JUMUAH AND EID SALAAT DURING LOCKDOWN

JUMUAH AND EID SALAAT DURING THE DEVIL’S LOCKDOWN

RESPONSE TO THE FATWA OF A MAURITIAN MOLVI

Question

Molvi Irfan Nauyock of Mauritius issued a fatwa that there is no Eid Salaah during lockdown because there is no Izn Aam in private properties. Is his fatwa valid? Must we abandon Eid Salaat? On the basis of this fatwa, we are to abandon even Jumuah Salaat since Ithn Aam is also a condition for the validity of Jumuah Salaat.

Answer

The honourable Molvi Irfan did not apply his mind correctly hence his erroneous fatwa. Firstly, private property does not negate Izn Aam (general permission to the male Muslim public to attend). The condition of Izn Aam does not hinge on Waqf property. As long as musallis have free access to the venue during the Salaat time, the condition of Ithn Aam is satisfied.

The ‘fatwa’ of Molvi Nauyock is a jumble of confusion in which he sought to acquit himself like a mujtahid, hence he made a mess of the numerous narrations from the different Math-habs. He has no entitlement to resort to the variety of Hadith narrations on which the different Math-habs base their respective views. Furthermore, the vast majority of narrations does not even support the Izn Aam condition of the Hanafi Math-hab.

As a muqallid, he is required to remain within the confines of the Math-hab. Since he is a professed Hanafi muqallid, he had no right to indulge in a twaddle of excrescent citations which clearly displays cognitive dissonance.

According to the Hanafi Math-hab, even if the venue is not a Musjid, Eid and Jumuah Salaat will be valid with a minimum of four males (one to act as Imaam, and three Muqtadis). We fail to understand the ambiguity of ‘imaam’ in the current context of Muslim life. If by ‘imaam’, the Molvi means ‘Sultan’, then he dwells in confusion. The Ummah today has no political Imaam, i.e. Sultan/King/Ameerul Mu’mineen. Jumuah and Eid Salaat have been performed by the Ummah since time immemorial all over the world in places where there was no Sultan. Thus, introducing the ‘imaam/sultan’ factor is a flapdoodle indulgence, and so is the issue of ‘private property’. Eid and Jumuah Salaat are valid even in private property to which the Muslim male community is given access during the Salaat time.

It is extremely short-sighted, to say the least, to issue a fatwa for the abandonment of Jumuah and Eid Salaat solely on the basis of the rubbish lockdown satanism of the atheists. Assuming that Eid Salaat is not valid in private homes in terms of the Hanafi Math-hab (although it is valid), then too, the imperative demand will be to incorporate into our Math-hab the method and view of the other Math-habs in order to safeguard this significant, important and vital Act of Ibaadat. We shall opt for the fatwa of the other Math-habs in order to guard the Eid Salaat and to prevent Muslims from forgetting this important Practice of the Deen. It is not permissible to allow an Act of Ibaadat to become antique and discarded.

It is absolutely ludicrous to set aside the Haqq of the other Math-habs for compliance with the satanism of the atheists who have ordered the devilish lockdown. When there is scope in the Hanafi Math-hab for borrowing from the other Math-habs during occasions of dire need, then it will be imperative to do so, and not to abandon the Shar’i Hukm. However, as far as Eid and Jumuah Salaat are concerned during the satanic lockdown, there is no need for Hanafis to look askance to the other Math-habs in view of the fact that the condition of Izn Aaam is satisfied even in private homes.

EID AND JUMUAH SALAAT DURING THE DEVIL’S LOCKDOWN REMAIN WAAJIB FOR THE ENTIRE UMMAH. WHEREVER MUSLIMS ARE ABLE TO PERFORM THESE SALAAT, THEY SHOULD EXECUTE IT WHETHER IN HOMES, GARAGES, STOREROOMS, OPEN AIR, ETC.

THE MAURITIAN FATWA IS CORRUP AND BAATIL. IT IS SET ASIDE AS DRIVEL.

29 Shawwaal 1443 – 31 May 2022

IBN MAS’UD’S (RADIYALLAHU ‘ANHU) STATEMENT REGARDING THE ORIGIN OF MENSTRUATION

Question

Is the following narration authentic and is the contents about the origin of menstruation correct?

It is narrated from Sayyiduna ‘Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (radiyallahu ‘anhu) that he said: “The men and women of the Banu Israil used to pray together. If a woman had a [male friend in the congregation], she would wear wooden shoes [that were elevated like stilts] in order to raise herself for her friend. Then, Allah ‘Azza Wa Jalla inflicted them with menstruation.” Ibn Mas’ud (radiyallahu ‘anhu) used to say: “Expel them [from the masjids] just as Allah has expelled them.”

Answer

Imams ‘Abdur Razzaq, Tabarani (rahimahumallah) and others have recorded this statement of Sayyiduna ‘Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (radiyallahu ‘anhu).

(Musannaf ‘Abdur Razzaq: 5115, Al Mu’jamul Kabir: 9484-9485. Also see: Sahih Ibn Khuzaymah: 1700)

‘Allamah Haythami (rahimahullah) has declared the narrators of Tabarani reliable (rijalus sahih) and Hafiz Ibn Hajar (rahimahullah) has declared the chain of Musannaf ‘Abdur Razzaq authentic (sahih).

(Majma’uz Zawaid, vol. 2 pg. 35, Fathul Bari, before Hadith: 294, vol. 1 pg. 400)

A similar narration has also been reported as the statement of Sayyidah ‘Aaishah (radiyallahu ‘anha).

(Musannaf ‘Abdur Razzaq: 5114)

Notes:

1) The last part of the Hadith should be translated as “Keep them back just as Allah has kept them back” instead of “Expel them just as Allah has expelled them.” See here for clarity regarding this.

