• Home
  • About
    • About Us
    • Testimonials
    • The Team
  • Q&A
    • Worship
      • Purification
      • Salah
      • Zakat
      • Fasting
      • Hajj
      • Qurbani/Udhiyyah
      • Death & Burial
    • Commerce, Finance & Investment
      • Trade & Business
      • Jobs & Services
      • Investments
      • Schemes & Products
      • Islamic Finance & Banking
    • Nikah & Divorce
      • Nikah
      • Divorce
    • Social Issues
    • Medical Issues
    • Wills & Inheritance
    • Advice
  • Research & Essays
  • Articles
  • Contact Us
  • Nisab

chat
Darul Fiqh Darul Fiqh
Darul Fiqh Darul Fiqh
  • Home
  • About
    • About Us
    • Testimonials
    • The Team
  • Q&A
    • Worship
      • Purification
      • Salah
      • Zakat
      • Fasting
      • Hajj
      • Qurbani/Udhiyyah
      • Death & Burial
    • Commerce, Finance & Investment
      • Trade & Business
      • Jobs & Services
      • Investments
      • Schemes & Products
      • Islamic Finance & Banking
    • Nikah & Divorce
      • Nikah
      • Divorce
    • Social Issues
    • Medical Issues
    • Wills & Inheritance
    • Advice
  • Research & Essays
  • Articles
  • Contact Us
  • Nisab

The Query

I had applied perfume on my neck before Ihram. Now I can smell that perfume on my hands and arms. Does this result in any penalty?

The Fatwa

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

The Reply

If perfume was sprayed on one’s neck before coming into the state of Iḥrām, and can now be smelt on other parts of the body, it will not be deemed a violation of Iḥrām. 

The Fiqh of the Reply

Iḥrām is a state and not just the name of two sheets of clothing. As such, if something was done prior to entering that state, then it is simply a continuation of that action. The perfume’s rubbing off onto other parts of the body will be deemed to be used before coming into the state of Iḥrām. Therefore, this apparent transfer of perfume is legally in the ruling of perfume applied before coming into the state of Iḥrām.

The Fuqahā’ have a recurring theme in several Masā’il, albeit with exceptions, that the continuation of something enjoys the rulings and circumstances of its initial starting state. As such, in the issue under consideration, the continuation of the perfume and its subsequent movement is deemed to be in its initial circumstances and state; the initial circumstance and state was that the perfume was applied out of the state of Iḥrām. This is the view of Shaykhayn, with Imam al-Kāsānī (d.587 AH) stating that this was initially the view of Imam Muhammad (Raḥimahullah) too, but he changed his position thereafter.

Of course, one of the strongest arguments for this issue is the Prophetic example, narrated by Sayyidah ʻĀ’ishah (Raḍiallahu ‘anhā) when reminiscing the memory of the Prophet ﷺ. She recalled the memory of perfume on the Prophet ﷺ,  where the shine of the perfume was vivid in the blessed hair of the Prophet ﷺ whilst he was in the state of Iḥrām. [Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī] Commentating on this narration, the Fuqahā’ state that the existence of perfume after coming into the state of Iḥrām was clearly not an issue as demonstrated by the Prophetic practice.

The Rationale of the Reply

The Fuqahā’ reason with this issue by stating that it is the application of perfume that is prohibited in the state of Iḥrām, and not the mere existence of perfume; and as such, the continued existence of perfume (applied prior to the state of Iḥrām) on one’s body after coming into the state of Iḥrām is inconsequential. If the existence of perfume is inconsequential, then it follows that the movement of this very perfume is also inconsequential. The scent that was already applied before cannot be considered application by merely smelling it on another part of the body.

Additionally, Iḥrām is not simply clothing or one’s body; Iḥrām is not restricted to a particular item. Iḥrām is a state which includes speech, action and person. Therefore, if something happened before the state of Iḥrām, it is inclusive of speech, action and one’s person.  Perfuming occurred before the state of Iḥrām, which includes both clothing and body, and its presence is continuously found after the state of Iḥrām, which includes both clothing and body. As such, one clothing to another, or one body part to another cannot be separated in this particular issue and case.

And Almighty Allah Alone Knows Best 

Mufti Faraz Adam,
Darul Iftaa Muadh ibn Jabal

www.fatwa-centre.com | 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.

الهندية ج 1 ص 242 ط دار الفكر:

وَلَوْ تَطَيَّبَ قَبْلَ الْإِحْرَامِ ثُمَّ انْتَقَلَ بَعْدَهُ مِنْ مَكَانٍ إلَى آخَرَ مِنْ بَدَنِهِ فَإِنَّهُ لَا شَيْءَ عَلَيْهِ اتِّفَاقًا كَذَا فِي الْبَحْرِ الرَّائِقِ.

