Is it permissible to show the eyes only in front of non-mahram men?
And the scholar replies
Praise be to Allah.
Yes, it is permissible for a woman to show her eyes. That is so that she will be able to see. But it is not permissible for men to look at the eyes of a woman.
Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Humayd said:
If the burqa’ [a kind of face veil] covers the entire face, leaving only the eyes uncovered, there is nothing wrong with that. But if it does not cover the entire face, rather it covers the mouth and leaves the rest of the face uncovered, that is not permissible, especially in the presence of non-mahram men.
So the entire face must be covered, but the eyes may be left uncovered so that the woman can see where she is going, as was said by Ibn Mas’ood, ‘Ubaydah al-Salmaani and others. And Allah knows best.
These are some of the most insecure men I have ever come across, worse than a bad movie. And the crazy part is how many men are willing to believe in these incredibly insecure, paraniod, un-manly, male scholars. Generations of being taught to be paranoid needs to stop. I think we need to stage an intervention to help these poor wimps find their balls and feel like real men. So generous of them to let their women see where their going. Maybe they should be restricted to maryying blind women.
These are some of the most insecure men I have ever come across, worse than a bad movie. And the crazy part is how many men are willing to believe in these incredibly insecure, paraniod, un-manly, male scholars. Generations of being taught to be paranoid needs to stop. I think we need to stage an intervention to help these poor wimps find their balls and feel like real men. So generous of them to let their women see where their going. Maybe they should be restricted to maryying blind women.
And Shaykh Saalih al-Fawzaan said:
There is nothing wrong with covering the face with the niqaab or burqa’ [kinds of face veil] which has two openings for the eyes only, because this was known at the time of the Prophet, because there is a need for that. If nothing shows but the eyes, that is acceptable, especially if that is what women customarily wear in that society.
Translation; we are still as bad as those whom Allah called, the worst of the worst. 9.97. And we have no hopes of getting better or smarter.
Translation; we are still as bad as those whom Allah called, the worst of the worst. 9.97. And we have no hopes of getting better or smarter.
But we should note that the majority of women, nowadays, do not stop at uncovering the eyes only, rather they go beyond that and uncover part of the forehead and nose, so they go beyond the area that it is permitted for them to show. Hence some of the scholars – such as Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen forbade wearing the burqa’ and niqaab, because of the careless attitude on the part of some women.
Cracked me up, they go beyond and show their nose and forehead. Oh Allah, just to funny, in a sick and twisted way. But see if you can find the bullsht as you read on, think Ibn.
Cracked me up, they go beyond and show their nose and forehead. Oh Allah, just to funny, in a sick and twisted way. But see if you can find the bullsht as you read on, think Ibn.
And Allah knows best.If that were true, they wouldn't be making their men stupid by quoting dead guys.
A Muslim asks a scholar
As I browse some of the answers I found this phrase the most correct ruling, this was about the ruling of covering woman face, while I found that most scolars say the oppisite regarding this issue, I found it in the "al-fiqh alaa almathahib al arbaa'a by abdelrahman aljazeeri".
Then how come the shiekh did not mention this and just state one opinion, I can understand if the sheikh sees the strongest opinion for that is his, but the others too see theirs as well. Then why did not he tell us that this is based on his opinion and not the majority of scholars.
And the scholar replied
Praise be to Allaah.
This phrase, “the most correct opinion”, means that the opinion chosen is the strongest opinion in terms of evidence. It does not mean that it is the view of the majority of fuqaha’; it may be so, or it may be the view of some of them.
Translation; the scholars do not believe the Quran is tough enough on women because they've made their men stupid and insecure by quoting hadith.
Translation; the scholars do not believe the Quran is tough enough on women because they've made their men stupid and insecure by quoting hadith.
The view which we chose – which is that it is obligatory for women to cover their faces – is what is indicated by the Quran and Sunnah, and was the practice of the believing women for many centuries. It is also the view expressed in fatwas by contemporary scholars such as ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz, Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, the scholars of the Standing Committee and others.
Firstly, the Quran, as you will see, does not command women to cover their faces or their hair. Secondly, you just read what Uthaymeen said, and thricely, the standing committee are not real believers as they always put some dead guy ahead of Allah. As they continue….
Firstly, the Quran, as you will see, does not command women to cover their faces or their hair. Secondly, you just read what Uthaymeen said, and thricely, the standing committee are not real believers as they always put some dead guy ahead of Allah. As they continue….
The Standing Committee, under the leadership of Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz, was asked the following question: Is the woman’s face a genital (awrah)?
They replied:
“Yes, the woman’s face is a genital (awrah) according to the more correct of the two scholarly opinions.”
It should be noted that when there is a difference of opinion, Muslims are obliged to refer to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, as Allah commanded when He said (interpretation of the meaning): Notice the word Interpretation? They can take liberties with that, and the Quran says it is complete with no need of a...sunnah.
4:59 “(And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if you believe in Allaah and in the Last Day”
Duh. That was for when Muhammad was alive and the Quran was not yet a book. Interesting note, Jews, Christians and Muslims all believe in the last day. Me? I believe in the day after that.
Duh. That was for when Muhammad was alive and the Quran was not yet a book. Interesting note, Jews, Christians and Muslims all believe in the last day. Me? I believe in the day after that.
By referring to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messeng, it becomes clear that the Muslim woman is obliged to cover her face in front of non-marriage-able men. There follows some of the evidence for that:
1 – Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): They need to make interpretations because it's in poetic form with far fewer words, But that's not an excuse to distort the intent.
33:59 “O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies (i.e. screen themselves completely except the eyes or one eye to see the way) when the go abroad. That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed. And Allah is Ever Oft‑Forgiving, Most Merciful”
Let’s look at what they added in their interpretation (which is everything in parenthesis). Allah is telling Gabe to tell Muhammad to tell women; if you go abroad, don’t go naked. And men, don't annoy the women. Clothing wasn’t a requirement of people of that day unless they were rich. And a cloak is not the same as a veil. And the whole point was for the believers to be seen and respected, not to be treated as slaves--by non believing pagans of the day.
And a cloak or an outer garment doesn’t cover the head. So what does that leave? A long piece of material that covers you from the shoulders down.
Let’s look at what they added in their interpretation (which is everything in parenthesis). Allah is telling Gabe to tell Muhammad to tell women; if you go abroad, don’t go naked. And men, don't annoy the women. Clothing wasn’t a requirement of people of that day unless they were rich. And a cloak is not the same as a veil. And the whole point was for the believers to be seen and respected, not to be treated as slaves--by non believing pagans of the day.
And a cloak or an outer garment doesn’t cover the head. So what does that leave? A long piece of material that covers you from the shoulders down.
The translitteration uses the following words--this is for those who email me on anything female/Islam related, most of whom are named Muhammad, and might know arabic translitteration. Ready? "bi" = with , "khumurihinna"= their coverings/their khimar/length of cloth, `ala'=on/over, "Juyūbihinna", from jaib = their chest/bosom. The arabic word for bosom is pockets. I find that amusing. SO, the verse is saying cover your pockets/bosoms. In fact the arabic words head (raas), and neck (jeed/`unq/raqbah) are not even found in this verse, even though they do appear in other verses--in an unrelated way.
Nothing about hair, forhead, nose, neck, mouth or chin or anything else that normally appears on a human.
I’d also like to point out that hellfire is for murderers, cheaters, thieves, liars, adulterers--no punishment listed at all for showing the hair, and, in the entire Quran, hair is only mentioned 5 times, hairy dates, hairy critters, Moses hair, grey hair, and not once does it say to cover it. Just thought you'd like to know that. And then..
They cite this Hadith, which always cracks me up. Al-Bukhaari narrated that ‘Aiesha said: “When Allah revealed the words ‘and to draw their veils all over their necks and bosom"
they tore their aprons and covered their faces with them.”
Getting a visual of faces with bosoms.
they tore their aprons and covered their faces with them.”
Getting a visual of faces with bosoms.
Out of hundreds and thousands of stories of Muhammad (hadith) the veil/hijab/full covering is mentioned only a half a dozen times! Yet they make such a big deal out of it.
The Quran does command that they not make religion a burden, that it is to be simple and a rewarding experience, not a burdon.
But the pervs insist on following these half a dozen hadith, all based on how perverted some of the companions were, watching his wives at their 'call of nature'. Umar...pffttt. Any wonder why Muhammad wanted the young girls not to run around naked once they started developing? He knew they were pervs.
Oh, and for those who believe Muhammad was a sex starved, war lord tough guy, not even close. But I'm sure the radicals prefer this image and having others believe it, too. It's hard to hate softie. And back to the scholars and why women are allowed to keep at least one eyeball uncovered.
The Quran does command that they not make religion a burden, that it is to be simple and a rewarding experience, not a burdon.
But the pervs insist on following these half a dozen hadith, all based on how perverted some of the companions were, watching his wives at their 'call of nature'. Umar...pffttt. Any wonder why Muhammad wanted the young girls not to run around naked once they started developing? He knew they were pervs.
Oh, and for those who believe Muhammad was a sex starved, war lord tough guy, not even close. But I'm sure the radicals prefer this image and having others believe it, too. It's hard to hate softie. And back to the scholars and why women are allowed to keep at least one eyeball uncovered.
2 – Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
24:31 “And tell the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent”
Again, anything in parenthesis is added in as an ‘interpretation’. But this is very simple command. Cover your genitals and don’t stare at anyone else’s genitals. But these scholars decided that the Quran has no meaning and God as no power. Think about it, who is going to beat you up if you show your hair, God or a follower of the wimpy, castrated by sharia, scholars who give Hadith more power? Perhaps they don’t want you to know that the Quran clearly says, do not follow stories/Hadith 31;6 or you will have a humiliating penalty.
