/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Treatment of women and tribalism?



ragdollcat1982
05-12-2009, 12:41 AM
The Western media portrays Islam as a religion that enslaves and oppresses women. One comes the practice of female gential mutilation or female circumcicsion? This is practiced mainly in Africa by both Muslims and Christians. Other things that come to my mind is the treatment of women under the Taliban Afganistan where women were forbidden to work, denied an education and access to medical care. Many of these women had no male relatives to support them because they were killed during the various wars, they were left to beg in the street. The taliban used Islam to justify the treatment of women in this manner. When I read the Quran and from my discussions with other Muslims this is tribal customs, not Islamic. Another one is the laws of women in Saudi Arabia, where women are forbidden to drive, they cannot get an education or even life saving medical treatment without the permission of a male relative. Is this allowed under Islam or are these governments simply mingling their preIslamic tribal customs with Islam? One would think that if this treatment of women is against Islamic teaching that more Muslims and clerics would speak out against it. Why the silence? If I do decide to embrace Islam I would like to embrace the faith as it was intended to be, not tribal customs. I dont mean to offend I would just like to get some clarifcation.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
'Abd-al Latif
05-12-2009, 10:19 AM
This is the ruling on female circumcision:

Circumcision for women is not obligatory

Q.I would like to know more about female circumcision in Islam. I have read the ahadith where the Prophet told a woman how to perform it. I would like to know if it is optional or obligatory, and - if it is obligatory - whether there is a certain way to do it (what part should be cut?).


A.Praise be to Allah.

Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said, in his book al-Mughni: "Circumcision is obligatory for men, and it is an honour for women, but it is not obligatory for them. This is the opinion of many scholars. (Imam) Ahmad said: For men it is more strictly required, but for women it is less strictly required." (al-Mughni 1/70).

Circumcision of the female consists of the removal of a part of the clitoris, which is situated above the opening of the urethra. The Sunnah is not to remove all of it, but only a part. (al-Mawsu‘ah al-Fiqhiyyah 19/28).

In this matter, it is wise to follow the interests of the female: if the clitoris is large, then part of it should be removed, otherwise it should be left alone. This size of the clitoris will vary from woman to woman, and there may be differences between those from hot climates and those from cold climates.

A hadith on the topic of female circumcision has been attributed to the Prophet (Peace and Blessings of Allah be upon Him), according to which he said: "Circumcision is a Sunnah for men, and an honour for women," but there is some debate as to the authenticity of this hadith. See Silsilah al-Ahadith al-Da‘ifah by al-Albani, no. 1935.

How circumcision is to be performed is mentioned in the hadith narrated by Umm ‘Atiyah, may Allah be pleased with her, according to which a woman used to perform circumcisions in Madinah. The Prophet (Peace and Blessings of Allah be upon Him) told her: "Do not abuse (i.e. do not go to extremes in circumcising); that is better for the woman and more liked by her husband." (Reported by Abu Dawud in al-Sunan, Kitab al-Adab; he said this hadith is da‘if).

The scholars’ opinions cited above should be sufficient explanation. And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid

http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/427
Reply

'Abd-al Latif
05-12-2009, 10:27 AM
The ruling on the ban of women driving was passed by a promonent scholar of Islam known as abdul Aziz ibn Abdullah ibn Baaz, more common known as Ibn Baz. It should be known that the fatwa the shaykh gave is restricted to Saudi Arabia and the ruling may vary from one country to another. One should go to the scholar of his country and ask for the rulings which are specific to his land as everyone lives according to their conditions.

Read this article as it will help you understand the whole scenario:

Does the ruling on driving a car vary from one country to another?


Q.Throughout the Muslim world we find that there are differences between one country and another, in manner of dress, customs and traditions. For example we see that in some countries our sisters wear niqaab, because they follow the fatwa that says that niqaab is obligatory, but that is not widespread in another country, and the opinion that they follow there is that niqaab is not obligatory, rather it is mustahabb. Similarly with regard to women driving cars, in some countries the shaykhs have declared it to be haraam because of the harms that would result if it were allowed, whilst in other countries it is a very ordinary thing for a woman to drive a car, and they have been doing so for decades.
To what extent is there flexibility in rulings? Is what is happening correct, I mean is it right that something may be obligatory in one country and mustahabb in another?.

