Does a Presumably Deceased Husband’s Nikah Still Remain Intact After Discovering He was Alive?

Does a Presumably Deceased Husband’s Nikah Still Remain Intact After Discovering He was Alive?

                       6th January 2022

  

Question: I need your guidance regarding an urgent matter. The problem is that few years back my brother’s family lived in Canada. My brother had a plane crash and the authorities reported him dead. So, his family returned back to Pakistan. My parents married me to my sister-in-law (after completing her iddah). She had 1 son and 1 daughter from her previous marriage. Now after 1 year the embassy reported that my brother is alive and survived the crash but was in comma since then. Now my question is, what is the legal status of my marriage? Also, she is pregnant with my baby girl so who will be the legal father?

 

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

Answer

In reference to your case in question, if what you have said is true to its very nature then due to the complex nature of your query, there are a number of factors that must be addressed namely the announcement of her husband’s death, his right to reclaiming his wife after he is discovered to be alive and the legal father of the new baby girl.

As for the first issue about the announcement of her husband’s death, then the general ruling is that post-death injunctions only apply once a person’s death has been confirmed after thorough investigation of a person’s living status. Such confirmed report must be based on sound evidence that establishes near certainty of their death and not founded on mere assumptions. Near certainty can be established either by reliable witnesses or from the reports of such existential calamities that leave little scope of survival. If the authority’s report of her former husband’s death due to a plane crash was convincing enough to accept then it was reasonable to consider him dead as usually the chances of surviving a plane crash is extremely rare.[1] As of which all post death injunctions such as inheritance distribution, grace period of four months and ten days etc will apply.

The second issue is now that after a year the embassy notified the family that her former husband was alive all this time but was in a coma, most probably in a vegetative state and receiving treatment, if this is confirmed and the report can be trusted after investigation then the scholars of the four madhabs have differed as to which husband does she belong to (see footnote).[2] The standard position in the Hanafi school is that her first Nikah remains intact. Which means that she must return back to her former husband and her second Nikah to his younger brother becomes automatically annulled.[3] This ruling is based on Sayyiduna Umar’s radhiyallahu anhu judgment during his reign of Khilafat where a man was abducted by a group of Jinns and became unknown whether he was alive or not. Sayyiduna Umar radhiyallahu anhu issued an injunction for his wife to wait for four years during which if he returned then they can reunite and live as married couple otherwise he will be presumed dead. Her husband did not return during that time and so presuming him to be dead, she observed the post-death grace period of four months and ten days and thereafter remarried to someone else. After remarrying, her former husband suddenly  returned and upon seeing his wife with another man, he went to Khalif Umar radhiyallahu anhu and related the entire incident to him. In one narration Sayyiduna Umar radhiyallahu anhu gave him the choice between returning to his wife or reclaim his mahr back (so she can continue living with her second husband).[4] However, in another version Sayyiduna Umar radhiyallahu anhu retracted from this view in favour of Sayyiduna Ali radhiyallahu anhu who maintained that her former husband has rights over her so she must return back to him and separate from her second husband. She will be entitled to the mahr of her second husband due to the permissibility of intimacy and also observe a separate waiting period from her second husband before reuniting with her former husband. The underlying rational of this view is that the Quran prohibits men from marrying women in the wedlock of someone else. As her former Nikah was not broken, she is still in her previous marriage.[5]

The underpinning ruling of the above is similar to your situation as in, when her former husband was discovered to be alive then he has more rights over her because their nikah was still intact. As a result, your marriage with her shall be automatically annulled. Remember that to end the marriage, her husband must either divorce her or agree to a Khula – wife returning her mahr in exchange of releasing herself from his marriage – in order to remarry elsewhere otherwise she sill remains in his wedlock.

The third issue is that she must now observe a waiting period before returning back to her former husband as indicated in the fatwa of Sayyiduna Ali radhiyallahu anhu. This is because by her consummating lawfully with another man, the waiting period is so to cleanse her womb which is three menses. But if she is pregnant like in your case, then she must not consummate with him until child birth so not to mix his seminal fluid with the child she is already conceiving.[6] This leads on to the final point as to who is considered to be this new baby’s legitimate father that she is now conceiving. The soundest opinion is that her second husband, which is you, will be considered the child’s legal father Islamically which means that the child’s lineage will be attributed to you.[7]

Having said the above, a final note on this is that such sensitive matters must be treated with wisdom. As she rightfully belongs to her first husband, no one can take that right away from him. She can no longer continue with any conjugal relationship with her second husband. Her second husband however, becomes responsible for financially maintaining his new born child.

 

 

 

[Allãh Knows Best]

 

 

Written and researched by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

 

 

[1] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb al-Mafqood, vol 6 p. 462-463

قُلْت: وَالظَّاهِرُ أَنَّ هَذَا غَيْرُ خَارِجٍ عَنْ ظَاهِرِ الرِّوَايَةِ أَيْضًا، بَلْ هُوَ أَقْرَبُ إلَيْهِ مِنْ الْقَوْلِ بِالتَّقْدِيرِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ فَسَّرَهُ فِي شَرْحِ الْوَهْبَانِيَّةِ بِأَنْ يَنْظُرَ وَيَجْتَهِدَ وَيَفْعَلَ مَا يَغْلِبُ عَلَى ظَنِّهِ فَلَا يَقُولُ بِالتَّقْدِيرِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَمْ يَرِدْ بِهِ الشَّرْعُ بَلْ يَنْظُرُ فِي الْأَقْرَانِ وَفِي الزَّمَانِ وَالْمَكَانِ وَيَجْتَهِدُ، ثُمَّ نَقَلَ عَنْ مُغْنِي الْحَنَابِلَةِ حِكَايَتَهُ عَنْ الشَّافِعِيِّ وَمُحَمَّدٍ، وَأَنَّهُ الْمَشْهُورُ عَنْ مَالِكٍ وَأَبِي حَنِيفَةَ وَأَبِي يُوسُفَ. وَقَالَ الزَّيْلَعِيُّ: لِأَنَّهُ يَخْتَلِفُ بِاخْتِلَافِ الْبِلَادِ وَكَذَا غَلَبَةُ الظَّنِّ تَخْتَلِفُ بِاخْتِلَافِ الْأَشْخَاصِ فَإِنَّ الْمِلْكَ الْعَظِيمَ إذَا انْقَطَعَ خَبَرُهُ يَغْلِبُ عَلَى الظَّنِّ فِي أَدْنَى مُدَّةٍ أَنَّهُ قَدْ مَاتَ اهـ وَمُقْتَضَاهُ أَنَّهُ يَجْتَهِدُ وَيُحَكِّمُ الْقَرَائِنَ الظَّاهِرَةَ الدَّالَّةَ عَلَى مَوْتِهِ وَعَلَى هَذَا يُبْتَنَى عَلَى مَا فِي جَامِعِ الْفَتَاوَى حَيْثُ قَالَ: وَإِذَا فُقِدَ فِي الْمُهْلِكَةِ فَمَوْتُهُ غَالِبٌ فَيُحْكَمُ بِهِ، كَمَا إذَا فُقِدَ فِي وَقْتِ الْمُلَاقَاةِ مَعَ الْعَدُوِّ أَوْ مَعَ قُطَّاعِ الطَّرِيقِ، أَوْ سَافَرَ عَلَى الْمَرَضِ الْغَالِبُ هَلَاكُهُ، أَوْ كَانَ سَفَرُهُ فِي الْبَحْرِ وَمَا أَشْبَهَ ذَلِكَ حُكِمَ بِمَوْتِهِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ الْغَالِبُ فِي هَذِهِ الْحَالَاتِ وَإِنْ كَانَ بَيْنَ احْتِمَالَيْنِ، وَاحْتِمَالُ مَوْتِهِ نَاشِئٌ عَنْ دَلِيلٍ لَا احْتِمَالَ حَيَاتِهِ؛ لِأَنَّ هَذَا الِاحْتِمَالَ كَاحْتِمَالِ مَا إذَا بَلَغَ الْمَفْقُودُ مِقْدَارَ مَا لَا يَعِيشُ عَلَى حَسَبِ مَا اخْتَلَفُوا فِي الْمِقْدَارِ نَقْلٌ مِنْ الْغُنْيَةِ اهـ مَا فِي جَامِعِ الْفَتَاوَى.

 

[2] According to the famous view of the Maliki school, her first husband cannot claim any rights over her as she now belongs to her second husband. According to the Shafi’ee school, like the Hanafi school, her second Nikah will be automatically annulled and must return back to her former husband after completing a cleansing waiting period from her second husband. According to the soundest opinion of the Hanbali school, her first husband can claim rights over her if her second marriage was not consummated. If she consummated her second marriage then her first husband will be given a choice to either to take her back or release her by reclaiming his mahr in order to remain with her second husband.

 

Mawsoo’atul Fiqhiyyat Kuwaitiyyah, vol 38, p. 279 – shamila

وَعِنْدَ الْمَالِكِيَّةِ أَنَّ الْمَفْقُودَ إِنْ عَادَ قَبْل نِكَاحِ زَوْجَتِهِ غَيْرَهُ، فَهِيَ زَوْجَتُهُ، وَهَذَا هُوَ الْقَوْل الْمَشْهُورُ الْمَعْمُول بِهِ، فَإِنْ عَادَ بَعْدَ النِّكَاحِ، فَعَنْ مَالِكٍ فِي ذَلِكَ رِوَايَتَانِ: الأْولَى: إِنْ عَادَ قَبْل الدُّخُول، فَهُوَ أَحَقُّ بِهَا، وَيُفَرَّقُ بَيْنَهَا وَبَيْنَ زَوْجِهَا الثَّانِي، وَأَمَّا إِنْ عَادَ بَعْدَ الدُّخُول، فَالثَّانِي عَلَى نِكَاحِهِ، وَلاَ يُفَرَّقُ بَيْنَهُ، وَبَيْنَ زَوْجَتِهِ. الثَّانِيَةُ: إِنْ عَادَ الْمَفْقُودُ، فَوَجَدَ زَوْجَتَهُ قَدْ تَزَوَّجَتْ فَلاَ سَبِيل لَهُ عَلَيْهَا، وَلَوْ لَمْ يَكُنْ دُخُولٌ. وَقَدْ أَخَذَ بِكُلٍّ مِنَ الرِّوَايَتَيْنِ طَائِفَةٌ مِنَ الْمَالِكِيَّةِ، وَقَال ابْنُ الْقَاسِمِ، وَأَشْهَبُ بِأَنَّ أَقْوَى الْقَوْلَيْنِ مَا جَاءَ فِي الرِّوَايَةِ الثَّانِيَةِ  وَهِيَ مَذْكُورَةٌ فِي الْمُوَطَّأِ

وَقَوْل الشَّافِعِيَّةِ يَخْتَلِفُ بَيْنَ الْقَدِيمِ وَالْجَدِيدِ: فَفِي الْقَوْل الْقَدِيمِ: إِنْ قَدِمَ الْمَفْقُودُ بَعْدَ زَوَاجِ امْرَأَتِهِ، فَفِي عَوْدَتِهَا إِلَيْهِ قَوْلاَنِ، وَقِيل يُخَيَّرُ الأَْوَّل بَيْنَ أَخْذِهَا مِنَ الثَّانِي، وَتَرْكِهَا لَهُ وَأَخْذِ مَهْرِ الْمِثْل مِنْهُ. وَفِي الْقَوْل الْجَدِيدِ: هِيَ بَاقِيَةٌ عَلَى نِكَاحِ الْمَفْقُودِ، فَإِنْ تَزَوَّجَتْ غَيْرَهُ فَنِكَاحُهَا بَاطِلٌ، تَعُودُ لِلأْوَّل بَعْدَ انْتِهَاءِ عِدَّتِهَا مِنَ الثَّانِي.

