The Burka, religious or not

MrPudding

Hi all,

Is the "requirement" to wear the Burka a religous requirement or a cultural one? I understand that some followers of Islam do not see the Burka as a requirement, so I am interested in the justification that the pro Burka people have.

MrP

hivizman

I'd just draw your attention to the long thread on the burqa/niqab referred to in the FAQ thread.

The various arguments in favour of and against face veiling are set out at length at a pro-hijab web-site http://www.muhajabah.com/niqab-index.htm .

There is no disagreement that the Qur'an enjoins women to cover themselves with the exception of the face and hands (and some would add the feet below the ankles). The issue is whether various prophetic traditions require women also to cover the face (except perhaps for the eyes) and the hands and feet. Even if this isn't a requirement, is face-veiling something that is pleasing to Allah? Or is it a matter of indifference, so that someone choosing to veil her face does not receive any particular reward?

MrPudding

hivizman wrote: »

I'd just draw your attention to the long thread on the burqa/niqab referred to in the FAQ thread.

The various arguments in favour of and against face veiling are set out at length at a pro-hijab web-site http://www.muhajabah.com/niqab-index.htm .

There is no disagreement that the Qur'an enjoins women to cover themselves with the exception of the face and hands (and some would add the feet below the ankles). The issue is whether various prophetic traditions require women also to cover the face (except perhaps for the eyes) and the hands and feet. Even if this isn't a requirement, is face-veiling something that is pleasing to Allah? Or is it a matter of indifference, so that someone choosing to veil her face does not receive any particular reward?

It seems to be a bit of a mixture... Some are indicating that it is religious in origin and others not.

My understanding, which is admittedly poor, is that there is reference to modesty, but that various people interpret that in different ways.

MrP

Jaafa

MrPudding wrote: »

It seems to be a bit of a mixture... Some are indicating that it is religious in origin and others not.

My understanding, which is admittedly poor, is that there is reference to modesty, but that various people interpret that in different ways.

MrP

That's basically it really. People will always take things to one extreme or another.

naq0821

if the woman’s niqaab or burqa’ does not show anything but the eyes, and the opening is only as big as the left eye, as was narrated from some of the salaf, then that is permissible, otherwise she should wear something which covers her face entirely.

Shaykh Muhammad al-Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

The hijaab prescribed in sharee’ah means that a woman should cover everything that it is haraam for her to show, i.e., she should cover that which it is obligatory for her to cover, first and foremost of which is the face, because it is the focus of temptation and desire.

A woman is obliged to cover her face in front of anyone who is not her mahram (blood relative to whom marriage is forbidden). From this we learn that the face is the most essential thing to be covered. There is evidence from the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and the views of the Sahaabah and the imams and scholars of Islam, which indicates that women are obliged to cover all of their bodies in front of those who are not their mahrams.

Fataawa al-Mar’ah al-Muslimah, 1/ 391, 392)

Hobbes

welcome to the forum naq0821. Please take time to read the forum charter and please in future quote where you cut+paste from. Thanks.

http://peacepropagation.com/what-is-the-correct-ruling-on-wearing-niqab-covering-face/

Mark Hamill

The following is a response to something naq0821 posted in the Religious Edicts thread, but I think its better suited here, as its more about burka and hijab in general.

naq0821 wrote: »

The meaning of Islam is total submissiveness to the command of Allah.

If this is true, then why is there more total submissiveness for women than men?

naq0821 wrote: »

Allaah commanded the wives of the Prophet and the believing women to stay in their houses, to observe hijab and to avoid showing their adornments to non-mahrams because of the permissiveness that all these things lead to, which spells doom for society.

But nearly all societies around the world avoid doom without requiring the women to follow these rules, so how do you explain that?

naq0821 wrote: »

So one of the main reason for banning driving for woman in Saudi is the requirement of removal of Hijab while driving thus causing Fitnah on the roads.

So lets say I go along with you quoted interpretation of modesty and hijab. (Hypothetically) would society as a whole not be better to try to educate its citizens to observe hijab subconsciously (men and women interact without sexual distraction by default, regardless of what the other is wearing), without the need for physical obstacles? I.e. if you accept hijab to this proposed extent, is the burka not just a stopgap measure? Its not teaching men to recognise womens modesty (the point of hijab, no?), its simply not giving them the opportunity to act negatively against it. Its not much measure of a society if the citizens never stray because they never have the opportunity.

naq0821

Will certainly do that in the future.

Meanwhile the link that I am attaching is also pretty clear on it.

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/13646/veil

naq0821

Mark Hamill wrote: »

The following is a response to something naq0821 posted in the Religious Edicts thread, but I think its better suited here, as its more about burka and hijab in general.




If this is true, then why is there more total submissiveness for women than men?

Why would you think that is total submissiveness for women and not men??
But nearly all societies around the world avoid doom without requiring the women to follow these rules, so how do you explain that?

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/33679 there are some statistics presented which could in some way answer to your queries about doom in the society.


So lets say I go along with you quoted interpretation of modesty and hijab. (Hypothetically) would society as a whole not be better to try to educate its citizens to observe hijab subconsciously (men and women interact without sexual distraction by default, regardless of what the other is wearing), without the need for physical obstacles? I.e. if you accept hijab to this proposed extent, is the burka not just a stopgap measure? Its not teaching men to recognise womens modesty (the point of hijab, no?), its simply not giving them the opportunity to act negatively against it. Its not much measure of a society if the citizens never stray because they never have the opportunity.

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]And O Prophet, enjoin the Believing men to restrain their gaze and guard their private parts. This is a more righteous way for them: Allah has knowledge of what they do.[/FONT] [al-Noor 24:30]
And after this verse came the verse for women to cover herself. Do not look at how people practice Islam but look at what Islam preaches one to do.

hivizman

Just for information, the Islam-QA (Islam Question & Answer) website is considered to be quite a "conservative" source. It propagates the views of a specific scholar, Shaykh Muhammad Salih Al-Munajjid. From a quick review of the internet, there are quite a lot of websites that question his reliability, but then this is the case for virtually any scholar of Islam!

Mark Hamill

naq0821 wrote: »

Why would you think that is total submissiveness for women and not men??

Because of how unbalanced it is. Women have to cover up more than men.

naq0821 wrote: »

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/33679 there are some statistics presented which could in some way answer to your queries about doom in the society.

This is a flawed source. Firstly, it gives no stats for muslim countries, so no comparison can be made to determine if less "doom" is occurring in islamic nations (even if the numbers where produced, they would be questionable: in very strict muslim countries, marital harassment and violence may not be legally recognised as a crime). Secondly, it admits that an unmeasured amount of "doom" occurs in islamic countries, or to muslims in general, but justifies it with the unprovable claim that it only happens to muslims who have forsaken Allah. Lastly, some of the stats dont necessarily describe any kind of doom eg illegitimate kids are by no means a burden of the state or grow up to be antisocial and the marriage of brother and sister is (imo) analogous to islamic sanctioned polygamy.

naq0821 wrote: »

And O Prophet, enjoin the Believing men to restrain their gaze and guard their private parts. This is a more righteous way for them: Allah has knowledge of what they do. [al-Noor 24:30]
And after this verse came the verse for women to cover herself. Do not look at how people practice Islam but look at what Islam preaches one to do.

That doesn't answer any of my questions in the last part. It looks like that passage is describing a method for people to satisfy allahs desire (cover up so that mens gazes aren't distracted by each others private parts). Hypothetically, would it not be better for men to learn to not get distracted regardless of what they could see?

blackthorn

hivizman wrote: »

Just for information, the Islam-QA (Islam Question & Answer) website is considered to be quite a "conservative" source. It propagates the views of a specific scholar, Shaykh Muhammad Salih Al-Munajjid. From a quick review of the internet, there are quite a lot of websites that question his reliability, but then this is the case for virtually any scholar of Islam!

You are putting it mildly. I consider that site to be promoting extremism.