Hijab and Inheritance Debates Rekindled: Al-Azhar and Great Classical Scholars Defend Islam’s Established Teachings against Modernist Challenges
By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi, New Age Islam
23 April 2025
Inheritance and Hijab as Tools of Reform? Scholars Expose the Dangers of Modernist Rhetoric
---
The controversy surrounding inheritance and women’s rights has reignited in Egyptian media following recent statements by Dr. Saad Al-Din Al-Hilali, in which he questioned the binding nature of religious texts on inheritance and advocated for women’s equality with men in this regard. In response, Ahmad Karima vehemently countered Al-Hilali’s views, reinforcing the established stance on hijab and the immutability of inheritance laws. Al-Azhar’s Global Centre for Fatwa also firmly rejected Al-Hilali’s position, denouncing the systematic incitement against religion and its laws. It warned that such attempts to undermine religious rulings—by casting doubt on one ruling and subsequently on others—contribute to intellectual and behavioural deviation, signalling the rise of dangerous extremism. Al-Azhar emphasized that the renewal of Islamic thought and sciences must remain within the realm of qualified scholars and not be dictated by public discourse or unqualified individuals. The institution also condemned the exploitation of slogans like “women’s rights” to distort religious rulings and portray Islam as antagonistic toward women, warning that this is a malicious tactic designed to weaken the role of religion and threaten the cultural and religious identity of Arab and Islamic societies.
Controversy is Stirred over Hijab and Inheritance Issues
Controversy is deliberately stirred around the issues of hijab and inheritance, with a hidden agenda to create the impression that Islam has deprived women of their rights. However, those who deeply study historical facts readily acknowledge—and do not hesitate to say—that Islam was the first and only religion to step forward successfully and comprehensively to safeguard women's rights, dignity, and honour.
To understand this truth, one must closely examine the cultures and civilizations of global societies in the 7th century, along with the Shaan-e-Nuzul of the Quranic verses. It then becomes clear that Islam empowered women with the ability to play prominent roles in various fields of life—from education to social contribution—and, at the same time, commanded the observance of hijab to protect them from predatory individuals who view women as objects.
Why did Islam so definitively command women to observe hijab? If we reflect on the rationale, many theories and opinions may come to mind. However, these are merely products of our limited reasoning. The reality is that every divine command is ultimately a test—a test of who obeys the Lord and expresses servitude, and who resists or seeks to change divine law based on their own limited intellect.
For the early generations of scholars, including the Companions of the Prophet, this was a moment of trial. Thus, they established a foundational principle: Islamic rulings are of two types—fundamental (uṣūlī) and derivative (furūʿī). The former requires definitive (qatʿī) evidence, while the latter may be supported by speculative (ẓannī) or definitive proofs.
For example, the obligation of Purdah in general is proven by definitive evidence. However, specific issues—such as whether a woman may uncover her face while observing Purdah—are matters of scholarly difference, and thus fall under furūʿī issues. According to the Hanafi school, uncovering the face and forearms is permissible during hijab if there is no fear of temptation (fitnah).
Unfortunately, some modernists today misunderstand this distinction. They argue—like Dr. Hilali recently did—that hijab is not a definitive obligation but merely optional. This confusion is what keeps this issue in the headlines again and again.
In reality, there is no disagreement among the four major Sunni schools of thought regarding the obligation of hijab. The difference lies only in whether uncovering the face and hands is permitted. Imams al-Shāfiʿī, Mālik, and Aḥmad (may Allah have mercy on them) did not permit uncovering the face or hands, regardless of whether there is fear of temptation or not.
However, Imam Abū Ḥanīfa (may Allah have mercy on him) stated that if there is a fear of temptation, uncovering faces is not allowed. And since the possibility of no temptation in today's era is extremely rare—and rare cases are legally disregarded—the later Hanafī scholars also issued fatwas in line with the other three Imams: a young woman must cover her face and hands; hijab is necessary.
Thus, there has never been any disagreement on the obligation of hijab, and this has been the unanimous belief of Muslim scholars throughout the ages. However, modernists continue to provoke controversy on this issue. Some have even chosen this as the subject of their PhD dissertations, aiming to go against the consensus of the Ummah and using deceptive arguments to deny the obligation of hijab.
Today, even the vast majority of Muslim women acknowledge that Islam has made hijab obligatory—even if their personal practice does not reflect it. That is, whether or not a woman observes hijab, she generally knows that Islam commands it.
This is similar to the case of prayer: no Muslim denies that prayer is obligatory, even though many do not pray regularly. If asked why they don't pray, they may admit their fault, but they won't deny the obligation—because they know that denying a definitive command like prayer is an act of disbelief among the authoritative scholars, fuqaha and jurists of Islam.
Nowadays, there's a trend of discussing reformation in secondary Islamic rulings. In truth, such discussions arise due to evolving circumstances and new challenges. Some furūʿī rulings that were once permissible have become impermissible under current conditions. Islamic jurisprudence contains many examples of this.
However, it must be kept in mind that only those issues which are subject to necessity, need, or customary practice can be reviewed and reinterpreted. In contrast, matters backed by definitive evidence and scholarly consensus cannot be changed—no matter how sincere a researcher may be.
We will first present to you the controversial statements of Dr. Hilali and Dr. Ahmad Karima as reported by several means of Arab media, and then present our own position on the issues of hijab and inheritance according to the four major Sunni schools.
Dr. Saad Al-Din Al-Hilali: Inheritance Verses Are Subject to Interpretation, Not Immutable
Dr. Saad Al-Din Al-Hilali, Professor of Comparative Jurisprudence at Al-Azhar University, stated that the verses of the Holy Qur’an — including those related to inheritance — are subject to contemplation and interpretation.
In an interview with Al Arabiya channel, Al-Hilali explained:
“Most rulings related to inheritance fall within the realm of jurisprudence. It is essential to distinguish between a Qur'anic verse that is definitive (qat‘ī) and the understanding of that verse, which often requires reflection. Even among the Companions and early jurists, there were differences regarding inheritance rulings.”
He emphasized that “seeking a fatwa on matters of inheritance pertains to interpretation, not the actual Qur'anic text.” He added, “Achieving equality in inheritance is a step toward promoting social harmony and tolerance.” He further clarified:
“I sought a fatwa on the understanding of the verse — not on the text of the religion itself.”
Referring to Turkey’s legal approach, he remarked:
“Turkey has long implemented inheritance equality. We, too, need to revisit how we understand the inheritance verses.” He stressed that “the Holy Qur’an is not a legal code, but a divine guide.”
In his televised statements, Dr. Al-Hilali said:
“Families can come together and agree on what satisfies them regarding inheritance distribution. Likewise, the state has the right to consult the public on whether to equalize shares between brothers and sisters. Changing inheritance laws based on public consensus is not forbidden by God.”
He added:
“Those who reject this stance position themselves as guardians over society.” He went on to say:
“Inheritance is a right — not a religious obligation like prayer or fasting.”
He concluded by asserting that “inheritance rulings are jurisprudential in nature and based on interpretations that reflect the understanding of the majority.”
Ahmad Karima Responds to Al-Hilali: Hijab Is a Religious Obligation, and Inheritance Is Not a “Sewage Pipe”
Dr. Ahmad Karima, Professor of Comparative Jurisprudence at Al-Azhar University, strongly criticized recent statements made by Dr. Saad Al-Din Al-Hilali concerning the issues of hijab and inheritance.
Appearing on the talk show “Question Mark” — a program dedicated to addressing controversial topics — broadcast on Al Shams channel on Sunday, Dr. Karima described Al-Hilali’s remarks as having exceeded all bounds, affirming that both hijab and inheritance are among the immutable principles of Islamic Sharia.
On the subject of hijab, Dr. Karima explained that covering a woman’s head — from the forehead to the back of the head and between the ears — is a clear religious obligation. He cited a hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him):
“When a woman reaches puberty, nothing should be seen of her except her face and hands.”
He emphasized that hijab is a fixed religious injunction (thābit min al-dīn bi’l-ḍarūrah) and not open to reinterpretation or rational speculation.
Regarding inheritance, Dr. Karima underscored the wisdom and majesty of Islamic legislation, which balances immutable rulings with others that are subject to contextual application. He clarified that the laws of inheritance are among the definitive rulings explicitly laid out in the Qur’an — especially in Surah An-Nisa — and are not open to revision or public negotiation.
He added:
“These matters are not open for discussion. Inheritance is not a matter to be determined by public referendum, as Dr. Al-Hilali claimed. It is not a sewage pipe to be installed in Tahrir Square.”
Dr. Karima warned that “selective interpretation, distortion of religious texts, and shocking the public with incorrect evidence to justify the unlawful or prohibit the lawful — all in the name of normalizing societal transgressions — are intellectual and epistemological crimes. Those who commit or advocate such acts must be held accountable.”
Al-Azhar Rebukes Calls for Inheritance Equality: Qur’anic Rulings Are Definitive, Not Open to Personalization
In a decisive and strongly worded statement, Al-Azhar’s Global Centre for Electronic Fatwa responded to controversial remarks made by Dr. Saad Al-Din Al-Hilali, who questioned the unchangeable nature of Islamic inheritance rulings. The institution reaffirmed that the Qur’anic laws of inheritance are clear, definitive, and divinely ordained, leaving no room for personal reinterpretation, subjective reasoning, or decisions based on public consensus. Dr. Al-Hilali, during a televised interview, had argued that “there is no Qur’anic verse that explicitly prohibits equality in inheritance between men and women,” especially in cases of equal kinship, such as between brothers and sisters. He further asserted that such rulings should ultimately be shaped by the will of the people rather than the authority of religious scholars.
Al-Azhar Denounces the Concept of “Personalized Religion”
In its official response, Al-Azhar warned that promoting a “personalized religion” or “individualized legislation” represents a dangerous overreach and a transgression against the divine structure of Islamic law. It described such actions as an encroachment upon the legitimate authority of governance, and a reintroduction of extremist and deviant ideologies under the guise of reform and modernity.
The statement emphasized:
“Systematic incitement against religious rulings — beginning with casting doubt on a single law and gradually extending to broader principles — is a serious intellectual crime. It fosters ideological and behavioural deviation and signals the resurgence of extremist tendencies.”
No Place for Misinterpretation or Sensationalism
Al-Azhar strongly criticized the misuse of media platforms to present non-specialist opinions as legitimate religious interpretations. The institution declared that renewal in Islamic sciences is a scholarly task that must be carried out by qualified experts with sound knowledge, piety, and adherence to traditional methodology. Reform, it stated, does not occur via television debates or sensational claims made by public figures without scholarly consensus.
The centre also condemned “shocking the public with incorrect or misleading interpretations” that attempt to justify the impermissible or prohibit the lawful. It warned that such actions are not only intellectual and epistemological crimes, but also threats to societal cohesion and spiritual stability.
Inheritance: A Fixed Ruling, Not a Public Referendum
Specifically addressing the issue of inheritance, Al-Azhar maintained that the Qur’anic verses found in Surah An-Nisa concerning inheritance shares are definitive (qat‘i) in both wording and meaning. Therefore, they are not open to reinterpretation or contextual modification. Attempts to equate male and female shares, it stated, violate both the clear scriptural injunctions and the consensus of classical Islamic scholarship.
Furthermore, Al-Azhar rejected Dr. Al-Hilali’s interpretation of the Qur’anic phrase “those in authority among you” (ulu al-amr) as referring to the general public, thereby suggesting that legislative authority could rest with the masses rather than within the framework of Sharia and qualified governance. Such an interpretation, it warned, undermines the principles of Islamic jurisprudence and mirrors extremist approaches that seek to distort the religion from within.
A Warning against Undermining Islamic Identity
The institution also issued a grave warning against the misuse of slogans like “women’s rights” as tools to undermine established religious rulings. It stated that such efforts are often rooted in an agenda to take Muslim societies away from Islamic path of life, erase their religious identity, and import alien ideologies that conflict with Islamic values.
“Calling Islamic rulings outdated or incompatible with modern times is not intellectual progress — it is an ideological deviation aimed at detaching Islam from people’s daily lives,” the statement said.
Renewal without Rebellion
In closing, Al-Azhar clarified that while reform in Islamic thought is essential, it must be rooted in tradition, scholarship, and reverence for sacred texts. True renewal lies in addressing new realities within the framework of established jurisprudence — not in rewriting divine commands or discarding inherited religious knowledge under the pretence of modernization.
Al-Azhar's stance represents not only a reaffirmation of core Islamic doctrines, but also a broader call to protect the intellectual, spiritual, and social integrity of the Muslim community in the face of rising attempts to re-engineer the religion according to personal whims or modern ideological trends.
Unanimous Position of the Four Sunni Schools on the Obligation of Ḥijāb and Purdah for Women
The four major Sunni schools of Islamic jurisprudence — Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi‘i, and Hanbali — are unanimous on the obligation of Hijāb (covering) for women, though they differ slightly on whether covering the face and hands is obligatory. Below is a concise summary of their views with authentic classical references:
1. Hanafi School (Ḥanafī)
Position: Covering the entire body except the face, hands, and feet is obligatory. However, if fitnah (temptation) is feared, covering the face becomes wājib (obligatory).
•References:
Al-Hidāyah by al-Marghīnānī: "And the woman is not to uncover her face among strangers (ajnabī), if there is fear of temptation." (Al-Hidāyah, vol. 1, p. 310)
Radd al-Muḥtār (Ibn ‘Ābidīn): “The face and hands are not ‘awrah (nakedness) unless there is fear of fitnah.” (Radd al-Muḥtār, vol. 1, p. 405)
2. Maliki School (Mālikī)
Position: Entire body including the face should be covered in front of non-maḥram men, especially if there is any fear of fitnah. The face is not ‘awrah, but its covering is recommended or obligatory based on circumstance.
Reference:
Al-Sharḥ al-Kabīr (al-Dardīr): “The face and hands are not ‘awrah, but if there is fear of temptation, then covering them is obligatory.” (Al-Sharḥ al-Kabīr, vol. 1, p. 214)
3. Shafi‘i School (Shāfi‘ī)
Position: The entire body including the face and hands is ‘awrah and must be covered in front of non-maḥrams.
Reference: Mughni al-Muhtāj (al-Khaṭīb al-Shirbīnī): “The entire body of a free woman is ‘awrah, even the face and hands.” (Mughni al-Muhtāj, vol. 1, p. 186)
4. Hanbali School (Ḥanbalī)
Position: The entire body including the face and hands must be covered. This is the strongest view in the madhhab.
Reference:
Al-Mughnī (Ibn Qudāmah):
“The entire body of a free woman is ‘awrah, even the face and hands, and it is not permissible to expose them to non-maḥrams.” (Al-Mughnī, vol. 1, p. 637)
The Immutability of Inheritance Laws in the Four Sunni Juristic Schools
The opinions of the four major Sunni Islamic juristic schools on the immutability of inheritance laws are largely consistent in asserting that the foundational principles of inheritance in Islam, as outlined in the Qur'an and Sunnah, are immutable. However, the application and interpretation of specific issues within inheritance laws may vary across the schools.
1. Hanafi School (Ḥanafī)
Position: The Hanafi School holds that the general rules of inheritance, as outlined in the Qur’an and Hadith, are immutable. However, there are nuanced rules regarding how these principles are applied in practice, with some flexibility in cases of equity (e.g., equalizing shares among heirs) and where the Islamic state may intervene for societal benefit.
References:
Al-Hidāyah by al-Marghīnānī: "The inheritance laws are fixed in the Qur'an and cannot be altered, though the application may vary in complex cases."
Radd al-Muḥtār by Ibn 'Ābidīn: "The allocation of shares according to the Qur’anic injunctions is definitive and must be applied as prescribed." (Radd al-Muḥtār, vol. 2, p. 389)
2. Maliki School (Mālikī)
Position: The Maliki school also upholds the immutability of the inheritance laws, viewing the specific shares and distribution of inheritances as fixed by the Qur'an. However, they allow for flexibility in the application of these principles in cases of equity, such as allowing for discretionary distributions in the absence of a direct heir.
References:
Al-Mudawwana by Sahnun: "The laws governing inheritance are derived directly from the Qur'an, and changing these laws would violate the text of revelation."
Al-Sharḥ al-Kabīr by al-Dardīr: "The fundamental principles of inheritance are fixed and cannot be altered. The state can make adjustments only in cases where no direct heirs are present."
3. Shafi‘i School (Shāfi‘ī)
Position: The Shafi‘i school firmly believes in the immutability of inheritance laws, viewing them as divinely fixed. Any alteration of the specific shares prescribed in the Qur’an is considered unlawful.
References:
Al-Umm by Imam al-Shafi‘i: "The shares designated for heirs in the Qur'an are fixed, and altering these without valid Islamic evidence is impermissible."
Mughni al-Muhtāj by al-Khaṭīb al-Shirbīnī: "The shares of inheritance are set by the Qur'an, and no one has the authority to change or reduce them." (Mughni al-Muhtāj, vol. 2, p. 194)
4. Hanbali School (Ḥanbalī)
Position: The Hanbali School holds the inheritance laws in Islam to be immutable, as they are directly derived from the Qur'an and Hadith. Any alteration of these laws would be viewed as an act of unlawful innovation (bid‘ah).
References:
Al-Mughnī by Ibn Qudāmah: "The inheritance shares set forth in the Qur'an are definitive and must be followed without deviation." (Al-Mughnī, vol. 4, p. 587)
Al-Insāf by al-Mardāwī: "The laws of inheritance in the Qur’an are immutable and must be upheld as they are, without change."
Conclusion:
All four major Sunni schools—Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi‘i, and Hanbali—agree that the core principles of inheritance, as outlined in the Qur'an and Hadith, are immutable. Any attempts to change or reinterpret these foundational laws without clear, authoritative Islamic justification would be considered impermissible. However, variations exist in the application and interpretation of specific inheritance cases, allowing for flexibility in particular circumstances (e.g., when no heirs are available or to ensure fairness).
Our view—representing the mainstream and majority position among Muslims—on purdah, hijab, and inheritance laws aligns with the established positions of the four classical schools of Islamic jurisprudence, as well as the consensus of the early predecessors and distinguished scholars of Islam. The obligation of purdah is unequivocal, firmly rooted in Islamic tradition, and not open to denial. Similarly, the core principles of inheritance, as outlined in the Qur'an and Hadith, are immutable and must be upheld without alteration.
Related Articles:
Hijab Controversy: Why Do Muslim Women Wear Hijab And Niqab?
-----
A regular columnist with NewAgeIslam.com, Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi Dehlvi is a classical Islamic scholar [Aalim, Faazil and Mutakhassis Fi al-Adab al-Arabi wa al-Ulum al-Shariah] with a Sufi background and an English-Arabic-Urdu Translator.
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism