Is wearing the Niqab/Pardah Fardh or Sunnah?

QUESTION
Assalamu Alaikum Respected Mufti Saheb. I would like Mufti Saheb to please respond to this. A few girls were told about the obligation of covering and wearing pardah. An Aalim of the town told these girls that it is not Fardh and a must, it is a sunnah. He even contacted Muftis that also say its sunnah. We would appreciate Mufti Saheb response and advice on what to do. Jazakallah

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.

As-salāmu ‘alaykum wa-rahmatullāhi wa-barakātuh.

Please refer to the following link to find a detailed response on the above query:

http://www.askimam.org/public/question_detail/28588

And Allah Ta’āla Knows Best

Mahmood Suliman

Student Darul Iftaa
Gaborone, Botswana

Checked and Approved by,
Mufti Ebrahim Desai.

Where does it say in the Quran that women must observe Hijab?

My Question is related to Hijab..I want to know the proper Defination of Hijab Because in different areas of the world Hijab is Defined in different way.some of women cover full body except their eyes and some cover their whole busy except their face. So i just need to know what is proper defination of Hijab in Qur’an.If it is to cover all the body except eyes then why scholar like Zakir Naik who is firm believer of Qur’an is going on the Different track.(Cover the whole body except face).

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.As-salāmu ‘alaykum wa-rahmatullāhi wa-barakātuh.Sister in Islam,It is encouraging to note your zeal in seeking clarity regarding such an issue. Since the rulings of Hijāb are a very delicate matter, we feel that it is important to first provide some introductory points before answering your specific query. The Purpose of HijābFirst and foremost, it is of absolute importance that one understands the social structure Islam attempts to establish within a Muslim society in regards to the intermingling of men and women. Throughout the Quran we find many verses that point to this very fact. Allah Ta’ālā says in the Holy Quran:وَلَا تَقْرَبُوا الزِّنَا إِنَّهُ كَانَ فَاحِشَةً وَسَاءَ سَبِيلًا And do not even go near fornication. It is indeed a shame and an evil way to follow.[1]He the Almighty says in another verse:وَقُلْ لِلْمُؤْمِنَاتِ يَغْضُضْنَ مِنْ أَبْصَارِهِنَّ وَيَحْفَظْنَ فُرُوجَهُنَّ وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّAnd say to the believing women that they must lower their gazes and guard their private parts, and must not expose their adornment.[2]Expounding on this message, the Holy Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) said:كُتِبَ عَلَى ابْنِ آدَمَ نَصِيبُهُ مِنَ الزِّنَا، مُدْرِكٌ ذَلِكَ لَا مَحَالَةَ، فَالْعَيْنَانِ زِنَاهُمَا النَّظَرُ، وَالْأُذُنَانِ زِنَاهُمَا الِاسْتِمَاعُ، وَاللِّسَانُ زِنَاهُ الْكَلَامُ، وَالْيَدُ زِنَاهَا الْبَطْشُ، وَالرِّجْلُ زِنَاهَا الْخُطَا، وَالْقَلْبُ يَهْوَى وَيَتَمَنَّى، وَيُصَدِّقُ ذَلِكَ الْفَرْجُ وَيُكَذِّبُهُ Allah has written for the children of Adam their share of zina which he commits inevitably. The zina of the eyes is the sight (to gaze at a forbidden thing), the zina of the ears is to hear, the zina of the tongue is the talk, the zina of the hands is to touch (that which is forbidden), the zina of the feet is to take steps (towards that which is forbidden) and the heart wishes and desires and the private parts testify all this or deny it.[3]It is clear from the above that the overall purpose behind establishing laws pertaining to separation between men and women is simply to protect their chastity and to establish a society wherein all doors leading to immorality and indecency are closed off right from its roots. Similarly, the hijāb is also a mechanism used to further these ideals by becoming an instrument that hinders zinā and all of its malevolent forms.Women and Today’s SocietyIn a society dictated by slogans of liberty and justice, a new generation has been born that thrives off of freedom of expression. This leads some to believe that the hijāb is anti-progressive, but such a notion is far from reality. Allah Ta’ālā has created women in this world with an alluring beauty that seizes the hearts of men and brings forth emotions of pure love and infatuation. It is for this reason that women continue to be exploited today through private and commercial means.It is also no secret that societies today are brimming with news concerning cases of rape and sexual assault. In a society where social acceptance through superficial means of one’s outer beauty has become mainstream, it is of no surprise that such would be the end result. As a premonition to such an outcome, the Holy Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) warned us in the following words:صِنْفَانِ مِنْ أَهْلِ النَّارِ لَمْ أَرَهُمَا، قَوْمٌ مَعَهُمْ سِيَاطٌ كَأَذْنَابِ الْبَقَرِ يَضْرِبُونَ بِهَا النَّاسَ، وَنِسَاءٌ كَاسِيَاتٌ عَارِيَاتٌ مُمِيلَاتٌ مَائِلَاتٌ… Two are the types of the denizens of Hell whom I did not see: people having flogs like the tails of the ox with them and they would be beating people, and the women who would be dressed but appear to be naked, who would incline others (towards evil) and themselves would be inclined (towards it)…[4] Through the tenets of Islam we form a stabilized society that protects women from all avenues that may lead to their mistreatment and exploitation. Only through practice can one see the respect a woman holds who is garbed from head to toe in clothes that protect her beauty and chastity. It is a sign of honor, dignity, and iman that brings to light the revered status of women in the eyes of Allah the Almighty.Difference between Satr and HijābWhen one hears the word hijāb, it is often assumed that the laws pertaining to it are the same as the laws of satr (the concealing of which is obligatory for everyone – legally, naturally and rationally). As a matter of fact, the laws of satr have remained an obligation from the very beginning, in all religious codes of the noble prophets and not only from the advent of Islam.[5] It is an injunction stemming from the natural disposition of insān that shows the intrinsic qualities of hayā (shame and modesty) that existed from the very inception of humankind. One can see the example of such qualities in the story Ādam and Hawā (alaihimas salam) as they hastened to cover themselves upon seeing their bare selves revealed[6]. Similarly, we find such an attribute in the story of Musā (‘alaihis salam) and the two girls who were fetching water from a well. Whilst one was walking towards Musā (alaihi salam), she treaded in a manner showing complete shame and modesty. Allah Ta’ālā revealed this quality in the following words:فَجَاءَتْهُ إِحْدَاهُمَا تَمْشِي عَلَى اسْتِحْيَاءٍ Then one of the two women came to him, walking in a manner showing hayā.[7]On the other hand, the laws of hijāb came about much after during the latter half of the prophethood of Nabi (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam).[8] As such, laws regarding covering oneself in private and public are different from the laws of hijāb that pertain more to rulings that require women to conceal themselves in the presence of non-mahram men[9].Consider an example from the following hadīth:عَنْ نَبْهَانَ، مَوْلَى أُمِّ سَلَمَةَ، أَنَّهُ حَدَّثَهُ أَنَّ أُمَّ سَلَمَةَ، حَدَّثَتْهُ أَنَّهَا كَانَتْ عِنْدَ رَسُولِ اللهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَمَيْمُونَةَ قَالَتْ: فَبَيْنَا نَحْنُ عِنْدَهُ أَقْبَلَ ابْنُ أُمِّ مَكْتُومٍ فَدَخَلَ عَلَيْهِ وَذَلِكَ بَعْدَ مَا أُمِرْنَا بِالحِجَابِ، فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: احْتَجِبَا مِنْهُ، فَقُلْتُ: يَا رَسُولَ اللهِ أَلَيْسَ هُوَ أَعْمَى لاَ يُبْصِرُنَا وَلاَ يَعْرِفُنَا؟ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: أَفَعَمْيَاوَانِ أَنْتُمَا أَلَسْتُمَا تُبْصِرَانِهِ. It is narrated by Nabhān the freed slave of Umm Salamah(radiyallahu ‘anha) that Umm Salamah (radiyallahu ‘anha) narrated to him, that she and Maymunah (radiyallahu ‘anha) were with the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), she said: “So when we were with him, Ibn Umm Maktum (radiyallahu ‘anhu) came, and he entered upon him, and that was after veiling had been ordered for us. So the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) said: ‘Veil yourselves from him.’ So I said: ‘O Messenger of Allah! Is he not blind such that he cannot see us or recognize us?’ So the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) said: ‘Are you two blind such that you cannot see him?'” One point of consideration is the fact that the addressees of this command of the Holy Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) were none other than two of the Umm al-Mu’minīn (mother of the believers), Sayyidatuna Umm Salamah and Sayyidatuna Maymūnah (radiyallahu ‘anhuma). If the blessed wives of the Holy Prophet (salllahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), who were at the pinnacle of piety and modesty were commanded to conceal themselves from men, then what can we say about the women of today who live in an era where people vie for social standing by sacrificing their modesty for the sake of public acceptance?Now that we have understood that the laws of satr are not only different, but existed before the laws of hijāb, we will commence with the discussion of Quranic texts relating to the injunctions of hijāb.The Degrees of HijābWhen taking a look at the various verses dealing with the injunction of hijāb, one can divide these verses into three levels, or “degrees”, of hijāb.