Forum Comments:

About the "majority" view


Dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq
Associate Professor of Economics and Finance
Upper Iowa University 

IBF-Net; 11/14/06; Message #5681; Reply to: #5657

[Note: To access the messages to which my comments were in reply, one may need to subscribe to the respective forum.]



Salam and greetings.
 
Br. Robbani shared some observations about the "majority" view, which is not related to Dr. Yunus thread. However, I believe this issue of the "majority view" deserves some deliberation.
"I would request my brother Dr. Mohammad Farooq to ... not waste (in my opinion) his energies on things that ultimately will not benefit the Ummah (such as insisting that interest is not Riba when the majority opinion say that it is). ... I would urge him to try to come to common terms with the majority opinion that modern day interest is actually Riba and thus haraam."
I welcome Br. Robbani's observation, as all these are in an Islamic spirit and it is due to our mutual love in the path of Allah that we offer nasihat to each other. May Allah shower abounding mercy and blessings upon Br. Robbani and all others in this regard. As far as the majority view in general, I would like to learn more.
 
Can Br. Robbani or others share any dalil in favor of the view that we should adhere to the "majority" position on any issue, because it is the "majority" view? Indeed, I find some interesting aspects on "majority", if we want to approach it from the theological or legalistic perspective. Please consider the following:

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
I used to teach Qur'an to 'Abdur-Rahman bin Auf. When Umar performed his last Hajj, 'Abdur-Rahman said (to me) at Mina, "Would that you had seen Chief of the believers today! A man came to him and said, "So-and-so has said, "If Chief of the Believers died, we will give the oath of allegiance to such-and-such person,' 'Umar said, 'I will get up tonight and warn those who want to usurp the people's rights.' I said, 'Do not do so, for the season (of Hajj) gathers the riffraff mob who will form the majority of your audience, and I am afraid that they will not understand (the meaning of) your saying properly and may spread (an incorrect statement) everywhere. You should wait till we reach Medina, the place of migration and the place of the Sunna (the Prophet's Traditions). There you will meet the companions of Allah's Apostle from the Muhajirin and the Ansar who will understand your statement and place it in its proper position' 'Umar said, 'By Allah, I shall do so the first time I stand (to address the people) in Medina.' When we reached Medina, 'Umar (in a Friday Khutba-sermon) said, "No doubt, Allah sent Muhammad with the Truth and revealed to him the Book (Quran), and among what was revealed, was the Verse of Ar-Rajm (stoning adulterers to death).'" (See Hadith No. 817,Vol. 8) [Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 9,
924b]

Does this hadith give credence to the "majority" view? Remember this was still the early periods not too long after the Prophet. There is an additional problem with this hadith. It claims that the verse of rajm was in the Qur'an, while the Qur'an does not have any such verse.

And no doubt after the death of the Prophet we were informed that the Ansar disagreed with us and gathered in the shed of Bani Sa'da. 'Ali and Zubair and whoever was with them, opposed us, while the emigrants gathered with Abu Bakr. I said to Abu Bakr, 'Let's go to these Ansari brothers of ours.' So we set out seeking them, and when we approached them, two pious men of theirs met us and informed us of the final decision of the Ansar, and said, 'O group of Muhajirin (emigrants) ! Where are you going?' We replied, 'We are going to these Ansari brothers of ours.' They said to us, 'You shouldn't go near them. Carry out whatever we have already decided.' I said, 'By Allah, we will go to them.' And so we proceeded until we reached them at the shed of Bani Sa'da. Behold! There was a man sitting amongst them and wrapped in something. I asked, 'Who is that man?' They said, 'He is Sa'd bin 'Ubada.' I asked, 'What is wrong with him?' They said, 'He is sick.' After we sat for a while, the Ansar's speaker said, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' and praising Allah as He deserved, he added, 'To proceed, we are Allah's Ansar (helpers) and the majority of the Muslim army, while you, the emigrants, are a small group and some people among you came with the intention of preventing us from practicing this matter (of caliphate) and depriving us of it.' [Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 8, #817]

This hadith is also related to the same theme as above. However, it has some further information related to what transpired after the death of the Prophet in selecting the successor. These are all companions of the Prophet. Does this hadith support the position that we should go with the "majority" view  - at least of the companions? Indeed, the "majority" view in this context was not adhered to, until de facto allegiance to Hadrat Abu Bakr was established, and gradually others rallied.