The correct translation will therefore be as follows:

Sayyiduna ‘Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (radiyallahu ‘anhu) that he said: “The men and women of the Banu Israil used to pray together. If a woman had a [male friend in the congregation], she would wear wooden shoes [that were elevated like stilts] in order to raise herself for her friend. Then, Allah ‘Azza Wa Jalla inflicted them with menstruation.” Ibn Mas’ud (radiyallahu ‘anhu) used to say: “Keep them back just as Allah has kept them back.”

2) Other general narrations suggest that menstruation was for all women and from the time of Sayyidah Hawwa. (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith: 294, Mustadrak Hakim, vol. 2 pg. 381)

In light of this, Hafiz Ibn Hajar (rahimahullah) has stated that it could be that due to the actions of the women of Banu Israil, the period of menstruation was increased. The narrations of Sayyiduna Ibn Mas’ud (in question) and Sayyidah ‘Aaishah (radiyallahu ‘anha) should be understood in this light.

Hence the words: ‘Then, Allah ‘Azza Wa Jalla inflicted them with menstruation’ would mean: Allah Ta’ala inflicted the women with extended periods of menstruation.

And Allah Ta’ala Knows best.

Answered by: Moulana Suhail Motala

Approved by: Moulana Muhammad Abasoomar

Ikhtilāṭ: A Critical But Neglected Islamic Prohibition

What is Ikhtilāṭ?
As the “human being has been created weak” (Qur’ān, 4:28) and “no temptation (fitnah) is greater for men than women” (Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 5096), the Sharī‘ah has placed strict safeguards against men and women interacting.
One of these safeguards is the prohibition of unnecessary mixing (mukhālaṭahikhtilāṭimtizājijtimā‘) between non-elderly men and women, something upheld by the vast majority of the classical jurists. Mixing refers to there being no segregation between men and women; that is, men and women are together in the same place, and don’t have their own areas or seating places. Unfortunately, due mainly to influences of non-Islāmic systems of morality, many Muslims have become very relaxed with regards to this ruling. Some even oppose and ridicule it.
RELATED: The Basis for Gender Separation in Islam
Ḥijāb
Ḥijāb primarily means to screen women from men but also has the secondary meaning of being fully covered when a woman’s person is exposed to onlookers due to some need, e.g. on the streets, in the markets or during Ḥajj. The obligation of Ḥijāb began towards the end of the 5th year of Hijrah with the revelation of verses in Sūrat al-Aḥzāb. From this time onward, care was taken to ensure non-elderly men and women do not unnecessarily intermingle or mix.
RELATED: Yes, Islam Forces Muslim Women to Wear Hijab
The Example of ‘Ᾱ’ishah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā) During the Incident of Slander

