All that remains is the view that the Khitaan (circumcision) is from the Sunan of the Fitrah and it is done for the sake and purpose of cleanliness and as a preventative limit for the power of desire and this is for sure not obligatory.
Al-Khitaan with a Kasrah of the Khaa’ comes from Khatana and means to cut and Khatn with a Fathah and Sukoon means cutting something specific from a specific organ. Al-Maawardi said: “The Khitaan of of the male is to cut the skin which covers the tip of the penis. And he said: The Khitaan of a female is to cut the skin which is at the top of her vagina like the fruit stone or comb of the rooster.” It is called Khitaan of the man and woman although the Khitaan of a female is specifically a reduction. And the entire foreskin is taken from the male where nothing remains of it and the tip of the penis is completely exposed. The following Ahaadeeth have been reported in relation to Khitaan:
1) Abu Hurairah (ra) said: The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “Ibraaheem Khaleel Ar-Rahmaan circumcised himself with an Adze (wood cutting tool) after he was eighty years old” as recorded by Ahmad, Al-Bukhaari, Muslim and Al-Bayhaqi.
2) It has been related from Sa’eed Ibn Jubair (ra) that he said: “Ibn ‘Abbaas was asked: How old were you when the Prophet died? He replied: At that time I had been circumcised. He said: At that time, people did not circumcise the boys till they attained the age of puberty” recorded by Al-Bukhaari.
3) ‘Uthaim Bin Kulaib related from his father from his grandfather: “He came to the Nabi and said: I have become Muslim. He said: Get rid of the hair of the disbelievers. He said: shave. He said: And somebody else with him said that the Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم also said: Get rid of the hair of the Kuffaar (disbelievers) and get circumcised” recorded by Ahmad, Abu Daawood and Al-Bayhaqi.
4) ‘Aa’ishah (ra) said: The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “When anyone sits between the four parts (of the woman) and the khitaan (circumcised parts) of the man meets the khitaan of the woman bathing becomes obligatory” recorded by Muslim, Ahmad and Abu Daawood. At-Tirmidhi reported it as: “If one Khitaan has gone past the other khitaan Ghusl become obligatory” and he said the Hadeeth is Hasan Saheeh.
5) Jaabir (ra) said: “The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم made an Aqeeqah for Al-Hasan and Al-Husein and he circumcised them after seven days (from their birth)” as recorded by Al-Bayhaqi.
6) Umm ‘Atiyyah Al-Ansaariyah (ra) related: “That a woman was circumcised in Al-Madeenah so the Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم said to her: Do not cut to extremes because that is more favorable for the woman and more desirable to the husband” as recorded by Abu Daawood and Al-Bayhaqi.
7) Ibn ‘Umar said: “A group of women from the Ansaar came to the Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم so he said: O women of the Ansaar color with a dipping, reduce but do not be excessive in cutting because that is more favorable to your husbands and for you and a covering (or denial) of two pleasures)”.
8) Abu Al-Mulaih Bin Usaamah related from his father that the Nabi صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “The Khitaan is Sunnah for the men and ennobling of the women” as reported by Ahmad, Al-Bayhaqi and Abu Daawood.
The A’immah and Fuqahaa have differed in regards to the Hukm (legal verdict) for the Khitaan of man and women in the following way: Ash-Shaafi’ said it is Waajib in regards to both male and female, a strong emphasis for this has been reported from Ibn ‘Abbaas (ra) and that there is no Hajj or Salaah for the one who has not been circumcised. Abu Haneefah and Maalik said that is Sunnah for both of them. Ahmad said that it is waajib for the man and not for the women. It has been related from Al-Hasan that he permitted that it be left and said: The people have embraced Islaam, the black and the white and non of them have not been examined and been circumcised.
The first group, Ash-Shaafi’ and those of his opinion, used as evidence the Hadeeth of Abu Hurairah (1), the Hadeeth of ‘Uthaim (3) and the Hadeeth of Umm ‘Atiyyah (6) for the obligation of the Khitaan of women. They say had circumcision not been obligatory for Ibraaheem then why did he do it at eighty years of age and the Qur’aan states:
أَنْ اتَّبِعْ مِلَّةَ إبراهيمَ حنيفاً
“And follow the Haneef (pure) Millah (religion) of Ibrahim”
and therefore this is an evidence for the obligation of circumcision. These evidences are also those which have been used by the third group in relation to men and not the circumcision of women by exempting the sixth Hadeeth (which the first group uses).
And the second group used the Hadeeth of Abu Al-Muleih (8) as evidence because the Hadeeth according to them described the Khitaan of men as being a Sunnah and it described the Khitaan of women as being a Makrumah (honour) which is also understood as being a Sunnah. And the third group used this Hadeeth as evidence to support their view that the Khitaan of women is a Sunnah. The first and third group added upon what we has been said previously by stating that the revealing of ‘Awrah is Haraam and this would not be permitted unless for a Waajib (obligatory act) and if the Khitaan was not obligatory then how could it be permitted to perform the Khitaan on a Baaligh (mature person) while his ‘Awrah is exposed, and the second Hadeeth is a Daleel for the Khitaan of those who have reached the age of puberty. This is the sum of their opinions and what they relied upon in terms of evidential proof.
And before we examine these texts in relation to how they have been used as evidence it is first necessary for us to examine them in terms of the correctness of Isnaad (chain) or lack of it. So we say: The Hadeeth of ‘Uthaim (3) is Munqati’, ‘Uthaim and his father are unknown (Majhool) as Ibn Hajar and Ibn ul-Qattaan have said and as such the Hadeeth is Da’eef and not suitable as legal proof. The Hadeeth of Umm ‘Atiyyah is disagreed upon in relation to ‘Abdul Maalik Bin ‘Umair, it has been said that he is Ad-Dahhaak, it has been said that he is ‘Atiyyah Al-Qurazhi and it has been said that he is other than these two. In addition it has been found to be at fault by including Muhammad Bin Hassaan and Abu Daawood said: “And Muhammad Bin Hassaan id Majhool (unknown) and this Hadeeth is Da’eef (weak)” and as such it is not suitable to be used as legal proof. The Hadeeth of ‘Abdullah Ibn ‘Umar (7) is also Da’eef and was classified as such by Ibn Hajar and Al-Bukhaari. Al-Haithami said: “It (the chain of the Hadeeth) includes Mundil Ibn ‘Ali and he is Da’eef” in addition to the Hadeeth of Abu Al-Muleih (8) of which Al-Bayhaqi said: “It is Da’eef” and Ibn Abi Shaibah and Ibn Abi Haatim found fault in it and as such it is not suitable to be used as legal proof. Therefore only the following Ahaadeeth remain: The first, second, fourth and fifth.
As for the first Hadeeth then it does not contain an indication for the obligation of circumcision because the Anbiyaa/Prophets (as) perform the Waajibaat (obligatory acts) just as they perform the Mandoobaat (recommended acts). So if somebody was to say that Ibrahim (as) performing this act whilst he was 80 years of age indicates that it is obligatory we would respond by saying: The fact that he performed the circumcision when he was eighty is rather indicates that it is not obligatory and had it been obligatory why would he in that case delayed it until that time.
Secondly the Shar’i Min Qablinaa (the Sharee’ah laws of previous Messages/Messengers) is not a Shar’a (legal law) for us and even if the circumcision of Ibrahim (as) was proven to be correct in the understanding that it indicated an obligation the Muslims have not been addressed to comply and follow him in it. And if someone was to say that the Qur’aan has commanded us to follow him then we would answer by saying that the ayah which they are using to support this view does not guide to what they are saying because the following of the Millah of Ibrahim does not mean the following of the Sharee’ah of Ibrahim and we have been commanded to follow the Millah of Ibrahim (as), the Millah of ‘Eisaa (as), the Millah of Moosa (as) and the Millah of Nooh (as) and all of these represent one single Millah, the meaning of which is the origin of the Deen and Tawheed and this is what was meant in the Noble Aayah:
“Verily the Deen with Allah is Al-Islaam.”
The Deen, Millah and Tawheed was the same in relation to all of the Anbiyaa (Prophets) however we have not been commanded to follow their Sharee’ah’s becaus every Nabi has a Sharee’ah which differs to the Sharee’ah of another Prophet. So we as Muslims are not addressed by any Sharee’ah except the Sharee’ah of Islaam. Allah سبحانه وتعالى said:
“To each of you we have given a Sharee’ah and a path (methodology).”
Khitaan (circumcision) is from the matters of the Sharee’ah (law) and does not relate to the Aqaa’id (beliefs) and as such is not related to the request that came in the Aayah. Therefore the Aayah and Hadeeth do not guide towards the opinion they have stated and the Hadeeth does not indicate anything other than knowledge about Ibrahim (as) having made his circumcision when he has reached 80 years of age without indicating anything else.
As for the fourth Hadeeth it indicates the reality that was existent among the Muslims which is that they use to get circumcised and this is a matter that we do not have any doubt in and none of the Muslims have any doubt in that. So when the Hadeeth stated: “The touching of the Khitaan with the Khitaan” indicates that both men and women had circumcision performed however it does not indicate Wujoob (obligation) or Nadb (recommendation) and it does not even look at the issue from the angle of its Hukm (legal ruling).
The fifth Hadeeth is similar as it also indicates that the Muslims used to perform circumcision as a practice and it provides a further new addition informing that Al-Hasan and Al-Hussein were circumcised at an early age on their seventh day which is contrary to what came in the second Hadeeth and this is a Waaqi’ah ‘Ain (A mere reality that happened indicating no more) and the Waaqi’ah ‘Ain is not generalised further and a generalising Hukm cannot be applied from it upon other than it. This means that Al-Hasan and Al-Hussein were circumcised on the seventh day and this action from the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم does not provide for a command from him to the Muslims for them to circumcise their sons when they are on their seventh day.
As for what those who have said that Khitaan is obligatory and used as evidence to support this view the argument of revealing the ‘Awrah which could not occur except in the case of a Waajib (obligatory act and they are referring here to those who are Baaligh (reached maturity)). We answer this by saying that this is not necessarily the case because the Shar’a has made Haraam the looking at the body of the woman and for it to be revealed to him however despite this the Shar’a has permitted the one looking for a wife for him to look at any part of the girl who he wishes to marry and to see the part of the body of the girl that he wishes to see.
Jaabir Bin ‘Abdullah said: The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “When one of you is seeking to betroth a woman then if he is able to look at that from her that invites him to marry her then he should do that. He (Jaabir) said: “So I was engaged to a girl from Bani Salamah and I used to hide in trees until I was able to see from her that which invited me to marry her and then I married her” recorded by Ahmad and Abu Daawood.
So this is a clear (Sareeh) Nass (text) permitting the one wanting to marry to look at any part of the lady who he wishes to engage in marriage. The statement in the Hadeeth: “… to look at that from her that invites him to marry her” is ‘Aamm (general) and a text did not come in this issue specifying it and as such he is allowed to look at her hair, chest, neck, legs and forearms if he wishes to know about this from his prospective future wife. All of this is Mubaah (permissible) despite seeking engagement to marriage is not obligatory so here the Shar’a has permitted the viewing of the woman’s ‘Awrah in an issue which is not Waajib (obligatory) meaning engagement and marriage.
As for what some ‘Ulamaa have said saying that what is meant in this Hadeeth is the permission to look at the face alone then this is a nonsensical view and it is an opinion that abrogates working with the Hadeeth and nullifies it and makes it a statement without worth or benefit because the looking at the face is permitted without the need of this text. In addition the transmitter of this Hadeeth stated that he would hide from the girl and look at that which invited him to marry her and it cannot be imagined that Jaabir would hide in palm trees so that he could see her face alone.
Also Abu Ja’far mentioned: “‘Umar sought to marry from ‘Ali his daughter and then he (‘Ali) said: She is young. It was then said to ‘Umar: He only wants to prevent her from marriage. He (Abu Ja’far) said: So he (‘Umar) spoke to ‘Ali (Again) so ‘Ali said: Send for her and if you are pleased then she is your wife. So he called for her to come. He said: So ‘Umar when and uncovered her leg so she said: Get away and if you had not been the Ameer of the believers I would have chopped off your neck” as reported by ‘Abdur Razzaaq and Sa’eed ibn Mansoor.
And with this Hadeeth the view that the ‘Awrah is not seen except in the case of the Waajib (obligatory act) falls down and when this doubt is taken out of the equation then all of the doubts and arguments related to the Khitaan being obligatory are also taken out of the equation. All that remains is the view that the Khitaan (circumcision) is from the Sunan of the Fitrah and it is done for the sake and purpose of cleanliness and as a preventative limit for the power of desire and this is for sure not obligatory.