Freedom For Ourselves: The War On Hijab Continues...

The hijaab: is it a source of freedom or forced oppression? This subject has become a crucial issue to Muslim women all over the world who choose to wear the hijaab, the clothing which we have been commanded by Allaah in the Qur’an to wear when we leave the house or are in the presence of men whom it would be permissible for us to marry. For us, it is NOT a symbol of oppression. It does NOT limit our freedom. It does NOT cause us to be second class citizens, or slaves, or whatever else Western governments and media outlets can come up with to justify stripping us of our right to wear the hijaab. It is clear, though, that many Western countries have set their sites on the Islaamically legislated hijaab.

An article at CNN.com quotes French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who states, "The problem of the burka (a type of hijaab) is not a religious problem. This is an issue of a woman's freedom and dignity. This is not a religious symbol. It is a sign of subservience; it is a sign of lowering. I want to say solemnly, the burka is not welcome in France."

The article goes on to say that since 2004 girls have been banned from wearing headscarves in state schools, and the French government refused a Moroccan woman's naturalization request due to the fact that she wore the burka.

Sarkozy states, "We cannot accept in our country women trapped behind a fence, cut off from social life, deprived of any identity. This is not the idea that we have of a woman's dignity."

Let me repeat that "…That is not the idea we have of a woman's dignity." (emphasis added) This is the arrogance that causes so much of the antagonism between the Islaamic world and the Western world. The idea that "Our way, is the right way", no matter who you are forcing it upon, no matter what the ideas and goals and beliefs of the other people may be. This idea of turning the whole world community into Nike wearing, Pepsi drinking Western clones instead of accepting and embracing the vibrancy of thousands of cultures and ideas and beliefs- as they so often claim.

Concerning France and the Muslims, Carla Power, in her article for Time, "The Politics of Women's Head Coverings", states, "Trying to rescue Muslim women is a French tradition dating back to the colonization of Algeria in the 1830s. Saving Algeria's veiled population was central to France's mission civilisatrice to bring the Enlightenment to Arabs. For French colonialists, the veiled Algerian woman was both a sign of resistance to French attempts to shape their society, and a rallying cry to redouble their civilizing efforts. "The Arabs elude us," fretted one general in the 1840s, "because they conceal their women from our gaze.""

Of course, the West has a history of this sort of thinking, as the Native Americans can testify. The invading Europeans did all that they could to rid them of their culture, language, beliefs- anything that marked them as "other". If they had had a magic pill to make them white, one can be sure they would have been slipping that into the water supply as well. Another example is the slaves brought over from Africa to work to build a nation in which they were seen as animals, or people of almost ape-like intelligence. They were beaten physically and emotionally, as, again, their cultures and beliefs were stripped away from them, and they fought to hold on to any bit of identity they could grasp. In other words, the people who had the power in both of these cases, simply decided that "Our way, is the right way", and imposed their beliefs and behaviors upon others who already had a belief system and a way of life which suited them. So it is happening with the Muslims in the world today. They are being told that to be successful, they have to dress, talk, live, and even believe as Western society dresses, talks, lives, and believes. And to the vast majority of us, that is simply not acceptable. Islaam, on the other hand, despite what some people without knowledge might believe, clearly advocates a responsible individual's choice of one religion and way of life, when this decision is made by the one willing to accept the consequences of that choice. There is no compulsion to choose a certain way of life- dialogue, discussion, debate yes - but no compulsion.

Wearing the Hijaab

I embraced Islaam when I was around twenty years old. At the time, I was a single mom attending college in Wisconsin. I was majoring in English and Theatre Arts, and I hung out with the "alternative" crowd. My only contact with Islaam up to that point was a vague recollection of a picture of Cat Stevens sitting cross legged on an oriental rug, wearing Muslim clothing, after he embraced Islaam and became Yusuf Islam. Then, one of my older brothers become Muslim, and came to live with me for a short period of time before his marriage, and through him I started to learn more about Islaam and all that it included and entailed. I could literally see the positive changes it had made in him, and it intrigued me. When he married a Canadian Pakistani, our family went to the wedding, and I was impressed by the characters of all of the Muslims we met. They were almost without exception gentle, intelligent, honest, generous people. I began seriously considering embracing Islaam, but was not strong enough to do it until my boyfriend at the time went to England as an exchange student. I plunged in, with all of my heart and soul.

When I first became Muslim, I wore modest clothing such as long skirts, or baggy pants, and loose, long sleeved shirts, and a pretty scarf on my head. Even this, to some of the people in the community, was too much. To most, though, it was still within the realm of acceptability- different, but not too different. Still, I persevered- it was clear to me that hijaab had been commanded by Allaah in the Qur'aan, and it was also clear that the Muslim women since the time of the Prophet, may Allaah's praise and salutations be upon him, had been wearing it. This is one of the things that attracted me to Islaam- revelation is revelation, and the words of Allaah in the Qur'aan had not been altered, and had been clearly explained by the Prophet, may Allaah's praise and salutations be upon him, and his companions, as well as the first three generations and those who came after them in righteousness. No if's, no maybe's, no room for "I think"- that, to me, is revelation. Opinions are great in their place, but there is no room for them when you are talking about something that has been clearly revealed by Allaah, Who knows His creation and what is best for it.

After a year or so, as part of the process of getting married. I communicated by mail with the Muslim brother who was to become my husband. He sent me more information on the hijaab, and I realized that what I was wearing was simply not up to standards. There are specific conditions which must be met for hijaab to qualify as hijaab. Some of these are that it must be loose, not transparent, without the resemblance to the clothing of non Muslims, and it must not be beautiful or attractive within itself. All of these are backed by proofs from the Qur'aan and the Sunnah, or sayings and actions, of the Prophet, may Allaah's praise and salutations be upon him. And it was simple common sense, as so much in Islaam is- if the purpose of the hijaab is to preserve the woman's honor and modesty, then clearly it can't be something which itself calls one to look at and admire the woman wearing it.

So, for my dowry, I didn't ask for money or gold or jewelry, which are the usual items requested- I asked for some "real" hijaab. I remember the first time I wore it, I was baffled by it. Did the veil go over or under the head scarf? How on earth did one put that huge square of fabric on one's head so it was comfortable and covering and didn't fall off? What did one wear under the jilbaab, or overgarment, so as not to roast? I even asked my husband how to put it all together, and he sort of guessed based on what he had seen other people wearing. One way or another, I finally got it all worked out, and I began wearing the full hijaab. I had a blue one, a white one with gray trim, and a burgundy one. To say that people stared would be an understatement. As an "alternative" I had gotten used to some strange looks and snide comments, but they were nothing compared to what I went through when I started wearing hijaab. And then, later, when I went to wearing the Saudi style black abaaya, it became worse. In other words, I had already been exposed to the "Our way, is the right way" manner of thinking when I was a quasi-punk, but somehow that was not as threatening to people as when I wore something that I firmly believed I had to wear, to please my Lord. As long as you can be placed in a niche and neatly labeled, you can be different to some extent- but once you think outside the box and do something that they are uncomfortable with, the gloves come off.

I have been called "ninja". I have been called a "ghost". I have been told to go back to my own country. I have been told that I don't have to dress this way in America. I have been followed through stores and harassed, and heard mothers telling their children that I must be a crazy person. My son was stoned by neighborhood kids in Aurora, Colorado, simply because we were openly, and clearly Muslim. After 9/11 some of the Muslims in my town removed their hijaab, afraid of being attacked verbally and physically. I simply chose to stay in the house for a few weeks, knowing that it was the better alternative to going out without my hijaab. Even this, though, was not really fair- when a Christian goes in and shoots up a school, all the Christians are not assumed to be murderers, yet when some misguided men who clearly have some great misunderstandings about Islaamic belief commit a crime, all Muslims are somehow guilty along with them. It also shows the hypocrisy of the argument that Sarkozy and others put forth, that they want to "free" the woman- there is no freedom in being forced either to stay in one's house, or to abandon something that one truly believes is the correct thing to do, out of fear of the consequences.

The hijaab has long been a target of those seeking to force Western ideals upon the Muslim nations. The West encourages this, seeing it as a "liberation" of the women. A few examples of this "liberation":

The author of the treatise, “at-Tatarif al-’Almaanee fee Mawaajihatu al-Hijaab”, said, on page 25, “The most dangerous of the poisoned arrows which Ataaturk was to aim towards the throat of the Muslim woman was his decree in the end of the year 1926 which came about due to his objective of prohibiting women from wearing hijaab. He made it obligatory upon them to uncover their faces. In addition, the Turkish parliament issued a command prohibiting the women from wearing the jilbaab, or outer garment, and making it compulsory for them to wear only a dress; otherwise their husbands and family members would be brought to trial.”

Muhammad ibn Ahmad Ismaa’eel said in his book, “’Awdatu al-Hijaab” (1/215), wrote, “When the English colonials installed Ridaa Bahluli as Shah of Iran in the year 1926, establishing the Bahluli family, he immediately abolished the legislated hijaab, and his wife was the first to uncover her face in an official ceremony. Then his command was issued to the police to harass the women who refused to follow the example of their queen, and went out wearing the hijaab. No woman left her home veiled, except that she returned unveiled, as the police would remove her hijaab by force, and confiscate her abaaya (her Islamic overgarment), and treat its wearer, as much as possible, in a contemptible, degrading manner . He prohibited the young women and the teachers from wearing the hijaab and going to their schools with it. He forbade any officer from the army officers from appearing in public places, or in the street with a woman wearing hijaab, regardless of how she was connected or related to him. Ridaa Khan was an intimate friend of Kamaal Ataaturk, and he always persisted in blindly following him, and in following after him step by step. In his actions, Ridaa Bahluli imitated exactly Ataturk, the original, in his war on Islaam.”

The author of the treatise, “at-Tatarif al-’Almaanee fee Mawaajihatu al-Hijaab” says on page 31, “However, the absolute secularists insist on expelling those women who wear hijaab, such that if she studies outside her land, then the high council of education mandates that acceptable qualifications are not based upon the diplomas granted by outside authorities, except if the student, male or female, also takes a required qualification test after he returns to his land. Then an obstacle is blatantly placed in front of the student who wears hijaab which is not in conformity with their regulations. As she is prohibited from taking the required exam unless she removes her hijaab.”

In the article "The Politics of Women's Head Coverings", as found at www.time.com, Carla Powell states, "A clutch of Western countries have put curbs on burqas and niqaabs, the full-face veils that leave only a slit for the eyes. The Irish have banned the burqa from classrooms, and in June, the Michigan Supreme Court gave judges the power to direct how witnesses dress for court, after a Muslim woman refused to take off her niqaab while testifying."

The number of countries taking up arms against the women who choose to wear hijaab is growing. Human Rights Watch issued a statement in February of 2009 stating that German Muslim women were forced to choose between their employment and religious beliefs. They said that laws banning teachers from wearing hijaab in some states in Germany discriminate against Muslim women, as Haleh Chahrokh, researcher in the Europe and Central Asia division at Human Rights Watch stated, "The claim that these restrictions don't discriminate doesn't stand up. They discriminate on the grounds of both gender and religion and violate these women's human rights." The HRW's report, "Discrimination in the Name of Neutrality: Headscarf Bans for Teachers and Civil Servants in Germany", is based on extensive research over an eight-month period.

Several countries have or are attempting to pass (and in many cases have actually passed) laws restricting a woman's right to wear hijaab in one way or another. These include, but are not limited to, Turkey, France, Belgium, Norway, Italy, Australia, Bulgaria, Tunisia, and even America. (Concerning Tunisia, Amnesty International issued a report in 2006 which very clearly presents the way in which harassment of women in Tunisia who wear the hijaab escalated, including assault, sexual abuse and imprisonment).

In America, you say? Yes- according to Radiance Weekly, "The Oregon state legislature has passed a bill banning teachers from wearing religious dress at schools and will be signed by the Oregon governor into law. “No teacher in any public school shall wear any religious dress while engaged in the performance of duties as a teacher” says the Oregon Workplace Religious Freedom Act. The bill also says education officials and schools would not be breaking the law if they “prohibit a teacher from wearing religious dress while engaged in the performance of duties as teachers."

An example which can perhaps put a human face on these sad affairs, is the story told by a second generation French Algerian sister who lives here in Yemen. First of all, I want to remind you of the photos you have all seen of religious police beating women wearing burqas in Pakistan and Afghanistan. These are used to cause outrage in the viewer, that such a thing could happen to a woman in the modern world. This French Algerian sister was in a store in a large city in France- NOT in any of the places in which the head covering has been banned, mind you- when a French policeman approached her and struck her repeatedly, causing her to collapse to the ground. Sound familiar? Remember, this Muslim woman was not breaking ANY laws at all, and was NOT charged with a crime. She was simply subjected to violence by a member of the police force, which theoretically should protect the people of France. Needless to say, she and her family have chosen to leave France, hopefully for good.

These are just some examples of the 'liberation" of the woman taking place all over the world. If these same actions were being taken against women to force them INTO the hijaab, they would be seen as oppressive and unjust- but as it is, as we can see by the example of France, the usual double standard applies- as long as it is done for what WE believe in, then it is acceptable.

I am among millions of women who choose to wear hijaab- not out of fear of my husband, or fear of imprisonment, or anything of the kind. I wear it simply because my Lord has commanded me to, and I want to please Him. It is a safeguard and protection for my honor, and my dignity, as well as my physical self. My hijaab allows me to interact with society, be it Muslim or non-Muslim, in the best way. I would rather be called a "ninja" then be whistled at, and would rather be judged on my intellect and character than my physical appearance. In my hijaab, I can meet anyone on equal terms, without all the sexual subtexts and posturing that tend to go on between members of the opposite sex when they interact. That is to say, I am judged for my self, for who I am, rather than how I look. And that is incredibly liberating.

The author of the book, “Lakay la Yatanaathir al-’Aqd”, pages 77-79, says, “These are a number of Western women who have tasted the flavor of faith, and the pleasure of uprightness on this way of life. They say one after another,

The hijaab increases me in true beauty.

The hijaab is a public statement of commitment to the religion.

The hijaab is a symbol of freedom.

The hijaab supplies me with added protection.

When I embraced Islaam, I made up my mind to wear the complete hijaab, from my head to my feet.

The hijaab is a part of me, of my very nature, as I began to wear it shortly before I embraced Islaam because it made me feel that I am respecting myself when I wear it.”

Do these women sound as if they are "oppressed", "shackled", or cut off from society? Do they sound like they need to be "freed" from anything? They are not pushing their beliefs on others, proselytizing or giving sermons on street corners- they are simply going about their business, living their lives, from within the shelter of the hijaab.

If Western culture truly believes in freedom and diversity, then it is clear that they have to abandon their call to remove the hijaab from the Muslim women. If, however, they want to live up to their colonial heritage, and subjugate and oppress people who are different than them, then they can just continue on the path they are already walking. They will find, however, that it will not be an easy road, as Muslim women are intelligent, strong individuals who will not give up their right to practice their religion easily.

A short course on the conditions of hijab from the sources of Islaam can be found at study.taalib.com