Yasir Qadhi – Are Women Allowed To Get Educated & Should Hijab Be Mandated
AI: Summary ©
AI: Transcript ©
So today's topic is gonna be one of
those
controversial ones.
As you're aware, I try to mix classical
Islam, tafsir, hadith with history and with modernity.
And I have to give an introduction before,
I talk about this topic because
what the the issue or the scenario is
that some of our youngsters came to me,
a country, not to no need to mention
the name of the country, has recently instituted
a policy of very strict women's code in
public,
banning women speaking in public,
curtailing the education of women, and they are
doing this in the name of Islam. And
our youngsters, our youth, our sisters especially,
they're wondering, what do we do?
Should we criticize in public? Should we defend?
Is this Islam? What exactly do we It's
a very awkward scenario. This is in the
news for the last week and especially our
Muhajibah sisters, they're put online. They're put on
the the the inquisition. People ask them, are
you supporting of this policy? Or is this
something a part of your Islamic tradition that
even the face is covered and you cannot
even speak and whatnot? So this is a
awkward reality that we have to explain and
discuss.
Now,
the fact of the matter is these are
very difficult topics. It's not easy.
And when I venture into these complex topics,
as usual, I open the door for a
whole barrage of criticism.
If you are aware, everywhere everybody is aware,
subhanAllah,
I am criticized by every single front for
every single thing. Either I'm a fundamentalist fanatic
or I'm a CIA agent, or everything in
the middle, or I'm a reformer of Islam,
or Iran scholar, or a sellout, or a
jihadist, or whatnot. Everything you can imagine I
have been labeled. And I sometimes wonder,
should I just leave talking about these topics
and just do some classical non controversial sub
but wallahi my conscience cannot allow this. Wallahi
I find it with utmost respect to all
the other scholars is good for them.
I am genuinely
concerned about the iman of our next generation.
And if we do not talk about these
difficult complex topics, if we leave them in
the dark,
then who else is gonna explain? Do you
want them to be educated by CNN?
Do you want them to get their information
from
Fox News?
So we have to discuss some very difficult
topics. And when I discuss one of the
problems is that
so many of our
insiders, if you like, the religious folks, they
want a simplistic black and white answer.
They want a yes or no, halal and
haram.
And when you don't give it to them
and when you try to be nuanced,
and if you listen to my talks, you
know me. I always try to give context.
You know, this is a multifaceted
difficult topic. It's not a simple yes or
no. When you try to do this and
therefore the simple minded, I call them 1
dimensional fundamentalists.
You don't give them what they want immediately.
Oh, this means you're destroying Islam, you're reforming
Islam, your alkaafir, your zindiq, your dawah. No,
a'udhubillah, a'udhubillah, a'udhubillah.
We wanna defend Islam, but sometimes these are
complex issues that are involving multiple arenas. And
so there's no easy answer.
This is a regime and a group of
people. They have a history. They're not coming
out of nowhere. And the reality is that
you cannot give a simplistic
one syllable answer, yes or no. So what
we're gonna try to do today is to
educate,
to begin the conversation. And even if I'm
mistaken in some views,
the goal is to defend Islam, the goal
is to raise awareness. If you disagree, come
to me. Let's have a discussion.
The goal is to provoke thought. The goal
is you do your research. I'm gonna be
mentioning specific points here. And the way to
respond to this is twofold.
There is a defensive way, I'm gonna go
over a few points defensive
and then there's an offensive way. Okay? So
bear with me, we're gonna go defense mode,
2 or 3 points, Now we're gonna switch
over to offensive mode, 2 or 3 points.
Then we'll conclude. Okay? As for the defensive,
the defensive way,
these critics they come and they say, oh,
how come your Islamic religion has all of
these codes about morality and whatnot? And the
response is they are comparing apples and oranges.
Why? Because Islamic law and the Islamic
society
and the Sharia
aims for more than what Western law aims
for. Western law is not concerned with private
morality. Western
law is not interested in akhlaq,
in tahbib,
in kamal of the nafs. Western law has
had to force itself to withdraw
from morality.
Western law is up to you what you
wanna do.
Islamic law is not like that. And so
you cannot compare
liberalism and democracy.
You cannot compare
secularism with the Sharia. It's apples and oranges,
completely different paradigm. And therefore, there's no point
in trying to equate, oh, this or that.
No. Because Islamic law and the Sharia and
a Muslim society
aims
to preach a type of morality,
to better your soul, to protect akhlaq,
to protect, you know, one's iman, one's ruhaniyat.
Whereas Western law, Western society
has no such intention.
And this goes back to their history
in which they were not able to live
with religion and the state together.
If you know your European history, they could
not live under the church. The church became
so tyrannical.
The church became so backward that they had
to get rid of the church completely in
public life. And they said, khalas, we don't
want anything to do with the church in
public life. They had a very bad experience,
call it PTSD with religion.
We as Muslims never had that PTSD.
Frankly, we look at the past with glorious
lens. We have a sense of nostalgia,
romantic nostalgia that in the good old days,
we had the pinnacle of technology, the pinnacle
of ulama, the pinnacle of science, everything was
combined. We never had the
types of church inquisitions.
Galileo wasn't burnt at our stake, it was
burnt at their stake. So Western society
had to
divorce itself from morality or else they could
not live together. And our Eastern society,
we
flourished under Islamic law. And it was only
under colonization
that we had to come under these nation
states and strip away from the Sharia and
have these difficult contradictions. So fact of the
matter is when a Westerner complains about Islamic
law, you have to sit back and educate
them. It's apples and oranges. Islamic law has
a very different goal than Western law. Also
still in the defensive mode
is that given the
reality of the world we live in,
question arises that what exactly does Islam say
about personal akhlaq and personal morality and personal
dress code. And fact of the matter in
an ideal Islamic land, if we lived in
a utopia,
if everybody Masha'Allah was a good Muslim who
wanted to abide by the Sharia, there is
no question that in an Islamic land, we
would want a land in which there's no
*. There's no Fahesha, there's no *, there's
no drugs, there's no alcohol, there is decency.
Now, what level of strictness and what are
the penalties? This even within Islamic law, you
have a bit of variation. Right? And so
some interpretations of Islam say that the face
does not have to be covered, it's not
obligatory. And some interpretations say that the face
should be covered as well. So this is
within mainstream Islamic law. And me personally,
I I even though I don't view the
niqab as being obligatory, but still I respect
all opinions that are mainstream. And we have
to say that within the mainstream views, there
are views that are
aura.
It's a the 4 madhhabs as a default
say the voice is not an awra. It's
a very, very minority opinion that says a
woman's voice should be awra as well. Generally
speaking, the default and this is the classical
Hanafi position as well, some modern Hanafis ever
different. You've heard the classical Hanafi school and
the Shafris and the Malikis and the hambalis,
all of the madahib,
the default position, a woman's voice is not
an awra. Nobody has to put any restrictions
if she speaks in a dignified manner. And
by the way, this is the Quran and
sunnah because Allah says in the Quran, Falatakhtaana
bilqawli,
that when you speak, do not speak in
a flirtatious manner, which means you can speak.
Do not speak in a flirtatious manner. And
throughout the Seerah, I cannot even count how
many instances a woman comes and complains or
challenges or asks a question and never once
is she told, hey, woman your voice is
awra. Never once in the entire Sira. And
we have again, the examples are too numerous
and that is the men and women talking
to each other in the marketplace, in the
masjid, people recognizing, people questioning, women questioning the
prophet sallAllahu alaihi wa sallam. Too many examples.
So then what is the evidence of those
that say woman's voice is aura? They don't
quote Quran and Sunnah as much as they
quote a principle. And that principle is shutting
the door of temptation,
I e we don't want to open this
door. It's better, you know, to be to
to be cautious. Right? To be extra over
cautious, we should go down this route. So
that's what the, the the principle they use.
And obviously, this is a Pandora's box because
how cautious do you wanna go in this
regard? But that is the, the reality that
they they use that. And and I say
in an ideal world in an ideal world,
there should be some no doubt,
soft power, which we want morality, we want,
covering of the men and women, we want
interaction to be in a dignified manner. Now
what level one goes, it depends on which
interpretation of Islamic law. That having been said
however, that having been said however, we also
have to point out that
we are not in an ideal world.
And
those
countries, and I'm trying to be very soft
here, there's only 2 or 3 countries in
the world that have mandated
covering
the hair.
Oh, actually, I think I think only 2
now.
There's only 2 or 3 countries that have
mandated covering of their Muslim countries.
And what we see, and this is an
awkward reality so please listen to me because
this is where my critics, they kind of
love to just put in their 2¢ here.
