The Author’s Appeal

Four years ago today, I wrote a series of articles on purdah. They were published in several issues of Tarjuman-ul-Quran. At that time, some aspects of the discussion were deliberately omitted, and certain matters had to be left incomplete—for the purpose then was not to write a book, but an article. By incorporating all those matters, along with the necessary additions and analyses, the present book has now been prepared. It cannot yet be claimed that this subject has been dealt with conclusively or that this is the final word. But those who are genuinely interested in understanding the subject will find here, to a considerable extent, knowledge and information, and arguments and proofs that will quench their thirst—at least, I certainly hope so.

Guidance lies with Allah alone; it is to Him that I seek help. Amen.

22 Muharram 1351 AH — Abul A‘la

The Fundamental Problems of Human Society

The Nature and Character of the Problems

Human civilization has two foremost and most complex problems. The welfare and progress of the human race depend upon the proper and balanced solution of these two problems. That is why, from time immemorial, the learned societies of the world have remained troubled and concerned about solving them.

The first problem is how the relationship between men and women can be established in social life. For this is, in reality, the foundation stone of civilization; and if there is the slightest deviation in it, then the structure raised upon it will necessarily be crooked as well.

The second problem concerns the individual and collective relationships of the human race. If even the slightest inconsistency remains in harmonizing these relationships, humanity will have to suffer their bitter consequences for ages to come.

While the importance of these two problems is so great, their complexity is also so vast that no one can solve them without a meticulous analysis of every fact concerning human nature. The observation that man is a microcosm has truly been justified: his physical constitution, natural disposition, capacities and abilities, desires, inspirations and emotions, and his actual relationship with the countless realms of creation outside his own being—all these matters exist within him like a universe. Unless one casts a clear gaze upon every part of such a world, it is impossible to gain a true knowledge of man; and without a complete and true knowledge, it is likewise impossible to solve his fundamental problems.

The matter is again so complex that, from the earliest times to the present day, it has remained a field for knowledge, science, and research. First, not all the facts of the world have yet been disclosed to humanity. No human knowledge has so far attained ultimate perfection; that is, no person can claim that all the facts related to a given field of knowledge are within his grasp. Moreover, the facts upon which light has so far been shed are so extensive and subtle that, let alone an individual, even a particular group cannot focus its careful attention on all of them at the same time. If one aspect is captured by the eye of knowledge, the other remains shrouded in darkness. In some places vision becomes narrow, while elsewhere personal inclinations obscure the path of sight. Despite every effort to solve these problems of human life with such compounded weaknesses, man remains unsuccessful, and ultimately his errors and deviations become conspicuous. A sound solution to a problem is possible only when an impartial view is attained regarding all the facts connected with it. Again, until all the aspects of the discovered facts—even if not all facts—are illuminated together by the light of knowledge, impartial vision cannot be attained. Yet the field of view is naturally so vast that its entirety does not fall within one’s sight; and, in addition, the desires, interests, and aversions of human nature are so powerful that even when something does become clearly visible, one turns one’s gaze away from it. In such circumstances, can an even and comprehensive vision ever be achieved? Any solution adopted in such a state will inevitably either involve excessive exaggeration and transgress reasonable limits, or else suffer from insufficiency and deficiency.

Of the two foremost problems described above, the first is the subject of our discussion here. When we examine the past history of this matter, we see only a remarkable tug-of-war between excessive exaggeration and extreme deficiency. On the one hand, we see woman giving nourishment to her children as a mother and assisting man through the ups and downs of life as his other half. On the other hand, that same woman has been employed as a maidservant or slave. She has been bought and sold like cattle. She has been deprived of ownership and inheritance. She has been made an embodiment of sin, filth, and humiliation. She has been given no opportunity for the expression or development of her personality. Again, at times, even when woman was elevated and developed, she was simultaneously plunged into immorality and licentiousness. She was turned into a plaything of bestial impulses. At other times, she was labeled an ‘agent of Satan’; and alongside her so-called development and advancement, the decline of humanity also began.

We call these two extremes not merely reasonable transgression of limits and extreme deficiency from the standpoint of outlook; rather, when we see their poisonous consequences through experience, we designate one in moral terminology as transgression of reasonable limits and the other as extreme insufficiency or deficiency. The historical background mentioned above teaches us that when a nation passes beyond the age of a savage life and advances toward civilization and settled society, its women initially live with men like slaves and servants. At first, notorious forces lead them toward gradual advancement. But when cultural development reaches a distinct stage, they realize that they cannot advance while keeping their other halves undeveloped. They then regard the path of their own progress as blocked and, as necessary, make half of the nation (women) capable of advancing alongside the first half (men). In this way they continue to compensate for the deficiency, and, no longer satisfied with compensation alone, continue moving forward. Eventually, the lineage-based order—which is called the foundation stone of civilization—is destroyed and erased by women’s freedom. Along with moral decline, the decline of intellectual, physical, and material powers inevitably becomes evident. What else can the ultimate result be but destruction?

Since presenting extensive examples from history would enlarge the scope of this treatise, we consider it appropriate to mention only two or four of them here.

Greece

Among the ancient nations, Greek civilization was the most glorious of all. In the early period of this nation, the status of women was utterly degraded in terms of moral outlook, legal rights, social customs, and so forth. In Greek mythology, the woman Pandora is described as the cause of human suffering and distress, just as Eve (peace be upon her) is held responsible for the same matter in Jewish mythology. No one is unaware of how strongly the fabricated false stories concerning Eve (peace be upon her) influenced the customs, laws, social life, and moral character of the Jewish and Christian communities. The notion that the Greeks held concerning Pandora likewise influenced their mentality. In their view, woman was an inferior creature. Women had no status at all in social life, and honored status was reserved exclusively for men.

This system, with some modifications, remained in force during the early stage of civilization’s development. The influence of civilization and the light of knowledge was evident only to the extent that women’s legal rights remained as before, while they were granted an elevated status in social life. She became the queen of the Greeks’ household. Her duties remained confined to the home, and within those limits she had complete authority. Her chastity was exceedingly valuable and was respected. The custom of purdah existed in aristocratic Greek families. Within their homes, the quarters of men and women were separate. Their women did not attend gatherings where men and women met together. They were not seen in public theaters. They considered forming a relationship with a man through marriage to be honorable. Living as a courtesan was extremely despised and accursed. This was the state of affairs when the Greek nation was very powerful and rapidly ascending the heights of progress. Although moral corruption existed at that time, it was limited. Greek women could claim purity, modesty, and chastity, whereas men were the opposite. They did not aspire to such qualities, nor could it be expected that they would lead pure lives. The class of prostitutes was an integral part of Greek society. For men, associating with this class was by no means considered objectionable.

Among the Greeks, the influence of the worship of desire and the incitement of lust gradually spread, and in this era the class of prostitutes attained such an elevated status that examples of it are rare in history. Brothels became the centers and meeting places of the Greek population at large. A galaxy of philosophers, poets, historians, writers, and experts surrounded this moon. Prostitutes not only presided over gatherings of knowledge, science, and literature; important political discussions were also conducted before them. Even in matters involving questions of life and death for the nation, the opinions of prostitutes were regarded as final. Yet no person was ever judged fairly by their judgment and deliberation. The worship of beauty kindled the fire of lust intensely among the Greeks. The statues or nude ideals of art toward which they expressed an appetite for beauty began supplying fuel to that fire. Eventually their mentality became so distorted that they did not consider the worship of lust objectionable in any way from a moral standpoint. Their moral standards had changed so greatly that leading philosophers and moralists did not consider adultery and obscenity ugly or objectionable. In general, the Greeks regarded marriage as an unnecessary custom and considered the open union of men and women without marriage reasonable. At last, their religion too surrendered to their bestial impulses. Worship of the goddess of love (Aphrodite) spread throughout Greece. Greek mythology relates of this goddess that, while the wife of one god, she established amorous physical relationships with three other gods and one human being. The child born from their sexual unions was later called the god of love (Cupid). This god of love was worshiped by the Greeks as a deity. It is not difficult to infer how low the moral standards were of a nation that accepted such a vile character not merely as its ideal but as an object of worship. No nation can rise again after such moral decline. During this very era of moral decline, the ‘left-handed’ doctrine spread in India and the ‘Mazdakite’ doctrine in Iran. In such circumstances, prostitution attained the status of religious purity in Babylon. As a consequence, Babylon later became merely part of past history, and its existence in the world vanished forever.

When worship of the goddess of love began in Greece, brothels were transformed into temples of worship. The shameless prostitute became a divine maiden or goddess, and the act of adultery was elevated to the status of a religious rite.

The second clear consequence of this worship of lust was that the evil practices of the people of Lot spread among the Greek nation like an epidemic and received religious and moral support. Such practices did not exist during the rule of Homer and Hesiod. But when cultural advancement, in the name of aesthetics, introduced the worship of nudity and sexual pleasure, the flames of lust reached such a stage that they diverted the Greek nation from the natural path and led it along an unnatural one. Art experts called it a ‘strong bond of friendship’ between two persons. The Greeks Harmodius and Aristogiton were the first to attain such honor that statues of them were erected in their homeland in their memory. An illicit and abnormal loving relationship had been established between them. History bears witness that after this period no new era began in the national life of the Greeks.

Rome

After the Greek nation, the opportunity for Roman advancement arose in the world. Here too we see a picture of rise and decline as before. When the Romans emerged from the darkness of barbarism and appeared upon the bright stage of history, their social order was such that the man had become the head of his family and possessed complete authority over his wife and children. In some cases, he even had the power to kill his wife.

When barbarism diminished to some extent and the Romans began advancing in civilization and culture, the ancient family customs remained, but their severity was reduced and conditions became somewhat more moderate. During the development of the Roman Republic, the custom of purdah did not prevail as it did among the Greeks. However, women and young men and women were kept respectful within the discipline of the family. Chastity and virtue, especially in the case of women, were precious jewels, and these were the touchstones of respectability. The moral standard was also high. Once, a member of the Roman Senate kissed his wife in front of his daughter. This was considered a grave insult to the national character, and a condemning vote was cast against him in the Senate house. At that time, marriage alone was the lawful and honorable means of union between men and women. A woman’s honor rested upon her motherhood. Although a class of prostitutes existed and men had the right to associate with them up to a certain limit, the Roman public nevertheless regarded this as extremely degrading, and men who associated with them were viewed with contempt.

As civilization and culture advanced, the Romans’ outlook regarding women also began to change. Gradually, such changes took place in marriage, divorce, the legal system, and family customs that conditions became the opposite of what they had been. Marriage became merely a legal agreement (Civil Contract), whose continuation and dissolution depended on the husband and wife. The responsibilities of married life became insignificant. Women were granted full rights of inheritance and ownership of wealth and property. Roman law freed them from the authority of their fathers and husbands. Roman women gained not only social freedom; a large portion of the nation’s wealth also gradually came under their control. They began lending money to their husbands at high interest. As a result, husbands became slaves to wealthy wives. Divorce became so easy that marital relationships began to be severed at every turn. The famous Roman philosopher and scholar Seneca (56 BCE–4 BCE), lamenting the prevalence of divorce, said, ‘Nowadays divorce is no disgrace in Rome. A woman counts her age by the number of her husbands.’

During this period, women began successively taking multiple husbands. Martial (43–104 CE) mentioned a woman who had taken ten husbands. Juvenal (60–140 CE) commented on a woman who had taken eight husbands in five years. Saint Jerome (340–420 CE) described a woman who had taken thirty-two husbands in her lifetime and had been her husband’s twenty-first wife.

The notion that sexual union between men and women without marriage was objectionable also gradually disappeared from people’s minds during this period. Even the leading moralists regarded adultery as an ordinary act. In 184 BCE, Cato was appointed censor and moral supervisor in Rome. He too declared sexual licentiousness acceptable. Cicero advised loosening moral restraints for young women. Epictetus, a complete follower of the philosophical principles of the Stoics—self-control, detachment, indifference, endurance, and solitude—used to give his disciples the following advice:

Refrain from the company of women before marriage as far as possible. But if anyone cannot exercise restraint in this matter, do not rebuke him.

Eventually, the bonds of moral character and social order became so slack that the Roman Empire sank beneath a flood of lust, nudity, and obscenity. Shamelessness and nudity began to be staged in theaters. It came to be considered necessary to adorn homes with nude, sexually stimulating, and obscene pictures. Prostitution spread so widely that during the reign of the Roman emperor Tiberius (14–37 CE), it became necessary to enact a law preventing girls from respectable families from engaging in prostitution and dancing. A spectacle called Flora became very popular at that time because it featured races by naked women. Communal bathing by men and women alike was customary. Essays containing obscene nude images were published without hesitation in Roman literature, and such literature was popular and enjoyed by the general public. The standard of literature was so low that even in writing these indecent and vile essays, there was no perceived need to employ figurative or witty turns of phrase.

After the Roman Empire was subdued by bestial impulses, its glorious edifice was so utterly reduced to dust that not even its final brick remained.

Christian Europe

Christianity appeared to remedy this kind of moral decline in the Western world. At first, its effects were quite beneficial. The doors of obscenity were closed, nudity was removed from every sphere of life, measures were adopted to abolish prostitution, prostitutes, singers, and dancers were restrained from sinful practices, and the concept of pure and virtuous character was instilled in people. But the Christian religious leaders’ conception of women and sexual relations exceeded the extreme limit. As a result, a war was declared against human nature.

Their primary and fundamental outlook was that woman was the very source of sin. For man, woman was the source of sinful temptation and the gate of Hell. All human suffering and distress had come from woman. To be born as a woman was a shameful matter. She ought to feel ashamed of her beauty, because it was Satan’s deadly weapon. Since she had brought a curse upon the world and its inhabitants, she would have to repent forever.

Tertullian, an early religious leader of the Christian community, commented on women as follows:

She is the gateway for Satan’s arrival, she attracts one toward the forbidden tree, she violates God’s law, and she destroys man.

The foremost Christian ascetic Chrysostom said the following about women:

—an unavoidable sin, an inborn evil impulse, a delightful danger, a domestic anxiety, a destructive lover, an adorned obstacle.

His view was that although sexual relations between men and women might take place through marriage, they were essentially an impure act, and abstention from them was desirable. Such an ascetic conception of moral character was spreading throughout the West under the influence of the passionless philosophy of Neoplatonism. Christian doctrine brought it to an extreme. Virginity and celibacy now became the touchstones of moral character. Married life was regarded as detestable and degraded from the standpoint of morality. People began to consider abstaining from marriage a virtuous act and a sign of elevated character. The way to live a pure life was deemed to be either not marrying at all, or, even after marrying, for men and women to sever their marital relationship. At various religious councils and assemblies, laws were enacted that church officials could not meet with their wives in private; even if they had to see each other, it had to be in an open place in the presence of at least two men. The notion that marital relations were impure gradually became deeply rooted among various kinds of Christians. An example of a prevailing practice may be given here. On any day when a religious ceremony was held in a church, a husband and wife who had lived together the previous night were not allowed to attend it. For through sexual union they had become sinners, and in such a condition they could not be permitted to enter any sacred place. This ascetic attitude made all family relationships, even the relationship between mother and son, more bitter, and the relationships formed through marriage were regarded as impure and sinful.

The two outlooks mentioned above not only excessively degraded the status of women from the moral and social perspectives, but also influenced cultural laws so deeply that, on the one hand, married life became dangerous for men and women, while on the other, women’s status in society became degraded and contemptible in every respect. The characteristics of the various laws that came into force in the Western world according to Christian regulations were as follows:

1. Women were made completely helpless in earning a livelihood and kept subordinate to men. Their rights concerning inheritance were extremely limited, and their rights over property were even more restricted. They had no authority even over money they had earned themselves. The husband had full authority over everything.

2. Permission for talaq and khula was not granted. No matter how great the discord between husband and wife, or how hellish the household became because of their mutual bitterness, religion and law alike compelled the husband and wife to remain bound in an inseparable union. If the situation became extremely desperate, they were permitted to dissolve the marriage on the condition that neither of them could marry elsewhere a second time. This was more stringent than the first principle, because in such circumstances the separated man and woman had no option for the rest of their lives except to practice celibacy or engage in sexual immorality.

3. After the death of the husband, it was completely forbidden and sinful for the wife to remarry, and likewise for the husband after the death of the wife. Christian priests said that this was nothing but enslavement to bestial impulses and indulgence in pleasure. They called it ‘refined adultery.’ A second marriage was considered an offense for church officials. Under the general law of the country, it was not permitted at all in some places. Elsewhere, even where there was no legal prohibition, religiously inclined people did not consider it lawful.

Modern Europe

When, in the eighteenth Christian century, the philosophers and litterateurs of Europe began agitating against society for individual rights and personal liberty, that erroneous civilizational system confronted them—a system formed by the vile combination of Christian moral governance, philosophy of life, and feudalism. It had bound the human soul in unnatural fetters and closed every avenue of progress. The outlook presented by the founders of modern Europe for shattering these prevailing customs and introducing a new order in their place gave birth to the French Revolution. Thereafter, the progress of Western civilization proceeded along a course whose ultimate outcome has reached the present stage.

At the beginning of the new age, whatever was done to raise women from their degradation bore fruit in social life. The former restrictions on marriage and divorce were reduced. Women’s right to earn a livelihood was restored. The moral outlook on which women had been held in contempt and neglect was corrected. The social principles that had caused women to live like slaves were also revised. The path of higher education was opened to women just as it was to men. As a result of these various reforms, the abilities and talents of women, suppressed under the pressure of defective social customs and the moral notions of the Dark Ages, gradually surged forth. They managed households, brought purity into society, and promoted the welfare of the people. The improvement of health, the raising of children, care of the sick, and the advancement of domestic life and science—among the qualities that had emerged in women alongside the new civilization—were the initial results of that movement. But the outlooks from whose womb this movement was born had contained from the very beginning an aspiration to transgress reasonable limits. In accordance with this aspiration, activity had advanced considerably during the nineteenth century, and by the beginning of the twentieth century European society had reached the second extreme limit of immoderation and excess.

The outlooks on which the new Western social system was founded may be expressed under the following three headings:

(a) Establishing equality between women and men,

(b) Women’s economic independence, and

(c) Unrestricted interaction between women and men.

The possible consequences of establishing a social system on these three fundamental bases eventually became manifest.

First, equality was defined in such a way that women and men were not merely equal in moral standing and human rights; women would also perform all the functions that men performed in civilized life, and just as moral restraints had been relaxed for men, they would likewise be relaxed for women. Because of this mistaken notion of equality, women became indifferent and rebellious toward their daily duties. In reality, the continuance of civilization and the human race depends on the fulfilment of these natural daily duties. Economic, political, and partisan tendencies made their personalities self-centered. Competing in elections, taking jobs in offices and factories, competing with men in independent business and industrial enterprises, participating in sports, athletics, exercise, and society’s entertainments, spending time in clubs, theatres, dancing, singing, and similar events, along with many other unnecessary and unspeakable activities, affected their minds and intellects so profoundly that the grave responsibilities of married life, raising children, serving and caring for the family, maintaining the household, and all other necessary duties fell outside their programs. Moreover, they developed a sincere hatred for their natural activities. Here, the Western family order—which is called the cornerstone of civilization—began to spread in a repulsive manner. The domestic life on whose peace and happiness the flowering of human capacity depends in fact began to collapse. In civilized society, the proper mutual relationship between woman and man is the marital bond; this now became weaker than a spider’s web. The path of increasing the lineage began to be blocked through birth control, abortion, and the killing of newborns. The mistaken notion of moral equality brought equality in immorality between women and men. What had been shameful even for a man was no longer shameful for a woman.

Second, women’s economic independence made them reckless toward men. According to former customs, the man earned and the woman maintained the home. This now changed. It was decided that both woman and man would earn, while responsibility for household order would be entrusted to an external third person. Apart from sexual relations, no relationship remained between woman and man that compelled them to remain connected with one another. If, for satisfying the enemy of lust, women and men must necessarily remain bound in an eternal mutual relationship and live a shared life in one home—is there any need for this? If a woman can earn her own livelihood, meet all her needs, and does not depend on another for security and assistance, why should she accept subordination to a man merely for sexual pleasure? Why should she place moral and legal restrictions upon her own shoulders? And why should she bear the grave responsibilities of a family? Especially when the notion of moral equality has made the path to sexual pleasure unobstructed, why would she abandon such an easy, pleasant, and respectable way of fulfilling her desire and adopt the ancient path of sacrifice and responsibility? Fear of sin has disappeared along with religion. Since society would no longer reproach her for obscenity, fear of society also vanished from her heart. Her only fear was an illegitimate child. But there is also birth control to save her from that. Even if conception nevertheless occurs, there is no reason not to abort the pregnancy. If that too fails to fulfil her wishes, the newborn may be secretly killed. But if, despite everything, the unfortunate desire for motherhood—which, unfortunately, has not yet disappeared—prevents her from killing the newborn, what harm is there in that? For so many movements are now being conducted in support of the ‘unwed mother’ and the illegitimate child that anyone who has the courage to regard them with contempt will be accused of being superstitious.

This has uprooted the Western social system. Nowadays, in every country, millions of young women lead lustful lives while embracing perpetual maidenhood. Again, many women fall into sudden traps of love and enter into marriage. But apart from sexual relations, there is no other necessary bond between husband and wife capable of binding them in permanent union. Therefore, there is now no room for stability or firmness in marriage. Since neither husband nor wife cares for the other, they are not prepared even for consideration or compromise concerning their married relationship. Mere sexual affection quickly cools; as a result, trivial differences of opinion, and often mere indifference, cause their separation. For this sole reason, most marriages end in divorce or legal separation. Birth control, abortion, the killing of fetuses and newborns, a declining birth rate, and an increase in illegitimate children are largely the final consequences of the causes mentioned above. Evil conduct, shamelessness, and the spread of venereal diseases also result from those causes.

Third, unrestricted interaction between women and men has excessively increased among women the desire to display beauty, nudity, and obscenity. Sexual attraction naturally exists powerfully between men and women, and unrestricted interaction between the two intensifies that attraction. Moreover, in such a mixed society, an irresistible desire naturally arises in both men and women to adorn themselves attractively for members of the opposite sex. Since, as a result of the change in moral outlook, such conduct is not considered blameworthy, and open expression is instead regarded as praiseworthy as a declaration of love, the display of beauty and elegance gradually crosses every limit. Eventually it reaches the extreme of nudity. This is the present condition of Western civilization. Nowadays, women’s desire to appear magnetic to the opposite sex is so strong that glittering and charming clothes, lipstick, rouge, and other cosmetics, with elaborate adornment, no longer satisfy their wishes. Finally, the unfortunate women cast off their clothes. Meanwhile, men demand still greater nudity. For the blazing flame of lust, instead of being extinguished by naked beauty, flares up more fiercely and demands still greater nudity. Just as a sip of water only increases the thirst of a traveler parched by the desert simoom, so the sexual thirst of these unfortunate people has become an unquenchable thirst. Unsatisfied by limitless sexual craving, these lustful people continually provide one another with the means of sexual gratification by every possible method. Why are there nude pictures, sexually stimulating literature, romantic stories, naked ballroom dancing, and motion pictures filled with sexual passion? All of them are examples of extinguishing that fire—or, in reality, stoking it further—which this erroneous social system keeps close to everyone’s throat and has named ‘art’ to conceal its own weakness.

Now the life-force of the worm-eaten Western nations is nearing exhaustion. In truth, no worm-eaten nation has ever survived. All the physical and mental powers that Allah the Exalted bestowed on human beings for living and progressing have been destroyed by such decay. Indeed, how can those who live oppressed by the torment of lust from every side, whose emotions and feelings must face ever-new provocations and excitements at every moment, and whom an exciting environment keeps under its influence, bring about the security, peace, and cheerfulness of mind indispensable to constructive and creative work? Nude pictures, obscene literature, captivating music, lust-stirring dances, romantic films, enchanting living scenes, and the continual opportunity to encounter the opposite sex on the roads keep their blood heated and excited. Amid such stimulation, where is the calm, cool field for their young descendants in which their mental and moral powers can develop? As soon as they form an association, the demon of bestial impulses devours them. After being seized by the claws of such a demon, where is the possibility of their progress?

Painful Despair in Human Thought

The story of three thousand years of historical rise and fall is connected with a vast region that was once the nurturing ground of two great civilizations, whose civilizational triumphs still resound throughout the world today. Egypt, Babylon, Iran, and other countries have similar histories. In the ancient Indian subcontinent too, for hundreds of years, the curse of transgressing reasonable limits and extreme degradation descended. On the one hand, woman was regarded as a slave; the man became her husband, lord, and worshipped deity, and she had to remain subject to her father in childhood, her husband in youth, and her son in widowhood. She committed self-immolation on her husband’s funeral pyre. She was deprived of authority and inheritance. In marriage, such a cruel law was imposed upon her that, against her will, she was given into the hands of a man and could not free herself from the noose of his authority and subordination until the last moment of her life. Like the Jews and Greeks, she was regarded as the embodiment of sin and moral and spiritual degradation. Her eternal individuality was refused recognition.

On the other hand, whenever compassion was shown toward her, she was turned into a plaything of bestial impulses. She became so closely a bodily companion of man that ultimately she was destroyed along with her people. What do the worship of the phallus and vulva, naked paired idols in temples, religious prostitutes, the love-play of Holi, and half-naked bathing in rivers—all these—recall? After the left-handed movement of ancient India, sin and adultery remained its final consequence. Like Iran, Babylon, Greece, and Rome, they spread through India as an infectious disease after the progressive development of its civilization, plunging the Hindu nation for several centuries into the abyss of disgrace and degradation.

A deep insight into this history reveals how difficult it has proved for human beings to understand equality and justice concerning women, comprehend it, and remain steadfast in it. Equality and justice may mean, on the one hand, giving a woman sufficient opportunity to display her individuality and abilities so that she can participate, with superior efficiency, in advancing human civilization. But on the other hand, such vigilant care must be maintained that she does not become a cause of moral degradation and the destruction of humanity. Moreover, a method must be determined for her assistance and cooperation in men’s work so that their combined activity may benefit civilization. For hundreds of thousands of years the world has been counting the days while awaiting this equality and justice, but it has not yet been achieved. At times it has reached one extreme and rendered one part of humanity inactive. At other times it has reached the opposite extreme, joining both parts of humanity together and plunging them into the abyss of destruction.

Nevertheless, equality and justice are not absent; they exist. But because human beings have evolved for hundreds of thousands of years amid transgression of reasonable limits and extreme emptiness, their judgment has become so distorted that even after seeing it with their own eyes they cannot recognize that this is the object of their eternal desire—the object they have sought for ages. Seeing this eternal ideal, they wrinkle their noses and mock it in delusion. Anyone in whom it is found is ridiculed. The example is like that of a child born in the depths of a coal mine and raised there. There can be no doubt that the coal-filled air and darkened place would seem natural to him. If he were then brought from inside the dark coal mine to the surface, he would initially wrinkle his nose at everything he saw in the sunlit, pure fields of the natural world. But in reality he is a human being. How long would it take him to distinguish the coal roof from the starry sky? How many days would he spend distinguishing polluted air from pure air?

The Muslim of the Modern Age

Only the Muslims were capable of showing the world, confused in the labyrinth of two opposing extremes, the way to the correct path. For only they possessed the correct solution to all the complex problems of social life. But it is a remarkable and heartbreaking irony of the world’s fate that the unfortunate one who held the lamp in this darkness of darkest night became night-blind. Far from guiding others, he himself went astray like a blind man and continued following one misguided person after another.

The collective form of the injunctions of the Shariah for which the term purdah is used as a heading is in fact included among the particularly important components of the Islamic social order. If these injunctions are properly situated according to the standard of this social order, no person possessing sound natural insight can avoid acknowledging that, in social organization, there can be no other means of moderation and the middle path without them. If these regulations can truly be embodied in practical life, then the suffering and grief-stricken world will rapidly hasten, without protest, toward this source of peace and will undoubtedly obtain the great remedy for social disease. But by whom will this work be accomplished? The one who possessed the power to accomplish it has himself been afflicted for a long time. Therefore, before moving forward, it is necessary to examine his illness somewhat.

Historical Background

In the latter part of the eighteenth century and the early part of the nineteenth, the flood of Western nations’ conquests submerged the Muslim countries with tremendous force. At that time the Muslims were half-asleep and half-awake, and before long this storm-flood, beginning in the East, engulfed the entire Muslim world of the West. Before the latter half of the nineteenth century had arrived, most Muslim states had become slaves of Europe, while the remaining countries, though not enslaved, had been defeated and influenced. After this all-destroying upheaval fully took shape, the Muslims’ eyes gradually opened. The national glory created by the progressive Muslims through world conquest and expansion of their dominion was unexpectedly reduced to dust. Thereafter, struck repeatedly by the powerful enemy, they began investigating the causes of their own defeat and the Europeans’ victory like a drunkard freed from intoxication. But their minds had not yet returned to normal. Though the intoxication had passed, their mental balance remained impaired. On one side, an intense sense of humiliation and dishonor pressed them to change such a degraded condition; on the other, a luxurious and labor-averse way of life lasting many centuries sought the easiest and nearest means of changing their circumstances. Moreover, they had become unaccustomed to applying their weakened powers of knowledge, intellect, thought, and judgment. In addition, the terror and panic that unexpectedly arise among a defeated slave nation had also spread among them. As a result of this combination of causes, reform-minded Muslims became involved in various imaginary and practical forms of sin. Most of them could not understand the true causes of their own inferiority and corruption or of Europe’s progress. Again, those who did understand lacked even the small amount of courage, endurance, and fighting spirit needed to cross the difficult road to progress. Weakness and panic existed equally in both groups. In this confused state of mind, their easier path to progress was to reflect the external features of Western civilization in their own lives and become themselves like a mirror within which lovely gardens and charming scenes of spring were reflected, while no real garden or any actual beauty existed.

Mental Slavery

At this extreme stage of the illness, Western dress, social system, literature and art, customs, manners, and ways of life began to be imitated. Even Western imitation became evident in speech. Efforts began to mold and arrange Muslim society according to Western ideals. Rebellion against God, atheism, and materialism were blindly adopted as ‘fashion.’ Blind faith in the explicit or implicit imported ideas and doctrines of the West, and presenting them as topics of discussion at gatherings, were regarded as signs of refined thought. Drinking, gambling, lotteries, horse racing, theatre, dancing and singing, and other products of Western culture were also adopted. Every outlook and method of conduct relating to decency, morality, social interaction, earning a livelihood, politics, law, and even religious beliefs and ceremonies was accepted without protest or investigation, as though it had descended from heaven as revelation—‘We hear and we accept.’ Just as the enemies of Islam in the past had expressed hatred and opposition toward historical events, the injunctions of Islamic Shariah, and the accounts of the Qur’an and Hadith, the Muslims of this age too began to feel ashamed of them and became eager to remove this alleged stigma.

The white masters of the West harshly criticized Islamic jihad. These Muslims too, bowing obsequiously at their masters’ feet, said, ‘Sir, where are we and where is jihad!’ They criticized slavery. The Muslims replied, ‘Why, this is entirely forbidden in Islam.’ When they criticized polygamy, they immediately abrogated a verse or injunction of the Qur’an. They said, ‘Complete equality between women and men is desirable.’ The Muslims replied, ‘That is precisely the fundamental principle of our religion.’ When they criticized marriage and divorce, the Muslims became eager to reform them. They said, ‘Islam is an enemy of the arts.’ The Muslims replied, ‘Sir! Islam has always patronized dancing, singing, painting, and sculpture.’

An Introduction to the Question of Purdah

This was the most reprehensible and shameful period in the national history of the Muslims, for it was during this period that controversy over the purdah system began. If the subject of debate had been the limits Islam had set for women’s freedom, the answer would not have been difficult at all. For the only disagreement seen in this matter is whether a woman may leave her face and hands uncovered; this is not an important difference of opinion. But the real matter is different here. This question arose among Muslims because Europe looked upon the ‘harem,’ purdah, and women’s outer covering with contempt. In their literature, Europeans depicted them in hateful and mocking images and gave women’s ‘seclusion’ (purdah) a prominent place in their list of Islam’s faults. When Europe rejected purdah as contemptible, how could Muslims, who were its very mental slaves, naturally fail to feel ashamed of it? They adopted the same approach here as they had regarding jihad, slavery, polygamy, and similar matters. They began turning the pages of the Qur’an, Hadith, and the deeply researched works of the jurist Imams. Their purpose was to see whether they could find within them any means of removing that ugly stigma and blemish. They learned that some Imams had permitted the hands and face to remain uncovered. They also learned that a woman could leave her home for necessary purposes. Furthermore, they learned that a woman could give soldiers water on the battlefield and care for the wounded. She could go to the mosque for prayer and elsewhere to receive and impart education. That was enough for them. They then announced, ‘Islam has granted women complete freedom. Purdah is merely an ancient custom of the blind, barbaric age. Narrow-minded and superstitious Muslims introduced it long after the early period of Islam (the Rightly Guided Caliphate). There is no injunction concerning purdah in the Qur’an and Hadith. They merely contain moral instruction concerning modesty and honor. No principle has been established by which women’s freedom of movement can be restricted.’

The Fundamental Point

It is a natural weakness of human beings that when, in practical life, they adopt a course, they are generally guided by emotion in choosing it rather than taking the help of reason and sound judgment with a calm and steady mind. Afterwards, they use arguments and proofs to establish as flawless the decision produced by that emotion. The same situation arose concerning purdah. The controversy that developed on this subject did not arise from any rational or Shariah-related necessity. The affection, feeling, and emotionalism produced by the influence of the victorious nation’s outwardly glittering culture, and by being overwhelmed by that nation’s intense propaganda against Islamic civilization, were the sole causes of the beginning of the controversy concerning purdah.

When our reform-minded educated society observed, with eyes widened in amazement, the beauty, luxurious adornment, unrestricted movement here and there, and activities in their own society of European women, an inevitable desire arose in their minds: that their own women should also be able to live in that manner, and that their own civilization should attain parity with European culture. When new ideas of women’s freedom, female education, and equality between men and women were showered upon them like incessant rain in the glittering printed letters of powerful, authoritative language, they became attracted to them. Under the powerful influence of this literature, their ability to distinguish between good and evil disappeared. The conviction became firmly rooted in their minds that, in order to become truly progressive and free from the stigma of antiquity and decay, they must blindly believe in those ideas and viewpoints, promote them through writing and speeches, and courageously implement them in practical life. When they saw veiled women clad in white garments, covered like moving tents or in the shroud-like dress of funeral biers, these self-deceived wretches were overcome with shame and collapsed in humiliation. How long could this be tolerated? At last, whether compelled or spellbound, they prepared to remove this stain of disgrace.

The movement for women’s freedom that raised its head among Muslims in the latter part of the nineteenth century was rooted in the emotions, sentiments, and emotionalism mentioned above. In some people, these emotions and sentiments were concealed behind subtle inner perceptions. They themselves were unaware of where this movement was taking them. They were self-deceived. Others, on the contrary, were aware of these emotions and sentiments, but hesitated to reveal their true feelings before others. Although they were not self-deceived, they tried to deceive the outside world by creating a fog of confusion. In any case, both groups were shooting arrows toward the same target: concealing the fundamental inspiration of their movement and attempting to conduct, instead of an emotion-driven movement, a rational one. Women’s health, their advancement in knowledge and practical matters, preservation of their natural and inborn rights, complete freedom to earn a livelihood, deliverance from men’s oppression and arbitrariness, the dependence of civilizational progress upon the advancement of women as half of the nation, and other techniques directly imported from Europe were employed in directing this movement in such a way as to deceive the Muslim public. A further strategy was adopted so that the hidden secret—that the movement’s principal aim was to encourage Muslim women to adopt European women’s conduct and the European social system—would not be disclosed to the Muslim public.

