmarriageable relative is defined broadly as someone with whom marriage is permanently unlawful.
To explain why Quranic injunctions on this matter are frequently addressed in the masculine form while applying universally, scholars point to several foundational linguistic, theological, and sociological principles.
The first principle addresses the default mode of address in the Arabic language and traditional legal discourse. By default, the Quran’s address encompasses all morally responsible beings, including humans and jinn, as highlighted in Verse 51:56 of the Quran: "Nor have I created jinn and Man, but to worship Me." The use of the masculine pronoun in Arabic grammar operates as a default form of address for mixed groups or general humanity, mirroring conventions found in many human civilizations. Historical norms of Arabic discourse often prioritized masculine pronouns, partly because a woman’s personal affairs and privacy were historically treated with high levels of discretion, tying a portion of societal dignity to that privacy.
Despite this linguistic convention, the Quran explicitly outlines the same familial bonds from the perspective of believing women. In Verse 24:31, believing women are instructed not to reveal their adornments except before specific male relatives, explicitly naming fathers, grandfathers, fathers-in-law, sons, and grandsons. Within this verse, a woman’s son is directly identified among her unmarriageable kin, confirming that the prohibition is bilateral. Furthermore, traditions attributed to the Prophet Muhammad frame these prohibitions around the relationship itself without gender bias. A well-known narration recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari states, "There becomes unlawful through suckling what becomes unlawful through birth," establishing foster-kinship barriers identically for both genders. Another authentic narration recorded by Bukhari and Muslim notes the definition of a mahram companion for travel from a woman’s perspective, reinforcing the reciprocal nature of these family boundaries.
The second and third principles guiding this understanding center upon the divine nature of legislation. In Islamic theology, good is defined by what the Creator deems good, and bad by what He forbids. God is not bound by the intrinsic demands or rights of His creation, as articulated in Verse 21:23 of the Quran: "Never is He asked of what He does, while rather it is they who shall be asked." Furthermore, His rulings inherently manifest divine wisdom. Passages outlining marital prohibitions in Surah an-Nisa typically conclude with divine attributes, such as Verse 4:24 stating, "Verily Allah was ever all-knowing, all-wise."
The fourth principle relates to human nature, or fitra, and innate moral aversion. Islamic scholars note that God created human beings with an innate disposition that naturally abhors certain relationships. Marriage between parents and children or among siblings is instinctively rejected by human nature, applying universally to both women and men. Imam Zayla‘i observed that the permanent legal bar on such unions serves to lessen and ultimately remove any base desire or longing within these family structures, aligning sacred law perfectly with innate human intuition.
The fifth principle incorporates the broader legal philosophy of Islamic jurisprudence regarding public benefit and the prevention of harm. Noted Shafi‘i jurist and legal theorist Imam Izz ibn Abd al-Salam emphasized that Islamic Sacred Law is entirely constructed around securing benefits and warding off harms. When the Quran addresses believers using masculine plural calls like "O you who believe," the address encompasses every believer, male and female alike, with women answering these calls just as men do.
Within the context of family law, these prohibitions yield profound social benefits, chief among them being the safety, trust, and integrity of the domestic household. By establishing permanent marriage prohibitions between parents and children, as well as siblings, homes are maintained as sanctuaries of mutual trust where familial care functions free from sexual or marital ambiguity.
The clarification provided by Shaykh Faraz Rabbani underscores how traditional Islamic legal theory reconciles linguistic conventions with universal moral and legal obligations, ensuring that family law protects the rights, dignity, and safety of both men and women across generations.