This article is a translation of selected passages from the book Ḥuqūq al Marʾah fī Ḍawʾ al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah “Women’s Rights in Light of the Prophetic Sunnah” by Dr. Nawāl bint ʿAbd al ʿAzīz al ʿĪd.
Navigation Menu For The Summary
Women, Advice, And Accountability Before Those In Authority
Granting Safety And Protection
Women And Service During Jihad
Financial Rights And Independent Ownership
Maintenance And The Protection Of Women’s Needs
When The Husband Fails To Spend
Maintenance During The Waiting Period
Inheritance And The Woman’s Fixed Right
Blood Money And Retaliation
The Honour Of Work Inside The Home
Work Outside The Home With Sharia Limits
Navigation Menu For The Full Article
The Woman’s Right To Advise Rulers And Carry Out Accountability Over People In Authority
The Woman’s Right To Grant Safety And Protection
The Work Of Women In Jihad
Giving Water To The Fighters
Treating The Wounded And Caring For The Sick
Does The Woman Have The Right To Fight Like The Man?
The Wisdom Behind Exempting Women From Military Responsibility
The Financial Rights Of Women
The Woman’s Right To Maintenance
Maintenance Due To Kinship
Ijmaʿ
Marital Maintenance
What Is Considered In Measuring Maintenance
Medical Care Of The Wife
The Wife’s Household Goods
The Husband Refusing To Spend
The Maintenance Of The Wife Of The Absent Husband
The Maintenance Of The Sick Wife
The Maintenance Of Women In The Waiting Period After Divorce
The Woman’s Right To Inheritance
A Doubt About The Woman’s Inheritance And The Reply To It
There Are Only Four Cases In Which The Woman Inherits Half Of The Man
There Are Many More Cases In Which The Woman Inherits Exactly Like The Man
There Are 10 Cases Or More In Which The Woman Inherits More Than The Man
Cases In Which The Woman Inherits While Her Male Counterpart Does Not
The Woman’s Right To Financial Contracts
The Woman’s Right To Blood Money
The Woman’s Right To Work Outside The Home
The Limits Of The Woman’s Work In Islam
Summary
Women, Advice, And Accountability Before Those In Authority
Islam did not make the Muslim woman passive in society. She shares with believing men the duty of al amr bil maʿruf wa al nahy ʿan al munkar, meaning commanding what is right and forbidding what is wrong. This duty includes advising rulers and correcting people in authority when ability, knowledge, and wisdom are present. The Qur’an joins believing men and believing women together in this duty, showing that accountability is not limited to men. Ibn al Nahhas al Dimashqi (d. 814AH) said that the mention of believing women in this verse proves that commanding right and forbidding wrong is obligatory upon women, just as it is obligatory upon men, when ability exists. The fuqaha also affirmed that this duty applies to both men and women. (Tanbih al Ghafilin ʿan Aʿmal al Jahilin by Ibn al Nahhas 20; Tafsir al Qurtubi by al Qurtubi 8/203; Ihyaʾ ʿUlum al Din by al Ghazali 2/474.)
The examples from the early generations show women advising rulers with courage, proof, and proper manners. Aʿishah, may Allah be pleased with her, corrected Marwan when he was the amir of Madinah and ordered him to return a divorced woman to her house. Her correction was based on her understanding of the ruling of the woman given a final divorce, and the matter was connected to the known difference over the hadith of Fatimah bint Qays. (Sahih al Bukhari 5015, 5/2038; Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 9/476–477; Sharh al Nawawi by al Nawawi 10/95; ʿUmdat al Qari by al Ayni 20/310.)
Asmaʾ bint Abi Bakr, may Allah be pleased with her, stood before al Hajjaj with firmness after the killing of her son Abd Allah ibn al Zubayr. She spoke the truth without fear, reminding him that he had ruined his Hereafter by what he did. Her courage was not recklessness, but truth spoken in its proper place. (Sahih Muslim; Sharh Sahih Muslim by al Nawawi 16/98–100; Mashariq al Anwar by al Qadi Iyad 2/203; al Nihayah by Ibn al Athir 5/170.)
Umm al Tufayl corrected Umar ibn al Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, by reminding him of the case of Subayʿah al Aslamiyyah, whose waiting period ended when she gave birth after her husband’s death. Her correction shows that even the Amir of the Believers could be reminded by a woman when the Sunnah was clear. (Musnad Ahmad 27109, 45/76; al Ahad wa al Mathani by Ibn Abi Asim 3384, 6/157; Majmaʿ al Zawaʾid by al Haythami 5/2; Sahih al Bukhari 5012, 5/2037; Sahih Muslim 1484, 2/1122.)
Umm al Dardaʾ corrected Abd al Malik ibn Marwan after hearing him curse his servant. She reminded him of the hadith that those who curse often will not be intercessors or witnesses on the Day of Resurrection. Her correction combined truth, evidence, and good manners. (Sahih Muslim 2598, 4/2006; Musnad Ahmad 27529, 45/517; al Nihayah by Ibn al Athir 5/18.)
Granting Safety And Protection
Islam gave the woman the right of aman, meaning safety and protection. Ijarah and aman carry the same meaning: granting safety to someone seeking protection. The mustaʾmin is the one who enters under such safety for a limited time. The Qur’an commands that a polytheist who seeks protection be granted safety until he hears the speech of Allah, then be taken to his place of safety. Al Zamakhshari explained that this applies to one who comes seeking safety in order to hear the call to tawhid and the Qur’an. Ibn Kathir explained that it also covers those coming from the land of war for a message, trade, peace, truce, jizyah, or similar needs. (al Mufradat by al Raghib 26; Lisan al Arab by Ibn Manzur 2/83; al Mubdiʿ by Ibn Muflih 3/489; al Dhakhirah by al Qarafi 3/445; Hashiyat Ibn Abidin 4/166; al Kashshaf by al Zamakhshari 2/174; Tafsir al Qur’an al Azim by Ibn Kathir 2/337.)
The majority of ulama held that a woman’s protection is valid. Ibn al Mundhir even quoted agreement upon that, except for a reported view that returned the matter to the imam. The hadith of Umm Haniʾ bint Abi Talib is the clearest proof: she granted protection to a man on the day of the Conquest, and the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “We have granted protection to the one whom you granted protection, O Umm Haniʾ.” (Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 6/273; Sahih al Bukhari 3000, 3/1157; Sahih Muslim 336, 1/498.)
The reports concerning Zaynab, the daughter of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, also support this meaning, even though some chains contain weakness. Together with the general hadith, “The protection of the Muslims is one. The lowest of them may act on behalf of it,” they show that the woman’s protection is recognised within the Muslim community. (al Ahad wa al Mathani by Ibn Abi Asim 555, 1/398; al Muʿjam al Kabir by al Tabarani 1049, 22/246; al Mustadrak by al Hakim 6842, 4/49; Majmaʿ al Zawaʾid by al Haythami 5/329; Jamiʿ al Tirmidhi 1579, 4/141; Sahih al Bukhari 3001, 3/1157; Sahih Muslim 1370, 2/1147; Gharib al Hadith by Abu Ubayd 2/104; Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 6/274.)
Women And Service During Jihad
The work of women in jihad is defined by the Sunnah. Their main role was giving water to fighters, treating the wounded, caring for the sick, preparing food, and helping return the killed to Madinah. The hadiths of Anas, al Rubayyiʿ bint Muʿawwidh, Ibn Abbas, and Umm Atiyyah show women serving in these ways during battle. (Sahih al Bukhari; Sahih Muslim 1812, 3/1444; Sahih Muslim 1813, 3/14447.)
Women did not normally go out to fight like men. Their normal work remained support, medical care, and service. Fighting only appeared when there was a direct need, such as defending oneself, protecting the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, or when defeat reached the Muslims. Umm Sulaym carried a dagger on the Day of Hunayn to defend herself if needed. Umm Umarah fought at Uhud when the Muslims were pushed back and defended the Messenger of Allah ﷺ until she was wounded many times. Safiyyah bint Abd al Muttalib used a spear when the people fled at Uhud. Women also took part at al Yarmuk when the battle became severe, including Asmaʾ bint Yazid, who killed several Romans with the pole of her tent. (Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 6/78; Sahih Muslim 1809, 3/1442; al Tabaqat al Kubra by Ibn Saʿd 8/415; al Istiʿab by Ibn Abd al Barr 4190, 4/1948; al Isabah by Ibn Hajar 12178, 8/265; Tarikh al Tabari by al Tabari 2/338 and 2/529; Sunan Saʿid ibn Mansur 2787, 213/307; al Muʿjam al Kabir by al Tabarani 403, 24/157; Majmaʿ al Zawaʾid by al Haythami 6/213.)
The going out of Aʿishah, may Allah be pleased with her, was not proof for women leading armies. Ibn Hazm explained that Aʿishah, al Zubayr, Talhah, and those with them did not reject the imamah of Ali, attack his leadership, give bayʿah to another, or go out to fight him. Their aim was to mend the harm caused by the killing of Uthman. Ibn Taymiyyah explained that Aʿishah thought her going out would bring benefit, then later saw that not going out would have been better, and she would cry when remembering it. (al Fisal fi al Milal wa al Nihal by Ibn Hazm 4/238; Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah by Ibn Taymiyyah 4/316.)
The exemption of women from military responsibility is linked to physical and psychological wisdom. War usually requires physical strength, movement, endurance, and bearing severe psychological pressure. These realities explain why women have usually been few in armies, even in modern times. The example of the Vietnam War is given, where millions of men participated compared with a very small number of women. (Ilm al Nafs al Tatawwuri by Sami Arifaj 138; Jawanib al Taʿarud bayn Unsur al Unuthah fi al Marʾah wa al ʿAmal al Siyasi by Adnan Ba Harith 83 and 87–88; Ilm al Nafs al Askari by Abd al Latif Husayn and Izz al Din Jamil 19, 28, 305, 323; al Marʾah fi al Qadim wa al Hadith by Umar Rida Kahhalah 3/10.)
Financial Rights And Independent Ownership
Islam gave the woman complete financial capacity. She may own land, houses, goods, wealth, and property. She may buy, sell, give charity, give gifts, make a will within the lawful limit, appoint an agent, enter contracts, dispute before the judge, and manage her wealth whether married or unmarried. The husband has no authority over her wealth simply because he is her husband. This stands in contrast to many Western legal systems that historically restricted the married woman’s financial independence. (Huquq al Marʾah fi al Shariah al Islamiyyah by Ibrahim al Najjar 63.)
The Qur’an commands that orphan wealth be handed over when maturity and sound judgement are found, without separating between male and female. This proves that femininity itself is not a reason for preventing financial control. The majority of fuqaha from the Hanafis, Shafiʿis, and Hanbalis held that the woman has financial capacity when maturity and sound judgement are present. (al Nisa 6; al Mabsut by al Sarakhsi 24/161; al Bahr al Raʾiq by Ibn Nujaym 8/91; Rawdat al Talibin by al Nawawi 4/182; al Majmuʿ Sharh al Muhadhdhab by al Nawawi 13/372; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 4/512; al Mubdiʿ by Ibn Muflih 4/305.)
Maintenance And The Protection Of Women’s Needs
Nafaqah means maintenance. It includes what is spent to preserve a person’s life and normal needs, such as food, drink, clothing, housing, bedding, service, and what custom requires within Sharia principles. Maintenance may be due through kinship, marriage, or other recognised causes. (Mukhtar al Sihah by al Razi 2/118; Lisan al Arab by Ibn Manzur 12/235; Hashiyat Ibn Abidin 3/572; al Kharashi ʿala Mukhtasar Khalil by al Kharashi 4/18; Hashiyat al Sharqawi ʿala Sharh al Tahrir by al Sharqawi 2/303; Kashshaf al Qinaʿ by al Buhuti 5/532; Ahkam al Nafaqah al Zawjiyyah fi al Shariah al Islamiyyah by Muhammad Yaqub 21.)
Maintenance due to kinship protects poor relatives through wealthy relatives. The fuqaha differed over the exact kinship that makes maintenance obligatory, but they agreed on the foundation that close relatives may be owed support when need exists. Evidence includes the hadith, “You and your wealth belong to your father,” the hadith ordering a person to begin with himself, then his family, then relatives, and the hadiths encouraging the support of daughters and sisters. (Sunan Ibn Majah 2291, 2/768; Sharh Maʿani al Athar by al Tahawi 4/158; Musnad Ahmad 6678, 11/261; Sunan Abi Dawud 3530, 3/289; Sahih Muslim 997, 2/692; Sahih al Bukhari 5040, 5/2048; Sahih Muslim 2631, 4/2027; Sahih Ibn Hibban 4471, 2/191; Sahih al Targhib wa al Tarhib by al Albani 1974, 2/412; Sunan al Nasaʾi 2532, 5/61.)
Marital maintenance is obligatory upon the husband by the Book, the Sunnah, ijmaʿ, and reason. It is obligatory even if the wife is wealthy, because the valid marriage contract is the cause of this obligation. The Qur’an commands the man of means to spend according to his means, and the one whose provision is restricted to spend from what Allah gave him. The Qur’an also places provision and clothing upon the father according to what is recognised. (Badaʾiʿ al Sanaʾiʿ by al Kasani 4/23; al Muhadhdhab by al Shirazi 2/166; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/156; Majmuʿ al Fatawa by Ibn Taymiyyah 26/114; Hawashi al Shirwani by al Shirwani 18/301; al Taj wa al Iklil by al Mawwaq 4/187; al Talaq 7; al Baqarah 233.)
The Sunnah confirms this clearly. The Prophet ﷺ told Hind bint Utbah to take from Abu Sufyan’s wealth what was enough for her and her child according to what is recognised. In the sermon of Arafah, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said that women have the right to provision and clothing according to what is recognised. The hadith of Muʿawiyah ibn Haydah also states that the wife’s right includes being fed and clothed. (Sahih al Bukhari 5049, 5/2052; Sahih Muslim 1714, 3/1338; Sahih Muslim 1218, 2/886; Musnad Ahmad 20013, 33/217; Sunan Ibn Majah 1850, 1/593.)
Maintenance is measured by sufficiency and custom, not by a fixed amount. The strongest view considers both the husband’s condition and the wife’s need, so that neither side is oppressed. If both are wealthy, the maintenance is according to wealth. If both are poor, it is according to hardship. If their conditions differ, the middle level is considered. (al Mabsut by al Sarakhsi 5/181; al Bahr al Raʾiq by Ibn Nujaym 4/193; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/157; Hashiyat al Dasuqi by al Dasuqi 2/509; Hashiyat Ibn Abidin 3/584; Majmuʿ al Fatawa by Ibn Taymiyyah 24/87; Zad al Maʿad by Ibn al Qayyim 5/493.)
Medical care is also treated as part of the wife’s needs by the stronger view, even though many earlier fuqaha did not include medicine and doctor’s fees under maintenance. The stronger view is that treatment falls under living with the wife according to what is recognised, because marriage is built upon love, mercy, and good companionship, not a rental relationship. (al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/161; Mughni al Muhtaj by al Khatib al Shirbini 3/431; al Fatawa al Hindiyyah 1/549; Hashiyat al Dasuqi by al Dasuqi 2/511; al Rum 21; al Mufassal fi Ahkam al Marʾah wa al Bayt al Muslim by Abd al Karim Zaydan 7/185; Ahkam al Nafaqah al Zawjiyyah by Muhammad Yaqub 65.)
The wife is not required to prepare the household goods from her mahr or private wealth. The majority held that furniture, bedding, covering, and house needs are upon the husband. Ibn Hazm said that the woman is not forced to prepare anything for the husband from her dowry or from any of her wealth, because the dowry belongs fully to her. (Badaʾiʿ al Sanaʾiʿ by al Kasani 2/309; al Bahr al Raʾiq by Ibn Nujaym 3/200; Iʿanat al Talibin by al Dimyati 3/349; al Furuʿ by Ibn Muflih 5/243; al Muhalla by Ibn Hazm 9/507; al Nisa 20; al Nisa 4.)
When The Husband Fails To Spend
If the husband is wealthy but refuses to spend, and the wife can access his wealth, she may take what suffices her and her child according to what is recognised, based on the hadith of Hind. If she cannot access it, she may take the matter to the judge, who may assign maintenance, imprison the husband, or take from his visible wealth. (Sahih al Bukhari 5049, 5/2052; Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 9/508; Aʿlam al Hadith by al Khattabi 2/48.)
If the husband is too poor to spend, the fuqaha differed. The Malikis, Shafiʿis, Hanbalis, Dhahiriyyah, and al Sanʿani held that the wife may request separation, and the judge may separate them, because qiwamah, meaning caretaking authority, is tied to spending, and keeping her without maintenance harms her. The Hanafis held that they are not separated due to poverty. Instead, maintenance becomes a debt, and the wife waits until he becomes able, using the Qur’anic principle of giving delay to one in hardship. (Tafsir al Qurtubi by al Qurtubi 5/169; Mawahib al Jalil by al Hattab 3/489; Rawdat al Talibin by al Nawawi 9/75; Hawashi al Shirwani 8/336; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/167; al Mubdiʿ by Ibn Muflih 8/208; al Muhalla by Ibn Hazm 9/508; Subul al Salam by al Sanʿani 3/226; Fath al Qadir by Ibn al Humam 4/201; Hashiyat Ibn Abidin 3/591; al Baqarah 280; Zad al Maʿad by Ibn al Qayyim 5/516–520.)
The absent husband is treated like the present husband regarding maintenance. If he leaves no maintenance, the judge may assign maintenance against him if the wife proves the matter. If he has visible wealth, her maintenance is taken from it. If not, she borrows against him. (al Taj wa al Iklil by al Mawwaq 4/201; Hashiyat al Dasuqi by al Dasuqi 2/246; Fatawa Ibn al Salah 2/455; Iʿanat al Talibin by al Dimyati 4/84; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/182; Kashshaf al Qinaʿ by al Buhuti 5/470.)
The sick wife keeps her right to maintenance if she became sick after being with her husband, because the cause of maintenance was already established, and illness is temporary. Good companionship requires each spouse to carry the other during weakness and illness. (Badaʾiʿ al Sanaʾiʿ by al Kasani 4/19; al Bahr al Raʾiq by Ibn Nujaym 4/197; al Majmuʿ Sharh al Muhadhdhab by al Nawawi 17/77; Mughni al Muhtaj by al Khatib al Shirbini 3/437; Kashshaf al Qinaʿ by al Buhuti 3/305.)
Maintenance During The Waiting Period
A woman in revocable divorce has maintenance and housing by ijmaʿ, because she remains in the ruling of a wife during the ʿiddah, meaning waiting period. She must not be removed from her house, and she should not leave, because Allah may bring about reconciliation and return. (al Istidhkar by Ibn Abd al Barr 6/165; al Talaq 1; Tafsir Ibn Kathir by Ibn Kathir 4/379; Tafsir Abi al Suʿud by Abu al Suʿud 9/261.)
The pregnant woman who is divorced with final separation has maintenance by ijmaʿ until she gives birth, because Allah commanded spending upon pregnant divorced women until they deliver. As for the finally divorced woman who is not pregnant, the strongest view is that she has no maintenance and no housing, based on the hadith of Fatimah bint Qays, where the Prophet ﷺ said that she had no maintenance and no housing. (al Istidhkar by Ibn Abd al Barr 18/69; al Talaq 6; al Tafsir al Kabir by al Razi 30/33; Sahih Muslim 1480, 2/1114; Zad al Maʿad by Ibn al Qayyim 4/528–542.)
Inheritance And The Woman’s Fixed Right
Islam removed the injustice of the period before Islam, when women were deprived of inheritance and could even be inherited as part of the estate. The Qur’an established fixed shares for women as mothers, wives, daughters, sisters, and other heirs. It affirmed that women have a share in what parents and relatives leave, whether little or much, as a fixed right. (Huquq al Marʾah fi al Islam by Muhammad Arafah 139; al Nisa 7; Tafsir Abi al Suʿud by Abu al Suʿud 2/146–147; Fath al Qadir by al Shawkani 1/426; Shubuhat fi Tariq al Marʾah al Muslimah by Abd Allah al Jalali 43–44.)
The Qur’an established the inheritance of the mother, wife, daughter, and sister in clear verses. The Sunnah also confirmed these shares, such as the hadith of Ibn Abbas about the abrogation of earlier inheritance arrangements, the hadith of Saʿd ibn Abi Waqqas concerning his daughter, the ruling of Ibn Masʿud concerning the daughter, son’s daughter, and sister, and the case of the daughters of Saʿd ibn al Rabiʿ. (Sahih al Bukhari 2596, 3/1008; Sahih al Bukhari 6352, 6/2476; Sahih Muslim 1628, 3/1250; Sahih al Bukhari 6355, 6/2477; Sahih al Bukhari 6362, 5/2479; Sahih Muslim 1616, 3/1234; Sunan Abi Dawud 2892, 3/121; Jamiʿ al Tirmidhi 2092, 4/414; Irwaʾ al Ghalil by al Albani 1677, 6/121.)
The claim that Islam wrongs the woman because she sometimes receives half the male share ignores the actual system of inheritance. Difference in shares is governed by closeness to the deceased, the generation’s place in life, and the financial burden placed upon the heir. The male is often given more because he is obligated to pay mahr, spend on his wife, support children, and carry financial duties, while the woman’s wealth remains hers. (al Tahrir al Islami lil Marʾah by Muhammad Imarah 68; Shubuhat fi Tariq al Marʾah al Muslimah by Abd Allah al Jalali 43; Huquq al Insan fi al Islam by Muhammad al Zuhayli 222; Sharh Sahih Muslim by al Nawawi 11/53; Adwaʾ al Bayan by al Shinqiti 1/308.)
There are only a few cases where the woman receives half of the male’s share, such as daughter with son, mother with father in certain cases, sister with brother, and wife compared with husband. In many other cases, the woman receives the same as the man, more than the man, or inherits while the male counterpart receives nothing. Examples include maternal siblings receiving equal shares, daughters sometimes receiving more by fixed share than sons would receive by remainder, and a son’s daughter or paternal sister inheriting where the male counterpart may be blocked. (Mirath al Marʾah wa Qadiyyat al Musawah by Salah al Din Sultan 18; Khasaʾis al Nisaʾ by Umm Amr Badawi 112; al Tahqiqat al Mardiyyah fi al Mabahith al Fardiyyah by Salih al Fawzan 161; Ahkam al Mawarith by Muhammad Abd al Hamid 165; Sharh Sahih Muslim by al Nawawi 5/175.)
Blood Money And Retaliation
In deliberate killing, men and women are equal in retaliation. A man may be killed for a woman just as a woman may be killed for a man, because human life is equal in this ruling. The hadith of the Jewish man who killed a young girl proves that retaliation is applied for a woman, and al Nawawi quoted ijmaʿ on the matter. (Sahih al Bukhari 6491, 6/2524; Sahih Muslim 1672, 3/1299; Sharh Sahih Muslim by al Nawawi 11/158.)
In mistaken killing, the blood money of the woman is half the blood money of the man by ijmaʿ. This is not because the woman’s humanity is worth less. Blood money is not the price of a human being. Rather, it is financial compensation connected to the financial loss caused to the family, and the man is usually the one responsible for financial support. (al Ijmaʿ by Ibn al Mundhir 116; Tafsir al Qurtubi by al Qurtubi 5/325–326; al Tamhid by Ibn Abd al Barr 17/358; al Umm by al Shafiʿi 6/106.)
This meaning is strengthened by the ruling of the fetus, where the compensation is the same whether the fetus is male or female, because the fetus has not entered the financial system of earning and spending. It is also strengthened by the rule that mistaken blood money is carried by the male agnates, while women and children do not carry any part of it. (Sahih Muslim 1681, 3/1309; Sahih al Bukhari 5426, 5/2172; Sharh Sahih Muslim by al Nawawi 11/176; Sahih al Bukhari 6507, 6/2531; Nayl al Awtar by al Shawkani 7/243; al Ijmaʿ by Ibn al Mundhir 120.)
The Honour Of Work Inside The Home
The woman’s work in her home is presented as one of the highest functions, because she raises believing souls, builds young minds, nurtures the next generation, and teaches harmony with society. Islam attached this great responsibility to her because of its importance and because Allah gave her qualities that help her fulfil it with excellence. (Tanbihat ʿala Ahkam Takhtass bil Muʾminat by Salih al Fawzan 50.)
Work Outside The Home With Sharia Limits
Islam urges the woman to remain rooted in her home and to care for her children, but it does not oppose her working outside the home when the proper conditions are met. The Sunnah shows women farming, weaving, buying and selling, teaching, giving medical care, and serving society. Jabir’s maternal aunt was permitted by the Prophet ﷺ to go out during her waiting period to harvest her palm trees. Another woman wove a cloak with her own hands and gifted it to the Prophet ﷺ. Women also treated the wounded, including Rufaydah al Ansariyyah, who had a tent in the masjid for caring for the injured. (Sahih Muslim 1483, 2/1121; al Nihayah by Ibn al Athir 1/244; Sahih al Bukhari 1987, 2/72; Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 3/143; Hashiyat Radd al Muhtar by Ibn Abidin 2/671; Sahih al Bukhari 2726, 3/1056; Sahih al Bukhari 5355, 5/2151; al Adab al Mufrad by al Bukhari 1129; al Isabah by Ibn Hajar 11175, 7/646.)
The limits of women’s work protect religion, dignity, family, and society. Her guardian’s permission is required, unless he prevents her unjustly while she genuinely needs to work. Work must not prevent marriage, delay it without need, stop childbirth, or harm her duties toward her husband and children. It must be lawful work, such as trade, teaching, medicine, and daʿwah, not work connected to interest based institutions, alcohol, dancing, singing, acting, or prostitution. It must also suit her nature and not force her into hard work that harms her femininity and bodily ability. (al Marʾah bayn al Bayt wa al Mujtamaʿ by Muhammad al Bahi 180; al Marʾah bayn al Fiqh wa al Qanun by Mustafa al Sibaʿi 171; al Marʾah al Muslimah by Wahbi Sulayman 228; Huquq al Marʾah fi al Sharia al Islamiyyah by Ibrahim al Najjar 204; Qadaya al Marʾah fi al Muʾtamarat al Dawliyyah by Fuad al Abd al Karim 780; al Nisa 34; al Nahl 72; al Baqarah 286; al Ihkam by al Amidi 1/160; al Muwafaqat by al Shatibi 2/115.)
When leaving for work, the woman must observe lawful clothing. It must cover the body, not be beauty in itself, not be transparent, not be tight, not be perfumed, not resemble men’s clothing, not resemble the clothing of disbelieving women, and not be clothing of fame. These conditions aim to protect modesty and close the doors of temptation. (Jilbab al Marʾah al Muslimah by al Albani; Awdat al Hijab by Muhammad Ismail al Muqaddam 3/145; Ahamm Qadaya al Marʾah al Muslimah by Muhammad Abi Yahya 31; Fath al Qadir by al Shawkani 4/34; al Muhalla by Ibn Hazm 3/217; Tafsir al Qurtubi by al Qurtubi 12/309; Ruh al Maʿani by al Alusi 6/56; Sahih Muslim 2128, 3/1680; al Istidhkar by Ibn Abd al Barr 8/307; Musnad Ahmad 21834, 5/205; Sunan Abi Dawud 4173, 4/79; Sahih Muslim 443, 1/328; Sahih al Bukhari 5546, 5/2207; Sahih Muslim 2077, 3/1647; Sunan Abi Dawud 4029, 4/43; Sunan Ibn Majah 3606–3607, 2/1192.)
End of Summary.
Full Article
The Woman’s Right To Advise Rulers And Carry Out Accountability Over People In Authority
O noble reader, the great role of the woman in calling to Allah has already passed, on both the individual and collective levels. Her care for knowledge has also passed, which made her stand beside the senior scholars of her time. Great scholars sat before her, so she gave fatwa, debated, reviewed scholars and students of knowledge, until many of them returned to her view and took light from her knowledge. Now she will appear as a woman of clear opinion and strong proof, commanding the ruler with what is right and forbidding him from what is wrong. There is no surprise in that, for Islam raises its individuals upon strength and upon speaking the truth, even against themselves. Allah, Most High, says:
وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتُ بَعْضُهُمْ أَوْلِيَاءُ بَعْضٍ يَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَيَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنْكَرِ وَيُقِيمُونَ الصَّلَاةَ وَيُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ وَيُطِيعُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ أُولَئِكَ سَيَرْحَمُهُمُ اللَّهُ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ
“The believing men and believing women are allies of one another. They command what is right, forbid what is wrong, establish salah, give zakah, and obey Allah and His Messenger. Those are the ones Allah will have mercy upon. Indeed, Allah is Mighty, Wise.” (al Tawbah 71)
Ibn al Nahhas al Dimashqi (d. 814AH) said: “I say: in His mentioning of ‘the believing women’ here is proof that commanding what is right and forbidding what is wrong is obligatory upon women, just as it is obligatory upon men, when ability is found.” (Tanbih al Ghafilin an Amal al Jahilin by Ibn al Nahhas 20.)
The jurists gave fatwa that the duty of commanding what is right and forbidding what is wrong is equal between women and men. (Tafsir al Qurtubi by al Qurtubi 8/203; Ihyaʾ Ulum al Din by al Ghazali 2/474.)
What follows will show what the woman gave in applying this great religious duty to people of authority and senior people, so it may be known that Islam gave her a status that no other status can rise above.
Aʿishah And Her Correction Of The Amir Of Madinah
Al Bukhari reported in his Sahih through the route of Yahya ibn Saʿid, from al Qasim ibn Muhammad and Sulayman ibn Yasar, that he heard them both mention that Yahya ibn Saʿid ibn al As divorced the daughter of Abd al Rahman ibn al Hakam, so Abd al Rahman moved her. Aʿishah sent to Marwan, while he was the amir of Madinah: “Fear Allah and return her to her house.” Marwan said in the hadith of Sulayman: “Abd al Rahman ibn al Hakam overpowered me.” Al Qasim ibn Muhammad said: “Has the matter of Fatimah bint Qays not reached you?” She said: “It will not harm you not to mention the hadith of Fatimah.”
Marwan said: “If there is harm with you, then enough for you is the harm between these two.” (Sahih al Bukhari 5015, 5/2038. Ibn Hajar said in al Fath: “Marwan’s saying, ‘Abd al Rahman overpowered me,’ means that he did not attack the ruling of returning her to her house. It was also said that he meant: he overpowered me with proof, because he used as proof the harm that was between them.” Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 9/476.
Ibn Hajar also said: “Marwan ibn al Hakam’s saying, ‘If there is harm with you,’ means: if what you have is that the reason Fatimah left was the harm that occurred between her and the relatives of her husband, then this reason is present, and for that reason he said: ‘enough for you is the harm between these two.’” Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 9/476.)
In this hadith, the Mother of the Believers Aʿishah, may Allah be pleased with her, commanded the amir of Madinah to return the woman who had been given a final divorce to her house.
In doing so, she opposed the hadith of Fatimah bint Qays, because Fatimah had given fatwa that the woman given a final divorce may move from her house. (See the detail of the matter and the evidences of both sides in Sharh al Nawawi 10/95; Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 9/477; Umdat al Qari by al Ayni 20/310.)
Asmaʾ bint Abi Bakr And Speaking The Truth Before al Hajjaj
Muslim reported in his Sahih through the route of Abu Nawfal, who said: I saw Abd Allah ibn al Zubayr upon the pass of Madinah. He said: Quraysh and the people began passing by him, until Abd Allah ibn Umar passed by him and stood over him.
He said: “Peace be upon you, Abu Khubayb. Peace be upon you, Abu Khubayb. Peace be upon you, Abu Khubayb. By Allah, I used to forbid you from this. By Allah, I used to forbid you from this. By Allah, I used to forbid you from this. By Allah, as far as I knew, you were one who fasted much, stood much in prayer, and joined family ties. By Allah, a nation whose worst one is you is truly a good nation.” Then Abd Allah ibn Umar left.
News of Ibn Umar’s standing and words reached al Hajjaj, so he sent for him, and he was taken down from the trunk and thrown into the graves of the Jews. Then he sent to his mother Asmaʾ bint Abi Bakr, but she refused to come to him. He sent the messenger back to her, saying: “You will come to me, or I will send someone to you who will drag you by your hair.” He said: She refused and said: “By Allah, I will not come to you until you send someone to drag me by my hair.”
He said: “Show me my sandals.” He took his sandals and then went quickly until he entered upon her. He said: “How did you see what I did to the enemy of Allah?” She said: “I saw that you ruined his worldly life, and he ruined your Hereafter. It has reached me that you say to him: ‘O son of the woman with two waist belts.’ By Allah, I am the woman with two waist belts. As for one of them, I used to lift with it the food of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and the food of Abu Bakr away from the riding animals.
As for the other, it was the waist belt of a woman who cannot do without it. Indeed, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ told us that in Thaqif there would be a liar and a destroyer. As for the liar, we have seen him. As for the destroyer, I think you are only him.” He then stood and did not answer her. (Sahih Muslim. Al Nawawi said: “The pass of Madinah is a pass in Makkah.” Sharh Sahih Muslim by al Nawawi 16/98. Al Nawawi said: “In it is the recommendation of giving salam to the dead in his grave and elsewhere, and repeating the salam three times, as Ibn Umar repeated it. In it is praising the dead with the good traits known about them. In it is a virtue of Ibn Umar because he spoke the truth in public and did not care about al Hajjaj, because he knew that his standing over him, his words, and his praise of him would reach him.” Sharh Sahih Muslim by al Nawawi 16/98.
The word for sandals is with kasrah on the letter sin, sukun on the letter ba, and tashdid at the end. It means sandals without hair on them. See Mashariq al Anwar by al Qadi Iyad 2/203, under the root s b t; Sharh al Nawawi 16/99. “Went quickly” means he walked rapidly. See Mashariq al Anwar by al Qadi Iyad 2/2830; al Nihayah by Ibn al Athir 5/170, under the root w dh f. “The destroyer” means the one who causes destruction. See Mashariq al Anwar by al Qadi Iyad 1/104; al Nihayah by Ibn al Athir 1/161, under the root b w r. Al Nawawi said: “The scholars agreed that what is meant by the liar here is al Mukhtar ibn Abi Ubayd, and by the destroyer is al Hajjaj ibn Yusuf.” Sharh Sahih Muslim by al Nawawi 16/100.)
Allah is the Greatest. How brave Asmaʾ, may Allah be pleased with her, was in speaking the word of truth before the unjust ruler. There is no surprise, for she was the daughter of her father, may Allah be pleased with them all.
But this was courage in its proper place, not foolishness, nor leaving wisdom or the rulers.
Umm al Tufayl And Correcting Umar ibn al Khattab
Imam Ahmad reported in al Musnad from Yahya ibn Ishaq al Saylahini, Qutaybah ibn Saʿid, and Ibn Abi Asim in al Ahad wa al Mathani through the route of Saʿid ibn Kathir ibn Ufair, all three from Ibn Lahiʿah, from Bukayr ibn Abd Allah ibn al Ashajj, from Busr ibn Saʿid, who said: I heard Umm al Tufayl, and Qutaybah said: the wife of Ubayy ibn Kaʿb, that she heard Umar ibn al Khattab and Ubayy ibn Kaʿb disputing. Umm al Tufayl said: “Why does Umar ibn al Khattab not ask Subayʿah al Aslamiyyah? Her husband died while she was pregnant, then she gave birth a few days later, and the Messenger of Allah ﷺ married her off.” The wording is that of Ahmad.
In another wording of his: “Umm al Tufayl said to Umar and to me: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ commanded Subayʿah al Aslamiyyah to marry when she gave birth.” (Musnad Ahmad 27109, 45/76; al Ahad wa al Mathani by Ibn Abi Asim 3384, 6/157.)
Al Haythami said in al Majmaʿ: “Ahmad and al Tabarani reported it. In it is Ibn Lahiʿah. His hadith is hasan, though there is weakness in him, and the rest of its narrators are trustworthy.” (Majmaʿ al Zawaʾid by al Haythami 5/2.)
There was difference over its chain from Ibn Lahiʿah. The most correct wording reported from him is the narration mentioned, because Yahya ibn Ishaq was from the early companions of Ibn Lahiʿah, and the scholars authenticated the hearing of Qutaybah from him. So its chain is hasan. (Tahdhib al Kamal by al Mizzi 3513, 15/4871; al Mukhtalitin by al Alaʾi 26, 65; Mizan al Iʿtidal by al Dhahabi 4535, 4/166; Tahdhib al Tahdhib by Ibn Hajar 648, 5/327.)
The hadith of Subayʿah al Aslamiyyah was reported by al Bukhari and Muslim. (Sahih al Bukhari 5012, 5/2037; Sahih Muslim 1484, 2/1122.)
In the hadith, Umm al Tufayl, the wife of Ubayy, carried out accountability over the Amir of the Believers, Umar ibn al Khattab, may Allah be pleased with them, despite his high rank and great status. Umm al Tufayl corrected him when she found that his view opposed the one whom Allah, Most High, sent to be obeyed by His permission. However, it is also noticed that she was not ill mannered with him. This is the guidance that must be observed when commanding what is right and forbidding what is wrong.
Umm al Dardaʾ And Correcting Abd al Malik ibn Marwan
Muslim reported in his Sahih through the route of Hafs ibn Maysarah, from Zayd ibn Aslam, that Abd al Malik ibn Marwan sent household furnishings from himself to Umm al Dardaʾ. One night, Abd al Malik got up and called his servant. It was as though the servant was slow in coming, so he cursed him.
In the morning, Umm al Dardaʾ said to him: “I heard you last night curse your servant when you called him.” She then said: I heard Abu al Dardaʾ say: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “Those who curse often will not be intercessors nor witnesses on the Day of Resurrection.” (Sahih Muslim 2598, 4/2006. Ibn al Athir said: “The word anjad is the plural of najad, with harakah on the jim. It means household goods, such as bedding, cushions, and curtains.” al Nihayah by Ibn al Athir 5/18, under the root n j d.)
Ahmad reported in al Musnad through the route of Maʿmar, from Zayd ibn Aslam, who said: Abd al Malik used to send for Umm al Dardaʾ, and she would spend the night with his wives. He would ask her about the Prophet ﷺ, and he mentioned the hadith with a similar wording. Its chain is sahih. Its narrators are trustworthy, from the narrators of the two Shaykhs. (Musnad Ahmad 27529, 45/517.)
Abd al Malik ibn Marwan hosting Umm al Dardaʾ, and his status, did not stop her from condemning his error when he made a mistake. She gave proof for her correction. In this is the care of the Companions in teaching their families goodness, as is clear from Umm al Dardaʾ narrating from her husband, may Allah be pleased with them.
At the same time, Umm al Dardaʾ was not ill mannered with Abd al Malik in correcting him, may Allah be pleased with her. This is an etiquette that should be observed.
Although Islam, as will come, prevented the woman from holding the greatest authority, it made her an active member and a strong element that commands and forbids, and whose words are heard, especially when what she mentions is built upon the principles and rules of Sharia. The proof for this has already been given, and Allah is the One who grants success.
The Woman’s Right To Grant Safety And Protection
Ijarah (granting protection) and aman (granting safety) come with one meaning. Aman and amn linguistically mean the calm of the self and the removal of fear. It is also used for the state a person is in. (al Mufradat by al Raghib 26; Lisan al Arab by Ibn Manzur 2/83, under the root a m n.)
Technically, aman means giving safety and protection to the one who asks for it. (al Mubdiʿ by Ibn Muflih 3/489; al Dhakhirah by al Qarafi 3/445.)
The mustaʾmin, with kasrah on the letter mim, is the one asking for aman. It refers to someone who enters the land of another with aman for a limited time, or the land of another with aman, whether he is Muslim or from a people at war. (Hashiyat Ibn Abidin 4/166.)
The evidence for its permissibility is the saying of Allah, Most High:
وَإِنْ أَحَدٌ مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ اسْتَجَارَكَ فَأَجِرْهُ حَتَّى يَسْمَعَ كَلَامَ اللَّهِ ثُمَّ أَبْلِغْهُ مَأْمَنَهُ ذَلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ قَوْمٌ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ
“If one of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection until he hears the speech of Allah. Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know.” (al Tawbah 6)
Al Zamakhshari (d. 538AH), may Allah have mercy on him, said: “The meaning is: if one of the polytheists comes to you after the sacred months have ended, and there is no covenant between you and him, and he seeks safety from you so that he may hear what you call to of tawhid and the Qur’an, then grant him safety until he hears the speech of Allah. Then, if he does not accept Islam, deliver him to the lands of his people where he is safe over himself and his wealth.” (al Kashshaf by al Zamakhshari 2/174.)
Then he clarified how aman is given and what the one granting aman must do.
Ibn Kathir (d. 774AH), may Allah have mercy on him, clarified its reason and said: “The purpose is that whoever comes from the land of war to the land of Islam to deliver a message, or for trade, or to seek peace, or a truce, or to carry jizyah, or other reasons like that, and he asks the imam or his deputy, he is given aman as long as he is moving within the land of Islam, until he returns to his land, his place of safety, and his homeland.” (Tafsir al Qur’an al Azim by Ibn Kathir 2/337.)
The majority of scholars held that the aman and protection of a woman is valid. Ibn al Mundhir (d. 318AH) even quoted agreement upon that. Al Hafiz said: “Ibn al Mundhir said: The people of knowledge agreed upon the permissibility of the aman of a woman, except something mentioned by Abd al Malik, meaning Ibn al Majishun, the companion of Malik, and I do not remember that from anyone else: that the matter of aman belongs to the imam.
He interpreted what came opposing that as specific cases. In the saying of the Prophet ﷺ, ‘The lowest of them may act on behalf of their protection,’ is proof against the neglect of this speaker. End quote. Something like the statement of Ibn al Majishun came from Sahnun, who said: It returns to the imam. If he permits it, it is permitted. If he rejects it, it is rejected.” (Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 6/273.)
The majority of scholars used the following as proof.
Al Bukhari and Muslim reported from the hadith of Umm Haniʾ bint Abi Talib, who said: I went to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ in the year of the Conquest and found him washing, while Fatimah, his daughter, was screening him. I greeted him, and he said: “Who is this?” I said: “I am Umm Haniʾ bint Abi Talib.” He said: “Welcome, Umm Haniʾ.” When he finished washing, he stood and prayed eight rakʿat while wrapped in one garment.
I said: “O Messenger of Allah, the son of my mother, Ali, claims that he will kill a man whom I have granted protection, so and so ibn Hubayrah.” The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “We have granted protection to the one whom you granted protection, O Umm Haniʾ.” Umm Haniʾ said: That was in the forenoon. The wording is that of al Bukhari. (Sahih al Bukhari 3000, 3/1157; Sahih Muslim 336, 1/498.)
Imam Ahmad reported this hadith in his Musnad with a sahih chain upon the condition of Muslim, through the route of Aqil ibn Abi Talib, from Fakhitah Umm Haniʾ, who said: On the Day of the Conquest of Makkah, I granted protection to two in laws of mine from the polytheists.
Then the Messenger of Allah ﷺ appeared, while dust was upon him, wearing a cloak wrapped around him. When he saw me, he said: “Welcome, Fakhitah Umm Haniʾ.” I said: “O Messenger of Allah, I have granted protection to two in laws of mine from the polytheists.” He said: “We have granted protection to the one whom you granted protection, and we have given safety to the one whom you gave safety.” Then he commanded Fatimah, so she poured water for him, and he washed with it. The hadith continues. (Musnad Ahmad 26892, 44/460. See al Nihayah by Ibn al Athir 2/281; Lisan al Arab by Ibn Manzur 2/284, under the root r h j. See Bayan Asmaʾ al Mubhamin in Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 1/470.)
Ibn Abi Asim, al Tabarani, and al Hakim reported through routes from Abd Allah ibn Shabib, from Ayyub ibn Sulayman, from Abu Bakr ibn Abi Uways, from Sulayman ibn Bilal, from Salih ibn Kaysan, from al Zuhri, from Anas ibn Malik, that Zaynab bint the Messenger of Allah ﷺ migrated to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ while her husband Abu al As ibn al Rabiʿ was a disbeliever. Then Abu al As ibn al Rabiʿ went to al Sham, and the Muslims captured Abu al As. Zaynab said: “I have granted protection to Abu al As.” The Prophet ﷺ said: “We have granted protection to the one whom you granted protection.” The wording is that of Ibn Abi Asim. (al Ahad wa al Mathani by Ibn Abi Asim 555, 1/398; al Muʿjam al Kabir by al Tabarani 1049, 22/246; al Mustadrak by al Hakim 6842, 4/49.)
Al Hakim and al Dhahabi remained silent about it, and I did not find it in Majmaʿ al Zawaʾid.
Its chain is weak due to the weakness of Abd Allah ibn Shabib. Abu Ahmad al Hakim said: “His hadith is gone.” Ibn Hibban said: “He reverses reports and steals them. It is not permissible to use him as proof because of the great number of times he opposed his peers in narrations from reliable narrators.” Ibn Adi (d. 365AH) said: “He narrated rejected reports.” (Ibn Adi attributed it to him in al Kamil 1098, 4/262, and Ibn al Jawzi attributed it in al Duʿafaʾ wa al Matrukin 2043, 2/127; al Majruhin by Ibn Hibban 2/47; al Kamil by Ibn Adi 1098, 4/262.)
He was followed by Abu al Zinbaʿ Rawh ibn al Faraj and Ahmad ibn Rushdin with al Tabarani in al Kabir, al Miqdam with al Tabarani in al Awsat, and Ubayd ibn Sharik with al Hakim in al Mustadrak. All four narrated from Yahya ibn Bukayr, from Abd Allah ibn al Samh, from Abbad ibn Kathir, from Aqil ibn Khalid, from Ibn Shihab, with the same meaning. However, it is a fallen support, because in its chain is Abbad ibn Kathir. Al Hafiz said: “Abandoned. Ahmad said: He narrated false hadiths.” (al Muʿjam al Kabir by al Tabarani 1048, 22/426; al Muʿjam al Awsat by al Tabarani 9006, 9/21; al Mustadrak by al Hakim 6841, 4/48; al Taqrib by Ibn Hajar 3156, 482.)
Al Haythami said in al Majmaʿ: “Al Tabarani reported it in al Kabir and al Awsat in abridged wording. In it is Abbad ibn Kathir al Thaqafi, and he is abandoned.” (Majmaʿ al Zawaʾid by al Haythami 5/329.)
It has a supporting report from the hadith of Umm Salamah, reported by al Tabarani in al Awsat and al Kabir, and al Hakim in al Mustadrak in a lengthy wording, in which it says: “Then Abu al As ibn al Rabiʿ followed her, meaning Zaynab, to Madinah, and sent to her: ‘Take aman for me from your father.’ She raised her head from the door of her room while the Messenger of Allah ﷺ was leading the people in Fajr prayer and said:
‘O people, I am Zaynab, and I have granted protection to Abu al As.’ When the Messenger of Allah ﷺ finished the prayer, he said: ‘I did not know of this until I heard it now. The lowest of the Muslims may grant protection on their behalf.’” The wording is that of al Tabarani in al Kabir. (al Muʿjam al Awsat by al Tabarani 4822, 5/110; al Muʿjam al Kabir by al Tabarani 6843, 4/49; al Mustadrak by al Hakim 5038, 3/263.)
He said in al Awsat: “This hadith is not reported from Umm Salamah except with this chain. Ibn Lahiʿah is alone in reporting it.”
Al Haythami said: “Al Tabarani reported it in al Awsat and al Kabir in abridged wording. In it is Ibn Lahiʿah. His hadith is hasan, though there is weakness in him, and the rest of its narrators are trustworthy.” (Majmaʿ al Zawaʾid by al Haythami 5/329.)
Al Hafiz said about Ibn Lahiʿah: “Truthful. He became confused after his books burned. The narration of Ibn al Mubarak and Ibn Wahb from him is fairer than that of others. He has some narrations in Muslim when joined with others.” The hadith is not from the narration of the two Abds from him. (al Taqrib by Ibn Hajar 3587, 538.)
It has other supporting reports that were left out for brevity, and the hadith, by its combined routes, is hasan.
Al Tirmidhi reported from Yahya ibn Aktham, from Abd al Aziz ibn Abi Hazim, from Kathir ibn Zayd, from al Walid ibn Rabah, from Abu Hurayrah, from the Prophet ﷺ, who said: “A woman may take protection for a people,” meaning she may grant protection on behalf of the Muslims. (Jamiʿ al Tirmidhi 1579, 4/141.)
Al Tirmidhi said: “A hasan gharib hadith.” He said: “I asked Muhammad, and he said: This hadith is sahih. Kathir ibn Zayd heard from al Walid ibn Rabah, and al Walid ibn Rabah heard from Abu Hurayrah. He is close in hadith.”
Al Albani graded it hasan in Sahih Jamiʿ al Tirmidhi.
I say: In its chain are Yahya ibn Aktham, Abd al Aziz ibn Abi Hazim, Kathir ibn Zayd, and al Walid ibn Rabah. Al Hafiz said about all of them in al Taqrib: “Truthful,” and he added regarding Kathir: “He makes mistakes.” (al Taqrib by Ibn Hajar 7557; 4116; 5646; 7472.)
It has already passed that Umm Hakim bint al Harith ibn Hisham took aman for her husband Ikrimah ibn Abi Jahl in the year of the Conquest, so the Prophet ﷺ gave him safety, even though the name of Ikrimah was mentioned among those whom he ordered to be killed even if found beneath the curtains of the Kaʿbah. (See p. 327.)
Al Bukhari and Muslim reported from the hadith of Ali ibn Abi Talib, in which the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “The protection of the Muslims is one. The lowest of them may act on behalf of it.” (Sahih al Bukhari 3001, 3/1157; Sahih Muslim 1370, 2/1147.)
Abu Ubayd (d. 224AH) said: “As for his saying, ‘The lowest of them may act on behalf of their protection,’ dhimmah means aman. He is saying: if a man among them gives the enemy aman, that is valid upon all Muslims, and they may not violate it.” (Gharib al Hadith by Abu Ubayd 2/104; see 2/168 under the root dh m m; Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 6/274.)
He said in al Amwal: “The Sunnah of the Prophet ﷺ came with that regarding women.” (al Amwal by Abu Ubayd.)
From all that has passed, the reports come together to establish this right for the woman. The extent of Islam’s respect and honouring of her becomes clear when it gave her the right of granting protection and safety to whomever she wishes, as long as there is no suspicion that the protected person is spying against the Muslims, just as is the case with the man. This is a right given to her which was not given to her by any international law, neither ancient nor modern.
The Work Of Women In Jihad
If a Muslim woman takes part with men in jihad, her work is defined in light of the Sunnah of the Prophet ﷺ. From the evidences already mentioned, the following becomes clear.
Giving Water To The Fighters
The Muslim woman may give water to the fighters. This is indicated by what the two Shaykhs reported from the hadith of Anas, who said: “On the Day of Uhud, the people fled. I saw Aʿishah and Umm Sulaym with their garments raised, so that I could see the anklets of their lower legs. They were carrying water skins on their backs, then pouring them into the mouths of the people.”
This is also indicated by the hadith reported by al Bukhari, in which Umar said that Umm Sulayt used to carry water skins on the Day of Uhud.
Al Bukhari placed the hadith of Umm Sulayt in the book of jihad under the heading: “The women carrying water skins to the people during battle.”
Treating The Wounded And Caring For The Sick
Treating the wounded is also from the work of the Muslim woman in jihad. This is indicated by what al Bukhari reported from the hadith of al Rubayyiʿ bint Muʿawwidh, who said: “We were with the Prophet ﷺ, giving water, treating the wounded, and returning the killed to Madinah.” Al Bukhari placed it under the heading: “Women treating the wounded during battle.”
It is also indicated by the hadith of Anas reported by Muslim, in which it says: “The Messenger of Allah ﷺ used to go out to battle with Umm Sulaym and women from the Ansar with him when he went out to battle. They would give water and treat the wounded.”
Muslim also reported in his Sahih from Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, that he wrote to Najdah al Haruri in response to his question. In it he said: “He ﷺ used to go out to battle with them, and they would treat the wounded.” (Sahih Muslim 1812, 3/1444.)
Muslim also reported from the hadith of Umm Atiyyah al Ansariyyah, who said: “I went out to battle with the Prophet ﷺ in seven battles. I would remain behind them in their camp, prepare food for them, treat the wounded, and care for the sick.” (Sahih Muslim 1813, 3/14447.)
Ibn Battal (d. 449AH) said in his explanation of the hadith of al Rubayyiʿ bint Muʿawwidh: “Al Muhallab said: In it is that a woman may directly handle a non mahram man for medical care and similar matters, such as being gentle with the sick and moving the dead.
If it is said: how was it permissible for women to directly handle wounded men when they were not maharim to them?
The answer is that this is permissible for elderly women, because the place of the wound is not enjoyed by touching. Rather, skins shrink away from it, souls dislike it, and touching it is pain for the one touching and the one being touched. As for women who are not elderly, they treat the wounded without directly touching them, such as by preparing the medicine and having someone else place it on the wound, without them touching anything from his body.”
Then, may Allah have mercy on him, he used as proof their agreement that if a woman dies and no woman is found to wash her, the man must not directly touch her in washing. Rather, according to some, such as al Zuhri, he washes her from behind a barrier.
According to most, tayammum is done for her. Then he said: “This indicates from their statement that direct contact with non maharim is not permissible according to them, because the state of death is further away from the causes that lead to desire and the means to it than the state of life.
So when they agreed that it is not permissible for a non mahram man to wash a dead non mahram woman by directly touching her without a cloth covering her, this indicates that direct contact with the living, who can feel, is even more deserving of being impermissible. Allah knows best.” (Sharh Ibn Battal by Ibn Battal 4/102. “Elderly women” means women advanced in age. See al Nihayah by Ibn al Athir 1/278; Lisan al Arab by Ibn Manzur 1/288, under the root j l l. Ibn Qudamah attributed the view of al Zuhri to him in al Mughni 2/202. This was said by Saʿid ibn al Musayyib, al Nakhaʿi, Malik, Ahmad, and the people of opinion, and it is the stronger view. See Sharh Ibn Battal by Ibn Battal 4/102; al Mudawwanah by Sahnun 1/186; al Mabsut by al Sarakhsi 10/161; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 2/202.)
Al Hafiz mentioned the statement of Ibn Battal in al Fath and responded to it, saying: “Ibn al Munir said: The difference between the state of medical treatment and washing the dead is that washing the dead is worship, while medical treatment is necessity, and necessities make prohibited matters permissible.” (Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 6/80.)
He also said in al Fath, under the heading: “Does a man treat a woman, and does a woman treat a man?” in the book of medicine: “As for the ruling of the matter, it is permissible for non maharim to give medical treatment when there is necessity, and it is restricted according to its need in what relates to looking, touching by hand, and other matters.” (Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 10/136.)
So to those women who have become broad in treating men and touching them without necessity, and to those men who have also become broad in that, it is said to them: fear Allah, stay with the evidence, and hold tightly to it with the molar teeth. Taking it is safety, and leaving it is destruction.
Does The Woman Have The Right To Fight Like The Man?
If it is said: does the woman not have the right to fight as the man fights, to stand beside him in the army, and to share half the responsibility with him?
The foundation, as has already passed, is that the work of the woman is restricted to what the evidences clearly mentioned: giving water to the fighters, treating the wounded, caring for the sick, and preparing food. If the women attend the battle with the men, then they are in separate rows at the rear of the army.
The evidence for this is what Imam Ahmad reported in al Musnad, and al Tabarani in al Kabir, from the lengthy hadith of Imran ibn Husayn, in which it says: “The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: ‘Go out to battle with Banu so and so, along with so and so.’ He said: The men were lined up, and the women were behind the men.” Its chain is weak because the narrator from Imran is unnamed. (Musnad Ahmad 19937, 33/162; al Muʿjam al Kabir by al Tabarani 609, 18/243.)
However, it is not hidden that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ used to separate the women from the men and place their rows at the back, as in the prayer of women in congregation with the men. Rather, he made the best rows of the women the last of them, and the worst of them the first of them. If this is the case in salah while there is safety, then what about fighting?
If it is said: is fighting not legislated for her?
It is said: al Bukhari placed a heading in his Sahih in the book of jihad: “The women going out to battle and fighting with the men.” Then he placed under it the hadith of Anas, who said: “On the Day of Uhud, the people fled from the Prophet ﷺ.”
He said: “I saw Aʿishah bint Abi Bakr and Umm Sulaym with their garments raised, so that I could see the anklets of their lower legs. They were carrying water skins on their backs, then pouring them into the mouths of the people.”
Al Hafiz said in al Fath, after mentioning the evidences for the female Companions taking part in jihad, without any clear statement that they fought, and these evidences have already passed: “I have not seen in any of that a clear statement that they fought. Because of that, Ibn al Munir said: He placed a heading concerning their fighting, but that is not in the hadith. Either he means that their assisting the fighters is battle, or he means that they only remained firm to give water to the wounded and the like while being ready to defend themselves, and this is what is usually the case.
It occurs with Muslim through another route from Anas that Umm Sulaym took a dagger on the Day of Hunayn and said: ‘I took it so that if any one of the polytheists came near me, I would split open his belly with it.’ It is also possible that al Bukhari intended with the heading to clarify that they do not fight even if they go out to battle. So his saying, ‘and their fighting with the men,’ would mean: is it permissible? Or, if they go out with the men to battle, do they limit themselves to what was mentioned of treating the wounded and the like?” (Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 6/78; Sahih Muslim 1809, 3/1442.)
Whoever follows the participation of women with men in fighting will see that this occurred from them when defeat came upon the Muslims. Their initial going out was for giving water, feeding, and medical treatment. However, if defeat reached the Muslims, or the enemy almost overpowered them, it became legislated for women to fight with what they could bear and were able to do. The evidences for this are many.
Among them is what came in the biography of Umm Umarah, Nusaybah bint Kaʿb, and her fighting on the Day of Uhud. It came in Tabaqat Ibn Saʿd: “Umm Saʿid bint al Rabiʿ used to say: I entered upon her, meaning Umm Umarah, and said: ‘Tell me your story on the Day of Uhud.’ She said: ‘I went out at the beginning of the day to Uhud, looking at what the people were doing. With me was a water skin containing water.
I reached the Messenger of Allah ﷺ while he was among his Companions, and victory and strength were with the Muslims. When the Muslims were defeated, I moved toward the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and began taking part directly in the fighting. I defended the Messenger of Allah ﷺ with the sword, and I shot with the bow until wounds reached me.’” Then he mentioned the story of Ibn Qamiʾah wounding her, until the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said to her: “Who can bear what you bear, O Umm Umarah?”
She was wounded on the Day of Uhud with thirteen wounds.
She also witnessed the fighting of Musaylimah at al Yamamah and was wounded that day with twelve wounds, between spear thrusts and sword strikes, and her hand was cut. That occurred when the Arabs were firm and Banu Hanifah fortified themselves in the Garden of Death. She, may Allah have mercy on her, had sworn to kill Musaylimah because he had killed her son. (al Tabaqat al Kubra by Ibn Saʿd 8/415; see al Istiʿab by Ibn Abd al Barr 4190, 4/1948; al Isabah by Ibn Hajar 12178, 8/265; al Bidayah wa al Nihayah by Ibn Kathir 6/326.)
Ibn Saʿd reported in al Tabaqat through the route of Hisham ibn Urwah that Safiyyah bint Abd al Muttalib came on the Day of Uhud after the people had fled. In her hand was a spear with which she was striking the faces of the people, saying: “Have you fled from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ?” When the Messenger of Allah ﷺ saw her, he said: “O Zubayr, the woman.” Hamzah’s belly had been split open, and the Messenger of Allah ﷺ disliked that she should see him, and she was his sister. (al Tabaqat al Kubra by Ibn Saʿd 8/41; Tarikh al Tabari by al Tabari 2/529; al Bidayah wa al Nihayah by Ibn Kathir 4/483.)
Al Tabari mentioned in his Tarikh that women fought on the Day of al Yarmuk. Juwayriyah bint Abi Sufyan went out in one round, and she was with her husband. She was injured after severe fighting. Her fighting occurred when the Romans charged against the Muslims until they nearly overcame them, until Allah turned the circle against His enemies and gave the Muslims their lands and homes as inheritance. (Tarikh al Tabari by al Tabari 2/338.)
Saʿid ibn Mansur reported in al Sunan, and al Tabarani in al Kabir, from the hadith of Muhajir al Ansari, that Asmaʾ bint Yazid al Ansariyyah witnessed al Yarmuk with the people, and she killed seven Romans with the pole of her tent. (Sunan Saʿid ibn Mansur 2787, 213/307; al Muʿjam al Kabir by al Tabarani 403, 24/157.)
Al Haythami said in al Majmaʿ: “Al Tabarani reported it, and its narrators are trustworthy.” Al Albani graded its chain hasan because it contains Muhajir ibn Abi Muslim, about whom al Hafiz said: “Acceptable.” Ibn al Qayyim, as already passed, considered the hadith of someone like Muhajir to be hasan. (Majmaʿ al Zawaʾid by al Haythami 6/213; al Radd al Mufhim by al Albani 155; al Taqrib by Ibn Hajar 6974, 975; Tahdhib al Kamal by al Mizzi 6217, 28/582; see p. 126.)
All that has passed is evidence that the woman may carry weapons in jihad and fight to defend herself, as Umm Sulaym did, or when there is need and defeat is coming upon the Muslims, as Umm Umarah, Safiyyah, Asmaʾ, and the women who witnessed al Yarmuk did.
Thus, all that belongs to the woman in war is that she performs the work of the Red Crescent, as the women of the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, used to do. She may carry weapons when there is need, as the evidences have already passed. As for joining the army only to wear the clothing of a soldier and walk around proudly here and there, considering this a sign from the signs of claimed progress, then this is foolishness that has no connection to seriousness. The affairs of life cannot bear this play.
It is astonishing that in a time when natural dispositions have been overturned, some people call for women to be given command over armies, cavalry divisions, and military planning. We have witnessed two global wars within forty years, both European and Western, but we did not see, read, or hear that a woman was leading men in either of them, managing battles, and laying plans for them. If these people have made Europe their model and followed its way, then I wish I knew who taught them to shout for this, so long as Europe itself has not adopted it in its military affairs. Wretched are a people whose women protect them.
Some use as proof the going out of the Mother of the Believers, Aʿishah, may Allah be pleased with her, as the leader of the opposition army, as they claim. By Allah, they have gone far from the right path. Ibn Hazm (d. 456AH), may Allah have mercy on him, said: “As for the Mother of the Believers, al Zubayr, Talhah, and those who were with her, they never invalidated the imamah of Ali at all, nor did they attack it, nor did they mention any wound against him that would lower him from the imamah, nor did they introduce another imam, nor renew bayʿah for anyone else.
This is something no one can claim in any way. It has therefore become necessarily clear, with no doubt in it, that they did not go to Basrah to fight Ali, nor to oppose him, nor to break his bayʿah. They only went to close the tear that had occurred through the killing of the Amir of the Believers, Uthman ibn Affan, may Allah be pleased with him, unjustly.” (al Fisal fi al Milal wa al Nihal by Ibn Hazm 4/238.)
The going out of the Mother of the Believers was not for war and not to break bayʿah. It was only for reconciliation between the people. Talhah and al Zubayr, may Allah be pleased with them, supported her in going out. She exercised her judgement, then regretted it, may Allah be pleased with her. Shaykh al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728AH) said: “Aʿishah thought that in her going out there was benefit for the Muslims. Then it became clear to her afterwards that not going out would have been better. When she remembered her going out, she would cry until her head covering became wet.” (Minhaj al Sunnah al Nabawiyyah by Ibn Taymiyyah 4/316.)
The Wisdom Behind Exempting Women From Military Responsibility
The political system of Islam, in exempting females from military responsibility, considers their natural formation and psychological readiness in two main ways.
The first is physical. It considers the limits of female bodily abilities, which appear clearly at the first glance. These usually do not suit the military task and its health related hardship. For this reason, soldiery throughout its different eras has been mostly masculine in nature. Even in this era, when military equipment has developed, it still requires physical strength and movement skills that clearly conflict with feminine nature.
War equipment and tools still need, for their operation, a complete general bodily structure. For that reason, weapons in general, especially complex weapons, have been technically prepared for the use of men and arranged according to their abilities and physical nature.
When the recruited girl is put before that weapon, disharmony occurs between them. Despite the appearance of this general female nature, every rule has exceptions, and the ruling in such matters is always according to the most common and widespread case. (Ilm al Nafs al Tatawwuri by Sami Arifaj 138; Jawanib al Taʿarud bayn Unsur al Unuthah fi al Marʾah wa al Amal al Siyasi by Adnan Ba Harith 83; Ilm al Nafs al Askari by Abd al Latif Husayn and Izz al Din Jamil 28, 305, 323; Muqawwimat al Shakhsiyyah al Askariyyah by Muhammad Saʿid 19.)
The second is psychological. It considers the limited psychological endurance among females, because military life is marked by the severity of its psychological pressures upon the individual. It directly threatens his psychological safety through the harshness of combat experiences, and those effects then appear negatively in aspects of his general health when he does not have enough psychological strength to preserve his inner balance.
Around one third of the American soldiers who took part in their country’s war with Vietnam lived through this suffering and these psychological disturbances. Although both sexes share in carrying this suffering, its effect upon females is greater and its impact upon them is stronger. (Ilm al Nafs al Askari by Abd al Latif Husayn and Izz al Din Jamil 19; Dirasat Intishar al Halat al Nafsiyyah lada al Kuwaytiyyin fi Marhalat ma baʿd al Udwan al Iraqi by Badr Muhammad 289; Jawanib al Taʿarud bayn Unsur al Unuthah fi al Marʾah wa al Amal al Siyasi by Adnan Ba Harith 87.)
Based on these natural realities in the female being, and what they show of clear behavioural effects upon the psychological and physical sides, which generally limit the full military contribution of women, the reasons for their general military absence can be understood in terms of number and leadership. Even though the modern world has witnessed legal openness toward women’s participation in different military fields, and groups of women have entered most military sectors, until complete female units could be formed in some countries, their total numbers remain small when compared with the numbers of men.
In the United States war with Vietnam, which was among the wars of the second half of the twentieth century, three million men took part across the years of the war, compared with seven thousand women, meaning only a ratio of 0.2 percent. (al Marʾah fi al Qadim wa al Hadith by Umar Rida Kahhalah 3/10; Jawanib al Taʿarud bayn Unsur al Unuthah fi al Marʾah wa al Amal al Siyasi by Adnan Ba Harith 88; Nahw Istratijiyyah Qawmiyyah li Iadat Taʾhil al Usra by Muhammad Hijaz 80.)
So to those who throw the gentle gender into military barracks and fighting rows, appointing themselves as callers to her “liberation,” as they claim, wearing sheep skins over the hearts of wolves, with speech sweeter than honey while its reality is more bitter than aloe, I say on the tongue of every female soldier:
“Do you seek your comfort, and do you seek your safety, behind every weak and gentle woman?
You burdened our shoulders with what has harmed us from you.
You shattered our womanhood and buried all its meaning.
We wore the uniform of your soldiers, while our arms had been twisted.
Upon the shoulder we were made to carry weapons from your ammunition.
You announced that truth is with you, and that justice is your religion.
By Allah, how much of our freshness was killed, and how much our homes were made forgotten to us.
We protected your row. How ugly your sight is.
Men who used a woman as a shield. Your effort has failed.”
The Financial Rights Of Women
A careful reading of the Sharia texts that came concerning direct financial dealings makes one stand upon a clear reality: there is no difference between the man and the woman in financial capacity and the actions that follow from it. Islam made permissible for her everything it made permissible for the man, exactly the same. It gave her, like the man, the right to enter into all types of financial contracts directly. It made her the possessor of complete right over her property, and it did not give the man, whatever his position or closeness to her may be, any authority over it.
She may own land, buildings, all kinds of property, and wealth. She may practise trade through selling, buying, sharecropping, farming partnership, business partnership, investment partnership, and all other permissible ways of earning. She may appoint someone else as her agent in what she does not wish to do herself. She may guarantee someone else, and someone else may guarantee her. She may make a bequest to whomever she wishes among those qualified to receive a bequest, and it is valid for her to be an executor. There is no difference in this between her and the man.
The evidences will come one after another confirming that the woman owns her wealth and has the right to dispose of it like the man, whether she is married or unmarried, because the husband has no authority over her wealth, and because femininity in itself was not a reason for placing her under restriction.
During reading through the chapters, the tongue will keep praising and thanking the Lord, Mighty and Exalted, for His just rulings, because when humans ruled, they wronged. The woman in the West carried chains, being viewed as a creature with deficient capacity. This remained common in Europe and its related lands until recent times, as their constitutions ruled that the woman may not dispose of her wealth and property, if she was married, except with her husband’s permission and approval.
Among the most dangerous oppressive means against the rights of women in particular is what is now common in Western society, namely the permissibility of making a bequest of the estate to whoever one wants, and depriving the heirs, or some of them, from it, to the point that they even made it permissible to make a bequest to a dog or a cat. (Huquq al Marʾah fi al Shariah al Islamiyyah by Ibrahim al Najjar 63.)
The Woman’s Right To Maintenance
Just as Islam guaranteed the woman the marriage gift at the beginning of her marriage, it also guarantees maintenance for her during it. Maintenance from the man also extends to his newborn daughter, his daughter, his mother, and those close to him from his direct relatives, as will be explained.
Defining Maintenance
Maintenance in language is taken from the root meaning of passing away. It is said: the horse or animal perished, meaning it died or was destroyed.
Or it is taken from the meaning of marketability. It is said: the sale became marketable when it became widespread and moved. (Mukhtar al Sihah by al Razi 2/118; Lisan al Arab by Ibn Manzur 12/235)
What is gained from this is that maintenance means using up wealth for the benefit of another and making it flow into his hand.
In Sharia, the Hanafis defined it by saying: supplying a thing with what keeps it standing. (Hashiyat Ibn Abidin 3/572.)
Ibn Arafah al Maliki (d. 803AH) defined it as: that by which the usual standing of a human’s condition is maintained without extravagance. (al Kharashi ala Mukhtasar Khalil by al Kharashi 4/18.)
The Shafiʿis defined it as: measured food due from a husband to his wife and her servant, and for others, such as a direct ancestor, direct descendant, owned person, or animal, what is enough for him. (Hashiyat al Sharqawi ala Sharh al Tahrir by al Sharqawi 2/303.)
The Hanbalis defined it as: sufficing the one whose maintenance is due from him with bread, condiment, clothing, housing, and what follows them. (Kashshaf al Qinaʿ by al Buhuti 5/532.)
Whoever looks at what has passed finds that the definitions agree in meaning and purpose, even if their wording outwardly differs.
These definitions gather the matters agreed upon, such as food, drink, clothing, and housing. It appears with complete clarity that the definitions of the Hanafis, Shafiʿis, and Hanbalis for maintenance are more precise and more comprehensive, because they include everything a person spends upon himself and others. They also cover the categories of obligatory maintenance and its different types, and they do not limit it only to marital maintenance.
As far as I have seen, the jurists did not give a separate definition specifically for marital maintenance, being satisfied with their general definitions of maintenance. However, a definition may be taken from between their lines and from the total of what they wrote, in the following way:
What is obligatory upon the husband, by Sharia, toward his wife of food, drink, clothing, housing, bedding, service, and what follows that, according to custom within the Sharia principles. (Ahkam al Nafaqah al Zawjiyyah fi al Shariah al Islamiyyah by Muhammad Yaqub 21.)
Maintenance Due To Kinship
This is the maintenance that becomes obligatory for the poor relative upon his wealthy relative because of the close blood tie of unmarriageable kinship that connects them, despite the difference among the jurists regarding its share.
The jurists differed in defining the kinship that obligates spending. The Malikis and Shafiʿis held that it is the kinship of birth absolutely. The Hanafis held that it is the kinship that makes marriage forbidden, and nothing else. The Hanbalis held that it is the kinship in which the relative inherits from his relative. It is therefore obligatory for direct ancestors upon direct descendants and the reverse. It is also obligatory among the rest of the relatives who are heirs by fixed share or by agnatic inheritance, such as brothers, paternal uncles, and their sons. (Hashiyat al Dasuqi by al Dasuqi 2/522; Mughni al Muhtaj by al Khatib al Shirbini 3/446; Badaʾiʿ al Sanaʾiʿ by al Kasani 4/30; Kashf al Qinaʿ by al Buhuti 5/557.)
The First Evidence
Ibn Majah reported in al Sunan, al Tahawi in Sharh Maʿani al Athar and Mushkil al Athar, and al Tabarani in al Awsat, from Isa ibn Yunus, who said: Yusuf ibn Ishaq ibn Abi Ishaq al Sabiʿi narrated to us, from Muhammad ibn al Munkadir, from Jabir, that a man said: “O Messenger of Allah, I have wealth and a child, and my father wants to take all my wealth.” He said: “You and your wealth belong to your father.” The wording is that of Ibn Majah. (Sunan Ibn Majah 2291, 2/768; Sharh Maʿani al Athar by al Tahawi 4/158; Mushkil al Athar by al Tahawi 2/230; al Muʿjam al Awsat by al Tabarani 3534, 4/31.)
Al Bazzar said: sahih. Al Mundhiri said: Its chain is trustworthy. (Ibn al Mulaqqin quoted it from him in Khulasat al Badr al Munir 2/203.)
Abd al Haqq al Ishbili (d. 581AH) authenticated it in al Ahkam al Kubra. Al Busiri (d. 840AH) said: Its chain is sahih, its men are trustworthy upon the condition of al Bukhari. I say: It is as he said. Al Albani authenticated it in al Irwaʾ and traced its supporting reports. (al Ahkam al Kubra by Abd al Haqq al Ishbili 1/201, 1204; Misbah al Zujajah by al Busiri 3/37; Irwaʾ al Ghalil by al Albani 3/323, 838.)
It has a supporting report transmitted by Ahmad in al Musnad, Abu Dawud in al Sunan, Ibn Majah in al Sunan, and al Bayhaqi in al Kubra through routes from Amr ibn Shuʿayb, from his father, from his grandfather, who said: A Bedouin came to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and said: “My father wants to take all my wealth.” He said: “You and your wealth belong to your father. Indeed, the purest thing you eat is from your earning, and the wealth of your children is from your earning, so eat it with ease.” (Musnad Ahmad 6678, 11/261; Sunan Abi Dawud 3530, 3/289; Sunan Ibn Majah 2291, 2/769; al Sunan al Kubra by al Bayhaqi 7/480.)
Its chain is hasan, because it is from the narration of Amr ibn Shuʿayb, and the verification of his narration has already passed. (This has already passed on p. 198–200.)
Abu Dawud placed this hadith under the heading: “A man eating from his child’s wealth.” Ibn Majah placed it under: “What a man has from his child’s wealth.”
Al Tirmidhi (d. 279AH), after reporting the hadith of Aʿishah in a wording close to the hadith of Abd Allah ibn Amr, said: “Acting upon this is according to some of the people of knowledge from the Companions of the Prophet ﷺ and others. They said: The hand of the father is extended over the wealth of his child, and he may take what he wishes. Others said: He may not take from his wealth except when he needs it.” (Sunan al Tirmidhi 3/639.)
Al Khattabi (d. 388AH) said: “From the fiqh in it is that the maintenance of parents is obligatory upon the child when he possesses it. They differed regarding the description of the fathers and mothers for whom maintenance is obligatory. Al Shafiʿi said: That is only obligatory for the poor father who is chronically unable. If he has wealth, or is healthy in body and not chronically unable, there is no maintenance for him upon him.
The rest of the jurists said: The maintenance of the parents is obligatory upon the child. I do not know of any one of them who made chronic inability a condition for it, as al Shafiʿi did.” (Maʿalim al Sunan by al Khattabi 12/323.)
Ibn Qudamah (d. 620AH) said in al Mughni: “The father may take from the wealth of his child what he wishes and own it, whether the son needs what he takes or not, whether the child is young or old, with two conditions.
The first is that he must not wrong the son, harm him, or take something to which his need is attached.
The second is that he must not take from the wealth of one child and give it to another. Ahmad explicitly said this in the narration of Ismaʿil ibn Saʿid. That is because he is prevented from specifying some of his children with a gift from his own wealth. It is even more fitting that he is prevented from specifying him with what he took from the wealth of his other child.” (al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 5/395.)
The Second Evidence
Muslim reported in his Sahih from the hadith of Jabir, who said: A man from Banu Udhrah freed a slave of his after his death. That reached the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, so he said: “Do you have wealth other than him?” He said: “No.” He said: “Who will buy him from me?” Nuʿaym ibn Abd Allah al Adawi bought him for 800 dirhams. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ brought the amount and gave it to him. Then he said: “Start with yourself and give charity to it. If something remains, then for your family. If something remains after your family, then for your relatives. If something remains after your relatives, then like this and like this.” He was saying: “Before you, to your right, and to your left.” (Sahih Muslim 997, 2/692.)
Al Nawawi (d. 676AH) said: “In this hadith are benefits. Among them is beginning in spending with those mentioned according to this order. Among them is that when rights and virtues crowd together, the strongest is given priority, then the next strongest.” (Sharh al Nawawi ala Sahih Muslim 7/83.)
The Third Evidence
Al Bukhari reported in his Sahih from the hadith of Abu Hurayrah, who said: The Prophet ﷺ said: “The best charity is what leaves one wealthy. The upper hand is better than the lower hand. Begin with those you support. The woman says: Either feed me or divorce me. The servant says: Feed me and use me. The son says: Feed me, to whom will you leave me?” They said: “O Abu Hurayrah, did you hear this from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ?” He said: “No. This is from the pouch of Abu Hurayrah.” (Sahih al Bukhari 5040, 5/2048.)
Al Bukhari placed this hadith under the heading in the Book of Maintenance: “The obligation of spending upon the family and dependants.”
Al Ayni (d. 855AH) said in Umdat al Qari: “Meaning, this is in explaining the obligation of spending upon the family. He intended the wife here, and he joined dependants to it by joining the general to the specific.” (Umdat al Qari by al Ayni 21/14.)
The Fourth Evidence
Muslim reported in his Sahih from the hadith of Anas ibn Malik, who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “Whoever supports two young girls until they reach maturity will come on the Day of Resurrection, he and I,” and he joined his fingers. (Sahih Muslim 2631, 4/2027.)
Al Nawawi said: “Whoever supports them means he stands over them with expenses, raising, and the like. It is taken from support, which is closeness. From it is: begin with those you support.” (Sharh al Nawawi ala Sahih Muslim 16/180.)
The Fifth Evidence
Abd ibn Humayd reported in his Musnad, Ahmad in al Musnad, Ibn Abi al Dunya in al Iyal, Ibn Hibban in his Sahih, and al Khatib in Tarikh Baghdad through routes from Hammad ibn Zayd, from Thabit, from Anas or someone else, who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “Whoever supports two daughters or three daughters, or two sisters or three sisters, until they separate from him or he dies leaving them behind, I and he will be like these two,” and he pointed with his index and middle fingers. (Musnad Abd ibn Humayd 1378; Musnad Ahmad 12498, 19/480; al Iyal by Ibn Abi al Dunya 110, 1/256; Sahih Ibn Hibban 4471, 2/191; Tarikh Baghdad by al Khatib 11/80, in the biography of Abd al Karim ibn Ibrahim, 5758.)
Its chain is sahih upon the condition of the two Shaykhs, and uncertainty regarding which Companion narrated it does not harm. It came through the route of Thabit and others without uncertainty.
Al Albani authenticated it in al Sahihah. (al Silsilah al Sahihah by al Albani 296, 1/592.)
Imam Ahmad reported in al Musnad, and al Tabarani in al Kabir, from the hadith of Umm Salamah, may Allah be pleased with her, and in it she said: I heard the Messenger of Allah ﷺ saying: “Whoever spends upon two daughters, two sisters, or two female relatives, seeking reward in spending upon them, until Allah enriches them from His bounty, Mighty and Exalted, or suffices them, they will be a shield for him from the Fire.” The wording is that of Ahmad. (Musnad Ahmad 26516, 44/134; al Muʿjam al Kabir by al Tabarani 938, 23/102.)
Al Haythami (d. 807AH) said: “Ahmad and al Tabarani reported it, and in it is Muhammad ibn Humayd al Madani, who is weak.” Al Albani graded it hasan in Sahih al Targhib wa al Tarhib. What came before it supports it. (Majmaʿ al Zawaʾid by al Haythami 8/157; Sahih al Targhib wa al Tarhib by al Albani 1974, 2/412.)
In it is a clear proof for spending upon sisters.
The Sixth Evidence
Al Nasaʾi reported in al Mujtaba, al Daraqutni in al Sunan, Ibn Hibban in his Sahih, al Hakim in al Mustadrak, al Bayhaqi in al Kubra, and al Maqdisi in al Mukhtarah, through routes from Yazid ibn Ziyad ibn Abi al Jaʿd, from Jamiʿ ibn Shaddad, from Tariq al Muharibi, who said: We came to Madinah, and there was the Messenger of Allah ﷺ standing on the pulpit, addressing the people and saying: “The hand of the giver is the upper hand, and begin with those you support: your mother, your father, your sister, your brother, then the closest and then the closest.” It is shortened with al Nasaʾi, and the wording is his. (Sunan al Nasaʾi 2532, 5/61; Sunan al Daraqutni 186, 3/44; Sahih Ibn Hibban 3341, 8/130; al Mustadrak by al Hakim 4219, 2/668; al Sunan al Kubra by al Bayhaqi 10879, 6/20; al Mukhtarah by al Maqdisi 141, 8/127.)
Al Hakim said: This hadith has a sahih chain, and they did not report it.
Al Maqdisi said: Its chain is sahih. Al Albani authenticated it in Sahih Sunan al Nasaʾi. (Sahih Sunan al Nasaʾi by al Albani 2532, 5/61.)
Ijmaʿ
Ibn al Mundhir (d. 318AH) said: “The people of knowledge agreed that the maintenance of poor parents who have no earnings and no wealth is obligatory in the wealth of the child. Everyone from the people of knowledge whom we preserve from agreed that a person must spend upon his small children who have no wealth. Also, a person’s child is part of him, and he is part of his father. Just as he must spend upon himself and his family, he must also spend upon his part and his origin.” (Ibn Qudamah quoted it from Ibn al Mundhir in al Mughni 8/169, and Ibn Muflih in al Mubdiʿ 8/213.)
Conditions For The Obligation Of Maintenance Due To Kinship
The people of knowledge placed conditions for the obligation of spending upon relatives. The details are as follows.
What Is Conditioned For The Obligation Of Spending Upon The Descendant
The direct ancestor must be able to spend upon the descendant. The jurists agreed that for fathers to spend upon their children, the ease of the fathers is not a condition for its obligation. Rather, the condition for its obligation is ability only, even if the father is poor. Its obligation does not fall from the father except if he is unable, such that his own maintenance is upon someone else from the direct ancestors or direct descendants. In this case, the obligation falls from him, and he is considered like one absent, because it is not reasonable to obligate him to spend upon someone else while he himself takes his maintenance from someone else.
The descendant must be poor, because the original rule is that a person carries his own maintenance.
The descendant must be unable to earn. This is realised by the following.
Young age.
Illness that prevents work and earning.
Seeking knowledge that occupies its person from earning.
Femininity, and what is meant by it is the one who does not earn what fulfils her need. (Mukhtasar al Khiraqi 1/113; al Muhadhdhab by al Shirazi 2/165; al Mabsut by al Sarakhsi 5/224; Badaʾiʿ al Sanaʾiʿ by al Kasani 14/30; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 5/395; al Mubdiʿ by Ibn Muflih 8/213; Rawdat al Talibin by al Nawawi 9/83; Nayl al Awtar by al Shawkani 7/129.)
Conditions For The Obligation Of Spending Upon Direct Ancestors
The direct ancestor must be poor and have no wealth.
The descendant must be well off, or able to work and earn.
It should be noted regarding the maintenance that is obligatory for direct ancestors upon their descendants that the inability of the direct ancestors to earn is not conditioned. The maintenance of the father is therefore obligatory upon his son as long as he is in need, even if the father is able to earn. The same applies to the grandfather and those above him, from the father’s side or the mother’s side, because Allah, Glorified is He, forbade harming parents, and forcing them to work while their children are wealthy is harm. Also, the child is from the father’s earning.
What Is Conditioned For The Maintenance Of Side Relatives
Their inability to earn along with their poverty.
The ease of the one upon whom maintenance is obligatory, because maintenance is giving and carrying a burden, and this is only realised when the giver who carries the burden is well off in a way that enables him to carry the burden of spending on someone else.
That the two share the same religion.
That the spender is an heir of the one being spent upon, by fixed share or by agnatic inheritance. (The earlier sources.)
From here it becomes clear that the maintenance of the woman, the mother and those above her, the daughter and those below her, and the sister, when they are in need, is a right upon the wealthy relative. She may demand it and is given it, as a favour and mercy from Allah for her.
Marital Maintenance
Marital maintenance is what is obligatory upon the husband, by Sharia, toward his wife of food, drink, clothing, bedding, service, and what follows that, according to custom within the Sharia principles. (Ahkam al Nafaqah al Zawjiyyah by Muhammad Yaqub 21.)
Its Ruling And The Evidences For Its Obligation
The jurists agreed that the ruling of marital maintenance is obligation, as a ruling and an effect. Therefore, it is obligatory upon the husband even if the wife is wealthy, whether she is Muslim or from the people of the Book, because the cause of its obligation is the valid marriage, and this is realised in all wives. (Badaʾiʿ al Sanaʾiʿ by al Kasani 4/23; al Muhadhdhab by al Shirazi 2/166; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/156; Majmuʿ al Fatawa by Ibn Taymiyyah 26/114; Hawashi al Shirwani by al Shirwani 18/301; al Taj wa al Iklil by al Mawwaq 4/187.)
They used as evidence the Book, the Sunnah, ijmaʿ, and reason.
Evidences From The Book
The First Evidence
His saying, Most High:
لِيُنْفِقْ ذُو سَعَةٍ مِنْ سَعَتِهِ وَمَنْ قُدِرَ عَلَيْهِ رِزْقُهُ فَلْيُنْفِقْ مِمَّا آتَاهُ اللَّهُ
“Let the one of means spend from his means, and whoever has his provision restricted, let him spend from what Allah has given him.” (al Talaq 7)
Al Qurtubi said: “Meaning, let the husband spend upon his wife and his young child according to his means, so he expands upon them if he is expanded upon, and whoever is poor spends according to that.” (al Jamiʿ li Ahkam al Qur’an by al Qurtubi 18/170.)
The Second Evidence
His saying, Most High:
وَعَلَى الْمَوْلُودِ لَهُ رِزْقُهُنَّ وَكِسْوَتُهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ
“Upon the father is their provision and clothing according to what is recognised.” (al Baqarah 233)
Ibn Kathir said: “Upon the father of the child is the maintenance of the mothers and their clothing according to what is recognised, meaning according to what is customary for their likes in their land, without extravagance and without restriction, according to his ability in his ease, middle state, and poverty.” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir 1/284.)
Reflect on the verse beginning with “upon”, which means obligation and firmness. The father is the one to whom the child is born, so the provision and clothing of the mothers are upon him.
The Third Evidence
His saying, Most High:
أَسْكِنُوهُنَّ مِنْ حَيْثُ سَكَنْتُمْ مِنْ وُجْدِكُمْ وَلَا تُضَارُّوهُنَّ لِتُضَيِّقُوا عَلَيْهِنَّ وَإِنْ كُنَّ أُولَاتِ حَمْلٍ فَأَنْفِقُوا عَلَيْهِنَّ حَتَّى يَضَعْنَ حَمْلَهُنَّ
“House them where you live, according to your means, and do not harm them to make things tight upon them. If they are pregnant, then spend upon them until they deliver their pregnancy.” (al Talaq 6)
Shaykh al Saʿdi (d. 1376AH) said: “It has already passed that Allah forbade removing divorced women from the houses, and here He commanded housing them, and He measured housing according to what is recognised, which is the house in which someone like him and someone like her would live, according to the husband’s means and difficulty.”*
This verse indicates that the husband who divorces is required by Sharia to house his divorced wife as long as she is in the waiting period, due to what the ulama recognised, that a command indicates obligation. If housing is obligatory upon the husband for his divorced wife while her waiting period remains, then it is even more fitting that he is required by Sharia to maintain the wife who has not been divorced.
The Fourth Evidence
His saying, Most High:
الرِّجَالُ قَوَّامُونَ عَلَى النِّسَاءِ بِمَا فَضَّلَ اللَّهُ بَعْضَهُمْ عَلَى بَعْضٍ وَبِمَا أَنْفَقُوا مِنْ أَمْوَالِهِمْ
“Men are caretakers over women because of what Allah has given some over others, and because of what they spend from their wealth.” (al Nisa 34)
Al Qurtubi said: “This verse indicates the disciplining of men toward their women. If they preserve the rights of men, men should not deal badly with them. The word caretakers is an intensive expression from standing over something, being entrusted with looking into it, and preserving it with effort. The standing of men over women is upon this limit, meaning that he stands over managing her, disciplining her, keeping her in her house, preventing her from going out, and that she must obey him and accept his command as long as it is not disobedience. The reason for that is superiority and spending.” (al Jamiʿ li Ahkam al Qur’an by al Qurtubi 5/169.)
Allah, Most High, affirmed the qiwamah of the man over the woman and connected that to two matters: superiority and maintenance. (The verification of the meaning of the verse will come on p. 916.)
Evidences From The Sunnah
The Fifth Evidence
Al Bukhari and Muslim reported from the hadith of Aʿishah that Hind bint Utbah said: “O Messenger of Allah, Abu Sufyan is a stingy man, and he does not give me what suffices me and my child, except what I take from him while he does not know.” He said: “Take what suffices you and your child according to what is recognised.” (Sahih al Bukhari 5049, 5/2052; Sahih Muslim 1714, 3/1338.)
Al Nawawi said: “In this hadith are benefits. Among them is the obligation of the wife’s maintenance. Among them is the obligation of the maintenance of poor young children.” Ibn Hajar also said that. (Sharh al Nawawi ala Sahih Muslim 12/7; Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 9/509. More explanation will come under the amount of maintenance on p. 648.)
This hadith is a great foundation in the topic of maintenance. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ gave the wife the right to take maintenance from the husband’s wealth when he falls short in spending upon her, whether the husband accepts or does not accept, and whether he knows or does not know, and he limited that to what is recognised.
The Sixth Evidence
Muslim reported in his Sahih from the long hadith of Jabir describing the Hajj of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. In it, he said in the sermon of Arafah: “Fear Allah regarding women, for you have taken them by the trust of Allah, and you have made their private parts permissible by the word of Allah. You have a right over them that they do not let anyone you dislike step on your beds. If they do that, then strike them with a strike that is not severe. They have over you their provision and their clothing according to what is recognised.” (Sahih Muslim 1218, 2/886.)
There was disagreement over the meaning of “the word of Allah”. Al Nawawi authenticated that what is meant is His saying, Most High:
فَانْكِحُوا مَا طَابَ لَكُمْ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ
“Then marry what pleases you of women.” (al Nisa 3) (Sharh Sahih Muslim by al Nawawi 8/184.)
Al Nawawi said: “In it is the obligation of the wife’s maintenance and clothing, and that is established by ijmaʿ.” (Sharh al Nawawi ala Sahih Muslim 8/184.)
The wording “they have” gives the meaning that the right of maintenance is established through obligation. Glory be to the One who gave His Messenger ﷺ concise speech. In a few words, he set down the principles of marital rights and duties, because of the great meanings they carry.
The Seventh Evidence
Imam Ahmad reported in al Musnad, Ibn Majah in al Sunan, al Nasaʾi in al Kubra, al Tabari in al Tafsir, al Tabarani in al Kabir, and al Bayhaqi in al Kubra, through the route of Hakim ibn Muʿawiyah, from his father Muʿawiyah ibn Haydah, from the Prophet ﷺ, who was asked by a man: “What is the right of the woman over her husband?” He said: “Feed her when you eat, clothe her when you clothe yourself, do not strike the face, do not make ugly speech, and do not abandon except inside the house.” The wording is that of Ahmad. (Musnad Ahmad 20013, 33/217; Sunan Ibn Majah 1850, 1/593; al Sunan al Kubra by al Nasaʾi 9180, 5/375; Tafsir al Tabari 5/66; al Muʿjam al Kabir by al Tabarani 1038, 19/427; al Sunan al Kubra by al Bayhaqi 1547, 7/466.)
Its chain is hasan. In it is Hakim ibn Muʿawiyah. Ibn Hajar said about him: “Truthful.” (al Taqrib by Ibn Hajar 1486, 266.)
Al Albani authenticated it in Sahih Sunan Ibn Majah. It has routes which I did not bring to keep this brief, and by them the hadith rises to authenticity. (Sahih Sunan Ibn Majah by al Albani.)
In the hadith is the direct mention of food and clothing, and it makes them a right from the rights of the woman.
The Eighth Evidence
The hadith of Abu Hurayrah that has already passed, raised to the Prophet ﷺ: “The best charity is what leaves one wealthy. The upper hand is better than the lower hand. Begin with those you support.” (Sahih Al Bukhari 1427.)
Ibn Hajar said: “Begin with those you support means those whose maintenance is obligatory upon you. It is said: A man supported his family when he gave them what they needed of food and clothing. It is a command to give priority to what is obligatory over what is not obligatory.” (Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 9/500.)
Al Bukhari placed it under the heading: “The obligation of spending upon the family and dependants.”
The family in the heading is the wife, and joining the dependants to her is from mentioning the general after the specific. (Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 9/500; Umdat al Qari by al Ayni 21/14.)
Ijmaʿ
Ibn Qudamah said: “The wife’s maintenance is obligatory by the Book, the Sunnah, and ijmaʿ.” Al Nawawi also quoted ijmaʿ in Sharh Sahih Muslim and Rawdat al Talibin, as did Ibn Hajar in al Fath and Ibn al Humam in Sharh Fath al Qadir. (al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/156; Sharh Sahih Muslim by al Nawawi 8/184; Rawdat al Talibin by al Nawawi 9/40; Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 9/500; Sharh Fath al Qadir by Ibn al Humam 4/379.)
Reason
The obligation of marital maintenance may be proven by reason, taken from the Sharia principles whose validity in practice is agreed upon. Among them is: whoever is retained for the right of another, his maintenance becomes obligatory upon him. (Badaʾiʿ al Sanaʾiʿ by al Kasani 4/15; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/156; Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 9/500.)
The majority of ulama, Abu Hanifah (d. 150AH), Malik (d. 179AH), al Shafiʿi in the old view, and Ahmad (d. 241AH), held that maintenance is measured by sufficiency, differing according to the one for whom maintenance is due and its amount. (al Mabsut by al Sarakhsi 5/181; al Bahr al Raʾiq by Ibn Nujaym 4/193; al Istidhkar by Ibn Abd al Barr 6/122; Tafsir al Qurtubi 3/160; Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 9/500; al Iqnaʿ by al Khatib al Shirbini 2/485; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/157; al Kafi fi Fiqh al Hanabilah by Ibn Qudamah 3/361.)
The majority used as evidence the following.
His saying, Most High:
وَعَلَى الْمَوْلُودِ لَهُ رِزْقُهُنَّ وَكِسْوَتُهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ
“Upon the father is their provision and clothing according to what is recognised.” (al Baqarah 233)
Allah, Most High, mentioned provision and clothing generally in His Book and conditioned in that what is recognised. Provision is not something set by a fixed measure. Rather, it is for explaining sufficiency and fulfilment. Claiming a fixed limit is an addition to the text, and adding to it is not permissible in Sharia. If He, Glorified is He, wanted to define maintenance by a fixed amount, He would have explained it, and it is not permissible to delay explanation beyond the time of need. (Ahkam al Nafaqah al Zawjiyyah by Muhammad Yaqub 45.)
The hadith of Aʿishah, may Allah be pleased with her, that has already passed, and his saying ﷺ to Hind: “Take what suffices you and your child according to what is recognised.”
Al Nawawi said: “In this hadith are benefits, among them that maintenance is measured by sufficiency, not by specific dry measures. The madhhab of our companions is that the maintenance of a relative is measured by sufficiency, as is apparent from this hadith, while the maintenance of the wife is measured by dry measures: upon the well off, two mudd each day; upon the poor, one mudd; and upon the middle one, one and a half mudd. This hadith replies to our companions.” (Sharh al Nawawi ala Sahih Muslim 12/7.)
Shaykh al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said: “He commanded her to take sufficiency according to what is recognised, and he did not measure for her any type or amount. If that were measured by Sharia or something else, he would have made clear for her the amount and type, just as he made clear the obligatory shares of zakah and blood money. If what is obligatory is sufficiency according to what is recognised, then it is known that sufficiency varies according to the wife’s condition in her need, and according to the difference of time and place, and according to the husband’s condition in his ease and difficulty.
The clothing of a short, small woman is not like the clothing of a tall, large woman, the clothing of winter is not like the clothing of summer, her food sufficiency is not like his food, and the food of hot lands is not like cold lands. The recognised standard in the lands of dates and barley is not the recognised standard in the lands of fruit and bread.” (Majmuʿ al Fatawa by Ibn Taymiyyah 24/87.)
The Messenger of Allah ﷺ commanded Hind to take her sufficiency from the wealth of her husband without a specific measure. Rather, he restricted that taking to sufficiency and need, and this is not something fixed by amount.
It is not preserved from any Companion at all that he measured maintenance by mudd or by ratl. Rather, the connected practice in every land and age is what has passed, that it is by what is recognised. (Zad al Maʿad by Ibn al Qayyim 5/493.)
What Is Considered In Measuring Maintenance
It has been decided in what has passed that the wife’s maintenance is considered by sufficiency according to the view of the majority. So what is considered in this measuring and consideration?
Is the husband’s condition considered, or the wife’s condition, or both together?
If the spouses are both in ease, agreement among the jurists stands that the obligatory maintenance here is the maintenance of those in ease, and the husband gives the wife what suits their two conditions.
If they are both in hardship, the jurists agree on the obligation of maintenance measured by the maintenance of those in hardship, because due to her hardship the wife is sufficed by what is basic, and that does not lower her standing at all because she is used to that state. The same applies regarding the husband, because due to his hardship he is unable to give anything other than what he can from the maintenance of those in hardship. At the same time, this measurement suits the condition of both spouses, with no excess and no neglect.
The same applies regarding the state of middle condition and balance in both of them, so the maintenance obligatory for the wife is the maintenance of those in the middle.
These three forms are agreed upon among the jurists.
As for when the condition of the spouses differs, such as the husband being well off and the wife being poor, or the reverse, then this state is a matter of disagreement among the jurists. The stronger view is what the Hanbalis, the Malikis in the relied upon view, and the Hanafis in one narration held, that the condition of both spouses together is considered in measuring maintenance, and the maintenance is the maintenance of those in the middle. (al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/157; al Mubdiʿ by Ibn Muflih 8/186; Hashiyat al Dasuqi by al Dasuqi 2/509; al Taj wa al Iklil by al Mawwaq 4/182; Hashiyat Ibn Abidin 3/584.)
They gathered between the evidences of those who considered the condition of the husband, such as His saying, Most High:
لِيُنْفِقْ ذُو سَعَةٍ مِنْ سَعَتِهِ وَمَنْ قُدِرَ عَلَيْهِ رِزْقُهُ فَلْيُنْفِقْ مِمَّا آتَاهُ اللَّهُ
“Let the one of means spend from his means, and whoever has his provision restricted, let him spend from what Allah has given him.” (al Talaq 7)
And the evidences of those who considered the condition of the wife, due to His saying, Most High:
وَعَلَى الْمَوْلُودِ لَهُ رِزْقُهُنَّ وَكِسْوَتُهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ
“Upon the father is their provision and clothing according to what is recognised.” (al Baqarah 233)
What is recognised means sufficiency, and because He, Glorified is He, made provision and clothing equal according to her condition, so maintenance is likewise. This is also due to his saying ﷺ to Hind: “Take what suffices you and your child according to what is recognised.” He considered her sufficiency, not the condition of her husband. (al Baqarah 233; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/157. This has already passed on p. 643 and what follows.)
Ibn Qudamah said: “Our proof is that in what we have mentioned there is gathering between the two evidences, acting upon both texts, and considering both sides, so it is more fitting.” (al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/157.)
Acting upon both texts is more fitting than acting upon one of them and leaving the other.
The obligatory maintenance of the wife from her husband can reach her through two ways.
The first is making available. Through this, the husband takes charge of preparing and providing the three types of marital maintenance: the food she needs, suitable clothing, and the proper Sharia housing. Among its conditions is that it is free of a co wife, because the presence of a co wife itself is harm to her, as is known, and that it is free of his family if she is harmed by their presence. (See the earlier sources.)
If the husband falls short in spending or delays it, then the woman may raise the matter to the judge. When this shortcoming is established before the judge, while the marriage remains between them and there is no factor removing maintenance, the obligation moves to ownership transfer.
The second is ownership transfer. In it, the judge assigns an amount of wealth sufficient for her food, clothing, and housing. She is given that amount every month or every week according to their agreement, or according to the prevailing custom, while considering conditions of high and low prices and differences in places and times. (al Mabsut by al Sarakhsi 5/181; Kashshaf al Qinaʿ by al Buhuti 5/542; Hashiyat Minhaj al Talibin 4/71.)
Medical Care Of The Wife
By returning to the Book and the Sunnah, we find that they obligate food, clothing, and housing, without explicitly mentioning medical care. As for the jurists, they held that the husband is not bound to pay for the medical care of his wife, neither the price of medicine nor the doctor’s fee, with the argument that these costs do not enter into maintenance in Sharia.
Ibn Qudamah (d. 620AH) said: “It is not obligatory upon him, meaning the husband, to buy medicines or pay the doctor’s fee, because that is intended for repairing the body, so it is not binding upon him, just as the tenant is not bound to rebuild what falls from the house or preserve its original structure. The same applies to the fee of the cupper and the one who performs bloodletting.” (al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/161; see also Mughni al Muhtaj by al Khatib al Shirbini 3/431; al Fatawa al Hindiyyah 1/549; Hashiyat al Dasuqi by al Dasuqi 2/511.)
This was answered by saying that measuring medical care upon the costs of repairing a rented property and preserving its structure is a comparison with a clear difference, because the marriage relationship is not a rental relationship. Rather, it is a marriage relationship built upon love and mercy. The woman is not a hired worker for him. Rather, she is the companion of life through the contract of life. Allah, Most High, says:
وَمِنْ آيَاتِهِ أَنْ خَلَقَ لَكُمْ مِنْ أَنْفُسِكُمْ أَزْوَاجًا لِتَسْكُنُوا إِلَيْهَا وَجَعَلَ بَيْنَكُمْ مَوَدَّةً وَرَحْمَةً
“And from His signs is that He created for you, from yourselves, spouses so that you may find calm with them, and He placed between you love and mercy.” (al Rum 21) (al Rum 21; see al Mufassal fi Ahkam al Marʾah wa al Bayt al Muslim by Abd al Karim Zaydan 7/185.)
After what the jurists mentioned, it is not hidden that the stronger view is that medicines and the doctor’s fee are counted among the matters that follow marital maintenance. The proof for that is as follows.
The First Proof
His saying, Most High:
وَعَاشِرُوهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ
“Live with them according to what is recognised.” (al Nisa 19)
There is no doubt that a husband spending on the medical care of his wife is one of the clearest forms of living with her according to what is recognised.
The Second Proof
If the jurists obligated the husband to pay for the maintenance of the servant, then obligating him to pay for her medical care is more fitting, because her need for medical care is greater than her need for service.
The Third Proof
From the signs of love and mercy is that the husband hastens to take care of his wife medically. It is not from love and mercy that the husband leaves her twisting and groaning from illness without helping her by presenting her to the doctor, while she needs that and he is able to do it. (al Mufassal fi Ahkam al Marʾah wa al Bayt al Muslim by Abd al Karim Zaydan 7/185.)
Dr Muhammad Yaqub said: “Some hold that the expenses of nursing are obligatory upon the husband when the matter relates to ordinary illnesses, from which hardly anyone is free. As for surgical operations that require a large amount of money, a distinction must be made. If the husband is poor and she is wealthy, then it is not obligatory upon him. But if he is wealthy and she is poor, then it is obligatory upon him.” (Ahkam al Nafaqah al Zawjiyyah by Muhammad Yaqub 65.)
There is no doubt that the religion whose good reaches all its people would not drop the right of the wife to medical care, while it establishes goodness for the one who is the best of people to his family.
The Wife’s Household Goods
The household goods are everything the house needs of furniture, tools, and other things. (Among the Malikis it is called al shuwar, with the three possible vowelings of the shin. In language, it means the household belongings. The wording household goods is the wording used in the books of the Hanafis. See al Mudawwanah al Kubra 4/218; Tartib al Qamus 2/773.)
The majority of the people of knowledge from the Hanafis, Shafiʿis, and Hanbalis held that the husband is the one responsible for preparing the wife’s household goods, including bedding, covering, belongings, and necessary items.
She is not bound to prepare any of that from her private wealth, neither from the marriage gift she received nor from other wealth she owns, because her marriage gift is a pure right belonging to her, which she became entitled to by the marriage contract. She is therefore not forced to spend anything from it on her household goods. (Mukhtasar Ikhtilaf al Ulama by al Tahawi 2/365; Badaʾiʿ al Sanaʾiʿ by al Kasani 2/309; al Bahr al Raʾiq by Ibn Nujaym 3/200; Iʿanat al Talibin by al Dimyati 3/349; Hashiyat al Bujayrami 3/408; al Furuʿ by Ibn Muflih 5/243.)
Ibn Hazm (d. 456AH) said: “It is not permissible for the woman to be forced to prepare anything at all for him, neither from the dowry that he gave her, nor from anything else, nor from the rest of her wealth. The whole dowry belongs to her. She does with all of it whatever she wishes. The husband has no permission in that and no objection. This is the saying of Abu Hanifah (d. 150AH), al Shafiʿi (d. 204AH), Abu Sulayman, and others.” (al Muhalla by Ibn Hazm 9/507.)
Then Ibn Hazm began replying to the Malikis, who held that the woman must prepare for the man what people usually prepare in their houses from the dowry she received, and that she is not bound to spend on her household goods more than the dowry she received, unless that was conditioned upon her or custom required it. Its weakness is not hidden. (al Talqin by al Qadi Abd al Wahhab 1/290; Mawahib al Jalil by al Hattab 3/523.)