A Great Deception

The most serious deception in this matter was the attempt to prove, by adducing arguments from the Qur’an and Hadith, that this movement was in accordance with Islam. Yet there is an immeasurable difference between the purposes and fundamental principles of the Islamic and Western civilizations and social systems. The inherent purpose of Islamic civilization is to regulate human sexual energy through moral discipline in such a way that, instead of being exhausted under the sway of debauchery and lust, it may be devoted to the formation of a pure, sacred, and virtuous civilization. The purpose of Western civilization and culture, on the other hand, is to accelerate material progress by employing women and men equally in life’s activities and responsibilities. Alongside this, it uses sexual stimulation in such activities as transform the bitterness of the struggle for life into sweet enjoyment. This difference in purpose necessarily demands a fundamental difference between Islam and Western culture in their ways of living. Islam requires a social system in which men’s and women’s spheres of activity are separate. Their free intermingling has been prohibited, and every means and element opposed to this discipline and regulation has been eradicated. Western culture, by contrast, aims and claims to bring both sexes into the same sphere of life and to remove every obstacle to their unrestrained, uncontrolled interaction and joint activity. Moreover, it grants them unlimited opportunities to enjoy each other’s beauty and sexual pleasure.

Now any conscientious person can judge how greatly those who simultaneously wish to follow Western culture and present the rules of the Islamic social system as evidence in their favor are deceiving themselves and others. In the Islamic social system, the final boundary of women’s freedom has been defined so that a woman may leave her hands and face uncovered and, when necessary, may also go out of the home. But these followers of the West have taken the very boundary defined by Islam as the first step on their journey. Where Islam’s journey ends, they begin, and they arrive at a point where shame, modesty, and propriety are cast aside. It is not merely the hands and face; rather, the bare head adorned with hair and a neat hairline, the shoulders, sleeves, braids, and half-exposed raised bosom are displayed before the eyes of spectators. Whatever remains of the graceful beauty of the body is covered with such fine fabric that through it those parts become visible by which men’s thirst for lust can be satisfied. Then wives, daughters, and sisters dressed and adorned in this manner are brought not before mahram men—those whom Islamic law prohibits them from marrying—but before friends, and are given the freedom to laugh, joke, converse, and play with unrelated men in a manner that no Muslim woman could enjoy even with her half-brother. The freedom to leave home, granted only when necessary and with complete Sharia-compliant covering, is instead used for traveling on public roads in attractive saris, half-naked blouses, and immodest glances; roaming in pleasure gardens; recreation in clubs and hotels; and watching films. The freedom Islam has granted women, under special conditions, to engage in activities other than household work is presented as an argument that Muslim women too should, like European women, abandon domestic life and family responsibilities, roam everywhere in political and economic pursuits, and labor shoulder to shoulder with men in the workplace.

The condition of the Indian subcontinent has reached roughly this stage. The mentally enslaved people of Egypt, Turkey, and Iran, despite having gained political independence, have advanced ten steps beyond this. The Muslim women of these countries wear clothing resembling that of European women. Through this they seek to erase the distinction between the genuine and the imitation. Turkey has advanced so far in this regard that photographs show Turkish women in bathing attire on the seashore. Three-quarters of the bodies of women wearing such clothing remain uncovered. The remainder is covered with fabric so fine that the body’s protruding and undeveloped parts stand out and become pronounced beneath the corresponding cloth.

Can any basis for supporting such a way of life be found anywhere in the Qur’an and Hadith? If anyone wishes to follow this path, they should openly declare that they are manifestly opposed to Islam and Islamic law. The Qur’an has declared every aspect of the fundamental principles, aims, and methods of the social system and way of life in question to be prohibited; yet it is not merely being adopted openly and knowingly—indeed, the first step along this path is being taken in the very name of the Qur’an. The purpose is to mislead and deceive the world, and then to take the subsequent steps along this path in the name of the Qur’an. What a great hypocrisy, baseness, and deceit!

The Subject of Our Present Discussion

The condition of the Muslims of the modern age has been described above. Two aspects of the discussion now lie before us. This book must concentrate on both of them.

First, the Islamic social system must be explained before all humanity, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, and it must also be explained why the injunctions of purdah have been prescribed within this system.

Second, the injunctions of the Qur’an and Hadith on one side, and the viewpoints of Western culture and society and their consequences on the other, must be presented comparatively before the Muslims of this modern age, so that their double-dealing way of acting may end and they may adopt either of the two paths. If they wish to live as true Muslims, they must follow the Islamic ordinances in full; otherwise, abandoning their association with Islam, they must adopt the shameful and dreadful outcome toward which the Western social system is attracting them.

Theoretical Discussion

The reasons for opposing purdah are not merely negative. In reality, the opposition rests upon a definite positive foundation. The basis of the opposing party’s objection is not simply that people regard women’s remaining confined within the home and leaving it with their bodies covered as unjust restriction, and therefore demand that purdah be abolished. Rather, the real matter is that they have before them a distinct picture of women’s life. They hold a settled, personal doctrine concerning interaction between women and men. They want women to do something else instead of living in this manner. They object to purdah because, while confined within the home and veiled, a woman cannot manifest that desired picture of life. Nor can she do this “something else.”

We must now examine what this “something else” is that women are expected to do. What doctrine and principles lie behind it, how just and reasonable is it, and what consequences has it produced in practice? It is clear that if we accept their doctrine and principles outright, then purdah and the social system of which purdah is an inseparable part will in fact be proved wholly erroneous. But why should we accept their doctrine without verification and rational examination? Are we to accept something without examination merely because it is new and has become widespread among the general public?

The Concept of Freedom in the Eighteenth Century

It has already been stated that the philosophers, natural scientists, and writers who attempted social reform in the eighteenth century actually confronted a civilizational system in which many complexities existed and in which there was not the slightest trace of grace. It was filled with irrational customary rituals and inconsistencies contrary to knowledge and human nature. Centuries of continuous decline had blocked its path of progress. On one side, an intellectual renaissance surged among the middle-class bourgeoisie, inspiring them to transcend the limits of individual effort; on the other, the ruling and religious leaders were busy tightening the bonds of prevailing myths and legends. From the Church to the military and courts, from the royal palace to agriculture and economic exchange, every division of life and every institution of society operated in such a way that a few decaying classes seized, as their previously established right, the fruits of all the labor and ability of the newly awakened groups associated with the bourgeoisie. In such circumstances, every effort at reform and correction began to fail before the selfishness and ignorance of the ruling party. For all these reasons, a blind inspiration toward revolution was awakening daily among the reformers and agents of change. At last, the wildfire of rebellion broke out against the entire social system of the time and every one of its divisions and parts. Thereafter, an extreme doctrine of individual freedom gained popular acceptance, whose purpose was to grant the individual complete freedom and unalloyed liberation against society. The doctrine began to spread that, just as an individual must be granted the right to perform whatever desired act he wished with complete freedom, he must likewise have the freedom to refrain from any act he did not desire. Society would have no right whatsoever to deprive anyone of personal freedom. The government’s sole duty would be to preserve individuals’ freedom of action. Public institutions would merely assist individuals in achieving their aims.

The exaggerated extreme doctrine of freedom that arose amid natural indignation and anger against a cruel social system contained the seeds of a greater evil and destruction. Even those who first advanced this doctrine were not fully aware of its inevitable consequences. If the consequences of such unrestrained freedom and arbitrariness had become evident during their lifetimes, they too would probably have been terrified. They had sought to introduce this doctrine merely as a weapon for eradicating the unreasonable excesses and irrational restraints existing in society in their time. But ultimately it took root in the minds of the inhabitants of the West and began to develop progressively.

It was from this concept of individual freedom that the present democratic social system, democratic cultural system, and moral licentiousness were born. For nearly a century and a half, this doctrine unleashed a flood of wrongdoing and oppression across Europe and America, with the result that humanity was compelled to rebel against it. For this social system granted arbitrary freedom without limit against the interests of the people, trampled the public interest, and destroyed society. Gradually, socialism and fascism emerged through this rebellion. Yet at the very root of the newly born isms, a seed of wrongdoing and evil remained embedded. In reality, one extreme doctrine was raised to resolve another extreme doctrine. The defect of the eighteenth-century movement for individual freedom is that it sacrificed the collective for the sake of the individual.

On the other hand, the defect of the present twentieth-century democratic doctrine is that it sacrificed the individual at the altar of the collective. A well-balanced doctrine for the good of humanity still exists today, just as it did in the eighteenth century.

The Changes of the Nineteenth Century

The French Revolution was nurtured in the lap of this freedom. Through this revolution, many earlier moral doctrines and civilizational and religious customs were abolished. When progress appeared as a result of these abolitions, revolutionary-minded people began to say that the worn-out principles of conduct followed from time immemorial had become obstacles to progress. No step forward was possible without changing them. After the erroneous fundamental principles of Christian morality had been abolished, the weapons of their criticism were rapidly turned against the foundational principles of human morality. Why should modesty and chastity be considered a danger? Why should the burden of fear of Allah be imposed upon youth? If someone fell in love with another without marriage, where was the fault in that? After marriage, did a person become so cruel that he should then be deprived of the right to offer love elsewhere? Questions of this kind resounded throughout the new revolutionary society, particularly being asked in a bold voice through novelistic writings. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, George Sand was the leader of this group. She herself shattered the moral principles upon which human civilization, especially a woman’s chastity and honor, depend. Though married to one man, she violated the marriage bond and established an illicit relationship with another. Eventually, her relationship with her husband was severed. Then began a succession of lovers, and she was unable to live with any one of them for more than two years. Her biography records six men with whom she openly carried on love affairs. One of her lovers made the following comment in her praise:

“George Sand first catches a butterfly and confines it in a flower cage—this is the period of her declaration of love. Then, when she pierces it with the tip of her proboscis, it flutters, and she derives the utmost delight from this. Then one day her love wanes. Then she plucks off its wings and places it among those insects selected as the principal characters for her novels.”

The French poet Alfred Musset was also one of her lovers. In the end, he was so deeply hurt by her betrayal that, at the time of his death, he left instructions that George Sand should not be allowed to attend his funeral. Such was that woman’s personal moral character. For thirty years, through her literature, her character influenced French youth. In her novel Lelia, she writes, on Lelia’s behalf, to Stenio:

“From the extent to which I have had the opportunity to see the world, I feel how mistaken our young men and women are in their ideas about love. The notion that love must be for only one person, or that one must win that person’s heart—and that forever—is entirely erroneous. Every other possibility must undoubtedly be given a place in the mind. I am prepared to concede that some people have the right to demonstrate fidelity in married life. But most people feel a different need and also possess the capacity to attain it. For this, it is necessary that men and women give each other complete freedom, show mutual generosity, and eradicate from their hearts everything that gives rise to jealousy and competition in love. Every love is valid, whether passionate or calm, sensual or platonic, steadfast or changeable, self-destructive or happiness-giving—”

In another novel of hers, entitled Jacques, she described a husband whom she presented to society as an ideal husband. The wife of Jacques, the novel’s principal character, embraces another man in secret, yet the broad-minded husband raises no objection. The husband explains the reason by saying:

“What right have I to trample underfoot a flower that wishes to give its fragrance to someone other than me?”

Elsewhere, the authoress makes the following comment in Jacques’s words:

“I have not changed my opinion, nor have I made any compromise with society. In my view, among all social institutions, marriage is the most extremely beastly institution. I believe that if human beings wish to develop in humanity and intellect, they will surely abolish this institution. In its place they will choose a pure human arrangement. Then human beings will advance beyond these men and women and will not create any impediment to one another’s freedom. At present, men are so selfish and women so timid that they demand no more elevated and dignified customs in place of the customs currently prevailing. Yes, those who lack conscience and virtue must, of course, remain bound in severe chains.”

All these doctrines and ideas were being propagated in 1833 and around that time. George Sand had gone only that far. She did not dare carry her doctrine and ideas to their inevitable final consequences. Nevertheless, some trace of free thinking, progressivism, and the darkness of ancient conventional morality still remained in her mind. Thirty-five years later, a second force of dramatists, writers, moralist philosophers, and others appeared in France. Alexandre Dumas and Alfred Naquet were among their leaders. They devoted all their strength to propagating the doctrine that human beings have an inborn right to freedom and the pleasures of life. Imposing moral rules and social bonds upon this right was a special form of society’s oppression of the individual. Previously, the demand for freedom of action for the individual had been made only in the name of love. To their successors, such a merely emotional basis seemed weak. They therefore tried to establish personal arrogance, licentiousness, and unrestrained freedom upon the firm foundations of reason, philosophy, and science. Their purpose was that, whatever young men and women might do, they should be able to do it with complete satisfaction of mind and conscience, and that society, instead of being displeased by the recklessness of their youth, should regard it as morally valid and proper.

In the latter part of the nineteenth century, writers such as Paul Adam, Henry Bataille, and Pierre Louÿs devoted all their strength through literature to emboldening young men and women in licentiousness. As a result, even the feeling of hesitation and restraint that the concept of ancient morality had kept alive within human nature was extinguished. In fact, in La Morale de l’Amour, Paul Adam reproached young men and women for the foolishness of unnecessarily assuring their lovers, when they fell in love, that they would give their lives for them, love them sincerely, remain theirs forever, and so on. Paul Adam says:

“All this is being said because the desire for bodily intercourse—which exists by nature in every human being and contains no sin—is regarded as impure according to the old doctrine. For this reason, people try unnecessarily to conceal it beneath a covering of lies. The grave weakness of the nation is that its lovers hesitate to say plainly that the purpose of their meetings is simply to satisfy bodily desire and attain enjoyment and the utmost pleasure.”

After this, he advised young men and women as follows:

“Be amiable and rational people. Do not make the companion of your impulses and enjoyment your god. (Let no one misunderstand the meaning of this. It refers to those men and women who may use one another for the purpose of satisfying their own impulses.) A person who builds a temple of love and then sits as the worshipper of a single idol is truly foolish. At every moment of pleasure, he should choose a new guest.”

Pierre Louÿs went several steps further than the others and began to declare openly that moral restraints in fact hinder the unfolding of human talent and intellectual power. Unless people are given the opportunity for bodily pleasure with complete freedom to break these bonds, no development of reason or material and spiritual progress is possible. In his book Aphrodite, he tried firmly to prove that Babylon, Alexandria, Athens, Rome, Venice, and other centers of culture and civilization reached their highest development precisely when depravity, licentiousness, and enslavement to impulse prevailed there to the fullest extent. But as soon as moral and legal restraints were imposed upon human desires, the human soul too, along with its impulses and desires, became bound within those restraints.

In France at that time, Pierre Louÿs was a renowned writer and essayist with his own distinctive method. He was also the director of a well-established literary institution. Under him, a group of storytellers, dramatists, moralists, and others devoted themselves to propagating his doctrines and viewpoints. With all the power of his pen, he widely promoted nudity and unrestricted interaction between women and men. In his book Aphrodite, he enthusiastically praised a certain period of Greece:

When naked humanity, the complete embodiment of inconceivable beauty, about whom the followers of religion had given the assurance that God had created him in His own image, presented her bodily form before twenty thousand spectators in the guise of a holy prostitute, with various finery and graceful poses, then declaring one’s love for her with complete lustfulness was that pure, sacred, heavenly love by which we were all created—

No act was considered sinful, shameful, or impure.

In short, stripping away every poetic covering, it said plainly:

Through vigorous moral education, we must eradicate this reprehensible notion that a woman’s becoming a mother is in no circumstances shameful, wrongful, or dishonourable.

The Progress of the Twentieth Century

In the nineteenth century, thought and doctrine had advanced only this far. At the beginning of the twentieth century, a new hawk appeared in the sky and tried to fly higher than its predecessors. In 1908, a play entitled Lelys by Peorr Wolff and Caston Leronx was published. In this play, two girls argue with their father before their young brother that they have the right to offer love freely, according to their own wishes. They also say how agonising a young woman’s life can be without love. An old father rebukes his daughter for having an illicit love affair with a young man. In reply, the daughter says:

How shall I make you understand? No one has the right to tell a girl that she should grow old unmarried without experiencing love—whether she is his sister or his daughter. You have been unable to understand this at all.

The First World War did not merely increase this movement for freedom; it brought it to an extreme. The birth-control movement had exerted a particularly strong influence on France. For forty consecutive years, France’s birth rate had been declining. Of its twenty-seven departments, only twenty had birth rates higher than their death rates. In some regions of the country, the death rate for every one hundred births ranged from 130 to 160. When the great war, which would decide the life or death of the French nation, began, thoughtful people in the country realised that the number of young men of military age in the nation’s cradle was extremely small. The national life might perhaps be secured by sacrificing this small number of young men, but it would be difficult to survive the enemy’s next attack. This realisation aroused an intense desire throughout France to increase the birth rate. From all sides, authors, journalists, speakers, scholars, and politicians began proclaiming in unison: “Bear children. Do not fear the customary bonds of marriage. Those unmarried women and widows who are prepared to conceive children in their wombs for the welfare of the motherland will not be objects of society’s condemnation; rather, they will deserve honour.”

At this time, the gentlemen who desired freedom naturally found a golden opportunity. Taking advantage of it, they began propagating all the remaining doctrines and ideas in the devil’s bag.

A prominent author of that time, the editor of Lo-Lyon Republican, made the following comment in an article entitled ‘Why Is Forced Adultery a Crime?’:

When a destitute poor person, tormented by hunger, becomes involved in theft and plunder, it is said, ‘Provide him with food and clothing, and the theft and plunder will stop by themselves.’ But, strangely, the help and sympathy extended to satisfy one natural need of the body are not extended to satisfy a second natural and important need—that is, to relieve sexual hunger. Just as the intense pangs of hunger lead a person to theft, so forced adultery and, in most cases, even murder are likewise the consequences of an equally intense sexual hunger—which is no less natural than hunger and thirst. A healthy, vigorous young man cannot forcibly restrain his sexual desire, just as he cannot restrain his hunger with the promise that he will obtain food next week. Everything is abundant in our cities. But just as the lack of food for a destitute person is agonising, so is the lack of sexual gratification. Just as food is distributed free of charge to the hungry, it is our duty to make some provision for those tormented by this second kind of hunger.

It must be remembered that this was not a humorous article. Just as it was written with the utmost seriousness and responsibility, it was also circulated throughout France with the utmost seriousness.

At this time, the Paris Faculty of Medicine awarded an experienced doctor a doctorate for one of his articles. The article was also published in the official journal. In one place, it contained the following comment:

Today we say without hesitation that I was sent to the mountaintop to give up spitting blood. We believe that a day will come when we shall be able to say, without artificial pride or shame, ‘I had syphilis at the age of twenty.’ These diseases are simply the price of the pleasures of life. A person who lives in such a way that no disease ever originates through him has an incomplete life. Out of cowardice, a gentle disposition, or religious delusion, he refrains from fulfilling his natural bodily needs, although this is merely one insignificant need among his natural needs.

Neo-Malthusian Literature

Before proceeding further, I consider it necessary to take another look at the doctrines and ideas discussed concerning the birth-control or contraceptive movement. When the great English economist Malthus proposed birth control to regulate the growing population in the latter part of the eighteenth century, he never imagined even in his dreams that his advice would, a century later, assist in propagating adultery and obscenity. Malthus advised self-restraint, marriage at a more advanced age, and the like to halt population growth. But when the New Malthusian Movement began in the latter part of the nineteenth century, its fundamental principle was to gratify sexual desire freely and, as its natural consequence, to prevent the birth of children by scientific means. As a result, even the last remaining obstacle to illicit sexual relations was removed, and the path of sin became unobstructed. For now a woman could freely offer her body to another man. Thereafter, no fear remained concerning the birth of a child or the responsibility of raising it. There is no room here to describe the dreadful consequences of all this; however, I shall give a few examples of the doctrines propagated in birth-control literature.

A brief account of the arguments and proofs by which a Neo-Malthusian preface has been written in this literature is as follows:

Every human being is naturally confronted with three great and powerful needs: first, food; second, rest; and third, the gratification of sexual desire. Nature has stored these three things in human beings with full force. It has also poured special pleasure into satisfying these needs. Therefore, people naturally desire to fulfil them. Reason and argument compel people to rush toward this with arrow-like speed. In the first two matters, their mode of action is the same. But, strangely, in the third matter their mode of action is different. Social moral regulations have imposed upon them the obligation that sexual desire may not be fulfilled without marriage. Within the bounds of marriage, fidelity and chastity-respect have been made compulsory for women and men. Moreover, it has been stipulated that the birth of children must not be prevented. Rules of this kind are entirely erroneous and indicative of stupidity. They are contrary to knowledge and nature. They are also morally wrong and portend terrible consequences for humanity.

Consider also the palace of doctrines built upon such a foundation. Babel, the leader of the German Social Democratic Party, writes plainly:

• Women and men are merely animals. Does the question of marriage—of permanent marriage—ever arise among animal pairs?

Dr. Drysdale says:

Among all our desires, love too is a changeable thing. To prescribe a single method for it means correcting the laws of nature. Young men and women possess, in a distinctive way, a desire for this variety. According to nature’s vast and equitable arrangement, our wish is that their experiences in this matter should be diverse. Free relationships are an expression of excellent character because they more closely resemble the laws of nature. Moreover, they arise directly from sentiment, emotion, and selfless love. The inspiration and desire by which such relationships are created possess great moral value. How could such happiness be possible through the commercial exchange that in reality turns marriage into a profession?

Let the reader observe how the viewpoint is changing and how an opposite ideology is gradually being adopted. At first, the effort was to regard adultery as innocent from the standpoint of morality and to place marriage and adultery on the same level. But now, advancing further, marriage itself is being regarded as blameworthy, while adultery is being granted a superior status.

The aforementioned doctor says elsewhere:

It is necessary to adopt arrangements by which love outside marriage may be regarded as honourable. It is gratifying that, as the path of divorce has been loosened, the path of marriage is also becoming closed. For marriage is now a contract between two persons for living together, and either party may terminate this contract whenever they wish. This is the only sound method of sexual intercourse.

The famous Neo-Malthusian leader of France, Paul Robin, writes:

In the past twenty-five years, we have achieved such success that we have brought the illegitimate child almost to the level of the legitimate child. Now all that remains is to arrange matters so that only bastards, or illegitimate children, can be born. For then there will be no question of competition.

The famous English philosopher Mr. Mill states firmly in his book On Liberty that a person who cannot demonstrate sufficient means of support for living shall, with the aid of law, be prevented from marrying. But when the question of abolishing prostitution arose in England, this same learned philosopher vehemently opposed it. His argument was that this would interfere with individual freedom and insult the workers, because it would amount to treating them like children.

Consider this: individual freedom must be honoured so that adultery may be committed under its protection. But if some fool wishes to marry in the name of individual freedom, he shall have no right to have that freedom protected. Interference by law in his freedom is not merely acceptable; rather, the conscience of the freedom-loving philosopher considers it necessary. Here the revolution in moral viewpoint is reaching its extreme limit. What was blameworthy has now become innocent, and what was innocent has now become blameworthy.

Consequences

Literature advances at the front, with public opinion following behind. Eventually, social character, norms, and the laws of the state surrender to it. Where, for a continuous period of one hundred and fifty years, philosophy, history, morality, science, novels, drama, the arts, and other means capable of producing an intellectual revolution collectively implant the same kind of viewpoint and ideas in people’s minds, it is extremely unlikely that society will remain uninfluenced by such ideas. Furthermore, where the government and all social institutions are founded on democratic principles, it is impossible that the law will not change along with changes in public opinion.

The Industrial Revolution and Its Reaction

Meanwhile, other civilisational elements had also conveniently become suited to the times. It was during this period that the Industrial Revolution took place. The changes it brought about in economic life and the effects that became evident in cultural life were directing the course of events in the very direction in which revolutionary literature wished to direct it. The possibility of mechanical invention and mass production gave extraordinary strength to the concept of individual freedom upon which the capitalist system had been founded. The wealthy class established large industrial and commercial enterprises. New centres of industry and commerce became huge cities. Millions of men and women were drawn from rural areas into the cities. The cost of earning a livelihood became exorbitant. Housing, food, clothing, and the daily necessities of life became extremely expensive. Partly because of cultural advancement and partly through the efforts of capitalists, countless luxury goods found a place among life’s necessities. But although the capitalists had created various comforts, pleasures, and luxuries in daily life, wealth was not distributed under the capitalist system to the extent that everyone could enjoy the means of obtaining them equally. After the capitalists had drawn the masses from rural areas into the cities, it would have been easy to provide them with the essential necessities of life—housing, food, clothing, and so on. The result was that a wife became a burden on her husband and children on their father. Far from bearing the burdens of relatives and kinsmen, it became extremely difficult for people even to support themselves. Economic circumstances compelled every person to earn. Women of every class—unmarried, married, widowed, and others—had to leave their homes to earn a livelihood. Then, when opportunities for women and men to mix together increased and their inevitable consequences became apparent, the idea of freedom and the new philosophy of character consoled fathers and daughters, brothers and sisters, husbands and wives, saying: ‘Do not be anxious; what is happening is very good! This is not decline; in reality, this is progress and emancipation. The bottomless abyss into which the capitalists are throwing you is not a hell-pit; it is heaven—heaven itself.’

Capitalist Self-Interest

The matter did not end there. The capitalist system, founded upon a particular conception of individual freedom, granted the individual an unconditional and absolute right to acquire wealth by every possible means. However wealth might be acquired, even if the enrichment of one person resulted in the destruction of any number of others, the new philosophy of character regarded it as legitimate and sacred. Thus the entire cultural system was established so as to support the individual in every way against the collective. Conversely, no means remained for protecting the collective’s rights against individual self-interest. Every path to destroying society was opened to self-seeking individuals. They began adopting ever-new methods of exploiting every human weakness for their own ends. One person appeared and, to fill his own pocket, induced another to engage in the evil of drinking. No one came forward to protect society from this plague-bearing rat. Another appeared and spread the web of interest. There was no one to save people from the grasp of this blood-sucking leech. Moreover, all the laws protected the interest of this bloodsucker, so that no one could safely preserve even a drop of blood from its grasp. A third person appeared and invented a strange form of gambling. Its spread became so extensive that no branch of industry or commerce remained free from gambling’s influence. No one was there to protect people’s economic life from this consuming fire. In an age when it was possible to fuel people’s most dangerous weakness, sexual madness, and thereby achieve immense personal gain, it was impossible that self-blinded individuals would fail to notice such human weakness in that unholy age of personal arrogance, rebellion, and hostility. In fact, sexual licentiousness was exploited to the fullest. All activities in theatres, dance halls, and film-production centres revolved around beautiful women. Women’s participation in these activities was made indispensable. Women were presented before the public in increasingly nude and sexually stimulating forms. In this way people’s sexual thirst was increased and their money was plundered. Some people began hiring out women and, by developing prostitution, turned it into a well-organised international business. Others invented ever-new instruments of beauty and luxury, using them to intensify women’s innate desire to display their beauty and to enhance their appearance; self-seeking businessmen earned immense sums from this. Some also invented new sexually stimulating clothing and fashions of nudity, induced beautiful women to wear them and move about in society, and crowds of modern young men began gathering around them with thirsty eyes and minds. Groups of young women became attracted to the newly invented, nakedly showy fashions, and the market for new clothing became lively. Some, seizing the opportunity, began circulating nude pictures and obscene literature, thereby infecting the public with leprosy and earning a handsome few pennies. Gradually matters reached such a point that no branch of trade or commerce remained free from the means of sexual madness. Look at the advertisements of any business establishment and you will find that, without a nude or semi-nude image of a woman, an advertisement is considered entirely worthless. In hotels, restaurants, shop showrooms, exhibition rooms, and the like, female figures were placed in such a way that men would be attracted toward them. In such circumstances, the only way to protect the interests of the helpless, unfortunate public was for them to repel all these attacks through their moral strength and protect themselves from sexual madness. But the capitalist system was founded on such a weak basis that its attacks could not be resisted. It possessed a complete philosophy of life and a powerful satanic force—namely, literature—which immediately defeated and overcame the moral viewpoint. The murderer’s skill lies in preparing the sacrificial animal for slaughter willingly and with a contented heart.

The Democratic Political System

The danger did not end there. Moreover, this concept of freedom gave birth to the Western democratic system of government, which became a powerful weapon for bringing this kind of moral revolution to complete fulfilment.

The fundamental principle of the new democracy was that people would govern themselves and formulate their own constitution and laws. They would make whatever laws they wished and repeal or change any law as they pleased. Above them there was no higher power or authority free from human weakness whose guidance they could humbly follow to save themselves from the wrong path. They had no immutable fundamental law beyond the limits of human power and eternal in nature. They had no firm, unchanging touchstone, unaffected by the impulses of human vice, by which they could distinguish truth from falsehood. Thus the new viewpoint of democracy made people completely autonomous and irresponsible. They became their own rulers and accepted public opinion as the source of every law.

It is evident that where all laws in social life are subject to public opinion, and where the governing authorities become servants of this new democratic god, law and state power cannot protect society from moral disorder; rather, in the end they become instruments of its destruction. Laws continue to change along with changes in public opinion. As the viewpoint of the public changes, so the principles and restraints of the law will be shaped accordingly. The direction in which the majority of votes lies becomes the touchstone for determining truth and welfare. If a proposal, however evil and irrational, can obtain the support of fifty-one percent, there will be no obstacle to turning it into law. A particularly horrible and detestable example of this is found in Germany’s pre-Nazi era. A German philosopher named Dr. Magnus Herschfield was president of the World League of Sexual Reform. For six years he conducted vigorous propaganda in support of the abominable practice of the people of Lot. Finally, the democratic god agreed to declare this illicit act ‘halal,’ or lawful, and the German Parliament, by an overwhelming majority, decided that if the act were performed with the consent of both parties, it would no longer be illegal. It was determined that if the person upon whom the act was performed were a minor, his guardian would cast the vote on his behalf.

In serving this democratic god, the law appears somewhat slow; its commands are indeed obeyed, but with indolence and indifference. The shortcomings that remain in this incomplete servitude are made up by all parts of the state administration together. Those who operate these democratic systems of government accept, even before making laws, the influence of the surrounding literature, moral philosophy, and the sentiments of the public. Every moral licence that becomes widespread among the people is, through the favour of those conducting government, recognised and accepted at every official level. Regarding matters that remain prohibited, the police and courts refrain from enforcing the law. These prohibited acts too come to be regarded as lawful. Take abortion as an example. It is still prohibited under Western law. Yet there is no country where it is not being practised openly and extensively. In England, approximately ninety thousand abortions are performed every year. Among married women, as many as twenty-five percent either perform abortions themselves or obtain the help of a specialist for this purpose. In some places, proper abortion clubs have been established. Ladies of high social standing pay weekly fees there and, when necessary, receive the services of abortion specialists. There are many such nursing homes in London where abortion patients are treated. Professor Judd recorded a detailed account of this subject in his book Guide to Modern Weekedness, which was published several years ago. Despite all this, abortion is still recorded as a criminal offence in the English law books.

Fundamental Principles and Evidence

I now wish to describe in detail how the combined operation of three elements—the modern moral outlook, the capitalist cultural system, and democratic political rule—is influencing and bringing to light the social character and the sexual relations between women and men. Since I have so far referred mainly to France—the country from which this movement began—I shall first present France as evidence. (See the book Towards Moral Bankruptcy by the French sociologist Paul Bureau. It was published in 1925.)

The Abolition of Moral Sensibility

The initial result of propagating the viewpoints described in the previous chapter was that people’s moral sensibility regarding sexual conduct became impaired. Shame, modesty, disgust, contempt, and the like gradually began to disappear. The distinction between marriage and adultery was erased from people’s hearts. At last, adultery became such an innocent thing that no need was felt to conceal it with abhorrence.

Until the end of the nineteenth century, the only change in the moral outlook of the French people was that adultery was regarded as an extraordinary natural matter for men. If their young adult sons did not contract venereal disease or face the possibility of being sent before a court, parents readily indulged their sexual licentiousness. Moreover, they were delighted if it brought them material benefit. They believed that sexual relations between a woman and a man outside marriage were not blameworthy. There are even instances in which parents encouraged their young adult sons to establish relations with influential or wealthy women in order to brighten their future. But their attitude toward men at that time differed from the attitude that came later. A woman’s chastity was considered valuable. The same parents who regarded their sons’ sexual licentiousness as youthful exuberance and overlooked it could not tolerate any stain or blemish on their daughters’ character. Even if a depraved man was considered innocent, a depraved woman was not. Although they furrowed their brows in disgust at the mention of a commercial prostitute, they showed no disgust toward the man who shared her bed. Similarly, the moral responsibilities of women and men in married life were not regarded as identical. Although a husband’s immorality might be tolerated, a wife’s immorality was considered seriously reprehensible.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, this situation changed. The women’s emancipation movement sounded the trumpet of moral equality between women and men; the result was that women’s wrongdoing, like men’s wrongdoing, was considered innocent. The notion that a woman’s dignity or honour might be injured by entering into a sexual relationship with a man outside marriage also changed. Paul Bureau says:

Not only in the large cities, but also in the small towns and villages of France, groups of modern young men have accepted the principle that, since they themselves are not chaste, they have no right to demand a chaste or virgin woman from a matchmaker. In Burgundy, Beaune, and other regions, it is a common occurrence that a girl has the company of many lovers before marriage and feels no need, at the time of marriage, to conceal the events of her past life from the matchmaker. They discuss freely among themselves their illicit companionship with other men, just as they discuss sports or earning a livelihood. At the time of marriage, the prospective husband is not merely informed about the bride’s past life; he is also made aware of all the friends who have enjoyed her body up to that time. In such circumstances, the prospective bridegroom takes particular care that no one should suspect that he has any objection to such conduct by the bride. —From the cited book, p. 94

He further says:

Educated girls from France’s educated middle class are widely seen working in offices or commercial establishments. They freely mix in respectable society, and none of these activities is considered contrary to morality. Subsequently, if one of these girls becomes attracted to a young man and begins living with him, marriage between them is considered entirely unnecessary. They consider living together without marriage preferable. Of course, after the desires of both have been fulfilled, each has the full right to separate from the other and offer love elsewhere. Their relationship is not unknown to society. They both visit respectable circles together. They do not conceal this mutual relationship, and no one else sees anything wrong in their way of life. This conduct was first seen among those who worked in factories. Later it was considered highly blameworthy. But it has now become an ordinary, everyday matter among respectable families. This way of life has now acquired the same status that marriage once held in social life. —From the cited book, pp. 94–96

In this way, the kept woman has now also been duly accepted. Monsieur Barthélemy (M. Berthelemy) was a professor of law at the University of Paris. He says: ‘The kept woman is gradually acquiring legal status like that of a married wife. Discussion of them has begun in Parliament. The government has now begun to protect their interests. After a soldier’s death, his kept woman also receives a pension similar to the allowance granted to his wife.’

The reason why adultery is considered innocent according to French moral philosophy can be determined from the following incident:

In 1918, a female teacher at an educational institution became pregnant while unmarried. There were some old-fashioned people in the education department, and they began making a commotion about the matter. As a result, a delegation of respectable people went to the education minister and presented the following arguments and evidence in such a way that the matter concerning the teacher was suppressed.

1. What right does anyone else have to interfere in a person’s private life?

2. What, after all, is so serious about her offence?

3. Is becoming the mother of a child without marriage not more democratic?

The instruction given to soldiers in the French military includes education on protecting themselves from venereal disease and on contraception, because it is regarded as an incontrovertible fact that soldiers will certainly commit adultery. On 3 May 1919, the wing commander of the French 127th Division circulated the following statement to the soldiers:

It has been learned that complaints have been made about armed soldiers crowding into the military brothel. Their complaint is that the armed soldiers have established a complete monopoly there and do not allow anyone else any opportunity. Because of the increase in the number of soldiers, the High Command is trying to increase the number of prostitutes. But until this arrangement is made, armed soldiers are hereby informed that they should not remain inside for too long. They should hurry a little in satisfying their lust.

