Connect with us

Islam

Friday Sermon: Don’t Judge a Book by Its Cover: The Stanford University Story

Published

on

By Babatunde Jose

“Don’t judge a book by its cover.” You’ve heard that expression so many times. The gross-looking brown apple just may be a delicious one, or beyond that old and peeling storefront there may be gorgeous clothes. We can never know what lies beyond the exterior until we check it out. The proverbial warning “do not judge a book by its cover” may hold true for relationships and life.

The Bible said: “Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.” John 7:24 .

The story of Stanford University is axiomatic of this expression.

A lady in a faded gingham dress and her husband, dressed in a homespun threadbare suit, stepped off the train in Boston, Mass. USA and walk timidly without an appointment into the Harvard University President’s outer office.

The secretary could tell in a moment that such backwoods, country hicks had no business at Harvard University and probably didn’t even deserve to be in Cambridge University.

“We want to see the president,” the man said softly.

“He’ll be busy all day,” the secretary snapped.

“We’ll wait,” the lady replied.

For hours the secretary ignored them, hoping that the couple would finally become discouraged and go away. They didn’t and the secretary grew frustrated and finally decided to disturb the president, even though it was a chore she always regretted.

“Maybe if you see them for a few minutes, they’ll leave,” she said to him.

He sighed in exasperation and nodded. Someone of his importance obviously didn’t have the time to spend with them, but he detested gingham dresses and homespun suits cluttering up his outer office.

The president, stern faced and with dignity, strutted toward the couple.

The lady told him, “We had a son who attended Harvard University for one year. He loved Harvard University and he was happy here. But about a year ago, he was accidentally killed. My husband and I would like to erect a memorial to him, somewhere on campus.”

The president wasn’t touched…. He was shocked.

“Madam,” he said, gruffly, “we can’t put up a statue for every person who attended Harvard University and died. If we did, this place would look like a cemetery.”

“Oh, no,” the lady explained quickly. “We don’t want to erect a statue. We thought we would like to give a building to Harvard University.”

The president rolled his eyes. He glanced at the gingham dress and homespun suit, and then exclaimed, “A building! Do you have any earthly idea how much a building cost? We have over seven and a half million dollars in the physical buildings here at Harvard University.”

For a moment the lady was silent.

The president was pleased. Maybe he could get rid of them now.

The lady turned to her husband and said quietly, “Is that all it costs to start a university? Why don’t we just start our own?”

Her husband nodded.

The president’s face wilted in confusion and bewilderment. Mr. and Mrs. Leland Stanford got up and walked away, traveling to Palo Alto, California where they established a university.

They founded ‘Leland Stanford Junior University’ as a memorial for their only child, Leland Stanford Jr., who died as a teenager of typhoid fever in Florence, Italy, in 1884 while on a trip to Europe. The university was established by March 9, 1885, Endowment Act of the California Assembly and Senate, and the Grant of Endowment from Leland and Jane Stanford signed at the first meeting of the board of trustees on November 14, 1885. It would later be referred to as simply – Stanford University.

The Stanfords donated approximately 40 million United States Dollars to develop the university, which held its opening exercises on October 1, 1891, and was intended for agricultural studies.

Its first student, admitted to Encina Hall that day, was Herbert Hoover, who went on to become the 31st US president. The wealth of the Stanford family during the late 19th century is estimated at $50 million.

You can easily judge the character of others by how they treat those who they think can do nothing. It was a monumental error on the part of the President of Harvard.

Leland Stanford was born in 1824 in what was then Watervliet, New York. He was one of eight children of Josiah and Elizabeth Phillips Stanford.

After being admitted to the bar in 1848, Stanford moved with many other settlers to Port Washington, Wisconsin, where he began a law practice.  In 1850, Stanford was nominated by the Whig Party as Washington County, Wisconsin district attorney.

On September 30, 1850, Stanford married Jane Elizabeth Lathrop in Albany, New York. The couple did not have any children for years, until their only child, a son, Leland DeWitt Stanford, was born in 1868.