وَذَهَبَ الْحَنَابِلَةُ إِلَى أَنَّ الْمَفْقُودَ إِنْ قَدِمَ قَبْل أَنْ تَتَزَوَّجَ امْرَأَتُهُ، فَهِيَ عَلَى عِصْمَتِهِ. فَإِنْ تَزَوَّجَتْ غَيْرَهُ، وَلَمْ يَدْخُل بِهَا، فَهِيَ زَوْجَةُ الأْوَّل فِي رِوَايَةٍ، وَهِيَ الصَّحِيحُ، وَفِي رِوَايَةٍ أَنَّهُ يُخَيَّرُ.فَإِنْ دَخَل بِهَا الثَّانِي، كَانَ الأْوَّل بِالْخِيَارِ، إِنْ شَاءَ أَخَذَ زَوْجَتَهُ بِالْعَقْدِ الأْوَّل، وَإِنْ شَاءَ أَخَذَ مَهْرَهَا وَبَقِيَتْ عَلَى نِكَاحِ الثَّانِي.

 

[3] Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Hiylatun Najizah, p. 68-69

[4] Musannaf ibn Abi Shaybah, No: 16720

ابْنُ عُيَيْنَةَ، عَنْ عَمْرٍو، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ جَعْدَةَ، أَنَّ رَجُلًا اسْتَهُوَتْهُ الْجِنُّ عَلَى عَهْدِ عُمَرَ، فَأَتَتِ امْرَأَتُهُ عُمَرَ، فَأَمَرَهَا «أَنْ تَرَبَّصَ أَرْبَعَ سِنِينَ، ثُمَّ أَمَرَ وَلِيَّهُ بَعْدَ أَرْبَعِ سِنِينَ أَنْ يُطَلِّقَهَا، ثُمَّ أَمَرَهَا أَنْ تَعْتَدَّ، فَإِذَا انْقَضَتْ عِدَّتُهَا تَزَوَّجَتْ، فَإِنْ جَاءَ زَوْجُهَا خُيِّرَ بَيْنَ امْرَأَتِهِ وَالصَّدَاقِ»

 

Sarakhsi, Kitāb al-Mabsoot, Kitāb al-Mafqood, vol 11 p. 39-40

عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ أَبِي لَيْلَى رَحِمَهُمَا اللَّهُ قَالَ لَقِيتُ: الْمَفْقُودَ نَفْسَهُ فَحَدَّثَنِي حَدِيثَهُ قَالَ: أَكَلْت حَرِيرًا فِي أَهْلِي ثُمَّ خَرَجْتُ فَأَخَذَنِي نَفَرٌ مِنْ الْجِنِّ فَمَكَثْتُ فِيهِمْ ثُمَّ بَدَا لَهُمْ فِي عِتْقِي فَأَعْتَقُونِي، ثُمَّ أَتَوْا بِي قَرِيبًا مِنْ الْمَدِينَةِ فَقَالُوا أَتَعْرِفُ النَّخْلَ فَقُلْتُ: نَعَمْ فَخَلُّوا عَنِّي فَجِئْتُ، فَإِذَا عُمَرُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ – قَدْ أَبَانَ امْرَأَتِي بَعْدَ أَرْبَعِ سِنِينَ وَحَاضَتْ وَانْقَضَتْ عِدَّتُهَا وَتَزَوَّجَتْ فَخَيَّرَنِي عُمَرُ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ – بَيْنَ أَنْ يَرُدَّهَا عَلَيَّ وَبَيْنَ الْمَهْرِ. وَأَهْلُ الْحَدِيثِ – رَحِمَهُمُ اللَّهُ – يَرَوْنَ فِي هَذَا الْحَدِيثِ أَنَّهُ هَمَّ بِتَأْدِيبِهِ حِينَ رَآهُ، وَجَعَلَ يَقُولُ: يَغِيبُ أَحَدُكُمْ عَنْ زَوْجَتِهِ هَذِهِ الْمُدَّةَ الطَّوِيلَةَ، وَلَا يَبْعَثُ بِخَبَرِهِ فَقَالَ: لَا تَعْجَلْ يَا أَمِيرَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ، وَذَكَرَ لَهُ قِصَّتَهُ.

 

[5] Sarakhsi, Kitāb al-Mabsoot, Kitāb al-Mafqood, vol 11 p. 39-40

وَهَذَا الْحَدِيثُ دَلِيلٌ لَنَا أَيْضًا فَنَتَّبِعُ الْآثَارَ، وَلَا نَشْتَغِلُ بِكَيْفِيَّةِ ذَلِكَ، وَكَأَنَّ عُمَرَ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ – إنَّمَا رَجَعَ عَنْ قَوْلِهِ فِي امْرَأَةِ الْمَفْقُودِ لَمَّا تَبَيَّنَ مِنْ حَالِ هَذَا الرَّجُلِ، وَأَمَّا تَخْيِيرُهُ إيَّاهُ بَيْنَ أَنْ يَرُدَّهَا عَلَيْهِ وَبَيْنَ الْمَهْرِ فَهُوَ بِنَاءٌ عَلَى مَذْهَبِ عُمَرَ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ – فِي الْمَرْأَةِ إذَا نُعِيَ إلَيْهَا زَوْجُهَا فَاعْتَدَّتْ، وَتَزَوَّجَتْ ثُمَّ أَتَى الزَّوْجُ الْأَوَّلُ حَيًّا إنَّهُ يُخَيَّرُ بَيْنَ أَنْ تُرَدَّ عَلَيْهِ وَبَيْنَ الْمَهْرِ، وَقَدْ صَحَّ رُجُوعُهُ عَنْهُ إلَى قَوْلِ عَلِيٍّ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُفَإِنَّهُ كَانَ يَقُولُ تُرَدُّ إلَى زَوْجِهَا الْأَوَّلِ، وَيُفَرَّقُ بَيْنَهَا وَبَيْنَ الْآخَرِ، وَلَهَا الْمَهْرُ بِمَا اسْتَحَلَّ مِنْ فَرْجِهَا، وَلَا يَقْرَبُهَا الْأَوَّلُ حَتَّى تَنْقَضِيَ عِدَّتُهَا مِنْ الْآخَرِ وَبِهَذَا كَانَ يَأْخُذُ إبْرَاهِيمُ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ – فَيَقُولُ: قَوْلُ عَلِيٍّ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ – أَحَبُّ إلَيَّ مِنْ قَوْلِ عُمَرَ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ -، وَبِهِ نَأْخُذُ أَيْضًا؛ لِأَنَّهُ تَبَيَّنَ أَنَّهَا تَزَوَّجَتْ، وَهِيَ مَنْكُوحَةٌ وَمَنْكُوحَةُ الْغَيْرِ لَيْسَتْ مِنْ الْمُحَلَّلَاتِ بَلْ هِيَ مِنْ الْمُحَرَّمَاتِ فِي حَقِّ سَائِرِ النَّاسِ كَمَا قَالَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنْ النِّسَاءِ} [النساء: 24] فَكَيْفَ يَسْتَقِيمُ تَرْكُهَا مَعَ الثَّانِي، وَإِذَا اخْتَارَ الْأَوَّلُ الْمَهْرَ، وَلَكِنْ يَكُونُ النِّكَاحُ مُنْعَقِدًا بَيْنَهُمَا فَكَيْفَ يَسْتَقِيمُ دَفْعُ الْمَهْرِ إلَى الْأَوَّلِ، وَهُوَ بَدَلُ بُضْعِهَا فَيَكُون مَمْلُوكًا لَهَا دُونَ زَوْجِهَا كَالْمَنْكُوحَةِ إذَا وُطِئَتْ بِشُبْهَةٍ، فَعَرَفْنَا أَنَّ الصَّحِيحَ أَنَّهَا زَوْجَةُ الْأَوَّلِ، وَلَكِنْ لَا يَقْرَبُهَا لِكَوْنِهَا مُعْتَدَّةً لِغَيْرِهِ كَالْمَنْكُوحَةِ إذَا وُطِئَتْ بِالشُّبْهَةِ. وَذُكِرَ عَنْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ أَبِي لَيْلَى – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ – أَنَّ عُمَرَ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ – رَجَعَ عَنْ ثَلَاثِ قَضِيَّاتٍ إلَى قَوْلِ عَلِيٍّ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ -، عَنْ امْرَأَةِ أَبِي كَنَفٍ، وَالْمَفْقُودِ زَوْجُهَا، وَالْمَرْأَةِ الَّتِي تَزَوَّجَتْ فِي عِدَّتِهَا. أَمَّا حُكْمُ الْمَفْقُودِ وَالْمُعْتَدَّةِ فَقَدْ بَيَّنَّا.

 

[6] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb al-Talāq, vol 5 p. 189

مطلب فِي عدة الْمَوْت

(قَوْلُهُ: وَفِي حَقِّ الْحَامِلِ) أَيْ مِنْ نِكَاحٍ وَلَوْ فَاسِدًا، فَلَا عِدَّةَ عَلَى الْحَامِلِ مِنْ زِنًا أَصْلًا بَحْرٌ (قَوْلُهُ: مُطْلَقًا) أَيْ سَوَاءً كَانَ عَنْ طَلَاقٍ، أَوْ وَفَاةٍ، أَوْ مُتَارَكَةٍ، أَوْ وَطْءٍ بِشُبْهَةٍ نَهْرٌ

 

Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Talāq, vol 1, p. 554

الْبَابُ الثَّالِثَ عَشَرَ فِي الْعِدَّةِ

وَعِدَّةُ الْحَامِلِ أَنْ تَضَعَ حَمْلَهَا كَذَا فِي الْكَافِي. سَوَاءٌ كَانَتْ حَامِلًا وَقْتَ وُجُوبِ الْعِدَّةِ أَوْ حَبِلَتْ بَعْدَ الْوُجُوبِ كَذَا فِي فَتَاوَى قَاضِي خَانْ. وَسَوَاءٌ كَانَتْ الْمَرْأَةُ حُرَّةً أَوْ مَمْلُوكَةً قِنَّةً أَوْ مُدَبَّرَةً أَوْ مُكَاتَبَةً أَوْ أُمَّ وَلَدٍ أَوْ مُسْتَسْعَاةً مُسْلِمَةً أَوْ كِتَابِيَّةً كَذَا فِي الْبَدَائِعِ.

وَسَوَاءٌ كَانَتْ عَنْ طَلَاقٍ أَوْ وَفَاةٍ أَوْ مُتَارَكَةٍ أَوْ وَطْءٍ بِشُبْهَةٍ كَذَا فِي النَّهْرِ الْفَائِقِ. وَسَوَاءٌ كَانَ الْحَمْلُ ثَابِتَ النَّسَبِ أَمْ لَا وَيُتَصَوَّرُ ذَلِكَ فِيمَنْ تَزَوَّجَ حَامِلًا بِالزِّنَا كَذَا فِي السِّرَاجِ الْوَهَّاجِ.

