|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
FROM NEW ISLAMIC LAWS BOOK by www.World-federation.org
Ruling 1719. I’tikāf is one of the recommended (mustahabb) ritual acts of worship (‘ibādāt) that becomes obligatory (wājib) by means of a vow (nadhr), covenant (‘ahd), oath (qasam), or suchlike. A valid i’tikāf is when one stays in a mosque with the intention of attaining proximity to Allah (qasd al-qurbah); and the recommended precaution (al-ihtiyāt al-mustahabb) is that the stay should take place with the intention of performing ritual acts of worship, such as prayers (salāh), and supplications (du’ā’s).
Ruling 1720. There is no particular time for performing i’tikāf; rather, whenever it is correct to keep a fast (sawm) during the year, performing i’tikāf at that time is also correct. The best time for performing i’tikāf is the blessed month of Ramadan, more so during the last ten nights of Ramadan.
Ruling 1721. The minimum length of time for i’tikāf is two nights and three days; less than that is not correct (sahih). There is no maximum limit. There is no problem in including the first or the fourth night in the intention of i’tikāf. If a person is a mu’takif [the term given to someone who is performing i’tikāf ] for five full days, he must also be a mu’takif on the sixth day.
Ruling 1722. The starting time for i’tikāf is the time of morning (subh) prayers on the first day, and, based on obligatory precaution (al-ihtiyāt al-wājib), the finishing time for i’tikāf is the time of sunset (maghrib) prayers on the third day. For a valid i’tikāf to take place, a period of time equivalent to three days will not suffice; i.e. one cannot be a mu’takif after the time of subh prayers on the first day [and stay in the mosque until the same time on the fourth day] even if he compensates the time lost from the first day on the fourth day; for example, he stays in the mosque from the time of afternoon prayers (zuhr) of the first day until the time of afternoon prayers on the fourth day.
CONDITIONS FOR THE VALIDITY OF I’TIKĀF
Ruling 1723. The following are the conditions for a valid i’tikāf.
i. The mu’takif must be a Muslim.
ii. The mu’takif must be sane (‘āqil).
iii. I’tikāf must be performed with the intention of attaining proximity to Allah.
Ruling 1724. A mu’takif must have the intention of attaining proximity to Allah in the same manner that was mentioned with regard to ablution (wudū’),1 and i’tikāf must be performed from start to finish with a sincere intention to attain proximity to Allah.
iv. The duration of the i’tikāf must be a minimum of three days.
Ruling 1725. The minimum duration of i’tikāf is three days; less than three days is incorrect. However, there is no maximum limit, as mentioned in Ruling 1721.
v. A mu’takif must fast during the days of i’tikāf.
Ruling 1726. A mu’takif must fast during the days of i’tikāf. Therefore, i’tikāf performed by someone who cannot [legally] fast [during those days] – such as a traveller who does not intend to stay for ten days, a sick person, a woman in menstruation (i.e. a hā’id) and a woman who is experiencing lochia (nifās) – is not correct. Furthermore, on the days of i’tikāf, it is not necessary to fast especially for performing i’tikāf; rather, it is acceptable for one to keep any fast during i’tikāf, even a fast that one has been hired to keep (istījārī), or a recommended fast, or a lapsed (qadā’) fast.
Ruling 1727. While a mu’takif is fasting – i.e. from the time of subh prayers until the time of maghrib prayers – everything that invalidates (i.e. makes bātil) a fast also invalidates i’tikāf. Therefore, a mu’takif must refrain from intentionally (‘amdan) doing the things that invalidate a fast.2
vi. I’tikāf must be performed in one of ‘the four mosques’ or in a jāmi’ mosque.
Ruling 1728. It is correct to perform i’tikāf in Masjid al-Harām, Masjid al-Nabī (S), Masjid al-Kūfah, and Masjid al-Basrah. Similarly, it is correct to perform i’tikāf in the jāmi’ mosque of every town, except when the religious leadership (imāmah) of that mosque is in the hands of a person who is not just (‘ādil), in which case, based on obligatory precaution, i’tikāf is not correct. A jāmi’ mosque is one that is not particular to people of a specific locality or area, nor to a specific group; rather, it is a place where people of different areas and localities of the town gather and frequent. The legality (mashrū’iyyah) of i’tikāf performed in any mosque other than a jāmi’ mosque is not established; however, there is no problem in performing i’tikāf in other mosques with the intention of there being a probability of it being a desirable act. As for performing i’tikāf in a place that is not a mosque – for example, in a place that is a husayniyyah3 or only a prayer room – it is not correct and has no legal basis.
vii. I’tikāf must take place in one mosque.
