A Woman's Awrah

[Joseph Islam]

LINK TO THE ORIGINAL THREAD
http://www.salaatforum.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=400#p406

by Joseph Islam  , On God's Earth, Monday, December 12, 2011, 07:10 (1 day, 3 hours, 52 min. ago) @ Waqas
edited by Joseph Islam, Monday, December 12, 2011, 08:00


Salamun Alaikum brother Waqas,

Thank you for acknowledging what I understand is your general approval of the sentiments of the article.

However, when dealing with academic contentions, please may I suggest that we not use words such as 'mistakes', but rather express our academic contentions as differences of opinion with clear evidence and then discuss it before we conclude.

Let us allow the readers to decide whose interpretations are cogent built on the information the authors have processed, any assumptions they have made and the conclusions they have advanced.

You raise two academic contentions with my interpretations:

(1) 33:53 the command to ask them from behind a hijab/barrier is in the masculine.
(2) The 'analysis of 33:59 is not quite on the mark'

Albeit, I have noted your articles they have not been written per se to tackle any objections from my article. I would rather you present clear, evidence based and succinct objections in this thread rather than expect one to prune the information from external sources and links you have provided.

With all due respect, authors that present their views should at least expect an evidence based thorough rebuttal to their arguments rather than a flippant remark.

In the end, only God knows best who has strayed from His path and who has been truly mistaken. (16:125)

I await your response.

Joseph.

--
'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act'
George Orwell

http://www.quransmessage.com
Copyright © 2010 Quransmessage.com

[Joseph Islam]

LINK TO THE ORIGINAL THREAD

http://www.salaatforum.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=400#p412

by Joseph Islam  , On God's Earth, Monday, December 12, 2011, 12:48 (22 hours, 20 minutes ago) @ Shabbir Ahmed


Salamun Alaikum brother Shabbir,

I actually find your understanding of Hijaab viz a viz women in light of the Quran very agreeable . Your three rules also provide an apt summary which I find in tandem with my own humble conclusions.

I would also like to add that any additions as part of 'deen' not stipulated by the Quran are akin to idol worship. I think you may have already resonated a similar sentiment. However, out of choice, men and women can wear what they feel is most modest in accordance with decent prevailing customs.

It is also worth appreciating that there are women that feel that bedecking / dressing their hair makes them look far more attractive and therefore, that would fall under part of their beauty (zeenat). In this case, they may feel more modest to keep it covered or tied back.

I also find your support with regards 'what body parts can women show in public' relating to 5:6 very interesting. It is an inference, but a very cogent one.

Thanks for sharing this piece.

Joseph.

--
'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act'
George Orwell

http://www.quransmessage.com
Copyright © 2010 Quransmessage.com

[Joseph Islam]

LINK TO THE ORIGINAL THREAD
http://www.salaatforum.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=400#p413

by Joseph Islam  , On God's Earth, Monday, December 12, 2011, 12:52 (22 hours, 18 minutes ago) @ Waqas

Salamun Alaikum brother Waqas,

Thank you so much for comments and clarifying your contentions. This gives me much more to work with and in particular your contention with 33:59.

I understand my view on 33:59 to be quite similar to the view expressed by another author who has kindly shared their view on this thread (brother Shabbir - Draw a shawl around your person when outdoors in public (33:59)).

However, I will get back to you InshAllah once I have had a chance to thoroughly review your article.

Your brother in faith,
Joseph.

--
'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act'
George Orwell

http://www.quransmessage.com
Copyright © 2010 Quransmessage.com

[Joseph Islam]

LINK TO THE ORIGINAL THREAD

by Joseph Islam  , On God's Earth, Tuesday, December 13, 2011, 09:37 (1 hours, 35 minutes ago) @ Waqas
http://www.salaatforum.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=400#p419


Dear brother Waqas,

Salamun Alaikum

I have had a chance to review your contentions:

Contention 1:

Although the verb that I think you refer to in 33:53 is in the masculine plural (which applies to both men and women), the pronoun 'hunna' is clearly in the feminine plural which can only be addressing women. Furthermore, the fasaluhunna (then ask them) with the pronoun 'hunna' is a feminine plural (subject of the address) as is the waqulubuhnna (their hearts - 'hunna' feminine plural). Therefore the subject address is clearly women.

Just simply reading the verse in Arabic and in context would give you the sense of the meaning.


Contention 2:

You seem to suggest 33:59 is not a universal address but a 'situation-specific' address based on the assumption that "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.".

The whole theme of the surah in the main captures universal rules and guidance for both men and women (e.g. 33:5, 33;35,33:49 etc) and others specific around the prophet and his contemporaries.

Therefore, I see no reason why by virtue of 33:58 and 33:60 that you restrict 33:59 to a time specific address. It can just as easily be argued that the sole reason for the universal edict to draw their outer garments came as a result of the conditions given in 33:58.

Furthermore, we note in verse 24:60 that older women can lay aside their outer garments provided they do not make wanton display of their beauty. The 'thiyabahunna' (their garments) cannot be a reference to their normal garments otherwise putting this aside would reveal their nakedness. Therefore, this is a reference to their outer garments which underscores the expectation that women would wear an outer garment. Therefore a universal rule is set in 33:59.

So with respect, I don't find your argument plausible from a Quran's perspective in my humble opinion.

However, thank you for raising your contentions and sharing your difference of opinion on this particular matter.

Your brother,
Joseph.

--
'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act'
George Orwell

http://www.quransmessage.com
Copyright © 2010 Quransmessage.com

[Joseph Islam]

LINK TO THE ORIGINAL THREAD
http://www.salaatforum.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=400#p429

by Joseph Islam  , On God's Earth, Wednesday, December 14, 2011, 13:09 (3 hours, 48 minutes ago) @ Waqas

Dear brother Waqas,

Salamun Alaikum


Re: Contention 1:

I feel that the subtitle in my article 'THE HIJAAB (PARTITION) IS ONLY A DIRECTIVE FOR THE PROPHET'S WIVES' may be bothering you. I still stand by this, as the hijab (partition) would not apply as a directive involving other women.

I have extrapolated with other sub-sections and verses that the prophet's wives are different from normal women and by virtue of the directive to the men; the directive applies to the prophet's wives too. They would have to comply with this directive as well.

The main purpose of this section in my article was to show the differences between the prophet's wives and other women.

Therefore I feel the article is clear in what it intended to impart.

http://quransmessage.com/articles/hijaab%20FM3.htm


Re: Contention 2:

As I have already clearly mentioned, I don't accept your understanding of 33:58-60 as

when X is happening
do Y
if X continues do Z

I understand 33:59 as do 'Y' with no 'X' or 'Z'. 'Y' may have come as a result of 'X' but 'Y' stands alone. These are your inferences and I do not deem it fit that you make me argue from your standpoint.

All women are being given a directive in 33:59 to cover themselves. Not all women would have been subject to the conditions in 33.58 and 33.60 which you seem to link together. Hence this is a universal directive. The verse does not say 'when condition X is over, then resume to the previous state' as it does in an example within 2:238-39 with regards another matter.

Therefore, I find it futile to respond to your request of a similar pattern to prove your point.

Thank you for accepting my definition of 'Thiyaab' as an outer garment which is not the impression you gave in your previous post.

You say:

"still be wearing under-garments/underwear for example as long as one does not show-off with their beauty"

So an older woman in your opinion is fine to be clad in 'undergarments / underwear' in front of her household and she will still not showing off her beauty?

I don't know about you or others, but I find this unacceptable and not within the decency that the Quran demands or the spirit of Islam.

I think we have covered enough mileage on this topic. We can't always agree on everything. Please accept this as my final post on this thread. After all, you have already shared your general approval of the article.

http://www.salaatforum.com/index.php?id=408

Your brother in faith.

Regards.
Joseph.

--
'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act'
George Orwell

http://www.quransmessage.com
Copyright © 2010 Quransmessage.com

[QM Moderators Team]

LINK TO THE ORIGINAL THREAD
http://www.salaatforum.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=400#p436

by Joseph Islam  , On God's Earth, Thursday, December 15, 2011, 11:03 (4 hours, 38 minutes ago) @ Waqas


Brother Waqas,

Salamun Alaikum.

I am just about to embark on travel abroad, so please accept this as my last involvement on this thread until I return, God willing.

There is a clear expectation from the Quran that women will have their chest (24:31), arms and legs (24:60) covered by the wearing of a suitable garment when not in intimate company. At the time of revelation, a 'thobe' fulfilled such a requirement. In today's terms another garment may provide the same coverage.

In verse 24:60, we clearly note that an older woman is permitted to remove her 'thobe' without wanton display of her beauty. This cannot refer to her normal garments as if this were to be removed she would be left exposed.

Hence, there is an inherent expectation that younger women will continue to wear a garment / outer garment such as a 'thobe' that covers their chest, arms and legs up to their feet when they are not in intimate company. This is the classical definition and this is how a 'thobe' is understood today.

Verse 33:59 either supports 24:60 or introduces an edict. Either way, there is an expectation to wear an outer garment / suitable garment when not in intimate company.

As I have clearly argued in my article, a hijaab by definition in the Quran is a barrier / screen and is not a term used for coverage of the hair. However, one can argue that bedecking the hair (beautifying oneself to an extent which can become a cause of attraction) needs to be appreciated under the broad Arabic term 'zeenat'. This is indeed a subjective area and I remain non committal as I do not see any reason to define this when the Quran has not explicitly done so.

Regards,
Joseph.

--
'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act'
George Orwell

http://www.quransmessage.com
Copyright © 2010 Quransmessage.com
Post reply

[Joseph Islam]

LINK TO THE ORIGINAL THREAD
http://www.salaatforum.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=400#p462

by Joseph Islam  , On God's Earth, Saturday, December 24, 2011, 17:58 (18 hours, 19 minutes ago) @ Waqas

Peace brother Waqas.

Yes, my definition of thobe with respect to women was a garment worn over normal clothes (not just undergarments). The 'normal' clothes are those apparel that are fine for general usage in close related company but would require further coverage when not in familiar company.

I hope that helps.

Regards
Joseph.

--
'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act'
George Orwell

http://www.quransmessage.com
Copyright © 2010 Quransmessage.com

[Joseph Islam]

LINK TO THE ORIGINAL THREAD
http://www.salaatforum.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=400#p484

by Joseph Islam  , On God's Earth, Wednesday, December 28, 2011, 05:51 (2 hours, 56 minutes ago) @ Waqas

Salamun Alaikum brother Waqas,

Whether a jilbab (33:59) or a thobe (24:60), this is a reference to outer garments that were used by Arabs of the 7th century who constituted the primary audience of the Quran. 'Outer garments' are worn over normal clothes as already defined in my previous post and will be used hereon to describe both the jalbab and thobe. The emphasis is on modesty and coverage as opposed to any particular type of apparel.

Today, modern equivalents would suit according to prevailing customs.

Furthermore, the clarification in dress code is not between those women that desire marriage and those that do not. The clarification is between elderly, menopausal women who are past child bearing age (qawaid - 24:60) and have no desire to marry and those women who are younger.

There may be young women who may not desire marriage. This does not mean that they are free to discard their outer garments when not in intimate company.


Therefore modifying your situations to suit the above context:

(1) An elderly woman who is past child bearing age when in the home in intimate company

• There is no need for outer garments.

(2) An elderly woman who is past child bearing age when in the home in non-intimate company

• They can discard their outer garments if they wish but to remain sufficiently clad is better (24:60).

(3) An elderly woman when outside

• Outer garments should be worn (33:59) as no exceptions are given for elderly women.

(4) A young woman when in the home in intimate company

• There is no need for outer garments (33:59 - reverse inference)

(5) A young woman when in the home but amongst non intimate company

• Outer garments should be worn. (24:58)

(6) A young woman when outside

• Outer garments should be worn. (33:59)

I hope this clarifies my views on the matter given the different situations.

Regards,
Joseph.

--
'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act'
George Orwell

http://www.quransmessage.com
Copyright © 2010 Quransmessage.com

[Joseph Islam]

LINK TO ORIGINAL THREAD
http://www.salaatforum.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=462#p494

by Joseph Islam  , On God's Earth, Wednesday, December 28, 2011, 21:52 (2 hours, 5 minutes ago) @ Waqas

Brother Waqas,

Salamun Alaikum

As requested, please see some of my supporting evidence which I have grouped together for easy comparison of the two terms.

http://quransmessage.com/articles/thobe-jilbab%20FM3.htm

With regards determining intimate / non-intimate company, I am making use of verse 24:31 as a guiding verse where intimate company is listed. Non-intimate will be by obvious deduction.

