Ruling concerning root vegetables (those which grow under the ground)

Asalam mu alay koem
Dear Brother,
Please let me know if this is true or not, a lady whom i go to Talim Classes with has told me that vegetables grown under ground are makroo, and to cook many makrooh things in one pot is Haram.
We are very used to making stew with more than 5 or 6 vegetables which are grown underground all in one pot. Is she telling the truth or is she mistaken.
Wasalaam,
Sha

Praise be to Allaah.

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“He it is Who created for you all that is on earth…” [al-Baqarah 2:29]

“O mankind! Eat of that which is lawful and good on the earth…” [al-Baqarah 2:168]

“Say: ‘Who has forbidden the adornment with clothes given by Allaah, which He has produced for His slaves, and al-Tayyibaat [all kinds of halaal (lawful) things] of food?’…” [al-A’raaf 7:32]

From this, we know that everything that grows from the earth is in principle halaal (permitted), and no-one should decree it to be haraam (forbidden) or makrooh (disliked) without sound Islamic evidence (daleel). What evidence is there that things that grow beneath the ground, like potatoes, carrots and onions, etc., are makrooh? What is the strange principle on the basis of which this lady – about whose background we know nothing – states that cooking a number of “makrooh” things in one pot results in haraam food?

If the resulting dish was intoxicating or poisonous, or was cooked with something haraam such as pork, then we would say that it is haraam to eat it. But the cooking of five or six kinds of root vegetables together, as you describe, is something permissible, and there is nothing wrong with it. We advise you not to give any weight to the words of those who have no knowledge. Allaah is the One Whom we ask to guide us to the truth and to help us understand our religion. May Allaah bless our Prophet Muhammad.

Ruling on eating cheese if the source of the rennet is not known

What is the ruling on the presence of rennet in most of the cheeses we buy, when we do not know where it is derived from?.

Praise be to Allaah.

The substance that is put in cheese is rennet; it is a yellowish white substance in a vessel of skin which is extracted from the stomach of a calf or nursing lamb. A little of it is added to the milk, which curdles and becomes cheese. 

See al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (5/155). 

The ruling on rennet varies according to where it is taken from. If it is taken from an animal that has been slaughtered in accordance with sharee’ah, then it is pure and may be eaten. If it is taken from an animal that died of natural causes or an animal that was not slaughtered in accordance with sharee’ah, then there is a difference of opinion among the fuqaha’ concerning it. The majority of Maalikis, Shaafa’is and Hanbalis are of the view that it is najis. Abu Haneefah and Ahmad, according to the other report narrated from him, were of the view that it is taahir. This is the view favoured by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him). He said in al-Fataawa (21/102): It is more likely that their cheese -- referring to the Magians -- is halaal and that the rennet from a dead animal (one that died of natural causes) and its milk are taahir. End quote. 

He also said (35/154): With regard to cheese that is made with their rennet – i.e., from some of the baatini sects who are regarded as kaafirs – there are two well-known views concerning that among the scholars, as in the case of rennet from dead animals and rennet from animals slaughtered by the Magians and Franks, of whom it is said that they do not slaughter meat properly. The view of Abu Haneefah and of Ahmad according to one of the two reports narrated from him is that this cheese is permissible, because the rennet of dead animals is taahir according to this view, because then it does not die when the animal dies. The view of Maalik and al-Shaafa’i, and of Ahmad according to the other report, is that this cheese is najis because in their view the rennet is najis, because the milk and rennet of the dead animal are najis according to them. If meat slaughtered by a particular person cannot be eaten, then meat slaughtered by him is like dead meat. Those who hold both views quoted as evidence reports that were narrated from the Sahaabah. Those who hold the first view narrate that the Sahaabah ate the cheese of the Magians, and those who hold the second view narrate that they ate what they thought was cheese of the Christians. This issue is subject to ijtihaad and one may follow the view of the Shaykh he asks. End quote. 

This is the correct opinion. Whether you know the source of the rennet and that it comes from an animal that was slaughtered properly or otherwise, or you do not know, there is nothing wrong with eating cheese that has been made with it. 

And Allah knows best.

Ruling on eating snails; is it permissible to cook them alive?

What is the ruling on eating snails? Bear in mind that preparing snails dish requires cooking them alive! Were snails used as food during the era of prophet Muhammad peace be upon him?.

Praise be to Allaah.

Snails are of two types, land snails and sea snails. Land snails come under the same heading as “insects and vermin” which have no blood that flows. Sea snails come under the heading of shellfish, which are sea animals. 

In al-Mawsoo’ah al-‘Arabiyyah al-‘Aalamiyyah it says: 

The snail is a invertebrate sea animal, and it is a kind of shellfish. Most snails have an external shell; some snails have a small flat shell above or under the skin, but most do not have a shell at all. 

Land snails have a pair of antennae, with an eye at the end of the longer antenna. The large sand snail is regarded as a harmful pest, because it has a voracious appetite for plants. Its length reaches 10 cm. End quote. 

Secondly: 

With regard to the ruling on eating snails: 

1.     Land snails come under the ruling on eating “insects”. The majority of scholars are of the view that it is haraam. Al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in al-Majmoo’ (9/16): The view of the scholars concerning land insects … our view is that it is haraam. This was the view of Abu Haneefah, Ahmad and Dawood. Maalik said: it is halaal. End quote. 

Ibn Hazm (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: 

It is not permissible to eat land snails or any other “insects and vermin”, such as geckos, cockroaches, ants, bees, flies, wasps, worms, lice, fleas, bedbugs, mosquitoes or anything else of that type, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “Forbidden to you (for food) are: Al Maitah (the dead animals)” and “unless you are able to slaughter it (before its death)” [al-Maa’idah 5:3]. And there is sound proof that slaughter can only be done in the neck or upper chest, so if it is not possible to slaughter it, then there is no way one can eat it unless it is dead i.e., not slaughtered properly, so it is haraam. End quote. 

Al-Muhalla (6/76, 77). 

The Maalikis did not stipulate that a creature which has no flowing blood should be slaughtered, rather they included it under the same ruling as locusts, and its slaughter is by boiling, roasting, or piercing it with a stick or needle until it is dead, whilst saying the name of Allaah over it. 

In al-Mudawwanah (1/542) it says: 

Maalik was asked about something in the Maghreb (North Africa) which is called a snail, that is found in the desert on the trees – can it be eaten? He said: I think it is like the locust. If it is taken alive and boiled or roasted, I do not think there is anything wrong with eating it, but if it is found dead, it should not be eaten. End quote. 

In al-Muntaqa Sharh al-Muwatta’ (3/110) by Abu’l-Waleed al-Baaji (may Allaah have mercy on him) it says: 

If that is proven, then the ruling on snails is the same as the ruling on locusts. Maalik said its slaughtering is by boiling or being pierced with a stick or needle until it dies, and the name of Allaah should be mentioned whilst doing so, as it is mentioned when cutting off the heads of locusts. End quote. 

