Clothing code for believing women
-
Peace mmmm
Read my post number #56 from this thread
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605126.50
If you're not satisfied just read the thread entirely
-
There are many things translated that make me wonder or simply doesn't make sense. This is one of them.
As a woman, what will I show to
my husband,
father,
father-in-law,
sons
stepsons
Brothers
Nephews
Women attendants or captives*male attendants who have no sexual needs
Boys not aware of sex?That I would not show to anyone else? will I show my chest to my father? Absolutely no way!
Interesting that woman attendants are mentioned but not my sisters, aunts, mother-in-law,daughters, etc.
The verses you have brought up have always made me wonder and I was ok with my understanding but now I am questioning if these verses are even talking about clothing.
-
Translations are imaginations many times secially in this aya.
There are no women attendants. There is just women "their women" that is the women of the women. That is a whole bunch and that destroyes the notion that the zina and the covering have anything to do with "not tempting" or that it is for the sake of men. Also the wording of the paragrapha speaks of showing off, not that something must be visible or not. The only thing that says anything about covering is where the khumur be drawon over the bosom. But there is nothign else that is being said to be covered. What women are being instructing is to not make a show of themselves, parading their beauties so that they are a window shop. The aya prevents vanity nor temptation, although tempting may be one of the aspects of vanity. The fact that it is spoken of their women shows well that this is not an aya for the sake of not tempting men, but for the sake that women are not living off vanity, as we so comongly that women are made to be compulsively obliged to be beautiful and attractive. And in that beauty and atttraction feminine attributes are usually too much highlighted. are attractive or not.
Nowhere in this aya it is said that this or that must not be seen. Except as said where it says to draw the khumur over the bossom.
Salaam
-
There are many things translated that make me wonder or simply doesn't make sense. This is one of them.
As a woman, what will I show to
my husband,
father,
father-in-law,
sons
stepsons
Brothers
Nephews
Women attendants or captives*male attendants who have no sexual needs
Boys not aware of sex?That I would not show to anyone else? will I show my chest to my father? Absolutely no way!
Interesting that woman attendants are mentioned but not my sisters, aunts, mother-in-law,daughters, etc.
The verses you have brought up have always made me wonder and I was ok with my understanding but now I am questioning if these verses are even talking about clothing.
Nowhere it is regarding to show or not to show chest. It is not about undressing and opening up the chest. The extra sheet over the dress and over chest only blurs the contours.
Others are interested in determining about the "jamal female body shape" of women and then they categorise them
- banana;
- apple;
- peer;
- hourgloss
Injunctions in Qur'aan are aimed at pursuading women to avoid making their contours prominent and visible to others. Just google about female body shape--this exposure is one major cause of ill treatment met to women in advanced countries. China has taken notice of it and issued necessary instructions to women while travelling in public transport. Others will also soon know the importance of dress code prescribed by Qur'aan.
-
Salamun Alaykum
Well, the verse 2431 has often been manipulated by sexist scholars.
The most aggressive English translation of this verse is Mohsin Khan's translation
And tell the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent (like both eyes for necessity to see the way, or outer palms of hands or one eye or dress like veil, gloves, head-cover, apron, etc.), and to draw their veils all over Juyubihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms) and not to reveal their adornment except to their husbands, or their fathers, or their husband's fathers, or their sons, or their husband's sons, or their brothers or their brother's sons, or their sister's sons, or their (Muslim) women (i.e. their sisters in Islam), or the (female) slaves whom their right hands possess, or old male servants who lack vigour, or small children who have no sense of feminine sex. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And all of you beg Allah to forgive you all, O believers, that you may be successful. (Dr Muhammad Muhsin Khan, 2431)
The additional words in parenthesis are often too long in Mohsin Khan's translation.
The truth is, the word "khumur" (plural of "khimar" means coverings. Khimar is anything that covers something. A table cloth is a khimar of the table, curtains of windows are khumur of the windows, neck shawls are khumur of necks etc.
