Tuesday 28 February 2012

Ruling on eating KFC (Kentucky Fried Chicken)

I work for about three years in KFC. They told me that the chicken is halaal. They also had a certificate. But now i have checked the e-codes on the site guidedway.com and i have seen that it is mushbooh. So i want to know ur opinion.
And i have one more very important question. They use shortening(oil). i checked that about shortening on guidedway.com and it says IT DEPENDS. so i am not sure whether is haraam or halaal. my question is can I eat fries or is it better to avoid it.
What is the ruling on fish burger?.

Praise be to Allaah.
Firstly: 
In order for it to be permissible to eat chicken and meat that is sold in Muslim countries and elsewhere, two conditions must be met: 
1.     The meat should have been slaughtered in the manner prescribed in sharee‘ah; it should not have been stunned with electricity, or drowned in water, or any other means of killing that is done in some countries.
2.     The one who slaughtered the meat should have been a Muslim or a kitaabi (one of the people of the Book, i.e., a Jew or Christian); it is not permissible to eat meat slaughtered by a communist, atheist or idol-worshipper. 
See the answer to question no. 83362
If it becomes clear to you that the chicken sold in these restaurants has not been slaughtered in the manner prescribed in sharee‘ah, it is not permissible for you to eat it and it is not permissible for you to work with those who sell it, because that comes under the heading of cooperating in sin and transgression. 
Secondly: 
It is permissible to eat fried meat and fish from these restaurants, subject to two conditions: 
1.     That it is not fried in the same oil as the non-halaal chicken or in vessels in which chicken was fried, until they have been washed, because the non-halaal chicken is maytah (dead meat) and is najis (impure).
2.     The meat should be halaal. 
And Allah knows best.

Ruling on eating the meat of mountain goats and wild cattle

What is the wisdom behind eating the meat of mountain goats and wild cattle? Is the basic principle behind it that it is permissible or allowed?.

Praise be to Allaah.
The basic principle with regard to land animals is that it is permissible to eat them unless there is evidence to show that it is prohibited. 
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The basic principle with regard to food is that it is permissible, except that for which there is evidence that it is prohibited. If we are uncertain about something, whether it is halaal or haraam, the basic principle is that it is permissible unless we find proof that it is prohibited. 
The evidence for that is the verse in which Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “He it is Who created for you all that is on earth” [al-Baqarah 2:29]. That includes everything on earth, animals, plants, clothing and so on. 
And Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “He it is Who created for you all that is on earth” [al-Jaathiyah 45:13]. 
Based on that, the basic principle with regard to all animals is that they are permissible unless there is evidence to prove that they are prohibited.
End quote from Fataawa Noor ‘ala al-Darb, 11/116 
It was narrated that there was consensus among the scholars that it is permissible to eat wild cattle. 
It says in al-Mawsoo‘ah al-Fiqhiyyah (5/134): Every wild animal that does not have fangs with which it kills prey and is not vermin – animals such as gazelles, wild cattle, wild donkeys (onagers), and wild camels – are permissible according to the consensus of the Muslims, because they come under the heading of that which is good (al-tayyibaat). End quote. 
Al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Mountains goats are halaal, and there is no difference of opinion concerning that.
End quote from al-Majmoo‘, 9/9 
Ibn Qudaamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Wild cattle are all permissible, of all types, including wild goats, mountain goats, wild cattle and other types of game. They are all permissible, and there is scholarly consensus on all of that; we do not know of any difference of opinion concerning it. (9/327). 
So it is permissible to eat it because it comes under the heading of al-tayyibaat (that which is good, i.e., halaal), and it does not come under the category of fanged predators or vermin. 
And Allah knows best.

Important note to learn and online quran recitation

Doing Quran recitation is the religious duty of every Muslim.  In saheed Sunnah, it is encouraged to do the recitation of Quran in a melodious voice by the holy Quran reciter by making the voice more melodious and interesting. Reading quran online and Making it melodious does not mean that it should be made more in singing tone but once should at least recite and read quranic Arabic in a good tone so that he/she himself feels good while listening to it and others also feel good while listening to quran. and plz do spread the true knowledge as much as you and Allah knows best listen quran online of the top online quran reciter with English and Urdu translation for quran teacher live

Ruling on eating balut (egg containing a dead chick)

Belut is a fertilized duck or chicken egg that contains a nearly-developed embryo. This egg is boiled and eaten in the shell. The prevalent belief here in the Philippines is that it contains a high level of protein and is good for the heart. It is sold in the markets and streets of the Philippines. What is the ruling on eating this kind of egg?.

Praise be to Allaah.
The description of this egg on some websites is as follows: 
Development of the chick usually takes 28 days, but balut is an egg that has been incubated for only 18 days, during which they get a real embryo with a primitive skeleton. 
When the egg reaches the age of 16-20 days, it is ready to be taken to market, where it will be boiled for thousands of customers who enjoy this food. This depends on the size of the egg. The egg that is 18 days old is the best. The sellers wash the eggs thoroughly with sponges, then when they are perfectly clean, they are put in a pot and boiled. End quote. 
With regard to the ruling on eating the egg with the embryo that is not fully developed, the ruling is that it is haraam, because it comes under the heading of eating maytah (something that has died without being slaughtered properly). Eating maytah is definitely haraam according to Islam. 
The scholars of the Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas were asked about the ruling on eating this egg and they ruled that it is haraam. 
They were asked: 
When we visited the Philippines, we noticed that the people of that country commonly eat a dish they call balut. This is a chicken egg that is placed in an incubator until it develops the form of a small chick with all its features. Three days before the egg is peeled, they cook the egg in water until it is done, then they break the egg and eat the chick that is inside it. 
Please advise us of the ruling on eating this food. 
They replied: 
If the situation is as described, then the chick is regarded as maytah (something that died without being properly slaughtered) and it is not permissible to eat it, because it had taken shape inside the egg, and the prohibition on maytah is something that is well known and well established in Islam. End quote. 
Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez Aal al-Shaykh, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allah ibn Ghadyaan, Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan, Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd 
Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (22/305) 
And Allah knows best.

Ruling on feeding dried blood to chickens

What is the ruling on chickens if they are fed dried blood? A lot of chickenfeed that chicken farmers buy to fatten their chickens, both in this country and abroad, contains dried blood, because in it there is a kind of protein that helps chickens grow.

