Polemics on the Veil in Egypt
Introduction
".. so much energy has been expended by Muslim men and then Muslim women to
remove the veil and by others to affirm or restore it .." (Ahmed 167).
This paper explores these efforts in two specific stages: the first and the last thirds of the
twentieth century. Through an analysis of some of the various arguments on the veil, I
will try to induce some general characteristics of the debate on the issue and on women
during these two specific periods of time. The starting point will be Kasim Amin’s
"Tahrir el Mara’a" (Liberation of Woman) and the counter argument of Talat Harb’s
"Tarbiet el Mara’a wal Hijab", (Educating Women and the Veil). The debate between
those two protagonists which has become a "prototype" of the debate on the veil
throughout the century (Ahmed P. 164). Malak Hefni Nassif’s and Hoda Sha’arawi’s
attitudes towards the veil represent an interesting insight to two different interpretations
of the hijab issue by feminist activists that prevail throughout the century. The whole
synthesis of this early debate is then put in juxtaposition to the debate later in the century
as represented by the avalanche of literature on the topic in the seventies, the views of
some famous sheikhs like Mohammed Metwally el Shaarawi and others, and the heated
debate initiated by the Minister of Education’s decree of 1994 to prevent school
administrations from imposing the hijab on girls as part of the uniform.
The Early Debate
Kasim Amin’s Tahrir El-Mara’a (Published 1899)
It may not be an exaggeration to say that Amin’s "Tahrir al-Mara'a" was one of the most
controversial book in Egypt’s modern history. It has ignited a strong debate and prompted
more than thirty reaction articles and books either to defy or assert his argument against
the veil (Ahmed P. 164).
The ideas of the book were not totally new, they echoed the writings of some writers like
Mariam al-Nahhas (1856-1888), Zaynab Fawwaz (1860-1914), Aisha al-Taymuriah
(1840-1902), and Murqus Fahmi’s (a Coptic lawyer) four act play "Al Mar’ah fi alSharq" or (The Woman in the East) (Badran P. 19). Yet, Amin’s book double-scored for
coming from a Muslim judge and for his overt proposal to unveiling women’s faces. His
words were not the only challenge to the existing notions of the hijab, it was his caliber as
a Moslim judge that has vocalized his call to unveil women and gave his book
importance.
After an introduction loaded with emotional phrases on the degradation of the Egyptian
woman and an exaltation of the European woman, the book is divided into four sections:
"Educating women", "Women’s veil", "The woman and the nation", and "Marriage and
divorce".
Amin starts his argument calling for the "Hijab Shara’ei" stating that the Hijab in its form
then (covering the face, the hair and the whole body) was not mandated by the Shari’aa.
He further adds that he was not calling for the "extreme" of the West which "makes the
woman liable to seduction" (Amin P. 65). The argument against the veil is in two
sections: The religious section which is mainly text interpretation and some Hadith that
prompt women to cover the hair and the whole body except for the hands and the face;
and the "social" (practical / everyday life) perspective. The later section includes "social"
ideas such as the inconvenience for women with their faces covered to dwell in business,
to testify in courts or to get engaged (as the groom should see her face first). Furthermore,
he argues that unveiling would make women watch their behaviors as they could be
recognized and hence their reputation would be at stake if they did any wrong. Still, from
the practical "social" point of view, the flimsy bourqo’ (face cover) used was more
tempting as it makes the viewer curious to see what was intended to be hidden. He further
argues that, if women are imprisoned in the hareem (part of the house where women are
secluded), then even if they did not commit any shameful act, it would not be due to any
virtue in them, but to the fact that they did not have the freedom to do otherwise.
Amin accuses the veil of being a barrier to women’s development and education (P. 85),
arguing that it deprived her from interacting with the society and learning how to live. He
illustrates by comparing the ignorant peasant with the elite urban lady who can speak
French and plays the piano, and concludes that the ignorat peasant would be more
capable of coping with the difficulties of life than the elite urbanite due to the seclusion
of the latter.
Talat Harb (1867 - 1941)
In his introduction, Talat Harb states that the main purpose of writing his book was to
defy Amin’s argument against the veil. Harb was called "father of Egypt’s economic
independence" and has established the first national bank in Egypt in 1920. So when
someone in his caliber - though it was early in his career - writes a book, his prestigious
position would place heavier weight to his argument.
In the introduction, he states that the majority of those who read Amin’s book have
denounced its ideas, and then declares the now common notion that liberating women is a
Western imperialist conspiracy. He ends the introduction with a note that Kasim Amin
would not have such hideous goals in mind, that he wrote his "notorious" book out of a
mixture of good will and misjudgment. Yet at the very end of the introduction, Harb
implicitly accuses Amin of plagiarism saying that the ideas of his book were published
earlier in Turkey and India.
The book is divided into two main sections: "The woman and her role in the society" and
"What moral qualities should the woman have". In the first section he states that "women
are inferior to men in perception and senses", that she has a different "calling" in life than
the man (she for the private sphere, he for the public sphere), and that she should not do
men’s job. He ends this section with the results he perceived out of liberating women in
Europe (immorality, drunkenness, casual relations..). Then he devotes the biggest section
of the book defending the veil (from page 60 to page 105) concluding that the current veil
is not good enough and that women are wrongly doing their best to show their beauty
from behind the veil.
