Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10
51
Women / Re: Dress code based on verses 24:31 and 33:59
« Last post by atijd on May 21, 2023, 05:49:09 PM »
Salam Wakas. Thank you for your response. I would also like Br. Joseph to give his perspective.

Quick question: do you think that this costume would be in line with verses 24:31 and 33:59? The cloak over her could be a jilbab, or outer garment that covers her normal clothes. I'd also want Br. Joseph to opine.

52
Women / Re: Dress code based on verses 24:31 and 33:59
« Last post by Wakas on May 21, 2023, 03:56:04 PM »
peace,

Those verses are covered here:
https://misconceptions-about-islam.com/misconception.php?id=34

Misconception: Muslim women must fully cover up in Islam
Background: Some think that Muslim women must cover their whole body, including face when in public. Women's dress code in Islam is one of the most focused upon subjects not only in the Western media but also in Muslim countries, yet it remains one of the most distorted and misunderstood.

Firstly, according to The Quran, the most important rule of the dress code for both men and women is as follows:

O children of Adam, we have provided you with garments to cover your bodies, as well as to adorn you. But the best garment is the garment of piety/righteousness. These are some of God's signs, so that they may be mindful. [7:26]

The garment of righteousness/piety could either refer to choosing a garment that reflects this quality or enveloping oneself in righteous/pious conduct is best, or both.

The following verses tells women to guard their private parts (i.e. genitalia) and cover their chests:

Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and guard their private parts, for that is purer for them. God is fully aware of what you do.
And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and guard their private parts, and that they should not reveal their beauty except what is apparent of it, and let them draw with their covers over their chests. And let them not reveal their beauty except to their husbands, or their fathers, or fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or the sons of their brothers, or the sons of their sisters, or their women, or those committed to them by oath, or the male servants who are without need, or the child who has not yet understood the composition of women. And let them not strike with their feet that reveals what they are keeping hidden of their beauty. And repent to God, all of you believers, that you may succeed. [24:30-31]

From the above verse it can be deduced that for the purposes of women's dress code two types of beauty are described:

1) What is apparent (this can be revealed in public)
2) What is hidden (this type must be covered in public, but could be revealed by a striking of feet or walk/stride which is revealing)

Such a striking of feet or walk could only reveal a limited number of parts of the body, e.g. the private parts, buttocks, thighs, breasts, hips, thus any part not revealed by such an action should not be considered part of hidden beauty and therefore part of apparent beauty. Of course, this means such things as face, hair, hands, feet etc would not clearly fall into the category of beauty that is meant to be hidden. Furthermore, the verse clearly brackets what beauty it is referring to by saying "...the child who has not yet understood the composition of women" implying it is relating to what is specific to a woman (i.e. what is different between man and woman) nothing else.
This understanding would also fit with The Quran's instruction on the body parts that are to be cleansed during daily ablution (hands, arms, face, head and feet), see 5:6, 4:43.

A headscarf (commonly called "hijab") is often worn by Muslim women, however this word is not used like this in The Quran. In fact, the word "hijab" is not even used to mean an item of clothing and simply means something which intervenes between two things, e.g. barrier, screen, seclusion. All verses where this word occurs are as follows: 7:46, 33:53, 38:32, 41:5, 42:51, 17:45, 19:17, 83:15. It should also be noted that believing men and women are free to eat in each other's company, whether family or friends [24:61], thus a veil covering the face (commonly called "niqab", or the full veil "burqa") would obviously be impractical. Again, such an item of clothing is nowhere to be found in The Quran.

Another common mistake regarding dress code is when the following situation-specific verse is applied to all situations:

And those who harm the believing men and the believing women, with no just reason, they have brought upon themselves a slander and a gross sin.
O prophet, tell your wives, your daughters, and the woman of the believers that they shall lengthen (or draw near) over themselves their outer-garments. That is more likely they be recognized so not harmed. God is Forgiver, Merciful.
If the hypocrites and those with disease in their hearts and those who spread lies in the city do not refrain*, then We will let you overpower them, then they will not be able to remain as your neighbours except for a short while. [33:58-60]
*proving harm is already occurring, and refers back to 33:58, which is before the modification in dress is mentioned.

The mistake is exposed when the practicalities of applying the above verses are considered. The verses deal with open enmity with significant repercussions for the perpetrators if this behaviour does not stop. The open enmity is direct to the person, hence the need for the women to modify their outer-garment in order to be recognised in public and not harmed. For the suggested solution in these verses to succeed four things must be in place:

1) The open enmity or harm must be present in the community first and direct to the women
2) The modification in outer-garment and the consequence for the perpetrator of not abiding by this identification code must either be made known to the community or this would have to be common knowledge amongst the community
3) The modification recommended would be enough to differentiate one group from another
4) The authority is in place to fight/expel those persisting in this behaviour

Clearly, this specific criteria has to be fulfilled for these verses to work, thus is not a universal rule. It is situation-specific, e.g. if a section of the community become hostile to believing women or women in general and the believers have some power in the land, then they can utilise this solution, effectively giving an ultimatum with no room for excuse for the perpetrators.

These verses are commonly interpreted to mean that Muslim women must lengthen (or draw near) their outer-garment whenever in public even in times of peace. However, this is easily refuted by considering that if this was the case and open enmity then appeared, the modification suggested in these verses would already exist, thus implementing the modification in these verses could not be done, thus rendering the solution described in these verses as void.
However, from these verses it can be deduced that wearing of an outer-garment by women when in public was the norm.

The following verse shows being clothed is the norm but makes it clear that flexibility is allowed in certain situations, as long as we are mindful of modesty. The context is etiquette within the household:

And the women who are past child bearing and who do not seek to get married have no sin upon them if they discard their garments*, provided they do not show off with their beauty. If they abstain, then it is better for them. God is Hearer, Knower. [24:60]
*Arabic word is "thiyab" and refers to ordinary clothes/gowns.

It should be noted that all examples of dress in The Quran of the righteous or believing men and women involve wearing garments, e.g. 18:31, 22:23, 24:58, 24:60, 35:33, 74:4, 76:21. Also, to provide clothing for others is considered a charitable or righteous act [4:5, 2:233, 5:89].

As can be seen, The Quran gives us a set of simple basic rules with flexible guidance for the rest, which can be applied to different situations/society/function. This flexibility is a mercy but has unfortunately been abused by various schools of thought and religious leaders who have issued their own additional rulings and consequently there is disagreement amongst them on other than the basic rules.

Additional notes for Arabic readers:
The word "khumur" is used in 24:31 and can be the plural of "khimaar" or "khimirr", and can mean any cover made of cloth or headcover, according to Classical Arabic dictionaries and Traditional Ahadith/Narrations (see Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 282). Please note the Arabic preposition "bi" meaning "with" in "bikhumurihinna", which means they are to cover their chests with their "khumur/covers/headcovers". The usage of preposition "bi" is different to the preposition "min" as used in 33:59 "min jalabeebihinna" which means to use a part of their "jilbab/outer-garment" in the modification suggested, i.e. not all of it has to be lowered or drawn near, just part of it. In 24:31 if God intended that part of it (e.g. headcover) stays on the head and part of it be used to cover the bosom, it would have been more appropriate to use "min khumurhinna". Furthermore, the word "yadribna" as used in 24:31 has no connotation of lengthening or lowering in any other occurrence, unlike "yudneena" in 33:59 which does, thus would have been more appropriate to use.
Even if "khumur" is taken to mean "headcovers" it should be noted that the order is to cover the chest, not the head - of course, one may cover their head if they wish.




53
Islamic Duties / Meaning of Salat
« Last post by Cihan on May 18, 2023, 12:05:26 PM »
Selam brothers and sisters

Though I have a lot of points to make on this, I believe it would be best if instead of me listing them all, that we go one by one, try to agree on and settle one point and then move onto the next.

I am fully aware that traditionally "Salat" is understood as "prayer", more precisely "5 times a day, ritual prayer". Salat is also translated in the Quran as things like, blessing, honour and in 22.40 strangely as Synagogues.

The root meaning of "Salat" is to follow something closely.  (In a horse race when the second horse follows the first one so closely that its head always overlaps the first horse’s body that horse is called AL-MUSSALLI (i.e. the one who follows closely / remains attached).

My point would be referring to Surah 11 Verse 87 which is translated as [They said, "O Shuaib! Does your prayer (Salat) command you that we leave what worship our forefathers, or that we do concerning our wealth what we will? Indeed you, surely you (are) the forbearing, the right-minded."]

Some translators due to this nonsensical translation are forced to insert, in brackets, things such as

"(thy habit) of prayer" - Asad
"thy way of prayer" - Pickthall
"thy (religion of) prayer" - Yusuf Ali

to salvage the situation which fails.

As Im sure you will all agree, a prayer cannot command. A prayer is calling out to God and in this instance the person in question is Prophet Shu'ayb. How can prayer, coming from Prophet Shu'aybs own mouth, directed at God, command Prophet Shu'ayb himself?!?

This is the first point I would like discussed before we move on. This translation is a logical fallacy and the Quran being the Word of God, is free from such things. This Verse alone, is sufficent for me to reject "Salat" as prayer, much less  "5 times a day ritual prayer"

Once we insert the correct meaning of the word into the verse, the result is this;

They said, "O Shuaib! Does, WHAT YOU FOLLOW (Salat), command you that we leave what worship our forefathers, or that we do concerning our wealth what we will? Indeed you, surely you (are) the forbearing, the right-minded."]

Which makes perfect sense.

Looking forward to reading your view and opinions.

Your brother in Faith
Cihan
54
General Discussions / Meaning of Salat
« Last post by Cihan on May 18, 2023, 11:28:01 AM »
Selam brothers and sisters

Though I have a lot of points to make on this, I believe it would be best if instead of me listing them all, that we go one by one, try to agree on and settle one point and then move onto the next.

I am fully aware that traditionally "Salat" is understood as "prayer", more precisely "5 times a day, ritual prayer". Salat is also translated in the Quran as things like, blessing, honour and in 22.40 strangely as Synagogues.

The root meaning of "Salat" is to follow something closely.  (In a horse race when the second horse follows the first one so closely that its head always overlaps the first horse’s body that horse is called AL-MUSSALLI (i.e. the one who follows closely / remains attached).

My point would be referring to Surah 11 Verse 87 which is translated as [They said, "O Shuaib! Does your prayer (Salat) command you that we leave what worship our forefathers, or that we do concerning our wealth what we will? Indeed you, surely you (are) the forbearing, the right-minded."]

Some translators due to this nonsensical translation are forced to insert, in brackets, things such as

"(thy habit) of prayer" - Asad
"thy way of prayer" - Pickthall
"thy (religion of) prayer" - Yusuf Ali

to salvage the situation which fails.

As Im sure you will all agree, a prayer cannot command. A prayer is calling out to God and in this instance the person in question is Prophet Shu'ayb. How can prayer, coming from Prophet Shu'aybs own mouth, directed at God, command Prophet Shu'ayb himself?!?

This is the first point I would like discussed before we move on. This translation is a logical fallacy and the Quran being the Word of God, is free from such things. This Verse alone, is sufficent for me to reject "Salat" as prayer, much less  "5 times a day ritual prayer"

Once we insert the correct meaning of the word into the verse, the result is this;

They said, "O Shuaib! Does, WHAT YOU FOLLOW (Salat), command you that we leave what worship our forefathers, or that we do concerning our wealth what we will? Indeed you, surely you (are) the forbearing, the right-minded."]

Which makes perfect sense.

Looking forward to reading your view and opinions.

Your brother in Faith
Cihan


55
Women / Re: Dress code based on verses 24:31 and 33:59
« Last post by atijd on May 18, 2023, 09:05:20 AM »
For instance, is a jilbab required? Is it a cloak?
56
Women / Dress code based on verses 24:31 and 33:59
« Last post by atijd on May 18, 2023, 08:38:29 AM »
Salam everyone,

I was wondering if someone, primarily Br. Joseph could explain the dress code required of a woman based on verses 24:31 and 33:59. I read his articles but I want it to be broken down into specifics.
57
General Discussions / Verse continuing in the other
« Last post by Pouyah on May 12, 2023, 04:42:17 AM »
Peace Brothers and sisters

Upon reading the passage in sura 2.219-220 i realized that the words "regarding this life and the hereafter" in 220 are a part of the previous verse, 219. Have you came across other passagea like this and what is the function do you think?
58
Wa 3alykum Assalam Brother Munir


Thank you for the kind response and your welcome.

I do understand what you are saying brother. At the end we can only take the best of what we hear(39:18). So after cross examination and as brother Joseph pointed out in the post, how does one reconcile the traditional view when there is problems like these below? These cannot be overlooked.

Quote
Now if we take the traditional position, we have not one, not two but a plethora of issues. How is the traditional position going to answer the following contentions as clear 'bayyin'?

The correlation of Prophethood and Scripture - 6:89, 2:213, 3:79 and 3:81
That 7:35 clearly talks about the continuation of messengers. Whenever 'Bani Adam' is addressed in this manner in the Quran, the message is generic and not time bound.
The continuation of guidance is mentioned in 2:38, 20:123
No nation is left without a messenger (10:47) and for every people there will be a guide (13:7, 39:71). It would incredulous to assert that no new nation has ever arisen anywhere in the world since the death of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).
The role of a messenger is clearly elucidated in 6:48 - ""We send the messengers only / except (Arabic: illa) to give good news and to warn: so those who believe and mend (their lives), upon them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve". This would be the perfect place to expect the inclusion of scripture or to establish shariah laws.
Who were the messengers (plural) during the ministry of Prophet Muhammad - 23:51-52?
How will the traditional position reconcile Gods decree for the present and the future with regards messengers prevailing - 58:21?
That prophets have greater responsibility and not just to deliver a message - 8:67?
Saleh and Hud are mentioned as messengers in the Quran and never as 'Nabi'. Even in the long list provided by Surah Anaam (Chapter 6) where a number of 'Nabi's' are mentioned, the names 'Saleh' and 'Hud' are absent. If the traditional position is to be accepted by way of the definition of 'rasul', what scriptures did both Saleh and Hud (pbut) bring with them and if so, why are they not mentioned?



Now when we consider the alternate position/view, we dont have any contradictions at all, just a verse or two that should be understood in light of the others verses that are clear.

Ramadan Mubarak to you and all those on the forum Insha'Allah.

Salam  :)
59
Brother Hamzeh

Salam.

Thanks for your response. I never mind any response from any forum members, specially yours, which are most of the times, if not always, very useful. I think your input and the link you kindly shared, the explanation of 57:52 by Brother Joseph, will help me to reconcile the issue.

Actually I got a little bit puzzled with the wordings ` and the scripture which He hath sent to His Messenger'. So far as i checked, in no other verses it was said so directly mentioning messenger accepting scripture in that way.
 
Thanks again.
60
Assalamu 3alykum Munir Rana

I hope you dont mind me giving some input on this.


Since we know there is a difference between messengers and prophets, the Quran defines and affirms clearly that prophets are given scriptures and authority. It also defines and affirms that messengers reaffirm the Scriptures that is between their hands and/or to warm of the last Day.

Its also important to note that prophets are automatically by default messengers since 2:213 confirms they also give good news and warnings. So keeping this in mind that prophets are by default and are automatically messengers, then its worthy to note if the messenger that is being mentioned is also a prophet? If he is, then there is absolutely nothing wrong with referring to that person as a messenger with which the scripture is sent down to him as it does hold true.

If the messenger or messengers that is being mentioned in a specific verse is also a prophet then that messenger would also have a scripture sent down with him. The reference in verse 4:136 is to believe in the messenger and what was sent to him and not to define who the messenger is per se.

So in this instance when God is asking the people to believe in His messenger and the scripture which He has send to him we know that this messenger is also a prophet, and its expected that the people understand and know that Muhammad(pbuh) is also a prophet and the seal of the prophet. So in this verse the instruction to believers is to believe in the messenger and the scripture that was sent to him.

There is also a related post [1] that brother Joseph responds to that I share below.

Inshallah this helps.

Salam

[1] 57.25
http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=294.msg923#msg923
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10