SachiBat

I love the truth.

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@skpvtt5 @Alisha1yesmah Oh so being in love is Haram now? 😂 Dude, men and women are allowed to talk, as long as there is no obscenity involved and they are not in privacy. Since you disagree, I am challenging you to bring your evidence, that being in love, or talking before nikah is Haram.

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@shinchan1184 @Alisha1yesmah Bring your evidence. I am waiting.

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@skpvtt5 @Alisha1yesmah Since you are clearly a retard who doesnt understand plain English, I am gonna try one single time again. In Pakistan, being mutually in love, or being mutually committed to someone with no physical relationship, is also often called as a "relationship". Which is NOT Haram.

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@Ivyy_heree You Do owe him sex when he wants it, just as he owes it to you whenever you want it.

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@MuhammadFromGOD @DrAsifOfficial @Shuayb__ "with permission of their ahl" is specific to those "your right hand possesses", which refers to slave girls, not to free believing women.

[MrNintendo @Bee_Hamid]

I think you’re treating the Hanafi position as if Ab�� Ḥanīfah just ignored the hadith about the wali. That isn’t how they got there at all.

The starting point is legal capacity: the discussion is about a free, sane, adult woman, whether virgin or previously married. Al-Kāsānī explicitly describes the wali’s authority over her according to Abū Ḥanīfah as ولاية الندب والاستحباب - a guardianship of recommendation, not an absolute condition for the contract’s validity. He then says that if she contracts her own marriage, or appoints someone to do it, it is valid. If she marries someone who is not her kufʾ (suitable match), however, the awliyāʾ retain a right to object.

📚 al-Kāsānī, Badāʾiʿ al-Ṣanāʾiʿ, 2/247.

So how did they derive that?

First, Qurʾān 2:232 says:

فَلَا تَعْضُلُوهُنَّ أَنْ يَنْكِحْنَ أَزْوَاجَهُنَّ
“Do not prevent them from marrying their husbands.”
Al-Jaṣṣāṣ says one indication here is:

إضافة العقد إليها من غير شرط إذن الولي

“The contract is attributed to her without stipulating the wali’s permission.”

His point is: Allah attributes the act of nikāḥ to the woman herself and then forbids the wali from obstructing her. So the Hanafi asks: how does a prohibition on the wali preventing her prove that his permission is what creates the validity of the contract?

📚 al-Jaṣṣāṣ, Aḥkām al-Qurʾān, 2/100.

Then they notice this isn’t an isolated wording. In 2:230 Allah says حَتَّى تَنْكِحَ زَوْجًا غَيْرَهُ (“until she marries another husband”), and then فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِمَا أَنْ يَتَرَاجَعَا (“there is no blame on the two of them returning to each other”). In 2:234 Allah speaks about فِيمَا فَعَلْنَ فِي أَنْفُسِهِ��َّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ (“what they do concerning themselves in a recognised manner”).

Al-Jaṣṣāṣ’s argument is cumulative: the Qurʾān repeatedly attributes this marital action to the adult woman herself without wording the wali’s permission as a condition of validity.

📚 Aḥkām al-Qurʾān, 2/101.

Then comes the Sunnah. Al-Jaṣṣāṣ cites:

الأَيِّمُ أَحَقُّ بِنَفْسِهَا مِنْ وَلِيِّهَا
“The ayyim has more right over herself than her wali.”

and:
لَيْسَ لِلْوَلِيِّ مَعَ الثَّيِّبِ أَمْرٌ
“The wali has no authority alongside the previously married woman.”

He explicitly understands this as evidence limiting the wali’s ability to prevent her acting for herself.

📚 Aḥkām al-Qurʾān, 2/102.
He also records the report that ʿĀʾishah arranged the marriage of Ḥafṣah bint ʿAbd al-Raḥmān to al-Mundhir b. al-Zubayr while her father ʿAbd al-Raḥmān was absent, and cites this among the early evidence for the permissibility of a marriage occurring without the wali personally conducting the contract.

📚 Aḥkām al-Qurʾān, 2/101.

Now to the obvious objection:

لا نكاح إلا بولي
“There is no nikāḥ except with a wali.”

The Hanafis DID discuss it.

