Feminism Under Veil

What absolute rubbish!

Has the chowk standards dived so low as to allow this kind of ridiculous garbage.

Lady, we get it. You are conservative and the hijab is just such a protective device.

My mother has never worn hijab and she is not any less of a muslim, or any more prone to sexual advances living in the west.

This article is way out there.

Why do women get their hair done?

Why do women wear makeup?

Why do women compete for the latest fashion and shoes?

Do you really think men care about what women are wearing?

Most men could care less about the latest fashion or the newest hair do a woman is sporting. Women indulge in this race for the best dressed, best coiffed, best shoes, best makeup for themselves and for other women.

Yes, for other women.

One of my mom's friends, a professor at an American university wears the hijab, and for some reason she behaves holier than thou. As if wearing the hijab makes her somehow superior to women who dont wear hijab.

I personally feel that she looks quite ridiculous.

Women should take pride in their bodies and their hair and beauty. God made them beautiful for a reason, and if men cant handle it; perhaps they should lower their gazes.

If I were a woman, I wouldnt wear the hijab. Why should I?
The problem lies not with my wearing the hijab but with other people. Why should I change my physical appearance to hide myself.

Personally, I find the author's assertion that feminism supports hijab reprehensible. Where did she get that, is beyond me.

To the author: You quote all those articles without any mention of their context. I can find ten times as many articles saying the opposite. You have clearly looked for articles that will support your opinion. In any case, you seem to be saying that women who wear more revealing clothing than a hijab-which is most non Muslim and many Muslim women - are asking to be raped. How dare you?
And of course men are attracted to women; what they do about it is upto them, not the women. Rape is about both power and sex.

God...what a frikking apologists for the islamofascists...

why don't you move to saudi arabia where you won't have to deal with the horrible "rape every few minutes" problem...

funny this article is written by someone in canada...what did the president of pakistan, land of the pure, say about women getting visas to go to canada? hmm..

.... the hijab is an attempt by fat and ugly women to level the playing field ... but it won't work ...... if you are forty pounds overweight and have a moustache the chances of getting laid are still pretty slim ..... you might ask, but what about the okay looking women who wear the hijab ?...... they are all lesbians ...... why the heck would a woman blessed by al-lah with good looks hide his bounties unless she was a lesbian .......

......... well, that is my theory and it is much more valid than the nonsense in this article ..........

Re: # 4

arjun mian,

....... musharraf was partially right - some women don't deserve a visa to canada ...... what a waste !

Re: # 6 yai musalman log chamcha giri kkeeoon karta hai.Hamid Bhai ko Musharraf sai koi kaam hai,iss liay itna chaploosi karta hai.

hajib is the fashion of the day and nothing else.
however women should not believe 'bare is dear'
Please avoid giving free show. be fashionable but not naked.

nikhat bibi,

........ i think you should move to saudi arabia where you can get pardoned for getting raped :

RIYADH, Dec 17 (AFP): Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah has pardoned a teenage girl sentenced to six months in jail and 200 lashes after being gang raped, Al Jazirah newspaper reported Monday. The ruling against the 19-year-old girl had attracted widespread international condemnation. She had been sentenced for being in a car with an unrelated male.

......... shame on you for shaming canada .....

Re: # 9 musalman aurat kay saath gustakhi na kar . yahi teri mardangi hai.

#9 Posted by hamidm2,

Mian, that's pretty lowdown. Insinuating the female author must be a rape victim for her defense of a garment of modesty.

Have you become a red-assed monkey with it's tail on fire like a certain hindoo interactor here?

Re: # 11 good zeema bhai good , ham baloch hindu hain .

Re: # 11

zeemax,

...... no, that thought did not cross my mind and it wouldn't be true in any case ........ any poor woman who gets raped would blame the rapist and not her lack of a head covering .......... only a mullah come lately like you would do that ........ shame on you !

Re: # 11 yai hp nai pava ko jihadi bola,aap ka kia khial hai zeema bhai.

This article is in no way addressing that Muslim or other women who dont cover their bodies are lesser Muslims or would be raped more. Certainly not. Who is a better Muslim or better person I dont pass judgements on that. I merely said that those women who do wear Hijab should not be stereotyped as oppressed, weak or conservative as shore sahib said. In height of emotions I think you guys have missed the point. Based on many studies (few of them mentioned here) I tried to validate the necessity scientifically. Many muslim women are adopting it in Uk USA Canada or Europe. Its all about choices.
Shore Sahib you say Most men dont care about women look or the way they dress. I think #5 post do very well counter your point. In todays world every one irrespective of their gender is into this race of fads and fashion, not only for their own pleasure and to compete with their gender but to attract opposite sex too.
And nb I did mention the sites from which i gathered these information. You were right I was looking for substance on internet to proove my point(obviously). Causes of rape, sexual assaults of women and men are much more complex. Clothing and displaying of women skin could be just one attributing factor to this monster of sexual crimes.
Nikhat Riaz

Re: # 13 chota log chot baat karta hai or tum iss ka acchha missaal hai hmid bhai

Re: # 15

nikhat bibi,

..... why don't you sell the hijab as a rape prevention device along with mace, chastity belts and unshaven legs ......... i am sure you can sell this idea to the canadian government ......

Re: # 17 dont talk bullshit man.

I love this nonsense.

Whereas some women consider hijab as a symbol of oppression, there are some women who consider it as a symbol of liberation and as a sign of feminism, that supposedly protects them from the preying eyes and unwanted attention of strange men.

slam and the Woman

Part 1

Dr Younus Shaikh



Dr. Younus Shaikh
Dr. Younus Shaikh

Before the advent of Islam, the pagan Arab women generally enjoyed a respectable status in society; many of them Khadija- the first wife of the prophet of Islam, had the right to engage in business and choose or dismiss their husbands in a matrilineal fashion; they took part in most activities of war and peace including public worship. In female oriented Arab paganism, goddesses had special status; in Mecca, the female goddess Al-Uzza, in Taif the goddess Al-Lat and in Medina the goddess Manat were the most popular deities, and their statues were most revered while the statue of the stern Allah was almost neglected.

