₦airaland Forum

CLAIM 2:

"The Qur'an obligates women to cover themselves in a long, broad, loose outer garment(cloak), hence the whole body and face must be covered"

Evidence: Qur'an 33:59

O Prophet! say to your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers that they let down upon them their over-garments; this will be more proper, that they may be known, and thus they will not be given trouble; and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.





To understand this verse better, it is essential to learn the context by reading from verse 57 to 60 of the same chapter:

57. Indeed, those who offend God and His Messenger - God has cursed them in this world and the Hereafter and prepared for them a humiliating punishment.

58. And those who harm believing men and believing women for [something] other than what they have earned have certainly born upon themselves a slander and manifest sin.

59. O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is God Forgiving and Merciful.

60. If the hypocrites and those in whose hearts is disease and those who spread rumors in AL-Madinah do not cease, We will surely incite you against them; then they will not remain your neighbors therein except for a little.

We learn from 58 that innocent Muslims were suffering prosecution and persecution. The wages for these prosecutors and persecutors was spelt out in 57. In 60, we confirm that those within the city(Madinah) responsible for this persecution will eventually be overcome and forced out of the city if they persist. In the meantime, as a precaution against sexual harassment which persecuted women risk, God instructed Muhammad to tell his wives, daughters and other believers' to dress more conservatively in 59. Thus warding off harassers. Regardless of your gender, the more conservative or traditional you dress, the more formal you look and the less likely you are to be harassed.

The direction to the women here is a precaution and response to the circumstance, against the harm and ill-treatment they risked or were subjected to. It is not a fixed, immutable rule that bind on all Muslim women regardless of time, place or circumstance. That would be like living on a drug for the rest of your life because the doctor recommended this drug to you or a family to alleviate an acute ailment. Women under no threat or risk of persecution or harrasment aren't concerned with the above verse.

Even if we agree with the jurists for the sake of argument that the directive in this verse is eternal, universal and not based on circumstance; there is no indication in this verse that even the face or hair must be concealed by the garment. The direction is lengthening of the garments. And garments generally covers the torso and limbs, not head or hair. Even a cloak doesn't need to cover the face or hair.

https://www.hmoon.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/cloak-hq-detail.jpg

https://www.ecouterre.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/samantha-pleet-shadow-cloak.jpg

---

CLAIM 3:

"The Qur'an obligates women to draw their headcovering/face-veil over their bosom, so they must use this to cover their face/hair and then draw part of it over their bosom"

Evidence: Qur'an 24:31

And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their khimar over their bosoms, and not to reveal their zinatahunna save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands' fathers, or their sons or their husbands' sons, or their brothers or their brothers' sons or sisters' sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigour, or children who know naught of women's unclothedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their zinatahunna. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that ye may succeed.

This is the most invoked verse by orthodox Muslim jurists to enforce their dress code. It important to note that non of these verses so far have specified a woman 's head or hair or face to be concealed. The jurists have to introduce words like hair, head or face when they interprete these verses. Why? Doesn't the Qur'an emphasize it is detailed and explanatory? (Please see Qur'an 6:114, 12:111, 16:89 e.t.c).

Let us analyse two words which rubbishes the claim of the veils or headcovering, these words have been distorted overtime and mistranslated to serve the claims of the veil or headcovering till date.

The word "khimar" in this verse is often translated by orthodox translators as veil or headcovering. Khimar is accurately an Arabic word for a cover, something that covers another, be it a piece of fabric covering the window, a jacket covering the chest, a lid covering a can e.t.c so it is not limited to a veil or headcover.

In cases, scarfs, shawls or mufflers are specified as Khimar in Arabic. These were worn by Arabs even before Islam for cultural reason or protection against the cold, dusty weather of their region. The proponent of the veil or head covering have tried employing this to advance their claims.

However, scarfs, shawls or mufflers musn't even conceal the whole hair, head or face. They are worn loosely in various styles or fashions revealing the whole face, neck, part or all of the hair as i have shown below. It is faulty to conclude mere mention of a woman in muffler, scarf or shawl is covering her neck, ears or hair to the last strand. Thus if, the directive in this verse was to cover the head, hair or face, then for clarity sake, God would have specifically used those words in this verse.