The incident of slander (ifk) referred to in verses of Sūrat al-Nūr occurred in the 6th year of Hijrah, after the revelation of Ḥijāb. Thus, while explaining its background,
‘Ᾱ’ishah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā) said:
“I had come out with the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) after Ḥijāb was revealed and thus I was carried in a hawdaj and put down in it.”[1]
‘Ᾱ’ishah’s (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā) person was completely concealed in the hawdaj.
Ibn Ḥajar explains:
That is, after the command of Ḥijāb was revealed, meaning the concealment of women from men looking at them, while before that they were not forbidden [from this]. She said this as an explanation for why she was concealed in the hawdaj, to the point that this led to them [later on in the journey] carrying it when she was not inside it while they believed she was inside it; as distinguished from before the Ḥijāb, as it may have been that women then rode on the backs of the saddles without a hawdaj.[2]
When later in the journey ‘Ᾱ’ishah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā) returned from searching for her misplaced necklace to find the caravan had left, she explains:
I headed towards my position where I was, and I assumed that they would find me missing and come back for me. While I was sitting at my place, my eyes overcame me and I slept. Safwān ibn al-Mu‘aṭṭal al-Sulamī al-Dhakwānī was behind the army, and he proceeded in the morning to where I was resting, and saw the shape of a person sleeping. He came to me and recognised me when he saw me, as he had seen me before Ḥijāb. I woke up when he said innā lillāhi wa innā ilayhi rāji‘ūn upon recognising me, so I covered my face with my Jilbāb, and by Allāh he did not say to me a word and nor did I hear from him anything besides innā lillāhi wa innā ilayhi rāji‘ūn” [3]
This demonstrates that after the revelation of Ḥijāb, extreme care was taken to ensure men did not see women in general circumstances, while in cases of necessity she was covered fully.
Non-Observance of Ḥijāb before its Obligation Cannot be Advanced as Evidence
There are narrations of Ṣaḥābah drinking wine in the time of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) or engaging in mut‘ah marriage. These narrations obviously cannot be advanced as evidence as they occurred before the prohibition of these acts. Similarly, it will be mistaken to use incidents before the revelation of Ḥijāb as proof for the permissibility of unnecessary mixing. Likewise, incidents in which elderly women are in reference are not evidence that this would be allowed for non-elderly women. For example, Sahl ibn Sa‘d (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhumā) explained that the young Ṣaḥābah came to eat at a woman’s house after Jumu‘ah, and in one version, it is clarified that she was an elderly woman (‘ajūz). [4]
Related: Western Hatred for Hijab: Have Muslims Contributed to the Problem?
Women’s Attendance of Congregational Ṣalāh in the Time of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam)
The congregational Ṣalāh that would take place in the time of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) would not entail mixing. Some narrations indicate that women were only permitted to emerge for Ṣalāh in the night (i.e. for Fajr and ‘Ishā’). [5]
‘Ᾱ’ishah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā) said:
“The Messenger of Allāh (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) would pray Fajr, and women from the believers would attend with him wrapped up in their cloaks, and then they would return to their houses while no-one recognised them.” [6]
Note, that these women would return immediately after the Ṣalāh and were not recognized by anyone.
Measures were taken for men and women to not mix.
Umm Salamah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā) said: “[The Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam)] would make salām, and the women would turn away and enter their houses before the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) [and the male companions] turned away.” [7]
Al-Zuhrī, a narrator of this ḥadīth, explains: “This was so that the women turn back before the men catch up with them.” (Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 875) Ibn Ḥajar comments that this ḥadīth shows “the reprehensibility of men mixing with women on the roads, let alone in homes.” [8]
The Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) said: “The best rows of men are the first and the worst of them are the last, and the best rows of women are the last and worst of them the first.” (Saḥīḥ Muslim)
Again, this is to show that men and women are to be separate from one another. One narration even indicates that there was a separate entrance for women in the time of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam). [9] Women’s emergence for ṣalāh was premised on such principles being adhered to. Once these principles were not maintained, and decadence became the norm amongst people, the ruling changed[10].
Separate Sessions for Men and Women
Female companions complained to the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) that “the men have overpowered us with you, so arrange a day for us…” (Saḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 101) This shows men and women would not gather together in the same place – otherwise, there would be no reason the women could not attend with the men.
Segregation During Ṭawāf
A governor of Makkah from the early part of the second century of Hijrah, Muḥammad ibn Hishām, stopped women completely from making Ṭawāf when men were making Ṭawāf, i.e. they had completely separate times for making ṭawāf. (Fatḥ al-Bārī, 4:548-9) ‘Aṭā’ ibn Abī Rabāḥ (26 – 114), the great scholar of Makkah, questioned this, stating that the wives of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) made Ṭawāf when there were men present. His well-known student, Ibn Jurayj (80 – 150 H), at this, asked: “How was it that [women] were mixing with the men [in Ṭawāf]?” He said: “They would not mix, ‘Ᾱ’ishah would perform Ṭawāf screened from the men, not mixing with them.” (Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 1618)
In other words, even in Ṭawāf, in the blessed era of the Salaf, men and women would keep separate from one another. Al-Fākihī (ca. 210 – 275 H) reports with his chain to Ibrāhīm al-Nakha‘ī: “‘Umar forbade men from making ṭawāf with women. He once saw a man making ṭawāf with the women and he struck him with a whip.” [11]
The later intermingling that became commonplace in the Ḥaram was censured by the scholars. Mullā ‘Alī al-Qārī (ca. 930 – 1014 H) describes what “the women of Makkah do today, in terms of mixing with men in that area” as “a great abomination”. (al-Maslak al-Mutaqassiṭ, p79) Another great Makkan Ḥanafī scholar before him, Ibn al-Ḍiyā’ (789 – 853 H), writes in his detailed work on Ḥajj: “From the vilest of abominations is what the ignorant women amongst the commoners do during Ṭawāf, mixing with men together with their husbands while their faces remain uncovered.” [12]
Ibn al-Ḍiyā’ has another work listing the ills that occurred in the Ḥaram, called Tanzīh al-Masjid al-Ḥarām ‘an Bida‘ al-Jahalat al-‘Awāmm. Amongst these ills, he mentions women coming into the Maṭāf and the Masjid on auspicious nights and mixing with men. (ibid. p34) A similar complaint was made even before by the Shāfi‘ī imām, al-‘Izz ibn Jamā‘ah (694 – 767 H), who added: “We ask Allāh to inspire the ruler to eradicate these abominations.”[13]
Avoiding Intermingling on the Roads
Ibn Ḥibbān narrates in his Ṣaḥīḥ that the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) said:
Women do not have the middle of the path.”
Ibn Ḥibbān explains that when a woman comes out for a need, she should not walk in the middle of the path. This is because men walk in the middle, and doing so may result in men and women coming in very close proximity to one another.[14] This is the teaching of Islām in the case of the road, so it would be even more emphasized in the case of closed environments.
Women Taught Behind Screens
‘Ᾱ’ishah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā), perhaps the greatest female teacher amongst the ṣaḥābah, would teach from behind a screen (ḥijāb/sitr) as mentioned in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. Aḥmad ibn Hanbal narrated that a group of students of ḥadīth came to the great muḥaddith, Abu l-Ashhab (70 – 165 H), and did not know which ḥadīth to ask of him until his daughter informed them from behind a screen of a ḥadith to learn from him. (Musnad Aḥmad, 33:401) From the blessed time of the Salaf, immense care would be taken to avoid intermingling – and this was despite the fact that their hearts were infinitely purer than ours.
The Qur’ān says that if men (i.e. the male ṣaḥābah) are to ask something of the wives of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam), they are to do so “from behind a screen” because “that is purer for your hearts and their hearts”. (Qur’ān, 33:53)
If the purest of hearts, that of the male companions and the wives of the Prophet, are affected by such interactions, people after them are in far greater need of such measures.