Arab pagan poetry was mostly concerned with the beauty and grace of their women, and the glory of their tribal values in peace and war. And it was only in one predator tribe of Mecca that the evil custom of burying alive of the daughters prevailed. It was highly unusual for a man of pre-Islamic Arab society to have more than one wife in his house; and it is quite certain that polygamy was introduced and encouraged by the prophet after the revelation of Islam.

Women were to produce as many Muslims as possible. This Ultimately resulted in the degradation in the status of the married woman in the Islamic society. Whereas the pre-Islamic Arab custom allowed many looser forms of marriage on the matrilineal and matri-local tradition that gave the woman freedom and liberty as full human being, however the artificial rules of Islamic nikah reduced marriage to mere sexual and social slavery.

The prophet of Islam, before prophet-hood, opposed the burying alive of the newborn daughters; he was eager to work for a woman and gladly married a divorced woman. The early Islam continued with most of the pre-Islam tribal traditions; there were for examples no hijabs or veils for women of Madina; and at a later date only the nine wives of prophets were restricted in their social intercourse as their home was constantly full of visitors, however the prophet’s women sex-slaves were not restricted in any such manners.

Indeed, the semi-transparent half-face- veil (hijab) was actually a very old custom originating in the Assyrian times, a status symbol and a mark of social distinction for the free women. The pre-Islamic pagan Arab woman of the cities often wore the fashionable semi-transparent half-face veil but the tribal women never did. Later, Islam added measures for“ the preservation of modesty F or women”-like casting down their eyes in public, concealing their breasts and jewellery and the likes. However, these restrictions were later extended by the followers of the prophet far beyond his original intentions as expressed in Koran, and remained more or less a permanent fixture of Muslim life thereafter. Later on, however, the insecurity of early Islam gradually added to the exclusion of women, and 100 years later, by the reign of the Abbasid Caliph Haroon ur Rashid, women became merely sexual toys and breeding machines; and as married women they were merely maidservants- mere man’s social appendages. Moreover, as female sex-slaves, women were freely bought and sold in open markets of all Islamic countries, and loaned, rented or bestowed as gifts to friends. The prophet himself bestowed women sex-slaves to his favorites. There was no limit to the number of slaves one could own; one of the companions of prophet Hazrat Zubair Ibn ul Arvan, for example, had had 1000 men-slaves and 1000 women sex-slaves. Islam took the woman as the land tilled by the man where he spilled his seeds.

The prophet himself took part or guided nearly 100 wars or raids or attacks for plunder. After him, his followers continued the offence. The fierce Islamic tribal Bedouins with centuries long experience of ruthless and cruel tribal warfare proved to be the worthwhile shock troops of Islam. After Iraq, Syria fell to the Islamic Empire in 634 CE. Despite surrenders, great massacres took place at many places; thousands of men were slaughtered and women and children sold into slavery; monasteries were ransacked, monks and villagers were slain and nuns were raped. After the conquest of Egypt, many of its towns were put to sword and their entire population wiped out. Great massacres also occurred in Cyprus and North Africa.

The Roman province of Iraq, the Syrian province of Iran, and the conquered Iran brought hundreds of thousands of men-slaves, women sex-slaves, and the vast fertile lands of these once mighty and civilized countries where the women had been held in high respect e.g. the Manichaecian Iraq, the Pharonic Egypt and North African Civilizations.

As in Egypt and Iran, wherever the conquering Islamic Bedouins armies went, they destroyed the local civilizations cultures, imposed their Islamic tribal medievalism recklessly murdering men and degrading women to perpetual sexual slavery. In short, the Islamic tribal Bedouins and barbarians did the same to the surrounding higher civilizations what the Roman barbarians did to the highly civilized ancient Greeks. Meanwhile the Islamic Bedouins continued to raid and abduct the European women for Islamic slave markets during all these Islamic centuries. The conquest of Syria forced the conversion of thousands of Christian priests to Islam, who changed their religion but not their profession: they became the stern anti-feminine Islamic mullahs and not only continued their religious magic and rituals but also continued the essentially Christian medievalism under Islam. In short, as a result of these conquests, destructions and imposition of Islamic tribal medievalism, societies under the Islamic Empire went further than any other in their total exclusion of women from political power and social influence. Islamic legislation went far beyond anything the prophet had originally dreamed of in his tribal religiosity in cheating women of their rightful place in society and in matters of inheritance. Where originally the Koran gave women the right if inheritance, the Islamic mullah invented the legalized institution of Waqf- the religious foundation, to exclude the daughters and their descendents from inheritance. Though the Koran does give the right of inheritance to women, she continued to be a minor; usually uneducated needing a guardian in father, husband or the son. Indeed, the status of women in Islam is theoretically exalted but utterly deplorable in practice.

Multiplying number of harems (residing place for the female sex-slaves), finally institutionalized under Caliph Al-Walid II, emphasized the inevitable degradation of womanhood under Islam. Haroon ur Rashid, the Islamic Caliph (ruler) had 2000 female sex-slaves, Caliph Mutwakkal had 4000 female sex-slaves; and every mullah, official or soldier of Islamic state had some men-slaves and women sex-slaves belonging to the conquered civilization nations.

Not being allowed to learn, experience or think for herself, it is no wonder that there are hardly very few outstanding women in 1600 years of Islamic history, and those who by chance or by the force of the ancient pre-Islamic customs came into light or in the corridors of power were sooner or later eliminated on the orders of some pious and religious Islamic mullah.. Indeed, Islam’s violent anti-feminism have been as nefarious as Christianity’s burning of hundreds of thousands European women as witches in 15th, 16th and 17th century. The female hating instruments of the Islamic Empire, the mullahs and the Caliphs, continued to promote degradation of women under the formal and sordid Islamic legal code of Shariah, the final seal on the complete subjection of the female element. The modern history of Islam is merely the continuation of the Islamic tribal medievalism, only the technology , phraseology and the façade is modern.

(to be continued)

Re: # 18

tigram,

... why?... being a bania, maybe you can capitalize on this business opportunity ......

Re: # 20

"that supposedly protects them from the preying eyes and unwanted attention of strange men."

How about blinding men so that they cannot view women with lust?

How about making them wear male chastity belts as part of Islam so that they cannot rape women even if they want to??

Why veil women and punish them for the criminal intents of momeen men??

Re: # 20

aslam mian,

"Whereas some women consider hijab as a symbol of oppression, there are some women who consider it as a symbol of liberation and as a sign of feminism, that "

....... do you know of any african americans who saw riding in the back of the bus as being 'liberating' ???? ....... cut out the nonsense, you know better than that ......... just because some blacks bought into the idea of being house-niggers does not make it right .....

Re: # 23

laddum

......... you obviously don't understand muslim men ... in most of the muslim world even sheep wear the hijab and run scared when they see a man approaching ........ when a crow flies over the tribal areas in pakistan it keeps one wing on its behind ......

"By observing the rule of ‘Hijab’, Muslim women make a statement about their identity and their equality as human beings."


This is pure bs.

It should read: By observing the rule of ‘Hijab’, Muslim women make a statement about their indentured identity and their equine equality as human beings.

nikhat ji, a pleasure to welcome a real Muslim woman.

Of course, wearing the full hijab should not be mandatory but there should be freedom to promote it among Muslim women, and Musims should be left free to treat as they like those 'Muslim' women who do not wear the hijab, who speak to non-Mehram men (worse, are in the company of non-Mehram men in absence of other Muslim men).

Clothes are an important part of culture, and Muslim women should be left free to create the culture they seek for themselves.

Dear Nikhat,

You forgot to list the far more practical and sounder reasons for a Muslim “feminist” to don the hijab:

(1) Less likelihood that the green brigade will be throwing acid in the face.

(2) Less need to maintain physical youth, vigor, and good looks – since the veil can be the great equalizer of looks.

(3) Less need for putting on make up and gaining the ability to merely get out of the bed and be on the move – leading to substantial time savings.

(4) Less likelihood that shauhar miaN will utter “I divorce you” three times in quick succession – since hukoom-following slave women are difficult to find in this day and age.

Warm regards! I love you. (I always LOVE individuals who help me maintain my sense of humor.)

beej bhrata, you have obviously not seen a hijab-wearing beautiful woman without the hijab :)

Muslim feminists do need to take care of themselves, just not for non-Mehram men.

Re: # 25

". in most of the muslim world even sheep wear the hijab and run scared when they see a man approaching ........ when a crow flies over the tribal areas in pakistan it keeps one wing on its behind ......"

Hamid mia I believe that if momeen men cannot control themselves then they should be wearing chastity belts.

very brilliant analysis . never came across anything as profound as this.i am shocked at the shitty dirty mentality of these interactors.keep it up.any Muslim will be proud of you my sister.

The Muslim women who wear hijab or cover their heads, do so because they wish to obey the commandments of Allah & His Prophet (pbuh) and tomorrow they will have to stand in front of both of them to answer. I don't understand why everything has to be analyzed to death.

Re: # 31
Well said. I also salute all Muslim women who stand up for themselves in this kind of adversity when no one else but their own brothers who have neither the shame to keep their Muslim names nor pulling the chaador from the head of their own sisters. What kind of low life would do that? And in the name of freedom? I think they need to be sent to mental asylum.

Re: # 33 Inshallah my brother.We have to be very careful.Islam is under the greatest threat since Halaku Khans attack on Baghdad in 1258 and we have leaders who want to sell pakistan like Benazir and Musharraf.Hazar Laanat on them AI PARWARDIGAR.ALLAH PAKISTAN KEE HIFAZAT KARAY.

yarr shore.....where in the article did the lady suggested that ur mother was less of a person for not wearing hijaab? Its your own insecurities that makes u utter these absurdities...all's shes saying that according to 'her' understanding its imp to cover herself from an Islamic perspective...if your mother's understanding is diff and shes comfortable with wearing whatever from an Islamic perspective than she has that right. Why do we have to take whatever happened in ur household as God's absolute truth. Its called narcissism look it up!

Re: # 34

Yooo Maaaaan!!

I-Slam is under attack,,,,,,,,,

Maaaan Jeeehaaaaad!!!!

Come on maaan, wake up and do Jeeehaaad against us kunjaroons and mushriqoooons!!!

Abbay hindoon, mirzaiyoon.....kyoon har mamlay mein kood paRtay hoo badsooratoon...this debate has nothing to do with monkeys, idlli sambar or gao-mootar or jesus wanna-bee's....so go fry those doughnuts, i'll take a dozen glazzed...chop chop Murli Pulsjskeieteyruutrtrerwewtwyusjfhfvcbcncjfhfhpujaran

Re: # 37

miyaan, hum tum par hans rahe hain...............aur tum ko samajh mein nahin aata ki tumhara mazaak bana hua hai is duniya meain....

Re: # 37

you momeens are so insecure........gaaaaawd....let your women be women and not mere slaves..........

Ohh one more thing shore bhai....Its highly rich coming from u how someone was looking ugly for whatever reason..aqalmand ko ishara kafii hotta hayy....nature hasnt been particularly kind with u in the looks dept. so it be wise to not condemn ppl for not having there shirt on...when u infact r buck-naked...if u know wat i mean

Re: # 34
Yes, the threat is bigger than Helague but we must trust Lord and always try to do the right thing. Isn't it interesting that what they thought was the weakest link in the chain that binds us, the ummah, together has turned out to be the the strongest and most invincible of all. They thought that they would be able to beguile Muslim women by showing them their two-faced dajjali freedom and turn us all into their slaves but sisters have proven to be so resolute, so headstrong, and so determined that there remain no fear of Helague and its designs. Take for example, sisters of Jamiah Hafsa, in Hijjab, head to toe, but they have taught world a lesson how to live and die for their cause. Subhanallh. They have upped the ante for us all.

#9 Posted by hamidm2 on December 17, 2007 4:14:20 am

[........ i think you should move to saudi arabia where you can get pardoned for getting raped]

And shame on you for assuming that these muslims could ever understand your level of interaction.

[......... shame on you for shaming canada .....]

What do you want from these muslims? Can you not figure out their thinking patterns?

abu, the problem is more general. It is not confined to spcific individuals. (expressly, not making any reference at all to shore sahib or to his most excellent family). It has to with the insistence that women who choose to follow Islam to the best of their understanding must RESPECT those others who, for instance, choose to run around naked or have free social intercourse with non-Mehram men.

diesel, while it is good to be careful, IMHO, you are overestimating the power of 'threats' to Islam (or underestimating the power of Islam). Just wait and watch. As inevitably as the sun turns on its axis, more and more Muslim women will wake up their duties to themselves and to Islam, as they see fit.

Re: # 37

Please do not insult their religion, values, or their dieties. Our Master (pbuh) has forbidden us. Besides the only thing we are responsible for is to deliver them the message of Tauheed. Why become them?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Dear Abu_Safwaan,

Here, this is what the author said,

"So Muslim ladies follow the words of Allah and practice Hijab as simple as that. But is this rule actually a repression of women’s freedom or is it a rightful need of society?

Among all the prevailing religions Islam is the only religion which addresses not only individuals but society as well. ‘Quran’ gives the infrastructure on which a Muslim state should formulate its family, civil and constitutional laws so that society functions normally and peacefully. And that includes the law of ‘Hijab.’"

So according to the author, hijab is something that Muslim ladies follow. She is also calling it a Law of Islam.

So there, the author is saying that Hijab is a law of Islam and that Muslim ladies follow it.

So by logical inference, those women who dont wear hijab are either not Muslim or are not following the so called "Hijab" LAW of Islam.

My dear Brother,

I would encourage you to read carefully. It will certainly improve your comprehension abilities.

Last time I checked, every Muslim family comprises a microcosm of Islamic practice.
To say that one family where women follow the law of hijab are somehow following the laws of Islam is belittling and making inferior those families where the women do not wear hijab.

Neither am I narcissistic, nor have I uttered any absurdities. You apparently cant read properly. Perhaps if you came off the pedestal of "I am a better Muslim than you", you would understand my points. But what can I say, with a name like Abu_Safwaan; you have to stand up for every thing absurd Islamic issue.

Kaal bhai u dont have an argument from me....i m all for ppl doing what there lil heart desires...as long as they dont feel the need to justify there shortcomings n absurdities with my religion

I m not on any pedestal....u just seem to think that everything ur mom n grandmother does is da bomb...bhai mayrayy....she has religious scripture n sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH) on her side to have the opinion all u have is nostalgia.....u n ur family r authority on kick-ass turkey recipe, raag malhaar n interior decoration...but u can hardly be taken seriously on matters of Islamic jurisprudence ...why is there such an impulsive need to be authority on all matters under the sun that u obviously has no credibility on...with all due respect offcourse

Again, I would emphasize that you, Mr. AbuSafwaan read things carefully. I never called that women ugly! you thought that all on your own.

I only said, that she looks ridiculous in hijab!

If you want to attack my looks, thats perfectly fine.

Just goes to show how truly Islamic you are!

Your akhlaq is so exemplary that the Prophet Muhammad would be proud!

Calling someone ridiculous looking is a compliment? Is this twilight zone?

Re: # 25 Posted by hamidm2 on December 17, 2007 5:16:37 am

[........ when a crow flies over the tribal areas in pakistan it keeps one wing on its behind ......]

Maybe the crow does not wear a veil, huh! Why single out the tribal areas? Do you think the crow feels safe while flying over any muslim land?

Okay, My dear!

I never claimed to be an expert on Islamic jurisprudence, but I do have a degree in Religious Studies with a focus on Islamic studies. Although its true its an education that taught me to look critically at my own religion rather than follow it blindly like students of Al Azhar!

My mother is a highly educated woman. She is a very good Muslim woman as well. Where does it say in the Quran to wear Hijab!

As far as Hadith is concerned, most of it is suspect anyways because it has been postulated that for all the hundred of thousands of hadith attributed to our prophet, he must have been busy speaking non stop all his life and also in his sleep.

And there is one thing I know about wise men like Muhammad. They all dont say very much.

As far as fiqh is concerned, why would I follow the rules of an Imam born ten centuries ago. YOu are welcome to indulge in your stoneage version of Islam.

I am free to interpret Islam as I choose. For on the day of judgement , you and I will be infront of Allah responsible for our actions just the same.

How about we let Allah decide!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Re: # 48 Posted by abu_safwaan on December 17, 2007 9:04:01 am

[....she has religious scripture n sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH) on her side to have the opinion all u have is nostalgia.....]

No, she has only her interpretation of the religious scripture, and it is only her interpretation. But, how would you know?

If having a choice with covering one's head with a dupatta or wearing the hijab, I think I would say that hijab does make people look ridiculous whether it is sixty five year old women or 5 year old girls.

Ridiculous is not the same as Ugly.

Perhaps when you come out of that twilight zone, Mr AbuSafwaan, you might want to invest in a good dictionary and thesaurus. Perhaps, then you would understand what people are really saying rather than putting your words in their mouths based on your poor understanding of the English language vocabulary.

Hazoor_e_Wallah!
Eik Adad Angrezi zuban ki Lughat kharideye.

Re: # 24

Hamidm sahib:

"......... just because some blacks bought into the idea of being house-niggers does not make it right ..... "

Some African-Americans still do and are happy. Can you not cut some slack form Muslim-Women, who, as Nikhat does, quote the authority of Allah's words?

Here is what I find interesting and I gave raised this question many times without anyone biting....what is it about Quran that is so easier for you to take it as God's word but when it comes to Hadith n sunnah rite away. Did God come to all of you personally and revealed Quran or is there a recorded DVD of Prophet (PBUH) where he recited the whole Quran....i agree some hadits r fabricated and this a science on which even western universities have phd courses.....but we rec'd Quran thru the same hands that delivered us the sahih hadith....reason we accept Quran without a shadow of doubt as God's word revealed to Prophet PBUH and than passed on to us thru honorable sahaba (RAW)....when we accept the same chain or narration for Surah-e-Baqara why wouldnt we the same chain of narration for bukhari n muslim?

And one more thing, Mr. Abu Safwaan,

You insult my family and me, and then end it with, with all due respect ofcourse!

Your standards of respect certainly confound my sensibilities, but hey thats you. What can I say!

The only thing that women who wear hijab have on their side is their choice to do so! I recognize only one scripture called the Quran, and where does Quran tell you to wear the hijab like that stupid scarf wound tightly around your head and neck?

Please do find me the exact Ayah where the Quran, "The only divinely revealed Islamic Scripture" says that Hijab is mandatory for women? and a law?

And if so, does the Quran define Hijab and say what it is, andhow big the piece of cloth should be,and how it should be worn?

Please dont tell me of any hadith, I only want proof from the Quran.

Shore is there a possibility that some of us can find the flabby gutt hanging out from over the hill aunties in there saries more ridiculous...rnt we quibbling over semantics now...duppata on head is happening but God-awful hijaab which in essence is dupatta on head is ridiculous....

The only reason we accept the Quran an unadulterated is because we choose to place our faith in Allah. And if Allah says that He/she alone will protect the Quran.

"Verily, we have sent down the Reminder, and, verily, we will guard it. Q15:9"



"Falsehood shall not come to it, from before it, nor from behind it - a revelation from the wise, the praiseworthy One". Q41:42

"Do they not meditate on the Qur'ran? if it were from other than God they would find in it many a discrepancy". Q4:82


Allah makes no such promises about the Hadith!

Wow...i think either u r avoiding the question on purpose or u didnt get it...i know wat Quran says...my question is how do u know if thats in fact wat Allah swt reveaaled to prophet (PBUH)....we dont have videotape of Prophet PBUH? U r trusting a chain of narrators....how come u r rejecting the same lineage for hadith? If these ppll were so evil that they would fabricate and associate sayings to prophet PBUH that he didnt make..wat stopped them from lying on Allah swt's behalf...if this was just an agenda from sahaba woulldnt they have just included the hadiths as part of Quran?

Re: # 46 Shore Sahib your inference is again wrong what to say about "comprehension abilities". You are correct as far as 'Law of Hijab is a Quranic Law' goes but how did you 'logically infer' that I was pronouncing other women who are not practicing it as lesser Muslims. Many women of my family donot practice Hijab in its strict sense. I made a deliberate choice for it. I was not promoting it and from the last para of my article if u infer me advocating Hijab then u r wrong again because I was addressing Muslim ladies who practice Hijab to practice 'Feminism', not to just sit in their homes but be an active member of society and work for other poor, crushed women irrespective of religion or race.
Nikhat Riaz

Actually the Quran was compiled during the reign of the Third Rightly guided Caliph Uthman Ghani, in its present format.

I think you didnt understand my answer. I have answered it satisfactorily in the previous post. We, Muslims choose to believe in the Quran and its infallibility is because of God's promise.

There is no compulsion in religion, and we choose to place our faith in Allah. We choose to believe what we believe.

The greatest rift in Islam that of between Shia and Sunni is because of only one hadith. The Shia t Ali believed it, the Sunnis did not! But each is as much Muslim as the other. Just like a woman wearing hijab is as much muslim as the one that chooses not to.

Re: # 15

Nikhat beti:

There has been a murder committed by a father in Canada on this Hijab. Obviously, Hijab brings passions out, and affects emotions of others in the society beyond the confines of a Hijabee.

You have failed to talk about the Hijabers.

It seems you are ready to accept controls, in the name of Allah, put on Hijabee. I thought in your article there was no need to rationalize the edicts of the passages that you attribute to Allah, in favor of Hijab.

Would you not say that by comparing Allah's words with the statistics of lesser people is dangerous at the very least, and degrades the power of Allah's words?

You may like to give some thought about the relationship of Hijab with Hijabers, from whom you are claiming it protects. Do you think an argument can be made that Hijab makes these Hijabers enforcers and high on desire and lust due to deprivation?

I can see Hijab in personal relationship with Hijabee as the personal statement. Instead of leaving it there, aren't you trying to make it societal?

I would say that you should come out and denounce that father who murdered his daughter. Such Hijabers are the problem that society should something about, would you not agree?

Nikhat, please be careful. # 46 is an extremely weak post.