2.     Sea snails are halaal, because of the general permission with regard to eating seafood. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“Lawful to you is (the pursuit of) water game and its use for food — for the benefit of yourselves and those who travel”

[al-Maa’idah 5:96] 

al-Bukhaari narrated that ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “Water game means what is hunted, and its food is what the sea throws out (onto the shore).” 

al-Bukhaari narrated from Shurayh, the companion of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), that he said: “Everything in the sea is madhbooh (slaughtered).” 

But we have not seen any hadeeth which suggests that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) ate snails. 

To sum up: 

The permissibly of eating snails applies to both types, both land and sea snails. If they are cooked alive there is nothing wrong with that, because land snails have no blood so that it might be said that they must be slaughtered properly and the blood extracted, and sea snails come under the general permissibility of sea game and food. 

And Allaah knows best.

Ruling on eating meat and plants that have been genetically modified

What is the ruling on eating the meat of animals that have been fed with plants that have been genetically modified?.

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly: 

Research is still ongoing into the effect of genetically modified plants on humans, plants, animals and the environment, and even on the economy. There are still specialists who advise not hastening to accept what appears to be the case with regard to genetically modified plants of abundant production and the ability to overcome defects and resist disease. 

There are two main points of view with regard to this issue: the first is that which is adopted by American companies and American government organisations, which is to allow the use of genetically modified plants and marketing of their products. The other view, which is the opposite view, is that which is adopted by the European Union, which bans cultivation (of genetically modified plants) in its territory and warns against its possible consequences. 

The matter is still not definitive with regard to its effects, because it needs years for the impact to materialise, according to specialists. The fact that we have some plants which are more resistant to pesticides means that they will be used a great deal, which will pose a danger to the environment and human health. The fact that the plant has this strength means that it will enter the body of the one that eats it. As is well known, the countries that import these plants will never be able to plant the seeds of these plants in their lands again. What this means is that they will remain under the control and domination of the companies that produce these seeds, and this is what will affect the quality of the plants produced and will affect the economy of the importing country, as it will continue importing and consuming, and not producing independently. 

The Arab Organisation for Agricultural Development held a conference in Sudan 15-17/6/2003 CE, the subject of which was: Evaluating the Environmental Impact of Introducing Various Kinds of Genetically Modified Plants and Animals. 

We will quote from that conference statements which will explain this issue, before ruling on what was mentioned in the question. 

1.

(on p. 45) Dr. ‘Awad-Allaah ibn ‘Abd-Allaah ‘Abd al-Mawla -- Prof of Horticulture and Genetics in the College of Agriculture, Khartoum University -- says:

What are genetically modified products?

This is a phrase which refers to the products of some crops which have been genetically engineered, which means introducing a foreign gene to the original genetic material. The foreign gene may come from different sources, and is introduced to increase the value and improve the genetic qualities of the genetically engineered plant. Usually plants are genetically altered for two purposes, namely:

(i)                To reduce the cost of producing these plants, by making the plant resistant to disease.

(ii)              To improve the quality of the product, by improving its appearance or nutritional components with regard to qualities that have to do with manufacturing and storage. 

Production of these genetically modified products is done using genetic engineering techniques. This involves first identifying the gene responsible for the desired quality and isolating it, then introducing it to the living being (the receiver). After this new gene has been mixed with the genetic material of the genetically engineered plant, it is possible to increase the number of cells in which the new gene is successfully mixed, then by means of tissue planting it becomes possible to produce complete plants from the cells, and these plants become genetically modified or engineered. Once this gene becomes well established in the genetically engineered plant, it becomes possible to transfer it to other types of the same crop by using traditional methods of raising plants, by means of hybridisation and crossbreeding. 

2.

In a paper entitled Genetic Modification: Justifications, Benefits and its Impact on the Environment and Society, by Dr. Lakhdar Khaleefi and Dr. Maajidah Khaleefi, it says (p. 15):

In the field of genetic modification in particular, there is a clear difference between American and European law. Whilst American law regards genetically modified foods as natural foods that do not pose any danger until proven otherwise, European law -- especially French law -- regards genetically modified foods as unnatural and a possible source of danger until proven otherwise. End quote. 

Secondly: 

The one who researches this issue cannot state that it is haraam to eat genetically modified crops and fruits unless it is proven for certain that they are harmful. This does not mean that we can be careless about this matter, because of what we have pointed out above of the possibility that they may pose a danger in many ways, and because people still prefer natural plants and crops, and people like them even if they are more expensive. 

The matter still needs more research and more time until the effects of these plants and the harm they may cause becomes clear. 

Until it is proven that they are harmful, the basic principle is that these plants are permissible and it is permissible to eat animals that have been fed on these plants, but it is also essential to be cautious about what these plants may cause in the future, and it is essential to follow up on research and information about these plants. 

And Allaah knows best.

Ruling on eating chicken that was fed hormones or ground meat

Does the meat of chicken grown by giving steroids is halal evenif it is slaughtered correctly?

Praise be to Allaah.

If the manufactured food or medicines did not contain anything harmful or impure (najis), there is nothing wrong with eating chickens to whom they were fed, if they have been slaughtered in the proper shar‘i manner by a Muslim or a kitaabi (i.e., Jew or Christian). 

But if the feed or medicine is harmful to man, and will make him sick, for example, it is haraam to feed them to chickens and to eat those chickens, because Allah 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 neither harming not reciprocating harm.” Narrated by Ibn Maajah (2431) and classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Irwa’ al-Ghaleel (896). 

If the feed is naajis (impure), such as meat from animals that died without being slaughtered properly (maytah) or blood and so on, that may be put in the feed, then the matter is subject to further discussion. 

Is most of the feed is made from those impure substances or from taahir (pure) things such as grains and the like? 

If most of the feed is pure, it is permissible to eat it, and there is nothing wrong with that. 

But if most of its feed is naajis (impure) -- this is what the scholars call “an animal that feeds on filth” -- it is not permissible to eat unless it has been detained and fed with taahir food that will make its meat good. 

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen said in al-Sharh al-Mumti‘ (11/298): 

The animal that feeds on filth is one whose food is mostly impure (najaasah). 

There are two scholarly views concerning this: one view is that it is haraam because it has been nourished by impure matter that has an effect on its meat. 

The other view is that it is halaal. This is based on the idea that impure things become pure when they undergo a transformation. They said: The impurity that it ate has been transformed into blood, flesh and the like that grows in the body, so it is taahir. End quote. 

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said:

The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) forbade the milk of an animal that feeds on filth or impurity, but if the animal is detained until it becomes pure, then it is halaal according to Muslim consensus, because before that the effect of the impurity could be seen in its milk, eggs and sweat, so it gave off a rotten and evil stench. Once that is removed, it becomes taahir (pure). If the ruling is established for a reason, it ceases to apply once that reason is no longer present. End quote. 

Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 21/618 

And Allah knows best.

It is Sunnah to make the animal face the qiblah at the time of slaughter

If a man wants to slaughter a chicken, does he have to make it face toward the qiblah or may he slaughter it no matter what direction it is facing?.

Praise be to Allaah.

The Sunnah with regard to slaughter is to make the animal face towards the qiblah, but that is not obligatory. If he slaughters it facing any other direction, his slaughter is halaal, but he has omitted a Sunnah. 

Ahmad (15022), Abu Dawood (2785) and Ibn Maajah (3121) narrated that Jaabir ibn ‘Abd-Allaah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) sacrificed two rams on the day of Eid. When he turned them to face towards the qiblah he said: “Verily, I have turned my face towards Him Who has created the heavens and the earth Haneefa (Islamic Monotheism, i.e. worshipping none but Allaah Alone), and I am not of Al-Mushrikoon .Verily, my Salaah (prayer), my sacrifice, my living, and my dying are for Allaah, the Lord of the ‘Aalameen (mankind, jinn and all that exists). He has no partner. And of this I have been commanded, and I am the first of the Muslims’ [cf. al-An’aam 6:79, 162-163]. O Allaah, from You and to You, on behalf of Muhammad and his ummah. In the name of Allah and Allah is most great.” Then he slaughtered them. 

The isnaad of this hadeeth may reach the level of hasan as Shu’ayb al-Arna’oot said in Tahqeeq al-Musnad. 

It says in al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (21/196), explaining the etiquette of slaughtering:

The slaughterer should face towards the qiblah and the animal’s neck should be turned to face the qiblah, because Ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) disliked eating the meat of any animal that had been slaughtered facing any direction other than the qiblah, and no one among the Sahaabah disagreed with him. That is narrated in some reports from Ibn Sireen and Jaabir ibn Zayd. End quote. 

See: al-Mughni, 3/221 

It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (22/477) concerning one who slaughters an animal facing a direction other than the qiblah and claims that making it face the qiblah applies only when slaughtering the hadiy: 

If the situation with regard to slaughter is as you say, then the slaughter is sound and valid in terms of it being halaal, but the slaughterer is going against the Sunnah by not turning to face the qiblah with the animal at the time of slaughter, and he is doing wrong by not accepting the advice, and he is mistaken in his claim that making it face the qiblah applies only when slaughtering the hadiy, because the Sunnah is to turn towards the qiblah with the animal at the time of slaughter in all cases, whether it is a hadiy or a sacrifice or otherwise. End quote. 

It also says (1/67): It is mustahabb for the slaughterer to face towards the qiblah  and to make the animal also face towards the qiblah, because it is the noblest of directions, and because turning to face the qiblah is mustahabb in acts of worship, except in cases where there is evidence to indicate otherwise. The fact that this is mustahabb is particularly emphasized if it is a hadiy or udhiyah. It is narrated from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allaah be upon him) said: “Offer your sacrifices and be of good cheer, for there is no Muslim who turns his sacrifice to face the qiblah but its blood and dung and wool will be hasanaat that are present on his scales on the Day of Resurrection.” And he used to say: “Spend a little, you will be rewarded a great deal.” This hadeeth was narrated by ‘Abd al-Razzaaq in al-Musannaf, and al-Tirmidhi, Ibn Maajah and al-Bayhaqi narrated something similar. Although the imams of hadeeth suggested that its isnaad is weak, it may be acted upon with regard to encouraging good deeds. Hence Ibn ‘Umar and Ibn Sireen regarded it as makrooh to eat meat that was not facing the qiblah at the time of slaughter. Limiting oneself to saying Bismillaah and letting the animal face any direction at the time of slaughter is forsaking that which is better, but the slaughter is still valid. This was the view of al-Qaasim ibn Muhammad, al-Nakha’i, al-Thawri, Ibn al-Mundhir and others. End quote. 

And Allaah knows best.

Ruling on eating imported sweets and candies

The chocolates came from England and Canada they were sent by our relatives as a gift now i would like to know how can we identify if it is haram or halal?. the ingredients didn't mention anything about it.the chocolates were twix,kit kat etc.I will be waiting for your reply

Praise be to Allaah.

Shaykh Muhammad al-‘Uthaymeen said: the basic principle concerning all foods and drinks is that they are permissible unless there is evidence to show that they are forbidden, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“He it is Who created for you all that is on earth. Then He rose over (Istawa) towards the heaven and made them seven heavens and He is the All-Knower of everything” [al-Baqarah 2:29] 

And because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “What I keep quiet about is permissible,” then he recited:

“Say (O Muhammad): I find not in that which has been revealed to me anything forbidden to be eaten by one who wishes to eat it, unless it be Maytah (a dead animal) or blood poured forth (by slaughtering or the like), or the flesh of swine (pork); for that surely, is impure or impious (unlawful) meat (of an animal) which is slaughtered as a sacrifice for others than Allaah (or has been slaughtered for idols, or on which Allaah’s Name has not been mentioned while slaughtering)”

[al-An’aam 6:145 – interpretation of the meaning]. 

(Narrated by Abu Dawod, al-At’imah, 3306). Al-Albaani said in Saheeh Sunan Abi Dawood, its isnaad is saheeh. No. 3225.  

If we do not know that this thing is haraam, either from a clear statement [in the Qur’aan or Sunnah] to that effect or because it comes under a general shar’i prohibition, or by proper analogy that dictates that it is haraam, then it is halaal. This is the basic principle concerning food, drink, clothing and customs.  

(Fataawa Manaar al-Islam, 3/647). 

On this basis it is permissible to eat them so long as it is not proven that their ingredients include anything that that is known in sharee’ah to be haraam. And Allaah knows best.

Ruling on unknown meat from kaafir countries

Here in America they sell meat that is frozen and we do not know who slaughtered it or how it was slaughtered. Can we eat it?.

Praise be to Allaah.

If the region where the meat mentioned is found has only People of the Book, namely Jews and Christians, then their meat is halaal, even if it is not known how they slaughtered it, because the basic principle is that meat slaughtered by them is halaal, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Made lawful to you this day are At Tayyibaat [all kinds of Halaal (lawful) foods, which Allaah has made lawful (meat of slaughtered eatable animals, milk products, fats, vegetables and fruits)]. The food (slaughtered cattle, eatable animals) of the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) is lawful to you and yours is lawful to them”

[al-Maa’idah 5:5].