This is the translation of Quran- Monotheist Translation
And tell the believing females to lower their gaze and keep covered their private parts, and that they should not reveal their beauty except what is apparent, and let them put forth their shawls over their cleavage. And let them not reveal their beauty except to their husbands, or their fathers, or fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or the sons of their brothers, or the sons of their sisters, or their women, or those maintained by their oaths, or the male servants who are without need, or the child who has not yet understood the composition of women. And let them not strike with their feet in a manner that reveals what they are keeping hidden of their beauty. And repent to God, all of you believers, that you may succeed. (2431)
"...and that they should not reveal their beauty except what is apparent..."
Some sexist and extreme scholars say that women must cover all parts of their body, some even say including the faces, and say that women must not wear light-coloured cloths and ornaments because they're beautiful. So what is the apparent beauty?
If covering the head and neck is compulsory, God would have said that in the Quran, God does not run out of words. In the verse 2431, God is telling women to wear respectable cloth.
".....or the child who has not yet understood the COPOSITION of women...."
How can the artificial ornaments such as make up, necklace, bracelets, rings, earrings etc be "composition of women"?
The mainstream scholars often make the beautiful Islam look like a sexist religion. To the sexist scholars and hadithers, why do most of you use the MURSAL hadith of Sunan Abu Daoud that says Aisha told Asma to cover all parts of body except this and this (face and hands) to justify the compulsion of headcoverings?
And this is a sickening Tirmidhi's hadith. Thank God that it is da'if. But Salafis and Deobandis love using this kind of hadith to oprress women.
Abdullah narrated that The Prophet said
?The woman is Awrah, so when she goes out, the Shaitan seeks to tempt her.? (Da?if)
Jami' at-Tirmidhi Vol. 1, Book 7, Hadith 1173Shafi'i was known for his sexist opinion, saying that "women are awrah". I have read it on several blogs of hardcore hadithers.
Read this, the corruption of 2431
http//www.quran-islam.org/main_topics/misinterpreted_verses/khomoorehenna_(P1226).html -
This is my understanding of 2431
God says to women to lower they look - be humble, cover and take care of their private parts. Your father, brother, other women etc.. can see you, for example, in bikini but is forbidden to wear bikini in public. But I think women should cover their head(hijab) when pray or recite the Quran. -
Nothing makes more evident body contours of women than hijab. The head of hijabed women, so tightly enclosed int he cloth, are really really revealing.
On the other hand, that thing about the contours is the reader's contribution, not the Qur'an's contribution.
And agression against women happens with and without countours. It is a matter that he agressor feels safe that he won't be caught or blamed. If you start blaming the women because of contours or because of whatever, then you are giving the escapegoat to agressors, because the woman will be blamed.
24.31 is not about about women covering but about women not falling for being dependent on looking attractive all the time. Men have strength women have looks, that is the way given to each to make head way when they lack intelligence or talents. The Qur'an which is a book of moral and spiritual guidance enjoins males not to resort to force and enjoins women not to resort to looks and attractiveness. That is not a matter of covering or not covering but of not showing off and that is what is said. The 24.31 does not say that nohting should be seen of the woman but that she does not display, make a show, exhibition. It says " "yubdina", to show, to exhibit, to display. It is root b-d-w, IV form. It is not that you dress this way or that way. The Qur'an has not said a word about clothes to that point. It is that whatever you do, whether something is seen or not, that you not exhibit. Some translators cited here translate "reveal", which is confusing. Yusuf Ali does a better job and says "display". There is a difference between something being visible and something being displayed. The Qur'an doesn't say about being visible, it says about dislaying. If your legs are seen, but not displayed, you are not giving in to vanity, you are not displaying "your goods". It says except what is apparent. Apparent is everything unless we cover it up. Therefore, except said bosom and external sexual organs (not all that visible in the woman), nothing is ordered to be covered, it is injoined not to make a show of it. That is, the woman is not to make a showof anything appparent. No word about covering except for the bossom.
So, in fact, the Qur'an makes it clear when it says when it says about the feet, not calling attention. One thing is that they are seen, or whatever is seen, and another thing is to call atention to something. Not that things are not seen, but that they are not exhibited nor attention is called to them, whatever it is. It may be jewelry, it may be bossom, it may be lashes or whatever. It is an injunction against vain pursuits not an apology of covering up. For cover ups there are already the imperials doing a good job. Muslims women do not need to help along.
Women on the one hand are constantly made to feel guilty if they are not beautiful, if they get wrinkles, if they do not look desirable at all or any more. That is tyranical and a self assumed slavery to looks. But the "veilers" also pursue to make women slaves of looks in another way. Looks are a sin, according to that other sick mentality and women should be made to pay for having looks, according to them.
The question is always to exact from women some extra tribute in order to get a certificate of aprroval? a permission to exist? a permission to be considered a full fledged human being? a right no to be discardad like a spoilt good? The territorial pee of the obssessed male?
I know there are much better things to expecto from males than this obsession and fiscalisation of womanness, but some of them are in real pains at their own sex it seems, because they make such a big deal of unimportant things, just to get ther "territory". And women for them, it seems, are their territory. The word opression comes to mind. The pity
is that they are relentless and manage to brainwash quite a number of people.Teh Qur'an is wise, and in 24.31 gives advice to women to not fall prey to the compulsion of having to be attractive all the time and to gain their standing in life thorugh looks. That is what 24.31 is about. Women should not live for her looks but for God and their personal improvement, as must do all human beings.
Salaam
-
Peace everyone,
I'm inclined to agree with some of what Mazhar said - I think its talking about general modesty rather than a specific way of dressing for all women. Avoiding tight clothing would be one part of it as well as just the intention to be modest and to not want to be seen and defined based on your looks and appearance.
The Quran also tells men to be modest and lower their gaze - so modesty in all ways, clothes, behaviour, actions etc is not gender specific.
This is my understanding of 2431
God says to women to lower they look - be humble, cover and take care of their private parts. Your father, brother, other women etc.. can see you, for example, in bikini but is forbidden to wear bikini in public. But I think women should cover their head(hijab) when pray or recite the Quran.I'm not sure about that - maybe it does mean something similar to that, although it may just be there for certain types of clothing customs saying under which conditions it could be 'relaxed' if wished, but as some others here have said, I wouldn't feel comfortable with that - or being too revealing once I have always been conscious about being modest.
In terms of women covering their hair when they pray, why do you think women should do this? Do you think men are required to?
Teh Qur'an is wise, and in 24.31 gives advice to women to not fall prey to the compulsion of having to be attractive all the time and to gain their standing in life thorugh looks. That is what 24.31 is about. Women should not live for her looks but for God and their personal improvement, as must do all human beings.
Salaam
I also agree with this. I think the Quran is guiding women and men away from what is superficial towards what is more beneficial spiritually and otherwise.
-
Peace,
That a woman must cover herself particularly much for praying is just silly. Why does she need to cover up for God? Would God feel tempted by her otherwise?
God bless you
-
The Quran also tells men to be modest and lower their gaze - so modesty in all ways, clothes, behaviour, actions etc is not gender specific.
when it comes to clothes can't be same. Man should cover himself but not like a woman. Nobody cares about man's boobs rotfl
I'm not sure about that - maybe it does mean something similar to that but as some others here have said, I wouldn't feel comfortable with that - or being too revealing once I have always been conscious about being modest.
In terms of women covering their hair when they pray, why do you think women should do this? Do you think men are required to?
I also agree with this. I think the Quran is guiding women and men away from what is superficial towards what is more beneficial spiritually and otherwise.Well, it is mentioned in hadiths and the Bible, women must cover their hair/head when pray, but this is not 100%, its based on my research. If you go to mosque or ortodox church you will see all women covered, they do this for centuries so why should you be different?
-
Jewmen cover their heads for prayers, they must.
And traditionally muslim men have also always covered their heads. Now since men follow european fashion but women are supposed to follow a fashion invented by "supermuslims", but look at saudis when they dres traditionally. And egyptians and all, all covered their heads. So that preposterous exigence that since women have always covered (which is not true) they should continue to cover, but that since men have always covered, but now they do not want to cover then they do not have to continue to cover is a slap on the face of muslim women. Let men do whatever they want with their dressing habits, but let women alone, we do not need a surveyor neither for that nor for anything else, and I really cannot fathom what the merit of male heads could be that females heads do not achieve. What a preposterous thing! For God? For God's sake, are we nuts!
