Hijab-Headscarf for Muslim Women - When? - Parts 1-4 WITH COMMENTS - Dr. Umar Faruq Abd-Allah on Hijabs and Headscarves - Currently Censored Articles

http://web.archive.org/web/20100715192027/http://www.altmuslimah.com/ Articles currently unavailable with comments on the altmuslimah site.

SCHOLAR DR. UMAR FARUQ ABD-ALLAH

Part 1: Dr. Umar Faruq Abd-Allah on hijabs and headscarves

BY RABEA CHAUDHRY, JUNE 30, 2010

I recently had the opportunity to interview Dr. Umar Faruq Abd-Allah, Chairman of the Board & Scholar-in-Residence at the Nawawi Foundation, a non-profit educational foundation based in Chicago, Illinois. Dr. Abd-Allah offered me his insights into the growing phenomenon of Muslim women taking off their headscarves. The first part of a four part interview is published here: The hijab is a highly charged symbol. How can we talk about a Muslim woman’s obligation to cover without the discussion implicating the other things that hijab has come to symbolize, such as identity and cultural resistance? Well, to begin with I think that we need to get rid of the word hijab because it is a cognitive frame and it carries with it lots of implications. It is not precise. What you are really talking about is the scarf and the Muslim woman’s obligation to cover her hair with a headscarf. The use of the word hijab to describe a Muslim woman's obligation to cover has made it possible for this obligation to become a touchstone by which a woman is judged as acceptable or unacceptable. Many prefer to use the word hijab in describing this obligation because it is in the Qur’an and because of the fact that it is enforced by the Qu’ran.

But the question is what is the hijab? The hijab is a way of living in which our families live in privacy and there is separation between private and public space. And now to take that reality which is very good and very helpful and which almost all of us follow and to attach that to the scarf, that’s not fair, that’s not right because then a woman’s covering becomes an issue of identity and an issue of highly politicized agenda. And I think that all of this needs to be set aside so that we can speak very honestly about the way that Muslim women should dress. We have to set our own cognitive frames. In setting our own cognitive frames we have to do so very honestly and very fairly. Islam is a religion of definition and everything that we believe in we define and it is so important to do that. So because we are talking about the scarf, we must remember that we are talking about an item of clothing. And this item of clothing and a woman’s obligation to cover her hair in public space is obligatory according to the four Imams. If she doesn’t do that then she’s failed to meet that obligation. In some cases she may be justified in failing to meet this obligation. In others she may not. Now we’re talking about something very concrete. To clarify, hijab is something very different from the question of whether or not a Muslim woman wears a scarf to cover her hair. Hijab is essentially a mode of living in which those members of your family who are women and who are children and who are maharim – who are forbidden from marriage to you because of their close kinship – live privately in your home. In most of our homes and in our traditional architecture we have public areas in our house like a guest room and then we have a private area. That’s the hijab. During the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), the hijab was a veil, a curtain that was put in the room of the Prophet because ...it was a simple one-roomed house and so when people would come to visit him they would be sitting with him and his wives would be sitting in the corner. And people obviously wanted to look at his wives to see what they looked like, to see if they were beautiful. And that’s not proper, so God put down the veil, the curtain, so that the Prophet’s wives would be put behind the curtain. So hijab in the sense that we have privacy in our lives cannot be challenged. Another aspect of hijab is that Islam requires us to live very upright lives. In order for us to live this kind of life of dignity, we endorse covering – because we all cover, men and women. Shyness

and a desire to be covered, these are essential psychological and moral values of Islam. Now that we’re speaking specifically about the question of a Muslim woman wearing a scarf to cover her hair in public, what is the nature of this obligation? A woman’s covering and the scarf are highly regarded in Islam and it is obligatory for a woman to cover her hair and wear the scarf according to the four Imams. But, it is not an act of worship. It is one of those aspects of law that is essentially rational and that pertains to social and private behavior. It has rulings that pertain to it, but it is something to which exceptions can be made and must be made in certain situations. And to say that a woman’s wearing of the scarf is just an issue of women’s sexuality and so forth, that’s not what this is about at all. …[Yes,] the four imams do say that a woman should cover her hair and wear a scarf, but a woman can also go out into public [and] engage in society. How, if at all, is the obligation to cover affected by the mounting pressures that women face when they do publically identify as Muslim by wearing the headscarf? Again, the four imams say that it’s obligatory. But even if it is obligatory that does not mean that there cannot be licenses in which a woman doesn’t wear a scarf. So, for example, after 9/11, Shaykh Abdullah bin Bayah and other prominent scholars were asked about women wearing scarves in public, which could expose them to danger and even to physical attack. And, Shaykh Abdullah bin Bayah as I recall, and I heard this from him and from others directly, said that if wearing the scarf in public threatens the woman’s life or brings her into danger, she should not wear it. And if she cannot take it off, then she should stay at home. And any jurists, any legists, who takes rulings right out of the book without looking at the social reality, the psychological reality, the personal reality of our society and just says, “This is the rule,” they turn this religion into a procrustean bed. …They make Islam completely unworkable. Again, I stress that the fact that women should wear scarves if they can and they should be respected for wearing them. But men also, especially those who stress the scarf, have to change their dress too. Don’t expect women to go out dressed a certain way if you are not going to do something that publically identifies you as Muslim as well. Our modesty and shyness is one of our

badges of honor. But to invert this and to make the woman exposed in public by the very act of her wearing a scarf, this is not right. (Photo: stratospherical) Rabea Chaudhry is Associate Editor of Altmuslimah Print-friendly | Email this |

Digg this |

Tweet this | Share on Facebook

24 COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE We try to remove any comments that do not conform to our netiquette guidelines. If any comments remain that are in violation, please let us know. The presence of offending comments does not necessarily reflect the views of the editors of altmuslimah.com

The interview makes a number of good points that I agree with on a personal level. Many people can universally agree on the basic need for separation between a protected private space and public living spheres. Its not a crazy or “out there” thought. This framework illuminates the reasoning behind the “hijab” verse in the Prophet’s home. It has long needed an explanation because people have thought that it meant that women have to stay behind a curtain all the time. Muslims themselves become confused over it, but Americans should also understand the idea when dealing with Muslims in America or in Muslim countries like Iraq and Afghanistan.

- Posted by Saadia on June 30, 2010 at 04:09 PM

The four traditional imams made the head covering a mandatory part of what I think is called “khimar” in the Quran, and not “hijab”. (Please Correct me if I am wrong).

In high school and college I began to search for my own modality because I realized that gender relations and women’s covering were the primary point of difference for young Muslims, girls especially, growing up in the U.S. Once a girl wears hijab, it becomes apparent that many people in movies, TV, magazines and everywhere else is not. I started to believe that modesty is relative, that healthy activities shouldn’t be limited due to clothing, and that a blase or “bored” attitude shouldn’t be created towards women because of overexposure. A Christian freind in college once remarked that modesty carries beauty. This was more in line with Muhammad Asad’s interpretation - he suggest women cover more when the environment is more dangerous. That said, I think hijab has its benefits for those who choose to wear it full time or even part-time. One is to liberate women from having to be subjected to beauty standards of random men, and another is to symbolize that men should stay away.

- Posted by Saadia on June 30, 2010 at 04:13 PM

My last sentence isn’t to suggest that not wearing a hijab does not mean random men should stay away.

- Posted by Saadia on June 30, 2010 at 04:15 PM

Dr. Umar says: “And to say that a woman’s wearing of the scarf is just an issue of women’s sexuality and so forth, that’s not what this is about at all. …[Yes,] the four imams do say that a woman should cover her hair and wear a scarf, but a woman can also go out into public [and] engage in society.” This leaves me with the question that, I think, still plagues quite a few of us, namely what is the justification for the head scarf? If it’s not about sexuality, then what is it about? One is probably tempted to say “it’s about religion and spirituality.” But that still begs the question: how does the act of “covering” reflect something religious and spiritual?

- Posted by tucompay1976 on June 30, 2010 at 10:50 PM

Saadia and Tucompay1976, Thank you both for your comments. Saadia, I think your posts are very insightful and echo a sentiment that a lot of women are beginning to feel - that modesty and women’s dressing does have to respond to social realities. Unfortunately, I do not know about the use of the word “khimar” by the four imams. Someone more knowledgeable on the subject will have to answer that question. ;) Tucompay1976, I think that Dr. Umar was stipulating that to use a woman’s sexuality as a reason to contain her (as we see in more conservative Muslim countries, like in Saudi Arabia where a woman’s sexuality is used as a reason why she should not be allowed to drive because it would be too distracting for men) is wrong, and cannot be justified by the obligation to wear the headscarf.

- Posted by Rabea Chaudhry on July 1, 2010 at 12:16 PM

Rabea, I think tucompay1976 is raising a broader question though: what is the rationale behind wearing a headscarf?

- Posted by asmauddin on July 1, 2010 at 03:04 PM

Indeed I am Asma. Earlier in the interview, Dr. Umar says: “A woman’s covering and the scarf are highly regarded in Islam and it is obligatory for a woman to cover her hair and wear the scarf according to the four Imams. But, it is not an act of worship. It is one of those aspects of law that is essentially rational and that pertains to social and private behavior. It has rulings that pertain to it, but it is something to which exceptions can be made and must be made in certain situations.” So, in this quote, Dr. Umar is referring to the practice of covering the hair as something other than an act of worship. It is, according to this passage, an “aspect of law that is rational.” I don’t doubt that there is a rational justification (indeed, what else can a justification be if not rational?) for the practice but I want to understand what it is. Exactly what is the rationale—the assumptions and premises—upon which this legal requirement is based?

If there are exceptions to the law, then what is the root for the “normal” state of affairs in which the practice must be fulfilled? These questions are grounded in my own concerns over the meaning of gender according to Muslim laws. The four Imams are said to have agreed that the head scarf (for women) is mandatory. If it doesn’t apply to questions of worship, meaning that covering is not an expression of devotion in the way prayer would be, then what does it have to do with? My hunch is that some ideas about sexuality linked to gender are at work here. If so, then I think we are back where we started: back to a point at which a shared understanding of gender needs to be developed such that the head scarf can be practiced in a way that reflects some non-discriminatory views of women and men.

- Posted by tucompay1976 on July 1, 2010 at 03:37 PM

Tucompany: You asked - If it [hijab] doesn’t apply to questions of worship, meaning that covering is not an expression of devotion in the way prayer would be, then what does it have to do with? I think this is the response that was provided: “But the question is what is the hijab? The hijab is a way of living in which our families live in privacy and there is separation between private and public space. And now to take that reality which is very good and very helpful and which almost all of us follow and to attach that to the scarf, that’s not fair, that’s not right because then a woman’s covering becomes an issue of identity and an issue of highly politicized agenda.”

- Posted by Saadia on July 1, 2010 at 04:09 PM

Why Hijab, why scarf – search for answer leads to the dawn of Islam, Prophet’s wife before Islam, way before Prophet declared that he was a messenger, Khadijah was a business woman, not just a business woman selling some nick nacks from her run down hut, was a successful woman, her business caravans were going in all directions, she was managing a phenomenally profitable business, if I equate her to today, she was Martha Stewed of her time. She kept doing it after becoming Mrs. Mustafa, was not

stopped and not told to show modesty and stop this nonsense, sit down in the house, let man taken care of you. After Prophet’s death, every thing fall apart, within 35 years, Muslim killed everybody, including Prophet’s grand children, caliphs - Amir Maavia started a parallel caliphate against Caliph Ali, he couldn’t wait for his tern that killed the democratic selection process established by Prophet – that was the beginning of kings, dictators, illegal power grabbers – hang on to ill legitimate power they found a successful mix – create group of religious leaders who would agree with them, spread ignorance and rule ruthlessly - make sure women remains under watchful eyes. An educated mother is like fertile land that would produce educated nation that was not the goal. Now the challenged was how to control and suppress women, they were progressive, intellectuals, were sitting in front of Prophet and asking questions – best way was to control women, confuse them, deny them education, don’t let them read Quran in a language that they can understand and create threat the to authority, spreading ignorance it the most effective tool of destruction and eliminates fear of challenge. For fourteen hundred years, ruthless suppression of Muslimahs has created a nation of ignorant. If a mother is uneducated, ignorant and on the top of it, she is suppressed what type of nation it would create? Just look around - from Morocco to Indonesia. What is the contribution of Muslims having in today’s world? It is not a valid argument that when Europe was living in dark ages Muslims were the top nations of the time – it is not an intelligent reasoning, when Europe came out of dark ages what caused Muslims to take their place. Today billion and half Muslims have nothing to offer. Less than fourteen million Jews control the whole world, to make the argument meaningful, there are 280 Jews Nobel prizewinners in Physics alone as compare to how many Muslims—-? Due to systematic, intentional suppression by these ruthless kings, emperors, dictators and religious nuts who wanted to stay in power, the smart, educated and free spirited Muslims started emigrating. Europe and America were experiencing a new dawn, age of science and technology. The Muslim men, religious leaders, control freak got panic – O, my God, Muslimahs would be going out of our control, they would regain their roll, they would start leading just like Khadijah again and that was not acceptable - the ground work was laid out for centuries ago - Muslimahs were uneducated, ignorant they were imprisoned in homes and in burqas when they were out of the home, had no self esteem. The task to keep them where they belong, was not a challenge, just has to be ingenious, simple and transparent – so these four Imams (millions like them) came up with a simpler and tested idea, confuse them with modesty concept, scare them, point out, look how corrupt western women are? These western women are destroying the society – they were afraid to point out that these women have struggled to gain and created a place in the society

once again, they are winning up hill battle in the male dominated world. Today more then 25% women are corporate CEOs in America and climbing, women are self made billionaires, scientists, engineers, architects, leading in space, fighting in combat – in Scandinavian countries 53% women are leading corporations. Are all these women corrupt, threat to morality? No the real threat is that men would have to share his world with women and it is hard to swallow but for Muslim men and religious goons it is a nightmare. They came up with a novel idea, wrap them in scarf, imprison them in hijab and naqab – slap them with modesty fear, invent more Hadiths, hire more lunatic Imams, give references from Quran – Quran has become most effective tool to create fear – they know for sure, 90% Muslimahs (and Muslims also) have not read Quran in a language that they would expose their false quotations. Just a reference from Quran would shut them up and to that matter everyone else, effectively.

Someday somehow, I hope and pray, soon, the Muslimahs would realize and understand what is their role? Just remaining uneducated and stay within the boundaries Muslim men have created for them would keep them in the same trap. All Mighty has given this unique opportunity to American Muslimahs to become the roll model for Muslimahs of the world. Show the modesty doesn’t come from clothes, it comes from education, it come from heart, it comes from the right roll they would play. Please don’t miss this opportunity – women are mothers of goodness, their main roll is to build nations, the soil where nations sprout. If it is not true than Pakistan should been most an exemplary country or Saudi Arabia where women cannot even drive. Muslim women diving car are against modesty and dignity, give me break.

- Posted by Aslam on July 1, 2010 at 04:33 PM

Saadia, regarding the quote you provided: “The hijab is a way of living in which our families live in privacy and there is separation between private and public space.” I’m not asking about the conceptual background on the “hijab.” I’m asking about the act of covering. This could be both for men and women but because men don’t have to cover their heads, I’m asking about women. Exactly why, if unrelated to sexuality, do women have to cover their hair? What about the hair is such that it must be covered in front of most males?

Aslam, you say: “They came up with a novel idea, wrap them in scarf, imprison them in hijab and naqab – slap them with modesty fear, invent more Hadiths, hire more lunatic Imams, give references from Quran – Quran has become most effective tool to create fear – they know for sure, 90% Muslimahs (and Muslims also) have not read Quran in a language that they would expose their false quotations. Just a reference from Quran would shut them up and to that matter everyone else, effectively.” This is extremely cynical. Most of your post lacks any credibility. I encourage you to rethink this and, if you feel history bears witness to such accusations, then write about it using historical evidence. The way I understand your ideas, it would seem that Muslim women are nothing short of the passive, subservient stereotypes many people say they are. Moreover, the idea of a male conspiracy is simply too easy. I wish it were that simple; at least then we could deal with it more effectively.

- Posted by tucompay1976 on July 1, 2010 at 11:49 PM

“But, it is not an act of worship. It is one of those aspects of law that is essentially rational” This is either really ambiguous or Dr. Faruq who is a very intelligent man is digging himself in a ditch, from which there is no escape. The moment you say its essentially rational is the moment the question arises, “its rational according to whose rationality?” “echo a sentiment that a lot of women are beginning to feel - that modesty and women’s dressing does have to respond to social realities.” Rabea, modesty is no longer a real virtue in our society. Our society values self-assertion, not selfrestraint. This is why Shalit wrote “A return to modesty.” It’s a virtue not really rewarded anymore, not just because of some general selfishness, but also because of the social and economic arrangements in place. So how exactly is modesty supposed to adapt to new social realities? By abandoning itself? Very few suggest that women’s dress shouldn’t adapt in some way. For instance, many Muslim women wear American clothing instead of shalwar kameez or burka. This is adaptation. So the question isn’t adapt versus no adapt, but how to adapt. Using which principles, what methodology? Many people use the methodology of a woman should be able to choose to wear whatever she wants according to how she interprets modesty. That’s not Islam, thats liberalism, and on this point and many

others they are incompatible. Aslam, you are smoking crack buddy. Stop reading your present obsessions into the past. Martha Stewart is no Hazrat Khadija (a.s.).

- Posted by edabdalghafur on July 2, 2010 at 12:07 AM

Tucompay1976 and Asma, thanks for the clarification. As far as the reasons why the four imams agreed that women should cover their hair in public, we need a scholar to answer that question. Dr. Umar’s main focus was to establish a framework in which the question of women taking off their headscarves can be discussed and understood from a compassionate standpoint. But he does talk about (in future installments of the article) the need for both sexes to be modest in public, and to dress distinctly. I assume modesty is a quality valued in Islam because, like humility and generosity, it quiets the ego. But this of course begs the question of why a woman’s hair and not a man’s? From my understanding, the male head covering was traditionally highly revered and stressed as well. But given that bias made its way into some of the doctrine, maybe the male head covering began to be overlooked when it became more difficult for men to cover? And Edabdalghafur, you ask “whose rationality”? I assume that Dr. Umar is speaking about the rational conclusions drawn by the four imams as well as the rational conclusions of the jurists that Dr. Umar talks about (those who do look at the social realities and are able to arrive at legal rulings that respond to the current climate, such as Shaykh Abdullah Bin Bayah). Because the head covering is a rational legal ruling, it can and should respond to social realities. Also I agree that a methodology would be nice - like how low a neck line should be, how tight a man’s pants should be - but I wonder if our need for finite rulings is evidence of a greater lack confidence in ourselves to make our own decisions based on a moral framework that we are all familiar with. For me, I think my hesitance to develop a personal relationship with the religion is a symptom of a lack of familiarity with the spirit of our religion and a lack of confidence in my personal relationship with God. At the end of the day, I should know when I am rationalizing something to myself and whether or not something goes against my gut feeling. Of course, relying on a gut feeling won’t work for all questions of dress. Some of are really easy to answer - like is a floor-length skirt more modest than a knee-length one (both of equal tightness)? Some are harder, like is a knee-length loose skirt more modest than skinny jeans that show

your entire shape from the waist down but cover the skin? For these harder questions, I do agree that some guidelines would be nice! But the actual distillation of those guidelines will need jurists actively engaged in creating workable rulings for our lives here in America. I think we will begin to see this soon enough.

- Posted by Rabea Chaudhry on July 2, 2010 at 12:58 AM

“But the actual distillation of those guidelines will need jurists actively engaged in creating workable rulings for our lives here in America.” I just wonder what people expect when they desire workable rulings for our lives in America. The standard ruling is that a woman cover, everything but her face and hands and not wear form fitting clothing. What’s really supposed to change here? As for finding a rationale. No one should hold their breath here, there is not going to be a single rationale compelling to all reasonable human beings that works in every situation. No rationale is going to convince someone that they must cover their wrists and ankles. That doesn’t mean the hijab is irrational, for we can find using reason benefits to covering, and the value of modesty generally in dress and behavior. The most articulate expression here, suitable to a western mind is probably Shalit’s “A return to Modesty.” It is seeing the benefits to modesty in general that give us reason to accept the divine command of hijab. But for us to understand why hijab as a particular expression of modesty is obligatory, we cannot understand it apart from a divine command. This is why, when Dr. Faruq says its not an act of worship, he’s digging himself into a ditch, or perhaps I’m just misreading him.

- Posted by edabdalghafur on July 2, 2010 at 06:54 PM

@Rabea: >>is a knee-length loose skirt more modest than skinny jeans that show your entire shape from the waist down but cover the skin? As a man, I can say both have the same effect… I do think Umar has tried hard to shy away from admitting that headscarves are all about sexuality. In the

absence of a rational reason, for which in a non-desert climate I can think of very few, it always comes back to sexuality. The conservatives even proclaim this loud for all to hear (and to obey). Also, Aslam is not so far off the mark: the greatest disaster to our formerly simple religion was that the religion died the very day that it became an empire. Our religion, like many others, became little more than a tool for the elites, and such a shame, too. Lastly, as a man, I don’t feel under any obligation to wear any sort of head covering, or some ridiculouslooking kufi or any other item of foreign fashions of yesteryear. Muslim women *choose* themselves (in Muslim America, at least) to wear a distinguishing head cover, thus its all on them and not on the men. I do, however, feel strongly against us guys wearing tight clothes and other such immodest behaviors. I’ll give you that.

- Posted by OmarG on July 3, 2010 at 02:34 AM

Omar, I want to offer a bit of advice. Let’s maintain a respectful attitude towards difference. “Ridiculouslooking kufi or any other item of…yesteryear.” That is a fairly polemical statement that reflects the same attitude offered by liberals who have very little interest in understanding who they share the world with. Let’s be fair, shall we?

- Posted by tucompay1976 on July 4, 2010 at 07:33 PM

No. I can still respect the people who wear such so-called “religious garb” without respecting the concept, which I will not and need not. Ridiculous is what ridiculous is. Its mere identity politics.

- Posted by OmarG on July 4, 2010 at 10:52 PM

I am happy that someone wants to understand what the rationale behind the hijab is, if it is not a form of worship, or a a way to hide sexuality, then what exactly is it??

I am leaning towards the way to hide a woman’s sexuality in which case I would like to ask any guy who is willing to answer if he has ever been attracted to a woman in a hijab? Now I’m pretty sure it isn’t out of the realm of possibilities that men are in fact still attracted to women even when they hide their hair… the next argument is that a man will respect a women who is wearing Hijab enough to treat her with respect and dignity. I for one do not wear the Hijab and find that being treated with respect and dignity should be reserved for all not just those who choose to cover their hair, so are we not actually socially crippling our men by teaching them that the Hijab is what they should respect rather then just people in general, and in this specific example women.

- Posted by ma2010 on July 7, 2010 at 09:14 PM

Dear Omar, The statement that “ridiculous is what ridiculous is” is ridiculous. Pardon the criticism but I believe we have an obligation to keep the level of discourse on this site within the realm of defensible and, more importantly, interesting debate. I appreciate your sincerity about the kufi but it doesn’t help us understand anything to learn about what you believe is ridiculous. The head scarf is a complex issue. I am beginning to think that we are beyond the point where we can come to a meaningful conclusion about its relevance in Muslim women’s lives. Perhaps the issue is too agenda-driven for any satisfying answers. I’ll remain open.

- Posted by tucompay1976 on July 7, 2010 at 09:37 PM

@ma2010: >> I would like to ask any guy who is willing to answer if he has ever been attracted to a woman in a hijab? For sure, how not! I, too, am not sure how hair can be an awrah. I personally do not find it so more than other attributes. Other men may indeed, perhaps, so your mileage may vary. @tucompany1976: Well, walking around a modern American city dressed like a Bedouin is as ridiculous as walking around a Bedouin camp in shorts and a halter top. Its relative, and although I regret that it may

lower the level of discourse, perhaps the discourse is too abstract and some plain common sense a la Thomas Paine is in order.

- Posted by OmarG on July 7, 2010 at 09:58 PM

The entire debate over the meaning of the head scarf—one in which I am admittedly engaged in—has rested on the question “why?” This is a valid question, to be sure, that asks the authorities capable of explaining the act of covering to do so in terms of what “reason” or “ideas” support the practice. Perhaps the question could be framed in a different way such that we begin to speak with the women who cover their hair. We can ask women, for example, “what” covering their hair means to them from an experiential view. This seems like a much richer discussion since it shifts the question of “covering” from the realm of ideas (reasons) to that of experience. This will probably shed more light on the question of “covering” than any other approach. This, I believe, was addressed in a previous article on this sight about why women didn’t wear the hijab (referring to the head scarf).

- Posted by tucompay1976 on July 8, 2010 at 03:04 PM

Page 1 of 2 1 2 > (page 2 not on archive, so not available

SCHOLAR DR. UMAR FARUQ ABD-ALLAH

Part 2: Dr. Umar Faruq Abd-Allah on hijabs and headscarves

BY RABEA CHAUDHRY, JULY 2, 2010

I recently had the opportunity to interview Dr. Umar Faruq Abd-Allah, Chairman of the Board & Scholar-in-Residence at the Nawawi Foundation, a non-profit educational foundation based in Chicago, Illinois. Dr. Abd-Allah offered me his insights into the growing phenomenon of Muslim women taking off their headscarves. The first part of the four-part interview can be readhere. The second part of the interview follows: When talking about the Muslim woman’s obligation to cover, I have heard community leaders stress that a Muslim woman should think of herself as an ambassador of our community. This places a lot of responsibility on the shoulders of our women. It does. Especially at a time like this when Islam is so suspect and when ignorance about Islam and fear about Islam permeates many Western societies. Muslim women are often feared to be Jihadis and to be terrorists just because they have on an item of dress. If she goes for an interview for a job it may be very difficult for her to get that. If she’s a little girl in school, the other children don’t really know how to associate with her. So you’ve really put a big burden on her. Now, if we lived in a society like 19th century Victorian America, a Muslim woman covering her head would have hardly raised an eyebrow. That was what a lot of women still did. And if you go back further than that, almost all women were covering their heads. But today because of the fact that in modern society women are often very much exposed physically in the way that they dress, when a Muslim woman begins to cover her body and put on a scarf she does stand out. She

becomes a symbol for the community and that being the case, men should also do something comparable so that you can see this is the Muslim man and it is not just the woman who stands out. Without stressing that our men begin dressing in a way that does identify them as members of our community, the burden that our women carry is way too heavy. Without sharing this burden with our women, we are making our women’s lives outside the home very difficult. This is dangerous because we should be active in society, we need to be out there, we need to be at the table so to speak, because if we are not at the table then we are on the menu. We have to be at the table, and we should live in society as a group. When our women are out there in their scarves, it becomes easy to wonder if this is a community of hidden males. And what is really interesting about this point is that because some of our men are concealing their Muslim identity in public and many of our women are exposing their identity by wearing a scarf, this becomes a violation of the basic principle of hijab because the woman is very private. The rules of hijab that divide our living space into public and private reflect that the woman, the baby and the child are the primary elements of that private sector. Let me be clear, of course she can come out in the public sector but she comes out wearing a scarf. And our men can come out in the public sector but they come out also dressing in a particular way. So when only our women come out dressed a particular way, then they are suddenly forced to become very public and the men who are not dressed a particular way can remain private. When a Muslim woman in a scarf is coming out into public and she is totally exposed, the man is now in hijab. He is in hijab. She’s not in hijab. She’s wearing a scarf yes, but if we know what hijab really is, the man is in hijabbecause he’s hidden. You can’t see him, you don’t know if he’s a Muslim or Hindu, you don’t know if he’s an Arab Muslim, an Arab Jew, an Arab Christian or just white. The man is in hijab. That is what hijab means – he is hidden from the public eye. She is not. She is the one who is absolutely out there, everybody knows it, so that’s hard for her to bear. Getting the men into the dress issue is extremely important; we should have items of dress that we want our men to wear too. And again, all of this must be done with style and beauty and finesse. But to the degree that any type of distinctive dress is a mark of identity in society, whether we intend it to be or not, then men have to also carry that mark. They also have to be a

public expression of that identity. I think that if we do that then over 50% of the problem is solved; maybe the whole problem is solved because then it becomes much easier on the women. I agree with you. When the duty of public representation of Islam is placed on our women, we are forced to deal with pressures and stresses that are often too difficult for us to bear. This is something that the men should be blamed for because we are physiologically and psychologically different. We [men] are people who God created to be able to confront difficulty and to alleviate the public pressure off of our women and I think the reason this is so difficult for women is because they are out there by themselves. Now, this is not the case for all women. There are women who are not broken by this pressure, and I think that this makes for women who are very strong. I know myself that I really admire any sister who wears the scarf in public and dresses in the proper dress according to Islamic Law. But I also know of girls and women who developed big psychological issues because of the fact that they feel so out of place wearing the scarf. So when a jurist, a legist, in Islam, comes to talk about this issue, he is nothing if he does not look at these problems that are associated with it and the lived experiences of these women. And in acknowledging the fact that men and women are different and have different strengths, it is important to remember that men and women are equal in rights, men and women are equal in nobility, men and women are equal in spiritual capacity but we are very different. We are as different as night and day, we are as different as yin and yang. And that is the beauty and the secret of God’s creation. And the man is able to carry in public what he is supposed to carry. So if there is a burden you give me 90% and if you like you can carry 10. But for me to put 90% on you and to carry 10 myself, what in the world is that? How undignified, how shameful. Rabea Chaudhry is Associate Editor of Altmuslimah Print-friendly | Email this |

26 COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE

Digg this |

Tweet this | Share on Facebook

We try to remove any comments that do not conform to our netiquette guidelines. If any comments remain that are in violation, please let us know. The presence of offending comments does not necessarily reflect the views of the editors of altmuslimah.com

“There are women who are not broken by this pressure, and I think that this makes for women who are very strong. I know myself that I really admire any sister who wears the scarf in public and dresses in the proper dress according to Islamic Law. But I also know of girls and women who developed big psychological issues because of the fact that they feel so out of place wearing the scarf. etc…” This is an offensive paragraph. It makes women who do not wear hijab sound weak and pathetic. I know that in many Muslim communities around the world and in the West, the hijab has become a symbol of being a “good girl” that many women are psychologically broken by NOT wearing it, and end up taking the headscarf on because they are sick of being outcasts. It takes a lot of strength to BE a Muslim woman with or without hijab.

- Posted by cancairo on July 2, 2010 at 04:57 PM

I think you’re absolutely right Cancairo, it does take a lot of strength to be a Muslim woman. But I think it’s important to take Dr. Umar’s quote in the specific context in which it was delivered - he was speaking specifically about the struggles of Muslim women in the West in headscarves - not because their struggles are more important than the struggles of women who do not wear the headscarf, but because this is the particular topic that I interviewed him about. He was not talking about the difficulties in self-identifying as Muslim in this society or globally, he was talking just about the difficulties of publicly looking “Muslim” here in America. And just because he is acknowledging that American Muslim women in headscarves deal with a great deal of social pressures because of their very public display of identity does not mean in any way that he is saying that women who are not in a headscarf are weak. Supporting sisters who wear it does and acknowledging the strength it takes to wear it does not mean that he is not supportive of women who do not wear it. In fact, quite the opposite I think.

- Posted by Rabea Chaudhry on July 2, 2010 at 05:44 PM

*The last sentence should read: Supporting sisters who wear it and acknowledging the strength it takes to wear it does not mean that he is not supportive of women who do not wear it. In fact, quite the opposite I think.

- Posted by Rabea Chaudhry on July 2, 2010 at 05:46 PM

cancairo truth is west thinks muslim womens are weak and they live under pressure of their family .They think our women hate our religion and its rituals actually 30 to 40 percent think like this and banning hijab is just a part of long going crusade its not over ..hijab is banned in france because they dont want muslims to folllow their religion. one muslim woman in france was assaulted in a market by a female lawyer because she was wearing scarf .One was stabbed to death in a court of germany and nobody dis domething and police even shot his husband who ran towards her wife to save her .They are doing brain washing of their population nobody know whats cana nobody knows how many civilians were killed in gaza by a terrorist nation israel.They(goverment of europe and america) simply hate muslims truth is this you cannot hide from this fact . They dont want islam to gain strength in europe at all .They made turkey their ally because they want to impose all of these stupid and non sensical rules in a muslim country .. why they dont stop jews to wear their caps . muslim women just wear scarf and they think this is violating the rights of a women come on she is wearing it because she wanna wear it ...then comes drawing mohammed what about this they just want to disturb the peace actually they do the sins and after doing that they blame every single evil deed on muslims ..muslims fight muslim this muslim that .shut up cant you show freedom of speech by speaking against your goverment who is killing and killing civilians in palestine and middle east .they say hamas is firing rockets in israel on civilians and a american marine who was in flotilla said in bbc “how many people can you kill by a home made rocket and they are firing rockets in illegaly settled israel and in retaliation israel fire jdams on them which kills at least 200 civilians and they is no ones or when ever it makes it to news you just see in the closing lines that there were some civilians who also came in radius of the bomb”.open your eyes open it please

- Posted by zainhusain on July 3, 2010 at 11:21 PM

The Catholic Church in France has warned against government plans to ban full veils on Muslim women in the country, urging mutual respect between faiths. “If we want Christian minorities in Muslim majority countries to enjoy all their rights, we should in our country respect the rights of all believers to practice their faith,” Bishop Michel Santier, the top French Catholic official for inter-religious dialogue, was quoted as saying by Reuters and the UK’s Daily Mail. He said very few women in France wore full veils and Muslim leaders agreed it was not obligatory in Islam, according to the Mail. A parliamentary commission last week urged the National Assembly to pass a non-binding resolution condemning full veils and then work out a law banning them. If Paris passed a law, Santier said, “the result could be the opposite of what is desired and lead to a reaction that increases the number of women wearing this garment. “A dialogue in truth among believers will help us go beyond mutual mistrust. The path will be long and hard,” he said. French Jewish leaders have also expressed concern about a veil ban, the report said. Santier regretted that the parliamentary commission did not invite Christian or Jewish leaders to give their views during the six-month-long hearings, which ended in December.

- Posted by zainhusain on July 3, 2010 at 11:34 PM

So a woman is no longer in a state of hijab when she goes out in public wearing the head scarf? It seems, according to Dr. Umar, that a woman wearing a headscarf is drawing more attention to herself by putting on this garment and as a consequence she is not living in privacy but is “out there” for everyone to look at, both as a Muslim and as an attractive female. What then is the purpose of a head scarf? This item of clothing almost seems, according to the interviewee, to pull one away from the state of privacy prescribed by Allah…could the writer please clarify?

- Posted by Zumar on July 4, 2010 at 01:59 AM

Men already have an item that sets them apart from the unbelievers. It’s called a beard. If more of them wore a traditional beard, us sisters wouldn’t have to bear the burden. Now I know some brothers simply can’t grow much of a beard. But there are plenty who can but choose not. And those who do not grow a beard, do not waste your time telling me if there is some deficiency you perceive in my wardrobe (and yes I do wear hijab). I will not listen until you grow a beard.

- Posted by Revertive on July 5, 2010 at 12:51 AM

@Zumar: You asked: “So a woman is no longer in a state of hijab when she goes out in public wearing the head scarf?” It does seem that given the public/private distinction that is at the heart of the hijab, a woman in a headscarf, who is put in the spotlight given the current sociopolitical situation, is no longer in private. Thus, Dr. Umar suggests that men step up their role as public representatives of the community by publicly identifying as Muslims in their dress so that women in a headscarf can be shielded from the scrutiny. You also ask: “It seems, according to Dr. Umar, that a woman wearing a headscarf is drawing more attention to herself by putting on this garment and as a consequence she is not living in privacy but is “out there” for everyone to look at, both as a Muslim and as an attractive female. What then is the purpose of a head scarf?” What is clear from the interview is that the purpose of the head scarf is NOT to put a woman in harm’s way, but to protect her. So if the head scarf functions in a manner that will put her in harm’s way, it is no longer serving its function and the community must respond. Here, Dr. Umar advocates for Muslim men to begin identifying as Muslim in their dress to provide support for the women. According to Dr. Umar, the headscarf is mandatory according to the four imams. I’m assuming that the rationality of the head

covering stems from the desire to maintain adab and humility amongst the sexes.

- Posted by Rabea Chaudhry on July 5, 2010 at 02:44 AM

i like that Dr Faruq is giving value to women’s experiences and women’s narratives!

- Posted by safiyyah on July 5, 2010 at 10:14 AM

“Men already have an item that sets them apart from the unbelievers. It’s called a beard. If more of them wore a traditional beard, us sisters wouldn’t have to bear the burden.”-Revertive Several non-Muslim religious men sport beards-examples would be Orthodox Jews or Amish Christians among many others. Beards are not obligatory in Islam. They are encouraged but are not requirements of faith.

- Posted by katseye on July 5, 2010 at 02:48 PM

As I understand it, one cannot follow the Qur’an without the Sunnah. The Sunnah says to grow a beard. Therefore, a beard is required. But if a beard isn’t enough, men wearing highwater pants should be. This is also Sunnah.

- Posted by Revertive on July 5, 2010 at 04:07 PM

>>advocates for Muslim men to begin identifying as Muslim in their dress HOW exactly am I supposed to do that? By adopting someone *else’s* cultural dress, just because those clothes are from a so-called Muslim-majority ethnicity?? Really? Didn’t Dr Jackson who spoke alongside

Umar at the RIS last month also assert that converts should not have to commit cultural suicide just to be considered good Muslims? I see this as merely yet another attempt at foreign Muslim cultures trying to imperialize and colonize us. The same old crap in another garb. BTW, I love almost everything Umar says and writes, but the responses to this specific suggestion simply irritates me. Listen, I’m tired of hearing about women who complain about having to wear hijab while we don’t have to be identified as they are. Listen, its YOUR choice. I sympathize with women who jog in a scarf in the summer, but she CHOSE to do it; nothing more I can do there. Personal choice is personal choice, not the burden of someone else, let alone a stranger who happens to be the same religion as her, but not connected in any other way. The Quran itself asserts that no soul can bear the burden of another. You made your seat, now sit in it and take it like an adult!

- Posted by OmarG on July 6, 2010 at 04:42 PM

OmarG, I completely disagree with your statement that a woman’s choice to wear a scarf is always HER choice. As Dr. Umar very eloquently stated in part I of the article, because a woman’s head covering has been conflated with so many other issues - such as identity, a woman’s worth, modest, etc. - the element of choice is slowly taken away. A man’s choice to wear the beard or not wear the beard is arguably much more of a choice - there is an established narrative that the beard is “just Sunnah”, that shaving the beard for job interviews is acceptable because we have to be a part of this society. But where is this established narrative when it comes to a woman’s choice to wear a scarf? I have been looking for it for about three years now and I haven’t found it!

- Posted by Rabea Chaudhry on July 6, 2010 at 05:07 PM

You can simply not wear it. In America, it is much more of a choice than in many other countries. Sure, there may be social consequences with or without family support. There is also the canard that Muslim women are increasingly “choosing” hijab and such women write articles about how they chose to wear hijab without male pressure.

Yet, my point stands true: women can choose to stand up for themselves and make their own choices, or they can choose to concede to social pressures, real or perceived (depending on which mosque community one belongs to). Its their choice to do either, and I’m not really concerned with either. I just won’t be bullied by the hijab brigade into dressing with alien clothes just to make life easier for them. I already make their lives easier by fulfilling my obligation to support the ones I’m related to. I’m not going to make my own life any more difficult than it already is to satisfy females I’m not even related to. They have to do that on their own.

- Posted by OmarG on July 6, 2010 at 06:16 PM

It’s not optional for me to stop wearing hijab. I cannot break an order of Allah, any more than I could stop making salaat. But it’s ok if you see me as a burden OmarG. That attitude I am used to.

- Posted by Revertive on July 6, 2010 at 06:37 PM

There is no order from Allah about head scarves. The only order in the Quran is for women to drawl their shawls over their chests so they don’t show their cleavage. Head scarves are mentioned, implied actually, in a hadith where the Prophet is purported to say to a woman that she should cover everything except “this and this” pointing to his face and hands. People are burdens only when they refuse personal accountability and won’t carry their own weight. I know nothing about you and you should not take it personally.

- Posted by OmarG on July 6, 2010 at 06:48 PM

BTW, prayer and head scarves don’t even come close to being in the same category. That’s a big problem.

- Posted by OmarG on July 6, 2010 at 06:48 PM

Obviously, if we are ordered to draw our head coverings over our breasts we have to be wearing a head cover in order to fulfill the command.

- Posted by Revertive on July 6, 2010 at 07:05 PM

But, that’s an inference. And, if its that important, where is the explicit order for it?? I can’t recall anything important in our religion which is left purely to inference. Not being mean is a pretty common sense inference, but its mentioned explicitly over and over again in both the Quran and the sunnah. Yet, something so important as covering a woman’s hair is just left out?? I find that hard to believe.

- Posted by OmarG on July 6, 2010 at 07:14 PM

Brother, it’s in the Sunnah. Also, covering the hair is found in Judaism and Christianity, so it’s not like the concept is alien to Islam. Regardless it’s not inference. Inference is assuming the ears and neck are also covered. But the order specifically says to pull our head coverings so that they also cover our bosoms. The order is not just to cover our heads, nor is it to cover our bosoms, but to do both at the same time with the same article of clothing.

- Posted by Revertive on July 6, 2010 at 07:23 PM

SCHOLAR DR. UMAR FARUQ ABD-ALLAH

Part 3: Dr. Umar Faruq Abd-Allah on hijabs and headscarves

BY RABEA CHAUDHRY, JULY 5, 2010

I recently had the opportunity to interview Dr. Umar Faruq Abd-Allah, Chairman of the Board & Scholar-in-Residence at the Nawawi Foundation, a non-profit educational foundation based in Chicago, Illinois. Dr. Abd-Allah offered me his insights into the growing phenomenon of Muslim women taking off their headscarves. The first part of the four-part interview can be readhere and the second part of the four-part interview can be readhere. The third part of the interview follows: And if Muslim woman does find it too difficult to wear a scarf in public, can she still be modest? Can she be spiritual? Yes, absolutely a woman can be modest without the scarf. Many American women – Jews, Christians, Muslims – are very proper and very modest. So, to label a sister who does not cover her hair as immodest, it’s like why? To say that you should wear the scarf because it’s an obligation and to say that it would be very dignified if you wore it, that’s another thing. But to make a moral judgment against her because she does not wear the scarf, that’s not right. The only judgment you can make against her is a legal judgment and that is that it is an obligation to wear the scarf and you didn’t fulfill that obligation. From the standpoint of the law, you cannot judge her interior. You cannot judge her heart. All you can say is that outwardly she has failed to fulfill her obligation. Then we have to ask legally, “Why didn’t you fulfill that obligation?”

Maybe she has a justification for that, maybe she doesn’t. Maybe she has the strength to do that, maybe she doesn’t. God says in the Qur’an “Obey God to the degree that you’re able.” So if she’s not able to fulfill that obligation because it is too much of a burden for her, the psychological burden for her is too great, then she’s justified in not fulfilling that obligation. She may still be a perfectly modest women who has the highest moral integrity and we cannot pass judgment on her. This is just as we cannot say that a woman who is covering her hair is a woman of integrity, because she may not be. That’s another question all together. We can only say that [a woman wearing a scarf in public has] fulfilled an obligation. Is she an honest woman? Is she a chaste woman? We can’t tell that from her wearing a scarf. We can’t make that judgment. And many women who don’t wear scarves are very, very good Muslims and a number of Muslim scholars in the Muslim world have noted that, and they’ve even said, “Don’t make judgments against women who don’t cover their hair.” And it may be that they pray five times a day and fast during Ramadan and fulfill all of their obligations, but it may be too difficult for them to fulfill the obligation to cover. The scarf must be nothing but an item of clothing. We cannot blow it up and conflate into the scarf issue all these other things. For instance, if we go back and talk about the way it was when there was slavery in the Muslim world, Muslim slave women were not required to wear scarves. Now, this is a difficult issue to talk about because slavery has been universally condemned in the modern age, but if we look just at the question of slave women not wearing scarves and covering their hair, this was in all the schools of law to my knowledge and yet these women were Muslims and they were extremely pious Muslims in many cases. The whole issue of what it means to cover your hair, it should not involve any kind of moral judgment. In Islam we measure outward conformities in terms of whether or not you have fulfilled an obligation, whether or not you have fulfilled something that is recommended, or neutral, or if you have done something that is disliked or forbidden. Islamic law cannot go beyond that and this is one of its redeeming features - that the law is not making moral judgments on people. It is not saying who’s going to Heaven and who’s going to Hell. It is only saying that if you want to obey God, you should do such and such. And all of us ask the forgiveness of God because there is no one among us who fulfills all the obligations.

After all, we are all human beings and legal judgments in Islam are never moral judgments. To think that they are, this is misinformation. And this is what the people of the cognitive frame of hijab as identity have done. They have mixed the whole thing up. This cognitive frame that a woman who doesn’t cover her hair is immodest is an ideological weapon that has been used to give a woman no choice: if you don’t wear this you’re bad. But in Islamic law we can’t make that judgment. This is what Dr. Sherman Jackson has talked about very eloquently when he talks about the misuse of the terms “Islamic” and “un-Islamic” because in Islamic law there is no such thing as “Islamic” and “un-Islamic”. There is obligatory, recommended, neutral, disliked, and forbidden. These are the legal categories and that’s all we can say about an act. When we use the word “Islamic” to describe someone’s actions, that becomes a very loaded term and that person is seen as a really good person and someone acting in a way that is “un-Islamic” is seen as a bad person. These terms are strategies to manipulate people’s behavior. [This] is why we need to set the cognitive frames and we need to deconstruct these false cognitive frames and we need to be very careful about making these moral judgments about other people. We say [an act] is obligatory, recommended, neutral, disliked or forbidden. That’s the way we speak. Again we are people who are dignified and who are people of integrity. And the rules of the law to me and to you and to us are blessed and sacred. I don’t take Islamic law lightly at all. But for me to break an obligation may be obligatory sometimes. There are some times when you have to draw exceptions because of circumstances. And even if that’s not the case, and I violate something I should not have violated, and all of us ask forgiveness thousands of times every year, then in that case in the end it is much better to break a rule than to break your psyche. A broken rule is easily repaired. We just say, “I ask your forgiveness God, what did I do? I am sorry, I am on my hands and knees crying. Forgive me!” God will forgive you a broken rule with such ease and such beauty. But a broken psyche, how can you ever mend that? And I have seen that and no doubt you have seen that more than I. I have seen women who really their psyches are broken or almost broken because of the rigidity of a community that has no understanding of how it practices Islam. And it requires her to bear this sociological and cultural burden that the man never carries or rarely carries. So here she is under siege in society. She’s got enough problems as it is and she’s under siege and he’s happy go lucky. He can go where he wants to go, he can mix with whom he wants

to mix with. That’s not right, that’s not fair. Rabea Chaudhry is Associate Editor of Altmuslimah Print-friendly | Email this |

Digg this |

Tweet this | Share on Facebook

33 COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE We try to remove any comments that do not conform to our netiquette guidelines. If any comments remain that are in violation, please let us know. The presence of offending comments does not necessarily reflect the views of the editors of altmuslimah.com

Dr. Faruq makes some very important points here. Yes, there is a difference between whether or not you fulfill any particular obligation and a judgement of one’s overall character. One must be extremely careful when jumping from one to the other because, for instance, their might be a valid excuse as to why a particular person fails to meet an obligation. Also, we should be hesitant to make such judgments of character because often obligations can be extremely difficult to fulfill and we may underestimate what is entailed, and further because of our own sinfulness. We don’t want to be guilty of hypocrisy. So for those reasons compassion is called for. However, to separate the fulfillment of obligations, legal and otherwise, from judgments of character altogether, this is a different matter. Judgments of character cannot be reduced to the fulfillment of legal obligations, but they also are not independent of the fulfillment of legal obligations. One cannot be negligent with respect to one’s legal obligations and expect a favorable judgement of character. But of course one needs solid evidence of negligence before such a judgment can be made. One question that might arise, is the following, if we say that wearing a headscarf is too difficult for many women because of the social alienation entailed (which seems entirely plausible), what level of dress can we expect from Muslim women, before a judgment of negligence is justified (with respect to hijab)? If a woman wears sleeveless shirts, or tight pants, or a shirt with a low neckline, what prima facie reason do we have to assume something other than negligence? Certainly, a woman has a choice to wear other more modest clothes that wouldn’t incur the social alienation of a headscarf.