-The First Degree-Allah Ta’ālā says in Surah al-Ahzāb, verse 53:وَإِذَا سَأَلْتُمُوهُنَّ مَتَاعًا فَاسْأَلُوهُنَّ مِنْ وَرَاءِ حِجَابٍ ذَلِكُمْ أَطْهَرُ لِقُلُوبِكُمْ وَقُلُوبِهِنَّAnd when you ask anything from them (the blessed wives of the Prophet), ask them from behind a curtain. That is better for the purity of your hearts and their hearts.This verse deals with the first degree of hijāb which discusses concealment of women in their own homes. This can further be substantiated by the following verse:وَقَرْنَ فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ وَلَا تَبَرَّجْنَ تَبَرُّجَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ الْأُولَىAnd remain in your homes, and do not display (your) beauty as it used to be displayed in the days of earlier ignorance.[10]This degree of hijāb encourages women to stay in their homes and conceal themselves and their beauty from the fitnah the lurks outside the four walls of her home. This means that they should not allow anyone outside of their homes to see any portion of their body, whether it be the face or any other part of the body.[11] Furthermore, this points to the fact that women should try their best to remain in their homes unless there is a need to go out as there is a danger to their chastity and is a means of fitnah for her.[12] The following hadīth points out to this fact:عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، قَالَ: الْمَرْأَةُ عَوْرَةٌ، فَإِذَا خَرَجَتْ اسْتَشْرَفَهَا الشَّيْطَانُ. It is narrated that the Holy Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) said: “The woman is one who should be concealed, so when she goes out, the Shaitan seeks to tempt her.”[13] Although the addressees of these verses are the blessed wives of the Holy Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), the injunctions related to them are common to all Muslim women as pointed out by many great muffassirūn (exegetes) such as Imam al-Qurtubi in his famous tafsīr, Al-Jāmi’ li Ahkām al-Qurān.[14]-The Second Degree-Allah Ta’ālā says in Surah al-Ahzāb, verse 53:يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُلْ لِأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَاءِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ جَلَابِيبِهِنَّ O prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers that they should draw down their jilbāb (shawls) over them.Herein mentioned is the second degree of hijāb. This level of hijāb deals with how women should conceal themselves when they have a need to leave their house. The jilbāb here actually refers to a piece of clothing large enough that it covers the entire body from head to toe.[15] The method of dawning the jilbāb is a point of contention amongst the ‘ūlamā; Imam Qurtubi mentions in his tafsīr: وَاخْتَلَفَ النَّاسُ فِي صُورَةِ إِرْخَائِهِ، فَقَالَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ وَعَبِيدَةُ السَّلْمَانِيُّ: ذَلِكَ أَنْ تَلْوِيَهُ الْمَرْأَةُ حَتَّى لَا يَظْهَرَ مِنْهَا إِلَّا عَيْنٌ وَاحِدَةٌ تُبْصِرُ بِهَا. وَقَالَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ أَيْضًا وَقَتَادَةُ: ذَلِكَ أَنْ تَلْوِيَهُ فَوْقَ الْجَبِينِ وَتَشُدَّهُ، ثُمَّ تَعْطِفُهُ عَلَى الْأَنْفِ، وَإِنْ ظَهَرَتْ عَيْنَاهَا لَكِنَّهُ يَسْتُرُ الصَّدْرَ وَمُعْظَمَ الْوَجْهِ. وَقَالَ الْحَسَنُ: تُغَطِّي نِصْفَ وَجْهِهَا. People have differed in regards to the method of dawning it (the jilbāb). Ibn ‘Abbās (radiyallahu ‘anhuma) and ‘Abīdah as-Salmānī (rahimahullah) state: It means to wrap it up in such a way that everything is concealed except that (the area of) one eye is left open for her to see with. Ibn ‘Abbās (radiyallahu ‘anhuma) (in another narration) and Qatādah (rahimahullah) say: It means to wrap it up above the forehead and to fasten it, then to fold it till above the nose even if both eyes are left open; although, she will have to cover her chest and majority of her face. Hasan (rahimahullah) says: She will cover half of her face.[16]Similar narrations have been mentioned in other books of tafāsīr as well.[17]From this we can clearly see that the mufassirūn and great figures of the past such as Ibn ‘Abbās (radiyallahu ‘anhuma) consider that the dawning of the jilbāb for women includes the covering of the face. This is to the extent that there are narrations of leaving only one eye open as well. To substantiate this further, Imam Qurtubi also states under the tafsīr of this verse:لَمَّا كَانَتْ عَادَةُ الْعَرَبِيَّاتِ التَّبَذُّلَ، وَكُنَّ يَكْشِفْنَ وُجُوهَهُنَّ كَمَا يَفْعَلُ الْإِمَاءُ، وَكَانَ ذَلِكَ دَاعِيَةً إِلَى نَظَرِ الرِّجَالِ إِلَيْهِنَّ، وَتَشَعُّبِ الْفِكْرَةِ فِيهِنَّ، أَمَرَ اللَّهُ رَسُولَهُ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَنْ يَأْمُرَهُنَّ بِإِرْخَاءِ الْجَلَابِيبِ عَلَيْهِنَّ إِذَا أَرَدْنَ الْخُرُوجَ إِلَى حَوَائِجِهِنَّ Since it was the habit of the Arab women to display their beauty as they would reveal their faces like the female slaves, and since such an action would lead to other men looking at them and filling their minds with thoughts of those women, Allah Ta’ālā commanded the Holy Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) to instruct the (Muslim) women to hang down their shawls over them whenever they would have a desire to go out for their needs.[18] -The Third Degree-Allah Ta’ālā says in Surah an-Nūr, verse 31:وَقُلْ لِلْمُؤْمِنَاتِ يَغْضُضْنَ مِنْ أَبْصَارِهِنَّ وَيَحْفَظْنَ فُرُوجَهُنَّ وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلَّا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا وَلْيَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِهِنَّ عَلَى جُيُوبِهِنَّ And say to the believing women that they must lower their gazes and guard their private parts, and must not expose their adornment (i.e. places of beauty), except that which appears thereof, and must wrap their bosoms with their shawls…This verse discusses the third and final degree of hijāb, which deals with hijāb of the second degree along with an exception to reveal certain portions of the body.[19] The meaning of this verse is apparent; a women is not allowed to display her beauty and she should cover herself with her shawl. Although, scholars differ as to what the words “except that which appears thereof” refers to. Many mufassirūn such as Imam at-Tabarī[20], Imam al-Qurtubī[21], and Imam Ibn Kathīr[22] have discussed the different narrations and opinions regarding this issue in detail. Mufti Shafī ‘Uthmānī has provided a concise summary of the differences in his book Ahkām al-Qurān in the following words:و حاصل الكلام في تفسير ما ظهر أنه مختلف فيه بين الصحابة والتابعين فعبد الله بن مسعود و من تابعه فسروه بالثياب و الجلباب، و علي ذلك فلا حجة فيه لمن استثني الوجه والكفين عن الحجاب…و عبد الله ابن عباس و عبد الله بن عمر و من تابعهما فسروا قوله تعالي: ولا يبدين زينتهن إلا ما ظهر منها، بقولهم: إنه الوجه والكفان. وهو محتمل المعنيين، الأول: أنه تفسير للزينة التي نهين عن إبدائها، فعلي هذا رجع هذا القول أيضا إلي معني قول ابن مسعود رضي الله عنه، فلم يكن الوجه والكفان من مستثنيات، والمعني الثاني: أنه تفسير لما ظهر، وعلي هذا الأحتمال كان الوجه والكفان مستثنيان من الحجابThe summary of the differences regarding the tafsīr of “that which appears thereof” is that a difference of opinion exists between the Sahabah and Tābi’īn themselves. ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ūd (radiyallahu ‘anhu) and those who are of his opinion say that it refers to (their) clothes and the jilbāb. According to this opinion, there is no room for those who exempt the face and the hands from hijāb…’Abdullah bin ‘Abbās (radiyallahu ‘anhuma) and ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar (radiyallahu ‘anhuma) interpret the words “and must not expose their adornment, except that which appears thereof” as meaning the face and the hands. This tafsīr holds two possibilities. The first possibility: This (face and hands) is the tafsīr for the word “adornment” from which women have been forbidden to display. According to this tafsīr, in meaning it will be the same as the interpretation of Ibn Mas’ūd (radiyallahu ‘anhu); therefore, the hands and face will not be exempt (from the hijāb). The second possibility: This is the tafsīr for “that which appears thereof”. According to this possibility, the face and the hands will be exempt from the hijāb.[23]In more simple terms, the verses according to each interpretation will mean:(1) According to the tafsīr of Ibn Mas’ūd (radiyallahu ‘anhu): And (they) must not expose their adornment, except their outer garments (e.g. their jilbāb).(2) According to the tafsīr of Ibn ‘Abbās (radiyallahu ‘anhuma): And (they) must not expose their adornment, except their hands and faces.It is important to take note that this discussion only pertains to the interpretation of this verse and not the ruling for the hijāb itself. Clarification on Women Exposing Their FaceOne may conclude through this that there remains scope for women to expose their face as it is a valid tafsīr of this verse. In order clear this misconception, we will expound with the following points:(1) After discussing the various opinions, Imam Qurtubī says in his tafsīr:قَالَ ابْنُ عَطِيَّةَ: وَيَظْهَرُ لِي بِحُكْمِ أَلْفَاظِ الْآيَةِ أَنَّ الْمَرْأَةَ مَأْمُورَةٌ بِأَلَّا تُبْدِيَ وَأَنْ تَجْتَهِدَ فِي الْإِخْفَاءِ لِكُلِّ مَا هُوَ زِينَةٌ، وَوَقَعَ الِاسْتِثْنَاءُ فِيمَا يَظْهَرُ بِحُكْمِ ضَرُورَةِ حَرَكَةٍ فِيمَا لَا بُدَّ مِنْهُ، أَوْ إِصْلَاحِ شَأْنٍ وَنَحْوِ ذَلِكَ. فَ”- مَا ظَهَرَ” عَلَى هَذَا الْوَجْهِ مِمَّا تُؤَدِّي إِلَيْهِ الضَّرُورَةُ فِي النِّسَاءِ فَهُوَ الْمَعْفُوُّ عَنْهُ. قُلْتُ: هَذَا قَوْلٌ حَسَنٌ، إِلَّا أَنَّهُ لَمَّا كَانَ الْغَالِبُ مِنَ الْوَجْهِ وَالْكَفَّيْنِ ظُهُورُهُمَا عَادَةً وَعِبَادَة..