عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(64): "Ruling on a Veiled Woman Uncovering her Face"

Date Added : 29-11-2015

 

Resolution No.(64): "Ruling on a Veiled Woman Uncovering her Face"

Date: 8/4/1424 AH, corresponding to 9/6/2003

 

The Board received the following question:

What is the ruling on uncovering woman's face for voters identifications causes minutes before voting takes place at polling stations?

Answer: All success is due to Allah

The Board is of the view that the permissibility of a woman uncovering her face, in general, is a controversial issue amongst the Jurists. The majority of them see that it is permissible for a woman to uncover her face because it isn`t an Awrah (private parts); whereas, some of them see that it is forbidden. Nevertheless, there is a consensus amongst the Jurists that it is permissible for the woman to uncover her face for litigation or delivering a testimony, and she isn`t considered sinful when required to do that for similar purposes.

Since casting her vote is tantamount to giving a testimony, a veiled woman is permitted to uncover her face, while not wearing make-up, for identity check at poll stations and she isn`t considered sinful at all. However, it is better that a female is assigned for checking the identity of veiled women during elections, and as much as possible.

And Allah, The Almighty Knows Best.

 

Chairperson of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Izz Aldeen Attamimi

  Dr. Wasif Al-Bakhri

Dr. Ahmad Hilayel

            Dr. Abdulsalam Al-Abbadi

  Dr. Yousef Ghizaan

     Sheikhb Sa`id Hijjawi

        Sheikh Na`iem Mujahid

             Sheikh Mahmood Shwayat

            Dr. Mohammad Abu Yahia

 

Note: His Grace, Dr. Nooh Al-Qhodat said: "It is permissible for a woman to cast her vote, and that covering her face before people other than her husband and Mahrams (unmarriageable male relatives) is obligatory according to some Jurists. Therefore, a woman who sees that covering her face before non-Mahrams (Marriageable men) obligatory, she mustn`t uncover it for the purpose of casting her vote."

 

 

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

The imam recited a verse containing a prostration of recitation (*sajdat al-tilāwah*) but did not prostrate. After the imam's *salām*, a follower (*maʾmūm*) performed a prostration of forgetfulness (*sujūd al-sahw*) because the imam had not performed the prostration of recitation. Is it permissible to go against the imam in this way?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
There is no sin on the imam if he omits the prostration of recitation (sujūd al-tilāwah), even deliberately. The maʾmūm (the one following the imam) is obliged to follow the imam in the prayer, so if the imam does not perform the prostration of recitation, it is not permissible for the follower to prostrate, because the imam is appointed only to be followed.
If the follower introduces a prostration after the imam’s salām but before his own salām, in a case where there is no prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw), his prayer is invalidated if he knew it to be prohibited. Otherwise, he is excused on account of his ignorance and his prayer is not invalidated.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Imām al-Jamal ʿalā Fatḥ al-Wahhāb: “His statement: ‘So the omission of the hayʾāt (the non-essential sunnahs of the prayer) is not compensated for by prostration; if one prostrates for any of them deliberately, his prayer is invalidated, unless he is excused due to his ignorance.’”
Since this issue is one that is hidden from the laymen, as it is among the subtleties of knowledge, and the laymen are excused for ignorance of whatever is of such a nature, and their act of obedience is not invalidated because of it, it may be said that the prayer of one who has not acquired knowledge of this issue is not invalidated, with the necessity of learning the rulings remaining. As for after knowing it, the prayer is invalidated. And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is it permissible for a mother to stop her daughter from marrying a respectable, God-fearing young man because he isn't college/university graduate?

It is impermissible to deny a woman her right in getting married except for a lawful reason, and problems can be solved through dialogue. However, she can file a suit in order for the judge to have a say in that regard.

Does using a wet miswak while fasting break the fast?

A fasting person should ensure that the miswak is dry when using it.
However, if the miswak is slightly moist but does not release any liquid when squeezed, then its use does not break the fast.

Is it required to fast consecutively when making up missed fasts?

● It is preferable to fast consecutively when making up missed fasts if they were missed due to a valid excuse.
● However, if the fasts were missed without a valid excuse, then fasting consecutively is obligatory, because making up the missed fasts in this case must be done immediately.
Separating the makeup fasts goes against the obligation of immediacy, but if someone does so, their fasts will still be valid. However, they will be sinful for delaying without a valid reason.

See More