What is the ruling on drinking one’s wife’s milk?

My wife is currently feeding our newborn child.
During sex, I drank her milk.
Is her milk halal for me?

Praise be to Allaah.

Before answering this question, we must explain some important points about the rulings (ahkaam) concerning breastfeeding (al-radaa’).

1. Breastfeeding is proven in the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and by ijmaa’ (scholarly consensus).

Qur’aan: Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “… your foster mothers who gave you suck, your foster milk suckling sisters…” [al-Nisa’ 4:23].

Sunnah: Ibn ‘Abbaas reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “What is forbidden by radaa’ (suckling or breastfeeding) is the same as what is forbidden by nasab (lineage).” (Agreed upon; al-Bukhaari, Muslim, 1444).

Ijmaa’: The scholars agree that the effect of radaa’ (breastfeeding) prohibits marriage and creates the relationship of mahram, and permits seeing and being alone (with the people to whom one is related through radaa’).

2. For breastfeeding to have the effect of transmitting its benefits from the nursing woman to the child suckled, it must meet certain conditions, which are:

The breastfeeding must happen within the first two years of the child’s life, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “The mothers shall give suck to their children for two whole years, (that is) for those (parents) who desire to complete the term of suckling…” [al-Baqarah 2:233].

The number of breastfeedings must total the known five feeds, in which the child eats his fill as if eating and drinking. If the child leaves the breast for a reason, such as to take a breath or to switch from one breast to the other, this (i.e., each separate time the child latches on) is not counted as one breastfeeding. This is the opinion of al-Shaafa’i, and the opinion favoured by Ibn al-Qayyim. The definition of rad’ah (one breastfeeding) is when the child sucks at the breast and drinks until the milk enters his stomach, then he leaves the breast of his own accord. The evidence for the number five (number of breastfeedings) is the report from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) who said: “There was in the Qur’aan [an aayah which stipulated that] ten [was the number of] breastfeedings which created the relationship of mahram, then this was abrogated [by another aayah which stipulated] five. The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died and [the aayah which stipulated five] was still being recited as part of the Qur’aan.” (Reported by Muslim, 1452). In other words, the abrogation came so late that when the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) died, some people had not yet heard that this aayah had been abrogated, but when they heard that it had been abrogated, they stopped reciting it, and agreed that it should not be recited, although the ruling mentioned in the aayah remained in effect. This is an abrogation of the recitation without abrogation of the ruling, which is one type of abrogation. Having understood this, breastfeeding after the first two years does not create any relationship of mahram. This is the opinion of the majority of scholars, and among the references which they quote is the aayah cited above, along with the hadeeth of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “Nothing of breastfeeding creates the relationship of mahram except what fills the stomach to bursting point, before (the age of) weaning.” Reported by al-Tirmidhi. (No. 1152), who said: This is a hasan saheeh hadeeth. The application of this according to the scholars among the Companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and others is that breastfeeding does not create the relationship of mahram except when it is within the first two years, and anything after the first two whole years does not create any such relationship.”

There are some other reports from the Sahaabah, such as that narrated from Abu ‘Atiyah al-Waadi’i, who said: “A man came to Ibn Mas’ood and said: ‘My wife was with me and her breasts were full of milk (she was engorged). I began to suck it and spit it out. Then I came to Abu Moosa.’ He (Ibn Mas’ood) said, ‘What did you tell him?’ So he (Abu Moosa) told him what he had told him. Then Ibn Mas’ood stood up, took the man’s hand (and said), ‘Do you think this is an infant? Breastfeeding is what produces the growth of flesh and blood.’ Abu Moosa said: ‘Do not ask me anything when this scholar is among you.’” (Reported by ‘Abd al-Razzaaq in al-Musannaf, 7/463, no. 13895).

In al-Muwatta’ (2/603), Maalik reported that Ibn ‘Umar said: “There is no breastfeeding except for the one who is breastfed in infancy; there is no breastfeeding for one who is grown up.” Its isnaad is saheeh.