My point in saying this isn’t to say we should all go out and rail on women who wear such items of clothing. It’s to say that when we call for tolerance, we shouldn’t do it in the liberal way, which too often amounts to, “well it really doesn’t matter what you wear, its all up to you anyway, and its your choice.” Such an attitude while it might creates a certain kind of tolerance, ultimately undermines hijab rather than supports it. The bottom line is that you can be tolerant in a different ways. Tolerance can stem from an attitude of indifference or an attitude that recognizes a particular ideal and obligation but recognizes human frailty or the other and oneself. One is nihilistic, the other compassionate.

- Posted by edabdalghafur on July 5, 2010 at 12:32 PM

This whole article is very eloquent and very understanding. However, has several assumptions in its articulation of the argument. The main one is of course is that that there is such a thing as “Islamic dress”. Islam is not political ideology or nationalistic entity, it doesn’t have boundaries, does not operate on the assumption that only people ... See Morefrom particular land/s can be adherents of Islam and most importantly does not have a particular “dress”. As a matter of fact Muslims in Eastern Europe and many other places simply wore their NATIONAL clothes which did not necessarily include hair covering for women. And note, that ‘ulama that came out of those areas had NO problem whatsoever with their “women’s struggle to cover up”, in fact the idea of “Muslim dress” seemed ridiculous to them. This idea that religion has a certain dress code in Islamic context occurred in the middle of 20th century with the raise of political version of Islam which started articulating the religion using widely used nationalistic framework. As a Muslim woman who chose not to cover anymore I affirm everyone that it was not because hijab was a “burden” for me that I discontinued covering my hair, but because I refuse to buy the new simplified and literal interpretation of scriptures. Religions main goal is get us in touch with spirituality and there is no political outwardly declaration of faith necessary to be Muslim, Christian or anybody else. So please be careful with this new term of “Islamic cress”.

- Posted by SofiaM. on July 5, 2010 at 03:47 PM

@SofiaM. Could not have said it better myself. Fully agree!

- Posted by Sobia on July 5, 2010 at 07:59 PM

While I appreciate the Dr. Abd-Allah’s attempt to alleviate some of the unfair judgment placed on women, I respectfully and completely disagree with the main premise of his argument: “The only judgment you can make against her is a legal judgment and that is that it is an obligation to wear the scarf and you didn’t fulfill that obligation.” There is no judgment to be made against her, period. For two main reasons: 1) there is no absolute legal authority on Islam, and therefore, no absolute legal ruling on hijab/scarf, and 2) stating that even ONE kind of judgment is allowed by a regular person, with a “legal” basis, is faulty and destructive. If his argument is to separate the types of judgment one can make, into personal and legal judgments: 1) Where is the main authority to claim hijab/scarf is obligatory? What legitimate legal authority exists that we use to derive fiqh/Islamic jurisprudence? He has argued many times against taking scholarly majority opinion as the end all for fiqh/Islamic jurisprudence, so it seems strange to me that this is what’s even alluded to. (i.e.; he usually calls for embracing pluralism: the fact that niqab/face veil is seen as obligatory by a group of scholars does not negate the opinion by other scholars that it is not. In the same breath, a group of scholars that opine hijab/scarf to be obligatory does NOT negate the opinion by other scholars that it is not.) Surprisingly, he seems to imply very early on that there is no question or doubt that hijab/scarf is an obligation, because the rest of argument relies on that assumption. 2) Even if a so-called legitimate legal authority existed to tell us what to wear, how is it liberating/useful/progressive for him to give the allowance of judgment to a regular person? “From the standpoint of law” (not sure what that means), of what use is the regular person’s judgment? You can’t sue the woman, imprison her, or do anything to her because as a regular person you’ve judged that she is not fulfilling her obligation. This is only inadvertently furthering the notion that we need to be concerned with OTHER Muslims to be fulfilling our own obligations. His argument takes an open doorway for discussion (with a very open-ended question posed) about complex Muslim womens issues and our community’s religious dogmatism, but closes it with an argument that continues to focus on ANALYZING a woman’s behavior. Some other issues also bugged me. What’s the purpose in judging each other, whether its personal or

legal, and where is the call by our Creator to do so? It doesn’t exist. Fiqh/Islamic Jurisprudence was created to provide an easier structure for daily life and a framework for people to practice their faith, by taking abstract values mentioned in the Qur’an and making them more practical. Too many loopholes in his responses for me to regard this as progressive as his other pieces, like the “Cultural Imperative” article.

- Posted by Dina B. on July 5, 2010 at 11:49 PM

@Dina B. I wish women in our community like you and Sobia were more vocal about this issue, although I understand if you feel similar to me that this whole “Islamic dress” thing is overblown and overrated. I have this feeling that as usual it’s Muslim men who blows this thing out of proportion and makes some unprecedented illogical statements, like Dina gracefully pointed out. To be honest I don’t believe that Dr. Abd-Allah is even trying to “alleviate” any unfair judgments. How does anyone “alleviate” judgments by feeling sorry for another indivudual’s informed and fully valid decisions? If he wanted alleviate anything he would be telling to leave this issue for women to deal with, hijab is just a dress that some females chose to wear and it does not represent anything except maybe a functionality (you can pray anywhere you want at any time given that you held your wudu’ long enough). Sorry for posting again, you obviously can probably tell I feel strongly about this issue. Thank you.

- Posted by SofiaM. on July 6, 2010 at 01:00 AM

First of all, I do not think that Dr. AbdAllahs argument was that you canNOT legally judge a woman. His main argument was that outward conformities are either adhered to or they aren’t. When a women wears hijab, she either is or she isn’t -Its something very visible. She is either adhering to that ruling or she is not. He reiterated quite a few times that there are no judgments to be made, period. I think he would agree that one person cannot “judge” another as Allah swt is the only One to judge. Dina, in regards to your comment- I’ll reply in number form to make it simpler. 1) If you truly feel that it is not an obligation under Islam to wear hijab, then that is your opinion which

you’re of course, entitled to. However, for you to “negate” the opinions of not just a group of scholars but generations and generations of scholars is not appropriate. There will always be a difference of opinion in any matter. For example, “halal/zabiha” meat- If you don’t eat zabiha meat and believe that the meat in the US is “halal” because it is from “people of the book” then by all means, it is halal for YOU. But if I am of the other opinion that all meat in the US is not from people of the book and is not “halal” then we would have a difference in opinion. You can’t try to shove meat that I don’t believe is halal down my throat, the same way I wouldn’t throw your meat in the trash to prevent you from eating it since YOU truly believe its halal. But our intentions have alot of worth. Our TRUE intentions matter a great deal in Islam. I have read alot of what you have written about hijab and sometimes it leaves me offended because the tone in which you write almost makes the women that wear hijab look like they must be backward, male-controlled zombies that lack the intellect to delve into their own faiths. Millions of women wear hijab across the globe and we also wear it for prayer for a reason. When we pray we are in our most pure state, wudoo, covered, etc@Sofia M - To state that hijab is a “functionality” only for prayer and does not represent anything is highly insulting and confusing. If it does not represent anything, then why bother to wear it during prayer either? 2) There is no universal “hijab police” that sits around judging people (although charlotte might be an exception Dina =D). Everyone has bad habits and Muslims are no exception to this. Its none of our business to be sitting around judging people. I agree that there is no purpose to judge one another but some things are quite evident. If I see someone drink alcohol - It is an observation/fact-not a judgment. If I attempted to judge that person, its meaningless as I cannot “sue,imprison” or do anything to them. I have always been of the opinion that hijab is an aspect of Islam. A small aspect. Its one of a thousand facets of our faith and probably does not fall high on the list. I agree that people put WAY too much emphasis on hijab when our practice of our basic pillars of islam are falling short- 5 daily prayers, zakat, hajj. We can ignore our brothers and sisters for days/weeks/years out of pride over disagreements but have a heart attack if a single strand of hair escapes our hijab - Islam is not just about our outward appearance. You can paint a broken car ten different times with ten different colors but in the end it will still be broken. Allah knows best.

- Posted by IsraN on July 6, 2010 at 02:24 AM

@SofiaM. Thanks for your thoughts, and I agree with your posts. Believe me, I am vocal about these issues… but only to the extent that it womens rights are much more than we focus on. @IsraN No offense was intended in my article. And nowhere do I put down women who used to wear hijab/scarf, so I’m not sure where you’re coming from. I commend women who fight for their right for liberty. Freedom to make the choices they want, not in response to judgment but in service and love to their Creator. The Most High knows best.

- Posted by Dina B. on July 6, 2010 at 02:37 AM

excuse me… love *for* their Creator.

- Posted by Dina B. on July 6, 2010 at 02:40 AM

Although my earlier post notes a lot of the issues I had with his response, there was a gem that I love in this. My favorite part of his response: “...But a broken psyche, how can you ever mend that? And I have seen that and no doubt you have seen that more than I. I have seen women who really their psyches are broken or almost broken because of the rigidity of a community that has no understanding of how it practices Islam. And it requires her to bear this sociological and cultural burden that the man never carries or rarely carries. So here she is under siege in society. She’s got enough problems as it is and she’s under siege and he’s happy go lucky. He can go where he wants to go, he can mix with whom he wants to mix with. That’s not right, that’s not fair.”

- Posted by Dina B. on July 6, 2010 at 02:47 AM

I think a lot of what Dr Umar has said is known already _ how many times have we heard from so many people and leaders in our communities that hijab doesn’t define how “good” a woman is and that we shouldn’t judge her. But then, if a Muslim woman who doesnt wear hijab applies to teach at the local Islamic school she is told she must adhere to hijab in class, or refused the job. A lot of it is lip service and theoretical. Muslims still have a long way to go before internalizing Also, differing opinions on hijab is not the same as differing opinions on halal meat. Muslims have made hijab a symbol of identity and resistance, not just religion. Muslim women, when learning about hijab before choosing to take it on, are not given options on what other scholars have said about hijab _ it’s only fard, period. Any other scholar who says otherwise, or even just opens the door that covering the hair may not be an obligation, is dismissed as a corrupt or western-backed scholar who is causing fitna, even if their educational backgrounds are sound. Many women who chose to take off their hijabs did so after careful study, because it’s not an easy thing to do. Not all of them have “broken psyches” and to dismiss their choice because they thought it was just a “burden” is insulting. I don’t feel bad for women in hijab; I just feel bad that we are not really given the background story, real reasons etc why we wear hijab.

- Posted by cancairo on July 6, 2010 at 11:55 AM

Dear IsraN, I am not the one proposing that scarf is just a piece of clothing. In fact if you read carefully in the article Dr Umar states “The scarf must be nothing but an item of clothing. We cannot blow it up and conflate into the scarf issue all these other things.” If you got problems with that then maybe I am not the only one whose opinion you may find insulting. Generally, I think we should not have any hard feelings towards each other in this forum and give benefit of the doubt to others. Thanks, for understanding. @cancairo God, thank you… I can’t stand this “broken psyches” expression. It’s so rediculous.

- Posted by SofiaM. on July 6, 2010 at 12:39 PM

@cancairo, thank you for your post. You captured my thoughts exactly. And I agree with you and SofiaM that the “broken psyche” talk is played out… but some women in our community really are under siege. Not because of hijab, but marital abuse, inequities, and other injustices our community turns a blind eye to.

- Posted by Dina B. on July 6, 2010 at 01:17 PM

@SafiaM. Thank you! you already said it well.

- Posted by OmarG on July 6, 2010 at 04:55 PM

@Dina: I think Umar is trying hard to walk a fine line between what he sees happening to every-day Muslims and the dictates of “Traditional” Islam. He wants to find a way to help American Muslims, but without challenging orthodox prescriptions for behavior that were originally formulated, IMHO, in Islam’s empire phase, a deviation, again IMHO from what it was supposed to be.

- Posted by OmarG on July 6, 2010 at 05:11 PM

I think Dr. Umar has eloquently addressed an on-going issue in our community - women who either chose not to cover or who chose to take off their scarves are judged by their outward actions. Thus, their adherence or non-adherence to legal obligations (as determined by the four imams) are used to measure their worth in a community. I think he establishes an important distinction that can begin to influence what I believe is a huge problems in our community. It could be the community that I come from, but I think that his comments are spot on. There is a collective narrative that begins to label people as pious and not

pious simply by measuring outward conformity. I have experienced this first-hand and no doubt others have experienced it as well. I am also confused as to why so many people are offended by Dr. Umar giving voice to the struggles of so many women. If women have come to Dr. Umar with these struggles and he’s addressing their narratives and making it easy for them, why does this offend those who may not have experienced the same struggles?

- Posted by Rabea Chaudhry on July 6, 2010 at 05:18 PM

I couldn’t agree more with the points made my SofiaM, DinaB, cancairo and OmarG. You’ve all said exactly what I wanted to say. @Rabea: “I am also confused as to why so many people are offended by Dr. Umar giving voice to the struggles of so many women. If women have come to Dr. Umar with these struggles and he’s addressing their narratives and making it easy for them, why does this offend those who may not have experienced the same struggles?” This is because in the process of supporting one group he is alienating another. It’s similar to when some feminists will fight sexism by employing racism. In this case, Dr.Umar seems to be alienating one (large) group of Muslim women to defend another. And that too on a questionable premise - that the hijab is an obligation. I think it is high time that Muslims acknowledge that there are a variety of views on the hijab. Those of us who believe hijab is not mandatory are always forced to recognize the interpretation which states hijab is compulsory, but the reverse respect is not required in our community. And Dr.Umar does nothing to give us that respect, and I would argue works to erode any respect we may have.

- Posted by Sobia on July 6, 2010 at 05:46 PM

Sobia, please tell us which scholars say hijab is not obligatory. If possible, provide their fatwas and associated justification.

Or is this your own personal ijtihad? In which case please inform us of your qualifications and relevant credentials. Thanks

- Posted by edabdalghafur on July 6, 2010 at 08:41 PM

Fatwas have no real presence in Muslim history, and currently are many times used for political manipulation. In addition to both of these reasons, I don’t personally seek fatwas because I believe our reliance on these statements has led our (Muslim)family to spiritual paralysis. Leaving us incapable of thinking about the complex social issues we face since we normally rely on spiritual leaders (who are experts on texts) to fix our real world problems when that is not their expertise. As for the scholars who claim hijab is not obligatory… contemporary scholars, like Sherman Jackson and Tariq Ramadan, won’t normally issue a formal opinion about it (as I have asked several scholars in recent years) or some will tell you that a mandate for wearing hijab is a popular opinion. Scholars traditionally, over the past 1,000 years, didn’t focus on hijab as it is lacking in their writings. The word “hijab” is not found in the Quran with relation to modesty, and there is only one verse that is taken to allude to hijab in the context we talk about it today. Several scholars have noted that all of the above reasons reflect a weaker significance that traditional scholars may have found modesty to play in contrast to our Muslim world today. Also, I don’t know if you’re asking for contemporary, western, nationalist, academic, or legal scholars, etc. I personally appreciate looking through the spectrum. There are many differences between scholars, and each one has a unique methodology. But here is a mixed compilation of scholars who have stated their opinion that hijab is not an obligation or provide the support, either through an interview, statement, legal ruling, etc: Muhammed Sa’id Ashmawi [“Al hijab laysa furida” (“The Veil Is Not Obligatory”)] Gamal Al-Banna Leila Ahmed Reza Aslam

Javed Ahmad Ghamidi Mustafa Ghalayini Nazira Zin ed-Din Zaki Badawi

- Posted by Dina B. on July 6, 2010 at 11:05 PM

I’m not familiar with all the names you’ve mentioned. But putting Reza Aslan on your list kind of discredits it.

- Posted by mohammed husain on July 7, 2010 at 09:54 AM

Credit, discredit. That’s cool. Your (or anyone’s) decisions and preferences regarding faith are none of my business.

- Posted by Dina B. on July 7, 2010 at 10:04 AM

Page 1 of 2 1 2 > (page 2 not on archive, so not available)

SCHOLAR DR. UMAR FARUQ ABD-ALLAH

Part 4: Dr. Umar Faruq Abd-Allah on hijabs and headscarves

BY RABEA CHAUDHRY, JULY 7, 2010

I recently had the opportunity to interview Dr. Umar Faruq Abd-Allah, Chairman of the Board & Scholar-in-Residence at the Nawawi Foundation, a non-profit educational foundation based in Chicago, Illinois. Dr. Abd-Allah offered me his insights into the growing phenomenon of Muslim women taking off their headscarves. The first part of the four-part interview can be readhere, the second part of the interview can be read here, and the third part of the interview can be read here. The fourth and final part of the interview follows: I take from this that you are emphasizing that Islamic Law is alive, dynamic, and constantly responding to social realities. Yes, everything in the law has got to be finely tuned so that it works in the social reality. To be a jurist you have to understand reality and you’ve got to direct people to live and behave in a way that enables them to practice Islam in its fullest and to negotiate reality in the most effective way. The living tradition always leaves you in the present tense. It’s almost difficult for me to accept that Islam does acknowledge and respond to personal capacity. I feel comfortable struggling because somewhere inside me a little voice is saying that if it’s not difficult then I’m not doing enough. That’s really what I have

understood a good Muslim and a good person to be – someone who is constantly struggling. Islam is a constant spiritual and moral struggle for sincere obedience to God and self-perfection. Misunderstanding the nature of the moral and spiritual struggle of Islam is probably one of the core problems with Muslims today. We often make Islam rigid, and it is not meant to be that way. When you study hadith with a traditional scholar, often the first hadith you study is called the opening hadith. It says,

“Those who show mercy [to others], the Most Merciful shows mercy to them. Be merciful to [all] who are on the earth, and He who is in the heaven will be merciful to you.” We always started the study of hadith here because this is a religion of mercy, and mercy comes out of love. For example, the Mawlid (the observation of the birth of the Prophet, peace be upon him) is meant to instill in us love and mercy by cultivating a deeper love for the Prophet. We should make the Mawlid one of the cornerstones of all our communities. It belongs to the central tradition of Sunni Islam and is completely consonant with the Qur’an and Prophetic Sunna. The great scholars of the four Sunni schools have consensus on its validity. The Prophet, peace be upon him, fasted on Thursdays because he was born on a Thursday, his wife ‘A’isha used to recite to him the verses of poetry which his contemporaries had composed in his honor. The Mawlid has traditionally been regarded as one of the greatest of all acts of worship that draw us closer to God. Additionally, according to the renowned Qur’anic commentator Ibn ‘Aashuur, the closing lines of Surat al-Tawba, the last chapter of the Qur’an to be revealed to the Prophet, accentuate the love and mercy that the Prophet felt for all humanity. They verses read:

