Bismillah. I got hold of two valuable articles from 1998:
- Maqasid al-Sharia (The Higher Objectives of Islamic Ethics-Law)
- Qawa’id Fiqhiyyah (Juristic or Legal Maxims of the Sharia, Islamic Ethics-Law)
If interested, download them from here:
Archive for the ‘Sunnah’ Category
Professor Muhammad Hashim Kamali – two important articles on Sharia
December 2, 2025ISLAM & THE SEVEN STAGES OF GRIEF
November 29, 2025
ISLAM & THE SEVEN STAGES OF GRIEF
Bismillah.
Previously, there were five stages of grief generally accepted amongst psychologists as:
1. SHOCK, 2. DENIAL, 3. ANGER, 4. BARGAINING, 5. ACCEPTANCE/HOPE.
Recently, some people have extended this to seven stages by adding GUILT & DEPRESSION after ANGER. But it varies from person to person: these are not necessarily linear stages: they may be cyclical or iterative. Hence, the 7 stages of grief are:
1. SHOCK, 2. DENIAL, 3. ANGER, 4. GUILT, 5. DEPRESSION, 6. BARGAINING, 7. ACCEPTANCE/HOPE.
0. GRIEF
0.1 THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD’S YEAR OF GRIEF AND SORROW
The Prophet, peace be upon him, experienced his “year of grief or sorrow” (عام الحزن, ‘Ām al Huzn) during his tenth year of prophethood, ie 3 years before the Hijra, when his only wife Khadija, his stalwart support for 25 years, died, followed closely by his uncle, Abu Talib, his tribal protector as chief of his clan, the Banu Hashim.
(I’m grateful to the Christian priest, whose name I’ve forgotten, who attended our Qur’an discussion circles c. 2013-14 and wished to co-write with me a Christian-Muslim guide to grief, since he had read about the Prophet’s “Year of Grief.” I didn’t have the time or capacity to work on it at the time, but he gave me an idea that has come to fruition today, God-willing.)
0.2 PROPHET YA’QUB BIN ISHAQ BIN IBRAHIM, aka ISRA’IL (JACOB BEN ISAAC BEN ABRAHAM, aka ISRAEL)
In the Surah named after his 11th son, Prophet Yusuf (Joseph), grief is prominent in the “best of stories.”
قال إني ليحزنني أن تذهبوا به وأخاف أن يأكله الذئب وأنتم عنه غافلون
(Yusuf, Joseph, 12:13)
When his elder 10 sons ask for his permission to take Joseph for a day out, Jacob combines grief (for the past) with fear (of the future):
“It grieves me that you take him away (from me), and I fear that the wolf will devour him whilst ye are heedless of him.”
When his sons lie to him, saying that the wolf had indeed eaten Joseph, Jacob sees through their lies and resigns himself to “beautiful patience” (صبر جميل).
Later, when his first 10 sons manage to come home without the 12th son Binyamin (Benjamin) as well, Jacob expresses extreme sorrow for Joseph, reiterates his commitment to “beautiful patience” and goes blind from grief:
وتولّى عنهم وقال ياأسفى على يوسف وابيضت عيناه من الحزن فهو كظيم
(Yusuf, Joseph, 12:84)
Although Ibn Kathir quotes the commentator Dahhak as explaining kazeem here to mean ka’eeb: intense grief and broken in spirit, i.e. depressed, the vast majority of commentators agree that Prophet Jacob displayed beautiful patience and did not complain to anyone except God, restraining his sorrow and grief. Others amongst the Salaf said that he waited eighty years to see his beloved son Joseph, for whom his grief equalled that of seventy bereaved parents, but he “was never pessimistic about God.” (Tafsir Tabari)
1. SHOCK
1.1 UMAR BIN AL-KHATTAB: SHOCK, DENIAL, ANGER, ACCEPTANCE
Our Master Umar was in shock, denial and anger upon the news of the Prophet’s death, threatening to kill anyone who said that the Prophet was dead, until Our Master Abu Bakr said the famous words:
“Whoever worshiped Muhammad, he should know that Muhammad has died. Whoever worships God, he should know that God is The Ever-Living, Who Will Never Die.”
Abu Bakr also recited from Surah Āl Imran (The Family of Amram), the verses confirming that Muhammad was mortal and speaking of the possibility of his death, for every soul has a predestined moment of death, praising those who show gratitude. Umar commented: “It was as though I had never heard these verses before!” He rapidly reached the stage or station of Acceptance.
وما محمد إلا رسول، قد خلت من قبله الرسل، أفائن مات أو قتل انقلبتم على أعقابكم، ومن ينقلب على عقبيه فلن يضرّ الله شيئا، وسيجزي الله الشاكرين
وما كان لنفس أن تموت إلا بإذن الله كتابا مؤجلا، ومن يرد ثواب الدنيا نؤته منها، ومن يرد ثواب الآخرة نؤته منها، وسنجزي الشاكرين
Āl Imran, The Family of Amram, 3:144-5)
3. ANGER
3.1 KHALID BIN WALEED
Our Master Khalid bin Waleed, the Sword of God, was overcome by grief on his deathbed when he realised he wouldn’t be granted martyrdom on the battlefield (because no human’s sword could defeat the Sword of God). He was especially frustrated at knowing how many people are cowards. Khalid’s last words were:
“I have a wound on every inch of my body, but I’m dying like an aging camel. May the eyes of cowards never (find rest in) sleep!”
ASIDE:
Khalid bin Waleed’s extraordinary life and military genius and career deserve to be immortalised in an epic poem in English. I have written opening and closing stanzas for such a poem. I pray that I or someone else is able to complete it:
OPENING STANZA: THE TALE OF KHALID BIN WALEED
If your eyes do weep and your heart does bleed
At the state of the Muslim nation,
Then remember the tale of Khalid bin Waleed:
It is enough as inspiration.
[…]
CLOSING STANZA: KHALID BIN WALEED’S LAST WORDS
“I’m dying like a camel
(Or like an aging sheep):
May the eyes of cowards
Never rest in sleep!”
TRIVIUM: THE KHALID BIN WALEED PARK IN PESHAWAR, PAKISTAN
This park goes by its Urdu/Farsi name: Khalid bin Waleed Bagh. The locals are Pathan (Pashtun), and so pronounce it somewhat Farsi style, as follows, making the ‘a’ sound like ‘o’: Kholid bin Woleed Bagh. British Empire troops stationed in Peshawar heard it pronounced like this, switched the syllables around and nicknamed the park, the “Colly-Wolly Bean Bag.”
3.2 TRUE PATIENCE IS ONLY AT THE FIRST BLOW
Anas bin Malik narrated that the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, passed by a woman who was weeping at a graveside, mourning a child she had lost. The Prophet said, “Fear God, and have patience.” She replied, not recognising him, “Get away from me, for you have not been afflicted by my affliction!” She was told that it was the Prophet who had spoken to her, so she came to his door and, finding no doorkeepers, said to him, “I did not recognise you.” He replied, “(True) Patience is only at the first blow.” (Bukhari & Muslim)
TRIVIUM: The Arabic for “blow” here is sadmah, root SDM. The name Saddam is derived from this as an intensive form, thus meaning, “One who delivers crushing blows.”
4. GUILT: JOSEPH’S BROTHERS
The 10 elder brothers of Prophet Yusuf (Joseph) had feelings of grief at the perceived favouritism of their father towards Yusuf. This manifested in Anger when some of them suggested killing him. Others felt guilty about this and suggested throwing him into a well, which is what they did. They must have had some feelings of guilt around this, and around lying to their father about Yusuf being eaten by a wolf. After many years, once they were reunited with Yusuf and his magnanimity, they went through the stages of Bargaining and Acceptance/Hope, admitting their mistakes to both Yusuf and their father Ya’qub. (Yusuf, Joseph, 12:91 & 12:97)
7. ACCEPTANCE/HOPE: NO FEAR, NO GRIEF
The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, endured his Year of Grief with immense patience and acceptance. This is the way of “living in the moment” as “children of the moment in time” (abna’ al-waqt) without fear (of the future) or grief (for the past), the way of the “Friends of God” or saints. The phrase, “There will be no fear upon them, nor will they grieve,” occurs repeatedly in the Qur’an for the People of the Garden in the Hereafter. However, it applies to certain, select people in this world also:
أَلَآ إِنَّ أَوْلِيَآءَ ٱللَّهِ لَا خَوْفٌ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا هُمْ يَحْزَنُونَ
ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ وَكَانُوا۟ يَتَّقُونَ
Lo! Truly, the Friends of God:
There is no fear upon them,
Nor do they grieve:
Those who have achieved faith (inner security)
And were always saving themselves (taqwa).
(Yunus, Jonah, 10:62-63)
In Imam al-Qushayri’s Treatise on Tasawwuf (Sufism), the first topic he discusses after brief biographies of early Sufis is that of Time (Waqt), where he says that “the Sufi is the son of his time,” i.e. that he lives in the moment. Shaykh Hamza Yusuf linked this to the above Qur’anic verse during a conversation in Abu Dhabi, 2022.
It is narrated from the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, that this applies to people in this world “who did not fear when the people had fear, and did not grieve when people grieved.” They will be surrounded by Light in the Hereafter, and made to sit upon pulpits of Light: even the Prophets and the Martyr-Witnesses will be amazed by their station. (Tafsir Tabari, #17,730 & #17,731)
Usama Hasan
London, UK
8th Jumada al-Thani 1447
28th November 2025
WHO ARE THE MU’ALLAFATU QULUBUHUM (THOSE WHO ARE GIVEN ZAKAT TO BRING THEIR HEARTS NEAR) ?
April 22, 2024
WITH THE NAME OF GOD, ALL-MERCIFUL, MOST MERCIFUL
WHO ARE THE MU’ALLAFATU QULUBUHUM
(THOSE WHO ARE GIVEN ZAKAT/ALMS TO BRING THEIR HEARTS NEAR) ?
Allah (God) says in the Qur’an:
إِنَّمَا الصَّدَقـٰتُ لِلفُقَراءِ وَالمَسـٰكينِ وَالعـٰمِلينَ عَلَيها وَالمُؤَلَّفَةِ قُلوبُهُم وَفِى الرِّقابِ وَالغـٰرِمينَ وَفى سَبيلِ اللَّهِ وَابنِ السَّبيلِ ۖ فَريضَةً مِنَ اللَّهِ ۗ وَاللَّهُ عَليمٌ حَكيمٌ
Truly, the [compulsory] alms are only for: the poor; the needy;
those who work upon them (in alms-collection);
those whose hearts are brought near;
those whose necks are under the yoke;
those who have taken on a major debt;
in the path of God; and the child of the path [i.e. the traveller]:
an obligation from God: for God is Knowing, Wise.
(Surah al-Tawbah, Repentance, 9:60 Hafs)
TAFSIR TABARI ON THIS VERSE (SUMMARISED)
Imam Tabari (224-310 H / 839-923 CE) said:
As for “those whose hearts are brought near”: they were a group of people who were brought closer to Islam (through the incentive of being given wealth), who could not be (openly) supported. The alms benefited themselves and their close families. Such people were: Abu Sufyan bin Harb, ‘Uyaynah bin Badr, Aqra’ bin Habis and similar heads of tribes.
Similar to what we have said, has been said by the People of Interpretation.
Mention of those who said that: Ibn ‘Abbas, Yahya bin Abi Kathir, Zuhri, Mujahid, Hasan [Basri] and Qatadah. Yahya bin Abi Kathir said that such heads of tribes were given a hundred she-camels[1] each by the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace; a few others were given fifty each. Zuhri added that this phrase includes Jews and Christians who submit to God (via Islam), even if they are rich.
The people of knowledge differed about whether or not this category exists today, and whether anyone today may be given charity to bring them closer to Islam?
Some of them said: The category of “those whose hearts are brought together” is invalid today: there is no share in the compulsory alms except for those in need, those in the path of God and those who work upon them (in alms-collection).
Mention of those who said that: Hasan [Basri], ‘Amir [bin Sharahil al-Sha’bi] and ‘Umar bin al-Khattab.
When ‘Uyaynah bin Hisn came to [Caliph] ‘Umar bin al-Khattab [seeking to be given alms], ‘Umar said, “The Truth (has come) from your Lord: so whoever wishes to, may have faith; and whoever wishes to, may deny!” [Surah al-Kahf, The Cave, 18:29 Hafs] That is, there is no bringing near today.
‘Amir [bin Sharahil al-Sha’bi] said: Those whose hearts were brought near, were only during the time of the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace: when Abu Bakr, may God Exalted’s Mercy be upon him, came to power, incentives stopped.
Others said: “Those whose hearts are brought near” exist in every age, and they have a right to some alms.
Mention of those who said that: Abu Ja’far [i.e. Imam Muhammad bin ‘Ali al-Baqir].
Abu Ja’far [i.e. Imam Tabari, who had his own, independent Madhhab] said:
The correct saying from amongst those, in my view, is that God has made alms to serve two purposes. One of them is to fill any gaps (of need) amongst the Muslims. The other is to aid and strengthen Islam. Whatever charity is to aid Islam and strengthen its means, this is given to both rich and poor. This is because it is not given to a person due to his need for it, but is given to him in order to aid the religion. This is just like what is given to a person for the sake of sacred war (Jihad) in the way of God, for that is given to him whether he is rich or poor, and not to fill his gap (of need). Similar are those whose hearts are brought near: they are given that charity even if they are rich: such giving to them seeks to benefit the matter of Islam and seeks to strengthen and fortify it.
The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, gave to whomever amongst those whose hearts were to be brought near, after God opened the victories for him: Islam spread and its people increased in honour. Thus, there is no proof in the argument of the one who says that “Today, no-one is to be brought near to Islam (via alms), because the people of Islam, by their great number, are prevented from being reached by anyone who wishes to give them alms.” The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, gave to those whom he gave whilst they were in the condition that has been described.
TAFSIR IBN KATHIR ON THIS VERSE (SUMMARISED)
Imam Ibn Kathir (700-774 H / 1300-1373 CE) said:
As for “those whose hearts are brought near”:
[1] Some were those who were given (alms) that they may submit (in Islam).
An example is that the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, gave to Safwan bin Umayyah out of the spoils (of war) at Hunayn, a battle that the latter had witnessed as a polytheist. Imam Ahmad, Muslim and Tirmidhi narrated that Safwan bin Umayyah said, “The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, gave me (wealth) on the Day of Hunayn whilst he was the most hated of people to me, but he continued giving me (wealth) until he became the most beloved of people to me.”
[2] Some were given (alms) in order that they improve their Islam (having already submitted) and for their hearts to become firm.
An example is that he distributed (wealth), on the Day of Hunayn, to a group of tribal chiefs and nobles amongst the released captives: a hundred camels each. He said, “Truly, I give to a man whilst another is more beloved to me, fearing that God will upend him (the former) on his face in the Fire of Jahannam.”
In the two Sahihs (of Bukhari and Muslim), there is on the authority of Abu Sa’id that ‘Ali sent a small nugget of gold, (encased) in its rock, to the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, from Yemen: he divided it amongst four people: Aqra’ bin Habis, ‘Uyaynah bin Badr, ‘Alqamah bin ‘Ulathah and Zayd al-Khayr, and said, “I bring them near.”
[3] Some were given (wealth) because of the hope that their peers would submit (in Islam).
[4] Some were given (wealth) in order to elicit alms from those around them, or
[5] To ward off harm from the border lands around the territory of the Muslims.
The place for detailed explanation of this is the books of jurisprudential rulings (furu’).
And God knows best.
Can alms be given to those being brought closer to Islam, after the (time of) the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace ?
There is difference of opinion in this matter.
It is narrated from ‘Umar, ‘Amir al-Sha’bi and a group (of authorities) that they are not to be given (alms) after his time, because God has honoured Islam and its people, established them firmly in the land and made the necks of others subservient to them.
Others said: Rather, they are to be given (alms) because he, Blessings and Peace be upon him, gave to such people after the Opening of Mecca [i.e. when Islam had already become established] and the Breaking of (the Tribe of) Hawazin [at Hunayn]: this was a situation where alms might be needed, so these could be diverted to them.
IMAM ABU BAKR AL-JASSAS (HANAFI) & QADI ABU BAKR IBN AL-‘ARABI (MALIKI)[2]
Imam Abu Bakr al-Jassas (305-370 H / 917-981 CE) said in his Ahkam al-Qur’an (Rulings of the Qur’an), whilst discussing the premise that alms are essentially for the poor:
If it is said that “those whose hearts were brought near” would receive alms without being poor, it would be said in reply: they would not receive it as alms; rather, alms would be collected for the poor, but some of it would be given to those whose hearts are brought near, in order to repel their harm against the poor amongst the Muslims, and that the former might submit in Islam, thus strengthening the poor amongst the Muslims. Thus, they would not receive it as alms; rather, alms were collected and used for the benefit (masalih) of the Muslims. This is because wealth given for the poor may be diverted for their benefit (masalih) if the Imam [i.e. the Caliph] rules over them and decides about matters beneficial to them (masalih).
[Summarised] Qadi Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabi (468-543 H / 1076-1148 CE) said in his Ahkam al-Qur’an (Rulings of the Qur’an):
THE NINTH ISSUE [regarding this verse of the Qur’an]
About “those whose hearts are brought near,” there are four views:
- They were given alms because of the weakness of their certainty, until this became strong. Those who said that they were Muslims, cited the examples of Abu Sufyan bin Harb, Aqra’ bin Habis and ‘Abbas bin Mirdas. Those who said that they were non-Muslims, cited the example of ‘Amir bin Tufail. Those who said that they were polytheists with an inclination towards Islam, cited the example of Safwan bin Umayyah.
- Yahya bin Abi Kathir named them as leaders of the following [ten] tribes or clans: Banu Umayyah, Banu Jumah, Banu ‘Amir, Banu Asad, Banu Hashim, Banu Fazarah, Banu Tamim, Banu Nasr, Banu Sulaym and Thaqif.
- Ibn Wahb narrated from Malik that he said: Safwan bin Umayyah, Hakim bin Hizam, Aqra’ bin Habis, ‘Uyaynah bin Badr, Suhayl bin ‘Amr and Abu Sufyan were amongst “those whose hearts were brought near,” and that on the day [of Hunayn] when Safwan was given alms, he was a polytheist.
Asbagh said, on the authority of Ibn al-Qasim: “Those whose hearts were brought near” were Safwan bin Umayyah and certain men of Quraysh. - The Shaykh Abu Ishaq named them to be forty men of the Quraysh and other tribes, including leaders and others.
THE TENTH ISSUE
There has been a difference of opinion as to whether [the category of] “those whose hearts are brought near” persisted.
Some of them said: They [i.e. this category of people] disappeared. This view was expressed by a group (of authorities), and was held by Malik.
