Fatwa Explorer

Fatwa #3105531 October 2014Germany

Family accepted nikāh but they did not explicitly approve verbally

Question

during a ceremony the father of the girl told the present people (around 15 relatives from both sides), that he had given his daughter by the named so-and-so to the boy named so-and-so. The boys family accepted the offer by giving a present, as is usual amongst the people. However, it wasnt said explicitly by the boy or any other representative that "he accepts her in marriage". Also the mahr was not mentioned in any way. Is this a valid nikah or are the boy and girl still considered non-mahram strangers?

Answer

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.

As-salāmu ‘alaykum wa-rahmatullāhi wa-barakātuh.

In principle, it is necessary to verbally pronounce one’s approval in order to initiate the nikāh.[1] As such, the nikāh in question was invalid and the boy and girl are still considered to be non-mahram for each other.

And Allah Ta’āla Knows Best

Bilal Mohammad

Student Darul Iftaa
New Jersey, USA 

Checked and Approved by,
Mufti Ebrahim Desai.

www.daruliftaa.net



[1] Fatāwā Dārul `Ulūm Zakariyyā, v. 3 p. 562, Zam Zam Publishers;

Fatāwā Dārul `Ulūm Deoband, v. 1 p. 419, Dārul Ishā`at;

[قال الحصكفي] (فَلَا يَنْعَقِدُ) بِقَبُولٍ بِالْفِعْلِ كَقَبْضِ مَهْرٍ وَلَا بِتَعَاطٍ وَلَا بِكِتَابَةِ حَاضِرٍ

[قال ابن عابدين] (قَوْلُهُ: فَلَا يَنْعَقِدُ إلَخْ) تَفْرِيعٌ عَلَى مَا تَقَدَّمَ مِنْ انْعِقَادِهِ بِلَفْظِ إلَخْ ح (قَوْلُهُ: كَقَبْضِ مَهْرٍ) قَالَ فِي الْبَحْرِ: وَهَلْ يَكُونُ الْقَبُولُ بِالْفِعْلِ كَالْقَبُولِ بِاللَّفْظِ كَمَا فِي الْبَيْعِ؟ قَالَ فِي الْبَزَّازِيَّةِ أَجَابَ صَاحِبُ الْبِدَايَةِ فِي امْرَأَةٍ زَوَّجَتْ نَفْسَهَا بِأَلْفٍ مِنْ رَجُلٍ عِنْدَ الشُّهُودِ، فَلَمْ يَقُلْ الزَّوْجُ شَيْئًا لَكِنْ أَعْطَاهَا الْمَهْرَ فِي الْمَجْلِسِ أَنَّهُ يَكُونُ قَبُولًا، وَأَنْكَرَهُ صَاحِبُ الْمُحِيطِ وَقَالَ الْإِمَامُ مَا لَمْ يَقُلْ بِلِسَانِهِ قَبِلْت بِخِلَافِ الْبَيْعِ لِأَنَّهُ يَنْعَقِدُ بِالتَّعَاطِي وَالنِّكَاحُ لِخَطَرِهِ لَا يَنْعَقِدُ حَتَّى يَتَوَقَّفَ عَلَى الشُّهُودِ وَبِخِلَافِ إجَازَةِ نِكَاحِ الْفُضُولِيِّ بِالْفِعْلِ لِوُجُودِ الْقَوْلِ ثَمَّةَ. اهـ. ح

(رد المحتار علي الدر المختار، ج ٣، ص ١٢، ايج ايم سعيد كمبني)

وَالثَّانِي قَبُولٌ وَهَلْ يَكُونُ الْقَبُولُ بِالْفِعْلِ كَالْقَبُولِ بِاللَّفْظِ كَمَا فِي الْبَيْعِ قَالَ: فِي الْبَزَّازِيَّةِ أَجَابَ صَاحِبُ الْبِدَايَةِ فِي امْرَأَةٍ زَوَّجَتْ نَفْسَهَا بِأَلْفٍ مِنْ رَجُلٍ عِنْدَ الشُّهُودِ فَلَمْ يَقُلْ الزَّوْجُ شَيْئًا لَكِنْ أَعْطَاهَا الْمَهْرَ فِي الْمَجْلِسِ أَنَّهُ يَكُونُ قَبُولًا، وَأَنْكَرَهُ صَاحِبُ الْمُحِيطِ، وَقَالَ: لَا مَا لَمْ يَقُلْ بِلِسَانِهِ قَبِلْت بِخِلَافِ الْبَيْعِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ يَنْعَقِدُ بِالتَّعَاطِي وَالنِّكَاحُ لِخَطَرِهِ لَا يَنْعَقِدُ حَتَّى يَتَوَقَّفُ عَلَى الشُّهُودِ بِخِلَافِ إجَازَةِ نِكَاحِ الْفُضُولِيِّ بِالْفِعْلِ لِوُجُودِ الْقَوْلِ ثَمَّةَ. اهـ.

(البحر الرائق، ج ٣، ص ٨١، ايج ايم سعيد كمبني)

Something wrong with this record?

Report a problem

This goes to whoever maintains the archive, not to Askimam.org. For a question about the ruling itself, use the link to the original above.

Sent anonymously. No account needed, and nothing identifies you.