[S.T.D.]

Maulana Taliban's statement was:

"I once posted on SF that Hakeem ul Ummah (RA) has advised against marrying beautiful women. ."

The quote from Hakeem ul-Ummat is:

"These days people see beauty in married women although today protection from Fitnah is in that the wife should not be much beautiful. Natural protection is in wife being less beautiful. Then he said on asking, although beauty is a blessing of Allah but today it has more possibility of Fitnah."

There appears to be a significant difference between the two statements. The first is a direct (not implied) discouragement from marrying beautiful women. The second is merely making one aware of the obvious fact that greater beauty naturally entails greater potential for fitnah.

This fitnah, which is actually applicable to anything beautiful in the Dunya, could be anything from attracting undue attention, gossip, evil eye, jealousy, to distracting a man from his deen.

When the Sahabah unhesistantly disposed of beautiful possessions, due to a mere moment's distraction in one Salaat, what problem is there in a man taking this factor into account when considering a lifelong marriage?

Even if Hakeem ul-ummat was referring to his own particular time and circumstances, it doesn't detract from the fact that the quote conveys a basic common sense that is relevant to all times and places.

[nuabuncarnigo]

Maulana Taliban's statement was:

"I once posted on SF that Hakeem ul Ummah (RA) has advised against marrying beautiful women. ."

The quote from Hakeem ul-Ummat is:

"These days people see beauty in married women although today protection from Fitnah is in that the wife should not be much beautiful. Natural protection is in wife being less beautiful. Then he said on asking, although beauty is a blessing of Allah but today it has more possibility of Fitnah."

There appears to be a significant difference between the two statements. The first is a direct (not implied) discouragement from marrying beautiful women. The second is merely making one aware of the obvious fact that greater beauty naturally entails greater potential for fitnah.

This fitnah, which is actually applicable to anything beautiful in the Dunya, could be anything from attracting undue attention, gossip, evil eye, jealousy, to distracting a man from his deen.

When the Sahabah unhesistantly disposed of beautiful possessions, due to a mere moment's distraction in one Salaat, what problem is there in a man taking this factor into account when considering a lifelong marriage?

Even if Hakeem ul-ummat was referring to his own particular time and circumstances, it doesn't detract from the fact that the quote conveys a basic common sense that is relevant to all times and places.

Except that there is no general or specific disagreement or discouragement in Islam on marrying beautiful women at all.

Priority should be given to practise of Deen but there are no further Islamic guidelines to say that the next set of prioritisation should be based on lack of beauty.

Once a person is satisfied with her Deen then she can be beautiful, rich or from a good lineage or not and if a Muslim chooses to pick a more beautiful wife (from two where both are practising) then there is no problem or rebuke on him from Sunnah. Hence we should make excuses and confine this saying of Hakeemul-Ummah (RA) to a specific timeframe or a specific situation etc.

[bonyrek]

Except that there is no general or specific disagreement or discouragement in Islam on marrying beautiful women at all.

Priority should be given to practise of Deen but there are no further Islamic guidelines to say that the next set of prioritisation should be based on lack of beauty.

Once a person is satisfied with her Deen then she can be beautiful, rich or from a good lineage or not and if a Muslim chooses to pick a more beautiful wife (from two where both are practising) then there is no problem or rebuke on him from Sunnah. Hence we should make excuses and confine this saying of Hakeemul-Ummah (RA) to a specific timeframe or a specific situation etc.

There is a hadith that Jews were first tested in regards to women and therefore we should beware of women.

Secondly, even though with regards to general populace the ruling maybe something but when it comes to people who are more careful in their deen to them it would be different. They do not take the way of the general populace.

Thirdly, the fitna can be known from reason and reason is proof in shariah.

[nuabuncarnigo]

There is a hadith that Jews were first tested in regards to women and therefore we should beware of women.

