FISABILILLAH - ﻓﺳﺑﻟﻳﻟﻟﻪ

Praise be to Allah, the Lord of All the Worlds. May Allah’s peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad, the Seal of the Prophets, and upon his family and Companions.

If a woman was portrayed in the following manner: for example, born and raised in England and lives with her family just outside London. She drives a Ford station wagon, leads a local Girls football team, shops at the Selfridges and just attended her 20-year high school reunion.

From this brief description of this young woman, the readers may have formed a particular picture of her in their minds. If they were told that this young woman wears a head scarf in keeping with her Muslim faith, that picture might take a drastic turn.

She is a Muslim. An image of a suppressed, meek, black-enshrouded woman is submitting to the demands of their dominating husband, races through some readers’ minds. However, why is this the case? Would we see this young woman any differently if she were a Christian or Jew? The answer is probably no, but since she is a Muslim woman, it is difficult not to have some preconceptions of her.

I don’t understand why, in the West, Muslim women are clumped into one large group and viewed as homogenous clones of one another, while their Christian and Jewish counterparts are rarely ever stereotyped in this way. Many people don’t realise, due largely to biased media interpretations, that there are a large variety of Muslim women around the world, from areas such as the Middle East, South Asia, South East Asia, Yugoslavia, Northern Africa, and the Southern parts of the former USSR, just as there are Christian and Jewish women in various countries. For instance, one probably would not classify a Mexican woman with a French woman, though both may be Roman Catholics and hold the same beliefs. In the same way, a British Muslim woman is different from Pakistani Muslims, who are different from Saudi Muslims. In these three countries, women are accorded different rights and privileges because of the government and customs in the area. For example, many British Muslim women are discriminated against because they cover their heads; Pakistani women have political rights but are often exploited by men; Saudi women have no public role, yet they are “protected” by Saudi men.

The negative stereotypes of Muslim women probably arise from this varying treatment of the female gender. The Western media, for some reason, latch on to a few examples of unjust behavior in the Islamic world, brand Islam as a backward and “fundamentalist” religion, especially in its treatment of women, and ignore that it was the first religion to accord women equal rights. While Christian and Jewish women were still considered inferior, the originators of sin, and the property of their husbands, Muslim women were being given shares in inheritance, were allowed to choose or refuse prospective husbands, and were considered equal to men in the eyes of God. However, through time, slowly changing customs, and the rise of male-dominated, patriarchal nation-states, Muslim governments began placing restrictions on women which had no grounds in the Quran or the hadith, the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad. On the other hand, Christian and Jewish women in the West have slowly been awarded rights not called for in the biblical tradition.

Traditionally, Judeo-Christian women were thought to be inferior to men and were given a low status in society. These negative attitudes toward women arose because Judaism and Christianity placed such a heavy emphasis on Eve’s role in the expulsion from Paradise. Because Eve, rather than Adam, was the first to be seduced by Satan and eat fruit from the Tree of Knowledge, she supposedly caused the fall of mankind. Therefore, all women, as the descendants of Eve, were thought to be evil and morally weaker than men. Early church fathers made statements such as, “Do you know that you are each an Eve?. . . You are the Devil’s gateway. . . .You destroyed so easily God’s image. On account of your desert even the Son of God had to die. In Christianity, women carried the extra burden of causing the death of Christ, as the Christians church fathers point out. As you are probably aware Christians believe Adam and Eve passed on their sin to all future generations, Jesus had to purge humankind from this “original sin” by sacrificing his life. Thus, by causing the fall of man, Eve also caused the death of Christ.

In the Jewish tradition, women receive no less harsh treatment. Because of Eve, all women have to face punishment on Earth including pregnancy, pain in childbirth, menstruation, and subjugation to men. Orthodox Jewish males still recite in their daily prayers: “Blessed be God King of the Universe that Thou has not made me a woman . . . . Praised be God that he has not created me woman” (Menahot 43b)

Often, the discrimination against females began immediately upon birth since baby girls were thought to be shameful, a view found several times in the Bible: “The birth of a daughter is a loss” (Ecclesiasticus 22:3). Jewish rabbis also expressed displeasure at the birth of a female, saying that boys brought peace into the world, whereas girls brought absolutely nothing.

