Friday, January 13, 2017

Reject Tillerson! Unfit For Secretary Of State!

Reject Tillerson!     While I generally support President Trump's nominees, Rex Tillerson stands out as the exception.  After reading these quotes in the Washington Post, I can not support his confirmation. President Trump should nominate a Secretary Of State  who understands Islam, which is our enemy, not our friend or ally.

“I do not support a blanket-type rejection of any particular group of people,”

The McCaren-Walter Act '52 does and so do I. The President can exclude subversive persons/groups under that act.  Islam makes Muslims our enemies with these damnable doctrines of conquest & terror:  3:151, 8:12,39,57,60,65,67, 9:5,29,38, 39,111,120,123, 33:26,27, 47:4,49:15, 59:2,13, 61:10-13; Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331 & 4.52.220

"gained an appreciation and recognition of this great faith,”

    What the Hell is great about Islam? Muslims believe that Allah wants them to conquer the world. They reject the paternity, deity, crucifixion, death & resurrection of Jesus Christ. They built an empire spanning half the globe leaving 270 million dead victims. They wage war against us because we are not Muslims.

“we should support those Muslim voices that reject this same radical Islam that we reject,”

    "Radical Islam is an egregious lie. Radical refers to the root. The roots of Islamic terrorism  are in the Qur'an and hadith. I linked to them above.  That is normative Islam as Moe preached and practiced it, not hijacked neither is it perverted nor is it distorted. It's Islam, Stupid!  Muslims who reject Jihad/terrorism incur the death penalty for apostasy codified in "Reliance Of The Traveller" Book O, Chapter 8.0...8.7.*  Denial of any part of Islam, the Qur'an or Islamic law is haram!

    Of 'moderate Muslims', he said:
“our greatest allies in this war.”

I write: every candidate for high office should read the Qur'an and one of the two sahih hadith collections! Had Tillerson read the Qur'an, he would know that Allah explicitly forbids inferior and equal relations with infidels. Muslims must be superior; they are forbidden to be friends, partners or allies of kuffar!  Read it and weep, LibTards!!

Shari'ah  The link to Reliance is not likely to last for long. I therefore quote the relevant  parts.

Chapter O8.0: Apostasy from Islam (Ridda)

(O: Leaving Islam is the ugliest form of unbelief (kufr) and the worst. It may come about through sarcasm, as when someone is told, ``Trim your nails, it is sunna,'' and he replies, ``I would not do it even if it were,'' as opposed to when some circumstance exists which exonerates him of having committed apostasy, such as when his tongue runs away with him, or when he is quoting someone, or says it out of fear.)


When a person who has reached puberty and is sane voluntarily apostatizes from Islam, he deserves to be killed.


In such a case, it is obligatory for the caliph (A: or his representive) to ask him to repent and return to Islam. If he does, it is accepted from him, but if he refuses, he is immediately killed.


If he is a freeman, no one besides the caliph or his representative may kill him. If someone else kills him, the killer is disciplined (def: o17) (O: for arrogating the caliph's prerogative and encroaching upon his rights, as this is one of his duties).


There is no indemnity for killing an apostate (O: or any expiation, since it is killing someone who deserves to die).


If he apostatizes from Islam and returns several times, it (O: i.e. his return to Islam, which occurs when he states the two Testifications of Faith (def: o8.7(12) ) ) is accepted from him, though he is disciplined (o17).


(A: If a spouse in a consummated marriage apostatizes from Islam, the couple are separated for a waiting period consisting of three intervals between menstruations. If the spouse returns to Islam before the waiting period ends, the marriage is not annulled but is considered to have continued the whole time (dis: m7.4). )

O8.7: Acts that Entail Leaving Islam

(O: Among the things that entail apostasy from Islam (may Allah protect us from them) are:

-1- to prostrate to an idol, whether sarcastically, out of mere contrariness, or in actual conviction, like that of someone who believes the Creator to be something that has originated in time. Like idols in this respect are the sun or moon, and like prostration is bowing to other than Allah, if one intends reverence towards it like the reverence due to Allah;

-2- to intend to commit unbelief, even if in the future. And like this intention is hesitating whether to do so or not: one thereby immediately commits unbelief;

-3- to speak words that imply unbelief such as ``Allah is the third of three,'' or ``I am Allah''-unless one's tongue has run away with one, or one is quoting another, or is one of the friends of Allah Most High (wali, def: w33) in a spiritually intoxicated state of total oblivion (A: friend of Allah or not, someone totally oblivious is as if insane, and is not held legally responsible (dis: k13.1(O:) ) ), for these latter do not entail unbelief;

-4- to revile Allah or His messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace);

-5- to deny the existence of Allah, His beginingless eternality, His endless eternality, or to deny any of His attributes which the consensus of Muslims ascribes to Him (dis: v1);

-6- to be sarcastic about Allah's name, His command, His interdiction, His promise, or His threat;

-7- to deny any verse of the Koran or anything which by scholarly consensus (def: b7) belongs to it, or to add a verse that does belong to it;

Wednesday, January 11, 2017

Obamination: Good Riddance Address; Repeated Lies About Islam and Ilamic State

Obamination: Good Riddance Address; Repeated Lies About Islam and Ilamic State nHat tip: Fox News, who published the AssWhole's prepared remarks.  The farewell address, to reasonable people, the good riddance address, is long and target rich but I have selected a few of the most egregious lies related to national security.[I reserve the economic and social issue lies for others.]  In keeping with my usual practice, I have placed  superscripts in the partial transcript. Each superscript is linked to a comment below the horizontal line. Click one, read the commentary and use your Back Space Key to return to your place in the spew of turd.

     Nine more days, thank God, only nine more days of durance vile!!! January 20, long time coming. Each time I see the lying impostor's image and hear his voice, I need to piss on his grave. Unfortunately I will not live long enough and can not afford to travel to Kenya, Indonesia, Hawaii, Chicago or Washington D.C.

    The New York Times claims that this is a video of the speech. I can not bear to listen to it. If you can, go ahead, waste an hour, its your time. I will show you what really happened below the video.

[...]It's that spirit1 - a faith in reason, and enterprise, and the primacy of right over might, that allowed us to resist the lure of fascism and tyranny during the Great Depression, and build a post-World War II order with other democracies, an order based not just on military power or national affiliations but on principles - the rule of law2, human rights, freedoms of religion3, speech4, assembly, and an independent press.

