As we will demonstrate using Islamic sources, when Sawda bint Zam’ah grew older and unattractive, Muhammad lost his attraction for her and considered divorcing her. However, Sawda did not want the marriage to end because, in Islam, the Prophet’s wives in this life would also be his wives in the hereafter. Sawda, having desired such a position, and so she requested that he allow her to remain married to him. Muhammad also allotted different times throughout the days to visit his wives. So she offered to give up her allotted turn to Aisha bint Abi Bakr, his younger wife, so that she would be visited twice a day. Muhammad accepted this arrangement. Quran 4:128 records this entire incident, which discusses reconciliation between spouses when discord arises and permits mutually agreed adjustments within marriage. In these interpretations, the verse is seen as affirming the permissibility of Sawda’s request and the compromise that was reached.
”And if a woman fears cruelty or desertion on her husband’s part, there is no sin on them both if they make terms of peace between themselves; and making peace is better. And human inner-selves are swayed by greed. But if you do good and keep away from evil, verily, Allah is Ever Well Acquainted with what you do.” – Hilali-Khan Surah 4:128
Here are the commentaries for the reason this verse was revelead:
Making peace is better than separation. An example of such peace can be felt in the story of Sawdah bint Zam’ah who WHEN SHE BECAME AGED, THE PROPHET WANTED TO DIVORCE HER, but she made peace with him by offering the night he used to spend with her to A’isha so that he would keep her. The Prophet accepted such terms and kept her.
Abu Dawud At-Tayalisi recorded that Ibn ‘Abbas said, “Sawdah feared that the Messenger of Allah might divorce her and she said, ‘O Messenger of Allah! Do not divorce me; give my day to ‘A’ishah.’ And he did …
In the Two Sahihs, it is recorded that ‘A’ishah said that when Sawdah bint Zam’ah BECAME OLD, she forfeited her day to ‘A’ishah and the Prophet used to spend Sawdah’s night with ‘A’ishah …
(And human souls are swayed by greed.) means, coming to peaceful terms, even when it involves forfeiting some rights, is better than parting. Abu Dawud At-Tayalisi recorded that Ibn `Abbas said, “Sawdah feared that the Messenger of Allah might divorce her and she said, `O Messenger of Allah! Do not divorce me; give my day to `A’ishah.’ And he did, and later on Allah sent down, (And if a woman fears cruelty or desertion on her husband’s part, there is no sin on them both) Ibn `Abbas said, “Whatever (legal agreement) the spouses mutually agree to is allowed.”. At-Tirmidhi recorded it and said, “Hasan Gharib”. In the Two Sahihs, it is recorded that `A’ishah said that when Sawdah bint Zam`ah became old, she forfeited her day to `A’ishah, and the Prophet used to spend Sawdah’s night with `A’ishah. There is a similar narration also collected by Al-Bukhari. Al-Bukhari also recorded that `A’ishah commented; (And if a woman fears cruelty or desertion on her husband’s part), that it refers to, “A man who is married to an old woman, and he does not desire her and wants to divorce her. So she says, `I forfeit my right on you.’ So this Ayah was revealed. ”Meaning of “Making Peace is Better Allah said, (And making peace is better). `Ali bin Abi Talhah related that Ibn `Abbas said that the Ayah refers to, “When the husband gives his wife the choice between staying with him or leaving him, as this is better than the husband preferring other wives to her.” However, the apparent wording of the Ayah refers to the settlement where the wife forfeits some of the rights she has over her husband, with the husband agreeing to this concession, and that this settlement is better than divorce. For instance, the Prophet kept Sawdah bint Zam`ah as his wife after she offered to forfeit her day for `A’ishah. By keeping her among his wives, his Ummah may follow this kind of settlement...
– Ibn Kathir 4:128
The Abridged version of Ibn Kathir says:
The Ruling Concerning Desertion on the Part of the Husband
Allāh states, and thus legislates accordingly, that sometimes, the man inclines away from his wife, sometimes towards her and sometimes he parts with her. In the first case, when the wife fears that her husband is steering away from her or deserting her, she is allowed to forfeit all or part of her rights, such as provisions, clothing, dwelling, and so forth, and the husband is allowed to accept such concessions from her. Hence, there is no harm if she offers such concessions, and if her husband accepts them. This is why Allāh said…
This means, coming to peaceful terms, even when it involves forfeiting some rights, is better than parting.
Abu Dāwud At-Tayāliṣī recorded that Ibn ‘Abbās said, “Sawdaḥ feared that the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ might divorce her and she said, ‘O Messenger of Allāh! Do not divorce me; give my day to ‘Ā’ishah.’ And he did, and later on Allāh sent down,
“َAnd making peace is better’. ‘Ali bin Abi Ṭalḥah related that Ibn ‘Abbās said that the Āyah refers to, ‘When the husband gives his wife the choice between staying with him or leaving him, as this is better than the husband preferring other wives to her.’ However, the apparent wording of the Āyah refers to the settlement where the wife forfeits some of the rights she has over her husband, with the husband agreeing to this concession, and that this settlement is better than divorce. For instance, the Prophet ﷺ kept Ṣawdah bint Zam’ah as his wife after she offered to forfeit her day for ‘Ā’ishah. By keeping her among his wives, his Ummah may follow this kind of settlement. Since settlement and peace are better with Allāh said,”
Narrated Aisha:
Sauda (the wife of the Prophet) went out to answer the call of nature after it was made obligatory (for all the Muslims ladies) to observe the veil. She was a fat huge lady, and everybody who knew her before could recognize her. So ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab saw her and said, “O Sauda! By Allah, you cannot hide yourself from us, so think of a way by which you should not be recognized on going out. Sauda returned while Allah’s Apostle was in my house taking his supper and a bone covered with meat was in his hand. She entered and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! I went out to answer the call of nature and ‘Umar said to me so-and-so.” Then Allah inspired him (the Prophet) and when the state of inspiration was over and the bone was still in his hand as he had not put in down, he said (to Sauda), “You (women) have been allowed to go out for your needs.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 318)
Narrated Hisham b. ‘Urwah:
On the authority of his father that ‘Aishah said: O my nephew, the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) did not prefer one of us to the other in respect of his division of the time of his staying with us. It was very rare that he did not visit us any day (i.e. he visited all of us every day). He would come near each of his wives without having intercourse with her until he reached the one who had her day and passed his night with her. When Saudah daughter of Zam’ah became old and feared that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) would divorce her, she said: Messenger of Allah, I give to ‘Aishah the day you visit me. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) accepted it from her. She said: We think that Allah, the Exalted, revealed about this or similar matter the Qur’anic verse: “If a wife fears cruelty or desertion on her husband’s part….” [4:128]
– Sunan Abi Dawud 2135
Some Muslims, uncomfortable with these narrations, argue that the reports lack sufficient strength or reliability.
From a historian point of view, this fulfils the “criterion of embarrassment.”, which is the idea is that a community is unlikely to invent or preserve stories that portray its revered figure in an unflattering or uncomfortable light. From this perspective, the narrations linking Muhammad to this incident are seen as potentially authentic precisely because they do not present him in an idealized manner. If the accounts were entirely baseless, the reasoning goes, why would Muslim transmitters, scholars, and exegetes preserve and circulate them?
Anyway, we have provided prominent Islamic scholars who have no issues with the hadiths mentioned. Muslims Scholar Dr Mahdi Rizqullah Ahmad argues that some of the reports identifying Qur’an 4:128 as referring to Sawda’s situation are transmitted through sound chains of narration and therefore meet the standards of authenticity recognized by hadith scholars.
When ‘Aishah taunted her over her age, she feared that she could be divorced by the Prophet. But her desire was to be raised as the Prophet’s wife on the Day of Judgement. So she gifted away her day to ‘Aishah. It is said that the Verse 128 of An-Nisa’ was revealed in reference to her… She was a heavy woman, of slow movements. Once she said to the Prophet, “Last night I prayed behind you, but while bowing down I held my nose from the fear of the blood drops.” (That is because the Prophet’s bowing and prostration were severely long). The Prophet smiled at her. And because of her weight and old age, the Prophet allowed her and others of her kind to leave Muzdalifah at Hajj at night before others could do.
Here is his footnotes:
6 Al-Bukhari/Al-Fath (19/273/H. 5212), Muslim (2/1085/H. 1463), Abu Dawud (2/602/The Book of Nikah/H. 2135), Ahmad: Al-Fathur-Rabbani (22/108) and (16/239): Sahih Ibn Majah (1/334/H. 1972) where Albani said it is Sahih.
7 Surat An-Nisa’: 128.
8 See Tabari: Tafsir (9/276-278) through a Sound (Sahih) chain, Abu Dawud (2/602/The Book of Marriage/H. 2135) and Albani: Sahih At-Tirmidhi (3/The Book of Tafsir/H. 2434), where Tirmidhi said that this has a Hasan-Sahih (Good & Sound) chain which was also the opinion of Albani.
Here is what IslamQA has to say regarding the authenticity of Ibn Kathir and at-Tabri:
Praise be to Allah, and blessings and peace be upon the Messenger of Allah:
Each of these Tafseers was written by a great Sunni scholar, and the scholars still recommend them. Each of them has its own characteristics which means that the seeker of knowledge cannot show preference to one of them over the other. There follow a few comments on these two Tafseers.
1 – Tafseer al-Tabari
Imam Muhammad ibn Jareer al-Tabari was born in 224 AH and died in 310 AH, at the age of eighty-six, in the region of Tabaristan.
