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

Is it permissible to offer an Udhiyah on behalf of another without their permission?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is not permissible for a person to offer a sacrifice (Udhiyah) on behalf of someone else without their permission, except in the following cases: if he sacrifices on behalf of the members of his household, if a guardian sacrifices from his own wealth on behalf of his ward, or if the Imam (ruler) sacrifices from the public treasury (Bayt al-Mal) on behalf of the Muslims. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

The Jurisprudential Significance of the Ḥadīth: "Whoever says, at the conclusion of the Fajr Prayer, while crossing his legs, before speaking..."
"Whoever says, at the conclusion of the Fajr prayer, while crossing his legs, before speaking: 'Lā ilāha illā Allāh, waḥdahu lā sharīka lah, lahu al-mulku wa lahu al-ḥamdu yuḥyī wa yumītu wa huwa ʿalā kulli shayʾin qadīr' ten times — ten good deeds will be recorded for him, ten bad deeds will be erased from him, he will be raised ten levels, he will spend that day in protection from everything disliked and guarded from the devil, and no sin will be able to befall him on that day except associating partners with Allah" — does this noble ḥadīth apply to the imam, and what is meant by "extraneous speech"?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is recommended for both the imam and those praying behind him to recite, immediately after the final salām, the specific remembrance reported in the sunnah to be said before turning away from one's place of prayer. The imam then leaves his praying spot, and the act of "turning" is fulfilled when the imam faces the congregation — even without physically leaving his spot — by positioning his right side toward them and his left side toward the qiblah, and this applies even while he is engaged in supplication.
Al-ʿAllāmah Ibn Qāsim al-ʿAbbādī states in his Ḥāshiyah ʿalā al-Tuḥfah (Vol.2/P.105): "It is most virtuous for the imam, once he has given the salām, to rise from his place of prayer immediately afterward." He adds that an exception must be made for the remembrances that are specifically required to be recited before he turns away. He then notes, citing Sharḥ al-ʿUbāb: "Yes, an exception to this rising immediately after the salām applies to the Fajr prayer, due to the authentic report that the Prophet ﷺ, when he prayed Fajr, would remain seated until the sun rose." He further cites, from al-Khādim, the ḥadīth concerning one who recites, at the conclusion of the Fajr prayer while still in the position of crossing his leg to rise: "Lā ilāha illā Allāh, waḥdahu lā sharīka lah..." and the rest of the well-known ḥadīth. He comments that this makes explicit that this particular remembrance is to be recited before the worshipper turns his legs to leave, and the same applies to Maghrib and ʿAṣr, as reported in those contexts as well.
What is meant by "speech" in the relevant ḥadīth is extraneous worldly speech that is not called for after the prayer and for which there is no legitimate excuse. The remembrances reported to be recited upon concluding the prayer, however, do not fall under this category of extraneous speech, since they are themselves required by the sharīʿah.
Al-ʿAllāmah ʿAlī al-Shabrāmalsī states in his Ḥāshiyah ʿalā al-Nihāyah (Vol.1/P.551): "If someone greets a person with salām while he is occupied with reciting this remembrance [i.e., 'Lā ilāha illā Allāh...'], should he return the greeting — without this causing him to forfeit the promised reward, since he is engaged in an obligatory matter — or should he delay returning the greeting until he finishes, this being a legitimate excuse for the delay?" He continues: "I say: the more likely view is the former, and the prohibition on speech is to be understood as applying to extraneous speech for which there is no legitimate excuse. Based on this, should the worshipper give precedence to this remembrance ('Lā ilāha illā Allāh...') or to reciting Sūrat al-Ikhlāṣ ('Qul huwa Allāhu aḥad')? This requires consideration, though it is not unlikely that the remembrance takes precedence, given that the Lawgiver urged hastening to it through his words 'while crossing his leg.' This is not considered ordinary speech, since it is not extraneous to what is required after the prayer."
Accordingly, it is recommended for both the imam and those praying behind him to recite this remembrance and to give it precedence over the other remembrances of the prayer, ensuring it is said before they move from their place. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on wudu (ablution) when there is an adhesive substance on the hand that is difficult to remove?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The general principle is: if what is applied to the limbs of wudu' (ablution) does not form a barrier substance preventing water from reaching the skin, then the wudu' is valid despite its presence. However, if these substances prevent water from reaching the skin, the wudu' is not valid with their presence, and they must be removed so that water reaches the hair or skin without any barrier.
Shaykh al-Islam, the Imam an-Nawawi, may Allah have mercy on him, says: "If there is wax, dough, henna, or similar substances on some of his limbs [of wudu'], and this prevents water from reaching any part of the limb, then his purification (tahara) is not valid — regardless of whether the amount is much or little. But if there remains on the hand or elsewhere only the trace and color of the henna, without its substance [i.e., the physical residue itself], or the trace of a liquid oil such that the water touches the skin of the limb and flows over it, though it does not remain [as a barrier] — then his purification is valid." [Al-Majmu' , Vol.1/P.529]. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling on swearing on the Holy Quran and breaking that oath?

It is impermissible to swear on the Holy Quran in vain, and it is also impermissible to subject it to such an act since breaking the oath after swearing on the Quran entails an expiation.