Did God impose the veil to differentiate between the slave woman and the free woman?

 Some Christians and atheists claim that God has prescribed the hijab - or niqab - for racist and discriminatory purposes between the slave woman and the free woman, and that chastity and purity have nothing to do with that. Some of them claim that its obligation ended with the end of slavery and the slave woman,

and they cite as evidence what was mentioned in the books of interpretation of the reasons for the revelation of the Almighty's saying:
(O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. And ever is God Forgiving and Merciful) [Al-Ahzab: 59]
and the hadith of Omar, may God be pleased with him, striking the slave woman who veiled.

Of course, as is their custom - in concealing what reveals their deception - they avoid presenting the rest of the verses on the hijab and the statements of the interpreters they cited as evidence for it, as well as the prophetic hadiths and the statements of the scholars.

To respond to these doubts, we say:

First:
God Almighty imposed the hijab on the women of the believers for many reasons, including:
1- That is purer for the hearts of women and men . God Almighty said: And when You have asked them for something, so ask them from behind a partition. That is purer for your hearts and their hearts. {Al-Ahzab: 53}.

2- It lowers the gaze and protects the private parts for both men and women . Allah the Almighty said:
( Tell the believing men to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts. That is purer for them . Indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what they do.) Then Allah the Almighty said immediately
after this verse : ( And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not to display their adornment except that which appears thereof and to draw their veils over their chests and not display their adornment. ) Except for their husbands, their fathers, or their husbands’ fathers…” The verse, then, as is clear from the two noble verses, is the command to lower the gaze and guard the private parts for both men and women, as well as the prohibition of revealing women’s adornments except for what cannot be hidden (clothes and outer garments), and the prohibition of revealing adornments to non-mahrams. Whoever contemplates the previous verse will find that Allah Almighty followed up His command to women to lower their gaze and guard their private parts with His command to them to hide their adornments. This indicates that the basic wisdom of the hijab, which is chastity and guarding the gaze and private parts, is based on guarding a woman’s adornment from the glances of men. There is no doubt that a woman’s beauty and charm is in her face. 3- Fear of temptation and attachment to women - God Almighty said: (And past-age women who no longer expect marriage - there is no blame upon them if they put aside their outer garments [for themselves], [but] not displaying their adornment. But to be chaste is better for them. And God is Hearing and Knowing.) In this verse, God permitted old women who do not expect marriage (because men do not desire them due to their old age) to wear the hijab, on the condition that they do not display their adornment .







If the prohibition is for an elderly woman in the case of removing her veil unless it is for adornment so that there is no temptation, then it is even more appropriate for a young woman who hopes to get married because most of the time if she reveals her face, her beauty is exposed and men look at her and temptation occurs.
The prohibition here is to prevent temptation and close the door to it, and female slaves have nothing to do with it.

- Allah the Almighty said: (And let them not stamp their feet to reveal what they hide of their adornment ) meaning that a woman should not stamp her feet to reveal what she hides of anklets and the like that she adorns herself with for men. So if a woman is forbidden from stamping her feet for fear of a man being tempted by what he hears from the sound of her anklets and the like, then how about uncovering her face?! Which is
a greater temptation: a man hearing an anklet on a woman’s foot and he does not know who she is or how beautiful she is? And he does not know whether she is young or old? And he does not know whether she is ugly or pretty? Or he looks at a beautiful face full of youth, freshness, beauty, charm and beautification in a way that brings temptation and invites people to look at her????

A question for Christians: (Did Allah forbid believing women from striking their feet - to show what adornment they have - because of blocking the means to everything that calls for temptation, or to differentiate between the slave woman and the free woman by hiding the sound of the anklets and thus hiding her social status (free or slave woman)?!! 

4- What some commentators mentioned that it is to distinguish free women from slave women as they mentioned in the reason for the revelation of the verse of Al-Ahzab.

These are the most prominent rulings on the legitimacy of the hijab, so if some of the rulings are negated (like the fourth), then some others remain , and the rest is the origin because the Qur’an explicitly states it (that is purer for your hearts and their hearts).


Second:
It is not correct and it is not right to say that the hijab is obligatory in order to distinguish the free woman from the slave woman, because the slave woman must wear the hijab if there is fear of temptation with her,

- Sheikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah says in this regard: “The slave women during the time of the Messenger, may God bless him and grant him peace, even if they did not wear the hijab like the free women; because temptation with them is less, they resemble the elderly women who do not hope to be tempted. Marriage , Allah the Almighty said about them: {There is no blame upon them if they put aside their outer garments [for themselves], [but] not displaying their adornment} [An-Noor].
As for the Turkish slave girls with beautiful faces, this can never be like the slave girls at the time of the Messenger (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), and she must cover her entire body from looking, in the chapter on looking. End quote .

