Plural marriage and fair treatment of co-wives, Dought & clear, - * He regrets his first marriage and wants to take a second wife

Share ::-

Share

I have been married for a year and a half, but I do not find in my wife anything to keep me chaste, because she is not beautiful and I regretted marrying her, which made me think about taking another wife, although my wife loves me and is good. But my problem is that I look at women with the aim of marriage, but when I mention the idea of a second marriage to my wife, she says that she could not live with me if there was another wife.
What should I do? I do not want to divorce her.
Praise be to Allaah.
Firstly:
Your real problem is what you mentioned about looking at women, even if that is with the aim of marriage, as you say. Whoever looks at women spoils his religious commitment and weakens his faith, and he no longer appreciates his wife and he spends all his time thinking another woman. This, of course, puts him off his wife even more and makes him think more of a second marriage, which he thinks is the way out. Whoever is aware of how people are will realize that because of this haraam looking, what was beautiful yesterday becomes ugly to them today, and as time passes, what was new becomes old and boring, so they will live a restless life and will never settle down, and one wife or two wives will never be for them.
Hence we say: Fear Allaah, may He be exalted, and lower your gaze and avoid looking at that which Allaah has forbidden. Go back to your wife and think about some of her attractive features and her good qualities, and you will find a lot of goodness, as the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “No believing man should hate a believing woman. If he dislikes one of her qualities, he will be pleased with another.” Narrated by Muslim (2672).
If a person wants to get married, it is not permissible for him to look at every woman who is coming and going, rather it is permissible for him to look at the one to whom he wants to propose marriage when he has decided to propose. So if he is told about a woman and he is pleased with her religious commitment, character and family, then all that remains is for him to look at her. It is permissible for him to do that whether it is with or without her knowledge, a look without desire.
As for what some people do, looking freely at women right and left, on the grounds that they will choose one of them, this is haraam and is not approved of in sharee’ah or accepted by sound human nature; no one would accept this for himself or his family.
We think that you understand all of that, and that deep down you understand that choosing a second wife by looking at women who are coming and going, is nothing but a trick by means of which the shaytaan has fooled you into haraam looking which will only make you more restless, in addition to it being disobedience towards the Most Merciful, may He be exalted, and obedience to the Shaytaan and falling into his trap.
Secondly:
It is permissible for a man to marry one or two wives, up to four, if he is able for that both financially and physically, and he thinks that he will be able to treat his wives fairly.
It is not essential for him to have the first wife’s permission in order to take a second wife. Most women would not agree to plural marriage and they think that it is impossible to live with it. This is due to many reasons, including the biased media which regards plural marriage as a crime and an action that will make the first wife feel that there is something wrong with her; in many cases men also abuse this right and tend to be unjust and transgress the limits, except for those whom Allaah protects.
The wise man must look at his family and how prepared they are to accept a plural marriage; he must weigh up the settled life that he has now and what may happen in the future, and think thoroughly – without emotion – about whether he needs a second wife, and how able he is to take care of two households and two families. He has to pray to Allaah for guidance (istikhaarah) before making any move towards marriage, and he has to make a good choice, so that he will not feel regret again and realize, when it is too late, that he is seeking something unattainable, no matter what type of woman he marries.
If he decides that he wants to take a second wife and his circumstances would allow for that, as we have mentioned above, and he is serious about it, then and only then is it permissible for him to look at the woman to whom he wants to propose marriage.
But at this point we would like to point out a mistake that many a husband makes, when his life and that of his family is disturbed when this issue comes up from time to time. What is the point of bringing up this issue that causes problems – do you want to make her miserable for the rest of her life?
If you are serious – and we think that it is too early for you to be serious about it because you have only been married for a short time – then put your trust in Allaah and you will be able to deal with matters as they arise.
May Allaah help us all to do that which He loves and which pleases Him.
And Allaah knows best.

Share

- PUBLISHERNajimudeeN M

Sharia and Islam, Dought & clear, - * Division of parents' estate between sons and daughters.

Share ::-

Share

Parental property is to be divide between 4 brother & one sister . What be the share of each one as shariat.
Praise be to Allaah.
If one parent has died, or both parents, and they have no heirs except four sons and one daughter, then the estate should be divided on the basis that each male takes the share of two females, i.e. the daughter will have one share and each of the sons will have two shares. So the estate should be divided into nine parts, of which the daughter will have one share and the eight remaining shares will be given to the four sons, each of them taking two shares. This should be done after taking out the expenses of preparing and shrouding the deceased, and paying off any dues he owed to Allaah or debts he owed to other people, and after fulfilling his bequests if he left any such instructions before he died.
The evidence for that is the verse in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Allaah commands you as regards your children’s (inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females; ... (The distribution in all cases is) after the payment of legacies he may have bequeathed or debts”
[al-Nisa’ 4:11]
For example, if we assume that after shrouding the deceased, paying off his debts and fulfilling his bequests, the amount he left is 9000 for example, then the daughter will have 1000 and each of the males will have twice that, namely 2000.
But if there are other heirs as well as the children, such as the father of the deceased, or his mother or grandfather or grandmother, then each of them must be given their share, and the rest divided among the sons and daughter in the manner mentioned above.
Note: If one spouse died before the other, then the living spouse inherits from the deceased. In the case asked about here, the share of the husband if his wife dies before him is one-quarter. The wife’s share if her husband dies before her is one-eighth.
For the children who are left, the estate should be divided giving each male the share of two females, as mentioned above, after the surviving spouse has taken his or her share.

Share

- PUBLISHERNajimudeeN M

Sharia and Islam, Dought & clear, - * Is the woman who is divorced after consummation of the marriage...

