salam alykm,
How much can a woman expose herself among other women. Both muslims and non muslims

Among fellow muslim sisters, she can expose from her knee downward to her feet and all of her arm, hands, face and head. her chest down to the knees must be covered.

Among nonmuslim ladies, she should dress up completely including the hijab and not expose any part to them except in situations of necessity e.g for medical attention.

Our Alfas in the house will throw more light on it.

@Iwaboy thanks for your additional explantion and may Allah increase us in knowledge and deep understand and reward our efforts.

My people I beg you to forgive me and take time to read this long post as i just need to explain this very sensitive issue as current statistics say there are about 2 million infertile women in the US. In a country like Nigeria it is 1 in 10 women. source (http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/f/female_infertility/stats-country.htm)

iwaboy:

May Allaah reward you abundantly for your effort.
I want us to remember that the Prophet (SAW) was allowed by Allaah to do certain things which are, by sharia (Islamic jurispundence), either makru or even haram for the rest of us. His marrying more than four wives which is haram for the rest of us is just one of such permissions his Lord granted him.

Yes this is true , but all the special things (that affects us) and was permitted is known by the scholars of islam. Marrying an infertile woman can never be said to be a special exemption to the prophet as wives of earlier prophets were rendered barren till Allah heeded their call. Some sahabas had wives that never had children and Umar RA married two women that never had children although he divorced them later on. I do not think this is relevant in this case.

As to people using the internet taking what's there as the only valid opinion is unfortunate. I think such people should try to read wide so that we can all learn. Concerning other views as to the sharia stand on marrying infertile women, I expected you to quote these non-Hambali Schorlars so that we can all learn from them. Most of the issues that seem new today are not reaaly new, I mean schorlars have made extensive pronouncements on them. If you look at Adabus-Sifaf, al-Albaani too dwelt on it. For this reason, I usually feel more comfortable looking deep at schorlars opinion before forming mine cos I'm not a mufti but a poor student of knowledge.

True i should have quoted some but i dont want to quote them out of context and i havent been able to find the book i am looking for regarding the sharh of this hadeeth. Although the opinion i am saying is not just a concotion of my personal imagination but opinion of sholars on this view. Insha Allah when i lay my hands on it i will be able to reference it.

Please, concerning the commentary you gave on Surah al-Shura, V. 49-50, I'll be grateful if you can send me the name of the tafseer or mufaseer that presented the explanation in that manner.

The commentary is an amalgamtion of many tafseers on the matter and it stems from tafseer lughawi. I am a formal student of knowledge alihamdulilah and this explanation has been explained by two of my sheikhs who dont know each other and across the atlantic but said very similar things on this issue "No woman is created barren in islam". Tafseer ibn katheer (if you read arabic) explains the word khalq under the verse, also check tafseer ul quran by Ibn Ashur. One thing mufaseers do when running commentary on verses is to explain why Allah did not use a particular word and the resulting meaning. Arabic is a very rich language and understanding the spirit of the quran is really subject to understanding the language. Also, the deep meaning of the verse like i explained cannot be extracted from tafseer books just like that, one really needs good teachers and i was fortunate to have studied under some wonderful sheikhs who explained the tafseer of the quran in tremenduous detail.

To really be able to say if the Prophet (SAW) meant marrying an infertile person was makroo or not, we may need to look at the hadith of Ma’qil ibn Yasaar (quoted in earlier post) and its sharih from schorlars of hadith who I think are more qualified than us. To say whether a hadith is 'am(general) or khas(specific) needs some proper understanding of the science of hadith.

I again consulted a Sheikh with three PHDs in islamic sciences yesterday on this subject and he said the hadeeth can never be said to be 'am (general). He explained that this man was a young man at the begining of his life and the prophet wanted him to have children and grow the ummah as islam was at its begining. He went further to corroborate my opinion that this would be descrimination against women who by Allahs wish dont have children, he also raised the issue i raised on how do you know if a woman is fertile? as only Allah knows the unseen and looking at relatives again is just conjecture that cannot be proven right.