Salaam
-
Nothing makes more evident body contours of women than hijab. The head of hijabed women, so tightly enclosed int he cloth, are really really revealing.
On the other hand, that thing about the contours is the reader's contribution, not the Qur'an's contribution.
And agression against women happens with and without countours. It is a matter that he agressor feels safe that he won't be caught or blamed. If you start blaming the women because of contours or because of whatever, then you are giving the escapegoat to agressors, because the woman will be blamed.
Please read about how brain functions, analyses incoming data, interprets it and reacts. Read it alongwith sex related desires activation system. It has relationship only with the contours, not with the face. No body gets charged by seeing the painting of Mona Lisa, instead might say Subhan Allah. Arabic word "hussan" meaning beauty relates only to face of the woman. Modern days standards of beauty are figure and figure is only for sex purposes.
-
Huruf you said "The Qur'an has not said a word about clothes to that point."
But what about the 3359 - how can a believing women be recognized and who should recognize her? Wouldn't that make her more vulnerable to the abuser of believers?Also 2460 is really strange - again what can she remove from her clothes without reveling beauty? And if she's in the privacy of her home why shouldn't she show herself?
-
Huruf you said "The Qur'an has not said a word about clothes to that point."
But what about the 3359 - how can a believing women be recognized and who should recognize her? Wouldn't that make her more vulnerable to the abuser of believers?Also 2460 is really strange - again what can she remove from her clothes without reveling beauty? And if she's in the privacy of her home why shouldn't she show herself?
naither on 24.31 nor any other ayas up to that point have said anything about clothing concerning women and neither I think concerning men.
as to 33.59 Why do you bring it into question? ?Have you read the ayas before that one and after? Believers were being agressed and women believers molested as well by the hypocrites. It has nothing to do with any dressing injonction. It was a war measure to protect them, not burden them. Why is it that every time God wants to protect women, superblievers turn that protection into a burden for women and a right for males to oversee them? Do you mean to punish women forever just because at a certain point in history they were subjected to molestation by the enemy? Are men believers the enemies of women believers? Does in that enmity have anything to do that they dress this or that way. Shouldn't then the molesters not expect the punishment what is foreseen for them in the Qur'an in those ayas. Is it not a shame that supposedly women believers living amongst men believers should be afraid of being molested by believers, whether they dress this or that way? Do today's believers believe that they have a right to live in peace but women do not have it? Why should anybody want to turn something that was meant to help women into a burden forced on them? Is nto that precisely the peak of hypocrisy. Why such enmity and hostility against women believers?
It is always the same thing over and over, any time the Qur'an mentions women, some way must be found to turn that against them. It is incredible. Are we never to get tired of that disobedient game. God does nto joke. God tells us things for our improvement as believers, but we snatch at straws if we see the glimpspe of a possibility of burdening something more on women. ?Where is the respect for that first aya of sura 4 where we are told to be conscious of allah and of al arHam )the wombs)? Is pushing women around the way to be conscious of al arHam?
As to 24.60, the ayas before that one must be read because it gives the context. There is nothing new in it. When people anywhere in the world are at home they tend to relax and not be as conscious about being more or less undressed, but the Qur'an is speaking about households with may be a lot of people and it enjoins everybody to be polite and not to intrude or impose on peoples intimacy, and it says to the older women that they can leave aside their clothes provided they do not make an exhibition of it, but that it is better for them not to do it.
In what does that change or contradict 24.31? It does not. Nowhere at all are women told to cover anything apart from the bossom, nowhere. It says to men as well as to women to guard their sexual organs. Guard is a wider meaning than clothe. One may guard those parts without covering them, but other than in bed, usually guarding them involves covering them. Apart from nudists, I think we would all do that for the sake of comfort and as far as I am concerned, also for health.
As to mens chest, even if they are no big deal, I do not like them to be exposed. Specially the hairy ones. And, I must say, usually men do not exhibit themselves all that much, so no worry that way. It is women who are pushed, very much pushed to exhibit themselves and they are the ones who are told in 24.31 not to let themselves be pushed to that. They are not told to cover, they are told not to make a show of themselves. If somebody is unable to see the difference between being invisible and exhibiting something, it is too bad, but the difference is very, very clear and women do know it, and I think men do to, because they notice and they show. Although their vanity sometimes drives nuts and think that anything that is good looking and female that moves on earth is out for them.
Salaam
-
Thanks Huruf for answering my questions, it's a new perspective on these ayats, I have to think about it, inshallah.
About 3359 again I understand the context this is a logical issue for me (not so much clothing in general ) - what a I really don't get is if someone make himself recognized in some way (for exmple if all lovers of cheese are walking around with pink hats and someone is abusing them wouldn't those hats - or the thing that makes them recognizable make the job easier for the abuser?) In the translation of the ayat it says "...That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused."
Is there some logical explanation? Or the translation isn't right?Peace
-
Please read about how brain functions, analyses incoming data, interprets it and reacts. Read it alongwith sex related desires activation system. It has relationship only with the contours, not with the face. No body gets charged by seeing the painting of Mona Lisa, instead might say Subhan Allah. Arabic word "hussan" meaning beauty relates only to face of the woman. Modern days standards of beauty are figure and figure is only for sex purposes.
REDYou're too serius Mr Mazhar. D
Not only "hussan" but also "wajjah"
-
Thanks Huruf for answering my questions, it's a new perspective on these ayats, I have to think about it, inshallah.
About 3359 again I understand the context this is a logical issue for me (not so much clothing in general ) - what a I really don't get is if someone make himself recognized in some way (for exmple if all lovers of cheese are walking around with pink hats and someone is abusing them wouldn't those hats - or the thing that makes them recognizable make the job easier for the abuser?) In the translation of the ayat it says "...That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused."
Is there some logical explanation? Or the translation isn't right?Peace
Well if they were agressing them on the pretext that they did not recognize them as believing women, and therefore thought they were any women, that would be a reason. Do not forget they were dealing with hypocrites and the believers knew it, so it could be a provisional measure to expose hypocrites. Not that exposing prevents the hypocrites from being hypocrites, but they would lose face and hypocrites do not like to loose face, that is part of being a hypocrite, to keep face while they are stabbing you on the back.
To understand Qur'an it is not a requirement that one should rid him o herself of common sense. Ig being recognized helps you do it, if being recognized does not help you do not do. However it was the fact was that under the circumstances did help to be recognized, for how long, probably not very long since we have the next ayas where the prospects were of change.
What is amazing, but not suprising having been breathing it since birth, is that whatever is said about women in the Qur'an seems to be understood always from the point of view of its import or profit for the males, and not of its import for the women. Why should the way women dress or undress be founded on whatever fancy of the men and not on the comfort and wellbeing of the women? This default setting of the women always being the peripherical sex and not humanity itself is the motor of so much misunderstanding of Qur'anic injuctions that are in themselves rather plain.
That is what we have to modify women are Humanity not an accessory to Humanity. As long as we do not imbibe that, we will stumble looking for the square of the circle an splitting every heair in the world in the process. The byzantine sex of the angels may be peanuts besides this.
By the way, I have not come to this thoughts by being awake or cleverer or anything like that other people. I have come to them because I have spent so many, so many years struggling with the inconsistencies and I have read so much from other people in the process that very little by very little I have come see things that was unable to see before, and I think that I still have to see many, many more. This forum is great for that and I profit to thank all participants. It is the case of the ants each one a little and the common wealth is enormous.
Salaam
-
when it comes to clothes can't be same. Man should cover himself but not like a woman. Nobody cares about man's boobs rotfl
Peace,
I didn't mean that men and women cover themselves in the same way. I meant that modesty in all ways is practiced by men and women.
Well, it is mentioned in hadiths and the Bible, women must cover their hair/head when pray, but this is not 100%, its based on my research. If you go to mosque or ortodox church you will see all women covered, they do this for centuries so why should you be different?
I could ask you the question though Why do I have to do that just because all those people do it?
