STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT

THE STATUS OF THE MAKSHUFAAT JAMAAT STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 2 MASTOORAAT OR MAKSHUFAAT? he term ‘mastooraat’ is a misnomer in relation to female tableeghi groups. The apt designation for such female groups is makshufaat which means females who are exposed or revealed or on display. The mere donning of an outer cloak does not make a woman mastoor (concealed, hidden from the public gaze). At the outset, we must clarify that the term makshufaat in this context is not being used with a pejorative connotation nor in an objugatory sense, nor do we imply sarcasm. We are merely saying that a spade is a spade. It is wrong to say that a spade is a spoon. The erroneous appellation appropriated for female-khurooj groups is due to a misunderstanding of the meaning of mastoor in the Shar’i sense. As far as the Shariah is concerned, Masturaat are such women who are totally and completely hidden from the public gaze. A woman who emerges into the public even with burqah is no longer mastoorah. On the contrary, she becomes makshufah (exposed). The Satr of a person is called such because it is totally hidden, hence it is mastoor. Whilst a portion of the human body will be validly mastoor if covered by garments, the woman in relation to Hijaab will not be mastoorah with only garments if she emerges into the public. The term is of relative significance. Different things are mastoor in different ways. Narrating a Hadith, Hadhrat Abdullah Ibn Mas’ood (radhiyallahu anhu) said that when a woman ‘emerges from her home, then shaitaan casts surreptitious gazes at her’. Whilst inside her home, she was validly Mastoor, protected from the gazes of the shayaateen. Once outside the home precincts, she becomes makshuf for the devils prowling around. There are two types of shayaateen: shayaateenul jinn (jinn devils) and shayaateenul ins (human devils). Outside her home, despite her burqah she becomes makshuf (exposed) to both categories of devils. Although the degree of exposure of a burqah-clad lady outside her home is greater to the jinn devils, the fact remains that she is exposed (makshuf) to even the human devils. When Hadhrat Saudah (radhiyallahu anha) had emerged at night to answer the call of nature, she was fully covered with a jilbaab which could comfortably conceal two women. Nevertheless, from the size of her body, Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) recognized who she was. The cloak was not adequate for qualifying her for the designation of mastoorah. The fact that a woman is recognized as a woman from even her outer-garment negates the mastooraat designation. Explaining the concept of mastoor, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Women have no share in khurooj (from their homes), except in cases of need.” They have no share in emergence. Emergence transforms the mastoorah into a makshufah. Furthermore, the Qur’aan Majeed in commanding: “Remaining resolutely in your homes…” explains the meaning of mastoorah who is one who remains resolutely within the home. Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (rahmatullah alayh) explaining the first category of Hijaab which makes woman a mastoorah, said: “The normal general rule of Hijaab is total seclusion. In this category the woman has to necessarily remain within the home environment and expose nothing of herself, not even her garments.” Thus, she is not allowed to emerge from the home for any activity which the Shariah has neither imposed on her nor described it as a haajat (need). Confirming the meaning of mastoor, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) described woman as Aurah, i.e., she has to be concealed in entirety from the gazes of ghair mahaareem. Since the women of the Tableegh Jamaat are out of their homes, on the streets, and in all public places where fussaaq, fujjaar and kuffaar abound, the appropriate appellation for them is Makshufaat jamaat. T STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 3 THE QUESTION OF WOMEN UNDERTAKING JOURNEYS FOR THE PURPOSES OF MASS TABLEEGH QUESTION Please study this fatwa (which I am sending) of Hadhrat Mufti Mahmoodul Hasan (rahmatullah alayh) on the issue of women going on Tableegh journeys. I have read your book explaining that Ladies Tableegh Jamaat is not permissible. However, the Ulama associated with the Tableegh Jamaat hold the view of permissibility. Please comment on the Fatwa. ANSWER After perusing the fatwa of permissibility issued by Hadhrat Mufti Mahmoodul Hasan (rahmatullah alayh) on the question of females undertaking journeys for purposes of tableegh, we comment as follows: With respect to the Honourable Mufti Sahib (rahmatullah alayh), we have to say that his fatwa is pure raai (personal opinion) unsubstantiated by any Shar’i daleel (proof). For a fatwa to enjoy the force of the Shariah, dalaa-il of the Shariah are imperative. The Shariah is not the product of personal opinion. The recent Fatwas issued by the senior Ulama of Darul Uloom Deoband, which prohibit females tableegh jamaat are of Shar’i worth and significance in view of the Shar’i evidences which the Honourable Muftis have provided for their fatwa. The same cannot be said of the fatwa of Hadhrat Mufti Mahmoodul Hasan (rahmatullah alayh) for want of Shar’i dalaa-il. The other Muftis who have endorsed the fatwa have simply endorsed a personal opinion. The number of Muftis endorsing a personal opinion does not add Shar’i lustre or force to the fatwa. In fact, it is improper to even describe a personal opinion as a fatwa. The Honourable Mufti Mahmoodul Hasan Sahib says in his fatwa: “The objective of the Tablighi Jamaat is to learn and strengthen our deen and encourage others to do the same. Towards the propagation of this ambition, long arduous journeys too are undertaken. Just how men are in need of learning and strengthening their deen, on the same token, women too are in need of it. Generally the facilities are not accommodated for in the houses. Thus travelling to places as far as London accompanied by a mahram, taking into cognizance all the boundaries of the Shariat and without stepping on the rights of anyone, would be allowed in the Shariat.” This is the fatwa. However, it is bereft of Shar’i proofs. It therefore lacks Shar’i force. Not only does it lack Shar’i force, it is also in conflict with the clear Nusoos of the Shariah as encapsulated in the Qur’an, Sunnah and the 14 century Ta-aamul of the Ummah. Let us now examine the ingredients in the aforementioned opinion. (a) The pursuit of the Objective is permissible in only ways and means which are valid and permissible in the Shariah. Regardless of how beneficial a methodology may appear for the propagation of the Deen, if it is in conflict with the Shariah, it will be haraam to adopt it. On the basis of this principle, television, photography, videos and the like are haraam for utilization in the propagation of the Deen no matter how ‘great’ the benefit may appear to those in whose opinion such methods are permissible. Similarly, regardless of the benefits which some Muftis discern in females undertaking journeys for the sake of tableegh, the method is in conflict with the Shariah, hence it is not permissible for women to globe-trot even with their mahrams for the sake of tableegh. Tableegh to the masses is not a Waajib duty for females, nor is it Mustahab, hence it is extremely short-sighted to draw them out of the homes, exposing them to the public and subjecting them to arduous journeys in which it is in this era IMPOSSIBLE to observe Shar’i Purdah (Hijaab). Purdah is not restricted to the cloak and the face-veil. These items of dress are simply a dimension of Purdah. The primary Purdah for women in terms of the Qur’aan, Sunnah and Ijma’ of the Ummah, is confinement within the holy precincts of the home. STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 4 Whilst the Honourable Mufti Sahib has explicitly stipulated for the permissibility the condition: “taking into cognizance all the boundaries of the Shariat and without stepping on the rights of anyone”, he has overlooked the irrefutable fact that in our time it is impossible to abide by these conditions, and NO ONE abides thereby. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: ‘Safar (journey) is a portion of the Fire.” A journey should not be undertaken unnecessarily. Since tableegh to the masses is not Waajib for females, it is not permissible to emerge from their houses, exposing themselves to all and sundry – to fussaaq, fujjaar and kuffaar – in flagrant violation of the Qur’aanic prohibition: “And remain (glued) within your homes and make not a display (of yourselves) as the exhibition of Jaahiliyyah.” Emerging from the home, be it with abaya (a semi-jilbaab) and niqaab, for something which is not Waajib, is not permissible for women, for in so doing they will come within the scope of the Qur’aanic proscription. How is it possible for women venturing to far off places necessitating public transport to abide by Shar’i Purdah? They mingle with fussaaq, fujjaar and kuffaar males and females in overcrowded airports, airport buses, planes, etc. They have to stand in long queues for passport checking, luggage checking, custom checking, and subjected to fussaaq, fujjaar and kuffaar males checking and viewing them. It is not always that females are available to examine, view and check the burqah ladies. In fact in Saudi Arabia male immigration louts order women to open their faces to enable checking. They have to line-up together with males in the same lines. They sit in airport lounges crowded with the most immoral elements of the world. In the planes, they line-up in the queues to visit the toilets. We have observed Muslim ladies standing immediately behind men and vice versa in the toilet queues. We have seen with our own eyes, a Muslim lady coming out of the plane toilet while a male is right in front of the queue staring at her. Is this hijaab? What has happened to the haya of the burqah-bibis? There is a total breakdown of Hijaab nowadays on journeys. The Tablighi brothers who maintain that their womenfolk along the journey are in ‘purdah’ are guilty of a massive canard. They dwell in self-deception. There is no true Purdah for women who mingle with all and sundry at airports, in the planes, in public transport, etc. The idea that the burqah/abaya and the veil are the be all of Hijaab is a delusion and has cultivated in the minds of Muslims a totally inaccurate concept of Hijaab. In addition to the abandonment of Hijaab is the disruption of Salaat, and the consumption of the haraam and mushtabah food of the airways served by the hands of faajiraat and kaafiraat. But these violations no longer have significant meaning to even those who purport vociferously that they are in the ‘Path of Allah’. (b) The virtues and importance of propagating the Deen are not denied. The method adopted for this objective is rejected since it is in conflict with the Shariah. The Sahaabah were well aware of the virtues and importance of propagating the Deen. In fact, during their era such propagation was imperative. It was the first age of Islam and the Deen had to be compulsorily spread and taken to the non-Muslim people of the world. Yet, they did not deem it necessary to initiate a mass women’s movement to propagate the Deen to the non-Muslim females who also were in need of the Deen just as their menfolk were in need. But, nowhere in the 14 century long history of Islam was a women’s mass movement created. The isolated cases of females accompanying their husbands, not on tableegh missions, but on first degree Jihad campaigns, may not be cited as a basis for the current women’s movement which STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 5 the Tableegh Jamaat has created in conflict with the Shariah. In fact, there are Nusoos to confirm Rasulullah’s opposition to even the isolated cases of females going with their husbands in Jihad. Once when he saw a woman with her husband on a Jihad campaign, he reprimanded her. When one of his wives sought permission for participation in Jihad, Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that women’s Jihad is Hajj. There was a greater need to teach women in the early days because all who came to Islam were non-Muslims. But, the method devised by the Sahaabah was for the menfolk to teach their women. This is the original and the only system of the Sunnah for the ta’leem of females. (c) “The same token” mentioned in the aforementioned opinion existed even during the time of the Sahaabah as well, and it existed in every age. The argument that the ‘facilities’ for ta’leem ‘are not accommodated for in the houses’ is incorrect. What prevents all the men who participate in tableegh jamaat activities, teaching their womenfolk? Why have the Tableegh Jamaat departed from the age-old Sunnah methodology (Tareeqah) of Ta’leem for women? Why does the Jamaat not also concentrate on the ‘home facilities’ to which Mufti Mahmoodul Hasan refers? A man spends years in Tableegh activities, travelling around the country and the globe, but he is unable to teach his womenfolk! In fact, he is unwilling, and his unwillingness stems from lack of understanding the objectives and priorities of Tableegh. Allah Ta’ala commands in the Qur’aan Majeed: “O People of Imaan! Save yourselves and your families from the Fire.” The method of saving is Ta’leem and Tarbiyat – teaching the Shariah and moral training. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Every one of you is a shepherd, and every one of you will be questioned about his (or her) flock.” It is the Waajib obligation of the males in the house to impart Ta’leem to their womenfolk. But, not only do they grossly neglect their homes, they are not even aware of their obligation since this issue does not feature in the syllabus of the Tableegh Jamaat. It is hideously corrupt to expect women from another locality or another country to come and teach the womenfolk who are the responsibility of their husbands and fathers. What exactly is meant by the lack of accommodation in the houses? This is extremely ambiguous, in fact baseless. The men have to create the necessary ‘accommodation for the necessary facilities’ in their houses. The Tableegh Jamaat should highlight this accommodation feature to its members and impress on them the imperative importance of cultivating the accommodation in their houses. If the menfolk are able to create the ‘accommodation’ for males outside their homes, why can they not create it in their own respective homes for their beloved ones? In which way did this ‘accommodation’ exist in the houses during the time of the Sahaabah and during the Khairul Quroon era? There is the Waajib need to revive that method which had been imparted to the Ummah by the Sahaabah, but which method the Ummah has today abandoned. It therefore, devolves on those who purport to be in the Path of Allah to revive the Sunnah method, and not fabricate a new method which in addition to being bereft of Islamic spirit and ethos, is in conflict with the Nusoos of the Shariah. It is not possible “to take into cognizance all the boundaries of the Shariat” when women emerge from their homes, especially for participation in a mass movement. When women emerge from their homes, the Hadith tells us that shaitaan lies in ambush for her. He will most assuredly manipulate her for spreading fitnah. Women’s mass movements are the innovations of the western kuffaar. The boundaries of the Shariat in this context are not restricted to wearing the cloak (and that too, defective cloaks) and the face-cloth. The very first boundary of the Shariat which the women violate is emergence from the home to participate in mass activity which Islam has not imposed on them in any degree whatsoever. Their Tableegh is confined to their flock – their children at home. STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 6 (d) Entrusting children to the grandmother while the mother departs on a tableegh mission in a distant country for which she has not been created, is abhorrent in the extreme. This advice is indeed short-sighted to say the least. Allah Ta’ala has bestowed the Amaanat of children to the mother, not to the grandmother. The grandmother is an emergency option. It is hideously abnormal for the mother to abandon her little children and embark on globe-trotting to make tableegh to others. This advice is in diametric conflict with the Hadith: “Every one of you will be questioned regarding your flock.” It is indeed cruel for a mother to abandon her little children and to dwell in the deception that she has discharged her maternal obligation by casting her flock to their grandmother. There is a vast difference between a mother and a grandmother. Furthermore, her abandonment of her flock is more reprehensible in view of tableegh to the masses not being her obligation. The Shariah does not call on her to embroil herself in a mass women’s movement for conducting mass tableegh. We respectfully say that the Honourable Muftis have grievously erred in their personal opinion for which they lack any Shar’i substantiation. COMMENT ON THE VIEW OF HADHRAT MAULANA YUSUF KANDELWI (RAHMATULLAH ALAYH) In expressing his view on female participation in mass tableegh which requires undertaking of journeys, Hadhrat (rahmatullah alayh) said: “The delicateness of this work with regards to women increases considerably. Women should never be brought to open gatherings when there is a possibility of no observance of purdah. Instead, a day should be stipulated when the women from nearby homes gather at a concealed place within their area to do ta’leem. It should begin by men informing their womenfolk of what they hear in the Ijtimas, da’wat, ta’leem, etc. In this way, Insha-Allah, their mind-set will begin to form in a short span of time.” So much is perfectly correct. There is no objection to this. However, the reality is that the gatherings of the ladies are not held at concealed places. The concealed place is the exception while the public place has become the norm. This is the natural consequence of any mass women’s activity and of emergence from the home. In Durban at one large Musjid, when bayaans take place, women converge in droves, driving cars shamelessly. They shamelessly take up the parking lots allocated for the musallis of the Musjid. Ulama have explained to us that they have to lower their gaze in shame for the women protruding from their vehicles. They think nothing of pulling up their vehicles next to males. They strut to the women’s section regardless of the staring eyes of the males whose purity of heart becomes contaminated by the arrival of these shameless women clad in mock burqahs. At the main Musjid in Malabar Port Elizabeth, the ladies jamaat sometimes have their programme at a house directly opposite of the Musjid’s main entrance. They commence their programme during the afternoon. They fill the Musjid’s parking space with their vehicles and shamelessly strut to the opposite house. When musallis arrive for Asr Salaat, some of the cars of the ladies are still blocking the parking spaces. Without any vestige of haya (shame) they jaywalk into the parking space and concerned males have to retreat into Purdah whilst these be-sharam (shameless), be-haya (immodest) tableeghi aunts stroll to their cars. Regardless of the takleef (inconvenience) they cause the musallis, it is of no concern to them. They labour under the hallucination of having accomplished a great feat by shamelessly leaving their homes, shamelessly parking their vehicles in the Musjid’s parking lot and shamelessly returning to retrieve their vehicles in full view of the arriving musallis. Thus, the talk of ‘concealed places’ and observance of Purdah by women who destroy their modesty with frequent emergence and participation in group activities, be it tabligh, are devoid of substance, are uttered for self-deception and to soothe the conscience. and to convey the idea that STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 7 everything is in order when in reality, the basis is corrupt. Allah Ta’ala has moulded woman for the home-role, not for the street-role. Hadhrat Maulana Yusuf Kandelwi’s advice that tableegh should be initiated by men at home, imparting ta’leem to them, is the only correct and Sunnah method. The accretion of the mass women’s movement is a bid’ah fraught with dangerous moral consequences which will yet be seen in the future. However, the advice of sending out women’s jamaats on journeys is most certainly baatil. It is a huge error. Even great Ulama err. The criterion is always the Shariah which is the product of the Qur’aan, Sunnah and Ijma’ of the Ummah. Women’s tableegh jamaat is in conflict with all three Sources of the Shariah. The ‘fatwa’ of permissibility does not proffer even a single Shar’i daleel. Taqleed of unsubstantiated raai (opinion) is not valid. HADHRAT MUFTI MAHMOODUL HASAN’S COMMENT Hadhrat Mahmoodul Hasan (rahmatullah alayh) is reported to have said: “When any query regarding tabligh comes to the Darul Uloom then I personally answer it. I don’t give it to any other mufti because I am unaware what answer would be given.” Indeed this attitude is highly erroneous and disturbing. It is expected that the Muftis staffing the Ifta Department of Darul Uloom Deoband are highly qualified and accomplished Ulama who have all the qualifications to issue fataawa on the principles of the Shariah. The statement of Hadhrat Mufti Mahmoodul Hasan, if correctly narrated, registers a vote of no-confidence in the Ifta’ Department of Darul Uloom. This is manifestly unjust and incorrect. In view of his bias for the specific methodology of the Tabligh Jamaat, his fatwas cannot enjoy genuine credibility because on his own admission, he will answer the istifta’ (question) with a preconceived bias which constrains him to refute the istifta’ even before having studied the contents. Since other Muftis of the Ifta’ Department will subject the istifta’ to the scrutiny of Shar’i dalaa-il, they are better poised to present a fatwa unadulterated with bias. TRAVELLING WITH WOMENFOLK FOR HAJJ AND UMRAH Another spurious argument tendered in favour of women’s tableegh jamaat journeys is: “The Ulama and pious people together with their womenfolk undertake optional Haj and Umrah trips travelling with planes, trains, buses, etc. in the presence of many strange men, yet no problem is perceived therein. Thus no problem should arise with regards to ladies Jamaats as well since its manifest benefits are apparent.” This argument is invalid for several reasons: (i) The primary premises (maqees alayh) in this syllogism is itself corrupt and in need of a Shar’i ruling. It is not a principle nor an absolute Shar’i permissibility. It is therefore improper to seek a ruling for ladies tableegh journeys on the basis of this corrupt primary premises. It simply lacks the viability for being the Maqees Alayh. (ii) What is the Shar’i basis and dalaa-il for claiming that optional Hajj and Umrah are permissible for women in the current scenario of fitnah and fasaad? There is no valid Shar’i basis for claiming permissibility for these female journeys in these times of immorality and fitnah. (iii) The averment that “no problem is perceived” with these optional Umra journeys, is arbitrary and incorrect. On the contrary, we maintain the same attitude and state the same ruling for women going for optional Hajj and Umrah in the current era of fitnah. (iv) What the Ulama and pious people of this age are doing is not necessarily permissible nor does it constitute Shar’i daleel. Numerous Ulama are embroiled in flagrant acts of fisq and fujoor. The personal deeds and misdeeds of the Ulama and pious people do not constitute Shar’i daleel, and STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 8 may not be cited as such, especially in the present age of laxity and indifference towards the Shariah displayed by even the Ulama and pious people. Hadhrat Aishah (radhiyallahu anha) narrated that Allah Ta’ala sent Wahi to Nabi Yusha’ (alayhis salaam) that He would soon be destroying the 60,000 inhabitants of a certain city. Among these inhabitants were 20,000 Auliya whose A’maal (righteous deeds) were as the deeds of the Ambiya. Extremely perplexed, Nabi Yusha’ (alayhis salaam) supplicated to Allah Ta’ala: “O Allah! That you will destroy the disobedient ones is understandable. But why will You destroy even the Auliya.” Allah Ta’ala revealed to Nabi Yusha’ (alayhis salaam) that these Pious Men became complacent with the evil of the masses. They became so desensitized as a consequence of mingling and fraternizing with the transgressors that the villainy of their misdeeds departed from their hearts. As a result of this attitude, they abstained from Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy Anil Munkar, hence the punishment has become halaal for them as well. Therefore, understand well, that the deeds of the Ulama and the pious people, especially of this corrupt era should not be presented as daleel for any activity which is in need of a Shar’i ruling. We are aware of Ulama and Muftis who visit the beachfronts with their womenfolk during the kuffaar holiday seasons. They savour their nafs and gratify their bestial lusts by feasting their eyes on the mobs of bikini-clad faajiraat and kaafiraat. Neither these Ulama nor their womenfolk any longer possess any haya. What type of a wife is the woman who can tolerate to be with her molvi husband at the beachfront where naked women parade in profusion? The Honourable Muftis should present solid Shar’i dalaa-il. The deeds of the Ulama and pious people of the time are not among such proofs of the Shariah. In short, it is not permissible in this age for women to go for Nafl Hajj and Umrah. It is not permissible to commit haraam for the sake of acquiring a Nafl act. FATWA ON IMAAM ABU YUSUF’S VIEW – ANOTHER SPURIOUS ARGUMENT Some Molvi Sahib annotating the fatwa of Mufti Mahmoodul Hasan (rahmatullah alayh) wrote: “In our Fiqah, the fatwa is given on the view of Imaam Abu Yusuf (rahmatullah alayh) on matters pertaining to Qadha and Waqf, not on the view of Imaam A’zam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullah alayh) despite him being the Ustaadh. Mufti Mahmood Gangohi and Mufti Muhamad Yusuf Ludhyanwi are Tabeeighi members.. …” (The annotation is incomplete on the fatwa copy sent to us.) Nevertheless, the purport of this comments is to convey the idea that just as the fatwa on Qadha and Waqf matters is generally given on the view of Imaam Abu Yusuf, so too the fatwa on Tableeghi issues should be the fatwa of the Tablighi Molvis. This averment is laughable. The Molvi Sahib who has made this comment has failed to understand the issue pertaining to Imaam Abu Yusuf (rahmatullah alayh). Fatwa on his view applies to issues in which he had greater knowledge. For example, a Mufti who has expertise in the capitalist system of banking, shares, trade and commerce, is in a better position to issue fatwa than his Ustaadh who lacks such knowledge. His fatwa will not run counter to Mansoos Ahkaam as do the fatwas of the Tablighi Molvis. Consider the example of Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (rahmatullah alayh). His knowledge supersedes the combined knowledge of all the Ulama of our day. Nevertheless, there were many new developments of which he lacked expertise, hence he could not issue a fatwa on such questions. Hadhrat Maulana Masihullah (rahmatullah alayh) explained to us that when the question of shares was posed to Hadhrat Thanvi(rahmatullah alayh) , he consulted with a trader in Saharanpur. The poor trader explained what he thought shares are. His explanation conveyed to Hadhrat Thanvi that shares were a valid Shirkat (Partnership) venture. Thus, on the basis of this misconception, Hadhrat Thanvi (rahmatullah alayh) said that shares are permissible. STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 9 However, when Hadhrat Masihullah (rahmatullah alayh) studied the explanation which we had prepared, he was 100% in agreement with our view of hurmat, that shares are haraam. In fact, when Hadhrat Mufti Mahmoodul Hasan (rahmatullah alayh) read our explanation, he too issued an unambiguous fatwa of impermissibility. But, the compilers of Fataawa Mahmoodiyah, deemed it appropriate to perpetrate Kitmaanil Haqq (Concealment of the Truth) by conveniently either destroying that fatwa or placing it in the archives where no one will come to know of it. In their clouded opinion it was appropriate not to include this particular Fatwa of Hadhrat Mahmoodul Hasan (rahmatullah alayh) in Fataawa Mahmoodiyah. Anyone interested in the Fatwa, may write to us. But as far as the Tableeghi Molvis are concerned, their fatwas on their own activities are clouded with bias and short-sightedness, hence it is preposterous to contend that other Ulama who possess greater insight and are unbiased and look at things objectively in the light of the Shariah, and who are aware of all the ins and outs, advantages and disadvantages of the Jamaat, lack the ability for issuing fatwa on Tableeghi issues. If the Tableeghi Molvis find any flaw in our views, they should pinpoint our errors. It serves no good purpose to merely harp monotonously on the benefits of the women’s mass tableegh jamaat without answering the Shar’i dalaa-il which are proffered for the prohibition. It is quite palpable that in view of the females jamaat promoters lacking Shar’i dalaa-il coupled to their inability to respond to the Shar’i dalaa-il the opposition proffers, they resort to side-stepping and ignoring the dalaa-il which impugn their stance. A refutation is valid only if it also counters and rebuts rationally with dalaa-il the arguments of the adversary. An article which skirts and ignores the dalaa-il of the adversary is not a valid refutation. It is simply an essay stating the views of the writer. There are benefits in everything, even in eating pork, consuming liquor and gambling. But such benefits cannot be cited for repealing and cancelling any Shar’i hukm. What the Tableeghi Jamaat Molvis are guilty of is abrogation of Mansoos Ahkaam, and this is haraam and intolerable. Such Qiyaas which is in conflict of Nass-e-Shar’i is not valid. The view of a senior Mufti minus Shar’i dalaa-il is essentially raai – his personal opinion which carries no Shar’i weight. It may not be imposed as a Shar’i Hukm. It is essential to understand that a Fatwa is in fact the Law of Allah Azza Wa Jal. It is not personal opinion. There is absolutely no resemblance between women’s emergence for undertaking journeys in the midst of fitnah and fasaad for tableegh activities which are not Waajib for them, and the Qadha and Waqf issues which Imaam Abu Yusuf (rahmatullah alayh) had to rule on. During the era of Khairul Quroom, Qadha and Waqf were in the evolutionary stage which comported with the Shar’i concept of Ijtihad which was then in vogue. Qadha and Waqf related to an evolving Shar’i corpus of Ahkaam which was in the formative stage. But all of the Fatwas of Imaam Abu Yusuf (rahmatullah alayh) were structured on the Shar’i Usool evolved by Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullah alayh) on the basis of the Qur’aan and Ahaadith. It is simply an issue of new developments with which Imaam Abu Yusuf had to deal with, hence precedence is given to his rulings. But, by this time, every mediocre Molvi is also fully acquainted with every iota pertaining to the Tableegh Jamaat. There is nothing new today in the Jamaat. On the contrary, whilst the Jamaat may be on the incline quantitively speaking, in Shar’i terms it is actually on the decline. The manifest sign for this fact is the ghulu’ which has set into the Jamaat at all levels. STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 10 In the rulings of Imaam Abu Yusuf there were no factors of hurmat. On the other hand, journeys of females are accompanied by a number of exceptionally evil, haraam factors. A Mufti who fails to see and understand these glaring Asbaab-e-Hurmat should desist from issuing a fatwa on this specific issue of females undertaking journeys. ANOTHER BASELESS ARGUMENT Another baseless argument tendered for the permissibility of women’s tableegh journeys is the Hadith: “Verily, you (women) have been granted permission to emerge (from your homes) for your needs.” On the basis of this Hadith the Tableeghi Molvis contend that it is permissible for women to undertake journeys through the minefields of fitnah and immorality to execute tasks which the Shariah has not at all imposed on them. Tableegh to the masses in distant places which necessitate journeys is definitely not among haajatikunna (your needs) mentioned in the aforementioned Hadith. The circumstance which evoked the aforementioned permission to emerge for needs, was the need to answer the call of nature. In those days, there were no toilets inside the homes. Even females, were constrained to go to remote spots to relieve themselves. The law of Hijaab created a dilemma due to misunderstanding, hence Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) explained to his wife, Hadhrat Saudah (radhiyallahu anha) that since answering the call of nature is a dire need, emerging from the house to fulfil this haajat is permissible. Whilst ‘needs’ are general despite the specific circumstance, it is preposterous to claim that tableegh by women to the masses is among their needs. This is not a haajat which permits them to leave their homes and expose themselves to all and sundry. Even Nafl Hajj for women during the times of peace and absence of fitnah, was frowned on. It is abnormal for women to embark on a journey for even Nafl Umrah. One Mufti Sahib conditions the permissibility with: “Provided there is no fear of fitnah.” One has to be either a moron or a deliberate liar to contend that this age in which we happen to be is without fitnah, and that there is no fitnah along the journey for women. All the Fuqaha of the early times as well as all our Akaabir Ulama of recent times prohibit women from attending even Walimah feasts on the basis of the presence of fitnah. They are not permitted to go to the Musjid because of the element of fitnah. Yet, the Tabligh Molvis wish everyone to blindly believe that there is no fitnah for women in the journeys they undertake for a task which the Shariah had never envisaged for them. Another act which they abortively force into the scope of ‘needs’ is the exceptional presence of a couple of ladies in Jihad campaigns during the age of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The logic which brings such female participation in Jihad within the scope of Haajat is indeed pathetically baseless and lamentable. Neither were females called to participate in Jihad nor were they granted permission. Some husbands on their own accord took with them their wives. There was no mass khurooj of females to participate in Jihad in the manner of the mass khurooj of women in this era for Tableegh journeys. There was no female brigade or nursing group to accompany the mujaahideen. The impression created by the promoters of female khurooj is extremely deceptive. Instead of permission, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) reprimanded them and expressly forbade women from participating in Jihad. The following Hadith knocks out the bottom of the women in jihad argument and is in fact the last nail in the coffin of the spurious arguments of the promoters of women’s khurooj. Hadhrat Umme Kabshah (radhiyallahu anha) narrated: “A woman of the tribe of Israh Bani Qadha-ah requested Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam): ‘O Rasulullah! Do you permit me to participate in that army?’ Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) refused to grant her permission. The woman then said: ‘O Rasulullah! My intention is not Jihad. My motive is to tend to the wounded and sick and give STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 11 them water to drink.’ Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) responded: “If it was not for the fear of women’s participation in Jihad becoming a Sunnat, and people (in the future) saying that a certain female (Sahaabiyah) went in Jihad, I would have given you permission. But, you remain behind (at home).” How can Ulama be so dishonest to deliberately cast a blind eye on this explicit command of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) prohibiting women from participating in Jihad? With what conscience do they contend that Jihad is among the ‘needs’ for which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) granted females permission to emerge from their homes? For hallucinated ‘benefits’ they brazenly and blatantly deny the explicit prohibition on female khurooj and participation in Jihad announced by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Indeed, it is not an exaggeration to say that the argument of Jihad for women to justify Tableegh journeys for them, is satanically inspired, hence it has become so simple to ignore the unambiguous prohibition. Hadhrat Aishah (radhiyallahu anha) narrates: “I sought permission from Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) (for participating) in Jihad. Then he said: ‘The Jihad of you women is Hajj.” On another occasion, Hadhrat Aishah (radhiyallahu anha), again seeking permission, said to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam): “Why should we (women) not wage Jihad with you, for verily I do not see in the Qur’aan any act superior to Jihad?’ Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: ‘Verily, for you (women) the best Jihad is Hajj of Baitullah-Hajj-e-Mabroor.” The Tableegh Jamaat has a penchant to apply the Qur’aanic aayaat and Ahaadith which deal specifically with Jihad, to their specific Tableegh methodology. The virtues, importance and significance of Jihad are extended to the specific Tableegh activities of the Jamaat. This is permissible since the Qur’aanic verses have a general application despite the revelation being occasioned by specific circumstances. There is nothing wrong in this. However, it is improper to be baselessly selective and ignore certain Jihad verses and adopt others on the basis of which capital can be extracted for the specific methodology of the Tableegh Jamaat. In terms of the Tableegh Jamaat penchant mentioned above, honesty demands that Rasulullah’s proscription of female participation in Jihad should likewise be applied to female participation in Tableegh journeys. It is furthermore, incongruent to present the isolated cases of female participation in Jihad to scuttle the teaching and spirit of the Qur’aan and Sunnah on the issue of female khurooj and participation in Jihad and Tableegh journeys. Rasulullah’s categorical statements of prohibition may not be rescinded or abrogated by the isolated examples of women in Jihad. There was no organized women’s jihad jamaat as there is an organized mass ladies tableegh jamaat in this age. THE CURSE OF RASULULLAH (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) Females who emulate males have been cursed by Allah Ta’ala and Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Regardless of the area of the emulation, be it in deeds of virtue, imitation of males is haraam. Even their Salaat is distinct from the Salaat of males. In this regard, Hadhrat Ibn Abbaas (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Allah has cursed men who emulate women, and women who emulate men.’ A woman equipped with a bow around her neck passed by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). He said: ‘Allah curses those women who emulate men and those men who emulate women.” This Hadith strongly prohibits female participation in Jihad, and the prohibition is logically and in terms of the Tableegh Jamaat penchant extended to Tableegh. Even to bear arms in the way men do is forbidden for them. By the same token, tableegh in the style of men is forbidden for women. Khurooj and Safar are exclusive for men. Women have no share in these male activities. Their khurooj is permissible only for genuine need. Their needs are specified by the Shariah. Undertaking journeys for the sake of tableegh to the masses is not among their needs, hence not permissible. STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 12 The Nusoos prohibiting women from khurooj even for ibaadat and jihad are numerous. It is baseless and not permissible to ignore them on the basis of the ‘benefits’ perceived nowadays in their khurooj and safar. THE ARGUMENT OF THE LESSER EVILS The Mufti Sahib has also attempted to justify female journeys for tableegh on the basis of the Fiqhi principle of Ahwanul baliyatain (the lesser of the two evils). This argument too is spurious. This principle applies only when there is no third lawful alternative. When all lawful options are closed, and one is faced with two evils from which escape is impossible, only then may this principle be invoked. If a starving man is able to find somewhere some halaal food, he may not invoke the principle of the lesser evils to consume haraam meat or pork. The basics of the Deen can be acquired from numerous simple books, and from females in the immediate locality, and also from their husbands and fathers. If women are willing to learn, they can arrange in their locality to be taught. It is therefore not permissible for them to perpetrate the haraam acts of unnecessary khurooj and safar on the basis of the principle of the lesser of the two evils. MEN AND WOMEN – THE DIFFERENCE IN THEIR PARTICIPATION The Mufti Sahib, arguing in favour of women’s tableegh journeys, says: “It is also important to note that when Hadhrat Moulana Ilyas Saheb Rahmatullah, commenced this noble work of Tabligh, there were reservations from some Muftis who did not understand and see the work of Tabligh from within. As the effort of Tabligh became widespread and Ulama and Muftis observed the work closely and from within, they supported the work including the Mastooraat Jamaat.” The initial hesitation of the Ulama regarding the Tableegh Jamaat is standard attitude and procedure in the department of Ifta’. This caution was not restricted for the Tableegh Jamaat. It applies to every new development. The Tableegh Jamaat was a totally new development whose methodology has no precedent in Islamic history. The hesitation and caution were therefore simply necessary. A variety of factors has to be investigated and ascertained before a fatwa could be issued. This initial caution cannot be extended to Makshufaat jamaat. There is no need to infiltrate the Makshufaat jamaat to ascertain its position and reality. Regardless of the perceived benefits, its reality is in conflict with the Shariah, hence numerous Ulama are opposed to it. The opposition to the Makshufaat jamaat is not the effect of remaining ‘without’ nor is there a need to participate and journey with one’s wife to ascertain what the Makshufaat jamaat is. There is no conundrum in the Makshufaat jamaat. It is a development simply in conflict with the Shariah whereas there was no conflict with the Shariah in the males wing of the Tableegh Jamaat. Whilst some ghulu’ has crept into the Tableegh Jamaat in this age, it did not exist in the early days of the Jamaat. All movements veer from the Haqq with the passage of time. It is essential that the elders of the Tableegh Jamaat take stock, assess the situation and ensure that the Jamaat does not veer rudderless widely off the mark of Siraatul Mustaqeem. It will indeed be a sad day when bid’ah takes over the Jamaat. Bid’ah is the natural consequence of ghulu’. Everything has limits. The Qur’aan states: “These are the limits of Allah. Whoever transgresses the limits, verily he has oppressed his own soul.” The enemies of the Haqq, especially the Barelwi Qabar Pujaaris, are praying for the deflection and demise of the Tableegh Jamaat. The Jamaat will be ignoring the sagacious advice and admonition of the Ulama-e-Haqq at the peril of self-immolation. We are not the enemies of the Tableegh Jamaat. We are of the same spiritual and academic roots. We are in conformity with the Jamaat’s methodology. But we emphatically reject the idea that the methodology of the Jamaat is the sole and exclusive method of Tableegh. The Jamaat’s method is one of the Mubah (permissible) methods of Tableegh which is a multifaceted institution of Islam. Extremists in the Jamaat should divest themselves of the haraam attitude that the Tableegh Jamaat methodology is Fardh-e-Ain and that only its method is the valid method of Tableegh. Baatil accretions must necessarily be weeded out. If not, these attitudes of bid’ah will throttle the Haqq from the Jamaat. This lamentable fate has happened to all institutions of the Haqq in Islamic history. The Jamaat is no exception. The elders must be careful. They must keep this huge Ship of Tableegh on course – on Siraatul Mustaqeem. Whilst it is undoubtedly, a huge Ship of the Haqq, it is STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 13 definitely not the Ship of Nooh (alayhis salaam) as the extremists in the Jamaat are projecting implying thereby that all those Ulama and non-Ulama who are not participating in Tableegh Jamaat activities are kaafirs. This is the clear implication of not being in the Ship of Hadhrat Nabi Nooh (alayhis salaam). Thus, the comparison with Hadhrat Nooh’s Ship is palpably false and an example of the ghulu’ which is choking the Jamaat. In the perpetration of crass ghulu’, one senior of the Jamaat, Maulana Taariq Jameel is outstanding. He holds some decidedly weird views which are even bizarre and Imaan-threatening. If Allah Ta’ala grants us the taufeeq, we shall discuss some of his baatil for the guidance of the Ummah. This is our obligation. This is part of the Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy Anil Munkar obligation which the Shariah imposes on us. It is our desire and Dua that the Jamaat remains on course. For securing this, it is imperative to arrest the ghulu’ and bid’ah and weed it out. A CONVOLUTED ARGUMENT Despite arguing in favour of female’s khurooj to participate in Tableegh journeys, the Mufti Sahib says: “When this was the condition in the era of the Sahaabah that due to fitnah women were prohibited from attending the salaah in the musjid, then one can well imagine the need for not allowing women to participate in the congregational prayer in this time and age, where the fitnah is rampant and widespread everywhere to such an extent that controlling the fitnah is impossible.” The reasoning of the Mufti Sahib is most pathetic. He concedes the preponderance of fitnah in women’s khurooj just to attend the Musjid which is the holiest of places, and which is in close proximity to their homes. He furthermore acknowledges the impossibility of controlling the fire of fitnah which has engulfed the whole world. Yet, he sees no fitnah in women undertaking journeys to distant places for tabligh to the masses which is not their function – which the Shariah has not imposed on them. In a vain and abortive attempt to neutralize the severity of the prohibition which he himself stated in the aforementioned statement, he flabbily avers: “As far as the second type of need is concerned, just as it was permissible in that era, it is permitted in this time and age provided there is no fear of fitnah.” It has already been explained earlier that what has been imagined as ‘need’ to justify female emergence and undertaking journeys, is absolutely not a need in terms of the Shariah. It is a despicable falsehood to peddle the baatil that women were permitted to participate in Jihad. Furthermore, Tableegh to the masses and undertaking journeys to do tableegh are not at all among the Shar’i needs of women. Their imperative need is to stay within the confines of their holy homes. Despite his weak attempt to justify female khurooj, the Mufti Sahib is constrained to say: “provided there is no fear of fitnah”. Now which Muslim in his sane senses can honestly claim that this era is devoid of the fear of fitnah? The fitnah which constrained the Sahaabah to prohibit even the very pious Sahaabiyah from attending the Musaajid has multiplied a thousand fold. To acknowledge the widespread fitnah, the “controlling of which is impossible” in this era according to the Mufti Saheb, and to condition the female’s khurooj with absence of fitnah, then to say that it is permissible for them in this age to undertake tableegh journeys, is to speak with a forked tongue. The stunt to proclaim permissibility defies credulity. The “unimaginable maladies and uncontrollable ailments which have spread in the ummah” mentioned by the Mufti Sahib cannot be remedied by acting in conflict with the Shariah – by encouraging women to participate in a mass female’s movement. The solution is to revert to the original Sunnah system of educating womenfolk within the precincts of their homes. This is the obligation of the menfolk who are in Tableegh. Their prior Tableegh is for their families. But the problem is that the men have no patience with their wives and children. They are prepared to globe-trot and spend ages away from home making ‘tableegh’ to others whilst they think nothing of neglecting Tableegh to their families. This speaks much for the corruption of their intentions. Brandishing the aim and the goal of the Tableegh Jamaat to justify a method which is inherently fraught with grave moral consequences for the entire Ummah, does not justify the abrogation of an explicit law of Islam, namely, the prohibition of female emergence for activities not imposed on them by the Shariah. The noble end does not justify a haraam methodology. STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 14 MORE CONVOLUTED ARGUMENT The Mufti Sahib also argues: “The Ulama of the Tableegh Jamaat have analysed that when the Shariah has granted women permission to leave their homes for a physical need, such as to acquire medical treatment or be hospitalized, then why would they not be allowed to leave their homes to acquire their Imaani need through attending madrasahs and Mastooraat (sic!) Jama’at?” They are not allowed for the simple reason that Allah Ta’ala has prohibited the latter while permitting the former. It is massive deception to utilize personal logic to deny and cancel any law of the Shariah. The Sahaabah and the Aimmah Mujtahideen were better poised to have understood this imagined mystery. Despite this, they prohibited females from the Musjid in that golden era when fitnah was practically nil. For the protection of posterity, the Sahaabah enacted the ban on female’s khurooj. In the 14 centuries of Islam’s history, the Tableegh Jamaat has been the first to innovate the evil of female khurooj on a mass scale. It appears that the Hadith in which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) mentioned that the reason for his refusal to grant the woman permission to participate in Jihad was the fear that such khurooj would be interpreted to be Sunnah, was directed to the Tableegh Jamaat. It is only the Tableegh Jamaat which has flagrantly violated this express prohibition of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), and they utilize personal logic and whim to deny what Nabi-e- Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had proclaimed regarding women’s Khurooj. In fact, their attitude and conduct testify that they have given female khurooj the status of Wujoob (compulsion). The interpretation which is employed to skirt the explicit prohibition is ta’weel-e-baatil (baseless interpretation). The reasons proffered for ignoring what Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said, and what the Sahaabah had ordered are the effects of fanciful imagination. FEMALE KHUROOJ IS NOT THE SOLUTION The Mufti Sahib in his promotion of khurooj-e-nisaa (emergence of women from their homes) laments: “However, due to the sad and unfortunate plight of the ummah witnessed across the globe, where a decline and degeneration of Deeni morals and values are seen in women, to the extent that they are openly seen frequenting the shopping centers and bazaars, halls and malls, occupying positions in shops and offices, driving about freely, going for morning walks and jogs in groups, taking part in national and international sports and even the Olympics, attending schools and universities, getting involved with or marring non Muslims, being influenced by anti Islamic beliefs and ideologies e.g. Darwin’s theory etc. and are also seen intermingling and interacting with the opposite sex without any sense of shame and modesty. Due to this sad and unfortunate plight, the need was perceived to use some other Halaal alternative which may perhaps not be the ideal but a means to acquire the ideal - a means through which a woman can once again come onto the path of the Sunnah and find her true place in her home and observe complete purdah. Hence the ‘Ulama have thought of ways (through girls madrasahs and Mastooraat Jama’at) to reform and rectify the unimaginable maladies and uncontrollable ailments which have spread in the ummah.” This sad and lamentable plight of the Ummah’s females painted by the Mufti Sahib is supposedly the basis for the justification to promote a mass movement of women undertaking journeys. If the Mufti Sahib makes an honest appraisal of the droves of women in the Makshufaat jamaats, he will find extremely few women who were former factory girls, shop girls, street girls, university girls, participants in Olympics, jogging girls, sports girls, etc.,etc. Females involved in these lewd outdoor occupations and professions continue with their haraam professions. Hardly any of these females are captured by the Tableegh Jamaat. Even the daughters of Tableeghi brothers and of even Molvis are attending universities. The females of fathers who are staunch Jamaat workers are on the streets and brushing shoulders with all and sundry. A man goes for 4 months believing himself to be in the Path of Allah whilst his wife manages the business and interacts with ghair mahram males and prowls around the streets. The females who are attracted to the Tableegh jamaat are those who are from so-called respectable homes. They are not factory and shop workers. They are females who are generally in their homes although not in full purdah. These are the women who are encouraged to leave their homes and undertake tableegh journeys. Girls working in factories, in shops and the public sector are not targeted. Seldom will such females join the Makshufaat jamaat. The immoral condition of females is not set to improve. It will deteriorate STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 15 further as we approach Qiyaamah. The downward plunge in the abyss of immorality cannot be arrested. All the predictions of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) have to necessarily materialize. The solution is only to propagate the Sunnah methodology and to leave the end result to Allah Ta’ala. The analysis of the Tableeghi Molvis is baseless. Methods in conflict with the Sunnah and Shariah are doomed to failure, and the consequences of such methods are always disastrous. Currently the public sector females are beyond the reach of the Makshufaat jamaats. If it is possible to organize bayaans for the ‘emancipated’ females, there is no need for women from other countries to undertake journeys for this purpose. There are many women locally who could arrange for bayaans at someone’s home in a very unostensible manner to advise and teach the females. There is no need to organize the females to go out in jamaats. Ulama and other knowledgeable women should organize bayaan programmes for the lost females. What is the need for a mass movement? What is the need to create a specific public mould for women’s tableegh? Why adopt the male tableegh model for women? Whilst Makshufaat jamaats are being justified by using the public sector girls as a smokescreen, hardly any of them (i.e. the factory, shop and university females) join these female jamaats. Mostly women who are generally in the homes are the members of the Makshufaat jamaats undertaking journeys to distant places. The claim by the Mufti Sahib that most of the women in the Makshufaat jamaats “are from the underprivileged class” is incorrect. The Tableegh Jamaat is not too active in the underprivileged areas whether for males or females. They operate more in privileged areas. Whatever the case may be, and whatever benefits are imagined, the bottom line is that methods which contravene the Shariah are not permissible and should not be employed. The work should be executed in compliance with the Shariah, and the result be left to Allah Ta’ala. The Qur’aan Majeed tells Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) that he has not been appointed a guard over people nor can he grant hidaayat to people. His duty is only to deliver the Message of the Deen. This was the function of all the Ambiya: “On us is nothing but to deliver the clear message.” (Qur’aan) Hidaayat cannot be rammed down the throats of people. Those who innovate new methods in conflict with the Shariah are desirous to supersede the Ambiya (alayhimus salaam). They believe that the inability to gain recruits is failure. Their emphasis is on their effort and on quantity whereas the sincere Muballigh’s focus is on Allah’s Ridha’, hence he does not act in conflict with the Ahkaam of the Shariah. This is an important lesson which the Tableegh Jamaat of our time should learn. Allah Ta’ala has created females for the home, not for outdoor activities, be these Deeni activities. Female khurooj is unnatural and haraam. Tableegh activities for women in the manner of the Makshufaat jamaats and by undertaking journeys are not permissible. FEMALES WITHIN THEIR HOMES ARE NOT DEPRIVED OF THE IMMENSE THAWAAB OF TABLIGH AND JIHAD FI SABEELILLAAH Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: * “Whoever of you (women) who remains at home, verily, she will acquire the amal (with its rewards) of the Mujaahid in the Path of Allah.” * “Your Jihad is Hajj.” That is the performance of the Fardh Hajj. * A woman who adopts patience when her husband marries again, will attain the thawaab and rank of Shahaadat. Thus she is not deprived of the thawaab of Tableegh whilst remaining within the precincts of her sacred home. STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 16 Subscribe to: The Majlis “Voice of Islam” Presenting the Knowledge of Islam, the Qur’aan and the Sunnah in Pristine Purity. Presenting the Deen of Islam as propounded and practised by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and his illustrious Sahaabah (radhiyallahu anhum). Rates R30.00 (South Africa) US$15 (Neighbouring States) US$20 (Rest of the world) Send your subscriptions to: The Majlis, Subscription Dept. P.O. Box 3393, Port Elizabeth, 6056, South Africa Printed by: As Saadiqeen Islamic Centre (A.S.I.C) Email: assaadiqeen@gmail.com STATUS OF MASTOORAAT JAMAAT 17 THESE PUBLICATIONS ARE DISTRIBUTED FREE OF CHARGE Your contributions may be forwarded to: Bank: Nedbank Acc name: As Saadiqeen Islamic Centre (A.S.I.C) Acc no: 1039 363 458 Branch Code: 1284-05 Ref: Publications Swift code: NEDSZAJJ Please send confirmation of deposit to : Fax: 086 260 3071 Email: assaadiqeen@gmail.com Some of our other publications 1. Ladies Tabligh Jamaat 2. The spreading of falsehood about the Tabligh Jamaat 3. Tabligh Jamaat and What is Melaad 4. Moulood and the Shariah 5. Sama’ (sufi singing) Hard copies of the books may be requested from: or The Publisher: Mujlisul Ulama Of South Africa P.O. Box 3393, Port Elizabeth, 6056 South Africa The printer: As-Saadiqeen Islamic Centre (Asic) P.O. Box 818 De Deur, 1884 South Africa Email: