Question:

Assalamu alaikum sheikh, Can a woman do her nikaah a week before the male. So if a woman accepts on the 12th December and the male accepts on the 24th December. Is this allowed and does the woman need to be at home until the male accepts her?

Question published as received.

The Fatwa

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

The Answer

The Fiqh of the Answer

The ‘Aṣl al-Binā’ of this Mas’alah is the necessity of Tarāḍī (mutual agreement) for every contract (ʿAqd). Nikāḥ is a contract that has two separate entities coming together to become one entity; the mutual agreement of two counterparties is required for a new entity to be formed. The agreement of both parties requires there to be a connection (‘Irtibāṭ) between what one party is offering and what the other is accepting. Hence, for there to be an intelligible connection between what each counterparty desires internally, there speech must coincide. Speech is the manifestation of the intentions that reside in one’s heart.

The Qiyās is that Qabūl should take place immediately so that the Qabūl is logically, and in reality (Ḥaqīqatan), directly connected and coinciding with the ‘Ījāb. However, there is undue difficulty in this as the counterparties need to think, ponder, and process any offer. Hence, the Sharīʿah applied the principle of Taysīr, and allocated the Majlis (session) as the place for ‘Irtibāṭ; as long as the session continues, the opportunity to accept the offer remains.

Further, spoken words have a transient existence, unlike written ones as has been mentioned by Imam Ibn ʿĀbidīn (d.1252 AH). In the context of a Nikāḥ to be valid, the offer and acceptance need to be interconnected, occurring simultaneously. The Fuqaha’ have mentioned the concept that one sitting is assumed to be a singular moment as has been expressed by Imam Ibn ʿĀbidīn (d.1252 AH). Therefore, if the offer and acceptance transpire within that moment, the contract is considered valid, acknowledging the practical difficulties of ensuring immediate and continuous verbal agreement during the marriage ceremony.

Nevertheless, if the offer and acceptance do not take place within a single sitting, the Nikāḥ will not be considered valid. Based on the information provided in the scenario, it appears that the Nikāḥ is not valid. However, if the situation involved a representative from the girl’s side who made the offer to the husband, and he accepted it in the same sitting, the Nikāḥ would be considered valid on the 24th, provided there were at least two witnesses present.

Once the girl has agreed to marry the boy, it doesn’t automatically signify that the offer from the boy’s side has been made. Consequently, the marriage is not considered finalised at this point. Awaiting confirmation of mutual interest from the boy’s side is essential. If there is mutual interest, a formal marriage ceremony will be conducted. During this ceremony, either the boy and the girl or their representatives will make the offer, and the other party will accept it to complete the marriage contract.

And Almighty Allah Alone Knows Best 

Maulana Inaamul Hasan Chothia
Trainee Mufti

Reviewed and approved by
Mufti Faraz Adam
Darul Iftaa Muadh ibn Jabal
www.darulfiqh.com 

DISCLAIMER:

The views and opinions expressed in this answer belong only to the author and do not in any way represent or reflect the views of any institutions to which he may be affiliated.

Arguments and ideas propounded in this answer are based on the juristic interpretations and reasoning of the author. Given that contemporary issues and interpretations of contemporary issues are subjective in nature, another Mufti may reach different conclusions to the one expressed by the author. Whilst every effort has been taken to ensure total accuracy and soundness from a Shari’ah perspective, the author is open to any correction or juristic guidance. On the event of any juristic shortcomings, the author will retract any or all of the conclusions expressed within this answer.

The Shari’ah ruling given herein is based specifically on the scenario in question.  The author bears no responsibility towards any party that acts or does not act on this answer and is exempted from any and all forms of loss or damage.  This answer may not be used as evidence in any court of law without prior written consent from the author.  Consideration is only given and is restricted to the specific links provided, the author does not endorse nor approve of any other content the website may contain.

(قَوْلُهُ: لَوْ حَاضِرِينَ) احْتَرَزَ بِهِ عَنْ كِتَابَةِ الْغَائِبِ لِمَا فِي الْبَحْرِ عَنْ الْمُحِيطِ الْفَرْقُ بَيْنَ الْكِتَابِ وَالْخِطَابِ أَنَّ فِي الْخِطَابِ لَوْ قَالَ: قَبِلْت فِي مَجْلِسٍ آخَرَ لَمْ يَجُزْ وَفِي الْكِتَابِ يَجُوزُ؛ لِأَنَّ الْكَلَامَ كَمَا وُجِدَ تَلَاشَى فَلَمْ يَتَّصِلْ الْإِيجَابُ بِالْقَبُولِ فِي مَجْلِسٍ آخَرَ فَأَمَّا الْكِتَابُ فَقَائِمٌ فِي مَجْلِسٍ آخَرَ، وَقِرَاءَتُهُ بِمَنْزِلَةِ خِطَابِ الْحَاضِرِ فَاتَّصَلَ الْإِيجَابُ بِالْقَبُولِ فَصَحَّ (حاشية ابن عابدين)

وَلَمْ يَذْكُرْ الْمُصَنِّفُ شَرَائِطَ الْإِيجَابِ وَالْقَبُولِ فَمِنْهَا اتِّحَادُ الْمَجْلِسِ إذَا كَانَ الشَّخْصَانِ حَاضِرَيْنِ فَلَوْ اخْتَلَفَ الْمَجْلِسُ لَمْ يَنْعَقِدْ فَلَوْ أَوْجَبَ أَحَدُهُمَا فَقَامَ الْآخَرُ أَوْ اشْتَغَلَ بِعَمَلٍ آخَرَ بَطَلَ الْإِيجَابُ؛ لِأَنَّ شَرْطَ الِارْتِبَاطِ اتِّحَادُ الزَّمَانِ فَجُعِلَ الْمَجْلِسُ جَامِعًا تَيْسِيرًا   (البحر الرائق)

قَوْلُهُ: وَيَنْعَقِدُ بِإِيجَابٍ وَقَبُولٍ) أَيْ فِي مَجْلِسٍ؛ لِأَنَّهُ يُشْتَرَطُ لِصِحَّةِ الْقَبُولِ الْمَجْلِسُ كَالْبَيْعِ لَا الْفَوْرُ وَصُورَةُ اخْتِلَافِ الْمَجْلِسِ أَنْ يُوجِبَ أَحَدُهُمَا فَيَقُومُ الْآخَرُ قَبْلَ الْقَبُولِ أَوْ يَشْتَغِلُ بِعَمَلٍ يُوجِبُ اخْتِلَافَ الْمَجْلِسِ (حاشية الشرنبلالي على درر الحكام)

قَوْلُهُ: اتِّحَادُ الْمَجْلِسِ) قَالَ فِي الْبَحْرِ: فَلَوْ اخْتَلَفَ الْمَجْلِسُ لَمْ يَنْعَقِدْ، فَلَوْ أَوْجَبَ أَحَدُهُمَا فَقَامَ الْآخَرُ أَوْ اشْتَغَلَ بِعَمَلٍ آخَرَ بَطَلَ الْإِيجَابُ؛ لِأَنَّ شَرْطَ الِارْتِبَاطِ اتِّحَادُ الزَّمَانِ فَجُعِلَ الْمَجْلِسُ جَامِعًا تَيْسِيرًا؛ وَأَمَّا الْفَوْرُ فَلَيْسَ مِنْ شَرْطِهِ؛ وَلَوْ عَقَدَا وَهُمَا يَمْشِيَانِ أَوْ يَسِيرَانِ عَلَى الدَّابَّةِ لَا يَجُوزُ، وَإِنْ كَانَ عَلَى سَفِينَةٍ سَائِرَةٍ جَازَ. اهـ. أَيْ؛ لِأَنَّ السَّفِينَةَ فِي حُكْمِ مَكَان وَاحِدٍ (حاشية ابن عابدين)

(وَأَمَّا) الَّذِي يَرْجِعُ إلَى مَكَانِ الْعَقْدِ فَهُوَ اتِّحَادُ الْمَجْلِسِ إذَا كَانَ الْعَاقِدَانِ حَاضِرَيْنِ وَهُوَ أَنْ يَكُونَ الْإِيجَابُ وَالْقَبُولُ فِي مَجْلِسٍ وَاحِدٍ حَتَّى لَوْ اخْتَلَفَ الْمَجْلِسُ لَا يَنْعَقِدُ النِّكَاحُ، بِأَنْ كَانَا حَاضِرَيْنِ فَأَوْجَبَ أَحَدُهُمَا فَقَامَ الْآخَرُ عَنْ الْمَجْلِسِ قَبْلَ الْقَبُولِ، أَوْ اشْتَغَلَ بِعَمَلٍ يُوجِبُ اخْتِلَافَ الْمَجْلِسِ، لَا يَنْعَقِدُ؛ لِأَنَّ انْعِقَادَهُ عِبَارَةٌ عَنْ ارْتِبَاطِ أَحَدِ الشَّطْرَيْنِ بِالْآخَرِ، فَكَانَ الْقِيَاسُ وُجُودَهُمَا فِي مَكَان وَاحِدٍ، إلَّا أَنَّ اعْتِبَارَ ذَلِكَ يُؤَدِّي إلَى سَدِّ بَابِ الْعُقُودِ؛ فَجُعِلَ الْمَجْلِسُ جَامِعًا لِلشَّطْرَيْنِ حُكْمًا مَعَ تَفَرُّقِهِمَا حَقِيقَةً لِلضَّرُورَةِ، وَالضَّرُورَةُ تَنْدَفِعُ عِنْدَ اتِّحَادِ الْمَجْلِسِ، فَإِذَا اخْتَلَفَ تَفَرُّقُ الشَّطْرَيْنِ حَقِيقَةً وَحُكْمًا فَلَا يَنْتَظِمُ الرُّكْنُ.(بدائع الصنائع)

سوال : ایک شخص نے ایک لڑکی سے نکاح اس طریقہ پر کیا کہ دو مسلمان گواہوں نے شوہر کے ایجاب کو الگ مجلس میں سنا پھر یہ گواہ لڑکی کے پاس آئے اور اس کا قبول دوسری مجلس میں سنا تو کیا یہ نکاح منعقد ہوا یا نہیں؟

الجواب : بصورت مسئولہ ایجاب و قبول کی مجلس بدل جانے کی وجہ سے نکاح منعقد نہیں ہوا۔ (فتاوى دار العلوم زكريا)