global_id
int64 1
19.1k
| title
stringlengths 4
265
| question
stringlengths 24
13.9k
| answer
stringlengths 19
37.4k
| topic
stringclasses 266
values | page_url
stringlengths 50
114
| article_url
stringlengths 42
292
| original_topic_id
int64 1
269
| original_id
int64 1
518k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
18,701 | Is It Permissible to Wipe Over Exfoliating Socks in Wudu? | Question
Is it permissible to wipe over exfoliating socks when doing wudu? | Praise be to Allah.Is it permissible to wipe over socks?
It is permissible to wipe over socks, if they are thick and cover the ankles.
As for thin socks, it is not permissible to wipe over them according to the majority of scholars, and it was said that there is consensus regarding that.
Ibn Qattan (may Allah have mercy on him) said: All are agreed that if the socks are not thick, it is not permissible to wipe over them.” (End quote from Al-Iqna‘ fi Masa’il Al-Ijma‘ 1/90)
Similarly, it is not permissible to wipe over socks that do not cover the ankles, according to the majority of jurists.
Is It Permissible to Wipe Over Exfoliating Socks in Wudu?
There are medical socks which exfoliate the skin to remove dead skin cells and soften the skin. They are called exfoliating socks, and they are of different types.
If they are thick and cover the ankles, it is permissible to wipe over them if they were put on when one was in a state of purity.
But if they are thin and show the colour of the skin, or they are thick but water goes through them, and it is not usually possible to walk in them, then it is not valid to wipe over them.
If someone needs to wear them and does not want to take them off every time they do Wudu, then he can wear thick socks over them and wipe over the outer socks.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/306291/is-it-permissible-to-wipe-over-exfoliating-socks-in-wudu | 59 | 306,291 |
18,702 | Is it permissible to wipe over socks that were put on when in a state of purity, after having been compelled to do tayammum? | Question
I did wudu, after which I put on socks so that I could wipe over them. When I woke up for Fajr prayer, I felt unwell and was unable to do wudu with water, so I did tayammum and prayed Fajr, and I completed my wudu by wiping over the socks. Is my completing it by wiping over the socks valid? | Praise be to Allah.If someone puts on khuffs after doing a complete wudu, he may wipe over them within the timeframe that is allowed, which is one day and night for one who is not travelling, and three days for one who is travelling.
He does not have to take the khuffs off until that period ends, or he finds himself in a state of major impurity, in which case he must take them off when he wants to purify himself (ghusl). It was narrated from ‘Abd ar-Rahman ibn Abi Bakrah, from his father, that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) granted a concession to travellers: if a traveller did wudu and put on khuffs, then he invalidated his wudu, he could wipe over the khuffs for three days and nights; the non-traveller could do so for one day and one night.
Narrated by Ibn Majah (556) and others. Ibn ‘Abd al-Hadi (may Allah have mercy on him) said in Tanqih al-Tahqiq (1/334): This isnad of this hadith is qawiy. End quote. It was classed as hasan by al-Albani.
Please see also the answer to question no. 9640 .
So if he put them on when he was in a state of purity, then did tayammum after that, then the excuse that made tayammum permissible was no longer applicable, so he did wudu and wiped over his socks, there is nothing wrong with that, and there is no report from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) to suggest that doing tayammum – during the period in which wiping over the socks is permissible – invalidates the concession that allows wiping over the khuffs.
The basic principle is that things remain as they are and cannot be changed except on the basis of evidence, and we do not know of any evidence to indicate that this is not allowed.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/265015/is-it-permissible-to-wipe-over-socks-that-were-put-on-when-in-a-state-of-purity-after-having-been-compelled-to-do-tayammum | 59 | 265,015 |
18,703 | Is the ruling on taking off the turban after wiping over it in wudu’ the same as the ruling regarding the khuffs? | Question
On what basis did the jurists differentiate between wiping over the khuffs and wiping over the turban, as they say that the one who takes off the khuffs after wiping over them invalidates his wudu, whereas the one who takes off his turban after wiping over it does not invalidate his wudu? | Praise be to Allah.Firstly:
Wiping over the turban is something that is proven in the sound prophetic Sunnah. In Sahih al-Bukhari (205), it is narrated that ‘Amr ibn Umayyah said: I saw the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) wiping over his turban and his khuffs.
The view that it is permissible to wipe over the turban is the view of Imam Ahmad.
As for the majority of jurists, they do not allow wiping over the turban.
Ibn Rushd said: The scholars differed with regard to wiping over the turban. Ahmad ibn Hanbal allowed that… And a number of them, including Malik, ash-Shafa‘i and Abu Hanifah, did not allow it."(Bidayat al-Mujtahid 1/15).
An-Nawawi said: If he limits it to wiping over the turban and does not wipe any part of his head, that is not valid, and there is no difference of opinion among us regarding that. This is the view of most of the scholars."(Al-Majmu‘ 1/407).
Hence al-Mirdawi regarded the issue of wiping over the turban as one of the views that was unique to the Hanbali madhhab. See: al-Insaf 1/185.
The view of Imam Ahmad is the soundest view in terms of evidence.
Secondly:
Those who say that it is permissible to wipe over the turban do not differentiate between the turban and the khuffs in terms of the ruling on whether wudu is invalidated by taking them off or not. Rather the ruling in this regard is the same in both cases.
Those who say that wudu is invalidated for the one who takes off the khuffs after wiping over them also say that with regard to the one who takes off his turban after wiping over it. This is the view of the Hanbalis.
Ibn Qudamah said regarding the turban: The ruling is the same with regard to the timescale, and he stipulated that one should already be in a state of purity when putting it on, and wudu is invalidated by taking off the turban [after wiping over it], as is the ruling with regard to the khuffs, because in both cases, wiping is done instead of doing something else."(Al-Kafi 1/39).
Al-Mirdawi said: If the foot or head of the one who wiped it becomes bare, or the timescale for wiping over them comes to an end, then the individual must purify himself in the normal way."(Al-Insaf 1/190)
Those who say that taking off the khuffs does not invalidate wudu also say the same with regard to taking off the turban. This is the view of Ibn Hazm az-Zahiri (the literalist), and was narrated from Imam Ahmad. It was also the view favoured by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him). See: al-Muhalla (1/173, 1/340); al-Insaf by al-Mirdawi (1/190).
Shaykh al-Islam said: The wudu of one who wipes over his khuffs and turban is not invalidated by taking them off."(Al-Ikhtiyarat al-‘Ilmiyyah, p. 26).
We have previously discussed the opinions of the scholars regarding the ruling on purification for one who takes off his khuffs, and which view is most likely to be correct, in the answers to questions no. 45788 and 26343 .
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/129557/is-the-ruling-on-taking-off-the-turban-after-wiping-over-it-in-wudu-the-same-as-the-ruling-regarding-the-khuffs | 59 | 129,557 |
18,704 | Ruling on wiping over short socks, if he pulled them up above the ankles and wiped over them, then they slipped below the ankles | Question
What is the ruling on wearing socks that are somewhat short if they were put on after doing wudu’, then when doing wudu’ again, I pull them up so that they cover the ankles and wipe over them? | Praise be to Allah.Firstly:
What is stipulated in order for it to be permissible to wipe over the socks
It is permissible to wipe over the khuffs and socks subject to certain conditions, one of which is that the socks must cover the place that must be washed when doing wudu. In other words, the socks must cover the feet and ankles, and it is not permissible to wipe over socks which come below the ankles.
The majority of scholars disallowed wiping over socks, but the Hanbalis permitted it if the conditions regarding the khuffs are met, one of which is that they must cover the ankles.
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said in al-Mughni (1/214): It is not permissible to wipe over anything except the khuffs and anything that takes their place that is cut down, and the like, that comes above the ankles.
What this means – and Allah knows best – is that the ruling on the khuffs also applies to that which takes the place of the khuffs and covers what must be washed when doing wudu, if it is possible to walk in it and it stays put by itself. That which has been cut down is the short khuff; it is only permissible to wipe over it if it covers the place that must be washed and the ankles cannot be seen, because it is tight or wrapped. This is the view of al-Shafa‘i and Abu Thawr.
But if it is cut so short that it comes below the ankles, it is not permissible to wipe over it. This is the correct view, narrated from Malik. It was narrated from him and from al-Awza‘i that it is permissible to wipe over it. End quote.
It says in Kashshaf al-Qina‘ (1/115): It is not valid to wipe over anything except that which covers the area that must be washed, which is the entire foot, otherwise it would mean that what is covered is to be wiped and what is not covered is to be washed, and there is no way to do both; therefore the entire foot [including the ankles] must be washed, because that is the basic principle. End quote.
Ibn Hazm disagreed, and said that it is permissible to wipe over [the khuff] that comes below the ankles.
Please see the answer to question no. 176866 .
Secondly:
The ruling on socks that slip below the ankles after being wiped over
If you wiped over the socks when they were covering the ankles, it is valid to wipe over them. But if they slipped down below the ankles after that, doing wudu by wiping over them is not valid and your current wudu is invalidated according to the Hanbalis, who say that it is permissible to wipe over the socks.
What is meant by it not being valid to do wudu by wiping over them is that it is not permissible for you to wipe over them again, until after you have done wudu in full, which includes washing your feet.
Some of the scholars are of the view that you cannot do wudu again by wiping over the socks, but the current wudu that you did before the socks slipped down below the ankles is still valid.
It says in Zad al-Ma‘ad: If any part of the place that must be washed becomes exposed after wudu was invalidated or the period during which wiping over the socks is allowed expires, then the individual must do wudu all over again [which includes washing the feet].
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) favoured the view that wudu is not invalidated [if the khuffs or socks slip below the ankle), and this was regarded as more likely to be correct by Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymin. See: ash-Sharh al-Mumti‘ (1/264).
If you can no longer wipe over your socks when you do wudu because the socks have slipped below the ankles, then you will not be able to avail yourself of this concession which allows wiping over the socks. Based on that, if you want to avail yourself of this concession, then you should choose long socks that cover the ankles and will stay up, and will not drop down to the part that must be washed when doing wudu.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/324533/ruling-on-wiping-over-short-socks-if-he-pulled-them-up-above-the-ankles-and-wiped-over-them-then-they-slipped-below-the-ankles | 59 | 324,533 |
18,705 | He put on short socks that come below the ankles over long socks; is it valid to wipe over them? | Question
I put on long socks, then I put short socks over the long socks, but the second pair of socks did not cover the place that is to be washed when doing wudu’ [i.e., the entire foot up to the ankle]. I put on both pairs when I was in a state of purity. What is the ruling on wiping over the outer socks which do not cover the place that is to be washed when doing wudu’, because they are short? | Praise be to Allah.In order for it to be permissible to wipe over the socks, it is stipulated that they must cover the place that is to be washed when doing wudu
In order for it to be permissible to wipe over the khuffs or socks, they must cover the place that is to be washed when doing wudu, which is the entire foot, from the tips of the toes up to the ankles. Please see the answer to question no. 192736 .
If someone puts on khuffs over khuffs, or socks over socks, before invalidating his wudu, and both pairs are intact, it is permissible to wipe over either of them.
But if they both have holes in them, or both are short, it is not permissible to wipe over either of them, according to the view that it is not permissible to wipe over the one that has holes, which is the view of the majority.
If one of them is short or has holes, it is valid to wipe over the outer one in all cases. In other words, whether it is the long sock or the short sock.
It is valid to wipe over the inner sock if it is intact, by inserting one’s hand under the outer sock and wiping the inner sock.
It says in Matalib Uli an-Nuha (1/132): If someone who is wearing a khuff puts another khuff over it, so long as his wudu is still valid, even if one of them has a hole in it, it is valid to wipe over the outer khuff in all cases, and to wipe over the inner one if it is the one that fulfils the condition of being intact. It is not valid to wipe over them if both of them have holes, even if, together, they cover the foot.
If both of them are intact, then it is valid to wipe over whichever of them he wishes.
If he wants to wipe over the inner one, he may put his hand under the outer one and wipe the inner one.
If the one who is wearing two khuffs takes off one of them, then he must take off the other one and repeat wudu. End quote.
In Hashiyat Ibn Qayid ‘ala al-Muntaha (1/63), it says: If he puts another khuff over it … – That includes four scenarios: either they are both intact, or they both have holes, or the outer one is intact and the inner one has holes, or vice versa.
In the first scenario, it is valid to wipe over either of them. In the second scenario, it is not valid to wipe over either of them, even if, together, they cover the foot. In the third scenario, it is valid to wipe over the outer one only. In the fourth scenario, it is valid to wipe over whichever of them he wishes. End quote.
Ruling on wiping over the socks when there is another pair of socks under them
What you have described is the fourth scenario, so it is valid to wipe over the outer socks and it is valid to wipe over the inner socks by putting your hand under the outer one and wiping the inner one.
If you take off the outer sock, you must also take off the inner sock.
Wearing a short sock over a long sock is like wearing a sandal over the khuff. At-Tirmidhi (99), an-Nasa’i (125), Abu Dawud (159) and Ibn Majah (559) narrated that al-Mughirah ibn Shu‘bah said:
The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) did wudu and wiped over his stockings and sandals. This hadith was classed as sahih by al-Albani in Sahih Abi Dawud.
Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim said: It is valid to wipe over shoes that do not cover the required area, provided that there are thick socks under them that do cover the required area, on condition that they are both put on together, or that the wearer put the shoes on before he invalidated his wudu, and on condition that he only takes them off together, because the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) wiped over his khuffs and sandals [when he wore them together].
He may also wipe over the sock only, but in this case it is not stipulated that he should have put them both on together and the like, or that he must take them both off together."(Fatawa ash-Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim 2/68).
Conclusion: It is permissible to wipe over short socks that are worn over long socks, and to take them off together.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/402052/he-put-on-short-socks-that-come-below-the-ankles-over-long-socks-is-it-valid-to-wipe-over-them | 59 | 402,052 |
18,706 | Wiping over the headcover (khimar) when there is a piece of cloth (headband) under it | Question
If I follow the view of the Hanbalis about it being permissible to wipe over the headcover that is wrapped under the chin, should I be wearing the headcover directly on my head, or is there nothing wrong with that [wearing a headband and the like]? Because I wear a small cloth (kerchief or headband) under it that goes around the head only, and does not go over the ears or under the chin. Is it sufficient to wipe the headscarf only, and not this piece of cloth? | Praise be to Allah.It is proven that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) wiped over his turban when doing wudu.
It was narrated from Ja‘far ibn ‘Amr ibn Umayyah that his father said: I saw the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) wiping over his turban and khuffs. Narrated by al-Bukhari (205).
It was narrated by Ka‘b ibn ‘Ujrah, from Bilal, that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) wiped over his khuffs and headcover. Narrated by Muslim (275).
Al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
What is meant by the headcover here is the turban, because it covers the head. End quote from Sharh Sahih Muslim (3/174).
By analogy with that, it is permissible for a woman to wipe over her headcover, especially that which goes under the chin. Whatever is prescribed for men is, in principle, also prescribed for women.
Moreover, the reason is the same, which is to alleviate the difficulty of taking it off and putting it back on again. In fact, women’s need to wipe over their headcovers is often more obvious and greater than that of men, as is quite clear.
Al-Hasan narrated from his mother, from Umm Salamah, that she used to wipe over her headcover.
Narrated by Ibn Abi Shaybah in al-Musannaf (224).
For more information and to see the views of scholars regarding this matter, please see the answer to question no. 148129 .
Secondly:
In order for it to be valid to wipe over the headcover, there is no stipulation that the headcover should rest directly on the head, because there is no text to that effect. Rather it is sufficient for it to cover the head as socks or khuffs cover the feet, and it is permissible to wipe over them even if there is another pair of socks or khuffs under them. This is the view of the majority of scholars.
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: If he put the outer khuff on before invalidating his wudu, it is permissible to wipe over it in all cases, whether the inner one is intact or has holes. This is the view of al-Hasan ibn Salih, ath-Thawri, al-Awza‘i and ashab al-ra’y. Malik disallowed that in one of the two reports narrated from him, as did ash-Shafa‘i in one of his two views, because usually there is no need to wear the second khuff, so there is no need for a general concession regarding it, as is the case regarding a plaster cast.
In our view, however, if the two khuffs together are covering the foot and it is possible to walk in them, then they are like one khuff, even if the inner khuff has holes. His saying that there is no need for it is not correct, for if the land is cold, it is usually not sufficient to wear just one khuff."(Al-Mughni 1/364).
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/382518/wiping-over-the-headcover-khimar-when-there-is-a-piece-of-cloth-headband-under-it | 59 | 382,518 |
18,707 | Ruling on using a wet broom or sprinkling or pouring water without passing the hands over the khuffs or socks | Question
A man has a broken back and cannot bend forward very far, so when wiping over the socks, either his wife wipes over them for him, or if he is outside the house, he uses a broom, for example, and wets it, then wipes over the top of the socks in the well-known manner. Sometimes, if there is no broom available, he sprinkles water on the socks using a spray bottle so as to cover the top of the sock. Is his prayer valid in the two cases mentioned above, or does he have to repeat his prayers? Some people put on khuffs or shoes made of thick leather, that are known to all people, over socks that cover the ankles, then instead of wiping they pour water on the shoe. Is it Islamically acceptable to pour or sprinkle water on the socks or khuffs in the case of need or otherwise? What is the ruling on the person’s prayer in this case too? | Praise be to Allah.Firstly:
It is permissible for a person to wipe over the khuffs of another person, as it is permissible for him to help him to do wudu’.
Ibn ‘Abidin (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his commentary on al-Bahr al-Ra’iq (1/182): If a person tells someone else to wipe over his khuffs and he does that for him, it is valid, as it says in al-Khulasah. End quote.
Secondly:
It is not stipulated that the wiping should be done directly with the hand. So if the wiping is done with a cloth or a wetted broom – as you mentioned – it is permissible.
An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said in al-Majmu‘ (1/549): Our companions said: It is valid to wipe with the hand, or with a finger, or a piece of wood, or a piece of cloth, or something else. End quote.
This is the view of the Hanbalis. Please see: al-Insaf (1/160, 1/185).
Thirdly:
It is valid to sprinkle water on the khuffs with a spray bottle and the like.
Zakariyya al-Ansari said: If he puts his wet hand on the khuff without passing the hand over it, or he drips water onto it, that is valid.
End quote from Sharh Manhaj at-Tullab ma‘a Hashiyat al-Bujayrami (1/88).
Fourthly:
If the shoes cover the ankles and were put on after purifying oneself completely, it is permissible to wipe over them, because that comes under the same ruling as khuffs. But if the shoes do not cover the ankles, then it is a matter concerning which there is a difference of scholarly opinion as to whether it is permissible to wipe over them.
The majority are of the view that it is not permissible to wipe over such shoes. However some scholars – such as al-Awza‘i, Ibn Hazm and Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) – were of the view that it is permissible to wipe over them. Shaykh al-Islam limited that to sandals that are difficult to take off except by using a hand or foot.
The evidence which indicates that it is permissible to wipe over sandals is as follows:
1.
The report narrated by al-Bazzar, according to which Ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) did wudu’ with his sandals on his feet; he wiped over them and said: This is what the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) used to do.
Its isnad was classed sahih by Ibn Hajar in ad-Dirayah fi Takhrij Ahadith al-Hidayah (1/83).
2.
The report narrated by Ibn Dawud (16) from Aws ibn Abi Aws ath-Thaqafi, which says that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) did wudu’ and then wiped over his sandals and feet. Classed as sahih by al-Albani in Sahih Abi Dawud.
3.
The report narrated by Ibn Abi Shaybah from Abu’-z-Zabyan, who said: I saw ‘Ali urinate whilst standing, then he did wudu’ then wiped over his sandals, then the mu’adhdhin gave the call to prayer, so he took them off.
It says in al-Furu‘ (1/160): Our shaykh [i.e., Ibn Taymiyah] favoured the view that it is permissible to wipe the foot and sandals that are difficult to remove except by using a hand or foot, as is mentioned in the reports. He said: It is sufficient in this case to wash or wipe most of the foot itself, or what is apparent of it, and that is more appropriate than wiping part of the khuff. End quote.
See: al-Muhalla (1/336) and al-Insaf (1/179).
As for the majority of scholars, some of them regarded these hadiths as da‘if (weak), and some of them interpreted them as referring to wiping over sandals that are worn over socks.
According to this view, if the sandals were put on over socks, it is permissible to wipe over both of them, because of the report narrated by at-Tirmidhi (99), an-Nasa’i (125), Abu Dawud (159) and Ibn Majah (559) from al-Mughirah ibn Shu‘bah, who said: The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) did wudu’ wiping over his socks and sandals. This hadith was classed as sahih by al-Albani in Sahih Abi Dawud.
Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his commentary on Sunan Abi Dawud: What appears to be the case is that he wiped over socks over which sandals were worn. This is what is to be understood from the report, because they are mentioned separately… Moreover, what was narrated from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab concerning that is that he wiped over the straps of the sandals that went over the top of the foot, along with the socks. As for the bottom part of the foot and heel, he did not wipe over them. End quote.
It was narrated in ‘Awn al-Ma‘bud that at-Tahawi said: He wiped over sandals under which there were socks, and his aim in doing so was to wipe over the socks, not the sandals. End quote.
In Masa’il Salih ibn al-Imam Ahmad (379) it says: I asked him about wiping over the sandals. He said: If there are socks on the feet that are tight on the feet, then there is nothing wrong with wiping over the sandals. End quote.
To sum up: according to the first view – which is the view of al-Awza ‘i and those who agreed with him – it is permissible to wipe over shoes that come below the ankles, whether socks are worn under them or not.
According to the view of the majority, if the person put on socks (that cover the ankles) when in a state of purity, and he put shoes on over them, then it is permissible to wipe over both of them.
When it is valid to wipe over the khuffs, it is valid to sprinkle water on them, as noted above, or to pour water on them, and in that way he will wash the khuffs. However, some jurists regard it as makruh (disliked), some of them said that it is only disliked if the water will damage them, and some of them stipulated that the individual should also wipe [the khuffs] as well as washing them.
It says in Kashshaf al-Qina‘ (1/119): The ruling on washing [the khuffs] is like the ruling on wiping over the head, as discussed above; it is valid to wipe it in addition to washing it.
It is makruh (disliked) to wash the khuffs, because that will damage them. End quote.
It says in Hashiyat al-Jamal ‘ala Sharh al-Manhaj (1/146): It is disliked to wash the khuffs repeatedly, because that will damage them.
From this we may learn that if the khuffs are made of iron and the like, it is not disliked to wipe or wash them repeatedly, because that will not damage them. And this is the same. End quote.
So he should limit it to sprinkling over the khuffs or dripping water onto them, and not pour water on them. If he uses a broom and the like, that will be better.
And Allah knows best | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/330611/ruling-on-using-a-wet-broom-or-sprinkling-or-pouring-water-without-passing-the-hands-over-the-khuffs-or-socks | 59 | 330,611 |
18,708 | Can I Wipe Over My Head Cover During Wudu? | Question
Is it permissible for a woman to wipe over her head cover? | Praise be to Allah.The scholars differed concerning the ruling on a woman wiping over her head cover ; there are three views:
The majority – which was also narrated from Ahmad – are of the view that it is not permissible for her to wipe over it only, and they ruled that if she does that, her Wudu is invalid, unless the head cover is thin and the water can penetrate it.
In Al-Mudawwanah (1/124) it says:
“Malik said concerning a woman wiping over her head cover : She has to repeat her Wudu and her prayer.”
We should point out here that Ash-Shafi`i (may Allah have mercy on him) said that the permissibility of wiping over the head cover depends on whether the report that mentions it is authentic. There are some authentic reports concerning that, such as the Hadith of Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him) in Muslim (275), according to which the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) wiped over his Khuffayn (leather slippers) and head cover. So Ash-Shafi`i (may Allah have mercy on him) should be included among those who allow wiping over the head covers of both men and women.
The Hanbalis, according to the other report from their Imam, are of the view that it is permissible to wipe (over the head cover) and the Wudu is valid. This is also the view of Ibn Hazm (may Allah have mercy on him), who said:
“Anything that is worn on the head, such as a head cover, cap, helmet and chain-mail, and so on, it is permissible to wipe over it, and women and men are the same in that regard, whether there is a reason to do so or not.” (Al-Muhalla, 1/303)
A third group is of the view that a distinction should be made between that which is difficult to remove and that which is easy. In the first case they regard it as permissible to wipe over it, but not in the second case. This is the view of Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) and, among contemporary scholars, Shaykh Al-`Uthaymin (may Allah have mercy on him).
Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“With regard to a woman wiping over her head cover , there are two reports:
According to the first report it is not permissible, because the texts that speak of the concession only refer to men for sure, whereas there is some doubt as to whether they refer to women.
According to the second report, it is permissible, and this is the apparent meaning of the general words “Wipe over the Khuffayn and the head cover.” – Narrated by Ahmad (39/325). The commentators said: The Hadith that says that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) did that is authentic, but the Hadith that says he allowed it is inauthentic, and women are also included in that, along with men, just as they are included with regard to wiping over the Khuffayn…
And because it is permissible for men to wipe over the head cover, so that is permissible for women too, like men. And because it is clothing that it is permissible to wear on the head and it is usually difficult to take it off, so it is likened to a man’s head cover, and more so, because the woman’s head cover covers more than the man’s head cover, and it is more difficult to take it off, so the woman's need for (this concession) is greater than in the case of the Khuffayn.” (Sharh Al-`Umdah, 1/265, 266)
Shaykh Al-`Uthaymin (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“Whatever the case, if there is some difficulty, either because it is cold or because it is difficult to take it off and put it on again, then there is nothing wrong with being lenient in matters such as this, otherwise it is better not to wipe over it, as there is no authentic text concerning this matter.” (Ash-Sharh Al-Mumti` `Ala Zad Al-Mustaqni`, 1/239)
The third view is the one that is most likely to be correct. It is proven from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) that he wiped over his head cover, and there is no difference between the head cover of a man and that of a woman; in fact it is more appropriate that this should be permissible in the case of women, because of the reasons mentioned by Shaykh Al-Islam.
Based on that, not every head covering may be wiped over; rather if the head is covered with something that might be problematic to take off, as in the case of a woman who fears that her hair may be seen, or she has covered her head to which she has applied henna, or it is very cold and she fears some harm (if she takes off her head cover), and other similar excuses.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/148129/can-i-wipe-over-my-head-cover-during-wudu | 59 | 148,129 |
18,709 | Is It Necessary to Wipe Over the Right Sock before the Left? | Question
I read on your website a fatwa having to do with wiping over the Khuffayn which said that it is obligatory to wipe over both Khuffayn at the same time, as is done when wiping the ears.
My question is: is wiping over both Khuffayn at the same time obligatory and necessary, or is it what is preferable? Is it essential to wipe the right foot with the right hand and the left foot with the left hand? Please note that I am at work and cannot stand on the ground in my socks because the ground is dirty. So I wipe over each foot on its own, meaning that I stand on my left foot and wipe the right foot, and so on. | Praise be to Allah.It is Sunnah when wiping the Khuffayn to wipe both of them together, but that is not obligatory. Some scholars are of the view that the right foot should be done first, but the correct view is the first one mentioned.
Al-Mardawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said in Al-Insaf (1/185): The Sunnah way of wiping (over the Khuffayn) is to put the hands with the fingers outspread on the toes, then draw the hands up towards the shins once on the right and left feet. It says in At-Talkhis wl-Bùlghah: It is Sunnah to give precedence to the right foot. Al-Bayhaqi narrated that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) wiped over his Khuffayn in one go, “it is as if I can see his fingers on the Khuffayn.” The apparent meaning of this is that he did not give precedence to one of them over the other. But however one wipes them it is acceptable. (End quote)
From the words “however one wipes them it is acceptable” it may be understood that what you mention about wiping the right foot first and then the left does not matter; rather it is only different from what is preferable if one is able to do it.
Shaykh Ibn `Uthaymin (may Allah have mercy on him) said: … i.e., what should be wiped is the top of the Khuff, so he should pass his hand from the toes up to the shin only, and the wiping should be done with both hands on both feet at the same time, i.e., the right hand should wipe the right foot and the left hand should wipe the left foot at the same time, as the ears are wiped, because this is the apparent meaning of the Sunnah. Al-Mughirah ibn Shu`bah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: Then he wiped over them, and he did not say that he started with the right foot, rather he said that he wiped over them. So this is the apparent meaning of the Sunnah. Yes, if we assume that if he cannot use one of his hands, then he should start with the right foot before the left foot. But many people wipe with both hands on the right foot and both hands on the left foot; there is no basis for this as far as I know. … But however one wipes the top of the Khuff is acceptable, but what we are talking about here is what is preferable. (End quote from Fatawa Al-Mar’ah Al-Muslimah, 1/250)
It does not matter either if one wipes the right foot with the left hand, but the Sunnah is to wipe the right foot with the right hand and the left foot with the left hand, unless there is something wrong with one of the hands that means it cannot be used.
It says in Kashshaf Al-Qina` (1/119): It is Sunnah to wipe the right foot with the right hand and the left foot with the left hand, because of the Hadith of Al-Mughirah quoted above. (End quote)
For more details, please see the following answers: 26343, 69829, 116409, 45788.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/147729/is-it-necessary-to-wipe-over-the-right-sock-before-the-left | 59 | 147,729 |
18,710 | One who is sick and one who is incontinent – can they wipe over their socks? | Question
Is it permissible to wipe over the socks that are not see-through and are somewhat thick, for the following reasons:
Cold, difficulty and sickness because of eczema in the feet, or because it is difficult to wash the feet every time one does wudoo’ because of old age and the individual is incontinent and needs to do wudoo’ several times a day?. | Praise be to Allah.The permissibility of wiping over the khufoof, or what takes their place of socks, is not limited to cases of sickness, cold or difficulty, because of the general meaning of the texts that were narrated about wiping over them. Indeed the person who is sick in this case may have more need than others to wipe over the khufoof.
The same applies to one who is affected by incontinence; he may wipe over the khufoof because of the general meaning of the evidence that it is permissible to wipe over the khufoof or socks, with no exceptions.
Ibn Qudaamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
If the woman who is suffering istihaadah (irregular vaginal bleeding), one who is affected by incontinence, and others in similar cases, do wudoo’ and put on khufoof, they may wipe over them. This was stated by Ahmad, because they are regarded as being in a state of complete tahaarah (purity). Ibn ‘Aqeel said: Because she has no choice but to avail herself of the concession, and the one who is compelled to avail himself of a concession is more entitled to do so.
End quote from al-Mughni, 1/174
Al-Mirdaawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Wiping over the khufoof or socks is permissible for the woman who is suffering istihaadah (irregular vaginal bleeding) and the like, as it is for others according to the correct view, as stated by Imam Ahmad.
End quote from al-Insaaf, 1/169
It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah (4/245):
The one who is affected by ongoing incontinence should, when the time for prayer begins, clean himself (istinja’) and put something over his private part that will prevent urine dripping, then he should do wudoo’ and pray. And he should do the same at the time of every prayer. The evidence for that is the verse in which Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“So keep your duty to Allaah and fear Him as much as you can”
[al-Taghaabun 64:16].
And because the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) instructed the woman who was suffering from istihaadah to tie a cloth (or put a pad) and do wudoo’ for each prayer. And it is permissible for the one who is suffering from incontinence, when he does wudoo’, to put on his socks and wipe over them until the end of the period during which wiping over the socks is permitted, because of the general meaning of the evidence. End quote.
Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Baaz, Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez Aal ash-Shaykh, Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan, Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd
We have discussed the conditions on wiping over the socks in the answer to question no. 9640.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/162395/one-who-is-sick-and-one-who-is-incontinent-can-they-wipe-over-their-socks | 59 | 162,395 |
18,711 | He wiped over his khufoof then remembered that the time for wiping had ended. Should he wash his feet or repeat wudoo’? | Question
1. Should one have the intention of wiping over the khufoof before starting to do wudoo’, or when he reaches the washing of the feet should he just wipe or wash them?
2. There is a person who did wudoo’ and wiped over his khufoof, then straight after he had wiped over his khufoof he remembered that the period for wiping over the khufoof had ended. Should he take off the khufoof and wash his feet, or should he take off his khufoof and repeat wudoo’ from the beginning?. | Praise be to Allah.
The intention is not essential for it to be permissible to
wipe over the khufoof. So long as the individual put on the khufoof when he
was in a state of purity, he may wipe over them. It is not essential for him
to form the intention to wipe over them before doing wudoo’; rather when he
reaches that point in his wudoo’, he may wipe over them and that is
sufficient.
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen was asked: is it essential in order for
it to be permissible to wipe over the khufoof that one should form the
intention to wipe over them?
He replied: Forming the intention in this case is not
obligatory, because this is a matter the ruling on which is connected to
whether it is present or not, so there is no need for the intention. That is
similar to the case when one wears a thobe: it is not necessary to form the
intention to cover one’s ‘awrah with it when praying, for example. So in the
case of wearing khufoof, it is not essential to form the intention to wipe
over them. The same applies to the intention with regard to the length of
time. If a person is travelling he may wipe over them for three days,
whether he intends that or not; and if he is not travelling he may wipe over
them for one day and one night, whether he intends that or not.
End quote from Majmoo‘ Fataawa Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 11/117
With regard to the one who wipes over his khufoof then
remembers that the period for wiping over them has ended, if that is
immediately after wiping over them, as the questioner mentioned, then the
way to proceed is to take off the khufoof and wash the feet only, because in
that case there will still be continuity in washing the parts of the body to
be washed in wudoo’, and there will be no lengthy interruption between
wiping the head and washing the feet.
But if he remembers that a long time after finishing wudoo’,
then he has to repeat wudoo’ and wash his feet, because with this lengthy
interruption it cannot be regarded as a continuation of wudoo’.
See: ash-Sharh al-Mumti‘, 1/355
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/147897/he-wiped-over-his-khufoof-then-remembered-that-the-time-for-wiping-had-ended-should-he-wash-his-feet-or-repeat-wudoo | 59 | 147,897 |
18,712 | Ruling on wearing one pair of socks over another when one did wudoo’ wiping over the first pair | Question
A man wiped over his socks, then put another pair over them before he broke his wudoo’, then he broke his wudoo’ so he did wudoo’ for prayer. Can he wipe over the second pair of socks or not ?. | Praise be to Allah.Yes, it is
permissible to wipe over the second pair of socks if he put them on over
socks that he had wiped over, because he put them on when he was in a state
of purity. So that comes under the general meaning of the words of the
Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) in the hadeeth narrated
by ‘Urwah ibn al-Mugheerah from his father who said: I was travelling with
the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and I reached out to
take his khufoof (off his feet) and he said: “Let them be, for I put my feet
in them when they (my feet) were pure (after doing wudoo’).” And he wiped
over them”
Narrated by
al-Bukhaari, 199
An-Nawawi
(may Allah have mercy on him) said: If he put on the khufoof (leather
slippers) when he was in a state of purity, then he broke his wudoo’ and
wiped over them, then he put on the jarmooq (a kind of large khuff that is
worn over the regular khuff) when he was in a state of purity in which he
had wiped over the khuff when he did wudoo’, then there are two well-known
opinions as to whether it is permissible to wipe over them (the jarmooq).
