My final entry...

Perhaps.. this is my final entry.. before I report to camp to serve my NS..

I'll be MIA (missing in action) for a while..

Misyaar Marriage: definition and rulings

This issue was quite a hot topic here in the Malay newspaper about a year ago.. but it is sad to see 2 ustazs who each wrote an article on it, both of them permitting it.. I'm not saying that i'm against their views on the matter, but i was disappointed by the one-sided argument that they presented in their article..

Whereas readers deserve to know that the permissibility of Misyaar is an issue of khilaaf among the scholars, and thus i present an article from: http://www.islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=82390&ln=eng

Question:
Misyaar marriage was mentioned on your website. What is this marriage? Is it halaal or haraam?.

Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

Misyaar marriage is where a man does a shar’i marriage contract with a woman, meeting the conditions of marriage, but the woman gives up some of her rights such as accommodation, maintenance or the husband’s staying overnight with her.

The reasons that have led to the emergence of this kind of marriage are many, such as:

1.

Increase in the number of single women who are unable to get married, because young men are put off marriage due to the high cost of dowries and the costs of marriage, or because there is a high divorce rate. In such circumstances, some women will agree to be a second or third wife and to give up some of their rights.

2.

Some women need to stay in their family home, either because they are the only care-givers for family members, or because the woman has a handicap and her family do not want the husband to be burdened with something he cannot bear, and he stays in touch with her without having to put too great a burden on himself, or because she has children and cannot move with them to her husband’s house, and other reasons.

3.

Some married men want to keep some women chaste because they need that, or because they need variety and halaal pleasure, without that affecting the first wife and her children.

4.

In some cases a husband may want to conceal his second marriage from his first wife, for fear of the consequences that may result and affect their relationship.

5.

The man travels often to a certain place and stays there for lengthy periods. Undoubtedly staying there with a wife is safer for him than not doing so.

These are the most prominent reasons for the emergence of this kind of marriage.

Secondly:

The scholars differed concerning the ruling on this type of marriage, and there are several opinions, ranging from the view that it is permissible, to the view that it is permitted but makrooh, or that it is not allowed. Here we should point out several things.

1.

None of the scholars have said that it is invalid or is not correct; rather they disallowed it because of the consequences that adversely affect the woman, as it is demeaning to her, and that affects the society as this marriage contract is taken advantage of by bad people, because a woman could claim that a boyfriend is a husband. It also affects the children whose upbringing will be affected by their father’s absence.

2.

Some of those who said that it was permissible have retracted that view. Among the most prominent scholars who said that it was permissible were Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz and Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez Aal al-Shaykh; and among the most prominent scholars who said that it was permissible and then retracted it was Shaykh al-‘Uthaymeen; among the most prominent scholars who said that it is not allowed at all was Shaykh al-Albaani.

3.

Those who said that it is permissible did not say that a time limit should be set as in the case of mut’ah. And they did not say that it is permissible without a wali (guardian), because marriage without a wali is invalid. And they did not say that the marriage contract may be done without witnesses or without being announced, rather it is essential to do one of the two.

Thirdly:

Opinion of the scholars concerning this type of marriage:

1.

Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked about Misyaar marriage; this kind of marriage is where the man marries a second, third or fourth wife, and the wife is in a situation that compels her to stay with her parents or one of them in her own house, and the husband goes to her at various times depending on the circumstances of both. What is the Islamic ruling on this type of marriage?

He replied:

There is nothing wrong with that if the marriage contract fulfils all the conditions set out by sharee’ah, which is the presence of the wali and the consent of both partners, and the presence of two witnesses of good character to the drawing up of the contract, and both partners being free of any impediments, because of the general meaning of the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “The conditions that are most deserving of being fulfilled are those by means of which intimacy becomes permissible for you” and “The Muslims are bound by their conditions.” If the partners agree that the woman will stay with her family or that her share of the husband’s time will be during the day and not during the night, or on certain days or certain nights, there is nothing wrong with that, so long as the marriage is announced and not hidden. End quote.

Fataawa ‘Ulama’ al-Balad al-Haraam (p. 450, 451) and Jareedah al-Jazeerah issue no. 8768, Monday 18 Jumaada al-Oola 1417 AH.

However, some students of the Shaykh said that he later retracted the view that it is permissible, but we could not find anything in writing to prove that.

2.

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez Aal al-Shaykh (may Allaah preserve him) was asked:

There is a lot of talk about misyaar marriage being haraam or halaal. We would like a definitive statement about this matter from you, with a description of its conditions and obligations, if it is permissible.

He replied:

The conditions of marriage are that the two partners should be identified and give their consent, and there should be a wali (guardian) and two witnesses. If the conditions are met and the marriage is announced, and they do not agree to conceal it, either the husband, the wife or their guardians, and he offered a waleemah or wedding feast, then this marriage is valid, and you can call it whatever you want after that. End quote.

Jareedah al-Jazeerah, Friday 15 Rabee’ al-Thaani 1422 AH, issue no. 10508.

3.

Shaykh al-Albaani was asked about Misyaar marriage and he disallowed it for two reasons:

(i)

That the purpose of marriage is repose as Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And among His Signs is this, that He created for you wives from among yourselves, that you may find repose in them, and He has put between you affection and mercy. Verily, in that are indeed signs for a people who reflect” [al-Room 30:21]. But this is not achieved in this kind of marriage.

(ii)

It may be decreed that the husband has children with this woman, but because he is far away from her and rarely comes to her, that will be negatively reflected in his children’s upbringing and attitude.

See: Ahkaam al-Ta’addud fi Daw’ al-Kitaab wa’l-Sunnah (p. 28, 29).

4.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) used to say that it was permissible, then he stopped saying that because of the negative effects, as it was poorly applied by some wrongdoers.

Finally, what we think is:

That if Misyaar marriage fulfils the conditions of a valid marriage, namely the proposal and acceptance, the consent of the wali and witnesses or announcement of the marriage, then it is a valid marriage contract, and it is good for some categories of men and women whose circumstances call for this type of marriage. But this may be taken advantage of by some whose religious commitment is weak, hence this permissibility should not be described as general in application in a fatwa, rather the situation of each couple should be examined, and if this kind of marriage is good for them then it should be permitted, otherwise they should not be allowed to do it. That is to prevent marriage for the sake of mere pleasure whilst losing the other benefits of marriage, and to prevent the marriage of two people whose marriage we may be certain is likely to fail and in which the wife will be neglected, such as one who will be away from his wife for many months, and will leave her on her own in an apartment, watching TV and visiting chat rooms and going on the internet. How can such a weak woman spend her time? This is different from one who lives with her family or children and has enough religious commitment, obedience, chastity and modesty to help her be patient during her husband’s absence.

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A

The green dome in Madeenah: its history and the ruling on its construction and on leaving it as it is

Question:
The green dome in Madeenah: its history and the ruling on its construction and on leaving it as it is.

Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

The history of the green dome

The dome over the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) dates back to the seventh century AH. It was built during the reign of Sultan Qalawoon, and at first it was the colour of wood, then it became white, then blue, then green, and it has remained green until the present.

Professor ‘Ali Haafiz (may Allaah preserve him) said:

There was no dome over the sacred chamber. There was in the roof of the mosque above the chamber a waist-high enclosure of brick to distinguish the location of the chamber from the rest of the mosque’s roof.

Sultaan Qalawoon al-Saalihi was the first one to build a dome over the chamber. He did that in 678 AH. It was square at the bottom and octagonal at the top, made of wood, and built on top of the pillars that surrounded the chamber. Planks of wood were nailed to it, over which plates of lead were placed, and the brick enclosure was replaced with one made of wood.

The dome was refurbished at the time of al-Naasir Hasan ibn Muhammad Qalawoon, then the leaden plates slipped, but they were fixed and refurbished at the time of al-Ashraf Sha’baan ibn Husayn ibn Muhammad in 765 AH. It fell into disrepair and was renovated at the time of Sultaan Qayit Bey in 881 AH.

The chamber and dome were burned in the fire that swept through the Prophet’s mosque in 886 AH. During the reign of Sultaan Qayit Bey the dome was rebuilt, in 887 AH, and strong pillars to support it were built in the floor of the mosque, and they were built of bricks to the correct height. After the dome had been built in the manner described above, cracks appeared in its upper part. When it proved impossible to refurbish it, the Sultaan Qayit Bey ordered that the upper part be demolished and rebuilt strongly using white plaster. So it was built solidly in 892 AH.

In 1253 AH, an order was issued by the Ottoman Sultan ‘Abd al-Hameed to paint the dome green. He was the first one to colour it green, and the colour has been renewed whenever necessary until the present.

It became known as the green dome after it was painted green. It was previously known as the white dome or the fragrant dome or the blue dome. End quote.

Fusool min Tareekh al-Madeenah al-Munawwarah by ‘Ali Haafiz (p. 127, 128).

Secondly:

Rulings thereon

The scholars, both in the past and in modern times, criticized the building of this dome and its being given a colour. All of that is because of what they know of sharee’ah closing many doors for fear of falling into shirk.

These scholars include the following:

1 – al-San’aani (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Ta-theer al-I’tiqaad:

If you say: A great dome has been built over the grave of the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), costing a great deal of money, I say: This is in fact great ignorance of the situation, because this dome was not built by him (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or by his Sahaabah or by those who followed them, or by those who followed the Taabi’een, or by the scholars and imams of the ummah. Rather this dome was built over his grave (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) on the orders of one of the later kings of Egypt, namely the Sultan Qalawoon al-Saalihi who is known as King Mansoor, in 678 AH, and was mentioned in Tahqeeq al-Nasrah bi Talkhees Ma’aalim Dar al-Hijrah. These are things that were done on the orders of the state and not on the basis of shar’i evidence. End quote.

2 – The scholars of the Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas were asked:

There are those who take the building of the green dome over the Prophet’s grave in the Prophet’s Mosque as evidence that it is permissible to build domes over other graves, such as those of the righteous and others. Is this argument correct or what should our response to them be?

They replied:

It is not correct to quote the fact that people built a dome over the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) as evidence that it is permissible to build domes over the graves of the righteous dead and others, because those people’s building a dome over his grave (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was haraam and those who did it sinned thereby, because they went against what is proven in a report from Abu’l-Hayaaj al-Asadi who said: ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allaah be pleased with him) said to me: Shall I not send you on the same mission as the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) sent me? Do not leave any image without erasing it or any high grave without levelling it.

And it was narrated that Jaabir (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade plastering over graves, or sitting on them or building over them. Both reports were narrated by Muslim in his Saheeh. So it is not correct for anyone to quote the haraam action of some people as evidence that it is permissible to do similar haraam actions, because it is not permissible to go against the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) by citing the words or actions of anyone else. And because he is the one who conveyed the command from Allaah, and he is the one who is to be obeyed, and we must beware of going against his commands, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And whatsoever the Messenger (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) gives you, take it; and whatsoever he forbids you, abstain (from it)” [al-Hashr 59:7].

And there are other verses which enjoin obedience to Allaah and to His Messenger. And because building up graves and erecting domes over them are means that lead to associating their occupants with Allaah, and the means that lead to shirk must be blocked. End quote.

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Razzaaq ‘Afeefi, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Qa’ood.

Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (9/83, 84)

3 – The scholars of the Standing Committee also said:

There is no proof in the fact that a dome was set up over the Prophet’s grave for those who take it as an excuse for building domes of the graves of the awliya’ (“saints”) and righteous people, because the building of a dome over his grave was not done on his instructions and was not done by any of his companions (may Allaah be pleased with them), or by the Taabi’een, or by any of the imams of guidance in the early generations whom the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) testified were good. Rather it was done by people of bid’ah (innovation). It was proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever introduces anything into this matter of ours that is not part of it will have it rejected.” And it was proven that ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) said to Abu’l-Hayaaj: Shall I not send you on the same mission as the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) sent me? Do not leave any image without erasing it or any high grave without levelling it. Narrated by Muslim. As it is not proven that he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) built a dome over his grave, and it is not proven from any of the leading imams; rather what is proven shows that to be an invalid action, and no Muslim should feel any attachment to the action of innovators who built a dome over the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). End quote.

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azzez ibn Baaz, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Razzaaq ‘Afeefi, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Ghadyaan, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Qa’ood

Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (2/264, 265).

4 – Shaykh Shams al-Deen al-Afghaani (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

al-‘Allaamah al-Khajandi (1379 AH) said, discussing the history of the green dome that was built over the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and explaining that it is an innovation that was done by some sultans and ignorant persons who erred and made a mistake, and that it is contrary to the clear saheeh ahaadeeth and reflects ignorance of the Sunnah, and that they went to extremes and imitated the Christians who are confused and misguided:

It should be noted that until the year 678 AH, there was no dome over the chamber which contains the grave of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), rather it was built by the king al-Zaahir al-Mansoor Qalawoon al-Saalihi in that year (678 AH), when this dome was built.

I say: He did that because he had seen in Egypt and Syria the adorned churches of the Christians, so he imitated them out of ignorance of the command and Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), as al-Waleed imitated them by adorning the mosque, as was mentioned in Wafa’ al-Wafa’.

It should be noted that undoubtedly this action of Qalawoon was contrary to the saheeh ahaadeeth of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), but ignorance is a great calamity and exaggeration in love and veneration is a real disaster, and imitation of foreigners is a fatal disease. We seek refuge with Allaah from ignorance and exaggeration and imitation of foreigners. End quote.

Juhood ‘Ulama’ al-Hanafiyyah fi Ibtaal ‘Aqaa’id al-Qubooriyyah (3/1660-1662).

Thirdly:

The reason why it has not been demolished:

The scholars have explained the shar’i rulings concerning the building of this dome and its obvious effects on the followers of bid’ah’ who have developed an attachment to this structure and its colour, and they praise and venerate it a great deal in their poetry and writings. Now it is up to the authorities to implement these fatwas, and this is nothing to do with the scholars.

The reason why it is not demolished is so as to ward off fitnah and for fear that it may lead to chaos among the ordinary people and the ignorant. Unfortunately the ordinary people have only reached this level of veneration towards this dome because of the leadership of misguided scholars and imams of innovation. They are the ones who incite the ordinary people against the land of the Two Holy Sanctuaries and its ‘aqeedah and its manhaj. They are very upset about many actions that are in accordance with sharee’ah in our view and contrary to innovation in their view.

Whatever the case, the shar’i ruling is quite clear, and the fact that this dome has not been demolished does not mean that it is permissible to build it or any dome over any grave, no matter what grave it is.

Shaykh Saalih al-‘Usaymi (may Allaah preserve him) said:

The fact that this dome has remained for eight centuries does not mean that it has become permissible, and being silent about it does not indicate approval of it or that it is permissible. Rather the Muslim authorities should remove it and put it back as it was at the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). They should remove the dome and the adornments and engravings that are found in the mosques, above all the Prophet’s Mosque, so long as that will not lead to an even greater fitnah. If it would lead to an even greater fitnah, then the ruler should postpone the matter until he finds an opportunity for that. End quote.

Bida’ al-Quboor, Anwaa’uha wa ahkaamuha (p. 253).

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A

http://www.islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=110061&ln=eng

Jahiliyyah of the Twentieth Century?

Is it permissible to use the word Jaahiliyyah to refer to societies after the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)?

Hence, it is not permissible to apply the term "Jaahiliyyah" to the societies of our time, even though the people may be ignorant..

And let us not fall into the idea (as well as trap) of Qutbiyyah.

Wallahu a'lam wa al-Musta'an.

Ruling on shaving the moustache

Question:
Some Brothers of mine growing the beard but there are shaving there mustaches. There are saying, that Omar, may Allah be pleased with him, did this and so it is good to do it. I read some answers on your website regarding the trimming of the mustaches, but it is permissible to shave it.

Answer:
Praise be to Allaah.

The scholars differed concerning the mustahabb Sunnah regarding the moustache, and there are two views:

1-

The first view is that it is Sunnah to shave it off altogether. This is the view of the Hanafis and Hanbalis. They quoted as evidence the apparent meaning of the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) that were narrated concerning this, such as “Trim the moustache” [narrated by al-Bukhaari (5892) and Muslim (259)] and other similar reports in al-Bukhaari and Muslim.

Al-Tahhaawi said in Sharh Ma’aani al-Athaar (4/230):

Shaving is better than trimming. This is the view of Abu Haneefah, Abu Yoosuf and Muhammad (may Allaah have mercy on them). End quote.

Ibn ‘Aabideen narrated in Radd al-Muhtaar (2/550) that later scholars preferred to trim it and said:

The (Hanafi) view according to some later scholars among our Shaykhs is that it should be trimmed. It says in al-Badaa’i’: This is the correct view. End quote.

2-

The second view is that the Sunnah is to trim the moustache, and that shaving it is makrooh. This is the view of the Maalikis and Shaafa’is. Imam Maalik (may Allaah have mercy on him) was very strict concerning that.

They quoted the following as evidence:

(i)

It was narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) that he heard the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say: "The fitrah is five things: circumcision, shaving the pubes, trimming the moustache, trimming the nails and plucking the armpit hairs." Narrated by al-Bukhaari (5891) and Muslim (257).

(ii)

It was narrated that al-Mugheerah ibn Shu’bah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: My moustache grew too long and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) trimmed it for me on a siwaak.” Narrated by Abu Dawood (188); classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood.

Al-Bayhaqi narrated in al-Sunan al-Kubra (1/151) with his isnaad that ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn ‘Abd-Allaah al-Uwaysi said: Maalik ibn Anas mentioned that some people shave their moustaches, and he said: The one who does that should be beaten. The hadeeth of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) about the moustache does not speak of shaving, rather it should be trimmed just enough to let the edge of the lips and the mouth show.

