Writings have circulated that review some of the recent Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) rules and issues promoted by some as "reducing the status of the female under the cover of religion and the name of Shar'a". These writings became the subject of controversy and skepticism. Such statements have been based on presenting contradictions of some Ahadeeth (the sayings of the Prophet (saw)) with the general representation of the status of women in Islam and the justice of Islam and its fairness for all humanity. These include some of the narrations that paired women with the Shaitan, or the crow, that females are the cause for male temptation, and that a woman is deficient in mind and Deen. This is in addition to other sayings talking about the creation of woman from a crooked rib, and others speak of wife-beating or her prostration to her husband. These and other suspicions are raised without showing the validity of these narratives or their methods of inferring rules (Istidlal). The writings have also focused on differentiating the Shariah texts and what the Muslim scholars (who are in the end human beings) understand of these texts. The writers invented the dialectic of the human element's weakness and tarnishing of the texts. They also had circulated that the research of Muslim scholars are filled with models of thought and language that is hostile to women, interpreted in the context of legislative legacy affected by a "masculine environment marginalizing women" and uses language that demeans women, contrary to the style of the Quran and how it honors women as a human being. Statements, briefings and daily columns converge on insulting, innuendo and questioning the Islamic jurisprudence through differentiation between texts that are consistent with the Islamic view of women and others that devalue women and despise her without referring to the bases that these rulings were built upon. All these writings claim to fight "legitimizing contempt for women" claiming to defend the religion and calling for the need to amend it of the statements that are offensive to Islam and distort its image.
The persons of these feminist pens (notably that mostly are male secularists) raise topics unknown to the majority, such as the non-inclusion of medical treatment by some scholars in the wife's Nafaqah (maintenance), hence they did not obligate the husband to treat his wife or pay the costs of her illness. They cite for example Ibn Qudamah in al-Mughani, "Nor should he buy medicines or pay the doctor's fees because it is meant to reform the body, hence this is not obligatory on him, like the tenant does not have to pay for repairs to the house if part of the house collapses". This analogy provoked their resentment and they taunted on what was in al-Mughani as a language inconsistent with the earnings of women in the threshold of the third millennium. They did not mention what was demonstrated by Ibn Qudamah in the same book: "If the woman is not accustomed to serve herself due to her status, or if she is weak, he shall have to provide a servant for her. For Allah's (swt) saying وعاشروهن بالمعروف)) "and live with them in kindness", and of living with her in kindness is to provide her a servant. Also, because it is what is constantly needed then it is part of Nafaqah". Thus, they were far from objectivity and fairness. Moreover, how would a regular adherent refer back to al-Mughani to check Ibn Qudaamah's, and many of the scholars' inference of the verse:
((لِيُنفِقْ ذُو سَعَةٍ مِّن سَعَتِهِ ۖ وَمَن قُدِرَ عَلَيْهِ رِزْقُهُ فَلْيُنفِقْ مِمَّا آتَاهُ اللَّهُ))
"Let a man of wealth spend from his wealth, and he whose provision is restricted- let him spend from what Allah has given him." [At-Talaq: 7]
The Muslim scholars did not consider medical treatment as part of the Nafaqah for it being of incidental matters and for the obviousness of being the responsibility of the guardian or the ruler. The same was the case with the claim by Imam al-Shafi'i, "If Nafaqah is for confinement then she is confined and if it is for the intercourse then the patient does not have intercourse and the Nafaqah is dropped". They cited this text segmented and truncated without even bothering to explain the meaning of confinement, and that the great Islam has obliged for women Nafaqah because she is bound to her original role as a mother and a wife, so she became confined from working and earning to provide a livelihood for herself. The venerable scholars have compared her status with the status of the Khaleefah as being confined from earning a livelihood because he assumes the task of caring for the affairs of Muslims. The full text from the Pearls of Imam al-Shafi'i in his book, Kitab ul-Umm, which he began with laying down Usul ul Fiqh (the principles of jurisprudence) in which he does not address trivialities, but thoroughly delves into the verses regarding the Ahkam with Istinbat (deriving) and understanding that he was gifted by his Almighty. The introduction of the text begins, "Al-Shafi'I (may Allah's mercy be on him) said, he said some people said that a man is not liable to provide Nafaqah for his wife until he consummated the marriage (has intercourse with her), and if he is absent then the Sultan is obliged to give her from her husband's money, if she requested the Nafaqah. But if he does not find his money, he imposes upon the husband the Nafaqah as a debt on him. But if she did not ask for it until after a period of time has passed and then she requested the Nafaqah, then he allocates for her Nafaqah from the day she requested it and does not obligate the expense of her Nafaqah during the period which is not requested by her. If the husband was unable to provide for her, the Sultan should not separate between them, and if he divorced her then he is obliged to provide for her Nafaqah whether he can return to her or not" (Kitabul Umm: The Disagreement on Women's Nafaqah). The statement did not address women or humiliate her as they claim. Thus the righteous Shar'a did justice to the woman and prescribed for her Nafaqah including that her husband is to bring for her a servant if he could. And even more importantly, he is to protect her with his soul; for if he dies protecting her honor, he is a martyr as stated in the hadith. Is it possible that he is commanded to die for her and then he degrades her?! Moreover, this ruling (hukm) is not binding on these writers, so whoever believes that the former scholars' understanding is weak, let him possess the implements of Ijtihad to present what he has, and then say "they are men and we are men", seeking in that the understanding that is closest to the right; not that he mocks and recounts the texts segmented and truncated in an apparently fraudulent manner, taking texts out of their context. The Mujtahid in Islam either errs or is on point and in both cases he is rewarded, because he exhorted efforts in deriving the legislative rule from its detailed Shar'i evidences as stated in the authentic Hadeeth«إِذَا اجْتَهَدَ الْحَاكِمُ فَأَصَابَ فَلَهُ أَجْرَانِ اثْنَانِ، وَإِذَا اجْتَهَدَ فَأَخْطَأَ فَلَهُ أَجْرٌ وَاحِدٌ» "If a judge makes a ruling striving to apply his reasoning and he is correct, than he will have two rewards, and if a judge makes a ruling striving to apply his reasoning and he is mistaken, then he will have one reward". However, those bidding on the Shar'i understanding have only shame in both realms and will be exposed to the eyes of the witnesses, Allah willing.
These pens deliberated selected categories from pioneered Fiqh books to indicate that the Islamic jurisprudential legacy suffers from a masculine perspective marginalizing women rather than considering her as a life partner worthy of appreciation and respect. These statements are cautiously disseminated and are focused on teeming criticism against the scholars and some novels, taunting that the sayings of scholars are just worthless personal opinions that could harm and not benefit, and that they are different from what Allah and the Prophet (saw) said. Thus, they ignore the definition of the legislative rule (Hukm Shar'i) in terms of being the speech of the Legislator concerning the actions of the servants. They also ignore the fact that research of jurisprudence scholars (Fuqahaa), are Shar'i research based on evidences that have come by way of revelation or guided by the revelation. So apart from that, we need not consider that nor is not under consideration in the first place. The common factor in these writings is that they make some of the views that are unknown to the vast majority of Muslims the focus of discussion and research, benefiting from the weakness of the Islamic culture in our time and the people's ignorance of these terms and evidence. So they enumerated opinions as if they were conclusive arguments, and raised the debate of the issues as opinions agreed upon by the scholars of the Ummah from all over the world. They altered the topic of discussion of the opinion of a particular scholar to the slandering of all scholars and questioning their fairness for women, so that women in their search became the focus of the entire legislative search. We also find them pouring their energies on odd Fiqh issues and rare words that are truncated and taken outside their meanings, not concerned of its owner's interpretation... besides other malicious methods, for the purpose of creating confusion and skepticism.
The question here, is the Muslim woman honored by defaming the scholars of Islam who laid down the Usul and have devoted themselves to the service of Shariah sciences in pursuit of understanding the texts that guide us to the worship of Allah the Almighty and to achieve the goal of creating us as human beings? Here is not the place for the defense of the likes of Al-Shafi'i and other endowed scholars, but belittling them is considered disregarding the words of Allah the Almighty:
((فَاسْأَلُوا أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِن كُنتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ))
"So ask the people of message if you do not know." [An-Nahl: 43]
There is no way to understand the Shariah texts except by a person who possesses the Shariah knowledge that qualifies him to do so or by asking the scholars; not as a matter of following the Faqih personally, rather as a matter of standing on the address of the legislator regarding the actions of the servants. This marginalization of the Islamic jurisprudence and taking the issue of women according to the whims in order to deviate Muslims from relaying on the Shar'i text from Quran and the correct Sunnah; and what is guided by them of the consensus of the Companions (Ijma'a of the Sahaba) and proper analogy (Qiyyas), so that the Muslim woman would replace them with resorting to whims and opinion based on skepticism. So that she falls prey to what she has escaped from and becomes a slave to the whims of human beings. Hence she leaves the ruling of Shar'a for the ruling of the incomplete human being and the worship of the Creator to the worship of the limited created being.
This media onslaught did not come with something new but is an insertion that come to be known as "Islamic feminism". Or an attempt to reconcile feminism and Islam, and to rely on feminist analytical curricula and screening Islamic sciences from the perspective of women to be revised on the basis of "justice" and equality and to be devoid of any (preferentially) thought that distinguishes between men and women, battling the idea of stewardship (Qiwama) and the guardianship (wulayah) of girls. This feminist thought, falsely attributed to Islam, promotes a vision based on equality and depends on the Quran as a static text protected from human's intervention. It claims that the ideas proposed by the Muslims in their Fiqh and Shariah researches are inevitably affected by what they called a male language hostile to women. It also claims that the earliest Scholars each of them is the son of his environment and influenced by what it was at that era ... The problem in this approach is the application of the theory of evolution on this matter; by applying the Darwinian hypothesis that views the era of the earlier Scholars as a backward era in attaining a status and elevation of women both physically and morally, and that what women are currently witnessing in the world is a different situation... This hypothesis is unfounded and is contrary to the sublimity and elevation that Muslim women enjoyed under Islam. Such an argument is only accepted if it is built on an outlook derived from the sayings of the Orientalists and the writings of the Western travelers, which became the focus of attention of Western academics, for its lies and malicious allegations that are incompatible with the foundations of scientific research. This Darwinist hypothesis is contrary to reality, and in this regard, it is suffice to say to these tendentious pens: Look around you and find the suffering of today's women across the world and the consumption of their rights. Whereas, the Shar'a has bestowed women their full legislative rights, so the woman was a mother and a housewife and an honor that must be protected. She had a right to full and effective participation in society, and received reverence from Scholars who have taken from her Shariah science. Hafiz Al-Dhahabi said, "It was never reported that a woman perjured in the narration of a Hadeeth"... Al-Shawkaani also said, "It was not conveyed from any of the Scholars rejecting information from a woman for being a woman ...!" They are promoting the argument that former scholars are the sons of their environment with regards to the perception of women with inferiority; and the question that comes to mind is whether the Faqih, who lived in the golden age of the Islamic thought under the shade of an Islamic State that spread the light of culture and enlightenment across the earth, to the extent that the kings of Europe sent their princesses to quench from Muslims' science and culture. Therefore, if the Faqih is the son of his environment, then how could you and the fruit of your traditional thought describe his reality with backwardness, regression and dependency on all levels!
In addition, the so-called Islamic feminism arose in the context of theories of postmodernism -related to knowledge which is linked to secularism and Western liberalism and to the idea of freedoms and equality. It considers language and history from the perspective of masculinity and femininity, while this standard is worthless in Islam not from the standpoint of the Legislator (Exalted is He above this) nor from the standpoint of the jurist; as this is considered giving prevalence to the whims. The spreading of this western view in the society is not intended to discuss the situation of women nor to claim their rights, but is aimed at what is beyond that; as it aims to reformulate the Ummah's identity in the process of Westernization enlivening the work of the advocates of renewal at the beginning of the last century, such as Mohammed Abdo and Al-Afghani.
It is startling that the lips of these male feminists and women who echo their arguments, to voice calls for prospecting and revising the legislative heritage which is insulting to women. This call is a matter of poisoning the core; for these are Fiqhi research grounded in Revelation, and are not revised in terms of moral and presumption. However they are revised based on Shariah; thereby, the text is weakened or conflicts with other evidence according to Usool Shari'I not simply the Faqih's style in addressing the subject and the congruence of this method with the currently dominant language. This may be accepted if we apply it on the popular tradition such as proverbs and aphorisms that are dominated by a language belittling women. But how is this possible with legitimate rules (Ahkam Shariah) associated with evidences through the revelation?! This shallow view of the texts, and clinging to the outer layer of issues, instead of searching for the purpose of the text and the worship aspect in it, is closer to the model of prima donna in the Western culture - "A vain, worthless, superficial woman seeking glorification and reverence". Worse still, is the issue of these suspicious calls by secularists calling day and night to separate religion from politics and the commitment of the Scholars to the pulpits to give speeches, advice and Ahkam of the state of childbirth and menstruation and claiming that politics needs specialists. Therefore what about the parasites of the Shariah science while they are its most ignorant people and do not excel to understand the science of Jarh wa Tadeel (criticizing and praising) to assess the authentication of one Hadeeth of the Ahadeeth that they are waging the attacks against and search for a weakness in them to establish the argument that the Islamic jurisprudence needs moral probation by those lacking morals? Do we establish the fixed on the basis of the variable, and measure religious texts with a fickle discretionary scale affected by the whims of people and walk behind the followers of the path of his predecessors hand span by hand span and arm's length by arm's length? Then, why not revise the Greek jurisprudence of the hatred of women and the misogynic language, since it was supplemented by the hatred against women and derived its name from it. Or is it the hate of women by the Greek considered a thought and a sacred philosophy?! Why not revise the writings of Western thinkers in the era of Enlightenment of contempt for women, instead of keeping it hushed and forgotten?!
This call for revising Fiqh of language hostile to women is at the very least a call of suspicious. It ignores obstructing the Shariah rules that are agreed upon, and matters that have not been subject to dispute or controversy in the presentation style "not ruined by problems in the text or understanding". Such as obstructing the Hudood (punishment system), not obligating the state to maintain Nafaqah for all its subjects and suspending Jihad. They are satisfied with systems that disrupted and immobilized the Shariah laws to be replaced by human regimes and man-made laws that wronged women and plundered her rights. Do you leave what is apparent like the sun in the sky, drill in the books for every arcane detail, and exploit it truncated of its context for malicious purposes... How do you pass your judgment?!
Will a sagacious Muslim woman accept that someone agitates her feelings and claims that she is a full partner, a crowned queen and a free woman who has to declare war on the law of Allah; So that she turns a blind eye to the real injustices that we witness with our own eyes from wasting away of women's rights under the rule of man-made laws, and the restriction of their legitimate rights, which the Lord of the Throne gave her without her demanding them? How many women are robbed of their rights to inheritance by their own families?! How many women deserving Nafaqah but are left without enough to live on?! How many were left pending at the courts' gates begging for a divorce paper from a husband who made her taste all sorts of ill torment?! How many girls have had their guardians refuse to marry them to men of good Deen and manners?! How many women have chosen to engage in innovative manners in marriage which dissipate women of their Shar'i rights under the malicious and oppressive capitalist surroundings?! The application of those Shar'i rights is what protects women from despair, misery and poverty. It was narrated by Muslim from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) said that the Prophet (saw) said:
«دِينَارٌ أَنْفَقْتَهُ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ، وَدِينَارٌ أَنْفَقْتَهُ فِي رَقَبَةٍ، وَدِينَارٌ تَصَدَّقْتَ بِهِ عَلَى مِسْكِينٍ، وَدِينَارٌ أَنْفَقْتَهُ عَلَى أَهْلِكَ، أَعْظَمُهَا أَجْرًا الَّذِي أَنْفَقْتَهُ عَلَى أَهْلِكَ»
"From the Dinar (money) that you spend in the path of Allah, the Dinar that you spent in freeing a slave, the Dinar that you give in charity, and the Dinar that you spent on your family, the one that is the greatest in reward is the one that you spent on your family." (Narrated by Muslim).
So where is this right, that Muslim scholars did not differ by before the inauguration of these trials, or is this the avoidance of persecuting regimes that pay the wage for these biased articles?!
These people are inspired by Mohammed Abdo when he reflected on the texts with a feminist view that claims women's advocacy and the fight against masculine language through fraud and subjugation of texts. This includes what he said on the subject of the creation of Eve from Adam's rib, saying: "This story was not mentioned in the Qur'an as it was mentioned in the Torah", ignoring the saying of the Prophet (saw) in the Saheehayn: «اسْتَوْصُوا بِالنِّسَاءِ فَإِنَّ الْمَرْأَةَ خُلِقَتْ مِنْ ضِلَعٍ وَإِنَّ أَعْوَجَ شَيْءٍ فِي الضِّلَعِ أَعْلَاهُ...» "Be advised to treat women righteously, for a woman is created from a rib, and the most curved portion of the rib is its upper portion."
It also includes the claim of some scholars like Abdo and others that polygamy is contempt for women and insults her and is only minimally permissible. Consequently, had the noble Prophet (saw) insulted any of his wives? Those who look at Islam in accordance with the requirements of the time often deviate from the track, so they outweigh the requirements of the time and addressing the public, rather than to propel in the orbit of the truth (Haq) and follow the Shar'i rule.
The attempt to bring the Islamic jurisprudence to the language of gender is like trying to insert a dress woven by a skilled maker through the eye of a narrow needle; it is a random thinking incompatible with reality. These claims are but Islamization and Arabization of ideas that extended from Western roots and belong to an imported ideology alien to society. They are researches that exploit women, in the context of the feminist movement in the Muslim countries, to pass the ideas of secularism and popularizing what is rejected by Muslims. Legitimate texts are perceived from the context of the strength of the evidences, and the one who is trying to exploit them to pass certain agendas is the one who degrades woman and abuses her; sometimes by publishing texts for a particular concept and at other times to exploit them. Otherwise, why should those who wanted to correct people's attitudes and their negative viewpoint towards the Muslim woman today, delve in Ahkam Shariah in the wombs of the mothers of books, unknown to the majority. Meanwhile turning a blind eye to a ridiculous television drama that focuses the inferiority perspective towards women and associate her with qualities of gossip, greed, selfishness, betrayal and excessive shallowness, as if these qualities are intrinsic in women?! How could such a person assault Islamic jurisprudence and claim to reveal its depths and sift through its texts while he watches a woman in front of him used as a commodity; bought and sold, and her dignity humiliated?! Why does he raise insults and innuendo against Fiqh and its contempt for women while he watches scenes that brutalize women and beat them for entertainment and recreation, in a televised drama instilling backwardness, and reactionary channels of adversity and obscenity?! Scenes that spread violence and violate the dignity of women and adversely affecting young people and degrading women in a cycle of violence, instead of spreading compassion as insisted by the Shar'a.
In addition to the above, the only way to change the negative attitudes towards women in Muslim countries, and to elevate the ways of people's interaction is to change the Muslims' concepts about life. Since, morals are part of the Islamic law and they are Shar'i rules, and are qualities that a Muslim must be characterized by to attain pleasure from Allah... Thus it is inevitable to seek the arbitration of Sharia making it the center of our awareness, ranging from applying«رِفْقًا بِالْقَوَارِيرِ» "Be gentle to the tender vases (women)", to society accepting the role of women at work and in Hisba (market inspector), to achieve effective participation in society to carry out their full legitimate rights. If they were serious about addressing the exploitation of Shariah and the Shariah texts, then they should seek to apply it uncompromised without one laying his finger on a single character and select what he wishes. Morals in Islam are inseparable from the legislative rule (Hukm Shar'i). However, the secularist demands to dismiss Shariah from life but apply the morals of Islam at once; this is astonishingly inconceivable...
((أفَتُؤْمِنُونَ بِبَعْضِ الْكِتَابِ وَتَكْفُرُونَ بِبَعْضٍ))؟
"So do you believe in some scripture and disbelieve in part?" [Al-Baqara: 85]
Oh Muslims, beware! These tendentious calls are designed to embrace women's rights (which they made it fall under the umbrella of human rights) as a measure to assess the Shar'i texts and to build on its basis our understanding of Shar'i rule. The aim of these calls is reverence for the idol of women's rights and abolishing the pure understanding of Islam. Islam views women and men in contrast to the prevailing view in the current world order and its penetrating institutions that suffocated the Muslim women. The Islamic viewpoint is based on focusing the differences between men and women, and that this distinction is from human nature. In women attaining this femininity there is happiness and advancement. Although the Lord of the Throne did not differentiate between men and women in terms of reward and punishment, however, the Almighty had pertained to her certain matters and allowed her to share with men other matters, and most of all that Allah will account her only by that she is mandated, and Allah does not mandate her more than what she can bear. The most important factor is the subject of reward and punishment, and this factor was not under the consideration or the interest of the people of the feminist literature, because their views are focused in the constricted worldly frame, whereas the hearts of Muslims yearn for meeting Allah and His pleasure and the Paradise.
((فَاسْتَجَابَ لَهُمْ رَبُّهُمْ أَنِّي لا أُضِيعُ عَمَلَ عَامِلٍ مِنْكُمْ مِنْ ذَكَرٍ أَوْ أُنْثَى بَعْضُكُمْ مِنْ بَعْضٍ))
"And their Lord responded to them: Never will I allow to be lost the work of any worker among you, whether male or female; you are of one another". [Ali-Imran: 195]
Written for the Central Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir by
Um Yahya Bint Muhammad
!["Close friends, that Day, will be enemies to each other, except for the righteous" [Az-Zukhruf: 67]](/en/media/k2/items/cache/5b74654ec36fd487c37a4827a65a7e86_M.jpg)