Not Intermingling at the Funeral Procession
According to a group of the imāms, it is recommended to stand behind the bier as it is being carried to its burial place. However, al-Ṭaḥāwī recorded from ‘Umar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhu) and his student, al-Aswad ibn Yazīd, that they would at times walk in front of the bier because women were following it from behind. This was done in order to avoid mixing with them.[15]
Al-Ṭaḥāwī says: “[The students of Ibn Mas‘ūd] would discourage [walking in front of the bier] and then would do it for an excuse, as that is better than mixing with women when they are close to the bier.” (ibid.) Badr al-Dīn al-‘Aynī al-Ḥanafī adds in his commentary: “because mixing (mukhālaṭah) with non-related women is ḥarām, while going ahead of the bier is permissible.” [16]
Shāfi‘ī Imāms Forbidding Intermingling
Abū ‘Abdillāh al-Ḥalīmī (338 – 403 H), one of the major early Shāfi‘ī mujtahids, said: “Allāh says: ‘O you who believe, protect yourselves and your families from the Fire.’ Included in the totality of this is that a man protects his wife and daughter from mixing with men and conversing with them and being alone with them.” [17]
Al-Māwardī (364 – 450 H), another major early Shāfi‘ī authority, said: “A woman is forbidden from mixing with men and is ordered to stay in the house [when there is no need to come out].” [18]
Abū Isḥāq al-Shīrāzī (393 – 476 H), another major Shāfi‘ī authority, states: “[Jumu‘ah] is not obligatory on a woman because of what Jābir (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhu) narrated…and because she may mix with men and that is ḥarām.” [19]
Imām al-Ghazālī (450 – 505 H) said: “When the speaker is a non-elderly man (shābb), attractive to women in dress and appearance, with plenty of poems, gestures and movements, and women attend his gathering, this is an abomination (munkar) which must be prevented, since the corruption in this is greater than the benefit…It is obligatory to erect a screen/barrier between men and women that prevents seeing [one another], as that is also an anticipated cause of corruption. Norms bear testimony to these abominations.” [20] Note, al-Ghazālī wrote this more than nine-hundred years ago.
Imām Mālik on a Woman Eating with her Husband’s Friends
Some refer to the statement of Imām Mālik in his Muwaṭṭa’ on a woman eating with her husband or brother along with their male companions who are unrelated to her. However, an early Mālikī authority from ‘Irāq, Abū Bakr Muḥammad ibn al-Jahm (d. 329 H), explains that Imām Mālik is here referring to an elderly woman (‘ajūz/mutajāllah). [21]
This is consistent with Imām Mālik’s other remarks, as he clearly opposes intermingling and makes distinctions between elderly and non-elderly women. It is narrated in the ‘Utbiyyah that Imām Mālik said: “I believe the ruler is to head towards workers on account of women sitting with them, and I believe he is not to leave a non-elderly woman sitting by these workers; as for an elderly woman and a lowly slave, who would not be suspect for sitting, and nor would the one sitting next to her be suspect, I see no problem with that.” [22]
Ibn Rushd al-Mālikī (450 – 520 H) comments on this passage from al-‘Utbiyyah: “Indeed the Messenger of Allāh (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) said: ‘I did not leave a temptation more harmful for men than women,’ and he said: ‘Create distance between the persons of men and women.’” [23]
Furthermore, Imām Mālik states, as reported in the Muwaṭṭa’, that a man may give salām to an elderly woman, but not to a non-elderly woman.
RELATED: Yes, How Women Dress Is Everyone’s Business
Imām Abū Ḥanīfah Forbids Women from Attending the Masjids
Imām Abū Ḥanīfah and his students did not allow non-elderly women emerging for Ṣalāh (al-Aṣl, 1:365), let alone another activity not sanctioned in Sharī‘ah and not based on genuine need. The reason for this is to prevent men and women interacting or being tempted by one another to engage in the impermissible (e.g. looking with desire, speaking unnecessarily, touching etc.).
Ikhtilāṭ Vs Khalwah
Some people argue that since mixing is not khalwah (being in solitude with a woman), it is not a sin. But khalwah is a separate, graver, sin, while mixing and intermingling is also a sin, though of a lesser category. The fact that intermingling does not necessarily entail khalwah does not mean it is not sinful.
RELATED: Is Islamic Gender Separation a Sign of Backwardness?
Conclusion: Statement of Ibn al-Ḥājj
In short, it is not permissible for non-elderly men and women to remain unnecessarily in a place where each gender is not designated their own separate area/space. Difficulties encountered in adhering to this principle does not negate its importance. Those engaged in this sin should try to eliminate it from their lives, or at minimum reduce it as far as possible, and constantly turn to Allāh in tawbah and ask Him to make for them a means to leave it completely. The corruption in the present time and the prevalence of such immoral practices and attitudes does not justify becoming lax or complacent about these matters. Rather, because of this prevalence, it would be a greater necessity to draw attention to its prohibition.
In this respect, I end with this fitting quote from the great Mālikī imām, Ibn al-Ḥājj (ca. 657 – 737 H), who lived more than seven-hundred years ago:
[The learned man] should teach [his womenfolk] the Islāmic teaching (sunnah) of coming out when she is compelled to do so. It has been transmitted that a woman comes out in the lowliest and roughest of her clothing, dragging her cloak behind her [to the length] of one hand span or an arm’s length…The Islāmic teaching (sunnah) has stipulated that her walking should be along the walls…Look, Allāh have mercy on us and you, at these teachings (sunan), how they have been erased in our time, to the point that they have come to be like something unknown, because of what [women] do of the opposite of these Shar‘ī states. Thus, a woman sits at home as is known of her normal manner, with lowly garments and avoiding adornment…and then when she wishes to come out, she becomes clean and adorned, looks to the finest clothing and jewellery she possesses and wears it, and then comes out on the road as if a bride that has appeared; and she walks in the middle of the road, mixing with men, and they have a way of walking – to the point that the men, I mean the righteous amongst them, retreat to the walls to make space for them on the road; while others mix with them…All of this is caused by not looking to the sunnah and its principles, and what the Salaf of this ummah (Allāh be pleased with them) have passed upon. When a learned person draws attention to this and its likes, these holes are closed, and the blessing of that would be hoped for everyone. Those who turn back from what ought not be, this is an excellent destination, and those who do not turn back will know that he/she is engaging in sin and so will remain broken hearted due to that. The goodness in being broken is known, and it is hoped the one who is broken will repent and turn back. [24]
Note: Circumstances and situations which arise in the land of non-Muslims, or in lands that have adopted non-Muslim norms, that are beyond our control, and which might temporarily constrain us to enter into environments of free-mixing to fulfil a genuine personal need (ḥājah), cannot justify introducing such an abomination in places under our control (like private residences or masjids) or entering such places without need. “Need” here refers to something that to avoid would cause unbearable distress and hardship to individuals (Asbāb al-‘Udūl, p261). For example, to not go into the market to purchase basic necessities would undoubtedly cause unbearable distress. There is no ḥājah for introducing free-mixing within homes/masjids/madrasahs, or to enter places where it is taking place without any need.
Notes
Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 4750; Fatḥ al-Bārī, Dār Ṭaybah, 10:386 
ibid. 10:395 
Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 4750; Fatḥ al-Bārī, Dār Ṭaybah, 10:387 
Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 6248 
Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 865; Fatḥ al-Bārī, 3:109-10 
Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 372; Fatḥ al-Bārī, 2:89 
Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, 850; Fatḥ al-Bārī, 3:89 
ibid. 3:92-3 
Sunan Abī Dāwūd, 460; Badhl al-Majhūd, Dār al-Bashā’ir al-Islāmiyyah, 3:186 
(see: darulmaarif.com/women-attending-the-masjid-a-clarification/). 
Akhbār Makkah, Dār Khaḍir, 1:252 
Akhbār Makkah, Dār Khaḍir, 1:252 
Hidāyat al-Sālik, p1022-3; al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā al-Fiqhiyyah, 1:201-2 
Ṣaḥīh Ibn Ḥibbān, 5601 
Sharḥ Ma‘ānī al-Ᾱthār, 1:485 
Nukhab al-Afkār, 7:268 
al-Minhāj fī Shu‘ab al-Imān, 3:398 
al-Ḥāwi al-Kabīr, 2:51 
al-Muhadhdhab, Dār al-Qalam, 1:358 
Iḥyā’ ‘Ulūm al-Dīn, Dār al-Minhāj, 4:639 
al-Jāmi‘ fi l-Sunan wa l-Ᾱdāb wa l-Maghāzī wa l-Tārīkh, 214 
al-Nawādir wa l-Ziyādāt, 8:243; al-Bayān wa l-Taḥṣīl, 9:335 
ibid. 9:336 
al-Madkhal, 1:244-5 