Maalik ibn Anas said: Shaving the moustache is a bid’ah (innovation) that has appeared among the people. End quote.

Abu’l-Waleed al-Baaji said in al-Muntaqa Sharh al-Muwatta’ (7/266):

Ibn ‘Abd al-Hakam narrated from Maalik: Trimming the moustache does not mean shaving it. I think that the one who shaves his moustache should be disciplined. Ashhab ibn Maalik narrated: Shaving it is a bid’ah (innovation).

Maalik (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: It was narrated from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him) that when he was upset by something, he would twist his moustache. If it was shaved off, there would be nothing to twist. End quote. See al-Tamheed (21/62-68).

Al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in al-Majmoo’ (1/34-341):

The guideline on trimming the moustache is that it should be trimmed so that the edge of the lip can be seen, but it should not be shaved off completely. This is our view. End quote.

In Nihaayat al-Muhtaaj by al-Ramli (8/148), who is one of the Shaafa’i imams, it says: It is makrooh to shave the moustache. End quote.

This opinion was also narrated from a number of the salaf.

Al-Bayhaqi narrated in al-Sunan al-Kubra (1/151) with his isnaad that Shurahbeel ibn Muslim al-Khawlaani said: I saw five of the companions of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) trimming their moustaches and letting their beards grow and dyeing them with saffron: Abu Umaamah al-Baahili, ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Bisr, ‘Utbah ibn ‘Abd al-Sulami, al-Hajjaaj ibn ‘Aamir al-Thamaali and al-Miqdaam ibn Ma’di Yakrib al-Kindi. They used to trim their moustaches to the edge of the lip.

They responded to the evidence quoted in favour of the first view in two ways:

1 – What is meant by trimming is trimming the edge of the hair which grows over the lip, not shaving off the hair completely, based on the evidence of the reports which mention trimming only.

Abu’l-Waleed al-Baaji said in al-Muntaqa Sharh al-Muwatta’ (7/266):

Ibn al-Qaasim narrated from Maalik that the explanation of the hadeeth of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) about trimming the moustache is that it is to be trimmed enough to let the red part of the lips show and the edges of the mouth. end quote.

Al-Nawawi said in al-Majmoo’ (1/340):

These reports – i.e. the reports which speak of trimming the moustache – are understood by us to mean trimming it to the edge of the lips, not shaving it off completely. End quote.

2 – Trimming does not mean removing it altogether, rather it means removing part of it.

The more correct view – and Allaah knows best – is the second one, which is that the Sunnah is to trim the moustache and not to shave it.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa (11/Baab al-Siwaak wa Sunan al-Fitrah/question no. 54):

The best is to trim the moustache as is the Sunnah. As for shaving it, that is not Sunnah. The analogy drawn by some of them, that it is prescribed to shave it as the head is shaved in Hajj is an analogy when a clear text states something else, so this analogy does not carry any weight. Hence Maalik said concerning shaving the moustache: It is an innovation that has appeared among the people, but we should not turn away from what is mentioned in the Sunnah, because following it is guidance, righteousness, happiness and success. End quote.

The Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas was asked: In a number of ahaadeeth it says “trim the moustache”. Is shaving different from trimming? Some people trim the first part of the moustache that is closest to the upper lip, and they leave the hair of the moustache, so they trim nearly half of the moustache and leave the rest. Is this what is meant? Or does trimming the moustache mean shaving off all of it? Please advise me of the manner in which the moustache should be trimmed.

They replied:

The saheeh ahaadeeth from the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) indicate that it is prescribed to trim the moustache. For example, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Trim the moustache and let the beard grow; be different from the mushrikeen.” (Agreed upon). And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Trim the moustache and let the beard grow; be different from the Magians,” and in some versions it says: “Trim the moustache.” Trimming means cutting it very short. The one who cuts his moustache very short so that the upper lip is visible or trims it is not to blame, because the ahaadeeth mention two things, but it is not permissible to leave the edges of the moustache, rather the whole moustache should be trimmed or cut, in accordance with the Sunnah. End quote.

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Razzaaq ‘Afeefi, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Qa’ood.

Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (5/149).

Al-Tabari and al-Qaadi ‘Iyaad favoured the view that both are permissible: shaving and trimming; al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar also inclined towards this view in Fath al-Baari (10/347).

See: al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (25/320).

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A

http://www.islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=103623&ln=eng