Re: A Woman's Reflection on Leading Prayer
Let's dissect this, shall we?
What we so often forget is that God has honored the woman by giving her
value in relation to God—not in relation to men. But as western feminism
erases God from the scene, there is no standard left—but men. As a
result the western feminist is forced to find her value in relation to a
man. And in so doing she has accepted a faulty assumption. She has
accepted that man is the standard, and thus a woman can never be a full
human being until she becomes just like a man—the standard.
How is God the standard here? Furthermore, lets say for argument's sake that God is the standard (which can in no way be supported through the Quran, so its just a personal perspective really, not the basis of a moral theory).
If God were the standard, then what is the difference between the a man trying to reach that standard and a woman reaching that standard? There shouldnt be any difference right? Otherwise, women are not trying to reach God's standard...they're then trying to reach a lower standard....
So this point is illogical.
When a man cut his hair short, she wanted to cut her hair short. When a
man joined the army, she wanted to join the army. She wanted these
things for no other reason than because the “standard” had it.
No, she doesn't want these things NECESSARILY because men have them. A woman has her own preferences, independent of men. If all of manking were only unisex - all females - I can guarantee you some would STILL have short hair. Some would STILL fight.
What she didn’t recognize was that God dignifies both men and women in
their distinctiveness--not their sameness. And on March 18, Muslim women
made the very same mistake.
So who decides what the distinctive actions are for a man that women cannot perform? Who decides what the distinctive actions are for a woman that a man cannot perform? Other than what is provided already in Quranic text. And nowhere in the Quran does it say that women cannot lead prayer. In fact, it doesn't even bar women from leading anything!
For 1400 years there has been a consensus of the scholars that men are
to lead prayer. As a Muslim woman, why does this matter? The one who
leads prayer is not spiritually superior in any way. Something is not
better just because a man does it. And leading prayer is not better,
just because it’s leading. Had it been the role of women or had it been
more divine, why wouldn’t the Prophet have asked Ayesha or Khadija, or
Fatima—the greatest women of all time—to lead? These women were promised
heaven—and yet they never lead prayer.
So now, we as women must emulate Ayesha and Khadija. What about emulating the Prophet - which is perscribed for all humans in the Quran?
Furthermore, this writer shows her ignorance by saying that there is no importance in the position of an imam. The imam position comes along with a lot of political power, because we human beings have given a lot of power in the hands of imams. They're more respected, people listen to them, and they shape our beliefs by issuing fatwas, etc. They're usually scholars, so people take their theories as equivalent to the Truth.
So, uh, yeah...there is a major fringe benefit that comes along with being an imam, as well as responsibility.
But now for the first time in 1400 years, we look at a man leading
prayer and we think, “That’s not fair.”
Oh please where has this woman spent her life? Under a rock? Ladies have been questioning this for some time now.
** We think so although God has given no special privilege to the one who leads. The imam is no higher in the eyes of God than the one who prays behind.**
No, he is not. But then, why is that a reason why ladies should not lead prayer? Its entirely irrelevant to the ethics. We can say that God doesn't really give any special priveleges to a person for being a mechanic, but does that mean ladies should not be a mechanic?
Its not about religion really, its about centuries of cultural influence in devising of religious laws.
On the other hand, only a woman can be a mother. And God has given
special privilege to a mother. The Prophet taught us that heaven lies at
the feet of mothers. But no matter what a man does he can never be a
mother. So why is that not unfair?
And only a man can be a father. Now what?
When asked who is most deserving of our kind treatment? The Prophet
replied ‘your mother’ three times before saying ‘your father’ only once.
Isn’t that sexist? No matter what a man does he will never be able to
have the status of a mother.
Uh yeah. Because of child-birth and child-rearing. Again, what does this have to do with the topic. Its a sad argument. Its like saying "look here is your biology. that is enough for you ladies. you dont need to do anything else than that so chill and sit at home with the babies. But you know, the men can do more than their biology..."
And yet even when God honors us with something uniquely feminine, we are
too busy trying to find our worth in reference to men, to value it—or
even notice. We too have accepted men as the standard; so anything
uniquely feminine is, by definition, inferior. Being sensitive is an
insult, becoming a mother—a degradation. In the battle between stoic
rationality (considered masculine) and self-less compassion (considered
feminine), rationality reigns supreme.
A woman leads a prayer and that now becomes equivalent to "being a mother is degrading, being sensitive is an insult"?
First off, is this woman implying that men are not sensitive? That an imam is cold-hearted? Is an imam not a "mother" for his ummah? A source of guidance, etc?
As soon as we accept that everything a man has and does is better, all
that follows is just a knee jerk reaction: if men have it—we want it
too. If men pray in the front rows, we assume this is better, so we want
to pray in the front rows too. If men lead prayer, we assume the imam is
closer to God, so we want to lead prayer too. Somewhere along the line
we’ve accepted the notion that having a position of worldly leadership
is some indication of one’s position with God.
Amina Wudood was not trying to come closer to God by leading the prayer, and anyone who think so totally missed her point. She's trying to separate cultural attitudes from Islam; and the two have been intertwined for centuries, unfortunately.
A Muslim woman does not need to degrade herself in this way. She has God
as a standard. She has God to give her value; she doesn’t need a man.
So, by leading a prayer, she is degrading herself. Yet a man is not degrading himself. This makes no sense, especially when the author is already saying that there is nothing special in being an Imam. So if there is nothing special, then let it go already. Why stress about it? And how is being an imam equivalent to gaining value by the opinions of other men? In fact, men are degrading Amina Wudood everywhere. So this woman was not looking for approval from men in her actions. In fact, she was looking to put them in their place.
In fact, in our crusade to follow men, we, as women, never even stopped
to examine the possibility that what we have is better for us. In some
cases we even gave up what was higher only to be like men.
Not at all. Women who work, women who are Islamic feminists, etc do not give up their families or their house, etc. So again, this woman is too culturally entrenched to think rationally.
Fifty years ago, society told us that men were superior because they
left the home to work in factories. We were mothers. And yet, we were
told that it was women’s liberation to abandon the raising of another
human being in order to work on a machine. We accepted that working in a
factory was superior to raising the foundation of society—just because a
man did it.
What drug is this author on? Never did the feminists say to give up family for a machine. In fact, feminists said to combine the two , as men do.
Then after working, we were expected to be superhuman—the perfect
mother, the perfect wife, the perfect homemaker—and have the perfect
career. And while there is nothing wrong, by definition, with a woman
having a career, we soon came to realize what we had sacrificed by
blindly mimicking men. We watched as our children became strangers and
soon recognized the privilege we’d given up.
Bullcrap. Stay at home during their critical years of development, then return to work. And I dont think taking out the time you're taking out anyway to read namaz to lead a prayer is going to have that much damage on children. In fact, a religious mom is a good influence on children. What a dumb lady.
And so only now—given the choice—women in the West are choosing to stay
home to raise their children. According to the United States Department
of Agriculture, only 31 percent of mothers with babies, and 18 percent
of mothers with two or more children, are working full-time. And of
those working mothers, a survey conducted by Parenting Magazine in 2000,
found that 93% of them say they would rather be home with their kids,
but are compelled to work due to 'financial obligations'. These
‘obligations’ are imposed on women by the gender sameness of the modern
West, and removed from women by the gender distinctiveness of Islam.
Single-moms are a result of men leaving them stranded with a child and no way of earning an income. These women have to take up a job and work extra hours. Tell the men to act like men and commit when they decide to knock up a woman.
It took women in the West almost a century of experimentation to realize
a privilege given to Muslim women 1400 years ago.
The privelege is not for women to sit at home. The privelege is the CHOICE to do what you want. The ABILITY to make CHOICE without man's force.
So if some woman makes a choice to lead a prayer, then stop trying to stop her. Its her God-given choice. God doesn't like it - he'll deal with her on his own. Stop trying to play God and define what these choices should be when God Himself has given the choice to the woman.
Given my privilege as a woman, I only degrade myself by trying to be
something I’m not--and in all honesty--don’t want to be: a man. As
women, we will never reach true liberation until we stop trying to mimic
men, and value the beauty in our own God-given distinctiveness.
If you wish to revel in the fact that you've got a vagina and a man does not; that you can get a period, and a man cannot; that you can birth a child, and a man cannot; that you can mother a child, etc - then kudos to you. I'm glad. But that is an independent aspect of life from pursueing a career. From being a religious leader as well. These women are trying to cross the two (outside responsibilities with inside responsibilities) when they shouldn't be crossed.
If given a choice between stoic justice and compassion, I choose
compassion. And if given a choice between worldly leadership and heaven
at my feet—I choose heaven.
So the world's leaders will not have a chance at heaven? So a woman who is a leader will not have a chance at heaven? So you can't have stoic justice and compassion together?
This woman has no idea what she's talking about.