R3V1V4L
17-05-09, 09:01 PM
Due to the considered inherent patriarchal nature and established systems of Islam, it is impossible for any Feminism to be compatible with that religion. Feminism moves to change the existing system of Islam to orientate the system to a more balanced male and female system mainly in those elements associated with the public sphere. This is usually done by altering the accepted social conducts established by the fundamentals of the religious system. It is for this reason that Feminism encounters heavy opposition from those in and associated with the religion of Islam. The ideas behind the religious laws of Islam come from books considered to be written by God and according to which God’s words are infallible and cannot, therefore, be changed no matter how much time passes since the revelations were revealed. In all religions God is seen as knowing best and is the Creator of all things, therefore His word is final. With this view, Feminism is challenged every step of the way; since it is not coming from revelations from God and is looking to change that which He revealed there is no doubt as to why it faces opposition and incompatibility with what is written in Islam’s holy book, the Qur’an.
Feminism, used in this term, was coined by utopian Charles Fourier.[1] It was first used in the 1890s in reference to women’s equal legal and political rights with men.[2] However, in understanding what Feminism is as an idea and concept it can be seen that feminist thought existed, but without term, prior to the 1890s.[3] For example, Wollstonecraft’s A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, which argues for the woman as a rational being, was published in 1792.[4] Feminism is an evolving movement. From the time of Wollstonecraft’s argument merely of female rationality being equal to that of man’s to that of today where women move to claim rights for women of the political and social levels. There are a few forms of ideological identity to which feminism attaches its ideals, such as Liberalism and Marxism.
“Liberalism is the most widely adopted theoretical framework in current western political thought”.[5] Liberalism emphasises the rights of the individual in the civil and political spheres. [6] The main contributors to the liberal theoretical framework were John Locke[7], Thomas Hobbes[8] and Immanuel Kant[9]. The individual freedoms that came about from their work can be seen in the rights of the United Nations and Capitalist nations today. They include “freedom of conscience, speech, association, occupation [and] sexuality” (which is a more recent phenomenon).[10][11]
Liberal feminism does not sit well with Islam as Islam looks at the collective community and collective thought as part of a key of shaping individual thought, while individual actions also shape a society. On the opposite side of this Liberalism looks at the State having no influence on shaping the thought of the individual and that the individual must govern himself solely and is not shaped by any thought but his own. [12] Liberalism, stemming from secular and plural ideals[13], does not accept a God-consciousness in the equation of man, instead freeing itself from this limitation. Taking this into account, liberal feminists have also added this to their part of the feminist movement, as they have accepted the “basic tenets of the liberal framework”.[14] Without understanding the idea of a God in the equation of man, and that according to religious thought God is the creator and so, therefore, has rights over man by way of shaping the laws in which human beings are to live, it makes it impossible for liberal feminism with a secular mindset to understand the nature of and concept of freedom within religion, especially that of Islam.
Marxist, or socialist concepts of freedom of human beings, unlike liberalism, has a large emphasis on the collective thought. In the article ‘Politics and Feminism: Deconstructing the Theoretical Frameworks’ it states the five main tenets of Marxism. These tenets state that “socialism is the focus of material production as the basic engine of history”.[15] Social concepts of happiness see that the individual makes up a collective and that when the collective progresses together it will cause happiness for the whole community.[16] Marxism sees history and the progress of man throughout it in a pattern, one that was formed through the relationships of groups of people with means of production of material progress.[17] Social constructs see the human labour force as a creation for material progress.[18][19] Hard labour is rewarded and weak labour is not. It is more class that distinguishes also the types of labour, rather than sex.[20][21] This is the essence of Marxism.
Marxism, far more than liberalism, ignores God completely. God never, in the entire system of Marxism, enters the equation. An infamous quote is that “religion is the opium of the masses”,[22] often quoted in discussing how Marxism views religion. This was said by Karl Marx in Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, 1843.[23] The original text was in German and appeared as “Die religion…ist das Opium des Volkes”.[24] A look at the section which this quote came from makes it more understandable to realise the view that Marx, the founder of Socialism, took on religion: “Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people [masses]”.[25] For feminists who have accepted the Marxist interpretation on how to define life’s affairs it makes it impossible for Islam, and any religions for that matter, to co-habitat as Marxist Socialism denies the concept of God completely, as can be seen from the discussion on the most famous of Marxist quotes above. By removing God it makes it impossible for Marxist feminists to understand the Muslim woman and how she interprets freedom as taken from the Qur’an, as the Qur’an is the word of God and cannot be challenged.
An understanding of the two main kinds of feminism, Marxism and Liberalism has been undertaken, so it is now time to understand the religious side to a person’s ideological view-point on life and the freedoms that are entailed within it. According to the five main religions, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism, all the sources for the laws of life and government are to be taken from the holy books they have and the Prophets who brought the books. For Judaism the book is the Torah and the Prophet is Moses; Christianity has its Bible and Prophet Jesus; Islam follows the Qur’an and Prophet Muhammad; Hindus have a few books, some written by one person and others written by a few such as the Vedas, Upanishads and the Gita; and Buddhists also have a variety of figures and books (Tripitaka and Jatakas), depending on what branch you follow the books will vary, but their main figure is Buddha (Prince Siddharta Gautama). For the purpose of this essay only one religion will be discussed, the most media-dominant of today, Islam.
