Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

Giving the animal an electric shock before slaughtering it may kill the animal if the voltage is high, or it may cause it to lose consciousness without killing it, if the voltage is low or moderate.

If it kills it, it is not permissible to eat it because it is “dead meat” (an animal that was not slaughtered in the proper manner) according to the consensus of the fuqaha’. If it does not kill it, and it is slaughtered in the proper shar‘i manner immediately afterwards, then it is halaal and it is permissible to eat it. 

Dr. Muhammad al-Ashqar (may Allah preserve him) said:

If the electric shock was fatal, then the animal is like one that has been “beaten to death” (and therefore haraam, as mentioned in al-Maa’idah 5:3). If it caused it to lose consciousness without killing it, and the animal was slaughtered in the proper shar‘i manner after that, then it is halaal. If it was not slaughtered properly but it was skinned and cut up without being slaughtered, then it is not halaal.

End quote from Majallat Majma‘ al-Fiqh al-Islami. Issue no. 10, vol. 1, p. 339

The Islamic Fiqh Council (Majma‘ al-Fiqh al-Islami) is of the view that it is not permissible to give chickens electric shocks before slaughtering them, because experience has proven that this leads to the death of a considerable number of them.

In a statement of the Islamic Fiqh Council, issued during its tenth conference in Jeddah in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia during the period 23-28 Safar 1418 AH/28 June-3 July 1997 CE, it says the following:

Animals that are slaughtered in the proper shar‘i manner after stunning are halaal and may be eaten if technical conditions are met that ascertain that the animal was not dead before it was slaughtered. These have been defined by experts at the present time as follows:

1.     The electrodes should be placed on the temples or on the forehead and back of the head

2.     The voltage should be between 100 and 400 volts

3.     The current should be between .75 and 1 amp for sheep, between 2 and 2.5 amps for cattle.

4.     The electrical current should be applied for between 3 and 6 seconds.

(c) it is not permissible to stun an animal that is intended for slaughter by using a captive bolt pistol or bolt gun, or by gassing.

(d) It is not permissible to stun chickens by means of electric shock, because experience has proven that this leads to the death of a considerable number of them before slaughter.

(e) It is not haraam to eat animals that were slaughtered properly after being stunned by using a mixture of carbon dioxide and air or oxygen, or by using a non-penetrating bolt gun that does not lead to the death of the animal before it is properly slaughtered. End quote.

Dr. Muhammad al-Hawaari stated that stunning of chickens by means of electrocution leads to cardiac arrest in 90% of cases and to death in 10%.

See Majallat Majma‘ al-Fiqh al-Islami, issue no. 10, vol. 1, p. 411, 583

Based on that, you need to look at the electrocution asked about. If it will lead, as the Council said, to the death of a considerable number of the chickens that are not separated from the live chickens, then it is not permissible to electrocute them. But if the electrocution uses a low voltage that does not lead to that, then the slaughter is halaal.

Secondly:

Saying “Bismillah” is a condition of slaughter being halaal, and is not waived in the case of forgetting or ignorance, according to the more correct scholarly view. See the answer to question no. 85669.

The basic principle with regard to saying “Bismillah” is that it must be done for each individual animal with the intention of slaughtering it in the proper manner.

But in the case of mechanical devices that slaughter a large number of chickens within a short time period, the scholars have differed with regard to the way of saying “Bismillah” that is essential for the slaughter to be halaal. There are several opinions:

1.     That it is sufficient for “Bismillah” to be said once by the person operating the machine, if it slaughters a number of chickens in one continuous time period. This is what has been stated in fatwas issued by the Standing Committee and in a statement issued by the Islamic Fiqh Council.

2.     That it is sufficient for “Bismillah” to be said once by the person operating the machine, on condition that the specific chickens that he is going to slaughter are in front of him, such as if they are lined up on the conveyor belt and the like. This has been stated in fatwas issued by Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him).

3.     That saying “Bismillah” when using these machines is not possible, therefore it is not permissible to use these machine for halaal slaughter.

The more correct view is the first one, for the following reasons:

It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah:

What is the ruling on mechanical slaughter, in which dozens of chickens are slaughtered by machines at the same time, saying “Bismillah” only once? If a person is slaughtering a large number of chickens by hand, is it acceptable for him to say “Bismillah” just once, or does he have to say it for each one individually?

Answer:

Firstly: it is permissible to slaughter using modern machines on condition that (the blades) are sharp and that the oesophagus and windpipe are cut.

Secondly: if the machine slaughters a number of chickens in the same continuous length of time, it is acceptable for the person operating the machine to say “Bismillah” once when he begins to operate it with the intention of slaughtering, so long as the person operating the machine is a Muslim or kitaabi (Jewish or Christian).

Thirdly: if the person is slaughtering by hand, he must say “Bismillah” separately for each chicken he slaughters, because each chicken is a separate entity.

Fourthly: The slaughter must be done in the slaughterhouse and the windpipe and two veins, or one of them, must be cut.

Bakr Abu Zayd, Saalih al-Fawzaan, ‘Abdullah ibn Ghadyaan, ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn ‘Abdullah Aal ash-Shaykh

End quote from Fataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah, 22/463

It also says (22/462): is it permissible to say “Bismillah” when operating the machine which does one repeated movement. Please note that what is meant is saying “Bismillah” only once, when starting the machine for slaughter.

Answer: it is acceptable for the person who is operating the machine to say “Bismillah” once when starting it for a number of (chickens) with the intention of slaughtering them, so long as the one who is operating it is a Muslim or a Jew or a Christian.

‘Abdullah ibn Ghadyaan, ‘Abd ar-Razaaq ‘Afeefi, ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Baaz. End quote.

It says in the statement of the Islamic Fiqh Council quoted above:

8. The basic principle is that slaughter of poultry and other animals is to be done by hand, but there is nothing wrong with using mechanical devices to slaughter poultry so long as the conditions of shar‘i slaughter mentioned above in paragraph 2 are met. And it is acceptable to say “Bismillah” once for each batch that is to be slaughtered in a continuous session, but if there was an interruption then saying “Bismillah” must be repeated. End quote.

But the statement of the Council did not specify that saying “Bismillah” must come from the one who is operating the machine.

Dr. Muhammad Sulaymaan al-Ashqar said: Saying “Bismillah” in the case of a large number, if they are to be slaughtered by hand in the Islamic manner, may be exhausting for the slaughterman. For example, if a person has the task of slaughtering 1200 chickens per hour at a rate of one chicken every three seconds, then he would have to say “Bismillah wa Allahu akbar” 1200 times in an hour which would be exhausting and very difficult, and such burdensome difficulty is to be avoided in Islam because Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning): “and has not laid upon you in religion any hardship” [al-Hajj 22:78].

Hence the Fatwa Council in Kuwait, of which I was a member at the time this fatwa was issued, stated that when slaughtering a large number of poultry it is sufficient to say “Bismillah” over them once, at the beginning, if the task is to proceed continuously without stopping. If there is a pause for some reason, then the slaughterman has to say “Bismillah” again for the remainder.

End quote from Majallat Majma‘ al-Fiqh al-Islami, issue no. 10, vol. 1, p. 346.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked the following question:

I went to visit the National Poultry Farms and I saw how they slaughter the chickens; in the beginning they suspend the chickens so that they cannot move, then they pass over the slaughterman who slaughters them without saying “Bismillah”. I asked: Why do you not say “Bismillah”? He said: Because I say “Bismillah” when I enter and I cannot say it for five hundred thousand chickens. So when I start I say, “Bismillah, Allahu akbar”, and that is sufficient. I said, Who did you ask? He said: The scholars gave me a fatwa to that effect and permitted it.

I do not know, O Shaykh, whether this action is permissible?

He replied: It is essential to say “Bismillah” over something specific, whether it is one or more. For example, if he lines up a thousand chickens then when starting the machine he says, “Bismillah”, that is sufficient. Then if he lines up another thousand chickens, for example, and starts the machine and the knives start moving, it is sufficient for him to say, “Bismillah” for this batch. And if another batch is lined up for him, he should say “Bismillah” for it.

Questioner: He says, “I say ‘Bismillah’ once and that is sufficient”?

Shaykh: Do you mean until the machine stops? No, that is not permissible, because “Bismillah” must be said over something specific.

Questioner: Another question, O Shaykh. We also went to visit Astra Farms in Tabook, where they were slaughtering quail. What do they do? They hang up these birds, then after hanging them up they pass over a machine that sprays water on the birds and stuns them somewhat, then they pass over something like a wall on which is written, “Bismillah wa Allahu akbar”, then they go to a machine that cuts off their heads. The person in charge said that this is acceptable. Is it acceptable to have the words “Bismillah wa Allah akbar” written down?

Shaykh: All of that is ignorance and now you, may Allah bless you, have to report what you and your brothers have seen in a signed statement and send it to Dar al-Ifta’, and tell them when you saw that, whether it was this year or a few years ago, so that you may discharge your duty with regard to this matter.

