To Western Women

Dear Krashid,

Take it easy my friend, life is precious, more important than religion, a whole lot more than human rights. Just laugh at the prof, dwell on the logic and reason we depend so much on, reflect on the futilty of individual life while admiring the human spirit.

In an earlier post I have called Yassar Arafat a Mahatma which should summarise my view on Israel.

Life is too multifarious to be serious all the time.

Regards

jay.

Haramiu#

I think chastity belt for males should also be marketed and you will beat Azim Premji.

We`ve debated the Koran being the literal word of God, or being merely divinely inspired. What about the third scenario- that the Koran isn`t the word of God, but something that came out of Muhammad`s imagination? What would the implications of that be?

To Fuzair#144

It is only a matter of semantics to differentiate between divinely inspired or literal word of God.

Does it prevent the taking of authority in the name of God, because it is divine and God ordained. As simple as that.

Going back to early history of Islam and rifts among Muslims, it was found convenient to close the door of Ijtihad.

That was a positive as well as negative step. Positive that it preserved the Islam as was practiced in that time. Its rituals were preserved including all ``Ibada``. Negative in the sense that all the Islamist movement see that period as role model and not only want to emulate that but also want to live in that time or bring back the old glory, forgetting that cultural aspect of Islam is also related to socio-economic status and there is no hard and fast rule.

Like, there is clear Ayah in Koran regarding Booty. But when Omar RZAH conquered some part, he did not allow it to be distributed, but left it to the people related to greater good of society.

The rule of law and good governance was a part and parcel of early Islamic history. And in most places where they conquered people welcomed them in comparision to local ruthless rulers. The example of Iran and India is appropriate.

With the advent of a established Muslim empire, the need for civil life increased, and possibly for that reason door of Ijtihad was closed, to keep peace in society and it is one of the principle of Fiqh to obey the ruler until he works against the greater good of society and openly performs evil. Also due to the strong opposition from Shiites, Kharijites and other small groups, it would have been convenient for rulers to go hand in hand with Mullahs in curbing the oppsition for the greater benefit of people.

But there is no doubt that Muslim rulers were pragmatic.

Why the movement of enlightenment which restarted in Muslim world, did not succeed, while it was successful in Europe needs to be studied.

One of the reason may be attack of Halaku to destroy the magnificient empire, but there must be other reasons also.

The current Islamic revival movements are a reaction to enlightenment, where all things foreign are unIslamic and only Islamic thing is related to past.

But the Islamic movements have a positive aspect that they are learning with experience and probably will mature with time.

Like Jamat-e-Islami in Pakistan, which has played a pivotal role in keeping the status quo with feudal-industrialist alliance as Islamic, is now one of the parties which has taken part in democratic struggle after 1970. This party which was pro-American all along is now Anti-American.

Although Taliban are blamed for the current crises. It is America, which has brought the genie out and is trying to put it back.

The world is not unipolar with one superpower as is assumed. It is just a temporary phase. Like European Union has more than double the share in world trade compared to America and China is going to increase its share in world trade to a significant extent in near future.

India is more than ready to play its part as a western ally to keep the status quo of North South divide or Rich and poor nation divide. That is amply evident in attitude of people of that region. (Only if the fruits of prosperity reach to common man only time will tell).

To Fuzair#144

It is only a matter of semantics to differentiate between divinely inspired or literal word of God.

Does it prevent the taking of authority in the name of God, because it is divine and God ordained. As simple as that.

Going back to early history of Islam and rifts among Muslims, it was found convenient to close the door of Ijtihad.

That was a positive as well as negative step. Positive that it preserved the Islam as was practiced in that time. Its rituals were preserved including all ``Ibada``. Negative in the sense that all the Islamist movement see that period as role model and not only want to emulate that but also want to live in that time or bring back the old glory, forgetting that cultural aspect of Islam is also related to socio-economic status and there is no hard and fast rule.

Like, there is clear Ayah in Koran regarding Booty. But when Omar RZAH conquered some part, he did not allow it to be distributed, but left it to the people related to greater good of society.

The rule of law and good governance was a part and parcel of early Islamic history. And in most places where they conquered people welcomed them in comparision to local ruthless rulers. The example of Iran and India is appropriate.

With the advent of a established Muslim empire, the need for civil life increased, and possibly for that reason door of Ijtihad was closed, to keep peace in society and it is one of the principle of Fiqh to obey the ruler until he works against the greater good of society and openly performs evil. Also due to the strong opposition from Shiites, Kharijites and other small groups, it would have been convenient for rulers to go hand in hand with Mullahs in curbing the oppsition for the greater benefit of people.

But there is no doubt that Muslim rulers were pragmatic.

Why the movement of enlightenment which restarted in Muslim world, did not succeed, while it was successful in Europe needs to be studied.

One of the reason may be attack of Halaku to destroy the magnificient empire, but there must be other reasons also.

The current Islamic revival movements are a reaction to enlightenment, where all things foreign are unIslamic and only Islamic thing is related to past.

But the Islamic movements have a positive aspect that they are learning with experience and probably will mature with time.

Like Jamat-e-Islami in Pakistan, which has played a pivotal role in keeping the status quo with feudal-industrialist alliance as Islamic, is now one of the parties which has taken part in democratic struggle after 1970. This party which was pro-American all along is now Anti-American.

Although Taliban are blamed for the current crises. It is America, which has brought the genie out and is trying to put it back.

The world is not unipolar with one superpower as is assumed. It is just a temporary phase. Like European Union has more than double the share in world trade compared to America and China is going to increase its share in world trade to a significant extent in near future.

India is more than ready to play its part as a western ally to keep the status quo of North South divide or Rich and poor nation divide. That is amply evident in attitude of people of that region. (Only if the fruits of prosperity reach to common man only time will tell).

Jay#172

Since I don`t expect any humanism which is also the basis of religion from people of your breed who justify killing of people by state sponsored terrorism in Kashmir in thousands.

As per your beliefs I also expected you to say, although you came belated on this. ``Killing of Jews by Arabs``

For one thing, the more you write the more my faith increases in Jihad as the only way to deal with a people like you and a nation as apathetic like you.

For one thing, the history of Israel is a dispossesion of locals of Palestine of their land, killing of them. It was an invasion of Europeans(Jews) on Arab soil.

You are justified in justifying that.

Salaam to all the jehadist, who are at least fighting oppression in some form.

Hell to all intellectuals who are stroking their pot belly after justifying all injustices.

The following verses has been quoted by several people to show why Muslim women should wear the hijab.

“O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils, screen themselves completely except the eyes ) all over their bodies.” (Surah Al-Ahzaab – Verse #59 This tafseer is Agreed upon by Ibn Kathir, Qurtabi and At Tabrani )

“And Say to the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent (like both eyes for necessity to see the way, or outer palms of hands or one eye or dress like veil, gloves, head cover, apron), and to draw their veils all over Juyubihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms) (Surah An-Nur, Verses 30-31, This tafseer is Agreed upon by Ibn Kathir, Qurtabi and At Tabrani )``

I have had an idea for a marketable product for quite some time now and I believe that the Chowk is possibly one of the best focus groups that can tell me how much of a market the product would have in Islamic countries.

Specifically taking up the challenge posed by the statement “And Say to the believing women to .... protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts)``, my idea is to design a high-tech chastity belt. In the medieval age, chastity belts were used in Europe, not necessarily by the vast majority of women but at least they were forced on women who were thought to be easy prey for unscrupulous men. These belts used a mechanical lock and key system. I propose to redesign the belt to use fingerprint recognition technology so that around the age of 6 onwards when the belt is first put on a girl, the father`s index finger would be the only fingerprint that would unlock the belt and, after the nikah, the husband`s fingerprint would be the sole key to open the belt. With the advent of modern materials, I am sure we can design one that would be reasonably comfortable and the electronic fingerprint keylock system would absolutely foolproof, fulfilling the requirements of the Qur`an. This is one way to integrate high technology with an Islamic way of life.

I recognize I am letting out my invention into the public domain before taking out a patent on it but hopefully, publication of this post on Chowk would establish the fact that I am the inventor of the high-tech chastity belt.

I earnestly solicit the views of Chowkwallahs on the marketability of such a product. In particular, Asif Naqshbandi, Farangi_Kush, krashid, and the whole host of Islamic scholars are requested to review the idea. I would also like to know if chastity belts are mentioned in any of the hadiths, etc. If not, I request that the concept of ijtehad may be applied to determine the appropriateness of chastity belts.

The additional benefit is that karo-kari and similar honor killings and rapes would become impossible and Islamic countries would approach the perfect society desired by the pious. And Zeemax would not be able to crow that the burqa and hijab come off real fast under the right circumstances.

re: dgit #171

dgit,

I agree with most of what you say...just wanted to clarify one thing:

you write,

``the manner in which the Quranic message is conveyed leaves little doubt: the word`s are to be construed as literally from God.”