Islam is currently the second largest religion in the world, which is around 19.2 percent of the world’s population according to the latest figures from the Vatican Church.[26] It is the youngest of the five major world religions. The religious figure in Islam is Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah bin ‘Adul-Muttalib bin Hashim.[27] Prophet Muhammad is also considered a Messenger within the religion of Islam. Prophet Muhammad was a Messenger as he was given the book the Qur’an, the word of God, Allah, sent by Gods messenger Angel Gabriel. It is from the Qur’an that Muslims take their reference point for their things in life, along with also the Sunnah, Ijma-as-Sahabah, and Qiyas.[28] It is then from these four main sources which the Shari’a law has come to be. The Shari’a is a composition of the understanding of all the laws given by Allah through the above-mentioned sources.
A Muslim must take all references for anything in life from Islam that is from Akham Shari’a. With this simple understanding, it is possible to now confirm on a basic level why religion, especially that of Islam, cannot be compatible with feminism. Feminism is a secular movement, meaning God is excluded from the equation in their understanding of the concept of freedom. Islam does not exclude God from the concept of freedom. Akham Sharai’ah relates to five areas, that is the social, economic, education, foreign affairs and ruling.[29] It is often the social, economic and education sides of the Akham that feminists deconstruct and criticise, describing the practices seen in the Muslim world of these as sexist and oppressive. However, the arguments presented by feminist critics are often unfounded as they are not Islamic practices but cultural practices of the regions in which Islam resides. This is where the lack of knowledge about Islam as a religion has tainted the feminist call for the freedom of Muslim women. With a better understanding of what is Islam and what is culture, a more productive move towards freedom for Muslim women can be reached.
The issues that will be discussed for the purpose of this essay which feminists often discuss are hijab and the seclusion of women, which were the main points of discussion in Leila Ahmed’s work Women and Gender in Islam: Historical Roots of a Modern Debate. Through this it will be shown how feminism and Islam are clashing ideologies and therefore unable to be compatible with one another.
The first issue to be addressed is the issue of hijab. The hijab which a Muslim woman wears is a prominent feature in her dress. Many people see hijab as only the cloth on the woman’s head that covers her hair. Even some Muslim woman are confused and think that this is all hijab is, however, this is not true. Hijab is described in the Qur’an, the holy book of Muslims:
“And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils (jalabeeb) over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their…” (Surah Nur, ayah 31)[30]
“O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters and the believing women that they should cast their outer garments (jilbab) over their persons (when abroad)…: 33: 59[31]
Some Muslim women feminists like to look at this verse and say that it is not clear what one must wear, only that a Muslim women must be modest in dress. When only looking at the English this may appear so, however, it is the Arabic which is the important language to understand the commands and prohibitions defined by God in the Qur’an. The khimar or hijab and the jilbab are obligatory codes of dress for the woman when in the public sphere.
The following Ahadith (traditions of the Prophet) show the use of the hijab in the public sphere:
Sahih Bukhari: As related by Anas:
Umar said, “I agreed with Allah in three things,” or said, “My Lord agreed with me in three things. I said, ‘O Allah’s Apostle! Would that you took the station of Abraham as a place of prayer.’ I also said, ‘O Allah’s Apostle! Good and bad persons visit you! Would that you ordered the Mothers of the believers to cover themselves with veils.’ So the Divine Verses of Al-Hijab (i.e. veiling of the women) were revealed…
Sahih Bukhari: Narrated Um ‘Atiya:
We were ordered to bring out our menstruating women and veiled women in the religious gatherings and invocation of Muslims on the two ‘Id festivals. These menstruating women were to keep away from their Musalla. A woman asked, “O Allah’s Apostle ‘ What about one who does not have a veil?” He said, “Let her share the veil of her companion.”
Sahih Muslim:
‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that her foster-uncle whose name was Aflah sought permission from her (to enter the house) but she observed seclusion from him, and informed Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) who said to her: Don’t observe veil from him for he is Mahram (one with whom marriage cannot be contracted) on account of fosterage as one is Mahram on account of consanguinity.
The root of discussions on veiling and unveiling, are identified by Leila Ahmed, in her work Women and Gender in Islam, as mentioned previously. Ahmed shows that hijab became a point of reference to highlight the manner in which Arabs and Muslims could leave barbarism and move forward with progress[32]—through the unveiling of women. The article ‘The discourse of the veil’ in Ahmed’s work on gender and Islam refers directly to the work of Egyptian judge Qassim Amin. In 1899 Amin published his work Tahrir Al-Mar’a (The Liberation of Woman).[33] Amin produced a work of controversy during a time of “visible social change and lively intellectual ferment”.[34] Ahmed points out that the veil had been discussed before Amin’s work, but the manner of language and demand placed in Amin’s idea of unveiling being a necessity of change for Muslim Egypt was the cause of “intense and furious debate”.[35] Amin’s work, as Ahmed shows, is an example of colonialist thoughts and concepts reiterated in the colonized native via their education in Western schools.[36] Western thoughts on society, mainly that of European superiority, were carried through in Amin’s work Tahrir Al-Mar’a. Amin was no feminist, in fact he was just arguing for a trade of patriarchy from an Islamic one to a Western one.[37] At the time of Amin, to be like a European meant being upper-class and educated and more civilised so naturally to dress like a European was one of the most visible views of progress and change.