A.Praise be to Allaah.

The rulings of sharee’ah are of two types:

1 – Those where the evidence of sharee’ah points to the ruling, regardless of various customs or what good or bad consequences may result.

In this case the ruling is fixed and does not vary from one place to another or from one person to another, unless a person is forced to do something, is sick or is excused, in which case the ruling is waived as much as required by his situation according to what it says in sharee’ah.

An example of such a fixed rule is the obligation to offer the five daily prayers, to fast Ramadaan, to enjoin what is good and forbid what is evil, to seek knowledge, etc.

Another example is the obligation for the Muslim woman to cover her entire body, including the face and hands. This ruling is obligatory and does not vary from one place to another.

We have already discussed this obligation in questions no. 21134 and 13647, where we quote the evidence for that.

2 – Rulings which are based on specific reasons, or where the ruling as to whether a thing is forbidden, allowed or obligatory depends upon whatever good or bad consequences will result from that, and where there is no shar’i evidence to suggest a fixed ruling that does not vary. The issue of women driving cars may come under this heading.

The scholars have issued fatwas stating that it is haraam because of the negative consequences that may result from it.

This applies completely to the land of the two Holy Sanctuaries. With regard to other countries, the matter should be referred to trustworthy scholars for they know their countries’ situation best.

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

People have spoken a great deal in the al-Jazeerah newspaper about the issue of women driving cars. It is well known that it leads to evil consequences which are well known to those who promote it, such as being alone with a non-mahram woman, unveiling, reckless mixing with men, and committing haraam actions because of which these things were forbidden. Islam forbids the things that lead to haraam and regards them as being haraam too.

Allaah commanded the wives of the Prophet and the believing women to stay in their houses, to observe hijab and to avoid showing their adornments to non-mahrams because of the permissiveness that all these things lead to, which spells doom for society. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And stay in your houses, and do not display yourselves like that of the times of ignorance, and perform As-Salaah (Iqamat-as-Salaah), and give Zakaah and obey Allaah and His Messenger. Allaah wishes only to remove Ar-Rijs (evil deeds and sins) from you, O members of the family (of the Prophet), and to purify you with a thorough purification”

[al-Ahzaab 33:33]

“O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies (i.e. screen themselves completely except the eyes or one eye to see the way). That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed”

[al-Ahzaab 33:59]

“And tell the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent (like both eyes for necessity to see the way, or outer palms of hands or one eye or dress like veil, gloves, headcover, apron), and to draw their veils all over Juyoobihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms) and not to reveal their adornment except to their husbands, or their fathers, or their husband’s fathers, or their sons, or their husband’s sons, or their brothers or their brother’s sons, or their sister’s sons, or their (Muslim) women (i.e. their sisters in Islam), or the (female) slaves whom their right hands possess, or old male servants who lack vigour, or small children who have no sense of feminine sex. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And all of you beg Allaah to forgive you all, O believers, that you may be successful”

[al-Noor 24:31]

And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “No man is alone with a (non-mahram) woman but the Shaytaan is the third one present.”

Islam forbids all the things that may lead to immorality or accusations of immoral conduct made against chaste women, who never even think of anything touching their chastity, and it has stipulated a punishment for that which is one of the most severe of punishments, in order to protect society from the spread of the causes of immorality.

Women driving is one of the means that lead to that, and this is something obvious, but ignorance of the rulings of sharee’ah and the negative consequences of carelessness with regard to the things that lead to evil – as well as diseases of the heart that prevail at present – and love of permissiveness and enjoying looking at non-mahram women all lead to indulging in this and similar things, with no knowledge and paying no attention to the dangers that it leads to. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Say (O Muhammad): (But) the things that my Lord has indeed forbidden are Al-Fawaahish (great evil sins and every kind of unlawful sexual intercourse) whether committed openly or secretly, sins (of all kinds), unrighteous oppression, joining partners (in worship) with Allaah for which He has given no authority, and saying things about Allaah of which you have no knowledge”

[al-A’raaf 7:33]

“and follow not the footsteps of Shaytaan (Satan). Verily, he is to you an open enemy”

[al-Baqarah 2:168]

And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I am not leaving behind me any fitnah more harmful to men than women.”