Narrated Imran: The Prophet said, "The Prophet said, "I looked into paradise and saw that the majority of its people were the poor, and I looked into the Fire and found that the majority of its people were women." [Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 8, #554]

Interesting. The majority of the people of Paradise are poor. If poverty is also associated with lack of access to education, then it is also understood that these are probably among the people who are the same people who don't know even the word "salat", but they know "namaz" [e.g., in entire South Asia, Persia, etc.]. They don't know what is siyam, but know "roza". Let alone having a nuanced knowledge and understanding of the issues pertaing to riba- interest, most of them don't even know what riba is [in the non-Arabic speaking world]. How can such people reach Paradise? Also, the majority of the people entering hell are women. Poor women!!! I am afraid that as a matter of conscience I can't reconcile myself with the import of such condemning view of women in general. One doesn't find support for such condescending view of women in the Qur'an.

Narrated Salman bin 'Amir Ad-Dabbi: I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "'Aqiqa is to be offered for a (newly born) boy, so slaughter (an animal) for him, and relieve him of his suffering." (Note: It has been quoted in Fateh-AL-Bari that the majority of the Religious Scholars agrees to the Hadith narrated in Sahih At-TlRMlZY that the Prophet was asked about Aqiqa and he ordered 2 sheep for a boy and one sheep for a girl and that is his tradition "SUNNA".) [Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 7, #380]

If the "majority" view is invariably what we are supposed to adhere to, then who says that Muslims don't view male children as more precious than female children? Does Br. Robbani agree to this majority view? I can't say I am sorry that I did not adhere to the "majority" view in this regard. I found the majority view here discriminatory and not sufficiently supported with dalil to be acceptable.

Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: On 'Id ul Fitr or 'Id ul Adha Allah's Apostle (p.b.u.h) went out to the Musalla. After finishing the prayer, he delivered the sermon and ordered the people to give alms. He said, "O people! Give alms." Then he went towards the women and said. "O women! Give alms, for I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-Fire were you (women)." The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is the reason for it?" He replied, "O women! You curse frequently, and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. O women, some of you can lead a cautious wise man astray." Then he left. And when he reached his house, Zainab, the wife of Ibn Masud, came and asked permission to enter It was said, "O Allah's Apostle! It is Zainab." He asked, 'Which Zainab?" The reply was that she was the wife of Ibn Mas'ub. He said, "Yes, allow her to enter." And she was admitted. Then she said, "O Prophet of Allah! Today you ordered people to give alms and I had an ornament and intended to give it as alms, but Ibn Masud said that he and his children deserved it more than anybody else." The Prophet replied, "Ibn Masud had spoken the truth. Your husband and your children had more right to it than anybody else." [Sahih al-Bukhari: Vol. 2, #541]

In some hadith, the only reason for the condemndation of the "majority" of women to hell is their "ungratefulness" to their husbands. [See Vol. 7, #125] In the above hadith, women are also portrayed as "deficient in intelligence and religion". Furthermore, when it says "I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you", what were the women really compared to? There are only men and women.

Abu Sa'id al-Khudri reported that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) used to go out on the day of Adha and on the day of Fitr and commenced the prayer. And after having observed his prayer and pronounced the salutation, he stood up facing people as they were seated at their places of worship. And if he intended to send out an army he made mention of it to the people, and if he intended any other thing besides it, he commanded them (to do that). He used to say (to the people): Give alms, give alms, give alms, and the majority that gave alms was of women. [Sahih Muslim, #1931]

Once again, interesting. It was women who were more generous than men. However, that's still no good, as they would be the "majority" of the hell !!! Of course, a complete generalization regarding this may not have been intended in such case. But if it is not an indication of women's relatively more generous nature, then the above hadith has only historical-context-specific relevance. However, there are many other hadiths that generally indicate more generosity and softness of heart of the women.
 
Here I have shared a brief survey of the view about "majority" based on hadith. I do understand the importance and weight of the preponderance of any view. I also don't think that the majority view is necessarily wrong or right. I am also not opposed (rather agree to) the role of majority at the "functional", decision-making level. I also don't believe that to be correct one has to be in a minority view. However, in reaching a conclusion, at least tentatively to the best of one's knowledge and understanding, a believer should uphold what he finds right in light of his conscientious due diligence, not just siding with the "majority" view.
 
Now, if we approach the issue of "majority" view on any matter from a theological or legalistic perspetive, I would very much like to be enlightened about the dalil for adherence to the "majority" view on any subject. Indeed, even if the Ulama had deveoped a functional "majority" approach to determining an authoritative view, then things would be different. However, even our Ulama do not approach "majority" as the criteria of the correctness of their own view, and that's why there have been so much divergence in views, especially in regard to laws and codes. Indeed, there are many examples where even some companions held on to their views that were not consistent with the majority, in some cases, the overwhelming majority. 
 
Seeking further enlightenment. Fi amanillah.
 
==========================================
Dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq
http://www.globalwebpost.com/farooqm


Home
Index of My Writings
Have you visited my other sites?
Kazi Nazrul Islam?
Genocide/Bangladesh/1971?