Wednesday, July 24, 2024
HomeOpinions“Hijab” does not have any holy genesis in Islam

“Hijab” does not have any holy genesis in Islam

Also Read

As per Sahih al-Bukhari 6240, Aisha narrated: Umar bin Al-Khattab (a close companion of Muhammad) used to say to Allah’s Messenger “Let your wives be veiled”. But he did not do so. The wives of the Prophet used to go out to answer the call of nature at night only at Al-Manasi (a wide, open place with no vegetation). Once Sauda (a wife of Muhammad), the daughter of Zam`a went out and she was a tall woman. Umar bin Al-Khattab saw her while he was in a gathering, and said, “I have recognized you, O Sauda!” He (Umar) said so as he was anxious for some Divine orders regarding the veil (the veiling of women).

When Muhammad came to know about the incident, surprisingly enough, he did not caution Umar not to look at his wife or any other woman and control his (as well as other Muslims’) uncalled-for gazing towards women.

To save Muhammad from this critical situation Allah revealed Quran 33:59: “O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be molested. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful”.

This verse tells loud and clear that women were publicly molested during Muhammad’s time in Medina. Eve-teasing was at its height in Arab tribal culture then. So, recognition of the women of Muhammad’s cohort was needed and thus veils for the women came in the Muslim community. This, by extension, also clarified that, non-Muslim women were allowed to be molested (by Muslim men) in public.

But as luck would have it, even a veiled Sauda remained a target for Umar. As per Sahih al-Muslim 2170a: Aisha reported: Sauda (Allah he pleased with her) went out (in the fields) in order to answer the call of nature even after the time when veil had been prescribed for women. She had been a bulky lady, significant in height amongst the women, and she could not conceal herself from him who had known her. Umar bin Al-Khattab saw her and said:

Sauda, by Allah, you cannot conceal from us. Therefore, be careful when you go out”. Aisha said: Sauda turned back. Allah’s Messenger was at that time in my house having his evening meal and there was a bone in his hand. She (Sauda) clined and said: Allah’s Messenger. I went out and Umar said to me so and so. Aisha reported: There came the revelation to him and then it was over; the bone was then in his hand and he had not thrown it and he said: “Permission has been granted to you that you may go out for your needs”.

Muhammad had to tolerate the uncouth observations of Umar towards Sauda. Though Allah granted permission to Sauda to go out with veil for her needs to respond to nature’s call, the issue of her recognition by Umar remained a thorn in the side of Muhammad’s prophethood. Muhammad was uncomfortable with that Sauda-Umar dispute. And then to guard the honour of the wives of Muhammad’s family Quran 33:32 was revealed:

“O wives of the Prophet! You are not like any other women: if you are mindful of Allah, then do not be overly effeminate in speech with men or those with sickness in their hearts may be tempted, but speak in a moderate tone”. And further the next verse, that is, Quran 33:33 put Muhammad’s wives within four walls of the house when it revealed,

“Settle in your homes, and do not display yourselves as women did in the days of pre-Islamic ignorance. Establish prayer, pay alms-tax, and obey Allah and His Messenger. Allah only intends to keep the causes of evil away from you and purify you completely, O members of the Prophet’s family”!

At larger Muslim social level, Allah commanded to Muslim men in Quran 24:30, “Tell the believing men to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts. That is purer for them. Indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what they do”. The Muslim women were also directed by Allah in Quran 24:31, “And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers,……”.

The rest has been a down-hill slide. What was ordained primarily for the wives of Muhammad was later applied to all Muslim women. Thus, Sharia compelled all Muslim women to wear veils (Burqa / Niqab / Abaya / Hijab) and ordered them to live within four walls. The concept of Mahram was introduced, which allowed Muslim women to go out of the home only if accompanied by a male relation of un-marriageable nature like father, real brother, son or first uncle. In Islam husband is also considered a Mahram. One should not forget that the genesis of veils came from the need to save Muslim women from molestation in public.

However, gradually over the centuries the veil and Mahram got diluted among many Muslims countries and localities. Now only Afghanistan and ISIS-Boko Haram controlled areas follow veils-Mahram duo very strictly. Thus, last year’s Hijab controversy in Karnataka schools was only to assert Islamism in educational institutions. Indian Islamists cried that the use of Hijab by the Muslim girls in schools (violating dress code), was a religious obligation / religious right / religious identity / personal choice / fundamental right, and what not? Those confusing multiplicities of reasons made their Hijab demand look comical. Indian woman Islamists like Rana Ayyub, Arfa Khanum Sherwani, Saba Naqvi and Sayema et al cried most in support of Hijab. But they themselves did not use any form of veil in public.

In another dimension, Mullah of the Indian sub-continent compares an unveiled Muslim woman with a lollipop without a wrapper. The comparison is so stupid that it equates Muslim women with something lifeless, soul-less and edible. The brain-dead Islamists are ready to accept that comparison to peddle Islamism in India. Funnily, Indian Leftist-Liberal gang-members like Mini Nair, Sakshi Joshi and Rohini Singh et al also supported the demand of Indian Muslims for using Hijab in the schools. This was the best example of “Begani Shaadi Mein Abdullah Diwana”. And the Islamic nautanki goes on.

The worst social contribution of Islamic invasions and rule in India was “Rape” of women and girls. The practice of Jauhar and use of Ghoonghat among Hindu women became commonplace with the advent of Islam in India. Sexual pleasure and satisfaction of Muslim men, paedophilia, sex slavery (right hand possess) and subjugation of women have been scripture-sanctified components of Islamic social order. Thus, ‘Rape’ can be religiously doubly rewarding in Islam if it is used as a tool to crush or convert a Kafir woman / girl. Allah originally ordained Hijab (veils) to save Muslim women from molestation and rape by fellow Muslim men. There is nothing to be proud of Hijab.

  Support Us  

OpIndia is not rich like the mainstream media. Even a small contribution by you will help us keep running. Consider making a voluntary payment.

Trending now

- Advertisement -

Latest News

Recently Popular