As of 29 May 2015 the following article could be read in German by anybody on my German blogsite netzkolumnist.com. Since it has not forfeited any of its actuality, this article is now being re-presented in German there and likewise accessible in English, too, here. Furthermore, it will be a chapter
— in a completely revised and expanded form —
in my third book project, starting as of the beginning of the next year:
… everybody knows that Islam dictates women to wear the veil…
It is right, that as early as in ancient times, long before the birth of Islam the veil was worn in Arabia, however, generally as a head covering for women of the upper class. Thus it can be also understood for certain that then the veil was worn by Muslim women in order to distinct themselves clearly from slaves. But there can also be another reason that the veil was worn and has been worn so often
(__apart from the other reasons, that obviously have been designed or even show an elitist nature in order to document this way the own “peculiarity”
— by the way this is a very common phenomenon__)
, but this reason would originate in superstition:
Being protected from the “evil eye”. Exemplarily being protected from the envy towards the looks of a certain woman, with the veil serving to curtain her physical beauty, thus protecting her.
(__This explanation, originating in superstition, is obviously a common phenomenon, which can be seen in numerous examples, wearing the veil being just one of them.__)
The fact that the following Qur’an verse is always being quoted by the Islam side finds its reason in the fact that there is no other reference in the Qur’an:
Oh Prophet, talk to your wives and daughters and the women of the believers to draw over themselves their outer garments. This way they will be recognized more easily and will not be harmed. And Allah is ever forgiving and merciful. (Surah 33, verse 59)
That may be different with the so-called Ahadith, but the genuineness of many of those “surviving sayings” is questionable, as will be explained in the following:
The Ahadith are surviving statements that
_m i g h t_
go back to Mohammed.
But on numerous occasions they were made
up in the corresponding situations and put
into Mohammed’s mouth.
These texts consisting of several thousands constitute the source of Muslim belief:
the Sunnah (which means something like “customs” “behaviour”).
It is them who weave the legend of the holy prophet by reporting about the thousand and one attributes of the behavior of the “beautiful model”. (Source: Kann man sich gegen den Fanatismus auf den Islam stützen?)
Hussein Amin describes this sysem of statements put into Mohammed’s mouth in his book Le Livre du musulman désemparé (that could be translated as: “The book of the clueless Muslim”) and that was published with the publisher La Decouverte in 1992:
The name of the prophet served as a guarantee for lies that were fought with even bigger lies. Any sect, any doctrine had an impressive number of Ahadith at its disposal in order to disqualify competing sects and doctrines. The aim justified any means, any make do was accepted, including making things up and defamation… (cf. loc cit, p53)
But mind you, “outer garments” is the translation for the word “djilbāb”, whose meaning is
_n o t_
_c a n _
mean a piece of clothing similar to a coat or a gown and that
_c o u l d_
also cover the face.
In order to deduce a rule from the above-quoted Qur’an verse, an
such a man-made rule
is in the end
an expression of patriarch-ideological dogma.
Abiding by such a man-made dogma is consequently agreeable for its own proponents
_i t i s n o t _
a rule called for by a god.
Why should such a rule be necessary for a god,
thus for a spiritual greatness imagined by people
who attributed all kinds of features to this greatness?
For whatever reasons these features might
have been attributed to this greatness (god).
(__Besides, the reasons are
going to be investigated
in detail in the range
of topics of the
The call for being allowed to wear the veil at school as an expression of affiliation to Islam therefore lacks the foundation and on the one hand merely shows poor knowledge of the religio-historical correlations and the development of this belief
_a s w e l l _
(__ just like,
_ i f y o u w i s h t o d o s o_
, you can find them
in the propaganda writings
by the Pauline Jesus movement,
generally called the gospels of
the New Testament,
and that for that very reason
will have to be in the focus of
the above-mentioned book project__)
, and on the other hand giving into this call
_h i n d e r s_
a progressive development of the Islam belief.
This poor knowledge will also find its rationale in the fact that both Muslim men and women may read the Qur’an only in Arabic, which they often do not understand and therefore depend on the statements by the Qur’an teachers, who are often structured in patriarchist way which then again is reflected in their corresponding interpretation of the Qur’an
— namely a doubtful one !
“ O f c o u r s e”
__u n f o r t u n a t e l y_
this is also Christian tradition, and I am not only talking about the “Biblia pauperum”, the so-called Bible for the poor, that
_e x p l a i n e d_
the canonical gospel to the (mostly!) uneducated people in the Middle Ages
e x p l a i n i n g
is exactly what it
_d i d n o t d o_
, thus it did not reveal its probable dubiousness and contradictoriness, but the representatives of this gospel
the corresponding propaganda writings of the Pauline Jesus movement
according to their dogmatics
for their sheep__)
above all in pictures, for anybody who cannot read needs pictures but they can also be “correctly” interpreted.
_u n f o r t u n a t e l y_
it goes without saying they today as well many „spiritual“ and secular media manipulate according to such methodical guidelines, which has to do with anything but
f r e e i n d i v i d u a l d e v e l o p m e n t
to gain the personal salvation
the community of
e q u a l
e q u a l l y w o r t h
(__Which is still to be interpreted:
_F o r_ what is man?__)
In order to do so above all you need a mandatory ethical norm that is
_i n d e p e n d e n t_
from any religion, as well as a
m a n d a t o r y
(__thus ensuring legal certainty mandatory for all__)
, that is oriented towards the conditions in
_t h i s_
world, for this is the world we live in and we can make
_s e c u r e d_
statements only about this world.
(__A world that we can even freely shape — as long as we do not violate the laws of nature, which, of course, involves respect to the beings co_inhabiting this planet.__)
Anything else is ideology and manipulation serving whatever
(in the end secular)
That means evaluating the
_b e h a v i o u r_
of a person should only then take place by representatives of the human race of this world, if it is geared against the well-being of others in this world.
And neither the evaluation of a
_b e h a v i o u r_
shown nor its reasoning should
_n e v e r e v e r_
be based on the backdrop of the affiliation to a certain faith group, but always
“speak for itself”.
That means exactly for the
_v e r y_
“ i s b e h a v i n g”.
© Joachim Endemann (translated by Kirsten Grunau)