Kafa'ah in the Hanafi Madhab

[jinnzaman]

The other thread thread is obfuscating three separate, but somewhat interrelated issues.

The first issue is whether Arabs, as a race, are more superior or noble than any other race.

In searching for some examples, two were brought forward: (1) Kafa'ah and (2) Rulership belonging to Quraysh. Many people have confused a lot of the issues, so perhaps it would be prudent to keep them separated.

Kafa'ah

Since I've only studied rudimentary Hanafi fiqh, I'm not even going to try and articulate the basis of kafa'ah in any other madhab, such as the Shafi'i madhab.

The first thing that we have to understand is that an 'amr (command) can be deemed obligatory under certain conditions. The general rule is that a command from Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) or Rasulullah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) is considered obligatory unless their is evidence to the contrary. The amount of evidence to the contrary determines the grading of the ruling. If their is overwhelming evidence to the contrary of a command, then its obviously not fardh or wajib. The key point to remember is that a fatwa is rarely given solely on the basis of a handful of narrations, but rather, it is based on the totality of evidences and this is why the role of the mujtahid is important

In terms of the basis of kafa'ah, it comes from various hadeeth:

1. Rasulullah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) said: "Listen! Women should be married off only by their guardians and their marriage should take place only with suitable matches." (Daaraqutni and Bayhaqi)

2. Rasulullah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) said: "Oh Ali (radhi allahu anhu)! Never delay in three matters: salah – when it’s time is nigh, janazah – when it is ready (before you), and an unmarried woman – when her Kufu’ (suitable partner) is found." (Tirmidhi)

3. Rasulullah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) said: "Choose carefully for your seed. Marry suitable women and marry off (your females) to them."
'Umar said: "Study genealogy, and be not like the Nabataeans of the Mesopotamian lowlands. When one of them is asked about his origin, he says: 'From such and such a village.'

These hadeeth have been interpreted as pronouncements to marry one's equal. The issue then arises as to what constitutes a suitable marriage partner, and this is an issue of ijtehad

The mujtahids of the Hanafi madhab, from the first mujtahid, Imam Abu Hanifah (rahmutallah alayh) who was a mujtahid mutlaq to those today in the form of the 'Ulema from the former Ottoman and Mughal Empire, have developed a variety of factors in determining compatibility in different spouses. The fuqaha of the Hanafi madhab have looked at a variety of evidences to determine how equality is determined.

Mukhtasar al-Quduri describes that compatibility is considered in: (a) lineage, (b) religion, (c) wealth, and (d) profession.

Different Hanafi 'Ulema categories kafa'ah differently. One source is the following hadeeth with the commentary by Amir ul Mumineen in Hadeeth, Ibn Hajr Asqalani (rahmutallah alayh)

Rasulullah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam) said: "A woman is married for four: her wealth, her lineage, her beauty and her religion, so choose one that is religious, and you will prosper."

Regarding this hadeeth, Ibn Hajar said in Fat-h al-Bari: "And it is taken from this that one with a noble lineage, it is better for him to marry one with a noble lineage, unless the lineage contradicts with a religious woman, or one with noble lineage contradicts a non-religious woman, then the religious woman is chosen. And it is likewise in the other three traits."

In other words, this hadeeth (one of several) establishes the criterion for which a person should base his marriage upon and Hanafi fuqaha have used it as an evidence to determine the factors that constitute good compatibility. This is why certain factors, such as religiosity, 'ilm, trump other factors, such as lineage or wealth/profession.

Now in terms of the practical application of kafa'ah, it arises only a limited set of circumstances:

a. When there is no Wali available, a Qadhi is obliged to ensure that the marrying couple are equals

b. When the Wali objects to a person getting married on the basis of incompatibility

If the wali consents, then obviously, incompatible couples will have a legitimate marriage.

