|
 |
Scholars differ whether the veil must cover the hands and face or not. There are two schools of thought. One school of thought says the veil must cover the hands and face, while the other school of thought says the veil should only cover the body, face and hands are not necessary. First of all we see the arguments of the second school of thought.
1. Allah the Almighty states in the Quran “And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual act, etc.) and not show off their adornment except only which is apparent (like palms of hands or one eye or both eyes) and to draw their veils, all over Juyubihinna and not to reveal their adornment --------” (Surah An-Nur 24;31)
They argue that Allah gives permission to open face and hands and it is clear from the words of “except only that which is apparent”.
2. Ayesha (radhiallaho unha) reported that once her sister, Asma (radhiallaho unha) visited her in finery------while the Prophet (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) was at home. He (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) turned away from her and said, “O Asma, when a woman reaches puberty it is not lawful for her to uncover any part of her body except this.” He (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) then pointed to his face and hand. (Abu Daood)
The above narration is one of the most commonly presented as proof for leaving the face and hands uncovered.
3. Narrated Anas (radhiallaho unho) on the day (of the battle) of Uhud when (some) people retreated and left the Prophet (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) I saw Ayesha bint Abi Bakar and Umm Sulaim with their robes tucked up so that the bangles around their ankles were visible, hurrying with their water skins (in another narration it is said, “carrying the water skins on their backs”) Then they would pour water in the mouths of the people, and return to fill the water skins again and come back again to pour water into the mouths of the people.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari)
Some peoples argue that if Hijab is essential then why were the bangles of Ayesha bint Abi Bakr and Umm Sulaim visible around their ankles?
4. Jabir bin Abdullah said I attended the Eid Prayer with the Prophet (sallallaho alaihi wasallam). First he offered the prayer before Khutba without Adhan and Iqamah. Then, as he was leaning against Bilal (radhiallaho unho) and ordered to fear Allah and come towards His obedience. He preached the people and advised them. After this he attended to women and preached them. He said to them to give alms. Many of them are the fuel of Hell. One woman who had thin cheeks stood up------”
Some people also argue from this tradition that covering face for women is not obligatory.
Now we analyse the above evidences and also the evidences of the other school of thought.
2. “And tell the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent (like both eyes for necessity to see the way, or hands and to draw their veils all over Juyubihinna and not to reveal adornment except ---------“(Surah An Nur)
Scholars who believe that face and hands are not included in Hijab argue that Allah allowed the woman to uncover the face and hand as Allah, the Almighty states in these words “except only that which is apparent.” They also argue that the commentary of Ibn Abbas (radhiallaho unho) cleared the meaning of the words “except only that which is apparent.
According to Ibn Abbas the meaning of the “except only that which is apparent, “ is the face and hands.
The commentary of Ibn Abbas is accepted only when there is no other commentary against the commentary of Ibn Abbas. But there are some commentaries of the other companions of the Prophet (sallallaho alaihi wasallam), like Ibn Masud. The commentary of Ibn Masud of “-except only that which is apparent “is that of outer dress like veil, gloves, head-cover, apron etc. Because there is no way one can cover these things i.e. outer dress, veil, gloves etc.
It is also narrated that Asma (radhiallaho unha) visited in finery while the Prophet was at home ---------(Abu Daood)
There are some internal and external evidences and due to these evidences this Hadith of Abu Daood cannot be relied upon. It is clear from the following discussion :-
The narration of Anas (radhiallaho unho) can be elaborated in the following three ways:-
This is the event of the Ghazwa Uhad and the Ghazwa Uhad was fought in Shawal 03 Hijra, while on the other hand the instructions regarding veil were revealed in fifth or sixth Hijra. The event of Ayesha bint Abi Bakr and Umm Sulaim took place before the revelation of these instructions. So this event cannot become a concluding evidence.
Muslim women tended to the wounded during the holy battles in the state of Hijab, following the ordainment of Hijab.
The event of battle of Uhud or some other events of holy battles are exceptional. Principally we cannot draw a permanent rule from such exceptional events.
Narrated “Abdullah bin Umar (radhiallaho unho) a man asked. “O Allah’s Messenger! What kind of clothes have you ordered for us in the state of Ihram? The Prophet (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) said:
“He should not wear a shirt, trousers, a turban, a head-cloak, except if he can find no slippers he can wear leather socks after cutting off what might cover the ankles. And he should not wear clothes which are scented with saffron or wars (kinds of perfume) and Muhrimah should not let down veil and should not wear gloves.”(Sahih-al-Bukhari Kitab-ul-Manasik)
When we study the Hadith cited above, we find two things:
(a) This is a special rule for women while they are in Ihram. It is also proved from the Hadith that the general ruling for the women while out of Ihram are that, they should wear gloves, socks and let down the veil over their faces. If there was no practice of this Hijab (i.e. wearing of socks, gloves and covering of face with Jalbab) then there was no need for this specification in Ihram.
As one verse of the Quran explains the meaning of another verse of the Quran, in the same manner one Hadith is explanation of the other Hadith. Same is the case with the Hadith of Abdullah bin Umar narrated by Imam Bukhari in his book Sahih-al-Bukhari. Because the Hadith of Abu Daood narrated by Ayesha (radhiallaho unha) explains the meaning of Sahih Bukhari’s Hadith. Complete Hadith of Abu Daood is as follows:
“Ayesha (radhiallaho unha) said: Riders would pass us when we accompanied the Apostle of Allah (SAW) while we were in the sacred state (wearing Ihram). When they would pass by us one of us would let down her garment from her head over her face, and when they had passed on, we would uncover our faces.” (Narrated by Abu Daood Kitab-ul-Manasik wal-Hajj.
The words of Ayesha (radhiallaho unha) are the clear evidence that the covering of face for women is obligatory. Opening of face for women in the state of Ihram is obligatory according to many scholars, and an obligation can be given up only when there is an order which cancels it. But if that action of Ayesha and other mother of Ummah was not correct then the Prophet (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) should certainly have forbidden them
Some people cite the incident of Fatima bint Qais (radhiallaho unha) which is as follow s:
“Fatima bint Qais reported that Abu Amr bin Hafs divorced her absolutely when he was away from home and he sent his agent to her with some barley. She was displeased with him and when he said: I swear by Allah that you have no claim on us, she went to Allah’s Messenger (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) and told him about that. He (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) said: He owes you no maintenance, and he (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) commanded her to spend the Iddah in the house of Umm Sharik, but then said: That is a woman whom my companions visit. So better spend this period in the house of Ibn Umm Maktum, for he is a blind man and you can put off your veil---------“(Narrated by Sahih Muslim). The same Hadith is reported in the books of Hadith in slightly different words.
From the above Hadith it is proved that Abu Hafs bin Mughira was away from home when he sent the irrevocable divorce to his wife Fatima bint Qais through his agent.
So when Fatima bint Qais (radhiallaho unha) received irrevocable divorce from her husband, she was afraid that she might be put to hardship, particularly, when she knew that there was no provision of lodging and alimony for her, because her husband had sent her only five measures of dates and five measures of barley which were insufficient for her during her waiting period (i.e. Iddah), particularly, in the absence of any other provision of lodging and alimony.
Under the above circumstances Fatima bint Qais said: “By Allah, I will inform Allah’s Messenger (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) and if alimony is due to me then I will accept that which will be sufficient for me and if it is not due to me, I will not accept anything from him”. When she mentioned that to Allah’s Messenger (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) and he (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) said:
“How many pronouncements of divorce have been made to you? I said: Three. He (SAW) said what he had stated was true. There is no alimony and lodging for you.” She was required to spend the Iddah and he (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) sent her the message that she should not be hasty in making a decision about herself and commanded her to move to the house of Umm Sharik. Then sent her the message that the companions (frequently) visit the house of Umm Sharik (as she had a very large family and had so many relatives to visit her). Allah’s Messenger (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) did not deem it proper to keep her in her house as her visitors were non-Mehram to Fatima bint Qais and she was thus required to observe veil). She was advised to go to the house of Ibn Umm Maktum, the blind. Then the Prophet (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) further said, “In case you put off head-dress he (Ibn Umm Maktum) will not see you”. So she went to his house and when the Iddah was over, Allah’s Messenger (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) married her to Usama bin Zaid bin Haritha.
Some people argue that Allah allowed aged women to put off their veil. They argue that Allah states in His Book: “And as for women past child-bearing, who do not expect wedlock, it is no sin on them if they discard their (outer) clothing----------”
If we study the complete verse then we find that this exemption of putting off the outer garments for aged women is conditional. It is clear from the following verse:
“And as for women past child-bearing who do not expect wedlock, it is no sin on them if they discard their (outer) clothing in such a way as not to show their adornment. But to refrain (i.e. not to discard their outer clothing) is better for them. And Allah is All Hearer, All Knower”. (An-Nur: 60)
Although Allah allowed the aged women to discard their outer clothing yet He also said that “But to refrain (i.e. not to discard their outer clothing) is better for them.”
As far as the narration of Jabir bin Abdullah is concerned the incident might have taken place before the revelation of instructions regarding veil, because the Eid Prayer was made obligatory in the 2nd Hijra while the instructions were revealed in 5th or 6th Hijra. (For reference please see Seerat Ibn Hasham)
So, it is not possible to draw a conclusion against observing veil from this incident.
So from the narration of Jabir bin Abdullah also we cannot draw a rule for young women.
There are some other incidents that prove that covering of face is obligatory for Muslim women from non-Mehram. Some of them are as cited below:
The story of slander against Ayesha (radhiallaho unha) which is concisely narrated in Holy Quran and the detail of this slander story is given in the Books of Ahadith, Books of Commentary and Books of Biography.
In the commentary of a verse of Surah An-Nur, Imam Bukhari narrated the story of slander against Ayesha (radhiallaho unha) in the following words:
“Narrated Ayesha (radhiallaho unha): Whenever Allah’s Messenger (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) intended to go on a journey, he would draw lots among his wives and would take with him the one on whom the lot fell. Once he drew lots when he wanted to carry out a Ghazwa, and the lot fell upon me. So, I proceeded with Allah’s Messenger (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) after Allah’s orders of veiling (the women) had been revealed and I was carried in a howdah (on a camel). We carried on our journey and when Allah’s Messenger (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) had finished his Ghazwa and returned and we approached Al Madina. Allah’s Messenger (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) ordered to proceed at night. When the army was ordered to resume the homeward journey, I got up and walked on till I left the army (camp) behind to answer the call of nature. After finishing I went towards my Howdah, but a necklace of mine of Jazz Alfa (a kind of black bead) was broken and I looked for it and my search for it detained me. The group of people who used to carry me on the camel, came and put my Howdah on the back of my camel on which I was riding. I was thin and lean as I used to eat little, so they did not feel the difference in the weight of the howdah and I was still a young lady. They drove away the camel and proceeded. Then I found my necklace after the army had gone. I came to the camp but found nobody therein so I went to the place where I stayed thinking that they would discover my absence and come back in my search. While I was sitting at my place, I felt sleepy and went to sleep. Safwan bin Al Muattal As-Sulami Abu Dhakwani was behind the army. He had started in the last part of the night and reached my staying place in the morning. When he saw the figure of a sleeping person he came to me and on seeing recognised me for he had seen me before veiling. I got up at his saying ‘Inna lillahi wa inna ilaihi rajiun (truly to Allah we belong and truly to Him we shall return, verse No. 156 Surah No.2) which he uttered on recognising me, I covered my face with my garment, and by Allah he did not say to me a single word except “Inna lillahi wa inna ilaihi rajiun “(Sahih Al Bukhari “The Book of commentary, Surah An-Nur verse No.12 Part No.18)
From this narration it is clear that this incident took place after revelation of instruction about veil.
From the words /action of Ayesha (radhiallaho unha) (i.e. I covered my face with my garment) it stands proved that the covering of face is obligatory for Muslim women from non-Mehram.
Another incident that proved that the obligation of covering face is narrated by Imam Muslim:
“Muhammad bin Qais said (to the people): Should not I narrate to you [(a Hadith of the Holy Prophet (sallallaho alaihi wasallam)] on my authority and on the authority of my mother? We thought that he meant the mother who had given him birth. He (Muhammad bin Qais) then reported that it was Ayesha (radhiallaho unha) who had narrated this: Should not I narrate to you (an incident) about myself and about the Messenger of Allah (sallallaho alaihi wasallam)? We said: Yes. She said: When it was my turn for Allah’s Messenger (sallallaho alaihi wasallam) to spend the night with me, he turned up, put on his mantle and took off his shoes and placed them near his feet. He spread the corner of his shawl on his bed and then lay down till he thought that I had gone to sleep. He took hold of his mantle and put on the shoes, and opened the door and went out and then closed it quietly, I covered my head, put on my veil and tightened my waist wrapper, then went out following his steps till he reached Baqi’. He stood there for a long time. He then lifted his hands three times and then returned and I also returned.”--------(Sahih Muslim)
This tradition also proves that the covering of face with veil is obligatory. If the covering of the face was not obligatory then there was no need for Ayesha (radhiallaho unha) to cover it.
There are many Ahadith that prove that covering of face for women is obligatory. But the traditions quoted above sufficiently prove the point. May Allah enable us to carry out His commands. Ameen!
From Voice of Islam August 2000
|
|
