Muslim Brotherhood & Misogyny “Question about the Woman as a ruler”

Cairo – Questions related to women’s issues are an important and significant theme in the Fatwa Section of Al-Dawah (The Call) Magazine, as they exceed in number all other Fatwas related to Copts, politics, and art.

In issue No. 58, released February 1981, N.S.Z from Sohag Province, asks:

What is the authority of the hadith, which states: “A people who make a woman their ruler will never be successful.”  What is the ruling on women occupying the positions of power?

The Brotherhood’s Mufti offers a final and decisive answer declaring his firm rejection as follows:

“The Hadith is authentic and recorded in the following major Books of Hadith: Al-Bukhari, Ahmad, Al-Nasa’i and Al-Tirmidhi. For instance, narrated Abu Bakrah (may Allah be pleased with him):

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “A people who make a woman their ruler will never be successful.” Narrated by Al-Bukhari. When the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was told that the people of Persia appoined the daughter of Khosrow II[1], as their ruler he said: “A people who make a woman their ruler will never be successful.” Late scholar Abul A’la Maududi[2] says: “This text – he means  the Hadith- if read accompanied with the Qur’anic verse: “Men are guardians over women,” then both texts  are decisive that the main positions in the state – the presidency, the ministry, the membership of Shura council or the administration of the various governmental bodies – should not be given to women.

The Mufti continues: “The objection may come from this point: that the rule in the verse is related to family system and not the polity. We ask this objector who disagrees explicitly with the Quran and Hadith: If God – Almighty – did not make her guardian in the house of her family, so how come to make her and allow her to become a guardian on the state and millions of homes? There is no doubt that guardianship of the state is more serious. Nowadays, we see them abuse and insult the religion of God. One of them says: “I am against the Hijab (headscarf) adding that: “Those wearing Hijab frighten children with their strange appearance”.  Another falsely claims that: “Islam did not ordain wearing Hijab.” Another one abuses the punishments (hudud) stipulated in the Quran and decreed by Allah by saying, “hudud is a matter that is subject to criticism and objection”. How people like that would succeed when proclaiming such disobediences to God, with blasphemous defiance to God and His Laws? 

In fact, there is a big difference between assigning women to positions that control matters, which is forbidden by Islam, and her role as a Jurist (scholar) or the guider, Mufti or consultant to her fellow sisters. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) consulted his wife, Om Salama, after the Hudaybiyah[3] treaty; and she offered him good counsel. The caliphs consulted women and considered their opinions if they are qualified and mature to give counsel. Some of the Prophet’s Companions used to say: “Whenever we differed over a certain issue or view, whether in jurisprudence, discipline or poetry  …etc., we would have recourse to Mother of the Believers (i.e. Lady Aisha[4]). We had always found the preponderant view in her sayings and advice.“[5]

Critique:

The Mufti explains: “The Hadith is that of the general rule that meant the specific, as the saying of Allah in the Quran: “Those to whom men said, ‘People have mustered against you, therefore fear them.” The word ‘People’ here is specific. Those who are meant here are neither the early or the later nor all people. It only means a specific group of them, not people at large. This is also true of fighting against Christians and Jews until they pay Jizya [6] (Poll tax) according to verse 31 of Surah al-Tawbah (i.e. The Verse of the Sword). The verse targets a section of Christians and Jews (in the lifetime of Prohet Muhammad) who were dispelled from the city of Medina for the crimes they committed. They were all plotting to invade the city of Medina and expel the Prophet and the Muslims out of it. Therefore, not all Christians or all Jews are addressed by this verse.

Critique:

Although the rule of (the general and the specific) in the texts of the Quran and the Hadith is well known to scholars of legal theory, yet the Brotherhood’s Mufti did not even consider the rule (of general that meant the specific) in his Fatwa on the people of Sasanian Empire and daughter of Khosrow II. Instead, he opted for Al-Maududi’s view to substantiate his fatwa.

The Mufti eventually concludes that the Hadith proves the complete marginalization of women, not only from the post of presidency of state, but from all other posts, be it high or low, including the presidency of departments in government institutions!

The utter confusion in Muslim Brotherhood’s view is that men’s guardianship on women in the house justifies the inevitable male guardianship over her in all fields of work. This overlooks the fact that a woman expert in her field of knowledge may obey her husband at home without being more knowledgeable than her. It is illogical that a woman at work be under the leadership of a man less competent than she is, just because he is a man!

This deliberate confusion persists when the Brotherhood’s mufti talk about the guardianship of the women CEO over many others, as if a woman running a company, a government or a department may millions of others at home!

The author of the fatwa (Mufti) moves from the right of women to work and the right of promotion because of competence and experience to a sudden attack on some of the ideas of women and their demands: Hijab and stipulated punishments. These women-specific ideas are phrased without accuracy or specificity. Such calls are said to be insulting Islam, which simply means that they are infidels whose blood is lawfully violable! This violent, subjective attack has nothing to do with the fatwa addressed by the Brotherhood-linked magazine. Moreover, such ideas, which are offensive to Islam – from the perspective of the Brotherhood- are echoed by many men and are not limited to women only. So, how are they going to be judged? Moreover, what is the relationship between this intellectual difference and the right of women to occupy senior post in her community? If we just assume that some women misbehave, does this necessarily mean that the whole sex is deprived of their substantial rights? What do you do with men who do wrong? Will they also be barred from state positions?

It is strange that the author of the fatwa sees nothing wrong with women as Jurist or mentor to members of her gender, a role that requires sound knowledge. Does the Brotherhood consider matters of life in this world more dangerous than matters of religion? Moreover, how it is justifiable for women to play the role of fatwa, with all its consequences, while they feared that she plays a role in political, economic and social issues, in her capacity as expert and professional.

Such unjust and unconvincing prohibition, and the unjustified separation between fatwa on religious affairs and fatwa on life affairs, cast implicit doubts on the practice of Islamic countries where women have assumed senior positions in the state, as in Pakistan, Bangladesh and Turkey. Have Muslim scholars in these countries heard not of final say of the Brotherhood of Egypt, as though they decide an axiomatic fact that is beyond doubt and beyond reproach? Let it be known that those scholars are well-established Jurists.

It is necessary here to ask the Brotherhood about their assessment of the counter-argument expressed by one of the most important jurists of the modern age. In his book: Islamic Jurisprudence On The Path Of Renewal, Dr. Mohammad Salim Al-Awa writes: “The truth is that women, in terms of their rights, her public freedoms and her participation in the public political work, are equal to man. There is no contradiction in performing her political duties and performing other duties unless to the extent when such conflict exists between the political duties of the man and his other duties.

Once a contradiction occurs, it is to be removed individually according to each case. None of the methods of precluding that discrepancy includes the establishment of rules that prevent women from public work, or accept these rules when others impose them.” Dr. Al-Awa added that those who oppose assigning political positions to women rely on the Hadith of the Prophet peace be upon him: “People who make a woman their ruler will never be successful.” .The Hadith is not that cogent since the reference therein is to the general authority that is above all authorities [absolutism]. Such authority is like that of the Caliphate Polity or the general presidency over one Islamic parent State, which controls the entire Islamic group of Sates.

Such type of state no longer exists, and is not expected to exist in the foreseeable future.  Al-Awa concludes that there is nothing wrong with women assuming some of these powers  based on competency and merit- even if it is the presidency of the state. That’s because none of these authorities – including the presidency itself – does not represent what is meant by the Hadith that “people who appoint a woman their ruler will never be doomed to failure”. Therefore, I do not see a legitimate impediment of assigning any position to qualified, glass-ceiling women based on their efficiency, ability and the trust of the people – the electors – in her. If that post needs elections or the confidence of those officials responsible for the appointment is established, then they are obliged to assign it to her”.[7] 

Equality between men and women is the standard rule, the right of women to hold senior positions in the state is recognized by Islam, and the corruption spotted by the Brotherhood is the shared responsibility of men and women. This corruption is only an expression of political, social and cultural imbalance, it requires a practical program, which the Brotherhood does not have, and will never have because they are satisfied of being in “a mid-way, warm zone” in between religion and politics.

The Brotherhood imagines that it is wining through hollow religious mottos and will not be losing because it is far from real political action.  However, the Brotherhood is implicated in matters of politics and life alike. Some of their leaders reveal political opportunism, which is intermixed with religion. In religion, the Brotherhood looks for a justification that is inexistent and invalid. 

Dr. Abdel Rehim Ali, an Egyptian Journalist and Member of Parliament, is an expert on Islamist Movements and political Islam. Ali is a member of Egypt’s Press Syndicate, head of the Arab Center for Journalism in Egypt and chairperson & Editor-in-Chief of Al-Bawaba Newspaper and Portal. He is also an Egyptian MP and head of the Arab Center for Research and Studies (ACRS) in Cairo and Paris.

[1]. Khosrow II was the last great king of the Sasanian Empire, reigning from 590 to 628. He was the son of Hormizd IV and the grandson of Khosrow I. (Translator)

[2]. Maududi (1903-1979) was an Islamist philosopher, jurist, journalist and imam.  

[3] . The Treaty of Hudaybiyyah was an important event that took place during the formation of Islam.

[4]. Ā’ishah bint Abī Bakr was one of Muhammad’s wives. In Islamic writings, her name is thus often prefixed by the title “Mother of the Believers”. (Translator)

[5] Issue No. 58 of Al-Dawah magazine, released in February 1981.

[6] . Jizya is a tax on non-Muslims for protection under Muslim rule. (Translator)

[7]Dr. Mohammad Salim Al-Awa: Islamic Jurisprudence in the Way of Renewal, Cairo, 1998 edition, Islamic Library, pages 81,82,83.