Maalik also reported in al-Muwatta’ that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Dinar said: “A man came to ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar when I was with him in the court-house, asking him about breastfeeding one who is grown up. ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar said: ‘A man came to ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab and said, “I have a slave-girl with whom I used to have sexual relations, and my wife went to her and gave her her milk, then when I went to her, she said, ‘Stop, by Allaah I have given her my milk.’” ‘Umar said, “Punish her (your wife), and (continue to) go to your slave-girl, for (the ruling on) breastfeeding only applies to breastfeeding of infants.”’” Its isnaad is saheeh.

From this is it clear that drinking one’s wife’s milk has no effect and does not create the relationship of mahram. Ibn Qudaamah said in al-Mughni (9/201): “One of the conditions of breastfeeding creating the relationship of mahram is that it should be within the first two years. This is the opinion of most of the scholars. Something like this was narrated from ‘Umar, ‘Ali, Ibn ‘Umar, Ibn Mas’ood, Ibn ‘Abbaas, Abu Hurayrah and the wives of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), apart from ‘Aa’ishah. It was also the opinion of al-Shi’bi, Ibn Shubrumah, al-Oozaa’i, al-Shaafa’i, Ishaaq, Abu Yoosuf, Muhammad, and Abu Thawr, and was narrated in one report from Maalik.

On the basis of the above, drinking one’s wife’s milk has no effect, but it is better to avoid it.

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen was asked about this matter, and he replied: Breastfeeding a grown-up has no effect, because the breastfeeding which has an effect (of creating the relationship of mahram) is that which consists of five feedings or more within the first two years, before weaning. On this basis, if it happened that someone breastfed from his wife or drank her milk, he does not become her son. Fataawa Islamiyah, 3/338. And Allaah knows best.

Verses in the Qur’aan where we should perform Sujood al-Tilaawah

I would like to know the specific ayats in the Qu'Ran where we should prostrate.

Praise be to Allaah.

There are fifteen places in the Qur’aan where we should perform sajdat al-tilaawah (prostration of recitation) when reciting them. It was reported from ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) recited to him fifteen verses in the Qur’aan where one should prostrate, three of which are in al-Mufassal and two in Soorat al-Hajj. It was reported by Abu Dawood, Ibn Maajah, al-Haakim and al-Daaraqutni, and classed as hasan by al-Mundhiri and al-Nawawi. The fifteen aayat are (interpretation of the meanings):

1 - “Surely those who are with your Lord (angels) are never too proud to perform acts of worship to Him, but they glorify His Praise and prostrate before Him.”

[al-A’raaf 7:206]

2 - “And unto Allaah (Alone) falls in prostration whoever is in the heavens and the earth, willingly or unwillingly, and so do their shadows in the mornings and in the afternoons.”

[al-Ra’d 13:15]

3 – “And to Allaah prostrate all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth, of the live moving creatures and the angels, and they are not proud [i.e., they worship their Lord (Allaah) with humility].”

[al-Nahl 16:49]

4 – “Say (O Muhammad): ‘Believe in it (the Qur’aan) or do not believe (in it). Verily! Those who were given knowledge before it, when it is recited to them, fall down on their faces in humble prostration.”

[al-Isra’ 17:107]

5 – “… When the Verses of the Most Beneficent (Allaah) were recited unto them, they fell down prostrating and weeping.”

[Maryam 19:58]

6 – “See you not that to Allaah prostrates whoever is in the heavens and whoever is one the earth, and the sun, and the moon, and the stars, and the mountains, and the trees, and al-dawaab (moving living creatures, beasts, etc.), and many of mankind? But there are many (men) on whom the punishment is justified. And whomsoever Allaah disgraces, none can honour him. Verily! Allaah does what He wills.”

[al-Hajj 22:18]

7 – “O you who believe! Bow down, and prostrate yourselves, and worship your Lord and do good that you may be successful.”

[al-Hajj 22:77]

8 – “And when it is said to them: ‘Prostrate to the Most Beneficent (Allaah)!’ They say, ‘And what is the Most Beneficent? Shall we fall down in prostration to that which you (O Muhammad) command us?’ And it increases in them only aversion.”