Ruling 1729. It is necessary that i’tikāf be performed in one mosque. Therefore, one i’tikāf cannot be performed in two mosques, whether they are separate from each other or joined together, unless they are joined together in a manner that they are commonly considered to be one mosque.
viii. I’tikāf must be performed with the permission of one whose permission is legally (shar’an) required.
Ruling 1730. I’tikāf must be performed with the permission of one whose permission is legally required. Therefore, if a woman’s staying in a mosque is unlawful (harām) – for example, because she has left her house without the permission of her husband – her i’tikāf is invalid; and in case a woman’s staying in a mosque is not unlawful but performing i’tikāf conflicts with her husband’s rights, the validity of her i’tikāf – if performed without her husband’s permission – is problematic (mahall al-ishkāl) [i.e. based on obligatory precaution, it is not valid].4 Similarly, if i’tikāf disturbs and annoys one’s parents due to their compassion and sympathy for him, it is necessary for him to obtain their permission; and if it does not annoy them, the recommended precaution is that he should still obtain their permission.
ix. A mu’takif must refrain from doing the unlawful acts of i’tikāf.
Ruling 1731. Someone who is performing i’tikāf must refrain from doing the unlawful acts of i’tikāf, which are as follows:
1. using fragrance;
2. having sexual intercourse with one’s spouse;
3. masturbating, having sexual contact with one’s spouse by means of touching, and lustfully kissing (based on obligatory precaution);
4. altercating (mumārah) and disputing (mujādalah) with others;
5. conducting a transaction.
Doing these things invalidates one’s i’tikāf. In the case of an i’tikāf that is not an assigned obligation (i.e. it is not al-wājib al-mu’ayyan),5 the obligation to refrain from these things – apart from having sexual intercourse – is based on obligatory precaution.6
Ruling 1732. It is not permitted (jā’iz) for a mu’takif to smell perfumes in any circumstance – whether he derives pleasure from smelling them or not – and neither is it permitted for him to smell fragrant plants and flowers if he derives pleasure from doing so; however, there is no problem if he does not derive pleasure from smelling them. Similarly, a mu’takif can use perfumed personal cleansing products, such as liquid soap or a bar of soap, shampoo, and toothpaste that has a pleasant smell. It is not permitted, however, to smell the perfume that people who are not performing i’tikāf usually apply when they come to mosques, but, apparently, merely having a sense of the fragrant smell is not a problem, nor is it necessary for one to hold his nose.
Ruling 1733. While one is performing i’tikāf, it is not permitted for him to have sexual intercourse with his spouse – even if it does not result in ejaculation – and doing so intentionally invalidates i’tikāf.
Ruling 1734. Based on an obligatory precaution, a mu’takif must not intend to ejaculate (even by lawful means), and he must refrain from having sexual contact with his spouse by means of touching, and he must also refrain from lustfully kissing her. Looking lustfully at one’s spouse during i’tikāf does not invalidate one’s i’tikāf, but the recommended precaution is that one should refrain from doing so.
Ruling 1735. Disputing about worldly or religious matters while one is performing i’tikāf is unlawful if it is done with the intention of defeating the other person or showing off one’s virtues and superiority. However, if it is done with the intention of making evident what is right, clarifying what is true, and resolving an error or mistake made by the other side, not only is it not unlawful but it is one of the best forms of worship. Therefore, the criterion [of whether such action is unlawful or not] is the intention of the mu’takif.
Ruling 1736. Conducting transactions while one is performing i’tikāf is unlawful; and based on obligatory precaution, any type of business transaction – such as hire (ijārah), silent partnership (mudārabah),7 exchange (mu’āwadah) etc. is also unlawful, although the transaction that is conducted is valid.
Ruling 1737. Whenever a mu’takif is compelled to conduct a transaction in order to procure food and drink or other necessary items, and he cannot find someone else who is not a mu’takif to do this on his behalf by way of agency (wikālah), and it is not possible for him to procure the aforementioned items without conducting a transaction – for example, by way of receiving them as a gift or borrowing them – in such a case, there is no problem in him conducting a transaction.
Ruling 1738. If a mu’takif intentionally commits an unlawful act of i’tikāf despite knowing the religious law (al-hukm al-shar’ī), his i’tikāf becomes invalid.
