Thoughts on a few ‘anti-female’
hadiths.
by
Ruqaiyyah Waris Maqsood.
In this article I wish to put
forward a few thoughts concerning some of the more well-known hadiths that are thought
by some to show anti-female bias. Once the background to them is known, it can
easily be seen that there is no
anti-female feeling in them whatsoever. In fact, the Prophet (pbuh) was a great
champion of women, and had many staunch female friends and supporters.
1.
It is better for women to pray at home.
It
was the normal practice of the female Companions to pray in the mosque, with no
sutrah (ie. barrier) dividing them from their men. They prayed behind
them, but with no dividing walls or curtains – which one could argue might have
invalidated their congregational prayer by separating them from the leader and
the congregation. Yet nowadays, in some places we find devout Muslim men
depriving women of their rightful place in the mosque by quoting the hadith
that it is better for women to pray at home. It does not say this in the Qur’an
– so where did this originate?
In fact, it came from
an occasion when an elderly and arthritic Muslim lady - Umm Humayd - expressed
her regret to the Prophet (pbuh) that although she longed to pray behind him in
the mosque, as so many others did, it was impossible for her to be there. The
Prophet (pbuh) assured her she need not be concerned about this, it was better
for her to pray in her own home (Abu Dawud 570). Many male Muslims have
misguidedly used this hadith to try to prevent their women from going to
mosques, and have turned them into ‘male clubs’ where any women who do go feel
obtrusive, shy and ‘pushy’.
Yet it is obvious from
many, many other hadiths that it was the normal practice in Madinah for
them to go. For example, Caliph Umar’s grandson tried to prevent his wife, but
was over-ruled by his father since the Prophet (pbuh) had encouraged them
saying: ‘Do not prevent the handmaids of Allah from attending the mosque.’
Muslim 888, Abu Dawud 568.
2. More women than men
in Hell?
After the Farewell
Pilgrimage at the Eid prayer the Prophet (pbuh) used his humour to charm his
female companions into donating more for charity than they might have intended.
Abdullah b. Abbas, who was there as a child, recorded that after he had offered
up the prayer and delivered his khutbah
the Prophet (pbuh) waved at the people to make them sit down, came down from
the pulpit and walked towards the women who were sitting in rows behind the
men, leaning on Bilal’s arm, while Bilal held out his cloak for them to throw
in their gifts of charity. This was not the required zakat-ul-Fitr (contributions made
by every Muslim who can afford it so that the poor can be given money in
advance in order to be able to pay for their feast obligations) but
extra personal gifts according to their own choice. One woman might donate a
ring off her finger, and others would see and do the same.
He urged the women to
be generous with their gifts, for when he had glimpsed into the flames of Hell,
he had noted the vast majority of people being tormented there were women. The
women were outraged, and one of them instantly stood up and demanded to know
why that was so. ‘Because,’ he replied, ‘you women grumble so much, and show
ingratitude to your husbands! Even if the poor fellows spent all their lives
doing good things for you, you have only to be upset at the least thing and you
will say, 'I have never received any good from you!’ At that the women began vigorously to pull off their rings and
ear-rings, and throw them into Bilal’s cloak. (Bukhari 1.28, Abu Dawud 439
etc).
Jabir b. Abdullah’s
version recorded that he recited to them the verse: ‘O Prophet! When believing women come to you to take the oath of loyalty
to you . . . (to the end of the verse)’ (60.12) and then asked the women if
they were fulfilling their covenant? None except one woman said, ‘Yes.’ ‘Then
give in charity,’ the Prophet (pbuh) declared. ‘Keep on giving alms, ladies,
let my father and mother sacrifice their lives for you,’ Bilal urged them. So
the ladies pulled off their fatkhs
(large rings, which were popular in pre-Islamic times) and other kinds of
jewellery and put them in Bilal’s garment. (Bukhari 2.95).
I feel strongly that this example
shows us the Prophet’s (pbuh) down-to-earth humour, and not a terrible
indictment upon the fate of female believers!
(For fuller information, please
refer to my article on ‘More Women than Men in Hell’).
3. Women lack
common-sense, therefore there evidence is only worth half that of a man.
After the ‘more women
in Hell’ hadith, some versions go on to add that the prophet (pbuh) commented:
‘I have seen none lacking in common sense and failing in religion but (at the
same time) robbing the wisdom of the wise, besides you.’ Upon this a woman
remarked: ‘What is wrong with our common sense and with religion?’ He observed:
‘Your lack of common sense (in) that the evidence of two women is equal to that
of one man; that is the proof of your lack of common sense. And you spend some
nights (and days) in which you do not offer prayer and in the month of Ramadan
(during the menstrual days) you do not observe fast; that is your failing in
religion.’ (Muslim 31. This hadith was also narrated on the authority of Abu
Tahir with this chain of transmitters. See also Muslim 448).
Would the Prophet
seriously teach something not in keeping with the teaching of the Qur’an? It is
perfectly possible that this, and the previous wry comment of the Prophet, were
examples of his humour? It is vital that it should be made very clear that
women not offering prayer during their menses or fasting on those days in the
month of Ramadan is NOT a failing in their religion at all – it was a concession
allowed by Allah in His revelation. As regarded the fasts, women were simply
required to make up the missed days at some other time before the coming of the
next Ramadan month. Their period of uncleanness and discomfort during
menstruation coming under the category of illness.
‘Therefore,
anyone of you who witnesses that month should fast therein, and whoever is ill
or upon a journey shall fast a similar number of days later on. Allah intends
your well-being and does not want to put you to hardship. He wants you to
complete the prescribed period so that you should glorify His Greatness and
render thanks to Him for giving you guidance.’
2:185:
Imam Malik, who did
not regard travelling as being a good enough reason, accepted menstruation as
valid reason. ‘No one who, by the Book of Allah, has to fast may break his fast
except for a reason - illness or menstruation. He must not travel and break his
fast." Malik said, "This is the best that I have heard about the
matter." Al-Muwatta 18:40.
Fiqh as-Sunnah 1.71a
(in the Alim Encyclopedia CD) gives us: If women fast (while menstruating
during Ramadan), those days will be considered null and void. They will still
have to make those days of fasting up later on. Mu'adhah said: ‘I asked Aishah:
Why must we make up the fasts missed due to our menstruation, but not the
prayers (missed through menstruation)?' She said, ‘That was what the Messenger
of Allah told us to do. We were ordered to make up the fasts, and we were
ordered not to make up the prayers.’
It has been suggested
that the Prophet (pbuh) regarded women as inferior to men for two reasons - the
inheritance laws in which a daughter received half the share of a son; and the
fact that two female witnesses were regarded as the equal of one male witness.
In fact, the Qur’an
actually taught that the witness of a woman was just as valid as that of a man,
and made no distinction regarding the sex of a witness in every single
reference except one – the concession of granting two female witnesses in
legal cases where women had little knowledge or expertise. The intention of
this concession was to prevent women being tricked or cheated by unscrupulous
men who could take advantage of their inexperience in business matters.
‘O
believers! When you deal with each other in lending for a fixed period of time,
put it in writing. Let a scribe write everything down with justice between the
parties. The scribe, who has been given the gift of literacy by Allah, should
not refuse to write; he is under obligation to write. Let the debtor dictate,
fearing the Almighty, his Lord, and not diminishing anything from the
settlement. If the borrower is mentally unsound or weak or is unable to dictate
himself, let the guardian of his interests dictate for him with justice. Let
two witnesses from among you bear witness to all such documents, if two men
cannot be found, then one man and two women of your choice should bear witness,
so that if one of the women forgets anything the other may remind her.
Witnesses must not refuse (to bear witness) when they are called upon to do
so.’ (2.282).
In every other kind of
case, there was no reason why the witness of a woman should not be just as
reliable as evidence as that of a man, and no distinction of either sex was
made or necessary. For example: ‘Those
who accuse a chaste woman of fornication and do not produce four witnesses to
support their allegation, shall be flogged with eighty lashes and their
testimony shall not be accepted ever after, for they are the ones who are
wicked transgressors.’ (24.4). The text implies any four witnesses, who
could be of either sex.
In societies where it is insisted that the witnesses should all be male, this is really a cultural gloss on the rule, since any text in the Arabic masculine plural grammatically includes both men and women, unless specifically stated otherwise. Assumptions that women’s evidence would be unreliable because of the inferiority of women in intellectual capacity, memory, or character stem from a patriarchal perspective in a male-dominated community which tried to limit the appearance of their women in public. The Qur’an does not bear this attitude and established the equality of men and women before Allah. The restrictions against public appearance are a nonsense in this century, when the medical evidence of the rape could be presented by a woman doctor to a female litigator in front of a female jurist! It is certainly a travesty of justice to deny a victim of rape the right to testify to this violent attack merely because she is a woman.
As regarded the
inheritance laws, the granting of a larger share to male inheritors was nothing
to do with female inferiority but assumed a society in which Muslim women were
entitled to keep whatever money and property they owned and not be obliged to
use it for the benefit of their men or families, whereas a Muslim man had the
obligation to support any dependent womenfolk and other relatives from his own
income. The spirit of the law was therefore not intended to deprive a woman
heiress, but to provide adequately for female dependents by enabling male heirs
to cope with the expense of all the responsibilities they would take on when a
senior man passed away.(4.11 etc).
6. Bad luck always comes to those ruled by
women.
Sometimes the supposed
anti-female hadith seems completely untrue. One such hadith was the one that no
nation that allowed itself to be ruled by a woman would prosper. This may have
been an example of one of the Prophet’s (pbuh) wry comments, but the hadith
itself is suspect. It was quoted for the first time some 150 years after the
Prophet’s death, with the claim that it was recorded by Abu Bakra just before
the Battle of Siffin, that battle itself being some thirty years after the
Prophet’s (pbuh) death. The reason was that the troops opposing Caliph Ali were
being led by a woman, in fact the lady was none other than the Prophet’s (pbuh)
beloved wife Aishah!
The hadith seems in
direct opposition to the words of the Qur’an to the ruling Queen of Sheba in
the time of the Prophet Sulayman (Solomon), who ruled over the most wealthy and
well-known people in the history of Arabia. She was asked to accept Islam, but
not to give up her rule (Surah 27:23-44). As for the presence in battle of
Aishah, Ali was reported to have said afterwards: ‘If a woman could have been khalif,
Aishah would have been khalif.’ (From ‘Identification of the men’ by Ibn
Abdu’s Sham, quoted by Aisha Bewley in ‘Islam, the Empoering of Women,’ Ta-Ha,
1999, p.30).
Indeed, some feel that
Abu Bakra’s testimony should be held in doubt anyway, since he had previously
been flogged for a fraudulent statement, and the shari’ah ruling was
that after such an offence the person’s word should never again be upheld as
reliable in a court of law. However, Abu Bakra was a noble Companion who had
related several hadiths. His ‘offence’ concerned the case of Mughirah b.
Shu'ba, a man known for his weakness for women, who would marry women and
divorce them after a short while to make room for more beautiful faces. In this
way, he was said to have married no less than 80 wives, taking steps to ensure
that his wives were never more than four at a time, the limit prescribed by the
shari’ah.
In those days at
Basra, there was a beautiful woman named Umm Jamil. She belonged to the same
tribe as that of Mughirah. Her husband had died and she became notorious for
loose morals. Mughirah was attracted by her and she visited him often. Some
Muslims in Basra became critical of the conduct of Mughirah. Abu Bakra’s house
across the street faced the house of Mughirah. One day there was a strong wind,
and the windows of the houses of both Abu Bakra and Mughirah were blown open.
Abu Bakra saw that Mughirah was locked in an uncompromising position with a
woman he assumed to be Umm Jamil. Abu Bakra had some friends with him, and they
also saw Mughirah with the woman.
So Abu Bakra wrote to
Caliph Umar accusing Mughirah of adultery. The report was endorsed by four
witnesses who had seen Mughirah with her. Umar took prompt action. He sacked
Abu Bakra from his office as Governor of Basra and appointed Abu Musa. Mughirah
was summoned to Madinah to face trial. Abu Bakra and the other witnesses who
had made the complaint were also summoned to Madinah.
At the trial, Mughirah
pleaded not guilty. His defence was that the witnesses had been mistaken – the
woman in question was his wife and not Umm Jamil. With great indignation he
averred that Abu Bakra and the men with him had no right to interfere in his
privacy. Abu Bakra on the other hand maintained that the woman was indeed Umm
Jamil, and the three other witnesses corroborated his statement. But the fourth
witness, Ziyad, stated that he had seen the event, but he had not seen the face
of the woman and could not be sure who she was. When the other witnesses were
cross examined, it was found that there were some weak points in their evidence
too. On being asked whether the woman had her back or her face toward them,
they it was her back, and tried to make out that even from her back she could
be identified as Umm Jamil.
Under the Qur’anic
law, in order to press the charge of adultery convincing evidence was necessary
from four witnesses and as in this case the fourth witness was not sure of the
identification of the woman, Mughirah was given the benefit of doubt and
acquitted. Abu Bakra and his companions who had levelled the charge were
punished with lashes for making a charge which could not be established. Such
was the care that was taken with evidence for adultery in those days! However,
one feels that Abu Bakra did not deserve his flogging. Nevertheless, this
decision and flogging made Abu Bakra ineligible for being regarded as a reliable transmitter of hadiths in the future.
I hope I have given some things to
ponder, as regards the verses so frequently put forward to suggest that women
are inferior to men in Islam. May Allah bless us all, Amin.
Wasalaam, Ruqaiyyah.