Quran

[@jubairahmed6386]

I wish Dr Shabir Ally took more time with this verse, this episode just felt too short. According to Dr Khaled Abou El Fadl, the commandment of drawing the Jilbab over the body mentioned in this verse was addressing a specific social problem that arose at that time (ie, the hypocrites harassing women). He wrote in his article: ❝The context of this verse indicates that the purpose of the Qur’anic revelation is to address a specific social problem at the time of revelation. This is made clear with the verse that follows the one cited above. Verse 33:60 threatens the men causing the problem (i.e. the harassers or molesters) by saying that if the hypocrites, perverts, and rumor mongers in Medina do not desist from causing harm, they might be expelled from the city all together.❞ Muhammad Asad wrote something similar in his commentary of this verse: ❝The specific, time-bound formulation of the above verse (evident in the reference to the wives and daughters of the Prophet), as well as the deliberate vagueness of the recommendation that women “should draw upon themselves some of their outer garments (min jalābībihinna)” when in public, makes it clear that this verse was not meant to be an injunction (hukm) in the general, timeless sense of this term but, rather, a moral guideline to be observed against the ever-changing background of time and social environment❞ It seems Dr Shabir Ally's understanding of this verse is different from how Dr Khaled Abou El Fadl & Muhammad Asad understood it, even though they held similar understandings over the other verses that were discussed in the previous episodes. Dr Shabir Ally didn’t talk about whether the commandment was time bound or not unlike the other 2 scholars with whom he shares similar views, he should have taken more time & discussed about this point as well. Also I think it would have been nice if he talked a bit more about the commentaries. In the next episode they are going to talk about another verse, so they aren’t going to return to this verse again, that's why I wish this episode was lengthier.

[@SuperJijja]

Your sources arnt CREDIBLE.

[@serm900]

@@SuperJijja hoow come

[@JahidMasud]

I assume that he took them into account and carefully dropped them not necessary to discuss in this short time. He probably only focused on what he thought would be more relevant.

[@jubairahmed6386]

@@JahidMasud Maybe. But I still think this episode should have been a bit longer, this verse needs a lengthier discussion. I am a bit disappointed with this episode unlike the previous ones.

[@shadowguard3578]

@@SuperJijja and you’re a credible source?

[@zidanesfather5719]

The fact that they’re even talking about having slaves and ownership over any human… is clear indication that there needs to be a reinterpretation of The Quran using what the eyes and ears witness in this era.

[@gangadin2873]

So.. you want them to lie even more?

[@stylicho]

You're viewing slavery through the modern lens. This was a time when being a slave meant you had sustenance and not being a slave could mean death. Slaves at this time were actually given quite a bit of freedom if I'm not mistaken. There's one saying where a master let's his slave go on some type of long journey by himself (kept remember exactly what it was)

[@isaacmuhihi8712]

@@stylicho so you mean Quran content does not apply to modern times or what????

[@stylicho]

@isaacmuhihi8712 similar to the Bible some things that took place over a thousand years ago doesn't apply to today

[@isaacmuhihi8712]

@@stylicho Then the books are only relevant to those who lived in those times. Right?

[@nohaabuarqoub9161]

We hope to here more about this topic from Dr. Shabir. I would ask him to clarify his view about wither the order of covering hair is literally mentioned in Quraan or even Hadith or not? For us, me at least it's not that clear. It's clear that we should be modest as possible as we can, but is it a must to cover hair to realize this aim of modesty! Some people say it's is a must coz it is required in prayer. But Wadoo also is required in prayer, does it mean it's is required when going out home!!!!

