Marriage

14^th October 2025

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: If a married man committed zina with another woman and had an illegitimate child from her then is this male child a mahram to his daughter born from wedlock?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

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

 

Answer: In reference to your query, according to the Sharīʿah, lineage (nasab) is established only through a valid nikāh (marriage). A child born through zinā (fornication) has no legitimate lineage and so, he will not be legally attributed to the biological father but to the mother instead.^[1] He won’t inherit from his biological father either.^[2] Despite this, marriage between this illegitimate child and his daughter born in wedlock is not permitted due to the closeness of the biological relationship and moreover.[3]

Due to non-establishment of nasab, the rules of hijāb must be maintained and khalwa (seclusion) is not permissible between them. Interaction should follow the general rulings related to non-mahrams.

 

[Allāh Knows Best]

Written by:  Apa Sumayya Qazi         Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

^[1] Radul Muhtar, Kitāb al-Nikāh, Vol 3, pg, 360

ولدا الزنا لا يلحق بازاني وان أقرّ

 

^[2] Fatawa Hindiyyāh, Kitāb al-Nikāh, Vol 3 pg, 352

لا ينسبونه الزنا إلى الزاني، ولا يرث أحدهما من الآخر

 

[3] Raddul Mukhtar, Kitāb al-Nikāh, Vol 3, Pg 29

(وَبِنْتِ أَخِيهِ وَأُخْتِهِ وَبِنْتِهَا) وَلَوْ مِنْ زِنًى (وَعَمَّتِهِ وَخَالَتُهُ) فَهَذِهِ السَّبْعَةُ

فِي كِتَابِ الرَّضَاعِ مِنْ أَنَّ الْبِنْتَ مِنْ الزِّنَى لَا تَحْرُمُ عَلَى عَمِّ الزَّانِي وَخَالِهِ لِأَنَّهُ لَمْ يَثْبُتْ نَسَبُهَا مِنْ الزَّانِي حَتَّى يَظْهَرَ فِيهَا حُكْمُ الرِّقَابَةِ، وَأَمَّا التَّحْرِيمُ عَلَى آبَاءِ الزَّانِي وَأَوْلَادِهِ فَلِاعْتِبَارِ الْجُزْئِيَّةِ وَلَا جُزْئِيَّةَ بَيْنَهَا وَبَيْنَ الْعَمِّ وَالْخَالِ.

 

Raddul Mukhtar, Kitāb al-Nikāh, Vol 3, Pg 31

وَأَمَّا بِنْتُ زَوْجَةِ أَبِيهِ أَوْ ابْنُهُ فَحَلَالٌ (وَ) حَرُمَ (الْكُلُّ) مِمَّا مَرَّ تَحْرِيمُهُ نَسَبًا، وَمُصَاهَرَةً (رَضَاعًا) إلَّا مَا اُسْتُثْنِيَ فِي بَابِهِ. .

وَمُقْتَضَى تَقْيِيدِهِ بِالْفَرْعِ وَالْأَصْلِ أَنَّهُ لَا خِلَافَ فِي عَدَمِ الْحُرْمَةِ عَلَى غَيْرِهِمَا مِنْ الْحَوَاشِي كَالْأَخِ وَالْعَمِّ. وَفِي التَّنْجِيسِ زَنَى بِامْرَأَةٍ فَوَلَدَتْ فَأَرْضَعَتْ بِهَذَا اللَّبَنِ صَبِيَّةً لَا يَجُوزُ لِهَذَا الزَّانِي تَزَوُّجُهَا وَلَا لِأُصُولِهِ وَفُرُوعِهِ، وَالْعَمِّ الزَّانِي التَّزَوُّجُ بِهَا كَمَا لَوْ كَانَتْ وَلَدَتْ لَهُ مِنْ الزِّنَى، وَالْخَالُ مِثْلُهُ؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَمْ يَثْبُتْ نَسَبُهَا مِنْ الزَّانِي، حَتَّى يَظْهَرَ فِيهَا حُكْمُ الْقَرَابَةِ وَالتَّحْرِيمُ عَلَى أَبِي الزَّانِي وَأَوْلَادِهِ وَأَوْلَادِهِمْ لِاعْتِبَارِ الْجُزْئِيَّةِ وَلَا جُزْئِيَّةَ بَيْنَهَا وَبَيْنَ الْعَمِّ، وَإِذَا ثَبَتَ ذَلِكَ فِي الْمُتَوَلِّدَةِ مِنْ الزِّنَى كَذَا فِي الْمُرْضَعَةِ بِلَبَنِ الزِّنَى. اهـ. قُلْت: وَهَذَا مُخَالِفٌ لِمَا مَرَّ مِنْ التَّعْمِيمِ فِي قَوْلِ الشَّارِحِ: وَلَوْ مِنْ زِنًى كَمَا نَبَّهْنَا عَلَيْهِ هُنَاكَ.

 

 

19^th August 2025

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: What is the Islamic ruling on the bride and groom exchanging wedding rings on their wedding day. I’ve heard some say it is not permissible due to imitation of non-believers whilst others allow it due to ‘Urf (social custom). Please provide detailed evidence on this.

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

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

Answer

Concerning your enquiry, the tradition of exchanging wedding rings began in Ancient Egypt to symbolise eternity, was later adopted by the Romans as a legal marriage sign and became part of Christian ceremonies by the 9th century.^[1] This custom eventually became a symbolic gesture of marriage.

In principle, gifting a ring to one’s spouse is permissible, as gifting is encouraged in Islam and supported by Hadith. Sayyiduna Anas ibn Malik radhiyallahu anhu relates that the Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam said, “Give gifts to one another, and you will love each other; hate one another and you will spoil your relations; and marry one another and you will increase in wealth.” It is reported in another narration that the Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam said, “Gifting removes hatred and envy.” ^[2]

Furthermore, there is a narration that a man who had no wealth was instructed by the Prophet to offer something as a mahr, even if it be an iron ring.^[3] This indicates the permissibility of giving a ring as part of a marriage. Although in that narration it was given as mahr and not as part of a ceremonial exchange or symbol (such as exchanging rings), it nevertheless highlights its neutral status.

A man may wear a silver ring, provided it does not exceed one mithqaal in weight (approximately 4.37 grams). Gold rings are strictly prohibited for men. However, women may wear rings made from gold or silver without restriction. If a ring is exchanged simply as a gift or expression of affection, without the belief without treating it as an integral part of a marriage ceremony or any religious symbolism, it is considered permissible in some interpretations. The practice of dedicating a formal ceremony to exchange rings in the presence of a mixed gathering is highly discouraged and should be avoided due to ostentation and concerns about imitating customs alien to Islam and could be viewed differently depending on the context.^[4] Moreover, Muslims should not to attach excessive importance to this practice either, rather treat it as exchange of gifts.

 

[Allāh Knows Best]

Written by:  Apa Sumayya Qazi     Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

 

 

^[1]

https://www.worldhistory.org/Wedding_Ring/
https://www.theknot.com/content/history-of-wedding-rings
https://academic.oup.com/jsh/article-abstract/32/2/335/962252
https://oxfordre.com/religion/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.001.0001/acrefore-9780199340378-e-661

 

^[2] Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, Kitāb al-Hibāh (The Book of Gifts), Hadith 2588:

عَنْ أَنَسٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ، قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ﷺ: «تَهَادَوْا تَحَابُّوا، وَتَبَاغَدُوا تَفْسُدُوا، وَتَصَاهَرُوا تَرْزَقُوا

Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, Kitāb al-Hibāh, Hadith 6136

عَنْ أَنَسٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ، قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ﷺ: «إِنَّ الْمُهَادَةَ تُزِيلُ الْبَغْضَ وَالْحِقْدَ

^[3] Ṣaḥīḥ al‑Bukhārī, Book of Nikāḥ, Chapter 51, Hadith no. 5149.

إِنِّي لَفِي الْقَوْمِ عِنْدَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ ﷺ … فَقَالَ: { اذْهَبْ فَاطْلُبْ وَلَوْ خَاتَمًا مِنْ حَدِيدٍ }. فَذَهَبَ … فَقَالَ: مَا وَجَدْتُ شَيْئًا وَلَا خَاتَمًا مِنْ حَدِيدٍ.”

 

^[4] Fatawa Hindiyyah, Vol 1, pg 276

وأما تقليد الإنسان المسلم واتباعه لعادات غير المسلمين وتقاليدهم**: فإنما يُحرّم إذا كان مخالفًا لأحكام الشرع، أو كانوا مختصّين به لأجل كونهم غير مسلمين وقصد به المسلم تقليدًا لهم من هذا الوجه.

> أما لو رأى في ذلك شيئًا يعجبه من جهة الحضارة أو التتمدّن أو الأخلاق، أو غير ذلك مما لا يَخالف الشريعة، فإنه له أن يفعله ولا حرج عليه في ذلك، وليس ذلك من التشبه المحرّم في شيء.

— من “تقليد المسلمين لعادات غير المسلمين وموقف الشرع من ذلك”

 

7^th December 2024

 

Question: I need some clarification regarding my son. He was Islamically married to a Christian woman without the civil marriage for just over a year. Now they are separated and is now wanting to divorce her. She claims to be practicing her faith. My questions are;

1. Was it permissible for my son to marry a Christian woman?
2. If it was permissible and he Islamically divorced her then must she observe an Iddah?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

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

 

Answer

Concerning your case enquiry, first understand that an ahle-kitāb is someone who believes and strictly adheres to (what they consider) a heavenly divine scripture for instance the Injīl, the Tawrah or the scrolls of the previous prophets even if it has been distorted. This includes a Christian who believes in the trinity or the divinity of Jesus because that is part of their doctrinal faith.[1] Despite that the belief in trinity is a form of shirk, Allāh Almighty still addresses them in the Qur’ān as the ahle-kitāb to distinguish them from the mushrikīn.[2] The added condition is that they must not engage in promiscuity nor consider fornication lawful in their religion.[3] The reason why Allāh Almighty permitted Muslim men marrying the women of the ahle-kitab was due to the shared teachings on the laws of marriage between Islām and the ahle-kitāb. Certain companions were reported to have married them.[4] Imām Kasāni rahimahullah, a prominent Hanafi jurist, explains that marrying the ahle-kitāb was an exceptional ruling as the probability of them accepting Islām was high due to their shared fundamental teachings and belief in the previous prophets.[5] But overtime, due to the change of circumstances the scholars ruled it as extremely disliked (makrūh) and should be avoided. Sayyiduna Umar radhiyallahu anha famously instructed a companion to divorce his Jewish wife after being informed that he married her with the fear of potential fitna. Other reasons jurists discouraged marrying them was the possibility of children becoming religiously and morally corrupted.[6]

With the extreme influence of secularism in todays’ time, the dislike in marrying them is highly emphasised. Furthermore, there are many who claim to be Christians or born in Christian families but either do not strictly follow their religious teachings or doubt religion altogether. Such women do not fall under the ahle-kitāb category.  If this was the case with your son’s wife, then she is not considered an ahle-kitābiyyah and their marriage was not valid at all.  The marriage is valid only if she follows the teachings of her faith even if it was makrūh.

Concerning the query about iddah, if she is considered an ahle-kitābiyyah then she must observe a waiting period of three menstrual cycles after receiving the divorces.  This is partly because she married a Muslim man according to the Islamic way and the Qur’an makes no distinction between a Muslim or an ahle-kitāb wife in their observation of a post-divorce waiting period.  Therefore, the laws of iddah after divorce applies to her as well.[7]

 

 

 [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 Nikah, vol 3 p. 45-46

(قَوْلُهُ: مُقِرَّةٌ بِكِتَابٍ) فِي النَّهْرِ عَنْ الزَّيْلَعِيِّ: وَاعْلَمْ أَنَّ مَنْ اعْتَقَدَ دِينًا سَمَاوِيًّا وَلَهُ كِتَابٌ مُنَزَّلٌ كَصُحُفِ إبْرَاهِيمَ وَشِيثٍ وَزَبُورِ دَاوُد فَهُوَ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ فَتَجُوزُ مُنَاكَحَتُهُمْ وَأَكْلُ ذَبَائِحِهِمْ (قَوْلُهُ: عَلَى الْمَذْهَبِ) أَيْ خِلَافًا لِمَا فِي الْمُسْتَصْفَى مِنْ تَقْيِيدِ الْحِلِّ بِأَنْ لَا يَعْتَقِدُوا ذَلِكَ وَيُوَافِقُهُ مَا فِي مَبْسُوطِ شَيْخِ الْإِسْلَامِ يَجِبُ أَنْ لَا يَأْكُلُوا ذَبَائِحَ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ إذَا اعْتَقَدُوا أَنَّ الْمَسِيحَ إلَهٌ، وَأَنَّ عُزَيْرًا إلَهٌ، وَلَا يَتَزَوَّجُوا نِسَاءَهُمْ قِيلَ وَعَلَيْهِ الْفَتْوَى، وَلَكِنْ بِالنَّظَرِ إلَى الدَّلِيلِ يَنْبَغِي أَنَّهُ يَجُوزُ الْأَكْلُ وَالتَّزَوُّجُ. اهـ.

قَالَ فِي الْبَحْرِ: وَحَاصِلُهُ أَنَّ الْمَذْهَبَ الْإِطْلَاقُ لِمَا ذَكَرَهُ شَمْسُ الْأَئِمَّةِ فِي الْمَبْسُوطِ مِنْ أَنَّ ذَبِيحَةَ النَّصْرَانِيِّ حَلَالٌ مُطْلَقًا سَوَاءٌ قَالَ بِثَالِثِ ثَلَاثَةٍ أَوْ لَا لِإِطْلَاقِ الْكِتَابِ هُنَا وَالدَّلِيلِ وَرَجَّحَهُ فِي فَتْحِ الْقَدِيرِ بِأَنَّ الْقَائِلَ بِذَلِكَ طَائِفَتَانِ مِنْ الْيَهُودِ وَالنَّصَارَى انْقَرَضُوا لَا كُلُّهُمْ مَعَ أَنَّ مُطْلَقَ لَفْظِ الشِّرْكِ إذَا ذُكِرَ فِي لِسَانِ الشَّرْعِ لَا يَنْصَرِفُ إلَى أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ، وَإِنْ صَحَّ لُغَةً فِي طَائِفَةٍ أَوْ طَوَائِفَ لِمَا عُهِدَ مِنْ إرَادَتِهِ بِهِ مَنْ عَبَدَ مَعَ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى غَيْرَهُ مِمَّنْ لَا يَدَّعِي اتِّبَاعَ نَبِيٍّ وَكِتَابٍ إلَى آخِرِ مَا ذَكَرَهُ. اهـ.

Ibn Humām, Fathul Qadeer, Kitāb Nikah, vol 3 p. 229

وَيَجِبُ أَنْ لَا يَأْكُلُوا ذَبَائِحَ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ إذَا اعْتَقَدُوا أَنَّ الْمَسِيحَ إلَهٌ وَأَنَّ عُزَيْرًا إلَهٌ. وَلَا يَتَزَوَّجُوا نِسَاءَهُمْ. وَقِيلَ عَلَيْهِ الْفَتْوَى، وَلَكِنْ بِالنَّظَرِ إلَى الدَّلَائِلِ يَنْبَغِي أَنْ يَجُوزَ الْأَكْلُ وَالتَّزَوُّجُ اهـ وَهُوَ مُوَافِقٌ لِمَا فِي رَضَاعِ مَبْسُوطِ شَمْسِ الْأَئِمَّةِ فِي الذَّبِيحَةِ قَالَ: ذَبِيحَةُ النَّصْرَانِيِّ حَلَالٌ مُطْلَقًا سَوَاءً قَالَ بِثَالِثِ ثَلَاثَةٍ أَوْ لَا وَمُوَافِقٌ لِإِطْلَاقِ الْكِتَابِ هُنَا. وَالدَّلِيلُ وَهُوَ قَوْله تَعَالَى {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ مِنْ قَبْلِكُمْ} [المائدة: 5] فَسَّرَهُ بِالْعَفَائِفِ احْتِرَازًا عَنْ تَفْسِيرِ ابْنِ عُمَرَ بِالْمُسْلِمَاتِ،

See Shaykh Mufti Taqi Usmani, Fiqhi Maqalat, vol 4, pp.239-241

 

[2] Kasān, Badā’i Sanāi, Kitāb Nikah, vol 2 p. 270 – 271

 

فَصْلٌ أَنْ لَا تَكُونَ الْمَرْأَةُ مُشْرِكَةً إذَا كَانَ الرَّجُلُ مُسْلِمًا]

وَمِنْهَا أَنْ لَا تَكُونَ الْمَرْأَةُ مُشْرِكَةً إذَا كَانَ الرَّجُلُ مُسْلِمًا، فَلَا يَجُوزُ لِلْمُسْلِمِ أَنْ يَنْكِحَ الْمُشْرِكَةَ؛ لِقَوْلِهِ تَعَالَى: {وَلا تَنْكِحُوا الْمُشْرِكَاتِ حَتَّى يُؤْمِنَّ} [البقرة: 221] ، وَيَجُوزُ أَنْ يَنْكِحَ الْكِتَابِيَّةَ؛ لِقَوْلِهِ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ مِنْ قَبْلِكُمْ} [المائدة: 5] ………

أَمَّا الْآيَةُ فَهِيَ فِي غَيْرِ الْكِتَابِيَّاتِ مِنْ الْمُشْرِكَاتِ؛ لِأَنَّ أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ، وَإِنْ كَانُوا مُشْرِكِينَ عَلَى الْحَقِيقَةِ لَكِنْ هَذَا الِاسْمُ فِي مُتَعَارَفِ النَّاسِ يُطْلَقُ عَلَى الْمُشْرِكِينَ مِنْ غَيْرِ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ قَالَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى: {مَا يَوَدُّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ وَلا الْمُشْرِكِينَ} [البقرة: 105] .

وَقَالَ تَعَالَى: {إِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ وَالْمُشْرِكِينَ فِي نَارِ جَهَنَّمَ} [البينة: 6] فَصَلَ بَيْنَ الْفَرِيقَيْنِ فِي الِاسْمِ عَلَى أَنَّ الْكِتَابِيَّاتِ، وَإِنْ دَخَلْنَ تَحْتَ عُمُومِ اسْمِ الْمُشْرِكَاتِ بِحُكْمِ ظَاهِرِ اللَّفْظِ لَكِنَّهُنَّ خُصِّصْنَ عَنْ الْعُمُومِ بِقَوْلِهِ تَعَالَى: {وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ مِنْ قَبْلِكُمْ} [المائدة: 5] وَأَمَّا الْكِتَابِيَّاتُ إذَا كُنَّ عَفَائِفَ يَسْتَحْقِقْنَ هَذَا الِاسْمَ؛ لِأَنَّ الْإِحْصَانَ فِي كَلَامِ الْعَرَبِ عِبَارَةٌ عَنْ الْمَنْعِ، وَمَعْنَى الْمَنْعِ يَحْصُلُ بِالْعِفَّةِ وَالصَّلَاحِ كَمَا يَحْصُلُ بِالْحُرِّيَّةِ وَالْإِسْلَامِ وَالنِّكَاحِ؛ لِأَنَّ ذَلِكَ مَانِعُ الْمَرْأَةِ عَنْ ارْتِكَابِ الْفَاحِشَةِ، فَيَتَنَاوَلُهُنَّ عُمُومُ اسْمِ الْمُحْصَنَاتِ،

 

[3] Tafseer Ahkamul -Quran Qurtubi, Surah Ma’idah [5:5], vol 6, p. 79

وَرُوِيَ عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ أَنَّهُ قَالَ:” الْمُحْصَناتُ” الْعَفِيفَاتُ الْعَاقِلَاتُ. وَقَالَ الشَّعْبِيُّ: هُوَ أَنْ تُحْصِنَ فَرْجَهَا فَلَا تَزْنِي، وَتَغْتَسِلُ مِنَ الْجَنَابَةِ.

 

[4] Musannaf ibn Abu Shaybah, Hadith No: 16168-16171

مَنْ رَخَّصَ فِي نِكَاحِ نِسَاءِ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ

وَكِيعٌ، عَنْ سُفْيَانَ، عَنْ أَبِي إِسْحَاقَ، عَنْ هُبَيْرَةَ، أَنَّ طَلْحَةَ، «تَزَوَّجَ نَصْرَانِيَّةً»

وَكِيعٌ، عَنْ سُفْيَانَ، عَنْ حَمَّادٍ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُبَيْرٍ، قَالَ: «لَا بَأْسَ بِنِكَاحِ النَّصْرَانِيَّةِ»

[5] Kasān, Badā’i Sanāi, Kitāb Kitāb Nikah, vol 2 p. 270 – 271

فَصْلٌ أَنْ لَا تَكُونَ الْمَرْأَةُ مُشْرِكَةً إذَا كَانَ الرَّجُلُ مُسْلِمًا]

وَالْفَرْقُ أَنَّ الْأَصْلَ أَنْ لَا يَجُوزَ لِلْمُسْلِمِ أَنْ يَنْكِحَ الْكَافِرَةَ؛ لِأَنَّ ازْدِوَاجَ الْكَافِرَةِ وَالْمُخَالَطَةِ مَعَهَا مَعَ قِيَامِ الْعَدَاوَةِ الدِّينِيَّةِ لَا يَحْصُلُ السَّكَنُ وَالْمَوَدَّةُ الَّذِي هُوَ قِوَامُ مَقَاصِدِ النِّكَاحِ إلَّا أَنَّهُ جَوَّزَ نِكَاحَ الْكِتَابِيَّةِ؛ لِرَجَاءِ إسْلَامِهَا؛ لِأَنَّهَا آمَنَتْ بِكُتُبِ الْأَنْبِيَاءِ وَالرُّسُلِ فِي الْجُمْلَةِ

