Niqab and the West

This refers to Masood Khan’s letter “Niqab and the West” (Oct. 28). Khan’s remarks that “the niqab is not mandatory religious attire” and that “being a part of a dress code in some societies for a long time, it has acquired a religious connotation for some people” are absolutely wrong. Allah commands believing women to guard their chastity, and the command to guard their chastity is also a command to do everything necessary to guard their chastity. No rational person would doubt that one of the means of doing so is covering the face, because uncovering it causes people to look at it and enjoy its beauty, and thence to initiate contact. The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “The eyes commit zina and their zina is by looking...” then he said, “... and the private part confirms that or denies it.” Narrated by Al-Bukhari, 6612; Muslim, 2657. How often do you find men gazing at the uncovered faces of women? And how often is such gazing followed by fornication, adultery, molestation or rape?

If covering the face is one of the means of guarding one’s chastity, then it is enjoined, because the means come under the same ruling as the ends. Allah says in the Holy Qur’an: “And tell the believing women to ......draw their veils all over juyoob... And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment...(Surah 24, Verse 31).” The jayb (pl. juyoob) is the neck opening of a garment. If a woman is commanded to draw her veil over the neck opening of her garment, then she is commanded to cover her face, either because that is implied or by analogy. If it is obligatory to cover the throat and chest, then it is more appropriate to cover the face because it is the site of beauty and attraction. The words “And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment” means that a woman should not stamp her feet so as to make known hidden adornments such as anklets and the like. If a woman is forbidden to stamp her feet lest men be tempted by what they hear of the sound of her anklets etc., then what about uncovering the face? Which is the greater source of temptation — a man hearing the anklets of a woman whom he does not know or whether she is beautiful, or whether she is young or old, or ugly or pretty? Or his looking at a beautiful youthful face that attracts him and invites him to look at it? It was narrated that Ibn ‘Umar said: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever lets his garment drag out of pride, Allah will not look at him on the Day of Resurrection.” Umm Salamah said, “What should women do with their hems?” He said, “Let them hang down a hand span.” She said, “What if that shows her feet?” He said, “Let it hang down a cubit, but no more than that.” Narrated by Al-Tirmidhi.

The consequences of violating the hijab rules should make one see the importance of hijab. It is easy for ignorant Muslim men to declare the hijab or niqab as un-Islamic but ultimately it is women who suffer by violating the hijab rules. These ignorant Muslim men then cannot do anything to restore the chastity or virginity of sexually abused women.

Nusratunissa Abdullah, By e-mail published 10 November 2009

Texas shooting

With due respect, Dr. Nidal Hasan had many options not to go to Iraq or Afghanistan. He could have refused and been court-martialed; he could have claimed conscientious objector status and he could have fled the country. He could have claimed insanity and he could have disguised himself and lived in California without being found for decades or ever. According to his medical colleagues, he became a religious extremist who condemned non-Muslims on many occasions. He has described terrorists as heroes. He went to work the day he massacred his colleagues (people he is supposed to help) in his traditional clothing — mind you, he is a major in the US military; even in Saudi Arabia, military personal must wear military uniforms when on duty. Some eyewitnesses are reported to have said, he prayed first and during his murderous rampage was screaming, Allah-o-Akbar. How could anyone say he is not driven by religious hate? He is a murderer. He could have gone to Iraq or Afghanistan and defected to his brothers if he did not want to be a US citizen instead of gunning down people who trust him and look to him for help.

Ali Alyami, By e-mail published 10 November 2009

Texas shooting 2

Thank you for your genuine editorial “Texas shooting.” In fact it is based on reality and represents the views of a number of Arab News readers. Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan is not an ordinary person. The US government should look deeply into the reasons that led their own army officer to go to such an extent. What has been done by him is the act and reaction of an individual. Muslims or Islam have nothing to do with this incident; this is a purely US Army internal problem. However, it seems that Hasan was not happy with the policy, procedure and system of the US Army. The media (particularly the Western) should not highlight his religion and make a hue and cry about it.

Zakaria Sultan, Riyadh published 10 November 2009

Texas shooting 3

There is one significant difference between Nidal Hasan and this unnamed man from Florida who shot several people or Timothy McVeigh or whoever else, I have seen the Arab media compare him to: the “others” (who are historically, but in most cases not actually practicing Christians) that are compared to Hasan. Florida man, McVeigh or others did not use religion to justify their attacks. It doesn’t matter whether Hasan was correct in his religion to shoot people down or not. The point is that he used Islam, however wrong it is, to justify his attacks. Hasan reportedly said “Allah-o-Akbar” before firing his gun. In recent history it is difficult to find non-Muslim people who have gone on rampage killing others while, for example, saying the “Hail Mary” or “Our Father”, or even mentioning the name of God. They do it for personal reasons where their religion (if any is actually practiced) plays absolutely no role in the matter. When someone says “Allah-o-Akbar” immediately before killing, then that would suggest a motive inspired by his or her religion. Had Hasan just gone on rampage without saying a word, he would have been another guy who went berserk.

John Doe, By e-mail published 10 November 2009