A Response to the Lies Regarding Niqab by Some Murabits
By Abul Layth
Disclaimer: I take full responsibility for anything uttered within this post. Shaykh Nuh Keller speaks only for himself, and I do not speak for Him. What I have quoted here comes directly from his tongue and I have included at the end of the article the audio file for those interested in listening. Please do not misconstrue my words as his. Far better and wiser is he than I, and I do not want anyone saying that Shaykh Nuh attacked the Muraabitoon etc. I am responding to their mistakes, and Shaykh Nuh is not. Thanks…
One of the things that I know hinders many from accepting traditionalism, is the lack of traditionalism that comes from its claimants. When I was a pseudo-salafi and would read things like the statement you are about to read, I would say to myself, “See! These evil ‘sufis’ have abandoned the shari’ah!” Now that I have seen with my own eyes the respect the true Sūfīs / Murīds have for sacred law and learning, the love and staunch defense they exert for it, the adherence to its perfect commands, I know now that every preconceived notion I had was a mistake. If one sincerely looks to the Shaykhs of the noble Sufis, they find Imams of Islam, ascetics striving to be in the divine presence, completely immersed in the reflection of their Lord. They find men such as Ibn ‘Atā’illah Iskandarī, the great Mālikī Shādhilī whose words still illuminate the hearts of those seeking Allah. They find men such as Imām An-Nawawī whose karamāt (charismatic acts) exceed what is known by his students. The greatest of all karamāt ascribed to him is that in nearly every Muslim’s home we find Riyādh-us-Sālihīn. Even the enemies of tasawwuf / Ihsān admit that they must “overlook” the “deviances” of this noble Shaykh of Islām and the Muslims. They are forced to swallow the fact that this Imām was erudite and a pillar for this Ummah. I say these words only because I understand the confusion some of the seekers face when reading blatant misinformation. I write this article only to clear the name of this noble science of Islām, tasawwuf, from the blunders of those who ascribe themselves to it.
You say Oh Murabit, and Allah’s refuge is sought,
- “The Arab deviations from the Deen, embodied most dramatically in evil suicide bombing and the equally evil hinduisation of women, involving the masking of the woman’s face – utterly against the command of the Qur’an and the Sunna, which requires the face to be left free” ((This statement can be found on the following thread by at the “Ribatforums” website: http://www.ribatforum.com/showthread.php?t=76 ))
I would like to point out to the Muraabitoon that our Shaykh Abdur-Rahmān Ash-Shaghūrī, that noble light of tasawwuf, guide to Allāh, the great Hāshimī – Darqāwī said in the clearest terms,
- “All those people that call to the exposing of the [woman’s] face, then he is a Shaytān (remote from Allah)!”
Our beloved Shaykh Nuh, may Allah always protect him and bless him and his family, told the murīds of the Hāshimī-Darqāwī order of an incident where Ikhwān Al-Muslimīn started hanging up advertisements of women wearing only khimār, calling the people away from the Niqāb. He says that Shaykh Abdur-Rahmān Ash-Shaghuri was “outraged”. It was upon this that he said the above quoted words.
I have written a very detailed defense of the Niqāb from the Qur’an, Sunnah, and the understanding of the earliest Muslims and have posted it here: Click Here. I have quoted over 20 major scholars of the past within it from the Shafi’iyyah, Maalikiyyah (such as Qadhi Abu Bakr ibn Al-’Arabi), the Ahnaaf, the Hanbalis and most of the major mufassireen. I encourage those who are honest to read the article themselves. They will see that the great Imams of Islām maintained that it was OBLIGATORY in times of fitnah and many held the same view in front of the ajnabi (non-related) man. As Shaykh Nuh said, the Niqab is a symbol in our times. The religious people, those who seek Allah’s love and beauty, wear it. It is because of this that Shaykh Nuh obligates his students to wear it in his presence and in the presence of their co-travellers (particularly at the suhba etc). The importance of this symbol is seen throughout the Qur’an and even found authentically in the Sunnah of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). For brevity, and due to the fact that we have already written a large amount of material on this issue, I will briefly respond to the claims of some of the Murabitoon that run Ribatforum.net . I beg Allah ta’alaa to guide them and us and set their hearts aright ameen!
He says: “Utterly against the Qur’an and the Sunnah…”
If only you had picked up a book of orthodox tafsir you would have seen what Allah ta’alaa says about covering the face.
يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُل لِّأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَاءِ الْـمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِن جَلَابِيبِهِنَّ ذَلِكَ أَدْنَى أَن يُعْرَفْنَ فَلَا يُؤْذَيْنَ وَكَانَ الله غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا
“Oh Prophet! Say to your wives, your daughters, the believing women, that they are to wrap their Jilbābs all over their bodies. That is so they are known as to not be bothered. And Allah is the Most forgiving, Most Merciful.”
The Mufassir of the Qur’ān, Abdullah ibn ‘Abbās, when asked regarding the Jilbāb as is reported in Tafsīr ibn Kathīr, Tabarī, and every detailed traditional work of exegesis states,
حدثنـي علـيّ, قال: حدثنا أبو صالـح, قال: ثنـي معاوية, عن علـيّ, عن ابن عبـاس, قوله: يا أيّها النّبِـيّ قُلْ لأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَناتِكَ وَنِساءِ الـمُؤْمِنِـينَ يُدْنِـينَ عَلَـيْهِنّ مِنْ جَلابِـيبِهِنّ أمر الله نساء الـمؤمنـين إذا خرجن من بـيوتهنّ فـي حاجة أن يغطين وجوههنّ من فوق رؤوسهنّ بـالـجلابـيب, ويبدين عينا
واحدة.
“Allah commanded the believing women, when going out of their homes for some need, to cover their faces from above their heads with their Jilbābs, leaving one eye to see the path.” [Tabarī, Ibn Kathīr and others]
The chain is accepted by the erudite mufassirīn, mainly Ibn Kathīr, At-Tabarī, the erudite Shādhilī Imām As-Suyutī, Imām Al-Qurtubī, Imām Al-Baydhāwī Ash-Shāfi’ī and hundreds of others. It is thus used by them to conclude the Jilbāb is the garment that covers the face. For its defense we have written extensively on this report and please refer to the articles referenced above regarding the face being ‘awrah.
The great Zāhid Imām, and student of our Imām ‘Alī (alayhis salām), ‘Abīdah As-Salmānī authentically reports regarding this verse:
Hishām informed us, from Ibn Sireen who said: “I asked (as to what it meant) ‘Abīdah (as Salmaani) about the statement of Allah: “O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their Jalābīb all over their bodies…” So he took his thowb (garment) and covered his head and his face, and he left exposed one of his eyes. [Tafsīr of Imām Tabari under āyah 33:59 and it is Sahīh]
Ibn Jarīr At-Tabarī in his great tafsīr reports the incident via the great Imāms of Islam as follows:
يعقوب ، قال : حدثنا ابن عُلَية ، عن ابن عون ، عن محمد ، عن عبيدة في قوله تعالى :﴿ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُل لِّأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَاءِ الْـمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِن جَلَابِيبِهِنَّ ﴾ [ الأحزاب : 5 ] فَلَبسَها عندنا ابن عون ، قال : وَلبسها عندنا محمد ، قال محمد : ولَبِسها عندي عَبيدة ، قال ابن عون : فتقنَّعَ بردائه فغطّى أنفه وعينه اليسرى ، وأخرج عينه اليمنى ، وأدنى رداءه من فوق حتى جعله قريبًا من حاجبه ، أو على الحاجب
Ya’qūb said, Ibn ‘Ulayyah informed us, from Ibn ‘Awn from Muhammad (ibn Sireen) from ‘Abīdah regarding Surat Al Ahzāb Āyah 59,”So Ibn ‘Awn covered in front us, and Muhammad covered in front us and he said, ‘And ‘Abīdah covered in front of me.’ Ibn ‘Awn said, ‘So he veiled himself with his ridaa’ covering his mouth and his left eye, leaving his right eye showing, then he drew his ridā’ from above making it close to his eyebrow, or upon his eyebrow.” [The chain of this hadīth is Sahīh (authentic). See ibn Jarīr’s Tafsīr of this āyah.]
So here we have the great ascetics, of whom the great Sūfī masters praise, ‘Abidah As-Salmānī, Muhammad ibn Sirīn, Ibn ‘Awn understanding this verse to mean that a woman covers her face. Who are you Oh one who says it is a “hinduisation” and “none of the Qur’an and Sunnah”? Are you equal or superior to these great masters of Islam? These great Mufassireen, fuquhā , and Awliyā’ of Allah ta’alā? Do you brethren even know who ‘Abidah As-Salmānī is? To read more on him click here.
Do they know who Muhammad ibn Sirīn is? Have they studied this noble Shaykh’s life? Ibn Hajr Al-‘Asqalānī states of him, “The Imām of his time!” He was the student of the great masters of tasawwuf, the companions of our beloved (‘alayhis salām), the purified grandsons of Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), Al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali (‘alayhis salām). He was close to Imam Al-Hasan Al-Basrī whom our silsilah reaches to our beloved Imam ‘Ali ibn Abi Tālib (alayhis Salām)! He sat with the ascetic Abdullah ibn Umar ibn Al-Khattāb, with the Imām of Ahlus-Suffah Abu Hurayrah (radhiya Allahu ‘anhu). The master of masters in hadīth, Ibn Hibbān Ash-Shāfi’ī says of him, “Muhammad ibn Sirin was the most pious God-Aware men of the people of Basrah! He was a virtuous faqih (jurisconsult), a Hāfith (i.e. memorized over 100,000 narrations), one who Feared Allah ta’alā, an interpreter of dreams!” ((Tahthib at-tahthib entry number 6928 ))
Is he a liar oh Murabit? An Innovator in Allah’s deen? An ‘arab who HINDUISED the Muslims? This is what you are claiming of Awliyā’ullah!