Questioner: O Shaykh, they say that a group of shaykhs gave them a fatwa allowing that.

Shaykh: No, some shaykhs issued a fatwa saying something other than this. Maybe he issued a fatwa saying what I have said, which is that he may collect a batch and then turn on the machine for this batch, even if he does not say “Bismillah” for each individual bird. It is similar to the case where he sees a flock of birds and shoots them and says “Bismillah”, and twenty birds fall – in that case they are halaal.

Al-Liqa’ al-Maftooh, 35/27

What seems most likely to be the case, and Allah knows best, is that what the shaykh (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned about saying “Bismillah” for each specific batch of birds being slaughtered, is not essential, because saying “Bismillah” once in this case is analogous to what is done when hunting. When hunting it is not essential to say “Bismillah” for each specific target; rather saying “Bismillah” is connected to the weapon. So if a person said “Bismillah” over his weapon with the intention of hunting, and he catches something other than what he aimed at, it is still halaal.

Here we will quote some useful words from Shaykh Muhammad Taqi al-‘Uthmaani (may Allah preserve him) which confirms what we have said above about the principle that “Bismillah” should be said over a specific animal (or batch) and that saying “Bismillah” just once on the part of the person operating the machine is a kind of concession that differs from the basic principle, by analogy with what is done when hunting. And he explains that there is no point in somebody standing next to the machine saying “Bismillah” when he is not actually operating it.

He said (may Allah have mercy on him):

With regard to the issue of saying “Bismillah”, it is very difficult when using this method. The first problem is identifying who is doing the slaughtering, because saying “Bismillah” is obligatory on the slaughterman to such an extent that if a man says “Bismillah” then another man does the slaughtering, that is not permissible. So the question is: Who is the slaughterer in the case of this machine? We could say that the one who starts the machine the first time is regarded as the slaughterer, because the function of the machine can only be attributed to the one who operates it, because machines are not sentient beings to which actions may be attributed. So the action is to be attributed to the one who uses them, and he becomes the doer by means of the machine. But the problem here is that the person who uses the machine at the beginning of the day, for example, only starts it once, then the machine continues running during work hours, and sometimes runs for twenty-four hours, cutting the necks of thousands of chickens. So if the person who turned it on at the beginning of the day said “Bismillah” only once, is that single utterance of “Bismillah” sufficient for thousands of chickens that are slaughtered throughout the day after turning on the machine? The apparent meaning of the Qur’aanic text (interpretation of the meaning) “Eat not (O believers) of that (meat) on which Allahs Name has not been pronounced” [al-An‘aam 6:121] indicates that each animal should have the name of Allah pronounced over it separately and be slaughtered immediately afterwards. From this the fuqaha’ derived rulings which indicate that the name of Allah should be mentioned over each animal or for each action.

I mentioned these phrases in my research and I concluded from them that the majority of imams who stipulate that the name of Allah should be pronounced at the time of slaughter stipulate that it should be said over a specific animal, and that it should be at the time of slaughter, and there should be no significant interval between saying the name of Allah and the act of slaughter. These conditions are not met in the method described in the case of machines. If the one who switches it on the first time says “Bismillah” once, that means that he did not say “Bismillah” over a particular animal, and between his saying “Bismillah” and his slaughtering of thousands of chickens there may be a lengthy interval that may last for a whole day or two days. So it appears to be the case that this single utterance of “Bismillah” is not sufficient for the slaughter of all these animals.

Then I saw some slaughterhouses in Canada, where they have a man standing beside the rotating knives, continually saying, “Bismillah Allahu akbar”. And I thought: with regard to his saying “Bismillah” carrying any weight in shar‘i terms there are the following problems:

1.     The words “Bismillah” should be uttered by the slaughterer; this man who is standing beside the rotating knife has nothing to do with the slaughter process; he is not operating the machine or turning the knife, and the chickens come nowhere near him. Rather he is a man who is completely separated from the process of slaughter and his pronouncement of the name of Allah does not come from the slaughterer.

2.     A number of chickens come to the rotating knife in a matter of seconds; this man who is standing there cannot say the name of Allah over each one of these chickens without intervals.

3.     This man who is standing is a human; he is not an automatic machine. So he cannot do any action apart from saying “Bismillah”. He may need to do things that will distract him from saying “Bismillah”, and during that dozens of chickens may pass through the rotating knife.

There is another concern to be noted regarding the topic of saying “Bismillah” over machines, which is drawing an analogy between turning on the machine and releasing a hunting dog. It is not obligatory to say “Bismillah” when the prey animal dies; rather it must be said when releasing the dog, and there may be a lengthy interval between the release of the dog and the death of the prey, and the hunting dog may kill a number of animals after being released once. So it seems that saying “Bismillah” once is sufficient for all of them to be regarded as halaal. Ibn Qudaamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: If the hunter says “Bismillah” over one prey (when releasing his dog) but then he catches another, it is halaal, and if he says “Bismillah” over one arrow and shoots it, then he takes another and shoots it (without saying “Bismillah”), what he catches with it (the second arrow) is not halaal.

What we mentioned above has to do with necessity, and in the issue under discussion, there is no necessity. However, if we think of the need to produce a large amount within a short time, which is because of increased population and the rise in the number of consumers, and the small number of slaughtermen, and the fact that sharee‘ah waived the condition of specifying the prey in the case of hunting because it is too difficult, as Ibn Qudaamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said, and in such cases sharee‘ah allows concessions to ward off hardship, in that case we may compare the issue under discussion to the issue of necessity (as in the case of hunting) with regard to mentioning the name of Allah, so as to ward off hardship and make things easier for people. However, I am not quite certain of this conclusion, but I wanted to put it forward for discussion by the scholars to decide about it, and I have not issued any fatwa on that basis until now, especially when we have a suitable alternative to the revolving knife which will meet all of the production needs at the same time. That alternative is to remove the revolving knife from the machine and replace it with four Muslim men who could take turns in cutting the chickens’ throats whilst mentioning the name of Allah, every time the suspended chickens pass by them.

This is something that I have suggested to a large slaughterhouse on the island of Reunion, and they did that. Experience indicates that this did not reduce the rate of production at all, because these people cut the throats of the chickens within the same timeframe as the revolving knife.

End quote from Shaykh Muhammad Taqi al-‘Uthmaani, Majallat Majma‘ al-Fiqh al-Islami, issue no. 10, vol. 1, p. 541-544

To sum up:

1.     Stunning the chickens by means of electrocution must be avoided, and it is not permissible for the organisation that is supervising slaughter to allow it unless they can be certain that it does not lead to killing any of the chickens.

2.     It is sufficient for the machine operator to say “Bismillah” when switching it on, and that must be repeated after any pause.

3.     There is no point in the five men beside the machine saying “Bismillah”; rather this is a waste of time that should be put a stop to.

4.     The organisations that supervise Islamic slaughter must pay attention to the conditions and essential guidelines on the matter, and not be careless in applying them. And they should try to arrange for the slaughter to be done by hand instead of by machines, in accordance with the suggestion made by Shaykh Muhammad Taqi al-‘Uthmaani. That is so as to do away with problems having to do with electrocution and saying “Bismillah”, and so as to avoid the possibility of the slaughter of some of the chickens being done inappropriately when passing over the rotating knife, because of differences in size among the chickens. This is a problem that some researchers have pointed out.

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

Celebrating the Mawlid (Prophet’s birthday) is bid’ah (an innovation). It is not narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or any of his companions or the Taabi’een or the Imams. Rather it was innovated by the ‘Ubaydis (Fatimids), who also introduced other innovations and misguidance.

The fact that this celebration is an innovation has been discussed in the answer to question no. 10070 and 70317. 

Secondly:

The basic principle is that it is permissible to eat and drink sweets that are free of harmful ingredients, so long as that is not helping in evil or propagating or encouraging its survival.

It seems that buying Mawlid sweets at the time of that celebration comes under the heading of helping and propagating it; rather it is a kind of establishing that festival or eid, because an eid is something that people observe regularly. If it is their custom to eat this specific food or they make it for that festival, unlike their habits at other times of the year, then buying and selling it, and eating it or giving it as a gift, on that day, is part of celebrating that festival or establishing it. So it is better for you not to do that on the day of the celebration.

In Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah there is a discussion to do with Valentine’s Day and buying sweets that have been coloured red and on which hearts are drawn, as an expression of celebrating that innovated festival. It says:

The clear evidence from the Qur’aan and Sunnah – on which there is consensus among the early generations of the ummah – that there are only two Eids or festivals in Islam: Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha. Any festivals other than these, whether they are connected to a person, a group, an incident or anything lese, are innovated festivals and it is not permissible for the Muslims to celebrate them or approve of them, express joy on them or help with them in any way, because that is transgressing the sacred limits of Allaah, and whoever transgresses the sacred limits of Allaah has wronged himself. … It is also haraam for a Muslim to help with this festival or any other haraam festivals in any way, whether it has to do with food, drink, selling, buying, manufacturing, giving, corresponding, announcing or anything else, because all of that is cooperating in sin and transgression and disobedience to Allaah and to the Messenger of Allaah, (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Help you one another in Al‑Birr and At‑Taqwa (virtue, righteousness and piety); but do not help one another in sin and transgression. And fear Allaah. Verily, Allaah is Severe in punishment”

[al-Maa’idah 5:2]

End quote.

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

In the saheeh Sunnah there are many reports which speak of the virtues of gathering to read the Book of Allaah, but in order for the Muslim to attain those rewards, he should ensure that the gathering is in accordance with sharee’ah. One of the prescribed ways in which people may gather to read Qur’aan is for the people gathered to read together for the purpose of study, learning the meanings and how to recite properly. Another kind of gathering that is prescribed is for each of them to read and the others to listen, so that they may ponder the meanings of the verses. Both are mentioned in the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). 

For more information please see question no. 22722, which explains the ruling on gathering to read the Qur’aan.

With regard to what each person reads being counted as a khatmah (complete reading of the Qur’aan) for each of them, this is not correct, because none of them has read the entire Qur’aan, or even listened to it, rather each of them has read a part of it, so they will only be rewarded for whatever they have read of the Qur’aan.

The scholars of the Standing Committee said:

Distributing ajza’ or parts of the Qur’aan to those who are present so that each one of them may read a hizb of the Qur’aan is not necessarily regarded as a khatmah or complete reading of the Qur’aan on the part of each one of them. End quote.

Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah, 2/480

Secondly:

It is not prescribed to say du’aa’ together after reading Qur’aan, and it is not permissible to pray that the reward for the reading go to any of the dead or the living. Our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not do that, and neither did any of his companions (may Allaah be pleased with them).

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked:

Is it permissible for me to read the entire Qur’aan for my parents, knowing that they are illiterate and cannot read or write? Is it permissible for me to read the entire Qur’aan for a person who knows how to read and write, but I want to give this khatmah to him? Is it permissible for me to read the entire Qur’aan for more than one person?

He replied:

There is no report in the Holy Qur’aan or in the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), or from his companions (may Allaah be pleased with them) to indicate that it is prescribed to give one’s reading of Qur’aan (or the reward thereof) to one’s parents or to anyone else. Rather Allaah has enjoined reading Qur’aan so that one may benefit from it, learn from it, ponder its meanings and act upon it. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“(This is) a Book (the Qur’aan) which We have sent down to you, full of blessings, that they may ponder over its Verses, and that men of understanding may remember”

[Saad 38:29]

“Verily, this Qur’aan guides to that which is most just and right”

[al-Isra’ 17:90]

“Say: It is for those who believe, a guide and a healing”

[Fussilat 41:44]

And our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Read the Qur’aan, for it will come as an intercessor for its companions.” And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The Qur’aan will be brought on the Day of Resurrection along with its people who used to act upon it, preceded by Soorat al-Baqarah and Aal ‘Imraan, like two clouds or two flocks of birds, spreading their wings, pleading on behalf of their companions (i.e., those who used to read them).”

The point is that it was revealed to be acted upon and pondered, to be read as an act of worship and read a great deal, not to be given to the dead or to anyone else. I do not know of any reliable basis for giving it to one’s parents or anyone else. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever does any action that is not in accordance with this matter of ours will have it rejected.” Some of the scholars are of the view that that is permissible, and they said: There is no reason why the reward for reading Qur’aan and other righteous actions cannot be given to others, and they liken that to the case of charity and du’aa’ for the deceased and others. But the correct view is the first view, because of the hadeeth quoted above, and other similar reports. If giving the reward for reading to another was permissible or prescribed, the righteous salaf would have done it. It is not permissible to make analogies with regard to acts of worship, because they can only be proven by a text from the Book of Allaah, may He be blessed and exalted, or the Sunnah of His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), because of the hadeeth quoted above and other similar reports.

Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn Baaz, 8/360, 361

With regard to their quoting the hadeeth, “When the son of Adam dies, all his good deeds come to an end…” this is not correct, rather if you think about it, you will see that the hadeeth indicates that it is not prescribed to give the reward for reading Qur’aan to the dead, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “A son who will pray for him,” not “who will read Qur’aan for him.”

Thirdly:

We should not write the letter (S) or abbreviations for the blessing upon the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). If a person can write such a lengthy question, he is not incapable of writing the blessing upon the Prophet in full. We have already discussed the ruling on writing such abbreviations in the answer to question no. 47976.

Fourthly:

Celebrating the Prophet’s birthday (al-mawlid) is an innovation, and doing special acts of worship on this day such as saying tasbeeh and tahmeed, observing i’tikaaf, reading Qur’aan and fasting is an innovation for which a person will not receive any reward, for these are all rejected.

It was narrated from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever introduces anything into this matter of ours that is not part of it will have it rejected.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2550; Muslim, 1718.

According to a version narrated by Muslim (1718) he said: “Whoever does an action that is not in accordance with this matter of ours will have it rejected.”

Al-Faakihaani (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

I do not know of any basis for this mawlid in the Qur’aan or Sunnah, and there is no report that any of the scholars of this ummah, who are examples in matters of religion and adhere to the path of those who came before, did this. Rather it is an innovation (bid’ah) which was introduced by those who have nothing better to do, and it is a means for them to have fun and eat a lot.

Al-Mawrid fi ‘Aml al-Mawlid, quoted in Rasaa’il fi Hukm al-Ihtifaal bi’l-Mawlid al-Nabawi, 1/8, 9

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

If celebrating the Prophet’s birthday was prescribed, then the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) would have told his ummah of that, because he is the most sincere of people and there is no Prophet after him who could explain anything he did not speak about. He (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is the Seal of the Prophets and he explained to the people what he had to explain of the truth, such as loving him and following his sharee’ah, sending blessings and salaams upon him and other rights of his that are explained in the Qur’aan and Sunnah. He did not tell his ummah that celebrating the day of his birth was something prescribed so that they would do that. He (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not do that during his lifetime and his companions (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) who were the dearest of people to him and the most knowledgeable of his rights did not celebrate that day, neither did the Rightly-Guided Caliphs or any others. Then those who followed them in truth of the best three generations did not celebrate this day either.

Do you think that all these people were ignorant of his rights or fell short with regard to them, until the later generations came and made up for this shortfall and made the truth complete? No, by Allaah. No wise man who understands the nature of the Sahaabah and how they followed the truth would say this. If you understand that the celebration of the Prophet’s birthday was unknown at the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and the time of his companions and the time of their earliest followers, you will realize that it is an innovation that has been introduced into the faith, and it is not permissible to do it, approve of it or advocate it, rather we must denounce it and warn people against it.

Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn Baaz, 6/318, 319

Fifthly:

It is not permissible for anyone to make up a du’aa’ or dhikhr and promulgate it among the people. The du’aa’ that is called du’aa’ al-raabitah is an innovated du’aa’, and thinking of those who are being prayed for and believing that they will recognize the one who is praying for them and will call out to him in Paradise – all of that is Sufi myths and fables that have no basis in the religion of Allaah. The Islamic guidelines by means of which a person can distinguish between Sunnah and bid’ah, right and wrong, are clear. The basic principle with regard to acts of worship is that nothing is permitted unless there is evidence. We cannot seek to draw closer to Allaah by doing an act of worship unless there is evidence from the Qur’aan or saheeh Sunnah that it is prescribed. The basic principle for the Muslim is to follow and not to innovate, and innovations will be rejected. Allaah has completed this sharee’ah for us and has completed His blessing upon us, so what need do we have for such innovations to be part of our lives at the time when we are falling so far short with regard to that which is proven in sharee’ah?

For more information see the answer to questions no. 27237 and 6745

We hope that what we have mentioned is sufficient to make these sister refrain from their innovation. We advise them to fear Allaah and follow the Sunnah. They should remember that Allaah does not accept any innovated act of worship, no matter what efforts and wealth are expended on it. Being moderate in following the Sunnah is better than striving hard in following innovation, as the great Sahaabi ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood (may Allaah be pleased with him) said.

We ask Allaah to guide those sisters to that which pleases Him, and we advise you to convey this message well and not take part in that with them, and to be patient in bearing any problems that may result from that.

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

As soon as a person dies, his wealth is transferred to his heirs. Thus financial obligations are transferred from the original owner of the wealth (the father who left it behind) to the new owners (the heirs). After having been the property of one person, it is now divided among the heirs according to their shares of inheritance. The mother gets one-eighth of the estate and the rest of it is divided among the children, with each male getting the share of two females. 

Each of them then adds the wealth that he or she has inherited to his or her previous wealth, if applicable. Based on that, each one of them will have a nisaab [minimum threshold] independent of the others. The year for the inherited wealth (after the passage of which zakaah becomes due) begins when the person who left this estate behind dies and the wealth is transferred to the heirs. If he died before zakaah on his wealth became due, this year no longer counts and a new year begins for the heirs.

The scholars of the Standing Committee were asked:

When should the heir pay zakaah? Is it when he takes possession (of the inheritance) or after one year has passed since he acquired it? And what about in the case a gift, if it is in the form of cash or real estate?

He replied:

Zakaah must be paid on the estate when one year has passed since the death of the one who left it behind, because ownership of the estate passes from the deceased to the heirs on the date of death, if the heir’s share reaches a minimum threshold (nisaab) of cash or gold or silver jewellery.

End quote from Fataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah, 9/305

If the estate includes agricultural land, then the heirs must pay the zakaah on the produce on the day of harvest; it is not permissible to delay it until one year has passed, because Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “but pay the due thereof (its Zakat) on the day of its harvest” [al-An‘aam 6:141].

For more information please see the answer to questions no. 99843 and 3593

Secondly:

The returns on the agricultural land that yields produce come under the same rulings as the original estate: they are to be divided according to the shares of each one, with each male getting the share of two females. But zakaah must be paid for the entire yield before it is shared out among the heirs.

With regard to zakaah on the houses: if they are intended for living in, then no zakaah is due on them at all.

If they are intended to be rented out, there is no zakaah on the houses themselves, but zakaah must be paid on the rent, which should be added to the rest of the wealth and zakaah should be paid on it if it reaches the minimum threshold and one year has passed.

See the answer to question no. 159321

Thirdly:

If you did not pay zakaah for the previous period, from the date of your father’s death, then you have to pay it as described above. In that case you will be responsible for paying the zakaah of one year, and at the end of the second year, of which half has passed, you have to pay zakaah for that year too.

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

A person may not know the real reason for which Allah tests him in this world until the Day of Resurrection, when he will discover the high status that Allah, may He be exalted, has prepared for him in Paradise if he is patient and seeks reward. At that time he will realise that Allah, may He be exalted, tried and tested him by His grace and in His wisdom.

It was narrated from Jaabir (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “On the Day of Resurrection, those who were hale and hearty will wish that their skin had been cut with scissors, when they see the reward of those who were put to trial.”

Narrated by at-Tirmidhi, 2402; classed as hasan by al-Albaani in as-Silsilah al-Hadeethah, 2206

It seems that you have, praise be to Allah, overcome that situation and its psychological effects; in fact I hope that you have emerged psychologically stronger, with higher morale and a purer spirit, for in every trial there is a blessing and after every calamity comes well being. No one should regret what has passed and dwell on the past that will never come back; rather he should learn a lesson from it for today and be optimistic about his future.

In your story there is a lesson for parents who are responsible for their children before Allah, may He be exalted, that they should not send them to places of danger on the grounds of thinking well of relatives. The unfortunate reality compels us to say that many cases of molestation come from relatives. We ask Allah to keep us safe and sound.

This is not a call to sever ties of kinship and cause division among people; rather it is a call to be always careful and take precautions as dictated by the situation. Parents have to take proper precautions without going to extremes or being negligent. Islam has given us an important principle in this regard, which is the principle of blocking the means (that may lead to evil). In fact Islam teaches us to take precautions even among siblings in the same house. That was when the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) instructed us to separate children in their beds, as was narrated by Abu Dawood (495) and classed as saheeh by al-Albaani.

Al-Munaawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: i.e., separate your children in their beds in which they sleep when they reach the age of ten years, so as to avoid temptations, even if they are his siblings.

End quote from Fayd al-Qadeer, 5/531]

At-Teebi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Telling them to pray and separating them in their beds are mentioned together in childhood for the purpose of discipline and adhering to all the commands of Allah… And for the purpose of teaching them good manners among people, and so that they will not find themselves in suspicious circumstances, and so that they may avoid all things that Allah has prohibited.

End quote from Sharh Mishkaat al-Masaabeeh, 2/155

In your story there is also a lesson for parents that they should check on their children’s situations and make the children get used to talking frankly about every issue they face, whether it is in school, in the street or in the home. Many children encounter problems and suffer mental illness as a result, and the parents are completely unaware of that, when they could have relieved their children of what was affecting them. But lack of frankness within the family leads to embarrassment in the children that prevents them from complaining to their parents.

Secondly:

With regard to what you mentioned about the young man who has proposed marriage to you, and your speaking frankly to him and telling him what happened to you when you were small, and his accepting it and not objecting – that is a blessing from Allah to you. Allah has brought you someone who will excuse you for what happened to you when you were small and will conceal a matter in which you were mistreated, and he wants to marry you you in the manner prescribed by Allah. May Allah reward him with good.

But you made a mistake when you continued to talk to one another before the shar‘i connection between you was made (i.e., marriage). You could have done the Islamic marriage contract and delayed consummation of the marriage until he graduates or finds work. But if the matter is allowed to remain as it is now, that is undoubtedly haraam, because there is no legitimate shar‘i relationship between you. Rather all it is at present is wishes and promises of marriage.

What you have to do is adhere to the Islamic ruling; it is not permissible for you to continue talking to one another until the shar‘i marriage contract has been done. If he is sincere in his promise to marry you, then he will respond to the ruling of Allah and will hasten to do the marriage contract, or he will cut off contact until he graduates. If he does not respond to the ruling of Allah, may He be exalted, then be very careful in that case, for his aim may be only to have fun and pass the time talking to girls, in which case he is using the promise of marriage as a means to get what he wants, especially if he knows the situation; this may be an opportunity for the Shaytaan to whisper to him and cause trouble.

You do not have to tell any suitor of what happened to you, and it does not matter if the hymen has been broken, because the hymen may be broken by jumping or by heavy menstrual bleeding.

We have previously published on our website several answers having to do with the ruling on talking and chatting between the sexes, such as the answers to questions no. 7492, 13791, 26890, 45668, 66266, 82702

We ask Allah, may He be exalted, to protect you, guide you and bless you with contentment and happiness.

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

This du’aa’ is not proven from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Something similar was narrated by Ibn Abi’l-Dunya in al-Faraj ba’d al-Shiddah, via al-Khaleel ibn Murrah from the faqeeh of the people of Jordan, who said “we heard that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)…” It was classed as da’eef by al-Albaani in al-Silsilah al-Da’eefah, 4173; and Da’eef al-Jaami’, 4348

Since it has not been proven in any saheeh report that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said this, no attention should be paid to it. 

There are du’aa’s which have been narrated in saheeh ahaadeeth which are sufficient, and we have no need for the du’aa’s narrated in weak reports. These du’aa’s protect the Muslim, and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) always used to recite them, such as the dhikrs for morning and evening, and other saheeh ahaadeeth. For example:

1 – Reciting the last two verses of Soorat al-Baqarah every night. It was narrated that Abu Mas’ood al-Badri (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The last two verses of Soorat al-Baqarah, whoever recites them at night, they will be sufficient for him.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 4008; Muslim, 807. al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “With regard to the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) ‘they will be sufficient for him,’ it was said that it means they will suffice instead of praying qiyaam al-layl; and it was said, they will suffice him against the Shaytaan, or against harm. It may be understood as meaning all of these things.’”

2 – Du’aa’ al-karb (prayer at times of stress). It was narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to say at times of stress:

“Laa ilaaha ill-Allaah ul-‘azeem al-haleem, laa ilaaha ill-Allaah Rabb il-‘arsh il’azeem, laa ilaaha ill-Allaah Rabb ul-samawaati wa rabb ul-ard wa rabb ul-‘arsh il-kareem (There is no god but Allaah, the Almighty, the Forbearing; there is no god but Allaah, Lord of the Mighty Throne; there is no god but Allaah, Lord of the heavens, Lord of the earth and Lord of the noble Throne).” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 6346; Muslim, 2730.

Reciting Soorat al-Ikhlaas, Soorat al-Falaq and Soorat al-Naas. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to recite them when going to sleep, and he would blow into his hands and then wipe them over whatever he could reach of his body. It was narrated from ‘Aa’ishah that every night when the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) went to bed, he would cup his hands together, blow into them then recite into them Qul Huwa Allaahu ahad, Qul a’oodhu bi Rabb il-falaq and Qul ‘aoodhu bi Rabb il-naas, then he would wipe as much as he could reach of his body, starting with his head and face and the front of his body. And he would do that three times. Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 5018.

And it was narrated that ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Aamir said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Have you not seen the verses that were revealed tonight, the like of which has never been seen? Qul a’oodhu bi Rabb il-falaq and Qul ‘aoodhu bi Rabb il-naas. Narrated by Muslim, 814.

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

This saying, “The sleep of the scholar is better than the worship of the ignorant”, is not a hadeeth from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and it is not a report from any of the Sahaabah or Taabi‘een. It is not known in the books of Sunnah and hadeeth, and we have not come across it in any of the recognized books of Sunnah, even after extensive searching.

