Forum Menu - Click/Swipe to open
 

Women attending Mosques: Hanafi Madhab Ruling

You have contributed 12.7% of this topic

Thread Tools
Appreciate
Topic Appreciation
super-glue, abu mohammed, ali, Arslan., Asaaghir
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
1,241
Brother
1,932
#31 [Permalink] Posted on 15th October 2014 03:54
Muadh_Khan wrote:
View original post

Bro.... U r acting exactly like what you accuse others of... 'Upholder of haqq'.... I m not taking sides... But when laymen get into a fiqhi argument both parties are guilty... This argument is more about proving 'i m right' rather than seeking 'what is right'...

Everyone plz take a break... And I advice the mods to completely lock all threads on this topic... Enough is enough...
report post quote code quick quote reply
+3 -0Like x 3Agree x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
1,012
Brother
466
#32 [Permalink] Posted on 15th October 2014 05:39
Assalamu Alaikum Muadh bhai

Quote:
When it comes to 5 times prayers in the Hanafi Madhab (Hidayah as being quoted by Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA)) [see picture 2 brown rectangle]

Imam Abu Yusuf (RA) and Imam Muhammad (RA) permits women in all five (5) Salah with no problems


Can you please provide a translation for the scan you provided from Mufti Taqi Uthmani. I am interesting in the above mentioned view of Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam Muhammad. So you are saying that there are opinions in the hanafi school that allow for women to go to the masjid for salah generally without dislike?

Can anyone direct me to any article or fatwa that shows the view of the other madhabs on this issue?

If the other madhabs do not see it as a problem, then it does not make sense in areas when there are people from all schools of thought, to not have any wudu or salah facilities for ladies, just so that we can ensure that the hanafi women practice on their madhab by preventing any access to the masjid.

Many Masjids have absolutely no section for women perform wudu or offer salat, and visiting ladies are turned away. Non muslims use this as an excuse to attack Islam. If the other madhabs allow for such facilities then this issue can be easier tackled when being attacked by non Muslims.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+4 -0Like x 4
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
1,012
Brother
466
#33 [Permalink] Posted on 15th October 2014 06:24
Quote:
Hereunder is a short list of the scholars of the past who also prevented the women from attending either the five Salaats in masajid or the Eid Salâah:

Imam Abu Yusuf (R.A) student of Imaam Abu Hanifa (R.A) (Umdatur Qari Vol.3 Pg. 305)

And Allah knows best

Wassalam

Maulana Mohammed ibn Maulana Harooon Abasoomer
Darul Iftaa, Madrassah In'aamiyyah


The above quoted from bro Arslan in his thread is conflicting with what Muadh bhai claimed about Imam Abu Yusuf.

EDIT: I realized he also says that Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam Mohammad did not allow for all women to go to the Masjid for 5 times salah, rather only very old women.

Sorry I do not want to contribute to any bickering between two threads, I am just trying to find out the the real position of Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam Muhammad.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Yasin's avatar
UK
6,659
Brother
921
Yasin's avatar
#34 [Permalink] Posted on 15th October 2014 06:39
umar123 wrote:
View original post

I want to rate winner and disagree for this.

Laymen arguing statement: winner

Muadh being guilty of what he opposed I disagree with. He has never claimed or even indicated to upholding Haqq. He has retracted and openly corrected more statements/research on this forum and elsewhere than any other member I have seen. I will not accept the "I'm right" claim on him.

No rules broken to initiate thread lock. In the original thread, extreme Majlis fans strongly and harshly criticized me, Muadh and other members who I cannot recall for stating the exact things that Arslan has eventually concluded himself by trying to answer Muadh and my questions posed in the original thread. He has also accepted Fatwas as being "opinions" which was pounded upon in the original thread as if I did some sort of Takfeer on the Mufti.

It is only befitting that all of that comes to light with this thread.

The worst thing about this entire thing is that they weren't even wrong. Their belief that every other opinion is Batil was wrong and aggressive which caused this very situation.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+4 -0Like x 4
back to top
Rank Image
Asaaghir's avatar
Spinistan Throne
1,096
Brother
734
Asaaghir's avatar
#35 [Permalink] Posted on 15th October 2014 10:22
This thread and many others are like

insya allah I will elaborate later within this post if my edit is approved.

The gum has lost its flavor and you are still chewing chewing chewing chewing
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0Like x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
112
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#36 [Permalink] Posted on 15th October 2014 10:51

umar123 wrote:
View original post

Dr Saheb,

Your opinion is much appreciated but I clearly understand where Shaykh (Mufti) Abu Hajira (HA) is coming from; I disgaree with him but absolutely understand where he is coming from (i.e. he is giving Fatwa based on later Hanafi Ulama who disagreed with earlier Ulama based on their circumstances).

Concerned wrote:
View original post

First disagreement:

Not my opinion but Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA)

  1. When it comes to 5 times prayers in the Hanafi Madhab (H-I-D-A-Y-A-H as being quoted by Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA)) [see attached]
    1. Imam Abu Haneefa (RA) [699-767]permitted older women in Maghrib, Fajar & Esha
    2. Imam Abu Yusuf (RA) [798] and Imam Muhammad (RA) [749-805]permits women in all five (5) Salah with no problems!

 

Second disagreement:

Not my opinion but Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA) clearly believes that Sayyidina Abdullah Ibn Umar (RA) supported the position of women visiting the Masjid.

This is in sharp contrast to the explaination given by Shaykh (Mufti) Abu Hajira (HA).

Therefore we believe that the son of Ameerul-Mumineen Sayyidina Umar (RA) understood  point of view of his own father better then Hanafees 700 years after Imam Abu Haneefa (RA).

We also believe that the grandson of Ameerul-Mumineen Sayyidina Umar (RA) understood  point of view of his own grandfather better then Hanafees 700 years after Imam Abu Haneefa (RA).

We also believe that the wife of Ameerul-Mumineen Sayyidina Umar (RA) understood  point of view of her own husband better then Hanafees 700 years after Imam Abu Haneefa (RA).

In conclusion we believe that Imam Abu Haneefa (RA) and his illustrious students i.e. Imam Abu Yusuf (RA) and Imam Muhammad (RA) understood the point of view better then Hanafees 700 years after Imam Abu Haneefa (RA).

The reason for Fatwaas:

However we clearly understand where Shayh (Mufti) Abu Hajira (HA) is coming from i.e. he is giving the Fatwa on the opinion of later Hanafees (good 600-700 years after Imam Abu Haneefa (RA)), Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA) says that in the footnote.

So Alhumdolillah no problems that was the reason for opening the thread.

So what is the problem?

People are free to follow the opinions clearly formulated 600-700 years after Imam Abu Haneefa (RA) but don't shove it down our throats as Haqq!

report post quote code quick quote reply
+2 -1Dislike x 1Agree x 2
back to top
Rank Image
Asaaghir's avatar
Spinistan Throne
1,096
Brother
734
Asaaghir's avatar
#37 [Permalink] Posted on 15th October 2014 11:18



Fatwas were posted and called opinions based on their understanding to their relevant times/area. This understanding was rebuked and disliked.

Muadh_Khan had categorically stated in point 2 that The solutions are personal Ijtehaad of the person and they are entitled to their opinion. The comment on it not being Makruh Tahreemi was based upon circumstances, this position still stands.

Arfatzafar posted a question and answer from a contemporary scholar which happened to be linked back to Muadh_Khan's site. His post was misleading because he olny posted what he found suitable to the thread. Thereafter, abu muhammad posted the entire answer which clearly showed the needs of this issue in "this" day and age. This is the opinion on most contemporary scholars of today.
Arslan. then posts an opinion to which ali asks for the dates that were not presented, possibly due to time difference, however these dates were then later provided by Muadh_Khan

Overall the entire discussion has become a worn-out chewing gum because the the point was clearly made by Muadh_Khan, a full contemporary answer by abu muhammad (both highlighted above) and finally the post by Arslan. which also is in full agreement with the initial comments by Muadh_Khan (leaving out the personal exaggeration) and the fatwa linked back to his website.
+"Arslan. wrote:
Notice, Mufti sahib is in favor of of having a womens facility in the masjid (I agree), and says that if it has to be done, then an all-womens's halaqah can be done in the masjid hall. But even after all that, we still cannot forget that the mufti bihi opinion is still that of karaaha. This is the book opinion. Nonetheless, DUE TO SOME OF OUR CIRCUMSTANCES, scholars who do not practice on this opinion will not be criticized as long as the women's arrangements are free from fitnah


The only slight self emphasis was the comment "by any stretch of imagination." made by Muadh_Khan, that's all.

Other than that, we have gone full circle and more just to understand that circumstances change and opinions change.

Subhan-Allah.

When people don't understand the basics of English posted in Muadh_Khan and Yasin's posts, members have to take the long route round to help understand what was being said in the first place.

report post quote code quick quote reply
+2 -0Winner x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
112
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#38 [Permalink] Posted on 15th October 2014 11:42

Correction to my translation of Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA):

Original:

  1. When it comes to 5 times prayers in the Hanafi Madhab (Hidayah as being quoted by Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA)) [see picture 2 brown rectangle]
    1. Imam Abu Haneefa (RA) permitted older women in Maghrib, Fajar & Esha
    2. Imam Abu Yusuf (RA) and Imam Muhammad (RA) permits women in all five (5) Salah with no problems!

Correction:

Having read the whole text and commentary in Hiadayah by Shaykhul-Hadeeth (Maulana) Sameerud-deen Qasmi (HA) it should be written like this:

  1. When it comes to 5 times prayers in the Hanafi Madhab (Hidayah as being quoted by Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA)) [see picture 2 brown rectangle]
    1. Imam Abu Haneefa (RA) permitted older women in Maghrib, Fajar & Esha
    2. Imam Abu Yusuf (RA) and Imam Muhammad (RA) permits O-L-D-E-R women in all five (5) Salah with no problems!

Shaykhul-Hadeeth (Maulana) Sameerud-deen Qasmi (HA) discussed the whole matter over 3 pages as to Imam Abu Haneefa (RA) restricted older women to certain prayers because he made a (logical) Ijtehaad that older women are less enticing BUT his students disagreed that this (logic) is not binding therefore (older) women are permitted in any Salah. Shaykhul-Hadeeth (Maulana) Sameerud-deen Qasmi (HA) also makes a point that young girls (or women) are specifically permitted for Eid Salah due to explicit Hadeeth, South African Ulama ofcourse disagree with that opinion as well.

Apology:

Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA) doesn't mention the word "older" in his footnote but the error is mine in not cross-checking Hidayah so I sincerely apologise.

The P-O-I-N-T still remains that the Hanafi Madhab didn't declare this action to be Makrooh Tahreemi in a blanket manner at all!

Spin:

Every explanation and copy/paste Fatwa being posted by Brother Arslan. is based on conjecture i.e. Fitnah in our times has increased so if earlier Scholars disliked it our situation is worse off so based on “subjective judgement calls” we deem the issue to be Makrooh Tahreemi.

I have never been to South Africa and don’t know the communities and (Mosque) infrastructure so it could be Makrooh Tahreemi in their country due to their circumsatnces; no idea.

The point of Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA) and multiple Scholars is exact opposite to South Africans summarised as follows:

Shaykh (Mufti) Ibn Adam (HA) wrote:
They saw that corruption was rife and widespread in their time; hence, women may be harmed by immoral and corrupt people if they emerged out of their homes. They feared that if women are encouraged to go to the Mosques, it could open the door for unlawful intermingling of the two sexes. The main reason, however, was the fear of women being harmed, as pointed out by Imam Ibn Abidin (Allah have mercy on him) in his renowned Radd al-Muhtar and other classical Fuqaha. This is the very reason why some classical Fuqaha permitted old women to attend the Fajr and Eisha prayers, for the immoral and wicked people are asleep at that time. Some even allowed them to go for Maghrib prayers, for the immoral people are normally busy eating at that time. Imam Ibn Abidin then states that if there is a fear of the wicked people loitering around in these prayers times, then it will be disliked for women to go for these prayers also. (Radd al-Muhtar, 1/566)

One should always keep in mind the context in which the Fuqaha were giving such verdicts. Life was very plain and simple. Women in Muslim countries and Islamic societies would normally not emerge out of their homes unless absolutely necessary. The need to emerge out of the house was not like the need we have in today’s complicated world. Hence, Muslim women would remain within the confines of their homes, and emerge outside only in certain unavoidable situations.

Keeping this context in mind, one can easily understand why the classical Fuqaha gave such verdicts. By allowing women to frequent the Mosques, they would be giving women permission to emerge out of their homes - women who would have otherwise not emerged outside. Thus, they feared that Muslim women normally do not come out of their homes, and in allowing (and encouraging) them to go to the Mosque, there is a possibility that evil and wicked people may jump at the chance of harming them.

If we were to apply this context to the modern era - where women are all over the market areas, shopping malls, shopping centres, streets and roads - it seems unfair to completely shun them from entering the Mosques. As one scholar of piety and knowledge once said: “We don’t mind women frequenting the most disliked of places in the sight of Allah (abghad al-Bilad) which are the bazaars (aswaq), but we have a major problem with women coming to the most beloved of places (ahab al-Bilad) in the sight of Allah, which are the Mosques!

report post quote code quick quote reply
+2 -2Dislike x 2Winner x 2
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
112
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#39 [Permalink] Posted on 15th October 2014 14:07

We live in some very strange times...

  1. Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA) is quoting Hidayah for the opinion of Imam Abu Haneefa (RA) which even a child knows is the fundamental text of Hanafi Madhab
  2. Arslan. is quoting commentary of Tirmidhi by Ibn Arabi (RA) [1165-1240] for the opinion of Imam Abu Haneefa (RA)!
    1. Neither the original book, nor the Author nor the commentary has much to do with the Hanafi Madhab at all....

And people are voting on the post; clearly shows that neither the writer nor the one voting has any idea as to what they are actually reading or backing...

Strange how far hate can permeate inside the heart and mind of a person to make them blind & oblivious to the obvious.

Allahul-Must'aan; how do people live with so much hate in their hearts? Subhanullah!

report post quote code quick quote reply
+2 -1Dislike x 1Winner x 2
back to top
#40 [Permalink] Posted on 15th October 2014 14:33
Very confusing discussion and can't make head or tail. I just need two questions answered with straightforward answers without long roundabout analysis.

1. What's the official ruling of the hanafi mazhab, mufta bihi, mutamad, whatever you want to call it?

2. Was it correct for brothers to say that deobandi position is cultural and that no way is it makruh tahrimi by any stretch?

Very simple two or three word answer will be appreciated please. I don't want to read more confusing lengthy answers.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
#41 [Permalink] Posted on 15th October 2014 14:49
This is Arslan

Bhai Muadh, your posts are irrelevant to what I was trying to say in my initial post in this thread. Insha'Allah, later I will login and explain clearly.

For now, just know that there is no hatred. That is only your misconception.

report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
112
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#42 [Permalink] Posted on 15th October 2014 15:19

Anonymous wrote:
View original post

1. What's the official ruling of the hanafi mazhab, mufta bihi, mutamad, whatever you want to call it?

Answer: The original ruling of the Hanafi Madhab is that older women are allowed but younger ones are not due to fear of inciting Fitnah. 600-700 year later Fatwa of Hanafi Madhab is that due to their circumstances of fearing for the safety of the women.

There is clear admission from even those who are proposing Makrooh-Tahreemi opinion that these are later Fatawaa by Mutakhireen.

2. Was it correct for brothers to say that deobandi position is cultural and that no way is it makruh tahrimi by any stretch?

Answer: Ulama of India have simply carried on quoting the Fatwaas which they inherited because it is correct according to their cultural norms and behaviors. It isn't just India because Allamah Ayni (RA) etc were neither Deobandi nor Indian

Judgemental call is to Ulama in the West to check and apply  and Ulama like Shaykh (Mufti) Ibn Adam (HA) clearly permit it. South African Ulama still don't...

Whats so confusing for you?

report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0Disagree x 1Winner x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Muadh_Khan's avatar
Offline
UK
11,537
Brother
112
Muadh_Khan's avatar
#43 [Permalink] Posted on 15th October 2014 15:23

Anonymous wrote:
View original post

  1. So you want me to retract something you don't understand.
  2. You admit that you can't read so you have no capability to understand
  3. And you have your fanboys (and girls) continously troll and rate dislike and old on every post
  4. You are posting opinions of Ibn Arabi (RA) for us to gather the Fatwa of Imam Abu Haneefa (RA)

And you think that there is no hate or dislike and you are being factual?

report post quote code quick quote reply
+0 -1Dislike x 1
back to top
#44 [Permalink] Posted on 15th October 2014 17:12
Why can't anyone here just give simple straightforward answers without giving roundabout analysis.

Question 1 asked for mufta bihi or mutamad & I get answer about "original" ruling. I heard that hanafi mazhab mutamad ruling is based on collective fuqaha not just Imam e Azam so please clarify what is mutamad or mufta bihi of hanafi mazhab.

Question 2 is simple yes or no answer but again I got a whole paragraph from you.

To make it easier, let me tell you what I understood from your answer and then all you have to do is confirm YES or NO whether my understanding is correct.

Question 1 answer, mufta bihi or mutamad of hanafi mazhab is that going to masjid is not allowed for young women but allowed for old women.

Question 2 answer is yes.

My understanding is correct YES or NO?
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Arslan.'s avatar
Unspecified
909
Brother
82
Arslan.'s avatar
#45 [Permalink] Posted on 15th October 2014 17:52
Analyzing Your Posts and the Problem, and What I am trying to Say


Ok, last try. I hope I can convey my points as clearly and succinctly as possible. All I ask is that you read to UNDERSTAND and not just to REPLY.

What am I saying (in this thread, and my locked thread)

1. The mufti bihi position is that of makruh tahrimi, currently. I never mentioned that it must be proven through the mutaqaddimeen or muta'akh-khireen. The point is, as of now, the position is that of makruh tahrimi and this is the mufti bihi position of the madhab.

2. I never mentioned there is ijma' on this opinion. Of course there are contemporary `ulamaa' that make khuruj from this opinion, but this does not negate the fact that the mufti bihi CURRENTLY is makruh tahrimi. So your posting of Mufti Taqi Uthmani's fatwa/bayan and Maulana Khalid is not needed, as we already know that some `ulamaa do not apply this opinion.

3. The opinion is NOT cultural. Even if the ruling of BLANKET makruh tahrimi was given only during the era of muta'akh-khireenn (and this is not entirely proven), it still does not make this cultural, nor have you proven it to be cultural. That fact that "makruh tahrimi" is mentioned in the books of fiqh tells us that this opinion is part of the madhab (i.e. derived using fiqh principles) and has nothing to do with culture.

What you said:

1. In the OP of this thread you quote mufti abu Hajirah:

Mufti Abu Hajirah wrote:
All that does not negate the fact that the mufta bihi is still Makruh Tahrimi,[/quote]

In reply to this quote of mufti abu hajirah, you said in the ilmhub thread;

Muadh Khan wrote:
No disagreement after this paragraph, at all. [/quote]

And in the OP of THIS thread you said:

Muadh Khan wrote:
He (HA) is relying on Fatawaa of Mutakhireen so I know where he is coming from.[/quote]

So basically, you said you accept this ruling as given by Mufti Abu Hajirah (which I've also quoted multiple times in my own thread). Then in the remainder of this thread you proceed to attempt to disprove the makruh tahrimi position and continue to call it cultural! Sincere question: Are you not contradicting yourself?

Just because the fatwa of Makruh Tahrimi was given by the muta'akh-khireen does NOT mean it is cultural.

In the OP, you basically admitted to the ruling of makruh tahrimi being at least part of the madhab, so this is why I told you to retract your following statements:

[quote="Muadh Khan"]Attending the Mosques may be discouarged but it isn't HARAM or MAKROOH-TAHREEMI by any stretch of imagination.


[quote="Muadh Khan"]...Deobandi position is actually cultural and not based on either the Madhab or Qur’aan and Sunnah.


Furthermore, you and Maulana Yasin made the statement that the 3 fataawa presented in the "Women are Different" thread are "personal opinions". This is also wrong. How are they personal opinions when these fataawa are based on the mufti bihi position and are clearly mentioned in the books of fiqh?!

The fatwa in our times that of Makruh Tahrimi. This has been mentioned by Mufti Abu Hajirah himself many times:

[quote="Mufti Abu Hajira"]As a hanafi however, the fatwa in our times is that of Makrooh , since the fitna is established in khurooj an nisaa.


Shoving My Opinion Down Peoples Throat?


Please show me where I have done this. I compelled no one to follow this opinion (though it is mufti bihi) and even admit that there are many `ulamaa who dont! Even Mufti Abu Hajirah admits to this! So who is shoving this opinion down who's throat?

Bhai, honestly speaking, the only thing you have shown in your posts is the you know how to EXPLODE in an argument, and that you know how to make rude and sarcastic remarks. Other than that, its all hot air, because you did not even read what I was actually saying.

See the difference between your posts and my posts. Point out where I used sarcasm against you, or slipped in a snide remark here and there.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+3 -0Winner x 3Optimistic x 1
back to top