Wednesday, September 24, 2008

THE MISUSE OF NIQAB

THE ABUSE OF ISLAM
AND
THE DORMANCY OF ISLAMIC SCHOLARS


EVIDENCE FROM THE MISUSE OF NIQAB (FACE-VEIL) IN THE NIGERIAN SOCIETY

BY:
ISSAH HASSAN TIKUMAH
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
AHMADU BELLO UNIVERSITY
ZARIA

Email: tikumah72@yahoo.com









Copyright© Issah Hassan Tikumah


ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means for any purpose without the written permission of the author except quotations and citations for academic purposes only.




First Published by Ahmadu Bello University Press (Nigeria) Ltd
in 2008




ISBN: 978-125-234-0





{{و إذا فعلوا فاحشةً قالوا وجدنا عليهآ ءاباءنا والله أمرنا بها قل إن الله لا يأمر بالفحشاء أتقولون على الله مالا تعلمون}}.
سورة الأعراف
And when they commit an immorality, they say, “We found our fathers doing it, and Allah has ordered us to do it” Say, “Indeed, Allah does not order immorality. Do you say about Allah that which you do not know?” (Qur’an 7:28)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter
Foreword by Dr M.S. ABUBAKAR - - -
Introduction - - - - - -
Chapter One:
The Islamic Code of Dress for the Woman - -
Chapter Two:
The Concept of Niqab and Its Religious Significance -
Chapter Three:
The Controversial Obligation of Niqab - - -
Chapter Four:
The Modified Niqab of Today - - - -
Chapter Five:
Niqab and the Danger of False Testimony - -
Chapter Six:
No Defence of Thesis In Niqab - - - -
Chapter Seven:
No Niqab in the Classroom - - - -
Chapter Eight:
Islam: The Objective-Oriented Religion - - -
Chapter Nine:
The Dormancy of Islamic Scholars - - -
Chapter Ten:
The Duty of Islamic Scholars - - - -
Chapter Eleven:
Reflections - - - - - -
Conclusion - - - - - -
Bibliography - - - - - -









In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

FOREWORD
I have gone through this very important book wherein the author, our Brother Issah Hassan Tikumah, has tried to offer some clarification on a particular mode of dressing known as niqab which is a subject of misunderstanding by many in our society. He has related the juristic position on the issue, where Islamic scholars got divided with reference to the interpretation of these two verses: Qur’an 24:31 and Qur’an 33:59. Some scholars understood the verses to mean covering the entire body of the woman, her face inclusive, while the majority of scholars are of the opinion that proper or decent dressing does not include covering the face. It is important to note that whenever scholars become divided on any Islamic question, any Muslim is free to follow either of the contending opinions without provoking condemnation from anywhere.
The author has cited some embarrassing situations caused by wrong use of niqab, which must be avoided by those who use it. In addition to the examples he has cited, there was a case of a female student who was caught stealing on Ahmadu Bello University campus. She was fully hijabed and niqabed. But upon investigation she was found to be a non-Muslim. Many of such cases might exist in our society.
The most fundamental question raised by the author is that even the type of niqab being used today does not comply with the one actually prescribed. It means that niqab users should endeavour to get the correct version so that they do not earn Allah’s displeasure instead. It is for the purpose of providing guidance that the author has decided to display the precise version of niqab on the front cover.
Having said all that, genuine niqab users should feel encouraged to continue with it and strictly comply with its regulations. However, they must never purify themselves or deride non-niqab users. This is because the Prophet (SAW) has taught that the Almighty Allah does not fancy what one wears, i.e. one’s outward appearance. What actually concerns Allah is the state of commitment in one’s heart. If the purpose of wearing niqab is to show off, or to join a bandwagon, or worse still, to commit an offence under its cover, it will be a fruitless exercise.
It is also pertinent to state here that niqab is never meant to be an avenue for identity concealment. Whenever the identity of any niqab user is requested, i.e. during examinations, security check-ups, business transactions, trials, etc, it is in her best interest not to hesitate to comply with the request; otherwise the purpose of niqab will have changed from concealing beauty (as a trigger for infatuation from men) into concealing identity, which is a criminal tendency.
The author has again added another feather to his cap. Already there are many books written in both Arabic and English by him. I pray the Almighty Allah to reward his effort with Jannatul Firr’daus, and to endow him with more wisdom and talent to tackle more of such problems in our society. I recommend this book to all Muslims, particularly our sisters who are desirous of maintaining decency in their mode of dressing.
Alhamdu Lillah.

Dr. Muhammad Sadiq Abubakar
Director, Centre for Islamic Legal Studies,
Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria – Nigeria
28/7/1429 – 31/7/08
















Introduction

Nigeria is a country where religion is suffering from spiritual barrenness; that is, perceptions of matters of morality are conditioned and contorted by primordial ethno-religious sentiments rather than objective spiritual insights. For instance, in his vile determination to oppose his Muslim compatriot, the Nigerian Christian has no shame advocating (in the name of Christian solidarity) the most anti-Christian Western vanity - such as nudity-parade (or Miss Beauty Pageant). By the same token, the Nigerian Muslim has no shame defending the inundation of Nigerian towns and cities with street beggars in the name of Islam - even as that is obviously disgraceful to Islam. In such a situation religion becomes more of a liability to society than an asset.
Where Muslims lack open-mindedness and sense of objectivity, “Islam” becomes not better than any other religion. Today’s Muslims are actively engaged in destroying fundamental principles of Islam in the name of the same Islam. On no account does Islam compromise the principle of justice or condone injustice. During the dawn of Islam thousands of people accepted the faith because they were enthralled by the unparalleled sense of justice of the Muslims – both among themselves and between themselves and non-Muslims. The solemn motto of these early devout Muslims was:

O you who believe, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allah, even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives. Whether one is rich or poor, Allah is more worthy of both. So follow not [personal] inclinations, lest you not be just. And if you distort [your testimony] or refuse [to give it], then indeed Allah is ever, with what you do, Acquainted.(Qur’an 4:135)

O you who believe, be persistently standing firm for Allah, witnesses in justice, and do not let the hatred of a people prevent you from being just[to them]. Be just; that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allah; indeed, Allah is acquainted with what you do. (Qur’an 5:8)

Unfortunately, today’s ethnocentric Muslims have effectively converted Islam into a movement of our brother is always right - and any of their numbers who would not join their ethnocentric movement is treated with suspicion and contempt in their midst. A quotation from the legendary Islamic thinker of the 20th century, Sayyid Abul A’la Maududi, might serve an instructive purpose here:

The nation known as Muslim today has forgotten, and by its conduct has led the world to forget, the fact that Islam actually is the name of a movement which started with a purpose and some principles … Its purpose has been forgotten. Its principles have been broken one after another and its name, having lost all its significance, is now merely used to denote racial and social allegiance. So much so that it is used on occasions where the very purpose of Islam is negated, where its principles are demolished and where instead of Islam there is all that is not Islam (Siddique, 1986:68).

The real Muslim places Islam above Muslims; but the fake Muslim places Muslims above Islam, that is, he would support a so-called Muslim brother/sister even when that so-called Muslim is destroying Islam itself. The writer of this book admonishes today’s Muslims to read and reflect on the message and circumstances that led to the revelation of Qur’an Chapter 4 verses 105-112 – Shaikh Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s “Translation and Commentary on the Holy Qur’an” is an excellent source of information on this issue. Lo and Behold! Allah the Exalted has no permanent friend at all (that is, Allah has no family, He has no tribe, He has neither a race nor a nation – He has no relation whatsoever, neither does He ever have any biase towards or against any particular relation); Allah only has permanent interest, and that permanent interest is truth and truth only.
Undoubtly, the biggest problem facing Islam today is ignorance about it - both on the part of Muslims and on the part of non-Muslims. It is the consensus of Islamic authorities that Islam is a religion that should be followed on the basis of knowledge and understanding and not on the basis of ignorance and blind imitation (Al-Qaradawi, in Bello, 2003:84). Unfortunately, in a general sense, one may find no difficulty in submitting that the overwhelming majority of the multitudes of today’s Muslims are mere imitators who do not really know why they do what they do. Today’s Muslim does not know, as enunciated by Sayyid Maududi (Murad, 1985), that Islam is a system and that no single part of that system functions in isolation from the other parts. Today’s Muslim does not know that Islam is a scientific religion with well-graded unequivocal scale of priorities in every aspect of life: for instance, where one is faced with a choice between two virtues, one must choose the higher of the two; and where one is confronted with a choice between two evils, one must choose the lesser of the two. Today’s Muslim does not know that Islam is an objective-oriented religion which does not enslave itself to any one particular means but would rather chart any legitimate course to achieve its lofty ends. Today’s Muslim does not know, as expounded by the renowned Shaikh Salih Al-Uthaimin of Saudi Arabia (Addimashqi and Ramadan, 2004:128), that every single law of Islam goes along with its own inalienable conditions of application and that where these conditions are not met, then, it is a crime against Islam itself to attempt applying the law there. Today’s Muslim does not know that the Islamic law of necessity (which permits the believer to do the impermissible when necessity dictates so – see, for example, Qur’an Chapter 2 verse 173 which prohibits pork and the meat of a dead animal but at the same time permits the believer to eat them as the last resort if he cannot find an alternative food when he is desperately hungry) makes Islam the most pragmatic, dynamic, ubiquitous and diversified system, so that a law that applies in one Islamic country may not apply in another because of variations in the peculiar circumstances and conditions of the two countries involved. The Glorious Qur’an (13:7) says: “And for every people is a guide” Suffice it to remember that different Muslim countries commence and end the fast of Ramadan on different days depending on when they sight the moon in their various countries and no country is obliged to follow the sighting of the moon by another country.
Perhaps the most disheartening situation is when one observes that some of the people regarded as Islamic scholars today are no less ignorant about Islam than their ignorant followers who look up to them for guidance and enlightenment – ‘the blind leading the blind’ sort of a situation. The result is that these so-called Islamic scholars tend to portray Islam, in the words of the erudite Al-Qaradawi (Bello, 2003:82),

As if it was (a legislation) incompetent to realize and guarantee the welfare of human beings. The short coming is not in the Sharee’ah but in their understanding, which has severed all links between the various rulings of the Sharee’ah. They would not care to treat two similar cases differently or to regard two different cases in the same way. This is far-fetched from the Sharee’ah, as its experts and men of erudition have explained to us.

The unfortunate net result of this web of ignorance of Muslims about their own faith is serious but unwarranted chronic tension and hostility among themselves (Muslims) and between themselves and non-Muslims.
The ignorance of non-Muslims about Islam thus becomes absolutely justified - if Muslims do not know their own religion, then, of course, non-Muslims are not expected to know Islam. However, the most unfortunate consequence of non-Muslims’ ignorance about Islam is that they tend to take anything sacrilegious Muslims may do to be Islam itself. The legendary grand judge of Egypt, Shaikh Muhammad Abdu (1849-1905) indeed stated a fact when he wrote that:

Most of what the common people call Islam, is not Islam in full. They have mainly preserved the forms of prayer, fasting and pilgrimage; a few doctrines have also been slanted from their true sense. With lots of heresy and superstition Islam has been exposed to, people have reached a state of stagnation and considered it a religion. May God protect us from them and the injustice they do to God and His religion. All that Muslims are blamed for has really nothing to do with Islam; it is a totally different thing they have chosen to call Islam. (Tabbarah, 1988:8)

Nothing causes more embarrassment – in fact, humiliation – to a true Muslim today than to hear that Muslims and non-Muslims are fighting over a particular issue, with the Muslims insisting on the issue while the non-Muslims are opposing it, but when the true Muslim eventually arrives at the scene of the fight and examines the case he discovers in his shock and disappointment that in the light of the plain teachings of their own faith the Muslims should rather have been the first to oppose what they are insisting on (while, ironically, the non-Muslims are opposing it). That is why if you hear news of a dispute between Muslims and non-Muslims anywhere in the world today, if only you view Islam as a principle and not as a social allegiance, you must approach the news with strict caution rather than rush headlong into supporting “fellow Muslims” - you may be supporting the opposite of Islam! Nothing can be more frustrating to a true Muslim today than that he comes into contact with his fellow Muslims who, instead of being his partners in faith, would rather become a threat to his faith by expecting him to do things most un-Islamic in the name of Muslim brotherhood.
The crux of the problem is that, as mentioned already, the overwhelming majority of today’s Muslims are fanatics - (a fanatic is one who is pious but does not have sound knowledge of the religion). A fanatic, by virtue of his ignorance, tends to take his own sentimental inclinations to be the wishes of Allah the Exalted. As such, the fanatic tends to over-emphasize minor issues while under-emphasizing major ones unwittingly. The ultimate implication is that the fanatic may cause more damage to the religion than he will practice or promote it. The foremost tabi’i (i.e. a companion to the companions of the holy Prophet), Al Hassan Al Basri, therefore minced no words when he warned that “religion will be lost as a result of the practices of both the excessive and the negligent” (Al Qaradawi, 1991:154). The reason is that, as explained by Al-Qaradawi, the excessive (i.e. the fanatic) tends to discourage people about religion by prohibiting everything and making things too rigid and difficult; the negligent, on the other hand, renders religion meaningless by making it too loose and permissive.
Then comes the crop of worldly religious scholars who place their personal comfort and well-being above the interest of Islam. These worldly religious scholars never mind compromising any truth or condoning any falsehood in order to protect their own material interest. Islamic scholarship owes its development to the painstaking and unbearable sacrifices of the early generations of the pious learned men of the faith. As a result of their painstaking struggle to clarify and preserve the originality of the faith, these early scholars of Islam went through all sorts of persecution and torture - not from non-Muslims but from their fellow Muslims who could not understand them. Someone who did not have a quarter of their faith called them infidels; someone who did not have a half of their sincerity called them hypocrites; someone who did not posses a tenth of their knowledge called them ignorant. Not only that but also they were put to physical humiliation and public ignominy. For instance, on orders of Caliph Mansur, Imam Abu Hanifah died in prison at the age of 70. Imam Malik once received 70 lashes in public, then, in his blood-stained clothes he was paraded on a camel’s back through the streets of Madina for full view by all and sundry. Imam Ibn Rushd died in exile, having been accused of apostasy and then banished by the Caliph of his day; but today his book, Bidayatul Mujtahid wa Nihayatul Muqtasid, is a cardinal text in every faculty of Islamic Law in the Sunni Muslim world. In short, one will hardly find anyone of the pioneer Islamic scholars who did not face public torture and ignominy, prison or exile. But today, sadly enough, people who are called Islamic scholars have sank so low that they can keep quiet over any matter of truth in order to avoid even the slightest ridicule or insult from their ignorant communities. This, as noted by Al-Qaradawi (1991), is one of the major factors creating religious extremism among the Muslim youth today. Having been frustrated by the hypocrisy and inaction of his so-called religious scholars/leaders, the Muslim youth eventually develops the tendency to take the interpretation of religious matters into his own hands, and in the process of doing so, this unlearned and immature youth naturally resorts to extreme measures.
The sad question to be asked is: ‘If everyone should avoid speaking out the truth simply to avoid personal injury to himself, then who will speak out, and when will corrections be made?!’ Obviously, the answer is ‘no one, and never at all!’ And that is how the terrible situation of the Muslim Ummah will not only remain stagnant but will also continue getting worse by the day. May Allah the Most Merciful protect us and guide us onto the right path.
Using the practice of niqab (face-cover of the Muslim woman) in the Nigerian society as a case-study, this book attempts to examine the ignorance of today’s Muslims about their faith, as well as the intellectual incompetence and moral indifference of their religious scholars as outlined above. Niqab was instituted for the purpose of hiding the woman’s beauty as a precautionary measure against promiscuity in society. Unfortunately, with the passage of time, the purpose of niqab was imperceptibly changed from beauty hiding into identity hiding. Furthermore, to every rule there is an exception. As such the practice of niqab is not without exceptions. It is well known to all of us that the Prophet Muhammad himself (pbuh) has categorically prohibited the use of niqab during the activities of Hajj. Similarly, in the words of Shaikhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah himself (who can be justifiably described as the champion of the advocates of strict use of niqab):

...For that matter, the look [at a woman’s face] that leads to temptation is unlawful, except for a legitimate reason - such as courtship [for marriage], the doctor [for medical treatment] and the like. (RIBII, 2000:31)

Unfortunately, some users of niqab today are either ignorant about the exceptions to that practice or, for reasons best known to themselves, are unwilling to respect the exceptions. This, coupled with the fact that identity hiding is a fundamental problem in any social setting, have made the modern practice of niqab a fertile ground for misunderstanding among Muslims and between Muslims and non-Muslims, both in private life and at public level – worldwide!
It is time for Muslims to understand that exceptions to Allah’s laws are never for fun. The Authority that made the law is the same Authority that made the exceptions. As such, the exceptions are part and parcel of the law itself, and ignoring the exceptions amounts to breaching the law itself and challenging the authority of the Law-maker. Whenever a law is applied with disregard for exceptional conditions, then, it backfires and yields a disastrous effect rather than produce a positive impact.
One historical fact an average Muslim of today cannot imagine, let alone understand, is that some of the controversial practices that create tension and hostility among Muslims are actually championed by arch enemies of Islam whose ultimate ambition is to divide Muslims and destroy Islam. Under all sorts of beautiful Islamic names and slogans these arch enemies of Islam initiate, advocate, propagate and over-emphasize issues that are divisively controversial but of minor spiritual significance, so that Muslims might waste their time and energy fighting among themselves over secondary matters at the expense of primary issues on which their spiritual survival and development depend. Such diabolical groups have been actively operating in Muslim circles since the time of the third Caliph, Uthman Ibn Affan (may Allah be pleased with him), and innocent pious believers imperceptibly get to adopt the alluring views of such deviant groups. We pray for the merciful guidance of Allah.
It is my humble prayer and earnest yearn that it may please Allah the Most Gracious the Most Merciful to make this book beneficial to the whole of the Muslim Ummah.


Issah Hassan Tikumah

Department of Education,
Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria.
07 Jimadal-Akhirah, 1429 AH – 10th June, 2008


CHAPTER ONE:

THE ISLAMIC CODE OF DRESS FOR THE WOMAN

As a matter of fact, Islam has not prescribed any particular form of dress for the woman; Islam has only established a standard/code of dress for the woman, and so the woman can put on any form of dress that does not breach the Islamic standard/code of dress (Al-Qaradawi, 1991:113). The Islamic standard/code of dress is enshrined in the following verses of the Glorious Qur’an:

And tell the believing women to lower their gazes and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof. (24:31)

O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves their outer garments. That is most suitable that they should be known and not molested. (33:59)

There are differences among Islamic authorities as to what type of dress must be worn by the woman to satisfactorily comply with the requirements of the verses quoted above. While some authorities see that the woman’s dress should cover her entire body, the face included, others are of the view that the woman’s dress should cover the whole body excluding the face only. But the most credible opinion, which is also the opinion of the vast majority of authorities, is that the woman’s face and hands are not to be covered(Al-Muslimiyyi, 2005:23-24; Al-Qaradawi, 1989:161, 2003:94). Consequently, Islamic scholars have prescribed the following seven conditions for the woman’s dress if she must satisfy the Islamic dress code:


1. The dress must cover the whole body excluding the face and the hands;
2. The dress should not be tight so as to expose the shape of her body;
3. The dress should not be transparent so as to expose her under-garments;
4. The dress should not resemble that of men;
5. The dress should not be colorful so as to elicit admiration (from men);
6. The dress should not resemble that of unbelievers;
7. The dress should not be fashionable/flamboyant (so as to attract attention from men).

A dress that satisfies the conditions outlined above is described as hijab (i.e., a veil) – which is compulsory for all Muslim women. However, the advocates of niqab are of the view that the hijab is incomplete except with niqab.


















CHAPTER TWO:

THE CONCEPT OF NIQAB AND ITS RELIGIOUS SIGNIFICANCE

Niqab is an Arabic word which simply means ‘a veil’. In Islamic circles it is used with specific reference to the cloth used by Muslim women for covering their faces when they move outside their homes. The purpose of niqab is to hide the infatuating beauty of the woman’s face from the lustful glances of men – this is a precautionary measure against promiscuity in society.
One only needs to carefully consider the magnitude of danger sexual promiscuity represents for society before one can appreciate why Islam should institute strong measures to circumvent promiscuity in society. Sexual desire is one of the most defiant instincts in man. This point is excellently expressed by Haroun Sheik, in his book titled “Sexual Issues in Modem Era and Its Solution in Islam” (undated: 3), in the following passage:

Man and woman have a perpetual appeal to each other. They have been endowed with a powerful urge for sexual love; with an unlimited capacity to sexuality attract each other. Their physical constitution, its proportions and shapes, its complexion, even its contact and touch, have a strange spell on the opposite sex. Their voice, their gait, their manner and appearance, each has a magnetic power. Moreover, the world around them abounds in factors that perpetually arouse their sexual impulse and make one inclined towards the other. The soft murmuring breeze, the running water, the natural hues of vegetation, the sweet smell of flowers, the chirping of birds, the dark clouds, the charms of the moon-lit night, in short, all the beauty and all the grace of nature, stimulate directly or indirectly the sexual urge between the opposite sexes.

The passage quoted above reveals that sexual life of society is a most delicate one and that unless wise and dispassionate measures were put in place to check sexual attraction between men and women society would be embroiled in sexual chaos - as evident in Western societies today - with all the ugly implications of societal disorder and health hazards thereof. It is part of such wise and dispassionate measures that Islam enjoins its adherents, male and female alike, to observe modesty and sanity in dressing. It is important to note, however, as expressed by Yusuf Ali (Note No. 2984),

On account of differentiation of the sexes in nature, temperaments, and social life, a greater amount of privacy is required for women than for men, especially in the matter of dress and the uncovering of the bossom.

It is part of the policy of ‘greater amount of privacy required for women’ that some Islamic authorities require the Muslim woman to conceal the attraction of her face by the use of niqab.
Notwithstanding its apparent significance, the niqab has been one of the most unsettling subjects of controversy among Islamic authorities down through the centuries. Their disagreement is not over the Islamicality of niqab but rather it is over the legal status of niqab in Islam – is it an obligatory practice for the Muslim woman or is it an optional practice for her? The reason is that while evidence abounds that niqab was widely practiced by women during the time of the Prophet (pbuh), there is simply no clear or specific injunction anywhere, neither in the Qur’an nor in the Hadith (traditions of the Prophet), sanctioning niqab as a mandatory practice for the Muslim woman. The arguments making niqab a compulsory practice for the Muslim woman are all inferential (i.e. they are inferred from the connotations of the Qur’anic verses dealing with the mode of dress for the Muslim woman). This inference shall be clarified in the next chapter of this book.




CHAPTER THREE:

THE CONTROVERSIAL OBLIGATION OF NIQAB

The Glorious Qur’an itself has stated that its rules and injunctions are in two categories: specific ones, which form the foundation of Islam, and unspecific ones which are subject to diversity of interpretation (see Qur’an 3:7). In this respect, the Qatar-based Shaikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, arguably the best brain of Islamic jurisprudence in today’s world, wrote:

The presumption of the connotation of a text of the law…. applies both to the Qur’an and to the Sunnah… This is so because the vocabularies of languages, quite naturally, are fraught with connotations, which may be literal, figurative, metonymic, general or precise, absolute or conditional. They may also carry meanings, which are specialized, implied, or applied. Furthermore, and it does happen very often, what one may understand from a passage or text is coloured by the degree of their intelligence, their circumstances, and their psychological and intellectual predispositions. Thus, for example, a person with a predisposition to harshness may understand from or read into a text what another person with a predilection for mildness may not… Again, a person with a broader horizon may understand from the same text what a person with a limited horizon does not. Yet again, an objectivist, who considers the sense of a text as its spirit, understands from it what a literalist, who rigidly sticks to the obvious, literal meaning of texts, does not… (Bello, 2003:90).

The pertinent point we are here driving at is that whereas some authorities interpret the phrase “except that which [necessarily] appears thereof” (in verse 31 of Chapter 24 of the Qur’an as quoted in chapter one of this book) as reference to those parts of the body which naturally appear out of necessity (that is, the face for seeing and identification, the hands for touching and the feet for walking), other authorities are of the view that the wording of the verse (that is, Qur’an 33:59), especially the phrase “to bring down over themselves their outer garments”, implies that the woman should cover her entire body and that the phrase “except that which [necessarily] appears thereof” is only referring to the woman’s outer-garments. Hence the latter group, on the basis of that inference of theirs, sees niqab as a compulsory practice for the woman. They also make similar inferences from certain traditions of the Prophet (pbuh) to support their advocacy of compulsory niqab.
The latest most credible work on the non-compulsory status of niqab was that of Shaikh Muhammad Nasiruddin Al Albani of Syria. Shaikh Albani is the most renowned authority of Hadith in recent history of Islam – it is a common phenomenon these days to see young Islamic scholars (including those of Nigeria) nicknaming themselves Albani in show of love and respect for Shaikh Albani. Shaikh Albani published over one hundred volumes before his death in the year 2000. His volumes were devoted to tracing every Islamic practice to its original source, form and content, through strict application of the Methodology of Hadith. In the last couple of decades virtually all major Islamic textbooks have been revised (and some are still being revised) to reflect the findings of Albani. Albani’s works initially earned him the love and respect of Saudi Authorities who employed him as a teacher and researcher in the Islamic University in Madina. However, Albani later fell out with his Saudi employers when his findings stated that there was no basis in Islamic traditions for making niqab a compulsory practice. The book he published on the subject, Jilbabul Mar’atil Muslimah Filkitabi Wassunnah, still remains a banned book in Saudi Arabia where niqab is compulsory for all women.
It is not the purpose of this book to determine which of the two opposing opinions presented above is right. The actual purpose of this book is to call to attention that, whether niqab is a compulsory practice or an optional practice, the practice of niqab is now being abused and such abuse must be checked in the interests of Islam, Muslims and society as a whole.



































CHAPTER FOUR:

THE MODIFIED NIQAB OF TODAY

It is beyond the imagination of any real believer to think that the Sharee’ah (i.e., the Islamic Law) which proceeds from the infallible wisdom of Allah, and which is ordained purposely for the highest well-being of mankind, will ever bring about problems rather than solutions in society. As explained by Shaikh Al-Uthaimin (2004:37-42), far from engendering problems for society, the Sharee’ah would rather repel problems at all costs. As such, anything Islamic that creates problems (rather than solutions) in society must be either falsely attributed to Islam or a deviation from its original form and content as ordained by Islam. The problem of niqab as widely used today is one of such deviant practices. In other words, the nature and form of niqab widely used today is not the same as that obtained during the time of the Prophet (pbuh) and his devout companions. Explanations provided by Ibn Abbas and other learned ones among the Prophet’s companions (See Tafseer At-Tabari Vol 12:45-47) indicate that the type of niqab obtained during the early generations of Islam was not a separate sheet of cloth designed to be a constant or rigid fixture on the face of the woman as obtained today. It was simply the same head-cover that was pulled down to cover a part of the face when the woman feared being fixed with the gaze of a man. The specially designed niqab which provides for fixed and total covering of the woman’s face, including (in some cases) even the eyes as it is found today, was a later modification of the practice of niqab, and it was this very modification that brought about the adulteration of the practice of niqab.
As in the case of painting whereby one additional colour can distort the beauty of an artistic design, a slight alteration in a religious practice may appear insignificant but its ramifications are enormous. Indeed, the modification in the nature of niqab has gone a long way to change the role of the niqab from that of beauty hider into that of identity hider instead, to the extent that it has become difficult (if not impossible) to tell whether the person moving in niqab is a woman or a man. The result is that not only that some women now use niqab to hide their identity for evil motives but also, even men now use niqab as a camouflage for various purposes – the latest internationally publicized incident was that of Maulana Abdul-Azeez in Pakistan, who attempted under the cover of niqab to escape from the siege of the Red Mosque in July 2007, but was caught by the security agents. In fact, the evil of niqab as an identity hider, especially here in Nigeria, has reached the extent that it has become a threat even to Islam itself. If the purpose of niqab was to forestall zina (illicit sex), zina is only one (out of the many) of the crimes now being facilitated by niqab as an identity hider. It has reached the extent that there are reports of men camouflaging themselves with niqab to visit their former girlfriends (who are now married) inside their husbands’ own homes. It has reached the extent that a girl whose boyfriend is sitting in a shop close to the shop of her own father would go to the boyfriend’s shop in niqab so that her father would not realize that it is his own daughter sitting there with a boy. Even in Saudi Arabia: the common story of people who have lived in Saudi Arabia for long is that Saudi Arabia has become a popular destination for prostitutes from all over the world and niqab as an identity hider is playing a prominent role in concealing these foreign prostitutes from detection by the Saudi authorities - let this be brought to the attention of the Saudi authorities. It has reached the extent that someone would stop a taxi to enter but when he/she sees a person in niqab sitting at the back of the taxi, he/she would turn away from the taxi because there have been reports of armed robbers using such tricks to lure away unsuspecting travelers and rob them. To wit, the evil of niqab as an identity hider, in terms of sowing discord and confusion among Muslims and between Muslims and non-Muslims, and in terms of misrepresenting Islam to the wider world, has reached such magnitudes that if the Prophet (pbuh) were alive today he would simply outlaw that practice as categorically as he outlawed temporary marriage. One fact that is difficult to challenge is that any practice that hides people’s identity constitutes a security threat in any society. As such, Islam (which is translated to mean ‘peace and security’ for mankind) can never contradict itself by sanctioning any societal practice that is based on identity hiding. The danger of any practice that threatens societal security is certainly greater than its benefit (if it has any benefit at all), and the cardinal principle and method of Islam is to always choose the lesser evil. Allah the Omniscient had perfect knowledge that time shall come when people will be hiding their identity in the name of the Qur’anic verse (33:59) so He Almighty in His Wisdom alluded to the importance of identification at the end of the same verse - (emphasis is mine):

That is most suitable that they will be known and not molested.












CHAPTER FIVE:

NIQAB AND THE DANGER OF FALSE TESTIMONY

False testimony simply means to testify to the truth of an event or incident of which one has no certain knowledge. False testimony is one of the greatest sins in the Islamic faith, so great that Islamic scholars have rated it at par with polytheism - the highest and most unforgivable sin in the Islamic faith. In a Hadith reported by Al-Bukhari and Muslim on the authority of Abi Bakrata, “The Prophet (pbuh) counted false testimony among the most serious of major sins”. In the words of Shaikh Afif Tabbarah, in his book titled “The Spirit of Islam” (1988:248):

It is false testimony that leads to ugly social evils and dangerous troubles that may put an end to the lives of people and lead to the loss of rights and the spread of confusion. That is why Islam compares the sin of false testimony to the sin of polytheism, the worst in Islam. God says: “Shun the abomination of idols, and shun the abomination of falsehood” (XXII: 30). God describes his beloved worshippers as being “Those who witness no falsehood” (XXV: 72).
Sheikh Tabbarah went further to elucidate that the Qur’an requires people “not to take things for granted unless they are confirmed through proof ….to rely on definite knowledge, and reproaches those who follow mere illusion and doubt” (258-259).
In fact, only a Muslim who does not really know what he is doing will condone even the slightest degree of false testimony in order to preserve the sanctity of niqab. It should be re-emphasize that Islam, as expounded by Shaikh Al-Qaradawi in his “Priorities”(Bello, 2003), is a scientific religion with well-set priorities in every aspect of life – be it in the area of doing good or in the area of avoiding evil. In this respect, three cardinal rules of Islamic jurisprudence are to be considered here (See Al-Uthaimin, 2004: 63-130):

1) Where one is confronted with a choice between two evils, one must choose the lesser evil.
2) Something prohibited as dharee’ah (precaution) is legitimized by necessity.
3) Where there is a conflict between a settled issue and an unsettled one, the former prevails over the latter.
a.
With respect to the first rule, it should be noted that the sin of false testimony is much greater than the sin of looking at a woman’s face (with lust). To wit, the simple fact that authorities have equated false testimony with polytheism clearly shows that false testimony is a greater sin even than zina itself. Concerning the second rule, it is instructive to note that prohibited things in Islam are in two categories: the first category embraces things prohibited as intrinsic evil, while the second category covers things prohibited (not as evil in themselves but only) as means to evil. Whereas false testimony belongs to the first category (that is, intrinsic evil), looking at a woman’s face is of the second category. In other words, whereas false testimony is an evil in itself, looking at a woman’s face becomes evil only if the looker gets tempted by the beauty of the woman’s face. To wit, it is a question of whether or not the face of the woman to be looked at is beautiful enough to merit the admiration of the looker. It is based on this fact that some authorities recommend the practice of niqab only for a woman with an exceptionally infatuating pretty face, and not for an ugly woman (Bashier, 1980:21).
With regard to the third rule, whereas false testimony is a clear, unequivocal and strong prohibition by both the Qur’an and Hadith as seen from the texts quoted earlier, and Islamic scholars of all generations are perfectly unanimous on the fact that false testimony is a major sin in the Islamic faith, Islamic authorities down through the centuries have been sharply divided over whether or not the Muslim woman commits a sin by exposing her face – with the vast majority of these authorities taking the position that the woman commits no sin thereof. In other words, whereas the sinfulness of false testimony is a settled issue among all Islamic authorities that of exposing the woman’s face is not. Furthermore, as explained earlier, the sin of looking at a woman’s face is only a probability, not a certainty, since it depends on the condition of arousal of lust in the looker - and there is no certainty that the looker will actually be attracted by the face of the woman being looked at. But the sin of false testimony, on the other hand, is certain and definite once it is committed.
In view of the three juristic rules explained above, it is Islamically untenable that the major and definite sin of false testimony should be compromised, toyed with or taken lightly in order to uphold the practice of niqab.








CHAPTER SIX:

NO DEFENCE OF THESIS IN NIQAB

And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge; for every act of hearing, of seeing and of (feeling in) the heart will be enquired into [on the Day of Reckoning] (Qur’an 17:36).

Islam has the highest standards of legal evidence and testimony ever seen by humanity, and it is the duty of Muslims to explain and enlighten both their fellow Muslims and non-Muslims on this fact. Muslims should not instead be committing severe injustice against Islam by portraying it as a naïve system with poor legal standards which would accept any nonsense or blackmail in the name of faith. Imagine that someone appeared before a panel of academic judges and, as someone proudly stated, “defended her thesis with full niqab!” while the judges simply assumed that the defendant was the bonafide candidate because, as they put it, “they knew her and they believed that she would not commit academic fraud”. If this assumption was made in the name of Islamic faith, that is quite ironical; because Islam will be the last system to tolerate that kind of superficial testimony. To wit, Islamically speaking, by no stretch of human language can the judges who sat over the case of that camouflaged defendant of thesis be exonerated from false testimony. To start with, is it not a possibility that someone else could have camouflaged himself/herself as the bonafide defendant? Obviously, it is both a possibility and a probability – especially in today’s Nigeria whereby proliferation of commercial writers of theises has become the concern of educational authorities in the country. It is to be understood that on the question of legal evidence/testimony Islam does not take any human being for granted on the basis of his/her record of virtue or piety – he/she may have been known in the past to be an angel, it does not make any difference to Islam. In a situation of real Islam, even if the defendant were the daughter or wife of the chairman of the defence panel and he came along with her from his own house the first thing he would have done upon his arrival at the venue was to ask the defendant to uncover her face for members of the panel to see and verify her identity. In a Hadith reported by Muslim on the authority of Zaid Ibn Khalid Al-Juhani, the Prophet (pbuh) said: “Shall I not tell you of the best witness? He is the one who produces his evidence before he is asked for it”. The chairman would have done that partly in the interest of his own integrity as a pious one and partly because it is the inalienable Islamic right and obligation of members of the panel to know the identity of the person they are to examine and award a certificate. As a matter of fact, anyone dealing with a woman in a formal/official capacity is Islamically entitled to see her face for legal, administrative and security reasons. In the words of no less great an icon of the Islamic law than the highly revered Ibn Qudamah himself, who wrote eight centuries ago with reference to the face of the woman (See Al-Mughni, Vol 9:498),

The witness is entitled to see the face of the woman for/against whom he bears witness, in order that the testimony will be based on certainty. Ahmad [that is, Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal whose school of thought champions the advocacy of compulsory niqab] says: One shall not testify for/against a woman unless he knows her by face. And if he deals with her in transaction/trade or rent/tenancy, he is entitled to see her face so that he may know her truly and may refer to her with certainty.

Commenting on this law, Shaikh Al-Muslimiyyi (2005:113-114) narrated a story of an incident he described as a landmark historical event in Islamic adjudication. The story is about a famous Islamic judge, Musa Bun Iss’haq, who lived in the third century of Islam. A woman dragged her husband to Bun Iss’haq in the court and claimed that the husband owed her Five Hundred Dinar and was unwilling to pay her back. The husband denied the woman’s claim. The woman then called out the witness (apparently, her male relative) she had taken along to the court. Ordinarily, no one inside the court was in doubt that the plaintiff was really the wife of the defendant. But Islam simply would not take anything for granted when dealing with legal testimony. So the judge asked the woman to uncover her face so that the witness might confirm her identity before testifying. Then the man stood up and protested against his wife uncovering her face before men in the court. But the judge, Bun Iss’haq, insisted that she must expose her face for the witness to see if he must testify for her. The man was so moved by jealousy over the order to show his wife’s face to other men that he categorically confessed to the court that he really owed the wife Five Hundred Dinar. The woman was in turn moved by the husband’s strong demonstration of love and jealousy for her that she rose up and declared before the court that she was writing off the debt and turning into a gift for the husband.
Although Sheikh Al-Muslimiyyi is a supporter of niqab, yet he went on to emphasise that the judge and the witness must look at the woman’s face, in his own words, wa in khaafaa al-fitnah, which means, “even if they fear being tempted (by the beauty of the woman’s face)” - because the sin of that temptation is insignificant as compared to the sin of false testimony.
Infact, it is doubtful if there is any system of legal thought that is as critical of man as an unpredictable being as Islam is. It is a fundamental belief in the Islamic faith that no believer can be sure that he/she will actually die as a believer. And indeed, history is full of instances when a one-time righteous/virtuous man died as a wicked disbeliever, or a one-time devout believer died as a lukewarm believer, and vice versa. In short, man can change for better or worse at any time. In view of all that, the word of a righteous man may be taken for granted on other issues but not on issues pertaining to legal testimony or the rights and integrity of another man. If for any compelling reason a pious man’s testimony is to be accepted without proof, then the least that would be demanded of him is to oblige him to take a solemn oath by Allah to that effect. It is a well-established rule of Islamic jurisprudence that, in its Arabic expression, wa kullu man yuqbal qawluhu halafa, which means, “And anyone whose word shall be accepted must swear”. This rule is derived from the declaration of the Prophet (pbuh), reported by Al-Bukhari and Muslim on the authority of Ibn Abas, that:

Were people to be given what they claim when they brought a case [without proof], men would claim the lives and properties of others; but [the claimant must furnish proof, and ] the oath must be taken by the defendant.

It is interesting to note that even the oath itself is not to be accepted naively; evidence of some degree of fear of Allah must be seen in someone before he/she can be entrusted to swear by Allah. Consider, for instance, the following Hadith reported by Al-Bukhari on the authority of Abu-Hurairah:

The Prophet (pbuh) suggested to some people that they should swear an oath and when they hastened to do so he ordered that lots should be cast among them concerning the oath as to who (among them) should swear.

The fact is that a truly Allah-fearing person will not eagerly rush into swearing by Allah; he would only swear by Allah when circumstances compel him to do so. That is why when those people rushed forward to take the oath the Prophet (pbuh) doubted their integrity and thus found a subtle way of diverting the oath instead to those among them who did not rush forward.
It is a long standing traditional practice in Islamic circles that when someone writes a letter of character recommendation for another person, regardless of how profoundly he/she might have known the recommendee and regardless of how pious/virtuous the recommendee might have been, the writer ends the recommendation letter with this particular sentence: La nuzackee ala Allahi ahadan, which means, “We do not purify anyone before Allah”, that is to say, ‘what we have stated is what we know the person to be, but it is Allah who actually knows his/her true character’. The writer of this book recalls his own experience some years ago when he requested his own Shaikh for a letter of character recommendation. The Shaikh started his letter depicting the writer almost as an angel while the writer watched on with pride and alacrity. But to the writer’s disappointment his Shaikh concluded his recommendation letter with the sentence La nuzackeehi ala Allah (that is, ‘we do not recommend him before Allah’), and not only once the Shaikh wrote this sentence but he repeated it several times. Thereupon the writer felt betrayed and thenceforth began to view his Shaikh with some suspicion. It was only later when the writer himself advanced in Islamic learning that he got to discover that what his Shaikh had done was an Islamic requirement. The Glorious Qur’an says (53:32):

So do not claim yourselves to be pure; He is most knowing of who fears Him.

It is necessary to explain further that the juristic rule that says Kullu insanin mu’tamanun ala dinihi i.e. ‘every person is trusted with his faith’, as explained by Shaikh Al-Uthaimin (2004:244), only applies to matters between man and Allah. For instance, a stranger arrived when people were just about to pray. When the stranger was given water to perform ablution for the prayer he responded that he prayed already before coming. That is an issue between him and Allah so he would not be asked to produce evidence that he had really prayed. But the rule does not apply where the rights of others or public interest are affected. Where the interest of society is at stake, then the society must carry out the necessary investigation upon the claimant – because the right of society Islamically supersedes the right of the individual.
In the light of all the plain facts provided above, it is simply bewildering that someone would sit before a panel of academic judges and defend her thesis with unverified identity in the name of Islam. Nigeria is currently bedeviled with serious levels of crime and has earned international notoriety as one of the most corrupt nations in the world. Rather than using ethnic sentiments to portray Islam as a problem–compounder with effective hide-outs for criminal impostors, the Nigerian Muslim must take advantage of the situation to demonstrate to both Nigerians and the world that Islam possesses sound solutions to Nigeria’s problems. The Glorious Qur’an commands the Muslim to declare thus, “I will never be an assistant to the criminals” (28:17). If people allow a Muslim to defend thesis while masked in niqab, it is because they are scared of Muslims’ blind sentimentality over the issue and not that they approve of that – certainly no one of conscience will feel comfortable testifying for someone he does not know. Muslims should know that it is neither in their own interest nor in the interest of Islam that they impose absurdities on people in the name of Allah. In tracing the geneses of the collapse of Christianity and emergence of atheism/agnosticism in Europe, the erudite Islamic thinker, Shaikh Muhammad Kutub, in his book titled “Islam, the Misunderstood Religion” (1982:xiii), stated the main cause of that phenomenon as the tendency of the Church for exacting costly extortions from the people “besides calling upon them to swallow nonsense and superstition in the name of God” Imagine that a Muslim girl in niqab went to a non-Muslim officer for university registration. The officer demanded to see her face for comparison with her photograph and she refused to show her face and rather insisted on her right to be registered without verification of her identity. The logical questions that naturally come forward are: How did she get the photograph that is attached to her documents? Did she not expose her face to the photographer (who, in the case of Nigeria, was most probably a man)? Unlike in the case of the registration whereby there may be other people present in the office, was she not (most probably) alone with the photographer inside the small camera studio when she exposed her face to him? And if her face will not be seen for comparison with the photograph when the need arises, then what is the significance of the photograph? Ultimately, the non-Muslim registration officer will, quite justifiably, only perceive her behaviour as religious aggression rather a genuine adherence to rules of faith. The Islamic philosopher Muhammad Kamil, in his book titled “The Logic of Faith” (1999:5), did not mince words when he stated in view of the irrational behaviuor of today’s Muslims around the world that unless the correct understanding of Islam was rediscovered “the rational modern mind, even of the Muslim, will find it impossible not to view the proposition of the Islamic state as regression into primitive religious tyranny”.


CHAPTER SEVEN:

NO NIQAB IN THE CLASSROOM

It has already been explicated in the preceding pages that in formal/official dealings a man has the Islamic right to see the face of the woman he is dealing with, for legal/administrative/security purposes and above all, to avoid the Islamically devastating sin of false testimony. Obviously, the seeing of the face in this case is not a mere veneer or formality; it is actually aimed at establishing acquaintance or familiarity for the purpose of identification. It follows ipso facto that the intensity of seeing required is to be determined by the level or degree of familiarity required; and the level or degree of familiarity required is in turn to be determined by the degree of significance of the purpose of the familiarity. It would be noted that the number of witnesses required by the Islamic law varies from situation to situation or from one case to another, depending on the seriousness of the case at stake (Al-Uthaimin, 2004:234). To wit, while a few seconds may suffice for the security man at the gate to compare the student’s face with her photograph on her identity card, the same may not suffice for the person who is to know the student for the purpose of issuing her with a certificate of academic performance and character training.
The position of the classroom teacher makes him the most important and unique witness for the university vis-à-vis the identity of the student. The classroom teacher is the only agent of the university who is in daily contact with the student. It is the classroom teacher who conducts both formative evaluation and summative evaluation for the student. Moreover, the classroom teacher must know the student in order to monitor her lecture attendance. In short, it is apt to say that, in view of the unique position of the classroom teacher, if he/she does not really know the student, then it will be strange for anybody else within the university structure (and for that matter the university as a whole) to claim to know the student. Consequently, it is mainly on the basis of the testimony of the classroom teacher that the university awards the student with a certificate of academic performance and character training.
In view of the unparalleled significance of university certificate, the classroom teacher, who is the university’s principal witness regarding the academic and character status of the student, must posses a well-grounded identity of the student. As name alone does not really provide any effective identification of a person, the classroom teacher must see the student regularly in order that he might establish her physical identity. Only a joker would assert that seeing the student’s face for a few seconds on registration day and for another few seconds on examination day is enough to make the teacher acquainted with the face of the student – except if the teacher actually possesses a photographic memory! If the writer of this book were to appear before a panel of judges to testify that the student who covered her face during his (the writer’s) lectures for ten months were actually his student, all the writer would say is this:

I have this name on my records (lecture attendance lists, examination results, etc), but for Allah’s sake, I do not actually know that student. Allah the Exalted says: ‘And do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge; for every act of hearing, of seeing, of (feeling in) the heart shall be enquired into (on the Day of Reckoning).

There is one more crucial point to be made. In all Nigerian universities – indeed, in all universities of the world – a specified percentage of lecture attendance is a mandatory requirement for every student who registers for a course of study. Let us assume that one of the girls in a lecturer’s class is called Jamilatu Adamu. If a student (?) enters the class under the cover of niqab and writes Jamilatu Adamu on the lecture attendance list and the lecturer accepts it without verifying the identity of the writer-under-cover, that lecturer, Islamically speaking, has unambiguously committed the abominable sin of false testimony.
In view of all the foregoing facts, it is not surprising that even the Islamic authorities who advocate niqab have listed the classroom alongside the court and the hospital as places where the disuse of niqab is allowed (Al-Muslimiyyi, 2005:112). It ought to be noted that university certificate is far too significant to be issued on the basis of tenuous testimony. To a very great extent, it is the university certificate that would determine the student’s future place in society, giving her either due or undue advantage over others. As such, unscrupulous awarding of certificate is not different from misappropriation of public property.
In fact, the misconceptions surrounding the practice of niqab have now reached such a depth that the practice has become a threat to Islam itself. For instance, some people now take the use of niqab to be more important even than learning the Qur’an itself. The point at hand may be illustrated by the story of a Saudi trained expert in Tajweed (scientific recitation of the Qur’an), who is an Imam in a suburb of Zaria where he also runs a Qur’anic school. The Sheikh narrated to the writer of this book how some young girls in niqab were brought by their parents for enrolment for studies in his Qur’anic school. The Sheikh assigned one of his trusted students to be teaching these girls. Then one day when he entered their class to evaluate them he noticed that their recitations were rather poor. Then he found out from their teacher that the girls had been wearing niqab during recitation. Thereupon the Sheikh explained to the girls that one could not learn Tajweed with her niqab on “because the teacher must watch the movement of your lips before he can determine whether or not you are saying it right. So you have to remove the niqab when you are reciting”. All but one of the girls removed their niqabs in compliance with the Sheikh’s orders. After several days of unsuccessful attempts to persuade the remaining one girl to remove her niqab during recitation, the Sheikh told his school teachers to “leave her alone; don’t force her, lest people say we want to see the faces of girls; that is how they create confusion and discord in our communities; she must have told her father and he asked her not to remove it; just leave her alone, lest she create a problem for us…” That was the story.
Now, are people who call themselves believers now trying to say that the Qur’an contains the seeds of its own destruction?! In other words, is it sensible for any genuine believer to imagine that the Qur’an would sanction any practice that will be an obstacle to the proper and effective learning of the Qur’an itself?! Not at all!!! Such a purpose–defeating attitude could only proceed from ignorance and misconception about the Qur’anic teaching concerned. Nothing can be more important to Islam than learning the Qur’an, because the Qur’an is the basis of the survival of Islam.






















CHAPTER EIGHT:

ISLAM: THE OBJECTIVE-ORIENTED RELIGION

Every sincere Muslim believes that the validity of the Qur’an as a divine comprehensive guidance for mankind is permanent and eternal. However, even simple human reasoning dictates that a law that is meant to be permanent for the ever-changing and dynamic nature of society must of necessity be equally flexible and versatile. That, indeed, is the nature of the law of Islam – dynamic, flexible and versatile. In other words, although the law of Islam is permanent and unchangeable, its interpretation/meaning varies with time, place and circumstances. A typical example is that, as analysed by Al-Qaradawi (Bello, 2003:81), where the Qur’an mentions camels, horses and donkeys as means of transportation, our modern minds automatically substitutes these animals with cars, trains and aeroplanes – even though it is the animals that are specifically mentioned in the verses. All that is because Islam is a goal-oriented religion and its laws are never to be enslaved to means – this is NOT the same as saying that Islam is a system of ‘the end justifies the means’. As such, the validity of any Islamic practice at any given moment or place is measured by the superiority of its advantages over its disadvantages. No less an Islamic giant than Imam Ibnul Qayyim wrote on “Modifying a Fatwaa [religious verdict] and its Variation in Accordance with Changes in Times, Places, Circumstances, Intentions, and Customs” (See footnote in Bello, 2003:136):
Costly mistakes to the detriment of the Sharee’ah have occurred because of ignorance about this, mistakes that have inevitably engendered unwarranted difficulties, complications, and affected behaviour, which, little is it known that the splendid Sharee’ah, which basks in, and operates on the loftiest ranks of human welfare, could not have brought them about. For, the foundation and superstructure of the Sharee’ah are founded on Wisdom and Welfare of Humans in this world and in the next. Therefore, the whole of it is an embodiment of the totality of justice, mercy, welfare, and wisdom. Consequently, any issue that walks out of the realm of justice to the realm of injustice, from the providence of mercy to the providence of its opposite, from the sphere of Wisdom to the sphere of Folly is, ipso facto, not from the Sharee’ah, even if this, through [devious] interpretation, may have been admitted into it…

To insist on any counter-productive corrupt practice on the plea that it is ordained by Allah (or that it is the Sunnah of the Prophet) will be tantamount to a blasphemous attribution of blind dogmatism to the Omniscient, Selfless and Infallible Allah. The Glorious Qur’an warns against that sacrilegious tendency:

And when they commit an immorality, they say, “We found our fathers doing it, and Allah has ordered us to do it” Say, “Indeed, Allah does not order immorality. Do you say about Allah that which you do not know?” Say, “My Lord has ordered justice…” (7:28-29)

As men are inherently prone to corruption, coupled with the ever-changing nature of human society, it is the responsibility of Islamic scholars, who are supposed to be “heirs to the Prophets”, to maintain vibrant thought and vigilant watch over the laws of the religion so as to ensure that the Islamic purpose is not defeated through deviant interpretation of its laws and backward practice of its teachings. As a matter of fact, any Islamic law/practice can be modified, strengthened, weakened or even suspended if it is realized that under a particular condition or circumstance the law/practice is creating more harm than benefit. Islamic history is replete with instances when laws were modified to reflect new realities or conditions. It should be remembered that temporary marriage was once permitted in Islam as a necessity. But when it was realized that people were abusing the practice, using it to legitimize zina(illicit sexual relations), the Prophet (pbuh) outlawed it permanently. Similarly, the rightly guided Caliphs of the Prophet (pbuh), especially Umar Ibn Al-Khattab, brought far-reaching reforms into the Islamic law in the light of new realities of life. For instance, Umar gave new legal rulings that made the punishments for divorce and drinking (of alcohol) much severer (than they were during the time of the Prophet) because these two vices (divorce and drinking) were now becoming fashion in the society. Similarly, during a severe famine Umar suspended the penal code of cutting off the hands of thieves on the understanding that severe hunger could compel otherwise righteous people to steal (Kutub, 1982:135). Likewise, much of the details of the Islamic law as we have it today came from the pronouncements of the second to the sixth generations of the icons of Islamic scholarship – including the four orthodox Imams: Abu Haneefah, Malik, Ash-shafi’i and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal. Unfortunately, as Al-Qaradawi rightly lamented(Bello, 2003:84), the so-called Islamic scholars of today, far from having their own thinking, only know how to make rigid and dogmatic references to the volumes of publications left behind by these Imams, forgetting that these Imams produced their volumes only in their striving to re-interpret and illuminate the Islamic message to reflect the new realities of their own time, and that if these Imams were alive today they would revise their own volumes to reflect the circumstances and conditions of the present day. In fact, as explained by Al-Qaradawi, these Imams revised some of their own rulings later in their lives to reflect changed conditions. This is particularly elaborate in the case of Imam As-Shafi’i who is known for having two maz’habs (schools of thought). These two are usually referred to as the old maz’hab and the new maz’hab. Imam Shafi’i lived in Baghdad where he developed the old maz’hab. Then he moved to Egypt where he re-interpreted his rulings to reflect the conditions of his new (Egyptian) environment, hence the new maz’hab. In the case of Nigeria the closest example of the overhaul of religious practices is symbolized by the 19th century jihads of the legendary Shaikh Uthman Dan Fodio, his brother Abdullah, and his son Muhammad Bello, who did not only write copiously on the way forward with the Sharee’ah but also mounted physical fight and opposition against those who insisted on deviant practice of the Sharee’ah.
Unfortunately, there are no more competent Islamic scholars capable of explaining the Islamic message in the light of modern realities. The terrible result is that Muslims have become one of the most backward people today, and people who do not know the true nature of the Islamic message tend to attribute Muslims’ backwardness to Islam itself. The Prophet (pbuh) prophesied this phenomenon in the following Hadith reported by Al-Bukhari on the authority of Abdullahi Ibn Amr Ibn Al’aas:

Allah does not take away the knowledge by removing it from the hearts of the people, he does it by the death of the (religious) learned men, till when none of the learned men (of the Religion) remains, people take as their leaders ignorant persons who when consulted will give their verdict without knowledge. So they will go astray and lead people astray.

Hostile retort is the usual strategy for people who are not equipped with facts and are thus incapable of intelligent argument. Indeed, one of the most dangerous things about today’s pseudo Islamic scholars is that when someone questions their thinking on any religious text they quickly move to accuse the person of questioning the credibility of Islam itself rather than their own understanding of Islam. For detailed analyses on this point please see the book titled “The Half-Scholar of Islam” by the writer of this book.












CHAPTER NINE:

THE DORMANCY OF ISLAMIC SCHOLARS

If the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) were to come back to life and see the plight of the Muslim woman in today’s Nigeria (and indeed in many other places around the world) he would weep unceasingly. The niqab that was ordained as a protection and safeguard for the pride and dignity of the Muslim woman has now become the symbol of her public ignominy instead. The Muslim woman, even the one in hijab without niqab, has completely lost her dignity in the eyes of both her fellow Muslims and non-Muslims. In the market places, hospitals and other public places the Muslim woman in hijab is viewed with suspicion and contempt, and her movement is restricted and closely monitored, because thieves and other kinds of criminals now operate effectively under the cover of the hijab/niqab. With all this happening, the innocent pious Muslim woman has no one to help her out of her public ignominy. The scholars whose duty it is to come to her defence are quietly sitting on the fence with folded arms.
One serious irony is that when these scholars are asked why they do nothing about the widespread abuse of niqab they try to justify their inaction by claiming that they only hear all these allegations but have seen ‘no evidence’ to warrant action. But the simple fact is that they have never conducted any investigation or research into these allegations, so it is only natural that they will not have any evidence in that respect. Without investigation one can never discover the truth about allegations; and without discovering the truth about allegations one can never react or respond appropriately to such allegations. Consider the following episode, as for instance:

There was a widespread allegation in the suburbs of Samaru and Jama’a in Zaria that a certain Igbo man had used niqab to disguise himself as a woman and entered the Jama’a Hospital at Samaru and stole a baby but was caught outside the hospital before he could go too far away; that when the culprit was handed over to the police they quickly set him free because he was discovered to be their fellow Igbo man. At about 11:40am on Monday 26 May, 2008, the writer of this book was at Jama’a Hospital to ascertain this allegation. The Director of the Jama’a Hospital denied that a baby was ever stolen from his hospital. The Director explained what actually happened: A certain woman entered the hospital and behaved in a way that raised suspicion that she wanted to steal the baby of an unconscious mother. An alarm was raised and the police were called in. But upon discovering that the suspect had just been released from psychiatric care, the police released her. The Director explained to the writer that he personally advised the family of the suspect to take her back to the psychiatry hospital. The Director could not remember whether or not the suspect was actually in niqab - meaning that niqab was never a central feature in the incident as widely propagated. But the suspect was actually a woman from the Muslim community and not a non-Muslim Igbo man as alleged.

From the episode narrated above the writer of this book discovered three important things:

1. At least some of the allegations propagated about the wearers of niqab are either half-truths or total fabrications;
2. For ethnocentric reasons the Muslim masses are likely to portray a suspect as a non-Muslim even though they know she is not one;
3. Failure on the part of Muslim authorities to investigate and publish the truth about allegations against wearers of hijab/niqab has contributed to the injury done to the public image of the Muslim woman. Powerful allegations like that of Jama’a Hospital as explained above are to a great extent responsible for the public suspicion of the Muslim woman in hijab/niqab, as a result of which restrictions are placed on the movements of these women in some hospitals and other public places. Had the Muslim authorities pursued such allegations and published (at least some of) them as untrue, some of the suspicions surrounding the wearers of hijab/niqab would have been averted and the public indignity of the Muslim woman would have been ameliorated. But if allegations are left to go uninvestigated, then, ‘silence means yes’.

Dear reader, from the episode of Jama’a Hospital as presented above, one can see clearly how evidence is acquired; one cannot acquire evidence by sitting down at one place waiting for it. The Glorious Qur’an says:

O you who believe, if a sinner comes to you with information, investigate… (49:6).


The books of Islamic history are full of evidence on how the Prophet (pbuh) and his devout Caliphs, especially Umar Ibn Al-Khattab, used to survey markets and other public venues as well as walk through the city streets at night in order to monitor and gather evidence on social and economic behaviour of their people; the Prophet (pbuh) and his Caliphs never stayed in offices waiting for chance to bring them information about the lives of their own followers. Moreover, Islam does not teach us not to react to public allegations unless we have evidence. The type of allegation Islam teaches us not to act upon without proof is the one that is concerned with the right/reputation of a particular person or group of persons, and not the one concerned with the general society. As for the one concerned with the general society, the Prophet (pbuh) used to react to allegations so promptly and decisively that the hypocrites among his followers secretly called him Uzunun, which literally means “an ear”. Uzunun is a derogatory Arabic expression which means “one who believes everything he hears”. Allah the Almighty responded to these hypocrites by telling them that the Prophet’s “believing everything he hears” was for the well-being of society:

And among them are those who abuse the Prophet and say, “He is an ear” Say, “[It is] an ear of goodness for you that believes in Allah and believes the believers and (is) a mercy to those who believe among you”. And those who abuse the Message of Allah – for them is a painful punishment, (Qur’an 9:61).

The obvious fact is that a responsible leader cannot wait for evidence about allegations of corruption in his society before he would act. This is because destruction does not wait for evidence; while evidence is awaited, destruction continues and by the time the evidence could be found, the destruction might have gone beyond control. There is no smoke without fire. When people make an allegation, the allegation may be a full truth, or a half truth, or a probability, or at least a possibility (by imagination). Even if it is only an imagination, it is necessary to caution people against it so that they may not transform their imagination into practice. Moreover, some allegations are by nature extremely difficult (if not impossible) to prove. For instance, there are allegations that some of those students wearing niqab on some Nigerian university campuses are non-Muslims – among them are boys. These allegations may be true. But how on earth can one find proof in that regard? It is only by special accident one can find evidence on such allegations since the perpetrators will hardly ever disclose themselves. In that case, a leader who says that he must see evidence before reacting is in effect abandoning his society to its fate. All these call for a responsible leader of society to be constantly alert, equipped with the most current and up-to-the-minute information about life in his society, so that he might react promptly and appropriately to issues emerging in his society. Unfortunately for today’s Muslim masses, perhaps the only area of societal development in which most of today’s Islamic scholars have the latest information (which might even include future projections) is that aspect of information concerned with the personal weaknesses of their rival scholars in the community.
One most beautiful irony is that the scholars who refuse to react to damaging and destructive public allegations on the pretext of lack of evidence are the same scholars who would advocate the use of niqab even at the price of false testimony. This brings into mind the writer of this book’s encounter with a certain Muslim clergyman in Zaria in the process of gathering information for this book. The writer said to the clergyman:

It is very tempting to question the motives of many of those that use the niqab here in Nigeria. Go round some Nigerian university campuses, for instance, and you would notice that some of the girls who cover their faces tightly (including their eyes), quite ironically, do not mind exposing their forearms decorated with dyes and glittering bracelets. In other words, they cover the part (that is, the face) that is controversial to cover while exposing that (that is, the forearms) which must be covered by the total consensus of Islamic authorities….And sometimes you see a girl in niqab standing in front of a boy and talking and behaving in such a coquettish way that a girl who wears niqab for motives of chastity simply would not do… is completely ridiculing to the whole concept of niqab.

In reaction to these words from the writer the clergyman asserted that “Islamically, we cannot question anybody’s motive; anyone who wears niqab must be taken to be honest in that respect until we see clear evidence that she is not honest… Those who cover their faces tightly while exposing their arms probably do so out of ignorance….” However, when the writer raised the question of some “Muslim women demonizing the niqab by hiding under it to steal items in the markets and to do other immoral things”, the clergyman contradicted himself with this blind assertion: “It is the non-Muslims, the Igbos, who do it just to spoil the name of Islam!” “For Allah’s sake, have you yourself ever caught an Igbo woman in niqab?” the writer asked the clergyman. Then the clergyman asserted further: “I have not; but I know that Muslims will not do it…” The simple logical fact is that if it is said that Islamically anyone wearing niqab must be taken to be honest until practical evidence proves otherwise, then, ipso facto, anyone who commits a crime in niqab must be taken to be a Muslim until practical evidence to the contrary is established. Islam is not Judaism whereby what is not acceptable to be done to a Jew can be done to a gentile (a non-Jew) with impunity – (See Qur’an 03:75). Just as it is Islamically unacceptable to accuse a Muslim of any crime without evidence, so it is Islamically unacceptable to accuse a non-Muslim of any crime without evidence. In the first place, Islam has never told anybody that Muslims are angels. After all, the Qur’an is full of laws dealing with crimes of all sorts – and the subjects of these laws are Muslims, not non-Muslims; even an honest Muslim is not an angel - he/she may commit any crime. In the second place, hypocrites have been part and parcel of every human society since time immemorial, and the Islamic society has never been an exception – in fact, the title of Chapter 63 of the Glorious Qur’an is “The Hypocrites”. There is no place for ethnocentrism in the Islamic faith. Misplacement of blame never helps matters; it only compounds matters by misleading one to go to the wrong source in searching for a solution he will never get. That aside, if the clergyman claims that those misusing niqab probably do so out of ignorance, he could be right. But the question is whether he has lived up to his obligation to enlighten those ignorant ones on the real purpose and correct practice of niqab? The answer is most probably ‘no’.



































CHAPTER TEN:

THE DUTY OF ISLAMIC SCHOLARS

As Ladan (2007:155) rightly noted, the mere presence of Islam or written Islamic ethics cannot guarantee societal well-being unless the society is also endowed with a “cream of scholars with moral virtues”. It is the duty of the scholars to stand as moral vanguards and intellectual signposts for the Muslim masses, and for the scholars to be able to live up to this duty of theirs, they must be paragons of knowledge and virtue. Unfortunately, as Ladan (2007:158) rightly lamented, not only that many of the persons viewed as Islamic scholars today are not really learned enough to be eligible for the mantle of Islamic scholarship but also, even those who are theoretically learned enough tend to lack the moral authority of Islamic scholarship. Not only that these morally wanting scholars are ever ready to make any impious and Islamically fraudulent pronouncement at the behest of men of power and wealth but also, their godless arrogance and immoral competition for fame and political influence in the community have led them to divide the Muslim population into mutually hostile and antagonistic factions - and each faction is prepared to oppose a rival faction even to the point of blasphemy! As no meaningful change can take place in any social setting without effective leadership and proper organization, the natural corollary of the avaricious scramble and politicking among these religious scholars (who are virtually incapable of mutual cooperation on any religious issue) is that Islam now lies at the mercy of hypocrites, opportunists and fanatics.
The case of the Tajweed expert who decided that the girl who refused to remove niqab and learn the Qur’an properly should be left alone in his Qur’anic school, as narrated in chapter seven above, is a clear illustration of the predicament facing today’s Muslim masses. Instead of standing by the truth and doing the right thing with faith and courage, the shaikh only succumbed to the sentiments of the misguided girl and her ignorant parents for fear of being called names in the community. If the Islamic scholars themselves are now afraid of explaining the truth of matters to their own ignorant followers, then, obviously, the way forward for the Muslim society is as bleak as anybody’s guess. The writer of this book has had no experience more disgusting than to hear some of the so-called Islamic scholars today grumble bitterly (in private) about a certain phenomenon in the Muslim society but then the same scholars would stand in front of the people and pronounce the exact opposite of what they grumble about (in private) – simply to avoid hurting feelings with unpalatable truth. They forget that by so-doing they are exchanging the displeasure of men for the displeasure of Allah their sole Creator and Sustainer. These so-called Islamic scholars must be reminded of the following verses of the Glorious Qur’an:


Indeed, those who conceal what we sent down of clear proofs and guidance after we made it clear for the people in the Scripture – those are cursed by Allah and cursed by those who curse (02:159).


Then we put you on an ordained way concerning the matter (of religion); so follow it and do not follow the desires of those who do not know. Indeed, they will be of no use to you against Allah at all. And indeed, the wrongdoers are allies of one another; but Allah is the Protector of the righteous (45:18-19).


The brutal reality is that religious knowledge has now been commercialized; religious knowledge has become a meal-ticket like any other type of knowledge; the man with religious knowledge now aims at maximum profit no less than does the professional capitalist sitting at Wall Street in London. As such, the man of religious knowledge is now prepared to play politics with any interest of Islam in favour of his personal material well-being - may Allah forbid! Allah the Almighty says in the Glorious Qur’an (02:174-175):

Indeed, those who conceal what Allah has sent down of the book and exchange it for a small price – those consume not into their bellies except the Fire. And Allah will not speak to them on the Day of Resurrection, nor will He purify them. And they will have a painful punishment. Those are the ones who have exchanged guidance for error, and forgiveness for punishment. How patient they are for (i.e. in pursuit of) the fire.



























CHAPTER ELEVEN:

REFLECTIONS

The foregoing analyses all call for a serious reflection on the situation of the Muslim Ummah today, especially with respect to the use of niqab. The result of such reflection may call for the following measures to be considered critically.

1) If niqab must be used, then, the original purpose of niqab as a beauty hider should be re-emphasized while niqab as an identity hider is vehemently discouraged and outlawed – that is if the practice of niqab must be an asset rather than a liability to society.

2) Islamic scholars must embark upon massive orientation exercise to the Muslim woman on the correct use of niqab, including elucidation on the circumstances or conditions under which niqab must not be used.

3) Islamic scholars must wake up to their duty as societal watchdogs. They must engage in regular and thorough investigation of all allegations pertaining to the misuse of niqab or hijab (and other Islamic symbols), and their findings on allegations must be published accompanied with relevant injunctions in the interests of Islam and society as a whole.

4) Islamic scholars should enlighten Muslims on the fact that Islam is an objective-oriented religion which does not enslave itself to means, that every law of Islam is strictly for the well-being of society, and that every law of Islam has specific conditions governing its application. The law of necessity in particular is of special importance in the Islamic faith. For instance, the last thing Islam will ever tolerate is for a man to see the private parts of a woman who is not his wife – in fact, some authorities have disapproved of it even for the husband himself (see Al-Mughni vol 9:496). Yet here in Nigeria – indeed, in most parts of the Muslim world today - Muslim women go to hospitals everyday whereby male doctors not only look at their genital areas but also dip their hands deep into the genitals of these women for medical reasons. And there is no Islamic scholar anywhere in the world who would tell you that these Muslim women should not tolerate their genitals being looked at by male doctors, that these women should rather die. And that is because the Islamic law of necessity permits the Muslim woman to tolerate that from the doctor; and if the woman were to choose to die because she would not like a male doctor to see her private part, then she would have died as a disobedient sinner against Allah Almighty. The Muslim should be enlightened on the fact that the Islamic law of necessity, which is one of the most spectacular expressions of the unbounded mercy of Allah upon His creatures, and which is an embodiment of the splendid beauty of the Islamic religion, is of elaborate application, affecting every aspect of the Muslim’s life, be it at individual level or at society level.

5) Perhaps the biggest problem facing Muslims in Nigeria, just like Muslims in most other parts of the world today, is what the writer of this book usually refers to as the contagion of imitation, that is, blind adoption of information from foreign Islamic sources. This contagion of imitation often goes a long way to violate the Islamic law of necessity, with untold terrible consequences for Muslims in the imitating country. As explained earlier on, the law of Islam is a divine, perfect and objective injunction. However, the interpretation of this perfect and objective law is done by imperfect and subjective human beings. As such, the understanding and interpretation of the law may not be as perfect and objective as are the text and spirit of the law itself. To wit, people’s perception and interpretation of issues are determined by their own peculiar personal and societal conditions. Against this backdrop, as earlier noted, the interpretation of the Islamic scholars of a particular country may not be applicable in other countries due to variations in peculiar circumstances and conditions of various countries. As such, for Islam to actually be a blessing to any society the religious scholars of that society must be their own men and not of those parroting the interpretations of foreign authorities.
Unfortunately for Muslims today, people from all over the Muslim world go abroad - for example, Saudi Arabia – to study Islam and when they go back to their own countries, instead of re-interpreting the theory they learnt abroad to reflect the peculiar conditions of their own countries, they only seek for direct and unmodified application of the theoretical concepts they studied abroad. The result is often that they mess up matters and worsen the problems of their own local societies. A quotation from a prominent scholar in Saudi Arabia, Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Lutfi Assobbag (2000:112), might shed some light on the point at stake:

Islam did not ordain the veil on the woman except to safeguard her against abuse, exposure to suspicion and immorality, and falling into crime. So how can it be lawful for the Muslim woman who believes in Allah and the Last Day to breach the order of Allah by taking off the veil in front of a man on the grounds that he is her servant, or her driver, or her doctor, or her trading partner, or a tailor, or a husband’s friend, or her teacher - be that in a general lecture hall or a private lesson classroom, or similar things??

Assobbag wrote these words in spite of the fact that his most learned pious predecessors, including Shaikhul Islam Ibn Taimiyyah himself as explained in the Introduction to this book, had seven centuries earlier listed the doctor as one of those permitted to see the woman’s face (for medical purposes). The fact is that the Saudi Arabia in which his pious predecessors wrote seven centuries ago was a poverty–ridden Saudi Arabia in which female medical doctors were probably more scarce than gold, whereas he (Assobbag) wrote in an oil-enriched wealthy Saudi Arabia where the best female doctors could be flown in from any part of the world at any time necessary. So he is not foolish by writing what he wrote. The foolish one is that Nigerian Islamic scholar who will see Assobbag’s words and blindly adopt them in his own country without critical consideration for the peculiar conditions of his own (poor) country.
Another Saudi scholar, Shaikh Kamal Azb (2001:50), was asked about the permissibility of mixing up boys and girls in a classroom. He responded that it is not permissible to mix up male and female students in the same classroom, and that where there is no gender separation in schools the Muslims of that country should go abroad and study in an Islamic country where there is gender separation in schools. This response from Shaikh Azb, in the opinion of the writer of this book, is not as stupid as it might sound once it is placed in the context of his peculiar personal and societal conditions. He lives in Saudi Arabia where virtually everything has its appropriate Islamic place and so it has never been necessary for any of his daughters to study in a gender mixed school. The real stupidity actually lies with that Nigerian Islamic scholar who might be influenced by the words of Sheikh Azb to come and tell Nigerian Muslims that if they cannot find gender separated schools then they should stay out of school. How many Nigerian Muslims can afford to go abroad and study in gender separated schools when most of the same Nigerian Muslims cannot afford to go and study in another city even within the boundaries of Nigeria?!
The writer of this book has never studied in Saudi Arabia. But some of the most important of his religious teachers studied in Saudi Arabia. Also, the vast majority of the Islamic textbooks read by the writer came from Saudi Arabia. As such, the writer has enormous respect for the religious scholars of Saudi Arabia. Moreover, no sincere believer will deny the fact that Saudi Arabia is the centre of Islam (for the simple fact it hosts the two holiest Islamic shrines – the Ka’abah and the Prophet’s mosque) and that Saudi Arabia has been the most important financial supporter of Islam worldwide over the last few decades. However, there is one elemental truth about today’s Saudi scholars the writer feels obliged to point out in the interests of Islam and Muslims around the world.
The simple truth is that a typical Saudi scholar does not travel around. Even if he travels, his travels are likely to be restricted to only the Arab nations. Even if he travels beyond Arab nations, he is unlikely to live anywhere for long enough to be able to understand the peculiar mentalities and circumstances of the people out there. A typical Saudi scholar of today does not have the experience of living with non-Muslims – because he has lived in a 100% Muslim nation ever since he was born. An English saying goes thus, “A proverb is no proverb until life has illustrated it” As such, the mere reading of volumes of Islamic literature does not give one a perceptive understanding of Islamic issues; it is only that reading which is nourished by practical life experience that brings about insightful understanding of matters. The Qur’an itself tells us this in the following verse (22:46):

Do they not travel through the land, so that their hearts (and minds) may thus learn wisdom and their ears may thus learn to hear?

In view of all this, a typical Saudi scholar does not have a global view of Islam. As such, if a typical Saudi scholar is approached for a verdict on an Islamic issue with a global status, he is not unlikely to pronounce a verdict that may be theoretically sound but practically dangerous. To illustrate this point, the writer of this book recalls an item he read in the year 2000 in one American–based international Islamic magazine. A prominent Saudi Shaikh was asked for a fatwa (religious verdict) on business transaction between a Muslim and a non-Muslim. The Shaikh replied that there was nothing wrong with legitimate business transactions between a Muslim and a non-Muslim but, the Sheikh concluded, while doing business with them “she should hate her non-Muslim business partners in her heart”. In their own foolishness, the editors of the magazine really published the unreasonable words of the Sheikh. Little did these editors know that while they kept on publicizing their empty hatred for their American hosts the Americans were busy planning for “September 11” in reaction to their foolishly provocative publications? Indeed, the Arabs have a proverb that says that “Whereas the anger of a fool is known from his words, the anger of a wise is known from his action” – for more on this topic, see a forthcoming book titled “ The Logic of September 11” by the writer of this book. Can any sensible believer imagine the Prophet (pbuh) sending an open letter to Ja’afar Ibn Abi Talib and his co-fugitives in Christian Abyssinia (that is, today’s Euthopia, which was the destination of the first Muslim migrants in the early years of Islam) telling them to hate their Abyssinian hosts?! Not at all – because even a fool can guess how much trouble such a message would have engendered for the fugitives if it got to the notice of their Abyssinian hosts.
At this juncture it may be stated in a footnote that critical Muslim observes who have had some experience in the West, as the writer of this book has had, have little choice but to agree with Al-Qaradawi when he stated that to a large extent Muslims’ own misrepresentation of Islam is responsible for the way people hate Islam today (Bello, 2003). At the beginning of Islam, hijrah (that is, flee from religious persecution) was made from the land of non-Muslims to the land of Muslims. But today the situation is the exact opposite of that trend. Almost every Western country today is full of Islamic scholars from Asia and the Arab world. While some of these Arab Islamic scholars migrated to the Western countries voluntarily, a good number of them actually fled to the West as asylum seekers when they were chased out of their own countries by their own anti-Islamic tyrannical Arab rulers. Unfortunately, instead of taking the opportunity to proselytise Islam to their Western hosts, some of these fugitive Muslim scholars in the West only take advantage of the liberal attitudes of the Western people to subject them to unacceptable provocation in the name of Islamic faith. They make about their Western hosts such offensive utterances they know very well that if they were to attempt making (against their native rulers) back in their home countries they would simply disappear into thin air. Today’s tribe/race–based Muslims must stop destroying Islam by misrepresenting it as a religion of nonsense and aggression. The writer of this book was shocked to read an internet publication (www.islamawareness...) whereby a Muslim woman in the American State of Florida was “suing the State of Florida Vehicle and License Department because it asked her to remove her face-veil (niqab) so that an ID photo can be taken.” This woman simply needed to be reminded that in Saudi Arabia vehicle and license department will never ask to see her face simply because there (in Saudi Arabia) women are never allowed to drive. Lo and Behold! Islam is an objective criterion of judgement between truth and falsehood, and not a racial divide between the East and the West.





CONCLUSION

It has been expounded that the purpose of niqab was to hide the woman’s beauty, and not to hide her identity. The conversion of niqab from beauty hider into identity hider as it is the case today has been responsible for serious crises and tension within Muslims and between Muslims and non-Muslims. Niqab as an identity hider has also created room for criminal impostors to disguise themselves with religious cover for various nefarious motives. For niqab to remain an Islamically valid practice it must be returned to its actual purpose as beauty hider (and not identity hider as it has now become). To further avert the civic controversies surrounding the practice of niqab, the users of niqab must be properly enlightened on the exceptional conditions to the use of niqab. Such exceptional conditions include the classroom, the court, the hospital, and any other place/condition whereby the purpose of identification calls the disuse of niqab. In particular, Islam will not exchange a minor evil for a major one by promoting the use of niqab at the price of false testimony. No Muslim is given the right to uphold her own faith (with the use of niqab as for instance) by destroying the faith of another Muslim (through, for example, the imposition of false testimony on him). And let it be remembered that, Islamically speaking, the ultimate responsibility for an imposed sin lies on the shoulders of the imposer (who may only be intoxicated with blind temporary authority/power or may just be fired by fanaticism).
The unity and solidarity of Muslims is of paramount importance. But Muslims are never to unite or solidarise on falsehood and inequity. Allah the Almighty says in the Glorious Qur’an (05:02):

And cooperate in righteousness and piety,
but do not cooperate in sin and aggression.

To unite and solidarise on injustice is to unite and solidarise against Allah and His Messenger, regardless of whether the people involved in such a sacrilegious unity call themselves Muslims or Christians or whatever - in fact, the case is worst if the people involved do so in the name of Islam. The ultimate result of any solidarity formed against Allah and His Messenger is failure and disaster for those who form it – even if they record any initial honeymoon “success”. The Glorious Qur’an declares:

Those who oppose Allah and His Messenger will be among those most humiliated. Allah has decreed, “It is I and My messengers who must prevail” Indeed, Allah is Powerful and Exalted in Might. (58:20-21)

Islam is not a blindly closed legislation incapable of addressing unforeseen circumstances; Islam only appears to be a blindly closed system where there are no competent and responsible religious scholars to monitor its practice. Islamic scholars must wake up to their cardinal duty to provide intellectual guidance and moral leadership for society. If the religious scholars are really religious scholars, then they must have the firm conviction that Allah the Irresistible is ever firmly ready to defend them against anyone who might threaten them for speaking the truth. If anyone threatens them for speaking out Allah the Almighty will first make that person the instrument of their success instead – and let them bear in mind that their highest success comes when they are killed for telling the truth, then He (Allah) will destroy that person (for opposing the defenders of truth); if anyone denies them a drop of water because they have spoken the truth, Allah will cause that person to die of thirst; if anyone causes them to lose a morsel of food because they have spoken the truth, Allah will make that person die of hunger; and if anyone uses his power against them for speaking the truth, Allah will make powerlessness and ignominy the end of that person. The religious scholars should bear in mind that if they are not killed by enemies of truth, they will still be killed by motor accident, or by cancer, or by stroke, or by diabetes, or by heart attack, or by malaria, or by mystery, or by etc - in a nutshell, they must die anyway. An Arab poem says: Iza lam yakun lilmawti buddun, faminal aari an tamuta jabanan, which means, “if there is no escape from death, then it is a shame to die as a coward”. If the religious scholars die as cowards, they will not only have died shamefully but they will also be met with the painful chastisement and eternal torment they deserve in the Hereafter. The religious scholars should therefore fear Allah the Omnipotent and thus begin to ‘call a spade a spade’ as required of them by Allah their Creator.
In the Introduction to this book it was stated that “Where Muslims lack open-mindedness and sense of objectivity, “Islam” becomes not better than any other religion”. For Allah’s sake, let us put sentiment aside and provide a dispassionate and fair answer to this question: Do people who condone a type of dress that facilitates various sorts of serious sinful acts (including zina, robbery and impersonation) really have any moral authority to condemn those who dress half-naked? The answer is obviously ‘NO’. People who seek to correct the wrongs of others but are not willing to listen to any suggestion that they should clean their own backyard will not only incur the wrath of Allah for their hypocrisy but will also be met with the ridicule and contempt they deserve from the people they seek to correct. Thus did Allah the Exalted justly ask the rhetorical question? :

Do you order righteousness of the people and forget yourselves while you recite the Scripture? Then will you not reason? (Qur’an 2:44).

Two salients points are necessary in the final analysis. Firstly, as elucidated by Sayyid Maududi (Murad, 1985), today’s Muslims put more emphasis on physical attributes of religion (that is, long beard, short trousers, niqab, etc) than the actual essence of religion – character. And since the physical features need almost no effort to manifest (as compared to character which needs diligent and sustained efforts to cultivate and maintain), the over-emphasis on physical features has made it a lot easier for any impostor with the weakest faith to use these physical features as a blackmailing cover to portray himself as the strongest Muslim instead. Secondly, attitudes toward matters of sin and morality vary from one individual to another, depending on individuals’ degrees of piety and levels of spiritual development. To wit, the kind of sin that may haunt a man of strong piety for months may disturb a man of weak faith for a few minutes only. In this respect a Hadith of Ibn Mas’ood states:

A Believer perceives his sin as an (unstable) mountain about to tumble on and crush him. A hypocrite, on the other hand, perceives his sin as a fly that (menacingly) alights on his nose that he dismisses with a wave of his hand (across his nose) like this – Ibn Mas’ood illustrated (See Al-Qaradawi, in Bello, 2003:226).

The sin of false testimony, which is at the top of major sins in the Islamic faith, has become a trivial offence (if it is taken to be an offence at all) for most people today. The writer of this book once had a neighbor that stopped greeting him simply because the neighbor approached him with a request for a letter of recommendation for his sister and the writer declined, saying “…I have no acquaintance with your sister”. The writer also remembers one incident that occurred while he was a teacher at an international Arabic school based in the Nigerian city of Jos. A prominent Islamic clergyman in a part of the country wrote a letter of recommendation for someone who was seeking for admission into that school. In his recommendation letter, which included all the due Islamic formalities, the clergyman described the applicant as a hafiz (that is, one who has committed the whole of the Qur’an to memory) – a quality that would have given the applicant an almost automatic admission into that school. Unfortunately, when the applicant was interviewed he was found to have only few chapters of the Qur’an in his memory. All the teachers in that school were shocked in disappointment because of the high regard they had for the clergyman who made that false recommendation. The reason is that the clergyman might have written his recommendation merely on the basis of what he was told without caring to ascertain the truth of the information he was given in that regard.
In view of the fact that the imperative to avoid false testimony (which has become a vogue for both the religious masses and clergymen of society) constitutes the backbone of the argument of this book, coupled with the fact that today’s Muslims emphasize on physical religious features more than religious character, the writer will not be surprised at all if his presentation is simply dismissed as a basket of nonsense.
May Allah the Most Merciful put us all among “Those who listen to speech and follow the best of it. Those are the ones Allah has guided, and those are the people of understanding” (Qur’an 39:18). And may Allah shower His peace and blessings upon our holy Prophet Muhammad.

































BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ali, A.Y. Translation and Commentary on the Holy Qur’an. King Fahd
Holy Qur’an Printing Complex, Madinah (1410AH).
Al-Jamal, I.M. (1981). Fiqhul Marr’atil Muslimah. Maktabatul Qur’an, Cairo.
Al-Muslimiyyi, A. A. (2005). Al-Usratu Fil Islam. Darussabuni, Cairo.
Al-Qaradawi. Y. (1989). Al-Halal Wal-Haram Fil Islam. IIFOS, Kuwait.
Al-Qaradawi, Y. (1991). Islamic Awakening Between Rejection And Extremism. (English translation by Al Shaikh–Ali and Wasfy). IIIT, Herdon.
Al-Qaradawi. Y. (2003). Prioriries in the Light of the Qur’an and the Sunnah. (English translation by Bello A. M). Olucouger Prints, Lagos.
Al-Uthaimin, M. S. Sharr’hu Manzumatil Qawa’id Wal Usool. Edited by Addimashqi,A.A. and Ramadan,S.M.(2004). Maktabatussunnah, Cairo.
Assobbag, M. L. “Tahreemul Khalwati Bilmarr’atil Ajnabiyyati Wal Ikhtilatil Mustahtirr”, in Majmoo’atu Rasa’il Fil Hijab Wassufoo’r. RIBII (2000), Riyadh.
At-Tabari, M. J. Jami’ul Bayan An Ta’weeli Aayil Qur’an. (Vol 12). Darul Fikr (1988), Beirut.
Azb, S.K.(2001).Ghaddul Basorr.Darurrawdah, Cairo.
Bashier, Z. (1980). Muslim Women in the Midst of Change. The Islamic Foundation, Leicester.
Ibn Hajar. Bulughul Maraam. (English translation by Al-Selek, M.). Dar El Aker (2005) Beyrouth.
Ibn Qudamah. Al-Mughni. (Vol 9). Dar Hijr (1992), Cairo.
Ibn Taimiyah. “Hijabul Marr’ati Wa Libasuha Fissalat”, in Majmoo’atu Rasa’il Fil Hijab Wassufoo’r. RIBII (2000), Riyadh.
Kamil, M. (1999) The Logic of Faith. Munascript Noetic Associates Ltd,
Lagos.
Kutub, M. (1982). Islam the Misunderstood Religion. Islamic Publications Ltd, Lahore.
Ladan, A. A. “Ethics in Fatwa (Legal Opinion) And Its Implications to Islamic Scholarship in the 21st Century Nigeria”. Journal of Educational Research and Development. Vol 2 No. 1, April 2007, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria.
Maududi, A.A. Come Let Us Change This World. Edited by Siddique, K. (1986). Thinkers Library, Singapore.
Maududi, A.A. Let Us Be Muslims. Edited by Murad, K.(1985). The Islamic Foundation, Leicester.
Sheik M. A. H. (Undated). Morality in Islam: Sexual Issues in Modern Era and Its Solution in Islam. Adam Publishers and Distributors, New Delhi – 110002.
Tabbarah, A.A. (1988). The Spirit of Islam. (English translation and Revision by Shoucair, H. T. and Baalbaki, R.). Dar El-Ilm Lilmalayin, Beirut
Tikumah, I. H. (2007) Islam or Tribalism? Ahmadu Bello University Press Ltd, Zaria.

NB: All quotations from the Arabic titles listed above are the author’s own translation of the Arabic texts.

















OTHER BOOKS BY THE SAME AUTHOR

1.The African God -
Commonsense for the 21st Century

2. The Half-Scholar of Islam

3. Muslims and English in Nigeria

4. Islam or Tribalism?

5.The Nonsense of Tribalism

6. The Refugees’ Rebellion

7. The Mother of All Ingrates

2 Comments:

Blogger khan books said...

GET PAKISTANI INDIAN AMERICAN WHATSAPP NUMBERS FREE FREE
CLICK HERE NOW

August 9, 2019 at 4:19 AM

 
Blogger khan books said...

GET PAKISTANI INDIAN AMERICAN WHATSAPP NUMBERS FREE FREE
CLICK HERE NOW

August 9, 2019 at 4:19 AM

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home