Gender Equality in Islam-05


During the course of this section, we will list some hadieths as it is still extensively used by Muslim priests, despite the fact being discredited by enlightened jurists for ages, aiming only to disambiguate just in case any of the readers faced one of it. Other hadieths were not discredited based on its reference/linkage line to prophet, but we find its content to be conflicting with other teachings or deeds of the apostle or with Quran. In addition, we will discuss some teachings that is credited yet misinterpreted against women by many hadieth references.

1. Narrated “Moad ibn Jabal“: Apostle of God said “Bloodwit of a female is half of male bloodwit ”

Many Islamic jurists in the past as well as contemporary jurists has discredited this hadieth, due to its incoherence with Quran, directly stating about the case of unintentional murders “then let him set free a believing slave, and bloodwit is to be paid to his family unless they forgo it as a freewill offering” Woman: 92. No comment or gender discrimination has showed in the verse. Accordingly, the credibility of this hadieth was challenged.

2. Narrated “Abu Huraira“: Apostle of God said “Then prayer is interrupted by the passage of a woman, a donkey or a dog (meant in front of the praying man)
Indexed by: Muslim

Another narration of this hadieth escalated the list to contain 6 elements, the three above, plus a Jew, a magus, or a pig! We discredit this hadieth based on several evidences:

- “Aisha“, apostle’s wife, had discredited this hadieth once heard about it saying, “Do Abu Huraira set us along with dogs and donkeys? I swore to God I used to be sleeping and my feet near to apostle’s head when he prays” this narration from the apostle’s wife is surely contradicting “Abu Huraira“ narration. Therefore, “Aisha” was the first to discredit this teaching, with our due respect of the effort of Muslim verifying his index.

- The narration conflicts with the Quranic verses about equality of men and women. As well, the holy verse, “We have honored the Children of Adam” Transfer: 70. The claimed teaching, equalized humankind as Jews, Magi, and Muslim women to animals, which disregard humanity at large.

The teaching conflicts with the verses fostering other tolerance in Quran considering its narration including the Jew and the Magus in the loop. Indexed in “Bukhary”, “While Muhammad (pbuh) was setting among his disciples; a funeral of a Jew was passing. The Apostle of God then erected standing in respect. His disciples commented: He is a Jew O’ Apostle. Muhammad (pbuh) then replied, “O’ Almighty God, Isn’t he a human!”

- The narration also conflicts directly with all apostolic teachings honoring women as we detailed before in this chapter.

- The basic concept of prayer abortion due to passage of a living creature in front of the praying man is not logically tolerable. How men can avoid a dog or a donkey to pass while praying in an open air place? How he avoid it in rural areas? What is the distance enough to consider the dog passed away from him? Shall the man stop every person who passed while he prayed to ask if he is a Jew or a Magus?

3. Narrated “Anas ibn Malik:“: “Angasha“ was singing (nomadic songs for camels to speed up) and the women camels were speeding up, it was then when Apostle of God said “Slowdown ‘Angasha’, show kindness to the perfume vials (narrated Qawareer in Arabic) Indexed by: Muslim

This is such an honorable teaching, demonstrating how afar the apostolic kindness was from the regular bedouins. Amazingly, even this soft and tender teaching was not salvaged from the anti-feminine jurists. While the wording is very clear, showing the apostle to fear the over speeded camels might bother the women, therefore he asked “Angasha” to slowdown his rhythmic songs, and accordingly the camels, only in order to fit the tenderness of feminine built, expressed by apostle of God as “Perfume Vials” or “Qawareer”.

Yet, the anti-feminism found a way to turn it to the direct opposite. Here is how it was explained by Imam “Nawawy” who said about it “the women are usually weak, and their emotions can be easily tackled by soft songs of the camels’ nomad, then they become more vulnerable to commit adultery, as singing is a usual entry to fornication”.

Can any of us today imagine singing as the intro of adultery! Surely not many will do. It is the cultural and tempral gap separating us from the time and place of Imam “Nawawy”. However, such an explanation should not stand as blame on him, but on the overall environment that blessed the masculine approach to life. By the end of the day, the ancient jurists and interpreters were the product of their environment and time.

4. It is said the apostle of God have seen a woman whom he liked, so he went to his wife “Zainab”, while she was busy in a housekeeping matter, he practiced marital relation with her, then went out to his disciples, and said, “Women comes and goes as seducing as a Satan, whenever one among you watches a woman whom he likes, he should go to his wife and have sex with her, this is enough to control his desires, as they are all alike”
Indexed by: Muslim

O’ my apostle, O’ great messenger, and great leader. May you forgive us for what the sick minded among us has invented, and claimed to pertain to you?
Can any Muslim in the light of his knowledge of Muhammad’s life, imagine these words and that event to be rightly narrated?

Whoever thinks for a moment these words could belong to Muhammad (pbuh), shall answer the following questions:

- How can Muhammad (pbuh) who ordered men not to be staring on a woman do it himself?

- Who could get into Muhammad’s heart, to know that he saw a woman, and desired her, then went to his wife to have sex with her? Who shall see this internal dialogue and record it?

- Did the apostle tell about it? Have he told his disciples that he made love to one of his wives moments ago, specifically “Zainab”, is this possible while he himself, taught us that sexual relations between couples shall never be disclosed?

- The only possible scenario here is the apostle was sitting among his disciples, then saw the woman, then excused to make love to his wife, then showered and came back to his disciples, a scenario that takes almost an hour. Can you imagine the apostle doing so, while he was the spiritual and temporal leader of a prosperous nation?

- The apostle who loved “Khadija“ and equaled none to her, then loved “Aisha“ and favored her, knows for sure that all women are not alike. Nevertheless, whoever faked or drifted this teaching did not know. If apostle believed all women to be alike, why then he asked God to forgive him if he was not just emotionally, having no control over his heart? Shall the man who experienced love adopt the claimed “Vaginal” approach to women perception, telling all women are alike? Surely, we say no.

- If all women were alike, why the revelation of God approved and regarded the human feelings in the verses related to prophet’s marriage to “Zainab bent Gahsh” whose name is included in the claimed hadieth? Muhammad married her after he liked her as stated in Quran. It was then when God blamed him for trying to ignore his feelings. How we are expected to see this coherent with Muhammad (pbuh) saying “all women are alike”

The story of “Zainab bent Gahsh” is such a controversial one, as many orientalists had undermined the apostle of Islam using it. Therefore, we will take a minute to explain it. The woman was married to “Zaid ibn Haretha”, the adopted son of Muhammad (pbuh). When Muhammad passed his adopted son at home, knocking the door,”Zainab”opened, informing that ”Zaid” was not at home. Then Muhammad (pbuh) turned his face and left her saying, “My Almighty Allah, You who turns man’s heart”. Obviously he liked the woman when he saw her, this is exactly why he wanted to make the situation shorter leaving her on spot.

On the other hand,”Zaid” was not satisfied with his wife, as she was a daughter of a leading clan in Quraish, and has a degree of kinship to Muhammad (pbuh), while he was a non-rooted man in this tribal community. He used to complain to Muhammad (pbuh) from her superior behavior, as she feels too noble to be his wife. Muhammad (pbuh) whenever hears this from him after the event of seeing her, he used to tell him “fear God O’ Zaid and keep consorting to your wife”. The Apostle did not want to accept ”Zaid” divorcing his wife as he feared if he did, maybe it is his ego, him Muhammad, who wanted this, so he used to affirm rejection, and this is typically what an honorable man shall do in such a situation.

It is valuable to say, it was quite uncommon for a man to marry his adopted son’s divorcee. The status remained so, until God revealed to his Apostle “When you said to him whom God had blessed and you had favored, ’Keep your wife, and fear God,’ and you were concealing within yourself what God should reveal, fearing other men; and God has better right for you to fear Him. So when Zaid had his husbandry rights with her, then We gave her in marriage to you, so that there should not be any fault in the believers, touching the wives of their adopted sons” The Clans: 37.