The first opinion is that it is permissible to wipe over them because he put
them on when he was in a state of purity. And the second opinion is that it
is not permissible, because that was an incomplete purification. That is how
many of the scholars look at it.
Ar-Rawiyaati
said: The more correct view is that it is not permissible to wipe over them.
Others said that the more correct opinion is that it is permissible to wipe
over them. This is the opinion of Shaykh Abu Haamid. It may be understood
from the words of ar-Raafi‘i and others that this (the second view) is more
correct and it is the view that is to be favoured, because he put them on in
a state of purity. Their saying that it is an incomplete purification is not
acceptable.
End quote
from Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, 1/534
Shaykh Ibn
‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said: If he put on khufoof then
broke his wudoo’, then he wiped over them, then put another pair of khufoof
over the first pair when at the time of putting on the second pair, he is in
a state of purity for which he wiped over the first khufoof, then the view
[i.e., the view of Imam Ahmad] is that the ruling on wiping applies to the
first pair, because he put on the second pair after breaking his wudoo’.
Some of the
scholars said: If he put on the second pair when he was in a state of
purity, it is permissible for him to wipe over them, because it is true to
say of him that he put his feet into them when they were in a state of
purity. The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “for I
put my feet in them when they (my feet) were pure.” This includes purity
attained by both washing and wiping. This is a strong view, as you can see,
and it is supported by the fact that our companions (may Allah have mercy on
them) stated that wiping over the khufoof removes impurity. So he put on the
second pair when in a state of complete purity, so why shouldn’t he wipe
over them? But if he put the second pair on when he did not have wudoo’,
then he cannot wipe over them because when he put them on he was not in a
state of purity.
End quote
from ash-Sharh al-Mumti‘, 1/258
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/163921/ruling-on-wearing-one-pair-of-socks-over-another-when-one-did-wudoo-wiping-over-the-first-pair | 59 | 163,921 |
18,713 | It is permissible to wipe over the khuffayn with a cloth or for someone else to wipe them | Question
My question is regarding the use of medical compression stockings and is similar to fatwa number 114192 but with additional information.
Can you please advise on the ruling for a person who wears medical compression stockings almost permanently (24 hours a day) and has an additional disability [severe arthritis] preventing them from reaching their feet, and also is unable to put the stockings back on without the aid of another person....
Under the ruling of a plaster cast: Is it permissible for another person to help a disabled person do wudu, because in fatwa number 114192 it says with regards to plaster casts it is not permissible to limit washing to the upper surface only as with the case of socks, therefore a physically disabled person would need someone else to assist by wiping the underside of their feet etc on their behalf?
Is it permissible to assume the ruling of a plaster cast if there are relatives or other people present to help remove / apply stockings or is it an obligation upon them every 24 hours so that the disabled person can take the ruling of socks instead? (on some occasions it is difficult or strenuous for some people to assist by applying the stockings properly due to the strong elastic material the stockings are made from).
Do we have to choose between one or the other (sock ruling of plaster cast ruling) or can we change from a day-to-day basis depending on what is easiest or do we have to be consistent with whatever ruling we decide to take?
If a physically disabled person has nobody present to help them on some occasions will their wudu be valid if they are unable to reach water to all parts of their feet (and legs in the case of the plaster ruling) due to no choice?
Is it permissible for a physically disabled person to use something other than the hands (for example a long handled sponge) in order to reach parts of the feet and legs when making wudu?. | Praise be to Allah.It is
permissible to wipe over the khuffayn (leather slippers) or socks for a
reason or otherwise. The one who is not travelling may wipe over his socks
for one day and one night, and the traveller may do so for three days and
nights.
If a person
needs to wear socks and has someone who can put them on for him, even if
that is in return for payment, then he must wipe over them and it is not
permissible for him to move to the option of tayammum or to regard the socks
as being like a plaster cast; rather they are socks that he puts on after
purifying himself completely.
It is
permissible for someone else to wipe over the socks for him, as it is also
permissible for someone else to help him to do wudoo’.
Ibn
‘Aabideen (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his commentary on al-Bahr
ar-Raa’iq (1/182): If he tells someone to wipe over his khuffayn and he
does so, that is valid as it says in al-Khulaasah.
It is not
stipulated that the wiping be done directly with the hand; if he wiped with
a piece of cloth or a sponge dampened with water and attached to a stick (a
long-handled sponge, as you mention), that is permissible.
An-Nawawi
(may Allah have mercy on him) said in al-Majmoo‘ (1/549): Our
companions said: It is acceptable to wipe (over the khuffayn) with the hand,
a finger, a stick, a cloth or something else.
This is also
the view of the Hanbalis. See al-Insaaf, 1/160, 185.
And if he
walks on a wet piece of cloth or through wet grass, that is acceptable.
It says in
al-Bahr ar-Raa’iq (1/182): If the place that is to be wiped got wet
by water or rain the width of three fingers, that is permissible. The same
applies if he walks through grass that has been made wet by rain. End
quote.
See also
Asna al-Mataalib, 1/97
As you can
see, the matter is quite simple, praise be to Allah.
If the
disabled person does not have anyone who can wipe his socks for him or he is
not able to wipe them himself with a cloth and the like, he should wash the
parts of his body that are to be washed in wudoo’, and do tayammum for
whatever he is unable to wash. See the answer to question no.
71202
Secondly:
If it is too
difficult to take the socks off and put them back on again, then the ruling
on a plaster cast applies and there is no time limit. So he may use them so
long as they are on him, and wipe over the entire thing, top and bottom (of
the feet)and to the ankles. It is not stipulated that he put them on when in
a state of purity. He may wipe them himself, using his hand or something
else, or someone else can wipe them for him. If he cannot find someone to
wipe them for him, even in return for payment, then he may wash the parts of
the body that are to be washed in wudoo’ and do tayammum for his feet, as
stated above.
We ask Allah
to grant well-being to all the sick Muslims.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/175940/it-is-permissible-to-wipe-over-the-khuffayn-with-a-cloth-or-for-someone-else-to-wipe-them | 59 | 175,940 |
18,714 | Can he wipe over his khufoof when removing madhiy (prostatic fluid)? | Question
When purifying myself from madhiy, can I wipe over my socks?. | Praise be to Allah.
Firstly:
Madhiy is najis (impure) and nullifies wudoo’ according to
scholarly consensus.
An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The ummah is
unanimously agreed that madhiy (a fluid which is usually secreted as a
result of sexual excitement) and wadiy (a thick white fluid that may come
after urination or due to other reasons such as illness) are najis.
End quote from Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, 2/571
And he (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Ibn al-Mundhir
said: They are unanimously agreed that it (wudoo’) is invalidated by the
emission of stools from the back passage, of urine and madhiy from the front
passage, and of wind from the back passage.
End quote from Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, 2/6
Secondly:
What is required when purifying oneself from madhiy is two
things:
1.To wash the penis and testicles
to remove whatever has gotten onto them of madhiy, because of what has been
stated above of it being najis.
2.To do wudoo’ to purify oneself
from it when wanting to pray or to do anything for which wudoo’ is
prescribed, because madhiy is one of the things that invalidate wudoo’, as
stated above.
See also the answer to question no.
2458
With regard to washing off the traces of madhiy, this
requires washing the traces from the affected part of the body; it cannot be
imagined that this involves wiping over the khufoof, as is quite obvious.
As for doing wudoo’ because of madhiy, it is like doing
wudoo’ in the case of any of the other things that invalidate wudoo’. If the
individual put on his khufoof when in a state of purity, it is permissible
for him to wipe over them when doing wudoo’, because of the hadeeth of
Safwaan ibn ‘Assaal (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: The Messenger
of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) used to command us not
to take off our leather slippers for three days except in the case of
janaabah, but not in the case of stools, urine or sleep.
Narrated by at-Tirmidhi, 96; Ibn Maajah, 478; and others.
Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Mishkaat al-Masaabeeh, no. 520
This indicates that wiping over the khufoof is permissible in
the case of things that invalidate wudoo’. But in the case of janaabah
(impurity following sexual activity), that requires ghusl so it is not
permissible to wipe over the khufoof when purifying oneself from it. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/178282/can-he-wipe-over-his-khufoof-when-removing-madhiy-prostatic-fluid | 59 | 178,282 |
18,715 | Can You Wipe Over Sheer Compression Stockings in Wudu? | Question
We are living in [a particular country] and my wife is six months pregnant. My wife is suffering from varicose veins in both legs because of pregnancy, so the doctor told her to wear compression stockings, which are sheer and the skin can be seen through them. He told her to wear them all day long, except at night time. Please note that the stockings are complete, and are like pants at the top; they do not cover the feet only. How can she do Wudu? Can she wipe over the stockings only, and if that is the case, how should she wipe over them, noting that putting the stockings on and taking them off is difficult because they are compression stockings. | Praise be to Allah.The Ruling on Wiping Over Sheer Stockings in Islam
The view of the majority of scholars is that it is not allowed to wipe over sheer socks or stockings, and that this concession is allowed only in the case of thick socks.
If these stockings are light and what is beneath them can be seen, then the more correct view is that it is not permissible to wipe over them.
Medical Necessity and Wiping Over Compression Stockings
But if sheer compression stockings are needed for medical purposes, and it is difficult to take them off every time one does Wudu, then the individual may do Wudu before putting them on, then he or she should put a thick socks over them, then when needing to do Wudu, he or she may wipe over the thick socks until he or she takes them off, or the period during which wiping over the socks is allowed comes to an end.
How to Maintain Wudu When Wearing Sheer Compression Stockings
If he or she is not able to do that, and taking off the compression socks is something that will cause harm or delay recovery, then the matter comes under the ruling on wearing a cast, so he or she should wipe over all of it from top to bottom, which is the place which is required to be washed.
If your wife takes the stockings off at night, she should do Wudu when she wants to pray Fajr, then put the compression stockings on, then put on thick socks over them, then wipe over the socks, as the ruling on wiping will apply to the socks and not to the stockings that are worn under them. Then when night comes, she may take off both the stockings and the socks, then when she wants to do Wudu for Fajr (on the following day), she should do the same thing, and so on.
The Importance of Wiping Only When in a State of Purity
I put this question to our Shaykh, `Abd Ar-Rahman Al-Barrak (may Allah preserve him) and he said that these stockings come under two rulings:
In one way, they resemble a cast, because they are worn for an essential need, and in another way, they resemble socks. In my view, she may wipe over the part of the foot that it is required to wash, and regard them as being like the Khuffayn (leather socks) in terms of the time-frame (within which it is permissible to wipe over the socks). They should also be put on when in a state of purity (i.e., after doing Wudu).
For more details, please see the following answers: 192736, 306291.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/259422/can-you-wipe-over-sheer-compression-stockings-in-wudu | 59 | 259,422 |
18,716 | Ruling on wiping over socks that are attached to the trousers | Question
What is the ruling on wiping over socks that are attached to the trousers (clarification: like those that are worn by ballet dancers)? Is that regarded as isbaal [letting the trousers come below the ankles]? | Praise be to Allah.It is permissible to wipe over the socks, if they cover the ankles and were put on when one was in a state of complete purity, i.e., in which the feet had been washed. In that case, he may wipe over them if he wishes.
For information on the conditions on wiping over the socks, and how it is done, please see no. 12796 and 9640.
It does not matter if the socks are attached to the trousers, and wearing these trousers is not regarded as isbaal.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/309691/ruling-on-wiping-over-socks-that-are-attached-to-the-trousers | 59 | 309,691 |
18,717 | Is Intention Necessary for Wiping Over Socks? | Question
Is it necessary to have the intention of wiping over the socks, meaning if I have Wudu and I put on socks without intending to wipe over them, when I do Wudu is it permissible to wipe over them even though I did not intend before that to wipe over the socks, and I only put the socks on to go out?. | Praise be to Allah.Is Intention Necessary for Wiping Over Socks?
It is not essential in order for it to be permissible to wipe over the socks that one should have the intention. If a person puts on socks when he is in a state of purity, then he may wipe over them for one day and one night if he is not travelling and for three days and nights if he is travelling.
Shaykh Ibn `Uthaymin (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked: Is it essential, in order for it to be permissible to wipe over the leather slippers, that one should have the intention of wiping over them and also the intention of the period (during which one will wipe over them)?
He replied:
In this case, the intention is not required, because this is a matter in which the ruling has to do with having socks on, and it does not require an intention. Similarly, if a person puts on a garment, it is not essential to have the intention of covering the `Awrah during prayer, for example.
And when putting on the leather slippers, he does not have to intend to wipe over them or to intend a period for which he will do that. Rather if he is travelling, he may wipe over them for three days and nights whether he intends that or not, and if he is not travelling, he may wipe over them for one day and one night, whether he intends that or not. (End quote from Majmu` Fatawa Ibn `Uthaymin, 11/117)
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/112323/is-intention-necessary-for-wiping-over-socks | 59 | 112,323 |
18,718 | She used to wipe over socks for varicose veins that do not cover the toes, as if wiping over khuffayn; what is the ruling on her prayer? | Question
My mother is elderly and has varicose veins in her legs. For quite some time she has been wearing special stockings on her legs from halfway up the foot up to the knee; i.e., the end of the foot is uncovered. She says that when doing wudoo’, she did wudoo’ as usual, then when she reached the feet she wiped over the socks mentioned. She did that for a while until she stopped using the socks, and that was because it was too difficult to take them off and put them on again. She did not ask about the ruling at that time, because she thought that this was permissible so long as it was wiped.
Now she is asking about the ruling on her prayers during this period?. | Praise be to Allah.Firstly:
With regard to wiping over the khuffayn or socks, it is stipulated that the sock should cover the place that must be washed, and the place that must be washed goes from the ends of the toes to the ankles.
Ibn Qudaamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: It is permissible to wipe over the khuffayn and the like if it covers the place that must be washed. If any part of the place that must be washed is not covered, then it is not permissible to wipe over it.
End quote from al-Mughni, 1/183
Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allah have mercy on him) said: It is not allowed to wipe over the socks and so on unless the conditions stipulated in sharee‘ah are met, one of which is that the socks should cover the place that must be washed.
End quote from Majmoo‘ Fataawa Ibn Baaz, 10/114
Based on that:
The socks mentioned in the question do not come under the ruling on wiping over the khuffayn, because they do not cover the place that must be washed. But if the sick person needs to wear them and it is difficult for him to take them off every time he does wudoo’, then he may do wudoo’ before putting them on, and then put over them socks that cover properly. Then when he needs to do wudoo’, he can wipe over the socks that are covering them, until he takes them off or the period during which wiping over the socks is permissible ends. This is something acceptable and there is nothing wrong with it.
If he is not able to do that, and taking off the medical sock is something that will cause him harm or delay his recovery, then it comes under the same ruling as plaster casts; he may wipe over the entire thing, top and bottom – and this is one of the differences between wiping over plaster casts and wiping over the khuffayn: the entire cast should be wiped, whereas only the top of the khuffayn is wiped – and the uncovered part of the foot should be washed.
For more information please see the answer to question no. 114192
Secondly:
What your mother should have done was ask about what was required in that situation. The fact that she did not ask indicates that she was careless; we ask Allah to forgive her.
With regard to making up the prayers that she offered in that situation, the scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) differed concerning that. Some of the scholars say that the prayers must be made up and some say that it is not obligatory to do that.
If she wants to be on the safe side and make up the prayers that she offered with that wudoo’, that will be better.
If it is too difficult for her to do that or the days on which she offered prayers in that state were many, then she may be excused for not knowing, if she thought that what she was doing was correct and it did not occur to her to ask about it. In that case she does not have to repeat them according to the more correct of the two scholarly opinions.
See the answer to questions no. 45648 .
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/192736/she-used-to-wipe-over-socks-for-varicose-veins-that-do-not-cover-the-toes-as-if-wiping-over-khuffayn-what-is-the-ruling-on-her-prayer | 59 | 192,736 |
18,719 | Ruling on wiping over khuffayn (leather slippers) made from monkey skin | Question
What is the ruling on wiping over khuffayn or socks made from monkey skin? | Praise be to Allah.
The skins of animals may be divided into three categories:
~1~
The skin of animals whose flesh may be eaten if they are slaughtered in the
manner prescribed in Islam. It is permissible to use them according to
consensus, whether they are tanned or not.
~2~
The skin of an animal whose flesh may be eaten if slaughtered in the proper
manner, but it died without being slaughtered properly. It is permissible to
use this after tanning, according to the correct view.
~3~
The skin of animals whose flesh cannot be eaten, such as lions, tigers,
monkeys, leopards…
The scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) differed greatly concerning the
ruling on this type of animal skin. This was mentioned by an-Nawawi (may
Allah have mercy on him) in al-Majmoo‘, where he quoted the views of
the scholars and summed them up in seven views.
See: al-Majmoo‘ by an-Nawawi (1/171); al-Mughni (1/53).
What appears to be the case – and Allah knows best – is that the view of
Imam Ahmad and a number of the early generations, that it is prohibited to
use the skins of carnivorous animals and animals whose flesh cannot be
eaten, is more likely to be the correct view. That is indicated by the
following:
The hadeeth of Salamah ibn al-Muhabbiq (may Allah have mercy on him),
according to which the Prophet of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be
upon him), during the campaign to Tabook, asked a woman for water. She said:
I do not have anything but what is in a waterskin of mine that was made from
(the skin of) a dead animal (one that was not slaughtered properly). He
said: “Did you not tan it?” She said: Of course. He said: “Its tanning is
its purification.” Narrated by Ahmad (19214) and an-Nasaa’i (4170); classed
as saheeh by al-Albaani in Ghaayat al-Maraam (26).
It was narrated that ‘Aa’ishah said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him) was asked about the skins of dead animals (those
that died without being slaughtered properly) and he said: “Their tanning is
their purification.”
Narrated by an-Nasaa’i (4172); classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani.
It is well known that in the case of animals whose flesh cannot be eaten,
slaughtering it (in the manner prescribed in Islam) does not make it
purified (and permissible to eat).
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked:
What is the guideline on using animal skins, whether they come from animals
whose flesh may be eaten or those whose flesh may not be eaten, and whether
they were tanned or not tanned?
He replied:
As for the skins of animals whose flesh becomes halaal by slaughter in the
manner prescribed in Islam, they are taahir (pure), such as the skins of
camels, cattle, sheep, deer (gazelles), rabbits and so on, and whether they
are tanned or not. As for the skins of animals whose flesh cannot be eaten,
such as the skins of dogs, wolves, lions, elephants and so on, they are
najis (impure), regardless of whether they were slaughtered, died or were
killed, because if even they are slaughtered in the prescribed manner they
do not become permissible and they cannot be pure, hence they are impure;
and regardless of whether they were tanned or not, according to the more
correct scholarly opinion. According to the more correct scholarly opinion,
impure skins cannot be purified by tanning if they come from animals that do
not become permissible to eat by slaughter in the prescribed manner. In the
case of skins from animals whose flesh may be eaten but they die before they
can be slaughtered properly, if they are tanned then they become pure, but
before tanning they are impure. So now animal skins may be divided into
three categories:
~1~
Those which are pure whether they are tanned or not. These are the skins of
animals that have been slaughtered in the prescribed manner, if they may be
eaten.
~2~
The skins that do not become pure either after tanning or before tanning;
they are impure. This refers to the skins of animals whose flesh cannot be
eaten.
~3~
Skins that become pure after tanning but are not pure before that; they are
impure. These are the skins of animals whose meat may be eaten (if
slaughtered in the prescribed manner), if the animal died without being
slaughtered in the proper manner.
End quote from Liqa’ al-Baab al-Maftooh, no. 16
See also the answer to question no. 147632
We may add that monkeys come under the heading of carnivorous animals and
the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) forbade using the
skins of such animals.
It was narrated from al-Miqdaam ibn Ma’deekarib that the Messenger of Allah
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) forbade wearing and riding on the
skins of carnivores.
Narrated by Abu Dawood (4131); classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani
It was narrated from Qataadah ibn Abi’l-Maleeh from his father that the
Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) forbade using the skins
of carnivores as furnishings.
Narrated by at-Tirmidhi (1771); classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in
Mishkaat al-Masaabeeh, no. 506
See also the answer to question no. 105419
Secondly:
Once it is established that the skins of animals whose flesh may not be
eaten and the skins of carnivorous animals are impure after death, it is not
permissible to wear them whilst praying, or to wipe over them for the
purpose of purification (wudoo’) even after tanning, because one of the
conditions of prayer being sound is that the garments worn should pure, and
one of the conditions for wiping over the khuffayn is that they should be
pure.
It says in Kashshaaf al-Qinaa‘ (1/116): It is also stipulated that be
pure in and of itself, because that which is impure in and of itself is not
allowed. Hence it is not valid to wipe over something impure, even in the
case of necessity, because of what is mentioned above concerning silk… end
quote.
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Wiping over
something pure – This is the second condition stipulated for the validity of
wiping over the khuffayn, which is that the item worn should be pure. The
word pure here refers to that which is pure in and of itself, which excludes
that which is impure in and of itself.
The word pure may be applied to something that has not been touched by
impurity, such as if you say: You have to pray in a pure garment, i.e., one
that has not been touched by impurity.
What is meant here is something that is pure in and of itself, because some
khuffs may be impure in and of themselves, such as if it is a khuff made
from donkey skin; and some may be pure in and of themselves, but they have
been contaminated or touched by impurity, such as if the khuff is made of
skin from a camel that was slaughtered in the prescribed manner, but it was
touched by impurity. Hence the former is impurity that is impure in and of
itself, but the latter deemed to be impurity according to the ruling.
Based on that, it is permissible to wipe over a khuff that has become
impure, but not to pray wearing it, because in the case of prayer it is
stipulated that one must avoid impurity. The reason why the item to be wiped
over must be pure in and of itself is that wiping over something that is
impure in and of itself only increases it in impurity; in fact if the hand
touches this impurity when it is wet, it also becomes impure.
End quote from ash-Sharh al-Mumti‘ (1/228)
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/197680/ruling-on-wiping-over-khuffayn-leather-slippers-made-from-monkey-skin | 59 | 197,680 |
18,720 | Do Socks Have to Cover the Ankles? | Question
I did some research on the issue of wiping over the Khuffayn (2 leather socks). The four Madhhabs say that the Khuff must cover the ankle. But I came across a book by Shaykh Al-Albani in which he said that it is possible to wipe over the shoe/Khuff that does not cover the ankle; this view is contrary to scholarly consensus. I hope you can explain the matter to me. | Praise be to Allah.Conditions of wiping over the Khuff (leather socks)
The four Schools of Fiqh agreed that one of the conditions for wiping over the Khuffayn (2 leather socks) is that they should cover the area that must be washed (in Wudu) – the ankles as well as the feet. If they do not cover the ankles, then wiping over them is not valid, by analogy with Wudu. Since what appears must be washed and what is covered must be wiped over, it is not possible to combine the original rule and the alternative in one limb. (See: Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil by Al-Kharashi, 179; Hashiyat Qalyubi wa `Umayrah, 1/68; Al-Mawsu`ah Al-Fiqhiyyah, 37/264)
Does the Khuff have to cover the ankle?
There is no scholarly consensus concerning this issue; rather there is a difference of opinion among the scholars (may Allah have mercy on them). Some of the scholars regarded it as permissible to wipe over the Khuff even if it does not cover the ankles; this is the view of Ibn Hazm and was narrated from Al-Awza`i (may Allah have mercy on them). Other scholars disallow that, as is the view of the jurists of the four Schools of Fiqh.
It says in Al-Mughni (1/180):
“He should not wipe except over the Khuffayn or whatever takes their place, such as those that are cut down, and the like, provided that it goes further than the ankles. What that means – and Allah knows best – is anything that takes the place of the Khuffayn in covering the place that must be washed, and in which it is possible to walk, and it is firm by itself. The one that is cut down is a short Khuff . It is only permissible to wipe over it if it covers the place that must be washed in Wudu, and does not show the ankle because it is tight or tied. This is the view of Ash-Shafi`i and Abu Thawr (may Allah have mercy on them). But if it is cut lower than the ankle, it is not permissible to wipe over it. This is the correct view narrated from Malik (may Allah have mercy on him). It was also narrated from him, and from Al-Awza`i, that it is permissible to wipe over it because it is a Khuff which one can walk with and thus it is similar to that which covers (i.e., a full Khuff). But in our view it does not cover the place that must be washed, so it is more like a slipper or sandal.”
Ibn Hazm (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“If the Khuffayn are cut below the ankle, then wiping over them is permissible. This is the view of Al-Awza`i. It was also narrated from him that he said: The Muhrim (a pilgrim in a state of Ihram) may wipe over the Khuffayn that are cut beneath the ankle. Others said that they cannot be wiped over unless they come above the ankle. `Ali [i.e., Ibn Hazm] said: It was narrated in an authentic report from the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) that he instructed people to wipe over the Khuffayn, and that he wiped over the socks. If there had been a specific limit, he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) would not have omitted to mention it. So it must be the case that anything that can be called a Khuff, sock or any other footwear that covers the feet may be wiped over." (Al-Muhalla 1/336).
The fact that the four Schools of Fih agree on a matter does not mean there is consensus on it. If the Rightly-Guided Caliphs agreed on a view is not to be regarded as consensus, then in the case of anyone of lesser standing this point is even more apt.
It says in Mudhakkirat Usul Al-Fiqh by Shaykh Muhammad Al-Amin ibn Mukhtar Ash-Shinqiti (may Allah have mercy on him):
“According to the majority of scholars, it is not regarded as a consensus if most of the scholars of a given era agree upon some matter. Ibn Jarir At-Tabari and Abu Bakr Ar-Rawi (may Allah have mercy on them) said: For one or two scholars to have different views does not undermine the consensus of the scholars. Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) agreed with this point, but the majority of scholars stated that what matters is the view of all the scholars of the Ummah, because infallibility belongs to all (when they collectively agree on an issue), not just some. The argument for the opposite view is that the view of the majority should be heeded and the view of the minority should be overlooked." (Mudhakkirat Usul Al-Fiqh, 1/156)
It also says:
“The agreement of the four caliphs does not constitute consensus according to the majority (of the scholars). The correct view is that it constitutes evidence, not consensus, because consensus can only occur if all are agreed.”
For more details, please see this category: Wiping over the socks.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/176866/do-socks-have-to-cover-the-ankles | 59 | 176,866 |
18,721 | Is Wiping Over Thin Socks Permissible? | Question
I heard in a lecture that the scholars permitted wiping over socks through which the skin cannot be seen, but I have read that it is permissible to wipe over socks even if they are thin. Which of the two opinions is more correct? | Praise be to Allah.Wiping over the Khuff is sunnah
It is established in the Prophet’s Sunnah that one may wipe over the khuff (a kind of leather socks that covers the ankle). The majority of scholars include socks under this ruling .
What is meant by socks, as was stated by Al-Khalil Al-Farahidi (may Allah have mercy on him), is a covering for the feet. (See Al-‘Ayn, 6/113)
In Mawahib Al-Jalil (1/318) it says: “Socks are a kind of footwear in the shape of the Khuff, made of linen, cotton or other fabric.”
The difference between socks and Khuff is that the Khuff are made of leather, whereas socks are not made of leather; rather they are made of wool, linen, cotton or other fabrics.
At the present time, socks are also made of nylon (or synthetic fabrics).
Is there any Hadith about wiping over socks?
There is no authentic report from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) about wiping over socks .
With regard to the Hadith narrated by At-Tirmidhi (99) via Abu Qays from Huzayl ibn Shurahbil from Al-Mughirah ibn Shu‘bah (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) did Wudu and wiped over his socks and sandals – it is an inauthentic and odd Hadith.
Abu Dawud (may Allah have mercy on him) said in As-Sunan (159):
“`Abd Ar-Rahman ibn Mahdi did not narrate this Hadith, because what is well known from Al-Mughirah is that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) wiped over the Khuff.”
`Ali ibn Al-Madini (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “The Hadith of Al-Mughirah ibn Shu`bah (about wiping over the Khuff) was narrated from Al-Mughirah by the people of Madinah, the people of Kufah, and the people of Basra. It was narrated by Huzayl ibn Shurahbil from Al-Mughirah, but he said: And he wiped over his socks – and he (Huzayl) differed from other narrators.” (As-Sunan Al-Kubra by Al-Bayhaqi, 1/284)
Al-Mufaddal ibn Ghassan (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “I asked Yahya ibn Ma`in about this Hadith and he said: All the narrators narrated it in reference to the Khuff , apart from Abu Qays.” (As-Sunan Al-Kubra by Al-Bayhaqi, 1/284)
Among those who also classed it as inauthentic were Sufyan Ath-Thawri, Imam Ahmad, Ibn Ma`in, Muslim, An-Nasa’i, Al-`Uqayli, Ad-Daraqutni and Al-Bayhaqi (may Allah have mercy on them).
An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “These are the leading scholars of Hadith. Although At-Tirmidhi said it was a sound Hadith, these scholars take precedence over him; in fact if any one of them was the only one to hold that view, he would still take precedence over At-Tirmidhi, according to the consensus of the people of knowledge.” (Al-Majmu` Sharh Al-Muhadhdhab, 1/500)
Is wiping over socks reported from the Companions?
There are authentic reports about wiping over the socks from the Companions.
Ibn Al-Mundhir (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“The permissibility of wiping over the socks was narrated from nine of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him: ‘Ali ibn Abu Talib, ‘Ammar ibn Yasir, Abu Mas`ud, Anas ibn Malik, Ibn `Umar, Al-Bara’ ibn `Azib, Bilal, Abu Umamah and Sahl ibn Sa`d.” (Al-Awsat, 1/462)
Ibn Al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “Abu Dawud added Abu Umamah, `Amr ibn Hurayth, `Umar and Ibn `Abbas. Thus there were thirteen Companions (who held this view).
So the view that wiping over socks is permissible is based on these Companions (may Allah be pleased with them), not the Hadith of Abu Qays.
Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) stated that it is permissible to wipe over the socks, and he said that the report of Ibn Qays was flawed.
That stems from his fair-mindedness and justice, may Allah have mercy on him. Rather he based it on the view of these Companions, and by clear analogy, because there is no clear difference between socks and Khuff that would make the ruling different.” (Tahdhib As-Sunan, 1/187)
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “The Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) wiped over the socks, and there was no one who disagreed with them during their own time, therefore it is consensus.” (Al-Mughni, 1/215)
Similarly, there is no difference between the Khuff and sock, if you think about it.
Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“The difference between socks and the Khuff is that the former are made of wool and the latter are made of leather.
It is known that such differences do not have any impact on Shar‘i rulings. It makes no difference whether it is made of leather, cotton, linen or wool.
By the same token, it makes no difference whether garments worn in ihram are black or white. … The most that can be said is that leather is longer lasting than wool, but this does not affect the ruling, just as it is not affected if the leather is durable.
Moreover, it is well-known that the need to wipe over one is the same as the need to wipe over the other. As they are same in terms of the reason and need for wiping, differentiating between them would be differentiating between two similar things, which is contrary to the fairness and common sense that are promoted by the Quran and Sunnah, and that with which Allah sent down His Books and sent His Messengers.
Those who differentiate between them on the grounds that one is permeable and the other is not has mentioned a difference that does not affect anything.” (Majmu` Al-Fatawa, 21/214)
Can you wipe over thin socks?
The majority of those scholars who regard it is permissible to wipe over the socks stipulated that in order for it to be permissible to wipe over them, they should be thick and it should be possible to walk in them. See: Al-Mabsut (1/102); Al-Majmu` (1/483); Al-Insaf (1/170)
That is because the ruling on socks is the same as the ruling on the Khuff, and the Khuff can only be thick, so socks cannot take the place of the Khuff unless they are like them.
Al-Kasani (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “If (the socks) are thin and let water through , then it is not permissible to wipe over them, according to scholarly consensus.” (Bada’i` As-Sana’i`, 1/10)
Ibn Al-Qattan Al-Fasi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “All scholars unanimously agreed that if the socks are not thick, it is not permissible to wipe over them.” (Al-Iqna` fi Masa’il Al-Ijma`, no. 351)
Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked: Is it permissible to wipe over socks, like the khuff, or not?
He (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “Yes, it is permissible to wipe over the socks if one can walk in them, whether they are made of leather or not.” (Majmu` Al-Fatawa, 21/213)
And he (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “If they are thin, they cannot be wiped over, because usually one cannot walk in such socks and there is no need to wipe over them.” (Sharh ‘Umdat Al-Fiqh, 1/251)
In Fatawa Al-Lajnah Ad-Da’imah (5/267) it says: “The socks must be thick, and what is beneath them should not be visible.”
And they said: “It is permissible to wipe over anything that covers the feet and is worn on them, such as the Khuff and thick socks.” (Fatawa Al-Lajnah Ad-Da’imah, 4/101)
Similarly, Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “It is permissible to wipe over socks and the like, whether they are made of wool, camel hair, goat hair, cotton or other materials, if they are thick and cover the place that it is obligatory to wash, and they fulfil all the necessary conditions.” (Fatawa wa Rasa’il Ash-Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim, 2/66)
And he (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “But if the sock is thin and shows the skin, then it cannot be wiped over.” (Fatawa Ash-Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim, 2/68)
Shaykh Ibn Baz (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “One of the conditions (for it to be permissible to wipe over the socks) is that the socks should be thick and covering. If they are thin, it is not permissible to wipe over them, because in that case the foot is as if it is uncovered.” (Fatawa Ash-Shaykh Ibn Baz, 10/110)
Some of the scholars regarded it as permissible to wipe over the socks in all cases.
An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “Our companions narrated from `Umar and `Ali (may Allah be pleased with them) that it is permissible to wipe over the socks, even if they are thin. They also narrated that from Abu Yusuf, Muhammad, Ishaq and Dawud.” (Al-Majmu` Sharh Al-Muhadhdhab, 1/500)
This is the view that was regarded as more likely to be correct by Shaykh Al-Albani and Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymin (may Allah have mercy on them)
But what we have mentioned above is the view of the majority of scholars, and it is the more correct view, because the basis for regarding it as permissible is an analogy with the Khuff, and thin socks are not like the Khuff, so no analogy can be made with them.
The socks that the Companions used to wipe over were thick, because thin socks were not known until recently.
Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “It is not acceptable to wipe over the socks unless they are thick socks. … The people only used to wipe over socks because for them they were equivalent to the Khuff, so they took the place of the Khuff on a man’s feet, and a man used to come and go wearing them.” (Al-Mughni by Ibn Qudamah, 1/216)
If it is asked: why did the scholars stipulate these conditions with regard to socks?
Al-Mubarakfuri (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “The basic rule is that the feet are to be washed , as is the apparent meaning of the Quran, and turning to alternatives is not permissible except on the basis of authentic Hadiths, the soundness of which is agreed upon among the leading scholars of Hadith, such as the Hadiths which speak of wiping over the Khuff. So it is permissible to turn from washing the feet to wiping over the Khuff, and there is no difference of scholarly opinion on that point.
But with regard to the Hadiths which speak of wiping over the socks, there is some difference of opinion among the leading scholars in the field concerning their soundness. So how can it be permissible to turn from washing the feet to wiping over the socks in all cases?
Because of that, they stipulated these restrictions on the permissibility of wiping over the socks, so that the socks in question would come under the same heading as the Khuff and thus be included in the Hadiths that speak of the Khuff.
If the socks are thick and can be kept on the feet without being tied, and it is possible to walk in them, then undoubtedly there is no significant difference between this type of socks and the Khuff, because they are like the Khuff. But if they are thin and cannot be kept on the feet without being tied, and it is not possible to walk far in them, then they are not like the Khuff, and undoubtedly there is a significant difference between them and the Khuff.
Do you not see that the Khuff is like sandals, and if sandals are not available, a man can come and go wearing the Khuff, and walk wherever he wants? So wearing the Khuff does not require him to take them off when walking, so he does not have to take them off by day or by night; rather he can wear them for several days and nights, and it would be difficult for him to take them off every time he does Wudu .
In contrast, for the one who wears thin socks, every time he wants to walk he has to take them off several times during the day and night, and in this case it is not difficult for him to take them off every time he does Wudu. This difference dictates that the concession should be granted to the one who wears Khuff but not to the one who wears thin socks. Making an analogy in this case would be making an analogy despite the difference.” (Tuhfat Al-Ahwadhi, 1/285)
In conclusion, the view of the majority of scholars is that it is not allowed to wipe over thin socks, and that the permissibility (of wiping over socks) is limited to thick socks.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/228222/is-wiping-over-thin-socks-permissible | 59 | 228,222 |
18,722 | It is not permissible to wipe over the khuffayn or socks unless one put them on in a state of complete purity | Question
What is the ruling on the following: if someone did wudu, then put on socks, then broke his wudu, then took off the socks for a few seconds to put some cream on his feet, then put the socks on again, does he have to wash his feet again if he repeats his wudu? | Praise be to Allah.It is not valid to wipe over the socks when doing wudu except in the case of one who put them on in a state of purity. This is indicated by the saheeh Sunnah of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him).
Al-Bukhari (206) and Muslim (274) narrated that al-Mugheerah ibn Shu‘bah said: I was with the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) on a journey, and I bent down to take off his khuffayn (leather socks), but he said: “Leave them, for I put them on when my feet were clean (taahir),” and he wiped over them.
According to a version narrated by Abu Dawood (151): “Leave the khuffayn, for I put the khuffayn on my feet when they were clean (taahir).”
An-Nawawi said:
This indicates that wiping over the khuffayn is not permissible unless one put them on in a state of complete purity. End quote.
Ibn Qudamah said in al-Mughni (1/174):
We do not know of any difference of scholarly opinion regarding the stipulation that prior purification is required in order for it to be permissible to wipe (over the khuffayn or socks). End quote.
Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Wiping over the khuffayn is only permissible for one who put the khuffayn on his feet when they were clean (taahir), after doing wudu. As for the one who put them on his feet when they were not clean and he had not done wudu, he cannot wipe over the khuffayn."(Al-Muwatta’ 1/37).
It says in al-Muntaqa Sharh al-Muwatta’ (1/78):
It is as he said: if a person put on his khuffayn after doing wudu, then he broke his wudu, then took off the khuffayn, then put them on again, the ruling on wearing them when in a state of purity is no longer applicable, and he is now wearing them when not in a state of purity. Putting on the khuffayn when in a state of purity is a condition of it being valid to wipe over the khuffayn. End quote.
Based on that, if someone takes off his socks then puts them on again when he is not in a state of purity, it is not permissible for him to wipe over them; rather it is essential for him to wash the feet when doing wudu. The fact that he only took the socks off for a few seconds does not change the ruling, because in fact he put on the socks when he was not in a state of purity, so it is not permissible for him to wipe over them.
And Allah knows best.
For more information, please see the answer to question no. 9640. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/128445/it-is-not-permissible-to-wipe-over-the-khuffayn-or-socks-unless-one-put-them-on-in-a-state-of-complete-purity | 59 | 128,445 |
18,723 | Ruling on wearing shoes if they are made of pig skin, and ruling on praying in them | Question
I have a question about wearing shoes, the soles of which are made of pig skin; please note that sometimes I pray in them and sometimes I take them off and pray without repeating wudoo’. I hope you can advise me of the ruling on wearing them, may Allah reward you. | Praise be to Allah.Firstly:
The pig is impure (najis) and its skin cannot purified by tanning, according to the correct scholarly opinion. Please see the answer to question no. 1695 .
Based on that, it is not permissible to wear anything made of pig skin whilst praying, because one of the conditions of prayer is that one’s clothes should be clean and pure, and should not carry any impurity. It is also not permissible to buy or sell such items, because this is property that has no value in Islamic law. For more information, please see the answer to question no. 147632; this applies whether it is shoes, a coat or a belt.
Secondly:
If a person prays wearing a coat or shoes… made from pig skin or any other type of skin that is impure and cannot be purified by tanning, his prayer is not valid, unless he is unaware of the ruling or forgot, in which case his prayer is valid and he is not to be instructed to repeat it, according to the more correct scholarly view.
With regard to wearing these shoes outside of prayer, that is permissible in the case of need. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Treating illness by eating lard (pig fat) is not permissible; with regard to treating illness by applying it to the skin then washing it off after that, that comes under the heading of the permissibility of direct contact with impure substances outside of prayer, concerning which there is a well-known difference of scholarly opinion. The correct view is that it is permissible in cases of need; if something becomes permissible in cases of need, then it is permissible to treat illness with it.
End quote from Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 24/270
But in that case it is essential to take precautions so that furniture and carpets are not contaminated with impurity. It is well known that impurity is only transferred when there is wetness or dampness on the shoes and in the carpets and so on, and the shoes come into contact with it.
See also question no. 22713
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/177335/ruling-on-wearing-shoes-if-they-are-made-of-pig-skin-and-ruling-on-praying-in-them | 59 | 177,335 |
18,724 | Does Wudu Remain Valid If the Time for Wiping Over Socks Ends? | Question
What shall I do when I remember during my prayer that the period of wiping on shoes has run out? Should I break my prayer?
If I wore socks under my shoes after ablution (Wudu), then took my shoes off while socks were still on, does this invalidate my ablution? | Praise be to Allah.Is Wudu Valid after Wiping Period Ends?
If the time for wiping over the Khuff has ended, and you have Wudu, then your Wudu does not become invalidated, according to the correct view, which was favoured by a number of scholars, including Ibn Hazm and Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on them), because there is no evidence that it becomes invalidated. Wudu is only invalidated by well-known causes such as passing wind.
Praying after the Wiping Period Has Expired
Based on this, if the period (for wiping over the socks) ends whilst you are praying, then you should carry on with your prayer, and pray as much as you want so long as you do not break your Wudu.
Does Removing Socks or Khuff Break Wudu?
If a person takes off the Khuff or socks after wiping over them, his Wudu does not become invalidated according to the correct scholarly opinion. That is because when a man wipes over his Khuff, he has completed his purification according to the Shar`i evidence, and when he takes them off, this purification remains in effect, based on Shar`i evidence, and it cannot be rendered invalid except with Shar`i evidence.
There is no evidence that taking off Khuff or socks that have been wiped over invalidates Wudu. Based on this, his Wudu remains in effect. This is the view favoured by Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) and a number of other scholars. (Majmu` Fatawa Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah, 21/179, 215, and Majmu` Fatawa wa Rasa’il Ash-Shaykh Ibn `Uthaymin, 11/179)
But taking off the Khuff brings the period for wiping over them to an end, i.e., he cannot put them on again and wipe over them, until after he does a complete Wudu in which he washes his feet.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/100112/does-wudu-remain-valid-if-the-time-for-wiping-over-socks-ends | 59 | 100,112 |
18,725 | If he wipes over his socks then takes them off, is his wudu invalidated thereby? | Question
If a person who has wudu wipes over his socks, then takes them off, is his wudu invalidated thereby?. | Praise be to Allah.The scholars differed concerning the ruling on one who does wudu and wipes over his socks, then takes them off.
Some scholars say that it is sufficient for him to wash his feet, and his wudu is completed thereby.
This is a weak view, because wudu requires continuity, i.e., there should not be a long time between the washing of the various parts, rather they should be washed one after another, in a continuous sequence.
Hence Ibn Qudaamah (may Allah have mercy on him) narrated in al-Mughni (1/367) that this view is based on the idea that there is no need for continuity in wudu, and this is weak.
Others said that the person’s wudu is invalidated thereby, and if he wants to pray he has to repeat his wudu. They quoted as evidence the fact that wiping takes the place of washing, and if the socks are removed the purity of the feet is no longer valid, because now they are unwashed and unwiped. If the purity of the feet is invalidated then the entire wudu is invalidated because it cannot be divided up. This view was favoured by Ibn Baaz (may Allah have mercy on him), as is stated in his Majmoo’ al-Fatawa, 10/113.
Yet others said that his wudu is not invalidated thereby unless he breaks his wudu in some other way (by breaking wind etc). This was the view of a number of the salaf, including Qataadah, al-Hasan al-Basri and Ibn Abi Layla. It was supported by Ibn Hazm in al-Muhalla (1/105), and was the view favoured by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah and Ibn al-Mundhir. Al-Nawawi said in al-Majmoo’ (1/557): this is the strongest view.
They quoted a number of things as evidence for that:
1 – That purity is not invalidated except by hadath (breaking one's wudu by breaking wind etc.) and taking off the socks is not hadath.
2 – The purity of one who wipes over his socks is established by shar’i evidence, and it cannot be ruled to be invalid except by further shar’i evidence, and there is no evidence to indicate that purity is invalidated by taking off the socks.
3 – The analogy with shaving the hair after doing wudu. If a person does wudu and wipes over his hair, then shaves his head, he remains in a state of purity and it is not invalidated by that. The same applies to one who wipes over his socks then takes them off.
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen said:
If a person takes off his socks after wiping over them, his wudu is not invalidated thereby, and he may pray as he likes until he breaks his wudu (hadath), according to the correct view.
End quote, from Majmoo’ Fatawa Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 11/193.
See also: al-Mughni, 1/366-386; al-Muhalla, 1/105; al-Ikhtiyaaraat, p. 15; al-Sharh al-Mumti’, 1/180. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/45788/if-he-wipes-over-his-socks-then-takes-them-off-is-his-wudu-invalidated-thereby | 59 | 45,788 |
18,726 | Should Socks Be of Leather to Wipe Over Them in Wudu? | Question
What is the nature of socks during wiping? Can a person wipe on any socks or it must be leather? Give the answer in light of Quran and Hadith? | Praise be to Allah.Al-Mughirah ibn Shu’bah said: “The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) did wudu and wiped over his socks and shoes.” (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 92; classed as sahih by al-Albani in Sahih Sunan al-Tirmidhi, no. 86)
The author of al-Qamus said: “Jawrab (socks) means something that is wrapped around the feet.”
Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabi said: “Jawrab means a thin cover for the feet made of wool, worn to keep the feet warm.”
Yahya al-Bakka said: “I heard Ibn `Umar saying, “Wiping over the socks (jawrabayn) is like wiping over the leather slippers (khuffayn).” (Al-Musannaf by Ibn Abi Shaybah, 1/173)
Ibn Hazm said: “Wiping over anything that is worn on the feet – of things that are permitted to be worn and which come up above the ankles – is Sunnah, whether they are slippers (khuffayn) made of leather or felt or wood, or socks made of linen, wool, cotton, camel hair or goat hair, whether leather is worn over them or not, or whether they are overshoes or slippers worn over slippers or socks worn over socks.” (Al-Muhalla, 1/321)
Some scholars differed as to whether it is permissible to wipe over the slippers (khuffaayn) . The correct view as indicated by the evidence is that it is permissible to do that, as stated above.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/13954/should-socks-be-of-leather-to-wipe-over-them-in-wudu | 59 | 13,954 |
18,727 | Can You Do Wudu with Socks On? | Question
What are the conditions for wiping over the socks? Please give the evidence for that. | Praise be to Allah.You can do wudu with socks on if you apply these four conditions:
That they should have been put on when one was in a state of purity, i.e., when one has wudu. The evidence for that is what the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said to al-Mughirah ibn Shu’bah: “Don’t worry, because I put them on when I was clean.”
That the khufuf (leather slippers which cover the ankle) or socks should be pure. If they are impure then it is not permissible to wipe over them. The evidence for that is that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) led his Companions in prayer one day wearing shoes, which he took off whilst he was praying. He said that Jibril had told him that there was something dirty/impure on them. This was narrated by Ahmad from the hadith of Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (may Allah be pleased with him) in his Musnad. This indicates that it is not permissible to pray wearing anything that is impure, because if the impure thing is wiped over, the person will be contaminated by that impurity, so he cannot be considered to be pure.
They may be wiped over when one is purifying oneself from minor ritual impurity (i.e., doing wudu after passing wind, urine or stools), not when one is in a state of major ritual impurity following sexual activity or when ghusl is required. The evidence for that is the hadith of Safwan ibn ‘Assal (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: “The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) commanded us, when we were travelling, not to remove our khufuf for three days and three nights, except in the case of janabah. But we could keep them on and wipe over them in the case of stools, urine and sleeping.” This was narrated by Ahmad from the hadith of Safwan ibn ‘Assal (may Allah be pleased with him) in his Musnad. So the condition is that wiping the socks may be done when purifying oneself (doing wudu) from minor ritual impurity, and it is not permissible in the case of major ritual impurity, because of the hadith which we have mentioned here.
That the wiping may be done within the time specified by Shari`ah , which is one day and one night in the case of one who is not travelling , and three days and three nights in the case of one who is travelling. This is because of the hadith of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: “The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) stated one day and one night for the one who is not travelling, and three days and three nights for the one who is travelling, i.e., for wiping over the khufuf.” This was narrated by Muslim. This period starts from the first time one wipes over the socks when doing wudu after some minor ritual impurity, and it ends twenty-four hours later for the one who is not travelling, and seventy-two hours later for the one who is travelling. So if we assume that a person purifies himself for Fajr prayer on Tuesday and remains tahir (pure, i.e., keeps his wudu) until ‘Isha prayer on Tuesday evening, then he sleeps and wakes up to pray Fajr on Wednesday, and he wipes his socks at five o’clock zawali time , then the period begins from 5 a.m. on Wednesday and lasts until 5 a.m. on Thursday. If we assume that he wiped his socks before 5 a.m then he can pray Fajr on Thursday with this wiping and pray as much as he wants as long as he remains tahir, because according to the most correct scholarly opinion, wudu is not broken when the time period for wiping over the socks expires. That is because the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) did not set a time limit for taharah, rather he set a time limit for wiping over the socks. Once that time limit expires, one cannot wipe over the socks again, but if a person remains in a state of taharah then his taharah is still valid, because this is what is implied by the shar’i evidence, and whatever is proven by shar’i evidence cannot be invalidated unless there is further shar’i evidence to that effect. There is no evidence to suggest that wudu is broken when the time limit for wiping over the socks expires, because what the basic principle is that he remains as he is (i.e., tahir) until it becomes apparent that this is no longer the case.
These are the conditions which apply to wiping over the khufuf . There are other conditions which were mentioned by some of the scholars, but some of these are subject to further debate.
For more, please see this category: Wiping Over the Socks
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/9640/can-you-do-wudu-with-socks-on | 59 | 9,640 |
18,728 | He needs to put on special socks before getting out of bed and doing wudu; can he wipe over them? | Question
I had an operation to treat varicose veins for the second time. I have to wear a special sock that prevents blood from stopping in my leg’s veins, otherwise the disease will return, and it is not easy to have a third operation. I have to wear this sock before leaving bed or my veins will be full of blood and this will decrease the benefit of the sock. Is it permissible for me to wear this sock before I leave bed for fajr prayer (before I perform wudu’)? Bear in mind that this sock covers my leg from toes to thigh, and as my profession requires me to stand for long time (university professor) I have to wear the sock. Please clarify the matter for me, may Allah reward you!. | Praise be to Allah.Firstly:
We ask Allah to heal you and grant you well being in this world and in the Hereafter.
Secondly:
If you can put on these socks before you sleep, when in a state of complete purity, this is good. It is well known that the non-traveller may wipe over the khufoof (leather slippers) and the like for one day and one night (24 hours) from the first time he wipes over the socks after breaking his wudu.
If you do wudu and then put them on before you sleep, and you wipe over them at the time of Fajr, it is permissible for you to wipe over them until the time of the next Fajr.
This will solve the problem of putting on the socks when not in a state of purity.
Thirdly:
If you cannot do that, such as if it will be harmful to wear them whilst sleeping, then there is nothing wrong with putting them on before getting out of bed, and that will come under the ruling on plaster casts, because you have no choice but to wear them and you will be harmed by not doing so., and it is not essential to have put the plaster cast on when in a state of purity in order to wipe over it. This is the view of the Hanafis and Maalikis. See al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (15/108).
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said in Sharh al-Kaafi: Undoubtedly the correct view is that it is not essential that plaster casts be put on when in a state of purity, rather when there is a reason to do so, they may be put on and one may wipe over them. End quote.
But it must be noted that if we regard these socks as being like plaster casts, in that case one must wipe over the whole thing, top and bottom, down to the ankles, and it is not permissible to limit it to the upper surface only, as is the case with khufoof and socks.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/114192/he-needs-to-put-on-special-socks-before-getting-out-of-bed-and-doing-wudu-can-he-wipe-over-them | 59 | 114,192 |
18,729 | If he wiped over his khufoof again then took them off, he can put them on again and wipe over them | Question
If a person performed washing wudu at the time of zuhar prayer then he puts on his khuffs, Then for asr prayer he renewed his wudu by just wiping over his khuffs. After asr he removed his khuffs, but while going out he puts on his khuff again. So the question is: Can he wipe over for maghrib prayer? Also provide evidence(daleel). | Praise be to Allah.Firstly:
Taking off the khufoof does not invalidate wudu according to the more correct view, so the one who takes off his khufoof may pray with his previous wudu.
See the answer to question no. 100112.
Secondly:
One of the conditions of wiping over the khufoof or socks is that they should have been put on when in a state of purity. This has been explained in the answer to question no. 9640.
The one who renews his wudu and wipes over his socks, then takes them off, then puts them on again before breaking his wudu, can be said to have put them on in a state of purity, so he may wipe over them.
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said: We said that if he takes off the khufoof he does not break his wudu, and this was also said by others. But none of those who said that wudu is not broken said that it is permissible to put them back and wipe over them. We tried hard but we did not find anyone who was of this opinion, otherwise it would be a sound view.
Questioner: Even if he is wiping over them to renew his wudoo?
Shaykh: No. If the wiping is to renew wudu, what that means is that the first wudu was not invalidated, so it is permissible to wipe over them after taking them off. Similarly if we assume that he did not wipe over them then he took them off when still in a state of purity, before wiping over them, then he put them on again, there is nothing wrong with that. End quote from Sharh al-Kaafi.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/116409/if-he-wiped-over-his-khufoof-again-then-took-them-off-he-can-put-them-on-again-and-wipe-over-them | 59 | 116,409 |
18,730 | How to Wipe Over Socks in Wudu | Question
My question is regarding the following hadith concerned with wiping over one's socks while in a state of taharah (purity):
Ibn Khuzayma said that according to Hadith narrated by Safwan Ibn ‘Assal, "the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) ordered us to wipe over khuff if we put them on in a state of purification, for 3 days during travelling and for one day and night in residency "
My question is that can I assume the statement 'one day and one night' in the hadith to mean 24 hours, and if so can I put my socks on in a state of taharah on at ANY TIME and wipe over them when I do wudu as long as the total period of time I have them on for is 24 hours?
For example, can I put them on 11pm one day and wipe over them when I do wudu up until 11pm the following day?
Also please could you tell me exactly which area of the socks has to be wiped over? I know that it is not permissible to wipe over the soles of the socks but do we have to wipe the sides and the back of our socks as well as the front of the socks?
Please reply as this would make my life a lot easier and also because I have sensitive skin. My ignorance of the matter leads to a lot of waswas and dissatisfaction. | Praise be to Allah.When to start wiping over socks
With regard to the beginning of the period when one may wipe over the slippers or socks , it begins from the first time one wipes over them after breaking one’s wudu, not from the moment one puts them on.
How to wipe over socks in wudu
The way in which one wipes over them is to put one’s wet fingers on the toes then pass them over the feet to the shin; the right foot should be wiped with the right hand and the left foot with the left hand. The fingers should be spread when wiping and it should not be repeated. (See al-Mulakhkhas al-Fiqhi by al-Fawzan, 1/43).
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymin (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“This means that what should be wiped is the top of the sock, passing one's fingers from the toes to the shin only, and one should wipe with both hands over both feet together, i.e., the right hand should wipe the right foot and the left hand should wipe the left foot at the same time, just as one wipes the ears, because this is the apparent meaning of the Sunnah, as al-Mughirah ibn Shu’bah said, ‘Then he wiped them both.’ He did not say that he started with the right, rather that he ‘wiped them both’. So this is the apparent meaning of the Sunnah.
If we assume that he cannot use one of his hands, then he should start with the right before the left. Many people wipe the right foot with both hands then the left foot with both hands, but there is no basis for this as far as I know. No matter how it is done, wiping the top of the slipper (or sock) is sufficient but what we have said here is best.” (See Fatawa al-Marah al-Muslimah, vol. 1, p. 250)
You should not wipe the sides or back of the sock because there is no report concerning that.
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymin said: “Someone may say that it is the bottom of the slipper or sock that should be wiped, because this is what is in contact with dust and dirt. But if we think about it we will see that wiping the top of the sock is what makes sense, because this wiping is not for the purpose of cleaning, rather it is an act of worship; if we were to wipe the bottom of the sock that would make it more dirty.” And Allah knows best. (See al-Sharh al-Mumti’ by Ibn ‘Uthaymin, vol. 1, p. 213)
For more, please see these answers: 20431 , 45535 , 309691 and 95230 .
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/12796/how-to-wipe-over-socks-in-wudu | 59 | 12,796 |
18,731 | If he wipes over his socks whilst at home then he travels | Question
If a person wipes over his socks whilst at home then he travels, should he complete the period of time allowed to the traveller for wiping over the socks?. | Praise be to Allah.If the person started wiping over his socks or khufoof when he was at home, and some of that period (which is 24 hours) still remained, then he travelled, he may complete the period for the traveller to wipe over his socks, so he may complete three days and nights starting from the time when he first wiped over them when he was at home.
This is the view of Imam Abu Haneefah and it is one of the two views narrated from Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him). Imam al-Shaafa’i was of the view, which was also the other opinion narrated from Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him), that he should complete the period of the non-traveller.
The correct view is the former, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) granted a concession to the traveller allowing him to wipe over the khufoof for three days and nights when travelling.
See: al-Mughni (1/371); al-Insaaf (1/402) and al-Sharh al-Mumti’ (1/251).
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
If he wipes over his socks when he is at home, then he travels, he may complete the period during which the traveller may wipe over his socks, according to the correct view. Some scholars stated that if he wipes over his socks whilst he is at home and then travels, he should complete the period during which the non-traveller may wipe over his socks, but the correct view is that which we have stated, because this man still had some of the period for wiping over his socks left before he travelled, then he travelled, so he comes under the ruling of a traveller who may wipe over his socks for three days. It was narrated that Imam Ahmad came back to this view after he used to say that he should complete the period of the non-traveller. End quote.
Majmoo’ Fatawa al-Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (11/175). | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/111874/if-he-wipes-over-his-socks-whilst-at-home-then-he-travels | 59 | 111,874 |
18,732 | How Long Can You Wipe Over Socks? | Question
I am 60 years old. I am suffering from an illness in my back that makes it hard for me to bend over and wash my feet during Wudu (ablution) . Is it permissible for me to wipe on my socks for a long period of time?. | Praise be to Allah.The Time Limit for Wiping Over Socks
The authentic Sunnah indicates that wiping over the socks is limited to a specific time period, which is one day and one night for the non-traveller, and three days and nights for the traveller.
Muslim (276) narrated that Shurayh ibn Hani’ (may Allah have mercy on him) said: I came to `A’ishah and asked her about wiping over the Khuffayn. She said: You should go to (`Ali) ibn Abu Talib and ask him, for he used to travel with the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). So we asked him and he said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) set a limit of three days and nights for the traveller, and one day and night for one who is not travelling.
At-Tirmidhi (95), Abu Dawud (157) and Ibn Majah (553) narrated from Khuzaymah ibn Thabit (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was asked about wiping over the Khuffayn and he said: “For the traveller it is three (days) and for the non-traveller it is one day.” (Classed as authentic by Al-Albani in Sahih At-Tirmidhi)
When Does the Time Period for Wiping over Socks Begin?
The most correct scholarly view is that the period for wiping over the socks begins from the first time one wipes over them after breaking Wudu, not from the time of putting them on. So if a person does Wudu for Fajr prayer, and puts on socks, then he breaks his Wudu at nine a.m. and does not do Wudu, then he does Wudu at twelve o’clock, then the period begins from twelve, and lasts for one day and one night, i.e., twenty-four hours.
An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Al-Awza`i and Abu Thawr said: The period begins from when he wipes over his socks after breaking Wudu. This was narrated from Ahmad and Dawud, and it is the favoured view and the most likely to be correct based on evidence. It was the view favoured by Ibn Al-Mundhir, and something similar was narrated from `Umar ibn Al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him). (End quote from Al-Majmu`, 1/512)
What to do When the Wiping Period Ends?
Based on that, you should follow the period for wiping over the socks, and when it ends it is not permissible to wipe over the socks, until you take them off then put them on after purifying yourself fully. But the end of the period does not mean that Wudu becomes invalid, according to the more correct view, so if the period ends and you are still in a state of purity, it is permissible for you to pray with this purity until it is broken.
Dealing with Difficulties in Washing Feet
What you mention about it being difficult to wash the feet can be overcome by sitting on a chair and the like, or pouring water over the feet without bending down to wash them.
An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Our view is that rubbing the limbs when doing Ghusl and Wudu is Sunnah but is not obligatory. If a person pours water over it and does not wipe it with his hands, or immerses himself in a lot of water, that is sufficient for his Wudu or Ghusl. This is the view of all the scholars except for Malik and Al-Muzani, who stipulated that in order for Ghusl and Wudu to be valid. (End quote from Al-Majmu`, 2/214)
We ask Allah to heal you and make you well.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/95230/how-long-can-you-wipe-over-socks | 59 | 95,230 |
18,733 | Should he wipe over his socks even though they smell bad? | Question
A worshipper came to do wudoo’ and he was wearing socks, i.e., he wanted to wipe over them, but his socks smelled bad and there was the danger that they would offend other worshippers. What should he do?. | Praise be to Allah.
The worshipper’s body and clothes should be clean, so that
the angels will not be offended by him and neither will his
fellow-worshippers.
Hence we are strongly urged to do ghusl, use the siwaak and
put on perfume on Fridays, because people are crowded together. Similarly
the Muslim who has eaten onions, garlic or anything else with an unpleasant
odour is forbidden to attend the mosque, lest he annoy anyone with his
smell.
Ahmad (16445) narrated that the Prophet (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “It is the duty of every Muslim to do
ghusl on Friday, and to use the siwaak and put on perfume, if his family has
any.” This hadeeth was classed as saheeh by Shu’ayb al-Arna’oot in his
commentary on al-Musnad.
Muslim (564) narrated
from Jaabir ibn ‘Abd-Allaah (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the
Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever eats
onions, garlic or leeks, let him not approach our mosque, for the angels are
annoyed by the same things that annoy the sons of Adam.”
If the socks have an offensive odour, then he should
certainly take them off and wash his feet. It is not permissible for him to
annoy the angels and other worshippers with their smell. If he enters the
mosque like that, he should be told to leave.
Muslim (567) also narrated that ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may
Allaah be pleased with him) said: “O people, you eat two plants which I
think are nothing but bad: this onion and garlic. I saw the Messenger of
Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), if he noticed their
smell on a man in the mosque, ordering that he be taken out to al-Baqee’.
Whoever eats them, let him cook them to death.”
Al-Nawawi said:
This shows that the one who smells of garlic and onions, or
anything similar, should be expelled from the mosque, and the evil should be
removed by hand whenever possible. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/69858/should-he-wipe-over-his-socks-even-though-they-smell-bad | 59 | 69,858 |
18,734 | Do We Have to Wash Our Feet in Wudu? | Question
Why does Allah mention wiping (or rubbing) the feet during Wudu in the verse, “rub (by passing wet hands over) your heads, and your feet up to the ankles” [Al-Ma’idah 5:6]? What we know is that we should wash our feet during Wudu, so why does it say imsahu (rub or wipe)? My friend asked me this question and told me, “I wipe my feet when making Wudu and I do not wash them,” and I did not know how to answer. Is there some kind of linguistic miracle in the way the words are put together? What is the reason why it mentions wiping instead of washing? | Praise be to Allah.What must be done in Wudu is washing the feet ; it is not sufficient to wipe them. Your friend’s understanding of the verse as meaning that the feet may be wiped is not correct.
The evidence that it is obligatory to wash the feet is the report narrated by Al-Bukhari (163) and Muslim (241) from `Abdullah ibn `Amr (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) stayed behind us on a journey and then caught up with us, and we were late in praying `Asr. We started doing Wudu and wiping out feet, and he called out at the top of his voice: “Woe to the heels from the fire” two or three times.
Muslim (242) narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) saw a man who had not washed his heels and he said, “Woe to the heels from the Fire.”
Ibn Khuzaymah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “If wiping were sufficient to discharge the obligation, there would have been no warning of the Fire in this case.”
Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
There are Mutawatir reports from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) which describe his Wudu and state that he washed his feet . He is the one who explained the commands of Allah. There is no report from anyone among the Companions which differs from that, except from `Ali, Ibn `Abbas and Anas, but it was narrated that they retracted that. `Abd Ar-Rahman ibn Abi Layla said: The companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) unanimously agreed that the feet should be washed . (Narrated by Sa`id ibn Mansur.” (Fat-h Al-Bari, 1/320)
With regard to the verse, it says (interpretation of the meaning):
“O you who believe! When you intend to offer the prayer, wash your faces and your hands (forearms) up to the elbows, rub (by passing wet hands over) your heads, and (wash) your feet up to the ankles.” [Al-Ma’idah 5:6]
This does not indicate that it is permissible to wipe the feet. The reason for this is that there are two readings of this verse.
Wa arjulakum (and your feet), with a Fathah on the letter Lam. In this case the word “feet” is mentioned in conjunction with the word Wajh (face), and the face is to be washed, so the feet are to be washed too. So it is as if the verse is basically saying: “Wash your faces, your arms up to the elbows and your feet up to the ankles, and wipe your heads,” but mention of washing the feet is put after mention of wiping the head so as to indicate that this is the order in which the parts of the body are washed in Wudu: washing the face, then the arms, then wiping the head, then washing the feet. (See Al-Majmu`, 1/471)
Wa arjulikum, with a Kasrah on the letter Lam. In this case it is mentioned in conjunction with the word Ra’s (head), and the head is to be wiped, so the feet are to be wiped too.
But the Sunnah shows that one may wipe over the feet only when wearing leather slippers or socks , subject to the conditions that are well known in the Sunnah. (See Al-Majmu`, 1/450; Al-Ikhtiyarat, p. 13)
Thus it is clear that in neither reading does the verse indicate that the feet may be wiped. Rather it indicates that it is obligatory to wash the feet, or to wipe over the socks if one is wearing socks.
Some of the scholars, based on the second reading, are of the view that the reason why wiping is mentioned with regard to the feet although they are to be washed is to indicate that one should be economical in using water when washing the feet, because people are usually lavish with water when washing them. So the verse enjoins wiping in the sense of washing them without being extravagant in the use of water.
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said in Al-Mughni, 1/186:
“It may be that what is meant by wiping is washing lightly. Abu `Ali Al-Farisi said: The Arabs call a light washing mash (wiping ) and say tamassahtu li’l-salah (literally “I wiped myself for prayer”) meaning I did Wudu.”
Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“Mentioning wiping with regard to the feet is an indication that one should not use too much water on the feet, because people are usually extravagant in using water for that.” (Minhaj As-Sunnah, 4/174)
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/69761/do-we-have-to-wash-our-feet-in-wudu | 59 | 69,761 |
18,735 | He wiped over his socks for three days when he was not travelling. Does he have to repeat his prayers for the two days? | Question
I did wudu for three consecutive days wearing the same socks, without taking off those socks, although the time when a person can wipe over his socks is one day and one night for one who is not travelling. Are my prayers on the second and third days valid, or do I have to repeat them because I went beyond the time when one may wipe over the socks?. | Praise be to Allah.The saheeh Sunnah indicates that the time for wiping over the khuffayn (leather slippers) for one who is not travelling is one day and one night, and for one who is travelling it is three days and nights. Wiping over the socks is like wiping over the khuffayn.
Muslim (276) narrated that Shurayh ibn Haani’ said: I came to ‘Aa’ishah and asked her about wiping over the khuffayn. She said: “You should go and ask Ibn Abi Taalib, for he used to travel with the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).” So we asked him and he said: “The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) stipulated three days and nights for the traveller, and one day and night for the one who is not travelling.”
Al-Tirmidhi (95), Abu Dawood (157) and Ibn Maajah (553) narrated from Khuzaymah ibn Thaabit (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was asked about wiping over the khuffayn and he said: “For the traveller, three and for the non-traveller, one day.” Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi.
Al-Tirmidhi (96), al-Nasaa’i (127) and Ibn Maajah (478) narrated that Safwaan ibn ‘Assaal (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) used to command us when we were travelling not to take off our leather slippers for three days and nights, except in the case of janaabah, but not in the case of defecating, urinating or sleeping.” This hadeeth was classed as hasan by al-Albaani.
Secondly:
The most correct view of the fuqaha’ is that the period begins from the first time a person wipes over his leather slippers after breaking his wudu, not from the time when he put them on or from the first time he broke his wudu after putting them on. So if a person does wudu for Fajr prayer, and puts on his leather slippers, then he breaks his wudu at nine o’clock in the morning but does not do wudu, then he does wudu at twelve o’clock, then the period for wiping over them starts at twelve o’clock, and lasts for one day and one night, or twenty-four hours.
Al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: al-Awzaa’i and Abu Thawr said: The time starts from when he wipes over them after breaking wudu. This was narrated from Ahmad and Dawood, and is the view which is most likely to be correct, based on the evidence. It was also the view favoured by Ibn al-Mundhir, and something similar was narrated from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allah be pleased with him).
End quote from al-Majmoo’, 1/512
This is what was regarded as more likely to be correct by Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him), who said: Because the ahaadeeth say “the one who is not travelling may wipe” and “the traveller may wipe”, and he only comes under the heading of one who wipes after he wipes for the first time. This is the correct view.
Al-Sharh al-Mumti’, 1/186
Thirdly:
A number of scholars, including Ibn Hazm and Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah, are of the view that the state of purity does not end when the period for wiping over the socks or leather slippers ends, because there is no evidence to suggest that. Rather the state of purity comes to an end when it is invalidated by one of the things that are known to invalidate it, such as passing wind.
Al-Muhalla, 2/151; al-Ikhtiyaaraat al-Fiqhiyyah, p. 15; al-Sharh al-Mumti’, 1/216.
Based on this, if a person is in a state of purity and the time for wiping over the socks ends before Zuhr, he may pray Zuhr and subsequent prayers with that previous state of purity, until he breaks his wudu.
Based on the above:
If the period for wiping over the socks ended and you were not in a state of purity, then you have to repeat all the prayers that you offered after the time for wiping over the socks ended and you did not wash your feet.
If the time for wiping over the socks ended and you were in a state of purity, then you only have to repeat the prayers from the time when you first broke your wudu after that time ended.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/69829/he-wiped-over-his-socks-for-three-days-when-he-was-not-travelling-does-he-have-to-repeat-his-prayers-for-the-two-days | 59 | 69,829 |
18,736 | When Does the Validity of Wiping Over Socks Expire? | Question
I read that the period for wiping over the socks lasts for one day and one night for one who is not travelling, and three days and three nights for one who is travelling. When this time ends, is the person’s Wudu invalidated, or does he remain pure? | Praise be to Allah.Shaykh Muhammad ibn `Uthaymin (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
The correct view is that his Wudu is not invalidated when the period for wiping over the socks comes to an end. For example, if this time ends at 12 noon, but you keep your Wudu until night time, you still have Wudu. That is because there is no evidence to suggest that Wudu is broken when the period of wiping over the socks ends.
The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) set the time limit for wiping over the socks; he did not set a time limit for Wudu. There is a principle that the seeker of knowledge should pay attention to, which is that what is proven by the Shar`i evidence cannot be invalidated without further Shar`i evidence, because what is proven remains as it is.
For more details, please see the following answers: 26343, 69829, 116409, 45788.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/21705/when-does-the-validity-of-wiping-over-socks-expire | 59 | 21,705 |
18,737 | Can he wipe over his socks if he put the right sock on before washing his left foot? | Question
Some people wash the right foot in wudoo’, then put on the sock, then they wash the left foot and put on the sock. If they do wudoo’ after that, is it permissible to wipe over the socks?. | Praise be to Allah.It is better and is more
on the safe side for the person doing wudoo’ not to put on his socks until
he has washed his left foot, because the Prophet (peace and blessings
of Allaah be upon him) said: “When one of you does wudoo’ and puts on his
khuffayn, he may wipe over them and pray in them, and he need not take them
off if he does not want to, except in the case of janaabah.” Narrated from
Anas (may Allaah be pleased with him) by al-Daaraqutni and by al-Haakim who
classed it as saheeh.
It was narrated from Abu Bakrah al-Thaqafi (may Allaah be
pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be
upon him) granted a dispensation to the traveller for three days and three
nights, and to the non-traveller for one day and one night: if he purifies
himself and puts on his khuffayn (leather slippers or socks), he may wipe
over them. Narrated by al-Daaraqutni and classed as saheeh by Ibn
Khuzaymah.
It is narrated in al-Saheehayn from al-Mugheerah ibn
Shu’bah (may Allaah be pleased with him) that he saw the Prophet (peace
and blessings of Allaah be upon him) doing wudoo’ and he wanted to take off
his khuffayn. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)
said to him: “Leave them, for I put them on when they (my feet) were in a
state of purity.”
The apparent meaning of these three ahaadeeth and similar
reports is that it is not permissible for a Muslim to wipe over his khuffayn
except when he put them on in a state of full purity. The one who puts his
khuff or sock onto his right foot before washing his left foot is not in a
state of full purity.
Some scholars are of the view that it is permissible to wipe
over the sock even if the person put his right foot into the khuff or sock
before washing his left foot, because in each case it is done after washing
the foot.
But the first view is
more on the safe side, and it is more apparent based on the evidence. So the
person who has done that should take off the khuff or sock from his right
foot before wiping, and put the sock back on after washing the left foot, so
that he avoids an area of scholarly dispute and will be on the safe side
with regard to his religious commitment. End quote.
Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him).
Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn Baaz,
10/116
Another indication that it is not permissible to wipe over
the khuffayn unless one put them on when in a state of full purity is the
report narrated by Ibn Khuzaymah and al-Daaraqutni from Abu Bakrah (may
Allaah be pleased with him), according to which the Prophet (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) granted a concession to the traveller for
three days and nights, and to the non-traveller for one day and night,
allowing them to wipe over the khuffayn if they put them on after purifying
themselves. Classed as saheeh by al-Khattaabi. Al-Bayhaqi narrated that
al-Shaafa’i classed it as saheeh and al-Nawawi classed it as hasan.
Talkhees al-Habeer, 1/278.
See al-Majmoo’ by al-Nawawi, 1/541. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/69866/can-he-wipe-over-his-socks-if-he-put-the-right-sock-on-before-washing-his-left-foot | 59 | 69,866 |
18,738 | Is it better to wipe over the socks or to wash the feet? | Question
Is it better to wipe over the socks or to wash the feet?. | Praise be to Allah.The majority of scholars, including Abu Haneefah, Maalik and al-Shaafa’i, are of the view that it is better to wash the feet. They said: that is because the basic principle is washing the feet, so that is better.
See al-Majmoo’, 1/502
Imam Ahmad was of the view that wiping over the socks is better. He gave the following evidence for that:
1 – It is easier, and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was never given the choice between two things but he chose the easier of the two, so long as it was not a sin; if it was a sin he would be the furthest removed of the people from it. Narrated by al-Bukhaari (3560) and Muslim (2327).
2 – It is a concession, and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Allah loves concessions to be taken as He hates sin to be committed.” Narrated by Ahmad, 5832; classed as saheeh by al-Albani in Irwa’ al-Ghaleel, 564.
3 – Wiping over the socks involves being different from the people of bid’ah who reject it, such as the Khaarijis and Raafidis.
There are many ahaadeeth from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) which indicate that he did both: he washed his feet and he wiped over his khuffayn (leather slippers). This led some scholars to say that wiping and washing are the same. This was the view favoured by Ibn al-Mundhir (may Allah have mercy on him).
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah and his student Ibn al-Qayyim were of the view that either may be better depending on the circumstances of his feet. If a person is wearing socks it is better to wipe over them, and if his feet are bare, it is better to wash them, and he should not put socks on in order to wipe over them.
This is indicated by the hadeeth of al-Mugheerah ibn Shu’bah (may Allah have mercy on him) who wanted to take off the Prophet’s khuffayn in order to wash his feet. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said to him: “Leave them, for I put them on pure,” so he wiped over them.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 206; Muslim, 274. This indicates that wiping is better for one who is wearing socks.
This is also indicated by the report narrated by al-Tirmidhi (96) from Safwaan ibn ‘Assaal (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) used to tell us when we were travelling not to take off our kufoof for three days and nights, except in the case of janaabah, but if one defecated, urinated or slept (there was no need to take them off). Classed as hasan by al-Albaani in Irwa’ al-Ghaleel, 104. The command to wipe indicates that it is better, but that applies to one who is wearing socks.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said:
Conclusion: what is better for each one is that which is suited to his circumstances. For the one whose feet are bare, it is better for him to wash them, and he should not put on socks so that he can wipe over them, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) used to wash his feet when they were bare, and he would wipe over them if he was wearing khufoof. End quote from al-Insaaf, 1/378
Ibn al-Qayyim said in Zaad al-Ma’aad (1/199):
He is not required to do more than is required with regard to the situation of his feet. If he is wearing khufoof, he should wipe over them and not take them off, and if his feet are bare he should wash them, and he should not put on socks so that he can wipe over them. This is the most correct opinion concerning the issue of whether wiping or washing is better. This is the view of our Shaykh (i.e., Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah). End quote. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/45535/is-it-better-to-wipe-over-the-socks-or-to-wash-the-feet | 59 | 45,535 |
18,739 | In order to be allowed to wipe over one’s socks, they have to have been put on at the
same time, after completing wudoo’ or ghusl | Question
What is the ruling
concerning a man who washes his right foot and puts his right sock on before he washes his
left foot? Is it permissible for him to wipe over his socks? | Praise be to Allah.You cannot wipe over your socks in this case, because you put the first
sock on before completing the act of purification (wudoo’ or ghusl). | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=4 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/2172/in-order-to-be-allowed-to-wipe-over-ones-socks-they-have-to-have-been-put-on-at-the-same-time-after-completing-wudoo-or-ghusl | 59 | 2,172 |
18,740 | Is it valid to wipe over one's socks in the summer? | Question
I often see some worshippers wiping over their socks when they do wudoo’, even in the summertime. I hope that you can explain to me to what extent that is permissible. Which is better for the non-traveller, to do wudoo’ washing the feet or wiping over the socks? Please note that those who wipe over their socks have no excuse, all they say is that there is a dispensation which allows this. | Praise be to Allah., and blessings and peace be upon the Messenger of Allaah.
The general meaning of the saheeh ahaadeeth about it being permissible to wipe over the leather slippers or socks indicates that it is permissible to do so in winter and summer.
I do not know of any evidence to indicate that this is only permitted in the winter, but it is not permissible for anyone to wipe over his socks etc. unless the conditions set out by sharee’ah are met, such as the stipulation that the socks must cover the part that is washed during wudoo’, they must be put on when one has wudoo, and attention must be paid to the length of time for which that is permitted, which is one day and one night for one who is not traveling, and three days and nights for the traveler, starting from the first time one wipes over them after breaking one's wudoo’, according to the more correct of the two scholarly opinions. And Allaah is the source of strength. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=4 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/20431/is-it-valid-to-wipe-over-ones-socks-in-the-summer | 59 | 20,431 |
18,741 | Does Taking Off Socks Break Wudu? | Question
If a person does Wudu and wipes over his socks, then during the period in which wiping over the socks is allowed he takes off his socks before he prays, should he pray and is his prayer valid, or is his Wudu broken by taking off his socks? | Praise be to Allah.Taking off one’s leather socks (Khuff, plural: Khufuf) after wiping over them does not invalidate Wudu, according to the correct scholarly view. When a person wipes over his socks, he has completed his Wudu according to what is implied by the Shar’`i evidence.
So if one takes them off, this Wudu is still valid according to the Shar’i evidence and cannot be broken except by something for which there is Shar`i evidence. There is no evidence to indicate that taking off leather slippers or socks that have been wiped invalidates Wudu. On this basis, then, his Wudu remains valid. This was the view favoured by Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) and a group of the scholars.
But if one puts his socks back on after that and breaks his Wudu, then he wants to wipe over them again, that is not allowed, because he has to put the socks on after doing Wudu in which he washed his feet, according to what was stated by the scholars.
References: (Majmu` Fatawa wa Rasa’il Ash-Shayk Ibn `Uthaymin, 11:179 and Majmu` Al- Fatawa by Ibn Taymiyyah, 11:179, 215)
For more details, please see the following answers: 21705, 69829, 116409, 45788.
And Allah knows best. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=4 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/26343/does-taking-off-socks-break-wudu | 59 | 26,343 |
18,742 | Can You Wipe Over Socks Without Prior Wudu? | Question
Is it permissible to do masah(wiping) on the socks even if one did not have wudu prior to putting on his socks. Example: It is hard to wash one’s feet at their business, because people think we are making a mess. | Praise be to Allah.The Importance of Upholding Islamic Practices with Confidence
A Muslim must be proud of his religion and not feel ashamed of its rites and rituals being performed in front of others, or of what Shari`ah imposes upon him. If he fears that seeing the implementation of a religious practice or ruling may cause the unbelievers to have an aversion to the religion, then he wisely conceals, aiming at presenting Islam gradually and in an appropriate way. This doesn’t mean to be ashamed or weak or feeling disgrace from the implementation of some religious rituals.
I suspect you fear their disapproval because of their misunderstanding, inverted senses, and spoiled opinions, ideas, and inclinations. How could the removal of one’s socks and the washing of one’s feet be considered filthy or disgusting, when the fact is that it affects cleanliness and the removal of sweat and unpleasant odor from the feet?
Can You Wipe Over Socks Without Prior Wudu?
It is not permissible for the person to pass wet hands over the socks unless he put them on in a state of purity. You can find the evidence in the following Hadith narrated by Al-Mughirah Ibn-Shu`bah (may Allah be pleased with him) in which he said:
“I was traveling with our Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and the Prophet asked me, “Have you got any water?” I said, “Yes” … and poured out water so that the Prophet washed his face and hands… and his arms then wiped his head. Then I bent over to pull off his Khuff (a type of leather or thick sock) but the Prophet said “Leave them for I put on my Khuff in a state of purification” then he wiped over them. (Narrated by Al-Bukhari and Fat-h Al-Bari, 5353)
Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) quoted the following in his explanation of the portion of this Hadith in which the Prophet’s said “I put them on a state of purification”:
Al-Hamidi narrated in his Musnad that the Prophet was asked whether one could pass wet hands over the Khuff, the Prophet answered saying: “Yes if the person puts them on in a state of purification.” (End quote)
Ibn Khuzaymah (may Allah have mercy on him) said that according to a Hadith narrated by Safwan Ibn Assal, “the Prophet ordered us to wipe over Khuff if we put them on in a state of purification, for 3 days during traveling and for one day and night in residency”.
Safwan’s Hadith, although it is authentic, does not meet the conditions defined by Al-Bukhari. But Al-Mughirah’s Hadith is in agreement with it in its indication of the stipulation of being in a pure state before putting on the socks.
How to Manage Wudu and Wiping Over Socks at Work
It is in fact easy to solve your problem; all you need to do is perform the complete ablution at home before going to work, wash your feet, then put on your socks. Then, if you want to perform ablution again at work, you can pass your wet fingertips over the back (i.e., top) of each foot.
And Allah Knows Best | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=4 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/996/can-you-wipe-over-socks-without-prior-wudu | 59 | 996 |
18,743 | One who wipes his socks although he was not in a state of tahaarah (purity) when he put them on | Question
For a while I was wiping my socks although I had not been in a state of tahaarah when I put them on, because I did not know about the ruling on this matter. What is the ruling concerning the prayers I offered during that time? | Praise be to Allah.You must repeat and make up those prayers which you did when you were wiping your socks although you had not been in a state of tahaarah when you put them on. | Wiping over the socks | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/59/wiping-over-the-socks?page=4 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/2170/one-who-wipes-his-socks-although-he-was-not-in-a-state-of-tahaarah-purity-when-he-put-them-on | 59 | 2,170 |
18,744 | Her nifaas (post-partum bleeding) came back when she was fasting | Question
If a woman’s nifaas stops after one week of giving birth and she starts fasting with Muslims during Ramadaan then the bleeding reoccurs, should she break her fast in this case? Does she have to make up the days she fasted and the days she did not fast?. | Praise be to Allah.If the woman who is bleeding in nifaas becomes pure (i.e., the bleeding stops) within forty days and she fasts for a few days, then the bleeding comes back within forty days, then her fast is valid, but she has to stop praying and fasting during the days on which the bleeding comes back – because it is (still) nifaas – until she becomes pure or the forty days end. When forty days have ended, she has to do ghusl, even if she has not seen the tuhr (white discharge signalling the end of menses or nifaas), because forty days marks the end of nifaas according to the more sound of the two scholarly opinions. After that, she has to do wudoo’ at the time of every prayer, until the bleeding stops, as the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) instructed the woman who was suffering from istihaadah (non-menstrual vaginal bleeding). And her husband may be intimate with her after forty days, even if she has not seen the tuhr, because the bleeding in this case is irregular bleeding which does not prevent her from praying and fasting, and does not prevent her husband from being intimate with his wife.
But if the bleeding after forty days coincides with the usual time of her menses, then she should stop praying and fasting and regard it as menses. And Allaah is the Source of Strength. End quote.
Samaahat al-Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Baaz
Fataawa Islamiyyah, 2/146 | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/106464/her-nifaas-post-partum-bleeding-came-back-when-she-was-fasting | 125 | 106,464 |
18,745 | Her baby is 20% breastfed; can she not fast? | Question
My baby is about one month old and is only 20% breastfed because my milk is very little; the rest of what he needs is given by means of artificial milk. I am living in a country where the hours of fasting are approximately seventeen hours. What is the ruling on fasting in my case? | Praise be to Allah.I put this question to our shaykh, ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan al-Barraak (may Allah preserve him) and he said:
She may break the fast and make it up on short days. End quote.
Please see also the answer to question no. 49794
And Allah knows best. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/231735/her-baby-is-20-breastfed-can-she-not-fast | 125 | 231,735 |
18,746 | She fasted even though she was not sure about her ghusl following menses. Does she have to make up the fast? | Question
I am a woman who suffers from severe waswaas (whispers from the shaytaan) with regard to acts of worship, especially with regard to tahaarah (purification). When my menses comes, I do not wait until I see the tuhr (white discharge signalling the end of menses). As soon as I see dryness, I do ghusl because I am so afraid of committing sin by not praying, and I repeat my ghusl twice or more. Two days before Ramadan I did ghusl following menses, and 24 hours later I saw a brownish reddish discharge, so I wiped the traces of the brownish discharge with a tissue and did ghusl at night with the intention of fasting the first day of Ramadan. I fasted the first day and the second day of Ramadan. At the time of ‘Asr prayer on the second day of Ramadan, I saw a little bit of yellowish discharge with some flecks in it, but I did not repeat my ghusl, and I continued fasting until the end of Ramadan. Now, after Ramadan, I feel that I have sinned and that my fast is not valid and thus I have to repeat the fast because I did not do ghusl again. Please advise me, may Allah reward you with good. Is my fast valid or do I have to repeat the fast once more? What do you advise me to do? May Allah reward you with good. | Praise be to Allah.Firstly:
Waswasah may be treated with two easy remedies:
1.
Remember Allah a great deal and obey Him. This is the way to attain peace of mind, stability and reassurance, and to ward off the Shaytaan and his whispers, as Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Those who believed (in the Oneness of Allaah — Islâmic Monotheism), and whose hearts find rest in the remembrance of Allaah verily, in the remembrance of Allaah do hearts find rest”
[al-Ra’d 13:38]
“Whoever works righteousness — whether male or female — while he (or she) is a true believer (of Islamic Monotheism) verily, to him We will give a good life (in this world with respect, contentment and lawful provision), and We shall pay them certainly a reward in proportion to the best of what they used to do (i.e. Paradise in the Hereafter).
98. So when you want to recite the Qur’aan, seek refuge with Allaah from Shaytaan (Satan), the outcast (the cursed one).
99. Verily, he has no power over those who believe and put their trust only in their Lord (Allaah)”
[al-Nahl 16:97-99]
“Say: “I seek refuge with (Allaah) the Lord of mankind,
2. “The King of mankind —
3. “The Ilaah (God) of mankind,
4. “From the evil of the whisperer (devil who whispers evil in the hearts of men) who withdraws (from his whispering in one’s heart after one remembers Allaah).
5. “Who whispers in the breasts of mankind.
6. “Of jinn and men”
[al-Naas 114:1-6].
Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his Tafseer: Sa’eed ibn Jubayr narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas said concerning the phrase “the whisperer (devil who whispers evil in the hearts of men) who withdraws”: The Shaytaan hovers around the hearts of the sons of Adam, and if a person forgets the remembrance of Allaah and becomes heedless, he whispers to him (waswasa), but if the person remembers Allah, he withdraws. This was also stated by Mujaahid and Qataadah.
Al-Mu’tamir ibn Sulaymaan narrated that his father said: I was told that the shaytaan or the whisperer blows into the heart of the son of Adam at times of sorrow and times of joy, but if the person remembers Allah, he withdraws. End quote.
2.
Turning away from the waswasah and distracting oneself from it, and not paying any attention to it or responding to it. This guarantees that it will go away and one will be cured of it.
Although this remedy is difficult in the beginning, it becomes easier later on. All you have to do is strive and make the effort, and ask Allah for help. Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “As for those who strive hard in Us (Our Cause), We will surely guide them to Our paths (i.e. Allaah’s religion — Islamic Monotheism). And verily, Allaah is with the Muhsinoon (good-doers)” [al-‘Ankaboot 29:69].
Ibn Hajar al-Makki (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked about the disease of waswasah - is there any remedy for it?
He replied: There is an efficacious remedy for it, which is ignoring it completely, even if one feels hesitant about doing so, because once a person stops paying attention to it, it cannot remain for long; rather it will go away after a short time, as those who were guided by Allah have experienced. But if a person pays attention to it and acts upon it, it will continue to increase until it drives him insane, and even worse than that, as we have seen in many of those who were tested by it and paid attention to it and to its devils. End quote from al-Fataawa al-Fiqhiyyah al-Kubra (1/149).
Secondly:
The end of menses is signalled by one of two signs:
(i)Complete dryness such that if the women were to insert a piece of cotton and the like, it would come out clean with no trace of blood or yellow or brownish discharge on it.
(ii)Emission of the white discharge, a white liquid which is well known to women.
You should not hasten to do ghusl until you are certain that you have become pure. Al-Bukhaari (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his Saheeh: Chapter on the beginning and end of menses; women used to send cotton pads with traces of yellow on them to ‘Aa’ishah and she would say: Do not hasten until you see the white discharge, meaning thereby becoming pure from menses.
It was also narrated by Maalik in al-Muwatta’, no. 130
Thirdly:
If you see complete dryness and do ghusl, then some brownish or yellowish discharge comes, that does not matter, because yellowish or brownish discharge after becoming pure is not menses, because of the hadeeth of Umm Salamah (may Allah be pleased with her) said: We did not regard the yellowish or brownish discharge after becoming pure from menses as anything important. Narrated by Abu Dawood (307); classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood.
There is no shortcoming or sin on one who delays doing ghusl and praying until she is certain she has become pure. Rather this is what she should do, because it is haraam to pray when one is menstruating.
Fourthly:
If we assume that you did ghusl before you really had become pure, then you did not repeat your ghusl, your fasts on the first and second days were not valid, because you were menstruating. But on the following days your fast was valid, because in order to fast, it is not stipulated that one should have done ghusl following menses or janaabah.
Based on that, if you saw complete dryness, then your ghusl was valid and your fast was valid.
If you were too hasty and did ghusl and fasted before complete dryness occurred, then you have to make up the fast of the first and second day, but with regard to the rest of the month, your fast is valid and you do not have to do anything further
Our advice to you is what we have stated above of the necessity of treating waswasah and ridding oneself of it, and not paying any attention to it.
We ask Allah to guide and help you.
And Allah knows best. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/110860/she-fasted-even-though-she-was-not-sure-about-her-ghusl-following-menses-does-she-have-to-make-up-the-fast | 125 | 110,860 |
18,747 | She is not sure whether she became pure before Fajr; should she pray and fast? | Question
On the last day of my monthly period, I saw some yellowish discharge about two hours before the adhaan of Fajr, then I went to sleep and I did not see whether that discharge stopped before Fajr or not. In the morning I noticed that the discharge had stopped, then I waited for a little while, then the adhaan for Zuhr had been given, and after that I did ghusl. Do I have to make up the prayers that I missed or should I offer Zuhr prayer only? Do I have to make up the fast of that day after Ramadan?. | Praise be to Allah.
If a woman gets her menses, then the basic principle is that
this menses remains until she is certain that it has ended, and it is not
permissible for her to fast or pray when she is not sure as to whether her
menses has ended or not.
We have discussed that in the answer to question number
106452.
‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) used to tell women
to take their time and not to be hasty until they were certain that they had
become pure. She used to say: Do not be hasty until you see the white
discharge, meaning purity from menses.
Based on that, you do not have to make up Fajr prayer; as for
Zuhr prayer you have to offer it because the time for it came when you were
pure from menses.
As for the fast, the fast of that day is not valid -- if you
fasted it -- because you were menstruating at the beginning of the day, and
you have to make it up after the end of Ramadan.
And Allah knows best. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/108459/she-is-not-sure-whether-she-became-pure-before-fajr-should-she-pray-and-fast | 125 | 108,459 |
18,748 | If a woman fasts when she is pregnant and is bleeding | Question
I fasted the entire month of Ramadan but I think it is most likely that my fast was not valid because I had a baby in my womb and I was bleeding. Now my health is not good and I cannot fast. If my fast was not valid, what should I do?. | Praise be to Allah.If a woman fasts and has a baby in her womb and she is bleeding, then her fast is valid, because the bleeding that she experiences whilst pregnant does not affect anything and is not regarded as menses or nifaas, because the child is still in the uterus so it is not nifaas. And it is not menses, because in most cases pregnant women do not menstruate. According to the view of those who say that the pregnant woman may menstruate, they stipulate that the blood should come at the usual time of her previous cycle.
If the woman who asked this question found that it was not clear what this bleeding was and it looked different, in that the bleeding came and went and was different and was not like the old cycle that she had before she was pregnant, then this is all irregular bleeding and her fast is valid. She does not have to make up the fast, praise be to Allah, because the bleeding that appears in pregnancy is usually irregular bleeding that increases and decreases, comes later or earlier than her usual cycle, and varies, so no attention should be paid to it.
But if we assume that it was as it was before she was pregnant and did not change, rather it came according to her usual cycle, then some of the scholars say that this is menses and that she should stop praying and fasting. This was the view of a number of scholars.
Some other scholars are of the view that even if it came according to her regular cycle and as it usually did before, it does not matter and the pregnant woman does not menstruate. This is the well-known scholarly view. But in most cases, the bleeding that pregnant women experience changes and does not remain the same all the time, and according to all scholars this does not count as anything and no attention should be paid to it. Rather her fast is valid and her prayer is valid.
Based on this, in this case she should protect herself with a piece of cotton and the like and do wudoo' for each prayer. So when the time for each prayer begins, she should do wudoo' and pray with that wudoo’ even if the blood is still coming out of her, because she is faced with a problem exactly like the one who suffers urinary incontinence and like the woman who suffers istihaadah (non-menstrual vaginal bleeding) and is not pregnant. This blood is irregular bleeding and does not affect her.
But she should wash her private parts after the time for prayer begins and do wudoo' for prayer and pray according to her situation.
If she joins Zuhr and ‘Asr, and Maghrib and ‘Isha’, as the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) taught some of the female Sahaabah to do, and if she does one ghusl for Zuhr and ‘Asr and another for Maghrib and ‘Isha’, for the sake of cleanliness and energizing herself, this is good, because the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) advised one of the women who were suffering from istihaadah to do that. End quote.
Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baz (may Allah have mercy on him). | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/128804/if-a-woman-fasts-when-she-is-pregnant-and-is-bleeding | 125 | 128,804 |
18,749 | His wife does not want to fast | Question
My dear brother is a devoted muslim and is fasting in the month of ramadan, ilhamdiallah, but his wife who is muslim does not practise nor does she recognise the month of ramadan. He has no family near him, and is finding it hard to influence her to change or to get on the right path. He prays to Allah (swt) to guide her and give him patience, but he feels as though she is on a different path or does not want to know any better about what being a muslim is about. Can you please let me know what he can do to guide her better or make her become a more devout muslim. | Praise be to Allah.What your brother should do
is strive his utmost to guide his wife to the path of truth. He should use
all methods of exhortation and warning, reminding her of Allah and His
rights, and pointing out the danger of what she is doing. Then he should
strive to find her good friends, even if they are from among his relatives,
such as putting her in touch with righteous wives of his friends, who can
bring her useful tapes and pamphlets. If she obeys him, this is what he
wants, otherwise there is no reason why he should not use such methods as
forsaking her, if that will be useful in this situation. If forsaking is
prescribed with regard to the husband’s rights, perhaps it is even more
appropriate with regard to the rights of Allaah.
It is narrated that Abu
Umaamah al-Baahili said: I heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Whilst I was sleeping, two men came
to me and took hold of my upper arm, and brought me to a rugged mountain.
They said: ‘Climb up.’ I said: ‘I cannot do it.’ They said: ‘We will make it
easy for you.’ So I climbed up until I was at the top of the mountain. There
I heard loud voices. I said: ‘What are these voices?’ They said: ‘This is
the screaming of the people of Hell.’ Then I was taken and I saw people
suspended by their ankles, with the corners of their mouths torn and pouring
with blood. I said: ‘Who are these?’ They said: ‘These are the people who
broke their fast before it was time to do so.’”
Narrated by al-Bayhaqi, no.
7796; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani.
If this is the punishment
for the one who breaks his fast before it is time, then what about the one
who does not fast at all?
If, in addition to not
fasting, your wife does not pray at all, then she is beyond the pale of
Islam, according to the correct scholarly view. Based on that, it is not permissible for your brother to remain married to her. And Allaah knows best.
See also question no.
12828. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/38282/his-wife-does-not-want-to-fast | 125 | 38,282 |
18,750 | She is thirteen years old and she does not fast Ramadaan | Question
A 12 or 13 years old girl does not fast during Ramadaan, should she or her family expiate? Should she fast? What should she do if she does not fast?. | Praise be to Allah.A woman becomes accountable when she fulfils the conditions, namely being Muslim, being of sound mind and being an adult. Adulthood is reached when she menstruates, emits maniy with desire or has a wet dream; or by the growth of hair around the private part; or when she reaches the age of fifteen. If this girls meets any of the conditions of being accountable, then fasting is obligatory for her, and she has to make up the fasts that she did not observe at the time when she was accountable. If she did not meet the conditions then she was not accountable and she does not have to do anything.
And Allaah is the source of strength. May Allaah send blessings and peace upon our Prophet Muhammad and his family and companions. End quote.
Standing Committee for Academic Research and Issuing Fatwas (10/146، 147) . | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/106485/she-is-thirteen-years-old-and-she-does-not-fast-ramadaan | 125 | 106,485 |
18,751 | Can a woman who is experiencing non-menstrual vaginal bleeding (istihaadah) fast? | Question
Can a woman who is experiencing non-menstrual vaginal bleeding (istihaadah) fast?. | Praise be to Allah.During the time when the woman who is experiencing istihaadah believes that the blood is menstrual blood, then she is menstruating and the rulings on menses apply to her. When the menses ends, then she is taahir (pure) and she should do ghusl, fast and pray and her husband may have intercourse with her, even if she is still bleeding.
It was narrated that ‘Aa’ishah said: Faatimah bint Abi Hubaysh came to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and said: “O Messenger of Allah, I am a woman who experiences istihaadah and I do not become pure. Should I give up praying?” The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “No. That is just a vein, and it is not menses. When your menses comes, then stop praying, and when it ends, then wash the blood from yourself and pray.” Narrated by al-Bukhari, 226; Muslim, 333.
Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said, explaining the phrase “that is just a vein”:
This indicates that if the blood which is flowing is blood from a vein – which includes bleeding that results from surgery – then that is not regarded as menses, so the things that become haraam in the case of menses are not haraam in this case, and a woman has to pray and to fast if that happens during the day in Ramadaan. End quote.
Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 11/question no. 226.
It was narrated from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) that one of the wives of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) observed i’tikaaf with him, and she was experiencing istihaadah and could see the blood. Sometimes she would place a basin beneath her to catch the blood. Narrated by al-Bukhari, 303.
See also the answers to questions no. 7501 and 5595
And Allah knows best. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/66571/can-a-woman-who-is-experiencing-non-menstrual-vaginal-bleeding-istihaadah-fast | 125 | 66,571 |
18,752 | Does vaginal bleeding due to surgery mean that one cannot fast? | Question
I gave birth two months ago but the bleeding of nifaas has not stopped until now. The radiographer found a piece of the placenta still inside the uterus, and I had an operation to remove it. This was after the first week of Ramadan had passed, but I did not fast until after the operation, even though the bleeding has not stopped. What should I do now? Is my fast valid? Can I have intercourse now, as the bleeding is very little since I did the operation?. | Praise be to Allah.The maximum length of nifaas (post-partum bleeding) is forty days, after which the woman is taahir (pure) and she may pray and fast and her husband may have intercourse with her, even if there is bleeding. This blood that comes after forty days is a haemorrhage, not nifaas.
This has been discussed with evidence in the answer to question no. 106464 .
Based on that, your fasting after doing the operation is valid, even if there is bleeding.
You have to make up the first week of Ramadaan when you did not fast.
With regard to the prayers that you did not offer after the forty days (of nifaas) ended, you do not have to make them up, in sha Allaah.
See the answer to question no. 45648.
And Allaah knows best. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/79202/does-vaginal-bleeding-due-to-surgery-mean-that-one-cannot-fast | 125 | 79,202 |
18,753 | Is Fasting without Ghusl after Period Valid? | Question
My menses ended before Fajr prayer and I waited until after the prayer, but I fell asleep and I woke up at ten a.m. I did not do ghusl because I forgot, and I took my sick daughter to the hospital, and I was busy until the time of ‘Asr prayer, then I did ghusl and made up the prayers that I had missed.
Allah knows that this is the first time this had happened to me since I reached puberty. The reason was that my period usually lasts for 9 days but this month it was 8 days, but I waited to make sure, but I was fasting. What should I do? Should I make up the fast? | Praise be to Allah.If you were certain that your menses had ended and you formed the intention to fast before dawn, even if it was one minute before, then your fast is valid, even if you delayed doing ghusl .
But if you were uncertain as to whether your period had ended, but you still intended to fast, then the fast was not valid because of your uncertainty as to whether your menses had ended.
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymin (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked about a woman who fasted when she was unsure whether her period was over, then when morning came she saw that it had indeed ended. Does her fast count even though she was not certain that her period had ended?
He replied:
“Her fast does not count, and she has to make up that day , because the basic principle is that the menses was still there, and her starting to fast when she was not certain that her menses was over means that she started to do an act of worship when she was uncertain as to whether one of the conditions of it being valid was fulfilled or not, and this means that it does not count.” (Majmu’ Fatawa al-Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymin, 19/107)
If a woman knows that her menses has ended , she must do ghusl so that she may pray, and it is not permissible for her to delay that until the time for prayer ends. If she does that, then she has to repent, as well as make up the prayers that she has missed.
If she forgets that her period has ended – as you mention in your question – then there is no sin on her in sha Allah for delaying her prayer, but when she remembers she must do ghusl and offer the prayers that she has missed – as you did.
We ask Allah to forgive us and you.
And Allah knows best. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/94839/is-fasting-without-ghusl-after-period-valid | 125 | 94,839 |
18,754 | Does tabarruj invalidate the fast? | Question
Does tabarruj invalidate the fast?. | Praise be to Allah.Firstly:
Allah has prescribed fasting for great reasons. One of the most important of these reasons and one of the greatest purposes achieved by the fast is so that we may attain piety (taqwa), as Allah says (interpretation of the meaning) :
“O you who believe! Observing As-Sawm (the fasting) is prescribed for you as it was prescribed for those before you, that you may become Al-Muttaqoon (the pious)” [al-Baqarah 2:183]
Taqwa or piety means obeying that which Allah has commanded and avoiding that which He has forbidden.
The person who is fasting is commanded to do acts of worship and obedience, and he is forbidden to do haraam things. Sins are bad enough when committed by anyone, but they are even worse when committed by one who is fasting. Hence the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever does not give up false speech and acting in accordance with it, and ignorant conduct, Allah has no need of him giving up his food and drink.” Narrated by al-Bukhari, 6057. See also question no. 37989 and 37658.
Ibn Khuzaymah, Ibn Hibaan and al-Haakim narrated that Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Fasting does not just mean giving up food and drink, rather fasting also means giving up idle and obscene talk.” Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Targheeb wa’l-Tarheeb, 1082.
‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab and ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allah be pleased with them) said: Fasting does not just mean giving up food and drink; it also means giving up lies, falsehood and idle talk.
Jaabir ibn ‘Abd-Allah said: If you fast, then block your ears, eyes and tongue from lies and sin; do not abuse your servants; be tranquil and dignified on the day of your fast; do not let the day when you do not fast and the day when you fast be the same.
It was narrated that Taleeq ibn Qays said: Abu Dharr said: When you fast then be careful as much as you can. When Taleeq was fasting he would enter his house and only come out to pray.
When Abu Hurayrah and his companions (may Allah be pleased with them) fasted, they would stay in the mosque and say, “We are keeping our fast pure.” See al-Muhalla, 4/305
One of the scholars said:
The person who is fasting must fast with his eyes and not look at anything that is not permissible; with his ears and not listen to anything that is not permissible; with his tongue and not speak any obscene words or slander any one or tell lies or backbite.
The believer should make the most of this blessed month in which the devils are chained up, the gates of Paradise are opened and the gates of Hell are closed, and a caller cries out, “O seeker of good, go ahead; O seeker of evil, desist!” The believer should make the most of this month so that he may draw closer to Allah, repent sincerely from all his sins and make a pledge to Allah to adhere to His religion and laws.
Secondly:
Sin – including a woman’s making a wanton display (tabarruj) of her beauty and charms to non-mahram men – detracts from the reward of fasting. The more sins are committed and the more serious they are, the more that detracts from the reward of fasting, and it may cancel out the reward altogether, so that a person may have denied himself food, drink and all the things that break the fast, yet still deprived himself of the reward for that by disobeying Allah. Hence the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “The one who fasts may get nothing from his fast but hunger, and the one who prays qiyaam may get nothing from his qiyaam but a sleepless night.” Narrated by Ibn Maajah, 1690; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Ibn Maajah.
Al-Subki said in his Fataawa, 1/221-226:
Can the (reward for) fasting be decreased by sins that may occur while one is fasting, or not? The view which we favour is that it can decrease, and I do not think there is any differing opinion on this matter…
Note that the complete reward for fasting is achieved when it is accompanied by acts of worship such as reading Qur’aan, observing i’tikaaf, praying, giving charity etc, and it may be achieved by avoiding haraam things. All of these things make the reward more complete.
Thirdly:
With regard to fasting that is accompanied by sins – including tabarruj on the part of a woman – the fast is not invalidated by that, rather it is valid and the fasting person has fulfilled his obligation and does not have to make up the fast. But the reward for fasting is decreased by that sin and it may be cancelled out altogether as stated above.
Al-Nawawi said in al-Majmoo’ (6/398):
The fasting person should protect his fast from backbiting and slander. What this means is that it is more important for the fasting person to avoid these sins than others, although those who are not fasting should avoid these sins too, as that is enjoined in all situations. If a person backbites while fasting, he has committed a sin but that does not invalidate his fast in our view. This is the view of Maalik, Abu Haneefah, Ahmad and all the scholars except al-Awzaa’i who said that the fast is invalidated by backbiting, and must be made up.
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen was asked in Fataawa al-Siyaam (p. 358): If a person utters some haraam words during the day in Ramadaan does that invalidate his fast?
He replied:
If we read the words of Allah (interpretation of the meaning):
“O you who believe! Observing As-Sawm (the fasting) is prescribed for you as it was prescribed for those before you, that you may become Al-Muttaqoon (the pious)” [al-Baqarah 2:183]
we will see that the reason why fasting is enjoined is so that we may attain piety, and piety means avoiding things that are forbidden. In general it means doing that which is commanded and avoiding that which is forbidden. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever does not give up false speech and acting in accordance with it, and ignorant conduct, Allah has no need of him giving up his food and drink.”
Based on this, the fasting person has to avoid haraam words and actions, so he should not backbite about people, or tell lies, or spread malicious gossip amongst them, he should not engage in haraam transactions, and he should avoid all haraam things. If a person avoids that for a whole month then he should be able to adhere to that straight path for the rest of the year. But unfortunately many of those who fast do not differentiate between the days when they fast and the days when they do not fast, so they carry on as usual with haraam speech such as lying, cheating and so on. You do not feel that they are observing the dignity of fasting. These actions do not invalidate the fast but they do detract from its reward, and may cancel out the reward of fasting altogether. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/50063/does-tabarruj-invalidate-the-fast | 125 | 50,063 |
18,755 | She has reached the age of puberty but she is not strong enough to fast | Question
A girl has reached puberty at the age of eleven and she is weak. Does she have to fast? If she is unable to fast then what should she do?. | Praise be to Allah.If the situation is as described, then she has to fast because menstruation is one of the signs of puberty for women, if it comes when she is nine years old or more. If she is able to fast then she must do it at the proper time, and if she is unable to do it or she faces extreme hardship in doing so, then she may not fast but she must make up the days that she did not fast when she is able to do so. End quote. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/106479/she-has-reached-the-age-of-puberty-but-she-is-not-strong-enough-to-fast | 125 | 106,479 |
18,756 | How can she make use of her time when she is cooking in Ramadaan? | Question
I would like to know what actions are recommended during this blessed month in order to increase one’s reward, such as dhikrs, acts of worship, and mustahabb actions. I know about Taraweeh prayer, reciting Qur’aan a great deal, seeking forgiveness a great deal and praying at night. But I want to know some words I can repeat during my daily duties such as when I am cooking or doing housework, because I do not want to miss out on the reward. | Praise be to Allah.May Allaah reward you with good for this concern and eagerness to do good and righteous deeds during this blessed month.
To the good deeds that you have mentioned may be added charity, feeding the poor, going for ‘Umrah and observing i’tikaaf for those who are able to do so.
As for the words that you can repeat whilst you are working, these include tasbeeh (saying Subhaan Allaah (Glory be to Allaah)), tahleel (saying Laa ilaaha ill-Allaah (There is no god but Allaah)), takbeer (saying Allaahu akbar (Allaah is most Great)), praying for forgiveness, making du’aa’ and responding to the muezzin. Keep your tongue moist with the remembrance of Allaah and seek a great reward with a few words which you can utter. For every tasbeehah you will have (the reward of) one charity, for every tahmeedah (saying Alhamdulillah (Praise be to Allaah)) you will have (the reward of) one charity, for every takbeerah you will have (the reward of) one charity, and for every tahleelah you will have (the reward of) one charity.
The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Every person’s every joint must perform a charity every day the sun comes up, every tasbeehah is a charity, every tahmeedah is a charity, every tahleelah is a charity, every takbeerah is a charity, enjoining what is good is a charity, forbidding what is evil is a charity, and if you do two rak’ahs at duha time (the forenoon), that may be sufficient.” Narrated by Muslim, 720.
And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Two words which are light on the tongue and heavy in the Balance, and beloved to the Most Merciful: Subhaana Allaah wa bihamdih, subhaan Allaah il-‘Azeem (Glory and praise be to Allaah, glory be to Allaah the Almighty).” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 6682; Muslim, 2694.
And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever says ‘Subhaan Allaah il-‘Azeem wa bi hamdih (Glory and praise be to Allaah the Almighty),’ a palm tree will be planted for him in Paradise.” Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 3465; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi.
And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever says ‘Astaghfir Allaah ul-‘azeem alladhi laa ilaaha illa huwa al-hayy ul-qayyoom wa atoobu ilayh (I seek the forgiveness of Allaah the Almighty, beside Whom there is no other god, and I repent to Him),’ will be forgiven even if he fled from the battlefield.” Narrated by Abu Dawood, 1517; al-Tirmidhi, 3277’ classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood.
And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “There is no Muslim on earth who prays to Allaah for something but Allaah will grant him it, or divert an equivalent evil from him, so long as he does not pray for sin or the severing of family ties.” A man among the people said: “Then we will pray a great deal.” He said: “Allaah is most generous.” Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 3573; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi.
And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “When you hear the muezzin, say what he says, then send blessings upon me, for whoever send one blessing upon me, Allaah will send ten blessings upon him. Then ask Allaah to grant me al-waseelah, which is a position in Paradise which will be attained by only one of the slaves of Allaah, and I hope that I will be the one. Whoever asks for al-waseelah for me, intercession will be granted for him.” Narrated by Muslim, 384.
And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever says when he hears the call to prayer, ‘Allaahumma rabba hadhhi’l-da’wat il-taammah wa’l-salaat il-qaa’imah, aati Muhammadan al-waseelah wa’l-fadeelah wab’athhu maqaaman mahmoodan alladhi wa’adtahu (O Allaah, Lord of this perfect call and the prayer which is about to begin, grant Muhammad al-waseelah (a station in Paradise) and al-fadeelah (a rank above the rest of creation), and raise him to the praised position that You have promised),’ my intercession will be granted for him on the Day of Resurrection.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 614.
See also the answer to question no. 4156
May Allaah increase us and you in beneficial knowledge and righteous deeds.
And Allaah knows best. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/65875/how-can-she-make-use-of-her-time-when-she-is-cooking-in-ramadaan | 125 | 65,875 |
18,757 | Taking pills to prevent period in the last ten days of Ramadaan | Question
If a woman’s period is going to come in the last ten days of Ramadaan, is it permissible for her to use contraceptive pills so that she can continue to worship during these days of blessing? | Praise be to Allah.This question was put to Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) and he said:
We do not think that she should use these pills to help her worship Allaah, because the period which happens to her is something which Allaah has decreed for the daughters of Adam.
The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) entered upon ‘Aa’ishah when she was with him during the Farewell Pilgrimage. She had entered ihraam for ‘Umrah, then her period came before she reached Makkah. He entered upon her and found her weeping. He asked, “Why are you weeping?” and she told him that her period had come. He told her, “This is something which Allaah has decreed for the daughters of Adam.” So the period is not something which is under her control. If it comes during the last ten days of Ramadaan, then let her accept what Allaah has decreed for her and not use these pills. I have heard from trustworthy doctors that these pills cause harm to the uterus and the blood, and they may cause deformity in the foetus if she should conceive. Hence we think that she should avoid them. If her period comes and she cannot pray or fast, this is beyond her control and is the decree of Allaah. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/13738/taking-pills-to-prevent-period-in-the-last-ten-days-of-ramadaan | 125 | 13,738 |
18,758 | She thought that the bleeding that results from an abortion was nifaas so she broke her fast | Question
One day in Ramadan I went to the hospital to abort a pregnancy that had lasted less than three months. I took some medicine, and after the abortion I ate some food because I thought that it was permissible for me to eat. But after I went back home I researched on the internet and I found out that I should have fasted and prayed, because that bleeding was irregular bleeding. So I made up the day I had missed after Ramadan ended. Is what I did sufficient or what do I have to do?. | Praise be to Allah.Firstly:
We have explained the ruling on deliberate abortion in the answer to question no. 42321, please refer to it. We have also explained the rulings on loss of the foetus at various stages of pregnancy in the answer to question no. 12475.
Secondly:
If a woman miscarries a foetus and it has no discernible human features, such as a head or limbs, then the bleeding that accompanies that is irregular bleeding, which does not stop her from praying and fasting. If there are discernible human features, then the bleeding is nifaas. The minimum period in which human features appear is eighty-one days, as is stated in the answer to question no. 37784.
Thirdly:
If you broke your fast because you thought that the bleeding was nifaas, then you found out that it was irregular bleeding and you made up the day you missed and the prayers, then you do not have to do anything else. If you have not made up the prayers of that day, then hasten to do so.
May Allah help us and you to obey Him and seek His pleasure.
And Allah knows best. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/81169/she-thought-that-the-bleeding-that-results-from-an-abortion-was-nifaas-so-she-broke-her-fast | 125 | 81,169 |
18,759 | Stopping one’s period during Ramadaan | Question
Some women take pills in Ramadaan to stop their periods. They do this so that they will not have to make up any fasts afterwards. Is this permissible and are there any restrictions on their doing this? | Praise be to Allah.I think that women should not do this and they should remain on the menstrual cycle that Allaah has decreed for them and for all the daughters of Adam. There is wisdom behind it and a reason for which Allaah created it, and this wisdom befits the nature of women. If a woman tries to stop this cycle, it will undoubtedly have a harmful effect on her body, and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “There should be neither harming nor reciprocating harm.” This is besides the fact that these pills can do harm to the uterus as the doctors have stated. What I think with regard to this issue is that women should not use these pills. Praise be to Allaah for His decree and wisdom. When a woman’s period comes, she should stop fasting and praying, and when her period is over she should resume fasting and praying; when Ramadaan is over she should make up the fasts that she has missed. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/7416/stopping-ones-period-during-ramadaan | 125 | 7,416 |
18,760 | If the bleeding lasts for more than 15 days is it still regarded as menstruation, and can she fast? | Question
I jst want to know that i have menhorrehia and my periods are irregular if i go over 10 or 15 days am i allowed to pray or not?. | Praise be to Allah.
There is no definitive evidence in sharee’ah to prove the
minimum or maximum length of menses. Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen was asked: Is
there a definitive number of days for the minimum or maximum length of
menses?
He replied:
There is no definitive number of days for the minimum or
maximum length of menses, because Allaah says (interpretation of the
meaning):
“They ask you concerning
menstruation. Say: that is an Adha (a harmful thing for a husband to have a
sexual intercourse with his wife while she is having her menses), therefore,
keep away from women during menses and go not unto them till they are
purified (from menses and have taken a bath)”
[al-Baqarah 2:222]
So Allaah did not make
the period of abstention a certain number of days, rather He stated that the
period of abstention ends when the woman becomes pure. This indicates that
the reason for the ruling is menstruation, and whether it is present or not.
When menstruation is present, the ruling applies, and when the period ends
the attendant rulings no longer apply. Moreover there is no evidence for
putting a time limit on menses, even though there was a need (at the time of
the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)) to explain the
definition if any such definition had existed. If there was such a
definition, it would have been explained in the Book of Allaah or the Sunnah
of His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Based on
this, every time a woman sees the kind of blood which is known to women as
being menstrual blood, then it is menstrual blood without that being
restricted to a certain time, unless the bleeding is continuous and never
stops, or it stops only for a short time such as one or two days in the
month, in which case it is istihaadah (non-menstrual vaginal bleeding).
Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen,
11/271
Based on this, it is not
permissible for you to pray except after the period has ended and you have
done ghusl (full ablution). The ending of menstruation may be known from one
of two signs: either the emission of a white discharge which comes at the
end of the period, or by total cessation of bleeding.
For more information, see the answer to question no.
5595,
where the matter is discussed in more detail.
And Allaah knows best. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/65570/if-the-bleeding-lasts-for-more-than-15-days-is-it-still-regarded-as-menstruation-and-can-she-fast | 125 | 65,570 |
18,761 | Why Can't You Fast on Your Period? | Question
We would like to know the reason why menstruating women do not fast even though fasting has nothing to do with impurity. | Praise be to Allah.Muslims must submit to the rulings of Allah
The believer has to submit to the ruling of Allah and accept it even if he does not know the reason behind it; rather it should be sufficient for him that Allah and His Messenger have commanded it. Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed into a plain error.” [al-Ahzab 33:36]
“The only saying of the faithful believers, when they are called to Allah (His Words, the Quran) and His Messenger , to judge between them, is that they say: ‘We hear and we obey.’ And such are the successful (who will live forever in Paradise).” [al-Nur 24:51]
There is wisdom behind every ruling
The believer should believe with certainty of faith that Allah is Wise and that He does prescribe anything except in accordance with His ultimate wisdom, and He does not enjoin anything except that which is in people’s best interests and He does not forbid anything except to protect people from its harm and evil. How well Ibn Kathir put it in al-Bidayah wa'l-Nihayah (6/79) when he said:
“The law of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is the most complete of laws; it did not leave any good thing that is recognized by the wise as being good but it enjoined it, and it did not leave any evil thing that is recognized by the wise as being evil but it forbade it. It has not enjoined anything of which people could say, ‘Would that this were not enjoined,’ and it has not forbidden anything of which people could say, ‘Would that this were not forbidden.’
We may understand the reasons, or they may be hidden from us, and most or part of them may be hidden from us.
Can a menstruating woman fast?
The scholars unanimously agreed that it is forbidden for a menstruating woman to fast , and that she has to make up the days that she misses because of menstruation if that was an obligatory fast, as in Ramadan.
They also agreed that if she does fast, her fast is not valid .
Why can't a woman fast on her period?
The scholars differed as to the reason why the fast of a menstruating woman is not valid.
Some of them said that the reason is not known to us.
Imam al-Haramayn said: “We do not know why her fast is not valid, because purity is not a prerequisite for it.” (Al-Majmu’, 2/386)
Others said: The reason why Allah has forbidden menstruating women to fast at the time of their period is out of mercy towards them, because loss of blood weakens them and if a woman were to fast when menstruating, she would be weakened both by menstruation and by fasting, in which case fasting would be an unfair burden and may even be harmful.
Shaykh al-Islam [Ibn Taymiyah] said in Majmu’ al-Fatawa (25/234):
“With regard to menstruation we say:
Islam brings moderation in all things, and going to extremes in worship is a kind of unfairness that the Lawgiver forbids, and commands us to be moderate in worship. Hence Islam tells us to hasten breaking the fast and to delay suhur, and it forbids continual fasting. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “The best and most moderate of fasting is the fast of Dawud (peace be upon him). He used to fast alternate days and he would not flee when meeting the enemy.” Moderation in worship is one of the greatest aims of the Lawgiver. Hence Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“O you who believe! Make not unlawful the Tayyibat (all that is good as regards foods, things, deeds, beliefs, persons) which Allah has made lawful to you, and transgress not. Verily, Allah does not like the transgressors.” [al-Maidah 5:67]
Forbidding permitted things is regarded as a transgression which goes against moderation. And Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“For the wrongdoing of the Jews, We made unlawful for them certain good foods which had been lawful for them — and for their hindering many from Allah’s Way; And their taking of Riba (usury) though they were forbidden from taking it.” [al-Nisa 4:160]
Because they went astray, they were punished by being forbidden good things, unlike the ummah that follows the middle way, for whom good things are allowed and bad things are forbidden. As this is the case, the fasting person is forbidden to eat and drink things that strengthen him and nourish him, and he is forbidden to deliberately cause his body to eject things that may weaken him. Otherwise if he were allowed to do that, he would be a transgressor and one who goes to extremes in his worship, and he would not be moderate.
Things that come out of the body are of two types. The first type is those that are unavoidable or which come out in a manner that does not cause any harm. There is nothing wrong with these, like urine and stools, because they do not cause any harm and they cannot be avoided. If they need to come out, that does not harm a person, rather it benefits him; the same applies if a person vomits and cannot help it, or experiences a wet dream, which also cannot be helped. But if a person vomits deliberately and ejects the food and drink that give him nourishment, or masturbates accompanied by feelings of desire.
A menstruating woman can fast at a time other than the times when she is bleeding, because then she will be fasting at a time when she is in a good state, when she is not losing blood which gives strength to the body. Fasting at the time when she is bleeding would weaken her physically and would mean that she is fasting at a time when she is not in a good state, so she is commanded to fast at times other than menstruation.”
And Allah knows best. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/50330/why-cant-you-fast-on-your-period | 125 | 50,330 |
18,762 | She was not certain that her period had ended, and she prayed and fasted | Question
I did ghusl at night, at the time of sahoor, because I knew that my period would end that day, and I ate sahoor and I fasted and prayed as well. Nothing came out of me during the time from Fajr until the adhaan of Maghrib, and when I wanted to go and pray, I discovered that the period had ended. Are my fasting and prayers valid?. | Praise be to Allah.It is not permissible for a menstruating woman to hasten to do ghusl and pray and fast until she is certain that her period has ended.
A woman may know that her period has ended from the emission of a white discharge which is known to women. Some women know that their period has ended when the blood stops.
So a woman should not do ghusl until she is certain that the menses has stopped.
Imam al-Bukhaari (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
“Chapter on the beginning and end of menses; the women used to send to ‘Aa’ishah pieces of cloth on which were traces of yellow, and she would say: ‘Do not hasten until you see the white discharge,’ meaning thereby purification from menses. Bint Zayd ibn Thaabit heard that the women were calling for lamps in the middle of the night to see whether their periods had ended, and she said: ‘Women never used to do that,’ and she criticized them.” End quote.
Pieces of cotton refers to pieces of cloth which the women would use to check whether the period had ended. The white discharge refers to if they used the piece of cotton and it came away clean with no trace of yellow.
Al-Haafiz ibn Hajar said:
The scholars are agreed that the onset of menses is known from the emission of blood at the time when menstruation is possible, but they differed with regard to the end of menses. It was said that it is known by the cessation of bleeding, which is when something inserted into the vagina comes out dry; or it was said that it is when the white discharge appears – this was the view favoured by al-Bukhaari.
This also indicates that the white discharge is a sign of the end of the menses and the onset of the period of purity (tahaarah). The view that it is known from the cessation of bleeding is countered by the fact that a cloth may come out dry during the period and that does not mean that the menses is over. This is unlike the white discharge which is emitted by the uterus when the menses stops. Maalik said: I asked women about that and it is something that is known to them, which they recognize at the end of the menses.
Fath al-Baari, 1/420
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked: If a woman’s period ends before Fajr and she does ghusl after, what is the ruling?
He replied:
Her fast is valid if she was certain that her period had ended before dawn came. What matters is that the woman is certain that she has become pure (i.e., that her period has ended). Because some women think that they have become pure when they have not. Hence the women used to bring their cotton pads to ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) and ask them whether the sign of purity was there, and she would say to them: “Do not be hasty until you see the white discharge.”
Women have to wait until they are certain that the menses has ended. If a woman has become pure, then she should form the intention to fast even if she does not do ghusl until after dawn comes. But she should also pay attention to the prayer and hasten to do ghusl so that she can pray Fajr on time.
Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 17/question no. 53
The questioner did ghusl at a time when she was not certain that her period had ended, and she discovered later on that she was in fact pure, after sunset according to her own account.
Based on this, what she did was not correct, and her fast on that day was not valid, so she has to make up that day.
We ask Allaah to grant her beneficial knowledge and enable her to do righteous deeds.
And Allaah knows best. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/66062/she-was-not-certain-that-her-period-had-ended-and-she-prayed-and-fasted | 125 | 66,062 |
18,763 | She saw the tuhr then she had some discharge – what should she do? | Question
My period lasted six days and on the sixth day the bleeding stopped. I used a piece of tissue to make sure, and a little bit of white discharge was coming out. So I did ghusl and my husband had intercourse with me that night, then I did ghusl and fasted (as it was Ramadaan). Then at Zuhr time I noticed some discharge in which there was a slight amount of red or yellow. I do not know what the ruling is. Do I have to make up that day or not?. | Praise be to Allah.
We do not know what you mean by “a little bit of white
discharge was coming out.” If what you mean is that you saw the white
discharge which is the sign of purity (tuhr), then whatever yellowish or
reddish discharge comes out after that is not regarded as menses, because
Umm ‘Atiyyah (may Allaah be pleased with her) said: “We did not regard the
brownish or yellowish discharge after the tuhr as being anything that
mattered.” Narrated by Abu Dawood, 307; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in
Saheeh Abi Dawood.
Based on this, your
prayer is valid, and there is nothing wrong with your having had
intercourse, because you were not menstruating.
But if what you mean is that you saw that the discharge was
still yellowish or reddish, this means that the menses had not yet ended. A
woman should not be hasty in deciding that the period has ended when she
sees yellowish or reddish discharge, no matter how little it is. The women
used to send pieces of cloth to ‘Aa’ishah with yellowish discharge on them,
and she would say, “Do not be hasty until you see the white discharge.”
Narrated by Maalik, 130.
Pieces of cloth refers to what women use to check whether
there is any trace of menses left or not.
See also question no.
66062.
Based on this, then you have to make up that day, because it
is not correct to fast when one is menstruating.
With regard to intercourse, there is no sin on you in sha
Allaah, because you thought that your period had ended, and you did not
deliberately commit a haraam action. Allaah says (interpretation of the
meaning):
“And there is no sin on you concerning that in which you
made a mistake, except in regard to what your hearts deliberately intend”
[al-Ahzaab 33:5]. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/65593/she-saw-the-tuhr-then-she-had-some-discharge-what-should-she-do | 125 | 65,593 |
18,764 | Are these people obliged to fast? Are they obliged to make up the fast? | Question
There is a boy who used to fast Ramadaan before he reached the age of puberty. While he was fasting during the day in Ramadaan, he reached puberty. Does he have to make up that day? What about a kaafir who becomes Muslim, or a menstruating woman who becomes pure, or an insane person who regains his sanity, or a traveller who comes back home and was not fasting, or a sick person who recovers and was not fasting? What do these people have to do with regard to refraining from eating and drinking for the rest of that day and making up the fasts?. | Praise be to Allah.The people mentioned in the question do not all come under the same ruling. We have mentioned the difference of opinion among the scholars and some of their words in the answer to question no. 49008.
We can divide the people mentioned in the question into two categories:
The boy who reaches puberty, the kaafir who becomes Muslim and the insane person who regains his sanity come under the same ruling, which is that they must refrain from eating and drinking for the rest of the day, but they do not have to make up the fast.
As for a menstruating woman who becomes pure, the traveller who settles and the sick person who recovers, they come under one ruling, which is that they do not have to refrain from eating and drinking, and they do not benefit at all from doing so, but they have to make up the fast.
The difference between the first and second groups is that the first group attains the conditions of being obliged to fast, namely being an adult, being a Muslim and being sane. Once it is proven that they are obliged to fast, then they must refrain from eating and drinking, but they do not have to make up the fast because they refrained when it became obligatory for them to refrain, and before that they were not obliged to fast.
As for the second group, the command to fast is addressed to them so it was obligatory in their case, but they had excuses which made it permissible for them not to fast, namely menses, travel and sickness, so Allaah granted them a concession and allowed them not to fast. The sanctity of the day was waived in their case, but when their excuses ceased to exist during the day, they would not benefit from refraining from eating and drinking, but they have to make up that day after Ramadaan ends.
Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
If a traveller reaches home and he is not fasting, then he is not obliged to refrain from eating and drinking, and he may eat and drink for the rest of the day, because refraining will not benefit him in any way, as he is required to make up this day. This is the correct view and it is the view of Maalik and al-Shaafa’i, and it is one of the two views narrated from Imam Ahmad (may Allaah have mercy on him). But he should not eat and drink openly. End quote.
Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (19/question no. 58).
He also said:
If a woman who is menstruating or bleeding following childbirth becomes pure during the day, she does not have to refrain from eating and drinking, and she may eat and drink, because refraining will not benefit her in any way, as she is obliged to make up that day. This is the view of Maalik and al-Shaafa’i, and it is one of the two views narrated from Imam Ahmad. It was narrated from Ibn Mas’ood (may Allaah be pleased with him) that he said: “The one who ate at the beginning of the day, let him eat at the end of it” i.e., if it was permissible for him to eat at the beginning of the day, it is permissible for him to eat at the end of it too. End quote.
Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 19/question no. 59.
The Shaykh was also asked:
If a person does not fast during the day in Ramadaan for a legitimate excuse, is it permissible for him to eat and drink for the rest of the day?
He replied:
It is permissible for him to eat and drink, because he broke the fast for a legitimate excuse, and if he broke the fast for a legitimate excuse, then the sanctity of the day does not apply in his case, and he is allowed to eat and drink, unlike a man who breaks the fast during the day in Ramadaan with no excuse; in his case we say that he is obliged to refrain from eating and drinking, even though he is obliged to make it up. Attention must be paid to the difference between these two cases. End quote.
Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 19/question no. 60.
He also said:
During our discussion on fasting, we stated that if a woman is menstruating then she becomes pure during the day, the scholars differed as to whether she is obliged to refrain from eating and drinking, or whether it is permissible for her to eat and drink for the rest of the day. We say that two views have been narrated concerning that from Imam Ahmad, one of which – which is the well-known view of the madhhab – is that she must refrain from eating and drinking. The other view is that she does not have to refrain, and it is permissible for her to eat and drink. We say that the second view is the view of Maalik and al-Shaafa’i (may Allaah have mercy on them), and this is what is narrated from Ibn Mas’ood (may Allaah be pleased with him), because he said, “The one who ate at the beginning of the day, let him eat at the end of it”. And we say that what the seeker of knowledge must do with regard to matters concerning which there is a difference of opinion is to look at the evidence, and to adopt the view which he believes to be most correct and not to pay attention to any other opinion so long as he has evidence, because we are enjoined to follow the Messengers, as Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And (remember) the Day (Allaah) will call to them, and say: ‘What answer gave you to the Messengers?’”
[al-Qasas 28:65]
With regard to quoting as evidence the saheeh hadeeth in which the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) issued the command to fast ‘Ashoora’ during the day, and the people refrained from eating and drinking for the rest of the day, we say: they have no evidence in this hadeeth, because fasting the day of ‘Ashoora’ is not like a case when the reason for not fasting ceases to exist. Rather it is confirming the obligation of fasting. There is a difference between the cessation of a reason not to do something and confirmation that something is obligatory, because what confirming that something is obligatory means is that the ruling that it is obligatory was not there before, whereas the cessation of a reason not to do something means that the ruling is established but there is a reason not to follow it.
A similar case would be if a kaafir became Muslim during the day. If a person becomes Muslim the obligation is confirmed for him. And a similar case is if a boy reaches puberty during the day when he is not fasting; the obligation is confirmed for him. So we say to the one who became Muslim during the day: you have to refrain from eating and drinking, but you do not have to make up this day. And we say to the boy who reached puberty during the day: you have to refrain from eating and drinking, but you do not have to make up this day. This is unlike a menstruating woman who becomes pure; in that case the scholars are unanimously agreed that she has to make up that day. If a menstruating women becomes pure during the day, the scholars are unanimously agreed that if she refrains from eating and drinking for the rest of the day, that will not benefit her and it will not count as fasting, and she has to make up that day. Hence we can see the difference between confirmation of the obligation and the cessation of a reason not to do something. If a menstruating woman becomes pure, this comes under the heading of the cessation of a reason not to do something, and if a boy reaches puberty or, as the questioner mentioned, the fasting the day of ‘Ashoora’ was enjoined before fasting Ramadaan was enjoined, this comes under the heading of confirmation of obligation. And Allaah is the Source of strength. End quote.
Majmoo Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 19/question no. 60. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/65635/are-these-people-obliged-to-fast-are-they-obliged-to-make-up-the-fast | 125 | 65,635 |
18,765 | Some drops come out of her and she is pregnant. Should she stop praying? | Question
Some coffee-coloured drops came out of my wife and she does not get her period sometimes. Should she fast and pray etc. knowing that she is one and half months pregnant?. | Praise be to Allah.Many of the scholars are of the view that a pregnant woman cannot menstruate. This is the view of two imams: Abu Haneefah and Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on them).
See: al-Mughni, 1/443.
This view was also favoured by the scholars of the Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas.
Others are of the view that a pregnant woman may menstruate. This is the view of Imam Maalik and Imam al-Shaafa’i (may Allah have mercy on them).
See: al-Majmoo’ (2/411-414)
This view was favoured by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibraaheem and Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on them).
This is so long as the blood meets the description of menstrual blood and comes at the normal time of menses.
This has been explained in the answer to question no. 23400.
Whatever the case, these drops that have come out from your wife are not menses, because they do not meet the description of menstrual blood and are not occurring at the time of menses.
So your wife is pure (taahir) and she may pray, fast and do all that women who are taahir do. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/38703/some-drops-come-out-of-her-and-she-is-pregnant-should-she-stop-praying | 125 | 38,703 |
18,766 | Ruling on blood that is passed before giving birth | Question
A woman passed blood during pregnancy, five days before her nifaas started, during the month of Ramadaan. Is this blood menstrual blood or part of the blood of nifaas, and what should she do? | Praise be to Allah.If the matter is as it is described, and she saw blood when she was pregnant, five days before delivery, but she did not see any other sign that delivery was imminent, such as labour pains or contractions, then this blood is neither menstrual nor nifaas, but according to the correct view it is a kind of irregular bleeding. On this basis, she should not stop doing acts of worship, but she should fast and pray. If this bleeding is accompanied by other signs of impending labour, such as contractions and so on, then it is nifaas and so she should stop praying and fasting, then when she is clean from it after giving birth, then she can make up the fasts she has missed, but not the prayers. | Women in ramadaan | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/125/women-in-ramadaan?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/6944/ruling-on-blood-that-is-passed-before-giving-birth | 125 | 6,944 |
18,767 | Women Forbidden For Marriage in Islam Due to Kinship | Question
Please could you tell me the basic guideline on marriage in Islam with regard to relatives? I know that it is permissible for a person to marry paternal cousins, but what is the ruling on marrying one’s father’s paternal cousin? And what is the ruling on my daughter marrying the nephew of my mother-in-law? Please advise me, may Allah reward you with good. | Praise be to Allah.Allah, may He be Exalted, has mentioned women who are forbidden in marriage because of kinship. Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Forbidden to you (for marriage) are: your mothers, your daughters, your sisters, your father's sisters, your mother's sisters, your brother's daughters, your sister's daughters…” [An-Nisa’ 4:23]
Shaykh Ibn `Uthaymin (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
These are seven who are forbidden in marriage, according to the text and scholarly consensus; none of the scholars differed concerning this." (Al-Sharh Al-Mumti`, 12/53)
They are:
The mother, which includes grandmothers on both the father’s and mother’s side
The daughter, which includes granddaughters
Sisters , whether full sisters or half-sisters through the father or mother
The paternal aunt, which also includes the paternal aunt of the father or mother
The maternal aunt , which also includes the maternal aunt of the father or mother
The brother’s daughter, which includes his granddaughters
The sister’s daughter, which includes her granddaughters
Any other women who are relatives, apart from these, are permissible for marriage. Hence Allah, may He be Exalted, says in the following verse (interpretation of the meaning): “All others are lawful…” [An-Nisa’ 4:24]
Based on that, the daughter of one’s paternal uncle or aunt, or of one’s maternal uncle or aunt, are permissible in marriage. The Quran states that in the verse (interpretation of the meaning):
“O Prophet (Muhammad )! Verily, We have made lawful to you your wives, to whom you have paid their Mahr (bridal money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage), and those (slaves) whom your right hand possesses - whom Allah has given to you, and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts…” [Al-Ahzab 33:50]
Based on this, it is permissible for a girl to marry her father’s paternal cousin , because a person’s paternal uncle is an uncle to him and to all his offspring. So her father’s paternal uncle is also an uncle to her, and his son is her cousin, and it is permissible for a girl to marry her paternal cousin.
it is also permissible for your daughter to marry the son of your mother-in-law’s brother, because the brother of your mother-in-law is her maternal uncle, because he is the maternal uncle of her father, and the maternal uncle of one’s father is also an uncle to his children. And it is permissible for a girl to marry her maternal cousin.
For more details, please see this category: Women Who are Forbidden for Marriage
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/161629/women-forbidden-for-marriage-in-islam-due-to-kinship | 43 | 161,629 |
18,768 | He did the marriage contract with a woman; is it permissible for him to look at her mother and shake hands with her before consummation of the marriage? | Question
Is it permissible to see the wife’s mother without hijab after doing the marriage contract and before the consummation of marriage, and to interact with her by shaking hands? Please note that I interacted with her in this manner after the marriage contract, without realising that there some doubt about this issue. But someone told me that this free interaction comes only after consummation of the marriage and not after the marriage contract. Is there any sin in this interaction, and is it haram (forbidden) or makruh (disliked)? | Praise be to Allah.As soon as a man does the marriage contract with a woman, her mother becomes one of his mahrams and she becomes permanently forbidden for him to marry, even if he has not yet consummated the marriage with his wife.
Based on that, there is nothing wrong with shaking hands with her, being alone with her and travelling with her… And there is nothing wrong with her appearing before him with her hair uncovered, because he has become one of her mahrams.
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: When a man marries a woman, all her mothers and foremothers become haram for him to marry [meaning her mother and grandmother] as soon as the marriage contract is done. This was stated by Ahmad and it is the view of most of the scholars, including Ibn Mas‘ud, Ibn ‘Umar, Jabir, ‘Imran ibn Husayn and many of the Tabi‘in. It is also the view of Malik, ash-Shafa‘i and ashab ar-ra’y… That is because Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning): {Prohibited to you [for marriage] are … your wives’ mothers,} [an-Nisa’ 4:23], and the woman with whom a man has done a marriage contract is his wife, and her mother is included in the general meaning of the verse. Ibn ‘Abbas said: Regard as general in application what the Qur’an stated in general terms, meaning apply the ruling in all cases, and do not differentiate between the one with whom the marriage has been consummated and the one with whom it has not."(Al-Mughni 7/85).
It says in Fatawa al-Lajnah ad-Da’imah (17/361):
A man proposed to a girl and has done the marriage contract with her. Is it permissible for him to look at the mother of his fiancée without hijab and shake hands with her, or is she still a stranger (non-mahram) to him until he consummates the marriage with the girl, after which the wife’s mother becomes a mahram to him, and it becomes permissible for him to look at her and shake hands with her?
They replied:
Before the marriage contract is done with her daughter, the mother of the fiancée is still a stranger (non-mahram) to the suitor, and it is not permissible for her to appear without hijab before him or for him to look at her or shake hands with her. But after the marriage contract is done with her daughter, he becomes a mahram to her and it becomes permissible for her to appear without hijab before him and for him to shake hands with her. End quote.
Permanent Committee for Academic Research and Ifta’
Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Aziz ibn ‘Abdillah ibn Baz, Shaykh ‘Abd ar-Razzaq ‘Afifi, Shaykh ‘Abdullah ibn Ghadyan, Shaykh Salih al-Fawzan, Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Aziz Al ash-Shaykh, Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymin (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
If a man marries a woman and does the marriage contract with her, the wife’s mother, and her mother’s mother (grandmother), and her mother’s mother’s mother (great-grandmother), no matter how far the line of ascent reaches, become mahrams to him, for whom it is permissible to appear without hijab before him, and it is permissible for him to shake hands with them, because the basic principle regarding this matter is that when the man does the marriage contract with a woman, he becomes a mahram to all her foremothers [mother, grandmother, etc]."(Fatawa Nur ‘ala ad-Darb).
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/165731/he-did-the-marriage-contract-with-a-woman-is-it-permissible-for-him-to-look-at-her-mother-and-shake-hands-with-her-before-consummation-of-the-marriage | 43 | 165,731 |
18,769 | If he marries a woman and consummates the marriage with her, he becomes a mahram to her daughters and granddaughters | Question
Someone’s father was married to two women, and his father had daughters from his second wife. His father died, and another man came and married his father’s wife who was that person’s maternal aunt. Are his sisters through his father mahrams to the husband of his maternal aunt or not? | Praise be to Allah.If a man marries a woman and she has daughters, then he becomes a mahram to them when he consummates the marriage with their mother, because Allah, may He be exalted, says, explaining who are a man’s mahrams (interpretation of the meaning):
{…and your step-daughters under your guardianship [born] of your wives unto whom you have gone in. But if you have not gone in unto them, there is no sin upon you} [an-Nisa’ 4:23].
The step-daughter is the daughter of one’s wife. It is not stipulated [in order for her to become a mahram] that she be under the guardianship of the new husband, because the verse refers to what is usually the case, so it is not stipulated.
The fuqaha’ are unanimously agreed that the step-daughter becomes a mahram to her mother’s husband if he has consummated the marriage with the mother, even if the step-daughter is not under his guardianship. Tafseer al-Qurtubi (5/101).
It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah (17/367): If a man marries a woman and consummates the marriage with her, it becomes permanently prohibited for him to marry any of her daughters or granddaughters, no matter how far the line of descent reaches, whether they are daughters from a previous or subsequent husband, because Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):
{Prohibited to you [for marriage] are your mothers … and your step-daughters under your guardianship [born] of your wives unto whom you have gone in. But if you have not gone in unto them, there is no sin upon you} [an-Nisa’ 4:23].
What is meant by the step-daughter is the daughter of the wife. So the man is regarded as a mahram of the daughters of the woman whom he has married and consummated the marriage with her, and it is permissible for them not to observe hijab in front of him. End quote.
Based on that, in the case of the man asked about, if he marries the woman and consummates the marriage with her, he becomes a mahram to all of her daughters and granddaughters, if there are any.
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/119165/if-he-marries-a-woman-and-consummates-the-marriage-with-her-he-becomes-a-mahram-to-her-daughters-and-granddaughters | 43 | 119,165 |
18,770 | Is The Mother-in-Law a Mahram? | Question
After I divorce my wife, is her mother regarded as a Mahram? Is it permissible for me to shake hands with her and sit with her, as there has been a disagreement between me and another brother about this? I hope that you can explain. | Praise be to Allah.We may deal with the subject of the wife’s mother by discussing a number of points, in which we hope you will find the answer to your question and more.
Understanding Who is a Mahram in Islam
Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
{Forbidden to you (for marriage) are: your mothers, your daughters, your sisters, your father’s sisters, your mother’s sisters, your brother’s daughters, your sister’s daughters, your foster mothers who gave you suck, your foster milk suckling sisters, your wives’ mothers, your stepdaughters under your guardianship, born of your wives to whom you have gone in — but there is no sin on you if you have not gone in them (to marry their daughters), — the wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins, and two sisters in wedlock at the same time, except for what has already passed; verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.} [An-Nisa’ 4:23]
This verse sums up the women who are Mahrams , and it includes those who are forbidden for marriage due to blood ties, as well as ties by marriage and through breastfeeding. Some of them are permanently forbidden for marriage and some of them are temporarily so.
Permanent vs. Temporary Mahram Relationships
Women who are permanently forbidden for marriage fall into three categories:
Those who are forbidden due to blood ties.
There are seven, who are mentioned in the verse: mothers, daughters, sisters, paternal aunts, maternal aunts, brother’s daughters and sister’s daughters.
The category of mothers also includes grandmothers, whether on the father’s side or the mother’s.
The category of daughters includes one’s own daughter as well as one’s son’s daughters and one’s daughter’s daughters, no matter how far the line of descent reaches.
The category of sisters includes full sisters and half-sisters through the father or the mother.
The category of paternal aunts includes a man’s paternal aunts, his father’s paternal aunts, his grandfather’s paternal aunts, his mother’s paternal aunts and his grandmother’s paternal aunts.
The category of maternal aunts includes a man’s maternal aunts, his father’s maternal aunts, his grandfather’s maternal aunts, his mother’s maternal aunts and his grandmother’s maternal aunts.
The category of brother’s daughters includes the daughters of a full brother, the daughters of a half-brother through his father, the daughters of a half-brother through his mother, and their daughters, no matter how far the line of descent reaches, and their sons’ daughters and their daughters’ daughters, no matter how far the line of descent reaches.
The category of sister’s daughters includes the daughters of a full sister, the daughters of a half-sister through her father, the daughters of a half-sister through her mother, and their sons’ daughters, no matter how far the line of descent reaches, and their daughters’ daughters, no matter how far the line of descent reaches.
Mahrams through breastfeeding
They are the same as the Mahrams through blood ties as described above, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “and what becomes Mahram (forbidden for marriage) through breastfeeding is that which becomes Mahram through ties of kinship.” (Narrated by Al-Bukhari, 2502 and Muslim, 1447)
In the case of breastfeeding there must have been a certain number of feedings, which is five or more.
Mahrams through ties by marriage
There are four: the father’s wife, the son’s wife, the wife’s mother and the wife’s daughters.
The category of fathers’ wives includes the wives of grandfathers, no matter how far the line of ascent reaches, and whether the grandfather is on the father’s side or the mother’s. If a man makes a marriage contract with a woman, she becomes forbidden for marriage to his sons, his sons’ sons and his daughters’ sons, no matter how far the line of descent reaches, whether he consummates the marriage with her or not.
The category of sons’ wives includes the wives of sons, no matter how far the line of descent reaches, because Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “the wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins”. If a man makes a marriage contract with a woman, she becomes forbidden for marriage for his father and his grandfathers, no matter how far the line of ascent reaches, whether on the father’s side or the mother’s, merely by virtue of the marriage contract, even if he does not consummate the marriage with her.
The category of wife’s mother includes her grandmothers, no matter how far the line of ascent reaches, because Allah says “your wives’ mothers”. If a man makes a marriage contract with a woman, her mother and grandmother become forbidden for marriage for him, merely by virtue of the marriage contract, whether he consummates the marriage with her or not, and whether they are grandmothers on her father’s side or her mother’s.
The category of wife’s daughters includes the daughters of her sons, and the daughters of her daughters, no matter how far the line of descent reaches. They are stepdaughters, so long as the marriage has been consummated with the wife. If divorce happens before the marriage is consummated, then the stepdaughters and their descendents do not become forbidden for marriage, because Allah says “your stepdaughters under your guardianship, born of your wives to whom you have gone in — but there is no sin on you if you have not gone in them (to marry their daughters)”. If the man marries a woman and consummates the marriage with her, then her daughters, and her sons’ daughters, and her daughters’ daughters – no matter how far the line of descent reaches – become forbidden to him, whether they were from another husband before him or from another husband after him. But if they get divorced before the marriage is consummated, then the stepdaughters and their descendents do not become forbidden to him.
Women who are temporarily forbidden for marriage
They are: The wife’s sister, paternal aunt, and maternal aunt. This prohibition is temporary, until the man is separated from the wife either through death or through a separation whilst still alive such as divorce or annulment of the marriage, and after the `iddah is over, because Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): {and two sisters in wedlock at the same time, except for what has already passed} and because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “One should not be married to a woman and her paternal aunt, or a woman and her maternal aunt, at the same time.” (Narrated by Al-Bukhari, 4820 and Muslim, 1408)
Is Your Wife’s Mother a Mahram in Islam?
The correct view is that the wife’s mother through breastfeeding is forbidden to her daughter’s husband, and there is no difference between her and a mother through blood ties.
This is the view of the majority of scholars, including the four imams. Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) held a different view, but the more correct view is that of the majority.
The scholars of the Standing Committee were asked:
A man has a wife: is his wife’s mother through breastfeeding regarded as one of this man’s Mahrams or not? Please note that the breastfeeding fulfilled the conditions according to Shari`ah.
They replied:
The wife’s mother through breastfeeding is a Mahram just like the wife’s mother through blood ties, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “and what becomes Mahram (forbidden for marriage) through breastfeeding is that which becomes Mahram through ties of kinship.” Based on this, he is a Mahram to his wife’s mother through breastfeeding. (End quote from Fatawa Al-Lajnah Al-Da’imah, 21/103-104)
Is the Father’s Wife Considered a Mahram?
The father’s wife is not a Mahram for the husband of a daughter from another woman.
Shaykh `Abd Al-`Aziz ibn Baz (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
My father has taken a second wife, and he has a son from her. Is she a Mahram for my husband; can she uncover in front of him? Please note that my father is the maternal uncle of my husband, so she is the wife of his maternal uncle.
He replied:
The father’s wife is not a Mahram for the husband of his daughter from another wife. Rather it is the wife’s mother who is a Mahram for her daughter’s husband, because Allah says, describing who is a Mahram in Surat An-Nisa’ (interpretation of the meaning): “your wives’ mothers”. The father’s wife is not a mother of his daughter from another wife, and that applies equally to a wife’s mother through blood ties and her mother through breastfeeding, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “and what becomes Mahram (forbidden for marriage) through breastfeeding is that which becomes Mahram through ties of kinship.” (Narrated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim). And Allah is the Source of strength. (End quote from Majmu` Fatawa Ash-Shaykh Ibn Baz, 21/15-16)
Can You Look at Your Fiancée’s Mother before Marriage?
If a woman is engaged but the Shar’i marriage contract has not yet been done, then her mother is still a non-Mahram to him and it is not permissible for him to look at any part of her body.
If a man wants to propose to a woman, but no marriage contract has been done between them, then it is not permissible for the man to look at any part of the mother’s body, because she is still a stranger (non-Mahram) to him.
The scholars of the Standing Committee were asked:
A man proposed marriage to a girl and did the marriage contract with her. Is it permissible for him to look at the mother of his fiancée and shake hands with her, or is she still a stranger to him until he consummates the marriage with his fiancée and the wife’s mother becomes a Mahram to him and it is permissible for him to look at her and greet her?
They replied:
Before the marriage contract is done, the fiancée’s mother is regarded as a stranger to the man, and it is not permissible for her to uncover in front of him or for him to look at her or shake hands with her. But after the marriage contract with her daughter, he is a Mahram for her and it is permissible for her to uncover and for him to shake hands with her. (End quote from Fatawa Al-Lajnah Al-Da’imah, 17/361-362)
Is it Permissible for a Woman to Show Her Adornment to Her Daughter’s Husband?
The more correct view is that it is permissible for the wife’s mother to show to her daughter’s husband that which she shows to her Mahrams.
But some scholars forbade the wife’s mother to show her adornment before her daughter’s husband, and the evidence they give for that is that the daughter’s husband is not mentioned among those before whom a woman may show her adornment, in Surat An-Nur, where Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
{And tell the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent (like both eyes for necessity to see the way, or outer palms of hands or one eye or dress like veil, gloves, headcover, apron), and to draw their veils all over Juyubihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms) and not to reveal their adornment except to their husbands, or their fathers, or their husband’s fathers, or their sons, or their husband’s sons, or their brothers or their brother’s sons, or their sister’s sons, or their (Muslim) women (i.e. their sisters in Islam), or the (female) slaves whom their right hands possess, or old male servants who lack vigour, or small children who have no sense of feminine sex. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And all of you beg Allah to forgive you all, O believers, that you may be successful.} [An-Nur 24:31]
This view was narrated from Sa`id ibn Jubayr, and it is one of the views narrated from Imam Ahmad. But the correct view is that it is permissible for a woman to show her adornment before her daughter’s husband, and to show before him that which she shows before other women and her Mahrams. This is the view of the majority of scholars. The fact that the daughter’s husband is not mentioned does not mean that he is not included in this verse, because the ruling concerning him is the same as the ruling concerning those who are mentioned of women to whom marriage is forbidden. It may also be said that the maternal uncle and paternal uncle are not mentioned either, but they are also Mahrams before whom one’s adornments may be shown.
Al-Jassas (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Because Allah mentioned along with fathers other Mahrams to whom marriage is forbidden permanently, this indicates that those who are Mahrams of similar standing come under the same rulings, such as the daughter’s husband, the wife’s mother, Mahrams by breastfeeding, and so on. (End quote from Ahkam Al-Quran, 5/174)
The scholars of the Standing Committee were asked:
Some women observe Hijab before the husbands of their daughters, and they refuse to greet them by shaking hands. Is it permissible for them to do that?
They replied:
The husband of a woman’s daughter is one of her Mahrams by marriage, so it is permissible for him to see of her what it is permissible for him to see of his own mother, sister, daughter and other Mahrams. Covering her face, head or forearms in his presence is going to extremes in Hijab and refusing to shake hands with him when meeting is also going to extremes of conservatism, and it could lead to dislike and severing of ties. She should stop going to such extremes unless she feels there is something suspicious about him, or she notices that he looks at her in an inappropriate manner, in which case she is doing the right thing. (End quote from Fatawa Al-Lajnah Al-Da’imah, 17/356-357)
Is It Permissible to Look at and Kiss Your Wife’s Mother in Islam?
It is permissible to look at the wife’s mother so long as the look is without desire. Although it is permissible to kiss her , kissing on the mouth must be avoided, and embracing must also be avoided, especially if she is young or he feels some kind of prohibited desire in his heart.
The scholars of the Standing Committee said:
The wife’s mother is a Mahram of her daughter’s husband, and it is permissible for him to see of his wife’s mother what a man sees of his Mahrams, such as the face, hands, neck, hair and so on. As for a woman kissing her daughter’s husband and embracing him, this is wrong and is not permissible, because that can only be done with one’s husband, because of the fear of fitnah involved. But it is permissible for him to kiss her on the head because there is nothing haram involved. (End quote fromFatawa Al-Lajnah Al-Da’imah, 17/365-366)
Shaykh Salih Al-Fawzan (may Allah preserve him) was asked:
Is it permissible to shake hands with one’s wife’s mother and to travel with her?
He replied:
Yes, there is nothing wrong with that, because she is a Mahram, as Allah has made the wife’s mother permanently prohibited for marriage to the husband of her daughter. Therefore she is one of your Mahrams, and there is nothing wrong with you shaking hands with her or travelling with her, because you are a Mahram for her. But if there is the fear of fitnah, then you should not shake hands with her, such as if you fear that there will be some temptation or provocation of desire in shaking hands with her, then do not shake hands with her. But if there are no reservations, then there is nothing wrong with shaking hands with her and travelling with her, and you are a Mahram for her, because she has become one of your Mahrams as the result of the marriage contract with her daughter. Allah says, listing the women who are Mahrams: “your wives’ mothers” [An-Nisa’ 4:23], i.e., your wives’ mothers are Mahrams (forbidden in marriage) to you. (End quote from Al-Muntaqa min Fatawa Ash-Shaykh Al-Fawzan, 3/question no.450)
Is a Wife’s Mother a Permanent Mahram after Divorce or Death?
What we have mentioned about the wife’s mother being a Mahram to the husband applies even if the wife is divorced or dies.
The prohibition on marriage remains, and she is a Mahram permanently. The divorce or death of the wife does not affect this ruling.
Is Consummation Required for Wife’s Mother to Be Mahram?
It is not essential for the marriage with the wife to be consummated in order for her mother to become a Mahram of the husband. Rather it is sufficient that the marriage contract be done with the wife in order for her mother to become a permanent Mahram of the husband.
Shaykh Muhammad ibn Salih Al-`Uthaymin (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
If the man does the marriage contract with the woman, her mother becomes forbidden to him and he becomes one of her Mahrams, even if he has not consummated the marriage with the daughter. If it so happens that the daughter dies or he divorces her, he is still a Mahram for her mother. If it so happens that consummation with the woman he married is delayed, he is still a Mahram to her mother, who may uncover her face in front of him, and he may travel with her and be alone with her, and there is nothing wrong with that, because the wife’s mother and grandmother become his Mahrams merely because of the marriage contract, because of the general meaning of the words of Allah, “your wives’ mothers” [An-Nisa’ 4:23], and a woman becomes a man’s wife as the result of a marriage contract. (End quote from Fatawa Islamiyyah, 3/132)
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/95757/is-the-mother-in-law-a-mahram | 43 | 95,757 |
18,771 | The sister of the wife's grandfather and the sister of her grandmother are forbidden for the husband in marriage as her paternal and maternal aunt are forbidden for him | Question
Are the sister of my wife’s grandmother and the sister of my wife’s grandfather mahrams to me? | Praise be to Allah.The wife’s grandmother – whether through her father or her mother – is a mahram to her husband on a permanent basis as soon as the marriage contract is done with her granddaughter, because she is included in the verse in which Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning): “Forbidden to you (for marriage) are:… your wives’ mothers” [an-Nisa’ 4:23]. So the mothers (and grandmothers) of wives are mahrams, no matter how far the line of ascent reaches.
Please see also the answer to question no. 161869
The sister of the wife’s grandmother comes under the same ruling as her maternal aunt, so she is prohibitted for marriage to the husband on a temporary basis, so long as his wife is still married to him. But if his wife dies or he divorces her and her ‘iddah ends, it becomes permissible for him to marry her grandmother’s sister. Similarly, the sister of the wife’s grandfather is also prohibitted to the husband on a temporary basis, because she comes under the same ruling as her paternal aunt.
The scholars of the Standing Committee said:
The grandfather is regarded as being the same as the father regardless of whether he is the grandfather on the father’s side or the mother’s side. End quote from Fataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah (17/355).
Al-Bukhaari (5109) and Muslim (1408) narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “One should not be married to a woman and her paternal aunt, or a woman and her maternal aunt, at the same time.”
See also the answer to question no. 175597
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/182844/the-sister-of-the-wifes-grandfather-and-the-sister-of-her-grandmother-are-forbidden-for-the-husband-in-marriage-as-her-paternal-and-maternal-aunt-are-forbidden-for-him | 43 | 182,844 |
18,772 | Is my father a mahram to the wife of my half-brother through my mother? | Question
I have a half-brother through my mother who has got married, praise be to Allah. Is my father a mahram to his wife or not? | Praise be to Allah.
He is not a
mahram to her, because he (the questioner’s half-brother) is not his son;
rather she is the wife of his wife’s son. So your half-brother through
your mother is the son of your father’s wife, who is your mother.
Therefore the wife of your half-brother through your mother is a
“stranger” (non-mahram) to him, and he is not a mahram to her. If your
brother divorced her, it would be permissible for your father to marry
her, because she is not the wife of his son, and she is not the daughter
of his wife, such that she would be his stepdaughter. So he is not a
mahram to her; rather she is the wife of his wife’s son, therefore she is
a non-mahram to him.
And Allah knows
best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/100325/is-my-father-a-mahram-to-the-wife-of-my-half-brother-through-my-mother | 43 | 100,325 |
18,773 | The wife’s daughter and her daughter’s daughter are mahrams for a man | Question
I married my second husband when my oldest daughter was nine years old. Now she is married, praise be to Allah, and she has four beautiful children, the oldest of whom is a girl who is eleven years old. My question is: Is my husband regarded as a mahram to my granddaughter who is eleven years old, or not? What are the conditions that must be paid attention to? | Praise be to Allah.If a man marries a woman and consummates the marriage with her, then her daughter – who is called his stepdaughter – becomes a mahram to him, and so do the daughter of her daughter and the daughter of her son, no matter how far the line of descent reaches.
Allah, may He be exalted, says explaining the women who are mahrams [and prohibited in marriage] for a man (interpretation of the meaning):
“…and your step-daughters under your guardianship [born] of your wives unto whom you have gone in…”
[an-Nisaa’ 4:23].
It says in Kashshaaf al-Qinaa‘ (5/72): The daughter of his stepson is prohibited for marriage according to the text, and the daughter of his stepdaughter is also prohibited, and this applies regardless of whether his wife is related to him (e.g., his cousin) or not, because they come under the heading of stepchildren. End quote.
It says in al-Insaaf (8/115): Note: The daughter of his wife’s son is prohibited to him for marriage. This was narrated by Saalih and others. Shaykh Taqiy ad-Deen (may Allah have mercy on him) stated that he did not know of any dispute concerning that. End quote.
Based on that, your husband is regarded as a mahram to your granddaughter, because she is included under the heading of stepdaughters.
A woman may uncover in front of her mahrams that which ordinarily appears of her, such as the head, face, hands, forearms and feet.
This is so long as there is no fear of fitnah or anything dubious. If a man feels any kind of temptation, it is haraam for him to look at her. If she has any doubts or concerns about the man, then it is haraam for the woman to uncover in front of him.
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/163263/the-wifes-daughter-and-her-daughters-daughter-are-mahrams-for-a-man | 43 | 163,263 |
18,774 | The wife’s grandmother is a mahram to the husband | Question
Is my wife’s paternal grandmother a mahram, i.e., can she uncover her face in front of me?. | Praise be to Allah.The wife’s grandmother – either paternal or maternal – becomes a mahram to the husband once the marriage contract is done, because she is included in the verse in which Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“your wives’ mothers” [al-Nisa’ 4:23].
Thus the mothers, grandmothers and great-grandmothers of the wife, no matter how far the line of ascent reaches, are mahrams to the husband.
It says in Zaad al-Mustaqni‘: His wife’s mother and her grandmothers become mahrams once the marriage contract is done.
See al-Sharh al-Mumti‘, 12/118
It says in al-Mawsoo‘ah al-Fiqhiyyah al-Kuwaitiyyah (37/ 368):
The fuqaha’ are unanimously agreed that it is permanently haraam to marry, due to marriage...the asl of the woman and they are her mother, her mother's mother and her father's mother (no matter how far the line of ascent reaches) and that is because Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “your wives’ mothers” which is mentioned after “Forbidden to you (for marriage) are: your mothers” [al-Nisa’ 4:23]. End quote.
Based on that: the grandmother of the wife is from your maharim and she may uncover her face in front of you and you may be alone with her like all other maharim.
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/161869/the-wifes-grandmother-is-a-mahram-to-the-husband | 43 | 161,869 |
18,775 | Is it permissible for him to marry the daughter of his wife’s sister after she dies | Question
There is a man who married the daughter of his wife’s sister after she died. What is the ruling on that?. | Praise be to Allah.
Firstly:
It is permissible for a man to marry the daughter of his
wife’s sister after his wife dies, because what is haraam is to be married
to the girl and her maternal or paternal aunt at the same time. But as the
maternal aunt has died, what is forbidden no longer applies, which is being
married to her and her maternal aunt at the same time. So there is nothing
wrong with his marrying her in that case.
It says in Tanqeeh al-Fataawa al-Haamidiyyah (1/111) –
a book of Hanafi fiqh –:
He was asked about a man whose wife with whom he had
consummated the marriage died, and she had a sister; is it permissible for
him to marry her sister one day after she died?
Answer: Yes, as it says in al-Khulaasah narrating from
the book al-Asl by Imam Muhammad; and as it says in Mabsoot Sadr
al-Islam, as quoted from him by al-Quhustaani; and as it says in
al-Muheet by Imam as-Sarkhasi… End quote.
Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked:
Is it permissible for a man to marry the daughter of his
wife’s brother?
He replied: It is not permissible for a man to marry the
daughter of his wife’s brother if the girl’s paternal aunt is still married
to him, just as it is not permissible either for him to marry the daughter
of his wife’s sister, if her maternal aunt is still married to him, because
the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) forbade a man to be
married to a woman and her paternal aunt at the same time, or to a woman and
her maternal aunt at the same time.
The scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) were unanimously
agreed that that is forbidden because of this saheeh hadeeth. But if the
paternal or maternal aunt dies or he has divorced her and the ‘iddah has
ended, then there is nothing wrong with him marrying the daughter of her
brother or the daughter of her sister, because in this case he will not be
married to them both at the same time.
End quote from Majmoo‘ Fataawa Ibn Baaz (21/8)
Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked:
A man married a woman and she bore him children. Now he wants
to marry the daughter of his wife’s sister; is that permissible?
He replied:
The wife is the maternal aunt of that sister’s daughter, and
the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “(A man) should
not be married to a woman and her paternal aunt, or to a woman and her
maternal aunt, at the same time.” So it is not permissible for him to marry
the daughter of his wife’s sister so long as he is still married to his
wife. But if he divorces her or she dies, and he marries her sister’s
daughter, there is nothing wrong with that.
End quote from Fataawa Noor ‘ala ad-Darb (19/2)
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/175597/is-it-permissible-for-him-to-marry-the-daughter-of-his-wifes-sister-after-she-dies | 43 | 175,597 |
18,776 | He wanted to help a woman become Muslim, then they committed zina and she got pregnant, then she insisted on leaving him, and cut off ties with him | Question
I would like to ask you a question which is killing myself -
I tried to help a women for reverting Islam though before she didnt had any religion and she agreed to marry with me but in the meantime we had sex without marriage and aftersometime she broke with me and Allah swt knows why she did that.
After that I repented a lot..May Allah forgive my sins and I tried to pray istekhara and during this period she gave the news that she is pregnant... which I told her that this is the sign for our marriage but she didnt believe it. Instead of that she got upset and angry as she became pregnant. Later she told me that she will abort the baby and we didnt marry.
Now its been 6 months she is carrying the baby and wants to deliever the child and In this meantime I have send several times of marriage proposal but she didnt accept.
I want my child back as well as her but she is not agreeing.
What shall I do to get my child back and and I know even we marry now the child will be illlegitmate.
There fore I would like to know what shall I do as I wana take the responsibility of the child and her and if its legal to do so... will i lose the child? If child born does he will have my name and am i legal to take care?
Kindly reply my answer at the earliest. | Praise be to Allah.
We believe that everyone who reads this question must learn
from it and convey that lesson to people, so that they may protect
themselves and their societies from such errors, and understand how doing
things the wrong way must inevitably lead to wrong outcomes, even if the aim
was noble. The aim is not sufficient to make actions right; rather the
action must also be free of any element of evil or corruption, as Ibn
al-Jawzi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: We seek refuge with Allah from
starting any action without basin it on knowledge and reason.
Talbees Iblees, p. 277
Similarly, we read what is mentioned in the question with a
great deal of sorrow. How the nafs (self) that is inclined towards evil
could take advantage of a girl who is interested in Islam, seeking guidance
and to learn about the Qur’an, and make her fall into the pit of desire and
forbidden pleasure, so that her search for guidance turned into an occasion
for resentment, anger and aversion, and showed her the darkness of sin
instead of the light of guidance. No light will be left in the heart of the
sinner; rather he will be stuck in the mire of his sin, and what has tainted
his heart of evil can hardly be washed away except after sincere repentance,
a great deal of praying for forgiveness, and turning to Allah, may He be
exalted, with humility and humbling oneself before Him, in the hope that He
may pardon and forgive, and help him to come back to obedience to his Lord,
so that he may move beyond this dark stage in which the sin began by forming
a relationship with a non-mahram woman and ended with zina.
See also fatwa no.
11195
Now that you have knocked at the door of repentance and have
turned to Allah, may He be exalted, you must understand some shar‘i rulings
which are very important in your case; we will list them for you below:
Firstly:
It is not permissible for a Muslim to marry a woman of any
other religion apart from the people of the Book, namely Jews and Christians
and those whom the scholars included under the same heading. As for a woman
who does not follow any religion at all, not even in name only or on
official papers, it is not permissible to marry her. Allah, may He be
glorified and exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And do not marry
Al-Mushrikat (idolatresses, etc.) till they believe (worship Allah Alone).
And indeed a slave woman who believes is better than a (free) Mushrikah
(idolatress, etc.), even though she pleases you”
[al-Baqarah 2:221] .
No exception is mentioned except in the case of the people of
the Book, because of the general meanings of the word mushrikaat (fem. pl.
of the word mushrik, meaning one who associate others with Allah).
Ibn Qudaamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
With regard to all disbelievers apart from the people of the
Book, such as those who worship whatever they see fit of idols, rocks, trees
and animals, there is no difference of scholarly opinion that it is haraam
to marry their women or eat meat slaughtered by them.
End quote from al-Mughni, 7/131
This has been discussed previously in fatwa no.
2851
Secondly:
Attributing the child who is born as a result of zina (with a
woman who is not married) to the zaani is also a problematic matter. The
Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “If (the child) is
from a free woman with whom he cohabited, he is not to be attributed (to the
zaani) and cannot inherit from him.” Narrated by Abu Dawood in as-Sunan,
2265; classed as hasan by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood.
We have previously discussed this issue in more detail in
fatwa no. 33591 and
175523.
Thirdly:
With regard to m of the child, there is nothing wrong with
you spending on the child who was born as a result of zina if you want to do
so, provided that this is done from a distance, by sending the money through
a bank account for example, without being in contact with that woman or
meeting her, so that the sin will not be repeated and so that the Shaytaan
will not cause temptation between you.
Fourthly:
It is not permissible for you to carry on trying to convince
her to marry. She has been put off and has been faced with distress because
of that sin. Similarly, it is not permissible to use the fact that you
prayed istikhaarah and that she became pregnant as proof that this marriage
is something good. We think that this is a kind of getting carried away in
temptation and is an attempt to confuse that woman. The marriage that is
prescribed by Allah, may He be exalted, and is liked by Him is not something
for which pregnancy that results from haraam actions can be interpreted as a
sign in its favour; rather it begins with obedience to Allah, may He be
glorified, and adherence to His laws and commands.
Our advice to you is to stop attempting to convince her;
rather you must stop trying to communicate with her in any way, because
there is no way that you can marry her if it becomes clear that she is
neither a Jew nor a Christian. Even if it becomes clear that she is a
follower of one of these two religions, there is no way that you can marry
her because she has refused and is convinced that marriage would fail after
it has been spoiled by zina.
We ask Allah to forgive us and you, and to grant us all well
being.
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/202737/he-wanted-to-help-a-woman-become-muslim-then-they-committed-zina-and-she-got-pregnant-then-she-insisted-on-leaving-him-and-cut-off-ties-with-him | 43 | 202,737 |
18,777 | Can a Muslim Man Marry a Non-Muslim Woman? | Question
A non-Muslim girl wants to love a Muslim guy and has decided to marry him. She is also ready to accept Islam. Does Islam permit a Muslim guy to marry a non-Muslim Asian girl? Both love each other very much and can’t stay without each other. What must be done now, how and when can she accept Islam. | Praise be to Allah.Belief in Allah: Your key to real happiness
Through this website we will send a message to this non-Muslim woman and others, telling them that no one can attain true life, happiness and peace of mind unless he believes in Allah as his Lord , Islam as his religion and Muhammad as his Prophet.
For all of the universe is created, and its Creator is Allah. He is the One Who raised the heavens with no pillars and spread out the earth, and created the mountains to stabilize it, and created the sea and the rivers.
{Surely, His is the creation and commandment. Blessed is Allah, the Lord of the `Alamin (mankind, jinn and all that exists)!} [Al-A’raf 7:54 – interpretation of the meaning]
Once this is clear, it should be understood that Allah sent messengers to His slaves, to show them the way, teach them and guide them to the path of salvation.
{Messengers as bearers of good news as well as of warning in order that mankind should have no plea against Allah after the (coming of) Messengers.} [An-Nisa’ 4:165]
And He ended the series of His messengers with Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him):
{Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but he is the Messenger of Allah and the last (end) of the Prophets.} [Al-Ahzab 33:40 – interpretation of the meaning]
Allah sent him with the religion of Islam other than which He will not accept any religion from anyone:
{And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.} [Al `Imran 3:85 – interpretation of the meaning]
How to convert to Islam
With regard to when and how she may become Muslim , it is very easy indeed. All she has to do is to say “Ashhadu an la ilaha illa Allah wa ashhadu anna Muhammad ‘abduhu was rasuluhu (I bear witness that there is no god except Allah and I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and Messenger).” Once she says that, she becomes Muslim . She should hasten to do that, because death may come suddenly, and no one knows whether he will live until tomorrow or not.
We welcome her as our sister in Islam, and we ask Allah to inspire her and guide her to do that which will bring her happiness in this world and in the Hereafter.
Can a Muslim Man Marry a Non-Muslim Woman?
What is stated in this question is that the woman is “non-Muslim”. This may be understood as meaning that she is one of the people of the Book – i.e., Jewish or Christian – or it may be understood as meaning that she is something else – such as Buddhist, Zoroastrian or communist.
If the woman who wants to marry a Muslim man is one of the people of the Book, there is no Shar’i impediment to this marriage, so long as it fulfils the shar’i conditions, such as the requirement that she be chaste. But the Muslim husband should be keen to bring his wife into Islam so as to save her from eternity in the Fire and so that he and his children will have a home that is based on Islam.
But if the woman who wants to marry a Muslim man is not one of the people of the Book, then it is not permissible for a Muslim to marry her.
Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
{And do not marry Al-Mushrikat (idolatresses) till they believe (worship Allah Alone). And indeed a slave woman who believes is better than a (free) Mushrikah (idolatress), even though she pleases you. And give not (your daughters) in marriage to Al-Mushrikun till they believe (in Allah Alone) and verily, a believing slave is better than a (free) Mushrik (idolater), even though he pleases you. Those (Al-Mushrikun) invite you to the Fire, but Allah invites (you) to Paradise and forgiveness by His Leave, and makes His Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) clear to mankind that they may remember.} [Al-Baqarah 2:221]
Ibn Kathir said:
“Here Allah forbids the believers to marry a mushrik woman who worships idols, and if this were general in meaning, it would include every mushrik woman, whether she is of the people of the Book or is an idol worshipper, but the women of the people of the Book are excluded from that in the verse (interpretation of the meaning):
{(Lawful to you in marriage) are chaste women from the believers and chaste women from those who were given the Scripture (Jews and Christians) before your time when you have given their due Mahr (bridal-money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage), desiring chastity (i.e. taking them in legal wedlock) not committing illegal sexual intercourse, nor taking them as girlfriends} [Al-Ma'idah 5:5]
‘Ali ibn Abi Talhah said, narrating from Ibn ‘Abbas concerning the words {And do not marry Al-Mushrikat (idolatresses) till they believe (worship Allah Alone)}: Allah excludes from that the women of the people of the Book. This was also the view of Mujahid, ‘Ikrimah, Sa`id ibn Jubayr, Makhul, Al-Hasan, Ad-Dahhauak, Zayd ibn Aslam, Ar-Rabi` ibn Anas and others. And it was said that what is meant is the mushrikun who worship idols, and it does not mean the people of the Book at all. This meaning is close to the first meaning. And Allah knows best.” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 1/474)
While noting that this is permissible, we should also remember that Islam encourages the Muslim man to marry a Muslim woman who is religiously committed, because the Muslim’s life with his wife is a complete and comprehensive life which involves chastity, lowering the gaze, and protecting and looking after the house and children. These and similar things cannot be achieved except with a religiously-committed wife.
Please see the answer to question no. 12283 ; also the answer to question no 20227 , which gives more details on the bad consequences of marriage to a non-Muslim woman. In the answer to question no. 3320 it states that it is not permissible to allow her to celebrate (non-Islamic) festivals inside or outside the home.
For more, please see these answers: 21380 , 8015 , and 8396
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/20884/can-a-muslim-man-marry-a-non-muslim-woman | 43 | 20,884 |
18,778 | Is it permissible to marry a Yazidi woman? | Question
I am a Muslim man and a believer. Is it permissible for me to marry a Yazidi girl or not?
Please note that she wanted to become Muslim, but her family refused. She is in Europe and I am in Egypt. | Praise be to Allah.Firstly:
The Yazidis are a deviant sect that began in 132 AH following the demise of the Umayyad state. In the beginning, it was a political movement to restore the glory of the Umayyads, but ignorance continued to prevail among them, and their innovations and misguidance developed until they went beyond the pale of Islam altogether.
The roots of this sect go back to the time after the battle of Karbala’, during the reign of Yazid ibn Mu‘aawiyah and the martyrdom of al-Husayn ibn ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and many of Aal al-Bayt (may Allah be pleased with them).
The Shi‘ah began to curse Yazid and accuse him of heresy and drinking alcohol.
After the demise of the Umayyad state, the Yazidis began in the form of a political movement. They loved Yazid and objected to the cursing of him in particular, then they objected to cursing in general, to the extent that they objected to the cursing of Iblees. They turned their attention to the Book of Allah, and erased every mention in it of curses or devils or seeking refuge, on the grounds that these words had not existed in the original Qur’an, and that that was something that had been added to it by the Muslims. Then they began to venerate Iblees who is cursed in the Qur’an.
Their beliefs:
-Their belief that Iblees is the peacock of the angels lead them to venerate statues of peacocks made of copper in the form of a rooster the size of a clenched fist. They take these statues around the villages to collect money.
-In their declaration of faith they say: “I bear witness that One is Allah and Sultan Yazid is the beloved of Allah.”
-Fasting: they fast three days of every year in December, which coincides with the birthday of Yazid ibn Mu‘aawiyah.
-Alms are collected by means of the peacock and that is done by chanting and given to the leaders of the sect.
-Pilgrimage: on the tenth day of Dhu’l-Hijjah, they stand on a mountain in al-Marjah an-Nooraaniyyah in Lalish in Iraq.
-Prayer: they pray on the night of the fifteenth of Sha‘baan, and claim that it makes up for the prayers of an entire year.
-Resurrection and gathering after death: this will occur in the village of Baatat on Mount Sinjar, where the balance will be set up in front of Shaykh ‘Adiyy ibn Musaafir, who will bring the people to account and he will take his followers and admit them to Paradise.
They frequent graves and shrines like those of Shaykh ‘Adiyy, Shaykh Shams ad-Deen, Shaykh Hasan and ‘Abd al-Qaadir al-Jilaani. Each shrine has servants who use oil and candles to light it.
They regard it as prohibited to marry between classes, and it is permissible for a Yazidi to marry up to six wives.
They prohibit the colour blue because it is one of the most prominent colours of the peacock.
They regard it as prohibited to eat lettuce, cabbage, squash, beans, and turkey, as well as the flesh of the peacock which is regarded by them as holy, because it is a reminder of Iblees, who is the angel peacock, according to their views. They also prohibit chicken, fish, venison and pork.
The Yazidi prays facing towards the sun when it rises and when it sets, then he kisses the ground and rubs his face on it. There is also a supplication that is recited before sleeping.
They have their own festivals, such as the Gregorian New Year, and the festivals of Marba‘aaniyyah, Qurbaan and Jamaa‘ah, the festival of Yazid, the festival of Khadr Ilyaas, and the festival of Balandah. They have a night that they call the “black night”, when they extinguish all lights and regard it as permissible during that night to do prohibited actions and drink alcohol.
In their book it says: “Obey and listen to my servants in what they tell you to do and do not speak of that in front of strangers, such as the Jews and Christians and people of Islam, because they do not understand what it is, and do not give them any of your books lest they change them without you realising.”
They respect the Christians, to the extent that they kiss the hands of priests and share communion with them, and they believe that the wine is truly the blood of Christ.
They took from the Christians the practice of baptism, whereby they take the infant to a spring called ‘Ayn al-Bayda’ and immerse him in it. When the child reaches the age of one week, they bring him to the shrine of Shaykh ‘Adiyy, where he is immersed in water and they shout his name out loud, asking him to make the child a Yazidi and a believer (in the angel peacock), i.e., Iblees.
When Islam entered the Kurdistan region, most of the inhabitants followed the religion of Zoroastrianism; some of the teachings of this religion were passed down to the Yazidis.
Their beliefs are mixed with Magian and idolatrous teachings, and they raised Yazid to the level of divinity. In their view the hierarchy is: Allah – Yazid – ‘Adiyy.
See: al-Mawsoo‘ah al-Muyassarah fi’l-Adyaan wa’l-Madhaahib wa’l-Ahzaab al-Mu‘aasirah (1/371-376).
For more information on their beliefs and misguidance, see the following:
Al-Yazeediyyoona fi Haadirihim wa Maadeehim by ‘Abd ar-Razzaaq al-Hasani
Al-Yazeediyyah: Ahwaaluhum wa Mu‘taqadaatuhum by Dr Saami Sa‘eed al-Ahmad
Al-Yazeediyyah wa Asl ‘Aqeedatihim by ‘Abbaas al-Ghazzaawi
Ma Hiya al-Yazeediyyah? Wa Man Hum al-Yazeediyyoon by Mahmoud al-Jundi
From the above it is clear that the Yazidis are a deviant and misguided sect who are beyond the pale of Islam. If this is a person’s religion, there is no doubt that he is a disbeliever whose religion is contrary to the religion of Islam that was brought by the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him).
Based on that, it is not permissible for a Muslim to marry a Yazidi woman, just as it is not permissible to marry a mushrik (polytheist) or Magian woman, and the like. No exception is made regarding disbelievers who are outside the pale of Islam, with regard to marriage, except in the case of the Jews and Christians, because they are originally People of the Book. As for the Yazidis and others, they have no Book in the first place; rather they are an apostate sect who combine all kinds of disbelief in one religion. Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning): “And do not marry Al-Mushrikat (idolatresses, etc.) till they believe (worship Allah Alone)” [al-Baqarah 2:221].
Ibn Qudaamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said in al-Mughni (7/102):
With regard to all the disbelievers, apart from the People of the Book, there is no dispute among the scholars concerning the prohibition on marrying their women or eating meat slaughtered by them. With regard to an apostate woman, it is prohibited to marry her no matter what religion she follows. End quote.
See also the answers to questions no. 13808 and 20884
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/203158/is-it-permissible-to-marry-a-yazidi-woman | 43 | 203,158 |
18,779 | If a man divorces his wife before consummation of the marriage, she becomes haraam for all of his offspring | Question
A man did the marriage contract with a woman, then he divorced her before consummating the marriage with her. Is she permissible for her son to marry after he has divorced her? | Praise be to Allah.
No, if a man
divorces a woman, she becomes haraam for all of his sons, the sons of his
sons, and the sons of his daughters, because she was the wife of the
father, even if he did not consummate the marriage with her, and Allah has
not connected this matter to consummation of the marriage. Allah, may He
be glorified and exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And
marry not women whom your fathers married”
[an-Nisa’ 4:22].
Marriage to their
fathers’ ex-wives is haraam for sons in all cases. “Father” in this case
refers to the immediate father as well as the grandfather, i.e., the
father’s father or the mother’s father. It includes all forefathers on the
mother’s side and on the father’s side. Their (ex-) wives are haraam for the
son to marry and he is a mahram to them because of the verse (interpretation
of the meaning): “And
marry not women whom your fathers married”
[an-Nisa’ 4:22].
This includes the one with whom the marriage was consummated and the one
with whom it was not consummated. This is a matter concerning which there is
consensus among the scholars and there is no difference of opinion
concerning it.
The converse is
also true: The son’s wife is also haraam for father to marry in all cases,
even if the son did not consummate the marriage with her. If a man marries a
woman then dies before consummating the marriage with her, or he divorces
her before consummating the marriage with her, she is haraam for his father
and all of his grandfathers, because Allah says (interpretation of the
meaning) “the
wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins”
[an-Nisa’ 4:23];
He did not say those with whom you have consummated the marriage. End
quote.
Shaykh ‘Abd
al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allah have mercy on him). | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/132757/if-a-man-divorces-his-wife-before-consummation-of-the-marriage-she-becomes-haraam-for-all-of-his-offspring | 43 | 132,757 |
18,780 | The father’s (ex-)wife is a mahram to his sons even if she did not bear him any children | Question
My father married his cousin (the daughter of his paternal uncle), but she did not bear him any children, so he divorced her. After that he married another woman, and she is my mother. Is it permissible for me to greet my father’s first wife with salaam or not? | Praise be to Allah.
Your father’s
wife is a mahram to you, whether she bore children or not.
If he only did the
marriage contract with her, and did not consummate the marriage with her,
then she is still a mahram to you, because Allah, may He be exalted, said
(interpretation of the meaning): “And
marry not women whom your fathers married”
[an-Nisa’ 4:22].
The wives of fathers and grandfathers become mahrams (to sons and grandsons)
as soon as the marriage contract is done. Even if your grandfather or father
did not consummate the marriage with her, she is still a mahram to you. If
he did consummate the marriage with her and lived with her, then it is more
definite that she is a mahram to you, even if she did not bear children.
To sum up: the
wives of fathers and grandfathers are mahrams (to sons and grandsons)
regardless of whether they bore children to your father and grandfathers or
not. And Allah knows best.
End quote
Shaykh ‘Abd
al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allah have mercy on him). | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/134166/the-fathers-ex-wife-is-a-mahram-to-his-sons-even-if-she-did-not-bear-him-any-children | 43 | 134,166 |
18,781 | He committed an immoral act with his wife’s daughter | Question
I am writing regarding a very delicate question, can you please answer me as soon as possible. What is the ruling regarding a person who has made the big mistake of having illicit relations with his step daughter, he has kissed, and had oral sex with her although no vaginal penetration has taken place. Is his Nikah with his wife still valid or not . | Praise be to Allah.First of all, and before answering your question about the shar‘i ruling, the Muslim must always find out about repentance and its means. So he should strive hard to find out about things that will expiate sins and ask Allah for pardon, mercy and forgiveness. The consequences of sin are terrible in this world and the Hereafter, but if Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, sees that the Muslim sincerely regrets what he has done, is determined to refrain from that sin in the future, and is sincere in seeking forgiveness and turning to Him, then He, may He be glorified and exalted, forgives sin, as He says (interpretation of the meaning): “And verily, I am indeed Forgiving to him who repents, believes (in My Oneness, and associates none in worship with Me) and does righteous good deeds, and then remains constant in doing them, (till his death)” [Ta-Ha 20:82].
But if he persists and is arrogant, and continues in his sin as if nothing happened, then he will carry a burden on the Day of Resurrection. Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And whosoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad SAW), and transgresses His limits, He will cast him into the Fire, to abide therein; and he shall have a disgraceful torment”
[an-Nisa’ 4:14].
What this man and this girl must do is hasten to make up for their recklessness in committing these grave sins and immoral actions, and seek forgiveness from Allah, may He be glorified and exalted. That cannot be achieved except by taking all possible measures to ensure that immoral actions do not occur again, by changing one’s place of residence, and avoiding mixing with his wife’s daughter, and keeping away from her altogether, so that seeing her will not prompt him to commit that sin again. This is the responsibility of both parties, and her mother – who is his wife – is also responsible. If they do not give due attention to the matter, and they do not keep far away from one another, the Shaytaan will tempt him again to fall into an even greater sin.
With regard to the shar‘i ruling, it is also serious. The Hanafi fuqaha’ stated that if a man touches a girl with desire, then the mahram rulings regarding marriage immediately come into effect, even if no intercourse takes place. Whoever kisses a girl with desire, her mother and daughter become haraam to him and she becomes haraam to his sons.
Ibn Abi Shaybah narrated in al-Musannaf (3/479-480) with his isnaads that ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) undressed his slave woman, then one of his sons asked to marry her, and he said: She is not permissible for you.
It was narrated from ‘Amr ibn Shu‘ayb, from his father, from his grandfather, that he undressed one of his slave women, then one of his sons asked to marry her and he said: She is not permissible for you.
It was narrated that Ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said: If a man undresses his slave woman, and looks at her with desire, she is not permissible for his son.
As-Sarkhasi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
We quote as evidence the reports of the Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them) – and he mentioned some of the reports quoted above – and because touching and kissing are a means that lead to intercourse, they are regarded as foreplay leading to it, so they have the same effect as intercourse itself in establishing the mahram relationship, just as the marriage contract, which is a means for legitimate intercourse, has the same effect in establishing the mahram relationship, except in the case where the text states otherwise, namely that of a stepdaughter. That is because the mahram relationship is based on precautions; therefore anything that could lead to intercourse may have the same effect with regard to the mahram relationship as intercourse itself, and that is as a precautionary measure, even though it has no effect on other rulings.
End quote from al-Mabsoot (4/206)
Ibn al-Humaam (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
If a man touches a woman with desire, her mother and daughter become haram for him, because touching and looking are means that lead to intercourse, so they are regarded as having the same effect, as a precaution.
End quote from Fath al-Qadeer (3/2210)
Moreover, the Hanafi fuqaha’ have ruled that the marriage is annulled because of touching with desire in such cases, as Ibn Nujaym (may Allah have mercy on him) said: In the case of a woman who is observing ‘iddah following a revocable divorce (first or second talaaq), if she allows her husband’s son to be intimate with her, or he kisses her with desire, then she is not entitled to any maintenance, because the separation did not occur as a result of talaaq, rather it occurred as a result of an action on her part, which is the sin she committed.
End quote from al-Bahr ar-Raa’iq (4/218)
Az-Zayla‘i (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Zina, touching and looking with desire result in in-laws becoming prohibited for marriage … The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever touches a woman with desire”, her mother and daughter become haraam for him. This is the view of ‘Umar, ‘Imraan ibn al-Husayn, Jaabir ibn ‘Abdullah, Ubayy ibn Ka‘b, ‘Aa’ishah, Ibn Mas‘ood, Ibn ‘Abbaas and the majority of the Taabi‘een.
End quote from Tabyeen al-Haqaa’iq (2/106)
We do not deny that a number of scholars stated that the mahram relationship only comes into effect as a consequence of intercourse within the framework of a valid, legitimate shar‘i marriage. Some of them said that intimacy and the like does not have any effect of creating a mahram relationship. Others said that the mahram relationship cannot be created, even as a result of intercourse, except within the framework of a valid marriage.
Shaykh ad-Dardeer al-Maaliki (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
It is permissible for a man who has committed zina with a woman to marry her ascendants and descendants, and for his father or son to marry her.
End quote from ash-Sharh al-Kabeer ma‘a Haashiyat ad-Dasooqi (2/251)
Ibn Hajar al-Haytami ash-Shaafa‘i (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Intimate actions are not like intercourse, according to the more correct view, because they do not require ‘iddah, so by the same token they do not result in creation of the mahram relationship.
Tuhfat al-Muhtaaj (7/303)
Al-Bahooti al-Hanbali (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
There is no proof that the mahram relationship is created as a result of intimacy or looking at the private part or elsewhere, or by being alone with the person, even with desire, because Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning): “but there is no sin on you if you have not gone in them” [an-Nisa’ 4:23]. What is meant by “going in” is intercourse. The same applies if she is the one who did that, i.e., what is mentioned above of intimacy, looking at the private part or elsewhere, and being alone with a man, with desire. Her daughter does not become haram for him, because he did not have intercourse with her mother.
End quote from Kashshaaf al-Qinaa‘ (5/71)
This has been discussed previously, and we stated which view is more likely to be correct. See 131569
But no one would say, and no wise person would accept it, that the husband should remain in that situation, exposing himself to the risk of falling into sin and immoral deeds, without closing the door to it.
Would this husband be happy to be gathered (on the Day of Resurrection) with the adulterers and adultresses, and to receive the same punishment as them, of which the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) spoke when he said: “…we came to something like a tannoor (clay oven), in which there was shouting and voices. We looked inside and saw naked men and women, towards whom flames came from beneath them. When the flames reached them, they cried out” then he stated that they were “the adulterers and adulteresses”, as is narrated in Saheeh al-Bukhaari (7047).
Undoubtedly, if your marriage to your wife is not annulled, then leaving things as they are and continuing to live with her daughter in the same house, with the possibility of being alone with her, is one of the gravest of evils and opens wide the door to falling into immoral deeds and incurring the wrath of the Lord, may He be glorified and exalted.
Your transgression of the sacred limits set by Allah is worse than mere annulment of the marriage.
If someone were to ask, does a wife become haraam for her husband if he kills her daughter, the answer would be: No.
But annulment of the marriage, or its being haraam from the outset is one thing, and the abhorrent nature of the crime is something else.
So think: where are you, O slave of Allah, and where is your religious commitment? How could you allow yourself to drift away from religion and be overtaken by your desires??
If you stay in your marriage to this woman, it is not permissible for you to continue in that immoral action. This is quite clear. But, moreover, it is not permissible for you to stay with the door to fitnah wide open in front of you. Rather you must keep away from fitnah and its causes, with all means at your disposal, and you must block every route that calls you to be tempted by this girl and to go back to what you both did.
What you must do is take precautions and protect your religious commitment, not only by repenting from those reprehensible actions, but also by closing the door to anything that could make you go back to it. ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “Give up riba and doubtful things.” Narrated by Ibn Maajah (2276); classed as saheeh by al-Albaani.
We ask Allah, may He be exalted, to protect Muslim families from immoral actions, both obvious and hidden.
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/199332/he-committed-an-immoral-act-with-his-wifes-daughter | 43 | 199,332 |
18,782 | Your father’s wife’s mother is not a mahram for you | Question
My father took a second wife and it is known that she has become a mahram for me, but my question is: Has her mother also become a mahram for me?. | Praise be to Allah.The mahrams through
marriage fall into four categories:
1.The ascendants of the husband
[his father and grandfathers] become mahrams to the wife.
2.The descendents of the husband
[his sons and grandsons] become mahrams to the wife.
3.The ascendants of the wife [her
mother and grandmothers] become mahrams to the husband.
These three categories
become mahrams as soon as the marriage contract is done.
4.The descendants of the wife
[her daughters and granddaughters] become mahrams to the husband. In this
case there must be consummation. Once consummation takes place, then her
daughters from a previous or subsequent husband become mahrams to him
forever.
End quote from al-Sharh
al-Mumti’ (12/128).
Thus it is clear that the
mother of the father’s wife does not become a mahram for his sons.
It is permissible for a man
to marry a woman, and for his son to marry her mother, or her daughter,
because that is included in the words of Allaah, after mentioning the women
who are mahrams (interpretation of the meaning):
“All others are lawful”
[al-Nisa’ 4:24]
And Allaah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/117628/your-fathers-wifes-mother-is-not-a-mahram-for-you | 43 | 117,628 |
18,783 | He was breastfed by the wife of his paternal uncle; are the daughters of his paternal uncle from his other wife forbidden to him for marriage? | Question
I have a paternal uncle who is married to two wives, one of whom breastfed me. Is it possible for me to marry the daughters of the other wife?. | Praise be to Allah.If you were breastfed five
times in the first two years of life by your uncle’s wife, then she is your
mother through breastfeeding and your uncle is your father, and all his sons
and daughters from this wife and from all his wives are brothers and sisters
to you.
Based on that, the
daughters you asked about, if they are your uncle’s daughters, are mahrams
to you; if they were from another husband, someone other than your uncle,
then there is nothing wrong with you marrying one of them.
Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allaah
have mercy on him) said: If a woman breastfeeds a child five times within
the first two years, or more than five times, the infant becomes a son to
her and her husband, who is the “owner of the milk”, and all the children of
the woman from the husband who is “the owner of the milk” or another husband
become brothers and sisters of the infant, and the children of the husband
who is the “owner of the milk”, from the wife who breastfeeds and other
wives, become brothers and sisters of the infant who is nursed. End quote
from Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn Baaz (22/274).
He was also asked (may
Allaah have mercy on him): I was breastfed by a woman, then her husband took
another wife and that wife had children; are they brothers to me?
He replied: If you were
breastfed five or more times and the milk was attributed to the husband
because it resulted from a pregnancy that occurred due to him, then they are
your brothers through your father and your mother through breastfeeding. As
for the children from his second wife, they are brothers to you through your
father through breastfeeding. End quote from Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn Baaz
(22/305).
And Allaah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/117623/he-was-breastfed-by-the-wife-of-his-paternal-uncle-are-the-daughters-of-his-paternal-uncle-from-his-other-wife-forbidden-to-him-for-marriage | 43 | 117,623 |
18,784 | Is the husband’s mother a mahram to the sons of his wife? | Question
Is the mother of one’s mother’s husband regarded as a mahram of the wife’s sons?. | Praise be to Allah.The mahrams through
marriage fall into four categories:
1.The ascendants of the husband
[his father and grandfathers] become mahrams to the wife.
2.The descendents of the husband
[his sons and grandsons] become mahrams to the wife.
3.The ascendants of the wife [her
mother and grandmothers] become mahrams to the husband.
These three categories
become mahrams as soon as the marriage contract is done.
4.The descendants of the wife
[her daughters and granddaughters] become mahrams to the husband. In this
case there must be consummation. Once consummation takes place, then her
daughters from a previous or subsequent husband become mahrams to him
forever.
End quote from al-Sharh
al-Mumti’ (12/128).
Thus it is clear that there
is no relationship of mahram between the ascendants and descendants of the
husband, and the ascendants and descendants of the wife. The husband’s
mother is not a mahram to his wife’s sons, so it is not permissible for her
to shake hands with them or be alone with them or travel with them.
And Allaah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/112170/is-the-husbands-mother-a-mahram-to-the-sons-of-his-wife | 43 | 112,170 |
18,785 | Is the husband of her husband's daughter a mahram for her? | Question
Is it permissible for me not to observe hijab before the husband of my husband's daughter or not?. | Praise be to Allah.
The husband of your husband's daughter is not a mahram for
you, because there is no reason to suggest that he is a mahram. Allaah says
(interpretation of the meaning):
“Forbidden to you (for marriage) are: your mothers, your
daughters, your sisters, your father’s sisters, your mother’s sisters, your
brother’s daughters, your sister’s daughters, your foster mothers who gave
you suck, your foster milk suckling sisters, your wives’ mothers, your
stepdaughters under your guardianship, born of your wives to whom you have
gone in — but there is no sin on you if you have not gone in them (to marry
their daughters), — the wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins,
and two sisters in wedlock at the same time, except for what has already
passed; verily, Allaah is Oft‑Forgiving, Most Merciful.
Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those
(slaves) whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allaah ordained for you.
All others are lawful”
[al-Nisa’ 4:23, 24]
Based on that, you have to observe hijab before him, and it
is not permissible to you to uncover in front of him or to be alone with
him, because he is a stranger or non-mahram like all other non-mahrams.
As for the husband of your daughter, he is a mahram for you,
because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “your wives’ mothers”.
And Allaah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/120041/is-the-husband-of-her-husbands-daughter-a-mahram-for-her | 43 | 120,041 |
18,786 | Most of his maternal cousins were breastfed by his mother and he was breastfed by his maternal aunt; what is the ruling on his brother? | Question
I was breastfed by my maternal aunt and my mother breastfed most of her children. Is it permissible for my brother to marry the daughter of my maternal aunt, knowing that he was not breastfed by my maternal aunt?. | Praise be to Allah.
If a person is breastfed by a woman for five definite
feedings, he becomes her son through breastfeeding and a brother to all her
children, both males and females.
The evidence for that is the reports narrated by Muslim
(1452) from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) who said: Among the
things that were revealed of the Qur’aan was that ten definite
breastfeedings make a person a mahram, then that was abrogated and replaced
with five definite breastfeedings.
The definition of breastfeeding is as Ibn al-Qayyim (may
Allah have mercy on him) said in Zaad al-Ma’aad (5/575):
One breastfeeding (rad’ah) means when the child takes the
beast and starts suckling, and then lets it go without being made to do so.
That is one breastfeeding, because the Lawgiver referred to one
breastfeeding in general terms, so it is to be interpreted according to
custom, and this is the custom. If the child stops briefly in order to
breathe or to rest or because of some distraction, then quickly goes back to
the breast, this is regarded as one breastfeeding, just as when a person who
is eating pauses briefly then quickly goes back to eating, this is not
regarded as two meals, rather it is one. This is the view of al-Shaafa’i.
And if the infant moves from one breast to the other, this is one
breastfeeding. End quote.
Based on that, if you were breastfed by your maternal aunt
five times, then you are the brother of all her sons and daughters, and it
is not permissible to you to marry one of them.
The ruling on breastfeeding has to do with the person who
breastfed and his children. As for his siblings, the ruling on breastfeeding
does not include them.
Based on that, if the daughter of your maternal aunt whom
your brother wants to marry breastfed from your mother, then she is his
sister through breastfeeding and it is not permissible for him to marry her.
But if she was not breastfed from your mother, then there is nothing wrong
with them getting married, because there is no impediment to their doing so
and that is not affected by the fact that you were breastfed by her mother
or that her siblings were breastfed by your mother.
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/104397/most-of-his-maternal-cousins-were-breastfed-by-his-mother-and-he-was-breastfed-by-his-maternal-aunt-what-is-the-ruling-on-his-brother | 43 | 104,397 |
18,787 | Is the mother of the father’s wife a mahram to his sons? | Question
Is the mother of the father’s wife regarded as a mahram to the husband’s sons?. | Praise be to Allah.Firstly:
The father’s wife is a
mahram to his sons and his sons’ sons, because Allaah says (interpretation
of the meaning): “And marry not women whom your fathers married, except
what has already passed; indeed it was shameful and most hateful, and an
evil way” [al-Nisa’ 4:22].
With regard to the mother
of the father’s wife, she is not a mahram to his sons, because there is
nothing to indicate that this is the case. Allaah, may He be exalted, says
after mentioning the women who are mahrams (interpretation of the meaning):
“All others are lawful…” [al-Nisa’ 4:24].
The scholars of the
Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas were asked: My father has taken
another wife besides my mother. Is the mother of this wife a mahram to my
father’s sons from his other wife, or is she a non-mahram and is it haraam
for them to meet her, sit with her and be alone with her?
They replied: The mother of
the father's wife is regarded as a stranger (non-mahram) to his sons from
another wife and his sons are not mahrams to the mother of the father’s
wife. So she must observe hijab and it is not permissible for them to be
alone with her or for her to travel with them, because they are not mahrams
for her. End quote.
Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah, 17/358
And Allaah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/117165/is-the-mother-of-the-fathers-wife-a-mahram-to-his-sons | 43 | 117,165 |
18,788 | She breastfed a child thinking that it was her son; is the mahram relationship through breastfeeding established? | Question
A few years ago, my aunt (my father’s wife) breastfed her neighbour’s son from both sides until he was satisfied and slept from night until morning, which is a sign that he was full. My question is: When my aunt breastfed the child she thought that it was her son, because they were the same age (4 months) and the same size, i.e., it was breastfeeding by mistake, but breastfeeding took place on more than 10 occasions when the child was fully breastfed (i.e. was full) and there were witnesses. Does the fact that it was a mistake count for anything?
I hope that you can clarify because there are strong ties between us. | Praise be to Allah.
If a woman breastfeeds a child under the age of 2 for five
feedings, then the rulings on relationships through breastfeeding are
established. She becomes his mother through breastfeeding, her husband
becomes his father through breastfeeding, and all her children and the
children of her husband, whether they are their own children or children
through breastfeeding, become siblings of this child who was breastfed.
In order to prove that this relationship of mahram exists, it
is not essential that the woman or the child should have intended it to be
so, or that she should know that he was not her child. With regard to the
rulings on breastfeeding, the scholars have mentioned issues from which this
ruling may be understood.
They said that if an infant girl crawled to a sleeping adult
and breastfed from her, then motherhood through breastfeeding is established
and the rulings on breastfeeding become applicable.
See: al-Mughni, 11/333; Tuhfat al-Muhtaaj,
3/492.
Based on that, your father's wife is a mother to this boy
through breastfeeding and your father is a father to him, and you are a
sister to him.
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/141208/she-breastfed-a-child-thinking-that-it-was-her-son-is-the-mahram-relationship-through-breastfeeding-established | 43 | 141,208 |
18,789 | Are First Husband's Sons Mahram to Second Husband's Daughters? | Question
I got married to a man who was already married and who had sons. I had a daughter from him, then he divorced me. I married another man, who has died, and I have sons and daughters from him. Are the sons of the first husband who divorced me Mahrams to me and my daughters from the second husband? Is it permissible for me and my daughters to uncover our faces in their presence? | Praise be to Allah.Why First Husband’s Sons Are Mahram to Their Father’s Former Wife
The sons of your first husband are Mahrams to you , because you were the wife of their father and you are not permissible for them to marry, because Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): {And marry not women whom your fathers married, except what has already passed; indeed it was shameful and most hateful, and an evil way.} [An-Nisa’ 4:22]
Mahram Relationship between First Husband’s Sons and His Daughter
Similarly, the sons of your first husband are Mahrams for your daughter from the first husband, because she is their sister through their father.
Are Daughters from Second Marriage Mahram to First Husband’s Sons?
With regard to your daughters from the second husband, there is no Mahram relationship between them and these sons, because there are no ties through blood, breastfeeding or marriage which would create that Mahram relationship.
Based on that, it is not permissible for them to uncover in front of the sons of your first husband, and it is permissible for them (the first husband’s sons and your daughters) to marry one another.
Permissibility of Marriage between First Husband’s Sons and Second Husband’s Daughters
Al-Kasani said in Bada’i` As-Sana’i` (4/4):
It is permissible for a man to marry a sister of his half-brother through his father. What that means is if his father’s wife gave birth to a son, and she had a daughter from another husband, that daughter is the sister of his half-brother through his father, but it is permissible for him to marry her. End quote.
This is the situation mentioned in the question. It is permissible for the sons of your first husband to marry your daughter from your second husband, who is the sister of their sister through the father.
For in-depth explanations, see the answers listed here:
Who Is a Woman’s Mahram
Etiquette of Talking to Non-Mahram Women
The Maternal and Paternal Uncles of the Husband Are Not Mahram to the Wife
Sitting with Husband’s Relatives and Shaking Hands with Them
Is the Father of One’s Ex-Husband a Mahram
Is My Husband’s Stepfather My Mahram?
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/112875/are-first-husbands-sons-mahram-to-second-husbands-daughters | 43 | 112,875 |
18,790 | If he marries a woman she becomes permanently forbidden in marriage to his father | Question
Is the wife of a son who has died, with whom the marriage was not consummated, regarded as permanently forbidden in marriage, or is she only temporarily forbidden?. | Praise be to Allah.
If a man marries a woman, then simply by virtue of the
marriage contract she becomes permanently forbidden in marriage to his
father, even if the marriage was not consummated, whether he dies or he
divorces her.
Allaah says, when mentioning the women who are forbidden in
marriage (interpretation of the meaning):
“the wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins”
[al-Nisa’ 4:23]
Ibn Qudaamah said in al-Mughni (9/524):
When a man has concluded
the marriage contract with a woman, she becomes forbidden in marriage to his
father simply by virtue of the marriage contract, because Allaah says
(interpretation of the meaning):
“the wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins”
[al-Nisa’ 4:23]
This refers to the wives
of his sons. And there is no scholarly difference of opinion on this point,
praise be to Allaah.
Ibn al-‘Arabi said in Ahkaam al-Qur’aan:
Every woman who becomes permissible (through marriage) to the
son becomes forbidden to the father permanently.
Imam al-Shaafa’i said in al-Umm:
Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“the wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins”
[al-Nisa’ 4:23]
So any woman whom a man marries becomes forbidden to his
father, whether the son consummated the marriage with her or not. Similarly
she becomes forbidden for his grandfathers on both his father’s and mother’s
sides.
The Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas was asked: Is it
permissible for a father to marry the woman whom his son divorced, if he did
not consummate the marriage with her?
They replied:
If the son concluded a marriage contract with a woman, then
she becomes permanently forbidden to his father and grandfather, including
fathers and grandfathers through both descent and breastfeeding (radaa’ah),
even if he did not consummate the marriage with her and was not alone with
her. This is indicated by the general meaning of the verse in which Allaah
mentions the women to whom marriage is forbidden (interpretation of the
meaning):
“the wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins”
[al-Nisa’ 4:23]
The Standing Committee was also asked (18/210):
What is your opinion concerning a man who married a woman
then divorced her, and her ‘iddah ended – is this women permissible in
marriage for the man’s maternal grandfather or is she forbidden to him? If
she is forbidden, what is the evidence for that, may Allaah reward you?
They replied:
It is not permissible for a man to marry a woman with whom
his son or his son’s son or daughter’s son, whether through descent or
breastfeeding, has concluded a marriage contract. That is because Allaah
says, when mentioning the women who are forbidden in marriage
(interpretation of the meaning):
“the wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins”
[al-Nisa’ 4:23]
So if a man divorces his wife or dies, she is not permissible
for his father or his grandfather, whether on his father’s or mother’s side, because this ruling applies equally to both paternal and maternal grandfathers, as the verse is general in meaning.
And Allaah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/40251/if-he-marries-a-woman-she-becomes-permanently-forbidden-in-marriage-to-his-father | 43 | 40,251 |
18,791 | She wants to marry a man whom she loves but he previously committed zina with her mother | Question
I have a friend who wants to marry a man whom she loves dearly, but the problem is that this man once committed zina with her mother who was married and had three children at that time. It was a mistake committed in a moment of heedlessness. My question is: what should she do? Is it permissible for them to marry?. | Praise be to Allah.
The fuqaha’ differed concerning one who commits zina with a
woman: is it permissible for him to marry her daughter or not? There are
two views:
The Hanafis and Hanbalis are of the view that it is not
permissible for him; they regarded haraam intercourse as being like halaal
intercourse with regard to who becomes a mahram as the result of a
marriage.
The Maalikis and Shaafa‘is are of the view that he may marry
her.
Ibn Qudaamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Haraam
intercourse creates the same mahram relationships as halaal intercourse or
intercourse as the result of a dubious marriage - meaning that those who
become mahrams as a result are confirmed in all three cases. So if a man
commits zina with a woman, she becomes haraam to his father and son, and her
mother and daughter become haraam to him. Something similar to that was
narrated from ‘Imraan ibn Husayn, and this was also the view of al-Hasan,
‘Ata’, Tawoos, Mujaahid, al-Sha‘bi, al-Nakha‘i, al-Thawri, Ishaaq and ashaab
al-ra’y.
Ibn ‘Abbaas narrated that haraam intercourse does not make
anyone a mahram. This was also the view of Sa‘eed ibn al-Musayyab, Yahya ibn
Ya‘mir, ‘Urwah, al-Zuhri, Maalik, al-Shaafa‘i, Abu Thawr and Ibn al-Mundhir.
End quote from al-Mughni, 7/90.
The more correct view is that of the Maalikis and Shaafa‘is,
that it does not make anyone a mahram. See also the answer to question
number 78597.
But our advice is that this marriage should not go ahead for
two reasons:
1.
So as to be on the safe side and avoid an area of scholarly
dispute, because she is haraam to him according to many scholars, especially
the Hanafi madhhab that is prevalent in your country.
2.
If he marries her, that will lead to him being close to her
mother and being in touch with her, and there is the fear that this would
remind him of that haraam action or tempt him to do it again, or it may be a
cause of the woman (the mother) being tempted. We ask Allah to keep us all
safe and sound.
If your friend is in a relationship with this man, this
indicates that he is corrupt and deviant, as he did not have any religious
commitment that could have deterred him from committing zina with a woman
who had three children and forming a relationship with her daughter. Such a
man cannot be trusted at all. Your friend has to end her relationship with
him. Perhaps Allah will send her a chaste husband who is not contaminated
with this evil and sin.
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/146043/she-wants-to-marry-a-man-whom-she-loves-but-he-previously-committed-zina-with-her-mother | 43 | 146,043 |
18,792 | It is not correct to draw an analogy between donating blood and breastfeeding to prove that someone is a mahram | Question
I know that breastfeeding establishes the relationship of being a mahram, and that if a woman breastfeeds a child she becomes his mother through breastfeeding (radaa’ah). Is it correct to draw an analogy between blood transfusion and breastfeeding?. | Praise be to Allah.This analogy is not
correct. The relationship of mahram that is proven in sharee’ah applies only
in the case of breastfeeding. This has been stated by the consensus of the
Fiqh Council.
Majallat al-Buhooth al-Islamiyyah,
35/343.
The Standing Committee was asked:
A man had blood taken from him to be given to his wife. Does
that have any effect on his married life with her?
They replied:
Perhaps the questioner is thinking of an analogy between
blood and the milk that establishes the relationship of a mahram. This
analogy is not valid for two reasons:
1-Blood is not a source of
nourishment as milk is;
2-That which establishes the
relationship of a mahram according to the text is breastfeeding that fulfils
two conditions: (i) that the breastfeeding occurs five or more times; (ii)
that that takes place within the first two years of the child’s life.
Based on this, the blood that has been taken from you and
given to your wife does not have any affect on your married life. And Allaah is the Source of strength.
Majallat al-Buhooth al-Islamiyyah, 4/332. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/26202/it-is-not-correct-to-draw-an-analogy-between-donating-blood-and-breastfeeding-to-prove-that-someone-is-a-mahram | 43 | 26,202 |
18,793 | Can You Marry a Woman and Her Aunt? | Question
Please guide me in the light of Surah An-Nisa verse number 23 and 24. The husband wants to marry his wife’s sister’s daughter (means wife niece). Can he marry his wife’s niece and have at the same time both women in Nikkah? | Praise be to Allah.Islamic Marriage Restrictions on Close Relatives
It is not permissible for a man to be married to two sisters at the same time or to a woman and her paternal or maternal aunt at the same time, because Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
{Forbidden to you (for marriage) are: your mothers, your daughters, your sisters, your father`s sisters, your mother`s sisters, your brother`s daughters, your sister`s daughters, your foster mothers who gave you suck, your foster milk suckling sisters, your wives` mothers, your stepdaughters under your guardianship, born of your wives to whom you have gone in — but there is no sin on you if you have not gone in them (to marry their daughters), — the wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins, and two sisters in wedlock at the same time, except for what has already passed; verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.} [An-Nisa` 4:23]
Shaykh `Abd Al-Rahman As-Sa`di (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his Tafsir (1/173): These verses refer to those who are prohibited in marriage because of blood ties, those who are prohibited because of breastfeeding, those who are prohibited because of ties through marriage , those who are haram because it is not permitted to be married to them and another woman at the same time, and women who are permissible in marriage.
With regard to those who are prohibited because it is not permitted to be married to them and another woman at the same time, Allah mentions being married to two sisters at the same time and describes it as prohibited.
And the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) forbade being married to a woman and her paternal or maternal aunt at the same time. So if we take a pair of women who are related to one another, if we imagine that one of them is male and the other is female, if it would be prohibited for them to get married, then it is prohibited for them to be co-wives. That is because of the severing of ties between relatives which would result from that. (End quote)
Hadith on Marriage with Paternal or Maternal Aunts
Al-Bukhari (5109) and Muslim (1408) narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “One should not be married to a woman and her paternal aunt, or a woman and her maternal aunt, at the same time.”
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said, explaining the women who are forbidden in marriage: “married to a woman and her paternal aunt, or a woman and her maternal aunt, at the same time” – Ibn Al-Mundhir said: The scholars unanimously agreed on this matter and there is no difference of opinion concerning it, praise be to Allah, except that some of the innovators whose difference of opinion does not count, namely the Rafidis and Khawarij, do not regard that as forbidden and they do not follow the Sunnah that is proven from the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), as it says in the Hadith of Abu Hurayrah (quoted above).
The Wisdom behind the Prohibition
The reason for the prohibition on being married to two sisters at the same time is that it would cause enmity among relatives and lead to severing the sacred ties of kinship, and this reason is also applicable in the case of marriage to a woman and her maternal or paternal aunt at the same time.
If they quote as evidence the general meaning of the words of Allah (interpretation of the meaning): {All others are lawful,} [An-Nisa` 4:24], then the report we have narrated makes exceptions from that. (End quote from Al-Mughni, 7/89)
Are the Wife’s Maternal Aunt and Paternal Aunt Regarded as Mahram?
Ruling on shaking hands with one’s mother’s maternal aunt
Status of Maternal Aunt in Islam
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/147367/can-you-marry-a-woman-and-her-aunt | 43 | 147,367 |
18,794 | Can he marry the daughter of his father’s wife? | Question
A man got married to a woman who had a daughter when he got married to her, and he was blessed with children from her. Can the man’s son from another wife marry the daughter of this woman whom his father married?. | Praise be to Allah.
There is nothing wrong with that, because there is no connection of blood between them, so she is a stranger (non-mahram) to him, and he is a stranger to her. So it is permissible for a person to marry the daughter of his father’s wife from another man, because Allaah says, after mentioning those to whom marriage is forbidden: “All others are lawful” [al-Nisa’ 4:24]. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/48954/can-he-marry-the-daughter-of-his-fathers-wife | 43 | 48,954 |
18,795 | Ruling on marrying a fifth wife during the ‘iddah following divorce of the fourth wife | Question
If a man has 4 wives and he divorces one of them,is it permissible for him to marry someone else during this iddah period? What is the daleel,if the answer is no it's not permissible for him to marry someone during the iddah period will that last marriage be valid and what should be done to rectify the situation according to the quraan and sunnah. | Praise be to Allah.
If the divorce that has been issued to the fourth wife is a
revocable divorce – i.e., it is the first or second talaaq – then the
scholars are unanimously agreed that a woman who has been given a revocable
divorce is still to be considered a wife until her ‘iddah is over. (al-Mughni,
7/104). If it is proven that she is still your wife, then you should note
that the scholars are agreed that it is not permissible for a free man to
have more than four wives at one time, because of the hadeeth narrated by
al-Tirmidhi (1128) from Ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) that
Ghaylaan ibn Salamah al-Thaqafi became Muslim and he had ten wives during
the Jaahiliyyah; they became Muslim along with him, and the Prophet
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) commanded him to choose four of
them. This was classed as saheeh by al-Albaani, as stated in Saheeh Sunan
al-Tirmidhi, 1/329.
It is clear from the above that it is not permissible for a
man to marry a fifth wife during the ‘iddah of a wife who has been given a
revocable divorce, because by doing so he will have five wives at the same
time, and the Sahaabah, the four imams and all of Ahl al-Sunnah
wa’l-Jamaa’ah are agreed, in word and deed, that it is not permissible for a
man to have more than four wives at one time, except for the Prophet
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah
said in al-Fataawa al-Kubra (4/154), that the great Taabi’i ‘Ubaydah
al-Salmaani said: “The companions of Muhammad (peace and blessings of
Allaah be upon him) did not agree on anything as much as they agreed that a
fifth wife cannot be married during the ‘iddah of the fourth, and a woman
cannot be taken as a co-wife with her sister.” Whoever wants to have more
than four wives is going against the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His
Messenger Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and is
going against Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah.
See Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah, al-Fataawa al-Jaami’ah
li’l-Mar’ah al-Muslimah, 2/641.
If this has taken place,
then the marriage contract is invalid, and you have to leave her until the
‘iddah of your divorced wife is over. If you have consummated the marriage
with her – i.e., with the fifth wife – then you have to give her the mahr
that is given to women of her social standing, and she has to wait out the
‘iddah of one who is divorced. Then if you want to marry her after that, you
must make another marriage contract with her, meeting all the conditions
prescribed in sharee’ah for a marriage contract.
But if your divorce of the fourth wife is an irrevocable
divorce – i.e., a third talaaq – then there is a difference of scholarly
opinion as to whether it is permissible to marry a fifth wife during the
‘iddah of the fourth wife following a third talaaq. The Hanbalis and Hanafis
say that this is not allowed, and this is the view regarded as most correct
by Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him). See
Kitaab Fataawa al-Talaaq by Shaykh Ibn Baaz, 1/278. On this basis, the
ruling is the same as that described above in the case of a revocable
divorce. When the ‘iddah of the woman who has been divorced for a third time
comes to an end, it is then permissible for him to make a marriage contract
with her (the fifth woman). And Allaah knows best.
But in the case of the fourth wife dying, it is permissible
for him to get married after she dies, because the marriage is not
considered to be still in effect in this case.
And Allaah knows best | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/12298/ruling-on-marrying-a-fifth-wife-during-the-iddah-following-divorce-of-the-fourth-wife | 43 | 12,298 |
18,796 | Is there such a thing as a temporary mahram? | Question
It is well known that it is not permissible for a man to shake hands with a non-mahram woman, or to be alone with her, but is it permissible for a man to greet – i.e., shake hands with – his wife’s sister or her aunt, on the grounds that they are his temporary mahrams? Similarly is it permissible to be alone with them or not?
Is the temporary prohibition on marriage between a man and his wife’s sister or aunt the same as the temporary prohibition on marriage between a man and another man's wife or not?. | Praise be to Allah.Firstly:
It is not permissible for a man to shake hands with his wife’s sister or aunt, and it is not
permissible for him to be alone with any of them, because they are not his mahrams. Rather marriage to them is temporarily forbidden, but this is
not enough to make them like mahrams with regard to being alone and shaking hands with them.
Secondly:
If it is established that a person is a
mahram through blood ties, breastfeeding or ties of marriage, then that is permanent. There is no such thing as a temporary mahram, rather there
is a temporary prohibition on marriage. The wife’s sister or aunt are not mahrams of a man, rather it is haraam for him to marry any of them
whilst he is still married to his wife, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Forbidden to you (for marriage) are: your
mothers, … and two sisters in wedlock at the same time”
[al-Nisa’ 4:23]
And because the Prophet (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade being married to a woman and her aunt at the same time. With regard to the wife of another man, she is
temporarily forbidden to anyone other than her husband, so long as she is still married to him. If the marriage ends through his death or through
divorce or annulment of the marriage contract, then it becomes permissible for someone else to marry her after her ‘iddah ends, even if he already
has a wife, so long as she is not a sister or aunt of the first wife.
And Allaah is the Source of strength. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=2 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/34682/is-there-such-a-thing-as-a-temporary-mahram | 43 | 34,682 |
18,797 | Attribution of an illegitimate child and rulings that result from that | Question
Thirty-two years ago an illegitimate child was born to a foreign kitaabi woman (i.e. Jewish or Christian woman). He is a young man of very good character and with a good heart. When he reached the age of 25, he started to look for his parents. He found his mother, and he found me, the father, a week ago. It has been proven by DNA testing that I am the father. I got married 31 years ago to a Muslim woman, and I have a daughter and two sons from her, and I have 4 grandchildren. Praise be to Allaah Who guided me, I came back to fear of Allaah and I am religiously-committed: I pray and give zakaah, and I did Hajj and ‘Umrah 3 years ago, my wife and I. I ask Allaah to guide me always and help me to repent.
I hope that you can advise me: is he a mahram for my wife and daughter? Is he a brother to my children? Should I regard him as one of the family? I hope that you can explain everything that has to do with the matter. | Praise be to Allah.
Firstly:
We ask Allaah to pardon us and you, and to help us to repent
properly and turn to Him, and to bless us with good and righteous offspring
by His grace and bounty.
Remember that repentance and guidance are the best things
that a person may be blessed with in this world; they are the greatest
blessings that Allaah can bestow upon us. So we must be grateful to Allaah
for them, and strive to renew them. The Prophet (peace and blessings of
Allaah be upon him) used to pray to Allaah for forgiveness and repent to him
one hundred times every day, as was narrated by Muslim (2702).
Secondly:
With regard to the attribution of illegitimate children, the
fuqaha’ have discussed this issue in detail and they said that one of two
scenarios must apply to the woman with whom zina is committed:
1 – Either she is married, in which case any child who is
born to her is to be attributed to the husband and not to anyone else, even
if she is certain that he is the child of the one with whom she committed
zina, unless the husband disowns the child by means of li’aan, in which case
the child is not attributed to the husband, rather he is to be attributed to
his mother and not to the zaani (adulterer).
2 – Or she is not married. If an unmarried woman has a child,
the scholars differed as to whether the child should be attributed to his
father, the zaani, or to his mother. There are two opinions, which have been
discussed and the evidence for them quoted, in the answer to question no.
33591. See also the answers to questions no.
117,
2103 and
3625. There it
says that the correct view is that this attribution is not valid, so it is
not permissible to attribute the illegitimate child to the zaani, rather he
should be attributed to his mother, even if there is certainty that this
child was fathered by this zaani.
It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (20/387):
The correct scholarly view is that the child is not to be
attributed to the man who had intercourse with the woman, unless intercourse
took place within the framework of a valid or invalid marriage or something
that may be taken as a marriage contract or concubinage or something that
may be taken as concubinage. In such cases, the child may be attributed to
the man who had intercourse with the woman, and they may inherit from one
another. But if it was a case of zina then the child cannot be attributed to
the zaani. Based on that, he cannot inherit from him. End quote.
It also says in Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah
(22/34):
With regard to the illegitimate child, he is to be attributed
to his mother, and he comes under the same rulings as any other Muslim if
his mother is a Muslim. He is not to be blamed or put to shame for his
mother’s crime or the crime of the one who committed zina with her, because
Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And no bearer of burdens shall bear another’s burden”
[Faatir 35:18]
End quote.
Thirdly:
It is well known that attribution of lineage affects many
rulings such as rulings on breastfeeding, custody, guardianship,
maintenance, inheritance, qasaas, the hadd punishment for stealing, slander,
testimony etc. Because the more correct view is that the illegitimate child
cannot be attributed to the zaani, none of the rulings mentioned above can
be proven to apply to the father of the illegitimate child, rather many of
them apply to the mother.
But the illegitimate father (the zaani) is still affected by
the rulings forbidding marriage. According to the majority of scholars, the
rulings forbidding marriage still apply between the illegitimate child and
his father and his father’s relatives.
Ibn Qudaamah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
It is haraam for a man to marry his illegitimate daughter, or
his illegitimate sister, or his (illegitimate) son’s daughter, or his
daughter’s daughter, or his brother’s daughter, or his sister who is
illegitimate. This is the view of most of the fuqaha’. End quote.
Al-Mughni (7/485).
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him)
was asked about an illegitimate daughter –can she marry her father?
He replied:
The view of the majority of scholars is
that it is not permissible to marry her. This is definitely the correct
view. End quote.
Majmoo’ al-Fataawa (32/134).
It says in al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (36/210):
It is haraam for a man to marry his illegitimate daughter,
because of the clear meaning of the verse (interpretation of the meaning):
“Forbidden to you (for marriage) are: your mothers, your
daughters…”
[al-Nisa’ 4:23]
because she is his daughter in a real sense and in linguistic
terms and she was created from his water (i.e. sperm), so the illegitimate
son is forbidden (in marriage) to his mother.
This is the view of the Hanafis and of the Maalikis and
Hanbalis. End quote.
Fourthly:
Based on the above, it is not permissible for this
illegitimate son of yours to marry your daughters, so they are his like
sisters. The same applies to your wife.
But that does not mean that he is a mahram for them in the
sense that they may be alone with him and take off their hijab in his
presence. Prohibition of marriage does not always mean that one is a mahram
in the sense that it is permissible to be alone with the person etc. This is
an additional ruling which applies only to the shar’i mahrams, so attention
must be paid to that.
Ibn Qudaamah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
Zina means that a person is forbidden in marriage, but it
does not make the person a mahram or make it permissible to look (at a
member of the opposite sex). End quote.
Al-Mughni (7/482).
This does not mean that you should not treat this young man
kindly and strive to bring him to Islam and make him a member of the family,
but he should not be attributed to his illegitimate father, and the issue of
the daughters of the family observing hijab in front of him should not be
taken lightly. We ask Allaah to bless you and guide you.
And Allaah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/85043/attribution-of-an-illegitimate-child-and-rulings-that-result-from-that | 43 | 85,043 |
18,798 | Marrying a woman from the people of innovation, and are conditions stipulated by the woman’s guardians binding? | Question
I am engaged with a girl recently. My family was not happy with this engagement initially because both families are not of the same cast (Cast system is dominant here in Sub-continent).Now the things are normal. But the problem is that my parents lived in a village and I lived in another city for seek of my job and study. Some of the relatives of my spouse also live in the same village (also her relatives are not happy about this engagement. The only reason is cast difference). My mother in law is insisting that she would not be going to marry her daughter me until I buy a house at city where I am living for my job/study (I visit my parent twice a month) and also marriage ceremony will not take place at my village. They conveyed these two statements to me. I clearly told them before the engagement that I have not enough resources to buy a house in city but I will take one on rent and so far as marriage is concerned it will take place at village. But right know they are insisting to do at city and also buy house first otherwise they will break this engagement. Both of these are not possible for me and I know it in advance that my parents will also not agree to have marriage ceremony at some other place. My parents are of the view that after marriage, they will help us to shift to city. I liked the girl very much and in fact I prayed for her for many times. I fear that if I say that both of your conditions are not possible for me they will negate the engagement. I do not want to lose the girl. I am really confused about that, I know Allah will do well for me Inshahallah; I just want more on this from you. Also should I clear them about my condition once again? Please take this all in consideration and suggest me some useful guide lines fro Quran and Sunnah as soon as possible. | Praise be to Allah.
We do not really understand what you are saying about your
family and your fiancée’s family being from different castes. However, if
what you mean by caste is tribe or clan or lineage, then the matter is
simple and does not need any discussion from us; you will find information
in question no. 13780 about this matter.
But if what you mean by caste is that she belongs to a sect
that has different beliefs than yours – and we think that you are of ahl
al-sunnah (a Sunni) – then in this case we must point out to you that among
the sects that claim to belong to Islam are some that are beyond the pale of
Islam, and some which have deviated from the path of ahl al-sunnah
wa’l-jamaa’ah. Examples of the former include the Qadianis (Ahmadis),
Ismailis, Huloolis, Raafidis (Shi’ah) and the Bareilawis. Examples of the
latter include the Ash’aris, Maatreedis and Murja’is.
If your fiancée follows the beliefs of one the of sects that
are beyond the pale of Islam, then it is not permissible for you to marry
her, because they comes under the rulings on mushriks because of their
apostasy from Islam. If she follows the beliefs of one of the misguided
groups, then it is permissible for you to marry her, but you should be
cautious about that, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah
be upon him) advised marrying women who are religiously-committed, so that
the husband’s own ‘aqeedah would be safe with her, and so that he can trust
her with his family and children.
‘Imraan ibn Hittaan was one of ahl al-Sunnah, and he married
a Khaariji woman in order to set her straight, but then he ended up becoming
one of the leaders of the Khawaarij.
See: Siyar A’laam al-Nubala’ by al-Dhahabi (2/214).
There are stern warnings narrated from the righteous salaf
against sitting with and keeping company with the people of innovation and
whims and desires.
Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) said:
Do not sit with people who follow whims and desires, for
sitting with them sickens the heart.
Tafseer al-Tabari (4/328).
Abu’l-Jawza’ said:
Because sitting with pigs is dearer to me than sitting with
any of those who follow their whims and desires.
Al-Ibaanah by Ibn Battah
(2/438).
Abu Qilaabah said:
Do not sit with the people who follow their whims and
desires, or talk with them, for I am not sure that they will not tempt you
into their misguided ways or confuse you about what you know.
Siyar A’laam al-Nubala’
(4/372).
Whatever the case, no doubt marrying a woman from ahl
al-sunnah is better for you and your family and your children, unless this
woman is like that because she is living among followers of innovation, and
perhaps you will be rewarded for bringing her out of that atmosphere.
See also the answer to question no.
85370.
Secondly:
It is not permissible for you to hold wedding celebrations
that include haraam things such as music, dancing and mixing. If that was
stipulated previously, it is a false condition and you do not have to fulfil
it.
In the answer to question no.
7577 we have explained how to
deal with such situations.
In the answer to question no.
9290 you will find information
on what it is permissible to use and listen to in celebrations.
If they insist on having a party – so long as it is free of
sin – then you can have two smaller parties – as is usually done by people
in your situation – one in their village and another with your own people.
Thirdly:
With regard to their stipulating that you should buy a house,
they have no right to stipulate that you should do that, unless that house
will be for their daughter and they want you to put it in her name. There is
no reason why the wife should not stipulate that the husband provide her
with accommodation in her own land, or in some other place, and after
marriage she has the right, if she wishes, to keep it or waive that right.
It is not up to the wife’s family to stipulate the conditions
of marriage unless they are doing it on behalf of their daughter, or the
conditions are in her interests. But if her guardian stipulates something
that has nothing to do with his daughter, that is not permissible. Rather
conditions are to be stipulated by the wife or by her guardian on her
behalf. In principle the guardian only has the right to agree to the
marriage or not. Even the mahr (dowry) belongs to the wife and she is the
one who stipulates it or delegates her guardian to stipulate it on her
behalf.
The wife or her guardian may stipulate that you will live in
their locality, and you are obliged to fulfil that condition, but they do
not have the right to stipulate whether the house will be bought or rented.
If you want them to drop this condition altogether, or at
least agree that the house is to be rented and not bought, then you must be
gentle in negotiating with them, and seek the help of knowledgeable and wise
people to speak to your fiancée’s family, and pray to Allaah to make things
easy for you.
See also the answers to questions no.
20757 and
10343.
We advise you to pray istikhaarah, for you may think that
this woman will be good for you and your children when in fact that is not
the case. We are ignorant and must seek the help of our Lord Who knows what
is best for His slave and decrees that for him. We are helpless so we must
seek the help of our Lord Who is able to make things easy or not, and He is
able to divert things and prevent them from happening. For more details
about the istikhaarah prayer, please see the answer to question no.
2217.
We hope that we have answered your question fully. We would
also remind you of the importance of making a good choice when seeking a
wife, and choosing one who is religiously committed, follows sound beliefs
and is of good character. We ask Allaah to grant you a righteous wife who
can help you to obey your Lord and protect you from that which is forbidden
to you.
And Allaah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/91983/marrying-a-woman-from-the-people-of-innovation-and-are-conditions-stipulated-by-the-womans-guardians-binding | 43 | 91,983 |
18,799 | Can You Marry a Woman and Her Father’s Ex-Wife? | Question
I would like to ask whether it is permissible to marry the stepmother in law (the wife is not her daughter) while keeping the wife and stepmother in law at the same time in nikah? | Praise be to Allah.Permissibility of Marrying a Wife’s Father’s Ex-Wife
It is permissible for a man to marry the ex-wife of his wife’s father, so long as that is not his wife’s mother. There is nothing wrong with marrying her even if her husband’s daughter is with him (is his wife), because there is no blood relationship between the two wives, i.e., between his first wife and her father’s ex-wife.
Forbidden Marriages: Sisters and Aunts
What is forbidden is to be married to two sisters at the same time, or to be married to a woman and her maternal or paternal aunt at the same time.
Please see question no. 22302.
Anything other than that is permissible, because Allah says, after mentioning those women whom one is forbidden to marry :
{All others are lawful, provided you seek (them in marriage) with Mahr (bridal-money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage) from your property.} [An-Nisa’ 4:24 – interpretation of the meaning]
With regard to a mother and daughter, if the daughter is the wife, then her mother becomes permanently forbidden for him to marry as soon as the marriage contract is completed.
Conditions Involving Mother and Daughter in Marriage
If the mother is the wife, then the matter is subject to further discussion:
If her husband consummated the marriage (i.e., has had intercourse with her), then the daughter is permanently forbidden for him.
If he has not consummated the marriage, then the daughter is forbidden for him until he divorces the mother, because Allah says, describing the women who are forbidden for marriage:
{your wives’ mothers, your stepdaughters under your guardianship, born of your wives to whom you have gone in — but there is no sin on you if you have not gone in them (to marry their daughters),” [An-Nisa’ 4:23 – interpretation of the meaning] (End quote from Kitab Fatawa Islamiyyah, vol. 3, p. 134)
And Allah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/23435/can-you-marry-a-woman-and-her-fathers-ex-wife | 43 | 23,435 |
18,800 | Does shaking hands with his fiancée’s mother with desire mean that he is not allowed to marry her daughter? | Question
If one merely touched his mother in law with lust (my hand may have touched her hand or her hand may have touched mine and experienced an erection), does nikah with her daughter become haram?
I need urgent advice in this matter? I am a young man and an immoral person. I have unclean thoughts and frequent erections. Just looking at a woman or if a woman merely touches me by mistake, I have an erection! . | Praise be to Allah.With regard to what you have mentioned about
looking at your fiancée’s mother with desire, this does not mean that you are not allowed to marry her daughter, because what would prevent you
from marrying her (the daughter) is your marrying her mother and consummating the marriage with her. The evidence for that is the verse in which
Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Forbidden to you (for marriage) are: … your stepdaughters under your guardianship, born of
your wives to whom you have gone in — but there is no sin on you if you have not gone in them (to marry their daughters),”
[al-Nisa’ 4:23]
But I advise you to fear Allaah and not take
the matter of looking lightly, for it is a serious matter, and the door to endless evil. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon
him) said: “Do not follow one glance with another, for you are allowed the first but not the second.” (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 277; Abu Dawood,
2147; Ahmad, 1373 – from ‘Ali, may Allaah be pleased with him).
What you have mentioned about feeling desire
whenever you look, is because your mind is constantly preoccupied with sex. Undoubtedly the corrupt media play a great role in that, because their
aim is to occupy people’s minds with such things by spreading pornographic movies and pictures, and love stories. These are things that the Muslim
should keep away from.
There is no reason why a person should not
satisfy his desires in the way in which Allaah has permitted, but for a man to live with no other thought than how to satisfy his desire, this is
something which every wise person should refrain from.
You should realize that no one will live in
this world, rather this is the abode of striving. Man is like a stranger in this world. Think about the words of the Prophet (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) to Ibn ‘Umar – who was a young man – “Be in this world as if you are a stranger or just passing through.”
Set your aim high and do not be content with
anything but the highest and noblest of things. The highest of things is the pleasure of Allaah and entering Paradise. If you set your aim high,
you will find that you are a new person, and the things you are suffering will disappear.
I advise you to obey the command of the
Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “O young men, whoever among you can afford it, let him get married, and whoever cannot,
then let him fast, for it will be a shield for him.”
(Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 5065; Muslim,
1400, from ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood, may Allaah be pleased with him).
Finally, I advise you to make du’aa’ and
turn to Allaah, for He will not let down the one who calls upon Him in sincerity and seriousness. Strive to control yourself, and keep away from
things that provoke your desire. Fill your heart with the love of Allaah and longing to meet Him.
May Allaah bless us with beneficial
knowledge, righteous deeds, humble hearts and answered prayers. May Allaah bless our Prophet Muhammad and all his family and companions.
And Allaah knows best. | Women who are forbidden for marriage | https://islamqa.info/en/categories/topics/43/women-who-are-forbidden-for-marriage?page=3 | https://islamqa.info/en/answers/26828/does-shaking-hands-with-his-fiancees-mother-with-desire-mean-that-he-is-not-allowed-to-marry-her-daughter | 43 | 26,828 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.