Women in Leadership Position. There is no text in the Qur'an or Sunnah that precludes women from any position of leadership, except in leading prayer (however, women may lead other women in prayer),due to the format of prayer, as explained earlier. There are exceptions even to this general rule, as explained later in this chapter. Another common question relates to the eligibility of Muslim women to be heads of state.
There is no evidence from the Qur'an to preclude women from headship of state. Some may argue that according to the Qur'an (4:34), men are the protectors and maintainers of women. Such a leadership position (responsibility, or qiwamah) for men in the family unit implies their exclusive leadership in political life as well. This analogy ,however, is far from conclusive. Qiwamah deals with the particularity of family life and the need for financial arrangements, role differentiation, and complementary of the roles of husband and wife. These particularities are not necessarily the same as the headship of state, even if some elements may be similar. Therefore, a Qur'anically based argument to exclude women from the headship of state is neither sound nor convincing. Most arguments for exclusion, however, are based on the following hadith, narrated by Abu bakrah:
During the battle of Al-Jamal (in which A'isha, the Prophet's widow, led an army in opposition to Ali, the fourth Caliph), Allah benefited me with a word. When the Prophet heard the news that the people of Persia had made the daughter of Khorsrau their queen (ruler), he said, "Never will such a nation succeed as makes a woman their ruler.
While this hadith has been commonly interpreted to exclude women from the headship of state, other scholars do not agree with that interpretation. The Persian rulers at the time of the prophet (P) showed enmity toward the Prophet (P) and toward his messenger to them. The Prophet's response to this news may have been a statement about the impending doom of that unjust empire, which did not take place later, and not about the issue of gender as it relates headship of the state in itself. Z. Al-Qasimi argues that one of the rules of interpretation known to Muslim scholars is that there are cases in which the determing factor in interpretation is the specificity of the occasion (of the hadith and not the generality of its wording. Even if the generality of its wording is to be accepted, that does not necessarily mean that a general rule is applicable, CATEGORICALLY, to any situation. As such, the hadith is not conclusive evidence of categorical exclusion.
Some argue that since women are excluded from leading the prayer for a mixed gathering of men and women, they should be excluded from leading the state as well. This argument, however overlooks two issues:
(1) Leading the prayer is a purely religious act and, given the format of Muslim prayer and its nature, it is not suitable for women to lead a mixed congregation. This point was discussed earlier. Leading the state, however, is not a "purely" religious act but a religiously based political act. Exclusion of women in one instance does not necessarily imply their exclusion in another.
(2) Even the matter of whether women may lead prayer is not without exception. Prophet Muhammad (P) asked a woman by the name of Umm Waraqah to lead her household in prayer, which included a young girl, a young boy, and a mu'azzin (caller to prayer--who is always male).
Al-Qasimi notes that the famous jurist, Abu-Ya'la al-Farra' (known for his writings on the political system of Islam), did not include among the qualifications of the imam (head of state) being a male. It should be noted, however, that the head of state in Islam is not a ceremonial head. He leads public prayers on some occasions and constantly travels and negotiates with officials of other states (who generally are men). He may be involved in confidential meetings with them. Such heavy and secluded involvement of women wth men and its necessary format may not be consistent with Islamic guidelines related to the proper interaction between the genders and to the priority of feminine fuctions at home and their value to society.
Furthermore, the conceptual and philosophical background of the critics of this limited exclusion is that of individualism, ego satisfaction, and the rejection of the validity of divine guidance in favor of other man-made philosophies, values or "isms." The ultimate objective of a Muslim man or woman, however, is the selflessly serve Allah and the Ummah in whatever appropriate capacity. In the incident of Al-Hudaybiyah, Umm Salamah, a wife of the Prophet (P), played a role equal to what we would refer to today as "chief advisor of the head of state."
THE IDEAL AND THE REALITY
ISLAMIC REFORMATION AND RENEWAL
This work focuses on the normative , or ideal, relating to gender equity in Islam. This ideal may serve as a yardstick against which the reality of present-day Muslims should be evaluated. It serves also as the objective toward which any Islamic reformation and renewal should be directed, reformation of wrong practices and renewal of adherence to the Islamic ideal.
When assessing the realities of Muslims, two extremes should be avoided:
1. Justifying injustices done to most Muslim women by religiously flavored cultural arguments. Most problematic in that extreme is the subtle assumption of the "correctness" of traditional cultural practices and attitudes, followed by a selective search for endorsement in the primary sources of Islam
2. Failing to see numerous positive aspects in Muslim societies, such as family stability and cohesiveness, the respect and adoration of mothers, and the sense of self-fulfillment of women who are not frequently seen in public; in the meantime, painting a stereotypical picture of Muslim women as ignorant, submissive, oppressed and almost totally enslaved by women-hating chauvinist men. The focus on injustices and on magnifying them is sometimes partly based on questionable interpretations of outsiders' observations. For example, the smaller percentage of career women in many Muslim societies is interpreted in a Western framework and is seen as an indication of Muslims' oppressing women and depriving them of job opportunities. Little attention, if any, is given to the personal choices of Muslim women and their concepts of family happiness, which may or may not be the same choices or concepts of their non-Muslim sisters.
RELATING TO INTENRATIONAL BODIES AND MOVEMENTS
Once an objective and fair assessment of Muslim practices is made, it should be compared with the normative teachings of Islam. There are enough indications to show that a gap does exists between the ideal and the real. Given the existence of such a gap, a wide gap at times, it follows that Muslim reformers and other international bodies and movements share at least one thing in common: an awareness of the need to close or at least narrow that gap. The problem arises, however, as to the most effective frame of reference and to the particulars of implementation.
International bodies and women's rights organizations tend to consider documents and resolutions passed in conferences as the ultimate basis and standard expected of all diverse peoples, cultures and religions. Committed Muslims, however, both men and women, believe in the ultimate supermacy of what they accept as God's divine revelation (the Qur'an and authentic hadith). To tell Muslims that one's religious convictions should be subservient to "superior" man-made (or woman-made) standards or to secular humanism, is neither acceptable or practical. Even if pressures, economic and otherwise , are used to bring about compliance with such resolutions or documents, the resulting changes are not likely to be deep-rooting and lasting. For Muslims, divine injunctions and guidnace are not subject to a "voting" procedure ot to a human election, editing or whimsical modifications. they constitute, rather, a complete way of living within Islam's spiritual, moral, social, political and legal parameters. Imposed cultural imperialism is not the solution.
IMPOSITION OR REFORM FROM WITHIN
On the other hand, reformation from within requires the following:
One of the main obstacles in the way of such a reexamination of some of the traditional views is worry on the part of some scholars about the reaction of other scholars or of the public to their conclusions. Yet, it is not the duty of the scholar to speak for what others want or expect. A qualified scholar is duty-bound to give practical answers to contemporary issues and problems without losing sight of the boundaries of proper interpretation. In the final analysis, it is Muslims' practices and understanding that need revision, not the revelatory sources, if properly understood, and more important, implemented.
There is no evidence from the Qur'an to preclude women from headship of state. Some may argue that according to the Qur'an (4:34), men are the protectors and maintainers of women. Such a leadership position (responsibility, or qiwamah) for men in the family unit implies their exclusive leadership in political life as well. This analogy ,however, is far from conclusive. Qiwamah deals with the particularity of family life and the need for financial arrangements, role differentiation, and complementary of the roles of husband and wife. These particularities are not necessarily the same as the headship of state, even if some elements may be similar. Therefore, a Qur'anically based argument to exclude women from the headship of state is neither sound nor convincing. Most arguments for exclusion, however, are based on the following hadith, narrated by Abu bakrah:
During the battle of Al-Jamal (in which A'isha, the Prophet's widow, led an army in opposition to Ali, the fourth Caliph), Allah benefited me with a word. When the Prophet heard the news that the people of Persia had made the daughter of Khorsrau their queen (ruler), he said, "Never will such a nation succeed as makes a woman their ruler.
While this hadith has been commonly interpreted to exclude women from the headship of state, other scholars do not agree with that interpretation. The Persian rulers at the time of the prophet (P) showed enmity toward the Prophet (P) and toward his messenger to them. The Prophet's response to this news may have been a statement about the impending doom of that unjust empire, which did not take place later, and not about the issue of gender as it relates headship of the state in itself. Z. Al-Qasimi argues that one of the rules of interpretation known to Muslim scholars is that there are cases in which the determing factor in interpretation is the specificity of the occasion (of the hadith and not the generality of its wording. Even if the generality of its wording is to be accepted, that does not necessarily mean that a general rule is applicable, CATEGORICALLY, to any situation. As such, the hadith is not conclusive evidence of categorical exclusion.
Some argue that since women are excluded from leading the prayer for a mixed gathering of men and women, they should be excluded from leading the state as well. This argument, however overlooks two issues:
(1) Leading the prayer is a purely religious act and, given the format of Muslim prayer and its nature, it is not suitable for women to lead a mixed congregation. This point was discussed earlier. Leading the state, however, is not a "purely" religious act but a religiously based political act. Exclusion of women in one instance does not necessarily imply their exclusion in another.
(2) Even the matter of whether women may lead prayer is not without exception. Prophet Muhammad (P) asked a woman by the name of Umm Waraqah to lead her household in prayer, which included a young girl, a young boy, and a mu'azzin (caller to prayer--who is always male).
Al-Qasimi notes that the famous jurist, Abu-Ya'la al-Farra' (known for his writings on the political system of Islam), did not include among the qualifications of the imam (head of state) being a male. It should be noted, however, that the head of state in Islam is not a ceremonial head. He leads public prayers on some occasions and constantly travels and negotiates with officials of other states (who generally are men). He may be involved in confidential meetings with them. Such heavy and secluded involvement of women wth men and its necessary format may not be consistent with Islamic guidelines related to the proper interaction between the genders and to the priority of feminine fuctions at home and their value to society.
Furthermore, the conceptual and philosophical background of the critics of this limited exclusion is that of individualism, ego satisfaction, and the rejection of the validity of divine guidance in favor of other man-made philosophies, values or "isms." The ultimate objective of a Muslim man or woman, however, is the selflessly serve Allah and the Ummah in whatever appropriate capacity. In the incident of Al-Hudaybiyah, Umm Salamah, a wife of the Prophet (P), played a role equal to what we would refer to today as "chief advisor of the head of state."
THE IDEAL AND THE REALITY
ISLAMIC REFORMATION AND RENEWAL
This work focuses on the normative , or ideal, relating to gender equity in Islam. This ideal may serve as a yardstick against which the reality of present-day Muslims should be evaluated. It serves also as the objective toward which any Islamic reformation and renewal should be directed, reformation of wrong practices and renewal of adherence to the Islamic ideal.
When assessing the realities of Muslims, two extremes should be avoided:
1. Justifying injustices done to most Muslim women by religiously flavored cultural arguments. Most problematic in that extreme is the subtle assumption of the "correctness" of traditional cultural practices and attitudes, followed by a selective search for endorsement in the primary sources of Islam
2. Failing to see numerous positive aspects in Muslim societies, such as family stability and cohesiveness, the respect and adoration of mothers, and the sense of self-fulfillment of women who are not frequently seen in public; in the meantime, painting a stereotypical picture of Muslim women as ignorant, submissive, oppressed and almost totally enslaved by women-hating chauvinist men. The focus on injustices and on magnifying them is sometimes partly based on questionable interpretations of outsiders' observations. For example, the smaller percentage of career women in many Muslim societies is interpreted in a Western framework and is seen as an indication of Muslims' oppressing women and depriving them of job opportunities. Little attention, if any, is given to the personal choices of Muslim women and their concepts of family happiness, which may or may not be the same choices or concepts of their non-Muslim sisters.
RELATING TO INTENRATIONAL BODIES AND MOVEMENTS
Once an objective and fair assessment of Muslim practices is made, it should be compared with the normative teachings of Islam. There are enough indications to show that a gap does exists between the ideal and the real. Given the existence of such a gap, a wide gap at times, it follows that Muslim reformers and other international bodies and movements share at least one thing in common: an awareness of the need to close or at least narrow that gap. The problem arises, however, as to the most effective frame of reference and to the particulars of implementation.
International bodies and women's rights organizations tend to consider documents and resolutions passed in conferences as the ultimate basis and standard expected of all diverse peoples, cultures and religions. Committed Muslims, however, both men and women, believe in the ultimate supermacy of what they accept as God's divine revelation (the Qur'an and authentic hadith). To tell Muslims that one's religious convictions should be subservient to "superior" man-made (or woman-made) standards or to secular humanism, is neither acceptable or practical. Even if pressures, economic and otherwise , are used to bring about compliance with such resolutions or documents, the resulting changes are not likely to be deep-rooting and lasting. For Muslims, divine injunctions and guidnace are not subject to a "voting" procedure ot to a human election, editing or whimsical modifications. they constitute, rather, a complete way of living within Islam's spiritual, moral, social, political and legal parameters. Imposed cultural imperialism is not the solution.
IMPOSITION OR REFORM FROM WITHIN
On the other hand, reformation from within requires the following:
- Social scientists, legislators and rulers should avoid using the argument of cultural particularity to justify anti-Islamic and non-Islamic practices and to continue oppressing men and women alike.
- Scholars should not continue to quote and repeat some of the long-standing juristic interpretations as if they were equal in authority and finality to the two primary sources of Islam. Nor should they engage in a fragmentary and selective approach in seeking justification of the erroneous status quo. They should realize that even the greatest of jurists are fallible humans, whose interpretations have been affected by the culture and circumstances under which they have lived. With the host of pressing and significant contemporary issues, a fresh ijtihad (interpretation) is needed.
One of the main obstacles in the way of such a reexamination of some of the traditional views is worry on the part of some scholars about the reaction of other scholars or of the public to their conclusions. Yet, it is not the duty of the scholar to speak for what others want or expect. A qualified scholar is duty-bound to give practical answers to contemporary issues and problems without losing sight of the boundaries of proper interpretation. In the final analysis, it is Muslims' practices and understanding that need revision, not the revelatory sources, if properly understood, and more important, implemented.
No comments:
Post a Comment