Plural marriage and fair treatment of co-wives, Dought & clear, - * Ruling on women hating polygyny (plural marriage)

gb

Share ::-

Share

- PUBLISHERNajimudeeN M. MD, IRI (Managing Director, Islamic Research Institution)

What is the ruling on a woman hating polygyny because of jealousy, since jealousy is something natural in women, and we read of the jealousy of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) concerning the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)? So where do we stand? I have learned from reading some books that hating one of the rulings of sharee’ah is tantamount to kufr.
-
Praise be to Allaah.
A woman’s jealousy concerning her husband is something that is innate and natural, and you cannot tell a woman, “Do not feel jealous over your husband.” If a person dislikes something even though it is prescribed in sharee’ah, that does not adversely affect him, so long as he does not hate the fact that it is prescribed. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Jihaad (holy fighting in Allaah’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you…” [al-Baqarah 2:216]
The woman who feels jealous does not hate the fact that Allaah has allowed her husband to marry more than one woman, but she hates to have a co-wife. There is an obvious difference between the two matters. Hence I hope that the brother who has asked this question, and other people, will think carefully about matters and not rush to judgement; I hope that that they will recognize the subtle differences whereby rulings differ.
From the fatwas of Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen for al-Da’wah magazine

Islamic General Articles, - * If the mother touches her child’s ‘awrah, does that invalidate her wudoo’?

gb

Share ::-

Share

- PUBLISHERNajimudeeN M. MD, IRI (Managing Director, Islamic Research Institution)

*

-Does touching the ‘awrah of a six-year-old child invalidate wudoo’?
-
Praise be to Allah
The scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) differed as to whether wudoo’ is invalidated by touching the ‘awrah of a minor.
Some of the scholars are of the view that wudoo’ is invalidated by touching the ‘awrah of a minor, as it is invalidated by touching the ‘awrah of an adult.
Ibn Qudaamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
According to the report which says that wudoo’ is invalidated by touching the private part, there is no differentiation between one’s own penis and that of another person, or between the penis of a minor or an adult.
End quote fromal-Mughni(1/118)
The Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas was asked: Does touching my child’s ‘awrah when changing his clothes invalidate my wudoo’?
They replied:
Touching the ‘awrah without a barrier invalidates wudoo’, whether the one who is touched is a minor or an adult, because it is proven that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever touches his private part, let him do wudoo’.” The private part of the one who is touched is the same as the private part of the one who touches another [with regard to the ruling].
End quote fromFataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah(5/265).
The second view is that wudoo’ is not invalidated by touching the ‘awrah of a small child.
Ibn Qudaamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: It was narrated from az-Zuhri and al-Awzaa‘i that no wudoo’ is required for touching the penis of an infant, because it is permissible to touch it and look at it.
End quote fromal-Mughni(1/118)
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked: Does washing the private parts of an infant invalidate wudoo’?
He (may Allah have mercy on him) replied:
No; that is, touching the private part of an infant does not invalidate wudoo’; rather touching a person who has reached the age of puberty does not invalidate wudoo’, unless that is done with desire. Thus we may reconcile between the hadiths of Talq ibn ‘Ali and Busrah bint Safwaan. The hadith of Talq ibn ‘Ali says that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was asked about a man who touches his penis whilst praying; is he required to do wudoo’? He said: “No; it is just a part of you.” And the hadith of Busrah says: “Whoever touches his penis, let him do wudoo’.”
And we say: If that is done with desire, then wudoo’ becomes obligatory, but if it is without desire, then it is not required. This detail is indicated by the words of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him): “it is just a part of you.” So if he touches it like touching any other part of the body (then it does not invalidate wudoo’). It is well-known that a person would never touch any other part of his body with desire, is that not so? So we say: If you touch it like you touch any other part of your body, without desire, then you do not have to do wudoo’, but if you touch it with desire, then you have to do wudoo’, because perhaps something may come out of you in the event of desire, without you realising.
To sum up: touching the penis of an adult or a minor does not invalidate wudoo’ unless it is accompanied by desire. The one who washes the private part of an infant definitely does not feel desire.
End quote fromLiqa’ al-Baab al-Maftooh.
What is more likely to be correct, and Allah knows best, is the second view, which is that the mother’s wudoo’ is not invalidated if she touches the ‘awrah of her infant, because this is something that happens a great deal, yet there is no report from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) to indicate that he instructed the womenfolk of the Sahaabah to renew their wudoo’ every time they needed to touch their children’s private parts, even though mothers often need to do so (when washing and bathing their children and so on).
And Allah knows best.
- ▌▌