While orientalists use this verse to undermine Quranic divinity, claiming Quran to be satisfying Muhammad’s needs and wishes. We find it a standalone proof on the divinity of Quran. Shall everyone imagine himself in the same situation; he would have never liked Quran to reveal what he hides, especially about something not very acceptable socially. when a man is in the role and status of an Apostle and a leader at a time, he will hate such a social liability.

5. Meeting a group of men coming from Persia, Apostle asked them, who became the king of Persians, they replied, they had crowned a woman. Then Apostle of God said, “Shall never prosper a nation wherein a woman leads” later on, we found apostle’s prophecy to be true, as the Rums had defeated Persians.
Indexed by: Bukhary, Turmudi, Nesa’iy and Ahmed.

Leaving alone the conflict of this hadieth equality concept in Quran, we shall discredit it based on a unique evidence, a historical one.

Historical Evidence of Falsehood:

- The Sassanid Empire was established by “Ardashir I“ (226–241), and it is worthy to say that the title “Kesra” is an imaginary Arab title that had never existed in Sassanid era, it was most probably mislead by the name of some Persian kings named “Khosrau I” and “Khosrau II”. The Sassanid kings has always adopted the title of “Shāhanshāh” or “King of Kings”

Hereunder, the time frames of the Sassanid kings succession:

Ardashir I 224 to 241, Peroz I 457 to 484 , Shapur I 241 to 272 , Balash 484 to 488 , Hormizd I 272 to 273 , Kavadh I 488 to 531 , Bahram I 273 to 276 , Djamasp 496 to 498 , Bahram II 276 to 293, Khosrau I 531 to 579 , Bahram III 293 , Hormizd IV 579 to 590, Narseh 293 to 302 , Bahram Chobin 590 to 591, Hormizd II 302 to 310 , Khosrau II 591 to 628 , Shapur II 310 to 379 ,Kavadh II 628 ,Ardashir II 379 to 383, Ardashir III 628 to 630, Shapur III 383 to 388 ,Shahrbaraz 630 ,Bahram IV 388 to 399, Purandokht 630 to 631, Yazdegerd I 399 to 420, Azarmidokht 631- 632 ,Bahram V 420 to 438 ,Hormizd VI 631 to 632, Yazdegerd II 438 to 457, Yazdgerd III 632 to 651 ,Hormizd III 457 to 459 ,

- The period of Muhammad (pbuh) life and Quran revelation lies all within the Sassanid dynasty period. Therefore, whoever the claimed empress shall be, she must be one of the Sassanid Empresses. Persia witnessed only a couple of Sassanid Empresses as we see in the table, first was “Purandokht” who ruled between 630-631, and her sister “Azarmidokht” who ruled between 631 and 632. Each for as little as two years.

- The defeats of Persians in front of Byzantines happened all during the 6 years war lead by “Heraclius“ against Sassanids between 622-628 AD, and ended with the Persians greater defeat in the “Battle of Nineveh“, where “Khosrau II“ was the ruling King of Persia. Therefore, he was a man who led not a woman, and no woman had ever set on the Sassanid throne before the defeat in “Nineveh“!

- Both Empresses, specially the first was recorded in Sassanid history as good Empresses. Tried her best to control the Empire after defeats, and stored it through a temporal peace settlement with Byzantines.

According to these historical facts, we find the possibilities of this hadieth limited to be said in another occasion, other than what was stated by the narrator, or to be totally fake one. Adding to this historical factor, the teaching conflict with other apostolic teachings, leave alone its contradiction with Quran, we find the highest possibility is that it did not pertain to Apostle Muhammad at all.

Over the coming post, we shall explore more surprizing facts about the claimed teachings dishonoring women.

No comments: