"And it is forbidden to contract a marriage, and it is not valid"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. We begin tonight's lesson, if Allah wills, which is the seventh prohibited act: the marriage contract. The author said "And it is forbidden to contract a marriage" for both males and females. The evidence for this is the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) Sahih Muslim 1409a So the marriage contract is among the prohibitions of ihram, whether the one in ihram is the guardian, the husband, or the wife. The ruling concerns these three: the guardian, the husband, and the wife. As for the witnesses, their being in ihram has no effect, but it is disliked for them to attend the contract if they are in ihram. However, what is forbidden is for the guardian, the husband, or the wife to be in ihram. If the marriage contract is made by one of them who is in ihram, it is forbidden. The evidence, as you heard, is the hadith of 'Uthman ibn 'Affan (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said Sahih Muslim 1409a So if a person in ihram contracts a marriage for a woman who is not in ihram, is the marriage forbidden or not?
The audience: Forbidden.
The Shaykh : A person in ihram for a woman who is not in ihram?
The audience: Forbidden.
The Shaykh : A contract by a person in ihram for a woman who is not in ihram? Forbidden. A contract by a person in ihram for a man and woman who are not in ihram, meaning the spouses are lawful?
The audience: Forbidden.
The Shaykh : Also forbidden, and the evidence is this. If someone asks how we can say this when it is established that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) married Maymunah while he was in ihram? He married Maymunah while in ihram. 'Abdullah ibn 'Abbas, the son of Maymunah's sister, who was knowledgeable about her situation, narrated that. We say the answer to that is from two angles: the first angle is the method of preferring the stronger evidence, and the second angle is the method of special privilege.
As for the first, which is the method of preferring the stronger evidence, the stronger position is that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) married Maymunah while he was in a state of lawfulness, not prohibition. The evidence for this is that Maymunah herself narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) married her while he was in a state of lawfulness, and that Abu Rafi', the messenger between them, meaning the intermediary between them, reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) married her while he was in a state of lawfulness. On this basis, that position is preferred because the one who was present at the event and directly involved in it knows it better than others. As for the hadith of Ibn 'Abbas, we say that Ibn 'Abbas did not know that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) had married her until after the Messenger had entered the state of ihram, so he assumed that the Messenger married her while in ihram based on his knowledge, since he did not know of it until after the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) had entered the state of ihram. This angle, as you see, is strong, clear, and free from doubt.
The second answer is that among the special privileges of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) is that he may marry while in ihram, because he is the most master of his desire among people. If anyone else married while in ihram, his self and the intensity of his desire would urge him to approach his wife, and he might have intercourse with her. But for the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), that is impossible; he is the most master of his desire among people. So his marriage while in the state of ihram is from what? From his special privileges. The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) has multiple special privileges in marriage. Is attributing this to special privilege a strange matter such that we would not agree with it, or not? The answer is no, it is not a strange matter. But what is the opinion if special privilege conflicts with preferring the stronger evidence, which is more appropriate? Preferring the stronger evidence is more appropriate so that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is not taken out of the ruling of his Ummah by a special ruling, and the original principle is the absence of special privilege. Therefore, the method of preferring the stronger evidence is more appropriate, which is that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) married Maymunah while he was in a state of lawfulness.
The author said "and it is not valid". The pronoun in "it is not valid" refers to the contract. That means if a contract is made for a woman who is in ihram for a husband who is not in ihram, the marriage is not valid. If a contract is made for a husband who is in ihram for a woman who is not in ihram, the marriage is not valid. If a contract is made for a man who is not in ihram for a woman who is not in ihram, but the guardian is in ihram, the marriage is not valid. Why? Because the prohibition is directed at the very essence of the contract, and what the prohibition is directed at in its essence cannot be made valid. If we were to validate what the prohibition is directed at in its essence, that would be opposing Allah and His Messenger, because what the Lawgiver has prohibited, He intends for the Ummah to leave it. If we were to carry it out, we would be opposing Allah and His Messenger. On this basis, if the marriage contract is made, it is not valid. Now, what if he contracted the marriage while in ihram, and then after exiting ihram, the man entered his wife and she bore him children? Do we uphold the contract or do we say that a new contract is necessary? The second option, and his first intercourse would be intercourse under doubt, and his children would be legitimate children attributed to him by law, just as they are attributed to him by nature. Is that clear, everyone?
The audience: Yes.
A Muhrim must neither marry himself, nor arrange the marriage of another one, nor should he make the proposal of marriage.
لا ينكح المحرم ولا يُنكح ولا يخطبA Muhrim must neither marry himself, nor arrange the marriage of another one, nor should he make the proposal of marriage.
لا ينكح المحرم ولا يُنكِح ولا يخطبThe audience: Forbidden.
The Shaykh : A person in ihram for a woman who is not in ihram?
The audience: Forbidden.
The Shaykh : A contract by a person in ihram for a woman who is not in ihram? Forbidden. A contract by a person in ihram for a man and woman who are not in ihram, meaning the spouses are lawful?
The audience: Forbidden.
The Shaykh : Also forbidden, and the evidence is this. If someone asks how we can say this when it is established that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) married Maymunah while he was in ihram? He married Maymunah while in ihram. 'Abdullah ibn 'Abbas, the son of Maymunah's sister, who was knowledgeable about her situation, narrated that. We say the answer to that is from two angles: the first angle is the method of preferring the stronger evidence, and the second angle is the method of special privilege.
As for the first, which is the method of preferring the stronger evidence, the stronger position is that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) married Maymunah while he was in a state of lawfulness, not prohibition. The evidence for this is that Maymunah herself narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) married her while he was in a state of lawfulness, and that Abu Rafi', the messenger between them, meaning the intermediary between them, reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) married her while he was in a state of lawfulness. On this basis, that position is preferred because the one who was present at the event and directly involved in it knows it better than others. As for the hadith of Ibn 'Abbas, we say that Ibn 'Abbas did not know that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) had married her until after the Messenger had entered the state of ihram, so he assumed that the Messenger married her while in ihram based on his knowledge, since he did not know of it until after the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) had entered the state of ihram. This angle, as you see, is strong, clear, and free from doubt.
The second answer is that among the special privileges of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) is that he may marry while in ihram, because he is the most master of his desire among people. If anyone else married while in ihram, his self and the intensity of his desire would urge him to approach his wife, and he might have intercourse with her. But for the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), that is impossible; he is the most master of his desire among people. So his marriage while in the state of ihram is from what? From his special privileges. The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) has multiple special privileges in marriage. Is attributing this to special privilege a strange matter such that we would not agree with it, or not? The answer is no, it is not a strange matter. But what is the opinion if special privilege conflicts with preferring the stronger evidence, which is more appropriate? Preferring the stronger evidence is more appropriate so that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is not taken out of the ruling of his Ummah by a special ruling, and the original principle is the absence of special privilege. Therefore, the method of preferring the stronger evidence is more appropriate, which is that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) married Maymunah while he was in a state of lawfulness.
The author said "and it is not valid". The pronoun in "it is not valid" refers to the contract. That means if a contract is made for a woman who is in ihram for a husband who is not in ihram, the marriage is not valid. If a contract is made for a husband who is in ihram for a woman who is not in ihram, the marriage is not valid. If a contract is made for a man who is not in ihram for a woman who is not in ihram, but the guardian is in ihram, the marriage is not valid. Why? Because the prohibition is directed at the very essence of the contract, and what the prohibition is directed at in its essence cannot be made valid. If we were to validate what the prohibition is directed at in its essence, that would be opposing Allah and His Messenger, because what the Lawgiver has prohibited, He intends for the Ummah to leave it. If we were to carry it out, we would be opposing Allah and His Messenger. On this basis, if the marriage contract is made, it is not valid. Now, what if he contracted the marriage while in ihram, and then after exiting ihram, the man entered his wife and she bore him children? Do we uphold the contract or do we say that a new contract is necessary? The second option, and his first intercourse would be intercourse under doubt, and his children would be legitimate children attributed to him by law, just as they are attributed to him by nature. Is that clear, everyone?
The audience: Yes.