 

[7] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb al-Talāq, Bab al-Iddat, vol 5 p. 247-248

فَصْلٌ فِي ثُبُوتِ النَّسَبِ

(غَابَ عَنْ امْرَأَتِهِ فَتَزَوَّجَتْ بِآخَرَ وَوَلَدَتْ أَوْلَادًا) ثُمَّ جَاءَ الزَّوْجُ الْأَوَّلُ (فَالْأَوْلَادُ لِلثَّانِي عَلَى الْمَذْهَبِ) الَّذِي رَجَعَ إلَيْهِ الْإِمَامُ وَعَلَيْهِ الْفَتْوَى كَمَا فِي الْخَانِيَّةِ وَالْجَوْهَرَةِ وَالْكَافِي وَغَيْرِهَا. وَفِي حَاشِيَةِ شَرْحِ الْمَنَارِ لِابْنِ الْحَنْبَلِيِّ. وَعَلَيْهِ الْفَتْوَى إنْ احْتَمَلَهُ الْحَالُ، لَكِنْ فِي آخِرِ دَعْوَى الْجَمْعِ حَكَى أَرْبَعَةَ أَقْوَالٍ ثُمَّ أَفْتَى بِمَا اعْتَمَدَهُ الْمُصَنِّفُ، وَعَلَّلَهُ ابْنُ مَالِكٍ بِأَنَّهُ الْمُسْتَفْرِشُ حَقِيقَةً، فَالْوَلَدُ لِلْفِرَاشِ الْحَقِيقِيِّ وَإِنْ كَانَ فَاسِدًا وَتَمَامُهُ فِيهِ فَرَاجِعْهُ.

(قَوْلُهُ: غَابَ عَنْ امْرَأَتِهِ إلَخْ) شَامِلٌ لِمَا إذَا بَلَغَهَا مَوْتُهُ أَوْ طَلَاقُهُ فَاعْتَدَّتْ وَتَزَوَّجَتْ ثُمَّ بَانَ خِلَافُهُ، وَلِمَا إذَا ادَّعَتْ ذَلِكَ ثُمَّ بَانَ خِلَافُهُ اهـ ح. (قَوْلُهُ: وَفِي حَاشِيَةِ شَرْحِ الْمَنَارِ إلَخْ) قَالَ الشَّارِحُ فِي شَرْحِهِ عَلَى الْمَنَارِ: لَكِنَّ الصَّحِيحَ مَا أَوْرَدَهُ الْجُرْجَانِيُّ أَنَّ الْأَوْلَادَ مِنْ الثَّانِي إنْ احْتَمَلَهُ الْحَالُ، وَأَنَّ الْإِمَامَ رَجَعَ إلَى هَذَا الْقَوْلِ، وَعَلَيْهِ الْفَتْوَى كَمَا فِي حَاشِيَةِ ابْنِ الْحَنْبَلِيِّ عَنْ [الْوَاقِعَاتِ وَالْأَسْرَارِ] وَنَقَلَهُ ابْنُ نُجَيْمٍ عَنْ الظَّهِيرِيَّةِ اهـ وَاحْتِمَالُ الْحَالِ بِأَنْ تَلِدَهُ لِسِتَّةِ أَشْهُرٍ فَأَكْثَرَ مِنْ وَقْتِ النِّكَاحِ. (قَوْلُهُ: حَكَى أَرْبَعَةَ أَقْوَالٍ) حَاصِلُ عِبَارَتِهِ مَعَ شَرْحِهِ لِابْنِ مَالِكٍ أَنَّ الْأَوْلَادَ لِلْأَوَّلِ عِنْدَ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ مُطْلَقًا: أَيْ سَوَاءٌ أَتَتْ بِهِ لِأَقَلَّ مِنْ سِتَّةِ أَشْهُرٍ، أَوْ لَا، لِأَنَّ نِكَاحَ الْأُولَى صَحِيحٌ فَاعْتِبَارُهُ أَوْلَى. وَفِي رِوَايَةٍ لِلثَّانِي وَعَلَيْهِ الْفَتْوَى لِأَنَّ الْوَلَدَ لِلْفِرَاشِ الْحَقِيقِيِّ وَإِنْ كَانَ فَاسِدًا. وَعِنْدَ أَبِي يُوسُفَ لِلْأَوَّلِ إنْ أَتَتْ بِهِ لِأَقَلَّ مِنْ سِتَّةِ أَشْهُرٍ مِنْ عَقْدِ الثَّانِي لِتَيَقُّنِ الْعُلُوقِ مِنْ الْأَوَّلِ، وَإِنْ لِأَكْثَرَ فَلِلثَّانِي. وَعِنْدَ مُحَمَّدٍ لِلْأَوَّلِ إنْ كَانَ بَيْنَ وَطْءِ الثَّانِي وَالْوِلَادَةِ أَقَلُّ مِنْ سَنَتَيْنِ، فَلَوْ أَكْثَرَ مِنْهُمَا فَلِلثَّانِي لِتَيَقُّنِ أَنَّهُ لَيْسَ مِنْ الْأَوَّلِ، وَالنِّكَاحُ الصَّحِيحُ مَعَ احْتِمَالِ الْعُلُوقِ مِنْهُ أَوْلَى بِالِاعْتِبَارِ، وَإِنَّمَا وَضْعُ الْمَسْأَلَةِ فِي الْوَلَدِ إذْ الْمَرْأَةُ تُرَدُّ إلَى الْأَوَّلِ إجْمَاعًا. اهـ.

قُلْت: وَظَاهِرُهُ أَنَّهُ عَلَى الْمُفْتَى بِهِ يَكُونُ الْوَلَدُ لِلثَّانِي مُطْلَقًا وَإِنْ جَاءَتْ بِهِ لِأَقَلَّ مِنْ سِتَّةِ أَشْهُرٍ مِنْ وَقْتِ الْعَقْدِ كَمَا يَدُلُّ عَلَيْهِ ذِكْرُ الْإِطْلَاقِ قَبْلَهُ، وَالِاقْتِصَارُ عَلَى التَّفْصِيلِ بَعْدَهُ، وَهَذَا خِلَافُ مَا قَالَهُ ابْنُ الْحَنْبَلِيِّ، وَهَذَا وَجْهُ الِاسْتِدْرَاكِ لَكِنْ لَا يَخْفَى مَا فِيهِ، فَقَدْ ذَكَرْنَا قَرِيبًا أَنَّ الْمَنْكُوحَةَ لَوْ وَلَدَتْ لِدُونِ سِتَّةِ أَشْهُرٍ لَمْ يَثْبُتْ نَسَبُهُ مِنْ زَوْجٍ وَيَفْسُدُ النِّكَاحُ أَيْ لِأَنَّهُ لَا بُدَّ مِنْ تَصَوُّرِ الْعُلُوقِ مِنْهُ وَفِيمَا دُونَ سِتَّةِ أَشْهُرٍ لَا يُتَصَوَّرُ ذَلِكَ، وَهَذَا إذَا لَمْ يَعْلَمْ بِأَنَّ لَهَا زَوْجًا غَيْرَهُ فَكَيْفَ إذَا ظَهَرَ زَوْجٌ غَيْرُهُ فَلَا شَكَّ فِي عَدَمِ ثُبُوتِهِ مِنْ الثَّانِي، وَلِهَذَا قَالَ فِي شَرْحِ دُرَرِ الْبِحَارِ: إنَّ هَذَا مُشْكِلٌ فِيمَا إذَا أَتَتْ بِهِ لِأَقَلَّ مِنْ سِتَّةِ أَشْهُرٍ مُذْ تَزَوَّجَهَا. اهـ.

وَالْحَقُّ أَنَّ الْإِطْلَاقَ غَيْرُ مُرَادٍ وَأَنَّ الصَّوَابَ مَا نَقَلَهُ ابْنُ الْحَنْبَلِيِّ، وَبِهِ يَظْهَرُ أَنَّ هَذِهِ الرِّوَايَةَ عَنْ الْإِمَامِ الْمُفْتَى بِهَا هِيَ الَّتِي أَخَذَ بِهَا أَبُو يُوسُفَ، وَأَنَّهُ لَا بُدَّ مِنْ تَقْيِيدِ كَلَامِ الْمُصَنِّفِ وَالْمَجْمَعِ بِمَا نَقَلَهُ ابْنُ الْحَنْبَلِيِّ، وَأَنَّهُ لَا وَجْهَ لِلِاسْتِدْرَاكِ. عَلَيْهِ بِمَا فِي الْمَجْمَعِ، وَاَللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ.

 

Does a Menstruating Female Traveller Pray Full Salāh or Qasr?

 31st December 2021

 

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: A menstruating woman travels to a destination of more than 48 miles and intends to stay there for less than 15 days. She will be staying for 10 days only and during that time she will become clean from her periods. She will return home after 3-4 days since her purity. Must she shorten her Salāh as Qasr or pray the full Salāh for those remaining days before returning home?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer:

The case in question is quite complex as the Hanafi scholars have differed regarding this issue. The current position we adopt is that the menstruating woman in the aforesaid case must pray Qasr after becoming clean, the reason for which will be discussed below. However, we will first explore the reason for the differences between the Hanafi scholars so to remove any potential confusion on this matter. A simple rule to understand is that in the Shariah, a person becomes a Shar’ee traveller if they make the intention of travelling more than 48 miles and staying at their destination for less than 15 days. Such intention must be deemed valid otherwise they will not be considered a Shar’ee traveller and the concessions of travelling will not apply. There are overall two opinions regarding your issue;

 

1) A menstruating woman in question must read the full Salāh after becoming clean and cannot read Qasr. This is the main stream view of the Hanafi scholars including Ibn Abideen Shami rahimahullah, Allama Badruddeen al-Ayni rahimahullah, Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi rahimahullah, Mufti Rasheed Ahmad Ludhyanvi rahimahullah and Mufti Mahmood al-Hasan Gangohi rahimahullah.[1] Ibn Abideen Shami rahimahullah clarifies this rulings by stating that if a woman starts her journey whilst she is menstruating and then upon reaching her destination, she becomes clean or she travels for three days (in the earlier times they would measure distances by days so three days journey was the safr distance) and becomes clean for the rest of the two days journey then she must read the full Salāh and not Qasr. This is because as he states that nothing of her intention counts during her menses period.[2]

 

2) The second position is that a menstruating woman who intends a journey of 48 Shar’ee miles will be considered a Shar’ee traveller and will read Qasr upon becoming pure on her journey (or at her destination of less than 15 days).[3] This is a minority opinion but arguably the most convenient position as well. Amongst those who maintain this view include Allamah Shurunbulali rahimahullah and Burhan al-Din Ibn Mazah rahimahullah.