I will like to bring your attention to the fact that islam permits polygamy to protect women, so how will the same islam that permits marrying of four wives then descriminate on them on the basis of fertility. If one wife is infertile you can marry another wife not descriminate
.
My dear brother i will like you to note that words of scholars could be rejected as they are humans as well and subject to mistakes only the words of the prophet PBUH can never be rejected. We have to use our intelligence to analyse issues and not practise "cut &paste " of hadiths or ayat , i mean literal interpretation. In usul ul fiqh there are several things we have to consider before using a single hadith to make a ruling, If a hadith appears to "contradict" other hadiths or ayats, there are ways to intepret it. I do not want to delve deep into usul ul fiqh here but i will like you to understand that the sole purpose of marriage is not to have children but companionship and prevention of zina. Allah says in the quran 30 v 21:
"And among His Signs is this that He created for you spouses of your own kind, that you may dwell in tranquility with them, and He has put love and mercy for one another: verily in that are Signs for those who reflect"

Having children is additional blessing to the marriage ans sura shurah vs 49 confirms that.

The reason why i am doing my best to hit home the point is because of the gravity of the word "makru" in this matter. It means if a man leaves a woman or refuses to marry her based on infertility then he will be rewarded by Allah. That is the implication of this ruling in lay mans term which cannot be so as this will contradict the spirit of islam and message of islam. Ibraheem and Zakariyyah PBUT had barren wives, the prophet PBUH had seven childless wives. We cannot use this one hadith to generalise a ruling, not forgeting the fact that the woman in question was most probably divorced or widowed. Not forgeting the fact that it is Allah that grants children and there is no woman created barren, not forgeting the fact that the infertitlity of a virgin woman can never be proven without medical examination, not forgeting the fact that in the hadith where the prophet PBUH listed four qualities men look for in marrying women he never mentioned fertility.

Some statements may sound to us as being discriminatory but, in the light of adequate and well informed commentory from our eminent schorlars, the actual intent of it will be clearer. For example, what will one say of a hadith in Sahih Muslim in which Abu Hurayrah said: "I was with the Prophet (SAW) when a man came and told him that he had married a woman of the Ansaar. The Messenger of Allaah (SAW) said to him, 'Have you seen her?' He said, 'No.' He(SAW) said, 'Go and look at her, for there is something in the eyes of the Ansaar." Can one say that's a discrimination against th Ansaari women? Of course not. How do we know with certainty? Through the explanation of our eminent shorlars of hadith.

The statement of the prophet in the first hadith is definately not descriminatory as it was a specific rule to one man , what is descriminatory is the ruling of MAKRU by some scholars which isnt the words of the prophet and can be rejected. Ibn qudamo(RA) is a great scholar with exceptional insight into fiqh and his work Al Mughni is a Hambali fiqh masterpiece and from your posts he also did not term it Makru but mandub to marry a fertile woman. However Al manawi in fayd ul qadeer termed it makru which could be a mistake on his part and every scholar made mistakes and we should not blind follow or "copy & paste" scholars in their mistakes when the evidence is established upon us. You quoted ibn hajar permitting marriage to an infertile woman or man but i dont think he termed it makru because you only use one ruling in fiqh and ibn hajar here used "permissible" amongst the five rulings and not Makru.


This hadith you quoted here is not descriminatory as this is the evidence of looking at your wife carefully before you marry her to see if you like her physical attributes, Lowering of gaze is not applied in a wife you genuinley want to marry. The additional explanation is this man is definatetly not an ansari man and probably a muhajir and the prophet PBUH in his practical wisdom directs the man to double check if he likes her as they are different to women he his used to. Indeed none of the words of the prophet can be said to be descriminatory and saying that could be tantamount to kufr but it is only scholars opinion or explanation that can be faulted.

Forgive me for dweling on this issue too much but I think the several readers of NL should be enlightened on this subject as some non muslims use issues like this to highlight islams oppression of women.

And God knows best

May Allaah reward you abundantly for all your efforts. I quite appreciate it. I've been trying to compile other evidences to butress my position further but, sth just came to my mind that it's not supposed to be a debate. I'm afraid one may end up confusing ppl instead of making efforts to guide due to differences in opinions of schorlars.