It was narrated that Hudhayfah ibn al-Yamaan (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “The people used to ask the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) about good things, but I used to ask him about bad things, fearing that I would live to see such things. I said, ‘O Messenger of Allaah, we were in a state of ignorance (jaahiliyyah) and evil, then Allaah sent us this good (i.e., Islam). Will there be any evil after this good?’ He said, ‘Yes.’ I said, ‘Will there by any good after that evil?’ He said, ‘Yes, but it will be tainted.’ I said, ‘How will it be tainted?’ He said, ‘(There will be) some people who will guide others in a way that is not according to my guidance. You will approve of some of their deeds and disapprove of others.’ I said, ‘Will there be any evil after that good?’ He said, ‘Yes, there will be people calling at the gates of Hell, and whoever responds to their call, they will throw them into it (the Fire).’ I said, ‘O Messenger of Allaah, describe them to us.’ He said, ‘They will be from among our people, speaking our language.’ I said, ‘What do you command me to do if I live to see such a thing?’ He said, ‘Adhere to the jamaa’ah (group, community) of the Muslims and their imaam (leader).’ I asked, ‘What if there is no jamaa’ah and no leader?’ He said, ‘Then keep away from all those groups, even if you have to bite (eat) the roots of a tree until death overtakes you whilst you are in that state.’” Agreed upon.

I call upon every Muslim to fear Allaah in all that he says and does and to beware of fitnah and those who promote it. He should keep away from all that angers Allaah or leads to His wrath, and he should be extremely cautious lest he be one of these callers to Hell of whom the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) tells us in this hadeeth.

May Allaah protect us from the evil of fitnah and its people, and protect this ummah from the evil of those who promote bad things. May He help the writers of our newspapers and all the Muslims to do that which pleases Him and may He set the Muslims straight and save them in this world and in the Hereafter, for He is Able to do that.

Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn Baaz, 3/351-353.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen was asked: I hope you can explain the ruling on women driving cars. And what is your opinion on the idea that women driving cars is less dangerous than their riding with non-mahram drivers?

The answer to this question is based on two principles which are well known among the Muslim scholars:

The first principle is: that whatever leads to haraam is itself haraam. The evidence for this is the verse in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And insult not those whom they (disbelievers) worship besides Allaah, lest they insult Allaah wrongfully without knowledge”

[al-An’aam 6:108]

So Allaah forbids insulting the gods of the mushrikeen – even though that serves an interest – because it leads to insults against Allaah.

The second principle is: that warding off evil – if it is equal to or greater than the interests concerned – takes precedence over bringing benefits. The evidence for that is the verse in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“They ask you (O Muhammad) concerning alcoholic drink and gambling. Say: In them is a great sin, and (some) benefits for men, but the sin of them is greater than their benefit”

[al-Baqarah 2:219]

Allaah has forbidden alcohol and gambling even though there is some benefit in them, so as to ward off the evils that result from them.

Based on these two principles, the ruling on women driving should be clear, because women driving includes a number of evils, including the following:

1 – Removal of hijab, because driving a car involves uncovering the face which is the site of fitnah and attracts the glance of men. A woman is only regarded as beautiful or ugly on the basis of her face, i.e., if it is said that she is beautiful or ugly, people only think in terms of her face. If something else is meant it must be specified, so that one would say that she has beautiful hands or beautiful hair or beautiful feet. Hence it is known that the face is the focal point. If someone were to say that a woman can drive a car without taking off her hijab, by covering her face and wearing dark glasses over her eyes, the answer to that is that this is not what really happens when women drive cars. Ask those who have seen them in other countries. Even if we assume that this could be applied initially, it would not last for long, rather the situation would soon become as it is in other countries where women drive. This is how things usually develop; they start out in an acceptable fashion then they get worse.

2 – Another evil consequence of women driving cars is that they lose their modesty, and modesty is part of faith as is narrated in a saheeh report from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Modesty is the noble characteristic that befits the nature of women and protects them from being exposed to fitnah. Hence it is mentioned in a metaphorical sense (in Arabic), in the phrase “more modest than a virgin in her seclusion.” Once a woman’s modesty is lost, do not ask about her.

3 – It also leads to women going out of the house a great deal, but their homes are better for them – as the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said – because those who love to drive enjoy it very much, hence you see them driving around in their cars here and there for no purpose, except to enjoy driving.

4 – You may find a divorced woman going where she wants, whenever she wants and however she wants, for whatever purpose she wants, because she is alone in her car, at any time she wants of the day or night. She may stay out until late at night. If people are complaining about this with regard to young men, then what about young women, going all over the place the length and breadth of the country, and maybe even beyond its borders.

5 – It is a means of women rebelling against their families and husbands; at the least provocation they may go out of the house and drive in the car to wherever they think they can get some peace, as happens in the case of some young men, who are able to put up with more than women.

6 – It is a cause of fitnah in many places: when stopping at the traffic lights, or at gas stations, or at inspection points, or when stopped by policemen at the scenes of traffic infractions or accidents, or if the car stalls and the woman needs help. What will her situation be in this case? Perhaps she may come across an immoral man who takes advantage of her in return for helping her, especially if her need is great to the point of urgency.

7 – When women drive it leads to overcrowding in the streets, or it deprives some young men of the opportunity to drive cars when they are more deserving of that.

8 – It causes fitnah to flourish because women – by their nature – like to make themselves look good with clothing etc. Do you not see how attached they are to fashion? Every time a new fashion appears they throw away what they have and rush to buy the new things, even if it is worse than what they have. Do you not see the adornments that they hang on their walls? In the same way – or perhaps more so – with the cars that they drive, whenever a new model appears they will give up the first for the new one.

With regard to the questioner asking, “And what is your opinion on the idea that women driving cars is less dangerous than their riding with non-mahram drivers?” – what I think is that both of them involve danger, and one is more serious than the other in some ways, but there is no necessity that would require one to do either of them.

Please note that I have answered this question at length because of the controversy that surrounds the issue of women driving cars, and the pressure faced by conservative Saudi society, which is striving to adhere to its religious commitment and morals, to allow women to drive cars.

This would be nothing strange if it were to come from an enemy who seeks to cause harm this land which is the last bastion of Islam that the enemies of Islam wish to penetrate. But what is even stranger is that this is coming from our own people who speak our language and live under our banner, people who are dazzled by what the kaafir nations have of material advancement and admire their ways which are devoid of any moral restrictions.

End quote from Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen.

With regard to countries in which woman are allowed to drive cars, Muslim women should avoid that as much as possible, for the reasons mentioned above.

In cases of necessity, such as helping accident victims or fleeing from a criminal, there is nothing wrong with a Muslim woman using a car in such situations, if she cannot find a man to help her.

There are other cases, such as women who have to go out to work and have no husband, father or guardian to look after them and no income from the government to meet their needs, and they cannot find work that they can do at home, such as some internet-based jobs, so they are forced to go out. In that case they can use the means of transportation that poses the least danger to them.

There may be some means of transportation that are available only to women, or a group of women may hire a driver to take them to work or university. Using taxis– for those who can afford it – may be better than using public transportation where a woman may be exposed to humiliation and aggression, so they should use taxis, so long as they are not alone with the driver.

If a woman is forced to drive a car in cases of extreme need, then she should drive wearing full jilbaab and hijab, and with fear of Allaah.

We have already mentioned above what constitutes need.

Women should also seek fatwas from the trustworthy scholars in their own countries – not those who are too lenient – who understand both sharee’ah and the situation in that country.

And Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“So keep your duty to Allaah and fear Him as much as you can”

[al-Taghaabun 64:16]

We ask Allaah to keep us safe and sound. May Allaah send blessings and peace upon our Prophet Muhammad and upon his family and companions.
Islam Q&A

http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/45880
Reply

ragdollcat1982
05-13-2009, 04:57 AM
From my religious prespective I can understand boys being circumcsied as it is removing a piece of skin, but doing it to a female is something that I find appalling. God designed the clitoris for a woman to be able to enjoy relations with her husband and only her husband. Both the Bible and the Quran state that both spouses are entilted to intimacy and pleasure from each other, cutting the clitoris off in whole or part would be denying the wife to enjoy that at its fullest IMHO.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Dawud_uk
05-13-2009, 06:54 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
The Western media portrays Islam as a religion that enslaves and oppresses women. One comes the practice of female gential mutilation or female circumcicsion? This is practiced mainly in Africa by both Muslims and Christians. Other things that come to my mind is the treatment of women under the Taliban Afganistan where women were forbidden to work, denied an education and access to medical care. Many of these women had no male relatives to support them because they were killed during the various wars, they were left to beg in the street. The taliban used Islam to justify the treatment of women in this manner. When I read the Quran and from my discussions with other Muslims this is tribal customs, not Islamic. Another one is the laws of women in Saudi Arabia, where women are forbidden to drive, they cannot get an education or even life saving medical treatment without the permission of a male relative. Is this allowed under Islam or are these governments simply mingling their preIslamic tribal customs with Islam? One would think that if this treatment of women is against Islamic teaching that more Muslims and clerics would speak out against it. Why the silence? If I do decide to embrace Islam I would like to embrace the faith as it was intended to be, not tribal customs. I dont mean to offend I would just like to get some clarifcation.
peace,

first of all you need to seperate truth from falsehood...

a lot of allegations are made with little or no proof by those who want to spread falsehood and corruption on the earth so slander those who are doing good.

i'll give you an example, did the taliban ban women from hospitals? no, they didnt but i am sure most people saw the newspaper articles a few years ago stating this and seeing the pictures of women being taken out of hospitals all over kabul.

so if they were removed from these hospitals, how can say they werent banned from hospitals? well it was because when the taliban took kabul they inherited a situation where many of the hospitals out of necessity were mixed but shortly after taking power a brand new purpose built women's hospital was built with financing from the kuwaiti government.

so the reality of the situation was that these women were being taken out of old hospitals and taken to a brand new women's hospital so who spread the lies of the opposite of the truth and send all the misleading pictures to the western news agencies?

it was an organisation called RAWA, the revolutionary associatin of the women of afghanistan which was a group of apostate women who hated islam and the law of God and so wanted to attack those who wanted shariah anyway they could.

RAWA would also lift up their burkha's as they worked past taliban police, knowing they would be hit on the ankles by the taliban for being immodest but having someone else nearby with a camara for the perfect shot to send to the western media of the taliban hitting women,

so you can see RAWA are a bunch of apostates and habituable liars, who hate islam and its God given laws and regulations so slander it anyway they can and the simple taliban, mostly being rural Quran students didnt really have any defence against such tactics.

they did ban many women from mixed work environments, but also instigated many women's work programs, helped women so they wouldnt need to beg by giving food.

they did attack a lot of schools, girls as well as boys schools but most of the schools they destroyed were mixed sex schools which they disagreed with where the curriculum was taught which was against the teachings of islam.

you see the education system was once again in a mess, with every faction wanting to indoctrinate the children according to their idiology, with various mixtures of secularism, communism, socialism etc in the curriculum.

the taliban orders the closing of such schools if they will not teach according to islam and if they refuse then they have destroyed these schools and killed these agents of the government who want to brainwash the children away from islam.

they did also tell some girls they must go home because of the situation of older boys and girls being taught together which is not allowed in islam, but this was meant to be a temporary situation as they didnt have enough school places for all and so felt if either the boys or girls must be sent home from the school in a region it was better it was the girls as the boys are the future men and breadwinners of the family,

this was a decision i disagree with, but i understand why they made it and would have obeyed it if i was there.

now many clerics do speak out against mistreatment of women, it is just you dont here about it in the western media as it goes against what they believe about islam so they dont report these stories if they even here of them at all.

hope this has helped in your search for the truth,

peace,
Reply

Dawud_uk
05-14-2009, 06:12 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by ragdollcat1982
From my religious prespective I can understand boys being circumcsied as it is removing a piece of skin, but doing it to a female is something that I find appalling. God designed the clitoris for a woman to be able to enjoy relations with her husband and only her husband. Both the Bible and the Quran state that both spouses are entilted to intimacy and pleasure from each other, cutting the clitoris off in whole or part would be denying the wife to enjoy that at its fullest IMHO.
peace ragdollcat,

the prophet muhammad (saws) taught us there is no embarressment in matters of the deen so lets deal with your objection here head on and show you why your objection is incorrect.

removing the clitoris is indeed haram, as it denies the women the right that Allah has given them to enjoy marriage, the prophet muhammad (saws) teaching men not to stop before their wives' had finished enjoying themselves.

but the partial removal of the cliteral hood and sometimes a small part of the cliteris actually has the opposite effect, hightening the sensation for the women, not dulling or removing it.

so one type is barbaric, robbing a woman of the right our creator gave both men and women to enjoy sex within a halal environment of marriage and the other can actually improve sexual relations.

apart from anything else, as someone who is interested in islam i would suggest you approach matters in a slightly different way, that is read the Quran, see if you become convinced of the truthfulness of the message of muhammad (saws) and if you do then what comes from that is truthful is can be authenticated.

this is because we could convince you every single ruling of islam is true and better but this doesnt necessarily prove islam as a whole to you.

peace,
Reply

- Qatada -
05-15-2009, 05:59 PM
Female Circumcision & Islam

| Sheikh (Dr.) `Abd al-Rahmân b. Hasan al-Nafisah, editor of the Contemporary Jurisprudence Research Journal , Riyadh

The question of female circumcision in Muslim lands attracts considerable media attention. This is probably due to the negative reactions and condemnation that the practice provokes – especially in European countries that have large Muslim communities. This attention grew considerably after one African Muslim discussed on television the way that this circumcision is carried out and declared that the practice was recommended by Islamic Law. This led certain countries to pass legislation prohibiting female circumcision on the grounds that it is harmful to women and a violation of their rights.

Pre-Islamic Arabia
Before discussing this practice in light of Islamic teachings, it behooves us to consider that the circumcision of girls is a custom that has been practiced since ancient times in parts of Africa, particularly in Egypt, Nubia, Sudan, and their surroundings. The prevalent type of female circumcision practiced in that region is known as Pharaonic circumcision, and it seems that the reason for it was the desire of the men in those societies to weaken the sexual desire of women in order to ensure their chastity.

It is quite possible that this practice spread to neighboring Arab countries from Egypt and practiced on occasion or that Arabs were at least aware of this custom before the advent of Islam, since customs can spread from one society to another. However, I have not come across any verifiable evidence that the Arabs of pre-Islamic times were in the practice of circumcising their daughters. Among them were those who killed their daughters fearing the shame that they brought and had no need for circumcision.

What is reported in the Sunnah
There are some narrations attributed to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) concerning female circumcision. The most important of which are the following:

1. “Circumcision is Sunnah for men and an honorable thing for women.” [Musnad Ahmad (19794)]

Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalâni discusses this hadîth in al-Talkhîs al-Habîr (4/1407):
Ahmad and al-Bayhaqî narrate this hadîth from al-Hajjâj b. Arta’ah who narrates it from Abû al-Mulayh from Usâmah from his father.

This al-Hajjâj is one who is known to use ambiguous terms in conveying his chain of transmission, and moreover he is inconsistent in this narration. Sometimes he cites his chain of transmission as given above and at other times he mentions an additional narrator named Shidâd b. `Aws after Abû Mulayh’s father. This is how we find the hadîth being narrated in Musannaf Ibn Abî Shaybah, Ibn Abî Hâtim’s `Ilal, and Mu`jam al-Tabarânî al-Kabîr.

At other times, he narrates the hadîth from Makhûl from Abû Ayyûb. This narration can be found in Musnad Ahmad. Ibn Abî Hâtim mentions this in al-`Ilal and quotes his father as laying the blame for the mistake on either al-Hajjâj or the narrator who relates it from him `Abd al-Wâhid b. Ziyâd. Al-Bayhaqî says about `Abd al-Wâhid b. Ziyâd: “He is a weak narrator and his narrations are incomplete.”

In al-Tamhîd, Ibn `Abd al-Barr says: “This hadîth depends upon the narration of al-Hajjâj b. Arta’ah whose narrations cannot be used as evidence for anything.”

The hadîth is in fact related by a narrator other than al-Hajjâj b. Arta’ah. This statement is related in Mu`jam al-Tabarânî al-Kabîr and in Sunan al-Bayhaqî on the authority of Ibn `Abbâs back to the Prophet (peace be upon him). However, al-Bayhaqî himself declares it to be a weak hadîth when he mentions it in Sunan al-Bayhaqî. He says in his work al-Ma`rifah: “It is not authentic as a statement of the Prophet (peace be upon him).”
Therefore, this is a weak hadîth.

2. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is reported to have passed by a woman performing circumcision on a young girl. He instructed the woman by saying: “Trim, but do not cut into it, for this is brighter for the face (of the girl) and more favorable with the husband.” [Mu`jam al-Tabarânî al-Awsat (2274)]

Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalâni discusses this hadîth as well in al-Talkhîs al-Habîr (4/1407-1408):
Al-Hâkim relates it in al-Mustadrak from `Ubayd Allah b. `Amr who narrates it from Zayd b. Abî Usayd from `Abd al-Malik b. `Umayr from al-Dahhâk b. Qays that in Madînah there was a woman called Umm `Atiyyah who used to circumcise the slave girls, so Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said to her: “O Umm `Atiyyah! Trim, but do not cut into it, for this is brighter for the face (of the girl) and more favorable with the husband.”

It likewise related by al-Tabarânî, by Abû Nu`aym in al-Ma`rifah, and by al-Bayhaqî with essentially the same chain of transmission except that narrator `Ubayd Allah b. `Amr narrates it from “a man from the city of Kufah” from `Abd al-Malik b. `Umayr.

Al-Mufdil al-`Ulâ’î says : “I asked Ibn Ma`în about this hadîth and he told me that its narrator al-Dahhâk b. Qays is not al-Fahrî.”

However, al-Hâkim and Abû Nu`âym discuss him under the biographical entry of “al-Fahrî”.

`Abd al-Malik b. `Umayr is inconsistent in how he narrates this hadîth. Sometimes it is narrated from him as mentioned above. At other times, he is allegedly relating it from `Atiyyah al-Qurazî as beginning with the words: “In Madînah, there used to be a practitioner of circumcision called Umm `Atiyyah…” It is related in this way by Abû Nu`aym in al-Ma`rifah. At other times he allegedly relates it with Umm `Atiyyah being the narrator [and not the practitioner]. This is how it is related in Sunan Abî Dâwûd.

Abû Dâwûd [in Sûnan Abî Dâwûd (5271)] declares the hadîth to be defective on account of the narrator Muhammad b. Hassân, saying: “Muhammad b. Hassân is an unknown narrator and this hadîth is weak.”

Ibn `Adiyy and al-Bayhaqî confirm Abû Dâwûd’s judgment that Muhammad b. Hassân is an unknown narrator. `Abd al-Ghanî b. Sa`îd, the author of Îdâh al-Shakk, disagrees, saying: “He is Muhammad b. Sa`îd al-Maslûb.” He goes on to narrate this hadîth from Muhammad b. Sa`îd al-Maslûb in his biographical entry for that narrator.

There are two other lines of transmission for this hadîth:

1. Ibn `Adiyy narrates it from Sâlim b. `Abd Allah b. `Umar – and al-Bazzar relaes it from Nâfi` - from `Abd Allah b. `Umar that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “O women of Madînah! Do it lightly, trim and do not cut into it, for it is more favorable with your husbands. And do not deny Allah’s grace.” This wording is from al-Bazzar. In al-Bazzâr’s chain of transmission, there is the narrator Mandal b. `Alî who is a weak narrator. In Ibn `Adiyy’s chain of transmission, there is the narrator Khâlid b. `Amr al-Qurashî who is even weaker.

2. Al-Tabarânî relates it in al-Mu`jam al-Saghîr – and Ibn `Adiyy relates it as well – from Abî Khalîfah who narrates it from Muhammad b. Salâm al-Jamhî from Zâ’idah b. Abî Ruqqâd from Thâbit from Anas with a text like the one found in Sunan Abî Dâwûd.

Ibn `Adiyy comments on this line of transmission, saying: “Zâ’idah is the only narrator to relate his hadîth from Thâbit.”

Al-Tabarânî says: “Muhammad b. Salâm is the only one to relate it like this.”

Tha`lab says: “I saw Yahyâ b. Ma`în among some people with Muhammad b. Salâm right in front of me and he asked him about this hadîth.”

Al-Bukhârî says about Zâ’idah: “His hadîth are false.”

Ibn al-Mundhir says: “There is no report about circumcision that can be relied upon and no chain of transmission that can be followed.”
In Nayl al-Awtâr (1/137-139), al-Shawkâni discusses the hadîth of Umm `Atiyyah and says basically the same things about its weakness that Ibn Hajar says above.

Female circumcision according to the scholars of Islamic Law
Due to the weakness of the hadîth that refer to female circumcision – with some of their narrators being known for deceptiveness and others whose narrations carry no weight – scholars of Islamic Law have differed widely regarding its legal ruling.

In the Hanafî school of law there are two different opinions. Some Hanafî scholars consider it to be a Sunnah for women. Others consider it to be merely an honorable thing. [refer to: al-Fatâwâ al-Hindiyyah and al-Ikhtiyâr li-Tahlîl al-Mukhtâr]

It is considered a preferred act (mandûb) for women in the Mâlikî school of law. They rely upon the hadîth of Umm `Atiyyah for this ruling. [refer to: Bulghah al-Sâlik li-Aqrab al-Masâlik and Ashal al-Madârik Sharh Irshâd al-Sâlik]

In the Shâfi`î school of law, circumcision is considered an obligation for both men and women. This is the official ruling of that school of thought. Some Shâfi`î scholars express the view that circumcision is obligatory for men and merely Sunnah for women. [refer to: al-Majmû`]

In the Hanbalî school of law, circumcision is obligatory for men and merely an honorable thing for women. It is not obligatory for them. The Hanbalî jurist Ibn Qudâmah observes: “This is the view of many people of knowledge. Imam Ahmad said that it is more emphatic for men.” [al-Mughnî (1/115)]

Among contemporary legal scholars, al-Sayyid Sâbiq writes: “The hadîth that call for female circumcision are all weak. Nothing among them is authentic” [Fiqh al-Sunnah (1/36)]

Conclusions:
It appears that female circumcision is more a cultural practice than a matter of Islamic teachings. We have seen that the hadîth which refer to the practice are all weak. The presence of that practice in Egypt an Nubia up to this day is just a continuation of a practice that has been around since the time of the Pharaohs. It is often hard for people to give up deeply ingrained customs and cultural practiced. They continue to be passed down from generation to generation.

Another example of the tenacity of custom is the practice among Indian Muslims where the woman pays a dowry to the husband. This is a pre-Islamic Indian custom that Islam declares false. Islam requires the husband to pay a dowry to the wife. Nevertheless, this custom persists among Muslims in both India and Pakistan, even though the history of Islam in India goes back for many long centuries.

Likewise, Islam put an end to many pre-Islamic customs that marginalized women and denied them their rights. It put an end to people condemning each other’s lineages. It put an end to the practice of wailing at a person’s burial. Nonetheless, these practices can still be seen in some Muslim societies and are often regarded by the people of those societies to be part and parcel of Islamic Law.

The Shâfi`î school of law has been the prevalent legal school in Egypt since its formative years. It may be that the scholars of the Shâfi`î school who promoted the view that female circumcision is obligatory had been influenced by the prevailing culture of the region.

There is no evidence that this practice was widespread among the Pious Predecessors. Moreover, the practice has never been prevalent in the regions where Islam originated – Mecca and Madinah and the surrounding areas of Arabia. It is extremely rare. If female circumcision had truly been endorsed by Islamic Law, it would certainly have been practiced and perpetuated in those regions. Only male circumcision is practiced, due to the authentic evidence in the Sunnah that it is part of the natural way (fitrah).

We conclude that female circumcision is merely a cultural practice that has no prescribed Islamic ruling for it and that is supported by no decisive textual evidence. It is simply a regional custom in the places where it is practiced. We must then take into consideration that many medical professionals consider it to have detrimental affects for the girls who undergo the operation. On that basis, it would be impermissible to allow this custom to continue. In Islamic Law, preservation of the person – the life and bodily soundness of the person – is a legal necessity. Anything that compromises this legal necessity by bringing harm to the person is unlawful.

And Allah knows best

http://www.islamtoday.com/showme2.cf...sub_cat_id=822
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 91
    Last Post: 07-12-2012, 02:50 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-31-2009, 04:47 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-06-2009, 06:24 PM
  4. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 05-29-2009, 01:57 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-14-2006, 09:37 PM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!