of his relative’s wedding feast, which includes what is forbidden, may be a cause of his guidance. He may reproach and rebuke himself, saying: “By committing this sin, I have brought about my relative’s estrangement from me,” and so he may desist. This often happens: when a person’s relative or companion has previously shunned him, he re-examines himself and reflects, and may perhaps turn back from the sin he had been committing.

The point is that attendance is not permissible, even if it leads to severing family ties. If family ties are severed, it is the one who issued the invitation who has severed them.

“If he attends and then becomes aware of it, he must remove it. If it persists because he is unable to remove it, he must leave. If he knows of it but neither sees nor hears it, he has a choice, ……”

His statement, “If he attends,” means: the invited person.

His statement, “then becomes aware of it,” means: of the evil.

His statement, “he must remove it,” is obligatory, based on the Prophet’s saying: “Whoever among you sees an evil, let him change it with his hand; if he is unable to do so, then with his tongue; and if he is unable to do so, then with his heart.” (1)

His statement, “If it persists”: the pronoun refers to the evil.

His statement, “because he is unable to remove it”: the lam denotes causation; that is, because he is unable to change it.

His statement, “he must leave”: this is the response to the conditional clause, and he must leave, because he cannot remain seated with people while an evil is being committed. The proof for this is what has preceded: Allah, Most High, says:

“And He has already revealed to you in the Book that when you hear Allah’s verses being disbelieved in and ridiculed, do not sit with them until they engage in a different conversation.” [al-Nisa’ 4:140]