 

The reason for the underlying differences between the scholars is based on whether her intention is considered valid or not during her menses. The classical position is that a menstruating woman’s intention is not valid because Salāh is not obligatory on her so she is not a Shar’ee traveller. They equate her intention with a minor child as an analogy whose intention is not considered valid. For instance, if a child travels 48 miles from his home and during the journey reaches puberty then he must read the full Salāh because he did not have a valid intention in the first place. Similarly with a menstruating woman. This is different from a non-Muslim adult who started his journey of more than 48 miles and during this journey he accepts Islām, then he will pray Qasr. This is because a non-Muslim adult’s intention is considered to be valid and hence becomes a Shar’ee traveller.[4]

 

The scholars of the second position disagree with equating a menstruating woman’s intention to that of a minor child’s inability of intention but instead equate her to a non-Muslim adult’s intention before Islām. The difference between the two is that a child is not fully mukallaf and mukhatab (responsible and addressed to comply with rules of the Shariah and Allāh’s laws) due to their minor age whereas a menstruating woman is legally responsible in certain aspect of the Shariah (like for instance committing a crime etc). They argue that a non-Muslim adult not being able to pray due to his disbelief does not invalidate his intention. Likewise, a menstruating woman not being able to pray due to impurity does not necessarily invalidate her intention of travelling either.[5] One can also argue that a minor child and a menstruating woman are not analogous in intention because a menstruating woman is balighah whereas as a minor child is not, so their respective rulings will be different.

 

Some have also argued that travelling itself is not an act of worship so their intentions are not the same as that of Ibadah. In Ibadah, a menstruating woman’s intention is invalid due to impurity, but not the intention of travelling itself as purity is not essential for that. The classical jurists of the first opinion have refuted the reasoning of the this second position stating that a menstruating woman cannot be equated to a non-Muslim traveller. For a non-Muslim, his kufr is a major impediment which is his voluntary action and can be removed through his Islām whereas menstruation is involuntary that cannot be removed at her own accord.[6] She is therefore similar to a minor child’s intention as his sexual maturity (bulugh) is involuntary.

 

One notices the complexity of the issue on the account of the different reasons postulated by the Hanafi jurists. Both opinions are correct in their own respect and are based on plausible reasons and analogies. However, due to convenience, we are more inclined towards the opinion that the menstruating woman in question must perform Qasr upon becoming pure from her menstruation during her travel. This is also the position of our senior teacher, Shaykh Mufti Shabbir Ahmed Patel Sahib.[7] If she chooses to adopt the first position as in to read the full Salāh as a precaution then she may do so. What is necessary is to remain consistent in following one position only and not to arbitrarily switch between positions.

 

 

[Allāh Knows Best]

 

 

 

Written by:  Apa Sajeda          Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam      

JKN Fatawa Department

 

 

[1] Allamah Badr al-Din al-Ayni, Al Binayah Sharhul Hidaya, Kitabus Salah, Vol 3, Pg 279

ولو طهرت الحائض في السفر، وبينهما وبين المقصد أقل من مسيرة سفر تتم، هو الصحيح

 

Mufti Mahmood Ganghohi, Fatwa Mahmoodiya, Kitaab Al Salah, Baab al salatul Musafir, Vol 7, Pg 502

حالت سفر میں حیض اور بہشتی زیور کی عبارت کی وضاحت

 

Shaikh Rasheed Ahmad Al Ludhyanvi, Ahsanul Fatawa, Kitaab Al Salah, Baab al salatul Musafir Vol 4, Pg 87

عورت سفر  میں وطن کے قریب جاکر  پاک ہوئی تو پوری نماز پڑھے

[2] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitābul Salaah, Bāb Ma Yufsidu Alsalaah…, vol 2 p. 135

طَهُرَتْ الْحَائِضُ وَبَقِيَ لِمَقْصِدِهَا يَوْمَانِ تُتِمُّ فِي الصَّحِيحِ كَصَبِيٍّ بَلَغَ بِخِلَافِ كَافِرٍ أَسْلَمَ.

(قَوْلُهُ تُتِمُّ فِي الصَّحِيحِ) كَذَا فِي الظَّهِيرِيَّةِ. قَالَ ط وَكَأَنَّهُ لِسُقُوطِ الصَّلَاةِ عَنْهَا فِيمَا مَضَى لَمْ يُعْتَبَرْ حُكْمُ السَّفَرِ فِيهِ فَلَمَّا تَأَهَّلَتْ لِلْأَدَاءِ اُعْتُبِرَ مِنْ وَقْتِهِ.

(قَوْلُهُ كَصَبِيٍّ بَلَغَ) أَيْ فِي أَثْنَاءِ الطَّرِيقِ وَقَدْ بَقِيَ لِمَقْصِدِهِ أَقَلُّ مِنْ ثَلَاثَةِ أَيَّامٍ فَإِنَّهُ يُتِمُّ وَلَا يُعْتَبَرُ مَا مَضَى لِعَدَمِ تَكْلِيفِهِ فِيهِ ط (قَوْلُهُ بِخِلَافِ كَافِرٍ أَسْلَمَ) أَيْ فَإِنَّهُ يَقْصُرُ

قَالَ فِي الدُّرَرِ لِأَنَّ نِيَّتَهُ مُعْتَبَرَةٌ فَكَانَ مُسَافِرًا مِنْ الْأَوَّلِ بِخِلَافِ الصَّبِيِّ فَإِنَّهُ مِنْ هَذَا الْوَقْتِ يَكُونُ مُسَافِرًا، وَقِيلَ يُتِمَّانِ، وَقِيلَ يَقْصُرَانِ. اهـ. وَالْمُخْتَارُ الْأَوَّلُ كَمَا فِي الْبَحْرِ وَغَيْرِهِ عَنْ الْخُلَاصَةِ.

قَالَ فِي الشُّرُنْبُلَالِيَّةِ: وَلَا يَخْفَى أَنَّ الْحَائِضَ لَا تَنْزِلُ عَنْ رُتْبَةِ الَّذِي أَسْلَمَ فَكَانَ حَقُّهَا الْقَصْرَ مِثْلَهُ. اهـ.

وَأَجَابَ فِي نَهْجِ النَّجَاةِ بِأَنَّ مَانِعَهَا سَمَاوِيٌّ بِخِلَافِهِ اهـ أَيْ وَإِنْ كَانَ كُلٌّ مِنْهُمَا مِنْ أَهْلِ النِّيَّةِ بِخِلَافِ الصَّبِيِّ، لَكِنْ مَنَعَهَا مِنْ الصَّلَاةِ مَا لَيْسَ بِصُنْعِهَا فَلَغَتْ نِيَّتُهَا مِنْ الْأَوَّلِ، بِخِلَافِ الْكَافِرِ فَإِنَّهُ قَادِرٌ عَلَى إزَالَةِ الْمَانِعِ مِنْ الِابْتِدَاءِ فَصَحَّتْ نِيَّتُهُ

 

As a side note, if a menstruating woman becomes pure during her journey and the remaining distance between her and her destination since her purity is more than 48 miles then she will read Qasr according to everyone.

 

[3] Imam Abu’l Ikhlas, Al-Shurunbulali, Hashiya al-Durar, Kitabul Salah, Baabul Musafir, Vol 1, Pg 132

وَلَا يَخْفَى أَنَّ الْحَائِضَ لَا تَنْزِلُ عَنْ رُتْبَةِ الَّذِي أَسْلَمَ فَكَانَ حَقُّهَا الْقَصْرَ مِثْلَهُ.

 

Burhan al din Ibn Mazah, Al Muhit Al Burhani, Kitabul Salah, Vol 2, Pg 40

والرابعة: الحائض إذا طهرت في هذا الوقت.

والخامسة: الطاهرة إذا حاضت في هذا الوقت، وإذا كان مسافرا في أول الوقت، وصلى صلاة السفر ثم أقام في الوقت لا يتغير فرضه، وإن لم يصل حتى أقام في آخر الوقت ينقلب فرضه أربعا، وإن لم يبق من الوقت إلا قدر ما يسع بعض الصلاة.

وإذا أسلم الكافر في سفره وبينه وبين المقصد أقل من ثلاثة أيام أو إذا أدرك الصبي (٩٧أ١) في سفره وبينه وبين المقصد أقل من ثلاثة أيام، فقد اختلف المشايخ فيه بعضهم قالوا: الذي أسلم يصلي ركعتين فالذي بلغ يصلي أربعا وقال بعضهم: يصليان ركعتين.

وفي «متفرقات الفقيه أبي جعفر» : فإنهما يصليان أربعا؛ لأنهما لم يكونا مخاطبين؛

فلا يقصران الصلاة، وأما الحائض إذا طهرت في بعض الطريق قصرت الصلاة؛ لأنها مخاطبة.

وفي «الحاوي» : سئل عن صبي خرج من نوركارايريد بخارى، فلما بلغ كرمة بلغ، قال: يصلي ركعتين إلى بخارى، وكذلك الكافر إذا أسلم فأما الحائض إذا طهرت من حيضها تصلي أربعا إلى بخارى.

 

[4] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitābul Salaah, Bāb Ma Yufsidu Alsalaah…, vol 2 p. 135

 

[5] Burhan al din Ibn Mazah, Al Muhit Al Burhani, Kitabul Salah, Vol 2, Pg 40

 

[6] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitābul Salaah, Bāb Ma Yufsidu Alsalaah…, vol 2 p. 135

[7] See  Menstruating woman travelling and Salāh, (2019) Fatwa: https://islamicportal.co.uk/menstruating-women-travelling-and-salah/ [accessed 31st December 2021]

 

What to do if You See Blood on the first day and don’t See it Thereafter?

10th December 2021

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: My period is late this month; I usually always get my period on the 11th. It is usually always on time however I think that stress from university and life has delayed it. I found some blood in my discharge during Asr today so I naturally did not pray.  I have not seen blood since Asr, however I did not pray Maghrib because this is the usual time of my period. Is this a sin because I saw nothing when I inserted a cotton like blood or anything. Was I supposed to pray Maghrib? I did not because I thought since it was the time of my daily period or close to it that I should not pray.

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer:

Thank for your query. You would like to know if the Maghrib you missed was supposed to be prayed. The issue whether Maghrib Salāh was obligatory on you or not depends on whether you continued bleeding or not thereafter within 10 days from the first time you saw discharge other than white. If you did not see any blood at all after this then the blood you saw at the time of Asr was not Haydh but Istihadha.  Therefore, you must repeat your Asr and Maghrib without the need for ghusl. [1] Generally, one should delay the Salāh until the end of the mustahab prayer time to check whether the bleeding continues or not. As for Maghrib, it is mustahab to read the prayer as soon as possible.[2] Therefore, you should have done wudhu and prayed your Maghrib salah shortly after the time had started. You will now have to do qadha of your Asr and Maghrib.

If on the other hand you continued bleeding thereafter within 10 days of when you first saw the blood after Asr, then all the days from that Asr time will be as considered your period days. Therefore, you will not have to do qadha of the Asr and Maghrib you missed. The ruling is the same even if some days you saw blood and some days you didn’t i.e. those days will still be considered Haydh according to your normal habit. [3] But you will not count your period from the 11th rather from the Asr time that you saw the blood.