If there are other kaafirs in the region, then do not eat it, because that means there is doubt as to whether it is halaal or haraam. Similarly if you know that those who sell these meats slaughter the animals in a way that is different from the shar’i method, such as strangling or electric shock, then do not eat it, whether the one who slaughtered it is a Muslim or a kaafir, because Allaah says:

“Forbidden to you (for food) are: Al Maitah (the dead animals — cattle — beast not slaughtered), blood, the flesh of swine, and that on which Allaah’s Name has not been mentioned while slaughtering (that which has been slaughtered as a sacrifice for others than Allaah, or has been slaughtered for idols) and that which has been killed by strangling, or by a violent blow, or by a headlong fall, or by the goring of horns — and that which has been (partly) eaten by a wild animal — unless you are able to slaughter it (before its death)”

[al-Maa’idah 5:3]. End quote. 

May Allaah help the Muslims to understand their religion, for He is All Hearing, Ever Near. End quote. 

The difference between the wine of this world and the Hereafter

We all know that wine is forbidden in this world and that it causes intoxication and fogs the mind; hence it is rijs (an abomination) and the handiwork of the Shaytaan, and it is the mother of all evils as the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allaah be upon him). My question is: why is wine haraam in this world and halaal in the Hereafter?.

Praise be to Allaah.

Allaah, may He be exalted, describes the wine of the Hereafter as being different from the wine of this world. He says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Round them will be passed a cup of pure wine —

46. White, delicious to the drinkers.

47. Neither will they have Ghoul (any kind of hurt, abdominal pain, headache, a sin) from that nor will they suffer intoxication therefrom”

[al-Saaffaat 37:45-47] 

So Allaah describes the wine of the Hereafter as: 

1.     white

2.     delicious to the drinkers, unlike the wine of this world which is distasteful when drunk

3.     having no “ghoul” (hurt, abdominal pain, headache, a sin) in it, which is what affects one who drinks it in this world, of headache, pain in the stomach and loss of reason. In Soorat al-Waaq’iah it says: “Wherefrom they will get neither any aching of the head” [56:19], i.e., they will not get a headache from it.

4.     “nor will they suffer intoxication therefrom”, unlike the wine of this world which causes them to lose their minds. 

See: Tafseer Soorat al-Saaffaat by Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, p. 107-109. 

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: 

The wine of the Hereafter is good, and does not cause any intoxication or harm. As for the wine of this world, it is harmful and causes intoxication. In other words, in the wine of the Hereafter there is no ghawl (intoxication) and the one who drinks it will not become intoxicated; it does not cause him to lose his mind and it does not cause physical harm. As for the wine of this world, it is harmful to mind and body alike. None of the harmful effects in the wine of this world will be found in the wine of the Hereafter. And Allaah is the source of strength. End quote. 

Majmoo’ Fataawa Ibn Baaz, 23/62.

Is it permissible to plant and eat a lettuce called “iceberg lettuce trinity” because of its name?

I am a farmer who plants lettuce, I have recently found out that a lettuce variety which is very common in my land carries the title "iceberg lettuce trinity".

Praise be to Allaah.

Lettuce is a kind of plant that it is permissible to eat. Allaah has blessed us with good food that He has created and brought forth for us from the earth. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“O mankind! Eat of that which is lawful and good on the earth, and follow not the footsteps of Shaytaan (Satan). Verily, he is to you an open enemy”

[al-Baqarah 2:168] 

“O you who believe (in the Oneness of Allaah — Islamic Monotheism)! Eat of the lawful things that We have provided you  with, and be grateful to Allaah, if it is indeed He Whom you worship”

[al-Baqarah 2:172] 

The permissibility with regard to these things that we are permitted to grow and eat has nothing to do with the names that people give to them, because the names come from these people, each according to his environment and language. 

Based on that, the fact that this is called “iceberg lettuce trinity” does not make it haraam to grow it or eat it, even though in our research we did not find out who gave this name to it. Whatever the case, even if the word trinity in the name is a religious name connected to deviant Christianity, it does not affect the fact that it is permissible.

Ruling on eating pickles and bread made with yeast in the dough

Is it permissible to eat fermented foods made at home, such as pickled cabbage, soy sauce, leavened bread, in order to help the digestion process?.

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly: 

The general principle with regard to foods is that they are permissible, and nothing is disallowed except that for which there is evidence that it is haraam and should not be eaten. 

But the problem is the use of yeast in these pickles. 

It says in al-Mawsoo‘ah al-‘Arabiyyah, under the heading Khameerah (yeast): 

Yeast is a substance that ferments the dough when making bread. Its effect is the formation of carbon dioxide which created bubbles that make the colour of the dough lighter, and makes the dough expand during baking and rise and increase in size. Yeast is also used to make beer, nabeedh and other alcoholic drinks. The he yeast that is used commercially is made from colonies of microscopic single-celled yeast organisms. Although there are more than 600 kinds of yeast, only a few of them are used commercially. 

Based on that: 

If the amount of yeast in these pickles and the like is very little, and it has dissolved in them, so that it does not have the effect of causing intoxication or languor, there is nothing wrong with using yeast in them, and eating these pickles. 

But if the yeast has a lasting effect on them, such that if the one who ate a lot of these pickles would become intoxicated or tired, it is haraam to use the yeast in them, or to eat anything to which yeast has been added in this way. 

Thus it become clear that pickles made from permitted foods are permissible. It should be noted that the vinegar which is put with these products or that is produced by pickling these materials, comes under the heading of drinks that are originally permissible, and is a type of food that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) ate and praised, saying, “What a good condiment is vinegar.” [Narrated by Muslim, 2051]. 

For a more detailed discussion on the ruling on vinegar, please see the answer to questions no. 106196 and 113941. 

Secondly: 

There is also nothing wrong with eating bread made with yeast. The yeast (khameerah) that is added to the dough does not come under the heading of khamr (intoxicant) that is haraam, and does not have any effect of causing intoxication or languor, especially since cooking it with fire alters the yeast completely, so that it no longer has any effect. 

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked:

How should we respond to the ruling on the yeast that they put in flour to help leaven it and make it easy to cook, as some people say that it is khamr and it is not permissible to use it? 

He replied: 

My response to that is that there is nothing wrong with putting yeast in the dough for the purpose of leavening it, because this does not affect it at all. Moreover, I do not think that this yeast would cause intoxication if a person were to eat it. The basic principle concerning all foods and drinks and clothing is that they are permissible, unless it is proven that they are haraam, because Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“He it is Who created for you all that is on earth. Then He rose over (Istawa) towards the heaven and made them seven heavens and He is the All-Knower of everything”

[al-Baqarah 2:29]. 

So there is nothing wrong with putting yeast in the dough to leaven it. 

Fataawa Noor ‘ala al-Darb (tape 70, side b) 

And Allah knows best.

Ruling on accepting food and sweets from a kaafir

If a Christian or Jewish person gives me sweets or food or a drink, is it permissible for me to ask whether it is halaal or not, or whether there is pork in it or not? Or should I keep quiet and mention the name of Allah and eat? What I mean is asking one of the Muslim brothers for his opinion about what it contains.

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly: 

It is permissible to accept a gift from a non-Muslim because he is a relative or neighbour, or for the purpose of softening his heart and calling him to Islam, but it is haraam if it is done as an act of friendship or love, because Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians as Awliyaa’ (friends, protectors, helpers), they are but Awliyaa’ of each other. And if any amongst you takes them (as Awliyaa’), then surely, he is one of them. Verily, Allaah guides not those people who are the Zaalimoon (polytheists and wrongdoers and unjust)”

[al-Maa’idah 5:51]

“O you who believe! Take not as (your) Bitaanah (advisors, consultants, protectors, helpers, friends) those outside your religion (pagans, Jews, Christians, and hypocrites) since they will not fail to do their best to corrupt you. They desire to harm you severely. Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, but what their breasts conceal is far worse. Indeed We have made plain to you the Ayaat (proofs, evidences, verses) if you understand”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:118]. 

The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) accepted the invitation of a Jewish woman and ate her food. 

In his Saheeh, al-Bukhaari included a chapter entitled Chapter on Accepting Gifts from Mushrikeen, in which he (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

Abu Hurayrah narrated from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) that Ibraaheem (peace be upon him) travelled with Sarah and entered a village in which there was a king or a tyrant. He (the king) said: Give her Haajir (the mother of Ismaa’eel, peace be upon him). And the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was given a gift of a sheep containing poison. And Abu Humayd said: The king of Aylah gave the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) a white mule and a cloak. And he quoted the story of the Jewish woman who gave the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) the poisoned sheep. 

Secondly: 

It is permissible to eat meat slaughtered by a Jew or a Christian, subject to certain conditions: 

1.     That it be slaughtered in the same manner as the Muslims; so the throat and oesophagus should be cut and the blood should be allowed to flow. If he kills it by strangling, electric shock or drowning in water, then it is not permissible to eat his meat, just as if a Muslim does that, it is not permissible to eat his meat.

2.     The name of Allah should be mentioned over it, and no other name should be mentioned such as the name of Christ or anyone else, because Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “Eat not (O believers) of that (meat) on which Allaah’s Name has not been pronounced (at the time of the slaughtering of the animal)” [al-An’am 6:121]. And He says concerning haraam things (interpretation of the meaning): “He has forbidden you only the Maytah (dead animals), and blood, and the flesh of swine, and that which is slaughtered as a sacrifice for others than Allaah (or has been slaughtered for idols, on which Allaah’s Name has not been mentioned while slaughtering)” [al-Baqarah 2:173]. 

If it is not known how the meat was slaughtered or whether the name of Allah was mentioned over it or not, it is permissible to eat it and he does not have to ask about how it was slaughtered, because of the report narrated by al-Bukhaari (2057) from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her), according to which some people said: O Messenger of Allah, some people bring meat to us and we do not know whether they mentioned the name of Allah over it or not. The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “Mention the name of Allah over it and eat it.” 

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said: 

So it is permissible to eat even if we do not know whether the slaughterer mentioned the name of Allah or not. Similarly, it is permissible to eat even if we do not know whether it was slaughtered in the proper manner or not, because if an action is done by the appropriate people, then in principle it is valid and sound unless there is evidence to the contrary. If we receive some meat from a Muslim or a Jew or a Christian, we should not ask about it and we should not ask how it was slaughtered or whether the name of Allah was mentioned over it or not. It is halaal so long as there is no proof that it is haraam, and this is one of the ways in which Allah has made things easy for us. End quote. 

Liqaa’aat al-Baab al-Maftooh, 20805. 

See also the answer to question no. 20805 

This is with regard to things in which proper slaughter is stipulated, such as animals and birds. 

With regard to fish, sweets and vegetables, there is nothing wrong with eating them, unless it is known that something haraam has been put in them, such as alcohol or lard (pork fat). 

The ruling of prohibition cannot be confirmed on the basis of doubt. But if a person tries to be careful and only eats that which he knows and is certain that it is free of haraam things, then this is better. 

The Jews adhere to the proper method of slaughter, and they avoid pork. 

For more information please see the answer to question number 88206 and85108. 

And Allah knows best.

Important note to learn and read quran online

Reading Quran to seek the light to the right path. The holy Quran is the ultimate source and light for all Muslims. To seek this light of it one needs to read Quran. The importance of the text of Quran cannot be doubted or questions. At the same time, the significance of learning Quran with translation holds a great strength for a holy quran reciter.

There are number of issue in the daily life of Muslims, in which Muslims need to improve according to the Quran. Muslims have been practicing the same conventions from long time, without consulting Koran themselves. Unfortunately, many times Muslims ignore the negative side and only see the positive side of what has been written in the Quran.

learn quran online with tajweed and the meaning tafseer read quran online from the live quran reciter and online tajweed quran tutors listen quran

If maniy (semen) is emitted whilst one is awake because of illness, ghusl is not required

In your response to question 1927 you said that emission of semen due to sickness does not require ghusl. But you did not give any Hadith to support your answer. Could you please give some basis for the answer so I could put my heart at rest.

Praise be to Allaah.  

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“If you are in a state of Janaabah (i.e. after a sexual discharge), purify yourselves (bathe your whole body)”

[al-Maa’idah 5:6] 

Junub (the person who is in a state of janaabah) refers to the person who has emitted maniy which gushes forth, accompanied by feelings of pleasure. 

“Gushing forth” refers to the aayah where Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“So let man see from what he is created!

He is created from a water gushing forth”

[al-Taariq 86:5-6] 

If the maniy is emitted whilst a person is awake, with no feelings of pleasure,  then he does not have to do ghusl. With regard to the hadeeth of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), “Water is for water” (narrated by Muslim, al-Hayd, 518), it is to be interpreted as referring to the regular case, when maniy is emitted accompanied by feelings of pleasure, and results in tiredness and exhaustion. But with regard to that which is not accompanied by feelings of pleasure, it is does not result in tiredness and exhaustion. 

Hence they said that this water (maniy) has three characteristics: 

1.                 It comes out gushing.

2.                 Its smell when it has dried is like the smell of eggs, and if it is not dry its smell is like that of mud and pollen.

3.                 Tiredness of the body after it is emitted. 

See al-Sharh al-Mumti’ by Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, part 1, p. 277-278. 

The Standing Committee was asked about the obligation of doing ghusl after experiencing a wet dream. They replied: 

It is clear that ghusl is obligatory when maniy comes out gushing, accompanied by feelings of pleasure, when one is awake, and if it happens, regardless of how it comes out, when one is asleep, because Imaam Ahmad narrated from ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “If water gushes, then do ghusl, and if it does not gush, then do not do ghusl.” 

Fataawa Islamiyyah, vol. 1, p. 216 

It was also narrated by Abu Dawood and al-Nasaa’i that ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “My madhiy (prostatic fluid) flowed excessively and I used to keep taking baths until (the skin of) my back cracked. I mentioned that to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) – or that was mentioned to him – and the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: ‘Do not do that. If you see madhiy, then wash your penis and do wudoo’ as you do for prayer, but if water gushes out [i.e., maniy or semen], then do ghusl.” (Narrated by Abu Dawood, al-Tahaarah, 178; al-Nasaa’i, al-Tahaarah, 193. Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Sunan Abi Dawood, no. 187). 

Ibn Al-Manzoor said: This indicates that if anything other than that is emitted when one is awake, or it flows because of sickness, then he does not have to do ghusl. 

Ibn ‘Aabideen said: If it – i.e., maniy – is emitted because of being beaten or because of carrying a heavy load on one's back, then in our view he does not have to do ghusl. 

Al-Dardeer said: If it is emitted without feelings of pleasure, rather it flows or comes because of being beaten or being stung by a scorpion, then he does not have to do ghusl. 

The Hanbalis and the Shaafa’is, according to the more correct of the two views, stated that if a man’s back is broken and maniy comes out of him, and it does not come from the penis, then he does not have to do ghusl. The Hanbalis stated clearly that the ruling in this case is like regular kinds of najaasah.

See al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah, vol. 31, p. 197. 

And Allaah knows best. 

If a man wakes up and finds some wetness but does not know what it is

I sometimes wake up and find wetness which I cannot differentiate from semen or something else. Should I in this case make ghusl? 
Please tell us if u have advice for Muslims living in the west regarding prayers and its timings, issues of purification ‘tahara’, the matter of shaking hands and other related issues that are important for a Muslim man to observe. Please help us may Allah reward you and guide you to the best for Muslims.

Praise be to Allaah.

If a man wakes up and finds some wetness, one of three scenarios must apply: 

1-

He knows that it is maniy (semen), by knowing the characteristics of maniy. The fuqaha’ have stated that the smell of wet maniy is like the smell of dough or the spadix of the palm tree, and the smell of dried maniy is like the smell of egg whites. In that case ghusl is required, but it is not essential to wash one’s garment because maniy is taahir (pure) according to the more correct of the two scholarly opinions. 

2-

He knows that it is madhiy (prostatic fluid), which case ghusl is not required, but he must wash off whatever has got onto his body and clothes, because madhiy is najis (impure). 

3-

He does not know whether it is maniy or madhiy. That is subject to further discussion. 

If his sleep was preceded by something that caused the provocation of desire, such as thinking or looking, then the wetness that he found on his garment comes under the ruling on madhiy. 

If his sleep was not preceded by something that would cause emission of madhiy, then he should do that which is most on the safe side, and follow the rulings on both maniy and madhiy; so he should do ghusl and wash off whatever has got onto his clothes, and he should do wudoo’ during his ghusl. 

It says in Mataalib Ooli al-Nuha (1/162): If the sleeper wakes up and finds wetness on his body or garment or bed, if he is certain that it is maniy he should do ghusl because it is obligatory, even if he does not remember having a wet dream.  Al-Muwaffaq said: We do not know of any difference of opinion concerning that. But he need not wash off whatever it got onto, because maniy is taahir. 

Maniy may be recognized by its smell, which is like the smell of dough or the smell of the spadix of a palm tree when it is fresh, or the smell of egg whites when they are dry. If he is certain that it is not maniy, he should purify whatever it got onto of his body or clothes, because it is najis. 

If he is confused about this wetness and does not know whether it is maniy or madhiy, if his sleep was preceded by some cause such as cold, looking or thinking or foreplay or an erection, he should purify whatever it has got onto, because it is more likely to be madhiy due to the causes; what we think is likely should be taken as a certainty in this case, such as if he saw a dream in his sleep then he must do ghusl, because it is more likely that it was maniy because of the reason.   

But if his sleep was preceded by a cause, and he found some wetness on his clothes or body or bed, he should do ghusl because it is obligatory and he should do wudoo’ in the right order and also purify whatever it has got onto. It says in Sharh al-Iqnaa’: To be on the safe side. Then he said: This is not obligatory on the basis of doubt, rather it is on the basis of taking precautions, because in the case mentioned above, it is either maniy or madhiy and there is no reason to regard one as more likely than the other, therefore to be on the safe side what may be obligatory should be done and that cannot be done except in the way mentioned. End quote. 

See also the answer to question no. 22705. 

What you have mentioned about advice having to do with prayer, purification and forming relationships with women may be found in the appropriate place on this website. See the answer to question no. 22309. 

We ask Allaah to help and guide us and you. 

And Allaah knows best.

He had a wet dream but he did not do ghusl because it was very cold

I was once sleeping in the afternoon after taking lunch. i had erotic dreams & sufferred from nocturnal ejactulation. when the adhan for assar was being given , i woke up. s it was very cold i could not take a bath. i washed the semen off from my pants, did taimyum and continued with my asaar prayers. did i do the right thing? is it necessary to take a bath after having a wet dream or is it suffficeient to wash off the semen & do wadoo to become clean.  
In fact in view of the cold i tokk bath only after a few days, & contined to perform salat all these days using the same garment. i hope i have put the problem before u lucidly

Praise be to Allaah.

It is the mercy of Allaah towards His slaves that the obligation to do certain duties no longer applies when one is unable to do them, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“Allaah burdens not a person beyond his scope”

[al-Baqarah 2:286] 

This also includes not being able to do ghusl when one is junub (in a state of impurity following sexual activity); whoever is not able to do ghusl because he is sick or it is very cold may do tayammum instead and he does not have to repeat his prayers, because of the hadeeth of ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas who said: “I had a wet dream on a cold night during the campaign of Dhaat al-Salaasil, and I was scared that if I did ghusl I might die. So I did tayammum and prayed, then in the morning my companions mentioned that to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). He said, ‘O ‘Amr, you led your companions in prayer when you were junub.’ I told him what had kept me from doing ghusl and I said, ‘I heard that Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And do not kill yourselves. Surely, Allaah is Most Merciful to you” [al-Nisa’ 4:29].’ The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) smiled and did not say anything.”

(Narrated by Abu Dawood, 334; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood, 323; al-Bukhaari narrated it as a mu’allaq report). 

If you were in a place where you could not find any means of heating the water and you feared that you might become sick if you did ghusl with cold water, then what you did was correct and you do not have to repeat it.

He used not to do ghusl for janaabah out of ignorance; should he make up the prayers?

When I was in the first year of middle school, one of my relatives told me about madhiy and told me that it is what comes out with desire. When I reached the third year of middle school, I took a lesson about madhiy and how to purify oneself from it. After that, every time I became junub I would wash my penis and do wudoo’ for prayer, because I did not know that it was maniy. When I learned the ruling nearly three years later, I was upset about the prayers that I offered (when I was junub). Do I have to repeat them because of my misunderstanding?.

Praise be to Allaah.

The difference between madhiy and maniy is well known. For more information please see the answer to question no. 2458. What the Muslim is required to do is learn what he needs to know in order for his belief, worship and dealings with others to be sound. 

If a person offers many prayers without having purified himself correctly, because he was unaware that purification was obligatory, he does not have to repeat them, according to the correct opinion. 

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:  

Based on this, if a person did not purify himself as prescribed in sharee’ah because the text had not reached him, such as if he ate camel meat and did not do wudoo’, then the text reached him and he came to know that it is obligatory to do wudoo’ after eating camel meat, or if he prayed in a camel pen then the text reached him (which says that it is not allowed to pray in camel pens), does he have to repeat the past prayers? There are two opinions, both of which were narrated from Ahmad.  

A similar case is if a man touches his penis and prays, then he finds out that the one who touches his penis has to do wudoo’.  

The correct view in all these cases is that he does not have to repeat the prayers, because Allaah has forgiven things done by mistake or out of forgetfulness, and because He says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“And We never punish until We have sent a Messenger (to give warning)”

[al-Isra’ 17:15].  

If a person has not heard of the command of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) concerning a particular matter, then the obligation is not confirmed in his case. Hence when ‘Umar and ‘Ammaar became junub and ‘Umar did not pray and ‘Ammaar prayed after rolling in the dust, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not tell either of them to repeat the prayer. Similarly he did not tell Abu Dharr to repeat the prayers when he was junub and did not pray for several days. And he did not tell those of his companions who had eaten until they could distinguish the white thread from the black thread to make up their fasts, and he did not tell those who had prayed facing Bayt al-Maqdis (Jerusalem) before news of the abrogation reached them to make up those prayers.  

A similar case is that of the woman who was suffering from istihaadah (non-menstrual vaginal bleeding) and had not prayed for some time because she thought that she did not have to pray. There are two views as to whether such a woman has to make up the prayers she missed. One view is that she does not have to make up the prayers – as was narrated from Maalik and others – because when the woman who was suffering from istihaadah said to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “I have been bleeding heavily for some time and it prevents me from praying and fasting,” he told her what she should do in the future, and he did not tell her to make up the prayers of the past.  

 End quote from Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 21/101 

See also the answer to question no. 45648 

But you should do a lot of naafil prayers, because the naafil prayers will make up for any shortfall in the obligatory prayers. And you should seek to learn beneficial knowledge, because the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “If Allaah intends good for a person, He causes him to understand Islam.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (71) and Muslim (1037). 

May Allah help us and you to do that which He loves and which pleases Him. 

And Allah knows best.

He did ghusl just to be clean, and he did not realize that he was junub. Should he repeat his ghusl?

I woke up and made ghusl and prayed as I usually do every morning. Two hours later I found out that I was junub. Should I repeat my ghusl in this case or the first ghusl is enough? Bearing in mind that I did not intend to clear the janaba while making ghusl.

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly: 

If a person prays then realizes that he was junub, he must do ghusl and repeat the prayer; his first ghusl does not count that he did as a habit or to keep clean, without the intention to remove janaabah, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Actions are but by intentions and each person will have but that which he intended.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (1) and Muslim (1907). 

Ibn Qudaamah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in al-Mughni (1/158): If he intended to do an act of purification for something for which purification is not prescribed, such as to cool down, and he did not intend the purification that is prescribed in sharee’ah, then the impurity is not removed because he did not have the intention of purification, so it does not count as anything.

End quote.

It is not sufficient to wipe the head and run the fingers through the hair when doing ghusl from janaabah

In question no. 2648 it described the way of washing the hair when doing ghusl [full ablution] from janaabah [impurity following sexual activity], but is it permissible to run the fingers through the hair and just to wipe the head, because I find it difficult to wash my hair every time because I use a hairdryer to make my hair look nice for my husband.

Praise be to Allaah.

When doing ghusl from janaabah you have to wash the entire body, including the hair. Ghusl means letting water run over every part of the body. Al-Sharh al-Mumti’, 1/128. 

It is essential to pour water on the hair and make it reach what is beneath the hair. Simply wiping over the head is not sufficient because it is not regarded as ghusl (washing); what is required is washing not wiping. 

It was narrated that Aa’ishah said: When the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did ghusl from janaabah, he would start by washing his two hands, then he would pour water into his left hand with his right hand and wash his private part, then do wudoo’ as for prayer, then he would take the water and, using his fingers, make it reach the roots of his hair, until he was certain that the water had reached the roots of his hair, then he would pour three scoops of water over his head, then he would pour water over the rest of his body, then he would wash his feet.” 

Narrated by Muslim, 474. 

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen said in his commentary on this hadeeth: It is essential when doing ghusl from janaabah to make sure the water reaches what is under the hair, even if the hair is thick. 

This is understood from the fact that he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) put his fingers in his hair and poured water over it three times after he made sure that the water was reaching the roots of his hair. 

Sharh Buloogh al-Maraam, p. 399 

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Women who find it difficult to wash their heads when doing ghusl from janaabah should be told that it is sufficient to pour water over their heads three times so that the water reaches every part of their heads, with no need to undo their braids or change anything of their hairstyle which they find it hard to change. They should also be reminded of the great reward they will have with Allaah, the good consequences and the everlasting good life that they will have in the abode of honour if they are patient in adhering to the rulings of sharee’ah. 

Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him), 6/236 

See also question no. 34776.

How to do ghusl from janaabah

How does one do ghusl (full ablution) to cleans oneself of janaabah (impurity following sexual activity)? 

Praise be to Allaah. 

There are two kinds of ghusl from janaabah – sufficient and complete. 

Sufficient ghusl means that you rinse your mouth and nose, then you wash your entire body with water, even if that means plunging yourself into deep water in one go. Complete ghusl means washing your private parts and anywhere else that is contaminated with traces of impurity, then you do full wudoo’, then you pour water over your head three times, making sure that it reaches the roots of the hair. Then you wash the right side of the body then the left side. 

Is it obligatory to wash one’s hair when doing ghusl after having intercourse?

is it a must to wash your hair after intercourse to be considered clean?

Praise be to Allaah.

Washing the hair when doing ghusl (full ablution) after having intercourse is obligatory. The evidence (daleel) for that is the hadeeth narrated by ‘Aa’ishah who said: “When the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did ghusl after having intercourse, he would start by washing his hands, then he would pour water with his right hand onto his left hand and wash his private parts, then he would do wudoo’ as for prayer, then he would take the water and put his fingers in his hair till he reached the roots, and when he saw that the water had reached the roots, he would pour water over his head three times. Then he poured water over the rest of his body, then he washed his feet.” (Reported by Muslim, 474). Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen said in his commentary on Buloogh al-Maraam (p. 399): “This also indicates that it is obligatory to make the water reach the roots of the hair when doing ghusl after intercourse, and if the hair is thick, one does this by putting one's fingers in one's hair and pouring water over one's head three times after the water has reached the roots of the hair.”

This ruling does not differentiate between men and women, but the scholars did discuss undoing the hair if it is braided, in the case of women who do ghusl after intercourse and after finishing their period. The most correct view is that it is not obligatory to undo braided hair. The evidence for this is the hadeeth of Um Salamah, who said: “I said, ‘O Messenger of Allaah, I am a woman who braids her hair, should I undo it to do ghusl after having intercourse?’ (According to another report, she said: ‘and after my period?’) He said, ‘No. It is enough for you to pour water on your head three times.’” (Reported by Muslim). Further evidence is to be seen in the hadeeth of ‘Ubayd ibn ‘Umayr, who said: “ ‘Aa’ishah heard that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar was commanding women to undo their braids when they did ghusl. She said, ‘This is very strange on the part of Ibn ‘Umar! He is telling women to undo their braids when they do ghusl – why doesn’t he tell them to shave their heads?! The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and I used to do ghusl using one vessel, and I never did more than pour water on my head three times.’” (Reported by Muslim, 331).

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen said in his commentary on Buloogh al-Maraam (p. 406): “This hadeeth speaks about women doing ghusl: do they have to undo these braids and wash what is underneath them or not? The Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) explained that it is not obligatory to undo them every time, because this is too difficult, especially in the case of ghusl after intercourse. There is a difference of scholarly opinion on the matter. Some scholars said that it is obligatory for women to undo their braids when doing ghusl after their periods, but not when doing ghusl after having intercourse. The difference between the two is obviously that ghusl after intercourse is done frequently, and it would be too difficult for a woman to undo her braids in the morning and put them back in the evening or vice versa, but ghusl following one’s period is usually done only once a month, so it is easy for a woman to undo her braids for this purpose. And Allaah knows best.

She did ghusl and prayed without washing her hair

Sometimes I do ghusl for janaabah (impurity following sexual activity) or menstruation, and I do not wash my hair because it is braided. What is the ruling on that?

Praise be to Allaah. 

This is a serious mistake and it is not permissible to do that. Therefore the prayer is not valid. You have to wash all of your body, including the hair, as stated in the hadeeth of Umm Salamah (may Allaah be pleased with he) who said: “I said, ‘O Messenger of Allaah, I am a woman who braids her hair – should I undo it to do ghusl for janaabah?’ He said, ‘No, it is sufficient for you to pour water over your head three times.’” (Narrated by Muslim, no. 330). If your hair is braided then you can wash it and make sure that the water reaches the roots as well was washing the rest of it. This is essential. Your prayers are not valid because you did not do ghusl from janaabah properly. One of the conditions of ghusl from janaabah is that water should reach every part of the body, including the hair. The same applies to ghusl following menstruation or post-natal bleeding.

 You have to repeat the prayers which you prayed when you had not washed your hair when doing ghusl following janaabah or menstruation. And Allaah knows best.

Her hair is falling out and washing her head harms her; how should she do ghusl following menses and in the case of janaabah?

We have a sister in Islam who is suffering from hair loss and the doctor asked her not to wash it with water except once a week, with the medicine, for three months. How should she purify herself in the case of janaabah?.

Praise be to Allaah.

What is required in ghusl in the case of janaabah is to wash the entire body with water, except that the woman whose hair is in braids is not obliged to undo them, but she should pour the water on her head in such a manner that it will reach all of her hair. 

That is because of the reports narrated by Muslim (330) from Umm Salamah (may Allaah be pleased with her) who said: I said: O Messenger of Allaah, I am a woman with tightly braided hair; should I undo it for ghusl from janaabah? He said: “No; it is sufficient for you to pour three handfuls of water over your head, then pour water over you, and you will become pure.” According to another report: Should I undo them for (ghusl following) menses and janaabah? He said: “No.”. 

Al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Sharh Muslim: Our view and that of the majority is that if a woman has her hair in braids and the water reaches all of her hair, inward and outward, without undoing the braids, she does not have to undo her braids, but if the water cannot reach all of her hair without undoing the braids, then she must undo them. The hadeeth of Umm Salamah is to be interpreted as meaning that the water reached all of her hair without her undoing it, because making the water reach all parts is obligatory. It was narrated from al-Nakha’i that it is obligatory to undo (braids) in all cases; it was narrated from al-Hasan and Tawoos that it is obligatory to undo braids when doing ghusl following menses, but not in the case of janaabah. Our evidence is the hadeeth of Umm Salamah. End quote. 

If using water will harm her and lead to her hair falling out, then she should do tayammum and wash the rest of her body, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “But if you are ill or on a journey, or any of you comes after answering the call of nature, or you have been in contact with women (i.e. sexual intercourse), and you find no water, then perform Tayammum with clean earth” [al-Maa’idah 5:6]. This verse indicates that the sick person who will be harmed or his recovery delayed by using water should do tayammum. Allaah has explained the wisdom behind this legislation in the verse where He says (interpretation of the meaning): “Allaah does not want to place you in difficulty, but He wants to purify you, and to complete His Favour to you that you may be thankful” [al-Maa’idah 5:6]. 

If she can wipe her head, she should do that and do tayammum and wash the rest of her body, because she is able to do that and because Allaah has not burdened any soul beyond its scope. 

Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allaah be pleased with him) was asked: I am a married woman and I am sick with an allergy in my chest, and I suffer fromt his condition throughout the year. How should I pray? Can I do ghusl without washing my head, and wiping it only? Please note that I get this problem when I wash my head several times a week, and I often do not pray because I am unable to wash my head and can only wipe it. I am confused and very anxious and worried, even though I know that the religion is easy. I hope that you can give me a definitive answer, so that I can live in peace and obey Allaah and fulfil my obligations properly. Please note that I am a teacher and I go out to work every day, and if I go outside after having a shower I fall sick, and Allaah knows that I am confused about how to live my married life, which means obeying my husband and above all obeying Allaah.  

He replied: 

If you will be harmed by washing your head in the case of janaabah and following menses, it will suffice to wipe it and do tayammum too, because Allaah says: “So keep your duty to Allaah and fear Him as much as you can”[al-Taghaabun 64:16]. And the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whatever I forbid you to do, avoid it; and whatever I tell you to do, do as much of it as you can.” End quote from Fataawa Islamiyyah, 1/214. 

For a description of tayammum, please see the answer to question number21074. 

This tayammum is permissible before or after ghusl, because washing the parts of the body in a particular order is not essential in ghusl. 

It should be noted that some women exaggerate their fear about hair loss. It is essential that the hair loss should be a real sickness and not just something imagined or feared, in order for a woman to be allowed the concession of not washing her hair and wiping it and doing tayammum instead. 

And Allaah knows best.