If some part of the Awrah is uncovered in Salaah..

20 Rabee’uth-thaani 1430 

Question: What is the ruling on someone who prays while some part of his Awrah (parts of the body that should be covered during the prayer) are uncovered and he does not realize it until after completing the prayer when someone informs him about it. Is his prayer correct or it is required from him to repeat the prayer?

 

Answer by Shaikh Saleh ibn Fawzan al-Fawzan (hafidhahullah), ‘No doubt that covering the awrah is from the conditions of Salaat with its pillars. Ibn Abdur-Barr (rahimahullah) said, ‘There is a consensus of the people of knowledge upon the annihilation of the Salaat if one prays while in the state of nakedness while he is able to dress himself.’ Or he said something similar. So, covering the Awrah is from the conditions of the soundness of the Salaat.

 However, there are details concerning what is mentioned in the question that the one who performed the prayer did not realize that some parts of his Awrah were uncovered until after he had completed his Salaat and those present near him informed him about it. If what was uncovered was too much, then the prayer has to be repeated. If what was uncovered was little and not intended, then the prayer is correct Insha’Allah based upon the narration,

 Narrated Amr ibn Salama, ‘…When my father returned, he said, ‘…The Prophet said, ‘…when the time for the prayer becomes due, …let the one amongst you who knows Qur’aan, the most should, lead the prayer.’ So they looked for such a person and found none who knew more Qur’aan than I because of the Qur’aanic material which I used to learn from the caravans. They therefore made me their Imam (to lead the prayer) and at that time I was a boy of six or seven years, wearing a Burda (i.e. a black square garment) proved to be very short for me (and my body became partly naked). A lady from the tribe said, ‘Won’t you cover the private part of your reciter for us?’ So they bought (a piece of cloth) and made a shirt for me…’ [Saheeh al-Bukharee]

So, it is proved that if some part of the awrah is uncovered, and it is a small part and unintended then the prayer is correct. However, if it was intentionally left open and he did not cover it while he was able to, then his prayer is incorrect, even if it was an insignificant (part of the awrah). And Allah knows best.’ [Arabic text of the Fatawa can be found at, http://www.alfuzan.com Fatawa no. 16603]

Text messages and e-mails which say: “Forward this or else you will be sinning and such and such will happen to you”

18 Rabi`ul-Awwal 1430

Recently it has become wide spread to receive an e-mail or a text message that includes a du’a or an advice. It reads: “I ask you by Allah to forward it”, or they might say: “if you forward it you will receive good news”. What is the ruling on such messages? Will I be sinful if I do not forward it?.

Praise be to Allaah.

Using modern means of communication such as mobile phones and e-mail to spread advice, exhortations, reminders and guidance is a good deed, because it is possible to reach hundreds of people with one click of the button. It is well known that the one who guides others to do good is like the one who does it, and that the one who calls others to guidance will have a reward like that of those who follow him, as Muslim (2674) narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“Whoever calls others to guidance will have a reward like that of those who follow it, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest.”

And Muslim (1893) narrated from Abu Mas’ood al-Ansaari (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“The one who tells another about something good is like the one who does it.”

If a Muslims writes some advice about the adhkaar for morning and evening, for example, and sends it to a hundred people, and many of them follow his advice, then he will have a great reward for that.

Hence we should make use of these means of communication and raise the level of the messages that are transmitted through them, so that they will be most effective and beneficial.

But sadly some people mix this good deed with a bad deed, which is a kind of lying and falsehood, such as saying, If you forward this, you will hear some good news”! This is a kind of fortune-telling. There is no shar’i evidence that the one who receives advice and passes it on to another will hear good news, rather he may hear bad news, or good news, or he may not hear anything at all.

The same applies to the one who says, “I am entrusting you with this to forward it and spread it, or else you will be sinning if you do not do that,” or “Such and such will happen to the one who does not forward it.” All of this is false and there is no basis for it. The one to whom it is sent does not have to do anything and there is nothing to oblige him to forward it, and he is not sinning if he does not do that. There is no basis for stating that someone is sinning without any proof from sharee’ah, and there is no basis for speaking of the unseen future which no one knows except Allaah.

Stating that reward or punishment will come as the result of actions done is something that must be referred to Allaah. Whatever He has permitted is what is halaal, and whatever He has forbidden is what is haraam, and reward and punishment are in His hand. Whoever says anything about that without proof is lying. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Say (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم):(But) the things that my Lord has indeed forbidden are Al‑Fawaahish (great evil sins and every kind of unlawful sexual intercourse) whether committed openly or secretly, sins (of all kinds), unrighteous oppression, joining partners (in worship) with Allaah for which He has given no authority, and saying things about Allaah of which you have no knowledge’”

[al-A’raaf 7:33]

These people think that they are making people spread good by encouraging and warning them, but they are mistaken and they are overstepping the mark. They should limit themselves to that which is mentioned in sharee’ah, which is sufficient, praise be to Allaah, such as saying: “Whoever spreads this good, there is the hope that he will have a reward like that of all those who act upon it.” That should be sufficient to encourage people to spread it.

This explains the importance of knowledge, because most of those who do this only do it because of ignorance, like those who fabricated ahaadeeth and attributed them to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) on the basis of spreading good and encouraging people to do good, but they ended up telling lies of a type for which the one who tells them is given a stern warning, but he thought that he was earning reward!

Our aim is to point out the falseness of this method and to warn people against it. Hence we say:

The one who receives any of these false messages should advise the one who sent it and explain to him that he should stop using these false incentives, and he should not believe what it says in the message, that if he forwards it such and such will happen to him and if he does not forward it such and such will happen to him, because this is a kind of lie, as stated above.

May Allaah help us all to do that which He loves and which pleases Him.

And Allaah knows best.

From IslamQA

When to check for end of menstruation?

14 Rabi`ul-Awwal 1430

Assalamu Alaykum,

I’ve been wondering about this recently.. Alhamdulellah I found an answer and hope it is of benefit insha Allah 🙂

Question: How vigilant should a woman be about ascertaining when her menstrual period has come to an end? Does she have to wake up (with an alarm clock’s help) at Fajr time to go and check if her period has ended with time enough to spare for her to bathe and pray? Or, should she just wake up whenever she wakes up and then go and and check? My question is not about how to clinically determine that the period is over. I’m clear about that. I just want to know how vigilant she has to be.

Answered by Sheikh Muhammad Muhammad Sâlim `Abd al-Wadûd

A woman does not have to wake up at Fajr time during the last days of her menstrual cycle. She is not burdened with discovering the exact moment that her menstrual period comes to an end.

The women used to send samples of cotton to `Â’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) so she could judge for them when their periods came to an end. She would simply tell them not to be in such a hurry.

This shows us that showing an exaggerated concern for determining when the period comes to an end is contrary to the practice of our Pious Predecessors.

We also have the general axiom of Islamic Law that “certainty is not removed by doubt”. In this case, the woman knows she is on her period. She is not under any legal burden to act upon the possibility that her period is over. Therefore, she is not required to wake up at Fajr time to determine whether her period might be over.

Likewise, we have the principle of Islamic Jurisprudence known as istishâb al-hâl. This means that in Islamic Law, the default assumption is that things are still as they have previously been. Since the woman is already on her period, she is free to continue to assume that she is on her period until evidence shows her that it is otherwise. She is not called upon to go out of her way and verify that she is still on her period. When it becomes clear to her that her period is over, then she should take her bath and resume her prayers.

The matter is one in which there is great flexibility and leniency. It should never be a source of worry or anxiety for any woman.

Taken from  Islam Today

Classes at IISCA (Bruns. Melb)

13 Rabi` Al-Awwal 1430

Assalamu Alaykum,

I finally have a tangible list of the classes run at IISCA in brunswick, melbourne.

You can find the classes elsewhere in aus here insha Allah

Tuesday: Study of the  Forty Hadeeth(explanation by sheikh jamal zarabozo 3 volumes) Currently up to Vol2 (Maghreb-Isha)

Friday:  Tafsir of the Quraan (Maghreb-Isha)

Saturday: Sisters only Aqeedah Classes (Dhuhr)

Sunday:  Study of Bulugh Almaraam (a book  by al_Hafidh ibn Hajar al-Asqalani) (Maghreb-Isha)

Interesting

16 Safar 1430

Assalamu Alaykum,

I was on my way home today as I passed by clegs (fabric chain store) and the shop’s logo caught my eye…

cleg_lady_logo Looks like a hijabi, no?

Online Resources

13 Dhul-Qi`dah  1429

Assalamu Alaykum,

Recently I came across the websites of Shiekhs Al-Albanee and Ibn Othaimeen (May Allah have mercy on them) and I was very impressed with the resources available so I thought I would share them with you.

Most of the resources are in arabic and are downloadable exe files, mp3s or pdfs., but some e-books are translated into different languages including english, french, urdu and a few others.

I am yet to familarise myself with the site, but meanwhile I will share with you the section of translated e-books on Shiekh Ibn Othaimeen’s website.

You can find them here insha’ Allah.

I really like the way the e-books are designed, and I hope you enjoy and benefit from them as well.

Wa assalamu Alaykum


The Jilbaab and what garments can substitute it

8 Dhul-Qi`dah 1429

From the book “Masaa’il Nisaa’iyyah Mukhtaarah min Fiqh al-’Alaamah Al-Albaanee” [Selected Women’s Issues from the Fiqh of Imaam Al-Albaanee] compiled by Umm Ayoob Ghaawee.

