Section — Wearing silk and qazz is permissible for women, not for men, even if they are fighters, except for a silk emblem or fabric woven with gold to the breadth of four fingers — Tuḥfat al-Mulūk

Ruling812

1 note

Using [silk] as a pillow and sleeping on it is lawful for them both—unlike a blanket.

Ruling813

1 note

Hanging a curtain on the door for need is lawful.

Ruling814

1 note

Silk brocade belts (tikkah) of silk and dibāj and their pouches are unlawful.

Ruling815

1 note

Wearing what has silk as warp is lawful without restriction; what has silk as weft is lawful in war only.

Ruling816

1 note

Nothing of gold is lawful for men.

Ruling817

For them from silver are lawful: the ring, the belt buckle and sword ornaments.

Saved on this device only — not synced to your account.

Sign in to tag and sync notes across devices.

Ruling818

Wearing a ring of stone, iron or brass is unlawful for men and women; what counts is the band, so the bezel may be stone. The man should turn the bezel towards the inside of his palm.

Saved on this device only — not synced to your account.

Sign in to tag and sync notes across devices.

Ruling819

1 note

It is better for one who is not a judge or ruler and does not need a seal to leave it off, and its weight should not exceed one mithqāl.

Ruling820

1 note

A loose tooth should not be bound with gold but with silver; if one’s nose is cut off or a tooth falls out it is replaced with silver; if it putrefies it is replaced with gold.

Ruling821

1 note

Dressing boys in gold and silk is unlawful; the sin lies on the one who clothes them.

From the editors

Footnotes

This is because it increases affection and love between spouses, as mentioned in al-Baḥr al-Rāʿiq 8:208. From Abū Yūsuf, who said, ‘I like it when my wife adorns herself for me, as she likes it when I adorn myself for her.’ The most correct (aṣaḥḥ) is that there is no harm in dying hair whether in war or otherwise. It is detailed in al-Muḥīṭ regarding dyeing with black: most scholars say it is disliked, but some permit it. This is narrated from Abū Yūsuf. As for using red, it is the Sunnah for men and a symbol of the Muslims, as in Radd al-Muḥtār 6:756. Also, in it, 6:422: It is disliked to use black except for war. It says in al-Dhakhīrah: As for dyeing with black for battle; to appear more formidable to the enemy, it is praiseworthy by agreement, and if it is to beautify oneself for women, it is disliked, and this is the opinion of most scholars, while some allowed it without disliking. See: Fatāwā al-Hindiyya 5:359, and Sharḥ Shirʿat al-Islām p. 295.

Ruling822

Carrying a handkerchief out of arrogance is unlawful; wiping sweat, moisture of ablution and mucus and the like is lawful; crossing the legs is lawful for need and unlawful out of arrogance.

Saved on this device only — not synced to your account.

Sign in to tag and sync notes across devices.

Ruling823

1 note

Tying the ratīmah (forelock loop) is lawful.

From the editors

Footnotes

Due to the ḥadīth: “Allah has permitted gold and silk for the females of his Ummah (nation) and forbidden it for the males,” in Sunan al-Nasāʿī 5:437, al-Mujtabā 8:161, and Musnad Aḥmad 4:392. al-Tirmidhī authenticated it (ṣaḥḥahu). The Messenger also said, “Do not wear silk, for whoever does not wear it in this world will not wear it in the Hereafter.” in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 2:695, and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 3:1638.

This is according to Abū Ḥanīfa. According to the two Companions (Abū Yūsuf and Muḥammad), it is permissible in war. See: al-Hidāyah 1:414, Dhakhīrat al-ʿUqbā p. 577, and al-Tabyīn 6:14.

It is apparent (ẓahir) that the scattered decorations on the garment should not be combined. Unless it is a thread of silk and a thread of something else, so that it all appears as silk. But if each decoration one is distinct, like the embroidery on a turban, it is not combined, as in al-Durr al-Mukhtār and Radd al-Muḥtār 6:353.

Ruling824

1 note

Looking at other than the face and hands of an unrelated free woman is unlawful; there are two reports about the foot. If he fears desire he should not look at the face either except for need; likewise if in doubt.

Ruling825

1 note

A young man may not touch her face and hands even if safe from desire, except an old woman who is not desired—then handshaking and the like are lawful; likewise if he is an elder and safe on his and her account; if he fears for her it is forbidden.

Ruling826

1 note

Touching a small girl who is not [of an age] to be desired is lawful.

Ruling827

1 note

The judge may look when giving judgement, the witness when testifying specifically, and the suitor may look with fear of desire—but he must intend thereby judgement, testimony and upholding the Sunna as far as possible, not satisfying desire.

From the editors

Footnotes

i.e., whether it is in war or not. Likewise, regardless of if the silk is the lesser component or the predominant component or equal to the other material like cotton, wool, linen, or wool, according to the sound (ṣaḥīḥ) view. This is because a garment does not become a garment except through weaving, and weaving is done with the weft (horizontal thread), so it is the weft that is considered. It does not become a garment except with both (warp and weft), the ʿillah (underlying cause) has two aspects, so the latter of them is considered, which is the weft. The weft is what is apparent in the appearance, the consideration is for what is apparent, not what is hidden.

It is permissible in war out of necessity; to instil awe and fear in the eyes of the enemy due to its brilliance and shine, and there is no necessity outside of it, therefore it is disliked. See: al-Tabiyyīn 6:15, and Dhakhirat al-ʿUqba p. 577.

Ruling828

1 note

The physician may look at the site of her illness if he cannot instruct a woman; then he covers what lies beyond the site of illness, looks and lowers his gaze as much as possible; likewise the midwife, circumciser and one giving enema.

From the editors

Footnotes

al-Kāsānī stated in al-Badā’i‘ 5:124: ‘If a woman has a wound or ulcer in a place where it is not permissible for men to look, it is better for her to be treated by another woman if she knows the treatment. If she does not know, she should learn and then treat her. If no woman is available who knows the treatment or can learn, and there is fear of her perishing or suffering unbearable pain, then a man may treat her. However, he should only uncover the area of the wound and lower his gaze as much as possible; because the sacred prohibitions become permissible in cases of necessity, like the prohibition of dead meat and drinking wine in situations of starvation or coercion. However, what is established by necessity should not extend beyond the area of necessity; because the reason for its establishment is the necessity, and the ruling does not exceed the reason.’ Ibn Nujaym stated in al-Baḥr al-Rā’iq 8:218: ‘A physician is only permitted to do this if no female physician is available. If one is available, then he is not allowed to look.’

Ruling829

A man may look at another man’s whole body except his ʿawrah (nakedness), and may touch what he may look at.

Saved on this device only — not synced to your account.

Sign in to tag and sync notes across devices.

Ruling830

1 note

A woman may look at a woman to the extent a man may look at a man.

From the editors

Footnotes

Because looking at one’s own gender is less severe, as mentioned in al-Hidāyah 10:26.

Due to them being the same gender and the general absence of desire, and what is common is considered certain; there is necessity for exposure among them, such as in entering bathhouses. See: Dhākhirat al-’Uqbā pp. 578-579, al-Mabsūṭ 10:147-148, al-Hidāyah 10:30, and al-’Ināyah 10:30. Non-Muslim women, like men, are only permitted to see the hands and face of a Muslim woman. Therefore, a Muslim woman should not expose her body to them. This is based on Allah’s directive: {…tell the believing women to lower their gazes, protect their private parts, and not display their adornments…except…and their women…} [An-Nur: 31]; this refers to Muslim women as explained by scholars like Ibn ‘Abbās, Ibn Zayd, and Mujāhid. The possessive form used in the verse emphasizes their shared faith, mandating their veiling from non-believers, including those from the People of the Book, as elaborated in Aḥkām al-Qurʾān 3:409. A believing woman should refrain from undressing in front of a polytheist or a woman from the People of the Book. Ismā‘īl an-Nābulsi also stated that it is impermissible for a Muslim woman to reveal herself to Jewish, Christian, or polytheist women unless the non-Muslim woman is her slave. Furthermore, as per Niṣāb al-Iḥtisāb, it is deemed inappropriate for a virtuous woman to be observed by a wicked woman, who might describe her appearance to men. Therefore, a Muslim woman should not remove her jilbāb or khimār in such situations. See: Radd al-Muḥtār 6:371.

Ruling831

1 note

He may look at his female slave who is lawful to him and his wife at their whole bodies.

From the editors

Footnotes

This is because he may touch her and be intimate with her and so looking is even more so justified. As mentioned in al-Mabsūṭ 10:148. Allah says: {Those who guard their private parts, except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for they surely are not to be blamed.} [Al-Mu’minūn 5-6], and the Prophet said: ‘Guard your private parts except from your wife or what your right hand possesses.’ in Sunan Abī Dāwūd 4:40, Sunan at-Tirmidhī 5:97, which he rated as good, and ‘A’isha, may Allah be pleased with her, said: ‘I used to bathe with The Messenger of Allah from a single container while we were both in a state of janābah (major ritual impurity)’ in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 1:256, and Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 1:100.

This is permissible if he is safe from having desire; otherwise, he should not look. It is not permissible for him to look at the back, belly, or thigh due to the necessity of seeing her in domestic work clothes. Allah said, ‘Let them not display their adornment except to their husbands, or their fathers, or the fathers of their husbands, or their sons…’ [An-Nur: 31], it is permissible for him to look at places of visible and hidden adornment. The verse does not mean the adornment itself, as these are sold in markets and seen by strangers. Rather, it refers to the places of adornment: the head where the crown and circlet are worn, the hair where ornaments are placed, the neck where necklaces hang, the chest also for necklaces and scarves which may extend to the chest, the ear where earrings are worn, the upper arm where armlets are worn, the forearm where bracelets are worn, the hand where rings and henna are applied, the leg where anklets are worn, and the foot where henna is applied. See: al-Mabsūṭ 10:149, al-Badā’i‘ 5:120, al-Tabiyyīn 6:19, and al-’Ināyah 10:33-34.

Ruling832

1 note

He may look at his unmarriageable kin at what is beyond the belly, the back and the thigh.

From the editors

Footnotes

Using gold and silver is prohibited except for necessities, which are fulfilled by the lesser option, silver, thus there is no need for the higher option, and it remains on the original ruling of impermissibility. This is according to Abu Ḥanīfa and Abu Yusuf. However, Muhammad said it is permissible with gold, and this is a narration from them. It is reported that ʿUrfajah bin Asʿad had his nose injured during the Days of Ignorance at the battle of Dhu’l-Kalāb, and he made a nose of silver which then rotted, so the Prophet instructed him to make a nose of gold. In Sunan an-Nasā’ī 5:440, al-Mujtaba 8:164. See: al-Istiyʿāb 2:744, Khalāsat al-Badr al-Munīr 1:307, Talkhīs al-Ḥabīr 2:176, among others. He also argues that because silver and gold are of the same kind, and the original rule is prohibition for both, if one is allowed in certain contexts, the other is also permissible. See: al-Tabyīn 6:16, among others.

Ruling833

1 note

The unmarriageable kin (maḥram): everyone with whom her marriage is permanently forbidden by blood, breastfeeding or affinity—even if through fornication.

Ruling834

1 note

Touching in that case too [is allowed]; if he fears for himself or her he should neither look nor touch. There is no harm in privacy with her or travelling with her.

Ruling835

1 note

He may look at another’s slave girl when safe from desire to what he may look at of unmarriageable kin—even if she is a mother of his child, mukātabah, mudabbirah or mustasʿāh; there are two opinions on privacy and travel with her. Touching that at the time of purchase is lawful even if he fears desire; it was said looking at purchase time with fear of desire is lawful, touching is not lawful with that.

Ruling836

The castrated, the severed and the effeminate are like an able man in the ruling of looking and touching.

Saved on this device only — not synced to your account.

Sign in to tag and sync notes across devices.