He starts his argument against unveiling with a compelling statement on the importance
of morality, fidelity and modesty. Then he moves on saying that Hijab is the best
assurance for these wonderful qualities, defying Amin’s religious argument with a
different interpretation of the same text the former had used (same text used by Ashmawi
and Tantawi later in the century). At the end, he puts a logical question: What is better for
women to veil or to be immodest? The question answers itself.
Harb uses the holy text as one source for convincing the reader, he had many other
sources such as a "scientific" research done in Europeby a German scientist that proved
that the German women betray their husbands seven times in average, the Belgium six
times, the British five times ... (Harb P. 63). So, if unveiling is to emulate the West, here
is the corruption and deficiencies resulting from the absence of veil. Harb uses the same
(social) practical argument used by Amin yet with different anecdotes, for example he
says that mingling with the other sex will make the woman compare her husband to a
stranger with possible unfavorable conclusions on the first. Harb laments that the society
was much better before the migration of foreigners attaching their existence with the
introduction of legalized prostitution and the call for unveiling women (Harb P. 97).
Malak Hefni Nassif (1886-1918)
Nassif was the daughter of a follower of Mohammed Abdou and one of the early female
teachers for five years before she got married to a tribe leader in Fayoum. After marriage,
she realized that she was a second wife, the discovery was distressful to her, and she
seems to have experienced chronic depression as expressed in her words to May Zeiada
(El-Gabri P. 11). Nassif used to send articles to newspapers advocating women’s rights
specifically against polygamy - reflecting her personal experience. In 1911 she sent a
petition to the people’s assembly (was read by a man, as she was not allowed as a woman
to speak in public). The petition included ten recommendations asking for more
education for women, access to mosques, having women enter the fields of medicine and
education, full participation in public life, and legal protection for women in marriage
and divorce. All recommendations were rejected, yet at least that was a feminist voice
heard in the People’s Assembly (although through a mediator).
Nassif’s position on the unveiling was firm opposition. She does not base her argument
on text interpretation as did Amin or Harb. She follows the "social" practical line
introduced by Amin arguing that although religion did not mandate the woman to veil,
nor that the veil was the proof of modesty, she refuses unveiling on the basis of the
immaturity of the society and the immorality of some men. She believed that the major
interest of the women who unveil was to follow the fashions and not to seek education as
Amin had argued (Ahmed P. 180).
Hoda Sha’arawi (1879-1947)
Sha’arawi comes from an upper-class Egyptian-Circasian family. She was forced to
marry her cousin at the age of nine while he was nearly the age of her father. At the age
of thirteen, she left her husband because of his return to his first wife. In her early
twenties, she accepted to return back to him, after he promised not to return to his first
wife again. Sha’arawi liked to stress the Western influence on her character and that she
had "created" herself by reading French books and socializing with French women like
Eug鮩e Le Brun (Ahmed P. 178). Early in 1909, Sha`arawi with the support of Princess
Ayn al-Haya Ahmed, approached the Cairo University with a proposal to hold a lecture
for female audience at the University hall to be given by her friend Margret Cl魥nt. The
topic was a comparison between the European and the Egyptian woman including a
discussion on the veil. King Fou’ad (then Rector of the University) agreed. The lecture
was a success and was followed by others. Nassif was one the speakers invited then.
In 1920, Sh’arawi was elected president of the Wafdist Women’s Central Committee
(WWCC) and in 1923, she and other WWCC members created an independent feminist
group called The Egyptian Feminist Union (EFU) after receiving an invitation from the
International Alliance of Women for Suffrage and Equal rights (IAW) to attend its
conference in Rome where they made their first public declaration of their program. The
EFU philanthropic activities included a dispensary for poor mothers and children, a
center for instruction in domestic arts, a handicrafts workshop, and a daycare center for
the children of working mothers. In 1925 the EFU founded L’Egyptienne , the first
explicitly feminist journal in Egypt (Badran P. 102). L’Egyptienne was in Frenche, later
in 1937, they issued al-Misriah in Arabic. These two papers formed a channel for the
EFU agenda which mainly included family laws and education for girls.
While Badran argues that unveiling was never part of the formal agenda of the EFU (P.
23), Sha’arawi was one of the first women to declare her denunciation of the veil and to
take it off in a theatrical dramatic act in 1923 upon her return from the (IAW) conference
in Rome.
Both Sha’arawi and Nassif represent what Laila Ahmed terms as "two divergent voices"
(Ahmed P. 174) within the feminist voices on the veil: Sha’arawi was a voice connected
with the western culture through readings and friends and consequently advocating
Western ideas; Nassif was a voice representing indigenous ideas, influenced by
Mohammed Abdou rather than western writers, wrote in Arabic rather than in French,
and raised issues that are totally indigenous such as access to mosques.
The Debate Late in the Century
The issue of the veil was not resolved with the unveiling of most urban women during the
middle decades of the century. The issue is back on the foreground as of the seventies.
One basic difference is the definition of hijab (the veil): early in the century it meant
covering the face and keeping women in the house. Later in the century, hijab meant
covering the hair and the whole body, only showing the hands and face, and not
necessarily limiting women to the private sphere. The new hijab has become, as Macloed
puts it, a symbolic resolution of women’s dilemma of having to work, and feeling guilty
about it. (Macloed P. 120) The earlier version of the hijab is now called "Nikab" and is
adding a new dimension to the controversy on the veil: a veiled women like Nabila
Hassan, the reporter of Akher Sa’a (an Egyptian magazine) investigating the world of
Monakabat treats it as a mysterious alien world (Akher Sa’a 8/12/92). Preachers and
sheikhs, specially on audio tapes, consider it as a double score for a woman to be
monakaba though not mandated. Opposition Islamic groups found a golden opportunity
to attack the government for not allowing monakabat to university compasses.
The Wave of the Seventies
In the seventies, Egypt witnessed what was described as a revival of indigenous Islamic
values. Some of the reasons given for that include: the defeat of 1967, the collapse of
Nasser’s Arab nationalist dream, the waste of the Yemeni War (1962-67), the failure of
Nasser’s socialist contract, Sadat’s insecurity vis-୶is the leftists and encouragement of
the Islamic current declaring the new label of "Dawlet el Ilm wal Iman" (The State of
Science and Faith), the petro-dollar coming with its agenda, the economic crisis and the
rising inflation rate, and the sense of corruption caused by the open door policy "Infitah"
which enlarged the gap between the rich and the poor. All the above made people
seriously consider returning to religion, the only solid ground available after all these
changes and disillusions.
As women are the bearers of culture, an avalanche of books was published outlining what
is to be expected from a true Muslim woman. Hijab was the hottest issue, it is a tangible
aspect of faith, so it should be a starting point for any true believer. Following is a
summary of the ideas shown in some books from this period
Because of Malak Hefni Nassif’s opposition to unveiling, her ideas were re-published in
1976 by a writer called Abdel Aal Mohamed El Gabri. The writer selects what to put in
the book, and comments on what she says, putting attractive titles that would appeal to a
conservative reader such as "The Corrupted Morals of the Educated Women", though
what is written under this title does not denounce educating women but simply
differentiate between learning sciences and being morally disciplined. He would also
attract the misogynous type of a reader by a chapter entitled "The Misbehavior of
Women" in which she criticizes some qualities that may be in the woman’s character
such as ignorance or snobbery.
Ni’mat Sidki wrote her book "El-Tabarruj" in 1975, she argues that God has punished her
for immodest dress and use of make up by an inflammation in the gums. She writes: "I
am a sinner deserving this punishment and more, for the mouth which God has
disciplined with illness and pain wore lipstick and did not command the good and forbid
the evil..." (Hoffman-Lad P. 29-30). Sidki resorts to Harb’s interpretation of holy text
concluding that God forbids women from displaying their bodies to preserve the society
from the harms of "el-tabarruj" .
In 1978, El-Gohari, in a book dedicated to Hassan el Banna, the founder of the Muslim
Brother’s Group, illustrates that Hijab means covering the woman’s beauty (Ziena) and
segregation from men. He puts two conditions for women’s education or work: sex
dichotomy and women’s veil (El Gohari P. 43). El-Gohari asserts that there is nothing to
argue about as far as the Hijab is concerned, women should veil, period. He quotes a
Hadith cited by Fatema that when the Prophet was asked which is best for the woman, his
answer was that "She should not see nor be seen by a man" (El-Gohari P. 44). (The same
Hadith was discredited by Fahmi Houeidi in Al-Ahram article in 1996). He dedicates the
biggest part of his book to denouncing women’s work and mixing with men.
El-Bahi starts his book in a way similar to that of Talat Harb, the first half of the book is
dedicated to denouncing the Western woman, drawing an image of a society rife with
homosexuality, pre-marital sex, infanticide and adultery. The second half targets the
feminist agenda articulated by groups during the first half of the century such as equality
in inheritance, in taking her opinion (al shoura), in marrying without a "wali", in having a
judge to effect divorce and polygamy, and equality in testimony, concluding that Islam
does not butter women with hypocrisy, but gives them all their due rights, and hence
there can never be more rights to claim.
The avalanche of such conservative ideas and the prevalence of the veil has alarmed
secular feminists like Nawal Al-Saadawi who published in 1972 "El Mara’a wal Gins"
(Women & Sex) denouncing the conservative ideas that "disguise" itself in religious
jargon (Researchers of El Maraa Al Gadida, 1995) . In another booklet, she argues that
since rural women who constitute 80% of the population are never veiled, then, according
to the conservatives’ logic, this majority of women are corrupt and immoral, a conclusion
that can not be true (Hoffman-Ladd P. 35). In 1996, Al Saadawi published a short story in
Al-Ahram newspaper, allegedly a true story of one of the cases who came to her as a
psychiatrist, the story implies that the veil and the rigid patriarchal family authority lead
to psychological distortion and sexual repression. Though, she never says these words,
the story is full of metaphors implying the idea. The protagonist is a veiled girl who
dreams of Noah arch leaving her out crying and agonizing her doom. The girl would fall
in love for a Pharoanic statue and the story ends with her throwing the statue away and
falling apart. Whether it is a true story or not, it carries Al-Saadawi’s message and
counter argument against the veil. The story was refused by all publishers and seems to
have reached Al-Ahram after a long struggle.
