Women-Led Friday Prayer

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

   Dear Bro,
Thanks for your elaborated reply. However, I am more confused than ever. Let us see how I interpreted your reply to my humble querries.

 rami wrote:

Bi ismillahir rahmanir raheem

...
Imam Zaid shakir has studied the Islamic sciences in syria and in morroco, so when the above is said it must be understood that anything other than this is an unqualified opinion not of sunni Islam, certainly we can ask to learn but ultimatly our opnion can be nothing but unqualified until we endevour to study the islamic sciences.

Of course I am not at all qualified to be anything closer to a level of islamic scholar. However, when it comes to enforcing some verdict without logic or some arguments that I couldn't understand, I may not be at ease to accept them just because the verdict was by a mujtahid of a high level. I would keep struggling with myself to gallop it down my throat untill I throw up if I could not get them or chew it down with more convincing arguments. 

 rami wrote:

Meaning under the islamic sciences no point has been raised that is worthy of consideration for making a legal ruling in Islam. To properly understand this we must first gain a proper understanding of the islamic sciences formost of which is Usul al Fiqh. Laws in Islam are not simply made based on logical arguments there are many other sciences and Issues that need to be considered at the same time. The issues with which the scholars of al Usul are primarily concerned include the following: 

Logic and its predications 
Linguistics 
Commands and Prohibitions 
Comprehensive al 'Amm and Particular terms al Khass 
Inconclusive al Mujmall and Determined concepts al Mubayyan 
Abrogation al Naskh 
Deeds (in particular, those of the Prophet, upon whom be 
peace, and their significance) 
Consensus al Ijma' 
Narrations relating to the Sunnan 
Analogical reasoning al Qiyas 
Indicating preference in cases of apparent contradiction 
Exercising legal acumen and scholarship Ijtihad 
Following a specific school of legal thought Taqlid 
Disputed Sources (those other than the four "agreed" sources) 

Well I count all of these as tools for logical arguments. Isn't it. So here I accept what you have described and shall accept any of these tools used to analyse the issue under discussion. But of course some one has to categorically describe these tools before using them to make a clear understanding.

 rami wrote:

The point is we can not formulate an argument and then claim it to be certain or difinitive and then place our faith in it. This is exactly what is occuring with those who follow Reda, they have put there faith in the arguments of uneducated people.

We are comparing the argument of a mujtahid to that of child relatively speaking and somehow concluding the child is correct.

Even a "child" sometimes may ask "stupid questions" that can make a mujtahid to provide a reply to answer the questions adequately or worst, could let him reconcile and rethink over his analysis of the issue. By no means one would expect "stupid answers" to such "stupid questions" but rather find another analogy or example to better explain them to this "child".  

 rami wrote:

A Mujtahid should possess:  
(1) He should be an expert in the Arabic language, literature and philology, so that he may be able to decide properly between the different connotations of the same word.  
(2) He should be a high calibre scholar of the Qur'an, and his study of it should be so intensive and extensive that whenever he has to consider a given problem, he should be capable of keeping before his mind's eye the whole sweep of Quranic thought and all relevant verses.  
(3) He should have the Traditions of the Holy Prophet [Hadith] memorized, so that whenever he has to concentrate on any problem, he may have all the connected Traditions, even those indirect ones, before him, clearly and vividly, to guide his thinking both appropriately and comprehensively.  
(4) Further he should be an expert in both the science of historical criticism (Riwayat) and logical criticism (Dirayat), so that he may be able to view the worth and connotation of various Traditions, under study in their proper perspective.  
(5) Above all, he should possess piety and a true Islamic character, and his heart should be imbued with what the Qur'an calls 'fear of God'.

I fully agree with that. No question about it and of course we can't expect the "child" to have all these qualifications. Right? So the "child" is bound to ask "stupid questions" and the Mujtahid is expected to provide suitable answers to the relevent questions pertaining the issue rather than blaming the child for his childish questions.

 rami wrote:

These points should not be ignored they are key, the situation we have here is one weak hadith being used as a primary (meaning the main piece of evidence) to formulate a ruling. Not only that but it is also being used to contradict other ahadith in the sunnah. You can not interprate one hadith in a way which contradicts other ahadith as rasul allah (sallah llahu alaihi wa sallam) did not contradict himself..

I fully agree with this conclusion and find no reason to go beyond this point to dissect a weak hadith with some arguments that don't make sense (atleast to me). It is in this sense that I raised some questions that I couldn't understand while some one does try to open up this hadith to prove anything against the issue or in favor of it. All I stated was (in my last but one posting) that this hadith  can't be considered sufficient to conclude the legalization of immamat by a women. Since the proponents of issue take this hadith (besides its weak narration) to give the impression that women lead prayer was quite common practice, atleast in the area where Umm-Warqa used to live. So, in that line of reasoning my question to them was that, if it was an established practice then there must not be only one hadith (that too, weak) but many other that could substantiate their argument. Till that time the issue is without any base.  

 rami wrote:

If you notice brother, Imam zaid is not reffering to the word Dar but the prophets words "Qarri fi Baytiki" in which baytiki means "her house", the word Dar is used in refrence to the people she led in prayer. Were they of her house hold only or of the area?

I have no objection to this argument (using the linguistic tool of argument) and may accept.

 rami wrote:

 However, then what is the import of the whole narration of this hadith. I mean, there doesn't seem to be any unusual advice for her from the Prophet Mohammad since she already must have been doing so for her regular obligatory prayer in her home. Also the need for "own mu�adhdhin  " is not clear if all she needed was to offer a prayer in her home. Now coming to your second possiblity.

The sahaba narated everything of the prophet (sallah llahu alaihi wa sallam) small or great there does not have to be any importance to the hadith as you suggest, unique or otherwise.

this line of argument is purely speculative so it is not grounds to establish your argument.

First of all, Bro, I am not arguing but raising a simple question to understand the issue. So, merely dissmissing it on the grounds of speculation may not be appropriate. All I was trying to highlight was (if we admit this weak hadith to be true), when every living being was required on the battle ground, so much so, the daughter of Prophet Mohammad herself was known to be present in the battle grounds to help the wounded people, what was the reason that Umm-Warqah was being denied for this great cause. There must be a higher purpose for her not to let her go into the battle field. It is in this sense that the decision of Prophet Mohammad has to be viewed with far more wisdom than any simplistic solutions presented above.

 rami wrote:

 my humble question is why were people (not only women but males as well) were allowed to have mosques in their homes despite the fact that all males were stressed to come to mosque for their obligatory prayers.

 "Umm-Warqa" to establish mosque in her home might have a ligitimate reason to assume that people outside her home might also had offered prayer in her home.

this is answered by

 in fact, the Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him, ordered the generality of believers to establish mosques in their homes. �Aisha relates, �The Messenger of God ordered that mosques be established in the homes

I think you have also partly answerd your own question in terms of the subject of umm waraqah she was female and female's were not encouraged to go to the masjid as men. 

 Imam al-Bukhari also mentions a hadith where the Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him, went to the house of a blind companion, �Itban b. Malik, to establish a mosque there.

If my memory is correct all rasul allah did to establish the masjid in this companion's house was to pray in one of the corners of the house and from that point on that area was considered the masjid.

What you imagine to be a mosque in her home is not correct, in rasul allah's time mosque's were plain and simple mere open space in a courtyard...etc

I couldn't understand a bit from your reply. I am so dumb. Can you explain why was there a need for establishing a mosque (irrespective of the type of mosque; whether it had structure or an open ground etc) in the houses of companions? I suggested one possiblity (far distances for some group of people living togather in the outskirts of the city) and requested that if you know any other that would help me understand the issue far better. However, on the contrary, I am being imagined to incorrectly understand the type of mosque. This reply is beyond my comprehension. If on one side it is stressed that all male muslims should attend the mosque, then making mosques in people's own home seem to be contradictory unless these homes are far away from the mosque. So the question still remain unanswered. 

 rami wrote:

 then the question comes as  how this "mu'adhdhin" might had offered the prayer after his ad'ahn for "all ladies show"?

your statment of "all ladies show" is insensative and is nothing more than semantics it is inapropriate to describe sahaba as such. The following answeres your question

My apology for using such phrases. I had no mischievous motives to use it here except to highlight the class of a gender group in a congregation at a mosque. However, I didn't find my the answer to my specific question from your following response.

 rami wrote:

 Imam ad-Daraqutni�s narration of this hadith mentions that Umm Waraqa was ordered to lead her women in prayer �wa ta�umma Nisa�aha.32 Hence, if the people praying with Umm Waraqa were from the surrounding area, they were all women, as Imam ad-Daraqutni�s version of the hadith makes clear. 
Based on this second line of reasoning, we have to accept that they were women, in accords with an interpretive principle, �There is no room for speculation when transmitted evidence exists.�33 Here the text specifically states, �her women.� Ad- Daraqutni�s version would clarify a potentially vague expression in the other versions.

you can not speculate on a matter when clear evidence is available, we are trying to understand what rasul allah tought  so we do not have room to ignore any piece of evidence. 

