COMMENT: Dudes and Hijabs …

I’ve just received a report about the Ayn Academy in Adelaide holding a conference to launch a book by Afroz Ali, a Sydney architect who claims to be a qualified imam with ijaza certificates kept at the Zaytuna Institute. Mr Ali's book is entitled UnVeiling Hijab.

Mr Ali’s biography on the Ayn Academy website includes a claim that he is “on the Board of Advisors at Markaz Aleem in Cairo, Egypt”. So what is this “Markaz Aleem”? What is its role in Islamic studies or in the accreditation of imams in Egypt? No details are given.

My concern isn’t so much with Afroz Ali’s claims about himself. At least, not in this post. Rather, I have another concern.

The issue of hijab is an extremely sensitive one. There are differing views on the subject. I have read various interpretations and rulings on the issue of women’s dress and the extent of their covering as required under the sharia or sacred law of Islam.

I have read views that state that women are required to cover their faces in the presence of non-mahram men (i.e. men whom they can marry) at all times except at the Haj. I have read views that state that women are required to cover everything except their face and hands in the presence of non-mahram men. I have read opinions that state that it is permissible for women to show the front part of their hair (as is common in South Asia, Central Asia and Iran). I have also read opinions that state that women need not cover their hair all the time in the presence of non-mahram men.

Each of these opinions has some scholarly basis. I have a preference for one of these views. However, I am not qualified to give any authoritative expression as to which view is correct.

And neither is Afroz Ali.

But there is another reason. Adelaide’s Muslim community, like that of Sydney and Melbourne, is going through a slight adjustment. A number of prominent Muslim women have chosen to cease wearing the hijab in public on a full time basis.

The choice of these women needs to be respected, whether we agree with their choice or not. Further, it is not for unqualified men with only rudimentary knowledge of Islamic sacred law to be writing on this issue.

I have every respect for Muslim sisters who choose to wear hijab, whether full-time or part-time. I also have every respect for sisters who choose not to.

Men have absolutely no idea how difficult it is walking out their front doors and being ambassadors of their faith in an environment when so much hatred is invested in that faith. We are living in a time when many people who claim to follow Jesus actively degrade and despise women who choose to dress like his mother just as much as (if not more than) they despise people who look like they might have been born in the Palestinian town of Bethlehem.

Muslim women need to be free to make their own choices. We may not agree with their choices, just as much as they may not agree with ours.

I’m no hadith scholar, but I do recall reading a hadith in which the prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of God be upon him) remarked:

There will come a time when holding onto Islam will be harder than holding onto hot coals.

Are we in that time right now? I’m not sure.

I do know that making a commitment to wear the hijab is an enormous one. Many of our sisters last the distance. Some stop for a break before continuing. Some choose to walk on leaving the issue by the wayside.

The confusion in the metaphors I have used in the paragraph immediately preceding this one is but a partial indication of just how difficult this issue is. I think it is a matter that should be left to our sisters to decide among themselves. If they need our advice and opinion, we should offer it honestly and with respect. We should keep in mind just how difficult this issue is.

It might also make it easier if our men decided to wear some openly Muslim symbol or dress. Perhaps our lectures to women on hijab should be accompanied by lectures to men about wearing caps and/or kufiyyeh's and/or sporting beards. In the present environment, what’s good for the gander should be just as good for the goose.

I myself used to lecture sisters on wearing hijab. I even considered sisters who didn’t wear hijab to be inferior Muslims or not worth talking to. At one stage, I even stopped returning their salams. We all make mistakes. We live and we learn.

There are Muslim women making enormous sacrifices in the cause of human rights and civil liberties in their countries. They are women like Irene Khan and Shirin Ebadi. In Australia, Muslim women with or without hijab are making enormous contributions to Muslim communities and the broader Australian community.

Muslim women who choose to wear the hijab, whether on a full or part time basis, must be respected. Muslim women who choose not to must also be respected. Whether hijab is compulsory or not under Islamic sacred law should be left to qualified scholars prepared to outline the full extent of their qualifications and provide clear proof of same. Everyone else should just shut their mouths.

That includes both Irfan Yusuf and Afroz Ali.

Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf

MEDIA: Natalie O'Brien verbals Sheik Hilaly?

When I read The Oz’s reporting on local Muslim matters, I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. The serious ignorance of recent reports by Dicky Kerbaj and Natalie O’Brien make me feel like laughing. But it makes me cry to think that, when reporting on some issues, the national broadsheet can produce hysterical reports more fit for a cheap tabloid.

Under the heading “Christians ‘should wear veil’”, O’Brien claimed on Saturday that Lakemba imam, Sheik Hilaly,

... says the Bible "mandates" the wearing of the veil by Christian women.

Now lets examine the actual words of Hilaly that O'Brien quotes in her story:

Through this I hope to raise awareness and understanding and eliminate apprehensions and misunderstandings about the veil ...

The veil upholds the modesty and protects the dignity of women, whether Muslim or non-Muslim ...

Wearing the veil creates the most realistic similarity with the Virgin Mary, the mother of Christ ...

The Muslim has no right to impose the rules of his religion on others. My religious duty is to advise the Muslim woman to be modest and to wear the Islamic dress. It is her choice whether to comply or not ...

Through these words I wanted to protect women from rapists who have lost their humanity, lost their minds and religion.

Whilst I believe that the rapists are responsible for their crimes, I wanted to protect my daughters by encouraging them to adopt all available lawful means of protection ...

I did not mean this analogy to denigrate immodestly dressed women; rather I meant to denigrate those men who set aside their humanity and turn into predators.

Now could someone please show me where in these words Hilaly has said that the Bible mandates women to wear veils? Indeed, the closest thing to this in O’Brien’s quotation of Hilaly was a claim that “the Virgin Mary is often depicted with a veil covering her head”. Naturally, the Pope will be rebutting this scurrilous suggestion during his address to the crowds at World Youth Day.

This is a classic case of O'Brien almost verballing Hilaly. At the very least, she seems to be deriving a meaning from his words that simply isn't there. This is the work of someone who is allegedly a senior reporter for the national broadsheet.

UPDATE I: Ms O'Brien telephoned me on the morning of 30 April 2008. She advised me that the headline to the article was not written by her. It is definitely true that she doesn't write headlines. However, the sub-editor who prepared the headline did so after reading her words. The headline reflects the sub-editor's understanding of Ms O'Brien's article, an understanding that is confirmed in this letter to the editor ...

Hilali: voice of unreason

TAJ Din al-Halili, once again proving himself to be incapable of rational insight or epistemic humility, now presumes to interpret the Bible for Christian women ("Hilali tells Christian women to wear veils”, 26-27/4).

If Halili had any understanding of the Bible, he would know that Christianity is fundamentally about regenerating the state of our hearts rather than conforming to a mode of dress: “Man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart” (1 Samuel 16:7). There is no obligation for women to wear a veil in the Christian faith. Nor should there be. Halili’s insistence on this matter is just another outworking of his desire to oppress and denigrate women.
Andrew Hastie
Larrakeyah, NT

Ms O'Brien further said that Hilaly had used the term "mandates" in his book which was written by the Sheik in English and not translated. And where does she say this? She refers me to the first paragraph of her story:

OUTSPOKEN Muslim cleric Taj Din al-Hilali says the Bible "mandates" the wearing of the veil by Christian women.

The word "mandates" appears in inverted commas and therefore represents a quote. Yep, a one-word quote. The sentence in which the word is quoted isn't reproduced in full. Just one word. Very convincing.

Ms O'Brien claims that my alleging that she verballed Sheik Hilaly was defamatory, threatening to "refer the matter to the lawyers". With these threats in mind, I have amended the original entry somewhat.

It is possible that the term "verballed" may be a little over-the-top. Perhaps a better phrase may have been "put words into his mouth" or "provide a rather novel interpretation of his actual words". I stand by my claim that nothing in the sentences of Hilaly she reproduces suggests that non-Muslim women are required to wear the veil.

Then again, Ms O'Brien claims she has read the relevant chapter of the book. She tells me that the Sheik wrote the book in English, and that what she read was not a translation.

If that is the case, she might ask her editor if the newspaper (or its website) can find room to reproduce the entire chapter where Hilaly uses the term "mandate", as opposed to allowing her only enough room to quote the actual word without much context. If, after reading the entire chapter, it becomes clear that Ms O'Brien was not quoting Hilaly out of context, I would be happy to unreservedly apologise. Until then, I can only comment on what she reports.

Finally, I managed to ask Ms O'Brien about the extent of her knowledge on the Tabligh Jamaat. She advised me that she spoke to them with some regularity and had also referred to a PhD thesis on the subject (I presume she means Dr Jan Ali's thesis, which she has referred to in previous articles). However, she claims that she cannot go to their gatherings as women are not allowed. She was, however, aware that they meet regularly at Sefton and Lakemba mosques.

I asked her basic questions about their theology and methodology - What were the six guiding principles of tabligh? What is the TJ textbook called and who wrote it? Basic questions. Kindergarten stuff. Ms O'Brien had no answers. She also didn't seem to know about the TJ gathering in Bangladesh where some 3 million people gather each year.

Despite not knowing even the basics of TJ's methodology and theology, Ms O'Brien is prepared to cite reports claiming this completely apolitical group which forbids all discussion of politics at its gatherings is linked to al-Qaida or is a recruiting ground for al-Qaida. The question thus arises: Is it appropriate for someone with little direct knowledge or experience with an organisation (beyond reading a PhD thesis and talking to some of its members on the phone) to be citing reports containing serious allegations?

UPDATE II: A source close to Sheik Hilaly has told me that Hilaly did not write his book on women in English. Rather, the book was written in Arabic and then translated into English by a translator arranged by Hilaly's Egyptian publishers. In other words, what Ms O'Brien has quoted is an English translation. The source also advised that Sheik Hilaly had cited over 20 verses from the Old and New Testaments (including the first letter of Paul to the Corinthians), his intention being to show non-Muslim readers that the hijab should not be seen as something alien as it is also part of their religious tradition.

Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf