Mothers who intend to complete the period of breastfeeding should nurse their children for two full years. The husband and father of a child is responsible for the maintenance and clothing of a divorced mother who breast feeds her child in accordance with the customs of society that do not go against the sacred law. No person is burdened beyond what he is able to do. No parent is allowed to use the child as a means to harm the other. The heir (who would inherit from the child if the child were to pass away leaving behind wealth) shall be responsible, if the father dies without leaving any wealth, for the same obligations as that of the father. If the parents decide to wean the child before two years finish, then there is no sin on them, if this is done after full consultation and agreement that it is in the child’s best interests. If you wish to hire wet-nurses for your children instead of their mothers, there is no sin in doing so provided you pay the agreed wages of such wet-nurses without any shortfall or delay. Be mindful of Allah by fulfilling His instructions and avoiding His prohibitions, and know that Allah sees everything you do and nothing is hidden from Him. He will reward you for any action you do.
The mothers should suckle their children for two whole years, (that is) for those (parents) who desire to complete the term of suckling, but the father of the child shall bear the cost of the mother's food and clothing on a reasonable basis. No person shall have a burden laid on him greater than he can bear. No mother shall be treated unfairly on account of her child, nor father on account of his child. And on the (father's) heir is incumbent the like of that (which was incumbent on the father). If they both decide on weaning, by mutual consent, and after due consultation, there is no sin on them. And if you decide on a foster suckling-mother for your children, there is no sin on you, provided you pay (the mother) what you agreed (to give her) on a reasonable basis. And fear Allah and know that Allah is All-Seer of what you do (233)
The Suckling Period is only Two Years
This is a direction from Allah to the mothers to suckle their infants through the complete term of suckling, which is two years. Hence, suckling after two years is not included in this address. Allah said:
لِمَنْ أَرَادَ أَن يُتِمَّ الرَّضَاعَةَ
(...who desire to complete the term of suckling,)
Therefore, the suckling that establishes Tahrim (prohibition, i.e., one cannot marry his mother or sister from suckling) is what occurs before the two years end. If the infant is suckled only after two years of age, then no Tahrim will be established. At-Tirmidhi under Chapter: 'Suckling establishes Tahrim within the first two years,' reported that Umm Salamah narrated that Allah's Messenger ﷺ said:
لَا يَحْرُمُ مِنَ الرَّضَاعِ إِلَّا مَا فَتَقَ الْأَمْعَاءَ فِي الثَّدْيِ وَكَانَ قَبْلَ الْفِطَامِ
(Suckling establishes Tahrim if it is on the breast and before Fitam (before weaning, i.e., before the end of the first two years).)
At-Tirmidhi said, "This Hadith is Hasan Sahih. The majority of the people of knowledge among the Companions of Allah's Messenger ﷺ and others acted upon this, that is that suckling establishes Tahrim (prohibition in marriage) before the end of the two years and that whatever occurs after that does not establish Tahrim". At-Tirmidhi is alone in recording this Hadith and the narrators in its chain meet the criteria of the Sahihayn. The Prophet's statement:
إِلَّا مَا كَانَ فِي الثَّدْي
(On the breast) refers to the organ of suckling before the two years. Imam Ahmad reported a Hadith in which Al-Bara' bin 'Azib narrated, "When Ibrahim, the Prophet's son, died, the Prophet ﷺ said:
إِنَّ ابْنِي مَاتَ فِي الثَّدْيِ، إِنَّ لَهُ مُرْضِعًا فِي الْجَنَّـةِ
(My son has died on the breast and he has someone to suckle him in Paradise.)
Furthermore, Ad-Daraqutni related that Ibn 'Abbas said that Allah's Messenger ﷺ said:
لَا يَحْرُمُ مِنَ الرَّضَاعِ إِلَّا مَا كَانَ فِي الْحَوْلَيْنِ
(Suckling establishes Tahrim only within the (first) two years.)
Imam Malik reported this Hadith from Thawr bin Zayd who narrated that Ibn 'Abbas related it to the Prophet ﷺ. Ad-Darawardi reported this Hadith from Thawr who narrated it from 'Ikrimah who narrated it from Ibn 'Abbas. In this narration, which is more authentic, he added:
وَمَا كَانَ بَعْدَ الْحَوْلَيْنِ فَليْسَ بِشَيْءٍ
(Whatever occurs after the two years is not considered.)