The specific issue of "racism" arises under the factor of lineage. However, keep in mind that lineage is not synonymous with race. For the purposes of kafa'ah, lineage is only a consideration for "Arabs." But the term "Arab" isn't defined racially nor linguistically, but through one's genealogy. An Arab is someone who can show his lineage goes back to the Arab tribes at the time of the Prophet (sallahu alayhi wa salam) Thus, someone who speaks Arabic, lives among other "Arabs", and is Arab "culturally/ethnically" isn't necessarily an Arab for the purpose of kafa'ah.

In terms of the old Arab times, its well established in history books as to how the Arabs of old would memorize their lineage, their forefathers, their accomplishments, their memories, their character, their family members, and even went so far as to memorize the lineage of their horses and other pack animals. This superb memory proved crucial in the formation of the science of hadeeth as well as the memorization and preservation of the Qur'an, which is a huge honor and blessing that Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) bestowed upon them. The Arabs of old are, generally, considered to be the descendants of Ismail (alayhi salam) as well.

Now in terms of why lineage is considered ONLY for Arabs, thats something I myself don't know, perhaps it has to do with the fact that Arabs had the most preserved lineage, or that they received Wahi, or that they are related to various Prophetic families, etc.

What IS important is that we should defer judgment to the mujtahids of the Ummah than a bunch of Eurocentrized Western Muslims who don't know jack about usul al fiqh but open their mouths against the fuqaha when they have no idea what the hell their talking about. Slandering an entire madhab, like racism, is not a part of Islam either. There's an etiquette of disagreement and throwing a temper tantrum when you haven't even researched something is in complete contradiction with the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallahu alayhi wa sallam).

I'm not sure if thats answered everyone's questions regarding kafa'ah, but there's a lot of misinformation about it and its becoming confused with other issues. Perhaps we should make a separate thread on it?

[Jamroll]

[jinnzaman]

Thanks Jamroll, I wanted some tea!

Wait a minute, this isn't a rishta meeting is it?

Because if it is, KABOOL HAI!

:FAINT:

[Jamroll]

Sorry dude, I thought it said Qahwa in the Hanafi Madhab.

[jinnzaman]

Jamroll said

Sorry dude, I thought it said Qahwa in the Hanafi Madhab.

Halwa?

[Hanbali]

The Hanafi madhab is wrong on this matter. We should adhere to the Quran and Sunnah, not on some madhab.

May Allah [swt] save us from extremism.

Kafa'ah has nothing to do with lineage or social standing.

It has only to do with piety and good character.

To cogitate otherwise--in today's day and age--is to do a great disservice to the image of Islam. Yet Muslims will continue to be cave-men who adhere to antiquated rulings made by scholars who lived in a different age.

[Hanbali]

I just read Jinnzaman's post...actually I didn't read it first time I posted.

Anyways, yes I agree that we should be respectful when we disagree with great scholars. Yet, this does not mean that we should be bashful in saying that they were wrong. And may Allah [swt] give them one reward for their ijtihad.

As for saying whether it is racism or not, I think we should be clear that the view *is* racist, but we should not say that the scholar is a racist. See the difference?

[jinnzaman]

Hanbali said

The Hanafi madhab is wrong on this matter. We should adhere to the Quran and Sunnah, not on some madhab.

May Allah [swt] save us from extremism.

Kafa'ah has nothing to do with lineage or social standing.

It has only to do with piety and good character.

To cogitate otherwise--in today's day and age--is to do a great disservice to the image of Islam. Yet Muslims will continue to be cave-men who adhere to antiquated rulings made by scholars who lived in a different age.

Firstly, its not just the hanafi madhab, its also the Shafi'i madhab.

Secondly, the basis of this opinion isn't the madhab itself, but hadeeth as stated below.

Thirdly, the basis of including the hadeeth is a statement of the Prophet (sallahu alayhi wa sallam).

Fourthly, stop twisting Islam in order to please the kuffar. Who cares what the "image" of Islam is and accept Islam for what it is.

Fifthly, the rulings aren't antiquated when they've been reaffirmed by subsequent mujtahids in different localities.

[jinnzaman]

Hanbali said

I just read Jinnzaman's post...actually I didn't read it first time I posted.

Anyways, yes I agree that we should be respectful when we disagree with great scholars. Yet, this does not mean that we should be bashful in saying that they were wrong. And may Allah [swt] give them one reward for their ijtihad.

As for saying whether it is racism or not, I think we should be clear that the view *is* racist, but we should not say that the scholar is a racist. See the difference?

Jaysh,

Its not racist or ethnocentric to have the requirement of lineage.

A person can be "black" or "white" or "asian" or "desi" and still be an Arab for the purpose of kafa'ah if they can show their lineage. An Arab who cannot show his lineage is not an Arab for kafa'ah. If a non-Arab can show his lineage, then he is an Arab.

How is that racist?

My ancestors were from Central Asia, Egypt, and Mongolia. My lineage is different from my ethnicity and race.

[shadha]

So like is this yet another issue over Hadiths?


shadha-

[jinnzaman]

shadha said

So like is this yet another issue over Hadiths?


shadha-

All of fiqh is an issue of textual interpretation.

[shadha]

I'll take that as a sugarcoated yes. Thanks, I was just curious...


shadha-

[jinnzaman]

shadha said

I'll take that as a sugarcoated yes. Thanks, I was just curious...


shadha-

Its not sugarcoated. Usul al fiqh is about the interpretation of all narrations, including the Qur'an. Before you bash an entire science, you should understand it at least.

[Hanbali]

jinnzaman said

Firstly, its not just the hanafi madhab, its also the Shafi'i madhab.

Right. And both madhaib are wrong on this matter.

Secondly, the basis of this opinion isn't the madhab itself, but hadeeth as stated below.

What hadeeth? I don't see any hadeeth to prove your point! The Prophet [s] merely said to marry women to their suitable partners. Those are the hadeeths. Nothing about lineage. In fact, the ONLY hadeeth about lineage is saying that those who base their opinion on lineage--instead of religiosity--will be LOSERS.

Fourthly, stop twisting Islam in order to please the kuffar.

Who is twisting Islam? The one who is extreme in his adherence to madhaib? Or the one who sticks to the Quran and the Sunnah?

Who cares what the "image" of Islam is and accept Islam for what it is.

I *am* accepting Islam for what it is. To introduce racist aspects into the religion is to change Islam and I cannot tolerate that.

If let's say some revered scholar claimed that honor killings were halal, would you go around publicizing his views? Or would you say "No, I respect the scholar but he is wrong" ? Would it not ruin the image of Islam to take one wrong view and claim it is a part of Islam? Should we not be worried about this?

Fifthly, the rulings aren't antiquated when they've been reaffirmed by subsequent mujtahids in different localities.

I thought there were like no mujtahid mutlaqs in this era? Isn't that what you say?

In any case, even those that affirmed those rulings, I have a sincere feeling that they were inadvertently biased by the sayings of past scholars. It happens. If Imam Abu Haneefa (ra) says something, then a Hanafi scholar is likely to give it a lot of weight, sometimes undue weight. Same way with a Salafi scholar and Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (ra).

[Hanbali]

jinnzaman said

Jaysh,

Its not racist or ethnocentric to have the requirement of lineage.

A person can be "black" or "white" or "asian" or "desi" and still be an Arab for the purpose of kafa'ah if they can show their lineage. An Arab who cannot show his lineage is not an Arab for kafa'ah. If a non-Arab can show his lineage, then he is an Arab.

How is that racist?

My ancestors were from Central Asia, Egypt, and Mongolia. My lineage is different from my ethnicity and race.

Raistlin,

I use the term racism in the general sense of the word. When for example a Muslim is discriminated against, I say 'hey that's racism!' Using terms like 'religionicism' is just odd. Or maybe I can use terms like you: "religio-centric"

Anyways, sorry to burst your bubble, but it is an 'ism', maybe not racism, but it is discrimination. It is discriminating about something people have no control over, something they are born with, instead of the content of their character.