Sheikh Ibn Uthaymeen (may Allah
have mercy on him) said, commenting on the previous statement of Ibn Taymiyyah: “He gave a good and acceptable reason for that, saying: The purpose of hijab is to cover that which is feared to be a cause of temptation, unlike prayer. For this reason, a person must cover himself in prayer, even if he is alone in a place where no one but Allah can see him. But in the chapter on looking, he must only cover himself where people can see . ” He said: The reason for this is not the reason for that. The reason for looking is fear of temptation. There is no difference in this between free women and slave women. His statement is correct without a doubt, and it is what must be adhered to. End quote . Ibn al-Mundhir says: “

It is proven that ‘Umar said to a slave woman whom he saw covering her head: Uncover your head, and do not resemble free women, and he hit her with a whip. If she is beautiful, it is forbidden to look at her, just as it is forbidden to look at a boy for fear of temptation. Ahmad said about a slave woman who is beautiful: She should cover her face.” End quote.

- Sheikh Hani bin Abdullah Al-Jubeir, a judge in the Makkah Al-Mukarramah Court, says:
“It has been reported that Omar used to forbid female slaves from covering their heads, and he said: The veil is only for free women. He struck a female slave from the family of Anas whom he saw covering her head, and he said: Uncover your head and do not resemble free women.” (Sunan Al-Bayhaqi 3305) and he authenticated it. This was well-known among the Companions and was not denied, as it usually appears during service and shopping. As for outside of prayer, if temptation is feared with them, like beautiful female slaves, then it is obligatory for them to cover their entire bodies, because the purpose of hijab is to cover what temptation is feared, unlike prayer. If temptation is not feared, as was the case with female slaves in the early days and during the time of the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, then they do not have to wear hijab like free women, and they are like elderly women. God Almighty said about them: “There is no blame upon them for putting aside their outer garments, but not displaying their adornment” [An-Nur: 60]. This is what appears to me, and God is the Grantor of success and the Guide. “There is no god but Him

.” End quote. Dr. Ali bin Abdullah Al-Siyah says in his book (Problem and Answer):
“It is not hidden that female slaves differ from free women by many rulings. There is no chapter of jurisprudence that is devoid of mentioning the differences between free women and female slaves. Touching a female slave is lighter than touching a free woman, as is looking at her and other rulings. Free women remain on the basis of the prohibition of touching.
Ibn Abi Shaybah said in his book, Book of Prayers, regarding a female slave who prays without a veil (2/41): Waki’ ibn al-Jarrah narrated to us, he said: Shu’bah narrated to us, on the authority of Qatadah, on the authority of Anas, he said: ‘ Umar saw a female slave of ours covering her face, so he struck her and said: Do not resemble free women. This is a saheeh isnad.
Shaykh al-Islam said: “The singing of female slaves that a man hears, the Companions used to hear it at weddings, just as they used to look at female slaves because there was no temptation in seeing them and hearing their voices. ” End quote

. Therefore, if differentiation was the reason for legislation, it would not be obligatory for a female slave to cover her head if it would lead to temptation. Rather, it is obligatory for her because the basic principle of hijab is concealment, chastity and purity.


Third:
The real reason for not imposing hijab on female slaves is to make things easier and more comfortable for them from Allah , since normal souls do not often yearn for female slaves like free women, and because the temptation of female slaves is much less than… The temptation of free women, and also since female slaves were often needed for employment and professional matters and were vulgar due to frequent coming and going, and imposing the veil on them was extremely difficult, it was from Allah’s mercy to His servants that He did not impose the veil on them as He imposed it on free women.


Fourth:
What sane person is this who thinks that discrimination - if it were a goal - would be by completely covering the head of a group of women to know that they are free, in exchange for uncovering the head of the other group to know that they are female slaves!!
If discrimination were a goal in itself, the Lawgiver would have ordered the free woman to wear a certain color and the female slave another color, or He would have ordered one of them to put a mark on her head, or other than dozens of ways by which this goal can be easily achieved.

Ibn Taymiyyah says: “There is nothing in the Book or the Sunnah that permits looking at female slaves in general, nor does it permit them to be veiled or to display their adornments.”
Imam Ibn Qudamah, the author of the reliable book in the Hanbali school of thought, says

: “Among the people of knowledge , he made it obligatory for her to wear the khimar if she got married,
or if a man took her for himself,
and it was recommended for her to cover her face when she prayed,
but he did not make it obligatory.
And for us, Umar struck a female slave of the family of Anas whom he saw covering her face ,
and he said: Uncover your head (meaning uncover your face and do not wear it again),
and do not resemble free women.
This indicates that this was well-known among the Companions and was not denied, to the extent that Umar denied his opposition to it. He used to forbid female slaves from covering their faces (wearing the niqab).
Abu Qilabah said: Umar ibn al-Khattab would not let any female slave cover her face during his caliphate, and he said: The veil is only for free women.
This weak person in Islamic matters wants to make Christian women like slave girls in Islam. He knows his own value and their value. You know best, Mr. Sh. M.


