The Infatuation
of Beliefs
Woman Leading Jummah Prayers: Why Am I Silent?
By Dr M. A. Muqtedar
Khan
Director of International Studies
Chair, Political Science Department, Adrian College
Non-Resident Fellow, Brookings Institution
Washington, DC
I have received several inquiries on why I have
not made any statement regarding the issue of
whether a woman can lead both men and women in
obligatory prayers and Friday prayers. Here is
my brief and general response to them.
1. By habit and purpose I leave matters of Ibadah
alone. My Ijtihad is focused on issues of muamalath,
particularly in the realm of politics, and public
policy. I am not interested in devoting hours
to do research in that area, I would rather spend
it in prayer.
In my Ijtihad on muamalath, I interpret primary
Islamic sources not through the lens of tradition
and past opinions but on the basis of reason and
public welfare deliberately privileging justice
and compassion. This formula of mine which guides
me to demand gender equality does not work in
the realm of Ibadah. What have reason or justice
[as humans understand] got to do with sal ah,
its process, its content and its nature? Hence
I abstain from Ijtihad in the realm of Ibadah.
2. I am not chickening out as some of you are
suggesting. In my book, American Muslims: Bridging
Faith and Freedom (pp. 93-94), and in an article
titled “The Epistemological Hijab”,
I have argued that the problem of Muslim women’s
status cannot be resolved until they gain moral
equality with Muslim men and they can do this
only by reclaiming equal right to interpret and
practice Islam. I have no problem if women develop
their own madhab (school of thought) and live
by it.
3. I maintain that every human being, man and
woman, Muslim and non-Muslim, has the right to
interpret God’s message, because the message
is addressed to all of humanity. They must interpret
and act accordingly, that is the essence of our
humanity. I will not deny anyone, including Amina
Wadud and her followers, the right to interpret
Islam and live by it.
Note To Khaled Abou El Fadl: Everyone has a right
to an opinion and the freedom to act on it, but
that does not mean that all opinions are right
or qualitatively equal. I never claim that everyone’s
Ijtihad is valid or correct or good. I only insist
that every human being (the vicegerent of God
on Earth, Quran 2:30) has the right to interpret
his Boss. For example on issues of Islam and democracy,
I think my opinions are profounder than yours
and on issues such as whether gummy bears are
halal, or if Muslims can have dogs as pets, perhaps
your opinions are better researched than mine
[especially since you have so many books in your
house as you keep telling us all].
4. Finally it is time Muslims remember that there
are many ways to understand Islamic injunctions.
While Hanafis encourage Muslims to migrate to
non-Muslim lands, Malikis forbid. While some allow
women to lead Tarawih prayers others do not. In
Saudi Arabia women can go to mosques, in India
they usually cannot. Bangladesh has a woman head
of state, and Iran a VP, but in Saudi Arabia they
cannot drive or vote. There are several interpretations
of Islam. The Progressive Muslims of North America
are now advancing their understanding of Islam
and practicing it. Wallahu Alam. Let us pray that
they continue to practice.
5. The last word. I have been following the debate
very closely and I find the arguments fascinating.
It is intriguing to see who knows what and who
quotes whom. I noticed that the traditionalists
are long on research but short on analysis, while
the progressives are all analysis except for one
hadith and the reference to Tabari.
I will however write an analysis on the debate
once it rests.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