Re: 4) Women are to be clad (jilbab) when not in familiar company (outside etc). So reverse inference would be, if they are at home in intimate company, there will be no need for outer garments.

Re: 5) 3 periods are captured when believers may need to part with their outer clothing. These are referred to as awratin (times of privacy) or when there is greater risk of exposure. Believers have been told to make sure that 'non intimate company' ask for leave during these times for privacy. Outside these times young women will be clad appropriately so there is no wrong in going about them at those times. Hence, a young woman when in the home should wear outer garments when in non-intimate company.

An important point is to be noted here: Those who have not reached puberty (blughu hulama) are mentioned in 24:58 as non-intimate company because they need to ask for leave.

These older children who have not reached puberty may still be aware of private aspects. This is different from the intimate company of young children mentioned in 24:31 who have no awareness of private aspects at all (tifli alladhina lam yazharu ala awrati).

Hope this helps, God willing.

Your brother in faith,
Joseph.

--
'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act'
George Orwell

http://www.quransmessage.com
Copyright © 2010 Quransmessage.com

[Joseph Islam]

LINK TO THE ORIGINAL THREAD
http://www.salaatforum.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=462#p497

Waqas,

I was actually rather disappointed with your post.

I have never claimed that a 'thobe' and a 'jilbab' were 'equivalent' terms and they do not need to be for my perspective on women's coverage 'to work'. This is your assertion and I feel it inappropriate for you to make me provide evidence given your parameters. I have made it clear that a 'thobe' and a 'jilbab' can refer to outer garments. This implies synonymy not equivalence.

I feel this is clear in the comprehensive evidence I provided which readers can see for themselves and make their own judgments.

http://quransmessage.com/articles/thobe-jilbab%20FM3.htm

If after the evidence I have provided you still cannot see the overlap of the terms, then I have nothing more to add. I do not deem it necessary or appropriate to provide any more evidence or clarification. Certainly for me, this is getting unnecessarily laborious. I leave the matter for the readers to decide based on the complete thread.

With regards the rest of your post, the centre of what you deem as a contradiction in my view is your lack of appreciation of 24:31 and its context and a deep seated bias with this matter.

You completely miss the point of 24:31. The term 'ma malakat aymanahunna' likely refers to women of the right hand possess as a separation phrase exists 'tabi'ina ghayri' which is referring to other male attendants (minal-rijal) which is clearly separate. Therefore, of course the "'ma malakat aymanahunna" will be intimate company as they are most likely to be female and 24:31 is addressing women.

You say:

"Also your differentiation here is not in the Arabic, nor is it logical/practical - "These older children who have not reached puberty may still be aware of private aspects." - e.g. is one meant to ask children at regular intervals if they know of "private aspects" of women, then proceed with the required protocol accordingly?"

With regards this, please re-read the post. The differentiation is in the Arabic. Children who have not reached puberty 'blughu hulama' in 24:58 are different from young children who have no sense of private aspects and not reached puberty (tifli alladhina lam yazharu ala awrati) - 24:31. Your last point about asking children about what they know is mute because of the Quranic verses which clearly class children in different categories regarding their knowledge of shame. 24:59 further elaborates. Would you ask a girl or a boy if they have reached puberty? I certainly wouldn't. God is clearly expecting us to make some sensible judgments here.

Finally, I know 24:58 is addressed in the masculine plural as this verse is addressing believers (both men and women). I don't see the point of your contention and I am well aware of its remit. The topic of our discussion is women and their dress code, so I am only highlighting that aspect of the verse.

In summary, I do not accept your contentions and with respect, I find them unduly critical when you have no alternative cogent position to offer yourself.

I would prefer not to impart any more time nor engage with you on this thread any longer which I feel has become a personal exchange with no wider value.

I have advanced my perspective to the best of my abilities. The verses are in front of you as are my arguments and my supporting evidence. If you cannot accept it, then reject it. This is your prerogative which I accept.

Peace.

--
'During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act'
George Orwell

http://www.quransmessage.com
Copyright © 2010 Quransmessage.com