This excerpt is taken from the book of Hafiz Salahuddin Yusuf, may Allah have mercy on him, titled "Is the Method of Prayer for Women Different from Men?"
In this article, the arguments of a Hanafi Mufti from Karachi, Sheikh al-Hadith Maulana Subhan Mahmood, on the above-mentioned topic have been examined, in which an attempt was made to prove that the method of prayer for men and women is different. However, the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said: [صلوا کما رأیتمونی اصلی] "Pray as you have seen me praying."
Reference: Sahih Bukhari:6008
This command of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, is general and includes every Muslim man and woman. From this perspective, the method of prayer for men is the same as for women, except for those things which the Prophet, peace be upon him, explicitly stated.
❀ For example, women have been instructed not to pray without a veil.
❀ It is not obligatory for women to go to the mosque to pray, etc., etc.
❀ Where should women place their hands and how high should they raise them?
❀ How should their sitting and standing be?
How to perform prostration?
The ruling that is established by authentic hadiths for men is the same ruling for women. There is no reasonable cause or basis to differentiate between men and women in these matters until it is proven by authentic hadiths. The fatwa issued by the mentioned Mufti Sahib on this subject is reviewed below, which will make it clear that the brothers of the Hanafi school do not have any strong evidence (authentic hadith) to support their sect.
Acknowledgment of the weakness of the "evidence" itself in the introduction:
First of all, before mentioning the "evidences," Mufti Sahib stated as a prelude that "Whatever issue the jurists discuss, its origin is in the Holy Quran and Hadith. However, determining where exactly its origin lies in the Quran and Hadith is not a task for just anyone; rather, it requires the capability of ijtihad. Therefore, the ruling for common people is that they should follow the issues explained by the jurists and Imams of their own school of thought. This is their safety because the general public cannot correctly understand the Quran and Hadith to derive rulings on their own. However, the mujtahids and jurists seek out the origin, and nothing is accepted without the origin."
Reference: (Daily "Jasarat" Karachi 30 October 1981)
Before responding to Mufti Sahib's preliminary remarks, let us first read the question of a woman to which Mufti Sahib gave the following reply: The question was: Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi and some other scholars of religion have stated that men, when making the intention, should take their thumbs up to the earlobe, and women should fold their hands only up to the shoulder, men below the navel, and women on the chest. In bowing (ruku), men should place their fingers like this, and women like that. Men should raise their waist for prostration (sajdah), and women should prostrate completely pressed down and close to the ground. I specifically studied the chapter on prayer (Bab al-Salah) in Sahih Bukhari and Mishkat al-Masabih to find out about this issue. I did not find any hadith regarding this. I have heard that there is a hadith about this in "Durmanthur." Currently, this discussion is ongoing among women here. If indeed there was such a significant difference in the manner of prayer between men and women, then Sayyida Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), who narrated over two thousand hadiths (including many specifically about women), would surely have clearly narrated hadiths on this matter. It is possible that she did narrate them, but I have not come across them. (Begum Abdul Ghani, Karachi)
Our Requests:
① In response to the respected lady, Mufti Sahib should have cited such ahadith in which women were given different rulings regarding prayer than men, so that the matter would have become completely clear. However, before mentioning any "evidence," Mufti Sahib first preached that the public does not have the ability to understand the Quran and Hadith. Therefore, they should blindly follow whatever their scholars tell them. This judgment about the public is absolutely wrong. Undoubtedly, some level of knowledge and capability is required to understand the Quran and Hadith. But the public can certainly be pointed to the relevant Quranic verse or Hadith of the Prophet ﷺ regarding a particular issue. The public is not so ignorant or stupid that they cannot understand the meaning even after reading the translation of a hadith or listening to scholars' explanations.
② To say that: the general public must follow the issues stated by the jurists and imams of their sect. Regarding this, one can ask the Mufti Sahib: who has given this ruling? The Holy Quran repeatedly commands obedience only to Allah and the Messenger. There is no command anywhere to obey the jurists and imams. If Muslim commoners are bound, it is only to the Quran and Hadith, not to the sayings and opinions of men. The public also refer to scholars from this perspective, that they explain the issue from the Quran and Hadith. Their intention is never that the Mufti proves the issue by citing the opinion of some jurist or imam. To keep such Muslim commoners completely unaware and ignorant of the Quran and Hadith, and to command them to act on issues contrary to the Quran and Sunnah, is that based on honesty and justice?
③ The third point that Mufti Sahib has stated is that whatever the jurists say, their basis is always the Quran or Hadith, and they do not say anything without this basis. The question is, why was there a need for this "clarification" at this point? If their claim is that nothing said by the jurists is against the Quran and Hadith, then there would be no need to clarify this matter. The very clarification regarding the presentation of original evidence by the jurists indicates that there is something suspicious. The fact is that Muhtarma Saeela asked a question to Mufti Sahib for which Mufti Sahib has no answer. In any authentic Hadith, there is no instruction for women to perform bowing, prostration, hand placement, or hand raising differently from men. That is why respected Mufti Sahib was compelled to make the aforementioned preliminary remarks. As the saying goes:
If the foundation stone is laid crooked by the architect,
The wall will surely lean crookedly.
After that, Mufti Sahib writes: Accordingly, the jurists describe specific forms regarding the appearance of women in prayer. All of these are proven from the ahadith. However, we will say that Mufti Sahib's claim is completely baseless because he could not present a single authentic hadith on this matter. As will be understood later.
Legislation?
Then it is written: Before we mention those hadiths, it should be understood that the purpose of Shariah regarding women is that they should remain covered and veiled as much as possible, whether they are at home or in a room, alone or in front of others. Even in prayer, which is the most important act of worship, this consideration has been taken into account. Thus, in some forms of prayer where specific postures have been described, scholars have also stated that the reason is covering and veiling. Undoubtedly, the purpose of Shariah regarding the covering and veiling of women, as explained by Mufti Sahib, is undeniable. But if the intention is to justify a self-invented method of prayer, then this is a matter of concern. The method of prayer prescribed by Shariah (in which no distinction is made between men and women) does not leave women uncovered or unveiled. If that were the case, Shariah would have itself commanded a different method of prayer for women, just as some rulings are different for women. Moreover, if anyone invents a different method of prayer for women claiming that it involves more covering and veiling, then this is a great audacity and is explicitly against [لَا تُقَدِّمُوۡا بَیۡنَ یَدَیِ اللّٰہِ وَ رَسُوۡلِہٖ]
Reference: (Al-Hujurat:1)
. The meaning of this would be that Allah Almighty and His Messenger, peace be upon him, did not know that a certain method of prostration or bowing for women involves more covering and that this would fulfill the purpose of Islamic Shariah more correctly. However, later jurists realized this point and filled this "gap," thus completing the purpose of Shariah. May Allah protect us, then may Allah protect us again. Does this not become clear from the cause stated by Mufti Sahib?Review of the Hadiths narrated by Mufti Sahib: Now a review of the Hadiths narrated by Mufti Sahib is presented. وباللّٰہ التوفیق۔
Difference in raising hands while making intention?:
Mufti Sahib writes: Now in this regard, Hadiths are mentioned about how far women should raise their hands
Reference: Mu'jam al-Tabarani: Vol. 22, p. 19, No. 28
. It is narrated by Wail bin Hujr, may Allah be pleased with him, that the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said: When Ibn Hujr prays, he raises both his hands up to the level of his ears, and a woman raises her hands up to the level of her chest. Imam Bukhari, may Allah have mercy on him, in a dedicated treatise regarding the raising of hands, narrated that Abd Rabah said that he saw Sayyida Umm al-Darda, may Allah be pleased with her (a famous female companion), raising her hands up to the level of her shoulders during prayer. The practice of both Hadiths will be such that when raising the hands up to the shoulders, part of the hand is also at the level of the chest.
Reference: Imam Bukhari's treatise on raising hands: Hadith 24
Answer: These are Mufti Sahib's arguments regarding how far women should raise their hands when making intention. He has proven from the narration of Sayyiduna Wail bin Hujr رضي الله عنه that men should raise both hands up to the ears and women up to the chest. However, O respected one! It should be noted that this narration of Sayyiduna Wail رضي الله عنه is weak according to the clarifications of the hadith scholars, as in Majma' al-Zawa'id with reference to Tabarani, this narration is present with a chain, and there Hafiz Haithami رحمه الله has explicitly stated that it includes Umm Yahya bint Abdul Jabbar, a narrator who is unknown [لم اعرفھا] and is not recognized there.
Reference: (Majma' al-Zawa'id: Vol. 2, p. 103)
Mufti Sahib's main basis of argument is on a narration that is not even suitable for reasoning or proof. The narration of Abdul Rabba quoted from Imam Bukhari's treatise "Juz' Raf' al-Yadain" does not reveal the aspect of difference between men and women that Mufti Sahib is trying to extract from it. Therefore, the structure of argument built upon it is baseless. In any case, the Hanafis do not have any authentic hadith regarding the difference between men and women in the matter of raising the hands. As Ibn Hajar and Qadi Shawkani (may Allah have mercy on them) have also written, who had a very deep and extensive insight into the hadith.
Thus, Hafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) writes:
[لم یرد ما یدل علی التفرقۃ فی الرفع بین الرجل والمرأۃ وعن الحنفیۃ یرفع الرجل الی الاذنین والمرأۃ الی المنکبین لانہ استرلھا] That is, "The Hanafis who say that men raise their hands up to the ears and women up to the shoulders, this ruling of differentiating between men and women is not found in any hadith."
Reference: (Fath al-Bari: Bab 85 p. 287 Hadith: 738, Vol. 2, Dar al-Salam Riyadh edition)
And Imam Shawkani (may Allah have mercy on him) writes:
[واعلم ان ھذہ السنۃ تشترک فیھا الرجال والنساء ولم یرد ما یدل علی الفرق بین الرجل والمرأۃ فی مقدار الرفع و روی عن الحنفیۃ ان الرجل یرفع الی الاذنین والمرأۃ الی المنکبین لانہ استرلھا ولا دلیل علی ذلک کما عرفت]That is, "Raising the hands is a Sunnah that is common to both men and women (meaning it is the same for both). There is no ruling to differentiate between the two regarding this. Similarly, there is no explicit narration to differentiate the amount of raising. For example, the Hanafi school holds that men raise their hands up to the ears and women up to the shoulders. There is no evidence for this Hanafi view."
Reference: (Neel al-Awtar: Vol. 2, p.198)
Difference in folding the hands?:
After that, Mufti Sahib states: Regarding folding the hands, both methods are established from Sayyiduna Muhammad صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم, folding the hands below the navel for men and folding the hands on the chest for women, both types of narrations are followed. Here, Mufti Sahib has quoted two narrations, one from Sayyiduna Ali رضي الله عنه, which mentions folding the hands below the navel, and the other from Sayyiduna Wail bin Hujr رضي الله عنه, in which he said that he prayed with the Messenger of Allah صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم and saw that the Prophet صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم folded his hands on his chest.
Mufti Sahib has reconciled the two narrations by stating that men should follow the narrations about placing the hands below the navel (taht al-sirrah) and women should follow the narration about placing the hands on the chest (ala al-sadr). However, the need for reconciliation arises only when both narrations (which appear contradictory) are authentic in their chains of transmission. If two contradictory narrations exist such that one is authentic and the other weak according to the principles of hadith scholars, then the ruling is to follow the authentic narration. The weak narration is abandoned in favor of the authentic one. Therefore, Mufti Sahib's first duty was to prove that both types of narrations about placing the hands are authentic and of equal status in their chains of transmission. Without this, reconciliation is not possible. Only after that can his mentioned reconciliation be acceptable.
Before making a conclusive application, it is necessary to examine the chain of narration status of both hadiths. The narration of Sayyiduna Ali رضي الله عنه
Reference: Sunan Abu Dawood: 756
is not present in the version commonly circulated in Pakistan and India. However, this narration is found in one manuscript of Abu Dawood (Ibn al-A'rabi), but there Imam Abu Dawood رحمه الله explicitly mentioned its weakness
Reference: (see 'Awn al-Ma'bood: Vol. 1, p. 275)
.It is also a masterpiece of Mufti Sahib's scholarly integrity that he cited Sunan Abu Dawood as the reference for the narration but omitted the explicit mention of its weakness present there. In contrast, the narration of Sayyiduna Wail bin Hujr رضي الله عنه is found in Sahih Ibn Khuzaymah, and Hafiz Ibn Hajar رحمه الله has quoted it in Bulugh al-Maram and declared it authentic; he also confirmed its authenticity in Fath al-Bari. Moreover, other muhaddithin have also authenticated and verified it. Even several Hanafi scholars have weakened the hadith of Ali رضي الله عنه and authenticated and verified the hadith of Wail.
① Allama Aini Hanafi in Umdat al-Qari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari writes:
[واحتج صاحب الھدایۃ لا صحابنا فی ذلک بقولہ صلی اللَّہ علیہ وسلم ان من السنۃ وضع الیمنی علی الشمال تحت السرۃ قلت ھذا قول علی بن ابی طالب و اسنادہ الی النبی صلی اللَّہ علیہ وسلم غیر صحیح…… فیہ مقال لان فی سندہ عبدالرحمن بن اسحٰق الکوفی قال احمد لیس بشیء منکر الحدیث] That is, "The author of Hidayah has used the saying of Sayyiduna Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, as evidence for the Hanafi school, in which it is stated that folding the hands below the navel is Sunnah. But I say that the chain of narration of this saying of Sayyiduna Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, is not authentic up to the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. There is a flaw in this narration because in its chain is Abdul Rahman bin Ishaq al-Kufi, about whom Imam Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, said that he is unreliable and a denier of hadith."
Reference: Umdat al-Qari: Vol. 5, p. 279, New Edition
② Sheikh Ibrahim Halabi
In Ghaniyat al-Mustamli fi Sharh Miniyat al-Musalli (also known as Kabiri Sharh) regarding the narration of Sayyiduna Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, under discussion, writes: [قال النووی اتفقوا علی تضعیفہ لانہ من روایۃ عبدالرحمن بن اسحٰق مجمع علی تضعیفہ] That is, "According to Imam Nawawi, may Allah have mercy on him, there is consensus on the weakness of this narration because it includes Abdul Rahman bin Ishaq al-Wasiti as a narrator, who is unanimously considered weak."
Reference: (Kabiri: p. 29, Mujtabai Edition, Delhi 1898)
③ Maulana Muhammad Hayat Sindhi Hanafi, may Allah have mercy on him, writes:
[بما تقدم و تقرران وضع الایدی علی الصدور فی الصلوٰۃ اصلاً اصیلاً و دلیلاً جلیلاً فلا ینبغی لاھل الایمان الاستنکاف عنہ و کیف یستنکف المسلم عما ثبت عن رسول اللّٰہ صلی اللّٰہ علیہ وسلم الذی قال لا یؤمن احدکم حتی یکون ھواہ تبعا لما جئت بہ بل ینبغی ان یفعل ذلک]
The above statement clearly shows that the basis (narration) for folding hands on the chest during prayer is strong and the evidence is clear, and it is absolutely not appropriate for any believer to disregard it. How can a Muslim disregard something that is proven from the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ himself? Furthermore, the Prophet ﷺ said that none of you can be a true believer until his desires conform to the Shariah brought by me. Therefore, every Muslim should follow the command of the Prophet ﷺ.
Reference: Fath al-Ghafoor: p. 8, Multan edition
④ Shah Naeemullah Bahranchi, in the practices of Mirza Muzhar Jan Janan, may Allah have mercy on him, writes:
[ودست را برابر سینہ می بستند و می فرمودند کہ ایں روایت ارجح است از روایات زیر ناف] That is, "Mirza Muzhar used to fold his hands on the chest during prayer and used to say that the narration of folding hands on the chest is more authentic than the narration of folding hands below the navel."
Reference: (p. 75)
When it is established from the statements of Hanafi scholars themselves that the narration with the phrase "taht al-sirrah" is weak and the narration about folding hands on the chest is authentic and preferable, then what status remains for Mufti Sahib's mentioned application? In any case, from this detail it has become clear that there is no difference in the ruling of folding hands in prayer between men and women. According to authentic narrations, the Prophet ﷺ folded his hands on the chest during prayer, and there is no separate ruling established for women regarding this. Therefore, the Sunnah method for both men and women is to fold the hands on the chest.
The manner of women's prostration in prayer?
① Regarding the manner of women's prostration in prayer, Mufti Sahib writes: Similarly, when women prostrate, they should do so by contracting well while keeping the chest covered. Two hadiths are presented as evidence for this. One of them is a Marasil hadith in Abu Dawood, and the other is in Sunan Bayhaqi. The Prophet ﷺ saw two women praying and said to them that when you prostrate, bring your body close to the ground.
②[واخرج البیھقی اذا سجدت المرأۃ الصقت بطنھا بفخذھا کا ستر ما یکون لھا]
Answer: However, we will say that the first mentioned hadith is Marasil, which according to the Muhaddithin and the preferred school of thought is not considered strong evidence. Moreover, in its chain of narration, a narrator named "Salim" is also abandoned.
The second narration is in Sunan Bayhaqi, whose translation Mufti Sahib has not quoted; he has only quoted the Arabic text. However, its meaning is the same. This narration is undoubtedly present in
Reference: Sunan Bayhaqi (Vol. 2, p. 223)
, but one feels like lamenting over Mufti Sahib's audacity and "scholarly honesty" because Imam Bayhaqi, may Allah have mercy on him, recorded this narration as a warning that it is so weak that one cannot use such narrations as evidence. Yet, Mufti Sahib has presented it as evidence.The speaker is a stammerer; what can be said about him?
And what about this hadith with the rule?
Mufti Sahib writes: Similarly, regarding sitting (qa'dah), there is a narration in Bayhaqi that one sat with one thigh over the other. [عن عبداللّٰہ بن عمر قال قال رسول اللّٰہ صلی اللّٰہ علیہ وسلم اذا جلست المرأۃ فی الصلٰوۃ وضعت فخذھا علی فخذھا] But you will be surprised to hear that this is also a fragment of the same mentioned hadith which Imam Bayhaqi, may Allah have mercy on him, included in his book only to warn people that this narration is of no use and cannot be used as evidence. It appears that Mufti Sahib did not personally study Sunan Bayhaqi and, after seeing a fatwa or article of some predecessor of his own sect, added one error upon another; otherwise, such blatant dishonesty cannot be imagined from a Sheikh al-Hadith and Mufti of such a great Darul Uloom. In any case, after narrating the mentioned hadith, Mufti Sahib states: From these ahadith, it has been established that the specific forms of prayer for women described by the jurists are proven from the ahadith. But the reality of the "ahadith" he mentioned has been explained above, from which it becomes evident that the Hanafi jurists' specific forms for women, different from men, are their own inventions; the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, did not give such a command.
Some More Arguments and Clarifications:
After that, Mufti Sahib states: It should be clear that for the proof of the Shariah ruling regarding women, it is not necessary that it be established from the Hadith of Sayyida Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her); it can also be established from any other Sahabi. It is also possible that there is a Hadith from Sayyida Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) on this matter, but we have not found it. Undoubtedly, for establishing a Shariah ruling, it is not necessary to have a Hadith only from Sayyida Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her); rather, a Shariah ruling can be established from the authentic Hadith of any Sahabi of the Prophet (peace be upon him). However, the question of the inquirer is certainly worth considering that more than two thousand Hadiths have been narrated from Sayyida Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her). If the method of prayer for women was different from that of men, then surely some Hadith of that nature would have been narrated from her. Similarly, it is also a point to consider that this is such an important and commonly encountered issue, yet no Hadith regarding it is established from Sayyida Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) or any other Sahabi. To say that it is possible that there is a Hadith from Sayyida Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) on this matter but we have not found it—what kind of reasoning is this? In this way, any fabricated issue can be proven by saying that it is possible there is a Hadith on it, but we have not found it.
Argument from "Interaction of the Ummah"?
Then they write: Besides this, the practice of the Ummah also proves the aforementioned details about women's prayer, and the practice of the Ummah is also a legal proof. But we would like to ask Mufti Sahib what he means by "practice of the Ummah"? Is it the practice of the current people (Ummah) or the practice of the era of the Companions? Regarding the era of the Companions, a legal proof can be discussed, and that is what is called the practice of the Ummah. But does the practice of later periods also fall under this "practice of the Ummah" which can be considered a legal proof? If Mufti Sahib means by "practice of the Ummah" the practice of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) (as this is its correct meaning), then can he provide any evidence that during the era of the Companions, Muslim women prayed differently from men in the way that today's Hanafi and Sharia-unaware women do? If that is the case, then the issue certainly becomes worthy of consideration. And if by practice of the Ummah he means the practice of the people after the era of the Companions and the Tabi‘in (may Allah have mercy on them), then respected Mufti Sahib should think before presenting it as a "legal proof" that then the issue under discussion will not be proven at all. Countless innovations will also be proven, which today have the "practice of the Ummah." Is Mufti Sahib ready for this? Can all these innovations be granted a certificate of permissibility on the basis of this "legal proof"?
Argument from "Maarah al-Muslimoon"?:
In the same context of the Ummah's interaction, Mufti Sahib has also argued from this famous narration attributed to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, i.e., [مارآہ المسلمون حسنا فھو عند اللٰہ حسن], that the action which Muslims consider good is also good in the sight of Allah.
① However, firstly, this hadith is not proven to be Marfoo‘ (attributed directly to the Prophet). It is a Mauqoof (attributed to a Companion) statement.
② Even if it were to be considered authoritative to some extent, it would only refer to the era of the Companions, and the interaction of the first-century Muslims would be considered good and applicable. Not the actions of later Muslims, who have generally been afflicted with numerous errors in belief and practice.
❀ The same point has been elaborated in great detail by Maulana Abdul Hayy Lakhnawi Hanafi (may Allah have mercy on him) in Al-Ta‘leeq al-Mumajjid, which is worth studying. For brevity, here we only refer to this source.
Reference: Al-Ta‘leeq al-Mumajjid: p.144
Similarly, the respected scholar has also presented [لا تجتمع امتی علی ضلالۃ]. Regardless of its chain of narration, assuming its authenticity and authority, the intended community here is also the community of the first century, that is, the Companions of the Prophet, may Allah be pleased with them all, and not the current community. Whose entire religion, except for one group of truth, is self-invented and within which there is a thriving market of polytheism and innovation. If the Mufti holds the belief that the current community cannot collectively be in error, then why is he engaged in conflict with his own Hanafi brothers (Barelvis)? The majority are theirs. According to this "argument," can the beliefs and practices of the Barelvis not be granted legitimacy? In any case, the various supports that the Mufti is presenting for his stance prove on their own that he does not have a clear argument or a mursal hadith as evidence for his position (that the method of prayer for women is different from that of men). If he did, the Mufti would not be searching for supports and would be content with presenting an authentic hadith. But from the aforementioned discussion, it has been conclusively established that the respected scholar does not have a single mursal connected narration as evidence for the issue under discussion in Hanafi jurisprudence.
[ھا توا برھانکم ان کنتم صادقین]
If you are truthful, then present your argument as proof.
Reference: Quoted from the weekly "Al-I'tisam" Lahore 22-29 January 1982
