The Concept of Hijaab

Newspapers over the past few weeks have been flooded with articles related to the ban on Hijaab in some country or the other. Issues raised have related to women’s emancipation, their independence, equality, their status in society, and lately, about Hijaab being a threat to security!

For this post, I intend to look at the concept of Hijaab or Purdah, from five angles. And then leave it to you, dear reader, to arrive at your own conclusions.
A. Definition of Hijaab in Islam
B. Extent of observing Hijaab in the manner of dressing
C. Removal of purdah and the effect on society (no moral preaching, just a few thoughts)
D. Hijaab in other religions
E. Hijaab for men

So here I go.

A. Definition of Hijaab in Islam
The Arabic word ‘Hijab’ literally means curtain or cover. Most Islamic legal systems define this type of modest dressing as covering everything except the face and hands in public. According to Islamic scholarship, Hijab is given the wider meaning of modesty, privacy, and morality. (Wikipedia)

In other words, it means to either hide oneself or be modest in the manner of dressing in front of strangers of the opposite gender. At the same time – and this is often forgotten - it also means avoiding looking at strangers of the opposite gender. (Strangers here would mean any person who one can technically marry).

When I am watching a movie and gaze upon the actress on screen, both she and I are guilty of not observing Hijaab.

B. Extent of observing Hijaab in the manner of dressing
Dr. Zakir Naik, in his book, “Answers to non-Muslims’ Common Questions about Islam” has succinctly mentioned the types of clothes to be worn, and I quote-

According to Qur’an and Sunnah there are basically six criteria for observing hijab:
1. Extent:
The first criterion is the extent of the body that should be covered. This is different for men and women. The extent of covering obligatory on the male is to cover the body at least from the navel to the knees. For women, the extent of covering obligatory is to cover the complete body except the face and the hands upto the wrist. If they wish to, they can cover even these parts of the body. Some scholars of Islam insist that the face and the hands are part of the obligatory extent of ‘hijab’.
All the remaining five criteria are the same for men and women.
2. The clothes worn should be loose and should not reveal the figure.
3. The clothes worn should not be transparent such that one can see through them.
4. The clothes worn should not be so glamorous as to attract the opposite sex.
5. The clothes worn should not resemble that of the opposite sex.
6. The clothes worn should not resemble that of the unbelievers i.e. they should not wear clothes that are specifically identities or symbols of the unbelievers’ religions.
(Unquote)

The following verse of the Qur’an sums up the requirement of Hijab from believing women.

Waqul lilmu/minati yaghdudna min absarihinna wayahfathna furoojahunna wala yubdeena zeenatahunna illa ma thahara minha walyadribna bikhumurihinna AAala juyoobihinna wala yubdeena zeenatahunna illa libuAAoolatihinna aw aba-ihinna aw aba-i buAAoolatihinna aw abna-ihinna aw abna-i buAAoolatihinna aw ikhwanihinna aw banee ikhwanihinna aw banee akhawatihinna aw nisa-ihinna aw ma malakat aymanuhunna awi alttabiAAeena ghayri olee al-irbati mina alrrijali awi alttifli allatheena lam yathharoo AAala AAawrati alnnisa-i wala yadribna bi-arjulihinna liyuAAlama ma yukhfeena min zeenatihinna watooboo ila Allahi jameeAAan ayyuha almu/minoona laAAallakum tuflihoona

And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O ye Believers! turn ye all together towards Allah, that ye may attain Bliss. (Qur’an 24:31; Translation by Yusuf Ali)

There is another verse that explains the manner of covering of a believing woman.

Ya ayyuha alnnabiyyu qul li-azwajika wabanatika wanisa-i almu/mineena yudneena AAalayhinna min jalabeebihinna thalika adna an yuAArafna fala yu/thayna wakana Allahu ghafooran raheeman

O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad): that is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. (Qur’an 33:59; Translation by Yusuf Ali)

One of the Hadiths of the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) clearly mentions the extent that a Muslim woman should cover herself.

Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:
Asma, daughter of AbuBakr, entered upon the Apostle of Allah (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) wearing thin clothes. The Apostle of Allah (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) 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. (Abu Dawood: Book 32, Hadith 4092)

To sum up, the most important term in the manner of dressing is that it should be such that even if a stranger sees you, it should not (sexually) attract him or her towards you.

C. Removal of purdah and the effect on society
A Marketing Head of a music channel, sharing the results of a study they had conducted in 2008 on the youth of today, summed up of the attitudes of girls in a single statement, “Let me show you what you can’t have”.

In the guise of openness, isn’t this moral turpitude?

As I’ve mentioned earlier, I’m not going to preach, so let me just ask some questions, which my readers may answer for themselves.

When we see beauty contests, Fashion TV and similar TV channels, Film Awards shows or even the kind of photographs of actresses, models, WAGs etc. that keep being printed daily in respectable ‘family’ newspapers, do we look at those women as individuals, or as “...mmmmmmm”?

What first strikes our mind when we see a demure looking girl in a nice loose dress walking down the street vis-a-vis when we see a similar girl in a cleavage revealing, figure-hugging dress?

Finally, have things like dancing, stage shows, small dresses, bikinis etc really made women equal to men, or elevated their position in society?

D. Hijaab in other religions
Both Christianity and Judaism have laid emphasis on the veil. Till the 12th century, Christian women traditionally wore veils. The exception was young girls (note the similarity to Islam?). It was only from the 15th century onwards that veils were replaced with hoods, and then slowly over the next 500 years, we see what we see today.

Judaism requires both men and women to substantially cover their bodies. Men are generally required to wear long trousers and long-sleeve shirts, and women wear blouses with sleeves below the elbow and skirts that cover the knees. Women are also required to wear loose clothes and not trousers in the presence of men. Men and women of the conservative Haredi community still do not wear tight clothes, skirts with slits, thin or bright clothes etc. (again, note the similarity?).

Similar to Islam, Judaism also follows the concepts of ‘Yichud’ – the non-permissibility of a man and a woman not married to each other being allowed to meet in seclusion – and ‘Negiah’ – non-permissibility of physical contact with a member of the opposite sex, except for one's spouse, children, grandchildren, parents, and grandparents – people one cannot marry.

We have a strong Jewish community here in Mumbai. Do we remember seeing Jewish men and women without proper loose-fitting dresses? I, for sure, don’t!

As regards Christianity, let me just begin and end with this quote.

But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. (Corinthian 11:5-6, King James Bible)

Buddhist, Jain and Hindu nuns have been either covering or shaving their heads for centuries.

E. Hijaab for men
Which brings me to my last point. Is Hijab only for women in Islam?

While we all keep talking about covering women etc., Hijaab is as strictly enjoined for men in Islam – maybe even more strictly.

Regarding the manner of dressing, certain types of dresses and ornaments that would make women attracted towards them are forbidden for men. There are numerous Hadith to that effect. Let me quote two.

Narrated AbuSa'id al-Khudri:
AbdurRahman said: I asked AbuSa'id al-Khudri about wearing lower garment. He said: You have come to the man who knows it very well. The Apostle of Allah (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) said: The way for a believer to wear a lower garment is to have it halfway down his legs and he is guilty of no sin if it comes halfway between that and the ankles, but what comes lower than the ankles is in Hell. On the day of Resurrection. Allah will not look at him who trails his lower garment conceitedly. (Abu Dawood: Book 32, Hadith 4082)

Narrated Ali ibn AbuTalib:
The Prophet of Allah (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) took silk and held it in his right hand, and took gold and held it in his left hand and said: both of these are prohibited to the males of my community. (Abu Dawood: Book 32, Hadith 4046)

Clearly, Muslim men are also required to cover their body from the navel upto the ankles. Additionally, Muslim men are forbidden from wearing gold jewellery, silk or any similar things that could be considered as a display of wealth on one’s body.

That’s not strict!

But the strict part of the Hijaab for men is not in their dress. It is in this verse of the Qur’an.

Qul lilmu/mineena yaghuddoo min absarihum wayahfathoo furoojahum thalika azka lahum inna Allaha khabeerun bima yasnaAAoona

Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty: that will make for greater purity for them: And Allah is well acquainted with all that they do. (Qur’an 24:30; Translation by Yusuf Ali)

In the Qur’an, men are strictly ordered to lower their eyes in front of strange women, and not to look at them in the face.

Difficult?

Now let’s see what the Bible says about it.

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. (Mathew 5:27-29, King James Bible)

This post has become much longer than what I’d envisaged when I started writing it. But let me end this post with a story from the Ramayana that I’d heard when I was a child. I do not have a reference for this; yet I’m mentioning it here - as an apt ending to this topic.

This was after Sita was kidnapped by Ravan. As he was carrying her to Lanka, she started dropping her jewellery one by one to guide Ram and Lakshman. When the jewellery was shown to them, Ram recognised all of it as Sita’s. But Lakshman could not recognise any jewellery – necklace, earrings, bangles. The only jewellery he recognised was Sita’s ‘bichiyas’ (toe rings worn by married women). When questioned, he said, “How could I look at Sita’s face when she was a strange woman to me? All my life, I have only looked at her feet, and I’m sure that these are her bichiya.”

(References and Acknowledgements: Al Qur’an; The Books of Hadith; ‘Answers to non-Muslims’ Common Questions about Islam’ by Dr. Zakir Naik; The Bible; Wikipedia; yaqb.org. Thanks once again to my brothers and cousins)

Homosexuality

Well, India has become the latest in the list of ‘enlightened’ countries which are allowing homosexuality in the name of equality. And we have so many ‘intellectuals’ among us who advocate accepting this, as it is ‘hereditary’, ‘natural’ and what not.

The immediate provocation for this blog was actually an article that appeared in a leading newspaper which quoted someone named 'Saleem Kidwai, author of Same Sex Love in India, a Muslim'. In that article, he says, “I can quote numerous examples of Muslims, including saints and poets, who were venerated even though they supported homosexuality or were gay themselves. Mir Taqi Mir is one example. Look at Sarmat Shaheed aka ‘Hare Bhare Shah’ whose grave is at Delhi’s Jama Masjid. Thousands of Muslims go there to pay respects though Shah’s homosexuality is well-known.”

Stop this BS.

Don’t use examples of people doing something to prove a point that has been clearly pointed out as an abomination in the Qur’an. Do I use the Qur’an – which I believe is the word of Allah – or these two examples of individuals that this person points out? I am not aware of Hare Bhare Shah, but I am clear on one thing – either this person is not a homosexual or he is not a shaheed / holy man. We have all seen how incidents are corrupted and people deified over time, especially in our part of the world.

Since Saleem Kidwai has quoted two examples - neither of which really stick - let me quote only two verses from the Qur’an here.

Walootan ith qala liqawmihi ata/toona alfahishata ma sabaqakum biha min ahadin mina alAAalameena. Innakum lata/toona alrrijala shahwatan min dooni alnnisa-i bal antum qawmun musrifoona.

We also (sent) Lut: He said to his people: “Do ye commit lewdness such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you?” “For ye practise your lusts on men in preference to women : ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds.” (Qur’an 7:80-81; Translation by Yusuf Ali)

Just two verses in Chapter 7 (Al-A’raf), clearly stating that homosexuality is transgression beyond bounds.

And what happened to the people of Lut who transgressed?

Waamtarna AAalayhim mataran faonthur kayfa kana AAaqibatu almujrimeena

And we rained down on them a shower (of brimstone): Then see what was the end of those who indulged in sin and crime! (Qur’an 7:84; Translation by Yusuf Ali)

For anyone who needs more proof, I would suggest reading Chapter 26 (Ash-Shu’araa), Verses 161-174, which relate the entire episode of Lut and what happened to the people who chose homosexuality over legal married life.

And as for myself, I shall repeat a prayer said by Lut himself.

rabbi onsurnee AAala alqawmi almufsideena

"O my Lord! help Thou me against people who do mischief!" (Qur’an 29:30; Translation by Yusuf Ali – part of verse)

That is Islam’s stance on homosexuality. What about the other major religions?

Let’s look at Christianity? Only 2 verses again.

Do you not know that the unrighteous and wrong doers will not inherit or have any share in the kingdom of God. Do not be deceived, (misled); neither the immoral and impure, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor those who participate in homosexuality, Nor cheats - swindlers and thieves; nor greedy graspers, nor drunkards, nor foulmouthed revilers and slanderers, nor extortioners and robbers will inherit or have any share in the kingdom of God. (1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

And most predominantly Christian countries count homosexuality as natural!

Judaism? I personally found this to be strongest in its denouncement of homosexuality. And I shall content myself by sticking to two verses once again.

And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. (Leviticus 20:13)

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind; it is abomination. (Leviticus 18:22)

And this is where I find what I mentioned earlier as the strongest denouncement.

The Oxford English dictionary defines abomination as a cause of disgust or hatred. In other words, one can read the above verse as lying with a male as with a woman is a cause of disgust or hatred in the eyes of God!

Now consider the position of this verse. It is interspersed between two other verses – one referring to child sacrifice (Leviticus 18:21 - And thou shalt not give any of thy seed to set them apart to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD) and the other pertaining to bestiality (Leviticus 18:23 - And thou shalt not lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith; neither shall any woman stand before a beast, to lie down thereto; it is perversion).

The Jewish word for abomination is ‘Toaiva’. Let us consider some other acts in the Jewish religion that are also considered ‘Toai’va’.

Eating non-kosher foods is also called a Toaiva-abomination, so is incest (specific mentions in Leviticus for the interested), child sacrifice to their gods, using a seer or magician to contact the dead or predict the future.

If there was a clearer proof of the abhorrence of such act, I am yet to see it!

Hey, but I am referring to all the three monotheistic religions. And we’re in India, where all these three religions are in a minority. C’mon folks, haven’t we seen Kama Sutra, Khajuraho etc.

Right, and then some people have seen the ancient Hindu religious and moral texts, like the Manu Smriti for instance, which says-

A kanya [unmarried woman] who pollutes (another) kanya must be fined two hundred (panas), pay the double of her (nuptial) fee, and receive ten (lashes with a) rod. But a stree [married woman] who pollutes a kanya shall instantly have (her head) shaved or two fingers cut off, and be made to ride (through the town) on a donkey. (Manusmriti 8:370-371)

Giving pain to a Brahmana (by a blow), smelling at things which ought not to be smelt at, or at spirituous liquor, cheating, and an unnatural offence with a man, are declared to cause the loss of caste (Gatibhramsa) (Manusmriti 11:68)

I have again restricted myself to two verses here, but again, it is interesting to see the punishment for a homosexual coming immediately after that of someone committing bestiality. See the parallel with Judaism? Those interested could check out Manusmriti 11:174-175.

And as for Saleem Kidwai and others of his ilk, I would only say-

Summun bukmun AAumyun fahum la yarjiAAoona

Deaf, dumb, and blind, they will not return (to the path). Qur’an 2:18; Translation by Yusuf Ali)