NAJIMUDEEN M
* CONTACT- aydnajimudeen@gmail.com

Islamic General Articles, - * Ruling on saying “Labbaykya Rasool-Allah (Here I am at your service, O Messenger of Allah)”

gb

Share ::-

What is the ruling on saying “Labbayk ya Muhammad (Here I am at your service O Muhammad)” or “Labbayk ya Rasool-Allah (Here I am at your service, O Messenger of Allah)”?
-
Praise be to Allah
With regard to someone saying “Labbayk ya Rasool-Allah” during the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), there is no confusion about this being permissible. It is something that was well known among the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) on many occasions.
Al-Bukhaari (128) and Muslim (32) narrated from Anas ibn Maalik that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was riding a mount with Mu‘aadh seated behind him, and he said: “O Mu‘aadh ibn Jabal.” Mu‘aadh said: “Labbayk ya Rasool-Allah wa sa‘dayk (Here I am at your service, O Messenger of Allah).” He said: “O Mu‘aadh.” Mu‘aadh said: “Labbayk ya Rasool-Allah wa sa‘dayk” – three times – he (the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “There is no one who bears witness that there is no god but Allah, and that Muhammad is His slave and Messenger, but Allah will forbid him to the Fire.”
Ibn al-Anbaari said: What is meant by saying Labbayk is: I am persisting in obeying you. They used to use the related verblabbato refer to staying in a place, and what is meant by sa‘dayk is following. Another scholar said: What is meant by Labbayk is responding time after time, and what is meant by sa‘dayk is following time after time. Al-Muhallab said: Responding by saying yes and any other word that gives the meaning of yes is sufficient, but responding to the call of a master by honouring him and saying labbayka wa sa‘dayk is better.
End quote fromSharh Saheeh al-Bukhaari(9/50).
Please see also the answer to question no. 21617
Once it is known that calling in this manner or speaking in this manner is only appropriate in the case of one who is still alive, then such a call can only be made to one who is alive and is able to hear the one who is calling him, and such words can only be addressed to one who is alive and can hear the words that are said to him. Nothing can be requested except of one who is alive and can hear, and is able to respond to the request that is made of him.
However, what appears to be the case with regard to those who say these words and make them a slogan, and call others to it, is that they want to exaggerate in showing extreme obedience to the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and adherence to his path, and to annoy those who oppose him and hate him. These are good aims that are in accordance with Islamic teachings, but this wording may give the impression – to one who does not understand the real meaning intended – that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) is like any other human who is alive, and that he can hear those who call upon him or talk to him; the one who does that may move on from that to calling upon him and seeking his help, because of the wrong impression that these words may give. Therefore it would have been more appropriate to avoid such a slogan and to replace it with other words concerning which there is no ambiguity, especially since the true way of showing obedience to the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and showing support for him, which he loved and which truly annoyed his enemies and haters, can only be by constantly obeying him and adhering to his teachings, not merely uttering claims and words.
Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan (may Allah preserve him) was asked:
There are some stickers in shops on which it is written “Labbayk ya Rasool-Allah”. Is this phrase permissible? Is it shirk? What should we do about it?
He replied:
The word “Labbayk” is for Allah – “Labbayk Allahumma labbayk (Here I am at Your service, O Allah; here I am).” With regard to the phrase “Labbayk ya Rasool-Allah”, if the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) were to call you (when he was still alive) and say, “O So and so,” you would say, “Labbayk ya Rasool-Allah”, as the Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them) used to say when he called them. They would say: “Labbayk ya Rasool-Allah.” But after his death, no one should say, “Labbayk ya Rasool-Allah.” Rather you should say: “Labbayk Allahumma labbayk.” End quote
And Allah knows best.

Share

- PUBLISHERNajimudeeN M. MD, IRI (Managing Director, Islamic Research Institution)