Shaikh Ahmad Kutty

Abstract

This article re-evaluates the Qurʾānic principle of qiwāmah (male responsibility and guardianship) through the lenses of classical tafsīr, Prophetic Sunnah, juristic diversity, and contemporary social realities. It argues that a husband’s duty to provide medical care for his wife is a binding Sharīʿah obligation in today’s context. This assertion is supported by the Qurʾān, the ḥadīth of Hind bint ʿUtbah, the objectives (maqāṣid) of Islamic law, the principle that fatwas must adapt to time, place, and custom, and contemporary authoritative fatwas—particularly those from Dār al-Iftāʾ al-Miṣriyyah. The study also warns against decontextualized legal reasoning, referencing Ibn al-Qayyim’s critique of rigid textualism and its detrimental effects.

Introduction

Islam views marriage not as a hierarchy of dominance but as a partnership grounded in care, mercy, justice, and accountability before God. The Qurʾān provides a framework for family life, emphasizing responsibility through the principle of qiwāmah, expressed in the verse:

_”Men are qawwāmūn over women by virtue of what God has given some over others and because they spend of their wealth.”_¹

The phrase ‘a husband’s duty to provide medical care for his wife’ emphasizes responsibility, aiming to inspire a sense of moral duty and accountability among the audience, highlighting the importance of fulfilling this obligation today.

The Meaning of Qiwāmah in Classical Tafsīr

The term qawwām originates from the root q-w-m, meaning to stand, maintain, and uphold responsibility. Classical exegetes interpret qiwāmah primarily as a functional responsibility rather than as an inherent superiority. Al-Ṭabarī describes it as supervision grounded in provision and protection; Ibn Kathīr identifies financial support as its foundation; al-Qurṭubī views it as governance linked to obligation; and al-Jalālayn succinctly defines it as “in charge of upkeep.”²

In modern times, Ibn ʿĀshūr expands this understanding, framing qiwāmah as a form of trusteeship (amānah) focused on family welfare rather than control. Authority, in this view, is inseparable from service—just as an imam leads by serving the congregation, a husband leads the household by shouldering its burdens.

Qurʾānic Foundations of Qiwāmah

Functional Preference (Faḍl)

Exegetes interpret faḍl not as moral or spiritual superiority, but as functional suitability—qualities such as physical ability or social responsibility that enable one to bear burdens. Ibn ʿĀshūr emphasizes that this preference exists solely to facilitate responsibility and cannot justify neglect, coercion, or harm.⁴

Financial Responsibility (Nafaqah)

The verse grounds qiwāmah in financial provision: “because they spend of their wealth.” Ibn Kathīr stresses that financial expenditure is the basis of authority; leadership without maintenance lacks Qurʾānic legitimacy.⁵ Therefore, the validity of qiwāmah is contingent upon the fulfillment of nafaqah.

The Prophetic Precedent: Hind bint ʿUtbah

The Sunnah clarifies the extent of spousal provision through the well-known account of Hind bint ʿUtbah. She expressed to the Prophet ﷺ her dissatisfaction with her husband, Abū Sufyān, for his stinginess, stating that he did not adequately provide for her and their children. He replied:

_”Take from his wealth what suffices you and your children, according to what is customary (bi-l-maʿrūf).”_⁶

This ḥadīth establishes key principles: a wife’s right is based on sufficiency (kifāyah), not mere survival; sufficiency is determined by customary standards (ʿurf); and the obligation lies firmly with the husband, allowing for self-help when provisions are unjustly withheld. Classical jurists understood this narration to encompass all legitimate needs—needs that necessarily expand as circumstances evolve. In an age marked by chronic illness and expensive medical care, healthcare becomes essential to sufficiency itself.

Ibn ʿĀshūr and the Welfare-Centered Model of Qiwāmah

In al-Taḥrīr wa-al-Tanwīr, Ibn ʿĀshūr situates qiwāmah within the Qurʾān’s broader aim of promoting tranquility (sakīnah), love, and mercy in marriage (Q. 30:21).⁷ He underscores that qiwāmah is contingent upon fulfilling obligations; neglect diminishes moral authority. He further asserts that nafaqah is comprehensive and defined by prevailing customs.

Linking qiwāmah to the verse “men have a degree (darajah) over them” (Q. 2:228), Ibn ʿĀshūr explains that this darajah signifies an increased responsibility rather than entitlement or privilege.⁸

Juristic Diversity and Contextual Reasoning

Classical jurists often limited nafaqah to food, clothing, and housing—not out of indifference to health, but because medical care in premodern societies was generally straightforward, inexpensive, and occasional. Juristic diversity reflects contextual realities rather than categorical exclusion:

• Ḥanafī jurists emphasized ʿurf in defining sufficiency.
• Mālikīs mandated childbirth expenses due to communal responsibilities.
• Shāfiʿīs acknowledged health-related needs as part of the provision.
• Ḥanbalīs focused on minimal sufficiency under survival conditions.⁹

These rulings were contextually relevant, not doctrinally rigid.

Contemporary Juristic Developments and Authoritative Fatwas

Modern jurists’ rulings, especially from respected bodies like Dār al-Iftāʾ al-Miṣriyyah, reinforce the importance of medical care, making the audience feel assured and respected in the scholarly consensus supporting this obligation.

Contemporary fatwa bodies, including IslamQA, recognize classical disagreements while affirming that ʿurf and necessity now decisively require the inclusion of medical care within spousal maintenance. These rulings represent principled continuations of classical jurisprudence, not deviations.

A Critical Warning Against Decontextualized Fatwas

Ibn al-Qayyim famously cautioned against issuing legal opinions detached from lived experiences. In Iʿlām al-Muwaqqiʿīn, he states:

_”Whoever gives fatwas based solely on what is written in books—without considering circumstances, customs, times, places, and consequences—has gone astray and led others astray.”_¹⁰

He compares such reasoning to a physician prescribing the same treatment for all patients regardless of their conditions. Applying premodern rulings on medical care without considering contemporary realities is not adherence to Sharīʿah but legal negligence.

Medical Care as an Essential Expression of Qiwāmah Today

When considering the Qurʾānic injunction to live bi-l-maʿrūf (Q. 4:19), the Prophetic judgment in Hind’s case, Ibn ʿĀshūr’s maqāṣid-oriented tafsīr, Ibn al-Qayyim’s methodological warnings, and contemporary fatwas together, it becomes evident that providing medical care for one’s wife is a necessary and obligatory act for husbands today, aligned with their means and local customs.

This obligation includes customary medical consultations, treatments, medications, and health insurance. Such provision is not an act of charity; it is the rightful fulfillment of qiwāmah.

Conclusion

True qiwāmah is demonstrated not through assertion but through presence—supporting one’s wife in vulnerability, protecting her health, and accepting responsibility with compassion. The Prophet ﷺ did not dismiss Hind’s complaint; he acknowledged her dignity, recognized her needs, and articulated a principle that can guide Muslim families across generations.

In providing medical care today, a husband does not overstep the Sharīʿah—he embodies it.

Notes

1. Qurʾān 4:34.
2. Muḥammad ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ al-Bayān; Ismāʿīl ibn ʿUmar Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAẓīm.
3. Muḥammad al-Ṭāhir ibn ʿĀshūr, al-Taḥrīr wa-al-Tanwīr.
4. Ibn ʿĀshūr, al-Taḥrīr wa-al-Tanwīr.
5. Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr.
6. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī; Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.
7. Qurʾān 30:21; Ibn ʿĀshūr, Tafsīr.
8. Qurʾān 2:228; Ibn ʿĀshūr, Tafsīr.
9. Ibn ʿĀbidīn; al-Ḥaṭṭāb; al-Ghazālī; Ibn Qudāmah.
10. Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah, Iʿlām al-Muwaqqiʿīn.

Bibliography

• al-Bukhārī, Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. Riyadh: Dār Ṭawq al-Najāt, 2001.
• al-Ghazālī, Abū Ḥāmid. Al-Wasīṭ. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyyah, 2001.
• Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah. Iʿlām al-Muwaqqiʿīn. Riyadh: Umm al-Qurā University, 1991.
• Ibn ʿĀbidīn, Muḥammad Amīn. Ḥāshiyat al-Durr al-Mukhtār. Beirut: Dār al-Fikr.
• Ibn ʿĀshūr, Muḥammad al-Ṭāhir. Al-Taḥrīr wa-al-Tanwīr. Tunis: Dār al-Tunisiyyah lil-Nashr, 1984.
• Ibn Kathīr, Ismāʿīl ibn ʿUmar. Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAẓīm. Riyadh: Dār Ṭaybah, 1999.
• Ibn Qudāmah, ʿAbd Allāh ibn Aḥmad. Al-Mughnī. Cairo: Maktabat al-Qāhirah.
• Muslim ibn al-Ḥajjāj. Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. Beirut: Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-ʿArabī, 1954.
• al-Qurṭubī, Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad. Al-Jāmiʿ li-Aḥkām al-Qurʾān. Cairo: Dār al-Kutub al-Miṣriyyah, 2010.
• al-Ṭabarī, Muḥammad ibn Jarīr. Jāmiʿ al-Bayān. Cairo: Dār al-Maʿārif, 1954.