Al-Jaṣṣāṣ answers:

هذا عندنا نكاح بولي لأن المرأة ولي نفسها كما أن الرجل ولي نفسه
“According to us, this is [still] a marriage with a wali, because the woman is the wali of herself just as the man is the wali of himself.”

Meaning: once she is adult, sane and legally competent, she possesses wilāyah over herself. The disagreement is partly about what “wali” legally entails here, not about pretending the hadith doesn’t exist.

📚 Aḥkām al-Qurʾān, 2/103.

He separately discusses أيما امرأة نكحت بغير وليها فنكاحها باطل (“Any woman who marries without her wali, her marriage is invalid”), challenges that report’s transmission in the form before him, and refers the detailed hadith criticism to his Sharḥ al-Ṭaḥāwī. So again, they weren’t unaware of the opposing evidence. They assessed, interpreted and reconciled it according to Hanafi uṣūl.

📚 Aḥkām al-Qurʾān, 2/103.

And this is the part that usually gets lost online: Hanafis are NOT saying the wali is pointless.

Abū Ḥanīfah still gives the awliyāʾ a legally recognised interest where she marries a non-kufʾ, and there is also discussion regarding mahr al-mithl. Al-Kāsānī explicitly says the guardians have حق الاعتراض - “the right of objection” - where she marries an unsuitable match.

📚 Badāʾiʿ al-Ṣanāʾiʿ, 2/247.

So the Hanafi argument is basically:

Adult + sane = full legal capacity → the Qurʾān repeatedly attributes marriage to the woman herself → the Sunnah says she has a stronger right over herself → early reports were understood to support that autonomy → texts apparently requiring a wali are then interpreted/reconciled within that framework → while the wali still retains recognised rights concerning suitability and family interests.

You can disagree with that uṣūl and prefer the Shāfiʿī/Hanbali reading. That’s a legitimate fiqh disagreement. But saying the Hanafis simply ignored “لا نكاح إلا بولي” or invented a loophole is just not an accurate representation of how the madhhab actually derived the ruling.

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@ZouhairsMurid So let me ask you this. Has Islam entered in a house where the only introduction to it was it was the religion terrorists like ISIS who do nothing but killing and raping? Would you consider it inexcusable if someone disbelieved in that "Islam"?

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@ZouhairsMurid When you say a majority of todays non-muslims will be in the fire, you ARE making a claim that for most of them, their disbelief is inexcusable in the sight of Allah. You are making a claim about Allah that you have no authority to make.

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@linkitinswa @YousufS_17 @YasirAlHanafi Excellent, what is the rule for transferring the Wilaya to anyone other than her father?

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@CrabstickFusion @YasirAlHanafi So you agree that divorced or widowed women don't need their wali's permission??

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@DauErgo13326 @CrabstickFusion @YasirAlHanafi Why don't you two settle who it is talking to first 😂😂😂 bro it's a general commandment for all Muslims. No one can a stop a woman from lawful marriage.

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@DauErgo13326 @CrabstickFusion @YasirAlHanafi Even there the Hadith doesn't say anything about getting the father's permission. It only establishes that the girls permission is mandatory. Also, the evidence for requiring the permission of women does not rest on this Hadith btw. It is clear from the Quran and Sunnah already.

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@ZouhairsMurid How about, you know, we let Allah make that judgement and focus on our own Akhira for once?

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@CrabstickFusion @YasirAlHanafi I can't believe I am having to point this out, divorced women can marry anyone, not just their former husbands. The Quran does not say "remarry" or "former husbands". It says "marry" and "husbands" which is general and applies to any man she wants to marry.

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@IbneKhan01 @namelessfard @triplefigurego1 The original position is based on what they thought the actual teaching of the Prophet was. Halal and Haram do not change with time. At most what one can say is that something should be discouraged, something is disliked, Makruh.

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@oma65045 @YasirAlHanafi

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@DnzGhost619 @YasirAlHanafi Welcome to the Takfir brigade😂😂😂

[SachiBat @pindiboy111]

@IbneKhan01 @namelessfard @triplefigurego1 Sorry thats not what I have read. The wali has to petition the Qadi and show that it was done outside if kufuw and get it invalidated. Kufuw is determined, its not something written on a persons face bro.