Indian Fatwa Issued Against Women Working With Men and Hair Dye

India’s economic boom has resulted in not just tremendous growth in the country but tremendous advances for women. Now, however, Muslim clerics have issued a fatwa to bar women from working or mixing with men in the workplace. The clerics also took time to condemn hair dye as unIslamic.

Maulana Saidur Rahman Azmi Nadwai, principal of Nadwatul Ulema, insisted that “in Shariat, there is a clear cut direction that women should wear veil in the office and should not mix with the male colleagues.” A good Sharia-based stylist, however, may continue to use heena.

It turns out that hair styling was addressed by the Prophet himself. This is from the Fatwa Center:

Dyeing the hair with Henna is a confirmed Sunnah of the Prophet ; he did it, said it and confirmed it. ‘Uthamaan Ibn Mawhib said: “I entered to the house of Um Slamah, so she showed me some hair of the Prophet dyed with Henna and Katam (a kind of dark Henna).” [Ahmad and Ibn Maajah] Furthermore, the Prophet said: “The best thing with which you dye your grey hair is Henna and Katam.” [An-Nasaa'ee]
Moreover, Ibn ‘Abbaas narrated: “A man who dyed his hair with Henna passed by the Prophet . Upon seeing him, the Prophet said: “This man did really well.” [Abu Daawood] Besides, Imaam Muslim reported that Abu Bakr and ‘Umar dyed their hair with Henna. Therefore, there is no way in doubting over the permissibility of dyeing the hair with Henna or doubting whether or not this is a Sunnah. The fact that Henna does not grow in the desert and believing that the Prophet was unlikely to obtain it, does not affect the religious ruling.

Of course for some men and women going grey, it is better Sunnah and later to get that younger look.

For the full story, click here.

9 Responses to “Indian Fatwa Issued Against Women Working With Men and Hair Dye”


  1. 1 Jericho 1, May 11, 2010 at 9:04 am

    And I’ll issue an agnostic fatwa on anyone making public religious statements….

    Here’s the single devine commandment I adhere to: Thou shalt keep thy religion to thy effin self…

    Freedom of religion is bullcrap, we need freedom from religion and fast.

  2. 2 vlf2112 1, May 11, 2010 at 9:31 am

    Good DOG! These religious types have entirely too much time on their hands, and too much religious crap on the brain.

  3. 3 Anonymously Yours 1, May 11, 2010 at 10:59 am

    Somebody has to make sure you don’t work on the sabbath. Any states in the US still have “Blue Laws”?

  4. 4 Queen of Sheba 1, May 11, 2010 at 10:59 am

    Jericho;
    Don’t visit Maine. The new GOP platform, voted on and passed last weekend, has as one of its tenets that the constitutional phrase “freedom of religion” does not mean “freedom from religion.” We have our own home-grown religious zealots to contend with.

    I wonder if the Muslims will now attempt to impose this bit of Sharia law on the overwhelming Hindu population of India. Could make for some fireworks (also prohibited by Sharia law).

  5. 5 TJ Colatrella 1, May 11, 2010 at 11:37 am

    The ban on commenting on the World Wide atrocities of Islam is one of the terrorists greatest weapons and why there will be War and Carnage in our near future…!

  6. 6 Buckeye 1, May 11, 2010 at 1:00 pm

    Does this explain all the long hair and beards we see in pictures from those countries where Sharia law prevails? All the women banned from “styling” and all the men too macho to do so?

    It seems the Koran’s interpretations have as many inconsistencies as those of the Bible.

  7. 7 lottakatz 1, May 11, 2010 at 1:25 pm

    This only appears tangential at first glance:

    http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0511/kagan-helped-shield-saudis-911-lawsuits/

    Kagan helped shield Saudis from 9/11 lawsuits

    “…Kagan, acting as President Obama’s Solicitor General, argued that the case should not be heard even if evidence proved that the Saudis helped underwrite al Qaeda, because it would interfere with US foreign policy with the oil-rich nation. She posited “that the princes are immune from petitioners’ claims” because of “the potentially significant foreign relations consequences of subjecting another sovereign state to suit.” ”
    ———-
    Free speech (as well as justice) will always take a back seat to political expediency in protecting the interest of ones allies, trading partners and here at home, voters. IMO that’s driving the West and Europe in deferring to screwball, extremist religion be it Muslim or our own home grown teabaggers, birthers and anti-abortion wing-nuts.

  8. 8 Macbooker 1, May 11, 2010 at 2:17 pm

    I have spent time in India representing other faiths and philosophies other than Islam and Hindu. Less than 15% of the population is Muslim, with most of the others being Hindu. I found that everyone wanted whatever is best for their people regardless of it origins. That was at a social betterment level which didn’t conflict with any religious beliefs or practices. On the whole, their educated class were more liberal in their beliefs than are many Americans.

  9. 9 Blouise 1, May 11, 2010 at 2:49 pm

    Hey, you wanna be a Muslim? This is what you put up with. It’s none of my business.


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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




Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Turley Tweets

Click here to follow the blog on Twitter.

SELECTED AS TOP LEGAL OPINION BLOG (2011)

SELECTED AS TOP LEGAL THEORY AND LAW PROFESSOR BLOG (2008)

blawg100_2008_winner9349c7

Winner — Top Opinion Writer By Aspen Institute and The Week Magazine for Best Single-Issue Advocacy (Civil Liberties)

Categories

Archives


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 781 other followers