» Earn on-going rewards and help us do more! «

The Rulings Related to A Child Born Out of Wedlock – Ask Shaykh YQ #198

share this pageShare Page
Yasir Qadhi

Channel: Yasir Qadhi

Series:

Episode Notes

Episode Transcript

© No part of this transcript may be copied or referenced or transmitted in any way whatsoever. Transcripts are auto-generated and thus will be be inaccurate. We are working on a system to allow volunteers to edit transcripts in a controlled system.


00:00:00--> 00:00:01

Our second question,

00:00:02--> 00:00:22

an anonymous sister, while she asks to remain anonymous, as you'll see why she has a very lengthy question, which I'll summarize. Apparently, she says that she got married to a man. And after she got married, she discovered that the man had an illegitimate child from a lady

00:00:24--> 00:01:07

from before their marriage, obviously, he was not married to that lady. And he, the father or her husband, still has a relationship with this child. He brings the child over every once in a while, and she was not informed of this child before the marriage. And now she feels uncomfortable, especially because the two of them have children, and they have daughters. And she doesn't know is this boy considered a Muharram. To her biological daughters, meaning this child is a not from marriage, this child was from a relationship that was pre pre marriage, premarital intercourse, basically, before they got married as well. And she's also asking, does does does that child have

00:01:07--> 00:01:18

any financial right? Or inheritance rights over my husband? Who is the father of my children? Should this boy be considered a part of my family or not?

00:01:19--> 00:01:20

One?

00:01:22--> 00:01:31

Oh, send me Kobe, Nika in Asia? No, hey, la him first.

00:01:33--> 00:01:34

Recovery.

00:01:43--> 00:02:26

Now, no doubt, I'm basing my answers on what you said. So I don't know his side of the story. If what you have said is true. No doubt, for you to not have been told is not something that is good. This is not information that he should have kept hidden from you. Because of course, while the marriage is valid, obviously, it is not healthy, to keep such secrets, because you are the life partner of this person, he has a child that is his. And also the fact that he was in an illegitimate relationship is something that you have the right to be affected by, let me put it that way. Right. And so it's not something that what he did was not right by not telling you. And you should have

00:02:26--> 00:03:07

been made aware of the circumstances of this person on this child and then make an informed decision. However, the fact that you were not told her not to wear does not negate the validity of the marriage contract between you and your husband. So your marriage contract is valid, because whatever sin the man or the woman has done before the marriage does not have meaning sort of a, you know, sexual nature, it does not invalidate the marriage itself. And so the previous Sins of a spouse with a third party or a child being born does not nullify the nigga that is taking place. But no doubt what the person has done is not something that is praiseworthy, and you have the right to

00:03:07--> 00:03:50

feel irritated, or you have the right to express that irritation. And you know, to that he should make amends for whatever way possible. However, to move on to the more technical issue. This was the moral if you like outrage or whatnot, now we get to the technical issue. This issue is multifaceted. And I'm going to give you generic rules. I do encourage you or your husband to go to a chef and a local chef and explain your situation so that the chef can quiz you and get more details. Again, that's something that pretty much all the time if there's a specific fit to go to a specific scholar so that any type of exclude any type of exceptional circumstances can be taken care of. I can't do

00:03:50--> 00:04:31

that in a generic q&a. But I'll give you Jen generic knowledge about this issue of illegitimate children because it is something that is something that people need to know about. And we seek Allah's refuge and protection for ever having to do with it ourselves. do realize by the way that this issue of unwed children or children born out of sorry, children born out of unwed marriages, this is one of the greatest dangers of intercourse outside of marriage. As it brings about children, it results in children who don't have stable families. And this is one of the main reasons not the only one not the not the you know, not the primary but one of the primary reasons why our religion

00:04:31--> 00:04:59

has legislated sexuality, and that why it encourages sexuality only within marriage and it forbids sexuality outside of marriage. We also need to know that the child of an unwed couple is absolutely blameless in all circumstances, and that never should such a child carry any blame or be made to feel guilty for what the parents have done. It is true that some

00:05:00--> 00:05:45

of Islamic fix some books of law, some of them, they do say that the child born of such a marriage should not be the Imam or should not be a person, a person of power, dignity. But that is their cultural understanding of certain generic aspects of the Sharia. In reality, the Koran is explicit what our attitude was zero to withdraw from that no soul shall bear the sin of another, whatever the parents might have done, the child is sinless. And it is not the fault of the child, the circumstances of the birth of the child, have nothing to do with the honor and dignity of that child. And it is unbefitting and unbecoming an Islamic for anybody to diminish the honor of that

