FEMALE GENITAL
MODIFICATION
INTRODUCTION
Allah SWT says in the Qur’an Al-Hakim:
81:8 And when the female
(infant) buried alive shall be questioned.
9 For what sin she was killed?
In
antiquity, many societies in the
Mediterranean
Basin practiced female
infanticide. Roman
fathers placed little necklaces around the necks of baby girls and abandoned
them on rubbish mounds. If the child was
fortunate, someone would come by and enslave the infant. Otherwise, she would
just starve to death, surrounded by the remains of
Rome’s abundant food supply. And those little necklaces they provided a link
to the parentage of the child, in case the child made something of herself
later in life and the parents decided they would like to reconnect.
How nice of them!
So, why do fathers abandon their
baby girls on rubbish heaps? Why do they
bury them alive? Why do they become consumed with grief upon hearing of the
birth of a daughter? Besides the perhaps
more obvious blow to ones macho image, many men also fear damage to their
honor. What if she goes off and has a
relationship with some low ranking man?
What if she has a relationship before I can marry her off to some man
from another tribe, thereby making important alliances? What if she takes a younger lover after being
married to this well-connected man?
Controlling female sexuality is an
obsession among some men. In many
societies around the world, the male elders consider having a daughter a burden
and a danger to the honor of the family.
The Jewish scriptures state: "Your daughter is headstrong? Keep a sharp
look-out that she does not make you the laughing stock of your enemies, the
talk of the town, the object of common gossip, and put you to public
shame" (Ecclesiasticus 42:11), "Keep a
headstrong daughter under firm control, or she will abuse any indulgence she
receives. Keep a strict watch on her shameless eye, do not be surprised if she
disgraces you" (Ecclesiasticus 26:10-11). In Jahiliyyah,
the Arabs also buried their daughters alive.
16:58-59
"When news is brought to one of them of the birth of a female child,
his face darkens and he is filled with inward grief. With shame does he hide
himself from his people because of the bad news he has had! Shall he retain her
on contempt or bury her in the dust? Ah! what an evil they decide on?"
In Christianity, women were considered
by nature, evil. After all, according
the Christian Bible, Eve is the one who tempted Adam to sin. Only Mary is considered chaste and pure among
women. Christians subscribed fully to
the Biblical statement: " The birth of a
daughter is a loss" (Ecclesiasticus
22:3). European fathers locked their daughters up in metal chastity
belts and held onto the keys. The poor
girls were not even able to clean themselves properly after going to the
bathroom inside these metal cages surrounding their genitals. And even earlier,
the Egyptian Copts or Kibtis, the Pharaonic people, allowed the girls to keep
clean, but, instead, surgically sewed their vaginas shut.
Then Allah
SWT sent revelation through His Prophet Muhammad SAW. He revealed the ayat
quoted above, and upon their acceptance of Islam, our Sahabi took an oath, the
Baiyya’:
Narrated Ubada bin As-Samit:
I gave the pledge of allegiance to the Prophet with
a group of people, and he said, "I take your pledge that you will not
worship anything besides Allah, will not steal, will not commit infanticide,
will not slander others by forging false statements and spreading it, and will
not disobey me in anything good. And whoever among you fulfill all these
(obligations of the pledge), his reward is with Allah. And whoever commits any
of the above crimes and receives his legal punishment in this world, that will
be his expiation and purification. But if Allah screens his sin, it will be up
to Allah, Who will either punish or forgive him according to His wish."
Abu `Abdullah said: "If a thief repents after his hand has been cut off,
then his witness will be accepted. Similarly, if any person upon whom any legal
punishment has been inflicted, repents, his witness will be accepted."
حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ الْجُعْفِيُّ، حَدَّثَنَا
هِشَامُ بْنُ يُوسُفَ، أَخْبَرَنَا مَعْمَرٌ، عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ، عَنْ أَبِي
إِدْرِيسَ، عَنْ عُبَادَةَ بْنِ الصَّامِتِ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ قَالَ بَايَعْتُ
رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فِي رَهْطٍ، فَقَالَ " أُبَايِعُكُمْ عَلَى أَنْ لاَ تُشْرِكُوا
بِاللَّهِ شَيْئًا، وَلاَ تَسْرِقُوا، وَلاَ تَقْتُلُوا أَوْلاَدَكُمْ، وَلاَ
تَأْتُوا بِبُهْتَانٍ تَفْتَرُونَهُ بَيْنَ أَيْدِيكُمْ وَأَرْجُلِكُمْ، وَلاَ
تَعْصُونِي فِي مَعْرُوفٍ، فَمَنْ وَفَى مِنْكُمْ فَأَجْرُهُ عَلَى اللَّهِ،
وَمَنْ أَصَابَ مِنْ ذَلِكَ شَيْئًا فَأُخِذَ بِهِ فِي الدُّنْيَا فَهْوَ
كَفَّارَةٌ لَهُ وَطَهُورٌ، وَمَنْ سَتَرَهُ اللَّهُ فَذَلِكَ إِلَى اللَّهِ، إِنْ
شَاءَ عَذَّبَهُ وَإِنْ شَاءَ غَفَرَ لَهُ ". قَالَ أَبُو عَبْدِ اللَّهِ
إِذَا تَابَ السَّارِقُ بَعْدَ مَا قُطِعَ يَدُهُ، قُبِلَتْ شَهَادَتُهُ، وَكُلُّ
مَحْدُودٍ كَذَلِكَ إِذَا تَابَ قُبِلَتْ شَهَادَتُهُ.
It is
rather telling that Allah SWT felt that female infanticide was so serious a
crime that pledging to not commit this practice came third in the list of
pledges constituting surrender to Allah in Islam; only second after agreeing to
worship none other than Allah.
After the revelation of the Qur’an,
our deen and our Shariah take precedence over any culturally devised solutions
to the problem of family honor. We must
abide by the commands and prohibitions of the Qur’an and the Sunnah. While Urf can be a source of fiqh, it is only
so if the Qur’an and the Sunnah do not directly address that particular
issue. Urf is far down on the list of
sources of fiqh. No matter how attached
we may become to cultural traditions, if they are proscribed by our Shariah, to
continue to perform such acts is sinful.
We are all aware of the poor image
of Islam held by the predominant culture in the West. Despite the treatment of women in the West
until very recently, the Western media has focused on other cultures, including
the cultures of countries where Islam is the dominant religion, and singled out
practices that subjugate and demean women as being the norm in those countries,
thereby proving the “superiority” of Western culture. Painting the “other” as backward, filthy,
sexually licentious, and morally depraved is an old tactic. The Romans did it to Carthage,
painting them as baby killers. Islamophobes paint our beloved Prophet SAW as a
pedophile in their effort to criminalize Islam.
Islamophobes have an agenda, a
mission, to paint Islam as evil. One way
is to focus on the treatment of women.
Not all of the accusations are unfounded. The fact that actual men have seldom followed
the teachings of the Qur’an and Sunnah in regard to the treatment of women does
not imply that Islam is misogynistic.
Far from it. Islam gave women the
right to contract and conduct business 1400 years before women gained that
right in the West – in 1973.
On the other hand, the errors and
failures revealed by history are no excuse for our present behavior. As Muslims, living in the world we live in
today, we cannot afford to be lackadaisical about our fiqh. You are an
ambassador for Islam, as well as for your country and your family. Many unseen eyes are watching you!! They are judging every Muslim in the world by
your behavior. If a fellow Muslim is
killed because someone got a poor impression of Islam and Muslims from your
behavior, you are partially to blame.
Remember our fiqh is not just ibadaat (worship), it is also mu’amalaat
(transactions). And if you are “non-practicing”, “secular” then fine, but make
sure people know you are not a Muslim.
Islam is not an ethnicity; it is a religion, a way of life. If you are not living it, then you are not a
Muslim, you have a different identity. We have no right to judge Christianity
by the behavior of “non-practicing” Christians or secular atheists, (although
many of us do). Please be clear about your identity so people will not judge Muslims
on the basis of your cultural or personal behavior. And, if your identity is as
a Muslim, learn your deen and try your best to live it. Don’t just assume you
know it because you grew up in a certain place or speak a certain language. It is amazing that people are so obsessed
with family or tribal honor, but care little for the honor of those who share
their nation or their deen.
With this in mind, we must examine
an issue made large by the Islamophobic movement: female genital
mutilation. This practice, confined
mostly to eight African states, has become a cause for condemning Islam as
misogynistic and barbaric, even though many practitioners of female genital
mutilation are not Muslim and many who perform it are women. Many Muslim leaders including leading shuyuk
have condemned it and have declared many of the forms of this practice to be
haram. However, in regard to one form of
this practice, scholars, both ancient and modern, disagree. Just the fatawa issued by the scholars of
Egypt
and
Al-Azhar University
alone reveal the extent of this iktilaaf.
In this paper, we will examine the
various forms of female genital modification in light of the Qur’an, the
Sunnah, and the Maqaasid ash-Shariah.
Defining
the Practice in Question
Female
genital mutilation is not an Islamic term.
No ayat of the Qur’an or hadith mention this term. It is a modern term
covering a range of practices. I have preferred to use the term “female genital
modification” in an effort to de-emotionalize the discussion. Mutilation implies harm, pain, evil.
Mutilation is haram. Even if, in the end, we find the practice to be haram, we
must use neutral terms in our initial discussion. When one of the things we must determine as
fuqaha is whether this practice is mutilation, we would be guilty of circular
logic is we used the term “female genital mutilation” to refer to the practices
in question.
First of all, most of the scholars
agree that the original or natural hukm sharii of any act is mubah.