Or what of that great Zāhida Hafsah bint Sirin (radhiya Allahu ‘anhaa)? This erudite woman of whom Iyās ibn Mu’āwiyah stated, “I have never seen anyone more virtuous than Hafsah!” ((Tahthib At-Tahthib entry 11910 )) The sister of Muhammad ibn Sirīn who reports from her. She sat with the mother of the believers and imitated them in character and faith as mentioned by her biographers. Imam Al-Bayhaqi narrates:
وعن عاصم الأحول قال : كنا ندخل على حفصة بنت سيرين وقد جعلت الجلباب هكذا : وتنقبت به ، فنقول لها : رَحِمَكِ الله قال الله تعالى : ( وَالْقَوَاعِدُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ
اللاَّتِي لاَ يَرْجُونَ نِكَاحاً فَلَيْسَ عَلَيْهِنَّ جُنَاحٌ أَن يَضَعْنَ ثِيَابَهُنَّ غَيْرَ مُتَبَرِّجَاتٍ بِزِينَةٍ ) ، قال : فتقول لنا : أي شئ بعد ذلك؟ فنقول : ( وَأَن يَسْتَعْفِفْنَ خَيْرٌ لَهُنَّ ) فتقول : هو إثبات الجلباب. رواه
البيهقي
It was narrated that ‘Aasim al-Ahwal said: We used to enter upon Hafsah bint Sirīn who had put her Jilbāb thus and covered her face with it, and we would say to her: May Allah have mercy on you. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And as for women past childbearing who do not expect wedlock, it is no sin on them if they discard their (outer) clothing in such a way as not to show their adornment” [al-Noor 24:60]. And she would say to us: What comes after that (of the āyah)? We would say: “But to refrain (i.e. not to discard their outer clothing) is better for them”. And so she said: [Referring to, ‘But to refrain is better for them’], “It is to keep the Jilbāb.” ((Narrated by al-Bayhaqi, 7/93. Rigorously Authentic ))
So is Hafsah also one to Hinduise Islam? Do you claim she is spreading an evil?
Or what of our Mother, Umm Al-Mu’mineen ‘Aa’ishah bint Abi Bakr? She covered her face in front the best of men – The Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) as well as the Sahaabah (radhiya Allahu ‘Anhum)! In fact there are multiple incidents of her doing it. Not only did she do it, but she encouraged others to do, as was narrated by Ibn Hajr in Fat-hul Baari,
حدثنا هشيم . قال : حدثنا الأعمش ، عن إبراهيم ، عن الأسود ، عن عائشة رضي الله عنها قالت : تُسدل المرأة جلبابها من فوق رأسها على وجهها
“Hushaym informed us saying, Al-’Amash informed us, from Ibrāhīm, from Al-Aswad, from ‘Aa’ishah (radhiyallahu ‘Anhā) that she said,
‘The woman is to bring down her Jilbāb from over her head and [then place it] upon her face.’ ” ((This is reported by Sa’eed ibn Mansoor. Al-Haafith ibn Hajr mentioned it in his Fat-hul Bāri 3/406. Ibn Al-Qayyim said in his Badā’I’ Al-Fawā’id: “Its chain is Sahīh upon the conditions of the two Shaykhs i.e. Muslim and Bukhāri.” It is also reported by Abu Dāwood in Al-Masā’il from Imām Ahmad from Hushaym with the same chain. In that chain however, the word Al-Mara’ah (the woman) is replaced with “Al-Muhrimah” (the woman in the state of Ihrām). Both narrations are Sahīh. ))
And Also what is reported from Imam Ahmad in his Musnad as well as Abu Daawud in his Sunan:
عن عائشة قالت : ” كان الركبان يمرون بنا ونحن مع رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم محرمات فإذا حاذوا بنا سدلت إحدانا جلبابها من رأسها على وجهها فإذا جاوزونا كشفناه
” .
It was narrated that ‘Aa’ishah said:
- “The riders used to pass by us when we were with the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in ihrām (the sacred state one enters when going to hajj or ‘Umrah). When they came near, each of us would lower her Jilbāb from her head over her face, and when they passed by we would uncover (our faces).” ((Narrated by Abū Dāwūd, 1833; Ahmad, 24067. This chain is hasan due to supporting reports in meaning. This hadīth has also been narrated by Umm Salamah and Asmā’ bint Abu Bakr by Al Hākim and he stated it was sahīh and Imam Adh-dhahabi agreed with Him. ))
Notice the plural in “Ihdinaa”. Similar is reported in the Muwatta via Fatimah from Asmaa’ bint Abi Bakr:
From Hishaam ibn ‘Urwah from Fātimah bint Al-Mundhir that she said,
- “We would nukhammir (cover) our faces while we were Muhrimaat, and while doing that we would be with Asmā’ bint Abi Bakr As-Siddeeq.”
I suppose Asmaa’ bint Abi Bakr, Faatimah bint Al-Mundhir, and our Mother ‘Aa’ishah are also “Hinduising” Islam as well! All of this was done with the approval of our Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), yet you murabitoon claim the opposite!
The SeekingIlm research paper should be enough to establish, at the very least, that this act was done during the time of the Sahaabah and generations after.
Secondly, an individual from the Muraabits quoted the following before the thread on this issue was closed on their forums:
Hajj Abdassamad’s words elsewhere on this topic will serve as an excellent conclusion:
Men who concern themselves with women’s clothing and avoid men’s issues of governance, establishing the halal, and struggling to establish the deen, to remove usury from society, to re-establish zakah which is in abeyance today, are extremely suspect, men who govern their women and refuse to be governed by a Muslim amir, but are content to be governed by kuffar.
Women must concern themselves with women’s clothing. It is not a manly thing for us to discuss [...]
((This quote can be found on page three of the thread: http://www.ribatforum.com/showthread.php?t=76 ))
I suppose we should not study menstruation, pregnancy, the ahkaam for women in Islam, because it is “not a manly thing for us discuss”? Was it unmanly of Abidah As-Salmaani? Ibn ‘Awn? Ibn ‘Abbaas? All of the Mufassireen of this Ummah? Was it “unmanly” of our Prophet Muhammad (‘alayhis Salaam) who had it revealed from the eternal magnificence of His creator?
I advise myself and you, oh Muraabitoon, to speak with the tongues of the scholars that preceded us. You have slandered our religion and abused an authentically established tradition of our mothers (radhiya Allahu ‘anhum) and the earliest Muslims. You have abandoned the way of the Sahaabah and their closest students for the whims of your own lowly selves. You banned a fine brother from your forums simply because he questioned your illegitimate claims. It is one thing to say that it is permitted to show the face and hands, and it is an entirely different thing to attack the Niqaab and call it evil, claiming it has no foundation within the Shari’ah. The fact that you people have attacked this noble act only shows the eventual outcome of your movement. As Shaykh Nuh said, “Groups come and groups go. Tariqa’s come and tariqa’s go…” If you truly care for your relationship with your Lord, care enough to repent from your atrocious statements, apologize to the brother who questioned your illegitimate claims, and humbly accept that you are misguiding the common folk with your misinformation. No Major Imam of the past has ever said what you have said. So fear Allah and turn to your Lord with sincere Repentance!
Oh Allah forgive us, Guide us, And set our hearts firmly upon your deen! Bless your Prophet, His family, Companions, and those that follow him until the day of standing! Aameen!
Listen to Shaykh Nuh’s lecture regarding the Niqaab: click here
Edited on: August 18 2007
36 Responses to “A Response to the Lies Regarding Niqab by Some Murabits”
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
- Tantawi’s Verdict on The Niqab, Our Response - Seeking Ilm (Knowledge) - [...] We responded to his lies in August of 2007 here. There is absolutely no doubt that the scholars of ...
One thing that maybe wasnt mentioned is that the Shaikh orders the Muridahs to cover in his presence is because it is also hard on the nafs.
Ma Shaa Allah
A fantastic post! As brother Abul Layth pointed out, one of the most important merits of niqab is to stay away from shubuhat. While most muslimas agree that wearing the niqab is more mustahab than wearing a hijab or khimar, it seems that a small group may disagree because of hawa al-nafs, Allah knows best. May Allah grant more Muslimas the hidaya to accept the niqab, ameen.
Thanks brother Abul Layth and sister Umm Layth for this wonderful article and comments.
Jazakumu Allaho khairan.
Asalamu’alayqum
Most scholars, including the four main schools of Islamic jurisprudence, hold the view that niqab is not an obligation { wajib – fard }. The niqab is an issue of Fiqh and not aqeeda lets get that clear also.
They cite a number of references for this opinion.
Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty: that will make for greater purity for them: And Allah is well acquainted with all that they do.
And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof…
24:30-31
According to the majority of contemporary scholars ‘what is apparent of it’ refers to the hands and face.
Scholars holding this view also state that it is well accepted by all scholars that the Prophet categorically forbade people from covering their faces or hands during hajj, the pilgrimage to Mecca. If it was necessary that the hands and face be covered at all times, he would not have stated its impermissibility during one of the most sacred points of a person’s life.
It is also generally held by the majority of scholars, including those that believe niqab is obligatory, that covering the face during the five daily prayers is also prohibited.
Another strong indication that niqab is not an obligation { wajib – fard } is presented in this hadith.
Abdullah bin Abbas reports that the Prophet was riding a camel with Al-Fadhl, Abdullah’s brother, behind him. A beautiful woman came to ask the Prophet about the Hajj of her father. Al Fadhl began to stare at her; her beauty impressed him a lot. The Prophet (peace be upon him) having noticed this while Al Fadhl was busy looking, put his hand behind and turned his face away from her hither and thither as she went along with them. Al Abbas said to the Prophet, “you are twisting the neck of your nephew!” The Prophet replied, “I noticed that both the boy and the girl were young; and I feared that Satan may intervene”.
Tirmidhi and Bukhari
Scholars argue that the Prophet controlled the boy Al Fadhl’s gaze, but didn’t mention the fact that the woman was not covering her face. As a rule, anything that Prophet Muhammad stays silent about is tacit approval. This hadith would seem to indicate strongly that niqab is not obligatory.
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin: Asma, daughter of AbuBakr, entered upon the Apostle of Allah (saw) wearing thin clothes. The Apostle of Allah (saw) turned his attention from her. He said: O Asma’, when a woman reaches the age of menstruation, it does not suit her that she displays her parts of body except this and this, and he pointed to her face and hands. (Narrated by Abu Dawood # 4092).
This Hadith has three authentic narrations and was correct by all Major Hadith scholars such as Albani.
Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Abbas: Al-Fadl (his brother) was riding behind Allah’s Apostle and a woman from the tribe of Khath’am came and Al-Fadl started looking at her and she started looking at him. The Prophet turned Al-Fadl’s face to the other side. The woman said, “O Allah’s Apostle! The obligation of Hajj enjoined by Allah on His devotees has become due on my father and he is old and weak, and he cannot sit firm on the Mount; may I perform Hajj on his behalf?” The Prophet replied, “Yes, you may.” That happened during the Hajj-al-Wida (of the Prophet). (Narrated by Bukhari # 589, Muslim, and others).
Shaykh Abdal Qadir says:
In Surat an-Nur (24:30-31) we find the key text.
Say to the muminun that they should lower their eyes
and guard their private parts.
That is purer for them.
Allah is aware of what they do.
Say to the mumin women that they should lower their eyes
and guard their private parts
and not display their adornments –
except for what normally shows –
and draw their head-coverings across their breasts.