My dear brother i will like you to note that words of scholars could be rejected as they are humans as well and subject to mistakes only the words of the prophet PBUH can never be rejected. We have to use our intelligence to analyse issues and not practise "cut &paste " of hadiths or ayat , I mean literal interpretation.

I think it is a fact widely accepted that all these schorlars are fallible. I do not think I have, at any time in my posts so far, presented any of them as infallible. I agree we have to use our intelligence for the analysis of schorlars opinion. The only thing I asked you for, when u mentioned the view of non-Hambali schorlars, was to get me where I could avail myself of access to their opinion to update what I know about d matter.
Do me a favour, let me know the name of the book(s) in which they expressed this opinion of theirs. I am in possession of Al-maktabatul shaamila; I have it on my pc. Most of the schorlars' books are in it in Arabic form.
May Allaah continue to be with us.

You are right brother its not meant to be a debate, i suggest we communicate outside Nairaland so we dont confuse others in here and we could have enlighten discussion.

Do expect my mail. May Allaah guide us.

zayhal:

Among fellow muslim sisters, she can expose from her knee downward to her feet and all of her arm, hands, face and head. her chest down to the knees must be covered.

Among nonmuslim ladies, she should dress up completely including the hijab and not expose any part to them except in situations of necessity e.g for medical attention.

Our Alfas in the house will throw more light on it.

Butressing what sis Zayhal has said, I'll say there is general agreement among scholars that she may uncover her hair, face, hands, neck, shoulders, legs from below her knees as well as feet in front of Muslim women.Concerning what she must cover in the presence of non-Muslim women, broadly speaking, there are two views. One may be considered very liberal while the other may be considered very strict. Both scholars of the Maliki and the Hanbali schools generally consider only what is between the navel and the knee as the `awrah(unclothedness) that a woman must cover in front of other women, regardless of whether they are Muslims or non-Muslims.

As opposed to the above view, both the Hanafi and the Shaf`i scholars consider it obligatory for her to cover her entire body except what is normally exposed in ordinary course of daily interaction and domestic work. They consider it a must for her to cover all her body except her face, hands and feet.

The above difference of opinion is based on the differences in interpreting the Qur’anic verse concerning rules of covering in which Allah Almighty says: “And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands’ fathers, or their sons or their husbands' sons, or their brothers or their brothers' sons or sisters’ sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigor, or children who know naught of women's unclothedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that ye may succeed.” (An-Nur :31)

According to the scholars of both the Maliki and the Hanbali schools, the phrase “their women” includes all women including non-Muslims, while the scholars of both the Hanafi and the Shaf`i schools say rather it specifically distinguishes Muslim women from others, and, therefore, she must observe stricter rules of covering when appearing before non-Muslim women as opposed to Muslim women.

The last mentioned view that a Muslim woman is absolutely obliged to cover her entire body except her face, hands, and feet in presence of non-Muslim women seems to be a little extreme. Schorlars say there are no evidence in the sources to support such a conclusion. They say there are numerous instances of non-Muslim women, from both Jewish and pagan backgrounds, visiting the wives of the Prophet (SAW), as well as other Muslim women, and yet, there is no mention anywhere that the Prophet (SAW) ever ordered them to observe special rules of covering in their presence. If it had been necessary for them to do so,they reason, it is most unlikely that the Prophet (SAW) would have failed to mention it to them plainly and clearly.

Therefore, the view of Maliki and Hanbali schools on this issue seems to be more consistent with the evidences of the sources, as well as the general spirit of the Shari`ah.

Having said this, however, it must be stated clearly: All scholars agree that while normal laws apply in normal circumstances, where there is a suspicion of seduction or temptation or inclination towards vices either due to corruption of society or moral perversion, Muslim women are obliged to take all necessary precautions and thus cover appropriately in order to safeguard their honor, dignity and chastity.”

Allaah knows best.

What are the definitions of these:

Hijab
Jilbab
Abaaya
Niqab
Burqa
Khimar

zayhal:

What are the definitions of these:

Hijab
Jilbab
Abaaya
Niqab
Burqa
Khimar

Hijab: means a veil in arabic and in the context of the qur'an "O, believers enter not the dwellings of the Prophet, unless invited… And when you ask of his wives anything, ask from behind a hijab. That is purer for your hearts and for their hearts. Q33v 53

Khimar: is from the root word Kh Ma Ra and it literarily means to cover, but in practical definition it means a head cover. According to dictionaries it is defined as head cover as well. In the context of the qur'an it says in Q24 vs 31 "And tell the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts, etc.) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent , and to draw their veils over Juyubihinna (i.e. bossoms.) and not to reveal their adornment except to their husbands. [translation from Noble qur'an]
"wa liyadribna bikhumurina ala juyubihina" Q24 v31 . the word translated as veil is actually wrong and that is where some confusion lies to non arabic speakers. The word in that word khumurina which is the plural for khimar. Now after understanding that the word is head cover the verse should be translated as ". . . .draw their head cover over their juyubihinna "

Now after understanding the two definition it will be understood that what we generally call the hijab nowadays is actually khimar drawn to cover the chest, bossom etc.

Jilbab: is also a form of cloak and the quran says in 33 v 59 " Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks all over their bodies . That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed. And Allâh is Ever Oft­Forgiving, Most Merciful."
The arabic word translated as their cloak is "jalabiybhinna" which is plural and singlur will be jilbab/jalbab.

From the three definition above: we can establish the reason why muslim women wear jalbab and wear the hijab which is khimar drawn over their bossom.

Nikab: literally means "to make a hole" contextually it means making a hole in aface cover so the eyes can see. I do not think exists in the quran linguistically(as far as i know) in relation to womens clothing but nikab is the veil which covers the face after you have worn the jalabab and the hijab. This is not compulsory in islam.

Burqa[b][/b]: linguistically refers to veiling the face as well. Practically nowadays, it is a single clothing comprising of khimar, hijab,jalbab,nikab - all in one. You wear it and all is covered, this kind is common in Afghanistan and might have been developed culturally and locally. It could be found in south west Nigeria and used by the women in "purdah- elehas". Again the burqa is not compulsory in islaam according to the majority of scholars.

I hope i have done a little explanation to the definition, anyother person could insha Allah shed more light on this.

And God knows best

@Lagosboy

Jazakallah khayran. Thanks a zil.

Asalam alaykum,

A woman in her iddah (waiting period), how much right does the husband still have on her?
Can she be without hijab in his presence?
can she cook his meals?
Does she have to seek his permission before going out?
Is it still his responsibility to provide for her needs?

What is this 'waiting period' about? waiting for what?

Menses

Oh sorry not menses, Iddah means the waiting period of a widow when her husband die

Sis Zayhal actual means the iddah of a divorce. We have iddah when a husband dies and after the first divorce, here it is after a divorce as that is the gist of the question

Inshallah i would answer when i am less busy.

FayeZik:

What is this 'waiting period' about? waiting for what?

I'm talking about waiting period after the first pronunciation of divorce. waiting for the stipulated time for both parties to decide whether they want to go ahead with the divorce or reconcile.

Salam alaykum to all, There is a question that has been bugging my mind for a while. Should married women use hair attachments? I understand that the Prophet(pbuh) cursed women who use them cos a mother approached him to know if her daughter whose hair was scanty and about to get married could use attachments and he replied that it would be misrepresentation to the husband who would be fooled to believe that the attachment is his bride to be's hair. He therefore cursed women who use attachments. I don't know how far this is true but if it is so, could a married woman whose husband already knows how long her hair really is use attachments to make herself more appealing to her husband?

I intend to look the best for my husband when I get married and I have been wondering if I could use hair attachments as one of my weapons to keep my husband drooling on me even as we age.  

Thanks, ma salaam

ronkeenuf:

I intend to look the best for my husband when I get married and I have been wondering if I could use hair attachments as one of my weapons to keep my husband drooling on me even as we age.  

oya lagosboy over to you

zayhal:

I'm talking about waiting period after the first pronunciation of divorce. waiting for the stipulated time for both parties to decide whether they want to go ahead with the divorce or reconcile.

Oh, okay. I did not know that there is a waiting period before actual divorce. Thanks for increasing my knowledge. i'm waiting for the answers.

mukina2:



oya lagosboy over to you

Wetin be your own sef, shebi u nor need attachment Abi Arsenal FC want am

@Topic

Mmmm interesting topic. How do i start, mmmmm

Firstly there is a unanimous agreement of sholars on the impermissiblity of the use of human hair to beautify the womans hair. This is from the hadith of the Prophet PBUH in Bukhari that says and (i am not quoting verbatim) Allah has cursed the Al - wasilah (The hairdresser that adds the hair) and mutawasilah (The lady who asks for it).

The scholars based on this hadith have prophibited the use of another persons human hair of whatever source.

Now to the issue of non human hair like wool , silk and cloth.

We have difference of opinion amongst the schools of thought.

Hanafi and shafi schools have allowed the use of wool and its kind because it is not human hair and not considered cheating. They have allowed it as it could beutify the woman for her husband.
The Shafi school based their on the condition that the source animal for the wool has to be pure as in halal to eat and also that the woman who does it is married with the permission of her husband.

The maliki school prohibits the use of wool and other things that seem like hair and not apparently clear it is not the womans hair. They have only permitted the use of things like silk to tie the hair as it doesnt add to the hair but only used as an extention and fully apparent it is not her hair.

The Hambali have toed a similar line of the malikis prohibiting anything that seems like human hair even if it is not human hair.

From the explanation above we should not condemn anyone using wool to beautify herself as long as it is for her husband. The use of rubber will take the similar ruling of wool but the reason rubber will be sometimes impermissible is water will not infiltrate rubber for the purpose of wudhu which makes the wudhu non valid. Wool could be penetrated by water so no issue with this.

And God knows best.

This my answer on a similar thread with sis Zayhal relating to this.

Sayyida A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) narrates that an Ansari girl was married and became sick hence all her hair fell out. They (her family and friends) intended to join her hair with false hair, so they asked the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) who said: “Allah has cursed the woman who joins her or someone else’s hair (with the hair of another man or woman) and the woman who asks for her hair to be joined with the hair of another.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, no 5590)

The opinion in the Hanafi school and Shafi school explains that the hadith specifically refers to someone elses hair and not an animal hair which was also available in their time. According to the Hanafi school the use of wool whether fitted or extended or looks longer is permissible. Fashion for a woman is not haraam rather it is encouraged to make her always attractive to her husband but fashion has to be within the limits set by islam.

If you read this book umad al qari sharh bukhari (its in arabic though, no english translation) under the hadith above it explains all these and highlights the permissibity of non human hair as long as it is not pig and a pure animal.

Remember the rule everything is halal until proven haram. The burden of proof is on one who says if it extends beyond the normal hair then it is haram. As far as i know there is no hadith stating this but the interpretation of the above hadith to mean is not correct in my humble opinion. Wool heavy or light is clear to the beholder it is not natural hair and as such no deception in this. Also remember the hair is for the husband and will be covered by hijab anyway.

The opnions above like i stated is of the Hanafi school and shafis as well. Some Malikis accept wool on the condition of not extending beyond the normal hair and i guess this is the opinion you stated.?

N.B Some hanafi scholars even permit wiping of wig during wudhu of the wig is fixed and not easily removed.

ronkeenuf:

Salam alaykum to all, There is a question that has been bugging my mind for a while. Should married women use hair attachments? I understand that the Prophet(pbuh) cursed women who use them cos a mother approached him to know if her daughter whose hair was scanty and about to get married could use attachments and he replied that it would be misrepresentation to the husband who would be fooled to believe that the attachment is his bride to be's hair. He therefore cursed women who use attachments. I don't know how far this is true but if it is so, could a married woman whose husband already knows how long her hair really is use attachments to make herself more appealing to her husband?

I intend to look the best for my husband when I get married and I have been wondering if I could use hair attachments as one of my weapons to keep my husband drooling on me even as we age.