Prevalence of the conservative ideas of the seventies books made the veil question
become as best described by Fadwa El Guindi’s statement: "A woman in public has a
choice: either looking secular, modern, feminine, and passive (hence very vulnerable to
indignities), or becoming a religieuse (a Muslim Sister), hence formidable, untouchable
and silently threatening" (El Guindi P. 87)
Mohammed Metwali el-Sha’arawi
el-Sha’arawi is a popular Islamic thinker and vigorously promotes the veil in its modern
sense. In 1980 he argues in his book "Al Maraa Kama Aradaha Allah" that when the
woman is not veiled, she is displaying her beauty seducing those who can not afford to
marry. Since those young men can not marry and have for example to wait till they finish
their education, they will have to resort to sin to fulfill this desire. Hence, women’s
unveiling pollutes the society and leads to immorality. He further argues that when the
woman takes the veil, she protects herself from being compared to a younger or a more
beautiful woman, and if the husband does not see any other woman but his wife, he will
desire no woman but her. (Hoffman-Lad P. 31). So, according to el-Sha’arawi, women’s
veil preserves the family and protects the whole society - nothing can be more important,
and the price is not so expensive in comparison.
Defying an argument that Hijab was introduced by the Mamluk to protect girls from
being kidnapped, he says that even if this is the case, we still need to protect the girls
from being kidnapped in the streets of Cairo by veiling them (Hassan, Akher Sa’a).
The same argument that a female’s dressing code is responsible if she is kidnapped or
raped is echoed at an Al-Shaab article on 12/13/92, and later in Al Ahram on 5/16/97 by
Abdel Wahhab Metawei in Barid El Gom’a, in reply to a mother’s problem whose
daughter was raped because of her immodest dress.
Sound Tracks Sold in front of Mosques (1997)
Sheikh Kishk, died few years ago, starts his tapes with a prayer containing "Ostor
Awratena" (God to cover our weaknesses / pudenda), the word "awratena" is a loaded
term as the translation indicates, and whether he says it or not, the word has a notorious
connotation with a woman’s body as explained in the vernacular section. He laments the
good old days when things were cheap, when women stayed at home and obeyed their
husbands, comparing it to women who (in a sarcastic tone) want to have the right to
divorce themselves. Kishk puts four pre-requisitions for women to go to heaven: to pray
five times a day, cover her hair, cover her pudenda, and obey her husband. He does not
tell where he got this combination from, most probably, it is an outcome of his
speculations. Kishk’s theatrical performance, audio dramatic effects, overwhelms the
audience, leaving no chance to question his sources.
Wagdi Ghoneim, in a tape entitled "Solouk El Okht El Moslima" (The Behavior of the
Moslem Sister), starts off the tape with a quotation "Every new innovation is Bida’a, and
every Bida’a is from the Satan", the new innovation he is referring to is women’s
unveiling and leaving the house. That was just the introductory phrase. He then moves to
the name of the tape: he says that he had wished to call the tape (The Behavior of the
Veiled Woman), because "unfortunately" there are women who are still unveiled, and
hence, are unworthy of advice. The tape is well focused and logically constructed (in
contrast to Kishk’s which moves from one topic to the other) on the expected behavior of
the veiled woman and her language in the street, in public, in family occasions, with
neighbors, in means of transportation and at work. The number of do’s and don'ts reached
at the end of the tape is alarming, one feels like the preacher wants to control and put
constraints on every single move or word of the woman. His justification to these
constraints is that the veiled woman is an "ambassador" of Islam. This way he
overweighs small errands and everyday activities turning them into representation
missions that should strictly follow complicated protocols. The word "awra" is again used
extensively, every unveiled woman has her "awra" seen by strangers. Even the veiled
who is not orthodox enough, leaving her neck, ears, a part of her legs or arms seen, has
her "awra" seen by others. This way every part of the body, except the hands the face is
"awra", the power of using the word is in its connotation with sexual organs, it may be
acceptable that the arms be seen but if they are as sacred as the sexual organs, then letting
them to be seen is a big crime.
The hijab in Schools and the Nikab Universities
In 1994, Dr. Hussein Kamel Bahaa’ El-Din, Minister of Education, fueled the battle on
the veil with decree No. 113 preventing school administrations from imposing the hijab
on girls. Given the symbolic importance of the veil, the decree mobilized many writers
attacking or defending the Minister’s position.
What made things more difficult was a fatwa issued by an-Al Azhar committee
denouncing the Minister’s decision and considering it as an assault on the religious
teachings. The thread was picked by the government’s opposition, and papers like AlAhrar came out with titles like: "The Volcano of Anger sweeps Egypt because of the
Minister’s decree .. Parents beg to the Minister to have Mercy .. The Minister is
appealing to the lime lights with his decree ..." (Al-Ahrar Sept. 5, 94).
The whole issue was turned into a political issue, it was not a matter of wearing the veil
or not, the Minister’s decree did not say that girls should not wear it, he said that parent’s
approval should be obtained first. Yet, given the political tension between Islamic groups
and the government, the decree was considered as an aggression on the later’s domain
specifically within the administration of the schools which impose the hijab sometimes
on girls who are six years old.
The Minister had earlier problems when he insisted that "Monakabat" are not allowed
inside university campuses unless they show their face to security. This decision has
stirred the many of opposition groups who took it into their shoulders to write the story of
any Monakaba who was denied the right to get into campus with great sympathy in their
papers.
Abdel Azim Ramadan, a historian with many publications, takes part in the debate. In an
articles published in "October Magazine" on September 4, 94, Ramadan took the
Minister’s side, against the fatwa. He starts (a bit on the defensive) by saying that he was
a graduate of Al-Azhar, is indebted to this educational institution and has nothing against
it whatsoever. Ramadan treats the Azhar fatwa as a political act inciting the people
against the Minister and embarrassing the government, putting a precedence to
counterfeit any other minister’s decision and threatening the government’s autonomy. For
the rest of the article, Ramadan tries desperately to put the veil issue in its place as a
personal religious decision, arguing that it is only one aspect of religiosity that can not
substitute the other aspects, he reiterates that the decree did not prevent girls from
wearing the hijab, it just prevented the administration from imposing it by putting the
condition of the parent’s approval. Finally, he argues that the Islamic groups’ opposition
to the decree is because they want to have the authority to impose a dress on girls that
would even transgress the parent’s authority.
On August 24, 94, and within the same context, "Akher Sa’aa" presents a book review of
"The Responsibilty of the Muslim Woman in Structuring the Family and the Society" by
Mohammed Bahy el Din Salem. The title of the article (written in a big font) was "All
Religions have called for the Hijab .. Unveiling is due to Ignorance of the True Teachings
of the Religion". The book as reviewed by the article is full of quotations from the Bible,
the Old Testament and of course the Quor’an, concluding with what is in the title.
Saied Ashmawi and Tantawi (August 1994)
Within the great commotion caused by the Minister’s decree, Saied Ashmawi wrote in
Rose-al-Yousef an article declaring that the Hijab is not mandated by Islam, interpreting
three Qur’anic verses: Ayet El Hijab, Ayet El Khimar, Ayet El Galaleeb, and some of the
Prophet’s Hadith, and concluding that the hijab phenomenon is an expression of
politicized Islam and is being used as a tool by the leaders of Gamaat Islamia. Tantawi,
then Grand Mufti of Egypt replies advocating Hijab interpreting the same verses, and
denying its connection with whatever is called "politicized Islam" as he puts it. The
debate goes on, but unfortunately ends up with the two sides discrediting each other, and
that was the sad end of the debate.
Ayat El Gelbab:
O ye who believe! Enter not the dwellings of the Prophet for a meal without waiting for
the proper time, unless permission be granted you. But if ye are invited, enter, and when
your meal is ended, then disperse, Linger not for conversation. Lo1 that would cause
annoyance to the Prophet, and he would be shy of (asking) you (to go); but Allah is not
shy of the truth. And when ye ask of them (the wives of the prophet) anything, ask it of
them from behind a curtain. That is purer for your hearts and for their hearts
Ashmawi interprets this verse as binding only to the wives of the prophet and not to any
women. It even does not include the concubines he took giving the Hadith told by Anas
Ben Malek that when the Prophet married Safia ben Yehia, people knew that he is taking
her as a wife not a concubine when he veiled her (put a curtain is the literal translation).
Tantawi argues that Ashmawi’s interpretation is wrong and that the Hijab applies to all
women, it is a religious doctrine (Hokm Share’ie)
Ayat El-Kehmar
And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and display of their
adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms.
Ashmawi does not complete the second part of the this verse: "and not to reveal their
adornment save to their husbands or fathers or husbands’ father, or their sons or their
husbands’ sons... " and hence interprets it as only pertaining to covering the bosom.
Tantawi defied the argument just by completing the verse.
Ayat El-Galaleeb
Oh Prophet! Tell thy wives and thy daughters and the women of the believers to draw
their cloaks round them (when they go abroad). That will be better, that so they may be
recognized and not annoyed. Allah is ever forgiving, merciful
(Translations are copied from Barbara Freyer Stowasser’s article, the Status of Women in
Early Islam)
Ashmawi says that this verse was to differentiate between the free women and the slaves,
and it is much related to when they urinate. The problem in interpretation arises in
deciding what is the "cloak" and far should cover of the body.
The argument reached a dead end. Tantawi used other papers to reiterate his criticism of
Ashmawi’s interpretation. A month later, and in reaction to the Azhar committee "fatwa",
Ashmawi opened the debate again, yet no one answered him. The debate is back to its
monologue-like format. In his last article, he simply discredits this committee, the whole
religious system accusing it of "terrorizing" those who think differently. The debate is
over.