Some said: They remain, because the Imam [i.e. the Caliph] may need to bring people near to Islam. [Caliph] ‘Umar discontinued them [i.e. this category of people] because of what he saw of the might of the religion.
My view is that if Islam is strong, this category disappears; but if such people are needed, they are given their share, just as the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, used to give the share. For it is narrated in the Sahih (authentic hadiths): “Islam began as a stranger, and will return as a stranger, as it began.” [Sahih Muslim]
THE ELEVENTH ISSUE
If we say that this category of people has disappeared, then their share returns to all the (other) categories, or to whichever (category or categories) the Imam decides, according to the previous explanation regarding the root of the disagreement.
Zuhri said: Half of their share is to be given to those who frequent the mosques. There is no evidence for this view. The first view (mentioned above) is more correct.
[1] A hundred camels represents a lot of wealth: it is the same as the diyah (blood-money) for murder. In today’s financial terms, it would approximate up to a hundred thousand US dollars or UK pounds, or even more. (AQS)
[2] The Hanafi and Maliki schools are complementary, in the sense that they represent the schools of Reason (Ahl al-Ra’y) and Tradition (Ahl al-Hadith) respectively. A holistic approach to the Sunnah combines these complementary approaches, as per Imam Shatibi (cf. Al-Shanqiti, On Madhhabs & Taqlid, AQS, 1445/2023)
DO WE FOLLOW THE AUTHENTIC HADITH, OR THE CONTRARY VIEWS OF IMAM, ABOUT FASTING SIX DAYS OF SHAWWAL, THE MONTH THAT FOLLOWS RAMADAN ?
April 11, 2024
Imam Nawawi said in his Commentary upon the hadith of Sahih Muslim about fasting the six days of Shawwal:
“In it is a clear indication to support the position of Shafi’i, Ahmad, Dawud and those who agreed with them in recommending the fasting of these six days. Malik and Abu Hanifah said that it is disliked. Malik said in al-Muwatta’ , ‘I never saw any of the people of knowledge fasting these days … They said: It is disliked, in case people think it is obligatory.’ The evidence of Shafi’i and those who agree with him is this clear, authentic hadith: if the Sunnah is established, it is not to be abandoned because some people abandon it, and not even if most or all of them abandon it. Their saying, ‘in case people think it is obligatory’ is disproven by the fast of ‘Arafah, ‘Ashura and other recommended fasts.”
—
Shaykh Muhammad al-Amin al-Shanqiti said:
There is no doubt that in the compiled Madhhab of Imam Malik, there are derived rulings (furu’) that oppose some texts of the revelation. It is apparent that some of these texts did not reach him, may Allah have mercy upon him: had they reached him, he would have acted upon them. Other texts did reach him, but he chose not to act upon them due to another indication that he believed was stronger evidence.
An example of a text not reaching him is the hadith about fasting six days of Shawwal, after the fast of Ramadan. He, may Allah have mercy upon him, said in his Muwatta’ (The Well-Trodden Path),
“Truly, I never saw any of the people of knowledge and understanding fasting these days, and nothing has reached me regarding this on the authority of the predecessors (Salaf). The people of knowledge dislike this practice and fear that it is an innovation, and that ignorant and coarse people will add to Ramadan what is not part of it if they see the people of knowledge allowing it and practising it.”
Here, Malik says explicitly that fasting six days of Shawwal reached him neither on the authority of the Prophet, nor on that of any of the Salaf. There is no doubt that had encouragement from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, to fast these days reached him, he would have fasted them and recommended others to fast them – it goes without saying that he would not have disliked the practice. This is because Malik would not have doubted that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was more kind and merciful towards the community than he was, for Allah has described the Prophet in the Qur’an as being kind and merciful.
If fasting those six days necessitated the problem because of which Malik disliked the practice, the Prophet would not have encouraged it and he would have considered the problem that Malik identified. But the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, avoided and dismissed the problem because he knew that the month of Ramadan is too well-known to be confused with any of Shawwal. This is similar to the recommended prayers before and after the obligatory prayers: none of the people of knowledge ever disliked them for fear that the ignorant would add to the obligatory prayers. This is due to the five compulsory prayers being well-known and not confused with others.
Anyhow, it is not for any Imam to say that a matter that has been approved by the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, is disliked for fear of the ignorant thinking that it is obligatory. Fasting of the aforementioned six days, and the Prophet’s encouragement of this, is established authentically from him. The hadith was transmitted by Ahmad, Muslim, Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah via several Companions, including Thawban, Jabir, Ibn ‘Abbas, Abu Hurayrah and Bara’ bin ‘Azib, as explained by [Imam Shawkani,] the author of Nayl al-Awtar.
(Shaykh Muhammad al-Amin al-Shanqiti, Lights of Eloquence: Commentary on Qur’an, Surah Muhammad, 47:24)
NB: Both the Hafiz Ibn ‘Abdul Barr and Imam Nawawi, leading Hadith scholars from the Maliki and Shafi’i schools of jurisprudence respectively, approved fasting six days of Shawwal due to the authentic hadith, and preferred this over the view of Imam Malik.
On Following Madhhabs – Shaykh Muhammad al-Amin al-Shanqiti
September 16, 2023
CONTEMPLATING THE QUR’AN
FOLLOWING THE QUR’AN AND SUNNAH:
BENEFITING FROM THE MADHHABS HOLISTICALLY
AND NOT FOLLOWING ONE MADHHAB RIGIDLY
Shaykh Muhammad al-Amin al-Shanqiti
An abridged translation of the author’s tafsir of
an ayah of the Qur’an (Surah Muhammad, 47:24)
from his Adwa’ al-Bayan (Lights of Eloquence)
with an
INTRODUCTION
by
Shaykh Suhaib Hasan
1st Rabi’ al-Awwal 1445 H / 16th September 2023
© Al-Qur’an Society, 1445 H / 2023 CE – All rights reserved.
Contemplating the Qur’an is a treatise on following the Qur’an and the Sunnah, benefiting from the codified Madhhabs holistically whilst not following any one Madhhab rigidly or blindly, by Shaykh Muhammad al-Amin al-Shanqiti (1325-1393 H / 1907-1973 CE) of Mauritania and Saudi Arabia, one of the greatest authorities on the Qur’an of the 20th century CE and the 14th Islamic century. The treatise is an abridged translation of the author’s tafsir of an ayah of the Qur’an (Surah Muhammad, 47:24) from his monumental tafsir, Adwa’ al-Bayan (Lights of Eloquence).
In this treatise, the author covers the following topics:
- Muslims must contemplate the Qur’an, learn it, understand it and act by it
- There is no basis for those who say that the above is only for the mujtahids
- A muqallid is not an ‘alim: a follower of opinions does not have knowledge
- Saying that we cannot follow the Qur’an and Sunnah but must follow the codified Madhhabs, is one of the greatest falsehoods
- A critique of Sawi’s view that holding to the apparent meanings of the Book and the Sunnah is one of the principles of kufr (blasphemy)
- On Ijtihad, Taqlid and Madhhab; permissible and impermissible taqlid
He concludes with eleven “Important Notes About This Issue,” including:
the Four Imams were united in forbidding their blind taqlid;
Haram/Halal cannot be stated on the basis of taqlid;
the difference between taqlid & ittiba’;
our stance towards the Imams;
every Imam has been criticized for going against the Sunnah in particular matters (with examples);
muqallids must distinguish between their Imam’s actual views and those added to his Madhhab after him;
it is impermissible for a Muslim to believe that the era of ijtihad is closed, and that only four Madhhabs must be followed;
turning away from the Qur’an and Sunnah in favour of the Four Madhhabs is one of the greatest problems that has beset Muslims over recent centuries.
We have added five important Appendices.
Firstly, an earlier, concise fatwa from the Shaykh about following Madhhabs, given in 1385 H (1964/5 CE). The Shaykh moved on from this fatwa somewhat, but we include it for the sake of integrity.
Secondly, we mention the Shaykh’s broadening out from his basis of the Maliki Madhhab after becoming exposed in Mecca and Medina to diverse views and schools from around the Muslim world.
Thirdly, we correct a contemporary misquote from Imam Ibn al-Qayyim, whom the Shaykh quotes extensively in his full discussion.
The misquote attempts to portray Ibn al-Qayyim as saying the opposite of his actual position, so we are happy to set the record straight.
Fourthly, we show how Imam Shatibi also presented a holistic approach to the Madhhabs.
Finally, we include Zamakhshari’s classic, educational and entertaining poem about Madhhabi sectarianism.
THE AGE OF AISHA AT MARRIAGE
September 26, 2021
With the Name of God, All-Merciful, Most Merciful
THE AGE OF AISHA AT MARRIAGE
Abridged translation from Islam Bahiri, Aisha’s marriage to the Prophet aged nine – a big mistake in the books of Hadith (in Arabic), Al-Yawm al-Sabi’, 15th July 2008. With additions from Salahi (2013).
Translation and editing by Usama Hasan
ABSTRACT
Aisha was about 18 years old when her marriage to the Prophet was consummated, and not nine. The narrations of Bukhari and Muslim saying otherwise are dubious in their texts and chains of transmission. They contradict the law (Sharia), the intellect, authentic hadiths, and the customs, habits and ethos of the age of Prophethood. Furthermore, they are completely incongruous with the timeline of the Prophetic mission.
1 The hadith of Bukhari about the age of Aisha at marriage
Imam Bukhari included this hadith with five slightly-different chains of narration in his Sahih:
Aisha said: The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, married me when I was six years old. We then came to Medina and I gave myself to him: I was nine years old then.
