From: mirza@sce.carleton.ca (Murad A. Mirza)
Subject: Re: 'burqa and muslim women'
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 01:05:58 GMT

ys3359@sarah.albany.edu (Yazmasterj) writes:

>In article <92094.04542432JMVQG@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU> Mahfooz Ahmed Jafry <32JMVQG@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU> writes:
>>Salam Alaikum :     Burqa and muslim women
>>Maula Madoodi wrote very nice things 

>[lotsa stuff deleted]

>>      Many people are writing on this issue, but now I would write the pardah a
>>nd men and putting men in the house.  If we read thoroughly (particularly sura
>>nisa, ahzab, noor in detials and with tafseer ) then we could find out that Hol
>>y Quran sets equal limitations on men also.  

>Assalamoalaikum

>	I just couldn't stay silent here.  I recently picked up Maulana
>Maudoodi's book entitled *Purdah and the Status of Women*.  One of the
>first things which struck me was that most of the book was his opinion
>without many relevent verses from the Quran.  Another was that the 
>Hadith he referenced were mostly from sources other than Sahih Bukhari
>and Muslim.  The verses in the Quran that he did reference (the ones
>I recognized) did not match the translations (specifically the Pickthall
>translation) I am familiar with.  
>	The biggest thing which bugged me was his analysis of women and
>nature.  He went into a detailed account of how women were in fact
>in capable of working outside of the home due to their menstrual
>period.  He declared that women during their menstrual period were
>actually in a period of sickness which completely affected their
>judgment and strength to a non-functional point.  He also declared that
>women were not in control of themselves either physically or emotionally
>during their menstrual period.
>	Now this is really news to me.  Being a woman who has also been
>going to school all her life and working for many years now, I am amazed
>that I have done so well since I am rendered emotionally and physically
>disabled for a week per month.  Maulana Maudoodi makes a lot of
>assumptions about women.  He declares that women are soft and 
>unaggressive.  He says they are passive and emotionally tender and
>sensitive.  He says they are not complete without having children.
>Why is a man deciding all of these things?  I have also read his
>book entitled *Birth Control*.  He declares that women are here
>for the sole purpose of procreation, therefore birth control renders
>them without purpose.  Again a decision by a man.  I have never read
>a passage in the Quran which declared women to be solely for
>procreation.  Certainly Khadija (raa), the wife of the Prophet was not
>solely a procreative force in her husband's life.  
>	The needs of Arabia in the 7th century with their tribal way
>of life and their attitudes towards women which justified infanticide
>of female children in their minds required a different attitude than
>is required today.  The Prophet preached for 23 years which is a very
>short time to transform a culture completely.  The fact that he
>accomplished as much as he did is evidence of his strength and the
>guidance from Allah.  The tribal culture was very much alive and
>remembered when he passed away however.  They were used to keeping
>their women suppressed.  The Quran gave unprecedented rights to 
>women which were later ignored.  Consent in marriage, rights to 
>inheritance, control of their earnings have all been curtailed by
>men.  These are rights which have been specifically granted to women
>in the Quran.  It is the height of chauvanism and biased behavior that
>requires women to be fully covered except for their eyes and hands
>(because Maulana Maudoodi mandates the veil also) and men to cover
>only from their navel to their knees.  A comparable area for women
>would be from their shoulders to their knees.  I don't know about
>other women but a bare chested man is quite attractive.  Shouldn't
>that be covered?  What about sexy arms and nice shoulders?  Shouldn't
>that be covered?  What if a man loves a mystery woman?  Then a burqa
>would be a complete turn-on for him?  I am being sarcastic and silly
>to prove a point.  One cannot be responsible for the sexual attraction
>of every single other person around.  There is a big difference between
>an image of modesty and a complete cover.  
>	Lastly, will someone please tell me where exactly in the Quran
>are the areas of satar specified?  Also, all the hadith Maulana Maudoodi
>mentioned on the subject of satar for women did not reference any
>Bukhari or Muslim.  Anyone know of this being specified in the Bukhari
>or Muslim collections of hadith?  

>Khudahafiz

>Yasmin

>**************************************************************************
>*                                   *                                    *
>*  Yasmin Sohrawardy                *  "Only Nixon can go to China"      *
>*                                   *                                    *
>*  Internet:  ys3359@csc.albany.edu *            - Ancient Vulcan        *
>*                                   *              Proverb               *
>**************************************************************************

assalam alaikum behan ji,

aap ka post parah dil khush bhi hua aur udas bhi.  You have definitely 
articulated yourself very well, Maulana may have been surprised.  Though
he was really surprised when he saw Lady Rana Liaqat Ali Khan accompanying
her husband everywhere.  

Remember, Maulana was a married man himself and a father too (both daughters
and sons), and I don't know if he had sisters.  So, he definitely was 
qualified to talk on the above topic.  But I have to accept the fact that his 
influence on his children was also not that pronounced as you may think.

To start my discussion (in parts) I will first set the parameters of this
exchange, which I am sure Maulana had in mind too:

	1) Remember, Hazrat Ayesha (RAA) is the source of 50% of all
	   hadiths quoted by sunni ulema.

	2) As you have mentioned about Hazrat Khadija (RAA),
	   ofcourse she was not for the purpose of procreation
	   (Hazrat Fatima (RAA) leader of women in Jannah was born to her)
	   but she was also a worthy partner and an influential
	   woman in Quraish.

The Ummahat-ul-Momineen were a group of extensively powerful women, having
influence over their respective tribes and nationalities.  The grouping
of these women in one household resulted in such an assembly of nations
which Sohrawardy Saheb would be proud of.  

Did purdah hinder the progress of Islam then? No. This question is posed
to start off this discussion.

Maulana obviously is talking about the very small details of the debate 
about purdah. 

Well you'll say that Maulana Ka Zour Chalta to Saab Auratoun Ko Burqa 
Pehna Daitay (but first Maulana had to look at his own brood and if he had
succeeded there then I would presume, if he had also been leader of Pakistan,
he would have tried only).

Saudi Arabia is a good model to look at (image of the situation in above para.)

What is happening there? 

Women sit at home (tang pay tang dal kar) and conduct the affairs like a real
master, aur tou aur aik aik kilo sona phen kar - baichari suppressed women.
Gari Chalanay Aik Nahi Dou driver, our darjanoun noukranian, haye baicharian.
If you go to Saudi Arabia (ofcourse with a Mehram) then ask around how are
women being treated or you can confirm this from your relatives or friends who
have lived there for a while. 

How do Saudi women feel about Purdah? well! I don't know personally
but information, from my relatives who happened to live there, says that
if a husband asks wife to atleast not cover her face her reply is "you
mind your own business mister this is between me and Allah." 

Obviously when there is no reason to displease Allah (minor infraction) 
then the woman becomes a tiger too, and fear of Allah takes over instead
of anguish over men.  Only if Pakistani women had understood this they
would have beaten the lordships to the ground long time back (utilizing 
the same old tricks which men use to suppress women in Pakistan).

Coming back to the real world issues where women have to toil shana ba shana
with her male counterparts.  Maulana's context was again typical mashriqi
aurat sans education as was and is the case in Pakistan, women like you
are very rare (but in positions of authority because of mainly Fathers
and GrandFathers), and some among them with not so influential Fathers
sit at home do procreation and pass on there knowledge to their brood,
hoping that someday mera baita kutch kam dikhae ga magar pata chala keh
beta tou nikama nikla aur baiti aagay barh gai, so this cycle continues
till somewhere down the line baita actually reaches expectations of his
mother.

This is not the end ... i will continue later.

Khuda Hafiz for now.
 
Murad Mirza.


Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan