|
Weekend Edition May 6-7, 2000
‘Tudung' remains beyond the
pale
Robita T Abdullah
May
6:
When PAS took over as the new government of Terengganu, almost everybody
had high hopes of seeing legal injunctions against some of the previous
penyamuns.
There was
keen expectation when the Wahhabi-educated Mentri Besar and his Executive
Council would implement the draft of their administrative priorities for
good governance and provide with impartiality to the aspirations of the
rakyat.
Many thought
that with the likes of Tun Salleh Abas, Mustaffa Ali and Wan Mottalib, not
many things could go wrong. In the euphoria of a two-thirds majority, PAS
commenced operations by barking up the wrong tree and did it with
belligerence.
The bridge
and road over Pulau Duyung were a saga in themselves. Under former mentri
besar Wan Mokhtar, the delay and cost-overruns were an embarrassment. The
toll road shortens the distance to travel north or south. Those proceeding
to Kelantan and/or Sungei Golok largely use it. The locals, mostly
motorcyclists, used the side roads and lanes.
By removing
the toll, all PAS has done is to rob the state to pay the rich and famous
- mostly KL types, Singaporeans and expatriates from the affluent
petroleum centre of Kerteh-Paka - rushing to exotic Golok in Southern
Thailand.
PAS with some
suddenness then made an edict compelling all Muslim workers in the state
to wear the tudung. This is beyond the pale. Everybody has the
human right to wear any attire he or she thinks fit. But the human duty is
to be within the ambit of decency - do not upset the
neighbours.
Covering the
aurat or sex appeal is lauded as the obligatory reason, but the
claim that Muslim men are seemingly predatory is a pathetic
generalisation. One wonders whether Muslim males will salivate with
uncontrolled passion at globular and unattractive Muslim women without the
tudung.
It is
passionately argued by some that this requirement is a Quranic
postulation. The pre-Islamic Arab society was one of unbelievable savagery
towards women. In 7th century Medina, there was the humiliating practice
of ta'arud, the harassment of women by blocking their paths and
urging them to fornicate.
The Holy
Prophet, on advice, protected his wives and other Muslims by wearing the
jilhab for identification to prevent embarrassment. (Re:
Al-Tabaqat, vol. 8. p.176).
The Quran
confirms it in verse 59 of sura 33. There is no direct ruling in
the Quran. But it has been conveniently misconstrued to
prolong the tradition of misogyny in Islam. It is perpetuated and impinged
somewhat upon the following hadith sahih:
"Those who entrust their affairs to a woman will never know
prosperity. "(Bukhari, Sahih, vol. 4 p.226)
"The prophet said that the dog, the ass, and woman interrupt prayer
if they pass in front of the believer, interposing themselves between him
and the qipla." (Bukhari, Sahih, vol. 1. p. 99)
"Three things bring bad luck: house, women and horse." (Bukhari,
Sahih, vol. 4. p.243)
"Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of
them to excel the other, and because they spend their property for the
support of the women." (Pickthall, The Meaning of the Glorious Koran,
sura, 4. Verse 34)
In essence, this sexual inequality was based upon, and somewhat
justified, that women have a threatening power which must be contained
and/or arrested. Is this compatible with the present world? Even in
paradise, 72 houris (bedadari) attend to the meanest male believer.
Alas, the male chauvinist world has designed for women to have no
similar attendants. The tudung is part of this peer group pressure and
oppression. It is really strange that Muslim men of this enlightened world
should allow such mutilation!
ROBITA T. ABDULLAH is a freelance writer based in
Terengganu.
| 
malaysiakini.gif
ros@Top