The Prophet's Last Prayer

The Prophet's Last Prayer Author:
Translator: Jalil Dorrani
Publisher: Naba Publication (www.nabacultural.org)
Category: Holy Prophet
ISBN: 964-8323-39-9

  • Start
  • Previous
  • 18 /
  • Next
  • End
  •  
  • Download HTML
  • Download Word
  • Download PDF
  • visits: 4102 / Download: 2991
Size Size Size
The Prophet's Last Prayer

The Prophet's Last Prayer

Author:
Publisher: Naba Publication (www.nabacultural.org)
ISBN: 964-8323-39-9
English

Alhassanain (p) Network for Islamic Heritage and Thought

THE PROPHET’S LAST PRAYER

Allamah Sayyid Murtada Askari

English Translation: Jalil Dorrani

www.alhassanain.org/english

The Prophet’s last Prayer

Author: Allamah Seyed Murteza Askari

Translator: Jalil Dorrani

First Edition: 2006

Publisher: Naba Publication

Site: www.nabacultural.org

ISBN: 964-8323-39-9

Table of Contents

Preface 4

The days when the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) was sick 7

Nursing of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) in Aysha’s house 7

The holy Prophet’s order to Abu Bakr to lead the Prayer 7

The Leading of Prayer by Abu Bakr at the time of illness of the Messenger (s.a.w.a.) 9

Severity of the illness of Prophet (s.a.w.a.) in his last days 10

Soft-heartedness of Abu Bakr in Prayer 10

Refusal of the holy Prophet from the Umar’s leading 12

Anxiousness of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) over the Imamat of Abu Bakr 12

Pray of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) behind Abu Bakr 14

Happiness of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) by the leading of Abu Bakr 14

Imamat of Abu Bakr is the proof of his Caliphate 16

The Conditions of Imamat of Prayer in the school of Caliphate 16

Imamat of Abu Bakr in the traditions of the Caliphs 16

The discussions of the earlier Muslims of Medina (Ansār) after the demise of the holy Prophet 18

Imamat of Sâlim and Ibn Umme Maktum in place of the holy Prophet 18

Imamate of a young boy who had not reached the age of puberty 20

Justice is not the condition in Imamat! 20

Examining and Analyzing the traditions 21

Imamate of Abu Bakr in the historical sources 23

The true history 23

Duty of Abu Bakr and Umar to the command of Usamah and the necessity to obey him 24

Critical analysis of the traditions 25

The reality of Imamate of Abu Bakr in the School of Caliphate 26

Abu Bakr made the voice of Takbir of the Prophet reach the people! 26

The true Imamate in the two Schools 28

Conclusions and Analyses of traditions 30

Notes 34

In the name of Allah

Preface

The Arabian Peninsula has, in its long history continuously witnessed many events. With the coming of Islam and the formation of religious issues through the heavenly personality of the great Prophet of Islam (s.a.w.a.) the page of pre-Islam Arab history saw a significant change. It turned into the Islamic history. Improper individual and collective conduct, wrong ways and styles of life, and similarly the beliefs and superstitions of the ignorant Arabs were the signs of the culture and civilization of the Arab society of those days.

People had wrongly interpreted the meaning of morality. For example, they received respect by burying theiralive daughters. Those who displayed more cruelty were regarded more respectable. Loot, arson, killing, and bloodshed were considered as bravery. When they heard about the Paradise, they asked whether the Paradise had its wars or no. When the reply was negative they said what it worth was!

The story of Zaid bin Haritha is an example of the condition of the ignorant Arabs. Zaid bin Haritha, during his childhood, went with his mother, to visit their relatives in another tribe, when bandits assaulted them. He could not run away and became a captive and was brought to the market of Ukaz for sale. Agents of Hadhrat Khadijah purchased him. She gifted him to the holy Prophet. The Prophet released him and when he was not prepared to return to his tribe along with his father and uncle, the holy Prophet announced near Ka’ba and in front of people that Zaid was his adopted son (in law).

Many of those people changed after the appearance of Islam. Mecca and Medina became centers of the light. The change reached to such an extent that an Ansari youth came to the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) on the day of the battle of Badr and asked: " O Messenger of Allah! What is the reward of one who fights against this community and gets killed? "

" Paradise. "came the divine response.

The young said: " Very nice, very nice! Then the distance between me and Paradise [the only barrier in front of me] is this date which I eat! " Saying so he threw away the dates, engaged in fighting until he was martyred. Yes, their fighting was for obtaining God’s pleasure, and for prospering in the other world.[1] But the opportunists and the wish-worshipper who saw a danger to their worldly [material] profits with the ever-increasing advance of Islam, tried, by every means, to remove this heavenly Shariat [Code] from their community. In the beginning, they tired to prevent progress. Thereafter, they resorted to threatening and intimidation. They used temptation and force to prevent the message from the masses. But the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) stood fast and firm against all those troubles and continued to fight against the devil and his servants.

But the world-seekers who saw their interests in danger, looked for an opportunity for revenge and for staging a revolt. Yet the holy Prophet took proper remedial steps. By God’s help and his sharp planning, he defeated all those mischief and uprisings. The holy Prophet (p.b.u.h.), during his last illness, thought a plan for defeating the coup de etat of the rioter companions, so that all of them could be sent out of Medina along with the army of Usamah. He selected Usamah, an 18-year-old, son of martyr Zaid bin Haritha for the command of that army and ordered that all young and old men must leave Medina with him.

In that battalion, people like Abu Bakr, Umar, Abu Ubaidah Jarrah, Abdur Rahman bin Auf, Sa’ad bin Abi Waqqas, Sa’ad bin Ubaldah, and many other famous companions were put under the command of Usamah. In the beginning they began to criticize, and said: " He made us subordinate to a boy of 18 years! " They refrained from proceeding. The holy Prophet (p.b.u.h.) delivered a sermon for them and said; " God’s Curse be on the one who opposes the Usamah’s army. God’s cursebe on the one who does not join the army of Usamah. "

The army of Usamah moved and camped at Joraf, a few kilometers from Medina. At the same time the illness of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) increased and its news reached the camps. The elders of the community returned to Medina. The next morning Bilal came home and cried: Prayer! Prayer! O Messenger of God! Since the holy Prophet had slept with his head on the thigh of Ali (p.b.u.h.), Aysha thought it a good occasion and told Bilal: " The Holy Prophet asked you to call Abu Bakr to lead the Prayer in his place. "

Abu Bakr stood for prayer in place of the holy Prophet (p.b.u.h.). When the condition of the holy Prophet (p.b.u.h.) improved and he heard the voice of Abu Bakr, He said: Raise me up. Then he made ablution. According to the narration ofSahih Bukhari , he went to the mosque, supported by two men, as his legs had became too weak to walk, his feet dragging on the ground. Then he disrupted the prayer of Abu Bakr and led it in a sitting state. After concluding the Prayer, he gave a little talk to the people and died on the same day.

Such kind of mischief and misbehavior continued till the demise of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.). It increased thereafter to such an extent that they took to the sloganHasbunā Kitabullah (The Book of God is enough for us). It became a cause of alteration and carelessness towards the Prophet’s traditions! With the passage of time, a new style was adopted, whereby false traditions were spread in condemnation of the Progeny of the Prophet, especially Amirul Mo-mineen Ali (p.b.u.h.), and in praise of the Caliphs in such a way that it became impossible to differentiate the true from the false!

Those events have created the need for a thorough research in history, so that false statements could be separated from the true ones. The said story is an example of such events, which the great scholar Syed Murtaza Askari has dealt with.

The Cultural and Scientific

Institution of Allamah Askari

In the name of Allah, the most Beneficent, the most Merciful

Praisebe to Allah the Lord of the worlds and peace be upon the Seal of the Prophets and Messengers, Muhammad and his Purified Progeny.

This servant has been frequently asked about themorning Prayer of Abu Bakr, on the day of the passing away of the holy Prophet. Is it a true incident, and is it a correct narration? And if we assume that it was a fact, then how was the circumstance? In any case, what conclusions can be derived from it?

Due to this, it came to my mind that a discussion on it be presented to answer these queries.

The days when the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) was sick

We begin with what the different sources and references of tradition and history have said in this respect.

InSahih Bukhari andSahih Muslim it is narrated from Aysha: When the illness of the holy Prophet increased and his pain got severe, he took permission from his other wives, so that he could be looked after in my house. He was given the permission…[2]

Nursing of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) in Aysha’s house

In another tradition she said: " The illness of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) began in the house of Maimuna. There he got permission from other wives so that he stayed in Aysha’s house the day of his sickness. He was given the permission.[3]

Bukhari has narrated from Aysha that the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) in his last illness, always used to ask: " Where will I stay tomorrow? " In reality he was waiting for Aysha’s turn. The Prophet was given permission so that he could stay in Aysha’s house.[4]

Moslem hasnarrated from Aysha that the holy Prophet continuously asked, " Where should I stay today and where will I be tomorrow?And was waiting for Aysha’s turn. " [5]

She says in another tradition that the Prophet used to observe the turns of his wives. But at the time of his last illness he used to ask; " Where will I stay tomorrow? "

In fact, he was very much fond of Aysha’s house. " As my turn came, he got comfort in my house. "[6]

The holy Prophet’s order to Abu Bakr to lead the Prayer

InSunan Ibn Majah andMusnad Ahmad it is narrated from Ibne Abbas that when the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) was in Aysha’s house and was ill, he said, " Call Ali for me. "

Aysha said: O Messenger of Allah, should I call Abu Bakr for you? "

The Messenger said: " Call him also. "

Hafsa said: O Messenger of Allah, " should I call Umar for you? "

The Messenger (s.a.w.a.) replied, " Call him also. "

When all of them gathered, the Prophet raised his head, glanced at them and fell silent.[7]

Umar turned towards the people, who had gathered, and said: " Get up from the presence of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.)! " Then Bilal came and told the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) about the time of Prayer. The Prophet said: Order Abu Bakr to lead the people in Prayer.

Aysha said: " O Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.), Abu Bakr is a mild and a soft hearted person and is unable to speak, and if he does not see you, he will cry and people will also cry. It would be better if you order Umar for Prayer. Then Abu Bakr went out of the room and prayed. "[8]

The Leading of Prayer by Abu Bakr at the time of illness of the Messenger (s.a.w.a.)

Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Moslem, Musnad Ahmad, Tabaqat Ibn Sa’ad andAnsabul Ashrâf have recorded (We quote the tradition fromSahih Bukhari) that Aysha says: " When the illness of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) became severe, Bilal reminded him of the time of Prayer. " The holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) said: Order Abu Bakr, so that he may lead the people in Prayer.

Aysha says: " O Messenger of Allah! Abu Bakr is a mild and softhearted person and if he stands in your place to pray, he would be unable to perform the duty of Imamat; it would be better if you order Umar for this job. " The Prophet (s.a.w.a.) said: " You are like those women around Joseph; order Abu Bakr so that he may pray with the people. "[9]

InSahih Bukhari, Sahih Moslem, Musnad of Abu Avana,Tabaqat of Ibn Sa’ad, "Sirah " of Ibn Hisham,Ansabul Ashrâf of Balazari, and in other books it is narrated (we quote the tradition fromSahih Bukhari ) from Aysha, that she said: When the pain of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) got severe, the Messenger was informed that it was time for Prayer. He said; " Abu Bakr is a soft hearted person, order him so that he may lead the Prayer. "

Aysha said: " Abu Bakr is softhearted and whenever he prays, he starts crying. "

The Messenger said: " Order him so that he may lead the Prayer. " I repeated my words.

The Prophet (s.a.w.a.) said: " Order Abu Bakr so that he prays the Prayer and you are like those women around Joseph. "[10]

Aysha also said: I requested the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) many times that he should not order him to lead the Prayer, and its reason was that I didn’t believe that people would like a person as his successor. The people would consider him unlucky and inauspicious. So I hoped that the holy Prophet would change his mind from Abu Bakr.[11]

Severity of the illness of Prophet (s.a.w.a.) in his last days

InSahih Bukhari, Sahih Moslem, Sunan Darmi, Musnad Abu Avana, Musnad Ahmad andTabaqat Ibn Sa’ad it is mentioned (the quotation is fromSahih Bukhari narrating from Ayesha): " When the illness of the holy Prophet got severe, he asked: Have the people prayed? "

We said: " No, people are waiting for you. "

The Messenger said: " Bring some water for me in a vessel. "

Aysha poured some water in a vessel and the Prophet took ablution. Then he intended to get up, but his condition got bad. After that he felt better. He asked, " Have the people prayed? "

We replied: " No, they are waiting for you. "

The Prophet said: " Bring some water in a container for me. " Aysha said: The Messenger sat up and did ablution for Prayer Then he intended to get up, but his condition got bad. Afterwards, when he felt better he asked: " Did the people pray? "

We replied: " Not yet, O Messenger of Allah! They are waiting for you. "

The Messenger of Allah said: " Bring some water in a container for me. "

He sat down and took ablution for Prayer, then intended to get up. His condition got worse. When he felt somewhat better, he asked: " Have the people prayed? "

We replied: " No, O Messenger of Allah, they are waiting for you. "

People were waiting for the holy Prophet, so that they could perform the night pray. The holy Prophet sent for Abu Bakr so that he could pray with the people. (Then the messenger of the holy Prophet came to Abu Bakr and said that the prophet had ordered him to lead the people in Prayer). Since Abu Bakr was a mild and softhearted person, he said: " Umar you lead for the people. "

Umar said: " You are better than me for this job. "

Then Abu Bakr led the people in Prayers in those days.[12]

Soft-heartedness of Abu Bakr in Prayer

InSahih Bukhari, Musnad Abu Avana, Tabaqat Ibn Sa’ad, andAnsabul Ashrâf of Balazari it is narrated (we quote the words of tradition) from Aysha that the holy Prophet in his illness said: " Give order to Abu Bakr, so that he leads the people in Prayers. "

Aysha says, " I begged when Abu Bakr stands in your place, people will not listen to anything except his weeping, so order Umar so that he can lead the people in Prayer. " Aysha then said to Hafsa: " You tell the Prophet that when Abu Bakr stands in his place, people will not hear anything except his weeping. So order Umar to lead the people in Prayer; and then Hafsa did so. "

The Messenger of Allah said: " Keep quiet! You are like the women around Joseph! Tell Abu Bakr that he should lead the people in Prayers. "

Then Hafsa said to Aysha: " I have never seen any goodness from you! "[13]

Refusal of the holy Prophet from the Umar’s leading

InSunan Abu Dawood – Chapter about the successorship of Abu Bakr,Musnad Ahmad, Sirah Ibn Hisham, Tabaqat Ibn Sa’ad, andAnsabul Ashrâf of Balazari it is narrated (We quoteSunan Abu Dawood from Abdullah Ibn Zamá) that when the illness of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) got severe, he was with a group of Muslims near the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.). Bilal informed the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) about the time of Prayer.

He said: " Tell someone to lead the people in Prayer. "

When he got out of the group, Umar was among the group but Abu Bakr was absent. I (Abdullah Ibn Zamá) said: Umar get up and lead the people in Prayer. " Umar got up and said theTakbiratul Ihram of the Prayer. " When the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) heard his voice, which was very loud, he said: " Then where is Abu Bakr? Allah and Muslims do not accept this! "

The Prophet (s.a.w.a.) repeated this; then sent someone to Abu Bakr. He came after the Prayer led by Umar was over and prayed again with the people![14]

Anxiousness of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) over the Imamat of Abu Bakr

In another tradition it has come, " When the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) heard the voice of Umar, he brought his holy head out of the room and said: No! No! No! Son of Abu Qahafa (Abu Bakr) should lead the people in Prayer. The holy Prophet said these words in anger. "

InMusnad Ahmad , it has come that Abdullah Ibn Zamá said that Umar told him: " Woe upon you, O son of Zamá, what are you doing with me, by the promise of Allah? " When you gave me orders to pray, I was thinking nothing but that the holy Prophet had ordered so, and if it was other than this, I would not have prayed with the people.

He told Umar; " By the promise of Allah, the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) has not told me that you should pray with the people, but when I did not see Abu Bakr, I saw you more eligible from amongst those who were present for leading the Prayer. "

InSunan Ibn Majah it is narrated from Sâlim Ibn Abid that,When the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) was in his deathbed, his condition was acute. Then he got somewhat better and said: " Is it time for Prayer? "

We said: " Yes. "

He said: " Ask Bilal to inform the people that it is time for Prayer. "

Again the condition of the Prophet got severe. When his condition got better he said, " Is it time for Prayer? "

We replied affirmatively.

He said: " Call Bilal so that he can make people aware of the time of Prayer and call Abu Bakr, that he lead the people in Prayer. "

Aysha said: " My father is mild and soft hearted When he stands in your place, he would weep and would not have the capability to pray. So it would be better if you order someone other than him. "

After that again the condition of the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) got bad. After sometime his condition got better.

Again he said: " Ask Bilal to make people aware of the time of Prayer. You are like the woman around Joseph. "

Sâlim Ibn Abid says: " Bilal gave Adhan Then Abu Bakr prayed with the people. "[15]

Another tradition quoted by Anas says; " When the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) got ill and in that illness he died; Bilal came to the Prophet and told him about Prayer time.

He said: " Bilal I became aware (of Prayer time). Then whoever wants he may pray, and whoever wants he may leave. "

Bilal returned to the Prophet (s.a.w.a.) and said: " O Messenger of Allah, my parentsbe sacrificed for you, who will lead the people in Prayer? "

He replied: Give order to Abu Bakr, that he may lead the people in Prayer. While Abu Bakr was ahead, the illness of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) went away…[16]

Pray of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) behind Abu Bakr

InMusnad Ahmad it is narrated from Aysha that the Messenger of Allah in his deathbed said, " Give order to Abu Bakr to he lead the people in Prayer. "

Then Abu Bakr prayed and the holy Prophet sat behind Abu Bakr and prayed.[17]

InMusnad Ahmad andAnsabul Ashrâf it is narrated (We quote the tradition fromMusnad Ahmad by Aysha): " When the Messenger of Allah was on the deathbed he sat behind Abu Bakr and prayed. "[18]

Happiness of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) by the leading of Abu Bakr

Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Moslem, andMusnad Abu Avana narrate (We relate the tradition fromSahih Bukhari from Zohari, who said): " Anas Ibn Malik Ansari, who was from the companions of the holy Prophet informed us that Abu Bakr used to pray during the illness of the Prophet. At the time of his death, people were in rows for Prayer and the holy Prophet pulled aside the curtain of the room (which was between his room and the mosque) and looked at us. After that the Prophet smiled. I could not understand the reason of his happiness at that moment. Then Abu Bakr wanted to come back so that he could take place in the rows of the congregation. He thought that the holy Prophet had come out to lead the Prayer. Then the holy Prophet gestured him to finish the prayers and put down the curtains and died on the same day.[19]

Bukhari, Abu Avana, and Balazari have narrated from Anas Ibn Malik (we are quoting fromSahih Bukhari ) that the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) did not come out of his house for leading us in prayers for three days. When it was time for Prayer he pulled aside the curtain and said…till the end of the tradition.[20]

In another tradition Anas says: The Muslims had gathered on the morning of Monday to pray when Abu Bakr was leading the prayers.[21]

All the traditions mentioned so far were according toSahih Bukhari . But five were fromSunan Abu Dawood, one fromSunan Ibn Majah , two fromMusnad Ahmad and they are used to prove the caliphate of Abu Bakr. (Very soon these traditions will be analyzed).

Hasan Basri says that the holy Prophet was ill; Abu Bakr was ordered to lead the people in Prayer. He (Hasan Basri) explains the reason of Abu Bakr’s Imamate in this way: People come to know, by Allah, that he is the master and leader after the holy Prophet.[22]

Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz sent a person to Hasan Basri to ask if the holy Prophet had appointed Abu Bakr as hissuccessor?

Hasan Basri replied: Does your Master and friend have any doubt? By Allah he chose him for his successorship. Because he ordered only him, and not others, to lead the Prayer and Abu Bakr was afraid ofAllah, that he should sit on that seat.[23]

Imamat of Abu Bakr is the proof of his Caliphate

Abu Avana (d. 316) after narrating some traditions in hisMusnad which were quotedearlier, has said: " This tradition makes apparent the caliphate and successorship of Abu Bakr after the demise of the holy Prophet. " It is because the Prophet said: " The most aware about the recitation of Qur’an should lead the prayers; and from the companions of the holy Prophet were some persons, who were more learned than Abu Bakr and more aware than him. Even from the companions were some persons whose voices were louder in reciting the Qur’an. The holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) had told many times, " Tell someone, other than Abu Bakr, to lead the people in Prayer. Abu Bakr is not capable for this job, and he is a mild and soft hearted person and he cries in his Prayer. "

After all these discussions the Prophet didn’t order anyone other than Abu Bakr, and was not happy in this matter with anyone except Abu Bakr. On this basis, according to the narration of Abu Masood, the holy Prophet said: " A man in his period of power and kingship should not pray behind another person. "[24] This proves that he is the caliph and successor after the Prophet.

Ibn Kathir[25] after bringing many sections of the traditions, and after finding solution for the contradiction of those traditions said, "the holy Prophet gave preference to Abu Bakr for leading the Prayer over all the companions.Prayer, which is one of the greatest pillars of practical Islam. "

Shaykh Abul Hasan Ashari said: " The holy Prophet preferred Abu Bakr for leading the Prayer, which in Islam is a clear and illuminated matter. "

He says: Giving preference to Abu Bakr for leading the Prayer is the proof that he was the most knowledgeable and most aware about the recitation of Qur’an amongst the companions!![26]

The Conditions of Imamat of Prayer in the school of Caliphate

There is a tradition that all the scholars unanimously have accepted as " correct " , in which the holy Prophet said: One who is most knowledgeable about the recitation of Quran will lead the prayer. Then if two are similar in recitation of Qur’an, the more knowledgeable about the traditions of the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) will lead. If they are similar in sunnat also, then that person who brought Islam earlier will lead the Prayer. Ibn Kathir says: It would have been better if this statement of Ashari was written with gold. Anyhow, all the conditions were gathered in Abu Bakr!!![27]

Imamat of Abu Bakr in the traditions of the Caliphs

The Sunni scholars bring a tradition from Imam Ali (p.b.u.h.), which could not be true.

Hasan Basri has narrated from Ali that the demise of the holy Prophet was not sudden. He died due to illness. During the illness Bilal came to him and told him about the Prayer time. Then he said: " Call Abu Bakr, so that he could lead the people in Prayer. " The Prophet said it while he saw me. "

When the holy Prophet passed away, the Muslims saw that the holy Prophet gave Wilayat (mastership) to Abu Bakr in the matter of religion. They gave Wilayat to Abu Bakr in the worldly matters too.[28]

In another tradition it is stated that Hazrat Ali (p.b.u.h.) said: At the time when the soul of the holy Prophet departed, he gave preference to Abu Bakr in Prayer. We also, in the worldly matters, gave preference to the one who was given preference by the holy Prophet in the matter of religion, we preferred him!! Then we gave preference to Abu Bakr for the Imamat of Prayer in congregation!!![29]

Anas has narrated from Ali, " The holy Prophet was ill; looking at us, he ordered Abu Bakr to lead the Prayers. When the Messenger passed away, the Muslims, in worldly matters chose that person, with whom the holy Prophet was happy in the matter of religion. So the Muslims accepted the leadership of Abu Bakr and by the promise of Allah, Abu Bakr was fit for leadership (Wilayat).