Another point to remember is that if you continued bleeding even after 10 days then you must refer back to your last Haydh and purity habit to determine which days were Haydh and which days were Istihadha. [4]

 

 

[Allāh Knows Best]  

 

 

 

Written by:  Apa Sajeda          Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam    

JKN Fatawa Department

 

 

[1] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb Taharah, Bābul Haidh , vol 1 p. 283

أقله ثلاثة بلياليها) الثلاث، فالإضافة لبيان العدد المقدر بالساعات الفلكية لا للاختصاص، فلا يلزم كونها ليالي تلك الأيام؛ وكذا قوله (وأكثره عشرة) بعشر ليال، كذا رواه الدارقطني وغيره

 

Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb Taharah, Bābul Haidh , vol 1 p. 294

وإن) انقطع لدون أقله تتوضأ وتصلي في آخر الوقت،

: (قوله لدون أقله) أي أقل الحيض وهو ثلاثة أيام (قوله في آخر الوقت) أي وجوبا بركوي، والمراد آخر الوقت المستحب دون المكروه كما هو ظاهر سياق كلام الدرر وصدر الشريعة

 

[2] Fatawa Hindiyya, Kitābul Salaah, Bābul Mawaqeet…, vol 1 p. 52

ويستحب تعجيل المغرب في كل زمان. كذا في الكافي

 

[3] Fathul Qadeer, Kitāb al Taharāt, Bāb al Haydh , vol 1 pg 172

أنَّ اسْتِيعَابَ الدَّمِ مُدَّةَ الْحَيْضِ لَيْسَ بِشَرْطٍ بِالْإِجْمَاعِ فَيُعْتَبَرُ أَوَّلُهُ وَآخِرُهُ كَالنِّصَابِ فِي بَابِ الزَّكَاةِ

وَرَوَى ابْنُ الْمُبَارَكِ عَنْ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ أَنَّهُ يُعْتَبَرُ أَنْ يَكُونَ الدَّمُ فِي الْعَشْرِ ثَلَاثَةَ أَيَّامٍ وَهُوَ قَوْلُ زُفَرَ. وَرَوَى أَبُو يُوسُفَ عَنْهُ وَبِهِ أَخَذَ أَنَّ الطُّهْرَ إذَا كَانَ أَقَلَّ مِنْ خَمْسَةَ عَشَرَ لَا يُفْصَلُ. وَقِيلَ هُوَ آخِرُ أَقْوَالِ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ وَعَلَيْهِ الْفَتْوَى.……… وَاخْتَلَفَ الْمَشَايِخُ عَلَى قَوْلِهِ فِيمَا إذَا اجْتَمَعَ طُهْرَانِ مُعْتَبَرَانِ وَصَارَ أَحَدُهُمَا حَيْضًا لِاسْتِوَاءِ الدَّمِ بِطَرَفَيْهِ حَتَّى صَارَ كَالدَّمِ الْمُتَوَالِي، فَقِيلَ يَتَعَدَّى حُكْمُهُ إلَى الطَّرَفِ الْأَخِيرِ حَتَّى يَصِيرَ الْكُلُّ حَيْضًا، وَقِيلَ لَا يَتَعَدَّى. قَالَ فِي الْمُحِيطِ: هُوَ الْأَصَحُّ. مِثَالُهُ: رَأَتْ يَوْمَيْنِ دَمًا وَثَلَاثَةً طُهْرًا وَيَوْمًا دَمًا وَثَلَاثَةً طُهْرًا وَيَوْمًا دَمًا فَعَلَى الْأَوَّلِ الْكُلُّ حَيْضٌ لِأَنَّ الطُّهْرَ الْأَوَّلَ دَمٌ لِاسْتِوَائِهِ بِدَمَيْهِ فَكَأَنَّهَا رَأَتْ سِتَّةً دَمًا وَأَرْبَعَةً طُهْرًا، وَعَلَى الثَّانِي السِّتَّةُ الْأُولَى حَيْضٌ فَقَطْ

 

Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb at-Taharāt, Bāb fid dima mukhtas bin Nisa, vol 1, p. 41

الطُّهْرُ الْمُتَخَلِّلُ بَيْنَ الدَّمَيْنِ وَالدِّمَاءِ فِي مُدَّةِ الْحَيْضِ يَكُونُ حَيْضًا وَلَوْ خَرَجَ أَحَدُ الدَّمَيْنِ عَنْ مُدَّةِ الْحَيْضِ بِأَنْ رَأَتْ يَوْمًا دَمًا وَتِسْعَةً طُهْرًا وَيَوْمًا دَمًا مَثَلًا لَا يَكُونُ حَيْضًا؛ لِأَنَّ الدَّمَ الْأَخِيرَ لَمْ يُوجَدْ فِي مُدَّةِ الْحَيْضِ.وَلَا يَبْتَدِئُ الْحَيْضُ بِالطُّهْرِ عَلَى هَذِهِ الرِّوَايَةِ وَلَا يُخْتَمُ بِهِ وَهِيَ رِوَايَةُ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنْ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ وَرَوَى أَبُو يُوسُفَ عَنْ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ أَنَّ الطُّهْرَ الْمُتَخَلِّلَ بَيْنَ الدَّمَيْنِ إذَا كَانَ أَقَلَّ مِنْ خَمْسَةَ عَشَرَ يَوْمًا لَمْ يُفْصَلْ وَكَثِيرٌ مِنْ الْمُتَأَخِّرِينَ أَفْتَوْا بِهَذِهِ الرِّوَايَةِ؛ لِأَنَّهَا أَسْهَلُ عَلَى الْمُفْتِي وَالْمُسْتَفْتِي. كَذَا فِي التَّبْيِينِ وَهَكَذَا فِي الزَّاهِدِيِّ وَالْأَخْذُ بِهَذَا أَيْسَرُ كَذَا فِي الْهِدَايَةِ وَعَلَيْهِ اسْتَقَرَّ رَأْيُ الصَّدْرِ الشَّهِيدِ حُسَامِ الدِّينِ وَبِهِ يُفْتَى. كَذَا فِي الْمُحِيطِ. فَإِنْ لَمْ يُجَاوِزْ الْعَشَرَةَ فَالطُّهْرُ وَالدَّمُ كِلَاهُمَا حَيْضٌ سَوَاءٌ كَانَتْ مُبْتَدَأَةً أَوْ مُعْتَادَةً وَإِنْ جَاوَزَ الْعَشَرَةَ فَفِي الْمُبْتَدَأَةِ حَيْضُهَا عَشَرَةُ أَيَّامٍ وَفِي الْمُعْتَادَةِ مَعْرُوفَتُهَا فِي الْحَيْضِ حَيْضٌ وَالطُّهْرُ طُهْرٌ. هَكَذَا فِي السِّرَاجِ الْوَهَّاجِ

 

Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitābul Taharah, Bāb Al-Haidh, vol 1 p. 301.

 وَإِنْ كَانَتْ فِي الْحَيْضِ، فَإِنْ جَاوَزَ الْعَشَرَةَ، فَإِنْ لَمْ يَقَعْ فِي زَمَانِ الْعَادَةِ نِصَابٌ انْتَقَلَتْ زَمَانًا وَالْعَدَدُ بِحَالِهِ يُعْتَبَرُ مِنْ أَوَّلِ مَا رَأَتْ. وَإِنْ وَقَعَ فَالْوَاقِعُ فِي زَمَانِهَا فَقَطْ حَيْضٌ وَالْبَاقِي اسْتِحَاضَةٌ، فَإِنْ كَانَ الْوَاقِعُ مُسَاوِيًا لِعَادَتِهَا عَدَدًا فَالْعَادَةُ بَاقِيَةٌ وَإِلَّا انْتَقَلَتْ الْعَادَةُ عَدَدًا إلَى مَا رَأَتْهُ نَاقِصًا، وَإِنْ لَمْ يُجَاوِزْ الْعَشَرَةَ فَالْكُلُّ حَيْضٌ. فَإِنْ لَمْ يَتَسَاوَيَا صَارَ الثَّانِي عَادَةً وَإِلَّا فَالْعَدَدُ بِحَالِهِ،

 

[4] Kasāni, Badā’i Sanāi, Kitāb al-Tahrah,  Fasl al-Haidh , vol 1 p. 41

  وأما) صاحبة العادة في الحيض إذا كانت عادتها عشرة فزاد الدم عليها فالزيادة استحاضة، وإن كانت عادتها خمسة فالزيادة عليها حيض معها إلى تمام العشرة لما ذكرنا في المبتدأة بالحيض، وإن جاوز العشرة فعادتها حيض، وما زاد عليها استحاضة

لقول النبي – صلى الله عليه وسلم – «المستحاضة تدع الصلاة أيام أقرائها» أي: أيام حيضها، ولأن ما رأت في أيامها حيض بيقين، وما زاد على العشرة استحاضة بيقين، وما بين ذلك متردد بين أن يلحق بما قبله فيكون حيضا، فلا تصلي، وبين أن يلحق بما بعده فيكون استحاضة فتصلي، فلا تترك الصلاة بالشك

 وَإِنْ كَانَتْ فِي الْحَيْضِ، فَإِنْ جَاوَزَ الْعَشَرَةَ، فَإِنْ لَمْ يَقَعْ فِي زَمَانِ الْعَادَةِ نِصَابٌ انْتَقَلَتْ زَمَانًا وَالْعَدَدُ بِحَالِهِ يُعْتَبَرُ مِنْ أَوَّلِ مَا رَأَتْ. وَإِنْ وَقَعَ فَالْوَاقِعُ فِي زَمَانِهَا فَقَطْ حَيْضٌ وَالْبَاقِي اسْتِحَاضَةٌ، فَإِنْ كَانَ الْوَاقِعُ مُسَاوِيًا لِعَادَتِهَا عَدَدًا فَالْعَادَةُ بَاقِيَةٌ وَإِلَّا انْتَقَلَتْ الْعَادَةُ عَدَدًا إلَى مَا رَأَتْهُ نَاقِصًا، وَإِنْ لَمْ يُجَاوِزْ الْعَشَرَةَ فَالْكُلُّ حَيْضٌ. فَإِنْ لَمْ يَتَسَاوَيَا صَارَ الثَّانِي عَادَةً وَإِلَّا فَالْعَدَدُ بِحَالِهِ،

 

 

Does Inheritance Law Apply to Unlawful Income?

4th December 2021

 

Question: Could you kindly clarify whether inheritance law applies to unlawful income or not? For instance, if my father passed away leaving his estate which was all earned through unlawful income then will his children inherit from the estate or not? Can it also be used to for other noble projects such as building a Masjid for him?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer

In refence to your case, if you acknowledge that the inheritance money your father left behind was all from unlawful income through a profession that is unlawful for a Muslim then it will not be Halal to inherit that money. There are severe warnings against earning unlawful income. The entire wealth must be disposed of by giving it away to the most-needy people without the intention of reward.[1] That is the standard ruling because a Muslim is not allowed to utilize nor profit from unlawful wealth.

As for your point about using the money to build a Masjid in your father’s name then if the inheritance money was unlawful in the beginning, then utilising it for a noble and sacred purpose will not be permitted also. The above ruling of giving it away towards the most-needy is necessary.[2] Allāh Almighty only accepts pure earnings spent towards a noble and charitable cause. Allāh states in the Quran, “O Believers! Spend from the pure earnings that you have earned and (also give into charity) from that which we have germinated for you from the land.”[3] The Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam said in a lengthy report, “Verily Allāh is pure and does not accept but pure”[4]

In the case where you wish for your father to receive the reward of continuous charity after his death, then this can be attained in many ways for instance, donating some money from your personal earnings towards a masjid, towards the poor or towards an Islamic institute in his name. If you still wish to build a Masjid for him then you may request family members and friends for some charitable donations for a Masjid project in his name. Even this method can fulfil the purpose.

 

 [Allãh Knows Best]

 

 

Written and researched by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

 

 

[1] Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Karāhiyyah, vol 5, p. 429

الْبَابُ الْخَامِسَ عَشَرَ فِي الْكَسْبِ

وَإِذَا مَاتَ الرَّجُلُ وَكَسْبُهُ خَبِيثٌ فَالْأَوْلَى لِوَرَثَتِهِ أَنْ يَرُدُّوا الْمَالَ إلَى أَرْبَابِهِ فَإِنْ لَمْ يَعْرِفُوا أَرْبَابَهُ تَصَدَّقُوا بِهِ وَإِنْ كَانَ كَسْبُهُ مِنْ حَيْثُ لَا يَحِلُّ وَابْنُهُ يَعْلَمُ ذَلِكَ وَمَاتَ الْأَبُ وَلَا يَعْلَمُ الِابْنُ ذَلِكَ بِعَيْنِهِ فَهُوَ حَلَالٌ لَهُ فِي الشَّرْعِ وَالْوَرَعُ أَنْ يَتَصَدَّقَ بِهِ بِنِيَّةِ خُصَمَاءِ أَبِيهِ كَذَا فِي الْيَنَابِيعِ.

 

Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitābul Buyu, Bāb Bai’ al-Fasid, vol 7 p. 301-2

مَطْلَبٌ فِيمَنْ وَرِثَ مَالًا حَرَامًا

(قَوْلُهُ إلَّا فِي حَقِّ الْوَارِثِ إلَخْ) أَيْ فَإِنَّهُ إذَا عَلِمَ أَنَّ كَسْبَ مُوَرِّثِهِ حَرَامٌ يَحِلُّ لَهُ، لَكِنْ إذَا عَلِمَ الْمَالِكَ بِعَيْنِهِ فَلَا شَكَّ فِي حُرْمَتِهِ وَوُجُوبِ رَدِّهِ عَلَيْهِ، وَهَذَا مَعْنَى قَوْلِهِ وَقَيَّدَهُ فِي الظَّهِيرِيَّةِ إلَخْ، وَفِي مُنْيَةِ الْمُفْتِي: مَاتَ رَجُلٌ وَيَعْلَمُ الْوَارِثُ أَنَّ أَبَاهُ كَانَ يَكْسِبُ مِنْ حَيْثُ لَا يَحِلُّ وَلَكِنْ لَا يَعْلَمُ الطَّلَبَ بِعَيْنِهِ لِيَرُدَّ عَلَيْهِ حَلَّ لَهُ الْإِرْثُ وَالْأَفْضَلُ أَنْ يَتَوَرَّعَ وَيَتَصَدَّقَ بِنِيَّةِ خُصَمَاءِ أَبِيهِ. اهـ وَكَذَا لَا يَحِلُّ إذَا عَلِمَ عَيْنَ الْغَصْبِ مَثَلًا وَإِنْ لَمْ يَعْلَمْ مَالِكَهُ، لِمَا فِي الْبَزَّازِيَّةِ أَخَذَهُ مُوَرِّثُهُ رِشْوَةً أَوْ ظُلْمًا، إنْ عَلِمَ ذَلِكَ بِعَيْنِهِ لَا يَحِلُّ لَهُ أَخْذُهُ، وَإِلَّا فَلَهُ أَخْذُهُ حُكْمًا أَمَّا فِي الدِّيَانَةِ فَيَتَصَدَّقُ بِهِ بِنِيَّةِ إرْضَاءِ الْخُصَمَاءِ اهـ. وَالْحَاصِلُ أَنَّهُ إنْ عَلِمَ أَرْبَابَ الْأَمْوَالِ وَجَبَ رَدُّهُ عَلَيْهِمْ، وَإِلَّا فَإِنْ عَلِمَ عَيْنَ الْحَرَامِ لَا يَحِلُّ لَهُ وَيَتَصَدَّقُ بِهِ بِنِيَّةِ صَاحِبِهِ، وَإِنْ كَانَ مَالًا مُخْتَلِطًا مُجْتَمِعًا مِنْ الْحَرَامِ وَلَا يَعْلَمُ أَرْبَابَهُ وَلَا شَيْئًا مِنْهُ بِعَيْنِهِ حَلَّ لَهُ حُكْمًا، وَالْأَحْسَنُ دِيَانَةً التَّنَزُّهُ عَنْهُ فَفِي الذَّخِيرَةِ: سُئِلَ الْفَقِيهُ أَبُو جَعْفَرٍ عَمَّنْ اكْتَسَبَ مَالَهُ مِنْ أُمَرَاءِ السُّلْطَانِ وَمِنْ الْغَرَامَاتِ الْمُحَرَّمَاتِ وَغَيْرِ ذَلِكَ هَلْ يَحِلُّ لِمَنْ عَرَفَ ذَلِكَ أَنْ يَأْكُلَ مِنْ طَعَامِهِ؟ قَالَ أَحَبُّ إلَيَّ فِي دِينِهِ أَنْ لَا يَأْكُلَ وَيَسَعُهُ حُكْمًا إنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ ذَلِكَ الطَّعَامُ غَصْبًا أَوْ رِشْوَةً وَفِي الْخَانِيَّةِ: امْرَأَةٌ زَوْجُهَا فِي أَرْضِ الْجَوْرِ، وَإِنْ أَكَلَتْ مِنْ طَعَامِهِ وَلَمْ يَكُنْ عَيْنُ ذَلِكَ الطَّعَامِ غَصْبًا فَهِيَ فِي سَعَةٍ مِنْ أَكْلِهِ وَكَذَا لَوْ اشْتَرَى طَعَامًا أَوْ كِسْوَةً مِنْ مَالٍ أَصْلُهُ لَيْسَ بِطَيِّبٍ فَهِيَ فِي سَعَةٍ مِنْ تَنَاوُلِهِ وَالْإِثْمُ عَلَى الزَّوْجِ. اهـ (قَوْلُهُ وَسَنُحَقِّقُهُ ثَمَّةَ) أَيْ فِي كِتَابِ الْحَظْرِ وَالْإِبَاحَةِ. قَالَ هُنَاكَ بَعْدَ ذِكْرِهِ مَا هُنَا لَكِنْ فِي الْمُجْتَبَى: مَاتَ وَكَسْبُهُ حَرَامٌ فَالْمِيرَاثُ حَلَالٌ، ثُمَّ رَمَزَ وَقَالَ: لَا نَأْخُذُ بِهَذِهِ الرِّوَايَةِ، وَهُوَ حَرَامٌ مُطْلَقًا عَلَى الْوَرَثَةِ فَتَنَبَّهْ. اهـ. ح، وَمُفَادُهُ الْحُرْمَةُ وَإِنْ لَمْ يَعْلَمْ أَرْبَابُهُ وَيَنْبَغِي تَقْيِيدُهُ بِمَا إذَا كَانَ عَيْنَ الْحَرَامِ لِيُوَافِقَ مَا نَقَلْنَاهُ، إذْ لَوْ اخْتَلَطَ بِحَيْثُ لَا يَتَمَيَّزُ يَمْلِكُهُ مِلْكًا خَبِيثًا، لَكِنْ لَا يَحِلُّ لَهُ التَّصَرُّفُ فِيهِ مَا لَمْ يُؤَدِّ بَدَلَهُ كَمَا حَقَقْنَاهُ قُبَيْلَ بَابِ زَكَاةِ الْمَالِ فَتَأَمَّلْ.

 

Mufti Mahmood al-Hasan, Fatawa Mahmoodiyyah, Kitabul Faraidh, vol 20, p. 339-340

 

Maulana Khalid Saifullah, Kitabul Fatawa, Meerath, vol 6, p. 344

 

[2] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitābul Zakāt, vol 2 p. 291

كَمَا لَوْ كَانَ الْكُلُّ خَبِيثًا كَمَا فِي النَّهْرِ عَنْ الْحَوَاشِي السَّعْ

(قَوْلُهُ: كَمَا لَوْ كَانَ الْكُلُّ خَبِيثًا) فِي الْقُنْيَةِ لَوْ كَانَ الْخَبِيثُ نِصَابًا لَا يَلْزَمُهُ الزَّكَاةُ؛ لِأَنَّ الْكُلَّ وَاجِبُ التَّصَدُّقِ عَلَيْهِ فَلَا يُفِيدُ إيجَابَ التَّصَدُّقِ بِبَعْضِهِ. اهـ. وَمِثْلُهُ فِي الْبَزَّازِيَّةِ (قَوْلُهُ: كَمَا فِي النَّهْرِ) أَيْ أَوَّلِ كِتَابِ الزَّكَاةِ عِنْدَ قَوْلِ الْكَنْزِ وَمَلَكَ نِصَابَ حَوْلِيٍّ، وَمِثْلُهُ فِي الشُّرُنْبُلَالِيَّةِ، وَذَكَرَهُ فِي شَرْحِ الْوَهْبَانِيَّةِ بَحْثًا؛ وَفِي الْفَصْلِ الْعَاشِرِ مِنْ التَّتَارْخَانِيَّة عَنْ فَتَاوَى الْحُجَّةِ: مَنْ مَلَكَ أَمْوَالًا غَيْرَ طَيِّبَةٍ أَوْ غَصَبَ أَمْوَالًا وَخَلَطَهَا مَلَكَهَا بِالْخَلْطِ وَيَصِيرُ ضَامِنًا، وَإِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُ سِوَاهَا نِصَابٌ فَلَا زَكَاةَ عَلَيْهِ فِيهَا وَإِنْ بَلَغَتْ نِصَابًا؛ لِأَنَّهُ مَدْيُونٌ وَمَالُ الْمَدْيُونِ لَا يَنْعَقِدُ سَبَبًا لِوُجُوبِ الزَّكَاةِ عِنْدَنَا.

 

 

[3] Quran [Surah Baqarah 2:265]

 

[4] Saheeh Muslim, No. 1015

بَابُ قَبُولِ الصَّدَقَةِ مِنَ الْكَسْبِ الطَّيِّبِ وَتَرْبِيَتِهَا

عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: ” أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ، إِنَّ اللهَ طَيِّبٌ لَا يَقْبَلُ إِلَّا طَيِّبًا، وَإِنَّ اللهَ أَمَرَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ بِمَا أَمَرَ بِهِ الْمُرْسَلِينَ، فَقَالَ: {يَا أَيُّهَا الرُّسُلُ كُلُوا مِنَ الطَّيِّبَاتِ وَاعْمَلُوا صَالِحًا، إِنِّي بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ عَلِيمٌ} [المؤمنون: 51] وَقَالَ: {يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا كُلُوا مِنْ طَيِّبَاتِ مَا رَزَقْنَاكُمْ} [البقرة: 172] ثُمَّ ذَكَرَ الرَّجُلَ يُطِيلُ السَّفَرَ أَشْعَثَ أَغْبَرَ، يَمُدُّ يَدَيْهِ إِلَى السَّمَاءِ، يَا رَبِّ، يَا رَبِّ، وَمَطْعَمُهُ حَرَامٌ، وَمَشْرَبُهُ حَرَامٌ، وَمَلْبَسُهُ حَرَامٌ، وَغُذِيَ بِالْحَرَامِ، فَأَنَّى يُسْتَجَابُ لِذَلِكَ؟ “

 

Is Botox Permissible or Not?

                           18th November 2021

 

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question:  I was wondering whether it is possible to give botox treatments and fillers. Eg. To enhance beauty etc?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

Answer

In reference to your query, it is permissible to perform botox and filler treatments as these procedures do not permanently alter ones’ bodily features that does not fall under the category of tagh’yeer. It is merely injecting a substance so to temporarily freeze the muscles. Tagh’yeer means to permanently alter one’s natural features by adding or removing a certain bodily limb for beautification that is contrary to what Allāh Almighty naturally created one upon.[1]. The effects of botox and fillers o the other hand is not permanent and lasts for a month or so. The treatment is continuously performed if the aesthetic effects are desired. It is a non-intrisve method so it does not require a surgical procedure.

To further explain, botox is most commonly associated with reducing muscle tension around certain features of the face enhancing volume and consistency. This is achieved by causing the facial muscles to stiffen and reduce contraction, resulting in an evener skin surface. Botox is semi-permanent usually lasting 3-4 months and requires continuation if one chooses to. It is also used for several other treatments such as excessive sweating, over-reactive bladder and chronic migraines etc.[2]

Dermal filler is similar to botox that enhances and adds plumpness to certain areas of the face particularly the lips, sides of the mouth and cheeks. It can further be used to add volume to the forehead and assist in smoothing out wrinkles. However, as mentioned that botox usually involves injecting a solution containing non-toxic bacteria powder, which is then mixed into a saline dissolvent. The solution contains three main ingredients that are required for a successful outcome, the bacteria, human albumin (which is the donated blood plasma of humans) and sodium chloride. The human plasma is what causes the use of botox to become haram, as it is forbidden to take benefit from any part of the human body for any reasons including aesthetic.[3]

Furthermore, dermal fillers contain calcium hydroxylapatite (which is non-animal derived mineral), hyaluronic acid, Polyalkylimide, Polylactic acid, PMMA.[4] There are different types of dermal filler that are used specifically for enhancing certain areas. Juvéderm filler is made from a hyaluronic acid gel whilst Restylane filler is a non-animal derived hyaluronic acid gel. However, there are fillers such as Collagen which is used to smooth out wrinkles and lines originally made from sanitized cows’ skin.[5]

The following types of fillers are derived specifically from hyaluronic acid with additions of the main ingredients. Sculptra, Captique, Hylaform and Radiesse fillers are permissible to be injected into the skin due to the base ingredient of hyaluronic acid. Some fillers are considered vegan in terms of the ingredients used and are required by law to be tested on animals therefore, removing the vegan-friendly label.[6]

Though botox and filler are not Haram when the conditions are met one should consider the possible side effects and risks of each procedure. Breathing difficulties, bruising, swelling and in severe cases nerve damage. If one does not feel the need to perform these procedures then best avoided. One must understand that from an Islamic perspective they are unnecessary forms of beautification for verily Allah looks at one’s heart and not at his outward appearance. A final point on this is that the above explanation  of botox is based on the current understanding of the procedure and ingredients. If it contains impure ingredients then it will not be permissible at all.

 

 

[Allāh Knows Best]

 

 

Written by:  Muftiya Gul-e-Maryam         Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

 

[1] Sharah Sahih Bukhari Libn Battaal, باب: المتفلجات للحسن, Vol 9, Pg 167

قال الطبرى: فى هذا الحديث البيان عن رسول الله أنه لا يجوز لامرأة تغيير شىء من خلقها الذى خلقها الله عليه بزيادة فيه أو نقص منه التماس التحسن به لزوج أو غيره، لأن ذلك نقض منها خلقها إلى غير هيئته،

 

[2]See https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/158647.php

 

[3] Muheet Al Burhani, Kitab Istihsaan, Vol 5, Pg 373

 وإنما لم يجز الانتفاع بعظم الخنزير والآدمي؛ أما الخنزير فلأنه نجس العين بجميع أجزائه، والانتفاع بالنجس حرام، وأما الآدمي فقد قال بعض مشايخنا: إنه لم يجز الانتفاع بأجزائه لنجاسته، وقال بعضهم: لم يجز الانتفاع به لكرامته وهو الصحيح، فإن الله تعالى كرم بني آدم وفضلهم على سائر الأشياء، وفي الانتفاع بأجزائه نوع إهانة به.

[4] https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/320510.php#what-are-dermal-fillers

 

[5] Muheet Al Burhani, Kitab Istihsaan, Vol 5, Pg 373

ثم جلد الميتة يطهر بالدباغ، فكذا عظمه يطهر باليبس، فيجوز الانتفاع به، فيجوز التداوي به.
وإنما لم يجز الانتفاع بعظم الخنزير والآدمي؛

[6] https://www.glamourmagazine.co.uk/article/plastic-and-cosmetic-surgery-for-vegans-information

 

Is Retracting from a Verbal Gift Allowed?

3rd November 2021

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: If an owner of an asset like a car (or a property) wants to gift his or her car and the offer is verbally made by the donor in front of a third person but the person for whom the gift is intended was not present. Furthermore, when the offer was verbally made in the absence of intended giftee he was already in possession of owner’s car keys for safekeeping. Is the original owner permitted to revoke his offer he made in the intended giftee‘s absence who is unaware of it and tell that person to give the owner his car keys which he was keeping for safety purposes so that car remains his as it was always before or is he obligated to convey his previous intention and verbal offer of gift?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer: In reference to your query, if the owner made a verbal gift of the car to a person in their absence and the intended person was not made aware of it at the time but the owner thereafter retracted from his statement and decided to keep the car instead of gifting it then this will be allowed as the conditions of gift have not been fulfilled. The conditions are both verbal acceptance and physical possession. The intended recipient who had the keys at the time kept them for safekeeping only, not as a way of ownership. Moreover, he did not indicate to any signs of acceptance since he was not aware of it at the time. The gift would have only been valid if after being made aware of it, he accepted the gift. [1]  Retracting from it thereafter would not have been valid. The owner can therefore revoke their verbal offer and reclaim the car keys from the trusted person.[2]

 

 

[Allāh Knows Best]

 

 

Written by:  Mufti Anas Mullah        Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

 

 

[1] Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Hibā, vol 4, p. 378

استودع أخاه عبدا أو ثوبا أو متاعا أو دارا أو دابة، ثم قال: وهبت لك وديعتي وهي في يد المودع يجوز إذا قال: قبلت، ولو وهب عبدا لأخيه وقبضه في المجلس أو بعده بأمره بالقبض نصا صح فشرط القبول في الأول دون الثاني، كذا في القنية.

[2] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb al-Hibā, vol 5 p. 694

(وملك) بالقبول (بلا قبض جديد لو الموهوب في يد الموهوب له) ولو بغصب أو أمانة؛ لأنه حينئذ عامل لنفسه، والأصل أن القبضين إذا تجانسا ناب أحدهما عن الآخر، وإذا تغايرا ناب الأعلى عن الأدنى لا عكسه
وهذا معنى قوله بعد لأنه حينئذ عامل لنفسه أي حين قبل صريحا (قوله بلا قبض) أي بأن يرجع إلى الموضع الذي فيه العين ويمضي وقت يتمكن فيه من قبضها قهستاني (قوله ولو بغصب) انظر الزيلعي (قوله عن الآخر) كما إذا كان عنده وديعة فأعارها صاحبها له فإن كلا منهما قبض أمانة فناب أحدهما عن الآخر (قوله عن الأدنى) فناب قبض المغصوب والمبيع فاسدا عن قبض المبيع الصحيح، ولا ينوب قبض الأمانة عنه منح (قوله لا عكسه) فقبض الوديعة مع قبض الهبة يتجانسان لأنهما قبض أمانة ومع قبض الشراء يتغايران لأنه قبض ضمان فلا ينوب الأول عنه كما في المحيط، ومثله في شرح الطحاوي، لكنه ليس على إطلاقه فإنه إذا كان مضمونا بغيره كالبيع المضمون بالثمن والمرهون المضمون بالدين لا ينوب قبضه عن القبض الواجب كما في المستصفى، ومثله في الزاهدي، فلو باع من المودع احتاج إلى قبض جديد، وتمامه في العمادي قهستاني

Baby with a Soiled Nappy Sitting on the Musalli’s Lap

1st November 2021

 

Question: Is my Salāh valid if my baby whose passed stool in his nappy comes and sits on my lap? Like sometimes he will pass stool whilst I’m in Salah. If he comes to me, I try to make him move away but he starts crying and will not move. Is my Salah valid?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer:

The case of determining the validity of the Salāh if a child with a soiled nappy sits on the lap of the person praying Salāh – musalli – depends on to whom the impurity is attributed; the child or to the musalli. Typically, the one carrying the najasat is the one to whom the najasat is attributed. Attributing the najasat to the child however depends on its ability to support themselves or not.  If such a child sitting on the musalli’s lap is not able to sit upright by themselves without any support such as a baby then the najasat will be attributed to the mussalli. This means that his or her Salāh becomes invalid but only if the child sits throughout the duration of completing one rukn (part of Salāh) or more e.g. one sajdah or one complete sitting. Sitting less than a rukn like for a few seconds or so and the mussali instantly removes the child (but in a manner that does not involve excessive movement) then the Salāh does not break.  If on the other hand, the child is old enough to be able to sit upright and support themselves then the najasat is attributed to the child and not to the musalli. In this case the musalli’s Salāh will remain valid no matter how long the child sits with a soiled nappy.[1]

You mentioned that at times your child passes stool whilst you are in Salah. Again it depends on the child’s ability to support themselves or not as described above.  What you must make sure is that no impurity leaks out of the nappy otherwise if it does and stains your clothes then if the stain is equivalent to 50p (or £2) coin in size then your Salah becomes invalid but if less than that then your Salah remains intact.

 

[Allāh Knows Best]

 

Written by:  Apa Sajeda          Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam    

JKN Fatawa Department

 

 

[1] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitābul Salaah, Bābu Shuroot Alsalah, vol 1 p. 402

(قوله وثوبه) أراد ما لابس البدن، فدخل القلنسوة والخف والنعل ط عن الحموي (قوله وكذا ما) أي شيء متصل به يتحرك بحركته كمنديل طرفه على عنقه وفي الآخر نجاسة مانعة إن تحرك موضع النجاسة بحركات الصلاة منع وإلا، بخلاف ما لم يتصل كبساط طرفه نجس وموضع الوقوف والجبهة طاهر فلا يمنع مطلقا أفاده ح عن الشرنبلالي (قوله كصبي) أي وكسقف وظلة وخيمة نجسة تصيب رأسه إذا وقف (قوله إن لم يستمسك) الأولى حذف إن وجوابها لأنه تمثيل للمحمول، فحق التعبير أن يقول كصبي عليه نجس لا يستمسك بنفسه ط (قوله وإلا لا).

