What is the ruling on one who cites the hadith of Umm Atiyyah regarding the pledge of allegiance to prove the permissibility of shaking hands with a non-mahram woman?

The questioner : This is a jurisprudential question regarding shaking hands with a non-mahram woman. Some say that it is permissible to shake hands with a non-mahram woman.

The Shaykh : And some say it is permissible to kiss her!

The questioner : He has evidence for it.

The Shaykh : It is permissible, and he has evidence? It is permissible to kiss her, and he has evidence?

The questioner : Complete the question for me. He cites the hadith of Umm Atiyyah al-Ansariyyah (may Allah be pleased with her), and the hadith is in *al-Bukhari* regarding the pledge of allegiance.

The Shaykh : His understanding of the hadith is refuted.

The questioner : I am just clarifying, may Allah reward you.
Al-Halabi : As we have learned, clarifying what is clear is a defect.

The Shaykh : Please.

The questioner : I ask for your forgiveness because I am speaking more than necessary in order to clarify so that I may respond.

The Shaykh : You are excused.

The questioner : May Allah reward you. He says this hadith indicates, by its explicit text and its implication, the permissibility of shaking hands, or at least during the pledge of allegiance, because the hadith in al-Bukhari says He says the explicit text of the hadith is the rest: "Place your hands for the pledge."

The Shaykh : What Allah willed. And the implication of the hadith, if this is its explicit text, where is its implication?

The questioner : He says if she is extending her hand for the pledge, then its implication is that the others also pledged allegiance. What is your answer? I initially wanted to kiss your head...

The Shaykh : If these people want to transmit this report without distortion, but you have ruined it for me because you did not obey me when I told you to kiss me, so I wanted to make it exactly like the incident so that we can bring it closer to people, on the basis that "let the witness inform the absent one." One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine. These people go out and say that they saw it.The Shaykh : Who did he extend his hand to? To Abu So-and-so. What is your name?

The questioner : Abu Aymen.

The Shaykh : To Abu Aymen. They go out and say he extended his hand to So-and-so. What will those who hear it understand? That Al-Albani shook hands with Abu Aymen. Will their report be correct, or will their understanding be correct? I did not understand you, perhaps not here now.

The questioner : I did not understand now.

The Shaykh : I know. I read the understanding, or the opposite, from the eyes of the researcher with me—wait a moment, please.

The questioner : The hadith is in al-Bukhari, but the error is in the understanding, may Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : But let me explain to you what I did not want to explain to you until it is firmly established in the mind, so that you understand that the group who told you that this hadith indicates shaking hands by its explicit text and implication is not correct by its explicit text, nor by its implication does it indicate shaking hands. And I illustrated for you just now an image that brings closer to us that image whose reality was hidden from us and which we understood from the narration in "Sahih al-Bukhari" with a correct understanding. I said if one of these present people transmitted what he saw with his own eyes that Al-Albani extended his hand to Abu Aymen, may Allah guide you, you are blaming the people who write about you.
Abu Layla : I am with you. I understand what you mean, that you do not extend your hand.

The Shaykh : You have written against yourself, and I do not know, may Allah guide you. Therefore, your tongue must speak for you, so do not blame us, but blame yourselves. You blame the people, blame yourself, but do not blame the people, because you will not blame yourself. People today are taken in like your story! "Al-Albani extended his hand" is with you more than once. Some people transmitted from Al-Albani that he extended his hand to shake hands with Abu Aymen. Some people took from this transmission, let us say from this narration, that Al-Albani actually shook hands with Abu Aymen. Did they understand the narration by its explicit text and implication, or did they stray from it far away?

The questioner : They strayed from it far away.

The Shaykh : So this is the answer to that question. Now, a new addition: in the authentic Sunnah, it is understood that the pledge of women, which is the counterpart to the pledge of men to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), differed completely in the form of the pledge. The men, the Prophet would shake hands with them, but as for the women, we have a text that he did not shake hands with them. We have a general text from the lady Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) We have a specific text regarding the pledge from the narration of Umm Amimah bint Riqqah, who was among those who pledged allegiance. One of the women asked him (peace and blessings be upon him) to shake hands with them as he shook hands with the men, so he said Thus are the people of desires, in the past and the present, taking what is ambiguous in the texts and setting aside the explicit texts A text from which no falsehood comes from before it or from behind it. And regarding the pledge, where that person I mentioned claimed that shaking hands occurred in the pledge, where did he take it from? From the woman extending her hand. So the Messenger did not shake hands with a woman, not in the pledge nor in anything else. But the extending of the hand by some women is established, and there is no room for denying it at all. And from that is this hadith in "al-Bukhari." But this extending, as we illustrated for you just now, does not necessitate that shaking hands occurred. Are you following up to here?

The questioner : So a woman withdrew her hand.

The Shaykh : I am asking you, what are you talking about? Answer the question. Are you following up to here or not?

The questioner : I am following with you, yes.

The Shaykh : If so, why are you asking? I am still going to walk you through the speech.

The questioner : I say, O Shaykh, regarding the negation that came from Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), I am still clarifying in order to respond with conviction. Before citing the hadith, if Allah wills, it is present and clear. It is said that the affirming is given precedence over the negating, and the one who has memorized the proof has an argument over the one who has not. So Aisha negates based on the limit of her knowledge of this matter, like the issue of combining prayers.

The Shaykh : Where is the affirming?

The questioner : He says this hadith affirms it.

The Shaykh : Which hadith?

The questioner : The one in "al-Bukhari."

The Shaykh : We have not finished with it, may Allah guide you. It appears that you have not been convinced.

The questioner : So a woman withdrew her hand.

The Shaykh : My brother, do not repeat the hadith to us and waste your time and ours. What is the benefit of repeating the hadith when we have answered you about it? Where is the affirmation? Does the extending of the hand, and I am still not finished with the explanation, does the extending of the hand necessitate shaking hands?

The questioner : It does not necessitate it.

The Shaykh : If so, why did you return to the hadith and say the affirming is given precedence over the negating? Where is the affirming?

The questioner : The one mentioned just now.

The Shaykh : But this is not an affirmation of shaking hands; this is an affirmation of extending the hand, and the extending of the hand does not necessitate shaking hands, and you saw with your own eyes. So why do you doubt the matter now, as if I had not completed the matter? So be patient, and nothing gives you patience except Allah. I said just now that the extending of the hand by some women is established with an establishment that cannot be refuted. First of all is this hadith, the hadith of al-Bukhari. And I thought I had finished proving that it does not indicate shaking hands. I said this is first. Second, there is a hadith that a woman extended her hand, and he (peace and blessings be upon him) said She extended her hand for the pledge in the same story of the pledge. He said to her, "Is this the hand of a man or a woman?" She said, "The hand of a woman." He said Because men do not dye their hands, dye your hand so that it is established for me that you are a woman. This is a second hadith in which the hand is extended, but there is no shaking hands in it. It is possible to take from this hadith and that one that the pledge of women to the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and the pledge of the Messenger to the women was by extending hands, not by shaking hands. Did you understand? It was by extending hands, not by shaking hands. Did you understand? So what do this hadith and that one give us? And here is a hadith that benefits us greatly in this matter, but our Lord has favored us by not having to argue with something that is not authentic with us, but it is permissible to cite it, especially since the chain of such a hadith is authenticated by some of the lenient scholars. It is a hadith in "Musnad Ahmad" and others that the Messenger sent Umar to pledge allegiance with the women on his behalf, so Umar would extend his hand from his side, and the women would extend their hands from their side, and the pledge was like this. Is it clear?

The questioner : May Allah reward you, yes.

The Shaykh : Finally, if the hadith in al-Bukhari and the hadith other than al-Bukhari, which is the second one, are authentic, then this follows the dyeing. This is published in my book, "The Muslim Woman's Hijab in the Book and the Sunnah." If it is authentic that it is obligatory for women to extend their hand, which is shaking hands, then the question arises: was this handshake with a barrier, or was it placing the palm on the palm like a man shaking hands with a man? This is another obstacle in the path of these people of desires. Also, we say that there are some hadiths we do not use as evidence, but we benefit from them as a possibility, placing them as a stumbling block in the path of those who exploit authentic hadiths and interpret them other than their correct interpretation. That the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) used to shake hands with them, and there was a cloth on his hand. Do you understand? There was a cloth on his hand. In another hadith, similar in weakness, it was a large basin of water in which the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) would dip his hand, and in that pledge of allegiance, she would dip her hand. There was no physical contact; the connecting medium was the water. We do not authenticate this, but we say that this and that are all possible. I think we have finished with this, but I want to draw your attention to something I hinted at, and I do not know if you noticed or not? Those who argue with the hadith in al-Bukhari that the handshake from him (peace and blessings be upon him) with women is established in the pledge of allegiance, these people say more than this established fact in their claim. They say it is permissible to shake hands with a woman upon meeting. Is that not so, or do you not know?

The questioner : I am not a liberal.

The Shaykh : May Allah guide you. You have the right to say to me, "I am not a liberal." Where are you from? Do you understand? I think you are a liberal? I am asking you: those who argue with this hadith, you are going to remind me of a Syrian story. Do you see how you know the story of that thief who used to steal chickens? Let it remain hidden.
Abu Layla : Our Shaykh, once I was shaking your hand. When I came to you, you extended your hand to me to shake it, but I remembered that you had put medicine on your hand, so I withdrew my hand. You mentioned the hadith and said to me, "Give me a lesson." You said, "Perhaps this happened with the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) when he withdrew his hand."

The Shaykh : You, Abu Aymen, said in the course of your speech what implies that you are debating in order to know how to debate, is that not so?

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : And on this basis, I agree with you to debate so that you learn how to debate. So memorize this point, and this is a very important jurisprudential point: if a text comes in contradiction to the rule, then this text is excluded from the rule. For example, if you have read something from the principles of jurisprudence regarding general and specific, absolute and restricted, and so on, but the example will clarify it for you. I often cite this example to clarify and remove the difficulty. means every carrion is forbidden. The hadith came: How do we reconcile the verse with the hadith? We say the verse is general: every carrion. The hadith excluded two types from this generality: fish and locusts. Is it permissible for us to exclude from the verse anything other than these two? The answer is no. Why? Because the text is general and tells you every carrion is forbidden; that is the meaning of the verse. means every carrion. The hadith excluded two types: fish and locusts. If we stop at this exception and do not add to it, because the general text prevents us from adding, is that right? Good. Now, suppose hypothetically that that partisan insists on interpreting the hadith of Umm Atiyyah in "al-Bukhari" as meaning she extended her hand, i.e., the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) shook her hand. Suppose that is the case. We would say to him: in that case, we exclude this incident from that generality. Here there is a handshake; we stop at it, is that right? Good. This handshake, as you said, is a story about them. Where did it take place? In the pledge of allegiance. Is it permissible to shake hands with women upon meeting, with a cousin, a maternal cousin, a neighbor, and so on, on the road, in the house, based on this hadith? The answer is no. Why? Because we have a general rule. Do the group not say this? They do not say it is permissible to shake hands with a woman only in the pledge of allegiance. They do not say it is permissible even upon meeting, greeting, and saying good morning and good evening. Do you know this about them or not?

The questioner : I know.

The Shaykh : So now you have learned a new lesson: how to debate the group and say to them, after all the explanation, "We concede to you, without reservation, that this hadith contains a handshake. But no, it does not contain a handshake. But hypothetically, according to the Syrian rule that does not come with you, come with it, is that right? We proceed with you that this hadith contains a handshake. But is the handshake general or partial? Partial. We say to them: stop at this part and do not exceed this part to other parts. Every time you say "Peace be upon you," you shake hands with the woman. And this is not the strangest thing you will hear; perhaps you have not heard from them. They said in a publication of theirs that it is permissible for a Muslim, when greeting a Muslim woman, not only to shake her hand but also to kiss her, but with the condition of no desire. Do you know this about them? May Allah increase you in knowledge. What remains for the one who reaches this level of ignorance to argue with the hadith of Umm Atiyyah, which contains no mention of shaking hands at all, and to cast aside the hadith of Aisha and the hadith of Ummamah bint Riqqah? And then the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), who established a very great rule from the chapter of blocking the means to harm: And in a narration with weakness, touching: They are from the misguidance and ignorance of this party regarding Islam. They do not say in the chapter of blocking the means to harm. You must have an idea of the chapter of blocking the means to harm, and this hadith is one of the evidences for this chapter of blocking the means to harm. So when they say it is permissible to shake hands, they have contradicted this. It is a type of zina, like looking, listening, touching, and walking toward the woman. The major sin did not occur, because the hadith concluded his speech by saying (peace and blessings be upon him): Then, do you know about these people, which indicates their extreme ignorance of Islam? They permit looking at nude films, corrupt cinemas, television, obscene pictures, and vile magazines, and so on. Do you know that? Welcome, how are you? What Allah willed, how are you?
Abu Layla : Who is this?
The child: This isThe Shaykh : Al-Albani. Our Shaykh.

The Shaykh : Do you know this harm that they speak of? You do not know it either.

The questioner : I hear it, but I have not been certain of it.

The Shaykh : They say this. The important thing is you have understood the answer, if Allah wills, regarding the hadith.
Al-Halabi : Our Shaykh, there is a hadith. May Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : He still has to wait for Abu Abd al-Rahman, because we have interrupted him more than once and he disliked it.
Al-Awaisheh: I mean, it seems to me that I see danger in the matter. They understood that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) extended his hand, and she was purified from that and withdrew her hand. Do you not see with me this matter?

The Shaykh : That is correct.
Al-Awaisheh: I mean, is there no danger in the matter?

The Shaykh : Danger, more dangerous. You are correct. May Allah reward you with good.
Al-Halabi : Our Shaykh, I say in support of all your good words, may Allah reward you. A hadith is narrated in the same issue of the pledge of allegiance that explicitly indicates that the pledge of allegiance is by speech. It is his saying (may the prayer and peace be upon him): This is explicit that the pledge of allegiance to women was by speech, not by action. May Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : And may Allah reward you. Is there anything else from you?