00:05:45--> 00:06:28

child for something that the parents might have done. So we need to be very explicit and clear about this, the child deserves nothing but love and comfort. And no one should make the child feel uncomfortable. Anybody who does this is doing something that is sinful for the person that is doing it, and the child is free of any sin of the parents. The the next issue is that the child that is born outside of wedlock, technically, it does not take on the legal protections afforded by marriage. Now, again, we have to differentiate between the moral status and the dignified status of the child, which is unblemished, versus the technical perks that come from being born in a marriage

00:06:28--> 00:07:08

situation, that's something separate. And a child that is born outside of wedlock does not take on any legal protection of a marriage because there was no marriage. In fact, that's one of the purposes of marriage married brings about legal protection between the partners and for children born from that partnership. In Islamic law. The child takes on the name of the Father, the stat D, the the financial responsibilities that are the Father, the child inherits from the Father, the father is financially responsible for raising the child etc, etc. However, if the child is born outside of the wedlock, then the default position is that there are no such protections. And

00:07:08--> 00:07:53

therefore the child will not take the name of the child of the Father, the child will not inherit from the Father. And we're going to come to this point again. But again, this is the default position that the financial responsibility will not be on somebody who is not considered to be the legal father of the child. This is the default position. Now, if the woman is married, and Zina occurs with another man, that's something totally else. In this case, the child shall take on the name of the married husband, and any external affair will be ignored and neglected by anybody outside of the marriage situation. No one else has the right to interfere in a marriage situation.

00:07:53--> 00:08:36

Even if modern tests are done or what not it means nothing to us, because our laws are not necessarily the same as biological laws. That's a separate issue. Our Shetty our film is not necessarily the same as biological DNA. So if there is a married couple, and well, yeah, the villa will seek Allah's refuge, Xena occurred and the married lady gave birth to a child. And DNA later showed that to this child is actually the son of so and so. From an Islamic perspective, we will ignore that because our prophets a lot while he was sent him said and wonder do lil frosh, the child is ascribed to the marriage or the bed that it was born upon, and wonder do they feel rush? This is

00:08:36--> 00:09:15

the rule of Islamic law. There's only one exception, and that is when the Father Himself man, sorry, not the father, when the husband of this woman says no, this child is not mine. And the husband then undertakes a particular process called Leon or what I know, we're not going to go down there, that's a technical thing between the husband and wife, the husband, and only the husband has the right to say, I know this child is not mine. And then there's a procedure to be done. An outsider cannot and should not get involved. It's none of their business. And if the couple has passed on and modern DNA tests bring about some other news and whatnot, this is all relegated to you know, the footnotes and

00:09:15--> 00:09:59

it doesn't affect anything, technically the child shall remain according to the, the the marriage so on what to do. Lil frosh, a married lady who has a child, that child is ascribed to the marriage and not to any type of affair, illicit affair that might have occurred. Even if DNA shows to the contrary, that means nothing because we want to just cover up anything that would have happened and provide dignity and sanctity to the marriage itself. However, if the lady were single, not married, and the father and mother of the child both agree and claim that this child is theirs. So this is now a couple of boyfriend, girlfriend, premarital couple whatever they they are together for a

00:09:59--> 00:09:59

while.

00:10:00--> 00:10:39

There's not been she's not a lady that's sleeping with multiple men. So she's no doesn't No, no, she has been in an illicit relationship with one person, and the two of them, then they have the child. And then they claim both of them, they say, this is our child, we know it's our child. Now, if they decide to get married, if they decide to get married, can we backtrack the marriage, the child is already born clearly before the kneecap, we're not talking about a gray area, and you know, within seven months or something less than nine months, whatever, if it's six months after kneecap, no problem, but so the child and the child that is born after the nigga even by six months, inshallah,

00:10:39--> 00:11:19

no problem we don't ask, however, what if the child is clearly born, and then then it got takes place. And the couple says, This is my child. So here we have a majority and a minority opinion, I hope this is a clear situation, both men and women are unmarried, the both of them committed, as you know, with one another, and the both agree and claim that this child is mine. If there's disagreement or whatnot, then then the whole situation falls apart. And they both decide to get married. So now they have a legitimate nikka. And a child from an illegitimate relationship between the same to the majority position, which is the default of the format hips, is that the child shall

00:11:19--> 00:12:02

be considered illegitimate, even if the marriage takes place, however, is however raw, and shareholder Islam, Ibn taymiyyah, and even Okay, and many modern scholars, including my own teacher, Sugarman, earth, I mean, they argued quite forcefully that in this case, with all of these conditions, we shall backtrack the marriage, and we shall overlook that the child was born before the nikka. And we shall consider the child to be a legitimate child name and inheritance and everything will be established. And this is the position that I also follow. And it is, it is in line with the goals of the Sharia, where we want to cover up a sin, and we don't want to criminalize

00:12:02--> 00:12:44

the child penalize the child want to cover up any sin and not make a big deal about it. And we want to protect the interests of the child, and to not, you know, have any backlash about the two, the two have repented clearly, and they're trying to make amends. They're trying to get married together, they do get married together, in this case, according to Ibn taymiyyah, NWfP and many, many modern scholars that we extrapolate that the guy if you like, and we simply claim the child to be a part of the the basically illegitimate child from this unit. And from this marriage, however, the sister's case, the one that emailed me, this man had a child, and did not ever marry the woman

00:12:44--> 00:13:22

that he had the child with. So this does not apply to this case. So if he had married or even if he gets married, a legitimate nikka, meaning not a fake one, a legitimate nikka. And the both of them, they know that this is their child, there were there were you know, together for that period of time. And they both acknowledge this, according to Edmonton, me, and many are odema. In this case, the child shall be considered a legitimate one. And we don't ask about their past. However, if there's no nica, then there's nothing to extrapolate. So in your case, your husband did not engage in an account with this lady. And so you cannot extrapolate back to this. So the child is going to

00:13:22--> 00:13:31

be considered, basically, technically, legally, not his. However, what does this mean when it comes to financial responsibility.

00:13:34--> 00:14:26

So because the default position is that the Father, the biological father, is not the legal father, and there shall be no inheritance. So those scholars said, likewise, there shall be no maintenance, okay, when there's no technical or legal linkage between this child and between the man who sired him, even if it's a biological father, so they said, just like there's no inheritance, and just like the child does not have to, you know, obey the father and whatnot. So to the father does not have to give financial support upon the child. And this is the default position of our earliest callers now, doesn't have to does not mean that he should not, there's no doubt that he should, especially if the

00:14:26--> 00:15:00

child is having difficulty being raised by the mother and her relatives. And here I want to just point out, and I always, you know, when it comes to Islamic law, I do not view myself as a self ruler ever being independent of the giants who precede me. I always am a minor person in their shadows, and I never give a fatwa or a position that is unique and unprecedented in Islamic history. There are some areas that I don't mind exploring some issues of Islamic theology, some issues of the sphere of the Prophet system, some issues when it comes to the

00:15:00--> 00:15:44

The concept of you know, otomo Quran and Raphael Corrado has certain issues, I don't mind being a little bit more going out on a limb and being in a very minority, or maybe even bringing something new. And I will defend myself when I do that. But when it comes to Islamic law, I have always said that I am simply following giants, and I never break away from those giants, I don't consider myself to be qualified to practice, HD hard in Islamic law. However, I will simply point out, I will simply point out that a group of modern scholars, and this is a modern opinion, arguing that a person who engages in illegitimate intercourse with a lady that that person should be partially if not fully,

00:15:44--> 00:16:25

financially liable as well. And this is a modern opinion. And so I'm simply saying it's there. I'm not endorsing it, because I don't feel qualified to endorse such a minority position, because it is only being argued by a group of modern Muslim rula. In the classical position, I am not aware of anybody who obligated who obligated upon the biological father, the maintenance of the child. But this modern group of scholars in the writing in academic journals, the writing, these are people that are working in it, especially as scholars trained and filk, who then work in courts of law in the modern world, they see things that sometimes people that are simply with their students and

00:16:25--> 00:16:59

reading, you know, the blessitt books, they don't necessarily sometimes see, and you know, what they're arguing, and I've read a few articles to this point, or an article or two, I should say, to this point, what they're arguing is that, what happens is that the bulk of the burden is then placed on the woman, the financial burden, and yet the pleasure and the sin was shared by both the man and the woman. So why should the woman be burdened financially, when the both of them are equally guilty? Or perhaps even the man is more guilty? If he was the one who, you know, would the lady and, you know, she had didn't have experience with men, and he kept on promising and whatnot, and the

00:16:59--> 00:17:40

both of them did us and no question about it, and then he just disappears, and I lost, you know, ghosts or whatnot, and then she has to deal with the child in the aftermath. And so, one, there is a modern position that why should you know, the person not also have a financial obligation. So, that is something that is a modern opinion, at the same time, I am simply telling you, it's there, I cannot, because of you know, my own limitations, I have to stick with the great giants and the established schools in my head. And I will say that I am not aware of any pre modern opinion, that has obligated financial support upon the biological father, that having been said, No scholar ever

00:17:40--> 00:18:13

prohibits the support, and it is definitely the morally correct thing to do. If the person you know, acknowledges this child to be his own, then your husband, the fact that your husband is, you say that, you know, helping the child and, you know, taking care of the child once in a while then giving money and whatnot, this is something that is the least that he should do, and there's no problem islamically doing it. The as I said, the issue is whether he is obligated to do orders wajib or not, no early scholars had to do is watch it but no scholar said is haram or mcru. Either if he wants to give money, he has the right to give money to whomever he wants. And there's no doubt that

00:18:13--> 00:18:54

this child you know, being a part of, you know, your husband's life and and being taken care of financially is something that is noble overall, even if the act itself was not noble, the sin was done, but why should that sin be perpetuated? Also the the the final point here, and you asked about the issue of marriage, and you're worried that you know, you're This boy is coming to your house, and you have daughters, you know, from this marriage, and so, is there Maharani or is there a provision of marriage. And when it comes to this issue, the vast majority of scholars, the Hanbury position, the Maliki position, the Hanafi position is that they say even if the child is it

00:18:54--> 00:19:38

legitimate, still, the marital rules or prohibitions will apply. Hence, if a father, if a male and a female engage in premarital intercourse, they have let's say, a daughter, right? This lady, this girl shall be prohibited for her biological father, and for all of the biological fathers sons, and for the biological fathers uncles. In other words, that girl or the boy doesn't matter, it will be considered for the purpose of marriage, like a real child like a legitimate child, not for the purpose of NASA of inheritance, you know, of patrilineal descent that no, they said, but for the purpose of marriage. Yes. And of course, there's one method that disagreed and with our utmost

00:19:38--> 00:20:00

respect for that great quote, I shoot you, Mom, even if we're a nursery I don't I lay but this issue, we have to respectfully simply delegate to the footnotes and leave it as something to know but never to act upon. No, you just don't do this. Your biological daughter is a daughter for the sake of marital purposes and you simply do not open this chapter or door and you leave this position as

00:20:00--> 00:20:39

a minority never acted upon the default position of the oma and Alhamdulillah. It is the vast majority position is that a child born outside of marriage shall be considered a biological child, for the purposes of marriage, for the purposes of what is allowed, it isn't allowed. And therefore, this young boy that is coming to your house, is how long for your daughters because your daughters are also the children of the same man who fathered this boy. So they are his half sisters, when it comes to when it comes to what marriage they are not his half sisters, when it comes to the legal rights and privileges when it comes to the last name. But they are those half sisters or I should

00:20:39--> 00:21:17

say step sisters, when it comes to the issue of marriage, and therefore there is no question there cannot be any marriage between your daughters. And between this boy, likewise, you as well become how long for this boy because he is you know, you're married to his father. And so there's no issue over there. I just want to point out, though, that this is the issue for marriage, quite a number of other men, including Mr. Kodama, they said that, yes, marriages how long, but still, hey, jobs should be observed. Because we don't want to respect the sanctity of marriage by extrapolating it to situations outside of marriage. And so what they're basically saying is that they don't want to

00:21:17--> 00:21:57

affirm a normal relationship, because it wasn't a normal union. Nonetheless, the point is that that's a technicality about whether or not the main issue is that this child is not allowed ever to marry your daughter's. And he should be told that you know, your daughters are the children of your, your your father, and he knows who his father is, as your daughter, your that your daughters are the children of his father, and he should he should know this, and he should view them as people that can never he can never marry. And this is the position of Islamic law as well. I want to conclude this by stating that you know, I understand sister that clearly this has irritated jr have every

00:21:57--> 00:22:34

right to be irritated. But I advise you to allow your husband some leeway in showing love and in showing care for this child. It's not his fault. The fact that your your husband is spending time with the child and spending money on it, I know that of course it will, you know, it will cause you some grief because you would rather that he spends on your children and whatnot. But put yourself in the shoes of the child as long as he's giving you your rights giving your children and his children his rights. If he gives some time and some money to this child that was born outside of marriage and inshallah it affects this child to grow up in somewhat of a stable environment. Be a productive

00:22:34--> 00:23:11

person, you know, be a good Muslim, you know, insha Allah, expect your reward from Allah subhanho wa Taala I know it's difficult and awkward. And yes, he should have told you but what has happened has happened and you've been good to others insha Allah they're going to be good back to Anisha Allah Allah azza wa jal will reward you and also I know the child is not yours. But once again, it's not the child's fault and for you to show as well some kindness and love and compassion. And again, just to bring the heart of the child close to you know, the family environment and whatnot. inshallah you will get your reward in this and in the end a lot so which knows best until next time, Giacomo mafia

00:23:11--> 00:23:13

saramonic murottal ye wabarakatuh

00:23:22--> 00:23:23

II

00:23:25--> 00:23:26

II

00:23:36--> 00:23:36

II can