BENGALURU: Delivering its verdict on the hijab controversy in a string of petitions on Tuesday, a full bench of Karnataka High Court considered holy Quran It is not mandatory for Muslim women to wear hijab or headgear.
The judges quoted the Prophet where he says in Sura (ii) verse 256 in the holy book: ‘Let there be no compulsion in religion…’ The bench also drew attention to a footnote in the remarks of Indian jurist Abdullah Yusuf Ali where He argued that “compulsion is incompatible with religion because religion rests on belief and will, and these would be meaningless when prompted by force. . . .
“On the question of whether the hijab is Islam-specific, the court held that the hijab is in fact the veil generally worn by Muslim women.”. , coverage hijab hidesMarks, protects and arguably confirms the difference in religious identities of Muslim women. However, the court said that it cannot be disputed that the word hijab is not used in the Quran, although commentators may have used it.
The court said that there is sufficient material within scripture to support the view that wearing the hijab is only recommendatory, if at all. It added, “We are only directors of what is said in the sun, because of the absence of punishment or penance prescriptions for not wearing the hijab.” “It can be rightly assumed that the practice of wearing the hijab was closely related to the socio-cultural conditions prevailing in that region. The veil was a safe means for women to leave the confines of their homes… What is not religiously obligatory cannot be made the quintessential aspect of religion through public movements or passionate arguments in courts. ,
The court said: “Given the life situation in the field concerned, wearing the hijab was recommended as a measure of social security for women and to facilitate their safe access to the public domain. More and more, this The custom of wearing the garment may have something to do with culture but certainly not with religion. The court observed that the history of mankind is replete with instances of mistreatment and oppression of women. Shows concern for cases of ‘tampering’ and therefore, it has recommended the wearing of this and other garments as a measure of social distancing. ,
It later adds: “This itself does not make the practice primarily religious and much less essential to the Islamic faith.”
The judges quoted the Prophet where he says in Sura (ii) verse 256 in the holy book: ‘Let there be no compulsion in religion…’ The bench also drew attention to a footnote in the remarks of Indian jurist Abdullah Yusuf Ali where He argued that “compulsion is incompatible with religion because religion rests on belief and will, and these would be meaningless when prompted by force. . . .
“On the question of whether the hijab is Islam-specific, the court held that the hijab is in fact the veil generally worn by Muslim women.”. , coverage hijab hidesMarks, protects and arguably confirms the difference in religious identities of Muslim women. However, the court said that it cannot be disputed that the word hijab is not used in the Quran, although commentators may have used it.
The court said that there is sufficient material within scripture to support the view that wearing the hijab is only recommendatory, if at all. It added, “We are only directors of what is said in the sun, because of the absence of punishment or penance prescriptions for not wearing the hijab.” “It can be rightly assumed that the practice of wearing the hijab was closely related to the socio-cultural conditions prevailing in that region. The veil was a safe means for women to leave the confines of their homes… What is not religiously obligatory cannot be made the quintessential aspect of religion through public movements or passionate arguments in courts. ,
The court said: “Given the life situation in the field concerned, wearing the hijab was recommended as a measure of social security for women and to facilitate their safe access to the public domain. More and more, this The custom of wearing the garment may have something to do with culture but certainly not with religion. The court observed that the history of mankind is replete with instances of mistreatment and oppression of women. Shows concern for cases of ‘tampering’ and therefore, it has recommended the wearing of this and other garments as a measure of social distancing. ,
It later adds: “This itself does not make the practice primarily religious and much less essential to the Islamic faith.”