Articles

Regarding Women Driving Cars
Author : The General Iftaa` Department
Date Added : 05-08-2025

The Response of the Iftaa’ Department to What Some Media Outlets Have Published Concerning "Women Driving Cars"

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.

The General Iftaa’ Department had previously issued several fatwas, numbered (862) and (1296), affirming the permissibility of women driving cars and exercising their right to mobility without sin or prohibition. These fatwas were published on the Iftaa’ Department’s website on (25/07/2010) and through various media outlets as well.

The basis of this ruling is that mobility through means of transportation—whether traditional or modern—is a universal human right. The Sharia does not prohibit it, whether for men or women. Rather, it affirms and defends this right, considering the protection of human rights a fundamental objective of the noble Sharia. This is supported by numerous well-established narrations from the Prophetic Sunna, which document the Sahabiyat (The righteous women who met the Prophet Muhammad {Peace be upon him}, believed in him as the Messenger of Allah and died as Muslims) exercising this right without any objection. This is the fatwa that the General Iftaa’ Department has consistently upheld in response to numerous inquiries it receives regularly.

As for what was stated in Fatwa No. (914) regarding the rejection of arbitrary restrictions imposed by some husbands on their wives, it reaffirms the above. It is not a husband’s right to prevent his wife from using modern means of communication, such as the telephone, just as it is not his right to oppress her by depriving her of visiting her family or fulfilling her duties. Conversely, the wife must also consider the reasons for harmonious marital life and safeguard the household from discord and disruption. Thus, she should seek her husband’s permission before leaving for non-essential needs, as the husband is a guardian and is responsible for his household. His responsibility entails observing these rulings so that both spouses are clear about their rights and obligations.

What some media outlets have done—by isolating the phrase "driving cars" out of context, neglecting to mention the human rights affirmed by the fatwa, and falsely attributing to the Iftaa’ Department the prohibition of what Allah and His Messenger have not forbidden—is an act far removed from integrity and objectivity. It violates the covenants of truthfulness and trustworthiness that a Muslim must uphold in their work and duties. This necessitates that discerning audiences verify and ascertain the facts before engaging in discussions that lack any established basis.

We ask Allah The Almighty to Guide everyone to righteousness and Lead us all to the straight path.

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

When does the time for the 'aqīqah lapse and pass?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
If the guardian was financially capable (mūsir) during the majority of the postnatal period (nifās) — which is sixty days — then the obligation of the 'aqīqah remains upon him until the child reaches the age of maturity (bulūgh). Once the child reaches maturity, the demand falls away from the father and those like him. At that point, it becomes Sunnah for the child himself to perform the 'aqīqah on his own behalf.
However, if the guardian was financially incapable (mu'sir) during the postnatal period, and then became financially capable after its expiry — that is, after sixty days — the 'aqīqah is no longer required of him. And Allah Almighty knows best.

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 compensating the patient in case of medical error on the part of the treating physician?

 
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The foundational principle is that every mistake issued by a physician that causes harm to another due to his negligence or lack of expertise obligates him to guarantee liability and compensate the harmed party. The Sharia maxim, in this regard, states: "The direct actor is liable."
 
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "As for if he was skilled but his hand committed an error—such as exceeding the proper limit of incision, cutting in an incorrect site, cutting with an instrument that inflicts excessive pain, or cutting at an unsuitable time—he is liable, because it is destruction (Itlaf) whose liability does not differ between intent and mistake, thus resembling the destruction of property; and because it is a prohibited act, so he guarantees liability for its secondary effects." [Al-Mughni].
 
However, if the physician performed what was necessary in the most complete manner and took all measures of care and caution, but complications occurred that could not be avoided according to specialists, then no liability rests upon him.
 
Shaykh al-Islam Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "The cupper and the circumciser bear no liability if they have not been negligent, and likewise the veterinarian if he bleeds an animal and it perishes." [Rawdat al-Talibin].
 
Al-Khattabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "I know of no disagreement that if the practitioner transgresses and the patient perishes, he is liable. Anyone who undertakes knowledge or practice he does not know is a transgressor; so if perishing arises from his action, he is liable for the blood-money (Diyah) while capital retaliation (Qisas) is dropped from him, because he did not act independently without the patient's permission. And the physician’s offense in the view of the generality of jurists is borne by his agnates ('Aqilah*)."* [Ma'alim al-Sunan].
 
If negligence or transgression is established against the physician, it is necessary to compensate the patient or seek forgiveness from him. And Allah Almighty knows best.

"I told my family at night: 'I will fast tomorrow as qaḍā' (a make-up fast),' but I forgot to make the intention before sleeping. Is my fast valid?"

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
 
The intention is obligatory in acts of worship. For obligatory fasting, the required intention is to resolve to fast during the night [before dawn]. Its proper locus is the heart, while verbalizing the intention out loud in acts of worship is a sunnah — so that the tongue may align with the heart. If the intent behind the statement in question was the intention to fast, then it is valid; but if the intent was merely to inform someone, or reflected hesitation or doubt, then it is not valid.
 
It is stated in *Bushrā al-Karīm* (Vol.1/P.216): "It is a sunnah to verbalize the intention — that is, whatever has already been intended in the heart, whether an obligatory or a voluntary act — such as specifying the number of rak‘ahs, just before the opening takbīr — so that the tongue may assist the heart, and because this is further removed from whispered doubts (waswasah), and in order to accommodate the view of those who held it obligatory in every act of worship that requires an intention (even though this is a minority position), by analogy with Ḥajj."
 
Accordingly: if the intention to fast arose in your heart before the second adhān [i.e., before Fajr], then your fast is valid.
 
And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.