His Tafseer is entitled Jaami’ al-Bayaan fi Ta’weel Aayi-‘l-Qur’aan.
Abu Haamid al-Isfaraayini said: If a traveller were to travel to China in order to obtain it, that would not be too much.
Tabaqaat al-Mufassireen by al-Dawoodi, 2/106.
Ibn Khuzaymah said: I have read it from beginning to end and I do not know of anyone on the face of the earth who is more knowledgeable than Ibn Jareer.
Siyar A’laam al-Nubala’, 14/273.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said: With regard to the Tafseers that are in circulation among the people, the most sound of them is the Tafseer of Muhammad ibn Jareer al-Tabari, for he mentions the views of the salaf with proven isnaads, and there is no bid’ah (innovation) in it, and he does not transmit reports from dubious sources such as Muqaatil ibn Bukayr and al-Kalbi.
Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 13/358.
He also said in Muqaddimah fi Usool al-Tafseer (p. 35), concerning the Tafseer of Ibn Jareer:
It is one of the best and greatest of Tafseers.
He relied on the views of three generations of mufassireen among the salaf, namely the Sahaabah, the Taabi’een, and the followers of the Taabi’een, and he quotes their opinions with isnaads going back to them. This is an important feature of his book which is not present in many of the books of Tafseer that are in circulation among us. But this feature does not matter to many ordinary Muslims who are not able to research isnaads and distinguish sound isnaads from weak ones; all they want is to know whether an isnaad is sound or weak by means of a clear and brief statement to that effect.
When he has finished quoting their opinions, he states which he thinks is most likely to be correct, then he describes how he reached that conclusion.
2 – Tafseer Ibn Katheer
His full name is Abu’l-Fida’ Ismaa’eel ibn Katheer al-Dimashqi, d. 774 AH.
His Tafseer is entitled Tafseer al-Qur’aan il-‘Azeem.
Al-Suyooti (may Allaah have mercy on him) said concerning this Tafseer: Nothing like it has ever been written.
Tadhkirat al-Huffaaz, p. 534.
This Tafseer is based on commentary by quoting texts – verses and ahaadeeth – and its fame is second to the fame of al-Tabari among later scholars.
It is written in an excellent and easy style which is not longwinded or boring, or too short and boring.
He explains verses by quoting other verses, and he quotes appropriate verses which explain the verse under discussion; then he quotes ahaadeeth that have been narrated on the same topic as the verse, and he quotes the isnaads of some, especially those that were narrated by Imam Ahmad in his Musnad, as he is one of those who memorized al-Musnad. He discusses the soundness and weakness of the ahaadeeth in most cases, which is an important feature of his Tafseer. Then he quotes the views of the salaf, including the Sahaabah and Taabi’een, and he states which view he believes to be superior. He also avoids odd dissenting opinions.
Muhammad ibn Ja’far al-Kataani said of it: It is full of ahaadeeth and reports with the isnaads of those who narrated them and discussion of how sound or weak they are.
Al-Risaalah al-Mustatrafah, p. 195
He draws attention to the shar’i attitude towards the Israa’eeliyyaat (reports from Jewish sources) and quotes some of them in his commentary on some verses.
Conclusion:
No seeker of knowledge can do without these two books. With regard to which is superior, nothing like the Tafseer of Ibn Jareer (al-Tabari) has been written since. It is essential for scholars and seekers of knowledge, but it is not appropriate for ordinary people because they are not qualified to understand it properly. The Tafseer of Ibn Katheer is more appropriate for the ordinary people, and there is much in it from which scholars and seekers of knowledge can benefit.
And Allaah knows best.
(IslamQA)
It appears evident that Muhammad—who, according to Surah 33:21, is presented as the best example for mankind—intended to divorce his wife when she grew old. If the motive was tied to her aging and loss of physical attractiveness, this raises serious moral concerns. A true prophet of God, one might argue, would not seek to dismiss his wife on the basis of age or appearance.
By contrast, the New Testament presents a radically self-sacrificial model of marital love. Jesus is depicted as loving with complete devotion, and even Paul—whom we regard as infinitely less than Christ—writes the following:
25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, 26 that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, 27 that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. 28 So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church. 30 For we are members of His body, of His flesh and of His bones. 31 “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” 32 This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church. 33 Nevertheless let each one of you in particular so love his own wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.
This passage presents marital love as self-giving, enduring, and protective—modeled on Christ’s sacrificial devotion. In light of this standard, one could argue that divorcing a wife due to aging or diminished attractiveness stands in tension with the kind of love described in Christian scripture.
The core issue, then, is not merely historical but moral and theological: what does it mean for a prophet to serve as the supreme example of conduct? And how should prophetic character be evaluated when measured against competing scriptural ideals of love and marriage?