There are five hukm sharii in Shariah; fard,
mustahab or mandub, mubah, makruh, and haram.
Unless evidence exists of a specific hukm other than mubah, then the
practice is mubah. Second, many have
claimed that no ayat of the Qur’an governs this practice. In that case, then, we must look to the Sunnah
and other sources of evidence, such as qiyas or other rational methods. Otherwise, if there is no specific applicable
nass can be found to bear upon the issue, then the practice would be mubah. However, there is an ayat of the Qur’an
addressing this practice. Allah SWT says:
4: 119
I will mislead them and I will create in them false desires;
I will order them to slit the ears of cattle and to alter
the creation of Allah.
Whosoever forsakes Allah and takes Shaytan as his friend has
surely suffered a manifest loss.
Therefore, any alteration,
mutilation, and/or permanent modification of the human body is haram.
This
ayat has been utilized in fiqh to prohibit cosmetic surgery, and other
alterations to the human body performed for the purpose of appearance, trend,
and other whims and fancies. The same
ayat provides the dalil for forbidding tattoos.
Moreover, it is upon this ayat that scholars have prohibited autopsies
and even organ donation.
In order to understand the weight
this ayat has in our fiqh, we must understand the law of evidence under
Shariah. Evidence is of several grades:
qati (certain), dhanni (probable), daif (weak), and khati’ah (false). The ayat
above is qati evidence, clearly making alteration of the body is haram without
a permissible reason, medical necessity, or clear statement in another ayat
providing either naskh or takhsis (abrogation or specification/exception), or a
hadith providing takhsis. Since there are no ayat providing either naskh or
takhsis, then we must seek authentic, mutawatir or sahih hadith that would
clearly make female genital modification mubah or one of the other five hukm
sharii.
But before we do, we must understand
the practice we are seeking a ruling on.
Female genital
modification is a practice prevalent in eight countries, centered mostly in Africa. Several forms of this practice exist at the
present time. These include:
- Nicking the
clitoral hood.
- Cutting off the
clitoral hood.
- Cutting off the
clitoris in part or in entirety.
- Cutting off the
labia mejora.
- Cutting off the
labia menora.
- Incising the
labia and sewing the labia together, leaving only a small hole for urine
and blood to pass.
- Cutting off the
clitoris and labia mejora and labia menora.
The practice has a long history. The first recording of this practice is in
the records of Pharaonic
Egypt
during the time of Seti I and Ramses II.
In
Egypt,
the midwives performed a procedure cutting off the clitoris, labia mejora and
labia menorah, and sewing the incised labia together, leaving only a small hole
for the passage of urine and blood. The
practice spread to
Sudan
when
Egypt
conquered
Nubia
and proliferated up and down the
Nile
River basin when the Nubian kings
conquered
Egypt.
When Christianity entered
Ethiopia
in the 1st century AD, the Church encountered the practice. Christianity opposed the practice
vigorously. Christianity has long
opposed circumcision for men; the idea of female circumcision was shocking for
the Church. Several prominent Christian
scholars wrote bulls (fatawa) prohibiting the practice. However, today, female genital modification
remains prevalent in the Ethiopian Coptic Church. In
Africa, animists
and pagan adherents, such as the Nandi, have long practiced this custom. And in
Ethiopia,
the Ethiopian Jews also perform female circumcision, but do not perform it for
men, despite clear Jewish law.
Why have previous peoples performed this
practice? As the presence of this
practice among the Ethiopian Jews, who do not circumcise men, reveals, the
practice centers on male concerns about women’s sexuality and the potential
impact on family honor. What if my daughter has sex before marriage? What if
she cheats on a husband that I married her to in order to cement family and
tribal ties? She would dishonor our
family, our tribe… So I need to find a
way to restrain her. As we noted in the
Introduction, some fathers were so traumatized by the birth of a baby girl that
they killed them rather than face potential shame.
Some fathers could not kill the child, after
all she could be married to another tribe to improve his business. So they cut her genitals to remove her
libido. And to make everything more
controlled, why not sew her vagina shut.
But how is her husband suppose to have sex with her, and if he manages
to do so, how is she to have a baby? How
does this procedure protect honor and lineage if she cannot have a child?
Have these concerns and the
traditional nature of the practice influenced the people of the eight countries
where this practice is prevalent to continue the practice after conversion to Islam? There is no doubt that it has pre-Islamic
roots. So do many Islamic practices,
including Hajj. However, one must ask if
this is a case of an existing practice adopted and approved of by the Qur’an
and Sunnah or a case of an existing practice Islamically justified so people
can continue to follow local traditions? How far are we willing to go to defend
urf?
Before we explore
proffered evidence that female genital modification has been adopted and
approved of by the Qur’an and Sunnah, let us set some preliminary
terminology. We shall define these terms
in more detail later, but for now, in the interest of clarity, we will refer to
male circumcision as Khitaan and female circumcision as Khifaadh. While khitaan has been used to refer to both
male and female circumcision, here we will restrict the usage so as to avoid
confusion. Male circumcision or khitaan refers to the cutting and removal of
the foreskin of the penis, a flap of skin surrounding the penis, attached to the
shaft just below the glans, which can be moved up or down, exposing the glans. Female circumcision or khifaadh, according to
its proponents, then would be analogous to male circumcision and refers to the
cutting and removal of the clitoral hood or prepuce, a flap of skin surrounding
the clitoris, attached just below the clitoris and capable of being moved up
and down to a slight degree. Movement of the prepuce is not necessary for
sexual stimulation or intercourse. The
WTO refers to this practice as
Type Ia
female genital mutilation.
As we have noted
above, besides removal of the foreskin or precape, there are other forms of
female genital modification. Because
these practices have been labeled “khitaan” or “khifaadh” by practitioners, it
is imperative we examine each one and determine, not only the nature of these
practices, but the hukm. We begin here by characterizing each practice. We will examine the hukm later if Allah SWT
gives us life.
The
first practice we will examine is nicking the clitoral hood. This practice
involves nicking the prepuce with a cutting instrument just enough to cause
bleeding and be superficially considered “cutting.” This practice has been
suggested by Western medical practitioners as a way to respect cultural
traditions without incurring the great harm women can experience with more
evasive procedures.
The
second practice is clitoridectomy. The
WHO defines this practice as partial or total removal of the clitoris and the
clitoral hood and classifies it as Type I female genital mutilation. Removal of
just the clitoral hood, which some consider to be female circumcision or
khifaadh, is referred to as partial clitoridectomy, or Type 1a female genital
mutilation. Total removal of the
clitoris and the prepuce is referred to a total clitoridectomy and constitutes
the cutting and removal of the entire clitoris and its prepuce. The WHO classifies this practice as Type Ib
female genital mutilation.
The
third practice is excision: cutting and removing the labia minora or inner
vaginal “lips,” and/or cutting and removing the labia majora or outer vaginal
“lips.” The WHO refers to this as Type II female genital mutilation. The WHO recognizes three forms; Type IIa –
removal of the labia minora; Type IIb – partial or total removal of the
clitoris and labia minora; and Type IIc – partial or total removal of the
clitoris, labia minora and labia majora.
The
fourth practice is infibulation or the partial or total sealing off of the
vaginal orifice. The WHO refers to this practice as Type III female genital
mutilation. Type IIIa involves excision,
removal and apposition or suturing of the labia minora. Type IIIb involves excision,
removal and apposition or suturing of the labia majora. Total infibulation
leaves no opening for sexual relations and only a small hole for urine and
blood to pass. In order for the woman to have sexual relations after marriage
or to give birth to children, she will have to undergo further difibulation
surgery. Some women are then subjected
to re-infibulation after child birth.
Now that we have
defined the practices in question, we can move on to examine the Divine Sources
of our deen to determine the hukm of each practice under Shariah law.
Evidence From Divine Sources
- The Hadith of Abu Hurairah on the Fitrah
All
of the scholars agree that the Qur’an does not specifically address
circumcision, either for males or females.
All evidence of the hukm sharii of circumcision comes from the Sunnah
and is reported in the hadith literature.
Proponents
of khifaadh put forward several hadith in support of their contention that khifaadh
is an Islamic practice. They begin with
hadith regarding the relationship of khataan to the fitrah, and arguing that
the commands and prohibitions of the Shariah apply equally to men and women
unless specified otherwise. This is based on the following Qur’anic verses:
4:
124. If any do deeds Of righteousness,
Be they male or female—And have faith,
They will enter Heaven, And not the least injustice
Will be done to them.
33: 35.
For Muslim men and women,—For believing men and women,
For devout men and women, For true men and women,
For men and women who are Patient and constant, for men
And women who humble themselves For men and women who give
In charity, for men and women Who fast (and deny themselves),
For men and women who Guard their chastity, and
For men and women who Engage much in God's praise,—
For them has God prepared Forgiveness and great reward.
According to the
Musnad Ahmad,
Umm Salamah RAA asked the Prophet SAW “I said: O Prophet of Allaah
how is it that we are not mentioned in
the Quran in the same manner as the men are mentioned?” She said: “Then, one
day, I suddenly heard the call of the Prophet
on the pulpit while I was combing my
hair, and I went near the door [of the room trying to hear what he says]
and I listened directly to the voice coming from the direction of the Jareed
(i.e. the part of the mosque which was thatched with the dried palm fronds,
where the Prophet
used to give Khutbah) and I heard him
saying: ''Allaah Says (what means): {
Indeed, the Muslim men and Muslim
women, the believing men and believing women, the obedient men and obedient
women, the truthful men and truthful women, the patient men and patient women,
the humble men and humble women, the charitable men and charitable women, the
fasting men and fasting women, the men who guard their private parts and the
women who do so, and the men who remember Allaah often and the women who do so
- for them Allaah has prepared forgiveness and a great reward.}[Quran
33:35]
a.
Khitaan and its Hukm
Given
this fundamental principle that the Shariah applies equally to all Muslims, men
and women, we must begin with an examination of the evidence from within the
hadith literature for khitaan, male circumcision, and its hukm. The hadith most
used to support the hukm of khitaan in Islam is a statement by Abu Hurairah RA.
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle said, "Five
practices are characteristics of the Fitra: circumcision,
shaving the pubic region, plucking the armpit hairs, clipping the nails and
cutting the moustaches short."
حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيٌّ،
حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، قَالَ الزُّهْرِيُّ حَدَّثَنَا عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ
الْمُسَيَّبِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، رِوَايَةً " الْفِطْرَةُ خَمْسٌ
ـ أَوْ خَمْسٌ مِنَ الْفِطْرَةِ ـ الْخِتَانُ، وَالاِسْتِحْدَادُ، وَنَتْفُ
الإِبْطِ، وَتَقْلِيمُ الأَظْفَارِ، وَقَصُّ الشَّارِبِ ".
Narrated Abu Huraira:
I heard the Prophet saying.
"Five practices are characteristics of the Fitra: circumcision, shaving
the pubic hair, cutting the moustaches short, clipping the nails, and
depilating the hair of the armpits."
حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ
يُونُسَ، حَدَّثَنَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ سَعْدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ شِهَابٍ، عَنْ
سَعِيدِ بْنِ الْمُسَيَّبِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ سَمِعْتُ
النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقُولُ " الْفِطْرَةُ خَمْسٌ
الْخِتَانُ، وَالاِسْتِحْدَادُ، وَقَصُّ الشَّارِبِ، وَتَقْلِيمُ الأَظْفَارِ،
وَنَتْفُ الآبَاطِ "
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said "Five
things are in accordance with Al Fitra (i.e. the tradition of prophets): to be circumcised, to shave
the pelvic region, to pull out the hair of the armpits, to cut short the
moustaches, and to clip the nails.'
حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى بْنُ
قُزَعَةَ، حَدَّثَنَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بْنُ سَعْدٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ شِهَابٍ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ
بْنِ الْمُسَيَّبِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلى
الله عليه وسلم قَالَ " الْفِطْرَةُ خَمْسٌ الْخِتَانُ، وَالاِسْتِحْدَادُ،
وَنَتْفُ الإِبْطِ، وَقَصُّ الشَّارِبِ، وَتَقْلِيمُ الأَظْفَارِ ".
Abu Huraira reported:
Five are the acts of fitra: circumcision, removing
the pubes, clipping the moustache, cutting the nails, plucking the hair under
the armpits.
حَدَّثَنِي أَبُو الطَّاهِرِ، وَحَرْمَلَةُ
بْنُ يَحْيَى، قَالاَ أَخْبَرَنَا ابْنُ وَهْبٍ، أَخْبَرَنِي يُونُسُ، عَنِ ابْنِ
شِهَابٍ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ الْمُسَيَّبِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، عَنْ رَسُولِ
اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم أَنَّهُ قَالَ " الْفِطْرَةُ خَمْسٌ
الاِخْتِتَانُ وَالاِسْتِحْدَادُ وَقَصُّ الشَّارِبِ وَتَقْلِيمُ الأَظْفَارِ
وَنَتْفُ الإِبْطِ "
Abu Huraira reported:
Five are the acts quite akin to
the Fitra, or five are the acts of Fitra: circumcision,
shaving the pubes, cutting the nails, plucking the hair under the armpits and
clipping the moustache.
حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ أَبِي
شَيْبَةَ، وَعَمْرٌو النَّاقِدُ، وَزُهَيْرُ بْنُ حَرْبٍ، جَمِيعًا عَنْ
سُفْيَانَ، - قَالَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ عُيَيْنَةَ، - عَنِ
الزُّهْرِيِّ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ الْمُسَيَّبِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، عَنِ
النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ " الْفِطْرَةُ خَمْسٌ
- أَوْ خَمْسٌ مِنَ الْفِطْرَةِ - الْخِتَانُ وَالاِسْتِحْدَادُ وَتَقْلِيمُ
الأَظْفَارِ وَنَتْفُ الإِبْطِ وَقَصُّ الشَّارِبِ " .
Narrated Abu Hurairah:
that the Messenger of Allah
(SAW) said: "Five are from the Fitrah: Cutting the pubic hair, circumcision, paring the
mustache, plucking the under arm hair and trimming the fingernails."
حَدَّثَنَا الْحَسَنُ بْنُ
عَلِيٍّ الْحُلْوَانِيُّ الْخَلاَّلُ، وَغَيْرُ، وَاحِدٍ، قَالُوا حَدَّثَنَا
عَبْدُ الرَّزَّاقِ، أَخْبَرَنَا مَعْمَرٌ، عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ
الْمُسَيَّبِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه
وسلم " خَمْسٌ مِنَ الْفِطْرَةِ الاِسْتِحْدَادُ وَالْخِتَانُ
وَقَصُّ الشَّارِبِ وَنَتْفُ الإِبْطِ وَتَقْلِيمُ الأَظْفَارِ "
. قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ صَحِيحٌ .
It was narrated that Abu
Hurairah said:
"Five things are of the
Fitrah: Clipping the nails, trimming the mustache, plucking the armpit hairs,
shaving the pubes, and circumcision."
(Sahih Mawquf)
أَخْبَرَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ،
عَنْ مَالِكٍ، عَنِ الْمَقْبُرِيِّ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ خَمْسٌ مِنَ
الْفِطْرَةِ تَقْلِيمُ الأَظْفَارِ وَقَصُّ الشَّارِبِ وَنَتْفُ الإِبْطِ وَحَلْقُ
الْعَانَةِ وَالْخِتَانُ .
It was narrated that Talq bin
Habib said:
"Ten things are from the
Sunnah: Using the Siwak, trimming the mustache, rinsing the mouth, rinsing the
nose, letting the beard grow, trimming the nails, plucking the armpit hairs, circumcision, shaving
the pubes and washing one's backside."
أَخْبَرَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ،
قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو عَوَانَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي بِشْرٍ، عَنْ طَلْقِ بْنِ حَبِيبٍ،
قَالَ عَشْرَةٌ مِنَ السُّنَّةِ السِّوَاكُ وَقَصُّ الشَّارِبِ وَالْمَضْمَضَةُ
وَالاِسْتِنْشَاقُ وَتَوْفِيرُ اللِّحْيَةِ وَقَصُّ الأَظْفَارِ وَنَتْفُ الإِبْطِ
وَالْخِتَانُ وَحَلْقُ الْعَانَةِ وَغَسْلُ الدُّبُرِ . قَالَ أَبُو عَبْدِ
الرَّحْمَنِ وَحَدِيثُ سُلَيْمَانَ التَّيْمِيِّ وَجَعْفَرِ بْنِ إِيَاسٍ أَشْبَهُ
بِالصَّوَابِ مِنْ حَدِيثِ مُصْعَبِ بْنِ شَيْبَةَ وَمُصْعَبٌ مُنْكَرُ الْحَدِيثِ
.
It was narrated from 'Ammar bin
Yasir that:
The Messenger of Allah said:
"Part of the Fitrah is rinsing out the mouth, rinsing out the nostrils,
using the tooth stick, trimming the mustache, clipping the nails, plucking the
armpit hairs, shaving the pubic hairs, washing the joints, washing the private
parts and circumcision.'"
(Da'if) Another chain with similar wording.
حَدَّثَنَا سَهْلُ بْنُ أَبِي سَهْلٍ،
وَمُحَمَّدُ بْنُ يَحْيَى، قَالاَ حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو الْوَلِيدِ، حَدَّثَنَا
حَمَّادٌ، عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ زَيْدٍ، عَنْ سَلَمَةَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَمَّارِ
بْنِ يَاسِرٍ، عَنْ عَمَّارِ بْنِ يَاسِرٍ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ـ صلى الله عليه
وسلم ـ قَالَ " مِنَ الْفِطْرَةِ الْمَضْمَضَةُ وَالاِسْتِنْشَاقُ
وَالسِّوَاكُ وَقَصُّ الشَّارِبِ وَتَقْلِيمُ الأَظْفَارِ وَنَتْفُ الإِبِطِ
وَالاِسْتِحْدَادُ وَغَسْلُ الْبَرَاجِمِ وَالاِنْتِضَاحُ وَالاِخْتِتَانُ " . حَدَّثَنَا جَعْفَرُ بْنُ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ عُمَرَ، حَدَّثَنَا
عَفَّانُ بْنُ مُسْلِمٍ، حَدَّثَنَا حَمَّادُ بْنُ سَلَمَةَ، عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ
زَيْدٍ، مِثْلَهُ
Narrated Ammar b. Yasir:
The Apostle of Allaah ( sal
Allaahu alayhi wa sallam ) said : The rinsing of mouth and snuffing up water in
the nose are acts that bear the characteristics of fitrah (nature). He then
narrated a similar tradition (as reported by Aishah), but he did not mention
the words "letting the beard grow". He added the words "circumcision"
and "sprinkling water on the private part of the body". He did not
mention the words "cleansing oneself after easing". Abu Dawud said :
A similar tradition has been reported on the authority of Ibn 'Abbas. He
mentioned only five sunnahs all relating to the head, one of them being parting
of the hair; it did not include wearing the beard. Abu Dawud said: The
tradition as reported by Hammad has also been transmitted by Talq b. Habib ,
Mujahid, and Bakr b. 'Abd Allaah b. al-Muzani as their own statement ( not as a
tradition from the Prophet, sal Allaahu alayhi wa sallam ).They did not mention
the words "letting the beard grow". The version transmitted by
Muhammad b. Abd Allaah b. Abi Maryam, Abu Salamah, and Abu Hurairah from the
Prophet ( sal Allaahu alayhi wa sallam ) mentions the words "letting the
beard grow". A similar tradition has been reported by Ibrahim al-Nakha'i.
He mentioned the words "wearing the beard and circumcision."
حَدَّثَنَا مُوسَى بْنُ
إِسْمَاعِيلَ، وَدَاوُدُ بْنُ شَبِيبٍ، قَالاَ حَدَّثَنَا حَمَّادٌ، عَنْ عَلِيِّ
بْنِ زَيْدٍ، عَنْ سَلَمَةَ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَمَّارِ بْنِ يَاسِرٍ، قَالَ
مُوسَى عَنْ أَبِيهِ، - وَقَالَ دَاوُدُ عَنْ عَمَّارِ بْنِ يَاسِرٍ، - أَنَّ رَسُولَ
اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ " إِنَّ مِنَ الْفِطْرَةِ الْمَضْمَضَةَ
وَالاِسْتِنْشَاقَ " . فَذَكَرَ نَحْوَهُ وَلَمْ يَذْكُرْ إِعْفَاءَ
اللِّحْيَةِ وَزَادَ " وَالْخِتَانَ " . قَالَ "
وَالاِنْتِضَاحَ " . وَلَمْ يَذْكُرِ " انْتِقَاصَ الْمَاءِ
" . يَعْنِي الاِسْتِنْجَاءَ . قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ وَرُوِيَ نَحْوُهُ
عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ وَقَالَ خَمْسٌ كُلُّهَا فِي الرَّأْسِ وَذَكَرَ فِيهَا
الْفَرْقَ وَلَمْ يَذْكُرْ إِعْفَاءَ اللِّحْيَةِ . قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ
وَرُوِيَ نَحْوُ حَدِيثِ حَمَّادٍ عَنْ طَلْقِ بْنِ حَبِيبٍ وَمُجَاهِدٍ وَعَنْ
بَكْرِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْمُزَنِيِّ قَوْلُهُمْ وَلَمْ يَذْكُرُوا إِعْفَاءَ
اللِّحْيَةِ . وَفِي حَدِيثِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ أَبِي مَرْيَمَ
عَنْ أَبِي سَلَمَةَ عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم
فِيهِ وَإِعْفَاءُ اللِّحْيَةِ وَعَنْ إِبْرَاهِيمَ النَّخَعِيِّ نَحْوُهُ
وَذَكَرَ إِعْفَاءَ اللِّحْيَةِ وَالْخِتَانَ .
In examining this line of ahadith,
we must note that there are variants of the hadith from Abu Hurairah that do
not mention khitaan. For example:
Sahih Bukhaari, Book of Dress
Narrated Ibn Umar: Allah’s Messenger (SAW) said, “To shave
the pubic hair, the cut the nails, to clip the moustaches short, are
characteristics of the fitrah.”
Moreover, the last hadith narrated
by Ammar ibn Yassir, shows the degree of variability in similar hadith on the
fitrah. However, given the abundance of
ahadith referring to khitaan,
there is no doubt that khitaan is an Islamic practice. Moreover, the hadith evidence points to a
hukm sharii of at least mustahabb or mandub, therefore, not just permissible,
but preferred and rewardable. Of the
traditional madhdhaab, the Hanafi and Maliki schools consider khitaan to be
Sunnah Mu’akkadah, while the Shafi and Hanbali schools consider it fard.
Certainly, under Jewish law, a
prior revelation, circumcision of men is obligatory. In Usuul Al Fiqh, prior law can be persuasive
evidence, provided it is confirmed by either the Qur’an or the Sunnah. Several versions of a hadith narrated by Abu
Hurairah recount:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle said "The
Prophet Abraham circumcised himself after he had passed the age of
eighty years and he circumcised
himself with an adze."
حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو
الْيَمَانِ، أَخْبَرَنَا شُعَيْبُ بْنُ أَبِي حَمْزَةَ، حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو
الزِّنَادِ، عَنِ الأَعْرَجِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى
الله عليه وسلم قَالَ " اخْتَتَنَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ بَعْدَ ثَمَانِينَ سَنَةً،
وَاخْتَتَنَ بِالْقَدُومِ ". مُخَفَّفَةً. حَدَّثَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ
حَدَّثَنَا الْمُغِيرَةُ عَنْ أَبِي الزِّنَادِ وَقَالَ
"بِالْقَدُّومِ" وَهُوَ مَوْضِعٌ مُشَدَّدٌ
Therefore, an argument could be
made that in regards to khitaan for men, the hukm under Jewish Halaqa law
remains and that khitaan is fard.
However, hadith conflict regarding
whether the Prophet SAW required new converts to circumcise.
'Uthaim b. Kulaib reported from
his father (Kuthair) on the authority of his grandfather (Kulaib) that he came
to the Prophet (saws):
I have embraced Islam. The
Prophet (saws) said to him: Remove from yourself the hair that grew during of
unbelief, saying "shave them". He further says that another person
(other than the grandfather of 'Uthaim) reported to him that the Prophet (saws)
said to another person who accompanied him: Remove from yourself the hair that
grew during the period of unbelief and get yourself circumcised.
حَدَّثَنَا مَخْلَدُ بْنُ
خَالِدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الرَّزَّاقِ، أَخْبَرَنَا ابْنُ جُرَيْجٍ، قَالَ
أُخْبِرْتُ عَنْ عُثَيْمِ بْنِ كُلَيْبٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ جَدِّهِ، أَنَّهُ
جَاءَ إِلَى النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقَالَ قَدْ أَسْلَمْتُ . فَقَالَ لَهُ
النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم " أَلْقِ عَنْكَ شَعْرَ الْكُفْرِ "
. يَقُولُ احْلِقْ . قَالَ وَأَخْبَرَنِي آخَرُ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله
عليه وسلم قَالَ لآخَرَ مَعَهُ " أَلْقِ عَنْكَ شَعْرَ الْكُفْرِ
وَاخْتَتِنْ " .
It is reported that al-Hasan
said, "Are you not astonished by this man? (i.e. Malik ibn al-Mundhir) He
went to some of the old people of Kaskar who had become Muslim and examined
them and then commanded that they be circumcised although it was winter. I heard that
some of them died. Greeks and Abyssinians became Muslim with the Messenger of
Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and they were not examined at
all."
حَدَّثَنَا
مُحَمَّدٌ، قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنَا عَبْدُ اللهِ، قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنَا مُعْتَمِرٌ
قَالَ: حَدَّثَنِي سَالِمُ بْنُ أَبِي الذَّيَّالِ، وَكَانَ صَاحِبَ حَدِيثٍ،
قَالَ: سَمِعْتُ الْحَسَنَ يَقُولُ: أَمَا تَعْجَبُونَ لِهَذَا؟ يَعْنِي:
مَالِكَ بْنَ الْمُنْذِرِ عَمَدَ إِلَى شُيُوخٍ مِنْ أَهْلِ كَسْكَرَ أَسْلَمُوا،
فَفَتَّشَهُمْ فَأَمَرَ بِهِمْ فَخُتِنُوا، وَهَذَا الشِّتَاءُ، فَبَلَغَنِي أَنَّ
بَعْضَهُمْ مَاتَ، وَلَقَدْ أَسْلَمَ مَعَ رَسُولِ اللهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم
الرُّومِيُّ وَالْحَبَشِيُّ فَمَا فُتِّشُوا عَنْ شَيْءٍ.
Alone, this evidence is not dispositive. Neither of these accounts is found in Sahih
collections. The first one narrated from
the grandfather of “Uthaim ibn Kulaib has a hidden defect. The part mentioning khitaan is related by an
unknown individual, rendering it broken and unusable for fiqh under our minhaj. The second one narrated by al-Hasan, a
Sahaba, is stronger, but Imam Bukhaari did not include it in his Sahih,
so we can assume he felt it has some defect.
The opinions of Abu Hanifa and Imam
Malik seem to conform to a view that the Prophet SAW used the term “fitrah to
indicate the Sunnah. Certainly, the hadith of Talq ibn Habib supports this
view.
So, what is the hukm sharii of
khitaan, male circumcision? Certainly,
the hadith of Abu Hurairah does not support a hukm beyond mustahabb or mandub. Referring to the five practices as “fitrah”
does not mean they are fard. There is no
evidence that refraining from shaving the arm pits, cutting the nails, shaving
the public hair and trimming the moustache is sinful and would incur
punishment.
It should also be noted that
khitaan was a common practice among the Arabs at the time of Prophet SAW. In rather lengthy hadith in Sahih Bukhaari’s
Book of Revelation narrated by Abdullah Ibn Abbas, a sub-narrator notes that
Ibn An-Natur, the governor of Ilya (Jerusalem)
narrated that Heraclius, the Byzantine Emperor, asked about a dream he had that
the leader of those who circumcise would become a conqueror. He was told that the Jews circumcised. He then asked about the Arabs, and was told
that they also practiced circumcision. While this hadith is weak at best, being
related by a sub-narrator, without proper isnad, it does show some indication
that male circumcision was an existing pre-Islamic practice, potentially
carried over from Arab descent from the son of Ibrahim (AS), Ismail (AS). And, it is known that the children of Muslims
were circumcised.
Narrated Said bin Jubair:
Ibn 'Abbas was asked, "How
old were you when the Prophet died?" He replied. "At that time I had
been circumcised."
At that time, people did not circumcise the boys till they attained the age of
puberty. Sa'id bin Jubair said, "Ibn 'Abbas said, 'When the Prophet died,
I had already been circumcised.
"
حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ
عَبْدِ الرَّحِيمِ، أَخْبَرَنَا عَبَّادُ بْنُ مُوسَى، حَدَّثَنَا إِسْمَاعِيلُ
بْنُ جَعْفَرٍ، عَنْ إِسْرَائِيلَ، عَنْ أَبِي إِسْحَاقَ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ
جُبَيْرٍ، قَالَ سُئِلَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ مِثْلُ مَنْ أَنْتَ حِينَ قُبِضَ
النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ أَنَا يَوْمَئِذٍ مَخْتُونٌ. قَالَ
وَكَانُوا لاَ يَخْتِنُونَ الرَّجُلَ حَتَّى يُدْرِكَ.
Salim said, "Ibn 'Umar,
Nu'aym and I were circumcised and they sacrificed a ram on our
behalf. I think that we were more happy about it than the other children since
a ram had been sacrificed on our behalf."
These two hadith seem to indicate a
continuation of the pre-Islamic Arab practice, where the boy was circumcised
around the age of puberty. Only weak
hadith indicate that Al-Hasan and Al-Hussein were circumcised on the 7th
day after birth, as is the custom among many Muslims today. So, we could suppose that the early Muslim
never questioned whether or not it should be performed. It was more or less automatic in the culture.
Therefore, none of these reports
provides definitive support that khitaan is fard. While circumcision of Muslim children might
be viewed as indicative of its obligation, this fact could stem from a preference
for circumcision among Arabs in general.
While aathar provide persuasive
evidence that the early scholars held that khitaan was fard, these too are not
dispositive.
Ibn Shihab said, "When a
man became Muslim, he was ordered to have himself circumcised, even if he
was old."
Although this report is not a hadith, but is an aathar or
report of a saying by a Sahabi, Tabi’in or scholar, it does provide evidence
that at the time of Umar Ibn Abdulaziz, the Muslims held that a convert was
required to circumcise. Moreover, it is
recorded that Ali ibn Abi Talib (RAA) also made a similar statement to the
effect that, “If a man becomes a Muslim, he must submit to circumcision, even
if he is 80 years old.”
The
Shia Ulema hold that a person may not make hajj until he is circumcised.
Given this evidence, one has to ask whether these aathar and
daif hadith are persuasive enough or reliable enough to support a hukm sharii
beyond mustahabb.
b. Hukm Sharii of
Khitaan for Males
Therefore, given the totality of
the evidence, the hukm sharii of khitaan for males is mustahabb or mandub. The Islamic hukm of khitaan is based on the
revelation sent to Ibrahim, and its affirmation in the Sunnah revealed to the
Prophet Muhammad (SAW). However, the most sahih report, the report of Abu
Hurairah, indicates that the hukm sharii applied under Jewish Halaqa law, that
of fard, has been abrogated and replaced by the hukm of mustahabb or
mandub. This is supported by the
earliest madhdhaahib, that of Abu Hanifa and Imam Malik, who hold that khitaan
is Sunnah Mu’akkadah. The aathar of Ibn Shihab, Ali ibn Abi Talib and others
were recorded far later and may be questionable. Earlier narrations regarding
the obligation of converts to circumcise also have issues, although the hadith
of Al-Hasan, holding that the practice is not obligatory, is stronger. Finally,
the opinion of Imam Malik holding that khitaan is Sunnah Mu’akkadah carries
great weight due to being the prevailing opinion of the Ahl al-Madina.
However, it should be noted that
the opinion that khitaan is fard is quite reasonable given the same
evidence. For this reason, ikhtilaf on
the issue of the hukm of khitaan, or male circumcision, is permissible. Allah Ta’ala Alaa.
c. Under the
Hadith of Abu Hurairah, Does Khitaan Apply to Females?
Proponents of female circumcision
have argued that the hadith of Abu Hurairah mentioned above applies equally to
women. We noted above the Qur’anic verse
supporting equal application of the Shariah law to women. Therefore, it is a well settled principle in
Islam that the commands and prohibitions of this Deen apply equally to men and
women unless otherwise indicated.
Clearly there are cases where this
equality can only be stretched so far. Men
do not menstruate or bear children. Men
are not required to wait for three quru’ before remarriage and are not required
to wait four months after the death of a husband to remarry. They do not have to wait to reveal what is in
their wombs.
Let us review the hadith of Abu
Hurairah in light of these considerations:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle said, "Five
practices are characteristics of the Fitra: circumcision,
shaving the pubic region, plucking the armpit hairs, clipping the nails and
cutting the moustaches short."
حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيٌّ،
حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، قَالَ الزُّهْرِيُّ حَدَّثَنَا عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ
الْمُسَيَّبِ، عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، رِوَايَةً " الْفِطْرَةُ خَمْسٌ
ـ أَوْ خَمْسٌ مِنَ الْفِطْرَةِ ـ الْخِتَانُ، وَالاِسْتِحْدَادُ، وَنَتْفُ
الإِبْطِ، وَتَقْلِيمُ الأَظْفَارِ، وَقَصُّ الشَّارِبِ ".
Many have noted that shaving the
pubic region, plucking the arm pit hairs and clipping the nails applies to
everyone, men and women. However, women
do not have moustaches. The same can be
said of beards, which many hold it is haram to cut.
The fact that some of the five fitrah may apply to men and women does not
necessitate that all of them apply.
Moreover, as we have seen, not all reports of this hadith include khitaan.
Therefore,
taken alone, this hadith and its related reports do not constitute sufficient
evidence to support the proposition that khifaadh or female circumcision is an
Islamic practice.
- The Hadith of Ayesha RAA: al-Khitaanu al-Khitaana
Imam Malik relates
in his al-Muwatta, the following:
Yahya related to me from Malik
from Ibn Shihab from Said ibn al- Musayyab that Umar ibn al-Khattab and Uthman
ibn Affan and A'isha, the wife of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant
him peace, used to say, "When the circumcised part touches the circumcised part, ghusl is obligatory."
حَدَّثَنِي يَحْيَى، عَنْ
مَالِكٍ، عَنِ ابْنِ شِهَابٍ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ الْمُسَيَّبِ، أَنَّ عُمَرَ بْنَ
الْخَطَّابِ، وَعُثْمَانَ بْنَ عَفَّانَ، وَعَائِشَةَ، زَوْجَ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله
عليه وسلم كَانُوا يَقُولُونَ إِذَا مَسَّ الْخِتَانُ الْخِتَانَ فَقَدْ وَجَبَ
الْغُسْلُ .
This hadith is also related by Imam
Malik through the Golden Isnad:
Yahya related to me from Malik
from Nafi that Abdullah ibn Umar used to say, "When the circumcised part passes the circumcised part, ghusl
is obligatory."
وَحَدَّثَنِي عَنْ مَالِكٍ،
عَنْ نَافِعٍ، أَنَّ عَبْدَ اللَّهِ بْنَ عُمَرَ، كَانَ يَقُولُ إِذَا جَاوَزَ
الْخِتَانُ الْخِتَانَ فَقَدْ وَجَبَ الْغُسْلُ
Imam
Muslim also relates in his Sahih:
Abu Musa reported:
There cropped up a difference of
opinion between a group of Muhajirs (Emigrants and a group of Ansar (Helpers)
(and the point of dispute was) that the Ansar said: The bath (because of sexual
intercourse) becomes obligatory only-when the semen spurts out or ejaculates.
But the Muhajirs said: When a man has sexual intercourse (with the woman), a
bath becomes obligatory (no matter whether or not there is seminal emission or
ejaculation). Abu Musa said: Well, I satisfy you on this (issue). He (Abu Musa,
the narrator) said: I got up (and went) to 'A'isha and sought her permission
and it was granted, and I said to her: 0 Mother, or Mother of the Faithful, I
want to ask you about a matter on which I feel shy. She said: Don't feel shy of
asking me about a thing which you can ask your mother, who gave you birth, for
I am too your mother. Upon this I said: What makes a bath obligatory for a
person? She replied: You have come across one well informed! The Messenger of
Allah (may peace be upon him) said: When anyone sits amidst four parts (of the
woman) and the circumcised parts touch each other a bath becomes
obligatory.
وَحَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ
بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى، حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الأَنْصَارِيُّ،
حَدَّثَنَا هِشَامُ بْنُ حَسَّانَ، حَدَّثَنَا حُمَيْدُ بْنُ هِلاَلٍ، عَنْ أَبِي
بُرْدَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي مُوسَى الأَشْعَرِيِّ، ح وَحَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ
الْمُثَنَّى، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الأَعْلَى، - وَهَذَا حَدِيثُهُ - حَدَّثَنَا
هِشَامٌ، عَنْ حُمَيْدِ بْنِ هِلاَلٍ، قَالَ - وَلاَ أَعْلَمُهُ إِلاَّ عَنْ أَبِي
بُرْدَةَ، - عَنْ أَبِي مُوسَى، قَالَ اخْتَلَفَ فِي ذَلِكَ رَهْطٌ مِنَ
الْمُهَاجِرِينَ وَالأَنْصَارِ فَقَالَ الأَنْصَارِيُّونَ لاَ يَجِبُ الْغُسْلُ
إِلاَّ مِنَ الدَّفْقِ أَوْ مِنَ الْمَاءِ . وَقَالَ الْمُهَاجِرُونَ بَلْ إِذَا
خَالَطَ فَقَدْ وَجَبَ الْغُسْلُ . قَالَ قَالَ أَبُو مُوسَى فَأَنَا
أَشْفِيكُمْ مِنْ ذَلِكَ . فَقُمْتُ فَاسْتَأْذَنْتُ عَلَى عَائِشَةَ فَأُذِنَ
لِي فَقُلْتُ لَهَا يَا أُمَّاهْ - أَوْ يَا أُمَّ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ - إِنِّي
أُرِيدُ أَنْ أَسْأَلَكِ عَنْ شَىْءٍ وَإِنِّي أَسْتَحْيِيكِ . فَقَالَتْ لاَ
تَسْتَحْيِي أَنْ تَسْأَلَنِي عَمَّا كُنْتَ سَائِلاً عَنْهُ أُمَّكَ الَّتِي
وَلَدَتْكَ فَإِنَّمَا أَنَا أُمُّكَ . قُلْتُ فَمَا يُوجِبُ الْغُسْلَ قَالَتْ
عَلَى الْخَبِيرِ سَقَطْتَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم " إِذَا جَلَسَ
بَيْنَ شُعَبِهَا الأَرْبَعِ وَمَسَّ الْخِتَانُ الْخِتَانَ فَقَدْ وَجَبَ
الْغُسْلُ " .
While
I have no doubt that this hadith is sahih according to Imam Muslim and was
accepted by Imam Malik, and therefore that it meets the criteria I have set
forth in our minhaj for a sahih hadith, valid for the purposes of deriving
fiqh, I have serious issues with the interpretation and subsequent translation
of this narration. Just because a
hadith is sahih does not mean that the interpretation is sahih.
The
term “khitaan” in this hadith has been interpreted and translated to mean “the
two circumcised parts.” In nawh, khitaan
is not a dual form. The dual of khitn or
khitaan would be khitaanaan or khitaanain.
So the literal meaning of this term is not the “two circumcised
parts.”
Therefore,
the apparent dhahiri meaning of khitaan in this hadith is singular, not
dual. And according to Lane’s Lexicon,
the term khitaan is defined in relation to the ayat of the Qur’an referring to ghusl
following intercourse.
Allah SWT says in the Qur’an:
4:43 "O you who believe! Approach
not As-Salat (the prayer) when you are in a drunken state
until you know (the meaning) of what you utter, nor when you are in a state
of Janaba, (i.e. in a state of sexual impurity and have
not yet taken a bath) except when travelling on the road (without enough water,
or just passing through a mosque), till you wash your whole body. And if
you are ill, or on a journey, or one of you comes after answering the call of
nature, or you have been in contact with women (by sexual relations) and you
find no water, perform Tayammum with clean earth and rub
therewith your faces and hands (Tayammum) . Truly,
Allah is Ever Oft-Pardoning, Oft-Forgiving.
In
his Lexicon, Lane defines the term khitaan as referring not only to
circumcision but also specifically to that part of the penis from where the
foreskin attaches or was attached just below the glans, up to the tip of the
glans. So in terms of the interpretation
of hadith of Ayesha RAA, Lane posits that it means that when the part of the
penis from the foreskin attachment line to the tip penetrates into the vagina,
then the person is in intercourse and must make ghusl. Anything short of this degree of penetration
does not incur ghusl.
This
is supported by a variant of the hadith found in The Muwatta of Imam
Malik.
Yahya related to
me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said from Said ibn al-Musayyab that Abu Musa
al-Ashari came to A'isha, the wife of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and
grant him peace, and said to her, "The disagreement of the companions in a
matter which I hate to bring before you has distressed me." She said,
"What is that? You did not ask your mother about it, so ask me." He
said, "A man penetrates his wife, but becomes listless and does not
ejaculate. "She said, "When the khitaan
part passes or penetrates, ghusl is obligatory." Abu Musa added, "I shall never
ask anyone about this after you."
وَحَدَّثَنِي
عَنْ مَالِكٍ، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ سَعِيدٍ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ الْمُسَيَّبِ، أَنَّ
أَبَا مُوسَى الأَشْعَرِيَّ، أَتَى عَائِشَةَ زَوْجَ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه
وسلم فَقَالَ لَهَا لَقَدْ شَقَّ عَلَىَّ اخْتِلاَفُ أَصْحَابِ النَّبِيِّ صلى
الله عليه وسلم فِي أَمْرٍ إِنِّي لأُعْظِمُ أَنْ أَسْتَقْبِلَكِ بِهِ .
فَقَالَتْ مَا هُوَ مَا كُنْتَ سَائِلاً عَنْهُ أُمَّكَ فَسَلْنِي عَنْهُ .
فَقَالَ الرَّجُلُ يُصِيبُ أَهْلَهُ ثُمَّ يُكْسِلُ وَلاَ يُنْزِلُ فَقَالَتْ
إِذَا جَاوَزَ الْخِتَانُ الْخِتَانَ فَقَدْ وَجَبَ الْغُسْلُ . فَقَالَ أَبُو
مُوسَى الأَشْعَرِيُّ لاَ أَسْأَلُ عَنْ هَذَا أَحَدًا بَعْدَكِ أَبَدًا .
Therefore,
the hadith of Ayesha has been incorrectly interpreted to mean “when the two
circumcised parts touch,” thereby indicating that a female can be circumcised
or that female circumcision is mubah.
Instead, it is more correctly interpreted to mean, “when the part of the
penis from the tip of the glans to the raised scar line where the foreskin was
attached penetrates into the vagina, it then becomes incumbent upon both
partners to make ghusl.”
In
short, this hadith of Ayesha RAA does not provide evidence of any hukm for
khifaadh. Although it could be used
tangentially to support khitaan in males, it has no bearing on female
circumcision.
3. Umm Atiyyah
While
proponents of khifaadh have relied upon both of the hadith above, it is upon
the narrations surrounding the practice of a female circumcisor in Madina upon
which the greatest weight has been placed.
I feel this reliance has been greatly misplaced.
The narration in Sunan Abu Dawud reads:
Narrated Umm Atiyyah
al-Ansariyyah:
A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (saws) said to
her: Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a
husband. Abu Dawud said: It has been transmitted by 'Ubaid Allah b. 'Amr from
'Abd al-Malik to the same effect through a different chain. Abu Dawud said: It
is not a strong tradition. It has been transmitted in mursal form (missing the
link of the Companions) Abu Dawud said: Muhammad b. Hasan is obscure, and this
tradition is weak.
حَدَّثَنَا سُلَيْمَانُ
بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ الدِّمَشْقِيُّ، وَعَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ بْنُ عَبْدِ
الرَّحِيمِ الأَشْجَعِيُّ، قَالاَ حَدَّثَنَا مَرْوَانُ، حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ
بْنُ حَسَّانَ، - قَالَ عَبْدُ الْوَهَّابِ الْكُوفِيُّ - عَنْ عَبْدِ الْمَلِكِ
بْنِ عُمَيْرٍ، عَنْ أُمِّ عَطِيَّةَ الأَنْصَارِيَّةِ، أَنَّ امْرَأَةً، كَانَتْ
تَخْتِنُ بِالْمَدِينَةِ فَقَالَ لَهَا النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم " لاَ تُنْهِكِي
فَإِنَّ ذَلِكَ أَحْظَى لِلْمَرْأَةِ وَأَحَبُّ إِلَى الْبَعْلِ "
. قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ رُوِيَ عَنْ عُبَيْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عَمْرٍو عَنْ عَبْدِ
الْمَلِكِ بِمَعْنَاهُ وَإِسْنَادِهِ . قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ لَيْسَ هُوَ
بِالْقَوِيِّ وَقَدْ رُوِيَ مُرْسَلاً . قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُدَ وَمُحَمَّدُ بْنُ
حَسَّانَ مَجْهُولٌ وَهَذَا الْحَدِيثُ ضَعِيفٌ .
Abu Dawud’s Sunan is an
important collection of hadith in that he collected ahadith that were being
used by scholars of his day in support of their dalil of fiqh. So the presence of this hadith in his Sunan
tells us scholars were using it in their dalil. However, we noted that Abu Dawud did not feel
this was a strong tradition in that it had been related in mursal form. It does
not specify that Umm Atiyyah actually heard the Prophet speak to the anonymous
woman who performed this practice. The verb used in relation to Umm Atiyyah is
“’an” not “haddathna” or some other indicator of direct hearing. However,
Sheikh Albani found this particular hadith to be sahih under his
criterion. As we have noted above, this
criterion, using Ilm Al-Rijal alone is not valid. Under our minhaj, I will not
accept a chain that has a broken link or one with such a weak relation. It is
simply too dangerous to accept such a hadith for the purposes of fiqh. Fiqh is not a joke. If it is haram to subscribe words falsely to
our Prophet SAW, how much more so to do so to Allah SWT. In fact Allah SWT says so.
Allah SWT says in the Qur’an al-Hakim:
6:144. Of
camels a pair, And of oxen a pair;
Say, hath He forbidden The two males,
Or the two females, Or (the young) which the wombs
Of the two females enclose?— Were ye present when God
Ordered you such a thing? But who doth more wrong
Than one who invents A lie against God,
To lead astray men Without knowledge?
For God guideth not People who do wrong
Some have
cited a version of this hadith found in al-Hakim’s al-Mustadrak which
they hold to be sahih. First, I have to
ask under what criteria has this hadith been found to be sahih? No uniform criterion exists for a sahih
hadith. The criterion for sahih used by
al-Hakim has been criticized by some scholars. While some of his sahih hadith
are also found in the Sahihs of al-Bukhaari and Muslim, and so conform
to their criteria, some were adjudged by his own ijtehad. Ibn Hajar
al-Asqalani, Imam Nawawi and al-Dhahabi found his criteria for sahih to be too
lenient. Moreover, this hadith is not
found in earlier collections. The
earliest is Abu Dawud and he finds the hadith to be da’if.
As we noted
above, one of the defects with this hadith of Umm Atiyyah is that it is found
in mursal form. However, some have cited
a hadith of Umm Habeebah, a circumciser of female slaves.
When the Prophet SAW asked her if she was currently
practicing female circumcision, she replied, "Unless it is forbidden and
you order me to stop doing it." It is reported that the Prophet (peace and
blessings be upon him) said to a midwife: "Reduce the size of the clitoris
but do not exceed the limit, for that is better for her health and is preferred
by husbands". This passage has come to be known as "the exciser's
narration." So, unlike the hadith of Umm Atiyyah, this hadith apparently
comes directly from person to whom the Prophet SAW spoke about the issue. While
this hadith presents the appearance of a complete chain supporting the
permissibility of female cutting of some form, the fact that it is not found in
the early collections raises concerns.
Imam al-Qaradawi does not find it to be sahih.
Even if we accept this hadith as
evidence based on its isnad, we must also look to the matin. What does this hadith say? Umm Atiyyah’s
hadith begins, “La tunhiki” “Do not
cut.” It then goes on to say that is
“ahdha” for women and beloved by men.
The “la” indicates dislike or a preference that the thing not be
done. The Prophet then states that it is
best, not just better, but the superlative best (ahdha), for women in terms of
their health and wellbeing. And, it is
best for the happiness of the husband.
Why? Many men derive the most
pleasure from their ability to satisfy their wives. If their wife is experiencing pleasure, they
will too. Under Shariah Law, the wife
has a right to sexual satisfaction, as does the husband. These practices deprive both partners of that
right.
Some scholars have held that the
“la” is crucial, and indicative of a gradual trend toward total prohibition,
much like the prohibition of alcohol and the dislike and trend toward
abolishment of slavery in Islam. These
scholars posit that “la tunhiki” means that the Prophet SAW was moving toward
abolishing this practice entirely. The
next part of the hadith substantiate this in that, just as with the ayaat of
the Qur’an mentioning the detriments of drinking alcohol, the Prophet gives the
‘illa or reason for preferring that she not cut.
It is important to note that while
the hadith of Umm Habibah does not have the language of “la tunhiki,” it still
advises her not to cut excessively so as not to harm the woman and to allow of
the pleasure of the man. Clearly, the
purport of this hadith of Umm Habeebah is the same as that of Umm Atiyyah, that
the preference is to forego cutting, but if it is done, one must consider the
pleasure of both the man and the woman.
Even if it does not contain the “la”, it still supports a gradual trend
toward ending the practice.
Finally, I find this hadith regarding
the female circumcisor and her practice to be insuffiently strong enough to
overcome the Quranic prohibition against mutilation or permanent modification
of the human bidy. I do not feel it is
binding evidence for the purposes of fiqh.
However, even when considered as persuasive evidence, I would agree with
those scholars who posit that the hadith indicates a move toward abolishing the
practice and that if that process was not completed before the death of
Rasulallah SAW, then the practice would be makruh.
- If Khifaadh was Mubah, Where is the Expected
Evidence?
One of the principles of this
minhaj is that we do not accept ahad hadith where the where the practice or
saying occurred in public and should have been recorded by many. Khifaadh is
not a public event, but certainly the wives of the Prophet, the Mothers of the
Believes would be expected to be aware of this practice or to have had it
performed. Where are the hadith from Ayesha, the wife of our Prophet SAW, who
was young enough to have been born around the time of her father’s
conversion? Where are the hadith from
sisters who converted to Islam recounting how they were circumcised after
Islam? And perhaps, most tellingly,
where is the hadith that the Prophet had his beloved daughter, Fatimah,
circumcised?
The proponents of khifaadh rely
upon a hadith related by Imam Jaafar al-Sadiq, from the Prophet SAW that
khitaan is law (i.e. Fard) for men and mukramah is for women. This hadith comes in various forms indicating
different things. In one form, it could
be interpreted to mean that khitaan is for men, and if some one wonders if under
the principle of equality of men and women under Shariah, what is for women,
then being honorable is for women. In
other words, the corresponding act for women is to act honorably and guard
their chastity.
However, some forms of this hadith
lead to another impression. In a version
related by Imam Jaafar al-Sadiq, the hadith would seem to be saying that
khitaan is for fard for men and “makrumah” for women, i.e. honorable. The difficultly with this interpretation is
that “makrumah” is not a hukm sharii. At
most, this hadith would indicate that khitaan is fard for men, and perhaps
permissible or mubah for women. It is
possible this could be stretched to mustahhabb or mandub given some forms of
the hadith. However, it appears that
some of the shuyuk of Al-Azhar have used this hadith or a variant to support
the opinion that khifaadh is mukaramah or pleasing to Allah SWT. Again, mukaramah is not a hukm sharii.
But, what about the missing hadith,
the missing evidence? If khifaadh was
mustahabb, why did not Fatimah, the most mukramah of women, have it done? Why didn’t her father have it performed on
her? It was a pre-Islamic practice. Where are ahadith recording any wife of
Prophet SAW or daughter having this done?
Where was Umm Habeebah when Zainab, Ruqayyah, Umm Kulthum and Fatimah
were born? And what about Ayesha, Hafsa,
even Khadijah RAA? Were they
dishonorable women? (Istaghfirullah)
What about the hadith recorded by
Shia? Where are the hadith in Al-Kafi
recording Fatimah’s khifaadh? Or the
khifaadh of Ali’s daughter, Zainab? The only so-called Shia group practicing
this khifaadh are the South Asian Ismaili
Dawoodi Bohras. In fact, two medical practitioners have been
indicted under the Federal anti-FGM statute for performing forms of female
genital modification on minor Ismaili Bohra girls in
Michigan.
In fact, the only hadith I could
find mentioning this practice in regard to one of the Mothers of the Believers
is the following rather dubious account:
Umm 'Alqama
related that when the daughters of 'A'isha's brother were circumcised, 'A'isha was
asked, "Shall we call someone to amuse them?" "Yes," she
replied. 'Adi was sent for and he came to them. 'A'isha passed by the room and
saw him singing and shaking his head in rapture - and he had a large head of
hair. 'Uff!' she exclaimed, 'A shaytan! Get him out! Get him out!'"
حَدَّثَنَا
أَصْبَغُ قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنِي ابْنُ وَهْبٍ قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنِي عَمْرٌو، أَنَّ
بُكَيْرًا حَدَّثَهُ، أَنَّ أُمَّ عَلْقَمَةَ أَخْبَرَتْهُ، أَنَّ بَنَاتَ أَخِي
عَائِشَةَ اخْتُتِنَّ، فَقِيلَ لِعَائِشَةَ: أَلاَ نَدْعُو لَهُنَّ مَنْ
يُلْهِيهِنَّ؟ قَالَتْ: بَلَى. فَأَرْسَلْتُ إِلَى عَدِيٍّ فَأَتَاهُنَّ،
فَمَرَّتْ عَائِشَةُ فِي الْبَيْتِ فَرَأَتْهُ يَتَغَنَّى وَيُحَرِّكُ رَأْسَهُ
طَرَبًا، وَكَانَ ذَا شَعْرٍ كَثِيرٍ، فَقَالَتْ: أُفٍّ، شَيْطَانٌ،
أَخْرِجُوهُ، أَخْرِجُوهُ.
This hadith is recorded by Imam
Bukhaari in his non-Sahih work, al-Adab al-Mufrad, indicating that Bukhaari
did not consider it sahih. Moreover, the
hadith mentions all manner of haram practices, including hiring some form of
kahin to perform for the girls. I feel
this hadith is far too questionable to be even considered as evidence.
However, the purport of this hadith
may be considered with a hadith in Sahih al-Bukhaari, narrating that
Washi recounted that “Hamza bin `Abdul Muttalib
came out during the Battle of Uhud, and said to a man who challenged him, 'O
Siba'. O Ibn Um Anmar, the one who circumcises other ladies! Do you challenge Allah
and His Apostle?' Then Hamza attacked and killed him, causing him to be
non-extant like the bygone yesterday.”
Given
this line of evidence, I would say that the most we can surmise is that calling
someone a female circumciser or even the son of a female circumciser was an
insult, and that such practices were viewed with scorn by the early community.
In sum, given the lack of expected
evidence for a practice considered to be “makrumah” or “mukaramah and the lack
of any other unquestionable evidence indicating the Prophetic Sunnah, I cannot
support any finding that khifaadh is mubah, much less that it carries the hukm
sharii of mustahabb. If anything, the
only argument that can be made on the basis of the evidence is that it is
makruh. However, the ahadith supporting
a hukm of makruh are not of sufficient weight to overcome the hukm assigned to
modifications of the body by Allah SWT in the Qur’an, i.e. haram.
Evidence
from Persuasive Sources
While I do not feel that persuasive
evidence including qiyas, maslahah, or the maqaasid ash-shariah are capable of
naskh of a clear nass of the Qur’an, it is possible for such rational
considerations to guide us in implementing the commands and prohibitions sent
down to us by Allah SWT.
In that effort, we turn now the
consideration of the maqaasid ash-shariah in implementing Allah’s command
against mutilation or alteration of the human body.
The first maqsid is protection
and preservation of deen. It is not
clear from the evidence of the Sunnah of our Rasulallah SAW that this practice
carries a hukm at variance from the general hukm given all alternations or
mutilations by the Qur’an. If anything,
the hadith of Umm Atiyyah and Umm Habeebah would indicate that the practice is
makruh, and not mustahabb, as some claim.
Mukaramah is not a hukm sharii.
Furthermore, it is not clear how
this practice would protect the deen of an individual. Allah SWT made marriage
mubah as a means to protect our chastity and honor. No proponent has even mentioned how this
practice would serve the worship of Allah or the practice of the deen in
general. We shall examine this issue of chastity and honor when we discuss the
maqsid of dignity.
The second maqsid is the
protection and preservation of life.
Several form of this practice of female genital modification directly
impact life. The Type III infibulation
or sewing up of the vagina, thereby preventing intercourse and the normal flow
of blood and urine from the body has a direct impact on the quality of life and
has resulted in death. Not only have
women died from the surgery to perform this Pharoanic circumcision, but even
those who survive face complications, bleeding, infection, unimaginable pain,
suffering, and death.
Moreover,
Type II excision also has led to the same health risks, including death. There can be no question that given the risk
of death, infibulation, reinfibulation, and excision are haram.
And not only are infibulation,
reinfibulation and excision haram in terms of the maqasid, they constitute
clear mutilation of the human body. As
we have noted several times, mutilation or alteration of the body is
haram. The hadith evidence cited by proponents
might be seen as making something analogous to male circumcision mubah, but no
procedure performed upon males is analogous to infibulation and excision. These practices are unquestionable haram and
performing them on another, and even upon one’s self is haram, and is
punishable under Shariah law. We will discuss the punishment below, in shaa
llah.
But what about Type I female
genital mutilation?
Malik related to me
that the generally agreed on way of doing things amongst the community about an
accident is that there is no blood-money until the victim is better. If a man's
bone, either a hand, or a foot, or another part of his body, is broken
accidentally and it heals and becomes sound and returns to its form, there is
no blood-money for it. If the limb is impaired or there is a scar on it, there
is blood-money for it according to the extent that it is impaired. Malik said,
"If that part of the body has a specific blood-money mentioned by the
Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, it is according to what the
Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, specified. If it is part of
what does not have a specific blood-money for it mentioned by the Prophet, may
Allah bless him and grant him peace, and if there is no previous sunna about it
or specific blood-money, one uses ijtihad about it." Malik said,
"There is no blood-money for an accidental bodily injury when the wound
heals and returns to its form. If there is any scar or mark in that, ijtihad is
used about it except for the belly-wound. There is a third of the blood-money
of a life for it. " Malik said, "There is no blood-money for the
wound which splinters a bone in the body, and it is like the wound to the body
which lays bare the bone." Malik said, "The generally agreed on way of doing things in
our community is that when the doctor performs a circumcision and cuts off the glans, he must pay
the full blood-money. That is because it is an accident which the tribe is
responsible for, and the full blood money is payable for all that in which a
doctor errs or exceeds, when it is not intentional."
Imam Malik
states in this fatwa that the cutting off of the glans of the penis during
khitaan is a crime. The people of Madina
considered such an act as analogous to accidental murder. Therefore, similarly to manslaughter, the
responsible party must pay diya or full blood money.
Two points
are evident from this hadith. First,
cutting off the glans, that portion of the sex organ that experiences pleasure
and which when stimulated, triggers sexual emissions, is haram. Cutting off the glans renders a man
impotent. While cutting off a woman’s
clitoris does not render her sterile, we do not fully understand the role of
female emissions in fertility.
Even
proponents must recognize that if we are going to talk about equality for men
and women under Shariah, then cutting off the “female glans,” the clitoris, is
haram and must be compensated by diya.
Any risk of death from the surgery itself only adds to the hukm.
So, what
about what many consider to be female circumcision, Type Ia FGM? Does removal of the clitoral hood or prepuce
impact life? Proponents claim that
removing the prepuce is good for health.
Some claim that it prevents the husband from contracting chlamydia when
performing cunnilingus or oral sex on a female.
Such a claim is ridiculous. Chlamydia is transmitted orally, anally and
through vaginal sex. If your partner has
this condition, removal of the prepuce will not prevent its transmission, nor
will it prevent a woman from contracting it.
Others, including Imam al-Qaradawi,
have claimed that it prevents immorality and promiscuity. This is also absurd. Some men have argued that male circumcision
reduces the sensitivity of the penis. Several studies have been conducted on
this issue, with varying results.
While there may be a slight loss of
sensitivity when the foreskin is removed, no one has claimed or suggested that
there is a corresponding loss of libido. Some even claim an increase. Removing
the foreskin does not affect male libido, so why would removing the prepuce
reduce female libido, thereby preventing promiscuity? This belief, unsubstantiated by medical
science, only reveals to degree of superstition, tradition and male anxiety
over female sexuality that drives this practice.
Moreover, this practice is more
likely to cause health problem. Given the evidence from medical science, if the
surgery is performed in unsanitary conditions by people who are not qualified,
it can cause pain, bleeding and death.
Furthermore,
another consideration impacts our determination of the hukm of this practice –
Sad al-Darar, blocking the doors to a greater harm. In
Sudan,
the government banned Pharoanic circumcision, but continued to allow “Sunnah”
circumcision. Practitioners used this
loophole to continue the practice with only slight modifications, resulting in
continued suffering, pain and death.
If it is found that permitting this form of genital modification is leading to
more evasive and haram forms, then it too must be declared haram.
The
third maqsid is protection and promotion of dignity, including lineage and
honor. Many proponents may suggest
that this practice does just that. As we
have noted, one of the motivations for this practice is control over women’s
sexuality in an effort to protect male honor.
However, this practice does not really succeed in that effort.
For one
thing, Type III and II FGM can result in prevent pregnancy or even lead to the
death of mother and baby at the time of birth.
This has a direct negative impact on lineage. And how honorable is it to marry your
daughter to a young man who will be unable to have relations with his new wife,
or who will lose a child and his wife in childbirth? These practices are a cruel and disguised
form of infanticide. Instead of killing
the girl at birth, we are killing them in child birth, and their unborn child
with them.
On the
basis of the prohibition on female infanticide revealed in the Qur’an, and the
clear nass declaring mutilation and alternation of the body to be haram, also
found in the Qur’an, as well as the principle of Sad al-Darar, all forms of
FGM, Types I, II and III are haram.
In regard to the fourth and fifth maqaasid, protection
and promotion of aql and mal, we can see no benefit to recommend these
practices. If anything, such practices
can lead to mental illness and the pain and suffering as well as disability and
physical ramifications can only lead to loss of mal.
THE HUKM OF FEMALE
GENITAL MODIFICATION
Based on the above evidence and
discussion, we find the following:
- We find that any form of
modification of the female genitals for other than medical necessity is
mutilation, and constitutes an illegal alteration of the human body
prohibited and made haram by the Qur’an in ayat 4:119 in Surah an-Nisaa’.
- We find that what the WHO
refers to as Type Ia FGM is haram under the prohibition against alteration
of the body by the Qur’an in ayat 4:119 and even if, for the sake of
argument, it should be found to be mubah, then haram by the operation of
Sad ad-Darar.
- We find that what the WHO
refers to as Type Ib FGM is haram under the prohibition against alteration
of the body by the Qur’an in ayat 4:119 and by the Sunnah, in the hadith
ordering diya for the cutting off of the glans of the penis.
- We find that what the WHO
refers to as Types II and III FGM are haram under the prohibition against
alternation of the body by the Qur’an in ayat 4:119.
- These hukm apply equally to
minors below the age of 18 as well as to adults. It is illegal to do it to children in
the West, but what about adult women voluntarily doing it? It may be legal under Western law, but if
it is haram under Islamic law, then it would be a sin. And even if someone views this practice
as mubah, the husband, not the parents, would have to be consulted and his
approval obtained. Such a procedure should only be performed by a licensed
medical doctor or surgeon, and only after consulting with at least two
gynecologists as to the advisability of the procedure, particularly in
consideration of child bearing and birth.
It should be noted that non-Muslims are now seeking forms of
excision of the labia minora for cosmetic purposes. This procedure is haram Islamically.
Cosmetic labiectomies are haram because they are intended to be
cosmetic. This is not a loophole
for those who care more about urf than Allah’s Shariah.
WORD ON FITNAH
Finally, we remind everyone that
fitnah akbar min al qatl, fitnah shadud min al qatl, fitnah ashdud min al
qatl. This discussion is meant to put
forward a fiqh position given the sources of our deen and the minhaj we find
the most sound. Not all may agree. Ikhtilaaf is permissible and no person
putting forth a reasonable position should be abused in any manner. Nor should people use differing decisions as
fuel for their own egos in an effort to appear superior to others. Kibriyya is
the sin of Shaytan. Do not approach
it. We may disagree on a position, but
in the end, we pray together, in jamaa for guidance from Allah.
And it is in that spirit of ijma
consensus that we must understand that we are all ambassadors of Islam. Everything we say is monitored, and not just
by Malaikah. People judge our deen by
our behavior; they judge Allah SWT by your behavior. Many unseen eyes are watching you. What do you want them to see?
Any error contained herein is upon my head alone, may
Allah SWT forgive me. Any truth is from the One who is Haq. Allah Ta’ala Alim.