Whether or not Quranic words are literally from God is a different issue altogether – a matter of personal belief, perhaps… should we attempt literal interpretation of these words, given the disastrous results it produces, is more important an issue….it directly affects people’s lives…..situation in Afghanistan being a good example in this matter……also, ijtehad (research work conducted by a qualified religeous scholar in order to give opinion on an issue which is not clearly discussed in Quran and Hadits) and ijmah (collected opinion of prominant Muslims of a society) are two different things. Ijmah is no longer practiced, but ijtehad is still practiced in several Muslim countries including Iran, Iraq, Bahrain, Pakistan, India, Egypt, and Syria. However, literal interpretation of Quran and sunnah is the biggest barrier in making ijtehad truly a way forward.

well...give the writer a break..

she sure has every right to express her self.

any way..

i just read this article and i feel it pretty much says all that thre is to say about the concept of Hijab ...obviously some of you still would call it the ``different interpretation``

NIQAB

By Um Amir

All too often Muslim women in niqab are ridiculed and called names regardless of time and place. Unfortunately, a woman who wears niqab in the United States will get better reception from the kafir than from Muslims. Muslim women often call women in niqab “ninjas” and “fitna on the face”, only failing to realize that they have wronged themselves.

Allah said: “If you do good, you do good for your own selves, and if you do evil, you do it against yourselves.” (17:7)

“Whosoever does righteous deeds it is for the benefit of himself, and whosoever does evil, it is against his own self.” (41:46)

This paper was written in response to those people who say things like ``The niqab is not in Islam”, or niqab is ``bad for dawa``, as well as those individuals who scoff at it too lightly. People should understand that the niqab is from the Qur’an and Hadith. Even if you hold the view of it not being wajib it is still THE BEST thing and anyone who wears it is to be respected. Anyone who discourages the wearing of niqab or denies it being in Islam or makes fun of someone who wears it should fear ALLAH and re examine their hearts and intentions.

``Allah has sent us to deliver whomsoever chooses, from the worship of

men to the `uboodiyah (worship and servitude) of Allah. And from the

narrowness of this world, to the vastness of this world and the Hereafter. And from the oppression of the (false) religions, to the justice of Islam.`` - Sahabee Rab`ee ibn Aamir [Ibn Katheer`s al-Bidayah wa an-Nihaayah]

Religious Reference to Niqab

“O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the

believers to draw their cloaks (veils, screen themselves completely except the eyes ) all over their bodies.” (Surah Al-Ahzaab – Verse #59 This tafseer is Agreed upon by Ibn Kathir, Qurtabi and At Tabrani )

“And Say to the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent (like both eyes for necessity to see the way, or outer palms of hands or one eye or dress like veil, gloves, head cover, apron), and to draw their veils all over Juyubihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms) (Surah An-Nur, Verses 30-31, This tafseer is Agreed upon by Ibn Kathir, Qurtabi and At Tabrani )

Generally there are two opinions regarding covering the face. One view held by the Ulema is that the niqab (covering the face) is wajib (compulsory) and other Ulema hold the view it is Mustahab (recommended and the best thing to do but not compulsory). Both scholarly opinions are dependent upon the concept of perceiving Ummul Mu’mineen, the wives of the prophet, as being an example to all Muslim women, or in a category of their own.

Be that as it may, following the etiquettes Allah taught the Prophet’s wives was the way of his companions and those that came after them. And, the best way is to follow Rasulullah’s, sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, practice as well as his companions. Ibn Kathir holds that these commandments are applicable to all Muslim women. (Tafseer Ibn Kathir, Vol. 3, p. 483)

This following hadith explains when and under what circumstance the verses of hijab was revealed. The wives of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqia at Medina) to answer the call of nature at night. `Umar used to say to the Prophet ``Let your wives be veiled,`` but Allah`s Apostle did not do so. One night Sauda bint Zam`aradi Allahu anha the wife of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam went out at `Isha` time and she was a tall lady. `Umarradi Allahu anhu addressed her and said, ``I have recognized you, O Sauda.`` He said so, as he desired eagerly that the verses of Al-Hijab (the observing of veils by the Muslim women) may be revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of ``Al-Hijab`` (A complete body cover excluding the eyes). (Hadith -Sahih Bukhari 1:148)

After the verses of hijab were revealed certain changes took place within the society at the time. For instance, women were carried on camels in a covered Haudaj, and they only went out if their faces and bodies were fully covered as explained in the following hadiths:

`A`isha radi Allahu anha used to say: ``When (the Verse): `They should draw their veils over their necks and bosoms,` was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets at the edges and covered their faces with the cut pieces.`` (Hadith - Sahih Bukhari 6:282)

“When the verse ``That they should cast their outer garments over their

persons`` was revealed, the women of Ansar came out as if they had crows

over their heads by wearing outer garments.” (Hadith - Abu Dawud, Narrated Umm Salamah, Ummul Mu`minin radi Allahu anha)

Narrated `A`isha radi Allahu anha who said, ``The riders would pass us while we were with the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam). When they got close to us, we would draw our outer cloak from our heads over our faces. When they passed by, we would uncover our faces.” (Hadith - Recorded by Ahmad, Abu Dawud and ibn Majah, Narrated `A`isha. [In his work Jilbab al-Marah al-Muslimah, al-Albani states (p. 108) that it is hasan due to corroborating evidence. Also, in a narration from Asma {who was not the wife of Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), Asma also covered her face at all times in front of men.)

A`isha radi Allahu anha narrated: ``May Allah bestow His Mercy on the first Muhajirat (emigrants). When Allah revealed, `...and draw their Khumur over their Juyubihinna...`, they (i.e. the women) tore their material and covered themselves with it.``(Sahih Bukhari) Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalanee, who is known as Ameer Al-Mu`mineen in the field of Hadeeth, said that the phrase, ``covered themselves``, in the above Hadith means that they ``covered their faces``. [Fath Al-Bari].

A’isha radi Allahu anha says: “(during Hajj in the state of Ihraam) when the male should walk in front of us while in the company of Rasulullah (sallallahu Alayhi wa sallam), then we would drop our veils from the head over the face.”

In addition, women were no longer required or encouraged to participate in Jihad unless completely necessary. They were forbidden to travel without a Mahram. A man who did not apply these rules on his family was called a Dayyouth.

In order to shed more light on the issue, it is just as important to look at the opinions of the scholars about Niqab.

Ibn Abbas radi Allahu anhu, who was one of the most knowledgeable companions of Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, states that the Muslim women are ordered to cover their head and faces with outer garments except for one eye.

Ibn Katheer said...

‘Women must not display any part of their beauty and charms to strangers except what cannot possibly be concealed.’

Imam Ghazaali(mentions in his famous book of Fiqh Ihyaal Uloom):

``Woman emerged (during the time of Rasulullah `saw`) with niqabs on their Faces``

Jami`atul Ulema Junbi Africa sate that the proper opinion for the Hanafi madhab is that ``A woman must be properly and thoroughly covered in a lose outer cloak which totally conceals her entire body including her face!``

(This from the book Islamic Hijab by Jami`atul Ulema P.12)

It is also state in the Famous books of Fiqh Durrul Mukhtar...

``Young women are prohibited from revealing their faces in the presence of men.``

The Mufassireen, such as Al-Qurtubi, site in their Tafseer of the Ayah on Jilbab (Al-Ahzab 33:59), that the Jilbab is: ``a cloth which covers the entire body... Ibn `Abbas and `Ubaidah As-Salmaani () said that it is to be fully wrapped around the women`s body, so that nothing appears but one eye with which she can see.`` [Tafseer Al-Qurtubi].

Imam Qurtubi in his Al-Jamia li Ahkaamul Qurãn states:

‘All women are in effect covered by the terms of the verse which embraces the Shari`a principle that the whole of a woman is ‘Awrah’ (to be concealed) – her face, body and voice, as mentioned previously. It is not permissible to expose those parts except in the case of need, such as the giving of evidence…’

In Fathul Bari, chapter Hajj, a tradition reported on the authority of A`isha radi Allahu anha says: ``A woman in a state of Ihram (during Hajj and Umrah) should stretch her head - cloth over to her face to hide it.``

Sheikh ibn Uthaimin ....

“The Islamic hijab is for the women to cover everything that is forbidden for her to expose. That is, she covers everything that she must cover. The first of those bodily parts that she must cover is her face. It is the source of temptation and the source of people desiring her. Therefore, the woman must cover her face in front of those men that are not mahram. As for those of who claim that the Islamic hijab is to cover the head, shoulders, back, feet, shin and forearms while allowing her to uncover her face and hands, this is a very amazing claim. This is because it is well-known that the source of temptation and looking is the face. How can one say that the Shari`a does not allow the exposure of the foot of the woman while it allows her to uncover her face? It is not possible that there could be in the Esteemed, Wise and Noble Shari`a a contradiction. “

Jamaal Zarabozo (a scholar of Islam in the United States)....

“In Surah Al-Ahzab, verse 59, Allah has ordered the believing women to wear a jilbab. A jilbab as defined in all the books of tafseer is a cloak that covers the woman`s body from the top of her head to her feet. It is also described in those books, form the scholars of the earliest generation that after that verse was revealed, the women would completely cover themselves, leaving, for example, just one eye exposed so they can see the road. Hence, this is the outer garment of the woman that she must wear when she is in front of men she is not related to. “

Ridiculing Niqab

Allah subhana wa ta’ala says: “The hypocrites fear lest a Sûrah (chapter of the Qur`ân) should be revealed about them, showing them what is in their hearts. Say: ‘(Go ahead and) mock! But certainly Allâh will bring to light all that you fear.’ If you ask them (about this), they declare: ``We were only talking idly and joking.`` Say: ``Was it at Allâh, and His Ayât (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) and His Messenger sallallahu alayhi wa sallam that you were mocking? Make no excuse; you have disbelieved after you had believed. If We pardon some of you, We will punish others amongst you because they were Mujrimûn (disbelievers, polytheists, sinners, criminals, etc.)” The hypocrites, men and women, are from one another, they enjoin (on the people) Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief and polytheism of all kinds and all that Islâm has forbidden), and forbid (people) from Al-Ma`rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm orders one to do), and they close their hands [from giving (spending in Allâh`s Cause) alms, etc.]. They have forgotten Allâh, so He has forgotten them. Verily, the hypocrites are the Fâsiqûn (rebellious, disobedient to Allâh). `` (Sura At-Taubah 9:64-67)

Regardless of whether it is concerning woman`s hijab or any other matter of the Shari’a, mocking and rediculing a Muslim for holding onto and applying the teachings of Islam NO MATTER HOW DETAILED of an issue it is, OR HOW UNIMPORTANT IT MAY SEEM TO SOME, EVEN THE POINT OF MOCKING one for use of a MISWAK, that renders a person a kafer, let alone ridiculing the decent women of niqab or calling them ``ninjas`` those are the actions of disbelievers, and render anyone who commits them a kafer even if his excuse is ``I was merely Joking`` . Make no excuse; you have disbelieved after you had believed!

At a gathering during the Battle of Tabuk, one man said, ``I have not seen anyone like our Qur’anic readers who is more desirous of food, more lying in speech and more cowardly when meeting the enemy.`` A man said, ``You have lied and you are a liar. I shall definitely tell the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) about that.`` That news was conveyed to the Messenger of Allah and the Quran was revealed. Abdullah ibn Umar added, ``I saw the man holding on to the bag of the camel of the Messenger of Allah and the dust was striking him while he was saying, `O Messenger of Allah, we were just joking and playing. Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said [saying the verse of the Quran], ``Was it Allah, and His Signs and His Messenger you were mocking? Make no excuse, you have disbelieved after you had believed. If We pardon some of you, We will punish others among you because they were sinners.`` (al-Tauba 65-66).

Based on this, ridiculing believers has been equated with ridiculing Allah, His Signs and His Messenger and constitutes disbelief.

I am certain that many of us have come across women who do not wear hijab and yet still possess better adab than one who does. Allah is all Knowing and all Seeing. However, that does not negate the injunctions Allah has put upon all of us that we should obey. The fact still remains that the practice of Islam is not only in words but more significantly in deed. Ridiculing any practice in Islam goes against the belief that Allah is the Creator and that He is the only one who knows the nature of His creations

Tabarruj

“O wives of the Prophet! You are not like any other women. If you keep your duty, then be not soft in speech, lest he is whose heart is a disease (of hypocrisy or evil desire for adultery) should be moved with desire, but speak in an honorable manner.

And stay in your houses, and do not display yourselves (tabarruj) like that of the times of ignorance (jahiliyya, before Rasulullah’s teachings), and perform as-salat, and give zakat and obey Allah and His messenger. Allah wishes only to remove ar-rijis (evil deeds and sins) from you, O members of the family of the prophet, and to purify you with a thorough purification.” (Surah al ahzab 32-33)

Mujahid and Qatadah say that the word Tabarruj in this verse means

walking in a lewd way. Muqatil states that Tabarruj is when a woman only

covers her head with her head with her scarf without covering her neck

and chest. Mubarrad says that Tabarruj is when a woman reveals her

physical attractiveness which she is required to hide.

Lais states that Tabarruj is when a woman does not hide the beauty of her face and her physical shape and considers it good to reveal it. Abu Ubaidah

(radiallahu anhu) says Tabarruj is when a woman exhibits her beauty and

her body in a way as to cause sexual excitement in men. Ibn Jauzi, after quoting the above statements, writes in regards to “stay in your houses”: “I believe that coming out of her house and roaming about the streets in itself is sufficient to cause trouble, let alone exhibiting her beauty and her body.” (Ahkaamun-Nisa`) Thus as much as possible women should remain in their homes.

A hadith that supports this stance is: Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahyah ibn Sa`id from Amra bind Abd ar-Rahman thats ``Aisha radi Allahu anha, the wife of the prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, said ``If Rasulullah, sallallahu alayhi wa sallam had seen what women do now, he would have forbidden them to go into the mosques, just as the women of the bani Isra`il were forbidden.`` Yahya ibn sa`id said that he asked `Amra, ``Were the women of the bani Isra`il forbidden to go into the mosques?`` and she said, ``Yes.`` (almuwatta 14.6.15)

All the criterions in the verse 33:32-33 were taught to the Wives of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) to safeguard their chastity, and since the wives of the Prophet are examples to all Muslim women, we are required to follow these Commandments. (Imam Abu Bakr Jassaas, Jassaas, vol. 5,p. 230)

“Oh you who believe! Enter not the Prophet’s houses, unless permission is given to you for a meal, (and then) no to wait for its preparation. But when you are invited, en enter, and when you have taken your meal, disperse without sitting for a talk. Verily, such behavior annoys the Prophet, and he is shy of asking you to go; but Allah is not shy of (telling you) the truth. And when you ask (his wives) for anything you want, ask them from behind a screen: that is purer for your hearts and for their hearts...”(33:53)

Muslims were forbidden from entering the houses of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), as they used to enter each others houses without permission in the days before Islam. Allah chose modesty and honor for this Ummah and commanded them to observe Hijab. Undoubtedly, this commandment is in respect and honor of this Ummah. (Tafseer Ibn Kathir)

Although the three Commandments in this Verse --entering the house of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) after permission, not engaging in idle talk after the meal, and observing Hijab between men and the wives of the Prophet, sallallahu alayhi wa sallam were revealed specifically for the houses of the Prophet and his Wives, these are binding for all Muslims as we are required to follow the guidance and tradition of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam). The only instances injunctions are not applicable to all Muslims is if Allah Himself specifies that a particular rule is meant only for the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) and the Ummah is not subjected to it.

It is not the case here. (Ibn `Arabi, Ahkaam-ul-Qur`aan, vol. 5, p. 342) This Verse provides the permission to ask, from behind a screen (Hijab), the Wives of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) for any necessary thing, including any matters of religion. And, all Muslim women would be bound by the same rule. Beside this Verse, other principles of the Islamic doctrine also tell us that a woman, for her honor) deserves to be hidden - her body as well as her voice. (Tafsir-ul-Qurtubi, vol. 14 , p. 227)

* * * * * *

There are many more proofs and references regarding niqab. It is evident by these mentioned above that niqab is not a matter to be belittled. If anything, the niqab should symbolize the strength of Muslim women to uphold their teachings in the midst of all the evil in society.

In all attempts to revive any teaching, a visual image of resurgence is sought after in every society. The niqab should serve as that-- a symbol and remembrance for each Muslim that we as Muslims are different from the kafir, that we have a purpose in life other than material gain, that this life is just a test. Its visual effect on the Islamic resurgence should be seen as an opportunity for all of us to earn a good deed.

Zayd bin Talhah narrated that Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said: “Every religion has distinctive quality, and the distinctive quality of Islam is modesty.” (al bayhaqi, ibn majah and imam malik’s almuwatta)

Allah subhana wa ta’ala said: “By the passing time, man is indeed in loss, excpet thsoe who believe, do good deeds, enjoin upon one another the keeping to truth, and enjoin upon one another patience in adversity.” (103:1-3)

So, how can people say that the niqab has no place in this day and age? when it clearly says in this ayah that we are at a loss through the time? I would assert that there is even a GREATER NEED nowadays to wear a face cover in order to give the Muslim woman the honor and dignity Allah gave the Ummul Mu’mineen.

Abdullah bin ‘Umar related that Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said: “Modesty and faith exist together, when one disappears, the other also disappears.” (al bayhaqi)

There are quite a few reasons as to why there is a need to wear niqab. However only one is for certain the best intention and purpose-- to please Allah, that one believes Allah has enjoined it upon her, and that Rasulullah’s sallallahu alayhi wa sallam wives wore them. Only with that intention in any endeavor we take on can we change ourselves and purify our hearts as women as well as a community.

“Verily, Allah does not change a people’s condition unless they change what is in themselves.” (13:11)

‘Verily, Allah will most certainly support the one who supports His cause; verily, Allah is the Most Powerful and Almighty.” (22:40)

Top Ten Things About Childhood That S-ck

by Ayeda

10-- Injections

9--- Loose teeth hanging off your gums by a thin sliver of skin that bleed when you try and pull them out

8--- Grown-ups who spell out words so that you can’t understand (yet you do and are traumatised for life over what they are actually saying about you)

7--- Fat, lazy ayahs who never change their clothes

6--- Maulvi Sahibs with bad breath

5--- Throat paint, ghararas and enemas

4--- Visiting stingy relatives on Eid

3--- Your mother making you give away your toys to kids who come over to your house (who called them over anyway, huh?)

2--- Pulling band-aids off

1--- Rectal thermometers

TRUE ISLAM, AN EXPERIMENT.

Islamic jihadists have cpture tourists in Philippines, are killing hindus in kashmir, jews in israel, world trade centre bombing. Some are suggesting that islam is inherently violent, non compromising and TNT, two nation theory, is the essence of islam.

A learned professor conducted the experiment, he drank wisky with water, brandy with water, gin with water, and even beer with water: and in all instances got drunk. He tried it with other subjects also and concluded `` irrespective of what you mix it with, water always make you drunk``. We the ordinary know the truth, islam in all of the above situations is like water, pure colourless and odourless, like the peaceful islam.

Now tell me what to do if a kafir doesnt convert. Let me check with the book.

In response to Fuzair (#144):

It is my opinion that any reasonable exegesis of the Quran must be done within a hemeneutical framework that takes into account it`s historical context.

An important part of this historical context is quite explicit from the Quranic text itself: God is addressing none other than The Prophet and the early muslims themselves. Contemplate on the Quranic message and this becomes apparent. The text alternates between describing the metaphysical and addressing the Prophet`s contemporary situation (by either laying out laws/principles and drawing similitudes with a previous prophet`s plight).

Now, to suggest that the Quran sans interpretation is not applicable in the 20th

century is missing the point. It`s a cop-out. A no-brainer.

Of course we need to interpret the Quranic message in light of our contemporary situation. Our situation compared to, say, the situation of 10th century muslims is vastly different. Times are not good for us, and unlike our 10th century fore bearers, we cannot afford to remain stagnant in our ways (I pick on 10th century Muslims because it seems our traditions had been cast in stone by them - it was they who closed the doors on Ijthehad).

I think many people agree with the above, but for some odd reason equate ``literalism`` to a blind ritualistic adherence to the Quran within it`s 7th century context. But, the manner in which the Quranic message is conveyed leaves little

doubt: the word`s are to be construed as literally from God.

I also object to the parallel drawn between the contemporary Muslim world and medieval Europe.

Apples and oranges, folks. The two are far more different than they are alike. It`s a far cry to compare the Taliban with the Catholic Church in it`s glory days.

Surya Sharma turns Peter Joseph, but still doesn`t feel safe in Lahore

LAHORE, MAY 2: Name: Peter Joseph. Father`s name: Shyam Sunder Sharma. Children: Monica and John. No, it is not some Anglo-Indian family living in Lahore`s Kashmiri Gate. Peter Joseph`s name till December 6, 1992, was Surya Prakash Sharma. He changed it when his brother Nand Kishore and cousin Ram Narain were killed in Lahore in the aftermath of the demolition of the Babri Masjid.

``I did not convert to Christianity. I just changed my name and it saved my life,`` he says, sitting in his small house in a lane in Kashmiri Gate. He refuses to be photographed. ``I`m very superstitious. It is like challenging fate,`` he says, holding his three-year-old daughter Monica close to him. He did not have the courage of giving Hindu names to his children, and then changed his wife Meera`s name to Mariam.

``I saw my brothers being killed in front of me. Many people in this area, mostly Hindus, have adopted Christian names to protect themselves,`` he adds. There is not even a single temple left in entire Lahore.

There was one Jain temple near Lakshmi chowk and another big one at Shalmi Chowk near Anarkali bazaar but both of them were burnt down after the Babri Masjid demolition. Some smaller ones in Krishna Nagar and Shyam Nagar in Chubhurjhi area where also destroyed, recall the 100-odd Hindus, now mostly living in Kashmiri Gate and Andhroon Bhati Gate.

``We are scared of even putting an idol of Ramchandraji or Krishanji in our houses. Most Hindus have converted to Christianity but we still offer our prayers to Hindu deities,`` says Frank (real name Harish Chandra). Most of the people refer to these Hindus-Christians as Balmikis in the area. Though Thapar Street, Bhatia Street, Bahamant Street and Sehgal Street remain, there is hardly any Hindu there. ``There used to be thousands of Hindus living in Lahore. But after December 6 (1992), most ran away to either Karachi or Kota in Peshawar. There are very few left now,`` says Septuagenarian Ram Pal, who has dared to retain his original name. ``This was the name given to me by my mother and I will be known by the same till I die,`` he says.

Though Christians too complain of ``problems and harassment,`` they are relatively better off. ``There are almost one lakh Christians in Lahore but they don`t really like to mingle much with the majority. We prefer to stay within our community,`` says Francis Louis, a science teacher in Don Bosco School in Lahore.

As if living as a minority in Pakistan is not bad enough, he says, teaching is even worse. Though Don Bosco is a Christian-run school, 70 per cent of the students are Muslims.

``There was a big furore in the school when I tried teaching the students about reproduction. The students went and complained to their parents who came and protested to the principal. I was almost thrown out of the school,`` he says. Louis had to apologise to the parents and assure them that he won`t teach them that subject in future.

``Now I just read what is in the book and cloak it in harmless and often meaningless language,`` he says.

Thomas D`Souza, who organises AIDS awareness programmes in schools and colleges, has to face hostility and ire every day. ``But we have to do our job. My assistant Franklin was beaten up by some students in Lahore University two days ago and has vowed to give up. I am trying to convince him but he is too scared,`` he adds.

The handful of Sikhs in Lahore are limited to the Dera Baba Gurdwara near Lahore Fort. ``There are three other Gurdwaras in Lahore but this is the only functional one,`` explains Harpal Singh, a kar sevak in the gurdwara which houses Maharaja Ranjit Singh`s Samadhi. ``Here, there are two dozen-odd Sikhs. We do the ``paath`` and read the Gurbani everyday even if there is nobody to listen. We will keep this Gurdwara alive,`` he adds.

to Fuzair:

bravo for that ``eye opening`` post. I also believe the essense of all religions is peace and love for God and God created things. Unfortunately, people have forgotten that. It is due to fundamental, narrow minded mullahs and their misled proteges that Muslims are looked down upon by the rest of the global community.

Ref Mushtaq Farooqui #: 165

When you quote Murata {``The pagans who bowed to idols of wood and stone, they could be patronised. But the monotheistic Muslims had to be shown the error of their ways.``}, can you explain why Kaffiristan has suddenly become Nuristan just in the last 100 years? Obviously, the Muslims of Afghanistan decided that they would not patronize the idolaters of Kaffiristan.

You say {You asked about Buddhism: Buddhism has violence as well. The papers have carried news items of the monks killing each other in Korea because each believes the other to be ``false``, and are in a power struggle to gain control of the monastaries.}

Two sets of monks fighting in Korea is not to be equated with systematic killing of non-believers, forced conversions, and government-sanctioned, religion-approved discrimination against minorities.

Are you claiming that Sri Lanka, Thailand, Burma, Cambodia, Viet Nam, Tibet, China, Korea and Japan were invaded by the armies of Ashoka and the population forcibly converted? To cite just one example, Ashoka sent his daughter Sanghamitra as an emissary of Buddhism, not as the head of an army, to Sri Lanka. Can you show any invasion of any of the above-mentioned states by an army out of India (that being the birthplace of Buddhism) and forcible conversions?

You say {When you said you believe that Buddhism is the ``only peaceful religion`` you are looking at it with the eyes on the true teachings of Buddhism - something that I am asking you to do with Islam as well.}

I am sure hamidm and SR will be able to quote chapter and verse from the Qur`an asking the Faithful to kill the infidels. Are you now going to delete these verses from the Qur`an? Will they become Satanic Verses? Has any maulvi issued a fatwa declaring them to be invalid? Does anyone dare to?

You quote Karen Armstrong {``The Quran taught that the people of the Book were to be respected, and within the Islamic empire Jews and Christians were allowed full religious liberty, as were the Zoroastrians, Buddhists and Hindus.``

She continues and states that Islam proved to be a tolerant religion in practice, that ``in fact many of the subject people wanted to convert to Islam, despite there being no pressure to convert.``}

Oh, yeah?. Exactly how many people are converting in India, East Timor, the Philippines, Thailand, and even China, now that the Muslims are no longer in power? Or, are you claiming that those who are smart have already converted and it is the stupid who remain as believers of backward religions?

I guess this gentle treatment of religious minorities by Muslims explains why there are more Zorastrians in India than in Iran.

I don`t mind you importing your religion from the deserts of Araby, but do you also have to import the sand from there to bury your head in? I haven`t seen any worse distortion of history or logic than your post.

wow! Muslims won`t get anywhere by showing their anger towards other races by hateful pieces of writing such as this one. I`ll give the benefit of the doubt to the writer of this poem...maybe it was written in a fit of anger, to let out some repressed steam. But that`s no excuse to ridicule western women. THE WRITER IS TRYING TO ERADICATE STEREOTYPES OF MUSLIM WOMEN, BUT IN THE PROCESS, SHE`S STEREOTYPING WESTERN WOMEN. WHAT SILLY HYPOCRICY! Not all western women wear miniskirts or low necks to attract attention. Women can attract men with or without wearing a scarf on their heads. Men will be men. It takes more than hiding your hair from the world, to earn respect as a woman. PEOPLE, PLEASE LOOK BEYOND THE CONFINES OF RELIGION AND SCARVES AND PHYSICAL APPEARANCES TO FIND THE VALUE AND RESPECT OF WOMEN.