Ala-Maududi
(24:31) And enjoin believing women to cast down their looks[31] and guard their
private[32] parts[33] and not reveal their adornment[34] except
that which is revealed of itself,[35] and to draw their veils over their
bosoms,[36] and not to reveal their adornment save to their husbands,[37]
or their fathers, or the fathers of their husbands,[38] or of their own sons, or the
sons of their husbands,[39] or their brothers,[40] or the sons of their
brothers,[41] or the sons of their sisters,[42] or the women with whom
they associate,[43] or those that are in their bondage,[44] or the male
attendants in their service free of sexual interest,[45] or boys that are yet unaware
of illicit matters pertaining to women.[46] Nor should they stamp their feet on the
ground in such manner that their hidden ornament becomes revealed.[47] Believers,
turn together, all of you, to Allah in repentance[49] that you may attain true
success.[48]
31. The commandments of restraining the gaze for women are the same as for men. They should not
glance intentionally at the other men, and if they happen to cast a chance look, they should
turn their eyes away; and they should abstain from looking at the satar of others. However, the
commandments relating to the men’s looking at women are a little different from those relating
to the women’s looking at men. On the one hand, there is an incident related in a tradition
saying that Umm Salamah and Umm Maimunah, wives of the Prophet (peace be upon him), were sitting
with him when lbn Umm Maktum, a blind companion, made his appearance. The Prophet (peace be upon
him) said to his wives: Conceal your faces from him. The wives said: O Messenger of Allah, is he
not a blind man? Neither will he see us nor recognize us. Thereupon the Prophet (peace be upon
him) remarked: Are you two also blind? Do you not see him? Umm Salamah has clarified that this
incident occurred at a time when the commandments about the observance of hijab had already been
sent down. (Ahmad, Abu Daud, Tirmizi). This is also supported by a tradition in Muatta saying
that a blind man came to see Aishah and she observed hijab from him. When asked as to why she
observed hijab when the man could not see her, she replied: But I do see him. On the other hand,
there is a different tradition from Aishah. In 7 A.H. a deputation of the Africans came to
Al-Madinah and they gave a performance of physical skill in the compound of the Prophet’s
Mosque. The Prophet (peace be upon him) himself showed their performance to Aishah. (Bukhari,
Muslim, Ahmad). In another case, we find that when Fatimah bint Qais was irrevocably divorced by
her husband, the question arose as to where she should pass her Iddah (the prescribed waiting
term after divorce or death of husband). The Prophet (peace be upon him) first told her to stay
with Umm Sharik Ansari, but then instructed her to stay in the house of Ibn Umm Maktum, where
she could stay with greater freedom as he was a blind man. He did not approve of her staying in
the house of Umm Sharik because she was a rich lady and her house was frequented by the
companions whom she entertained generously. (Muslim, Abu Daud). Read together these traditions
show that the restrictions about the women’s looking at men are not so hard as about the men’s
looking at women. While it is forbidden for women to sit face to face with men, it is not
unlawful if they cast a look at men while passing on the way or see a harmless performance by
them from a distance. There is also no harm for women to see the other men in case of real need
if they are living in the same house. Imam Ghazzali and lbn Hajar Asqalani have also reached
almost the same conclusion. Shaukani in his Nail al-Autar (Vol. Vl, p. 101) has quoted Ibn Hajar
as saying: Such a permission in respect of women is also supported by the fact that they have
always enjoyed this type of freedom in outdoor duties while they came out veiled when visiting
the mosques, or moving in the streets, or during the journey, so that men may not gaze at them,
the men were never commanded to use the veil so that women may not gaze at them. This shows that
the commandments in respect of the two sexes are different.. However, it is not at all
permissible that women should gaze leisurely at men and draw pleasure of the eye in doing so.
32. That is, they should abstain from illicit gratification of their sex desire as well as from
exposing their satar before others. Though the commandments for men in this respect are the same
as for women, the boundaries of satar for women are different from those prescribed for men.
Moreover, the female satar with respect to men is different from that with respect to women. The
female satar with respect to men is the entire body, excluding only the hand and the face, which
should not be exposed before any other man, not even the brother and father, except the husband.
