Conversion as related to visa approval...

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I just realized that a paragraph that I thought I added wasn't included, making it look like the reference to Mary and khimar was also extra-Quranic. It is not. My bad. I was commenting on your post about Christian headcovering.

[nurse1967 287]

There are so many Muslim women on here who truly try to educate on their religious beliefs. Then, there are those that want to sit and pass judgement on all of those that they feel don't meet their standards. I think those are about as hypocritical as they come. If Allah would send a woman to hell because she fails to cover her hair, I would think that he would be even busier condemning Muslim men who consistently don't live up to their "Islamic "responsibilities as well. Just my thoughts as a Christian woman married to a Muslim man.

[maimouna 21]

Salam Sofiyya, What about this one? Not authentic for you as well?

Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Hadith # 282

Narrated Safiya bint Shaiba (Radhiallaahu Ánha) "Aisha (Radhiallaahu Ánha) used to say: "When (the Verse): "They should draw their veils over their necks and bosoms," was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets at the edges and covered their faces with the cut pieces.

PS - I failed to note that khimar did not connote a veil as a piece of cloth during the time of the Prophet (pbuh). It was merely a cloth used by men and women as protection from the elements and to carry goods. The connotation as a head veil was added at the time headcovering was determined to be required through fiqh.

To you the word "khimar" means a mere cloth, to me "khimar" means headcovering. During the time of the prophet (pbuh), it was well understood what hijab was, the sahabiyaaas (the best of our ummah) wore it around the prophet so there was no debate needed about what it meant back then.... To me the ayat is clear alhamdoulilah...this is a matter of faith, the little details do not matter to me. To each their own!!

Let's just be careful in making haram halal especially as we have new converts in this forum.

Betsy, I'd hope that you are not talking about me when it comes to hypocrisy, I never said anything about anyone entering hell as I am solely concerned with my own relationship with Allah(swt) however I will not sit quiet if I feel like someone's comments/views might mislead people. At the end of the day everybody is responsible for their own literacy when it comes to religious beliefs. Muslim men who do not live up to their own responsibilities are condemned in the Quran.If you need a copy of the Quran, I'll send you one.

Masalama!!!! (forgive the typos...didn't re-read as it is bed time)

Edited April 28, 2011 by maimouna

[nurse1967 287]

Salam Sofiyya, What about this one? Not authentic for you as well?

Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Hadith # 282

Narrated Safiya bint Shaiba (Radhiallaahu Ánha) "Aisha (Radhiallaahu Ánha) used to say: "When (the Verse): "They should draw their veils over their necks and bosoms," was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets at the edges and covered their faces with the cut pieces.

To you the word "khimar" means a mere cloth, to me "khimar" means headcovering. During the time of the prophet (pbuh), it was well understood what hijab was, the sahabiyaaas (the best of our ummah) wore it around the prophet so there was no debate needed about what it meant back then.... To me the ayat is clear alhamdoulilah...this is a matter of faith, the little details do not matter to me. To each their own!!

Let's just be careful in making haram halal specially as we have new converts in this forum.

Betsy, I'd hope that you are not talking about me when it comes to hypocrasy, I never said anything about anyone entering Jannah as I am solely concerned with my own relationship with Allah(swt) however I will not sit quiet if I feel like someone's comments/views might mislead people. At the end of the day everybody is responsible for their own literacy when it comes to religious beliefs. Muslim men who do not live up to their own responsibilities are condemned in the Quran.If you need a copy of the Quran, I'll send you one.

Masalama!!!!

Nope I was not referring to you. And nope don't need a Quran either. Have a hubby and a few Qurans around the house here. But, thanks for the offer.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Salaam, Thank you for your question, sis.

There are many interesting things about this hadith. First, it is commonly used to argue that niquab is mandated, not to argue that head covering is mandated.

Second, it refers to 24:31 as the ayah that commanded that the neck and bosom be covered; no mention of head covering. So, it is not useful in proving that head covering is required of Muslim women. Even the Prophet (pbuh) wore a khimar; there are ahadith about that, too, but it hasn't occurred to many that his practice of wearing one makes it incumbent upon men to do the same. Besides, not all ahadith, even sahih ahadith, are indicative of something the Prophet approved of as a directive from God. Face covering, as referred to in the cited sahih hadith, is an example of that.

The very fact that interpretation is required to explain that, in this supposedly clear ayah, that Allah really meant "head covering" when He plainly omits the words "head" or "hair" from what to cover is very telling. I mentioned before that the word in "hijab" in the Quran is never used to refer to a garment or a means of dress, so hijab as dress was also an interpretation. The interpretation was largely based on the needs and norms of the societies the rulings were made for, per the allowance of mashlaha. As an interpretation, it remains open to debate.

You say that "to me" khimar was just a cloth, but that is not limited to just my singular understanding. Khimar is a cover, not specifically a "head covering". I explained before that the religious connotation was determined after the death of the Prophet, not before. 24:31 tells us to cover our breasts. It does not demand that the cover we use must also remain on our heads.

Salam Sofiyya, What about this one? Not authentic for you as well?

Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Hadith # 282

Narrated Safiya bint Shaiba (Radhiallaahu Ánha) "Aisha (Radhiallaahu Ánha) used to say: "When (the Verse): "They should draw their veils over their necks and bosoms," was revealed, (the ladies) cut their waist sheets at the edges and covered their faces with the cut pieces.

To you the word "khimar" means a mere cloth, to me "khimar" means headcovering. During the time of the prophet (pbuh), it was well understood what hijab was, the sahabiyaaas (the best of our ummah) wore it around the prophet so there was no debate needed about what it meant back then.... To me the ayat is clear alhamdoulilah...this is a matter of faith, the little details do not matter to me. To each their own!!

Let's just be careful in making haram halal especially as we have new converts in this forum.

Edited April 28, 2011 by Sofiyya

[Sofiyya 1,687]

In the Prophet's (pbuh) day, Muslim women's hair wasn't concealed, just draped. I wonder, is anyone curious as to how a verse that explicitly commands concealing women's breasts as an act of public modesty came to be known as the verse that explicitly commands concealing women's hair as an act of spiritual obedience?

I'd love to hear what anyone has to say about that.

[maimouna 21]

Salam Sofiyya,

I think you said somewhere that you studied Islamic Law, so you must know that when it comes to Islamic Law it boils down to 4 sources: Quran, Sunnah (ahaadiths), ijima'a (consensus of the scholars, 4 main ones 4 example), and qiyas (your own judgment). I am a big fan of that last one by the way when it comes to law. However when it comes to hijab, the ulema has virtually no difference of opinon on that regard. When you say the verse explicitly commands conceiling women's breasts, that is your interpretation. I along with the majority of classical commentors agree that this verse commands us to extend the veil to covers our breasts. So your interpretation of the verse is a minority opinion.

In the end, I wear hijab to please Allah (swt), to exercice modesty and humility and I hope HE is happy with my efforts.

I do believe that the companions of the prophet (saw) wore the veil, can you please share references on where in your research did you see that the sahabiyaats did not wear proper hijab?

I am very curious about that, and Inshallah afterwards I'll drop the subject as we can sit here and throw verses back and forth at each other all day and it is not going change my beliefs and probably not yours. I pray for your guidance and I hope you will pray for mine.

Jazaks!

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Salaam. I'm detecting a bit of defensiveness in your posts to me, so, before I begin to address you again, please understand that we are not in competition with each other and I am not out to change your mind. Hijab is beautiful and it would be cruel to rob the world of more of its willful beauty. However, my 50 years in substantive study and devotion to the application of law in concrete situations has lead me intellectually and spiritually off the current trend toward rigidity, so, yes, my perspective is not entirely pedestrian, which some find to be disturbing. Insha'allah, we can move past that soon.

However, I stated before that my words are not intended to discourage the practice of head covering, yet, despite what you believe to be the absolute answer, there are other equally legitimate interpretations to consider. I know that this is always a heated topic due to the emotion that mu7ajabat bring to it. We will we disagree, but, because you say that you appreciate the exercise of individual reasoning (that is r'ay, BTW, not qiyas), I expect that we will do so respectfully.