 (iv) people of her neighbourhood, (v) people of her house (including both male and female). Having a dedicated "mu�adhdhin" rules out all possibilities except the (ii) and (iv). Isn't it? People don't need exclusive dedicated "mu�adhdhin " for their prayers at home untill or unless it is an occassion as mentioned in possiblities (ii) and (iv). Even if it is established that it was the possiblity # (ii) i.e. all women of the area offering prayer at her home, the question as to how the "mu�adhdhin " might had offered his prayer could remain more closer to as having it offered behind Umm-Warqah rather than assuming him to go far distance away to attend the other mosque.

the above partly answers your questions, you are asuming to much based on little evidence, why does the muadhin need to go far far away he could simply wait until the prayer is finished and pray by himself or simply go home as more than likely he was a neighbour.

Am I not right to assume your reply of "partly answer" as "partly no answer"? All your suggested solutions for the male Mohaddin require far more concrete ruling from Quran and Sunnah to establish that he should not accept the women as his imam. Aren't your arguments kind of in a circle? Seems like onus of burdon for proving or disproving (or providing the evidence) in this issue has been shifted to the opposite side. This is definitely the least position that anyone would like to be in. I would suggest to revise your suggested solutions for this Mohaddin to avoid such a situation. The suggested solution through only one narration of ad-Daraqutniis not not flawless since it ignores to account for the presence of a dedicated male "mohaddin".

 rami wrote:

 If the reason that I have presented is correct then this word could logically means "area" and not merely "home".

it is clear from the evidence she only led her female inhabitants in prayer not of her area.

Brother, again, here I am requesting for any alternate reasons someone can suggest to establish mosques in the houses other than the reason of 'far distances'.

 rami wrote:

....this line of reasoning clearly contradicts the evidence presented, you are speculating on why a muadhin was apointed further a point of "dedicated muadhin" is not sound do you know any cases of  "part time" muadhin it is a non issue.

Are you suggesting that one should not ask questions to un understood replies? I am surprised with this kind of reply. Instead of making any reflections on the question, your much emphasis lay on snubbing the questioner. The question was simple and was raised when someone try to make me understand that all Umm-Warqah did was to lead only female women of her house only and she had a dedicated mohaddin for all her prayers. 

 rami wrote:

 Missing the point of having a dedicaed "mu'adhdhin".

you have not proven your reasoning for a dedicated mudhin, you have only speculated on the matter with no real evidence presented.

Well, brother correct me if I am not looking at the same wording of the hadith as I should be doing it. Here is the wording of the hadith that has been under discussion for this isssue. "......she sought permission from the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) to have a mu'adhdhin in her house. He, therefore, permitted her (to do so). .....". 
Now kindly let me know what do think what kind of permission was requested by the lady and for what purpose i.e. to say why she made this request? I think I am more relying on the wording of this hadith than speculating from my own self. 

 rami wrote:

 I respect this reasoning, however, the reasons to neglect all other sources for this hadith (Abu Dawud,6 ad-Daraqutni,7 al- Bayhaqi,8 al-Hakim,9 the Tabaqat of Ibn Sa�d,10 and other sources) and relying only on one (that suits the theory) is not a logical way of establishing anything

You can not interprate a hadith to contradicte another hadith if two similar hadith are presented except one is missing a piece of information there is no potential for contradiction one complaments and expands on the other. An Understanding of Usul al Fiqh (rules of deriving rulings) is required here.

I might agree of the Usul al Fiqh as you have described, however, I shall reserve my comments (simply, not to divert from the main topic) as to what is more preferred way of obtaining an evidence in such cases.

 rami wrote:

 Moreover the question of "how might the mu'adhidhin had offered the prayer?" would still hang out to conclude anything but to say that he might had offered behind Umm-Warqah.

you reasoning is clearly contradicted by a hadith which clearly establishes that only women were led in prayer.

Well brother I don't think you have a point here. Even if the explanatory narration of Ad-Daraqutni is also made available, the question of mu'adhidhin is still not resolved. Simply because what Prophet might had given her commands in a generic terms, can't be used to deduce an obligation for the male mu'adhihin not to offer his prayer with the congregation. For this kind of interpretation, the onus then shifts to the opponents of the issue to provide an independant evidence where Prophet might had categorically prohibited male muslims offering prayers behind female imams.