فَيَصْلُحُ أَنْ يَكُونَ الِاسْتِثْنَاءُ رَاجِعًا إِلَيْهِمَا Ibn ‘Atiyyah says: “What becomes apparent to me in regards to the ruling derived from the words of this verse is that women are commanded to not reveal themselves and that they try their best to conceal all that is considered to be adornment (beauty). The exception made here is due to certain movements that are absolutely necessary (for women to do) or in order to fix something, etc. As such, “that which appears thereof” in this context refers to revealing at times of necessity for women; therefore, it is amongst those things that are forgiven (due to a need).” According to me [referring to Imam al-Qurtubī himself], this is a better approach, except that since the face and hands become revealed habitually or at times of ībādah…it is better to say that the exception refers to those two times
(only).24 There are some who mention that revealing the face is permissible for women if there is no fear of fitnah[25]. In regards to this, Imam Jalāluddīn al-Mahallī mentions in his Tafsīr al-Jalālayn:{وَلَا يُبْدِينَ}…{زِينَتهنَّ إلَّا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا} وَهُوَ الْوَجْه وَالْكَفَّانِ فَيَجُوز نَظَره لِأَجْنَبِيٍّ إنْ لَمْ يَخَفْ فِتْنَة فِي أَحَد وَجْهَيْنِ وَالثَّانِي يَحْرُم لِأَنَّهُ مَظِنَّة الْفِتْنَة وَرُجِّحَ حَسْمًا لِلْبَابِ[The verse says] “And they must not expose”…”their adornment, except that which appears thereof”. This refers to the face and the hands; therefore it should be permissible for one to look at a woman (i.e. her face) if he does not feel there will be fitnah. This is according to one opinion; the other opinion is that such an act is harām since there is a possibility of fitnah. This (second) opinion has been given preference in order to close the doors (leading to fitnah).[26]Mufti Shafī’ comments on this as well in the following words:و أنت خبير بأن هذا أمر يعز وجوده في القرون الأولي أيضا إلا ما شاء الله تعالي، ويشهد له قصة الفضل ابن عباس مع امرأة خثعمية بأن النبي صلي الله عليه و سلم حول وجه الفضل عنها، و قال: رأيت شابا و شابة فلم آمن عليهما الفتنة، كما رواه البخاري والترمذي، فما ظنك بزماننا الذي بدا فيه التساوي بين المحاسن والمساوي، وكادت القلوب أن تكون منكوسة فلاتعرف معروفا و لا تنكر منكرا، و عادت الفواحش فيه مفخرا، واتخذت المناهي متجرا؛ تجارت بهم الأهواء كما تتجار الكلب بصاحبه، و يخبط بهم الهوي في مذاهبه وغياهبه؟ فكيف يحصل الأمن واليقين علي أنه لا يحدث في نفسه الميلان إلي قربها بالنظر إليها؟ You already know that such a thing (not having fear of fitnah) was seldom found during the first era of Muslims as well (i.e. the time of the Holy Prophet sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam and his Sahabah radiyallahu ‘anhum) except that which Allah Ta’ālā wanted. The story of Fadl ibn ‘Abbās (radiyallahu ‘anhu) and the woman of Khath’amiyyah attests to this fact since the Holy Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) turned the face of Fadl away from her (when he saw them staring at each other) as he told them: “I saw a young man and a young woman and I did not feel secure from fitnah arising between them.” As narrated by Imam Bukhārī and Imam Tirmidhī. [Considering this] what do you think is the situation in our times where good and evil have been labeled as equal, the hearts (of people) have turned upside down to the extent that they cannot even differentiate between wrong from right, where indecency (i.e. adultery, prostitution, etc.) has returned as a means to boast one’s own ego, where forbidden acts have become a business? A time where selfish desires travel with people like a dog travels with his partner? Where wishes and fancies have plunged people into its depths and its darkness. So how can one feel secure and certain that one’s heart will not be inclined towards her (i.e. towards committing indecency with her) when one’s eyes are focused on her?27 All four schools of thought (i.e. Mālikī, Hanbalī, Shafi’ī, and Hanafī) agree that it is impermissible for women to expose their face in front of non-mahram men[28].After discussing the points above, the conclusion the we arrive at is that although there is a difference of opinion regarding the tafsīr of verse thirty one of Surah an-Nūr, there remains no discrepancy in regards to the ruling derived therefrom. That is to say that even though there are authentic narrations concerning the meaning of “except that which appears thereof”, there still remains no disagreement pertaining to the application of the verse according to the vast majority of the fuqahā, especially in reference to our time where fitnah lurks at every corner; therefore, it is not feasible for women to leave their homes with their faces uncovered in front of non-mahram men.The core of this discussion boils down to the fact that the third degree of hijāb no longer remains an issue, whether it is because one opts for Ibn Masūd’s (radiyallahu ‘anhu) tafsīr of the verse which states that “except that which appears thereof” simply refers to women’s outer garments and ornaments, or because the revealing of one’s face in our times can lead to fitnah, and in order to close this door completely, the ruling of impermissibility was given preference.[29] The Field of AhkāmBefore we conclude this discussion, we would like to make one final point. The saying goes “to each his own”, but does this apply to the laws of Shari’ah? Like any other field, Islamic sciences have also been divided into different categories each with their own specialists. The muhaddithūn are tasked with preserving the words and asānīd (chains of narration) of ahādīth for later generations, whereas the mufassirūn discuss the meanings, interpretations, and explanations of the verses in the Holy Qurān. Similarly, the fuqahā are those who spent a great portion of their lives deducing rulings from the Holy Qurān and the Ahādīth of the Holy Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam). One may say that each field is also linked to the other in one way or another.The point of consideration is that simply because one is a master in one field it does not necessitate that he is a master in another. If one holds a PhD in mechanical engineering, it does not mean that he has the knowledge to perform a surgery on a patient requiring a bypass. This also goes for one who has studied immensely on his own but does not hold the credentials needed to assert his authority in front of those who hold valid credentials in that field. For example, if one studies hundreds of books on the subject of medicine, keeps up with WebMD every day, and further reads every article regarding medicine for fifteen years, he still does not hold the credentials that a student of medicine would hold that only studied for a mere seven to eight years. The reason being is that certain sciences require certain procedures and experience under direct supervision of an authority in order to be labelled as a master in that field.To substantiate this point, consider the words of Imam Tirmidhī, a great and renowned muhaddith, regarding the status of the fuqaha:وَهُمْ أَعْلَمُ بِمَعَانِي الحَدِيثِ And they (the fuqahā) have more knowledge of the meanings of the ahādīth.[30]To conclude, while there may be some who attempt to interpret the meanings of the Qurān and ahādīth in their own way, the rulings derived therefrom will not be taken into consideration unless uttered by the fuqahā themselves. The reason is very simple, the fuqahā are masters in the field of deduction and have written thousands and thousands of books on various subjects of ahkām. Furthermore, such a claim is not something new; rather, the chain of fuqahā and their mastery in this field can be traced back to the first century of Islam. Their words have always been accepted as the final judgment in all matters of fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence) for over one thousand years. Simply being god fearing and a firm believer of the Quran does not mean one cannot err, especially when one’s opinion is weighed against a thousand years of study backed by thousands of scholars from the four accepted schools of thought. Such an opinion in the end contradicts ijmā’ (consensus) and holds no weight in the sciences of fiqh and deduction.The fact of the matter is that although one may have done great and outstanding work in a certain field and attained a high status in the eyes of the public, it does not necessitate that he has the credentials to make decisions regarding other fields of Islam.May Allah Ta’ālā accept the efforts of all those who defend Islam and may He continue to take work from them. Ameen.And Allah Ta’āla Knows BestBilal MohammadStudent Darul Iftaa
New Jersey, USAChecked and Approved by,
Mufti Ebrahim Desai.www.daruliftaa.net

[1] Al-Quran, Al-Isrā, 32
[2] Al-Quran, An-Nūr, 31
[3] Sahīh Muslim, Book of al-Qadr (Fate), vol. 4, pg. 2047, Dar Ihyā at-Turāth
[4] Sahih Muslim, 2128, The Book of Clothes and Adornment
[5] Ma’ariful Quran, ” The Difference Between the Injunctions of Satr-ul-‘Awrah and Veiling of Women (Hijab)”, Surah al-Ahzab:53
[6] فَلَمَّا ذَاقَا الشَّجَرَةَ بَدَتْ لَهُمَا سَوْآتُهُمَا وَطَفِقَا يَخْصِفَانِ عَلَيْهِمَا مِنْ وَرَقِ الْجَنَّةِ(سورة الأعراف، ٢٢)
[7] Al-Quran, Surah al-Qasas:25
[8] Ibid.;Ahkām al-Quran by Mufti Shafī’ ‘Uthmānī, vol. 3, pg. 404-406, Idarah al-Quran w’al-‘Ulūm al-Islamiyyah
[9] Ma’ariful Quran, “The Second Issue – the Hijab of Women”, Surah al-Ahzab:53;Ahkām al-Qurān by Mufti Muhammad Shafī’ ‘Uthmanī, vol. 3, pg. 408, Idarah al-Quran w’al-‘Ulūm al-Islamiyyah
[10] Surah al-Ahzab:33
[11] Ma’ariful Quran, “The First Degree of Hijab from People by Virtue of Staying Home”, Surah al-Ahzab:53; الأولي من سورة الأحزاب هذه الآية أعني قوله تعالي: و إذا سألتموهن متاعا فاسألوهن من وراء حجاب، و هي أول آية نزلت في الحجاب…و هذه الآية تدل علي أن كيفية الحجاب الشرعي هو التستر بالبيوت والخدور بحيث لا ينكشف للرجال شيء من أبدانهن و زينتهن…(أحكام القرآن للمفتي محمد شفيع، ج ٣، ص ٤٠٨، إذارة القرآن و العلوم الإسلامية)؛ الأولي: حجاب الأشخاص بالبيوت والجدر والخدور والهوادج و أمثالها، بحيث لا يري الرجال الأجانب شيئا من أشخاصهن و لا لباسهن و زينتهن الظاهرة و لا الباطنة، و لا شيئا من جسدهن من الوجه والكفين و سائر البدن(أحكام القرآن للمفتي محمد شفيع، ج ٣، ص ٤٥٤، إذارة القرآن و العلوم الإسلامية)؛ (فَاسْأَلُوهُنَّ مِنْ وَرَاءِ حِجَابٍ) يقول: من وراء ستر بينكم وبينهن، ولا تدخلوا عليهن بيوتهن (ذَلِكُمْ أَطْهَرُ لِقُلُوبِكُمْ وَقُلُوبِهِنَّ) يقول تعالى ذكره: سؤالكم إياهن المتاع إذا سألتموهن ذلك من وراء حجاب أطهر لقلوبكم وقلوبهن من عوارض العين فيها التي تعرض في صدور الرجال من أمر النساء، وفي صدور النساء من أمر الرجال، وأحرى من أن لا يكون للشيطان عليكم وعليهن سبيل.(جامع البيان للطبري، ج ١٢، ص ٣٩، دار الفكر)
[12] الثاني: أمرهن بملازمة البيوت. وهو أمر مطلوب من سائر النساء…و قد يحرم عليهن الخروج…وما يجوز من الخروج كالخروج للحج و زيارة الوالدين و عيادة المرضي و تعزية الأموات من الأقارب…وقال ابن كثير: و قرن في بيوتكن، أي الزمن بيوتكن فلا تخرجن بغير حاجة.(أحكام القرآن للمفتي محمد شفيع، ج ٣، ص ٤٠٨، إذارة القرآن و العلوم الإسلامية)
[13] Sunan at-Tirmidhi, 1173, The Book of Suckling
[14] وَقَرْنَ فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ وَلَا تَبَرَّجْنَ تَبَرُّجَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ الْأُولَى وَأَقِمْنَ الصَّلَاةَ وَآتِينَ الزَّكَاةَ وَأَطِعْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا.مَعْنَى هَذِهِ الْآيَةِ الْأَمْرُ بِلُزُومِ الْبَيْتِ، وَإِنْ كَانَ الْخِطَابُ لِنِسَاءِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَقَدْ دَخَلَ غَيْرُهُنَّ فِيهِ بِالْمَعْنَى. هَذَا لَوْ لَمْ يَرِدْ دَلِيلٌ يَخُصُّ جَمِيعَ النِّسَاءِ، كَيْفَ وَالشَّرِيعَةُ طَافِحَةٌ بِلُزُومِ النِّسَاءِ بُيُوتَهَنَّ، وَالِانْكِفَافِ عَنِ الْخُرُوجِ مِنْهَا إِلَّا لِضَرُورَةٍ، عَلَى مَا تَقَدَّمَ فِي غَيْرِ مَوْضِعٍ(الجامع لأحكام القرآن للقرطبي، ج ٧، ص ٤٨١، دار الحديث) وَإِذَا سَأَلْتُمُوهُنَّ مَتَاعًا فَاسْأَلُوهُنَّ مِنْ وَرَاءِ حِجَابٍ ذَلِكُمْ أَطْهَرُ لِقُلُوبِكُمْ وَقُلُوبِهِنَّالتَّاسِعَةُ- فِي هَذِهِ الْآيَةِ دَلِيلٌ عَلَى أَنَّ اللَّهَ تَعَالَى أَذِنَ فِي مَسْأَلَتِهِنَّ مِنْ وَرَاءِ حِجَابٍ، فِي حَاجَةٍ تَعْرِضُ، أَوْ مَسْأَلَةٍ يُسْتَفْتَيْنَ فِيهَا، وَيَدْخُلُ فِي ذَلِكَ جَمِيعُ النِّسَاءِ بِالْمَعْنَى، وَبِمَا تَضَمَّنَتْهُ أُصُولُ الشَّرِيعَةِ مِنْ أَنَّ الْمَرْأَةَ كُلُّهَا عَوْرَةٌ، بَدَنُهَا وَصَوْتُهَا، كَمَا تَقَدَّمَ، فَلَا يَجُوزُ كَشْفُ ذَلِكَ إِلَّا لِحَاجَةٍ كَالشَّهَادَةِ عَلَيْهَا، أَوْ دَاءٍ يَكُونُ بِبَدَنِهَا، أَوْ سُؤَالِهَا عَمَّا يَعْرِضُ وَتَعَيَّنَ عندها.((الجامع لأحكام القرآن للقرطبي، ج ٧، ص ٥٢٠، دار الحديث)
[15]الثالثة- قوله تعالى: (مِنْ جَلَابِيبِهِنَّ) الْجَلَابِيبُ جَمْعُ جِلْبَابٍ، وَهُوَ ثَوْبٌ أَكْبَرُ مِنَ الْخِمَارِ. وَرُوِيَ عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ وَابْنِ مَسْعُودٍ أَنَّهُ الرِّدَاءُ. وَقَدْ قِيلَ: إِنَّهُ الْقِنَاعُ. وَالصَّحِيحُ أَنَّهُ الثَّوْبُ الَّذِي يَسْتُرُ جَمِيعَ الْبَدَنِ.(الجامع لأحكام القرآن للقرطبي، ج ٧، ص ٣٥٢، دار الحديث)
[16] Ibid.
[17] ثم اختلف أهل التأويل في صفة الإدناء الذي أمرهن الله به فقال بعضهم: هو أن يغطين وجوههن ورءوسهن فلا يبدين منهن إلا عينا واحدة.* ذكر من قال ذلك: حدثني عليّ، قال: ثنا أَبو صالح قال ثني معاوية عن علي عن ابن عباس، قوله (يَاأَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُلْ لأزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَاءِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ جَلابِيبِهِنَّ) أمر الله نساء المؤمنين إذا خرجن من بيوتهن في حاجة أن يغطين وجوههن من فوق رءوسهن بالجلابيب ويبدين عينا واحدة.* ذكر من قال ذلك: حدثني محمد بن سعد قال ثني أَبي قال ثني عمي قال: ثني أَبي عن أبيه عن ابن عباس، قوله (يَاأَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُلْ لأزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَاءِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ جَلابِيبِهِنَّ … ) إلى قوله (وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَحِيمًا) قال: كانت الحرة تلبس لباس الأمة فأمر الله نساء المؤمنين أن يدنين عليهن من جلابيبهن. وإدناء الجلباب: أن تقنع وتشد على جبينها.(جامع البيان للطبري، ج ١٢، ص ٤٦، دار الفكر)؛الثانية: الحجاب بالبراقع والجلابيب بحيث لايبدو شيء من الوجه والكفين و سائر الجسد و لباس الزينة، فلايري إلا أشخاصهن مستورة من فوق الرأس إلي القدم(أحكام القرآن للمفتي محمد شفيع، ج ٣، ص ٤٥٣، إذارة القرآن و العلوم الإسلامية)
[18] Al-Jāmi’ li Ahkām al-Qurān of Imam al-Qurtubī, vol. 7, pg. 532, Darul Hadīth
[19] الثالثة: الحجاب بالجلابيب وأمثالها مع كشف الوجه والكفين والقدمين(أحكام القرآن للمفتي محمد شفيع، ج ٣، ص ٤٥٤، إذارة القرآن و العلوم الإسلامية)
[20] وقوله: (وَلا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ) يقول تعالى ذكره: ولا يُظهرن للناس الذين ليسوا لهن بمحرم زينتهنّ، وهما زينتان: إحداهما: ما خفي وذلك كالخلخال والسوارين والقرطين والقلائد،والأخرى: ما ظهر منها، وذلك مختلف في المعنيّ منه بهذه الآية، فكان بعضهم يقول: زينة الثياب الظاهرة.ذكر من قال ذلك: حدثنا ابن حميد، قال: ثنا هارون بن المغيرة، عن الحجاج، عن أبي إسحاق، عن أبي الأحوص، عن ابن مسعود، قال: الزينة زينتان: فالظاهرة منها الثياب، وما خفي: الخَلْخَالان والقرطان والسواران…وقال آخرون: الظاهر من الزينة التي أبيح لها أن تبديه: الكحل، والخاتم، والسواران، والوجه.ذكر من قال ذلك: حدثنا أبو كريب، قال: ثنا مروان، قال: ثنا مسلم الملائي، عن سعيد بن جُبير، عن ابن عباس: (وَلا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا) قال: الكحل والخاتم….حدثنا ابن بشار، قال: ثنا أبو عاصم، قال: ثنا سفيان، عن عبد الله بن مسلم بن هرمز، عن سعيد بن جُبير، في قوله: (وَلا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا) قال: الوجه والكفّ….وقال آخرون: عنى به الوجه والثياب.*ذكر من قال ذلك: حدثنا ابن عبد الأعلى، قال: ثنا المعتمر، قال: قال يونس (وَلا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا) قال الحسن: الوجه والثياب.(جامع البيان للطبري، ج ١٠، ١١٧-١١٩، دار الفكر)
[21] الثَّالِثَةُ- أَمَرَ اللَّهُ سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَى النِّسَاءَ بِأَلَّا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ لِلنَّاظِرِينَ، إِلَّا مَا اسْتَثْنَاهُ مِنَ النَّاظِرِينَ فِي بَاقِي الْآيَةِ حِذَارًا مِنْ الِافْتِتَانِ، ثُمَّ اسْتَثْنَى، مَا يَظْهَرُ مِنَ الزِّينَةِ، وَاخْتَلَفَ النَّاسُ فِي قَدْرِ ذَلِكَ، فَقَالَ ابْنُ مَسْعُودٍ: ظَاهِرُ الزِّينَةِ هُوَ الثِّيَابُ. وَزَادَ ابْنُ جُبَيْرٍ الْوَجْهُ. وَقَالَ سَعِيدُ بْنُ جُبَيْرٍ أَيْضًا وَعَطَاءٌ وَالْأَوْزَاعِيُّ: الْوَجْهُ وَالْكَفَّانِ وَالثِّيَابُ. وَقَالَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ وَقَتَادَةُ وَالْمِسْوَرُ بْنُ مَخْرَمَةَ: ظَاهِرُ الزِّينَةِ هُوَ الْكُحْلُ وَالسِّوَارُ وَالْخِضَابُ إِلَى نِصْفِ الذِّرَاعِ «1» وَالْقِرَطَةُ وَالْفَتَخُ «2»، وَنَحْوُ هَذَا فَمُبَاحٌ أَنْ تُبْدِيَهُ الْمَرْأَةُ لِكُلِّ مَنْ دَخَلَ عَلَيْهَا مِنَ النَّاسِ.(الجامع لأحكام القرآن للقرطبي، ج ٦، ص ٥١٨، دار الحديث)
[22] وَقَالَ (4) : {وَلا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا} أَيْ: لَا يُظهرْنَ شَيْئًا مِنَ الزِّينَةِ لِلْأَجَانِبِ، إِلَّا مَا لَا يُمْكِنُ إِخْفَاؤُهُ.وَقَالَ ابْنُ مَسْعُودٍ: كَالرِّدَاءِ وَالثِّيَابِ. يَعْنِي: عَلَى مَا كَانَ يَتَعَانَاهُ نِسَاءُ الْعَرَبِ، مِنَ المِقْنعة الَّتِي تُجَلِّل ثِيَابَهَا، وَمَا يَبْدُو مِنْ أَسَافِلِ الثِّيَابِ فَلَا حَرَجَ عَلَيْهَا فِيهِ؛ لِأَنَّ هَذَا لَا يُمْكِنُ إِخْفَاؤُهُ. وَنَظِيرُهُ فِي زِيِّ النِّسَاءِ مَا يَظْهَرُ مِنْ إِزَارِهَا، وَمَا لَا يُمْكِنُ إِخْفَاؤُهُ. وَقَالَ بِقَوْلِ ابْنِ مَسْعُودٍ: الْحَسَنُ، وَابْنُ سِيرِينَ، وَأَبُو الْجَوْزَاءِ، وَإِبْرَاهِيمُ النَّخَعي، وَغَيْرُهُمْ. وَقَالَ الْأَعْمَشِ، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُبَير، عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ: {وَلا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا} قَالَ: وَجْهُهَا وَكَفَّيْهَا وَالْخَاتَمُ(تفسير ابن كثير، ج ٣، ص ٣٤٨، دار الحديث)
[23] Ahkām al-Qurān by Mufti Muhammad Shafī’ ‘Uthmanī, vol. 3, pg. 426, Idarah al-Quran w’al-‘Ulūm al-Islamiyyah
[24] Al-Jāmi’ li Ahkām al-Qurān of Imam al-Qurtubī, vol. 7, pg. 519, Darul Hadīth
[25] وأما الدرجة الثالثة: اأني خروجهن مستورة الأبدان من الرأس إلي القدم مع كشف الوجه والكفين بشرط الأمن من الفتنة…فاختلف فيه كلمات القوم، منهم من رخص فيها بشرط الأمن من الفتنة، و منهم من لم يرخص فيها إلا عند الاضطرار(أحكام القرآن للمفتي محمد شفيع، ج ٣، ص ٤٦٠، إذارة القرآن و العلوم الإسلامية)
[26] Tafsīr al-Jalālayn, Surah an-Nūr, verse 31
[27] Ahkām al-Qurān by Mufti Muhammad Shafī’ ‘Uthmanī, vol. 3, pg. 467, Idarah al-Quran w’al-‘Ulūm al-Islamiyyah
[28] Although the Hanafī position seems to have some room for discussion, in our times the final position holds to be the same as the other three schools of thought. For a detailed discussion on this matter, refer to the following link:http://www.deoband.org/2009/04/fiqh/miscellaneous/the-niqab-and-its-obligation-in-the-hanafi-madhhab/ For information regarding the position of the other three madhāhib, refer to:Ahkām al-Qurān by Mufti Muhammad Shafī’ ‘Uthmanī, vol. 3, pg. 460-467, Idarah al-Quran w’al-‘Ulūm al-Islamiyyah Also see:Ma’ariful Quran, ” The Third Degree of Islamic Legal Hijab About Which Jurists Differ “, Surah al-Ahzab:53
[29] Ahkām al-Qurān by Mufti Muhammad Shafī’ ‘Uthmanī, vol. 3, pg. 469, Idarah al-Quran w’al-‘Ulūm al-Islamiyyah
[30] Sunan at-Tirmidhī, 990, The Book Janāiz (Funerals)

Niqaab & Modesty

Modesty, JamiatKZN & Mufti Ebrahim Desai

IS THERE A VALID DIFFERENCE OF OPINION ON THE NIQAAB???
RESPONSE TO JAMIATKZN & MUFTI EBRAHIM DESAI
QUESTION – Some people argue that a woman does not have to conceal her face from the gazes of Ghair Mahram men. They cite the following view of the JamiatKZN:
It is compulsory for her to cover her entire body from head to toe with the exception of her hands, feet and face in front of strange (nonMahram) men. This is irrespective if strange men are present on one’s property/house/yard or strange men have a ‘view’ into one’s property/house/yard. (Maraaqil Falaah 1/91)

Is there a valid difference of opinion on the issue of women covering the face? If this
is true then why do Muslims go through so much effort and difficulty to cover their
faces if it is not a Sharia requirement?
(Ghair Mahaareem: All males except those with whom nikaah is not permissible.)
RESPONSE
Allah Ta’ala commands: “O Nabi! Say to your wives, your daughters and the
women of the Believers that they draw over them their Jilbaabs (outer-cloaks).
That (i.e. covering themselves with Jilbaabs) is the least (minimum requirement
which they should adopt) so that they be recognized (as respectable and
honourable ladies) and not be molested (by evil men)”. – (Surah 33, Aayat 59)
Commenting on this Aayat, Allamah Abu Bakr Jassaas says: “In this verse is the
indication that young women have been commanded to conceal their faces from
strange males when they emerge (from their homes).” [Ahkaamul Qur’aan]
Innumerable Fuqaha, Mufassireen, etc. have stated that this Aayat refers to women
covering the face. According to all four Math-habs, women must conceal their faces
from Ghair-Mahram men. Here are a few quotes from the four Mathaahib:

 Hanafi Math-hab: “It is mentioned in Al-Muntaqaa that women will be
prohibited from exposing their faces so that it does not lead to Fitnah. And in
our era, it is Waajib to prohibit them (from exposing their faces) – in fact it is
Fardh due to the preponderance of Fasaad.” [Majma’ul Anhur] The
Honourable Faqeeh was speaking about 400 years ago. Today, it is much
worse! The Wujoob of females covering their faces appears in innumerable
Kutub.
 Maaliki Math-hab: “And verily the two (i.e. face and palms) are not Aurah,
even though it is Waajib to conceal them (i.e. the face and palms) due to the
fear of Fitnah.” [Jawaaahirul Ikleel – Haashiyaa Saawi & other Maaliki Kutub]
 Shaafi Math-hab: “Yes, that woman who is certain of the gaze of a strange
man falling on her, it is incumbent upon her to cover her face from him (i.e.
the Ghair-Mahram man). Otherwise (if she does not conceal her face), then
she will be assisting him towards Haraam. Thus, she will be committing a sin.”
[Tuhfatul Muhtaaj] The Wujoob of females covering their faces is mentioned
in Nihaayatul Muhtaaj and many other Shaafi Kutub as well.
 Hambali Math-hab: “And the face is Aurah outside Salaah as far as gazes
(of ghair-Mahram men) are concerned just like the rest of the body.” [AlIqnaa’ and other Hambali Kutub] In fact, Imaam Ahmed Bin Hambal has
mentioned that even the finger-nail of a woman is Aurah (i.e. it is Waajib to
conceal). What then should be deduced regarding the face???
The scope of this article precludes us from presenting all the Qur’aanic Aayaat,
Ahaadeeth, names and quotes of the authorities of the Shariah which prove that
women should cover their faces. The Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen, Fuqaha of the four
Math-habs, Muhadditheen, Mufassireen, etc. have mentioned that it is Waajib upon
women to conceal their faces from ghair-Mahram men. Their consensus is sufficient
for the sincere seeker of the truth.
HIGHEST DEGREE OF HIJAAB
A Mu’min strives for the highest degree of Hijaab. When speaking about modesty,
then the highest degree of Hijaab should be expounded on. Allah Ta’ala commands:
‘And (O Women!) Remain firmly in your homes.’ (Surah 33 – Aayat 33)
Women must remain at home. They may not emerge from their homes
unnecessarily. It is known as Hijaabul Ash-Khaas Bil Buyoot which means that a strange man (Ghair Mahram man) will not see the woman at all to the extent that he
does not see her even with her clothes on. Since he does not see her at all, her face,
palms and her entire body is automatically concealed from him.
This is the highest level of Qur’anic Hijaab (Purdah) commanded in at least two
Aayaat and proven by several Ahaadeeth. There are at least 24 Ahaadeeth which
substantiate the Shar’i Law that women must remain glued to their homes and they
may only emerge from their homes for necessities deemed imperative by the
Shariah – not so-called necessities which human minds fabricate.
The command is for women to be glued to their homes – not an exposed yard or the
outside of one’s home which exposes a woman to passing traffic. It is not permissible
for the man’s wife and/or daughter to emerge from their homes into their exposed
yards even for the sake of relaxation. This is because they are exposing themselves
to Ghair Mahareem for no valid reason which is shameless.
A woman may not emerge from her home without valid Shar’i reason even if she is
covered from head to toe. The Burqah, Niqaab, Jilbaab, etc. are not a license to
emerge from the home without valid Shar’i reason.
2. When a woman emerges from her home for a reason deemed imperative by the
Shariah, the Jilbaab is a requirement. This vital Qur’aanic injunction may not be
omitted. The masses should be given Ta’leem pertaining to the Jilbaab.
Women wearing pyjamas, exposing their hair, the bodily shape and/or also exposing
their faces to Ghair Mahrams, are indeed shameless. Part of modesty is for a woman
to cover her face as well. Read carefully the following articles:
1. The Indisputable Wujoob of The Niqaab
2. Menk & The Female Pilot.
3. More Hijaab Articles
MARAAQIL FALAAH – THE MISUNDERSTOOD TEXT
In regards to a woman, it is compulsory for her to cover her entire body from head
to toe including the face with the exception of her hands and feet in front of strange
(non-Mahram) men. JamiatKZN quoted “(Maraaqil Falaah 1/91)” as a reference
that it is not compulsory for her to cover her face in front of strange (nonMahram) men.

Since the text is misleading, it is necessary to elaborate. The text of Maraaqil Falaah is as
follows:
“ومجيع بدن احلرة عورة إال وجهها وكفيها” ابطنهما وظاهرمها يف األصح وهو املختار
Translation: “And the entire body of a free woman is AURAH except her face and palms
– the front and back (of the face and hands) according to the most authentic view and this
is the chosen opinion.” [Emphasis ours]
The Mas’alah mentioned in Maraaqil Falaah pertains to Aurah – not Hijaab. Even the
Qur’aan explains the Mas’alah pertaining to Aurah (Satr). This is not disputed. We agree
that the face is not included in the Aurah (Satr) of a woman. However, as far as Hijaab is
concerned, a woman must cover her face. The references to prove that women MUST cover their faces in front of Ghair Mahrams are innumerable.
Why did they omit the Sharah (commentary) on this Mas’alah mentioned by Allamah
Tahtaawi Rahimahullah on the issue of a woman exposing her face?
قوله: “إال وجهها” ومنع الشابة من كشفه خلوف الفتنة ال ألنه عورة
Translation: “And the young woman is prohibited from exposing her face due to the
fear of Fitnah – not because it is Aurah.”
There is a need to ask the JamiatKZN and Mufti Ebrahim Desai: Is there Fitnah
when women expose their faces to Ghair Mahrams?
Since there is Fitnah, why does the JamiatKZN claim that there is a difference of
opinion when it is acknowledged that unveiling is a cause of temptation for men
and women?
In the article they sent to the brother, the following is what Mufti Ebrahim Desai
mentioned:
“Unveiling has a number of disadvantages. Some of them are as follows:
1. It is a violation of the Quran and Hadith;
2. It shows woman’s weakness in belief;
3. It is a cause of temptation for men and women;
4. It strips off her modesty that is an integral part of Faith;
5. It subjects her to adultery and sexual harassment (especially now in Egypt with
the vaginal kit, adultery has become so easy. Had all the women been veiled, the
government would not have so much difficulty in trying to outlaw this kit);
6. It hurts her dignity and feelings and it stains her chastity;

7. It prompts woman to take part in commercial advertisements and films as a
showpiece and a source of enjoyment for the viewers.”
DIFFERENCE OF OPINION
Firstly, there is a difference between Hijaab and Aurah. We are discussing Hijaab
here – not Aurah. Secondly, there is a difference of opinion amongst the Fuqaha
whether the face of a woman is included in her Aurah or not. Thirdly, whilst we agree
that a woman’s face is not Aurah; her face has to be concealed from Ghair Mahrams
due to Hijaab. Fourthly, there is no valid difference of opinion as far as Hijaab is
concerned. Those who claim that there is a difference of opinion amongst the Fuqaha,
should send their dalaa-il for scrutiny. When a person requires a Shar’i Masalah,
then the Masalah is obtained from the Kutub of the Fuqaha. Referring directly to
Qur’aan and Hadeeth for deriving Masaail, is the function solely of the Mujtahideen.
It seems as if the JamiatKZN realized that they committed a huge blunder in their
newsletter. The following statement of Imaam Shaafi’ (Rahmatullahi Alaih) should
be salutary: “Whenever I put forward Shari’ Hujjat (Evidence from the Shariah) in
regard to any mas-alah to someone and he accepted it, honour for him in my heart
grew.”
IT IS INCUMBENT (WAAJIB) UPON WOMEN TO COVER THEIR FACES IN FRONT OF GHAIR MAHRAMS. THERE IS NO VALID DIFFERENCE OF OPINION ON THIS ISSUE!
IT WOULD BE EXCELLENT IF ‘MUFTI’ EBRAHIM DESAI AND THE JAMIATKZN PUBLICLY CLARIFY THIS ISSUE! IN FACT, THIS IS NECESSARY. MAY ALLAH GUIDE THEM AND US. AAMEEN

Jamiatul Ulama Northern Cape

WOMEN IN THE DRIVING SEAT

CURSED BY ALLAH TA’ALA

Question: Many Muslim women who wear the purdah niqaab drive vehicles. It has become a normal practice. The Ulama, the vast majority or perhaps 99% of them, are all silent on this issue. They remove the niqaab while driving. Everyone can see them. When they stop, they lower their niqaabs. What is the status of these women drivers in the Shariah? What does Islam say about women driving cars?

Answer (by Mujlisul Ulama):

Their status is that of the faasiqaat (flagrantly sinful) and faajiraat (immoral). They are the tinder of Jahannam. The women drivers of today are all signs of Qiyaamah. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:

“I take oath by The Being Who has sent me (as the Messenger) with the Haqq! This world will not end unless khasf, qazf and maskh occurs.” The Sahaabah asked: “And, when will that be?” Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “When you see women in the saddles (driving), when singing women are in abundance, when false testimony becomes prevalent, and when homosexuality and lesbianism are perpetrated.”

The prohibition of “driving in saddles’ is not restricted to horses. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has mentioned this in the context of the Impending Hour of Qiyaamah. That is, in profusion women will be driving in the era in close proximity of Qiyaamah. We are today in that era of Aakhiruz Zamaan. This prediction has materialized and the satanic phenomenon of women driving is incremental.

Although the women who are observing mock ‘purdah’ believe themselves to be purdah-nasheen ladies, they dwell in satanic deception. The ‘surooj’ (saddles) mentioned by Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) refers to the driving seat of modernday vehicles. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) lumped them together with homosexuals and lesbians. When these scoundrels begin to preponderate, then it heralds the close advent of Qiyaamah.

These driving faajiraat are absolutely shameless. They have eliminated every vestige of haya from their hearts. It is not possible for a Muslim woman who genuinely fears Allah Ta’ala to drive a car. Almost every step prior to the acquisition of a driving licence is lewd. The woman has to interact with males throughout the process before being granted the rubbish driving licence. We have seen such ‘burqah bibis’ standing in queues, intermingling with kuffaar males at traffic departments. They are tested by male traffic personnel.

The woman sits alone with him in the vehicle. Her husband or father is a veritable dayyooth for permitting this type of zina.

Aiding and abetting these women to flagrantly indulge in this type of zina and lewd public projection, are the ulama-e-soo’ – the juhala, moron molvis – which issue fatwas of ‘jawaaz’ (permissibility) for this type of swinery. The worst culprits and agents of Iblees in this regard are the Tablighi molvis who commit even the kufr of proclaiming ‘permissibility’ for women to travel without mahrams on tabligh excursions.

OUR ROTTEN, CORRUPT SOCIETY

OUR ROTTEN, CORRUPT SOCIETY

INVITING ALLAH’S ATHAAB

An eye-opener for Muslims, is the following lament of a Sister from the U.K.

“Assalamu Alaykum,

Regarding the fatwa issued by 17 scholars in Pakistan on Travelling without a Mahram and the response by The Majlis, I have some thoughts on this as a female living in the West (UK), second generation who always saw women living in the UK as females who went out, shopping, work, etc etc. It was all normal to me as I did not grow up with knowledge on this subject. Islam was very foreign to me in terms of masaail. However at that time there was no open mixing between the learned and unlearned. People kept within the limits to a great extent. When I was a teenager, not that long ago, this changed.

I have witnessed married scholars, muftis groom girls many years younger than themselves. Whilst Islam permits polygamy and the age difference isn’t an issue, they did not have the right intention as they continued to groom these girls without directly going to their fathers and asking for their daughters hand in marriage despite being in contact with the father.

They would use their knowledge of deen as a way of grooming these girls, talking daily, putting down their first wives and second wives to the teenage girls. This didn’t just happen in front of me but all over the UK. Some of these scholars commit zina with these girls and then use the leverage of exposing the girl if she goes to expose him due to their status in the community. People will believe him and not the naive teenager. Seeing this over and over, created a very choking environment for me. I alerted the elders many a time but despite them agreeing the evidence was there, nothing was done.

These scholars audaciously come in front of the families of the teenager and befriend them. They have no shame at all. It is very difficult for these girls to understand that one day they will have their own true loving husband because these scholars have no intention of marrying them and just stringing them along and doing whatever they can do to them in that time. So many have not been exposed because it would hurt the future of the unmarried girl. It is like they are stuck in this foggy environment where they cannot see right from wrong (we could go into the effects of fluoride here but this can be researched separately).