Some Common Features of the Debate
The above were some glimpses of the debate on the veil, following are some the general
characteristics of the debate during the two periods.
The centrality of the Western paradigm in the discourse
Colonialism has trapped the discourse on women into a discourse on culture. (Ahmed P.
176). To prove that the natives are in need of the Western civilization, the colonizers took
it on their shoulders to impose their superior culture on the colonized areas, Mitchell puts
it as capturing the soul after capturing the Body (Mitchell P. 95). And since women are
the bearers of culture, there situation is always targeted and the first step was the veil.
Since then, the veil has become "pregnant with meanings" (Ahmed P. 176), any
questioning of its validity is interpreted as questioning of the merits of Islam. Unveiling
becomes what "The Enemies of Islam" want.
In Talat Harb’s introduction of "Tarbiet el Mar’a wal Hijab", he argues that the West has
always hoped to control the East. Khedive Ism’ail, seeking to secede from the Ottoman
Empire, sought the help of the Europeans achieve their goal of undermining the integrity
of the society, in exchange of intruding the Western customs into the Egyptian society.
Why would the West bother to ruin the lives of the Moslem woman, simply because they
are jealous that the European woman is suffering in the name of liberation while the
Moslem woman is in such an honorable condition, i.e. they want the whole world to be
suffering as much as they are suffering. The anecdote he mentions to prove Ism’ail
disgraceful attitude was when he instructed the Sioufia school girls (some of them
reaching 16 years old) to go out with their faces unveiled wearing European hats, as a
result of this disgrace, "most of those girls have become prostitutes"! (Harb P. 4). At the
end of the introduction he puts it this way "We have long accepted the foreigners’ idea,
taking whatever they say for granted, until we have lost our indigenous characteristics;
but now we know of their hideous goals towards the East" (Harb P. 6)
The above was a true example of what Ahmed labels as "resistance narrative" (P. 166),
Harb is resisting the western cultural penetration, women’s position is one of the tools of
fighting such an influence. The same argument is valid late in the century, this time,
Islamists are resisting globalization, and economic dependence rather than colonization.
Gamal Abou El Ez, a well known psychiatrist, argues in an interview on the hijab
published in Akher Sa’a, issue of 8/12/92, that Muslims have to prove their identity
against the crimes committed against them in Bosnia. Still, the issue of gender is trapped
into the discourse on culture and societal integrity.
Reference to the Western woman as a paradigm to be followed or denounced is a major
feature of the discourse on women. A package of moral laxity, pornography, casual sex,
materialism, and disappearance of family ties is usually assemble by the religious
debating voices like Al Bahi who devotes half his book describing the corrupt conditions
of the Western woman. The same approach was followed earlier in the century by Talat
Harb, and is followed by many other religious proponents of unveiling.
Another extreme would put the Western woman as paradigm to be emulated, the
strongest voice in that extreme is Kasim Amin. In between, is Amina Al-Saeieed’s
approach in Hawa calling for "selective adaptation of western customs" (Hoffman-Lad P.
38)
The other paradigm that was appealed to by many of those opposing the veil (Amin &
Saadawi) is the unveiled rural woman.
Reference to Holy Text
The issue of text interpretation and the validity of some AHadith have taken a catalyst
role in the debate on the veil and on women in general virtually by all participants of the
debate. Kasim Amin, who has been attacked for his western inclinations, has various
excerpts from the Qura’n and reference to the Prophet’s time, devoting one chapter of his
book on the veil from a religious point of view (Pages 68-83). Nawal al Saadawi, best
known as a secular feminist, would appeal to religious values and examples from the
early Islamic community (Hoffman-Ladd P. 43). The debate centers on few Quar’anic
verses, yet each side interprets it differently as seen in the debate between Ashmawi and
Tantawi.
Even the issue of text interpretation is trapped in a larger political context, as implied by
Ashmawi’s choice of words describing two methods of text interpretation: the
"traditional" method, followed by the "terrorists and fundamentalists" which interprets
the exact wording of the verse; and the "right orthodox" method which tries to understand
the Quranic verse within the context of its revelation.
For the Good of the Nation
The centrality of women’s position in the progress of the nation was highlighted as early
as in Kasim Amin’s "Tahrir el Mara’a". The same theme was adopted by Harb and later
by Islamists: in 1952 at a conference convened by various Islamic associations, the
Moslem Brothers’ representative declares that "woman is the standard by which the
nation rises or falls" (Hoffman-Lad P. 27). El-Sha’arwi’s argument for the veil is based
on the dangers of the unveiled woman to the society. Nawal el Saadawi talks for the
"millions of Egyptian women" (Hoffman-Lad P. 35). In virtually all the writings on
women, the same argument stands, that for the sake of the nation or the society, the
woman should be so and so, with lots of contradiction lying within these so and so.
The Split Vernacular
The vocabulary used by any of the debating currents reflects their direction. On the one
hand one hears or reads "awra", "fitna" and "zina" as words much related to the discourse
on women: the woman’s body is "awra" that would lead to "fitna" (seduction of men)
which will prompt them to the act of adultery (zina). This formula stands against the
expected role of women to be "sakan" or a (home to the man). Another expression is
"Fitra" or nature, which stresses the physical difference and the weakness of the female
body.
At the other end of the discourse we hear and read "legal advocacy" , "class exploitation"
and "empowerment". The easiness to translate the vocabulary of the second sort of the
discourse implies the western origin of the words, whereas the first group’s words resist
translation being part of the uniqueness of the indigenous culture
It is interesting to note that the term "emancipation" has been borrowed from the more
liberal to the more conservative side of the debate. While Kasim Amin uses
"emancipation" as opposed to women’s segregation and the veil, Nie’mat Sidki, AlGohari, and Al-Bahi use it as opposing to the western "enslavement" of the women by the
obligations of work and bread winning on the one hand, and sexual exploitation on the
other hand. The same apply to the metaphor of "bondage": The bondage of the "Harem"
in Amin’s argument is replaced by the bondage of "modernity" and the treatment of the
woman as a commodity. Hence the liberation of unveiling early in the century is reversed
at its end to the liberation of veiling.
One new term is being added in the nineties to the discourse on the veil: personal
freedom or personal choice . Salah Montasser argues for personal freedom in taking or
leaving the hijab in Al-Ahram (06/26/94). The same token was expressed by Nabila
Hassan, in her article exploring the world of Monakabat (Akher Sa’a 8/12/92), Nabila is
veiled without covering the veil, and when asked by the one of those interviewed, why
she doesnot cover her face, again the argument of personal freedom is emphasized.
Meeting points among opposing voices
The meeting points are many, first, that Islam has been a liberating force. After this point
the debate emerges: Amina Sa’eid says that "it has stopped at the magnificent beginning"
and it is our duty to carry on the liberation process (Hoffman-Ladd P. 38). On the other
hand, Harb, Al-Gohari, Al-Bahi and many other voices declare that nothing better can be
done to the position of women, she has received all possible rights. Further liberation will
make her an image of the corrupt Western woman leading to the destruction of the
society.
Another meeting point is the perceived degradation and refusal of the current (in all
times) position of women of women. Amin did not accept the situation then for women’s
ignorance and seclusion, Harb denounced it for women’s lax of morals by not sticking to
the true Hijab and wearing the flimsy "Bourqo’" (Harb P. 105). Al Saadawi looks at the
degradation of women in the patriarchal system of the society or the "exploitative class
position" (al-Saadawi P. 43), and Ni’amat Sidki finds the degradation of women in the
exposure of her body (Hoffman-Ladd P. 29). This point can be best elaborated by Sayyed
Qutob’s calling the current society as "sick, defiled, fallen age" (Qutob P. 14).
Amin perceived degradation of women in some of the then accepted norms of the society
such as polygamy, the man’s absolute right to divorce his wife without a reason, men’s
eating alone and then the women eating what is left, to have castrated men as managers
on the harem (Amin P. 16) and finally being deprived from participating in public life
(Amin P. 17)
Conclusion
The debate on the veil is never resolved. It is not merely a debate on putting on a scarf or
dressing in a certain way, women’s dressing code has been trapped in the dilemma of
identifying with a whole culture, with political and economic factors playing either at the
background or the foreground.
The common features found early in the century are still resilient late in the century, even
the "resistance narrative" in spite of the absence of colonialism.
The debate on the veil has been a good venue for exercising patriarchy over women. It
first seen in Amin’s contemptuous notes of the status of women, spelled out in Harb’s
argument, expressed by Bahithat El Badia’s quotation by Laila Ahmed: "..If he (man)
orders us to veil, we veil, and if he now demands that we unveil, we unveil, and if he
wishes us to be educated, we are educated .." (Ahmed P. 183), and is still there in 1997 as
represented in Mohammed Ghoneim’s tape. The Minister of Education’s decree has
challenged the political patriarchy (Joseph P. 3) of Jamat Islamia who wanted to have a
saying over the girls dressing code, even competing with the kinship patriarchy of the
parent.
The instances of having debating voices arguing with each other are very rare: those
opposing the veil write and lecture in contexts alienated from those advocating it. The
result is stratified contexts, or monologues, each using a separate logic and vocabulary.
The debate between Kasim Amin and Talat Harb, or Ashmawi and Tantawi are not the
rule in the history of the debate on the veil. Amin’s was the golden age in comparison
with Ashmawi’s. "Tahrir el Mara’a" was honoured by a reaction of around thirty articles
or books, whether they agreed or disagreed, such a reaction reflects a coherent society;
Ahsmawi’s article, on the other hand, was lucky enough to get a reply from Saied
Tantawi, yet the whole debate went calmly, and was cut off soon.
A great controversy still surrounds the early participants of the debate, and specifically
those opposing the veil: they are imperialist agents to some, or pioneering emancipators
to the others. Kasim Amin, is a misogynist to Leila Ahmed, an imperialism agent to
Khamies and even to Leila Ahmed, and the least of accusations is plagiarism (Ahmed and
Badran). The same controversy surrounds Hoda Sha’arawi who is treated by Margot
Badran as an indigenous active feminist, by Leila Ahmed as a naive girl preyed by
Europeans as Eug鮩e Le Brun (P. 154), and by Husayn Muhammed Yusuf (a fellow
Shabab Mohammed member) as a zionist agent (Hoffman-Ladd P. 32)
Many of the educated people including a writer like Laila Ahmed (as quoted in the
introduction) feel saturated of the debate on the veil for its own sake, they already feel
that too much effort has been spent on this issue and hence are unwilling to spend more
energy on it. Yet, the debate goes on, not for the sake of a dressing code, but for asserting
an identity, a culture, or a political orientation.
Works Cited
Ahmed, Leila. Women and Gender in Islam. Cairo: The American University in Cairo,
1992.
Amin, Kasim. Tahrir El-Mara'a. Cairo: Oriental Library, 1899.
Ashmawi, Saied. "El-Hijab Lais Farida." Rose-al-Youssif 6/13/94 1994: 22-25.
Ashmawi, Saied. "Al-hijab Lais Farida Islamiah." Rose-al-Youssif 6/27/94 1994: 81-83.
Ashmawi, Saide. "Lagnet el Fatwa el Shara'ia bel Azhar Gheir Share'ia." Rose-al-Youssif
8/22/94 1994: 28-31.
Badran, Margot. Feminists, Islam, and Nation. Princeton, New Jersy: Princeton
University Press, 1995.
El-Bahi, Mohammed. El-Islam Wa Itigah El-Moslima El Moa'sira. Cairo: Dar ElI'etesam, 1978.
El-Gabri, Abdel Mota'al Mohammed. El-Moslima El-Asria eind Bahithat El-Badia.
Cairo: Dar El-Ansar, 1976.
El-Ghazali, Mohammed. Kadaia El-Mara'a bin el Takalid El Rakida Wal wafida. Cairo:
Dar El-Sherouk, 1990.
El-Gohari, Mahmoud Mohammed. El-Okht El-Moslima Asas El-Mogtama'a El-Fadel.
Cairo: Dar El-Ansar, 1978.
El-Sha'arawi, Mohammed Metwally. Al Mara'a Kama Aradha Allah. Cairo, 1980.
Emara, Mohammed. El-Islam Wal-Maraaa fi Ra'ai El-Imam Mohammed Abdou. Cairo:
El Kahira Lil Thakafa El Arabia, 1975.
Ga'afar, Mohamed Anas Kasim. El-Hegouk El-Siasia Lil Mara'a. Cairo: Dar El-Nahda
El-Arabia, 1987.
Gharieb, Ma'amoun. ""Masouliet El Maraa El Mouslima fi Binaa El Osra"." Akher Sa'a
1994.
Ghoneim, Wagdi. Solouk El Mara'a El Moslima. .
Guindi, Fadwa El. "Veiled Activism, Egyptian Women in the Contemporary Islamic
Movement." Femmes de la Mediterranee, Peule Mediterraneens 22-23.June 1983 (1983):
79-89.
Harb, Mohammed Talat. Tarbiet el-Maraa Wal-Hijab. Cairo: El-Taraki, 1899.
Hassan, Nabila. "Aalam El-Monakabat." Akher Sa'a , 8/12/92.
Hoffman-Lad, Valerie J. "Polemics on the Modesty and Segregation of Women in
Contemporary Egypt." Int. J. Middle East Studies .19 (1987): 23-50.
Joseph, Suad. Persistent Patriarchies. Cairo, 1994.
Khamis, Mohammed Atiya. El-Harakat El Nisa'ia wa Silataha bil Isti'mar. Cairo: Dar El
Ansar, 1978.
Kishk, Abdel Hamid. Hokok El Zawgein.tape .
Macleod, Arelene Elowe. Accommodating Protest. New Haven: Yale University Press,
1991.
Mitchell, Timothy. Colonizing Egypt. Cairo: AUC, 1988.
Reid, Donald Malcolm. Cairo University and the making of Modern Egypt. Cairo: The
American University in Cairo, 1990.
Ramadan, Abdel Azim. "Bayan Lagnet Fatwa El Azhar." October 1994.
Researchers, El Mara'a El Gadida. El-Haraka El-Nisa'ia El-Arabia. Cairo: Dar ElMostakbal El-Arabi, 1995.
Saadawi, Nawal. Qadiyat al-mara'a El-siyassia wal jinsieah. Cairo, 1977.
Saadawi, Nawal. "Halit Fatah, Min Daftar Ahwal Eiadati." Al-Ahram 7/5/96 1996: The
Appendix.
Stowassar, B. "The Status of Women in Early Islam." Muslim Women. Ed. Freda
Hussain. London: Croomhelm, 1984. 11-43.
Sullivan, Earl. Women in Egyptian Public Life. Cairo: The American Unversity in Cairo,
1986.
Tantawi, Mohammed Saied. "Bal il-Hijab Farida." Rose-al-Youssif 6/27/94 1994: 78-80.