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

What is the ruling on using toothpaste during the day in Ramadan?

Using toothpaste does not break the fast as long as nothing reaches the body cavity. However, it is disliked (makruh).
It is preferable for a fasting person to use it before the time of fast starts or after Iftar (breaking the fast) to avoid risking their fast.

Is it permissible to combine Zuhr and Asr prayers for being occupied with a wedding ceremony?

No, it isn`t permissible to combine Zuhr and Asr, or Maghrib and Isha because of being busy with a wedding since the exemption for combining prayers is based on lawful excuses, and this isn`t one of them. And Allah Knows Best.

What is the ruling on brown discharge before the menstrual period? Is it considered part of menstruation (Hayd)?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Dusky discharge (Kudrah), reddish discharge (Humrah), and yellowish discharge (Sufrah) are all considered menstruation (Hayd) if they occur during the time of the menstrual cycle. If their duration exceeds a day and a night, and the period persists from the first sight of the discharge until the cessation of the menstrual blood—provided the total duration does not exceed fifteen days—then all of it is menstruation. However, if the duration exceeds fifteen days, then the discharge is not considered menstruation, but rather chronic irregular bleeding (Istihadah). And Allah the Exalted knows best.

What is the ruling on swearing an oath by the Prophet ﷺ, and does such an oath take effect according to Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, requiring expiation upon its breach?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Swearing an oath by a created being is disliked (makrūh) in our Shāfiʿī school. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Swearing by a created being is disliked — such as swearing by the Prophet, the Kaʿbah, Jibrīl, the Companions, or the Prophet's family. Al-Shāfiʿī, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: 'I fear that swearing by other than Allah the Almighty may constitute an act of disobedience.' The scholars of the school explained this to mean: that is, something forbidden and sinful — indicating that he had some hesitation in the matter. Al-Imām stated: the established position of the school is that it is categorically not forbidden, but rather disliked. Furthermore, whoever swears by a created being, his oath does not take effect and no expiation (kaffārah) is required if he breaks it." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn wa ʿUmdat al-Muftīn, Vol. 11/P.6]
According to the Ḥanbalī school, however, expiation becomes obligatory upon one who swears by our master the Prophet ﷺ and then breaks his oath. Imām al-Bahūtī al-Ḥanbalī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "No expiation is required for swearing by other than Allah the Almighty, even if the oath is broken — because expiation was made obligatory for swearing by Allah and His attributes, out of reverence for His names, and nothing else is equal to Him in this regard... except in the case of swearing by our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, for expiation becomes obligatory when one swears by him and then breaks the oath. This was explicitly stated in the narration of Abū Ṭālib, because he is one of the two conditions of the two testimonies of faith by which a disbeliever becomes a Muslim. Ibn ʿAqīl held the view that swearing by any of the other prophets, peace and blessings be upon them all, carries the same ruling." [Sharḥ Muntahā al-Irādāt, Vol. 3/P.441]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

See More