Posts Tagged ‘Fiqh’

Did the Prophet Muhammad protect an icon of Mary and Jesus inside the Ka’bah at Mecca?

December 25, 2025

Bismillah. This alleged incident, at the time of the Conquest of Mecca when the Ka’bah was purified of the 360+ idols around it and inside it, was famously mentioned by Martin Lings (Abu Bakr Siraj al-Din), may God have mercy upon him, in his book, Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources.

In 1990, JIMAS (UK) published a then-recent exchange of letters in the Saudi Gazette between Abu Bilal Mustafa al-Kanadi [The Canadian], may God have mercy upon him, and Martin Lings, in which Kanadi was very critical of Lings: one of his criticism was Lings’ inclusion of this story in his Sirah (Biography of the Prophet), based on its mention by al-Waqidi in Kitab al-Maghazi (The Book of Military Expeditions) and al-Azraqi (d. 250 H) in Akhbar Makkah (History of Mecca). That exchange is reproduced at the bottom of this post, for reference. Neither correspondent referred to the Hadith expert Imam Dhahabi’s discussion and comment on this report.

Imam Dhahabi’s discussion and comment on this report

Muslim [bin Khalid] al-Zanji [The Negro], on the authority of Ibn Abi Najih, on the authority of his father [Abu Najih], who said: Men of the Quraysh sat and reminisced about the building of the Ka’bah … [The builders] depicted prophets, angels and trees inside it. They depicted Ibrahim [Abraham] divining with arrows. They depicted Jesus and his mother …

And in the hadith on the authority of Ibn Abi Najih, on the authority of his father [Abu Najih], on the authority of Huwaytib bin ‘Abdul ‘Uzza and others: On the day of the Conquest [of Mecca], the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, entered the House [of God]. He ordered for a cloth to be moistened and commanded that those pictures be effaced. He placed his palms upon the picture of Jesus and his mother and said, “Erase them all, except what is beneath my hand.” Al-Azraqi transmitted it.[1]

Ibn Jurayj said: Sulayman bin Musa al-Shami [The Syrian] asked ‘Ata’ bin Abi Rabah [The Mufti of Mecca] whilst I was listening, “Did you come across the statue[2] of Mary and Jesus in the House [of God]?” He replied, “Yes, I came across the embellished[3] statue of Mary with Jesus standing in her lap. There used to be six support pillars inside the House: the statue of Jesus and Mary was in the pillar nearest the door.” So I [Ibn Jurayj] asked ‘Ata’, “When was it destroyed?” He replied, “In the fire during the rule of Ibn al-Zubayr.” I asked, “Do you mean that it was there during the time of the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace?” He replied, “I do not know, but I think it was there during his time.”

Dawud bin ‘Abdul Rahman said, on the authority of Ibn Jurayj: I then repeated the question to ‘Ata’ after a while. He said, “The statue of Jesus and his mother was in the middle pillar.”

Al-Azraqi said: [4] Dawud al-‘Attar [The Perfumier] narrated to us, on the authority of ‘Amr bin Dinar, who said, “I came across the statue of Jesus and his mother in the Ka’bah before it was demolished.”[5] Dawud said: One of the gatekeepers informed me on the authority of Musafi’ bin Shaybah that The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: “O Shaybah! Erase all the pictures except what is beneath my hand.” When he lifted his hand, there was Jesus, son of Mary, and his mother.

Al-Azraqi said, on the authority of Sa’id bin Salim: Yazid bin ‘Iyad bin Ju’dubah narrated to me, on the authority of Ibn Shihab [al-Zuhri] that The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, entered the Ka’bah containing pictures of angels. He saw the picture of Ibrahim [Abraham] and said, “May God fight them! They made him an old man divining with arrows.” He then saw the picture of Mary and placed his hand upon it, saying, “Erase all [the pictures] in it, except the picture of Mary.”

Al-Azraqi then quoted similarly with another chain of transmission. It is mursal [“hanging loose”; discontinuous].[6] But the statements of ‘Ata’ and ‘Amr are established (thabit): this is a matter that we had never heard of until today. [emphasis added]

Source:

al-Imam Shams al-Din Muhammad bin Ahmad bin ‘Uthman al-Dhahabi (d. 748 H / 1347 CE),
Siyar A’lam al-Nubala’ (Biographies of Notable Nobles),
ed. Dr Bashshar ‘Awwad Ma’ruf,
Mu’assasat al-Risalah, Beirut, 1422 H / 2001 CE, vol. 26, pp. 67-69


[1] The editor of the Siyar adds the reference: Akhbar Makkah,1/165

[2] Timthal: icon, picture or statue

[3] Muzawwaq: embellished, especially with quicksilver (mercury) or an amalgam of quicksilver and gold.

[4] The editor of the Siyar adds the reference: Akhbar Makkah,1/167-8

[5] The Ka’bah has been destroyed and rebuilt several times in its history due to floods, fires, earthquakes, etc.

[6] Mursal especially refers to a Follower (Tabi’i) quoting the Prophet directly without naming the Companion (Sahabi) from whom he must have heard the narration. In this case, Ibn Shihab [al-Zuhri] is a Follower and quotes The Prophet directly without naming the intervening Companion(s), so the narration is mursal. There is much difference of opinion amongst Hadith scholars about the authenticity of the mursal hadith. See the section on this topic in Suhaib Hasan, An Introduction to the Science of Hadith, Al-Qur’an Society, London, 1994, pp. 24-29.

ANALYSIS & BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES from Imam Dhahabi’s Tadhkirat al-Huffaz (Memoire of the Preservers of Hadith)

A. IBN SHIHAB AL-ZUHRI (50-124 H): The most knowledgeable of the Preservers of Hadith (Huffaz)

Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Muslim bin ‘Ubaydillah bin ‘Abdillah bin Shihab bin ‘Abdillah bin Zuhrah bin Kulab, The Qurayshi, The Zuhri, The Madinan, The Imam. He narrated Hadith from Ibn ‘Umar, Sahl bin Sa’d, Anas bin Malik, Mahmud bin al-Rabi’, Sa’id bin al-Musayyib, Abu Umamah bin Sahl and their generation of minor Companions (Sahabah) and major Followers (Tabi’in). The following narrated Hadith from him: Ma’mar bin Rashid, Awza’i, Layth, Malik, Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah and multitudes besides them.

Layth said, “I never saw a person of knowledge at all more comprehensive than Zuhri. He would narrate about encouragement of worship: you would say that he only specialised in that. If he narrated about the (history of) the Arabs and genealogies, you would say that he only specialised in those. If he narrated about the Qur’an and the Sunnah, then similarly … He was amongst the most generous of people … He used to drink honey a lot, but not eat apples. He said: I never forgot any knowledge after my heart had deposited it … No-one has had patience upon knowledge like my patience; no-one has spread knowledge the way I have.”

Nafi’ checked his memorisation of the Qur’an with Zuhri. (Zuhri memorised the entire Qur’an in eighty nights.) ‘Umar bin ‘Abdul ‘Aziz said, “No one remains more knowledgeable about past traditions than Zuhri.” Malik said, “Ibn Shihab remained, but there was no-one similar to him in the world.” Ayyub al-Sikhtiani said, “I did not see anyone more knowledgeable than him.” ‘Amr bin Dinar said, “I did not see the dinar (gold coin) and the dirham (silver coin) less important to anyone than Zuhri: they were like dung to him.” Others said: Zuhri was an accomplished soldier. He used to dye his grey hair with henna.

[The Umayyad Caliph] Hisham bin ‘Abdul Malik asked Zuhri to dictate some knowledge to one of his sons, so he dictated four hundred hadiths to him. Zuhri then assembled People of Hadith and narrated those four hundred hadiths to them. He met Hisham again after a month or so: Hisham tested him by telling him that the book of dictated hadiths had been lost. Zuhri called a scribe and dictated the hadiths again: these were compared against the original book, and there was not a single difference, not even in a letter. Makhul was asked, “Who was the most knowledgeable person you ever met?” He replied, “Ibn Shihab.” He was asked, “Then who?” He replied, “Ibn Shihab.”

Some further statements of Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri:

“Al-Qasim bin Muhammad said to me: I see that you are eager for knowledge: Shall I not then point you to one of its great vessels? … ‘Amrah bint ‘Abdul Rahman, for she grew up in ‘Aisha’s lap. So I came to her and found her to be an ocean that could not be exhausted.”

“I never revised knowledge at all.”

“Whoever would like to memorise hadiths, should eat raisins.”

“A Preserver of Hadith is only born once in forty years.”

“God has not been worshipped via anything better than knowledge.”

B. ‘AMR BIN DINAR, THE PRESERVER OF HADITH, THE IMAM (c. 46-126 H)

The person of knowledge of the Sanctuary (Haram). Abu Muhammad of Jumayh (their freed-slave), The Meccan, al-Athram. He heard traditions from Ibn ‘Abbas, Ibn ‘Umar, Jabir bin ‘Abdillah, Bajalah bin ‘Abdah, Anas bin Malik, Abu l-Sha’tha’, Tawus and many others. Shu’bah, Ibn Jurayj, the two Hammads [Hammad bin Zayd & Hammad bin Salamah], the two Sufyans [Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah & Sufyan al-Thawri], Warqa’ and many besides them, all narrated from him.

Shu’bah said, “I did not see anyone more established in Hadith than ‘Amr.” Ibn Mahdi said: Shu’bah said to me, “I did not see anyone like ‘Amr bin Dinar.” Yahya al-Qattan and Ahmad [bin Hanbal] said, “He was more established than Qatadah.” ‘Abdullah bin Abi Najih said, “I never saw anyone at all with more (juristic) understanding than ‘Amr, not even ‘Ata’, Mujahid or Tawus.”

Ibn ‘Uyaynah said, “He would not leave the mosque. He would ride a donkey. I only ever saw him sitting down. He was a person of understanding (jurist). He would narrate by meaning … Trustworthy, Trustworthy, Trustworthy … He divided the night into three: he would sleep for a third, teach his hadiths for a third and pray for a third … We did not have anyone with more understanding, knowledge or preservation than ‘Amr bin Dinar.”

The Hafiz Ibn al-Mufaddal established him as one of the four amongst the top generation (of hadith-narrators) after the year 40 H: Zuhri, ‘Amr bin Dinar, Qatadah & Abu Ishaq al-Sabi’i.

C. MUSLIM BIN KHALID AL-ZANJI (100-180 H): “the Imam, the Man of Understanding (Jurist) … Shaykh of the Sanctuary (Haram).”

Muslim bin Khalid al-Zanji [The Negro]. He narrated Hadith from the likes of Ibn Abi Mulaykah, Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri, ‘Amr bin Dinar, Zayd bin Aslam, Hisham bin ‘Urwah, ‘Abdul Malik Ibn Jurayj and their generation. He devoted himself to Ibn Jurayj for a while, gained juristic understanding and gave fatwas, concentrating on knowledge. He transmitted the (Qur’anic) letter variations (huruf) from ‘Abdullah bin Kathir, and gave Shafi’i permission to give fatwas. Shafi’i, Marwan al-Tatiri, Humaydi, Musaddad, Hakam bin Musa, the Hafiz Ibrahim bin Musa, Hisham bin ‘Ammar and others narrated Hadith from him.

Azraqi said, “He was a person of understanding and worship. He would fast all the time.”

Yahya Ibn Ma’in said, “There is no problem with him.”

Ibn ‘Adi said, “He is good in Hadith: I hope there is no problem with him.”

Abu Dawud said, “Weak in Hadith.”

Bukhari said, “Rejected in Hadith.”

Abu Hatim said, “He is not used as a proof.”

Ibrahim al-Harbi said, “He was the Jurist of Mecca.”

Suwayd said, “He was named ‘The Negro’ because of his black skin.” But Ibn Sa’d and others said that he was blonde: he was termed ‘The Negro’ via the irony of opposite meaning. Dhahabi: He died in 180 H, aged 80.

Professor Muhammad Hashim Kamali – two important articles on Sharia

December 2, 2025

Bismillah. I got hold of two valuable articles from 1998:

  1. Maqasid al-Sharia (The Higher Objectives of Islamic Ethics-Law)
  2. Qawa’id Fiqhiyyah (Juristic or Legal Maxims of the Sharia, Islamic Ethics-Law)

If interested, download them from here:

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:

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

  4. 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

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

Difficulties with fasting: Al Azhar Fatwas and other resources

June 6, 2016

Bismillah.  Here are some relevant resources:

 

  1. The Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) has worked with Islamic scholars, imams, chaplains and leaders to produce an information paper for schools and colleges over the observance of Ramadan during this summer’s exams.
  2. The Practice of Fasting in the Modern World – seminar abstracts from Al Mahdi Institute
  3. Al Azhar fatwa from 2010 on “Fasting in Countries where the Nights are Short [and the Days are Long]” – detailed jurisprudence, worth a read. Mentions the 18-hour example as definitely constituting harm: “People living in countries with extreme variations in daylight hours and nights face an 18-hour fast or more (more than three-quarters of the entire day), which is certainly a difficult feat. Expert opinions determined the inability of the human body to tolerate such extended periods of fasting which definitely poses harm. Therefore, we cannot maintain that harm is the objective of Islamic law.” Their conclusion is to follow the timings of Mecca and Medina, or what is known as the Hijazi timetable.  For practical advice on following this in the UK, see Hafiz Naveed’s work at http://www.al-rukn.com
  4. Al Azhar Fatwa (2015): “Fasting For Those Working in Strenuous Jobs”
  5. Fatwa on breaking the fast during Ramadan for students revising for exams (see below for Arabic text)

    Source: http://www.elwatannews.com/news/details/36353, 09/08/2012

    Question: Is it permitted for the student to break his/her fast in Ramadan to be able to revise in preparation to take exams?

     Answer: Dr. Ali Goma, the Mufti of Egypt, replied:

    It is appropriate to distinguish between a student who can handle revising with some degree of hardship and one who cannot do so at all because of fasting. It is also appropriate to distinguish between students who finds someone to sponsor him and one who works to support himself and his dependants and whose working life, essential for him to support them, will be affected as a consequence of his failure in the exam.

    If student who is mature and responsible under Sharia is in a desperate and real need to revise during the days of Ramadan such that it will affect his and his dependants’ livelihood, and he knows that most probably – by any sign or experience – that his fasting will lead to his failure due to physical weakness or will impair his academic education which is necessary to generate his income and his essential expenditure or the livelihood of his dependants, in this case it permitted for him to break his fast. This is based on what Ibn ‘Abdin and other jurists stated where they allowed bakers and people with similar occupations of manual labour to break their fast.

    It is mandatory on these students in this case to make up the missed days, because of this necessity (darurah) or the need (hajah) that is effectively a case of necessity, as soon as this emergency situation comes to an end.  It should be noted that this fatwa is based on necessity (darurah), which is always evaluated in terms of its extent and degree. The necessity here is conditional upon (i) the student being forced to revise during Ramadan and it not being possible to postpone the exams.  It is again conditional upon (ii) the near-certainty on the part of the student that he will fail if he cannot study and (iii) upon the conviction that this failure will impair or deprive him from completing his education where he will not be able to find work except through it or he will not be able to provide for his and his family’s basic needs except by obtaining it (the education). If one of these conditions is not met, fasting becomes obligatory on him and it is not allowed for him to break the fast.

    Translation by Salah al-Ansari & Usama Hasan

    اسأل والمفتى يجيب.. هل يجوز للطالب أن يُفطر فى رمضان ليتقوَّى على المذاكرة فى أيام الامتحان؟

    هل يجوز للطالب أن يُفطر فى رمضان ليتقوَّى على المذاكرة فى أيام الامتحان؟ يقول الدكتور على جمعة مفتى الجمهورية: ينبغى أن يُفرّق هنا بين من يستطيع المذاكرة مع نوع من المشقة وبين من لا يمكنه المذاكرة أصلاً بسبب الصوم، وأن نفرق أيضاً بين مَن يجد عائلاً يعوله وينفق عليه وبين من ينفق هو على نفسه أو عياله بحيث إن رسوبه سيؤثر على حياته العملية التى لا بد له منها لكسب قوته وقوت عياله؛ فإذا احتاج الطالب المكلَّف شرعاً احتياجاً أكيداً يؤثر على معيشته أو معيشة من يعوله إلى المذاكرة فى نهار رمضان، وغلب على ظنه بأمارة أو تجربة أن صومه يُفضِى إلى رسوبه المستلزم لضعفه أو عجزه عن إكمال مسيرته التعليمية التى لا بد له منها لاكتساب معيشته ونفقته الأساسية أو نفقة عياله: فإنه فى هذه الحالة يباح له الفطر؛ أخذاً بما استظهره ابن عابدين وغيره من إباحة الفطر للخبّاز ونحوه من أرباب الحِرَف الشاقة، والواجب على هؤلاء الطلاب قضاء ما أفطروه بسبب هذه الضرورة أو الحاجة التى تُنَزَّل منزلتها فور زوال هذا الظرف الطارئ عنهم. ويجب التنبه إلى أنّ هذه الفتوى إنما هى فتوى ضرورة، والضرورة تقدر بقدرها، وأنها مشروطة بكون مذاكرة الطالب مضطرّا إليها فى شهر رمضان ولا يمكن تأجيلها، ثم هى مشروطة أيضاً بأنه يغلب على ظنه الرسوب إن لم يذاكر، وهى مشروطة ثالثاً بأن هذا الرسوب سيضعفه أو يحرمه من استكمال دراسته التى لا عمل له إلا بها، أو من توفير الاحتياجات التى لا قوام له أو لعياله إلا بها. فإن عُدِم شرط من هذه الشروط فالصوم واجب عليه ولا يجوز له الإفطار.

Abortion – Rulings in Islamic Jurisprudence and Muslim-majority countries

October 23, 2014

Bismillah.  Here is a translation I put together for my presentation at the International Summer School on Science and Religion, Paris, August 2014.

The discussion is interesting because these Sharia scholars refer to the modern science of embryology in their discussion, although there are one or two minor errors in the scientific references.  The traditional juristic positions are based on Qur’an/Hadith, so abortion is prohibited after 0, 40 or 120 days, with some exceptions.  Thus the hadiths are not conclusive.  But the science is not conclusive either as to “beginning of life”: people make a case for 0 days (conception), 40 days (foetal brain activity) or 120 days (development of major organs).  Note that the latter two views are relevant to “end of life” discussions also, i.e. brain-death vs. organ-death.  In the end, this is a complex ethical problem with medical and religious input: the material provided below is intended to educate, clarify and provoke thought and debate around this difficult topic.

Rulings on Abortion – Islamic Jurisprudence (PDF)

Abortion laws in OIC countries – summary (PDF with UK, US & France for comparison; the 7 most common justifications for abortion in legal systems around the world are interesting, according to the UN; research by Sofia Patel)

[Update 26/10/2014:]

Here are some suggested study/discussion questions:

1. What does Islamic tradition say about the beginning of life? (0 days = conception; 40-49 days = 6-7 weeks; 120 days = 4 months = 17 weeks 1 day)

2. Are the hadiths about ensoulment after 40 or 120 days related to Aristotle’s view (40 days for boys; 80 days for girls) ?  Do these have a common origin (e.g. divine revelation), or did Greek ideas influence the transmission of some hadiths?

3. Is Ibn al-Qayyim’s comparison of pre-ensoulment foetal life to plant life valid? Is this related to the Ikhwan al-Safa’s theory about mineral/plant/animal/human soul, all derived from the Cosmic Spirit?

4. Is abortion ever justifiable in Islam?  If so, under what conditions?

5. How far are the 7 international legal justifications for abortion, listed by the UN, compatible with the holistic, universal objectives of Islamic law (maqasid al-sharia) ?

6. Islamic jurists often speak about the danger to a mother’s life or health in discussions about abortion.  Are considerations of a mother’s mental health also relevant or included in such discussions?

7. Are there are any other considerations regarding the welfare (maslaha) of mother and foetus/child, consistent with the letter and spirit of Islamic law, that should be taken into account in such discussions?

With the Name of God, All-Merciful, Most Merciful

 

ABORTION, STAGES OF THE EMBRYO AND THE BEGINNING OF LIFE

 

Summarised from: Dr. Ali Muhyi l-Din al-Qarahdaghi & Dr. Ali Yusuf al-Muhammadi, Fiqh al-Qadaya al-Tibbiyyah al-Mu’asirah (Jurisprudence of Contemporary Medical Issues), Dar al-Basha’ir al-Islamiyyah, Beirut, 1426/2005, pp. 428-451

 

Summary and translation by Dr. Usama Hasan

August 2014

 

 

Contents

 

1        A General Ruling on Abortion. 2

 

2        Specific Rulings on Abortion, related to the Stages of the Embryo. 2

 

2.1        The “mixed fluid” stage (al-nutfah al-amshaj): days 0-8. 3

2.2        The “clinging” stage (al-‘alaqah): days 9-22/23. 3

2.3        The “chewed lump” stage (al-mudghah): days 23/24-42, i.e. up to 6 weeks. 3

2.4        The stage of the creation of bones, and the clothing of them with flesh. 4

2.5        When is the spirit breathed in? [ensoulment] 4

2.6        [The view of modern science] 5

2.7        Our view.. 5

 

3        Rulings on Abortion. 7

 

3.1        [Fatwa of the Islamic Fiqh Academy] 8

3.2        [Resolution of the Islamic Organisation for Medical Sciences] 8

3.3        Views of past jurists about abortion. 8

3.4        [Discussion] 9

3.4.1        [Abortion is prohibited in general, as per Ghazzali’s view] 9

3.4.2        [Ibn Taymiyyah’s view] 10

3.5        Summarised Juristic Rulings Related to Foetuses. 10

3.6        The Ruling on Abortion due to Deformities. 11

 

 


1. A General Ruling on Abortion

Abortion is, in general, haram (morally and legally prohibited and sinful) unless out of necessity due to the mother’s life: abortion is allowed if the mother’s life is in danger, or if she is in danger of great and severe harm.

 

This is indicated by all the Qur’anic verses that prohibit transgression on any person’s life in any stage of life, e.g. Whoever kills one person … it is as though he has killed all people;[1] Do not kill your children due to poverty: we sustain you and them;[2] Do not kill your children due to fear of poverty: we sustain them and you.[3]

 

As for abortion being allowed to save the mother’s life, this is from the evidence indicating that the foetus owes its existence to the mother so it cannot cause her death; also, her life is real and stable, and is therefore preferred over the foetus’ life that is not certain. This falls under repelling a greater harm by tolerating a lesser harm.[4]

 

2. Specific Rulings on Abortion, related to the Stages of the Embryo 

The specific ruling on abortion is connected to the stages of the embryo, from the fertilisation of ovum by sperm to the breathing of the spirit into it and the completion of these stages.

 

The Qur’an mentions that the human was created from dust that turned to dry clay. Clay includes various minerals such as iron, phosphorus, calcium, copper, etc. It also has subtle plant-like and animal-like structures. God created Adam from this clay, and from Adam He created Eve. Then natural reproduction continued with the mixing of the man’s semen and the woman’s ovum, each one of them contributing 23 chromosomes to the genetic code. God calls this the “mixed fluid.”[5] This is the basis of the creation of humans, except for the miraculous creation of Jesus, peace be upon him.[6]

 

The stages of the embryo, [that give rise to] the ruling on abortion at each stage, are as follows:

 

2.1    The “mixed fluid” stage (al-nutfah al-amshaj)[7]: days 0-8

 

This is the fertilisation of the ovum by sperm, and may be done artificially outside the womb. The fertilised cell divides, becoming 16 cells after about 4 days. These settle in what the Qur’an calls a “safe place,” i.e. the womb: Then We made him a drop of fluid in a safe place.[8]

 

2.2    The “clinging” stage (al-‘alaqah): days 9-22/23

 

God described this stage with “creation”[9] whereas the previous stage was described as “making,” indicating that this stage has characteristics and changes that make it deserving of such a label.[10]

 

The ‘alaqah linguistically relates to “clinging,” i.e. to the womb wall. The group of cells that developed by division from a single one are composed essentially of a nucleus and cytoplasm, having no limbs or other distinguishing structures of a human body, but they suck their necessary sustenance and oxygen inside the womb from the structures and fluids around them.[11] This stage lasts 2 weeks.

 

2.3    The “chewed lump” stage (al-mudghah): days 23/24-42, i.e. up to 6 weeks

 

This stage is so named[12] because the embryo looks like it has been chewed by a human mouth. During this stage, the heart cavity forms, as do the reproductive organs. The small umbilical cord, which grows as the foetus develops, transports the necessary sustenance and oxygen to the foetus from the mother and its waste products in the other direction.

 

All the stages, up to and including this one, end around 40-42 days, as stated by specialist doctors and embryologists. Around 42 days, a new stage of development begins, when the embryo begins to take the form of a human being with all its apparatus, following which the stage of a new creation beings after the breathing of the spirit: We clothed the bones with flesh, then We began a new creation – so Blessed is God, the Best of Creators![13]

 

Scientific instruments and investigation, as well as imaging of the foetus inside the womb, have all shown us that the foetus takes the form of a human after the sixth week, i.e. after about 42 days of pregnancy,[14] and this is also indicated by the hadith of Sahih Muslim (see below).

 

2.4    The stage of the creation of bones, and the clothing of them with flesh

 

The skeleton begins to become apparent after 40 days. Its initial centres of development are the jaw and collar-bone, followed by the thigh and shin.

 

2.5    When is the spirit breathed in? [ensoulment]

 

[Canonical hadiths speak of three stages of creation of the foetus, each lasting 40 days, after which there is ensoulment. However, the hadiths are slightly ambiguous as to whether these three stages are consecutive or parallel. Respectively, these two interpretational possibilities imply ensoulment after 120 days or 40 days, and traditional authorities are indeed divided into two camps about this. Interestingly, Aristotle taught that ensoulment for boys and girls occurred after 40 days and 80 days, respectively. – Translator’s note]

 

All the stages, up to and including this one, end around 40-42 days, as stated by specialist doctors and embryologists. Around 40-42 days, a new stage of development begins, when the embryo begins to take the form of a human being with all its apparatus, following which the stage of a new creation beings after the breathing of the spirit. The foetus takes the form of a tiny human after the sixth week, i.e. after about 42 days of pregnancy. This is also indicated by the various narrations of Sahih Muslim that mention the basic creation of a person in their mother’s womb taking 40, 42 or 45 days and nights. One narration mentions “40 plus a few nights.”[15]

 

Hafiz Ibn Hajar says, “Once the fluid remains in the womb for 40 days or nights, God gives permission for its [full] creation … this is when the angel descends upon it … The narrations of the hadith of Ibn Mas’ud agree on 40 days; the hadith of Anas does not mention any timing; the narrations of Hudhayfah’s hadith differ: some of them mention 40, others 42, 43, 45 or ‘40 plus a few’.”[16]

 

The scholars reconcile these narrations by saying that they may differ according to individual embryos; according to Qadi ‘Iyad, the narrations mean that the following stages occur at the beginning of the second period of 40 days, i.e. days 41-80.[17]

 

2.6    [The view of modern science]

 

In modern embryology, this period of days 40-49 is when the embryo becomes a foetus, and when ultrasound is able to detect the beating heart. The bone skeleton also begins to appear.[18] Hence, these narrations do not contradict.

 

Modern science also indicates that the initial creation (Stages 1-3) is completed in the first 40-odd days. However, one hadith in Bukhari and Muslim appears that to say that each of Stages 1-3 takes 40 days, after which the spirit is breathed in, i.e. after four months or 120 days.[19]

 

However, if we analyse this hadith carefully, we find it does not unequivocally indicate the meaning that the previous people of knowledge understood. In fact, its beginning agrees with the others hadiths of Sahih Muslim which say that all three stages are completed within the first 40-odd days. The word thumma can mean “then” for consecutive stages or “moreover” for simultaneous stages. “With such interpretations,” says the leading authority Dr. Muhammad Salam Madhkur, “the hadith agrees with modern medicine.”[20]

 

2.7    Our view

 

There are three major stages, based on our understanding of the hadith of Ibn Mas’ud in Bukhari:

 

  1. From the fertilised egg to the beginning of the small human form (0-40 days, roughly)
  2. Formation of a small human (40-120 days, roughly)
  3. Breathing of the spirit (ensoulment), i.e. 120 days onwards

 

Any intentional harm to the embryo is haram (prohibited) after 40 days.

 

In terms of life:

 

  1. 0-40 days – there is the lowest level of life, beginning with the developing cell life. Cell division leads to similar living cells that form a structure, but this does not reach the level of human life.
  2. Week 6: the foetus begins to take the form of a small human. Ultrasound detects its heart beating. Blood circulation begins to work. Major skeletal nodes appear.
  3. Week 7: Thigh and shin bones appear.
  4. Week 8: Upper and lower arm bones appear, as do weak, stretching movements.       However, this does not represent complex human life.
  5. End of Week 11- Week 12: the foetus enters a new, distinctive stage. Its brain is developed, its functions start: the beginning of a human entity emerges clearly, as follows. Movements develop from reflex reactions to complex, compound actions such as bending the back, raising the head, kicking the feet and moving the mouth and lips. Brain stem activity begins, sending electrical signals to the heart.       Periods of rest and stillness follow activity and movement: sleep and waking, sensation and shock, jump and play. Electrical signals appear that can be recorded and traced to the foetal brain, indicating surface brain activity.

 

However, the doctors say that the brain is not fully-formed in terms of its basic structure until the 4-month mark. Dr. Muhammad Ali Albar says, “At the end of the fourth month, the foetus can hear and make movements by its own will. Individual, personalised facial features appear. Do not all these indicate the breathing of the spirit?”

 

All this is the medical aspect of the issue, revealed by modern medicine and rare, modern instruments that monitor the development and movements of the embryo and foetus; none of these means were available in the past. If we analyse this modern knowledge and the hadiths on the subject, we find that there is no contradiction. In particular, only one hadith seems to mention three periods of 40 days; most of the narrations mention a total of 40, 42, 45 or 40-odd days.

 

Modern medicine does not speak about the spirit, which is mentioned in the hadith. Only God knows the nature and reality of this spirit.[21] The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, informed us that this spirit is breathed in after 120 days, so this must be affirmed.

 

Although bear in mind that only one narrator from Ibn Mas’ud, Zayd b. Wahb, mentioned the breathing of the spirit after 120 days; the rest of the narrators mentioned the writing of sustenance, lifetime and eventual misery or happiness, but did not mention the breathing of the spirit; neither did the other Companions who narrated the hadith: Ibn ‘Abbas mentioned it, but did not attribute it to the Prophet, peace be upon him.[22] It is possible to reconcile these two hadiths: the angel visits twice – once after 40 days to arrange the formation of the foetus and again after 120 days to breathe the spirit.[23] God knows best.

 

According to the doctors, life begins with a single cell but gradually develops into a full human life. The jurists draw the line (for full human life) at 120 days, which is when the spirit is breathed in. Similarly, all plants and animals enjoy life but do not benefit from the spirit of God that is breathed into humans, and on the basis of which the angels were commanded to prostrate to the human.[24]

 

The moment of breathing the spirit at 120 days is a matter of the unseen – humans and our medicine cannot know it, so we must accept it without interpretation or explanation, especially since it does not contradict modern science. After 120 days, the foetus is a complete human, deserving all that a human being enjoys after birth: respect, rights and the prohibition of harm against it.

 

Plant life has less power than animal life, which has less than human life. Animals may have more or less chromosomes: apes have more than other animals, whilst humans have the most at 46 chromosomes.[25]

 

Imam Ibn al-Qayyim mentions two types of embryonic life:

 

  • plant-like life before ensoulment, and
  • complete, human life after ensoulment.[26]

 

Foetal life after 40 days is complete in a material sense, just like complete animal life but more respected than the latter since it is in the fundamental human form. However, it lacks the divine breathing that bestows, and God knows best, the special human attributes such as knowledge, logical thinking, deduction and analysis as explained in the verses about the creation of Adam. God created Adam to settle in the world and civilise it and to be its steward, so He breathed His Spirit into him, taught him the Names. He gave him, along with knowledge and logical deduction, the capability to act. Along with intellect, He gave him choice and will. These higher attributes do not appear in the early stages of the foetus, but only after 120 days, e.g. voluntary movement etc.

 

3. Rulings on Abortion

It is undoubtedly haram (prohibited) to harm the embryo that is younger than 40 days. The prohibition becomes more severe after 40 days. The greatest prohibition occurs after 120 days, in which case killing the foetus would be like murdering an independent human being. These levels of prohibition are appropriate in Islam to describe the size of the crime and its effects.

 

3.1    [Fatwa of the Islamic Fiqh Academy]

 

The Islamic Fiqh Academy issued a ruling (no. 56-6/7) prohibiting abortion absolutely, and mandating medical techniques to save and protect the lives of embryos and foetuses. Furthermore, Ruling No. 113 (12/7) says in Clause 2 that, “The embryo has a right to life as soon as it is formed. It must not be harmed by abortion, or by any type of damage …”

 

3.2    [Resolution of the Islamic Organisation for Medical Sciences]

The Council on Conception, part of the Islamic Organisation for Medical Sciences, issued the following resolution: “The Council has considered contemporary medical, scientific realities explained by modern research and medical technology. It concluded that:

 

  • the foetus is alive from the beginning of pregnancy
  • its life is to be respected during all stages, and especially after ensoulment
  • transgression against the foetus by abortion is not permissible, except for an extreme medical necessity
  • some members disagreed, allowing abortion before 40 days, especially in case of a valid reason”[27]

 

3.3    Views of past jurists about abortion

 

  • The schools of jurisprudence in the past agreed that abortion was haram (prohibited) after 120 days.[28] Some of them even said that this was so when the mother’s life was in danger, e.g. Ibn ‘Abidin said, “If the foetus is alive, abortion is prohibited, since the mother’s death is hypothetical and it is not permissible to kill a human being on the basis of a whimsical matter.”[29] But if her death is certain or very likely, not simply hypothetical, then her life is to be given precedence over the foetus’, which may be aborted.
  • As for before ensoulment, most jurists regard abortion as prohibited (haram) also, unless it is to safeguard the mother. This is the view of the Malikis and Ibadis, the dominant view of the Hanafis and Shafi’is, one view of the Hanbalis and the apparent view of the Zahiris.[30] Some of the Hanafis, Shafi’is, Malikis and Hanbalis allowed abortion before ensoulment[31], as did the Zaydis on condition that both parents agreed. Some jurists, including Lakhmi (Maliki) and Abu Ishaq Marwazi (Shafi’i) allowed abortion before 40 days, but prohibited it thereafter.[32] Some Hanafis allowed abortion before ensoulment for a valid reason, even if it did not reach the level of necessity, whilst others specified the condition of necessity.[33] Some Shafi’is allowed abortion before ensoulment if the conception was via illegal extra-marital sex (zina: fornication or adultery).[34]

3.4    [Discussion]

 

The majority of jurists held that abortion was prohibited at any stage based on:

 

  • the verses prohibiting the taking of life, e.g. 6:151 and 17:33. A foetus is a life without doubt.
  • God forbade pilgrims from hunting (5:95), and the Prophet forbade the destruction of ostrich eggs by pilgrims, stipulating their value in compensation in cases of violation.[35] Malik said, “I have always heard that the compensation due upon a pilgrim for killing an ostrich is a camel. In case of an ostrich egg, my view is that the amount is a tenth of a camel’s value, just as the compensation for the foetus of a freewoman is to free a slave, male or female; these are worth 50 dinars, which is a tenth of his mother’s blood-money.”[36] Ibn al-Qasim said, “Malik compared the egg to a foetus,” i.e. in essence, like a foetus that is prohibited to harm.

 

3.4.1   [Abortion is prohibited in general, as per Ghazzali’s view]

 

Thus, the stronger view is that of the majority, i.e. that harming embryos is prohibited, even before ensoulment. One researcher who emphatically supported this position was Imam Ghazzali. In explaining the difference between coitus interruptus and abortion before ensoulment, he said: “The child is formed when the sperm enters the womb … Coitus interruptus is not like abortion or burying the infant alive because the latter two are crimes against an existing thing that is of different stages. The first stage is that the sperm enters the womb, mixes with the woman’s water and prepares to accept life: spoiling this would be a crime. Once it becomes a chewed lump and a suspended lump, the crime becomes more obscene, and even more so once ensoulment has taken place and the process of creation has levelled out. The extremity of such obscenity is once the foetus has become an independent life [i.e. been born as a baby].” He then mentioned that the beginning of the embryo’s existence is from the entry of semen into the womb.[37]

 

3.4.2   [Ibn Taymiyyah’s view]

 

Shaykh-ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah was asked about a man who said to his wife, “Abort your foetus: the sin is upon me.” If she does this, what expiation is due upon them both?

 

He answered: “They must free a believing slave: if they are unable to, they must both fast two months consecutively. In addition, they must give compensation to the heirs of the foetus who did not kill it: not to the father, for he ordered its killing, and so deserves nothing.” In answer to another question, he said, “Abortion is prohibited by the consensus of the Muslims: it is like burying children alive or killing them, which God has forbidden (81:8-9 & 17:31).”

 

He also said about a woman who aborted her foetus by striking her belly or by drinking medicine, “She must give compensation to the heirs of the foetus, other than the mother, by the Sunnah of the Messenger of God and the agreement of the Imams.”[38]

 

3.5    Summarised Juristic Rulings Related to Foetuses

 

  1. Blood-money and expiation if prohibited abortion is carried out: the perpetrator, whether father, mother or someone else, must pay the blood-money, which is a tenth of that of the mother according to the Malikis and Shafi’is; others distinguish between a male and female foetus.[39] According to the Shafi’is and Hanbalis, expiation is also due, being the freeing of a slave if possible, otherwise fasting for two consecutive months.[40]
  2. The waiting-period (‘iddah) of a widow or divorced woman ends by [termination of the pregnancy:] delivery of the child or abortion of the foetus.
  3. The father of the child must pay maintenance for the pregnant mother in case of divorce.[41]
  4. A pregnant woman may break her fast during Ramadan if she fears harm.[42]
  5. Delay of the punishment for extra-marital sex [i.e. flogging and/or stoning to death] whilst the woman is pregnant. [43]
  6. The foetus has incomplete personhood, so it has rights of inheritance etc.[44]

 

3.6    The Ruling on Abortion due to Deformities

 

The following declaration was issued by the Islamic Fiqh Academy of the Muslim World League:

 

The Academy analysed this matter during its twelfth meeting held in Mecca 15-22 Rajab 1410 H / 10-17 February 1990 CE. The council of religious scholars, after consultation with specialist medical experts who attended for this purpose, declares the following:

 

  • Once pregnancy reaches 120 days, abortion is not permissible, even if medical analysis shows that the foetus is deformed. The only exception is if it is established, by a medical panel consisting of reliable, specialist experts, that the continuation of pregnancy comprises a confirmed danger to the life of the mother, in which case abortion is allowed, whether or not the foetus is deformed, in order to repel the greater of two evils.
  • Before 120 days of pregnancy, if it is established and confirmed, by a medical panel consisting of reliable, specialist experts, using instrument-based monitoring, that the foetus is dangerously and incurably deformed, and that if it remains and is born to term, it will have a bad life, with both it and its family suffering much pain, then in that case: abortion is permissible if the parents request it. The academy, whilst making this declaration, advises the doctors and parents in such cases to save themselves from God, and to take every caution in this matter.

 

[1] Q. 5:32

[2] Q. 6:151

[3] Q. 17:31

[4] Ibn ‘Abidin 5/377, al-Sharh al-Kabir with commentary by Disuqi 4/268, Sharh al-Kharshi 5/274, al-Iqna’ 4/129, Kuwaiti Encyclopaedia of Jurisprudence 2/59.

[5] Q. 76:1

[6] Q. 3:59

[7] al-nutfah: the ejaculated fluid of the man or woman; amshaj: a mixture of the essential parts of a thing. See the lexicons al-Misbah al-Munir, Lisan al-‘Arab and al-Qamus al-Muhit.

[8] Q. 23:13

[9] Q. 23:14

[10] Muhammad Salam Madhkur, al-Jinin [Foetuses], 1389, p. 56

[11] Dr. Mukhtar al-Mahdi, The Beginning of Human Life, Book 2 of the Islamic Organisation for Medical Sciences, Kuwait, pp. 65 onwards.

[12] Q. 23:14 & 22:5

[13] Q. 23:14

[14] Papers by Dr. Hassan Hathout, Dr. Mukhtar al-Mahdi, Dr. Ahmad Shawqi, Dr. Muhammad Na’im Yasin & Dr. Abdullah Salamah.

[15] The Arabic for “a few” here is bid’, which refers to a single-digit number, i.e. 1-9 maximum. (Translator’s note)

[16] Fath al-Bari 11/480-1

[17] Fath al-Bari 11/481

[18] Dr. Mukhtar al-Mahdi’s paper, p. 65

[19] Fath al-Bari 11/481

[20] Al-Jinin (Foetuses), p. 54

[21] Q. 17:85

[22] Fath al-Bari 11/468

[23] Ibn al-Qayyim, Kitab al-Ruh [The Spirit], p. 205

[24] Q. 38:71-72

[25] This is not true: some apes have 48 chromosomes, with a very clear and close relationship to the 46 human chromosomes. (Translator’s note)

[26] Kitab al-Ruh, p. 38 & Shifa’ al-‘Alil, pp. 38-41

[27] Book 1, Islamic Organisation for Medical Sciences, p. 351

[28] Fath al-Qadir 2/495 [Hanafi], Hashiyah al-Disuqi 2/267 [Maliki], Nihayat al-Muhtaj 8/416, Al-Majmu’ 5/301 [Shafi’i], Al-Mughni 7/815 [Hanbali], Al-Muhalla 11/29-31 [Zahiri].

[29] Ibn ‘Abidin, Hashiyah, 1/602

[30] See sources previously cited.

[31] See sources previously cited; also al-Furu’ 6/191, al-Insaf 1/386

[32] See sources previously cited; also Rahuni’s commentary on Zurqani 3/264; Sharawani 6/248; Nihayat al-Muhtaj 8/416

[33] Ibn ‘Abidin 2/380

[34] Nihayat al-Muhtaj 8/416

[35] Ibn Majah, Sunan – Manasik 3077; Ahmad 744-5

[36] Al-Mudawwanah 2/437

[37] Ghazzali, Ihya’ ‘Ulum al-Din [Revival of the Religious Sciences], 2/53

[38] Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmu’ Fatawa [Collected Fatwas], 34/159-161

[39] Meaning that the blood-money for a male is double that of a female. (Translator’s note)

[40] See sources previously cited; also Bidayat al-Mujtahid 2/656

[41] This implies that this payment comes to an end upon abortion. (Translator’s note)

[42] This implies that this concession comes to an end upon abortion. (Translator’s note)

[43] This implies that this punishment is due upon abortion.  The authors are referring to ancient/mediaeval punishments, although the Ottomans abolished these in the mid-19th century, since they were no longer suitable for the age. (Translator’s note)

[44] See the brilliant book by our teacher, Muhammad Salam Madhkur: Al-Jinin [Foetuses], where he has explained this in detail.

Hadiths on Female Circumcision (FGM)

March 19, 2014

Bismillah. Further to Quilliam’s press release last week against the call to reintroduce female circumcision (FGM) in the Maldives, here are further thoughts on the issue, including a discussion of hadiths about the subject:

1. FGM is a cultural practice that was known in pre-Islamic Arabia. It is also found in parts of Africa.

2. FGM has no religious Islamic sanction – there are just two traditions on the subject, both of which are strongly disputed, with many jurists throughout history discounting them as having nothing to do with the Prophet of Islam.

There are two hadiths in the Sunan collections (medium-level authenticity) relevant here. To paraphrase, these two hadiths say, “Cut, but don’t cut too much” and “Female circumcision is a way of honouring (!) women.”

The isnads (chains of narration) of these two hadiths are acknowledged to be weak, including by the Sheikh Albani. However, regrettably, Albani judged that the two hadiths support each other and that they are therefore sound (hasan). This judgment is quoted by many writers, including the influential Saudi scholar al-‘Arifi/’Urayfi in his “Etiquettes of Welcoming the Newborn in Islam” (Adab Istiqbal al-Mawlud fil Islam), to support FGM. [Note that thousands of copies of the latter book in Arabic were distributed for free in the UK by salafist organisations.]

However, the UK-based British-Iraqi Sheikh Abdullah al-Judai vehemently disagrees with Albani about this, declaring these hadiths to be seriously weak and FGM to be a custom not approved by Islam. [See Postscript below for more details.]

Here, it is worth analysing three claims made in the recent Lapido Media article on Maldives FGM (http://www.lapidomedia.com/node/3987):

(a) “the four Sunni schools approved of female circumcision”

This may well be the case, because of the above hadiths being accepted by jurists without scrutiny, although many Hadith scholars pointed out their weakness. Like the blasphemy and apostasy laws of medieval Islam, FGM became a theoretical juristic position even though it was rarely practiced. These issues need to be addressed by the proponents of so-called “traditional Islam” (that is actually mediaeval Islam), of both the madhhabist and salafist varieties.

(b) “one reason for this was to reduce women’s sexual appetite”

Ibn Taymiyyah certainly says so, and endorses it. He goes on to claim that “non-Muslim women, being uncircumcised, have excessive sexual desire.” (Ibn Taymiyyah, Fatawa al-Nisa’ or Jurisprudential Pronouncements relating to Women.) Other mediaeval jurists, also known for their xenophobia and misogyny notwithstanding positive qualities in other aspects, probably agreed with him.

(c) [A Maldivian cleric] quotes a hadith of the collection by Prophet Mohammed’s wife, Aisha, as saying, ‘A bath becomes obligatory if one sleeps with your wife and the circumcised parts touch each other.’ The cleric concludes: ‘The word circumcision has been applied to both men and women here. The hadith demonstrates that women must be circumcised as well.’

This hadith may be more sound but, as Sheikh Judai states, it contains no approval of (male or female) circumcision, merely providing a factual description. To claim that this hadith obliges FGM (“women must be circumcised”) is an example of very poor and flawed logic and juristic reasoning.

3. The fact that FGM is cultural, not religious, is obvious from two matters: (i) it is/was known in non-Muslim communities in Arabia and parts of Africa; (ii) female circumcision is a very rare practice in the Muslim world, unlike male circumcision that is universal in Muslim societies.

4. The hadith (of 40 Nawawi) and fundamental Sharia principle of outlawing harm (la darar wa la dirar), that is based on numerous Qur’anic verses, dictates a total Islamic ban on FGM today, now that the medical, physiological, sexual, emotional and psychological harms are indisputable. This is the position of Al-Azhar and other institutions.

5. We should welcome the recent tougher legislation and enforcement against FGM in the UK and commend the campaign of the young British-Somali woman from Bristol in this regard. We should note also that there a number of British clerics who are stuck in a mediaeval mindset and poor understanding of the hadiths and fiqh (jurisprudence) who openly promote FGM and regard it as “preferable” because of what is written in centuries-old human texts. I hope that these clerics will reconsider their positions, both intellectually and societally.

6. The literalist, fundamentalist thinking behind this call in the Maldives has also given rise to the same cleric’s insistence on the reintroduction of ancient hudud punishments such as amputation and flogging, that have no place in modern society. These punishments were abolished by the scholars and sultans of the Ottoman Empire in the 1850’s, but have been reintroduced in Muslim-majority countries by literalists in the 20th and 21st centuries.

7. An example of the danger of the above is the case of the 15-year old Maldivian girl who was sentenced to flogging for fornication, even though she was the victim of rape and sexual abuse by her stepfather. This sentence under the regressive hudud laws was only overturned after a year-long international uproar and campaign (eg https://www.amnesty.org/en/news/maldives-girl-rape-victim-be-spared-outrageous-flogging-sentence-2013-08-21), in which I served as Avaaz’s consultant on Islamic law in 2013. And, of course, there have been many similar contemporary cases under hudud laws in Pakistan, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan and other countries.

Usama Hasan
London, UK
19th March 2014

Postscript: In 2004 I attended some sessions near Watford (UK) of the European Council for Fatwa and Research, as an observer. The scholars present included Sheikhs Ibn Bayyah, Qaradawi, Judai, Faysal Mawlawi, Qarahdaghi, Anas Abu Ghuddah, Suhaib Hasan and others.

The FGM issue came up. A French-Arab cleric had written in his submission that FGM was recommended, based on the hadiths discussed above (no. 2). Sheikh Judai disagreed vehemently, stating that FGM is not a sunnah and declaring that “These hadiths are utterly weak, even though Sheikh Albani, whom I venerate in Hadith studies, authenticated them!” No other scholar contradicted Judai in that session. I asked him afterwards about the “circumcised parts meeting” hadith: he immediately replied that it contains no promotion of FGM, being merely a description (cf. 2c above).

As Imam Ghazzali said, as quoted by Ibn Bayyah, nine-tenths (90%) of juristic understanding is to understand society and other contextual realities. Even total mastery of the scriptural texts (Qur’an and Hadith) comprises no more than one tenth (10%) of jurisprudence.

Muslim clerics and jurists need to develop deeper understanding of scripture as well as human nature and society before pronouncing on critical issues and promoting harmful rules and laws for entire populations in the name of God.

Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone http://www.blackberry.com

Islam and the Veil – Opening Up the Discussion About Hijab

February 3, 2014

Bismillah.  With the global discussion about the veil due to “World Hijab Day” on 1st February, 2014, this is a good time to re-publish here a detailed, academic paper from 2011.  It is from the following book: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Islam-Veil-Theoretical-Regional-Contexts/dp/1441187359/ – one of the editors was kind enough to say that mine was the best paper in the collection, which was quite a compliment since other authors include Javaid Ghamidi and other experts.

Please click here to download the full paper: Islam and the Veil – Usama Hasan

I also suggest the following questions as a guide to study/discussion sessions about this topic:

STUDY/DISCUSSION QUESTIONS ABOUT VEILING (FOR A HETEROSEXUAL CONTEXT)

1. Distinguish between the terms hijab (veil), khimar (headscarf) and jilbab (covering).  Are these religious or cultural aspects of dress/clothing, or a mixture of the two, i.e. religio-cultural?

2. God is veiled from humanity.  What is the nature of the veil(s), and what is meant by the veil being lifted for the believers’ Vision of God?  How did veiling (of women, caliphs – who had a hajib, etc.) symbolise the above truths?

3. What is the significance, if any, of the fact that in Surah al-Nur, men are instructed before women to “lower their gaze and guard their chastity” ?

4. Surah al-Nur: women were instructed to draw their headscarves (khimar) over their bosoms.  Is this a command to cover the head and hair, or to cover the breasts, or all of the above?

5.  Surah al-Nur: What is meant by the “ordinarily-apparent adornment” (zinah zahirah) that may be displayed by women? Is it parts of the body, the top layer of clothing, jewellery, make-up or a combination of these?  What would then be the implied “hidden beauty/charms” (zinah batinah) that men and women would only reveal to close family, spouses, etc. ?

6. Some Companions insisted that women must be covered top to toe in public, including the face; others excepted the face and hands, as did the majority of early authorities; others excepted the forearms, half-way to the elbows (Tabari) or all the way to the elbows (Qadi Abu Yusuf, for women who worked in bakeries and thus had to roll up their sleeves – mentioned by Imam Sarakhsi in Al-Mabsut); others excepted the feet also (Abu Hanifah); some even excepted the head and hair (minority view mentioned by Ibn ‘Ashur).  Some female Companions gathered their skirts when nursing warriors in battle such that their ankles or shins were visible (‘Aisha & Hafsa – Sahih al-Bukhari).  How are these views to be understood from the text?  Do the above views indicate that the context and ‘urf (social custom) is influential in what constitutes modest and appropriate dress?

7. Is the hadith of Asma about “covering up except face and hands” genuine or weak?  If the latter, does that support the niqab-obligation view or the khimar-not-necessary view?

8.  Is a woman to be regarded as “naked” and “sinful” if her face, hands, head, hair, feet, ankles, shins and/or forearms are visible in public, as per the above views? Or should the onus be on men to restrain lustful glances, as they are ordered to do so beforehand in Surah al-Nur?

9.  Surah al-Nur: In terms of the males “having no sexual desire” before whom a woman doesn’t need to worry about veiling, the commentators have extended this to several categories.  How should this be understood in modern societies?  What is your view about the classical view that obliged women to cover in front of their fathers and brothers to prevent the latter having incestuous thoughts?

10. Surah al-Nur: About “their women” before whom women can unveil, does this apply only to Muslim women or to all women (both views are classical) ?  Does it matter about the morality of such female company, i.e. is the matter related to appropriate dress and behaviour?

11. Surah al-Ahzab (hijab meaning curtain or screen): Does this verse imply gender-segregation?  If so, is that a general principle or was it only for the Prophet’s wives and family?

12. Surah al-Ahzab: what is meant by the jilbab?  Is it simply a shawl (Ibn al-Arabi & Ibn Kathir), any dress that reasonably covers the body, an outer garment or cloak on top of usual clothes, or a cloak with a hood that must go on top of a khimar (Albani’s view) ?

13. Surah al-Ahzab: The jilbab is explicitly “that they may be recognised (as noble women) so they are not harassed.” How is that to be understood and practiced in the modern world? Is it true that traditional clothing, i.e. khimar/jilbab/niqab protects Muslim women from sexual harassment in various societies?

14.  How does fiqh al-ma’al (jurisprudence of consequences, cf. Sheikh Abdullah bin Bayyah) apply to issues of gender-segregation and veiling/unveiling in the modern world?  In particular, what implications do veiling/unveiling have for working or professional women in Muslim/non-Muslim societies?

15.  Is the khimar or headscarf (mistakenly called hijab) a normal part of clothing in some cultures, analogous to a hat or cap, or a symbol of faith, modesty, purity, identity, or some combination of these?

16.  What are the psycho-spiritual effects of wearing a headscarf and/or jilbab and/or niqab for women?  Do these lead to confidence, subjugation, control, spirituality, modesty, pride, purity, ostentation, humility, holier-than-thou attitude or a combination of these?

17.  What are the psycho-spiritual effects upon men of women wearing a headscarf and/or jilbab and/or niqab?  In men, do these lead to feelings of purity, increased/decreased/repressed desire, a positive/negative attitude towards veiled/unveiled women, or a combination of these?  How does all this affect the attitudes of Muslim/non-Muslim men towards Muslim/non-Muslim women, whether veiled or unveiled, and their perceptions of beauty, attractiveness, sexuality and desire?

18.  What is all the fuss really about, and are men and women equal in this whole discussion?  Do the notions of gender-equality and women’s liberation have any bearing on the whole issue?

19. Who should ultimately decide what is appropriate dress and behaviour for men and women in a given society?  Is it men, or women, or male religious scholars, or female religious scholars, or panels of religious scholars, or society as a whole including parents, families, religious/spiritual authorities, etc.?

20. And finally, how does God, with the 99 Names of Beauty (jamali) and Majesty (jalali), to Whom we are all returning, relate to all of this in our lives?

Usama Hasan

London, 3rd February 2014 / 3rd Rabi’ al-Thani 1435