The true female and male hijab?
-
Peace,
Based on the Quran, what is our true Hijab? What is the Zeenat of a female? Is it just her bosom? I know that women are not to wear tight clothing and stomp their feet to reveal the body parts, but is this just for the bosom? I personally believe that both male and females in general shouldn't reveal body parts that do not need to be revealed that may stimulate the opposite sex. Of course I believe that in the traditionalists view point is excessive since it only purtains to women, even though they state that men just need to be covered from navel to knee.
What are your thoughts? I know that if I was married I would want my wife to be covered to not incite unwanted temptation on males, and the same with my own body. In not talking Burqa, just loose fitting clothing and not clothing to attract attention.
Peace
-
what is our true Hijab?
A barrier between two (3353). There is no hijab in 2431.What is the Zeenat of a female? Is it just her bosom?
No. It is her ornaments such as her necklace, earrings, bracelets, and anklelets.Is it just her bosom? Actually the word just is redundant here. The correct question is Is it her bosom?
No! Never! Otherwise God will be saying that there is no harm in a believing woman's revealing her bosom to the people listed in 2431, such as her male attendants (taabe'eena gaire uule'l arbate mine'r rejaal). There may be no harm in the woman's revealing her necklace to her male attendants by wearing it over her blouse all right. But her bosom? Just imagine. Will the Saudi King allow his wife's male bodyguards (her male attendants) to see her bosom?
stomp their feet to reveal the body parts
It is not body parts but anklelets. A Woman lets the people notice her anklelets by stomping her feet in order to ring her anklelets like bells. She does not reveal her body parts. Please note the verb which God uses here. It is not reveal (yobdeena) but let them notice (yo'lamah).Perace,
Hasan Ak?ay -
what is our true Hijab?
What is the Zeenat of a female? Is it just her bosom?
No. It is her ornaments such as her necklace, earrings, bracelets, and anklelets.Thiese are not exclusive to women.
No! Never! Otherwise God will be saying that there is no harm in a believing woman's revealing her bosom to the people listed in 2431, such as her male attendants (taabe'eena gaire uule'l arbate mine'r rejaal). There may be no harm in the woman's revealing her necklace to her male attendants by wearing it over her blouse all right. But her bosom? Just imagine. Will the Saudi King allow his wife's male bodyguards (her male attendants) to see her bosom?
Are these attendants "gaire uule'l arbate"?
It is not body parts but anklelets. A Woman lets the people notice her anklelets by stomping her feet in order to ring her anklelets like bells. She does not reveal her body parts. Please note the verb which God uses here. It is not reveal (yobdeena) but let them notice (yo'lamah).
Have you ever heard ankletes ring like bells? What ankletes are these?
-
Thiese are not exclusive to women.
We are discussing the zeenah mentioned in 2431. The verse is specifically about believing women.Are these attendants "gaire uule'l arbate"?
The question whether they are gaire uule'l arbate, which according to the so-called scholars of Islam means sexually impotent, changes nothing because even if they really are, the King will never allow his wife to reveal her bosom to them. Or will he? Please answer, will he?I asked some believing women "Will you reveal your bosoms to your sexually impotent male attendants as the scholars claim that God allows you to, one of them said "Definitely not!" "Why not?" "Because what actually counts is the way I regard my male attendant rather than he regards me." Like me to elaborate?
What ankletes are these?
I accept that I exaggerated but if two or more were worn on one ankle, they surely would jingle loudly.Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Thiese are not exclusive to women.
We are discussing the zeenah mentioned in 2431. The verse is specifically about believing women.I am also talking about believing men. Is it forbidden for men to wear these?
The question whether they are gaire uule'l arbate, which according to the so-called scholars of Islam means sexually impotent, changes nothing because even if they really are, the King will never allow his wife to reveal her bosom to them. Or will he? Please answer, will he?
I asked some believing women "Will you reveal your bosoms to your sexually impotent male attendants as the scholars claim that God allows you to, one of them said "Definitely not!" "Why not?" "Because what actually counts is the way I regard my male attendant rather than he regards me." Like me to elaborate?
