format_quote Originally Posted by
snakelegs
is waajib the same as fard?
if so, i never knew that! seems that plenty of religious muslim women are content with hijaab...:confused:
yeah...but we can't judge them as a religious muslimah or not.
Posted by sis al muwahiddah...
Ibn Qudâmah, a leading Hanbalî jurist and proponent of covering the face, says the following in al-Mughnî (9/498):
A male witness may see the face of the woman he is to be a witness for…
If a man engages in business with a woman, either buying and selling or entering into a rental agreement, then he has a right to see her face… It is related from Ahmad b. Hanbal that that he disliked his doing so if the woman in question is young, but not if she were old. It is likely that he meant that he disliked it for someone who feared temptation and in cases where it is not necessary for him to transact with her. As for when there is a need and where there is no fear of overt sexual arousal, there is no objection.
Dr. Muhammad b. Sâlih al-Duhaym, the presiding judge at the Layth District Courthouse in Saudi Arabia, is a contemporary scholar who regards covering the face to be obligatory. He issued the following ruling:
If a woman is living in a country, or in a time, or under circumstances where she cannot cover her face and hands – whether the reasons are societal, political, or related to public safety – and if she might face difficulty or might lose out on a greater good, then it is permitted for her to uncover her face and hands.
Many Hanafî jurists hold the view that a man can look at woman’s face as long as his doing so does not incite sexual desire. If it does incite such desire in him, then he is prohibited from looking at her face. Nevertheless, in cases where there is a compelling need for him to see her face, then he may look at it, even if he feels desire.
The eminent Hanafî scholar, `Alâ al-Dîn al-Samarqandî, writes in Tuhfah al-Fuqahâ’ (3/334):
If there is a necessity, then there is no objection to the man looking at her face, even if he feels desire. This is the case for the judge or the witness. They can look upon her face in the dispensation of justice or when carrying out the function of acting as a witness.
Likewise, he can do so if he is intent on marriage, since the purpose is not to indulge his sexual desires. This is because of what is related from the Prophet (peace be upon him) that he said to al-Mughîrah b. Shu`bah: “If you would take a look at her, it is better for fostering harmony between you.”
Scholars of Islamic Law make a distinction between matters that are prohibited
for their inherent evil and matters that are prohibited
only because they have the potential to lead up to the perpetration of an inherent evil. For instance, murder, fornication, and drug abuse are prohibited in their own right. By contrast, a woman showing her face in public is prohibited – by the scholars who regard it as prohibited – because of the temptation that it might cause and that might lead to the sin of fornication or adultery. The woman is not required to veil her face for the mere sake of covering it.
This is an important distinction in Islamic Law. Things that are prohibited in their own right cannot be permitted except in cases of dire necessity (darûrah). For instance, a person may not drink wine. However, if that person is choking on something and can only find wine to save himself, he may drink it out of necessity. By contrast, things that are prohibited only because they can lead to other unlawful activities are allowed for any valid need (hâjah).
Ibn al-Qayyim explains this principle in I`lâm al-Muwaqqi`în:
Prohibitions regarding the means to wrongdoing are not like things that are prohibited for their own sake. Prohibitions regarding the means to wrongdoing will be lifted for a valid need (hâjah). As for things that are prohibited for their own sake, their prohibition is not lifted except in cases of dire necessity (darûrah).
Source