Talk:Hijab

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The first section of the article must clarify that SOME Muslim women do not wear the hijab[edit]

@AntiDionysius:

You reverted my good faith edits on 7 November 2023 within 5 minutes, with no careful consideration.

I added a "need citation" for this highly questionable statement leading the second paragraph of the article: "In Islam, Muslim women are required to observe the hijab in front of any man they could theoretically marry." This sentence, permitted at the top of the article gives the impression that ALL Muslim women wear hijab. There is no citation for this sentence. You reverted my "need citation" edit for no reason.

In addition, you reverted my very brief, well-documented, neutral paragraph, summarizing the unquestionable fact that some Muslim women do not wear the hijab: 

    According to the Harvard University Pluralism Project: "Some Muslim women cover their head only 
    during prayer in the mosque; other Muslim women wear the hijab; still others may cover their head 
    with a turban or a loosely draped scarf." [1]

One sentence or brief paragraph (like this) should appear in the first section of the article.

@Rasnaboy: I am asking for a third party review of this revert by AntiDionysius.

QamarBurtuqali (talk) 01:16, 8 November 2023 (UTC)QamarBurtuqali[reply]

The quote is in reference to Muslim women in America. Not the wider world. It should be in the section “Around the world”, not in the lead. AriseYoArise (talk) 08:21, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://pluralism.org/women-in-islam

The second paragraph of the article does not belong in the introduction[edit]

The second paragraph of the Hijab article is:

"In Islam, Muslim women are required to observe the hijab in front of any man they could theoretically marry.[citation needed] This means that hijab is not obligatory in front of the father, brothers, grandfathers, uncles or young children or those regarded as mahram.[5] Hijab is similar to the tichel or snood worn by Orthodox Jewish women, certain headcoverings worn by some Christian women, such as the mantilla, apostolnik and wimple,[6][7] as well as the dupatta worn by many Hindu and Sikh women.[8][9][10]"

The first sentence is highly debatable, as discussed in the body of the article. Of course, there is no reliable citation for the first sentence. The rest of the paragraph contains details that are discussed in the body and does not belong in the introduction.

Let us agree that the second paragraph of the Hijab article should be deleted entirely.

QamarBurtuqali (talk) 04:08, 8 November 2023 (UTC)QamarBurtuqali[reply]

I dispute the citation that editor :@Barbardo: added to the sentence
"In Islam, Muslim women are required to observe the hijab in front of any man they could theoretically marry."
Naturally, Barbardo has not provided a page number. I checked his reference by reading the entire article.
In fact, the article does not support the sentence in question.
Barbardo is engaging in Edit Warring, again, on 10 November 2023‎.
I urge other qualified editors to check Barbardo's citation.
I repeat, in my humble opinion, the second paragraph of the Hijab article should be deleted entirely.
QamarBurtuqali (talk) 13:28, 11 November 2023 (UTC)QamarBurtuqali[reply]
@QamarBurtuqali, since many readers just read the lede to gain an essential insight, the content about headcoverings in various religious and cultural contexts makes more sense in the top section than in the 'Dress Code' area since that relates to what the Islamic sects have to say about the dress.
The lede's purpose is to provide a concise overview of the topic, distinct from the detailed examination in the 'Dress Code' section, which primarily focuses on Islamic laws.
If you find it appropriate, you may choose to either remove or elaborate on the sentence in the 'Dress Code' section but its WP:Notablilty and WP:Due nature merits its presence in the lede. StarkReport (talk) 13:33, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because the topic is "Hijab" not "Female Head Coverings Around The World,"
the comparison you added is a footnote. A footnote does not belong in the lede.
The information in notability and due in the Dress Code section, but not in the lede.
IMHO.
QamarBurtuqali (talk) 16:46, 10 December 2023 (UTC)QamarBurtuqali[reply]
@QamarBurtuqali, "Because the topic is "Hijab" not "Female Head Coverings Around The World,"" Kindly note that it is a religious dress, which makes it WP:Noteworthy, as opposed to dresses that serve a functional or fashionable intent.
And, relegating well-sourced information that mentions religious parallelism about the religious subject matter to just a footnote is absurd.
As I have reiterated before, 'you may choose to either remove or elaborate on the sentence in the 'Dress Code' section,' but it belongs in the lede, especially considering we already have the paragraph 'The practice of Islamic veiling varies around the world --------- unofficial pressure to wear or not wear a hijab' in the lede. This is despite the information being extensively covered in the article body and related articles.
Again, note that the Dress code specifically addresses Islamic guidelines regarding the hijab, making the inclusion of this line inappropriate within that context. StarkReport (talk) 22:36, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Given the significance of addressing the definition of the dress and its contextual importance in the lede section, it can even be written in the top like:
"In modern usage, hijab (Arabic: حجاب, romanized: ḥijāb, pronounced [ħɪˈdʒaːb]) generally refers to various head coverings conventionally worn by many Muslim women. It is similar to the tichel or snood worn by Orthodox Jewish women, certain headcoverings worn by some Christian women, such as the mantilla, apostolnik and wimple, as well as the dupatta worn by many Hindu and Sikh women." StarkReport (talk) 22:56, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Just a question of better paraphrasing?[edit]