Share ::-

Share

Last year I got married and was living with my husband in Kuwait due to health problem that arose after I came to Kuwait, my husband sent me to India for treatment and promised that his parents will take care of my medical expenses. After coming to India we found out I had a chronic illness and had to take medicine life long. This agitated my in-laws and they started abusing me and my parents verbally. Financially they refused to take care of me, so came back to my parent’s place for shelter. To My Husband they gave wrong information about me and my parents as if we ill treated them and created misunderstanding between me and my husband. Listening to his parents, he gave me three thalaq at the same time through a letter stating that due to my health reason he feels that I can’t conceive a normal child and not fit for proceeding married life. He was not willing to solve this issue by coming to India so I went to Kuwait to prove him my innocence. There with help of Islamic scholars and relatives we made him understand what he did was out of islam and unkind. Also with help of a doctor i made him understand that there is nothing serious about my illness and that I can conceive. But he was not willing to accept and denied me shelter to spend my hidda period with him. He gave me two options either to stay in In-law’s house or in my parent’s house and gave me just 80 dinar for maintenance during hidda period. He refused to pay for what my parents spent during my stay with them. Having faith that his mind will change, I came back and staying with my parents now. My Hidda period is going to get over. I don’t know what to do next? He has not changed and not even communication with me. My husband and his family has done injustice, acted unfairly and have spoiled my future by spreading all wrong things about me. As they are not willing to settle this issue in person, my relatives insist me to file a case through shariyath court (which is conducted in Chennai with help of town ghazi and with Muslim judges) or civil court as there is provision for claming maintenance amount. A girl’s life becomes uncertain due to this kind of thalak, so what islam say about this? Does islam ask husband to provide any compensation or maintenance after hidda period for a girl’s future? Can I seek the help of shariyath court or civil court? What is the meaning for kuraan aayath chapter: 2 versus: 241.
Praise be to Allaah.
Firstly:
If a man divorces his wife thrice in one go, such as if he says “You are divorced three times” or “you are thrice divorced” or he says it in separate words such as saying “You are divorced, divorced, divorced”, then it counts as one divorce according to the more correct opinion, and he may take her back so long as she is still within the ‘iddah period. Once the ‘iddah period has ended he cannot go back to her without a new marriage contract.
Secondly:
The revocably divorced woman (i.e., first or second talaaq) is entitled to maintenance during her ‘iddah, and it is not permissible to make her leave the house, because of the words of Allaah (interpretation of the meaning):
“And turn them not out of their (husband’s) homes nor shall they (themselves) leave, except in case they are guilty of some open illegal sexual intercourse. And those are the set limits of Allaah. And whosoever transgresses the set limits of Allaah, then indeed he has wronged himself. You (the one who divorces his wife) know not it may be that Allaah will afterward bring some new thing to pass (i.e. to return her back to you if that was the first or second divorce)”
[al-Talaaq 65:1].
Based on this, you are entitled to request the maintenance that your father spent on you during your ‘iddah, if what your husband gave you was not enough, and you can refer the matter to the sharee’ah court and make a claim there. If there is no sharee’ah court, and it is not possible to take your rights by advising your husband or through the intervention of good people, it is permissible to refer the matter to the civil courts, even though it is not proper to refer for judgement to man-made laws, but do not take more than you are entitled to, even if that is awarded to you by the courts.
Secondly:
Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And for divorced women, maintenance (should be provided) on reasonable (scale). This is a duty on Al‑Muttaqoon (the pious)”
[al-Baqarah 2:241]
This maintenance is obligatory in the case of a woman who is divorced before consummation, if she did not have a specified mahr at the time of the marriage contract, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“There is no sin on you, if you divorce women while yet you have not touched (had sexual relation with) them, nor appointed unto them their Mahr (bridal-money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage). But bestow on them (a suitable gift), the rich according to his means, and the poor according to his means, a gift of reasonable amount is a duty on the doers of good”
[al-Baqarah 2:236].
But if the divorce came after consummation, then maintenance is not obligatory according to the majority of fuqaha’, rather it is mustahabb.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) was of the view that it is obligatory for all divorced women.
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Maintenance must be given to every divorced women, even after consummation. And he quoted as evidence for that the verse in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And for divorced women, maintenance (should be provided) on reasonable (scale). This is a duty on Al‑Muttaqoon (the pious)”
[al-Baqarah 2:241]
“Divorced women” is general in meaning, and the entitlement is confirmed by the word “duty” [haqqan]. This is further confirmed by the words “on the pious”. This indicates that doing this is part of piety or fearing Allaah (taqwa), and fearing Allaah is obligatory. What the Shaykh [Ibn Taymiyah] said is a very strong argument if the marriage has lasted a long time, but if the man divorces her within a short period, then in that case we say:
Firstly: the woman’s relationship with the man has lasted only a short time
Secondly: The mahr she was given is still with her, because it was only given to her recently.
But if the marriage lasted for a year, or two years, or a few months, then in that case what Shaykh al-Islam (may Allaah have mercy on him) said is sound. This is a moderate view that falls in between two others which say that it is either mustahabb in all cases or obligatory in all cases. This is the correct view. End quote fromal-Sharh al-Mumti’(12/308).
Maintenance depends on the husband’s situation, whether he is rich and well off or poor and hard up. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“But bestow on them (a suitable gift), the rich according to his means, and the poor according to his means”
[al-Baqarah 2:236].
There is no specific, set amount in this case.
If a man divorces his wife, he should offer some consolation by giving her some money.
As for referring the claim to the husband’s relatives, we do not think that this will achieve anything for you. Refer their matter to Allaah, for He will requite each person for what he did.
You do not know what is best for you. Perhaps Allaah will bring you something good, as Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allaah knows but you do not know”
[al-Baqarah 2:216]
Turn to Allaah and cling to Him, and delegate your affairs to Him, and do a lot of acts of worship. Allaah will not let His righteous slaves down.
We ask Allaah to heal you, grant you well being and decree good for you.
And Allaah knows best.

Share

- PUBLISHERNajimudeeN M

Trust (amaanah) in Islam, Dought & clear, - * Ruling on the worshipper doing the actions of prayer at the same time as the imam

I was praying behind the imam in Maghrib prayer, and when he rose from
bowing, I rushed to rise from bowing and I do not know whether I did
that at the same time as him or shortly after him. Hence I do not know
whether the prayer was valid or not, because I read on your website
that this is makrooh, as the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be
upon him) forbade that. But if the Prophet (blessings and peace of
Allah be upon him) forbade it, how can it be makrooh? Isn't it more
likely that it would be haraam? I hope that you can clarify.
Praise be to Allah
Firstly:
Your prayer is valid:
1 –
because bowing or prostrating at the same time as the imam is makrooh,
and it does not invalidate the prayer, as we have explained in fatwa
no. 33790.
2 –
what appears to be the case from what you say is that you were
following the imam, and you started to rise from bowing after the imam
began to rise, so you were still basically following him, and you did
not go ahead of him or do the act at the same time as him. Therefore
uncertainty in this case does not count for anything, because
certainty cannot be dispelled by uncertainty.
Secondly:
The basic principle with regard to things forbidden by the Messenger
of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) is that they are
to be understood as meaning that the thing forbidden is haraam.
Ibn an-Najjaar (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
If it says that something is forbidden (in a text of the Qur'an or
Sunnah), then it is understood to be haraam according to the four
imams and others. Ash-Shaafa'i (may Allah have mercy on him)
emphatically rejected the view of those who say that it means it is
makrooh.
End quote fromSharh al-Kawkab al-Muneer(3/83)
This is applicable whether the prohibition is mentioned in the texts
of the Qur'an or in the texts of the Sunnah.
That is because Allah, may He be exalted, has emphasised that it is
obligatory to shun and refrain from that which the Prophet (blessings
and peace of Allah be upon him) forbids.
Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):
"And whatsoever the Messenger (Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah
be upon him)) gives you, take it, and whatsoever he forbids you,
abstain (from it), and fear Allah. Verily, Allah is Severe in
punishment"
[al-Hashr 59:7].
That is because taking the fact that the Prophet (blessings and peace
of Allah be upon him) forbade something as proof that it is haraam is
the way of the believers, namely the Sahaabah and Taabi'een.
But the wording of something being forbidden may be regarded as
meaning that it is makrooh, and not haraam, if there is proof to that
effect. There may be many indications that the prohibition mentioned
in a text means that something is makrooh rather than haraam.
For more information, please see fatwa no. 184119
Thirdly:
With regard to the prohibition mentioned in the hadith of Abu
Hurayrah, in which it tells us that the Messenger of Allah (blessings
and peace of Allah be upon him) said: "The imam has only been
appointed to be followed, so when he says takbeer then say takbeer,
and do not say takbeer until after he has said takbeer; and when he
bows then bow, and do not bow until after he has bowed; … and when he
prostrates then prostrate, and do not prostrate until he has
prostrated…" Narrated by Abu Dawood (603); classed as saheeh by
al-Albaani inIrwa' al-Ghaleel(2/121)
Some of the scholars looked at the wording of the hadith and
understood the prohibition according to the basic principle, i.e.,
that it indicates that it is haraam. Hence they said: It is obligatory
to follow the imam, and it is haraam to go ahead of him, and it is
also haraam to do the actions at the same time as him.
Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Ali ibn Adam al-Ethiopi said:
Al-'Allaamah ash-Shawkaani (may Allah have mercy on him) said,
commenting on the hadith of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with
him), in which it says: "When he says takbeer then say takbeer":
This indicates that the worshipper who is praying behind the imam
should not start to say the takbeer until after the imam has finished
saying it. The same applies to bowing, rising from bowing, and
prostrating. This is also indicated by his words in the second report:
"Do not say takbeer, do not bow, and do not prostrate", and by all the
other reports which mention this prohibition or forbidding.
There was a difference of opinion concerning that, as to whether it is
obligatory or recommended. What appears to be the case is that it is
obligatory, without differentiating between the opening takbeer
(takbeerat al-ihram) and others. End quote.
Al-Jaami' said:
What ash-Shawkaani said about the command meaning that it is
obligatory is the view that was regarded as most likely to be correct
by as-San'aani in his'Iddah, vol. 2, p. 241. It is also more likely to
be correct in my view. So it is haraam for the worshipper to go ahead
of his imam, or do the actions at the same time as him, because the
clear prohibition mentioned above in the report of Abu Dawood
indicates that it is haraam. And Allah knows best.
End quote fromSharh Sunan an-Nasaa'i(10/112-113)
Most of the scholars said that the prohibition on doing actions of the
prayer at the same time as the imam indicates that it is only makrooh.
Ibn Qudaamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
What is recommended is for the worshipper to start doing the actions
of prayer, such as moving up and down, after the imam has done them,
and it is makrooh for him to do them with the imam, according to most
of the scholars.
End quote fromal-Mughni(2/208)
Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Doing the actions of prayer at the same time as the imam is makrooh,
and it was said that it is contrary to the Sunnah, but the more
correct view is that it is makrooh.
Examples of doing things at the same time as the imam include:
when the imam says "Allahu akbar" for rukoo' (bowing), and starts to
bow down, and you and the imam bow down at the same time. This is
makrooh because the Messenger (blessings and peace of Allah be upon
him) said: "When he bows then bow, and do not bow until he has bowed."
In the case of sujood (prostration), when the imam says takbeer for
prostration, and you prostrate and you and the imam reach the floor at
the same time. This is makrooh because the Messenger (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him) said: "Do not prostrate until he (the
imam) has prostrated."
Al-Bara' ibn 'Aazib said: After the Prophet (blessings and peace of
Allah be upon him) said "Sami'a Allahu liman hamidah (Allah hears
those who praise Him)" [and we had all risen from bowing], not one of
us would bend his back (in order to prostrate] until the Prophet
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) went down in prostration,
then we would go down in prostration after him.
End quote fromash-Sharh al-Mumti'(4/189).
Perhaps the indication that the prohibition mentioned in the text –
concerning the one who does the actions of the prayer at the same time
as his imam – is makrooh and not haraam, in their view, is two things:
1.
That the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) denounced
in the strongest terms only the one who goes ahead of the imam.
It was narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) that
the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: "Does not
one of you fear, if he raises his head before the imam, that Allah may
turn his head into the head of a donkey, or that Allah may change his
form into the form of a donkey?" Narrated by al-Bukhaari (691) and
Muslim (427). No such stern denunciation came concerning doing the
actions of prayer at the same time as the imam, so the ruling thereon
is less strict.
Ibn al-Mulaqqin (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
The apparent meaning of the hadith indicates that it is haraam to go
ahead of the imam and the implicit meanings is that it is permissible
to do the actions of prayer at the same time as the imam. However,
there is no doubt that it is makrooh to do so, and it causes one to
miss out on the virtue of praying in congregation.
End quote fromal-I'laam bi Fawaa'id 'Umdat al-Ahkaam(2/552)
Some of the scholars objected to understanding this hadith as meaning
that it is permissible to do the actions of prayer at the same time as
the imam; rather when taken as a whole, the hadiths indicate that this
is not permissible.
Al-'Iraaqi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The Prophet (blessings
and peace of Allah be upon him) said, in the hadith of Abu Hurayrah
that was narrated by Abu Dawood – "When he says takbeer then say
takbeer, and do not say takbeer until he has said takbeer"; and
concerning bowing: "Do not bow until he has bowed"; and concerning
prostration: "Do not prostrate until he has prostrated" – what this
additional material that was reported by Abu Dawood indicates is that
it is not possible that doing the actions with the imam could be
permissible
End quote fromTarh at-Tathreeb(2/330)
Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Abu Dawood added: "and do not bow until he has bowed, and do not
prostrate until he has prostrated." This is a good addition, which
rules out the possibility that what was meant by his words "when he
says takbeer then say takbeer" was doing it at the same time as the
imam.
But this report of Abu Dawood clearly rules out doing these actions
before the imam or at the same time as him. And Allah knows best.
End quote fromFath al-Baari(2/179)
In'Umdat al-Qaari(5/217) it says:
The report of Abu Dawood clearly rules out doing any of (the actions
of prayer) before the imam or at the same time as him. End quote.
2.
Perhaps the majority regarded the reason for this prohibition as being
the fact that it is obligatory to follow the imam and not differ from
him, as is explained at the beginning of the hadith of Abu Hurayrah
quoted above. It was also narrated by al-Bukhaari (722) and Muslim
(414) as follows: The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon
him) said: "The imam is appointed to be followed, so do not differ
from him."
The precise meaning of being an imam is that the imam is to be ahead
of those who are praying behind him both in the place where he stands
and in his actions and words.
If a person bows at the same time as the imam, for example, even
though he has not properly followed the imam, he has not completely
abandoned the idea of following, which is in contrast to the case of
one who bows before the imam. The latter has done an action that is
diametrically opposed to following the imam.
Hence doing actions at the same time as the imam is makrooh because it
detracts from the proper meaning of following the imam, which is
required, but it is not entirely contrary to it, unlike doing actions
before the imam, which is haraam because it is entirely contrary to
the idea of following the imam, which is obligatory.
And Allah knows best.