The true female and male hijab?

[amuslim]

Peace,

Based on the Quran, what is our true Hijab?  What is the Zeenat of a female?  Is it just her bosom?  I know that women are not to wear tight clothing and stomp their feet to reveal the body parts, but is this just for the bosom?  I personally believe that both male and females in general shouldn't reveal body parts that do not need to be revealed that may stimulate the opposite sex.  Of course I believe that in the traditionalists view point is excessive since it only purtains to women, even though they state that men just need to be covered from navel to knee.

What are your thoughts?  I know that if I was married I would want my wife to be covered to not incite unwanted temptation on males, and the same with my own body.  In not talking Burqa, just loose fitting clothing and not clothing to attract attention.

Peace

[drfazl]

.
Hijab is concerned with the 'eye to eye' message alone.
And fear for our own safety

With the help of any hijab covering the eye is not possible;
And blindfolding is ridiculous. So fear and lower the gaze.
.

[brook]

what is our true Hijab?
A barrier between two (33:53). There is no hijab in 24:31.

What is the Zeenat of a female?  Is it just her bosom?
No. It is her ornaments such as her necklace, earrings, bracelets, and anklelets.

Is it just her bosom? Actually the word just is redundant here. The correct question is: Is it her bosom?

No! Never! Otherwise God will be saying that there is no harm in a believing woman's revealing her bosom to the people listed in 24:31, such as her male attendants (taabe'eena gaire uule'l arbate mine'r rejaal). There may be no harm in the woman's revealing her necklace to her male attendants by wearing it over her blouse all right. But her bosom? Just imagine. Will the Saudi King allow his wife's male bodyguards (her male attendants) to see her bosom?

stomp their feet to reveal the body parts
It is not body parts but anklelets. A Woman lets the people notice her anklelets by stomping her feet in order to ring her anklelets like bells. She does not reveal her body parts. Please note the verb which God uses here. It is not reveal (yobdeena) but let them notice (yo'lamah).

Perace,
Hasan Ak?ay

[Samia]

what is our true Hijab?

What is the Zeenat of a female?  Is it just her bosom?
No. It is her ornaments such as her necklace, earrings, bracelets, and anklelets.

Thiese are not exclusive to women.

No! Never! Otherwise God will be saying that there is no harm in a believing woman's revealing her bosom to the people listed in 24:31, such as her male attendants (taabe'eena gaire uule'l arbate mine'r rejaal). There may be no harm in the woman's revealing her necklace to her male attendants by wearing it over her blouse all right. But her bosom? Just imagine. Will the Saudi King allow his wife's male bodyguards (her male attendants) to see her bosom?

Are these attendants "gaire uule'l arbate"?

It is not body parts but anklelets. A Woman lets the people notice her anklelets by stomping her feet in order to ring her anklelets like bells. She does not reveal her body parts. Please note the verb which God uses here. It is not reveal (yobdeena) but let them notice (yo'lamah).

Have you ever heard ankletes ring like bells? What ankletes are these?

[brook]

Thiese are not exclusive to women.
We are discussing the zeenah mentioned in 24:31. The verse is specifically about believing women.

Are these attendants "gaire uule'l arbate"?
The question whether they are gaire uule'l arbate, which according to the so-called scholars of Islam means sexually impotent, changes nothing because even if they really are, the King will never allow his wife to reveal her bosom to them. Or will he? Please answer, will he?

I asked some believing women "Will you reveal your bosoms to your sexually impotent male attendants as the scholars claim that God allows you to, one of them said "Definitely not!" "Why not?" "Because what actually counts is the way I regard my male attendant rather than he regards me." Like me to elaborate?

What ankletes are these?
I accept that I exaggerated but if two or more were worn on one ankle, they surely would jingle loudly.

Peace,
Hasan Akcay

[Samia]

Thiese are not exclusive to women.
We are discussing the zeenah mentioned in 24:31. The verse is specifically about believing women.

I am also talking about believing men. Is it forbidden for men to wear these?

The question whether they are gaire uule'l arbate, which according to the so-called scholars of Islam means sexually impotent, changes nothing because even if they really are, the King will never allow his wife to reveal her bosom to them. Or will he? Please answer, will he?

I asked some believing women "Will you reveal your bosoms to your sexually impotent male attendants as the scholars claim that God allows you to, one of them said "Definitely not!" "Why not?" "Because what actually counts is the way I regard my male attendant rather than he regards me." Like me to elaborate?

Very logical: why would I show my bosom to an impotent  ?
"ariba and arab: أربة \ أرب " means need . The feminine form is more empahasized than the masculine one: Those who do not have a need to see her bosom more than just an organ, such as doctors, therapists, radilogists...
A plural of this word with this meaning (the less emphasized masculine form) is used in verse 20:18 (m'aariba): needs

I accept that I exaggerated but if two or more were worn on one ankle, they surely would jingle loudly.

And it is also exaggerated that even more than one anklete would ring like a bell.  At least not where I used to live and where women used to wear ankletes. The verse is not revealed for those few women who wear more than one very special ankelete that ring like bells when they are walking

[huruf]

So, is there really a "hiyab", whatever it is, or is there simply some personal (physical) good manners that the Qur'an enjoins?.

I have more and more the impression, that what the Qur'an gives as a series of indications for conviviality in easy and comfort has been sex drived to make a of it not one of five pillars, but the pilar, and that even when we try to get rid of many unquranic conventionalities, we are still bound by them. In 24.31 among those to whom women can show their "zeena" the women of the family are mentioned. And with that, as far as I am concerned, off goes all the structure of "hiyab" as covering in front of the males because these could be (surely will be) excited. Since in 24.31 we are told the women to whom other women may show their "zeena", it must then be deduced that women must not show their "zeena" to any  other women, that is to women who are not "mahram", just as it must not be shown to men who are not "mahram", . It must be concluded then that the "modesty" thing is not so much of a sexual recomendation as a more general rule of good social behaviour with people of any sex.  Unless, of course, we take that in this aya "nisaa'" doesn't mean women.

So women's "zeena", the part that is usually translated as "their beauty" or "their hidden beauty", that part that supposedly could excite the males, should after all be translated as jewelry or accessories, and that they must not be shown to women either. So about what are we speaking here? Not about sexual temptation, obviously. May be about non ostentation? modesty, but not in any sexual sense? I had a sense of that long ago when I asked myself if male mahrams were all inoculated to be inmune to excitement. Whatever.   

Every time I get a new insight into the hiyab swindle I get more and more ashtonished. This is one of the modern editions of the earth is flat. And while I agree that it is annoying and a burden being measured and inspected for your physical attractiveness, what cannot be condoned is to manipulate scripture in order to impose an obligation that does not exist and attribute to scripture an obsession that does not exist and attribute to that obssession the virtue of preventing all evils and of making of hiyabed women the salvation of the world and biggest part of the universe. And the extent to which this is done is really alarming, because such a lack of doubt in something like that cannot be natural. So there is a determination that, no matter what, the qur'an cannot not say that hiyab is an obligation.



Salaam

[brook]

Thank you, sister huruf, for telling the truth: the zeenah mentioned in 24:31 is simply the jewelry or accessories which women wear; it is never their body parts as the so-called scholars of Islam have been claiming for hundreds of years.

However, I am not sure what you mean by women who are not "mahram". Only the opposite sex can be mahram. For proof please note the people cited in 4:23. They are all women, without exception, and they are mahram to men. 

Another thing that needs clarifying is your deduction that women must not show their "zeena" to any other women.

God mentions two kinds of zeenah in 24:31:

(1)the ones which are in the open (maa zahara minha) such as hairpins, earrings, the necklace that stops short of the bosom, and bracelets. Believing women are allowed to wear them in the presence of anybody including the men mahram to them.

(2)the hidden or covered ones such as the necklace which reaches over and below the bosom and the anklelets. The believing women are forbidden to reveal them to anybody except the men and women listed in 24:31.

So about what are we speaking here? Not about sexual temptation, obviously. May be about non ostentation? modesty, but not in any sexual sense?

Non ostentation, yes. The word God uses for it is motabarrejaat in 24:60. Believing women and believing men are free to wear jewelry all right but they are forbidden to show them off (7:31).

Male attendants are proof enough. They are definitely mahram to the women who employ them; that is, believing women are allowed to marry their male servants or attendants if they want, as Khadija married Mohammad, her male attendant.

However, a believing woman is still allowed to reveal her hidden zeenah to her male attendant. If God meant the woman's body parts such as her bosom by the zeenah in 24:31, He would not allow that obscenity which may lead to adultery.

On the other hand, there may be some men whom believing women can trust even better than they can trust their male attendants, such as the imam of the local mosque. The imam is not included in the list of the people the women are allowed to reveal their hidden zeenah to.

Peace,
Hasan Akcay

[brook]

God mentions two kinds of zeenah in 24:31:

(1)the ones which are in the open (maa zahara minha) such as hairpins, earrings, the necklace that stops short of the bosom, and bracelets. Believing women are allowed to wear them in the presence of anybody including the men mahram to them.

Please excuse me for the mistake here. I meant not mahram. A woman's ucle is mahram to her; that is, she is forbidden to marry him. But she can marry her male attendant; he is not mahram to her.

It is interesting that uncles are not included in the list of the people in 24:31. Why must they be excluded? Because the verse is not dealing with sexual issues, like whom believbing women are allowed to marry or whom they are not allowed to; it is about the jewelry women wear.

Peace,
Hasan Akcay

[siki]

peace all

In my opinion "Zeena " is neither exclusively jewelery, nor going to the extent of making it as a pair of  " exposed female breasts "

What i understand of this Zeena thing is,  "the women being allowed to become casual regarding her dress , where she can be more relaxed for the sake of comfort , resulting into a slight exposure of certain attractive features of her body.

let me explain;

Normally a woman is suppose to hide/ guard the attractive parts of her body in a way that " they " do not attract the attention of men (excluding a husband) by igniting lustfull feelings, and hence creating an undesirable sexuall tension between them.

lets say if her neck is attractive and pulls the attention of males, then normally she should dress up in a way that this beauty of her,  remains hidden under normal circumstances. (a beautiful necklace may further enhance the beauty ,and her attraction,  so two of these together would become her zeena)

Same way , a pair of nice looking hands /arms if exposed by short sleeves , or feet/ankles/legs exposed by a short Capri, or by a casually(or intentionally) drawn up shalwar,   would be attractive (sexy) to men, and  would act as Triggers.

Even the "Bosom thing" mentioned in 24-31(wal udriben be khumrihinna), could be part of it.  Under normal circumstances she should doubly cover them in a way that her breasts are not noticeable by men in a sexual manner. And if they are big/pretty and curvy, she is suppose to take special care to diffuse/subtle out their impact.

So , all that this ayah is saying " that she can be a little causal/ relax about these things in the presence of certain category of people.  But most definately staying within the limits of modesty and not crossing the line which could be termed as obscenity by that family/society.

I don't know , weather i have been able to convey myself  ?  

siki