Discovering the Headcover - 5

Before I say anything, I am going to warn you that you must have read the previous episodes of this series in order to properly understand the foregoing discussion. So, please take your time to read them, if you haven't done so.

* * *

An important issue that the Muslims face today is establishing connections with the disbelievers or non-Muslims. This issue is due to the definitive instructions in the Quran on the matter. For some people, especially those who live in the non-Muslim majority countries, this is not an issue in their minds, because they are either overwhelmed with such connections or they formed their diaspora in order to avoid any ties with the non-Muslims. For some others, they prefer not to dig in. In case of the extremists, they use the relevant verses of the Quran to justify their hostility against the non-Muslims and against the Muslims who interact with the non-Muslims. Despite all these, still another group of Muslims have worked their way to have a solution to the issue. If you read the Quran, however, not befriending the non-Muslims or not allying with them is there, explicitly mentioned and repeated, and expressed in an authoritative language that is directly addressing the believers. You cannot miss it. How come you work your way around it?

O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are [in fact] allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you – then indeed, he is [one] of them. Indeed, Allah guides not the wrongdoing people. (5/51)

O you who believe! do not take for guardians those who take your religion for a mockery and a joke, from among those who were given the Book before you and the unbelievers; and be careful of (your duty to) Allah if you are believers. (5/57)

Let not believers take disbelievers as allies rather than believers. And whoever [of you] does that has nothing with Allah , except when taking precaution against them in prudence. And Allah warns you of Himself, and to Allah is the [final] destination. (3/28) 

O you who have believed, do not take as intimates those other than yourselves, for they will not spare you [any] ruin. They wish you would have hardship. Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, and what their breasts conceal is greater. We have certainly made clear to you the signs, if you will use reason. (3/118) 

O you who have believed, do not take the disbelievers as allies instead of the believers. Do you wish to give Allah against yourselves a clear case? (4/144)

Here, I am not going to discuss the details of the answer to that question, because my goal is not to scrutinize the social interactions but to scrutinize the method I proposed and used in analyzing the headcover issue. So, I am going to suffice with drawing some lessons and parallels between these two issues.

Did I tell you that those who worked their way around the problem of "befriending the disbelievers" did so mostly in the last 50 years or so! Guess why? They had no other choice. Until the end of the 18th century, the Muslims had the higher hand among the civilizations, and they did not have much affair with the non-Muslims other than trade or wars. This situation was rooted in one sense in the verses mentioned above. With the start of the demise of the power of Muslims, not only the strength of the faiths dwindled but also the ties with the non-Muslims grew stronger. When we came to the 1900's, the Muslims were simply vanquished by the disbelievers in virtually all fronts of life. So, it was not anymore a question, whether to engage with the non-Muslims or not. If you did not, you didn't have a chance to thrive. You had to learn from them. You had to establish friendship with them. You had to depend and rely on them. You had to ally with them. In short, you had to go against what was told in the Quran!

Then, what did those who found a solution do? How did they come to a solution? Simple and brief answer is 1- they looked at the historical and textual context of those verses, 2- they scrutinized the meaning of the words "disbeliever", "ally", "friend" not just as used among the people but as used in the Quran, 3- they did not solely look at the verses at hand but considered the big picture of the Quran, 4- they confined the "stay away order" against those who function in the abhorred ways mentioned in the Quran. In short, those who solved the problem developed a life style in which a person's disbeliever status is not necessarily derived from their beliefs but from their actions towards the Muslims. This conclusion mostly came from an analysis of the meaning of "disbeliever" in the Quran and a critical thought thereof. As an example of this approach, you can read this blog.

The above example about the "stay away order" can be used as a pattern to see how the minds of those who interpret Islam work. You can project this pattern to other matters, such as music, sculpture, arts, presence of women in the society, state-religion interaction. The scholars do not apply the critical thinking and objective analysis unless and until they have to. Until then, they go with blind imitation and status quo, claiming these to be the order of God. But when the time comes, suddenly God's orders change!

Nevertheless, I have good news. If you set aside the dominant view of the masses, the pure human conscience and intuition have the ability to see the direction towards the truth. This is a God-given ability to the human heart. That is, in all of those issues where the scholars cling to a blind imitation and side with the status quo, the free thinking individuals all along the history held the idea that "there must be another way of understanding God's words, still intended and willed by Him." An example of this is us today knowing that there are angelic non-Muslims and satanic Muslims, and so, there has to be a different way of understanding the aforementioned verses. Now with all these, let's get back to the headcover issue.

So far in the previous episodes, we looked at the psychological aspects of the matter and also made a methodological verification of the status of headcover as an "order of God". The last step involved a look into the meaning and function of "adornment". Then, we wanted to perform a self-check in order to make sure that we are not deviating from the straight path of God. Now, we saw that what we did as critical thinking while adhering to the word of God, although in the appearance against the beliefs of the masses and the governing understanding of the Quran, is in fact exactly what the "scholars" do and what the masses "think" when they fall into the obliging conditions. That is, if you wait long enough, you may see the scholars and masses voice the same ideas about the headcover that we have been working on so far. 

In fact, this series of blogs is not the only one announcing non-orthodox views on the issue of headcover, but the sources who do so are mostly linked to political endeavors or have life styles that are inconsiderate of God's expectations of a believer. And most of all, such non-orthodox views lack a connection and adherence to the word of God. As a result, even if those views on the headcover issue might be worthy of thinking, they are marginalized and outcast due to the accompanying factors mentioned here.

But again, before we go any further, we have to establish one thing for sure. What we are doing cannot be correct, just because there are others doing it. Conversely, what we are doing cannot be wrong, just because there is no one else doing it. Far from any connection to the number of others holding onto it, what we are doing can only be proven correct or wrong through compliance with the book of God and compatibility with the actions of His Messenger (pbuh).

Discovering the Headcover - 4

We are in an effort to figure out exactly what God is ordering the lady believers for their modest dress style. Our intention is to act according to the guidelines given by God so that we can attain happiness in this world and enter His paradise in the afterlife. Or is it? Are we really intending to submit ourselves to our Creator's orders or are we dragging our feet and actually trying to find a pretext to modify things as we see fit to our comfort?

The answer to the above question must be answered by each and every individual for themselves. This is their private relationship with their Lord. Nevertheless, there is an issue at hand, and we need to bring it to a satisfactory conclusion. The issue is what God orders explicitly for the dress of the ladies, specifically the headcover.

Interesting enough, the people who are most mentioned in the Quran, the Israelites, had an incident reminiscent of ours. This is the incident that is highlighted by the name of the longest chapter of the Quran: Baqarah. If you are willing to learn the details of this matter, you can read the relevant verses from the Quran or look at the literature. Another alternative is to read this blog that presents the Quranic verses related to the story of Moses and the Israelites in the chronological order of events. Here, only the aspects that are linked to our investigation of the headcover case are going to be mentioned.

As the Israelites were on their journey in the desert led by Moses and Aaron (pbut), God ordered them to sacrifice a cow (2/67-71). At that point, the people were not that willing to slaughter a cow. Possible reasons are, one, they were a crowded people and killing one cow is like losing a precious source of food and drink for many, and two, they had just committed the cow worshiping in the absence of Moses and they were not willing to attack a god (!). So, the Israelites repeatedly told Moses to ask his God the properties of the cow to be slaughtered, thereby postponing the execution of the order. They did this question-answer iteration three times until a complete description of the cow was obtained. Even then, they had a hard time in executing the order, but eventually they did.

Let's make a thought experiment. What if the Israelites went ahead and executed the order to slaughter a cow right after told by Moses for the first time? They would have done it without any detailed explanation as to which cow God wants them to slaughter. In fact, had it been so important in the eyes of God, He could have given those details along with the order itself. So, the fact that the order came without descriptions of a cow means that they were free to choose any cow. However, as they asked further questions, they actually made the situation more difficult for themselves, because when something is revealed in more clear terms, it becomes a more powerful and non-revocable order. That is, not doing something that is clearly told is a heavier violation than something that is ambiguous. Therefore, since at the first instance, the order was just about slaughtering a cow, the Israelites had the freedom to choose. Working on the details in fact resulted in the loss of their freedom in the way to execute the order. Keeping these lessons in mind, let's go back to our discussion about the headcover.

Remember the criteria mentioned in the previous episode to recognize the orders of God in the Quran? In fact, if you carefully look again at these criteria and then check back with the verses related to the headcover, you may have a hard time in weighing towards an answer. That is, you can not comfortably claim the headcover to be an explicit order of God, but you can not claim it to not be one, either! What to do? God knows best, perhaps we need to look at the general direction we are shown and do our best to act accordingly.

With this intention, if we look at the verse in the chapter Nur, which is the verse that contains the word headcover, we see that the constant emphasis throughout this long verse is about hiding the adornments. More specifically, the expression that is taken as the reference to the headcover sits right between two explicit instructions on the covering of the adornments. So, a logical conclusion from here is that the part that is referenced to the headcover must be related to the adornments, too. This is why some scholars claim that this verse does not dictate the headcover.

And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands' fathers, or their sons or their husbands' sons, or their brothers or their brothers' sons or sisters' sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigour, or children who know naught of women's nakedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that you may succeed. (24/31)

If you zoom out from this verse, you see that the verses from 26 through 33 focus on avoidance of adultery. So, if we put this 31st verse into a context, it must be about a precaution about avoiding adultery, in particular, and about curtailing the prevalence of explicit sexual expression, in general. In this regard, hiding the adornments except from a list of people is explicitly told by God. So, before hastily jumping to the classical conclusion that "headcover hides the hair of a woman, which counts as part of her adornment; and so, headcover is an order of God", it is imperative to see other locations where God uses the word "adornment" so that we can have a clearer image of what is meant here. In the below verses, the words that are translated from the verb or noun form of the "adornment" are underlined.

And Moses said, "Our Lord, indeed You have given Pharaoh and his establishment splendor and wealth in the worldly life, our Lord, that they may lead [men] astray from Your way... (10/88) 

And We have placed within the heaven great stars and have beautified it for the observers. (15/16) 

He said: My Lord! Because You have sent me astray, I verily shall adorn the path of error for them in the earth, and shall mislead them every one (15/39) 

Wealth and children are [but] adornment of the worldly life. But the enduring good deeds are better to your Lord for reward and better for [one's] hope. (18/46) 

So is he who is on clear evidence from his Lord like him to whom the evil of his work has been made attractive and they follow their [own] desires? (47/14)

So, if you think about the adornment through its function, it is not just about the women's beauty. Adornment is something that causes fixation on what is carrying it. Be it the heavens with the stars, be it the worldly life with its riches and progeny, adornment ultimately has the power to make you forget other things. Now, keeping in mind this definition of adornment based on its functions, let's think again on the verse of headcover.

First of all, it is clear that God does not want us to become paranoid on the matter and to fanatically try to cover all kinds of beauty. How do we know this? Because, right at the beginning, He tells us that natural look, unaltered form that is normally visible is acceptable. By the same token, we can also deduce that this is certainly not an invitation to look ugly, either. Furthermore, what is hidden by the use of a cover must be okey to be shown to that list of people. Furthermore, what is hidden by that cover must be sensitive to the stamping of the feet, as a result of which the adornment is still able to function and draw attention to its bearer. Let's be reasonable and count the "stamping of the feet" as the representative element for all gestures that are going to function similar to an adornment.

Blending the functions of  the adornment with the specifications above derived from the Quranic verse, it is safe to say that women are told to cover their adornments, be them material or behavioral, that have the potential to draw attention to themselves and cause a fixation of the gazes. It is obvious that what may induce such an effect on different people may change from person to person, and what may look good on someone may not look as good on another. And what is considered as beauty also changes from culture to culture and from time to time. This is why, perhaps, our Creator gave us a relatively abstract criteria and invited us to do our best in this regard.

In fact, if you look at the other verse related to the covering of women through these paradigms, the notion of functionality becomes even more obvious:

O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful. (33/59)

Accordingly, for example, a lady may choose not to put a headcover when in her natural looks, but may choose to use headcover when she is coming from the hairdresser. Put more clearly, headcover may be something to be used as needed, rather than a permanent change of shape. Having said that, it is perfectly fine for some women to choose headcover as a permanent way of dressing as part of their religious life; but this would be their choice, not necessarily a dictation by God.

As a confirmation to these conclusions based on the notion of functionality, we see that God allows the older women or those who have no more natural instinct to find a spouse to not wear a cover for their adornment, unless they go to extremes in this regard:

And (as for) women advanced in years who do not hope for a marriage, it is no sin for them if they put off their clothes without showing off their ornaments; and if they restrain themselves it is better for them; and Allah is Hearing, Knowing. (24/60)

Before concluding this episode, let's remember the question in the beginning and let's take it one step further. By looking into the meaning of the word "adornment" and making use of the notion of functionality, are we doing the same thing as the Israelites facing the order of slaughtering a cow? Or are we really intending to figure out and submit to what Allah wants from us given our conditions today? Why don't we simply go with the practice that has been present among the companions of the Messenger of God and all along the Islamic history? Would the Messenger of God do the same critical thinking as us, had he lived today, or would he do exactly the same way as he did 14 centuries ago in the Arabian peninsula?

Allah knows best what is in the hearts, and we ask for His guidance and forgiveness in our quests and endeavors. 

Discovering the Headcover - 3

As expressed at the very beginning of this series of blogs on the headcover, it is necessary to establish clearly what is known and what is unknown in order to reach some conclusions that are going to help with our problems or confusions in this age. Along this line, one essential point is that the benefits of something does not make it an order of God, and conversely, the harms of something does not make it a prohibition of God. Rather, it is a clear and explicit expression from God's book that helps us identify His orders and prohibitions.

Thinking of the headcover, we can reiterate the same criteria. The benefits of headcover, which is not my ultimate aim here, do not make it an order of God. On the other hand, if headcover is a clear order of God, the harms due to wearing it, if any, is not a reason for not wearing it. You try your best to do the act despite the harms on the way. 

This is similar to waging a war. High probability of winning a war does not justify it, and harms due to an incumbent war does not justify escaping it. That is why we must be sure about what is clearly order of God and what is open for change over time and place, when it comes to the headcovering, and covering in general.

In the Islamic jurisdiction, there is a methodology for deciding if something is an order of God or if it is a recommendation. As such, when you see the cases where God orders something in His book, you observe one or a combination of the following:

1. God uses an authoritative language with explicit words. 
2. The order is either repeated or paraphrased at other places
3. The addressee of the words is directly the believers
4. Certain steps or details of the act are disclosed

Let's see some examples:

Regarding pilgrimage to Mecca, "Pilgrimage thereto is a duty people owe to Allah," (3/97). 

Regarding the five daily prayers, "Indeed, prayer has been decreed upon the believers a decree of specified times." (4/103). 

Regarding the ablution before the prescribed prayers, "O you who believe! When you rise up for prayer, wash you faces, and your hands up to the elbows, and ..." (5/6). 

For other cases such as voluntary night worship, contemplation, acquiring knowledge, you see an orientation, but the relevant verses do not satisfy the above conditions to become an order of God: 

"And those who spend the night to their Lord prostrating and standing" (25/64),

"Had We sent down this Quran on a mountain, you would certainly have seen it falling down, splitting asunder because of the fear of Allah, and We set forth these parables to people that they may reflect." (59/21), 

"It is only those who have knowledge among His slaves that fear Allah." (35/28).

However, that they are not orders of God does not mean that people disregard them completely. It just means that God wants you to do it, but the depth and manners of doing it may change from person to person and from time to time. So, you are expected by God to assess your conditions and strive to do these acts as much as you can. Totally abandoning and never minding those acts, on the other hand, is a clear disrespect to God, because you see that He is orienting you that way.

Now let's project these findings to the case of headcover. First, let's look at the two verses on the issue:

And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands' fathers, or their sons or their husbands' sons, or their brothers or their brothers' sons or sisters' sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigour, or children who know naught of women's nakedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that you may succeed. (24/31)

O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful. (33/59)

One, the direct addressee of these verses is not the women but the prophet, himself. It is his duty to tell his wives, his daughters and the believing women to observe these. Second, we don't see an expression stating that this act is an obligation towards God. Third, if you look at the context of these verses (i.e. the verses before and after) and also consider the history-long discussions on how to observe this "order of God", you don't close in on a clear manners of doing the act. Then, headcover as an order of God is not really a straightforward conclusion. 

On top of this, take this verse, where the Owner of the Universe tells us where to stop our scrutiny on such controversial matters:

O you who believe! Ask not about things which, if made plain to you, may cause you trouble. But if you ask about them while the Quran is being revealed, they will be made plain to you. Allah has forgiven that, and Allah is Oft­Forgiving, Most Forbearing. (5/101)

So, the overall conclusion from the above discussion is that one cannot claim the headcover to be an order of God, at least not at a primary level, but that there clearly are some directions in this regard pointed at by our Creator.

But wait a minute! We arrived at the above conclusion based on a methodology developed by the Islamic scholars and not by a God-given measuring stick. How can we be sure of the accuracy of our conclusion and the reliability of the method thereof? Plus, there is also the practice of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and his family and his companions. Had it not been the order of God, would they stick to the headcover, and covering in general, as strongly as they did?