When Patriarchy Joins Forces with the Owners of Absolute Truth

The Speech in English

"On women leading prayers.. Oh, fellow men.. I swear I don't know from where to start or how! Because of the horror I was subjected to. And there people of knowledge who committed the terrible mistake of permitting women to lead prayers.. Don’t know how! To his aim (the person who thinks this is not forbidden in Islam) he did the following: He said that the hadith which prohibits women from becoming leaders, the hadith told by Abu Bakrah Al Thaqafi, ''A nation which placed its affairs in the hands of a woman shall never prosper". He said that this hadith is not a proof. Why? He said Abu Bakrah is crooked.. Yes, I swear he said so.. Abu Bakrah is a Sahabi (one of the disciples of Prophet Muhammad). Huh, I say this Abu Bakrah Al-Thaqafi is a Sahabi.. He said Abu Bakrah is crooked, and a liar.. and this means that the hadith he told is false. This was the first observation. The second observation was that Al Bukhari (one of the basic sources of collected hadith) contains spurious hadith. Let him reach where he wants. [cut out part] They want to shaken everything that was mentioned against this issue, even those who which are 100% proven in solid igmaa (the agreement among sheikh) which is of the same status as the Quran.. That is that women are not permitted to give Friday sermons or lead prayers. The handing over of verdict is to be taken as the handing over of the Quran to us. In the highest level of agreement and tawatur (transmission) from generation to generation.. So that no matter how long you searched books, you won't find a single recorded incidence from the prophet's time until our present time, saying that a woman has ever led prayers. You won't find a single occurrence. And this is called the most powerful practical igmaa. He comes to that issue which enjoys an agreement that is as clear as the morning sun, and he wants to shake it and raise doubts among muslims. So you can imagine what is the case with other sharia rules, which are thousands.. He can play with them as he wishes. Why?.. Because their origins and interpretation (sharia rules) are unknown to the majority of people.. And the only ones who can interpret them correctly are a few individuals.. those who are sheikhs or scholars. They hope to shake all this. But they won't be able to, in spite of our apparent weakness. so many times, little gatherings defeated numerous gatherings."
_____________________________________

Well, there is so much to say about the speaker's way and attitude.. especially if we asked a psychiatrist to watch this video and analyze the man. It is enough to see how he breaks his sentences and pauses to stare at the faces of those listening to him, in order to force them to accept all what he says as absolute facts. He seeks to manipulate his listeners and take full control over their minds. It is also apparent that most of his audience are simple-minded people, who have not received much, if any, education. I really wanted to see their faces for once (which the cameraman didn't want), although I can imagine how they looked.

What concerns me here is the presumable "argument" presented by this sheikh in order to convince people that there can be no such thing as a woman leading prayers. That is live example of how the masses are being brainwashed at mosques, especially after Friday prayers.

Many violent attacks in Egypt have taken place after Friday prayers! It might seem strange, and more likely to be the opposite.. But that is a well-known fact. The majority of violent clashes between Muslims and Christians, which happened recently in Egypt, took place right after the Sheikh is through with his speech. This "coincidence" was recorded in clashes which took place in Alexandria, Ayyat, Menniya, and other places. It was the common belief that this was just a coincidence, that the attackers had actually planned the attack before hand.. And that Friday prayers only served to gather those violent people together at the mosque. But the chaos and lack of organization, the strange combination of people taking part in the attack, and the crude methods used during those attacks (usually using anything that comes to hand as a weapon), have all suggested that those outbursts were planned by others.. To be precise, the only person who inspired this attack was the Sheikh giving the Friday sermon at those mosques, out of which angry masses of men go directly to attack their Christian neighbors.

So, we have to admit that some male imams are not doing a good job. And now, we can see an example of the speeches given and the hidden agendas behind them. In this particular case, it is clear that the speaker doesn't only seek to make the issue of female imams become completely out of question.. But he also raises the anger of his audience against those who would say elsewise. It is also clear that he wants them to believe that anyone who expresses the opinion that it is OK for a woman to become imam, is someone who aims to shake their beliefs and mess with Islam. Moreover, he stresses the message that the only people who are fit to talk about religion are its men.