Again, anything in parenthesis is added in as an ‘interpretation’. But this is very simple command. Cover your genitals and don’t stare at anyone else’s genitals. But these scholars decided that the Quran has no meaning and God as no power. Think about it, who is going to beat you up if you show your hair, God or a follower of the wimpy, castrated by sharia, scholars who give Hadith more power? Perhaps they don’t want you to know that the Quran clearly says, do not follow stories/Hadith 31;6 or you will have a humiliating penalty.
As they continue…..watch how they twist the words of, 'adornments', which are apparent, like arms and legs, the face and eyes, and so on.
In this verse, Allah forbids showing all adornment except that which is apparent, which is that which a woman cannot avoid showing, such as the outer garment.
Hence Allah said “except only that which is apparent”, and He did not say, except that which they show.
Then He again forbade (did anyone see the word forbidden? No? It’s because the word isn’t in the verse) showing any adornment, except to those for whom an exception is made 24:31 “..and not to reveal their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers…” – interpretation of the meaning”
According to them, bosoms are an adornment that husbands, fathers and other male relative are allowed to see. Now why would the verse say that? Because back in that day running around naked or half naked was the norm. Ever see the hieroglyphs of the Egyptians? Lots of half naked humans all over the place. But it would be unheard of to say; 'gramps can see the adorning bosoms', espeically if you read my other blogs where the scholars work extra hard to convince the men that they can't trust anyone, not even close relatives. But back in the day, gramps would have seen her ta-ta's as would most of the village/tribe.
They continue....
Hence Allah said “except only that which is apparent”, and He did not say, except that which they show.
Then He again forbade (did anyone see the word forbidden? No? It’s because the word isn’t in the verse) showing any adornment, except to those for whom an exception is made 24:31 “..and not to reveal their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers…” – interpretation of the meaning”
According to them, bosoms are an adornment that husbands, fathers and other male relative are allowed to see. Now why would the verse say that? Because back in that day running around naked or half naked was the norm. Ever see the hieroglyphs of the Egyptians? Lots of half naked humans all over the place. But it would be unheard of to say; 'gramps can see the adorning bosoms', espeically if you read my other blogs where the scholars work extra hard to convince the men that they can't trust anyone, not even close relatives. But back in the day, gramps would have seen her ta-ta's as would most of the village/tribe.
They continue....
This indicates that the adornment mentioned in the second phrase is not like the adornment mentioned in the first; the first adornment is that which appears in all cases and cannot be hidden, and the second adornment is that which is hidden, and is done deliberately [but concealed from all but those mentioned in this verse]. If it were permissible for everyone to see the hidden adornment, then there would be not point of speaking in general terms about the first and making an exception in the case of the second adornment.
The 2nd adornment they speak of is jewelry, more specifically it's toward the end of the verse they speak of, “..and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments..” I guess there’s a good reason for them to have excluded that part of the verse. Just so there's no confusion, here is the entire verse.
The 2nd adornment they speak of is jewelry, more specifically it's toward the end of the verse they speak of, “..and that they should not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden ornaments..” I guess there’s a good reason for them to have excluded that part of the verse. Just so there's no confusion, here is the entire verse.
24:31 And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands' fathers, or their sons or their husbands' sons, or their brothers or their brothers' sons or sisters' sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigor, or children who know naught of women's nakedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that ye may succeed.
Hmm....do they want to succeed? You should probably read that verse twice, if you're debating hijab you'll want the truth. And they're they’re not done yet…
3 – Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): They always use that ( )
33:59 “O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies (i.e. screen themselves completely except the eyes or one eye to see the way). That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed. And Allaah is Ever Oft‑Forgiving, Most Merciful”
We saw this verse earlier. They really don't have much support for the veil in either the Quran or hadith, so they repeat the few they have, over and over. Again, everything in parenthesis has been added because the scholars do not believe the Quran was complete and they want you to be stupid and have a miserable life before you go to hell for believing them.
We saw this verse earlier. They really don't have much support for the veil in either the Quran or hadith, so they repeat the few they have, over and over. Again, everything in parenthesis has been added because the scholars do not believe the Quran was complete and they want you to be stupid and have a miserable life before you go to hell for believing them.
Ibn ‘Abbaas said: “Allah commanded the believing women, when they go out of their houses for some need, to cover their faces from the top of the head with the jilbaab, and to leave only one eye showing.”
Ibn is now in the hellfire sucking on bitter fruit. Want to join him? Just keep putting Hadith before Quran and distorting Quran to fit the perverted views of scholars and you’ll be sucking on bitter fruit, too.
Ibn is now in the hellfire sucking on bitter fruit. Want to join him? Just keep putting Hadith before Quran and distorting Quran to fit the perverted views of scholars and you’ll be sucking on bitter fruit, too.
I believe western women who wear the hijab have motives that have nothing to do with religion. When I see a woman covering her hair or going to other extremes- that do not ordinarily appear- they are drawing as much attention to themselves as a woman in a bikini. They want attention. And I don't think they really care if it's good attention or bad attention, just so long as they get attention. Totally contradicts the intent of the verse.
And for those of you who debate the subject, if you hear a lie/hadith you should challenge it with the truth. Because Allah loveth the truth tellers. And you'll always win the debate.