If you wear the Hijab not because you are convinced Islam requires that of Muslim women, but merely and only to practise 'feminism' (whatever that means) you suddenly get on a much weaker wicket.

----------------

bubba, even if it is all interpretation (although that is not true), can we not accept the interpretation (even if it is one person's interpretation) that all Muslim women should wear the Hijab and those women who insist on calling themselves Muslim but refuse to wear the Hijab and follow other requirments will be punished by Allah on the day of judgement? And that Muslim women have a right and an obligation to inform their 'co-religionist' sisters should the latter be going down the wrong path?

Dear Miss Riaz,

Thank you for correcting my misunderstanding. If you hadnt, any logical person would have inferred the same. Until and unless you say clarify something, I have no way of knowing what you exactly mean or dont mean.

My comprehension is just fine, perhaps your way of presenting it is suspect!

If you would have been clearer in what you said, perhaps we could have avoided this misunderstanding.

Although you did call Hijab a Law!

Lady, you are talking from two corners of your mouth.

When you suddenly mutate a choice into a law, all those women who do not follow that choice are suddenly what? I would suspect: Breakers of Law, hence, Not great followers of that Law like yourself.

Although, I do understand where you are coming from. I actually do. I apologize for my harsh words in previous posts.

Nikhat,

Thanks for this thoughtful piece. I hope to read more from you on chowk!

anil ji, any sane person will condemn the murder. We can be sure nikhat does. But she is promoting the hijab as an Islamic obligation (as she interprets it. Or not, nikhat?). Those who oppose the hijab (according to their interpretation) should do that on their own time.

Perhaps the author should point out one more benefit of the WONDERFUL Hijab!

If hijab had been worn, the poor child Aqsa would have been alive!

So hijab protects you not only from sexual violence but also murder!

Wow....what a Stockholm Syndrome.

shoresahib, you might have discerned a real problem in nikhat's approch. Hijab may be good or bad. Does nikhat wear the Hijab because she has done that good/bad analysis, or is it actually a requirment of her faith (as she sees it)?

If it is merely for an egoistic 'bold public statement' and to stand out as a 'feminist' with no real religious backing, then there could be some real problems, even doctrinally. May be the Quran has something to say on what kind of behavior is to be avoided by a Muslim woman....

Shore...Quran started being compiled in the ime of Omer RAW and zaid bin sabit was incharge of that project, Othman RAW added zayr zabar paysh on it so the non arabs can pronounce it n understand like it was suppose to be...but that has nothing to do with the question on hand...my question is simple which u r aoiding..

how is it that you can gleefully accept a book as thick as quran...every single word in it to be accurate and genuine and you don't doubt the the hands thru which we recieved that book..u dont for a second think that ohh maybe the surah about the condemnation of homosexuals is fabricated...u dont question the one single word, sentence in that entire book..n my hatts of 2 u for that..but when the same individuals tell u that Prophet PBUH was in his home and the sister of Ayesha (RAW) walked in ...he head was uncovered..when she left Priophet PBUH said that ayehsa once Muslim women(hindoos n mirazayees neeed not get excited) reach the age of puberty they shouldnt appear in public unless there entire bodies r covered except n then he pointed to the face n hands.....my question is simple....the chain of narration for sahih hadith is the same as Quran n thats why in ahle-sunnah wal jaammh..sunnis that is..we take sahih hadith as authentic as Quran because its absurd to say that Person X delivered a whole book saying that this is what was revealed on Prophet PBUH n we al agree that person X is absolutely honest n correct but when the same person X attributes another saying with Prophet PBUH..we ar up in arms..n hes a liar all of a sudden..i m baffled

There is no surah about Homosexuals.

There are some verses about Qaum e Loot, but they refer to the homosexual rape which like heterosexual rape is reprehensible!

And no, The Quran does not follow the same chain of narration as the Hadith!

you are sorely mistaken!

Re: # 66

"When you suddenly mutate a choice into a law, all those women who do not follow that choice are suddenly what?" (Shore)

illegal aliens.

I have no proof that the Quran has not been changed. Maybe it has, but I place my faith in Allah promise to guard it.

I dont think homosexuality is a sin, but if it is: then I let the following verses be my guide!


Allah Almighty forgives pretty much all sins except idol worshiping and trinity beliefs; "Allah forgiveth not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgiveth anything else, to whom He pleaseth; to set up partners with Allah is to devise a sin most heinous indeed. (The Noble Quran, 4:48)." Therefore, Islam forms the direct relationship between a Muslim and His Creator Allah Almighty as long as a Muslim believes in One True GOD. There is no middle man between a Muslim and His Creator; "It was We Who Created man, and We know what dark suggestions his soul makes to him: for We are nearer to him than (his) jugular vein. (The Noble Quran, 50:16)"

shoresahib, can please expand a little on "The Quran does not follow the same chain of narration as the Hadith!"

(Abu seems to be asking how does anyone even know Allah made the promise, if you do not believe the source....)

kaal ji,

God bless your kaal heart :)

thanks, ts. I am a supporter of religious freedom, but not sure about those who use religious symbols merely for strategic purposes without fully believing in them... :(

The Quran was compiled during the reign of Uthman, whereas the hadith were not compiled till 300 years after Muhammad's death. does that answer your question Eklavya?

Kaal bhai,

I support your support of religious freedom, but not your support of cultivating religious differences.

I am quite upset at Jang (our resident sardarji) for not following the traditions of sikkhism.

Like you, I am interested in seeing the so called adherents of certain religions, follow the most literal interpretation of their religion

Thanks shoresahib. It does. Your believe in the Quran because it was compiled sooner after Prophet Muhammad's death than were the hadiths. Hope that is right.

-------------------

ts, IMHO, there is no such thing as literal or illiteral 'interpreations.' These things were not ever said for the exclusive benefit of rocket scientists, or phd holders. These things were said for the salvation/betterment of simplest of people in the simplest of words.

Now, rocket scientists and phd holders may have other purposes than to simply follow what was clearly told to everyone, and that is a different matter. :)

eklavya, if simple people cannot understand simple things, or differ in the understanding of the purported simplicity, what does that have to do with rocket scientists?

CA, simple people always understand these things. If not, they very quickly find out. That's why there is a real world out there.

It's always 'rocket scientists and phd holders' who are never clear about their 'interpretations.' Note that these 'interpretations' are always the creations of individuals, nothing to with the texts - whose interpretations are clear to normal people. That's why there is an unreal world out there.

Kaal yaar, give me an example of the difference between a simple person's understanding and that of a rocket scientist's and lets see.

What is 'is'?

Kaal bhai,

I agree that the so-called educated one's, the one's that try to categorize and differentiate and label everything, those are the true moorakhs :).

I am simple soul that just wants to promote oneness, for in the end, we are all going to flow back to the same source.

Re: # 80

You are wrong on both accounts.

Qura'n: Qura'n was edited, collated, and compiled by Holy Prophet (pbuh). He is the one who named the chapters. He is the one who told which verses to be included in which Surah (chapter) and where in that Surah. The glaring example is that of how Qura'n is compiled. The first chapter in Qura'n that is Chapter Fateha or The Preamble is from the Medinite period which occures 13 years later after his declaration of Prophethood. Whereas there are 10s of Surahs in the last part (part 30) which is from the earliest period of Islam. And there is a reason for editing Qura'n in such a way, which is beyond the scope of this post. What about a testimony from Qura'n itself, that it giveth to show that Qura'n existed in scripted form during the lifetime of Holy Prophet (pbuh).

Here are verses 77-79 from the Chapter The Inevitable (Al-Waqia)

Most surely it is an honored Quran, In a book that is protected, Which none shall touch but those who are clean:

Based on this verse it is forbidden to touch Qura'n unless one is with ablution. Now please explain to me how can Qura'n tell someone not to touch something which does not even exist. It is absurd. So the only conclusion is that Qura'n existed in the scripted form during the life of Holy Prophet (pbuh). What the three first Caliphs have done is only to gather all scripts into one form of book as guided by Holy Prophet (pbuh). So even an inuendo to suggest that Qura'n somehow came into being during the reign of Third caliph is gross injustice.

Hadith:

Similarly Imam Bukhari is not the first or the only person who compiled ahadith about 200 years later; but as a matter of fact the great work of establishing Islamic laws which is based essentially on Qura'n and Hadith had already been completed 100 years before he was born (810 AC).

For example, the great Muslim Jurist Imam Abu-Hanifa (699-767) was born only 60 years after the departure of Holy Prophet (pbuh). Imam Malik was born (715-796), Imam Shafi (767-820); Imam Hanbal (780-855). So now when Imam Bokhari was born, great work on ahadith and turning them into law has already been completed and was laready in practice. Interestingly enough Imam Malik's book of Law Al-mowatta which still exsts today and is available on-line is nothing but collection of hadith. He also uses that method of chain of narration which is attributed to Imam Bokhari.

Please do not mislead yourself into the way of sin. Apprently you have chosen a lifestyle which is based on misguiding self with half truths and outright misinformation. What you chose to do is your prerogative but please do not try to justify it with lies.

LOL, ts bhai, I don't know if everyone and everything always goes to the exactly same place. May be, at some higher, phd level, that may be the belief, but not at the ordinary level where the rest of us stay. :)

Kaal, I asked for a difference...just one example..

CA, EVERYTIME interpretationists and phds speak, they have to add their own 'interpretations.' That is the so-called process of 'creating meaning.'

In some contexts, humans were to 'recieve' meaning, not 'create' it. Ordinary people do just that. That is why they are never confused.

--------------

I will not give examples, except one. Every Muslim - educated, half-educated, uneducated - can understand the obvious. Prophet Muhammad was the last Prophet of Allah. But that is not clear to many Punjabi scholars of Arabic. And you cannot convince them. They know arabic better than any arab.

Ek yaar, wherever did you get the idea that "EVERYTIME interpretationists and phds speak, they have to add their own 'interpretations.' That is the so-called process of 'creating meaning." it is so strange...

NEVEREVER and in no context were/are humans to "receive" the meaning...it is contradictory to what a human or even a chimp is. Human beings have always created the meaning, changed it, applied it to their circumstances and changed it yet again. That is what ebing a human means.

Punjabi scholars of Arabic are just as right as the Arabic Scholars of Arabic. It is not a matter of them knwoing Arabic better (which is actually an erroneous corollary you propose), it is not even a matter of them not knowing "an arabic religion" better. It is a matter of them making sense of something foreign and non-universal per their reality.

it always surprised me (not!) when so-called liberals froth at the mouth at the 'oppression' of muslim females even when they choose to freely wear the hijab of their own accord.

as to whether it makes someone a 'better' muslim is a moot point since it is a matter of personal freedom. however, if people do it for the intention of pleasing Allah and His Habib then surely He will give them reward for it.

Islam is not in the hijab but the hijab is in Islam.

"NEVEREVER and in no context were/are humans to "receive" the meaning"

Millions upon millions upon millions will violently disagree. You, like a true 'rocket scientist and phd' have dismissed all messages. You will love interpretationists, but not people. :)

They can disagree Ek, violently even. But I have human knowledge on my side. They have some idiots musing atop a hill from 2000 yrs ago. ;) I am no rocket scientist but I do give humans much more credit than simply dismissing them as automatons of religion.

Re: # 94
"You will love interpretationists, but not people. :)"

wah wah kaal bhai. Lagta hai app gumrah thay. magar ab rah nazar aagayee aap ko :)

Shore..listen man..wat u do is none o my concern..i have said it before...i m only responsible for my actions..wat i do have an issue with is , ur mother or ur grandmother telling me what Islam is when none u of have the spent the same time learning not only the basics of Quran n hadiths but these r subject in which ppl do thier phd's....i m sorry but just because ur dada jaan was a regular at maghrib prayer i wouldnt take him up ( i wouldnt take mine up either) as sheikh-ul islam if he in facts think that homosexuality or women showing there armpits n men sleeping out of wedlock is absouletly within the bounds of what Islam allows. You are a good singer n good cook, i m sure because u have spent time with sincerity to learn the trait...understanding of Islam is not heredatory....

U r yet to answer a basic question, did uthman RAW personally gave u a copy of Quran or did it reach u thru a chain of narrators...? my insistance that chain of nnaration which..Prophet PBUH told abu bakar RAW, he told Omer raw, omer raw ordered zaid bin sabit to start compiling n wrote it down...in rthe same manner abu-hurrairah started to gather what Prophet PBUH said n he started that was being compiled in the same manner that Quran was in the time of the Omer RAW, Uthman RAW, Ali RAW n so on n so forth....it was the same ppl that transfered quran in a textual form or memorized it n than passed it on to their generations that transferred Hadith....there is an Ijma (consensus) of classical scholars as well modern scholars about the authenticity of Bukhari n Muslim...if u respect tan-sayn for his musical work..why wouldnt u accord the same revernce to Scholars who worked tirelessly to gather the sayings of Prophet (PBUH)...for the umpteenth time..wat u do in the privacy of ur home..is none o my business..what is my business is that u telling me what my religion when u r completly out of sorts from all perspective to be a sheikh on Is;amic jurisprudence....aykk mirzayii kam thayy Islam sikhanay koo abbb gawayayy or shauqeen mizaaj bhii jotoon mein daal batein gayy..

Chalo, CA, good for you. Waise, religions are VAST fields. They give plenty of flexibility. Not that all flexibility ultimatley matters significantly, because there are orders of privileges and labors within any religion, as within any structured field. So there are 'queen-bee' interpretations, 'soldier' interpretations, and day-laborer's interpretations. All are valid, but not all count. Few automatons. May be within communism, but not in religion. Here it is all a 'labor of love' - something we discussed on UP. Love is very very imporatant, in making people that to you might look like automatons.

Got to run for now, CA. Later?
---------------

lol, ts bhai, having written that I did think I should change that, but it seemed 'full of meaning' for those who like to interpret, so let it go, half 'maliciously' :)

Re: # 98

kaal bhai, I am just a humble gullible innocent soul. I take anything you type to be exactly what you mean :).

Good. That is how it should be. To Hindus, I even tell: I am God Himself - a very lousy and worthless sort of God, but God nevertheless. he he. bye, dost.

Mr. Hamza,
Thank you for your response.
You keep telling me that what I do in the privavy of my own home is my own business, yet you bring it up over and over again.

You have absolutely no idea what I do in the privacy of my home.

My mother or grandmother have no desire to tell you anything, so lets keep them out of it.

You can scream all you want at me about my ignorance about Islam. But that is your opinion, and it does not make it true.

There are those who call the Prophet a pedophile for consummating marriage with a nine year old Ayesha. It is again, just an opinion. It does not make it true.
This is my last post to you. From now onwards you are on permanent ignore. To you your Deen, and to me mine!

Shore sahib,

You have taken the high road once again. Good response.

Abu/hamzaa ...yaar let it go would ya?

Shore sahib,

may I suggest that you remove abu/hamza from your ignore list?

When he is angry, he often makes incendiary remarks, but he does apologize for them later. Furthermore, he truly does reason quite well if you get him to calm down.

Abu yaar, can you tone down and converse normally for a bit with shore. Both of you have some valid points. Explore further. I encourage you to see similarities (now that Kaal is gone)

All's i was saying that It was him who insinuated that since his mother didnt do hijaab....than it MUST not be necessary....i dont bring my mother n my grandmother as witnesses in conversation when he does than we have to address that..i m not dissing them...i m saying if his mother n grandmother r of the opinion that ISLAMICALY its OK for men to marry men or love them romatically or even if they r of the opinion that men n women can be with each without marraige and thats perfectly within bounds ISLAMICALY than my mother n grandmother would respectfully object n disagree...n so would I...i m not suggesting whether that makes them good muslim or bad..or whthere i m a good muslim or bad..i m here defending what my religion is...he is preaching to all of us what Islam allows n doesnt allow..if hes wrong than its my responsibility to set the record straight...

Hurricane Bhai,

I didnt formally put him on my ignore list. I Just meant that I wont engage in dialogue with him. Its quite futile!

I am sure Hamza is a wonderful person, and probably so is Abu Safwaan.
I just dont want to discuss anything with them in the future, because I will always be wrong no matter what!

Both of them have become too personal, and left common decency by the wayside. Thus, May they be wise and prosper. I will end with this prayer.

to take hijab or not should be matter of personal choice....
I do not know what the fuss is all about....
Religon is a personal matter....
And should remain so.....
regarding men.....
well there is no doubt that they are attracted more to revealing clothing rather than hijab.....
though I seriously doubt that hijab "liberates" women.....

Re: # 106

I completely disagree with the "attracted more to unclothed" theory.

1. If a woman is unattractive, she may repel people if she wears less clothes.

2. I live on the beaches. All the ladies are in bikinis etc. The novelty wears off. You see people for people after a bit. Now if you were to place that bikini girl in a church, that would change everything...so context is important. For the talibaan, colorful socks were attractive.

If all women were not to wear hijab, then wearing the hijab would become the attractive thing....