The
Asian Age
Behind the veil
By Dr Zeenat Shaukat Ali
The recent diktat on Muslim women to make themselves invisible
behind burqas or suffer adverse reactions (even have acid thrown
on their faces) issued by the Lashkar-e-Jabbar in Kashmir, is yet
another way of gaining recognition, legitimacy and political
control through the victimisation of women.
This is not the first time that religion has been used to impose a
Taliban like control on women by driving them to seclusion or
locking them behind closed doors. And perhaps this is also not the
last time. What is alarming is that such dictums and threats are
catching on in cities like Hyderabad and even Mumbai.
It is claimed that the basis of the mandate for veiling and
secluding women are found in the primary sources of Islam, the
Holy Quran and the Sunnah of Prophet Mohammed. Since such
arguments are tendentious it is necessary to quote directly from
the Quran and the authentic Sunnah of Prophet Mohammed.
The use of the word “burqa” is not there in the Holy Quran. Hence
in order to fully appreciate the arguments on the subject of the
veil it is necessary to fully analyse, etymologically and
historically, the dimension of the word “veiling”.
The association of clothing, modesty and morality in Islam
acquires meaning beyond the familiar, hence limiting it to a
single dimension of “veiling” obscuring historical developments,
cultural and social differences, class, special rank and
socio-political articulations.
An interesting point to be noted is that the Quranic reference to
“hijab” meaning “screen” does not concern or limit itself to
women’s clothing. The Holy Quran has a number of references to
hijab, not one of which concerns women’s clothing.
In one instance the Holy Quran says: “It’s not fitting that God
should speak to him except by inspiration or from behind a veil (hijab).”
(H.Q. 42:51)
The veil here is not material. The reference endorses the
“non-gendered” context separating the creator from his mortals.
Another verse uses this term to segregate the wrongdoers from the
righteous: “Between them shall be a veil (hijab), and on the
Heights will be men who would know everyone by his marks...” (H.Q.
7:46)
Again reference is made to those who accept the truth and those
who do not. At another instance: “We put between thee and those
who believe not in the Hereafter a veil (hijab) invisible.”(H.Q.
17: 45)
The next reference is to the separation of light and darkness:
“Truly do I love the love of good, with a view to the glory of my
Lord until (the sun) was hidden in the veil (hijab) of the night.”
(H.Q. 38:32)
Finally there is one more verse which says: “O ye who believe
enter not the Prophet’s house until leave is given to you... and
when you ask his ladies for anything you want, ask them behind a
screen.” (H.Q. 33:53).
The reference here again is to a screen and not to women’s
clothing. Although traditionalists argue that this verse relates
to women in general, modern scholars equally well grounded in
Islamic theology uphold that this verse relates to the wives of
the Prophet or “ummul Mumineen” only as they were special.
Modesty of both outlook and appearance is recommended in the Holy
Quran. Hence, with regard to gender one verse of the Quran speaks
to both men and women to be modest. It should be noted that the
first verse on modesty of outlook is addressed to men: “Say to the
believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their
modesty; that will make for greater purity for them.” (H.Q. 24:30)
“And say to believing women that they should lower their gaze and
guard the modesty.” (H.Q. 24:31)
Further recommendations to women are: “They should not display
their beauty and ornaments except what must ordinarily appear
thereof.” (H.Q. 4.31). And “O Prophet, tell thy wives and
daughters 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.” (H.Q. 33:59)
It is interesting that these verses do not refer to hijab but to
“khimar” (head cover) and “jilbab” (body dress or cloak). It
should be noted that the centre of both these verses is modesty,
protection and special status.
According to the noted scholar Syed Ameer Ali the last injunction
was required by special circumstances which then prevailed in
Medina, where the hypocrites would molest a woman and feign
innocence by suggesting that they thought that the woman was a
person of ill-repute.