The Muslim Skeptic

THE FALLACY OF ‘WOMEN’S FACILITIES’

ZINA AT THE MUSAAJID – THE FALLACY OF ‘WOMEN’S FACILITIES’

Consequent to our exposure of the zina at the Musjid in Musgrave, a Sister from the U.K. sent the following comment:

Assalamu Alaikum

Regarding the relationship between the man and woman via the opening of masjid for women http://www.themajlis.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2890:avenues-of-zina-by-molvis-&catid=34:majlis-articles&Itemid=27

In Ramadhan the imam/leader of East London Mosque had to make an announcement regarding women wearing proper clothing otherwise don’t bother coming to the masjid.

Of course, they shouldn’t be going anyway but East London Mosque has had women’s space for years and years.

There was an uproar by the youth on Twitter by youth who got upset by the imam telling them what to do. However these are the things that were being promoted on the horrible social media platform ‘Tiktok’ in the Holy month of Ramadhan.

https://mobile.twitter.com/saq_a13/status/1515050342119055362

“Let’s go East London Mosque for taraweeh, they have the baddest hijabis”

“You’re from Manchester and your FYP is making you want to go to East London Mosque to see all the baddest hijabis ” (I’m not sure what FYP stands for)

The imam, Shaykh Abdul Qayum made an announcement:

“Reminder for aadaab of coming to the Masjid.

First to the brothers, please do not go near to the sisters entrance when you are collecting your wife or your sister or your mother. Stay away from the women’s entrance.

Nowadays everyone has phone communication. Al haya-u shu’batuminal imaan. (Shyness is a branch of imaan). How can we be standing in front of the women/sisters who are coming and going? Stay away from the sisters’ entrance.

Number 2 for the sisters. We are talking about coming to the masjid by sisters. There are some aadaab we need to maintain. Many sisters are compromising their hijab, their dress. Young sisters are coming without proper hijaab according to the Shari’ah. It is a big sin. You are coming to pray to get reward, but you’re committing sin again. So if you are not covering yourself properly according to the Shari’ah, don’t come to pray at the Masjid.”

https://mobile.twitter.com/5Pillarsuk/status/1514545568760143876

East London Mosque is a place where once you would see Somalian sisters covered in large, loose abayas and niqab in the masjid. However over time it has changed and now the youth are dressing largely inappropriately. This and the messages by young men on Tiktok was brought to the attention of the Imam of the masjid.

Alhamdulillah for Mujlisul Ulama who do noes divert from the Haq.” Wassalam

(End of the Sister’s comments)

This deplorable state of zina in the making – the disgusting state of the Musaajid having become platforms for zina and of the fallacy of women’s separate facilities, etc., are directly attributable to the cynical attitudes and schemes of molvis who are worst than khanaazeer. Molvis were the very first in the diabolical plot to abrogate the Ijma’ of the Sahaabah – the Ijma’ on the ban and prohibition of females attending the Musjid. Now in almost all countries where the Musaajid have been opened to women, lewd women, women with prostitutional and immoral tendencies flock to the Musaajid to execute the vile and obscene schemes of shaitaan. Allah Ta’ala has labelled such women with the epithet Habaailush Shaitaan (The Snares of the Devil).

It is absolutely disgusting that the Musaajid have become platforms for scheming zina relationships. Ulama who lure women from their homes to listen to their bayaans should take note and understand their vile role in this satanic saga of zina which they have created, promote and condone.

9 Shawwaal 1443 – 11 May 2022

MUSJID FACILITIES FOR WOMEN

Q. Some Ulama in UK have issued the fatwa that it is permissible to establish separate facilities for females at the Musjids for Salaat. They cite Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah alayh) and Mufti Taqi Usmani in support. What is Shariah’s ruling?
A. As far as Mufti Taqi is concerned he is person’a non grata. He is a liberal who has lost his Islamic bearings many years ago. He has opened the avenue for the fitnah of immorality and riba with his corrupt fatwas halaalizing pictography and so-called ‘islamic’ banking. Meanwhile, all his halaalizing practices, especially banking fatwas are designed for the dollars. The capitalist bankers pay tens of thousands of dollars for fatwas of permissibility for their riba products.
As far as their citing Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah alayh) is concerned, they merely flaunt their jahaalat. They are morons wallowing in ghabaawat. Haafiz Ibn Hajr (Rahmatullah alayh) said that it is only a GHABI (a chap whose brains are densely clogged with nafsaaniyat and worldly objectives) who will have the temerity to claim that it is permissible for women to gatecrash into the Musaajid.
All the arguments of ‘hikmat’ proffered by the legalizers of this Prohibition are spurious excrescences of the nafs. We have elaborately discussed and refuted all their ghutha (rubbish) arguments in seven booklets which are available on our website. It is not permissible to have facilities for females in the Musaajid. The Sahaabah had enacted Ijma’ on this Prohibition, hence no one’s view can ever override this sacred Consensus.

AVENUES OF ZINA BY MOLVIS

MUSAAJID MADE AVENUES OF ZINA BY MOLVIS

“DO NOT COME NEAR TO ZINA.” (Qur’aan)

The Qur’aan forbids all stepping stones and introductory acts and factors leading to zina. All things leading to zina are just as haraam as zina. Among the measures introduced by molvis for indulgence in zina is opening the Musaajid for females. Based on their shaitaani, convoluted logic the Ulama, even the sincere ones, invite women to the Musaajid for Salaat and for listening to their talks. This is indeed a cunning ploy of shaitaan who has entrapped the molvis in his snare. The talk of separation or separate facilities for women is another shaitaani deception with which the molvis have become hoodwinked. Read carefully the following letter of a brother who was trapped into zina via the Musjid platform. The Brother writes:

My Adulterous Relationship from Musjid-us-Salaam, Musgrave

As salaam u alaikum

I am a musalee of Musjidus Salaam, Musgrave — the new Musjid that was built last year in Musgrave. This year on the 1st of Ramadaan I parked my car in the basement. There was a lady in a car (Note: We have deleted the type/name of the vehicle to avoid detection and recognition of the prostitute woman by her husband –The Majlis) who entered at the same time as I did. While walking to the lift, she said, “Sorry brother, which way to the ladies lift.” I pointed to it and she thanked me and smiled . I walked away thinking nothing of it. On the next evening we happened to enter at the same time again, and she smiled at me and I smiled back.

Thereafter I didn’t see her for 2 days. The next time I saw her she jokingly said, “You’ve been missing for 2 days.” I laughed and said, yes, and asked her: Did you miss me. She laughed and said nothing. When I got back to my car, there was a note on the windscreen, with a message, and a phone number. When I messaged the number it turned out to be her. We started communicating, and by the middle of Ramadaan, our messages had become x rated. We had a biting passion to be with each other. We both are married and have our own spouses. On Wednesday after Eid, we met at a hotel and spent the afternoon together. We went to the point of no return. (i.e. committed the ultimate sin of adultery—The Majlis)

I am feeling very guilty, and need to get out of this relationship, because I know it’s wrong, but I’m addicted. I’m not blaming the Musjid, because it is the House of Allah. However, the biggest sin the trustees could have committed was allowing ladies and men in the same musjid, and entering through a common parking lot.

Please make others aware so that this doesn’t happen again to me and others. Jazakallah (End of letter)

On the occasion of the expulsion of Iblees from the Heavens, he supplicateto Allah Ta’ala. He made dua to be granted several things. One of his supplications was for “TRAPS”. Accepting the dua of Iblees, Allah Ta’ala said: “Your Traps will be women.” In the terminology of the Hadith these Traps are called Habaailush Shaitaan.

Entrapping the brother as well as innumerable others in similar scenarios, Iblees fired the first arrow of zina in the Musjid basement which became the avenue of zina – an avenue created by the Ibleesi molvis and juhala trustees. The very first step towards zina was the fortuitous encounter in the basement by man and woman. This encounter belies the stupid, shaitaani claim of ‘separation’ or ‘separate facilities’. There is total free intermingling in most Musjids at the entrances and exists. The separation inside the Musjid proper is a mock separation. And, assuming a total separation can practically be established, then too it remains HARAAM for women to attend the Musjid.

The first encounter ignited the spark of zina in the man and woman. Shaitaan succeeded in planting the seed of zina in the man and woman. The woman’s expression of ‘thanks’ and ‘gratitude’ was a further act designed by Iblees to ensure that these unfortunate souls would indulge in zina. Shaitaan ensured the germination of the seed of zina which Iblees had already planted in their hearts. This expression of thanks in alluring tones was part of the net of zina being spread by Iblees. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Women are snares of shaitaan.”

The lustful smile cast by the woman provided exceptionally good fertilizer for the germination of the seed of zina in the heart of the brother. Although the brother says that he was thinking ‘nothing’ of this incident, if he reflects he will not fail to discern the lust which had been kindled. He labored in self-deception. He was already entangled in the Trap of Shaitaan.

The next night, shaitaan went a step further to solidify his trap. He planned the supposedly coincidental encounter again. Now the two went a step further in the route to zina. They exchanged smiles of zina despite the fact that they were proceeding into the House of Allah for Salaat. The sanctity of the Musjid and the Salaat did not deter them from entrapment in the meshes of Iblees and the nafs. The man had lost his thinking capability. Imaam Ghazaali (Rahmatullah alayh) said that when a man is entrapped by a woman, 80% of his brain cells become inoperative.

In the next encounter two days later, the woman discarded whatever vestige of hayaa she may have had by virtue of Imaan which she appears to have extinguished, and invited the brother by implication to zina. All the trappings necessary for actual zina had been cultivated. Thus, they committed the ultimate act of adultery in the hotel room hired specifically for the commission of adultery.

Both are married. Not the Musjid, not Salaat, not the Holy Month of Ramadhaan, not the auspicious Nights of Ramadhaan, nor the thought of their spouses and their children deterred them from the treachery and villainy of zina. They had become like atheists, entirely oblivious of the Presence of Allah Ta’ala and of the Two Recording Angels alongside them.

Molvis and jaahil trustees are primarily responsible for such zina episodes initiated in the Musaajid environs. Whatever the brother has described is not an isolated happening. Such zina encounters are on the increase in the wake of intermingling of sexes in the Musjid environs. The rubbish so-called ‘ulama’ and the rubbish jaahil trustees are largely responsible for this haraam zina state of affairs. They are the causes for zina in the Musjid and for breaking up of homes. They are guilty of the vile acts of treachery and infidelity committed by the adulterers towards their spouses sitting at home.

The veil of ignorance on the brains of some sincere Ulama is most distressing. Some Ulama despite being ‘senior’ and ostensibly ‘pious’ and operating Deeni institutions, lure women into the public domain to attend their lectures held in the Musaajid. These molvis should understand that they are guilty of debauchery. They pillage and plunder the Imaan and Hayaa of women. They should hang their heads in shame. The earth needs to be purified of these highway dacoits who rob Muslims of their Imaan and Hayaa. Shaitaan has urinated on the Aql (Brains) of these molvis – they are NOT Ulama – and he has paralyzed their intelligence. They therefore, miserably and disgustingly fail to understand the extremely simple fact of the Prohibition of female emergence from the home. How is it ever Islamically possible for Ulama to encourage women to come out of their homes to listen to their bayaans in the Musaajid when the Sahaabah had unanimously banned women from attending the Musjid for Fardh Salaat – a practice which Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had permitted?

These molvis are not interested in the moral reformation and spiritual elevation of women. Their satanic desire is ‘female company’. They want to display themselves to the females is peacock-style – in the manner in which the peacock spreads its wings and dances. Shaitaan has really jarred the mental equilibrium of these molvis whom Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) described as “THE WORST OF PEOPLE UNDER THE CANOPY OF THE SKY”.

7 Shawwaal 1443 – 9 May 2022

FATWA ON MUSJID CLOSURE AND SOCIAL DISTANCING IN SALAAH

FATWA ON MUSJID CLOSURE AND SOCIAL DISTANCING IN SALAAH

Question:
Assalaaamualaikum.
Mufti Makada Saheb,
There is much confusion amongst people of knowledge regarding the term difference of opinion.Many Students and Scholars alike latch on to the term when it comes to social distance in Salah and closure of Masaajid .
To clarify this dilemma:

  1. Is social distance in Salah and musjid closure a valid difference of opinion?
  2. What are the limits of and what type of valid difference of opinions ought to be respected?

ANSWER

Haamidan wa Musalliyan

Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakaatuh

A valid difference of opinion (ikhtilaaf) takes place in the case where the differences come within the scope of the textual proofs of the Quraan and the Hadith. These types of differences will be similar to the differences between the four mazhabs who establish their mazhabs from the textual proofs of the Quraan and Hadith. However, if a difference goes against the textual proofs of the Quraan and Hadith, then this is not regarded as a valid difference of opinion (ikhtilaaf) that can be accommodated in Deen. Rather, it is regarded as a violation of Deen (khilaaf).

In regard to the issue of social distancing, then practising this in salaah is impermissible as it opposes the clear and categorical texts of the Hadith. Hence, one will accept the opinion of those people whose view conforms to the command of the Hadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alaihi wasallam). One will not accept the opinion of those people whose view opposes the command of the Hadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alaihi wasallam).

When we view the Ahaadith, then we see that Hazrat Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) was greatly displeased with the Ummah not joining the saffs and mentioned that this method of performing salaah is the means of one being cut off from the mercy of Allah Ta‘ala, as well as disunity being created in the hearts.

Below are a few Ahaadith that will shed light on the displeasure of Hazrat Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) for the Ummah performing salaah in this manner.

  1. Being Cut Off from the Mercy of Allah Ta‘ala

In one Hadith, Hazrat Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) said, “The one who joins the saff (i.e. he does not leave gaps in the saff), Allah will join him (to His special mercy), and the one who cuts the saff (i.e. by leaving gaps), Allah Ta‘ala will cut him off (from His mercy).” (Mustadrak #774).

  1. Creating Disunity in the Hearts

On one occasion, before Hazrat Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) commenced the salaah, he turned his mubaarak face towards the Sahaabah (radhiyallahu ‘anhum) and said thrice, “Straighten your saffs.” Hazrat Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) then said, “By Allah! You will certainly straighten your saffs, or Allah will most definitely create disunity in your hearts!” (Sunan Abi Dawood #662) On hearing this, the Sahaabah (radhiyallahu ‘anhum) immediately ensured that there were no gaps between them.

  1. Shaitaan Entering between the Gaps

Hazrat Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam) said, “Join your saffs (i.e. stand joined to one another, with no gaps in between), and keep your saffs close to one another, and ensure that your necks are in line with one another, for I take an oath by that Being in whose control lies my life – I certainly see Shaitaan entering through the gaps in the saff like a small goat.” (Sunan Abi Dawood #776)

From the above mentioned Ahaadith, we understand that through carrying out the salaah in accordance to the sunnah, the mercy of Allah Ta‘ala will be acquired, unity will be created in the hearts of the believers, and they will be saved from the evil effects of Shaitaan.

The Fuqahaa have clearly mentioned that performing salaah with gaps between the musallis is makrooh-e-tahreemi (impermissible) and one will be sinful through performing salaah in this manner. Imagine that salaah is the greatest ibaadat of Deen, and it is a means of acquiring the mercy of Allah Ta‘ala, yet through opposing the sunnah, one receives sin through the salaah instead of reward!

For further details, you may refer to the attached kitaab we have prepared on this topic.

And Allah Ta’ala (الله تعالى) knows best.