 

 

 

[6] Musannaf ibn Abu Shaybah, Hadith No: 16163

مَنْ كَانَ يَكْرَهُ النِّكَاحَ فِي أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ

عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ إِدْرِيسَ، عَنِ الصَّلْتِ بْنِ بَهْرَامَ، عَنْ شَقِيقٍ، قَالَ: تَزَوَّجَ حُذَيْفَةُ يَهُودِيَّةً فَكَتَبَ إِلَيْهِ عُمَرُ أَنْ خَلِّ سَبِيلَهَا، فَكَتَبَ إِلَيْهِ: إِنْ كَانَتْ حَرَامًا خَلَّيْتُ سَبِيلَهَا فَكَتَبَ إِلَيْهِ: «إِنِّي لَا أَزْعُمُ أَنَّهَا حَرَامٌ، وَلَكِنِّي أَخَافُ أَنْ تَعَاطَوُا الْمُومِسَاتِ مِنْهُنَّ»

 

Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb Nikah, vol 3 p. 45-46

(وَصَحَّ نِكَاحُ كِتَابِيَّةٍ) ، وَإِنْ كُرِهَ تَنْزِيهًا (مُؤْمِنَةٍ بِنَبِيٍّ) مُرْسَلٍ (مُقِرَّةٍ بِكِتَابٍ) مُنَزَّلٍ، وَإِنْ اعْتَقَدُوا الْمَسِيحَ إلَهًا، وَكَذَا حِلُّ ذَبِيحَتِهِمْ عَلَى الْمَذْهَبِ بَحْرٌ.

(قَوْلُهُ: كِتَابِيَّةٍ) أَطْلَقَهُ فَشَمَلَ الْحَرْبِيَّةَ وَالذِّمِّيَّةَ وَالْحُرَّةَ وَالْأَمَةَ ح عَنْ الْبَحْرِ (قَوْلُهُ: وَإِنْ كُرِهَ تَنْزِيهًا) أَيْ سَوَاءٌ كَانَتْ ذِمِّيَّةً أَوْ حَرْبِيَّةً، فَإِنَّ صَاحِبَ الْبَحْرِ اسْتَظْهَرَ أَنَّ الْكَرَاهَةَ فِي الْكِتَابِيَّةِ الْحَرْبِيَّةِ تَنْزِيهِيَّةٌ فَالذِّمِّيَّةُ أَوْلَى. اهـ.

ح قُلْت: عَلَّلَ ذَلِكَ فِي الْبَحْرِ بِأَنَّ التَّحْرِيمِيَّةَ لَا بُدَّ لَهَا مِنْ نَهْيٍ أَوْ مَا فِي مَعْنَاهُ؛ لِأَنَّهَا فِي رُتْبَةِ الْوَاجِبِ. اهـ. وَفِيهِ أَنَّ إطْلَاقَهُمْ الْكَرَاهَةَ فِي الْحَرْبِيَّةِ يُفِيدُ أَنَّهَا تَحْرِيمِيَّةٌ، وَالدَّلِيلُ عِنْدَ الْمُجْتَهِدِ عَلَى أَنَّ التَّعْلِيلَ يُفِيدُ ذَلِكَ، فَفِي الْفَتْحِ وَيَجُوزُ تَزَوُّجُ الْكِتَابِيَّاتِ وَالْأَوْلَى أَنْ لَا يَفْعَلَ، وَلَا يَأْكُلَ ذَبِيحَتَهُمْ إلَّا لِلضَّرُورَةِ، وَتُكْرَهُ الْكِتَابِيَّةُ الْحَرْبِيَّةُ إجْمَاعًا؛ لِافْتِتَاحِ بَابِ الْفِتْنَةِ مِنْ إمْكَانِ التَّعَلُّقِ الْمُسْتَدْعِي لِلْمُقَامِ مَعَهَا فِي دَارِ الْحَرْبِ، وَتَعْرِيضِ الْوَلَدِ عَلَى التَّخَلُّقِ بِأَخْلَاقِ أَهْلِ الْكُفْرِ، وَعَلَى الرِّقِّ بِأَنْ تُسْبَى وَهِيَ حُبْلَى فَيُولَدَ رَقِيقًا، وَإِنْ كَانَ مُسْلِمًا. اهـ.

 

Mufti Radhaul Haq, Fatawa Darul-Ulum Zakariyyah, vol 3, p. 605-607

 

[7] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb Iddah, vol 3 p. 504-505

وَأَنْوَاعُهَا حَيْضٌ، وَأَشْهُرٌ، وَوَضْعُ حَمْلٍ كَمَا أَفَادَهُ بِقَوْلِهِ (وَهِيَ فِي) حَقِّ (حُرَّةٍ) وَلَوْ كِتَابِيَّةً تَحْتَ مُسْلِمٍ (تَحِيضُ لِطَلَاقٍ) وَلَوْ رَجْعِيًّا (أَوْ فَسْخٍ بِجَمِيعِ أَسْبَابِهِ) .

(قَوْلُهُ: وَلَوْ كِتَابِيَّةً تَحْتَ مُسْلِمٍ) لِأَنَّهَا كَالْمُسْلِمَةِ حُرَّتُهَا كَحُرَّتِهَا وَأَمَتُهَا كَأَمَتِهَا بَحْرٌ، وَاحْتَرَزَ عَمَّا لَوْ كَانَتْ تَحْتَ ذِمِّيٍّ وَكَانُوا لَا يَدِينُونَ عِدَّةً كَمَا سَيَأْتِي مَتْنًا آخِرَ الْبَابِ (قَوْلُهُ: لِطَلَاقٍ، أَوْ فَسْخٍ) تَقَدَّمَ فِي بَابِ الْوَلِيِّ نَظْمًا فِرَقُ النِّكَاحِ الَّتِي تَكُونُ فَسْخًا وَاَلَّتِي تَكُونُ طَلَاقًا (قَوْلُهُ: بِجَمِيعِ أَسْبَابِهِ) مِثْلُ الِانْفِسَاخِ بِخِيَارِ

 

Ibn Nujaym, Bahr Rāiq, Kitāb Iddah, vol 4 p. 141

وَأَطْلَقَ الْحُرَّةَ فَشَمِلَ الْمُسْلِمَةَ وَالْكِتَابِيَّةَ تَحْتَ مُسْلِمٍ فَالْكِتَابِيَّةُ تَحْتَ الْمُسْلِمِ كَالْمُسْلِمَةِ حُرَّتُهَا كَحُرَّتِهَا وَأَمَتُهَا كَأَمَتِهَا.

 

Sarakhsi, al-Mabsoot, Kitāb Talaq, vol 6 p. 32

[بَابُ الْعِدَّةِ وَخُرُوجِ الْمَرْأَةِ مِنْ بَيْتِهَا]

وَمَعْنَى الْعِبَادَةِ فِي الْعِدَّةِ تَبَعٌ لَا مَقْصُودٌ أَلَا تَرَى أَنَّهَا تَجِبُ عَلَى الْكِتَابِيَّةِ تَحْتَ الْمُسْلِمِ وَهِيَ لَا تُخَاطَبُ بِالْعِبَادَاتِ.

 

14th December 2023

 

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question:  A sister is having trouble conceiving naturally. She has no kids. Her friend, who is a pharmacist and said she can take medication to initiate breast milk supply from her body so she can adopt (foster) a baby and breastfeed him/her and therefore have a milk child as opposed to just having an adopted child and then having issues with purdah when the child reaches maturity. Would this be permissible in Islām?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

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

 

Answer

In reference to your case in question, yes it would be permissible and if the medication induces natural milk and she breast feeds an infant under two years of age (or two and a half years at most) then milk-kinship relationship is now established between her and this infant. She becomes the milk-kin mother to this infant and purdah won’t be necessary if this infant was a male child. However, her husband does not become this child’s milk-kin father and if it was a female child then purdah would be necessary. This is because for him to be the milk-kin father, her milk must be produced through him to establish a connection between him and the infant, but because the milk was produced due to the medication only, no direct connection exists between him and this child and hence, his milk-kinship relationship is not established with this infant.[1]

 

Allāh Knows Best

 

Written by:  Apa Sumayya Qazi          Reviewed by: Mufti Abdul Waheed

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam        

JKN Fatawa Department

 

 

[1] Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb Ridā’, vol 1, p. 377

إذَا طَلَّقَ الرَّجُلُ امْرَأَتَهُ وَلَهَا لَبَنٌ فَتَزَوَّجَتْ بِزَوْجٍ آخَرَ بَعْدَ مَا انْقَضَتْ عِدَّتُهَا وَوَطِئَهَا الثَّانِي أَجْمَعُوا أَنَّهَا إذَا وَلَدَتْ مِنْ الثَّانِي فَاللَّبَنُ مِنْ الثَّانِي وَيَنْقَطِعُ مِنْ الْأَوَّلِ وَأَجْمَعُوا عَلَى أَنَّهَا إذَا لَمْ تَحْبَلْ مِنْ الثَّانِي فَاللَّبَنُ مِنْ الْأَوَّلِ وَإِذَا حَبِلَتْ مِنْ الثَّانِي وَلَكِنْ لَمْ تَلِدْ مِنْهُ، قَالَ أَبُو حَنِيفَةَ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى -: اللَّبَنُ يَكُونُ مِنْ الْأَوَّلِ حَتَّى تَلِدَ مِنْ الثَّانِي كَذَا فِي الْمُحِيطِ.

رَجُلٌ تَزَوَّجَ امْرَأَةً وَلَمْ تَلِدْ مِنْهُ قَطُّ ثُمَّ نَزَلَ لَهَا لَبَنٌ فَأَرْضَعَتْ صَبِيًّا كَانَ الرَّضَاعُ مِنْ الْمَرْأَةِ دُونَ زَوْجِهَا حَتَّى لَا يَحْرُمَ عَلَى الصَّبِيِّ أَوْلَادُ هَذَا الرَّجُلِ مِنْ غَيْرِ هَذِهِ الْمَرْأَةِ

وَلَوْ وَطِئَ امْرَأَةً بِشُبْهَةٍ فَحَبِلَتْ مِنْهُ فَأَرْضَعَتْ صَبِيًّا فَهُوَ ابْنُ الْوَاطِئِ مِنْ الرَّضَاعِ وَعَلَى هَذَا كُلُّ مَنْ ثَبَتَ نَسَبُهُ مِنْ الْوَاطِئِ ثَبَتَ مِنْهُ الرَّضَاعُ وَفِي كُلِّ مَوْضِعٍ لَا يَثْبُتُ نَسَبُ الْوَلَدِ مِنْهُ ثَبَتَ الرَّضَاعُ مِنْ الْأُمِّ كَذَا فِي الْمُضْمَرَاتِ

رَجُلٌ تَزَوَّجَ امْرَأَةً فَوَلَدَتْ مِنْهُ وَلَدًا فَأَرْضَعَتْ وَلَدَهَا ثُمَّ يَبِسَ لَبَنُهَا ثُمَّ دَرَّ لَهَا لَبَنٌ بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ فَأَرْضَعَتْ صَبِيًّا كَانَ لِهَذَا الصَّبِيِّ أَنْ يَتَزَوَّجَ أَوْلَادَ هَذَا الرَّجُلِ مِنْ غَيْرِ الْمُرْضِعَةِ كَذَا فِي فَتَاوَى قَاضِي خَانْ

 

Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb Ridā’, vol 9 p. 72

(طَلَّقَ ذَاتَ لَبَنٍ فَاعْتَدَّتْ وَتَزَوَّجَتْ) بِآخَرَ (فَحَبِلَتْ وَأَرْضَعَتْ) (فَحُكْمُهُ مِنْ الْأَوَّلِ) لِأَنَّهُ مِنْهُ بِيَقِينٍ فَلَا يَزُولُ بِالشَّكِّ وَيَكُونُ رَبِيبًا لِلثَّانِي (حَتَّى تَلِدَ) فَيَكُونَ اللَّبَنُ مِنْ الثَّانِي

(قَوْلُهُ طَلَّقَ ذَاتَ لَبَنٍ) أَيْ مِنْهُ، بِأَنْ وَلَدَتْ مِنْهُ؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَوْ تَزَوَّجَ امْرَأَةً وَلَمْ تَلِدْ مِنْهُ قَطُّ وَنَزَلَ لَهَا لَبَنٌ وَأَرْضَعَتْ وَلَدًا لَا يَكُونُ الزَّوْجُ أَبًا لِلْوَلَدِ لِأَنَّ نِسْبَتَهُ إلَيْهِ بِسَبَبِ الْوِلَادَةِ مِنْهُ، وَإِذَا انْتَفَتْ انْتَفَتْ النِّسْبَةُ فَكَانَ كَلَبَنِ الْبِكْرِ، وَلِهَذَا لَوْ وَلَدَتْ لِلزَّوْجِ فَنَزَلَ لَهَا لَبَنٌ فَأَرْضَعَتْ بِهِ ثُمَّ جَفَّ لَبَنُهَا ثُمَّ دَرَّ فَأَرْضَعَتْهُ صَبِيَّةً فَإِنَّ لِابْنِ زَوْجِ الْمُرْضِعَةِ التَّزَوُّجَ بِهَذِهِ الصَّبِيَّةِ، وَلَوْ كَانَ صَبِيًّا كَانَ لَهُ التَّزَوُّجُ بِأَوْلَادِ هَذَا الرَّجُلِ مِنْ غَيْرِ الْمُرْضِعَةِ بَحْرٌ عَنْ الْخَانِيَّةِ

 

1^st May 2023

 

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

Question: A man has an illegitimate male child. Can this child come in front of his biological aunt and paternal grandmother without hijab being observed when he gets older and also serve as their Mahram?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

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

 

Answer

In reference to your query on whether this illegitimate child is a mahram or not to them has two separate legal rulings.  First concerning the paternal grandmother (father’s mother) and secondly the aunt. The illegitimate male child becomes a mahram to the fornicator’s mother because the child is now biologically connected to the grandmother through his illegitimate father (even if nasab is not established). The laws of musaharat is also established through illegitimate relation whereby the fornicator’s ascendants and descendants become unlawful for the child to marry i.e. mahram.[1]

As for the aunt, illegitimate father’s sister, the child does not become her mahram due to the child’s lineage not being attributed to the father.[2] In other words, when a man fornicates with a woman and an illegitimate child is born, this child’s lineage is attributed to the mother and not to the father because the Shariah does not recognise lineage outside of wedlock.  As of which this child’s biological connection is cut off from his illegitimate father’s siblings as well as from his legitimate children and moreover, he cannot inherit from this illegitimate father’s estate. This is different in the case of ascendants and descendants because direct connection is established. Henceforth, this child has no mahram relationship with his aunt and she must observe Hijab in front him after he attains bulugh.[3]

 

 

[Allāh Knows Best]

 

 

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

Attested by: Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

 

 

[1] Ikhtiyaar Li Ta’leel Mukhtar, Vol 3, Pg 88

 وَالزِّنَا يُوجِبُ حُرْمَةَ الْمُصَاهَرَةِ) ، فَمَنْ زَنَى بِامْرَأَةٍ أَوْ وَطِئَهَا بِشُبْهَةٍ حَرُمَتْ عَلَيْهِ أُصُولُهَا وَفُرُوعُهَا، وَتَحْرُمُ الْمَوْطُوءَةُ عَلَى أُصُولِ الْوَاطِئِ وَفُرُوعِهِ. (وَكَذَا الْمَسُّ بِشَهْوَةٍ مِنَ الْجَانِبَيْنِ وَالنَّظَرُ إِلَى الْفَرْجِ مِنَ الْجَانِبَيْنِ أَيْضًا) ، وَالْمُعْتَبَرُ النَّظَرُ إِلَى فَرْجِهَا الْبَاطِنِ دُونَ الظَّاهِرِ. رُوِيَ ذَلِكَ عَنْ أَبِي يُوسُفَ، وَهُوَ الصَّحِيحُ.

 

 

Raddul Mukhtar, Vol 3, Pg 32

قَوْلُهُ: وَحَرُمَ أَيْضًا بِالصِّهْرِيَّةِ أَصْلُ مَزْنِيَّتِهِ) قَالَ فِي الْبَحْرِ: أَرَادَ بِحُرْمَةِ الْمُصَاهَرَةِ الْحُرُمَاتِ الْأَرْبَعَ حُرْمَةَ الْمَرْأَةِ عَلَى أُصُولِ الزَّانِي وَفُرُوعِهِ نَسَبًا وَرَضَاعًا وَحُرْمَةَ أُصُولِهَا وَفُرُوعِهَا عَلَى الزَّانِي نَسَبًا وَرَضَاعًا كَمَا فِي الْوَطْءِ الْحَلَالِ وَيَحِلُّ لِأُصُولِ الزَّانِي وَفُرُوعِهِ أُصُولُ الْمُزَنِيّ بِهَا وَفُرُوعُهَا.

 

[2] Raddul Mukhtar, Vol 3, Pg 29

فِي كِتَابِ الرَّضَاعِ مِنْ أَنَّ الْبِنْتَ مِنْ الزِّنَى لَا تَحْرُمُ عَلَى عَمِّ الزَّانِي وَخَالِهِ لِأَنَّهُ لَمْ يَثْبُتْ نَسَبُهَا مِنْ الزَّانِي حَتَّى يَظْهَرَ فِيهَا حُكْمُ الرِّقَابَةِ، وَأَمَّا التَّحْرِيمُ عَلَى آبَاءِ الزَّانِي وَأَوْلَادِهِ فَلِاعْتِبَارِ الْجُزْئِيَّةِ وَلَا جُزْئِيَّةَ بَيْنَهَا وَبَيْنَ الْعَمِّ وَالْخَالِ.

 

Raddul Mukhtar, Vol 3, Pg 31

وَمُقْتَضَى تَقْيِيدِهِ بِالْفَرْعِ وَالْأَصْلِ أَنَّهُ لَا خِلَافَ فِي عَدَمِ الْحُرْمَةِ عَلَى غَيْرِهِمَا مِنْ الْحَوَاشِي كَالْأَخِ وَالْعَمِّ. وَفِي التَّنْجِيسِ زَنَى بِامْرَأَةٍ فَوَلَدَتْ فَأَرْضَعَتْ بِهَذَا اللَّبَنِ صَبِيَّةً لَا يَجُوزُ لِهَذَا الزَّانِي تَزَوُّجُهَا وَلَا لِأُصُولِهِ وَفُرُوعِهِ، وَالْعَمِّ الزَّانِي التَّزَوُّجُ بِهَا كَمَا لَوْ كَانَتْ وَلَدَتْ لَهُ مِنْ الزِّنَى، وَالْخَالُ مِثْلُهُ؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَمْ يَثْبُتْ نَسَبُهَا مِنْ الزَّانِي، حَتَّى يَظْهَرَ فِيهَا حُكْمُ الْقَرَابَةِ وَالتَّحْرِيمُ عَلَى أَبِي الزَّانِي وَأَوْلَادِهِ وَأَوْلَادِهِمْ لِاعْتِبَارِ الْجُزْئِيَّةِ وَلَا جُزْئِيَّةَ بَيْنَهَا وَبَيْنَ الْعَمِّ، وَإِذَا ثَبَتَ ذَلِكَ فِي الْمُتَوَلِّدَةِ مِنْ الزِّنَى فَكَذَا فِي الْمُرْضَعَةِ بِلَبَنِ الزِّنَى. اهـ. قُلْت: وَهَذَا مُخَالِفٌ لِمَا مَرَّ مِنْ التَّعْمِيمِ فِي قَوْلِ الشَّارِحِ: وَلَوْ مِنْ زِنًى كَمَا نَبَّهْنَا عَلَيْهِ هُنَاكَ.

 

[3] For more details see Ahsanul Fatawa vol 5, p. 78, Fatawa Faridiyyah, vol 4, p. 464 and Fatawa Qasimiyyah, vol 13, p. 237

 

 

 

17^th September 2022

  

Question: If the wife receives tax credit benefits which suffices for her needs but also asks the husband on top of that to give her the nafaqah (marital expenses); can he refuse paying nafaqah? Also kindly explain how nafaqah works in Islām.

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

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

 

Answer

To begin with tax credit is a government pay-out of extra income to individuals to support them with their basic living costs. As there are many forms of tax credits the most common ones which presumably you are referring to are working tax credits and child tax credit. Working tax credit are for those employees or self-employed individuals with low income, earning below the minimum threshold whereas child tax credit in addition to child benefit is for those responsible for children. The government calculates your annual income and then tops it up with additional revenue so to meet the minimal threshold of your yearly income.[1] This scheme like other benefit schemes provided by the government for struggling parents and workers Islamically does not absolve the husband from his legal responsibility of nafaqah towards his wife and children. In other words, he must still pay nafaqah towards her and for his children.

Nafaqah by definition as Shaykh Wahbah Zuhayli rahimahullah explains is to spend from ones earning and provide adequate essentials for one’s family (in this case, wife and children) such as food, clothes, cooking utensils, cleaning assets for the home, cutlery etc and shelter to the best of one’s ability. Commencing with his wife (and children) in maintenance is essential as advised by the Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam (as will be mentioned below).[2] The following conditions must be fulfilled according to the Hanafi jurists for nafaqah to be necessary;

1. The Nikāh between them should be valid that is, adopting all of the necessary Islamic conditions for the relationship between them to be Halāl. Hence, nafaqah is not necessary nor can be demanded if their Nikāh was not valid (Nikāh Fasid).[3]
2. The wife to relocate to her husband’s accommodation and his right to retain her after marriage. This means that in order for her to be eligible for nafaqah, she must live with him permanently after marriage and not to prevent him from intimacy thereafter. This also includes if she intends to relocate but he refuses to accommodate her, even so she is entitled to nafaqah because the prevention is from him instead from her.[4] If she refuses to move in with him without a valid reason or constantly leaves the home without his permission then he is not obliged to pay nafaqah to her because she now becomes a nashizah – disobeying wife.[5]

The man’s obligation to provide nafaqah is established through sound evidence from the Quran and Sunnah. Allāh Almighty states in the Quran, Men are maintainers (qawwamūn) over women because of that which Allāh has conferred (favours) over each of them and because of them (men) spending from their wealth.”[6] The term Qawwām implies to many meanings such as leader, protector, provider and maintainer. In this context it refers to financial maintenance. The great Tafsīr master Imām Qurtubi rahimahullah comments under this verse that Allāh has conferred men over women for financially providing for them, thus if he fails to financially secure her then he is not fulfilling his duty of Qawwām as of which, she can legally demand for her marriage to be annulled through an Islamic judicial process.[7] It is reported that a man once asked the Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam about the wife’s right over her husband, to which he responded, “To feed her when he eats, to cloth her when he dresses, he does not strike her in the face, does not ridicule her and nor he separates from her except in the home.”[8]  It is evident from the above that it is a man’s legal duty to financially secure the needs of his wife and children by providing from his own earnings. Government benefits are not coming from him so in that respect he is not classed as a provider. Ibn Abidīn Shamī rahimahullah, a renowned Hanafi jurist mentions that despite she has her own wealth, she can still ask for expenses;

(And the husband is to spend on her by himself) because he is a Qawwām over her, not so he can take the residue because what has been stipulated for her or given to her is for her ownership…………that if she eats from her wealth or asks (from others for money) then she can reclaim from him the stipulated amount.”[9]

Ibn Nujaym rahimahullah also mentions the same as above except that he adds that after stipulating maintenance for her in addition to benefits, if she utilises all of the money before the agreed date of her next payment between them, then she cannot demand any more from him until her next due payment. He states;

This indicates also that if she lavishly spends and consumes her expenses of the month before its passing (i.e. passing of the month) and she is in need then he will not stipulate any more for her, like as though her expenses perished.” [10]  

Furthermore, the jurists mention that if he married a wealthy woman (or possesses wealth of her own) then he is still legally obliged to provide for her. The amount however is determined by the moderate standard agreed between them. Ibn Nujaym rahimahullah states;

If he is poor and she is rich then the expenses (to the standard) of poverty is necessary because when she married a poor then she consented to the expenses of a poor. Nevertheless, the adopted fatwa is that the expenses of moderate (standard) is necessary in both scenarios (regardless of who is poor or wealthy) and that (amount) which is above poverty (standard) and below affluence.”[11]    

A few points can be concluded from the above,

1. In Islām, the husband is the breadwinner which is to maintain his wife and children by spending on them from his own earnings. Government benefits are there to provide additional financial support for people with low income. This itself does not equate to nafaqah nor absolve him from his financial duties as the additional support is not from him. This is similar to the case if his wife is wealthy or earns for herself, even so the jurists mention that he still remains financially responsible.
2. To spend moderately on his family. The Shariah has not stipulated any amount nor fixed a time period of maintenance (e.g. weekly or monthly). Both of these would be determined mutually between the couple based on his financial circumstance. Providing the basics such as; food, clothing, grocery shopping, household essentials, bills etc are the least to fulfil his financial obligation.
3. If the agreed amount is not sufficient for her basic needs, then she can ask for more in which case he cannot refuse when he is able to provide for her.[12] The Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam once advised Abu Sufyān’s wife to take that which is sufficient for you and for your child after he refused to spend on them.[13]
4. Finally, after fulfilling his basic right she cannot impose any further financial demands on him such as, demanding more to lavishly spend on herself or to purchase items beyond necessity like expensive clothes etc. In this case, he is not obliged to give her more Islamically.

 

[Allãh Knows Best]

 

 

Written and researched by (Mufti) Abdul Waheed

Answer Attested by Shaykh Mufti Saiful Islam

JKN Fatawa Department

 

 

 

[1] Richardson, D. (2022), What are Tax Credits? Available at: What are tax credits? – Which? [accessed 2nd September 2022]

[2] Zuhayli, Fiqhul Islami wa adillatihu, vol 7 p. 723

مبادئ عامة في النفقات

معنى النفقة وأسبابها: النفقة مشتقة من الإنفاق: وهو الإخراج، ولا يستعمل إلا في الخير. وجمعها نفقات. وهي لغة: ما ينفقه الإنسان على عياله. وهي في الأصل: الدراهم من الأموال. وشرعاً: هي كفاية من يمونه من الطعام والكسوة والسكنى (1). وعرفاً هي الطعام. والطعام: يشمل الخبز والأُدم والشرب. والكسوة: السترة والغطاء. والسكنى: تشمل البيت ومتاعه ومرافقه من ثمن الماء ودهن المصباح وآلة التنظيف والخدمة ونحوها بحسب العرف.

نفقة تجب للإنسان على نفسه إذا قدر عليها، وعليه أن يقدمها على نفقة غيره، لقوله صلّى الله عليه وسلم: «ابدأ بنفسك، ثم بمن تعول» (1) أي بمن تجب عليك نفقته.

 

[3] Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitābus Talāq, vol 1, p.570

[الْبَابُ السَّابِعُ عَشَرَ فِي النَّفَقَاتِ وَفِيهِ سِتَّةُ فُصُولٍ]

[الْفَصْلُ الْأَوَّلُ فِي نَفَقَةِ الزَّوْجَةِ]

وَلَا نَفَقَةَ فِي النِّكَاحِ الْفَاسِدِ، وَلَا فِي الْعِدَّةِ مِنْهُ، وَلَوْ كَانَ النِّكَاحُ صَحِيحًا مِنْ حَيْثُ الظَّاهِرُ فَفَرَضَ الْقَاضِي لَهَا النَّفَقَةَ

 

Kasān, Badā’i Sanāi, Kitāb Nafaqah, vol 5 p. 117

عَلَى هَذَا الْأَصْلِ يَنْبَنِي أَنَّهُ لَا نَفَقَةَ عَلَى مُسْلِمٍ فِي نِكَاحٍ فَاسِدٍ لِانْعِدَامِ سَبَبِ الْوُجُوبِ وَهُوَ حَقُّ الْحَبْسِ الثَّابِتِ لِلزَّوْجِ عَلَيْهَا بِسَبَبِ النِّكَاحِ؛ لِأَنَّ حَقَّ الْحَبْسِ لَا يَثْبُتُ فِي النِّكَاحِ الْفَاسِدِ وَكَذَا النِّكَاحُ الْفَاسِدُ لَيْسَ بِنِكَاحٍ حَقِيقَةً وَكَذَا فِي عِدَّةٍ مِنْهُ إنْ ثَبَتَ حَقُّ الْحَبْسِ

 

[4] Kasān, Badā’i Sanāi, Kitāb Nafaqah, vol 5 p. 114

وَلَنَا أَنَّ حَقَّ الْحَبْسِ الثَّابِتِ لِلزَّوْجِ عَلَيْهَا بِسَبَبِ النِّكَاحِ مُؤَثِّرٌ فِي اسْتِحْقَاقِ النَّفَقَةِ لَهَا عَلَيْهِ لِمَا بَيَّنَّا

 

Kasān, Badā’i Sanāi, Kitāb Nafaqah, vol 5 p. 128

أَمَّا الْأَوَّلُ فَتَسْلِيمُ الْمَرْأَةِ نَفْسَهَا إلَى الزَّوْجِ وَقْتَ وُجُوبِ التَّسْلِيمِ وَنَعْنِي بِالتَّسْلِيمِ: التَّخْلِيَةَ وَهِيَ أَنْ تَخْلِي بَيْنَ نَفْسِهَا وَبَيْنَ زَوْجِهَا بِرَفْعِ الْمَانِعِ مِنْ وَطْئِهَا أَوْ الِاسْتِمْتَاعِ بِهَا حَقِيقَةً إذَا كَانَ الْمَانِعُ مِنْ قِبَلِهَا أَوْ مِنْ قِبَلِ غَيْرِ الزَّوْجِ فَإِنْ لَمْ يُوجَدْ التَّسْلِيمُ عَلَى هَذَا التَّفْسِيرِ وَقْتَ وُجُوبِ التَّسْلِيمِ؛ فَلَا نَفَقَةَ لَهَا وَعَلَى هَذَا يُخَرَّجُ مَسَائِلُ: إذَا تَزَوَّجَ بَالِغَةً حُرَّةً صَحِيحَةً سَلِيمَةً وَنَقَلَهَا إلَى بَيْتِهِ فَلَهَا النَّفَقَةُ لِوُجُودِ سَبَبِ الْوُجُوبِ وَشَرْطِهِ وَكَذَلِكَ إذَا لَمْ يَنْقُلْهَا وَهِيَ بِحَيْثُ لَا تَمْنَعُ نَفْسَهَا وَطَلَبَتْ النَّفَقَةَ وَلَمْ يُطَالِبْهَا بِالنُّقْلَةِ فَلَهَا النَّفَقَةُ؛ لِأَنَّهُ وُجِدَ سَبَبُ الْوُجُوبِ وَهُوَ اسْتِحْقَاقُ الْحَبْسِ وَشَرْطُهُ وَهُوَ التَّسْلِيمُ عَلَى التَّفْسِيرِ الَّذِي ذَكَرْنَا

 

[5] Valid reason for not relocating could include for instance, he has not paid her mahr yet, then she is eligible for nafaqah and can restrain herself from relocating until he pays her, her full mahr.

 

Ibn Nujaym, Bahr Rāiq, Kitābus Talāq, vol 4 p. 303

(قَوْلُهُ لَا نَاشِزَةٍ) بِالْجَرِّ عَطْفٌ عَلَى الزَّوْجَةِ أَيْ لَا تَجِبُ النَّفَقَةُ لِلنَّاشِزَةِ وَهِيَ فِي اللُّغَةِ الْعِصَابَةُ عَلَى الزَّوْجِ الْمُبْغِضَةُ لَهُ، يُقَالُ نَشَزَتْ الْمَرْأَةُ عَلَى زَوْجِهَا فَهِيَ نَاشِزَةٌ، وَعَنْ الزَّجَّاجِ النُّشُوزُ يَكُونُ بَيْنَ الزَّوْجَيْنِ وَهِيَ كَرَاهَةُ كُلِّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمَا صَاحِبَهُ، كَذَا فِي الْمُغْرِبِ وَفِي الشَّرْعِ كَمَا قَالَ الْإِمَامُ الْخَصَّافُ الْخَارِجَةُ عَنْ مَنْزِلِ زَوْجِهَا الْمَانِعَةُ نَفْسَهَا مِنْهُ وَالْمُرَادُ بِالْخُرُوجِ كَوْنُهَا فِي غَيْرِ مَنْزِلِهِ بِغَيْرِ إذْنِهِ لِيَشْمَلَ مَا إذَا امْتَنَعَتْ عَنْ الْمَجِيءِ إلَى مَنْزِلِهِ ابْتِدَاءً بِغَيْرِ إيفَاءِ مُعَجَّلِ مَهْرِهَا وَمَا إذَا خَرَجَتْ مِنْ مَنْزِلِهِ بَعْدَ الِانْتِقَالِ إلَيْهِ وَأَطْلَقَ الْخُرُوجَ فَشَمِلَ الْحَقِيقِيَّ وَالْحُكْمِيَّ وَهُوَ عَدَمُ تَمْكِينِهَا لَهُ مِنْ الدُّخُولِ فِي مَنْزِلِهَا الَّذِي يَسْكُنَانِ فِيهِ قَبْلَ أَنْ تَسْأَلَهُ النُّقْلَةَ؛ لِأَنَّهَا كَالْخَارِجَةِ،

 

[6] Surah Nisa [4:34]

 

[7] The right demanding dissolution is according to the Maliki and Shafi’ee School, but not according to the Hanafi school. Later Hanafi scholars have adopted the Maliki position of her right to demand a dissolution for not financially maintaining for her. Tafseer Qurtubi vol 5 p. 168-169

فِيهِ إِحْدَى عَشْرَةَ مَسْأَلَةً: الْأُولَى- قَوْلُهُ تَعَالَى: (الرِّجالُ قَوَّامُونَ عَلَى النِّساءِ) ابْتِدَاءٌ وَخَبَرٌ، أَيْ يَقُومُونَ بِالنَّفَقَةِ عَلَيْهِنَّ وَالذَّبِّ عَنْهُنَّ، وَأَيْضًا فَإِنَّ فِيهِمُ الْحُكَّامَ وَالْأُمَرَاءَ وَمَنْ يَغْزُو، وَلَيْسَ ذَلِكَ فِي النِّسَاءِ.ثالثة- فهم العلماء من قَوْلُهُ تَعَالَى: (وَبِما أَنْفَقُوا مِنْ أَمْوالِهِمْ) أَنَّهُ مَتَى عَجَزَ عَنْ نَفَقَتِهَا لَمْ يَكُنْ قَوَّامًا عَلَيْهَا، وَإِذَا لَمْ يَكُنْ قَوَّامًا عَلَيْهَا كَانَ لَهَا فَسْخُ الْعَقْدِ، لِزَوَالِ الْمَقْصُودِ الَّذِي شُرِعَ لِأَجْلِهِ النِّكَاحُ. وَفِيهِ دَلَالَةٌ وَاضِحَةٌ مِنْ هَذَا الْوَجْهِ عَلَى ثُبُوتِ فَسْخِ النِّكَاحِ عِنْدَ الْإِعْسَارِ بِالنَّفَقَةِ وَالْكُسْوَةِ، وَهُوَ مَذْهَبُ مَالِكٍ وَالشَّافِعِيِّ. وَقَالَ أَبُو حَنِيفَةَ: لَا يُفْسَخُ، لِقَوْلِهِ تَعَالَى: (وَإِنْ كانَ ذُو عُسْرَةٍ فَنَظِرَةٌ إِلى مَيْسَرَةٍ «3») وَقَدْ تَقَدَّمَ الْقَوْلُ فِي هَذَا فِي هَذِهِ السُّورَةِ.

 

[8] Sunnan Ibn Majah, Hadeeth No: 1850

بَابُ حَقِّ الْمَرْأَةِ عَلَى الزَّوْجِ

حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا يَزِيدُ بْنُ هَارُونَ، عَنْ شُعْبَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي قَزْعَةَ، عَنْ حَكِيمِ بْنِ مُعَاوِيَةَ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، أَنَّ رَجُلًا سَأَلَ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ مَا حَقُّ الْمَرْأَةِ عَلَى الزَّوْجِ؟ قَالَ: «أَنْ يُطْعِمَهَا إِذَا طَعِمَ، وَأَنْ يَكْسُوَهَا إِذَا اكْتَسَى، وَلَا يَضْرِبِ الْوَجْهَ، وَلَا يُقَبِّحْ، وَلَا يَهْجُرْ إِلَّا فِي الْبَيْتِ»

 

[9] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitābus Talāq, vol 5 p. 292

بَابُ النَّفَقَةِ

(وَلِلزَّوْجِ الْإِنْفَاقُ عَلَيْهَا بِنَفْسِهِ)

 وَلَوْ بَعْدَ فَرْضِ الْقَاضِي خُلَاصَةٌ (إلَّا أَنْ يَظْهَرَ لِلْقَاضِي عَدَمُ إنْفَاقِهِ فَيَفْرِضُ) أَيْ يُقَدِّرُ (لَهَا) بِطَلَبِهَا مَعَ حَضْرَتِهِ

(قَوْلُهُ وَلِلزَّوْجِ الْإِنْفَاقُ عَلَيْهَا بِنَفْسِهِ)

 لِكَوْنِهِ قَوَّامًا عَلَيْهَا لَا لِيَأْخُذَ مَا فَضَلَ، فَإِنَّ الْمَفْرُوضَةَ أَوْ الْمَدْفُوعَةَ لَهَا مِلْكٌ لَهَا، فَلَهَا الْإِطْعَامُ مِنْهَا وَالتَّصَدُّقُ، وَمُقْتَضَاهُ أَنَّهَا لَوْ أَمَرَتْهُ بِإِنْفَاقِ بَعْضِ الْمُقَرَّرِ لَهَا فَالْبَاقِي لَهَا أَوْ بِشِرَاءِ طَعَامٍ لَيْسَ لَهُ أَكْلُ مَا فَضَلَ عَنْهَا. وَفِي الْخَانِيَّةِ: لَوْ أَكَلَتْ مِنْ مَالِهَا أَوْ مِنْ الْمَسْأَلَةِ لَهَا الرُّجُوعُ عَلَيْهِ بِالْمَفْرُوضِ بَحْرٌ مُلَخَّصًا

 

 

[10] Ibn Nujaym, Bahr Rāiq, Kitābus Talāq, vol 4  p. 295

بَابُ النَّفَقَةِ

فَمُقْتَضَى التَّمْلِيكِ أَنَّ لَهَا ذَلِكَ كَمَا تَقَدَّمَ التَّصْرِيحُ بِهِ عَنْ الْخُلَاصَةِ وَالذَّخِيرَةِ فِي نَفَقَةِ الشَّهْرِ وَلَا فَرْقَ بَيْنَ نَفَقَةِ شَهْرٍ أَوْ يَوْمٍ، فَلَيْسَ فَائِدَةً أَنَّهُ يَلِي الْإِنْفَاقَ مَعَ فَرْضِ الْقَاضِي إلَّا لِكَوْنِهِ قَوَّامًا عَلَيْهَا لَا لِأَنَّهُ يَأْخُذُ مَا فَضَلَ وَعَلَى هَذَا لَوْ أَمَرَتْهُ امْرَأَتُهُ بِشِرَاءِ طَعَامٍ وَاشْتَرَى لَهَا فَأَكَلَتْ وَفَضَلَ شَيْءٌ وَاسْتَغْنَتْ عَنْهُ فِي يَوْمِهَا، فَلَيْسَ لَهُ أَكْلُهُ وَالتَّصَرُّفُ فِيهِ إلَيْهَا كَمَا هُوَ مُقْتَضَى التَّمْلِيكِ وَيَدُلُّ عَلَيْهِ أَيْضًا أَنَّهَا لَوْ أَسْرَفَتْ فِي نَفَقَةِ الشَّهْرِ فَأَكَلَتْهَا قَبْلَ مُضِيِّهِ وَاحْتَاجَتْ لَا يَفْرِضُ لَهَا أُخْرَى كَمَا لَوْ هَلَكَتْ كَمَا فِي الذَّخِيرَةِ، فَالْحَاصِلُ أَنَّ الْمَفْرُوضَةَ أَوْ الْمَدْفُوعَةَ إلَيْهَا مِلْكٌ لَهَا فَلَهَا الْإِطْعَامُ مِنْهَا وَالتَّصَدُّقُ وَفِي الْخَانِيَّةِ الْمَرْأَةُ إذَا فُرِضَتْ لَهَا النَّفَقَةُ فَأَكَلَتْ مِنْ مَالِ نَفْسِهَا أَوْ مِنْ مَسْأَلَةِ النَّاسِ كَانَ لَهَا أَنْ تَرْجِعَ بِالْمَفْرُوضِ عَلَى زَوْجِه

 

[11] Ibn Nujaym, Bahr Rāiq, Kitābus Talāq, vol 4  p. 297

وَإِنْ كَانَ مُعْسِرًا وَهِيَ مُوسِرَةٌ وَجَبَ عَلَيْهِ نَفَقَةُ الْمُعْسِرِينَ؛ لِأَنَّهَا لَمَّا تَزَوَّجَتْ مُعْسِرًا فَقَدْ رَضِيَتْ بِنَفَقَةِ الْمُعْسِرِينَ، وَأَمَّا عَلَى الْمُفْتَى بِهِ فَتَجِبُ نَفَقَةُ الْوَسَطِ فِي الْمَسْأَلَتَيْنِ وَهِيَ فَوْقَ نَفَقَةِ الْمُعْسِرَةِ وَدُونَ نَفَقَةِ الْمُوسِرَةِ

 

Kasān, Badā’i Sanāi, Kitāb Nafaqah, vol 5 p. 140

فَصْلٌ فِي شَرْطِ وُجُوبِ هَذِهِ النَّفَقَةِ

وَيَسْتَوِي فِي اسْتِحْقَاقِ هَذِهِ النَّفَقَةِ الْمُعْسِرَةُ وَالْمُوسِرَةُ فَتَسْتَحِقُّ الزَّوْجَةُ النَّفَقَةَ عَلَى زَوْجِهَا وَإِنْ كَانَتْ مُوسِرَةً لِاسْتِوَائِهِمَا فِي سَبَبِ الِاسْتِحْقَاقِ وَشَرْطِهِ وَلِأَنَّ هَذِهِ النَّفَقَةَ لَهَا شَبَهٌ بِالْأَعْوَاضِ فَيَسْتَوِي فِيهَا الْفَقِيرُ وَالْغَنِيُّ كَنَفَقَةِ الْقَاضِي وَالْمُضَارِبِ

 

 

[12] Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitābus Talāq, vol 1, p.576 (Book)

[الْبَابُ السَّابِعُ عَشَرَ فِي النَّفَقَاتِ وَفِيهِ سِتَّةُ فُصُولٍ]

[الْفَصْلُ الْأَوَّلُ فِي نَفَقَةِ الزَّوْجَةِ]

إنْ كَانَ الصُّلْحُ بَعْدَ فَرْضِ الْقَاضِي، أَوْ بَعْدَ تَرَاضِيهِمَا عَلَى شَيْءٍ لِكُلِّ شَهْرٍ يُعْتَبَرُ هَذَا الصُّلْحُ بَيْنَهُمَا مُعَاوَضَةً، وَفَائِدَةُ اعْتِبَارِ التَّقْدِيرِ أَنْ تَجُوزَ الزِّيَادَةُ عَلَى ذَلِكَ وَالنُّقْصَانُ عَنْهُ فَعَلَى هَذَا الْأَصْلِ يَخْرُجُ جِنْسُ هَذِهِ الْمَسَائِلِ، وَإِذَا صَالَحَتْ الْمَرْأَةُ زَوْجَهَا عَلَى ثَلَاثَةِ دَرَاهِمَ لِكُلِّ شَهْرٍ فَقَالَتْ الْمَرْأَةُ: لَا يَكْفِينِي هَذَا الْقَدْرُ كَانَ لَهَا أَنْ تُخَاصِمَهُ حَتَّى يَزِيدَهَا مِقْدَارَ مَا يَكْفِيهَا إذَا كَانَ الزَّوْجُ مُوسِرًا، وَإِذَا صَالَحَتْ الْمَرْأَةُ زَوْجَهَا عَلَى ثَلَاثَةِ دَرَاهِمَ – نَفَقَةُ كُلِّ شَهْرٍ – ثُمَّ قَالَ الزَّوْجُ: لَا أُطِيقُ ذَلِكَ فَإِنَّهُ لَا يُصَدَّقُ فِي ذَلِكَ، وَيَلْزَمُهُ جَمِيعُ ذَلِكَ، قَالَ فِي الْكِتَابِ: إلَّا أَنْ يَبْرَأَ مِنْهُ الْقَاضِي يُرِيدُ بِهِ إلَّا أَنْ يَتَعَرَّفَ الْقَاضِي عَنْ حَالِهِ بِالسُّؤَالِ مِنْ النَّاسِ، فَإِذَا أَخْبَرُوا أَنَّهُ لَا يُطِيقُ ذَلِكَ نَقَصَ عَنْهُ، وَأَوْجَبَ عَنْ قَدْرِ طَاقَتِهِ

 

Ibn Nujaym, Bahr Rāiq, Kitābus Talāq, vol 4  p. 319

وَإِذَا صَالَحَتْ الْمَرْأَةُ زَوْجَهَا مِنْ نَفَقَتِهَا عَلَى ثَلَاثَةِ دَرَاهِمَ كُلَّ شَهْرٍ فَهُوَ جَائِزٌ وَكَانَ ذَلِكَ تَقْدِيرًا لِنَفَقَتِهَا وَالْأَصْلُ أَنَّ الصُّلْحَ بَيْنَهُمَا مَتَى حَصَلَ بِشَيْءٍ يَجُوزُ لِلْقَاضِي أَنْ يَفْرِضَهُ فِي نَفَقَتِهَا بِحَالٍ فَالصُّلْحُ بَيْنَهُمَا تَقْدِيرٌ لِلنَّفَقَةِ وَلَا تُعْتَبَرُ مُعَاوَضَةً سَوَاءٌ كَانَ هَذَا الصُّلْحُ قَبْلَ فَرْضِ الْقَاضِي أَوْ التَّرَاضِي عَلَى شَيْءٍ أَوْ كَانَ بَعْدَ أَحَدِهِمَا، وَإِذَا وَقَعَ الصُّلْحُ عَلَى شَيْءٍ لَا يَجُوزُ لِلْقَاضِي أَنْ يَفْرِضَهُ عَلَى الزَّوْجِ فِي نَفَقَتِهَا بِحَالٍ كَالثَّوْبِ وَالْعَبْدِ يَنْظُرُ إنْ كَانَ الصُّلْحُ بَيْنَهُمَا قَبْلَ قَضَاءِ الْقَاضِي لَهَا بِالنَّفَقَةِ وَقَبْلَ تَرَاضِيهِمَا عَلَى شَيْءٍ لِكُلِّ شَهْرٍ يُعْتَبَرُ الصُّلْحُ مِنْهُمَا تَقْدِيرًا وَبَعْدَ أَحَدِهِمَا يُعْتَبَرُ مُعَاوَضَةً، وَفَائِدَةُ اعْتِبَارِ التَّقْدِيرِ أَنْ تَجُوزَ الزِّيَادَةُ عَلَيْهِ وَالنُّقْصَانُ عَنْهُ وَفَائِدَةُ اعْتِبَارِ الْمُعَاوَضَةِ أَنْ لَا تَجُوزَ الزِّيَادَةُ عَلَى ذَلِكَ وَلَا النُّقْصَانُ، وَإِذَا صَالَحَهَا عَلَى دَرَاهِمَ كُلَّ شَهْرٍ، ثُمَّ قَالَتْ لَا تَكْفِينِي زِيدَتْ، وَلَوْ قَالَ الرَّجُلُ لَا أُطِيقُهُ فَإِنَّهُ لَا يُصَدَّقُ فِي ذَلِكَ فَإِنَّهُ الْتَزَمَهُ بِاخْتِيَارِهِ

 

[13] Bukhari, No: 5367

بَابُ إِذَا لَمْ يُنْفِقِ الرَّجُلُ فَلِلْمَرْأَةِ أَنْ تَأْخُذَ بِغَيْرِ عِلْمِهِ مَا يَكْفِيهَا وَوَلَدَهَا بِالْمَعْرُوفِ

عَنْ عَائِشَةَ، أَنَّ هِنْدَ بِنْتَ عُتْبَةَ، قَالَتْ: يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ إِنَّ أَبَا سُفْيَانَ رَجُلٌ شَحِيحٌ وَلَيْسَ يُعْطِينِي مَا يَكْفِينِي وَوَلَدِي، إِلَّا مَا أَخَذْتُ مِنْهُ وَهُوَ لاَ يَعْلَمُ، فَقَالَ: خُذِي مَا يَكْفِيكِ وَوَلَدَكِ، بِالْمَعْرُوفِ»

15^th August 2022

 

Question: What is the Islamic ruling on performing Nikāh online with the bride and groom and witnesses in different locations?

 

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

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

 

Answer

In reference to the above query, virtual Nikāh whether online or over the phone performed in a manner where the bride, groom and witnesses are physically in different locations is not valid. Legal jurists have outlined that it is necessary for all of the above to be physically present in one session at the same time for the Nikāh to be valid. [1] As a result of a virtual Nikāh, marital relationship between them will not be lawful as they won’t be classed as husband and wife. This is the adopted position amongst contemporary Hanafi jurists more particularly the Deobandi tradition.[2]

If the groom for instance is able to be physically present with the Imām and the witnesses but the bride is in a different location (or vice-versa), then an alternative solution is that the absent bride to appoint an agent (wakeel) to represent her in the gathering. Appointing an agent is permissible as was the case with King Najashi when he performed the Prophet’s sallallahu alayhi wasallam marriage with Sayyidah Umme Habibah radhiyallahu anha at Habashah. The Prophet sallallahu alayhi wasallam was in Madinah whilst she was in Habashah with King Najashi representing the Messenger of Allāh sallallahu alayhi wasallam as his wakeel.[3]

 

 

 

 [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 Nikāh, vol 3 p. 14

 

وَمِنْ شَرَائِطِ الْإِيجَابِ وَالْقَبُولِ: اتِّحَادُ الْمَجْلِسِ لَوْ حَاضِرَيْنِ

(قَوْلُهُ: اتِّحَادُ الْمَجْلِسِ) قَالَ فِي الْبَحْرِ: فَلَوْ اخْتَلَفَ الْمَجْلِسُ لَمْ يَنْعَقِدْ، فَلَوْ أَوْجَبَ أَحَدُهُمَا فَقَامَ الْآخَرُ أَوْ اشْتَغَلَ بِعَمَلٍ آخَرَ بَطَلَ الْإِيجَابُ؛ لِأَنَّ شَرْطَ الِارْتِبَاطِ اتِّحَادُ الزَّمَانِ فَجُعِلَ الْمَجْلِسُ جَامِعًا تَيْسِيرًا؛ وَأَمَّا الْفَوْرُ فَلَيْسَ مِنْ شَرْطِهِ؛ وَلَوْ عَقَدَا وَهُمَا يَمْشِيَانِ أَوْ يَسِيرَانِ عَلَى الدَّابَّةِ لَا يَجُوزُ، وَإِنْ كَانَ عَلَى سَفِينَةٍ سَائِرَةٍ جَازَ. اهـ. أَيْ؛ لِأَنَّ السَّفِينَةَ فِي حُكْمِ مَكَان وَاحِدٍ.

 

Fatawa Hindiyyah, Kitāb Nikāh, vol 1, p. 269

(وَمِنْهَا) أَنْ يَكُونَ الْإِيجَابُ وَالْقَبُولُ فِي مَجْلِسٍ وَاحِدٍ حَتَّى لَوْ اخْتَلَفَ الْمَجْلِسُ بِأَنْ كَانَا حَاضِرَيْنِ فَأَوْجَبَ أَحَدُهُمَا فَقَامَ الْآخَرُ عَنْ الْمَجْلِسِ قَبْلَ الْقَبُولِ أَوْ اشْتَغَلَ بِعَمَلٍ يُوجِبُ اخْتِلَافَ الْمَجْلِسِ لَا يَنْعَقِدُ وَكَذَا إذَا كَانَ أَحَدُهُمَا غَائِبًا لَمْ يَنْعَقِدْ حَتَّى لَوْ قَالَتْ امْرَأَةٌ بِحَضْرَةِ شَاهِدَيْنِ زَوَّجْتُ نَفْسِي مِنْ فُلَانٍ وَهُوَ غَائِبٌ فَبَلَغَهُ الْخَبَرُ فَقَالَ: قَبِلْتُ، أَوْ قَالَ رَجُلٌ بِحَضْرَةِ شَاهِدَيْنِ: تَزَوَّجْتُ فُلَانَةَ وَهِيَ غَائِبَةٌ فَبَلَغَهَا الْخَبَرُ فَقَالَتْ زَوَّجْتُ نَفْسِي مِنْهُ لَمْ يَجُزْ

 

[2] Jalandhari, Khayrul Fatawa, Nikāh, vol 4, p. 369, Maulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani, Kitāb Fatāwa, KItāb Nikāh, vol 4, p. 305,  Mufti Islamil Kacholvi, Fatāwa Diniyyah, Kitāb Nikāh, vol 3, p. 202, Mufti Mahmod Hasan Gangohi, Fatāwa Mahmoodiyyah, Kitāb Nikāh, vol 10, p. 680

 

[3] Maulana Idrees Khandhelwi, Seertaul Mustafa, vol 3, p. 246

2^nd June 2022

 

Question: My sister-in-law lives with us but had physical relationship with my mother. Are my brother and his wife still married? And are my mum and dad still married too?

الجواب حامداً و مصلياً

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

 

Answer

In reference to your case scenario, despite the severity of the sin, the laws of musaharat would not apply. In other words, her husband would not become unlawful upon his wife and neither would this invalidate your parent’s marriage. The laws of musaharat in an unlawful relationship whereby the ascendants and descendants of each of the perpetrators become permanently unlawful for marriage apply when a man and a woman engage in either a sexual act, touch each other with lust or look inside each other’s private area with lust. Sexual act of both man and a woman is deemed as complete fulfilment of the shahwat whilst touching and seeing inside the private organ are precursors to the fulfilment of the shahwat.[1] Contrarily, two people of the same gender engaging in sexual act for self-gratification is deemed unnatural Islamically and has no implication on the rulings of musaharat despite the severity of the crime. This is also the same case with other cases, for instance, the jurists state that if a man fornicates with a woman through her anal passage instead of the vaginal passage, then this does not necessitate the prohibition of musaharat despite it being a sinful act.[2] This is because of the act being unnatural so similarly, same sex relationship that is unnatural would also not necessitate the prohibition of musaharat.

As an advice, both your mother and sister in-law must repent sincerely to Allāh from this shameful act and adopt all of the necessary safeguarding measures to ensure this act is not repeated.

 

[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 Nikāh, vol 3 p. 32

 

[فَصْلٌ فِي الْمُحَرَّمَاتِ]

(أَصْلُ مَزْنِيَّتِهِ) أَرَادَ بِالزِّنَا فِي الْوَطْءِ الْحَرَامِ (وَ) أَصْلُ (مَمْسُوسَتِهِ بِشَهْوَةٍ) وَلَوْ لِشَعْرٍ عَلَى الرَّأْسِ بِحَائِلٍ لَا يَمْنَعُ الْحَرَارَةَ (وَأَصْلُ مَاسَّتِهِ وَنَاظِرَةٍ إلَى ذَكَرِهِ وَالْمَنْظُورُ إلَى فَرْجِهَا) الْمُدَوَّرِ (الدَّاخِلِ) وَلَوْ نَظَرَهُ مِنْ زُجَاجٍ أَوْ مَاءٍ هِيَ فِيهِ (وَفُرُوعُهُنَّ) مُطْلَقًا وَالْعِبْرَةُ لِلشَّهْوَةِ عِنْدَ الْمَسِّ وَالنَّظَرِ لَا بَعْدَهُمَا وَحَدُّهَا فِيهِمَا تَحَرُّكُ آلَتِهِ أَوْ زِيَادَتُهُ بِهِ يُفْتَى

(قَوْلُهُ: وَحَرُمَ أَيْضًا بِالصِّهْرِيَّةِ أَصْلُ مَزْنِيَّتِهِ) قَالَ فِي الْبَحْرِ: أَرَادَ بِحُرْمَةِ الْمُصَاهَرَةِ الْحُرُمَاتِ الْأَرْبَعَ حُرْمَةَ الْمَرْأَةِ عَلَى أُصُولِ الزَّانِي وَفُرُوعِهِ نَسَبًا وَرَضَاعًا وَحُرْمَةَ أُصُولِهَا وَفُرُوعِهَا عَلَى الزَّانِي نَسَبًا وَرَضَاعًا كَمَا فِي الْوَطْءِ الْحَلَالِ وَيَحِلُّ لِأُصُولِ الزَّانِي وَفُرُوعِهِ أُصُولُ الْمُزَنِيّ بِهَا وَفُرُوعُهَا.

(قَوْلُهُ: أَرَادَ بِالزِّنَى الْوَطْءَ الْحَرَامَ) ؛ لِأَنَّ الزِّنَى وَطْءُ مُكَلَّفٍ فِي فَرْجِ مُشْتَهَاةٍ وَلَوْ مَاضِيًا خَالٍ عَنْ الْمِلْكِ وَشُبْهَتِهِ، وَكَذَا تَثْبُتُ حُرْمَةُ الْمُصَاهَرَةِ لَوْ وَطِئَ الْمَنْكُوحَةَ فَاسِدًا أَوْ الْمُشْتَرَاةَ فَاسِدًا أَوْ الْجَارِيَةَ الْمُشْتَرَكَةَ أَوْ الْمُكَاتَبَةَ أَوْ الْمُظَاهَرَ مِنْهَا أَوْ الْأَمَةَ الْمَجُوسِيَّةَ أَوْ زَوْجَتَهُ الْحَائِضَ أَوْ النُّفَسَاءَ أَوْ كَانَ مُحْرِمًا أَوْ صَائِمًا،

 

Ibn Nujaym, Bahr Rāiq, Kitāb Nikāh, vol 3 p. 105

(فَصْلٌ فِي الْمُحَرَّمَاتِ)

(قَوْلُهُ وَالزِّنَا وَاللَّمْسُ وَالنَّظَرُ بِشَهْوَةٍ يُوجِبُ حُرْمَةَ الْمُصَاهَرَةِ) وَقَالَ الشَّافِعِيُّ الزِّنَا لَا يُوجِبُ حُرْمَةَ الْمُصَاهَرَةِ؛ لِأَنَّهَا نِعْمَةٌ فَلَا تُنَالُ بِالْمَحْظُورِ، وَلَنَا: أَنَّ الْوَطْءَ سَبَبُ الْجُزْئِيَّةِ بِوَاسِطَةِ الْوَلَدِ حَتَّى يُضَافَ إلَى كُلِّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمَا كَمُلًا فَيَصِيرُ أُصُولُهَا وَفُرُوعُهَا كَأُصُولِهِ وَفُرُوعِهِ، وَكَذَلِكَ عَلَى الْعَكْسِ وَالِاسْتِمْتَاعُ بِالْجُزْءِ حَرَامٌ إلَّا فِي مَوْضِعِ الضَّرُورَةِ وَهِيَ الْمَوْطُوءَةُ وَالْوَطْءُ مُحَرَّمٌ مِنْ حَيْثُ إنَّهُ سَبَبُ الْوَلَدِ لَا مِنْ حَيْثُ إنَّهُ زِنًا وَاللَّمْسُ وَالنَّظَرُ سَبَبٌ دَاعٍ إلَى الْوَطْءِ فَيُقَامُ مَقَامَهُ فِي مَوْضِعِ الِاحْتِيَاطِ كَذَا فِي الْهِدَايَةِ وَلَمْ يَسْتَدِلَّ بِقَوْلِهِ تَعَالَى {وَلا تَنْكِحُوا مَا نَكَحَ آبَاؤُكُمْ} [النساء: 22] كَمَا فَعَلَ الشَّارِحُونَ لِمَا قَدَّمْنَا أَنَّهُ لَا يَصْلُحُ الِاسْتِدْلَال بِهِ، أَرَادَ بِالزِّنَا الْوَطْءَ الْحَرَامَ، وَإِنَّمَا قَيَّدَ بِهِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ مَحَلُّ الْخِلَافِ، أَمَّا لَوْ وَطِئَ الْمَنْكُوحَةَ نِكَاحًا فَاسِدًا أَوْ الْمُشْتَرَاةَ فَاسِدًا أَوْ الْجَارِيَةَ الْمُشْتَرَكَةَ أَوْ الْمُكَاتَبَةَ أَوْ الْمُظَاهَرَةَ مِنْهَا أَوْ الْأَمَةَ الْمَجُوسِيَّةَ أَوْ زَوْجَتَهُ الْحَائِضَ أَوْ النُّفَسَاءَ أَوْ كَانَ مُحْرِمًا أَوْ صَائِمًا فَإِنَّهُ يَثْبُتُ حُرْمَةُ الْمُصَاهَرَةِ اتِّفَاقًا وَبِهِ عُلِمَ أَنَّ الِاعْتِبَارَ لِعَيْنِ الْوَطْءِ لَا لِكَوْنِهِ حَلَالًا أَوْ حَرَامًا وَلِيُفِيدَ أَنَّهُ لَا بُدَّ أَنْ تَكُونَ الْمَرْأَةُ حَيَّةً؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَوْ وَطِئَ الْمَيِّتَةَ فَإِنَّهُ لَا تَثْبُتُ حُرْمَةُ الْمُصَاهَرَةِ كَمَا فِي الْخَانِيَّةِ

 

[2] Durrul Mukhtār wa hashiyah Ibn Ābideen Shāmi, Kitāb Nikāh, vol 3 p. 32

[فَصْلٌ فِي الْمُحَرَّمَاتِ]

وَلِيُفِيدَ أَنَّهَا لَا، تَثْبُتُ بِالْوَطْءِ بِالدُّبُرِ كَمَا يَأْتِي خِلَافًا لِلْأَوْزَاعِيِّ وَأَحْمَدَ. قَالَ فِي الْفَتْحِ: وَبِقَوْلِنَا قَالَ مَالِكٌ فِي رِوَايَةٍ وَأَحْمَدُ، وَهُوَ قَوْلُ عُمَرَ وَابْنِ مَسْعُودٍ وَابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ فِي الْأَصَحِّ وَعِمْرَانِ بْنِ الْحُصَيْنِ وَجَابِرٍ وَأُبَيُّ وَعَائِشَةَ وَجُمْهُورِ التَّابِعِينَ كَالْبَصْرِيِّ وَالشَّعْبِيِّ وَالنَّخَعِيِّ وَالْأَوْزَاعِيِّ وَطَاوُسٍ وَمُجَاهِدٍ وَعَطَاءٍ وَابْنِ الْمُسَيِّبِ وَسُلَيْمَانَ بْنِ يَسَارٍ وَحَمَّادٍ وَالثَّوْرِيِّ وَابْنِ رَاهْوَيْهِ وَتَمَامُهُ مَعَ بَسْطِ الدَّلِيلِ فِيهِ.

Ibn Nujaym, Bahr Rāiq, Kitāb Nikāh, vol 3 p. 105

(فَصْلٌ فِي الْمُحَرَّمَاتِ)

وَلِيُفِيدَ أَنَّهُ لَا بُدَّ أَنْ يَكُونَ فِي الْقُبُلِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَوْ وَطِئَ الْمَرْأَةَ فِي الدُّبُرُ فَإِنَّهُ لَا يَثْبُتُ حُرْمَةُ الْمُصَاهَرَةِ وَهُوَ الْأَصَحُّ؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَيْسَ بِمَحَلِّ الْحَرْثِ فَلَا يُفْضِي إلَى الْوَلَدِ كَمَا فِي الذَّخِيرَةِ وَسَوَاءٌ كَانَ بِصَبِيٍّ أَوْ امْرَأَةٍ كَمَا فِي غَايَةِ الْبَيَانِ وَعَلَيْهِ الْفَتْوَى كَمَا فِي الْوَاقِعَاتِ وَلِأَنَّهُ لَوْ وَطِئَهَا فَأَفْضَاهَا لَا تَحْرُمُ عَلَيْهِ أُمُّهَا لِعَدَمِ تَيَقُّنِ كَوْنِهِ فِي الْفَرْجِ إلَّا إذَا حَبِلَتْ.

                           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