The first thing we must observe in these two Ayats is that they begin in the same way, with Allah the Exalted instructing the Messenger, may Allah bless him and give him peace, as follows:
“Say to the muminun…”
“Say to the mumin women…”
This indicates that it is a strong, Divinely ordained Sunna. It is not a law with punishment or reward attached to it.
Important to us is the phrase from the second Ayat which specifies: “ – except for what normally shows – ”
We find in Ibn ‘Atiyya that he relates how Asma bint Abu Bakr was with her sister Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her, when the Messenger entered, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. When his wife questioned about the correctness of her sister’s dress, the Prophet indicated that she should be covered except – and he mimed the hands and the face. This permits us to say that the Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, gave indication about modesty by covering, in accordance with the Qur’anic stricture “ – except for what normally shows – ”. This allows us to say that the covering of the face is not an Islamic practice, but more seriously is a defiance of the indication of our Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.
The Muslim Community cannot be led into a frivolous and futile struggle at the hands of men and women who do not know what the Deen of Islam is in the first place.
Allah the Exalted has declared in Surat Al ‘Imran (3:32):
Say, ‘Obey Allah and the Messenger.’
Then if they turn away,
Allah does not love the kafirun.
Shaykh Abdal Qadir was right to say what he said in regards to the whole niqab issue as it has clearly been a tool to take muslims away from adressing real issues of the Ummah.
As for the evil hinduisation of women well anyone that lives and has lived among many muslims comming from India and pakistan will understand that their culture is hindu and their deen is riddled with hindism.
The shaykh didnt call niqab hindu he simply called for the liberation of women from the evil hinduism of muslim men who use the niqab and other things as a serious barrier against the muslim women and to stop the spread of Islam in the west which it is doing.
Do you think western people like niqab? do you think that niqab is going to somehow call people to islam?
Do you think that niqab is not a barrier?
No where in the Quraan or the hadith does it say that a women must wear a niqab that is a simple fact , you can quote scholars and qadis until the cows come home but the hard line fact is this!
Not one ayah of the Quraan orders women to cover their faces in public.
Shaykh Abdal Qadir says on this matter QUOTE :
” If Muslim men are being extreme in their strictness to women, it must mean that they are being lax in relation to their own obligations. The mechanism which will restore power to the Muslim Community is the restoration of the Fard of Zakat. The restoration of the Fard of Zakat demands its payment in Gold Dinar and Silver Dirham, by Qur’anic injunction and the practice of the Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and the people of Madinah. So important is this matter, it demands a lengthy and all-inclusive Fatwa. To this end we have asked the leading Faqih of our time on all matters concerning Zakat and Halal trade practice based on the ‘Amal of the People of Madinah to give a definitive Fatwa on banking practice.”
Shaykh Abdal Qadir as Sufi says Quote ;
” Allah the Exalted says in Surat Luqman (31:6)
But there are some people who trade in distracting tales
to misguide people from Allah’s Way
knowing nothing about it
and to make a mockery of it.
Such people will have a humiliating punishment.
A few weeks ago, some European leaders met together in Brussels in order to discuss the fall-out caused by the disastrous collapse of the military adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan. Concern was expressed about the surprising (to them) rise of numbers entering the Deen of Islam in Europe. Another of their concerns was the awareness of a growing unity and coherence of voice among Muslims who insisted on an end to an ethos which seemed to license and encourage attacks on Islam. Catholic christianity’s dogmas had collapsed in an avalanche of financial claims against paedophile priests, the near-abolition of marriage alongside easy divorce, and the cruel doctrines around abortion and contraception. To distract from their troubles, the Pope decided to win favour with his banking creditors by an attack on Islam. At the Brussels meeting it was decided that a perfect and easy target both to humiliate the Muslims and to break their spirit was an attack on the so-called ‘Islamic veil’. This had the added advantage of boosting the fantasy that atheist women in Europe were ‘free’, were ‘modern’ and not oppressed.
Wa alaykumsalaam
Wa’alaykum Salaam Wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh
Bismillahi Bābunā
Before I even begin this discussion, I would like to state that Niqāb is not the issue at all. It is covering of the woman’s face. The niqāb is simply a means by which the Muslimah fulfills the command of Hijab/Jilbāb. Allah ta’alaa has commanded both Khimār and Jilbāb, and if you had read the research paper you would have not said the statements you have said here, may Allah bless you. It is unfortunate that you would make such a claim, bringing absolutely no statement from the noble scholars of the past. In fact brother, what you have done is narrate an absolute falsehood upon Imām Ahmad, his madh-hab, as well as the Shāfi’iyyah and their madh-hab. You have also upon many Hanafis, especially the ones of late. For now, I shall quote those scholars of the past that contradict what you have said, may Allah forgive you:
I will not quote many quotes for saving space and time. Please read the research papers we have written on the subject for more quotes and references:
The Shafi’ī faqīh Imām Ibn Rislān (rahimahullah) said,
“The Muslims are in agreement that it is prohibited for women to come out of their homes while their faces are uncovered.” [See Nayl Al Awtār 6/114]
Imām Ahmad ibn Nāqib Al-Masrī, author of ‘Umdat As-Sālik said,
“Wa qad naql al-ittifāq ‘alaa mana’ an-nisā’ min al-khurūj sāfirāt Al-wujūh wa lā faraq bayna khawf al fitnah wa ‘admhaa” [pg 512 of the ‘Umdah]
Translation of Shaykh Nuh: “A majority of the scholars have been recorded as holding that it is unlawful for women to leave the house with faces unveiled, whether or not there is likelihood of temptation.”
The Imām of the two Harams, the great Shafi’ī Mujtahid, Imām Al-Juwaynī said,
“There is agreement (ittifāq) of the Muslimīn upon the forbiddance of women coming out (of their homes) with their faces unveiled.”
[Quoted in Tuhfat Al-Minhāj Bi-Sharh Al-Minhāj of Ibn Hajr Al-Haytamī, Vol. 7 page 193, published by Dār Al-Fikr. Also quoted by Imām An-Nawawī in his Rawdhat-Tālibīn. Also quoted by Imām Taqiyud-dīn Abū Bakr ibn Muhammad Al-Husaynī Ad-Dimashqī Ash-Shāfi’ī in his Kifāyatul Akhyār Vol. 2 page 42. This statement is also quoted from him in Imām Al-Khatīb Ash-Shirbinī’s Al-Mughnī Al-Muhtāj.]
The Faqīh and Mālikī Qadhī Ibn Al ‘Arabī said,
“And all of the woman is ‘awrah; her body, her voice, and it is not permissible for her to uncover that unless out of necessity, or need such as witnessing (in court), or a disease that is affecting her body…” [Ahkām Al Qur’aan 3/1579]
So these quotes are just a brief glimpse at the great A’immah who held this view. As you will come to see, the majority did indeed hold this as reported by Imām Al-Juwaynī and Imām Ahmad ibn Rislān (rahimahumullah). Let us continue the response inshā’Allāh.
The majority of scholars? Quote for us an established mufassir that the “majority” of the scholars held this view regarding this verse! In fact, the great Imams and exegetes of old quoted the scholarly disagreement regarding ‘what is the thāhir (apparent) of the woman’. Let us quote for you:
The following tafsīr can be found beneath the āyah 24:31 that reads:
وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلَّا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا
“and not to expose their adornment, except that which is apparent thereof…”
For those who do not know, the disagreement here, and what the brother is quoting is regarding the words “apparent thereof”. What is the “apparent” of the adornment of a woman?
Ibn Kathīr in his tafsīr beneath this verse says:
قَالَ اِبْن مَسْعُود : كَالرِّدَاءِ وَالثِّيَاب يَعْنِي عَلَى مَا كَانَ يَتَعَاطَاهُ نِسَاء الْعَرَب مِنْ الْمِقْنَعَة الَّتِي تُجَلِّل ثِيَابهَا وَمَا يَبْدُو مِنْ أَسَافِل الثِّيَاب فَلَا حَرَج عَلَيْهَا فِيهِ لِأَنَّ هَذَا لَا يُمْكِنهَا إِخْفَاؤُهُ وَنَظِيره فِي زِيّ النِّسَاء مَا يَظْهَر مِنْ إِزَارهَا وَمَا لَا يُمْكِن إِخْفَاؤُهُ وَقَالَ بِقَوْلِ اِبْن مَسْعُود الْحَسَن وَابْن سِيرِينَ وَأَبُو الْجَوْزَاء وَإِبْرَاهِيم النَّخَعِيّ وَغَيْرهمْ
[The apparent thereof is] “Ar-Ridā’” (a type of clothing)…And those who said the statement of Ibn Mas’ūd were Ibn Sirīn, Abul-Jawzā’, Ibrāhīm An-Nakha’ī and other than them”.
You can see this quote for yourself here: http://quran.al-islam.com/Tafseer/DispTafsser.asp?l=arb&taf=KATHEER&nType=1&nSora=24&nAya=31
Imām At-Tabarī actually mentions this ikhtilāf in the very beginning of his explanation of this verse saying,
وَذَلِكَ مُخْتَلَف فِي الْمَعْنَى مِنْهُ بِهَذِهِ الْآيَة , فَكَانَ بَعْضهمْ يَقُول : زِينَة الثِّيَاب الظَّاهِرَة
[The second type of Zīnah (adornment) is the apparent adornment] And regarding that type, there is disagreement regarding its meaning, and some of them (i.e. the scholars) said, “Adornment (means) Ath-Thiyāb (the clothing) Ath-Thāhirah (that is the apparent).”
He goes on to quote right below that all of the scholars that held this view: Ibn Mas’ūd, Ibrāhīm An-Nakha’ī, Hasan Al-Basrī, Abu-Ishāq who responded with the Qur’ān itself saying,
أَلَا تَرَى أَنَّهُ قَالَ : { خُذُوا زِينَتكُمْ عِنْد كُلّ مَسْجِد }
“Haven’t you see where Allah says, ‘Take your Zīnah (adornment, i.e. clothing) when you go to the masjid…’”
To see these quotes in the tafsīr of At-Tabarī go here: http://quran.al-islam.com/Tafseer/DispTafsser.asp?l=arb&taf=TABARY&nType=1&nSora=24&nAya=31
So where is your claim to majority? Again, brother, I am not denying that it is (supposedly) reported by Ibn ‘Abbas that he said “face”. I am denying your claim to the majority, when it is Ibn Mas’ūd (radhiya Allahu ‘Anhu), Ibrāhim An-Nakha’ī, Abul-Jawzā’, Hasan al-Basrī, Abu-Is-hāq, and many others who held that the apparent of someone’s adornment is their clothes, not their face!