[@jubairahmed6386]

He said in the previous video that head covering is not mandatory according to the Quran. & he will probably discuss the hadiths in his later videos

[@ayako_samaa]

Well males also have to cover things that they can’t show to other men like they have to wear shorts belong the knees to pray and why isn’t it the same for women

[@hooriyahamzah7428]

It is necessary as the outer garments a big piece of fabric called jilbab in arabic and chaddar in urdu, like a big shawl they wore it when gng out they used to cover their heads and bossom and body with it and wore itnon top of their clothes to cover themselves but not face and when the verse 33:59 was revealed it was told to draw a part of jilbab over them to , over their faces that they are wearing to cover their bossom and head any ways. Men also wore a cheddar like jilbab a big shawl a big piece of cloth when they used to go out and it was considered an honorable thing for them and they took pride in it whose cheddar or shawl is better n expensive. Like the turban is an honorable thing in some cultures

[@Andrew_Young]

I found this interpretation very persuasive, especially the part that claims that it doesn't require the covering of the face. If the women were to cover their face while allowing them to see they'd have to draw the garment from one side of the face to the other, so their eyes are not covered. In other words, they wouldn't be drawing it *over* but from side to side. I also appreciated that Dr. Shabir came to the defense of the slave women as well. Certainly, a perfect God would want to protect the slave women as well. However, I'm confused by the word "molested". That has very strong connotations of forced sexual activity, yet it seemed at times he was describing a man approaching a woman and propositioning her rather than forcing her. It seems to me if someone is molesting another they aren't asking their permission.

[@dom3073]

slave women must cover their bosom, thys, buttocks, private part, etc but theres no requirement for covering hair.

[@RobenArjen]

Meaning modest dress sense reduces that chance

[@Ruby-G]

Slavery is condoned and sanctioned in Islam. The hijab is to enable Muslims to target non-hijab females such as servants, slaves, and non-Muslim "whores" to molest them (Quran 33:59). Islam is hateful and vile.

[@lahleholivia7398]

The science museum us the sun and moon cannot follow each other as they are 93,000,000 miles apart on completely different trajectories 😕

[@m.e.e2878]

Love the seriessssssssssssssssssssssssssss.

[@nayara414]

"Who am I to offer my own interpretation in the face of these giants of quranic commentary... I learnt from them" @dr Shabir and @Let the Quran Speak 2:170 And when it is said to them, 'Follow what God has sent down,' they say, 'No; but we will follow such things as we found our fathers doing.' What? And if their fathers had no understanding of anything, and if they were not guided?

[@nabilc1667]

He actually gives his own interpretation right after saying that lol

[@Big-gp9bi]

What issue do you have exactly with brother Shabir?

[@nayara414]

His own interpretation, but with what methodology?

[@nayara414]

​@Big-gp9bi I don't have issue with Br Shabir. I wish for him to review the findings of the Marvelous Quran channel, review the evidence, assist in the mission, for the betterment of humanity, and for the fulfilment of the purpose of our creation.

[@laylaali5977]

The Quranic view of dress code both men and women is dress decent the conservative traditionalist literalist interpretation is based on mid evil traditional clothing because significant part of their religion is based on their local tribal cultures.

[@lesoul4567]

In Fussilat chapter 41 verse 41 Allah says that nothing can be add in the Qur'an from before it or behind it. Why do muslims accept warsh Quran knowing that there are different words in hafs and warsh. For example in the hafs Quran 7th chapter verse 57 Allah says it's He who sent the wind as glad tidings the word bouchran is used here but in the warsh Quran the same verse it's said that It's He who sends the wind to separate . The word used is noushran . In another chapter hafs the word sihran is used and the same verse in warsh saahiraan is used. Why, isn't a contradictions??

[@Farhadmoh]

Thnx dr shabbir

[@HitherandYarn]

Could "recognized and not molested" also mean to cover so you can be recognized (don't cover your face) and at the same time be protected from molestation?

[@FGHIslam]

Allah is not saying over the bossom but Allah is saying 'over' themselves in Surah 33:59, that means, it should be over the head to the bottom right?

[@ivanos_95]

Instead of ordering the women to cover themselves, as the only way to avoid the sexual abuse, and thereby giving the men a reason to sexually abuse the women, Muhammad should have put all emphasis on teaching the men to not treat the women as primarily sexual objects, so that the women wouldn't need to worry about the potential abuse in the first place.

[@Me-sb2xp]

He did. And it is mentioned by Allah that Muslim men should lower their gaze. This verse, however, is referring to non-Muslim men harassing Muslim women as a way of fighting Islam. So it is very unlikely that those types of men would listen to the Qutanic and Prophetic advice on the matter.

[@ivanos_95]

@@Me-sb2xp If he did, there would be no need for the women to cover themselves outside their sexual parts, or even for the men to lower their gaze, so the need for covering and lowering gaze is a result of treating women as primarily sexual objects, and all orders in the Quran are directed primarily towards the Muslims, as the only ones who follow Muhammad/Quran.

[@gangadin2873]

@@ivanos_95 Remember that mohammad did nothing to the molesters. Shabir ali lied that they were hypocrites, but nowhere does it say that the molestors were hypocrites. Also, even if they were hypocrites, the idea that a molestor has an excuse - shows what the legal system allows AS AN excuse that the "free women" are supposed to counteract with their clothing, doesn't it?

[@sa-adumar9351]

And your comments on the assertion that it was because molestation that's why these verse was revealed, you responded Dr Ally lied. It makes me wonder if you are even listening to the discussion because he repeatedly said he doesn't align himself with that interpretation. Please be fair and sincere with your criticism. I don't if you are a religious apologetic even it you aren't, you are a human and as such be sincere and truthful

[@RobenArjen]

He did already, Quran tells them to lower their gaze and guard their modesty

[@ONE_SERVANT_OF_ALLAH_73]

THE GUIDANCE & COMMAND IS THERE.. BUT ONE IS FREE TO FOLLOW OR IGNORE. IT IS BETTER TO READ, UNDERSTAND & FOLOW THE HOLY AL-QURAAN AS IT IS A TOTAL GUIDANCE BY & FROM ALLAH (SAWT) FOR ALL MANKIND.

[@charlesmuhmanson3928]

She finally said PBUH. I wonder what changed?

[@DirtyGeorge]

Lmao this defo works

[@NRFP]

You made video that slave women dress & free women dress not same. hadith said slave women can not were hijab. many people call it double standard

[@dom3073]

nothing wrong with that.

[@NRFP]

@@dom3073Yes religion made slave women as product shame. double standard rule for double standard people. not only muslim. also other religion

[@Chaos_personified.]

​@@dom3073there's sth wrong with that. If we're to follow the injunctions in the Quran both free women and slave women should dress same. Or aren't there muminat amongst the slave women?? And the Hadith wasn't attributed to the prophet(SAW)but to Umar(RA)

[@dom3073]

@@Chaos_personified. no the muminat would dress same as muslim women. The issue is the non muslim prisoners of war.

[@Chaos_personified.]

@@dom3073 difference between muminat and Muslim women please?

[@dryasir786]

💕

[@jankandemir2711]

I also heard that since Medina was heavily Jewish populated, and the Jewish women were dressing in all in black head-to-toe. Therefore, they were not abused and being subject to assaults when they were out in the public. So muslims did the same for the time being, but it stuck like a clue to certain cults. Any comments on that?

[@Ruby-G]

False. Islam tells the origin of the hijab in Sahih al-Bukhari 146: --------------------------- Narrated `Aisha: The wives of the Prophet (ﷺ) used to go to Al-Manasi, a vast open place (near Baqi` at Medina) to answer the call of nature at night. `Umar used to say to the Prophet (ﷺ) "Let your wives be veiled," but Allah's Apostle did not do so. One night Sauda bint Zam`a the wife of the Prophet (ﷺ) 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). -------------------------- They have to fully cover up especially in black color as dark as night because of the peeping-Tom pervert Umar al-Khattab, Muhammad's 4th father-in-law, had a sick liking to watch women pooping outside at night and he wanted to target the servants, slaves, and non-Muslim "whores" to molest them. That's how the hijab came to be in Islam. So disgustingly sick and vile.

[@2AN3M]

Let the Giants speak 😂😂

[@gangadin2873]

More like let the mullah lie even more.

[@NRFP]

You made video that slave women dress & free women dress not same. hadith said slave women can not were hijab. many people call it double standard