The Proof Of The Majority
The First Proof
His saying, Most High:
وَآتَيْتُمْ إِحْدَاهُنَّ قِنْطَارًا فَلَا تَأْخُذُوا مِنْهُ شَيْئًا
“And you have given one of them a great amount, then do not take anything from it.” (al Nisa 20)
The marriage gift is a pure right of the wife once it is named, even if it is great. It is not lawful for the husband to take anything from it except with her willing consent. The household goods are things in which benefits are shared, so they are upon the husband, not upon her.
The Second Proof
His saying, Most High:
وَآتُوا النِّسَاءَ صَدُقَاتِهِنَّ نِحْلَةً فَإِنْ طِبْنَ لَكُمْ عَنْ شَيْءٍ مِنْهُ نَفْسًا فَكُلُوهُ هَنِيئًا مَرِيئًا
“Give the women their marriage gifts willingly. But if they willingly give up to you anything from it, then eat it in ease and comfort.” (al Nisa 4)
Allah made it obligatory upon men to give women their marriage gifts as a free gift, and He did not make anything from it permissible for men except by the willing consent of the women. (al Muhalla by Ibn Hazm 9/507.)
Since the stronger view is that the wife is not forced and not bound to prepare her house from her marriage gift or from wealth other than her marriage gift, the correct view is that she is not prevented from contributing with her wealth to buy her household goods and the things the house needs. This is from her as a voluntary act and pure choice, not by way of binding obligation. These things remain owned by her. The husband only benefits from them and uses them with the wife’s permission and pleasure, whether that is clearly said or indicated by circumstance. (al Mufassal fi Ahkam al Marʾah wa al Bayt al Muslim by Abd al Karim Zaydan 7/147.)
If the husband divorces his wife and they disagree over the household goods or the property and things found in the house, then the accepted word is the husband’s word, because by divorce she became a stranger, so her hand was removed, and she joined the rest of strangers.
However, if the wife brings proof for what she claims of ownership of the things found in the house, then the ruling is for her according to her proof, based on the general rules of proof. (Badaʾiʿ al Sanaʾiʿ by al Kasani 2/309.)
The Husband Refusing To Spend
The Sharia principles have ruled that the husband must spend upon his wife, and that it is not lawful for him to turn away from it in any circumstance. However, some husbands who have no share of goodness and no conscience to restrain them are overtaken by their desires, and their lower selves that command evil make it seem easy for them to fall short in this Sharia duty because of weakness in religion and lack of faith.
The noble Sharia did not leave this action without placing a firm solution for it. If the husband refuses to spend upon his wife, the matter will not be free of one of two states: either he is well off or he is poor. If he is well off, then his state will not be free of one of two matters.
The First State
He has visible, known wealth. If the wife is able to access his wealth, she may take from it the amount that suffices her without his permission, because the Prophet ﷺ said to Hind, the wife of Abu Sufyan, when she complained to him of her husband’s stinginess: “Take what suffices you and your child according to what is recognised.” Al Bukhari placed it in the Book of Maintenance under the heading: “If the man does not spend, then the woman may take without his knowledge what suffices her and her child according to what is recognised.” (Sahih al Bukhari 5049, 5/2052.)
Ibn Hajar (d. 852AH) said: “The author took this heading from the hadith of the chapter by way of greater priority, because it indicates the permissibility of taking to complete the maintenance, so it also indicates the permissibility of taking all the maintenance when he refuses.” (Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 9/508.)
If the wife is not able to take from him, she may raise her matter to the judge and ask for maintenance to be assigned, or for him to be imprisoned until he spends. If he spends, that is what is required. If he refuses, he is imprisoned. If he remains patient upon imprisonment, the ruler takes the maintenance from his wealth if it is from the same type as maintenance. If it is from other than its type, such as goods and real estate, then the majority hold that the wealth is sold so that maintenance may be paid to the wife from it according to her sufficiency, because the Prophet ﷺ said to Hind: “Take what suffices you.” He ﷺ did not distinguish between one kind of wealth and another.
Al Khattabi (d. 388AH) said: From the hadith of Hind is taken the permissibility of taking the same type and other than the same type. (Aʿlam al Hadith by al Khattabi 2/48.)
The Second State
The husband is poor. This means a person who is unable and cannot fulfil for his wife what Allah made obligatory for her of Sharia maintenance in any way. (Rawdat al Talibin by al Nawawi 9/175; Kashshaf al Qinaʿ by al Buhuti 5/535; Hashiyat Ibn Abidin 3/575.)
If the husband claims poverty concerning his wife’s maintenance, and he has no visible wealth, and his wife believes his claim, then his poverty is ruled by agreement, because there is nothing opposing his claim. If his wife declares his claim false, then the Shafiʿis and Hanbalis held that the accepted word is the wife’s word if wealth was known for the husband, and she is asked to swear an oath to strengthen her claim, because the original state is that his wealth and ease remain. If wealth was not known for the husband, then the accepted word is the husband’s word with his oath, because he is denying, and the original state is absence of wealth, and most of the time a thing remains upon its original state. (al Iqnaʿ by al Khatib al Shirbini 2/488; Hashiyat al Bujayrami 4/116; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/167; al Mubdiʿ by Ibn Muflih 8/186.)
If the husband becomes too poor to spend upon his wife after having been well off, is separation made between them because of poverty? There are two views in the matter.
The First View
The Malikis, Shafiʿis, Hanbalis, and this is also the view of the Dhahiriyyah (literalists), and al Sanʿani (d. 1182AH) preferred it in Subul al Salam, held that if the wife requests separation between her and her husband who is too poor to spend upon her, her request is answered, and the judge, or whoever stands in his place, separates between them. (Tafsir al Qurtubi 5/169; Mawahib al Jalil by al Hattab 3/489; Rawdat al Talibin by al Nawawi 9/75; Hawashi al Shirwani 8/336; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/167; al Mubdiʿ by Ibn Muflih 8/208; al Muhalla by Ibn Hazm 9/508; Subul al Salam by al Sanʿani 3/226.)
They used the following as evidence.
The First Proof
His saying, Most High:
الرِّجَالُ قَوَّامُونَ عَلَى النِّسَاءِ بِمَا فَضَّلَ اللَّهُ بَعْضَهُمْ عَلَى بَعْضٍ وَبِمَا أَنْفَقُوا مِنْ أَمْوَالِهِمْ
“Men are caretakers over women because of what Allah has given some over others, and because of what they spend from their wealth.” (al Nisa 34)
The Lord, Mighty and Exalted, affirmed the caretaking of men over women because of two matters.
The first is His saying:
بِمَا فَضَّلَ اللَّهُ بَعْضَهُمْ عَلَى بَعْضٍ
“Because of what Allah has given some over others.”
The second is His saying:
وَبِمَا أَنْفَقُوا مِنْ أَمْوَالِهِمْ
“And because of what they spend from their wealth.”
The letter “baʾ” here may be for causation, so maintenance is from the causes of qiwamah, because the removal of the cause leads to the removal of what comes from it. It is also valid that the “baʾ” is for exchange, so qiwamah is exchanged with spending. If spending from the man is absent, then the woman has the right to request separation from her husband who is too poor to spend.
Al Qurtubi (d. 671AH) said: “His saying, ‘and because of what they spend from their wealth,’ means that whoever is unable to provide her maintenance is not a caretaker over her. If he is not a caretaker over her, then she has the right to dissolve the contract, because the intended aim for which marriage was legislated has been removed. In it, from this way, is a clear proof for the establishment of dissolving the marriage due to poverty in maintenance and clothing.” (al Jamiʿ li Ahkam al Qur’an by al Qurtubi 5/169.)
The Second Proof
His saying, Most High:
فَإِمْسَاكٌ بِمَعْرُوفٍ أَوْ تَسْرِيحٌ بِإِحْسَانٍ
“Then keeping with what is recognised or releasing with excellence.” (al Baqarah 228) (al Baqarah 228.)
Al Jassas (d. 370AH) said: “Some people use as evidence His saying, ‘Then keeping with what is recognised or releasing with excellence,’ for obligating separation between the poor man who is unable to provide maintenance and his wife, because Allah, Most High, only gave him a choice between one of two things: either keeping with what is recognised or releasing with excellence. Leaving maintenance is not what is recognised. So whenever he is unable to do it, releasing becomes binding upon him, and the ruler separates between them.” (Ahkam al Qur’an by al Jassas 2/98.)
The Third Proof
His saying, Most High:
فَأَمْسِكُوهُنَّ بِمَعْرُوفٍ أَوْ سَرِّحُوهُنَّ بِمَعْرُوفٍ وَلَا تُمْسِكُوهُنَّ ضِرَارًا لِتَعْتَدُوا
“Keep them according to what is recognised or release them according to what is recognised, and do not keep them to cause harm and transgress.” (al Baqarah 230) (al Baqarah 230.)
The poor husband, when he keeps his wife while being unable to spend upon her, is causing harm and transgressing. It is upon the judge to remove this harm and transgression by separating between them. (Ahkam al Qur’an by al Jassas 2/99.)
This proof and the one before it were answered by saying that the two verses are not suitable as proof for the claim, because there is no indication in them of separating between the spouses due to poverty. Harm and transgression only exist when the person has involvement and choice in them. Poverty is not contrary to keeping with what is recognised, because excellence in living together relates to what comes under the servant’s ability and choice. (Ahkam al Qur’an by al Jassas 2/99.)
The Fourth Proof
What al Bukhari and Muslim reported from the hadith of Abu Hurayrah, raised to the Prophet ﷺ: “The best charity is what leaves one wealthy. The upper hand is better than the lower hand. Begin with those you support.” The woman says: “Either feed me or divorce me.” The servant says: “Feed me and use me.” The son says: “Feed me. To whom will you leave me?” They said: “O Abu Hurayrah, did you hear this from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ?” He said: “No. This is from the pouch of Abu Hurayrah.”*
The last part has been reported as raised to the Prophet ﷺ by Ahmad in al Musnad and al Nasaʾi in al Kubra. The editors of al Musnad spoke at length on weakening the raised narration, so return to it for more. (Musnad Ahmad 10818, 16/479; al Sunan al Kubra by al Nasaʾi 9211, 5/385.)
The point of evidence is: “Either feed me or divorce me.” So the woman was given a right to request separation between her and her husband when he does not spend upon her.
This was answered by saying that the saying of Abu Hurayrah does not indicate forcing the poor husband to divorce his wife. How could this be, when it is general speech that is not specific to the poor husband only? Rather, it includes the well off husband as well. There is no disagreement that if the well off husband does not spend upon his wife, he is not forced to separate. Rather, he is imprisoned because of not spending upon her. (Fath al Qadir by Ibn al Humam 4/201.)
The Fifth Proof
What al Shafiʿi reported in al Umm, and al Bayhaqi from him in al Kubra, through the route of Muslim ibn Khalid, from Ubayd Allah ibn Umar, from Nafiʿ, from Ibn Umar, that Umar ibn al Khattab wrote to the commanders of the armies regarding men who had been absent from their wives, commanding them either to spend or divorce. If they divorced, they were to send the maintenance for the time they had held them. Al Albani authenticated it in al Irwaʾ. Its men are trustworthy, the men of the two Shaykhs, except Muslim ibn Khalid al Zanji. Ibn Hajar said: “A jurist, truthful, with many mistakes.” However, he was followed upon it. It came in al Ilal of Ibn Abi Hatim: “My father heard the mention of the hadith of Hammad, from Ubayd Allah ibn Umar…” My father said: “We take this concerning past maintenance.” So this chain rises to hasan. (al Umm by al Shafiʿi 5/91; al Sunan al Kubra by al Bayhaqi 15484, 7/469; Irwaʾ al Ghalil by al Albani 2159, 7/2281; al Taqrib by Ibn Hajar 6669, 938; al Ilal by Ibn Abi Hatim 1/406.)
The use of this proof was answered by saying that Umar sent this concerning the well off, not the poor.
The Sixth Proof
What al Shafiʿi reported in al Umm, Abd al Razzaq in al Musannaf, Saʿid ibn Mansur in his Sunan, al Daraqutni in al Sunan, and al Bayhaqi in al Kubra, through routes from Abu al Zinad, who said: I asked Saʿid ibn al Musayyib about the man who does not find what he can spend upon his wife. He said: “They are separated.” Abu al Zinad said: I said: “Is this Sunnah?” Saʿid said: “Sunnah.” Al Shafiʿi said: “What resembles the saying of Saʿid, ‘Sunnah,’ is that it is the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.” (al Umm by al Shafiʿi 5/107; Musannaf Abd al Razzaq 12357, 7/96; Sunan Saʿid ibn Mansur 2022, 2/82; Sunan al Daraqutni 193, 3/297; al Sunan al Kubra by al Bayhaqi 15485, 7/469.)
Ibn al Qayyim (d. 751AH) said: Its highest level is that it is from the disconnected reports of Saʿid ibn al Musayyib. (Zad al Maʿad by Ibn al Qayyim 5/512.)
Ibn Hazm said: “Two sayings have authentically come from Saʿid ibn al Musayyib, as we have brought. One of them is: he is forced to separate from her. The other is: they are not separated. They are different. Which of the two is the Sunnah? Whichever of them is the Sunnah, the other is contrary to the Sunnah without doubt. Saʿid did not say that it is the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. Even if he had said it, it would be disconnected and not a proof. So how then, when he undoubtedly meant that it is the Sunnah of someone below him ﷺ?” (al Muhalla by Ibn Hazm 10/95.)
The Seventh Proof
They measured poverty in maintenance upon castration and impotence. They said: If dissolution is established due to inability to have relations, then the harm resulting from lack of relations is less than the harm that occurs from lack of spending, because the harm from lack of relations usually does not go beyond losing a pleasure without which the body can stand. As for the harm resulting from lack of spending, it may lead to the destruction of the body. (al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/163.)
This was answered by saying that it is a comparison with a difference, because intimacy and enjoyment do not become a debt upon the husband for his wife when they do not occur, unlike marital maintenance, which becomes a debt owed to her by him and does not fall except by payment or release.
Also, castration and impotence are defects whose removal is not expected, unlike poverty, because Allah may make ease after difficulty.
Also, enjoyment and having children are intended from marriage originally, unlike wealth, because it is not intended for itself in marriage. Rather, it is a following matter and one of its necessities.
The Second View
The Hanafis and the literalists held that the spouses are not separated due to the husband’s poverty in his wife’s maintenance. Rather, the wife is commanded to borrow against him after maintenance has been assigned for her against him, and she waits until he becomes able. (Fath al Qadir by Ibn al Humam 4/201; Hashiyat Ibn Abidin 3/591; al Muhalla by Ibn Hazm 10/92.)
They used the following as evidence.
The First Proof
His saying, Most High:
وَإِنْ كَانَ ذُو عُسْرَةٍ فَنَظِرَةٌ إِلَى مَيْسَرَةٍ
“And if he is in hardship, then delay until ease.” (al Baqarah 280) (al Baqarah 280.)
If the husband does not give maintenance to his wife due to his poverty, it becomes a debt upon him in his liability, and the rulings of debts apply to it. Allah, Glorified is He, made clear that if the debtor becomes poor and unable to pay the debts upon him, he is given delay until he becomes able. If there was anything connected to inability to pay and fulfil other than waiting until ease, the Noble Qur’an would have made it clear. The woman is commanded by the text to give delay. (al Mabsut by al Sarakhsi 5/190; Sharh Fath al Qadir by Ibn al Humam 4/291; Zad al Maʿad by Ibn al Qayyim 5/516.)
This use of evidence was answered by saying that the verse is specific to debts other than maintenance. What indicates that is the place and cause of the verse, so it is not suitable as proof for the claim.
The Second Proof
His saying, Most High:
لِيُنْفِقْ ذُو سَعَةٍ مِنْ سَعَتِهِ وَمَنْ قُدِرَ عَلَيْهِ رِزْقُهُ فَلْيُنْفِقْ مِمَّا آتَاهُ اللَّهُ لَا يُكَلِّفُ اللَّهُ نَفْسًا إِلَّا مَا آتَاهَا سَيَجْعَلُ اللَّهُ بَعْدَ عُسْرٍ يُسْرًا
“Let the one of means spend from his means, and whoever has his provision restricted, let him spend from what Allah has given him. Allah does not burden any being except with what He has given it. Allah will make, after hardship, ease.” (al Talaq 7) (al Talaq 7.)
The point of evidence from the verse is that when the man is poor and does not possess what enables him to obtain maintenance, he is not obliged to overburden himself for spending, because Allah, Glorified is He, did not burden him with what is beyond his ability. If he is poor in his wife’s maintenance, he does not sin, because maintenance is not obligatory upon him during his poverty. So his poverty in what is not obligatory upon him cannot be a cause for separation between him and his wife.
This use of evidence was answered by saying that the verse does not indicate that spouses are not separated because of poverty. This is because the fact that the poor man is not burdened with spending upon his wife does not require that separation is impermissible, because it was legislated to remove harm from the woman and free her from that husband who cannot spend upon her. (Ahkam al Nafaqah al Zawjiyyah by Muhammad Yaqub 93.)
The Third Proof
What Muslim reported in his Sahih from the hadith of Abu al Zubayr, from Jabir, who said: “Abu Bakr entered seeking permission to come in upon the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, and he found the people sitting at his door, while none of them had been given permission. Abu Bakr was given permission, so he entered.
Then Umar came and sought permission, so he was given permission. He found the Prophet ﷺ sitting, with his wives around him, silent and gloomy. Umar said: ‘I will say something to make the Prophet ﷺ laugh.’ He said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, if only you had seen the daughter of Kharijah asking me for maintenance. I stood up and struck her neck.’
The Messenger of Allah ﷺ laughed and said: ‘They are around me, as you see, asking me for maintenance.’ Abu Bakr stood up to Aʿishah and struck her neck, and Umar stood up to Hafsah and struck her neck, both saying: ‘Do you ask the Messenger of Allah ﷺ for what he does not have?’
They said: ‘By Allah, we will never ask the Messenger of Allah ﷺ for anything that he does not have.’ Then he separated from them for a month, or twenty nine days. Then this verse was sent down upon him: ‘O Prophet, say to your wives,’ until He reached, ‘for the women of good among you is a great reward.'” The hadith continues. (Sahih Muslim 1478, 2/1103.)
The point of evidence is that Abu Bakr and Umar, may Allah be pleased with them, stood and struck their two daughters in the presence of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ when they asked him for maintenance that he did not have. It is impossible that they would strike two women asking for a right, while the Messenger of Allah ﷺ approved them upon that. This proves that they had no right in what they asked for of maintenance in the state of poverty.
If their request for it was invalid, then how can the woman be enabled to dissolve the marriage due to absence of what she has no right to request and what is not lawful for her? Allah, Glorified is He, commanded the creditor to give the poor person delay until ease. (Zad al Maʿad by Ibn al Qayyim 5/519.)
This use of evidence was answered by saying that rebuking the request for what the Messenger ﷺ did not have does not indicate that dissolution of the marriage is impermissible due to the husband’s poverty in his wife’s maintenance. As for the Messenger of Allah ﷺ approving Abu Bakr and Umar in striking them, then that was because he knew that fathers may discipline children if they do what is not appropriate. It is known that he ﷺ did not fall short in what was obligatory upon him of spending, so perhaps they requested more than that. It has not been narrated that the wives of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ requested dissolution and were not answered. (Subul al Salam by al Sanʿani 3/225.)
How could that possibility be said, when the Messenger ﷺ gave them the choice after that, as came in His saying:
يَاأَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُلْ لِأَزْوَاجِكَ إِنْ كُنْتُنَّ تُرِدْنَ الْحَيَاةَ الدُّنْيَا وَزِينَتَهَا فَتَعَالَيْنَ أُمَتِّعْكُنَّ وَأُسَرِّحْكُنَّ سَرَاحًا جَمِيلًا
“O Prophet, say to your wives: If you want the life of this world and its adornment, then come, I will provide for you and release you with a good release.” (al Ahzab 28)
They chose him, may the salah and salam of Allah be upon him.
The Fourth Proof
Among the Companions there were always poor and well off people, and their poor were many times more than their well off. The Prophet ﷺ never enabled even one woman to dissolve the marriage because of the poverty of her husband, nor did he inform her that dissolution was a right belonging to her, so if she wished she could be patient and if she wished she could dissolve it. He was legislating rulings from Allah, Most High, by His command. Suppose the wives left their right, was there not even one woman among them who would demand her right? (Zad al Maʿad by Ibn al Qayyim 5/519.)
Imam Malik (d. 179AH) and others debated over this. He said: “People today are not like that. She only married him hoping.” (al Muhalla by Ibn Hazm 10/97.)
The meaning of his speech is that the women of the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, wanted Allah and the final abode, and their aim was not worldly life. Therefore, they did not mind the poverty of their husbands. As for the women of today, they only marry hoping for the worldly life, maintenance, and clothing of husbands. This recognised custom became like something conditioned in the contract, and the custom of the Companions and their women was like something conditioned in the contract. The customary condition in the foundation of Malik’s madhhab is like the spoken condition. Ibn al Qayyim said this. (Zad al Maʿad by Ibn al Qayyim 5/517.)
The Fifth Proof
The Sharia principle states that the lighter of two harms and the lesser of two evils is to be taken when there is no way out except by falling into one of them. Ruling with marital separation cancels the husband’s right completely. Binding the wife to wait for her husband until he becomes able, and to borrow against him, is only delaying her right for some time. Delaying the right is lighter than cancelling it, so that must be followed.
Ibn al Qayyim said: “Allah has made poverty and wealth two mounts for the servants. A man may be poor at one time and wealthy at another. If every man who became poor had his wife dissolved from him, the trial would become general, evil would become severe, the marriages of most people would be dissolved, and separation would be in the hands of most women. Who has not been struck by difficulty and lacked maintenance at times?” (Zad al Maʿad by Ibn al Qayyim 5/520.)
The Sixth Proof
If enjoyment becomes impossible from the woman because of a long lasting sickness, and she becomes unable to have relations, then…
The Maintenance Of The Wife Of The Absent Husband
If the husband is absent and leaves his wife without maintenance, whether his absence is because he left his town for the length of travel, and the wife goes back to the judge so that he may assign maintenance for her against him, and she establishes proof for that by swearing that her absent husband did not give her maintenance, that she was not disobedient, and that she was not divorced with her waiting period completed, then if the husband has visible wealth, the judge rules maintenance for her and executes the ruling in his visible wealth, whether it is from the same type as maintenance, such as food and clothing, or not from its type, such as real estate and other things.
If he has no visible wealth, he rules maintenance against him and she borrows against him. The majority of jurists, Malik, al Shafiʿi, and Ahmad, held this, that the absent is like the present concerning the rulings of maintenance. (al Taj wa al Iklil by al Mawwaq 4/201; Hashiyat al Dasuqi by al Dasuqi 2/246; Fatawa Ibn al Salah 2/455; Iʿanat al Talibin by al Dimyati 4/84; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/182; Kashshaf al Qinaʿ by al Buhuti 5/470.)
They used as evidence what al Bukhari and Muslim reported from the hadith of Aʿishah, who said: Hind bint Utbah came and said: “O Messenger of Allah, Abu Sufyan is a very withholding man. Is there any sin upon me if I feed our children from what belongs to him?” He said: “No, except according to what is recognised.”
Al Bukhari placed it in the Book of Maintenance under the heading: “The maintenance of the woman when her husband is absent from her, and the maintenance of the child.” (Sahih al Bukhari 5044, 5/2051.)
They also used as evidence what al Shafiʿi reported in al Umm through the route of Ibn Umar, that Umar ibn al Khattab wrote to the commanders of the armies regarding men who had been absent from their wives, commanding them either to spend or divorce. If they divorced, they were to send the maintenance for the period they had held them. Al Albani authenticated it in al Irwaʾ.
The Maintenance Of The Sick Wife
If the wife is sick, she falls into two categories.
The first is that she becomes sick before being taken to her husband, with an illness that does not enable her to move to the husband’s home. In this state, she has no maintenance, because the retaining that obligates maintenance has not been realised, the retaining through which the rulings of marriage are fulfilled, such as enjoyment, service, and companionship.
The second is that she is taken to her husband while healthy, then becomes sick after that while with him, with an illness that prevents her from giving herself to her husband for him to enjoy her. In this case, maintenance is obligatory, because the cause of maintenance has already occurred and been realised, and illness is something temporary. It is known in the Sharia that maintenance is from the obligatory rights of the wife over the husband, as a continuous obligation so long as marital life remains.
Continuous rights do not fall because of temporary matters.
Also, good living together requires each spouse to carry the other in illness and weakness. What has become impossible for him of enjoyment is due to a cause in which no negligence is attributed to the woman. This is the view of the Hanafis, Shafiʿis, and Hanbalis. (Badaʾiʿ al Sanaʾiʿ by al Kasani 4/19; al Bahr al Raʾiq by Ibn Nujaym 4/197; al Majmuʿ Sharh al Muhadhdhab by al Nawawi 17/77; Mughni al Muhtaj by al Khatib al Shirbini 3/437; Kashshaf al Qinaʿ by al Buhuti 3/305; Sharh Muntaha al Iradat by al Buhuti 3/353.)
The Maintenance Of Women In The Waiting Period After Divorce
It is good, before establishing the right of the divorced woman in the waiting period to maintenance, to point out some definitions.
Divorce is the ending of the marriage tie immediately or eventually, with a wording derived from the wording of divorce or what carries its meaning.
It is divorce in which the husband owns the right to take back his wife, even if she is not pleased, as long as she is in the waiting period, without needing a new marriage gift or a new contract.
This is the divorce in which the husband does not own the right to take back his wife except with her permission and with a new contract and marriage gift, and it is less than three divorces.
The Woman Finally Divorced With Major Separation
She is the woman whose husband has completed her divorce, so she no longer becomes lawful for him until she marries another husband. Her divorces are three. (al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 7/268, 272, 301; al Mutliʿ by Muhammad ibn Abi al Fath 349.)
The people of knowledge agreed concerning the maintenance of women in waiting periods upon the following.
The First Matter
Maintenance is obligatory for the woman in revocable divorce. Ibn Abd al Barr said: “There is no disagreement among the ulama of the ummah that those women over whom their husbands have the right of return have maintenance and all other expenses upon their husbands, whether they are pregnant or not pregnant, because they are in the ruling of wives concerning maintenance, housing, and inheritance as long as they are in the waiting period.” (al Istidhkar by Ibn Abd al Barr 6/165.)
The woman in revocable divorce has maintenance and housing, because revocable divorce is considered an extension of marriage, due to His saying, Most High:
لَا تُخْرِجُوهُنَّ مِنْ بُيُوتِهِنَّ وَلَا يَخْرُجْنَ إِلَّا أَنْ يَأْتِينَ بِفَاحِشَةٍ مُبَيِّنَةٍ وَتِلْكَ حُدُودُ اللَّهِ وَمَنْ يَتَعَدَّ حُدُودَ اللَّهِ فَقَدْ ظَلَمَ نَفْسَهُ لَا تَدْرِي لَعَلَّ اللَّهَ يُحْدِثُ بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ أَمْرًا
“Do not remove them from their houses, and they should not leave, unless they commit a clear indecency. These are the limits of Allah, and whoever transgresses the limits of Allah has wronged himself. You do not know. Perhaps Allah will bring about, after that, a matter.” (al Talaq 1) (al Talaq 1.)
Ibn Kathir (d. 774AH) said: “His saying, ‘Do not remove them from their houses, and they should not leave,’ means during the waiting period she has the right of housing upon the husband as long as she is in the waiting period from him. The man does not have the right to remove her, and it is also not permissible for her to leave, because she is also connected to the husband’s right. His saying, ‘These are the limits of Allah,’ means His laws and His prohibitions.
His saying, ‘and whoever transgresses the limits of Allah,’ means he leaves them and goes beyond them to other than them and does not obey them, ‘has wronged himself,’ meaning by doing that. His saying, ‘You do not know. Perhaps Allah will bring about, after that, a matter,’ means: We only kept the divorced woman in the husband’s home during the waiting period so that perhaps the husband may regret divorcing her, and Allah, Most High, creates in his heart the will to take her back, so that becomes easier and simpler.” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir 4/379.)
Reflect on the verse and you will stand upon the following.
First: His saying, “Do not remove them from their houses, and they should not leave,” added the houses to the wives, though they belong to the husbands, to emphasise the prohibition and to explain the completeness of their entitlement to live in them, as if they were their property.
Second: His saying, Glorified is He, after His prohibitions, “These,” points to the rulings mentioned. What is in the demonstrative word of distance, despite the closeness of what is pointed to, gives notice of the high rank of those rulings and their distant station.
Third: His saying, “These are the limits of Allah, and whoever transgresses the limits of Allah,” made the limits of Allah appear a second time, even though the place is one of pronoun use. Making the noun appear where a pronoun would usually be used gives greatness to the matter of transgression and points to the cause of the ruling. (Tafsir Abi al Suʿud 9/261.)
They also used as evidence what Ahmad reported in al Musnad, al Nasaʾi in al Mujtaba, and al Tabarani in al Awsat and al Kabir, through routes from al Shaʿbi, from Fatimah bint Qays, who said: I came to the Prophet ﷺ and said: “I am the daughter of the family of Khalid, and my husband, so and so, sent me my divorce.
I asked his family for maintenance and housing, but they refused me.” They said: “O Messenger of Allah, he sent her three divorces.” She said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “Maintenance and housing are only for the woman when her husband has the right of return over her.” The wording is that of al Nasaʾi. Al Albani authenticated it. (Musnad Ahmad 27100, 45/53; Sunan al Nasaʾi 3403, 6/144; al Muʿjam al Awsat by al Tabarani 7109, 7/144; al Muʿjam al Kabir by al Tabarani 935, 24/378; Sahih Sunan al Nasaʾi by al Albani 3403.)
The Third Matter
The pregnant woman who is divorced with final separation has maintenance. Ibn Abd al Barr said: “If the woman finally divorced is pregnant, then she has maintenance by the ijmaʿ of the ulama.” (al Istidhkar by Ibn Abd al Barr 18/69.)
This is due to His saying, Most High:
وَإِنْ كُنَّ أُولَاتِ حَمْلٍ فَأَنْفِقُوا عَلَيْهِنَّ حَتَّى يَضَعْنَ حَمْلَهُنَّ
“If they are pregnant, then spend upon them until they deliver their pregnancy.” (al Talaq 6) (al Talaq 6.)
Al Razi (d. 606AH) said: “This is an explanation of the ruling of the divorced woman with final separation, because the woman in revocable divorce deserves maintenance even if she is not pregnant. If she is divorced three times or divorced through return of compensation, then she has no maintenance unless she is pregnant.” (al Tafsir al Kabir by al Razi 30/33.)
So the maintenance is for her because of the pregnancy.
As for the finally divorced woman who is not pregnant, and likewise the woman divorced through return of compensation, because the majority of jurists count this as final divorce, she has no maintenance and no housing according to the strongest view from the statements of the people of knowledge.
This was the famous report from Ahmad, and the view of Abu Thawr and Abu Dawud. Shaykh al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728AH) preferred this view, as did his student Ibn al Qayyim. (al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 7/249; Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 9/400; Zad al Maʿad by Ibn al Qayyim 5/198; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/132; al Mubdiʿ by Ibn Muflih 8/192; Ibn Qudamah attributed it to Abu Thawr in al Mughni 8/132, and Ibn Hajar in Fath al Bari 9/390; al Muhalla by Ibn Hazm 10/291; Mukhtasar Ikhtilaf al Ulama by al Tahawi 1/149; Majmuʿ al Fatawa by Ibn Taymiyyah 33/33; Zad al Maʿad by Ibn al Qayyim 4/522.)
They used as evidence what Muslim reported in his Sahih through the route of Abu Salamah ibn Abd al Rahman, from Fatimah bint Qays, that Abu Amr ibn Hafs divorced her finally while he was absent. His agent sent barley to her, and she disliked it.
He said: “By Allah, you have nothing upon us.” She came to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and mentioned that to him. He said: “You have no maintenance upon him.” He ordered her to observe her waiting period in the house of Umm Sharik, then he said: “That is a woman whom my Companions visit.
Observe your waiting period with Ibn Umm Maktum, for he is a blind man. You may remove your clothes. When you become lawful, inform me.” She said: When I became lawful, I mentioned to him that Muʿawiyah ibn Abi Sufyan and Abu Jahm had proposed to me. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “As for Abu Jahm, he does not put his stick down from his shoulder. As for Muʿawiyah, he is poor and has no wealth. Marry Usamah ibn Zayd.” I disliked him. Then he said: “Marry Usamah.” So I married him, and Allah placed good in him, and I was happy. (Sahih Muslim 1480, 2/1114.)
Muslim also reported through the route of Abu Salamah, from Fatimah bint Qays, that her husband divorced her in the time of the Prophet ﷺ, and he gave her a small amount of maintenance. When she saw that, she said: “By Allah, I will surely inform the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. If I have maintenance, I will take what benefits me, and if I have no maintenance, I will not take anything from him.” She said: I mentioned that to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. He said: “You have no maintenance and no housing.” (Sahih Muslim 1480, 2/1114.)
It occurred in the narration of the group except al Bukhari that her husband divorced her three times, so the Messenger of Allah ﷺ did not assign for her maintenance or housing. (Abu Dawud 2286, 2/286; Ibn Majah 2036, 1/656; al Tirmidhi 118, 3/484; al Nasaʾi 3548, 6/208. See Ibn al Qayyim’s detailed response to the criticisms made against the hadith of Fatimah bint Qays, for he set aside a valuable study for it in Zad al Maʿad 4/528–542, the like of which is rarely found elsewhere.)
The saying of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ has already passed: “Maintenance and housing are only for the woman when her husband has the right of return over her.” (This has already passed on p. 683.)
This ruling agrees with what came in the Book of Allah, Mighty and Exalted. Allah, Most High, says:
يَاأَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ إِذَا طَلَّقْتُمُ النِّسَاءَ فَطَلِّقُوهُنَّ لِعِدَّتِهِنَّ وَأَحْصُوا الْعِدَّةَ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ رَبَّكُمْ لَا تُخْرِجُوهُنَّ مِنْ بُيُوتِهِنَّ وَلَا يَخْرُجْنَ إِلَّا أَنْ يَأْتِينَ بِفَاحِشَةٍ مُبَيِّنَةٍ وَتِلْكَ حُدُودُ اللَّهِ وَمَنْ يَتَعَدَّ حُدُودَ اللَّهِ فَقَدْ ظَلَمَ نَفْسَهُ لَا تَدْرِي لَعَلَّ اللَّهَ يُحْدِثُ بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ أَمْرًا فَإِذَا بَلَغْنَ أَجَلَهُنَّ فَأَمْسِكُوهُنَّ بِمَعْرُوفٍ أَوْ فَارِقُوهُنَّ بِمَعْرُوفٍ
“O Prophet, when you divorce women, divorce them for their waiting period and count the waiting period, and fear Allah, your Lord. Do not remove them from their houses, and they should not leave, unless they commit a clear indecency.
These are the limits of Allah, and whoever transgresses the limits of Allah has wronged himself. You do not know. Perhaps Allah will bring about, after that, a matter. Then when they reach their term, keep them according to what is recognised or part from them according to what is recognised.” (al Talaq 1–2)
Allah, Glorified is He, commanded the husbands who, when the term is reached, still have the right of keeping or releasing, not to remove their wives from their houses. He also commanded their wives not to leave. This indicates the permissibility of removing the one whose husband has no right to keep her after divorce.
Allah, Glorified is He, mentioned for these divorced women rulings that are attached to one another and do not separate from one another. He, Glorified is He, pointed to the wisdom of that, and that it is specific to the women in revocable divorce, due to His saying: “You do not know.
Perhaps Allah will bring about, after that, a matter.” The matter hoped to be brought about here is taking her back. The wisdom of the Wisest of judges and the Most Merciful of those who show mercy required that the wife remain in her house so that perhaps the husband may regret it, and the evil by which the devil stirred between them may leave, so his soul follows her and he takes her back.
Thus, the wording is specific to women in revocable divorce only. The clue that directs to this is in His saying, Most High, “Perhaps Allah will bring about, after that, a matter,” and His saying, “Then when they reach their term, keep them according to what is recognised or part from them according to what is recognised.” Keeping according to what is recognised only exists where return is possible.
If the divorce is a major final separation, then there is no bringing about and no keeping. How can keeping or return be possible when Allah, Most High, said concerning the finally divorced woman:
فَإِنْ طَلَّقَهَا فَلَا تَحِلُّ لَهُ مِنْ بَعْدُ حَتَّى تَنْكِحَ زَوْجًا غَيْرَهُ
“If he divorces her, then she is not lawful for him after that until she marries another husband.” (al Baqarah 36) (al Baqarah 36.)
Upon this explanation, it becomes clear that those spoken about in the verse of divorce are only women in revocable divorce.
There is no way to insert the finally divorced woman into it except by separating the pronouns and making them differ from the one they refer to, and this is not carried by the eloquence of the Qur’an and its clear arrangement. (Zad al Maʿad by Ibn al Qayyim 5/526–528.)
Ibn al Qayyim said: “The saying of the Prophet ﷺ, ‘Maintenance and housing are only for the woman when her husband has the right of return over her,’ was taken from the Book of Allah, Mighty and Exalted, explaining it and making clear what the Speaker meant by it. The agreement of the judgement of the Prophet ﷺ with the Book of Allah, Mighty and Exalted, has become clear, and the just scale is also with them and does not oppose them.” (Zad al Maʿad by Ibn al Qayyim 5/528.)
The Woman’s Right To Inheritance
It has already passed that the woman in the period of ignorance before Islam did not inherit, because she herself was inherited as part of the estate. The one who is inherited does not inherit. Rather, she had no inheritance and no ownership. It is known that the Arabs in their period of ignorance before Islam did not consider the woman fit to inherit from her relatives, because she did not carry a sword, did not defend the tribe, did not raid, and did not take war gains.
They feared that wealth would pass to a stranger if she married him, so they deprived her of inheritance, the marriage gift, and the will. They consumed her wealth wrongfully and aggressively, until the sun of Islam rose to remove the thick darkness of the period of ignorance before Islam, and to establish the woman’s right to inheritance, whether she was a mother, wife, sister, or daughter. The verses of the Qur’an came to confirm the woman’s right to inheritance, as did the Prophetic hadiths. (See Huquq al Marʾah fi al Islam by Muhammad Arafah 139.)
The Woman’s Inheritance In The Book And The Sunnah
The First Proof
Allah, Most High, says:
لِلرِّجَالِ نَصِيبٌ مِمَّا تَرَكَ الْوَالِدَانِ وَالْأَقْرَبُونَ وَلِلنِّسَاءِ نَصِيبٌ مِمَّا تَرَكَ الْوَالِدَانِ وَالْأَقْرَبُونَ مِمَّا قَلَّ مِنْهُ أَوْ كَثُرَ نَصِيبًا مَفْرُوضًا
“Men have a share of what parents and close relatives leave, and women have a share of what parents and close relatives leave, whether it is little or much, a fixed share.” (al Nisa 7)
Allah established the right of women in inheritance and confirmed it from several ways.
First: Allah, Glorified is He, mentioned women separately after mentioning men. He did not say: “Men and women have a share,” so that their independent place in this ruling would not be taken lightly, and to remove what existed in the period of ignorance before Islam of not giving them inheritance. (See Tafsir Abi al Suʿud by Abu al Suʿud 2/146; Fath al Qadir by al Shawkani 1/426.)
Second: His saying, Most High, “whether it is little or much, a fixed share,” is among the clearest proofs that the woman’s right to inheritance is established, even from the small and lowly amount left by the deceased. This leaves no room for doubt, suspicion, or escape from giving the woman what she deserves by Allah’s gift to her.
Third: His saying, “a fixed share.” Although the woman’s share was already mentioned at the beginning of the verse, “and women have a share,” Allah, Most High, repeated the mention of this share and confirmed it with the word “fixed” to remove any confusion and to establish this right with decisive establishment. (See Tafsir Abi al Suʿud by Abu al Suʿud 2/147; Shubuhat fi Tariq al Marʾah al Muslimah by Abd Allah al Jalali 43–44.)
The Second Proof
The Qur’an established the right of the mother to inherit. Allah, Glorified is He, says:
فَإِنْ كُنَّ نِسَاءً فَوْقَ اثْنَتَيْنِ فَلَهُنَّ ثُلُثَا مَا تَرَكَ وَإِنْ كَانَتْ وَاحِدَةً فَلَهَا النِّصْفُ وَلِأَبَوَيْهِ لِكُلِّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمَا السُّدُسُ مِمَّا تَرَكَ إِنْ كَانَ لَهُ وَلَدٌ فَإِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُ وَلَدٌ وَوَرِثَهُ أَبَوَاهُ فَلِأُمِّهِ الثُّلثُ فَإِنْ كَانَ لَهُ إِخْوَةٌ فَلِأُمِّهِ السُّدُسُ مِنْ بَعْدِ وَصِيَّةٍ يُوصِي بِهَا أَوْ دَيْنٍ
“If they are women, more than two, then for them is two thirds of what he left. If she is one, then for her is half. For his parents, each one of them has one sixth of what he left, if he has a child. If he has no child and his parents inherit from him, then for his mother is one third. If he has siblings, then for his mother is one sixth, after any will he made or debt.” (al Nisa 11)
The Third Proof
Allah established the right of the wife. He, Glorified is He, says:
وَلَهُنَّ الرُّبُعُ مِمَّا تَرَكْتُمْ إِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ لَكُمْ وَلَدٌ فَإِنْ كَانَ لَكُمْ وَلَدٌ فَلَهُنَّ الثُّمُنُ مِمَّا تَرَكْتُمْ
“For them is one fourth of what you leave if you have no child. If you have a child, then for them is one eighth of what you leave.” (al Nisa 12)
The Fourth Proof
Allah established the right of the daughter. He, Glorified is He, says:
يُوصِيكُمُ اللَّهُ فِي أَوْلَادِكُمْ لِلذَّكَرِ مِثْلُ حَظِّ الْأُنْثَيَيْنِ فَإِنْ كُنَّ نِسَاءً فَوْقَ اثْنَتَيْنِ فَلَهُنَّ ثُلُثَا مَا تَرَكَ وَإِنْ كَانَتْ وَاحِدَةً فَلَهَا النِّصْفُ وَلِأَبَوَيْهِ لِكُلِّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمَا السُّدُسُ مِمَّا تَرَكَ
“Allah instructs you concerning your children: for the male is the like of the share of two females. If they are women, more than two, then for them is two thirds of what he left. If she is one, then for her is half. For his parents, each one of them has one sixth of what he left.” (al Nisa 11)
The Fifth Proof
Allah established the right of the sister. He, Glorified is He, says:
وَإِنْ كَانَ رَجُلٌ يُورَثُ كَلَالَةً أَوِ امْرَأَةٌ وَلَهُ أَخٌ أَوْ أُخْتٌ فَلِكُلِّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمَا السُّدُسُ فَإِنْ كَانُوا أَكْثَرَ مِنْ ذَلِكَ فَهُمْ شُرَكَاءُ فِي الثُّلثِ
“If a man or woman is inherited from as one leaving no parent or child, and he has a brother or a sister, then for each one of them is one sixth. If they are more than that, then they share in one third.” (al Nisa 12)
And He said:
يَسْتَفْتُونَكَ قُلِ اللَّهُ يُفْتِيكُمْ فِي الْكَلَالَةِ إِنِ امْرُؤٌ هَلَكَ لَيْسَ لَهُ وَلَدٌ وَلَهُ أُخْتٌ فَلَهَا نِصْفُ مَا تَرَكَ وَهُوَ يَرِثُهَا إِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ لَهَا وَلَدٌ فَإِنْ كَانَتَا اثْنَتَيْنِ فَلَهُمَا الثُّلُثَانِ مِمَّا تَرَكَ وَإِنْ كَانُوا إِخْوَةً رِجَالًا وَنِسَاءً فَلِلذَّكَرِ مِثْلُ حَظِّ الْأُنْثَيَيْنِ يُبَيِّنُ اللَّهُ لَكُمْ أَنْ تَضِلُّوا وَاللَّهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمٌ
“They ask you for a ruling. Say: Allah gives you the ruling concerning one who leaves no parent or child. If a man dies and has no child, but he has a sister, then she has half of what he left. He inherits from her if she has no child. If there are two sisters, then they have two thirds of what he left. If they are siblings, men and women, then for the male is the like of the share of two females. Allah makes clear to you so that you do not go astray, and Allah knows all things.” (al Nisa 176)
Proofs From The Sunnah
The First Proof
Al Bukhari reported through the route of Ata, from Ibn Abbas, who said: “The wealth used to be for the child, and the will used to be for the parents. Then Allah abrogated from that whatever He willed. He made for the male the like of the share of two females. He made for each of the parents one sixth. He made for the woman one eighth and one fourth, and for the husband one half and one fourth.” (Sahih al Bukhari 2596, 3/1008.)
The Second Proof
Al Bukhari reported in his Sahih, in the Book of Shares Of Inheritance, under the chapter on the inheritance of daughters, and Muslim reported from the hadith of Saʿd ibn Abi Waqqas, who said: “I became sick in Makkah with an illness that brought me close to death.
The Prophet ﷺ came to visit me. I said: O Messenger of Allah, I have much wealth and none will inherit from me except my daughter. Shall I give two thirds of my wealth in charity? He said: No. I said: Then half? He said: No. I said: One third? He said: One third, and one third is much. Leaving your children wealthy is better than leaving them poor, begging from people. You will not spend any spending except that you will be rewarded for it, even the morsel that you raise to your wife.” The wording is that of al Bukhari. (Sahih al Bukhari 6352, 6/2476; Sahih Muslim 1628, 3/1250.)
Al Bukhari also reported in the inheritance of daughters, through the route of al Aswad ibn Yazid, who said: “Muʿadh ibn Jabal came to us in Yemen as a teacher and leader. We asked him about a man who died and left a daughter and a sister. He gave the daughter half and the sister half.” (Sahih al Bukhari.)
The Third Proof
Al Bukhari reported in his Sahih, in the Book of Shares Of Inheritance, under the chapter on the inheritance of a son’s daughter along with a daughter, and under the chapter on the inheritance of sisters with daughters as residuary heirs, through the route of Huzayl ibn Shurahbil, who said: “Abu Musa was asked about a daughter, a son’s daughter, and a sister. He said: The daughter has half and the sister has half. Go to Ibn Masʿud, for he will agree with me.
Ibn Masʿud was then asked, and he was informed of Abu Musa’s statement. He said: I would then have gone astray and would not be among the guided. I will judge concerning it with what the Prophet ﷺ judged: for the daughter is half, for the son’s daughter is one sixth, completing two thirds, and whatever remains is for the sister. We came to Abu Musa and informed him of Ibn Masʿud’s statement, so he said: Do not ask me as long as this learned man is among you.” The wording is in the first place from al Bukhari. (Sahih al Bukhari 6355, 6/2477; Sahih al Bukhari 6361, 6/2479.)
The Fourth Proof
Al Bukhari reported in his Sahih, in the Book of Shares Of Inheritance, under the chapter on the inheritance of sisters and brothers, and Muslim reported in his Sahih, in the Book of Shares Of Inheritance, under the chapter on the inheritance of the one who leaves no parent or child, through the route of Muhammad ibn al Munkadir, who said: I heard Jabir say: “The Prophet ﷺ entered upon me while I was sick. He called for water for ablution and performed ablution, then he sprinkled me from his ablution water. I regained consciousness and said: O Messenger of Allah, I only have sisters.” Then the verse of shares of inheritance was sent down. The wording of Muslim is: “Until the verse of inheritance was sent down”:
يَسْتَفْتُونَكَ قُلِ اللَّهُ يُفْتِيكُمْ فِي الْكَلَالَةِ
“They ask you for a ruling. Say: Allah gives you the ruling concerning one who leaves no parent or child.” (al Nisa 176) (Sahih al Bukhari 6362, 5/2479; Sahih Muslim 1616, 3/1234.)
The Fifth Proof
Abu Dawud reported in al Sunan, Ibn Majah reported in al Sunan, al Tirmidhi reported in al Sunan, al Daraqutni reported in al Sunan, al Hakim reported in al Mustadrak, and al Bayhaqi reported in al Kubra, through routes from Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn Aqil, from Jabir ibn Abd Allah, who said: “The wife of Saʿd ibn al Rabiʿ came with her two daughters from Saʿd to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and said: O Messenger of Allah, these are the two daughters of Saʿd ibn al Rabiʿ. Their father was killed with you on the day of Uhud as a martyr. Their uncle took their wealth and did not leave them any wealth, and they cannot marry unless they have wealth. He said: Allah will judge concerning that. Then the verse of inheritance was sent down. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ sent to their uncle and said: Give the two daughters of Saʿd two thirds, give their mother one eighth, and whatever remains is for you.” (Sunan Abi Dawud 2892, 3/121; Sunan Ibn Majah 2720, 2/908; Jamiʿ al Tirmidhi 2092, 4/414; Sunan al Daraqutni 37, 4/79; al Mustadrak by al Hakim 7954 and 7995, 4/370 and 4/380; al Sunan al Kubra by al Bayhaqi 12092, 6/229.)
Al Tirmidhi said: “This hadith is sound. We do not know it except from the hadith of Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn Aqil.” Al Hakim said: “Its chain is sound.” Al Dhahabi agreed with him. Its chain is hasan. It contains Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn Aqil, over whom there is disagreement, and the stronger view is that his hadith is hasan when he does not contradict, and he did not contradict here. Al Albani graded it hasan in al Irwaʾ. (See Tahdhib al Tahdhib by Ibn Hajar 6/13, 19; al Taqrib by Ibn Hajar 542, 3617; Irwaʾ al Ghalil by al Albani 1677, 6/121.)
The Sixth Proof
Abd al Razzaq reported in his Musannaf, Ibn Abi Shaybah reported in his Musannaf, Ahmad reported in al Musnad, Abu Dawud reported in al Sunan, Ibn Majah reported in al Sunan, al Tirmidhi reported in al Sunan, Ibn al Jarud reported in al Muntaqa, al Tabarani reported in al Kabir, al Bayhaqi reported in al Kubra, and al Maqdisi reported in al Mukhtarah, through routes from al Zuhri, from Saʿid ibn al Musayyib, that Umar ibn al Khattab said: “I do not think that the blood money belongs except to the male agnates, because they pay blood money on his behalf. Has anyone among you heard anything from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ concerning that?”
Al Dahhak ibn Sufyan al Kilabi, whom the Messenger of Allah ﷺ had appointed over the Bedouins, said: “The Messenger of Allah ﷺ wrote to me that I should give the wife of Ashyam al Dibabi inheritance from the blood money of her husband.” So Umar ibn al Khattab took that view. The wording is that of Ahmad, and its chain is sound according to the condition of the two Shaykhs. (Musannaf Abd al Razzaq 17764, 9/397; Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah 27550, 5/416; Musnad Ahmad 15745, 25/22; Sunan Abi Dawud 2927, 3/129; Sunan Ibn Majah 2642, 2/883; Jamiʿ al Tirmidhi 1415, 4/27; al Muntaqa by Ibn al Jarud 966; al Muʿjam al Kabir by al Tabarani 8139, 8/299; al Sunan al Kubra by al Bayhaqi 16265, 8/134; al Mukhtarah by al Maqdisi 86, 8/85.)
Al Tirmidhi said: “Hasan sahih, and action is upon this among the people of knowledge.”
Al Maqdisi said in al Mukhtarah: “Its chain is sound.”
Abu Dawud placed it under the chapter on the woman inheriting from the blood money of her husband.
The Seventh Proof
Al Bukhari reported in his Sahih, in the Book of Tafsir, under the chapter:
يَاأَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا يَحِلُّ لَكُمْ أَنْ تَرِثُوا النِّسَاءَ كَرْهًا وَلَا تَعْضُلُوهُنَّ لِتَذْهَبُوا بِبَعْضِ مَا آتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ
“O you who believe, it is not lawful for you to inherit women by force, nor to prevent them in order to take away part of what you gave them.” (al Nisa 19)
Through the route of Ikrimah, from Ibn Abbas, who said: “When a man died, his close male relatives had more right to his wife. If some of them wished, he married her. If they wished, they married her to someone else. If they wished, they did not marry her off. They had more right to her than her family. Then the verse was sent down.” (Sahih al Bukhari.)
I have brought only a small portion of the Prophetic hadiths that establish the woman’s right to inheritance. Otherwise, the books of the Sunnah are full of the sayings and rulings of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ in establishing her right. Return to their books of shares of inheritance if you seek more.
A Doubt About The Woman’s Inheritance And The Reply To It
Whoever looks into the recommendations of the global conferences on women will find the demand for equality between women and men in the right of inheritance. They consider lack of equality to be discrimination against women. In these procedures there is an attack against the rulings of Sharia concerning the woman’s inheritance.
This made some Muslim countries that participated in these conferences, and others that did not participate, object to these procedures and recommendations, and explain that this matter is among the decisive Sharia rulings that do not accept taking and rejecting. Among the countries that objected were Libya, Egypt, Iran, Mauritania, Morocco, and Tunisia, in both the International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo, 1994CE, 1415AH, and the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, 1995CE, 1416AH. (See the doctoral thesis of Dr Fuad al Abd al Karim, Qadaya al Marʾah fi al Muʾtamarat al Dawliyyah, Dirasah Naqdiyyah fi Dawʾ al Islam, 817–841.)