Rather we found it among the books of the Shi‘ah which are full of fabrications and lies, in a book called Man la yahduruhu al-Faqeeh (4/352-367) by ash-Shaykh as-Sadooq (d. 381 AH), where it says:

“It was narrated from Hammaad ibn ‘Amr and Anas ibn Muhammad from his father, and they both – meaning Hammaad and Muhammad the father of Anas – narrated from Ja‘far ibn Muhammad, from his father, from his grandfather, from ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib, from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) that he said to him: – and he mentioned a very lengthy hadeeth, in which he said: ‘O ‘Ali! The sleep of the scholar is better than the worship of the worshipper.’”

From this book it was picked up by many of the books of the Shi‘ah, such as Makaarim al-Akhlaaq by at-Tubrusi (d. 548 AH), p. 441; Bihaar al-Anwaar by al-Majlisi, 2/25; and elsewhere.

The indication of falsehood is clear in this hadeeth. Hammaad ibn ‘Amr and Muhammad the father of Anas are both majhool (unknown) and are not known to have been narrated from Ja‘far as-Saadiq. There is no mention of him in the books of the Sunnis or even in the books of the Shi‘ah, to such an extent that the commentator on the book Man la yahduruhu Faqeeh (1/536) said, when Shaykh as-Sadooq attributed its isnaad to Hammaad ibn ‘Amr and Anas: “Hammaad ibn ‘Amr, perhaps he is from the city of Naseebiyyeen, and is not mentioned, and the same applies to Anas ibn Muhammad. In the isnaad going back to them there are unknown narrators, and it is as if they are from among the regular masses”– meaning Ahl as-Sunnah!

When Abu’l-Qaasim al-Kho’i gave a biography of him in Mu‘jam Rijaal al-Hadeeth, 7/235, he did not narrate from anyone that they regarded him as trustworthy. Rather he also said: “as-Sadooq’s isnaad going back to him about the will (wasiyyah) of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and his family) to Ameer al-Mu’mineen [‘Ali] (peace be upon him) is da‘eef (weak), and includes a number of unknown narrators.” End quote.

It is sufficient for you to know that hundreds of hadeeths that are attributed to Ja‘far as-Saadiq were only narrated with this isnaad going back to him, which even some of the Shi ‘ah admit includes some unknown narrators, and the unknown narrator is used as a means to tell lies about the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him).

Similar to this is another saying, “The sleep of the scholar is worship.” These are not the words of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) either. Mullah ‘Ali al-Qaari (may Allah have mercy on him) said: It has no basis in any marfoo‘ report (one that has an isnaad going back to the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)).

End quote from al-Asraar al-Marfoo‘ah fi’l-Akhbaar al-Mawdoo‘ah, p. 374

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

1.

Imam an-Nasaa’i is Ahmad ibn Shu‘ayb ibn ‘Ali ibn Sinaan ibn Bahr al-Khurasaani an-Nasaa’i, who was known by the kunyah Abu ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan or as an-Nasaa’i, after a city in Korasan that is called Nasa. 

2.

He was born in 215 AH and died in 303 AH.

3.

His book as-Sunan as-Sughra is known as al-Mujtaba or al-Mujtana, but the former is more correct and more well-known. The scholars differed concerning it: is it an abridged version that he himself compiled, as Ibn al-Atheer, Ibn Katheer, al-‘Iraqi and al-Sakhkhaawi said, or is it an abridged version prepared by his student Abu Bakr ibn as-Sunni, as is the view of adh-Dhahabi and Ibn Naasir ad-Deen ad-Dimashqi?

4.

The number of hadeeths in as-Sunan as-Sughra is 5774.

5.

Some scholars gave the title as-Saheeh to Sunan an-Nasaa’i, including Abu ‘Ali an-Nisapoori, Ibn ‘Adiy, ad-Daaraqutni, Ibn Mandah and al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi, because of the stringent conditions of Imam an-Nasaa’i and his careful examination of hadeeths. But this opinion cannot be accepted from the one who suggested it, because the number of da‘eef hadeeths in his Sunan is approximately five hundred, according to the verdict of Shaykh al-Albaani (may Allah have mercy on him). The number differs according to the ruling of the scholar who is examining the book. We see that Imam Ibn Katheer (may Allah have mercy on him) criticised those who said that the hadeeths in Sunan an-Nasaa’i were saheeh, and he criticised those who said that the conditions of an-Nasaa’i were more stringent than the conditions of Imam Muslim (may Allah have mercy on him), as he said:

“The opinion of al-Haafiz Abu ‘Ali ibn as-Sakan and also of al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi concerning the book as-Sunan by an-Nasaa’i, that it is saheeh, is debatable. And (their opinion that) his conditions concerning the narrators were more stringent than the conditions of Muslim is not a given, because his narrators include men who are unknown (majhool), in that they themselves or their level of trustworthiness and accuracy is unknown; they also include majrooh narrators (i.e., those whose reports are rejected because of flaws in their character etc). And it contains hadeeths that are da‘eef, mu‘allal and munkar (types of weak hadeeths), as we have pointed out in al-Ahkaam al-Kabeer.”

Al-Baa‘ith al-Hatheeth fi Ikhtisaar ‘Uloom al-Hadeeth, p. 44

6.

as-Sunan as-Sughra contains the fewest da‘eef hadeeths among the six books after the Saheehayn (al-Bukhaari and Muslim); there is not a single mawdoo‘ (fabricated) hadeeth in it.

al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said: To sum up, the book of an-Nasaa’i contains the fewest da‘eef hadeeths and majrooh narrators among the books after the Saheehayn .

End quote from an-Nukat ‘ala Kitaab Ibn as-Salaah, 1/484

7.

There are many commentaries on an-Nasaa’i’s as-Sunan as-Sughra, among the most famous of which is the commentary of as-Suyooti which is entitled Zahr ar-Raba ‘ala’l-Mujtaba. There is also a commentary on it by Imam Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Haadi as-Sindi. And there is an audio commentary on as-Sunan by Shaykh ‘Abd al-Muhsin al-‘Abbaad (may Allah preserve him). One of the most comprehensive commentaries is Dhakheerat al-‘Uqbah fi Sharh al-Mujtaba by Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn Aadam ibn Moosa al-Ithiyobi (may Allah preserve him), which is contemporary and has been published in forty volumes! The first five volumes of it have been published by Dar al-Mi‘raaj in Riyadh and the rest of its volumes were published by Dar Aal Baroom in Makkah al-Mukarramah; it is also available on the Internet on the al-Maktabah al-Wafqiyyah website and elsewhere.

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

It is not permissible to buy and sell pigs or any part of them, such as the skin, bones and fat, because Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Say (O Muhammad ): ‘I find not in that which has been inspired to me anything forbidden to be eaten by one who wishes to eat it, unless it be Maytatah (a dead animal) or blood poured forth (by slaughtering or the like), or the flesh of swine (pork, etc.) for that surely is impure”

[al-An‘aam 6:145].

Al-Jassaas (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Although meat is singled out for mention, what is meant is all parts (of the pig). The meat is only singled out for mention because that is what is mostly used and sought from it.

End quote from Ahkaam al-Qur’aan, 1/153.

It was narrated from Jaabir ibn ‘Abdullah (may Allah be pleased with him) that he heard the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) say in the year of the conquest when he was in Makkah: “Verily Allah and His Messenger have forbidden the sale of alcohol, dead meat (from animals that were not slaughtered properly), pork and idols.” It was said: O Messenger of Allah, what do you think about the fat of animals that were not slaughtered properly, for it is used to caulk ships and is applied to leather and people use it to light lamps? He said: “No, it is haraam.”

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2082; Muslim, 2960.

Ibn Battaal (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The scholars are unanimously agreed that buying and selling pork is haraam.

End quote from Ibn Battaal’s commentary on Saheeh al-Bukhaari, 6/344

Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said: With regard to the prohibition on selling pork, it includes the entire pig and all of its parts, outside and inside.

End quote from Zaad al-Ma‘aad, 5/674

But… If it is not possible to acquire pig bones except by buying them and there is no other substance that can take its place, then there is nothing wrong with you doing that because this is a case of necessity, and necessity makes permissible that which is forbidden as Allah, may He be exalted, said (interpretation of the meaning):

“while He has explained to you in detail what is forbidden to you, except under compulsion of necessity”

[al-An‘aam 6:119].

Secondly:

There is nothing wrong with making use of pig bones in the way mentioned to manufacture glue, because bones come under the same rulings as the fat of dead animals, and the hadeeth only forbade selling it, not making use of it. Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said: There are two scholarly opinions concerning the phrase “it is haraam”. One is that these actions are haraam, and the other is that selling is haraam if the purchaser is buying it for that purpose. These two opinions are based on the question of whether the prohibition applies to selling it for the purpose mentioned or to the use mentioned. The former is the opinion favoured by our shaykh and it is more likely to be correct, because when the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) told them of this prohibition, he was not referring to these uses of it;  rather he told them about the prohibition on selling, then they told him that they trade in it for these purposes, and he did not grant them a concession allowing them to sell it, but he did not forbid them to use it in the ways mentioned. The fact that something is permissible to sell does not necessarily mean that it is permissible to use. And Allah knows best.

End quote from I‘laam al-Muwaqqi‘een, 4/248.

So it is permissible to make use of these bones without buying them. If there is a need for that and it is not possible to find them except by buying, then it is permissible to buy them.

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

The basic principle is that it is not permissible for men to use gold, whether as an adornment or for medicinal purposes, except in cases of necessity.

If a specialist doctor thinks that treatment of the tooth, whether by using a “bridge”, filling it or inserting a screw to fix it, can only be done using gold, there is nothing wrong with that. But if it is possible to treat the tooth just as well using some other material, then it is not permissible to use gold, because of the report narrated by ‘Urfujah ibn As‘ad (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: My nose was cut off on the day of (the battle of) al-Kulaab during the Jaahiliyyah, so I had a nose made of silver, but it began to smell bad, so the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) told me to get a nose made of gold.

Narrated by at-Tirmidhi, 1770; classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani (may Allah have mercy on him) in Saheeh at-Tirmidhi

An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: With regard to the view of the author, that in cases of necessity it is permissible to use gold, this is agreed upon (among the scholars). Our companions said: It is permissible to use an (artificial) nose or tooth made of gold or silver; similarly, putting fillings of gold and silver in teeth is permissible.

End quote from Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, 1/312

It says in al-Mawsoo‘ah al-Fiqhiyyah, 11/121:

The fuqaha’ are unanimously agreed that it is permissible to use a nose made of gold. The Malikis and Hanbalis, and Muhammad ibn al-Hasan among the Hanafis, and the Shaafa‘is, said: (This also applies to) teeth. And the Shaafa‘is added: fingertips. The Maalikis and Hanbalis also stated that it is permissible to treat a tooth or teeth with gold. The basic principle concerning that is the report about ‘Urfujah ibn As‘ad (may Allah be pleased with him). … And al-Athram narrated from Moosa ibn Talhah, Abu Jamrah ad-Dab‘i. Abu Raafi‘ ibn Thaabit al-Banaani, Ismaa‘eel ibn Zayd ibn Thaabit and al-Mugheerah ibn ‘Abdullah, that they fixed their teeth with gold.

End quote.

It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah (24/70): If the dentist is skilled and thinks that it is better for you to have a tooth made of gold rather than anything else, then it is permissible for you, otherwise it is not. End quote.

They also said (24/56): In cases of necessity it is permissible to use gold to make an (artificial) tooth, nose and so on, if nothing else could be used instead. End quote.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked about the ruling on having gold teeth.

He replied: It is not permissible for men to have gold teeth except in a case of necessity, because it is haraam for men to wear gold or use it as an adornment. In the case of women, if it is customary for women to wear gold teeth, there is nothing wrong with that, and she may have her teeth plated with gold, if that is a customary kind of beautification, and does not constitute extravagance.

End quote from Majmoo‘ Fataawa wa Rasaa’il Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 11/102

Based on that:

If the doctor who is treating you only used the screw made of gold because nothing else could be used instead, or because it is better for your teeth, there is nothing wrong with that. Otherwise it should be removed, unless doing so will cause harm, in which case there is nothing wrong with leaving it.

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

The apparent meaning of the Qur’aan indicates that zakaah should not be spent on this project, because it is not one of the groups on which zakaah is to be spent, as mentioned in the aayah (interpretation of the meaning):

“As-Sadaqaat (here it means Zakaah) are only for the Fuqaraa’ (poor), and Al-Masaakeen (the poor)…”[al-Tawbah 9:60]

The Council of Senior Scholars issued a statement saying that zakaah money should not be given to this project, as stated above.

And Allaah knows best.

Majmoo’ Fataawa wa Maqaalaat Mutanawwi’ah lil’Shaykh Ibn Baaz, vol. 14, p. 300.

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

It is mustahabb to give charity to one who is in need, even if it is something small, because the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Protect yourselves from the Fire even if it is with half a date.”

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 5564; Muslim, 1689

It was narrated that Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever gives charity the equivalent of a date that was acquired by halaal means – for Allah does not accept anything but that which is good (halaal)– Allah accepts it in His right hand, then He tends it for the one who gave it, as one of you tends his foal, until it becomes like a mountain.”

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1321

Secondly:

Reciting du‘aa’ before giving charity is something that is subject to further discussion. This has been discussed previously in the answer to question no. 98579.

Thirdly:

It is permissible for a person to give in charity on his own behalf and to intend that others among those who have died have a share of the reward of his charity. This has been discussed in the answer to question no. 102322.

With regard to giving a share of the reward for the charity to those who are still alive, this is not mentioned in the Sunnah so it is better not to do it.

It says in Zaad al-Mustaqni‘: If a person does any act of worship and dedicates its reward to a deceased Muslim, or one who is still living, that will benefit him. End quote.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

If a person has died, and one does an act of worship on his behalf, that serves a purpose, because the deceased is in need (of hasanaat) but cannot do any righteous deeds. But if he is alive and is able to do this act, then in that case it depends, because it may lead to the living person depending on this man who is doing an act of worship on his behalf. There is no report that the Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them) or the righteous early generations did such a thing; rather what they were accustomed to do was to dedicate the reward for an act of worship to the dead; in the case of those who were still alive, they did not do this, except in the case of an obligation such as Hajj, because that was known from the time of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), but that is subject to the condition that the person on whose behalf Hajj is performed is incapable in such a way that there is no hope of recovery.

End quote from ash-Sharh al-Mumti‘, 5/371

Fourthly:

There is nothing wrong with exchanging pieces of metal for others; rather it is permissible for you to change your mind about this charity, because anything that is given as charity or a gift does not become the property of the recipients unless they take possession of it. If it has not been taken possession of, then the giver has the option to go ahead with it or to change his mind concerning it. See the answer to question no. 146237

Fifthly:

The one who wants to give charity has a choice between giving it to one poor person or more, as he sees fit. It is better to give it to relatives if they are in need, because Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “To an orphan near of kin” [al-Balad 90:15].

And because the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Charity given to the poor person is charity, but given to a relative it is two things: charity and upholding ties of kinship.”

Narrated by at-Tirmidhi, 594; classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani, may Allah have mercy on him.

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

The evidence from the Qur’an and Sunnah, and the comments of the Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them), indicates that singing accompanied by music is haraam. This has been discussed previously in the answers to questions no. 5000 and 43736.

As it is proven that singing and music are haraam, the Muslim should hate that which Allah and His Messenger hate and tell others not to do it.

The Muslim should tell singers not to commit this sinful action, because the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever among you sees an evil action, then let him change it with his hand [by taking action]; if he cannot, then with his tongue [by speaking out]; and if he cannot, then with his heart – and that is the weakest of faith.” Narrated by Muslim. 

Voting via mobile phone for a singer so that she can win the title involves a number of things that are forbidden according to sharee‘ah:

1.

It implies approval of sin, and approval of sin is itself a sin. Al-Qurtubi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “Approval of sin is itself a sin, hence both the one who does it and the one who approves of it are included in the punishment for sin and are both doomed.”

Tafseer al-Qurtubi, 5/418

2.

It is failing to forbid what is evil. Al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) narrated that there was scholarly consensus that enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil is obligatory.

Sharh Muslim, 9/22

3.

It is encouraging singers in their sinning and their disobedience towards Allah, may He be exalted. Allah has forbidden us to help the sinner in his sin, as He says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Help you one another in Al‑Birr and At‑Taqwa (virtue, righteousness and piety); but do not help one another in sin and transgression. And fear Allaah. Verily, Allaah is Severe in punishment”

[al-Maa’idah 5:2].

4.

It involves spending money, whether a small amount or a great amount, in disobedience towards Allah, and “The feet of the slave of Allah will not move [on the Day of Resurrection] until he is asked about five things: his wealth, from where he acquired it and on what he spent it…”

Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 2417; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Sunan al-Tirmidhi.

5.

Taking an interest in these foolish programs distracts the Muslim from what is useful to him in both religious and worldly terms, and it distracts from what is really in his interests, and it distracts him from Allah, may He be exalted.

Secondly:

With regard to the expiation for the one who does that, there is no expiation except that he has to repent, which means: regretting what he has done, giving up participating in such programs, and resolving not to do that again.

He should also strive to do righteous deeds so that Allah will accept his repentance. Allah, may He be exalted, 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].

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

It is prescribed to pray istikhaarah concerning permissible matters or when choosing between mustahabb matters. With regard to things that are obligatory, mustahabb, haraam or makrooh, it is not prescribed to pray istikhaarah concerning them.

