Bukhari

Hadith Commentary:
Imam Shafi'i rahimahullah has issued a fatwa based on this very hadith that if any property of the oppressor is found, the oppressed may take from it an amount equivalent to what is owed to him. The later Hanafi scholars have also given the same fatwa.
(Tafheem al-Bukhari, vol. 9, p. 124)

Hadith Commentary:
(1)
Imam Bukhari rahimahullah holds the position that whatever wealth of the oppressor reaches the oppressed, the latter may take from it according to his rightful due. As is his habit, he has also mentioned the statement of Imam Ibn Sirin rahimahullah in preference of his own school of thought. Our inclination is also the same: when it is not possible for someone to obtain his right through a judge (qadi), and in case of denial, the rightful owner does not have any witnesses, then he may take his right by any means. Accordingly, the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam permitted Hind radi Allahu anha to take from Abu Sufyan’s radi Allahu anhu wealth for the children’s expenses in a manner that is customary and reasonable.

(2)
Being in accordance with custom does not relate to precise measurement, but rather, if a sensible person considers it to be an appropriate amount, then that should be taken. It will be according to what is customary (ma‘ruf). Extravagance cannot be permitted under this pretext.

Hadith Commentary:
From this hadith, Imam Bukhari deduced that the expenses of the children are obligatory upon the father; otherwise, the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) would have instructed Hindah to provide half of the expenses herself and take the other half from the wealth of Abu Sufyan. However, he did not say this.

Hadith Commentary:
According to this hadith, the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said to Hind (radi Allahu anha):
If a husband does not provide the full expenses for his children, then it is permissible to take from his wealth, without informing him, an amount that is customary in society—that is, sufficient for subsistence.
If the expenses had been obligatory upon Hind (radi Allahu anha), the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) would have instructed her to spend from her own wealth and not to take anything from her husband’s property. However, he did not give any such instruction, which clearly means that the expenses for the child are not the responsibility of the mother, but rather the father, and after him, his heirs are responsible.

Hadith Commentary:
You gave the verdict in the absence of Abu Sufyan; this is in accordance with the chapter.
Hind bint Utbah, the wife of Abu Sufyan and the mother of Muawiyah radi Allahu anhu, passed away during the caliphate of Umar al-Faruq.
Radi Allahu anha.

Hadith Commentary:
➊
It is permissible to pass judgment in the absence of a person, provided that the judgment pertains to the rights of people (huquq al-‘ibad). For example, if someone committed theft and then disappeared, but the crime is proven through evidence, indications, and witnesses, then in such circumstances, a unilateral decision can be made regarding the property. However, a decision to cut off his hand cannot be made in his absence, because that pertains to the rights of Allah (huquq Allah).

➋
Although Abu Sufyan radi Allahu anhu was present in Makkah at that time, when Hind bint ‘Utbah radi Allahu anha made a complaint regarding him, he was not present in that gathering. The Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam gave a ruling in his absence because the wife’s claim was based on truth.
And Allah knows best.

Hadith Commentary:
You had personal knowledge regarding this matter, and based on this certainty, you issued this ruling.

Hadith Commentary:
1.
Hind bint Utbah radi Allahu anha embraced Islam on the occasion of the conquest of Makkah, and she expressed her emotions in this passionate manner without concealing anything. The Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was also aware regarding Abu Sufyan radi Allahu anhu, because prior to this incident, his daughter Umm Habibah radi Allahu anha had already entered into the marriage of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam. The Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, considering the statement of Hind radi Allahu anha to be based on reality, did not issue a legal verdict (fatwa) on the basis of his personal knowledge, but rather decreed that you may take as much wealth in the customary manner as is sufficient for you and your children.

2.
From this incident, it is understood that a judge (qadi) may issue a verdict based on his personal knowledge in the presence of the following conditions, and the matter under discussion should pertain not to the rights of Allah (huquq Allah) but to the rights of the servants (huquq al-‘ibad):
➊ Socially, the matter should be well-known among the people.
➋ The judge, due to his personal character, should be of righteous conduct and pure.
➌ Before issuing such a verdict, he should not have been punished or accused in any kind of crime.
➍ There should be no fear of suspicion or ill-thinking arising.
In the presence of these conditions, the judge may issue a verdict solely on the basis of his personal knowledge.
And Allah knows best.

Hadith Commentary:
It is permissible for the wife of a miserly man to take, in a lawful manner and without his permission, from his wealth what is sufficient for herself and her children.

This is the same Hind bint Utbah radi Allahu anha, regarding whom further details are as follows:

When Hind’s father Utbah, her uncle Shaybah, and her brother Walid were killed on the Day of Badr, it was very hard on her. Then, on the Day of Uhud, when Hamzah radi Allahu anhu was killed, she rejoiced at this. She went to his abdomen, cut it open, took out his liver, chewed it, and then spat it out. Then, on the Day of the Conquest (of Makkah), when Abu Sufyan entered Makkah as a Muslim—after the Prophet’s sallallahu alayhi wa sallam cavalry had captured him that night and al-Abbas had granted him protection—Hind became angry at his acceptance of Islam and grabbed his beard. Later, after the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam had settled in Makkah, she came, accepted Islam, and pledged allegiance.

It has already been mentioned at the end of the chapter on Merits (Manaqib) that she said to him: “O Messenger of Allah! There was no household on the face of the earth more beloved to me to be humiliated than your household, but today, due to Islam, there is no household on the face of the earth more beloved to me to be honored than your household.” He (the Prophet) also said: “By Him in Whose hand is my soul...” (Fath) (Para: 22, p. 238)

This happened because, in the Battle of Badr, when Hind’s father Utbah, her uncle Shaybah, and her brother Walid were killed, it weighed heavily upon her, and out of this anger, she enticed Wahshi to kill Hamzah radi Allahu anhu.

She was very pleased by this, and she cut open the abdomen of Hamzah radi Allahu anhu, took out his liver, chewed it, and then spat it out.

When the Day of the Conquest of Makkah came and Abu Sufyan radi Allahu anhu entered Makkah as a Muslim—because the Muslim army had captured him—al-Abbas radi Allahu anhu granted him protection. Hind became very angry at his acceptance of Islam and grabbed his beard. When the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam had established permanent control over Makkah, Hind came to the court of the Messenger, accepted Islam, and said: “O Messenger of Allah! There was no household in the world more despicable in my eyes than your household, but today, due to Islam, there is no household more honorable in my eyes than your household.”

The Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam replied: “By Him in Whose hand is my soul, the same is true for me.”

From this, the noble character of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam can be understood: how much room he made in his heart even for such an enemy woman when she accepted Islam. He would forget all her hostile actions and grant her the honor of being admitted to his noble court.

Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam a thousand times, and as many times as there are particles, and upon his family and all his companions. Ameen.

Hadith Commentary:
(1)
Hind bint Utbah radi Allahu anha pledged allegiance to the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam. When she reached the clause of the agreement that “you will not steal,” she said: “I used to steal from Abu Sufyan’s wealth.” At that moment, Abu Sufyan radi Allahu anhu spoke up: “Whatever theft has occurred previously is forgiven for you.” When she came again a second time, Abu Sufyan radi Allahu anhu was not with her. At that time, she said: “My husband is extremely miserly.”

(2)
From this hadith, it is understood that it is permissible (halal) for the wife of a miserly husband to lawfully take from his wealth without his permission as much as is necessary to fulfill her and her children’s needs. (Fath al-Bari: 9/632) And Allah knows best.

Hadith Commentary:
That is, it should not be excessive so that the charge of dishonesty cannot be established.

Hadith Commentary:
(1)
In one narration, it is stated that you may take from his wealth in a customary manner that which suffices you and your children.
(Sahih al-Bukhari, al-Buyu', Hadith: 2211) (2)
From this hadith, it is understood that if the husband is not present at home and has not arranged for the household expenses, then it is permissible to take from his wealth an amount sufficient for the household expenses.
(3)
The following rulings are established from this hadith:
➊ The amount of the wife's maintenance is not fixed, because the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said: "Take what suffices you."
➋ The wife's maintenance is of the same category as the children's maintenance, meaning both will be provided in a customary manner.
➌ The father alone is responsible for the expenses of the children.
➍ If a woman is able to take sufficient maintenance from her husband's wealth, then she does not have the right to annul the marriage (fasakh nikah).
➎ In those obligations for which no fixed limit is prescribed, custom (‘urf) will be taken into consideration.
➏ If the husband or father does not fulfill their obligations, then they may be collected from them by any means.

Hadith Commentary:
Hind bint Utbah, the wife of Abu Sufyan and the mother of Muawiyah (radi Allahu anhum), is referred to here.
This hadith also sheds light on the rights of wives: if a husband does not provide maintenance (nafaqah) or acts with miserliness, then the wife may adopt any lawful means to obtain it from him.
However, it is necessary to keep sincerity of intention in view, and if the objective is merely mischief or to cause discord in the household, then this concession is no longer applicable.

Benefits and Issues:
➊
The expenses of the wife and children are the responsibility of the husband.
And it is obligatory upon him
to provide for them according to customary practice.

➋
If, for a beneficial purpose, spouses or friends mention some faults of each other, it is permissible.

➌
At times, a judge (qadi) may issue a verdict based on his personal knowledge without requiring witnesses.

➍
If a person is not fulfilling someone’s rightful due, it is permissible
to take from his entrusted property an amount equal to one’s right.
(See also Khatabi and Hadith 3534)

(1) The purpose of the chapter heading is that if a judge knows about a person’s character and a legal issue arises concerning him, then a verdict can be given against him even in his absence, just as the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) did—not summoning Abu Sufyan (radi Allahu anhu) nor asking him anything, because you (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) already knew about him.

(2) Backbiting someone is a major sin; however, there are certain situations where it is legally permissible. Imam Nawawi (rahimahullah) has enumerated six such cases. He states: Due to a legal necessity, it is permissible to backbite a living or deceased person when there is no alternative: If there is a need for someone’s help or assistance to change or remove an evil, or if the intention is to correct a wrongdoer, then it is permissible to clarify the matter before someone who has the power and authority to remove the evil. This is also permissible at such a time. To seek a fatwa from a mufti or scholar, it is permissible to inform him of the actual situation, for example, saying, “So-and-so has wronged me, he has deprived me of my right,” etc. This is not a form of forbidden backbiting but is permissible. To inform others of an oppressor’s wrongdoing and evil in order to protect other Muslims from his harm, or to inform the people of Islam out of sincere advice that so-and-so has this baseness and can commit such vile acts, so you need to be cautious and alert regarding him—this is also permissible. Criticism of hadith narrators, as well as advising those seeking marriage ties about the weaknesses and shortcomings of the prospective family, also falls under this category. This is, by consensus, permissible and lawful, and at times of necessity, obligatory. The fifth situation where backbiting is legally permissible is when a person openly commits immorality or is a confirmed innovator, or openly drinks alcohol or gambles, etc.—then it is permissible to inform others of these evil deeds so that they can protect themselves from him. The sixth situation is when a person is known by a nickname or title that apparently constitutes backbiting, such as “A‘raj” (the lame), “A‘mash” (the weak-sighted, i.e., squint-eyed), “A‘ma” (the blind), “Ahwal” (the cross-eyed), etc.—then calling him by this, provided it is not with the intention of belittlement, is permissible; otherwise, it is forbidden. And Allah knows best.

(3) For a judge or ruler, it is permissible to listen to the backbiting of one party about the other in order to make a correct judgment between disputing parties, as has been mentioned.

(4) From this blessed hadith, it is also established that it is permissible for a man to hear the voice of a non-mahram and unrelated woman in case of necessity.

(5) From this blessed hadith, it is also understood that the maintenance of the wife and children is the responsibility of the husband and father. Most scholars hold that only as much is obligatory as is required for the legitimate needs of the wife and children. It is also understood that when the Shariah has not specified the details of matters, then custom (‘urf) should be considered.

(6) In an appropriate manner—that is, according to your social status, and this status keeps changing. In a wealthy household, the nature of expenses is different, and in a poor household, it is different.

Commentary:
Benefits and Issues:

➊
Fulfilling the lawful needs of the wife and children is the husband's obligation.

➋
When asking about a legal issue, if someone's fault is mentioned in order to clarify the actual situation, this is not considered backbiting, therefore it is permissible.

➌
For fulfilling lawful needs, the wife's use of the husband's wealth without his permission is permissible.

➍
The determination of "appropriate limit" can be made by considering the circumstances, environment, the husband's financial condition, and the nature of the need.

Takhrij:
«أخرجه البخاري، النفقات، باب إذا لم ينفق الرجل فللمرأة أن تأخذ بغير علمه...، حديث:5364، ومسلم، الأقضية، باب قضية هند، حديث"1714.»©Explanation:
➊ From this hadith, it is understood that if the husband, despite having the means, does not fully provide for the expenses, then the wife may, without informing him, take from his wealth as much as is necessary to fulfill her legitimate needs.
This is why one may obtain one's legitimate right by whatever means it can be acquired.
And complaining for the purpose of remedying injustice does not fall under the category of backbiting (ghibah).
➋ The wife is authorized to take her complaint against her husband to the court in order to obtain her rights.
This complaint is also not considered backbiting; if it were included in the definition of backbiting, the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) would have prohibited Hind from doing so.
Clarification: «حضرت ہند بنت عتبہ بن ربیعہ بن عبد شمس رضی اللہ عنہا » She accepted Islam after her husband Abu Sufyan entered the fold of Islam at the time of the Conquest of Makkah.
Her father Utbah, uncle Shaybah, and brother Walid were killed on the day of the Battle of Badr.
This incident was very distressing for her nature; thus, when Hamzah (radi Allahu anhu) was martyred, she cut open his stomach, took out his liver, chewed it, and then spat it out.
She passed away in Muharram, 14 AH.
There are other opinions regarding the year of her death as well.
«حضرت ابوسفیان رضی اللہ عنہ » Sakhr ibn Harb ibn Umayyah ibn Abd Shams.
He used to be the standard-bearer, leader, and commander of the disbelievers in their confrontations with the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam).
He accepted Islam at the time of the Conquest of Makkah, when Abbas (radi Allahu anhu) succeeded in bringing him to the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) under his protection and safety.
This incident occurred before the entry into Makkah.
His Islam was very excellent and commendable.
He passed away in 32 AH during the caliphate of Uthman (radi Allahu anhu).

Benefit:
It is established from this hadith that a wife may present a complaint about her husband to the ruler of the time, and this does not constitute backbiting (ghibah). It is also understood that the maintenance and financial support (nafaqah) of the wife and children is the responsibility of the husband. If he is negligent in this matter or displays miserliness, then the wife may, in a reasonable manner, take something for herself and her children from her husband's wealth without his permission. This is applicable when the husband possesses wealth; however, if he is poor, then the wife should also be considerate of his situation.