Those who cry out without understanding began repeating the recommendations of the conferences like trumpets, and the callers to Hell took charge of stirring doubts in order to extinguish the light of Allah. But Allah refuses except to complete His light, because foam vanishes as waste, while what benefits people remains on the earth. I am certain that the one who raises this doubt has complete ignorance of the rulings of Sharia. If he had studied the science of inheritance shares, he would have been ashamed of this demand. Here is the dismantling of his claim and the invalidation of his doubt.
The First Reply
The difference between males and females in some issues of inheritance is governed by three standards.
The first is the degree of closeness between the heir, whether male or female, and the one inherited from, the deceased. Whenever the connection is closer, the share in inheritance increases. Whenever the connection is more distant, the share in inheritance decreases, without any regard to the sex of the heirs.
The second is the place of the inheriting generation in the time sequence of generations. The generations that are receiving life and preparing to carry its burdens usually have a greater share in inheritance than the generations that are leaving life behind and having their burdens reduced. Rather, their burdens usually become placed upon others, regardless of whether the heirs are male or female.
The third is the financial burden that the Sharia obligates the heir to bear and fulfil toward others. This is the only standard that produces a difference between the male and the female. But it is a difference that does not lead to any injustice against the female or any reduction of fairness toward her. (See al Tahrir al Islami lil Marʾah by Dr Muhammad Imarah 68.)
The Second Reply
The wisdom behind the woman’s share being half of the man’s share must be known.
This is because the share in inheritance is built upon the economic burdens in family life for each of them. The man is obligated in Sharia, as has passed, to pay the marriage gift, to carry the duty of maintenance, and if he divorces his wife, she has the parting gift.
So the man in the Sharia of Islam is the one obligated with the financial burdens of the family. It was therefore from justice that this man should have a share of inheritance greater than the woman’s share, so that he may use it to carry out these duties. As for the woman, she takes her share of inheritance without the slightest participation or the slightest financial responsibility. The matter can be explained in a simple calculation as follows. (See Shubuhat fi Tariq al Marʾah al Muslimah by Abd Allah al Jalali 43; Awdaʿ al Marʾah fi al Qur’an by Abd al Munʿim Sayyid Hasan 307; Huquq al Insan fi al Islam by Muhammad al Zuhayli 222; al Marʾah wa Huququha fi al Islam by Muhammad al Sadiq al Afifi 124.)
If a man dies, for example, and leaves a daughter and a son, and he leaves for them an amount of 6000, then the son’s share is 4000, and the daughter’s share is 2000. If the boy marries, he must give his wife a marriage gift, prepare a home for her, and spend upon her from his wealth. As for his sister, she is not required to spend on her husband or pay him a marriage gift. Rather, her husband is the one required to spend upon her. If she does not marry, then her maintenance is upon her father, her brother, or the nearest person to her. In this case, the 4000 is for him, his wife, and his children, so his share becomes equal to his sister’s share, or less than it. (See al Marʾah al Muslimah Amam al Tahaddiyat by Ahmad al Husayn 51.)
Al Nawawi (d. 676AH), may Allah have mercy on him, said, explaining the wisdom behind giving men more than women in inheritance: “Its wisdom is that men are met by many expenses in taking care of dependents, guests, slaves, visitors, giving comfort to those who ask, bearing financial liabilities, and other matters. Allah knows best.” (Sharh Sahih Muslim by al Nawawi 11/53.)
Al Shinqiti (d. 1393AH) said: “The wisdom behind giving the male more than the female in this verse, meaning His saying, Most High, ‘for the male is the like of the share of two females,’ is what He pointed to in another verse, in His saying, Most High:
الرِّجَالُ قَوَّامُونَ عَلَى النِّسَاءِ بِمَا فَضَّلَ اللَّهُ بَعْضَهُمْ عَلَى بَعْضٍ وَبِمَا أَنْفَقُوا مِنْ أَمْوَالِهِمْ
“Men are caretakers over women because of what Allah has given some over others, and because of what they spend from their wealth.” (al Nisa 34)
That is because the one who takes care of another and spends his wealth upon him always expects decrease, while the one cared for and spent upon always expects increase. The wisdom in giving preference to the one expecting decrease over the one expecting increase, in order to compensate for his expected decrease, is very clear.” (Adwaʾ al Bayan by al Shinqiti 1/308.)
In conclusion, it can be said that inheritance wealth was not caused by either of them at all, nor did they customarily strive to obtain it. Rather, it is ownership granted by Allah, who made them own it by compulsory ownership. So the wisdom of the All Wise, All Aware required that the male should have the like of the share of two females, even if both reach the deceased through one cause, because the male expects decrease and the woman expects increase. This is a clear wisdom denied only by one whose insight Allah has blinded.
The Third Reply
Careful study of the cases and issues of inheritance as found in the science of inheritance shares reveals a reality that may astonish many people because of their previous wrong thoughts about this subject. This study of inheritance cases and issues makes clear the following.
There Are Only Four Cases In Which The Woman Inherits Half Of The Man
First: The presence of the daughter with the son, due to His saying, Most High:
يُوصِيكُمُ اللَّهُ فِي أَوْلَادِكُمْ لِلذَّكَرِ مِثْلُ حَظِّ الْأُنْثَيَيْنِ
“Allah instructs you concerning your children: for the male is the like of the share of two females.” (al Nisa 11)
Second: The presence of the father with the mother when there are no children and no husband or wife, due to His saying, Most High:
فَإِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُ وَلَدٌ وَوَرِثَهُ أَبَوَاهُ فَلِأُمِّهِ الثُّلثُ
“If he has no child and his parents inherit from him, then for his mother is one third.” (al Nisa 11)
So He assigned one third to the mother, and the remainder, which is two thirds, belongs to the father.
Third: The presence of the full sister or paternal sister with the full brother or paternal brother, due to His saying, Most High:
وَإِنْ كَانُوا إِخْوَةً رِجَالًا وَنِسَاءً فَلِلذَّكَرِ مِثْلُ حَظِّ الْأُنْثَيَيْنِ
“If they are siblings, men and women, then for the male is the like of the share of two females.” (al Nisa 176)
Fourth: The husband and wife, due to His saying, Mighty and Exalted:
وَلَكُمْ نِصْفُ مَا تَرَكَ أَزْوَاجُكُمْ
“For you is half of what your wives leave.” (al Nisa 12)
So if one spouse dies and leaves the other, the inheritance is as follows: when there is no child, the husband’s share is half and the wife’s share is one fourth. When there is a child, the husband’s share is one fourth and the wife’s share is one eighth. (See Mirath al Marʾah wa Qadiyyat al Musawah by Salah al Din Sultan 18; Khasaʾis al Nisaʾ by Umm Amr Badawi 112.)
There Are Many More Cases In Which The Woman Inherits Exactly Like The Man
Among them is the case of the mother’s inheritance with the father when there is a male child. The father takes one sixth, and the mother also takes one sixth, while the son takes the remainder by residuary inheritance.
Among them is the inheritance of maternal brothers with maternal sisters. They are always equal in inheritance. Allah, Most High, says:
وَإِنْ كَانَ رَجُلٌ يُورَثُ كَلَالَةً أَوِ امْرَأَةٌ وَلَهُ أَخٌ أَوْ أُخْتٌ فَلِكُلِّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمَا السُّدُسُ
“If a man or woman is inherited from as one leaving no parent or child, and he has a brother or a sister, then for each one of them is one sixth.” (al Nisa 12)
This verse clearly indicates that the woman’s share is equal to the man’s share when the sibling relationship is through the mother.
There Are 10 Cases Or More In Which The Woman Inherits More Than The Man
First: The fixed share of two thirds can sometimes benefit the woman more than residuary inheritance benefits the man. An example is the following.
If a woman dies leaving 60000, and the heirs are a husband, father, mother, and 2 daughters, then the husband’s share is one fourth, meaning 12000. The father’s share is one sixth, meaning 8000, plus the remainder by residuary inheritance, but nothing remains. The mother’s share is one sixth, meaning 8000.
The 2 daughters’ share is two thirds, meaning 32000, and each daughter receives 16000. (The assumed share should be 15000, but the issue contains proportional reduction. So the estate is divided over the total shares, meaning 60 over 15 equals 4000, and this is multiplied by each person’s share so that all heirs bear the reduction. Proportional reduction in inheritance shares is when the shares of the issue exceed its base, with an increase that leads to a decrease in the shares of the heirs. See al Tahqiqat al Mardiyyah fi al Mabahith al Fardiyyah by Shaykh Salih al Fawzan 161; Ahkam al Mawarith by Muhammad Abd al Hamid 165.)
If we suppose the same issue, but with 2 sons instead of 2 daughters, then the shares of the heirs would be as follows: the husband’s share is one fourth, meaning 15000; the father’s share is one sixth, meaning 10000; the mother’s share is one sixth, meaning 10000; and the 2 sons’ share is the remainder by residuary inheritance, meaning 25000, so each son receives 12500. From this example, it becomes clear that the daughter’s share, 16000, was more than the son’s share, 12500.
Second: The fixed share of half can sometimes benefit females more than residuary inheritance benefits the man. An example is the following.
If a woman dies leaving 156000, and the heirs are a husband, father, mother, and daughter, then the husband’s share is one fourth, meaning 36000; the father’s share is one sixth, meaning 24000, plus the remainder by residuary inheritance, but nothing remains; the mother’s share is one sixth, meaning 24000; and the daughter’s share is half, meaning 72000. (The issue contains proportional reduction.)
If we suppose the same issue, but with a son instead of the daughter, then the son’s share would be 65000, which is the remainder by residuary inheritance, so it would be less than the daughter’s share.
Third: The fixed share of one third may sometimes be better for the woman than residuary inheritance is for the man.
An example is an estate of 48000, and the heirs are a wife, mother, 2 maternal sisters, and 2 full brothers. The wife’s share is one fourth, meaning 12000. The mother’s share is one sixth, meaning 8000. The 2 maternal sisters’ share is one third, meaning 16000, so each sister receives 8000. The 2 full brothers’ share is the remainder by residuary inheritance, meaning 12000, so each brother receives 6000.
In this example, each of the 2 maternal sisters received 8000, although they are more distant in relation, while each of the 2 full brothers received 6000.
Cases In Which The Woman Inherits While Her Male Counterpart Does Not
Examples of these cases include the following.
First: The son’s daughter and the son’s son. An example of this case is the following.
If the estate is 195000, and the heirs are a husband, father, mother, daughter, and son’s daughter, then the husband’s share is one fourth, meaning 39000; the father’s share is one sixth, meaning 26000, plus the remainder by residuary inheritance, but nothing remains; the mother’s share is one sixth, meaning 26000; the daughter’s share is half, meaning 78000; and the son’s daughter’s share is one sixth, meaning 26000. (The issue contains proportional reduction.)
If we suppose the same issue, but with the son’s son instead of the son’s daughter, then the husband’s share would be one fourth, meaning 45000; the father’s share would be one sixth, meaning 30000; the daughter’s share would be half, meaning 90000; and the son’s son’s share would be the remainder by residuary inheritance, but nothing remains.
Here the son’s daughter took the fixed share of one sixth, meaning 45000, while the son’s son took nothing. If it is said that the son’s son here has the obligatory will, then this is contrary to the view of the majority. (See Sharh Sahih Muslim by al Nawawi 5/175.)
Second: The paternal sister and the paternal brother. An example of this case is the following.
If the estate is 84000, and the heirs are a husband, full sister, and paternal sister, then the husband’s share is half, meaning 36000, the full sister’s share is half, meaning 36000, and the paternal sister’s share is one sixth, meaning 12000. (The issue contains proportional reduction.)
If we suppose the same issue, but with a paternal brother instead of the paternal sister, then the husband’s share would be half, meaning 42000; the full sister’s share would be half, meaning 42000; and the paternal brother’s share would be the remainder by residuary inheritance, but nothing remains.
Here the paternal sister took her fixed share of one sixth, meaning 12000, while her counterpart, the paternal brother, took nothing. He has no obligatory will, because he is not from the descendants of the deceased’s child.
Third: The inheritance of the grandmother. She often inherits while her counterpart among grandfathers does not inherit. An example is: the mother’s father and the mother’s mother. The mother’s father is prevented because he is a non inheriting grandfather, while the mother’s mother inherits one sixth as a fixed share, plus the remainder by return to her.
In this way, there are dozens of examples in which the woman takes the same as the man, more than him, or she inherits while her male counterpart does not inherit, in exchange for 4 specific cases in which the woman inherits half of the man’s share, for reasons that agree with the other streams of Sharia rulings whose parts complete one another in precise balance, without one side being wronged for the sake of another, because it is the Sharia of Allah, the All Wise, the All Aware. (For more, see Mirath al Marʾah wa Qadiyyat al Musawah by Salah al Din Sultan, for its author has benefited and written well.)
Because of the financial rights that Islam guaranteed for the woman under its shade, fair minded people of the West came to see it as a model worthy of being followed. This is no surprise, for the One who legislated it is Allah:
أَلَا يَعْلَمُ مَنْ خَلَقَ وَهُوَ اللَّطِيفُ الْخَبِيرُ
“Does He who created not know, while He is the Subtle, the All Aware?” (al Mulk 14)
Among their statements on this are the following.
Annie Besant, author of The Religions Of India, said: “How great the plan of the universe is in its appreciation of the Prophet’s views ﷺ concerning women.” After she listed many verses that urge the care and honouring of women, she said: “The teachings of the Prophet ﷺ do not stop at general matters. He laid down a law for women’s inheritance, and it is a law more just and broader in freedom regarding the independence it grants her than the English Christian law that was applied until about 20 years ago. What Islam laid down for the woman is considered a model law, for it guaranteed their protection in everything they own from their relatives, brothers, and husbands.” (Quoted from al Marʾah bayn al Fiqh wa al Qanun by Mustafa al Sibaʿi 214.)
Gustave Le Bon, author of The Civilization Of The West, said: “The Qur’an gave the woman inheritance rights better than those in European laws. The principles of inheritance mentioned by the Qur’an are upon a great level of justice and fairness. The reader can understand that from the verses that I quote from it, and in which I point sufficiently to its general rulings. From my comparison between them and French and English rights, it becomes clear that the Sharia of Islam gave wives, whom some claim Muslims do not live with according to what is recognised, inheritance rights whose like we do not find in our laws.” (Translation of Adil Zuʿaytir 474.)
Glory be to the One who judged and was just.
The Woman’s Right To Financial Contracts
Islam guaranteed women their rights to own wealth, estates, houses, and similar things through any lawful cause of ownership. It made it permissible for her to practise trade and all other lawful ways of earning. She may accept gifts from her wealth, give charity, and make a will from it to whomever she wishes among those who are not her heirs, within the limit of one third. She may dispute with others before the judiciary, and she may do that herself or through someone she appoints on her behalf by her own choice. Among what indicates this is His saying, Blessed and Most High:
وَابْتَلُوا الْيَتَامَى حَتَّى إِذَا بَلَغُوا النِّكَاحَ فَإِنْ آنَسْتُمْ مِنْهُمْ رُشْدًا فَادْفَعُوا إِلَيْهِمْ أَمْوَالَهُمْ
“Test the orphans until they reach marriage age. Then if you perceive sound judgement from them, give them their wealth.” (al Nisa 6)
Allah, Most High, commanded the guardians of orphans to hand over their wealth to them on the condition that they reach maturity and that sound judgement is perceived from them, without separating between male and female. This indicates the woman’s financial capacity and her right to dispose of her wealth, and that what she inherited is to be handed to her after she reaches maturity and sound judgement is perceived from her. This is the view of the majority of jurists from the Hanafis, Shafiʿis, and Hanbalis, in the well known view from them, and it is the stronger view due to the apparent indication of the verse. You will see, from the proofs, the establishment of her entitlement in buying, selling, and financial contracts generally. (This has already passed on p. 192; al Nisa 6; see al Mabsut by al Sarakhsi 24/161; al Bahr al Raʾiq by Ibn Nujaym 8/91; Rawdat al Talibin by al Nawawi 4/182; al Majmuʿ Sharh al Muhadhdhab by al Nawawi 13/372; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 4/512; al Mubdiʿ by Ibn Muflih 4/305.)
The Woman’s Right To Blood Money
Islam did not only preserve the woman’s right during her life. Rather, it preserved it after her death, because it made the woman and the man equal in the foundation of humanity, guaranteed each of them their rights, and bound each of them to duties suited to their creation. When a person is attacked and his life, or part of him, is destroyed, Islam binds the aggressor to the consequences, whether he was mistaken or deliberate.
Among those consequences is blood money. Its root is “wadyah.” One says: “He paid the blood money of the killed person,” meaning he gave his guardian the blood money. It is the wealth that becomes obligatory due to an offence committed by the offender against life, limb, or other than them. (See Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 12/187; al Taʿarif by al Munawi 346; Fath al Qadir by Ibn al Humam 1/175.)
Blood money is also called “aql.” The origin of that is that when the killer killed someone, he would gather the blood money from camels and tie them in the courtyard of the guardians of the killed person, meaning he would tie them with their ropes, so that he could hand them over to them. (See al Nihayah by Ibn al Athir 3/278, root a q l; Fath al Qadir by Ibn al Humam 1/175.)
Ibn Qudamah said: “The Book of Blood Money: The foundation for the obligation of blood money is the Book, the Sunnah, and ijmaʿ. As for the Book, it is the saying of Allah, Most High:
وَمَنْ قَتَلَ مُؤْمِنًا خَطَأً فَتَحْرِيرُ رَقَبَةٍ مُؤْمِنَةٍ وَدِيَةٌ مُسَلَّمَةٌ إِلَى أَهْلِهِ إِلَّا أَنْ يَصَّدَّقُوا
“Whoever kills a believer by mistake, then freeing a believing slave and blood money handed over to his family, unless they give it in charity.” (al Nisa 92) (al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/289.)
The woman’s blood money is half of the man’s blood money. Ibn al Mundhir, al Qurtubi, and Ibn Abd al Barr transmitted ijmaʿ on that. (al Ijmaʿ by Ibn al Mundhir 116; Tafsir al Qurtubi 5/325; al Tamhid by Ibn Abd al Barr 17/358.)
Al Shafiʿi (d. 204AH) said: “I do not know any opposition from the people of knowledge, early or later, that the blood money of the woman is half the blood money of the man, and that is 50 camels.” (al Umm by al Shafiʿi 6/106.)
Al Qurtubi (d. 671AH) said: “The ulama have agreed that the blood money of the woman is half of the blood money of the man. Abu Umar said: Her blood money became, and Allah knows best, half of the blood money of the man because she has half the inheritance of the man, and the testimony of 2 women is like the testimony of 1 man. This is only in blood money for mistake. As for deliberate killing, then retaliation applies between men and women, due to His saying, Most High:
النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ وَالْعَيْنَ بِالْعَيْنِ
“The life for the life, and the eye for the eye.” (al Maʾidah 45) (al Jamiʿ li Ahkam al Qur’an by al Qurtubi 5/326.)
As is the habit of those ignorant imitators of the Orientalists, who are ignorant of Sharia and its rulings, they began circling around the subject of the woman’s blood money, clinging to threads weaker than the threads of a spider’s house, raising questions, showing amazement, and demanding equality. To demolish their doubt, I bring the following.
The First Reply
If killing by mistake contains blood money, then deliberate killing contains retaliation. In the second, males and females are equal. Ibn Abd al Barr (d. 463AH) said: “As for the majority of ulama and the group of the imams of fatwa in the lands, they agree that a man is killed for a woman just as she is killed for him, due to the saying of Allah, Mighty and Exalted:
النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ وَالْعَيْنَ بِالْعَيْنِ
“The life for the life, and the eye for the eye.” (al Maʾidah 45)
And due to the saying of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ: ‘The blood of the Muslims is equal.'” (This is part of a hadith reported by Imam Ahmad 7012, 11/587; Abu Dawud 2751, 3/80; al Sunan al Kubra by al Bayhaqi 15688, 8/29, through routes from Amr ibn Shuʿayb, from his father, from his grandfather, raised to the Prophet ﷺ with this wording according to Abu Dawud. Its chain is hasan because it comes through the narration of Amr ibn Shuʿayb, and the verification of his narration has already passed on p. 198. It has a supporting report from the hadith of Ali reported by Ahmad in al Musnad 993, 1/122, and through him by Abu Dawud in al Sunan 4530, 4/180. In it: “The blood of the believers is equal.” Ibn Hajar graded its chain hasan in Fath al Bari 12/261. Its men are reliable, the men of the two Shaykhs, except Abu Hassan al Aʿraj, who is from the men of Muslim. He is truthful, and his narration from Ali is disconnected. See Jamiʿ al Tahsil by al Alaʾi 280, 764; al Taqrib by Ibn Hajar 1133, 8105.)
Its proof is also what al Bukhari reported in his Sahih, in the Book of Blood Money, under the chapter on a man being killed for a woman, and Muslim reported in his Sahih, in the Book of Oaths, Warriors, And Blood Money, under the chapter on the establishment of retaliation in killing with a stone and other sharp or heavy things, and a man being killed for a woman, from the hadith of Anas ibn Malik, who said: ”
A Jewish man killed a young girl for some jewellery she had, and he killed her with a stone. She was brought to the Prophet ﷺ while she still had some life in her. He said to her: Did so and so kill you? She pointed with her head, no. Then he asked her a second time, and she pointed with her head, no. Then he asked her a third time, and she said yes, and pointed with her head. So the Messenger of Allah ﷺ killed him between two stones.” The wording is that of Muslim. (Sahih al Bukhari 6491, 6/2524; Sahih Muslim 1672, 3/1299.)
Al Nawawi said: “In this hadith are benefits. Among them is that a man is killed for a woman, and this is the ijmaʿ of those whose view is considered. Among them is that the offender who kills deliberately is killed in retaliation in the same way that he killed. If he killed with a sword, he is killed with the sword. If he killed with a stone, wood, or their like, he is killed with its like, because the Jewish man crushed her, so he was crushed.” (Sharh Sahih Muslim by al Nawawi 11/158.)
From here, it becomes clear that personal punishments, which are stronger in effect and more painful, are equal between men and women. The woman is taken in retaliation for the man, and the man is taken in retaliation for her.
There is no doubt that financial penalties are far below this in level. The punishment of deliberate killing is retaliation unless the family of the killed person pardon, so retaliation is taken from the killer, whether man or woman, for the killed person, whichever of the two it may be. This is because here we are dealing with a human life in exchange for another human life, and the man and the woman are equal in humanity.
The Second Reply
If the killing is by mistake, or the family of the killed person pardon and request blood money, then blood money is not a price in exchange for the killed person, because the human being is not valued by wealth. Rather, blood money is a gift from the Lord in which the financial loss that reaches the family is considered when they lose a man who supports it or will support it if sound judgement is perceived from him and he reaches manhood, unlike the woman who is supported and spent upon. If gain is connected to liability, then the wisdom of the Subtle, All Aware is not hidden from you.
This is indicated by the fact that Islam did not distinguish in the blood money of the fetus between it being female or male, because it ruled concerning it with a ghurrah, meaning a slave, male or female. The reason for the absence of this difference is that the fetus, whether male or female, had not yet entered into responsibility in the system of expenses within the family, because it had not been born alive so that after that it could become an earner. Its ruling is therefore upon the original equality between male and female in blood money.
The proof for this is what al Bukhari reported in his Sahih, in the Book of Blood Money, under the chapter on the fetus of the woman, and that blood money is upon the father and the male agnates of the father, not upon the child, and Muslim reported in his Sahih, in the Book of Oaths, Warriors, Retaliation, And Blood Money, under the chapter on the blood money of the fetus and the obligation of blood money in mistaken killing and near deliberate killing upon the offender’s male agnates, from the hadith of Abu Hurayrah, who said:
“Two women from Hudhayl fought. One of them threw a stone at the other and killed her and what was in her belly. They disputed before the Prophet ﷺ, so he ruled that the blood money of her fetus was a ghurrah: a male slave or a female slave. He also ruled that the blood money of the woman was upon her male agnates.” The wording is that of al Bukhari. (Sahih Muslim 1681, 3/1309.)
In the narration of Khalid ibn Abd al Rahman with al Bukhari, in the Book of Medicine, under the chapter on soothsaying, there is an addition: “The guardian of the woman who was made liable said: How can I pay, O Messenger of Allah, for one who did not drink, did not eat, did not speak, and did not cry at birth? The like of that should be left. The Prophet ﷺ said: This one is only from the brothers of the soothsayers.” (Sahih al Bukhari 5426, 5/2172.)
Al Nawawi said: “Know that what is meant by all of this is if the fetus comes out dead. As for if it comes out alive and then dies, then the full blood money of an adult is obligatory for it. If it is male, 100 camels are obligatory, and if it is female, 50.” (Sharh Sahih Muslim by al Nawawi 11/176.)
So if the fetus dies in its mother’s womb, the killer pays the value of a male slave or female slave, whether the fetus is male or female. That is only because the system of expenses is being considered, so pay attention.
The Third Reply
Among the greatest matters by which the Sharia of Islam is distinct, as far as I know, is that it placed the blood money of mistaken killing and what falls under its ruling upon the male agnates of the offender.
The proof for that is what al Bukhari reported in his Sahih, in the Book of Blood Money, under the chapter on the male agnates, through the route of Abu Juhayfah, who said: “I asked Ali: Do you have anything that is not in the Qur’an? He said: By the One who split the seed and created the soul, we do not have anything except what is in the Qur’an, except understanding that a man is given in his Book, and what is in the sheet. I said: What is in the sheet? He said: Blood money, freeing the captive, and that a Muslim is not killed for a disbeliever.” (Sahih al Bukhari 6507, 6/2531.)
Also, what has passed from the hadith of Abu Hurayrah, in which it says: “And he ruled,” meaning the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, “that the blood money of the woman was upon her male agnates.”
Al Shawkani (d. 1250AH) said: “A man’s male agnates are his relatives from his father’s side, and they are his male agnate relatives. They were the ones who would tie the camels at the door of the guardian of the killed person. Placing blood money upon the male agnates is established by the Sunnah, and it is the ijmaʿ of the people of knowledge, as in al Fath. Making the male agnates liable is contrary to the apparent sense of His saying, Most High:
وَلَا تَزِرُ وَازِرَةٌ وِزْرَ
“No bearer of burden bears the burden of another.” (al Anʿam 164)
So the hadiths that rule blood money upon the male agnates specify the generality of the verse, due to the interest found in that. This is because if the killer alone were taken with blood money, it would be close to consuming all of his wealth, because repeated mistakes cannot be made fully safe from. If he were left without liability, the blood of the killed person would be wasted. The male agnates of the man are his clan. His closest branch begins, and if they are unable, then those nearest are joined, then those nearest, from the legally responsible, male, free members of the male agnates by lineage, then by cause, then it is from the public treasury.” (Nayl al Awtar by al Shawkani 7/243.)
The Sharia considered 2 important matters when making blood money obligatory upon the male agnates.
The first: The male agnates of the man are his relatives from his father’s side only. Relatives from the mother’s side are exempted, in a clear indication that maleness is linked to expenses and financial liabilities.
The second: Those who contribute as male agnates are every legally responsible male. The woman is excluded from bearing any of it. Ibn al Mundhir said: “Everyone from the people of knowledge whose view we preserve has agreed that the woman and the child who has not reached maturity do not pay as part of the male agnates.” (al Ijmaʿ by Ibn al Mundhir 120.)
This is proof that Islam considered the side of maintenance and earning, so it made the woman’s blood money half of the man’s blood money.
The Fourth Reply
Umar ibn al Khattab, Zayd ibn Thabit, Saʿid ibn al Musayyib, Umar ibn Abd al Aziz, Urwah ibn al Zubayr, al Zuhri, Qatadah, and Ibn Hurmuz said, and Ibn Abd al Barr said that it is the saying of the seven jurists of Madinah, the majority of the people of Madinah, Malik, and Ahmad ibn Hanbal: The woman equals the man in compensation up to one third of the man’s blood money. Her finger is like his finger, her tooth is like his tooth, her exposed bone wound is like his exposed bone wound, and her displaced bone wound is like his displaced bone wound. (Ibn Abd al Barr attributed this to those mentioned in al Tamhid 17/358, as did al Qurtubi in al Tafsir 6/207, and Ibn Qudamah in al Mughni 8/315. See al Tamhid by Ibn Abd al Barr 17/358; al Istidhkar by Ibn Abd al Barr 8/64; al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/315; al Mubdiʿ by Ibn Muflih 8/350. Muhammad ibn Abi al Fath al Baʿli al Hanbali said: “The exposed bone wound is the wound that shows the whiteness of the bone.” al Mutliʿ by al Baʿli 367. Ibn al Athir said: “The displaced bone wound is a wound that moves the bone from its place.” al Nihayah by Ibn al Athir 1/3107.)
They used as evidence what Abd al Razzaq reported in his Musannaf, al Daraqutni reported in al Sunan, and al Nasaʾi reported in al Mujtaba, through the route of Ismaʿil ibn Ayyash, from Ibn Jurayj, from Amr ibn Shuʿayb, from his father, from his grandfather, who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “The compensation of the woman is like the compensation of the man until it reaches one third of her blood money.” (Musannaf Abd al Razzaq 17756, 9/396; Sunan al Daraqutni 38, 3/91; Sunan al Nasaʾi 4805, 8/44.)
Its chain is weak due to 2 defects.
The first is the ambiguous narration of Ibn Jurayj, for he was a mudallis, and Ibn Hajar counted him in the third level. (Tabaqat al Mudallisin by Ibn Hajar 37, 83.)
The second is the weakness of Ismaʿil ibn Ayyash in what he narrates from the Hijazis, and this is one of those narrations. Al Albani graded the hadith weak in al Irwaʾ. (al Taqrib by Ibn Hajar 142, 477; Irwaʾ al Ghalil by al Albani 2254, 7/308.)
Ibn Hajar said in al Talkhis: “Al Shafiʿi said: Malik used to mention that it is the Sunnah, and I used to follow him in it, while something remained in myself about it. Then I learned that he meant the Sunnah of the people of Madinah, so I went back from it.” (al Talkhis al Habir by Ibn Hajar 4/25.)
Ibn Qudamah said: “Also, because it is the ijmaʿ of the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, since no disagreement from them has been transmitted except from Ali, and we do not know that this is established from him. Also, what is below one third is equal between male and female, as proven by the fetus, because male and female are equal concerning it.
As for one third itself, are they equal in it? There are 2 reports. One of them is that they are equal in it, because it is not considered the limit of smallness, and for this reason the will is valid at one third.
It was also narrated that they differ in it, and this is the sound view, due to his saying: ‘until it reaches one third.’ ‘Until’ is for an end point, so what comes at the end point must differ from what came before it.” (al Mughni by Ibn Qudamah 8/314.)
At the end of this chapter, it becomes clear that I did not cover the woman’s right to financial donations, because this has already been studied in detail in the chapter on Sharia rights. So let women praise Allah, Most High, for the great blessings He has granted them. To Him belongs all praise, as befits the majesty of His Face and the greatness of His authority. (This has already passed on p. 192.)
“bitterness and misery.” (Tanbihat ʿala Ahkam Takhtass bil Muʾminat by Salih al Fawzan 50.)
From what has passed, it becomes clear that the woman’s function in her house is higher than every function. She produces bright minds and good believing souls. She raises the young, builds the generation, and feeds it with the highest social feelings, which raise within it the spirit of harmony with society, so it goes out to society loving others and being loved by others.
It is no surprise that Islam attaches this great function to her, because of its greatness, and because of what Allah has prepared within her of abilities that make her carry out this function with skill and success, and make Paradise beneath her feet.
The Woman’s Right To Work Outside The Home
Even though Islam urges the woman to remain in her house and to carry out the raising of her child, it does not oppose her work when its conditions and limits are met. The Sunnah and the Sirah both testify to this study. Among the proofs for that are the following.
The First Proof
Muslim reported in his Sahih from the hadith of Jabir ibn Abd Allah, who said:
“My maternal aunt was divorced, so she wanted to cut the dates from her palm trees. A man rebuked her for going out, so she came to the Prophet ﷺ. He said: ‘Yes, cut the dates from your palm trees, for perhaps you may give charity or do a good deed.'” (Sahih Muslim 1483, 2/1121. “Cut the dates” means harvesting the date palms and cutting their fruit. See al Nihayah by Ibn al Athir 1/244. See the difference over the divorced woman whose divorce is final going out during the waiting period in Sharh Maʿani al Athar by al Tahawi 3/74; Tafsir al Qurtubi by al Qurtubi 18/154; Subul al Salam by al Sanʿani 3/202.)
In this hadith, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ permitted a woman observing the waiting period after a final divorce to go out to cut the dates from her palm trees. From the understood meaning of the hadith, it is known that the maternal aunt of Jabir used to go out before her waiting period without anyone objecting to it. When she entered her waiting period, a man objected to her going out, so she took the matter to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, and he permitted her. Rather, he gave the reason for that as charity and doing good.
Al Nawawi (d. 676AH) said: “In it is the recommendation of giving charity from dates at the time of their harvest, giving gifts, the recommendation of gently prompting the owner of dates to do that, and reminding him of good and righteousness.”
The hadith is proof that the woman may look after her farming, just like the man.
The Second Proof
Al Bukhari reported in his Sahih, in the Book of Sales, under the chapter on mentioning the weaver, from the hadith of Sahl ibn Saʿd, who said:
“A woman came with a cloak.” He said: “Do you know what a cloak is?” It was said to him: “Yes, it is a wrapped cloth, woven at its edge.”
She said: “O Messenger of Allah, I wove this with my own hand to clothe you with it.” The Prophet ﷺ took it while he was in need of it. He came out to us while it was his lower garment. A man from the people said: “O Messenger of Allah, clothe me with it.” He said: “Yes.” The Prophet ﷺ sat in the gathering, then returned, folded it, and sent it to him.
The people said: “You have not done well. You asked him for it while you knew that he does not refuse one who asks.”
The man said: “By Allah, I only asked him for it so that it would be my shroud on the day I die.”
Sahl said: “So it was his shroud.” (Sahih al Bukhari 1987, 2/72. Ibn Hajar said in Fath al Bari: “Explaining the cloak as a wrapped cloth is loose wording, because the cloak is a covering, and a wrapped cloth is what one wraps himself with, so it is broader. But because most of their wrapping was with it, they gave it that name.” Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 3/143.)
In the hadith, the woman used to work in weaving. Based upon this, al Bukhari placed the heading: “The chapter on mentioning the weaver.”
Ibn Abidin (d. 1252AH) said: “The father may send his daughter to a woman who teaches her a craft, such as embroidery and sewing, for example, so that she can support herself from her own earning when needed.” (Hashiyat Radd al Muhtar by Ibn Abidin 2/671.)
The Third Proof
What has already passed under the woman’s right to financial dealings of hadiths showing that women worked during the time of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ in buying and selling without objection. (This has already passed on p. 709 of the study.)
The Fourth Proof
Al Bukhari reported in his Sahih, in the Book of Jihad, under the chapter on women treating the wounded in battle, and in the Book of Medicine, under the chapter on whether a man may treat a woman or a woman may treat a man, from the hadith of al Rubayyiʿ bint Muʿawwidh, who said:
“We were with the Prophet ﷺ giving water, treating the wounded, and returning the killed to Madinah.” The wording is in the Book of Jihad. (Sahih al Bukhari 2726, 3/1056; Sahih al Bukhari 5355, 5/2151.)
Ibn Hajar (d. 852AH) said: “In it is the permissibility of a woman treating a non mahram man when there is necessity. Ibn Battal said: This is specific to women who are mahrams, then to elderly women among them, because the place of the wound is not enjoyed by touching. Rather, the skin recoils from it.
If necessity calls for other than elderly women, then it should be without direct contact and touching. This is indicated by their agreement that if a woman dies and no woman is found to wash her, a man does not directly wash her by touching her. Rather, he washes her from behind a barrier, according to some of them, such as al Zuhri. According to the majority, dry purification is performed for her. Al Awzaʿi said: She is buried as she is. Ibn al Munir said: The difference between the case of medical care and washing the dead is that washing is worship, while medical care is necessity, and necessities permit prohibited matters.” (Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 6/79–80. More explanation of the hadith has already passed under the woman’s right to participate in jihad, p. 376.)
Al Bukhari also reported in al Adab al Mufrad from the hadith of Mahmud ibn Labid, who said:
“When the vein of Saʿd was struck on the day of the Trench and his condition became severe, they moved him to a woman called Rufaydah, who used to treat the wounded. When the Prophet ﷺ passed by him, he would say: ‘How did you reach the evening?’ And when he came in the morning: ‘How did you reach the morning?'” (al Adab al Mufrad by al Bukhari 1129. Ibn Hajar graded its chain sound in al Isabah 11175, 7/646. Al Albani graded it sound in Sahih al Adab al Mufrad.)
Ibn Hajar said in al Isabah: “Rufaydah al Ansariyyah was mentioned by Ibn Ishaq in the story of Saʿd ibn Muʿadh when he was wounded during the Trench. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: Place him in the tent of Rufaydah, which is in the masjid, so that I may visit him from close by. She was a woman who treated the wounded and volunteered herself to serve Muslims who had lost means and needed care.” (al Isabah by Ibn Hajar 11175, 7/646.)
In these hadiths is the woman practising the profession of medical care.
From what has already passed of hadiths concerning the woman’s right to knowledge, daʿwah, buying, and selling, the realism of this religion becomes clear, as well as its call for its members to participate in the advancement and rise of society, while preserving priorities, arranging duties, and without neglecting the main obligations.
The Limits Of The Woman’s Work In Islam
Islam laid down for the woman’s work an upright path, sound in step, far in vision, and deep in feeling.
Safety, security, and affection spread over its sides.
Through it, the dignity of the woman is preserved, and the society that accepts this path and governs by it only reaps fruits of good that continue to give. Here is the explanation of these limits. (See al Marʾah bayn al Bayt wa al Mujtamaʿ by Muhammad al Bahi 180; al Marʾah bayn al Fiqh wa al Qanun by Mustafa al Sibaʿi 171; al Marʾah al Muslimah by Wahbi Sulayman 228; Huquq al Marʾah fi al Sharia al Islamiyyah by Ibrahim al Najjar 204; Qadaya al Marʾah fi al Muʾtamarat al Dawliyyah by Fuad al Abd al Karim 780.)
The First Limit
Her guardian must permit her to work, whether he is her husband or other than her husband. Without the agreement of her guardian, it is not permissible for her to work, because the man is a caretaker over the woman, as Allah, Most High, said:
الرِّجَالُ قَوَّامُونَ عَلَى النِّسَاءِ بِمَا فَضَّلَ اللَّهُ بَعْضَهُمْ عَلَى بَعْضٍ وَبِمَا أَنْفَقُوا مِنْ أَمْوَالِهِمْ
“Men are caretakers over women because of what Allah has given some over others, and because of what they spend from their wealth.” (al Nisa 34)
This is unless he prevents her out of spite, wrong, and oppression while she needs to work. In that case, he has no right of permission over her in this matter. Likewise, he has no right to force her to do professional work that she does not accept.
The Second Limit
This work that she practises must not turn her away from marriage, which Islam urged and confirmed, nor delay it without need.
The Third Limit
Islam urges having children and increasing offspring. The proofs for this are many, as Allah, Mighty and Exalted, says:
وَاللَّهُ جَعَلَ لَكُمْ مِنْ أَنْفُسِكُمْ أَزْوَاجًا وَجَعَلَ لَكُمْ مِنْ أَزْوَاجِكُمْ بَنِينَ وَحَفَدَةً وَرَزَقَكُمْ مِنَ الطَّيِّبَاتِ
“Allah has made for you spouses from yourselves, and has made for you from your spouses sons and grandchildren, and has provided you from good things.” (al Nahl 72)
The Muslim woman should not make work something that turns her away from having children under the excuse of being busy with work.
The Fourth Limit
This work must not be at the expense of her duties toward her husband and child. The woman’s work in principle is in her house, and work outside it is an incidental matter. In the hadith of Abd Allah ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with them both, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “The woman is a shepherd over the household of her husband and his child, and she is responsible for them.”
The Fifth Limit
The woman’s work must be lawful. Lawful work is what agrees with the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, such as buying, selling, teaching, medicine, daʿwah to Allah, and similar things.
As for unlawful work, it is every work about which a specific prohibition has come in Sharia, such as a woman working in interest based institutions, alcohol factories, dancing and singing, acting, and practising prostitution.
The Sixth Limit
The woman’s work must agree with her nature, her femininity, and her physical and emotional qualities, such as the lawful types of work mentioned earlier. As for work that does not agree with her nature or her femininity, such as cleaning public streets, constructing buildings, digging roads, working in coal mines, and other hard jobs, it is not permissible for her to practise them, because practising them is an aggression against her nature and femininity, and a burdening of her with what she cannot bear. The Lord, Glorious and Exalted is He, says:
لَا يُكَلِّفُ اللَّهُ نَفْسًا إِلَّا وُسْعَهَا
“Allah does not burden any soul except with what it can bear.” (al Baqarah 286)
Burdening someone without ability and without considering the natural makeup is burdening with what cannot be borne. (See al Ihkam by al Amidi 1/160; al Muwafaqat by al Shatibi 2/115.)
The Seventh Limit
She must go out to work with lawful covering clothing that covers her whole body, with its descriptions and conditions. (See the conditions of lawful clothing in Jilbab al Marʾah al Muslimah by al Albani; Awdat al Hijab by Muhammad Ismail al Muqaddam 3/145; Ahamm Qadaya al Marʾah al Muslimah by Muhammad Abi Yahya 31 and what follows.)
Among its conditions are the following.
It Must Cover The Whole Body
This is due to His saying, Most High:
يَاأَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُلْ لِأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَاءِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ جَلَابِيبِهِنَّ ذَلِكَ أَدْنَى أَنْ يُعْرَفْنَ فَلَا يُؤْذَيْنَ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَحِيمًا
“O Prophet, tell your wives, your daughters, and the women of the believers to draw their outer garments over themselves. That is nearer to their being known, so they will not be harmed. Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.” (al Ahzab 59)
The outer garment is the large covering, meaning the cloak, with which the woman wraps herself over her clothes, according to the soundest of the views. (See Fath al Qadir by al Shawkani 4/34. It has been explained through 7 views, which Ibn Hajar brought in Fath al Bari 1/336. This is one of them, and al Baghawi was firm upon it in his Tafsir 3/339. Ibn Hazm said in al Muhalla 3/217: “The outer garment, in the language of the Arabs with which the Messenger of Allah ﷺ addressed us, is what covers the whole body, not part of it.” Al Qurtubi graded it sound in his Tafsir 12/309.)
Al Albani (d. 1420AH), may Allah have mercy on him, said: “The truth required by acting upon what is in the 2 verses of al Nur and al Ahzab is that when the woman leaves her house, she must cover her head and wear the outer garment over the head covering, because, as we said earlier, it is more covering for her and further from describing the size of her head and shoulders. This is a matter sought by the Lawgiver.
Know that most Muslim women have failed regarding this combining between the head covering and the outer garment when the woman goes out. The reality among them is either the outer garment alone over their heads or the head covering, and with some of them it may not be complete, like what is called today the scarf, so what Allah has forbidden them to show of inner beauty becomes uncovered. Is it not time for righteous women, wherever they are, to wake from their heedlessness, fear Allah regarding themselves, and place the outer garments over their head coverings?” (Jilbab al Marʾah al Muslimah by al Albani 85–86.)
It Must Not Be Beauty In Itself
This is due to His saying, Most High:
وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ
“And they must not show their beauty.” (al Nur 31)
Through its general wording, this includes outer clothing if it is decorated and draws the eyes of men toward it. This is supported by His saying, Most High:
وَقَرْنَ فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ وَلَا تَبَرَّجْنَ تَبَرُّجَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ الْأُولَى
“Remain in your houses and do not display yourselves as women displayed themselves in the first period of ignorance.” (al Ahzab 33)
It says in Fath al Bayan: “Display is when the woman shows her beauty, her attractive qualities, and what she must cover, in a way by which she calls the desire of men.” The intent behind commanding the outer garment is only to cover the woman’s beauty. It therefore cannot be reasonable that the outer garment itself should be beauty. This, as you can see, is clear and not hidden. (Fath al Bayan by Siddiq Hasan Khan 7/274.)
Islam strongly warned against display to the point that it placed it together with shirk, fornication and adultery, theft, and other forbidden matters, when the Prophet ﷺ took the pledge from women that they would not do that. Abd Allah ibn Amr, may Allah be pleased with them both, said:
“Umaymah bint Ruqayqah came to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ to pledge allegiance to him upon Islam. He said: ‘I pledge allegiance to you that you will not associate anything with Allah, will not steal, will not commit fornication or adultery, will not kill your child, will not bring a slander that you invent between your hands and feet, will not wail over the dead, and will not display yourself with the display of the first period of ignorance.'”
Al Alusi (d. 1270AH) said in Ruh al Maʿani: “Know that, in my view, what is connected to the beauty that is prohibited to show is what most luxurious women in our time wear over their clothes and use to cover themselves when they leave their houses. It is a covering woven from silk of several colours, and it contains golden and silver designs that amaze the eyes. I see that husbands and the like permitting them to go out with that and walk with it among non mahram men is from little protective jealousy, and the trial of this has become widespread.” (Ruh al Maʿani by al Alusi 6/56.)
It Must Be Thick And Not Transparent
This is because covering is only achieved through that. As for transparent clothing, it increases the woman in temptation and beauty. Muslim reported in his Sahih, in the Book of Clothing and Adornment, under the chapter on women who are clothed and unclothed, leaning away and making others lean away, from the hadith of Abu Hurayrah, who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:
“Two types of the people of the Fire I have not seen: people with whips like the tails of cattle with which they strike people, and women who are clothed but unclothed, making others lean and leaning themselves. Their heads are like the leaning humps of camels. They will not enter Paradise and will not find its scent, even though its scent is found from such and such a distance.” (Sahih Muslim 2128, 3/1680.)
Ibn Abd al Barr (d. 463AH) said: “He meant women who wear light clothing that describes and does not cover. They are clothed in name, unclothed in reality.” (al Istidhkar by Ibn Abd al Barr 8/307.)
Ibn Hajar al Haytami (d. 974AH) made a special chapter in al Zawajir on a woman wearing a thin garment that describes her skin, and that it is from the major sins. (al Zawajir by Ibn Hajar al Haytami 1/127.)
It Must Be Loose And Not Tight
It must not describe anything from her body, because the purpose of clothing is to remove temptation, and this is only achieved through loose and wide clothing. As for tight clothing, even if it covers the colour of the skin, it describes the size of her body or part of it, and presents it before the eyes of men. In that is corruption and a call toward it, which is not hidden.
Ahmad reported in al Musnad, al Bayhaqi reported in al Sunan, and al Maqdisi reported in al Mukhtarah from the hadith of Usamah ibn Zayd, who said:
“The Messenger of Allah ﷺ clothed me with a thick Coptic garment from what Dihyah al Kalbi had gifted to him, so I clothed my wife with it. He said: ‘Why did you not wear the Coptic garment?’ I said: I clothed my wife with it. He said: ‘Command her to place a lining underneath it, for I fear that it will describe the size of her bones.'” The wording is that of Ahmad. (Musnad Ahmad 21834, 5/205; al Sunan al Kubra by al Bayhaqi 3078, 2/234; al Mukhtarah by al Maqdisi 1365, 4/149. Al Albani graded it hasan in Jilbab al Marʾah al Muslimah.)
The Prophet ﷺ commanded Usamah to command his wife to place a lining beneath the Coptic garment, and a lining is an undergarment worn beneath the outer garment, in order to prevent it from describing her body. The command indicates obligation. (See Gharib al Hadith by Abu Ubayd 3/179; al Nihayah by Ibn al Athir 4/7. Al Albani replied to those who explained the Coptic garment as transparent clothing from 2 ways: first, his clear statement in describing the Coptic garment as “thick”; second, the reasoning of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ in his saying: “I fear that it will describe the size of her bones.” See Jilbab al Marʾah al Muslimah by al Albani 132.)
It Must Not Be Scented Or Perfumed
This is due to many hadiths forbidding women from using perfume when they leave their houses. Among them is what Imam Ahmad reported in al Musnad, Abu Dawud reported in al Sunan, al Tirmidhi reported in al Sunan, al Nasaʾi reported in al Mujtaba, and al Hakim reported in al Mustadrak from the hadith of Abu Musa al Ashʿari, that the Prophet ﷺ said:
“Any woman who applies perfume and then passes by a people so that they may smell her scent, she is an adulteress.” (Musnad Ahmad 19726, 4/413; Sunan Abi Dawud 4173, 4/79; Jamiʿ al Tirmidhi 2786, 5/106; Sunan al Nasaʾi 5126, 8/153; al Mustadrak by al Hakim 3497, 2/430.)
Al Tirmidhi said: “Hasan sahih.” Al Hakim said: “Sound in chain.” Al Dhahabi agreed with him. Al Albani graded its chain hasan in al Sahihah.
Muslim reported in his Sahih, in the Book of Prayer, under the chapter on women going out to the masjids if no temptation results from it, and that she must not go out perfumed, from the hadith of Zaynab, the wife of Abd Allah, who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said to us:
“When one of you attends the masjid, she must not touch perfume.” (Sahih Muslim 443, 1/328.)
And from the hadith of Abu Hurayrah, raised to the Prophet ﷺ:
“Any woman who has used incense must not attend the later Isha prayer with us.” (Sahih Muslim 444, 1/328.)
Ibn Daqiq al Id (d. 702AH) said: “In it is the prohibition of perfume for one who intends to go out to the masjid, because it stirs the cause of men’s desire.” (Ihkam al Ahkam by Ibn Daqiq al Id 3/101.)
Al Albani said: “If that is forbidden for one intending the masjid, then what is the ruling for one intending the market, alleys, and streets?” (Jilbab al Marʾah al Muslimah by al Albani 139.)
These hadiths are general and include all times. The later Isha prayer was mentioned specifically in the hadith of Abu Hurayrah because temptation at its time is stronger due to darkness and the emptiness of the road, unlike other times. (See al Mirqat by Ali al Qari 2/71.)
It Must Not Resemble Men’s Clothing
Al Bukhari reported in his Sahih, in the Book of Legal Punishments, under the chapter on expelling people of sin and effeminate men, from the hadith of Ibn Abbas, who said:
“The Prophet ﷺ cursed effeminate men and women who imitate men. He said: ‘Expel them from your houses.’ So he expelled so and so, and Umar expelled so and so.” (Sahih al Bukhari 6445, 6/2508.)
He also reported in the Book of Clothing, under the chapter on men who imitate women and women who imitate men, from the hadith of Ibn Abbas:
“The Messenger of Allah ﷺ cursed men who imitate women and women who imitate men.” (Sahih al Bukhari 5546, 5/2207.)
Ibn Hajar said in Fath al Bari: “Al Tabari said: It is not permissible for men to imitate women in clothing and adornment that are specific to women, nor the reverse.” (Fath al Bari by Ibn Hajar 10/332.)
Ibn Abi Jamrah (d. 699AH) said in Bahjat al Nufus: “The wisdom in cursing the one who imitates is that he has taken something out of the description upon which the Wisest of judges placed it. He pointed to that in cursing those women who join hair, saying: ‘Those who change the creation of Allah.'” (Bahjat al Nufus by Ibn Abi Jamrah 3/104. Reported by al Bukhari 4604, 4/1853, and Muslim 2125, 3/1678, from the hadith of Ibn Masʿud.)
It Must Not Resemble The Clothing Of Disbelieving Women
The Messenger ﷺ warned against resembling the disbelievers. Muslim reported in his Sahih from the hadith of Abd Allah ibn Amr, who informed him:
“The Messenger of Allah ﷺ saw me wearing 2 garments dyed with safflower. He said: ‘These are from the garments of the disbelievers, so do not wear them.'” (Sahih Muslim 2077, 3/1647.)
It Must Not Be Clothing Of Fame
Ahmad reported in al Musnad, Abu Dawud reported in al Sunan, and Ibn Majah reported in al Sunan from the hadith of Ibn Umar, who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:
“Whoever wears a garment of fame, Allah will clothe him with a garment of humiliation on the Day of Resurrection.” (Musnad Ahmad 5664, 2/92; Sunan Abi Dawud 4029, 4/43; Sunan Ibn Majah 3606–3607, 2/1192. Al Albani graded its chain hasan in Jilbab al Marʾah al Muslimah.)
Whoever goes out for her work must fear her Lord and hold firmly to covering. Allah, Most High, says:
يَاأَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا قُوا أَنْفُسَكُمْ وَأَهْلِيكُمْ نَارًا وَقُودُهَا النَّاسُ وَالْحِجَارَةُ عَلَيْهَا مَلَائِكَةٌ غِلَاظٌ شِدَادٌ لَا يَعْصُونَ اللَّهَ مَا أَمَرَهُمْ وَيَفْعَلُونَ مَا يُؤْمَرُونَ
“O you who believe, protect yourselves and your families from a Fire whose fuel is people and stones. Over it are angels, harsh and strong. They do not disobey Allah in what He commands them, and they do what they are commanded.” (al Tahrim 6)
