Dheen General

Dr. Akram Nadwi’s disastrous mistake!

In a recent interview between the BBC and Dr. Akram Nadwi, a scholar and an influential reasearch fellow of Oxford University. Some startling and somewhat shocking statements were made. Millions of people, both muslims and non muslims alike, would be taken-a-back by the new boundaries set on the discussion of segregation in Islam. Dr. Akran Nadwi claims that the early sources of Islam do not advocate or specify any notion of a ‘segregation of the sexes’. The BBC programme ‘Divine women’ aired a number of days ago, dealt a new blow to those seeking formulated assurances of segration in muslim communities. Bettany Hughes – the author, historian and presenter of ‘Divine women’, reveals the hidden history of women in religion. Primarily the programme, focused on the roles of women in religious circles who in many areas shaped, formed and in some cases were instrumental in the spread of its message. Secondly, the programme sought to highlight the defining female figures who helped make a ‘world religion’ become a ‘world religion’. It is in part 3 of the programme where the new claim made by Dr Akram Nadwi, is unleashed on the millions of people both muslims and non-muslims. For the non muslim, he/she would see Islam as no alien to the idea of it being surrounded in controversies and headlines. But, the startling revelation is bound to make many within the islamic religious communities reel with disgust and anger.
In the Wikipedia page dedicated to the Dr, the following is attributed:

Nadwi says he does not advocate unrestricted mixing between the sexes, but acknowledges that Muslim societies and families often limit the potential of their girls and women. He compares this limitation to the “live burial” (i.e. female infanticide) practised in pre-Islamic Arabia. He attributes to the “decline of every aspect of Islam” an insecurity and weakness which leads to these restrictions on girls’ education and women’s rights

Although the quote is self-explanatory, in and of itself it is evident the very liberal and open attitude Dr. Akram Nadwi harbours. The idea of having a physical barrier erected to segregate the genders is non-existent in the scriptures of Islam, according to the scholar, who is apparently an authority on the subject of female scholars in Islam. As absurd and barbaric the claims may seem, these ideas are finding root in the up-coming ‘practicing’ muslims, not to mention in the islamic events organised within university campuses. Where the notion of a physical barrier to segregate the genders is fast becoming a thing of the past!.
I am in no way seeking to tarnish his pious name. Or, seeking to slander the reputable man. But, when it comes to the truth being highlighted and mentioned, i will not hold back in calling a spade a spade!
From the endless ulema and scholars of traditional leaning i have dealt with, learnt from, and had the good fortune of sitting with. They are all clear that despite the mother of the believers, Aisha (ra) being one the fundamental figures of spreading the islamic teachings. She taught behind a veil and the students (whom were male) would sit on the other side of the vial. This is a physical barrier which was in existent long before we had pseudo-scholars in the ummah trying to advocate the eradication of physical barriers! We have a set of standards set by the sharia, which is eternal and does not need to be ‘fine-tuned’ as it were, or changed to suit an era. It is the era and time in question which has to mould into the standards set by the sharia. It is suffice to say, the post 9/11 era has had a dramatic effect on the english speaking scholars of the western world. Those that think our way out of this turbulent times will only be viable if we forsake or even leave behind some of the principles by which we stand!
It is also appropriate to note, Dr. Akram Nadwi is also the person who famously said it is not a sunnah to wear a hat to cover the head whilst in prayers. That, it was an innovation imported from other cultures in which muslims once again threaded this idea into an act of piety. He is a man who seems to be the epitome of the word controversy. When a person seeks to undermine the sunnah by demeaning the practices of Islam. Wether that it is the subject of segregation of the sexes or the practices of the sunnah. One thing is for sure, the end of that individual would not be a very blissful one. As he or she may want it to be. When the doors to sin and evil are left open or in fact removed entirely, we will have situations like this arising: (Astagfirullah!)

By ServantofAlMalik

Islam is in the spotlight now more than ever before and this has caused people to question the faith itself and none more so than the new-age modernists muslims, largely from the convert western countries who are hell-bent on reforming Islam and its traditional values. This blog is a small space in the vastness of the internet where the fight to preserve, uphold and dignify the traditional inherent human values, are proactively argued against the onslaught of modernist propaganda and hate. Covering topics from current affairs to life-enriching inspirations, though to the traditional teachings of the pious and the awliyah of the past and the present. If you would like to contribute to this blog, or become an author of articles then why not contact me on

46 replies on “Dr. Akram Nadwi’s disastrous mistake!”

this is nothing new i have also heard some remarks about the niqaab being made by him. Which is also an afront to all the women who willfully wear the veil.


salams HafiSaad
your point about the veil being the decision of the woman is valid, I dont see how you concluded that shaykh akram is opposing those women who wish to wear the hijab, ive heard a few of his talks and in all of the ones where hijab is mentioned he is only saying that veil is not COMPULSORY…. but he also says if a woman feels her facial beauty may still cause fitnah or distractions to the men, then it is encouraged for her to use the veil…… and he has always given examples of sahaba from hadith to allow listeners to be able to relate to the concepts on a practical level…. maybe there was some miscommunication as his accent is not perfect!!!…. i hope that conflict is clarified… inshallah


adding onto previous point, shaykh akram only says hijab is fard as that is what is clearly defined in quran and sunnah and this opinion is the common opinion in the hafi fiqh, however some hanafi scholars may encourage veil based on location!! ws


you guys need to grow up and seriousl study this guy wrote 52 volume with so much authenticity behind it what you have done any thing goes aginst your elders teachings you guys raise hell do something present a better rserch tan him or just hush up


Assalamu alik ya akhi ……
Giving any/some opinion against the * HUKM -E-QATAIYAH * is deviation from shariyah of Allah S.W.T ……..
writting 52 or 100 books is not any criteria / justification .


I have had the opportunity to sit with Mawlana Akram Nadwi when he was writing his book on Female scholarship. I think Mawlana Shahib is fully aware of the social and cultural context that we live in unlike many of the strict scholars who may have little or no dealing with the wider society. There is nothing wrong being on the side of caution or being ultra orthodox/ conservative. This by no means is the most appropriate or valid stance. Both are valid in the context. Personally I have moved away from ultra orthodox stance as I have grown older and now try to adopt fiqhi stance that are best suited in the present day context (Time and place), provided it is grounded on credible scholarship and not by whimsical or literal reading of text. His observation of many of the female scholarship is very true. Institute were not set up to produce high calibre scholars but rather a system to safeguard the bare minimal (needed for the time to secure future learning).


i have attended some of his classes in oxford at which there have been a physical barrier between the sexed in the classroom


one of his youtube speeches say yes a physical veil if you are in the female instructors house but hijab is fine outside that. Let’s be polite in the comments though people


the proof you are asking for is the hadith that explains when aisha (RA) came into the room without the veil where the blind man was and the prophet corrected her and reminded her to cover, the reasoning for this is that women have to cover up outside the house as that is public environment, but in the house the women are the dominating figure…. hence in her private place a woman shouldnt have to cover, so the barrier was advised so women could continue in the house as normal while men would come and go after meeting the prophet (SAW)
I hope brother i have done a little justice to the complexity of this topic…. please do dua for me in this month jzk


Its so true, in today’s Islam, barriers have been crossed so much that even within practicing Muslim households, where the man has a beard and the women wears a niqab outside, are openly mixing within their friends circles in their homes.
Mahram for a man is his mom, wife, sister and daughter. Not your brothers wife or your cousin sisters.

We will follow in the footsteps of the people before us. step by step. This is now clear!!


firstly i would like to criticise the person who is trying to defend the shaykh by telling people that there is a barrier in the classes in oxford, as he does not have any influence on whether the barrier is put in place even though this person has observed correctly…shaykh akram does not believe that the barrier is a requirement in public, only in the houses, and his basis is made on the hadith referring to the incident when a blind man was in the prophet (s.a.w) house and aisha (r.a) entered the room without her proper covering, and the prophet corrected her, however what needs to be noticed is that the prophet (saw) only reminded her in such a circumstance inside the house, a barrier was never advised or enforced ever in any recollection whatsoever outside the private environment of the house. now if you wish to personally enforce a rule which is not based on SUNNAH (which in every single case without exception is based on a hadith to support it) then do so at your own accord or give your daleel and I wouldnt give two hoots about whether you guys are muslim or not as a daleel will resolve most complications!!! but when my muslims brothers/sisters start making unsupported accusations against a scholars integrity, I remember coming across a hadith which i current cant recall (but im sure given how knowledgeable the people on this blog are they will have no difficulty identifying the hadith i am referring to) about the punishment of people who transgress in disrespect of the the people of knowledge(scholars), I begin to wonder if you people have taken the time to reflect on what is in your own hearts( I ONLY SAY THIS ON THE BASIS THAT PLAYING THE BLAME GAME IS VERY DANGEROUS FOR OUR IMAN AND I DONT SEE HOW ONE CAN LOOK INTO ANOTHER MANS HEART WHEN THEY HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE THEMSELVES!!!)
Brothers PLEASE start contemplating on the deeper guidance of the quran and sunnah and its wisdom before you lose your iman in this vicious circle of pointing fingers!!!


Finally a brother mentioned that this shaykh allows kissing aswell as mixing, Im beginning to get the impression that you guys have no regard for truth, if you want to gossip GO TO THE DAMN CLUBS, stop spreading fitnah in forums like this!
I checked the video and the kissing you are criticising was done by a sahabi, if you were in front me i may have slapped you, criticising a sahabi with such disrespect!!! the hadith the shaykh was referring to was about a sahabi who made a MISTAKE (if you dont understand the term then get a dictionary) and went to prophet to repent several times but the prophet had greater wisdom in mind… he was trying to teach the people a way to purify the sins and mashallah what better way than prayer itself!!! and the shameless people like those on this blog dont even think twice before taking the piss out of the companions!!! THINK THINK THINK stop being a bunch of mindless idiots
and pay more attention before mocking a story of a sahabi !!!


my final point: If you wish to enforce a ruling no problem do whatever the hell you like…. Just remember making the halal into haram and the haram into halal (and onwards) has consequences mostly for those who are not scholars as the scholars will be rewarded even if they make error in understanding a ruling, whereas you people wont be given such liberties even if you interpret correctly as there will still be punishment for not following the usul of learning the knowledge of the religion….Put simple RELIGION IS NOT YOUR TOY TO PLAY WITH IN ANY WAY TO YOUR HEARTS CONTENTMENT…please …we are muslim …. HAVE SOME FEAR


Incase it hasnt clicked with you already… my final point was aimed at the blogger of this article who seems to be very arrogant in thinking he knows the religion inside out… firstly the “scholars” he most likely studies with are sufis and pirs who in the development of shariah do not play a role (maybe in spirituality but definitely not shariah) ….. for the shariah and its rulings we turn to the faqhis and muhaddithin as they are the inheritors of the prophets knowledge, as mentioned by the prophet himself….. as for the claims made about the wives of the prophet and their day to day behaviour, the blogger is correct only to a limited extent, but he has no interest to actually waste his time checking the details… there were unique restrictions applied to the wives before the prophets death and also after, for the reason that they were the mothers of the believers …. you will easily be able to find detail on this topic from any credible scholar, if you are too lazy to find the references in the hadith of which there are countless….where the wives of prophet had a certain code of practice and all other sahabi women had separate code of practice….. however if you still wish to run around flashing that piety flag…. may allah reward you for your simplicity in understanding the rulings…. just remember shariah is not your playground and your actions will have implications on you and other muslims …. may allah open all our hearts to the truth …aameen


The number of contradictory statements in your comments are astounding and unbelievably funny. It amazes me. You say not to criticise the ulema yet you find it okay to publicly ridicule and humiliate the ‘pirs’. In your twisted definition, who do you think the ‘pirs’ are? Charlatans? Soothsayers? If this is your definition of who the ‘pirs’ are. Then I’m not surprised that you are confused and lost in your bubble world, where flying fairies and gnomes exist! Let me correct your understanding. First of all ‘pir’ is a Persian word. Which is used for a shaykh of tazkiyah. – Purification of the heart. A person who has mastered the inward & the outward aspects of Islam, the spritual and the physical, the zahiri & the batini, the exoteric & esoteric.

Secondly, the true ‘pirs’ are the heirs of the prophet (saw). Who are the complete reflection of the sunnah and the SHARIYAH. They are not charlatans or soothsayers as you are under the impression. They first and foremost, have the knowledge of shariyah and sunnah. Some have deeper knowledge of shariyah and sunnah than others but that does not mean in anyway shape or form that they practice things outside the boundaries of shariyah. Do not get mixed up between the charlatans and ‘pirs’. Yes, there are some dodgy ‘pirs’, but that’s with everything in life. You have fakes and the real products. Thirdly, you say the “…’pirs’ (in other words the awliyah and the saliheen) made no impact on the development of shariyah”. Frankly, this is laughable! The greatest Sufi or ‘pir’ was the prophet (saw) himself! Without whom there would not even be a shariyah. The companions, the ai’mahs, the sidiqeen were all ‘pirs’. In other words shaykhs, mashaykhs, and scholars of Islam!


@Kasim I see you are threatening to slap me and telling everyone they can “go to hell”. Is this your way of defending the Sunnah?? First of all, I DID NOT criticise any Sahabah. Please produce your evidence if you think I did! Secondly the question to Shaikh Akram was about free-mixing. Why did he think it was suitable to mention the story about kissing? What did he expect the young college students to learn from that story? Take your head out of your backside and think carefully. If I ask you “is it ok for me to sit next to your sister in class and you say to me that its no problem, some good people sit so close to her they kissed her by mistake, so go ahead”, what would you understand by that? I think you need to worry about your own imaan! Free mixing is an open door to zina! That is why the majority of scholars have prohibited it! Do you know what zina of the eye is? Why Shaikh Akran not mention zina of the eye instead of talking about kissing?


@Kasim you wrote above in reply to someone that “in the house the women are the dominating figure..” and then later you are cussing everyone and telling us to go to the DAMN CLUBS. You also accusing people posting here of not having any knowledge. My question to you is. DO YOU HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE OF THE QURAN? ALLAH SAYS IN THE QURAN THAT MEN ARE DOMINANT OVER WOMEN (Suran nisa 34). COULD YOU PROVIDE YOUR EVIDENCE FOR DOMINANCE OF WOMEN IN THE HOUSE??? OR THIS ANOTHER LIBERAL TAFSIR OPINION OF SHAIKH AKRAM?


@Rayman, Salams and im sorry at the point when i made the comments I was annoyed at the way people were jumping to conclusions by taking little bits of the video and making judgements without any will to check themselves whether this person has a valid point based on hadith, but had time to think and i realised its no ones fault. we are in a time where each individual is inclined to assume what they have been informed first hand is correct and anything they are told is questionable and most likely a lie and i can understand thats a valid position to be in given there are so many interpretations of how religion should be practiced!!!
so i will try to explain the point about the kissing as maybe the message may not have been conveyed as strongly in the video….. what had happened was that a sahabi was in the market place and kissed a woman, he went to prophet (SAW) and told him but no reason was given for the action, the prophet (SAW) turned away from the man three times, so the sahabi went away, the time for prayer came and at the end of the prayer the prophet (SAW) called out for the sahabi who came to prophet (SAW) to seek means for forgiveness(possibly punishment) for kissing a woman. when sahabi came prophet (SAW) asked him to the nearest translation, do you not know the bad deeds are washed away by good deeds…..
please put our differences behind you and just understand the point that is being made as it is very important …. the concept being addressed here is that when you make a mistake dont get too focused in seeking punishment but rather if you make a mistake follow it with a good deed so that you break the effects of the bad deeds on your soul as much as possible by you as an individual…..
furthermore Im sorry i wouldnt really slap anyone it was more of an expression of my feelings as i had assumed you had fully understood the message in the video and I assumed you were aware that it was a sahabi that kissed a woman and i suspected maybe you were ridiculing the kissing story involving the sahabi and if someone ridicules a sahabi or prophet (SAW) from what ive learnt one should sit around and enjoy such criticism against such pious people, as shaykh akram basically took the story from hadith and not from a story book, and i never ever said anyone should go to hell as its wrong to say that to even a non muslim, as we are supposed to be inviting them to religion not telling them to go to hell, i was basically saying people can make whatever rulings up that they like but allahs commands will never change …. im sure the miscommunication should be resolved inshallah
you also asked a few questions about my sister and free mixing and zina of the eyes…. im going to give a general response as my point will be same along most of the points… zina of eyes and free mixing and being in a room with a single non mahrum is clearly mentioned as impermissible by shaykh akram as there is clear evidence in quran and hadith proving these actions are not allowed… however i think maybe you are referring to women being in the public environment, in that case I would define the term free mixing with other similar phrases so we can identify that we agree on the definition of the term, so would you agree that free mixing is essentially mingling or socialising.??? if this is the case then shaykh akram did not allow this at any point , however free mixing does not mean women and men being in a supermarket or a library as they are there to fulfil there own requirements independant of the other non mahrums at the place, and this does not involve any concept of socialising, which is a principle of free mixing…. if it were meant that women shoudnt teach men or learn from them or go to market places…. then what was the purpose of hijab, from what ive understood the hijab allows women to hide that which distracts the opposite sexes in order to avoid fitnah when they do need to leave their houses to fulfil their needs be it seeking knowledge, shopping, etc…
And just to finish on the point you made about students getting the impression that its ok to get close to a sister and kiss her whether intentionally or by mistake…. I doubt any muslim with a general understanding of right and wrong would get the impression that its ok to do such acts in public or even behind closed doors…. as ive watched the video and being a student I never came to such a conclusion that its ok to get close to a sister or kiss her by mistake or intentionally… again i have explained the purpose of the story in the hadith was completely different at the beginning and it carries a much bigger message….
i cant reiterate enough im not trying to get at you in any way in this message… we are all learning and no one has perfect knowledge of the quran except the prophet (saw)…
I hope we hold no grudges against each other as we muslims and if you think someone is wrong that is your right to have an opinion i just encourage that have your references not from people but from the sahih books and the quran as in the end it is them on which all muslim base their iman and amal!!! Wassalam

“The number of contradictory statements in your comments are astounding and unbelievably funny”
You initiated with the above deeply cynical statement and continued with numerous derogatory statements maybe in the hope that it may incline the readers in favour of your points that followed but the only point you seemed to repeat throughout the post was that “a pir is a shaykh of tazkiyah. – A person who has mastered the inward & the outward aspects of Islam, the spritual and the physical, the zahiri & the batini, the exoteric & esoteric.”
I do agree with the first point, a pir is a shaykh of tazkiyah, however the other points you made dont link to this initial definition, as you fail to see that no man can see into another mans heart, hell even a man cant guarantee that he himself will die a muslim or a kafir for that is for allah to decide, and furthermore you talk about physical yet you fail to understand the fact that there is something called privacy for every man, so it doesnt matter how much of a devoted murshid you are there will always being parts of the pirs life you will never know,… so to make such illogical assumptions that a shaykh of tazkiyah has mastered the spiritual and physical aspects of religion knowing you do not have full knowledge of any pirs soul, it leaves my mind boggled as to how you can create such connections without any basis proposition…
so im not even going to ask for an elaboration as you might start saying something like when the pir looks into your eyes, he sees into your soul…. im going to finish off all your points with following response… you said ‘there are dodgy pirs and genuine pirs’… a pir is a shaykh of tazkiyah, and you dont have the right or the ability to determine which pir is dodgy and which is genuine as ive explained previously as you cant see through any mans soul….so a pir is a pir dodgy or not…. i dont have a problem with taking guidance from a pir for spiritual guidance but if you think im going to take sunnah from a man who is not knowledgeable in science of hadith, or if you think im going to take fatwas from a man who does not know fiqh, youve got another thing coming…. being a pir is one thing, being a faqhi or muhaddith or mufti is another, and if a pir is also a certified mufti or alim etc… then im happy to take fatwa from him but i am not going to sit around and have a pir tell people what sunnah is when he doesnt have the courtesy to even bother reading bukhari or muslim to know who his prophet(SAW) was or how he lived his life as beautiful as he did!!!!
again i dont mind if you dont respond as all im going to do is refute you till i feel most people reading are aware of your lack of awareness of DEFINITIONS and RELIGION


@ Kasim. Thanks for your apology. We all get angry sometimes. Seeing what Dr Akram said in the video also made me angry. I read your response and I still disagree with what Dr Akram said. He failed to explain the real distinction between homes clothes and outside clothes. Most hijabi sisters in this country wear the same clothes in both places. They do not cover their adornment (zeenah) with proper jilbal as commanded in Sura e Noor 24:31. They are putting adornments on top of the jilbab or not wear it all. Many of the girls in his lecture were wearing trousers and many types of flowery attractive clothers – zeenah. The purpose of the barrier is to hide the zeenah from view. Dr Akram’s first mistake was that he destroyed the barrier without calling on our sisters to wear proper clothes and jilbabs without adornments. His second mistake is that instead of reminding young people of Allah’s command to lower their gazes (Surah e Noor 24:30) he talked about how easy it is to get forgiveness for kissing. His third mistake is that he said there is no basis in Islam for segregation. He has his right to his own opinion but you can’t stop people from criticising his opinion when he is criticising the opinion of many famous scholars before him who approve the barrier.


My dear brother your knee jerk reactions and simpleton replies leave me no room but to pity you. I do not mean to sound condescending or arrogant but you are coming across as this more and more. Firstly, when I say a ‘pir’ or for that matter, the correct word: shaykh at tareeqa, is ‘pure and has mastered the inner and outer sciences’. I do not mean in any way shape or form that he is free from error. Certainly Not! As I’m sure you would know (hopefully) no person is sinless save the prophets. Secondly a genuine shaykh at tareeqa cannot be a person who has no idea of shariyah, it’s rulings and claim to be a Sufi. He has to be a knowledgable person of the shariyah. Maybe not be to the level of a scholar but has to know at least the basics of Islam. The fard, wajibats, sunnah and nafl actions. Secondly, no shaykh will know what is in the souls. But he will, (just like a physical doctor) know the diseases of the heart of a person by understanding and then diagnosing the symptoms. Which he will only base from the teachings he has learnt of Quran and Hadith. One of the greatest Sufi shaykh being Syyiduna Abdul QADIR JILANI. Who was a Muadith, a mufasir and great arif. Just as a normal doctor diagnoses the problem from hearing the patient, this is how a spiritual shaykh can know also. By the student telling him what he struggles in. Salah, ramadan, fasting etc. Then he will prescribe a prescription from the sunnah for the person to benefit. Lastly, when I say dodgy ‘pir’ I mean the charlatans. A dodgy ‘pir’ is a person who is using the name of a pious person of the past to cash in on the situation and make himself a good living/money. When he does not live by the shariyah, does not pray or fast. There are plenty of these fake charlatans all over east Africa and Asia! To be honest, I’m quite surprised you were not aware of such people. When almost the whole world and even non-Muslims are aware of them. These are the ones who are giving a bad name to the real Awliyah. People see them and instantly think these are ‘pirs’.


Unfortunately Im being forced to respond with simpleton replies if that is how you perceive them only due to your persistent ignorance of my actual points… im not asking for alot im just asking you to comprehend the difference between a figure of authority and a spiritual guide, and im not denying both attributes exist in a single individual, just that a spiritual guide alone cannot be an authority for fard, sunnah, etc…. because as much as I appreciate your passion to convince yourself that a sincere pir must have basic knowledge of religion, I have come across many pirs who are very sincere, and generally anyone can see when a man is sincerely pious through is etiquette and practice of religion, however they do not necessarily know the fundamental principles of the religion as many of them chose to ignore the responsibility of distinguishing culture from religion….. im only saying what i and many other people i know have witnessed. Im sure i could refer to several scholars as potential pirs, as their level of piety is projected through their manners and practice which is based on their ‘sound’ knowledge of sunnah.
I never disagreed with the fact that there are pure and sincere pirs in the world, however you keep making feeble attempts at trying to assume what i am thinking. My general point was simply that a pir is not an authority except but in the field of spirituality, and they are limited in that field aswell for the reason that no man can be better than the prophet (SAW) in spirituality, and our purpose as muslims is to aim to do as the prophet (SAW) did in our attempt to reach the level of piety that he possessed, and Allah does not accept any way other than the prophets (SAW), hopefully you will not reject this point…. furthermore you mentioned the prophet was the greatest pir for all of time… I would have to disagree as the statement is incomplete, brother he was the best scholar, the best man, the best husband, the best father, the best friend, the best businessman, the best son, the best brother, the best jurist, ‘the walking quran’, I could go on but i think you should have got the idea by now, you know im only having to use this approach as you are not demonstrating any will to accept that there is no way to reach perfect spirituality but by being complete in every field of the religion or by being under the guidance of people who are experts in each of the fields which will carry one to the level of spirituality that will gain the pleasure of allah.
so now that ive mentioned some of the characteristics of the prophet (SAW) you should be able to understand that he is not the greatest pir, that is not what he was sent down for, he is the perfect example in every aspect, and that fact that he was perfect in everything made in the best spiritual guide, so in effect you shouldnt be focusing on following a pir but a man he strives to be like the prophet in every aspect of the sunnah and as a result the people closest to the sunnah will inevitably be the muhadditheen…. as they are the ones who are closest to the sunnah through the hadith which they have studied in great depth and implemented into their own lives as much as they are able to….. finally please dont waste time picking petty points to make, if you wish to dispute any points that may benefit us in bringing us closer to the religion then i am more than happy to hear them… jzk


1. Firstly, Sh.Akram Nadwi is one of the respected scholars not only in South Asia but in the wider Arab & Western world.
2. I too learnt of these statements attributing to him sometime back. Though, i took time to find the reality.
3. His views that gender-segregation didn’t existed during salaf era is a minority one or an isolated opinion not held by the wider majority of scholars.
4. Again, about face-veil being not mandatory is his own opinion, although there is difference of opinion among scholars about it but personally i feel, the evidence relating to compulsory face-veil outweighs not wearing it, due to varying factors.
5. Finally, of course in Western World there has begum a movement for a complete reorientation of fiqh which can’t be applied in anyway in the “Muslim-world” but we need to stay a bit cautious in jumping into the bandwagon.
6. Atlast, i feel appalled that in order present Islam palatable to non-Muslim audience in West, boundary rules are being relaxed if not broken, which i feel would have terrible consequences if its not kept in check.


Read sura nisa you deluded imbecile! Allah has categorically mentioned people to lower their gazes and for the women to COVER in order to preserve their modesty. Go and learn Islam from a classical scholar. Don’t make google & yahoo your teachers and lords who you look up to. Thank Allah hypocrites like you are in the very very minority. What a retarded fool!!


astaghfirullah…. brother if you are a muslim, then the person you are calling an imbecile is one of your own…. think before you speak… ws


salams rashed, when making a point always consider what the quran declares in its verses as they are effectively the final call in understanding a direct ruling….. here’s something to think on …. why would allah waste time his and yours to tell you to lower your gaze and guard your modesty, and further instruct the women to pull their head covering over their bosoms so as to protect their chastity if it were just culture or tradition, does it make sense that your creator would reveal to you baseless commands, when there are so many other issues in the revelation that carry so much importance, clearly you must see that covering the head and the body was specifically declared as it was deemed by your creator as necessary. and who knows you more than the one who is closer to you than your own jugular vein….may allah give us knowledge that brings us closer to allah and protect us from the knowledge which deceives man to corruption


[…] as being traditionalists and sufi orientated, also spew out such words. Using spurious ulema like Dr. Akram Nadwi & Hamza yusuf to legalize their stances on being silent when evil is widespread. These spurious […]


Salam alaikum

I am surprised that after complaining about Dr. Akram’s “error”, the article was only able to produce one argument against what Dr. Akram said: the act of Aisha, which as you know is conditioned by the ayah in Surat al-Ahzab: “Oh you who believe, do not enter the house of the Prophet unless you are given permission…” until we get to “and if you ask them (i.e. his wives) for something, ask them from behind a veil. That is purer for your hearts and their hearts.” And this is about the wives of the Prophet (saw), as you can find in any tafsir. In other words, covering and separating oneself from the men was obligatory for the wives of the Prophet (saw) by the command of Allah, but not obligatory for anybody else -unless there’s an evidence for it (a basic principle of usul: a prohibition or obligation needs evidence).

Furthermore, even if we were to say that Aisha’s (ra) action was not linked to the verse, it would still not be an evidence according to the majority of scholars, because the opinion of a Companion is not a hujja according to the majority of scholars. Check out what al-Bazdawi, the great Hanafi usul scholar, says in his usul:
Abu Sa’id al-Barda’i said: “Blind following of a Companion is obligatory and analogy is abandoned due to it.” He added: “And this is what we found our teachers upon.” al-Karkhi said: “It is not obligatory to follow them except in what cannot be understood through analogy.” al-Shafi’i said: “Not one of them should be followed blindly.” Some gave preference in following blindly, and followed the khulafa (ra). The actions of our associates (i.e. Hanafi imams) differed on this topic. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad (ra) said: “Announcing the value of the capital is not a condition”, although the opposite is narrated from Ibn Umar (ra). Abu Hanifa and Abu Yusuf (ra) said regarding the pregnant woman: “She is divorced three times according to the Sunna”, even though the opposite is narrated from Jabir and Ibn Masud. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad said regarding the partner who is employed: “He is liable”, and they narrated it from Ali, whereas Abu Hanifa differed based on opinion.

It goes on to a long discussion regarding when the opinion of a Companion is a hujja and when it’s not, and the conditions for that. However, the main point is that it shows how the founders of the Hanafi madhhab -Abu Hanifa, Abu Yusuf and Muhammmad (ra)- differed from Companions quite often and had no problem with it. Thus, even if it was the opinion of Aisha not based on the verse which specifies it as being something specific for the house of the Prophet (saw) and his wives (ra), even then you would not have an argument that implies obligation according to Abu Hanifa, Abu Yusuf and Muhammad (ra).

In fact, seeing as the article could not quote a verse of the Quran or a saying of the Prophet (saw) to support its argument that what Dr. Akram was saying was incorrect, I wonder whether its author could provide an evidence that perhaps one of the founders of his maddhab held this opinion?

But let’s say, even if you were to find a quote (I doubt it, but let’s pretend anyway), would you be able to dismiss Dr. Akram’s views without having any idea of what his view is based on? Surely that would be a disastrous mistake and a gross deviation from the traditional method of Islamic scholarship, which requires that careful research is undertaken before criticisms are made. This is particularly so when one considers that Allah has said in the Quran (al-Hujurat, ayah 12): And do not backbite one another. Would one of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? You would hate it! So fear Allah, for Allah accepts repentance and is merciful.

And may Allah guide us all to respecting His religion, not playing with its texts to follow our desires, and doing justice to the people of knowledge.

PS. The hadith about Aisha and the blind man does not seem relevant to the topic, as it’s about the hijab in terms of clothing, not hijab as a barrier for physical separation. They are two separate topics.

PS2. Dr. Akram’s daughter wears niqab, so he can’t be that much against it.

And Allah knows best.


This is the most hilarious post in the entire thread. Reflexinismo’s argument is “Don’t follow Sahabah because Hanafi scholars did not follow them and even if anyone provides evidence against his argument it will not matter!? But his own big daleel is “Dr Akram’s daughter wears niqab”! What if she is wearing it because her husband wants to? I think Reflexiionismo should change his name to Reflexioniscuco!


as salaam alaikum,

Most Hanafi cultures that are Indian or Pakistani prefer the full purdah because that is their cultural preference. I’m not talking about the niqab. I’m talking about the barrier in public.

This barrier is bid’ah, let’s be clear. Is it a bad bid’ah? Allahu alem. I don’t mind people using it but it is not fard. The Sahabiyyat (ra) did not read salaah behind a purdah – they WORE their purdah.

I also wear my purdah. If I am in my home and my husband is entertaining male friends, I can and do use walls and doors to maintain my purdah, as that is my home. But to extend this “home” system of purdah into events is absolutely, 100% redundant and not at all required.

Aisha taught behind a purdah in her home because she was IN HER HOME. If she was teaching in a mosque she could have just taught in her full (clothing) purdah and have been fine, but she preferred to stay in her home because that was the command given to the Wives of Muhammad (saaws), not to ordinary women.

The Hanafi Aalimahs where I live teach at the madrasas and they do not have a screen in front of them. They teach in full (clothing) purdah. They are not doing anything wrong by this, and to say that women are doing something wrong because they wear their purdah instead of putting a physical wall or curtain or divider between them and other people is a huge misunderstanding of what purdah is and how it is used.

Do we not remember this ayat? “And when it is said to them, ‘Follow what Allah has revealed,’ they say, ‘Rather, we will follow that which we found our fathers doing.’ Even though their fathers understood nothing, nor were they guided?”

Most of the Hanafis where I live are guilty of this exact same charge. They follow a lot of Hindu cultural practices mixed in their Islam, and when you try to correct them they absolutely refuse to listen because this is how their parents taught them. I’m sorry to be blunt but there is no justification for a lot of what these laymen (not Aalimahs) do, and even when you confront them with evidence still they’d rather follow their own desires and culture than Islam.

Finally, if you think I’m a Salafi you are wrong. The Salafi “madhhab” will never succeed as it uses democracy to establish its rulings (e.g. the “Majority of scholars” nonsense). I don’t care what the majority of scholars say. I care WHY they say it. If the evidence for the ruling is based on faulty analogy or weak hadith or misunderstandings of Arabic, then I do not follow the majority, not even within my own school. I follow the most sound ruling.


Erm… It’s either you’ve not been to the haram or is completely retarded! Both the harams a have barriers, sections for women and men. Lol. You for real?



Salam alaykoum;
I invite the brother who wrote that to look at the history of the first masjid in islam, there was no ‘physical barrier’ until the number of attendent grow so much that Rasul PBUH asked the sahaba to ‘make’ a place separated for women so they can be at ease.
Also, if the sheikh has doubts about the hat, who are you to say that he has issues with ‘Sunna’ astaghfirou Allah, stop for a minute, re-read what you writ and either give arguments (verifyable ones, bye giving the Hadiths or bye giving the names of the scolars who claims as you says)
History tells it true, if you have other facts than what you said about Ummuna Aicha, give them. Cause the matter of Umahat el muslimines can’t always be taken as a rule regarding their very special status in islam.


You must be joking right? How can you say we can’t follow the ummahatul Musleemin because they have special status in Islam? Ther lives and the lives of the entire cadre of companions are beacons of guidance and light for us to follow and emulate. Otherwise it’s like saying the prophets have a special relationship with Allah so we can’t follow them. Astagfirullah! Please think before you speak, write or do. The author was pointing out a valid point which agree with. In this time and age when everything is falling apart, the least we should expect is that our own so called scholars ready with their begging bowls in front of the non Muslim audience. Seeking to get approval, acceptance and appriciation from them. Unfortunate many of these phoney scholars are prevalent in our societies leading people astray.


With regards to the wearing of the hat, there is a hadith in Tirmidhi about it, which suggests the sahaba and the prophet (saw) wore a hat:

حَدَّثَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ، حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ لَهِيعَةَ، عَنْ عَطَاءِ بْنِ دِينَارٍ، عَنْ أَبِي يَزِيدَ الْخَوْلاَنِيِّ، أَنَّهُ سَمِعَ فَضَالَةَ بْنَ عُبَيْدٍ، يَقُولُ سَمِعْتُ عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ، يَقُولُ سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقُولُ ‏”‏ الشُّهَدَاءُ أَرْبَعَةٌ رَجُلٌ مُؤْمِنٌ جَيِّدُ الإِيمَانِ لَقِيَ الْعَدُوَّ فَصَدَقَ اللَّهَ حَتَّى قُتِلَ فَذَلِكَ الَّذِي يَرْفَعُ النَّاسُ إِلَيْهِ أَعْيُنَهُمْ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ هَكَذَا ‏”‏ ‏.‏ وَرَفَعَ رَأْسَهُ حَتَّى وَقَعَتْ قَلَنْسُوَتُهُ ‏.‏ قَالَ فَمَا أَدْرِي أَقَلَنْسُوَةَ عُمَرَ أَرَادَ أَمْ قَلَنْسُوَةَ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏”‏ وَرَجُلٌ مُؤْمِنٌ جَيِّدُ الإِيمَانِ لَقِيَ الْعَدُوَّ فَكَأَنَّمَا ضُرِبَ جِلْدُهُ بِشَوْكِ طَلْحٍ مِنَ الْجُبْنِ أَتَاهُ سَهْمٌ غَرْبٌ فَقَتَلَهُ فَهُوَ فِي الدَّرَجَةِ الثَّانِيَةِ وَرَجُلٌ مُؤْمِنٌ خَلَطَ عَمَلاً صَالِحًا وَآخَرَ سَيِّئًا لَقِيَ الْعَدُوَّ فَصَدَقَ اللَّهَ حَتَّى قُتِلَ فَذَلِكَ فِي الدَّرَجَةِ الثَّالِثَةِ وَرَجُلٌ مُؤْمِنٌ أَسْرَفَ عَلَى نَفْسِهِ لَقِيَ الْعَدُوَّ فَصَدَقَ اللَّهَ حَتَّى قُتِلَ فَذَلِكَ فِي الدَّرَجَةِ الرَّابِعَةِ ‏”‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَبُو عِيسَى هَذَا حَدِيثٌ حَسَنٌ غَرِيبٌ لاَ نَعْرِفُهُ إِلاَّ مِنْ حَدِيثِ عَطَاءِ بْنِ دِينَارٍ ‏.‏ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ مُحَمَّدًا يَقُولُ قَدْ رَوَى سَعِيدُ بْنُ أَبِي أَيُّوبَ هَذَا الْحَدِيثَ عَنْ عَطَاءِ بْنِ دِينَارٍ وَقَالَ عَنْ أَشْيَاخٍ مِنْ خَوْلاَنَ وَلَمْ يَذْكُرْ فِيهِ عَنْ أَبِي يَزِيدَ ‏.‏ وَقَالَ عَطَاءُ بْنُ دِينَارٍ لَيْسَ بِهِ بَأْسٌ ‏.‏

Narrated Fadalah bin ‘Ubaid:

That he heard ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab saying: “I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) saying: ‘The martyrs are four: A believing man whose faith is good, he meets the enemy and proves faithful to Allah until he is killed. That is the one to whom the people will raise up their eyes like this on the Day of Judgement’ and he raised his head until his hat fell – [he said:] I do not know if it was ‘Umar’s hat or the hat of the Prophet (ﷺ) that fell – he said, ‘And a believing man whose faith is good (but not as brave as first), he meets the enemy, but due to cowardice, it only appears that he was struck with a thorn of an acacia tree when an unexpected arrow comes to him, yet it kills him. He is among the second level. And a believing man who has mixed righteous deed with another evil one, he meets his enemy and proves faithful to Allah until he is killed. This one is in the third level. And a believing man who wasted himself (in wrongdoing), he meets the enemy and proves faithful to Allah until he is killed. This one is in the fourth level.'”

[Abu ‘Eisa said:] This Hadith is Hasan Gharib, it is not known except as a narration of ‘Ata bin Dinar.

He said: I heard Muhammad saying: “Sa’eed bin Abi Ayyub reported this Hadith from ‘Ata bin Dinar – from some Shaikhs of Khawlan – and he did not mention ‘from Abu Yazid’ in it.” And he said: “‘Ata bin Dinar; there is no harm in him.”

Imam tirmidhi considers this hadith to be fine, though Albani insists it is Daeef.

Secondly, it is common sense to assume that the sahaba wore hats. Have you experienced the desert heat? imagine walking around in 50 degree heat with your head exposed. Obviously they covered their heads to protect themselves from the heat.


I don’t know very much about Akram Nadwi but this blog entry is not written in the vein of someone interested in the truth.

The shaikh’s credentials demand respect and are unlikely to be equalled by the author.

In fact this entry does not deserve being maintained, it should be a matter of great shame to the author.


Hadhrat Aisha RA was one of the mothers of the believers and they RA had completely different standards due to the command in Surah al Ahzab for the wives RA of Nabi S to remain behind a screen. Regular Muslim women were not commanded to do this.

The proof is one Hadith where a wife RA of Nabi S was ordered by Nabi S to go behind the screen when a blind man RA came to visit. But a regular sahabiyyah RA was advised by Nabi S to live with that same blind man RA during her iddah as he would not be able to see her.

See the difference? We have taken the strictest level of Shari commands meant for a special class of women and tried to apply them to all women



So do you segregate men and women during the holiest of holy rituals e.g. umrah, and tawaaf. Can’t you see how culturally influenced your views are? And Why would you need a hat to pray….what purpose does it have??


Leave a Reply to Moe Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.