Sunday, July 13, 2008

Muslim woman’s hijaab in front of kaafir women

Q) What are the things that a Muslim woman may uncover in front of a kaafir woman, such as a Buddhist woman for example? Is it true that she is not allowed to uncover her face?

A) Praise be to Allaah.

The correct view is that a woman may uncover what is above the navel and what is below the knees in front of another woman, whether she is a Muslim or a kaafir. As for the area between the navel and the knees, this is ‘awrah and is to be covered in front of everyone. No woman should see this area of another woman, whether she is Muslim or non-Muslim, related to her or not related; the same applies to the ‘awrah among men (i.e., no man should see the ‘awrah of another man). A woman may see the chest, head, shins, etc., of another woman; similarly a man may see the chest, shins, and head of another man. With regard to the view of some scholars, that a believing woman should not uncover in front of a kaafir woman, this view is superceded by the more correct of the two scholarly views, because at the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), Jewish women and also idol-worshipping women used to enter upon the wives of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) for various reasons; it is not narrated that they used to wear hijaab in front of them, and they are the best and most pious of women.

Shaykh Ibn Baaz, in al-Fataawa al-Jaami’ah li’l-Mar’ah al-Muslimah, part 3, p. 830

He bequeathed one-third of his wealth to his daughters as a punishment to his son for taking all the money

Q) One year before my father died, he gave to each of us – three daughters and one son – the papers pertaining to the accounts where he had deposited the money he had been saving for us; he had suffered a great deal during the years he was working abroad to save this money for us and provide us with this money. So none of us dared to withdraw any money without referring to him, out of respect for him.
Then my brother withdrew all the money in the account following an argument which arose between my brother and my sister. My father (may Allaah have mercy on him) was on the girls’ side, which made my brother (may Allaah forgive him) withdraw all the money which my father had deposited in his account then handed over the documentation. When he (my brother) found out about this will, he started court proceedings to prove the will legally invalid. When his father found out about it from the bank, he was deeply shocked, and he told him to put the money back because he needed it, as he was sick. But my brother refused to return the money, which had a bad effect on my father. My father died angry with my brother, and he had written a will leaving one-third of his money to his daughters; this will was intended as a punishment to my brother which my father wrote before he died, understanding fully what he was saying.
I myself refused to accept this will because I was not comfortable with it, and I insisted on taking only that which was due to me according to sharee’ah. I advised my sisters to ignore this will, in order to correct any mistake that my father may have made and so as to uphold good relations with my brother as Allaah enjoins upon us to do. But my many attempts did not succeed, and they went ahead and executed the will through the courts. The tears of my mother (may Allaah have mercy on her) did not succeed in deterring them from insisting on the will being executed. I also tried several times to deter my brother from entering into a dispute with my sisters in the court, in order to protect the name and reputation of our father. I asked him to consider this as a punishment in this world for what he had done to my father. But he refused to give up what he considered to be his right for any reason, and all of them accused me of not supporting the truth. I kept myself out of this dispute by appointing a lawyer to declare my objection to this matter from the outset.
I hope that you can advise me of the shar’i ruling and what my siblings’ position is according to sharee’ah. Please tell me what my duty towards them is, when they have adopted this stance towards me on this matter despite my many attempts to maintain good relations with them and honour them.
Please advise me, may Allaah reward you.

A) Praise be to Allaah.

It is unfortunate that there are many such cases among siblings, and what makes the matter even more regrettable is that the reason for this dispute is money. In fact I appreciate our sister’s good nature and wisdom, since she has preferred peace to entering into a dispute with her brother, and she has tried to contain the problem and solve it within the family. This in itself should be considered the beginning of a proper solution. As for the answer to this question, it may be answered in the following points:


The money which your father had saved for you and gone to great lengths for your benefit, is the due of everyone whom Allaah has decreed has a share of inheritance. Each of you has a share allotted by sharee’ah after the death of your father; none of you have the right to keep this money for himself and deny it to the rest of the heirs, because by doing so he is transgressing upon the rights of others. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allaah likes not the transgressors”[al-Baqarah 2:190]

It was narrated by Abu Harrah al-Raqaashi that his paternal uncle said: “I was holding on to the reins of the she-camel of Messenger of Allaah SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “A man’s wealth is not permissible except with his consent.” (Narrated by Ahmad, 20172; classed as saheeh al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Irwaa’, 1761).

On this basis, what your brother did by taking this money is considered to be a haraam action, especially since he took the money when your father was still alive and he is not entitled to any of the money until after his father died. Indeed, after his father’s death he is not entitled to anything more than the share which Allaah has allocated to him in the laws of inheritance. So what your brother must do is to repent to Allaah and restore the rights of people.


The will which your father wrote was not acceptable according to sharee’ah, and it is not permissible for you to demand that it be executed, because a person who is designated as an heir according to sharee’ah cannot be given something in the will (wasiyyah). The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Allaah has given each person his rights and no will can be made in favour of an heir.” (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 2120; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi, 1722), So it is not permissible for you to demand it, even if your brother has taken your money. But you may demand what Allaah has granted you in the laws of inheritance.


You should continue to advise and guide them and try to bring them together as much as you can. Remember that you will be rewarded by Allaah for that. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“There is no good in most of their secret talks save (in) him who orders Sadaqah (charity in Allaah’s Cause), or Ma‘roof (Islamic Monotheism and all the good and righteous deeds which Allaah has ordained), or conciliation between mankind; and he who does this, seeking the good Pleasure of Allaah, We shall give him a great reward” [al-Nisa’ 4:114]

Keep telling your sisters not to demand more than they are entitled to, and that demanding one-third is something that is not permitted. Try also to convince your brother, in a good way, to give your sisters that which is rightfully theirs, and to show mercy to his sisters after his father’s death instead of being a torment to them. You will undoubtedly face problems in doing that, but be patient. We ask Allaah to make you steadfast.


If you are doing the right thing, it will not matter if people blame you or accuse you of being biased. Be steadfast in adhering to the truth. Finally, we call on all of you to fear Allaah and to ward off this scandalous dispute which does not make anyone happy apart from the Shaytaan, those in whose hearts is a disease and everyone who enjoys the troubles of others or is filled with malicious envy.

I ask Allaah to put things right between you. May Allaah bless our Prophet Muhammad.

Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid

She got married without writing the marriage contract – should she repeat the marriage?

Q) I have been married for a year and a half and when i got married it was to a muslim man and i became muslim after a year and a month of being married we did the marriage islamically correct ie: he asked my fathers permission and had two witnesses and he asked me what i wanted for dawry but we did not make a marriage contract do we need to make one and is the marriage valid?and also i do not have a Wali do i need one?

A) Praise be to Allaah.


May Allaah bless you; we congratulate you for the blessing of Islam, for it is the greatest of blessings. We also congratulate you for your marriage, and we ask Allaah to continue to bless it, and to bless you with a righteous husband and righteous offspring.


If the marriage was done with the agreement of your father and in the presence of two witnesses, then it is a valid marriage, and it does not matter that the marriage contract was not written down or that the mahr (dowry) was not recorded. But the marriage contract should be written down because that helps to protect people’s rights. As your marriage was done before you became Muslim, then your wali (guardian) was your father who was of the same religion as you, so if you want to write it down and document what is in the marriage contract, there is nothing wrong with that.

But now your father is not qualified to act as your guardian, because of the difference in religion. See the answer to question no. 48992.

But you do not need a wali now, because the previous marriage contract is valid, as stated above.

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A

The bank is offering to let him delay payment of a loan in return for some fees

Q) I borrowed an amount from a bank. The bank offers to delay the installments up to three times a year in return for extra fees to be added. Is it permissible to delay paying installments?

A) Praise be to Allaah.

A loan is a contract that is based on kindness is a kind of charitable action, and it is not permissible to stipulate that interest be paid on it, either at the beginning of the contract or when there is a delay in payment. It was a common feature of the riba of the Jaahiliyyah that if the borrower was unable to pay off, it would be said to him, “Add more and pay later” i.e., add some more money to the loan and we will give you longer to pay it back.

Ibn al-Jawzi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The scholars of tafseer said concerning the words of Allaah, “O you who believe! Consume not Ribaa doubled and multiplied, but fear Allaah that you may be successful” [Aal ‘Imraan 3:130]: This verse was revealed concerning the riba of the Jaahiliyyah. Sa’eed ibn Jubayr said: If one man owed another man money, when the time to pay came he would say, “Give me more time and I will pay you more money. That is what is meant by doubled and multiplied. End quote from Zaad al-Maseer (1/457).

Shaykh Muhammad al-Ameen al-Shanqeeti (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: It should be noted that the riba which all Muslims are unanimously agreed is not allowed, and no one differed concerning that is the riba of the Jaahiliyyah, which is where the lender would give the borrower more time to pay in return for the latter increasing the amount to be repaid. End quote.

The scholars are unanimously agreed that every loan in which it is stipulated that more be paid is riba.

Ibn Qudaamah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said every loan in which it is stipulated that more be paid is haraam, with no difference of scholarly opinion. Ibn al-Mundhir said: They are unanimously agreed that if the lender stipulated that the borrower must pay something extra or give him a gift, and he gives the loan on that basis, taking the extra amount is riba.

It was narrated from Ubayy ibn Ka’b, Ibn ‘Abbaas and Ibn Mas’ood that they forbade loans that bring benefits. End quote from al-Mughni (4/211).

Based on that, if the banks allowing you extra time to pay off the loan is in return for interest or fees, then it is the essence of riba, unless the fee is very low, such as the cost of paperwork and the like, and the bank will not benefit from that. These type of fees should not vary according to the amount of money involved, so whether the debt is one hundred thousand or ten thousand, the fee should be the same, if we assume that this procedure requires fees.

But if the fee is very high, or the fee varies according to the amount of money owed, then this is the essence of the riba of Jaahiliyyah.

Dr. ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Muhammad al-Tayyaar was asked: I took from the bank what is known as tawarruq, and the borrower may delay one of the payments until the end of the period, but the bank will charge a fee between 200 and 250 riyals in return for the delay. Is this amount considered to be riba or is it permissible?

He replied: If this amount is in return for an unforeseen delay in the event of non-payment or being unable to make a payment, then this is the riba of the Jaahiliyyah which is haraam according to scholarly consensus. When the time for paying the debt came they would say: Either pay it off or increase the amount. The shar’i option in this case is to give the one who is hard up extra time to pay, as Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And if the debtor is in a hard time (has no money), then grant him time till it is easy for him to repay” [al-Baqarah 2:280]. But increasing the amount for him is not permissible under any circumstances. End quote from Islam Today website.

We ask Allaah to protect us and you from the evils, sin and danger of riba.

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A