It says in al-Mawsoo‘ah al-Fiqhiyyah, 3/243: There is no room for istikhaarah with regard to matters that are obligatory, haraam or makrooh. Rather it applies to things that are recommended and permissible. And with regard to recommended matters, istikhaarah should not be done to decide whether to do them or not, because they are required. Rather it should be done when there is a conflict, i.e., when there are two conflicting matters and one does not know which one to start with or limit himself to. With regard to permissible matters, one may pray istikhaarah when deciding whether to do them at all. End quote. 

Secondly:

With regard to divorcing a woman (talaaq), it may come under one of five rulings.

It says in Zaad al-Mustaqni‘: It is permissible in case of necessity and is makrooh when there is no such need. It is mustahabb in the case of harm, obligatory in the case of eela’ (an oath to refrain from marital intimacy) and haraam in the case of bid‘ah (innovation).

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The phrase “It is permissible in case of necessity” means if the husband needs to do that, then it is permissible for him, such as if he cannot be patient with his wife. If there is a need for that, it is permissible for him to divorce her…

End quote from ash-Sharh al-Mumti‘, 13/8

In this case, before divorcing her it is mustahabb for the man to pray istikhaarah, asking Allah to guide him. But if things are going smoothly, it is not prescribed for him to pray istikhaarah, because in this case divorce is makrooh.

Similarly, if divorce has become obligatory for him, it is not prescribed for him to pray istikhaarah, such as if he has discovered that his wife is not chaste and has not repented. In that case it is obligatory for him to divorce her and not to keep her.

Similarly, it is permissible for the wife to ask for a divorce if she has been harmed by her husband, such as if he does not spend on her maintenance, or if she dislikes him because of his bad attitude or weakness in his religious commitment and so on. In that case it is mustahabb for her to pray istikhaarah about asking for a divorce. But if things are going smoothly, it is haraam for her to ask for a divorce, because the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Any woman who asks her husband for a divorce when it is not absolutely necessary, the fragrance of Paradise will be forbidden to her.”

Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood.

For more information please see the answer to question no. 118325

To sum up, it is prescribed for the husband to pray istikhaarah about divorcing his wife if doing so is permissible. Similarly it is permissible for the wife to pray istikhaarah about asking for a divorce, if doing so is because of a reason that makes it permissible to seek divorce. Apart from that, it is not prescribed to pray istikhaarah about divorce.

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Liqa’ al-Baab al-Maftooh by Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 55/126

Praise be to Allaah.

By His bounty towards the Muslim, Allah has made the matter of du‘aa’ broad in scope. There are du‘aa’s in the Qur’aan, du‘aa’s of the Prophets and Messengers, that are few in words but great in meaning. And there are du‘aa’s in the Sunnah, du‘aa’s of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). And there are also du‘aa’s of the noble Sahaabah, Taabi‘een, scholars and righteous people, which have been compiled in many books and are also to be found in their biographies. We do not think there is any need for anyone to come along and make up phrases for calling upon his Lord, and not be content with keeping them between him and his Lord until he spreads them among people on web sites and elsewhere. The one who browses websites will find a great deal of such material, most of which is questionable.  The reason for that is that those who originally wrote these things were not scholars or seekers of knowledge. 

One example of what we are talking about is something that is widespread on many web sites, a du‘aa’ that contains clear exaggeration and some phrases that is extremely abhorrent and distasteful. It is the du‘aa’ mentioned by the questioner. Its mistakes are twofold:

1.     Using the same word referring to the striving of the created being in committing sin and the striving of the Lord, the Creator, the All-Forgiving. This is something that it is not befitting for the one who is calling upon his Lord to do, and it is disrespectful towards Allah, may He be glorified and exalted.

2.     It ascribes “striving” to Allah, may He be exalted! This is a word that it is abhorrent to attribute to the Lord, may He be exalted. This word is indicative of expending effort and energy, which is impossible in the case of Allah, may He be exalted, Who told us that He created the heavens and the earth and everything in between and no fatigue or tiredness touched Him. Allah, may He be exalted, said (interpretation of the meaning): “And indeed We created the heavens and the earth and all between them in six Days and nothing of fatigue touched Us” [Qaaf 50:38]. This clearly states that there is no tiredness or fatigue on the part of Allah, may He be exalted, at all. Rather He mentioned it here, after He created the heavens and the earth and everything in between them, so as to dispel any confusion and refute those among the Jews who attributed that to Him. This negation of tiredness and fatigue is indicative of the perfection of His power, may He be glorified and exalted.

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said: It should be noted that when it is said that Allah does not possess an attribute, it is not only a negation; rather as well as the negation, what is meant is the opposite. So when Allah, may He be exalted, said of Himself (interpretation of the meaning): “and nothing of fatigue touched Us”, what is meant is a negation of fatigue and an affirmation of the perfection of His might and power.

End quote from Tafseer Soorat al-Baqarah, 2/132

If it were correct to say of a sinful person that he “strove” in committing sin, how can a person be content to say of his Lord, may He be exalted, that He “strove” in concealing it when He – may He be exalted – is able to conceal it and, rather, to forgive it and replace it with good deeds (hasanaat) with one word, “Be!” This is not permissible; rather it is haraam, and it is not permissible for anyone to speak of his Lord in a manner that is suggestive of shortcomings or that is far removed from the proper etiquette that must be observed before Him, may He be glorified.

What the Muslim must do is refrain from using this phrase in his du‘aa’ and beware of spreading it. Websites must also erase this sentence from their pages and not incur sin by spreading it.

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

It is not permissible for a Muslim to offer an obligatory prayer on his mount, unless there is a valid excuse, because on a mount he will omit some of the essential parts of the prayer, such as standing, bowing and prostrating.

It was narrated from Jaabir ibn ‘Abdullah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) used to pray on his mount facing towards the east, but when he wanted to offer an obligatory prayer, he would dismount and face towards the qiblah. 

Ibn Battaal said: The scholars are unanimously agreed that it is not permissible for anyone to offer the obligatory prayer on his mount without a valid excuse. Because offering obligatory prayers on one’s mount when it is possible to dismount is not permissible, and because the conditions of the obligatory prayer stipulate that the worshipper should face towards the qiblah and continue to do so throughout, an obligatory prayer offered by a rider who cannot stand up or face the qiblah is not valid.

End quote from al-Mawsoo‘ah al-Fiqhiyyah, 27/231

But this ruling does not apply to one who prays on a bus when he is able to do all the obligatory and essential parts of the prayer, such as facing towards the qiblah, standing, bowing and prostrating. The scholars have stated that praying in a howdah is valid, because one can do all the obligatory parts of the prayer. The howdah is like a room on the camel’s back.

An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The conditions of the obligatory prayer are that the worshipper should face towards the qiblah and continue to do so throughout. It is not valid without facing towards the qiblah except in cases of extreme fear, and it is not valid on the part of one who is walking whilst facing towards the qiblah, or one who is riding and is not able to stand up or face towards the qiblah. And there is no difference of scholarly opinion on this point.

If he faces towards the qiblah and does all the essential parts of the prayer in the howdah or similar place on the back of a mount that is standing, there are two opinions concerning the validity of his obligatory prayer. The more correct opinion is that it is valid and this was stated definitively by the majority.

End quote from Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, 3/221

It says in al-Mawsoo‘ah al-Fiqhiyyah (27/231): If the obligatory prayer is offered on one’s mount, that is not permissible unless there is an excuse, because the conditions of the obligatory prayer are that the worshipper should be facing towards the qiblah and continue to do so throughout, and he should fulfil all the conditions and essential parts. But if a person is able to offer the obligatory prayer atop his mount, fulfilling all of its conditions and doing all of its essential parts, even if he has no excuse, his prayer is valid. This is the view of the Shaafa‘is and Hanbalis, and it is the preferred view of the Maalikis.

End quote.

Based on that, there is nothing wrong with you praying on the bus so long as you do all the essential parts of the prayer.

But it must be noted that it is obligatory to offer the obligatory prayer with the Muslim congregation in the houses of Allah (i.e., in the mosques) and it is not permissible to stay away from offering the prayer in congregation in the mosque except for one who has an excuse. For more information please see the answer to question no. 8918 and 40299.

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

We have previously discussed the difference of opinion among the scholars concerning the maximum length of nifaas; the most correct view is that it is forty days. See the answer to question no. 10488. 

Secondly:

With regard to the bleeding that occurs after the period of nifaas has ended, if it comes at the usual time of the menstrual period, then it is menses and the woman should not pray or fast or have intercourse with her husband at that time, until her monthly period has ended, as is well known.

If it occurs at a time other than the usual time of the menstrual period, then it is istihaadah (non-menstrual bleeding) and in this case she should fast and pray, and her husband may have intercourse with her. But she has to do wudoo’ for each obligatory prayer after the time for it begins, then with that wudoo’ she may offer whatever naafil prayers she wishes.