Suckling beyond the Two Years
It is reported in the Sahih that 'A'ishah thought that if a woman gives her milk to an older person (meaning beyond the age of two years) then this will establish Tahrim. This is also the opinion of 'Ata' bin Abu Rabah and Layth bin Sa'd. Hence, 'A'ishah thought that it is permissible to suckle the man whom the woman needs to be allowed in her house. She used as evidence the Hadith of Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hudhayfah, where the Prophet ﷺ ordered Abu Hudhayfah's wife to give some of her milk to Salim, although he was a man, and ever since then, he used to enter her house freely. However, the rest of the Prophet's wives did not agree with this opinion and thought that this was only a special case. This is also the opinion of the majority of the scholars.
Suckling for Monetary Compensation
Allah said:
وَعَلَى الْمَوْلُودِ لَهُ رِزْقُهُنَّ وَكِسْوَتُهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ
(...but the father of the child shall bear the cost of the mother's food and clothing on a reasonable basis.) meaning, the father of the baby is obliged to provide for the expenses of the mother and to buy her clothes, in reasonable amounts usually used by similar women in that area, without extravagance or stinginess. The father spends within his means in this case. Allah said in another Ayah:
لِيُنفِقْ ذُو سَعَةٍ مِّن سَعَتِهِ وَمَن قُدِرَ عَلَيْهِ رِزْقُهُ فَلْيُنفِقْ مِمَّا آتَاهُ اللَّهُ لَا يُكَلِّفُ اللَّهُ نَفْسًا إِلَّا مَا آتَاهَا سَيَجْعَلُ اللَّهُ بَعْدَ عُسْرٍ يُسْرًا
(Let the rich man spend according to his means; and the man whose resources are restricted, let him spend according to what Allah has given him. Allah puts no burden on any person beyond what He has given him. Allah will grant after hardship, ease.)(65:7)
Ad-Dahhak commented, "If the husband divorces his wife, with whom he had a child, and she suckles that child, he is required to provide for the mother's expenses and clothes within reason."
No Darar (Harm) or Dirar (Revenge)
Allah said:
لَا تُضَارَّ وَالِدَةٌ بِوَلَدِهَا
(No mother shall be treated unfairly on account of her child,) meaning, the mother should not decline to rear her child to harm its father. The mother does not have the right to refrain from suckling the child after giving birth, unless she suckles him/her the milk that is necessary for his/her survival. Later on, she is allowed to give up custody of the child as long as she does not do that intending to harm the father. In addition, the father is not allowed to take the child from his mother to harm the mother. This is why Allah said:
وَلَا مَوْلُودٌ لَّهُ بِوَلَدِهِ
(...nor father on account of his child.) meaning, by taking the child from its mother intending to harm the mother. This is the Tafsir of Mujahid, Qatadah, Ad-Dahhak, Az-Zuhri, As-Suddi, Ath-Thawri and Ibn Zayd, and others on this Ayah.
Allah then said:
وَعَلَى الْوَارِثِ مِثْلُ ذَٰلِكَ
(And on the (father's) heir is incumbent the like of that (which was incumbent on the father).) meaning, by refraining from harming the relative (of the father, i.e., his infant), as Mujahid, Ash-Sha'bi and Ad-Dahhak stated. It was also reported that (the Ayah requires) the inheritor (of the father) to spend on the mother of the child, just as the father was spending, and to preserve her rights and refrain from harming her, according to the Tafsir of the majority of the scholars. We should state that Ibn Jarir has explained this subject in detail in his Tafsir and that he also stated that suckling the child after the second year might harm the child's body and mind. Sufyan Ath-Thawri narrated that 'Alqamah asked a woman who was suckling her child after the second year ended, not to do that.
Fitām (weaning) occurs by Mutual Consent
Allah said:
فَإِنْ أَرَادَا فِصَالًا عَن تَرَاضٍ مِّنْهُمَا وَتَشَاوُرٍ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِمَا
(If they both decide on weaning, by mutual consent, and after due consultation, there is no sin on them.)
This Ayah indicates that if the father and the mother decide on the Fitam (weaning) before the two years (of suckling) end, and for a benefit that they duly discuss and agree upon, then there is no sin in this case. So, the Ayah indicates that one parent is not allowed to make this kind of decision without duly consulting the other parent, as stated by Ath-Thawri. The method of mutual consultation protects the child's interests. It is also a mercy from Allah to His servants, for He has legislated the best method for parents to rear their children, and His legislation guides and directs the parents and the children to success. Similarly, Allah said in Surat At-Talaq (chapter 65 in the Qur'an):
فَإِنْ أَرْضَعْنَ لَكُمْ فَآتُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ وَأْتَمِرُوا بَيْنَكُم بِمَعْرُوفٍ وَإِن تَعَاسَرْتُمْ فَسَتُرْضِعُ لَهُ أُخْرَىٰ
(Then if they give suck to the children for you, give them their due payment, and let each of you accept the advice of the other in a just way. But if you make difficulties for one another, then some other woman may give suck for him (the father of the child).)(65:6)
Allah then said:
وَإِنْ أَرَدتُّمْ أَن تَسْتَرْضِعُوا أَوْلَادَكُمْ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ إِذَا سَلَّمْتُم مَّا آتَيْتُم بِالْمَعْرُوفِ
(And if you decide on a foster suckling-mother for your children, there is no sin on you, provided you pay (the mother) what you agreed (to give her) on a reasonable basis.) meaning, if the mother and the father both agree that the father assumes custody of the child due to a circumstance that compels her or allows him to do so, then there is no sin in this case. Hence, the mother is allowed to give up the child and the father is allowed to assume custody of the child. The father should kindly give the mother her expenses for the previous period (during which she reared and suckled the child), and he should seek other women to suckle his child for monetary compensation. Thereafter, Allah said:
وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ
(And fear Allah) meaning, in all of your affairs,
وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّهَ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرٌ
(And know that Allah is All-Seer of what you do.) meaning, none of your affairs or speech escapes His perfect Watch.
The injunctions of suckling the children by the mothers
This verse contains injunctions relating to rada` ah (رضاعۃ) or the suckling of children. It will be recalled that in verses appearing earlier and later than this, the injunctions of talaq (divorce) have been taken up. In between, there appear injunctions relating to the suckling of children, because it generally happens that issues concerning the feeding and upbringing of children are disputed following a divorce. Since these disputations lead to violence, this verse offers moderate injunctions which can be carried out easily and appropriately by man and woman both. For the two situations of suckling and weaning, whether these show up during the period of marriage, or after divorce, a system was suggested which helps stop mutual bickering, or injustice to any of the parties.
For instance, it was said in the first sentence of the verse:
وَالْوَالِدَاتُ يُرْضِعْنَ أَوْلَادَهُنَّ حَوْلَيْنِ كَامِلَيْنِ ۖ لِمَنْ أَرَادَ أَن يُتِمَّ الرَّضَاعَةَ
that is, 'And mothers suckle their children for full two years' -- unless there be some strong compelling reason which leads to weaning before that time.
Some rules concerning rada` ah or suckling of children come out from this verse; these are:
Suckling of children is an obligation of the mother
Naturally suckling is an obligation of the mother. If she does not feed without a valid reason or because of some hostility or displeasure, she will be a sinner. And she cannot accept any payment for suckling from her husband, as long as she is married to him because that is her own duty.
The total period of suckling
The second rule is about the total period of suckling which is two years. Unless there be some special reason, it is the right of the child that this period be completed.
From this we also know that the total time given for suckling is full two years after which suckling should not be done. However, on the basis of some verses of the Qur'an and reports from ahadith, Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) ruled that if it was carried on over a period of 30 months or two and a half years, all the legal effects of suckling shall be applicable and if this was done because of the weakness of the child, a legitimate excuse, it would then be no sin either. But breast-feeding a child after completing two and a half years is unanimously haram (forbidden).
In the second sentence of this verse, it was said:
وَعَلَى الْمَوْلُودِ لَهُ رِزْقُهُنَّ وَكِسْوَتُهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ ۚ لَا تُكَلَّفُ نَفْسٌ إِلَّا وُسْعَهَا
And on him, to whom the child is born, falls the provision of food and clothing for them (the mothers) with fairness. No-body is obligated beyond his capacity.
The first point that must be noted here is that the Qur'an uses the word وَالْوَالِدَاتُ , for mothers but while referring to the father, it opts for الْمَوْلُودِ لَهُ : to whom the child is born' leaving out the smaller word although the said word, 'walid' والد (father) does appear elsewhere in the Qur'an, for instance: لَّا يَجْزِي وَالِدٌ عَن وَلَدِهِ ' (Fear the Day) when no father shall be of avail to his child' (31:33). But the use of al-mawludi lahu الْمَوْلُودِ لَهُ in place of walid والد in this setting.has a secret behind it. The whole of Qur'an has a unique method and style so it does not describe any law in the way governments of the mortal world do. It rather presents it in a sympathetic and affectionate manner, a manner in which it could become easy for human beings to accept it and act accordingly.
Since the father has been obligated to pay for the expenses of the child, even though the child belongs to the father and the mother both, it was possible that the father could take this injunction to be somewhat burdensome, therefore, the expression al-mawludi lahu (°tc to whom the child is born' ) was preferred over walid ('father' ). The meaning of this expression -- 'to whom the child is born’ -- suggests that, no doubt both father and mother share in the birth of the child, but the child is, however, ascribed to the father. The lineage comes from the father. Now that the child is his, the responsibility of the child's expenses should not be heavy on him.
Responsibilities of mothers and fathers
The third rule of Islamic law given in this verse is: While suckling the child is certainly the responsibility of the mother but the sustenance of the mother, inclusive of all necessities of life, is the responsibility of the father and this responsibility continues as far as the marriage or the post-divorce waiting period of wife ('iddah) continues. When divorce and ` iddah have matured, the responsibility of the husband towards the expenses of his wife will end, but the father will con tinue to be obligated to pay for the suckling of the child. (Mazhari)
The standard of wife's liabilities
When the husband and wife are both affluent, matching expenses will be obligatory. When both are poor, correspondingly matching expenses will be obligatory. On this much there is total agreement. However, the Muslim jurists differ if both have a different financial status. Following al-Khassaf, the author of Hidayah has ruled that should the woman be poor and the man rich, her expenses will be medial, that is, higher than those of the poor and lower than those of the rich. According to al-Karkhi, the status of the husband will be the criterion. In Fath al-Qadir, fatwa has been reported on this position from many jurists. (Fath al-Qadir, pp 422, v.3)
In the verse under discussion, after stating injunctions, the Qur'an
r D
says: لَا تُضَارَّ وَالِدَةٌ بِوَلَدِهَا وَلَا مَوْلُودٌ لَّهُ بِوَلَدِهِ that is, 'no mother shall be made to suffer on account of her child, nor a man to whom the child is born, on account of his child.' It means that the father and mother of the child should not stonewall each other. For instance, the mother may be unable to suckle the child due to some excuse but the father may start forcing her to do so, hoping that she being the mother of the child would finally melt down and suckle the child. Or, take the case of a mother who has no excuse, yet she refuses to suckle the child hoping that the poor husband, being the father of the child would, in one way or the other, find the means to have the child suckled elsewhere.
Forcing or not forcing a mother for suckling
The fifth rule deduced from (No mother shall be made to suffer on account of her child) appearing above is that it is not permissible for the father to compel the mother to suckle the child if she refuses to do so under some excuse, or need. And if the child refuses to be suckled by another woman, or also refuses to feed on any milk other than that of his or her mother, the mother will then be compelled to feed the child. This rule we know from لَا تُضَارَّ وَالِدَةٌ بِوَلَدِهَا ; (nor a man to whom the child is born, on account of his child).
Wages of suckling for a divorced woman
The sixth rule that we learn about is: If the mother demands wages to suckle, she has no right to do that as long as she is married to her husband or is within the post-divorce waiting period. Here her maintenance, which is the responsibility of the child's father, is enough in itself. Asking for additional wages amounts to harming the father. The situation changes if the post-divorce waiting period has expired and the responsibility of maintenance is all over. Now, if this divorced woman demands from the father wages to suckle her child, the father will have to pay it -- since not doing so amounts to a loss to the mother. However, the condition is that she should ask for the same amount of wages as is taken by some other woman. If she asks for more, the father will have the right to engage a wet-nurse to suckle the child in her place.
The responsibilities of suckling an orphan
Later in the subject verse, it is said: وَعَلَى الْوَارِثِ مِثْلُ ذَٰلِكَ. It means: If the father is not alive, the responsibility for arranging to have the child suckled falls on the person who is the legal heir (warith) of the child and a mahram محرم (person with whom marriage is prohibited for ever); that is, those who are entitled to be inheritors of the child. if he dies, would be the ones responsible for his sustenance in the absence of the father. If, there be more than one heir like him, everyone will share that responsibility in proportion to their share in the inheritance. Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) explained that assigning the responsibility of having the orphaned child suckled to the heirs also tells us that the sustenance of a minor child will continue to be, even after weaning, a charge of the heirs since there is nothing special about milk, the purpose is to have the expenses of the child covered. For instance, if the mother of the orphaned child and his grandfather are both alive, these two then, are his mahram محرم ، and heirs as well. Therefore, the maintenance of the child shall be borne by both of them in proportion to their share in the inheritance, that is, the mother will bear one-third and the grandfather, two-thirds. Here from we also know that the right of the orphaned grandson on his grandfather is much stronger than the rights of his own adult sons, since he is not responsible for the sustenance of his adult child, while the sustenance of the orphaned grandson is obligatory on him. However, a grandson has not been given a share in inheritance in the presence of sons, because it is against the principle of inheritance and justice, as giving a share to the farther in presence of the nearer children is not rational in itself and is certainly, against the hadith لا ولی رجل ذکر (for the nearest male) in Sahih al-Bukhari. Nevertheless, the grandfather does have the right to make some provision in his will for the orphaned grandson, if he feels there is need to do that. This could even turn out to be higher than the share of sons. Thus the need of the orphaned grandson was taken care of, while at the same time, the principle of inheritance -- that in the presence of the nearer, the farther should not receive -- remained intact.
The injunctions of weaning
After that, it is said in the subject verse:
فَإِنْ أَرَادَا فِصَالًا عَن تَرَاضٍ مِّنْهُمَا وَتَشَاوُرٍ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِمَا
that is, if the mother and father of the child, after mutual consultation and agreement, decide that they have to wean the child earlier than two years, because of the inability of the mother or some sickness of the child, then there is no sin involved here as well. The condition of 'mutual consultation and agreement' was placed for the reason that in weaning the child, his or her welfare should be the paramount concern. Making the child a target-board of mutual differences and quarrels is undesirable.
Injunctions of suckling by a nurse
In the end, it is said:
وَإِنْ أَرَدتُّمْ أَن تَسْتَرْضِعُوا أَوْلَادَكُمْ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ إِذَا سَلَّمْتُم مَّا آتَيْتُم بِالْمَعْرُوفِ
It means: If you wish, for some expedient reason, to have your children suckled by a wet-nurse in place of the mother, even then there is no sin in doing so. However, the condition is that the wages settled with the wet-nurse be paid in full. If the wages were not paid as settled, the sin thereof will rest with the parents.
From this we learn that should a father realize that the feed of the mother, who is willing to suckle, is not good for the child, he has the right to stop the mother from suckling and get a wet-nurse to do that.
From this we also learn that the wages or salary of the woman employed for suckling should be negotiated and settled clearly so that there is no dispute later on; and then let the settled wages be handed over to her at the appointed time and let there be no postponement or evasion.
After stating all these injunctions relating to rada` ah (suckling) رضاعہ ، the Qur'an once again returns to its special manner and style whereby it brings into focus the fear of Allah Almighty and the concept of His all-encompassing Knowledge so that acting in accordance with law becomes easy, and one remains bound by it under all conditions, seen or unseen. It is said: وَاتَّقُوا اللَّـهَ وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّـهَ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِي that is, 'keep fearing Allah and know for sure that Allah Almighty is fully watching over your open and secret, and your seen and unseen, and He is aware of all intents and purposes hidden in your hearts.' Any party that acts against these injunctions of suckling and weaning or takes a decision in this connection disregarding the welfare of the child, shall deserve punishment.
After divorce, many matters remain to be cleared up. Sometimes the husband and wife wish to remarry; or maybe the woman wishes to have a new husband. On no account should obstacles be placed in their path. A woman may well have children from her former husband. Maybe they are infants, who have to be suckled. This being the case, the man and the woman should not cause trouble for one another. Rather than make the matter an emotional issue between them, they should settle it by mutual counsel and consent. This is how a believer should settle matters involving conflict and separation. The interests of both parties should be respected, with neither party seeking to inconvenience the other. Attempts should be made to settle the dispute in a manner acceptable to both sides. This is the cleaner, purer way of settling disputes, a method befitting those whose souls have been purified by true belief. Unless a person believes in God and fears His judgement, he will not be inclined to heed admonishment, no matter how correct and relevant it may be. He will set out to find a loophole in the advice he has been given and make up some excuse or the other for not applying it to himself. One who believes in God and the Last Day, knows, however, that the matter does not end there. Finally it will come before God, at which point the erring individual will not be able to make any excuses for having shirked his responsibilities.