This excerpt is taken from Hafiz Salahuddin Yusuf Rahimahullah's book "Is the Method of Prayer for Women Different from Men?"
In the previous article, you read a commentary on the article by the Mufti and Sheikh al-Hadith of Darul Uloom Karachi. Despite being Sheikh al-Hadith, the manner in which he demonstrated trustworthiness and honesty has already been observed by the readers. Now, we have received another booklet for commentary, which has been distributed among female students studying Islamic studies at the Department of Islamic Sciences (Sheikh Zaid Islamic Center New Campus) at Punjab University, Lahore. It reached us through the respected father of one of the students, who also insisted on clarifying the truth of the arguments presented in it. When the author glanced at it, he was very surprised that in it too, with great fearlessness, scholarly trustworthiness and honesty have been similarly violated, just as was done in the previous article. Interestingly, the first article was written by the Sheikh al-Hadith and Mufti of Darul Uloom Karachi, published about 22 years ago in the daily "Jasarat" Karachi. This second article, included in this booklet and published by H.M. Saeed Company Karachi under the title "Women’s Method of Prayer," is apparently by a student and trainee of the aforementioned Sheikh al-Hadith Maulana Subhan Mahmood Sahib. Because at the beginning of the booklet, under the title "Endorsement," his approval and commendation are included, in which he refers to him as "Dear Sir Salma." Moreover, his name is written as "Abdul Rauf Sikhrovi, Deputy Mufti of Jamia Darul Uloom Karachi." So, one is a teacher and the other a student. One is a Mufti and administrator of Darul Uloom, the other his deputy Mufti; one is an elder, the other his dear sir. But the student deputy and dear sir have surpassed the teacher and elder in committing dishonesty and scholarly betrayal. Thus, the saying "What the father cannot do, the son does completely" has been fulfilled.
Although this clarification is very unpleasant and deeply distressing for us, especially in the current circumstances when the country and nation urgently need unity and solidarity, yet when such a great crime is committed knowingly in broad daylight, and that too by those who are called heirs of the Prophet’s pulpit, claimants of piety and righteousness, wearers of the cloak and turban, bearers of the knowledge of Prophethood, holders of the position of issuing fatwas and research, and occupy the noble position of Sheikh al-Hadith, but by betraying scholarly honesty and deceiving in the name of the Hadith of the Prophet, attributing to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) things that are not proven from him. Whereas the noble command of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) is: [من کذب علی متعمدا فلیتبوأ مقعدہ من النار] "Whoever deliberately lies upon me, let him prepare his place in Hell."
Reference: (Sahih Bukhari:3461)
And the Hadith which the author includes in his book only to inform people that it is very weak, unreliable, and cannot be used as evidence. Yet despite such clear explicitness, a person called Sheikh al-Hadith does not quote the scholar’s explicit statement but instead quotes it as a Hadith of the Prophet to prove his own sect and argues from it. Tell me! Is it correct to attribute this Hadith to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him)? Is it correct to argue from it? Is this not deception and fraud? Regarding deception and fraud, consider the conduct and command of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). He passed by a heap of grain, put his hand into it, and felt moisture on his fingers. He asked the owner why the inside part was moist. He said: Because of rain. The Prophet said: Why did you not put the moist part on top so that people could see it? Then he said: [من غش فلیس منی] "Whoever cheats is not one of me."
Reference: (Sahih Muslim:102)
It is very noteworthy that the Prophet (peace be upon him) gave such a severe warning about cheating in ordinary worldly goods, so how great a criminal must be the one who uses deception and forgery in matters of religion and faith? Can such a claimant of piety, righteousness, knowledge, and virtue have any connection with the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him)? The author does not deny this, but in the light of the aforementioned Hadith of the Prophet, this point is certainly worth considering. The author invites scholars who commit scholarly betrayal (deception) to reflect on both Hadiths and consider whether their conduct does not make them deserving of the warning [من کذب علی متعمدا]
Reference: (Sahih Muslim:3)
and [ومن غشنا، فليس منا] (صحیح المسلم:101)? If not, then it is a matter of satisfaction, but please clarify why not? After these preliminary remarks, we now review the booklet "Women’s Method of Prayer" by Maulana Abdul Rauf Sikhrovi, Deputy Mufti of Darul Uloom Karachi, [بعون اللہ و توفیقہ] and clarify the scholarly betrayals committed in this booklet. Maulana Sikhrovi Sahib says in his introductory words: "The 'Women’s Method of Prayer' is coming next. Before that, a question and detailed answer are written in which the difference between the method of prayer of women and men is proven from the pure Ahadith and the practices of the Companions. This is written because many non-following Muslims, especially women, are given the impression that the method of prayer for women and men is the same. Consequently, their non-following women pray like men, which is merely due to ignorance. Therefore, after this detailed clarification, non-following women should follow these Ahadith and practices and accept the truth, and women following the Hanafi school should be fully confident that their method is absolutely correct and according to Shariah."Here is the question and answer.
Question:
What do the scholars of religion say regarding this issue that a girl belongs to the Hanafi school of thought, her husband is non-muqallid (not following a particular madhhab), and he tells his wife to pray like men. It is not at all established that the method of prayer for women is different from that of men. Now please tell whether the Hanafi girl should pray according to her husband's instructions like men or not? Also, is the difference in the method of prayer between women and men in the Hanafi school proven from the Ahadith or not? Please provide a detailed and reasoned answer to satisfy us. Jazakum Allahu Ta'ala. Humble Abdul Haleem, Dhoraki Sindh
Reference: (The Method of Prayer for Women, pages 36-37)
Answer:
In response, Maulana Sikhrovi Sahib states: In the mentioned case, it is not permissible for Ahl al-Hadith to force their Hanafi wife to pray in the manner of men. Because the method of women's prayer being exactly like that of men is not explicitly proven by any hadith; rather, the difference in the method of prayer between women and men is established by many hadiths and reports from the Companions and the Successors. The four Imams of Fiqh—Imam Azam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik, Shafi'i, and Imam Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on them—all agree on this. The details are below.
Our answer:
In this, Maulana Sahib has written one thing that "the method of prayer for women" being exactly like that of men is not explicitly proven by any hadith.
❀ The second point written is: rather, the method of prayer for women being different from that of men is proven by many hadiths and reports from the Companions and the Successors.
❀ The third claim is that all four Imams of Fiqh are unanimous on this.
❀ In this regard, our first observation is why the author felt the need to mention reports from the Companions and the Successors along with hadiths? In our view, the reason is merely to add weight or to intimidate. Otherwise, the reality is that there is not a single hadith with an authentic chain narrated on this issue in the possession of the Hanafi scholars, and the same applies to the reports from the Companions and the Successors. As we proceed, the truth of our claim will become as clear as daylight. بعون اللّٰہ و توفیقہ
❀ The second observation is that the author has stated: the method of prayer for women being exactly like that of men is not explicitly proven by any hadith. This statement is correct to some extent but its meaning has been misunderstood. That is, [کلمۃ الحق ارید بھا الباطل] the statement is correct but its implication has been taken as false. To understand this, it is necessary to grasp a fundamental point. According to Islam, the sphere of activity for women is limited to domestic affairs, pregnancy, nursing, and the care and protection of children. The sphere of activity for men is broad, including economic struggle and all external matters (politics, governance, jihad and fighting, etc.). Therefore, the Shariah has given men and women different rulings considering their distinct responsibilities and natural characteristics. But where there is no issue of separate capabilities and accordingly different duties, common rulings have been given for both. In this respect, there are three types of rulings.
① Those rulings which relate to the sphere of action of men, their unique characteristics and capabilities, and their specific duties and obligations.
② Those rulings which relate to the sphere of action of women, their gender characteristics, and their specific duties and obligations.
③ Those rulings which do not relate to any particular gender or gender-based issues but are general and can be performed equally by both men and women. Neither gender characteristics hinder their performance. Therefore, Shariah has not prescribed different rulings for them.
❀ The first category of rulings applies only to men, and the addressed party is understood to be men only.
❀ The second category of rulings applies only to women, and the addressed party is understood to be women only.
❀ However, the third category of rulings applies to both, and both are considered the addressed parties.
All teachings of faith and belief, acts of worship, and ethics fall into this third category, and both are equally obligated and addressed, except where Shariah exempts one from a particular ruling. Until an exception is proven by an authentic evidence (a verse of the Quran or an authentic hadith), the ruling is the same for both men and women. For example, [اقیموا الصلوۃ و آتوا الزکوٰۃ] the command of prayer and zakat includes both men and women. Therefore, both are obligated, and the method of performance is the same for both unless a specific exception is proven for one gender. For example, the exceptions for women are that prayer is excused during menstruation and postpartum bleeding, covering the head is obligatory for women, if the Imam forgets, men say SubhanAllah to warn him, and women clap (i.e., strike palm on palm without saying SubhanAllah) or other proven exceptions, there will be differences. Apart from these, there is no difference. [یٰۤاَیُّہَا الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا کُتِبَ عَلَیۡکُمُ الصِّیَامُ] O you who believe! Fasting has been prescribed for you. [آمنوا اور علیکم] Both are masculine plural forms, yet the addressed are not only believing men but also believing women. Fasting in Ramadan is obligatory for both unless an exception is proven for someone. The exception for women in fasting is that they cannot fast during menstruation and postpartum bleeding. Apart from that, they share the other rulings of fasting with men. [یٰۤاَیُّہَا الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا قَاتِلُوا الَّذِیۡنَ یَلُوۡنَکُمۡ مِّنَ الۡکُفَّارِ] O you who believe! Fight those disbelievers who are near you.
Reference: (At-Tawbah:123)
Here, the believers are addressed and commanded to fight. But since this command relates to the sphere of men’s activity, believing women are not the addressed party. By analogy, there are other rulings and issues. In light of this fundamental point, we say that prayer is an act of worship. Its ruling applies to both men and women; both are obligated to perform it. How will both perform the prayer? Exactly in the way the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, performed it or commanded it to be performed. It is not permissible to differentiate between them in the method of performance except for the differences explained in the hadith of the Messenger of Allah. And in the hadith of the Messenger, we find no differences except these. The differences are as follows:
① A woman prays covering her head.
② A woman claps instead of saying SubhanAllah.
③ It is not obligatory for a woman to come to the mosque and pray in congregation.
④ A woman cannot lead men in prayer.
Therefore, Maulana Sikhrovi Sahib’s statement that "the method of prayer for women" being exactly like that of men is not explicitly proven by any hadith is very strange. Because there is no need for explicit proof. When Shariah has not differentiated between the two, how can the scholar of Shariah say that the method of prayer for women is exactly like that of men?
This can be understood by an example: Shariah has commanded both men and women to fast in Ramadan. But it has not explained any difference between their rulings. This clearly means that just as a believing man fasts, a believing woman will fast in exactly the same way. But some people invent different rulings for women than men. When asked for evidence, they say that the method of fasting for women being exactly like that of men is not explicitly proven by any hadith. Honestly, is this any evidence? Or will this "evidence" establish a self-made difference between men and women? A difference will be established only when you prove it from the texts of Shariah (Quran or hadith). Therefore, if Maulana Sahib’s claim that "the method of prayer for women" being different from that of men is proven by many hadiths and reports of the Companions and Successors were true, then he would not have needed to resort to such wordplay. But since he knows the reality of the hadiths he presents, though he keeps his followers in darkness, he is compelled to resort to various kinds of rhetoric.
❀ The third claim of his is that all four Imams of Fiqh agree on this. We will clarify the tricks he used and the showmanship he displayed to prove this claim when we discuss the truth of this claim in its proper place.
Now, first of all, let us examine the arguments they have presented in the name of Hadiths and the traditions of the Companions. Please observe and also shed tears of blood over their disregard for the fear of Allah.
[First Argument]:
[عن ابن عمر رضی اللّٰہ عنہ انہ سئل کیف کان النساء یصلین علٰی عھد رسول اللّٰہ صلی اللّٰہ علیہ وسلم قال کن یتربصن (یتربعن؟) ثم اُمرن ان یحتفزن]
Sayyiduna Ibn Umar رضي الله عنه was asked how women used to pray during the blessed time of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, to which he replied that initially they used to sit on their knees, then they were instructed to pray while sitting closely together.
Reference: (Jami' al-Masanid: p.200 vol.1) (The Method of Prayer for Women: p.38)
Firstly: The author has presented this first hadith with the mentioned reference. What is the meaning and method of sitting on the knees initially? Similarly, what does it mean to pray while sitting closely together? When should they sit closely? How should they sit closely? The author has not provided any explanation of these matters. At least, we do not understand either of these points.
Secondly: Despite extensive searching, we did not find this hadith 'as mentioned above' in the book nor in other sources. If the author provides the complete reference, we would be grateful. Because until it is found in any book, its chain of narration (isnad) cannot be confirmed, and without clarification of its isnad status, it is of no use. It cannot even be accepted as a hadith of the Prophet. If it is indeed a hadith, then what is its source and reference? In other words, the first evidence itself is without proper reference and details, thus the entire effort of the author truly corresponds to the meaning of this couplet.
When the architect lays the first brick crooked,
The entire wall leans crooked.
[Second Evidence]:
[وعن وائل بن حجر رضی اللّٰہ عنہ قال، قال لی رسول اللّٰہ صلی اللّٰہ علیہ وسلم: یا وائل بن حجر! اذا صلّیت فاجعل یدیْکَ حذاء اذنیک والمرأۃ تجعل یدیھا حذاء ثدییھا]
Sayyiduna Wa'il bin Hujr رضي الله عنه says that the Prophet Muhammad صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم taught me the method of prayer, and said: O Wa'il bin Hujr! When you start the prayer, raise your hands up to your ears, and a woman should raise her hands up to her chest.
Reference: (Majma' al-Zawa'id: p.103 vol.2)-(Method of Prayer for Women)
Answer:
This hadith is indeed present in the mentioned book. But after this hadith, the following words are also present there. (وفیہ) ام یحییٰ بنت عبدالجبار لم اعرفھا. In the chain of narration of this report, there is a narrator named Umm Yahya whom I do not know. Observe the scholarly integrity of the author that where he has taken this narration from, it is explicitly mentioned that there is an unknown narrator in it. After that, he has presented it as a Hadith of the Prophet. Whereas a hadith with even one unknown narrator in its chain is not considered reliable. It cannot be used as evidence. This principle is also known to the author, which is why he cleverly omitted the part where the author of the book, Allama Haithami, clarified its chain of narration status. Such people are described by the following couplet:
Some stars are visible, some are not
These tricksters give deception openly
Calling it a Hadith of the Prophet and proving an issue from it is a great audacity and extremely bold insolence.
This is the work of those whose courage is abundant
[Third Argument]:
[عن یزید بن حبیب ان رسول اللّٰہ صلی اللّٰہ علیہ وسلم مَرّ علی امرأتین تصلّیان فقال اذا سجدتما فضما بعض اللحم الی الارض فان المرأۃ لیست فی ذلک کالرجل]
The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, passed by two women who were praying. Upon seeing them, he said: When you prostrate, press some parts of your body firmly to the ground, because in them a woman is not like a man.
Reference: Al-Sunan, by Al-Bayhaqi: p.223, vol.2], [A'laa Al-Sunan referencing Marasil Abi Dawood: p.19, vol.3
Answer:
This narration is mursal and its chain is not authentic either. Firstly, according to the scholars of hadith, a mursal narration is not considered reliable. Because in it, a Tabi‘i narrates directly from the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, even though he did not hear that hadith from the Prophet ﷺ himself. From whom did this Tabi‘i hear the hadith? He does not mention that. In this narration, Yazid bin Habib is a Tabi‘i, but he is narrating from the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, without mentioning the intermediary. That is why hadith scholars also call mursal narrations disconnected (munqati‘). And disconnected narrations are unacceptable. Moreover, there is a narrator who is sound but abandoned (matruk) in this chain. Therefore, in the light of the principles of hadith scholarship, this narration is also unreliable and not a proof. That is why Imam Bayhaqi himself has called it disconnected and narrated it in his book as such.
[Fourth Argument]:
[عن عبداللّٰہ بن عمر رضی اللّٰہ عنہما قال: قال رسول اللّٰہ صلی اللّٰہ علیہ وسلم اذا جلست المرأۃ للصلٰوۃ وضعت فخذھا علی فخذھا الاخریٰ و اذا سجدت الصقت بطنھا فی فخذیھا کا سترما یکون لھا وان اللّٰہ تعالیٰ ینظر الیھا ویقول یا ملائکتی اشھدکم انی قدغفرت لھا]
Our Master Abdullah bin Umar, may Allah be pleased with them, says that the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said that during prayer, when a woman sits, she should place one thigh over the other, and when she goes into prostration, she should bring her stomach close to both thighs in such a way that the maximum of her 'awrah (private parts) is covered. Allah looks at her and commands the angels, "O angels! Bear witness, I have forgiven this woman."
Reference: (The Method of Prayer for Women: pp. 40-41)
Answer:
سبحان اللہ! How great is the virtue of this Hanafi method of prayer? But Maulana Sikhrovi Sahib did not provide any reference for such an "important hadith" and quoted it in this book without any reference. Why was this done? In our opinion, the reason is that it is not a Hadith of the Prophet. Because this narration is present in Sunan al-Kubra by Al-Bayhaqi, but Imam Bayhaqi said about it: [لا یحتج بامثالھا] It is very weak; one cannot use such a narration as evidence. After that, he said about the most important narrator of this narration, Abu Mati' al-Hakam bin Abdullah: His hadiths are clearly weak, and most of the hadiths he narrates are not followed. Imam Yahya bin Ma'in and others have declared him weak. All these details about this narration are present in the same place from where it was quoted, which is Imam Bayhaqi's
Reference: Sunan al-Kubra: Vol. 2, pp. 222-223, old edition and pp. 314-315, new edition, Vol. 2
But Maulana Sikhrovi Sahib did not consider it appropriate to provide its reference. The reason is the same as we have stated.
[Fifth Argument]:
[عن ابی ھریرۃ رضی اللّٰہ عنہ قال قال رسول اللّٰہ صلی اللّٰہ علیہ وسلم التسبیح للرجال والتصفیق للنساء]
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said (that if during prayer something occurs that invalidates the prayer) for men it is to recite Tasbih, and for women, they should only clap.
Reference: (Tirmidhi: p85, Saeed Company, Muslim Sharif: p181, vol.1)
Answer:
This hadith is authentic, therefore it is necessary to act upon the difference mentioned in it for men and women. But this is in the case when women also pray in the mosque with the men in congregation. Just as in the time of the Prophet ﷺ, women also used to come to the Prophet's Mosque and pray in congregation. The rows of men were in front and the rows of women were behind. In this hadith, the Prophet ﷺ has instructed that if the Imam forgets, men should say "SubhanAllah" to alert him. And if none of the men speak, then the women should clap to alert the Imam.
But we ask Maulana Sikhrovi Sahib whether he accepts this hadith? Our claim is that he does not accept this authentic hadith. Because accepting this hadith means that women are also allowed to come to the mosque and pray in congregation. The Prophet ﷺ gave this permission, and that is why He also gave the mentioned instruction. But in Hanafi jurisprudence, there is no permission for women to come to the mosque and pray in congregation. When this is the case, it clearly means that the Hanafis do not accept this hadith. But the Ahl al-Hadith الحمدللہ do accept it.
[Fifth Argument]:
[قال ابوبکر بن ابی شیبۃ سمعتُ عطاء سئل عن المرأۃ کیف ترفع یدیھا فی الصلاۃ قال حذو ثدییھا (وقال ایضا بعد اسطر) لا ترفع بذلک یدیھا کالرجل و اشار فخفض یدیہ جداً وجمعھا الیہ جدا وقال ان للمرأۃ ھیئۃ لیست للرجل]
Imam Bukhari, may Allah have mercy on him, narrates from his teacher Abu Bakr bin Abi Shaybah who said that he heard from Hazrat Ata that he was asked about how a woman should raise her hands in prayer? He replied: up to her chest. And he said that a woman should not raise her hands in prayer in the same way as men do, and when he indicated this, he lowered his hands considerably and joined them well, and said that the method of a woman in prayer is not like that of men.
Reference: (Al-Musannaf by Abi Bakr bin Abi Shaybah: p239, vol 1). (The Method of Women’s Prayer: p41-42)
Answer:
These are two narrations, meaning there are two statements of a Tabi'i. But Maulana Sukhrovi has combined both and presented them as one. Whereas the chains of narration (isnads) of these two narrations are separate. He has omitted their isnads so that their true reality cannot be clarified. Previously, in those narrations as well, he used deception and concealment, which he presented as Ahadith of the Prophet, whose reality we have clarified. In this regard, the first observation is that when the difference between man and woman, as explained by him, cannot be proven from any authentic Hadith, then how can it be proven from the statement of any Sahabi or Tabi'i? Secondly, in terms of the chain of narration, both these statements are weak.
① The full chain of narration of the first statement is as follows: [حدثنا ھشیم قال انا شیخ لنا قال سمعت عطاء] Abu Bakr bin Abi Shaybah says that Hashim narrated to us, Hashim said, one of our sheikhs (teachers) informed us, this sheikh said, I heard from Ata... From this chain of narration it is clear that Abu Bakr bin Abi Shaybah (author of the book "Al-Musannaf") did not hear this from Ata (a Tabi'i).
Whereas Maulana Sukhrovi wrote: Imam Bukhari's teacher Abu Bakr bin Abi Shaybah says, "I heard from Hazrat Ata..." He omitted the two intermediaries in between. Hashim and his sheikh, the one who heard from Ata is that sheikh, not Abu Bakr bin Abi Shaybah. Now who is that sheikh? And what is his status? Is he trustworthy or weak? Until this detail about that sheikh is known, this statement will be weak and unreliable.
② The chain of narration of the second narration is: [حدثنا محمد بن بکر عن ابن جریج قال قلت لعطاء] That is, the author of the book (Al-Musannaf) Imam Abu Bakr bin Abi Shaybah says that Muhammad bin Bakr narrated to us, he narrated from Ibn Jurayj, Ibn Jurayj said, I said to Ata. Then the statement follows which Maulana Sukhrovi has quoted. Although Ibn Jurayj is a trustworthy narrator, the Muhaddithin have clarified two points about him.
❀ One is that if Ibn Jurayj says "سمعت" "I heard," or "سألت" "I asked," or "اخبرنی" "He informed me," then the narration is authentic. But when he says "So-and-so said" or "I was informed," such narrations are rejected.
❀ Secondly, Imam Abu Bakr says that he saw in the book of Imam Ali bin Madini that he asked Yahya bin Saeed about the narration of Ibn Jurayj from Ata, and he said that narration is weak. I asked Yahya, he narrates it with the word [اخبرنی], he said even then it is nothing; all narrations from Ata are weak.
Reference: (Tahdhib al-Kamal by Al-Mizzi: Vol. 12, pp. 60-63, Dar al-Fikr, Beirut, Lebanon)
In light of this clarification, this second narration (statement of the Tabi'i) is also not authentic because firstly it is from the word "qala" (he said). Secondly, it is narrated from Ata, and the narration of Ibn Jurayj from Ata, even if narrated with [اخبرنی], is of no use. Moreover, on the same page and regarding the same matter, there are two more narrations which prove that women also raise their hands up to the shoulders; please observe!
