Purdah and the Woman

Hi Angela

I am not sure about the situation in Afghanistan or else. I am one of those who does not pay much attention to the media.

About ten years back, when I went to perform Umrah (lesser pilgrimage) � meaning I went to Saudi Arabia, I found the situation there completely different to what is portrayed in the media. There are problems in every country, every society and every religion but I feel that where Islam and Muslim women are concerned things are blown out of proportion, so personally I think most of us just ignore what the media presents.

I could not connect to the link you posted, I will try again later.

Take care

ummziba wrote)
Sorry, I was a little slow in getting the right story .  So, of course she should marry him and ignore the silly misogynist friend with the bad advice!

The basis for "purdah" doesn not come from Islam, it comes from culture.  A bad (and sad) attempt by some misguided men to control their women.  How do they justify it?  Beats me, but I am sure they think they are correct, just as many wrongdoers justify things to themselves to make it seem right in their minds.

Assalamu Alaikum

First of all, Brother Mohammad, the question about Purdah is not simply about the ayats you quote as Sister Ummziba pointed out.  The question about Prudah Sister Angela brings forth is about a book called Purdah and The Status of Woman in ISLAM which was written by Sayyid Abul A�la Maududi and was originally published in 1939. 

As I see it, the problem with Purdah (the book) is this.  The author starts out by setting up a very negative image of the world.  No just the non-Muslim world, but all of it.  He believes that not only non-Muslims but also Muslims were living a life away from Allah.  But in setting up his argument, he argues that humans as being created by NATURE and that we are created by natures just like other animals (his worlds) and then he goes on to create a picture of humans that reduces them to not much more than lustful animals.  Of course he gives lots of examples when would lead one to agree with him.  He uses examples of nude beaches and such.  Another step in his argument is that he claims that all societies throughout history that have allowed women to work or interact outside of the home have done so for the benefit of enhancing males sexual desires.  In other word, they have oppressed and devalued women and turned them into little more than sex objects.  He also builds an argument that women are physically weaker than women but no just do to lack of muscle mass.  But the fact that they give birth and have monthly cycle makes them �very nearly sick.�  His research is no well documented and medical information is from 1909.   One such statement from a Professor Lapin Sky in his book The Development of Persoanlity in Women is as follows:

��during menstruation a woman is deprived of her freedom of action; she becomes a slave to involuntary behavior and her capacity to do anything at will is considerably reducted.�

Maududi goes on to say in Purdah �There is evidence to show that a woman loses her mental balance during this period.  She becomes easily irritable and furious, behaves at times in a silly and wild manner, and may even commit suicide.� 

If that is not enough to want men to not only lock women away but to put in insane asylums, take a look at what he says about pregnancy.  �She turns mentally deranged; all her mental and psychic energies remain upset; and a little carelessness can cause her serious illness.�  After pregnancy, things do look much better, in fact, he says that it takes �about a year� for her to get out of this �sick or nearly sick condition.�  And while she is in this condition, �her general efficiency is reduced to half, even to less than half.�  I think someone needed to show this many studies about women in some cultures who give birth and within a matter of a couple of hours are back working the fields with baby strapped on her back.  If what he said were true about women, why would we even risk having children or allowing women to care for them?  With respect to breast feeding, which he argues is a must for a mother to do; he states �The best of her body is turned into milk for the baby.�  What does that even mean?  He goes as far as to say that during the time a mother is beast feeding, what she intakes all goes to the production of milk except for �just that much as can keep her alive.�

I guess if we that human creation to be the result of NATURE, this might be turn; however, Allah didn�t fall short on insight when creating women.  Women are not creatures who are some how rendered emotionally or even physically crippled by virtue of any aspect of their child bearing capacity.  Although there may be some cases where women have had problems with their reproductive cycle, that is by far not the norm.  We don�t need to do research to know this.  All we have to do is look at the current world population and the fact that approximated � of the world population continues to be female.  If Maududi�s argument were correct, the world population would be far less and there would be far fewer women, if for no other reason than from deaths due to suicide and deaths related to child birth.

In all fairness to Maududi, maybe he was simply going on the best research at the time; however given that we are living almost 70 past the time when Purdah was originally published, does it not make sense to update the data?  Why hasn�t someone done that?  Is it possible that his argument would not hold up so well if it were updated?

Now that I�ve pointed out a few problems, let me turn to what he claims �Purdah� is.  Maududi states that �Purdah� is �a title for a set of injunctions, which constitute the most important part of the Islamic system of community life.�  He goes on to say that anyone �who has not wholly lost his powers of discernment� will see that what he say is true.  And that if �this system� works, �the whole woe-stricken world will rush towards this fountainhead of peace and security and seek its help in curing its social maladies.�  I have a problem with this.  His clam in the book is that the Ummah is sick.  He says, �he himself [the Muslim] has got lost and is running after the other blind people in search of light and truth.�  If this is the case, why is he giving us something new?  Why isn�t he just pointing us back to Islam?  What is �this system�, this �set of injunctions�?  Does he think he can do something that the Noble Qur�an could not?  This fountainhead we will be rushing towards.  Is that Islam or his �Purdah�?

I know I�m being long winded here but the book is 152 pages long and he weaves a rather lengthy (and at moments plausible) argument in trying to get his audience to buy his view.  But I�m not ready to leave yet.  The most interesting part of the story is yet to come.

Once he finally gets around to actually discussing the Qur�an, we have read 90 pages of his book.  He first quotes the Qur�an for purposed of his subject in Chapter 10 which begins on page 91.   All I can say is that I was shocked.  It truly appeared to me that the ayats he quoted and the way he translated them were for the sole purpose of justifying his view and not as a means to see if his view held up under Islamic scrutiny.  I have never seen ayats so misquoted before.    

First, he tried to show that the Qur�an agrees with his position that humans were created just like animals.  He quotes Sura 42, Ayat 11 as such

�He has given you wives from among yourselves to multiply you, and cattle male and female.�

when Sura 42, Ayat 11 actually is as follows:

Yusuf Ali Translation: (He is) the Creator of the heavens and the earth: He has made for you pairs from among yourselves and pairs among cattle: by this means does He multiply you: there is nothing whatever like unto Him and He is the One that hears and sees (all things).

Allah is not saying that he created humans and animals the same no more than he is saying he created heaven and earth the same.  It is a quote about �Creation� and definitely not about �NATURE.� 

To make matter worse, right after that he quotes Sura 2, Ayat 223 this way

�Your wives are your farms.�

when that ayat is as follows:

Yusuf Ali Translation: Your wives are as a tilth unto you; so approach your tilth when or how ye will. But do some good act for your souls beforehand; and fear Allah and know that ye are to meet Him (in the Hereafter) and give (these) good tidings to those who believe.

I guess Maududi believes that women are like animals and that  their purpose is basically as a breeding machine.  It interesting that he doesn�t make this same claim about men.  Somehow men are the farmers and women are the farm.  That doesn�t sound like two apples but more like apples and hay.  Why didn�t he see in this ayat that since Allah created woman to be man�s partner, he did so in a manner that was fitted to him (i.e., the reason for the use of the word �tilth��Allah cultivated, created, women as a fitting mate for man).  Well, if we go a bit further in his book, we will see why he needs to set up with distinction between men and women.

In the next chapter, 11, Maududi makes this statement, ��men being the active partner has been justly regarded by Islam as superior to women� and he quote the Qur�an in justifying that claim but he makes the same mistake as before.  That is, he misquotes.  He writes Sura 2, Ayat 228 this way

�Of coarse, men are a degree above them (women).�

when that ayat actually is as follows:

Yusuf Ali Translation: Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three monthly periods nor is it lawful for them to hide what Allah hath created in their wombs if they have faith in Allah and the Last Day. And their husbands have the better right to take them back in that period if they wish for reconciliation. And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them according to what is equitable; but men have a degree (of advantage) over them and Allah is Exalted in Power Wise.

The degree that men have over women in his case is a matter regarding divorce.  It has nothing to do with men being superior to women.  In act, it says in this ayat that �women shall have rights similar to the rights against them� but that �men have a degree (of advantage) over them.�  Advantage over what?  In this case, divorce.  How in the world does that mean men are superior?

In the very next section, Man as Provider, of Chapter 11, not even two whole paragraphs later, Maududi, again asserts the superiority of men over women and once again, he misquotes an ayat from the Qur�an.  He does so with Sura 4, Ayat 34 this time.  He translates it in the following way

�Men are the governors of the affairs of women because Allah has made man superior to women and because men spend of their wealth on them.�

when it should be as follows:

Yusuf Ali Translation: Men are the protectors and maintainers of women because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct admonish them (first) (next) refuse to share their beds (and last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience seek not against them means (of annoyance): for Allah is Most High Great (above you all).