[al-Furqaan 25:60]

9 – “[As Shaytaan has barred them from Allaah’s Way] so that they do not worship (prostrate before) Allaah, Who brings to light what is hidden in the heavens and the earth, and knows what you conceal and what you reveal.”

[al-Naml 27:25]

10 – “Only those believe in Our aayaat (verses, signs, etc.) who, when they are reminded of them fall down prostrate, and glorify the Praises of their Lord, and they are not proud.”

[al-Sajdah 32:15]

11 – “… And Dawood guessed that We had tried him and he sought forgiveness of his Lord, and he fell down prostrate and turned (to Allaah) in repentance.”

[Saad 38:24]

12 – “And from among His Signs are the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. Prostrate not to the sun nor to the moon, but prostrate to Him Who created them, if you (really) worship Him.”

[Fussilat 41:37]

13 – “So fall down in prostration to Allaah, and worship Him (Alone).”

[al-Najm 53:62]

14 – “And when the Qur’aan is recited to them, they fall not prostrate.”

[al-Inshiqaaq 84:21]

15 – “… Fall prostrate and draw near to Allaah!”

[al-‘Alaq 96:19]

Al-Albaani said, in Tamaam al-Minnah (296):

“On the contrary, the hadeeth is not hasan, because it includes two majhool [unknown] narrators. Al-Haafiz said in al-Talkhees, after quoting the opinion of al-Mundhiri and al-Nawawi that it is hasan: ‘’Abd al-Haqq and Ibn Qattaan classed it as da’eef [weak]. It includes ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Munayn, who is majhool, and the one who narrated from him is al-Haarith ibn Sa’eed al-‘Atqi, who is also unknown.’ Ibn Maakoolaa said: ‘ He did not narrate any hadeeth apart from this one.”

Hence al-Tahhaawi was of the opinion that there is no second sajdah in Soorat al-Hajj, towards the end of the soorah. This is also the opinion of Ibn Hazm who said in al-Muhalla:

“Because it is not narrated in any saheeh report that this was the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and there is no scholarly consensus to this effect. But it was reported with a saheeh isnaad that ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab, the daughter of ‘Abd-Allaah and Abu Darda’ performed sajdah in (the second verse quoted from Soorat al-Hajj).”

Then Ibn Hazm discussed whether the sajdahs for the other aayaat quoted are prescribed in Islam. He mentioned that the scholars are agreed upon the first ten, that performing sujood when reciting these aayaat is prescribed. Al-Tahhaawi also reported this consensus in Sharh al-Ma’aani (1/211), but he said that the sajdah in Soorat Fussilat was prescribed, instead of the sajdah in Soorat Saad. Both scholars narrated ahaadeeth with saheeh isnaads from the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) concerning the sajdahs in Saad, al-Najm, al-Inshiqaaq and al-‘Alaq. These last three are from the Mufassal, which is referred to in the hadeeth of ‘Amr mentioned above.

In conclusion, even though the isnaad of the hadeeth is weak, it is supported by the consensus of the ummah which supports most of it, and by saheeh ahaadeeth which support the rest of it, except for the second sajdah in Soorat al-Hajj, for which there is no evidence in the Sunnah or in the consensus of the scholars. But some of the Sahaabah used to prostrate when reciting it, which could be taken as evidence, especially since no one is known to have disputed with them in this regard.

To sum up, the prostration of recitation should be performed when reciting the fifteen verses quoted above. And Allaah knows best.

Is it true that there is no evidence of a Qur’aan being written in the 7th century?

I was womndering if it is true that there is no evidence that there is no trace of a Qu'ran being written in the 7 th century

Praise be to Allaah. 

This is a false and incorrect statement made by those who try to find faults with Islam so as to put people off this religion. It is sufficient to know that Allaah has guaranteed to preserve the Qur’aan, as He says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Verily, We, it is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur’aan) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption).” [al-Hijr 15:9]

 Moreover, the fact that the transmission of the Qur’aan by memory and in writing was mutawaatir – narrated by groups to groups [to such an  extent that so many people could not conceivably have agreed upon a lie] – is well known to anyone who has the slightest acquaintance with Islamic knowledge, especially knowledge of recitations and reciters.

 There are still many people nowadays who have learned the Qur’aan orally, with isnaads directly going back to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

 One of the miracles of Allaah’s protection of the Qur’aan is the fact that those who try to tamper with it are always found out.

 The point is, everything that was revealed to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was written down in front of him straight away, and some of the Sahaabah had masaahif (written copies of the Qur’aan). After the death of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), the  first khaleefah, Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq (may Allaah be pleased with him) gathered the Qur’aan in  written and kept it. Then the third khaleefah, ‘Uthmaan ibn ‘Affaan (may Allaah be pleased with him) compiled it in mus-hafs that were based on the mus-haf compiled by Abu Bakr, in addition to what had been memorized.

 When we realize that the Qur’aan was written down and compiled by the Sahaabah, and ‘Uthmaan sent copies of the Mus-haf during his reign to all the main centres of Islam, so that it would be a reference for them, and there were no disputes concerning them, then how can we say that there is no written trace of the Qur’aan in the seventh century? Moreover, there are several ancient manuscripts of the Qur’aan in libraries and museums which bear visible testimony to the fact that nothing has been changed in the Book of Allaah. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And verily, it is an honourable well‑fortified respected Book (because it is Allaah’s Speech, and He has protected it from corruption). Falsehood cannot come to it from before it or behind it, (it is) sent down by the All‑Wise, Worthy of all praise (Allaah).” [Fussilat 41:41-42]

  And Allaah knows best.

Celebrating completing the Qur’aan (khatm al-Qur’aan)

Some women, when they finish learning the Qur’aan by heart from their shaykhah, organize a simple celebration in which they read from the end of  the Mus-haf and immediately add something from the beginning (al-Faatihah and five aayaat of al-Baqarah) so that their reading will not cease. What is the ruling on that?

Praise be to Allaah. 

Praise be to Allaah, and peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allaah.

 Celebrating the completion of memorizing the Qur’aan is not Sunnah, because nothing of that nature was narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or from any of his Sahaabah. Doing this on the grounds that it is part of religion is bid’ah. But people do it as a customary expression of joy for the blessing of having memorized Qur’aan, like celebrations for the return of one who has been away, or for finding work, or for moving to a new home. If the celebration for completing the Qur’aan is of this nature, then there is nothing wrong with it. If a passage from the Qur’aan is recited, from the beginning or the end, without having to recite a specific soorah or recite in a particular way such as joining the end to the beginning, then this is fine, because reciting from Qur’aan is the best thing that can be done in a gathering and it is a reminder for those who are present. With regard to making du’aa’ when completing the recitation of the Qur’aan, it was reported with a saheeh isnaad from Anas (may Allaah be pleased with him) that when he completed the Qur’aan, he would gather his family together and make du’aa’ with them. If the reader makes du’aa’ when he completes the Qur’aan, and those who are present say “Ameen” to his du’aa’, this is fine.

 With regard to calling the teacher “shaykhah” , there is nothing wrong with this. Now you know, may Allaah bless you, that there is no reason not to have the celebration you have described. There is no need to read from the end of the Mus-haf and then join it to the beginning. Doing something in this manner requires evidence (daleel), because reading Qur’aan is an act of worship, and acts of worship must be done only in the manner in which the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did them, as Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Indeed in the Messenger of Allaah (Muhammad) you have a good example to follow for him who hopes for (the Meeting with) Allaah and the Last Day, and remembers Allaah much” [al-Ahzaab 33:21]

 Written by Shaykh ‘Abd-Al-Rahmaan al-Barraak

 There is a hadeeth about the person who stops for a rest immediately carrying on, which was narrated by al-Tirmidhi (may Allaah have mercy on him) from Ibn ‘Abbaas. According to this hadeeth, a man said, “O Messenger of Allaah, which deed is most beloved to Allaah? He said, “Al-haal al-murtahil.” The man said, ‘What is al-haal al-murtahil?” He said, “The one who starts from the beginning of the Qur’aan until he reaches the end, and when he stops for a rest, he immediately carries on.”

 But this hadeeth is da’eef (weak), as al-Tirmidhi (may Allaah have mercy on him) says after he quotes it: this is a ghareeb (strange) hadeeth which we only know from Ibn ‘Abbaas with this isnaad, and this isnaad is not strong.

 Hence Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in al-I’laam (p.289, part2), after he mentioned this hadeeth: Some of them understood from this that when a person has finished reading the whole Qur’aan, he should then read al-Faatihah and three verses of Soorat al-Baqarah, because he stopped when he completed it, and he continued when he started again. But none of the Sahaabah or Taabi’een did this, and none of the imaams regarded it as mustahabb (encouraged). What is referred to in the hadeeth is when a person returns from one military campaign and immediately joins another, or every time he completes one good deed, he starts another which he  completes as he did the first one. But what some readers do is not what was meant in the hadeeth at all. And Allaah is the source of strength.

Reciting Surahs and Aayahs in a different order

My question is regarding the order in which the quran should be recited in a prayer, either outloud or quietely.

Should the wroshipper recite the surahs or ayahs in the order that they are presented in the quran. For example, is it permissible to recite surah Al-Nas in the first rakah followed by surah Al-Kawthar in the second rakah, or ayah 50-60 in surah al Baqara (for example), followed by ayah 10-20 in the second rakah.
please clarify this and explain why so.

Praise be to Allaah.

Reading later parts of the Qur’aan before earlier parts is called Tankees (inversion). There are different types of Tankees:

Tankees al-Huroof (inversion of letters)

Tankees al-Kalimaat (inversion of words)

Tankees al-Aayat (inversion of verses)

Tankees al-Suwar (inversion of Soorahs)

Tankees al-Huroof (inversion of letters) means putting a later letter before a previous letter in one word, for example, instead of “Rabb” one reads “Barr”

Undoubtedly this is haraam, and invalidates a person's prayer, because it changes the Qur’aan from the way in which it was spoken by Allaah, and usually alters the meaning in a drastic manner.

(Al-Sharh al-Mumti’ by Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 3/110)

Tankees al-Kalimaat (inversion of words) means putting a later word before a previous word, for example, instead of “Qul huwa Allaahu ahad”, one reads “Ahad Allaah huwa qul”!

This also is undoubtedly haraam, because it changes the Qur’aan from the way in which it was spoken by Allaah.

(Al-Sharh al-Mumti’, 3/110)

Tankees al-Aayat (inversion of verses) means reciting a later aayah before a previous aayah, for example, reciting “min sharr il-waswaas il-khannaas” before “ilaah il-naas”!

Concerning this, al-Qaadi ‘Ayyaad (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

There is no dispute concerning the order of the aayahs in each soorah. This is something which is Tawqeefi, i.e., based on revelation [and is not open to ijtihaad], and the order is that which now appears in the Mus-haf, and this is how the ummah transmitted it from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

(Sharh al-Nawawi, 6/62. This was also the view of Ibn al-‘Arabi, as stated in al-Fath, 2/257).

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen said:

Tankees al-aayaat (inverting verses) is also haraam according to the most correct view, because the order of the aayahs is tawqeefi (something which is based on revelation [and not open to ijtihaad]). The meaning of “tawqeefi” is that it was dictated by the order of the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

(al-Sharh al-Mumti’, 3/110).

Tankees al-Suwar (inversion of Soorahs) means, reciting later soorahs before earlier ones, for example, reciting Aal ‘Imraan before al-Baqarah.

The ruling on this:

Those scholars who say that the order of soorahs is not tawqeefi do not see anything wrong with this.

Those who think that it is tawqeefi or that the consensus of the Sahaabah on the order of soorahs is evidence, do not think that it is permissible.

The correct view:

Is that the order of soorahs is not tawqeefi; it is the result of ijtihaad on the part of some of the Sahaabah.

There was no ijmaa’ (consensus) among the Sahaabah on the order of soorahs; the order in the Mus-haf of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood – for example – is different from that in the Mushafs of others.

In the Sunnah there is evidence that supports the view that it is permissible:

(A) Hudhayfah said: I prayed with the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) one night, and he started to recite al-Baqarah. I thought, he will do rukoo’ when he reaches one hundred aayaat, but he kept going. I thought, he will complete it in one rak’ah, but he kept going. I thought, he will do rukoo’ now, but he started to recite al-Nisaa’, and he recited all of it, then he started to recite Aal ‘Imraan and recited all of it… (Narrated by Muslim, 772).

The evidence in this hadeeth is that he recited al-Nisaa’ then Aal ‘Imraan.

Al-Nawawi said:

Al-Qaadi ‘Ayyaad said: this contains evidence for those who say that the order of soorahs is the result of ijtihaad on the part of the Muslims when they wrote down the Mus-haf. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not dictate the order of soorahs; he entrusted this task to his ummah after his death. This is the view of Maalik and the majority of the scholars, and was the view favoured by al-Qaadi Abu Bakr al-Baaqillaani. Ibn al-Baaqillaani said: it is the more correct of the two views, although both are possible.

He said: what we say is that the order of soorahs is not binding when writing, praying, studying, teaching or learning. There is no report from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) concerning that which would make it forbidden to differ from it. Hence the order of soorahs in the various Mus-hafs differed, before the Mus-haf of ‘Uthmaan.

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and the ummah after him in all ages regarded it as permissible to differ from the order of soorahs in prayer, and when studying and teaching.

He said: with regard to the view of those scholars who say that (the order of soorahs) was set by the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and that he put them in the same order as appears in the Mus-haf of ‘Uthmaan – and that the different orders came about before they heard of his ruling and his final review of the Qur’aan with Jibreel – they interpret the fact that he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) recited al-Nisaa’ first and then Aal ‘Imraan as meaning that this happened before the final ruling was dictated, and these two soorahs appear in this order in the Mus-haf of Ubayy.

He said: there is no dispute concerning the fact that a person who is praying may recite in the second rak’ah a soorah which comes before the soorah which he recited in the first rak’ah; but it is makrooh to do this in one rak’ah, or when reciting Qur’aan outside of salaah.

He said: but some of them permitted this.

The prohibition of the Salaf against reading the Qur’aan backwards is interpreted as referring to those who read from the end of a soorah to the beginning.

He said: there is no dispute concerning the fact that the order of aayaat in each soorah is based on revelation from Allaah and is as it now appears in the Mus-haf and as it was transmitted by the ummah from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

(End of the comments of al-Qaadi ‘Ayyaad). And Allaah knows best.

(Sharh Muslim, 6/61, 62).

Al-Sindi said:

The phrase [in the hadeeth of Hudhayfah] “then he started to recite Aal ‘Imraan” means that it is not obligatory to follow the order of soorahs when reciting.

(Sharh al-Nisaa’i, 3/226).

(B) It was reported from Anas ibn Maalik (may Allaah be pleased with him) that a man from among the Ansaar used to lead them in prayer in the mosque of Qubaa’. Every time he led them in prayer, he would start his recitation with “Qul huwa Allaahu ahad”, then when he finished it, he would recite another soorah. He did that in every rak’ah. His companions spoke with him and said, “You always start with this soorah, then you do not think it is enough and you recite another. Either you should recite this soorah alone, or you should leave it and recite another.” He said, “I am not going to stop reciting it. If you like, I will lead you in prayer as I have been doing, and if you do not like it, I will leave you.” They felt that he was one of the best of them, and they did not want anyone else to lead them in prayer. When the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) came to them, they told him about this. He said, “O So and so, what is stopping you from doing what your companions tell you? What makes you keep on reciting this soorah in every rak’ah?” He said, “I love it.” He said, “Your love for it will grant you admittance to Paradise.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari mu’allaqan, and by al-Tirmidhi with an isnaad similar to that of al-Bukhaari, 2901).

The evidence in this report is the fact that the man recited Soorat al-Ikhlaas in his prayer before any other soorah that comes before it (in the Mus-haf), and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) approved of that.

(C) This is the action of ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him).

Al-Imaam al-Bukhaari said:

Al-Ahnaf recited al-Kahf in the first rak’ah and Yoosuf or Yoonus in the second, and he said that he had prayed Fajr with ‘Umar and he had done the same.

(Baab al-Jam’ bayna Sooratayn fi’l-Rak’ah, in Kitaab al-Adhaan).

With regard to the latter part of your question, we say:

It is permissible to recite aayahs 50-60 of al-Baqarah in the first rak’ah, then to recite aayahs 1-20 of al-Baqarah in the second rak’ah, because then the meaning of the passage will be complete.

But reciting aayahs 10-20 means that one is cutting off the meaning, so it is better not to do this. Perhaps you mentioned the numbers only by way of example and you did not mean these particular aayaat. And Allaah knows best.

Abrogation of the verse ordering the confinement of an adulteress in a house

I would like to know more about the meaning of this part of Surah al-Nisa’:

"If any of your women are guilty of lewdness . . . confine them to houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some (other) way." [al-Nisaa’ 4:15]

Does this mean to punish a woman who has committed adultery by death, or does it mean to imprison her for the remainder of her life? Also what does "or Allah make some way for them" mean?

Thank you for you time, I look forward to your response so that I may better understand Islam through the explanation of Muslims as opposed to those of non-Muslims.

Praise be to Allah.

Allah says: "If any of your women are guilty of lewdness, take the evidence of four (reliable) witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some (other) way."
[al-Nisa’ 4:15]

Ibn Katheer, may Allah have mercy on him, said in his Tafseer (explanation) of this aayah:
"At the beginning of Islam, the ruling concerning a woman who was proven guilty of adultery was that she was to be detained in a house and not allowed to come out until she died. So the phrase ‘If any of your women are guilty of lewdness’ refers to adultery. ‘Take the evidence of four (reliable) witnesses from amongst you against them; and if they testify, confine them to houses until death do claim them, or Allah ordain for them some (other) way’ - the ‘other way’ that Allah made for them was the abrogation of this. Ibn ‘Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, said: ‘This was the ruling until Allah revealed Surat al-Nur, then this punishment was abrogated and replaced with whipping or stoning.’ Something similar was reported from ‘Ikrimah, Sa‘id ibn Jubayr, al-Hasan, ‘Ataa’ al-Khurasani, Abu Saalih, Qutaadah, Zayd ibn Aslam and al-Dahhak, stating that this is abrogated, and this is agreed upon. Imam Ahmad said: ‘Muhammad ibn Ja‘far told us that Sa‘id told us from Qutaadah from al-Hasan from Hattaan ibn ‘Abdullah al-Raqaashi from ‘Ubaadah ibn al-Saamit who said: Whenever the wahy (revelation) descended upon the Messenger of Allah (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him), it affected him, the stress showed on him and his face would change. Allah sent a revelation to him one day, and when it was over, he said: " Listen to me, Allah has made another way for them. (When) a married man (commits adultery) with a married woman, and an unmarried man with an unmarried woman, then in the case of married (persons) there is (a punishment) of one hundred lashes and then stoning (to death), and in the case of unmarried persons, (the punishment) is one hundred lashes and exile for one year."’ It was reported by Muslim and other narrators of Sunan via Qutaadah from al-Hasan from al-Hattan from ‘Ubaadah ibn al-Saamit from the Prophet (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) with the wording: ‘Receive (teaching) from me, receive (teaching) from me. Allah has made another way for those (women). When an unmarried man commits adultery with an unmarried woman, (they should receive) one hundred lashes, and banishment for one year. In the case of a married male committing adultery with a married female, they should receive one hundred lashes and be stoned to death.’ Al-Tirmidhi said: This is a saheeh hasan hadeeth."

Al-Qurtubi, may Allah have mercy on him, said in his tafseer of this aayah:
"This [confinement] was the first punishment for adultery, at the beginning of Islam. Ibn ‘Abbas and al-Hasan said: Ibn Zayd added: They would not be allowed to marry, until they died, as a punishment for them when they asked to marry someone else. This ruling applied for a while, then the Prophet (Peace & Blessings of Allaah be upon Him) said, according to the hadeeth narrated by ‘Ubaadah ibn al-Saamit: "Receive (teaching) from me, receive (teaching) from me. Allah has made another way for those (women). When an unmarried man commits adultery with an unmarried woman, (they should receive) one hundred lashes, and banishment for one year. In the case of a married male committing adultery with a married female, they should receive one hundred lashes and be stoned to death." Some of the scholars said: the idea of punishment and shame was still there with the lashing, because there is no contradiction, and they are applied to one person. As for confinement, this is abrogated, by the consensus of the scholars. And Allah knows best.

To complete the benefit of what has been said, it is appropriate to learn the tafseer of the next aayah in Surat al-Nisaa’:
"If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both. If they repent and amend, leave them alone; for Allah is Oft Returning, Most Merciful." [al-Nisaa’ 4:16]

Ibn Katheer, may Allah have mercy on him, said in his Tafseer of this aayah:
"‘If two men among you are guilty of lewdness’ means two who commit an immoral act, so they should be punished. Ibn ‘Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, Sa‘eed ibn Jubayr and others said: i.e., by putting them to public shame and hitting them with shoes. This was the ruling until Allah abrogated it and replaced it with lashing and stoning. ‘Ikrimah, ‘Ataa’, al-Hasan and ‘Abdullah ibn Katheer said: ‘This was revealed concerning a man and a woman who commit adultery. The phrase ‘if they repent and amend’ means if they give up what they were doing and mend their ways. ‘Leave them alone’ means not to keep rebuking them with ugly words after that, because the one who has repented from his sin is like one who never sinned at all. ‘Allah is Oft Returning, Most Merciful’ - it was proven in the two Saheehs: ‘If the slave woman of one of you commits adultery, apply the punishment of lashing, and do not blame her (after that)’ - i.e., do not blame her for what she did after the punishment has been given, because the punishment is an expiation for her deed.’"

The veil war continues

And the newest soldier in this fight is Egypt's minister of culture!

Farouq Hosni, the Egyptian minister of culture, has offered his resignation but refused
to apologise for comments he made about the hijab in which he said wearing of Islamic veils was a "regressive" trend.

Hosni said that the controversy over the hijab and veil was prompted by political motives, stressing that Islam does not impose wearing of the hijab on women. He also said that it was a fashion trend and not a sign of good morals.

The minister told the Egyptian daily, al-Masri
Al-Youm: "There was an age when our mothers went to university and
worked without the veil. It is in that spirit that we grew up. So why
this regression?"
Hosni offered his resignation after the the Muslim
Brotherhood, Egypt's largest Islamic political group, called for the
minister to "apologise and resign", calling his remarks insults that
were directed at Islam's religious leaders.
This had led to outrage from the Saudi mufti, who says that Hosni's remarks are a calamity!
Saudi Arabia's top Muslim cleric described the Egyptian culture
minister's recent criticism of the veil as a "calamity," a Saudi
satellite channel reported on Saturday.
[…]
"It is a calamity that struck Islamic lands and contradicts the
teachings of the Quran," Saudi Arabia's Grand Mufti, Sheik Abdul-Aziz
al-Sheik responded. "It is truly painful to hear such declarations from
within Islamic lands, from people who are considered Muslims," he added
in a statement aired by Al Majd television, a religious channel.
Ok, first of all, there is nothing in the Koran on their kind of Hijab, so the saudi mufti is full of shit. The Hijab that is talking about is not a religious, but a tribal, dress and isn't mendatory for muslim women. For the Mufti to say that is an outright lie. The Koran says women should dress modestly, but didn;t specify headcovering or any of that other crap. I am glad that somebody in power in this country finally had the balls to say it. It's 5 years too late, but oh well, I will take it!