What we see those countries that have been
overly harsh or overly conservative,
there is a
backlash.
And
the reality is that this strictness
actually causes many people
to leave spirituality
and leave loving Allah and His Messenger.
And we see in one country that had
a very strict law, but recently they shifted
it, subhanAllah, from hardcore covering to now nightclubs
and dancing overnight.
Where did all of that strictness go? It
was completely
superficial, we can tell like this. Another country
has this mandate and since they have been
mandating it, the levels of riddah and leaving
Islam has gone from 1% to 30%.
Like there's such a animosity
to this rule that it is actually now
become something that people Astaghfirullah astaghfirullah hate Islam
for. Whereas,
those countries that haven't mandated it but have
allowed preachers to preach have
softly
encouraged it. We have found hijab increasing by
10 fold.
In the eighties,
hardly any Middle Eastern and my own country,
my parents country as well, it wasn't common
amongst the elites. We know this, I know
this, you all know this. Now you go
there, mashallah tabarakallah,
you see religiosity,
prayer and hijab everywhere.
Which one has been more successful?
Harsh power or soft power? So I say
and I'm sorry to be blunt here but
especially our young men who are very overzealous
and if you if they don't get their
fatwa immediately you become the murtad or the
zinik or whatnot. My dear brothers, with utmost
love and respect,
harshness
only works in some situations and scenarios.
And the general rule is softness
will accomplish more. And this also applies to
Islamic laws as well.
If society is not ready
and you come and you be ultra strict,
you might end up causing more damage and
harm.
Wallahi we're on the same wavelength. Don't misquote
me. I'm not saying that, you know, Islamic
law doesn't mandate modesty. Of course it mandates
modesty, but I'm just being factual with you.
You're getting angry at me. I'm pushing back
at you. The majority of Muslim lands do
not mandate this level
in public as the law of the land.
The majority Muslim lands have allowed the preachers
to preach and soft power and you want
them to do that. But you don't put
in the government and whip people if they
don't because there's gonna be a backlash.
So again, this is the tension between
ideal and between what?
Reality.
This is the tension. And when I quote
reality, I am not endorsing it.
I wish we lived in a utopia.
I wish we live where everybody's iman was
mashallah 100%.
And if their iman is strong, then yes,
you can bring a system that is to
their level. But when people
are not at that level, what did our
mother Aisha radiAllahu Anha say? And this is
something we need to think about. We're still
on the defensive, we're gonna get too offensive
now in a bit. Our mother Aisha radiAllahu
anha said, the first
verses of the Quran that Allah revealed, they
dealt with heaven and *, Jannah and now
iman and taqwa.
And iman then grew in the heart.
Once iman became strong
then Allah revealed don't drink
and Allah revealed don't gamble and Allah revealed
don't do zina.
Our mother Aisha herself said, if the first
commandment that Allah revealed would be don't drink
and don't gamble, the Sahabah themselves would have
said we can't do this.
And unfortunately,
our many of our youth, they wanna jump
to 100 when the people are at level
5. It doesn't work that way. You have
to slowly build them up. Now, how do
you do it and whatnot will vary from
time to place to culture. But I am
saying the Sharia asks us that if a
policy is gonna result in worse backlash,
then use your wisdom and go step by
step. Gradualism
is a part of the shari'a. There's nothing
wrong with this. It's not kufr to say
this, that listen, the ideal is there. You
are way down here for you to come
and start at point 100 when the people
are at point number 5 or something. It
doesn't work that way. Also,
you have to be fair.
Islamic law, what has it primarily come to
do?
Is the veil number 1 on the list?
How about prevention of crime?
How about safety? How about elimination
of poverty? How about justice? Isn't this more
important in the Quran than one of these
other aspects? So let's begin with the big
issues and work our way down. Listen to
me carefully, the goal, yes, is the full
program. But you don't start from the bottom
by ignoring the top because it's gonna result
in a backlash. So organically, slowly but surely,
this is how it should go. And eventually
when the people are ready, we give them
InshaAllahu ta'ala a higher level. So this is
on the,
defensive. And for the record me personally,
I do not view women's voice as an
aura and, women's education. Again, personally again, we're
gonna have a sheikhir who has written 30
volumes about female scholars of Islam. He has
a book, Muhadditha 30 volumes about the female
scholars of Islam. We've always had female scholarship.
We've always had, Muhaddithaat
and and Muqri'at and the scholarship has been
a part of the tradition. So I personally
do not agree with this, but they have
their their views and even if we disagree,
khed, it is what they have done. Now
this is the defensive. Now let's go on
the offensive,
the offensive against the critics.
We need to understand
that
while it is true that Western lands are
largely secular, they don't get involved in private
morality,
still you cannot have a law that is
completely immune to morality.
Even the West
has morality laws.
They must because by system, by government, you
must talk about private issues. Simple example, the
West is still discussing issues of abortion, issues
of LGBT. They're discussing it because it does
affect public and private and they're having their
own agendas about this. They're they themselves have
laws about modesty and *.
Every single country in the world
has certain laws about indecency.
Every country in this country, you have different
laws for men and women about what they
can and they cannot wear. This is the
reality.
And
person will say, but hold on a sec.
The laws of America don't deal with the
headscarf. They deal with maybe the upper body
or the lower body. And we say, so
the point is the law of the land
is getting involved in covering the body. Yes
or no? Yes. The law of the land
philosophically speaking, let's not ask the percentage of
the body, is not this government also dictating
that a man and a woman cannot walk
around publicly without anything odd? Yes. There's indecency
laws in the federal level and there's indecency
laws at the state level. There's indecency laws,
you will go to jail, you will get
fined in every Western country even those, Astaghfirullah
for saying this, but some countries you're not
gonna be fined for being absolutely no clothe
but certain acts conjugal relations cannot be done
in public. Why?
Because it's indecent.
So every single country has indecency laws. So
then
the issue then becomes
who gets to decide
what is indecent and what isn't?
Who gets to decide what percentage of the
body should be covered?
Our country, this country, America,
its indecency laws keep on going down and
down and down and down.
Every one of us who grew up in
the seventies, eighties, nineties, we see how society
has changed. What was not allowed on public
TV is now mainstream and public TV. What
even the, what even the
cables did not allow, now it is mainstream
completely.
So when you don't have a system in
place, when you don't have a
clear cut methodology,
indecency will continue to go down and down
and down and down and down. In this
country in this country, sorry to be a
little bit explicit, a 2 piece bathing suit
was considered to be indecent and immoral up
until
the sixties.
Sixties,
you you would be arrested. In fact, there's
a famous picture. It is so halal. I
can even show it in the masjid nobody
would get angry. That's how it is. That
a woman is wearing a full bathing suit
in this country 1920,
a full bathing suit, but it goes only
to her shin, to her,
beneath the the
the the knees. It only goes to here.
Full bathing suit and famous picture she's being
arrested in California beach. Why? Because her shin
is showing.
This is 100 years ago.
100
years ago, she's wearing full bathing suit which
we now call a burkini.
Burka, burka the women's our sisters wear it,
right? She's wearing basically a burkini, right? And
she goes to jail in this country,
in this country. Why? Because her feet and
her upper shin, a lower shin, it's not
even upper, lower shin is being exposed. So
in 100 years
from going to jail because your feet are
showing or your lower shin is showing to
now astaghfirullahalahaalafzillah
complete almost in the beaches, complete almost *.
What happens when you don't have a system
in place? This is what's gonna happen. So
every government, every country
has decency laws and you will go to
jail for being indecent. If other countries have
different laws, we need to push back. Why
should American morality
and American indecency
be the standard of the whole globe? What
gives America the right to dictate decency laws?
Why can't other cultures have their own decency
laws? So we push back at them. Who
are you to dictate to the rest of
the world when you yourselves are debating, and
you yourselves have constant cases and whatnot back
and forth between And now the AI images,
another debate is happening. If the AI comes
in and and and pretends to be a
living person and creates a indecent image, is
that legal or not? Now the courts are
debating this child AI. The courts are debating
this. So indecency laws are universal
around the world.
If a certain regime has a different standard
than your regime,
they're all standards. And no one culture should
have the right to be the definitive. So
we go on the defense over there as
well.
Another,
defense that we can do or another sorry,
offensive. Sorry, offensive. Another offensive we can do
is that you seem to be overly concerned
only when Muslim women are involved. You never
get involved when the western laws seem to
criminalize
against Muslim dress code. You only want their
quote unquote freedoms in Muslim lands. Why are
you not complaining about Belgium and about France
and about other countries that have banned the
hijab or the niqab? Where's the freedom of
women over there? And as you're probably aware,
I just told you that woman was arrested,
for you know exposing her lower leg in
1920.
Well, a year ago, 2 years ago, a
woman was arrested, a Muslim sister was arrested
in France. And again, I showed the picture
and I put it on my on my
Facebook. She was arrested in France because she
wore a headscarf and she was fully covered
on the beach. The French have a law,
it is not allowed to be covered on
the beach.
This is their law. And she got fined
I think €500. Why? Because she's wearing a
headscarf and she's wearing a full, you know,
modest clothing sitting on the beach with her
kids. And the police came and wrote her
a fine. You're not allowed to be covered
on the beach.
How come the same institution CNN and Fox
News don't get irritated at France? Where's the
freedom of the women in France all of
a sudden? Selective outrage. Only when Muslim women
are covered, they just cannot stand it and
they want to get rid of the covering.
Okay. How about in Western laws when Muslim
women choose to be covered? How about then?
So we can be on the offensive over
here as well in this regard that there's
a selective outrage. Also another offensive in reality
that we have to point out is that
this regime that you're so irritated about, it's
not coming out of thin air.
You used to control this very land.
And in your timeframe,
this land
was completely
subjugated to internal civil war, to mobs, to
hysteria.
People were not safe on the streets. Women
would get raped always under your watch, under
your watch. It was not safe for men
and women to live.
This regime has come whether you like it
or not, they have brought a semblance of
civil law and order. Women can actually walk
safely on the street without being intimidated.
Now, which would you rather have? A society
where a woman can wear whatever she wants
while astaghfirullah the possibility being raped which happened
under your watch or a society where she
might have to be a little bit extra
but there is civil law and order?
You see, again, it's so easy for the
critics to point out the negatives, but how
about the positives?
This society and this regime, whatever you wanna
say, it has brought stability
and it has brought a sense of order
that this country has not had for over
40 years. And then I go to my
final point here. And this is really the
the harshest point here.
Who exactly are you
to tell us that you care about women,
especially in that region,
when you directly have been involved
in massacring and killing over a 1000000 people
by your own invasions in that country.
Wallahi, the hypocrisy
of America. And I say this as somebody
born and raised here, The hypocrisy of our
government and our media
to point fingers
at
a local group that is from their own
tradition and background for having women cover and
say we want the freedom of women. The
very fingers you are wagging, they are dripping
with the blood of a 1000000 widows, a
1000000 children have died because of our invasion.
And even now as we speak, you talk
about caring for women, 50,000
children have died in Gaza because of your
lands. So many women are without children, without
husbands
massacred because of our bombs. We have to
push back and say, who do you think
you are to make us pretend that you
care about women and children? It is obvious
that you do have no concern for actual
sanctity of life rather all Muslims understand,
understand. I don't like using the conspiracy card.
I'm not gonna say conspiracy, but I will
say it's a vicious game that is being
played. A vicious game. What is that game?
The game is
we need to pretend to the world we
are morally better. We are superior to those
people. We need to pretend that we are
better
and of the ways we will pretend
is we will pretend to care about women's
rights and women's education.
Wallahi we care about women's rights and education
but you guys
cannot claim you care about women's rights when
you have bombed that very region back into
medieval times, when you have invaded under false
pretenses,
when you have physically raped a'udhubillah your own
troops, when you have had your own, you
know, background bases over there, your own torture
chambers over there, when you have literally kidnapped
women, we have sister Afiya sitting literally a
few miles away, kidnapped in of the very
land over there, the very land over there,
literally the very land. So please spare us
your hypocrisy
that you care about women's rights because wallahi
your actions speak louder than words. You do
not care about women's rights. You do not
care about education. You do not care about
freedom. You have an agenda.
And as a part of that agenda,
you must portray
that civilization
as backward and barbaric
even though in terms of covering the hair
versus bombing,
you are the real barbaric
aliens and invaders. You are the real people
who have massacred and killed. There is no
equation between covering the head the head versus
literally massacring a 1000000 people. So please
spare us this rhetoric of caring about women
and wanting their betterment.
You have no right to preach to the
very people whom you have bombed into being
of the middle ages. And it is because
of your invasions, and it is because of
your meddling that this group has actually achieved
legitimacy
cause it is the only group that gave
stability when you could not give stability. It's
the only group that gave the people dignity
because they actually represent the people, they're of
the people and by the people. And even
if I disagree with some of their policies
and I do for the record, I do
disagree. Listen to me carefully.
My criticism
will never ever be in the side of
those that have invaded this country. My criticism
will be as a brother to brother internally.
We keep our baggage and our dirty laundry
inside.
I will not be used as a tool
in a vicious game. I will not be
using a pawn from the very people who
want to use me as an inside native
informant, as a tool in a vicious game
to legitimize
invading, to legitimize their their notion of them
being superior. No Wallahi they are not superior.
And even if I disagree with some policies
of this regime, and I do, I will
try to advise them privately, or I will
criticize them internally, or I will never ever
join sides with the others, and go on
public TV and lambast them without pointing out
who the heck do you think you are
to get involved in all of this. So
oh Muslims,
the situation is more complex.
It's not a simplistic yes or no here.
Even if we disagree and I do disagree,
be careful,
be very careful that you do not become
an unwitting pawn in a vicious game that
is trying to legitimize
the dehumanization
of our religion. That's really the goal here.
That's really what is happening here. They choose
one of them
who was
no doubt viciously attacked and shot and no
doubt we our sympathies goes out to this
lady and they give her the Nobel Prize,
right? Whereas in reality, and why do they
do this? Because once again they wanna portray
that we are the victors, we are the
superior race. This is all a facade.
It's all a vicious game. How are you
the superior race when you're the ones that
bomb them back into medieval times? You're the
ones that invaded. You're the ones that have
deprived them of becoming a modern nation state.
It's your double invasions and you're supporting and
you're doing this and that. So please spare
us this false rhetoric and this hypocrisy
of pretending to be superior. And therefore all
Muslims and especially our youth here, do not
think it's a simplistic either this or that.
No, the world is much more complex.
And when they criticize,
they're not criticizing
except with an agenda. And when they point
fingers, those fingers are not pure fingers that
they're pointing. So even if you disagree, then
disagree from a different paradigm, not from their
paradigm. And if they come and point something
at our brothers and sisters before you join
them and say, yes, I agree like that.
Make sure you put a mirror to the
very people that are pointing fingers. Make sure
you show them hold on a sec, who
exactly are you? And there's a hypocrisy and
there's selective outrage and this and that. So
do not fall prey to this false narrative
and understand the world is a complex place.
It's not a simplistic place. In the end
of the day, we make dua for our
brothers and sisters in that region, for the
people in charge in that region to take
the advice and the mashura of the global
scholarly community to prioritize what Islam wants them
to prioritize. I am not in a position
to, you know, dictate minute details. Maybe some
aspects are beyond my knowledge. So I'm not
gonna be too harsh and critical, but for
the record I say
that, I think that they need to also
take into account the PR and the positives.
And even from an Islamic perspective, really why
follow the strictest opinion? Why when the Sharia
has multiple opinions? In my humble opinion, if
I were to advise them, I would say,
you know, be wise in this regard and
prioritize other things for the time being and
have a soft morality. But to go to
the very strictest, perhaps this might result in
a backlash that is not good, but that
is between me and them personally. When CNN
comes and Fox News comes, I will not
jump on their side and point fingers at
my brothers and sisters. No, I will defend
their right to do so. And I will
say to CNN and Fox, who are you
to criticize when you have far more bigger
crimes that you have to answer for? You
have no right to get involved in metal
and local affairs. Would you like it if
they started pointing fingers at you and they
started saying things about your industry? And again,
so much can be said here, the filth
of this land. Imagine if the power was
reversed. Imagine
if that country had superpowers, if that country
had the media, if that country was invading
this country and constantly in the media, they're
talking about, I'm sorry to be blunt here,
the * of America, the * of
America, the filth of this country. They're constantly
saying, look at these innocent ladies, how they're
being misused and abused. 19 year old girls
and they're being abused by these filthy men.
And they constantly, constantly do this. And they're
attacking this land and they're throwing bombs on
it. Would you like this to be to
be completely switched around? And if that were
to be switched around, it would make more
sense because we are defending the honor of
our sisters around the world. But khair, in
the end of the day, oh Muslims, please
be more
intelligent,
more nuanced.
Understand
that it's not a simple yes or no.
And may Allah Subhanahu Wa Ta'ala grant us
the wisdom to not be an aid of
an enemy against our brothers even as we
advise our brothers. Wajazakumullahu Khaira. Wassalamu alaykumu rahmatullahi
wa barakatru.