وفي فتاوى قاضيخان:

وأجمعوا على أنه يجوز التطيب قبل الإحرام بما لا يبقى عينه بعد الإحرام وإن بقيت رائحته وكذا التطيب بما يبقى عينه بعد الإحرام كالمسك والغالية عندنا لا يكره في الروايات الظاهرة (قاضيخان ج 1 ص 140)

لِأَنَّهُ لَوْ تَطَيَّبَ قَبْلَ الْإِحْرَامِ ثُمَّ انْتَقَلَ بَعْدَهُ مِنْ مَكَان إلَى آخَرَ مِنْ بَدَنِهِ فَإِنَّهُ لَا شَيْءَ عَلَيْهِ اتِّفَاقًا، (البحر ج 3 ض 4)

في إرشاد الساري ص 455:

وانتقال من مكان إلى آخر أي لو انتقل الطيب من مكان إلى مكان من بدنه لا جزاء عليه اتفاقا كذا في الكبير وهو مخالف للقياس لأنه يصير استعمال عضوين وهو موجب لجزائين غايته أنه بغير تعمد منه ثم في التعبير في الانتقال دليل على أنه بنقله من مكان إلى مكان يتعدد الجزاء

وفي بدائع الصنائع في ترتيب الشرائع للكاساني ج 2 ص 144 ط دار الكتب:

وَيَدْهُنُ بِأَيِّ دُهْنٍ شَاءَ، وَيَتَطَيَّبُ بِأَيِّ طِيبٍ شَاءَ سَوَاءٌ كَانَ طِيبًا تَبْقَى عَيْنُهُ بَعْدَ الْإِحْرَامِ أَوْ لَا تَبْقَى فِي قَوْلِ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ، وَأَبِي يُوسُفَ، وَهُوَ قَوْلُ مُحَمَّدٍ أَوَّلًا، ثُمَّ رَجَعَ، وَقَالَ: يُكْرَهُ لَهُ أَنْ يَتَطَيَّبَ بِطِيبٍ تَبْقَى عَيْنُهُ بَعْدَ الْإِحْرَامِ.

وَحُكِيَ عَنْ مُحَمَّدٍ فِي سَبَبِ رُجُوعِهِ أَنَّهُ قَالَ: كُنْتُ لَا أَرَى بِهِ بَأْسًا حَتَّى رَأَيْتُ قَوْمًا أَحْضَرُوا طِيبًا كَثِيرًا، وَرَأَيْتُ أَمْرًا شَنِيعًا فَكَرِهْتُهُ، وَهُوَ قَوْلُ مَالِكٍ، احْتَجَّ مُحَمَّدٌ بِمَا رُوِيَ «أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ – صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ – قَالَ لِلْأَعْرَابِيِّ: اغْسِلْ عَنْكَ هَذَا الْخَلُوفَ» .

وَرُوِيَ عَنْ عُمَرَ، وَعُثْمَانَ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا – أَنَّهُمَا كَرِهَا ذَلِكَ، وَلِأَنَّهُ إذَا بَقِيَ عَيْنُهُ يَنْتَقِلُ مِنْ الْمَوْضِعِ الَّذِي طَيَّبَهُ إلَى مَوْضِعٍ آخَرَ فَيَصِيرُ كَأَنَّهُ طَيَّبَ ذَلِكَ الْمَوْضِعَ ابْتِدَاءً بَعْدَ الْإِحْرَامِ، وَلِأَبِي حَنِيفَةَ، وَأَبِي يُوسُفَ مَا رُوِيَ عَنْ عَائِشَةَ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهَا – أَنَّهَا قَالَتْ «طَيَّبْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ – صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ – لِإِحْرَامِهِ حِينَ أَحْرَمَ، وَلِإِحْلَالِهِ حِينَ أَحَلَّ قَبْلَ أَنْ يَطُوفَ بِالْبَيْتِ، وَلَقَدْ رَأَيْتُ وَبِيصَ الطِّيبِ فِي مَفَارِقِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ – صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ – بَعْدَ إحْرَامِهِ» ، وَمَعْلُومٌ أَنَّ وَبِيصَ الطِّيبِ إنَّمَا يَتَبَيَّنُ مَعَ بَقَاءِ عَيْنِهِ فَدَلَّ أَنَّ الطِّيبَ كَانَ بِحَيْثُ تَبْقَى عَيْنُهُ بَعْدَ الْإِحْرَامِ، وَلِأَنَّ التَّطَيُّبَ بَعْدُ حَصَلَ مُبَاحًا فِي الِابْتِدَاءِ لِحُصُولِهِ فِي غَيْرِ حَالِ الْإِحْرَامِ، وَالْبَقَاءُ عَلَى التَّطَيُّبِ لَا يُسَمَّى تَطَيُّبًا فَلَا يُكْرَهُ كَمَا إذَا حَلَقَ رَأْسَهُ ثُمَّ أَحْرَمَ.

وَأَمَّا حَدِيثُ الْأَعْرَابِيِّ فَهُوَ مَحْمُولٌ عَلَى مَا إذَا كَانَ عَلَيْهِ ثَوْبٌ مُزَعْفَرٌ، وَالرَّجُلُ يُمْنَعُ مِنْ الْمُزَعْفَرِ فِي غَيْرِ حَالِ الْإِحْرَامِ فَفِي حَالِ الْإِحْرَامِ أَوْلَى، حَمَلْنَاهُ عَلَى هَذَا تَوْفِيقًا بَيْنَ الْحَدِيثَيْنِ بِقَدْرِ الْإِمْكَانِ.

وَأَمَّا حَدِيثُ عُمَرَ، وَعُثْمَانَ فَقَدْ رُوِيَ عَنْ ابْنِ عُمَرَ، وَعَائِشَةَ – رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا – بِخِلَافِهِ فَوَقَعَ التَّعَارُضُ فَسَقَطَ الِاحْتِجَاجُ بِقَوْلِهِمَا، وَمَا ذُكِرَ مِنْ مَعْنَى الِانْتِقَالِ إلَى مَكَان آخَرَ غَيْرُ سَدِيدٍ؛ لِأَنَّ اعْتِبَارَهُ يُوجِبُ الْجَزَاءَ لَوْ انْتَقَلَ، وَلَيْسَ كَذَلِكَ بِالْإِجْمَاعِ.

وَلَوْ ابْتَدَأَ الطِّيبَ بَعْدَ الْإِحْرَامِ فَوَجَبَتْ عَلَيْهِ الْكَفَّارَةُ فَكَفَّرَ، وَبَقِيَ عَلَيْهِ هَلْ يَلْزَمُهُ كَفَّارَةٌ أُخْرَى بِبَقَاءِ الطِّيبِ عَلَيْهِ، اخْتَلَفَ الْمَشَايِخُ فِيهِ، قَالَ بَعْضُهُمْ: يَلْزَمُهُ كَفَّارَةٌ أُخْرَى؛ لِأَنَّ ابْتِدَاءَ الْإِحْرَامِ كَانَ مَحْظُورًا لِوُجُودِهِ فِي حَالِ الْإِحْرَامِ فَكَذَا الْبَقَاءُ عَلَيْهِ بِخِلَافِ الْمَسْأَلَةِ الْأُولَى، وَقَالَ بَعْضُهُمْ لَا يَلْزَمُهُ كَفَّارَةٌ أُخْرَى؛ لِأَنَّ حُكْمَ الِابْتِدَاءِ قَدْ سَقَطَ عَنْهُ بِالْكَفَّارَةِ، وَالْبَقَاءُ عَلَى الطِّيبِ لَا يُوجِبُ الْكَفَّارَةَ كَمَا فِي الْمَسْأَلَةِ الْأُولَى.

وفي بدائع الصنائع في ترتيب الشرائع للكاساني ج 6 ص 138 ط دار الكتب:

(وَجْهُ) رِوَايَةِ أَبِي يُوسُفَ أَنَّ حَالَ الْبَقَاءِ لَا يُقَاسُ عَلَى حَالِ الِابْتِدَاءِ؛؛ لِأَنَّ الْبَقَاءَ أَسْهَلُ مِنْ حُكْمِ الِابْتِدَاءِ

في العناية ج 2 ص 8 ط دار الفكر للبابرتي (ت 786ه):

وَكَذَلِكَ قَوْلُهُ بِالِاتِّفَاقِ يُخَالِفُ قَوْلَهُ قُبَيْلَ هَذَا لَوْ قَعَدَ يَجُوزُ عِنْدَهُ مِنْ غَيْرِ عُذْرِ كَرَاهَةٍ، وَكَذَا يُخَالِفُ إطْلَاقَ مَا ذُكِرَ فِي بَابِ النَّوَافِلِ، وَيَجُوزُ أَنْ يُقَالَ ذَكَرَ فِي مَبْسُوطِ فَخْرِ الْإِسْلَامِ وَجَامِعِ أَبِي الْمُعِينِ أَنَّهُ لَوْ قَعَدَ فِي النَّفْلِ لَا يُكْرَهُ عِنْدَهُ فِي الصَّحِيحِ؛ لِأَنَّ الِابْتِدَاءَ عَلَى هَذَا الْوَجْهِ مَشْرُوعٌ بِلَا كَرَاهَةٍ، فَالْبَقَاءُ أَوْلَى لِأَنَّ حُكْمَ الْبَقَاءِ أَسْهَلُ مِنْ حُكْمِ الِابْتِدَاءِ. فَقَوْلُهُ فِي الصَّحِيحِ يَدُلُّ عَلَى أَنَّ ثَمَّةَ غَيْرَ صَحِيحٍ، فَالْإِطْلَاقُ هَاهُنَا وَفِي بَابِ النَّوَافِلِ يَكُونُ عَلَى الصَّحِيحِ. وَقَوْلُهُ وَيُكْرَهُ بِالِاتِّفَاقِ عَلَى غَيْرِ الصَّحِيحِ، وَلَعَلَّ قَوْلَهُ بِالِاتِّفَاقِ وَقَعَ سَهْوًا مِنْ الْكَاتِبِ.

