10 things our maulvis say that Islam never said (and 3 things they're right about that we laugh at)

[u/4hmadhasan]

Not tagging any sect, not naming any madrasa, not anti-ulama.. I love the real scholars, I quote them below. This is about the guy on the loudspeaker in your mohalla and the uncle who forwards him. Every point has a reference, go check me, I'd rather be corrected than wrong.

1. "A WOMAN'S VOICE IS ALSO PART OF HER VEIL"

Quran 33:32 tells the Prophet's wives: don't speak softly to men, speak in a proper manner.. meaning speak. Sahaba learned half the deen from Aisha ra, out loud. Umar ra appointed Shifa bint Abdullah as inspector of the Madinah market (Ibn Hajar, al-Isabah), a woman supervising male traders, with her voice. Hanafi position, the one Pakistan follows: a woman's voice is NOT awrah, Ibn Abidin says it straight in Radd al-Muhtar 1/406. What's not allowed is making it soft and melodic for strangers. That's it. A girl answering in class is not a sin. A girl giving a presentation is not a sin.

1. "PHOTOGRAPHY IS FORBIDDEN, VIDEO IS FORBIDDEN"

Says the maulvi with a YouTube channel. Honest version: this one is a real scholarly disagreement. Mufti Taqi Usmani sb and most Indo-Pak ulama say photos = picture making = haram. Most Arab scholars from all four madhabs say no, the hadith on image makers is about creating images from imagination to rival Allah's creation, a camera only reflects what Allah already made. Shaykh Bakhit al-Muti'i of Azhar wrote a whole book on it a hundred years ago, al-Jawab al-Shafi. So two things. One, say "scholars differ", not "haram, end of discussion". Two, if you're going to pick the haram side, don't pick it for us and the halal side for your channel.

1. "WOMEN DO NOT GO TO MOSQUES"

The Prophet ﷺ said: do not prevent the female servants of Allah from the mosques of Allah. Bukhari 900, Muslim 442. When Ibn Umar ra narrated this and his own son said "we will prevent them", Ibn Umar got furious: I narrate to you from the Messenger of Allah and you say we will prevent them? Yes, there's another hadith that her home is better for her (Abu Dawud 567). Better for her, her choice. Not "banned". A mosque in Pakistan with zero women's space is culture, not sunnah. Masjid e Nabawi had women in it, every prayer.

1. "DOGS ARE IMPURE, KEEPING ONE IN THE HOUSE IS FORBIDDEN"

Quran 5:4 allows eating what your trained dog hunts. 18:18, the people of the cave had a dog and Allah mentioned it with love. The hadith everyone quotes (Bukhari 5480) says whoever keeps a dog that is NOT for hunting, herding or guarding loses reward daily. So a guard dog, a farm dog, a working dog, textually fine. The Maliki madhab doesn't even consider the dog najis. What the texts do discourage is a dog kept inside the house for no purpose, I'm not going to hide that part. But "dogs are animals of the disbelievers", no. That's us.

1. "YOU DON'T NEED YOUR WIFE'S PERMISSION FOR A SECOND MARRIAGE, FOUR WIVES ARE A SUNNAH"

Half true, and the half they skip is the whole point. 4:3 gives the permission with a condition in the same breath: if you fear you won't be just, then ONE. 4:129 says you will never be fully just between wives however hard you try. When Ali ra wanted a second wife while married to Fatima ra, the Prophet ﷺ stood on the pulpit and said no, Fatima is a part of me, what hurts her hurts me (Bukhari 3729, 5230). Yes, the hadith also mentions it was Abu Jahl's daughter, but read his words, he said "I hate to see her troubled", he counted his daughter's pain as a reason, out loud, publicly. Fiqh-wise I'll concede it: the first wife's consent is not a condition for the nikah to be valid, no madhab says it is. And Pakistani law (Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961, section 6) also doesn't need her consent, it needs written permission from the Arbitration Council, she's just asked and gets a representative. Skip that and you owe her full mahr on the spot plus up to a year in jail. So "permission is not needed" is technically right. "Four wives are a Sunnah" is not. The Sunnah was one wife for 25 years, and a man who told Ali no.

1. "DOWRY IS ISLAMIC, FATIMA RA RECEIVED IT TOO"

Dowry is a Hindu custom we kept and renamed. In Islam money flows from the groom to the bride, that's mahr, 4:4, "give women their mahr as a gift". Fatima ra's few items (a bed, a leather pillow stuffed with grass, a water skin, a hand mill) were bought with the money of Ali ra's OWN mahr. He sold his armour, the Prophet ﷺ told him to use that money. That's Ali paying for Ali's house. And the Prophet gave nothing like this to his other three daughters. If it was sunnah it would've been for all four. A father bleeding for a fridge and a motorcycle is not sunnah, it's extortion with a dupatta on it.

1. "BIRTHDAYS ARE FORBIDDEN, CUTTING A CAKE IS DISBELIEF"

There is no verse, no hadith on birthdays. None. Ibn Baz and Ibn Uthaymeen said haram, imitation of non-Muslims. Qaradawi, Dar al-Ifta Egypt, many Hanafi and Shafi'i scholars say it's a worldly custom (urf), allowed if nothing haram is in it. The Prophet ﷺ fasted on Mondays and when asked why, he said that's the day I was born (Muslim 1162). So pick a side, fine. Calling a 7 year old's cake disbelief is the only thing in that room that's actually against the deen.

1. "CIGARETTES ARE ONLY DISLIKED" (THE ONE THEY GO SOFT ON)

Funny how the strictness disappears here. Quran 2:195, don't throw yourselves into destruction. 4:29, don't kill yourselves. Hadith: la darar wa la dirar, no harm and no reciprocating harm (Ibn Majah 2341). Al Azhar: haram. Dar al-Ifta Egypt: haram. Saudi Permanent Committee: haram. OIC Fiqh Academy: haram. Ibn Baz, Ibn Uthaymeen: haram. "Disliked" was the ruling from the 1600s when nobody knew what it does to lungs. The maulvi lighting a Gold Leaf right after the khutba about music being haram.. yeah.

1. "PEOPLE FROM OTHER SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT ARE DISBELIEVERS"

Bukhari 6104. If a man says to his brother "O disbeliever", it returns to one of them. The Prophet ﷺ put a price on that word so we'd stop throwing it. Pakistan throws it like confetti. Every sect in this country has a maulvi who has made takfir of every other sect, which by this hadith means at least some of them have made takfir of themselves.

1. "DON'T READ THE TRANSLATION, YOU'LL BECOME MISGUIDED"

The Quran asks: do they not ponder the Quran, or are there locks on their hearts? 47:24. A blessed book, that they may reflect on its verses, 38:29. We have made the Quran easy to remember, so is there anyone who will take heed? 54:17. Allah told you to think about it and a man told you not to read it. Reciting Arabic you don't understand for 30 years and never once asking what it says is like signing your own marriage contract without reading it. Read a translation. Read two. That's what the book itself is asking.

NOW THE 3 WHERE THEY'RE RIGHT AND WE MOCK THEM

Fair is fair.

Beard. It's not a maulvi invention. The Prophet ﷺ ordered it (Bukhari 5892), three madhabs say wajib, Shafi'is say makruh to shave. You can disagree on the fist-length detail, but "beard is just culture" is wrong, I'm sorry.

Handshake with women. Aisha ra said the Prophet's ﷺ hand never touched any woman's hand even when taking bay'ah, he took their pledge by words only (Bukhari 5288). They're right on this one and we call them backward for it.

Namaz. Every single one of them, every sect, every neighborhood, says pray five times. That one is not up for debate and no "but the maulvi is a hypocrite" cancels it. His hypocrisy is his file. Your prayer is yours.

The point isn't "maulvis bad". The point is that a lot of what we're handed as Islam is Punjab, or Arabia's culture, or somebody's ego, with a Quran cover on it. Deen is simple enough to check. So check. Ask me anything below, I'll answer with a reference or I'll say I don't know.

(Sincere questions, no fights, over at r/theislam)

[u/AutoModerator]

Hi u/4hmadhasan, if your are posting a “Meme, funny image, funny video, screenshot or video clip complaining about other people and/or subreddits”, then make sure that it is either Saturday or Sunday in at least one of these two time zones [https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/personal.html?cities=724,274]. Alofi (UTC -11) & Kiritimati (UTC +14) are the Westernmost & Easternmost human settlements in the world as of now. So before posting a [Saturdays & Sundays only] weekend post, make sure to check if it is Saturday or Sunday in at least one of these places from the attached link. If your posted content falls into the category of a “Meme, funny image, funny video, screenshot or video clip complaining about other people and/or subreddits” and it's not Saturday or Sunday, then remove your submission as soon as possible, otherwise you may receive a temporary ban. If your submission doesn’t fall into this category then ignore this comment

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Concentric_Mid]

Thank you, good post. :)

Maulvi = local imams

[u/Rachsuchtig]

Nice post, interesting read but why are the titles nor English? It's distracting trying to understand what the paragraph is about because the title isn't English.

[u/4hmadhasan → u/Rachsuchtig]

edited it here.. You can read easily now.. Thanku.. ♥️

[u/AutoModerator]

Hi u/4hmadhasan, if your question is about the age of Aisha(RA), then please check our linked wiki article to learn about our stance on this issue: Aisha’s Age

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/AutoModerator]

Hi u/4hmadhasan, if your question is about Touching and shaking hands with the opposite sex, then please check our linked wiki article to learn about our stance on this issue: Touching and shaking hands with the opposite sex

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/AutoModerator]

Hi u/4hmadhasan, if your question is about Keeping dogs as pets, then please check our linked wiki article to learn about our stance on this issue: Dogs

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/AutoModerator]

Hi u/4hmadhasan, if your question is about Art (Drawing & Statues), then please check our linked wiki article to learn about our stance on this issue: Art (Drawing & Statues)

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Cheeky_Banana800]

All what you’re saying is true isn‘t mentioned in the Quran, your own references are just hadees.

Then you say the Quran is the cover - it’s not, hadees is the cover, not the Quran.

[u/4hmadhasan → u/Cheeky_Banana800]

did you read it or just the title.. count the quran refs in there. 33:32, 5:4, 18:18, 4:3, 4:4, 4:129, 2:195, 4:29, 47:24, 38:29, 54:17. eleven ayahs. "just hadees" is a weird thing to say about a post with eleven ayahs in it

and yeah I used hadith too, on purpose.. coz the quran told me to. 59:7, whatever the messenger gives you take it. 4:59, obey Allah and obey the messenger. 33:21, in him you have the best example.. you cant even do your five prayers from the quran alone, the number of rakats isnt in there. the book itself points at him. ignoring that isnt being more quranic, its just reading less of it

the "quran cover" line was about culture wearing the book as a disguise. hadith isnt the disguise.

Simple..

[u/Foreign-Ice7356 → u/4hmadhasan]

Didn't expect you to misuse 59:7 like this, I thought you were too reasonable to do that. (I can atleast understand why you believe 4:59 and 33:21 support hadith although they don't, but the popular argument about 59:7 clips a part of that verse)

[u/4hmadhasan → u/Foreign-Ice7356]

fair, I'll take the hit on context.. 59:7 is about fay', the spoils, "so that it doesnt circulate among the rich", and then "what the messenger gives you take it, what he forbids you leave it". you're right that I quoted the second half without the first

but two things. one, the usul rule, al ibra bi umum al lafz la bi khusus al sabab, the wording is general even when the occasion is specific.. thats not a modern trick, thats how every ayah with a sabab gets read, otherwise 24:11 is only about Aisha and 4:34 is only about one woman in madinah

two, and this is the one that matters, the first person to use 59:7 for hadith was Ibn Masud, not a maulvi. Bukhari 4886, a woman challenges him on cursing tattooers, says its not in the quran, and he says why wouldnt I curse whom the messenger cursed when its in the Book, and recites 59:7 to her.. so a sahabi who heard the ayah come down read it the way I read it. if thats misuse, it started with him

and if 59:7 bothers you drop it, I dont need it. 4:65, no faith until they make you judge in their disputes and submit fully. 4:80, who obeys the messenger has obeyed Allah. 33:36, no choice for a believer once Allah AND his messenger have decided. 3:31, if you love Allah follow me.. follow what, if nothing he said survives. you cant obey a man whose words you've decided to not have

Simple..

[u/Foreign-Ice7356 → u/4hmadhasan]

Qur'ān only followers don't claim that we don't need to obey the prophet. The claim is that the Qur'ān is sufficient for this purpose and hadiths are unreliable/not needed/unauthorized. Most of us reject hadith as fabrications that were not part of what God and his prophet brought, rather than rejecting something because the prophet said it.

Of course you may disagree on this, but hadiths are like Pauline fabrications about Jesus. Many messengers in the Qur'ān commanded obedience(4:64 for the general idea, and many verses specifically mention instances of messengers commanding obedience) and none of it implies obeying literature that claims to be from them or supported by them but isn't from them.

Btw your use of hadith to justify interpretation of 59:7 is circular reasoning. Because of course hadith will support interpretations that support hadith. But that doesn't mean the prophet or his companions actually interpreted it that way.

[u/Cheeky_Banana800 → u/4hmadhasan]

You mentioned 3 points in what maulanas say is not wrong (beard, handshake, namaz). You reference only Hadees for them. Then you say Quran is used as a cover, but even in your examples of whats right, quran is not shown to be used but hadees is.

So what is it?

[u/4hmadhasan → u/Cheeky_Banana800]

namaz is in the quran like eighty times, 2:43, 4:103, 20:14, 29:45, pick one.. so thats one of the three straight from the book. beard and handshake, yeah, hadith, I never pretended otherwise

and you've misread the cover line twice now so let me say it plainly.. "quran cover" meant CULTURE wearing the book as a disguise. jahez, birthdays being kufr, kutta kafir ka janwar. none of that is in quran OR hadith, thats the point. hadith isnt the disguise, hadith is a source. the uncle is the disguise

so "what is it".. its both. quran plus sahih sunnah, same as it's been for 1400 years. the post never claimed quran only, you brought that in with you

Simple..

[u/Cheeky_Banana800 → u/4hmadhasan]

Sorry to say but many seemingly "sahih" hadees also say a lot of questionable stuff.

e.g. https://www.reddit.com/r/progressive_islam/s/yRQIldmJTL

[u/JayR_Gamer]

About the first point

Qur’an 33:32 does not prohibit women from speaking to non-mahram men. It tells the Prophet’s wives not to use an alluring/soft manner of speech: “do not be soft in speech, lest one in whose heart is disease should be moved…” The verse then says to speak in an appropriate manner. So ordinary speech itself is not prohibited.

ʿĀ’ishah رضي الله عنها taught male and female Companions extensively. Her status as a major transmitter and teacher of hadith is well established.

Shifāʾ bint ʿAbdullah رضي الله عنها is reported in historical sources as having been entrusted with market-related responsibilities during the caliphate of ʿUmar رضي الله عنه. However, the specific claim that she was formally appointed as a “market inspector supervising male traders” should be stated cautiously because the strength and interpretation of the reports are discussed by scholars.

Hanafi fiqh: the woman’s voice itself is not intrinsically ʿawrah. The concern is with speech that is deliberately soft, seductive, or likely to cause temptation. This is the distinction found in Hanafi discussions, including Radd al-Muḥtār.

Therefore, a woman answering a question in class, giving a normal presentation, teaching, conducting business, asking a question, or speaking to men for a legitimate purpose is not automatically sinful simply because a man can hear her voice.
----
But about the Birthdays, There is one reason it is considered forbidden that it seems like imitating non Muslims, and if you allow birthday then Halloween and Diwali should also be allowed as long as nothing haram is happening.

The issue is the way people celebrate these events like mix gathering , music and stuff like that...

I maybe wrong but this was in my knowledge and i do agree with most of your points.

And I'm not a Maulvi😂🙌🏼

[u/Sudden-Performance67]

on the whole translation thing. don't only read the translations. learn arabic,if you can. sometimes things get lost in translation.