The 17 scholars state that time has changed so the fatwa needs modernising. Yes times have changed, they are worse. Taqwa has left. Openly sinning is the norm. Shame has left.

I enrolled and taught at different Islamic schools and madaaris and it is so easy for Shaitan to make the male and female teachers commit haraam because the parents are not around, families are not around. In the UK we have ‘safe’ means of travel in general, buses and trains and plenty of places to meet up with the opposite gender. Unfortunately there are teenagers who have had an abortion because they found themselves in the position they preached against, whether a normal every day Muslim or a student of knowledge. It’s happening in all scenarios. It’s not just the molvis and apas and madrasah students. It’s even those who are deendaar people who would never think of themselves to commit zina but have and as Muslims we should, in this day and age, absolutely accept every single advice of Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam that Shaitan is the third party no matter how strong you think you are. The modern times makes it so easy for Shaitan to push us. The opportunities are there, the hotels are there, the travel options are there. One finds themselves saying it is haraam and the next second Shaitan has swept us off our feet in a situation we do not want to be in yet this brain fog stops the male and the female from leaving.

The Majlis has quoted several news articles regarding Islamophobia all over the world including the UK. In the UK people generally spread the news of a recent attack on Muslim women in their own areas and I know there are hundreds of more incidents that could have been added from the UK alone. Niqabs are being pulled off frequently but most of these are not reported. The women in that area are afraid to the extent they don’t talk about it. The answer would be to stay home but going back to my opening sentences, we are so used to going out and about despite now having the deeni knowledge we once didn’t have but then we are afraid of the consequences. We have to admit that trying to be progressive is of no use as when these muslimahs report it to the police or the supermarket then they are told there is nothing we can do. We can’t expect protection of Allah Ta’ala when we go against His Deen.

Despite all of the above, there is a change in society now. The knowledgeable deeni people are being replaced with a fresh new wave of Muslims, reverts and those Muslims who had no knowledge their entire lives but are now turning to Allah azza wa jal in hope and fear. People I would not have imagined wanting to fully practise the Deen of Allah azza wa jal are now turning to Him. After seeing the negatives above, this is very refreshing.

I cannot fathom how 17 scholars came to such a ruling because I am just one random person with very little experience and I have seen in the Haram Shareef men talking to young girls openly just like you witnessed decades ago. I have seen the stares from the young males in front to the young girl a few feet behind during tawaaf of the Ka’bah. This was a few years ago and now fitnah is worse and more open to be seen by all.

I do not need to be a mufti to see that it is unsafe for women to emerge. Recently two 14 year olds were attacked in the UK on a bus. They had friends with them. They were approached by a woman telling them to take their hijab off. I remember my teen years, we would go out on the bus and teenage Muslim girls seem to be louder than non Muslim girls. Loud giggling and cackling. I was quite shy as a teen but I was still out and about as it was the norm. It was only when I started to hang around with the non-Muslims at school did I learn proper adab and that you can be calm and respectful. I didn’t understand what the muslimahs were trying to prove by acting that way. It was very depressing. I am not saying these 14 year olds were doing that but only a 10 year old kid came to their rescue and he was attacked for doing so. The muslimahs were brutally attacked and the male who was with the attacker blocked anyone from helping the teenagers. In such an open environment I don’t see how he blocked others from helping except that this is a wake-up call from Allah Ta’ala. But instead of Muslim females acknowledging this, they protest and rant at the ‘injustice’ – that no one is helping them.

My understanding of life as a female in the west in 2020 in that we need to go back to the basic rulings of Islam from ancient books and go through each ruling one by one and act on them. We need to shun modern rulings because Allah Ta’ala is very openly telling us this is not the way. We need to accept our role and it isn’t a regressive one. This role protects us from abuse of the men outside, it means all those teenagers, now full UK adults will have no regrets of being groomed and abused. It means that mothers can concentrate on the tarbiyah of their children. It means we can complete all our qazas which majority of people in the UK have due to the schooling system instead of going to all the Islamic talks and wasting time. It means we can then catch on when a scholar makes an odd statement and not follow him blindly. If a scholar says a female can be an aalimah, hafizah and gain a degree at university then perhaps he has some things going on in his life in conflict with Deen such as attending mixed events himself because even if this aalimah sticks to her study at university and prays Salah in the Salah room, the males on the other side of the cloth still manage to gain opportunity to talk to her and make her feel worthless.

I could write an entire book on the issues that women face, the grooming, the attacks but it will not achieve anything because a muslimah needs to accept that the rulings of the early Fuqaha are Islam and this is the only way that she will find protection and ease of heart in this world. She can still have a business from home, she can still study, she can do anything within the comforts of her own home in this day and age. There are many arguments these females are putting forward to justify their need to go out but they are not valid because generally what they mean is they do not put trust in Allah and are putting trust in modernism to save the Muslims. But it isn’t working out . We’ve had all of these years of modernism, where has it got us? We can be modern. We can take the good and leave that which causes harm. This is the balance Islam provides but not accepting that the harms in the dunya are as a result of our own misconduct is something we need to work on.

From my experience, the people who spout corrupt fatwas are participating in the corruption themselves. They may only be a little into it but not realising the effects it can have on the Ummah.

Reading the examples in your book, gave me many flashbacks of the things I and other females have witnessed. It is only Allah Ta’ala’s fazl that I and other females in the west are still on the path of Islam as the roads we have tread upon were very far from Him. May Allah azza wa jall forgive us all and allow us to feel content on the rulings of the fuqaha so that we can enjoy eternall bliss in Jannah. Ameen. Wassalam (End of the Sister’s letter)

COMMENT

The ‘scholars’ to whom the Sister refers are in reality shayaateen (devils) in human bodies or men with the hearts of wolves as mentioned in the Hadith. They are Iblees-incarnate. They plunder the hayaa (shame and chastity) of females who are vulnerable due to their natural attribute of nuqs fil aql (intellectual deficiency). Taking gross satanic advantage of such vulnerability these devilish molvis and sheikhs gratify their zina lusts without any semblance of Imaani conscience or fear for Allah Azza Wa Jal.

These scholars of lust and agents of Iblees are the primary cause for the ruin and destruction of the Ummah. They are the worst kind of traitors in the Ummah. Under subterfuge of their outward Islamic appearance they perfidiously perpetrate heinous and scandalous crimes of zina and concupiscence. It is difficult to believe that such scoundrels as described by the Sister have any Imaan.

Further, the reality on the ground – the real dangers to which Muslim females outside the home have to be confronted with, at the very minimum testifies to the colossal ignorance of those muftis who have the temerity to issue corrupt and stupid fatwas legalizing the haraam act of women travelling without mahrams. In fact, it is haraam in our day for women to venture out of their homes to attend to even needs within the neighbourhood. In these times of fitnah and fasaad it is incumbent for a mahram to accompany a woman when she desires to visit even a next door neighbour for a valid reason. These muftis who disgorge stupid zigzag fatwas are described as mufti maajin by the Fuqaha. They are moron muftis who are adept in the art of stupid and devious interpretation for abrogating Shar’i ahkaam which have come down in the Ummah from the era of the Sahaabah. These moron muftis are in the satanic game of fabricating a new shariah to appease the modernist zanaadaqah.

Be exceptionally weary of the muftis of this age. A sincere Muslim will not become enmeshed in the tentacles of deception of the maajin muftis, if he consults his heart, for Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Seek a fatwa from your heart.”

20 Jamadul Awwal 1441 – 16 January 2020

Niqaab, Burqah And Khimaar

Niqaab, Burqah And Khimaar

INTRODUCTION

A lesbian-type, moron Kaafirah belonging to the Gay-Lesbian temple in Cape Town has written an article loaded with pure stupidities to deny the Islamic law pertaining to Hijaab. In her flotsam drivel she made her best stupid endeavours to debunk the validity of the Jilbaab/Burqah, Niqaab and Khimaar (headscarf). In her satanic attempt she has succeeded in only displaying her stark ignorance and the density of her copro-brains.

Her arguments consist of only compounded rubbish which evokes the mirth of all and sundry – of even such modernists whose brains have not been convoluted by the gay-lesbian-homosexual cult.

 

Although the rubbish which the moron Kaafirah has disgorged does not warrant an intelligent response, we have nevertheless deemed it appropriate to refute her rubbish which may influence such ignorant Muslims who have lost their Imaani bearings. The discussion which follows is for the benefit of ignorant Muslims who may have been cast into doubt by the stinking effluvium discharged the moron Kaafirah.

Niqaab Burqah and Khimaar

The VEIL slips over abusive pride marchers

this post was taken from islam21c.com and had pictures and video,  that was removed here. we felt that in spite of  that fact we need to spread the news to the muslim public. with that being said we stick by our policy of using only halaal means to spread the message of islam.  so because of this the post is a little disjointed.(Jaalhaque)

 

The VEIL slips over abusive pride marchers

Negative framing and the assumptions that come with it
Disability benefits assessor Dr Macker loses his job after refusing to address a six-foot-tall, bearded man as ‘madam’. [1]

Vicar, Reverend, and school governor Peter Hughes of St. Alban’s who described LGBT+ proselytisation at schools as a form of child grooming is pushed to step down as school governor. [2]

Nationwide parental rallies against the ‘no outsiders’ LGBT+ programme, evangelised to four-year-olds and above in schools with an uptake of nearly 98% Muslim, [3] are called “mobs” that should be “tackled”. [4]

More recently, a video circulating of a Muslim woman dressed in a niqāb shouting at a member of a Gay Pride rally in Walthamstow created a public furore. Later on, despite alleged eye-witnesses claiming she was harassed and called “scum” beforehand, the woman was arrested. [5]

Beyond succumbing to the social furore, the police may have stoked memories of their bygone incarceration of “gay” activists even in the minds of those activists themselves! The hypocrisy of the alt-right was nothing surprising after the video—which appeared to conveniently begin in the middle of a skirmish—went viral. It is another perfect opportunity to peddle their Islamophobia.

Katie Hopkins blamed the ‘crime’ on the increasing presence of minority groups. [6] Hopkins, who forced her cradler, The Daily Mail, to pay £150k in damages to a Muslim family in 2016 – also in Walthamstow – for inventing a story about that family’s links to al-Qaeda will probably walk away scot-free this time. More disenchanting, maybe, was the audacious reaction of certain Muslims who accused the provoked Muslim woman of being ‘stupid’. If failing to minimally react like some pro-LGBT+ commentators who tried to make sense of the 50-second video, at least assume a standard better than that of Katie Hopkins. According to commentator Colin Wilson:

“I don’t think, for example, that I’ve ever heard of anyone being arrested before for heckling a Pride march – I’ve seen plenty of people do it, but they were generally white, and yet the first person to get nicked is a Muslim woman in a niqab. Would the cops have arrested a Tommy Robinson fan in an England shirt? A nun? And in Waltham Forest it’s even more the case that we can’t choose to side with Muslims or with LGBT people, because the woman was specifically abusing members of Imaan, the Muslim LGBT group.” [7]

The video was sourced from a Muslim counter-extremism practitioner who thought it was his duty to highlight homophobia. The irony in highlighting ‘hate’ by the person is not escaped: counter-extremism in whatever flavour and shape it comes in, presumes a demonised, mainly Muslim identity and is reliant on ‘signs’ – behaviours and symbols – that are used to further deepen the demonisation of the target group. [8]
Whilst the impulse to share an incident with an intention to stigmatise harmful behaviour may have some merit, where the incident is partially informed, it can lead to stigmatisation of an already scrutinised and demonised group.

The responses to the video exemplify this. It seems the War on Terror traits, which has reproduced a McCarthyistic trial by a lack of due process for Muslims, has seeped into the consciousness of society.
Yusuf Patel
@YusufJP_
· 28 Jul 2019
Disgusting homophobic abuse at those on Waltham Forest Pride today.

No matter what form hate comes in, we must stamp it out and say no to all forms of hate! Also, very importantly we cannot call out one form of hate but be silent/complicit on others. @GalopUK @stonewalluk

Embedded video

Salma Yaqoob

@SalmaYaqoob
Absolutely appalling. It is this woman’s behaviour that is shameful. And an abuse of freedom of speech to harass peaceful protestors in such a hateful homophobic manner. Just heartbreaking to see such spite & hypocrisy. “Treat others as you would like to be treated yourself”…

75
12:42 – 30 Jul 2019
Twitter Ads information and privacy
See Salma Yaqoob’s other Tweets

East Midlands Trainspotting Hub 🏳️‍🌈
@CarlPlandogRBX
· 28 Jul 2019
Replying to @YusufJP_ and 2 others
bruh @TomW_LNER
Thomas Whyte
@TomW_LNER
bruh didn’t know letterboxes could speak

6
23:44 – 28 Jul 2019
Twitter Ads information and privacy
See Thomas Whyte’s other Tweets
The mainstream and social media clamour focused on the Muslim woman’s statements and behaviour. Journalists inundated the source of the video with requests to use the video to create stories about how a Muslim woman shouted out the famous Alan Partridge line “Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve”, bringing this, as well as religious orthodoxy by implication, into the ever-expanding realm of ‘hate’. [5]

Journalists, that body of people who are supposed to ask the questions that probe the assumed, dominant narrative, failed to ask simple questions. Did the Muslim woman start hurling statements at the rally spontaneously? Or were her statements a reaction? If so, what caused this reaction? And why is the steward trying to clearly restrain the LGBT+ activist rather than the Muslim woman? The underlying assumption in the blind-eyeing of these questions was that she is Muslim, and a veiled one at that, and therefore in a Muslim versus LGBT+ member situation, the Muslim must be the presumed aggressor. This was enough, so it seems, for the anti-Muslim mob and their journalist and social media allies to proverbially lynch her.
Yusuf Patel
@YusufJP_
· 28 Jul 2019
Disgusting homophobic abuse at those on Waltham Forest Pride today.

No matter what form hate comes in, we must stamp it out and say no to all forms of hate! Also, very importantly we cannot call out one form of hate but be silent/complicit on others. @GalopUK @stonewalluk

Embedded video

Asher McShane

@ashermcs
Hi – could we please use this video on the Evening Standard website with credit to you?

View image on Twitter
10
18:06 – 28 Jul 2019
Twitter Ads information and privacy
See Asher McShane’s other Tweets
This racist assumption was realised by the police too when the person arrested for potentially committing a public order offence and placed in a cell overnight was a Muslim woman. [9]

The speculative conclusions formed the foundations for ripe Islamophobia. Everything from her religion to the fabric across her face was mocked, blamed and made the subject of legal measures. This, from among the same people who were using the attack on the niqāb by Boris Johnson as political capital to point-score only a couple of weeks ago.

She was a coward, apparently, for covering her face, whilst the one who broke off from a rally, privileged by her semi-celebrity status, backed by the very same mob-like rally, and now the media, politicians, and police, was the victim. [10] What was that about oppressive power structures?

Witnessing this spectacle, I notice the lack of commentary about the Muslim woman’s perspective, how she felt, and why she reacted the way she did. I also witness how the person breaking from the rally has not been arrested and placed in a cell for possible public order offences to “investigate” whether she did something to provoke the situation and potentially cause harassment, alarm, and distress.

Indeed, how many a time have EDL members hurled abuse at Islām and Muslims; how many of these members have been arrested by the police? Deliberately provocative placards against Islām, and other more sinister placards calling for “less Islam”, echoing Douglas Murray’s genocidal call, have been paraded up and down the streets of this country. Why have there been no arrests under the Public Order Act? Where are the sanctimonious free speech warriors that are normally present to defend these placards now?

Freedom of speech is cardinal when it comes to attacking Islām. Utter “shame on you” and make Biblical references to crowd? Prepare for some unprecedented police action.

What the entire fiasco highlights is the permeation of racist assumptions, including among those who claim to “love all” and promote “inclusiveness”. In fact, the latter increasingly perpetuate a type of tyranny that is coercing Muslims to choose between modifying their beliefs to accommodate their worldview or be made an “outsider” in society. It is a Henry Ford type of “love” and “inclusivity” that is premised on ideological assimilation.

This is not about this specific incident. This is about the persistent and negative framing of Muslims as the aggressor that continues to perpetuate a demonisation of Muslims that fuels repressive and oppressive mechanisms. Be that justice by a pitchforks and pickaxes mob, or coercive ideological assimilation that replicates fascist tendencies.

There is a need for a stronger challenge to these set of dynamics, no matter who—Muslim, non-Muslim, LGBT+ or non-LGBT+—pushes it. Do we want to be living in a society which presumes a group as guilty thereby fanning the flames of Islamophobia? How long can specific narratives remain the preserve of a majority yet double standards employed for a demonised minority? And do we want to accept coercive ideological assimilation that replicates fascist tendencies and pitch-forks, pick-axes mob rule?

These are some questions which must be advanced.

Source: http://www.islam21c.com

Notes:

[1] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/07/10/christian-doctor-lost-job-government-department-refusing-identify/

[2] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-48827031

[3] https://www.transgendertrend.com/no-outsiders-queering-primary-classroom/

[4] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-48965655

[5] https://5pillarsuk.com/2019/07/29/police-arrest-niqabi-woman-who-criticised-lgbt-activists-after-they-harassed-her/

[6] https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/homophobic-abuse-waltham-forest-pride-police-investigation_uk_5d3dacb3e4b0a6d637411072?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJay7HHbwikkdEnPgRUh7wNVrjfBkWHOFILfe3mIsEbj7U1mMvIXzsGFFMPeS-nwKNNwYGyUhbjv1n2dTqDJ6PJryfphY831_ZzevD9zXMtockZKIDDUKdXO3RhekjDzrufL9EVNIuAGSDrKTyzzZYchpizcXOy77MQiPFKe3Izd

[7] https://www.rs21.org.uk/2019/07/30/waltham-forest-pride-we-cant-arrest-our-way-to-liberation/

[8] https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/07/the-curious-reaction-to-a-niqab-wearing-homophobe/

[9] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jul/29/woman-arrested-over-homophobic-abuse-during-pride-march

[10] https://www.itv.com/news/london/2019-07-29/who-hurled-homophobic-abuse-at-lgbt-pride-marchers-in-walthamstow/

Tagged with: GAY HATE HATE CRIME ISLAMOPHOBIA LGBT MARCH NIQAB ORIENTALISM POLICE PRIDE RACISM

ABOUT the author
she is a niqāb-wearing British Muslim woman, and a student of knowledge in the Hanafi school of law. She has studied law, works professionally and takes a keen interest in Muslim public affairs.

NIQAAB BANNING

European countries and even the kuffaar gov-ernment of Algeria have banned the Niqaab. Ostensibly the ban is a display of hatred for Islam. Nevertheless, the prelude for this banning is the abandonment of true Hijaab by Muslims themselves. As such, it is a punishment of Allah Ta’ala.
Hijaab is not restricted to donning the Niqaab. Hijaab is a whole system which requires Muslim females to remain within the precincts of the home. Muslim women all over the world have completely abandoned Hi-jaab. In fact, they regard the niqaab as a licence for free and unrestricted roaming and prowling in the public domain.
As a punishment, Allah Ta’ala is now inflicting the phenomenon of islamophobia which brings humiliation and danger to Muslim women who deem it appropriate to wander around in public places.
When Muslims themselves indulge in flagrant violation of the ahkaam of the Shariah, then Allah Ta’ala humiliates and punishes us in different ways. Islamophobia is one such way.
Muslims are deserving of the humiliation which they have invited with their rebellion against Allah Ta’ala.