What is the ruling on a woman running for political councils, arguing that women in the Old Testament bandaged the wounded in war, and the Shaykh’s clarification that the electoral system is not an Islamic system.

The Shaykh : What he fears...

The questioner : Regarding the nomination of women, was there anything in the principles, meaning in the first century, of one kind or another, nominating a woman to work as a leader or like Nadiya Bashnaq or other candidates? She says that in the time of the Companions, there were those who bandaged the wounded, provided first aid to the wounded, and fought?

The Shaykh : Tell her to go down into the battlefield and bandage the wounded... No, it does not exist. But the thing that may be mentioned before I answer your question is that we must state that this entire system, meaning the electoral system, is not Islamic, even if there were only Islamists. Encouraging the entire Ummah, all its individuals, to choose members for the National Assembly, this was never an Islamic system. The Muslims lived for long centuries without knowing such a system, except when they were colonized by the disbelievers, first militarily, and secondly and finally ideologically. As is known to all scholars and writers, ideological colonization is more dangerous than military colonization, and the evidence is the greatest proof of that. Because when the military colonization was occupying many Islamic lands, the Muslims at that time knew that their enemy was occupying their land and that they were dealing with it as the owner of it. But what the colonization did with its long stay in the Islamic lands was far more evil than its military harm. That is because when it left those lands to give them complete and effective independence, they claimed to have left, but they left their ideas, their beliefs, their manners, their morals, and their laws among them. Therefore, if you say that the disbeliever left the lands of Islam, or if you say that he did not leave, in both statements you are truthful. Because when you say he left, you mean he left with his body, and if you say he did not leave, you are truthful because you mean he did not leave with his ideas, traditions, and laws. Reality testifies to the effects of these laws and the effects of his not leaving, what he left in the lands of Islam of systems that Muslims are still practicing while the disbeliever is outside their lands. So this system, the electoral system, is not Islamic at all. The greatest proof of that is what we see in many Islamic countries. I do not know, here, according to what is published in the newspapers, that this election was clean. And I say it may be so in terms of not using open, blatant fraud and using terror and force by some influential people or some high-ranking officials. It may be that some of that happened. But what certainly happened is that the candidates used un-Islamic means, and perhaps we can say they were illegal means. They bought the votes of many people, sometimes with material, sometimes with status, sometimes I do not know, with many, very many means, in order to succeed. He may succeed and he may not, and that is another discussion. Islam does not accept such a choice and election that exposes many of those who want to succeed to resorting to un-Islamic means. Also, Islam says: The parliamentary election practiced today does not make this distinction that Islam makes. Are those who know equal to those who do not know? They do not distinguish, and they say they are equal. Therefore, the righteous Muslim votes, the wicked Muslim votes, the knowledgeable Muslim votes, the ignorant Muslim votes. What is this system? This is not an Islamic system. A very large group of ignorant Muslims may gather and choose one of them. So what is the benefit of this person’s presence in the National Assembly? Nothing. So how was the matter in the first era? And I forgot to say that it is not only the male who is nominated, but also the female. All of this is not an Islamic system. How was the matter previously? The matter was referred to the Muslim Caliph. He chose the Shura Council. And without a doubt, those chosen for the Shura Council are not looked at for anything except: As for Islam, the country is Islamic, so there is no need to mention it. They are not looked at except to be first righteous, and secondly to be from the scholars who act upon their knowledge, and thirdly and finally to be people of opinion and thought. You may find a righteous man, as the Imam of the House of Migration, Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him), said: "In Medina are people whose supplications we seek blessing, but we do not narrate hadith from them." The Prophetic hadith is not narrated from them, even though what are they? Righteous people whose supplications are sought for blessing. He asks them for supplication, but does not narrate hadith from them. Why? Because hadith has men. It is not enough for the narrators of hadith to be truthful, as the people of al-jarh wa al-ta'dil say, but they must also be alert and sharp, so that deception and obscurity do not escape them. So if the Muslim ruler wants to choose the Shura Council, he does not suffice that the chosen one is righteous, nor does he suffice that he is only a scholar, but he must be sharp, knowing how to handle the affairs of the Ummah, knowing, as it was said in old times, how to eat the shoulder. So this Caliph or this Imam chooses, seeking help from those he has known throughout his life, the Shura Council. These are the Shura Council, they are the Council of Ministers, let us call it that now. As for this chaos, what do I mean, for all individuals of the people to choose eighty people or less or more according to the population of the region? This was not known to the Muslims throughout these long centuries, but they took it, as we said earlier, from their colonizers. Were there women in the Shura Council in that time? No. All that some people of desires in the present age hum about to give the woman what they claim she lost of rights? They find there very rare incidents that so-and-so was, for example, a supervisor or a market inspector. There are such narrations, regardless of whether they are true or not, because the pen of investigation has not yet been tasked with conducting such an investigation, but as history it is narrated. But this, with its rarity and infrequency, has no relation to election and nomination in the Shura Council. So the Shura Council in Islam cannot have women in it, especially since the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: Therefore, what misleads you when you hear some narrations that there were some women there, and as you said, they were treating the sick and the wounded, and so on. These are for sudden and temporary circumstances, while we are discussing the normal, natural circumstances. There is no election of a parliament or National Assembly in the Islamic system, but rather the Shura Council, which is mentioned in the Qur'an, and the one who chooses it is the ruler, the one in authority, ruling by the Book of Allah and the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), seeking help from those he trusts in their knowledge and intellect, as I mentioned earlier. Please.