Shaikh Al-Albaanee was asked the following question in a recorded talk: “We would like more details on the definition of a jilbaab, since you have stated that your view on the jilbaab is that it is a garment that covers the body from the head to the feet. However, we have come across a rather large difference of opinion in the language books concerning this. Amongst the linguists are those who say it is a large gown, while others say it is a khimaar. And others hold the same view you mentioned, Shaikh. So we would like a further elaboration, may Allaah reward you, as well as which one is the strongest opinion.”

The Shaikh responded to the questioner: “I’m sorry but I’m having difficulty understanding the part where you said that some people hold the jilbaab to be the khimaar. What is the khimaar that you are referring to when you say that they consider it to be the jilbaab? This is because it is well-known that the khimaar is a head-covering and not an ample garment that covers a woman’s entire body from her head to her feet. So who is it that claims that the jilbaab is a khimaar from what you know, according to what I mentioned? This is truly a very strange thing. Who said this?!”

The questioner said: “This is mentioned in the book Lisaan-ul-‘Arab, where it states that such a definition for it is held by some people.”

The Shaikh said: “It states that the jilbaab is a khimaar?”

The questioner said: “Yes.”

So the Shaikh replied: “It is not possible to say this because as you know there are two ayahs in the Qur’aan – one ayah that orders women to wear the jilbaab while the other orders them to put on the khimaar. It is not possible to say that both ayahs contain a repetition of the same meaning, thus the jilbaab would be the khimaar, while the khimaar would be the jilbaab. Rather, both of these terms – the jillbaab and the khimaar – have their own respective meanings that are distinct from one another.

You know, for example, that when a woman is at home and she gets up to pray her obligatory prayers, for the most part, she is normally at home with her hair uncovered. So she just places her khimaar over her head. The Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) said: ‘Allaah does not accept the prayer of a mature woman unless she has a khimaar.’

What is meant here is not the jilbaab at all, but rather what is meant is the head-covering. From the evidences that indicate this is that the Prophet (sallAllaahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) ordered us to wipe over the turban or the khimaar or the socks.

My objective behind this hadeeth is to show that it indicates that the khimaar is a garment that both men and women – males and females – share in wearing.

It cannot be understood from this, for those who understand the Arabic language, that a man can place a jilbaab over himself! Rather, it means that he can place a khimaar (head-covering) over himself.

So it is permissible for a person that places a khimaar over his head to wipe over it (when performing ablution), regardless of whether it is a man or a woman. My objective behind this discussion is to firstly confirm the quote according to the Arabic language, and secondly if it is finally confirmed that the quote is indeed found in Lisaan-ul-‘Arab and that it states that the meaning of a jilbaab is held to be a khimaar, then it is sufficient proof, from what you quoted, that such a statement is weak because of the fact that the author said: ‘It is held to mean such and such.’ (i.e. uncertainty)

Furthermore, if we study the texts from the Book and the Sunnah, of which we already mentioned some of them, we would derive with certainty that the khimaar is not a jilbaab and nor is the jilbaab a khimaar.

In brief, a khimaar covers less that a jilbaab while a jilbaab has a more ample range in terms of the parts that it covers. Also, a jilbaab is specific for only women. They were the ones who were ordered to wear it and not men. But as for the khimaar, then that is a garment that both men and women share in wearing. Even though a man is not obligated to wear it, regardless, it is a garment that both men and women partake in wearing, just like a shirt. In the same manner that a man wears a shirt to cover his ‘awrah – which is different from the ‘awrah of a woman – so does a woman. But her ‘awrah is ampler than the ‘awrah of a man.

This is why we said in the book ‘The Muslim Woman’s Hijaab’ that when a Muslim woman leaves from her home, she is obligated to do two things:

(1) To place a khimaar over her head, and (2) then to apply a jilbaab over that, thus going out dressed with the khimaar and the jilbaab. So when a woman goes out of her home, one garment does not suffice without the other – a woman must combine between both the khimaar and the jilbaab. You are aware of the Qur’anic verse related to the khimaar in which Allaah says: ‘And (tell them) to draw their khumur (veils) over their bosoms.’ [Surah An-Noor: 31]

Drawing a garment close to the bosom cannot be achieved with a jilbaab. This can only be achieved with a khimaar, since it is possible to wrap it. But as for the jilbaab, you know that it cannot be wrapped around the chest or on the neck. You can see here how the men wrap their khimaars and how they affix them to their necks. So due to this, what has been particularized here is the khimaar and not the jilaab. When a woman goes out from her house, she is obligated to place a khimaar over her head and to wrap it over her neck and her chest. This is since a jilbaab does not correspond in her attempt to achieve this comprehensive covering since it is ample and long whereas the khimaar is ample and short. So each of these garments has its own specific effect in fulfilling what a woman is obligated to cover. This is my response to what you have asked. If there is anything left that I have not covered in my discussion, then remind me of it.”

The questioner asked: “So then I understand from this that the jilbaab is not the wide gown that women wear today, here (in this country) for example, from the neck to the feet?”

The Shaikh responded: “No, not at all. This is not a jilbaab. However, this leads us to elaborate further on discussing what is related to the jilbaab. As we stated before, according to the language, a jilbaab is not a garment like that which is known as the balto. So what needs to be clarified now is:

The command directed towards women, particularly with regard to wearing the jilbaab, is not an obligatory act of worship which has a meaning that we can’t comprehend. Rather, on the contrary, it does have a meaning we can understand. And the meaning that is derived from it, which we indicated previously, is to achieve the covering that a woman must abide by.

So if, for example, a woman wears two garments or she makes the jilbaab into two pieces – one upper piece and one lower piece – and both of these pieces fulfill the objective of the jilbaab, which has been mentioned in the Qur’aan, at this point, even though we don’t refer to these two pieces as a jilbaab from a linguistic standpoint, we hold that it still fulfills the desired objective of the command to wear the jilbaab from a religious perspective.

There used to be found in Syria up to recently, and there still continues to be found in some practicing women that stick to the Religion, a garment called Malaa’at-uz-Zamm. Have you heard anything about this during your lifetime?”

The questioner replied: “We have something called a Malaa’ah (cloak).”

The Shaikh said: “No, I said Malaa’at-uz-Zamm.”

The questioner replied: “No, not with this term. We say Malaa’ah.”

The Shaikh said: “This is an Arabic term. The point is that this garment which we have with us in Syria consists of two pieces. The first piece is a skirt known as a tannoorah – are you familiar with this word?”

The questioner said: Yes.”

The Shaikh said: “A tannoorah is a skirt that is affixed to the waist with an elastic strap. So naturally it is wide and ample.

A woman wears this from here, thus covering the entire lower part of her body. Then over this tannoorah, which is called a kharraatah (skirt) in Syria, is placed the upper part of the garment, which is placed over the head and which a woman uses to cover her head, shoulders, sides, hips and even the belt strap that is tightened around the waist by this tannoorah or this kharraatah. No part of this skirt’s waist-strap is visible since it goes under it. Is the image clear?”

The questioner replied: “Yes.”

The Shaikh continued: “Amongst us here, they call this garment Malaayat-uz-Zamm (or Malaa’at-uz-Zamm), since the skirt is strapped at the waist with a plastic waistband. So if you have grasped a perception of this dress with us, then the point that I am trying to make is that even though this cloak-like garment is not a jilbaab (linguistically), it still fulfills the obligation of a jilbaab, which consists of covering the body completely. Is this clear to you?”

The questioner said: “Yes.”

The Shaikh said: “If the matter is clear, then we see that we are not obligated to adhere to the literal wording of the jilbaab, but rather to its end-result, objective and goal. Now I will go back to this ‘balto’ which I talked about previously, which the Muslim women wear today and which is of various types. It may be produced in long sizes for some of the practicing women reaching up to their feet. However, this is not a jilbaab. In spite of this, it is still not like the Malaa’at-uz-Zamm since it does not cover the head and what it consist of, for example. But what does the woman do today? She wraps a garment known as the esharp around her head – is this term known to you?”

The questioner answered: “Yes.”

The Shaikh said: “A small khimaar (i.e. the esharp) that is fastened to the head but which exposes parts of the forehead and temple and which also exposes parts of the neck since it is small in size, naturally does not fulfill the objective of a jilbaab according to its proper definition. The objective of a jilbaab is as we have discussed concerning the Malaayat-uz-Zamm. Is this clear? So let’s take the example of this woman who is wearing this balto – what would you call this?”

The questioner[1] said: “We call it a Hijaab.”

The Shaikh said: “No, this is wrong. The point is that if a woman wears this type of ‘Hijaab’ then places a khimaar over her head, then there must be a Hijaab, i.e. jilbaab placed over this khimaar. We have stated that there are two verses in the Qur’aan. This jilbaab may be divided into parts as we stated before when we discussed the Malaayat-uz-Zamm.

So therefore, if a woman wears that garment which you call a Hijaab and then places a valid khimaar over her head and not that which is known as the ‘esharp’, then places over this khimaar a partial garment that covers half of her body, such as one that covers her shoulders and hands, at this point, this becomes valid and acceptable according to the Religion.” [2]

Footnotes:

[1] The questioner was from Algeria.

[2] Silsilat-ul-Hudaa wan-Noor (tape no. 232)