For more information please see the answer to question no. 106464

Thirdly:

The scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) differed concerning the case of a woman suffering istihaadah if she refrains from praying out of ignorance: does she have to make up the prayers that she omitted? There are two opinions:

1.     That she has to make up the prayers.

2.     That she does not have to make up the prayers. This is the view favoured by Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him).

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: If the woman who is suffering istihaadah did not pray for some time because she thought that it was not obligatory for her to pray, there are two opinions as to whether it is obligatory for her to make up the prayers. One opinion is that she does not have to make them up – as was narrated from Maalik and others – because when the woman who was suffering from istihaadah said to the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), “I have been bleeding heavily for some time and it prevents me from praying and fasting,” he told her what she should do in the future, and he did not tell her to make up the prayers of the past. End quote from Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 21/102

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said: It is best if you pray what you omitted during the early days, but if you do not do that there is nothing wrong with it, because the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) told the woman who was suffering from istihaadah and who said that she was suffering heavy bleeding during which she did not pray to count her menses as six or seven days and to pray the rest of the month, but he did not tell her to make up the prayers that she had omitted. If she does make up the prayers that she missed, this is good, because it may be that she was heedless in not asking, but if she does not make them up there is no sin on her. End quote from Majmoo‘ Fataawa Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 11/276

To be on the safe side, your friend should make up the prayers that she missed as much as she is able to. So every day she should make up whatever she can of the prayers that she omitted during this time, because it seems that there was a kind of heedlessness on her part as she did not ask even though the time during which she did not pray was lengthy, and usually one does not stop praying for so long. Moreover, she used to pray sometimes, which indicates that perhaps she knew that she should be praying. See also the answer to question no. 31803.

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

There are many conditions of du’aa’, including the following:

1 – You should call upon no one except Allaah. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “If you ask, then ask of Allaah, and if you seek help, then seek the help of Allaah.” Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 2516; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’.

This is what is meant by the verse (interpretation of the meaning):

“And the mosques are for Allaah (Alone), so invoke not anyone along with Allaah”

[al-Jinn 72:18] 

This is the most important condition of du’aa’, without which no du’aa’ will be accepted and no good deed taken up. There are some people who make du’aa’ to the dead and regard them as intermediaries between them and Allaah. They claim that these righteous people will bring them closer to Allaah and intercede for them with Him, and they claim that their sins are so great that they have no status before Allaah, and that is why they set up these intermediaries and pray to them instead of Allaah. But Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And when My slaves ask you (O Muhammad) concerning Me, then (answer them), I am indeed near (to them by My Knowledge). I respond to the invocations of the supplicant when he calls on Me (without any mediator or intercessor)”
[al-Baqarah 2:186]

2 – You should seek to draw close to Allaah in one of the ways that are prescribed in sharee’ah.

3 – You should avoid seeking a quick response, for this is one of the problems that may prevent the du’aa’ from being accepted. In the hadeeth it says: “One of you may be answered so long as he is not hasty and says, ‘I said du’aa’ but I got no response.’” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 6340; Muslim, 2735.

In Saheeh Muslim (2736) it says: “A man’s (du’aa’s) may be answered so long as it does not involve sin or severing the ties of kinship or hastening.” It was said: “O Messenger of Allaah, what does hastening mean?” He said: “When he says, ‘I made du’aa’ and I made du’aa’ but I did not see any response,’ so he gets discouraged and stops making du’aa’.”

4 – The du’aa’ should not involve sin or severing of the ties of kinship, as stated in the hadeeth quoted above: “A man’s (du’aa’s) may be answered so long as he does not involve sin or severing the ties of kinship …”

5 – You should think positively of Allaah. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Allaah, may He be exalted, says: ‘I am as My slave thinks I am.’” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 7405; Muslim, 4675. According to the hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah: “Make du’aa’ to Allaah when you are certain of a response.” Narrated by al-Tirmidhi; classed as hasan by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’, 245.

Whoever thinks well of his Lord, Allaah will bestow His bounty upon him and give him in abundance.

6 – You should be focused, aware of the greatness of the One upon Whom you are calling. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Know that Allaah does not answer a du’aa from a distracted heart.” Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 3479; classed as hasan by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’, 245.

7 – Ensuring that one’s food comes from good (halaal) sources. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Verily, Allaah accepts only from those who are Al-Muttaqoon (the pious)”

[al-Maa’idah 5:27]

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) stated that a response was unlikely for one who eats, drinks and wears haraam things. In the hadeeth it says: [The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)] mentioned the man who undertakes a lengthy journey and is disheveled and covered with dust, and he stretches his hands towards heaven saying, ‘O Lord, O Lord,’ when his food is haraam, his drink is haraam, his clothes are haraam. He is nourished with haraam, so how can he be granted a response?

Narrated by Muslim, 1015.

Ibn al-Qayyim said: Thus eating haraam things saps the strength of the du’aa’ and weakens it.

8 – You should avoid aggression in du’aa’, for Allaah does not like aggression in du’aa’. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Invoke your Lord with humility and in secret. He likes not the aggressors”

[al-A’raaf 7:55]

See also question no. 41017.

9 – You should not let du’aa’ distract you from an obligatory duty such as an obligatory prayer that is now due, and you should not neglect parents’ rights on the basis of du’aa’. This is indicated by the story of Jurayj, when he did not answer his mother’s call and turned instead to his prayer. She prayed against him and Allaah tested him sorely.

Al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The scholars said: This indicates that what he should have done is to answer her, because he was offering a supererogatory (naafil prayer), continuation of which was voluntary, not obligatory, whereas answering his mother and honouring her was obligatory and disobeying her was haraam.

Saheeh Muslim bi Sharh al-Nawawi, 16/82.

For more information see Kitaab al-Du’aa’ by Muhammad ibn Ibraaheem al-Hamad.

Islam Q&A

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

Naturally, a married woman will have friends from before her marriage, and there is nothing at all in sharee‘ah to keep her away from her friends, unless her husband does not give her permission for that. Rather, things remain as they are, so she may keep her friends from before, and they may visit her in her home and she may honour them with hospitality. This is how things were among the noble female Sahaabah, foremost among whom are the Mothers of the Believers, the wives of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him).

It was narrated that Umm Salamah said: The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) prayed ‘Asr, then he entered upon me and some women from Banu Haraam, who were from among the Ansar, were with me. 

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1233; Muslim, 834.

Here is Umm Salamah (may Allah be pleased with her); the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) entered her house and found her female friends with her. Then she (may Allah be pleased with her) says that he prayed two rak‘ahs to make up the Sunnah prayer of Zuhr.

There is a great deal of evidence, but what we have quoted above is sufficient. In fact the basic principle is that the husband should honour his wife’s friends even after his wife dies! This is mentioned in the saheeh Sunnah.

It was narrated that ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) said: I never felt jealous of any of the wives of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) except Khadeejah, even though I never met her. But the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) used to mention her often, and sometimes he would slaughter a sheep then cut it up and send it to the friends of Khadeejah. One day I said to him: It is as if there is no woman in this world except Khadeejah! He said: “She was such and such, and I have children from her.”

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 3607; Muslim, 2435.

Secondly:

What we have mentioned above does not contradict the wife’s duty to obey her husband if he tells her to end her relationship with one of her friends, or does not allow one of them to visit her, because the husband is in charge of the wives in the home, and he is a shepherd who is responsible for his flock. Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has made one of them to excel the other…”

[an-Nisa’ 4:34].

And the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “The man is the shepherd of his family and he is responsible for his flock.”

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 853; Muslim, 1829

The wife does not have the right to admit anyone into her husband’s house if the husband does not want that person to enter his house. And the wife does not have the right to go out of the marital house except with her husband’s permission. Even if he does not allow her to visit her family, she has to refrain from doing so. He may be unjust in this decision of his, in which case he is sinning; or he may be correct, in which case he will be rewarded. Whatever the case, it is obligatory for the wife to obey her husband in this regard. The wise woman will not put the friendship of a woman before her role as a wife who is happy with her husband and children in the marital home.

It was narrated that Jaabir said: The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Fear Allaah with regard to women, for you have taken them as a trust from Allaah, and intimacy with them has become permissible to you by the word of Allaah. Your rights over them are that they should not allow anyone whom you dislike to sit on your furniture. If they do that, then hit them, but in a manner that does not cause injury or leave a mark.  Their rights over you are that you should provide for them and clothe them in a reasonable manner.”

Narrated by Muslim, 1218.

The husband’s preventing her from seeing a particular friend does not necessarily mean that that woman is of bad character or lacking in religious commitment; rather the pros and cons of any relationship are many and the wife may not understand these pros and cons in all cases.

But if the husband sees something in the friend’s attitude or religious commitment (or lack thereof) that makes this necessary, then the matter is clear and does not need any explanation.

For more information, please see the answers to questions 112048 and 10680.

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A