What factors could undermine the position given by the holy Prophet to Abu Bakr?

The discussions of the earlier Muslims of Medina (Ansār) after the demise of the holy Prophet

After this, what comes is not surprising. Zar Ibn Hobaish has narrated from Abdullah, that when the holy Prophet passed away, the Ansars said, " there should be an Amir (chief) from us, and an Amir from you. " Zar Ibn Hobaish added that Umar came to the people and said: " O people of Ansar! Are you not aware that the holy Prophet ordered Abu Bakr to lead the people in Prayer? "

They replied: " Yes. "

Umar said, " Who, amongst you all, wants to exceed the position of Abu Bakr? "

Ansar said: " We take refuge in Allah that we go ahead of Abu Bakr. "[30]

Imamat of Sâlim and Ibn Umme Maktum in place of the holy Prophet

The elders of the school of Caliphate claim that such traditions prove the Caliphate of Abu Bakr. Now the question is: Whether praying in place of the holy Prophet (p.b.u.h.) is the proof for being his successor and Caliph?

I don’t know how the scholars overlooked what Bukhari has stated in hisSahih?

Sâlim, the freed slave of Abu Huzaifa, used to lead the Prayer for Muhajireen and companions in Qubamosque, and amongst the companions were Abu Bakr and Umar.[31]

It is worth saying that Abu Bakr was there a Mamoom (praying behind), and following someone else, who was from Mawali (a freed slave).

Abu Dawood in hisSunan, and Ahmad in hisMusnad narrate that the holy Prophet chose the son of Umme Maktum as the Caliph of Medina.[32]

InMusnad Ahmad there is a tradition, which indicates: Ibn Umme Maktum used to pray with the people although he was blind.[33]

InMaghāzi Waqidi (died in 207 A.H),Tabaqāt Ibn Sa’ad, andSirah Ibn Hisham it is narrated that Ibn Umme Maktum took part in the battles of Badr,[34] Uhud,[35] Bani Nuzayr,[36] Ahzab,[37] Bani Qurayza,[38] Fat’h[39] and other battles.[40]

Waqidi and Ibn Masood narrate, " Ibn Maktum used to be present in Friday prayers with the people, and recite the sermon near the pulpit and the pulpit was on his left. "[41]

I don’t know how the learned scholars forget that Bukhari has mentioned in his book in the chapter of Prayer:

Chapter of Imamat of the slave and the free ones;

Chapter of the tradition, which says Zakwan (the slave of Aysha) use to lead for Aysha from the aspect of Quran.

Chapter of the Imamat of illegitimate children and Bedouins.

Chapter of Imamate of the young boy (who has not reached the age of puberty). [42]

Imamate of a young boy who had not reached the age of puberty

It is narrated from Amr Ibn Salma, in the chapter of the Victory of Mecca, that his community used to prefer him in leading the Prayer, because he knew to recite the Quran much more than others.

Amr Ibn Salma says: " I was asked to lead the Prayer although I was six or seven yearsold, and there was a dress on my body while going in prostration it moved on one side. "

Then a woman said: " Wouldn’t you cover your back and buttocks from your followers? "

" Then clothes were purchased for me, and nothing like those clothes has made me happy. "[43]

A similar version of this tradition inSunan Abi Dawood has appeared from Ibn Salma : " I was continuously leading my tribe (in prayers). My dress was torn from behind When I used to prostrate my buttocks were visible. " In other tradition he says; " The condition in which I was leading my tribe there was a small coat on my body and it was yellow. When I used to go into prostration my body was visible. "

A woman from the tribe said; " Cover the private parts of your body from us. "

" Then a Yemeni dress was purchased for me. "[44]

Justice is not the condition in Imamat !

Bukhari has narrated, about a person who was misguided, from Hasan Basri that, " Read Prayer behind a person who is misguided and brings wicked ideas! Hisideas harms him only, and are not related to us! "[45]

He has also narrated from Zuhari that, " We don’t believe that a " Mukhannas " (Gay) should become Imam-e-Jamat, except in an emergency.[46]

Companions have narrated from Abu Huraira that the holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) said; " Daily Prayers can be performed behind any Muslim.Whether he is of a good or bad character; even if he has committed " great sins " . [47]

Examining andAnalyzing the traditions

I don’t know how the Sunni scholars have forgotten these words and concluded Abu Bakr’s Caliphate and successorship from the leading of a congregation pray during the last illness of the Prophet? How did the clear and apparent contradictions between the traditions that have come in the " Sahih books " remain hidden from the scholars?

Did the holy Prophet take permission from his wives to pass the days of his illness in Aysha’s house?

Or he observed the turns of his wives and used to say, " Where am I tomorrow? "

Was he interested that Aysha’s turn come and when Aysha’s turn came, the Prophet got comfort in her house? Or perhaps when it was not Aysha’s turn the Prophet did not go to her house? Actually what did happen in Aysha’s house on that day? What was the holy Prophet asking for? Did he ask for Ali? So when the names of Abu Bakr, Umar and Abbas were mentioned did he agree to it?

When Abu Bakr came to the Prophet, did he tell him to lead the Prayer?

Or the Prophet’s condition was constantly deteriorating. When his condition found little improve, he used to take ablution and when he wanted to get up, his condition become bad. Then he said, " Call Abu Bakr so that he may lead the Pray or other answers thatare mentioned in the traditions or other occasions?

Did Bilal come to the holy Prophet (p.b.u.h.) to inform him of the time of the Pray? Did the Prophet said: " Bilal I became aware of the time of Prayer, whoever wants can pray, and whoever wants can go? " Did the holy Prophet order Bilal to make him aware about the time of Prayer?

Or rather he said, " Ask someone to lead the people in Prayer. "

Then Ibn Zamá went to Umar and told him that he should lead the people in Prayer. When the holy Prophet heard his voice he said: Allah will not accept this.

Did the holy Prophet order Abu Bakr to lead the people in Prayer,then Aysha went so many times to the holy Prophet so that he may appoint Umar to lead the Prayer, but the holy Prophet did not accept it and said " you are like the women around Joseph " ?

Who, in fact, addressed these words to the Prophet?Aysha or Hafsa? Who invited Umar to lead the Prayer? Did Abu Bakr invite Umar to lead the Prayer? Then he didn’t accept it and said, " You are more eligible to lead the Prayer? " Or IbnZamá, invited Umar to lead the prayer? Then he accepted it and prayed and the Prophet got angry with him? When, for the last time, people saw the holy Prophet, was he praying in a sitting position behind Abu Bakr? Or it was when he turned the curtain aside, in Aysha’s house, and people were standing in rows behind Abu Bakr?

What is meant by the “White Hand of Musa (A)?

وَأَدْخِلْ يَدَكَ فِي جَيْبِكَ تَخْرُجْ بَيْضَاء مِنْ غَيْرِ سُوءٍ فِي تِسْعِ آيَاتٍ إِلَى فِرْعَوْنَ وَقَوْمِهِ إِنَّهُمْ كَانُوا قَوْمًا فَاسِقِينَ

And enter your hand into the opening of your bosom (collar), it shall come forth white without evil; among nine signs to Fir‘awn and his people, surely they are a transgressing people. (al-Naml, 27/12)

Amongst all the Prophets of God, Musa (A) was the one who displayed the most miracles, perhaps because the Banu Israil - the Jews - were the most perverse amongst the nations in their outlook and conduct. One can say that from the aspect of their intransigence and stubborn habit of clinging to their own ideas, they are a unique nation in history.

Due to their warped logic, they were never truly receptive to the truth, and repeatedly demanded that their Prophets display miracles according to their individual proclivities, their idle curiosity and their baseless whims; some of them even demanded miracles that were logically impossible. They did not understand that the path of seeking conviction, searching for the truth and acquiring guidance - which is the only course for salvation - requires the heart and mind to be free of the tendency towards stubbornness. Additionally, miracles only come about through God’s will and according to the necessity and circumstances at the time, and not for the amusement and vagaries of an ignorant people.

To complete His favour, God sent most of His Messengers to this nation, and they presented many wondrous and clear miracles to their people so that the face of Truth would not be covered by the veils of deception and corruption. However, the Jews were ungrateful for these blessings, and killed several of the Prophets of God. Despite their atrocious behaviour, God patiently presented His proofs by continually sending Prophets to them.

The greatest Prophet appointed as a messenger to this nation, was Musa (A); he was sent to a nation who, under the yoke of slavery, had lost all its virtues and excellences. In their practice, lies masqueraded as the truth, and merits were based on false criteria. Musa (A) began his mission by preaching to a limited and closed circle in an environment which was bereft of Divine values and knowledge, until he made the nascent community stronger and increased their inner realization. Like the Prophets before him, he tried to bring an end to their narrow and ossified thinking by inculcating in them the preference for the life in the next world.

The verse above mentions only one of the wondrous miracles of this Godly man and contains several novel and elegant points, the exposition of which follows below:

According to the scholars who have commented on this verse, the phrase, “white without evil” refers to the whiteness of the hand of Prophet Musa (A), which he presented to the people as a proof of his claim of prophethood. The use of the phrase, “without evil”, negates the notion that his hand was stricken or afflicted by any disease. In fact, the Qur’an asserts that this whiteness was distinct from a kind of known illness.

This explanation is weak in several respects:

1. The whiteness of the hand of this Prophet of God must have resembled the whiteness of a kind of sickness (vitiligo or leukoderma) for the verse to allay the concerns of the observers and reassure them that there was no affliction present.

2. At the time of Prophet Musa (A) magicians performed wondrous acts, and even though the deeds of the magicians and charlatans were the result of their limited human abilities and were based only on sleight-of-hand, training and practice, they nevertheless had a great effect on the minds of the common people. However, a miracle of this type (a white hand) was not of the same level as the other miracles displayed by Musa (A), each of which was amazing and unique in its own right. Furthermore, the miracle of the white hand (as currently described) would not convince the masses that an extra-ordinary act was taking place, or weaken the position of the magicians and convince them to come out to the arena of confrontation.

3. This miracle was only visible to the group who had gathered around Prophet Musa (A) and it was difficult for those who were even a few metres away from him to see it clearly.

To support our claim that the arguments above are weak, we can refer to another verse:

فَأَلْقَى عَصَاهُ فَإِذَا هِيَ ثُعْبَانٌ مُّبِينٌ {o} وَنَزَعَ يَدَهُ فَإِذَا هِيَ بَيْضَاء لِلنَّاظِرِينَ

So he cast down his rod, and lo! it was an obvious serpent; And he drew forth his hand, and lo! it appeared white to the onlookers. (al-Shu‘ara, 26/31-32)

The verse above describes how Prophet Musa (A) first cast down his staff in front of a large crowd of Fir‘awn’s people and others that had been assembled to watch him. The staff turned into a large dragon and caused consternation in the assembly; it was then that that he displayed his second miracle, which was his radiant hand.

If we assume that that the hand of the Prophet (A) became white only to the extent that it resembled someone with a skin-related illness, it would not be visible except to a small group of the crowd who had gathered, and would not have qualified as a miracle that heralded his Divinely-appointed mission and that served as the main proof of his claim. It would not be enough to bring about popular acceptance in his Prophethood or cause the wonderment that would bring about a deep and positive transformation in the hearts and minds of the people and broaden the horizons of their thinking.

About the specific time when the miracle took place, the Qur’an states:

قَالَ مَوْعِدُكُمْ يَوْمُ الزِّينَةِ وَأَن يُحْشَرَ النَّاسُ ضُحًى

(Musa) said: Your appointment is the day of the Festival and let the people be gathered together in the early forenoon. (Ta Ha, 20/59)

It is possible that Prophet Musa (A) chose this special time for the display of his miracle because by then the sun was at its highest point and the day was at its brightest so that nobody would be able to deny the occurrence and nature of the miracle and everyone would see it clearly.

How can we imagine that at this time of the day in the bright sunlight, his miracle merely resembled the hand of a sick person, so that people confused

the whiteness of the hand of Prophet Musa (A) for leprosy, while God informed them that what they were witnessing was the miracle of their Prophet and not a type of affliction of the skin!

With this interpretation we cannot expect that this display of the whiteness of his hand, which is devoid of any brilliance or radiance, to transform the audience or be effective in convincing them to abandon their erroneous beliefs and submit to the claims of the Messenger of God. This is because a miracle demonstrates its relation to the Creator and the Knower of revelation, and its nature is such that it cannot be challenged by people who are unaware of the supernatural world and those who witness it feel that have been allowed a new chance to discover the truth.

On the other hand, the Qur’an states:

وَمَا نُرِيهِم مِّنْ آيَةٍ إِلَّا هِيَ أَكْبَرُ مِنْ أُخْتِهَا وَأَخَذْنَاهُم بِالْعَذَابِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَرْجِعُونَ

And We did not show them a sign but it was greater than it’s like, and We overtook them with chastisement that they may turn. (al-Zukhruf, 43/48)

In this verse it has been specified that each miracle that Prophet Musa (A) displayed was followed by a bigger and more important miracle. This demonstrates a subtle and important point which is a methodology to encourage informed choice and for the staged development of man to a level where his thinking changes. This is because if, some of those whose thinking was perverted were not convinced by the first miracle, the second miracle might be more compelling and inspire them and bring life to their dead hearts and encourage them to search for the truth.

Thus on the day of their festival, and in the midst of the multitudes loyal to Fir‘awn, when the Prophet of God cast his staff on the ground and demonstrated that awesome miracle which caused astonishment and consternation to all, if we imagine that the second miracle - the white hand - only resembled the whiteness of the hand of a person with some sickness, how can we say it was greater and more important than the first miracle? When such whiteness is not only less remarkable than the first miracle, but is not even equivalent or comparable to it.

By taking into account the arguments above, it seems that the interpretation of the white hand resembling that of a sick person is not plausible and we need to re-examine the matter to remove the difficulties mentioned above.

This Divine miracle can be explained in the following manner:

Since the term used for whiteness (bayda ) is also a synonym for the sun, the nature of this miracle is according to one of three possibilities: either the level of radiance and brightness of the hand of Prophet Musa (A) was of a lower intensity that the radiance of the sun, which would not be noticeable by the people; or it is equal in intensity to that of the sun, which likewise would not cause that much amazement; therefore, the only remaining possibility is that the brightness of the Prophet’s hand must have been more intense than the sun so that its penetrating illumination would cause wonderment in every observer. In this way it would send a message to those who sought the path of true guidance to consider this miracle as a

conclusive proof of prophethood which originates from a Divine source, and ultimately force the people of Fir‘awn to grudgingly submit to the truth.

According to medical science, a radiance and brilliance more intense than that of the sun cannot be tolerated by human eyes, and if the intensity is greater than the capacity of the eyes to bear, it will be damaging to every eye directed at it. A further danger also exists in that it may damage the retinas just as when one stares overlong at the sun; therefore, it seems that the Qur’an is indicating that the miracle here is that the light radiating from the hand of Musa (A), although brighter than the light of the sun, is perfectly harmless to the gaze and does not damage the vision of the onlookers in any way.

Now it becomes clear that that this new interpretation of the phrase, “white without evil”, can reinforce the view that the radiant light that issued from the hand of the Prophet of God, and which lit up the surroundings, did not cause any damage to the onlookers.