@Barbardo with ref to this edit dif seem over following sentence.

.. In Islam, Muslim women are required to observe the hijab in front of any man they could theoretically marry. ..

I have not read the presently given source but I think there is a scope for having better paraphrasing and better academic source.

If not then when contested it is always better to provide the exact quote from the source.

On side note: @QamarBurtuqali Discuss every point in a separate section, so other editors will not get confused and avoid temptation of edit war and always give preference to article talk page discussion.

Please do not divert and keep to the topic of each specific discussion. Bookku (talk) 10:54, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Right. The sentence is highly dubious and it will be impossible to provide
a citation to support the essence of the sentence. This is why that I urge editors
to delete the sentence (and the entire paragraph). These issues are already
discussed in depth in the section Dress Code of the body of the article.

QamarBurtuqali (talk) 14:17, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@QamarBurtuqali The related sentences what I can see in section Dress Code are following.
1)

Modern Muslim scholars usually require women to cover everything but their hands and face in public

2)

.. that it is obligatory for women to cover their hair, and the entire body except her face and hands, while in the presence of people of the opposite sex other than close family members. ..

3)

.. In Shia jurisprudence, by consensus, it is obligatory for women to cover their hair, and the entire body except her hands and face, while in the presence of people of the opposite sex other than close family members. ..

4)

.. In private, and in the presence of close relatives (mahrams), rules on dress relax. ..

To begin with concept of Mahram is a complex enough to translate and simplify in a single sentence. In sentences 2, 3, 4 the term seems to have been used is "close family members" to mean Mahrams but I am not sure that is also very accurate depiction of concept of Mahrams. Secondly 'close family members' is a relative term having different meanings in different religions, cultures and regions.
Explaining of complex enough concept in a single simple sentence can always be a challenge.
  • As per MOS:LEAD guideline lead is summary of most representative parts of the article body. (Summarized sentences in the lead do not need to have references)
  • Presently following two sentences in the lead, seem to represent summary for (above mentioned) sentences coming in the later section(s).

.. In Islam, Muslim women are required to observe the hijab in front of any man they could theoretically marry. This means that hijab is not obligatory in front of the father, brothers, grandfathers, uncles or young children or those regarded as mahram. ..

Can it be rephrased some thing on following line?
.. In Islam, Muslim women are expected to observe the hijab in front of most adult men (including cousin brothers and at most public places), except in front of mahram that includes the father, grandfathers, uncles and brothers. ..
Bookku (talk) 07:59, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@ Bookku
The article lead contains this sentence that accurately summarizes the content of the Dress Code section:

"There is a consensus among Islamic religious scholars that covering the head is either required or preferred, though some argue that it is not mandated."

In my humble opinion, the second paragraph of the lead should be deleted because it contains detailed complex ideas that are already well addressed in the Dress Code section.
QamarBurtuqali (talk) 00:27, 13 November 2023 (UTC)QamarBurtuqali[reply]
As far as sentence you are pointing out seem to miss out on clear mention of very essential dogma:
  • " A Muslim woman need not be visible without Hijab to any 'non-Mahram' adult men."
BTW I have added Inline Template:Discuss to the present sentences in lead, IMO we wait for inputs indue course from more users for better consensus.
Bookku (talk) 06:26, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Barbardo
In my humble opinion, it will be impossible to find a citation to support the phrase

.. In Islam, Muslim women are required to observe the hijab

because experts will carefully write something like "There is a consensus among Islamic scholars that..."
Moreover, when Islamic religious scholars give opinions (fatwa) about the requirements of female attire
in the presence of non-Mahram adult men, they do NOT require "hijab." In modern parlance, the word "hijab" refers to a particular type of a head covering.
QamarBurtuqali (talk) 00:23, 14 November 2023 (UTC)QamarBurtuqali[reply]

@Barbardo : @Bookku and I have been discussing the phrasing of these two sentences. @Bookku added inline Template:Discuss so we can seek input from more users for better consensus. QamarBurtuqali (talk) 11:42, 14 November 2023 (UTC)QamarBurtuqali[reply]

Two users @AriseYoArise and @ArdyWard902 deleted an entire paragraph while it was under discussion in the Talk Page[edit]

@AriseYoArise and @ArdyWard902 have no business to delete an entire paragraph when the paragraph was being discussed in the Talk Page. The paragraph contained two "discuss" templates to warn editors.

Here is the paragraph they deleted:

In Islam, Muslim women are required to observe the hijab in front of any man they could theoretically marry.[1] [discuss] This means that hijab is not obligatory in front of the father, brothers, grandfathers, uncles or young children or those regarded as mahram.[2][discuss] Hijab is similar to the tichel or snood worn by Orthodox Jewish women, certain headcoverings worn by some Christian women, such as the mantilla, apostolnik and wimple,[3][4] as well as the dupatta worn by many Hindu and Sikh women.[5][6][7]

User @AriseYoArise does not heed warnings. I have already tried to stop him. IMHO, another editor should restore the paragraph.

QamarBurtuqali (talk) 09:24, 14 November 2023 (UTC)QamarBurtuqali[reply]

@Bookku: They ignored your "discuss" template ! Argh. QamarBurtuqali (talk) 09:54, 14 November 2023 (UTC)QamarBurtuqali[reply]
Thanks for reporting at the talk page. I have shared Template:Contentious topics/alert/first or relevant reminder with most of us.
Let us hope that helps. Bookku (talk) 04:10, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://journal.unisza.edu.my/jimk/index.php/jimk/article/download/557/410/
  2. ^ "BBC - Religions - Islam: Hijab". www.bbc.co.uk. Retrieved 2023-09-06.
  3. ^ Khir-Allah, Ghufran (24 May 2021). Framing Hijab in the European Mind: Press Discourse, Social Categorization and Stereotypes. Springer. ISBN 9789811616532.
  4. ^ Lindberg, Christine A. (2012). Oxford American Writer's Thesaurus. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-982992-7.
  5. ^ "Religious clothing and personal appearance". Pew Research Center. June 29, 2021. Retrieved May 5, 2023.
  6. ^ Spurgeon, Andrew B. (14 August 2016). Twin Cultures Separated by Centuries: An Indian Reading of 1 Corinthians. Langham Publishing. p. 196. ISBN 978-1-78368-139-6. Ghoonghat (also ghunghat or jhund) is the Hindi word used for a veil or a scarf that a woman in northern India wears to cover her head or face (in states such as Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, and Assam). Sometimes the end of a sari or dupatta (a long scarf) is pulled over the head or face to function as a ghoonghat.
  7. ^ Garcia, Myrian (March 15, 2022). "How India's Religious Headwear Ban Affects Muslims And Not Hindus". Religion Unplugged. Retrieved May 5, 2023.

Some wear it, not many[edit]

I changed the word “many” to “some” in the opening sentence. The sentence now says: “In modern usage, hijab (Arabic: حجاب, romanized: ḥijāb, pronounced [ħɪˈdʒaːb]) generally refers to various head coverings conventionally worn by some Muslim women.” This is because the source cited clearly states: “Hijab: A head scarf, worn by some Muslim women, which leaves the face exposed.” Dido789 (talk) 21:32, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

== This article does a poor job of highlighting views and reasons of scholars who say Hijab isn't mandatory.

A) In Surah 24 Verse 31: “And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and guard their chastity, and not to reveal their adornments except what normally appears. Let them draw their Khimars over their chests, and not reveal their ˹hidden˺ adornments except to their husbands, their fathers, their fathers-in-law, their sons……”

People who claim that the Hijab is mandatory for women are assuming that the Khimar in this case means a “headscarf” when in reality the actual definition of a Khimar is a “cloth/cover”.

There's even evidence from an authentic Hadith that supports this claim. 

“Narrated Anas Bin Malik: “Abu Talha said to Umm Sulaim: 'I heard the voice of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) sounding weak and I sensed some hunger in it. Do you have anything? She said: 'Yes.' So she got some loaves of wheat bread, then she took out a Khimar of hers, and put the bread in it. Then she put it under my arm, and wrapped my upper body with part of it, and she sent me to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ)." He said: "So I brought it to him, and I found the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) sitting in the Masjid, and there were people with him. So I stood among them, and the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: 'Has Abu Talhah sent you?' I said: 'Yes.' He said: 'With food?' I said: 'Yes.' So the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said to those with him: 'Stand up.'" So they left, and I left in front of them, until I came to Abu Talhah, and I told him (that they were coming). Abu Talhah said: 'O Umm Sulaim! The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) is coming with people, and we don't have anything to feed them.' Umm Sulaim said: 'Allah and His Messenger know best.'" He said: "So Abu Talhah departed until he met up with the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). The Messenger of Allah came, while Abu Talhah was with him, until they entered, when the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: 'Come O Umm Sulaim! What do you have?' So she brought him that bread, and he (ﷺ) ordered that it be broken into pieces. Umm Sulaim poured some butter from an oil-skin upon them, then the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) recited whatever Allah willed for him to say over it. Then he said: 'Let ten come.' So ten were admitted, and they ate until they were full, and then they left. Then he said: 'Let ten come.' So ten were admitted, and they ate until they were full, and they left. Then he said: 'Let ten come.' So ten were admitted, and they ate until they were full, and there were seventy or eighty men."

Grade: Sahih (Darussalam) Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3630 https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:3630”

Logically speaking, if the Khimar only meant a headscarf, why is Umm Sulaim (RA) wrapping bread in a Khimar?

B) So scholars who claim the Hijab is mandatory cite a supposed historical backstory about how this verse was directed towards women who already wore the headscarf. According to them, “the Quran is assuming that every woman at the time of the revelation of these verses was already covering their hair to begin with, hence it contains a de-facto order for all Muslim women to wear a headscarf “. Hence the only way it would make sense is if EVERY SINGLE Muslim women at that time were wearing a headscarf to begin with, because they are the only women this verse is directed towards.

However, it's a well known fact that only the elite and upper class women covered their hair. In fact classical scholars prescribed different awras based on the social status of women, and slave women were prohibited from covering their hair.

So what seems more likely, that the Quran is referencing some obscure 7th century custom that only the elite women at that time practiced, for the purpose of establishing a universal injunction on “covering the head”, OR that the command simply means “cover your chest using a piece of cloth”?

C) Looking at images of Muslim women in the periods of the Islamic Golden age (the era shortly after the death of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH when Islamic civilisation flourished), even when free women wore head scarfs on their head, they had bits and strands of hair showing. If hair is actually something women are obligated to cover, these women would have been careful to make sure there's no hair showing.

This article does a poor job of highlighting the views and reasoning of scholars who believe Hijab isn't mandatory[edit]

A) In Surah 24 Verse 31: “And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and guard their chastity, and not to reveal their adornments except what normally appears. Let them draw their Khimars over their chests, and not reveal their ˹hidden˺ adornments except to their husbands, their fathers, their fathers-in-law, their sons……”

People who claim that the Hijab is mandatory for women are assuming that the Khimar in this case means a “headscarf” when in reality the actual definition of a Khimar is a “cloth/cover”.

There's even evidence from an authentic Hadith that supports this claim.

“Narrated Anas Bin Malik: “Abu Talha said to Umm Sulaim: 'I heard the voice of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) sounding weak and I sensed some hunger in it. Do you have anything? She said: 'Yes.' So she got some loaves of wheat bread, then she took out a Khimar of hers, and put the bread in it. Then she put it under my arm, and wrapped my upper body with part of it, and she sent me to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ)." He said: "So I brought it to him, and I found the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) sitting in the Masjid, and there were people with him. So I stood among them, and the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: 'Has Abu Talhah sent you?' I said: 'Yes.' He said: 'With food?' I said: 'Yes.' So the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said to those with him: 'Stand up.'" So they left, and I left in front of them, until I came to Abu Talhah, and I told him (that they were coming). Abu Talhah said: 'O Umm Sulaim! The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) is coming with people, and we don't have anything to feed them.' Umm Sulaim said: 'Allah and His Messenger know best.'" He said: "So Abu Talhah departed until he met up with the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). The Messenger of Allah came, while Abu Talhah was with him, until they entered, when the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: 'Come O Umm Sulaim! What do you have?' So she brought him that bread, and he (ﷺ) ordered that it be broken into pieces. Umm Sulaim poured some butter from an oil-skin upon them, then the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) recited whatever Allah willed for him to say over it. Then he said: 'Let ten come.' So ten were admitted, and they ate until they were full, and then they left. Then he said: 'Let ten come.' So ten were admitted, and they ate until they were full, and they left. Then he said: 'Let ten come.' So ten were admitted, and they ate until they were full, and there were seventy or eighty men." Grade: Sahih (Darussalam) Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3630 https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:3630”

Logically speaking, if the Khimar only meant a headscarf, why is Umm Sulaim (RA) wrapping bread in a Khimar?



B) So scholars who claim the Hijab is mandatory cite a supposed historical backstory about how this verse was directed towards women who already wore the headscarf. According to them, “the Quran is assuming that every woman at the time of the revelation of these verses was already covering their hair to begin with, hence it contains a de-facto order for all Muslim women to wear a headscarf “. Hence the only way it would make sense is if EVERY SINGLE Muslim women at that time were wearing a headscarf to begin with, because they are the only women this verse is directed towards. However, it's a well known fact that only the elite and upper class women covered their hair. In fact classical scholars prescribed different awras based on the social status of women, and slave women were prohibited from covering their hair. So what seems more likely, that the Quran is referencing some obscure 7th century custom that only the elite women at that time practiced, for the purpose of establishing a universal injunction on “covering the head”, OR that the command simply means “cover your chest using a piece of cloth”?



C) Looking at images of Muslim women in the periods of the Islamic Golden age (the era shortly after the death of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH when Islamic civilisation flourished), even when free women wore head scarfs on their head, they had bits and strands of hair showing. If hair is actually something women are obligated to cover, these women would have been careful to make sure there's no hair showing. ChickenSoup54 (talk) 16:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hijab&oldid=1222059769"