The woman is not allowed to wear a thin or a tight fitting dress which might reveal the skin or
the outlines of the body. According to a tradition from Aishah, once her sister Asma came before
the Prophet (peace be upon him) in a thin dress. The Prophet (peace be upon him) immediately
turned his face away and said: O Asma, when a woman has attained her maturity, it is not
permissible that any part of her body should be exposed except the face and the hand. (Abu
Daud). Ibn Jarir has related a similar incident from Aishah saying that once the daughter of
Abdullah bin Tufail, who was her mother’s son from her former husband, came to her house on a
visit. When the Prophet (peace be upon him) entered the house, he saw her but turned his face to
the other side. Aishah said: O Messenger of Allah, she is my niece. Thereupon the Prophet (peace
be upon him) remarked: When a woman reaches the age of puberty, it is not lawful for her to
display her body except the hand and the face. (Then he indicated what he meant by the hand by
gripping his own hand from the wrist so that there was hardly a breadth left between his grip
and the palm of the hand). The only relaxation permitted in this connection is that a woman can
uncover only that much of her body before her close relatives (for example, her brother, father,
etc.) as is absolutely necessary for attending to the household duties. For instance, she can
roll up her sleeves while kneading the flour, or tuck up her trousers while washing the floor.
The boundaries of female satar with respect to women are the same as the boundaries of the male
satar with respect to men, which is the part of the body from the navel to the knee. This does
not, however, mean that a woman should appear half naked before other women. It only means that
while it is obligatory to keep the part of body from the navel to the knee duly covered, it is
not so in case of other parts.
33. It should be carefully noted that the demands that divine law makes from women are not only
those it has made from men, that is restraining of looks and guarding of the private parts, but
it makes some other demands from them also, which it has not made from men. This shows that men
and women are not identical in this respect.
34. Adornment includes attractive clothes, ornaments and other decorations of the head, face,
hand, feet, etc. which the women usually employ, and is expressed by the modern word make-up.
The injunction that this makeup should not be displayed before others is discussed in detail in
the following notes.
35. Different interpretations given by different commentators of this verse have greatly confused
its real meaning. All that is obviously meant is that women should not display their make-up and
adornment except that which is displayed of itself and is beyond their control. This clearly
means that women should not purposely and intentionally display their make-up, but there is no
accountability if the make-up becomes displayed without any purpose or intention on their part;
for instance, the head-wrapper’s being blown aside by the wind thus exposing the adornment, or
the outer-garment itself which cannot be concealed but which nevertheless has attraction being a
part of the female dress. This very interpretation of this verse has been given by Abdullah bin
Masud, Hasan Basri, Ibn Sirin and Ibrahim Nakhai. On the contrary, some other commentators have
interpreted the verse to mean all those parts of the body which usually remain exposed or
uncovered and in this they include the hands and the face with all their adornments. This is the
view of Ibn Abbas and his followers, and a large number of the Hanafi jurists have accepted it.
(Ahkam-ul-Quran, AlJassas, Vol. III, pp. 388-389). Thus, according to them, it is permissible
for a woman to move out freely with the uncovered face in full make-up and adornment of the
hands.
We are, however, unable to subscribe to this view. There is a world of difference between
displaying something and its becoming displayed of itself. The first implies intention and the
second compulsion and a state of helplessness. Moreover, such an interpretation also goes
against the traditions which state that the women never moved out with open and uncovered faces
in the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) after the commandments of hijab had been sent
down. These commandments implied veiling of the face as well, and the veil had become a part of
the female dress except during Hajj when one has to be in the prescribed state of ihram and keep
the face uncovered. Another argument that is advanced in support of this view is that the hands
and the face are not included in the satar of the woman, whereas satar and hijab are two
entirely different things. Sanctity of satar is such that it cannot be violated even before the
mahram males like the father, brother, etc. As for hijab it is over and above satar which is
meant to segregate women from non mahram males; the discussion here relates to the commandments
of hijab and not to satar.
36. In the pre-lslamic days of ignorance, women used to wear a sort of head-band, which was tied
in a knot at the rear of the head. The slit of the shirt in the front partly remained open
exposing the front of the neck and the upper part of the bosom. There was nothing except the
shirt to cover the breasts, and the hair was worn in a couple or two of plaits hanging behind
like tails. (AI-Kashshaf, Vol. II, p. 90, and Ibn Kathir, Vol. III, pp. 283-284). At the
revelation of this verse, the head-wrapper was introduced among the Muslim women, which was
meant to cover the head, the breasts, and the back, completely. The way the Muslim women
responded to this command has been described by Aishah in a vivid manner. She states that when
Surah An- Noor was revealed and the people learned of its contents from the Prophet (peace be
upon him), they immediately went back to their houses and recited the verses before their wives,
daughters and sisters. There was an instantaneous response. The Ansar women, one and all,
immediately got up and made wrappers from whatever piece of cloth that was handy. The next
morning all the women who came to the Prophet’s Mosque for prayers were dressed in wrappers. In
another tradition Aishah says that thin cloth was discarded and the women selected only coarse
cloth for the purpose. (lbn Kathir, Vol. III, p. 284, Abu Daud).
The very nature and object of the command demanded that the wrapper should not be made out of
fine and thin cloth. The Ansar women immediately understood the real object and knew what type
of cloth was intended to be used. The Law-Giver himself clarified this and did not leave it to
be interpreted by the people. Dihya Kalbi states: Once a length of fine Egyptian muslin was
presented to the Prophet (peace be upon him). He gave a piece of it to me and said, Use one part
of it for your shirt, and give the rest of it to your wife for a wrapper, but tell her that she
should stitch another piece of cloth on the inner side so that the body may not be displayed
through it. (Abu Daud).
37. This verse describes the circle in which a woman can move freely with all her make-up and
adornment. Outside this circle she is not allowed to appear with make-up before the other
people, whether they are relatives or strangers. The commandment implies that she should not
display her embellishments outside this limited circle, intentionally or through carelessness.
However, what becomes displayed incidentally, in spite of care and concern, or what cannot be
concealed, it is excused by Allah.
38. Fathers’ include grandfathers and great grandfathers as well, both paternal and maternal.
Accordingly a woman can appear before her own and her husband’s grandfathers just as she can
appear before her own father and father in law.
39. Sons include grandsons and great grandsons from the male or female offspring. No distinction
is to be made between the real sons and the step-sons.
40. Brothers’ include real and stepbrothers.
41. Sons of brothers and sisters include sons, grandsons and great grandsons of all the three
kinds of brothers and sisters.
42. After the relatives, the other people are now being mentioned. But before we proceed further,
it would be useful to understand three things in order to avoid confusion.
First, some jurists hold that the freedom of movement and display of adornment by a woman is
restricted to the circle of relatives mentioned in this verse. All others, even the real
paternal and maternal uncles, are excluded from this list and a woman should observe hiab from
them because they have not been mentioned in the Quran. This is, however, not a correct view.
Let alone the real uncles, the Prophet (peace be upon him) disallowed Aishah to observe hijab
even from her foster uncles. A tradition quoted in Sihah Sitta and Musnad Ahmad on the authority
of Aishah says that once Aflah, brother of Abul Quais, came to see her and sought permission to
enter the house. But since the commandment of hijab had been received, Hadrat Aishah refused him
permission. On this Aflah sent back the word saying, You are my niece: you were suckled by my
brother Abul Quais’s wife. But Aishah still was hesitant whether it was permissible to appear
unveiled before such a relative or not. In the meantime the Prophet (peace be upon him) arrived
and he ruled that he could see her. This shows that the Prophet (peace be upon him) himself did
not interpret the verse in the way these jurists do that it was lawful to appear unveiled only
before those relatives who have been mentioned in the verse and not before others. He
interpreted it to mean that hijab need not be observed from those relatives with whom marriage
is prohibited, for instance, paternal and maternal uncles, son-in-law and foster relatives.
Hasan Basri from among the followers has expressed the same opinion and the same has been
supported by Allama Abu Bakr al-Jassas in his Ahkam-ul- Quran. (Vol. III, p. 390).
Secondly, there is the question of those relatives with whom marriage is not permanently
prohibited; they neither fall in the category of mahram relatives (that women may freely appear
before them with adornment) nor in the category of complete strangers that they should observe
full hijab from them as from others. What should be the right course between the two extremes
has not been determined by the Shariah for such a course cannot possibly be determined. The
observance of hijab or otherwise in such cases will inevitably depend on the mutual
relationship, age of the woman and of men, family relations and contacts and other circumstances
(e.g. residence in the same house or in different houses). The personal example of the Prophet
(peace be upon him) himself in this matter gives us the same guidance. A large number of
traditions confirm that Asma, daughter of Abu Bakr, who was a sister-in-law of the Prophet
(peace be upon him), appeared unveiled before him and no hijab, at least of the face and hands,
was observed by her. This same position continued till the Farewell Pilgrimage which took place
just a few months before the death of the Prophet (peace be upon him). (Abu Daud). Similarly Umm
Hani, daughter of Abu Talib and a first cousin of the Prophet (peace be upon him), appeared
before him till the end without ever observing hijab of the face and hands. She herself has
narrated an incident pertaining to the conquest of Makkah, which confirms the same. (Abu Daud).
On the contrary, we see that Abbas sends his son Fadal, and Rabiah bin Harith bin Abdul
Muttalib, a first cousin of the Prophet (peace be upon him), his son Abdul Muttalib before the
Prophet (peace be upon him) with the request for a job, as they could not be married till they
became earning members of the family. They both see the Prophet (peace be upon him) in the house
of his wife Zainab, who is a first cousin of Fadal and is similarly related to the father of
Abdul Muttalib bin Rabiah. But she does not appear before them and talks to them from behind a
curtain in the presence of the Prophet (peace be upon him). (Abu Daud). Taking the two kinds of
precedents together we come to the same conclusion as we have stated above.
Thirdly, in cases where the relationship itself becomes doubtful, hijab should be observed even
from the mahram relatives. Bukhari, Muslim and Abu Daud have related a case where Saudah, a wife
of the Prophet (peace be upon him), had a brother born of a slave woman. Utbah, the father of
Saudah and the boy, left a will enjoining his brother, Saad bin Abi Waqqas, to look after the
boy as a nephew for he was from his own seed. When the case came before the Prophet (peace be
upon him), he rejected the claim of Saad, saying: The boy belongs to him on whose bed he was
born; as for the adulterer, let stones and pebbles be his lot. But at the same time he told
Saudah to observe hijab from the boy because it was doubtful whether he was really her brother.
43. The Arabic word nisa-i-hinna means their female associates. Before we consider what women are
exactly meant, it is worth noting that the word used here is not annisa, which merely means
women, but nisa-i-hinna which means their female associates. In the former case, it would be
quite permissible for a Muslim woman to appear unveiled before all sorts of women and display
her adornment. The use of nisa-i-hinna, however, has circumscribed her freedom within a specific
circle. As to what specific circle of women is implied, the commentators and jurists have
expressed different opinions.
According to one group, the female associates mean only the Muslim women; as for the non-Muslim
women, whether zimmis or otherwise, they are excluded and hijab should be observed from them as
from men. Ibn Abbas, Mujahid and Ibn Juraij hold this opinion and cite the following incident in
support thereof: Umar wrote to Abu Ubaidah: I hear that some Muslim women have started going to
public baths along with the non-Muslim women. It is not permissible for a woman who believes in
Allah and the Last Day that she should expose her body before the women other than of her own
community. On receipt of this letter Abu Ubaidah was much upset, and he cried out: May the face
of the woman who goes to the public baths to whiten her complexion be blackened on the Last Day!
(Ibn Jarir, Baihaqi, Ibn Kathir.
Another group, which includes Imam Razi, is of the view that female associates are all women
without exception. But it is not possible to accept this view as in that case an-nisa should
have sufficed and there was no need to use nisa-ihinna. The third opinion, and this appears to
be reasonable and nearer the Quranic text, is that their female associates mean those familiar
and known women with whom a woman usually comes into contact in her daily life and who share in
her household chores, etc. whether they are Muslim or non-Muslim. The object here is to exclude
those women from the circle who are either strangers and whose cultural and moral background is
not known or whose antecedents are apparently doubtful, which make them unreliable. This view is
also supported by the authentic traditions which state that zimmi women used to visit the wives
of the Prophet (peace be upn him). The real thing to be considered in this connection would be
the moral character and not the religious belief. Muslim women can meet and have intimate social
contacts with noble, modest and virtuous women, who come from well-known and reliable families
even if they are non-Muslim. But they must observe hijab from immodest, immoral and vulgar women
even if they happen to be Muslims. Their company from the moral viewpoint is as dangerous as of
other men. As for contacts with un-known, unfamiliar women, they may at the most be treated like
non-mahram relatives. A woman may uncover her face and hands before them but she must keep the
rest of her body and adornments concealed.
44. There is a good deal of difference of opinion among the jurists about the correct meaning of
this injunction. One group holds that this refers only to the slave girls owned by a lady.
Accordingly they interpret the divine command to mean that the Muslim woman can display her
adornment before a slave girl, whether she is an idolatress or a Jew or a Christian, but she
cannot appear before a slave man even if he is legally owned by her. For purposes of hijab, he
is to be treated just like a free male stranger. This is the view of Abdullah bin Masud,
Mujahid, Hasan Basri, Ibn Sirin, Said bin Musayyab, Taus and Imam Abu Hanifah, and a saying of
Imam Shafai also supports this. They argue that the slave is not a mahram to the lady. If he is
freed, he can marry his former owner. Therefore the fact of his being a slave cannot by itself
entitle him to be treated like the male mahrams and allow the lady to appear freely before him.
The question why should the words those in their possession which are general and applicable to
both slaves and slave girls, be restricted to mean only slave girls, is answered by these
jurists like this: Though the words are general, the context and background in which they occur
make them specifically applicable to slave girls only. The words those in their possession occur
just after their female associates in the verse; therefore one could understand that the
reference was to a woman’s relatives and other associates; this could lead to the
misunderstanding that the slave girls perhaps were excluded; the words those in their possession
therefore were used to clarify that a woman could display her adornments before the slave girls
as before her free female associates.
The other group holds that the words those in their possession include both the male slaves and
the slave girls. This is the view of Hadrat Aishah, Umm Salamah and some learned scholars of the
house of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and also of Imam Shafai. They do not argue merely on
the basis of the general meaning of the words, but they also cite precedents from the Sunnah in
support of their view. For instance, the incident that the Prophet (peace be upon him) went to
the house of his daughter, Fatimah, along with his slave Abdullah bin Musadah al-Fazari. She was
at that time wearing a sheet which, would leave the feet exposed if she tried to cover the head,
and the head exposed if she tried to cover the feet. The Prophet (peace be upon him) felt her
embarrassment and said: No harm: there are only your father and your slave! (Abu Daud, Ahmad,
Baihaqi on the authority of Anas bin Malik). Ibn Asakir has stated that the Prophet (peace be
upon him) had given that slave to Fatimah, who brought him up and then freed him. (But the man
turned out to be an ungrateful wretch; in the battle of Siffin, he was the bitterest opponent of
Ali and a zealous supporter of Amir Muawiyah). They also quote the following words of the
Prophet (peace be upon him) in support of their stand: When any of you agrees to a deed of
emancipation with her slave, and the slave has the necessary means to buy his freedom, she (the
owner) should observe hijab from him. (Abu Daud, Tirmizi, Ibn Majah on the authority of Umm
Salamah).
45. The literal translation of the text would be: those from among the men who are your
subordinates and have no desire. The obvious meaning is that apart from the mahram males, a
Muslim woman can display her adornment only before the man who satisfies two conditions:
firstly, he should be in a subordinate capacity, and secondly, he should be free from sexual
urges either due to advanced age, impotence, mental weakness, poverty or low social position, so
that he cannot cherish the desire or have the boldness to think evilly of his master’s wife,
daughter, sister or mother. Anybody who studies this injunction in the right spirit with a view
to obeying it, and not for the sake of finding ways and means of escaping from or violating it,
will readily appreciate that the bearers, cooks, chauffeurs and other grown up servants employed
these days in the houses do not fall in this category. The following clarifications given by the
commentators and the jurists of this point would show the type of men envisaged in the verse.
According to Ibn Abbas: This implies a man who is a mere simpleton and has no interest in women.
According to Qatadah: A poor man who is attached to you merely for his sustenance. According to
Mujahid: A fool who only needs food and has no desire for women. According to Shabi: The one who
is a subordinate and entirely dependent on his master, and cannot have the boldness to cast an
evil look at the womenfolk of the house. According to lbn Zaid: The one who remains attached to
a family for such a long time that he is regarded as a member brought up in that house, and who
has no desire for the women of the house. He is there merely because he gets his sustenance from
the family. According to Taus and Zuhri: One who does not cherish the desire for the women nor
has the courage to do so. (Ibn Jarir, Vol. XVIII, pp. 95-96, Ibn Kathir, Vol. III, p. 285).
The best explanation in this regard is the incident that happened at the time of the Prophet
(peace be upon him), which has been quoted by Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Daud, Nasai and Ahmad on the
authority of Aishah and Umm Salamah. There was a certain eunuch in Madinah who was allowed free
access to the wives of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the other women of the city, on the
assumption that he being incapable of sex was free from the sexual urge. One day when the
Prophet (peace be upon him) went to the house of his wife, Umm Salamah, he heard him talking to
her brother, Abdullah bin Abi Umayyah. He was telling Abdullah that if Taif was taken the
following day, he should try to have Badia, daughter of Ghailan Thaqafi. And then he started
praising Badia’s beauty and her physical charms and even went to the extent of describing her
private parts. On hearing this, the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) said: O enemy of Allah, you
seem to have seen her through. Then he ordered that the women should observe hijab from him and
he should not be allowed to enter the houses in future. After this he turned him out of Madinah
and forbade the other eunuchs also to enter the houses, because the women did not mind their
presence, while they would describe the women of one house before the other men of other houses
in the society. This shows that the word incapable of sex desire do not merely imply physical
impotence. Anyone who is physically unfit but cherishes sex desire in the heart and takes
interest in women can become the cause of many mischiefs.
46. That is, the children who do not yet have their sex feelings aroused. This may apply to boys
of 11 to 12 at the most. Older boys start having sex feelings though they may still be immature
otherwise.
47. The Prophet (peace be upon him) did not restrict this injunction to the jingle of the
ornaments, but has derived from it the principle that besides the look, anything which tends to
excite any of the senses, is opposed to the objective for which Allah has forbidden the women to
display their adornment. Therefore, he ordered the women not to move out with perfumes.
According to Abu Hurairah, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: Do not stop the bondmaids of
Allah from coming to the mosques, but they should not come with perfumes. (Abu Daud, Ahmad).
According to another tradition, Abu Hurairah passed by a woman who was coming out of the mosque
and felt that she had perfumed herself. He stopped her and said: O bondmaid of Allah, are you
coming from the mosque? When she replied in the affirmative, he said: I have heard my beloved
Abul Qasim (peace be upon him) say that the prayer of the woman who comes to the mosque with
perfumes, is not accepted till she purifies herself with a complete bath as is done after a
sexual intercourse. (Abu Daud, Ibn Majah, Ahmad, Nasai). Abu Musa Ashari has quoted the Prophet
(peace be upon him) as saying: A woman who passes on the way with perfumes so that people may
enjoy her perfumes, is such and such: he used very harsh words for her. (Tirmizi, Abu Daud,
Nasai). His instruction was that women should use scents with bright colors but light odors.
(Abu Daud). Similarly the Prophet (peace be upon him) disapproved that feminine voices should
enter the ears of men unnecessarily. In case of genuine need the Quran itself has allowed women
to speak to men, and the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) wives themselves used to instruct people
in religious matters. But where there is no necessity, nor any moral or religious objective, the
women have been discouraged to let their voices be heard by men. Thus if the imam happens to
commit a mistake during a congregational prayer, and he is to be warned of the lapse, the men
have been taught to say Subhan-Allah (Glory be to Allah), while the women have been instructed
to tap their hands only. (Bukhari, Muslim, Ahmad, Tirmizi, Abu Daud, Nasai, Ibn Majah).
48. Turn towards Allah: Repent of the lapses and errors that you have been committing in this
regard so far, and reform your conduct in accordance with the commands given by Allah and His
Prophet (peace be upon him).
49. It would be useful to give here a resume of the other reforms which the Prophet (peace be
upon him) introduced in the Islamic society after the revelation of these commandments.
(1) He prohibited the other men (even if they are relatives) to see a woman in privacy or sit
with her in the absence of her mahram relatives. Jabir bin Abdullah has reported that the
Prophet (peace be upon him) said: Do not visit the women whose husbands are away from home,
because Satan circulates in one of you like blood. (Tirmizi). According to another tradition
from Jabir, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: Whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day
should never visit a woman when alone unless she has a mahram relative also present, because the
third one would be Satan. (Ahmad). Imam Ahmad has quoted another tradition from Amir bin Rabiah
to the same effect. The Prophet (peace be upon him) himself was extremely cautious in this
regard. Once when he was accompanying his wife Safiyyah to her house at night, two men of Ansar
passed by them on the way. The Prophet (peace be upon him) stopped them and said: The woman with
me is my wife Safiyyah. They said: Glory be to Allah! O Messenger of AIlah, could there be any
suspicion about you? The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: Satan circulates like blood in the
human body; I was afraid lest he should put an evil thought in your minds. (Abu Daud).
(2) The Prophet (peace be upon him) did not approve that a man’s hand should even touch the body
of a non-mahram woman. That is why while administering the oath of allegiance, he would take the
hand of the men into his own hand, but he never adopted this procedure in the case of women.
Aishah has stated that the Prophet (peace be upon him) never touched the body of any other
woman. He would administer the oath verbally to them; when this was done, he would say: You may
go, Your allegiance is complete. (Abu Daud).
(3) He strictly prohibited the woman from proceeding on a journey alone without a mahram or in
company with a non-mahram. A tradition from Ibn Abbas has been quoted in Bukhari and Muslim
saying that the Prophet (peace be upon him) gave a sermon and said: No man should visit the
other woman when she is alone unless she has a mahram also present, and no woman should travel
alone unless accompanied by a mahram. A man stood up and said: My wife is going for Hajj, while
I am under orders to join a certain expedition. The Prophet said: You may go for Hajj with your
wife. Several other traditions on the subject, emanating from Ibn Umar, Abu Said Khudri and Abu
Hurairah, are found in authentic books of traditions, which concur that it is not permissible
for a Muslim woman who believes in Allah and the Last Day that she should go on a journey
without a mahram. There is, however, a variation with regard to the duration and the length of
the journey. Some traditions lay down the minimum limit as 12 miles and some lay down the
duration as one day, a day and night, two days or even three days. This variation, however,
neither renders the traditions unauthentic nor makes it necessary that we should accept one
version as legally binding in preference to others. For a plausible explanation for the
different versions could be that the Prophet (peace be upon him) gave different instructions at
different occasions depending on the circumstances and merit of each case. For instance, a woman
going on a three-day journey might have been prohibited from proceeding without a mahram, while
another going on a day’s journey might also have been similarly prohibited. Here the real thing
is not the different instructions to the different people in different situations, but the
principle that a woman should not go on a journey without a mahram as laid down in the tradition
quoted above from lbn Abbas.
(4) He not only took practical measures to stop free mixing of the sexes together but prohibited
it verbally as well. Everyone knows the great importance of the congregational and the Friday
prayers in Islam. The Friday prayer has been made obligatory by Allah Himself; the importance of
the congregational prayer can be judged from a tradition of the Prophet (peace be upon him),
which says: If a person does not attend the mosque without a genuine reason and offers his
prayer at home, it will not be acceptable to Allah. (Abu Daud, Ibn Majah, Daraqutni, Hakim on
the authority of Ibn Abbas). But in spite of this, the Prophet (peace be upon him) exempted the
women from compulsory attendance at the Friday prayer. (Abu Daud, Daraqutni, Baihaqi). As for
the other congregational prayers, he made the women’s attendance optional, saying: Do not stop
them if they want to come to the mosque. Then at the same time, he made the clarification that
it was better for them to pray in their houses than in the mosques. According to Ibn Umar and
Abu Hurairah, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: Do not prohibit the bondmaids of Allah from
coming to the mosques of Allah. (Abu Daud). Other traditions from Ibn Umar are to the effect:
Permit the women to come to the mosques at night. (Bukhari, Muslim, Trimizi, Nasai, Abu Daud).
And do not stop your women-folk from coming to the mosques though their houses are better for
them than the mosques. (Ahmad, Abu Daud). Umm Humaid Saidiyyah states that once she said to the
Prophet (peace be upon him): O Messenger of Allah, I have a great desire to offer my prayer
under your leadership. He replied: Your offering the prayer in your room is better than your
offering it in the verandah, and your offering the prayer in your house is better than your
offering it in the neighboring mosque, and your offering the prayer in the neighboring mosque is
better than offering it in the principal mosque (of the town). (Ahmad, Tabarani). A tradition to
the same effect has been reported from Abdullah bin Masud in Abu Daud. According to Umm Salamah,
the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: The best mosques for women are the innermost portions of
their houses. (Ahmad, Tabarani). But when Aishah saw the conditions that prevailed in the time
of the Umayyads, she said: If the Prophet (peace be upon him) had witnessed such conduct of the
women, he would certainly have stopped their entry into the mosques as was done in the case of
the Israelite women, (Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Daud). The Prophet (peace be upon him) had appointed
a separate door in his mosque for the entry of women, and Umar in his time had given strict
orders prohibiting men to use that door. (Abu Daud). In the congregational prayers the women
were instructed to stand separately behind the men. At the conclusion of the prayer, the Prophet
(peace be upon him) and his followers used to remain sitting for a while so that the women could
leave the mosque before the men. (Ahmad, Bukhari). The Prophet (peace be upon him) would say:
The best row for the men is the front row and the worst the last one (nearest to the women’s
row); and the best row for the women is the rearmost row and the worst the front one (just
behind the men’s). (Muslim, Abu Daud, Tirmizi Nasai, Ahmad). The women joined the Eid
congregational prayers but they had a separate enclosure from men. After the sermon the Prophet
(peace be upon him) used to address them separately (Abu Daud, Bukhari, Muslim). Once outside
the Mosque the Prophet (peace be upon him) saw the men and women moving side by side in the
crowd. He stopped the women and said: It is not proper for you to walk in the middle of the
road; walk on the sides. On hearing this the women immediately started walking along the walls.
(Abu Daud). All these commandments clearly show that mixed gatherings of the men and women are
wholly alien to the temper of Islam. It cannot therefore be imagined that divine law which
disallows the men and women to stand side by side for prayers in the sacred houses of Allah,
would allow them to mix together freely in colleges, offices, clubs and other gatherings.
(5) He permitted the women to make modest use of the make-ups, even instructed them to do so, but
strictly forbade its overdoing. Of the various types of make-up and decoration that were
prevalent among the Arab women in those days, he declared the following as accursed and
destructive of communities:
(a) To add extra hair to one’s own artificially with a view to make them appear longer and
thicker.
(b) To tattoo various parts of the body and produce artificial moles.
(c) To pluck hair from the eyebrows to give them a special shape, or to pluck hair from the face
to give it a cleaner look.
(d) To rub the teeth to make them sharp or to produce artificial holes in them.
(e) To rub the face with saffron or other cosmetic to produce an artificial complexion.
These instructions have been reported in Sihah Sitta and in Musnad Ahmad on the authority of
Aishah, Asma bint Abu Bakr, Abdullah bin Masud, Abdullah bin Umar, Abdullah bin Abbas and Amir
Muawiyah through reliable narrators.
After having the knowledge of these clear commandments from Allah and His Prophet (peace be upon
him), a Muslim has only two courses open before him. Either he should follow these commandments
practically and purify himself, his family life and the society at large of the moral evils for
the eradication of which Allah and His Prophet (peace be upon him) have given such detailed
commandments, or if due to some weakness he violates one or more of these commandments, he
should at least realize that he is committing a sin, and regard it as such, and should abstain
from labeling it as a virtue by misinterpretation. Apart from these alternatives, the people who
adopt the Western, ways of life against the clear injunctions of the Quran and Sunnah, and then
try their utmost to prove them Islam itself, and openly claim that there is no such thing as
hijab in Islam, not only commit the sin of disobedience but also display ignorance and
hypocritical obstinacy. Such an attitude can neither be commended by any right-thinking person
in this world, nor can it merit favor with Allah in the Hereafter. But among the Muslims there
exists a section of modern hypocrites who are so advanced in their hypocrisy that they repudiate
the divine injunctions as false and believe those ways of life to be right and based on truth,
which they have borrowed from the non-Muslim communities. Such people are not Muslims at all,
for if they still be Muslims, the words Islam and unIslam lose all their meaning and
significance. Had they changed their Islamic names and publicly declared their desertion of
Islam, we would at least have been convinced of their moral courage. But in spite of their wrong
attitudes, these people continue to pose themselves as Muslim. There is perhaps no meaner class
of people in the world. People with such character and morality cannot be unexpected to indulge
in any forgery, fraud, deception or dishonesty.
