Niqab : an introduction of later days ?

Society Religion & Philosophy
21

Walikum peace psyah

There is nothing for compaison as such as Islam did not orignate from any place in the world except Arabia.

Dates is sacred fruit in ISlam because :

i ) It was abundant in Arabia.
ii ) Prophet (pbuh) of Islam liked it very much.

Mangoes Watermellon or oranges are not sacred fruits beacuase

i ) They are abundant in Subcontinent , which is not the birth place of Islam
ii ) Prophet of Islam (pbuh) didn't get to eat them very often.

Not that I have anything against Dates, rather I like the fruit very much, but at the same time I like Mangoes and oranges too.

Now nomatter how hard you try but you cant deny the inherent association of Dates with many ritual in Islam.

^ This is cultural impact of Arabia on dynamics of religious traditions of Islam.

Another example :

Rich and Arrogant People of Arabia used to wear cloths longer than required length and drag it on ground. (which they still do now) This is a cultural practice attibuted to people of Arabia. I dont know any other group of people which exhibits arrogance in such a way in this age and time.

Now why the scholars of early day Islam and later days failed to discriminate between people of Arabia and rest of the world. Why they insist that whole muslim world should drink that potion which will only cure the disease of people of Arabia ?

Why I should feel guilty wearing ankle length trousers or shalwar kameez when I dont have an iota of arraogance in my mind ? When i dont have a clue that by doing so i would exhibit arrogance. Becasue this is not my cultural practice and my culture is different from arabia.

22

Peace Code_Red

I feel you bro totally. In their defence however, I would like to make a few clarifications:

a) Though cultural impacts exist in Islam, it is not to say that those cultural impacts are not valid just because they are cultural. The idea of Arabisation cannot be totally rejected purely because it undermines other cultures. Arabic is part of Arabian culutre too, yet the Qur'an is established in Arabic. What I am trying to say is however much I like my own identity, controlled Arabisation is a part of Islam.

b) Also there are some people who are ultra literal and zealous, those who want to impose total Arabisation.

c) But on the other side we have total anti-Arabisation those who only see the symbolic value in the actions of Muhammad (SAW) and reject any inference of literalism.

Should we not try to balance the literal with the symbolic?

Instead of rejecting dates entirely why should not give them preference only, and when they are not available we turn to other sweet things. This way we ackknowledge the literal act by way of preference rather injunction and that let's us exercise our own cultural practices on a secondary level?

With niqab however; I think we need to take a step back before jumping the gun. We have not even satisfactorily established that it IS a cultural practice, that:

  • is used to prevent sand in the face in the desert
  • just a fashion statement

According to my understanding and research niqab was specifically designed for Islamic purposes in a time when the Islamic society was very mature. Unfortunately we have regressed from that position. My qualms are not with niqab being an imposition of culture, my qualms are niqab being viewed as a requirement, when at most as a new thing it should only be viewed as an additional counter-measure. A thing mustahab.

Here I don't think it is as much as an issue of Arabisation as it is Zealousness.

23

:salam: Bro

I think Code_Red made some very valid points and so have you. The one thing I do not agree with is that we make our cultural practices or amenities secondary. I think we should not as long as they are not in violation of Islam. What I would agree with is that we should be able to adapt between the good things of cultures shared by muslims from different ethnicities. Each culture develops for the ease and extravaganza of the its society, its the extravaganza we should be weary of. However when living in another cultural domain we should try and adapt to those things which make it living easier in their native domain as long as they are in compliance with Islamic principles.

I agree, niqab is not mandated as a requirement. Its more an issue of zealousnessless of Arabization. Another one from our own regional culture would be the famous saying that a Pathan keeps his wife behind seven veils.

24

Salaams,

as far as the original question is concerned, it was religously obligatory for the respected wifes of the Prophet (saw) to wear niqab as it is mentioned in the acclaimed biography "Muhammad" based on the earliest sources of Islam (Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Majah etc) written by Martin Lings.

The scholars differ on whether this ruling also applies to other women or not, especially in our times as can be read on www.sunnipath.com.

25

Re: Niqab : an introduction of later days ?

Peace

This is a very important read:

http://www.bilalphilips.com/bilal_pages.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=277

Please click the first read more link on the above hyperlink.

Wassalam

26


Because other religions have grown out of it. Fashion changes with time for non-muslims. Islam do not believe in change, fashion which was current in 1400 is imposed as perpetual.

When you are talking about submission; which submission do you mean; to men or to God?

27

Re: Niqab : an introduction of later days ?

LOL at arabisation - controlled or otherwise. I am happy and proud to be Pakistani.

28


First, we are not taking about different religious perspective regarding niqab but rather the culture of Arabs. If veil for women preexisted before Islam in Arab culture, then people from different faiths should have wore, not as a religious ideology but as a culture custom; however, we do not find any historical evidence to support the fact that veil actually preexisted before Islam. Thus, it proves my point!


submission to Allah Ta'ala, off course!

29

IMO hijaab and niqaab makes women more submissive to men as well.

30

and i assume you were there before the birth of islam?

I think the logic in the previous post carries weight. people had beards since antiquity in that time too. that was too because of the reason of the harsh environment in arabia. all of the tribal socieities living in harsh environments have beards and pardah in it. just look at the pashtoon socieities.
niqaab might have been there because of the reason that was mentioned in the previous post.

31


how so? let me ask you a very simple question: why do you wear clothes?

@jaanan
were you there too? There is no shred of evidence to prove that niqaab preexisted in Arab culture as a sign of modesty or covering from men. If you are claiming that the person who isn't supporting your argument is wrong then burden of proof lies on you, not other way around. For example, if I claim that I saw a flying monster, then it is me who needs to bring forth the evidences to prove that I actually did see the flying monster; no other way around! Also, if you read my previous posts and try to answer my question, you'll notice that logic tells us that niqaab couldn't have preexisted in Arab as a covering from men.

32

Obviously to cover myself because its a decent thing to do.

But dont the niqaabis and hijaabis wear clothes underneath?

If your question is do I wear another set of covering over and above the clothes then my answer is, No I don't.

33

Re: Niqab : an introduction of later days ?

^so when you wear clothes, then it is considered covering up and decent. However, if a women wears extra clothes, then it is a problem and she is being oppressed and submitting to men. I don't have much left to say except that thank you for exposing your hypocrisy and this is all you hijab hate mangors and attackers can say.

So People, What Are You Wearing?
34

Banday bhai sahab,

I have no problem with women dressing modestly. But tell me why it is imposed only on women, are they indecent in normal clothes. They can wear a third dress on top of it for all I care, if they want to do it themselves, unfortunately if they do wear normal clothes only somehow our "mu'ashira" thinks of them as non religious person. A lot of women might be doing only for this very reason.

Regarding your claim of me being hypocrate:

I believe man and woman should have equal rights in ALL respects. Hypocrate is a person who do not think so and gives justifications and hide behind the curtain of "oh but they have different responsibities and roles".

Hypocrate is a person who believe its OK to beat a women and hide behind "oh but how much a stick as thick as finger can hurt".

And the list goes on and on.

And for your information I don't hate hijaabis or niqaabis. Infact I like modern hijaabis. Hate is a very strong negative emotion, I mistrust them, sure. But hate them, not at all.

35

Re: Niqab : an introduction of later days ?

^ what is important , what YOU believe or what the Prophet [pbuh] said ?
if ur not muslim then disregard this question

36

Re: Niqab : an introduction of later days ?

So you agree that people don't do these things because they think its just or logical. They do it only out of love/respect for the prophet.

Oh BTW I was born in a muslim family, I believe in God/entity, I believe that the prophet was a very wise man for his times. The system which he devised was the best for the time. But many of the things which were acceptable at that time, are not acceptable now. The followers of Islam has made the religion so compicated for their own good, based on their own interpretations.

37

Peace Light Bearer

You ask a question ... "Are they indecent in normal clothes?" You see this is a difficult question to answer. First of all we need to determine what normal means. In the west women on average will wear less clothes than the men, but some men will go around without their shirts on and may be a small pair of shorts. Even in UK culture a man doing this will be seen as indecent. A woman doing this i.e. going around topless might be arrested, it would depend where she was doing this.

What I am trying to allude to is the fact that even in our 'normal' situation women and men dress differently however be it for very different reasons. The general trend of less clothes on women in the West is driven by the 'sex' symbol they are supporting knowingly or otherwise. The women in the East seem oppressed due to this 'norm' that we find ourselves in. However, they are not yet viewed in the same way as women in the West. Infact, we (with Eastern mindsets) understand the dynamics of sister and mother moreso.

Simply women have more to hide and they will find it generally harder to hide because of the curves i.e. bosoms and hips. Men will not have this issue, generally speaking. So when you say normal clothes are you saying that men and women can wear the same cloth woven in the same way to be equal? Or are you saying normal is based on the style and trends of todays western fashions, if so, then you need to eliminate the different in physical structure of the body and the difference in the intent of fashion for women and men to finalise your conclusion regarding fairness of dress.

It does not change your argument ... men and women should both be equally encouraged to dress modestly.

38

love and respect of Prophet is the basis of faith, even belief in Quran is based on that
otherwise on which stone were the words of Quran carved by God ? it the tongue of Muhammad which spoke its words and because we believe he was the most truthful and trustworthy we accept Quran as word of God

if u dont believe prophet was a man for all times then you are saying the religion he gave is obsolete ? then why not abandon islam altogather ?
In islam innovation is strictly forbidden and tradition sunnah] is encouraged.