This colonialist use of the veil as an object of progress to freedom for society through the woman has carried on to the feminist structure of freeing women today. Not all feminist thinkers demand the removal of the veil. Nassef wrote some articles on the issue of veiling, almost a decade after Amin’s work.[38] She discussed the ideas of men had of veiling arguing that they were only “imaginings” and unfounded.[39][40] Nassef “points out that women were accustomed to veiling and should not be abruptly ordered to unveil,”[41] an opposing argument to that of Amin’s. Amin demanded immediate unveiling, as have most callers for unveiling done in his stead. While Nassef is considered a Muslim feminist, her ideas of unveiling are not argued from a religious perspective[42], and she makes this clear in her work. Her arguments are from careful observation she has undertaken. “Moreover, she asks, ‘How can you men of letters…command us to unveil when any of us is subjected to foul language if she walks in the street, this one throwing adulterous glances at her and that one bespatting her with his despicableness so that the sweat of shame pours from her brow’”.[43] So, unless the entire cultural views that have existed for centuries from men and women, which have come from a religious basis, about women being unveiled and what an unveiled woman means to them is altered, women being unveiled abruptly will never succeed and only cause social turmoil. Nassef is arguing for a gradual process, and not that it must be done by all women but more a choice they make to do so or not.
Today, with the “Big Sister”[44] idea Muslim women are often told what their voice is rather than telling feminists themselves, as Susan Muaddi Daraj, in her article Understanding the Other Sister: The Case of Arab Feminism, highlights: often “Arab women’s voices are excluded from discussions concerning their own lives”.[45] This comes from a misunderstanding of Islam and the cause for veiling. The reason Muslim women are called to veil comes from Islam, as the reference from the Qur’an and hadith previously shows. But some women do veil for other reasons, political, forced or other.[46] The underlying call from feminists about the hijab showing the restriction of women and their oppression is incorrect. As mentioned, it is a call from Allah to veil, so the primary cause of veiling is according to Godly calls and religious doctrine rather than oppressive dictatorships. With a better comprehensive understanding of Islam, feminist thinkers will be able to understand the manner of dress of the Muslim woman and notice that it is not a cause or symbol of oppression, rather incorrect cultural practices not from Islam are the cause of oppression for Muslim women specifically those in the Arab and African lands.
The second issue is the seclusion of women. It is another highly discussed issue that Leila Ahmed discusses in her article ‘The discourse of the veil’ in relation to Qassim Amin’s book The Liberation of Women. Seclusion is seen as women being hidden in their homes and not let out for any real purpose.[47] Amin’s interpretation of women being secluded has come from a male perspective, which Nassef discussed in her work. Men are not permitted into all areas that women are, and the same applies to women with respect to men. With misrepresentation, it has become wide spread knowledge that Muslim women are kept in their homes and are not allowed out for work. Seclusion, even in Amin and Ahmed’s works, relates to this, the rights of women to work. In Islam, as a religion, the woman has many rights including the right to work. The primary priority as defined for the woman is the home and her family. It is obligatory for the man to work and provide for the basics for the family’s survival. Unlike in Christian or Jewish traditions, if the woman works it is not obligatory for the woman to give up her money to her husband. She has rights over the money she earns and it is her money only; while her husband’s money is also her money, her money is not her husband’s money.
It has become a practice of other cultures, through misinterpretation of Islamic texts themselves, to keep women in seclusion only. It is also a misinterpretation of Muslim women who ignore texts and only work for work and ignore their home. What must be reached is a balance between the two priorities, which is something feminist thought sometimes leaves behind. Rather than a push for one or the other of the extremes, equal ground must be reached. To achieve this, it would be better to discuss the balance in relation to Islam and Islamic texts within the Muslim societies for the societies to be able to change, as it is Islam that is their reference point for the rights and freedoms of people in life.
An issue, not to do with practice, but rather the nature of religion, that makes it impossible for Islam and feminism to co-exist with one another is the inherent patriarchy of religion. Islam identifies that its Prophet is a man and refers to God in a masculine way. Allah is seen as being referenced as “He”[48] and “His”[49]. Feminists also have an issue with those who are recognised as scholars and politicians in Islam. The scholars that are regularly referenced and well known in the Islamic world are men and those given executive powers in matters of the State have been granted to men only through Islamic law: “A nation which placed its affairs in the hands of a woman shall never prosper!”[50] The inherent patriarchy of Islam causes it to be a sight of oppression and backwardness to feminists. This is the source of the beginning of feminist opposition to Islam. The issues of practice of Muslims raised by feminists can be solved through the increasing of Islamic knowledge amongst the Muslims, both males and females. The issues raised by feminism cannot be solved through feminist thought as it is a secular thought and cannot be moulded in to meshing with Islamic Muslim thought. Islam has all references from the word of God and actions of the Prophet and his companions (sahabah). So, it is this that must be the reference point to obtain equality for Muslim women, and Muslim men.
Endnotes:
[1] Ed. Ted Honderich. 1995. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, Oxford University Press, Oxford. p.270
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Arneil, B. 1999. ‘Politics and Feminism: Deconstructing the theoretical frameworks,’ in Politics and Feminism, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. p.121
[6] Ed. Ted Honderich. 1995. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, Oxford University Press, Oxford. p.483
[7] Ibid.
[8] Arneil, B. 1999. ‘Politics and Feminism: Deconstructing the theoretical frameworks,’ p., p.121
[9] Op. Cit.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Arneil, B. 1999. ‘Politics and Feminism: Deconstructing the theoretical frameworks,’ p., p.129
[12] Ibid., p.122
[13] Ed. Ted Honderich. 1995. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, p.483
[14] Op. Cit., p.127
[15] Arneil, B. 1999. ‘Politics and Feminism: Deconstructing the theoretical frameworks,’ in Politics and Feminism, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. p.138
[16] Ibid.
[17] Ibid.
[18] Ibid.
[19] Ibid.
[20] Ibid.
[21] Ibid., p.139
[22] http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/300700.html
[23] Ibid.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Ibid.
[26]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080330.wislamcatholic0330/BNStory/International/home
[27] Saifur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri. 2002. The Sealed Nectar: Biography of the Noble Prophet, Darussalam, Riyadh. p.30.
[28] An-Nabhani, Taqiuddin. 2002. Nidham ul-Islam (The System of Islam), Al-Khilafah Publications, London, p. 88.
[29]Taqiuddin an-Nabhani. 2002. Nidham ul-Islam, p.59.
[30] The Koran. revised edition 2005. trans. N. J. Dawood. Penguin Books, London, p.248.
[31] The Koran. trans. D. J. Dawood, p. 299.
[32] Ahmed, Leila. 1992. Women and Gender in Islam., p.149.
[33]Ibid., p144.
[34] Ibid.
[35] Ibid.
[36] Ibid., p. 155.
[37] Ibid., p. 168.
[38] Ibid., p.180
[39] Ibid.
[40] Ibid.
[41] Ahmed, Leila. 1992. Women and Gender in Islam, p.180.
[42] Ibid.
[43]Ibid.
[44] http://www.monthlyreview.org/0302darraj.htm
[45] Ibid.
[46] Ibid.
[47] Ahmed, Leila. 1992. Women and Gender in Islam
[48] The Koran. trans. D. J. Dawood, p.194.
[49] Ibid., p.142
[50] http://arabcomment.com/2008/politics-leadership-and-the-muslim-woman/
(http://arabcomment.com/2008/politics-leadership-and-the-muslim-woman/)
Bibliography:
Ahmed, Leila. 1992. Women and Gender in Islam: Historical Roots of a Modern Debate, Yale University Press, New Haven. Al-Mubarakpuri, Safi-ur-Rahman. Revised 2002.
The Sealed Nectar: Biography of the Noble Prophet, Darussalam, New Delhi.
An-Nabhani, Taqiuddin. 2002. Nidham ul-Islam (The System of Islam), Al-Khilafah Publications, London.
Arneil, B. 1999. ‘Politics and Feminism: Deconstructing the theoretical frameworks,’ in Politics and Feminism, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 121-151.
ed. Deniz Kandiyoti. 1991. Women, Islam and the State, Temple University Press, Philadelphia.
ed. Haideh Moghissi. 2005. Women and Islam: Critical Concepts in Sociology, Vol. I, Images and Realities, Routledge, New York.
ed. Haideh Moghissi. 2005. Women and Islam: Critical Concepts in Sociology, Vol. II, Social conditions, obstacles and prospects, Routledge, New York.
Keddie, Nikki R. 2007. Women in the Middle East: Past and Present, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
ed. Ted Honderich. 2005. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
The Koran. revised edition 2005. trans. N. J. Dawood. Penguin Books, London.
Darraj, S. M. 2002. ‘Understanding the Other Sister: The case of Arab feminism’, Monthly Review Vol. 53, no. 10, http://www.monthlyreview.org/0302darraj.htm
Jameela, Maryam, ‘The Feminist Movement and the Muslim Woman’,http://www.islam101.com/women/jameelah.htm
‘Politics, Leadership, and the Muslim Woman’, http://arabcomment.com/2008/politics-leadership-and-the-muslim-woman/
‘Islam and Feminism’, http://www.geocities.com/athens/oracle/3499/asr317_2.htm
‘Feminism and Islam’, http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/999
‘Islam is the world’s largest religion: Vatican’, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080330.wislamcatholic0330/BNStory/International/home Writers such as John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, who discussed a theory of “individual freedom on the economic and political foundations of Hobbes, Locke and Smith” did not distinguish between male and female. Mill became a foundation, then, of Liberal feminist thought. Marxism does not discriminate in its labour force, in theory. Social ideas see all labour as equal no matter what sex. From communal labour also comes communal ownership. Instead she shows that her view is from “observation and experience and [accounts of] the experiences of a variety of women”, which makes her studies and analysis therefore more credible.
Feminism, used in this term, was coined by utopian Charles Fourier.[1] It was first used in the 1890s in reference to women’s equal legal and political rights with men.[2] However, in understanding what Feminism is as an idea and concept it can be seen that feminist thought existed, but without term, prior to the 1890s.[3] For example, Wollstonecraft’s A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, which argues for the woman as a rational being, was published in 1792.[4] Feminism is an evolving movement. From the time of Wollstonecraft’s argument merely of female rationality being equal to that of man’s to that of today where women move to claim rights for women of the political and social levels. There are a few forms of ideological identity to which feminism attaches its ideals, such as Liberalism and Marxism.
“Liberalism is the most widely adopted theoretical framework in current western political thought”.[5] Liberalism emphasises the rights of the individual in the civil and political spheres. [6] The main contributors to the liberal theoretical framework were John Locke[7], Thomas Hobbes[8] and Immanuel Kant[9]. The individual freedoms that came about from their work can be seen in the rights of the United Nations and Capitalist nations today. They include “freedom of conscience, speech, association, occupation [and] sexuality” (which is a more recent phenomenon).[10][11]
Liberal feminism does not sit well with Islam as Islam looks at the collective community and collective thought as part of a key of shaping individual thought, while individual actions also shape a society. On the opposite side of this Liberalism looks at the State having no influence on shaping the thought of the individual and that the individual must govern himself solely and is not shaped by any thought but his own. [12] Liberalism, stemming from secular and plural ideals[13], does not accept a God-consciousness in the equation of man, instead freeing itself from this limitation. Taking this into account, liberal feminists have also added this to their part of the feminist movement, as they have accepted the “basic tenets of the liberal framework”.[14] Without understanding the idea of a God in the equation of man, and that according to religious thought God is the creator and so, therefore, has rights over man by way of shaping the laws in which human beings are to live, it makes it impossible for liberal feminism with a secular mindset to understand the nature of and concept of freedom within religion, especially that of Islam.
Marxist, or socialist concepts of freedom of human beings, unlike liberalism, has a large emphasis on the collective thought. In the article ‘Politics and Feminism: Deconstructing the Theoretical Frameworks’ it states the five main tenets of Marxism. These tenets state that “socialism is the focus of material production as the basic engine of history”.[15] Social concepts of happiness see that the individual makes up a collective and that when the collective progresses together it will cause happiness for the whole community.[16] Marxism sees history and the progress of man throughout it in a pattern, one that was formed through the relationships of groups of people with means of production of material progress.[17] Social constructs see the human labour force as a creation for material progress.[18][19] Hard labour is rewarded and weak labour is not. It is more class that distinguishes also the types of labour, rather than sex.[20][21] This is the essence of Marxism.
Marxism, far more than liberalism, ignores God completely. God never, in the entire system of Marxism, enters the equation. An infamous quote is that “religion is the opium of the masses”,[22] often quoted in discussing how Marxism views religion. This was said by Karl Marx in Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right, 1843.[23] The original text was in German and appeared as “Die religion…ist das Opium des Volkes”.[24] A look at the section which this quote came from makes it more understandable to realise the view that Marx, the founder of Socialism, took on religion: “Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people [masses]”.[25] For feminists who have accepted the Marxist interpretation on how to define life’s affairs it makes it impossible for Islam, and any religions for that matter, to co-habitat as Marxist Socialism denies the concept of God completely, as can be seen from the discussion on the most famous of Marxist quotes above. By removing God it makes it impossible for Marxist feminists to understand the Muslim woman and how she interprets freedom as taken from the Qur’an, as the Qur’an is the word of God and cannot be challenged.
An understanding of the two main kinds of feminism, Marxism and Liberalism has been undertaken, so it is now time to understand the religious side to a person’s ideological view-point on life and the freedoms that are entailed within it. According to the five main religions, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism, all the sources for the laws of life and government are to be taken from the holy books they have and the Prophets who brought the books. For Judaism the book is the Torah and the Prophet is Moses; Christianity has its Bible and Prophet Jesus; Islam follows the Qur’an and Prophet Muhammad; Hindus have a few books, some written by one person and others written by a few such as the Vedas, Upanishads and the Gita; and Buddhists also have a variety of figures and books (Tripitaka and Jatakas), depending on what branch you follow the books will vary, but their main figure is Buddha (Prince Siddharta Gautama). For the purpose of this essay only one religion will be discussed, the most media-dominant of today, Islam.
Islam is currently the second largest religion in the world, which is around 19.2 percent of the world’s population according to the latest figures from the Vatican Church.[26] It is the youngest of the five major world religions. The religious figure in Islam is Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah bin ‘Adul-Muttalib bin Hashim.[27] Prophet Muhammad is also considered a Messenger within the religion of Islam. Prophet Muhammad was a Messenger as he was given the book the Qur’an, the word of God, Allah, sent by Gods messenger Angel Gabriel. It is from the Qur’an that Muslims take their reference point for their things in life, along with also the Sunnah, Ijma-as-Sahabah, and Qiyas.[28] It is then from these four main sources which the Shari’a law has come to be. The Shari’a is a composition of the understanding of all the laws given by Allah through the above-mentioned sources.
A Muslim must take all references for anything in life from Islam that is from Akham Shari’a. With this simple understanding, it is possible to now confirm on a basic level why religion, especially that of Islam, cannot be compatible with feminism. Feminism is a secular movement, meaning God is excluded from the equation in their understanding of the concept of freedom. Islam does not exclude God from the concept of freedom. Akham Sharai’ah relates to five areas, that is the social, economic, education, foreign affairs and ruling.[29] It is often the social, economic and education sides of the Akham that feminists deconstruct and criticise, describing the practices seen in the Muslim world of these as sexist and oppressive. However, the arguments presented by feminist critics are often unfounded as they are not Islamic practices but cultural practices of the regions in which Islam resides. This is where the lack of knowledge about Islam as a religion has tainted the feminist call for the freedom of Muslim women. With a better understanding of what is Islam and what is culture, a more productive move towards freedom for Muslim women can be reached.
The issues that will be discussed for the purpose of this essay which feminists often discuss are hijab and the seclusion of women, which were the main points of discussion in Leila Ahmed’s work Women and Gender in Islam: Historical Roots of a Modern Debate. Through this it will be shown how feminism and Islam are clashing ideologies and therefore unable to be compatible with one another.
The first issue to be addressed is the issue of hijab. The hijab which a Muslim woman wears is a prominent feature in her dress. Many people see hijab as only the cloth on the woman’s head that covers her hair. Even some Muslim woman are confused and think that this is all hijab is, however, this is not true. Hijab is described in the Qur’an, the holy book of Muslims:
“And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof; that they should draw their veils (jalabeeb) over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their…” (Surah Nur, ayah 31)[30]
“O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters and the believing women that they should cast their outer garments (jilbab) over their persons (when abroad)…: 33: 59[31]
Some Muslim women feminists like to look at this verse and say that it is not clear what one must wear, only that a Muslim women must be modest in dress. When only looking at the English this may appear so, however, it is the Arabic which is the important language to understand the commands and prohibitions defined by God in the Qur’an. The khimar or hijab and the jilbab are obligatory codes of dress for the woman when in the public sphere.
The following Ahadith (traditions of the Prophet) show the use of the hijab in the public sphere:
Sahih Bukhari: As related by Anas:
Umar said, “I agreed with Allah in three things,” or said, “My Lord agreed with me in three things. I said, ‘O Allah’s Apostle! Would that you took the station of Abraham as a place of prayer.’ I also said, ‘O Allah’s Apostle! Good and bad persons visit you! Would that you ordered the Mothers of the believers to cover themselves with veils.’ So the Divine Verses of Al-Hijab (i.e. veiling of the women) were revealed…
Sahih Bukhari: Narrated Um ‘Atiya:
We were ordered to bring out our menstruating women and veiled women in the religious gatherings and invocation of Muslims on the two ‘Id festivals. These menstruating women were to keep away from their Musalla. A woman asked, “O Allah’s Apostle ‘ What about one who does not have a veil?” He said, “Let her share the veil of her companion.”
Sahih Muslim:
‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that her foster-uncle whose name was Aflah sought permission from her (to enter the house) but she observed seclusion from him, and informed Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) who said to her: Don’t observe veil from him for he is Mahram (one with whom marriage cannot be contracted) on account of fosterage as one is Mahram on account of consanguinity.
The root of discussions on veiling and unveiling, are identified by Leila Ahmed, in her work Women and Gender in Islam, as mentioned previously. Ahmed shows that hijab became a point of reference to highlight the manner in which Arabs and Muslims could leave barbarism and move forward with progress[32]—through the unveiling of women. The article ‘The discourse of the veil’ in Ahmed’s work on gender and Islam refers directly to the work of Egyptian judge Qassim Amin. In 1899 Amin published his work Tahrir Al-Mar’a (The Liberation of Woman).[33] Amin produced a work of controversy during a time of “visible social change and lively intellectual ferment”.[34] Ahmed points out that the veil had been discussed before Amin’s work, but the manner of language and demand placed in Amin’s idea of unveiling being a necessity of change for Muslim Egypt was the cause of “intense and furious debate”.[35] Amin’s work, as Ahmed shows, is an example of colonialist thoughts and concepts reiterated in the colonized native via their education in Western schools.[36] Western thoughts on society, mainly that of European superiority, were carried through in Amin’s work Tahrir Al-Mar’a. Amin was no feminist, in fact he was just arguing for a trade of patriarchy from an Islamic one to a Western one.[37] At the time of Amin, to be like a European meant being upper-class and educated and more civilised so naturally to dress like a European was one of the most visible views of progress and change.
This colonialist use of the veil as an object of progress to freedom for society through the woman has carried on to the feminist structure of freeing women today. Not all feminist thinkers demand the removal of the veil. Nassef wrote some articles on the issue of veiling, almost a decade after Amin’s work.[38] She discussed the ideas of men had of veiling arguing that they were only “imaginings” and unfounded.[39][40] Nassef “points out that women were accustomed to veiling and should not be abruptly ordered to unveil,”[41] an opposing argument to that of Amin’s. Amin demanded immediate unveiling, as have most callers for unveiling done in his stead. While Nassef is considered a Muslim feminist, her ideas of unveiling are not argued from a religious perspective[42], and she makes this clear in her work. Her arguments are from careful observation she has undertaken. “Moreover, she asks, ‘How can you men of letters…command us to unveil when any of us is subjected to foul language if she walks in the street, this one throwing adulterous glances at her and that one bespatting her with his despicableness so that the sweat of shame pours from her brow’”.[43] So, unless the entire cultural views that have existed for centuries from men and women, which have come from a religious basis, about women being unveiled and what an unveiled woman means to them is altered, women being unveiled abruptly will never succeed and only cause social turmoil. Nassef is arguing for a gradual process, and not that it must be done by all women but more a choice they make to do so or not.
Today, with the “Big Sister”[44] idea Muslim women are often told what their voice is rather than telling feminists themselves, as Susan Muaddi Daraj, in her article Understanding the Other Sister: The Case of Arab Feminism, highlights: often “Arab women’s voices are excluded from discussions concerning their own lives”.[45] This comes from a misunderstanding of Islam and the cause for veiling. The reason Muslim women are called to veil comes from Islam, as the reference from the Qur’an and hadith previously shows. But some women do veil for other reasons, political, forced or other.[46] The underlying call from feminists about the hijab showing the restriction of women and their oppression is incorrect. As mentioned, it is a call from Allah to veil, so the primary cause of veiling is according to Godly calls and religious doctrine rather than oppressive dictatorships. With a better comprehensive understanding of Islam, feminist thinkers will be able to understand the manner of dress of the Muslim woman and notice that it is not a cause or symbol of oppression, rather incorrect cultural practices not from Islam are the cause of oppression for Muslim women specifically those in the Arab and African lands.
The second issue is the seclusion of women. It is another highly discussed issue that Leila Ahmed discusses in her article ‘The discourse of the veil’ in relation to Qassim Amin’s book The Liberation of Women. Seclusion is seen as women being hidden in their homes and not let out for any real purpose.[47] Amin’s interpretation of women being secluded has come from a male perspective, which Nassef discussed in her work. Men are not permitted into all areas that women are, and the same applies to women with respect to men. With misrepresentation, it has become wide spread knowledge that Muslim women are kept in their homes and are not allowed out for work. Seclusion, even in Amin and Ahmed’s works, relates to this, the rights of women to work. In Islam, as a religion, the woman has many rights including the right to work. The primary priority as defined for the woman is the home and her family. It is obligatory for the man to work and provide for the basics for the family’s survival. Unlike in Christian or Jewish traditions, if the woman works it is not obligatory for the woman to give up her money to her husband. She has rights over the money she earns and it is her money only; while her husband’s money is also her money, her money is not her husband’s money.
It has become a practice of other cultures, through misinterpretation of Islamic texts themselves, to keep women in seclusion only. It is also a misinterpretation of Muslim women who ignore texts and only work for work and ignore their home. What must be reached is a balance between the two priorities, which is something feminist thought sometimes leaves behind. Rather than a push for one or the other of the extremes, equal ground must be reached. To achieve this, it would be better to discuss the balance in relation to Islam and Islamic texts within the Muslim societies for the societies to be able to change, as it is Islam that is their reference point for the rights and freedoms of people in life.
An issue, not to do with practice, but rather the nature of religion, that makes it impossible for Islam and feminism to co-exist with one another is the inherent patriarchy of religion. Islam identifies that its Prophet is a man and refers to God in a masculine way. Allah is seen as being referenced as “He”[48] and “His”[49]. Feminists also have an issue with those who are recognised as scholars and politicians in Islam. The scholars that are regularly referenced and well known in the Islamic world are men and those given executive powers in matters of the State have been granted to men only through Islamic law: “A nation which placed its affairs in the hands of a woman shall never prosper!”[50] The inherent patriarchy of Islam causes it to be a sight of oppression and backwardness to feminists. This is the source of the beginning of feminist opposition to Islam. The issues of practice of Muslims raised by feminists can be solved through the increasing of Islamic knowledge amongst the Muslims, both males and females. The issues raised by feminism cannot be solved through feminist thought as it is a secular thought and cannot be moulded in to meshing with Islamic Muslim thought. Islam has all references from the word of God and actions of the Prophet and his companions (sahabah). So, it is this that must be the reference point to obtain equality for Muslim women, and Muslim men.
Endnotes:
[1] Ed. Ted Honderich. 1995. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, Oxford University Press, Oxford. p.270
[2] Ibid.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Arneil, B. 1999. ‘Politics and Feminism: Deconstructing the theoretical frameworks,’ in Politics and Feminism, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. p.121
[6] Ed. Ted Honderich. 1995. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, Oxford University Press, Oxford. p.483
[7] Ibid.
[8] Arneil, B. 1999. ‘Politics and Feminism: Deconstructing the theoretical frameworks,’ p., p.121
[9] Op. Cit.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Arneil, B. 1999. ‘Politics and Feminism: Deconstructing the theoretical frameworks,’ p., p.129
[12] Ibid., p.122
[13] Ed. Ted Honderich. 1995. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, p.483
[14] Op. Cit., p.127
[15] Arneil, B. 1999. ‘Politics and Feminism: Deconstructing the theoretical frameworks,’ in Politics and Feminism, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. p.138
[16] Ibid.
[17] Ibid.
[18] Ibid.
[19] Ibid.
[20] Ibid.
[21] Ibid., p.139
[22] http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/300700.html
[23] Ibid.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Ibid.
[26]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080330.wislamcatholic0330/BNStory/International/home
[27] Saifur-Rahman Al-Mubarakpuri. 2002. The Sealed Nectar: Biography of the Noble Prophet, Darussalam, Riyadh. p.30.
[28] An-Nabhani, Taqiuddin. 2002. Nidham ul-Islam (The System of Islam), Al-Khilafah Publications, London, p. 88.
[29]Taqiuddin an-Nabhani. 2002. Nidham ul-Islam, p.59.
[30] The Koran. revised edition 2005. trans. N. J. Dawood. Penguin Books, London, p.248.
[31] The Koran. trans. D. J. Dawood, p. 299.
[32] Ahmed, Leila. 1992. Women and Gender in Islam., p.149.
[33]Ibid., p144.
[34] Ibid.
[35] Ibid.
[36] Ibid., p. 155.
[37] Ibid., p. 168.
[38] Ibid., p.180
[39] Ibid.
[40] Ibid.
[41] Ahmed, Leila. 1992. Women and Gender in Islam, p.180.
[42] Ibid.
[43]Ibid.
[44] http://www.monthlyreview.org/0302darraj.htm
[45] Ibid.
[46] Ibid.
[47] Ahmed, Leila. 1992. Women and Gender in Islam
[48] The Koran. trans. D. J. Dawood, p.194.
[49] Ibid., p.142
[50] http://arabcomment.com/2008/politics-leadership-and-the-muslim-woman/
(http://arabcomment.com/2008/politics-leadership-and-the-muslim-woman/)
Bibliography:
Ahmed, Leila. 1992. Women and Gender in Islam: Historical Roots of a Modern Debate, Yale University Press, New Haven. Al-Mubarakpuri, Safi-ur-Rahman. Revised 2002.
The Sealed Nectar: Biography of the Noble Prophet, Darussalam, New Delhi.
An-Nabhani, Taqiuddin. 2002. Nidham ul-Islam (The System of Islam), Al-Khilafah Publications, London.
Arneil, B. 1999. ‘Politics and Feminism: Deconstructing the theoretical frameworks,’ in Politics and Feminism, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 121-151.
ed. Deniz Kandiyoti. 1991. Women, Islam and the State, Temple University Press, Philadelphia.
ed. Haideh Moghissi. 2005. Women and Islam: Critical Concepts in Sociology, Vol. I, Images and Realities, Routledge, New York.
ed. Haideh Moghissi. 2005. Women and Islam: Critical Concepts in Sociology, Vol. II, Social conditions, obstacles and prospects, Routledge, New York.
Keddie, Nikki R. 2007. Women in the Middle East: Past and Present, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
ed. Ted Honderich. 2005. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
The Koran. revised edition 2005. trans. N. J. Dawood. Penguin Books, London.
Darraj, S. M. 2002. ‘Understanding the Other Sister: The case of Arab feminism’, Monthly Review Vol. 53, no. 10, http://www.monthlyreview.org/0302darraj.htm
Jameela, Maryam, ‘The Feminist Movement and the Muslim Woman’,http://www.islam101.com/women/jameelah.htm
‘Politics, Leadership, and the Muslim Woman’, http://arabcomment.com/2008/politics-leadership-and-the-muslim-woman/
‘Islam and Feminism’, http://www.geocities.com/athens/oracle/3499/asr317_2.htm
‘Feminism and Islam’, http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/999
‘Islam is the world’s largest religion: Vatican’, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080330.wislamcatholic0330/BNStory/International/home Writers such as John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, who discussed a theory of “individual freedom on the economic and political foundations of Hobbes, Locke and Smith” did not distinguish between male and female. Mill became a foundation, then, of Liberal feminist thought. Marxism does not discriminate in its labour force, in theory. Social ideas see all labour as equal no matter what sex. From communal labour also comes communal ownership. Instead she shows that her view is from “observation and experience and [accounts of] the experiences of a variety of women”, which makes her studies and analysis therefore more credible.