❀ Hazrat Abdurabbah bin Zaitoon says:
[رأیت ام الدرداء ترفع کفیھا حذو منکبیھا حین تفتتح الصلاۃ فاذا قال الامام، سمع اللّٰہ لمن حمدہ رفع یدیھا، قالت اللھم ربنا لک الحمد]
I saw Sayyida Umm Darda رضي الله عنها that when she would start the prayer, she would raise her palms up to her shoulders. And when the Imam (while rising from Ruku) [سمع اللّٰہ لمن حمدہ] would say, she would raise her hands (up to the shoulders) (i.e., perform Raf' al-Yadain) and say, [اللّٰہم ربنا لک الحمد].
See, in this narration, the action of a Sahabiyyah is described which clearly supports the position of Ahl al-Hadith. The second narration is from Imam Awza'i, who narrates from Imam Zahri that Imam Zahri said, [ترفع یدیھا حذو منکبیھا] a woman raises her hands up to her shoulders. This also supports the Ahl al-Hadith view. Both these narrations are present on the same page of Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, from which the Hadith of the Prophet [صلواکما رأیتمونی اصلی] is supported. Moreover, in Sahih Bukhari, the action of Sayyida Umm Darda is also present that she used to sit in prayer like men [وکانت ام الدردا تجلس فی صلاتھا جلسۃ الرجل]
Reference: Sahih Bukhari: after 826
❀ Sayyida Umm Darda رضي الله عنها used to sit in her prayer as men sit (and she was a jurist). This refers to the manner of sitting in Tashahhud. That is, neither men nor women should sit on all four knees during Tashahhud, but both should sit according to the Sunnah. And how is sitting according to the Sunnah? Imam Bukhari has explained this under this chapter with hadiths, which is that in the first Tashahhud, one should sit with the right foot upright and the left foot folded inward, and in the final Tashahhud, the left foot should be extended forward and the right foot kept upright, and sitting on the four knees is called Turuk in the hadith. The purpose of bringing this in Imam Bukhari’s translation of the chapter is to clarify that there is no difference between men and women in this matter.
[Seventh Evidence]:
[حدثنا ابو الاحوص عن ابی اسحاق و عن الحارث عن علی رضی اللّٰہ عنہ قال اذا سجدت المرأۃ فلتحتفز ولتضم فخذیھا]
It is narrated from Sayyidina Ali رضي الله عنه that he said: When a woman prostrates, she should sit on her two thighs and keep her thighs together.
[Eighth Evidence]:
[عن ابن عباس رضی اللّٰہ عنہ انہ سئل عن صلاۃ المرأۃ فقال تجتمع و تحتفز]
When Sayyiduna Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them) was asked about the prayer of a woman, he said: join (all the limbs) and sit on the heels.
Reference: (The Method of Prayer for Women: pp. 42-43)
Answer No: 7 and 8:
The first narration of Sayyiduna Ali has been quoted with reference to Sunan Bayhaqi. But there only the words [فلتضم فخذیھا] appear; [فلتحتفز] is not present.
Secondly, the narrator from Sayyiduna Ali in this narration is Harith bin Abdullah Al-A'war, about whom Hafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said that he is accused of rejection (Rafd), besides his hadith is weak and some hadith scholars have called him a liar.
Reference: (Taqreeb wa Tahdheeb al-Kamal: Translation of Harith bin Abdullah Al-A'war)
Thus, this narration is weak and not acceptable as evidence in terms of its chain.
Eighth narration:
It is from Sayyiduna Ibn Abbas رضي الله عنهما, for which no reference is recorded. We have looked into some sources on our own, but did not find this narration. Obviously, what is the status of such a narration? Moreover, what is the description of the condition in it? That is also not clarified. The Arabic words translate as "he should gather and contract," but when should he gather and when should he contract? There is no explanation for this. Maulana Sikhrovi Sahib has translated it as "(all limbs) should be brought together and sit on the heels." But this translation does not correspond to the words. In any case, discussion on the translation and its meaning is a matter for later; first, it must be established whether it is a hadith or a statement of a companion.
A completely clear statement of the Prophet ﷺ and Prophetic practice regarding the manner of prostration:
Compare the aforementioned unauthentic sayings of the Companions with the statement of the Messenger of Allah صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم in which he clearly forbade the mentioned manner of prostration that is being affirmed by the Hanafis for women. Please observe:
The Messenger of Allah صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم said:
[اعتدلوا فی السجود: ولا ینبسط احدکم ذراعیہ انبساط الکلب] Maintain moderation in prostration, and none of you should spread his arms on the ground like a dog spreads them.
Reference: Sahih Bukhari: 822],[Sahih Muslim:493
In this hadith, the Prophet ﷺ addressed the Muslims and not only forbade them from spreading their arms on the ground during prostration but also likened doing so to the way a dog sits. His address includes both men and women.
Yes, if a separate manner of prostration for women is established from hadith, then women would not be included in this. But no hadith states different or separate rulings for women’s prostration compared to men’s, as is clear from the previous discussion. The chapters Imam Bukhari and Muslim have dedicated to this hadith by Imam Nawawi make the manner of prostration very clear. Before this hadith, Imam Bukhari, may Allah have mercy on him, narrated from Sayyiduna Abu Humaid Sa’idi رضي الله عنه, who described the entire prayer of the Prophet ﷺ in a gathering of the Companions رضي الله عنهم, including this detail about the manner of prostration.
❀ [وقال ابو حمید: سجد النبی صلی اللّٰہ علیہ وسلم ووضع یدیہ غیر مفترش ولا قابضھما] Sayyiduna Abu Humaid رضي الله عنه said: The Prophet ﷺ prostrated and placed his hands (on the ground) neither spread out nor close to his sides.
Reference: (Sahih Bukhari:822)
Imam Nawawi, in Sahih Muslim, in the chapter on this hadith mentioned in the previous reference, makes the desired manner of prostration very clear. Its translation is as follows. It explains moderation in prostration, as well as placing both palms on the ground, keeping the elbows raised from the sides, and lifting the stomach off both thighs.
What does moderation in prostration mean? Hafiz Ibn Hajar said: It means to adopt a balance and middle ground between "Iftirash" (spreading the arms on the ground) and "Qabd" (keeping the elbows close to the sides).
And Imam Ibn Daqiq al-Eid says:
Here, moderation probably means performing the prostration in the manner and condition as has been commanded.
Reference: Fath al-Bari: Vol. 2, p. 390, mentioned chapter, published by Dar al-Salam - Riyadh
From this brief explanation, the manner of the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) prostration also becomes clear, as well as his command in which he ordered everyone, without distinction between men and women, to prostrate in the same way as he himself used to do.
After mentioning the above eight arguments (whose reality we have clarified), Maulana Sikhrovi Sahib states: From the above-mentioned ahadith and the practices of the Sahabah and Tabi‘in, it is clearly proven that the method of prayer for women is distinctly different from that of men. Now observe the school of thought of the Imams of Fiqh regarding this matter.
Reference: (p.43)
But we will say that leaving aside the ahadith, the aforementioned person could not present a single hadith on the issue under discussion. What he has presented in the name of ahadith, calling them ahadith and making others believe them to be ahadith, deserves the threat of Hellfire. Therefore, we sincerely and with a well-meaning spirit state that his school of thought is absolutely not based on any hadith. He should stop referring to hadith in this matter and cease making others believe that this issue of the Hanafis is according to the ahadith. The same situation applies to the practices of the Sahabah and Tabi‘in, which are also weak and unreliable in terms of chain of narration.In the past few years, three books have been published from the Arab world. The subject of all three books is that all issues of Hanafi jurisprudence are in accordance with the Quran and Hadith. All three authors have focused entirely on proving this point. We have specifically tried to examine the arguments regarding the differences in prayer between men and women in these three books, because the purpose of all three authors is to negate the impression or reality that any issue in Hanafi jurisprudence is against the Quran or Hadith. But after reviewing all three books, we were deeply disappointed. Because all three have described the difference between men's and women's prayer. But except for one Mursal narration, none of them have presented any Hadith. All have relied only on one rational argument that there is more [اَسْتَر] covering (purdah) for women in it. This clearly means that the Hanafi scholars from the Arab world have accepted that there is no Hadith on this issue. If there were, they would certainly have presented it, because their purpose is precisely to prove Hanafi jurisprudential issues according to the Quran and Hadith.
The second thing that became clear is that the Hanafi scholars of the Arab world are more trustworthy and honest compared to the Hanafi scholars of the Indian subcontinent. These Arab scholars needed to prove the Hanafi method of women's prayer from Hadith. But since the fact is that there is not a single authentic Hadith in the books of Hadith on this, they did not present any Hadith at all. In contrast, our Indian subcontinent scholars, who are adorned and segmented, the owners of the cloak and turban, lack scholarly honesty and integrity, and sitting on the seat of fatwa and Hadith, they are exerting their pen to make false and completely weak (baseless) narrations accepted as Hadith. فإنا للّٰہ و إنا الیہ راجعون Is this not the same Jewish deception mentioned in the Quran by Allah Almighty in these words? [فَوَیۡلٌ لِّلَّذِیۡنَ یَکۡتُبُوۡنَ الۡکِتٰبَ بِاَیۡدِیۡہِمۡ ٭ ثُمَّ یَقُوۡلُوۡنَ ہٰذَا مِنۡ عِنۡدِ اللّٰہِ] Destruction is for those who write the book with their own hands and then say, "This is from Allah."
Reference: (Al-Baqarah:79)
Anyway, now observe the names (with full introduction) and excerpts of these three books. One of these books is named:
① الفقہ الحنفی فی ثوبہ الجدید
② صیاغۃ جدیدۃ و میسَّرۃ للاحکام الشرعیۃ علی مذھب الامام أبی حنیفۃ مع ذکر الدلیل من الکتاب والسنۃ [5 volumes]
Its translation is as follows: Hanafi Fiqh, in a new format, facilitation and renovation of Shariah rulings according to the school of Imam Abu Hanifa, with evidences from the Book and Sunnah.
[The author's name is Abdul Hamid Mahmood Tahmaz, published by Al-Dar Al-Shamiyah Beirut, first edition 1998]
The author of this book has described five differences between men's and women's prayer. He writes, we are only presenting the translation:
The first Sunnah of prayer: Raising the hands before Takbir al-Tahrimah, men raise both hands up to the ears. And women up to the shoulders, because there is more covering (purdah) for women in this. The Hanafi scholars of the subcontinent describe raising the hands up to the chest. This author has described it up to the shoulders. In any case, as evidence, the Hadith presented by the author is translated as follows.
It is narrated from Sayyiduna Malik bin Huwayrith رضي الله عنه:
That when the Messenger of Allah صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم said اللہ اکبر, he would raise both his hands up to the level of his ears.
Reference: (Sahih Muslim:391). (Al-Fiqh al-Hanafi fi Thawb al-Jadid: p.215, vol.1)
This argument applies to men raising their hands. But on what basis should women raise their hands up to their shoulders? This argument has not been presented by the learned author.
Second difference:
The fourth Sunnah of prayer is that a man should place his right hand below the navel on the left hand, and a woman should place her hands on her chest below the breasts, without clasping the hands, but rather placing the palm over the palm, because this provides more modesty for her.
The evidence for this is the following hadith. [Sayyiduna Sahl bin Sa’d (RA) narrates that people were instructed that in prayer a man should place his right hand on his left arm.
Reference: Sahih Bukhari 740
This hadith provides evidence for a man to place his right hand on his left arm while standing. But it does not specify on which part of the body he should place his hands. For this, the learned author has cited the narration of Sayyiduna Ali placing his hand below the navel from Musnad Ahmad and Abu Dawood, but he himself has clarified that there is some discussion regarding its chain of narration. [وفی سندہ مقال]
Reference: (Al-Fiqh al-Hanafi fi Thawb al-Jadid: p.217, vol.1)
However, regarding the method of folding hands for a woman, no evidence has been presented except that it provides more modesty (covering).
Third Difference:
A man should firmly hold his knees with his hands during rukoo and bend his back, meaning he should keep it straight, neither too high nor too low. In one narration, it is mentioned to firmly place both hands on the knees, and in another narration, to spread the fingers. All these instructions are for men. However, a woman should spread her fingers, not hold her knees, but join her fingers together and place her hands on her knees, bend her knees, and keep her arms close to her body. This is because it provides her with more modesty.
Reference: Al-Fiqh al-Hanafi fi Thawb al-Jadeed: Vol. 1, p. 221
Fourth Difference:
After describing the manner of prostration for men, it is written: But a woman should prostrate by folding and pressing herself, bringing her stomach close to her thighs and also bringing her arms close to her sides. This is because the basis of a woman's matter is modesty (covering), therefore the Sunnah method that involves the most covering is in her favor. The evidence for this is the Mursal narration (which has already been mentioned) that Imam Bayhaqi, may Allah have mercy on him, also narrated as a disconnected hadith. Yazid bin Abi Habib (a Tabi'i) reports that the Prophet, peace be upon him, passed by two women who were praying, and he said: When you prostrate, bring some of your flesh (i.e., your stomach) close to the ground, because a woman is not like a man in this matter.
Reference: Abu Dawood Fi al-Marasil: 87]. [Al-Fiqh al-Hanafi fi Thawb al-Jadeed: p.223, vol.1
Fifth Difference:
Regarding sitting in the final Tashahhud, it is narrated in the hadith of Sayyiduna Abu Humaid Saidi that the Prophet ﷺ would extend his left foot forward, keep his right foot upright, and sit on his buttocks (fourth joints). This is called sitting in the Turuk position. This is a narration from Sahih Bukhari, but the author of [الفقہ الحنفی فی ثوبہ الجدید] has rejected it, calling it weak in chain and text. According to him, a man will sit in the final Tashahhud the same way as in the first Tashahhud. After that, he writes: but a woman in the final Tashahhud sits in the Turuk position on her fourth joints (that is, what has been rejected for men despite being an authentic hadith is now established for women based on reason) and places one thigh over the other and extends her feet out from under the right fourth joint, because this is more modest for her.
Reference: Al-Fiqh al-Hanafi fi Thawb al-Jadid: p. 226, vol. 1
❀ This Hanafi scholar has described five differences for women and has not presented any hadith for any of these differences at all. Only one mursal narration has been presented regarding the manner of prostration, which is considered inadmissible by hadith scholars. Moreover, one narrator in this narration, Salim, is also abandoned. In this respect, its chain of transmission is weak. Then it only says that you should touch some flesh to the ground in prostration. What is the correct meaning of these words? It is not clear at all. But the three things mentioned and said for a woman's prostration are:
① The woman should bow and prostrate.
② She should bring her stomach close to her thighs.
③ And she should keep her arms close together.
Do these three things come under "touch some flesh to the ground"? If yes, then how? Clarification is needed. In any case, we are stating that the author of Fiqh al-Hanafi fi Thawb al-Jadeed has admitted for four sects that they do not have any evidence from the Book and Sunnah. If they had, they would definitely have presented it, because their purpose is to establish every issue of Hanafi fiqh according to the Book and Sunnah. To affirm these four matters, they had to take this rational support that these conditions for women are اَسْتَر (more covered). But they did not have the ability to first admit that there is no evidence in the Book and Sunnah for these four (actually five) issues, but our intellect has suggested that women should act in these matters in this way because it provides more covering for them. Can something be made obligatory, necessary, Sunnah, or recommended on the basis of intellect and analogy? We ask the Hanafi scholars: if there is no ruling or explicit statement in the Quran and Hadith about something, can it be made obligatory, necessary, Sunnah, or recommended on the basis of intellect and analogy? If yes, then what evidence do they have for this? And if it cannot be done, then on what basis have they proposed these differences? The Hanafis only have one mursal (and that too weak and disconnected) narration regarding the manner of prostration, and it is very ambiguous. It does not include all those conditions that are considered necessary for women. These conditions of prostration also seem fabricated, for which they have no evidence.
❀ The second Hanafi scholar’s book and its introduction:
Its name is "الفقہ الحنفی و ادلّتہ". The author of Hanafi fiqh and its evidences is Sheikh Asad Muhammad Saeed al-Sagharji, published by Dar al-Kalim al-Tayyib, Damascus, Beirut - First edition 2000.
It is in three volumes. In this book, three differences for women are mentioned:
① The man places his hands below the navel, and the woman places her palms below the chest.
Reference: (p.173)
② The woman prostrates by bowing and brings her stomach close to her thighs because it provides more covering for her.
Reference: (p.174)
③ The woman sits on her left thigh and takes her left foot out from under the right thigh because this method provides more covering for her.
Reference: (p.175)
See! This Hanafi scholar also has not presented any evidence from the Book and Sunnah for these differences. Although the subject of this book is also to present the evidences of Hanafi fiqh issues.
❀ The third book and its introduction:
Its name is "ارکان الاسلام فقہ العبادات علی مذھب الامام ابی حنیفۃ النعمان". The author is Wahbi Suleiman Ghawji. It is in two volumes, published by Dar al-Basha’ir al-Islamiyyah, Beirut, First edition 2002. It also mentions only three differences:
① At the time of Takbir al-Tahrimah, the man raises his hands to the level of the ears, but the woman raises her hands to the level of the shoulders because her life and prayer are based on covering.
② The man places his right hand over the left below the navel, but the woman places her right hand over the left on the chest without interlocking (without making a circle) because it provides more covering for her.
③ The woman sits on her thigh (chutd) because it provides more covering for her.
This Hanafi scholar also has not given any evidence from the Book and Sunnah for these differences. Only this rational reason has been given that it provides more covering.
At this point, we want to ask two more questions to the Hanafi scholars.
① First Question
One is that if a woman raises her hand not just up to the shoulder but two inches higher, up to the level of the ears (like men), then how is there immodesty in that? After all, what aspect of immodesty is there in this? If this difference were based on the text, then no Muslim would be authorized to ask this question. But we are asking this question precisely because its basis is reason and analogy. Therefore, we also have the right to question based on reason and analogy so that we can understand whether it truly has any rational or analogical basis. Otherwise, in our view, it does not even have a rational or analogical basis. It certainly does not have a Shariah basis, as has already been explained in detail. Similarly, the same question applies to other situations: how is there an aspect of covering in them? And if a woman does the same as a man does, then how and in what way is there immodesty?
② Second Question
The fact is that Islamic Shariah has prescribed rules of modesty for women and has prohibited forms of immodesty. If in these conditions and circumstances, modesty truly applies to women and otherwise it is immodesty, then would Shariah not have commanded to observe it? Has Allah Almighty forgotten? Or was the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) unable to clarify this issue as later the Hanafi jurists explained?
After that, Maulana Sukhrovi Sahib has quoted some Arabic phrases from the schools of the four Imams of jurisprudence and their jurisprudential books, giving the impression that all four schools agree on this matter. We will not discuss this much for now, because in our view, the primary sources are only the Book and the Sunnah. Therefore, it does not matter to us who supports or practices it. The main point is whether they have any evidence for their statement or action or not. And we fully acknowledge and confidently even challenge that if anyone besides the Hanafis agrees with the Hanafis on this issue, just as the Hanafis are unable to present any evidence, [ولوکان بعضھم لبعض ظھیرا] similarly, other jurists cannot present any evidence for the correctness of this school of thought. [ھاتوا برھانکم ان کنتم صادقین] If you are truthful, then present the evidence.
This is why the Shafi'i scholars, like the Hanafis, also prescribe a separate method of prayer for women, but their knowledgeable people also admit that all the narrations cited in this regard are weak. If any narration is somewhat useful, it is only a single mursal narration. Accordingly, in the book referenced by Maulana Sikhrovi Sahib regarding the Shafi'i school of thought, a difference in the manner of prostration for men and women is mentioned. But look at this passage carefully. There, Imam Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) has presented a hadith as evidence for men that the Prophet (peace be upon him) kept his arms away from his sides during prostration and kept enough space between his hands so that the whiteness of his armpits was visible. But why should a woman prostrate clinging closely? They have not presented any evidence for this. Rather, in the text of "Al-Muhadhdhab" (a book of Shafi'i fiqh), the reason given is that it provides more covering for women, but in its commentary, this point is silently passed over.
Reference: Al-Majmu' Sharh al-Muhadhdhab: Vol. 3, pp. 405-406
Similarly, earlier at one place they write:
[والمعتمد فی استحباب ضم المرأۃ بعضھا الی بعض کونہ استرلھا وذکر البیھقی بابا ذکر فیہ احادیث ضعفھا کلھا واقرب مافیہ حدیث مرسل فی سنن ابی داود] According to the Shafi'i school, it is recommended for a woman to gather herself during prayer. The entire basis of this is that this posture is more modest for her. (They have no hadith for this.) Imam Bayhaqi, may Allah have mercy on him, mentioned some hadiths in a chapter in Al-Sunan Al-Kubra, all of which he declared weak. Among them, a Mursal hadith is somewhat valuable, which is found in the Mursal of Abu Dawood.
Reference: Al-Majmu': Vol. 3, p. 381
Regarding the Hanbali school of thought, Maulana Sikhrovi Sahib has also stated that it aligns with the Hanafi position on this issue. However, the passage he presented in this regard falls under the category of the worst betrayal; perhaps that is why he refrained from translating the Arabic text and only quoted it. We present the Arabic text he provided along with its translation. Please review it and acknowledge his honesty and integrity. He writes: [وفی مذھب الحنابلۃ: و فی المغنی: و ان صلت امرأۃ بالنساء قامت معھن فی الصف و سطاً، قال ابن قدامۃ فی شرحہ اذا ثبت ھذا فانھا اذا صلت بھن قامت فی وسطھن، لا تعلم فیہ خلافا بین من رأی لھا ان تؤمھن ولان المرأۃ یستحب لھا التستر ولذلک لایستحب لھا التجا فی۔۔۔۔ الخ]
He did not translate it, so we do: And the Hanbali position: (In the Hanbali fiqh book) Al-Mughni, it is stated: If a woman leads women in prayer (i.e., a woman leads women in congregation), then she should stand among the rows of women (i.e., not stand in front like a man). Ibn Qudamah explained this in his commentary: Once it is established that a woman can lead women in prayer, then when she leads them, she should stand among them in the rows. Among those who believe that a woman can lead women in prayer, there is no disagreement to our knowledge that in such a case the woman should stand among the rows. (Because this is the method narrated from Sayyida Aisha and Umm Salamah, may Allah be pleased with them both. This passage was not quoted by the aforementioned author, but it exists in the original book. We have quoted it because the continuity of the next passage depends on it.) And because modesty is recommended for a woman, therefore standing separately (in front) is not recommended (and standing among the rows is اَسْتَر (more modest) for her, so this is recommended for her).
Reference: Al-Mughni with Al-Sharh Al-Kabir: Vol. 2, p. 82, New Edition: Vol. 2, p. 17
Tell me!
Nowhere in this passage is there any detail of the difference under discussion, which Maulana Sikhrovi claimed also exists in the Hanbali school. Where are the five points or eight differences mentioned in this passage, as claimed? It actually discusses a completely different issue, which is a woman leading other women in prayer. There is no explicit mention of this in the hadith. However, the practice of Sayyida Aisha and Umm Salama (may Allah be pleased with them) is found, where they led women in prayer, standing in the middle of the row. Based on this, the mentioned Arabic passage states that in such a case, the woman would stand in the middle, not in front, as the male imam stands in front. If it is said that even here a difference between men and women is described, so it cannot be considered irrelevant, we would respond that although this difference is accepted by some scholars, it has no relation to the differences under discussion. Those differences are not according to the Hanbalis but the Hanafis. Then how can it be correct to consider the Hanbalis as agreeing with this issue? Furthermore, there is another question here: is it permissible in Hanafi fiqh for a woman to lead other women in prayer? According to them, a woman cannot lead other women in prayer; it is considered a disliked act. When a woman leading prayer is itself disliked, then there is no need to differentiate between men and women in this regard. From this perspective also, quoting the aforementioned excerpt by the Maulana is misplaced and a scholarly betrayal. The result of this is to become an example of [ضلوا فاضلوا]. اعاذنا اللٰہ منہ.
Maulana Sikhrovi Sahib writes: The above-mentioned authentic hadiths, the practices of the Companions and the Successors, and the statements of the jurists of the four Sunni schools of jurisprudence prove that the prescribed method of prayer for women is different from the method of prayer for men. The method of prayer for women involves maximum covering and drawing the body close together, avoiding contact with one another, and this method has been unanimously agreed upon and continuously practiced in this Ummah since the blessed time of the Holy Prophet ﷺ. To this day, no fatwa from any Companion, Successor, or other jurists of the Ummah has been seen that prescribes the method of prayer for women to be the same as that for men. Moreover, the senior Ahl al-Hadith scholars have also issued fatwas on this issue according to the above-mentioned hadiths. (After this, a fatwa of Maulana Abdul Jabbar Ghaznavi, may Allah have mercy on him, which is according to Hanafi jurisprudence, has been quoted.)
Reference: (The Method of Prayer for Women: pp. 45-46)
Answer:
In this, the author has repeated some of his claims, the reality of which we have clarified by the grace of Allah. However, a brief explanation is given again to complete the argument. [لِّیَہۡلِکَ مَنۡ ہَلَکَ عَنۡۢ بَیِّنَۃٍ وَّ یَحۡیٰی مَنۡ حَیَّ عَنۡۢ بَیِّنَۃٍ]
Reference: (Al-Anfal:42)
① First claim:
That the Sunnah method of prayer for women, as established from hadiths, reports, and the four schools of thought, is different from the method of prayer for men. But we have clearly explained the full reality of this claim [الحمدللہ]. There is not a single authentic hadith supporting this claim. Therefore, the only Sunnah method of prayer is that which is proven from the Prophet ﷺ, and it is the same for both men and women, except for some specific instructions. Until the scholars of the Hanafi school prove this difference from authentic hadiths, they have absolutely no right to make this claim.
② Second claim:
That in the method of prayer for women, there is a command to observe maximum covering and to fold the body tightly and keep parts close to each other. But where is this command? We have not found this in any hadith. [هاتوا۟ برۡهـٰنكمۡ إن كنتمۡ صـٰدقین] (If you are truthful, then present the evidence!)
③ Third claim:
That this method has been agreed upon and continuously practiced from the time of the Prophet's blessed era until today. This is mere boasting. When this method is not proven by any hadith of the Prophet ﷺ, then how can it be said that it has been agreed upon and continuously practiced from the blessed era of the Prophet ﷺ until today? Against this, we have already cited two narrations from Sayyida Umm Darda, one in Sahih Bukhari and one in the compilation of Ibn Abi Shaybah. Both these narrations negate the claim of consensus and continuous practice. Moreover, when this method of prayer for women is not proven by any hadith, then how can it be believed that women used to pray in this manner during the era of the Prophet, the Companions, and the Tabi‘in? [سبحانک ھذا بھتان عظیم]
④ Fourth claim:
There is no record of any fatwa from any Sahabi, Tabi'i, or other jurists of the Ummah that states women's prayer is the same as men's. We have already answered this that when an issue is clear, there is no ambiguity or disagreement. No one issues a fatwa on it, nor does anyone ask about it. We gave the example that fasting in Ramadan is obligatory for both men and women, and the etiquettes and duties for both are the same. Now if someone invents new etiquettes for women and is asked for evidence, he will say that he has never seen any fatwa from any Sahabi, Tabi'i, or jurist of the Ummah stating that the method of fasting is the same for men and women. Tell me! Is this a reasonable argument? When something is established and there are clear explanations in the Quran or Hadith about it, there is no need for anyone's fatwa, nor does anyone issue one. Whoever presents something against an established issue is responsible for providing evidence and proving it. Similarly, the issue of women praying like men is very clear, based on the Prophet's ﷺ statement: [صلواکما رأیتمونی اصلی]
Reference: (Sahih Bukhari:631)
. Now, whoever claims that the method of prayer for women is different from men, this claim is against this Hadith. Therefore, it is his responsibility to present evidence to prove his claim.⑤ Fifth Claim:
It has been claimed about the senior Ahl al-Hadith that they also accept this point. But the quotation is only from Maulana Abdul Jabbar Ghaznavi, may Allah have mercy on him. Can only one elder be called a senior of Ahl al-Hadith? Maulana Abdul Jabbar Ghaznavi is certainly among the seniors of Ahl al-Hadith, but he is not "seniors," he is one senior. He is one of our great and eminent elders. But you yourself call Ahl al-Hadith non-followers (ghair muqallid), so then what is the benefit of quoting the statement or fatwa of any of our elders before us? By the blessing of non-following [الحمدللہ] we are safe from senior-worship. Therefore, Maulana Ghaznavi's fatwa is also incorrect in our view just as your entire book is incorrect, rather a collection of errors. This is why none of the scholars of Ahl al-Hadith have supported Maulana Ghaznavi. The doctrine of Ahl al-Hadith is present in the fatwas of the scholars of Hadith elsewhere, from where Maulana Ghaznavi's fatwa was quoted. Please observe! The question contains arguments presented by the Hanafis themselves.
Answer:
The method of performing prayer is the same for both men and women. The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said: [صلواکما رأیتمونی اصلی]
Reference: (Sahih al-Bukhari:631)
and in Bukhari ،،باب سنۃ الجلوس في التشھد،، it is: [کانت ام الدرداء تجلس فی صلوتھا جلسۃ الرجل و کانت فقیھۃ] From this, it is understood that women also sit like men. The hadiths mentioned in Al-Bayhaqi and Abu Dawood in the question are weak and not reliable.
Reference: (Fatawa Ulama al-Hadith: Vol. 2, p.175)
This is the doctrine of Ahl al-Hadith, which is based on the Prophetic Hadith [صلواکما رأیتمونی اصلی]
Reference: (Sahih al-Bukhari:631)
. This ruling [صلوا] includes both men and women. It is necessary for both to perform prayer according to the Prophetic method. And that method is the same for both, except for those specific matters for which the Prophet ﷺ gave separate instructions for women. The Hanafi school has prescribed a different method of prayer for women, which is not established by any Hadith; therefore, adopting that method for women is not permissible until it is proven by Hadith. And we claim that the Hanafi scholars will never be able to prove it until the Day of Judgment. The attitude of "I will not accept" has no cure. But the fact is that they do not have a single authentic Hadith in support of their position, as is clear from the discussions on the previous pages.Maulana Sikhrovi Sahib writes: As far as the claim of the Ahl-e-Hadith people is concerned, they neither have any Quranic verse nor any Hadith nor any fatwa from any rightly guided Caliph in this regard. However, if they present the example of Sayyida Umm Darda, which is that "Sayyida Umm Darda used to sit in prayer like men."
Reference: (Al-Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah: Vol.1, p.20)
Regarding this example, it is stated that reasoning from this example is not correct for several reasons.
Reference: (Page:47)
Answer:
The principle of the respected Maulana, which has been presented here again, is completely wrong, the fallacy of which we have already clarified twice before. The point is that presenting a Quranic verse or Hadith is the responsibility of the scholars of the Hanafi school because they have adopted a self-made method. The Ahl al-Hadith have a very clear Hadith. Just as the command to fast in Ramadan is general, including both men and women. Now, if a person claims that a woman should not do certain things during fasting or should do certain things, while not considering those necessary for men, and when prevented from doing so, he says, "Present a Quranic verse, or a Hadith, or a fatwa of any rightly guided Caliph." Tell me, is this stubbornness or scholarly reasoning? After all, what answer will you give to someone who proposes new rules of fasting for women? Is there any answer other than this: the command of the Quran is general, and no separate method has been prescribed for women. Therefore, just as men fast, women will fast in the same way, and the etiquettes and rules of fasting that are necessary for men will also apply to women. Is this not a valid argument? Apart from this argument, can you present any Quranic verse, Hadith, or fatwa of a rightly guided Caliph? If you can, then show it, and we will also show you. First, show this principle. If this is a principle, then use it and demonstrate.
[ما ھو جوابکم فھو جوابنا] The fundamental basis of our position is the Hadith of the Prophet. Then how can it be said that the Ahl al-Hadith do not have any Hadith supporting their stance? When the foundation of this issue itself is the Hadith of the Prophet. So demanding a Quranic verse or a fatwa of a rightly guided Caliph is nothing but stubbornness. Yes, one demand can be that the authenticity of this Hadith be proven. And it is [الحمدللہ] proven.
❀ The second demand could be how it is proven from this hadith that the method of prayer for both men and women is the same?
In response to this, we will say that the Messenger of Allah did not prescribe a separate method of prayer for women "except for a few things." Therefore, in the command "Pray as you have seen me pray," women are included along with men. The same rulings that are established from the Prophet ﷺ will apply to both. Whatever exception applies to men or women will be the one proven by the hadith of the Messenger. Men raise their hands up to the ears, and women up to the shoulders. Men perform prostration in one way and women in another, etc. This difference between men and women is not mentioned in any hadith. Therefore, there is no justification for this difference. If it is proven from the hadith of the Messenger, we will have no hesitation in accepting it. Our argument is based solely and only on the hadith of the Messenger. It is not influenced by Sayyida Umm Darda or anyone else. Her narration is cited only to indicate the practice of the Companions' era. Therefore, we consider it unnecessary to discuss the three responses presented by the aforementioned person regarding the influence of Sayyida Umm Darda and will move forward.
However, after this, the author has tried to condemn the hadith, [صلواکما رأیتمونی اصلی], which we find necessary to discuss. First, please observe the author's statement. He writes: Moreover, if these gentlemen argue from [صلواکما رأیتمونی اصلی] that women's prayer is the same as men's, then this argument is not correct.
Firstly, the context of this sentence is a specific incident, the summary of which is that a particular delegation came to the presence of the Holy Prophet ﷺ to stay for twenty days, and upon their return, he gave them some advice, one of which was [صلواکما رأیتمونی اصلی]
Reference: Page:49-50
Answer:
It is true that a delegation came to you, most of whom were young. But they stayed with you for 20 days; was the purpose of this to gain education and training in religion or something else? Obviously, they came to you to learn religion, and upon their return, you gave them this advice along with other admonitions: Pray as you have seen me pray.
Reference: Sahih Bukhari:631
In this context, has your statement become insignificant so that it cannot be used as evidence? What in this context has made your statement (نعوذ باللہ) condemned (not authoritative)? Rather, this context further clarifies the importance of this statement that those who came from far away to learn religion from you, you specifically emphasized praying according to the Sunnah. And this opportunity for education and training was such that if the method of prayer for women was different, you would have certainly informed them at this occasion. Because when you saw that these young men had become sad due to being away from home, you said: Go back to your families and stay with them and teach them (religious matters) and command them. Giving a general command about prayer at this occasion without differentiating anyone is strong evidence that in this command, both men and women were included in the Prophet’s view, not just men. Then saying that this was only an advice is very strange. Are the Prophet’s advices not actionable or not valid for reasoning? Is it not correct to derive rulings and issues from them? Was the purpose of the Prophet’s advice to emphasize action or something else? Obviously, it was to emphasize action. Does emphasizing action clarify the importance of this command or make it insignificant? Is there any rationality in this reasoning to condemn the Hadith of the Prophet?
He further states: In any case, if this sentence is viewed out of context, there is no doubt that the generality of this hadith includes the entire Ummah, both men and women, and it is obligatory upon the entire Ummah that the method of prayer of our Master ﷺ should be the method of the Ummah. But it should be clear that adherence to this generality is only necessary until a Shariah evidence contradicts it. And if any evidence contradicts this ruling in certain specific actions or individuals, then due to that specific evidence, those particular individuals or actions will be exempt from this ruling. For example, the weak and the sick are exempt from those hadiths in which concessions have been granted to them, and women are exempt from all those hadiths in which they have been commanded to observe covering and concealment. Therefore, in the presence of exceptions, it is not correct to deduce conformity in the overall manner and method of prayer between men and women from this sentence.
Reference: (Page:50-51)
Answer:
الحمدللّٰہ, in this excerpt, Maulana has accepted the principle which is well-established, as we have been explaining in previous discussions, that the Prophet's ﷺ statement: [صلواکما رأیتمونی اصلی] is general and includes both men and women. According to this, it is necessary for both to pray according to the Prophet's ﷺ method. However, exceptions will be those things whose exception is proven by hadith.
Agreed opinion of Bu Ali Baraye Man
Now our only question is that since you have accepted this established principle, fulfill this responsibility that the things you teach women which differ from the men's method of prayer, prove them from authentic hadiths. For example, according to you:
① Men raise their hands up to the ears in Takbir al-Tahrima, while women raise them up to the shoulders or chest.
② Men place their hands below the navel, and women on the chest, such that the palm of the right hand rests on the back of the left hand.
③ Men do not place their arms on the ground during prostration nor keep them close to their sides. But women prostrate by curling up and pressing to the ground so that the stomach touches the thighs completely. Also, instead of keeping the feet upright, they stretch them out to the right side. Women place their entire arms including elbows on the ground.
④ Women, after rising from the first prostration, place their left thigh (on the ground) and stretch both feet to the right side, placing the right calf over the left calf.
⑤ The method of sitting for the Qa'dah (sitting) will be the same as the sitting mentioned between the two prostrations.
⑥ Women bow slightly in Ruku so that both hands reach the knees, not bowing deeply like men.
⑦ Women place their fingers together on the knees. Unlike men, they do not spread their knees wide or hold the knees, and they bend the knees (slightly forward) and keep their elbows close to the sides.
⑧ Women keep the ankles of both feet together in Ruku. These are the eight differences that Maulana Abdul Rauf Sikhrovi Sahib has mentioned in "The Method of Prayer for Women." Our demand from him and all Hanafi scholars is that they prove these eight differences from hadiths. And if they cannot do so (and we claim they cannot do so until the Day of Judgment), then our only request to them is that they do not deprive women of praying according to the Sunnah and stop presenting these eight forms as necessary for them. When these forms are not proven from hadiths, then who gave the Hanafi scholars the right to declare them obligatory for women? [هَاتُوا۟ بُرۡهَـٰنَكُمۡ إِن كُنتُمۡ صَـٰدِقِینَ]
Another anecdote or lesson is that the Hanafi scholars are not all in agreement about the different methods they prescribe for women. As mentioned in previous discussions, the author of "الفقہ الحنفی فی ثوبہ الجدید" has described five methods. The authors of "الفقہ الحنفی وادلّتہ" and "ارکان الاسلام علی مذھب الامام ابو حنیفۃ النعمان" have each described three methods. The author of "The Method of Prayer for Women" has described eight methods. If these methods are mentioned in the hadith, then why is there a difference in their number? This very difference is sufficient to clarify that a separate method of prayer for women is not established from the Prophetic hadith, but rather it is fabricated by the Hanafi jurists and is based on analogy and opinion. Whereas in acts of worship, the original ruling is based on divine command (Allah and His Messenger's order), and there is absolutely no scope for analogy or opinion in it.