Praise be to Allaah.
With regard to feeding chickens or other animals that may be eaten with impure substances (najasah) such as blood and the like, if it is a small amount, that does not matter and it does not make them haraam or make them jallaalah (animals that feed on filth and dung); rather the jallaalah should be detained until it becomes pure and clean, if most of its food is impure (najis). 
But if only a small amount of the animal’s food is impure (najis), then it does not have any impact and it does not make the animal haraam, so long as the ratio is 20% or 30% and so on. This does not matter. Rather what makes it haraam is if the ratio is more than that - 60% or 70%. If this is the ration, then the animal is regarded as jallaalah, so it should be detained so that it can be given good and pure food and water. If it has been detained for a suitable number of days, then it becomes pure and is halaal. This applies if the impure material is the majority of what it eats. The time for detaining animals varies. Chickens should be detained for three days, and that is enough for them to be fed good food and good water. Other animals, such as sheep, cattle and the like should be detained for longer than that, such as seven days or more, so that they can be given good food and water, and their flesh becomes good (halaal) after that. We have asked many of those who have knowledge of this matter, and they said that what is fed to chickens of dried blood is a small amount in comparison to other, pure food. End quote. 
Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allah have mercy on him). 

Is it permissible to eat food offered by actors and riba-based banks?

In our country there are some riba-based banks that set up tents to offer iftaar to people who are fasting. Is it permissible to eat this food?.

Praise be to Allaah.
In some countries it is very common for food to be offered in Ramadan; this is done by some charitable organisations and people who are known for their religious commitment and righteousness, or by some business people who we think are good people. In these cases, there is nothing wrong with the Muslim eating from that food, and we ask Allah to decree a great reward for those who do that. 
It is also very common for some actors, dancers and others whose work and earnings are haraam, and some riba-based organizations such as banks, to offer food in this manner. 
This kind of food should be shunned and one should not eat from it. This is the least that the Muslim can do to denounce the evil actions of those people and to rebuke them for their haraam and reprehensible actions. 
It is not befitting for the fasting Muslim to be the guest of a female dancer or actress, or a thief who is well known for stealing and embezzling the public wealth, and to eat iftaar at their tables. 
It is also inappropriate to be the guest of those against whom Allah, may He be exalted, has declared war, namely the riba-based banks which openly commit that which is even more haraam than dancing and acting. 
It is no secret that these people are trying to draw close to ordinary people by means of these actions and to become more famous. Otherwise, if they really wanted to do good, they would give up the evil actions and haraam deeds that they are doing. That is the best thing that they could do for themselves. And Allah is Good and does not accept anything but that which is good (or halaal). 
This food that is offered by the riba-based banks should not be partaken of for another reason, which is that offering this food is nothing more than an advertisement for this riba-based bank, so it is not permissible for the Muslim to partake of it. 
The scholars have forbidden advertisements for riba-based banks that are more low-key than this. 
The scholars of the Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas were asked: 
Is it permissible to put up Ramadan timetables produced by some banks in the mosques, or not? 
They replied: 
It is not permissible to put up Ramadan timetables produced by some banks or other businesses in the mosques, because that is something concerning which there are shar‘i reservations, like advertising haraam transactions, making the houses of Allah places to promote and advertise commercial products, and other things that are contrary to the sanctity of the mosques… End quote. 
Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz, Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez al al-Shaykh, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allah ibn Ghadyaan, Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan, Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd 
Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah, vol. 2, 5/239-240 
And Allah knows best.

Ruling on eating sweets that contain gelatin and carmine

Today it is quite often hard to find for example candy that is halaal for us to eat. Especially here in the western countries، a lot of the candy contains gelatine. But there is also another substance that is used to make the candy get the colour they have، and it is called carmine، which is the red colour (which they use in candy and more)and they get it from female lice.
Some moslims are not aware of this and I would appreciate if you could explain if this is allowed for us to eat or not?.

Praise be to Allaah.
Firstly: 
Some types of gelatin are of vegetable origin, and there is nothing wrong with using this or eating foods that contain it. 
Some types of gelatin are of animal origin, and this is subject to further discussion. Whatever the case, there is nothing wrong with eating foods that contain it because even if it comes from animals that have not been slaughtered properly or other haraam sources, it has been transformed into another substance that has different characteristics. 
See the answer to question no. 97541
Secondly: 
We have not been able to find out whether what you say is true about carmine and its being derived from female ants. If we assume that it is indeed the case, if the sweet is not harmful then there is nothing wrong with eating it, because of what was mentioned above about the haraam substance being transformed into a different substance. 
With regard to lice, there is a difference of opinion as to whether they are naajis. Some of the fuqaha’ say that they are naajis (impure) because they contain blood and their food is blood. Some of them say that they are taahir (pure) because they are likened to flies. But there is consensus that it is haraam to eat them. 
Al-Duraymi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: It is haraam to eat lice according to consensus. End quote from Hayaat al-Haywaan al-Kubra, 2/118. 
It is haraam to eat lice just as it is haraam to eat maytah (meat that was not slaughtered properly) or drink alcohol. But if they have been turned into another substance by means of some treatment, then there is nothing wrong with eating that substance, as explained above. 
It should be noted that the basic principle with regard to these foods and drinks is that they are permissible, because it cannot be said that any of them are haraam on the basis of speculation. Similarly it cannot be said that most of the sweets contain gelatin, because this is contrary to reality. If a person wants to avoid things containing gelatin or carmine, he will find plenty of other alternatives in other types of sweets. 
And Allah knows best.

Ruling on eating duck and pigeon

I am not sure if i can eat meat as a duck OR pigeon. are they Halal.

Praise be to Allaah.
The basic principle with regard to food and drink is that it is permissible unless there is proof that it is haraam. Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “He it is Who created for you all that is on earth” [al-Baqarah 2:29]. 
It was narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas said: The people of the Jaahiliyyah used to eat some things and refrain from others because they found them off-putting. Then Allah, may He be exalted, sent His Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), revealed His Book, and explained what is permissible and what is forbidden. Whatever the Qur’aan has permitted is permissible and whatever it has forbidden is forbidden, and whatever it does not mention is pardoned. Then he recited: “Say (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم): I find not in that which has been revealed to me anything forbidden to be eaten by one who wishes to eat it, unless…” [al-An‘aam 6:145] until the end of the verse.
Narrated by Abu Dawood (3306); classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani (may Allah have mercy on him). 
Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said: The second type is that concerning which no prohibition was narrated; it is permissible, but on condition that it be slaughtered properly, such as duck and waterfowl.
End quote from Fath al-Baari. 
With regard to ducks and pigeons, there is no evidence to suggest that it is haraam to eat them, so we go back to the original principle, which is that they are permissible. In fact the permissibility of eating pigeons can be seen in the fact that the Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them) ruled that if a muhrim (pilgrim in ihram) hunted the pigeons of the Haram (sanctuary), the expiation for that is a sheep, which indicates that it is permissible to eat them (i.e., pigeons -- the prohibition is on hunting when in ihram and within the boundaries of the Haram). 
Ibn Qudaamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Similar rulings were made by ‘Umar, ‘Uthmaan, Ibn ‘Umar, Ibn ‘Abbaas and Naafi‘ ibn ‘Abd al-Haarith…
End quote from al-Mughni, 3/247 
An-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Our companions are unanimously agreed that it is permissible to eat ostriches, chickens… ducks, sand grouse, sparrows, larks, francolin and pigeons…
End quote from Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, 7/22 
He also said: Whatever lives in the water and on land, including waterfowl such as ducks, geese and so in, is halaal as stated above, but if any of these dies of natural causes (i.e., is not slaughtered in the proper manner) it is not halaal, and there is no difference of scholarly opinion on this point. Rather it is essential that it be slaughtered properly.
End quote from Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, 9/35 
And Allah knows best.