Very logical why would I show my bosom to an impotent confused?
"ariba and arab \ " means need . The feminine form is more empahasized than the masculine one Those who do not have a need to see her bosom more than just an organ, such as doctors, therapists, radilogists...
A plural of this word with this meaning (the less emphasized masculine form) is used in verse 2018 (m'aariba) needsI accept that I exaggerated but if two or more were worn on one ankle, they surely would jingle loudly.
And it is also exaggerated that even more than one anklete would ring like a bell. At least not where I used to live and where women used to wear ankletes. The verse is not revealed for those few women who wear more than one very special ankelete that ring like bells when they are walking
-
So, is there really a "hiyab", whatever it is, or is there simply some personal (physical) good manners that the Qur'an enjoins?.
I have more and more the impression, that what the Qur'an gives as a series of indications for conviviality in easy and comfort has been sex drived to make a of it not one of five pillars, but the pilar, and that even when we try to get rid of many unquranic conventionalities, we are still bound by them. In 24.31 among those to whom women can show their "zeena" the women of the family are mentioned. And with that, as far as I am concerned, off goes all the structure of "hiyab" as covering in front of the males because these could be (surely will be) excited. Since in 24.31 we are told the women to whom other women may show their "zeena", it must then be deduced that women must not show their "zeena" to any other women, that is to women who are not "mahram", just as it must not be shown to men who are not "mahram", . It must be concluded then that the "modesty" thing is not so much of a sexual recomendation as a more general rule of good social behaviour with people of any sex. Unless, of course, we take that in this aya "nisaa'" doesn't mean women.
So women's "zeena", the part that is usually translated as "their beauty" or "their hidden beauty", that part that supposedly could excite the males, should after all be translated as jewelry or accessories, and that they must not be shown to women either. So about what are we speaking here? Not about sexual temptation, obviously. May be about non ostentation? modesty, but not in any sexual sense? I had a sense of that long ago when I asked myself if male mahrams were all inoculated to be inmune to excitement. Whatever.
Every time I get a new insight into the hiyab swindle I get more and more ashtonished. This is one of the modern editions of the earth is flat. And while I agree that it is annoying and a burden being measured and inspected for your physical attractiveness, what cannot be condoned is to manipulate scripture in order to impose an obligation that does not exist and attribute to scripture an obsession that does not exist and attribute to that obssession the virtue of preventing all evils and of making of hiyabed women the salvation of the world and biggest part of the universe. And the extent to which this is done is really alarming, because such a lack of doubt in something like that cannot be natural. So there is a determination that, no matter what, the qur'an cannot not say that hiyab is an obligation.
Salaam
-
Thank you, sister huruf, for telling the truth the zeenah mentioned in 2431 is simply the jewelry or accessories which women wear; it is never their body parts as the so-called scholars of Islam have been claiming for hundreds of years.
However, I am not sure what you mean by women who are not "mahram". Only the opposite sex can be mahram. For proof please note the people cited in 423. They are all women, without exception, and they are mahram to men.
Another thing that needs clarifying is your deduction that women must not show their "zeena" to any other women.
God mentions two kinds of zeenah in 2431
(1)the ones which are in the open (maa zahara minha) such as hairpins, earrings, the necklace that stops short of the bosom, and bracelets. Believing women are allowed to wear them in the presence of anybody including the men mahram to them.
(2)the hidden or covered ones such as the necklace which reaches over and below the bosom and the anklelets. The believing women are forbidden to reveal them to anybody except the men and women listed in 2431.
So about what are we speaking here? Not about sexual temptation, obviously. May be about non ostentation? modesty, but not in any sexual sense?
Non ostentation, yes. The word God uses for it is motabarrejaat in 2460. Believing women and believing men are free to wear jewelry all right but they are forbidden to show them off (731).
Male attendants are proof enough. They are definitely mahram to the women who employ them; that is, believing women are allowed to marry their male servants or attendants if they want, as Khadija married Mohammad, her male attendant.
However, a believing woman is still allowed to reveal her hidden zeenah to her male attendant. If God meant the woman's body parts such as her bosom by the zeenah in 2431, He would not allow that obscenity which may lead to adultery.
On the other hand, there may be some men whom believing women can trust even better than they can trust their male attendants, such as the imam of the local mosque. The imam is not included in the list of the people the women are allowed to reveal their hidden zeenah to.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
God mentions two kinds of zeenah in 2431
(1)the ones which are in the open (maa zahara minha) such as hairpins, earrings, the necklace that stops short of the bosom, and bracelets. Believing women are allowed to wear them in the presence of anybody including the men mahram to them.
Please excuse me for the mistake here. I meant not mahram. A woman's ucle is mahram to her; that is, she is forbidden to marry him. But she can marry her male attendant; he is not mahram to her.
It is interesting that uncles are not included in the list of the people in 2431. Why must they be excluded? Because the verse is not dealing with sexual issues, like whom believbing women are allowed to marry or whom they are not allowed to; it is about the jewelry women wear.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
peace all
In my opinion "Zeena " is neither exclusively jewelery, nor going to the extent of making it as a pair of " exposed female breasts "
What i understand of this Zeena thingis, "the women being allowed to become casual regarding her dress , where she can be more relaxed for the sake of comfort , resulting into a slight exposure of certain attractive features of her body.
let me explain;
Normally a woman is suppose to hide/ guard the attractive parts of her body in a way that " they " do not attract the attention of men (excluding a husband) by igniting lustfull feelings, and hence creating an undesirable sexuall tension between them.
lets say if her neck is attractive and pulls the attention of males, then normally she should dress up in a way that this beauty of her, remains hidden under normal circumstances. (a beautiful necklacemay further enhance the beauty ,and her attraction, so two of these together would become her zeena)
Same way , a pair of nice looking hands /arms if exposed by short sleeves , or feet/ankles/legs exposed by a short Capri, or by a casually(or intentionally) drawn up shalwar, would be attractive (sexy) to men, and would act as Triggers.
Even the "Bosom thing" mentioned in 24-31(wal udriben be khumrihinna), could be part of it. Under normal circumstances she should doubly cover them in a way that her breasts are not noticeable by men in a sexual manner. And if they are big/pretty and curvy, she is suppose to take special care to diffuse/subtle out their impact.
So , all that this ayah is saying " that she can be a little causal/ relax about these things in the presence of certain category of people. But most definately staying within the limits of modesty and not crossing the line which could be termed as obscenity by that family/society.
I don't know , weather i have been able to convey myself ? ) tempt
siki
-
What has become of the Quranic Islam as a result of certain people's having poured their social customs and personal assumptions into it?
Veiled to all men beyond her family, a young Bedouin woman wears the classic face covering of her people (but she has no headcover on her top. H A). http//www3.nationalgeographic.com/places/gallery/saudiarabia_veiled-bedouin-woman.html
In Senegal Muslim women wear a colourful headgear against the sun while working in the fields but go topless. (Amir Taheri, New York Post August 15, 2003) http//www.marzeporgohar.org/index.php/index.php?l=1&cat=20&scat=&artid=121
-
What has become of the Quranic Islam as a result of certain people's having poured their social customs and personal assumptions into it?
Veiled to all men beyond her family, a young Bedouin woman wears the classic face covering of her people (but she has no headcover on her top. H A). http//www3.nationalgeographic.com/places/gallery/saudiarabia_veiled-bedouin-woman.html
In Senegal Muslim women wear a colourful headgear against the sun while working in the fields but go topless. (Amir Taheri, New York Post August 15, 2003) http//www.marzeporgohar.org/index.php/index.php?l=1&cat=20&scat=&artid=121
That second link deserves its own thread.
But I couldn't help pointing out
In 1981, Abol-Hassan Bani-Sadr, the first president of the Islamic Republic, announced that ''scientific research had shown that women's hair emitted rays that drove men insane'' (sic).
I don't think it's the hair...
Apparently the author of the second link is also a chronic liar.
-
As Salaamu Alaikum all,
Had a big discussion/debate/argument about this a while back with some folks. To see my point of view refuting the article on free-minds and other places about "khimar" and the ayaat mentioned in this thread, as well as others arguements against mine, start at the following link with the fourth comment on the page
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=14453.75
Just my 2 cents again.
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
peace all
In my opinion "Zeena " is neither exclusively jewelery, nor going to the extent of making it as a pair of " exposed female breasts "
What i understand of this Zeena thing is, "the women being allowed to become casual regarding her dress , where she can be more relaxed for the sake of comfort , resulting into a slight exposure of certain attractive features of her body.
let me explain;
Normally a woman is suppose to hide/ guard the attractive parts of her body in a way that " they " do not attract the attention of men (excluding a husband) by igniting lustfull feelings, and hence creating an undesirable sexuall tension between them.
lets say if her neck is attractive and pulls the attention of males, then normally she should dress up in a way that this beauty of her, remains hidden under normal circumstances. (a beautiful necklace may further enhance the beauty ,and her attraction, so two of these together would become her zeena)
Same way , a pair of nice looking hands /arms if exposed by short sleeves , or feet/ankles/legs exposed by a short Capri, or by a casually(or intentionally) drawn up shalwar, would be attractive (sexy) to men, and would act as Triggers.
Even the "Bosom thing" mentioned in 24-31(wal udriben be khumrihinna), could be part of it. Under normal circumstances she should doubly cover them in a way that her breasts are not noticeable by men in a sexual manner. And if they are big/pretty and curvy, she is suppose to take special care to diffuse/subtle out their impact.
So , all that this ayah is saying " that she can be a little causal/ relax about these things in the presence of certain category of people. But most definately staying within the limits of modesty and not crossing the line which could be termed as obscenity by that family/society.
I don't know , weather i have been able to convey myself ? tempt
siki
Common sense tells people, men or women, roughly the limit between behaving or dressing normally and "overdoing" it, I would agree with you simply on common sense. However, the fact of enjoining the same whether you are with females or with males and establishing the difference solely on personal relation -being part of the family or household or not- makes think that it is not necessarily talking about sexual possibilities, although they may be included in the general respectful attire and manners to be observed in front of everybody with whom one is not in familiar terms. Now, I don't know whether at those times Arab men wore much jewelry. If not, then it makes more sense that this part which is addressed to women refers to showing (off?) things that one puts on as adornment and not things that are part of the body.
There is another part in this which is evaded because of this hurry to override everything with the "sexual" (enormous) dimension. I refer to simple (unprovoquing) beauty. I for instance like women -rather, beautiful women. Not that I find them attrative in a sexual way, but still I like beauty, and woman's beauty is well, beautiful. I can't see why it should be necessarily tempting and not merely pleasing. ?What is wrong with seeing something pleasant? Needless to say that you can be very well covered and still manage to throw some hooks. Of course, there are also beautiful men, but may be not so often and not of the same kind. And of course, as we all know, beauty mostly is a matter of personal taste. At any rate admiring and enjoying it is not the same thing as being hormone driven.
Salaam
-
That second link deserves its own thread.
But I couldn't help pointing out
I don't think it's the hair...
Apparently the author of the second link is also a chronic liar.
I wish you said what Amir Taheri's chronic lie is about.
Is it a lie that Abol-Hassan Bani-Sadr, the first president of the Islamic Republic, announced that ''scientific research had shown that women's hair emitted rays that drove men insane'' (sic)?
If it is, ImamQuranonly and siki and you are telling a lie because you claim that the zeenah mentioned in 2431 is women's bodily beauty which should be covered otherwise men will sexually be provoked.
wouldn't the raiment of righteousness include dressing or covering up oneself as Allah has described in 2431...? (ImamQuranonly)
In 2431 Allah does not describe the way women have to cover themselves up. The only thing He says they have to cover up is their genital organs (forooj), which actually is a warning in passing because the main topic the verse deals with is the way women have to wear their jewelry (zeenah). Otherwise, He would be allowing them to reveal the hidden parts of their body such as their lust-provoking (?) hair and bosoms to the exceptional people cited in the verse such as their male attendants.
As for ImamQuranonly?s claim that the khumur provides protection for women with large breasts, medium breasts and small breasts, please excuse me but I can not take it seriously.
"?because," ImamQuranonly goes on explainig, "when a woman is properly wearing a khumur and uses the extra material to cover her breast area over the clothes she already has on, no one can tell what size and shape here breasts are."
Really? Well then, those X-size breasts become hidden after the khumur is placed on them. So what happens to their mysterious sizes when the women obey God Who allows them to display the hidden parts of their body?
Back to your accusation of Amir Taheri. Is it a lie that the Muslim women in Senegal wear a colourful headgear against the sun while working in the fields but go topless?
I searched for a photo to support his claim but have not been not able to yet. However, I have come across this photo of the Australian aborigines
http//www.fotosearch.com/IST503/1157592/
The truth is that the only religious awrah is people?s genital organs (2430-31; 235-6, 7029-30); the rest of the human body, including the breasts, is traditional awrah or not awrah at all. I may explain if necessary and if God wills.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
I searched for a photo to support his claim but have not been not able to yet. However, I have come across this photo of the Australian aborigines
http//www.fotosearch.com/IST503/1157592/
The truth is that the only religious awrah is people?s genital organs (2430-31; 235-6, 7029-30); the rest of the human body, including the breasts, is traditional awrah or not awrah at all. I may explain if necessary and if God wills.
Just a little help...from Sudan
http//www.viewimages.com/Search.aspx?mid=3350329&epmid=1&partner=Google
and
http//C\Users\Samia\Desktop\dinka woman.jpg
-
Common sense tells people, men or women, roughly the limit between behaving or dressing normally and "overdoing" it, I would agree with you simply on common sense. However, the fact of enjoining the same whether you are with females or with males and establishing the difference solely on personal relation -being part of the family or household or not- makes think that it is not necessarily talking about sexual possibilities, although they may be included in the general respectful attire and manners to be observed in front of everybody with whom one is not in familiar terms. Now, I don't know whether at those times Arab men wore much jewelry. If not, then it makes more sense that this part which is addressed to women refers to showing (off?) things that one puts on as adornment and not things that are part of the body.
There is another part in this which is evaded because of this hurry to override everything with the "sexual" (enormous) dimension. I refer to simple (unprovoquing) beauty. I for instance like women -rather, beautiful women. Not that I find them attrative in a sexual way, but still I like beauty, and woman's beauty is well, beautiful. I can't see why it should be necessarily tempting and not merely pleasing. ?What is wrong with seeing something pleasant? Needless to say that you can be very well covered and still manage to throw some hooks. Of course, there are also beautiful men, but may be not so often and not of the same kind. And of course, as we all know, beauty mostly is a matter of personal taste. At any rate admiring and enjoying it is not the same thing as being hormone driven.
Salaam
Huruf
) I like your style,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,of writing, ................and it does contain sense too.
siki
-
As Salaamu Alaikum all,
Had a big discussion/debate/argument about this a while back with some folks. To see my point of view refuting the article on free-minds and other places about "khimar" and the ayaat mentioned in this thread, as well as others arguements against mine, start at the following link with the fourth comment on the page
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=14453.75
Just my 2 cents again.
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
Oh my God, where was i ? How come i missed ,,,,all that mess,, in the above mentioned debate (
siki
-
As Salaamu Alaikum all,
I wish you said what Amir Taheri's chronic lie is about.
Is it a lie that Abol-Hassan Bani-Sadr, the first president of the Islamic Republic, announced that ''scientific research had shown that women's hair emitted rays that drove men insane'' (sic)?
