'Aqd and Walīmatu' n-Nikāh in Perspective - Newstrends
Connect with us

Opinion

‘Aqd and Walīmatu’ n-Nikāh in Perspective

Published

on

The word ‘aqd (عَقْدٌ plural عُقود) literally means ‘a bond’, ‘a covenant’ or ‘a contractual agreement’ between two or more people . In Qur’ān 5:1, Allāh says, يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَوْفُوا بِالْعُقُودِ “O believers! Fulfil your contract obligations…” A trade contract between a seller and a prospective buyer is an ‘aqd. Similarly, a business agreement between two partners (as in partnership business) is also an ‘aqd.

When prefixed to ‘Nikāh’, as in عقد النكاح ‘aqdun-Nikāh’, it connotes a ‘marriage contract/solemnization’. It’s a simple religious rite performed by the father of the prospective bride, his designate or her male guardian (mainly from her biological father’s family or her son, according to the ترتيب الأولياء sequence of guardians). It requires no ceremony or pomp. It’s simply an acceptance of marriage proposal by the prospective groom. زَوَّجْتُكَ بِنتِي فُلانَةَ “I’ve married my so and so daughter to you”, or any other expression that implies consent. In other qords, it’s a contract of ‘offer and acceptance.’

Walīmah (وَلِيمة) on the other hand connotes ‘a feast’. It’s defined literally as,

اجتماع مجموعة من الأشخاص الذين يعرفون بعضهم جميعاً أو يعرفون أحد الأشخاص في هذه الدعوة لتناول الطعام، غالباً بغرض الاحتفال أو لهدفٍ آخر

“A gathering of a group of people who are known to each other or who know one of the congregation for the purpose of eating food. Mostly, such occasions are as a result of celebration or for some other reasons..”

READ ALSO:

When prefixed to Nikāh, as in Walīmatu’n-Nikāh (وَلِيمة النكاح) or (وليمة العِرس), it implies, ‘a wedding feast’. In contemporary usage, it’s otherwise known as wedding reception.

Ruling on ‘aqd and walīmatu’n-nikāh

According to the Shari’ah, ‘aqdun-Nikāh is a compulsory rite, for it’s the only activity that confers legality on marriage contracts. This is the express meaning of the words of the Most High, فَانْكِحُوهُنَّ بِإِذْنِ أَهْلِهِنَّ “Marry them with the permission of their family…” (4:25). This is explained by the hadīth of our mother, Ā’ishah (may Allāh be pleased with her), that the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ said:

” أيما امرأة نكحت بغير إذن وليها فنكاحها باطل فنكاحها باطل ، فنكاحها باطل

“Any woman who gets married without the permission of her guardian (waliyy), then her marriage is invalid.” (He repeated it three times.)

As for the Walīmatu n-Nikīh, then, it’s ruling is that it’s Sunnah (a recommended act), and not obligatory. Ibn Qudāmah, rahimahuLlāh said in Al-Mughnī:

لا خلاف بين أهل العلم في أن الوليمة سنة في العرس مشروعة، لما روي أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أمر بها وفعلها. فقال لعبد الرحمن بن عوف، حين قال: تزوجت: أولم ولو بشاة.. إلى أن قال: وليست واجبة في قول أكثر أهل العلم.

“There’s no difference of opinion among the scholars on the Waleematu n-Nikaah being a Sunnah (non-obligatory act) based on the report that the Prophet ﷺ said to ‘Abdurrahmān bn ‘awf, after the latter informed him about his marriage, “organize a feast, even if it’s with just one sheep”. (Ibn Qudāmah thus continues discussion on this matter) until he said, and (the walīmah of nikāh) is not compulsory in the view of most of the scholars.”

Simply put, while ‘aqdun-Nikāh is compulsory and inevitable, the Walīmatu’ n-Nikāh is not.

Who organises the walīmatu’n-nikāh?

Organizing the wedding feast is primarily the duty of the groom at his convenience (time and place). In the hadīth of ‘Abdurrahmān bn ‘awf cited earlier, the instruction was clearly directed at him. The Prophet ﷺ said, “May Allāh bless you. Organise a walīmah even if it is with (serving the meat of) just a sheep.”

READ ALSO:

Note: ‘Abdurrahmān bn ‘awf was one of the wealthiest Muslims at the time. So the Prophet’s ( ﷺ) emphasis ‘even if with the meat of just a sheep’ was meant to indicate that he doesn’t need to necessarily expend much to organise the feast.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymīn, rahimahuLlāh said: “It (the walīmah) is prescribed for the husband, because the Prophet ﷺ said to ‘Abdurrahmān ibn ‘Awf: “Give a walīmah,” and he did not tell his in-laws to do that. And because the blessing is greater for the husband than for the wife, because he is the one who sought the woman; it is very rare for the woman to seek the man.”

Al-Sharh al-Mumti’, 12/321

It’s important to emphasize this point because majority of Muslim parents (the brides’ especially) seem not to know/jettison this Sharī’ah. They assume that it’s their right to dictate the when and how a wedding feast should take place, and often put a lot of burden on their son-in-law. This mentality needs to change if indeed we desire a blissful marital life for our daughters. There’s no harm if there’s a joint agreement between both families on this issue, but to assume a draconian position, bullying the groom into taking forceful decisions is repugnant to justice, good conscience and natural laws.

When can the Walīmah be organised?

The most appropriate time for organizing the Walīmatu n-Nikāh is immediately after consummation of marriage. That is, after the first sexual intercourse between the newlyweds. Shaykh bn Taimiyyah rahimahullāh said:

ووقت الوليمة في حديث زينب وصفته تدل على أنه عقب الدخول.

“The time for organizing the walīmah, according to the hadīth of Zaynab bint Jahsh (one of the prophet’s wives) is after consummation.”

وجاء في مغني المحتاج: والأفضل فعلها بعد الدخول لأن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لم يولم على نسائه إلا بعد الدخول. انتهى…

“Its also mentioned in ‘Mughnī al-Muhtāj’ of Al-Khatīb Ash-Sharbīnī, ‘and the most appropriate time to organize the walīmah is after consummation because the Prophet ﷺ never arranged a walīmah for any of his wives until after consummation.”

وفي مختصر خليل في الفقه المالكي: الوليمة مندوبة بعد البناء، قال في الشرح الكبير على مختصر خليل: والمعتمد أن كونها بعد البناء مندوب ثان فإن فعلت قبله أجزأت.

Similarly, it’s mentioned in ‘Mukhtasar al-Khalīl’ (a principal book on Mālikī fiqh), “The walīmah is prescribed after consummation.” It’s stated in ‘Ash-Sharh al-Kabīr, a commentary on Mukhtasar al-Khalīl’, “the position of the Madh-hab is that the walīmah should come after consummation. However, if it were done before then, that suffices.”

What next for couples after ‘aqd?

These days, one of the issues I’m dealing with is that of failed marriages after ‘aqd and before walīmah as a result of minor disagreements or loss of interest due to infatuation and lust. Some couples have disagreed over the legality or otherwise of living together before the walīmah is done or being in ‘Khalwah (seclusion without a third party) and having sexual intercourse. There are also cases of whether or not the lady will observe any iddah in case they got separated before consummation since they haven’t had the walīmah.

READ ALSO:

Recently, I’ve heard of so many instances where the walīmah was delayed for months or even years after ‘aqd with spouses losing interest in each other. In between the ‘aqd and walīmah, some have found love elsewhere; some have had petty disagreements and irreconcilable differences and decided to call it quit.

One of the major causes of disagreements is whether or not couples can start being together in seclusion without the lady’s mahram. Some parents insist that their daughters cannot stay with their suitors after the ‘aqd until the walīmah is done. But the question is, can we still consider two lovers as strangers to each other after ‘aqd?

The Sharī’ah is very clear on this issue. What constitutes marriage and confers legitimacy of consummation on the couples is the ‘aqd by the bride’s father, his designate, or her guardian. As soon as the offer and acceptance had been done, he is permitted to be in seclusion with her and to enjoy her sexually and otherwise (with or without walīmah).

In the event that they separate after ‘aqd, and before consummation, there’s no ‘iddah (waiting period of 3 menstrual courses after divorce) on her. She’s also entitled to half of the mahr promised to her, if such agreement is reached. And if such agreement has not been reached, then, she’s entitled to some benefits based on what he can afford. But if it has been consummated, then, she will receive her full mahr and will do the ‘iddah. (Q. 2:236-237).

Admonition to parents and guardians

In this world of deceit and lies, where no one can absolutely be trusted, parents and guardians, and indeed bachelorettes live in serious dilemma as to which to follow between consummation before walīmah and after it. This fear is necessary to avoid being scammed by irresponsible brothers who ‘taste and dump’ sisters just a few months after marriage. Indeed we have heard about marriages that only lasted 4-7 months before Talāq. This is why most parents insist on waleemah before consummation.

However, I think that the only solution to this dilemma a return to the Sharī’ah, and not by trying to outsmart it. We have also witnessed wedding ceremonies of the rich and influential where millions of naira were spent on the reception, and which did not last but for a few months/years. And because the Sharī’ah implores us to be simple does not mean that we should be stupid.

The Messenger of Allāh ﷺ said, “If there comes to you one with whose character and religious commitment you are pleased, then give (your daughter or female relative under your care) to him in marriage…”. The onus is thus on the parents/guardians to make due diligence (note: not “checking it” with soothsayers) on their prospective son-in-law before consenting to the marriage. They should ask everyone that knows something about him; his siblings, friends, neighbors, colleagues, anyone. The family should designate a responsible and wise person to carryout a secret investigation about him. It may take months, but it surely guarantees that their daughter is not going into the wrong hands.

A sister told me last month that she’s afraid of leaving her two year old marriage because she acted against her father’s advice not to marry the brother (I don’t really know the reason for his objection as she never told me). Now, she’s tired of the marriage but fear what her father will say. Another said that after the ‘aqd, she realized that the guy only acted saint, that he lied his way into her heart. Now, she wants out, what should she do?

Conclusion

In conclusion, let’s all be sincere in all that we do, and stop embarrassing Islām. Do not delay your walīmah unnecessarily lest Shaytān causes dissent between you during the waiting period. Try ro make your walīmah simple, and affordable. Remember, wedding is just an event, marriage is the reality.

Dr. Sanusi Lafiagi is a lecturer in Department of Islamic Studies, Al-Hikmah University Ilorin

Loading

Advertisement

Opinion

UI, UCH and the Question of Inclusive Leadership

Published

on

UI, UCH and the Question of Inclusive Leadership
Saudi-based Nigerian Islamic scholar, Mallam Ibrahim Agunbiade

UI, UCH and the Question of Inclusive Leadership

By Mallam Ibrahim Agunbiade
agunbiadeib@gmail.com

July 23, 2026

The appointment of Professor Peter Olamakinde Olapegba as the 14th substantive Vice-Chancellor of the University of Ibadan (UI), effective November 1, 2026, is deserving of congratulations. I wish him a successful tenure as he takes on the responsibility of leading Nigeria’s premier university.

The reported competitive process through which he emerged—following the assessment of eight candidates and the shortlisting of five for the final stage—is commendable, provided it was conducted transparently and strictly on merit.

However, this development also raises an important question that deserves honest and constructive discussion: When will a qualified Muslim have the opportunity to emerge as Vice-Chancellor of the University of Ibadan?

This question is not directed at Professor Olapegba or his Christian faith. If he emerged as the best candidate through a fair and transparent process, then he deserves the support of all Nigerians. My concern is whether qualified Nigerians of different faiths enjoy equal opportunities to compete for the highest leadership positions in our national institutions.

The same question applies to the University College Hospital (UCH), Ibadan, where a change in leadership is expected in the coming months. It is therefore time for stakeholders to begin constructive conversations about the appointment of the next Chief Medical Director (CMD).

READ ALSO:

I believe that qualified and competent Muslim professionals should be encouraged and given a fair opportunity to compete for the position. If the best candidate happens to be a Muslim, there should be no hesitation in appointing that individual. Equally, if the best candidate is a Christian or belongs to another faith, the same principle of merit should apply.

This is not a call for religious quotas or preferential treatment. Rather, it is a call for a level playing field.

A Muslim should not be appointed simply because he is a Muslim, just as a Christian should not be appointed simply because he is a Christian. Leadership must be based on competence, integrity, experience, and the capacity to deliver.

However, merit can only be meaningful when every qualified candidate has a genuine opportunity to compete without bias or discrimination.

The University of Ibadan and UCH are national institutions that belong to all Nigerians. Their leadership should therefore reflect the principles of fairness, inclusiveness, equal opportunity, and merit.

As Professor Olapegba prepares to assume office, I congratulate him once again and wish him a successful tenure. At the same time, I believe this is the right moment to ask whether our leadership selection processes truly provide equal opportunities for all qualified Nigerians.

As the succession process at UCH approaches, I urge stakeholders to ensure that no qualified candidate is excluded—consciously or unconsciously—because of religious identity. Let the process be transparent, competitive, and firmly anchored on merit.

I am not asking for a Muslim to be appointed simply because he is a Muslim. I am asking that no qualified Muslim should be denied the opportunity to lead simply because of his religious identity.

The same principle should apply to every Nigerian, regardless of faith or background.

Let merit prevail. Let competence prevail. Let fairness prevail.

 

UI, UCH and the Question of Inclusive Leadership

Loading

Continue Reading

Opinion

Case for replicating the Oyo kidnap-rescue template nationwide, By Farooq Kperogi

Published

on

Case for replicating the Oyo kidnap-rescue template nationwide, By Farooq Kperogi
Farooq Kperogi

Case for replicating the Oyo kidnap-rescue template nationwide, By Farooq Kperogi

Because human beings are prone to perceive nonexistent patterns, connections and intentional design even in random or unrelated events, a cognitive tendency called apophenia, and because Nigerians have an enduring and justified mistrust of government, I have seen many people question whether the abduction and rescue of pupils and teachers from three schools in the Yawota and Ahoro-Esinele communities of Oriire Local Government Area in Oyo State really happened.

The mistrust is legitimate, but I find the apophenic leap from mistrust to the conclusion that the entire episode was staged a little unsettling.

I am convinced by the available evidence that pupils and teachers were indeed abducted by despicably homicidal terrorists. I have seen no credible evidence that any government paid criminals to stage the spectacle of an abduction and rescue.

Contemporary reporting documented the May 15 attacks, identified abducted children and teachers, interviewed their relatives and recorded the killing of two teachers before the surviving captives regained their freedom.

Terrorist groups have been abducting and killing innocent students for more than a decade and have never needed prompting from politicians to do so. Attributing their heinous crimes to sponsorship by rival factions within the Nigerian political class unintentionally exculpates these scoundrels and converts murderers into mere instruments of political intrigue.

That said, there is no complete clarity about how the pupils and teachers regained their freedom. Government critics have alleged, without evidence, that a huge ransom was paid as a precondition for their release. As I will show later, I doubt this.

But the government’s version of how the pupils and teachers were rescued is not entirely coherent, either.

READ ALSO:

The Presidency initially described the rescue as the outcome of a successful joint military, police and intelligence operation. It said eight suspected kidnappers were arrested, other members of the group were killed and neither ransom nor a prisoner exchange was involved. The abductors had allegedly demanded the release of a detained terrorist leader, but the government said he remained in custody and was being prosecuted.

The Army’s subsequent account was less dramatic than the Presidency’s early language suggested. It did not say troops stormed the camp and physically extracted the hostages during a firefight. Instead, it said a month-long intelligence operation identified the group’s leaders, informants, logistical networks and hideouts. According to the Army, arrests disrupted the group and exerted pressure that “ultimately led the terrorist group to unconditionally release the pupils and teachers.”

In a July 10 interview with Tinubu-owned TVC News, former DSS operative Seyi Adetayo offered a more specific but as yet uncorroborated explanation of the operational modalities of the rescue. He claimed that government security operatives identified and detained some kidnappers’ mothers, wives, children and other associates, sent recordings of those arrests to the abductors and combined coercive pressure with intelligence operations. He also claimed that the terrorists were warned that harm to their captives would bring harm to their relatives.

Based on the available evidence, the most defensible interpretation of what happened is that this was an unusually collaborative, intelligence-driven and coercively negotiated release. It was probably not a conventional battlefield rescue. Nor does it appear to have been a ransom-propelled release.

This actually fills me with hope. It means the government may have found a potentially effective template for disrupting terrorist networks and rescuing their victims without exposing abductees to the indiscriminate violence of a frontal military assault.

But the part of the template worth replicating is its lawful core: interagency cooperation, careful intelligence gathering, the identification of terrorist networks, the disruption of their supply routes and the arrest of culpable collaborators.

There would be no greater evidence for the truth of the government’s account of the Oriire rescue than the successful replication of its methods in unresolved mass-abduction cases nationwide.

READ ALSO:

The February 3-4 terrorist assault on Woro and neighboring Nuku communities in Kaiama Local Government Area of Kwara State not only killed scores of people but also led to a mass abduction. UNICEF reported that around 176 women, including pregnant women, and children were kidnapped from Woro.

More than five months later, the victims have not been released, according to the latest public reports. The terrorists have released videos showing women and small children appealing desperately for intervention. They, too, need the collaborative intelligence-gathering energies that security agencies deployed in Oyo.

On May 15, suspected militants abducted 42 children from Mussa Primary and Junior Secondary School and surrounding homes in Askira-Uba Local Government Area of Borno State. Some of the abductees were extremely young. According to the latest available reporting, all 42 remain missing.

There was a separate school attack in Lassa town in the same local government area in Borno on June 29. Gunmen attacked Government Day Secondary School while students were taking examinations. Eight people were rescued, but 36 students and one staff member remain captive. The students comprised 25 girls and 11 boys.

On June 7, in Magamin Diddi village in Maradun Local Government Area of Zamfara State, bandits reportedly invited villagers to what was presented as a peace meeting and then abducted them. The police confirmed that 39 people were taken, although community estimates were as high as 50. The kidnappers reportedly demanded ₦125 million and released some captives to communicate the demand. There has been no authoritative public account of the remaining captives’ release.

Nor should the passage of time cause older victims to disappear from the national conscience. Eighty-nine of the Chibok schoolgirls abducted in 2014 remain officially unaccounted for. Their families have endured more than a decade of promises, occasional discoveries and prolonged uncertainty.

There are many more cases than I have the space to chronicle in this column. Security forces presumably have records of mass abductions, including many that never made the national news. Yet Nigeria has developed a disturbing ritual in which outrage follows an abduction, officials promise decisive action and public attention eventually moves elsewhere while families remain imprisoned in terrifyingly crippling uncertainty.

The true test of the Oyo operation is not the applause it generated after one dramatic success but the number of forgotten captives its methods can bring home. If its intelligence model worked as the government says it did, it should become a national operational doctrine rather than a self-contained public-relations trophy.

Replicating it in Woro, Mussa, Lassa, Magamin Diddi and other communities would simultaneously rescue imperiled citizens, restore public faith in the capacity of the government to perform its primary duty and begin to extirpate a kidnapping economy that has destroyed communal peace and individual peace of mind across Nigeria. Until that happens, Oyo remains an encouraging breakthrough, but not yet a proven national template.

 

 

Case for replicating the Oyo kidnap-rescue template nationwide, By Farooq Kperogi

Kperogi is a renowned columnist and United States-based professor of journalism 

Loading

Continue Reading

Opinion

Shettima’s final test, by Azu Ishiekwene

Published

on

Azu Ishiekwene
Azu Ishiekwene

Shettima’s final test, by Azu Ishiekwene

Shettima’s final test, by Azu Ishiekwene

•Ishiekwene is the Editor-In-Chief of LEADERSHIP and author of the book, Writing for Media and Monetising It. 

Loading

Continue Reading

Trending