Jilbab [Quran 33:59]

Xawl

Good analogy Sister. Love it. (-

If the Qur'an had been revealed to a prophet who lived among the Eskimos, it would mention fur coats and hoods, eating fish, maybe it would mention fishing through holes in the ice etc.

Nobody would conclude from this that Muslims should wear fur coats or fish through holes in the ice, regardless of where and when they are living.

herbman

Salam and Peace

first thanks for your effort and reply.

peace herbman, all,

I find your alternative understanding of 3359 to be very weak and simply unnecessary.

I found your understanding weak too
http//misconceptions-about-islam.com/dress-code-women-veil.htm

You said The question is does a piece of tissue protect you against the offenders? Knowing that everyone in these time, men and women were covering their heads and body against sun.

I think you have misunderstood the verse. Firstly, the verse does not state nor imply that a garment will protect those in question. It discusses a modification to the garment being worn.
Secondly, even if everyone is covering their head and body against the sun this may or may not be relevant. One would have to prove they do so in the manner in the common understanding of 3359 thus rendering the common understanding inconsequential.

ok let's see what the verse says regardless of the meaning of Jilbab here is your translation in red what I consider wrong or misinterpreted

And those who harm the believing men and the believing women, with no just reason, they have brought upon themselves a slander and a gross sin.
O prophet, tell your wives, your daughters, and the wives of the believers that they shall lengthen (or draw near) their Jalabib. Thus, they will be recognized and avoid being harmed. God is Forgiver, Merciful.
If the hypocrites and those with disease in their hearts and those who spread lies in the city do not refrain*, then We will let you overpower them, then they will not be able to remain as your neighbours except for a short while.

In v 3358 harm yudhuna is applied for men and women, so who is harmed --> men and women
then the verse point to prophet's women and believing women only not to men, why?
If as you say women are told to "modify" something in their outer garment, why men should not follow the same logic if it is as you say to be recognised?

Now let's focus on the "that they shall lengthen (or draw near) their Jalabib. Thus, they will be recognized and avoid being harmed"

why do you keep "lengthen" as first possible meaning of "yud'nna" while the basic meaning is "draw near" and "approach"!

then you have the particule "over themselve" 'alayhina, which can be part of the verbe "yud'nna" please see lane lexicon page 86 and should not be translated separetly

you say, .. U;, (M,
Mgl, Msb,) and -, ;. (T, 8,) and l, (M,
Msb,) and d , (TA,) and 4U occurs in a verse of
S'ideh as meaning Zs, (M,) He, or it, and I,
nas, or became, near, Ic., to him, or it' (T, M,
Mgh, Mob ;u6ijs yn. with L1) (M, M, O)

in summary

female gender of the verse should get nearest of Jalabib

the verse continue and explain why
your translation Thus, they will be recognized and avoid being harmed. God is Forgiver, Merciful.
quranic corpus translation that is more suitable that they should be known and not harmed. God is Forgiver, Merciful.
Yusuf Ali that is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested and Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

As you see your translation is missing a little part ADNA which is same root as DNW (to be near/approach)
and this introduvce the result of the sentence you get nearest to the solution which is to be known/recognised and avoid to be harmed

Now I answer to your comment
I think you have misunderstood the verse. Firstly, the verse does not state nor imply that a garment will protect those in question. It discusses a modification to the garment being worn.

I really don't get you, the verse explain the "problem",
men and women harmed
...then give a solution get nearer the Jalabib
...then explain if the solution is set, the consequences will be avoiding to be harmed

so my comment was just to justify if "a cloth" can avoid you to be harmed?
Again in my logic if I had to avoid "problems" in a different community/society I would dress the same as them and not differently, this will surely avoid me problems.
See consequences of 9/11 in USA, any guy wearing a turban was "recognised" as muslim even if not like e.g. the sik community, and these people had troubles after 9/11!!!

Why allegorical when there are plausible physical barriers, e.g. distance, screen, seclusion (i.e. not in same room) etc.

There are also several assumptions in your view, which are simply not necessary. Thus, I have to ask what is the exact problem you have with the following understanding, which is a slightly modified understanding of the common one

http//misconceptions-about-islam.com/dress-code-women-veil.htm

By "problem" I mean something which can be proven to be illogical/contradictory/impractical.

again simply by using logic, if you ask something to someone behind a hijab, can you see each other or do you have to guess someone is there? Like in the mentionned verse 3353
why this is not applied "outside", let say in the market or elsewhere? do you (man) have to take a hijab with you when ever you talk to a women, if she does not have one?

Peace

huruf

As salaamu aleykum

Thanks for replying.

But what about the 3359..I see that just one person have an hypothetic answer (herbman)..what the rest think about the meaning of the "jilbab"

x And why would there be so much surah's about "outergarments"

What is a jilbab? (if want please reply or try to reply in what thy believe)

I found a description in a book where was written something about ..what is a jilbab..

'Abd-Allaah ibn Mas'uud, radiya Allaahu' anhu, who was known as the most skilled
Sahaabi scholar in matters of the Shari'ah. He became a Muslim when he was a young
child and since then he continued with Rasuul-Allah, salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam, and
He gained a lot of understanding of the Quran from him. 'Umar Ibn Al-Khattab, radiya
Allaahu 'anhu, said of him "By Allah, I know of no person more
qualified in dealing with the Quran than 'Abd-Allaah ibn Mas'uud. "
He radiya Allaahu 'anhu, put a word Jilbaab (as mentioned in the Quran, Suurat
Al-Ahzaab, Ayah 59), from being "a piece of clothe that covers the entire body,
including the head, face and hands. "

I think the niqab is not written in the quraan but so do the jilbab and the facecovering (this is a piece of text I wrote myself half a year before (for those who don't believe in the facecovering please refrain from reaction,for those who are misguided because they don't find the niqab in the Quraan read this..(niqab is not the same as the facecovering with the jilbab!!!!)

Dear brother in islam,thanks for your reply..I can be wrong,let Allah decide this by self but want to explain..when the woman have to go on hajj,they can't wear a niqab but have to cover their faces still..with the jilbab..because the niqab is attached to the face as a piece of clothe and cover the face with their jilbab not..to were gloves is also probihited in hajj but covering the hands by a jilbab is that not..we have to care much about the explenations because a niqab is not the same as the recommended jilbab..a jilbab looks like a cloack (from the medieval time) and a niqab with two eyes unveiled not..the cloack can cover the face when it is necessary like when the drivers pass by the woman,they let down their jilbab on their faces and when the drivers with horses (mans!)were gone,they lift up again their jilbab..take care for misunderstandings in islam en study very well the ahadith,alhamdullilah

This is just a hypothetic theory and I hope to find the answer by studying further...

Love and peace for all the seekers of truth

We do not need to know what a jilbab is. We are not ordered to the end of times to dress any particular garment. The aya is not about dress, it is about fighting the enemy in a dire situation and on a particular issue. What! So that women would comply with your whim of being subjected to a particular garment would you want that believing people should be threatened and attacked by hyocrites tot he end of times so that you could enforce on women a particular way of dressing which you do not even knoe in what it consists.

You just be plain an sincere. You want women subjected to secial treatment of opression but you do not want to blame yourself but you want to blame God for it? At least be a man and answer for your own whims. Do not attribute them to God.

And again 24.60mis nothing to do about outer garments or whatever, there are no outer garments. That is just a choice of words of the translator to cover womething which he does not know exactly what it is. And what it amounts to is that older women can go out of their home swith les formal dress than younger women. Many, many people in the world, be they men or women, dress more carelessly whent hey are at home than when they go out. So, older women, not older men are exampted from that, but are encouraged to do it as little as possible. It is a licence not an imposition. But, of course, there comes the male-is-king brigade striving by hook or crook that the Qur'an opresses women and punishes them for being women, because it would seem, that in spite of the fact that "Islam", as they say, "there is no original sin", that it seems is only for men, not for women. Women are sin itself, that is why they must be opressed with clothes , opressed with suspicion, opressed with jailing in home or anywhere, opressed with deprivation of freedom.

What a sorry lot "muslim" men make when they forget that they are Gods slaves and no better than their mothers, their sisters their daughters, and that they are not the intermidiate God between God himself and women, but just a wretched lot, who is threatened, or rather, warned by God himself not to slander women, not to opress them, and not to malign them.

You better think about your own sins and not waste your time gtrying to find fault with women or trying to find some fault you may opress women with. Do not forget it males do not have a special relationship with God like that of the United States and Israel. God is not the united States, God loves women and orders us to reverence the wombs.

Salaam

Wakas

peace herbman,

Thanks for the reply.

You said

then the verse point to prophet's women and believing women only not to men, why?
If as you say women are told to "modify" something in their outer garment, why men should not follow the same logic if it is as you say to be recognised?

In my view, there could be a few reasons, e.g. damage limitation, I.e. Quran gives guidance which will reduce the problem for women. And/or if it is direct abuse to the person, men are more likely able to defend themselves whilst women may not be hence the guidance given. Also, the slander/lies may have been, in part, related to immodesty hence the guidance on dress.

However, let's be clear, in your alternative view, you do not address the issue you raise with me at all. So whatever objection you have, you must also apply it to your own view and answer it, if possible.

You said

why do you keep "lengthen" as first possible meaning of "yud'nna" while the basic meaning is "draw near" and "approach"!

Simple both are possible Classical Arabic meanings, hence both are shown.

Thanks for pointing out the small missing parts in the translation on the linked to page. This has now been corrected.

You said

Again in my logic if I had to avoid "problems" in a different community/society I would dress the same as them and not differently, this will surely avoid me problems.
See consequences of 9/11 in USA, any guy wearing a turban was "recognised" as muslim even if not like e.g. the sik community, and these people had troubles after 9/11!!!

I can see why you'd say that but unfortunately for you that is not what the verse says, as it talks about the result of being recognised. So, whatever guidance/solution is discussed it aids being recognised, not blending in and being indistinguishable - unless this can be explained away.
Further, if others dress in a way that is not acceptable or appropriate for you, then you may not wish to blend in as you suggest.

Interestingly, when I searched for that old thread, I found another which you brought up the same issue then admitted it is about recognition, see here.
Quote I think you are right this is to be informed and be recognized, better to inform and avoid any clash.

In my view, what the verse is discussing is a mix of verbal abuse, slander/lies about believing men and women - some of which is direct to the person. And part of the issue is that some perpetrators are allied with the believers but are still doing this, and/or are claiming they are not doing it when they are - and the possible reason they give is they did not realise they were believing women of the discussed group. Hence the guidance given (which will aid recognition), thus act as an ultimatum that may expose their hypocrisy, if they continue that is.

Bro Fahad and I discussed this verse in detail here
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9598400.10
I just realised you posted on that thread so you may be aware of it already.

You said

again simply by using logic, if you ask something to someone behind a hijab, can you see each other or do you have to guess someone is there? Like in the mentionned verse 3353

If you think people are unable to understand or implement the literal interpretation of this verse, that is up to you. I consider it practical.

You said

why this is not applied "outside", let say in the market or elsewhere? do you (man) have to take a hijab with you when ever you talk to a women, if she does not have one?

If you wish to apply it out with what the verses discuss, that is up to you. I prefer to stick with what the verse actually says, i.e. prophet's wives within the household or at their house.

diamantinehoneybunch

mamnoeoea qatief alazhaar,

Women are human beings too.
What? Women must cover their faces blahblahblah when they encounter unrelated men? Why? Because THE WHOLE women's body are subject to rape commited by men who.encounter them? Please bro. Women are not sexual and indescent objects who need to wrap themselves in the prison-like clothes called burqa, niqab, abaya, chador etc.

Women are humans. It is stupid to say women's faces, hands, hair, head, necks are indecent and immodest. Women are humans like men too except they have breasts that MUST be covered.

Most of members on this forum are not sectarians! We are not Sunnis. Many of us are former Sunnis. Many of us have studied hadiths.

If you love hadiths, other extra books by your mullahs and hadith-based Quran tafseer so much, you are also defending the movie Innocent of Muslims because the anti-Islamic movie is based on true Sunni teachings. K?
So don't be angry with the movie. Salafis should really be proud of the movie.

The verses never mean to condone women to wrap themselves like the movie Scream. Just to be descent women. K?

Regards

hawk99

OK, people, I'm kinda confused here. We know that there's no mandatory clothing article required to be worn by women.. but then what is the "Jilbab" this quranic versre is talking about?
Pickthall
O Prophet! Tell thy wives and thy daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them (when they go abroad). That will be better, so that they may be recognised and not annoyed. Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful.
Yusuf Ali
O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad) that is most convenient, that they should be known (as such) and not molested. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Peace all,

3359 is in reference to the "prophets wives" and what years, time is the ayat referring to? today? no,
of course not, the ayat is referring to the women believers and wives during the life of Muhammad. It is ridiculous
to conclude that the clothes that the wives of the prophet wore to ward off offenders are to be worn by believing
Muslims today who are under no threat. Obviously women were being accosted during those times much like
todays Egypt where the clothes and being Muslim have not saved the victims from sexual assault. Apparently
during the rise of Muhammad's followers to power, the identifying dress code was a warning to their enemies
not to assault the believing women under the threat of retaliation.

"On Wednesday night, when Egypt's army chief announced the forced departure of Mohamed Morsi, the streets
around Tahrir Square turned into an all-night carnival. But not everyone there was allowed to celebrate. Among
the masses dancing, singing and honking horns, more than 80 women were subjected to mob sexual assaults,
harassment or rape. In Tahrir Square since Sunday, when protests against Morsi first began, there have been
at least 169 counts of sexual mob crime."

"Egypt is full of sexual harassment and people have become desensitised to it ? but this is a step up,"
said Soraya Bahgat, a women's rights advocate and co-founder of Tahrir Bodyguard, a group that rescues
women from assault. "We're talking about mob sexual assaults, from stripping women naked and dragging
them on the floor ? to rape."

Insane leader

Egyptian Salafist preacher Ahmad Mahmoud Abdullah said that women protesting in Tahrir Square 'have no
shame and want to be raped.'

by Nina Burleigh

God bless

peace

diamantinehoneybunch

The insane retard Ahmad Mahmoud Abdullah has no shame and wants to rot in hell.
If I had supernatural talent like Carrie, I would levitate all the insane clergymen and throw them. LOL.

Well I am also sick with the enforcement of the prison-like clothes on women. Women are humans too, not sexual indecent objects that need to be cover in a prison-like cloaks in order to be more honorable.

huruf

The joke is the whole circle of the question. Women should cover, according to this assinine conception, because males are turned on when they see them. The holders of that view, usually also hold that men are less emotional and carried away by feelings or impressions than women are, and therefore they are in command, but then how is it that women can see men and not feel in danger of doing wrong and males can't?

If somebody is not able to behave properly on seeing somebody else, should not be the person prone to do wrong on a mere visual image be kept inside or under control rather than the persons who can control themselves. That is, women, according to this view, can control themselves perfectly no matter how males or other women dress. Shouldn't then be the men the ones to have their freedom curtailed since they are unable to behave properly in society?

And how can power in society be handed to people who are unable to control themselves? Shouldn't those be treated as under age people and properly guarded?

What a cheap and irrational trick to keep women punished and held guilty until proven innocent, which would be never, because their mere existence seems to be a threat to this kind of twisted males.

Salaam

mamnoeoea_qatief_alazhaar

As salaamu aleykum

Many muslim woman have free choice to wear what they want but choose for the niqab to wear and even go outside to demonstrate when a country want to ban the face covering..this is a free choice that this woman make and even they can choose something else,they don't are opressed by others,not by man,not by anyone.
They choose by self this covering.

The world is became a place of struglle because the long time opressing of woman by men..still these times the woman who think she is free is opressed by living a life of defending and longing to become equal to a man..but how much choises a woman can make,it is by her nature,by how God creates her..how much we wish do to the same thing as men,how more we become hard and though,how more they will not accept the shyness inside and also their softeness,how more they will become sad and by defending theirself in a hard way and not accept their softeness,they will loose everything where a woman feels happy with ;their softeness from hart and from brain..

Softeness is not the same as weakness..these are two different things that woman have to learn..while tehy make themself more strong to survive in ths life,they pay a big price for this behaviour..they will never get the statisfaction and inner peace that God wants for his creatures.

when a woman will start to accept her softness then she wil understand why others want to cover themselves..without this experience,they will always think that covering of the woman is an opressing act.

It is easy to have "free" thoughts,a free mind and to have an opinion..but trust me,without experience,without age..there is not such thing as the truth is mine for always and forever..this world is not for us alone..within 1000 years our ideas are maybe opressing for the people who will live then..that is why there is a message from Allah that came to us for for a reason..

First try to understand why someone want to cover herself and defending her covering treu demonstrations and why they find that people are opressing them when they have to take out there face veil..

Because I see a lot of people who want to be wise and intelligent and who want to spread a message of freedom whit a free mind but what if that "freedom" opresses others (burqa-ban/niqab ban)how lovely they opressng others with their other view.

Trust me the truth what people are finding will never be a truth that opress others..in the quran is written that we can choose to be muslim (there is no pressure) and to follow the rules of God but we can't opress others who don't want to follow the rules..but in the system outside Gods' rules people are opressing the woman who want to wear the niqab/burqa..

Who is then the opresser??
People who want to wear in piece what they want or people who want to put laws on the woman and to tell them what to wear..

Let people deside by self what to wear..this would be real freedom

unknownuser

It's not an obligatory to wear it and it's not haram to wear it.

Peace

huruf