In 1852, having lost his law library and other property to a fire, Stanford followed his five brothers to California during the California Gold Rush. He served as a justice of the peace and helped organize the Sacramento Library Association, which later became the Sacramento Public Library.

In 1856, he and Jane moved to Sacramento, where he engaged in mercantile pursuits on a large scale. He was one of the four merchants known popularly as “The Big Four” and were the key investors in the Central Pacific Railroad which was incorporated  on June 28, 1861, and Stanford was elected as its president.

Stanford ran unsuccessfully for governor of California in 1859. He was nominated again in 1861 and won the election. He served one term, then limited to two years.

In May 1868, he joined others in forming the Pacific Union Express Company. It merged in 1870 with Wells Fargo and Company. Stanford was a director of Wells Fargo and Company from 1870 to his death in June 1893.

Also in May 1868, he started the Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Company (now Pacific Life) and served as its first president from 1868 to 1876.

He is widely considered a robber baron.  He owned two wineries, the Leland Stanford Winery in Alameda County founded in 1869, and the 55,000 acres (223 km2) Great Vina Ranch in Tehama County, containing what was then the largest vineyard in the world at 3,575 acres (14 km2) which was given to Stanford University.

His Palo Alto horse breeding farm was what was later developed into the Stanford University, the university was nicknamed “The Farm.”

Their only son Leland Stanford Junior was born in 1868.

Stanford was politically active and became a leading member of the Republican Party. In 1860, he was named a delegate to the Republican National Convention in Chicago but did not attend. He was elected governor in a second campaign in 1861.

He was the eighth Governor of California, serving from January 1862 to December 1863, and the first Republican governor. Later, he served in the United States Senate from 1885 until his death in 1893.

This was the man the short-sighted President of Harvard looked down upon. Thanks to providence, that incident led to the founding of one of the best universities in the United States. Indeed, ‘never judge a book by its cover’.

Don’t look down on others.  The superiority complex is why we have so much division in the world today.  The superiority complex, the overly righteous in heart, causes nothing but division.

Ihdinas-Siraatal-Mustaqeem: Show us the straight way,(Quran 1:6)

Barka Juma’at and a lovely weekend.

 +2348033110822

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Islam

Friday Sermon: The Weapon of a Believer

Published

on

By

By Babatunde Jose

By earnestly praying to God, we achieve the greatest of blessings: atonement for our sins and an increase in rank with our Lord. Prayer is also a potent remedy for our sicknesses, for it instills faith in our souls.

As human beings, our life in this world is characterized by fluctuating conditions happiness and sadness. There is no perpetual bliss or misery. Life by its very nature is a test. Allah says: “He is the One that has created Life and Death in order to test who amongst you is best in conduct.” (Quran, 67:2)

Pleasant and favorable conditions demand us to be grateful and humble while adverse conditions require us to be patient and to seek Allah’s help.

Dua means invocation – to call out – and is an act of supplication, meaning asking or begging for something earnestly or humbly. It is an act of worship in which we ask Allah for His forgiveness and mercy, to grant us His favors and answer our requests.

Making dua (invocation) is an important part of the Islamic faith, as Allah says in the Quran that believers should call on Him and ask Him for His assistance and forgiveness. Along with this, Allah provides assurance that He can hear and see everyone wherever they may be, and that He will indeed respond to prayers.

In Surah Ghafir, He says: “. . .  Make Dua before Me, I will accept. . ..” (Quran 40:60). Thus, Muslims should not be shy in seeking the help and guidance of Allah in every problem they face in their life.

Every condition is a manifestation of the Will of Allah. What has passed us was not meant to befall us and what has befallen us was not meant to pass us. Assistance comes with patience, relief after affliction and ease after difficulty. (Tirmidhi)

Our faith and belief is tested when we undergo difficulties and afflictions. These difficulties may be physical, emotional, financial, or spiritual. Allah says: “Verily We will test you with some fear, hunger, and loss of wealth, life or the fruits of your labor.” (Quran 2:155)

These adverse conditions may at times be upon an individual, a family, a community or upon a large section of the Ummah as is the current case of Palestine, Syria, Afghanistan, Myanmar and our country Nigeria where people are suffering needlessly, queuing for PVC, at ATM for new notes and worst of all for fuel, a God-given resource for which our country is the 6th largest producer in the world, but which we have been importing for  30 years. As the largest economy in Africa, we are ironically the poverty capital of the world and as the largest black nation in the world, we also have the highest population of out of school children.

Prayers or dua are panacea for the present problems facing the nation today. The dilemma, however, is that dua for us has become a ritual. Yet, Dua, according to a Hadith, has the unique ability to change destiny (Tirmidhi).

All the Prophets (peace be upon them), as we find in Quran, resorted to supplications as their ultimate ‘weapon’ to solicit Allah’s help when all their efforts to reform their respective nations faced hostile environments.

For example, the Prophet Noah (Nuh), asked God to inflict a torment on his people, who went astray despite his best efforts to guide them to the right path. As an answer to his prayer, God inflicted a great flood on them which went down in history.

The Prophet Job (Ayyub), called out to God because of his distress, saying “… Great harm has afflicted me, and You are the Most Merciful of the merciful” (Surat al-Anbiya, Quran 21:83). Allah said: We responded to him (Job) and removed from him the harm, which was afflicting him and restored his family to him.” (Surat al-Anbiya, Quran 21: 84).

God answered Prophet Solomon (Suleyman), who prayed: “My Lord, forgive me and give me a kingdom the like of which will never be granted to anyone after me. Truly You are the Ever Giving.” (Surah Sâd, Quran 38: 35). And God bestowed a great power and wealth on him.

Accordingly, those who pray should keep in mind the verse, “His command when He desires a thing is just to say to it, ‘Be!’ (Surah Ya-Sin, Quran 37:82).

At the time of the battle of Badr, with the future of Islam under threat, when a small ill equipped band of 313 Muslims faced an army of 1,000 well-armed, the Noble Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) spent the entire night on the eve of the battle begging and supplicating unto Allah for His assistance and Allah Almighty the following day granted the greatest victory in the annals of Islamic history.

In another such incident, when Sultan Yusuf ibn Ayyub ibn Shadhi (c. 1137 –1193), commonly known by the epithet Saladin, received news of the Crusader’s ships sailing toward them with reinforcements, he retired to the masjid and spent the night in prayer, beseeching and begging Allah Almighty’s assistance. In the morning prayer, he told a pious man, “Please make dua, so that the enemy ships left the shores carrying reinforcements.” The person replied, “Don’t fear, Saladin. Verily the tears of the night have drowned the enemy ships.” A short while later news was received that the ships had sunk.

We read in the Bible, 2 Kings 20:1-6 the story of Hezekiah. This is axiomatic of the power of supplication: “In those days Hezekiah was sick and near death. And Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, went to him and said to him, “Thus says the Lord: ‘Set your house in order, for you shall die, and not live.’”

2 Then he (Hezekiah) turned his face toward the wall, and prayed to the Lord, saying, 3 “Remember how, O Lord, I pray, how I have walked before You in truth and with a loyal heart, and have done what was good in Your sight.” And Hezekiah wept bitterly.

4 And it happened, before Isaiah had gone out into the middle court, that the word of the Lord came to him, saying, 5 “Return and tell Hezekiah the leader of My people, ‘Thus says the Lord, the God of David your father: “I have heard your prayer, I have seen your tears; surely, I will heal you. On the third day you shall go up to the house of the Lord. 6 And I will add to your days fifteen years.”

Such is the power of dua which has been rightfully referred to by scholars as ‘the weapon of a believer’.

While there are conducive and opportune moments when duas are accepted in relation to the above there are no restrictions or specifications on the act of dua. Dua can be made at any time, in any place, in any language.

A person who has faith in this truth can pray to God for anything and can hope that God will answer those prayers. For example, a person who is seized by an incurable disease will surely resort to all forms of medical care. Yet, knowing that only God restores health, prayers will be offered to Him for recovery. We pray today that God should restore the health of our afflicted brothers and friends. Amen

Dua is that act which ‘connects’ the slave to his Master. The slave lifts his hands as begging bowls in an expression of begging as a beggar does. “O mankind! It is you who stand as beggars in your relation to Allah, and it is Allah Who is Free of all wants, Worthy of all praise. (Quran, 35:15).

It is said that Allah feels shy in turning His slave away empty handed. (Tirmidhi, Ahmed, Abu Dawood).

If it is not in the nature of a mother to turn her child away empty handed no matter how disobedient a child may be, how is it possible that the One who is the most merciful and who has placed mercy in the hearts of all mothers turns away His slave, empty handed? How is it possible for the One Who becomes angry when His slaves do not supplicate to Him not to be happy when they do? (Sunan Ibn Majah)

Continuously turning to Allah Almighty in dua is a sign of one’s conviction in Him and the more one turns to Him, the more one’s faith increases. Dua is a condition of the heart and conversation with one’s Maker in the language of one’s choice.

Dua in times of ease is gratifying and engenders humility while at the same time it serves as an assurance of our duas being accepted in times of difficulty, according to Tirmidhi.

Dua in times of difficulty, accompanied by the shedding of tears is uplifting, invigorating, assuring, cleanses, refreshes, and provides solace and relief to a broken heart.

A person can ask God for anything within the limits of the permissible (halal). This is because, as mentioned earlier, God is the only ruler and owner of the entire universe; and if He wills, He grants man anything He desires. Every person who turns to God and prays to Him should credit God’s power to do anything and “be firm in supplication” as our beloved Prophet, peace be upon him, said.

In current times as individuals we are faced with so many tribulations and internationally, the Ummah is faced with crises across the globe that, at times we cannot help but feel helpless, frustrated, and depressed. In such times we have the choice of negotiating these hurdles all by ourselves or through voicing our dissent by petitioning the ‘powers’ that be or to utilize the most powerful ‘weapon’ at the disposal of every Believer — dua and stand up before Allah Almighty and to petition Him for His help as He alone is the one who has power over everything and every situation.

Collectively, we can raise up our hands and supplicate to Allah to deliver us from the Pharaoh of our time. Vox populi vox Dei.

… There are some people who say, ‘Our Lord, give us good in the world.’ They will have no share in the hereafter. And there are others who say, ‘Our Lord, give us good in the world, and good in the hereafter, and safeguard us from the punishment of the Fire.’ They will have a good share from what they have earned. God is swift at reckoning. (Surat al-Baqara Quran 2:200-202)

 

Prayer for Palestine: Lord God, we turn to you in these trying hours when conflict is a daily reality for our sisters and brothers in Israel and Palestine. We ask you to bring justice to the people of Palestine. And utmost peace and reconciliation in the region.

Barka Juma’at and Happy weekend

Dua: On no soul doth Allah place a burden greater than it can bear. It gets every good that it earns, and it suffers every ill that it earns. (Pray): “Our Lord! condemn us not if we forget or fall into error; our Lord! Lay not on us a burden like that which Thou didst lay on those before us; Our Lord! lay not on us a burden greater than we have strength to bear. Blot out our sins and grant us forgiveness. Have mercy on us. Thou art our Protector; help us against those who stand against faith.”

+2348033110822

Continue Reading

Islam

Friday Sermon: Hijab 2: By Choice or by Force?

Published

on

By

By Babatunde Jose

 “Even though the hijab is related to religion, its acceptance is up to the individual. There is no compulsionBut if a girl wants to wear it, she should be given the chance to do so.” Syed Hasnain Akhtar, professor of Arabic at Delhi University.  Unfortunately, this has not always been the case in many countries.

The perception of the hijab dates back to Hadith when the “verse of the hijab” descended upon the fledgling Muslim community in 627 CE. Now documented in Sura 33:53, the verse states, “And when you ask [his wives] for something, ask them from behind a partition. That is purer for your hearts and their hearts”.

The wearing of the veil has since become a contentious issue as a result of controversial interpretations that has led to its being forced on women in many places and in others, being banned. There is no end to the Hijab War.

In the 1960s and 1970s Western clothing largely dominated in Muslim countries. For example, in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran, women went out in public without the hijab. This changed following the Soviet Afghan War, military dictatorship in Pakistan, and the Iranian revolution of 1979, when traditional conservative attire including the abaya, jilbab and niqab made a comeback.

After the Iran Islamic Revolution of 1979, the Hijab Law was decreed. It led to protests and demonstrations by women.

However, in Turkey there has been a decline in women wearing the hijab in recent years, although under Erdoğan Turkey is becoming more conservative and Islamic.

Egypt did not pronounce any ban on the hijab, but a movement to rededicate themselves to Islamic values led some college aged Muslims to adopt the jilbab as a dress code. Soon this movement expanded outside of the youth realm and became a more widespread Muslim practice. Women viewed this way of dress as a way to both publicly announce their religious identity as well as a way to simultaneously reject western influences of dress and culture that were prevalent at the time. A case of choice.

Many people, both men and women from backgrounds of both Islamic and non-Islamic faith questioned the hijab and what it stood for in terms of women and their rights. There was questioning of whether in practice the hijab was truly by choice or by force of social coercion.

Today the hijab means many things for different people. For Islamic women who choose to wear the hijab it allows them to retain their modesty, morals, and freedom of choice.

There are a few topics that take a lot of heat when discussed. One such topic is the hijab. Is it a choice? Or a forceful compulsion on Muslim women?

Ms. Neha Saleem, who observed the hijab said: “There is no compulsion in religion. One should not force someone to wear the hijab no matter how old they are, though one can suggest it and tell them how it’s a good thing. Ultimately, though, it is a matter for the people and their own personal choices. I wear a hijab because I like covering myself and I feel protected.”

But society cages women in various lengths of cloth in the name of chastity and dignity. In a few Muslim states, hijab is not mandatory by law, but it is the society that conditions the modesty of the women in the name of the hijab. The cultural concept of hijab or modesty controls the society and freedom of women – this is so badly inculcated in the psyche that there is nothing that can be done to alter it. This cultural concept defines the modesty of women and brings the entire focus to their bodies in exactly the same way as using a woman’s naked body to sell products.

The hijab is currently required by law to be worn by women in Iran, Afghanistan, and the Indonesian province of Aceh. But it is no longer required by law in Saudi Arabia since 2018, although Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman has stated that women must still wear “decent and respectful attire”.

In Gaza, Palestinian jihadists belonging to the Unified Leadership (UNLU) have rejected a hijab policy for women.

Other countries, both in Europe and in the Muslim world, have passed laws banning some or all types of hijab in public or in certain types of locales. Women in different parts of the world have also experienced unofficial pressure to wear or not wear a hijab.

The Muslim Reform Movement holds that Quran 53:33; 33:59; 24:30-31 simply meant “barrier” and that it was used in the context of both men and women; the jilbab and the khimar were pre-Islamic clothes and the Quran simply recommended how to wear these, rather than imposing a new clothing requirement.

Turkey had a ban on headscarves at universities until recently. In December 2010, however, the Turkish government ended the headscarf ban in universities, government buildings and schools.

In Tunisia, women were banned from wearing hijab in state offices in 1981 and in the 1990s, more restrictions were put in place.

In 2017, Tajikistan banned hijabs. Under existing laws, women wearing hijabs are banned from entering the country’s government offices.

On 15 March 2004, France passed a law banning “symbols or clothes through which students conspicuously display their religious affiliation” in public primary schools, middle schools, and secondary schools.

On 13 July 2010, France’s lower house of parliament overwhelmingly approved a bill banning wearing the Islamic full veil in public. It became the first European country to ban the full-face veil in public places, followed by Belgium, Latvia, Bulgaria, Austria, Denmark and some cantons of Switzerland in the following years.

In 2016, Bosnia-Herzegovina’s supervising judicial authority upheld a ban on wearing Islamic headscarves in courts and legal institutions, despite protests from the Muslim community that constitutes 40% of the country.

The blatant sexualization of the body in both cases causes women to be perceived as nothing more than a source of temptation, pleasure, and sin. Owing to such notions, when a girl is little, she has to be dressed in a ‘modest’ way, during her adolescence she is forced to wear a dupatta and finally as a grown woman, she knows her position lies behind the hijab.

Considering the verse in Qur’an 24:31, which states that they should cover their “adornments” and not show them to strangers outside the family, it can be thought that the Qur’an introduces a new scale of chastity in the public sphere. This has become a veritable weapon in the hands of Talibanic Islamists who now interpret it as Allah’s enforcement of the hijab on women: A practice which Afghanistan and Iran have today carried to a notorious level, abridging the fundamental rights of women. A sad irony to a supposed religion of peace, equality, and freedom.

In India, Muslim women are allowed to wear the hijab and/or burqa anytime, anywhere. However, in January 2022, a number of colleges in the South Indian state of Karnataka stopped female students wearing hijab from entering the campus following the state government circular banning ‘religious clothes’ in educational institutions where uniforms are prescribed. This led to the celebrated Karnataka High Court case of 15 March 2022. The Court, in a verdict, upheld the hijab ban in educational institutions where uniforms are prescribed, arguing that “the practice is non-essential in Islam.”

Among the issues raised are: What is the ambit and scope of essential religious practices? Is the wearing of a headscarf an essential religious practice? An essential part of a religion means the core beliefs upon which a religion is founded. It is upon the cornerstone of essential parts or practices that the superstructure of a religion is built, without which a religion will be no religion. If taking away that part or practice results in a fundamental change in the character of that religion or in its belief, then such part could be treated as an essential or integral part of the religion. We may then ask: Is the wearing of the Hijab an essential part of the religion of Islam? This is the litmus test.

Wearing a hijab may be a practice, it may be an ideal or a permissible practice, but to raise it to the level of an essential religious practice, something more is required. It has to be shown that if the headscarf is not worn, the identity of the person as a believer in the faith itself would be jeopardized.

It could be argued that wearing of a headscarf may be a religious practice but is not essential to the religion as non-following of such practice would not lead a believer to be non-Muslim. The essential religious practices are those practices, if not followed, would render the person religion-less.

In this vein, it is worth considering the issue of wives for example. The Muslim law permits marrying four women. Personal law nowhere mandates or dictates it as a duty to perform four marriages. No religious scripture or authority provides that marrying less than four women or abstaining from procreating a child from each and every wife in case of permitted bigamy or polygamy would be irreligious or offensive to the dictates of the religion.

The Five Pillars of Islam are: Profession of Faith (shahada). The belief that “There is no god but God, and Muhammad is the Messenger of God”; Prayer (salat). Alms (zakat); Fasting (sawm) and Pilgrimage (hajj).

We must not end this sermon without reference to what is happening in Afghanistan.  Today, nobody would call what is going on in Afghanistan Sharia, the dictates of hadith nor define it as based on any known Islamic injunction.  It is not only a blatant travesty of Islam but also an abuse of fundamental human rights of the female gender.

How can they be more Muslim than the holy Prophet?  Afghanistan is everything bad about Islamic fundamentalism.  It is not Islam, but religion gone awry.

The veil by whatever name it is called should be by choice and not by force. Secondly, being a choice, society should stop making political weapons out of it by banning it in whatever guise.

Barka Juma’at and happy weekend

 +2348033110822

Continue Reading

Islam

Friday Sermon: Hijab 1: A Historical Excursion

Published

on

By

By Babatunde Jose

The issue of the veil and hijab has created so much controversy and continues to do so depending on which side of the religious and social platform we stand to observe the unfolding events. The issue raises many fundamental questions which cut across historical, social and traditional spheres, Quranic pronouncement and Hadith, Islamic jurisprudence, Sharia and the whole gamut of Islamophobia and Hijabophobia. Finally, issues of law across nations where the question has been, to ban or not to ban.