Imām Al-Qurtubī also agrees there is ikhtilāf regarding “The apparent thereof” in his tafsīr by stating the following,
وَاخْتَلَفَ النَّاس فِي قَدْر ذَلِكَ ; فَقَالَ اِبْن مَسْعُود : ظَاهِر الزِّينَة هُوَ الثِّيَاب
“and the people (i.e. the scholars) disagreed regarding the preciseness of that. Ibn Mas’ūd (radhiya allahu ‘anhu) said, “The apparent adornment is the clothing (thiyāb).”…
You can also read this quote here in the third paragraph:
http://quran.al-islam.com/Tafseer/DispTafsser.asp?l=arb&taf=KORTOBY&nType=1&nSora=24&nAya=31
Now regarding the statements from the scholars reporting from Ibn ‘Abbās, we have shown the weakness of these statements in the article “Defending the obligation of Niqab: article 2” that can be found at the following link: http://seekingilm.com/archives/47#tafsir
Imām Al-Baghawī also mentions the disagreement regarding this verse in his Ma’ālim At-Tanzīl, see Dār Ibn Hazm publication page 904. The late Hanafī Mufassir, Shaykh Muhammad Shafi also quotes the disagreement amongst the Sahābah regarding this phrase of the verse. See Ma’arif Al-Qur’an volume 6 page 411 published by Maktab Dar al-Ulūm in 2003. The famous Shāfi’ī exegete, Imām Al-Baydhaawi (rahimahullah) also reported this opinion and considered it the correct one in his tafsīr.
Imām Al-Māwardī I in his tafsir called, “An-Nukt wal-‘Uyūn” quotes three opinions:
أحدها : أنها الثياب ، قاله ابن مسعود .
الثاني : الكحل والخاتم ، قاله ابن عباس ، والمسور بن مخرمة .
الثالث : الوجه والكفان ، قاله الحسن ، وابن جبير ، وعطاء .
“The first [meaning of apparent adornment] is that it is Ath-Thiyāb (the garments). This was stated by Ibn Mas’ūd.
The Second Kuhl (Sunnah Eye liner), and rings. This was said by Ibn ‘Abbās and al-Miswar ibn Makhramah.
The Third, “The face and the hands. This was said by Al-Hasan, Ibn Jubayr, and ‘Atā’”. [end quote]
So do not think that we will fall for such a claim when the true researcher has looked to the books of tafsīr and have seen the opposite of what you claim!
To conclude on this issue:
A) The scholars disagreed regarding this tafsir (explanation) as quoted by the exegetes of old.
B) No one single opinion is reported from the companions and tābi’īn. No earlier scholars ever had agreement as to what it meant.
C) You Murabitun are picking and choosing from the Qur’ān what you WANT. The fact is 33:59 is also fardh, and the same scholars who hold the opinion that “the apparent thereof” is the face and hands, hold that 33:59 refers to covering the entire body, example: Ibn ‘Abbas! So do not pick and choose verses. The Qur’an is to be taken in its entirety!
Again, we have shown that the tafsīr you follow is weakly reported from the Sahābah in the research paper. This was alluded to by the great Hanbalī, Imām Al-Bahūtī.
Another claim that is easily refuted by some simple research. Firstly, we must understand that woman’s ‘awrah is different in different circumstances. So her ‘awrah is not the same in all affairs. This was alluded to by the great Shafi’ī Mujtahidīn. Some brief examples:
Imām Ash-Shirwāni said, “[Imām] Ziyādi in Sharh Al-Muharar said: For a woman there is three ‘Awrahs,
1) ‘Awratu-fis-Salāh (the ‘awrah of prayer) – and that was mentioned before – It is everything of the body except the face and the hands.
2) The ‘Awrah with regards to an un-related man looking at her: It is the entire body including the hands and the face, according to (the opinion that is) relied upon.
3) The ‘awrah in privacy and amongst her Mahrams (those people related to her and un-marriable): It is like the ‘Awrah of men. [i.e. from her navel to her knees].
This division was also mentioned by the virtuous Shāfi’ī jurist, Imām Taqiyud-Dīn As-Subkī when he said,
“And what is the closest (in opinion), from what our companions have produced is that the face and the hands of a woman are ‘awrah in nathr (i.e. looking) and not in the Salāh.”
[Quoted by Imām Al-Khatīb Ash-Shirbinī in his Al-Mughnī Al-Muhtāj.]
Also by the Hanbali, Ibn Al-Qayyim when he said:
“The ‘awrah is of two types: an ‘awrah in the Salāh (prayer) and an ‘awrah in looking (’awratu fin-nathr). So as for the free woman, it is (allowed) for her to pray while her hands and face are uncovered, and it is not (allowed) for her to go out in the markets and gatherings of people like that (i.e. it is not allowed for her to go out without the face and hands covered).[See Tahthīb As-sunan and ‘Ilām Al Muwaqi’īn 2/80]
This shows your inadequate research, false claims, and lack of proof. The scholars of the Shafi’ī and Hanbali guilds clearly reconciled between all the proofs regarding this issue.
We have already responded to this as well in the research paper. I will not waste space responding to this argument forwarded by you. For those interested in the response go to the following link: http://seekingilm.com/archives/47#fadhl
This hadith is weak. We have shown its severe weaknesses, as well as what some of the scholars say regarding it in the following link: http://www.seekingilm.com/archives/47
Basically:
1)It is mursal as stated by Abū Dāwūd himself. Khālid ibn Durayk never met ‘A’ishah!
2)Sa’īd ibn Bashīr al-Azdī is weak. Especially weak from Qatādah who he reports from in this chain (as said by Ibn Numayr and other great Huffāth)
3) Possible tadlīs
4) All supporting narrations are also very weak in our view. We have explained why in the second section of the research.
I think you mean like yourself and your Shaykh who says the covering of the woman’s face is a hinduisation! Clear and obvious neglect for scholarly research! The Muslim community can not be led by the likes of you or your Imām who has total disdain for the actions of the Sahāba and their followers!
It does not surprise me that one who distorts the voews of the Muslim scholars of the past would manipulate his own shaykhs words!
Oh noble reader! Look at the EXACT words of Abdalqadir as-sufi himself:
He calls the “masking of a woman’s face”: “Arab deviations”, “hinduisation of women”, “utterly against the command of the Qur’an and the Sunnah” and even argues that “these should disappear from Britain!”
To read this quote for yourself see at the following link (next to last paragraph on the page): http://www.shaykhabdalqadir.com/content/articles/Art071_18062007.html
So this evil individual, has called this established act of Islām, an act proven to h ave been done in the presence of the Prophet Muhammad (‘alayhis salaam) upon his approval with horrible phrases, and goes as far as to say that it should DISAPPEAR FROM BRITAIN!
So not only has this evil individual called it vile names, branded an established sunnah – obligation a deviance, but has called for the removal of the niqāb !
Our beloved master, Muhammad (‘alayhis salām) said, in the clearest terms, “Whoever rejects my sunnah is not from us!” [See Ibn Hajr’s words on this hadith in his bulugh al maraam]
So now look at one of his supposed followers manipulating his words! He said the shaykh didn’t call the niqāb hindu! Read his words again oh reader!
So, not only do we see the clear misquote from his followers, but we also see the evil of the “shaykh”. Calling for the total “disappearance” of it from Britain! Does anyone else smell a supporter of the methodology of the enemies of Islām; maybe a “muslim” Jack Straw?
Did the Prophet Muhammad (‘alayhis salaam) care what the kuffār thought when the Sahaabiyyat covered their faces in front of the Kuffār? Did He (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) care what they thought when He spoke words revealed by Allah bashing their paganism? Did He (‘alayhis salaam) care what they thought when he destroyed their pagan idols after conquering Makkah? Did He care what they thought when Allah revealed:
يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُل لِّأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَاء الْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِن جَلَابِيبِهِنَّ ذَلِكَ أَدْنَى أَن يُعْرَفْنَ فَلَا يُؤْذَيْنَ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُوراً رَّحِيماً
O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies. That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed. And Allah is Ever OftForgiving, Most Merciful.[33:59]
The word “Jalābīb” the plural of Jilbāb, has been explained by the earliest Muslims, including Abdullah ibn ‘Abbās, ‘Abīdah As-Salmāni, Hasan Al-Basrī, and many others, as that which covers the entire body only leaving the eye to see the way! Do you disagree with this authentic tafsīr?
The fact is, when Allah reveals a command, we obey Him ta’ala, whether the Kuffār like it or not. The Kuffar’s desires are not the test for faith!
Allah says,
ولن ترضى عنك اليهود ولا النصارى حتى تتبع ملتهم قل إن هدى الله هو الهدى ولئن اتبعت أهواءهم بعد الذي جاءك من العلم ما لك من الله من ولي ولا نصير
“Never will the Jews nor the Christians be pleased with you till you follow their religion. Say: “Verily, the Guidance of Allah that is the (only) Guidance. And if you were to follow their (Jews and Christians) desires after what you have received of Knowledge, then you would have against Allah neither any Wali (protector or guardian) nor any helper.”
The Mu’minin strive to please Allāh, seeking his love and mercy by obedience to Him. They do not try and follow the Kuffār’s desires so that they end up having no protector against Allah’s wrath!
Lie! 33:59. It could also be argued that 24:31 alludes to it with the words illa mā thahara minhā.
No one is being extreme by encouraging the established practice of covering the woman’s face in front of the ajnabi! Stop your lies and your distortions. There are hundreds of proofs for the establishment of this act, and you ignore them all simply to please the Kuffār, just as you have admitted yourself when you started talking about what the kuffar think, blah blah blah.
Solution: When the kuffar gathered to destroy Islām, did our beloved Sayyid (‘alayhis salām) say, “What do the kuffar think about it…” Rather he un-sheathed his sword, implemented true tasawwuf amongst his companions, and defended Islām and the dignity of the Muslims by all Halāl means. You on the other hand tell us to abandon our Islamic heritage and submit to the whims of the kuffar!
The worst enemy for the Muslims are those who sit at the palaces of the enemies of Islām, who care for what they think, and who seek their pleasure by changing and manipulating Islām. Oh Muslims! Cling to the path of the righteous forefathers and security will be found! As I have said before, the arguments of the Murabitun are weak and have no foundation. We challenge this murabit and anyone of them to bring a single quote from the scholars of the first 1200 years of Islām ever saying what this man has said about the Niqāb. Show us a SINGLE ONE that has ever called for its “disappearance”. Show us a single noble scholar who has ever even criticized this act!
Search oh Murabit and see for yourself the falseness of Abdalqadir as-sufi!
And Peace and Blessings be upon our beloved Prophet Muhammad, his family, his companions, and those that followed them in righteousness. Amīn!
AAMEEN!
And amazingly, the whole point of covering is to BE KNOWN, TO BE DIFFERENT from the non-Muslim women.
And just to add, it does open the doors to da’wah more than these people know. Westerners also love it, and praise it even. I’ve gotten so many praises along with the sarcastic remarks that I also got when I was simply wearing a headscarf (khimaar). I loved the idea of covering my face even before accepting Islam. So don’t act like you know what you are speaking about brother. May Allah forgive you and us
Asalaamualaykum
Niqab the word does not exisit in the Quraan and thats not a lie so please dont accuse me of being a lier, woe unto liers and defamers!
If you (anyone) wants to interpret something, then write a tafseer UNDER the text with your evidence, but do not stick it into the quotes of the Holy Quran – just translate it as closely word for word as you can and then explain it somewhere else. The reason is that it is really misleading for those who don’t know Arabic.
If I didn’t have a clue about Arabic I might think that “juyubihinna” actually means FACE. There is no way that this word means face or body in Arabic. It comes from the root word meaning neck, collarbone in arabic. Not only is the stuff in brackets wrong, but it is inside the quotes of the Quran. This is how the older scriptures got corrupted, people slowly started sneaking their own words into the text. Alhamdulillah Allah promises to protect the Quran until Judgement Day. I have also read ahadith translated so badly, where the word head is substituted with face just to try to make an evidence out of nothing. This is why it is so important for all of us to try to learn Arabic so that we can read things for ourselves instead of someone else’s translation.
This is a warning! please be wary when reading the hadith used as evidence for covering the face. Many are translated FALSLEY. The Prophet said that whoever lies about what he said should expect their seat in hellfire so please FEAR ALLAH and be careful what you transmit to others. If you read this one example you will know what I mean:
Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Hadith # 282 Narrated Safiya bint Shaiba (RA) “Aisha (RA) used to say: “When (the Verse): “They should draw their veils over their necks and bosoms,” was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets at the edges and covered their faces with the cut pieces.”
The word FACE does not exist in the arabic version of this hadith. it reads “…cut their waist sheets at the edges and FAKHTAMARNABIHA” this word in arabic is derived from the word khimar, and it simply means “they put them as khimar”. A khimar does not cover the face. we can prove this by using the following hadith: Abu Dawood Book 2, Hadith # 0641: Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu’minin (SAW) “Rasulullah (SAW) said “Allah does not accept prayer of a woman who has reached puberty unless she wears a veil.” the word they translate as “veil” is in arabic khimar. And we all know that we are not allowed to pray with our faces covered; thus the khimar can not possibly cover the face .
Here is another argument for your defamation of the Murabitun who happen to be more active than you are and will ever be thats another simple fact for you to stop attacking those who share a little difference to your extremist veiw point.
Niqab is NOT Required
[Edited by Adim]
Wa’alaykum Salaam
Mr. Abdullah, you are either blind or did not read the post above. In it I EXPLICITLY stated this is not an issue of niqāb. It is an issue of the face being ‘awrah. Niqāb is a wasīlah to fulfill the obligation of true Jilbāb. Please understand this very SIMPLE fact. Re-read comment 21 please. You are wasting our time.
Seriously, stop being so ridiculous. Firstly you missed the ENTIRE point! The point is about “Illa mā thahara minhā (the apparent thereof)” and not specifically about the word juyubihinna. Why are you rejecting the āyah 33:59? You pick and choose what you like from the Qur’an now? You rely on one āyah and reject the others? Maybe that is the manhaj of your firqah, but it is not the manhaj of Ahlus Sunnah!
No one even used this hadīth in responding to your deviant guild, so why are you dodging all of the bullets that pierced your argument and relying on a non-argument?
Anyhow, “fakhtamarna” means literally to COVER. The original root is KHMR – the same root of khamr (as in alcohol – as alchohol ‘covers’ the senses). Granted it does not say they “covered their faces”, but it does not say they covered their hair either. So it is not a proof for you either. Rather, the scholars, such as Ibn Hajr in his fat-hul-Bārī interpret it based upon the Qur’anic and other Sunnic evidences, all of which we have quoted in the research article referred to numerous times thus far. We have also responded further to this claim in research paper under the argument and hadīth of mu’tajirāt.
Apparently you didn’t read it!
Indeed, niqāb is not required! We agree! Wearing Jilbāb is required and it is a garment that covers the face. Niqāb is a means to the obligation of Jilbāb. Get it right! Read!
As for your sick attempt of quoting the innovator of our time, Al Albaani (may Allah have mercy upon him), then you should know that he has been refuted by hundreds of his co-salafis as well as other Sunnis on this issue. So do not waste our time with simply copying arguments we have already responded to in the research article.
Sir, fear Allah and stop bashing the covering of the face. You have bashed a symbol of Islām. You have labeled it a hinduisation. Such an atrocious claim has been refuted and we have shown in this post and in our research paper that your ilk is utterly wrong.
May Allah guide you and us Āmīn.
Asalaamaualaykum
I do find this interesting how you call me and the murabitun devients lol take a good look at your own shaykhs you know the ones the scholars for dollars, its not my shaykh that tells his mureeds to follow taqi usmani in his devient islamic banking practices let alone the fact that your shaykhs sit with devients like Qadarwi who twist every hadith and ayat of the quraan to suit their modernist veiw point.
This topic is really just a patheic attack againt the murabitun who share a serious difference of opinions in fiqh, interesting how we also share the same veiw as shaykh hamzah yusuf but no where do you attack him with the same vile stench of fitna.
The fact is this, Niqab is not part of the Aqeeda of a muslim if it was it would have been releaved in the Quraan and also transmitted by Imam Malik and Sahnun etc etc
You wont find any ayat in the quraan that states Niqab is fard or otherwise.
You can quote scholars until the cows come home but the facts are clear.
So your attempt to attack muslims who do not agree with your fiqh and pay as you go scholars for dollars on sunnipath is basless and weak.
Shaykh Abdal Qadir as Sufi is total right when he says :
” If Muslim men are being extreme in their strictness to women, it must mean that they are being lax in relation to their own obligations. The mechanism which will restore power to the Muslim Community is the restoration of the Fard of Zakat. The restoration of the Fard of Zakat demands its payment in Gold Dinar and Silver Dirham, by Qur’anic injunction and the practice of the Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and the people of Madinah. So important is this matter, it demands a lengthy and all-inclusive Fatwa. To this end we have asked the leading Faqih of our time on all matters concerning Zakat and Halal trade practice based on the ‘Amal of the People of Madinah to give a definitive Fatwa on banking practice.”
Until you can do better than the murabitun by having mosques communities and scholars who do the work rather than talk about it then i suggest you keep quiet on this matter as you are no better at all when we compair who is doing what and how.
Remember this one also, we teach for free we dont ask for payments for asking questons o fiqh etc like sunnipath and we dont accept the devients like taqi usmani who are on the bank payroll lol
ma salaama Abdullah
Backbiting Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani, you are not even at his level rather you are even beneath the dust beneath his feet.
Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani will ejoy gaining your hasana on the day of judgement.
I wonder why then the great Mujtahid Qadi Abu Bakr stated ““And all of the woman is ‘awrah; her body, her voice, and it is not permissible for her to uncover that unless out of necessity, or need such as witnessing (in court), or a disease that is affecting her body…” [Ahkām Al Qur’aan 3/1579]
This is also a well known opinion of Shaykh Bin Bayyah (May Allah Bless and Protect Him).
Asalaamualaykum ,
I couldent care less what this Qadi says or that right now as that is just indoctrination and blind following.
The Quraan does not say that women have to wear a face veil period and to force this idea that women have to wear a face veil is in itself extremist .
As for Taqi the scholar for dollar well his own fatwas for islamic banking show his serious lack of understanding of what Riba actually is.
Taqi Usmani has been refuted time and time again for his outragous attempts to legalise what is haraam and remember Riba is worse that Zina with ones own mother in the shade of the Kaba!
While you all are passive tax payers and accept the kaffir control of your wealth people like myself are not happy with the status quo , i want an end to world usurous banking and the only way is to destroy usury with what ALLAH has given us for everything that is halal can be acheived Alhamdulillah.
By islamizing Riba your only give more power to the banks and their regimes.
The Gold dinar and the silver Dirham is the future of Islamic trade and not only that but it is Islam to establish and mint these coins because no matter how many fatwas you give paper will always stay as paper and will never have real instrinsic worth.
Islam is not secularist so stop acting like secularists and start doing your job of establishing Islam with its leadership under Amirs and calling openly the non muslim people to islam which means stop living in a ghettoist mentality and be a part of society also starting with speaking the language of the land you live which includes doing khutbas in these said languages so that one can invite non muslims in the masjids and they can understand because to be frank being in the uk and seeing all these mosques which are nothing but cultural clubs for stealing people money think they are paying zakat when in fact they are not! I suppose i could go on for ever and ever but why should i? Imam Ali [as] Said ” when i argue with an ignorant person i always loose”
Ma salaama Abdullah
ps this is for those blind followers of muftis that make riba halal so read if you care about your future!
You Murabitun, and especially yourself Abdullah, are lacking in understanding.
You hide beneath the excuse “it is not a point of ‘aqeedah” when you have been refuted, your shaykh exposed and your disgusting attacks pierced with the sword of truth.
The fact is, it is an issue of ‘aqeedah when a man reviles an established act of Islam. You have just rejectd 33:59, over 30 proofs from the Sunnah, Sahaaba, and taabi’in, based upon sole whim. You were refuted on every single point and you resulted to the same sleezy argument of the pseudo-salafis; no taqleed!
Firstly, your attempt to attack Shaykh Taqi only shows your own poor understanding of law, which had already been manifested in this post/comments.
You couldn’t respond to a single point forwarded by our staff or others. Why? Because you and your ilk are foolish individuals who enjoy imitating Jack Straw and other kaafir bigots in Europe.
Look at your words,
<blockquote>I couldent care less what this Qadi says or that right now as that is just indoctrination and blind following.
</blockquote>
What a sad flee from truth. You didn’t even get the point as to why he quoted the quote, then you ignore the fact that this Qaadhi of Andalus held this opinion. What you don’t understand is that your Shaykh has called 1400 years of scholarship “innovation” and “Hinduisation”.
You and your firqah have been squelched.
P.S. Sitting with Qaradawi or any other individual does not mean that you support his opinions or thought. It means that you respect the fact that he is Muslim. That is the bottom line, and one you can’t seem to grasp!
What ignorance. It’s one thing to defend the opinion that the face is not ‘awrah but to still uphold it as mustahabb, and another thing to call it an evil innovation. The fact that people go around speaking about this issue without knowledge, ridiculing the scholars of the past, as if they knew nothing, only shows us how pathetic we have become.
Abdullah, do yourself a favor and stay away from this site. It will only add to your sayyiat to continue to speak on this issue. Also, leave the topic alone because it is you who makes yourself look like a man who hasn’t gotten his priorities straight. Islam is Islam, from a-z and I just hope there aren’t people who actually follow your misconstrued statements and lies because that will weigh you down on yawm al qiyaamah. May Allah forgive you and us.
Asalaamualaykum
Quote : ” What you don’t understand is that your Shaykh has called 1400 years of scholarship “innovation” and “Hinduisation”.
You and your firqah have been squelched.
P.S. Sitting with Qaradawi or any other individual does not mean that you support his opinions or thought. It means that you respect the fact that he is Muslim. That is the bottom line, and one you can’t seem to grasp!
No where does Shaykh Abdal Qadir as Sufi call scholarship “innovation” and “Hinduisation”, so lets get a few facts straight shall we no?
You use a lame excuse to attack Murabitun when in fact they are more active than you period.
Its a matter of simple Intellectual lingustics really which you cannot comprehend which shows you have a serious lack of Aql.
The shaykh talked about the hinduisation of women which now includes the forced extremist veiw that niqab is wajid when it is not, if you do not know about hindu culture u suggest you read more because everyone knows that hindu culture belittles women and strips them of their equal rights , you know! that basically women are treated as second class citizens.
When you have done as much work and effort as the murabitun and their Shaykhs maybe then you can critisize what they havent done.
I ask this of you and answer me straight and dont give me some loaded rubbish i want straight answers!
1. How many people have come to islam by your dawah?
2. How many Amirs, Mosques and communities have you set up?
3. Allah and his messenger Sayyiduna Muhammad {saw} have declared war on riba { usury } so what is your stance on this and how do you intend to fight the global usurous banking network?
4. Do you really think by islamizing banks that this will change our situation as an ummah and give us back the power over the Kuffar?
These are just a few questons for now and i expect a serious answer to all of them with full details otherwise i will come to the conclusion that your nothing but a sound bite in the wind and have shut yourself away from real issues hoping that the Imam mahdi will come and save you like most wako sufis like Nazim and Kabbani etc.
Ma salaama Abdullah
Your jack strawian filth has been refuted. You keep trying to manipulate your own “Shaykhs” words. He clearly said, and we quoted him prior to this,
He does not even mention what you claim he does. He does not mention “those who make it wajib”. Rather he damns the covering of the face as “’utterly against the Qur’an and the Sunnah”.
So where is his proof that it is “utterly against the Qur’an and the Sunnah”? Where in his atrocious attack upon Islam does he have premise for such a statement? Has ANY OF THE PAST SCHOLARS of Islam, 1400+ years of scholarship EVER stated such a thing about the covering of the face?
We have shown from the greatest Imams of this Ummah that it is an established act, some deeming it waajib and others Mustahabb. But to say that it is NOT FROM THE SUNNAH is a satanic lie, a bida’ah in this noble deen, and a staunch anti-islamic belief, eminating either from hatred of Allah and His messenger’s Sunnah, or from sheer ignorance. We have proven to all that covering the face is established amongst the companions (radhiya Allahu ‘anhum) as well as in the life of the beloved Prophet Muhammad. If you refuse to accept the numerous reports, verses of the Qur’an, as well as thousands of orthodox Sunni Scholars statements, then to you be your way and to our be ours. Do not, however, attempt to speak in the name of Islam with your atrocious heresy and expect the Sunni to remain silent.
121 people have taken shahada from me, by Allah’s permission alone. Maybe 122 if we count my wife’s cousin, though I let her have the phone to give her Shahada.
These questions you have asked have nothing at all to do with this issue. You are DODGING the bullet again. Turn to Allah, repent, and come to the orthodox Sunni way. Speak with the tongue of the scholars of old, not the tongue of strawian satanic bigot who has called war upon the fundamentally established clothing of a Muslimah!
I do not seek leadership. Unlike your strawian evil master who defines Islamic practices as Arab innovations and anti-Qur’an and Sunnah. My Sunni Shaykh is my guide. And our way is nothing like yours. We cling to the scholars of old, while you cling to heresy.
By not taking part in it. Allah says, “And do not cooperate in sin and transgression”. It is that simple. If enough Muslims implement their deen and refuse to take part in the ribaa institutions, their systems will collapse in our lands. That is the bottom line.
As for your demand to answer these questions that have NOTHING To do with the topic at hand, then this is clearly an attempt to avoid the fact that your strawian Shaykh has committed an atrocious bida’ah, attacked Islam, and went as far as supporting the evil paganistic elite in his words,
Christian Monarchy? The same monarchy that for centuries massacred Muslims, subdued them, pillaged their lands? The same monarchy that upholds pagan beliefs that contradict the message that our beloved salaf died for?
You support the christian monarchy, and we will support tawhid.
To you be your religion, and to us be ours. Just repent and come to Allah. I hope that Allah guides the “murabitun” back to Sunnism and away from deviated heresy that has no basis in Islamic Law. Ameen!
Asalaamualaykum
Quote ” The Arab deviations from the Deen, embodied most dramatically in evil suicide bombing and the equally evil hinduisation of women, involving the masking of the woman’s face – utterly against the command of the Qur’an and the Sunna, which requires the face to be left free ”
So there you go again taking the words way out of context, he said” evil suicide bombing and the equally evil hinduisation of women, [ now there is a space a commer! the he says "involving the masking of the woman’s face – utterly against the command of the Qur’an and the Sunna, which requires the face to be left free "
This does not mean the niqab is hindu lol dear me eheh you cannot even understand simple english lingustics here.
The niqab is used by hindu cultural muslims among indo pak muslims thats a fact ! and it is used againt women to make them less part of western society .
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin: Asma, daughter of AbuBakr, entered upon the Apostle of Allah (saw) wearing thin clothes. The Apostle of Allah (saw) turned his attention from her. He said: O Asma', when a woman reaches the age of menstruation, it does not suit her that she displays her parts of body except this and this, and he pointed to her face and hands. (Narrated by Abu Dawood # 4092).
Never mind lol its clear that you cannot see beyong your own cultural islamism.
As for your Quote :" 121 people have taken shahada from me"
So where are they now? where is this community of yours of 121 new muslim converts? this i would love to see and know about, please provide me with proof of this! because if this is true this is wonderful work alhamdulillah.
Back to you acusing shaykh abdal qadir a sufi attacking islam which is one attack too far in my book, you stand accusing shaykh abdal qadir when in fact he has way far more effort for islam than you have and this is one simple fact that you cannot deny.
Interesting how you avoid the queston when i asked about your stance on riba [ usury ], so i ask again with in a simple way that you can answer.
What do you intend to do about the world banking elite that controls your wealth and the wealth of all muslims period?
This is the real queston here dear Sidi and i suggest you stop calling shaykh abdal qadir evil as all you do is throw yourself into deviation if you carry on attack shaykh abdal qadir this foul abuse i will have to take this further with your own shaykhs and see what they have to say about your abusive language .
You said before when i mentioned the fact that Nuh Keller has sat with Yusuf Qadarwi what did you say? shall i repeat what you said?
You said Quote ” P.S. Sitting with Qaradawi or any other individual does not mean that you support his opinions or thought. It means that you respect the fact that he is Muslim. That is the bottom line, and one you can’t seem to grasp!”
So now are you telling me that I am not a muslim and that shaykh Abdal Qadir is not a muslim and we dont deserve respect the same as any other muslim?
Beware! for calling Muslims Kaffirs! or even making slight accusations that the murabitun are not muslims!
We opposee riba and the modernist islamism of Qardawi and his likes, this does nit mean we call his kaffir no! we never ever call muslims kaffir thats a fact, you are so full of hatred that it has blinded you from Yaqin and i advise you to take back those filthy words and attacks against the murabitun otherwise you stand no better than a wahaabi who does the same!
Abul Layth, you fell for his little game. He wanted you to get sidetracked with issues that should be between us and Allah. It is not his concern how active or non-active you are, how many you’ve given shahadah to, or what not. We aren’t here to bash them for things they are doing or not doing. He should stick to the points and defend them and that’s it. If he can’t, which he can’t, it’s Allah that brings success. So don’t fall into his game. What is yours is yours for Allah to know. We don’t want our sincerity to be lost because we decided to play the game of the foolish.
Bismillah…
Do you understand English? I’m being very honest here. The comma only means “pause” when reading. He qualifies his statement “the equally evil hinduisation of women” with what comes after the comma, “involving the masking of the woman’s face”, then after the dash clarifies further, “utterly against the command of the Qur’an and the Sunna, which requires the face to be left free”. So his claim “against the command of the Qur’an and the Sunna” is also qualified with what comes after where he clearly states, “which requires the face to be left free”.
What is “which” here? “Which” is in reference to the Qur’an and the Sunna. What does he say about the Qur’an and the Sunna? “utterly against it”…What is “utterly against it”? He not only mentions it prior to the statement, but afterward the statement as well. Any native English speaker can see that you are either being foolish, or simply do not understand english properly. Again, your sad manipulation of your Shaykh’s statements only shows your disobedience to your own Shaykh. It also shows me that you know that your “shaykh” is wrong on this issue, as you refuse to admit that he has clearly called the covering of a woman’s face “evil hinduisation of women”.
1) Irsāl from a minor tabi’i to ‘A’ishah (Khalid ibn Durayk)
2) Sa’id ibn Bashīr Al-Azdi is weak, and specifically weak from Qatādah who he is reporting from as said by Hadith Ibn Numayr and As-Saaji (rahimahumullah). Furthermore, he was abandonded by Hafith Ibn Mahdi as well as Imam Ahmad according to Abu Daawud. The Jarh upon him is extensive.
3) Qatādah commits tadlīs.
4) Also Walid Ibn Muslim commits tadlīs here, and he has been criticized as well.
5) The hadith is weak and cannot be used as proof for your stance, especially when it contradicts 33:59.
6) We have already responded to this quoting the scholars. You fail to read!
Stick to the topic, or be banned from the site. Thanks.
Asalaamualaykum ,
Mashallah , As a Muslim i know too well the diverse opinions of the ummah, lets make this clear now for all to read , Niqab is an Issue of Fiqh and not Aqeeda period!
You have to seriously strip away your past Wahaabism when corresponding with fellow muslims otherwise you do nothing but create fitna and serious deviation.
I know full well what scholars say in this subject of niqab among many other issues and lets make another thing clear, Scholars are not my preists! i do not follow blindly the words and acts of scholars espeically when most of them today like qardawi and taqi agree with haraam so called Islamic banking!
We have a difference of Fiqh thats a fact so respect that difference as i respect yours, i do not agree with you at all about certain issues of fiqh but never the less you are a muslim and Sayyiduna Muhammad [saw] said :
Abu Hurairah, radiyallahu ‘anhu, reported that Muhammad the Messenger of Allah, sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam, said:
“Do not be envious of one another; do not artificially inflate prices against one another; do not hate one another; do not shun one another; and do not undercut one another in business transactions; and be as fellow-brothers and servants of Allah.
A Muslim is the brother of a Muslim. He neither oppresses him nor humiliates him nor looks down upon him. Piety is here – and he pointed to his chest three times. It is evil enough for a Muslim to hold his brother Muslim in contempt. All things of a Muslim are inviolable for another Muslim: his blood, his property and his honour.”
[Sahih Muslim]
The adab of muslims is that we do not call each other kaffir even if we happen to make a few mistakes and small acts of kuffr ,i think that any scholar who thinks niqab is wajib is lost in interpretation of scholars.
Being a muslim now 20 years i have seen these old arguments until it turns people blue in the face and where does it end up? i tell you nothing but ill feeling and fitna.
While you waffle on wether niqab is part of deen or not the fact remains dear Sidi! yo are now under the global financial control of the usurious banking network , so what are you! going to do about that?
By avoiding the serious issues that face the ummah you fall into sufi woofi secularism and out of date traditionalism , beware of this sidi if you have a serious heart and love for the ummah as i do and as my shaykh does.
Allah says in Quraan ;
Those who devour usury will not stand except as stands one whom the devil by his touch has driven to madness. That is because they say: Trade is like usury: but Allah has permitted trade and forbidden usury…. Allah will deprive usury of all blessing, but will give increase for deeds of charity, for He loves not any ungrateful sinner…. O you who believe, fear Allah and give up what remains of your demand for usury, if you are indeed believers.
If you do it not, take notice of war from Allah and His messenger, but if you repent you shall have your capital sums; deal not unjustly, and you shall not be dealt with unjustly. And if the debtor is in difficulty, grant him time til it is easy for him to repay. But if you remit it by way of charity, that is best for you if you only knew. [Surah al Baqarah, verse 275-280 ].
ALLAH and his messenger is now at War with Usury so i suggest you join that fight or be lost in a tradtionalist sectarianism that keeps Islam under the control of kuffr.
Just as the staff of Musa, peace be upon him, cut through the sophisticated sorcery of the magicians of Pharaoh and showed it to be the baseless illusion it was, so the gold dinar of Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, will cut through the equally magical deception of the usurer’s monetary system and show it up for what it really is: worthless scraps of paper and evanescent numbers in cyberspace with no real value whatsoever. The gold dinar will put economic power back into the hands of ordinary men and women where it belongs. This is Islam. This is Divine guidance in action. What you see is what you get.
Your brother in Islam ma salaama Abdullah
Asalaamualaykum ,
Mashallah , As a Muslim i know too well the diverse opinions of the ummah, lets make this clear now for all to read , Niqab is an Issue of Fiqh and not Aqeeda period!
I know full well what scholars say in this subject of niqab among many other issues and lets make another thing clear, Scholars are not my preists! i do not follow blindly the words and acts of scholars espeically when most of them today like qardawi and taqi agree with haraam so called Islamic banking!
We have a difference of Fiqh thats a fact so respect that difference as i respect yours, i do not agree with you at all about certain issues of fiqh but never the less you are a muslim and Sayyiduna Muhammad [saw] said :
Abu Hurairah, radiyallahu ‘anhu, reported that Muhammad the Messenger of Allah, sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam, said:
“Do not be envious of one another; do not artificially inflate prices against one another; do not hate one another; do not shun one another; and do not undercut one another in business transactions; and be as fellow-brothers and servants of Allah.
A Muslim is the brother of a Muslim. He neither oppresses him nor humiliates him nor looks down upon him. Piety is here – and he pointed to his chest three times. It is evil enough for a Muslim to hold his brother Muslim in contempt. All things of a Muslim are inviolable for another Muslim: his blood, his property and his honour.”
[Sahih Muslim]
The adab of muslims is that we do not call each other kaffir even if we happen to make a few mistakes and small acts of kuffr ,i think that any scholar who thinks niqab is wajib is lost in interpretation of scholars.
Being a muslim now 20 years i have seen these old arguments until it turns people blue in the face and where does it end up? i tell you nothing but ill feeling and fitna.
While you waffle on wether niqab is part of deen or not the fact remains dear Sidi! yo are now under the global financial control of the usurious banking network , so what are you! going to do about that?
By avoiding the serious issues that face the ummah you fall into sufi woofi secularism and out of date traditionalism , beware of this sidi if you have a serious heart and love for the ummah as i do and as my shaykh does.
Allah says in Quraan ;
Those who devour usury will not stand except as stands one whom the devil by his touch has driven to madness. That is because they say: Trade is like usury: but Allah has permitted trade and forbidden usury…. Allah will deprive usury of all blessing, but will give increase for deeds of charity, for He loves not any ungrateful sinner…. O you who believe, fear Allah and give up what remains of your demand for usury, if you are indeed believers.
If you do it not, take notice of war from Allah and His messenger, but if you repent you shall have your capital sums; deal not unjustly, and you shall not be dealt with unjustly. And if the debtor is in difficulty, grant him time til it is easy for him to repay. But if you remit it by way of charity, that is best for you if you only knew. [Surah al Baqarah, verse 275-280 ].
ALLAH and his messenger is now at War with Usury so i suggest you join that fight or be lost in a tradtionalist sectarianism that keeps Islam under the control of kuffr.
Just as the staff of Musa, peace be upon him, cut through the sophisticated sorcery of the magicians of Pharaoh and showed it to be the baseless illusion it was, so the gold dinar of Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, will cut through the equally magical deception of the usurer’s monetary system and show it up for what it really is: worthless scraps of paper and evanescent numbers in cyberspace with no real value whatsoever. The gold dinar will put economic power back into the hands of ordinary men and women where it belongs. This is Islam. This is Divine guidance in action. What you see is what you get.
Your brother in Islam ma salaama Abdullah
Assalamu alaikum,
I continue to be astonished, as a revert Muslimah, how tied up in knots men get about the ‘evil niqab’. I’ve encountered, as well, many people, usually men, who insist that niqab/covering the face can only push people away from Islam and that it is always a barrier to communication.
Needless to say, these men have never themselves worn niqab.
It was niqab that ‘hooked’ me when I was first exploring the idea of Islam – in a moderate community, I might add, in which some women covered their face but most did not. I’m not the only woman to have been drawn to Islam by its expressions of haya/modesty.
And as I and others who have chosen to cover our faces can explain, niqab is a barrier to communication when the wearer and/or the other party MAKES it so. If a munaqabah is dealing with a closed-minded person, they’ll be closed-minded with or without her niqab. The fact that she looks ‘different’ (and the baggage that they impose on her because of it) is what makes them uncomfortable. I certainly don’t hear Muslim men calling for women to discard their hijab/khimar just because it makes some non-Muslims uncomfortable.
You just flamed ‘em!
Hm, it’s not so much my intention to flame anybody! But these things do get under my skin. I’m in academia; feminist writers, journalists, and others who ought to know better too often do the same thing. They forget that they cannot speak of the experiences of someone else without relying on careful research into what that group has to say about themselves.
Anyone learned enough to do so can talk authoritatively about fiqh (which is why I’m not saying anything about fiqh), but not everyone can speak about what it means to live that shari’ah. Even respected Shaykhs can forget that sometimes.
May Allah SWT reward you and everyone else who contributes to this site for your diligent and important work for the sake of the ummah.
Bismillahi Baabunaa
My first thought, One of the signs of the end of time is when the ignorant will be given stations of authority and prestige.
I want everyone to understand that I am not forcing this opinion, that covering the face is fard, upon people. In fact I certainly believe that the dispensationary opinion of the Hanafis and some Malikis is applicable in many circumstances. My goal by compiling the several pieces I have done on Niqab is to arm women with traditional Islamic knowledge regarding this issue.
What truly worries me is that not enough women know this issue well. I have been emailed so many times by women asking me how to “defend” their niqaab. It worries me that they even have to defend themselves!
I would like to thank you, as well as all the other sisters who email us regarding this issue, for your prayers and support.
The evidence that niqab is fard comes soley from ‘interpretations’ of men. The ACTUAL evidence proves otherwise. There were many examples of ahadith which mention women with incovered faces in front of Rasullulah and he never remprimanded them. What is even more astonishing is the number of people who PURPOSELY twist the Arabic meanings of ahadith and ayat to make it appear to lay people that niqab is wajib.
This website explains the issue more:
***** website deleted – Seekingilm is not your advertising company *******
What most intrigues me is this hadith:
Bukhari Book 54 #515. Narrated Sa’d bin Abu Waqqas: Once Umar asked leave to see Allah’s Apostle, in whose company there were some Qurayshi women, who were talking to him and asking him for more financial support, raising their voices. When Umar asked permission to enter, the women quickly screened themselves (fa badirna al-hijab). When Allah’s Apostle admitted Umar, Allah’s Apostle was smiling. Umar said, “O Allah’s Apostle! May Allah keep you happy always!”. Allah’s Apostle said, “I am astonished at these women here with me. As soon as they heard your voice, they quickly screened themselves”. Umar said, “O Allah’s Apostle! You have more right to be feared by them”. Then he addressed (the women) saying, “O enemies of yourselves! Do you fear me and not Allah’s Apostle?” They replied, “Yes, for you are a fearful and fierce man as compared to Allah’s Apostle”. On that Allah’s Apostle said (to Umar), “By Him in Whose hands my life is, when satan sees you taking a path, he takes a path other than yours”.
So they ‘screened’ themselves out of fear of Umar?? Had it truly been fard why did they not ‘screen themselves’ from Rasulullah himself? And the sad thing is this hadith just adds fuel to the argument that niqab is oppresive to women, as clearly these ones were doing it of FEAR of a MAN.
Nonsense! One must take into account that the aayaat of Hijab – those stating that the face is to be covered specifically 33:59 – were revealed much later in Islam. The problem you have is proving that these narrations of women exposing their faces was AFTER the verse of hijaab was revealed.
1) The first method of response is to say that these women were the wives of the Nabi (‘alayhis salaam) as mentioned by Ibn Hajr [Fat-hul Baari: his exact words:
هُنَّ مِنْ أَزْوَاجه
As in one report is identifies them as Qurayshi. If this is the case then no big deal.
2) If we say that this is not the case, then it is obligatory for the one who attempts to utilize this hadith as proof to prove that this was AFTER the verse of hijab was revealed. For their "Screening themselves" was out of "Fear" and not out of an obligation. What further proves that this took place BEFORE the verse of Hijab - and possibly in Makkah - is the fact that they were raising their voices over the voice of the Nabi ('alayhis salaam) as mentioned in the multiple reports of Sahih Al-Bukhari.
In one report of this in Sahih Al-Bukhari, the Manaqib of Umar ibn Al Khattab it clearly states:
وعنده نسوة من قريش يكلمنه ويستكثرنه عالية أصواتهن على صوت
they were "Raising their voices above the Nabi" - a strict forbiddance in the Qur'an.
Allah says:
يا أيها الذين آمنوا لا ترفعوا أصواتكم فوق صوت النبي ولا تجهروا له بالقول كجهر بعضكم لبعض أن تحبط أعمالكم وأنتم لا تشعرون
O ye who believe! Raise not your voices above the voice of the Prophet, nor speak aloud to him in talk, as ye may speak aloud to one another, lest your deeds become vain and ye perceive not. [49:2]
If this verse had been revealed it would have been necessary to condemn their raising of their voices as the forbidance is divine. Note that Hujurat is a Medini surah, just as the verses of Hijab, which also supports our stance.
3) There is yet another explanation taken up by some jurists and that is that these women, if they were not the wives of the Nabi ‘alayhis salaam, then they were women seeking NAFAQAH (maintenance). This is actually mentioned by Jabir in the hadith of Sahih Muslim narrating this incident as alluded to by Ibn Hajr in his explanation of this hadith.
By consensus of the scholars, the one making a plea to the Hakim, bearing testimony etc. is to unveil their face for cases of identification. Qadhi Ibn ‘Arabi Al-Maliki mentions this as an exception to the general prescription of covering the face in front of the ajnabi.
This is, in his terms, a “Haajah” and thus renders the need of great importance.
Whatever the case, all of these arguments refute your pathetic claims and instead shows how little fiqh you have of the matter at hand.
Emotional vomit! This is an isolated incident and does not have anything to do with the prescription of true hijaab. If you had read the Qur’an you would understand why Hijab/Jilbab is fard, but I do not expect one who ignores the 1400 year old tradition of Islam to read the Qur’an or even the reports pertaining to this issue. As for the sad article you linked to, all of the pitiful claims have been refuted:
http://seekingilm.com/seekingilms-research/niqab
Was-Salam
‘Admin’, if you all you can do is resort to insults and personal attacks, then there is no benefit in speaking to one like you. But jazakallah khair for your ignorant comments. I thought this site was about ‘gaining knowledge’? From what I’ve read it’s the same empty rhetoric of supposedly following the Quran and Sunnah, but in actualy fact rudely attacking anyone who does not agree with your narrow-minded interpretation (is this from Quran and Sunnah too?). At the end of the day ayah 33:59 DOES NOT mention anything about faces, it’s simply men who have put that interpretation there. No surprise is it really?
The word face is implicitly drawn from the aayah based upon WHAT the JILBAB was in the time of the Prophet Muhammad (‘alayhis salam). We proved this throughout the article.
When deciding WHAT a word’s MEANING is one has to return to the language and its masters, it is that simple. Your denial of “face” is in fact a denial of the language utilized in the Qur’an. What you are doing, in fact, would be like denying Shakespeare’s authority in English.
What is no surprise is that such is beyond your understanding.
I got to thinking further about your post “sara” and realized something absolutely absurd!
It is “men” that Allah commands us to consult in these matters of law.
فاسألوا أهل الذكر إن كنتم لا تعلمون
It is astonishing to me that a Muslim could have such disdain for the forefathers of the Ummah they subscribe to. These are the same individuals of whom Allah says,
“And the first to lead the way, of the Muhajirin and the Ansar, and those who followed them in goodness – Allah is well pleased with them and they are well pleased with Him, and He hath made ready for them Gardens underneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide for ever. That is the supreme triumph.”
This is a people of whom our beloved Master Prophet Muhammad said, “The best of mankind!”
Sad times when a people hold contempt for the one’s whom Allah loves, while glorifying His enemies.
What people like Sara and Abdullah al Murabit do not understand is that the Quran cannot simply be read and understood. If that were the case, then there would have been no need for the Prophet Muhammad. Indeed, there have been several deviant sects in the past who have postulated that there is no need to follow the Sunnah or refer to ahadith, and the Quran alone suffices. However, this presents a problem. After all, the Quran does not explain everything in its text. Allah, in his divine wisdom, knew that he was not simply dropping a copy of the Quran in everyone’s house, but rather he was revealing it along with “a walking Quran” as Aishah put it, so that people could understand the full intricacies of the Quran.
So I laugh when stupid comments like, “the Quran never commands women to cover their faces,” and as Sara said, “At the end of the day ayah 33:59 DOES NOT mention anything about faces” are presented. If everything has to be stated in the Quran, then do not pray as you do. Because the Quran does not instruct the way a Muslim must pray. Just make up whatever way you want to pray and hope that Allah will accept it. Indeed, just pray like a Christian does in church.
However, if you accept the fact that the Sunnah clarifies the Quran, then any seeker of truth will come to realize that the verses in which the Quran commands women to cover themselves does not explicitly specify what part of the body the women must cover. So we turn to the Sunnah. And that is what Abul Layth does in his beautifully written articles. He shows that the all the female Companions of the Prophet would cover their faces (their is one hadith in which one woman would not, so Aishah took it upon herself to cover that woman’s face). And the ahadith that make it seem as if the face is not awarah are weak.
However, there is some scholarly disagreement over whether it is mustahabb or wajib to cover the face. However, there is absolutely NO position that says that it is an innovation. And it is indeed innovation itself to postulate something like that. However, if one wants to accept either position, it is alright to do so, although I find the position of the majority, that covering the face is wajib, far more convincing. This even though I am a strict Hanafi.
Assalaamu-alaykum,
I’ve read through these posts. I’m not actually disturbed by the vigorous debate. Abul Layth posted a very compelling argument and depended extensively on reliable interpretations. He also asserted that the position is between mustahab and fardh. I don’t find Murabits position alot different from Abul Layth either. But Murabit is concerned that excessively promoting theses elements of the fiqh, undermines other elements of the deen (though I know this is not what is being intended). I can relate to what he says even though I’m no associated with the murabitoon. But Murabit did seem weigh his argument too muchwith issues about ribah and Islamic finance, but I suppose he was only trying to make a point.
What does disturb me are the extent of the personal attacks, and the complete disavowment of the sources and people of tradition (though I know this is not what is being intended). I hope that there may be some way of recognising that each person is grounded in their approach, and that neither has to undermine the others person. Pragmatically speaking, neither of you can alter each others path through debate. But you must perform salaah together at some point. You must perform your hajj together. You occupy the same public space where business and politics run their course. For that very sake, there must be some way you guys can respect your personal tradition and continue with the sincere worship of Allah AW.
From my perspective, I’ve heard of an incident in the US where a sister with Niqaab refused to remove her veil when giving testimony in court. Sisters won’t have their drivers licence pictures taken, so they just drive without licenses. I also realise that the argument is for Jilbaab and not niqaab. Truthfully speaking, I’ve only seen Iranian people adopting this method of peeping through. The niqaab seems to be the majority Sunni application. I’ve also seen Quraanic ayats where the word face and veil are included in the translation in brackets so as to force the meaning in the tafseer.
I’m also inclined to believe that women are oppressed in Muslim societies and non-Muslim socieities. The niqaab or the jilbab have truly come to mean a purity and defense of some element of a womens honour I possibly don’t understand. Because I believe a persons honour is in their dignified behaviour AND their dignified treatment. I’ve heard lectures where an Arab scholar described women who drive or wear lipstick as similar to prostitutes. No moderation in his view at all.
Evidently, I’m not a scholar. The books of fiqh are written for people of doctrine. They are hard to get hold of, harder still to grade as important by an ordinary person, and honestly the world still ticks on for me in its current condition. It doesn’t befit me to live with my heart in kitaabs when my current environment is evident and my ihsaan can only be earned on a few strong fundamentals. But I sit here as a Muslim man, who married a dentist. She works with ajnabi men everyday. Her job brings relief and cure to people. She is never assaulted through some or other fitnah. Some Ulema even send their wives and daughters to her, because she’s lax with her fee and really good at what she does.
For someone like my wife, who is truly a good person and a benefit to mankind for her skill and her profession, I am not inclined to force her to obey Allah AW command. I respect her freedom of conscience as I do for any other person. For people like us, the path is one that’s walked everyday.
Thank you guys for the information, for the clarity of purpose and your commitment to the knowledge of deen.
Interesting perspective Goolam.
Salaam to all Muslims,
Allow me to say, as a matter of fact there’s no clear-cut Quranic text (literally speaking) that allows exposure of the face & hands [of women]. Surah 24:31 does not say, “except face and hands”. The words, “Face & Hands” do not even EXIST in that passage. This is a product of interpretation of certain scholars which they inferred from some Ahadith and reasoning…and please Abdullah Al-Murabit, the word ‘Jayb” DOES NOT MEAN “neck” in Arabic. “Jayb” literally means the neck-slit of a garment (i.e. the collar)
as-Salamu Alaikum dear Abu Layth and Umm Layth.
May Allah preserve you both and grant you the neighborhood of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) in Jannah al-Firdaws for your devoted da’wah and protection of the Deen. Amin.
If only you lived in US, I’d have arranged a visit to you with my family, but to see blessed people such as you is such an honor, that perhaps I may not deserve.
I am pretty sure Da’i, such as you, don’t need the supportive words “Please keep up the good work!” because your motivation comes directly from your heart and Iman.
Again, may Allah (SWT) always protect and bless you and your family.
Islam
Wa’alaykum salam wr wb Islam,
Yes we do live in the US, and no it is an honor for us to meet you! And encouragement is always good considering all the hate mail we receive from pseudo-sufis and pseudo-salafis!
Allah Ma’akum
was-salam,
Abu Layth
The murabit guys argument is weak and emotional. The fact Quran doesn’t state the exact method or the time for prayers and their are differing narrations doesn’t mean we prayer according to what we think the verse is saying.This is obviously done by the companions who learned first hand so that’s why thier interpretation holds weight. For example the noble prophet (peace and blessing upon him) prayed for IBn Abbas in his understanding of the Quran. And people like UMar were witness to his expertise. So when Ibn abbas’s students such as mujahid or ibn sirin who inherit his correct understanding interpret the verses about veiling then who is sum fake Sufi to declare niqab evil. You yourself ii think anways claim to follow imam malik but in truth the fact that your shayk can say such words about and attack a sunnah regardless wether it is fard/wajib or mustahab shows his deviancy I hope and pray as of now he has changed his opinion. Talking about blind following you seems to have done a good job of that with your shayk. He attacks a sunnah and u follow even though qoutes from actual giants from the Maliki madhab were shown such as qadhii IBn arabi Maliki I’d rather follow the verdict of a man who is called by orthodox Sunnis to be the Maliki bhukari and a master of Hadith then to follow sum dodgy shayk Allah knows best but I’ve seen pictures of these murabits with these big guitar like instrumenta( lol dnt kno the name). Clear disregard for the Inheritors of knowledge shows how deviant thy are