Powered by
UI
Techs
Home
>
Forums
>
>
Women's Issues
>
Women travelling Alone to Mecca/Medina
Post Reply
Username
Invalid Username or Password
Password
Format
Andale Mono
Arial
Arial Black
Book Antiqua
Century Gothic
Comic Sans MS
Courier New
Georgia
Impact
Tahoma
Times New Roman
Trebuchet MS
Script MT Bold
Stencil
Verdana
Lucida Console
1
2
3
4
5
6
Message Icon
Message
- Forum Code is ON
- HTML is OFF
Smilies
[quote][font=Arial]Assalammualaikum, There are various methods of interpreating the law. This is the case in Australia, USA, UK and Indonesia and also Saudi Arabia. Part of my role at work is to interpret Australia 'Retirement Benefit' legislations. We find at times that it is hard to understand the purpose of the law. The courts at times apply an literal meaning to the law of the legislation but at times they try to understand the purpose of the law by reading the discussion that took place before parliament pass the law. Sometimes its hard to determine the purpose as there is no specific documentation to inform the purpose of the law. So Even in Western countries there are various methods to interpret the law. Saudi Arabia is a country where they have taken Imam Ahmed bin Hambal's method of interpreting Islamic Law. His method gives more weight on the literal meaning of the quran and hadith. Furthermore, Imam Ahmed bin Hambal puts more weight on the Literal meaning of Quran and Hadiths then to use Ijtihad to derive rules of Islamic Law. Why? Well....There is definitely the hadith where the Prophet ask Muadh ibn Jabal when he was departing to Yeman of what he should first look at at. And He mentioned the Quran. and then the Sunnah and Lastly Ijtihad. The prophet approved of this. (Reference cant remember but if you want to know...I can dig it up) ....Well, inline with the above hadith Imam ibn Hambal argues that we should use the literal meaning of the Quran and Hadiths if we can find it then only use ijtihad if there is a need to it...that is if there is no specific reference to the quran or hadith to such an extent that he prefers to use a lower-grade of Sahih hadiths than to use ijtihad. This is a method of interpretation approved among the majority of the Muslim Ummah. So if the Saudi Government uses this method and provides proof of using this method, it is acceptable. Of course... this doesn't mean I agree that this is the best method of interpreting the Quran and Sunnah. It would always be better to know the purpose behind the law and see how the purpose can be achieved in today's time and environment. Knowing the purpose of the law is at times hard to achieve as the Quran and Hadiths doesnot always state the purpose of the law. This is similar to the view of Imam Abu Hanifa. This is my opinion...but not necessarily the best of opinion in the sight of Allah. So in summary there are various methods of interpreting the Quran and Sunnah. Could be Literal or it could be purposive. Both could be correct. As for the topic of Hajj and Woman. Both conclusion could be correct. Why? If you take the literal point of view, the following hadith and other hadiths ( and yes there is no specific injunction in the quran) then it is not allowed. Ibn 'Abbas reports: "I heard the Prophet (peace be upon him) saying: 'A man must never be alone with a woman unless there is a mahram with her. A woman also may not travel with anyone except a mahram relative.' A man stood up and asked: 'O Prophet of Allah! My wife has gone for Hajj while I am enlisted for such and such a battle, what should I do?" The Prophet (peace be upon him) replied, 'Go and join your wife in Hajj." (Reported by Bukhari and Muslim). Under this circumstance, if a female has the intention to go and would have gone if there was no restriction, then Allah being Most gracious and merciful, She would get the reward of the hajj. This is supported by the following comment. Yahya bin 'Abbad reported that a woman from Iraq wrote to Ibrahim AnNakh'i: "I have not yet performed the prescribed Hajj; for although I am rich, I have no mahram who may accompany me on this trip." He wrote her back: "You are one of those whom Allah has not given the means to perform (Hajj)." Abu Hanifah, Al-Hassan, At-Thauri, Ahmad and Ishaq all hold a similar view on this issue. If you take the purposive approach, by the following hadith and actions by the companions then you would conclude that the restriction at the time of the prophet was due to security and in this time and place, security is not really a big issue. Although sadly in some part of the world this is not the case. reported by Bukhari from 'Adi ibn Hatem, who says: "I was with the Prophet (peace be upon him) when a man came to him and complained of poverty. Another man complained about highway robbery. Thereupon the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: 'O 'Adi! Have you seen the city of Hira in Iraq?' I said: 'No, but I have heard about it.' The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: 'If you lived long enough you will see that a woman will travel from Hira and will perform Tawaf round Ka'bah, and she will have no fear except that of Allah." So in this hadith, the woman with taqwa travels (no mahram mentioned) to Mecca with no fear of any highway robber implying that there was a security concern when travelling at the time of the prophet. This opinion is supported by the fact that 'Umar gave permission to the wives of the Prophet (peace be upon him) to perform Hajj while accompanied by 'Uthman and Abdur-Rahman ibn 'Awf. I'm not too sure if the group includes Hafsa bint Uthman (A mahram of Uthman). There are also those who's view are in the middle...that is they require the woman to travel in group for her safety (also taking a purposive approach). This is the view of some Shafii Scholars. So...In summary of the hajj issue there is a possibility of both view being correct. I view the second view as the better view as I believe that the injunction that are required of us have a reason behind them. In times where it is hard to determine the purpose of the law, we might need to take a literal approach. For example the injuction for the prohibition for the Mushrikuun to enter Mecca, I believe in the literal meaning...that is... prohibition for all times to come. As for those who believe in the literal approach then I respect your opnion because we need to respect each other's point of view. This is supported by the incident when the companions were informed by the prophet to head to Banu Qurayza and pray Asr when they reach there. The group travelled and on the way the time for Asr prayers was upon them and some prayed because they believed that the spirit of Asr prayer is to pray at its time. The rest of the group prayed Asr when they reached Banu Qurayza at the time of Maghrib because they believed in the literal meaning of the prophet's statement. This incident was brought to the prophet and the prophet remaind quiet...meaning that he did not correct anyone or any group but he approved both party. (again if you need the reference...I can dig it up). I hope this helps both parties in this discussion. [;)] Wassalam Umar Batchelor[/font=Arial][/quote]
Mode
Prompt
Help
Basic
Check here to be notified by email whenever someone replies to your topic
Show Preview
Share
|
Copyright
Studying-Islam
© 2003-7 |
Privacy Policy
|
Code of Conduct
|
An Affiliate of
Al-Mawrid Institute of Islamic Sciences ®
Top