Head Covering Of Women
Peace! Ma’am, actually the point of both Ghamidi and other scholars (like Muhammad Asad, for example) is that the Quran’s directive is for the جيب to be covered, be it with a خمار or otherwise. Their point is not that one should take off the خمار from the head and put it on the جيب. No one is saying that. Some of the cloth of the خمار used to remain after the customary head covering which is said to remain on the shoulders. The Quran wanted the جيب to be covered and, therefore, asked for that cloth to be kept on the جيب instead of the shoulders. The خمار is mentioned because Arab women wore it and this was a solution which everyone could adopt to cover the جيب. No where does the Quran say to put on a خمار. If I said to you, ” ہاتھوں سے آگے جو قمیص کا کپڑا آیا ہوا ہے اسے اندر کی طرف لپیٹ لو,” no one would take that to mean that you have to wear a قمیص, just that the cloth should not extend beyond the hand . I already clarified that if one take assumptions with him to the Quran, he will insert his own opinions in it. This is what happened in the case of many eminent scholars, with all due respect, including Imam Ameen Ahsan Islahi and from him Mawlana Ishaq, and Ghamidi Sahab has addressed the cultural influence on the Islahi Sahab’s opinion in the 23 questions series, I believe. We are all so bound by our culture to believe that a head covering is mandatory that even if it is mentioned as a tool to cover something else, we take that to mean it is being mandated. If this assumption was not present, no one would ever take this verse to mean that a خمار is obligatory. The lack of these assumptions is, I believe, what lead Muhammad Asad to rightfully conclude that the directive is the covering of the جيب and not the use of a خمار (because he was an Austrian convert).