From the
Sunna we come to know that if an adult woman, a black dog, or a donkey passes
in front of someone who is praying Salaat, without a Sutra (obstruction)
in between, then his Salaat is invalidated. This is based on a sound
Hadith of the Prophet ﷺ narrated by his illustrious companion Abu
Dharr (radi Allahu anhu):
إِذَا قَامَ أَحَدُكُمْ
يُصَلِّي فَإِنَّهُ يَسْتُرُهُ إِذَا كَانَ بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِثْلُ آخِرَةِ الرَّحْلِ
فَإِذَا لَمْ يَكُنْ بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِثْلُ آخِرَةِ الرَّحْلِ فَإِنَّهُ يَقْطَعُ
صَلاَتَهُ الْحِمَارُ وَالْمَرْأَةُ وَالْكَلْبُ الأَسْوَدُ
When any one of you stands for prayer and there is a thing before him equal
to the back of the saddle that covers him and in case there is not before him
(a thing) equal to the back of the saddle, his prayer would be cut off by
(passing of an) ass, woman, and black Dog.
(Sahih
Muslim)
Some people
object to this Hadith and the ruling contained therein on the basis that it is
misogynist and degrades women. They often quote the reaction of the Prophet’s
own beloved wife, sayyida Aisha (radi Allahu anha) to this Hadith, when she said
to one of its narrators: “You have compared us (women) to donkeys and dogs!”
The answer
to this objection is that while analogizing women with dogs and donkeys in
their essence is certainly an example of misogyny and would naturally be considered
a degradation of the high status of women as human beings, this Hadith has not
actually analogized women with any animal in its essence. In other words, the
Hadith does not say that “women are like dogs and donkeys”. It is only
stating that among the factors which result in the invalidation of Salat is the
passing in front of the Musalli of three things, one of which is an
adult woman.” However, this does not necessitate that the raison d’etre of why
a woman’s passing in front nullifies the Salat is identical to that of why a
black dog or donkey passing in front nullifies the Salat. In fact, the reasons
are different though the result (nullification of the Salat) is the same. It is
only because the result is the same that women have been mentioned in the same
sentence with dogs and donkeys. Imam al-Qurtubi, in his explanation of the
Hadith, has stated that the distraction of the woman is different than the
distraction of the donkey which may bray, and that of a black dog which may
cause fright. It is only the common factor of distraction to the praying
man offering his Salat which results in the ruling of the nullification of the
Salat by the passing in front of these three, though the reason for the
distraction is different for each.
To help
illustrate this point, consider the fact that in Islam is it forbidden to eat,
among other things, the flesh of swine (pork), the flesh of canine, and the
flesh of a human being (cannibalism). No one can infer from this that Islam has
equated human beings with swine and canines.
Sayyida
Aisha (radi Allahu anha) mentions, in refutation of this Hadith, that she would
often lie in front of the Prophet ﷺ when he was offering his Salat,
and then would at times get up and slip away, while this action of hers did not
nullify the Prophet’s ﷺ Salat. However, this argument is erroneous
because the Hadith is talking about passing in front of someone who is praying
from one side to the other, i.e., someone passing in front of him from his left
and passing to his right, or vice versa.
Another
objection to the ruling contained in this Hadith is that it is not accepted by
the major schools of jurisprudence in Islam, namely, the Hanafi, Maliki, and
Shafi’ie schools. There seems to be a difference of opinion within the Hanbali
school. The position of the jurists and their respective schools of law is that
the Hadith speaks of not nullifying the Salat proper, but of “cutting” the concentration
of the one who is praying. This seems to be somewhat of a far-fetched explanation
since the wording of the Hadith does not mention “concentration” or the Khushu
of the Salat. It would be safer and more cautious to act upon the literal
wording of this Hadith.
No comments:
Post a Comment