We would start our discourse with a historical excursion into the institution of veiling across the ages and its metamorphosis into a symbol of Islamic identity.

We shall interrogate the Quranic provision and determine if it was recommendatory or mandatory. Therefore, without the hijab, would the Muslimness of a woman become null and void? Can what is made recommendatory by the Holy Quran be metamorphosed into mandatory dicta by hadith which is supplementary to the Quran? These and other issues shall be explored in the Sermons to come.

There is no doubt, the controversy over the hijab arose out of the age-long interpretations given the Quranic verses, some hadiths,  and the role of Islamic schools of jurisprudence after the demise of the Prophet.

Veiling did not originate with the advent of Islam. Evidence of veiling dates back as far as 2500 BC. Elite women in ancient Mesopotamia and in the Byzantine, Greek, and Persian empires wore the veil as a sign of respectability and high status.

In ancient Mesopotamia and Assyria, they had explicit sumptuary laws detailing which women must veil and which women must not, depending upon the woman’s class, rank, and occupation in society. Female slaves and prostitutes were forbidden to veil and faced harsh penalties if they did so. Veiling was thus not only a marker of aristocratic rank, but also served to “differentiate between ‘respectable’ women and those who were publicly available”; pro bono publico.

Strict seclusion and the veiling of matrons were also customary in ancient Greece. Between 550 and 323 BCE, prior to Christianity, respectable women in classical Greek society were expected to seclude themselves and wear clothing that concealed them from the eyes of strange men. Roman custom included the practice of the head covering worn by the priestesses of Vesta (Vestal Virgins).

It is not clear whether the Hebrew Bible contains prescriptions with regard to veiling, but rabbinic literature presents it as a question of modesty. It became an important rabbinic virtue in the early Roman period, and it may also have been intended to distinguish Jewish women from their non-Jewish counterparts in Babylonian and later in Greco-Roman society. According to rabbinical precepts, married Jewish women have to cover their hair. According to Fadwa El Guindi, at the inception of Christianity, Jewish women were veiling their heads and faces.

The Bible attests to the veiling of women as we read in the passage in 1 Corinthians 11:4-7: “every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head”.

The early Church Fathers, including Tertullian of Carthage, Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus of Rome, John Chrysostom and Augustine of Hippo attested in their writings that Christian women should wear a headcovering, while men should pray with their heads uncovered.

There is archaeological evidence demonstrating that headcovering was observed as an ordinance by women in early Christianity, and the practice of Christian headcovering continues among female adherents of many Christian denominations today.

In the Indian subcontinent, Hindu women cover their heads with a veil in a practice known as ghoonghat. Intermixing of populations resulted in a convergence of the cultural practices of Greek, Persian, and Mesopotamian empires and the Semitic peoples of the Middle East. Veiling and seclusion of women appear to have established themselves among Jews and Christians before spreading to urban Arabs of the upper classes and eventually among the urban masses. In the rural areas it was common to cover the hair, but not the face.

According to Leila Ahmed, the rigid norms pertaining to veiling and seclusion of women found in Christian Byzantine literature have been influenced by ancient Persian traditions, and there is evidence to suggest that they differed significantly from actual practice.

Available evidence suggests that veiling was not introduced into Arabia by Muhammad, but already existed there, particularly in the towns, although it was probably not as widespread as in the neighboring countries such as Syria and Palestine.

Similarly, to the practice among Greeks, Romans (Byzantines), Jews, and Assyrians, its use was associated with high social status. In the early Islamic texts, the term hijab does not distinguish between veiling and seclusion, and can mean either “veil” or “curtain”.

Allah says “O Prophet! Tell your wives & daughters & the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies (screen themselves completely except the eyes), that will be better that they should be known as respectable women so as not to be annoyed or molested. (Quran 33:59)

 The Holy Quran does not make wearing of hijab or headgear mandatory for Muslim women. Whatever is stated in the above Ayat, is only directory, because of the absence of prescription of penalty or penance for not wearing hijab, the linguistic structure of other verses supports this view.

The only verses in the Qur’an that specifically reference women’s clothing are those promoting modesty, instructing women to guard their private parts and draw their scarves over their breast area in the presence of men.

The contemporary understanding of the hijab dates back to Hadith when the “verse of the hijab” descended upon the community in 627 CE. Now documented in Sura 33:53, the verse states, “And when you ask [his wives] for something, ask them from behind a partition. That is purer for your hearts and their hearts”. This verse, however, was not addressed to women in general, but exclusively to Muhammad’s wives.

As Muhammad’s influence increased, he entertained more and more visitors in the mosque, which was then his home. Often, these visitors stayed the night only feets away from his wives’ apartments. It is commonly understood that this verse was intended to protect his wives from these strangers. During Muhammad’s lifetime the term for donning the veil, darabat al-hijab, was used interchangeably with “being Muhammad’s wife”.

Because Islam identified with the monotheistic religions of the conquered empires, the practice was adopted as an appropriate expression of Quranic ideals regarding modesty and piety.  Veiling gradually spread to upper-class Arab women, and eventually it became widespread among Muslim women in cities throughout the Middle East.

Veiling of Arab Muslim women became especially pervasive under Ottoman rule as a mark of rank and exclusive lifestyle, and Istanbul of the 17th century witnessed differentiated dress styles that reflected geographical and occupational identities.

By the 19th century, upper-class urban Muslim and Christian women in Egypt wore a garment which included a head cover and a burqa (muslin cloth that covered the lower nose and the mouth). The name of this garment, harabah, derives from early Christian and Judaic religious vocabulary, which may indicate the origins of the garment itself. Up to the first half of the twentieth century, rural women in the Maghreb and Egypt put on a form of niqab when they visited urban areas, “as a sign of civilization”.

Hijab has been referred to as the veil that covers the head and is usually worn by Muslim women. It is taken as a symbol of modesty and privacy. The Quran never explicitly used the term hijab in reference to body veiling, instead used the words khimār and jilbab. The word hijab means “a screen or curtain” and is used in the Quran to show the meaning of a screen, partition, or curtain. None of these words are used in the Quran in reference to what the Muslims refer to today as a dress code for the Muslim woman.

Some meanings for the word include screen, covering, curtain, drapes, or partition. Hijab in the Quran has nothing to do with the Muslim women dress code.

Jews practiced the tradition of wearing a veil (by women) and cover (by men), as apparent from Talmud quotes (Talmud equals the hadiths and sunnah, but neither of which are the words of God Himself). The Christians adopted this further. The people belonging to the above-mentioned religions cover their heads in the synagogues, weddings, and religious festivities.

Christian nuns are seen in full veil all the time. In pre-Islamic times in Arab, everyone used to wear a veil only out of tradition. In Saudi Arabia up to this day, men cover their heads with veils. In North African Sahara, the Tuareg Tribe has men wearing veils instead of women. In pre-Islamic times people used to cover themselves more fully in order to protect themselves from the harsh weather conditions, especially in the Arab states with scorching heat.

Covering the heads was neither a religious nor a social obligation. But today it has assumed a potent religious ammunition, particularly with the weaponization of religion.

There is nothing bad in the adornment of hijab by choice by women to protect them from the lustful attention of the menfolk and also to project their Islamism, but when its use is being forced as we have in some Talibanic societies under the guise of Hadithi injunctions, then it becomes a questionable exercise open to interrogation. This brings into fore the various interpretations of the provisions of the Quran and the fatwa of the various schools of Islamic jurisprudence on the matter. To be continued.

Barka Juma’at and happy weekend,

 +2348033110822

Continue Reading

Trending

%d bloggers like this: