Exposing the foolish defense of Hijab by Zakir Naik! Eye opener for those who relate Hijab with modesty. Must read for Muslim women and others!
Thanks to his fans, we have enough YouTube video postings of Dr. Naik’s take on various aspects and practices of his brand of Islam. Continuing with our objective of denouncing falsity and irrationality, we now analyze the following video where Dr. Naik defends the indefensible hijab.
The video is titled Hindu woman questions Dr. Naik about Hijaab (Islamic veil) which can be watched here
The Hindu lady in the above video asks Dr. Naik that isn’t a Hindu woman who wears a salwar kameez modest? Why degrade women by forcing hijaab(veil)? She also mentions that since Dr. Naik is so inspired by reformist Raja Ram Mohan Roy, why doesn’t he accept his stand against the purdah (hijab, veil) system?
Dr. Naik, the
literalist follower of Islamic scriptures that he is, presents the following
arguments to defend the retrograde 7th century Arabic practice.
(*our responses follow his arguments)
1. Dr. Naik argues that just because he agrees with many of Raja Ram Mohan Roy’s reformist ideas, it does not mean that he must agree with ALL the reformist ideas of Raja Ram Mohan Roy
2. To reinforce
his argument, Dr. Naik gives the example of Mr. L. K. Advani’s statement that
“rapists deserve death punishment”. He supports Mr. Advani’s statement because
it’s in line with Islam. But this does not mean he will agree with every
statement of Mr. Advani.
- We concur with Dr. Naik that it’s impossible to agree with or follow all the views of any person, no matter how great that person be. This much of Dr. Naik’s argument is rational indeed and we would add that Dr. Naik should apply the same logic on Prophet Muhammad too. Many Muslims blindly follow each and every tradition of the prophet (Sunnah) no matter how inordinate or irrational they be in current context. [for instance wearing mera naam joker trousers that don’t reach your ankles!. Others refuse to use soap after lavatory because soaps were not manufactured during Prophet’s era!]
- But the rest of this argument of Dr. Naik is a departure from rationality and a surrender to blind belief. Nowhere does Dr. Naik enlighten us about Raja Ram Mohan Roy’s arguments against purdah and his rebuttal of those arguments. Instead he gives us a glimpse of the rigid yardstick that he uses to accept or reject an argument. This is evident from the example he presents. He agrees with Mr. Advani that “rapists should be put to death” NOT because of any rational merit (that it may act as a deterrent) BUT only because that statement is in line with Islamic Law (Sharia) Dr. Naik in a way admits that his brand of Islam is not open to reforms. It’s well known that a religion that is not open to noble ideas from within and without is bound to transform into a fanatic irrational cult dominated by dumb-heads.)
Anyways, this part of the lady’s question and Dr. Naik’s response has little bearing on the subject topic of Hijaab. It only highlights the rigidity of Dr. Naik’s doctrine. So lets move forward.
3. He then informs us that modesty levels differ according to different regions/cultures. What is modest here may be considered immodest elsewhere. He also takes a jibe on Indian Saree and eulogizes the great Islamic culture of not casting a second glance on women as this would be considered “feasting on her beauty”
- When Dr. Naik knows that modesty is better defined by the culture and region we live in, how foolish it is for his brand of Islam to force a single rigid dress code on women (and men) across the world? Dr. Naik has rather naively exposed his brand of Islam that does not respect cultural differences but wants all cultures to succumb to a 7th century Arabic culture, no matter what the negative implications of such a custom be on the people! Very Sad indeed.
- While taking a Jibe at Indian Saree, Dr. Naik forgot that modesty of any other culture may seem taboo and preposterous in another culture. Does he know that an Arab village woman may lift her skirt to cover her face if spotted without a veil (as for her revealing her face is the most immodest act !). She may end up revealing what most of the world may consider immodest exposure
- Dr. Naik
also doesn’t know or doesn’t want the audience to know that the Islamic
dress code was not a reformist step for women at large. One must know that slave women were NOT ALLOWED to wear the veil. So the devout
Muslims were always free to ”feast on the beauty”(yuck!) of
slave women all the time! Islamic veil is not to maintain modesty of
women but to make distinction b/w free Muslimah and a slave girl! [By
the way, doesn’t allowing Muslims to keep women as slaves expose how much
Islam is concerned about modesty of women?]. What springs up from the
literal accounts of Islam is that women in Islam are no more than sex
objects, some of whom (called wives) are protected exclusively for
husbands and rest (called slave women) need not be protected as their
modesty carries no weight and they are public property in Dr. Naik’s
terminology.Here’s how it’s been immodestly and explicitly
mentioned in the Tafsirs and Sahih Hadits: (These are not taken from
anti-Islamic sites by the way. They are lifted straight from Islamic
Publication Houses versions that are online on almost every other Islamic
Quran [33:59], Tafsir Ibn Kathir-
Here Allah tells His Messenger to command the believing women — especially his wives and daughters, because of their position of honor — to draw their Jilbabs over their bodies, so that they will be distinct in their appearance from the women of the Jahiliyyah and from slave women…..if they do that, it will be known that they are free, and that they are not servants or whores.
Sahih Bukhari Vol 5 Hadith 523:
Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet stayed with Safiya bint Huyai for three days on the way of Khaibar where he consummated his marriage with her. Safiya was amongst those who were ordered to use a veil.
Sahih Bukhari Vol 5 Hadith 524:
Narrated Anas: ….The Muslims said amongst themselves, “Will she (i.e. Safiya) be one of the mothers of the believers, (i.e. one of the wives of the Prophet ) or just (a lady captive) of what his right−hand possesses” Some of them said, “If the Prophet makes her observe the veil, then she will be one of the mothers of the believers (i.e. one of the Prophet’s wives), and if he does not make her observe the veil, then she will be his lady slave.” So when he departed, he made a place for her behind him (on his and made her observe the veil.
- The brand
of Islam that Dr. Naik follows glorifies the traditions of 7th century
Arabic Muslims, which is an insult to modesty anywhere in the world today.
Keeping women as slave is not only immodest but cruel and inhuman. Isn’t
it painfully ridiculous that Muslim men cannot stare Muslim women but
stare and rape slave women? Can this at all help in keeping the Muslim men modest in their thought, speech, dress and action?
Here are few Sahih Hadith which expose how much Islam cares for modesty of women.
Sahih Muslim: Book 008, Number 3371:
Abu Sirma said to Abu Sa’id al Khadri (Allah he pleased with him): 0 Abu Sa’id, did you hear Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) mentioning al-’azl? He said: Yes, and added: We went out with Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) on the expedition to the Bi’l-Mustaliq and took captive some excellent Arab women; and we desired them, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, (but at the same time) we also desired ransom for them. So we decided to have sexual intercourse with them but by observing ‘azl (Withdrawing the male sexual organ before emission of semen to avoid-conception). But we said: We are doing an act whereas Allah’s Messenger is amongst us; why not ask him? So we asked Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him), and he said: It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born.
Sahih Muslim: Book 008, Number 3373:
Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (Allah be pleased with him) reported: We took women captives, and we wanted to do ‘azl (coitus interruptus) with them. We then asked Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) about it, and he said to us: Verily you do it, verily you do it, verily you do it, but the soul which has to be born until the Day of judgment must be born.
Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 137:
Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah’s Apostle about it and he said, “Do you really do that?” repeating the question thrice, “There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection.
So this is the “modesty” that early Islam brought to the world. How comfortable would you be with this kind of twisted modesty? “Allowing rape of innocent women”, is this about modesty at all?
4. Then he quotes the Quran and Hadith to inform us about all that Islam considers as modesty and how men and women should guard their modesty
Dr. Naik has cleverly skipped the context in which the veiling verses were revealed. The context would have surely helped his audience appreciate how this “noble” practice of wearing the hijaab was started in Islam. There must have been some good reason for starting this practice…Right?
Well no problem , we will give the context and you be the judge!
Here’s how Umar, the companion of the prophet, forced the veil on Muslim women for all times to come
Sahih Bukhari (an authentic Islamic scripture) Volume 1, Book 4, Number
Narrated ‘Aisha:The wives of the Prophet used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqia at Medina) to answer the call of nature at night. ‘Umar used to say to the Prophet “Let your wives be veiled,” but Allah’s Apostle did not do so. One night Sauda bint Zam’a the wife of the Prophet went out at ‘Isha’ time and she was a tall lady. ‘Umar addressed her and said, “I have recognized you, O Sauda.” He said so, as he desired eagerly that the verses of Al-Hijab (the observing of veils by the Muslim women) may be revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of “Al-Hijab” (A complete body cover excluding the eyes).
Did you read it right? YOU SURE DID!
Shockingly, while it was Umar who deserved punishment for harassing the prophet’s wife, Dr. Naik’s God chose to punish the wife instead of punishing Umar for the uncivilized indecent act. The All-Just God of Dr. Naik’s hadits rewards the culprit and punishes the victim
Well, this is just half the story. You must be interested in knowing as to how effective was the veil injunction of the All-Knowing God in defending the woman’s modesty!
If you are a rational person, you would have already guessed that by letting the perpetrator go scot free and punishing the victim, no good could have possibly come out of this injunction. And that is what exactly happened
Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 318:
Narrated Aisha: Sauda (the wife of the Prophet) went out to answer the call of nature AFTER it was made obligatory (for all the Muslims ladies) to observe the veil. She was a fat huge lady, and everybody who knew her before could recognize her. So ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab saw her and said, “O Sauda! By Allah, you cannot hide yourself from us, so think of a way by which you should not be recognized on going out. Sauda returned while Allah’s Apostle was in my house taking his supper and a bone covered with meat was in his hand. She entered and said, “O Allah’s Apostle! I went out to answer the call of nature and ‘Umar said to me so-and-so.” Then Allah inspired him (the Prophet) and when the state of inspiration was over and the bone was still in his hand as he had not put in down, he said (to Sauda), “You (women) have been allowed to go out for your needs.
Tell me dear friends, what kind of a cruel joke is this. A man harasses a woman going out to answer the call of nature. Allah punishes the woman by forcing her to wear a veil and even after veiling herself, she is still harassed. Dr. Naik’s God/ Allah, as reflected in the hadith, is incompetent and completely incapable in correcting the corrupt. Instead He unjustly punishes the victim.
- Which sane woman in the world would like to wear a veil on this ground?
- Is this about modesty at all or about defending an eve-teaser simply because he is a favorite of Allah’s favorite Prophet?
- Can letting the eve-teaser culprit go away scot free help the victim?
- Can punishing the victim reform the culprit? And if yes, why not apply the same standards on self?
As we said, YOU
BE THE JUDGE!
Ironically this icon of injustice is draped and aped mindlessly by Muslim women across the world. Or perhaps even if they have the mind after getting ill due to Vitamin D deficiency, still who cares about half-intelligent women in fanatic Islamic world? Ignorance is not always bliss
5. Then Dr. Naik lectures us on the six criteria of modesty as described in the hadiths, one of which is that a man should not wear a woman’s garment
This criterion is absolutely shocking to us and it could be equally shocking for Dr. Naik too. We are informed by some Islamic sites that the Prophet of Islam received revelations when he was in the garment of his beloved youngest wife Hadrath Aisha. It was for this reason that he preferred to stay more with her than the other wives
We would request Dr. Naik to protest against these sites which highlight this cross-dressing account of the Prophet as Sahih (Authentic)
She told that
the people used to choose: ‘A’isha’s day to bring their gifts, seeking thereby
to please God’s messenger. She said that God’s messenger’s wives were in two
parties, one including ‘A’isha, Hafsa, Safiya, and Sauda, and the other
including Umm Salama and the rest of God’s messenger’s wives. Umm Salama’s
party spoke to her telling her to ask God’s messenger to say to the people, “If
anyone wishes to make a present to God’s messenger, let him present it to him
wherever he happens to be.” She did so and he replied, “Do not annoy me
regarding ‘A’isha, for inspiration has not come to me when I was in any women’s
garment but ‘A’isha’s.” They then called Fatima, sent her to God’s
messenger, and she spoke to him, but he replied, “Do you not like what I like,
girlie?” She said, “Certainly,” so he said, “Then love this woman.” (Bukhari and Muslim.)
Mishkat Al Masabih, Volume II Book XXVI
account is available online here: Number 2442 source:http://bewley.virtualave.net/bukhari20.html#gifts
He said to her, ‘Do not injure me regarding ‘A’isha. The revelation does not come to me when I am in the garment of any woman except ‘A’isha.’”
We await Dr. Naik’s future videos which clarify if cross-dressing is halaal ( and modest) or if there’s any proof that the above hadiths are false. The intention of presenting this Sahih hadith is not to embarrass , but to help the likes of Dr. Naik in appreciating that it’s naive to be so rigid on dress codes, when even the Prophet was flexible about such things.
6. He then frivolously gives the example of twin sisters walking the street and encountering a ruffian. He is sure (how?) that a ruffian will tease the sister in a mini skirt and not the other sister in a hijaab
We have already seen through sahih hadiths that despite wearing a veil, the wife of the prophet was harassed by Umar Al- Kattab. Umar is regarded as one of the best Muslims, a Sahaba (companion of the prophet). If one of the best Muslims can behave like an eve-teaser against a veiled women, a ruffian may end up harassing both the gals in all probability…Right?
So the argument that a woman wearing a veil can be any deterrent is proved wrong from hadiths themselves.
Also, Dr. naik forgets to ponder as to Why are not men forced to wear the veil? Can’t they have the charms to distract women the same way women can? Dr. Naik would do good to learn from the Vedas in which both men and women are encouraged to wear non revealing dresses and strict punishment is prescribed for anyone who teases women.
7. Finally, Dr. Naik quotes the Hindu scriptures to show that hijaab and cross dressing are prohibited in Hinduism too and had Raja Ram Mohan Roy known this he would not have gone against the purdah (veil, hijaab) system.
we learn from Dr. Naik’s brand of Islam is a shocking account of how unjust is
the practice of forcing a women to wear a veil. If Raja Ram Mohan Roy would
have known this and if the home minister of India comes to know of it, then
they would’ve sure banned the veil as it has been banned in France. The reason
why this practice was started is pathetic and grossly unjust. No human being
can condone such injustice just for the sake of literally following your
religion. The societies that don’t reform and do not respect a women are bound
Having refuted the more unjust than irrational arguments of Dr. Naik above, we draw your attention to the sane voices in the Islamic world, who are not naive to follow scriptures literally. They are proud Muslims (and Muslimahs) that live in the 21st century, respect the diversity of cultures and most importantly understand the harmful effects of such retrograde practices on health and safety:
Sample this rational article by a Canadian Muslim
This person highlights how the burqa is an ill-fit and a threat to Canadian society and the Muslim women.
a) Security: In July this year, an armed man dressed in a burka robbed the Scotiabank in Mississauga and made off with an undisclosed amount of cash.
b) Safety: In October 2007, a Calgary school bus was involved in a roadside accident in which one girl was killed. Although no news outlet was willing to report this, news clips of the driver showed she was wearing a very restrictive head covering that had almost certainly compromised her peripheral vision and could have been the reason she slammed into a truck parked on the shoulder on a clear day.
c) Health: New studies in England and Ireland have found that Muslim women who wear the burka or niqab (and their breast-fed children) tend to get rickets due to an insufficiency of vitamin D, through lack of exposure of their skin to sunlight. A study released by British National Health Service doctors said hijab and burka-wearing women were putting their health at risk because they do not get enough sunlight, an alarming number who wear the burka are suffering from bone deficiencies due to lack of vitamin D.
d) Gender equality: The MCC agrees that the state has no place in the bedrooms or wardrobes of the country. However, if the status of any woman in Canada is affected by what happens in the bedroom or wardrobe, be it spousal abuse or the forced wearing of attire meant to marginalize girls or women, then we feel the state must intervene. Society has a role to play to ensure the human rights of girls and women are not being compromised behind closed doors.
There’s another dangerous aspect to the veil. That it is now being forced on women in radicalized pockets even in our own country. To remind you of this reality, here’s a news byte
Rayana R Khasi is a 23-year-old engineering graduate preparing for civil services main exams. However, she has an even tougher task than preparing for the competitive tests, for she has been facing threats from religious fundamentalists. And the two policemen posted outside her house at Vidyanagar in Kasargod show the enormity of the threat. Rayana’s “crime” was that she began wearing jeans and top instead of the burqa. “It is not that I am exposing myself. I don’t do it. But they want me to cover my entire body, including the face, with burqa as other Muslim women do it here, which I don’t want to,’’ the girl told Deccan Herald over the phone.
Imagine, this is happening to an educated girl in a so called secular democracy! What would be the fate of the Muslimahs, majority of whom are uneducated and cannot be as brave as this girl? Well, haven’t we heard of muslimahs being killed or having acid thrown on their faces for not wearing the veil? It’s barbaric, retrograde and despicable!
Women are human beings like men (its unfortunate that we have to state this explicitly). Just like men, their sexuality is only a fraction of who they are. To reduce them to the status of a sex-object from head to toe is to deny them their humanity, dignity and integrity. The veil is also an insult to men! It presumes that men are sex maniacs who can get aroused by just looking at a woman’s face! How can a normal Muslim man accept such an insult upon himself?
Modesty is to be maintained, of course, but as defined by the society and native culture and as agreeable to human health, safety, security, dignity and equality. It must not be dictated or forced through rigid and unjust religious injunctions, as in Dr. Naik’s brand of Islam, where the veil is actually a symbol of a failed strategy to ostensibly protect the victim by further victimizing her.
Wake up and wake others to stop this inhuman practice.
May Eeshvar give strength to all Muslim sisters realize the followin
O woman, you do not deserve to be defeated by challenges and obstacles. On contrary, you possess the power to defeat the stiffest challenge. Defeat the enemies and their armies. You have valor of thousands of men. Realize your true potential and demonstrate your valor. Please us all through your courage. The world demands that from you! [Yajurveda 13.26]