Answered by:
Mufti Zakaria Makada
Checked & Approved:
Mufti Ebrahim Salejee

VALIDITY OF SALAAT

Question
I understand that during salaat, for men – the entire region from above the navel to below the knees, should not only be covered, but its shape should also be concealed, i.e., the clothing should not be skin-tight. Without this, the salaat is not valid. However, there are two issues I am worried about:
(a) The lower garment – I understand that the trousers should be loose and not tight-fitting or hugging closely the thighs and knees. But how loose is good enough? Is it considered sufficiently loose if there is enough free space in each leg of the trousers to fit an arm alongside the leg? This understanding of looseness becomes important when taken together with the below problem about the upper garment. I wish to understand if the validity of the salaat is affected by the situation.
(b) The upper garment – the kurta which covers till below the knee during standing position in salaat, rises up when in the ruku’ position. Although it still covers completely the posterior and most of the thighs, the problem is that the kurta rises up to about a few inches above the knee. During sajda, there is no problem as the back panel (daaman) of the kurta reaches the upper end of the ankles, and the thighs are folded inwards. However, during jalsah, again the kurta slightly rises – partially exposing the knees.
Answer
In fact, during Salaat and at all times when in public, the body should be covered appropriately from neck to above the ankles. This applies not only to Salaat. The notion that covering the aurah is sufficient, is baatil. While the validity of Salaat is reliant on covering the Satr/Aurah, it is sinful to perform Salaat with only the Satr covered if one has garments to cover the entire body.
If the trousers is so tight, e.g. jeans, which reveals the shape of the satr area, then it is as if he is naked. His Salaat is therefore not valid with such lewd kuffaar garb. The looseness should be such that the shape of the satr area is not at all visible.
A kurtah which rises a few inches above the knees during Ruku’ is not a proper kurtah. The kurtah should be midway between the knees and the ankles, then it will not rise above the knees during ruku’.
Furthermore, for practical purposes, ‘validity’ of Salaat should be understood in the context of Acceptance (Maqbooliyat) by Allah Ta’ala, not in the technical context appearing in the Kutub of Fiqh. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that Salaat performed haphazardly is struck into the face of the musalli as if it is an old dirty scrap cloth. This is regardless of the Fiqhi validity of the Salaat.
Therefore, Salaat performed with jeans, T-shirts, tight pants, even loose pants without a kurtah covering the satr area, garb with logos of any kind whatsoever, with elbows exposed, with western garb, and with pants below the ankles is NOT VALID. Such Salaat MUST be repeated with proper attire.

FROM THE MAJLIS VOLUME 26 NUMBER 02

The Imam Facing The Qiblah or Congregation After Salah

Question

Why do some Imam’s turn around after every Salah and do adkhar whilst others don’t? Or some only after Fajr and ‘Asr.

Is there a Sunnah to this?

Answer

The ‘Ulama have mentioned that the qiblah (direction) of du’a is the sky. (That’s why the hands face the sky). However, it is among the etiquettes of du’a that the person making du’a should face the Ka’bah. (Silah al-Mumin pg.101, Al-Hisn al-Hasin pg.57)

If one leaves it out, he will not be sinful just like it is etiquette to be in the state of wudu whilst making du’a. If this too left out (as is the case in many a situation), the du’a will still be correct.

Should the Imam remain facing the qiblah or turn to the congregation?

Sayyidatuna Ummu Salamah (radiyallahu’anha) reports that Rasulullah (sallallahu’alayhi wasallam) would remain in his spot [i.e, facing the qiblah] after the Fard Salah for a short while.

(Sahih Bukhari, Hadith: 849)

Sayyidah ‘Aishah (radiyallahu’anha) reported that Rasulullah (sallallahu’alayhi wasallam) would only remain in that spot for the duration it takes to recite: Allahumma Antas Salam, wa minkas Salam, Tabarakta Ya Dhal Jalali wal Ikram.

(Sahih Muslim, Hadith: 1334-1336)

The above is recommended when there are Sunnah Salahs that follow the Fard Salah. The Imam may remain facing the qiblah for a short duration to recite the few masnun dhikrs, and move away from the spot of Imamat, to read his Sunnah Salah.

As for the practice of the Imams of turning away from the direction of the qiblah after the Fajr and Asr Salahs. The Fuqaha (Jurists) have stated that if the Imam intends to remain seated in his place after those Fard Salahs which are not followed by any Sunnah Salah, then he (the Imam) should turn away from the direction of the qiblah. (It is Mustahab to do so). He could turn towards the direction of the people or towards the right or left.

It is Makruh Tanzihi for the Imam to remain seated in the direction of the qiblah. (Rad al-Muhtar vol.1 pg.531)

If he has to perform the Sunnah Salah after the Fard, he should stand up immediately and not perform the Sunnah on the same spot.

(Rad Al-Muhtar vol.1 pg.531. Also see Fathul Bari vol.2 pg.431, Musannaf ibn Abi Shaybah vol.1 pg. 336,337.)

This has been recorded as the practice of Rasulullah and various Sahabah (radiyallahu ‘anhum) as well.

Narrations that support the above

  1. Sayyiduna Samurah ibn Jundub (radiyallahu ‘anhu) is reported to have said: ‘Rasulullah used to turn around after completing the (Fard) salah and He would face us.’

(Sahih Bukhari, Hadith: 845).

This was in the case when Rasulullah wanted to sit for a while (Fathul Bari) and if not then Rasulullah would stand up immediately.

(Musannaf-Abdur- Razzaq vol.2 pg.246).

  1. Sayyiduna ‘Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (radiyallahu’anhu) is reported to have said: ‘When the Imam completes the salam, he should immediately stand up, and if not then he should at least turn away. He was asked as whether it would suffice for the Imam to move from his spot and face the qiblah? He replied; ‘He should face the east or west.’ (i.e. He should face a direction other than the qiblah.)

(Musannaf Abdur-Razzaq vol.2 pg.242,243).

  1. In fact, it is reported about Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (radiyallahu’anhu) that as soon as he would complete the Fard Salah (as an Imam), he would immediately stand up. The narrator states, “He would do it, so quickly as though he was on burning coal.” (Musannaf Abdur-Razzaq vol.2 pg.242,246).

And Allah Ta’ala Knows best,

Answered by: Moulana Muhammad Abasoomar

Checked by: Moulana Haroon Abasoomar