Additionally, women are portrayed in the bible quite consistently as appendages of men; as possessions of men; as goods which may be sold, disposed of, given away, traded, or just ordered about by men.

As Vern Bullough, author of Subordinate Sex, explains, “Adultery was not a sin against morality, but a trespass against the husband’s property” (Schmidt 118). Since the wife was the husband’s property, she could not be violated without his permission. This view of adultery changed with the advent of Christianity, when Jesus introduced the idea that adultery could be committed against a woman also, but later many of the church’s theologians “reverted to the patriarchal understanding of adultery” (Schmidt 122). In present-day Israel, however, the old law still pertains. A married man can have an affair with an unmarried woman and have children that are considered legitimate. If a married woman, on the other hand, has an extramarital affair, her children “are considered bastards and are forbidden to marry any other Jews except converts and other bastards” for ten consecutive generations.

Christian practices also often ignored women’s rights in cases of divorce. In original Christianity, divorce was expressly forbidden, and Jesus supposedly said that “anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery” (Matthew 5:32). This harsh view failed to take into account the possible incompatibility of a man and woman and condemned unhappy couples to stay together against their will. This situation was especially difficult for women because society did not allow them extramarital relations but condoned the relations of married men with prostitutes and other single women. In Judaism, divorce was allowed and even encouraged at times. Early Jewish scholars disagreed over the reasons a man could divorce his wife, some said, that a man should not divorce his wife unless he has found her guilty of some sexual misconduct, some said, he may divorce her even if she has merely spoiled a dish for him. Some say, he may divorce her even if he simply finds another woman more beautiful than she. However now the Jewish law says Jewish men can divorce their wives for any reason whatsoever.

Suffering such blatant discrimination, it seems amazing that most Christian and Jewish women have overcome the odds and achieved equal rights with males. However, this has been a fairly recent development, largely occurring in this century. Within the past hundred years, women began to be considered citizens of states, were given voting rights, property rights, and easier access to divorce. Now many Muslim women hold the former position of Christian women, but generally all they receive from the latter is scorn, derision, misunderstanding, or pity. It is ironic that the religion which significantly improved the status of women as compared to both Judaism and Christianity, and indeed was the first religion to grant women equal rights in all areas of life, including religion, sexuality, inheritance, and law, is now regarded as one that oppresses women.

One of the basic principles of Islam is justice for all humans and equality in the eyes of God. Women are considered no less than men in aspects of religion and are not denigrated anywhere in the Quran. First, in the Qur’anic Creation story, Eve is not mentioned as being seduced by the Serpent and taking the first bite of forbidden fruit. Rather, it says: “by deceit he [Satan] brought them to their fall: when they tasted the tree their shame became manifest to them (7:19:23). Both Eve and Adam were held equally responsible. Hence, women in Islam do not bear the stigma as the daughters of a sinful Eve nor are they to be blamed for corrupting innocence. Nor were women created as inferior to men, or solely for pleasure as the Judeo-Christian scriptures sometimes implied. Here, in very blatant terms, it is stated that women and men are made from the same soul, and therefore, how could one gender possibly be inferior? In fact, neither gender is inferior, as the Quran states: “And their Lord answered them: Truly I will never cause to be lost the work of any of you, Be you a male or female, you are members of one another” (3:195).

This concept of gender equality in Islam begins immediately upon birth. When baby girls were born in Pre-Islamic Arabia, they were often buried alive to prevent shaming the tribe or family. In response to this infanticide, the Quran forbade treating a female child as disgraceful and states that both baby boys and girls are equally a blessing from God: “To Allah belongs the domination of the heavens and the earth. He creates what He wills. He bestows female children to whomever He wills and bestows male children to whomever He wills” (42:49). Prophet Muhammad even guaranteed Paradise to those fathers who bring up their daughters with “benevolent treatment” and also encouraged both males and females to pursue knowledge and education (Bukhari, Muslim).

Furthermore, in Islam girls are not considered the property of their fathers and have complete control over their sexuality, in contrast to the Judeo-Christian tradition. A free woman can never be sold it would be repulsive for a father to sell his daughter as a concubine nor can she be married against her wishes, or the marriage can be annulled. After the marriage, a woman does not become the possession of her husband and is supposed to retain her own name and identity. Additionally, Islam does not imply that a woman is made entirely for the pleasure of her husband but refers to spouses as equal partners: “They are your garments and you are their garments,” the function of garments being to protect, cover, and adorn (2:187). Today, Western media often convey the idea that Muslim women are completely submissive to their husbands, but in fact, even the wives of the Prophet Muhammad [peace and blessings of Allah be upon him] used to fight with him if they did not get their way; they were far from the submissive, meek stereotypes of Muslim women today.

Another area in which Muslim women had greater rights than those of Judeo-Christian women is property. In an Islamic marriage, rather than paying the husband a dowry, the wife receives a substantial gift from him which then remains under her control, not his or her family’s, even if she is later divorced. Any other property a woman may happen to own at the time of the marriage is also exclusively hers and the husband has no right to use it. Even if she earns her own income, it is the husband’s responsibility to maintain her and the children, and she has no obligation whatsoever to provide for the family. Furthermore, a woman in Islam can inherit money or property from any one of her relations, including her husband.

In the early years of Islam, a woman’s rights were also protected concerning sexuality and divorce; a double standard did not exist between males and females. According to Islam, both genders are supposed to remain chaste until marriage, not just the women, and adultery consists of any married person engaging in sexual intercourse with someone other than a spouse. The punishment for both men and women who commit adultery, if the actual act is witnessed by four other people, is death by stoning. If a husband arbitrarily accuses his wife of being unfaithful, they both take an oath upon God, and if the wife swears that she is innocent and the husband swears that she is not, the marriage is irrevocably over and the woman is not considered an adulteress. However, throwing loose accusations around about any woman is highly discouraged in Islam. A woman’s dignity should not be toyed with and one should not, under any circumstances, speculate about her sexual conduct without very secure evidence. The Quran sets forth a very harsh punishment for those people who do: “Those who defame chaste women and do not bring four witnesses should be punished with eighty lashes, and their testimony should not be accepted afterwards, for they are profligates (24:4).

A similarly just attitude prevails in cases of divorce. First, divorce is not at all encouraged in Islam but allowed under compelling circumstances, which both men and women are allowed to obtain. The Prophet said [peace and blessings of Allah be upon him] that “among all the permitted acts, divorce is the most hateful to God” (Abu Dawud).

Couples are told in the Quran to live with one another in kindness: “Live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If you dislike them it may be that you dislike something in which Allah has placed a great deal of good” (4:19). In the hadith, this view is reiterated: “The believers who show the most perfect faith are those who have the best character and the best of you are those who are best to their wives (Tirmidhi). However, in some cases, divorce is inescapable, and Islam attempts to make it as amicable as possible.

The last approach I will mention which Islam uses to protect women is the Hijab, or the veil. This is ironic because Western media often portray the Muslim veil as a suppressive force in a woman’s life. Every Muslim woman is required to wear a scarf or some sort of head-covering and loose-fitting, modest attire. This is not a means of controlling a woman’s sexuality or suppressing her but rather, is used to protect her. It is hoped that by dressing this way she will not be seen as a mere sex symbol but will be appreciated for her mind. Furthermore, it will not subject her to unwanted sexual advances or harassment. It is interesting to note that the head-covering for women is not an Islamic innovation but was practiced by Judeo-Christian women centuries earlier, and yet is scoffed at by the West today.

Hence, Islam in its original state gave women privileges and imposed no harsh restrictions or double standards upon them. However, with the progression of time, the rights of Muslim women began deteriorating, and today, very few Muslim countries adhere to the Islamic ideal in their treatment of women.

The last thing Muslim women need to add to their problems at this point is more problems. Rather, the solution for achieving true freedom, independence, and happiness must come from within from the teachings of the Prophet, from the depths of the Quran, and from the wealth of rich Islamic tradition.

Wal Hamdu Lillahi Rabbil ‘Alamin

By Sister Umm Habiba

• Leave a comment... (0)

The Continuity of Purposed Scholarship Methods In Najd

A few years back while reading through Shaikh Saleh Uthaymeen’s (r) Sharh of Shaikh Bakr Abo Zayd’s (r) Huliyat Talib al Ilm (A Work Based In The Pursuing Knowledge Genre) there were a number of issues that remained for me points of reflection. It is these matters of which I feel an intense desire to communicate and share with the reading audience.

 

Shaikh Uthaymeen (r) out of all the Najdi, Saudi Ulema holds an interesting place in my thought for a number of reasons. Some of these reasons are too personal to digitalize and publish online and others because of their beneficial nature demand to be  made known.
Shaikh Uthaymeen (r) was an inheritor of the teaching method of and an initmate student of the esteemed Hanabali scholar, who was the only Najdi to interpret the whole of the Qur’an, the Faqih Shaikh Nasr as-Sa’adi (r). Shaikh as-Sa’adi (r) employed a teaching method in community of Unayza, Najd which deeply impressed, shaped and affected Shaikh Uthaymeen (r).

To begin with Shaikh Sa’adi (r) focused on the works of Shaikh al Islam Ibn Taymiyah (r) and others from the Hanbali school like al Bahuuti. He put much emphasis on linguistic studies so he taught most of the old Azhar language curriculum up to the al Fiyah Ibn Malik. Learning was based on texts and stages and teaching was oral commentary interlaced with inquiring questions that could determine the student’s understanding plus student participation. Learning was in stages and was a marriage of theory and application in which we find that traditional texts and primers (mutoon) along primary sources being taught (Qur’an and Hadith). Shaikh Uthaymeen (r) inherited this system and continued this tradition of teaching so that we find the Sa’adi system continued on. This system emphasized the continuity of traditional scholarship with a push to  investigative learning so that not only the rationale for a position or opinion was learned but also its evidence whether it was textually based or principally based.

Shaikh Uthaymeen (r) was reknown for zuhd, humility and the love of his students. One of the signs of his humility was that he explained the Book of Shaikh Bakr Abo Zayd , Hulliyat Talib Ilm despite the fact that Shaikh Bakr was his contemporary to Shaikh Uthaymeen (r). Rather, than write a work he took to explain a work of one of his contemporaries. Many saw in this a gesture of respect and esteem, a demonstration of refined ethics and communicating his value of other scholars. He demonstrated that manners can accompany disagreement as he disagreed with Shaikh Bakr Abo Zayd (r) on occasion throughout his commentary on the work.

Shaikh Uthaymeen (r) continued to extend the educational method he inherited from Shaikh as Sa’adi (r). As a result we see Shaikh Uthaymeen gently critique the suggestion made by Shaikh Bakr Abo Zayd (r) that after reading al-Waraqaat in Usul al-Fiqh that one can progress on to ar-Rawda (an Adapation and Abridgement of Imam Ghazali’s (r) al-Mustafsa) of Imam Ibn Quddama (r) in Usul al Fiqh. The rationale for not coming to agreement with Shaikh Bakr Abo Zayd is that Shaikh Uthaymeen understood this  suggestion not to follow in line with systematic learning as had been the path of all the great scholars of Islam. He wanted to instill into the student in practice and thought the matter of gradual, systematic progressive learning. This was the way and path to  success and refinement.

A Difference Of Method Rather Than End

Another point which caught my attention was Shaikh Uthaymeen’s (r) critique of Qadi Abu Bakr Ibn Arabi al Maliki (r). Shaikh Uthaymeen (r) voiced his difference with a suggestion made by Qadi Ibn Arabi (r) that the first thing a student ought study is mathematics before pursuing any other learning. In response Shaikh Uthaymeen (r) qualified this suggestion as preposterous and further raised the question: how could one put anything before the study of the Qur’an?

Two important points emerge from this position and question and they are method and end. Here what we see is a difference in method rather than end. The two are agreed upon in the importance of the centrality of the Qur’an in study. There is also a contextual difference Qadi Ibn Arabi al Maliki (r) was an intimate student of Imam HujjatUllah Abu Hamid al Ghazali (r). Learning had in their time been permeated by a love of the humanities and those sciences which enhance human reasoning for the Ulema (r) considered the ability to properly conceptualize matters to be the larger part of knowledge.

