Powered by
UI
Techs
Home
>
Forums
>
>
General Discussion
>
Hidjab - some aspects
Post Reply
Username
Invalid Username or Password
Password
Format
Andale Mono
Arial
Arial Black
Book Antiqua
Century Gothic
Comic Sans MS
Courier New
Georgia
Impact
Tahoma
Times New Roman
Trebuchet MS
Script MT Bold
Stencil
Verdana
Lucida Console
1
2
3
4
5
6
Message Icon
Message
- Forum Code is ON
- HTML is OFF
Smilies
[quote][blue]They should not display their ornaments save those which are ordinarily displayed Explicit [/blue] This is an Implicit +Explicit directive in that "save those which are ordinarily displayed" is clearly an implicit referrence. Following your line of reasoning, the Quran should have stated in black-and-white those ornaments/adornements that are ordinarily displayed. There is considerable differenc of opinion among the scholars of yore, and even the contemporary ones, on "what is ordinarily displayed". I am surprised as to why the Quran has left something "ambiguous in the whole array of unequivocal words". "what is ordinarily displayed" might be unambiguous to your mind but not to mine just as the requirement of "head-covering" is discernible to me from the verse under discussion but not to you. [maroon]There is another thing to consider. The Holy Qur'an has exempted old ladies from this last directive later on. But it has not used the word Khimar there. Instead, it has independantly used Thuab (24:60). Had the original concern of Shari'ah been 'Khimar', something with which Arab women cover their heads, it should have used this word instead of Thaub. This means that the concern of the Shari'ah was to cover the bosoms with whatever means it is attained.[/maroon] It would be interesting to see how you understand the word "Thuab". [i]Such elderly women as are past the prospect of marriage,- there is no blame on them if they lay aside their [u](outer) garments[/u], provided they make not a wanton display of their beauty: but it is best for them to be modest: and Allah is One Who sees and knows all things. (24:60, Yusuf Ali)[/i] [i]As for women past child-bearing, who have no hope of marriage, it is no sin for them if they discard their [u](outer) clothing [/u]in such a way as not to show adornment. But to refrain is better for them. Allah is Hearer, Knower. (24:60, Pickthal)[/i] Would you care to give your understanding of this verse both from the philological as well as hermeneutical aspect? I expect you would not use any deductive reasoning in your explanation. Also, what is your understanding of the word "Jilbab"? [maroon]Yes, I do not deny that you cannot find anything in the Hadith literature about head covering. We do not find donkeys as forbidden species in the Holy Qur'an but the Holy Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have thrown over the pots of some people who would cook them. Similarly, it is only appropriate for ladies to cover their heads. What I have been saying is that the Shari'ah does not give an exhausitive list of all those deeds which should be done. Head covering is important, no doubt. But I cannot make it part of Shari'ah unless of course, we find it in the fundamental sources of Islam.[/maroon] So according to you, since we don't find donkeys as forbidden species in the Holy book, it is [b]only appropriate [/b]not to eat donkeys. If someone does eat 'em, it can only be deemed inappropriate just as "it is only appropriate for ladies to cover their heads". Is this the kind of comparison you are doing? "Head-covering" is important to you even if it is, as you say, not a part of the Shari'ah, but it raises a number of crucial questions: [green]Why should it remain important today?[/green] [green]Without divine backing, important is a relative term, isn't it?[/green] [green]If women of today no longer consider it a so-called decent Muslim practice and they can still be within the realm of decency while discarding this practice, why should it be considered desirable to adhere to it?[/green] Here's a syllogism: (1) You say: The Quran doesn't give an exhaustive list of all those deeds which should be done. (2) I say: The Quran does list [b]Important [/b] deeds that should or shouldn't be done and where human intellect could err (don't misconstrue this statement as implying that the Quran is simply a laundry list of do's and dont's). (3) You say: Head covering is important, no doubt. (4) I say: The Quran has promulgated "Head-covering" because, see (2) Hadith is a secondary source of Islam and we find the Prophet's (sws) explanation and annotation of Quranic verses in this corpus. This is what he has been reported to have said about the issue at hand: A’isha said: Asma, daughter of Abu Bakr, entered upon the Apostle of Allah (May peace be upon him) wearing thin clothes. The Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) turned his attention from her. He said: O Asma’, when a woman reaches the age of menstruation, it does not suit her that she displays her parts of body except this and this, and he pointed to her face and hands. (Sunan Abu Dawood, Vol 3, No 4092) Just to clarify, Abu Dawud said: This is a mursal tradition (i.e. the narrator who transmitted it from A’isha is missing) Khalid b. Duraik did not see A’isha). [maroon]I was just saying that the Holy Qur'an has dealt with this issue of male and female interaction quite deeply like it was never touched before. [/maroon] This is what you had written: [maroon]Intresting point is that [u]you will not find any directive[/u] to the effect of male and female interaction in the Bible. It is only the Holy Qur'an which takes up the issue and deals with it.[/maroon] I guess this is just a matter of a more careful choice of words, something of which we should all be mindful. [maroon]What you have said about the verses on polygamy is quite right. The point was that the Qur'an does make references to the prevalent practices without any intention of promulgating them. The decisive factor, no doubt, is the context and the arrangment of the directives. Once we agree, the Holy Qur'an does refer to the current practices without such intention of legislating them, the only thing to see is whether this is the case with Khimar as well, something which I have been trying to show.[/maroon] The Holy Quran has referred to the then prevelant practice of polygany and has in fact legislated not in favor of it but against not having it as an option. The wisdom conatined therein is for everyone to see. Somewhat in a different manner, it has legislated in favor of "Head-covering" and the wisdom in it is for everyone to see. [maroon]I'd like this discussion to continue to the point I get convinced because, if I do, I would find it quite easy to explain the importance of head covering with reference in the Holy Qur'an. [/maroon] And my purpose is to alter my understanding if it is based on shaky grounds. It would not be easy for you to explain the importance of "Head-covering" just as it is not easy to explain the importance and wisdom of a number of other Quranic directives, not least of which is the right of "Nushuz" given to men. It really depends on the audience; their state of mind and willingness to understand. I do reckon, however, that a genuine difference of opinion can exist. Salam hkhan, [maroon]we r patiently waiting for the conclusion by scholars; if there was any; which i doubt very much, as there seem to b equal no. of scholars 'For' and 'Against', or may b more for "For"[/maroon] I am no scholar but from whatever i have read, i have gathered that the difference of opinion is not in point of the requirement of "Head-covering" but regarding the "complete veil" or "Niqab" or 'face-covering", if you will. Some classical and contemporary scholars derive the requirement of "Niqab" from some verses. However, barring some feminist "scholars", i have yet to see any other scholar who doesn't consider "Head-covering" necessary. Javed Ahmed Ghamidi sahib is the first scholar of high intellectual merit who has arrived at this opinion and that too rather recently. Even his learned teacher had the same view as i am trying to advocate. Perhaps one could mention Muhammad Asad as a possible exception but he too is rather vague in his note on this verse --- 24:31--- but still comes across as not accepting "Head-covering" as obligatory. I may be wrong and if there are or were other reputable scholars having the same view, i would look forward to stand corrected. In the end i would quote a reply to a relevant question by Mr Shehzad Saleem. He has dealt with the issue quite well. May Allah grant us the courage to accept the truth as it is. Question: I am a student of the Qur’an. After going through it many many times, I have come to the conclusion that nowhere does it mention that women should cover their heads. In the following verse, God is asking women to cover their bosoms with a Khimar (a dress, a coat, a shawl, a shirt, a scarf, etc.), not their heads or their hair. And tell believing women to lower their eyes, and maintain their chastity. They shall not reveal any parts of their bodies, except that which is necessary. They shall cover their chests, [with their Khimar] and shall not relax this code in the presence of other than their husbands, their fathers, the fathers of their husbands, their sons, the sons of their husbands, their brothers, the sons of their brothers, the sons of their sisters, other women, the male servants or employees whose sexual drive has been nullified, or the children who have not reached puberty... (24:31) After all the Almighty does not run out of words. If He required of the believing women to cover their heads, He would have clearly said so. Is not then covering the head a cultural tradition? Is it not that it is this tradition which scholars have erroneously identified with Islam? Please comment. Answer: You see it is imperative while interpreting the verses of the Qur’an to determine the addressee of a particular verse otherwise one is bound to end up misinterpreting the verse. The address in the Qur’an changes among the various groups present (Muslims, Jews, Christians, Hypocrites), and if one reflects on the context of a verse and has a flare for the language of this Divine masterpiece, it is not difficult to grasp who among the groups is addressed. As far as 24:31 is concerned, it is obvious from its very first words that the believing women of the Prophet’s times are addressed. The Arabic word used for believing women is ‘Al-Mu’minat’. People normally translate this word without taking into account the article ‘Al’ (alif-lam) appended to the word ‘Mu’minat’. The particle ‘Al’ if properly translated together with the word ‘Mu’minat’ to which it is attached would mean ‘these believing women’ and not ‘believing women’. The phrase ‘these believing women’ obviously refers to the believing women who were present at the time these verses were revealed. It is an established historical fact the believing women of those times used to wear a khimar (a covering) on their heads and then made it fall along their bodies without covering their chests. It is they who are addressed and told that they must cover their chests as well. In other words, since the directive is given to women who already covered their heads but did not cover their chests, it was not required to mention the covering of the head. So the point which needs to be understood is that while translating these verses one must give due consideration to the word ‘Al-Mu’minat’ and see in what form believing women already dressed and what was the additional directive given to them. Moreover, the nature of this directive is such that it cannot be confined to the believing women of the Prophet’s times: it pertains to every believing women. All directives which have moral implications are general. For example if it had been said in the Qur’an that ‘these believing women should always uphold the truth and never lie’, then though the believing women of a particular age are addressed, it obviously cannot be concluded that believing women of later times are not bound by this directive. Therefore, in my opinion, covering the head is neither a cultural tradition nor the product of some scholar: It is the purport of the Qur’an. Edited by - Razi Allah on March 15 2004 04:44:04 Edited by - Razi Allah on March 15 2004 04:48:28[/quote]
Mode
Prompt
Help
Basic
Check here to be notified by email whenever someone replies to your topic
Show Preview
Share
|
Copyright
Studying-Islam
© 2003-7 |
Privacy Policy
|
Code of Conduct
|
An Affiliate of
Al-Mawrid Institute of Islamic Sciences ®
Top