The heat and debate generated by the Sarkozy outburst against the burqa, which described it as a mobile prison and “a sign of subservience,” was on expected lines. But what surprised the neutral observer was the fact that the French President, despite being a Roman Catholic, could hold such an extreme opinion about a dress code that only asserts the decency of a woman. “I am of Catholic culture, Catholic tradition, Catholic faith,” Sarkozy had said in his book, The Republic, Religions and Hope. Therefore, he should have known that the Church had always associated the veil with moral rectitude. No wonder all traditional depictions of Virgin Mary show her veiled. And according to Vatican protocol, queens or First Ladies who visit the Pope should dress in black and cover their heads with a veil. In April this year when Prince Charles took his wife Camilla to meet the Pope she was dressed in just that way. In any case it is demented logic to question the religious sanctity of a dress that covers the body while saying nothing about atavistic nudism. Hence, it may be easily concluded that Sarkozy’s crusade against the burqa is totally unwarranted and condemnable.
But the debate has raised the interesting question of whether or not a Muslim woman can be compelled under Islamic law to wear the burqa. A perusal of the Quran reveals that the word ‘burqa’ finds no mention in it. The terms used by the Quran are jilbaab, an outer wrapping garment which is to be worn around the body (33:59), and khimaar, a kind of head-covering which is to be extended to also cover the bosom (24:31). It may be noted here that jilbaab and khimaar denote just modest clothing and not a head-to-toe shroud with just a small opening for the eyes. Had this been the case the Quranic instruction to the Muslims (both men and women) to “lower their gaze” (24:30-31) would have made no sense.
http://newageislam.com/looking-beyond-the-burqa--/islam,-women-and-feminism/d/1526
No comments:
Post a Comment