“Ahmad ibn Hanbal said about a slave girl , if she is beautiful: she should cover her face ,
and a slave girl should not be looked at . How many glances have cast confusion in the heart of its owner.

o Ibn Saad is and his book "Al-Tabaqat" to clarify the foolishness and insignificance of the evidence they rely on and that it does not deserve even a discussion:


1- "Al-Tabaqat Ibn Saad" is a history book and we do not take our religion from history books. We Muslims have reliable legislative sources that we cite and from which we take our Sharia, rulings and values.


(2) This Ibn Saad is a person whose hadith is abandoned because he was among four who lied about the Messenger, may God bless him and grant him peace!!!!! So how can we believe and accept the evidence that this cursed misguided person brought when it does not deserve even a discussion!!!!!


(3) For those who do not know Ibn Saad, we present this brief summary to them so that they may know that the world has become too narrow for the Christians and they have not found any doubts except in suspicious books by suspicious people:

Certainly the common Christians do not know him because they are, as they say in the Egyptian dialect, “ghalaba.” As for their priests who have made a profession of lying to God and falsifying facts, they know him. Here is a definition of this man and the statements of the scholars of Islam before the parrots of the Christians were born:

Muhammad ibn Umar ibn Waqid al-Waqidi al-Aslami Abu Abdullah al-Madani, the judge of Baghdad, the client of Abdullah ibn Buraydah al-Aslami.

Al-Bukhari said: Al-Waqidi is a Madani who lived in Baghdad. His hadith is abandoned. Ahmad, Ibn Numayr, Ibn al-Mubarak, and Ismail ibn Zakariya abandoned him (Tahdhib al-Kamal, Volume 26).

This is on pp. 185-186. On the same page, Ahmad said: He is a liar. Yahya said: He is weak. In another place, he is nothing. Abu Dawud said: I was informed by someone who heard from Ali ibn al-Madini who said: Al-Waqidi narrated thirty thousand strange hadiths. Abu Bakr ibn Khaithama said: I heard… Yahya bin Ma’in says: The hadith of Al-Waqidi is not written, it is nothing. Abdul Rahman bin Abi Hatim said: I asked Ali bin Al-Madini about him, so he said: His hadith is abandoned. Here is also a beautiful defect in the chain of transmission of the hadith, which is his narration on the authority of Abdullah bin Ja’far Al-Zuhri. Ishaq bin Mansur said: Ahmad bin Hanbal said: Al-Waqidi used to change the hadiths, he used to attribute the hadith of his nephew Al-Zuhri to Muammar. Ishaq bin Rahawayh said: As he described, and more severe, because in my opinion he is one of those who fabricate hadith. Al-Jarh wa Al-Ta’deel 8/Biography 92.

Ali bin Al-Madini said: I heard Ahmad bin Hanbal say: Al-Waqidi fabricates chains of transmission. Tarikh Baghdad 3/13-16.

Imam Muslim said: His hadith is abandoned

. Al-Nasa’i said: He is not trustworthy. Al-Hakim said: His hadith is fabricated. Al

-Dhahabi, may God have mercy on him, said: There is consensus on abandoning him. This was mentioned in Mughni Al-Du’afa 2/Biography 5861.

Al-Nasa’i said in “The Weak and Abandoned”: Those known for lying about the Messenger of God are four: Al-Waqidi in Medina, Muqatil in Khurasan, and Muhammad bin Sa’eed in Ash-Sham.







Therefore, all the evidence mentioned from the classes of Ibn Saad is not worth discussing, because it is a history book and not a source for Muslims, and the author of the book is a liar and his hadith isabandoned !!====

Here we must distinguish between two important matters to expose the falsehood of the doubt-maker:

First: The distinction between female slaves and free Muslim women as human beings with regard to the laws and obedience to Allah (and this is what the misguided and misguided one wants), and this is not mentioned in the religion of Islam at all.

Second: The distinction between the behavior and appearance of female slaves, which is characterized by immodesty and revealing their hair and faces when going out, and the appearance of all believing women (whether they are female slaves or free women because the common denominator between them is faith), and this is what the verse was revealed about and this misguided one is trying to hide it).

For further clarification:

(1) Before the revelation of the noble verse, the appearance of female slaves was to go out to relieve themselves, revealing their hair and faces and displaying their adornment.

(2) Among the unveiled women were those who were Muslim and those who were not Muslim.

(3) The hypocrites would harm the unveiled women, whether they were Muslims or not.

(4) Therefore, Allah revealed this noble verse to protect and safeguard all the women of the believers, whether they were free women or slave women, because the common denominator between them is faith, as we mentioned. Therefore, the address in the verse was general (the women of the believers) to address the common denominator, which is faith, without discrimination and without limiting it to free women only. This general address alone is sufficient to demolish the doubt and destroy it from its foundation.
Therefore, the noble verse was revealed so that the wives and daughters of the Messenger and all the women of the believers (whether they were free women or slave women) would not resemble the appearance and behavior of the unveiled slave women in their dress and uncovering their hair and faces, but rather to draw their outer garments over themselves, lest an immoral person harm them with words.



From the above, it is clear that the Quran did not give preference to free Muslim women over Muslim slave women, and that the Quran did not differentiate between free Muslim women and Muslim slave women!!!
But the distinction was in appearance and behavior to protect the believing Muslim woman (whether she is a mother or free) from the unveiled woman (whether she is a free woman or a Muslim mother or non-Muslim).

Rather, if we contemplate the noble verse, we will realize the greatness of Allah and discover that the verse is the one that equates slave women with free women if they are believers and committed to what Allah has imposed on them in terms of clothing. Consequently, the immoral and hypocrites will not be able to harass the believing women because they will not know whether they are free or slave women, and this is to protect and safeguard them from being harmed.

For this reason, Allah’s wisdom was to make the address general:
- The wives of the Messenger
- The daughters of the Messenger
- All believing women without discrimination, whether the believing woman is free or a mother.






The goal is not to discriminate between free women and slave women by restricting the veil to free women and forbidding it to slave women, as the misguided and misleading one claims. Rather, the goal is to distinguish the wives and daughters of the Messenger and all the women of the believers in dress only, so that they do not show their adornment, lest the hypocrites think that they are unveiled slave women and block their way.

However, if the slave woman is a believer and fears God and adheres to the dress that God has imposed, then there is no difference between her and free women and she will avoid harm from the hypocrites .

Does a slave woman or even a free woman have a private part in Christianity?!!!
There is no text or living that defines a private part for a free woman in Christianity ... Rather, she has the right to reveal anything with absolute freedom, and what prevents or permits her is public taste and the requirements of society, meaning society allows it or does not allow it ... Thus, if a free woman does not have a private part, then we have understood the state of female slaves ... The slave woman is available for everything from sex, work, forced labor, service, and fighting ... and her entire body is the property of the masters without restraint, as was the case with female slaves in all societies before Islam ... Even the married slave woman can be enjoyed by her master and expel her husband, and this is according to the text of the Holy Book, as we will explain at the end of the article when comparing the rights of female slaves in Christianity and Islam ... !!!!


Does a nation or even a free woman have ... a private part that must be covered in any civilized society, legislation or law?!!!

There is absolutely no such thing except in Islam.


The command to cover up is a divine Islamic command for all believing women:
The command to cover up is a divine command for all women, Islam has not excluded anyone from them... This includes the right hand slaves if they are believers and not infidels... God Almighty said: " O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves [part] of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused. "


And there is no verse or hadith at all... that might specify not covering up for any of the believing female slaves...!!, and we have never found a verse or hadith at all... that might limit men's lowering of the gaze to a category of women..!!!

Ibn Hayyan (may Allah have mercy on him) said: { And the women of the believers } includes free women and slave women. The temptation with slave women is greater because of their frequent behavior, unlike free women. So, excluding them from the general category of women requires clear evidence. { That is more likely that they will be known } because they cover themselves with chastity, so no one will approach them, and they are not suitable for what they dislike, because if a woman is extremely covered and modest, no one will approach her, unlike a woman who displays her modesty, for she is desired. It seems to us that this opinion that Abu Hayyan (may Allah have mercy on him) leaned towards is more worthy of acceptance than others, in keeping with the Islamic Sharia, which calls all women to cover themselves and be chaste.

And certainly we have never heard in God’s legislation and God’s religion .. that you lower your gaze from women and not women, or that you lower your gaze from a free woman and stare intently at a slave woman ..!!!!


Rather, it is a matter that is taken for granted and there is no argument about it ... lowering the gaze without argument about it from all women without exception ..


and it is a matter that is taken for granted and there is no argument about it ... .. that a woman covers her body, and there is no specialization in that between a free woman or a slave woman ...