Ruling837

1 note

The slave is like a stranger in viewing his mistress, and he may enter upon her without permission.

From the editors

Footnotes

The first view is that the feet are considered ʿawrah according to the ẓahir ar-riwāyah, and this was authenticated by al-Aqṭaʿ and Qāḍī Khān. The second view is that the feet are not ʿawrah. al-Ḥasan ibn Ziyād narrated from Abū Ḥanīfah that looking at her feet is permissible, so they are not ʿawrah, and this was also stated by al-Karkhī. This is because a woman might struggle to not expose her feet when walking barefoot or in sandals because she might not always find socks to wear. Moreover, desire is not typically aroused by looking at the feet as it is by looking at the face. Therefore, if the face is not ʿawrah despite desire it causes, the feet are even less likely to be. This was stated in al-Hidāyah 1:259, and Majmaʾ al-Anhur 1:81. This is the more correct opinion (aṣaḥḥ). Al-Mawṣilī stated in al-Ikhtiyār that the feet are not ʿawrah during prayer but are ʿawrah outside of prayer.

Ruling838

1 note

He may practise coitus interruptus with his slave girl without her permission, with his free wife with her permission, and with his slave wife with her owner’s permission.

From the editors

Footnotes

Meaning that looking at the face and hands is permissible provided there is no fear of arousal. However, it is not allowed if there is doubt that he may feel desire, because looking is a form of zinā (adultery). Allah commands: “Let them not display their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof.” [An-Nūr: 31]: meaning the places of their adornments, as in al-Hidāyah 10:24. The meaning of ‘that which appears thereof’ according to Ibn ‘Abbās, Ibn ‘Umar, ‘Ā’ishah, Makhūl, Sa‘īd ibn Jubayr, and Mujāhid, “the face and the hands,” in Sunan al-Bayhaqī al-Kabīr 2:226, 7:85,94, Muṣannaf Ibn Abī Shaybah 3:546-547, Sunan al-Sughra 1:224, Sharḥ Ma‘ānī al-Āthār 4:332, al-Darāyah 1:123, Tafsīr al-Ṭabarī 17:118. Further, the Prophet said, “A woman in iḥrām should not wear a niqab or gloves.” in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 2:653; had they been ‘awrah, covering them would not have been forbidden. See: al-Baḥr al-Rā’iq 1:284.

Ruling839

Kissing a man on the mouth and embracing him tightly are disliked; there is no harm in shaking hands; it was said there is no harm in those two as well if he intends courtesy and honour.

Saved on this device only — not synced to your account.

Sign in to tag and sync notes across devices.

Ruling840

1 note

There is no harm in kissing the hand of a scholar or a just ruler.

From the editors

Footnotes

Meaning if she is an old woman who is not desired, then there is no harm in shaking hands with her and touching her hand, or if he is an elderly man who is safe with respect to himself and her, then there is no harm in shaking her hand. However, if he does not feel safe about her possibly developing desires, it is not permissible for him to shake her hand as it may expose her to temptation, just as it is not permissible if he fears for himself; because the prohibition is due to the fear of temptation. If she is someone who is not desired, then the fear of temptation is non-existent due to the absence of desire, as in al-Mabsūṭ 10:155, al-Badā’i‘ 5:123, al-Tabiyyīn 6:18, and al-Hidāyah 10:25.This differentiation in ruling between the young woman and the old, and the young man and the elderly man is because Allah distinguished between them in this matter, granting permission for older women to remove their hijabs due to the absence of temptation and desire, as He says: {And women of post-menstrual age who have no desire for marriage—there is no sin on them if they put off their outer garments, not displaying adornment. But to refrain is better for them} [An-Nūr: 60]. Allah also allowed an old man to see a woman’s adornment unlike a young man, due to the absence of desire and temptation with him, as He says: {Or those senile old men who have no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women} [An-Nūr: 31].

فصل ويَحِلّ لبس الحريرِ والقَزّ للنِّساء لا للرِّجال ولو كانوا مقاتلين إلا العلم الحرير أو المنسوج بالذهب قدرَ أربعةِ أصابع عرضاً.