By keeping in mind the preceding discussion, the meaning of the word “bayda ” also becomes clear; here it does not denote normal whiteness; rather the meaning of brilliance and illumination is more compatible with the verse.1 This meaning forbayda is also normally found in the terminology of jurisprudence (fiqh ); for example, in the expression, “the brilliant nights” (ayam al-bayd ), which are the nights during which the moon is at its most luminous. These examples can be of use in revealing the facts and provide another proof for the matter discussed above.

From the foregoing, the verse can be translated as follows:

“O Musa, put your hand into your collar and when you draw it out, it shall be radiant without causing any damage; this is one of nine miracles with which you have been sent to Fir‘awn and his people, indeed, they are a transgressing and rebellious nation.” (al-Naml, 27/12)

Reference

1. The late Mulla Muhsin Fayd in his exegesis of the verse states: “He would take his hand out of his collar and illuminate his surroundings.” (Tafsir Safi, 4/89). Therefore, at those moments of the day, the brilliance of the white hand of Prophet Musa (A) would be brighter than the sun, otherwise the statement that his hand illuminated his surroundings in the day time would not make any sense.

Allama Majlisi states in his exegesis of this verse: “The radiance that issued from the hand of Prophet Musa (A) was brighter than that of the sun.” (Bihar al-Anwar, 13/78).

Abu’l Futuh Razi also states in his exegesis of the verse that: “He would draw his hand out from his collar and it would appear white and it would be brighter than the sun.” (Tafsir Razi, 7/353).

The author of Nasikh al-Tawarikh also states: “He would draw his hand out of the opening at his collar and it would be as bright as the sun and it would light up the scene in a manner that nobody could look directly at it.” (Nasikh al-Tawarikh, 1/373).

All these statements show that the explanation that the whiteness of the hand of the Messenger of God was similar to the whiteness of a skin affliction - which the great exegetes have generally inferred from the phrase, “white without evil” - does not agree with any of the reports mentioned above.

The Manifestation of Qur’anic Wisdom in the Laws of Inheritance

يُوصِيكُمُ اللّهُ فِي أَوْلاَدِكُمْ لِلذَّكَرِ مِثْلُ حَظِّ الأُنثَيَيْنِ

God enjoins you concerning your children: the male shall have a share (of inheritance) equal to the share of two females; (al-Nisa, 4/10)

وَإِن كَانُواْ إِخْوَةً رِّجَالاً وَنِسَاء فَلِلذَّكَرِ مِثْلُ حَظِّ الأُنثَيَيْنِ

And if there are (several) siblings, men and women, then the male shall have the like of the portion of two females; (al-Nisa, 4/176)

As mentioned in the foregoing verses, Islam has ordained that the share of the man in inheritance should be twice that of the female and has called its followers to practice this Divine decree. This matter requires some deliberation and analysis; however, before we begin a discussion about this ruling, we need to remind ourselves that:

A debate about the respective inheritance of men and women must not be devoted to supporting the rights of men while ignoring the high status and actual rights of women; rather the intention should be to defend the sanctity of revelation, which has prescribed a course based on the intrinsic nature of human beings and what is in their true best interest. Accordingly, it becomes evident that the discussion at hand will not be influenced by man-made social norms, which are subject to change in every era, even though the social environment in its own way exerts such a tremendous influence on the thinking of the populace that it even sways the opinions of some of its intellectuals.

After this preamble, we now embark on a closer study of the issue:

Islam treats men and women in a manner that is comprehensive, taking into account all aspects of their existence, in recognition of their valuable place in creation. On the one hand, in its prescriptive guidance (revelation), Islam considers the essential worthiness and the spiritual potential of men and women to be the same; each one of them, through suitable actions, can achieve their maximum and deserved potential.

On the other hand, if we consider the opinions and findings of psychologists and physiologists about the physical, mental, emotional and spiritual differences between men and women based on their research and observation, we find that the rights and responsibilities of men and women have been prescribed by taking into account their inner and real differences, which does not affect their essential equality or their dignity as human beings. In other words, in the view of religion, the actual and natural differences of the two sexes does not mean that there is any difference in their respective worth.

There is no doubt that in the course of the social development of human beings, the female sex has always been the subject of oppression and denial of rights. She has suffered much deprivation at the hands of men.

On the other hand, there is also no doubt that the many remedial and radical developments through the ages, have inclined towards the opposite extreme; and the attempts to resolve the conflict has not achieved a balanced result in this regard, despite well-meaning efforts.

Amongst them, the seekers of women’s rights are no exception and we have witnessed many times their disproportionate behaviour in the defence of the rights of women.

As for the fact that equality in every aspect between the rights of men and women has been declared as a basic and established truth by those who defend women’s rights; we must analyze the basis on which this view has been formed, and to what extent it is logical and whether it is compatible with reality.

It is true that both men and women are partners in the human race, and both possess equal human rights and virtues; however, there are undeniable differences in their physical and emotional compositions. Of course, these differences are not defects, by which one sex can claim superiority over the other; rather, they are differences that make them distinct from one another. Consequently, when it is claimed that the two sexes “must” have the same rights as each other, we need to ask, where is this “must” derived from?1

The equality of rights of individuals of one sex is a matter that is logical and tenable; however, the equality of rights, in all aspects, of two different sexes (in view of their emotional and physical differences) requires proof to support the claim; and if a proof for this equality in all aspects and dimensions is not forthcoming or produced, then the claim of the need for equality of rights is baseless and illogical; in truth, a robust validation of this claim is still pending.

A cursory glance at the many and varied feminist ideas and views will reveal the truth of the matters stated above:

The ideology of feminism was established in the West as a movement that sought women’s rights; even though it is possible that its proponents, especially women, started this movement sincerely in order to attain the true rights of women, the existence of capitalist and economical motives behind the propagation of the feminist ideology at the stage of its inception cannot be denied.2

However, aside from the factors that influenced the dawn of this ideology, even nowadays, feminism has been transformed into many different schools and theories, and every group who propagates this ideology has embarked on its own particular course, often criticizing the stance of others and insisting that their own opinions are the most progressive.

The proponents of women’s rights originally advocated equality of rights for men and women. The views of Simone de Beauvoir, as outlined in her book, “The Second Sex” - which has become famous as the “Bible of Feminism” - are based on this same principle that since men and women are both human beings, they should have equal rights.

However, the course of social development forced feminists to review their thinking, to the degree that they were no longer content with espousing equal rights for men and women, but went further to state that females were the superior sex. In essence, this was the exact opposite of the extreme view that had deprived women of their rights in the first place. Extremism appeared in the school of feminism, to the extent that one radical feminist, Andrea Dworkin, embarked on a scathing criticism of masculinity and

considered maleness to be essentially synonymous with violence, death and destruction.

Today, in practical terms, the principle of equality is not always practised in western societies; for instance, when they say that men and women must receive equal rights because of the fact that they are both human beings, in the matter of child custody the courts rule in favour of women on the basis of their sex, and not on the basis of their membership of the human race. Contrary to the claim of equality in every respect, this is a legal rule that is openly biased and unfair to men and which the judiciary invariably supports.

Finally, the emergence of post-modernism in contemporary times, which has influenced many modern ideologies and schools of thought, has also changed the focus of feminists regarding the pursuit of women’s rights. Specifically, a new group of feminists have stood up against the excesses of the era of modernism, by emphasising the importance of the maternal role of women. In fact, this group believe that both men and women possess special unique qualities. Thus, they extol matters such as pregnancy and the nursing of infants as distinctive values which are exclusive to women, and criticize the extremists by asking how they could ignore this precious feminine quality when considering the rights of women?3

In any case, in view of the transformations in the ideology of feminism, in addition to the fundamental question already mentioned about the absence of logical and decisive proofs to validate their main claims, we also need to ask how long and to what degree will these various contrasting opinions about women’s rights continue to change? And where will this development ultimately stop and settle?

Furthermore, who is the most qualified to select the correct view from amongst the plethora of opinions on the subject, and will the view of these experts not be later subjected to criticism and review?

It must not be forgotten that that although the proponents of equal rights for men and women have not explicitly discussed the different faculties of reasoning, intellect, labour and management of the two sexes, nevertheless they always take into account these undeniable and fundamental differences that are integral to the two sexes and apply them in the variety of social issues. This fact is borne out by statistics which analyse how, in practice and in different social settings; men are selected much more often than women to managerial posts. They also conclusively show how, in societies which clamour about equality of rights between men and women, the intellectual and labour output of men and women are rewarded in an inconsistent and biased manner.

It is a clear reality that the physical constitutions of men and women are suited to particular responsibilities; men are suited to performing heavy and rugged work and in contrast, women are more suited to lighter and more delicate tasks. This is a difference that the Creator has placed in the essence of the two sexes.

If the rights of both sexes must be identical, then the work that the two can do should likewise be distributed in an identical manner, because it is not logical that the tasks be different but the rights be the same!

The other factor that results in the difference in rights, is the difference in responsibilities. Let us consider a factory, an office or a manufacturing plant in which there are many workers busy doing a variety of tasks. One is the president, and others, depending on their level of expertise, are advisers, employees and labourers. It is obvious that the rights of the president are different from that of everyone else and this difference will not be considered to be unjustified, because his rights are proportional to the responsibilities he bears.

This is a sensible system that has been accepted by all societies. If all the salaried workers in one department are men, or all of them are women, or both men and women run the department, even then, the situation will be the same. A president, even if she is a woman, will have a higher salary than the male employees, because her responsibilities are different. Therefore, in these situations, no one will claim equal rights for men and women.

This difference in responsibilities, which in turn causes the difference in rights, is an accepted convention. At this point, the question arises that when a difference in responsibilities results in a difference in rights - and this matter raises no protest or objection - then why should the differences in the responsibilities of men and women due to their nature and disposition, which are immutable and go back to the essence of their respective existences, not result in a difference in the rights of the two? Is there an argument that proves that the differences in responsibilities which raise and lower individual rights, are only limited to conventional responsibilities, and do not encompass natural and existential differences?

The implication of the foregoing question is that, if the proponents of equal rights between men and women want to ignore the natural and distinct responsibilities of the two sexes by formulating laws bases on equal rights, then they are acting contrary to nature. Laws can always be made according to their whims and desires, but nature itself cannot be changed!

And finally, there is another question that arises here, and that is: When national and private companies are allowed to make distinctions in the job specifications of the male and female employees, and thereby, allocate different rights to them, and diverse societies also accept this practice as normal, why is a religious school of thought not allowed to pronounce the rights of the men and women who are its adherents on the basis of the responsibilities it has allocated to each one?

If the differences in conventional rights as practised by private and public institutions or by particular individuals have raised no objections and are accepted norms in all societies, why are the differences in rights as espoused by a religion challenged? When an ordinary employer has the right to decide the duties of the employees working in his company as well as their rights, why can’t the founder of a great intellectual and spiritual movement not do the same for its followers and adherents? That too, a religion that has placed a great financial responsibility on the shoulders of its male followers; a religion that makes a man responsible for procuring every necessary provision for his wife commensurate to her status and rank; in these circumstances, justice dictates that the share of men and women in inheritance must be different.

Let us assume that a father who wishes to allocate some money to his two sons, gives the married son twice as much as the one who is unmarried. Can one say that the right of the unmarried son has been violated, or that he has been disadvantaged because he received less? Here too, there is a difference, but it is based on justice and fairness, because if the father gave both sons the same amount, morally he would be guilty of unjust discrimination; similarly there is a difference in the inheritance of men and women according to the law ofsharia ; however, it is a just distribution based on the lighter responsibility placed on the woman, and which is fairly reflected in the lesser amount that she inherits.

This is when in general, for most families, one can reasonably say that the expenses a man incurs in supporting his wife in the course of their married life is many times greater than the amount which the woman would inherit if she was to receive equal shares to her male siblings.

As a rule, the financial commitments that a man undertakes has an influence; when the man guarantees the living expenses of his wife, he feels a greater sense of responsibility towards her. This will engender a positive reaction from the wife, who sees herself as indebted to her husband and strives to repay her debt by fostering a relationship with him based on love, respect and collaboration.

As a result of the increased sense of responsibility on the part of the husband towards his wife on the one hand and the sense of indebtedness on the part of the wife towards the husband on the other, there is an increase in their mutual love and affection and this will help to strengthen the foundations of their family life. This same strengthening effect would not arise if the woman received a greater share in inheritance.

From the dawn of Islam to the present, millions of Muslim brothers and sisters, wives and husbands have lived genially side by side, without the disparity in the share of inheritance causing any disruption in the order of Muslim family life; in fact, there has not even been much evidence of dissatisfaction at this arrangement which would cast a shadow on their cordial relations or cause rifts between family members. And, the rare events when there have been family disputes due to the shares in inheritance, do not invalidate the general situation stated above.

One of the interesting developments in recent times is the increased tendency for women in the West (in comparison to men) to turn towards Islam. Despite all the efforts of some western agencies to convince women that Islam denies women their rights - and in their widespread propaganda they do not refrain from every allegation of the violation of rights - nevertheless, more women turn to Islam than men.

This fact can be easily seen from statistical reports and must not be dismissed lightly; rather we need to study this matter carefully and think about the possible factors that would make a woman from the western society become prepared to ignore the equal right of inheritance that she has been granted through the laws of her country (a law that was enacted with the material benefit of women in mind), in favour of a religion which has directed that the share in inheritance of men is twice that of women.

Is it possible to overlook the influential factor of innate human nature (fitra ), which is related to the true essence of human beings and ignore the specific essential nature of the female sex in this regard? Especially when we know that Islam has taken into account the spiritual and physical differences between men and women as the basis for the laws of inheritance. When a law has been enacted on the basis of justice and is rooted in the depths of human nature, why should it be subject to change and reform? And what should it place as its focus instead of justice and innate human nature?

If man-made laws had positively addressed the needs that originate from the depths of the human being and satisfied his inner feelings, then such issues would not warrant consideration.

In addition to what has already been mentioned, another aspect of the Divine wisdom in the laws of inheritance is the economical aspect; specifically: In the west, the wealth that reaches women through inheritance is equal to that which men receive in the same way.

However, in most cases the wealth of women is used less in the way of industry and sound business, and a large portion of it is usually spent on decorations, superfluous ceremonies, luxuries and jewellery, nonessential goods and various diversions; not only is this wasteful, but it is also against moral decency, causing emotional anguish in poor families and ultimately resulting in a social malaise and a culture of overindulgence and extravagance; it is possible that if this same wealth was in the hands of men, they would use it to develop business and financial enterprises and investments that would appreciate in value, resulting in a betterment of their economical status.

It is not without reason that the development and flourishing of the economies in western societies has come about from the wealth of men, and most businesses and financial institutions in these same societies that are clamouring for equal rights for men and women, are in fact related to men.

Another factor is to do with the supervision of the family. In reality, the role of men and women is to complete and perfect one another, therefore, the correct use of the capacity of each one in the assistance of the other enables their joint life to proceed smoothly, and this division of responsibilities and planning in their associated lives caters for the needs of the family.

When the Qur’an places the responsibility of protection and supervision on the shoulders of men by stating:

الرِّجَالُ قَوَّامُونَ عَلَى النِّسَاء

Men are the protectors of women (al-Nisa, 4/34)

it does not mean to say that men are the leaders or that one sex is superior to the other at the level of humanity. When a man and woman live together as partners and embark on family life, especially a family founded on the principle of mutual cooperation and understanding, which of the individuals has the better ability to supervise the family and provide for its expenses; the man, the woman or the children?4

When we look at the prevailing situation in society, we see that the owner of a business, who has employed several individuals, and whom he pays for their services, naturally takes over the role of supervisor of his employees without having been elected to the post by anybody. This is a conventional practice and the employees accept the situation without question.

The Qur’an also mentions the role of the man as the supervisor of the family unit as a matter of accepted practice and not a new innovation. It supports what is the normal practice in society, and by the use of the phrase, “and because they spend out of their wealth” (bima anfaqu ), in the verse above, it alludes to the same issue that the greater claim of the man to the role of supervisor and protector is linked to the responsibility of providing for the family’s needs that rests on his shoulders.

This rational principle is intertwined with the essence of existence; meaning that, in addition to human beings who have acknowledged, out of a natural instinct, the role of the man as a supervisor and protector, the same situation exists naturally in the animal kingdom as well, and examples of this behaviour are clearly observable in many aspects of their life.

Here it is appropriate to mention another issue also; that which is commonly heard in the west from the same groups of enlightened thinkers and proponents of freedom is the rights of homosexuals, and there is a tendency even amongst the most distinguished thinkers to be drawn towards this matter in the name of the defence of freedom. Perhaps it will not be many years before the rights of homosexuals are catered for in the whole of western society and their rights are accepted as a natural and expected feature to a point where any objection raised will be considered as an unacceptable about-turn and no one will be able to say anything or raise any objection about the matter.

When it becomes acceptable to base legislation on the low and base desires of humanity, every sacred value will be discarded and society will descend into moral decadence and decay. The fact is that the procedure of this legislation is fundamentally incompatible with the essential nature of mankind, and that which is presented in the name of the preservation of freedom, should be confined to that kind of freedom that facilitates the wholesome and balanced needs of humankind, and not the demands that arise from unnatural and unhealthy temperaments.

If, under the banner of freedom and the protection by law, this abnormal and aberrant sexual conduct becomes pervasive and common, then, as a consequence of the actions of the same enlightened and broadminded thinkers and defenders of women’s rights, half of humankind in western society itself - its women - will become deprived of marrying and having a normal physical relationship with the opposite sex and in the fullness of time, this community will have to face the threat of extinction. Is the enactment of such laws in the best interests of mankind and do they have results and consequences worth defending?

If we review the history of legislation in different nations of the world, we come across laws for which thinkers and experts had put in a lot of thought and effort; yet with the passing of time, and on deeper reflection

and analysis, the miscalculations of the legislators, and the weakness, inadequacy and ineffectiveness of those laws have been ultimately exposed. That which in yesteryears was considered by visionaries to be the ideal and most effective manner of governing their societies, has come to be acknowledged as the product of an improper and incomplete understanding.

Therefore, they turn to a new system of legislation, and despite the progress in ideas and thoughts of intellectual and experts, the search (for perfect law) still occupies the minds of researchers.

How often have a large group of scholars unanimously backed a particular ideal, yet with the passage of time and the advance of knowledge, the weakness and error of their views is conclusively proved.

It is universally accepted by scientists, working in different fields, that without understanding and taking into account the essential nature of man, planning and the creation of schemes and programs will be of little worth.

It cannot be denied that today, despite the vast knowledge at mankind’s disposal in every field, there are many peaks that have not yet been scaled, especially in matters to do with the inner and spiritual realm that exists inside man; indeed in his spiritual potential man is a deep ocean and our knowledge about it is negligible. As a consequence, planning and the formulating of legislation to govern the life of man, whose true identity and essence is shrouded in mystery, is similar to planning a course of treatment for an invalid whose illness is unknown.

The formulation of legislation not only calls for a complete and all-encompassing knowledge about every facet of man’s being, rather it also requires a thorough knowledge of society and its convoluted social interrelationships as well as the knowledge of other creatures whose lives are also interwoven with mankind.

On what authority and knowledge do those who claim that they desire the flourishing and felicity of human society base their plans and schemes?

The fact is that the knowledge and perception of mankind is not yet able to fully comprehend the inner physical and spiritual properties of human beings and the mysteries of social conduct that arise from the interaction of individuals with one another. As a result, man is unable to address the diverse needs of humanity and distinguish the correct course from the multiple paths that present themselves before him.

Even if the principles that lead to human perfection are understood, human knowledge and intellect is unable to solitarily answer the multitude of questions that arise, and take sole responsibility for directing the progress of humanity in every sphere according to the Divine plan. It is only when man searches within himself and makes use of the values that are buried in his heart and nature that he will achieve success and create a system that takes into account the different aspects of his existence.

The truth is that when formulating legislation, man is not able to remain immune from his own personal nature and character; the differences amongst individuals in their upbringing, cultural and social norms, familial customs and other factors deeply influence their perceptions, decisions and opinions. The interpretation of terms and ideas are not the same by all individuals in a society, each understands according to his own insight and

views. The thoughts and ideas of legislators and regulators who embark on studying human nature are also drawn, knowingly or unwittingly, towards preconceptions acquired from their particular environment and therefore they are unable to make impartial analyses of situations.

All this indicates the futility of expecting human intellect and knowledge to single-handedly be able to serve this need and it is a decisive affirmation of the fact that human legislation can be potentially very damaging. It is here that we must acknowledge that one cannot submit with certitude and confidence to such a doubtful system and entrust one’s prosperity to it. Even if we assume that a day will come when the knowledge of man will be able to encompass all facets of human existence, even then that will not guarantee the wellbeing of mankind because man is naturally prone to making decisions based on his personal and selfish interests.

Keeping these various difficulties in mind, the well-known western thinker Rousseau writes:

“To discover the best laws which will be beneficial to nations, one has to necessarily seek out a perfect intellect, who is cognizant of all human lusts and frailties but is himself not affected by them. He should have no relationship to nature, but yet have a complete knowledge of it. His own prosperity should not depend on us, but he should be ready to assist us to achieve our own prosperity...”5

Dr Carrel writes on the same subject:

“The systems of government, entirely constructed in the minds of doctrinaires, are valueless. The principles of the French Revolution, the visions of Marx and Lenin, apply only to abstract men. It must be clearly realized that the laws of human relations are still unknown. Sociology and economics are conjectural sciences - that is, pseudo-sciences.

Thus, it appears that the environment, which science and technology have succeeded in developing for man, does not suit him, because it has been constructed at random, without regard for his true self.”6

Therefore, the right to formulate law is more suited to the One whose sacred being is not subject to the conditions and influences of the environment, nor can failure in any task be ever imagined for Him. His limitless knowledge completely encompasses the entirety of existence and He knows the fundamental and true needs of man and is aware of the boundaries of his potential and the changes and developments that human beings and the universe are yet to go through. And He is God, and the right to systematize legislation is only befitting for Him.

The Qur’an states:

أَفَحُكْمَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ اللّهِ حُكْمًا لِّقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ

Is it then the judgment of (the times of) ignorance that they desire? And who is better than Allah to judge for a people who are sure? (al-Ma’ida, 5/50)

References

1. To date, those who defend the rights of women have always presented the principle of equal rights as fundamental and undeniable and therefore, they have questioned why there is a difference between the inheritance of men and women in Islamic law. However, they have ignored the point that the actual question they should first answer is that on what basis is the principle of equal rights of the sexes founded, when there are clear differences between men and women.

2. The historical background of this ideology and coincident with its inception, is the industrial revolution in England, which led to the movement demanding voting rights for women. In the face of the industrial changes that were sweeping across Europe the governments could now tax women, because only those who paid taxes had the right to vote in elections.

3. For a more comprehensive review, refer to “Modern Political Ideologies”, by Andrew Vincent. (The author has relied on a translation of this work by Murtada Thabitfar); also “Huquq-e Zan dar Keshakesh-e Sunnat wa Tajaddud”, by Muhammad Hakimipur, “Feminesm ‘Alayhi Zanan”, by Sayyid Ibrahim Husaini, as quoted in the Journal of Book reviews, Faslname-ye Kitab naqd, No. 17, Winter 1379 (lunar).

4. It is possible that in some cases women are more qualified to supervise than their husbands, however, invariably, the law does not mention all special cases, and is concerned with the general situation amongst human beings.

5. Social Conventions, p. 81.

6. Man, the Unknown, p. 30.