The difference in positions between that of Qadi Ibn Arabi (r) and that of Shaikh Uthaymeen is one of great interest. And this given that Qadi Abu Bakr (r) demands that the student refine certain analytical capabilities and skills before aiming to develop  memory and approach the Qur’an. Whereas, Shaikh Uthaymeen (r) wants the student to cultivate memory and become familiar with content of the Qur’an before immersion in secondary sources and tertiary and supplementary learning. There is a qualitative difference in these two methods but in the end both scholars delved in fiqh, usul, tafsir, and hadith.  Shaikh Uthaymeen (r) gave to grammar the role given to logic by more senior Ulema who had preceded. On the other hand, Qadi Ibn Arabi al Maliki (r) saw importance in logic, grammar, and math in the development of the mind and in the cultivation of learning these are sciences which fall under the category of means rather than ends (Uloom al-Al’aa).

Imam Ibn Khaldoun (r) in his Muqaddima speaks of a similar difference between the educational methods of al Anadalus (the West) and the Cities of al Maghrib. The Cities of the Maghrib relegated and restricted study in the early stages to the Qur’an whereas in al Andalus learning was diversified the Qur’an was accompanied by ancillary studeis. In the end the educational systems emphasized various methods to achieve the same purpose, a well educated individual. Now maybe it can be argued that they may have had different vision of what a good education is and this a plausible claim.

In my read of the difference between Shaikh Uthaymeen (r) and Qadi Ibn Arabi (r) there is a meaningful difference.  Curriculum and education can achieve varying ends predicated upon the materials and the ways in which learning takes place. I would go out on the edge and make the claim that in this difference there is an assertion that Revelation is superior to intellect as well as an assertion that Revelation is not understood except with presence of intellect. Discussing this topic is worthy of a separate post. In any event, we gain much from looking in to this difference and accounting for it.

Education, The Muslim In The West And Islam

What constitutes a real well rounded education is a matter of emphasis and debate but  what remains constant is that it must be one which refines and cultivates morals as well as skills. In the debate over how and what a student ought study whether it be primary sources or principles or the application of principles in light of the primary source there are a number of things that we Muslims from the West must come to terms with.

What we want to claim is that a well rounded Islamic education is concerned with building intellectual and well as physical skills in addition to, cultivating intimacy with the Qur’an and Sunnah and instilling respect and familiarity for the scholarly Islamic tradition because it is in the tradition that we will learn how principles are outlined and applied that is contextualized. So the universal needs a particular and vice versa.

The Western Muslim or Muslim from the West brings various skills some intellectual and others practical. What we bring to the table as Westerners are very essential skills that can aid us in grasping the spirit and content of Islamic tradition as well as its primary sources. The challenge we encounter as Westerners is the notion that things West are wicked as well as a problem of values. There is an assumption in Western Academic culture that critique is an end in itself and that there are no absolutes except the claim that there are no absolutes. It can be conferred to that this method has allowed science to progress but it has also undermined other very necessary things for life such as the life of the soul. What has driven many of us to Islam and its sources and tradition is no longer vibrantly in practice to a large degree.The same methods of rigor and intensity is rare to find in scholarship today although it is there and the idea of the polymath which so much characterized the Muslim scholar is rare in the West. We are truly in an age demanding the Reconstruction of Islamic Thought without being charged with treason.

In aiming to map a sense of intellectual and emotional orientation we are faced but with two very spiritual and profound values. The first is patience and the other is exertion. We must patiently exert ourselves to study to be able to make sense of ourselves and Islam today cultivating continuity and illustrating legitimate and wholesome adaptability while keeping in mind that Islam relates to but is above context. Tradition has always been a dialogue between principles and context unfortunately Islamic thought today and learning struggles with engaging de-contextualization so that we can speak to the age. The educated is left to question and to fend in the wild. It is in resolving these differences we face brought on by political demise, colonialization, rationalization, scientification, secularization, globalization and Westernization as well as ignorance and disorientation that movement, forward movement, resolution may, perhaps be attained to.We need in my estimate to look to see if there may be fruit in the differences and contrasts we live in today and further by looking to find the fruit we need to keep in mind the importance of meaning and substance.

It is in a kufri (devoid of Iman) read of history that the claim is made that we can not transcend the suffocating atomosphere that we abide in. In fact, this is even a bad readof qadr itself and is more characteristic of determinism (jabr) than it is of a sound interpretation of Islamic creed. Man in the pinnacle of creation in our read of time and history and man is possessed of guidance (shariah), intellect, instinct, emotion, and will plus Divine aid but Allah (swt) has charged us to follow causes (see: Surah Kahf) while understanding their powerlessness. So it is necessary to return to a proper anthropology of man (understanding of man), history and the aims of time, life and creation.

What studying Qur’an, Sunnah and the scholarly tradition which dialogues with and contextualizes these two sources in time and place by rigorous scholarship guided by principles ought teach us is a number of values of these mention will be made of two:

One listening is the majority of the struggle in learning. If one listens well then one will be on the path for listening clarifies, allows one to analyze and through it we come to realize. Listening requires humility and demands a willingness to learn from others. Two, being seriously systematic and maintaining continuity with the past and present is the way of scholarship and knowledge.

AstagfirUllah Wa Allahu Al’am Wa Aleem Wa Rabbul Alaameen

Abul-Hussein

Some Notes Regarding Distant And Online Learning In Islamic Studies

The debate regarding distant and online learning versus “traditional classroom” education is nothing new in Western educational circles but it is unprecedented in Muslim circles in the West and not so new for Muslim circles in the East. There are a number of issues that come up with University education, online education and the Halaqa system. There is a qualitative difference in these systems and each has its own characteristic and and benefits and deficiencies at times.

There are fundamentals in Islamic scholarship which are not compromisable and that is that Islamic education is grounded in shaping character and not just intellect this is a primary end of Islamic education. The least effective in realizing this endeavor is online learning. Online learning is a response to meet the need of a student who is unable to have personal contact with Ulema or those who are bogged down by the affairs of life and need flexible schedules.

In discussing the matter of online learning with Dr. Nabil al Jawhari (h) head of tasfir studies in al Azhar ash Sharif Tanta Branch he said that with a strong curriculum there is benefit but the student after finishing a full BA program needs at minimum 50 hours live contact time with scholars. This is to fill in gaps. As da’wah and education being a subset of da’wah becomes more commericialized it is necessary to critically evaluate the new postures and efforts in Islamic education in the West so that people are clear as to the realities of Islamic education. The foundation in Islamic education is contact in the live with Islamic scholars and the foundation in studying classical texts is to study these texts with the learned this also is the case with the Arabic language and Qur’anic memorization and recitation. Any other approach to this goes against what is foundational (khilaf al asl)and will require fine tuning.

The concern here is more with the psychology of the student than it is with the attempt to afford others sound and solid education according to ability. The student needs to be honest that enrolling in an online program is an attempt to close a gap but it is not the most effective way of learning least we have a generation of students convince themselves that they are scholars and not be prepared to handle what is demanded of scholars. Sound Islamic education is craftlike and in so being demands a student-master relationship that is not virtual but rather personal this is the foundation of Islamic education. Communicating literacy in Islamic sciences can be achieved a number of ways and of those is by way of online learning but being a faqih requires intimacy as well as reading classical texts. Online learning is much more effective with the use of contemporary scholarly texts as the amount of mastery in language skills and other sciences to deal with these works is less demanding than what is demanded when working with classical texts.

Another suggestion in refining online learning is to focus on developing intellectual skills, and a strong focus on how to study, and benefit and then that a system of account be put in place as many of our brothers have transformed online learning into entertainment and have lost the seriousness that learning demands. If we want to communicate quality learning and not just aim for business success then we need to consider the reality of the student. In my experience of teaching online it is the sisters who have brought the skills that pay the bills. The essence in Islamic learning will remain one on one live contact least we see disaster. As we saw that University education versus halaqa studied brought benefits as well as problems we will see that online learning too has its flaws in fact those flaws are clear to the experienced. The University system and online learning in its various forms ought compliment the halaqa circle rather than compete to eliminate it. In this way Islamic education will be dynamic and people have the chance to be honest with themselves and others.

Some students who study online or online institutions may see this post as an attack on the legitimacy of their efforts but by Allah (swt) as an online instructor it is far from that. We need to be honest and put sensitivity and ego aside for the sake of Islamic learning. The truth is that any respectable online educational system even in the West requires live contact time to accompany online learning. The essence is Islamic learning is live contact time anything other than that goes againt this foundation (khilaf al asl) and requires fine tuning particularly if the student has not mastered Arabic.

Wa Bi-Lahi at Taufeeq

Abul-Hussein

www.altranslators.com

• Leave a comment... (0)