Also of importance is the word "zinatahunna" often interpreted as decorations, adornments or ornaments. Hence, Muslim jurists forbid women from wearing them, this gives another reason why Muslim women in sharia'ah compliant societies dress in plain garments with dull colors like black or brown, concealing their earrings, bangles, rings, wrist watches and other attractive, accessories or decorations.

This interpretation contradict verse 31 of Chapter 7 where God enjoined all believers to go to their centers of worship with their "Zinatakum"(adornments/apparels/ornaments). In truth, Qur'anic words are best understood from the context of their usage. Mere reliance on dictionary meaning can result in erroneous conclusions, because vocabularies and dictionaries are subject to alterations over generations.

At the end of this verse, women were warned against stamping their feet, so as not to reveal the "Zinatahunna" which they have hidden. If zinatahunna mean ornaments or adornment, how does stamping the feet reveal them. To be more accurate, zinatahunna refers to sexual parts of the body like breast, thigh or backside whose shape is clearly outlined when a woman walks or stamp her feet in a in certain manners. Also, women are permitted to reveal these zinatahunna in presence of children like toddlers who know naught about a woman 's unclothedness. A woman 's unclothedness entails sexual parts of her anatomy as listed earlier, not necklace, beads, decorated fabrics or other adornment.

We now examine the claims of these jurist and the oft-repeated verses they present as evidence.

CLAIM 1
"Muhammad 's wives were ordered to veil. His wives were pious and led exemplary lives which true Muslim women must emulate. So, the veil is highly recommended, if not obligatory for Muslim women"

EVIDENCE: Qur'an 33:53

O you who believe! do not enter the houses of the Prophet unless permission is given to you for a meal, not waiting for its cooking being finished-- but when you are invited, enter, and when you have taken the food, then disperse-- not seeking to listen to talk; surely this gives the Prophet trouble, but he forbears from you, and God does not forbear from the truth. And when you ask of them any goods, ask of them from behind a barrier; this is purer for your hearts and (for) their hearts; and it does not behoove you that you should give trouble to the Messenger of God, nor that you should marry his wives after him ever; surely this is grievous in the sight of God.



A detailed analysis of this verse reveals no direction for the veil or any clothing. This is simply an instruction barring men from visiting Muhammad 's home without permission and that when these men visit the Muhammad 's home, they mustn't barge into the wives' room or privacy to make a request but request for behind a barrier(door, wall or curtain). The directive here is not even for the wives of Muhammad. It purpose is to guard the privacy of Muhammad but unfortunately have been employed till date to bury women in black sacs from puberty till death.

IS THE FACE-VEIL AN ISLAMIC REQUIREMENT FOR WOMEN?

Before answering this, here are 3 noteworthy facts;

i) the vast majority of Muslims hold the veil to be optional but highly recommended and deem it the most meritorious outfit for a believing woman.

ii) a small percent of Muslims hold the veil to be mandatory and regard the slightest exposure of a Muslim woman 's face in presence of non-related men to be sin and crime.

iii) another small percent hold the veil and in cases, the head covering as an invention of ancient clergy without basis or root in Islam.


Opinions aside, there is no mention of the veil in Islamic scripture; Qur'an. The Book does enjoin modest and chastity in a number of verse but no where does it define a wear/outfit mandatory for believers and neither does it specifies the body parts like face, hair or feet to be covered. Contrary to this, Muslim jurists have somehow deduced from a number of verses, wears/costumes for women, ranging from a simple head covering drawn over the bosom to a cloak draping on on the ground as the wearer walks and down to a veil that conceal the whole face. Any Muslim who denies these costume is considered a disbeliever by these jurist and any Muslim woman who doesn't wear them is regarded weak in faith.

How many of us are willing to to direct a mysterious veiled person who knocks on our door asking to be directed to the door of a neighbor? It is only sensible to identify the person behind that veil because if he/she turn out to be a stalker or robber, he have no clue to track this person or identify he/she even if this is someone close to us.

I 'll rather deal with a merchant whose face i can see and recognize even years later than a faceless merchant. We could give more examples. In essence, it is only natural to recognize and identify whom we are dealing with even if it is our new course mate or passenger sitting behind us in the cab. The veil disregard these basic facts, failing to consider that not even our voice or names can fill in for the role of our face in identification, recognition and communication.

THE PROBLEM WITH THE FACE-VEIL IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE

The dilemma of the veil transcend beyond societal culture or mass reception. It pertains to the design and role of the veil in separation and hamper of communication or interaction. While a number of our wears or accessories like hats, sunshades, surgical masks partly covers the face, the veil stands out as a wear designed and functioning to conceal the face from human sight. This is the main fault of the veil, and whether it protects/empowers women or restrict/repress them is a different ball game.

The liberal aren't entirely wrong, people must be free to choose their outfit. But there is no such thing as infinite freedom. One man 's freedom cannot be allowed to encroach another 's right. The point driven at here is plain; our faces are our identities. We owe this identity to whoever we are dealing with, whether the bus driver, receptionist or roadside vendor. To assure them of safety and security from us now and tomorrow, it is their right to identify who they are dealing with. To grant the veil this freedom wont go without compromising this right.

THE STATUS OF THE FACE-VEIL IN THE TRADITIONAL MUSLIM THOUGHT

The veil is a very controversial subject in the traditional Muslim thought, in that despite all the books, lectures and sermons exalting it as a symbol of Islam and nobility, imploring women to veil, there is not a single verse in the scripture recommending it.

Nonetheless, the veil is so revered in the Muslim world that women have taken drastic steps like cutting off a relation, giving up their ambition or job in order to don the veil permanently. Although the veil is generally regarded as optional in the Muslim communities, family, peer, regional or clergy pressure is more than enough to compel women to adopt it. Besides, in certain region in the Muslim world like Saudi Arabia, the veil is regarded a mandatory wear for women and criminal, sinful for women to unveil before non-related men.

DEFINITION

Even within the topic of clothing, the word 'veil' is a multi meaning word. For the sake of clarity, a veil according to this paper is a piece of fabric worn over the face and draping to the bosom. It is common among Middle easterners, Arabs and conservative religious women particularly of the Muslim community. In most cases, the veil is black, concealing the whole face except both eyes or sometimes only one eye is revealed while in rare cases, even the two eyes are concealed.

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/04/30/article-1269909-095CE449000005DC-972_233x478.jpg

INTRODUCTION

In a number of states particularly in Europe, the veil has been a bone of contention for the authorities, senate or government. While the veil is generally well received and even praised till date in the Middle East, it is poorly received in the West, with the wearer risking discrimination, marginalization and pressure to dump it. In recent time, after much controversies, debate and voting, certain states like Canada, Belgium and France have banned the veil from public space.

This reality have offended so many, ranging from wearers of the veil, to the advocates and down to the western leftists who may not necessarily appreciate or believe in the veil but stand for freedom of individual to dress as they desire with no restriction from the government.


This paper discusses the basis and legitimacy of the veil ban while challenging or disputing the stance of pro-veil Muslims and the western allies; the leftists.

CONTENT:

1. Introduction

2. Definition

3. The Status of Face-Veil in the traditional Muslim thought.

4. The Problem with the Face-Veil in Public space.

5. Is the Face-Veil an Islamic Requirement for Women?

6. The Face-Veil in the Dark and Middle Ages.

7. The Face-Veil in Modern Times.

8. Conclusion.

9. Bibliography

Empiree:
The same nonsense you spurt to your girlfriend on kufar section.

This is the second time you are mentioning this. Ifeann and i are just friends. Get your facts right and stop wasting time on irrelevancies.

vedaxcool:
Please provide evidence of this well documented view of mine, since it is well documented it should be easy to find, quoting hadiths is not the issue, Failure to do so implies your treacherous dishonesty!

Quoting the hadith does sum it, those are Hadith which your classical clergy have authenticated. You believe in those clergy men, you stand by them, they are your heroes, celebrities, saints e.t.c. And since authentic Hadith are canon and authoritative as far as your understanding of Islam is concerned, those Hadith make up your views.

justlove91:
You can also see how they completely ignored the questions.

I bet he doesn't have the answer right now but is just trying to buy himself time. Even then, a bit of courtesy and diplomacy would have credited him rather than acting cold.

By the way, there is no torture or grave punishment. Here is evidence from the Qur'an:

Qur'an 36:51-52
And the Horn will be blown; and at once from the graves to their Lord they will hasten. They will say, "O woe to us! Who has raised us up from our sleeping place?" [The reply will be], "This is what the Most Merciful had promised, and the messengers told the truth."

There is no reference to any kind of punishment in the grave throughout the Qur'an. As the above verses point out, sinners resurrected will consider themselves awoken from a sort of ''sleeping place'', not a "torture chamber" as the proponents of grave punishment allege. It means bodies in the grave are in a kind of hibernating/soulless state, not alive and conscious.

I believe "Punishment in the Grave" is no more than a fable or urban legend invented by corrupt clergymen to tighten their grip on their followers.

Empiree, 9jaforlife, i "ll love to have your answer to the OP 's question. I think this is a very important issue, considering that you present yourselves here as Muslims who believe in the punishment of the grave. Please lets be focused.

Hello Justlove91.

Have you seen Edip Yuksel 's debate with Ali Sina. Please check it out, i believe this is just the abridged record:

https://mostintolerantreligion.files./2011/11/english-debate-of-edipyuksel-vs-ali-sina.pdf

You sound like one of those Muslims who kept aligning and appealing to ultraconservative, militant and puritan understanding of Islam without much investigations only to one day discover the fallacy of their position in the face of rational proofs. You found your Islamic faith completely razed down with nothing to resist the blows. See, i was at the crossroad 2 yrs ago. And it changed my understanding about God, morality and humanity so much that while i still consider myself a Muslim, most Muslims cannot even stand me one bit. I have been called an apostate, a misguided/doomed Muslim, a non-Muslim pretending to be Muslim, hypocrite, enemy of Islam e.t.c by fellow Muslims.

I think you should begin to look at Islam from alternate angles, don't assume the mainstream is the only voice of Islam. Pick out each issue you have with Islam and study the position of different voices within the Muslim world on it.

vedaxcool: your penchant for lies have no bounds indeed, care to provide proof?

1. Sahih Bukhari 9:83:17

Narrated 'Abdullah: Allah's Apostle said, "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."

2. Sunan Abi Dawud » Book of Prescribed Punishments (Kitab Al-Hudud)

Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas:

A blind man had a slave-mother who used to abuse the Prophet (ﷺ) and disparage him. He forbade her but she did not stop. He rebuked her but she did not give up her habit. One night she began to slander the Prophet (ﷺ) and abuse him. So he took a dagger, placed it on her belly, pressed it, and killed her. A child who came between her legs was smeared with the blood that was there. When the morning came, the Prophet (ﷺ) was informed about it.

He assembled the people and said: I adjure by Allah the man who has done this action and I adjure him by my right to him that he should stand up. Jumping over the necks of the people and trembling the man stood up.

He sat before the Prophet (ﷺ) and said: Messenger of Allah! I am her master; she used to abuse you and disparage you. I forbade her, but she did not stop, and I rebuked her, but she did not abandon her habit. I have two sons like pearls from her, and she was my companion. Last night she began to abuse and disparage you. So I took a dagger, put it on her belly and pressed it till I killed her.

Thereupon the Prophet (ﷺ) said: Oh be witness, no retaliation is payable for her blood.

You political view celebrate death of Muslims while explaining away the actions of their assailants. Once the actions are reversed you begin to accuse muslims and Islam of being responsible!

You search in my posts, for in them you think you will find faults in me and evidence to testify against me. And you will not believe me however factual my claims are. I do not desire approval of anyone. I know that you do not have the love of truth and morals in you. I come with ideas defending Islam from unholy teachings/views attributed to it like the above, but you deny me as some sort of impostor. If another come justifying such teachings in the name of God, him you will receive. Do not think that i care if you deny me, there is one that you deny; the plain truth:

Saudi Court Sentences Gangrape Victim

Saudi Court Gives Death Penalty To A Man Who Renounced Islam

The Case Of Aasia Bibi

Even the cheapest way to obtain 1st class is not a walk over. IMO, the cheapest way to obtain 1st class is to study "smarter".

1. Time Management.
Consider your time like your money. Imagine having to pay for every time you waste sleeping, chatting e.t.c. If you plan to study from nightfall till midnight, dont get absorbed in some other stuffs that drain your study drive and concentration.

2. Focus
There are certain factors that hinders one from excelling in school. Noisy, unserious, carefree roommates, poor hostel facilities, insufficient cash e.t.c. Work to correct these things.

3. Study 'smarter'.
Read, understand and APPLY. If you cram, you will live to cram the same stuff another time. If simply understand, you will forget it after a while, although it will be easier to relearn it another day. If you apply what you are studying to something around you or something you already know, it will be difficult to forget it.

That 's how the brain works. The brain can easily grasp and recall Newton 's first law of motion if the reader applies the law, relating it with a car(body) which keep traveling at a constant speed untill it bump into a parked car(at rest) which had remained parked untill it was bumped by the former car.

Dapo777:
Being a guy comes with some downsides too.

1)Lots of attention.
Guys envy girls for this. The girls get all the attention everywhere they go,Facebook,twitter,instagram ,its a girls world online. What about offline,girls still get all the attention. If a guy and a girl should ask for the same help,the girl has 85% more chances of getting helped. So annoying

2)Girls are always right.
In an argument,a guy can never win it,he must give up for the girl to win the argument,also a guy cannot hit a girl even if the girl is hitting him,its not fair.

3)Girls are wooed.
Girls get wooed and flattered all the time,their ego are nurtured 24/7 but a guy is left with his own ego to carter by himself. So sad

4)Lesbians are more tolerated than gays.
Lesbians are more accepted than gays generally,even straight people get turned on by lesbians and not gays. So sad for the gays.

5)Girls enjoy sex more.
Ohhh gush this is the most annoying, imagine me doing all the work ,pounding her like my life depends on her punny only for her to be screaming in ecstacy ,enjoying all the thrill. The kind of intense orgasm girls have ehn,it makes guys fascinate about what its like to have an orgasm as a girl. To make matters worse,they have multiple orgasm. clitoral own is there,vaginal own is there,g spot own is there, even nipples orgasm is there. BUT WHY?

6)Girls manipulate guys without getting noticed.
They know all the tricks in the book. They manipulate guys and we guys don't see it as manipulation, is it through tears? Through sex? Through sweet words? Chaiii guys have suffered. We even pay for the sex they are enjoying more. Wtf?

7)Women are more sympathetic than men.
Women generally can show more sympathy than men. Some men can't be taught be importance of sympathy, not all men tho,but generally women have the upper hand.

Women do less work
Since they are considered weaker vessel,they do less work wherever they are,on a general note. Men are handled with iron hand while women are pampered and they still get the same reward with the guys or even higher reward.

Well that's it.

What about their looks?

true2god:
Sorry to ask, is 'science' of the hadith a social science, natural science, applied science, physical science or what?

It is not really a science even though its proponents claim so. Hadith weren't directly collected from the Muhammad. The earliest document date about 150 years after Muhammad. Like the Jewish Mishnah, hadith have a chain of reporters said to trace the hadith from the collectors or writers through a number of reporters and generations back to Muhammad. Realizing the reality of individuals fabricating hadith and ascribing it to Muhammad, the later clergymen devised a method of scrutinizing the hadith books they inherited from their ancestors to separate true Hadith from false hadith.

This method entails studying the life and character of each individuals in the chain of reporters of a particular Hadith. Any hadith with a reporter in its chain who the clergy deem untrustworthy or questionable, is graded weak or fabricated and rejected. If all the reporters of the hadith are deemed trustworthy, the clergy grade the hadith and approves it. This method was defined as Science of Hadith.

parisbookaddict:
My apologies. .it's a nairaland automated quoting error. It has been corrected as I can see. I have seen the link .. u haven't made an points unless if u posted some tin since I last checked. anyway I found ur posts here amusing.. u often blast usermane for rejecting the hadiths..it's funny that u now reject some of it.. why don't u reject the whole thing..

Because in most cases Hadith lovers have a hard time coming to terms with gross hadith teachings. Empiree, is talking about science of hadith, according to this so called science of hadith, the hadith that reported Muhammad married and cohabited with 9 years old Aisha is Authentic.

vedaxcool:
I seem to have hurt a nerve ending!
First Lie: Netanyahu Threatened to Strike Iran on the fraudulent pretext of Nuclear weapons, typically usermane is crying like his co-religionist zionist whose stock in trade is making false claims to spill muslim blood!

Whoever knows my religio-political views understand that i am against spilling blood of others for simply holding alternate views. You on the other hand cannot proudly say this, because your views which include slaying apostates or ''blasphemers'' are well documented.

Second Lie: the Palestinian suffer the living side by side with one of the most evil and totalitarian regime on earth, Arabs living in Israel are denied their right to history, the Israeli govt insist despite the massacres that was formented by zionist, Arabs have no freedom of expression to call it Nakba.

I don't know much about this, but is it allowed to call 9/11 and other Islamist terrors "Islamic or Jihad" in your opinions despite how much the terrorists invoked Islam?

Fourth Lie: jews in Iran while they can enjoy many rights have for many years been enjoying, in fact they enjoy more rights than sunnis, so your lies here has no basis!

The page that your link referred me to cement my claims. In summary, things are only recently getting better for Iranian Jews. Isreali Arabs have long passed that level. Give me a break.

The population of Jews in Iran today is markedly lower than their population in before the so called Islamic revolution, thanks to emigration. Iranian Jews had far more rights in secular Iran where Islamists where weakened than today 's Iran. Why hasn't there also been a marked decrease in Muslim numbers in Isreal, well guess what; most of the I6% of Isrealis who are Muslims would rather live in Israel than in any of the so called Muslim states like Iran.

While you brag that your co-religionists are growing in UK, US or France mostly due to immigration, ever wondered why non-Muslims are declining in Iran or Egypt mostly due to emigration? Compared to the number your co-religionists migrating to west, how many non-Muslims are migrating to the so called Muslim states? There is nothing to offer. Baha'ism is not even recognized as a religion in Iran, Bahai's in Iran face institutionalized persecution whereas these same Baha'is enjoy better freedom in Isreal. Atheism is a crime in Iran whereas Atheists are free in Isreal, how on earth do you dare compare Iran with Isreal in terms of rights of religious minorities?

vedaxcool:
https://cdn.timesofisrael.com/uploads/2012/09/UN-General-Assembly-I_Horo-3-85x48.jpg
Another example of hating Islam and muslims and working to see them dead, The Israeli PM Chicken sh!!T Netanyahu, lies in 2012 about Iran Nuclear weapons, in fact he was simply trying to incite violence against a muslim country under false pretext, he wanted to create a situation that would lead to many North Carolinna shootings happening by the second, despite the fact that his intelligence agency thought otherwise:

Typical, always crying Islamophobia if the likes of Netanyahu threaten Iran but never blaming it on your religion when people are massacred and beheaded by your co-religionsts in the Middle East. Its simple, if you detest non-Muslims blaming terror on your religion, also desist from blaming every oppression or aggression at any Muslim on Islamophobia.

FYI, 20% of Isrealis are Muslims who enjoy a better standard of living, rights and privileges than Iranian Jews who are not even considered as full citizens by virtue of their religion. If Netanyahu want Muslims dead so bad, why isn't he starting with Muslims within his domain? I appreciate your concern for lives of the Iranians but i wont tolerate you feeding this into Islamism or Muslim victim hood complex.

I don't believe all those crap about abrogation of Qur'an verses. It is orthodox Muslim clergy 's palaver. Please watch this video, no verse of the Qur'an calls for that.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtJmm9Pa8xk

^^^^
They said the thread is meant for non-Muslims only, didn't you read the the headings?