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

What can a menstruating woman do on Laylat al-Qadr?

If a menstruating woman engages in remembrance of Allah (dhikr), supplication (du‘a), and sincere devotion, she has indeed observed Laylat al-Qadr. She may also listen to the Quran from audio sources such as the radio or television.

Must a person refrain from eating for the rest of the day if they break a fast of a vow (nadhr) or a make up fast (qada)?

 

Whoever observes a vowed fast (nadhr) or a makeup fast (qada) is prohibited from breaking it without a valid excuse. If they break it without a legitimate reason, they are sinful.
However, they are not required to refrain from eating for the rest of the day, because such restraint is only required out of respect for the month of Ramadan, not for other types of fasting.

A man led the people in prayer as imam, and at the end of the prayer he performed a prostration of forgetfulness (*sujūd al-sahw*) because he had omitted a short *sūrah* after al-Fātiḥah. What is the ruling on his prayer and that of those praying behind him?

 

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
According to the Shāfiʿī school, it is sunnah to recite a sūrah after al-Fātiḥah in the prayer. One who omits it has a valid prayer, and no prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw) is prescribed for omitting it. If someone performs sujūd al-sahw for its omission while knowing the ruling and remembering it, his prayer is invalidated. But one who is ignorant of the ruling, or who did so out of forgetfulness, his prayer is not invalidated, because this is among the matters that are obscure to people, and ignorance of it is not restricted to those who recently entered Islam.
Shaykh al-Islām al-Shams al-Ramlī said in Nihāyat al-Muḥtāj ilā Sharḥ al-Minhāj (Vol.2/p.70): “The remaining sunnahs are not compensated for by prostration, such as the remembrances (adhkār) of bowing and prostration, that is, the opening supplication (duʿāʾ al-iftitāḥ) and the sūrah, in accordance with the base rule, because they are not of the same nature as what has been reported [as compensable]. If one prostrates for any of them deliberately, his prayer is invalidated, unless he is excused due to ignorance. As for the objection raised that the ignorant person does not know that sujūd al-sahw is prescribed, and whoever knows it knows its place, this is refuted by denying such a necessary connection, for the ignorant person may hear only that sujūd al-sahw is prescribed before the salām, and so assume that it applies to every sunnah and is not restricted to its prescribed place.”
This is among the matters that are obscure, in which the mukallaf is excused for ignorance, as stated by al-Shabrāmallisī in his Ḥāshiyah ʿalā Nihāyat al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/p.70).
However, if the imam prostrates, and the follower (maʾmūm) presumes that his imam’s prostration is for a reason for which one does not prostrate, it is not permissible to follow him in it, so long as the follower knows the ruling.
Accordingly, the prayer of one who did not recite a sūrah after al-Fātiḥah is valid, and sujūd al-sahw is not prescribed for it. Whoever prostrates out of ignorance or forgetfulness, his prayer is valid, because this is among the issues hidden from the general public. But whoever prostrates while knowing the ruling and remembering it, his prayer is invalidated. And Allah Almighty 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.