Whether it is a lie or not who said this, those who follow Quran only as divine scripture don't believe such nonsense or use it as reason for the proofs from Al Quran that we provide. To group it as such and suggest it, is to try to mislead others from the legitimate arguments and their proofs.
If it is, ImamQuranonly and siki and you are telling a lie because you claim that the zeenah mentioned in 2431 is women's bodily beauty which should be covered otherwise men will sexually be provoked.
wouldn't the raiment of righteousness include dressing or covering up oneself as Allah has described in 2431...? (ImamQuranonly)
First you are wrong in saying "which should be covered otherwise men will sexually be provoked". I have never made that claim. The reason I give for women covering up what I described in the article is because ALLAH gave the command; He knows the purpose of His own command, your or my reasoning and judgment to reject that is only a sign of disbelief or rejection of faith in that command from Him! You clearly haven't considered all of the terms used in 2431 if you think that breasts/chest/cleavage are free to go uncovered.
In 2431 Allah does not describe the way women have to cover themselves up. The only thing He says they have to cover up is their genital organs (forooj), which actually is a warning in passing because the main topic the verse deals with is the way women have to wear their jewelry (zeenah).
First, this is actually a lie. Allah clearly describes "part" of the way women are to cover themselves. You must not be reading the entire ayat. But other instructions are also given in 3359. Maybe you missed the part in 2431 that says to use their "khumur" to cover their cleavage. And, according to you, Allah wouldn't be interested in how women reveal anything from their body, BUT He would be very concerned about how they wear their jewelry ) That's an utterly stupid suggestion and point of view when based only from reason and logic.
Otherwise, He would be allowing them to reveal the hidden parts of their body such as their lust-provoking (?) hair and bosoms to the exceptional people cited in the verse such as their male attendants.
If you understood the ayaat correctly, then you would not be saying that He would be allowing them to reveal the hidden parts of their body to "male attendants". Just to give you a hint in the right direction, only the part in brown below in the ayat is said can be revealed to those people. According to you, that would only be jewelry anyway right?
Your mind is obviously terribly influenced by sunnism,etc. and the thought that every command from Allah is addressing the sexual urges of men. Let's look at 2431 again
Transliteration Waqul lilmu/minati yaghdudna min absarihinna wayahfathna furoojahunna wala yubdeena zeenatahunna illa ma thahara minha walyadribna bikhumurihinna AAala juyoobihinna wala yubdeena zeenatahunna illa libuAAoolatihinna aw aba-ihinna aw aba-i buAAoolatihinna aw abna-ihinna aw abna-i buAAoolatihinna aw ikhwanihinna aw banee ikhwanihinna aw banee akhawatihinna aw nisa-ihinna aw ma malakat aymanuhunna awi alttabiAAeena ghayri olee al-irbati mina alrrijali awi alttifli allatheena lam yathharoo AAala AAawrati alnnisa-i wala yadribna bi-arjulihinna liyuAAlama ma yukhfeena min zeenatihinna watooboo ila Allahi jameeAAan ayyuha almu/minoona laAAallakum tuflihoona
Literal And say to the believers they (F) lower/humble from their eye sights, and they (F) protect/safe keep from their genital parts between their legs, and they do not show their decoration/beauty except what appeared/is visible from it, and they hold in place/sew (E) with their head covers/covers on their collar opening in clothes/chests , and they do not show their decoration/beauty except to their husbands, or their fathers, or their husband's fathers (fathers in-law), or their sons, or their husband's sons (step- sons), or their brothers, or their brother's sons (nephews), or their sisters' sons (nephews), or their women, or what their right (hands) owned/possessed (i.e. care-giers under contract), or the followers/servants (those) not (owners) of need/desire/intelligence and resourcefulness (without a sexual drive) from the men or the child/children (the very old or very young), those who did not see and know of on the women's shameful genital parts , and they (F) do not beat/strike with their (F) feet to be known what they (F) hide from their decoration/beauty , and repent to God all together , oh you the believers, maybe/perhaps you succeed/win.
Free-Minds And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and keep covered their private parts, and that they should not show-off their beauty except what is apparent, and let them cast their shawls over their cleavage. And let them not show-off 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 children that come after them, or those who are still their dependants, 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.
Rashad Khalifa And tell the believing women to subdue their eyes, and maintain their chastity. They shall not reveal any parts of their bodies, except that which is necessary. They shall cover their chests, and shall not relax this code in the presence of other than their husbands, their fathers, the fathers of their husbands, their sons, the sons of their husbands, their brothers, the sons of their brothers, the sons of their sisters, other women, the male servants or employees whose sexual drive has been nullified, or the children who have not reached puberty. They shall not strike their feet when they walk in order to shake reveal certain details of their bodies. All of you shall repent to GOD, O you believers, that you may succeed.
Yusuf Ali And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husbands' sons, their brothers or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women, or the slaves whom their right hands possess, or male servants free of physical needs, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex; and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments. And O ye Believers! turn ye all together towards Allah, that ye may attain Bliss.You act as if the part in red was the only command given in the ayat. There are SIX commands given to believing women in that ayat, see if you can figure out what all 6 of them are and what is the difference between them!
As for ImamQuranonly?s claim that the khumur provides protection for women with large breasts, medium breasts and small breasts, please excuse me but I can not take it seriously.
"?because," ImamQuranonly goes on explainig, "when a woman is properly wearing a khumur and uses the extra material to cover her breast area over the clothes she already has on, no one can tell what size and shape here breasts are."
Really? Well then, those X-size breasts become hidden after the khumur is placed on them. So what happens to their mysterious sizes when the women obey God Who allows them to display the hidden parts of their body
To help you, try to read the part I have written above SLOWLY. Then go back and read the link and all of it arguments/proofs for and against it. If that doesn't help you to understand it, then just PRAY (if you do that).
Khimar when placed over the cleavage helps to hide size if done correctly. Just like clothes won't hide if a person is fat or skinny, khimar won't completely hide the size of women with extreme breast size. But it will reduce their appearance and keep from attracting too much attention to them from "men and women". Either way, there is no exception for women to be able to show their breasts to all those mentioned including male attendants. Even when khimar is not used to cover the cleavage, the breasts are still to be covered under the command in 3359.
Back to your accusation of Amir Taheri. Is it a lie that the Muslim women in Senegal wear a colourful headgear against the sun while working in the fields but go topless?
I searched for a photo to support his claim but have not been not able to yet. However, I have come across this photo of the Australian aborigines
http//www.fotosearch.com/IST503/1157592/
Using people's behavior, customs and dress patterns that are based off of incorrect knowledge anyway, is no way to prove or disprove the commands given by Allah in Al Quran. I guess you could also go back to pre-cave man when man just went around naked and say we all need to get back to our roots because we were not over sexed back then when everyone was naked. Your arguments are really sad. Al Quran is it's own criteria. You can't defend it or oppose it by the actions of humans.
The truth is that the only religious awrah is people?s genital organs (2430-31; 235-6, 7029-30); the rest of the human body, including the breasts, is traditional awrah or not awrah at all. I may explain if necessary and if God wills.
Peace,
Hasan AkcayAllah made sure that people of knowledge don't follow ridiculous suggestions by people like you by including in ayat 2431 (along with 3359)
walyadribna bikhumurihinna AAala juyoobihinna
and they hold in place/sew (E) with their head covers/covers on their collar opening in clothes/chestsI guess you think this means that they should use their covers to spread over their chest jewelry? )
I really don't understand where you get your points from unless you don't believe in Al Quran as divine scripture from Allah as guidance for all humanity. And are we talking about "awrah" or "zeenah" or all of 2431?
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
As Salaamu Alaika siki,
LOL rotfl It was a mess, and I'm not proud of the arguments. But I still referred to it because I stand by the arguments that I put forth to make the point. Hopefully those who read it can look at the points of importance and ignore the other parts. -\
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
o Oh my God, where was i ? How come i missed ,,,, the mess,, created in the above mentioned debate
siki