Ruling 1739. If a mu’takif inadvertently (sahwan) or forgetfully commits an unlawful act of i’tikāf, it does not invalidate his i’tikāf in any circumstance.
Ruling 1740. If a mu’takif commits an unlawful act of i’tikāf on account of not knowing the ruling about this, in the event that he was culpably ignorant (al-jāhil al-muqassir),8 his i’tikāf becomes invalid; and if he was inculpably ignorant (al-jāhil al-qāsir), his i’tikāf is valid and it will be ruled as inadvertence [which as mentioned in the previous ruling, does not invalidate one’s i’tikāf in any circumstance].
Ruling 1741. If a mu’takif invalidates his i’tikāf by doing one of things that renders an i’tikāf invalid – which were mentioned in the previous rulings (masā’il) – and if the i’tikāf is an assigned obligation,9 then based on obligatory precaution, he must make up the i’tikāf [i.e. he must perform it belatedly as qadā’]; and if the i’tikāf is not an assigned obligation – for example, one makes a vow to perform i’tikāf without assigning a time for it – it is obligatory that he starts the i’tikāf all over again; and if it is a recommended i’tikāf and one invalidates his i’tikāf after the completion of the second day, then based on obligatory precaution, he must make up the i’tikāf; and if one invalidates a recommended i’tikāf before the completion of the second day, there is no obligation on him and he does not have to make it up.
x. A mu’takif must remain in the place of i’tikāf and must not leave it except in cases where leaving is legally permitted.
Ruling 1742. In cases where it is permitted for a mu’takif to leave the mosque, he must not stay outside the mosque for longer than it is necessary for him to attend to the matter in question.
LEAVING THE PLACE OF I’TIKĀF
Ruling 1743. Leaving the place of i’tikāf for necessary and unavoidable matters – such as going to the toilet – is permitted. Leaving the mosque in order to perform ritual bathing (ghusl) for ritual impurity (janābah) is also permitted; indeed, it is obligatory. Similarly, it is permitted for women to leave in order to perform the ghusl for irregular blood discharge (istihādah); and if a woman who is experiencing istihādah and who must perform ghusl does not do so, the validity of her i’tikāf is not affected.
Ruling 1744. Leaving the place of i’tikāf in order to perform ablution (wudū’) for an obligatory prayer within its prescribed time (adā’) is permitted, even if the time for the prayer has not yet set in; and leaving in order to perform wudū’ for an obligatory qadā’ prayer – in case there is ample time for performing it – is problematic [i.e. based on obligatory precaution, one must not leave in this case].
Ruling 1745. In the event that there are facilities for performing wudū’ inside the mosque, a mu’takif cannot leave the mosque in order to perform wudū’.
Ruling 1746. If it becomes obligatory on a mu’takif to perform ghusl, in case the ghusl is one of the ghusls that is not permitted to be performed in a mosque – such as the ghusl for janābah, which would require staying in the mosque while in the state of janābah or would cause the mosque to become impure – he must leave; otherwise, his i’tikāf becomes invalid; and in case there is no problem in performing ghusl in the mosque – such as the ghusl for touching a corpse (mass al-mayyit) – and it is possible to perform ghusl, then based on obligatory precaution, it is not permitted to leave the mosque.
Ruling 1747. Leaving the place of i’tikāf in order to perform recommended ghusls – such as the Friday ghusl or the ghusl for performing the rituals (a’māl ) of Umm Dāwūd10 – and similarly, leaving in order to perform a recommended wudū’, is problematic [i.e. based on obligatory precaution, one must not leave in order to perform them]. Generally speaking, leaving a mosque for ‘supererogatory matters’ (i.e. those that are religiously preferred to be done rather than not done) – excluding matters that are commonly considered to be necessary – is problematic, and precaution must be observed [i.e. based on obligatory precaution, one must not leave the mosque for ‘supererogatory matters’]. However, a mu’takif can leave the place of i’tikāf for the purposes of attending a funeral procession (tashyī’ al-janāzah), preparing a corpse for ghusl, prayers, burial (dafn), and suchlike; [he can also leave for] visiting the sick and attending the Friday prayer (salāt al-jumu’ah).
Ruling 1748. Based on obligatory precaution, it is not permitted for a mu’takif to leave the mosque in order to attend congregational prayers (salāt al-jamā’ah) that are being held outside the place of i’tikāf unless one is a mu’takif in the holy city of Mecca, in which case he can leave the mosque in order to perform congregational prayers or to perform prayers on his own ( furādā); furthermore, he can perform these prayers wherever in Mecca he wants.
Ruling 1749. A mu’takif cannot leave the mosque in order to bring things that he needs if he can instruct someone who is not a mu’takif to bring them for him.
Ruling 1750. A mu’takif can leave the place of i’tikāf in order to sit secondary school, university, or hawzah (Islamic seminary) examinations in the event that it is commonly considered to be necessary. However, he must not stay outside the mosque for a long time such that the form of the i’tikāf is lost; up to two hours, for example, is no problem.
Ruling 1751. If a mu’takif leaves the mosque in order to attend to some urgent matter but stays outside for a long time such that the form of his i’tikāf is lost, his i’tikāf is invalid even if he was compelled or forced to leave, or he left because of necessity or due to forgetfulness.
Ruling 1752. If a mu’takif leaves the place of i’tikāf – intentionally, of his own choice, and while knowing the religious law – for a matter that is not necessary, nor one for which a mu’takif is permitted to leave, his i’tikāf becomes invalid.
Ruling 1753. If a mu’takif leaves the place of i’tikāf – on account of not knowing the ruling (mas’alah) and being ignorant of the religious law – for a matter that is not necessary, nor one for which a mu’takif is permitted to leave, his i’tikāf becomes invalid.
Ruling 1754. If a mu’takif leaves the mosque due to forgetfulness, his i’tikāf becomes invalid; and if a mu’takif leaves the mosque because he was compelled or forced to leave, his i’tikāf does not become invalid unless he stays outside for a long time such that the form of i’tikāf is lost, in which case his i’tikāf becomes invalid.
Ruling 1755. If it is obligatory for a mu’takif to leave the place of i’tikāf – for example, in order to pay a debt that is obligatory on him, and the time to repay it is due, and he has the ability to repay it, and the lender wants it to be repaid; or, in order to accomplish something else that is obligatory on him and which requires him to leave – in these cases, if he acts contrary to his duty and does not leave, he commits a sin but his i’tikāf does not become invalid.
Ruling 1756. A mu’takif must not stay outside the mosque for longer than is necessary; and while he is outside, if possible, he must not sit under a shade. However, there is no problem if he sits under a shade while he is outside in order to empty his bowels and/or bladder; and based on obligatory precaution, after he has emptied his bowels and/or bladder, he must not sit at all unless it is necessary for him to do so.
Ruling 1757. A mu’takif can walk under a shade outside the mosque, although the recommended precaution is that he should avoid doing so.
Ruling 1758. Based on obligatory precaution, it is necessary for a mu’takif to take the shortest route when he leaves the place of i’tikāf or returns to it. However, if by using a longer route he would end up staying outside the mosque for a shorter time, he must choose that longer route [i.e. the route could be longer in distance but quicker to traverse due to it being, say, less busy].
MISCELLANEOUS RULINGS ON I’TIKĀF
Ruling 1759. When one makes the intention to perform an i’tikāf that is not an assigned obligation,11 he can stipulate a condition from the outset that if a problem arises, he will leave the i’tikāf.12 Therefore, by stipulating such a condition, one can leave the i’tikāf if a problem arises, and there is no problem in doing so even on the third day. However, if a mu’takif stipulates a condition that he will stop his i’tikāf even if no particular reason arises, the validity of such a condition is problematic [i.e. based on obligatory precaution, it is not a valid condition]. It is worth mentioning that stipulating the aforementioned condition (i.e. the condition of leaving the i’tikāf in the middle of it if a problem arises) before or after the i’tikāf has started is not correct; rather, it must be stipulated at the time of making the intention to perform i’tikāf.
Ruling 1760. A valid i’tikāf is not conditional on one having reached the age of legal responsibility (bulūgh), and i’tikāf performed by a child who is able to discern between right and wrong (mumayyiz) is also correct.
Ruling 1761. If a mu’takif sits on a usurped (ghasbī) carpet and he is aware of the fact that it is usurped, he commits a sin but his i’tikāf does not become invalid; and if someone gets to a place first and reserves it, and a mu’takif takes his place without his consent, then although he commits a sin his i’tikāf is valid.
Ruling 1762. If at the time of making the intention for an obligatory i’tikāf one stipulates a condition of returning (i.e. a condition of leaving the i’tikāf in the middle of it if a problem arises) – the details of which were mentioned in Ruling 1759 – in the event that he does something that is unlawful for one to do during i’tikāf, it is not necessary for him to make up the i’tikāf nor to start it all over again.
Ruling 1763. If a woman who is performing i’tikāf becomes hā’id after the completion of the second day of i’tikāf, it is obligatory on her to leave the mosque immediately; and based on obligatory precaution, it is necessary for her to make up the i’tikāf, unless from the outset she had stipulated a condition of returning (i.e. a condition of leaving the i’tikāf in the middle of it if a problem arises), the details of which were mentioned in Ruling 1759.
Ruling 1764. Performing an obligatory qadā’ i’tikāf is not an immediate obligation (al-wājib al-fawrī).13 However, making it up must not be delayed to such an extent that it would be regarded as being careless in accomplishing the obligation; and the recommended precaution is that it should be made up immediately.
Ruling 1765. If a mu’takif dies in the middle of an i’tikāf that has become obligatory on account of a vow, oath, covenant, or the passing of two days of i’tikāf, it is not obligatory on his guardian (walī) (i.e. the eldest son) to make up the qadā’ i’tikāf, although the recommended precaution is that a qadā’ i’tikāf of a deceased person should be performed. Of course, in the event that a mu’takif had stipulated in his will that, in such a case, someone must be hired from the one-third of his estate14 to perform i’tikāf for him, then the deceased mu’takif ’s will must be followed.
Ruling 1766. If a mu’takif intentionally invalidates his i’tikāf by having sexual intercourse – be it during the day or at night – it is obligatory on him to give recompense (kaffārah). As for [intentionally invalidating one’s i’tikāf by performing] other unlawful acts, there is no kaffārah, although the recommended precaution is that one should give kaffārah.
The kaffārah for invalidating an i’tikāf is the same as the kaffārah for invalidating a fast of the month of Ramadan – i.e. one has the choice of either fasting for sixty days or feeding sixty poor people – although the recommended precaution is that one should observe the sequence in giving kaffārah, meaning that one should first fast for sixty days, and if he cannot, he should then feed sixty poor people.
Ruling 1767. It is not permitted to change from one i’tikāf to another, whether both i’tikāfs happen to be obligatory, like when a person has made one of them obligatory on account of a vow, and the other on account of an oath; or, both are recommended; or, one is obligatory and the other recommended; or, one is to be performed for himself and the other on behalf of someone else (niyābah) or he is being hired to perform it for someone else; or, both are to be performed on behalf of someone else.
See the sixth condition for the validity of wudū’ and Ruling 281.
2 See Ruling 1551 for a list of the things that invalidate a fast.
3 A husayniyyah is a congregation hall for Shia ceremonies.
4 As mentioned in Ruling 6, the term ‘problematic’ (mahall al-ishkāl) amounts to saying the ruling is based on obligatory precaution.
5 An assigned obligation is an act of worship that must be performed at one distinct time. One way that an i’tikāf could become an assigned obligation is by means of a vow.
6 This means that, with regard to an i’tikāf that is not an assigned obligation, the obligation to refrain from having sexual intercourse is a fatwa, whereas the obligation to refrain from the other things is based on obligatory precaution (see Ruling 6 for the distinction between a fatwa and a ruling based on obligatory precaution). As for an i’tikāf that is an assigned obligation, the obligation to refrain from those things is a fatwa, except for the third, which as stated in brackets in the ruling itself, is based on obligatory precaution.
7 This refers to a commercial association whereby an investor entrusts capital to an agent who trades with it and shares with the investor a pre-determined proportion of the profits.
8 The terms ‘culpably ignorant’ and ‘inculpably ignorant’ are explained in footnotes pertaining to Ruling 12.
9 See the first footnote pertaining to Ruling 1731 for an explanation of this term.
10 The rituals of Umm Dāwūd are a recommended set of acts of worship that are usually performed in the middle of the month of Rajab. See, for example, Shaykh ‘Abbās al-Qummī’s Mafātīh al-Jinān, in the section on the recommended acts for Rajab.
11 See the first footnote pertaining to Ruling 1731 for an explanation of this term.
12 Such a condition is known as ‘a condition of returning (rujū’)’.
13 This is an obligation that must be performed as soon as it possible to do so, and delaying its performance is not permitted.
14 This refers to the maximum amount of one’s estate over which he has discretion in a will for it to be disposed of in accordance with his wishes after his death.
