Third: It involves going out into the open countryside to remember Allah, and thus resembles Hajj in certain respects. This is why the greater Eid, during the Hajj season, was an occasion of assembly for the pilgrims. Clearly, if the female Companions knew that praying in their homes was better for them, most of them would not have agreed to forgo what was better. Otherwise, this would mean that the best of generations engaged in the less meritorious deeds.

If it is said:

“This preference applied only to women after the female Companions, once women began behaving as they did, and because none of the prayer leaders after the Messenger is his equal. As for the female Companions, praying behind the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was better for them. This would therefore be a general address from which the first generation was excepted, since restricting the scope of a general statement is permissible.”

We reply:

This contradicts what is self-evidently known about the languages of Arabs and non-Arabs, what is self-evidently known from the religion of the Muslims, the natural disposition Allah has given rational people, and the consensus of the Muslims.

For concerning his words:

“Do not prevent Allah’s female servants from attending Allah’s mosques, though their homes are better for them,”

the Muslims unanimously agree that those present were certainly included. They differed concerning the second and third generations: were they included by the address itself, or by separate evidence? There are two views on this. But all agree that including those absent while excluding those present is impossible.

Language itself also rules this out, for his words:

“Do not prevent Allah’s female servants”

were undoubtedly addressed first and foremost to the Companions—may Allah be pleased with them. How, then, does language rule out their being excluded from it while those who came after them are included? Those versed in language have no doubt that this is impossible.