Let us make more discoveries and dig deeper as we examine his speech closely..

1-Notice the beginning of his speech, and how he concentrates on making the topic of his argument sound blasphemous in itself: "Oh, fellow men.. I swear I don't know from where to start or how! Because of the extreme horror I was subjected to. And there are people of knowledge who committed the terrible mistake of permitting women to lead prayers.. Don’t know how!"

Now, those people do not need to hear anything further. They already had the ready-made judgement from their all-knowing sheikh, who himself is lost for words at the mere thought of bringing up such a horrible thought for discussion.

2- He moves on to talk about an imaginary man who argues for women being imams. He didn't give any specific identification or attribute any specific details related to this person.. Such as his profession (Is he a man of religion or not?), his educational background (Did he study Islamic Sharia or not?), or his cultural orientation. All this is equally irrelevant to him and to his audience, as they all have agreed on the outcome of the argument before it even started.

He claims that his fictional character "said that the hadith which prohibits women from becoming leaders, the hadith told by Abu Bakrah Al Thaqafi, 'A nation which placed its affairs in the hands of a woman shall never prosper'. He said that this hadith is not a proof. Why? He said Abu Bakrah is crooked.. Yes, I swear he said so.. Abu Bakrah is a Sahabi (one of the companions of Prophet Muhammad). Huh, I say this: Abu Bakrah Al-Thaqafi is a Sahabi.. He said Abu Bakrah is crooked, and a liar.. and this means that the hadith he told is false."

Can you hear the gasps and see the open mouths as I imagined I did? Of course this hypothetical person is a dead man by now. We aren't waiting to know about anything he said or why he said it. "He" is insulting one of the Prophet's companions! Can you imagine people?! Who wants to argue about anything this damned man says? Let's concentrate on hunting him down and cutting him to pieces.

3- But sheikh Howeini has to provoke his audience to the maximum, and be sure that they will hate to hear a single word being mentioned about women imams. So he goes on: "This was the first observation. The second observation was that Al Bukhari contains spurious hadith!"

OK.. So, apparently this guy doesn't know that there is nothing blasphemous about saying that Al Bukhari still contains spurious hadith, or that there is a whole branch of Islamic scholars, who studied the Science of Hadith, who agree that more work should be done on Al Bukhari in order to make sure which of the hadith with weak Isnad (weak reliability) should continue to be included, and which of them should be eleminated. However, that is not a problem. The problem is with those people who just say "Amen" to every word he utters. Those people actually depend on him as their source of religious knowledge. And this puts us in front of a crisis.

4-Here comes the most interesting part. Al Howeini suddenly shifts from the imaginary man he was talking about, who made all those kinds of shameful claims against Abu Bakrah and Bukhari, and moves on to an open attack. He now refers to a mysterious group of people as "They". It seems that he wants to convince his audience that those "they", who have no definition of any kind to help us identify them, "want to shaken everything that was mentioned against this issue, even those which are 100% proven in solid igmaa"

Ahuh.. So, this is a conspiracy, if I am not mistaken. And it sounds like a really serious kind of conspiracy. Yet, "they" who are behind it are completely ambiguous to us. Of course, only Al Howeini knows who "they" are. But, if he has decided to warn the people against them, shouldn't he be kind enough to define those conspirators, who want to shake shake shake everything that is completely agreed upon in Islam?

5- But wait.. There is more that we didn't know, that only a sheikh like him has got knowledge of. First time for me to know that any hadith, even the sahih, which absolutely no one would dare suspect to be true, has got "the same status as the Quran"!! This is really way off limits. The mix and mingle between hadith and Quran is clearly prohibited in Islam. We can doubt what is said in Hadith, we can judge a hadith as either Sahih (true) or Daif (weak) or Mawdu (spurious). But we can never do the same with Quran. So how is it that they both are of the same status?! Does that mean that I can judge the reliability of Quran? Or does it mean that I can not judge the reliability of Hadith? (Bear in mind that igmaa stands for sheikhs agreeing on the same opinion. And this opinion may very well be the result of their personal views which they build through a human logical sequence on their own interpretation of a text. And does not refer to the hadith itself even.)

He did not stop there, actually.. He stresses it even more and more. "The handing over of this verdict (women are not to be imams) is to be taken as the handing over of the Quran to us," he says!He also claims that his one and only hadith, which has nothing to do with women being imams, or even political leaders, even enjoys "the highest level of agreement and tawator (trasmission) from generation to generation."

Now, wait a minute! Is this man really saying what I understood? Is he building all those false arguments, using all this wrong information, and saying all this hocus pocus about religion, just to close the door in front of women to become imams?!
Is this that scary? Are those sheikhs willing to destroy the very basics of Islamic principles and science of hadith, just to prevent women from becoming imams and giving the Friday sermon?! My God!

6-By now, you should have become familiar with the method used by our friend here. (So sorry to call him a friend.) He just keeps repeating and stressing and exaggerating. It seems pretty normal, thus, that the next thing he resorts to is posing a challenge. He dares anyone to be able to find a recorded incidence of a woman becoming imam: "So that no matter how long you searched books, you won't find a single recorded incidence, from the prophet's time until our present time, saying that a woman has ever led prayers. You won't find a single occurrence. And this is called the most powerful practical igmaa."

Seriously, this the first time ever to see a competition that promises failure to all contestants. So, what does this new religious theory imply really? Does it mean that anything that people didn't use to do in the past becomes religiously prohibited or haram?.. Is driving a car haram? Is buying an iPod haram? Is using a blender in the kitchen haram? Is having a blog haram?(Sure in my case it must be! Ask him.) Is using laser beam haram? Is building a rocket haram? Is landing on Mars haram?
Or, let's be more specific. Let's talk female jobs.. Is it haram for a woman to work at a call center? Is being a female surgeon haram? Is working on TV haram? What about working on a xeroxing machine? Is it haram to be a female engineer? Is being a female pianist haram? A female scientist? A female politician? A female pilot? A female actress? A female director? A female analyst? A female journalist? A female photographer? A female factory worker? A spokeswoman? A female secretary? A female employee? A female programmer/software developer? Are all those jobs haram?
Then, what is left?

7- In the same mysterious way by which we were introduced to "they", the guy goes back to the "he" he was talking about in the beginning; and says, "He comes to that issue (no women imams) which enjoys an agreement that is as clear as the morning sun, and he wants to shake it and raise doubts among muslims. So you can imagine what will be the case with other sharia rules, which are thousands.. He can play with them as he wishes."

This "he" is very evil it seems. Still, we don't know who the hell "he" is. But it is clear that he belongs to the conspiracy gang of "they".. Yet, neither "They" nor "He" has got any motives for what they are doing! We don't even know what their purpose is! Does it only stop at shaking beliefs and raising doubts among muslims? So, is it out of mere hatred? Is it part of a bigger conspiracy?.. Why are they doing this?.. Please, please, Sheikh Howeini, tell us why they are doing this to us.

8- "Why?.. Because their (sharia rules) origins and interpretation are unknown to the majority of people.. And the only ones who can interpret them correctly are a few individuals.. those who are sheikhs or scholars."

Mmmmmmm.. So this is what they are after!.. Oh Oh.. Nope, it's not.. This is what encouraged them to go on with their evil plan.. But still does not explain what purpose this plan actually serves. Well, it seems that the purpose is not important. Let's concentrate on the methods and the means for carrying out the plan.
Don't know if I am the only one who thinks of Dr. Evil right now! Suddenly, all that comes to mind is the Austin Powers movie.. There is Austin, and there is Dr. Evil and his gang who wish to destroy the world for no reason whatsoever. Not a big deal, though.. Watching a silly movie, you consider motives and purposes to be unneeded extras. But sadly, this is not a movie. This is real. DAMN REAL.

Now, what did he say the reason was? That Muslims don't know how to interpret Muslim Sharia?? Then, this whole conspiracy thing is so stupid. Because we can teach Muslims how to interpret their sharia. Like the "Learn-it-yourself" book series.. Or we don't even need that. We spend 12 years of our lives learning religion at schools. Let's teach kids how to interpret sharia.

Of course, Al Howeini won't allow any ray of light to reach his audience. He must slam the door in front of them, make them lose any hope that one day they may no longer be in need of his services. Therefore, he makes it clear that the only one who can interpret religion is the sheikh or the scholar of Islamic sharia.

9- Then comes the grand finale.. "They hope to shake all this. But they won't be able to.. in spite of our apparent weakness. So many times, little gatherings defeated numerous gatherings."
Ehe2 ehe2 ehe2. We are weak.. ehe2 ehe2 ehe2. "They" are stronger than us, and "they" are more than us!! ehe2 ehe2 ehe2. But we will win. We will defeat them. We shall prevail. We don't need to know any further. Thanks dear sheikh.

This is the kind of speech used at out mosques. We have to face it. There is a major brainwash going on. I am not implying that it is always on purpose, moved by wicked intentions.. Although there are cases where this is actually the case. I am just saying that this kind of talk, discouraging people against using their minds, along with feeding them with preconceptions and hostility towards anyone who happens to have a different opinion, or suggest something new, is pulling our whole society backwards. There can never be any hope in progress this way. We won't even be able to keep standing where we are today. And one day, our offspring may wake up to find themselves living in the Mamluk era.

There is nothing in Quran or Sunnah that prohibits women from becoming imams or giving Friday sermons, and that is more than enough. Sharia states that it is the default for everything to be halal (allowed by God), unless there is a holy verse stating elsewise. I can see nothing against the idea except patriarchal arrogance and religious extremism which is against women in general. Why can't we even discuss it?

I'd ask you now to watch this video and then tell me: Would you rather have Al Howeini or this woman (or anyone like her) as your imam in prayer? Please let's try to be honest and fair.

Living in a Patriarchal Society

Throughout human history and in all ancient societies women were a significant driving force in sustaining the development of their community, safeguarding resources, educating youth and ensuring continuity of social, cultural and historical heritage values. Although this role is not explicitly stated in ancient texts, the impact and influence of women is evident by implied symbolism in mythology, as well as the presence of ancient goddesses in ancient religions. For various reasons discussed before, societies gradually changed, and began following the patriarchal rather than the matrilineal model. A closer look at all societies worldwide would lead us to believe that most if not all are now, or were at one point of time completely patriarchal in nature. At one point of time, when physical strength was more important than intelligence, a patriarchal society was the solution to the way society was set up. It was survival of the fittest, and males fought among themselves to achieve dominance. It was not very fair for women, but the harsh living conditions, and aggression of males belonging to other tribes dedicated what was required to survive, and women agreed to live in these primitive patriarchal societies, as a way of ensuring their own survival. Before modern feminism and as far back as the late middle ages, women were not satisfied with their rights in their societies, however their efforts were not organized, so had minimal impact on the status of women in society.



In patriarchal societies, most men felt that they needed to compete together, and women were not even part of the equation. At the same time, women had the additional burden of child bearing, and rearing children which made it difficult for them to advance their status, or their society as a whole. As time passed, and new inventions came up every day, and human's use for muscles decreased. A sudden shift were intelligence became more important than physical strength happened, and women found a place where they were able to compete with men, and sometimes even excel. For the first time in modern history women found their niche... their way of integrating with society, contributing to the progress of humanity, and regaining their previous respected status. The term "feminism" was coined in the late 19th century. The first wave of modern feminism started in the 19th-early 20th century, mainly giving women the right to vote. This was a worldwide movement but unfortunately had very little impact on the middle east ( some countries like Saudi still don't allow women to vote, and when Kuwait allowed women to vote a few years ago, men called television stations complaining that they feel it is unacceptable to "release women out into the streets" to go vote.) Many women began getting an education, but the patriarchal society dictated that a woman's priority should be marriage, usually at a young age, and with marriage came children... one after the other. The multiple children in a short period of time adversely affected women's health, and most were still unable to compete in society, because they had bigger responsibilities to handle, namely their 12 or 13 children! The patriarchal society model was still being followed despite the fact that women and men were of equal intelligence. The real revolution happened with the invention of the birth control pills in 1960, despite the many adverse effects initially found, they adjusted the doses, and found a dose sufficient for birth control without harming women. This is how the second wave of feminism took place in the 60's-80's. This wave involved equalities of laws and of culture. The third wave of feminism is from the 90's until today, and it is mainly a continuation of the work done by the first 2 waves.

By looking at this short history, one can see that with progress, came the chance for women to be treated as equals, so equal rights for women are an equivalent to how civilized a country is, and how far they have come from the primitive patriarchal societies that once existed. You will also notice that women were never given their rights easily, they had to fight and work hard for them. In the world we live in, religion plays a big part of most peoples' life. Everyone wants to follow their religion carefully, so they will eventually be rewarded and go to heaven. The patriarchal interpretation of religion has been a very large obstacle for women, especially because they wanted to stay within the boundaries set by religion, and they never once questioned the interpretation or how certain rules or restrictions were imposed. With progress and the dramatic increase of educated and free thinking women, many began thinking "outside the box". Some people began questioning points they felt were unfair, and they believed that God would never be unfair to the people he created. They started reading, and many came up with conclusions that they believe contradicted earlier interpretations. These women felt that their own interpretations represented God's word and not an ancient ideology of people's mixed interpretations a thousand years ago. They have found that women were grossly underrepresented in religious institutions, and that when a text is open to individual interpretation, it is usually interpreted from a man's point of view, which may be unfair to these women.



Although women are educated about religion just as much as men, and some even graduate from Al-Azhar university with degrees in religion, so their religious knowledge surpasses that of the average sheikh in a local mosque, women have been denied the right to preach religion in mosques, or to lead prayers. Even worse than that is that women are discouraged from, and rarely pray at the mosque. They are told that it is best for them to pray at home, while the men go to the mosque to pray. In the mosques that allow women to come in to pray, women usually are given a small corner in the back, so they pray behind the men. Women are taught that this is their place, and they should never question the validity of this blatant display of misogyny. Some go as far as considering any discussion of this subject as blasphemy. The idea of a woman imam was unheard of and ridiculed. Any woman who dared think of such a ridiculous act was deemed immoral and irreligious. The Hanafi interpretation of Islam allows a woman to lead a female only congregation, but if a male is present, regardless of his age, social status, education or knowledge, he should be the leader in prayer. There is no frank Koranic text that prohibits a woman imam, but again it is the patriarchal interpretation that refuses to see a woman lead in any way, including prayer.
The only hadith that unequivocally states that women may not lead mixed congregations is Ibn Majah (Kitab iqamat is-salat was-sunnati fiha) #1134, narrated through Jabir ibn Abdullah: "A woman may not lead a man in Prayer, nor may a Beduin lead a believer of the muhajirun or a corrupt person lead a committed muslim in Prayer." So again this hadeeth equated a religious pious woman to a corrupt person, or a non believer. The blatant misogyny expressed in this hadeeth is not fit to be a saying of the prophet, who clearly respected women, and one if his sayings actually tells people to learn their religion from 3a2esha. "You can learn half your religion from this rosy-cheeked girl." He therefore encouraged people to consult her in religious matters, and after his death she became one of the major sources of Hadith. It is clear that the prophet respected her opinion, and trusted her ability to preach religion and teach others about it, which is what an imam does during the Friday sermon and prayers. The conclusion is that the prophets actions contradict the saying of the hadith forbidding women to be imams. Religious scholars have also stated that "The eminent scholars of Hadith say that the chain of reporters of this hadith is extremely weak, and hence, it is not to be taken as evidence in the question in hand." In conclusion, no religious text forbids a woman from becoming an Imam in any prayer, or from preaching religious sermons. It is also clear that the one factor that stops women from practicing their religion in the way they choose is society, and the patriarchal ideology that society tries to disguise in a religious form.

In recent years, women have become more active on this front, and many examples can be found worldwide of how women stood up to the decaying old traditions, and attempted to regain their rights which they were originally given by religion. In 1994 a woman named Amina Wadud became the first woman in South Africa to deliver the Friday sermon, at the Claremont Main Road Mosque in Cape town. In 2003, a new venue for Eid prayer was established in Durban by a group of individuals and was later taken on by an organisation called Taking Islam to the People . To date there are 5 women who offer the Friday sermons at this venue. In Canada in 2005 and 2006, many women preached on Fridays, and led mixed gender prayers. These events were organized by The United Muslim Association in Toronto, Canada. This organization is determined to continue this practice of having women delivering the sermons and leading prayer.The United States also has its own activists, who started in March of 2005 to lead prayers, despite the uproar of the assembly of Muslim jurists of America, who issued a fatwa banning the practice, totally disregarding religious facts,and acting only based on their patriarchal ideology. The women also received bomb threats, and the venue where the prayers were to be held was changed to avoid violent extremist reactions. These events all took place in non Muslim countries, who gave these women enough space and freedom to practice their religion in ways they felt was acceptable to God's words.


The sad part is the events in "Islamic" countries, who have the available resources of understanding religion, and speak the very language the Koran uses to teach Islam. In Bahrain in 2004, a 40 year old woman attempted to deliver the Friday sermon in one of the biggest mosques there. This took place on the last Friday of Ramadan. The would-be Imam was wearing full male dress with an artificial beard and moustache. The mosque was packed with 7000 worshippers. When she sat in front of the people just before she was to deliver the sermon, some worshippers realised that the new imam was a woman in disguise. They and the mosque's imam, Sheikh Adnan Al-Qattan , handed her over to the police who arrested her. The reaction of the worshippers as well as that of the police was uncalled for. This is in addition to the fact that the voice of a woman working alone can never be loud enough to impact a patriarchal society. Had this woman had enough support from her peers, she would not have had to resort to drastic measures to practice a right she believes that she has. Had the worshippers been more open minded and more respectful and understanding, they would have discussed the matter with her rather than called law enforcement. Had the police officers enough respect for women, they would not have arrested her for attempting to deliver a sermon in a mosque, which is not an illegal act.
In India, a Muslim woman named Daud Sharifa runs a 3,000-strong network to help Muslim women. She believes that a mosque for women is one way of relieving the many sufferings of Muslim Indian women who have to submit to "community rulings" of mosques which are run by males, and women have no say in how the rulings are made, women are also not allowed to enter most mosques in the area.. Many of the women feel that the rulings are biased against women who have been divorced, abandoned and mistreated by their husbands. The mosque is basically run by women, but prayers are open to everyone. Although this is not against God's teachings, it has caused an uproar from religious figures. After this news was published on an Arabic website, the reactions of the Muslim men were astounding. They have ranged from outrage to anger to redicule and insults, with very few supporters.

My conclusion is that in order for women to live free and have equal rights in our society, religion has to be understood in its true form, devoid of any patriarchal or misogynist ideology. Then, and only then will men support the rights of their mothers, sisters, wives and daughters. This will only be accomplished if women stand up for themselves and their beliefs, and never give in to a society that undermines their efforts or initiatives. It will also work only if women are united so their voices can be heard. {13:11 Truly, God will never change the condition of a people until they change it themselves (with their own souls)} .