Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Mothers Milk (of his own wife)

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Basic Members

Salaam

I am new to shia chat so apologies in advance.

My sister in law just had a baby and our mother in law told her not to let her husband near her breast otherwise he will becomes their new borns brother - is this true? Does that mean your nikkah breaks if your hudband accidentally has your milk?

Can someone please point me in the right direction?

Link to post
Share on other sites
simpleton said:
Salaam

I am new to shia chat so apologies in advance.

My sister in law just had a baby and our mother in law told her not to let her husband near her breast otherwise he will becomes their new borns brother - is this true? Does that mean your nikkah breaks if your hudband accidentally has your milk?

Can someone please point me in the right direction?

Salaam,

No, even if he (considering he is an adult) drank her milk it would not have any effect in terms of establish a relation through breast-feeding at this stage. That only applies to children who have not completed 2 years of age (amongst other conditions).

Quote

(Excerpt from Rules Regarding Suckling a Child)

(viii) That the child should not have completed two years of his age, and, if it is suckled after it has completed two years of its age, it does not become Mahram of anyone. In fact, if, for example, it sucks milk eight times before completing its two years, and seven times after completing its two years, it does not become Mahram of anyone. But, if milk continues from the breast for more than two years since a woman gave birth to her child, and she suckles the child continuously, that child will become Mahram of those who have been mentioned above.

http://www.al-islam.org/laws/marriage2.html#2483

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
My sister in law just had a baby and our mother in law told her not to let her husband near her breast otherwise he will becomes their new borns brother - is this true? Does that mean your nikkah breaks if your hudband accidentally has your milk?

Your mother-in-law is badly mistaken. According to most Shi'a marja's, it is permissible for the husband to consume his wife's breast milk. The only notable exception that I am aware of is Ayatullah Sistani, who states that it is impermissible on the basis of obligatory precaution. But even then it does not nullify the nikah, as your mother-in-law seems to think. Unless you guys are Sunni's, as I think they have some rulings such as the one your mother-in-law mentioned.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Wassalam,

Your mother-in-law is badly mistaken. According to most Shi'a marja's, it is permissible for the husband to consume his wife's breast milk. The only notable exception that I am aware of is Ayatullah Sistani, who states that it is impermissible on the basis of obligatory precaution. But even then it does not nullify the nikah, as your mother-in-law seems to think. Unless you guys are Sunni's, as I think they have some rulings such as the one your mother-in-law mentioned.

Heard the same....

Fee Amaanillah.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sistani rules that

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

Based on the obligatory precaution one must refrain from drinking that

Wassalamu Alaykum

_____

The question asked was quite explicit. Since there are also minors here, I am not posting the question. It encompassed everything envisaged in the original post.

Edited by Rawshni
Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel uncomfortable reading all that, but it is a religious matter so gotta live with it! Now, the Ayat Ullah Sistani rulings point out the precaution and you may want to realize mother's breast milk is for the BABY not the hubby :squeez: However, the question is whether if by chance, husband swallows wife's breast milk, does it cause any problem in their relationship?......Answere is NO. In order to establish a Mahram relationship, a child should suckle and the details have been posted many times!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

^

The Ayatullah maintains it is an obligatory precaution. Translated into acts, it would mean the husband should consciously refrain from doing anything due to which there may be a possibility of the wife's milk going into his mouth. That is what I have understood from the ruling.

Link to post
Share on other sites
^

The Ayatullah maintains it is an obligatory precaution. Translated into acts, it would mean the husband should consciously refrain from doing anything due to which there may be a possibility of the wife's milk going into his mouth. That is what I have understood from the ruling.

I don't wish to go into spicy details, but it is a possibility during intimacy and hence the explanation. I don't think except few weirdo, who would like to be breast fed by their wives :dry: The point is as I mentioned before if it happens doesn't make husband and wife, mother and son :!!!:

Wala hola Wala Quwata Illah Billah!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Khamenei rules that:

Salamun `alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu.

The answer is as follows: Bismihi Ta`alIt does not cancel the nikaah and she does not become his mother by breastfeeding. Furthermore, drinking wife’s milk is no problem.

With prayers for your success,wassalam.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sis you really have a way with words that leave me thinking for a while before I can understand it... lol

and I don't mean it in a bad way -_-

I know. Itry to be precise in a world where language is mostly used im;recisely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
What i dont understand is why there is always 2 opposing answers giving by Marjas... It happens on soo many different topics?!! Why?!

AFAIK, It has never happened that one marja says halal and the other haraam. Here too, the ruling by Ayatullah Khamenai is allowed and Ayatullah Sistani says Obligatory Precaution, {that is it is as good as wajib(mind you, not wajib) to abstain}, and Sistani ruling also gives you the permission to refer to another marja, so his ruling is not binding. I wouldn't call it opposite. Sistani ruling, does not put you into sin, if you drink, nor does Khamenei ruling.

Opposite would be when Sistani would say haraam, and Khamenei would say halal.

Difference in verdict is because, both have referred to different means of research, and have concluded on the basis of evidence that they have found.

Link to post
Share on other sites
^ Language is a poor vehicle for communication, anyways. ;)

Whatever, but still the best avaialable to man

What i dont understand is why there is always 2 opposing answers giving by Marjas... It happens on soo many different topics?!! Why?!

AFAIK, It has never happened that one marja says halal and the other haraam. Here too, the ruling by Ayatullah Khamenai is allowed and Ayatullah Sistani says Obligatory Precaution, {that is it is as good as wajib(mind you, not wajib) to abstain}, and Sistani ruling also gives you the permission to refer to another marja, so his ruling is not binding. I wouldn't call it opposite. Sistani ruling, does not put you into sin, if you drink, nor does Khamenei ruling.

Opposite would be when Sistani would say haraam, and Khamenei would say halal.

Difference in verdict is because, both have referred to different means of research, and have concluded on the basis of evidence that they have found.

Obligatory Precaution comes into play where the ruling mujtahid falls short of ennunciating the hillat or hurmat of something. It is the strongest possible recommendation for the carrying out or abstaining [as in the case of this topic] from something.

Syed Sistani has taken this position.

Syed Khamenie's ruling is very clear. Obviously, he does not say "yeah go ahead. Do it" but he has clearly maintained that in his view, it is of no consequence if it happens.

So, in impoer, the directions are opposite.

Wallahu 'aalam

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Banned

guys i cant believe no one has clicked on that maybe...JUST MAYBE the OP is having a laugh. since it was a sunni/ wahabbi fatwa that said if a man wanted to work with a na marham he had to be "breast fed" by her, technically making her like his mother.

the OPs post (i believe) was a reference to that, if a husband...ahem.....his wife.

what next? people asking if the man wearing a nappy and being burped is halal?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Obligatory Precaution comes into play where the ruling mujtahid falls short of ennunciating the hillat or hurmat of something. It is the strongest possible recommendation for the carrying out or abstaining [as in the case of this topic] from something.

Syed Sistani has taken this position.

Syed Khamenie's ruling is very clear. Obviously, he does not say "yeah go ahead. Do it" but he has clearly maintained that in his view, it is of no consequence if it happens.

So, in impoer, the directions are opposite.

Wallahu 'aalam

The directions are opposite, but, they do not create the problem of halal and haraam at the same time, thats the point I wanted to put forward. The possibility of halal has been factored in by both the Marjas.

Maybe, I was not able to comminicate it that well.

Edited by Hopeful
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Opposite would be when Sistani would say haraam, and Khamenei would say halal.

hhmm true...

well on another issue which i have come across in the past where this has happened....

In the matter of playing Chess... Sistani has said its totally forbidden and haram. BUT Khamenei has said it is fine to play if you dont gamble?!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
The directions are opposite, but, they do not create the problem of halal and haraam at the same time, thats the point I wanted to put forward. The possibility of halal has been factored in by both the Marjas.

Maybe, I was not able to comminicate it that well.

I would say the Sistani ruling, in the minimum, tilts towards prohibition.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
hhmm true...

well on another issue which i have come across in the past where this has happened....

In the matter of playing Chess... Sistani has said its totally forbidden and haram. BUT Khamenei has said it is fine to play if you dont gamble?!!

Now, this is something which I would call absolutely opposite verdicts. Do you have any references??

I would say the Sistani ruling, in the minimum, tilts towards prohibition.

I do not deny the tilt, but I do not ignore the very little space which he has left to move towards the other direction. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Now, this is something which I would call absolutely opposite verdicts. Do you have any references??

Chess

Q: What is the ruling on playing chess with/without placing a bet?

A: From the mukallaf’s perspective, should it not now be considered among the instruments of gambling, there is no objection to playing it provided that no betting is involved.

FAQ's at Khamenies Site

http://www.leader.ir/langs/en/index.php?p=...g+Chess&t=s

Click FAQ, then click Gambling Instruments

Can't find the Sistani ruling

I do not deny the tilt, but I do not ignore the very little space which he has left to move towards the other direction. :)

Obligatory precuation in the case of the Sistani ruling would be a very strong recommendation to abstain from the act.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
I know this is kind of odd...but....What if a nursing mom was in an exceptional situation - say trapped in a building after an earthquake - would she be able to use her milk to nourish others - perhaps someone who was injured or in need?

Post of the century!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...