Thanks, ma salaam

Sister the analysis above explains the hadith in question, however on the use of attachment itself it could only be permitted under the Hanafi fiqh , in my humble opinion however i will suggest you use wool as it could serve the prupose and you could still make wudhu properly with water penetrating as attachment i guess are made from synthetic material except spaces are left for water to penetrate.

And indeed Allah knows best

Lagosboy:

Wetin be your own sef, shebi u nor need attachment      Abi Arsenal FC want am

@Topic

Mmmm interesting topic. How do i start, mmmmm

Firstly there is a unanimous agreement of sholars on the impermissiblity of the use of human hair to beautify the womans hair. This is from the hadith of the Prophet PBUH in Bukhari that says and (i am not quoting verbatim) Allah has cursed the Al - wasilah (The hairdresser that adds the hair) and mutawasilah (The lady who asks for it).

The scholars based on this hadith have prophibited the use of another persons human hair of whatever source.

Now to the issue of non human hair like wool , silk and cloth.

We have difference of opinion amongst the schools of thought.

Hanafi and shafi schools have allowed the use of wool and its kind because it is not human hair and not considered cheating. They have allowed it as it could beutify the woman for her husband.
The Shafi school based their on the condition that the source animal for the wool has to be pure as in halal to eat and also that the woman who does it is married with the permission of her husband.

The maliki school prohibits the use of wool and other things that seem like hair and not apparently clear it is not the womans hair. They have only permitted the use of things like silk to tie the hair as it doesnt add to the hair but only used as an extention and fully apparent it is not her hair.

The Hambali have toed a similar line of the malikis prohibiting anything that seems like human hair even if it is not human hair.

From the explanation above we should  not condemn anyone using wool to beautify herself as long as it is for her husband. The use of rubber will take the similar ruling of wool but the reason rubber will be sometimes impermissible is water will not infiltrate rubber for the purpose of wudhu which makes the wudhu non valid. Wool could be penetrated by water so no issue with this.

And God knows best.

Jazakallah khayran
nice reply.

arsenal Fc likes everything i do

So mukina you be omo gunners, hope say you know ur first eleven, a lady came disturbing me with Arsenal/gunners plus shin shin, to cut to the story short i asked her whats ur goal keeper's name, she was as silient as a cemetary. Hehehe. Serve her right

@lagosboy- Jazakhallahu khairan i never followed the thread till now and i must commend ur effort and tawalkali, you be fiqh master o, i bow o.
Thanks for the correction i thought it was Iddah of talaq.

zayhal:

Asalam alaykum,

A woman in her iddah (waiting period), how much right does the husband still have on her?
Can she be without hijab in his presence?
can she cook his meals?
Does she have to seek his permission before going out?
Is it still his responsibility to provide for her needs?

Firstly, Iddah in the context of divorce is the period of aprrox 3 months waiting period of the wife after the first or second divorce before she is free to marry anyother person.

Allahs says in the qur'an Q65 v 1

O Prophet! When you divorce women, divorce them at their ‘Iddah (prescribed periods) and count (accurately) their ‘Iddah (periods). And fear Allaah your Lord (O Muslims). And turn them not out of their (husband’s) homes nor shall they (themselves) leave, except in case they are guilty of some open illegal sexual intercourse. And those are the set limits of Allaah. And whosoever transgresses the set limits of Allaah, then indeed he has wronged himself. You (the one who divorces his wife) know not it may be that Allaah will afterward bring some new thing to pass (i.e. to return her back to you if that was the first or second divorce).[/b]Q65 v 1

And divorced women shall wait (as regards their marriage) for three menstrual periods, and it is not lawful for them to conceal what Allaah has created in their wombs, if they believe in Allaah and the Last Day. [b]And their husbands have the better right to take them back in that period, if they wish for reconciliation. And they (women) have rights (over their husbands as regards living expenses) similar (to those of their husbands) over them (as regards obedience and respect) to what is reasonable, but men have a degree (of responsibility) over them. And Allaah is All-Mighty, All-Wise.