I apologize in advance that there is no way that I can do this subject justice in a single day, so there will be much simplification. The study of the formulation and evolution of Islamic law requires an open mind. If you have done deep, long-term study, you find that there has been debate and evolution over 1400 years regarding women's obligation to cover.

Contrary to your boiled down list, the entire spectrum of study takes you beyond Sharia, ijima, and qiyas. Jurists and scholars are not bound to those concepts in making their determinations. They are, also, not limited to four schools of thought, or by the designations of Sunni or Shia, or even Islam, as some traditions are rooted in Abrahamic concepts outside of Islam.

A well stocked library will contain tomes in several languages covering a wide variety of opinions from many different schools that developed throughout the ages. It will include books written to rebut other books. The schools have differed greatly and borrowed from each other. The four major schools of this time differ in about 25% of their rulings; their variations, no matter how drastic, are viewed as legitimate by the others. The early imams, while strong in their opinions, were humble in recognizing the fallibility and limitations of their analysis. They were merely human and in no way able to form absolutes where Allah had not.

That is why there are several schools of thought to begin with. That is why there is allowance for regional and local needs. That is why there are trends within schools. The error that is made in pronouncing ijima to be the closure of debate in matters that are not absolute in Sharia is that one must accept that fiqh methodology has the same level of authority as Sharia.

But, since Sharia is superior to fiqh, that simply cannot be so. Textual authority, embodied, for example, in the Quranic directive to pray, or to avoid eating pork, or to believe in the Oneness of God, are non-negotiable. The wording is direct, the command clear. It is understood without further explanation that there is no deviation allowed from the text.

However, when someone, no matter how learned, creates a ruling by deduction, there is no absolute established. One can point to ijima as instructive, but there is, indeed, room for debate. The early imams had to, first, establish that the meaning of khimar in 24:31 was a head covering, although that is not its total meaning in Arabic, nor was that its only function in the days of the Prophet (pbuh). Then, they had to link the interpretive covering of the hair (determined to be part of a woman's adornment) to explicit command to cover the breasts.

The absence of a mention of hair in the ayah required interpretation, qiyas. Qiyas is the method of analyzing an original (illah) situation (eg. the command to cover the breasts) and extending it to a similar case. The Hanafi jurist, Sadr al-Shari’ah, in his Tawdih, defines qiyas as ‘extending the (Shari’ah) value from the original case over to the subsidiary (far`) by reason of an effective cause which is common to both cases and cannot be understood from the expression (concerning the original case) alone.’ [`Ubaydullah ibn Mas'ud Sadr al-Shari’ah, al-Tawdih fi Hall Ghawamid al-Tanqih, p. 444]

In other words, since it was not possible to derive head covering from the wording of the ayah alone, an legal extension was applied to conclude that both the hair and the breasts must be covered. It can be argued that this ruling, derived from an illah out of the authoritative text carries the weight of Sharia. It can also be argued that it does not due to a lack of consistency in applying the derivation.

For example, in Sunni jurisprudence, the practice of the Sahaba is another source of qiyas that has been utilized to justify the denial of an allowance granted by Sharia. An easy example is the banning of interfaith marriage by Muslim men in Singapore. Caliph Umar prohibited interfaith marriage for Muslim men on the basis of mashlaha, that it hurt the society by limiting the available pool of husbands for Muslim women, forming a precedent for the ulema in Singapore, but negating an explicit allowance in the Quran. Some argue that his ruling followed the intent of ayah 2:221, interpreting it to include ahl al kitab with mushrikeen (polytheists and atheists), invalidating ayah 5:5.

Later, the early jurists ruled that the marriage of a Muslim man to a non-Muslim women living in a non-Muslim country is mukruh (disliked). However, neither of these qiyas extrapolations have formed the precedent and created an extra-Quranic burden for men, who continue to enjoy the interpretation of 5:5 as an exception to 2:221 (and to 60:11-12) that is not allowed to Muslim women.

I don't want to diverge too far, so I'll move from here to your specific question regarding hijab and the Sahaba. I will remind you again that the Quran never uses the word "hijab" to refer to a manner of dress. While there is a dress code in the Quran, a specific recipe of what is allowed and what is not is not there. We are to lengthen our garments, cover our breasts, and behave in a manner that doesn't draw attention to us.

The Prophet's wives were to be addressed from behind a barrier (hijab). There are ahadith about how Umar (he was a busy guy) hid in the fields at night in order to see the Prophet's wives as the ventured out to relive themselves. His objective was to convince the Prophet that they should be face-veiled and unrecognizable to others, as their special status required, in his opinion. Niquab was not a consideration for all Muslim women, as was not the application of the hijab as a barrier between all women and non-mahram.

Women were a large part of the Prophet's cabinet. They supplied him with feedback, pointed out omissions (ayah 33:35 is a result of women requesting an ayah re their spirituality), some even went to war with him. Several of his wives owned their own businesses, and one traveled with him to assist in negotiating treaties. His first wife funded his mission, encouraged him and kept his confidences. These were not women whose piety was appraised by their dress, but by their deeds. Their sacrifice was not in what they wore, but by how they acquitted themselves.

Historically, Islam is a dynamic and fluid faith that is in danger of being strangled by Arab chauvinism, and I say that as an Arab. There are people who will insist on the absolutism of prayer only in Arabic being acceptable to Allah. Yet, they cannot explain how the prayers of prophets who did not speak Arabic (Jesus, for example, spoke Aramaic) were accepted. They insist that everyone must dress like Arabs, but the Book was revealed all over the world before reaching the Arabian pennisula, so most of those who received the Book before did not know how Arabs dressed.

The Quran expressly says that there are adaptations so that the people will understand and be more easily approached. Our job, as Muslims, is to make the approach and the sharing easy. We can only do this by following the historical precedent of allowing for adptation and by remembering that one of the beauties of Islam is that it allows each individual to have a full on direct relationship with God, bearing no burden of anyone else's practice.

While tradition, continuity and elements that unify us, such as prayer in Arabic, are useful and wonderful things, we must keep in the forefront that taqwa involves less about legalisms and more about obtaining and maintaining the joy of worship so that it can radiate throughout your daily affairs, drawing others to you.

It has been said that the act of wearing hijab is like an act of worship all day. That is a special way to feel if that is what wearing hijab means to you. If wearing the hijab does not make sense to you, but your love of God is sincere and alive, your relationship with Him can thrive without it.

We all all connected through Him. We must not allow appearances to break our unity. One can wear the hijab and be a cruel person, or not wear it and be the kindest person around. Islam is not what we wear, but what we do. That is our ultimate measure.

I apologize to all for the length of this post, to LongRoadHome, I apologize for your critical question devolving into a hiajb thread , and to my dear sister in Islam, my prayers for you will always be offered in sincere abundance. All knowledge is from Allah. May He guide us all.

Salam Sofiyya,

I think you said somewhere that you studied Islamic Law, so you must know that when it comes to Islamic Law it boils down to 4 sources: Quran, Sunnah (ahaadiths), ijima'a (consensus of the scholars, 4 main ones 4 example), and qiyas (your own judgment). I am a big fan of that last one by the way when it comes to law. However when it comes to hijab, the ulema has virtually no difference of opinon on that regard. When you say the verse explicitly commands conceiling women's breasts, that is your interpretation. I along with the majority of classical commentors agree that this verse commands us to extend the veil to covers our breasts. So your interpretation of the verse is a minority opinion.

In the end, I wear hijab to please Allah (swt), to exercice modesty and humility and I hope HE is happy with my efforts.

I do believe that the companions of the prophet (saw) wore the veil, can you please share references on where in your research did you see that the sahabiyaats did not wear proper hijab?

I am very curious about that, and Inshallah afterwards I'll drop the subject as we can sit here and throw verses back and forth at each other all day and it is not going change my beliefs and probably not yours. I pray for your guidance and I hope you will pray for mine.

Jazaks!

Edited April 28, 2011 by Sofiyya

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I apologize again for my typos I'm never left alone with a keyboard at work as I'm dyslexic and a terrible typist, thus the repetitive editing. I'm sure that the allotted time to edit has been shortened, too, meh

[maimouna 21]

Alhamdulilah!

My apologies to sister LongRoadHome as well for going so off topic.

Sofiyya, I didn't get defensive, sorry you felt that way and I appreciate healthy discussion that stimulates our minds and reaffirms our faiths one way or another.

I forgot one critical sentence at the end of the post.

Allahu Ahlam (Allah (swt) knows best!!)

[doodlebugg 10]

OK this has nothing to do with the original question but has anyone ever thought about what happens to everyone in all of the different religions that are out there when we die? I mean *really* thought about it? Ultimately, if only one religion is correct, then it doesn't matter which one you belong to because only one will be the "true" one. On the other hand, if God just wants us to view religion as a mechanism to praise Him, it won't matter and then all of the countless hours of debate could have been used for things more important, like praying - in whatever form brings you closer to Him.

Granted I just had all of my hormones and intestines kicked out of whack so I'm thinking a lil crazy these days but I kind of see that as the ultimate question. Will He just choose *one* set of religious peeps or take the devout from each style, no matter whether it be Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Buhdist (sp?), Hindu, etc.

/end random post.

[Staashi 371]

OK this has nothing to do with the original question but has anyone ever thought about what happens to everyone in all of the different religions that are out there when we die? I mean *really* thought about it? Ultimately, if only one religion is correct, then it doesn't matter which one you belong to because only one will be the "true" one. On the other hand, if God just wants us to view religion as a mechanism to praise Him, it won't matter and then all of the countless hours of debate could have been used for things more important, like praying - in whatever form brings you closer to Him.

Granted I just had all of my hormones and intestines kicked out of whack so I'm thinking a lil crazy these days but I kind of see that as the ultimate question. Will He just choose *one* set of religious peeps or take the devout from each style, no matter whether it be Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Buhdist (sp?), Hindu, etc.

/end random post.

I think he takes those that honor Him in whatever form they choose.

[kristen_maroc 126]

I think he takes those that honor Him in whatever form they choose.

I really, really hope so.

That being said, after 4 years in Morocco, I have to say that there is no way that I as a Christian can watch so many people live their lives with such faith and good works... and NOT believe that God will accept their worship, service, and submission. I just find it... not to put myself in God's position to judge, but I just would not be able to understand it.

Then again, being here for four years has also made me feel not 100% Christian, certainly not Muslim, but almost something in between...

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Salaam, doodle Allah says several times in the Holy Quran that there will be those who don't call themselves Muslim who will enter Jannah at His pleasure. It's clear that He's not interested in our labels, but in our righteousness.

Thank you, Kristen and LRH for your kind comments.

OK this has nothing to do with the original question but has anyone ever thought about what happens to everyone in all of the different religions that are out there when we die? I mean *really* thought about it? Ultimately, if only one religion is correct, then it doesn't matter which one you belong to because only one will be the "true" one. On the other hand, if God just wants us to view religion as a mechanism to praise Him, it won't matter and then all of the countless hours of debate could have been used for things more important, like praying - in whatever form brings you closer to Him.

Granted I just had all of my hormones and intestines kicked out of whack so I'm thinking a lil crazy these days but I kind of see that as the ultimate question. Will He just choose *one* set of religious peeps or take the devout from each style, no matter whether it be Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Buhdist (sp?), Hindu, etc.

/end random post.

[doodlebugg 10]

Salaam, doodle Allah says several times in the Holy Quran that there will be those who don't call themselves Muslim who will enter Jannah at His pleasure. It's clear that He's not interested in our labels, but in our righteousness.

I really wish there were some "universal" church that accepted all members. If there were more of those perhaps we could learn to love one another instead of constantly starting wars over a passage or two in a book.