There is nothing here about superiority but rather a division of duties based upon the distinction Allah in His All-Knowing wisdom knows is best for men and women.  If man has a �degree� over women it�s because they work and support the family and are given the duty of being the protector, maintainer and spiritual leader of not only their wife but of their family.  This allows women to be free to do her duties of taking care of the home and raising their offspring if they have any.

I am going to stop quoting at this point because I think it is clear that something is not quite right about the book.  And trust me, it doesn�t get better.  In fact, he goes from men being superior to a full fledged war on why women.  Although women are given the okay by both Allah and the Prophet (pbuh) to work outside the home, to go to the mosque to pay, to have careers of their own, and the right to gain economically from their labor, Maududi had a reason for denying all of those things to women.  He does so in a very subtle way.  He says that women can have those things but solely for the purpose to make betterment of men.  Or has he would say for the �ruler.�  That is, women are to be educated but only insofar as that makes them better wives and mothers.  So they can talk classes on cooking and childcare. They can pray but only in their closets.  They don�t need a career because Allah gave them their only careers, i.e., serving their husband (which includes bearing raising his children); and because they inherit and receive marriage dowry on top of having their husband support them, well, they (women) more often than not end up �economically better off than the husband.�  In other words, women are not to have any ambitions whatsoever outside of their married life.  Ambition is for men and men alone.

And then the rest of the book goes into detail as to how a woman should be in order to be considered virtuous, what the punishment is if she doesn�t act virtuous and how to prevent her from not being virtuous.  Although there are snippets here and there as to the behavior of men, it is usually included as a means to make a point that that is for men but more or something different is expect of women.  Oddly enough, at one point in the book, the author says that men should treat their wives in such a way as to preserve the relationship between �ruler and ruled� and not put it at the level of �master and slave�; however, although �ruler and ruled� is even taken the Qur�an way too far, his book does nothing short of putting the marriage relationship as one of �master and salve�.

Never does he clearly states what the �set of injunctions, which constitute the most important part of the Islamic system of community life�, which he said early on in the book that he was going to put forth, are.  By his own definition of the state of the Ummah and a need for a cure for its �social maladies�, this book should be equally address to the problems of both men and women; however, it is obvious by the book that he feels the entire problem can be simply solved by secluding women from the rest of society.  It is interesting that he comes close to pointing out some problems that men have attributed to the Ummah but he never quite goes there.  I will give you one example.  In discussing �Human Nature and its Demands�, he quotes Sura 3, Ayat 14 this way

�Men are tempted by the lure of women and offspring.�

when the ayat should be as follows:

Yusuf Ali Translation: Fair in the eyes of men is the love of things they covet: women and sons; heaped-up hoards of gold and silver; horses branded (for blood and excellence); and (wealth of) cattle and well-tilled land. Such are the possessions of this world's life; but in nearness to Allah is the best of the goals (to return to).

He was trying to use this ayat to show that man has a natural desire to be married and have children; however, if we consider the full ayat it appears that man has a desire for many things and not just a natural desire to get married and have kids.  In fact, this ayat is about man�s desire for this world and a warning about what the true goal is. 

If man is so inclined to desire this world, why is he free to roam the streets while women are locked away in their homes?  There is no warning that he should be at home if he is not at work.  Does he really think that by secluding women that all of the worlds �woes� will simply disappear?  There are more maladies to this world than sex...there are alcohol, drugs, and gambling for starters.  This is supposed to be a book to help solve the �woes� of the Ummah.  Why is there not more advice and instructions to help men deal with issues they have that keep them off the right path?

Bottom line for me is this book gives rise to more questions and concerns than anything.  It is based upon poor and/or outdated research.  It uses arguments that are Islamically unfitting at times�such as the statement and arguments regarding humans as being a product of nature and are created in the same manner as animals.  It never clearly states what the �set of injunctions� for correcting the woes of the world are and at the same time, it actually distorts and at times even eradicates some of the base commands of both the Noble Qur�an and the Hadith. 

Okay, you probably got more than you wanted but there is my short, but long winded, version of the book.  If anyone would like an e-copy of it, I would be glad to send it to you.  It is an Adobe Reader file.  If you want a copy, just send me you e-mail address through a PM and I will make sure you get it.

Allah Hafiz

PAZ, Khadija