Can A Woman Become A Head Of An Islamic State?

[Valenteenah.]

Originally posted by Nur:

Ahura

 

Fiath matters are not to be taken as a joke, if you are not Muslim, it would be advisable that you respect the faith, if you are, with such statments as to mock islamic rulings of Waliyy for the women, then I suggest that you take a good look of your choices, Islam is surrender, its indeed slavery, not to fellow man, but to Allah. Womens place in Islam is set by Quraan and Sunnah, if you have any evidence to show that the idea of Mahram is laughable, please share, but save your self the trouble of living in the middle, you can judge Islam from the prespective of people without a definite purpose in life except for laughing and having fun.

 

 

Nur

Am I to take it that you drew all those assumptions from my amusement at the outraged fella's post? LoL...

 

I often thank Allah that I learned Diinta way before I started interacting with Muslims.

 

As you were, dear.

 

 

[edit]

 

 

Ahura

 

Matters of faith are not to be taken as a joke, if you are not Muslim, I can understand, however it would be advisable that you respect the faith, if you believe that you are a Muslim, with such statments as to mock islamic rulings of Waliyy and Mahram for the women, then I suggest that you take a good look of your choices, you may be in for a surprise after you die, it was reported that men who made a mockery about Muslim Quraan readers by saying that they have big bellies and are not good in fighting, where declared Kuffar by Allah " Do not apologise, You have turned kuffar after your iman"

 

Islam is surrender to a higher authority, more powerful than authorities you live under who can pass any law they like regardless of what you like, Islam is also a form of slavery, men and women are slaves for Allah, by choice that is, not to fellow man though or to fashion designers, but to Allah alone, , Womens place in Islam is set by Quraan and Sunnah, Its mainly home related and child rearing, if you have any evidence to the opposite and that the idea of Mahram is laughable, please share with us, but save your self the trouble of living on the edge, I assure you that you can laugh now, or you can laugh later, but not both times.

 

Nur

*Sigh*

 

It's difficult not to be offended by your tactics, Nur. But I will resist anyway.

[Cumar]

Originally posted by Amelia:

quote:Originally posted by xiinfaniin:

Those hadiths, and many more, were rejected

not on the basis of an unreliable character of a sahaabi, but for other relevant reasons walaal.

If my memory serves me right, that’s the

exact

reason a lot of hadeeth were rejected

Xiin

- on the questionable character of transmitters. Infact, people with questionable characters or self-interest in their transmissions were dismissed - whether they have come across the prophet or not. Not the mention, Bukhari cross examined almost all of the hadeeth and only accepted a hadeeth that was narrated from more than one person as people were fabricating hadeeth left right and centre to suit them. Again, refer to the definition of a companion and you'll see how its impractical to say that every companion was a saint. Maybe

Nur

can shed light on this subject as he seems to know the science of hadeeth better. I'm in no way attacking the character of Abu Bakra (I actually merely regurgitated what I read on the subject for someone to shed some light - Alas, no1 did) and maybe instead of focusing on the character of the transmitter, we can move this debate forward and discuss the hadeeth’s applicability.

 

Thanks.

As-salaam Alaikuum sister,

 

It is an scholary ijmaa (consesus)that all the sahabas are the people of the Paradise and reliable. All their narrations that have been reported from them are to be accepted and this is found in the commentaries of al-'Aqeedah at-Tahaawiyyah by ibn Abee al-Izz al-Hanafee.

 

Secondly, one cannot question the hadeeth found in Bukharee based on the grounds of some modernists who try to invent some execuse to disregard the hadeeth.

 

Thirdly it is stated in the Encyclopedia of Islaamic jurisprudence (al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah):

 

The fuqaha’ are agreed that one of the conditions of the position of caliph is that the holder should be male. The leadership of a woman is not valid, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “No people will ever prosper who appoint a woman in charge of them.†That is also so that he will be able to mix with men, to devote his time solely to dealing with affairs of state, and because this position involves handling very serious matters. The responsibility is great and this is a man’s role.

 

Imaam ibn ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Baaz was asked:

What is the Islamic view on a woman being nominated as a candidate for the position of head of state, or head of a government, or a public ministry?

 

He responded:

It is not permissible to appoint or elect a woman as head of state. This is indicated by the Qur’aan, Sunnah and scholarly consensus. In the Qur’aan, Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

 

“Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allaah has made one of them to excel the other…â€

 

[al-Nisa 4:34]

 

The ruling in the verse is general and includes a man’s position of leadership in his family, and applies more so to his position of public leadership. This ruling is supported by the reason given in the verse itself, which is men’s intellectual superiority and better understanding etc, which are basic qualifications for leadership.

 

In the Sunnah, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “No people will ever prosper who appoint a woman in charge of them.†Narrated by al-Bukhaari.

 

Undoubtedly this hadeeth indicates that it is haraam for a woman to take a position of public leadership, or to become the governor of a province or city, because all of that comes under the general meaning of the hadeeth, and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said that those who appoint a woman as their leader will never prosper. Prospering means being successful and doing well.

 

The ummah unanimously agreed in practical terms at the time of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs and the imams of the first three generations, which the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) testified were the best of generations, that women should not be appointed as governors or judges. There were women who were brilliant in religious knowledge, to whom scholars would refer concerning knowledge of Qur’aan, hadeeth and religious rulings, but no woman aspired to positions of public leadership during that time or any other position of that nature. The shar’i responsibilities of such positions cannot be carried out by women, because that involves travelling to the provinces, and mixing with the members of the ummah, and meeting with them, and leading the army sometimes in jihad, and negotiating with the enemy, and accepting oaths of allegiance from members of the ummah, and meeting with them, men and women, at times of war and peace, and so on. This is not appropriate for a woman, and it goes against the rulings of sharee’ah that are established to protect her and keep her safe from having to go out and mix in such a manner.

 

Rationally speaking, women should not be given positions of public office, because what is required of the one who is chosen for such a position is that he should a man of great resolve, determination, smartness, will power and good management skills. These characteristics are lacking in women because they have been created with weakness in their intellect and thinking, and with strong emotions, so electing them to such positions is not in the interests of the Muslims and does not help them to achieve greatness.

 

And Allaah is the source of strength. May Allaah send blessings and peace upon our Prophet Muhammad and upon his family and companions.

 

Wasalaam Alaikuum

[Nur]

Ahura

 

you write;

 

It's difficult not to be offended by your tactics, Nur. But I will resist anyway.

 

 

Offending poeple is a lesser crime than offending Alllah, have you seriously thought about the implications of your statments? If I were you, wallahi I would worry. I intended to save you, not to offend you, if offense is what you sense, than we need to look at islam from same perspective, may be you are looking at it from a western prespective az little too much.

 

 

Nur

[Valenteenah.]

Nur,

 

You've got the wrong end of the stick here. Perhaps you should go back and re-read my original post (helpfully quoted below for you) and try to figure out who, and not what, I was mocking before trying to save me by throwing me to the killer sharks. Acuudu Bilaah.

 

--->

 

Originally posted by Ahura:

[QB]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Salafi da'wa:

It truly offends the intellect to perceive a person who needs the permission of A Wali to travel, to perform voluntary fast,to marry and other responsibilities enshrine by Al-Caziz would order her husband or father or a stranger she cant mix with. Ya3ani imagine her father or husband obeying the one they have commanding rights over????

^^ And there is the crux of the matter. A woman (

a slave in all but name

) ruling over free men! Ha ha...what a good joke. *Chuckles*

Now I remember why I decided to stop getting involved in these topics. :rolleyes:

[Nur]

Ahura

 

i did read it, and again, the problem is that you think that according to waht salafi has written, a woman is a SLAVE and a man is FREE, well that is wrong, they are all slaves of Allah with different roles.

 

You see Ahura, if you have a cat and the cat is hit by a car, and its leg is ambutated at the vet, and the vet suggests that a dogs leg is transplanted on the cat, what would happen? it will be a funny looking cat, I am sure you agree.

 

So, when you live in the west, study in the west, watch western TV, eat Western food, live under political system alien to islam, and then you try to apply parts of Islam in your life, it will also look funny like the cats leg that does not match.

 

To get the picture Ahura , imagine, being a princess, the man is like your servant, he goes to work, and when he comes, he appreciates your role, the role of a homemaker, in effect, you are the boss of the boss, you stay home, with kids, spend quality time with your kids, instilling in them ethics and good behaviour, . As a woman you fashion your kid to be the man you want to see in public, you teach him to be honest, kind, tolerant of others, and caring. Your husband takes care of all the expenditure, and your own wealth is out of reach to him, in the Fiqh, he might even be required to pay you for breast feeding.

 

Now, That is a society, and the one you live in is another, they are like a cat and a dog.

 

 

Nur

[-Serenity-]

Suleyman,

 

This ruling is supported by the reason given in the verse itself, which is

men’s intellectual superiority and better understanding

etc, which are basic qualifications for leadership.

Rationally

speaking, women should not be given positions of public office, because what is required of the one who is chosen for such a position is that he should a man of great

resolve, determination, smartness, will power and good management skills

. These characteristics are

lacking in women

because

they have been created with weakness in their intellect and thinking

, and with strong emotions, so electing them to such positions is not in the interests of the Muslims and does not help them to achieve greatness.

As you can tell, I’m really no match for your intellectual competence (not created for purpose, you see). So, I take a bow and exit, sir.

 

*leaves murmuring something about caqli xumo iyo niman*

 

Edit,

 

Originally posted by Nur:

Now, That is a society, and the one you live in is another, they are like a cat and a dog.

What it is, is a dream. Now snap out of it.

[Valenteenah.]

Nur,

 

I'm afraid you still have it wrong. But that hardly matters. Whatever you are selling, am just not buying. Sorry.

[Nur]

Ahura

 

I guess as eNuri Cheif salesman, I cant sell to everybody, we are sorry our packaging leaves a lot to be desired, majority of target custoers love it, but I respect your choice of products you buy, in case you are ever dissatisfied with your current products, our doors are wide open, same low price, and thank you for shopping at eNuri, our customer service department will send you a free gift inshallah.

 

 

Nur

[Johnny B]

This is just Yummy , actually too yummy.

 

Good Xiin, Military intelligence is a contradiction in terms so is Xiin housekeeping.

more to come when i get home !!

[Didi Kong]

Suleyman, patriarchal misreadings are always to be found in interpretations. There is no surprise there.I guess no one asked rasulullah(saw) why a country led by a woman will never prosper. It is a heavy statement that is just suspended in the air.

[- Femme -]

I guess no one asked rasulullah(saw) why a country led by a woman will never prosper. It is a heavy statement that is just suspended in the air.

I actually asked my Imam that question a couple of months ago and he said that it does not mean that a woman can't run a country or that the country will not prosper because a woman is the head of it...but that it means that men must have become so useless for it to come for a woman to rule. And a nation of useless men is a loser nation so maaha? So in that sense, it won't prosper.

 

And I would believe his version, because I don't believe in those sexist interpretations. Less intellegent? Kiss my foot. :rolleyes:

[Didi Kong]

I always wondered what that statement really meant.

[Socod_badne]

And I wonder why is resident puritans and self-proclaimed prelates NEVER chastise those who, like Sulimaan, subvert God's words of equality between the sexes to serve their own selfish and sexist ends. They're always jump for the closest jugular vein of anyone who suggests reinterpretation of ayas, accusing them of Bida but not those like Sulimaan who seem to be doing the same thing. Interesting discrepency I must say. Perhaps it suggests something about the characters and intentions of these individuals.

[Naden]

Head of a state? I gather that position is political rather than religious. I remember a conversation I had with a friend after returning from a city that shall remain unnamed in Somalia. This city of about 30,000 residents had the typical arrangement of a Somali town in that region. Walking through the commercial road, vendors spread every type of goods you could imagine. From about 6 a.m. or so till sunset, these vendors sold food, clothes, even cell phones/cards. A most curious observation. The people sitting on the ground are about 80% women. A quick look at small (unfortunately, now a little struggling) farms showed most of the work being done by women. A glance at the hospital and a few schools showed a 90% and about 50% woman employees respectively. I must admit, the only spots that men had the clear domination were two: the police station (about 15 young and middle-aged men) and the cafes/majlis.

 

My take on a leadership/head of state position is this: it tends to be a ceremonial position propped and supported in most places in the world by group affiliations and influenced heavily by business/industry. The real influence lies and has always in the hands of people who move the trade/business world. From this admittedly small sample, the affairs of this Somali city are run by mostly women who buy and sell, teach and raise children, and grow food.

 

The adversarial and hostile tone of the hadith in contention surprises me a little. Prophet Mohamed's (pbuh) life from working for his first wife Khadija (may god be pleased with her) and helping manage her affairs to entrusting Aisha (may god be pleased with her as well) with the instruction of muslims speak of respect and appreciation of women in a leadership position (economic/religious).

 

In any case, I don't really think it poses a real dilemma for women in muslim societies. What matters, I believe, is their involvement in legislative/policy positions at levels lower than this ceremonial highest position of power. Those are the ones that usually matter in the day to day survival of a family. Seeing from this Somali city and many other Muslim states, women teachers, farmers, doctors, ministers, researchers are already participating and will probably do so more in the future.

[Khayr]

I think that this thread is a good example that illustrates the islamic ruling on this issue.

 

People that put aside all else but their xawa, really have a problem b/c you can't view Islam from a Women's prespective only or a Man's prespective only. That would be self-serving, meaning - that the deen would be serving your personal aspirations and whims.

 

Naden,

 

Pragmatism is not what muslims live by, we can use practical solutions. However, if the easier and more 'pragmatic' approach contradicts Islamic Parameters, then it is to be negated.

 

You have described the redefinition of gender roles in Somalialand. Its shameful to see that happening but that doesn't prove the 'Rule' wrong. What it does show us is that gender roles have been redefined, so that the family can have a 'full belly'. But what if there are less traditional families (as seen in Europe and N.A.), then who is there to feed, if the houses are empty i.e. divorces,single home families etc.?

 

Where pragmatism contradicts Islamic Parameters, then it should be rejected.