Clothing code for believing women
-
It also signifies that we cover our head and our mind ....
rotfl sorry just had to. Just a word joke. No offence intended. Don't take it too seriously.
...who just want to follow the English style and not the way of the Prophets.
Are you from the Subcontinent? Seriously, what is "the English style"?? Please, I hope you don't imagine a conflict between an imaginary east and west.
Cheers
-
Thanks, supportpeacenotwar I was starting to believe that too. It seems it's actually up to a person to decide what is the modest clothing for them depending on the environment.
I just don't know who shapes the environment...someone had to be first in everything once (weather it's the miniskirt or head cover)- should we really that heavily relay on it and be like the other "sheep"?
Sometimes I feel that no one is questioning some socially accepted beliefs - dogmas that society lives by (for example the "definition of oppressed women" and that we're trying to tweak the meanings to fit that current belief? Or maybe it is suppose to be so? -
Seriously, what is "the English style"??
Here's the answer to your question
-
Smoking cigarettes - English style
-
Drinking whisky - English style
-
Keeping dogs, even sleeping with dogs - English style
-
Eating pork ham chops - English style
-
Shaving beard - English style
-
Wearing shorts - English style
-
Women going naked - English style
-
Reading dirty magazines - English style
-
Eating crabs and frogs - English style
-
Swearing to God - English style
-
Insulting Prophets - English style
-
Using foul language - English style
-
Killing unborn babies (abortion) - English style
-
Doing sodomy (homosexualism) - English style
-
Gambling and casinos - English style
-
Going to cinemas - English style
-
Eating with left hand - English style
-
Overeating like a pig and never fasting - English style
-
Pretty much every evil and stupid thing that people do, where did they learn it? English and European culture. The culture of the kafirs - who are declared as impure and unclean in the Quran
O you who believe! Verily the pagans (non-Muslims) are impure
-
-
Thanks, supportpeacenotwar I was starting to believe that too. It seems it's actually up to a person to decide what is the modest clothing for them depending on the environment.
I just don't know who shapes the environment...someone had to be first in everything once (weather it's the miniskirt or head cover)- should we really that heavily relay on it and be like the other "sheep"?
Sometimes I feel that no one is questioning some socially accepted beliefs - dogmas that society lives by (for example the "definition of oppressed women" and that we're trying to tweak the meanings to fit that current belief? Or maybe it is suppose to be so?Of course nobody has to be sheep. And that is also onr of the reasons which change occurs in the world, someties for something worse, sometime for something better. Concerning dress, I sincerely think, for women, "in the first world" in the last cenutry has gone for the better. We just have to think the way women had to force themselves inside corsets, which prevented them from breathing normally and which caused widespread fainting, you know, women are so delicate, they faint. Today women can dress as they like and be comfortable without calling attention. The fact that there are fashions which are abhorrent does not detract from the fact that it is perfectly possible for women to dress unasummingly and comfortably, and even nicely without having to undergo torture. Shoes are another chapter. ?How many women have spoilt thier feet and spine because of the usage of narrow highheeled shoes as a duty, for the sake of a job or for the sake of a husband or whatever. Today there are shoes which are an assault on health an to my taste also on beauty, but on the other hand you can shoe comfortably and nicely without calling attention. Most women today wear trousers which is far more comfortable than those skirts which were narrow or would fly open with movements or wind.
So, completely agree that we do not have to follow fashion for the sake of fashion if there is no meaningful advantage. But it seems that fashion is something universal and no civilasation escapes it. Neither the islamic ones. What we women, an eventually men, must strive for is that whatever be the fashion there is room in it for sensible clothing that protects, gives comfort and is nice looking and fitting. There are always people that would try anything new. It is their temperament and they also have a right to feel comfortable with their personality. It also helps to may be find better ways to satisfy our needs and tastes. The negative side is very important but I think it is derived from economic and manipulative and social engineering factors in which obviously the wellbeing of people is completely disregarded.
In fashion there intervenes covetousness, but also something more sinister like the obssession on making people, but very, very particularly women slaves to the opinion of others about how they are sexy attractive or mere loosers.
Salaam
-
Peace,
In all honesty, as they say, - although I am honest in all my posts - my reason for posting here is more to do with standing for what Allah swt has told us in the Quran. There are some posts here which just seem to view things black and white and that's not always the case so I offer another opinion.
I am starting to find the discussion here only helpful in certain occasions and for certain topics. I feel like there is either a lot of repetition or a lot of conflict. I don't know how that helps. This is not directed to you per se, but its just because of what you said and I've been thinking about this recently.
I also feel like there is a lot of copycat stuff and I don't like that - like I sometimes get my own opinion just echoed back at me, which can be agreeing but its more like there is nothing where the person says they agree but they just restate in a different way what I said to them. This has happened to me several times now, it's like huh?... and then sometimes people are talking about peace but... what are they actually supporting in reality and how do they actually behave.
I guess I am really reflecting on the place of this forum as a way of communicating about the Quran and the actual outcome.
Just a series of thoughts that came to mind.
A froum is just another possibility to communicate and since it is free for all, with some moderation, thank God, you can get anything for good or for bad. I do not bother with the bad, I am not anbody's guardian, and I try to profit from the good as much as I can.
I think it is important, frommy point of view forums are about the best things that the internet has brought for people who want to discuss and learn with freedom and nobody telling you what you should dare and what you should not dare. We are not going to find gems every day, but the gems that come up from time to time are worth the while for however long. As to good manners. Sure there are very polite and respetful posters. So let us keep that and not bother with the rest. On the other hand let us not forget either that written exchanges do not allow to see faces and expresions of people. We may get the feeling of harshness when possibly there is none, because when it is face to face, there are smiles, their are gestual expressions which give a different tone to the whole.
I would stick to the good and care for the good things and forget the others. It is the best thing even from the point fo view of being kind to those who look tu us unkind.
Salaam
-
Thanks, supportpeacenotwar I was starting to believe that too. It seems it's actually up to a person to decide what is the modest clothing for them depending on the environment.
I just don't know who shapes the environment...someone had to be first in everything once (weather it's the miniskirt or head cover)- should we really that heavily relay on it and be like the other "sheep"?
Sometimes I feel that no one is questioning some socially accepted beliefs - dogmas that society lives by (for example the "definition of oppressed women" and that we're trying to tweak the meanings to fit that current belief? Or maybe it is suppose to be so?Peace mmmm,
NP. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that point about dogma - but I believe in the West, women are just as responsible for the "oppressive" nature they still face, as men are. Sometimes when you look at a lot of insults that can be thrown at women such as "slut" or things like that - it will be women calling other women this. However, if a man says that insult, then it will be seen as sexist.
If we refer to fashion - women are apparently more liberated, with more rights now but they are doing exactly the same thing they were doing centuries ago. Huruf mentions corsets in the past which was a type of fashion for women. Interestingly, "oppressive" countries have comfortable and loose clothing for women at all times. While the West has much more "constrictive" and uncomfortable clothing that is deemed appealling.
That same harmful fashion is still going on today and women now are buying it in an apparently such educated, free and liberal environment. As well a lot of expectations of what women need to conform to. I don't get it - why are women doing this to themselves? Is it really just the men that oppress women or do women do that to themselves/each other as well? Maybe its the way Western fashion is and is one of the consequences of vanity.
-
A froum is just another possibility to communicate and since it is free for all, with some moderation, thank God, you can get anything for good or for bad. I do not bother with the bad, I am not anbody's guardian, and I try to profit from the good as much as I can.
I think it is important, frommy point of view forums are about the best things that the internet has brought for people who want to discuss and learn with freedom and nobody telling you what you should dare and what you should not dare. We are not going to find gems every day, but the gems that come up from time to time are worth the while for however long. As to good manners. Sure there are very polite and respetful posters. So let us keep that and not bother with the rest. On the other hand let us not forget either that written exchanges do not allow to see faces and expresions of people. We may get the feeling of harshness when possibly there is none, because when it is face to face, there are smiles, their are gestual expressions which give a different tone to the whole.
I would stick to the good and care for the good things and forget the others. It is the best thing even from the point fo view of being kind to those who look tu us unkind.
Salaam
Peace huruf,
I was actually going along a different point in my post but nevermind, I'll deal with this. I don't think its just that people can't see each other. I mean that's why voice chat is more popular - you still don't need to see the person but you can hear intonation etc in voice which is important for discussing. I think the kind of thing I'm talking about goes on everywhere and is an issue with human beings - I never really meant that it wasn't.
I am just looking at the way in which people discuss Islam and then looking back at Allah's swt teachings and I am just reflecting, nothing wrong with that.
I also get a vibe of competitiveness and unfairness in general in terms of debate and discussion. Competitiveness on a personal basis not just in terms of the discussion. Like I said, it's not just this place, it's everywhere and definitely this exists face to face as well.
Not just the impolite people but just the whole nature of this forum or any forum. I don't think this is isolated to free minds, I think its everywhere. I don't think its about Muslims or Quran only, I think its about human beings. As with any place where humans get together, there will be competitiveness and unfairness - but the irony is we are discussing the Quran. And I wonder how much I am learning here because whenever I go away and reflect and ask for Allah's swt help in learning from the Quran - I get much more out of it than I do here. This could be a lesson for me. Allah knows best. This could be a little bit about the stage in my spiritual path as well. So, I think you should know that's where I'm coming from.
Something I'd like to end my post on, it's not meant to be answered - why does Allah swt mention the way most of mankind is ungrateful and its essentially getting at the point most of mankind doesn't really care, is this just referring to non-Muslims or even just those that aren't Quran only...? I'm not sure we can say that. It may refer to most human beings in general.
-
Isfareel,
Had you been born in Europe, you would most probably been one of those racist, islamophobic people, religious or not. I can see that your world view is characterized by conflict, an us-vs-them mentality. This is also characterized by constantly blaming things on "the others"... and basically adopting the disempowered victim role. Fear is the keyword here, which in turn means lack of peace, and peace we get from Allah.MAny of your points show how strong the victim mentality and refusal to take responsibility for oneself is. Now I understand better why hadithists are in favor of e.g. intercession and blaming and punishing women for the weaknesses of men, because these things are in essence a shunning away from personal responsibility and an act of blaming everyone and anything except oneself. It is very unfortunate since this always leads to ruin. Look at the s.c. Islamic world. As it is written in the quran, Allah will not change the condition of a people unless they themselves decide to change. Change will not come from outside, it has to be initiated within yourself first. God helps those who help themselves. Stop using the evil of the imperial powers to justify your own resort to evil. The treatment of your next of kin has nothing to do with foreign power that wreck havoc in your country. They are different things.
-
Peace mmmm,
NP. I'm not entirely sure what you mean by that point about dogma - but I believe in the West, women are just as responsible for the "oppressive" nature they still face, as men are. Sometimes when you look at a lot of insults that can be thrown at women such as "slut" or things like that - it will be women calling other women this. However, if a man says that insult, then it will be seen as sexist.
If we refer to fashion - women are apparently more liberated, with more rights now but they are doing exactly the same thing they were doing centuries ago. Huruf mentions corsets in the past which was a type of fashion for women. Interestingly, "oppressive" countries have comfortable and loose clothing for women at all times. While the West has much more "constrictive" and uncomfortable clothing that is deemed appealling.
That same harmful fashion is still going on today and women now are buying it in an apparently such educated, free and liberal environment. As well a lot of expectations of what women need to conform to. I don't get it - why are women doing this to themselves? Is it really just the men that oppress women or do women do that to themselves/each other as well? Maybe its the way Western fashion is and is one of the consequences of vanity.
Exactly, exact?ly exactly. That is the point of 24.31. That is why it is mentioned that we can make a display in front of our women, but not in front of other women, that is exactly what the Qur'an is out to prevent, that women fall prey to such cheap stuff like vaniyy and competitivenes in it with other women, the male being in some way and in social circumstances like the trophy that the displayer woman wins and gives her her standing in society. That is it. Women must not get caught in that beautfiied rate race.
Salaam
Sorry I answered inside the quotes. I put it ouside so that it is understood.
-
Nor walk in insolence upon the Earth (Surah 3119 Bismillah included)
I already told you if your tafseer is different with Quran Alone's.Like differences between Chatolic and Protestant.
- Smoking cigarettes - English style
REDYou're little humorous bro Israfeel.
Smoking Cigarettes is english style?
Did you know who is the founder of Kretek Cigarettes (mixing of tobacco and clove cigarettes)? the answer is mine country.
Because of that my country is rank 2-3 in term of smoker rating.Your term of english style contains some faulty, because this term is too racist.By saying "English" this means you only mentioning the ethnic in England.
Seehttp//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_people
Isfareel,
Had you been born in Europe.He's from Canada.
-
Women must not get caught in that beautfied rate race.
I don't get it - why are women doing this to themselves? Is it really just the men that oppress women or do women do that to themselves/each other as well? Maybe its the way Western fashion is and is one of the consequences of vanity.
Yes yes yes! Couldn't have said it better!
-
Peace huruf and pixelangelbaby,
I missed that post of your earlier, huruf... I saw the quote and didn't see your text in it.
Definitely - that whole competitiveness in women (and sometimes with men) just creates hostility with other women and I think every single woman - no matter how 'physically beautiful' will feel there is something wrong with her or something that needs to be improved. Having said that, I also believe that beauty really is about the person themselves not how they look.
All the emphasis on physical and outward appearance in that way is a stressful approach to life and the Quran encourage a relaxed and happy approach instead. Those 'most beautiful woman' competitions are just the epitome of this problem. As women we should be encouraging each other, not fighting or competing or wanting to get more and more attention purely for our looks - it makes us shallow and superficial rather than mature (not matter what age we are), with self respect, thoughtful etc.
-
Peace supportpeacenotwar,
It was this need for display I was trying to get at when I wrote my previous posts in this thread, but it seems I expressed myself poorly.
God bless you
-
Don't worry, Man of faith. No need to apologize for what you write. You do it with the best intention, and that is what matters. Sometimes it is difficult to guess the intention of the writer, but inyour case it is not.
Que bad thing is that this is such a trodden and squeezed for dividends question that if is difficult to say something and not builty of almost everything, as Richelieu said, something like that.
I insist that there is a very settled, established, rooted habit of interpreting anything the Qur'an must say and where women are involved, or anything else for that matter, from the point of view of its function for men. Woman, as aptly recounted in the Bible regarding woman's creation, is for men. It is preposterous to suggest that it she is as much for herself as men are for themselves. That is that she is the human being. Therefore if women do something what other meaning could it have than do something for the men? For women themselves? No, for humanity, and humanity is men. It is very simple. Not complicated at all. What other meaning could 24.31 have than that women do something for the sake of men? Impossible to find any other meaning for it. No matter what it says, we should not. And modernly, in the same way that goods are traded, evaluated and relatively understood in money and crimes in prison time, woman significance is traded in coverings. That is exactly the way to go about with women. How can anybody speak about women without dealing with clothing? There is no way. If you talk about men you can derive toward the philosophical, the sociological, the artistic, the emotional, the sportive, you name. Coming to women, no, none of that please. Women is a matter of covering or uncovering. Stop. Textile business whould fill the planet with monuments to women.
Let us see how long it takes till we get another thread as to whether it is permissible for women to wear feathers redindianwise. Y announce that that is the oncly cover I ever consider for myself. The feathers I don't dare to wear them yet, and it is not easy to get good feathers, but the headband I do. I love it. May be for my burial I'all wear some feathers. At least those who complained about a woman without veil was like rooster or something, my feathers should cut their complaints short I hope.
I was en Egypt for some time these past two years and I was so displeased with the difference it made with when I was there many, many years ago. The hijab "fashion", which I find ugly and gloomy, at least the way they dress in Egypt, has done away with the traditional peasant and popular atirements, which were graceful, joyful and airy. I hope they get soon over this brainwash and start being the happy and genial people that I knew.
Salaam
We are hypnoticed
-
Peace supportpeacenotwar,
It was this need for display I was trying to get at when I wrote my previous posts in this thread, but it seems I expressed myself poorly.
God bless you
Peace Man of Faith,
No prob. Sorry if it felt like we were all disagreeing with you and you couldn't make yourself heard.
May God's blessings be upon you
-
double post
-
"What other meaning could 24.31 have than that women do something for the sake of men?"
I just want to point out, unrelated to the topic Yes women do something for the sake of men as much as men do something for the sake of women...we're there to compliment each other not to be enemies (as much as feminists try to present it that way). We are not independent of each other but interdependent.
Peace.
-
I don't agree that having children is something women do for men - they do it for themselves too. That's feministic propaganda - as if women don't have feelings and need for children so that's something they exclusively do for the sake of men.
But I agree that no human being should be treated that way not even children.Salam.
-
Who said exclusively? Why do you attribute things that have not been stated at all? That is not a fair debate to put words in people's mouths. What makes you suppose that "exclusively" is meant when it was not said and the very matter does not invite it? When a member of the family lays the table for all to eat, do you say that he or she does it for him or herself and not for others and that therefore nobody should take into account that he or she has doen that chore?
Women may or may not want children, but most usually they have them for the sake of both the mother and the father and even the grandparents or other siblings, then sometimes may be only for their own sake and sometimes only for the father's sake. Or wouldn't you do something like that for a man you love and trust even if you did not want children? What would you do then for him if you do not do the one thing he would not be able to do for himself? You would only do it for yourself? Not for him?
On the other hand, even if the women did it always exclusively for their won sake, THE FACT IS THAT IT IS ALSO DONE FOR THE FATHERS, even if it is not purposely. So, yes, you said wrong in all counts. It is done for the fathers, but the "exclusively" you put it, nobody else did, nor it is conceivable and why you did it I cannot fathom.
Could it be that you did so under the pressure of male chauvinistic propaganda? Because I see that you resort repeatedly to dismiss other people's arguments with the remark that they are feministic propaganda, as if the person who writes was an idiot unable to observe and think for himself or herself and spoke like a parrot and needed to be warned from the danger of such "witches". So when you attribute things that are not said, others, yes, could be authorized to attribute what you say to male chauvinistic proapaganda and it might no be as wrong as when you throw the feministic bit at others. I am not attributing to you or any others male chauvinistic propaganda, so please give proper arguments and do not call others victims of that type of thing without contributing a proper proof.
Other than islamic feminism I do not have any idea of where today's "feministic" propaganda is nor do a need any coaching.
Otherwise, if women in the west have any rights at all today it is to a great extent thanks to feminists, those ridiculous women (and men) who fought and suffered for the sake of affirming that women are not children, incapacitated beings who need forever the custody of men, any men. I may not follow any propaganda but I respect them and do not see any reason for anybody to disrespect them, particularly women who if today exercise rights they wouldn't have dreamt of a century and a half ago it is because those people exposed themselves to utmost ridicule and much worse things for our sake. Surely we owe them more respect than to the bunch of obssessed with womens bodies and their control. I do not know, may be today there are some bunch of feminists that are nuts, but in every ideology there are nuts, why you bother with those, and worst of all you why you throw in the fray what other people say, I do not know, unless you want to disqualify what others write and you do not find any other means, or may be you are afraid for others that they may fall prey to those "witches". On the other hand there is for instance an islamic feminsim which is quite worthy of respect and consideration and is doing a lot for understanding the Qur'an and which is upheld by women and men equally. Those women and men deserve respect and if we do not respect them, then we should not be surprised that further along the way we find that all our great rights as women have gone down the drain.
And I come back to that thing that women do for men that you deny. Of all the things that anybody can do for anybody else, I think that is the most important. By discounting iot or throwing it under the carpet and as if it was to be taken for granted and amounted to nothing, we are undervaluing the most intimate tie not only between men and women but between the whole of humanity and worst or the same thing, we are disobeying a very direct and absolute command of God I come back to aya 4.1 where we are told in imperative Ittaqw Allah wa ittaqw al arham "be conscious of God and be conscious of the wombs". If we do not do that as humans and as males and females we are failing in a direct command of God and we are failing to understand God's rahma and we are failing to have the necessary respect of our own nature. So yes, the main thing, I would say, the ONLY thing that women can do for men as such women is have their children, for themselves, yes but not least FOR THEM.
That, as women, is the true giving of ourselves, not some idiotic covering of head or of legs or whatever . And the funny thing is that most women know it and do it, but it as if it was some kind of shameful thing to talk about. IT IS TRUE, IT IS BIG, IT IS GREAT AND IT IS GOOD. If women do not give it the importance it deserves and God states, how or why do we expect that others will value and accept it as something valuable, as something precious? How can we be so ignorant?
Salaam