Calm

Iftaar is a noun. Aftara is the verb. One of the easiest ways for you to know if a word is a verb or not, it is by asking yourself can this word be used with tanween, if yes then it is not a verb. Example: Huwa aftara(verb) iftarun(noun/notice the tanween) mushbi3.

I did not say gheebah are lies, read all my previous posts in this thread. I said having a strict law like this reduces the amount of lies, since even the truth when negative is not allowed to be spread.

Au contraire, I think the strictness of gheebah is very fair because like this Islam always gives the right of the accused person to defend themselves against whatever is been talked about them, it reduces significantly the amount of lies when reporting a situation because both parties are present and it also teaches us not to give advice when we hear a one sided story.

There is a difference between a sin committed secretly that harms the person himself and the sin that is a direct crime towards both God's laws and a person's right, such as the rapist example you mentioned. So say for a Zaani you cannot tell others that he's a Zaani unless you have four witnesses and the only time even with your witnesses you're allowed to tell is when at the Shar'i jury while observing the rest of the shar3s' laws . To speak of a crime to a jury to have justice take your right is different than going around discussing it with people. Yes, it is gheebah. You either mention the story with unknown variables (no names or descriptions/hint that lead to recognizing the person you're speaking about) to people who don't know the person and so you can seek the advice you want. OR, have the person present and wise people (who you seem to seek advice from) and explain what happened. As a wajib obligation you're not allowed., its gheebah. Tell them you're not discussing it not because you're the one who was wrong but because you dont want to fall in gheebah... if they want to know more then they'd have to ask you when the person is present so both can present their side of the story while none of it is gheebah.

^Still wash the elbow even if water splashed on it from when you were washing the head and neck..because what if the water slashed there while you were washing your head but not your neck yet, if you leave the elbow not washed afterwards this means you messed the tartibi and did head then elbow (when splashed and not washed when it was it's turn), then neck and body...

I reported to you the fiqhi ruling. It is not my own definition. And the tyrants we've seen commit they're sins proudly and publically, you don't need to use gheebah to let people aware of their tughyaan.

You're mistaken, whether the person is aware of the negative things in them or not and you speak negative about them while they're absent it's gheebah. Look into the story of how the ayah of gheebah was revealed. Aisha, just signaled in with her hand that the woman who left the room was short, and the law againbst gheebah was revealed. Do short people don;t know their height? and people are not aware of it? She left the room and the prophet saw her while she was in the room, yet that hand signal meaning she's short was considered gheebah. The only time it's negative and not a gheebah is when the talk is about a publically committed sin. Woman X does not wear hijab all the time in public. It;'s a sin, it's not a compliment, it's mentioning a sin this woman X does, however it is done by her in public, so mentioning it even if she is not present is not gheebah.

If you're saying anything negative (or even something neutral but you know that person wouldn't like this being said about them)about a Muslim during their absence it is gheebah, ya3ni haraam even if it's true. If you want to discuss it with others, have the person present and speak all you want (while respecting the other fiqhi laws), but at least it wont be gheebah. The big problem with gheebah as opposed to many other sins, is that you're committing two offenses at once, one towards God's laws and one towards the person so istighfaar by itself is not sufficient.

^I'm not sure I understand your question. Are you asking about the nafs al-lawammah?

Yes of course. It is because it's true it's gheebah, if it's not true it would be tuhmah , both of which are strictly forbidden in Islam.

Yes-same in any wajib ghussl. Yes. By clean you mean tahir-ing? If yes, it's fine if it does. Tartibi just means that you start with the head and neck then the rest (not the other way around)**, even if while washing the head and neck the water reaches elsewhere. No, you don't need new water. After making sure it washed the head and neck completely, then do the right and left, even if while doing each side water splashes on the other side it does not matter. Luckily it's not the second.. complication removed. **Messing up the tartibi and need to redo is when for example: you wash head and neck then body, then once you're done you realize there was a drop of say paint or band-aid on your forehead, you can't just at the end wash that off and be done because like this you would have done the body properly then the head, this voids tartibi.

The hadith does not say she's not allowed to spend her own money in anything without permission, the part where it says from her own money it's talking only in regards to nithr/vow*. The previous part of sadaqa etc it's saying from which is with her husband, so from his money she is not allowed to give sadaqa without his permission, from her money the only thing she's not allowed to give without his permission is nithr. I understand the hadith seems confusing because of the wording and punctuation..I hope you can make sense from what I'm saying. The translation is not exact either.I added colors to the Arabic version hoping it would make the meaning clearer. According to Maraji' fatawa, she is allowed to do whatever she wants with her money without the need to take her husband permission for it. The fatawa also say a married woman cannot make any nithr without her husbands permission. It seems saying the same as the quoted hadith. The Malihaa (her money) word is only in regards to nithr (vow) it is not condition for the rest of the words before nithr , the other words (actions) sadaqa tadbeer etc are from which is from her husbands. why not nithr*: a wife cannot make a vow in money without her husbands permission because he's the one who is supposed to give her money she 'need' so if she is to add a wajib/vow to the list of what are her usual expenses are, this implies that he is responsible to pay this money and hence she cannot make something wajib (therefore religiously should get out of his money) of her money without his permission, her money is not supposed to be for what is wajib on him..