This is plainly hinted in the following verse: “Truly if the
hypocrites and those who stir up sedition in the city desist not,
we shall make thee stand up against them.” (H.Q. 33:60). Such a
dress was therefore a kind of protection and not meant for
suppression. Finally, in older women such dress is done away with:
“Such elderly women as are past the prospect of marriage — there
is no blame on them if they set aside their outer garments without
making a wanton display of their ornaments.” (H.Q. 24:60).
An interesting view on the dress code of women in pre-Islamic
Arabia is propounded by Said Al Ashmawy, former chief justice of
Egypt’s Supreme Court (author of 15 books on Islam and law).
Basing his data on history he says, “In the Prophet’s day, many
women went about with their chest uncovered. What the Quran stated
was that women should dress more modestly; by pulling a cloth
across the chest.” A similar view is held by Maulana Muhammed Asad.
Seeing the widespread laxity of morals among all classes of
people, the Prophet strongly recommended modesty in appearance and
dress. But to suppose that his recommendation would assume its
present form that he enjoined seclusion or ostracisation of women
is wholly opposed to the spirit of his reforms. The Quran itself
offers no warrant for holding the seclusion of women as presently
practised or imposed.
It must be noted here that Islam did not introduce veiling or
seclusion in Arabic countries nor is this indigenous to Arabs.
Long before the advent of Islam, veiling and seclusion appear to
have existed in the Hellenistic-Byzantine era and among the
Sassanians of Persia.
In ancient Mesopotamia, the veil for women was regarded as a sign
of respectability and high status; decent married women wore the
veil to differentiate themselves from women slaves and unchaste
women.
The latter were in fact forbidden to cover their heads or hair. In
Assyrian law, slaves were forbidden to use the veil. Those caught
using the veil illegally were liable to severe penalties. Thus
veiling was not simply a mark of aristocracy but also used to
distinguish “respectable” women from disreputable ones.
Successive invasions brought the Greeks, Persians, Mesopotamians
and the Semitics in contact. The practice of veiling and seclusion
of women appears subsequently to have become established in Judaic
and Christian systems. Gradually these spread to the urban upper
classes of the Arabs and eventually to the general urban public.
The veiling of Arab Muslim women belonging to urban areas became
more pervasive under Turkish rule as a mark of rank and exclusive
lifestyle. By the 19th century upper-class urban Muslim and
Christian women in Egypt wore the “habarah”, which consisted of a
long skirt, a head cover, and a burqu, a long rectangular cloth of
white transparent muslin placed below the eyes, covering the lower
nose and the mouth and falling to the chest.
The revival of the term in the Seventies took place when the veil
became the centre of feminism and nationalist discourse in Egypt
during British colonial occupation.
Classical as well as modern scholars submit that verses relating
to dress are not obligatory (Fard al Ayn or Fard al Kifayah) since
there is no textual stipulation which makes it obligatory (wajib).
Indeed, Al Jabiz writes that women with the knowledge of their
kin, socialised freely at that time of early Islamic community.
Furthermore, Al Wahidi, in his Asbab al-Nazul, and other scholars
maintain that the reference in Surah 24:31 to scarves that should
cover both head and bosom (khimar; in contrast to the full-length
dress) was based on the need to differentiate between free women
and slaves. Further scholars emphasised that if scarves were used
to distinguish free women from slaves “then the abolition of
slavery in the modern period has eliminated this reason for
(extra) covering of oneself,” (p. 324).
Jurists differ as to the requirement of veiling and seclusion
contained in the Sunnah. Reference of veiling in the earlier,
hence sounder, hadiths are vague and general; whereas the latter,
hence less reliable, hadiths are much more detailed.
Some women consider veiling to be liberating, some find it an
assertion of cultural identity. In the West veiling is associated
with morality and privacy. However, to some it implies
subordination and subjugation. And on the basis of religion it
cannot be enforced.
Dr Zeenat Shaukat Ali is professor of Islamic studies at St.
Xaviers College, Mumbai