“Truly, a Messenger has come to you from among yourselves, one upon whom it weighs heavily that you should suffer in this life and the life to come, who is solicitous about you and your welfare, whose nature toward the believers is sheer kindness and mercy. So, if they turn away, say, ‘God is all I need. There is no god but He. It is He upon Whom I have placed my reliance, and He is the Lord of the Magnificent Throne.’” According to Ibn ‘Aashuur, the first part of the verse was revealed about the disbelievers who had rejected the Prophet, and the end of the verse refers to the believers. It is as if the beginning of

the verse is saying, “You who saw this beautiful Prophet in your midst and disbelieved in him, know that this pained him deeply because he desired for you all that is good in this world and the next.” This is really important because sometimes we ask questions like, “Can we pray for nonMuslims?” The Prophet had a huge heart and his heart took in all humanity. He suffered with the suffering of the disbelievers. Who are we then, as Muslims, to be pompous and to be arrogant in this society? We have got to begin to cultivate in this community men and women who are truly rooted in this religion and who can represent it to us and to others in a way that’s pleasing to God and his Prophet and doesn’t break the psyche. You will then see then that traditional scholars are those who won’t give you a guilt complex or make moral judgments against you. Islam is a religion of outward rules that are not arbitrary or rigid, and inward spiritual and moral guidelines. This Islam of rigid arbitrary rules is destroying us; hollow rules with no understanding or wisdom, no theology, no love of the Prophet, peace be upon him. We are currently suffering from a blight of religious extremism. The Prophet, peace be upon him, warned us against extremism and taught us that it has nothing to do with Islam. Religious extremism belongs to the “Party of Satan” (hizb al-Shaytan). Satan is himself an extremist and the greatest fanatic of history. The Sufis say that when you do an act of disobedience it requires one tawba, one act of forgiveness. When you do an act of obedience, it requires a thousand acts of forgiveness so that you do not become arrogant and proud and you do not look at yourself as better than others. Arrogance is the greatest sin of all, greater even than disobedience. Arrogance is the mark of the Khawarij, the outsiders, the rebels who destroy Islam in the name of Islam and who, according to our Prophet, peace be upon him, are the worst of all God’s creation. The numerous hadith about the Khawarij are among the most authentic and the most multiplytransmitted (mutawaatir) of Islam. Imam Muslim’s “Sahih” has an extensive treatment of them towards the end of his Chapter on Zakah. The Prophet, peace be upon him, warned us: “There will come out of this religious community [of Islam] a people who will make you despise your prayer when compared to their prayer." He adds that we “will despise our fasting compared to their fasting.” He also says, peace be upon him: “They recite the Qur’an [continuously] but it does not go deeper than their shoulder blades.” That is, it does not enter their hearts and fill them with

light, mercy, and understanding. “They will shoot out of [this religion of] Islam like an arrow shoots out of the bow.” Their fanaticism has no spiritual foundation or religious depth. Because Islam is a religion of mercy and moderation, it ultimately rejects them and they ultimately reject it, and Islam returns to its normative beauty. We’ve got to create a community in which it’s possible to breath. We must begin to set its own distinctive cognitive frames on the foundational principles of the Qur’an and Sunna and in a manner consistent with the four great Imams and the rich traditions of normative Islamic civilization. And then our Islam becomes human, beautiful, rational; it becomes common sense and most of the problems that we have they disappear. *In light of questions asked about his initial answers to Part IV of the interview, Dr. Umar has clarified his responses and added citations to the hadith he quoted. Rabea Chaudhry is Associate Editor of Altmuslimah Print-friendly | Email this |

Digg this |

Tweet this | Share on Facebook

12 COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE We try to remove any comments that do not conform to our netiquette guidelines. If any comments remain that are in violation, please let us know. The presence of offending comments does not necessarily reflect the views of the editors of altmuslimah.com

This issue is still alive. I read the comments and I can say that there are many views on this topic. I guess it comes down to personal choice.Wow!!

- Posted by zulu2 on July 7, 2010 at 09:55 AM

Why would you assume it comes down to personal choice? When you say that it means essentially whatever position you take, well, its arbitrary, just personal preference. I’m not sure many of those

commenting would agree with you there.

- Posted by edabdalghafur on July 7, 2010 at 10:02 AM

I commend Dr. Umar on speaking out against the hollowness of legal fetishism that characterize certain ideological and physical spaces amongst Muslims in the last thirty years. Although I strongly differ with him on points of fiqh, and the exclusion of non-Sunni jurisprudence from this or any other major treatment of hijab online, I can appreciate his sentiments toward love and tolerance as a priori any legal enterprise. I am glad that he attempts to maintain a modest line given the clear tyranny of a frequently condescending religious hierarchy in our community, a hugely interrelated and under-examined issue.

- Posted by Abbas Jaffer on July 7, 2010 at 10:35 AM

Dear Rabea: Is there a way that the references and citations of the hadith and statements he attributes to the Prophet can be posted here too? I’d be interested in those, especially the statement the Prophet said about fanatics. Thanks.

- Posted by asifsheikh (San Francisco) on July 7, 2010 at 11:35 AM

@edabdalghafur…then I guess those women out there will have to comply with your demand or your single interpretation! NOT!!! It’s choice. After all, why are there two sides?

- Posted by zulu2 on July 7, 2010 at 01:19 PM

“[These] rigid rules ... hallow rules [of] no understanding, no theology, no love of the Prophet, this is destroying us.” Cannot agree more with this. As a community ( and I am not only talking about the US) we have became insecure in our intelligence, increasingly outwardly and superficially obsessed with political identities we have created for ourselves throughout the past century or so, and we are losing the spirituality, which is the only thing that matters in the end of the day.

- Posted by SofiaM. on July 7, 2010 at 03:23 PM

Also, make dua for Umar, since publicly saying anything about hijab outside of the party line can be near political suicide in our Muslim-American community, to say nothing of what it does to people overseas who say similar things.

- Posted by OmarG on July 7, 2010 at 03:26 PM

Zulu2, You’ve obviously been indoctrinated into conventional liberal dogma. Mere disagreement over a given issue does not logically imply that things are a matter of choice, or up to me. To assume that is to demand others comply with your particular liberal interpretation. It seems that people on this website basically want to privatize dress (excluding Dr. Faruq), make it a matter of personal preference and arbitrary choice, and thus insulate women from any criticism. Thats a fine position to take. Thats the line of the Western mainstream and increasingly the global mainstream. But call a spade, a spade. It’s not submitting to religious guidance, its submitting to the whims of the self.

- Posted by edabdalghafur on July 7, 2010 at 10:36 PM

I get it. Say anything that you disagree with and it’s considered liberal!!! ...conservatives are the only ones who know best. Alright….time to convert out i guess???

- Posted by zulu2 on July 7, 2010 at 11:05 PM

as salam alaikum zulu2. First of all, why so much anger? No one is asking you to leave Islam. There’s no need to convert out if you disagree with another Muslim. If everyone did this, there’d be no Muslims left! Dress in Islam is both personal preference AND religious obligation. If you agree with hijab in its most common interpretation (only showing the face and hands and [depending on the scholar] the feet) that still leaves a lot of room for women. For example, I wear long, broomstick skirts with a kurti and a shayla hijab. I wear white, black, brown, blue, orange, and many other colors. This is both my religious obligation (as I believe it to be) and my personal preference. I know sisters who wear modest jeans and long-sleeve t-shirts with an al amira. I know sisters who wear salwar kameez with a huge dupatta (and they cover their hair but not their necks/ears). I know sisters who are from Africa and they wear kaftans (or something that looks like a kaftan to me) and a head covering that doesn’t cover the neck or the ears or the bosom. Are these women right or wrong? The answer is: it depends. It depends on the intention of the woman. If she is covering just because of societal/family demands, she’s missing the point. If she’s covering inadequately (by my definition) but her heart and her intention are well placed, then any issue with her dress is between her and Allah, not with me. All I can do is be a good example inshallah. The only time I become upset about sisters who refuse hijab are the ones who wear super tight and/or revealing clothing. You don’t have to reject all aspects of modesty simply because you disagree with hijab, and I think all of us can agree that dressing modestly is an absolute requirement of Islam. How can you be modest when you have cleavage or (worse) butt cleavage showing (and yes I’ve seen this in the masjid)? How can you be modest when everyone knows the exact outline of your hips, including cellulite? I also become upset with sisters who wear hijab and cover all the “required” areas, but they may as well be uncovered because their clothing is super tight. However, my being upset is MY problem, not their problem. And it’s certainly not the problem of some random guy in the community who has become the haram police. Especially when he goes swimming in short-shorts in front of women, or he refuses to grow any sort of a beard, not because he disagrees with

the sunnah of growing a beard but because it’s “inconvenient” or makes him “less attractive”. There’s room in Islam for a liberal interpretation, as long as the fard is not ignored. If you honestly believe hijab is not fard that is between you and Allah. I am not part of that transaction, whether you are right or wrong. But please respect my right to believe hijab is fard, and don’t insult me because I made a “personal choice”. If I believe that hijab is not a choice but a command, how can it be a personal choice? To me, it is an obligation.

- Posted by Revertive on July 8, 2010 at 10:10 AM

Please take a look at the article again - Dr. Umar has included hadith citations.

- Posted by Rabea Chaudhry on July 8, 2010 at 09:13 PM

The hadith that were quoted seemed to be framed in a way that fundamentally do not contradict the principles of Islam. Others that I’ve read seem like they address the realities that people go through in a certain situation, and which may not be applicable to other situations. I liked the opening hadith that Dr. Umar stated because sometimes if women who are not married try to do “humanitarian” work, it might seem to be a problematic result of her singlehood. If someone chooses not to get married because they think there is something which is stopping them, whether it is preparedness or a societal problem, then why not work in the meantime? Other hadith seem very problematic. One time I was reading a book that said that this world should feel like a jail for the believer. I don’t know in what context it was said, but it didn’t make sense to me as a teenager or even later. (however much I like privacy). That is where my skepticism about where these sayings of the Prophet began - in search for truth. In that search, I also felt that ethics were often neglected from the contemporary American context, in place of discussions about painted finger nails. On the other hand, Yusuf Ali speaks about hadith in a way that is supposed to lift burdens in a certain

environment. Even then, to lighten burdens, its acknowledged that only so many details can be addressed by the hadith - a common point with Rushdie.

- Posted by Saadia on July 27, 2010 at 03:10 PM

Page 1 of 1 ------ END OF DOCUMENT------