Is female circumcision morally recommended?

Indonesian Ulema in favour of female circumcision: a “human right”

The practice is “recommended” and according to “tradition”, although it can not be made compulsory. For the head of the MUI it is within the “human rights” and is “guaranteed by the Constitution.”

AsiaNews, by Mathias Hariyadi:
The Indonesian Council of Ulema (MUI) is in favour of female circumcision (and men) that, although it can not be considered mandatory, it is still “morally recommended.” This is shown by the words of the leader of the largest Islamic organization in the most populous Muslim country in the world. He warns, however, to avoid “excesses”, coming to the removal or cutting of the clitoris. In the meantime, has come under investigation and will be prosecuted by a court “ethical” the judge who, in recent days, he “joked” about sexual violence to women, causing a veritable wave of outrage (see AsiaNews 15/01 / 2013 Ordinary Indonesians against judges and politicians who “justify” sexual violence).
The reference point for Islamic issues (such as the legality of a food and a drink), a “consultor” to the government in matters of faith, the body responsible for issuing fatwas – the answers on Muslim questions of faith and morals – the MUI has taken a position on female circumcision. And by the mouth of his head, Kiai Hajj Amin Ma’ruf, pointed out that it is an”advisable practise on moral grounds”, at the same time, he rejects any attempt to declare this practice illegal or contrary to the principles. It comes under the sphere of “human rights,” said the Islamist leader, and is “guaranteed by the Constitution.”
Read more:


11 replies

  1. WHO states:
    The Indonesian regulation on “Female Circumcision” runs counter to a number of Indonesian laws which include decrees enshrining international legal obligations in the national legal framework. These are Law No. 7/1984 on the ratification of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW); Law No. 5/1998 on the ratification of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT); Law No. 39/1999 on Human Rights; Law No. 23/2002 on Child Protection; Law No. 23/2004 on the Elimination of Domestic Violence; and Law No. 23/2009 on Health.

  2. Usually a tradition of the Holy Prophet sallalaho alaihiwasallam and an incident occurring during the time of Hadhrat Umar ra is used quoted to justify FGM. Our jamaat has investigated this and discovered that the misunderstanding arose due to incorrect translation in the first case. While in the second case, it makes no sense why Hadhrat Umar ra would have sent away two ladies to be circumcised after they accepted Islam when this was never practised in Islam before that incident. One can conclude therefore that what Hadhrat Umar ra said was probably misunderstood by the reporter of the tradition.

  3. The gist of matter is as follows:

    “Therefore the matter of female circumcision is not
    a matter of Islamic law at all, it was an old custom which was not made unlawful as such by the
    Holy Founder of Islam saw ,and was certainly not encouraged by him.”

  4. What was and is the purpose and the mission of Hadhrat Masih Maud (as)? To affirm and restore the true teachings of Islam and remove all those practices that have taken root in Islam but are NOT part of the teachings and Sunnah of Hadhrat Muhammad (saw).

    Hadhrat Masih Maud (as) has never to my knowledge said women circumcision is part of the teachings of Islam. Nor has any of his Khulafa said that such practice is according to the teachings of Islam. In fact if my memory serves me right, Hadhrat Khalifa-tul Masih V ( atba) in his one of the Friday Sermons very strongly denounced such practice.

    Hadhrat Masih Maud (as) has taught us a very simple rule that any Hadith that does not agree with the Holy Quran or is according to it, is not to be accepted as authentic. And besides how is it possible that a practice so cruel, wrong and unnecessary could be part of the teachings of Islam? IF it had any merit or benefit, what prevented Allah to have revealed an injunction in the Holy Quran about it or for that matter, revealed some guidance to Hadhrat Masih Maud (as) about it, when there is clear injunction about circumcision of men?

    In my firm opinion such practice has NO place in the beautiful comprehensive and complete teachings of the Isalm.

  5. What a foolish way to do such bad things! And that is being done by maulvis in the name of religion!
    They do not seek guidance from the Quran. They do not see the clear well known practice of the Holy prophet s.a.w.s. Did he preach any such thing? There are singular unreliable words attributed to the prophet s.a.w.s.

    Circumcision is Sunnah of Ibraheem a.s. It does not apply to females. That is the end of it. All the Arabs were descendants of Ibraheem a.s. Such bad practice was not known to any one. We can ask the Jews too if there was any such bad practice among them.
    The Hadith is to serve the Quran and Sunnah. Any weak hadith should not be entertained at all.

    In one hadith, the words of praise from the ladies about circumcision is about the male circumcision, that it is more honorable for them that male be circumcised.
    WE see here again that Hadith ( a doubtful one ) is playing havoc with the Muslims. Is it the most important thing to do !!

  6. While Arabs being descendants of Hadhrat Ibrahim (as), would be practicing this, it’s strange that most Yemenis, North Africans like the Egyptians, etc., are in the habit of doing this in the name of Islam.

    So are some subcontinent asians like the Bohras. All in the name of Islam, again….

  7. When I first heard this practice from a vilage Muslim clerik of Wahabbi beliefs, I was appalled.

    Without even reading the Quran or Sunnah, I revolted agaisnt the idea the cleric was promoting and insisting on the practice.

    Thanks to the teachings of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community that enlightened us. Just because the practice existed or is use in some tribal living in Africa predatig Islam, it is repugnant to attribute this to Islamic law.

    The Indonesian “ulema” (should be Jahil) is crazy and out of his mind.

Leave a Reply