Kuff and Umm Kulthoom’s Marriage
An argument that Answering-Ansar recycles again and again (and again) is that Umm Kulthoom was not the Kuff (equivalent) of Umar bin Khattab, and therefore the marriage could not have taken place.
First, it should be established what is Kuff in the first place. It literally just means that a man should marry his equivalent. Now, as for what constitutes equivalency, this is a matter of debate. Various scholars have done their own Ijtihad and they have postulated as to what factors are involved when it comes to Kuff. There are a variety of opinions amongst the Ahlus Sunnah as to which factors are considered in Kuff, but the strongest and most egalatarian opinion–and the one used by the Salafi scholars–is that Kuff is in reference to religious commitment only.
Evidence for this position comes from a Hadith of the Prophet in which he said: “If there comes to you (to propose marriage to your daughter) one with whose religious commitment and character you are pleased, then marry (your daughter) to him, for if you do not do that, there will be fitnah (tribulation) on earth and widespread corruption.” (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 1084, from Abu Haatim al-Muzani. This hadeeth was classed as hasan by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi.)
This is the opinion of the Salafi scholars, as stated by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen, who is considered one of the highest of authorities in Salafi circles:
Islam-qa.com says
Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen [said]:
The issue of kafaa’ah or compatibility has to do with religious commitment, as Allaah has explained in His Book.
Thus, Kuff is largely in reference to religious commitment. It is also in relation to such intangible elements that are a manifestation and reflection of this religious commitment, including character, personality, respect, interests, and habits. In fact, the best approximation of the word Kuff in the English language would be the word “compatible.” To ask if a couple is Kuff is to ask if they are compatible. Compatibility means that the two people have personalities which match up with each other (i.e. their chemistry is good). The key point is that Kuff refers to the inner-self of a person, and not the superficial and external things of which a person has no control over.
The Prophet said: “A woman is married for four reasons, her wealth, lineage, status and Deen (i.e. religious nature). So choose the one who is religious.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, 2/762) Here, the Prophet categorically downplays wealth, lineage, and status as being factors to choose a wife for; instead, he says to look for religious commitment in a potential spouse.
It is true that the position of the Hanafi and Hanbali Madhabs is that wealth is one of the factors comprised within Kuff. However, they say that this requirement for wealth is met if the man is able to provide the Mahr (dowry) and can afford the expenses of the marriage as well as maintenance of the wife and household. Umar bin Khattab met these requirements and thereby fulfilled the financial qualifications of the Hanafi and Hanbali Madhabs. As for the Maliki and Shafii Madhabs, they do not even recognize that wealth is a part of Kuff, and this is the position of the Salafi scholars as well.
Islam-qa.com says
If a man is able to provide the mahr (dowry) and can afford the expenses of marriage and the maintenance of his wife and household, then he is compatible with her, according to the majority of scholars, both those who regard wealth as a condition of compatibility, such as the Hanafis and Hanbalis, and those who do not, such as the Maalikis and the Shaafa’is according to the more correct view among them.
As for the view that the husband must be rich on the same level as the wife, this is a less correct view that was held by some of the fuqaha’.
But the correct view, based on the evidence, is that compatibility does not matter except with regard to religious commitment, as is the view of (Imam) Maalik (may Allaah have mercy on him).
Answering-Ansar says that Kuff refers to the following:
1. Ancestry / Family Lineage / Tribe
2. Free or slave
3. Wealth / Property
However, this opinion is a very weak one, and is refuted by the stronger opinions which are based upon the Quran and the Hadith.
1. Ancestry / Family Lineage / Tribe
As for ancestry, this would be a direct violation of the Islamic exhortations of egalatarianism. It would be bigotry and discriminatory for people to be judged upon their origins instead of their actions. And in fact, this concept is based in the very Jahiliyyah that the Prophet came to destroy.
The Prophet said: “There are indeed people who boast of their dead ancestors; but in the sight of Allah they are more contemptible than the black beetle that rolls a piece of dung with its nose. Behold, Allah has removed from you the arrogance of the Time of Jahiliyyah (Ignorance) with its boast of ancestral glories. Man is but an Allah-fearing believer or an unfortunate sinner. All people are the children of Adam, and Adam was created out of dust.” (At-Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud)
The Prophet said further: “Undoubtedly Allah has removed from you the pride of arrogance of the age of Jahilliyah (ignorance) and the glorification of ancestors. Now people are of two kinds. Either believers who are aware or transgressors who do wrong. You are all the children of Adam and Adam was made of clay… If they do not give this up (i.e. pride in ancestors) Allah will consider them lower than the lowly worm which pushes itself through dung.” (Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi)
Thus, it would be immoral and unjust to claim that Umar bin Khattab could not marry Umm Kulthoom on the basis of his ancestry. We have noticed the pattern adopted by the Shia who say that such-and-such person was an illegitimate child from a reprehensible person and therefore he too must be wretched. This is not morally sound: a person can only be held accountable for his own actions and deeds, not those of his ancestors or even parents. Likewise do the Shia say things like such-and-such person was born to such-and-such great person and therefore he is blessed. This too is not morally sound, as it conveys a sense of superiority over a person for no action or doing of his own.
SunniPath.com says
Suitability and compatibility (kafa’a) is also one of the important things that need to be considered when choosing a spouse. One of the main ingredients for a prosperous and successful marriage is compatibility. The greater the compatibility and more similar your goals and outlooks, the more likely is the prospect of a successful marriage…the most important aspect that needs to be considered when choosing a spouse is one’s religious inclination and manners. There is no mention of looking for a spouse in the family.
Compatibility is encouraged, but that does not necessarily mean looking for a spouse within the family. Many times, you may have so much in common with somebody from a total different background, whereas no chemistry is found between first cousins.
There are many examples where the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) and the Companions (Sahaba, Allah be pleased with them all) contracted marriages outside the family. Thus, to place exaggerated emphasis on marriages within the family based purely on pride of ancestry and lineage is something that Islam disapproves of.
And Allah knows best
Muhammad ibn Adam al-Kawthari
Darul Iftaa, Leicester, UK
As for tribalism, the Prophet clearly declared Assabiyyah (tribalism) to be Haram: “He is not one us who calls for Assabiyyah or who fights for Assabiyyah or who dies for Assabiyyah.” (Abu Dawood)
The Prophet said about Assabiyyah: “Leave it. It is rotten.” (Sahih Bukhari & Muslim)
He further said: “The people of such and such a tribe are not my friends and supporters, rather my friends and supporters are the pious, no matter where they are.”
Therefore, all arguments made by the Shia in which they say that Umar could not have married Umm Kulthoom based on his parents or ancestors are nullified and made void by the egalatarian spirit of Islam.
2. Free or slave
The idea that free people can only marry free people or that slaves should only marry slaves is very immoral and it does not match up with the Quranic exhortations. Allah says in the Quran:
“And marry such of you as are solitary and the pious of your slaves and maid servants. If they be poor; Allah will enrich them of His bounty. Allah is of ample means… ” (Quran, 24:27-34)
Here, Allah says for the free masters to marry their slave women. So obviously this is not what is meant by Kuff either. The Prophet married Zaynab bint Jahsh al-Qurashiyyah to his freed slave Zayd ibn Harithah, and he married Fatima bint Qays al-Fahriyyah al-Qurashiyyah to Usamah, the son of Zayd, and he married Bilal ibn Rabaah to the sister of ‘Abd al-Rahmaan ibn ‘Awf. All these examples eliminate the possibility that Kuff would mean being free or not.
3. Wealth / Property
The same Quranic verse I quoted above applies here too. Allah commands in the Quran for Muslim men to marry pious women even if they are poor. So how can we say that wealth and property is an issue when it comes to marrying someone? It would again be immoral and unjust to claim this.
The Prophet said to Banu Bayaadah: “Give (your female relative) to Abu Hind in marriage and ask for his daughters in marriage” and he was a cupper. Therefore, we find that wealth cannot be a part of Kuff, otherwise the Prophet would not have advised people to marry someone who was a cupper.
Islam-qa.com says
What is implied by the ruling of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is that attention should be paid to compatibility in religious commitment first and foremost. So a Muslim woman should not be given in marriage to a kaafir, or a chaste woman to an immoral man. The Qur’aan and Sunnah do not pay attention to any compatibility beyond that. It is haraam for a Muslim woman to marry an evil adulterer. No attention is paid to lineage, profession, wealth, or whether the man is free or a slave. It is permissible for a lowly slave to marry a free woman of noble birth, if he is chaste and Muslim. And it is permissible for a non-Qurashi to marry a Qurashi woman, and for a non-Haashimi to marry a Haashimi woman, and for poor men to marry rich women.
And he said: The fuqaha’ differed as to the definition of compatibility. Maalik said, according to the apparent view of his madhhab, that it refers to religious commitment…
Social level may refer to lineage, wealth, education, profession or job, or it may mean all of them.
If a man’s religious commitment and character are pleasing, then he is compatible with the woman, no matter what her social level, according to the more correct view, as noted above. This is the basic principle and the ruling of sharee’ah.
The truth is that Kuff is a very subjective word, and it simply means what its translation is: equivalency. What constitutes equivalency is subjective. Umar bin Khattab was definitely the Kuff of Umm Kulthoom because he had religious commitment, character, and respect comparable to the best. There is not a single scholar who would argue otherwise. How could one say that Umar bin Khattab al-Farooq is not the Kuff of Umm Kulthoom!? He was the Caliph of the Muslims, the Companion of the Prophet, and one of the founding fathers of the Islamic movement. We cannot possibly find a better suitor than this.
Furthermore, even if we were to accept the weaker position of those scholars who say that Kuff refers to lineage, we find that none of these scholars ever claimed that Kuff was only lineage. There are also many other things such as wealth, position, etc. If a potential candidate is weak in one item, he may be stronger in another thereby compensating for what he “lacks” in; he would thereby fulfill the Kuff requirement. Hence, if the Shia feel that Umar bin Khattab was “weak” in his ancestry, then he more than compensated for this by his elevated position, wealth, and prestige as the Caliph of the Muslims.
Thus, we learn three things:
1. Kuff is subjective. There is no way one can use a litmus test and declare someone not to be Kuff to the other.
2. Kuff is multi-factorial. No one element can disqualify a person, but rather it is a general feeling of relative equivalency that must be met. If a person is weak in one thing he might be stronger in another.
3. There is no way that two people can be exactly Kuff (equivalent). After all, no two people are exactly equal in wealth/property. If one person has a few cents more than another, does this suddenly mean that they are not good for marriage? Likewise, if the Shia value the lineage of Ali ibn Abi Talib, then one could easily value the lineage of Umar bin Khattab Al-Farooq who was the second highest Sahabi in rank (above that of Ali). Thus, Umar’s lineage would be comparable to that of Ali’s and therefore Kuff would be met in this matter; if their lineages are not exactly equal, they are at least comparable to each other.
Kuff is Not a Requirement, Only a Recommendation
It should also be noted that no matter what definition of Kuff is taken, at most Kuff is a recommendation and not a requirement. This is simply what the scholars have recommended their believers to do based on their own individual Ijithad. Kuff does not fit into the necessary obligations of a Nikah, which include having two witnesses and other such things. Therefore, a Nikah which is not Kuff in the eyes of some scholars is still a valid Nikah because it meets the Shariah requirements for a marriage.
Therefore, even if Umar and Umm Kulthoom were not Kuff according to some scholars, their Nikah would still be 100% valid and accepted as such.
Syedi vs Non-Syedi
In regards to the idea that a Syedi can only marry a Syedi, the response to this is that the strongest opinion amongst the Ahlus Sunnah–the one taken by the Salafi scholarship–is that there is no such thing as “being a Syedi.” Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid issued the following fatwa on the matter:
Islam-qa.com says
The idea that there are “sayyids” or “walis” (“saints”) whom Allaah has singled out from among mankind for some favour, or that they have a status which other people do not share, is an idea which is based on the Magian belief that Allaah is “incarnated” in people He chooses from among mankind. The Persians used to believe this of their kings (Chosroes) , and that this spirit moved from one king to another, through his descendents. This Magian (Zoroastrian) idea spread to the Muslims via the Raafidi Shi’ah, whose origins are Magian – so this idea was introduced to the Muslims. This idea says that Allaah selects some of mankind, to the exclusion of others, for this status, which is the status of imaamah and wilaayah. So they believe in this idea with regard to ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib and his descendents, and they add other positions to that, such as sayyid…They said that as this sayyid or wali has this position and status, then they know better what is in our best interests, so we should entrust our affairs to them, because they are better than us, and so they are more entitled…There can be no doubt that this is obviously a misguided notion.
This is the strongest opinion and it is the most egalatarian. Why should anyone be elevated based upon a matter which they had no control over? It does not make sense. If one were to claim Umm Kulthoom was superior because she was of the lineage of Ali ibn abi Talib, then Umar bin Khattab could claim lineage to Prophet Nuh who was superior to Ali. And if that were still not enough, then Umar could claim lineage to Prophet Adam. The truth is that we are all children of Adam and descendants of Prophet Nuh. Therefore, ancestry cannot be used as a guage of superiority because we all come from such noble status. It is only our evil actions which destroy our inborn nobility, and it is only our good deeds that reflect our nobility.
There is no such thing as “being Syedi” and this is an imaginary position that people have invented of their own. It has no basis in the Quran and Hadith. The Prophet called certain people “Syedi” but this does not mean that their children automatically become Syedi as well. The Prophet referred to Abu Bakr as “Sadiq” (truthful), but does this mean that this title will be passed on to his children and their children as well? Of course not. They may or not be truthful, and truthfulness is not an inherited quality but rather it is an aspired for quality. Therefore, the idea that people are born as “Syedi” has no sound basis and it is a weak position. It is sad that some Sunnis have adopted this bigotted idea of “being Syedi”, despite the fact that its origins can be found in the Ghullat Shia who are the first to exaggerate on such matters.
As for those Sunni scholars who take a different position than the Salafis and acknowledge the existence of “Syedis”, the vast majority of them do not prohibit marriage between a Syedi and a non-Syedi. We read the fatwa of Shaikh Faraz Rabani on Sunni Path:
SunniPath.com says
There is nothing wrong with marrying a non-Sayyid if he is religious, upright, and of good character.
It is wrong to marry a Sayyid who is not this way, and you have no obligation to obey your parents in such a case.
As for the Hanafi position that Answering-Ansar referred to, Kuff is only a necessity in case that the girl’s Wali does not agree to the marriage. According to the Hanafi Madhab, if the two are equal in stature (Kuff), then they can get married without the permission of the Wali. This is the Hanafi position (and it is misstated by Answering-Ansar). Thus, those who do not meet the Kuff requirement can still get married with the blessing of the woman’s Wali; in Umm Kulthoom’s case, Ali had agreed to marry her off to Umar and thus this criteria was fulfilled.
Ask-Imam.com (A Hanafi fatwa site) says
“A sayed female can marry a non-sayed male if she has the permission of her guardian” (Raddul Muhtaar, Vol. 2, Page 297, Fataawaa Darul Uloom Deoband Mukammal wa Mudallal, Vol. 8, Page 236/7)
There is no Syedi alive today who is equivalent to the greatness of Umar bin Khattab. In any case, there are many differing opinions amongst the Ahlus Sunnah in regards to “being Syedi”, but there has never been a strong position such as that it is completely Haram for a Syedi to marry a non-Syedi. No Sunni fatwa site on the net has passed such a ruling. For that matter, the Shia Maraje’ have also allowed a “Syedi” to marry a “non-Syedi”; Grand Ayatollah Sistani was asked the following question to which he answered:
Grand Ayatollah Sistani says
Question : Can a non-Sayyid man marry a Sayyid girl?
§ Answer : Yes
So how can Answering-Ansar claim that the marriage could not have taken place since Umm Kulthoom was a Syedi and Umar was not? Their own Maraje’ have said that it is perfectly permissible for such a marriage to take place.
Something Else to Think About
There is another pressing matter: by demanding that Umm Kulthoom only marry the Ahlel Bayt, the Shia are quite literally asking her to marry amongst her biological brothers only! After all, the Shia say that Syedis are the descendants of Ali and Fatima. In that case, the only option left for Umm Kulthoom would be to marry one of her biological brothers, since nobody else in the world is Syedi yet. I hope that these Shia propagandists can understand how ludicrous this argument of theirs is.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Umar was the Kuff of Umm Kulthoom. Kuff translates to “equivalency” and it simply warrants that the two parties are compatible with each other. In fact, the best lexical usage of the word “Kuff” is indeed compatibility. Umar and Umm Kulthoom were compatible because they both had a great religious commitment. The fact of the matter is that Kuff is something subjective. There is no way to actually rank people objectively; the Shia view Umar in a very negative light, but the Sunnis see him as worthy of any woman. The entire purpose of the debate was to prove that Umar bin Khattab is a worthy individual otherwise Ali wouldn’t have given him his daughter.
Written By: Ibn al-Hashimi, www.ahlelbayt.com
|
|