Secondly, even though with regards to general populace the ruling maybe something but when it comes to people who are more careful in their deen to them it would be different. They do not take the way of the general populace.

Thirdly, the fitna can be known from reason and reason is proof in shariah.

First my Dear Respected Brother,

I understand your gut reaction to jump to the defence of Shaykh (Maulana) Hakeemul-Ummat (RA) thinking that he is being disparaged or dishonoured, in addition, you can chose to use the “Report this Post (little triangle)” button for the Moderators/Administrators to take action; but I can assure you that there is no need.

Women being Fitnah:

You have alluded to a Hadeeth which is as follows in full:

"The world is sweet and verdant, and Allah having put you in it in your turn watches how you act; so fear the world and fear women, for the first trial of the Bani Israel had to do with women" (Sahih Muslim)

There is no distinction between beautiful and not so beautiful women.

General Populace vs Specific People:

There are no two sets of Shariahs revealed to Muslims and even if that was the case even then there is no commandment in Shariah that its Mustahab (or praiseworthy) to avoid beautiful women.

Reason being proof of Shariah?

I know your reasoning but I don't understand your implications?

Are you implying that every single one from amongst the Malfoozat of Shaykh (Maulana) Hakeemul-Ummat (RA) is governed by a solid reason, hence binding in Shariah on Muslims (from Karachi to New York)?



Note for everyone else before jumping in

I am neither extolling the virtues nor singing praises of beautiful women; simply stating that this particular advice CANNOT be applicable to all Muslims at all times under all circumstances. Allah (SWT) knows best why, how and to whom he actually said it to.

The command in Sunnah is NOT to disparage, disrespect any Muslim let alone someone of the caliber of

أخبرنا إبراهيم بن يعقوب قال حدثني أحمد بن إسحق قال حدثنا وهيب قال حدثنا منصور بن عبد الرحمن عن أمه عن عائشة قالت ذكر عند النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم هالك بسوء فقال لا تذكروا هلكاكم إلا بخير

Sayyida Aisha (RA) narrates that Rasul-ullah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) stated, "Destroyed be with ones due to this sin so don't speak about your dead except good" [Sunan An-Nasa'i]

[vforvandetta]

Maulana Taliban's statement was:

"I once posted on SF that Hakeem ul Ummah (RA) has advised against marrying beautiful women. ."

The quote from Hakeem ul-Ummat is:

"These days people see beauty in married women although today protection from Fitnah is in that the wife should not be much beautiful. Natural protection is in wife being less beautiful. Then he said on asking, although beauty is a blessing of Allah but today it has more possibility of Fitnah."

There appears to be a significant difference between the two statements. The first is a direct (not implied) discouragement from marrying beautiful women. The second is merely making one aware of the obvious fact that greater beauty naturally entails greater potential for fitnah.

This fitnah, which is actually applicable to anything beautiful in the Dunya, could be anything from attracting undue attention, gossip, evil eye, jealousy, to distracting a man from his deen.

When the Sahabah unhesistantly disposed of beautiful possessions, due to a mere moment's distraction in one Salaat, what problem is there in a man taking this factor into account when considering a lifelong marriage?

Even if Hakeem ul-ummat was referring to his own particular time and circumstances, it doesn't detract from the fact that the quote conveys a basic common sense that is relevant to all times and places.

Post of the thread.

Advice of Hazrat Aqdas Muhammed Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA) is in the category of preferable action. It does not rise to the level of Sunnah or an obligation. Reason is simple. If you are supposed to marry only the less beautiful then are the beautiful ones cursed? That is silly. Beauty, like wealth, is a blessing and Allah (SWT) might use it as a test - He (SWT) does what He (SWT) wishes. He (RA) also advised against mixing with the rich people for similar reasons. Does it mean that wealth is undesirable in Islam? Not in the least. Both Hazrat Khadija (RA) and Hazrat Usman (RA) were super rich. Both advices by Hazrat Thanwi (RA) should be taken in the sense of preferable, in the spirit of moderation. Religion is simple and it should be kept that way.

Unless some one comes out with a magnificent insight the matter seems to be clear enough for us to divert our energies to more pressing issues.

[bonyrek]

First my Dear Respected Brother,

I understand your gut reaction to jump to the defence of Shaykh (Maulana) Hakeemul-Ummat (RA) thinking that he is being disparaged or dishonoured, in addition, you can chose to use the “Report this Post (little triangle)” button for the Moderators/Administrators to take action; but I can assure you that there is no need.

Actually I was purely defending the statement without any regards to the individual who said it. So...

Women being Fitnah:

You have alluded to a Hadeeth which is as follows in full:

"The world is sweet and verdant, and Allah having put you in it in your turn watches how you act; so fear the world and fear women, for the first trial of the Bani Israel had to do with women" (Sahih Muslim)

There is no distinction between beautiful and not so beautiful women. There need not be such distinction. Its implied aand obvious. The hadith wwould have a vast meaning and specifiying it with "beauty" would have restricted it.

What is clear from the hadith is advise or recommendation or infact obligatory command to caution and fear with regards to women. So such cautionery behaviour becomes a sunnah. From context of hadith as well as reason, the beauty of women is one of the issues on which taking caution becomes sunnah.

General Populace vs Specific People:

There are no two sets of Shariahs revealed to Muslims and even if that was the case even then there is no commandment in Shariah that its Mustahab (or praiseworthy) to avoid beautiful women. Its not two sets of shariah but one shariah that applies differently to different categories of people. The people of caution such as the sufis would stay away from anything doubtful and anything that has a possibility of diverting his spiritual pursuit. Similarly, in laymen when something can lead to haram then the means to it can be blocked.

Reason being proof of Shariah?

I know your reasoning but I don't understand your implications?

Are you implying that every single one from amongst the Malfoozat of Shaykh (Maulana) Hakeemul-Ummat (RA) is governed by a solid reason, hence binding in Shariah on Muslims (from Karachi to New York)? No my point was that this issue was clear enough by reason itself. And in such case it is duty that he stay away from it. Our minds like our ears and eys would be questioned by Allah. So to know that something would lead to problems and yet not do anything would be irresponsible in matter of deen.



Note for everyone else before jumping in

I am neither extolling the virtues nor singing praises of beautiful women; simply stating that this particular advice CANNOT be applicable to all Muslims at all times under all circumstances. Allah (SWT) knows best why, how and to whom he actually said it to.

The command in Sunnah is NOT to disparage, disrespect any Muslim let alone someone of the caliber of

أخبرنا إبراهيم بن يعقوب قال حدثني أحمد بن إسحق قال حدثنا وهيب قال حدثنا منصور بن عبد الرحمن عن أمه عن عائشة قالت ذكر عند النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم هالك بسوء فقال لا تذكروا هلكاكم إلا بخير

Sayyida Aisha (RA) narrates that Rasul-ullah (Sallaho Alaihe Wassallam) stated, "Destroyed be with ones due to this sin so don't speak about your dead except good" [Sunan An-Nasa'i] And yes it agreed that this issue is not one of which someone is to be criticized heavily or forced upon but one of wisdom and precautionary advise especially when we see that such issues are bringing up corruption and problems in the community. And full imaan is when one hates to turn to disbelief, and such precautions are parts of such hate for disbelief.

[S.T.D.]

Except that there is no general or specific disagreement or discouragement in Islam on marrying beautiful women at all.

Priority should be given to practise of Deen but there are no further Islamic guidelines to say that the next set of prioritisation should be based on lack of beauty.

Once a person is satisfied with her Deen then she can be beautiful, rich or from a good lineage or not and if a Muslim chooses to pick a more beautiful wife (from two where both are practising) then there is no problem or rebuke on him from Sunnah. Hence we should make excuses and confine this saying of Hakeemul-Ummah (RA) to a specific timeframe or a specific situation etc.

Except I fail to see what is there to make excuses for. People are putting words into Hakeem ul Ummat's mouth and stretching his statement to convey something he didn't.

I'm also assuming that many of Hakeem ul-Ummat's Malfoozat are not Shariah rulings, nor fatawa, but rather insightful statements based on common sense and factual reality.

Allow me as a half-baked layman to produce a couple of Malfoozat of my own:

Half-baked Malfooz no.1: "Acquiring anything of great beauty nowadays entails a greater potential for fitnah"

Half-baked Malfooz no.2: "Out of all the lure and temptations of the Dunya, beautiful women are amongst the most coveted after nowadays"

Are the above statements based on common sense, or did I just break the Shariah and my statements need to be contextualised in order to exonerate me?

Despite Hakeemul Ummah's status as a Mujaddid, and his qubooliyat evidenced by the inexplicable barakah in everything he produced during one life time, he is not infallible, as demonstrated by his erroneous position regarding the blessed sandals of the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace).

However, it was the duty of the Muhaqqiq ulama to have highlighted or contextualised any such problematic positions. It is not the duty of laymen like me and you, nor the quarter-baked molvis of today who struggle to fathom even the most basic of concepts.

[nuabuncarnigo]

Actually I was purely defending the statement without any regards to the individual who said it. So...


There need not be such distinction. Its implied aand obvious. The hadith wwould have a vast meaning and specifiying it with "beauty" would have restricted it.

What is clear from the hadith is advise or recommendation or infact obligatory command to caution and fear with regards to women. So such cautionery behaviour becomes a sunnah. From context of hadith as well as reason, the beauty of women is one of the issues on which taking caution becomes sunnah.


Its not two sets of shariah but one shariah that applies differently to different categories of people. The people of caution such as the sufis would stay away from anything doubtful and anything that has a possibility of diverting his spiritual pursuit. Similarly, in laymen when something can lead to haram then the means to it can be blocked.


No my point was that this issue was clear enough by reason itself. And in such case it is duty that he stay away from it. Our minds like our ears and eys would be questioned by Allah. So to know that something would lead to problems and yet not do anything would be irresponsible in matter of deen.



And yes it agreed that this issue is not one of which someone is to be criticized heavily or forced upon but one of wisdom and precautionary advise especially when we see that such issues are bringing up corruption and problems in the community. And full imaan is when one hates to turn to disbelief, and such precautions are parts of such hate for disbelief.

Dear Respected Brother,

I was reading the works of Shah Waliullah (RA) last night so for the sake of Allah (SWT) and in order to prevent you from making Ta’weel and implicitly projecting words in the mouth of Sayyidina Rasul-ullah to defend the Malfoozat, I accept defeat.

You are right and I am wrong.

[bonyrek]

Dear Respected Brother,

I was reading the works of Shah Waliullah (RA) last night so for the sake of Allah (SWT) and in order to prevent you from making Ta’weel and implicitly projecting words in the mouth of Sayyidina Rasul-ullah to defend the Malfoozat, I accept defeat.

You are right and I am wrong.

Thats a silly way of accusing me. You can stick with your dhahiri bidah expecting every word to be mouth fed onto you while keeping your brains in the freezer.

And I don't even belong to the deoband school. There's absolutely no reason for me tto defend the individual or his book. I would blame your criticism to be based on a lack of deeper insight into books of tassawuf.

[nuabuncarnigo]

Thats a silly way of accusing me. You can stick with your dhahiri bidah expecting every word to be mouth fed onto you while keeping your brains in the freezer.

And I don't even belong to the deoband school. There's absolutely no reason for me tto defend the individual or his book. I would blame your criticism to be based on a lack of deeper insight into books of tassawuf.

I started with above because I lack deeper insight into Tassawuff.

And as you wish brother.