 

Fatawa Hindiyya, Kitābul Salaah, Bābu Shuroot Alsalah , vol 1 p. 63

إذا وضع في حجر المصلي الصبي الغير المستمك وعليه نجاسة مانعة إن لم يمكث قدر ما أمكنه أداء ركن لا تفسد صلاته وإن مكث تفسد بخلاف ما لو استمسك وإن طال مكثه وكذا الحمامة المتنجسة إذا جلست عليه. هكذا في الخلاصة وفتح القدير.

وكذا الجنب والمحدث إذا حمله المصلي جازت صلاته. كذا في السراج الوهاج.

 

Ibn Nujaym, Bahr Rāiq, Kitāb al-taharah, Bāb Shuroot Alsalah, vol 1 p. 281

وفي الظهيرية الصبي إذا كان ثوبه نجسا أو هو نجس فجلس على حجر المصلي وهو يستمسك أو الحمام النجس إذا وقع على رأس المصلي وهو يصلي كذلك جازت الصلاة

 

Burying a Muslim in a Non-Muslim Cemetery

26th October 2021

 

Question: A Muslim passed away and where they live the cemetery is divided into three parts. The front and rear are where Muslims are buried. Christians are buried in the middle part.  There was no space in the Muslim parts, so she was buried in the middle next to a Christian. They did so in order not to delay the burial. She was the first Muslim buried there. There was another Muslim buried there after and it’s anticipated that portion of the Christian cemetery will be allocated for Muslims in future. But it is still next to Christians.  Is that okay, or does she need to be moved to a Muslims only cemetery, particularly as she is next to a Christian at the moment? It may be possible they can move her if necessary.

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

Answer

As a general note to begin with, having a specific burial cemetery for Muslims has been a continuous practice since the time of the Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam. This is because our burial rituals are distinct from other faiths. Another reason for burying Muslims and non-Muslims in separate cemeteries is because according our tradition, Allāh’s wrath descends upon a disbeliever for not bringing faith upon Allāh I and His beloved Messenger sallallahu alayhi wasallam unlike for a true believer.[1] For this reason it is not appropriate nor permitted for a Muslim to buried in a non-Muslim cemetery.[2]

Concerning your case however, if this sister had to be buried in the Christian area due to lack of space in the Muslim area and next to her, another Muslim is buried then that would be permissible as a necessity. It will not be necessary to exhume her body thereafter to relocate her elsewhere. Exhuming the body is necessary in specific circumstances only like being buried in a land owned by someone else for instance.[3]

 

 

[Allãh Knows Best]

 

 

Written and researched by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

 

[1] Kasān, Badā’i Sanāi, Kitāb Janāiz,  vol 1 p. 319

وَيُكْرَهُ أَنْ يَدْخُلَ الْكَافِرُ قَبْرَ أَحَدٍ مِنْ قَرَابَتِهِ مِنْ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ؛ لِأَنَّ الْمَوْضِعَ الَّذِي فِيهِ الْكَافِرُ تَنْزِلُ فِيهِ السَّخْطَةُ وَاللَّعْنَةُ فَيُنَزَّهُ قَبْرُ الْمُسْلِمِ عَنْ ذَلِكَ، وَإِنَّمَا يَدْخُلُ قَبْرَهُ الْمُسْلِمُونَ لِيَضَعُوهُ عَلَى سُنَّةِ الْمُسْلِمِينَ،

 

[2] Zuhayli, Fiqhul Islami wa adillatihu, vol 2 p. 480

الفرض الرابع ـ دفن الميت:

مكان الدفن والدفن في البحر

ولا يدفن كافر في مقبرة المسلمين، ولا مسلم في مقبرة الكفار

 

[3] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb Janāiz, vol 2 p. 238

 

(وَلَا يُخْرَجُ مِنْهُ) بَعْدَ إهَالَةِ التُّرَابِ (إلَّا) لِحَقِّ آدَمِيٍّ كَ (أَنْ تَكُونَ الْأَرْضُ مَغْصُوبَةً أَوْ أُخِذَتْ بِشُفْعَةٍ) وَيُخَيَّرُ الْمَالِكُ بَيْنَ إخْرَاجِهِ وَمُسَاوَاتِهِ بِالْأَرْضِ كَمَا جَازَ زَرْعُهُ وَالْبِنَاءُ عَلَيْهِ إذَا بَلِيَ وَصَارَ تُرَابًا زَيْلَعِيٌّ.

(قَوْلُهُ إلَّا لِحَقِّ آدَمِيٍّ) احْتِرَازٌ عَنْ حَقِّ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى كَمَا إذَا دُفِنَ بِلَا غُسْلٍ أَوْ صَلَاةٍ أَوْ وُضِعَ عَلَى غَيْرِ يَمِينِهِ أَوْ إلَى غَيْرِ الْقِبْلَةِ فَإِنَّهُ لَا يُنْبَشُ عَلَيْهِ بَعْدَ إهَالَةِ التُّرَابِ كَمَا مَرَّ (قَوْلُهُ كَأَنْ تَكُونَ الْأَرْضُ مَغْصُوبَةً) وَكَمَا إذَا سَقَطَ فِي الْقَبْرِ مَتَاعٌ أَوْ كُفِّنَ بِثَوْبٍ مَغْصُوبٍ أَوْ دُفِنَ مَعَهُ مَالٌ قَالُوا: وَلَوْ كَانَ الْمَالُ دِرْهَمًا بَحْرٌ

 

Ambiguous Terms for Divorce

7th October 2021

 

Question: The man said the following to his wife in a heated argument. Here is his full statement. “Gosh I still tried to make this so-called relationship work because of nikaah I was so stupid I should have left u when I found out about your bad habits. Your mother who is a divorcee knows about her life but she still chose a divorce for u as well – where is the shame in that. You don’t know the value of nikah or the importance of it. A woman like you who ruined her marriage without the blink of eye. U don’t know what marriage is? What nikah is? Now you have ruined your marriage after using me you have started a relationship with someone else. How can you value nikah? I am well rid of u now, good riddance to bad rubbish and that’s the end of it. Don’t ever contact me again.” What type of Talaq has taken place?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer

In reference to your query by uttering such words constitute one irrevocable divorce. From the above statement, there is no clear mention of the word divorce. However, looking at the context of the full conversation we can deduce that statements such as “I am well rid of u now…that’s the end of it”[1] and “Now you have ruined your marriage after using me” within such a context are ambiguously[2] referring to divorce[3], hence an irrevocable divorce would imply from the use of these sentences even if he later on denies it. [4]

[Allāh Knows Best]

 

 

Written by:  Mufti Anas Mullah        Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam  

JKN Fatawa Department

 

[1]Ibn Ābideen, Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitābul Talaaq, Bāb Alkinayaat, vol 3 p. 298

 وَأَمَّا حَالَةُ الْمُذَاكَرَةِ فَتُصَدَّقُ مَعَ كُلٍّ مِنْهُمَا بَلْ لَا يُتَصَوَّرُ سُؤَالُهَا الطَّلَاقَ إلَّا فِي إحْدَى الْحَالَتَيْنِ لِأَنَّهُمَا ضِدَّانِ لَا وَاسِطَةَ بَيْنَهُمَا(قَوْلُهُ انْتَقِلِي) مِثْلُ اُخْرُجِي وَقَدْ تَقَدَّمَ

 

[2] Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Talaaq, Bāb fi Eeqaa’ al talaaq, Fasl fil Kinaayat  vol 1, p. 375

وَالْأَحْوَالُ ثَلَاثَةٌ (حَالَةُ) الرِّضَا (وَحَالَةُ) مُذَاكَرَةِ الطَّلَاقِ بِأَنْ تَسْأَلَ هِيَ طَلَاقَهَا أَوْ غَيْرُهَا يَسْأَلُ طَلَاقَهَا (وَحَالَةُ) الْغَضَبِ فَفِي حَالَةِ الرِّضَا لَا يَقَعُ الطَّلَاقُ فِي الْأَلْفَاظِ كُلِّهَا إلَّا بِالنِّيَّةِ وَالْقَوْلُ قَوْلُ الزَّوْجِ فِي تَرْكِ النِّيَّةِ مَعَ الْيَمِينِ وَفِي حَالَةِ مُذَاكَرَةِ الطَّلَاقِ يَقَعُ الطَّلَاقُ فِي سَائِرِ الْأَقْسَامِ قَضَاءً إلَّا فِيمَا يَصْلُحُ جَوَابًا وَرَدَّا فَإِنَّهُ لَا يُجْعَلُ طَلَاقًا كَذَا فِي الْكَافِي

[3]  Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb al-Talaaq, Bāb fi Eeqaa’ al talaaq, Fasl fil Kinaayat  vol 1, p. 375

وَلَوْ قَالَ فِي حَالِ مُذَاكَرَةِ الطَّلَاقِ بَايَنْتُك أَوْ أَبَنْتُك أَوْ أَبَنْت مِنْك أَوْ لَا سُلْطَانَ لِي عَلَيْك أَوْ سَرَّحْتُك أَوْ وَهَبْتُك لِنَفْسِك أَوْ خَلَّيْت سَبِيلَك أَوْ أَنْتِ سَائِبَةٌ أَوْ أَنْتِ حُرَّةٌ أَوْ أَنْتِ أَعْلَمُ بِشَأْنِك. فَقَالَتْ: اخْتَرْت نَفْسِي. يَقَعُ الطَّلَاقُ وَإِنْ قَالَ لَمْ أَنْوِ الطَّلَاقَ لَا يُصَدَّقُ قَضَاءً

 

[4] Usool al-shashi,Fasl fi Al Sareeh wal Kinaayah, pg 68

وَالْكِنَايَة هِيَ مَا استتر مَعْنَاهُ وَحكم الْكِنَايَة ثُبُوت الحكم بهَا عِنْد وجود النِّيَّة أَو بِدلَالَة الْحَال إِذْ لَا بُد لَهُ من دَلِيل يَزُول بِهِ التَّرَدُّد

Reclaiming Financial Contribution from Ex-Husband

                           5th October 2021

 

Question: Is it necessary for the wife to financially contribute towards the home? What finances can she reclaim from her husband and is Khula permissible for him not financially contributing?   

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

In the name of Allāh, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

 

Answer

Islamically it is the husband who bears all financial outgoings and general maintenance of the house. Islām does not burden the wife to take charge of all outgoing expenses. If she voluntarily spends from her earnings or the couple mutually agree to share outgoing expenses between them then there is no harm. One of the final admonishes of the Messenger of Allāh e to his Ummah in his lengthy farewell speech was to uphold the rights of women in which he also included, “…and for them (wives) you bear (the responsibility of) feeding them and clothing them with kindness.”[1] Stipulating food and clothing is mere coincidental as these were the most common expenditures otherwise the essence of the Hadeeth suggests that the husband is the main breadwinner and provider, not his wife.

Resorting to Khula must be on valid grounds and mutually agreed between both parties. Apart from the husband’s shortcomings in his financial responsibilities, other factors causing his wife to undergo extreme difficulty during the marriage must exist for Khula to be valid. When Khula occurs on valid grounds, she is eligible for financial maintenance during her waiting period that follows the Khula procedure.

She can reclaim all of her personal belongings and anything that she owns. Anything she gave to him as a loan to which he acknowledged at the time then she can reclaim that. If what she contributed towards the home was as a gift and not with the intention of loan, she cannot reclaim from him.

 

 [Allãh Knows Best]

 

 

Written and researched by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

[1] Saheeh Muslim