2 Timeline of the Prophetic Mission
The foundational sources of Islamic history and of the life of the Prophet overwhelmingly agree on the following timeline of the Prophetic mission:[1]
570-1 CE: Birth of the Prophet
610: Beginning of the Prophetic mission (aged 40)
623: Migration (Hijrah) to Medina, after 13 years of the mission in Mecca
632-3: Death of the Prophet in Medina, after 10 years of his mission there.
3 Historical critique of the narration of Bukhari
According to the narration of Bukhari, the Prophet married Aisha in 620 when she was six, and the marriage was consummated in 623 when she was nine. This would mean that she was born in 614, four years into the Prophet’s mission. This is a glaring error, as we shall now show.
3.1 Comparing Aisha’s age to that of her older sister Asma
The above historical sources are unanimous that Asma was 10 years older than Aisha, and that Asma was born 27 years before the Hijrah, i.e. in 596.
Thus:
Asma was born in 596: she was 14 when the Prophetic mission began and 27 at the time of the Hijrah.
Aisha was born in 606: she was 4 when the Prophetic mission began and 17 at the time of the Hijrah. She was married at 14; the marriage was consummated when she was 17, or 18 if we allow for a few months after the Hijrah.
The historical sources are unanimous that Asma died soon after a famous historical incident, the death of her son Abdullah bin Zubayr at the hands of Hajjaj bin Yusuf in 73 H, when she was aged 100.
Thus, she was born in 596 and died c. 693-696.[2]
3.2 Tabari: all of Abu Bakr’s children were born before the Prophetic mission
The previous point is in agreement with Tabari’s statement that all of Abu Bakr’s children, including Asma and Aisha, were born before the Prophetic mission.
When the Prophetic mission began, Asma was 14 and Aisha was 4. This further confirms the weakness of Bukhari’s narration.
3.3 Comparing Aisha’s age to that of Fatima, the Prophet’s daughter
Ibn Hajar, author of the premier commentary on Bukhari, mentions a narration in his Al-Isabah that Fatima was born in the year of the rebuilding of the Ka’bah, when the Prophet was 35 years old, and that she was 5 years older than Aisha.
According to this, Aisha would have been born around the time of the Prophetic mission. She would then have been 13 at the time of the Hijrah, and not 9 as the narration of Bukhari says.
This again illustrates that the narration of Bukhari is unreliable and suffers from what is known as idtirab (inconsistency) in Hadith terminology.
[NB: Ibn Hajar does not appear to have noticed this inconsistency, because in his same work Al-Isabah, he repeats that Aisha was born four years into the Prophet’s mission, even though other narrations, some of which he himself mentions, indicates that she was born several years before this. – U.H.]
3.4 Aisha’s age when she accepted Islam
Ibn Kathir mentions in Al-Bidayah wa l-Nihayah that “amongst the females who accepted Islam during the first three years of the Prophetic mission were Asma and Aisha. This was whilst the Prophet’s preaching was covert. Then, in the fourth year of his mission, God commanded him to announce his mission publicly.”
This again contradicts the original narration of Bukhari, since the latter implies that Aisha was born in the fourth year of the Prophetic mission.
However, according to the correct calculation, Aisha was born 4 years before the Prophetic mission began and so was 7 when she accepted Islam, being just about old enough to do so.
[Salahi (p. 204) further adds that Aisha is mentioned in Ibn Ishaq’s Sirah, the earliest book on the biography of the Prophet, amongst the first fifty people to accept Islam. She is nineteenth on the list. There are no children on the list, although Ibn Ishaq mentions that she was young. Salahi estimates that she must have been at least ten, making her 18 at the time of her marriage. – U.H.]
3.5 Aisha’s early memories of Islam
Imam Bukhari himself narrates in a chapter, “Abu Bakr’s neighbouring the Prophet” that Aisha said:
“My earliest memories are of my parents already practising Islam. The Prophet would visit us daily, morning and evening. When the Muslims were persecuted, Abu Bakr left, intending to migrate to Abyssinia.” [He was persuaded to return from the outskirts of Mecca. – U.H.]
The historical sources are unanimous that the first Muslim migration to Abyssinia was in Year 5 of the Prophetic mission. If Aisha was born in Year 4 of the Prophetic mission, there is no way she could have remembered her father heading towards Abyssinia. But the correct date for her birth is 4 years before the Prophetic mission: this is consistent with her remembering her father’s attempted journey, when she would have been around 9 years old.
3.6 The appropriate age of marriage
In his Musnad, section on Aisha, Imam Ahmad narrates that when the Prophet’s first wife Khadijah bint Khuwaylid died, Khawlah bint Hakeem, wife of Uthman bin Maz’oon, came to the Prophet and suggested that he should remarry. When the Prophet asked to whom, she said,
“A virgin or a matron, as you wish.”
The Prophet replied, “A virgin.”
Khawlah then recommended Aisha.
This establishes that Aisha was ready for marriage at this time, and that the Prophet did not need to wait for a few years.
The Qur’an (Women, 4:6) confirms that the minimum age of marriage is the same as that for financial responsibility.
Therefore, there is no way that Aisha could have been only 6 years old at this time.
3.7 Aisha’s previous engagement
In his Musnad, Imam Ahmad also narrates from Khawlah bint Hakeem that Abu Bakr had already agreed with Mut’im bin Adi that Aisha would marry the latter’s son, Jubayr bin Mut’im. Abu Bakr then called off this engagement so that she could marry the Prophet.
Now, there is no way that Abu Bakr would have engaged her to Jubayr after the beginning of the Prophet’s mission, because Mut’im and his family were polytheists; Jubayr even fought against the Muslims at the Battles of Badr and Uhud. Thus, this engagement must have been when Jubayr and Aisha were both children, before the Prophet’s mission began. This again confirms that Aisha could not have been born four years into the Prophet’s mission; in fact, she was born four years before it began, as we have established above.
3.8 Aisha remembering the revelation of a Qur’anic verse as a child
Imam Bukhari narrates that Aisha said: “I was a little girl playing when this verse was revealed to Muhammad: Nay, the Hour is their appointed time; the Hour is more calamitous and more bitter.”[3]
Now, it is established that Surat al-Qamar was revealed c. 614 CE, around four years into the Prophet’s mission. This again is consistent with the correct view that Aisha would have been around 8 years old at this time: this fits with her saying, “I was a little girl playing then.”
3.9 A virgin must not be married without her permission
Imam Bukhari also narrates from the Prophet that he said, “A virgin must not be married without her permission.”
It is impossible that the Prophet could say such a thing and do the opposite, for if the original hadith is to be believed, Aisha was six years old and playing with her friends and dolls when she got married – there is no mention of her permission being asked. And even if it had been, it would have no Sharia acceptability, since it was before her age of responsibility, puberty and intellectual maturity.
3.10 Aisha nurses the wounded at the Battle of Uhud
[Salahi reminds us that Imam Bukhari also quotes that Aisha, along with Umm Salamah, nursed the Muslim soldiers at the Battle of Uhud, which took place 18 months after her marriage.[4] Had she been nine upon marriage, she would have been only eleven at this time. The Prophet did not allow anyone under 15 to join the army as a soldier – would he have allowed a girl of 11 to come along? (Abdullah bin Umar turned 15 between the Battles of Badr and Uhud: he was not allowed to participate at Badr, but was allowed at Uhud.)]
4 Criticism of the chain of transmission
The original hadith has five routes of narration in Sahih Al-Bukhari.
4.1 The narrations in Bukhari are all suspect, because they are those of Hisham bin ‘Urwah to the people of Iraq
The five different chains of transmission (isnad) given by Imam Bukhari all have two narrators between him and Hisham bin ‘Urwah, who narrates from his father ‘Urwah from Aisha. Thus, the hadith is singly-narrated by Hisham, Urwah and Aisha. The two narrators between Bukhari and Hisham in each case are all people of Iraq:
- Farwah bin Abi l-Mighra’ and Ali bin Mishar
- ‘Ubayd bin Isma’il and Abu Usamah
- Mu’alla bin Asad and Wuhayb
- Muhammad bin Yusuf and Sufyan [bin ‘Uyaynah]
- Qabisah bin ‘Uqbah and Sufyan [bin ‘Uyaynah]
Hisham appears to be the weak link in this chain. Ibn Hajar narrates in his Hady al-Sari as well as in his Tahdhib that Imam Malik did not approve of Hisham’s narrations to the people of Iraq. Imam Malik said that Hisham went to Kufa in Iraq three times to narrate hadiths: the first time, he said: “My father narrated to me that he heard Aisha …” The second time, he said: “My father informed me on the authority of Aisha …” The third time, he said: “My father, on the authority of Aisha …”
In other words, Imam Malik did not accept Hisham’s narrations in Iraq, since he went there to narrate in his old age when his memory had faltered somewhat, and he practised tadlis, i.e. obscuring or omitting the mode of transmission, making the narration suspect.
4.2 Hisham never narrated these hadiths in Medina: the Muwatta omits them completely
Furthermore, Imam Malik learnt hadiths directly from Hisham in Medina for many years, but the age of Aisha at marriage is not mentioned in the Muwatta at all. Thus, Hisham never mentioned this narration at all in Medina, but only in Iraq where his narrations are suspect anyway. These considerations strengthen the earlier historical ones, confirming that the hadith about the age of Aisha is seriously flawed.
5 Conclusion
Islam Bahiri concludes:
Aisha was about 18 years old when her marriage to the Prophet was consummated, and not nine. The narrations of Bukhari and Muslim saying otherwise are textually corrupt and dubious in their chains of transmission. They contradict the law (Sharia), the intellect, authentic hadiths, and the customs, habits and ethos of the age of Prophethood. Furthermore, they are completely incongruous with the timeline of the Prophetic mission.
Thus, we are not obliged to revere Bukhari and Muslim more than the Prophet, peace be upon him. We have the right to reject what they accepted and accept what they rejected. Islam is neither confined to the scholars of Hadith and Fiqh, nor to their time. Thus, we are able to critique, correct and evaluate the books of Hadith, Fiqh, Sirah and Tafsir. We are able to reject the numerous mistakes and fabrications found in them. In the end, these books are a purely human heritage: we are not obliged, and in fact it does not befit us, to imbue them with sacredness or divinity. We are equal human beings to the people of our history.
6 References
- Islam Bahiri, Aisha’s marriage to the Prophet aged nine – a big mistake (or lie) in the books of Hadith (in Arabic), Al-Yawm al-Sabi’, 15th July 2008. Reproduced in Jamal al-Banna, Tajrid al-Bukhari wa Muslim min al-ahadith allati la tulzim [Expunging Bukhari and Muslim of non-binding hadiths], Da’wah al-Ihya’ al-Islamiyyah, Cairo, Dhu l-Qi’dah 1429 / November 2008.
- Adil Salahi, Muhammad – His Character and Conduct, Islamic Foundation, Markfield, 2013, pp. 203-5
[1] Al Kamil fi l-Tarikh by Ibn al-Athir; Tarikh Dimashq by Ibn ‘Asakir; Siyar A’lam al-Nubala’ by Dhahabi; Tarikh by Tabari; Al-Bidayah wa l-Nihayah by Ibn Kathir; Tarikh Baghdad by Khatib Baghdadi; Wafayat al-A’yan by Ibn Khillakan and many others.
[2] The three years’ uncertainty in her date of death is simply due to uncertainty between the pre-Islamic lunisolar Arabian calendar and the Islamic lunar calendar: over a century, the two differ by three years. – U.H.
[3] Qur’an, Surat al-Qamar, The Moon, 54:46
[4] Bukhari, Sahih, Kitab al-Jihad wa l-Siyar (Book of War and Military Expeditions), Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, Beirut, 1423/2002, p. 530, no. 2880.
TEN TRUTHS ABOUT JIHAD
November 10, 2019
With the Name of God, All-Merciful, Most Merciful
TEN TRUTHS ABOUT JIHAD
Bismillah. During the Islamic lunar month of Rabi’ al-Awwal [originally, the “first month of spring”], when the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, was born and died, thus fulfilling an ancient Jewish or Israelite prophecy about the Prophets being born and dying on the same date, thus completing a cosmic cycle, I am moved to republish this article that I wrote in 2017, since the Prophet and his name continues to be praised and vilified around the world. I suggest that it may be useful as a basis for Friday sermons (Jumu’ah / Jumma khutbahs) about Jihad, for those who agree with this content.
Within those last two years, some more things have happened:
(1) I was reminded that there are narrations in the Sirah tradition saying that the Prophet’s birth name was not Muhammad, but Qutham, and that Muhammad (“The Oft-Praised One”) was a title given to him later. If these are true, then “Muhammad” would be much like “Christ” or “Buddha,” i.e. a title originally, not a name, although of course many titles become names later, and vice-versa, as with Caesar.
(2) Sheikh Hamza Yusuf Hanson recommended to me the book by Juan Cole, Muhammad: Prophet of Peace Amid the Clash of Empires (Hachette USA, 2018). I’ve read a few chapters, and it is a very interesting read. And it tends to confirm my own conclusions that I wrote on 1st August 2017 for the Muslim Reform Movement, and that are republished here as: Ten Truths About Jihad. In particular, see the quote from Ibn Sa’d via Ibn al-Qayyim on the context of Qur’an, Repentance, 9:29, that appears to be the most militant verse in the Qur’an, but the context again suggests a meaning of self-defence!
(3) A modified version of this article was included by me and my friend, Sheikh Dr Salah al-Ansari al-Azhari in our Tackling Terror (Quilliam, 2018), a rebuttal of ISIS’ Fiqh al-Dima’ or Jurisprudence of Blood.
(4) I also discussed some of this with Prof. Rabbi Dan Cohn-Sherbok and Dr. George Chryssides in our chapter on “War and Peace” in our People of the Book – How Jews, Christians and Muslims Understand Their Sacred Scriptures (Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 2018)
But here we are, back to my original article [with a few additions in square brackets]:
TEN TRUTHS ABOUT JIHAD
With the Name of God, All-Merciful, Most Merciful
[Note: the Meccan period of the Prophet’s mission represented peaceful preaching under persecution; the Medinan period represented city-state-power and included war. Hence the reference to Meccan & Medinan verses, to understand context.]
- THE ESSENTIAL QUR’ANIC TEACHING ABOUT JIHAD IS THAT IT IS A LIFELONG, NONVIOLENT STRUGGLE FOR GOODNESS, JUSTICE AND TRUTH AGAINST EVIL, INJUSTICE AND FALSEHOOD
The essential Qur’anic teaching about Jihad is that it is a non-violent struggle for goodness of all kinds, and against evil of all types. This is clear from the following Meccan verses of the Qur’an:
“Struggle in God, as the struggle (jihad) deserves …” (Pilgrimage 22:78); and
“Obey not the concealers (of truth), and struggle against them with it (the Qur’an): a great struggle (jihad).” (The Criterion 25:52)
- DURING HIS 13 YEARS’ MISSION IN MECCA, THE PROPHET AND HIS FOLLOWERS WERE SUBJECTED TO PERSECUTION, BUT WERE ORDERED TO REMAIN PATIENT & NONVIOLENT
This is clear from verses such as the following:
“Withhold your hands (from violence in self-defence): establish prayer and give in charity” (Women 4:77)
Note that during this time, the Prophet’s followers were persecuted, tortured and killed. He himself was the subject of assassination attempts and plots (Spoils of War 8:30), but the Muslim response remained peaceful and nonviolent.
- DURING THE PROPHET’S 10-YEAR MISSION IN MEDINA, MILITARY JIHAD IN SELF-DEFENCE WAS EVENTUALLY PERMITTED
This is clear from Medinan verses such as the following:
“Permission has been given to those who were fought (to fight back), because they have been oppressed … those who were unjustly expelled from their homes, only for saying: ‘Our Lord is God’.” (Pilgrimage 22:39-40)
“Fight, in the way of God, those who fight you, and transgress not: truly, God does not love transgressors.” (The Heifer 2:190)
- MILITARY JIHAD MAY ONLY BE DECLARED BY A LEGITIMATE AUTHORITY
An example of such an authority was the Prophet Muhammad, undisputed leader of the city-state of Medina – see the Medina Charter, an agreement between the Prophet and the non-Muslim, largely Jewish, tribes of Medina, for clauses relating to mutual defence of Medina against external aggression.
Several Qur’anic verses that speak of fighting and concluding peace are addressed in the singular to the Prophet, e.g. Women 4:84 and Spoils of War 8:61. This is because only he, as the legitimate ruler of the city-state of Medina, had the authority to declare a state of war or peace.
Throughout the centuries of Islamic jurisprudence on warfare ethics, the jurists have agreed that only a legitimate authority can declare a state of war or military jihad. In modern times, this means that only legitimate states have the authority to declare a state of war or military jihad: vigilante or non-state actors such as terrorist groups have no Islamic authority whatsoever to issue a call to arms in the name of jihad. This is why we stated in the Muslim Reform Movement Declaration that “we reject violent jihad.” [i.e. by non-state actors]
- EVEN THE MOST APPARENTLY-BELLIGERENT VERSES ABOUT JIHAD ARE IN SELF-DEFENCE
For example, the eighth and ninth surahs or chapters of the Qur’an, al-Anfal (Spoils of War) and al-Tawbah (Repentance):
In Surah al-Anfal, the command to “Prepare against them your strength to the utmost …” is followed by the exhortation to accept overtures of peace from the enemy: “If they incline towards peace, then also incline towards it, and trust in God.” (Spoils of War 8:60-61)
Thus, the preparation of utmost strength is largely a deterrent, to encourage any enemies to sue for peace.
In Surah al-Tawbah, the command to “Fight them: God will punish them at your hands …” was preceded by the cause: “They violated their oaths and … attacked you first.” (Repentance, 9:12-15)
Thus, as in The Heifer 2:190 and Pilgrimage 22:39, fighting was ordered in self-defence. Note that in the Medinan era, the pagan, polytheistic Meccan armies attacked the Muslims in Medina several times, aiming to wipe the latter out, e.g. at the Battles of Uhud and the Trench. Thus, the Prophet and the Muslims in Medina were utterly justified in waging military jihad to protect themselves. The numerous Qur’anic verses dealing with military jihad against the Meccan polytheists must be understood in this context.
Finally, the verse of jizya (Repentance 9:29) was revealed when the Byzantines and their allies under Emperor Heraclius threatened the northern regions of Islamic Arabia from Syria, resulting in the Tabuk expedition that ended without any fighting.[1]
The jizya protection- and poll-tax, the name itself deriving from Persian [according to a narration by Imam al-Qurtubi under 9:29], was always a political tax, not religious. This is evident in the fact that some Islamic jurists later advised Muslims under the Reconquista in Andalusia to pay jizya to their Christian conquerors. Furthermore, the Ottoman Caliph abolished the jizya and the associated category of dhimma in the mid-19th century CE, with the agreement of his most senior Islamic scholars, recognising that it was no longer relevant to the modern world of the time.[2]
Thus, although early Muslim armies did take part in expansionist campaigns, at least partly motivated by the war strategem that ‘Offence is the best form of defence’, Muslim authorities, both political and religious, have recognised for at least two centuries that this kind of military jihad has no place in the modern world that is governed by treaties, peace agreements and international collaboration.
- MILITARY JIHAD WAS ALSO LEGISLATED TO PROTECT & PROMOTE RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
This is clear from the following Qur’anic verse:
“Permission has been given to those who were fought (to fight back), because they have been oppressed … those who were unjustly expelled from their homes, only for saying: ‘Our Lord is God’.
And were God not to check some people by means of others, then monasteries, churches, synagogues and mosques, where God’s name is mentioned often, would surely be demolished.” (Pilgrimage 22:39-40)
Thus, military Jihad was also legislated to protect the religious freedom of Muslims, Jews and Christians, according to the explicit text of the Qur’an. Muhammad bin Qasim, the 8th-century CE Muslim commander who first brought Islam to India, extended this religious protection to Zoroastrian and Hindu temples.[3]
Note that this religious protection also originally extended to the idolatrous polytheists of Mecca and Medina – the latter were included in the Medina Charter, and both were covered by the Qur’anic dictum, “To you, your religion: to me, my religion.” (The Concealers of Truth, 109:6) It was only when the Meccan polytheists refused to be peaceful and violently persecuted the Muslims, attempting genocide, that they were fought. Even then, the Hudaybiya peace treaty was concluded with them later.
- MILITARY JIHAD WAS ALWAYS CONDITIONED BY STRONG ETHICAL RESTRICTIONS
Numerous hadiths speak of the obligation of avoiding the killing of women, children, old people, peasants, monks and others in war – in the 7th-century CE, these were advanced, civilised teachings. Further hadiths forbid the chopping down of trees, burning of orchards or poisoning wells or other water supplies as part of war tactics. These teachings may be seen as Islamic forerunners of modern warfare ethics, such as the Geneva Conventions, that are also Islamic in spirit and must be seen as binding upon Muslims worldwide.
The 12th-13th century CE Andalusian philosopher and jurist, Ibn Rushd (Averroes), in his short ‘Book of Jihad’, part of his Bidayat al-Mujtahid (available in English as ‘The Distinguished Jurist’s Primer‘), discusses ten issues related to the philosophy and ethics of war or military jihad. Thus, Islam has a long tradition of warfare ethics.
- TO REITERATE, JIHAD IS A STRUGGLE FOR GOOD AGAINST EVIL
This may take many forms: jihad bil-mal is charitable spending; jihad bil-lisan is speaking truth or goodness against evil and injustice. Thus, all forms of social, intellectual and political struggle with noble aims are a type of jihad, in traditional Islamic terminology. An example of this is the hadith or Prophet’s teaching, “The best jihad is to speak a word of truth before a tyrant ruler.”
However, this teaching does not privilege so-called ‘Islamic political parties’ or islamist groups that wrongly claim to monopolise interpretations of Islam in the social and political realms.
Jihad is a universal struggle for good against evil. The verse, “Struggle in God, as the struggle (jihad) deserves …” (Pilgrimage 22:78) also includes the teachings, “… This is the path of your father Abraham … Establish prayer, give charity and hold to God: He is your Protector …”
- THE OUTER JIHAD IS ALWAYS UNDERPINNED BY INNER JIHAD
Inner jihad or jihad al-nafs (struggle against the self’s base desires) has always been understood as a prerequisite for taking part in the outer jihad, or struggle for goodness and truth in the world.
This is reflected in the Qur’anic promise of heaven to whoever fears standing before God and “forbids their self from base desires” (The Snatchers 79:40-41). Furthermore, a hadith states, “The true mujahid (holy warrior) is the one who struggles against their own self for the sake of God.”
Ibrahim bin Abi Ablah, an early ascetic of Islam, once remarked after a military expedition, “We have returned from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad,” i.e. from the lesser, military jihad to the greater jihad of lifelong struggle against evil. This teaching was also attributed to the Prophet himself and widely favoured by the Sufis, who were keen to preserve the spiritual dimensions of Islam during the early centuries of astonishing Islamic military conquests and worldly success. [Although many Hadith scholars did not accept this as a saying of the Prophet, they accepted its meaning, since it came from someone regarded as a holy main or saint (wali). Such scholars include Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani.]
- JIHAD TODAY
As shown above, Islamic teachings about jihad are essentially spiritual and non-violent. All charitable efforts or struggles by Muslims today for goodness, truth and justice against evil and injustice may be termed jihad. For example, the Prophet termed “struggling to help widows and orphans” and “struggling to serve elderly parents” as types of jihad. [Sound hadiths of Bukhari & Muslim, etc.]
Armed or military jihad is the strict preserve of legitimate authority such as modern nation-states engaging in ethical warfare: this is why the Muslim Reform Movement firmly rejects ‘violent jihad’ carried out by non-state actors or vigilante groups such as terrorist organisations.
What we really need is a jihad for universal human rights, dignity, equality, peace and justice, tempered by the mercy and compassion that are the essential spirit of Islam and the Qur’an.
Imam Dr Usama Hasan (briefly an armed mujahid alongside the anti-communist mujahideen in Afghanistan, 1990-1)
London, UK, 1st August 2017
Modified & republished: 10th November 2019 / 12th Rabi’ al-Awwal 1441
NOTES:
[1] Ibn Sa’d said, “It reached the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, that the Romans [Byzantines] had gathered large multitudes in Syria, and that Heraclius had prepared provision for his men for a year. He had brought with him the tribes of Lakhm, Judham, ‘Amilah and Ghassan. They had sent an advance party to al-Balqa’.” – cf. Ibn al-Qayyim, Zad al-Ma’ad, Al-Matba’ah al-Misriyyah wa Maktabatuha, n.d., vol. 3, p. 2
[2] cf. Usama Hasan, From Dhimmitude to Democracy, Quilliam, 2015
[3] Al-Baladhuri, as quoted by Ihsanoglu. cf. Usama Hasan, From Dhimmitude to Democracy, Quilliam, 2015, p. 26
ISLAM AND UNIVERSAL EQUALITY (A FRIDAY OR EID SERMON FOR HAJJ OR EID AL-ADHA)
August 9, 2019With the Name of God, All-Merciful, Most Merciful
ISLAM AND UNIVERSAL EQUALITY
(A FRIDAY OR EID SERMON FOR HAJJ OR EID AL-ADHA)
Mount of Mercy (Jabal al-Rahma), Arafat, near Mecca, during the annual Hajj pilgrimage, 2006. This is where the Prophet Muhammad delivered his Farewell Sermon to humanity in 632 CE, echoing God’s last message to humanity in the Qur’an [49:13]. Photo credit: (c) Haris Ahmad
The “Million Man March” on Washington DC, 23 August 1968, that included Martin Luther King Jr.’s historic, “I Have A Dream” speech. Photo credit – Wikipedia
[This sermon is written to be read out, or adapted and edited by each individual preacher, khateeb or khateeba according to their unique situation, community and congregation. Delivery time is approximately 20-30 minutes, depending on your oratory style and any gems of wisdom that you would like to add further. You may also wish to add the traditional blessings upon mention of the Messengers of God, such as: “may God bless him and grant him peace.” You will also probably want to recite the Qur’anic verses quoted in Arabic as well – apologies that I do not have the time or technology at the moment to add the proper, mushaf text in Arabic. I hope to do that in the future, God-willing.]
[FIRST SERMON]
Al-hamdu li’Llahi rabbi-l-‘alamin. Was-salatu was-salamu ‘alal-mursalin – All Praise belongs to God, Lord of the Worlds. Blessings and Peace be upon the Messengers of God.
As hundreds of millions of people around our world mark the occasion of Hajj and Eid al-Adha this week, let us be reminded and inspired by the Qur’an,
O Humanity! We created you from Male and Female, and made you into Nations and Tribes, that you may know each other. Truly, the most honoured of you in the presence of God are the most pious of you. Truly, God is All-Knowing, All-Aware … [Qur’an, Surat-ul-Hujurat, Chapter: The Chambers, 49:13]
… And by the Prophet Muhammad’s “Farewell Sermon” or Khutbat-ul-Wida’ delivered at the Hajj in the 10th year of the Islamic calendar or the year 632 of the Christian or Common Era. The Prophet’s farewell sermon was appropriately, and breathtakingly-symbolically, delivered at the “Mount of Mercy” (Jabal al-Rahma), for he was the most merciful messenger of God Most Merciful, and echoed the Qur’anic verse above:
“O people, truly your Lord is One and your ancestor is one. Truly, there is no superiority of Arab over non-Arab, of non-Arab over Arab, of white over black, of black over white, except by piety: all of you descended from Adam, and Adam was created from dust (or the soil of the earth).” This is a soundly-transmitted, authentic or sahih hadith, and perfectly-congruent in meaning with the individual and holistic messages of the Qur’an.
These are the definitive Islamic declarations of universal equality: although clearly some people do more good than evil and vice-versa, since piety is only known to God, outwardly and essentially in this life, all people are absolutely equal.
When Martin Luther King Jr. famously declared,
I have a dream … that one day people will be judged not by the colour of their skin, but by the content of their character …
he was actually not stating anything new, except perhaps in the 1960s US context of the civil rights movement, a clear example of a blessed, social jihad, despite the US founding declaration that it was a self-evident truth that “all men are created equal.” The Muslim world had possessed this teaching for over 13 centuries, for “content of character” is another way of saying “piety” or “righteousness”, as in the above examples from the Book of God and the Way of His Messenger.
Let’s reflect on that again:
Firstly, in the 7th century of the Christian or Common Era, that is, in what many people today regard as backward medieval times, the Prophet Muhammad was inspired with a message of God that began, ya ayyuhan-nas: “O people or humanity!” Now, we know that there are many ayat or verses of the Qur’an, dozens in fact, that begin with ya ayyuhan-nas: “O people or humanity!” But if we study their tarteeb an-nuzul or chronological, time-based order of revelation, do you know which one was revealed last after 23 long years of prophethood, persecution and patient struggle in the path of God?
It was this verse of Surat-ul-Hujurat!
Secondly, after those long, 23 years of utter submission, servitude and spirituality, the Prophet chose, and he was guided by God as always, to impart this key teaching, or deliver this key message, as part of his farewell sermon on the Mount of Mercy that, like Jesus Christ’s Sermon on the Mount of Olives and Moses’ receipt of the revelation of the Ten Commandments on Mount Sinai centuries earlier, would resonate for millenia with the millions and millions of men and women of God.
The last verse of the Book of God addressed explicitly to humanity, and the last major message of the Messenger of God to mankind, delivered in the mountains of Mecca, the mountains that witnessed the message and still resonate with it, if only we knew. Therefore, this is indeed a universal, Islamic declaration by God and then by the Messenger of God, echoing and confirming his Brother-Messengers before him. But what does this universal Muhammadan proclamation say after ya ayyuhan-nas?
The Prophetic proclamation says, to paraphrase, that God created us and reflected in us the breathtaking beauty of His diversity, as males and females, and across the spectrum of gender and sexuality, for as we learn in multiple fields of God-given, beneficial knowledge, all of which is drops from the oceans of the Divine Knowledge, from mathematics to music to medicine to metaphysics, and from physics to photography to philology to politics and philosophy, the “opposite poles” of a spectrum such as “male and female” are often the dominant forces, normal modes, eigen-vectors and eigen-functions, but they also imply the entire spectrum itself. “We created you from Male and Female.”
And in the Farewell Sermon, the Prophet reminded the male-dominated society that gender-based rights are mutual and that people of both sexes, the opposite pairs that imply the entire spectrum in between, complement each other in all aspects of life:
O People, it is true that you have certain rights with regard to your women, but they also have rights over you … Do treat your women well and be kind to them, for they are your lifelong partners and committed helpers.
Another passage of the Qur’an reminds us of our humble origins, our need for loving partners and spouses, and our ethnic and linguist diversity:
Amongst His Signs is this, that He created you from dust; and then,- behold, you are people scattered (far and wide)!
And amongst His Signs is this, that He created for you mates, partners and spouses from among yourselves, that you may dwell in tranquillity with them, and He has placed love and mercy between your (hearts): truly, in that are Signs for those who reflect.
And amongst His Signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth, and the variation and diversity in your languages and your colours: truly, in that are Signs for those who know.
[Qur’an, Surat al-Rum, Chapter: The Romans or Byzantines, 30:20-22]
The message of the Messenger continues with this depth of diversity by reminding us that we are different nations and tribes: different peoples in language, culture, with collectively multi-coloured skins and multi-coloured personalities. We have individual identities, but also group identities: nations and tribes, a tribe being a very large family. People now have new tribes, from political and religious affiliations to fans and supporters of particular sports-clubs and genres of art or music.
Nations and tribes lead to nationalism and tribalism, both of which can be good or bad, or a mixture of the two. The positives of nations and tribes is that these matters give us a sense of belonging and the comfort of community, for we are social creatures. Nations and tribes can do great things, such as feeding the poor, looking after widows, widowers and orphans, caring for animals and the earth, toppling tyrants, fighting oppression and injustice and building great civilisations that reflect the Majesty and Beauty of God by harnessing the power of collective effort and the synergy of diverse material and spiritual forces.
But nations and tribes can do immense evil when these forces descend, like vicious, collective egos into cycles of hatred, violence and revenge. “My nation first, whether it’s right or wrong! My tribe first, whether it’s right or wrong!” The whole of human history, including the past, present and future, is littered with the awful cruelty, violence, warmongering and genocide caused by God-given nations and tribes being utterly misused, for evil rather than good.
And this is why, in this verse of Surat-ul-Hujurat, God follows mention of nations and tribes with: li ta’arafu: that you may know and recognise each other deeply. Know yourself, and know your nation and tribe, to give you a strong sense of the positive values, individual and collective, that inspire you to goodness, but do not use them to hate other people, other nations, other tribes, other sports fans, other political parties, simply for being different to you and irrespective of right and wrong.
Fourteen centuries ago, the Qur’an reminded us to dig deep and harness our individual and collective energies for goodness, and to bring people together. God didn’t say: li tanafaru or li taqatalu, that I created you in different nations and tribes to hate each other or to fight and kill each other and indulge your mad, genocidal impulses, but li ta’arafu: that you may know and recognise each other deeply, and see the beauty of God in each other’s good qualities, for people are mirrors of each other, with all our goodness and evil reflected back at us.
One of the great strengths and positive resources of today’s world is that through our God-given learning, telecommunication and travel, We, the peoples of the world, not just “We, the people” of America or Britain or Russia or Saudi Arabia or Iran or India or Pakistan or the blessed lands of Africa and the other great continents, but “We, the peoples of the world” are able to know, communicate with, learn about and develop deep friendships, and therefore to recognise each other on a deep human level, individually and collectively, more than ever before.
I seek the forgiveness of God, for me and for you all, for all of us. Seek His forgiveness, for truly, He alone is the Forgiver, the Merciful.
[SECOND SERMON]
Al-hamdu li’Llahi rabbi-n-nas, maliki-n-nas, ilahi-n-nas. All Praise belongs to God, Lord of humanity, King of humanity, Deity of humanity.
We now come to the crux, literally, of these majestic, divine teachings that are perhaps more relevant today than in all the bygone millenia of human history, because of the ever-increasing size of the human race and the competition for the earth’s scarce resource. Within our lifetimes, ours and our living parents and grandparents, the human family has rocketed from 2 billion people to nearly 8 billion today.
God says: Truly, the most honoured of you in the presence of God are the most pious of you.
And the Prophet said in his last message to the crowds of thousands gathered around him on his Hajjat-ul-Wida’ or Farewell Pilgrimage to Mecca:
O people, truly your Lord is One and your ancestor is one. Truly, there is no superiority of Arab over non-Arab, of non-Arab over Arab, of white over black, of black over white, except by piety: all of you descended from Adam, and Adam was created from dust (or the soil of the earth).
In other words, we are united despite our diversity: we are one human family, for as our scientists tell us, we are a narrow species as a human race, and there is no real scientific evidence for different races, only different skin-colours, that themselves will disappear through the increasing inter-marriage accelerated by globalisation, so that humans in a few centuries or millenia will all be the same colour and it will be clearer that there is only one race: the human race, and that is our ultimate nation and tribe.
There is no superiority of Arab over non-Arab, of non-Arab over Arab, of white over black, of black over white, except by piety.
And let’s face it bluntly and honestly, many Muslims have forgotten this and our communities and societies are plagued with racism: Arab v. non-Arab, North African Arab v. Black African, Arab v. Turk v. Kurd v. Persian v. Indian v. Chinese and all the subdivisions underneath. This jahiliyyah that Islam brilliantly eradicated in the City of the Prophet is back with a vengeance. As we know from other Qur’anic verses and commentary and study of history from a Qur’anic lens, God honoured the Israelites with being custodians of His Covenant. Then this duty and honour passed to the Ishmaelites or Arabs. A century after the Prophet, it passed to the Persians and North Africans and Black Africans and Kurds and Mongols and Indians and Turks. And now, each of these groups have nation-states that are vying for leadership of the Muslim world, and each one is claiming superiority over the other based on its history and supposedly-better culture. And the Arabs in particular – and my family, like most families of Indian Muslim heritage, claim Arab ancestry, have no superiority over others because, as Imam al-Shafi’i categorically showed, every Muslim is an Arab of sorts because every Muslim can recite at least one line from the Qur’an in Arabic. Furthermore, the Qur’an being in classical Arabic, does not make any Arab or Indian or Turk or Persian superior, if we do not live by the exalted ideals of God’s Holy, Noble and Majestic Word.
No! The people who deserve to lead the “Muslim world” are the true people of God, plain and simple, those who love God and are loved by Him and who are always with the poor and the oppressed and the marginalised. And sometimes, it requires the greatest courage to keep saying basic truths when these are being forgotten and ridiculed.
As the greatest custodians and authorities of the Islamic tradition agreed:
God will give dominance to a non-Muslim state that practises justice over a Muslim state that practises oppression.
This is because God is Truth, and God is Just, and He underpinned His creation with the Balance, that we may not transgress the Balance. And there is no point countering Islamophobia with Westophobia, for Western, non-Muslim societies that are more just and better at human rights will continue to dominate Muslim societies that are culturally infested by racism, inequality, oppression of women, have appalling human rights records and even practise medieval slavery in a few places, although human-trafficking of men, women and children for forced labour and sexual slavery is a new problem all over the world, and it is called “modern slavery.”
Piety, or God-consciousness or true spirituality, is ultimately the most important “content of character.”
May Allah inspire us with the examples of His beloved servants. May Allah bless all of our countries, our nations, our peoples, our tribes, and enable us to do good and avoid evil.
[DU’AS OR SUPPLICATIONS]
[May Allah be with you, and accept and bless your sermons and your prayers!]
Usama Hasan
London, UK
Friday 8th Dhul Hijjah 1440 / 9th August, 2019
Boris Burkas
August 14, 2018With the Name of God, the Apparent, the Hidden
BORIS BURKAS
- The “Boris Burkas” controversy is a good opportunity to further debate around the Islamic veil in a civil way. A key issue is that the niqab or face-veil does not (currently) have the social acceptability in the UK that it does in some Muslim-majority countries. There needs to be more civilised dialogue to help wider society understand why thousands of British women choose to wear a face-veil in public. Conversely, the principles of Islamic ethics and law dictate that public security and safety is of paramount importance: we also need an internal dialogue amongst proponents or defenders of the face-veil about this issue.
- It is important to summarise what Boris said: he critiqued the Danes, some of whom still swim stark naked in public, for banning the burka (or correctly, niqab). He expressed the wish that the fringe practice of face-veiling, at which he poked fun, would disappear in Britain, but opposed a ban. He also echoed Jack Straw’s 2006 call for face-veiling to end.
- I recently spent an hour in a residential area of the Highfields district of Leicester, and observed that about half of all women walking on that street wore the niqab. Several had teenage daughters with them who covered their hair but not the face. There are clearly a few parts of UK cities, such as Birmingham, Leicester, Blackburn and elsewhere, where the niqab is quite common, although nationally it is a fringe practice.
- Face-veiling was clearly known in pre-Islamic Arabia, including amongst men. Reasons for it included simple environmental ones such as the problem of sandstorms – Arab horsemen riding with their faces covered are a familiar sight in the desert. Cultural practices often become divorced from their origins. It is for this reason that Tuareg men still cover their faces with the tails of their turbans, sometimes even when indoors. At the Marrakech Declaration conference in 2016, the most senior Islamic cleric of Niger attended wearing this traditional Tuareg dress.
- Aside from culture, veiling also of course has religious and spiritual dimensions. Islamic culture and tradition continued and adapted many Jewish, Christian and Arabian pre-Islamic practices. The veiling of women in Islam came to fundamentally symbolise higher theological and metaphysical truths, the most central of which is that God is veiled by creation, and the veil (hijab) between humanity and God is lifted in the Hereafter for those who purify their souls sufficiently. Now, God has the Most Beautiful Names: a traditional Islamic idea is that the masculine represents and manifests Transcendence, Majesty and the Outer whilst the feminine represents and manifests Immanence, Beauty and the Inner. (These metaphysical concepts related to gender are explored in ‘The Tao of Islam: A Sourcebook on Gender Relationships in Islamic Thought’ by Sachiko Murata, 1992.) Of course, there are other, non-traditional views on the subject, especially more modern ones.
- Thus, the Muslim woman became veiled because she represented the Divine Beloved and the Divine Beauty. Her veiling in public also became an extension of her home-based role, where she remained in purdah (a curtain or veil), a term that has ironically been borrowed for the suspension of UK parliaments before elections. Occasionally, veiling applied to men too: we can also be beloved sometimes, and there is a minority South Asian Muslim practice of veiling the bridegroom – I have witnessed this at a wedding in the UK. Of course, the Christian practice of veiling the bride is well known in the UK. The Muslim caliph, sultan or local emir was sometimes veiled in public, to preserve an element of mystery, respect and power. His doorkeeper was literally known as “the veiler” (hajib). Metaphysically, the ruler here represented the Divine Majesty and Divine Power. Of course, there is a gender-asymmetry here that may be mistaken for, or perverted into, gender-inequality, as Munira Mirza alludes to in her article on this subject.
- Boris was wrong to comment that he could find no scriptural justification for face-veiling in the Koran, on two counts. Firstly, his comment is inaccurate, since traditionally, some Islamic authorities have interpreted some verses to include face-veiling, as I described in detail in my 2011 paper, Islam and the Veil. Secondly, his comment implies that scriptural literalism is justified, whereas scripture was always supposed to be read alongside considerations of history, society, morality, spirituality and ethics. NB: at least Boris was closer to the mark than the Prince of Wales, who famously and inaccurately said in his 1990s lecture at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies, that “veiling was a cultural tradition, and not from the Prophet of Islam.”
- Clearly, face-veiling is not fully accepted in UK society, as politicians’ comments from Jack Straw (2006) onwards illustrate. However, it is not totally unknown, so there are cultural blindspots in operation. I have already mentioned the bridal veil, a beautiful Christian tradition. There is also the practice of entertainers and party-goers wearing masks. In 2013, I attended an interfaith meeting at Lambeth Palace, that was also addressed by Baroness Warsi: in his closing remarks, Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury, referred to “masqued parties” in previous centuries at the palace, that he said were a euphemism for wife-swapping parties. To this day, British newspapers continue to report about private sex parties where all participants wear masks. This again raises the question of private vs. public practice.
- In contrast to the UK, face-veiling is clearly socially-acceptable, and even the norm, in some parts of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan and other Muslim-majority countries, where people might invert Boris’ comments and speak of “bank robbers dressed as women.” In Saudi Arabia, I noticed that niqabs were of different levels of opacity and transparency, and saw young girls having great fun lifting and lowering their veils as they peered out at the world in preparation for a religious, socially-conservative adult life. During my years of teaching at mosque, college and university in the UK and Pakistan, the female students adopted diverse dress-codes with regard to covering or not covering their heads and faces, and there was always social acceptance from other students and teachers, both male and female. I have also come across face-veiling teachers in Islamic schools in the UK and Pakistan. In Pakistan, “Burka Avenger” is a popular cartoon series promoting education and female empowerment. It was so successful that it was bought by Nickelodeon Pakistan. Islamic face-veiling has come to the UK via British multiculturalism and needs to be understood seriously, rather than treated with knee-jerk reactions.
- Having grown up in the UK since the age of five, I was at first uncomfortable talking to women in niqabs, but I learnt to respect their choices and to gauge basic emotions such as sadness or joy from their eyes. To return to a spiritual aspect of this question, I find sunglasses, that are obviously worn by both men and women, annoyingly including indoors, to be far more of a barrier to meaningful contact: in many spiritual traditions around the world, the eyes are a window into, and a mirror of, the soul. Clearly, eye-contact is prohibited by ray-bans, whereas at least you can tell if a niqab-wearer is smiling from the twinkling of her eyes. If we can’t see each other’s eyes, we can’t see into each other’s souls.
- Having said all of the above, there is a clear principle of Islamic ethics and law that public welfare (maslaha) overrides most other considerations. In western, (post-)Christian societies, there are genuine concerns about social acceptability and public security. This must be considered in the debate, especially by defenders and proponents of face-veiling.
- Anecdotally, I have come across several western non-Muslim men, who describe the veil as being “sexy” and “mysteriously attractive.” This raises another internal question for some Muslims: if the veil is supposed to symbolise and promote modesty and chastity, how do we guard against it becoming counter-productive?
CONCLUSIONS
- Boris Johnson should apologise for the offence caused by his comparing face-veiled women to pillar-boxes and bank robbers. Perhaps in the future, such comments will not be offensive because the national debate will be mature and integrated enough for face-veiled women themselves to laugh along with the jokes. But with all the racial and religious tensions in the UK, particularly around Islam, visibly-different Muslim women are one of our most vulnerable minorities, especially those who wear the niqab. A senior politician, a possible future Prime Minister, should display higher standards in public and be more responsible: for example, he probably knows that he would never get away with similarly mocking the characteristic dress of British ultra-orthodox Jews.(DISCLAIMER & APOLOGY: On a private electronic discussion group of salafi activists c. 2009-10, I once made a flippant remark about our men and women dressing like “clowns and ninjas.” I was making a serious point about integration and traditional dress, by which I stand: public perception and respect for local society is important in Islam. But the comment was made public and used against me by my opponents during the 2011 Tawhid Mosque controversy, so for the record, although many salafis told me that they found the comment funny, I would like to apologise for any offence caused.)
- We need more civilised and mature debate in the UK to address at least two major aspects of this issue. Firstly, I hope that more proponents of the niqab, especially face-veiled women themselves, articulate their thinking and experience so that wider society understands the practice better, leading to more social acceptance and less fear around it, as exists already in many Muslim-majority countries. Secondly, I hope that the proponents and defenders of the face-veil consider genuine concerns in wider society around security and facial visibility, since the niqab has not been native to these shores in the past.
- Those insisting that the niqab be discarded are taking an illiberal position: it is better to have a respectful debate. If, as a result, some or all women remove their niqabs, then all well and good from the perspective of opponents of niqab, but those women’s free choice must be respected. I know of several British Muslim women who used to wear a niqab, but stopped doing so for reasons of social cohesion after 9/11 and 7/7. On the other hand, I was told anecdotally that more young women wore the niqab as a defiant response to Jack Straw in 2006. And in the same year, a white British female convert to Islam who had worn the niqab for 10 years, gave Channel 4’s alternative Christmas Day message.
- It is better to debate a matter without settling it, than to settle it without debating. I hope and pray that this whole controversy leads to a better understanding of the issue in the UK through constructive debate.
- Boris Bikes were a huge success. There might be a lucrative commercial opportunity right now for someone to market a suitable line of “Boris Burkas.” But joking aside, I would genuinely love to see Boris discuss this issue with a niqab-wearer, especially one that could match his wit and stand up for her free choice. It would be very helpful for both sides to have such an interaction. I hope someone can arrange such an encounter.
Usama Hasan
London
14th August 2018
UNITY 