What is the ruling on women sitting with men, given that every woman has her mahram (a relative one may not marry)?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Shaykh, the question regarding ikhtilat (free mixing of men and women) is still the topic. For example, in the case of a gathering of relatives, where every woman has her mahram (a relative one may not marry) present. They cite the hadith of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) Riyad as-Salihin 1629 and the hadith . In this scenario, the mahram (a relative one may not marry) is present for the woman in the gathering. They argue that ikhtilat (free mixing of men and women) among relatives is permissible because the mahram (a relative one may not marry) is with her. They also cite the hadith of the bride who served the guests during the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).
The Shaykh : Yes, it was the bride of Sahl ibn Sa'd al-Sa'idi.
The questioner : Yes, she was serving these men. Furthermore, the one who holds this view necessarily holds the position that it is permissible to uncover the face and hands. From this starting point—first, the permissibility of uncovering the face and hands, and second, the presence of a mahram (a relative one may not marry)—these factors make the mixing seem permissible. So I do not know what the answer to that is.
The Shaykh : First, the issue of the face and hands is a matter that has been settled. There are books on this, including my book *The Muslim Woman's Hijab in the Book and the Sunnah*. The matter does not require renewing the research on this topic. However, if someone has a doubt, they may raise it and we will answer it. As for the question of ikhtilat (free mixing of men and women) and citing such hadiths as evidence, our answer is as follows: First, in those hadiths, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) warns against khalwah (seclusion with a non-mahram) and does not permit ikhtilat (free mixing of men and women) in the sense understood today. That is, he does not permit, for example, a man to sit next to his brother's wife; that is ikhtilat (free mixing of men and women). But if a brother sits with his wife on one side of the gathering, and another brother sits with his wife on another side, and other mahram (a relative one may not marry) relatives are also present, and they engage in ordinary conversation, this has no relation to the ikhtilat (free mixing of men and women) we are discussing, for which we cite the aforementioned hadiths. Second, do these hadiths permit the late-night gatherings that take place today, and perhaps for years or even centuries before today, among families, where they engage in idle talk, perhaps telling jokes, making the gathering full of merriment, joy, and happiness, with women and men laughing, one giggling and the other laughing, and so on? Without a doubt, no one cites those hadiths as evidence for the permissibility of such gatherings.
The story of that bride who served the guests is, without a doubt, one where she was wearing the hijab that is obligatory by the consensus of Muslim scholars, which is everything except the face and hands. Her clothing was not like the clothing of the women who serve guests today, from which perhaps her arm might be visible, or perhaps something of her chest or neck, and so on. Does serving those guests by this bride imply the meaning of ikhtilat (free mixing of men and women)? Absolutely not. There is no meaning of ikhtilat (free mixing of men and women) in it, because "ikhtilat" means that things intermingle with one another. Therefore, such hadiths...
No one of you should meet a woman in privacy unless she is accompanied by a Mahram (i.e., a relative within the prohibited degrees).
لا يخلون أحدكم بامرأة إلا مع ذي محرمNo man is alone with a woman except that Satan is the third among them.
ما خلا رجل بامرأة إلا كان الشيطان ثالثهماThe Shaykh : Yes, it was the bride of Sahl ibn Sa'd al-Sa'idi.
The questioner : Yes, she was serving these men. Furthermore, the one who holds this view necessarily holds the position that it is permissible to uncover the face and hands. From this starting point—first, the permissibility of uncovering the face and hands, and second, the presence of a mahram (a relative one may not marry)—these factors make the mixing seem permissible. So I do not know what the answer to that is.
The Shaykh : First, the issue of the face and hands is a matter that has been settled. There are books on this, including my book *The Muslim Woman's Hijab in the Book and the Sunnah*. The matter does not require renewing the research on this topic. However, if someone has a doubt, they may raise it and we will answer it. As for the question of ikhtilat (free mixing of men and women) and citing such hadiths as evidence, our answer is as follows: First, in those hadiths, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) warns against khalwah (seclusion with a non-mahram) and does not permit ikhtilat (free mixing of men and women) in the sense understood today. That is, he does not permit, for example, a man to sit next to his brother's wife; that is ikhtilat (free mixing of men and women). But if a brother sits with his wife on one side of the gathering, and another brother sits with his wife on another side, and other mahram (a relative one may not marry) relatives are also present, and they engage in ordinary conversation, this has no relation to the ikhtilat (free mixing of men and women) we are discussing, for which we cite the aforementioned hadiths. Second, do these hadiths permit the late-night gatherings that take place today, and perhaps for years or even centuries before today, among families, where they engage in idle talk, perhaps telling jokes, making the gathering full of merriment, joy, and happiness, with women and men laughing, one giggling and the other laughing, and so on? Without a doubt, no one cites those hadiths as evidence for the permissibility of such gatherings.
The story of that bride who served the guests is, without a doubt, one where she was wearing the hijab that is obligatory by the consensus of Muslim scholars, which is everything except the face and hands. Her clothing was not like the clothing of the women who serve guests today, from which perhaps her arm might be visible, or perhaps something of her chest or neck, and so on. Does serving those guests by this bride imply the meaning of ikhtilat (free mixing of men and women)? Absolutely not. There is no meaning of ikhtilat (free mixing of men and women) in it, because "ikhtilat" means that things intermingle with one another. Therefore, such hadiths...
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.