عربي
Home


Articles

Articles

Answer from the General Iftaa` Department on what was Published in "Al-Ra'y" Newspaper.
Author : The General Iftaa` Department
Date Added : 06-07-2023

Answer from the General Iftaa` Department on what was Published in "Al-Ra'y" Newspaper

 

 

We have read what was written in "Al-Ra'y" newspaper (Issue No. (14044), Tuesday, March 24, 2009) under the "Al-Ra'y Platform" section entitled (The story of a Jordanian family raises deep questions in religion and society / Medical examination made him doubt her pregnancy, so he divorced her, and the due date of childbirth cleared her. Would she return to him?).

 

We would like to emphasize that divorce cases aren`t answered over the phone.

 

Indeed, this is true due to the extremely sensitive nature of this matter and because some people, if they heard the answer on the phone, try to change the question to get the answer that suits them.

This emanates from insufficient knowledge of the meaning of the Sharia ruling, which is the ruling of Allah before Whom we will be held to account. Consequently, there is no use in having hidden some facts from the Mufti or the Judge. Once Allah's Messenger (PBUH) said, "You people present your cases to me and some of you may be more eloquent and persuasive in presenting their argument. So, if I give some one's right to another (wrongly) because of the latter's (tricky) presentation of the case, I am really giving him a piece of fire; so he should not take it." {Bukhari & Muslim}.

 

It is the duty of the Iftaa` Department to give the ruling of Sharia; however, the responsibility of implementation is that of the person concerned.

In the matter under discussion:

 

• How dare a man divorce his wife repeatedly although recently married? What happened to patience, good character, and trusting wife?!

 

• How could four doctors make a mistake in a matter that lies within their field of specialty and the fact that medical devices, nowadays, are very advanced?!

 

• What could the Mufti do after the husband admits having divorced wife on three separate occasions and this is proven in the Sharia court? Just as the wife was made lawful to her husband by uttering one word, she is made forbidden to him by uttering one word as well, which is the utterance of divorce. Out of His mercy, Allah made the wife unlawful to her husband after three divorces (Talaq Bain baynuna Kubra/Final divorce). Allah the Almighty says {What means}: "A divorce is only permissible twice: after that, the parties should either hold Together on equitable terms, or separate with kindness. It is not lawful for you, (Men), to take back any of your gifts (from your wives), except when both parties fear that they would be unable to keep the limits ordained by God. If ye (judges) do indeed fear that they would be unable to keep the limits ordained by God, there is no blame on either of them if she give something for her freedom. These are the limits ordained by God; so do not transgress them if any do transgress the limits ordained by God, such persons wrong (Themselves as well as others). So if a husband divorces his wife (irrevocably), He cannot, after that, re- marry her until after she has married another husband and He has divorced her. In that case there is no blame on either of them if they re-unite, provided they feel that they can keep the limits ordained by God. Such are the limits ordained by God, which He makes plain to those who understand." (Al-Baqarah, 229-230)

 

The marriage mentioned in the above verse is what the jurists call marriage of desire. I.e. the intention is living permanently with the wife, and not the engaging in a poor performance that the virtuous person would feel ashamed to mention. The Prophet (PBUH) said about it: "May Allah curse the one who makes permissible and the one who makes permissible for him." {Transmitted by Abu Dawood}. In addition, the Prophet (PBUH) called such person as "The borrowed "buck" goat". The Department wouldn`t deliver such Fatwa nor would any of the scholars who have respect for their knowledge. Moreover, with due respect, media should seek the truth and the ruling of Sharia since sympathizing with whoever divorces his wife in this way is inappropriate.

 

We do not like divorce because, as the Prophet (PBUH) said, it is the most hated of lawful things to Allah. However, worse than that is that a man lives with a woman who is not lawful to him, or that a woman lives with a man who is not lawful to her. The person addressed here is not the first to divorce and regret, but we confirm that no one had divorced without regretting that afterwards.

In the past, they used to say:

 

Do you cry over Layla while you left her*****Layla is gone, so what are you going to do about it!

In conclusion, do not blame the Mufti, but blame those who do not estimate matters correctly.

 

 

 

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who purchases a sacrificial animal (uḍḥiyah) and it then develops a defect before slaughter?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a defect that invalidates the sacrifice (uḍḥiyah) arises after its purchase — for example, if one purchased a sound, defect-free animal, and it then developed a limp, blindness in one eye, or a similar defect before slaughter — it does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah, according to the Shāfi'ī school.
It is stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib (Vol.1/P.535): "Even if the limp develops [in the animal] while the knife is upon it, it still does not fulfill the requirement, because it is lame at the moment of slaughter — this is analogous to a case where a sheep's leg breaks and one hastens to slaughter it [in that condition]."
The Ḥanbalī school, however, held that if the one offering the sacrifice purchased the animal while it was sound and defect-free, and a defect then befell it afterward, the sacrifice remains valid and there is no obligation to replace it.
It is stated in Masā'il al-Imām Aḥmad, one of the Ḥanbalī reference works (Vol.8/P.4021): "I said: If a person purchases the sacrificial animal while it is sound, and it is then afflicted with illness, blindness in one eye, or a broken limb [before slaughter]? He [Imam Aḥmad] said: It is said that it still fulfills the requirement. Isḥāq said likewise, because he purchased it while sound, and the defect befell it only afterward, so it remains sufficient on his behalf." [End of quote]
Accordingly, a sheep afflicted with a defect that invalidates the sacrifice does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah — whether the defect arose after purchase or during the slaughter itself — according to the Shāfi'ī school. However, there is no objection to following the Ḥanbalī position on this matter [as a valid alternative]. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on wudu (ablution) when there is an adhesive substance on the hand that is difficult to remove?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The general principle is: if what is applied to the limbs of wudu' (ablution) does not form a barrier substance preventing water from reaching the skin, then the wudu' is valid despite its presence. However, if these substances prevent water from reaching the skin, the wudu' is not valid with their presence, and they must be removed so that water reaches the hair or skin without any barrier.
Shaykh al-Islam, the Imam an-Nawawi, may Allah have mercy on him, says: "If there is wax, dough, henna, or similar substances on some of his limbs [of wudu'], and this prevents water from reaching any part of the limb, then his purification (tahara) is not valid — regardless of whether the amount is much or little. But if there remains on the hand or elsewhere only the trace and color of the henna, without its substance [i.e., the physical residue itself], or the trace of a liquid oil such that the water touches the skin of the limb and flows over it, though it does not remain [as a barrier] — then his purification is valid." [Al-Majmu' , Vol.1/P.529]. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Is it permissible for a husband to stop his wife from visiting her family?

A husband shouldn`t stop his wife from visiting her family, and it is disliked for him to do so because such an act makes them harbor feelings of hatred against him.

What is the ruling on offering a sheep as a sacrifice (Udhiyah) if its fat-tail is sound, except that when it was young, the tip of its fat-tail was cut so that it would grow larger? And what is the ruling in case of doubt regarding the amount that was cut?

 
In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Cutting a minor, insignificant portion from the tip of an animal's fat-tail (al-alyah) to encourage it to grow larger is not considered a defect, and it does not prevent the animal from being valid for sacrifice (Udhiyah).
 
It is stated in Tuhfat al-Muhtaj (Vol.9/P.352): "There is some scholarly deliberation regarding the common practice of cutting the tip of the fat-tail so that it grows larger. It could potentially be likened to a partial cut of the ear—supported by the jurists' general rule: 'even if it is a small amount.' On the other hand, if it is an exceptionally minor cut, it might have no effect on validity. This is explicitly clarified by the juristic exception to the general rule, which states that cutting a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm. This latter view is more well-founded.
 
Furthermore, I found that some scholars investigated this matter and concluded: 'It should not affect validity if a custom-sanctioned portion of its fat-tail is removed during its youth to make it grow larger and look better, just as castrating a male animal causes no harm.' However, applying this unconditionally contradicts the established texts of the jurists, as understood from what I have laid out; thus, the restriction I specified is what must be relied upon."
 
Similarly, it is mentioned in Nihayat al-Muhtaj (8/135): "If a small piece is cut from the fat-tail to help it grow larger, the most well-founded view is that the sacrifice remains valid, as was given in a formal legal verdict (Fatwa) by my father [Shihab al-Din al-Ramli], may Allah be pleased with him. This is proven by the jurists' maxim: 'The loss of a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm.'"
 
In cases where there is doubt as to whether the portion cut was large or small, the animal is still deemed valid for sacrifice. It is noted in Hashiyat al-Shubramallisi ‘ala Nihayat al-Muhtaj (Vol.8/P.135):
 
"This matter requires careful consideration, but the closer and more correct view is that it is valid. This is because soundness is the default state for the animal from which the piece was cut, and it aligns with what usually occurs—namely, that the part removed to help the fat-tail grow larger is naturally very small." And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.

See More