That order is now being challenged - first by violent fanatics who claim to speak for Islam5; more recently by autocrats in foreign capitals who see free markets, open democracies, and civil society itself as a threat to their power. The peril each poses to our democracy is more far-reaching than a car bomb or a missile. It represents the fear of change; the fear of people who look or speak or pray differently6; a contempt for the rule of law that holds leaders accountable; an intolerance of dissent and free thought; a belief that the sword or the gun or the bomb or propaganda machine is the ultimate arbiter of what's true and what's right7.

Because of the extraordinary courage of our men and women in uniform, and the intelligence officers, law enforcement, and diplomats who support them, no foreign terrorist organization8 has successfully planned and executed an attack on our homeland these past eight years9. And although Boston and Orlando remind us of how dangerous radicalization10 can be, our law enforcement agencies are more effective and vigilant than ever. We've taken out tens of thousands of terrorists - including Osama bin Laden11. The global coalition12 we're leading against ISIL has taken out their leaders, and taken away about half their territory.

ISIL will be destroyed13, and no one who threatens America will ever be safe. To all who serve, it has been the honor of my lifetime to be your Commander-in-Chief.

But protecting our way of life requires more than our military. Democracy can buckle when we give in to fear. So just as we, as citizens, must remain vigilant against external aggression, we must guard against a weakening of the values14 that make us who we are. That's why, for the past eight years, I've worked to put the fight against terrorism on a firm legal15 footing.

That's why we've ended torture16, worked to close Gitmo17, and reform our laws governing surveillance18 to protect privacy and civil libertiessurveillance. That's why I reject discrimination against Muslim Americans19. That's why we cannot withdraw from global fights - to expand democracy, and human rights, women's rights, and LGBT rights20 - no matter how imperfect our efforts, no matter how expedient ignoring such values may seem. For the fight against extremism and intolerance and sectarianism21 are of a piece with the fight against authoritarianism and nationalist aggression.

If the scope of freedom and respect for the rule of law shrinks around the world, the likelihood of war within and between nations increases, and our own freedoms will eventually be threatened.

So let's be vigilant, but not afraid. ISIL will try to kill innocent people. But they cannot defeat22 America unless we betray our Constitution and our principles in the fight. Rivals like Russia or China cannot match our influence around the world - unless we give up what we stand for, and turn ourselves into just another big country that bullies smaller neighbors.

Which brings me to my final point - our democracy is threatened whenever we take it for granted23. All of us, regardless of party, should throw ourselves into the task of rebuilding our democratic institutions. When voting rates are some of the lowest among advanced democracies, we should make it easier, not harder, to vote. When trust in our institutions is low, we should reduce the corrosive influence of money in our politics, and insist on the principles of transparency and ethics in public service. When Congress is dysfunctional, we should draw our districts to encourage politicians to cater to common sense and not rigid extremes.

And all of this depends on our participation; on each of us accepting the responsibility of citizenship, regardless of which way the pendulum of power swings. [...]


    Spirit my foot! The two global wars and great depression were struggles for survival. Other nations, slave and free, some not sharing our values, struggled along with us.

rule of law

    Christ help me,. I need to curse!!! The accursed liar hates our Constitution and has no respect for the rule of law. He violated both the organic law and statutes, ruling by decree with his phone & pen.

Freedom of religion

    But not for Catholics & Protestants, just for his Muslim brothers. Suing the Little Sisters Of The Poor to compel them to enable abortion!!!  

    The first amendment's free exercise clause is for religions, not organized crime disguised as religion. Get a God blessed clue for Chrissake!  What legitimate religion recruits and retains congregants by lethal force?  Does "Convert or die." have meaning for you?  How about a divine imperative to wage war on Jews, Christians & Zoroastrians until we are subjugated and make annual extortion payments?  How about "my provision is placed under the shade of my spear"?  

    In which article, section & clause does Obamination discover the right to attack, kill, rape, plunder or enslave neighbors who do not share your superstition?  In that same constitutional provision you will find the right to manifest, practice & propagate Islam. Need proof?  Here it is!!

free speech

    Obamination and Shrillery would shut down The Drudge Report, Breitbart News, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity & Mark Levin if they could.  Free speech is only for them and their surrogates. They are trying to prosecute climate change deniers. They signed onto HRC Res 16/18 in an attempt to silence the critics of Islam.

violent fanatics

    One man spoke for Islam: Muhammad, who died in 632.  He killed one man by his own hand and commanded 86 battles, only one of them defensive, participating in 17.

    Obamination wants us to believe that Islam is anodyne, beneficent & peaceful. In fact, it is inherently violent by design. It was contrived for the purpose of giving the imprimateur of divine sanction to the natural proclivity of Arabs: barbarian rapine.  

    After his cougar died, Moe got his living by his spear: taking it from those who created it.  
{I was sent with the sword just before the Hour so that Allah be worshipped alone without partners. My provision was placed under the shadow of my spear, and those who defy my order were disgraced and humiliated, and he who imitates a people is one of them.) Tafsir Ibn Kathir

    Attention: doubters, deniers & dissenters: read this extortion letter sent by Moe to Aqaba and explain eo me how Islam is a great religion of peace!!!

look differently

    CamelShit!  Skin color, physignomy & language are irrelevant. Rational objection to Islam/Muslims is based on knowledge obtained from the canonical texts of Islam including the Qur'an, sahih ahadith, tafsirs, sira & shari'ah.  Obamination's accusations of racism and bigotry turn around to point directly at him, he hates whites.


    Obamination described himself perfectly in that sentence.

foreign terrorist organization

    Islam is the foreign terrorist organization!!! Get a God Blessed clue for Chrissake!!! Every GdM is a member of it.

no successful attacks?

    Accursed liar!!! The Boston Marathon bombing, San Berdino Massacre, Pulse Club Massacre and Fort Hood Massacre were failures? Damn! Damn! Damn!!  Direct planning & execution by Al-Qaeda & flkying aircraft into towers  are not essential elements of all terror attacks!


    It's Islam, AssWhole!!!!!  Normative, off the shelf Islam as preached and practiced by Moe 1400 years ago. Not radical, extreme, perverted, hijacked or distorted: Islam!!! Terrorism: what Allah commanded; what Moe did &  Believers do!!!
3:151, 8:12,39,57,60,65,67, 9:5,29,38, 39,111,120,123, 33:26,27, 47:4,49:15, 59:2,13, 61:10-13; Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331 & 4.52.220.  The damnation of Obamination can not come too soon!

taken out terrorists

    And that stopped terror attacks, right?  Bataclan, Berlin, Nice, Orlando & San Bernardino attacks came after Osama was shot.  One thousand down, 1.6 billion to go. Terrorism ends when there are no living Muslims, not before!!!  Click each of these links to the Qur'an & hadith, read them and get a clue for Chrissake!!! 3:151, 8:12,39,57,60,65,67, 9:5,29,38, 39,111,120,123, 33:26,27, 47:4,49:15, 59:2,13, 61:10-13; Sahih Bukhari 1.7.331 & 4.52.220.

ISIL destroyed

    What of Hisb Ut-Tahrir, Hezbollah, Boko Haram  etc et al and every GdM who believes in Allah, his imperatives, threat and promise?  Al-qaeda was "on the run" and Islamic state was the "JV team". Terrorism will continue until there are no more Muslims.

global coalition

    We do not have Muslim friends, allies or partners. Muslim regimes sponsor terrorism, they do not combat it. GdFs do  not know that the Qur'an explicitly forbids inferior and equal relationships with infidels. "Take not as friends"! Do not be a fool: read'em and curse Islam & lying Traitors..

Our Values

    National suicide, defeat, surrender and submission are not our values!  Victory at any cost to preserve life, liberty & prosperity are our values.  Giving sanctuary to enemy combatants disguised as refugees is not our value. Allowing terror training camps to proliferate is not our value. letting terrorists live is not our value. Worrying about their wives and brats is not our value. Hiroshima & Nagasaki reflect our values.

legal footing

    When dealing with Islam, there is one law: extinction. Make it extinct by every means necessary!!!  The Constitution and laws are not suicide pacts. Enemy combatants who attack us have no rights in our legal system.  They belong at he end of a rope or in the holding tank of the nearest hog farm.


    Waterbarding is not torture. Our own troops were subjected to it in training.  There is nothing illegal, immoral or wrong with it. Those who bitch about it should be drowned in a hog farm holding tank.

close Gitmo

    Release your Muslim brothers to return to the battlefield and plot new attacks against us. What can go wrong with that?  AssWhole! No words can express my contempt!!


    Several recent attackers were on watch lists and under surveillance. What good did that do?  Get them to Hell out of here! Expel all Muslims presently in Dar al-Harb and do not admit any more!!!

Muslim Americans

    The ultimate oxymoron! Muslim and American are polar opposites! One can not be both! Their value system is the polar opposite of ours. Their paradise is a carnal house and being killed in battle against infidels is their price of admission.  They are enemies, not Americans.  Expel them and do not let any more in!!

global fights

    Islam is theocratic, not democratic and can not be altered. Reform is impossible! Islamic law requires the execution of Queers. Islamic law does not allow freedom of religion or speech. Not being Muslim is a capital offense.  Your damned fool Arab Spring is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

fight against

    Islam, you GdM!!!


3:85. And whoever seeks a religion other than Islâm, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.

3:110. You [true believers in Islâmic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad  and his Sunnah (legal ways, etc.)] are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma'rûf (i.e. Islâmic Monotheism and all that Islâm has ordained) and forbid Al-Munkar (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islâm has forbidden), and you believe in Allâh. And had the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) believed, it would have been better for them; among them are some who have faith, but most of them are Al-Fâsiqûn (disobedient to Allâh - and rebellious against Allâh's Command).

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 80:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Verse:--"You (true Muslims) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind." means, the best of peoples for the people, as you bring them with chains on their necks till they embrace Islam.

defeat America

    America was defeated by the lame stream media in  Korea and Vietnam.  AssWholes lying about the identity and character of the enemy and  its persistent existential threat will be the cause of our defeat by Islam.

    It is death by a thousand cuts, wearing down by attrition. Islam is persistent, it never quits attacking. Muslims go to war or to Hell. While they believe, they will wage war. If you continue bringing in more rapefugees & gimmigrants, we will be defeated demographically.

democracy threatened

    The greatest threat to our representative republic was your election and re-election by Goddamned  Fools who listened to your siren song of shit uncritically and projected their dreams onto an unworthy vessel.  The second greatest threat was the nomination of the Bloody Bitch Of Bengthazi despite her long litany of obvious lies.  

    Now we must be vigilant in keeping President Trump's feet to the fire, holding him true to his campaign promises. We must be inolved in the primary election cycles in ' 18, 20 & 24 and replace the damned  RINOs with Conservatives!!!

    Patriots, get off the couch! Turn off the idiot box, get nominating petitions and run for school boards, township boards, county supervisor, city commissions and precinct delegates.   #MAGA!

Monday, January 09, 2017

Hijab 103 Authentic History Of The Islamic Head Bag

Hijab 103 Authentic History Of The Islamic Head Bag My colleague has shown to you  a commentary on the verse of the hijab. Being an equal opportunity offender who eventually pisses off everyone, I take her lesson a step further.  

    Debi cited the Mariful Qur'an, a translation & tafsir written by the father of M. Taki Usmani, the Shari'ah Finance expert who sat on Pakistan's high court and was involved in updating the translation. The tafsir is an eight volume set, with an index volume which you can download from You can read the page noted in her citation here.

    Debi also displayed to you a Canuck video criticizing a seminar purporting to give the history of the hijab.  I intend to display to you some history you will not easily find elsewhere. But first, a little background information.

    Arab and related cultures consider women to be chattel property. Girls are owned by their fathers and sold to husbands. The Muslim purchases the girl's awrah with his mahr.  Because I doubt your will to read Ishaq's Sira, I now exhibit to you a quote from  Guillaume's translation.  I could not make  OCR work, so here is a screen shot of the page with the hot section highlighted.

The Muslim's wife is a prisoner [Tabari translates it differently: "domestic animals"[ Al-Tabari, Vol. 9, pp. 112-113], having no control over her life.

    Now we dispose of the modesty claim: it does not apply to slaves. It is purely carnal, not pious.

24:31. And tell the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things), and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts, etc.) and not to show off their adornment except only that which is apparent (like palms of hands or one eye or both eyes for necessity to see the way, or outer dress like veil, gloves, head-cover, apron, etc.), and to draw their veils all over Juyubihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms, etc.) and not to reveal their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husband's fathers, their sons, their husband's sons, their brothers or their brother's sons, or their sister's sons, or their (Muslim) women (i.e. their sisters in Islâm), or the (female) slaves whom their right hands possess, or old male servants who lack vigour, or small children who have no sense of the shame of sex. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And all of you beg Allâh to forgive you all, O believers, that you may be successful.

Read the verse of Hijab:


33:59. O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies (i.e.screen themselves completely except the eyes or one eye to see the way). That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed. And Allâh is Ever Oft­Forgiving, Most Merciful.

    So as not to be annoyed; what does that mean?  We will delve into hadith for the answer. The Profiteer did not have indoor plumbing or an outhouse. When nature called, he went ino the desert to answer it. Being a kind husband, he gave his wives permission to go out to the desert at night for their personal needs, meaning to defecate.

    Umar, caliph in waiting, was campaigning for the hijab. As part of his campaign, he hassled Sauda, the Profit's second wife, while she was taking a dump in the desert.   Sauda complained to Moe, who revealed the Verse of Hijab as a result.  

Sahih Bukhari

Volume 1, Book 4, Number 148:

Narrated 'Aisha:

The wives of the Prophet used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqia at Medina) to answer the call of nature at night. 'Umar used to say to the Prophet "Let your wives be veiled," but Allah's Apostle did not do so. One night Sauda bint Zam'a the wife of the Prophet went out at 'Isha' time and she was a tall lady. 'Umar addressed her and said, "I have recognized you, O Sauda." He said so, as he desired eagerly that the verses of Al-Hijab (the observing of veils by the Muslim women) may be revealed. So Allah revealed the verses of "Al-Hijab" (A complete body cover excluding the eyes).

Volume 8, Book 74, Number 257:

Narrated 'Aisha:

(the wife of the Prophet) 'Umar bin Al-Khattab used to say to Allah's Apostle "Let your wives be veiled" But he did not do so. The wives of the Prophet used to go out to answer the call of nature at night only at Al-Manasi.' Once Sauda, the daughter of Zam'a went out and she was a tall woman. 'Umar bin Al-Khattab saw her while he was in a gathering, and said, "I have recognized you, O Sauda!" He ('Umar) said so as he was anxious for some Divine orders regarding the veil (the veiling of women.) So Allah revealed the Verse of veiling. (Al-Hijab; a complete body cover excluding the eyes). (See Hadith No. 148, Vol. 1)

See also: Sahih Muslim 26.5397

    Remember this next time you see a Muslima pictured smugly smirking, brim full of supremacism in her head bag. Imagine her squatting over a pile in the desert. Not to be outdone, I now exhibit to you a priceless graphic novel illustrating the incident described in the ahadith displayed above. Note: the incident of Moe's adultery with Miriam is documented in my various posts about "Innocence Of Muslims", look for it in the right sidebar. 

Anni Cyrus’ on "Unknown: Lies About Hijab 101"

Anni Cyrus’ Unknown: Lies About Hijab 101 (posted at Jihad Watch)

Anni speaks of the dangers of shariah.

Given, shariah is Islam, and Islam is the sunnah and the shariah of the alleged "prophet of Islam," why not speak directly to the reality of the danger, which is Islam?

No history on Hijab--is that the position of the falsehood in Hijab 101?

That claim is nonsense.

The "suggestion" or choice to wear or not to wear hijab goes no further then one verse sorta-kinda alluding to it in the Qur’an?


As the Qur’an commands, obedience to “Allah” is commanded, and “Allah” commanded obedience to the alleged “prophet of Islam.” Tafsir further provides, sunnah of the “prophet” is part of the “revelation” received, and in that sunnah, as sira provides, the “prophet” supported and thus taught the house was the ideal covering “Allah” desired for women.

Therefore tafsir, as well as ahadith, is perfectly clear on the mandate of the Burka.

In brief.

Therefore, in condensed version, here follows:

  “Burka” mandate of Islam 

On the above topic, for those seeking to know and understand the verses of the Qur’an and the intended meanings of those respective verses with respect to the stated topic; for such, the great scholars of hadith and masters and Imams of tafsir—Tabarani, ibn Kathir, Imam Baghawi, Hakim, Qurtubi, Mazhari, Baihaqi, al-Mahalli, etc.-- provide the following explanations and clarifications:

The degrees of Islamic legal Hijab and the injunctions relating to them The sum of seven verses of the Qur’an and seventy narrations of Hadith about the Hijab of women seems to be that the real objective desirable in the sight of the Shariah is Hijab-ul-ashkhas i.e. physical hiding of women from strangers. In other words, women and their movement should remain hidden from the sight of men, something that can be accomplished by means of the four walls of homes or tents or hanging curtains. All forms of Hijab allowed other than this [sic] are all restricted by or conditional with the ground of need, time of need, and measure of need.

Thus, the first degree of Hijab –which is the really desired objective of the Shariah—is that women stay in their homes. But, the Shariah of Islam is a comprehensive and complete social system in which full consideration has been given to all human needs. Then, it is all too obvious that women will face inevitable circumstances when they have to go out of the house at some or the other time. For this purpose, the second degree of Hijab, in the light of the Qur’an, and Sunnah, seems to be that they should go out wearing a burqa ‘ or long shawl concealing their whole body. To see their way, they leave only one eye open from inside the sheet, or use a patch of net before the eyes as is placed in a burqa ‘ for this purpose. On occasions of need, this second degree of Hijab too – like the first one – is agreed upon among all Muslim scholars and jurist. 

(Mariful Qur’an, By Maulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi, translated by, Muhammad Shamim and Muhammad Wali Raazi, Revised by Maulana Muhammad Taqi ‘Usmani, Fourth Edition, 2007, Maktaba-e-Darul- ‘Uloom, Karachi, 14 Pakistan. Vol. 7, Surah al-Ahzab : 33: 53 – 55, P. 218.)

Therefore, Feminist, fighters and defenders of women’s rights--aka, in the face of Islam, fools and silent gutless wonders--anyone who objects to a woman, when outside her home, having to be so concealed, so imprisoned; then fight that which demands and commands such: Islam.

As stated above, it is the doctrine and thus the instruction from the Qur’an and the Sunnah,  and thus the consensus of all Muslim scholars and jurist.

Moving forward on the topic, we note, The “Holy Prophet” reportedly said: “When a woman comes out (of her house), the Shaytan marks her out (that is, makes her a means of spreading evil among Muslims).” 

(Maulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi , Vol. 7, Surah al-Ahzab : 33: 53 – 55, Ibid, P. 221.) 

Hence, from the Islamic perspective, the reason for the mandate of legal hijab .

Additionally, as the source provides, “ Ibn Khuzaymah and Ibn Hiabban have also reported,” in their rendition of the above cited hadith, there also these additional words: “(and [a woman] is closer to her Rabb [Lord] when she is [hidden] in the midmost [section] of her house.” (Ibd.)

What’s more, as the revered scholar provided, this, “reported by Tabarani, as quoted by Kanz,” once more, word hadith attributes to the “Holy Prophet”: “For woman, there is no share in going out except when inevitable.)” (Ibid.)

Therefore, as we move forward in this topic, we will dive deeper into the details of the first and second degree of hijab, and what the “sacred texts” of Islam have to say on it.

In the  Commentary mentioned above, Ma’ariful Qur’an, well-versed on the consensus of the notable scholars that  proceeded him,  the revered scholar  and author provides, “The first verses on the subject of hijab for women are the ones which were revealed in Surah Ahzab at the time of marriage of the mother of the believers Sayyidna Zainab bit Jahash with the Holy Prophet.” 
(Mariful Qur’an, Vol. 6, Surah An-Nur, 24: 30, 31, P. 407.)

The most agreed upon time of the above marriage and thus of the time in which the injunction of Hajib was allegedly revealed is  5th Hijrah. (ibid. [Vol.. 6, P. 407.]) Shortly, we will read of the noted marriage account mentioned above.

Surah Ahzab has five verses that speak to the topic of the mandate for hijab; Surah An-Nur has two verses on the topic, the latter said to have been revealed at the time of “the episode of Ifk (false imputation) …. Ifk means the worst type of lie, imputation, or slander,” in this instance, that specifically brought against Aishah. (Ibid,  P.373.)

Speaking further on “the episode of ifk,” limiting our focus on the incident to only providing the time in which it occurred, referring to Aishah, Ma‘ariful Qur’an provides, “The common practice was that first she would sit in her litter and then it was placed on the back of the camel. It was because by this time the injunction of hijab had been revealed.” (Ibid.)

As we will read shortly, as just spoken to in the above citation, because secondary to the alleged commandment for full seclusion of the Muslim woman; when traveling, the litter served as the mandated hijab in place of the full covering and seclusion the house provided for the women when stationary at home-base or elsewhere.

Though the verses in Surah Ahzab are claimed to have come first, notwithstanding that, since the information provided in Surah Ahzab on the topic is expansive, and once into it, we will be there a good while; first, we will cite the verses in Surah an-Nur on the injunction, which are these:

Say to the believing men that they should lower their gazes and guard their private parts; it is more decent for them. Surely Allah is All-Aware of what they do. (30.)

And say to the believing woman that they must lower their gazes and guard their private parts and must not expose their adornments, except that which appears thereof, and must wrap their bosoms with their shawls, and must not expose their adornments except to their husbands or their fathers or the fathers of their husbands, or to their sons of the sons of their brothers or the sons of their sisters, or to their women, or those owned by their right hands, or male attendants having no (sexual) urge, or to their children who are not yet conscience of the shames of women…. (vs. 31.)

We will eventuate in returning to commentary on the above verses.  But briefly, now, stepping away from those verse and Ma’ariful Qur’an, we go, first, to the two Sahihs; first to Bakhari, and later on to Muslims wherein the reader is provided a bit of the background setting in which and for which the above verses on the injunction of the veil were allegedly revealed.

In Sahih Bukhari, the chapter in focus here opens hearkening back to and citing verse 5 of chapter 11, we reads as follows:

“No doubt! They did fold up their breast, that they may hide from Him. Surely, even when they cover themselves with their garments, He knows what they conceal and what they reveal. Verily, He is the All-Knower of the (innermost secrets) of the breast.” (V. 11:5)

Narrated Muhammad bin ‘Abbad bin Ja’far that he heard Ibn ‘Abbas reciting: “No doubt! They did fold up their breast …” (V.11:5) and asked him about its explanation. He said, “Some people used to hide themselves while answering the call of nature in an open space lest they be exposed to the sky, and also when they had sexual relation with their wives in a [sic] open space, lest they be exposed to the sky; so the above revelation was sent down regarding them.”

(Sahih Al-Bukhari, Translated by: Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, Darussalam, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 1997, Vol. 6, Book 65 (Book of Commentary) P. 160,  #4681.)

Tafsir Ibn Kathir provides this on the verse just cited above (11:5):

Ibn Abbas said, “They used to dislike facing the sky with their private parts, particularly during sexual relations. Therefore, Allah revealed this verse.” Al-Bukhari recorded by way of Ibn Jurayj, who reported from Muhammad bin ‘Abbad bin Ja’far who said, “Ibn ‘Abbas recited,
“Behold their breast did fold up.”

Clear as mud, right?

Indeed. Therefore, ibn Kathir relates the following actions of Ibn Jurayj:

So I said: “O Abu Al-Abbas! What does –their breast did fold up—mean?”

Good question, ibn Jurayj.

And to his posed question, ibn Kathir relates, Bakhari related, Ibn Abbas answered with the following explanation:

“The man used to have sex with his woman, be he would be shy, or he used to have answering the call of nature (in the open space) but, he would be shy. Therefore, this verse,
“No doubt! They did fold up their breast, was revealed.’”

ibn Kathir also provides this on the meaning of the somewhat odd verse:

In another wording of this narration, Ibn Abbas said, “there were people who used to be shy to remove their clothes while answering the call of nature in an open space and thus be naked exposed to the sky. They were also ashamed of having sexual relations with their women due to fear of being exposed towards the sky. Thus, this was revealed concerning them.”

Al-Bukhari reported that ibn ‘Abbas said that “they cover themselves,” means that they cover their heads.

And then Ibn Kathir provides, al-Bakhari provides for the reader, verse 6 of Surah 11—a Meccan chapter, worth noting:

And no moving creature is there on earth but its provision is due from Allah. And He knows its dwelling place and its deposit. All is in a Clear Book.”

(TAFSIR IBN KATHIR [ABRIDGED] V. 4, ABRIDGED BY A GROUP OF SCHOLARS UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF SHAYKH SAFIUR-RAHMAN AL-MUBARAKPURI, DARUSSALAM, Riyadh, Second Edition, 2003, Vol. 5, Surah 11. Hud (5-6)pp. 21-22. [Qur’anic Text: parenthetical] )

Well, as stated earlier, that certainly clears the verse up….

Therefore, therefrom, onward we go, to yet another Sahih Bukhari provided hadith on the subject: the aforementioned wedding of the alleged “prophet” and to Zainab bint Jahsh:

Narrated Ana: A wedding banquet of bread and meat was held on the occasion of the marriage of the Prophet to Zainab bint Jahsh. I was sent to invite the people (to the banquet), and so the people started coming (in groups); they would eat and then leave. Another batch would come, eat and leave. So I kept on inviting the people till I found nobody to invite. Then I said, “O Allah’s Prophet! I do not anybody to invite.” He said, “Carry away the remaining food.” Then a batch of three persons stayed in the house, chatting. The Prophet left and wen towards the dwelling place of “Aishah and said, “Peace and Allah’s Mercy  be on you, O the people of the house!” She replied, “Peace and the Mercy of Allah be on you, too. How did you find your wife? May Allah bless you.” Then he went to the dwelling places of all his other wives and said to them the same as he said to ‘Aishah, and they said to him the same as ‘Aishah had said to him. Then the Prophet returned and found a group of three persons still in the house, chatting. The Prophet was a very shy person, so he went out (for the second time) and went towards the dwelling places of ‘Aishah. I do not remember whether I informed him that the people have [sic] gone away. So, he returned and as soon as he entered the gate, he drew the curtain between me and him, and then the Verse of Al-Hijab was revealed.

(Ibid, pp. 270 – 271, #4793.)

Then there is this incident:

Narrated ‘Aishah: Sauda (the wife of the Prophet) went out to answer the call of nature after it was made obligatory (for all the Muslims ladies) to observe the veil. She was a fat huge lady, and everybody who knew her before could recognize her. So, ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab saw her and said, “O Sauda! By Allah, you cannot hide yourself from us, so think of a way by which you should not be recognized on going out.” Sauda returned while Allah’s Messenger was in my house taking his supper, and a bone covered with meat was in his hand. She entered and said, “O Allah’s Messenger! I went out to answer the call of nature and ‘Umar said to me so-and-so.” Then Allah revealed upon him (the Prophet) and when the state of Revelation was over and the bone was still in his hand as he had not put it down, he said (to Sauda), “You (women) have been allowed to go out for your needs.” (Ibid. pp. 272-273, #4795.)

That instant there of alleged “revelation” is worth noting. Considering, though it seems almost trifling, and actually given and allegedly received in between bites of the chunks of meat on the said bone; according to what tafsir provides on the alleged revelation of permission granted to the women to go out for their needs, in that, their “needs” were also provided, and detailed, as we will read shortly.

That said, Sahih Bukhari also provides the following on the injunction of the veil, and ‘Umar’s contribution, if you will, to it:

Narrated ‘Umar: I said, “O Allah’s Messenger! Good and bad persons enter upon you, so I suggest that you order the Mothers of the believers (i.e.. your wives) to observe veils.”

Then Allah revealed the Verses of Al-Hijab. (al-Bukhari, Ibid. P.269, #4790.)

Footnotes thereat, in volumes sold, purchased, and read throughout the Muslim world, read, “i.e. The observing of veils (complete body cover excluding the eyes) by the Muslim women.” (Ibid.)

As we will cover and show more on, as we advance herein, the alleged Allah-orders to the “blessed” wives of the so-called prophet, because the said wives were examples for all the Muslim women to emulate, were thus orders for all the women of Islam.

In sum, as Ma’ariful Qur’an provides, “all these instructions are not restricted to the blessed wives in particular, in fact, virtually all Muslim women are obligated to observe these,” provides the ruling. (M.Q. Vol. 7, P.138.)We will add more to this topic later.

However, for now, we go to Sahih Muslim, read what Muslim provides on the subject. There, we read the following:

Ibn Umar reported that Umar had said: My Lord concorded [sic] with (my judgments) on three occasions. In case of the Station of Ibrahim, in case of the observance of the veil and in case of the prisoners at Badr.

Our focus here today, obviously, the second of the three occasions mentioned above. Hearkening back  to the challenge, so to speak, of the open-air scenario mentioned earlier herein, with respect to that and the hadith just cited, footnotes on the above-cited hadith read as follows:

The second case is that of the veil of the women. Hadrat “Umar did not approve of going out of women, especially the members of the household of the Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him), without veil. He asked the Holy Prophet … to press his wives to observe pardah. The Holy Prophet … did not like to press his wives to observe the pardah. The Holy Prophet … did not like to issue any command which had not the sanctin [sic] and will of God behind it. But not much time was passed that Allah revealed the verses pertaining to veil.

(Sahih Muslim, By Imam Muslim, Rendered in English by ‘Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, Islamic Book Service, Fourth Edition, 2005, Vol. IV, Book Pertaining to the Merits of the Companions, Excellent Qualities of Umar, (Allah be pleased with him), P. 95, hadith, 2399, FN, respectively.)

[* “purdah” (sometimes spelled pardah, as above): “A Persian/Urdu word for the seclusion of women. (A Glossary of Islamic Terms, Aisha Bewley, Ta-Ha Publishers, LTD, 2009, P. 17.)]

(seclude: place in or withdraw into solitude; remove from social contact and activity, etc. isolate; shut off; keep apart: They secluded the garden from the rest of the property. [].)

Al-Bukhari relates the narrative this way:

Narrated Anas: “Umar said, “I agreed with Allah in three things,” or said, “My Lord agreed with me (accepted my invocation) in three things. I said, ‘O Allah’s Messenger! Would that you took the Maqam (place) of Ibrahim (Abraham) as a place of Salat (prayer).’ I also said, ‘O Allah’s Messenger! 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…. (Bukhari, Ibid, P.29, # 4483.)

We deduce from the rendition provided by Muslim, that, according to Islamic teaching, when the alleged prophet informed his ummah on the allegedly, as Bukhari puts it, “divinely” revealed injunction of the veil; henceforward, it was then a mandate with “the sanctin [sic] and will of God behind it.”

Footnotes provided in Ibn Majah echoe much the same as that in Muslim, as we read in the following:

There were several instances in the life of ‘Umar where he said something out of his own judicious opinion or judgment, and Allah’s ordainment came in accord with that judgment. Cases in point are: the commandment regarding Hijab (women’s veil); the question of the prisoners of the Battle of Badr …. This attribute of forming correct opinions was certainly a special gift or favor granted to ‘Umar from Allah.

(Sunan Ibn Majah, English Translation, Compiled by: Imam Muhammad Bin Yazeed Ibn Majah Al-Qazwini, Ahadith edited & referenced by: Hafiz Abu Tahir Zubair ‘Ali Za’I, Translated by: Nasiruddin al-Khattab [Canada], Final review by: Abu Khaliyl [USA], Darussalam. Vol. 1, The Book of the Sunnah, Virtues of Umar, P. 146, FN. On # 100.)

We note, in the first of the two just cited ahadith, the injunction of the veil—“purdah … the seclusion of women”--is referred to as “the observance of the veil,” and in the second comments on it, the revered Imams refer to the issue as “the commandment regarding Hijab.”  Moreover, they precede the latter with the qualifier, “Allah’s ordainment.” Additionally, we gain from the definition of purdah, which means “seclusion,” the commandment was for the women of Islam to be, in short, removed “from social contact and activity, etc.” and to be isolated, “shut off,” kept apart from it.

We likewise regard, a suggestion is a suggestion, a recommendation is a recommendation, and a commandment is a commandment. The latter, non-optional.

We also note that we have four instances in which and “needs” for which the alleged revelation allegedly came:

1.       “the time of marriage of the mother of the believers Sayyidna Zainab bit Jahash with the Holy Prophet.” 
2.       The instance in which Umar relates, he was visiting the house of the so-called prophet, and he said, “‘O Allah’s Messenger! Good and bad persons visit you! Would that you ordered the Mothers of the  believers to cover themselves with veils.’”
3.       The instance that I will call the “open-air” scenario and the disquiet it presented.
4.       And finally, the alleged revelation while at the bone, so to speak, when Umar told Sauda to think of a way to keep herself from being recognized when out answering the call of nature.

With that said, the above tucked in mind, so too, with the Qur’anic command, ““Obey God and obey the Messenger and those who are in charge…”  (al-Nisa, 4:59), we go now to what the “sacred texts” provide that the “Messenger of Allah” had to say on the topic of the veil. The following event related as that which happened during the final pilgrimage, therefore, after the alleged revelation of the “the commandment regarding Hijab”:

Abu Waqid Al-Laithi narrated that he heard the Messenger of Allah say to some of his wives during the Farewell Pilgrimage, “This, and then the surface of mats.” [1]  (Hasan.)

[1] Indicating that they may stay home from its performance in following years after it that year.

(Sunan Abu Dawud, Compiled by: Imam Hafiz Abu Dawud Sulaiman ibn Ash ‘ath, Ahadith edited and referenced by: Hafiz Abu Tahir Zubair ‘Ali Za’i, Translated by: Nasiruddin al-Khattab (Canada), Final Review by: Abu Khaliyl (USA); First Edition, Darussalam, 2008; Vol. 2, The Book of the Rites of Hajj and Umrah,  Chapter 1, p. 332, # 1722, FN respectively.)

Waqidi relates the event in these words, providing first for the reader, the setting:

When the Messenger of God …. Set out for Hajj he went before al-Shajara. When he returned from Mecca he entered Medinah from the resting place of al-Abtah. The Messenger of God was in his resting place in Batn al-Wadi. The people were with him at night. And it was said to him, “Surely, you are blessed in Batha! The Messenger of God said to his wives, “This is the Hajj, then the back of the carpet” –meaning, stick to your homes.

(The Life of Muhammad, Al-Waqidi’s Kitab al-Maghazi, Translated by Rizwi Faizer, Amal Ismail, and AbdulKader Tayob, Routledge; New York, NY, 1st Publication, 2011. P. 545.)

And Ma’ariful Qur’an provides the narrative this way, and, given this comment is found in those provided for Surah 33, we go to a few of those pages on the topic now:

… On the occasion of the Last Hajj (Hajjatul-Wadaa’), the Holy Prophet helped his blessed wives perform Hajj with him personally, the remark that he made on return was: (This is it. After that, should stick to the mats at home). The first word (hadhihi: translated here as ‘this is it’) refers to this very Hajj and (husur) is the plural form of (hasiir) which means a mat (of straw, a modest version of other floor spreads such as rug, carpet, daree, ets.). In essence, the Hadith is saying: Your going out for this alone is done. After that, you stick to the mats of your homes necessarily without having to part therefrom.

(Mariful Qur’an,  Vol. 7, Surah Al-Ahzab: 33: 28 – 34, P. 142, 143.)

Now we are about to see, how, according to Islamic teaching and the consensus provided by the revered scholars of Islam on the injunction in focus here; the alleged “revelations,” as spoken to above, were by no means, as inconsequential as they seemed. By no means, simply limited to the tossing, if you will, of a veil or shawl over one’s head, “bosoms,” shoulders or body. Not by a long shot. For what tafsir provides is that the covering detailed in the “revealed” verses on Hijab (seclusion of the women) was in fact the Allah-preferred observed full-covering provided by a house. Therewith providing the end Islamic mandate of full seclusion of the Muslim women.

Hence the just cited occasions of the command, “’This is the Hajj, then the back of the carpet’ –meaning, stick to your homes.” (Waqidi rendition.)

For the same authoritative tafsir referenced last—Commentary, as mentioned before, embraced by the Muslim world-- also provides, that, “the sense of Islamic legal Hijab as understood by the Holy Prophet and his blessed wives was but that women stay in their homes and, if traveling, in their shughduf (camel-litter), their presence was not to be exposed before men.” (Ma’ariful Qur’an, Vol. 7, P. 222.)

For such reasons, as touched on herein, the incident with Aishah referred to in the opening pages of this chapter; the incident of ifk; hence, with respect to that incident, and the topic in focus here, this:

The reason why Sayyidah  Aishah was left behind in the wilderness during the event of Ifk was no other but that the Hijab of the blessed wives was not simply restricted to the burqa or long sheet, in fact, even while traveling, they used to be in their camel-litter (shughduf or hawdaj). This shughduf itself was mounted on the camel and was dismounted as such. A shughdul is like a miniature roomette for the traveler…. (ibid.)

A camel-borne miniature mobile home, so to speak.

Because, for the women of Islam, to observe the covering provided by the home, be that a home mobile or stationary; “in the Shariah, it is a hijab that stands achieved by their staying at home, that is, the home becomes their veil or cover (al-hijab-bil-buyut).” (ibid, P. 141.) 

Hence the earlier-cited narratives of the order, “to the mats of your homes necessarily without having to part therefrom.” ( Ibid.142.)

The same source sums up the principle of the hadith with this clarification and buttressing:

This concerns the observance of full hijab (purdah or veil). It was said: (And remain in your homes, and do not display (your) beauty …. -33)….(p. 140. ibid)

In this verse, the essential injunction about hijab is that women stay at home (that is, do not go out without the need as admissible in the Shariah). Along with it, it was also said that they should not go out moving around in public without hijab …. The word : (tabarruj) essentially means manifestation or display and, at this place, it means the display of personal embellishment before non-Mahram men—as it appears in another verse: (not displaying embellishment –An-Nur, 24:60).
The verse tells us two things about hijab:

(1)    For women, the real thing desirable with Allah is that they should not go out of their homes. Their creation is an answer to whatever needs to be done at home. Let them stay involved in it. As for the real hijab desirable in the Shariah, it is a hijab that stands achieved by their staying at home, that is, the home becomes their veil or cover (al-hijab-bil-buyut).
(2)    The other thing it tells us is: If a woman has to go out of the home to take care of some need, let her not go out with any display of embellishment. Instead, she should wear what covers her whole body, a burqa ‘, or jilbab (women’s gown, garment or cloak)—as in the verse of the very Surah Al-Ahzab: (bring down over themselves part of their outer garments—33:59), the details about which shall appear later….(Ibid, P. 140, 141.)

The verses in Surah Al-Azab and, some, commented on above are these:

[31] O wives of the prophet, you are not like any other women, if you observer *taqwa. So, do not be too soft in your speech, lest someone having disease in his heart should develop fancies (about you); and do speak with appropriate words. [32] And remain in your homes and do not display (your) beauty as it used to be displayed in the days of earlier ignorance. And establish salah, and pay zakah, and obey Allah and His messenger. Allah only intends to keep (all sorts of) filth away from you, O members of the family (of the prophet), and to make you pure through a perfect purification. [33] And  be mindful of Allah’s verses and the wisdom that is recited in your homes. Surely, Allah is All-Kind, All-Aware.  (ibid. P. 131.)

And the following verse:

O prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the beleivers that they should draw down their shawls over them. That will make it more likely that they are recognized, hence not teased. And Allah is Most-Forgiving, Very-Merciful. [59] (ibid. P. 238.)
*[“taqwa (God-fearing). Surah 58:8. M.Q. Vol. 8. P.352.]

The injunction, the source tells us, is “the avoidance of addressing non-Mahram men soflty and tenderly and avoidance of going out homes unnecessarly.” That injunction, the source provideds, is “The same tells us, that the original word used in the last cited Qur’anic verse is “jilbab.” And “jilbab” is further defined as “a long sheet in which a woman gets to be hidden from the head to the feet. (This has been reported from Sayyidna Ibn ‘Abbas)” (ibid, P. 222.)
Ibn Jarir is then cited, “citing his own chains of authority,” that, reportedly, Sayyidna ‘Abdullah Ibn ‘Abbas asserted, “The manner in which jilbab is used, that is, a woman should be wrapped therein, from the head to the feet, and that her face and nose too be hidden behind it—leaving only one eye uncovered to see the way.” (ibid. P. 223.)
We will return to more on the “only one eye uncovered” mandate later. But for now, speaking to that provided in the alleged revelation received “at the bone,” with respect to the woman being granted permission to go out for certain needs; this, provided under the subheading, “Occasions of need have been exempted from the obligation of ‘staying in homes’”:

In the opening sentence of verse 33: (And remain in your homes), staying in homes was made obligatory (wajib) which apparently purports that it should be absolutely prohibited and haram for a woman to go our of her home, but verse has [sic], at the first place, already indicated through the use of the words: (And do not display your beauty) within the verse that going out as needed is not prohibited in an absolute sense. Instead, what is prohibited is going out in a manner which displays embellishment. Then, there is the injunction of: (bring down over themselves part of their outer garments –33:59) to appear later in Surah Al-Ahzab. This injunction is itself telling us that to a certain degree women do have the permission to go out of the home, of course on condition that they go out in hijab wearing an outer garment like burqa’ etc. (ibid, P. 141.)

Then the revered scholar, Maulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi, hearkening back to “the bone” alleged revelation, provides the following:

In addition to that, the Holy Prophet has himself clarified that occasions of need are exempt from this injunction, as in a Hadith where, while addressing the blessed wives, he is reported to have said: (You are permitted to go out for your needs –reported by Muslim). Then, the conduct of the Holy Prophet after the revelation of the verse of hijab proves that women have permission to go out of home on occasions of need, as the going of the blessed wives with the Holy Prophet for Hajj and ‘Umrah stands confirmed on the authority of sound and authentic Ahadith. (Ibid.)

Indeed, as spoken to above.

Maulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi adds, sound and authentic ahadith likewise provide, it stands proved thereby, in many of the battles in which the so-called prophet fought, thereto, it was common for some of his wives to accompany him.

He adds, the same likewise reveal, on many occasions, “the blessed wives used to go out of their homes to visit their parents, did their duty by calling on the sick among relatives and  offering condolence on the death of someone among them.”  He adds, during the time of the “prophet” “they also had the permission to go the Masajid.” (Ibid.) As well as going out, as we showed above, for Hajj and ‘Umrah.

Hence the previous citation: “Your going out for this alone is done. After that, you stick to the mats of your homes necessarily without having to part therefrom.” (ibid. P. 142.)

The revered writer then tells the reader, two of the “blessed wives” took that to mean, “ ‘your going out was permissible for this very Last Hajj. Beyond that, the consensus of the rest of the wives “—including a jurist of the class of Sayyidah ‘A’isha, unanimously interpreted” the above cited “ words of the Holy Prophet,” to mean this:

‘your going out of your homes is permissible for this kind of journey which aims at performing a recognized act of worship, otherwise you should stay at home’ In [sic] gist, from the sense of the verse: (And remain in your homes –33)—as supported by indicators of the Qur’an, the practice of the the Holy Prophet and the consensus of the noble Sahabah—occasions of need are exempted which include religious obligations of Hajj and Umrah, taking care of the natural duties towards parents, visiting Mahram relatives in health and sickness and attending to other requirements of this nature. (Ibid.)

Additionally, the source relates, if a woman must go out to earn her living, there too, the exemption to go out applies, as long as she does so in hijab—full seclusion, as spoken  to above, with only one eye uncovered, thus, allowing her to see her way. But it is once more underscored, when she goes out she must do so in “full mantle or chadar,” thus, refraining from displaying not only details of her physical body, excepting one eye, but also any of her personal beauty and embellishment.

Driving that message home, the source restates the above-cited instruction, stating:

It has been made amply clear in the previous paragraph that the sense of the imperative of
‘remain in your homes’  (33) as proved from the very indicators, rather, expressions of the Qur’an, as well as from the practice of the Holy Prophet and after him from the consensus of the noble Sahabah, it is confirmed that occasions of need are exempt from it—which includes going for religious needs of Hajj and Umrah etc. (ibid, P. 143.)

Ibn Kathir addresses the topic with these words:

“And stay in your houses,” means, stay in your houses and do not come our except for a purpose. One of the purposes mentioned in Shariah is prayer in the Masjid, so long as the conditions are fulfilled, as the Messenger of Allah said:

“Do not prevent the female servants of Allah from the Masjids of Allah, but have them go out without wearing fragrance.”

According to another report:

“even though their homes are better for them.”


 As stated earlier before adding in this update, there remains, much more one can, and will, when time allows, add to this topic.