The hijab (Part 3)

What I believe doesn't seem to matter much at all as the debate of whether only the palms and the face is allowed or just the body should be covered, is being wildly contested even among the theologians. Muslim scholars have made a lot of arguments supporting different degrees of clothing before various audiences.

What is clear to me however, is that the Quran stated quite clearly in Surah An-Nur, 31 and 58, where the word aurat clearly means body parts. In Surah Al-Ahzaab aurat is used for the third time to indicate the meaning of "without protection" or terdedah. The significance of aurat is later amplified in the various hadis, each championing minute details of what is aurat and what parts should be closed and hidden.

That would be missing the point.

The reason why the aurat is there has really practical applications which the Quran stated explicitly - guarding their modesty and protect their "kehormatan". It is not so much about your hair or your knees or your elbows or shoulders but whether your clothes are too unnecessarily revealing. In fact, so revealing that it affects the modesty requested in the Quran.

Somehow, along the way, some people decided that that modesty can be fulfilled by dressing up like a walking robe with a slit to see where one's going. That's their way of interpretating modesty. Whatever it is, the Quran is actually not prohibitive of women showing their head with their hair. Much less voice. The surah on the voice is more a don't flirty-voice with strangers cause you don't know their intentions. Which I think a lot of the surahs are sensible advices and sound suggestions. Surely, that doesn't imply that a woman's voice is aurat. That is inherently stupid like certain muslim scholars say that the muslimahs are not allowed to recite the Quran aloud in public because their voice are haram to be heard.

In the case of the caller to the radio station, her misconception is with the stereotype of the music industry and entertainers. It is not so much about the tudung. She is actually saying that her religious ideals probably might no go down well with people in the industry and it won't sell. She is right in a way. Sex sells, tudungs are a bit difficult.

However, this is what we call a loss. She can make a difference if she pursues a musical career using the talents God gave her in a non-compromising way. Whether she has an album contract or not, she don't have to be apologetic for what she choose to believe as modesty in Islam. That is way better than those who APPEARS modest (hijab and all) but are merely doing it to not stuck out like a sore thumb.

This is the power of conformity. People are conforming not because they think it is a modest attire. They are thinking that the tudung is a religious attire. It is not about being more muslim or more Islam than the girl who wears none, it is about modesty in clothing which the Quran quite explicitly states. Cover your body, don't wear revealing clothes or ostentatious adornments.

In any case, wearing the hijab or otherwise is an issue of modesty. If someone doesn't do it, she is immodest, not unislamic. It is pretty common for people to mistake the two. It might be reductionist to do so, but it is really fringe issues.

The Quran has stated what aurat is and why the body should be covered. Now, defining the limits of what should be covered is technicalities. We can all agree it is immodest to parade mammal glands around, or skimpy dressing. However, the hair on the crown of your head? No, the Quran never said cover yourself until only two eyes are visible.

I believe the body is the aurat and aurat is for modesty purposes and issues of dignity, integrity and respect (kehormatan), for want of a better word. The hair or the voice, imho is definitely not problematic. You can be covered from head to toe, it is up to you to think of what kind of modesty you're trying to achieve. Some people wear hijabs but gold rings, bracelets, chains and glittering accessories to parade their wealth. Less consternation over that huh?