في العناية ج 9 ص 101 ط دار الفكر للبابرتي (ت 786ه):

لِأَنَّ الْعَقْدَ الْغَيْرَ اللَّازِمِ هُوَ الَّذِي يَكُونُ لِلْبَقَاءِ فِيهِ حُكْمُ الِابْتِدَاءِ كَمَا تَقَدَّمَ فِي الْوَكَالَةِ،

في العناية ج 10 ص 154 ط دار الفكر للبابرتي (ت 786ه):

وَالشُّيُوعُ الطَّارِئُ يَمْنَعُ بَقَاءَ الرَّهْنِ فِي رِوَايَةِ الْأَصْلِ، وَعَنْ أَبِي يُوسُفَ أَنَّهُ لَا يَمْنَعُ؛ لِأَنَّ حُكْمَ الْبَقَاءِ أَسْهَلُ مِنْ حُكْمِ الِابْتِدَاءِ فَأَشْبَهَ الْهِبَةَ

الجوهرة النيرة للحدادي الزبيدي (ت 800 ه) ص 151 ط دار الكتب:

(قَوْلُهُ وَمَسَّ طِيبًا إنْ كَانَ لَهُ) هَذَا يَدُلُّ عَلَى أَنَّ الطِّيبَ مِنْ سُنَنِ الزَّوَائِدِ وَلَيْسَ مِنْ سُنَنِ الْهَدْيِ

وَعَنْ أَبِي يُوسُفَ أَنَّ الطَّارِئَ لَا يُؤَثِّرُ فِي الرَّهْنِ؛ لِأَنَّ حُكْمَ الْبَقَاءِ أَسْهَلُ مِنْ حُكْمِ الِابْتِدَاءِ أَلَا تَرَى أَنَّ مُعْتَدَّةَ الْغَيْرِ لَا يَجُوزُ أَنْ تَكُونَ مَحَلًّا لِلنِّكَاحِ ابْتِدَاءً وَيَبْقَى النِّكَاحُ فِي حَقِّهَا بِأَنْ وُطِئَتْ امْرَأَةُ الرَّجُلِ بِشُبْهَةٍ تَعْتَدُّ لِذَلِكَ الْوَطْءِ وَلَا يَبْطُلُ النِّكَاحُ وَكَالشُّيُوعِ الطَّارِئِ فِي الْهِبَةِ لَا يَمْنَعُ صِحَّتَهَا بَقَاءً وَيَمْنَعُ صِحَّتَهَا ابْتِدَاءً

Total
0
Shares
Share 0
Tweet 0
Previous Article
  • Hajj
  • Q&A
  • Worship

When should the shoulder be revealed by men in the state of Ihram?

  • July 4, 2022
Read More
Next Article
  • Hajj
  • Q&A

Is it permissible to pause Tawaf to drink Zamzam water?

  • July 11, 2022
Read More
You May Also Find
Read More
  • Q&A
  • Trade & Business

Liquidating Collateral to Settle an Outstanding Debt

Read More
  • Divorce
  • Marriage and divorce
  • Q&A

Does outstanding Nafaqah become a debt on the ex-husband?

Read More
  • Q&A
  • Schemes & products

Is a deposit free mortgage offered by Skipton Building Society permissible?

Read More
  • Q&A
  • Salah

Imam Forgets Takbirat in Id Salah

Read More
  • Q&A
  • Trade & Business

Is dropshipping permissible?

Read More
  • Medical Issues
  • Q&A

Using CBD drinks for medical reasons

Read More
  • Q&A
  • Wills & Inheritance

Two-tiered inheritance query

Read More
  • Q&A
  • Trade & Business

Is subleasing permitted? What are the conditions and requirements?

Subscribe to our Newsletter
Recent Posts
  • Liquidating Collateral to Settle an Outstanding Debt
    • September 24, 2023
  • Does outstanding Nafaqah become a debt on the ex-husband?
    • September 24, 2023
  • Is a deposit free mortgage offered by Skipton Building Society permissible?
    • September 24, 2023
  • Imam Forgets Takbirat in Id Salah
    • September 22, 2023
  • Is dropshipping permissible?
    • September 22, 2023

Darul Fiqh is a Fatwa website providing Islamic answers to everyday Fiqh issues and questions.

Powered by

Subscribe to Our Newsletter
Follow Us

Input your search keywords and press Enter.