The divorce is twice, after that, either you retain her on reasonable terms or release her with kindness. And it is not lawful for you (men) to take back (from your wives) any of your Mahr (bridal-money given by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage) which you have given them, except when both parties fear that they would be unable to keep the limits ordained by Allaah (e.g. to deal with each other on a fair basis). Then if you fear that they would not be able to keep the limits ordained by Allaah, then there is no sin on either of them if she gives back (the Mahr or a part of it) for her Al-Khul‘ (divorce). These are the limits ordained by Allaah, so do not transgress them. And whoever transgresses the limits ordained by Allaah, then such are the Zaalimoon (wrongdoers).

And if he has divorced her (the third time), then she is not lawful unto him thereafter until she has married another husband…” Q2 v 228

From the verses above we understand that a wife has to remain in her husbands house for 3 months after the pronouncement of a divorce and this is the general ruling in all schools of jurispudence in islam.

To answer your qestions

Rights:
The wife has the same rights she had before the divorce as regards maintenance, feeding , clothing and such, the only rights she doest have is his time or sexual rights.

Regarding the hijab , since she is allowed to live in the house with him I presume (subject to any other conflicting evidence) she could be without the hijab but no sexual relations is permitted.

Regarding making meals that could be subject to her discretion but the husband still maintains her it is only natural to be able to make meals as well.

Regarding permission of leaving the house , I DONT KNOW and i dont want to speculate in islam half of knowledge is to be able to say "I DONT KNOW" _{(however, from this ayah " . . And they (women) have rights (over their husbands as regards living expenses) similar (to those of their husbands) over them (as regards obedience and respect) to what is reasonable, but men have a degree (of responsibility) over them. And Allaah is All-Mighty, All-Wise"
We might be able to say she needs his permission, it remains a conjecture on my path though)}

We should understand that the wisdom of her remaining in the house is to give them room to come together again and Allahs says that in the verses above, the husband could also take her back within this period of iddah and does not need to wait for 3 months if he wishes to take her back as he has the rights islamically to take her back subject to the limits of islam. The couple are only given this opportunity twice and if there is a third divorce that is it! The husband cannot marry her again except she marries another person sincerely and divorces.

After three months she is free to marry anyother person, if there is no reconcilation.

On This subject of divorce i am not very knowledgable in divorce issues but only done the little best of my ability. If there is any superior arguement or opinion to the above please throw my rubbish in the bin and take it.

And indeed Allah knows best.

Allahu akbar, sheikh Lagosman. What about iddah of a widow

Abu Zola:

Allahu akbar, sheikh Lagosman. What about iddah of a widow

Ah Abuzola me i be bloody student of knowledge o, sheikh ke ! far from it o.

“And those of you who die and leave wives behind them, they (the wives) shall wait (as regards their marriage) for four months and ten days” Q2:234

Regarding widows the days of iddah are longer and she would obviously be in their matrominal home till the whole state is shared by the will or judge. The verse above is self explicit.

FayeZik:

Oh, okay. I did not know that there is a waiting period before actual divorce. Thanks for increasing my knowledge. i'm waiting for the answers.

Aunty e ku ojo meta o , how are the kids

@ Lagosboy, jazakallah khayran. May Allah who is the knower of all continue to increase you in knowledge and strengthen your soul with faith.

Jazakallah khayran Lagosboy. 

I'll check on the aspects u couldn't answer. Gracia!

Salaam. A woman was fasting and just during magrib she felt her period. She wasn't sure, though and she had no access to the toilet until about 15 minutes later; and she saw the her period had infact started. The problem is she doesn't know when it started.It might have been during magrib or immediately after or even before. Should she make up for the fast? And what about the magrib prayer she missed? she's making up for ramadan.

Lagosboy:

Aunty e ku ojo meta o , how are the kids

Thanks Lagboy, alhamdulillahi, we are all doing fine. My regards to your family too.
I was directed to the thread where u are answering 'ifyalways' Qs about islam. Very interesting Qs and As, I am learning a lot. Allahuma Robbi sidna ilima. (Amin) .

Correct me if I'm wrong. Re: the waiting peiod (of either the divorce or death). The reason for the wait is to allow enuf time to make sure that the woman is not pregnant before the divorce/death . So that there will not be any story/rumor about legitimate/illegitimate child later on.