Dressing immodestly in front of one’s in-laws

Answered according to Hanafi Fiqh by

Q: I am a married female living with my in-laws i.e. father in-law, mother in-law and my husband’s sister. My husband says I can only cover between my navel and knees in front of them because they are unmarriageable to me and there is no sign of lust or fitna. He says I can roam in home like this If my husband has no problem with my being topless in home and only cover between navel and knees and abdomen and back of abdomen. I also belive that there is no possibility of fitna because two are muslim women in the house and my father in law is my father in law. My husband also say’s that they can also touch those parts if needed as they are unlawful to marry and if there is no lust. Please tell me as soon as possible that is it sinful or not to only cover those parts between navel and knee and going topless with bare breasts. I know being modest is good but what in this case when my husband has no problem and says I can? And I am asking only in front of muslim women and mehrem men. Please don’t tell about non-mehrem men I know that.


A: This is not in keeping with respect and modesty for a woman to come before people clad in this manner. Especially it is totally shameful for her to expose these parts of her body before her father in-law. Over and above this can be a cause of stirring up wrong feelings within your father in-law towards you. The fuqaha have explained that if the father in-law touches the body of the daughter in-law with lust and desire (i.e her direct body without there being any veil in between) the nikaah of his son and daughter in-law will immediately terminate. 

And Allah Ta’ala (الله تعالى) knows best.

 ومن مسته امرأة بشهوة حرمت عليه أمها وبنتها وقال الشافعي رحمه الله لا تحرم وعلى هذا الخلاف مسه امرأة بشهوة ونظره إلى فرجها ونظرها إلى ذكره عن شهوة (الهداية 2/309)

( ولا فرق ) فيما ذكر ( بين اللمس والنظر بشهوة بين عمد ونسيان ) وخطأ وإكراه فلو أيقظ زوجته أو أيقظته هي لجماعها فمست يده بنتها المشتهاه أو يدها ابنه حرمت الأم أبدا (الدر المختار)

قال الشامي: قوله ( أو يدها ابنه ) أي المراهق كما علم مما مر وأما تقييد الفتح بكونه ابنه من غيرها فقال في النهر ليعلم ما إذا كان ابنه منها بالأولى ولا بد من التقييد بالشهوة أو ازديادها في الموضعين (رد المحتار3/35)

وكذا لو فزعت فدخلت فراش أبيها عريانة فانتشر لها أبوها تحرم عليه أمها ( وبنت ) سنها ( دون تسع ليست بمشتهاة ) به يفتى (رد المحتار3/37)

( فلو تزوج صغيرة لا تشتهى فدخل بها فطلقها وانقضت عدتها وتزوجت بآخر جاز للأول ( التزوج ببنتها ) لعدم الاشتهاء وكذا تشترط الشهوة في الذكر فلو جامع غير مراهق زوجة أبيه لم تحرم (الدر المختار 3/35)

Answered by:

Mufti Zakaria Makada

Checked & Approved:

Mufti Ebrahim Salejee (Isipingo Beach)

This answer was collected from, where the questions have been answered by Mufti Zakaria Makada (Hafizahullah), who is currently a senior lecturer in the science of Hadith and Fiqh at Madrasah Ta’leemuddeen, Isipingo Beach, South Africa.

Find more answers indexed from:
Read more answers with similar topics:
Subscribe to IslamQA Weekly Newsletter

Subscribe to IslamQA Weekly Newsletter

You will receive 5 Q&A in your inbox every week

We have sent a confirmation to you. Please check the and confirm your subscription. Thank you!