A
Muslim Sisters Response to The Campaign of Dr Taj Hargey to Ban the Burka in
Britain
My
reply to a blog entry on: A Muslim Sisters’ Response to The Campaign of Dr Taj
Hargey to Ban the Burka in Britain
It
says “August 21, 2014 by Imran Hussein”, but also states it is by Ruqayyah
Dawood, so it is not entirely clear to me who actually wrote this.
To kick
this off, let me see what this is all about. A Muslim cleric in the UK, a Dr
Taj Hargey, has launched a campaign to ban the wearing of all types of face
masks in public, including the burka - in the UK. He accepts women as equals,
as participating members of society who can be visible, even in a mosque.
He
states the burka has nothing to do with Islam and is just a cultural fad
imported from Arabia. He further questions all Muslims why they don’t reject
this misogynistic piece of covering as it clearly divides Muslims from normal
people. Yes, I am distinguishing between normal people and those demanding
women wear a full body covering.
He
makes some valid points, like the fact that the Koran nowhere states that “women
need to cover their bodies excepting faces and hands” and that any covering is
prohibited for women on pilgrimage, the hajj. It’s only the interpretation of
humans, old men, who have decided what is an adequate attire for young women.
He points to the origins of veiling and the role of distinguishing slaves from
free women, the slave owners. Disassembling the religious arguments, he points
to cultural demands and how today the burka is seen as a positive sign, a sign
of victory of Muslims in their quest for world domination.
So now
we have a reply by a female Muslim, a woman who likes walking around as an
unidentifiable object, a non-personality. A woman who thinks tolerance and acceptance
are one-way streets and if I tolerate and adjust to the local culture in Oman, there
is no need for the Oman people to tolerate or adjust to other cultures.
I have marked the post I am replying to as
As a British female revert to Islam, I am yet again offended by a man
trying to impose his beliefs about what he thinks is best for me, what I should
wear and how I should practice my chosen faith.
We are
not told, what has offended this poor kid in the past to be traumatised so badly.
Whatever
it was, she now thinks that offending others in their cultural environment is a
lot better than feeling offended by the culture she wants to live in.
I would like to categorically
assert that I did not accept the religion of Islam to have Muslim reformists
try to chase me away from it, or deter me from following its normative
tradition.
It is
telling how simpleminded people tend to identify with a symbol of their belief.
This poor, deluded woman thinks that asking her to associate with the cultural
environment she is living in and to demonstrate some tolerance for the
traditions of this country as well as respect for the locals is simply too
much. Rather, she expects others to tolerate and respect her adopted culture
from 1000s of miles away, the Arabian desert. There, slaves are banned from
wearing veils and burkas and only the free women may cover themselves.
Our
Muslimah now thinks that the practices of the Arabian desert, stemming from
cultural norms 1000s of miles away and 1000s of years ago need to be applied
here and now.
She makes
it sound as though if she were deprived of this cloth, her entire identity and
belief system would be stripped away along with it. Living in a tolerant
society which caters for every crackpot is one thing – expecting this society
to now adopt the crackpot rituals and beliefs is another.
Dr.
Hargey is propagating an integration with the host society, not a ban on
personal beliefs. If a person wants to practice their beliefs they are welcome
to do so, but not at the cost of everyone around them.
Does
this woman ever stop and think what message she is sending out? Does she
consider the feelings of others? Is she in any way considerate or only selfish?
Especially by someone who is clearly
untrained and lacking in scholarly credence. [1]
She is
so desperate to oppress others with her threatening and frightening attire she
is blindly lashing out. She has no factual points, so she delivers the
knee-jerk reaction of not addressing facts but rather resorts to trying to
damage the person’s credibility, regardless of the validity of their arguments.
She
refers to a blog of someone who rejects the notion of progress and change
within Islam and reckons that if something was good enough for Muhammad, it
must be good enough for all Muslims. That’s how easy the world can be. Live
your life according to the rules of the 7th century and everything is fine.
The first baseless accusation I’d like to
address, made by Dr Taj Hargey, who doesn’t deserve a formal introduction, is
that the face veil poses a security risk. Despite there being no evidence
to support that veiled women are prone to committing criminal or terrorist
acts, I do not know of anyMuslim woman who has the slightest objection to
removing the face veil to confirm their identity, thus adhering to much needed
security measures in airports and other places that require heightened
security.
This
woman is so full of hate and fear that she can’t think straight. Criminals are
using the burka as disguise from cameras. That is a security risk. They are
using the politeness factor, which creates a threshold which needs to be
overcome before addressing every person in a burka to establish their identity.
That is a security risk. It’s truly astonishing how limited her thinking
capability is.
In 2001, having being a Muslim for
seven years, I deliberated and studied the issue of adorning the face veil and
willingly adopted it for myself. That choice and the way I choose to dress have
never prevented me from being a compassionate, positive and active citizen of
Britain. Neither has it restricted me in volunteering for activities to promote
health and fitness in my city. I have delivered presentations on Islam at
schools, fed the homeless in my local area, and even taken part in parent’s
races on Sports Day! Rather it is counter productive and negative campaigns by
Dr Hargey which encourage unrest and distrust, whilst proposing a dangerous
totalitarian law on dress code that threatens all of our liberties, whatever
our faith and beliefs.
How can
you be a “positive and active citizen” if you are locking yourself away under
all these layers of cloth? This cloth spells “do not approach”. When I
approached 3 burka clad women they ran away shrieking before I could get past
the “Could you tell me where ….”
Maybe
this woman has taken part in something – but has she ever considered how others
felt in her presence?
What
Dr. Hargey is proposing is a rational and factual approach leading to a
position of communal acceptance and integration, instead of this divisive
garment.
How is
this counter-productive? How does the burka do anything for the acceptance of
Islam in non-Islamic countries? How does a burka bring trust? Ludicrous.
Banning
the hiding of the face is totalitarian, threatening liberties? In this culture
people ought to take responsibility for their actions. Looters, rioters and
hooligans don’t.
Another groundless assertion that Dr
Hargey makes in ‘support’ of his campaign against the ‘burka’ is that the veil
does not have a place in Islam and is that it is completely against Islamic
thought and tradition. This claim is riddled with inaccuracies and
misinformation. History documents that amongst the vast majority of Muslim
scholars since the early days of Islam, there has always been a healthy culture
of debating religious issues. These topics would include the best way to offer
prayer, whether shellfish is a permitted for consumption and if the
face veil is obligatory or just an extra act of worship. Within all schools of
thought the face veil has always been considered, at the very least, to be an
honored act of obedience to The Creator.
This
is a lie. There has never been a “healthy” debate regarding Islam in Islam. Muslims
who disagree over nuances in the interpretations of their vague and ambiguous
texts kill each other before they talk.
None
of the 1000s of groupings within Islam agree on the covering for women. There
is no common agreement whether or not it is required and if it is required what
should be covered and by what.
Dr Hargey also feebly attempts at a
claim that the veil cannot be Islamic because other ancient cultures encouraged
it prior to the advent of Islam. This is like saying the turban cannot be part
of Sikhism, because the Arabs wore it before they did! In fact the claim that
the face veil stems from deep roots in Persian tradition doesn’t wash either.
Ancient Greek texts speak of the veiling, and the seclusion of women being
practiced among the Persians as a means to separate the ‘elite’ from the
commoners. Historically, the veil was an article of apparel that was a means of
denoting social distinction. It was not a widespread phenomenon, but was
restricted to a certain social class of women. [2]
Dr.
Hargey points out that other ancient cultures knew of veiling and/or covering
women to different degrees at different occasions. Today, women are part of
society and men and women have equal rights legally, something denied to women
in Islamic jurisprudence.
In contrast the face veil, or ‘niqab’
adopted by Muslim women, is considered an act of obedience and commitment to
The Creator, because as the Qur’an states,
It is
relatively useless to constantly refer to what something is “considered as”.
That is human interpretation and confirmation bias will not allow any objective
statement.
“Indeed, the noblest among you near
Allah, is the one who is most conscious of Allah.”[3]
A book
making a vague statement is not providing a definition or clear statement. What
exactly does “noblest among you near Allah” mean? Who is noble or more noble
among whom? What is near or further away from a god? How can anyone even be
closer to something which has never been demonstrated to exist? What is the
requirement to be “conscious” of something? How can a human be “conscious” of a
god if that god is not part of our reality, our continuum and reality? Complete
hogwash.
Dr Hargey also dismisses the veil by
arguing that it is a backward cultural practice. He usually cites the Pakistani
community, and argues that it is just a primitive tradition of elderly
Pakistani women. This pseudo-argument does not hold water. Modern Islamist
feminists and contemporary scholars are infact trying to educate much of the
developing world that many of their customs, including honour
killings, the caste system and preference of boys over girls are not connected
to Islam. They argue that these customs are antithetical to Islamic values and
are rooted in ignorance.Pakistan is no model for the most practising Islamic
society. The irony is, many of these Islamist feminists who struggle against
backward cultural practices – wear the face veil themselves! Thus, the veil is
a symbol for revival and progress.
The
rituals in Islam are adopted or “borrowed” from earlier traditions, mostly
pagan. That’s why Muslims today run around the Kaaba and a black stone seven
times and throw pebbles at the symbolised devil, wearing white robes and
performing ritualistic washings and animal sacrifices as punishment. Primitive
traditions. Muslims throw themselves on the ground and put their heads on the
floor and then greet their guardian angels on the right and the left. Primitive
traditions. They believe in demons, evil spirits and enter a toilet only left
foot first while mumbling some ritualistic words to ward off the evil spirits,
the jinn, trying to take control of their bodies via the exposed body openings.
Primitive traditions. They believe in the evil eye and curses and black magic.
They mutilate the genital organs of boys and girls.
The
burka has been around for 1000s of years, was abolished and was revived. The
Koran only condones knowledge of the Koran and the hadith reject change and
progress. Muslims are not interested in science and scientific advancements, so
they lie and invent something sounding “sciency” and attribute this to Koran
and Muslims. No, there is no progress in Islam and least of all in the burka.
It must be said that Dr Taj Hargey will
not understand why women choose to wear the niqab without acknowledging the
revolution that occurred amongst women at the time of the Prophet Muhammad
(peace be upon him). The women during the early period of Islam
enthusiastically adhered to the Quranic instruction of the veil as part of an
uprising against the ignorant practices of those times.
This
is a fabrication and sheer ignorance. The covering for free women existed and
was merely adopted.
Just as western history celebrates the
burning of bras of the 1960’s, so does the Islamic world cheer the women of the
Arabian deserts who tore their sheets in two so that they may cover their heads
and faces. This was their revolution, with The Creator as their
Liberator and Protector, freeing them from sexual deprivation, degradation
based on gender,and empowering them against a culture of immorality – Common
practices in the age of ignorance included marriages that had more in common
with prostitution than a contract of love and compassion. Islam emancipated
women.
Utter bullshit.
Five years after the Prophet’s
migration to Medina, the fifty-ninth verse of Surah Al-Ahzab, was revealed,
How
does she know this? How can she claim this with any degree of certainty?
“O Prophet, tell your wives and your
daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part]
of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not
be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful. [4]
This
is a typical description of women when they were on a camel in a caravan as
free women, not as working slaves.
The Prophet (pbuh) was commanded to
tell his wives, daughters and the women of the believers to ‘bring their outer
garments close to them’ so that they can be recognized as noble women and not
be harmed. In response to the verse, the women of Madina were reported to have
come out with their faces covered in different ways. [5]
They “were
reported” means nothing. “Some say” has no bearing on anything.
Whilst Dr Hargey mentions verse thirty
in Surah Al-Noor,where Allah Almighty commands believing men and women to lower
their gaze and guard their chastity, he fails to follow it up with the mention
of the following verse, verse thirty-one, where Allah then tells women to not
expose their beauty except that which is normally apparent. [6] There are two
interpretations for the ‘normally apparent’. Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased
with him) says it means the face and hands, however, Ibn Mas’ud (may Allah be
pleased with him) interprets it as whatever is apparent after the face is
covered.
Well,
Dr. Hargey also omits the rest of the Koran. His point is why do women need to protect
themselves from men when men are commanded to lower their “gaze”? Wouldn’t a
simple command in the Koran be sufficient to settle this once and for all: “do
not force yourself on women”.
Dr.
Hargey points out a contradiction in the Koran, which says one thing and then
contradicts it with something else. The sentence that women should “not expose
their beauty except that which is normally apparent” is a typical, wonderfully
vague sentence which carries no information at all and can be interpreted into
anything you want regarding clothes on women.
These revelations and traditions are
where the deep rooted Islamic view of face veil stems from and where I myself
derive my belief that my niqab is as an additional act of obedience to my
Creator. My interpretation, which is in line with the Shafi’, Hanbali and later
Hanafi jurists has encouraged myself to emulate the women closest in affection
and time to the Prophet of Islam, namely his wives and daughters. These women
are my role models. Obviously Dr Hargey doesn’t consider them as people we
should look up to. Perhaps Dr Hargey’s demeaning behaviour
towards the adherents of mainstream Islam is due to an inferiority
complex?
The
writer of these lines demonstrates her simple mind and primitive beliefs with
this. She takes what some men, Ibn ‘Abbas and Ibn Mas’ud tell her how to dress.
Two men who lived more than 1000 years ago, if they even excited and were not
fabricated along with Muhammad’s fairy tales.
This
hypocrite of a woman demonstrates her double standards when she says that men
who tell her what is best when they lived 1000 years ago this is totally
acceptable – yet when a man tells her something today, she is “offended by a
man trying to impose his beliefs about what he thinks is best for me”.
Embarrassing.
She
accepts the ancient scholars and their rulings over her and dresses according
to the culture of the 7th century and uses the internet of the
21st century. Astonishing.
Women
in the hadith are pictured as tilth, objects, without a voice, deficient in
every way. But this woman wants the dress but not the consequences. Typical
cherry-picking.
Dr Hargey also says that the face veil
is not permitted in Islam’s Holy City of Makkah during the Annual Pilgrimage.
Having performed the Annual Pilgrimage once and the lesser ‘Umrah’ Pilgrimage
twice, I can tell you it is a frequent sight to witness the Saudi security
guards reminding the womenfolk, who do not wear veil, of its importance in such
a mixed and crowded environment. Those who choose to keep their faces
uncovered, when normally they would wear veil elsewhere, do so only due to
adopting the ruling of Hanafi school which states that no cloth should touch
the face during ‘Ihram.’ [7] When not taking part in the rites of the pilgrim,
female visitors to Makkah are often seen wearing the face veil- a practice in
line with normative Islam
Wow!
Typical bending and twisting things until they comply with your own wishes.
It was
narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “A
man stood up and said, ‘O Messenger of Allaah, what kind of clothes do you
command us to wear during ihraam?’ The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah
be upon him) said: ‘Do not wear a shirt or pants or a turban or a burnous. If
one of you does not have any sandals then let him wear the khuffayn (leather
slippers) and cut them so that they come below the ankle. Do not wear anything
that has been dyed with saffron or turmeric. Women in ihraam should not wear
niqaab or gloves.”
(Narrated
by al-Bukhaari, 1468; Muslim, 1177)
Wearing
niqaab is one of the things that are forbidden when in ihraam. A woman can
cover her face in front of non-mahram men after entering ihraam with part of
her garment, lowering it from the top of her head over her face, without
committing the forbidden action of wearing niqaab.
It was
narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: A
man stood up and said: “O Messenger of Allaah, what clothes do you command us
to wear in ihraam?” The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)
said: “Do not wear shirts, pants or any kind of headgear… and women in ihraam
should not wear niqaab or gloves.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1741.
When a woman enters ihram, she should not wear a niqab or
burqa.
It is haraam for the muhrimah to wear
the burqa’ or niqaab (kinds of face-veils), and to wear gloves, because the
Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Women (during Hajj)
should not wear niqaab or gloves.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari.
Ibn Qudamah said in regards to this condition, "I have
not found this condition to be from (Imam) Ahmad, nor is it from the Hadith. In
fact, reality contradicts this condition. For verily, the cloth that covers
over a women's face, rarely does it remain un-touching to her skin. Had this
been a condition (that it should not touch her face) the Prophet (peace be upon
him) - would have explained it."
Malik’s Muwatta, Book 20, Number 20.5.15:
Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that Abdullah ibn Umar used to say
that A WOMAN IN IHRAM SHOULD WEAR NEITHER A VEIL NOR GLOVES.
“The truth is the niqab is NOT an Islamic institution, but
an innovation borrowed from paganism and Judaism! This was the opinion of Quran
translator Marmduke Pickthall”
Ibn
al-Mundhir said: The fact that wearing the burqa’ (face veil – during ihraam)
is makrooh is narrated from Sa’d, Ibn ‘Umar, Ibn ‘Abbaas and ‘Aa’ishah. We do
not know of anyone who held a different view. Al-Bukhaari and others narrated
that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “A woman
should not wear niqaab or gloves.” But if she needs to cover her face because
men are passing close by her, then she should lower part of her garment from
the top of her head over her face. This was narrated from ‘Uthmaan and
‘Aa’ishah, and this was the view of ‘Ata’, Maalik, al-Thawri, al-Shaafa’i,
Ishaaq and Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, and we do not know of any opposing view. This
is because of the report narrated from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with
her) who said: “The riders used to pass by us when we were in ihraam with the
Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). When they drew
near, one of us would lower her jilbaab from her head over her face, and when
they had passed by we would uncover our faces.” Narrated by Abu Dawood, 1833
and by al-Athram. Al-Mughni, 3/154. The hadeeth of ‘Aa’ishah was classed as
saheeh by al-Albaani in Risaalat Jilbaab al-Mra’ah.
This
last ruling again stresses the covering of women when travelling.
Taking into account all Dr Hargey’s
false claims, I conclude that either he is very ignorant about the religion he
claims to follow, or like asserted previously he seeks attention due to inner
feelings of inferiority when surrounded by strong Muslim women. Either way his
campaign is yet another attempt of a man trying to dictate what a woman should
wear. Dr Hargey seems to be imposing his sexist views on women by telling
them what attire they should adorn themselves with. He has joined the likes of
fashion designers, men’s magazines and politicians such as Jack Straw, in
attempting to forcefully impose the sexist ideology that a man has the right to
entice women to undress against her own honour and free will. It is sad to
witness that this form of sexual harassment remains unchallenged. Despite all
of the sacrifices women have made throughout history, this hidden patriarchy
continues unabated. Dr Hargey’s proposal is a threat to Civil liberties
whilst stunting the promotion of community and social cohesion that he claims
to defend.
It is not an exaggeration to postulate
that Hargey’s campaign is tantamount to sexual harassment.
This
to me is the most amazing paragraph of this piece of primitive drivel. It is
appalling how childish and simple-minded indoctrinated women can become. She
wants to hide inside her protective shell as is dictated by old men 1000 years
ago and scoffs at a person who is trying to enable a way for women to
participate in the social activities of the 21st century. This woman will not pilot a
Boeing jet as her counterparts in the free world can - when Saudi women aren’t
even allowed to use a bicycle in public. She will never participate in any
social or professional activity which requires dressing in anything but a
burka. There will always be this wall between her and the rest of the world. And
she calls it sexual harassment. Dr. Hargey’s campaign can save lives, those
lives of women whose father or husband can demand the wives ask for permission
to leave the house and demand they wear a burka when they do. And she calls
this sexual harassment.
I have
met women on nudist beaches and neither raped nor harassed them or treated them
with anything but the respect they deserved. It’s the personality, not the
clothes which count.
But
this woman must feel terribly threatened by reality that she needs her shell
like a snail. And then talks about the inferiority complexes of others. Sad!
The Equality and Human Rights
Commission of Britain states that the following criteria equate to sexual
harassment, and urge victims not to be fooled into thinking it is reasonable to
tolerate such behavior;
1.
Comments about the way you look which you find demeaning.
2.
Indecent remarks –(this would include comments such as “get it off,”
“take it off”)
3.
Sexual demands by a member of your own or the opposite sex (this would
include demands for you to reveal a part of your body which you consider to be
private)
4.
Unwanted conduct on the grounds of your sex [8]
Yeah,
picking and choosing. The above is made to look as though it were a quote, a
verbatim citation. It is not. It is picking and choosing and an interpretation
of what it says on that page and twisting the intentions to suit this woman’s
agenda. I personally stare more at a burka clad woman than a normally dressed
one.
Since the private parts of a person is
a place on the human body is that which is customarily kept covered by clothing
in public venues and conventional settings, as a matter of decency, decorum,
and respectfulness, [9] it then it follows that Hargey should be accused of
sexual harassment. The idea of what is ‘private’ from one person to the next
differs, but in no way should be enforced by others on the individual.
This
woman is now hysterical and borderline psychotic. Looking at a woman is not
sexual harassment, regardless of whether she is wearing something or not. In
our culture a woman in what I call “normal” clothes is neither harassing nor
being harassed. The woman on the Copacabana is fully dressed when wearing the typical
Brazilian tanga. It is the mind of the observer that makes this sexual or an
harassment of any type. But this primitive female is incapable of grasping
this.
Every
adult human knows that a female has boobs and a vagina. We don’t normally display
sexual organs in public. That is how people have developed social norms. they
regulate behavioural patterns and social interaction. When I leave one cultural
zone and enter another one, I am asked to respect the local culture. I comply because
I am tolerant and capable of adjusting. This woman, clearly, is not.
Although the above forms of sexual
harassment can be inflicted by either gender, in all honesty I have only ever
heard, “Show us your face/legs/hair,” and “Get it off,” from men, never women.
These experiences have strengthened my determination to never let a man dictate
to me how much flesh I should expose.
This
is hilarious. She is too stupid or too deluded or both to realise what nonsense
this is. Were Ibn ‘Abbas and Ibn Mas’ud men?
The unfortunate fact is that despite
our claims of advancement in the fields of science and academics,the world we
live in today is just as rife with prejudices and pressures to fit into what is
‘normal,’ as it ever has been.It doesn’t matter if an individual is white,
black, yellow, fat, thin, covered or not- there will always be a section of the
community who will frown upon our appearance and choices and aim to take away
our freedoms. Even more consequential is that we are ‘thrown’ into this life as
slaves to our circumstance, not able to control our place of birth, our parents
or lineage, our DNA or our social condition. Infact there are psychologists who
deliberate quite rightly, that we never even chose to exist at all. [10]
Stating
the obvious. So what?
This state of bondage is magnified when
we are pressured to fit into the social norms of our communities, taking the
form of a suffocating cultural slavery. Sometimes our participation in
following changing fashions and trends is willing- we quite like those maxi
dresses that are now ‘in vogue’ or we don’t mind paying ridiculous prices for
the new smart phone which has only one additional feature different to the
previous model- but most times we un-wittingly and un-willingly succumb to
societal pressure.
It is
painfully obvious that this woman does not understand the 21st century and can’t handle the 21st century. She is intellectually
incapable of adjusting to a modern age lifestyle and just wants to go back to
the simple life of the 7th century – forgetting FGM and lacking
medical or hygienic standards. She obviously wants men to take care of her and
she is only incubator and maid.
Another form of enslavement is the
servitude to our desires, many of which are harmful to our psychological state,
our loyalties to others and our spiritual well-being. Examples include the urge
to pursue that unobtainable man or woman at the expense of our pride and
dignity,the drive to follow our dreams no matter who gets trampled upon and the
desire to fulfil every filthy fantasy thus degrading our very being.
What a
waste of a mind. Completely useless and utterly failed.
This is where Muslims like myself
prefer to rid ourselves of all these forms of subjugation and find solace and
purpose in submitting to the Creator becoming ‘His’ slave alone. This may be
interpreted and adhered to slightly differently from one striving Muslim to the
next, but the intention and willingness is the same and should be respected
equally. Islam is not monolithic, and Hargey cannot force his views on
the mainstream Muslim community. This bigotry must stop.
Yep,
figures. This is a failed person who is given pride and the feeling of being
someone through religion when she can’t do this in the real world. And a Dr.
Hargey threatens this. The problem is that feels useless and tries to
compensate that with attaching herself to an imaginary god, a god she can shape
and mould however she wants in her primitive mind, bar reality and the real
mess the Koran and the sunnah presents.
I could easily fit into todays ‘norm’
of dressing to impress. As a white woman living in England it would barely
raise an eyebrow. And if our lives just conclude in the grave, ultimately us
all finishing up as worm buffet, as some would have us believe- what difference
does it make if I lived a life as a Devil and you as an Angel? I however
believe to have found the only logical purpose of life,choosing to please my
Lord thus removing the chains of societal pressures. If we are not permitted to
do this, or have not discovered the true freedom that comes from it, I believe
we may as well just keel over and die.
My journey to hijab, and later, the
face veil, was a spiritual endeavor and a religious choice. Wearing hijab for
me once adopting Islam was a no brainier. The images I was brought up with of a
pious chaste Mary (Allah be pleased with her) covering her beauty for her Lord,
had a huge influence in this. Despite some reservations within my close circle
of friends and family, once I decided to wear the face veil it was due to my
own convictions;I had no doubts about my decision. Even my husband did not
believe it was necessary at that time, but after listening to my reasons, he
supported my assessment. He eventually was persuaded and agreed there was a
strong case for it within the Islamic tradition. Yes, surprising as it sounds,
I, the woman, got a man to agree with the veil.
It does make me wonder what Dr Taj
Hargey would do if his wife or daughter decided they wanted to adopt the face
veil? Would he force them to go against their values and beliefs? If
so, wouldn’t he turn into that dominating male figure he claims to vehemently
oppose? Actually, isn’t he doing that already?
I just
pity her and feel sorry for her and hope she doesn’t up and go to Iraq,
thinking a simple life is easier for her to bear.
By Ruqayyah Dawood
[3] Al-Qur’an [49:13]
[4] Al-Qur’an [33:59]
[5] Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 4481
[6]Al Qur’an [24;30-31]
[7] Ihram is the sacred state of the
pilgrim which includes two unsewn pieces of cloth for the men and other rules
such as not killing a creature or trimming the nails.
[10] “Thrownness”, according
to Heidegger and Binswanger, is a psychological term referring to the
circumstances that characterize a person’s existence that are beyond the
person’s control.
