 |
 |
 |
|
|
| Sisters |
|
The awrah of the Muslim woman amongst Muslim women |
Compiled By :Abu Aqeela
Translated By : Abu Aqeela |
|
All praises
to Allah, we praise Him and seek His Aid and His Forgiveness,
we seek refuge in Allah from the evils of our ownselves
and from the evils of our actions. I bear witness
that there is none worthy of worship except Allah
having no partners and I bear witness that Muhammad
is His Slave and Messenger (peace and blessings be
upon him)
To proceed:
That which you have before you is an attempt to bring
about some clarity in regards to the issue of the
Awrah of the muslim Woman amongst Muslim women &
the Dancing of women (at gatherings such as Eid,Weddings,etc).
You will find within this short treatise, selective
fataawa in regards to these two issues. It has also
been separated in to two parts.
This section consists of the kalaam of our shaykh,
Saalih ibn Foazaan ibn Abdullah al Foazaan(may Allah
preserve him) in form of questions and answers (fataawa).
Allah subhaanahu wa ta aala says in in His Book:
...and not to reveal their adornments
except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's
fathers, their sons, their husband's sons, their brothers
or their brother's sons, or their sister's sons, or
their (Muslim) women (i.e. their sisters in Islaam),
or the (female) slaves whom their right hands possess,
or old male servants who lack vigour, or small children
who have no sense of the shame of sex. And let them
not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide
of their adornment. And all of you beg Allaah to forgive
you all, O believers, that you may be successful.
From that which has been highlighted in the forementioned
ayah it is permissible for the believing women to
reveal their adorments (those areas of adorments eg.
the likes of the face,hair,neck,forearm & lower
shin. wallahu aalum) amongst believing women, or female
slaves or children who have no sense of same or sex.
The question however now arises in regards to the
type of clothing worn in these situations from that
which is suitable and allowed.
In this regard several questions were asked to Shaykh
Saalih ibn Foazaan ibn Abdullah al Foazaan (May Allah
preserve him) :
Question Many women hold an opinion regarding
the awrah of a woman infront of another woman is that
which is between the navel and the knee. So some of
them do not hesistate to wear clothing that very tight
or open revealing large portions of the chest and
arms. What do you say concerning them?
Answer.What is required from the muslim women
is modesty and shyness, and that she should be a good
example to her muslim sisters,and she shouldnot expose
to them except that which is considered normal/befitting
for/of righteous muslim women to show amongst themselves.
This is what is initially upon them and is safest
for indeed being unattentive and laxed in exposing
that which there is no need to expose could lead to
further unattentiveness and carelessness hence leading
to that which is forbidden. wa Allahu aalum (and Allah
knows best) [1]
Question Does a woman wearin tight clothes
infront of other women come under the hadeeth ((...women
who will be clothed yet naked...))?
Answer.There is no doubt that the wearing of
tight clothes which reveal the alluring parts of the
body is something not permissible, not permissible
except for wearing it for her husband only. As for
infront of other than her husband then it is not permissible.Even
if there is only women present because she will represent
as a bad example for them.When they see her doing
so they may follow her in it. Also she has been ordered
to cover her awrah with that which is loose and a
be covered in front of everyone except her husband.
So she covers her awrah in front of other women as
she does in front of men except that which is considered
normal and befitting of her to show amongst other
women like the face, hands,feet and that which there
is a need to uncover/reveal..[2]
Question What is the ruling concerning the
wearing of clothes which are see thru or tight to
the extent that it reveals her bodily parts?
Answer.It is obligatory upon the women that
their clothing is not of the likes that it is so thin
that the colour of the skin may be seen thru it, neither
that it is so tight as to reveal the shape of her
bodily parts this is because the Prophet (saw) said
: ((Two types of people from
the inhabitants of hellfire i have not yet seen: Women
covered yet uncovered when they walk they swing their
sides/hips, upon their heads resemble the humps of
camels they will not enter al jannah nor will they
find its scent, and men who have with them whips resembling
the tails of cows with them they beat the slave of
Allah))[3]
Shaykh ul Islaam ibn Taimiya - may Allah have mercy
upon him- in Maj'moo al fataawaa says regarding the
staetment of the messenger (saws)
((...covered but uncovered...)) means the wearing
of clothes that doesnot cover her so she is clothed
but in reality she is naked, like the woman who wears
clothing which is thin so as to show her skin or clothing
which is tight which clings revealing her bodily parts
for example her posterior or the thigh or the likes.
Truly the clothing of a woman is that which covers
her not showing the shape of her limbs or more than
that becuse it is that which is loose and non transparent.
[ 4]
What has preceeded, is some of the fatwaa given by
shaykh Saalih al Faozaan -may Allah preserve him-
pretaining to the attire of muslim women amongst muslim
women hopefully bringing some clarity to this affair.
However for one to hold the opinion that the awrah
of the muslim woman amongst muslim women is that which
is between the navel and the knee then from that which
is upon them is:
- firstly ,to present evidence in this regard
and a presidence for this opinion from ahul Ilm.
- secondly to acknowledge that holding the
opinion that the awrah is of such (between women)
would illiminate such clothing such as 'hipsters'
or 'stretch jeans' or the likes as the shape of
the bodily parts can clearly be seen and there
for is not permissible, as explained by the shaykh
may Allah preserve him.
A question was asked in this regard to, the Muhaddith,
the Imaam the late Shaykh Muhammad Naasir ud Deen
al Albaanee (may Allah have mercy upon him) which
was published in al Asaalah magazine, volume 8. The
translation of this section was not done by
myself and can be found at the website al-manhaj.com
under the e books section ( which is reproduced here).
Question We know that a woman's dancing in
front of her husband, and likewise her dancing with
women, which is swaying, and the dabkah [ 5]
of men are forbidden, but what is the proof for that?
Please provide us with some insight on this, may Allaah
reward you.
Answer This question consists of three parts:
First: A woman dancing in front of her husband
Second: Her dancing in front of other women
Third: The dabkah performed by men
As for the first part, which is a woman's dancing
in front of her husband. If her dancing is natural
and not professional – i.e. she did not learn how
to dance, as is the fashion of this time – even if
she stirs the desires of the man, then there is no
text that can be found that forbids this. But this
is on the condition that it occurs between her and
her husband only. As for the case where she has learned
to dance and she applies the rules of modern-day dancing,
then this is not permissible. This is because I believe
that if she will do that in front of her husband,
then she will surely also do it in front of other
men besides her husband.
As for her dancing in front of other women, then I
also say that if her objective in dancing is to dance
this modern style of dancing, then it is clear that
it is not permissible. And if it is said: "What is
the proof for what you have stated?" I say: Moderation
in matters is very rare; there is either excessiveness
or there is negligence. This is especially the case
with people who have lived a long period of time in
deviation of a specific nature. Then when it becomes
clarified to them that this matter was a deviation
and that the Religion rejects it, they turn away from
it and introduce in place of that, a severe reaction.
This is what has befallen us in this present time
with regard to the issue of demanding the proof in
place of the liberation from blind following. The
Muslims, both special and common people, have lived
long generations not knowing anything but the madh-hab
of so and so and the madh-hab of so and so – four
madh-habs, the madh-habs of Ahl-us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah.
And this is not to mention the other madh-habs, those
that have deviated from the Sunnah and the Jamaa'ah.
As for relying on what Allaah and his Messenger, sallAllaahu
'alayhi wa sallam, said for support, then this was
only found in the generations that have received testimony
of their excellence. Then that affair came to an end
for a point in time until there came the time of Ibn
Taimiyyah and those of his students who were devoted
to him. So they informed the Muslims of the obligation
of returning back to what the first Salaf (predecessors)
were upon, such as relying on the Qur'aan and the
Sunnah for support.
There is no doubt that the Call of Ibn Taimiyyah and
his students had a positive effect. However, its scope
was very weak during his time and intellectual impassiveness
(i.e. not reflecting on proofs) took over and became
dominant amongst the special classes of people, not
to mention the common ones. Then there followed succeeding
generations in which this re-awakening that Shaikh-ul-Islaam
Ibn Taimiyyah ignited died out. And the Muslims turned
back to their indifference of comprehending and understanding
(i.e. the evidences), until this present time and
a brief period before it, for many scholars rose to
take charge of the Da'wah's revival, due to the need
of returning to the Qur'aan and the Sunnah. They were
preceded in some of that by Shaikh Muhammad Ibn 'Abd-il-Wahhaab,
for in reality, he called to the following of the
Qur'aan and the Sunnah. But looking at the areas in
which the Arabs of Najd during Shaikh Muhammad's land
used to live in, and considering the paganism that
took place in their lands, his greatest effort was
in showing strong concern for Tawheed. And as is very
natural, in my opinion, such that mankind's ability
is limited, he was not able to wage his war on every
front, as they say. So because of this, all of his
efforts were geared towards spreading the call of
Tawheed and waging war against paganism and idolatry.
And he received all the success in that and his splendid
Call was spread all over the Islaamic world afterwards.
And this was even though, unfortunately, there occurred
battles between him and his opponents. But this is
the Sunnah (Way) of Allaah with regard to His creation.
And you will not find any change in the Sunnah (Way)
of Allaah.
However, in current times, the scholars have renewed
their call to the Book and the Sunnah and thus many
of the common and special people in the Arab lands
have re-awakened. As for the non-Arab lands, then
unfortunately they are still in a state of sleep.
However, these Arab lands have been tested by a reversal,
which is what I have indicated previously, such that
some of them do not stop at the middle point of moderation.
Instead they know of one thing and are ignorant of
another thing. So you will see the common man who
doesn't understand anything, when he asks the scholar
on any subject "What is its ruling? ", regardless
of whether the answer is a denial and a negation,
he begins with his demand: "What is the proof?"
And sometimes that scholar is not able to establish
the proof, especially if the proof is deduced and
adopted through thorough research, and it is not stated
in a specific text in the Qur'aan and the Sunnah.
So in issues of this nature, it is not proper for
the questioner to go deep and say: "What is the proof?"
And it is required that the questioner know himself.
Is he from the people that understand evidences or
not? Does he have any share in knowledge of the general
('aam) and the specific (khaas), the unrestricted
(mutlaq) and the restricted (muqayyad), the abrogating
(naasikh) and the abrogated (mansookh). So if the
person does not understand any of these things, then
does he get any benefit from saying: "What is the
proof"?! For what?! – For the ruling on a woman dancing
in front of her husband or her dancing in front of
her Muslim sister, whether it is either permissible
or forbidden! And the dabkah of men! He wants the
proof for that! But in reality, there is no textual
proof from the Messenger, sallAllaahu 'alayhi wa sallam,
on that matter that exists for us. There is only investigation,
deduction and the acquisition of understanding for
it.
Due to this, we say at certain times: Not every issue
has an explicit proof that can be presented in detail,
which every Muslim can understand, whether he is a
common unlettered person or a student of knowledge.
But this is not for all the issues. This is why Allaah,
the Most High, says: "Ask the people of knowledge
if you don't know."
From the extremism that we indicated previously –
and due to it, the most ignorant of people has begun
to decline the proof – is that many of those who attribute
themselves to the Book and the Sunnah: They believe
that the scholar, when he is asked on an issue, it
is obligatory upon him to link "Allaah said and His
Messenger said" with his answer.
I say that this is not an obligation, and that it
is from the benefits of belonging to the methodology
of the Salaf As-Saalih (righteous predecessors). And
furthermore, their biographies and their fataawaa
(religious verdicts) is a proof in action for what
I have stated. So based on this, mentioning the proof
is obligatory when the situation necessitates it,
however it is not an obligation on him every time
he is asked a question to say: "Allaah says such and
such" or "The Messenger of Allaah, sallAllaahu 'alayhi
wa sallam, said such and such." And this is especially
if the issues are from the detailed and intricate
issues of Fiqh in which there are differences of opinion.
Furthermore, the saying of Allaah:"Ask
the people of knowledge if you don't know"
is first of all in the unrestricted sense, so all
you have to do is ask someone whom you feel is from
the people of knowledge. And when you hear the answer
from him, then it is upon you to follow it, unless
you have a doubt about it due to what you heard from
another scholar. There is no harm in you mentioning
that to him. So at that point, the scholar must make
an effort, with the knowledge he has, to remove this
doubt which has been presented to the questioner.
In summary: A woman dancing in front of her husband,
along with the restrictive condition mentioned previously,
is permissible. As for her dancing in front of other
women, then it has two forms also, as we have stated
before. With regard to a woman dancing in front of
her husband, then if her dancing is not joined with
professionalism (i.e. learned way of dancing), but
rather it is just a moving and waving of hands, and
there is no shaking of the hips or those sorts of
things that stir the desires and causes doubts, then
there is also no problem with this dancing. If it
is correct to call it dancing! But if any of those
(evil) things mentioned above are found in it, then
refraining from it is the original principle. As for
the dabkah of men, then if it is in imitation of the
dances, which we see are normally joined with singing,
not to mention that there are words mentioned in them
that are not from the Religion, then this is lahw
(a vain pastime) and it is not encouraged. Rather,
it is encouraged to stay away from it, as the Prophet,
sallAllaahu 'alayhi wa sallam, said: "Every lahw (vain
pastime) the Son of Adam engages in is falsehood,
except his playing with his wife, his playing with
his horse, archery and learning to swim." So due to
this hadeeth, we hold the opinion that it is falsehood.
So if this is the condition of the pure vain pastime
in that we are encouraged to refrain from it and that
is not from the truthful matters, then we say that
it allowable, so long as is not accompanied with something
that opposes the Religion in any aspect of it. However,
it is an allowance that must be weighed by the hadeeth
that I have mentioned previously.
But in my opinion, and Allaah knows best for I have
not witnessed any of these dabkahs, it is not possible
for it to be free from any opposition to the Religion.
And this is because, for example, we have heard the
dabkah at times, and it is not just it alone. Rather,
we hear along with it, music, the mu'adhdhin calling
the Adhaan and the Imaam reciting the Qur'aan out
loud. And they do not care about anything else but
instead they are busy with their vain pastime. Therefore,
the dabkah is from the vain pastimes that must be
weighed and determined. And we do not say that it
is Haraam (forbidden) unless it is combined with something
that goes against the Religion from one of the aspects,
for then it would turn without a doubt into something
Haraam (forbidden).
Footnotes:
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