Ruling on eating fish that fed on dead animals in artificial ponds

Is it permissible to eat fishes that is feed from dead animals eg dead chickens or najaza in artificial pond.

Praise be to Allaah.
If most of the food that was given to the fish was taahir (pure), it is permissible to eat the fish and there is nothing wrong with that. 
But if most of it was from najis (impure) carcasses (i.e., the fish are what the scholars call jallaalah or animals that feed on filth), then it is not permissible to eat the fish until they have been prevented from eating impurities for three days or more, and have been fed with food that is pure so that their flesh will become good. 
It says in Kashshaaf al-Qinaa‘ (6/193): Jallaalah – which refers to animals most of whose food is najis – is haraam, as is its milk, because of the report narrated by Ibn ‘Umar who said: The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) forbade eating jallaalah or (drinking) its milk. Narrated by Ahmad, Abu Dawood and at-Tirmidhi who said: (it is) hasan ghareeb. It was classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in al-Irwaa’, 2503… 
… (it is haraam) until it has been kept for three days and nights, because if Ibn ‘Umar wanted to eat (such an animal), he would keep it for three days and feed it with pure food, and prevent it from eating impure food, whether it was a bird or animal, because the factor that was preventing it from being halaal would be removed thereby. End quote. 
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said: The milk of the jallaalah that feeds on impure things was forbidden by the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), but if it is kept until it becomes pure, then it becomes halaal according to Muslim consensus, because before that the traces of impurity would appear in its milk, eggs and sweat, and the stench and foulness of the impurity would become apparent. But once that disappeared it would become pure. If the ruling applies because of a reason, it ceases to apply when that reason disappears.
End quote from Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 21/618. 
The Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas was asked: They feed chickens with various kinds of food, among which is ground meat of animals that died without being slaughtered properly, and meat from pigs. Are the chicken that are fed with this meat halaal or haraam? If they are haraam, what is the ruling on their eggs? 
They replied: If what is said about their feed is correct, then there is a difference of opinion among the scholars with regard to eating their flesh and eggs. Maalik and a number of others said that eating their flesh and eggs is permissible, because the impure feed becomes pure when it is transformed into flesh and eggs (i.e., istihaalah). But a number of scholars, including ath-Thawri, ash-Shaafa‘i and Ahmad are of the view that it is haraam to eat their flesh and eggs, or to drink the milk (of animals to which the same criteria apply), unless they were fed with pure feed after that for three days or more, in which case it becomes permissible to eat the (meat), eggs and milk. And it was said that if most of their feed is impure, then they are classed as jallaalah and cannot be eaten, but if most of their feed is pure, then they may be eaten. A number of scholars said that it is haraam, because of the report narrated by Ahmad, Abu Dawood, an-Nasaa’i, at-Tirmidhi and Ibn Maajah from Ibn ‘Umar, according to which the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) forbade eating jallaalah or (drinking) their milk. 
Jallaalah refers to any animal that eats filth and other kinds of impurities. But the most correct view is that which says that it depends, which is the second view quoted above.
End quote from Fataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa’imah, 23/377 
If it is clear that eating these fish – even if they have been kept (away from impurities) for three days or more – will cause harm, it is not permissible to eat them, because Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning): “and do not throw yourselves into destruction” [al-Baqarah 2:195]. And the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “There should be no causing harm or reciprocating harm.” Narrated by Ibn Maajah, 2431; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Irwa’ al-Ghaleel, 896 
And Allah knows best.

The evidence that a man’s ‘awrah is from the navel to the knee

I need to have some evidence from the sunnah of our beloved prophet that men's ‘awrah is from the navel to the knee. My friend is asking for the proof.

Praise be to Allaah.
There are many ahaadeeth which indicate that a man’s ‘awrah is the area between the navel and the knee (and the navel and knee are not part of the ‘awrah). See al-Majmoo’, 3/173; al-Mughni, 2/286 
These ahaadeeth include the following: 
1 – Abu Dawood (3140) and Ibn Maajah (1460) narrated that ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Do not show your thigh, and do not look at the thigh of anyone, living or dead.” 
2 – Ahmad (21989) narrated that Muhammad ibn Jahsh (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) passed by Ma’mar when I was with him, and his thighs were uncovered. He said: “O Ma’mar, cover your thighs, for the thigh is ‘awrah.” 
3 – Ahmad (15502), Abu Dawood (4014) and al-Tirmidhi (2798) narrated from Jawhad al-Aslami that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) passed by him when his thigh was uncovered and he said: “Do you not know that the thigh is ‘awrah?” 
4 – al-Tirmidhi (2798) narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The thigh is ‘awrah.” 
Shaykh al-Albaani said concerning these ahaadeeth in al-Irwa’(1/297):  
Although their isnaads are not entirely free of weakness, they strengthen one another, because there is no narrator among them who may be regarded as suspicious, rather their weakness has to do with confusion and ambiguity. And there are similar reports which make one confident that the hadeeth is saheeh, especially since some of them were classed as saheeh by al-Haakim, and al-Dhahabi agreed with him. And al-Bukhaari narrated it in a mu’allaq report in his Saheeh… But a number of these isnaads give the hadeeth strength, and raise it to the level of being saheeh, especially sincere there are similar, corroborating reports on the same issue. End quote. 
It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (6/165): 
Even though there is some weakness in the isnaads of these ahaadeeth, as there are gaps in the chain of narrators or there is some weakness in some of the narrators, nevertheless they support one another, and when taken as a whole they provide the required evidence. End quote. 
The majority of fuqaha’ are of the view that these ahaadeeth should be followed and they stated that a man’s ‘awrah is from the navel to the knee. See al-Mughni, 2/284 
And Allaah knows best.

Using drawings and pictures to learn medicine

I am a medical student, and i wish to become a good doctor one day InshaAllah. Reguarding my education my problems are
1) My books contain figures of the human body both male and female, and I do not know if Hijab permits such knowledge to be learned,
2) As a student I have to cut open dead human bodies to study the various parts of the human body. I do not know if this is haraam or halaal
3) In exams students draw pictures of specific parts in their answers (not of the whole human body). I know the hadeeth that all picture makers will be in the fire, but i donot know if it is permissable to draw pictures for educational purposes.
Please advise me as I do not wish to go beyond the Islamic Shareeah.

Praise be to Allaah.
It is well known in our religion that the basic principle with regard to drawings and pictures of animate beings is that they are haraam, because of the many ahaadeeth in which it says that they are forbidden and warn against them. We have previously explained that in a number of questions on this site. Please see, for example, question no. 7222
It is well known in the principles of fiqh on which there is consensus that in cases of necessity, forbidden things are permitted, so the ruling may change from prohibition to permission if that will lead to achieving one of the five necessities that Islam came to protect, which are: religion, life, physical health, honour and wealth. 
Because medicine is one of the necessary sciences that people need, to such an extent that some scholars regarded it as a communal obligation, this means that some things are permitted which are basically forbidden, in order to fulfil this communal obligation.  
Al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Rawdat al-Taalibeen (1/223): 
With regard to sciences, some of them are a communal obligation, such as medicine. End quote. 
Indeed, Muwaffaq al-Deen al-Baghdaadi narrated in his book al-Tibb min al-Kitaab wa’l-Sunnah (187) that Imam al-Shaafa’i said: 
I do not know of any branch of knowledge, after knowledge of halaal and haraam, that is more noble than medicine. End quote. 
Even if a doctor does not treat women except in cases of necessity, he must learn how to treat both sexes, because a woman may not be able to find a female doctor in a certain specialty or in a certain city. Also, knowledge of medicine is based on understanding the makeup of the human body, and the features of its various parts, and details of their functions. How well the doctor understands that will determine how well he knows medicine and how successful he is in ridding people of problems and diseases.  
Hence there is nothing wrong with the doctor studying drawings that show the human body, whether they are of men or women, and there is nothing wrong – in sha Allaah – with using drawings in exams for students of medicine and life sciences, as that will help them to understand properly and learn this knowledge correctly. 
In our religion it is permissible for women to treat men in cases of necessity. 
It was narrated that al-Rubayyi’ bint Mu’awwidh (may Allaah be pleased with her) said: We were with the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), bringing water, treating the wounded and carrying the slain back to Madeenah. Narrated by al-Bukhaari (2882). 
Ibn Hajar said, commenting on this hadeeth in Fath al-Baari (6/52): 
This shows that it is permissible for a non-mahram woman to treat a non-mahram man in cases of necessity. End quote. 
In our religion there is also evidence which indicates that it is permissible to make pictures and images for children’s toys, because children need to play and learn. See the answer to question no. 9473
In a Fatwa issued by the scholars of the Standing Committee, there is evidence which indicates that it is permissible to make pictures in cases of necessity, such as pictures to prove the identity of a person and the like. See the answer to question no. 34904 and 39806
As for making pictures and drawing parts of the body separately, such as the head or the chest, many scholars are of the view that it is permissible. See the answer to question no. 13633
All of the above indicates that it is permissible to use drawing and pictures in studying medicine, etc. 
A similar fatwa has also appeared previously on our site in the answers to questions no. 10228 and 13716
And Allaah knows best.

Is it permissible for the spouses to be naked when having intercourse without any cover?

I was told by Islamic teacher that "janaba" or intimacy of spouses is not permitted if uncovered by sheet or blanket, because angels who are present are ashamed and insulted by naked bodies of spouses in state of janaba. So spouses must cover their bodies with blanket during intimacy and must not uncover naked bodies. I am really confused, because I know ahadeeth which are opposite of it. I would appreciate if you solve this misunderstanding.

Praise be to Allaah.
Prohibition (tahreem) is an Islamic ruling which cannot be attributed to sharee'ah without sound shar'i evidence that is proven from the Book of Allaah or the Sunnah of His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). The majority of Hanafi, Shaafa'i and Maaliki scholars are of the view that it is permissible for the spouses to be naked when having intercourse. The Hanbalis are of the view that it is makrooh to be naked and not covered when having intercourse, and they quote ahaadeeth as evidence for that, but none of them are sound, for example: 
1 – It was narrated that Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "When one of you goes in unto his wife, let him be covered, for if he is not covered, the angels feel shy and depart, then if they have a child, the Shaytaan will have a share of him." 
This was narrated by al-Tabaraani in al-Mu'jam al-Awsat (1/63), and by al-Bazzaar who classed it as da'eef (weak), as it says in Nasab al-Raayah, 4/247. 
2 – It was narrated that 'Abd-Allaah ibn Mas'ood (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "When one of you goes in unto his wife, let him cover and not be naked like donkeys." 
This was narrated by al-Tabaraani in al-Mu'jam al-Kabeer, 10/196, and by al-Bayhaqi, who classed it as da'eef (weak) (7/193). Its isnaad includes Mandal ibn 'Ali, who is da'eef. 
It was also narrated by Ibn Maajah (1921) from the hadeeth of 'Utbah ibn 'Abd-Allaah al-Sulami, who was classed as da'eef by al-Albaani in Irwa' al-Ghaleel, 2009. 
3 – It was narrated that Abu Umaamah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "When one of you goes in unto his wife, let him cover himself and his wife, and not be naked like donkeys." 
This was narrated by al-Tabaraani (8/164). Its isnaad includes 'Afeer ibn Ma'daan who is da'eef, as was stated in Majma' al-Zawaa'id, 4/293. 
As it is established that these ahaadeeth are da'eef (weak), it is not valid to quote them as evidence that it is obligatory to be covered and to say that it is forbidden to be naked when having intercourse. The basic principle is that it is permissible for spouses to enjoy looking at and touching one another. 
The majority of scholars have quoted as evidence that it is permissible the hadeeth of Bahz ibn Hakeem, from his father, from his grandfather, who said: I said, O Messenger of Allaah, with regard to our ‘awrah, what may we uncover of it and what must we conceal? He said: “Cover your ‘awrah except from your wife and those whom your right hand possesses (i.e., concubines).” I said, O Messenger of Allaah, what if the people live close together? He said, “If you can make sure that no one sees it, then do not let anyone see it.” I said, O Messenger of Allaah, what if one of us is alone? He said, “Allaah is more deserving that you should feel shy before Him than people.” 
Narrated and classed as hasan by al-Tirmidhi, 2794; Ibn Maajah, 1920; Classed as hasan by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi. 
They also quoted as evidence a da'eef hadeeth, narrated from 'Abd-Allaah ibn 'Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) who said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "Beware of being naked, for you have with you those who never leave you except when you defecate, and when a man goes in unto his wife, so feel shy of them and respect them." 
Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 2800. Its isnaad includes Layth ibn Abi Sulaym, who made mistakes and was classed as da'eef by al-Albaani in Irwa' al-Ghaleel, 64. 
Conclusion: There is no saheeh hadeeth which says that it is forbidden to be naked when having intercourse with one's spouse, and the basic principle is that that is permitted, and there is proof that supports this basic principle. 
And Allaah knows best.

He wants to marry her but she does not wear niqaab. Should he go ahead and propose or should he look for someone else?

I am a young Arab man who lives according to our Arab traditions, or what is known as a good attitude and etiquette, but this commitment has nothing to do with adhering to Islamic teachings, because in our country adhering to tradition does not contradict listening to music, mixing, dealing with riba-based banks and so on. I proposed marriage to a girl in the same environment that I am living in, and her family have been friends of my family for a long time. They all approved of the marriage since they know that we are both of good character. But my problem, unfortunately, started when I began to read about the rules on marriage in Islam and I started to reduce mixing and to pray regularly in the mosque and let my beard grow and not deal with riba-based banks and not listen to music and so on. Now both families are regarding me as an extremist, except those on whom Allaah has mercy, and they started to make this girl afraid of me, even though she loves me very much and has told them all about that many times. The girl wants to be committed but she is not able to do some things such as wearing niqaab or covering the face. So she too regards these things as signs of extremism in religion, as her family do. 
Should I forget about this girl who is of good character and proper etiquette and who is keen to pray and recite the adhkaar of the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and is trying to be committed, and who loves me and tells others of that, and does not want to lose me, but she is unable to do some things that have to do with religion, such as covering her face, and look for someone else who is committed but whose family and behaviour I do not know and my judgement of her will be only according to what I hear from those who know her family and behaviour?.

Praise be to Allaah.
We ask Allaah the Almighty to make us and you steadfast in adhering to His religion, and to bless us and you with more obedience and righteousness. 
With regard to what you are asking about, it is better for you to stay with this girl towards whom your heart is inclined, and who feels likewise about you, and who has no faults that would cause you to leave her. All that there is, is that she needs a little care and encouragement and sound Islamic education to accept and follow the commands of Allaah. 
A lot of that may come after marriage, especially if you treat her nicely and move her into a better environment than the one she is in, which is what we advise and encourage you to do.  
There is no reason why a woman who loves her religion and is obedient to her husband should not respond to the command of Allaah as regards her clothing, especially since this will make her husband love and respect her more. 
Her refusal to wear niqaab may be because of the lies fabricated by some of those who are ignorant and who follow their own whims and desires, who say that the niqaab is a custom inherited from the Jaahiliyyah and that it was not brought by Islam. You should explain to her the ruling on a woman covering her face, with evidence from the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and tell her that the scholars are unanimously agreed that this ruling is prescribed in Islam. 
Remind her of the Sahaabi women who hastened to tear their aprons so that they could cover their faces after the verse of hijab was revealed, and encourage her to have righteous friends. Tell her that this world is transient and soon each of us will meet our Lord with our deeds. 
Neither you nor she should worry about what your families will say. As for such environments where the rulings of Islam are not known and people cannot differentiate between proper adherence to Islam and extremism no attention should be paid to them or to what they say about one who adheres to the path of righteousness. 
If your wife does not respond to the Islamic injunction to cover the face, then be patient with her, and try to convey the message to her in some other way, such as from another women who is involved in da’wah, or by means of tapes and books by scholars whose knowledge and religious commitment can be trusted. 
Seek the help of Allaah and persist in calling upon Him, asking Him for support and help to establish a household based on what our Lord loves and is pleased with. 
Show her the answer to question no. 21134, which speaks of the obligation to wear niqaab according to the Qur’aan and Sunnah. 
And please see question no. 20343 which speaks of the husband’s duty to advise his wife and how he may do so. 
And Allaah is the Source of strength.

He writes the name of Allaah on the workers’ caps to remind them of Allaah

Is it permissible that I write tasbeeh and adhkaar on the hats of those who work in industrial associations? I do this in order to remind them of Allah. But I was told that it belittles Allah’s name.

Praise be to Allaah.
The name of Allaah should not be written on these caps, so as to protect His name from being disrespected and so as to free the wearer of any inconvenience, because he may need to go to the toilet wearing this cap, and it may be difficult for him to take if off every time he wants to do that.  
The way in which the name of Allaah may be disrespected in this case is that the cap may be worn and taken off and placed on the floor and so on, and it may be affected by dirt such as dust and sweat, or the wearer may do something that Allaah has forbidden and disallowed, such as smoking or backbiting about people, when he is wearing the name of Allaah written on his head. 
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said concerning the ruling on putting Qur’aanic verses on clothing: If the aim of that is to exhort and remind people, we do not find that in the gatherings where verses of Qur’aan are present (e.g. on the walls), we do not find that they increase people’s piety or awareness of Allaah, rather in some of these gatherings we see that evils are committed, where people smoke and backbite about others and eat their flesh, and the book of Allaah is above their heads, but they are gatherings in which Allaah is disobeyed. End quote from Liqaa’aat al-Baab il-Maftooh (2/54). 
And Allaah knows best.

Wearing gold on which Aayat al-Kursiy is engraved or which is in the shape of an eye or hand

Many people give as a gift a piece of gold on which is engraved Aayat al-Kursiy or the name of Allaah or the phrase “Allaah jalla jalaaluhu”, or another type which is in the form of a hand, eye or heart, or which contains blue beads. My question is: which of these are haraam, and why? What should the Muslim do if he is given such items as a gift?.

Praise be to Allaah.
Firstly: 
It is not prescribed to write Aayat al-Kursiy or the name of Allaah on pieces of gold that are to be worn, because that is a kind of disrespect. It may also be an imitation of the Jews and Christians who hang up or wear things that they revere, such as the cross etc. 
There is a concession allowing writing names on rings, even if the name includes the name of Allaah, such as Abd-Allaah or ‘Abd al-Rahmaan. Similarly there is nothing wrong with writing useful words on a ring even if they include the name of Allaah, such as al-hamdu Lillah (praise be to Allaah), tawakkaltu ‘ala Allaah (I put my trust in Allaah) etc. Many such reports have been narrated from the Sahaabah and Taabi’een. Some examples have been mentioned in the answer to question no 68805 
The Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas was asked: We sell hearts in which the name of Allaah is written, which are bought by Arabs and non-Arabs of every kind. We may tell the Arabs that it is haraam to take them into the toilet. Please advise us on the ruling on selling them. 
They replied: Selling jewellery on which the name of Allaah is written is not permissible, unless it is erased from it. A similar question was submitted to the Committee which they answered in Fatwa no. 2077, the text of which is as follows: 
We attach with out letter some gold jewellery on which is written the name of Allaah. This jewellery is used by our Muslim women as an adornment only. A while ago our brothers in the Committee for the Enjoining of Virtue and Elimination of Vice (enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil) told us that using this jewellery is haraam, because the name of Allaah is written on it. We tell you that this jewellery is only used by Muslims as an adornment, unlike the women of the Jews and Christians, as the Christians wear jewellery on which there are pictures of the cross and images of idols, and the Jews wear jewellery on which there are pictures of the star of David. We hope that you can explain this issue.  
They replied as follows: Since this jewellery has the name of Allaah written on it and is intended for Muslim women to wear around their necks, as Christian women wear a cross and Jewish women wear a star of David, and since things on which the name of Allaah is written may be worn to ward off harm or bring benefits, or for other purposes, and wearing it may expose it to disrespect such as if a person sleeps in it and rolls on top of it, or wears it in places where it is makrooh to take anything in which is written the words of Allaah or the name of Allaah, the committee thinks that it is not permissible to use this jewellery on which the name of Allaah is written, so as to avoid imitation of the Christians and Jews whom the Muslims are forbidden to imitate, and so as to block the means that may lead to evil, and so as to protect the name of Allaah from disrespect, and because of the general meaning of the prohibition on wearing amulets. End quote from Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (13/473)
Secondly: 
There is nothing wrong with wearing gold in the shape of a heart, but if it is in the shape of a hand or eye, or it contains blue beads, then it should not be worn, because they wear these things or hang them up in the belief that they ward off the evil eye or bring good luck. Even if a Muslim does not wear them on the basis of such corrupt beliefs, he still should not wear them, because by doing so he is imitating those who wear them for these reasons, and that may lead people to think badly of him, as they will think that he is wearing it to ward off the evil eye. So it is not permissible to wear them in that case. This comes under the heading of wearing amulets, which is forbidden. 
Ahmad (17458) narrated from ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Aamir al-Juhani (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever wears an amulet has associated something with Allaah (shirk).” Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’. 
Ahmad also narrated (17440) that ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Aamir (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: I heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: “Whoever wears an amulet, may Allaah not fulfil his need, and whoever wears a sea-shell, may Allaah not give him peace.” Classed as hasan by Shu’ayb al-Arna’oot in Tahqeeq al-Musnad.
 An amulet is something that is worn to ward off the evil eye and protect against disaster. 
Al-Khattaabi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: An amulet is a bead that they used to wear in the belief that it could ward off disaster. 
Al-Baghawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Amulets are beads that the Arabs used to put on their children to protect them against the evil eye. This was declared false by sharee’ah. See: al-Ta’reefaat al-I’tiqaadiyyah, p. 121. 
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Sea-shells were taken from the sea and worn to ward off the evil eye. They say that if a person wears this shell he will not be affected by the evil eye or by the jinn. 
With regard to the phrase “may Allaah not give him peace” it was said that it means, may Allaah not give him tranquility, and the opposite of tranquillity is anxiety and grief. 
And it was said: May Allaah not let him achieve any good, thus he is given the opposite of what he was asking for.. 
The phrase “has associated something with Allaah (shirk)” refers to major shirk, if he believes that the amulet itself bring benefits or wards off harm without the command of Allaah. Otherwise it is minor shirk. 
End quote from al-Qawl al-Mufeed Sharh Kitaab al-Tawheed (1/189). 
Whoever is given a gold item of this type should not wear it. He may sell it but he should erase some of its markings before selling it so that it cannot be worn, and has to be melted down and made into something new. 
And Allaah knows best.

She is married to a Muslim and hijab is putting her off Islam

My husbad is Muslim and has talked frequently about me becoming Muslim myself. I just have one concern... the women being covered. Why do they need to cover themselves and only reveal what is odinarily revealed. I am American, we reveal almost the entire body here. I just want to get an understanding.

Praise be to Allaah.
There can be no doubt that Allaah only enjoins that in which there is wisdom, but in some cases the wisdom behind some rulings may be hidden from people, and in some cases it may be quite obvious – such as the prohibition on alcohol which clouds the mind and hinders people from the remembrance of Allaah and from prayer [cf. al-Maa'idah 5:91]. 
The wisdom behind the prescription of hijab is one of the most clear, because it is a covering for woman and guards their chastity, and it prevents the foolish from making approaches and harassing them. How often has a woman’s hijab prevented the devils among mankind from harrassing her? How often have unveiled women made a display of their beauty and charms, which has led to their being harrassed by the foolish? Concerning this, Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 
“O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies (i.e. screen themselves completely except the eyes or one eye to see the way). That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed. And Allaah is Ever Oft‑Forgiving, Most Merciful”
[al-Ahzaab 33:59] 
This verse gives the complete answer to your question, because Allaah mentions here the command to His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to tell his wives and daughters and the believing women to wear hijab, and it mentions the wisdom behind that, which is so that they may be protected and not exposed to annoyance. 
When women go out showing most of their bodies – as the questioner mentions – this is one of the greatest causes of crime and corruption of men’s morals, and of the spread of immorality. It is also degrading for woman, as we see women becoming cheap products for business-owners and advertisers, who show woman half-naked and devoid of modesty in order to attract customers and market their products. 
A woman’s body belongs to her and is not to be shared with people. When she gets married it belongs to her husband and she should not let anyone else have a share in it. What does a woman want when she shows her body and exposes her charms to onlookers? Does she just want them to look and stare, and what is the affect of that on rapists and the foolish? How are you going to stop them from getting what they want by attacking you and trying to rape you. Are you going to show some meat to the hungry and then try to stop them from eating it? 
In a modern study it was shown that: 
65% of female workers are exposed to sexual harassment in their place of work in some European countries. 
18% of women in America have been raped or been subjected to attempted rape at some stage in their lives. 
More than half of victims were under the age of 17. 
Kitaab Ihsaa’aat, Diraasaat, Arqaam (p. 140). 
Islamic sharee’ah brought that which is best for men and for women, and for the family and society. It does not impose restrictions on women as some enemies of Islam claim. Islam allows women to work, seek knowledge, engage in business, testify in court, uphold the ties of kinship, visit the sick, and so on, but it has set limits regarding her going out in order to protect her and to prevent the foolish from harassing her. 
We say to the questioner: 
Many western women, when they think about it and come to know the reality of Allaah’s laws concerning women, do not hesitate to declare their Islam and enter into the religion of the Prophets and the righteous. 
In Islam, women are protected and looked after. That is not in return for her staying in the home only, rather that is because she plays a great role, which is taking care of her husband and raising and caring for children. This is an important role, because the soundness or corruption of society depends on the extent to which mothers are successful in their raising and teaching of their children. 
One of the largest British insurance companies carried out a study on one million housewives, which produced amazing results. This study showed that the average full-time housewife spends 19 hours per day meeting the needs of her family, because she is the one who is raising the children, teaching them, looking after family members when they fall sick, and is responsible for the household budget. 
In addition to that – looking at what the houswife’s value from a purely materialistic point of view, far removed from any emotional criteria – a woman who stays at home is the most valuable thing the family can have. 
Op. cit., p. 118, 119 
It has become clear to many wise women the serious danger posed by the false freedom that they are enjoying and they have finally realized where this path will lead them. It is stated in another study that: 
80% of American women think that the freedom that women have gained in the last 30 years is the reason for the promiscuity and violence that are prevalent nowadays.  
75% feel worried about the loss of values and the disintegration of the family. 
80% have great difficulty in combining their responsibilities at work with their responsibilities towards their husbands and children. 
87% said that if the clock was turned back they would consider the demands for equality as a social conspiracy against the United States and they would resist those who raise the banner of equality. 
op. cit., p. 147 
All it needs is for you to think about the matter a little, and look at real life, and you will see that hijab spares women from evil, harm and crimes. Islam has closed the door to such evils with its laws, including the requirement for women past the age of puberty to wear hijab. 
Finally we would like to congratulate you on the fact that Allaah has granted you a Muslim husband, so that you will be able to see Islam in practice from him and his Muslim relatives, which may encourage you to enter Islam and which may remove the barrier of fear about entering this great and purely monotheistic religion. Also note that entering this final religion, which Allaah wants for all people, is a great honour of which you may be deprived if you delay and death then overtakes you. So hasten to enter Islam, with submission to the will of Allaah, with eagerness and delighting in this blessing of Allaah.  
You should note that if you fall short in your observance of hijab because your human weakness or you feel embarrassed in front of your people, this is regarded as a sin. That should not prevent you from doing the great good deed which will lead you to Paradise and save you from Hell, namely embracing Islam. You should also note that the Shaytaan (Satan) is the enemy of all the sons of Adam, and he is the one who is stirring up these doubts in order to prevent you from entering this religion, so that he can increase the number of those who will follow him to Hell. So be strong and courageous in making the decision that will lead to eternal happiness, by Allaah’s leave. We ask Allaah to help you and to give you the will power to enter Islam as our sister in Islam, and to share this blessing. We thank you for your confidence in us. 
And Allaah is the Guide to the Straight path.

He wants to photograph his wife naked so that he can look at the pictures when he is away!

Can a husband video tape his wife while she is naked or showing off her body parts, so he can watch the video when he is away or when she is not there, and get the pleassure that way for time being rather than watching something else which might be haram.

Praise be to Allaah.
The action mentioned in the question is one of the most abhorrent of actions. It is haraam in and of itself and because of what it leads to. As for it being haraam in and of itself: a woman in principle is entirely ‘awrah and it is not permissible to take her picture in the first place, even if nothing appears but her face and hands, so how about if what appears is more than that. What if the picture shows her most private ‘awrah? Undoubtedly this is more abhorrent and sinful and leads to greater punishment. 
The scholars of the Standing Committee were asked: 
Is a picture of a woman in her passport or elsewhere ‘awrah or not? Is it acceptable for a woman, if she refuses to have her picture taken, to delegate someone to perform Hajj on her behalf, because she cannot get a passport for that reason? And what is the limit of covering for women according to the Qur’aan and Sunnah? 
They replied: 
She does not have the right to allow her face to be photographed, whether in a passport or otherwise, because it is ‘awrah, and because having her picture in a passport or elsewhere is a cause of people being tempted because of her. But if she cannot travel for Hajj without doing that, then she is granted a concession allowing her to have her picture taken so that she may perform the obligatory duty of Hajj, and it is not permissible for her to delegate someone else to do it on her behalf. The entire woman is ‘awrah according to the evidence of the Qur'aan and Sunnah, so what she is required to do is to cover all of her body before non-mahrams, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 
“and not to reveal their adornment except to their husbands, or their fathers, or their husband’s fathers …”
[al-Noor 24:31] 
“And when you ask (his wives) for anything you want, ask them from behind a screen, that is purer for your hearts and for their hearts”
[al-Ahzaab 33:53] 
Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Ghadyaan, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Qa’ood. Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (1/718, 719). 
In the answer to question no. 13342 we quoted Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzan as saying:  
Taking pictures of women is not permitted at all, because of the temptation and evil that results from that, in addition to the fact that taking pictures is forbidden in and of itself. So it is not permissible to take pictures of women when traveling or for any other reason. The Council of Senior Scholars has issued a statement that this is haraam. End quote. 
The husband has no excuse for taking pictures of his wife naked because he is her husband. That does not make it permissible for him to do this abhorrent act, and his being away from his wife is not regarded as an excuse for him, because it is haraam to take pictures of women in the first place – we have quoted fatwas of the scholars concerning that – and because of the evil consequences to which it leads. Among the consequences to which keeping pictures of one’s wife when she is naked or immodestly dressed may lead are the following: 
1.     The husband’s belongings may be stolen or he may lose or forget the picture in a public place, so the picture may be spread far and wide and it may fall into the hands of fools who would make use of the picture to cause more evil and corruption.
2.     He and his wife may get divorced, in which case she would become a stranger (non-mahram) to him, in which case it would not be permissible for him to look at her after the divorce which makes her a stranger to him.
3.     The husband may use it against his wife. There have been many such cases where the husband uses such things against his wife to make her give up her financial rights or fulfil his haraam desires or keep quiet about his abhorrent actions, and all of that happens because he possesses pictures or a video of her when she is naked or semi-naked.
4.     The husband’s looking at a picture of his naked wife when he is away from her will never extinguish his desire, rather the opposite is the case. It will inflame his desires and they cannot be extinguished – in most cases – except by doing haraam actions such as the secret habit – which is the least of them – or zina or homosexuality – Allaah forbid. 
So his excuse for taking pictures of his wife and keeping them so he can look at them when he is away from her is unacceptable, and his action is a cause of him falling into haraam, because of the picture-taking itself, and because of the evils to which it leads. 
It is not permissible for the husband to take a picture of his wife when she is naked or semi-naked. He should have the attitude of protective jealousy for his honour, and do whatever he can to protect his honour and not neglect it by doing such actions. Similarly, it is not permissible for the wife to agree to do that and she should denounce him and not respond to him. 
Allaah has made each spouse a libaas (screen) for the other. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“They are Libaas [i.e. body-cover, or screen, or Sakan (i.e. you enjoy the pleasure of living with them) Tafsir] for you and you are the same for them”
[al-Baqarah 2:187] 
The husband should pay attention to that: he is a screen for his wife, so how could he seek to uncover her by means of this action when the basic principle is that he should be a screen and conceal her? 
The husband should not stay away from his wife and family a great deal, because he needs them and they need him. His wife needs him so that they can keep one another chaste, and the children need him to raise them and look after them. If the husband has to go away and the wife agrees to that, then he must fear Allaah, his Lord, and keep away from anything that may provoke his desire such as mixing with women, being alone with a member of the opposite sex or looking. He should do a lot of acts of worship, especially fasting, and he should choose righteous companions who will guide him to do good and encourage him to obey Allaah. 
We ask Allaah to help him to do that which He loves and which pleases Him. 
And Allaah knows best.

Uncovering the ‘awrah in front of children

I have the following question: Is it allowed for a small child to see its parents awrah? Is it for example allowed to shower together with its parents?.

Praise be to Allaah.
It is not permissible to uncover the ‘awrah in front of children who have reached the age of discernment, because Allaah has commanded the believers to tell household members who have not reached the age of puberty to ask for permission before entering at the three times, as He says (interpretation of the meaning): 
“O you who believe! Let your slaves and slave‑girls, and those among you who have not come to the age of puberty ask your permission (before they come to your presence) on three occasions: before Fajr (morning) Salaah (prayer), and while you put off your clothes for the noonday (rest), and after the ‘Isha’ (night) Salaah (prayer). (These) three times are of privacy for you; other than these times there is no sin on you or on them to move about, attending to each other. Thus Allaah makes clear the Ayaat (the Verses of this Qur’aan, showing proofs for the legal aspects of permission for visits) to you. And Allaah is All‑Knowing, All‑Wise”
[al-Noor 24:58] 
These times when Allaah has enjoined us to tell children to seek permission are times when people wear fewer clothes. 
The great scholar Ibn ‘Ashoor (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in his tafseer al-Tahreer wa’l-Tanweer: These times are times when household members would wear fewer clothes, and it would be reprehensible for their children to see their ‘awrahs, because that would leave an impression on the child’s mind, as he would not be used to seeing it. And because children should be brought up to cover their ‘awrahs so that that will be like second nature to them when they grow up. End quote. 
This is the proper etiquette with children: they should be prevented from seeing people’s ‘awrahs, because of the negative effects that will have on their attitude when they grow up. 
The great scholar Ibn Sa’di (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in his Tafseer, when listing the lessons learned from this verse: … it is not permissible to allow a small child who is below the age of puberty to see the ‘awrah, and it is not permissible for his ‘awrah to be seen, because Allaah has only commanded them to seek permission so as to avoid something that is not permissible. End quote. This applies to a child who has reached the age of discernment and understands what is ‘awrah. 
The great scholar Abu Bakr al-Jassaas said in Ahkaam al-Qur’aan (3/464-465): Allaah has enjoined the child who understands about women’s ‘awrahs to seek permission to enter at the three times, in the words “Let your slaves and slave‑girls, and those among you who have not come to the age of puberty ask your permission (before they come to your presence)…”  
What is meant is the one who understands that and sees women’s ‘awrahs. The one who is not commanded to seek permission is younger than that. End quote. 
If a child has not reached the age of discernment, there is nothing wrong with not covering before him. Ibn Qudaamah said in al-Mughni (7/76): As for the boy, if he is still a small child and has not reached the age of discernment, it is not obligatory to cover before him. End quote. 
The great scholar Zakariya al-Ansaari said in Sharh al-Bahjah (4/98): It is permissible to uncover the ‘awrah before a small child who cannot tell others of what he has seen. End quote.
This is a good guideline. It is permissible to uncover the ‘awrah before a small child who cannot tell others of what he has seen, such as a child who is one or one and a half years old. But it is not permissible to uncover it in front of a child who can tell others of what he has seen, such as a child who is three years old. But it should be noted that this may vary from one child to another. Some children are more advanced than their peers in mental and linguistic development, and some lag behind their peers. 
And Allaah knows best.

Ruling on wearing trousers and a suit and tie

What is the ruling on wearing trousers if they are tight and stick to one’s body, or if they are baggy in order to imitate the westerners, what if a person wears a different style from what the westerners wear? 
What is the ruling on wearing suit and tie and other clothes usually used by the unbelievers? Is it acceptable because it became of Muslims’ habits and that an average Muslim will not think that they are worn to resemble the unbelievers? What should a Muslim wear nowadays?.

Praise be to Allaah.
The basic principle with regard to clothes is that they are permissible, except those which Islam has definitely excluded, such as gold and silk for men, except in the case of scabies and the like.  Wearing trousers is not something that is unique to the kuffaar, but wearing tight trousers which show the shape of the body, even the ‘awrah, is not permissible. Loose pants are permissible, unless the wearer intends to resemble those of the kuffaar who wear them. The same applies to wearing a suit and tie. These are not garments that are unique to the kuffaar, so they are permissible, unless the wearer intends to imitate them.  
To sum up, the basic principle with regard to clothes is that they are permissible, unless there is shar’i evidence to show that they are not allowed, as stated above. 
And Allaah is the Source of strength. May Allaah send blessings and peace upon our Prophet Muhammad and his family and companions. End quote. 
Standing Committee for Academic Research and Issuing Fatwas 
Shaykh ‘Abd al-Azeez ibn ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Baaz, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Razzaaq al-‘Afeefi, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Ghadyaan, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Qa’ood. 

Ruling on wearing a robe in the graduation ceremony

Many faculties, schools, and institutions obligate its graduates to wear a special uniform. Many brothers mentioned that this robe is the uniform of priests and monks in churches when they baptise. How true is this?.

Praise be to Allaah.
It is haraam for a Muslim is to imitate the disbelievers in their clothing which is uniquely theirs, whether the disbelievers are Jews, Christians, or anyone else, because of the general meaning of the evidence in the Qur’aan and Sunnah which prohibits imitation of them. That includes the hadeeth of the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allaah be upon him) in which he said: “Whoever imitates a people is one of them.” (Narrated by Imam Ahmad, Abu Dawood and others). And the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allaah be upon him) said, when he saw ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Amr wearing two garments that had been dyed with safflower: “These are the garments of the disbelievers, so do not wear them.” Narrated by Muslim in his Saheeh. And it is proven in Saheeh Muslim that ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) wrote a letter to his worker in Azerbaijan, ‘Utbah ibn Farqad (may Allaah be pleased with him) saying: Beware of luxury and the clothing of the people of shirk and silk garments. 
Based on that, it is not permissible to wear the so-called robe when graduating from a school, institute or college, because it is one of the garments of the Christians. The Muslim should be proud of his religion and of his following his Prophet Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allaah be upon him), and he should not pay attention to the customs of those with whom Allaah is angry and who have gone astray, such as the Jews, Christians and others. 
And Allaah is a source of strength will stop may Allaah send blessings and peace upon our Prophet Muhammad and his family and companions. 
Standing Committee for Academic Research and Issuing Fatwas.