Tag: cultural

Wearing a headscarf to recite Quran

by Evidence seeker, posted in The headscarf

Does a woman have to wear a headscarf while reciting the Quran?

 

B8BB95CA-2376-416B-A838-628B4640B3FB

 

Wearing a headscarf while reciting Quran has no basis in the religion. It is noteworthy that in other religions women wear a headscarf (e.g Sikhism, Hinduism) to show respect. Due to many Muslims sharing geographical/cultural roots with these religions, the idea that a woman’s head must be covered to recite Quran seems to be rooted in culture. Cultures where covering the head is a mark of respect. 

 

Culture is based upon repeated traditions. Religion however is more scientific – it is based upon evidence and in this case, there is none.

Question about the headscarf

by Evidence seeker, posted in The headscarf

 

98b7b2ad-be35-4d81-ae9f-e8b2f50d8c00How am I to understand the narration related to the story of Ifk, when Aisha covered herself when the sahabi saw her? Isn’t this proof that women should cover their heads and faces? 

 

You refer to the following (I have only included the relevant part as the story of the ifk is a very long narration (from Bukhari).

 

وَكَانَ صَفْوَانُ بْنُ الْمُعَطَّلِ السُّلَمِيُّ ثُمَّ الذَّكْوَانِيُّ مِنْ وَرَاءِ الْجَيْشِ، فَأَصْبَحَ عِنْدَ مَنْزِلِي فَرَأَى سَوَادَ إِنْسَانٍ نَائِمٍ، فَعَرَفَنِي حِينَ رَآنِي، وَكَانَ رَآنِي قَبْلَ الْحِجَابِ، فَاسْتَيْقَظْتُ بِاسْتِرْجَاعِهِ حِينَ عَرَفَنِي، فَخَمَّرْتُ وَجْهِي بِجِلْبَابِي،

Safwan bin Al-Muattal As-Sulami Adh-Dhakwani was behind the army. When he reached my place in the morning, he saw the figure of a sleeping person and he recognized me on seeing me as he used to see me before ‘hijab’. So I woke up when he recited Istirja’ (i.e. “Inna li l-lahi wa inna llaihi raji’un”) as soon as he recognized me. So I covered my face with my jilbaab.

 

Firstly, A’isha mentioned Safwan bin Al Muattal recognized her because he was used to seeing her before ‘hijab’. Now, the ONLY verse (See 33.53) which mentions ‘hijab’ in connection to women is the verse about the wives of the Prophet.

 

Following on from this, in the same Surah – Surah Al Ahzaab, verse 32, Allah tells the wives of the Prophet  that they are not like other women and it is to go against the evidence if we take verses Allah (Azza wa jall) made specific to the wives and apply it to all women. 

 

Secondly, it is very relevant that we take note that A’isha said she covered her face with her jilbaab. She did not use the word ‘khimaar’ (which is used in common day Arabic to mean ‘a headscarf’. In other words, she used her clothing to cover her face as the verse had ordered people to interact with the wives of the Prophet through a screen/barrier.

 

In other words, the story of the ifk actually indicates the implementation of the verse of ‘hijab’ for the wives of the Prophet. It has nothing to do with covering the head.

‘Ask the people of knowledge!’

by Evidence seeker, posted in Scholars

maze-1560302_640

This is a very popular quote amongst Muslims. It is indeed from the Quran. So, let’s take a look at what the Quran actually states but I have to warn you first. It’s most likely going to be a shock to the system so brace yourself.

 

 

 

It comes up twice in 16:43 and 21:7.

 

 وَمَآ أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ إِلاَّ رِجَالاً نُّوحِى إِلَيْهِمْ فَاسْأَلُواْ أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِن كُنْتُم لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ – بِالْبَيِّنَـتِ وَالزُّبُرِ وَأَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الذِّكْرَ لِتُبَيِّنَ لِلنَّاسِ مَا نُزِّلَ إِلَيْهِمْ وَلَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ

 

16:43 ‘And We sent not before you (O Muhammad) any but men, whom We sent revelation. So ask (plural form) Ahl Adh-Dhikr,(i.e. ‘people of the Reminder’) if you know not. (44). With clear signs and Books (We sent the Messengers). And We have also revealed the Dhikr (reminder/revelation) to you so that you may clearly explain to people what was revealed to them, and that perhaps they may reflect.’

 

وَمَآ أَرْسَلْنَا قَبْلَكَ إِلاَّ رِجَالاً نُّوحِى إِلَيْهِمْ فَاسْئَلُواْ أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِن كُنتُمْ لاَ تَعْلَمُونَ – وَمَا جَعَلْنَـهُمْ جَسَداً لاَّ يَأْكُلُونَ الطَّعَامَ وَمَا كَانُواْ خَـلِدِينَ

 

21:7 And We sent not before you but men to whom We revealed. So ask (plural form) the people of the Reminder if you do not know. (8). And We did not place them in bodies that did not eat food, nor were they immortals.

It is obvious from the translation, even if one doesn’t understand Quranic Arabic that both the verses start off addressed to the Prophet, affirming that the messengers before him were all from mankind (as opposed to angels or any other kind of being). Then, the people are ordered to ask ‘the people of the reminder’ or ‘Ahl Adh dhikr’ if they do not know. It is worth noting that this is very specific. It is about asking these people on this specific issue.

So who are these people who will confirm all the messengers before Muhammad’s time were humans? These people are the Jews and Christians. They believe in the same Prophets as the Quran tells us about. If you read the rest of the Quran, this will appear to you as clear as day.

Where is the command to follow scholars, to delegate our morality, our religious principles? It is nowhere to be found. In fact the Quran states the opposite!

In 9:31, we are told

 

اتَّخَذُواْ أَحْبَـرَهُمْ وَرُهْبَـنَهُمْ أَرْبَاباً مِّن دُونِ اللَّهِ وَالْمَسِيحَ ابْنَ مَرْيَمَ وَمَآ أُمِرُواْ إِلاَّ لِيَعْبُدُواْ إِلَـهاً وَحِداً لاَّ إِلَـهَ إِلاَّ هُوَ سُبْحَـنَهُ عَمَّا يُشْرِكُونَ

 

‘They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah, and (they also took as their Lord) the Messiah, son of Maryam, while they were commanded to worship none but One God, none has the right to be worshipped but He. Praise and hallowed be He above what they associate (with Him).’

A well known hadith explains this verse.

Adi ibn Hatim (he was not a Muslim at this point) reported: I heard the Prophet reciting the verse in Surah At-Tawbah, “They have taken their priests and rabbis as Lords besides Allah.” (9:31) I asked: O Messenger of Allah, we don’t worship them and [The Prophet] replied: “but do they not make impermissible what Allah has made permissible and do they not make permissible what Allah has made impermissible and you do that?” I replied: ‘yes’ and he said: “then that it is [a form] worshipping them.” (Tirmidhi)

For over a millennium, the Muslim clergy have changed and twisted the religion so much that it is almost unrecognisable. The list is endless. From claiming that interest is permitted (when it is a major sin and that which is tantamount to Allah waging war against you), taking away women’s God given rights, making sex slavery acceptable, terrorism presented as jihad, propagating domestic violence and abuse, and so on and so forth.

Our principal enemy is, in reality, within us. It is us. We are leading ourselves astray. Following opinions instead of scripture, the creation instead of the Creator.

Furthermore, the Quran states

 

وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَن يَتَّخِذُ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ أَندَادًا يُحِبُّونَهُمْ كَحُبِّ اللَّهِ وَالَّذِينَ ءَامَنُواْ أَشَدُّ حُبًّا لِلَّهِ وَلَوْ يَرَى الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُواْ إِذْ يَرَوْنَ الْعَذَابَ أَنَّ الْقُوَّةَ لِلَّهِ جَمِيعًا وَأَنَّ اللَّهَ شَدِيدُ الْعَذَابِ – إِذْ تَبَرَّأَ الَّذِينَ اتُّبِعُواْ مِنَ الَّذِينَ اتَّبَعُواْ وَرَأَوُاْ الْعَذَابَ وَتَقَطَّعَتْ بِهِمُ الاٌّسْبَابُ – وَقَالَ الَّذِينَ اتَّبَعُواْ لَوْ أَنَّ لَنَا كَرَّةً فَنَتَبَرَّأَ مِنْهُمْ كَمَا تَبَرَّءُواْ مِنَّا كَذَلِكَ يُرِيهِمُ اللَّهُ أَعْمَـلَهُمْ حَسَرَتٍ عَلَيْهِمْ وَمَا هُم بِخَـرِجِينَ مِنَ النَّارِ

 

2:65. ‘And of mankind are some who take (for worship) others besides Allah as rivals (to Allah). They love them as they love Allah. But those who believe, love Allah more (than anything else). If only, those who do wrong could see, when they will see the torment, that all power belongs to Allah and that Allah is severe in punishment.) (166. When those who were followed disown (declare themselves innocent of) those who followed (them), and they see the torment, then all their relations will be cut off from them). (167. And those who followed will say: “If only we had one more chance to return (to the worldly life), we would disown (declare ourselves as innocent from) them as they have disowned (declared themselves as innocent from) us. Thus Allah will show them their deeds as regrets for them. And they will never get out of the Fire.’

There are other verses on this issue. Go ahead and have a look.

It’s ironic because the very foundation, the cornerstone of Islam is to worship one God (‘Allah’ in Arabic) and the term ‘Muslim’ (contrary to popular belief) means ‘one who submits to Allah’. Letting the Muslim clergy define the religion completely contradicts this and leads the global Muslim community astray.

It’s time to find our way back.

Beat her lightly

by Evidence seeker, posted in Women

woman-sitting-silhouette-clipart

Islam is not the rod with which men beat women. I have just watched yet another so-called ‘Sheikh’ on YouTube state the Quran allows men to beat their wives. Enough is enough. For generations, Muslim women around the world have suffered and continue to suffer from domestic violence and abuse because of such opinions.

Those in a position of power or authority will always present dogma so that they are not undermined. It has served the Muslim clergy well historically and to this day, feeds into a patriarchal culture whereby the husband is somehow responsible or a moral guide for the wife. Thus, she is deemed spiritually lesser, requiring discipline.

The whole argument pivots on the translation of one word – the Arabic verb ‘Dharaba’ (in Surah An Nisa’, verse 34). It is a word which has a huge array of meanings in the Quran including ‘to bring forth’, ‘to strike the ground with a stick’, ‘to deal with’ and so on. Context is all important in helping us to understand what it means in each case in the Quran.

The common misconception that Islam allows and even encourages wife beating is down to a sexist and cultural context within which, this word ‘Dharaba’ is wrongly translated as ‘beat/hit’. This translation works for those cultures where women are seen as lesser citizens, beings to be subjugated and ruled over. In other words, it is not Islam but men who legalize and normalize wife beating. Worse, they use the banner of Islam to hide what is blatantly oppression and wrongdoing.

If you study all the instances of ‘dharaba’ in the Quran and the example of the Prophet, it is clear it means ‘to go away/separate’.

The verse is very clear. If a husband sees ‘nushuz’(ie. an uprising – unreasonable demands) from his wife;

1). He admonishes/speaks to her about it
2). Forsakes her in the bed
3). Separates/goes away

This process is exactly what the Prophet did with his wives when they wanted more financially than he had to give. So my question now is, do the Fuqaha (jurists) know the religion better than the Prophet did?

What allows the same patterns to be perpetuated is that many Muslim women often do not feel able to come forward and seek help. They are afraid that they will be blamed instead of being comforted, reminded that, wife beating is a right of the husband. Terrified of what taking a stand will cost them. In unity comes strength so as Muslim women, we must stand with these women, with our hearts and minds, the correct knowledge of the religion in our hands.

I believe any change in society starts from within us. We, as Muslims, need to change our views so women can come forward and break the chains of silent suffering. We must offer comfort rather than judgement. Most important of all, our understanding and advice must be based upon actual knowledge and Scripture as opposed to deeply entrenched cultural and patriarchal injustices.

Like I said, enough is enough.

For detailed evidence, click this link.

MUSLIM WOMEN are more than ‘Hijab’.

by Evidence seeker, posted in Women

8890505903_abd85199da_bTell a lie long enough, it becomes the ‘truth’.

The word ‘hijab’ appears in the Quran 7 times. Not one of these is in reference to women covering. Nevertheless, Muslims all around the world, whether they speak Arabic or not, talk about ‘hijab’.

‘Hijab’ is Quranic Arabic for ‘barrier’ although it is commonly used for the veil/scarf and translated as ‘covering’,  ‘concealing’ or a ‘curtain’. This is an idea which has been propagated, most likely for centuries, by the predominately Arab male Muslim clergy. A clergy, which has objectified women as much as the Western world has sexualised them. Two sides of the same coin.

After spending years of my life researching women’s issues in Islam, a journey which has taken me places both physically and psychologically, I realised that out of the Quran’s 6235 verses, only 2 are about how women in general should dress in public. That’s around 0.03% of the Holy Book. An indication of how much of a Muslim woman’s faith is about her dress.

One (33:59) tells us to cover ourselves so we are known as Muslims. The other (24:31) that the chest and legs should be covered – the legs covered in a way as not to reveal what is beneath the covering. That’s it.

God tells Muslim women to cover their bodies so that they are known as Muslim women (The culture at the time of revelation was one where people often exposed themselves). Sadly, the majority of Muslim women are unaware of this and wear a headscarf and often a cloak and a face covering (they believe) to safeguard their beauty. That is because they are basing their opinion on the commonly accepted term ‘hijab’ for how they should dress.

I chose the path of Islam, learnt Classical Arabic and am memorising and studying the Quran. I have worn a scarf, a jilbaab (cloak/robe) and even a niqaab (face veil). Based upon God’s word, I now wear modest clothing. My religion is founded upon my own research and studies. I ask all other Muslim women to do the same.

Language and thought are strongly connected. When we use the word ‘hijab’, there are obvious connotations. We are making the whole issue about sexuality. Women become a temptation needing to be tempered, with the potential to lead men astray. It is a term founded in culture. A term that serves the needs of men as it then leads to further arguments that women need to cover their bodies with cloaks (jilabib), their faces (niqaab), and even infringes on their civil liberties (e.g. working, sports, going out/travelling without a male relative). Frankly, it reduces women so that they end up not having a voice or in extreme situations, even a presence.

I believe that we need to stop using the word ‘hijab’. It is a baseless concept. Women regardless of their religion are not defined by men and the word ‘hijab’ is doing exactly that. It leads to Muslim girls as young as 5 years being ‘sexualised’ when they are shrouded in a scarf and sometimes even a cloak. It is a term intertwined with cultural expectations involving shame, honour, and purity. A means by which a woman’s piety can be judged.

Many a Muslim will argue for ‘hijab’ claiming it is not just for a woman’s body but for her character and the way she interacts with the world. I argue the exact opposite. Dressing modestly, based upon evidence, brings religion to the forefront while kicking sexualisation firmly into the background.

We are more than our bodies. It’s time to move forward and it’s up to us as Muslim women to lead the way.