Consider this: this notice was being officially circulated by the military department of a civilized government in the world. This means that even the idea that adultery could be morally reprehensible had been erased from their minds. This notion had disappeared from society, from the law of the country, and from everyone’s mind. (When soldiers whose moral condition is like this enter a country as conquerors, it is easy to imagine the terrible consequences for the honour and chastity of that country’s women. This is one kind of moral standard of a military force. The Qur’an presents another kind of moral standard: ‘When the Muslims are granted authority in the world, they establish prayer therein, pay zakat, command good deeds, and prevent reprehensible acts.’ One kind of soldier roams about like a bull. The other kind of soldier seizes power in order to preserve human moral dignity and teach people purity. Have people become so blind that they cannot distinguish between the two?)

Some time before the First World War, an agency was established in France. Whatever a woman’s circumstances and moral conduct might be, it was the agency’s task to induce her in every case to undergo a new trial. If a man wished to establish a sexual relationship with a woman, he merely had to provide that woman’s address. In addition, he had to deposit twenty-five francs with the agency as an initial fee. The agency then became responsible for persuading the woman to agree to the act.

It is known from the register of this agency that there was no class of French society from which large numbers of people had not conducted business through the agency. These activities were not hidden from the French government. —Paul Bureau, p. 16

Regarding how extreme their moral decline had become, Paul Bureau says:

In some districts of France and in densely populated areas of the large cities, sexual relations between close relatives—even between fathers and daughters and between brothers and sisters—were not uncommon.

The Excess of Obscenity

Before the First World War, France’s attorney general, Monsieur Bulot (M. Bulot), stated in one of his reports that there were five hundred thousand women who earned their livelihood by renting out their bodies. But it would not do to compare the prostitutes there with the prostitutes of the Indian subcontinent. France is a civilized and advanced country. All activities there are carried out on a large scale with propriety and good organization. Newspapers, pictures, postcards, telephones, personal invitations, and every other decorous means are used to attract customers’ attention. People’s consciences never reproach them for these activities; rather, those women who have the opportunity to gain greater fortune in this business can often exercise considerable influence in the country’s politics, economy, and respectable classes. What women of this class were in the age of Greek civilization, these women have likewise become.

A member of the French Senate, Monsieur Ferdinand Dreyfus (M. Ferdinand Dreyfus), says that prostitution is no longer a private matter. Through the financial profit generated by its agencies, it has become a business and a well-organized industry. Agents who supply its raw material import and export independent and very young girls as commodities for this business. The demand here for girls under ten years of age is extremely high.

Paul Bureau says:

It is a powerful institution. It is being run in an organized manner by highly paid senior officials and workers. Publicists, writers, speakers, physicians, midwives, merchants, and tourists work here. Advertising is used, and ever-new methods of display are adopted.

Even apart from these haunts of obscenity, prostitution is conducted openly in hotels, tea houses, dance halls, and similar places. At times, brutal abuse and extreme cruelty also occur. In 1914, in France, the mayor of a city once had to intervene to save the life of a girl. The girl had had to satisfy twenty-seven customers in a single day, and many more customers were still waiting.

During the First World War, France gained the distinction of establishing a kind of charitable brothel in addition to commercial brothels. Those patriotic women who, during the war, rendered great service to the heroes defending France’s security and acquired illegitimate fatherless children were honoured with this title. It is impossible to put such a base idea into words. These women continued prostitution in an organized manner, and helping them became a moral duty of people from the criminal class. The widely circulated Frantasio and Lavie Parisiemme displayed the utmost zeal in attracting the attention of capable men to these women. At the beginning of 1917, one issue of the latter periodical published 199 advertisements for these women.

The Contagious Disease of Sexual Mania and Obscenity

Venereal Disease

The widespread public acceptance of shamelessness and adultery, as the natural consequence of the burning fire of sexual inclination, had at its root all that literature, advertising, cinematography, theatrical performance, song and dance, nudity, and obscenity.

An army of self-interested capitalists remains engaged in stoking sexual desire by every possible means and thereby expands its own business. Daily, weekly, fortnightly, and monthly periodicals publish articles and pictures filled with extreme obscenity. This is their particularly effective weapon for widely circulating their papers. Superior talent, skill, and psychological expertise are applied to this work so that the prey cannot defend itself in any way. In addition, extremely impure literature and pamphlets concerning sexual matters are published in book form. These are circulated in such quantities that as many as twenty-five or thirty thousand copies are printed in a single edition. Sometimes even a sixtieth edition of this literature is published. Some publishing houses are devoted exclusively to this work. There are many writers and men of letters who have gained fame and honour by doing such work. Composing an obscene book is no longer at all dishonourable; rather, if it is accepted by the public, its author becomes worthy of membership in the French Academy or at least of receiving the Croix d’Honneur.

The government silently ignores all this shamelessness and incitement to lust. If something extremely disgraceful is ever published, the police reluctantly send the offender before the court. Moreover, there are the magnanimous courts. From the seats of justice there, offenders are merely warned and released. For those who occupy the judges’ seats also relish this kind of literature. Some judges’ pens are themselves engaged in composing obscene sexual literature. If, by chance, a judge proves to be old-fashioned and there is fear that he may deliver an improper verdict, major men of letters and famous writers collectively intervene, and the newspapers sharply criticize the matter, saying that freedom is necessary for the advancement of literature and the arts. To impose moral restraints through the attitude of a dark age is to silence the voice of aesthetics. By what means does this aesthetics advance? Nude pictures and films are especially effective in this regard. Millions of albums are produced and placed not only in markets, hotels, and tea houses. At the second session of the Anti-Obscenity Association, Emil Puresi presented a report in which he said:

These filthy and base oil paintings create excitement and intense thirst in the human senses. They incite the unfortunate purchasers to such sinful acts that the body shudders even at the thought of them. Their ruinous effect on boys and girls is indescribable. Many schools and colleges have been destroyed by these things, morally and physically; for girls in particular, nothing could be more harmful than this.

This aesthetics is cultivated through entertainment in theatres, cinemas, music halls, and coffee houses. Every theatrical performance that the aristocratic class of French society watches with pleasure, and every playwright and accomplished actress upon whom flowers are showered with appreciative applause, is sexually stimulating. The distinctive feature is that the character who is extremely vile from the moral point of view is presented as the finest and most elevated ideal. In Paul Bureau’s words:

If, by observing the picture of life that our playwrights have been presenting for the last thirty or forty years, someone wishes to form an idea of our cultural life, he will understand at least this much: all the married couples in our society are ungrateful and distrustful of one another in married life. Perhaps the husband is a fool, or his wife is his bitterest enemy. If the wife has any noble quality, it is that she will always be disliked by her husband and remain ready to offer love elsewhere.

If this is the condition of the theatrical performances of the aristocratic class, it is easy to imagine what the theatres and places of entertainment of the general public may be like! The language, graceful gestures, and nudity that devotees of sexual amusement enjoy are shamelessly performed on the stage. The public is informed beforehand that every means of satisfying its sexual thirst will be available. It is further announced: Our stage rejects conventionality and is naturalistic (Realistic).

Emil Puresi recorded many examples in his report. He collected these examples by visiting various places of entertainment, and to explain them he used letters instead of names.

B. ‘Here the actresses’ songs, monologues, and gestures were extremely obscene. The scene that had been unveiled on the stage stopped just as it was approaching the final stage of sexual intercourse. More than a thousand spectators had gathered there. Many respectable people were among them. Everyone was absorbed and uttering appreciative cries.’

N. ‘Here the brief songs, the short speeches between them, the gestures, and the silences had reached the utmost limit of shamelessness. Children and underage youths were also sitting with their parents and enjoying this entertainment, and every boy applauded vigorously while watching the obscene performance.’

L. ‘Here the audience raised an uproar five times and repeatedly forced the actress to perform in such a way that she had to conclude her performance with an extremely obscene song.’

R. ‘Here the audience repeatedly urged an actress to give an extremely obscene performance.’

At last the actress exclaimed irritably, “Are you so shameless? Don’t you see that there are some children here too?” Saying this, she left without finishing the performance. It was so obscene that even the most sinful woman could not have endured its repetition.

J. ‘After the performance, a lottery was held for the actresses. They began selling each ticket for ten santims (one santim being approximately equivalent to two annas). Whichever actress’s name a person drew, she became his for the night.’

Paul Bureau says: ‘Most of the time, a woman is brought onto the stage whose body bears not the slightest trace of clothing. Adolphe Biason once wrote in protest against all these matters in the famous French newspaper Tamps: now the only thing remaining on the stage is the performance of sexual intercourse. In fact, only then will art attain perfection.’

Literature supposedly concerned with the enlightened knowledge and medical science of the birth-control movement and sexology has played a prominent part in propagating shamelessness and destroying people’s moral character. In public lectures, obscene photographs, and books, pregnancy, related matters, and instructions for using contraceptive devices are analyzed through pictures and their explanations so thoroughly that nothing more needs to be disclosed. In such books on sexology, no aspect of sexual activity is left undisclosed, beginning with anatomical analysis. Outwardly, a cloak of knowledge and science has been placed over these matters, so that there may be no avenue for objection. Moreover, it has advanced so far that it is called social service. The stated reason is that they wish to protect others from error and confusion regarding sexual activity. But the actual fact is that this literature and educational propaganda create vile shamelessness among women and men and among adolescent boys and girls. As a result of all this, a situation has arisen in which a young underage girl who comes to study in a library acquires knowledge about sex that even married women may not possess. The same is true of young boys. Their sexual inclinations awaken prematurely. Consequently, they become eager to experiment with masturbation. Before reaching full maturity, they fall into the claws of sexual desire. There is an age limit for marriage, but no age limit has been set for experimenting with sexual activity. Thus all these practices continue from the age of twelve or thirteen.

A Forewarning of National Decline

Where impurity, the worship of desire, and enslavement to physical pleasure and gratification reach their extreme; where everyone—women and men, young and old alike—becomes immersed in sensual indulgence; and where the blazing fire of madness carries people beyond their control, it is entirely natural for all the causes of national decline to become manifest. Seeing such a nation rushing toward destruction at a high peak, people conclude that its sensual indulgence is not an obstacle to progress but rather a support. They further say that a nation reaches its highest development only when it reaches the extreme of sensual indulgence. But such a conclusion is entirely false. Where the forces of creation and destruction operate together, and constructive activities are clearly visible overall, only a person whose reason and intellect have become impaired can count the destructive forces among the causes of creation.

For example, if a prudent businessman earns immense wealth through intelligence, labor, and experience, while also indulging in drinking, gambling, and sensual pleasures, then what could be greater folly than to regard both sides of his life as causes of comfort and prosperity? In reality, the causes of his prosperity and the sum of these latter vices are engaged in bringing about his ruin. The fact that he remains established in a mansion through the strength of his former virtues does not mean that the destructive forces are not affecting him. A little careful observation will show that these destructive forces are continually consuming the strength of his mind and body. They are plundering the money he has earned through his labor. Along with destroying him, these forces are always waiting for an opportunity to finish him with a decisive attack at the very first blow. The devil of gambling can, in an evil moment, destroy in an instant all the money he has earned throughout his life, and it sits waiting for that very moment. The devil of drinking can, at the right time, take advantage of his insensibility and make him commit such a fatal mistake that he may become bankrupt in a moment. It too is looking for that opportunity. The devil of vice is also waiting for the moment when it can involve him in murder, suicide, or sudden ruin. It is impossible to imagine what the state of that man’s prosperity would have been had he not fallen into the clutches of these devils!

The same is true of a nation. It progresses through constructive forces. But, for want of proper direction, after advancing several steps along the path of progress, it begins to create the causes of its own destruction. For some time, the creative forces continue to lead it forward. At the same time, however, the destructive forces consume its vital strength from within like woodworm. Eventually they leave it so hollow that a single sudden blow reduces its edifice of glory to dust. I shall briefly describe here the clear and substantial causes of the destruction that France’s misguided social system has brought upon it.

Destruction of Physical Strength

The first evil result of the absolute rule of sexual desire was that the physical strength of the French people gradually began to decline. The enslavement to lust had exhausted their powers of self-restraint and patience. The prevalence of venereal diseases had a devastating effect on their health. From the beginning of the twentieth century, the military authorities were compelled, every few years, to lower the physical-qualification standard for recruiting new soldiers (New Reqruits). For only a very small number of young men who met the standard originally set could be found later. This is a reliable instrument which, like a thermometer (Thermometre), tells with near certainty how rapidly the physical strength of the French nation is declining. Among the causes of this degeneration, venereal disease was a particular one. During the first two years of the First World War, seventy-five thousand soldiers were sent to hospitals for syphilis. At a single medium-sized military camp, 242 soldiers contracted this disease at the same time. On the one hand, consider that critical situation when the French nation was wavering at the threshold between life and death, when the desperate efforts of every soldier were necessary for the nation’s very existence, and when a single franc was extremely valuable. Time, strength, every resource, and every object had to be expended in the defense of the country to the greatest possible extent. On the other hand, consider the young men of this nation: thousands of them not only became unfit for work for long periods because of sexual indulgence, but at this critical moment they also caused the nation’s money and resources to be spent on their treatment.

A French specialist, Dr. Laredde (Dr. Laredde), says that in France, thirty thousand people die every year from syphilis and diseases caused by it alone. After fever, this is the greatest cause of death. Such is the condition produced by a single venereal disease! Besides this, there are many other diseases of this kind.

Abolition of Family Discipline

The universal spread of this unbridled sexual madness and love of debauchery brought the second great calamity upon French civilization: the abolition of family discipline. The permanent and firm relationship between man and woman through which family discipline is established is called marriage. Through this relationship, peace, harmony, stability, and permanence are established in human life. It transforms one’s private life into a social life. It makes people servants of civilization so that they may suppress the curse of disorder. Within the boundaries of this discipline arises such a tranquil and noble atmosphere of love, peace, and sacrifice that the new generation can be raised and developed with sound character, proper education, and pure character formation. But where the idea of marriage and its noble purpose has been completely removed from the hearts of men and women, where no purpose of sexual relations has a place in the mind except the satisfaction of lust, and where groups of lustful men and women roam from flower to flower like bees, drinking nectar, there this discipline cannot be established or maintained. Where men and women possess the capacity to bear the serious responsibilities of married life, together with its rights, duties, and moral rules, the result of their mental and moral condition is that the education of each generation becomes inferior to that of the preceding one. Selfishness and arbitrariness among people increase so greatly that the bonds of civilization begin to break. Their vacillation in changing direction and making decisions increases so much that no stability remains in national or international politics. Because of the absence of family peace, their lives become increasingly bitter, and an everlasting anxiety gives them no peace even for a moment. This is the worldly Hell that people purchase in the madness of foolish indulgence.

In France, only seven or eight men and women per thousand marry each year. This ratio is so insignificant that it can easily be inferred from it how enormous a portion of the French population remains unmarried.

Again, even among the small number of people who marry, very few marry with the aim of living an honest and chaste life. They have other purposes besides this one. Indeed, it was a socially accepted and desirable practice to marry a woman who had given birth to an illegitimate child in order to declare her child legitimate. Paul Bureau says:

It was commonly practiced among the working class of France for a woman intending to marry to obtain, before the marriage, a promise from her future husband that he would acknowledge her illegitimate child as his own legitimate child.

In 1917, a woman gave the following statement before the Seine (Saine) Civil Court:

Before the marriage, I had warned my husband about this matter: the sole purpose of my marriage was that the child I had given birth to while unmarried should be declared legitimate. The question now is whether I would live with him as husband and wife. I had no such intention then, nor do I have it now. That is why, on the very day of our marriage, at half past five, I divorced my husband. I have not been intimate with him to this day, because I had no desire to fulfill the responsibilities of married life.

—Paul Bureau’s aforementioned work, p. 55

The head of a distinguished college in Paris once remarked to Paul Bureau that, generally, the sole purpose of marriage for modern young men was to obtain the services of a mistress in their own homes as well. For ten or twelve years they roamed about freely, tasting pleasures on every side. Then a time came when, exhausted and weary from such licentiousness and debauchery, they married a woman so that they could obtain some measure of peace at home while also enjoying pleasures like an independent pleasure-seeker. —Ibid.

In France, adultery by married people is not at all considered objectionable or blameworthy. If someone keeps a mistress at home besides his wife, there is no need to conceal it. Society also regards it as an ordinary and possible matter.

—Ibid., pp. 76–77

In such circumstances, the marital relationship has become so weak that it is severed at every trivial disagreement. Often the married life of these unfortunate people does not last more than a few hours. For example, a respected Frenchman who had occupied a ministerial position several times divorced his wife only five hours after the marriage. Divorces occur over such trivial matters that hearing of them provokes laughter. For instance, if either husband or wife snores in sleep, or if one does not like the other’s dog, divorce becomes inevitable. Once, 294 divorces took place on the same day in the Seine Civil Court. When the new marriage law was passed in 1844, four thousand divorces were granted. In 1900, this number reached 7,500; in 1913, 16,000; and in 1931, 21,000.

Destruction of the Lineage

Raising children is a high form of moral action. It requires restraint of the instincts, renunciation of desires and passions, acceptance of hardship and labor, and the sacrifice of wealth and life. Those who are selfish and enslaved to their instincts are wholly unprepared for this noble task. For loneliness, isolation, and brutishness take hold of them.

For nearly a century, a birth-control movement has been operating in France. As a result of this movement, every French man and woman has learned methods by which they can enjoy sensual pleasure while avoiding its natural consequences: conception, childbirth, and the continuation of the lineage. There is no city, suburb, or village where contraceptive medicines and devices are not openly sold. Consequently, their use is not confined to sexually unrestrained pleasure-seekers; married men and women also use them extensively and desire that the birth of children should not create any obstacle to their enjoyment. Observing the extent to which France’s birth rate is declining, experts have estimated that this widespread epidemic of contraception prevents the birth of at least six hundred thousand children every year. Those conceptions that occur despite all these methods are destroyed by abortion. In this way, the arrival of another three or four hundred thousand human children in the world is prevented. Abortion is not performed only by unmarried women; married women are equally involved in this matter. From the standpoint of morality, this act is considered beyond criticism and a woman’s right. It seems that the law of the country has closed its eyes to this matter. Although it is still recorded as a criminal offense in the law books, the fact is that, out of three hundred people, scarcely one is prosecuted for this offense. Even among those prosecuted, seventy-five percent are acquitted by the court. The medical technique of abortion is so easy and widely known that most women can perform it themselves. Those who cannot do so have no difficulty obtaining a doctor’s help. Killing a fetus, or killing a child in the womb, has become for them an ordinary matter, like the painful extraction of a tooth.

This mentality has transformed mother nature so that the mother who has always acknowledged love and tender affection as the highest and ultimate values in the world is not merely disinclined and indifferent toward her children, but has become their enemy. Those children who are born despite the futile attempts at contraception and abortion are treated cruelly. Paul Bureau expresses this painful fact in the following words:

Every day, newspapers report the misery of those children whose parents have treated them with cruel inhumanity. The newspapers mention only the exceptional cases, but people know very well how cruelly these parents generally treat these unfortunate, unwanted guests. Their parents are sad and indifferent toward them because this unfortunate group has completely destroyed the pleasures and enjoyments of their lives. In many cases, a lack of courage prevents an abortion, and thus an innocent child enters the world. But immediately after its arrival, it must suffer the full punishment. —Ibid., p. 74

Aversion and hatred toward children have reached such an extreme that once, when a woman’s six-month-old baby died, she held a singing and dancing gathering with the corpse of her dead child placed before her and said to her neighbors:

We will not allow a second child now. My husband and I have gained perfect peace from this child’s death. Just think, what is a child? It is always whining and crying, creating filth—is there any way to escape from this? —Ibid., p. 75

More painful still is the fact that infanticide is spreading like a contagious disease. The French government and its courts have continued to ignore this grave crime just as they ignore abortion. For example, in 1918, two women were brought before the ‘Loir’ court for murdering children, and both were later released. One of them drowned her infant child. Her first child was being raised by a relative, and she expressed a desire to raise a second child as well. But the mother decided that she would eliminate such an enemy at all costs. The court deemed her offense forgivable. The second woman first strangled her child. Thinking that its breath had not been completely extinguished, she threw it against a wall and crushed its skull. In the opinion of the judge and jurors, she was not considered deserving of the death penalty. In the same year, a dancer was brought before the Seine court for a similar offense. She tried to pull out her child’s tongue, then killed it by crushing its head and cutting its throat. The judge and jurors also declared this woman innocent.

A nation that can reach such an extreme in hostility toward its own descendants cannot be saved from destruction by any system of good governance in the world. The birth of a new generation is essential to preserve a nation’s continuity. A nation that becomes hostile to its own descendants in reality becomes its own enemy. It continually commits suicide and, even without an external enemy, keeps annihilating its own existence. It has already been stated that France’s birth rate has been steadily declining for the past sixty years. In some years, the death rate exceeds the birth rate. In some years, the two are equal. At other times, the birth rate rises only with great difficulty, at a ratio of one per thousand compared with the death rate. On the other hand, the number of foreign immigrants in France continues to increase day by day. In 1931, among France’s total population of 40,180,000, there were 2,890,000 foreign immigrants. If this condition continues, it is hardly surprising that by the latter part of the twentieth century the French nation will become a minority in its own homeland.

This is the ultimate result of those doctrines and viewpoints on which the movement for women’s rights was conducted at the beginning of the nineteenth century.

A Few More Examples

We have described the doctrines of France and their consequences only to preserve the continuity of the historical account. But it would be unjust to consider France solely responsible in this matter. In reality, the condition of all those countries that have adopted the previously described incompatible principles of the so-called doctrines and social order is generally similar. As an example, let us consider the United States, whose social system is established in full perfection.

The Sexual Influence of the Surroundings on the Young

The famous George Ben Lindsey (Ben Lindsey) was once chairman of the court established for juvenile crimes in Denver (Chairman of the Juvenile Court of Denver). For this reason, he had the opportunity to learn well about the moral condition of America’s young people. In his book entitled “Revolt of Modern Youth,” he wrote that American boys and girls had begun to reach maturity before the appointed time. Sexual tendencies emerged in them at a very early age. As an example, after examining the condition of 342 girls, he found that 250 of them had reached maturity between the ages of eleven and thirteen and displayed signs of sexual thirst and physical desire that could not be expected in an eighteen-year-old girl. —Ibid., pp. 82–86

Dr. Edith Hooker (Edith Hooker) wrote in her book entitled ‘Laws of Sex’:

Among the distinguished, respectable, and wealthy classes, it is a very common occurrence for a girl of seven or eight to form a romantic relationship with boys of her own age and, in most cases, to engage in sexual activity as well.

She further says:

A seven-year-old girl, the bright jewel of a family, becomes involved with her elder brother and several friends. In another incident, a group consisting of two girls and three boys was found engaged in sexual activity with one another. They also encouraged other boys and girls of their own age to engage in the same act. The oldest in this group was a ten-year-old girl. Nevertheless, she gained the distinction of receiving declarations of love from various lovers. —Ibid., p. 328

A report by a physician in Baltimore reveals that more than a thousand cases are filed in that city each year alleging sexual activity with girls under twelve years of age.

—Ibid., p. 177

This is the initial consequence of an atmosphere filled with every means and resource for awakening lust and producing sexual excitement. An American author says:

The condition in which the greater part of our population spends its time is so abnormal that, by the age of ten or fifteen, boys and girls develop an inclination to form romantic attachments to one another. The consequences of such premature sexual desire are naturally extremely serious and frightening. At the very least, the result is that young girls run away from home with friends or marry at an early age. But if they fail in the game of love, they may commit suicide.

Sexual Practice in Schools

Thus, for those boys and girls in whom sexual tendencies awaken prematurely, schools become the first field of experimentation. There are two kinds of schools. In one kind, only students of the same sex are enrolled, while in the other kind, coeducation is arranged for both boys and girls.

In schools of the first kind, the contagious diseases of homosexuality (Homo Sexuality) and masturbation (Masturbation) are spreading. Since certain emotions and feelings are aroused in childhood, and the surrounding environment creates intense excitement for them, it becomes essential to adopt some means of satisfying them. Dr. Hooker says that in such educational institutions, colleges, nurses’ training schools, and religious seminaries, incidents constantly occur in which two people of the same sex engage in sexual activity with each other and have no interest at all in the opposite sex. —Ibid., p. 331

Regarding this, she cites many more incidents and says that girls engaging in sexual activity with girls and boys with boys have faced terrible consequences. Other books reveal how rapidly this homosexuality is spreading like a contagious disease. Dr. Lowry mentions in his book “Herselt” that once the headmaster of a school secretly informed forty families by letter that it was no longer possible to keep their children in the school, because a terrible state of moral corruption had arisen among them. —Ibid., p. 179

Now we shall discuss the second kind of school, where boys and girls are educated together. Here, just as the elements that create sexual excitement are present, the means of satisfying it are also readily available. The sexual desire and tendencies aroused in childhood find opportunities for fulfillment after entering this kind of school. Boys and girls become accustomed to studying extremely vile and obscene literature. Romantic stories and novels, booklets bearing only the name of art, obscene works dealing with sexual problems, and articles providing information about contraception become the most attractive objects of sexual influence for school and college students. The renowned American author Hindrich von Loewen says that the literature most in demand at American universities is merely a concentrated essence of every kind of impurity, uncleanliness, obscenity, and boldness. Such literature has never before been circulated so freely among the public.

The knowledge gained from all this literature leads young men and women to discuss it freely and prepare for direct experimentation. Boys and girls, young men and women, go out together for petting parties, where they freely drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes and fully enjoy life through dancing and singing. *Mr. Lindsey estimates that 45 percent of high-school girls become morally corrupted before leaving school.

The proportion is much higher at the later stages of education. Mr. Lindsey says that high-school boys lag far behind girls in sexual desire. Generally, it is the girls who take the initiative in one way or another, while the boys dance to their tune.

Three Principal Provocative Factors

There is still a kind of order and discipline in schools and colleges that somewhat restricts the students’ interactions. But when these groups of modern young men and women leave school and enter the field of life with the blazing fire of sexual hunger and an unruly nature, their agitation and disturbances overcome every obstacle and restraint. Here there is a complete storehouse of fuel for exciting their sexual tendencies, and the means of calming the excitement are also easily available.

Regarding the causes behind the extraordinary spread of moral corruption in America, an American newspaper makes the following comment:

There are three satanic forces, and their trinity has today exerted its influence over this part of the world and created a hell. These three forces are:

1. Obscene literature. Since the First World War, it has been spreading shamelessness on a vast scale with astonishing rapidity.

2. Motion pictures; these do not merely incite lustful romantic tendencies but also provide practical instruction in them.

3. The degraded moral standard of women; because of their dress, frequent nudity, growing habit of smoking cigarettes, and unrestricted association with men, among other things, their relationships even with strangers become intimate.

These three things are spreading widely among us. As a result, the decline and eventual disappearance of Christian civilization and its social system will become inevitable. If we still cannot check their advance, then our history too will be written in the same way as that of Rome and other nations, which the worship of appetites and sexual frenzy, along with their wine, women, dancing and singing, cast into the bottomless abyss of destruction.

These three satanic forces, which influence civilization and the social system, create perpetual agitation in the emotions and feelings of all young men and women who possess even a little warm blood. In reality, the abundance of obscenity is the inevitable consequence of such agitation.

*. How I can get married, P.172

The prevalence of obscenity

The number of women in America who have adopted prostitution as their permanent livelihood is approximately four to five hundred thousand.* But American prostitutes should not be considered similar to prostitutes in this country. They are not hereditary prostitutes. An American prostitute is a woman who, until yesterday, pursued an independent occupation, became morally corrupted through bad company, and sought refuge in a brothel. She will spend some time there. Then she will abandon prostitution and take a job in an office or factory. Investigations have shown that fifty percent of American prostitutes enter prostitution from among domestic servants (Domestic Servant). The remaining fifty percent leave jobs in hospitals, offices and shops and go to brothels. Generally, this trade is begun at the age of fifteen to twenty, and at the age of twenty-five to thirty they again leave the brothel and begin some independent occupation.**

The significance underlying the existence of four to five hundred thousand prostitutes in America can easily be understood from this discussion.

It was stated in the previous chapter that in Western countries prostitution has become a well-organized international business. New York in America, Rio de Janeiro, and Buenos Aires are major centers of this business. Each of New York’s two large business centers has its own management board, whose president and secretary are duly elected. Each has a legal adviser who pleads their case. Thousands of agents are employed to entice and abduct young women. They roam everywhere in search of prey. The skill of these predators can be estimated from the following account: the president of a migrants’ association in Chicago once counted the arrivals over a fifteen-month period. It was found that during this time letters had been received from 7,200 girls bound for Chicago stating that they were on their way there. But only 1,700 reached their destination. No trace at all was found of the remaining girls.

Apart from brothels, there are also many Assignation Houses and Call Houses there. Their purpose is that if respectable men and women wish to meet one another, suitable arrangements are made for them at those places. An investigation found that one city alone had 78 such houses. Two other cities had 43 and 33 such houses respectively.*

It is not only unmarried men and women who go to all these houses; many married men and women also go there. A renowned social reformer remarked, ‘One-third of the inhabitants of New York are morally and

*.Prostitution in U.S.A., P. 64-69

**.Heself, P. 116

physically do not fulfill the responsibilities of married life. There is no significant difference between conditions in New York and those in other parts of the country.**

An association of American moral reformers is called the ‘Committee of Fourteen.’ On behalf of this committee, extensive efforts are made to locate haunts of immorality, investigate the country’s moral condition, and take effective measures for moral reform. Its reports state that nearly all of America’s dance halls, nightclubs, beauty parlors [Beauty Saloons], manicure shops [Manleure Shops], massage rooms [Massage Rooms], and hairdressing shops [Hair Dressing saloons] have been turned into brothels. It would not be an exaggeration to say that they are even worse than brothels. For the evil deeds committed there are beyond description.

Venereal diseases

Venereal disease is the inevitable consequence of sexual licentiousness. It has been estimated that 90 percent of America’s inhabitants are afflicted with this disease. It is known from the Encyclopedia Britannica that the government dispensaries there treat, on average, two hundred thousand syphilis patients and one hundred sixty thousand gonorrhea patients every year. Sixty-five dispensaries are devoted solely to treating these diseases. But patients crowd private doctors more than government dispensaries. There, 61 percent are treated for syphilis (gummy sores) and 89 percent for gonorrhea. —The aforementioned work, vol. 23, p. 45

Every year thirty to forty thousand children die of congenital syphilis. Apart from severe fevers, among all the diseases that cause death, the mortality rate from syphilis is exceptionally high.

Regarding gonorrhea, specialists believe that 60 percent of young men are afflicted with this disease. Both married and unmarried men are included among them.

Gynecologists agree that among married women who undergo surgery, syphilis bacteria are found in 75 percent.*

*.Prostitution in U.S.A., P. 64-69

**.Heself, P. 116

Divorce and separation

Under such circumstances, how can family discipline and the marital relationship remain intact? Women who live independently and feel no need for a man in their lives except to satisfy their sexual desires, and with whom men can associate without marrying them, regard marriage as an unnecessary thing. Modern philosophy and a materialistic outlook have erased from their hearts the idea that establishing a relationship with another man outside marriage could involve any fault or sin. This environment has also rendered society so insensitive that it neither hates nor considers blameworthy a woman of this kind. George Lindsay expressed the attitude of ordinary American women in the following words:

Why should I marry? Of my companions who married during the past two years, five out of every ten have ended their marriages in divorce. I believe that every girl in the present age has the natural right to adopt an independent course of action in matters of love. We possess sufficient knowledge of contraception. This has also removed our fear that an illegitimate child might be born and complicate our present situation. We believe that, according to modern methods, changing traditional customs and practices is what conscience demands.

Only intense romantic passion can induce a shameless woman with such an attitude to marry. But most of the time this passion is not sincere; it arises from a temporary excitement. Once the intoxication of excitement wears off, no love remains between husband and wife. A slight difference in nature and conduct breeds hatred between them. Finally, they seek refuge in the courts, applying for divorce or separation.

Lindsay says:

In 1922, every marriage in Denver ended in separation, and one divorce case was filed for every two marriages. This was not limited to Denver; similar events occurred in almost every city in America. He further says: Divorces and separations have been increasing day by day. If this situation continues—and there is ample reason to expect that it will—then in most parts of the country exactly as many cases will be filed in court for divorce as licenses are issued for marriage.*

Once, an article was published in a newspaper called the ‘Free Press’ of Detroit (Detroit). A portion of it is quoted below:

*. Laws of sex, P. 204

The scarcity of marriage, the prevalence of divorce, and the widespread practice of permanent or temporary sexual relations outside marriage prove that we are rushing rapidly toward bestiality. The natural desire to produce children is disappearing; aversion to newborn children is growing; the awareness that family and domestic order are essential to the stability of civilization and an independent state is being erased from people’s minds. On the other hand, a ruthless indifference is taking root within civilization and governing power.

Companionate Marriage, that is, trial marriage, was introduced as a means of remedying the prevalence of divorce and separation. But this solution has proved worse than the actual disease. Trial marriage means that instead of being bound by ‘marriage of the old kind,’ a man and a woman will live together for some time. If, during this period of living together, their minds become compatible, they will enter into the bond of marriage; otherwise, they will separate and continue seeking their fortunes elsewhere. During the trial period, they must refrain from having children. For if a child is born, marriage between them then becomes obligatory in the proper manner. This is called Free Love, or ‘free love,’ in Russia.

National suicide

The worship of appetites, aversion to fulfilling marital responsibilities, distaste for family life, and the instability of marital relationships have often destroyed women’s natural maternal emotion and affection. Yet in reality this is the greatest spiritual affection of womankind, and not only civilization and culture but the existence of humanity itself depends upon its existence. It is from the absence of this affection that the satanic passion for contraception, abortion and infanticide has arisen. Despite legal restrictions, every young woman in America has full access to knowledge concerning contraception. Contraceptive medicines and devices are sold freely in the market. Not to mention ordinary women, even school and college students carry these materials with them, so that a sweet ‘evening outing’ with a lover will not be ruined merely because he suddenly happened to fail to bring them along.

George Lindsay says

Four hundred and ninety-five high-school girls voluntarily confessed to me that they had directly engaged in sexual activity with boys. Only 25 of them became pregnant. The others

*. Revolt of Modern Youth. P.211-214

were fortunate enough to escape it. But most of them possessed sufficient knowledge of contraception. This knowledge had become such an ordinary matter for them that people cannot imagine it.

Unmarried girls use those medicines and devices so that no obstacle may arise in the path of their freedom. Married women use them because, if they have a child, they must not only assume responsibility for its upbringing and education, but the husband’s path to divorce is also thereby obstructed. It is to avoid all these dangers that married women use contraceptive medicines. All women dislike becoming mothers because, in order to enjoy life fully, it is considered essential to be free from this danger in the form of a child. Moreover, childbirth causes their beauty to decline.*

Whatever the reason, among those who form such relationships between men and women, the natural consequence is prevented by contraceptives in 95 percent of cases. If, unfortunately, the remaining 5 percent become pregnant, the way remains open to abortion and infanticide. George Lindsay says that one and a half million abortions are performed in America every year, and thousands of newborn children are killed. —The aforementioned work, p. 220

The condition of England

We do not wish to prolong this subject any further. But we do not consider it appropriate to conclude this discussion without quoting a portion of George Ryley Scott’s book entitled ‘A History of Prostitution.’ The author is an Englishman, and he has depicted his motherland in the following words:

Even excluding those women who have adopted renting out their bodies as their sole means of livelihood, there is another class of women—and their number too is increasing day by day—who adopt other means to obtain the necessities of life and also engage in adultery as an accessory means of earning a few extra pennies. There is no difference at all between commercial prostitutes and these women. The only difference is that they are not called prostitutes. We may, of course, call them Amateur Prostitutes, that is, ‘professional-less prostitutes.’

The number of these lustful or nonprofessional prostitutes seen nowadays has never been witnessed at any other time. Women of this class are found in every stratum of society, high and low. If these respectable ladies are ever called prostitutes, even by hint or gesture, they become furious. But

*.Macfeddin manhood and Marriage hs.C

their expressions of displeasure and anger do not alter the actual facts. The actual fact is that there is not the slightest difference between them and the notorious, shameless prostitutes of Piccadilly.

……Immoral conduct and fearlessness regarding such matters—even conduct of the street—have become a fashion among the young women here. Smoking cigarettes, heavy drinking, painting their lips red, displaying knowledge of sexual science and contraception, discussing obscene literature, and every such matter have become a fashion among them. ……The number of girls and women who have entered into sexual relations with others without hesitation before marriage is increasing day by day. Girls who were genuinely modest and bashful virgins, once seen taking vows before the altar of dedication in church, have nowadays become extremely rare.

In describing the causes that have brought the situation to this point, the author says:

An intense desire for adornment had aroused an irresistible craving among the girls, and under its influence they had become enamored of the costly clothing of the latest fashions and various articles for enhancing beauty. This is one of the principal causes of that immoral prostitution. Hundreds of thousands of young women and girls dressed in costly, eye-catching clothing can be seen every day on the streets. Seeing them, every person of conscience will say that money earned by honest means cannot bear the expense of such clothing. Therefore, it would not be an exaggeration to say that men alone purchase their clothes for them.

This statement was as accurate fifty years ago as it is today; the only difference is that formerly the men who bought their clothes were perhaps their husbands, fathers, or brothers. But now other men buy them in their place.

Women’s emancipation is also largely responsible for this situation. Over the past several years, parental supervision and care of girls have declined so greatly that, as a result, girls nowadays have become so independent and reckless that even boys could not have become so thirty or forty years ago.

One major reason for the widespread growth of sexual promiscuity in society is that increasing numbers of girls are taking jobs in commercial establishments, offices and other fields. In these places they have opportunities to mix with men day and night. This has lowered the moral standard of men and women to a very low level. When a man takes the initiative and wishes to do something, a woman has no power to restrain him. As a result, sexual relations develop between the two, and these transcend all restraints of morality. The idea of marriage and a chaste life now finds no place in the mind of a young woman. The intoxicating period of pleasure once sought only by men of the libertine class is now desired by every young woman. Virginity and chastity are nowadays regarded as customs of an ancient age, and the girls of the modern age consider them a danger. In their view, the joy of life is to drink one’s fill, during youth, of the colorful wine of sexual pleasure. For this reason they roam around dance halls, nightclubs, hotels, brothels and the like. In that hope, they prepare to go out on pleasurable excursions by motorcar with completely unfamiliar men. In short, they voluntarily and knowingly cast themselves—and have continued to cast themselves—into an environment that naturally kindles the fire of lust in the human mind. Thereafter, they are not at all apprehensive about its inevitable natural consequence; rather, they welcome it.

The decisive question

Those who oppose the veil system in our country and in other countries actually have such a picture of life displayed before them. The bright scenes of such a life have overwhelmed their senses. These viewpoints, such moral principles, and the bright side of such material and physical pleasures have influenced their minds and intellects. Their hatred of the veil is due to the fact that the moral philosophy of the West in which they have placed their faith is completely opposed to the moral philosophy associated with the veil, and the various material benefits and pleasures they desire are obstructed by the veil. The question now is whether they are willing to accept the dark side of this way of life—that is, its poisonous consequences. They are not all in agreement on this matter.

There is one group that is prepared to accept all these consequences. In reality, according to them, this too is a bright side of the Western philosophy of life—not a dark side.

A second group regards this as the dark side of the picture and is unwilling to accept its consequences. But they have become enamored of all the means of enjoyment associated with such a way of life.

There is a third group that has neither the knowledge to understand these viewpoints nor any awareness of their consequences. They are not prepared to exert themselves by thinking and researching whether there is a causal relationship between these viewpoints and their consequences. Their duty, they believe, is simply to surrender to the current and blindly imitate the age.

These three groups are so intermingled that in discussion it becomes difficult to determine which group a participant belongs to. As a result of this intermingling, the subject under discussion generally becomes a complete jumble. For this reason, I consider it necessary to identify and separate each group and then discuss each one accordingly.

The group initiated into the creed of Western civilization

The first group has knowingly embraced those doctrines and cultural principles upon which Western civilization and culture have been built. They think with the same mind as the social architects of modern Europe and view the problems of life from the same perspective. They also wish to dye the cultural life of their own countries in that Western color. In their view, the ultimate aim of women’s education is that women should become capable of earning a livelihood and, along with that, acquire the arts and techniques of winning the hearts of other men. In their opinion, a woman’s place in the family is to be an earning member of the household like a man and to contribute her share to the common budget. In their view, a woman’s position in society is to add an element of pleasure to social life through her beauty, adornment, and graceful manner. With her cuckoo-like voice she will create a pleasurable thrill in people’s hearts. Through her musical art she will soothe their ears. Through her seductive dancing she will send a revitalizing stream through their souls. Through her manner of “her waist swaying as she walks, her youthful body trembling,” she will entertain the sons of Adam. The spectators will enjoy the sight to their hearts’ content, while electric currents will race through their cool blood cells. She will go about engaging in social service, become a member of the municipality and council, and participate in conferences and assemblies. She will spend her time and intellect solving political, cultural, and social problems. She will take part in sports, amusement, and games. In swimming, running, jumping, flying through the air, and so forth, she will break records. According to them, women have no other role in national life besides this. In short, she will do whatever lies outside the home, while she will not go anywhere near whatever lies within it. They regard this kind of life as the ideal life. They believe that this is the only path to worldly progress, and that all ancient moral perspectives that obstruct this path are meaningless and false. Just as Europe replaced ancient moral values with new ones, so have they. Material progress and bodily indulgence are, in their eyes, the only valuable and desirable things. Modesty, chastity and purity, moral character, the responsibilities and fidelity of married life, preservation of lineage, and similar matters are not merely worthless to them; they are nothing but barbaric, superstitious deceptions. No step toward progress is possible without uprooting all these things.

They are, in fact, true believers in the Western religion. By embracing the doctrines through which Europe has propagated its ideas and outlook, they too are trying to spread them widely in the countries of the East by the same means.

New Literature

First, consider their literature, which is a particularly powerful force in shaping the mind and intellect. Through this so-called literature (?) [in reality, bad literature], a determined effort is made to present the new conception of character brightly before future generations and to pull the ancient moral values out of every particle of their minds and intellects and cast them far away. Here I shall present some examples of this from Urdu literature.

A story entitled “Shirin’s Lesson” was published in a respected monthly literary magazine in this country. The author was highly educated, renowned in literary circles, and held a high position. The gist of the story is that a young woman has come to study with her teacher. During the lesson, she presents him with a love letter from a young man she loves, for the purpose of discussing it. She first met this young friend at a tea party, where a woman introduced them. From that very day, they began meeting and exchanging letters. The young woman wants her teacher to write a reply to the love letter. The teacher is trying to turn her away from all these frivolous matters and draw her toward her studies. The following conversation takes place between the young woman and the teacher on this subject:

Young Woman: I do want to study. But I want to study something that will help me fulfill the hopes of my waking dreams. I do not want to study something that will make me remain an old maid from now on.

Teacher: Well, apart from this great man, do you have any other young male friends?

Young Woman: Yes, there are several. But this young man’s distinctive quality is that he scolds in a very sweet voice.

Teacher: Well, tell me, what would happen if your father learned about this letter?

Young Woman: Good gracious! Didn’t Father write love letters of this kind in his youth? He was quite a dashing gentleman. And what would be so surprising if he still wrote them? He isn’t old yet!

Teacher: Fifty years ago, it was impossible even to imagine that anyone would write such a love letter to a girl from a respectable family.

Young Woman: Then did people in those days fall in love only with members of the lower classes? Well, then the lower-class people must have lived quite comfortably in those days, while the respectable classes were rather wicked.

The tone of the story writer’s literary philosophy rings out in Shirin’s final remarks.

Shirin says: New young women like us have a double responsibility. It is our duty to recover all the joys and pleasures that our elders have lost and to eliminate the habits of anger and falsehood that exist.

A few years ago, another renowned literary magazine published a moderately short story entitled “Remorse.” In simple language, its summary is as follows:

An unmarried girl from a respectable family falls in love with a young man. Without her parents’ knowledge, she summons him to her room. As a result of establishing an illicit sexual relationship, she becomes pregnant. Then, in order to prove this reprehensible and impure act of hers justified, she mutters to herself:

Why am I so anxious? Why is my heart trembling so? … Does my conscience sting me? Am I ashamed of my weakness? But the event of that beautiful moonlit night has been written in golden letters in the book of my life. I regard the memory of those intoxicated moments of youth as a precious treasure of my life. Am I not ready to sacrifice everything to regain those moments?….

Then why is my heart trembling? Is it because of sin? Have I committed any sin? No, I have committed no sin. Against whom have I sinned? Who has been harmed by my sin? I made a sacrifice. I sacrificed myself for him. Alas, if only I could have sacrificed even more for him! I am not afraid of sin. But yes, I am afraid of this social witch. Her strangely meaningful, suspicious gaze is falling upon me….

Why should I be afraid of him, then? Is it because of my own sin? But what is my sin? Does no other girl in society do what I have done? Ah, that sweet night—the touch of his lips’ nectar upon my lips! The close embrace! And on his fragrant, honeyed chest, I lost myself in an inexpressible ecstasy—and what of it? What else would anyone have done? Would another woman have rejected him at that moment?

Sin? I have never committed any sin. I am not remorseful at all. I am ready to do it again… Chastity? What exactly is chastity? Virtuous virginity, or purity of mind? I am no longer a virgin. Have I lost my chastity?

Let the peace-hating witch called society do whatever it pleases. What can it do to me? Nothing. Why should I fear its brazen mockery? Why should I be afraid of its whispering? Why should I let my face grow pale? Why should I hide my face because of its taunts and jokes? My heart tells me that I did the right thing. Then why should I behave like a thief? Why should I not proclaim with drums and trumpets that I did this—and did it well?

By presenting arguments and proofs of this kind, the new writers wish to teach every girl of the modern age—probably their own sisters and daughters as well—this attitude and way of thinking. Their teaching is that if a young woman has the opportunity to receive another man’s embrace on a moonlit night, she must dissolve herself into his heated bosom. For in such a situation, this alone is possible. When a woman faces such circumstances, she can do nothing else. This is not a sinful act, but rather sacrifice and self-surrender. It does not diminish the honor of chastity. If virginity is surrendered with purity of mind, what does chastity matter? It remains written in golden letters in a woman’s life. Her conduct and character should likewise be such that the whole book of her life is written in golden letters.

Now there remains society. Therefore, if society blames such a virtuous and chaste woman, it must be called a disturber of the peace and a witch. Who is guilty: those who blame these girls who have made such a sacrifice, or those respectable unmarried girls who cannot ignore the sweet embrace of an uncovered bosom on a beautiful moonlit night? A tyrannical society that calls such a beautiful act ugly can have no right to command people’s respect, nor should anyone have to hide his or her face in fear of it after doing such a beautiful act. Every girl must openly and fearlessly display this moral greatness and, instead of being ashamed herself, make society ashamed.

Even professional prostitutes never displayed such audacity and boldness. For those unfortunate women had no moral philosophy by which sin could be made virtue and virtue sin. The prostitutes of earlier times did ruin their chastity, it is true, but they considered themselves degraded and sinful. But now the new literature wants to push the daughter and daughter-in-law of every family several steps ahead of the prostitutes of old. For it is inventing a new philosophy to conceal evil deeds and obscenity.

There is another magazine that enjoys considerable esteem in our country’s literary circles. A story entitled “The Younger Brother-in-Law” was published in this magazine. The story writer’s father earned great respect in society by writing high-quality moral literature for women. He was also honored by women for this noble work. Yet in the story, his own son beautifully portrays and presents before his sisters the character of a girl who, before marriage, feels an inexpressible thrill in body and mind at the thought of the full youth and sexual excitement of her imagined younger brother-in-law. Even in her unmarried life, her outlook was such that she believed: “A youth that passes away in silence and tranquility is a sign of idleness. In my opinion, agitation and exuberance are inevitable in youth, and the attraction and repulsion of beauty and love are its offering.” With this outlook and these ideas, when the girl saw her husband’s bearded face at the wedding ceremony, her delicate impulses became shrouded in mist. She then decided, in accordance with her previously imagined desires, that she would be bound in the bonds of love to her husband’s own brother. The opportunity soon arose. When her husband went abroad for his education, the younger brother-in-law and sister-in-law indulged themselves to their hearts’ content, and both committed the utmost betrayal against the brother and husband. The story writer reveals this misdeed in the adulterous girl’s own writing. She writes and sends a letter to her unmarried friend describing all her activities. She gives a detailed account of how, after passing through all the preliminary stages, the love between the younger brother-in-law and sister-in-law reached its culmination. Nothing of the bodily and mental ecstasy occurring during their close embraces and sexual intercourse has been left unmentioned in the letter. Only a depiction of the sexual act itself is absent. Perhaps this omission was deliberately retained on the assumption that the readers would fill the gap themselves with the brush of imagination.

If the example from France described earlier is compared with the new literature, it will be clearly evident that this latter group of adventurers has set out along the same path toward the same destination. Minds and intellects are being shaped in outlook and morality for that way of life; their attention is focused especially on women, so that not the slightest trace of modesty and dignity remains in them.

New Culture

In practice, it is not only this moral philosophy and way of life that are found; along with them, a capitalist cultural system and Western democratic principles have also become operative. These three forces, acting together, are producing the very picture of Western life that has been constructed. The most vulgar and obscene literature on sexual science is being written and widely distributed among school and college students. Pictures of nudity and immoral women are adorning every newspaper, pamphlet, home, and shop. Extremely obscene and tasteless gramophone records are being played in houses and in markets and bazaars. Everything the cinema does is increasing sexual excitement. On the bright white screen, it makes obscenity and shamelessness so attractive that every boy and girl accepts the lives of the actors and actresses as an excellent ideal. When young men and women, after watching such desire-stimulating performances, step outside the theater, they eagerly look for opportunities to spread love traps in every direction. All this is simply various forms of capitalist conveniences. Through the favor of this capitalist system of life, conditions are rapidly arising in the great cities in which it becomes essential for women to seek their own livelihoods. It is with the help of this oppressive system that propaganda, along with medicines and apparatus, has begun.

The blessings of the modern democratic system reached the countries of the East chiefly through England and France. It primarily opened the path of political and social activity for women.

Secondly, it established certain institutions in which unrestricted interaction between men and women became essential. Thirdly, it loosened the restraints of law so greatly that not only the expression of a desire for obscenity, but even putting it into practice, is in most cases not considered a crime at all.

Under these circumstances, those who have decided with complete self-confidence to follow this path of life have undergone an almost complete revolution in their morality and social conduct. Their women now go out in such dress that one might mistake them for film actresses. Their boldness has reached such an extreme that the nudity of their clothing, the shameless expression of their beauty, the excessive elaboration of their adornment, and every graceful gesture clearly show that, apart from becoming sexual magnets, these women have no other aim or purpose. Their shamelessness has reached such an extreme that bathing in bathing attire with men, photographing themselves in that condition, and publishing the photographs in newspapers are not considered shameful for any respectable woman of this class. Indeed, the question of shame does not arise there at all. According to modern moral doctrine, all parts of the human body are equal. If the palms of the hands and soles of the feet may be left uncovered, then what is wrong with leaving the buttocks and pubic area uncovered? To them, the outward expression of the enjoyment of life’s pleasures, collectively called art, is above all morality. Indeed, it is their standard for character. On this basis, fathers and brothers swell with joy and pride when they see their daughters and sisters, before them on the stage, receiving the applause of hundreds of eager listeners and spectators through dancing, singing, and amorous graceful gestures. Material success—another name for the purpose of life… In their view, it is more valuable than all those things sacrificed to obtain it: once a woman has become a desired object and gained the ability to win social popularity, even if she loses her chastity she has lost nothing; rather, she has gained everything. For this reason, they cannot understand at all why it should be blameworthy for a girl to study alongside boys at college or, in the fullness of youth, to travel alone to Europe for education.

The devoted slaves of the West must make a decision

These are the very people who most severely criticize the practice of purdah. In their view, purdah is such a trivial and obvious falsehood that ridicule, jokes, and mockery are sufficient to abolish it. But this notion is exactly like that of a person who feels no need for a nose on his face and therefore mocks everyone whose nose he sees. Only fools can be defeated by such foolish reasoning. If they possessed even a trace of rationality, they would certainly understand that there is in fact a fundamental difference in values between them and us. What we consider valuable is worthless to them. Therefore, an act that we consider necessary according to our own values is inevitably regarded by them as not only unnecessary but meaningless. Yet in place of discussing the real substance of such a fundamental difference of opinion, only a person of limited understanding can quarrel over its branches and offshoots. In determining human values, we must follow the natural law alone. According to natural law, that which the human physical constitution and nature demand, and through which human welfare, happiness, and peace can be achieved, is what truly deserves to be established as a value.

Therefore, let us test by this standard whether we or you are on the right path in this disagreement over values. Bring whatever evidence and arguments of knowledge and science you possess; we shall present what we possess. Then observe, like just and knowledgeable people, where the weight lies. If by this method we establish the standard of values, you may, if you wish, accept the values founded on sound knowledge and reason, or you may follow values adopted merely out of inclination. But remember: if you adopt the second course, your condition will become so pitiable that instead of mocking our way of acting, you yourselves will become objects of ridicule.

The Second Group

After them there is another group. The first group includes both non-Muslims and nominal Muslims. But the second group consists entirely of Muslims. Among them, a strange mixture of half-purdah and half-progress is seen nowadays. They are neither here nor there, like a wavering group. On the one hand, they cherish an Islamic inclination; they follow the standard presented by Islam for character, civilization, refinement, and good conduct; they wish to adorn their women with the ornaments of dignity and chastity and protect their homes from moral impurity. Nor are they willing to accept all the consequences that naturally emerge from the fundamental principles of Western culture and social life. But, on the other hand, while crushing the principles and laws of the Islamic social system, they lead their wives, sisters, and daughters along the path of Western civilization, restraining themselves somewhat and shrinking back somewhat. They hold the mistaken belief that by combining half the Western and half the Islamic way, they will enjoy the advantages of both civilizations—that Islamic character will remain intact in their homes and the discipline of family life will also remain in order. At the same time, their social life will contain not only the evils of the Western social system, but also its self-deception, indulgence, and material conveniences. But the first point is that it cannot be right to weave together the halves of two opposing civilizations with different ideals and goals. For when such incompatibilities are combined, there is a greater likelihood that the defects of both will come together rather than their virtues.

Secondly, it is also unreasonable and contrary to nature to think that once the bonds of Islam’s firm moral system have been loosened and people have begun to enjoy breaking the law, they can still be confined within a boundary that carries no risk of harm. The changing of these half-naked garments, this craving for beauty and adornment, this initial training in bold shamelessness at gatherings of friends, this growing fascination with cinema, nude pictures, and love-filled stories and dramas, and this Western-style education for girls may perhaps not be able to spread to their full extent; perhaps the present generation may remain safe from their evils. But to think that the future generation will likewise remain safe from their evils would be a sign of folly. In culture and social systems, mistakes often begin with trivial matters. Yet that very trivial error grows through the generations and assumes a terrifying form. The consequences of the false foundations upon which the modern form of society was established in Europe and America did not become apparent immediately; rather, their full consequences have only recently become completely manifest in the third and fourth generations. Therefore, this mixture of the Western and Islamic systems and this half-progress are not truly anything lasting or stable; their natural inclination is toward Westernism. Those who are following this path should know that although they themselves may not reach the destination of the journey they have begun, their sons and grandsons will certainly reach it.

The Decisive Question

Under these circumstances, before proceeding further, everyone must think and investigate deeply and settle the following fundamental question. It is this:

Are you prepared to suffer the consequences of the Western social system that have become manifest in Europe and America and that are the natural consequences of that very social system? Do you want an atmosphere of such excitation and sexual frenzy to arise in your society as well? Do you want such a flood of shamelessness, lack of chastity, and obscenity to spread among your people? Do you want venereal diseases to spread like an epidemic? Do you want family and household discipline to be destroyed? Do you want divorce, marital separation, and the widespread practice of separation to become common? Do you want young men and women to become accustomed to free sexual relations? Do you want population growth to be halted through birth control, abortion, feticide, infanticide, and similar practices? Do you want young men and women to destroy their greatest effective strength and health through excessive sexual frenzy? Do you even want premature sexual tendencies to begin emerging among underage boys and girls, with the result that instability in their mental and physical development becomes firmly rooted from the very beginning?

If you are prepared to accept all this for the sake of material gain and sensual desire, then follow the path of Western civilization with an unhesitating heart, and from then on do not even take the name of Islam upon your lips. Before following that path, you must also publicly declare that you have severed your relationship with Islam, so that afterward you cannot deceive anyone in the name of Islam and your disgraced condition does not become a cause of shame or blame for Islam and Muslims.

But if you are not prepared to accept all these consequences, if you recognize the necessity of a great and sacred culture in which pure character and dignified rights can be upheld, in which people can find a peaceful environment for their mental, spiritual, and material development, in which men and women can perform their cultural duties according to their highest abilities while remaining safe from the errors and shortcomings of mutual provocation, in which the foundation of culture—that is, the family—can be firmly established, in which offspring are safeguarded and there is no fear of racial intermixture, in which family life becomes an abode of joy and peace, a friendly educational platform for children, and all members of the family can work together with mutual sympathy, then you cannot turn toward the West in order to achieve these lofty objectives. For the West has proceeded in an entirely opposite direction, and reaching the East by traveling westward is logically impossible as well. If this is truly your desire, then you must adopt the path of Islam.

But before taking this path, you must remove from your hearts all desire for the material gains and sensual indulgences that accompany it, and you must also erase from your minds the outward viewpoint and mentality of Western self-deception. You must likewise abandon all the principles adopted from Western culture and social organization. Islam has its own fundamental principles and objectives. It also has its own eternal sociological outlook. In accordance with the natural demands of its fundamental principles, objectives, and sociological outlook, it has formulated a corresponding social system. It maintains this social system through a special discipline and adherence to rules. The utmost skill and particular attention to human psychology have been applied in establishing these rules, principles, and discipline. Without them, this social system cannot be free from flaws, shortcomings, and disorder. It is not an imaginary system like Plato’s democracy, nor Sir Thomas More’s imagined ideal kingdom, Utopia, or Ramrajya; rather, it is a system that has passed through fourteen centuries of trial by fire. During this long period, in no country or nation has even one-tenth of those evils appeared under its influence that became manifest within a single century in Western civilization. If you wish to benefit from this strong and well-planned social system, you must fully observe its discipline and rules. You will have no right to insert into it any self-invented, or borrowed from others, obsolete and condemned practice that is contrary to the nature of this social system.

Since the third group consists of a number of foolish, thoughtless people who lack the ability to exercise judgment and reach sound conclusions, they deserve to be disregarded. Therefore, it is preferable to proceed without discussing them.

The Natural Law

Nature created human beings, like all other living creatures, divided into two classes—male and female—and gave both a natural mutual attraction. But research into other animals shows that their division into males and females, and the natural attraction between them, serve solely to ensure the continuity of their species. For this reason, they have been given attraction—in other words, sexual feeling—only to the extent necessary for reproduction and thus the continuity of their species. There is a controlling force in their nature that prevents them from exceeding a definite limit in sexual matters. In contrast, sexual feeling in human beings is unlimited, unrestrained, and far more intense than in other animals. Their sexual activity is subject to no restriction of time or season. There is no force in their nature capable of confining them within a particular boundary. An eternal mutual sexual feeling exists between men and women. They possess inexhaustible sources of mutual attraction and sexual feeling. Their hearts contain a tremendous longing for desire and love. Their physical structure, bodily beauty, grace, sense of touch, and every limb have created a desire for the opposite sex. Their voices, manner of walking, bodily form, graceful gestures, and the like possess attraction in full measure. Moreover, the realm of nature surrounding them has been filled with countless elements that awaken their sexual desire and make them enamored of one another. The gentle breeze, the murmur of rivers, the lovely verdure spread across the land, the fragrance of flowers, the songs of birds, the rumbling of clouds, and the beauty of moonlit nights—in short, every scene of natural beauty and every radiant beauty in the created world directly or indirectly awakens human sexual desire.

A review and examination of the physical constitution of human beings reveals that the immense reservoir of power within it is a combination of vital energy, working energy, and sexual energy. There are several ductless glands in the body that stimulate particular organs by secreting life-juice, or hormone. These ductless glands produce efficiency, skill, intelligence, and the like in human beings. In addition, these glands awaken sexual feeling in them and bring about the emergence of emotional sensations that stimulate sexual capacity. To give rise to these emotional sensations, they provide the various means of beauty, grace, adornment, and decoration. They also create in the eyes, ears, sense of smell, sense of touch, and imagination the ability to be attracted to all these embellishments.

*Inside the human body are several ductless endocrine glands. The fluid secreted by these ductless glands is called hormone. Hormones stimulate particular organs and limbs of the body. The following nine ductless endocrine glands are found in men and women:

Pineal, Pituitary, Thyroid & Parathyroid, Thymus, Pancreas, Adrenal, Ovary, Placenta.

All of the above are present in the female body, while only some are present in the male body. —Translator

This kind of efficiency in nature is also visible in the storehouse of human mental powers. The stimulating forces within the mind have two great desires. The first inspires a person to secure the safety of his own existence and to serve himself. The second compels him to establish a relationship with the opposite sex. In youth, when a person’s working capacity fully develops, this second desire becomes so powerful that it often suppresses the first. Under its influence, a person becomes so deeply affected that he does not hesitate to sacrifice his own life or knowingly and willingly cast himself into destruction.

The Influence of Sexual Attraction on the Formation of Civilization

What is all this for? Is it merely to ensure the continuity of the species—that is, for reproduction? Not at all. For the survival of the human race, reproduction is not needed to the extent that it is needed among fish, goats, and other animals. Then what could be the reason that nature has created a greater degree of sexual feeling and sexual attraction in human beings than in all other living creatures, and has created the greatest number of stimulating elements for this purpose? Is all this, then, merely for human indulgence and pleasure? That too is not the case. Nature has not presented pleasure and indulgence as the sole goal and purpose of life in any field. In order to motivate human beings and other living creatures to perform some great purpose, it has presented pleasure and sexual enjoyment as a form of delight, so that they may perform that task as if it were their own. Now consider what great purpose nature has before it in this matter. However much this subject may be examined and studied, no explanation can be found other than that nature wishes to create a civilization through the human race alone, excluding all other creatures.

For this reason, such a desire for passion and love has been created in the human mind that it demands not merely physical union and reproduction, but an eternal companionship, intimate communion, and spiritual relationship.

For this reason, human beings have been given sexual feeling in greater measure than the capacity for intercourse. If even one-tenth of the sexual desire and attraction within them were used for reproduction, their health would be destroyed. Their physical strength would be exhausted before they reached a normal age. The purpose of the excess of sexual attraction in human beings is not that they should engage in sexual activity more than all animals and birds; rather, its sole purpose is to bring women and men together and make their mutual relationship lasting and strong.

For this reason, along with attraction and desire, one finds in the female nature modesty and reserve, an affected reluctance toward sexual activity, an impulse to flee, and a natural tendency to resist. This exists, to a greater or lesser degree, in every woman. This impulse to flee and affected reluctance can also be seen in female animals. But in human women its strength and extent are greater. It has been made even more rigorous through the emotional force of modesty and reserve. This shows that the purpose of the sexual magnetism in human beings is nothing other than an eternal union. It does not mean that every sexual desire will culminate solely in sexual activity.

For this reason, human children have been created weaker and more helpless than the young of all other animals. Compared with animals, a human child remains dependent on its parents for safety and care for several years. It acquires the ability to stand on its own feet and become self-reliant only much later. The underlying purpose of this, too, is that the relationship between woman and man is not confined to a mere sexual relationship; rather, as a consequence of this relationship, they are compelled to cooperate and assist one another.

Greater affection and tenderness toward children has been poured into the human heart than into that of other creatures. Animals and birds care for their young for only a very short time and then abandon them. After that, no relationship remains between them. Indeed, they may not even recognize one another. Human beings, on the other hand, remain attached to their children with affection and tenderness even after the period of their early care has passed. This affection continues through sons, grandsons, and successive generations. The selfish, animal nature of human beings becomes so deeply influenced by this tenderness, love, and affection that they desire more for their children than they desire for themselves. An aspiration arises in their hearts to arrange the most prosperous life possible for their children. They leave the fruits of their own labor and toil for them. Nature’s purpose may be to transform the sexual relationship between men and women into an eternal union through the creation of this powerful love and attachment. This eternal union and companionship are made a support for the formation of the family. Then the bonds of kindred affection unite many other families through marriage. As a result, through the combination of love and those who are loved, an organization of mutual help, cooperation, and exchange is established among them. In this way, a social and cultural relationship comes into existence.

The Fundamental Problem of Civilization

It has thus become clear that the sole purpose of the sexual desire poured into the atoms and innermost soul of the human body, and for whose proper assistance stimulative substances have been extensively gathered at every level of the created universe, is to draw human beings from individuality toward collectivity. Nature has implanted this desire as the true stimulating force of human civilization. As a result of this sexual desire and attraction, a bond is formed between the two sexes of the human race, and this bond becomes the beginning of social life.

After examination and review, it became self-evident that the problem of relations between men and women is in fact a fundamental problem of civilization itself. The welfare and corruption, progress and decline, strength and weakness of civilization depend upon its solution. Within this aspect of the human race there is an animal relationship, which may otherwise be called merely sexual and directly lustful. It has no purpose other than preserving the existence of the race or reproduction. The second relationship is human. Its purpose is for the two to assist and cooperate with one another, according to their respective abilities and natural aptitudes, in fulfilling a common purpose through their combined strength. For this assistance, their sexual love functions as a means of connection and cooperation. These animal and human elements together, at the same time, carry out civilizational activities through it and gather additional individuals to keep those activities continuing. The welfare or ill-fare of civilization depends upon whether complete harmony and balance are maintained through the combination of these two kinds of elements.

Essential Matters in the Formation of a Pure and Chaste Civilization

Having examined and reviewed this problem, we now need to understand how a proper harmony and natural integration of the animal and human relationships between women and men can be achieved for a pure and pious civilization. Moreover, we must also understand the errors and deviations in establishing harmony within this integration that cause civilization to become disordered.

1. Moderation in Sexual Desire

The most important and foremost question is how this sexual desire and attraction can be restrained. It has already been stated that human beings possess this desire to a greater degree than other animals. Not only is the sexual stimulating force within the human body powerful; countless sexually stimulating elements are also scattered throughout the vast external world. Nature itself has gathered these elements in such abundance that if people deliberately adopt means, through their inventive power, to increase and improve them, and embrace a civilization in which their sexual thirst continually grows and they then keep seeking easy ways to quench it, it will inevitably cross the desired limits. The animal element in human beings will triumph over the human element, and this animal demon will devour both their humanity and their civilization.

Nature has made every aspect of sexual relations, their initiation and their stimulating elements, pleasurable. But it has already been indicated that nature has employed this kind of heightened pleasure solely for its own purpose—that is, the formation of civilization. If this pleasure exceeds its limits and people become absorbed in it, it will not only destroy civilization; it may also become, and has become, the cause of humanity’s destruction many times in the past.

Examine the records and histories of the nations that have been destroyed. Sexual madness had crossed all limits among them. Their literature was filled with writings of this stimulating kind. Their ideas, stories, poems, paintings, images, places of worship, houses, and everything else provide clear evidence of it. Observe also the condition of those nations that are now moving toward destruction. However they may call their sexual madness by any beautiful and innocent name—art, erotic literature, appreciation of beauty, or anything else—changing the wording of the explanation does not alter the underlying truth. Does this not mean that in society women are eager for the company of men and men for the company of women? Why does the desire for cultivating beauty and adorning themselves continue to grow among women and men? What could be the reason that, in mixed society, women’s bodies have become unclothed? What is it for which women expose every part of their bodies and display them before the public, while men raise the demand, ‘More, more’? What does it signify that nude pictures, nude statues, and nude dancing are receiving the greatest acclaim? Is this not also why no pleasure is found in a film until the enjoyment of love and romance is obtained and sexual relations begin in its dialogue and actions? If these and many similar scenes are not for sexual madness, then what are they for? What else can be the consequence, besides destruction, of a civilization in which such an imbalanced sexually stimulating environment is created?

In such an environment, the intensity of sexual desire, repeated stimulation, and constant sexual activity inevitably cause the descendants to become weak; their physical and mental powers become impaired, their powers of thought become scattered and disordered, obscenity increases, sexual diseases spread, and movements for contraception, abortion, and the killing of fetuses and newborns begin.*

Women and men continue to engage in sexual intercourse like animals. They use the greater sexual desire that nature has given them than it has given other creatures for purposes contrary to nature’s intended purpose, and their bestiality surpasses that of all animals. Even monkeys and apes are defeated by them. There is no doubt that such an intense animal impulse will destroy human culture and civilization, and even the whole of humanity. Those who become immersed in it will suffer such moral degradation that they will sink so low that there will be no hope of rising again.

1.A certain doctor says, “The beginning of adulthood brings about many important changes. At that time, a revolutionary state arises in the activities of the mind and body, and they develop and unfold in every direction. During this period, all strength is needed to endure these changes and to attain that development and unfolding. Therefore, people’s resistance to disease is very low at that time. The long period required for normal physical development and unfolding, the improvement and growth of the limbs and organs, and mental and physical changes—after which a person passes from childhood into youth—causes fatigue in the human body. For during this time the human body is engaged in the utmost exertion. In this state, it would be inappropriate to place an abnormal burden upon it; sexual activity and sexual stimulation in particular would be fatal for it.”

Another renowned German psychologist and sociologist says, “Because the sexual organs produce an extraordinary sensation of supreme pleasure, gratification, and emotional excitement, they are always ready to consume a large portion of our mental energy. If they gain dominance, they will keep a person absorbed in personal pleasure and enjoyment instead of civilizational service. Through a small degree of carelessness, they will make a person’s sexual life unbalanced and harmful instead of beneficial. Preventing this danger ought to be the great purpose of education.”

Likewise, the same consequence will occur in a civilization where extreme deprivation is adopted instead of what is naturally necessary. Just as it is harmful to exceed the limits in satisfying sexual desire, so too is it harmful to suppress it excessively. A civilizational system that seeks to make people celibate and renunciants struggles against nature. But nature is never defeated by its opponent; rather, it crushes that opponent completely. It is entirely true that no civilization can be built upon the foundation of true monasticism, because in reality this is opposed to the formation of culture and civilization. Of course, by firmly establishing the doctrine of monasticism in people’s minds, a civilizational system can certainly create such a celibate environment in which sexual relations are regarded as reprehensible, hateful, and vulgar. Refraining from them will be considered the standard of character. But suppressing sexual desire means suppressing humanity. It will not be suppressed alone; rather, human talent, productive power, intelligence, energy and courage, resolve and valor—all will be suppressed along with it. As a result of its suppression, all human strength will become inert. The particles of the blood will grow cold and coagulate, and people will have no power within them to stimulate them. For this sexual power is the greatest stimulating force in human beings.

Therefore, the primary duty of a good and pious civilization will be to protect sexual desire from excess and extreme deprivation, bring it into a moderate and well-balanced state, and regulate it thoroughly through suitable rules and principles. The organization of social life should be such that, on the one hand, all the abnormal stimulation and excitement that people create through their desires and devotion to pleasure must be stopped. On the other hand, all the means intended by nature for calming and satisfying natural stimulation must remain open.

2. Establishing the Family Foundation

Now this question naturally arises in the mind: what is nature’s will? Have we been kept immersed in darkness in this matter so that we may act as we please with our eyes closed and call that nature’s desire? Rather, if we reflect and investigate the signs of nature, can we not learn its intention? Many people probably hold the former view. That is why, without paying attention to the signs of nature, whenever something occurs they declare it, as they please, to be nature’s intention. But when a seeker of facts sets out in search of them, after advancing only a few steps it seems to him that nature is pointing clearly with its finger toward its intention.

It is well known that, behind creating human beings as male and female like other creatures and placing sexual attraction between them, nature’s primary purpose is reproduction. But with regard to human beings, reproduction is not nature’s only demand; rather, nature expects something more from human beings besides this. With a little thought and investigation, we can learn what that demand is and what kind it is.

The first thing that attracts our attention is that, unlike all other animals, only the human child requires more time, labor, and attention for care and upbringing. Even if we consider it simply as an individual creature, we see that several years pass before it can fulfill its biological needs—that is, acquire the ability to obtain food and protect itself. During the first two or three years it remains so helpless that it cannot survive without its mother’s constant care and upbringing.

It is evident that, no matter at what preliminary stage of barbarism human beings may remain, they are not mere animals. Some degree of civilization inevitably becomes necessary for their lives. Thereafter, because of this civilization, two further demands are added to the natural demands of raising children. First, all the civilizational means and resources that the caregiver can obtain must be devoted to raising the children. Second, the child must be educated in such a way that he may be prepared to conduct the affairs of the civilizational environment into which he was born and to take the place of those who came before him. As civilization continues to advance, both these demands become increasingly burdensome. On the one hand, the need for the essential means and unavoidable provisions required for raising children continues to increase; on the other hand, civilization not only requires, for its existence, appropriately educated and trained workers according to its stature, but also desires, for its development and continual progress, that the future generation be better than the present one—in other words, that every child’s caregiver try to make the child better than himself. This is an ultimate sacrifice, which impels human beings to sacrifice their own self-interest.

These are the demands of human nature. Woman is the foremost spokesperson for these demands. A man may, after enjoying a woman’s company for a short time, free himself forever from his responsibility. But the woman continues to suffer the natural consequences of that association for years, even for her entire life. From conception onward, she must bear the consequences of that association for at least five years. But if the full demands of civilization are to be observed, this means that the woman who enjoyed the pleasure of a man’s company for a moment must bear her grave responsibility for a long fifteen years. Now the question is: how can only one party undertake a shared responsibility? So long as a woman is not free from the fear of her partner’s betrayal, so long as she is not assured regarding the raising of her child, and so long as she is not relieved of obtaining the necessities of her daily life, how can she be prepared to bear such a grave responsibility? For a woman who has no guardian or protector, conception is nothing but an accident, a calamity—an extremely terrible calamity. Her desire to escape it is entirely natural. Otherwise, how could she welcome such a conception?

If the preservation of the human race and the establishment and advancement of civilization are considered necessary, then it is inevitable that, when a man places a burden upon a woman, he too must share in bearing that burden. But how can a man be persuaded to take part in this? If we consider nature’s inevitable directive for preserving the existence of the race, we find that what a man has to do in this regard is completed within moments through sexual intercourse. Thereafter, the entire burden remains upon the woman alone and in no way applies to the man. Even from the perspective of sexual attraction, it is clear that this does not compel a man to remain with that woman. If he wishes, a man can leave one woman and establish a relationship with another. In this way he can sow his seed in every field. Therefore, if all these matters are left to his will, there can be no reason for him willingly to undertake the subsequent burden. In such circumstances, is there anything that will compel him to spend his labor and earnings on that woman and her unborn child? Why should he feel affection for this pregnant woman instead of another beautiful maiden? Why should he spend his own money raising a useless lump of flesh? Why should he sacrifice his sleep because of the cries of a newborn child? Why should he suffer because this little devil breaks everything he owns, dirties the whole house, and refuses to obey anyone’s restrictions?

Nature itself has provided a partial solution to this problem. It has created in woman beauty, sweetness, captivating power, and the capacity to sacrifice and devote herself for the sake of love and affection. By employing these weapons, she can overcome the man’s selfishness and arbitrariness and bring him under her control. Moreover, nature has created in the human child such a wondrous power of captivating others that, despite his painful, destructive, and mischievous nature, he keeps his parents bound by ties of affection and tenderness. Yet these things alone are not sufficient to compel people, year after year, to bear loss, hardship, and sacrifice in order to fulfill their moral and civilizational duties. It must be remembered that Satan, humanity’s eternal enemy, is constantly attached to human beings. He is always trying to turn them away from the natural path. In his bag of deceptions he has an inexhaustible supply of arguments and temptations with which to lead astray the people of every nation in every age.

It is one of the fundamental powers of religion that it inspires men and women to sacrifice and devote themselves to the nation and to civilization. It prepares the self-seeking animal in human form for sacrifice. Only the prophets sent by Allah, having correctly understood the will of nature, proposed marriage as the proper method of sexual relations between men and women and of civilizational cooperation. It was through their teaching and guidance that marriage became established among all nations throughout the world. On the moral foundation they preached, such spiritual capacity for action arose in human beings that they could endure hardship, suffering, and loss for its sake. Otherwise, in reality, who could be a greater enemy of children than their parents? The social rules established by the prophets laid the foundation of the family system, whose firm grip compels boys and girls to undertake such responsible relationships and such joint work. Otherwise, the animal demands of youth become so powerful that, without external discipline, a mere sense of moral responsibility cannot restrain them from sexual promiscuity. Sexual desire is inherently anti-social. It gives rise to a love of selfishness, arbitrariness, and anarchy. It contains neither stability nor a sense of responsibility. It generates incentive only for temporary pleasure and enjoyment. Subduing this demon and obtaining its service for a form of social life that requires patience, forbearance, labor, sacrifice, a sense of responsibility, and family order is not easy. Family order alone confines this demon in a small bottle and takes away from it the agency of sinfulness and licentiousness. It then appoints it as the agent of the continual cooperation and joint work between men and women that are essential for building life. Without this, the civilizational life of humanity would end; people would live like animals, and ultimately the human race would disappear from the face of the earth.

Therefore, to free sexual desire from arbitrariness and excess and fulfill its natural demands, the only path that nature itself wishes to keep open is that men and women should be united permanently through marriage and that the foundation of the family system should be established through this union. The equipment needed to run a vast and extensive factory such as civilization is manufactured in this small workshop [factory] of the family. As soon as boys and girls enter youth, the directors of the workshop consider arranging a sound conjugal system for them so that better descendants may be born from their marital union. Thereafter, every worker in this workshop will try with complete sincerity to develop the descendants born after them as well as possible. As soon as the newborn child begins life’s first moment in the world’s field of activity, he enters, within the family’s boundaries, an environment of love, care, maintenance, and education, as though receiving the ‘Water of Life’ [elixir of life] for his development. In reality, only within the family does a child find the companionship of two people who not only love him, but also cherish in their hearts the desire that he attain a higher status than that into which he was born. Nowhere else in the world do parents desire to see their child better, happier, and more prosperous in every respect. Thus, willingly or unknowingly, they try to make the future generation better than the present one. There is not the slightest trace of selfishness in this effort. They desire nothing for themselves; they desire only the welfare of their children, and they find the reward for their labor in seeing their children’s lives fulfilled and successful. Where else in this workshop of the family can such devoted laborers and selfless workers be found—people who not only perform unpaid labor for the welfare of humanity, but can spend their time, peace, strength, abilities, and everything earned through their labor in serving them? Who else is prepared to sacrifice every valuable possession for this work while someone else enjoys its fruits? Who else finds the reward for his labor in producing excellent workers and servants for others? Can there be any purer and nobler aspiration of humanity than this?

Every year, for the survival of the human race and the continuity and advancement of human civilization, millions upon millions of such couples are needed—couples who can willingly and gladly devote themselves to the responsibility of this noble service and, by entering into marriage, lay the foundation of such a field of work. The great factory operating in the world can function only in this way: if such volunteers are continually formed and provide people to run this factory. If new people are not recruited, and the old workers consequently become unfit for work, the number of workers will gradually decline. One day this formative entity will lie disabled. Those who operate this machine of civilization have not only the duty to keep it running during their own lives; it is also their duty to try to obtain people who will take their place.

Viewed from this perspective, marriage is not merely a lawful means of satisfying sexual desire; rather, it is an essential social duty. Society has a natural right over the individual, and the individual can never be granted the right to reserve for himself the decision whether or not to marry. Those who refuse to marry without a reasonable cause are not merely parasites upon society; they are also traitors and plunderers. Every person born into the world continues, from taking his first breath until entering youth, to enjoy the inexhaustible resources accumulated by those who came before him. It is through the institutions they established that he receives the opportunity to live, to be raised and developed, and to advance humanity. During this period he only continues to receive; he gives nothing. Society spends its resources and time to perfect his incomplete powers, in the hope that when he himself becomes capable of giving something, he will certainly do so. Now, if upon reaching adulthood he claims personal freedom and arbitrariness and says that he will satisfy only his own impulses but will not fulfill the responsibilities and duties connected with those impulses, then he is betraying and deceiving society. Every moment of his life must be called wrongdoing and injustice. If society possesses even the slightest awareness, instead of considering this offender a gentleman, lady, or honorable person, it will regard him as a thief, bandit, and deceiver. Willingly or unwillingly, we have become possessors of all the wealth that our predecessors left for us. How, then, can we be free to decide whether or not to fulfill the purpose of the natural law through which we inherited this legacy? Shall we or shall we not produce future descendants to inherit such wealth of the human race? Shall we or shall we not form a second group, fashioned as we were, to manage all these resources?

3. Eradicating Sexual Licentiousness

Along with establishing marriage and the foundation of the family, it is also necessary to block every avenue for satisfying sexual desire outside the fortress walls of marriage. For otherwise, nature’s purpose cannot be fulfilled—the purpose for which it demands marriage and the establishment of the family foundation.

As in the ancient Age of Ignorance, even in the present age of ignorance most people regard adultery as a natural act. In their view, marriage is merely an artificial and superfluous thing invented by civilization. Their idea is that just as nature created a male goat for every she-goat and a male dog for every bitch, so it created a man for every woman. Therefore, nature’s law is that whenever desire and opportunity arise and a man and woman mutually consent, sexual intercourse should take place between them just as it does among animals! In reality, however, this is a thoroughly mistaken interpretation of human nature. They have regarded human beings as mere animals. Thus, whenever they use the word ‘nature,’ they mean animal nature instead of human nature. The unrestricted sexual relations they call ‘natural’ may be natural for animals, but they are never natural for human beings! They are not only contrary to human nature; when judged by their ultimate consequences, they are also contrary to the animal nature embedded within human beings. This is because humanity and animality within a human being are not two separate things. In reality, their combination within the same being forms a single personality, and the needs of the two are so closely intertwined that when one is neglected, the other is automatically destroyed.

Outwardly, it may seem that adultery fulfills the needs of animal nature. For the purpose of reproduction and preserving the existence of the human race is fulfilled solely through sexual intercourse, whether through marriage or without it. But if we look once at what we have described earlier, we will know that this act frustrates the purpose of human nature just as it frustrates the purpose of animal nature. Human nature demands that the sexual relationship be firm and lasting, so that the parents can raise the child together and the man can, for a reasonable period, assume full responsibility not only for the child but also for the child’s mother. If the man does not come to believe that the child is his own offspring, he will not make sacrifices or endure hardship to raise it, nor will he accept that the child should be his heir. Likewise, if the woman does not believe that the man who impregnated her is willing to assume responsibility for supporting her and her child, she too will not agree to take upon herself the danger of pregnancy. If the parents do not cooperate in raising the child, its education, moral, mental, and economic condition cannot reach the level by which it could become a useful worker of human civilization. All these are the demands of human nature. When, trampling upon these demands, a man and woman establish a temporary relationship like animals, they also neglect the demands or needs of animal nature [that is, producing children and increasing the lineage]. For at that time they have no concern, nor can they have any concern, for producing children and increasing the lineage. It occurs only because of their desire for sexual pleasure. This is completely contrary to nature’s will.

The standard-bearers of the modern age of ignorance themselves suffer from this weakness. For this reason they advance another argument, saying: if two people in society come together and spend a few moments in pleasure and enjoyment, what harm is done to society that it should interfere? If one party uses force against the other, or deceives and defrauds the other, or causes some social danger or disorder, then society certainly has the right to intervene. But when none of these occurs and the matter concerns only the enjoyment of two individuals, what right does society have to obstruct their activity? If people’s private affairs are interfered with in this way, individual freedom becomes meaningless.

This concept of individual freedom is a particular ignorance of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, which disappears as soon as the first rays of knowledge and the search for truth appear. After a little thought and investigation, people can understand that the kind of freedom claimed for the individual has no place in social life. Those who desire such freedom would do better to go into the forests and jungles and live like animals. Human society is in reality such a network of love and relationships that every person’s life is closely intertwined with the lives of countless other human beings. Each person influences others just as he is influenced by others. Where such mutual relationships exist, no act can be called wholly private and individual. It is impossible to conceive of any personal act that has no effect upon society as a whole. Not to speak of the actions of the limbs, there is not even a desire hidden in a corner of the mind that does not act upon our existence and then, through its reflection, upon others. The consequences of each action of our minds and bodies move away from us and reach such distant places that they lie beyond our knowledge. In such circumstances, how can it be said that the use of an individual’s own power affects no one other than himself? Therefore, is no one else to do anything about it, and should that individual have complete freedom in this matter? If I do not have the freedom to keep swinging the piece of wood in my hand wherever I please, to move my two feet as I wish and go wherever I want, to drive my vehicle as I please, and to pile up rubbish in my home as I wish—and if it is desirable that countless other such personal activities be subject to social rules—then why should my sexual act possess such a special status that it is not subjected to any social regulation, and why should I be given complete freedom to use it as I please?

To say that the sexual enjoyment a man and a woman engage in secretly, in a secluded place and without anyone’s knowledge, has no effect on social life is merely childish talk [Childish talks]. In reality, the actions of any individual who has a direct relationship with a society affect not only that society but all humanity. They affect not only people of the present age; future generations also suffer their consequences. Bound by the social and sociological rules that encompass all humanity, no individual can, under any circumstances, remain separate in some secure place. Just as he remains connected with social life while in open fields, marketplaces, or public assemblies, so he remains connected with social life while protected in a closed room and behind walls. When, in seclusion, he wastes his capacity to produce offspring in temporary, short-sighted pleasure, he is in reality engaged in spreading disorder in social life, violating the rights of the nation, and causing countless moral, material, and civilizational harms to society. For his own interests, he strikes at the social institutions through which he benefited as a member of society, while refusing to fulfill his responsibility for the permanence of their establishment. From municipalities to the state, from educational institutions to the military, and from factories to laboratories of scientific research, society has established all these institutions solely in the belief that every person who benefits from them will contribute his indispensable share to their establishment and preservation. But when that faithless man expends his sexual power in such a way that he has no desire left to produce children, increase the lineage, or undertake the responsibility of raising children, he destroys the foundation of this entire system with a single blow. He breaks the social contract to which he was connected as a human being. Instead of fulfilling his responsibility, he places it upon the shoulders of others. He cannot be a respectable person—he is a thief, deceiver, and appropriator of others’ property. To show him favor is to commit injustice against all humanity.

After recognizing the status of the individual in social life, it can undoubtedly be said that the power bestowed upon our minds and bodies is not for the individual alone; rather, it is held in our custody for all humanity. We will have to answer to all humanity for every power. If we waste our own life or any of our powers, or harm ourselves through our wrongdoing, the true result of this act will not simply be that we have wasted or damaged what belonged to us. In reality, it will be regarded as our embezzlement of what had been entrusted to us for the sake of the entire human world, thereby harming humanity. Our existence in the world testifies that we were able to enter it only because others endured hardship and bore responsibilities and radiated toward us the stream of life’s light. Thereafter, the state system secured our lives. The health department remained engaged in preserving our health. Through the combined efforts of millions upon millions of people, the necessities of our daily lives were provided. All the institutions together supplied us with strength and ability, attempted to educate us, and raised us to our present status. Is this to be our return for all that? Would it be justice that we should needlessly destroy the life and strength whose creation, preservation, and development others contributed so greatly to, or make them harmful instead of beneficial? For this reason suicide has been prohibited. For this reason the greatest sage and philosopher of the world [the Prophet, peace be upon him] declared the masturbator accursed. (*********) Hadith cursing the masturbator. For this reason same-sex intercourse—that is, the evil act of the people of Lot—has been called a detestable crime. For this reason adultery, even as personal amusement, is not a golden moment of pleasure; rather, it is a particular injustice against the entire nation.

If one thinks deeply, it will be seen how many social wrongs are closely intertwined with the act of adultery. For example:

1. First of all, the adulterer runs the risk of contracting a venereal disease. In this way, he not only diminishes his daily strength that could be used for beneficial work, but also harms society and his descendants. Every physician agrees regarding gonorrhea that the sores it causes in the urinary passage are incurable in most cases. One physician has remarked that once gonorrhea is contracted, it can never be cured. As a result, the liver, urinary bladder, rectum, anus, and other organs are often affected. It also causes gout and other diseases. There is even a risk of permanent sterility. It also becomes contagious to others. Then consider another deadly consequence: syphilis, or garmi sores. It is universally known that the entire bodily constitution becomes poisoned by it. Its poisonous effects spread through every organ and limb from head to foot. It not only destroys the physical strength of the afflicted person; the germs of the disease are also transmitted in countless ways from one person to innumerable others. The patient’s innocent children and descendants continue to suffer its consequences through successive generations. As the natural consequence of the wicked father’s regarding a few moments of sexual pleasure as the most desirable thing in his life, the child is born blind, mute, deaf, or insane.

2. Not every adulterer need be afflicted with a sexually transmitted disease. But it is impossible for him to escape the moral weakness certainly associated with the act of adultery. Shamelessness, deception, false malicious intent, selfishness, enslavement to passion, inability to restrain evil desires, corrupt ways of thinking, an inclination to revel in sexual activity, fickleness, distrust, and similar moral evils of adultery become firmly reflected in the adulterer’s mind. The harm caused by the weakness of a person who harbors these faults is not confined merely to sexual activity; rather, it spreads from him into society in every sphere of life. If these faults become widespread among the majority of society, then art, literature, amusements, sports, knowledge and science, trade and commerce, social relations, economics, politics, the courts, military service, governance of the country, and everything else will be endangered and brought to a standstill. Especially under a democratic system, the moral characteristics of individuals inevitably become reflected in the life of the entire nation. How can political stability arise in a nation whose larger number of people possess neither constancy nor firmness, and whose majority are deprived of such qualities as trustworthiness, sacrifice, and self-restraint?

3. Once adultery is granted a lawful place, it becomes necessary to keep prostitution established in society as well. Whoever says that a young man has the right to seek amusement thereby also admits that society needs a considerable number of women who will lead extremely low and degrading lives in every respect. The question now is: where will these women come from? They will, of course, be members of society itself. Each will be someone’s daughter or sister. Millions of women who could have been the presiding figures of individual homes, the founders of families, and guardians of many children must be cast out of society and established in the streets and marketplaces, so that they may be turned into places of excretion for men of lewd nature, like municipal urinals. By this means all the traits of honor proper to women may be taken away from them, and they may be taught to sell their beauty and youth. Moreover, they are to be prepared in such a way that they can sell their love, body, mind, beauty, and graceful manner every moment to new customers, and instead of rendering any productive service, become lifelong playthings for satisfying the lust of others.

4. If adultery is accepted as lawful, the civilizational conventions of marriage are destroyed. Ultimately, instead of marriage, only adultery remains throughout society. The first point in this regard is that men and women inclined toward adultery rarely possess the ability to lead a sound married life. For suspicion, inferiority, lust for gratification, and an undisciplined nature are produced by this system, and such people develop unstable desires and weakness in restraining evil impulses. This completely destroys the qualities necessary for a successful married life. Even if they enter the marital bond, the mutual affection, companionship, trust, tenderness, and cordial relationship that can produce good children and establish a joyful family will never become firmly rooted among them. Again, wherever the path to adultery is made easy, it is practically impossible for the civilizational principle of marriage to remain in force. For those who have the opportunity to gratify their evil desires instead of assuming responsibility, what need would they have to take a heavy responsibility upon their shoulders?

5. It has been proved that the legalization and prevalence of adultery do not merely uproot civilization; rather, they strike at the very roots of the human race. As a result of unrestricted sexual relations, neither men nor women feel—and cannot feel—any desire to do anything for the permanence and strength of the human race.

6. If a child is born to society and the human race through adultery, it is an illegitimate child. The distinction between legitimate and illegitimate children within a lineage is not merely the product of sentiment—as some fools think; in reality, in many respects, producing an illegitimate child is a cruel injustice both to that child and to the whole of human civilization. First, the child is conceived when the parents are absorbed in a bestial impulse. The pure human feeling that arises during sexual intercourse between a married couple is never possible during an illicit sexual union. A purely bestial sexual frenzy brings the two together, and at that time they remain far removed from all human qualities. Neither the mother nor the father is prepared to welcome such an illegitimate child. The child is not a desired object; rather, to the parents it is a burden or an unwelcome calamity. It is deprived of the father’s affection, tenderness, assistance, and sympathy. It receives only one-sided care from its mother, and even that with dissatisfaction and without sincere enthusiasm or energy. It is deprived of the loving care and upbringing of grandparents, uncles, aunts, and the other close relatives of the family. Such a child naturally grows up, under all circumstances, as a defective and incomplete human being. Its character cannot be properly formed, nor can any talent within it develop. It cannot obtain the means and resources for advancement and efficiency. It will itself be incomplete and defective, without resources, friends, support, or protection, and in such circumstances it can never become as useful in building civilization as it could have been as a legitimate child.

Supporters of illicit sexual relations say that a state system should be established for the upbringing and education of children. The child’s parents will give birth to it through unrestricted sexual relations and then leave it in the state’s care to be raised and trained for service to civilization. Their purpose in making such a proposal is that the freedom and individuality of men and women may thereby be preserved. Moreover, the desire for children and their upbringing that lies behind the sexual impulse will also be fulfilled without marriage. But the astonishing thing is that they propose, for the present generation’s descendants, a system of education and government upbringing that leaves no means for the development of individuality or the advancement of personality. Where millions of children are shaped simultaneously according to the same ideal, the same rules, and the same pattern, the flowering of their distinct personalities is never possible. At most, an artificial equality will be created among them and they will be made alike. Children will emerge from this factory with identical personalities, just as iron pieces come out of a huge factory made in the same mold. It is worth considering how low and vile these foolish people’s conception of human beings is! They want to shape human children like Bata Company’s shoes. They do not know that forming a child’s personality is a highly delicate art. This art can be practiced only in a small studio, where each painter’s attention is fixed upon a single painting. In a factory where hired laborers produce millions of identical pictures, the delicate art of raising children will be destroyed rather than developed.

Thereafter, national education would require a body of workers who would assume responsibility for raising children on behalf of society. It is evident that only those workers who can restrain their own emotions and evil impulses, and in whom moral self-control is found, can be suitable for this work. Otherwise, how could they create self-restraint in children? The question now is: where will such people be imported from? They wish to establish a national education system precisely so that men and women may be released without restraint to gratify their evil impulses. When the power of self-restraint and the ability to suppress impulses have thus been destroyed at their roots in society, where will a sighted person be found in a village of the blind to teach the new generation how to walk along the right path?

7. The life of the woman whom a selfish man makes the mother of a child through adultery is destroyed forever. Humiliation and hatred from the people, together with a mountain of troubles, collapse upon her so heavily that she remains crushed beneath them throughout her life. The modern moral ideal proposes the solution that all forms of motherhood must be regarded as equal, whether motherhood results from marriage or by some other means. It is said that motherhood is worthy of respect in every circumstance. It is further said that it is a great injustice by society to curse and stigmatize a woman who has assumed the responsibility of motherhood through simplicity or carelessness. But the first point in this regard is that, however much this may benefit the adulterous woman, it is a great disaster for society as a whole. The contempt and humiliation with which society naturally regards an illegitimate child are, on the one hand, a great barrier against the sins and evil deeds of men and women, and, on the other, a special sign that moral feeling remains awake in society. If the mother of a legitimate child and the mother of an illegitimate child are given equal status, it will mean that the distinctions between good and evil, right and wrong, and sin and virtue have been removed from society. The second point is this: even if that were so—that is, even if the mothers of legitimate and illegitimate children were granted equal status—would this solve all the difficulties that the mother of an illegitimate child would have to face? Although the advocates of the new outlook regard both mothers as equal, nature will never regard them as equal, and in reality they can never receive equal honor. Their equality is contrary to reason, conscience, logic, justice, and truth. How can the foolish woman who, overcome by a temporary surge of sexual emotion, surrendered her body to a selfish man unwilling to accept any responsibility for her or the child, be equal to the intelligent woman who restrained the emotions and feelings of her youth until she found a respectable and responsible man as her husband? What reason or conscience would regard these two women as equal? A show of making them equal may be staged, but where will that foolish adulteress obtain the maintenance, protection, sympathetic treatment, affection, loving regard, good wishes, peace, and stability that a married woman receives? From what market can the affection of the father and the love of the paternal relatives be imported for her illegitimate child? At most, she may be given financial assistance by force of law. But in this world, do a mother and child need only money? Therefore, it is true that, however much equal rights for legitimate and illegitimate motherhood may provide external consolation to sinners, they cannot protect them from the poisonous consequences of their folly, nor protect illegitimate children from their natural disadvantages at birth.

For the reasons stated above, it is absolutely essential for the establishment and flourishing of social life that the spread of sexual relations in society be stopped completely, and that only one path be left open for calming and fulfilling the impulses of youth: the path of married life. Giving men and women freedom for adultery means showing them unjust indulgence; it is not merely injustice toward society but its destruction. A society that considers this matter insignificant, wishes to disregard adultery as merely “having a good time,” and wants to show tolerance toward “sowing wild oats” is in reality an ignorant society. It is unaware of its own rights and acts as its own enemy. If it were conscious of its rights and understood the poisonous effect of individual freedom in sexual relations upon social interests, it would regard this as it regards theft, robbery, and murder—indeed, as more serious than theft and robbery. A thief, robber, or murderer harms at most one person or a few people, but the adulterer robs the entire society and future generations. At the same time, he seizes the wealth of millions upon millions of human beings. The extent of his crime is more far-reaching and widespread than that of other crimes. When it is universally accepted that, if someone infringes upon another for the sake of personal gain, the force of law may properly be used with society’s assistance against him, and when theft, murder, plunder, fraud, and other means of appropriating what belongs to others are regarded as crimes and obstructed through punishment, there is no reason why the law of the country, as society’s protector, should not declare adultery a punishable offense.

It is also clear from the standpoint of principle that marriage and adultery cannot be parts of the same social system at the same time. If it is made lawful for one person to satisfy the sexual impulse without marriage, then maintaining the institution of marriage for another person for the same purpose becomes meaningless. The example is exactly like declaring travel on a train without a ticket lawful while simultaneously maintaining a system for selling tickets. No person of conscience can accept both arrangements at the same time. The logical course would be to abolish the practice of selling tickets altogether. But if it is to remain, then traveling without a ticket must be declared an offense. Similarly, applying both marriage and adultery is unjust and inconsistent. If marriage is considered necessary for civilization—as has already been proved through argument—then it is absolutely necessary to declare adultery an offense.*

A clear characteristic of ignorance is that only those matters whose consequences are very limited and become apparent within a short time are perceived. But matters whose consequences are broad and far-reaching, and whose results appear only after a delay, are given no importance and receive no attention. This is why theft, robbery, and murder are taken seriously while adultery is not. Even a barbarous society does not consider a person who keeps plague-infected rats in his house or spreads an infectious disease deserving of forgiveness, because the harmful nature of his action is plainly visible. But the adulterer who cuts at the roots of civilization for his personal interest receives every indulgence from ignorant barbarians, because the harm caused by him, though rationally understandable, is not felt. Thus it does not even enter the minds of the ignorant what criminal element there can be in adultery. If the foundations of civilization were established upon conscience and the science of nature rather than barbarism, this system would never be accepted.

4. Methods for Preventing Obscenity

To stop something harmful to civilization, it will not be sufficient merely to declare it a legal offense and provide a punishment for it; rather, four kinds of measures must also be adopted, as follows:

a) Through education and training, people’s minds must be reformed to such an extent that they themselves view the said act with abhorrence and regard it as sinful; their moral consciousness must keep them from committing that sin.

b) Social character and public opinion must be shaped against this sinful act in such a way that the people

1. A common perverse notion exists that a young man should have some opportunity to satisfy his sexual desire before marriage, because it is difficult to restrain sexual feeling in youth and restraint harms health. But all the sources from which this conclusion has been drawn are based on error. An urge whose force cannot be restrained is an abnormal condition [abnormal], and this abnormal state arises among ordinary people because a misguided civilizational system forcibly excites them. The unrestricted contact with women adorned with finery in our cinema, literature, painting, dance and music, and in this mixed society of men and women, is what makes a normal person abnormally sexually inclined. Otherwise, in a calm and pure atmosphere, such sexual excitement cannot arise between ordinary men and women that it cannot be restrained through mental discipline and moral education. The notion that health is ruined if one does not engage in sexual activity in youth, and that adultery is therefore permissible for the sake of health, is also wholly false. In reality, for the preservation of both health and morality, it is necessary to change those misguided social arrangements and the false standards of a luxurious life that have made marriage difficult and adultery easy.

regards it as a criminal and shameful act and views it with such abhorrence that public opinion may also restrain from this sinful deed those whose education is incomplete or whose moral consciousness is weak.

c) All the means and resources that incite and tempt people toward this sinful act must be removed from the civilizational system. In addition, as far as possible, the means and resources that compel people to commit the sin must also be eradicated.

d) Such obstacles must be created in civilizational life against this sinful act that, even if someone wishes to commit it, he cannot do so easily.

Conscience testifies to the truth and necessity of the four methods mentioned above, and nature itself demands them. In practice, the procedure followed throughout the world is also that, in order to stop matters that social law has deemed crimes, these four kinds of measures are adopted along with punishment. Now, if it is accepted that the spread of sexual relations destroys civilization and constitutes a great crime against society, then it must inevitably also be accepted that, along with prescribing punishment to block the path of adultery, all the reformative and preventive measures described above must be adopted. Public education is also necessary for this purpose. The people must be made hostile to it. All matters that create sexual excitement among people must also be removed from the boundaries of civilization. The obstacles that arise regarding marriage must likewise be removed from the social system. Restrictions must also be imposed to such an extent on the mutual mixing of men and women that, if anyone wishes to establish a relationship between men and women without a marital bond, that path is blocked. After admitting adultery to be a sin and a crime, no person of conscience can utter even a word against any of these measures.

Some people accept the moral and social principles on which adultery has been deemed sinful. But their obstinacy lies in insisting that, instead of punitive and preventive measures against adultery, reliance should be placed solely on reformative measures. They say, “Through education, awaken such spiritual feeling in people and strengthen the demands of their minds and their moral consciousness to such an extent that it will stop on its own. Otherwise, adopting punitive and preventive measures instead of spiritual reform and correction would mean that you are not merely treating people like children; you are insulting humanity.”

We also admit this much: this is the path of reforming and correcting humanity. In reality, the highest stage of civilization is that such a power is created within human beings that they themselves continue to respect social laws and institutions, and their minds restrain them from breaking moral bonds. It is for this purpose that all efforts are devoted to educating people. But the question is: has our civilization actually reached that stage? Have ordinary and moral education refined humanity to such an extent that we can rely upon its spirituality and no overt punitive or preventive measures are needed to preserve the social system? Leave aside past ages; in their words, that was the “age of darkness.” This twentieth century—the “age of light”—is before us. Look at civilized countries such as Europe and America in this age. Every one of their people is educated, and their citizens take pride in higher education. But have education and spiritual reform stopped crime and violations of the law there? Are theft and robbery absent there? Do deception, fraud, oppression, and misconduct not occur there? Are police, courts, prisons, cultural records, and accounting not needed there? Has such a sense of moral responsibility arisen among the people there that they are no longer treated like children? If that is not the case—if even in this civilized age the law and order of society cannot be left solely to the moral consciousness of the people, and if punitive and preventive measures of both kinds are still adopted everywhere to stop crime, thereby supposedly “insulting humanity”—then why has an “insult to humanity” become intolerable only in matters of sexual relations? Why is this obstinacy displayed only in this one matter, insisting that these “children” be treated like “adults”? Think a little more deeply and see what kind of thief is hiding in the corners of their minds.

It is said that the things being excluded from the bounds of civilization as sexually stimulating are the very essence of art and aesthetic enjoyment, and that if these are avoided, the source of beauty in human life will dry up. Therefore, if anything is to be done to preserve civilization and reform society, it should be done in such a way that fine art and aesthetic enjoyment are not harmed. We agree with these gentlemen to this extent: art and aesthetic enjoyment are indeed valuable things, and their preservation and development are desirable. But social life and social welfare are the most valuable of all. They cannot be sacrificed for any art or enjoyment. For art and aesthetic enjoyment to develop and flourish, a way must be found that can harmonize them with social life and its welfare. Art and aesthetic enjoyment that bring destruction instead of life and disaster instead of welfare can never be allowed to flourish within society. This is not merely our personal or domestic viewpoint; it is the demand of conscience and nature. The whole world accepts it as a principle and applies it everywhere. Things regarded throughout the world as destructive to social life and causes of disaster are nowhere indulged under the name of art and aesthetic enjoyment. Just as literature that incites disintegration, conflict, murder, plunder, and similar acts is not tolerated merely for literature’s sake, neither is literature that incites the spread of deadly diseases such as plague and cholera tolerated anywhere. No government in the world permits films or theaters that spread excitement for the disruption of peace and rebellion to be publicly shown. No law or social conscience is prepared to regard with respect pictures that express impulses toward oppression, conflict, and misconduct, or that violate universally accepted ideals of morality, however great their artistic skill may be. Although pickpocketing is a highly delicate technique and the art of sleight of hand may be considered supreme, no one wishes to promote it. Forging notes, checks, and legal documents requires exceptional intellectual power and skill, but no one considers this art lawful. In the art of deception and fraud, the human mind has displayed its ingenuity in many ways, but no civilized society likes to honor such achievements. It is an acknowledged truth that social life, its peace, security, progress, and welfare are more valuable than any fine art or aesthetic enjoyment. Therefore, they cannot be sacrificed for any art. The only point of disagreement in this matter is that what we regard as contrary to social life and its welfare, others do not. If their outlook were like ours, they too would feel the need to regulate art and aesthetic enjoyment as we do.

It is also said that arranging purdah between women and men and restricting their free movement in society in order to prevent illicit sexual relations is in fact to harbor doubt and suspicion about their character. This seems to imply that all people have been considered characterless and that they have no trust at all in the character of women and men. This is a very logical argument. Extend this line of reasoning a little further. The lock used at a house door seems to proclaim that the householder considers every person in the world a thief. The existence of the police testifies that the government considers everyone in the country dishonest. The reason a contract is signed in monetary transactions is likewise that one party considers the other party an embezzler. The preventive measures adopted to stop crime imply that all those affected by them have been considered potential criminals. By this line of reasoning, you too are regarded at every moment as a thief, rogue, embezzler, and person of doubtful character. Yet this does not hurt your self-respect in the least. Why, then, is your sensibility so weak in that one particular matter?

The matter is actually just as indicated above. Those in whose minds the worn-out influence of ancient moral notions still persists regard adultery and sexual misconduct as reprehensible. But they do not consider them so reprehensible that they must be eradicated altogether. For this reason, their outlook and ours differ concerning the adoption of reformative and preventive measures. If the natural facts were disclosed to them and they could properly understand the true situation in this matter, they would agree with us that as long as a person remains human and the elements of humanity remain present in him, he will consider the betterment of social life more dear than the evil inclinations of civilized man and their enjoyment; he cannot remain indifferent to all these preventive measures.

5. The Proper State of the Marital Relationship

After establishing the family foundation and blocking the path of sexual licentiousness, what is essential for a sound civilization is that the proper nature of the relationship between women and men in the social system be determined. Their rights must be defined with justice. Responsibilities must be properly divided between them. Their positions and allowances within the family must be determined in such a way that there is no gap between moderation and equality. Among all the problems of civilization, this problem is extremely difficult. Yet people have failed to solve it most of the time.

There are some nations that have given women authority over men. But we do not find even one example of any of these nations having risen to any height of refinement and civilization. At least, the pages of history contain no trace of any nation that, by making women the rulers of men, gained any power or status in the world or accomplished any notable work.

Most nations of the world have given men superiority over women. But in most cases this superiority has taken the form of oppression and turned women into slaves. They have been humiliated and trampled underfoot. They have been granted no economic or civilizational rights. They have been used as insignificant domestic servants and as playthings for satisfying men’s sexual appetites. It is true that a group of women outside the family was furnished with some education and the adornments of civilization, but this was solely so that they could fulfill men’s sexual desires more

completely and appealingly. Thus, through their musical arts they could provide pleasure to the ears, through dancing and bodily movements pleasure to the eyes, and through the highest and most extreme sexual allure pleasure to the body. This was the extremely shameful method discovered by men’s evil inclinations for insulting and disgracing womanhood. No nation that adopted this method escaped destruction.

Modern Western civilization has adopted a third approach. It is that equality and equal rights must exist between women and men. Their responsibilities will be corresponding and nearly identical. Both will compete in the same fields of work, both will earn their own livelihoods, and both will be self-supporting. This method of social organization has not yet achieved perfection, because men’s superiority is still evident. Women and men have not yet become equal in any sphere of life. Women have still not obtained everything they should have gained in the form of complete equality. But the extent to which equality has been established has created a disruption in the civilizational system. We have already discussed its results in detail. Therefore, I do not think it necessary to make any further comment here. All three of these forms of civilization are deprived of justice, moderation, and harmony, because they have neglected to understand nature’s guidance and to adopt a course accordingly. Deep reflection with conscience and reason will show that nature itself has provided a sound solution to all these matters. Indeed, this too is a great power of nature: under its influence, woman can neither descend as low as people have tried to make her descend, nor rise as high as she has wished to rise or as man has tried to raise her. Guided by its deluded conscience and self-deception, humanity has adopted two opposing extremes. But nature wishes to follow justice, the middle path, and moderation, and itself points out this path.

No one can deny that women and men are equal as human beings. Women and men are the two parts of humanity. In building civilization, laying and shaping the foundations of culture, and serving humanity, both are equal partners. Both possess minds, intellects, conscience, feelings, instincts, and human needs. For civilizational reform and advancement, the mental development, intellectual cultivation, growth of conscience, and development of the power of thought of both are equally necessary, so that each may fully assume their respective role in civilizational service. In this respect, the demand for equality is entirely reasonable. A sound civilization also absolutely requires that women, like men, be given the opportunity to advance as far as possible according to their natural powers and abilities. They must be given opportunities to acquire knowledge and higher education. Like men, they must also be given civilizational and economic rights. They must be accorded such status in society that a sense of self-respect arises within them and those human qualities develop that can arise only through a sense of self-respect. Those nations that have denied this kind of equality, that have kept their women ignorant, uneducated, humiliated, and deprived of social rights, have themselves fallen into the abyss of degeneration. For to degenerate half of humanity is to degenerate humanity. It is futile to expect honorable people from the womb of a degraded and humiliated mother, educated people from the lap of an uneducated mother, or people of elevated thought from the nurturing care of a fallen mother.

But equality has a second aspect. It is that women and men will have the same field of work and perform the same kind of work. The major responsibilities of all spheres of life will be placed equally upon both, and both will occupy the same kind of position in the civilizational system. In support of this, evidence from scientific experiments and observations is presented to say that women and men are equal in physical strength and capacity (Equipotential). This kind of equality is said to exist between them. To reach such a conclusion, however, it is not enough merely to say that nature also intends both to perform the same kind of work. Such a conclusion can never be logical unless it is proved that their physical structures are also the same, that nature has assigned the same kind of responsibilities to both, and that their mental states are identical. All the scientific theories humanity has discovered to date provide the opposite answer.

The Nature and Constitution of Women in Biology

Research in biology has established that women differ from men in every respect, including their shape, form, and even the protein molecules of tissue cells. When sex formation occurs in a child in the womb, the physical structures of the two classes begin developing in different ways from that time onward. A woman’s physical structure is formed so that she may be capable of bearing and raising children. From the initial womb formation through maturity, the full development of her body takes place for the completion of this capacity, and this determines the course of her future life.

After reaching maturity, menstruation begins. This affects the functioning of all her organs and limbs. Observations by physiologists show that the following changes occur in women during menstruation:

1. The body’s capacity to retain heat decreases. As a result, more bodily heat is released and the temperature falls.

2. The pulse becomes weak, blood pressure decreases, and changes occur in breathing.

3. Changes occur in the endocrine glands, tonsils, and lymphatic glands.

4. Protein metabolism decreases.

5. Phosphates and chlorides are excreted in smaller quantities, and gaseous metabolism deteriorates.

6. Digestion is impaired. The protein and fat content of food becomes insufficient for building the body.

7. The power of breathing decreases, and changes begin in the organs of speech.

8. The nervous system becomes sluggish and the power of sensation is weakened.

9. Memory declines and there is no concentration on any subject.

All these changes bring a healthy woman so close to illness that it becomes difficult to distinguish between health and sickness. It is difficult even to find thirty percent of women who experience no pain or discomfort during menstruation. Once, 1,060 women were examined, and it was found that 84 percent of them had suffered some kind of pain or discomfort during menstruation. Dr. Elim Nudik, a specialist in physiology, says:

The changes generally observed among menstruating women are as follows:

Headache, fatigue, pain in the limbs, nervous weakness, harshness of disposition, pain in the urinary tract, reduced digestion, constipation in some cases, occasional nausea and vomiting. A considerable number of women feel mild pain in the breasts, which at times becomes extremely severe. Some women’s voices become hoarse during this period. At other times digestion is completely impaired and breathing becomes difficult.

Of the women examined by Dr. Craeger, half experienced digestive disturbances during menstruation and constipation toward the end.

Dr. Geeb Hard says:

Very few women have been found who experienced no discomfort during menstruation. Most were found to have headaches, pain in the lower abdomen, and dryness of the throat. During this time they become irritable and feel like crying.

In these circumstances, it would not be an exaggeration to say that a woman actually becomes ill during menstruation. It is a kind of illness that afflicts a woman every month.1

All these physical changes inevitably affect a woman’s mental powers and limbs. After careful observation in 1909, Dr. Voicechevsky remarked that during this period a woman’s powers of concentration and mental labor decline. Professor Krschi Skevsky, after psychological observation, reached the conclusion that women’s nervous systems become excited at this time. Their powers of sensation become weakened and unbalanced. Their ability to make decisions based on orderly thought declines and often disappears. Even settled decisions previously formed in the mind become disturbed. As a result, the activities of daily life to which she is accustomed are also disrupted during this period. A female tram conductor will make mistakes issuing tickets and counting change. A female motorist will drive fearfully and slowly and become bewildered at every turn. A female typist will make typing errors, type slowly, omit words despite her efforts, type incorrect sentences, and strike one key while intending to strike another. A female barrister will be unable to present a case correctly and will make errors in reasoning while arguing it. A female magistrate’s understanding will decline and she will make mistakes in reaching decisions. A female dentist will not easily find the instruments for extracting teeth at hand while working. A female singer will lose her pitch and rhythm. Indeed, a vocal expert will be able to tell merely by hearing the voice that the singer is menstruating. In short, during menstruation a woman’s mind, brain, and nervous apparatus become weak and disordered. Her limbs cannot function according to her will; rather, an inner dominant force overwhelms her willpower and power of judgment. She performs actions involuntarily. In this condition she no longer possesses freedom of action and loses the ability to perform responsible work.

Professor Lapinsky remarks in his book The Development of Personality in Women that during menstruation women’s freedom of action is lost. A dominant force makes them submissive. Their ability to choose voluntarily whether or not to perform an action is almost lost.

All these changes occur in a healthy woman and gradually turn into illness. Many such cases have been recorded in which a woman becomes like a madwoman in this condition. Becoming excessively angry at slight provocation, doing something like an animal or an idiot, and even committing suicide are not impossible. Dr. Kraft Ebing says that the women whom we see as modest, polite, and cheerful in daily life undergo a sudden change during menstruation. This period seems to arrive upon them like a “storm,” and they become harsh, quarrelsome, and intolerant. The household servants, children, and even the husband become hostile toward her. They do not behave well even toward strangers. After careful investigation, some specialists have reached the conclusion that most criminal acts by women occur during menstruation, because at this time they cannot restrain themselves. At such a time even a very honest woman may commit theft and later repent. Weinberg remarked after careful observation:

Fifty percent of women who commit suicide do so during menstruation. On this basis, Dr. Kraft Ebing remarked that when a criminal adult woman is tried in court, the authorities should investigate whether the crime was committed during her menstrual period.

Pregnancy is more difficult than menstruation. Dr. Reprev says that the excessive bodily substances of a woman that are discharged in a hungry state are discharged in greater quantities during pregnancy. The physical and mental capacity for labor that a woman possesses in her normal state becomes disordered during pregnancy. The balance of the brain is disturbed. All her mental faculties fall into continuous disorder. She remains wavering between illness and health. Then, for trivial reasons, she reaches the boundary of illness. Dr. Fisher says that a healthy woman suffers severe mental agitation during pregnancy. Restlessness and anxiety appear in her. Her memory becomes confused, and sensation, thought, investigation, and understanding decline. Hulak, Elias, Albert Moll, and other specialists unanimously hold that the final month of pregnancy passes in such a condition that during this time a woman is not capable of performing any kind of physical or mental labor.

After giving birth, there is a risk of suffering from various diseases. The mother is also at risk of suffering from septic illness. In order to return to her pre-pregnancy condition, agitation and movement occur in her limbs, causing the entire bodily system to become disordered. Even when there is no danger, it takes several weeks for her to return to normal. Thus, from conception until a full year has passed, a woman is in reality ill or half-ill. As a result, her working capacity becomes half, or less, than it was in her normal condition.

Then comes the period of breastfeeding, when she does not live for herself; rather, she lives to fulfill the trust that nature has deposited with her. During this time, the valuable substances in her body are transformed into breast milk for her child. From food, only the amount necessary to sustain her life is incorporated into her body, and the remainder is transformed into breast milk. After this, for a long period, all her attention must remain focused on the child’s upbringing, care, and education.

In the present age, the problem of breastfeeding has been addressed by supplying infants with food from outside. But this is not a sound solution. Nature has stored in the mother’s milk the provisions for raising the child, and nothing can serve as a suitable substitute for them. Depriving the child of this is nothing but a great injustice and selfishness. All specialists agree on this matter that no food is better than mother’s milk for the child’s genuine development.

So that the mother may feel secure about her child and devote herself confidently to work outside the home, the proposal of “nursing homes” or “children’s homes” has been made for the child’s education and upbringing. But it is not possible to provide genuine maternal affection in a “nursing home” or children’s home. Where will the affection, tenderness, and goodwill needed in early childhood come from in the heart of a hired caregiver? This new method of raising children has not yet been tested. This new method of raising children has not yet been tested. The descendants produced by the new factory of children’s homes have not yet borne fruit. Their nature and character, conduct and behavior, and deeds and activities have not yet become evident. Therefore, it would not be proper to comment beforehand on the success or failure of this experiment by saying that the world has discovered a sound substitute for the mother’s lap. It is still universally acknowledged that the mother’s lap is the child’s natural nursery and school.

Now it is understandable even to a person of ordinary good sense that, even if women’s and men’s physical and mental powers and abilities were equal, nature has not assigned equal responsibilities to both. Apart from sowing the seed for the continuation of the lineage, no task has been imposed upon man. After that he is completely free. He can perform any other work in life. On the other hand, all responsibility for continuing the lineage has been assigned to woman. From the time she was in the embryonic chamber of the mother’s womb, she was changed and transformed to make her capable of bearing this responsibility. All the instruments of her body were fashioned for this purpose. For this very reason, the menstrual cycle continues throughout her youth. During this period, each month for three to ten days she is unable to undertake responsibility for any highly important work or perform any difficult physical or mental labor. For this very reason, she must endure severe hardship during the full year of pregnancy and the postpartum period. During this time she is, in reality, half-alive. For this very reason, the two years of breastfeeding pass in such a way that she irrigates the field of humanity with her own blood and makes it fertile and fruitful with the streams from her breast. For this very reason, the several years of the child’s initial care and upbringing pass amid such labor and hardship that during this time night sleep and daytime rest become forbidden to her. In this way she sacrifices her own comfort and peace, pleasure and enjoyment, and natural desires for the sake of future generations.

If this is the actual situation, then think and see what justice is. Is it justice that a woman alone should fulfill all the responsibilities given by nature, and in addition have the burden of all civilizational responsibilities placed upon her, while man has been freed by nature from all the responsibilities assigned to her? Should she be told: ‘O woman! Bear the burdens of all the pain and hardship that nature has placed upon you, and moreover join us in working to earn a livelihood. Participate equally with us in governing the country, the judiciary, industry, commerce, agriculture, establishing peace in the country, defending the country, and other such activities. Enter our society and entertain us. Gather the means of our luxury, pleasure, merriment, and enjoyment.’

This is not justice but injustice; not equality but manifest inequality. Justice should be that the person upon whom nature has placed far greater responsibilities should be allowed to perform the lighter and easier work of society. Conversely, the person upon whom nature has placed no responsibility should perform society’s important and more laborious tasks. In addition, he must assume responsibility for the family’s maintenance and protection.

Placing work outside the home upon women is not merely unjust; in reality, they also lack the full capacity to perform the manly tasks mentioned above. Only a person whose working capacity is steadfast, who can continuously and always perform his duties with such competence, and whose physical and mental strength can be relied upon, can be qualified to perform all these tasks. But how can workers who become incapable or only slightly capable for a sufficient period every month, and whose working capacity repeatedly falls below the desired standard, bear the burden of all these responsibilities? Consider an army or navy composed of women, in which, precisely at the time of war, some are confined to maternity wards and a considerable group has become incapable of working because of pregnancy. If I give the example of the army, you will say that this is a very difficult task. But consider the police, the judiciary, diplomacy, railways, and industry and commerce. Which of these responsibilities does not require a constantly dependable and capable workforce? Then the purpose of those who want women to perform men’s work is perhaps either to turn the entire female sex into men and destroy the human race, or to forcibly make some percentage of women behave like men and select them to suffer punishment, or to lower the standard of competence in all kinds of social work.

But whichever of the foregoing methods you adopt, preparing women for men’s work is wholly contrary to the demands and ways of nature! This is beneficial neither to mankind nor to womankind. Since, according to physiology, woman has been created for bearing and raising children, she has therefore also been endowed psychologically with qualities such as love, affection, sympathy, tenderness, maternal feeling, gentleness of heart, keen sensibility, and flexible emotional responsiveness—qualities entirely suited to the daily tasks assigned to her by nature.

In married life, man has been assigned the dignity of acting, and woman of being influenced by action. For this reason, woman has been endowed with qualities that prepare her to work chiefly in the sphere of receiving influence. Instead of hardness, she possesses gentleness, softness, and flexibility. Instead of exerting influence, she possesses the capacity to receive influence. Instead of acting, she possesses the capacity to respond to action. Instead of firmness and steadfastness, she is inclined toward submission, modesty, and humility. Instead of arrogance and boldness, she possesses refusal, a tendency to flee, and resistance. How can woman achieve success in those occupations and spheres of life where hardness, dominance, authority, resistance, and indifference are required, and where firm resolve and conviction are needed instead of weak emotional impulses and desires? To draw women into all these spheres of society means destroying womanhood and destroying all those spheres as well.

This brings about not the advancement of women but their decline. Suppressing a person’s natural talents and creating artificial abilities in them contrary to nature is not called progress; rather, genuine progress consists in strengthening and developing men and creating opportunities for their work.

There is no success for womanhood in this; rather, there is failure. In some areas of life woman is weak while man is strong and advances; in other areas man is weak while woman is ahead. In competition with men, the unfortunate woman is being made to stand in those areas of life in which she is weak. The inevitable result will be that woman will always be proved inferior to man. Whatever methods may be adopted, even if the entire male population of the world were to strive with all its might, it could not produce from among women an Aristotle, Ibn Sina, Kant, Hegel, Omar Khayyam, Shakespeare, Alexander, Napoleon, Salahuddin, Nizam-ul-Mulk Tusi, or Bismarck—not even a mother of ordinary caliber.

This brings not benefit but harm to civilization. Just as human life and civilization need hardness and severity, they also need gentleness and flexibility. As much as they need a skilled commander, a judicious adviser, and an excellent ruler, they need an excellent mother, an excellent wife, and family members. Whichever of these two classes is excluded, civilization will inevitably suffer.

This is precisely the division of work that nature has made between the two classes. All the sciences, including biology, psychology, and sociology, point toward this division of work. The assignment of responsibility for bearing and raising children to women is a decisive fact. It sets a boundary for them in human civilization. No artificial system can alter this fact. A sound civilization can only be one that accepts this fact exactly as it is. It will then place women in their proper position and grant them social honor. It will recognize their rightful civilizational and economic rights. It will assign them responsibility only for the home, and assign responsibility for the outside world and guardianship of the family to men. A civilization that tries to cast aside this division of work may temporarily display material progress and spectacles of splendor, but in the end its destruction is certain. For when women are burdened with economic and civilizational responsibilities equal to those of men, they will cast aside the burden of the natural responsibilities assigned to them. As a result, not only will civilization be destroyed, but humanity as well. If a woman undertakes any effort contrary to her nature and natural constitution, she may manage some portion of men’s work, but a man can never become capable of bearing and raising children.

In view of this division of work made by nature, the necessary conditions of the family system to be established and of the roles assigned to men and women are set out below:

1. Earning for the family, supporting and maintaining it, and performing labor-related work in civilization shall be the duty of men. Their education and training must be such as to make them as well suited as possible to fulfill all these purposes.

2. Raising children, performing household tasks, and shaping family life into heavenly sweetness shall be the duty of women. They must be given appropriate education and prepared for this purpose.

3. To preserve family discipline and protect it from having as many leaders as it has heads, legal authority must be vested in one person, so that the family does not become an army without a head. It must be remembered that such a person can only be a man. For the member of the family whose mind and brain deteriorate repeatedly during menstruation and pregnancy can in no circumstances be qualified to exercise this authority.

In the civilizational system, the necessary preventive measures must be adopted to preserve this division of work, education, and administration, so that no foolish person or group of persons, out of folly, may merge the spheres of work of men and women and thereby undermine that civilizational system.

Human Errors and Shortcomings

In order to formulate a sound civilizational system that takes into account the demands of human nature and all the indications of its human tendencies and physical constitution, an attempt has previously been made, through solid, learned discussion and scientific examination, to establish what its principles and conditions ought to be regarding men and women, particularly in relation to sexual relations. Everything stated in the discussion on this subject has been stated in unambiguous language, leaving no room for repetition or ambiguity. The matters discussed are extremely clear from the perspective of knowledge and science, and generally all thoughtful people are fully aware of them. Yet the height of human weakness is that, among all the civilizational systems people have formulated through their efforts, not one has incorporated these clear and just instructions of nature fully and harmoniously. It is also clear that people are not ignorant of their natural needs. Their own mental condition and physical characteristics are not unknown to them. Nevertheless, it is equally clear that to this day they have been unable to formulate any harmonious civilizational system whose principles incorporate all these demands, characteristics, implications, and purposes in a consistent manner.

The Real Cause of Despair

The sole cause of despair is that to which this book pointed at the very beginning. It is a natural weakness of human beings that their vision does not encompass every aspect of a matter as a whole. One particular aspect always attracts them. Then, when they incline toward one side, the other side falls outside their view, or they deliberately proceed by ignoring the remaining sides. In the small and personal matters of life, this human weakness becomes plainly evident.

The problems of culture and civilization are numerous and extensive. These problems, in turn, have countless clear and obscure aspects. How, then, can it be possible for all these problems to remain free from the influence of human weakness?

Human beings have certainly been given knowledge and conscience. But generally, conscience alone does not help them solve the problems of life. Affection and inclination make them one-sided, and when they proceed in a particular direction, they enlist knowledge and conscience in its support. In such a situation, even if their knowledge seeks to lead them in another direction and their conscience protests against their one-sided attitude, they do not admit their fault. Rather, they compel their knowledge and conscience to devise arguments in favor of their desires and inclinations.

Some Clear Examples

Among the various problems of society that are the subject of our discussion today, this human obstinacy, extreme excess, and deficiency have manifested themselves.

One group, becoming excessively inclined toward morality and spirituality, came to regard sexual relations between men and women as utterly abhorrent. We find this imbalance in Buddhist, Christian, and Hindu religious doctrines. We find that, as a result, in a vast part of the world, whether within the bounds of the family or outside them, such sexual relations are regarded as reprehensible. What has been the result? The unnatural and anti-civilizational life of asceticism has been regarded as the goal of morality and self-purification. Many men and women among humanity wasted their mental and physical strength by following a path contrary to nature, that is, by struggling against nature. Those who united with one another in accordance with nature’s demand did so with the attitude that they had been compelled to fulfill a detestable necessity. It should be noted that such a relationship cannot generate any love or affection, nor any mutual assistance or sympathy, between husband and wife. Not only can no virtuous and progressive civilization be born from it, but women’s dignity is also degraded as a result of so-called moral ideas. The blind supporters of asceticism have described sexual attraction as a satanic provocation and woman as the “agent of Satan.” They have regarded woman as some such impure entity, so that anyone who desires purity of mind comes to consider it necessary to hate woman. This kind of notion about women has been presented in Christian, Buddhist, and Hindu literature, and it can easily be imagined what women’s status could be in a social system established on the basis of such notions and doctrines.

There is another group exactly opposite to this one, which favors physical desire and has advanced so far in this matter that it has surpassed not only human nature but even the demands of animal nature. This has become so clearly manifest in Western civilization that there is no longer any way to conceal it. Under the laws there, adultery is not a crime. The use of force or interference with another person’s lawful rights is considered a crime. Unless one of these crimes is committed, adultery is not merely not a punishable offense; it is not even considered a shameful offense. Up to this point they remained within the bounds of animal nature. But afterward they advanced still further. They disregarded even the purpose of sexual relations among animals—the continuation of the species. They made sexual relations merely a means of physical pleasure. The human being, created as the noblest of creatures, reached this point and became the most degraded of creatures. First, deviating from human nature, he establishes, like an animal, such unrestrained sexual relations that no civilization can be built upon them. Then he deviates even from animal nature and puts an end to the natural consequence of sexual relations—the birth of children. His aim is that no future descendants should be born to preserve the existence of the human race.

One group did recognize the importance of the family, but its management was placed within such restrictive bonds that the individual was shackled and no balance was maintained between rights and duties. The Hindu family system is a striking example of this. Here women have no freedom in their wishes or actions. They have no rights in civilization or earning a livelihood; while a wife, she is a slave, and while a mother, she is also a slave. Under widowhood, her life is worse than that of a slave; while alive, she is like the dead. Her lot contains only the fulfillment of duties; there is nothing that can be called a right. Under this social system, an attempt is made from the very beginning to turn woman into a speechless creature, so that she may develop no awareness of her own personality. There is no doubt that by this method the foundation of the family becomes strong and there is no fear of rebellion by the woman in that family. But by humiliating and degrading half the nation, this social system has in fact, through its method of construction, committed such a terrible injustice that Hindu society is now suffering its consequences.

The second group tried to improve women’s status, and gave them complete freedom in will and action. In this matter the limit was crossed so far that family discipline was completely destroyed. The wife is free, the daughter is free, the son is free! In reality, there is no head or elder in the family. No one has any authority. A husband cannot ask his wife, “Where did you spend the night?” A father cannot say to his daughter, “With whom do you associate, and where do you go?” Husband and wife are merely two equal friends, and they run their household on equal terms. The child is like a minor member of this ‘family association.’ Among this group, the means of obedience essential because of slight differences in temperament and nature are absent. This is the Western social system. This is that Western social system whose standard-bearers claim to have brought a revolution in civilization and social organization. To see the true nature of their revolution, one should read the accounts of some marriage-and-divorce court in Europe or America, or of a Juvenile Court1and examine them. The figures on crime recently published by the Home Office of England show that crime among adolescent boys and girls is rapidly increasing. Its real cause has also been stated to be that family discipline has become extremely weak.2

No human civilization has succeeded in properly understanding the element of modesty and respect preserved in human nature, especially in women’s nature, and in implementing it in practice through clothing and social customs! Modesty and respect are regarded as an outstanding virtue of human beings, especially of women. But this virtue has not been expressed through any reasonable method or suitable customs in clothing and social life. No one has attempted to define the proper limits of ‘Sitr-e-Awrat’ and preserve it equally. No principle has been established for embodying modesty in the clothing and conduct of men and women. In interaction and meetings among men, among women, and between men and women, no correct and reasonable limit has been determined as to which parts of the body should be covered or uncovered. Although the matter was as important as it was from the standpoint of civilization, civility, and general morality, it has been neglected to an equal degree. It has been left to some extent to local custom, since customary practices change with the overall circumstances. The matter has not been left to individuals’ own will, taste, and power of choice, so that each might adopt a correct method according to personal preference. As a result, a strange mixture of modesty and immodesty is seen in the clothing and social practices of different groups. There is no rational mutual relationship, unity, harmony, or trace of principle among them. In the countries of the East, the matter merely remained incongruous. But in the clothing and social practices of Western nations, indecency crossed such limits that they completely uprooted modesty and respect. Their new view became that modesty and decency are not natural feelings, but are created merely by the habit of wearing clothes. ‘Sitr-e-Awrat’ and modesty have no connection whatsoever with morality and civility; rather, they are specifically a means of arousing human sexual desire.1The practical expression of this philosophy of immodesty is revealing clothing, physical beauty contests, nude dancing, nude pictures, indecent performances on the stage, the growing movement for nudism, and humanity’s return toward the animal nature of chaste and virtuous women.

This excess can also be seen on the other side of the problem. Those who gave importance to morality and purity provided security for women—not by regarding her as a living, conscientious being, but by regarding her as a lifeless ornament, like a priceless jewel. They also avoided the question of her education and training. Yet for the welfare of culture and civilization, this question is just as important for women as it is for men. Conversely, those who recognized the importance of women’s education and training, while neglecting the importance of morality and purity, sowed the seeds of the destruction of culture and civilization in another way.

Those who observed nature’s system of division of work (Division of Labour) assigned women, in the service of civilization and society, only the duties of household work and raising children. The responsibility of earning a livelihood was assigned to men. But they could not preserve balance in this division of work. They deprived women of all economic rights. They gave them no right of inheritance. Full ownership of property was given to men. Thus, by economically crippling women, they effectively established a relationship between men and women resembling that of a master and a slave woman. To remedy this, another group emerged. They wanted to grant women economic and civilizational rights. But they committed another error. Materialism had clouded their minds. Therefore, they understood freeing women from economic and civilizational servitude to mean that women, like men, had to become earning members of the family. To bear all the responsibilities of civilization, women too had to participate equally with men. From the materialist point of view, this arrangement had great appeal. For it not only lightened men’s heavy burden, but as women began participating in earning a livelihood, money and the means of luxury began to be acquired on an almost doubled scale.

In addition, twice as many hands and minds as before became available to manage the nation’s economic and social systems. As a result, civilizational progress suddenly began to accelerate. Their excessive inclination toward material and economic matters made the family so preoccupied with them that other aspects of civilizational life were neglected and abandoned, although those aspects were no less important from the economic and material standpoint. Thus, even after learning the laws of nature, they continued to violate them deliberately. Their own scientific research bears witness to this. They had claimed to seek justice for women, but the injustice they actually inflicted was proved by their experiments and observations. They wanted to grant women equal rights, but in practice they established inequality between men and women. Their industrial science itself provides the proof. They wanted to reform culture and civilization, but in reality they created deadly instruments for its destruction. We can learn the details from the events and statistics they themselves have reported. It should be noted that they are not unaware of all these facts; but, as stated earlier, it is a human weakness that, when formulating the laws of life, it is not possible for them to adopt an equally proportioned and suitable arrangement embracing all truths. Their nature drives them toward one extreme, and when they are driven in that direction, many matters fall outside their view. Again, although many truths come to their notice, they ignore them and close their eyes even after seeing them. Here the testimony of such a blind person is being described. Indeed, what better proof of deliberate blindness could there be?

The Russian scientist Anton Nemilov is a staunch Communist. He devoted nearly two hundred pages of his book The Biological Tragedy of Woman to proving through scientific experiments the natural inequality of men and women. Nevertheless, while recording all the scientific data, he himself writes:

Nowadays, if it is said that women should be given limited rights in the civilizational system, people would at least support it. But we are vehemently opposed to this proposal. Nor should we deceive ourselves by regarding the establishment of equality between men and women in practical life as an easy task. Nowhere in the world has as much effort been made to make women and men equal as has been made in Soviet Russia. Even so, the fact is that women’s status within the family has changed very little. —p. 76

Why only in the family? No change has been initiated in society either. The firm conviction that women and men cannot be equal is deeply rooted not only among the ordinary classes but also among the highly educated people of the Soviet state. Among women, this idea has exerted such a strong influence that, if they are regarded as equal to men, then

the English translation of this book was published in London in 1932

they will consider men to have fallen from their own status. Moreover, they will describe them as weak and lacking in manliness. If we try to learn the views of any scientist, author, student, businessman, or one hundred percent of Communists on this matter, we will find that they never regard women as their equals. If we read any contemporary novel, no matter how independent-minded its author may be, somewhere in that novel we will find a description that will prove the above-mentioned idea of gender equality false.

—pp. 95–194

What is the reason for this?

The reason is that here a very important principle comes into conflict with revolutionary principles. That principle is this: from the standpoint of physiology, equality between men and women is impossible, and equal responsibilities have not been assigned to both. —p. 77

The matter will become clearer through another quotation: In short, sexual licentiousness has become manifest among all workers. This has created a terrifying situation and is threatening the destruction of the socialist system. It must be resisted by every possible means. For it is extremely difficult to struggle against this front. I can cite hundreds of thousands of incidents proving that sexual licentiousness has spread not only among ignorant people, but also among highly educated and intelligent senior officials.

—pp. 202–203

How clear and authoritative the foregoing statements are! On the one hand, there is the clear admission that nature has not established equality between women and men. The attempt to establish equality in practical life has failed. To the extent that a kind of equality has been established in opposition to nature, to that same extent a stream of obscenity has flowed, and the entire social system has come close to collapsing. On the other hand, there is the demand that women’s rights in the social system must not be regulated, and that if this is done, we will oppose it. What greater proof can there be in this matter than that human beings are not ignorant, but knowledgeable and conscious? Yet how great a slave to nature is the human being! He regards as false the truths and principles he himself has discovered, and denies his own tests and observations. Closing his eyes to every direction, he proceeds single-mindedly behind his impulses until he reaches their deluded limit. No matter how conclusive and forceful the arguments and proofs offered by his own knowledge, intelligence, and conscience against reaching such an extreme may be, and no matter how evil and poisonous the consequences revealed to his eyes may be, all are futile.

**********

***********

Have you considered the one who has taken his own whims as his deity? Allah knowingly led him astray, sealed his ears and heart, and placed a covering over his eyes. Who, then, will guide him? Will you still not take heed?

—Surah al-Jathiyah: 23

The Principle of Balance in Law in Islam

In this world of unbalanced extremism and deficiency, there is only one civilizational system in which perfect justice and balance can be found, one that takes into consideration every aspect of human nature, even its hidden aspects. Its workings are based on complete and special knowledge of the human physical constitution, including animal instincts, the mental nature, mental characteristics, and natural needs. The purpose of nature behind each of these creations has been fulfilled completely and in such a way that no other purpose, however minute, is obstructed or harmed. Ultimately, all these purposes combine to assist in fulfilling the great purpose—the purpose of human life. This justice, balance, and harmony are so perfect that no human being can create them through his own knowledge, effort, or conduct. That a law made by human beings should contain no one-sidedness anywhere is utterly impossible. Quite apart from creating such a law oneself, the real point is that ordinary people cannot fully understand the significance of this just, balanced, and supremely scientific system unless they possess exceptional insight and conduct research and experiments concerning it year after year. I do not praise this law because I am a believer in Islam; rather, I believe in Islam because I see in it perfect balance and harmony, and complete agreement with the laws of nature. Seeing all this, my heart testifies that the author of all these laws and regulations must surely be none other than He who created the heavens and the earth and possesses knowledge of the present and the future. The truth is that only He can tell the misguided children of Adam, rushing in different directions, the sound way of justice and moderation.

**************

**************

The Islamic Social System

।।One।।

Fundamental Perspective

One distinctive feature of Islam is that it itself sheds light on the wisdom underlying its laws and regulations. Regarding the Islamic injunctions governing relations between women and men in society, Islam itself has told us upon which fundamental principles of knowledge and science, and upon which natural mysteries, those injunctions are founded.

The Essential Meaning of the Marital Relationship

The first mystery disclosed in this matter is as follows:

****************************

I have created everything in pairs. —Surah al-Dhariyat: 49

This verse points toward a broad meaning of the Law of Sex. The Engineer of the universe is revealing His engineering art and technique in this way: He has constructed all the machines of the universe according to the Law of Sex—that is, He has constructed all the parts of these machines in pairs. Whatever craftsmanship is seen in this created world is an astonishing result of this law and principle of pairing!

Let us now consider what the Law of Sex is. The fundamental point of this law is that one of the pair will possess activity and the other a tendency to receive activity. One will possess influence and the other acceptance of influence. One will possess the ability to unite and connect, and the other a tendency to be united and connected. The relationship between two things consisting of this uniting and providing the opportunity for it, this activity and tendency to receive it, this influence and its acceptance, and this authority and acceptance of authority, is the marital relationship. All construction proceeds from this relationship, and through construction the workshop of the entire created universe operates. Everything in creation has been created in pairs within its respective class. The fundamental marital relationship found within every pair is that one is the agent and the other the recipient of its activity. Naturally, this relationship takes different forms in different classes of creation: one kind of pairing is found among matter, and another among growing solid substances. Yet another kind of pairing or Law of Sex is found among living creatures. All these laws of pairing differ according to their conditions and natural purposes. But the fundamental principle of the Law of Sex is one and identical in all of them, whatever their kind or class. For nature’s true purpose—construction and the attainment of a formed structure—it is essential that one member of the pair possess the power to act and the other the power to receive action.

After understanding the meaning of the verse cited above, three fundamental principles of the Law of Sex are established from it:

1. The formula by which Allah Almighty created the entire universe, and the method He determined as the basis for operating His workshop, can never be impure or base; in essence, it is pure and honorable. Therefore, it is desirable that it exist. Those opposed to the workshop may regard it as impure and abhorrent and keep away from it. But the Maker and Owner of the workshop would never wish for His workshop to be shut down. He too will wish that the component parts of the workshop’s machines remain active and continue to perform their functions.

2. Both action and the reception of action are equally necessary for operating this workshop. The existence of the agent and the recipient of its action is equally important in this workshop. The agent’s action possesses no special honor, nor is there any dishonor in the other’s receiving the action. The agent’s distinction lies in possessing the power of action and the qualities of an agent, enabling it to carry out the active side of the marital process properly. If someone used the parts of an ordinary machine for purposes other than their proper functions, for which they were not made, that person would be called foolish and inexperienced. First, the attempt would fail, and if force were used, the machine would be ruined. The same applies to the vast machine of creation. Only a foolish and inexperienced person could conceive of placing the active side in the recipient’s position and the recipient in the agent’s position. He might then display even greater foolishness by making this attempt and hoping to succeed. But the Creator of this vast machine will never do so. He will keep the active side in the position of action and train it accordingly, while assigning the receptive side to the work of receiving and arranging for it to acquire the capacity to receive action.

3. Action possesses a kind of superiority over the reception of action. This does not mean that action is honorable and receiving action dishonorable; rather, it means that action inherently contains superiority, strength, and influence. When one thing acts upon another, it is because the first is superior to the second, stronger, and capable of exerting influence. The thing that receives action and is influenced by it does so because it is subdued, weaker, and capable of being influenced. Just as the existence of both the agent and the recipient is equally necessary for action to occur, so the agent must possess superiority and the power to exert influence, while the recipient must possess the ability to acknowledge precedence and receive influence. For if both were equal in strength and neither had precedence over the other, neither would accept the influence of the other, and no action would occur at all. If cloth were as hard as a needle, sewing could not be completed. If soil lacked softness with which to acknowledge the precedence of the spade and plough, agriculture and construction would become impossible. In short, not a single task in the world could be performed if there were no recipient of action for an agent and it did not possess the capacity to be influenced by the agent. Therefore, the nature of the agent within a couple requires that it possess superiority, firmness, and the power of authority—what is called masculinity. It is desirable that it be so in order to fulfill its duty as the active element. Conversely, the nature of the recipient requires softness and a tendency to receive influence—what is called femininity. These qualities can enable it to succeed in the receptive function of the marital system. Those who are unaware of this subtle mystery treat the agent’s personal superiority as honor and status, thereby considering the recipient inferior and disgraced; or, by denying superiority altogether, they try to create in the female recipient the qualities that ought to exist in the agent. But the Engineer who created both parts fits them into the machine in such a way that, in honor and dignity, they are alike, and in education, upbringing, and receiving favor, they are equal. Yet the dominance and subordination demanded by the nature of action and reception must be created between them so that the purpose of the marital system may be fulfilled. Otherwise, both may become hard as stones, with the result that conflict alone can arise between them, while they can adopt neither a common course of action nor any cooperative method.

These are the principles derived from the primary meaning of the marital system. The mere fact that women and men exist in pairs as material beings requires that these principles exist in their relationship. As we proceed, it will become clear that the social system created by the Creator of the heavens and the earth gives particular attention to the three matters described above.

The Animal Nature of Human Beings and Its Implications

Now advance one step further. The existence of woman and man is not merely material existence; it is also animal existence. From this perspective, what demand lies behind the marital relationship between them?

The Qur’an says:

********************

Allah Almighty has made pairs for you from among yourselves, and has also made pairs among the animals. In this way He spreads you throughout the earth. —Surah al-Shura: 11

*************************

Your women are a tilth for you.

—Surah al-Baqarah: 223

In the first verse, the creation of pairs among both human beings and animals is mentioned together. Their shared purpose is stated to be the increase of their offspring through their marital relationship.

In the second verse, human beings are distinguished from the general class of animals, and it is shown that within this special kind of marital relationship there is a relationship between a field and a farmer. This is a biological truth. From the perspective of biology, this is the finest analogy that can be given for woman and man.

Three further principles can be derived from these two verses. They are as follows:

• Allah Almighty created human pairs, like those of other living creatures, so that their offspring might continue to increase through sexual relations. This is a demand of the animal nature of human beings, and an opportunity must be provided for its fulfillment. He did not create human beings so that some of them would merely sustain themselves on earth; rather, to preserve the human race, He placed such sexual attraction in human animal nature that couples could unite and continue increasing their offspring in order to keep Allah’s earth functioning. Therefore, a system ordained by Allah can never suppress or eliminate sexual attraction; rather, it must necessarily provide an opportunity through which people can fulfill this natural demand.

2. After comparing woman and man to a farmer and a field, it is stated that the relationship between a human couple differs from the marital relationship of other living creatures. Even if they are considered as animals rather than as human beings, it can be seen that the physical constitution of these two [male and female] has been made in such a way that the firm and enduring relationship existing between a farmer and his field must likewise exist between them. The farmer’s work is not merely to cast seed upon his land; he must also irrigate it, supervise the seed and crop, and maintain them. Similarly, a woman is not a field into which some creature casually casts a seed while passing by, after which a tree grows automatically from it. Rather, when a woman conceives, she actually becomes dependent upon the farmer, so that he may care for and maintain her and assume full responsibility.

3. According to biology, the sexual attraction between human couples is exactly like that found among other animals. Every creature of one class feels an animal sexual attraction toward every creature of the opposite sex, and the immense desire for reproduction placed within them attracts toward one another those members of both sexes who actually possess the capacity to reproduce. Therefore, the system created by the Maker of the universe cannot ignore this weak aspect of human animal nature. For hidden within it is such a powerful tendency toward sexual anarchy [Sexual anarchy] that it cannot be restrained without special methods of preservation. Once it escapes control, the human being becomes worse than an animal.

(Arabic******************************)

We have indeed created the human being in the finest form; then We reduce him to the lowest of the low—except those who believe and perform righteous deeds. —Surah al-Tin: 4–6

Human Nature and Its Desires

It has been stated earlier that animal nature is the ground and foundation of human creation. The edifice of humanity has been built upon this ground. Of all the things needed to preserve the individual and collective existence of human beings, Allah Almighty has placed the desire for each thing, and the ability to fulfill each desire, within the animal part of human nature. It is therefore not Allah’s will at all to prevent any of these desires from being fulfilled or to destroy any of these abilities. All these conditions are necessary, and without them human beings and the human race cannot survive. Nature does, however, desire that human beings should not adopt purely animal methods in fulfilling their desires and using all their abilities. Rather, regarding the desires belonging to their human aspect and the super-animal needs within them, their method should be humane. For this purpose, Allah Almighty has prescribed the boundaries of the Shariah so that human actions may be subject to an orderly discipline. Along with this, a warning has also been issued that if limits are transgressed or an inferior method is adopted, destruction will become inevitable.

(Arabic********************************)

Whoever transgresses Allah’s limits only wrongs himself. —Surah al-Talaq: 1

Now observe which characteristics of human nature and which desires the Qur’an points to in discussing the marital matter.

The explanation of the kind of relationship placed within human nature between the two classes [male and female] is as follows:

(Arabic**************************)

Among His signs is that He created spouses for you from among yourselves so that you may find peace in them, and He placed affection and mercy between you. —Surah al-Rum: 21

(Arabic**********************)

They are a garment for you, and you are a garment for them. —Surah al-Baqarah: 187

The earlier verse that mentioned the creation of pairs for both human beings and animals stated that the purpose of creating pairs was merely the preservation of the lineage. Here, by distinguishing human beings from animals, it describes the human characteristic that the creation of pairs has a higher purpose: their relationship is not merely sexual, but a relationship of love and affection. Each is a partner to the other in happiness and sorrow. There will be such companionship, connection, and contact between them as exists between the body and clothing. Such a relationship between the two is the foundation of human civilization, as stated earlier. The two words [Arabic] indicate that woman contains peace and a source of joy for man, and that woman’s natural service is to bring peace and moments of joy into this strife-filled and active world—this is human family life. For the sake of material and worldly comforts, Westerners have, of course, ignored the importance of this family life. In reality, just as the other departments of civilizational and social organization have importance, so does the family department; and for civilized life it is just as necessary as the other departments.

2. This sexual relationship does not merely seek mutual love between husband and wife; it also seeks that a deep, intimate relationship be established with the children born through this relationship. For this purpose, the Creator of the universe has arranged the physical constitution of human beings, especially women, and the natural conditions of pregnancy and breastfeeding in such a way that affection for the child becomes intertwined with her blood, flesh, and very particles. The Qur’an says: (Arabic******************)

His mother carried him in hardship, and after two years she weaned him.

—Surah Luqman: 14

(Arabic********************************)

His mother carried him with hardship and gave birth to him with hardship, and the period from conception to weaning was thirty months. —Surah al-Ahqaf: 15

The same is true of the man, although in terms of love for the child he is somewhat below the woman.

(Arabic****************************)

Love of desirable things establishes lineage-based and marital relationships among human beings. From these relationships come families; from families, clans; and from clans, nations. Then civilization is formed from all these relationships.

(Arabic*******************************)

And He is Allah, who created the human being from water and then established lineage-based and marital relationships among them. —Surah al-Furqan: 54

(Arabic***************************)

O humankind! We created you from a male and a female, and then made you peoples and tribes so that you may know one another. —Surah al-Hujurat

Thus, blood, lineage, and marital relationships are in reality the primary and natural foundations of human civilization. The establishment of that civilization depends on a condition in which children are identified through their parents and their lineage remains secure.

3. It is a natural human desire that, if anyone wishes to leave some of the fruits of his life’s labor for someone, he wishes to leave them for his children and loved ones; and he will leave them for those with whom he has remained bound throughout his life by blood ties.

(Arabic******************************)

According to the injunctions of Allah’s Qur’an, some relatives have a greater claim than others to inheritance.—Al-Anfal

(Arabic*******************************)

Those whom you have adopted as sons, Allah has not made them your sons.—Surah Al-Ahzab

Therefore, the preservation of lineage is also necessary for the distribution of inheritance.

4. Modesty is an extremely natural tendency in human nature. Allah has created within the physical constitution of human beings the desire to keep certain parts of the body covered. This physical instinct has compelled people, from the earliest times, to wear some kind of clothing. In this chapter, the Qur’an has refuted modern theories in unequivocal language. The Qur’an says that feeling ashamed to expose and attempting to cover those parts of the human body that possess sexual attraction for men and women is a natural demand of human nature. Satan, of course, wants people to leave these parts exposed.

(Arabic*******************************)

Then, when they both tasted the fruit of that tree, the parts of their bodies that had been covered became exposed, and they began covering themselves with the leaves of Paradise.

—Surah Al-A’raf:

The Qur’an further says that Allah instituted clothing so that, on the one hand, it would cover one’s shame and, on the other, enhance one’s beauty. Covering one’s shame alone is not sufficient; along with it, there should be fear of Allah in the heart.

(Arabic*********************)

We have provided you with clothing to cover your private parts and as adornment, but the garment of piety is the best.—Surah Al-A’raf: 26

This is the fundamental concept of the Islamic social system. After holding this concept in your heart, study the detailed form of this social system, which has been developed on its basis. While studying it, you should examine with a penetrating eye how much sincerity, usefulness, consistency, and rationality have been maintained in implementing, to the letter, the doctrines that Islam has adopted as the basis of its legislation. In every kind of man-made law we have seen, we have noticed the clear weakness that there is no complete harmony or consistency between its basic doctrines and its practical details. A vast disparity appears between the principles and their branches. The principles are described in one form, while the minor details prescribed to give them practical shape take another form. A doctrine is presented after ascending into the skies of thought, research, and reason. But when people descend from the higher world into the practical field and confront problems, they lose everything in such a way that they no longer remember their own doctrine. Examine human-made laws with a telescope and a particularly critical eye, and see whether the system presented before the world by an unlettered man of the Arabian desert—without the advice of any legislative council or select committee in formulating it—contains anywhere any inconsistency, defect, or deviation.

The Islamic Social System

Two

Fundamental Principles and Mandatory Provisions

As has been explained elsewhere, the most important problem in building a society is to protect sexual impulses from licentiousness and bring them under order and discipline. Without this, the order of civilization cannot be preserved. If it is ever violated, there is no means of protecting people from terrible moral and psychological degeneration. For this purpose, Islam has placed relations between men and women within separate boundaries and connected them to a single center.

Prohibited Men and Women

First, Islamic law has made those men and women unlawful for one another who are compelled to live together or in very close relationships. For example: mother and son, father and daughter, brother and sister, paternal aunt and nephew, paternal uncle and niece, maternal aunt and nephew, maternal uncle and niece, stepfather and daughter, stepmother and son, mother-in-law and son-in-law, father-in-law and daughter-in-law, sister-in-law and brother-in-law [two sisters together], and men and women related through breastfeeding. By prohibiting marriage between all these men and women, they have been made so pure and distant from sexual desire that they cannot even conceive of any sexual attraction. [Of course, if someone is of an animalistic disposition and subject to no moral bond, that is a separate matter.]

Prohibition of Adultery

After establishing these boundaries, the second prohibition imposed is that every woman married to another man is unlawful. Apart from these, illicit sexual relations with all the remaining women have been prohibited.

(Arabic*********************************)

Do not even approach adultery. For it is, on the one hand, an indecency and, on the other, a wrong path.

—Surah Bani Isra’il: 32

Marriage

In this way, all avenues of sexual licentiousness have been blocked through the application of controls and prohibitions. But one avenue has been left open to meet the demands of man’s animal nature and to maintain the prescribed laws and procedures of nature’s workshop. It has been said: ‘Fulfill this desire and need, but not through disconnected and irregular relationships; not secretly, nor through the path of open obscenity. Rather, through a regulated public declaration, so that it becomes known and manifest to everyone in your society that a certain man and woman have become one another’s.’

(Arabic************************)

All women other than these have been made lawful for you, so that you may establish a lawful relationship with them in exchange for your wealth [dower], not an unrestricted sexual relationship. Therefore, marry them with the permission of their guardians. Let them be bound in marriage, not made mistresses openly or secretly.—Surah An-Nisa: 24–25

Observe the balance of Islam here. The sexual relationship that was unlawful and detestable outside marriage has, upon entering the bounds of marriage, not merely become permissible; it has become an excellent righteous act. It is commanded to be undertaken, while abstaining from it is disapproved. Such a relationship between husband and wife becomes an act of worship. Indeed, if a wife fasts a voluntary fast or engages in prayer and recitation in order to avoid fulfilling her husband’s legitimate desire, she will be sinful. In this connection, hear some of the noble sayings of the Noble Prophet (peace be upon him):

(Arabic******************************)

You should marry, for marriage is an excellent means of protecting the eyes from evil glances and preserving the private parts. Whoever among you does not have the ability to marry should fast, because fasting suppresses sexual desire.—Tirmidhi

(Arabic***************************************)

By Allah, I am the foremost among you in fearing Allah and avoiding His displeasure. Yet I fast, break my fast, pray, sleep at night, and marry. This is my Sunnah, and whoever turns away from my Sunnah has no connection with me.—Bukhari

(Arabic*********************************)

A wife should not observe a [voluntary] fast without her husband’s permission.—Bukhari

(Arabic*****************************)

When a woman spends the night apart from her husband, the angels continue to curse her until she returns to her husband.—Bukhari

(Arabic*************************************)

When one of you sees a woman and is attracted to her beauty, he should go to his wife, because whatever that woman possesses is also possessed by his wife.—Tirmidhi

The purpose of all these instructions of the Shariah is to close every avenue of sexual misconduct. Sexual relations should be confined within the bounds of marriage. Outside these bounds, there should be as little sexual stimulation as possible. When sexual excitement arises from the demands of nature or from some incident, a center should be designated for its fulfillment. That center is the wife for the husband and the husband for the wife. All these arrangements have been made so that people may save themselves from every unnatural and self-created stimulation and disorderly activity and devote themselves to the civilizational system with undivided energy. All the sexual love and attraction that Allah has poured into every man and woman for operating this workshop should be spent entirely on building the family and ensuring its stability. The marital relationship is desirable in every respect because it fulfills the desires of human nature and animal nature and the purpose of Allah’s law. Conversely, avoiding marriage is undesirable in every respect, because it must lead to one of two reprehensible acts: either a person will not fulfill the demand of nature’s law and will spend his energy struggling against nature, or, compelled by nature’s demands, he will satisfy his desire through a misguided and unlawful path.

Family Organization

After determining sexual desire to be a means of creating and preserving the family, Islam organizes the family. Here too, with complete balance, it has considered all those aspects of nature’s law discussed earlier. I have discussed in detail the degree of justice observed in determining the rights of men and women in a book entitled Haqq al-Zawjayn [The Rights of Husband and Wife]. By studying it, you will learn that Islam has established as much equality between the two classes as is possible. But Islam does not support any equality contrary to the laws of nature. Whatever rights a man has as a human being, a woman has exactly the same rights.

(Arabic**********************************)

But because he is the head, personal status—not in the sense of the husband’s honor, but in the sense of influence and authority—has been justly granted to the man.

(Arabic********************************)

Thus, by establishing the natural relationship of “giver” and “recipient of giving” between woman and man, Islam organized the family in the following manner:

The Authority and Rule of the Man

Within the family, the man holds the status of head and director; that is, he is the ruler, protector, and guardian of the family’s moral and all other affairs. Obedience to him is obligatory for his wife and children [provided, of course, that he does not command disobedience to Allah and the Messenger]. It is the husband’s responsibility to earn a livelihood for the family and obtain the necessities required for living.

(Arabic************************************)

Men are in charge of women because Allah has given some of them advantage over others and because men spend their wealth on the dower and maintenance.—Surah An-Nisa: 34

(Arabic********************************)

A man is the ruler of his wife and children, and he will be held accountable for them before Allah in the Hereafter.—Bukhari

(Arabic*********************************)

Righteous women are obedient to their husbands and, in their absence, protect what Allah has entrusted them to protect.—Surah An-Nisa: 34

(Arabic************************************)

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: When a woman leaves her home without her husband’s permission, every angel in the heavens continues to curse her, and everyone she passes by, except jinn and human beings, condemns her until she returns.

(Arabic***********************************)

As for those wives from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them; if they do not desist, separate from them in bed; and if that does not reform them, strike them. Then, if they obey you, do not seek a pretext against them.—Surah An-Nisa: 34

(Arabic********************************)

We have instructed people to treat their parents well. But if they pressure you to associate with Me something of which you have no knowledge, then do not obey them.—Surah Al-Ankabut: 8

(Arabic************************************)

The family has been organized in such a way that one person will be its head and ruler. Concerning those who try to destroy this order and discipline, the Prophet (peace be upon him) issued the following warning:

(Arabic************************************)

I have no connection with anyone who tries to spoil the relationship between a husband and his wife.

Women’s Field of Activity

In this organization, woman has been made the queen of the home. The responsibility of earning a livelihood rests on the husband, while managing the household with the earned money is the woman’s task.

(Arabic********************************)

A woman is the manager of her husband’s home, and she will be held accountable for managing that household.—Bukhari

She has been freed from responsibilities outside the home. For example, the Friday prayer has not been made obligatory for her. Jihad is not obligatory for her either, although, when necessary, she may go to serve the mujahideen. This will be discussed properly later. She does not need to participate in funerals; rather, she has been discouraged from doing so.—Bukhari

She has not been required to pray in congregation or attend the mosque. Although she has been permitted to go to the mosque subject to certain restrictions, this has not been encouraged.

She has not been permitted to travel except with a mahram man.—Tirmidhi

In short, a woman’s leaving the home has been disapproved in every respect, and according to Islamic law, the desirable course for her is to remain at home. (Arabic******************)—[Its meaning is: Remain within your homes. Some say that this command was specifically addressed to the wives of the Prophet (peace be upon him), because the verse begins, “O wives of the Prophet.” But which of the instructions given in this entire verse is specific to the Prophet’s wives? It says: “If you are pious, do not speak to anyone in a coquettish manner, lest one in whose heart is a disease entertain some hope concerning you. Speak in a straightforward manner. Remain in your homes. Do not go out displaying yourselves and adorning yourselves like the women of the Age of Ignorance. Establish prayer, pay zakat, and obey Allah and the Messenger. Allah wishes to keep you away from impurity.”]

Reflect upon these instructions. Which of them is not applicable to ordinary women? Should ordinary women not be pious? Should they speak to unrelated men in a coquettish manner? Should they refrain from prayer, zakat, and obedience to Allah and the Messenger? Does Allah wish to leave them in impurity? If all these instructions apply to ordinary women, why should the statement “Remain within your homes” alone be specific to the wives of the Prophet?

In reality, this misunderstanding has arisen because people see these words at the beginning of the verse: “O wives of the Prophet! You are not like ordinary women.” But the style of expression is exactly like telling the child of a respectable family: “You are not like the children of ordinary people, wandering through the streets and markets and committing wrongdoing, are you?”

You need to conduct yourselves with some caution. This does not mean that it is desirable or commendable for other boys and girls to wander about markets like unruly people; rather, the purpose of such an expression is to establish a standard of good character, so that every boy and girl who wishes to become like the children of respectable families may strive to reach this standard. The Qur’an adopted this method of advising women because, during the Age of Arab Ignorance, women enjoyed the kind of freedom that exists in Europe today. Through the Noble Prophet (peace be upon him), they were gradually being made followers of Islamic civilization, and moral boundaries and the bonds of social order and discipline were being established for them. In this situation, the lives of the Mothers of the Believers were specially regulated so that they could serve as examples for other women and their way of life could be followed in the homes of ordinary Muslims. The same opinion was expressed by Allamah Abu Bakr Hissam in his work entitled Ahkam al-Qur’an. He says that although this instruction was revealed for the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his wives, its application is equally relevant to the universal Prophet’s community and ordinary Muslims. We have been commanded to follow the Prophet, and the commands revealed to him also apply to us. Only regarding a few specific commands has it been clearly stated that they were exclusive to the Prophet. [The cited work, volume 3]

This is the clear meaning of the verse. But the matter has not been made so strict because in some circumstances women may need to leave the home. It may be that a woman has no guardian. It may also be that, because of the family’s head’s financial hardship, unemployment, illness, incapacity, or many other such reasons, a woman has to work outside the home. In such circumstances, sufficient latitude has been allowed within the law.

It is stated in a hadith:

(Arabic*****************************)

Allah Almighty has permitted you to go outside the house as necessary.

—Bukhari

But the fact that a woman’s sphere of activity is her home is not modified by this kind of permission, which is granted in the Islamic social system on account of circumstances and necessity. It is merely permission for a particular situation, and it should remain limited to that situation.

Necessary Restrictions

An adult woman has been granted a considerable degree of freedom in her own affairs. But she has not been granted as much freedom as an adult man. For example:

A man may go wherever he wishes. But a woman—whether she is unmarried, married, or widowed—in all circumstances must have a mahram man accompanying her when she travels.

(Arabic************)

It is not permissible for a woman who believes in Allah and the Hereafter to travel for three days or more without her father, brother, husband, son, or another mahram man accompanying her.

(Arabic****************)

It is narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: A woman must not travel for one day and one night unless a mahram man is with her.

(Arabic*****************)

It is further narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: It is not lawful for a Muslim woman to travel even for one night without a mahram man. —Abu Dawud

The disagreement in these narrations concerning the duration of travel does not make it particularly important whether it is one day or two. What is important is that a woman has not been given the freedom to travel alone, because this is extremely harmful. For this reason, the Prophet (peace be upon him) did not attach such importance to specifying the duration of travel. He mentioned different durations in view of different conditions, times, and circumstances.

A man has been given complete freedom regarding his own marriage. He may marry any Muslim woman or any woman from the People of the Book, and he may also keep a female slave. But a woman is not completely free in this matter. She may not marry a non-Muslim.

(Arabic************)

They are not lawful for them, nor are they lawful for them. —Surah al-Mumtahanah 10

Nor may she have intercourse with a male slave. Just as the Qur’an permits a man to have intercourse with a female slave, it does not grant women the same permission. During the time of Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), a woman, misinterpreting the Qur’an, had intercourse with her male slave. When Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) learned of this, he presented the matter to the assembly of the Companions for consultation. After discussion, they unanimously reached the following decision:

(Arabic***********)

She has misinterpreted the Book of Allah.

When another woman sought Umar’s permission to commit such an act, he punished her severely and said:

(Arabic************)

It is beneficial for Arab women so long as they remain safe from disgraceful conduct.

A woman may choose as her husband any free Muslim man, except a slave or an unbeliever. But in this matter too, she must obtain the permission of her father, grandfather, brother, or other guardians. A guardian has no right to marry a woman off against her will. For the Prophet’s instruction on this matter is:

(Arabic***********)

In deciding whom to marry, the girl has a greater right than her guardian.

(Arabic**********)

A virgin girl must not be married off without her permission.

But it is not proper for a woman either to marry whomever she wishes against the opinion of the responsible men of her family. For this reason, wherever the Qur’an mentions a man’s marriage, it speaks of his marrying himself. For example:

(Arabic***********)

Do not marry polytheist women.

(Arabic************)

Marry them with the permission of their family members.

But wherever the marriage of women is mentioned, it speaks of giving them in marriage. For example:

(Arabic**********)

Give widowed women in marriage.

(Arabic****************)

Do not give your women in marriage to polytheist men until they believe.

The meaning of all this is that just as a married woman is under her husband’s authority, an unmarried woman is under the authority of the responsible person in her family. But this subordination does not mean that she has no freedom in her wishes and actions, or no freedom in her own affairs. Its true meaning is that men are responsible for protecting the social system from division and disorder, and for protecting the character and activities of the family from dangers within and without. For the preservation of this order, it is an essential duty of a woman to obey the person responsible for maintaining it, whether he is her husband, father, or brother.

Women’s Rights

In this way, while recognizing as a natural truth that Allah has given some people precedence over others, Islam has also properly defined that men have a degree of superiority over women. It correctly recognizes the differences between women and men in biology and psychology. It preserves those differences exactly as they are and determines their status and allowances accordingly. The next important question concerns women’s rights. In determining these rights, Islam has kept three matters in view.

First, the authority given to a man solely to maintain order in the family must not be used by him to commit injustice, nor should the relationship between ruler and subject become a relationship between master and slave.

Second, women must be given opportunities through which they can develop their natural talents within the bounds of the social system and participate as fully as possible in the formation of civilization.

Third, it should be possible for women to rise to the highest heights of progress and success. But whatever takes place in their progress and success must take place as women. They have no right to imitate men, and training them to live a manly life is beneficial neither to women nor to civilization. Nor can they achieve success by living a manly life.

Keeping the three matters mentioned above fully in view, Islam has granted women such extensive civilizational and economic rights and honored them with such high respect and status, and has provided such a lasting guarantee for preserving these rights and honors through moral and legal directives, that no example of it can be found in any ancient or modern social system in the world.

Economic Rights

The most important and necessary matter by which a person’s status in society is established and preserved is economic standing. All laws other than Islam have kept women economically weak, and the principal cause of women’s enslavement in society has been this financial hardship. Europe wanted to end this condition and therefore made women earners. As a result, it brought about another great misfortune. Islam adopted a middle course between the two. It granted women extensive inheritance rights. She receives a share in the inheritance of her father, husband, children, and other close relatives [Under the law of inheritance, a woman is given half the share of a man. The reason is that a woman receives dower and maintenance from her husband, whereas a man is deprived of these. The maintenance of a woman is not only obligatory upon her husband; if she has no husband, her father, brother, children, or other elder relatives are obliged to maintain her. Therefore, since the grave responsibility placed upon a man is not placed upon a woman, she is not given the same inheritance share as a man.] In addition, she receives dower from her husband. She has full ownership and title to the wealth and property acquired through all these means, and neither her father, husband, nor anyone else has the right to spend it. Moreover, if she invests capital in a business or earns money through her own labor, she will own that as well. Nevertheless, responsibility for her maintenance rests entirely upon her husband. No matter how wealthy a wife may be, her husband cannot be freed from the responsibility of maintaining her. Thus Islam has made a woman’s financial position so secure that she is often better off than a man.

Civilizational Rights

Women have been given full rights in choosing a husband. No one may marry her off anywhere against her will, and no one may prevent her from doing so. However, if she chooses as her husband a man inferior to her in lineage, her guardians have the right to object.

A woman has been given the full right to divorce a foolish, oppressive, or incapable husband. Islam has instructed husbands to exercise the rights granted to them over their wives with good conduct and compassionate treatment. The Qur’an says:

(Arabic**************************)

Treat women well

(Arabic**************************)

Do not forget to make your mutual relationship compassionate and loving.

The Noble Prophet (peace be upon him) said:

(Arabic**************************)

The best among you are those who are best to their wives and who treat their own families with affection.

This is not merely moral advice. If a husband wrongfully oppresses his wife in exercising his rights over her, she has the right to take legal action.

4. Widows, divorced women, and women whose marriages have been dissolved according to law, or who have been separated from their husbands, have been given the full right to marry again. It has been clearly stated in this regard that a former husband or any of his relatives has no rights of any kind over these women. Such a right has not been granted to women in most European and American states.

5. Complete equality between women and men has been established in civil and criminal law. In matters concerning the security of property, life, and honor, Islam makes no distinction whatsoever between women and men.

Women’s Education

Women have not merely been permitted to acquire religious and worldly education; their education has been considered as necessary as men’s education. Just as men received religious and moral instruction from the Noble Prophet (peace be upon him), women did likewise. Time was set aside for women, and they would attend at that time to learn from the Noble Prophet (peace be upon him). The wives of the Prophet, especially Aishah al-Siddiqah (may Allah be pleased with her), were teachers not only of women but also of men, and leading Companions and Successors learned hadith, Qur’anic exegesis, and jurisprudence from her. The Prophet (peace be upon him) even ordered that instruction be given to female slaves, let alone women of noble families. He said:

(Arabic********************************)

Whoever has a female slave and teaches her well, teaches her good manners and decency, then sets her free and marries her, will receive a double reward.

Bukhari

Therefore, from the standpoint of basic education, Islam makes no distinction between women and men. Of course, a difference in the type of education is necessary. From Islam’s perspective, a woman’s true education is that which develops her into an excellent wife, mother, and homemaker. Since her sphere of activity is the home, she needs an education that can make her more useful in this sphere. In addition, she needs the kinds of knowledge that can develop her into a true human being, build her character, and broaden her outlook. This kind of education is essential for every woman. Then, if a woman possesses exceptional intelligence and mental ability and wishes, after receiving this education, to pursue advanced studies in other branches of knowledge, Islam will not obstruct her path. The condition, however, is that she must not cross the limits prescribed by the Shariah.

Women’s True Liberation [Emancipation]

These are merely matters of rights. But these matters alone cannot convey the immense favor Islam has bestowed upon women. The entire history of human civilization bears witness that women were regarded in the world as embodiments of humiliation, shame, and sin. The birth of a daughter was a great crime and a source of shame for her father. The practice of killing daughters had arisen to escape the humiliation of relations with in-laws. [The Qur’an describes the mentality of this Age of Ignorance in these words:

(Arabic********************************)

When any of them was given the news that a daughter had been born, his face would become darkened, as though he had swallowed poison. He would be so ashamed at this news that he could not show his face. He would think, ‘Should I accept her with disgrace, or bury her in the earth?’]

Quite apart from the ignorant and uneducated, even religious leaders in educated societies had long faced the question of whether women were truly human and whether Allah had given them any soul. In Hindu belief, the Vedas are forbidden to women. In Buddhism, there is no path to nirvana for one who maintains relations with a woman. In Christianity and Judaism, woman alone is held responsible for human sin. In Greece, housewives had no education, civilization, culture, or civilizational rights. In Rome, Iran, Egypt, China, and other centers of civilization, women’s condition was almost the same. As a result of centuries of slavery, subordination, and universal hatred and humiliation, the sense of self-respect had been erased from women’s minds. They had forgotten what rights they were born with in the world and what place of honor they possessed. Men regarded it as their right to oppress and abuse them, while women regarded enduring such persecution as their duty. The attitude of servitude had been so deeply implanted in them that a woman felt proud to call herself her husband’s slave, and the worship of her husband was her religion.

In such a situation, the one who brought about a great revolution not only legally but also psychologically was Islam. Islam alone changed the mentality described above regarding women and men. The slogans of women’s rights, women’s education, and women’s awakening that you hear today are echoes of that revolutionary message which was uttered by Muhammad (peace be upon him). He changed the course of human thought, and he alone made the world hear that a woman is a human being exactly as a man is.

(Arabic***************************)

Allah Almighty created all of you from a single human being and created its mate from it. In the sight of Allah, there is no difference between women and men.

Surah al-Nisa 1

(Arabic***************************)

A man will receive the result of whatever he does, and a woman will receive exactly the result of whatever she does.

Surah al-Nisa 32

The path to the rank attained by a man through faith, good deeds, and spiritual advancement is equally open to a woman. If a man can become Ibrahim ibn Adham, no one can obstruct a woman’s path to becoming Rabi’a al-Basri.

(Arabic***************************)

Their Lord answered their prayer: I will not allow the work of any worker among you to be lost, whether male or female; you are from one another.

—Al Imran 195

(Arabic***************************)

And whoever does righteous deeds, whether woman or man, if he or she is a believer, such people will enter Paradise, and they will not be wronged even by the extent of a speck.

—Al-Nisa 124

Again, Muhammad (peace be upon him) was the only person who warned men that just as men have rights over women, women likewise have rights over men.

(Arabic***************************)

Just as a woman has responsibilities and duties, she also has rights.

Moreover, Muhammad (peace be upon him) freed women from shame, insult, and humiliation and honored them with dignity and status. He told fathers that a daughter is not a source of shame for them; rather, by raising her and fulfilling her rights, they may attain Paradise.

(Arabic***************************)

If a person raises his two daughters until they reach maturity, that person and I will come together on the Day of Resurrection in this manner, just as my two fingers are joined together.

Muslim

(Arabic***************************)

If anyone has daughters and raises them, they will become a barrier protecting him from Hell.

—Nasai

The Noble Prophet (peace be upon him) told husbands that a good wife is the greatest blessing for them in this world.

(Arabic***************************)

Among the blessings of this world, the best blessing is a good wife.

Nasai

(Arabic***************************)

Among the things of this world, women and perfume are dearest to me, and prayer is the coolness of my eyes.

Nasai

(Arabic***************************)

Among the blessings of this world, nothing is better than an excellent wife.

Ibn Majah

It was the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), the Prophet of Islam, who alone said that after Allah and His Messenger, the mother is most deserving of honor, esteem, and kind treatment.

(Arabic***************************)

A man said, “O Messenger of Allah, who has the greatest right to receive good treatment from me?” The Messenger said, “Your mother.” He asked, “Then who?” He said, “Your mother.” He asked, “Then who?” He said, “Your mother.” He asked, “Then who?” He said, “Your father.”

Bukhari.

(Arabic***************************)

Disobedience to one’s mother and depriving her of her rights—Allah has made these unlawful for you. —Bukhari

The Noble Prophet (peace be upon him) also told people this essential truth: an excess of emotion, the delicacy of sensory feeling, and a tendency toward extremes are part of a woman’s nature. Allah created her upon this nature, and it is not a defect in her femininity; rather, it is her beauty. Whatever benefit people can derive from this, they can derive only by keeping her established upon that nature. If they try to make her straight and hard like a man, she will break.

Thus, the Noble Prophet (peace be upon him) was the first and last person to transform not only men’s but also women’s attitudes toward women, replacing the attitude of the Age of Ignorance with a correct attitude founded not on emotion but on knowledge and reason. Moreover, he did not stop at spiritual reform and correction; through law, he provided for the protection of women’s rights and the prevention of men’s injustice and oppression. In addition, he instilled such awareness in women that they could understand their legitimate rights and seek the protection of the law to preserve them.

The Prophet (peace be upon him) had such great compassion, affection, and tenderness for women, and was such a great protector of them, that whenever they suffered even the slightest injustice, they would immediately complain to him. Men too lived in fear, thinking that the women might at any time lodge a complaint against them with the Prophet.

Hazrat Abdullah ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said:

As long as the Prophet (peace be upon him) was alive, we were very cautious regarding our wives, lest a punitive command suddenly be revealed against us. After the Prophet (peace be upon him) passed away, we began speaking freely with them. —Bukhari

According to a narration by Ibn Majah, the Prophet (peace be upon him) had prohibited striking one’s wife. Once, Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) complained that women had become very rebellious and that permission should be given to beat them in order to make them obedient. The Prophet (peace be upon him) gave permission. It was as though the people had been waiting for this for a long time. On the very day permission was given, seventy women were beaten by their husbands. The next day, the women who had complaints crowded around the Prophet’s house. The Prophet (peace be upon him) gathered the people and said:

(Arabic************************************************)

Today seventy women have surrounded the family of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Every one of them was complaining against her husband. Those who have done such a thing are not the best among you.

The result of this moral and legal reform is that women have been granted such a high status in Islamic society that no example of it can be found in any other society in the world. A Muslim woman can rise in worldly life and in matters of religion, in material, spiritual, and intellectual respects, to such heights of honor and advancement as only men have been able to reach. Her life as a woman is no obstacle to this in any way. In this twentieth century, the world is far behind Islam. Human thought has not reached the heights of thought to which Islam has risen. Whatever the Western countries have given women, they have not given it to them as women; rather, they have done so by turning women into men. In reality, women are still despised in their eyes, just as they were in the Age of Ignorance. A queen of the home, a husband’s wife, a mother of children—in short, a true woman still has no status. If honor and status exist, they belong to the ‘masculine woman,’ or the woman who is like a man—female in body but male in mentality, working like a man in civilization and society. In other words, this is not the honor of femininity, but the honor of masculinity! Furthermore, the clear proof of an inferiority complex and mental disorder is that Western women proudly wear men’s clothing, whereas no man can even imagine going out in public wearing women’s clothing. Being a wife is humiliating to Western women, whereas being a husband is not humiliating to any man. A woman takes pride in doing manly work, yet no man has honored womanly work such as homemaking and raising children. Islam alone has done this: it has kept women in their natural place while granting them high status in civilization and society. In reality, Islam alone has upheld the honor of femininity. Islamic civilization keeps women women and men men, assigning each of them separately those tasks for which nature created them. It then keeps each in their own place while giving both equal opportunities for honor, advancement, and success. In its view, femininity and masculinity are both necessary parts of humanity. Both are equally important in building civilization. The service each performs within its own sphere is equally beneficial and equally deserving of honor. There is no superiority in masculinity, nor humiliation in femininity. Just as a man gains honor, advancement, and success by remaining a man and performing manly work, so a woman will gain honor, advancement, and success by remaining a woman and performing womanly work. It is the task of a sound civilization to keep women in their natural sphere of activity, grant them full human rights, honor and respect them, develop their latent talents through education, and open the way to their advancement and success within that sphere and those boundaries.

The Islamic Social System

।।Three।।

Safeguards

This was the complete structure of the Islamic social system. Before moving forward, let us look once again at the important features of this structure.

1. The purpose of this system is to keep the entire environment as free as possible from sexual excitement and sexual agitation, so that people’s physical and mental energies may flourish within a pure and peaceful environment and they may participate in building civilization through their preserved and united strength.

2. Sexual relations must be completely confined within the bounds of marriage. Outside these bounds, not only must disorder in conduct be prevented, but every possible avenue of disorder in thought must also be blocked.

3. Women’s sphere of activity shall be separate from men’s. With regard to their respective natures and their mental and physical abilities, different responsibilities in civilization shall be assigned to them. Their relationship shall be organized so that, within the lawful boundaries, they will assist one another. But no one shall cross those boundaries and interfere in the other’s work.

4. Within the discipline of the family, the man shall have the status of a caretaker, and everyone in the household shall obey the head of the household.

5. Both women and men shall have human rights, and both must be given opportunities for advancement. But neither may violate the boundaries established for them in society.

The social system founded upon this structure requires certain safeguards by which its discipline may remain intact, along with all its characteristics. Islam’s safeguards are of three kinds:

a) Spiritual reform,

b) Penal laws,

c) Preventive measures.

These three kinds of safeguards have been proposed with regard to the nature of the social system and the suitability of its purpose, and together they perform the work of maintaining it.

Through spiritual reform, people are trained in such a way that they become willing, of their own accord, to obey this social system, whether or not there is any external force to compel them to obey it.

Through penal law, every kind of crime that would destroy this system is blocked.

Through preventive measures, methods have been introduced into social life that purify the social environment of abnormal excitement and artificial activity and greatly reduce the danger of sexual licentiousness. For those whose spiritual reform has not been achieved through moral education and who do not fear penal law, this method creates such obstacles in their path that, even if they desire and long for sexual licentiousness, taking effective action becomes difficult for them. Moreover, it is a method that separates the spheres of women and men, establishes family discipline in the genuinely Islamic manner, and preserves those boundaries that Islam has prescribed to maintain the distinction between women’s and men’s lives.

Spiritual Reform

In Islam, the foundation of obedience has been established entirely upon faith. The commands and prohibitions of the Shariah apply to whoever believes in Allah, His Book, and His Messenger. To obey a command and refrain from a prohibition, one needs only enough knowledge to know that Allah has commanded one matter and forbidden another. Therefore, when a believer learns from Allah’s Book that Allah has forbidden indecency and wrongdoing, his faith demands that he refrain from those acts and also prevent his own mind from being attracted to them. Similarly, when a woman learns what place Allah and His Messenger have assigned her in society, her faith demands that she accept that place with a contented heart and willingness and not transgress her limits. Thus, as in other areas of life, Islam’s correct and complete obedience within the spheres of morality and social conduct depends on faith. For this reason, before giving any directive concerning morality and social conduct, Islam first called people to faith and sought to embed it firmly in their hearts.

This is such a fundamental means of spiritual reform that it is connected not only with morality but with the entire Islamic system. In particular, within the sphere of character, Islam adopted such a scientific method of education and training, a brief description of which is given below:

Modesty:

It has been stated earlier that, influenced and driven by his animal nature, a person commits adultery, theft, lies, and other crimes; all these are contrary to human nature. In the language of the Quran, these acts are called ‘munkar.’ The word ‘munkar’ means ‘unknown’ or ‘unfamiliar.’ Calling these acts ‘munkar’ means that human nature is not familiar with such acts, and when its animal nature compels it to commit them, it will view all these ‘munkar,’ or unfamiliar, acts with abhorrence. The wise Lawgiver pointed to this element or faculty, and it is ‘modesty.’

The shame that a person attracted to ‘munkar’ acts feels before his own nature and before Allah is called ‘haya’ in Islamic terminology. Haya means modesty. This modesty is a force that restrains a person from indecency and other munkar, or reprehensible, acts. If he ever commits an evil act under the influence and direction of his animal nature, this very element—modesty—stings his conscience. The essence of Islamic moral education is to bring this latent element of modesty out from the depths of human nature, nurture it through knowledge, understanding, and awareness, create a firm moral feeling, and appoint it as a watchman in the human mind. This is an explanation of the following hadith:

(Arabic************************************************************************)

Every religion has a character, and the character of Islam is modesty.

Another hadith also sheds light on this:

(Arabic**********************************************)

If you have no modesty, then do whatever you wish.

For when modesty is absent, the primal impulses of the animal nature prevail over a person, and then ‘munkar’ is no longer munkar to him.

Natural human modesty is like a formless element that assumes no particular shape. It has an instinctive aversion to all reprehensible acts, but contains no understanding or awareness. For this reason, a person does not know why he feels aversion to a particular act; this ignorance gradually weakens his feeling of aversion. Then, under the pressure of animal impulses, he begins to commit reprehensible acts, and after repeating them again and again, his sense of modesty is eventually destroyed. The purpose of Islamic moral education is to remove this ignorance. It does not merely inform him openly about munkar acts; it also makes them clear in the hidden corners of his heart. It warns him of the harmfulness of each reprehensible act so that he may hate it with inner insight. Moral education then makes this cultivated modesty so sensitive that even the slightest inclination toward a reprehensible act does not remain hidden from him, and he does not fail to sound a warning even about the slightest defect in his desires and inclinations.

The scope of modesty in Islamic morality is so broad that no area of life lies outside it. For example, Islam has also employed it for moral reform in that sphere of civilization and society connected with human sexual life. By revealing to modesty the subtle, sweet, secret whisperings of the human mind concerning sexual matters, it makes modesty vigilant over them. There is no opportunity here for a detailed discussion. I shall be content with a few examples.

The Thief of the Mind

In the eyes of the law, adultery occurs through physical sexual intercourse. But from the moral point of view, attraction to the opposite sex outside the bounds of marriage is adultery in intention and desire. Finding pleasure in the beauty of a stranger, enjoying the sound of that person’s voice in one’s ears, using a soft and alluring manner of speech in conversation, and repeatedly taking steps toward that person’s residence—all these are preliminaries to adultery and, in meaning, adultery itself. The law cannot catch such adultery. It is the thief of the mind, and only the mind’s police can arrest it. In this connection, the following warning has been given in a hadith:

(Arabic************************************************************************)

The two eyes commit adultery, and their adultery is the gaze; the two hands commit adultery, and their adultery is touch; the two feet commit adultery, and their adultery is walking along this path; conversation is the adultery of the tongue; desire and longing are the adultery of the mind; finally, the sexual organ confirms or disproves all of this.

The Harm of the Gaze

The greatest thief of the mind is the gaze. For this reason, the Holy Quran and the Noble Hadith draw attention to it first. The Quran says:

(Arabic*********************************************************)

O Prophet! Tell the believing men to lower their gaze from other women and to guard their private parts. That is the purest way for them. Allah is aware of what they do. And, O Prophet! Tell the believing women to lower their gaze from other men and to guard their private parts. —Surah An-Nur: 30–31

It is stated in a hadith:

(Arabic***********************************************)

O children of Adam! Your first glance is forgivable, but beware: do not cast a second glance. —Jassas

Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) was told: (Arabic*************************************************)

O Ali! Do not cast a second glance after the first. The first is forgivable, but the second is not.

Hazrat Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) asked, ‘What should I do if my gaze falls suddenly?’ The Prophet said, ‘Turn your gaze away immediately.’ —Abu Dawud

The Tendency to Display Beauty

The desire in a woman’s heart to display her beauty is also one cause of the harmful effects of the gaze. Desire is not always explicit. Somewhere behind the curtain of the mind, the desire to display beauty remains hidden, and it reveals itself in the beauty of dress and adornment, the arrangement of the hair, the choice of fine and fashionable clothing, and similar matters. The Quran uses the comprehensive term ‘tabarruj al-jahiliyyah’ for all this. Beauty and adornment undertaken to delight the eyes of anyone other than one’s husband are called ‘tabarruj al-jahiliyyah.’ If anything is done for this purpose, it too will be considered ‘tabarruj al-jahiliyyah.’ No law can be enacted for this. It depends on a woman’s conscience. She herself must examine her mind and see whether any impure desire is hidden there. If it is, then Allah’s instruction for her is: (Arabic********************************)

Do not now display the adornment and finery with which you used to go about in the manner of the Age of Ignorance. —Al-Ahzab: 33

Adornment behind which there is no impure intention or desire is Islamic adornment. Any adornment containing even the slightest evil desire is the adornment of the Age of Ignorance.

The Harm of the Tongue

Another agent of the mind—Satan—is the tongue. There is no measure of how much harm is constantly being caused and spread by the tongue. Men and women converse with one another. No evil desire is openly expressed, but the secret thief of the mind is creating sweetness in the voice, an attraction in the manner of speaking, and a spell in the conversation. The Qur’an exposes this thief of the mind:

(Arabic********************************)

If you fear Allah, then do not speak in a soft and alluring manner [with others], lest one whose heart is diseased [with evil desire] should entertain hopes about you. When you speak, speak plainly and straightforwardly [as one person ordinarily speaks to another]. —Al-Ahzab: 32

It is this thief of the mind that takes pleasure in describing and listening to accounts of the lawful or unlawful sexual relations of others. To enjoy this pleasure, love songs are sung, true and false love stories are told, and these things are disseminated throughout society like the gentle heat of a smoldering fire.

The Qur’an says: (Arabic***********************************************************************)

Those who desire that indecency should spread among the Muslims will have a painful punishment in this world and in the Hereafter. An-Nur: 19

There are many other forms of harm caused by the tongue, and in each form a thief of the mind is assigned. Islam has investigated all these matters and warned against them. No woman has been permitted to describe the condition of another woman to her husband. It is stated in a Hadith: (Arabic*********************************************************)

Men and women have been forbidden to describe the private details of their married life to others. For this too spreads obscenity and implants infatuation in people’s hearts. —Abu Dawud

If the imam makes a mistake during congregational prayer, or it becomes necessary to alert him to something, men are permitted to alert him by saying, ‘Subhanallah.’ Women, however, have been instructed to strike one hand against the other without saying anything aloud. —Abu Dawud, Bukhari

The Harm of Sound

At times the tongue remains silent, but the sense of hearing is attracted through other movements. This too is connected with an evil intention, and Islam has issued a warning concerning it: (Arabic******************************************************)

Let them not stamp their feet while walking, lest the beauty [such as ornaments] that they conceal become known. —Surah An-Nur: 31

The Harm of Fragrance

Among all the messengers that carry news from one evil mind to another, fragrance is one. It is an extremely subtle means of conveying information, one that people consider very subtle indeed. But Islamic modesty is so sensitive that, to its delicate nature, even this subtle movement is severe. Islamic modesty does not permit a Muslim woman to walk along the road or go to a gathering dressed in fragrant clothing. For what benefit is there in concealing her beauty and ornaments? Her pleasant scent will spread through the air and create arousal.

(Arabic*******************************************************************)

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said that a woman who uses perfume or fragrant substances and goes among people is a wayward woman.

(Arabic****************************************************************)

When any woman among you goes to the mosque, she should not use such substances.

(Arabic************************************************************)

Colorless, fragrant attar is suitable for men, and brightly colored, scentless attar for women.

The Harm of Nudity

In the chapter on satr [the parts of the bodies of men and women that Islamic law commands to be covered are called satr—Translator], Islam has given the correct explanation of human modesty and honor, which no civilization in the world has been able to refute. Nowadays, even among the world’s most civilized nations, men and women have no hesitation about leaving any part of the body uncovered. For them, clothing is for beauty, not for satr. But in Islam’s view, satr is more important than beauty; Islam commands men and women to cover those parts of their bodies in which sexual attraction toward one another is found. Nudity is such an obscenity that Islamic modesty and honor cannot tolerate it in any way. Not to mention before other men, Islam does not approve even of a husband and wife being naked before each other. —Ibn Majah

(Arabic*************************************************************)

When any of you goes to his wife, he should pay attention to covering the satr. The two of them should not become naked like donkeys. —Ibn Majah

(Arabic*******************************************************************)

Hazrat A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) said that she never saw the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) naked.

Even greater modesty and honor require that Islam does not approve of remaining naked while alone. The reason is that one should observe greater modesty before Allah.

(Arabic*********************************************************************)

Beware! Never remain naked. For Allah’s angels remain with you; they do not separate from you except when you go to relieve yourselves or approach your wives. Therefore, be modest before them and honor them.

In Islam’s view, clothing through which parts of the body can be seen and the satr becomes exposed is no clothing at all.

(Arabic******************************************************************************)

The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said that those women who, although clothed, are naked; please others and are pleased by others; and walk with their necks bent in a strutting manner like Bukhti camels will never enter Paradise, nor will they even smell its fragrance.

A few examples have been given here so that the standard and moral vitality (Spirit) of Islamic character may be estimated from them. Islam wants to keep the social environment and atmosphere free and pure from every inciting factor of obscenity and reprehensible acts. The source of all these incitements lies in the inner region of the human being. The germs of obscenity and reprehensible acts are nurtured there, and from there begin small movements or impulses that later become causes of anxiety and disorder. The ignorant regard this as insignificant and ignore it; but in the view of the wise, it is in fact the root of the grave disease that destroys character, civilization, and society. Therefore, Islamic moral education seeks to create such a powerful sense of modesty in the inner self that a person continually holds himself to account and, whenever the slightest inclination toward an evil act appears, can perceive it and destroy it at the root through his own willpower.

Penal Law

The fundamental principle of Islamic penal law is that, so long as a person has not committed an offense capable of destroying the civilized order, he should not be bound by the shackles of state power. But once he commits such an offense, he should not be accustomed to committing sin and undergoing punishment through mild penalties. The conditions for proving an offense must be strict. —[In Islamic evidentiary law, the conditions for proving an offense have generally been made very strict. The conditions for proving adultery have been made the strictest. In general, Islamic law considers two witnesses sufficient for matters as a whole. But for proving adultery, at least four witnesses have been prescribed.] As far as possible, people must be protected from coming under the law. —[The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: (Arabic*********************) Protect Muslims from punishment as far as possible. If there is any means of acquitting the accused, let him go. For an imam, it is better to err in acquitting than to err in imposing punishment. —Tirmidhi] But when someone does come under the law, he should be given such a severe punishment that he will not merely refrain from repeating the sin; rather, the hundreds of thousands of others attracted to this sin will become fearful and alarmed when they see that severe punishment. For the purpose of law is to free society from crime, not to let people commit crimes repeatedly and undergo punishment repeatedly.

For the preservation of the social order, the Islamic penal system has designated two acts as punishable offenses: one is adultery, and the second is false accusation.

The Punishment for Adultery

It has been stated earlier concerning adultery that, from the moral point of view, this act is the result of a person’s utter degradation.

The person who commits this act proves in reality that his humanity has been defeated by his animal nature. After this, he can no longer remain an upright member of human society. In society’s view, it is one of those great crimes that strike at the foundations of human civilization. For all these reasons, Islam has determined that it is a punishable sin, whether or not any other offense accompanies it—whether it is committed by force or involves the violation of another’s rights.

The Qur’an’s instruction is this: (Arabic*************************************************************)

Flog each of the adulterous woman and the adulterous man one hundred times, and do not let compassion for them overcome you in Allah’s law, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. When they are punished, let a group of Muslims be present to witness their punishment. —Surah An-Nur: 2

There is a vast difference in this matter between Islamic law and Western law. In the view of Western law, adultery by itself is not a crime. In their eyes, adultery is considered a crime only when it is committed by force or with a woman who has a husband. In other words, under their law adultery itself is one offense, while force and violation of another’s rights are additional offenses. Because of this fundamental difference, the two also differ in punishment. Western law considers imprisonment sufficient for forced adultery, and when adultery is committed with a married woman, it gives her husband the right to compensation. This punishment does not prevent crime; rather, it makes people still more fearless. That is why, in those countries where such laws are in force, the incidence of adultery has continued to increase. In contrast, Islamic law protects society from this kind of crime and from criminals in cases of adultery. In countries where this kind of punishment is imposed for adultery, the crime never becomes universal. Once punishment is carried out according to the ruling of the Shariah, such terror is created among the entire population that for several years no one dares commit this kind of crime. For a person inclined toward such crime, this is a kind of psychological operation through which his mind is automatically reformed.

In the West, the mind views one hundred lashes with disgust. The reason is not that it dislikes physical punishment for people; rather, the real reason is that its moral sensibility has not yet fully developed. At first it regarded adultery as a fault. Now it considers it mere play, a form of entertainment through which two human beings may amuse themselves for a while. Therefore, it wants the law to show leniency in this matter and no effective action to be taken so long as the adulterer does not interfere with another’s freedom or legal rights. When another’s freedom or rights are violated, however, it is regarded as an offense by which only one person’s rights have been harmed. For this reason, it considers an ordinary penalty or compensation sufficient punishment for the offense.

It is clear that a person who holds this view of adultery will regard one hundred lashes for the act as a cruel punishment. But when his moral and social sensibilities develop and he comes to know that adultery, whether voluntary or forced, is in every case a social crime and that the whole society is harmed by it, his view of punishment will change automatically. He will have to acknowledge that society must be protected from this harm and that, since the factors inciting adultery are rooted in human animal nature and cannot be eradicated through mere imprisonment and compensation, there is no alternative to adopting severe measures if all avenues to it are to be closed. Rather than harm the entire nation and its future innocent descendants by sparing the criminal the pain of punishment, it is far better to inflict severe physical punishment on one or two persons and thereby protect millions of human beings from countless moral and social harms.

There is another reason why one hundred lashes are regarded as oppressive. It can easily be understood by considering the foundations of Western civilization. I have already described that this civilization began with a tendency to support the individual against the collective, and that its entire foundation was constructed upon an exaggerated concept of individual interests and rights. Therefore, however much an individual wrongs the collective, this does not seem so intolerable to Western people; rather, in most cases they welcome it gladly. But when a hand is raised against an individual to preserve the rights of the collective, their bodies shudder and all their sympathy goes to the individual instead of the collective. Moreover, like the inhabitants of the entire Age of Ignorance, the distinctive characteristic of these adherents of Western jahiliyyah is that they give greater importance to emotion than to reason. Since the harm suffered by one individual is felt in a limited form, they regard it as a great evil. On the other hand, they cannot appreciate the significance of the widespread harm suffered by society as a whole and by its future descendants.

The Shariah Ruling on Baseless Accusations of Adultery

The harm caused by a false accusation of adultery is almost like the harm caused by adultery itself. Making a false accusation of adultery against a respectable woman does not merely disgrace her alone; it increases hostility among different families, casts doubt on lineage, destroys marital relations, and allows one person, by uttering a few words only once, to punish many people for many years. The Qur’an has prescribed a severe punishment for this offense.

The Qur’an says: (Arabic****************************************)

Those who accuse chaste women of adultery and then cannot produce four witnesses in support of the accusation—flog them eighty times and never accept their testimony thereafter. Such people are themselves evildoers. —Surah An-Nur: 4

Preventive Measures

Thus, through its political power, Islamic criminal law forcibly abolishes wrongdoing on the one hand and protects respectable members of society from the slander of malicious people on the other. Islamic moral education purifies people inwardly in such a way that, when evil desire arises in the mind because of deficiencies in moral education and is forcibly turned into action, the law restrains it. An additional method has been adopted between these two methods because it will assist moral education in spiritual reform. Through all these methods, the social order has been reformed so that the weaknesses remaining in individuals because of deficiencies in moral education do not grow or become effective; so that an environment is created in society in which evil desires have no opportunity to emerge; and so that every possible path by which the civilized order might be destroyed is blocked.

We shall now describe each of those methods in detail.

The Command Regarding Clothing and Satr

In matters of social instruction, Islam’s first task was to eradicate nudity and define the limits of satr for men and women. The condition of Arab jahiliyyah in this regard was no different. They would become naked before one another without hesitation. —[It is stated in a Hadith: Hazrat Miswar bin Makhrama (may Allah be pleased with him) was carrying a stone. On the way, his lower garment came undone, but he continued carrying the stone in that condition. Seeing him, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said, ‘Cover your body and do not walk about naked.’ —Muslim] They considered covering themselves while bathing and relieving themselves unnecessary. They performed tawaf of the Ka‘bah completely naked and considered it an excellent act of worship. —[Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him), Mujahid (may Allah have mercy on him), Tawus (may Allah have mercy on him), and Zuhri (may Allah have mercy on him) unanimously stated that tawaf of the Ka‘bah was performed naked.] Women too would become naked during tawaf. —[Muslim, in the Book of Tafsir, has described this Arab practice: a woman would perform tawaf naked and say to the assembled people, ‘Who will give me a garment with which I may cover my body?’ In this way, giving clothing to the naked woman was considered a great meritorious deed.] Their women’s clothing was such that part of the chest remained uncovered, as did parts of the arms, waist, and below the knees. Exactly the same condition is seen today in Europe, America, and Japan. In none of the countries of the East is there any social system that determines which parts of the body should remain uncovered and which should be covered.

In this matter, Islam taught humanity the first lesson of civilization.

(Arabic******************************************)

O children of Adam! Allah has sent down clothing for you to cover your bodies, and it is an adornment for you. —Surah Al-A‘raf: 26

According to the meaning of this verse, covering the body has been made obligatory for every man and woman. The Prophet (peace be upon him) gave strict instructions that no one should become naked before another.

(Arabic***********************************************)

Cursed is the one who looks at his brother’s satr.

—Al-Jassas: Ahkam al-Qur’an

(Arabic***********************************************)

No man should look at another man naked, nor should any woman look at another woman naked. —Muslim

(Arabic********************************************************)

By Allah, it would be preferable for me to be thrown down from the sky and torn apart than to see someone’s private parts or for someone to see my private parts. —Mabsut

(Arabic*********************************************************)

Beware, never become naked. For those who are with you never leave your company, except during defecation and sexual intercourse. —Tirmidhi

(Arabic****************************************************)

Even when one of you approaches his wife, he should keep her private parts covered and should not become completely naked like a donkey. —Ibn Majah

Once the Prophet (peace be upon him) went to the grazing ground for the zakat camels and saw that the camel herder was lying there naked. He immediately dismissed him from his employment and said:

(Arabic*******************************)

He who is shameless is of no use to us.

The Limits of the Awrah for Men

Along with all these instructions, separate limits have also been prescribed for covering the bodies of women and men. In the terminology of the Shariah, the part of the body that must be kept covered is called the awrah. The portion between a man’s navel and knees is regarded as his awrah, and he has been commanded neither to uncover it before others nor to look at another person’s awrah.

(Arabic****************************************************)

It is narrated from Abu Ayyub Ansari that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said, ‘What is above the knees and below the navel is part of what must be covered.’ —Darqutni

(Arabic*************************************************)

For a man, the portion to be covered extends from the navel to the knees. —Mabsut

(Arabic************************************************************)

It is narrated from Ali that the Prophet said, ‘Do not show your thigh to anyone, and do not look at the thigh of any living or dead person.’ —Tafsir al-Kabir

This is a universal instruction. No one is exempt from it except one’s wife.

(Arabic*******************************************************)

Guard your awrah from everyone except your wives and slave women. —Ahkam al-Qur’an

The Limits of the Awrah for Women

The limits of awrah have been made broader for women. They have been commanded to cover their entire bodies except their faces and hands. This command includes fathers, brothers, and all close relatives, and there can be no exception in the case of any man other than the husband.

(Arabic********************************************************)

The Prophet said, ‘A woman who believes in Allah and the Hereafter may not leave uncovered more than this of her hand.’ Saying this, he placed his hand at the middle of his wrist. —Ibn Jarir

(Arabic****************************************************************)

When a girl reaches maturity, no part of her body should be visible. Only her face and hands up to the wrists may be seen. —Abu Dawud

Aisha said, ‘Once I came before my nephew Abdullah ibn Tufayl dressed up, and the Prophet disliked it. I said, “O Messenger of Allah! He is my nephew.” The Prophet then said:

(Arabic************************************************)

When a girl reaches maturity, it is not permissible for her to expose any part of her body except her face and hands.’ Saying this, he placed his hand above her wrist in such a way that only a fist’s width remained between the middle of the wrist and the place where he had placed his hand. —Ibn Jarir

Asma bint Abu Bakr, the sister-in-law of the Noble Prophet, once came before him wearing a thin garment. Her limbs could be seen through the garment. He immediately turned his gaze away and said:

(Arabic*********************************************************)

‘O Asma! After reaching maturity, it is not permissible for a woman to show anyone any part of her body except this and this.’ Saying this, the Prophet pointed toward her face and the wrists of her hands. —Fath al-Qadir

Once Hafsa bint Abd al-Rahman came to Aisha’s house wearing a fine scarf. Aisha tore it off and covered her with a thick shawl. —Imam Malik: Muwatta

The Prophet said:

(Arabic**********************************************)

The curse of Allah is upon those women who are clothed yet naked.

Do not allow women to wear such tight clothing that the shape of their bodies becomes apparent.

These reports show that, except for the face and the wrists of the hands, a woman’s entire body is included in the awrah. This awrah must be covered even before the closest members of the household. It may not be uncovered before anyone other than the husband, whether that person is a father, brother, or nephew. Garments through which the limbs of the body can be seen may not be worn either.

All the instructions given in this chapter concern young women. The instructions to cover the awrah become applicable when a girl reaches maturity and remain in force as long as sexual attraction remains in her. After this age has passed, they have been relaxed to some extent.

The Holy Qur’an says:

(Arabic********************************************************************)

There is no blame upon very elderly women who no longer hope to marry if they lay aside their scarves, provided that they do not intend to display their adornment. But observing caution in this matter is better for them. —Surah al-Nur: 60

Here the reason for reducing the strictness is clearly stated. The meaning of ‘who no longer hope to marry’ is that they have no sexual desire or sexual attraction. Moreover, as a precaution, the condition has been imposed that displaying adornment must not be their intention; that is, if even a spark of sexual desire remains in their hearts, it is not permissible for them to leave their scarves aside. This rule has been relaxed only for those elderly women who, having reached old age, are free from clothing-related restrictions and toward whom there is no fear of anyone casting an improper glance, apart from a look of respect. Such women may remain at home without a scarf or shawl.

Seeking Permission

The second restriction imposed thereafter is that entering a house without the permission of its inhabitants has been prohibited, so that no one may see the women of the household in a condition in which it is not proper for men to see them.

(Arabic*******************************************************)

When your sons reach maturity, they should enter the house only with permission, just as those before them used to enter with permission. —Surah al-Nur: 59

Here too, the reason has been made clear. The command to seek permission applies only to those in whom sexual feelings have arisen. Before these feelings arise, seeking permission is not necessary.

In addition, other people have also been commanded not to enter anyone’s house without permission.

(Arabic********************************************)

O believers! Do not enter anyone’s house without the permission of its owner, and when you enter, greet the inhabitants of the house with salam. —Surah al-Nur: 27

The real purpose here is to establish a barrier between the inside and outside of the house, so that women may remain safe from the gaze of unrelated men in family life. At first, the Arabs could not determine the reason for these instructions. Therefore, they would sometimes peer inside from outside the house. An incident of this kind once occurred with the Noble Prophet himself. One day he was in his chamber when a man peered through the window. He said:

If I had known that you would peer inside, I would have pierced your eye. The command to seek permission was given precisely to protect people from such glances. —Bukhari

After this, he declared:

If anyone looks inside another person’s house without permission, the inhabitants of the house have the right to gouge out his eye. —Muslim

Thereafter, unrelated men were instructed that if they needed to ask for something from another person’s house, they should ask for it from outside, from behind the curtain, without entering the house.

(Arabic***************************************)

When you ask anything from women, ask it from behind a curtain. That is purer for your hearts and theirs. —Surah al-Ahzab: 53

Here too, the purpose of the restriction has been fully illuminated. The real purpose is to protect men and women from sexual desire and arousal, and this instruction has prohibited free mixing between men and women.

These instructions are not only for unrelated men; they also apply to household servants. It is narrated that once Bilal or Anas wanted to take one of Fatimah’s children from her. She handed the child to him from behind the curtain. —Fath al-Qadir

Yet both of them were special servants of the Noble Prophet and were like members of his own family.

Seclusion and Physical Contact

The third restriction is that no one other than the husband may remain in seclusion with a woman or touch her body, no matter how close a friend or relative he may be.

(Arabic***********************************)

It is narrated from Uqbah ibn Amir that the Prophet said, ‘Beware! Do not enter into seclusion with women.’ An Ansari man asked, ‘O Messenger of Allah, what is your instruction regarding a brother-in-law?’ The Prophet said, ‘He is death itself!’ —Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi

(Arabic******************************)

Do not go to a woman when her husband is absent, for Satan flows through one of you like blood. —Tirmidhi

(Arabic*******************************************)

Amr ibn al-As said, ‘The Prophet prohibited us from going to a woman when her husband is absent.’ —Tirmidhi

(Arabic***************************************)

From today onward, no one should go to a woman whose husband is absent until one or two other people are with her. —Muslim

There is a similar instruction against touching:

(Arabic***************************************)

The Prophet said, ‘If anyone touches the hand of a woman with whom he has no lawful relationship, then on the Day of Resurrection a blazing fire will be placed upon his hand.’

Aisha said that the Prophet accepted allegiance from women only verbally. He did not take their hands into his own. He never touched the hand of any woman except his wife. —Bukhari

Usaymah bint Ruqayqah said, ‘I went with several women to the Prophet to pledge allegiance. He took from us the pledge to refrain from associating partners with Allah, theft, adultery, false accusation, and disobedience to the Prophet.’ After the pledge was completed, we said, ‘Come, let us pledge allegiance to you by placing our hands in yours.’ The Prophet said, ‘I do not touch women’s hands; I accept the pledge only verbally.’ —Nasa’i and Ibn Majah

These instructions also apply only in the case of elderly women. It is permissible to sit in seclusion with an elderly woman and touch her body. Abu Bakr used to visit a tribe where he had been breastfed. He would shake hands with the elderly women of that tribe. It is said that Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr would have an elderly woman massage his hands and feet.

The distinction made between young and elderly women proves that free mixing between men and women must be prohibited, because it can open the way to corruption.

The Distinction Between Mahram and Non-Mahram Men

Except for the husband, all men—whether mahram or non-mahram—are subject to the instructions above. Before none of them may a woman uncover any part of her body other than her face and hands, which constitute her awrah, just as a man may not uncover his awrah [any part between the navel and knees] before another man.

All men should enter the house with permission, and none of them may sit in seclusion with a woman or touch her body. —[There is a considerable difference between mahram and non-mahram men regarding touching the body or placing a hand on it. A brother may hold his sister’s hand to help her board or leave a vehicle. It should be understood that this is not permissible for a non-mahram man. When the Noble Prophet returned from a journey, he would draw Fatimah close and kiss her head. Abu Bakr would also kiss the heads of Fatimah and Aisha.]

The Instructions Regarding Purdah

The verses of the Holy Qur’an in which the command regarding purdah has been given are presented below:

(Arabic**************************************************************************************************************)

[O Prophet! Tell the believing men to lower their gazes and guard their sexual purity. That is purer for them. And tell the believing women to lower their gazes, guard their sexual purity, and not display their adornment except what is ordinarily visible. Let them draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their adornment except before their husbands, fathers, fathers-in-law, sons, stepsons, brothers’ sons, sisters’ sons, their fellow women, their slaves, male attendants without sexual desire, and children who are not yet aware of women’s private matters. [Also command them] not to stamp their feet while walking so that their concealed adornment may become known through the sound of their footsteps.]

—Surah al-Nur: 30–31

(Arabic**************************************************)

O wives of the Prophet! You are not like other women. If you wish to remain mindful of Allah, do not speak in an alluring or ambiguous manner, lest those whose hearts contain a sickness develop hopes concerning you. Speak plainly and straightforwardly. Remain in your homes and do not display your beauty and youth as in the former Age of Ignorance. —Surah al-Ahzab: 32–33

(Arabic**********************************************************)

O Prophet! Tell your wives, daughters, and believing women to cover their bodies and faces with their cloaks. —Surah al-Ahzab: 59

Reflect upon all these verses. Men have merely been urged to lower their gazes and protect their character from sexual indecency. Women, however, have not only been given the two commands mentioned above; additional instructions have also been given concerning social conduct and behavior. This clearly means that restraining the gaze and guarding the private parts alone are not sufficient to preserve their character; several other rules are also necessary. We must now examine how the Noble Prophet and the Companions embodied these instructions in Islamic society. We must also examine what their words and actions reveal about the true meaning of these instructions and how they can be implemented.

Restraint of the Gaze

First, women and men have been commanded, ‘Lower the gaze.’ That is, instead of directing one’s gaze at anyone’s face, it should be lowered. This is the literal meaning of the Qur’anic expression ‘ghadd al-basar.’ But this does not fully clarify its meaning. The true purpose of Allah’s command is not that people should always look downward and never look upward; rather, it is that they should protect themselves from what the terminology of hadith calls the adultery of the eyes. Just as a man’s pleasure in viewing the beauty and adornment of an unrelated woman causes disorder, looking at an unrelated man likewise causes disorder for a woman. Corruption and upheaval naturally begin here. Therefore, this path has been blocked first of all, and this is the true purpose of restraining or lowering the gaze.

It is true that if one lives in the world with one’s eyes open, one’s gaze will fall upon everything. It is not possible for a man never to see a woman or for a woman never to see a man. Therefore, the Lawgiver has instructed that if one’s gaze suddenly falls upon someone and one feels some attraction to that person’s beauty, looking at that person a second time is prohibited.

Jarir said, ‘I asked the Messenger of Allah, “What should I do if I happen to glance at someone suddenly?” He replied, “Turn your gaze away.”’ —Abu Dawud

(Arabic********************************************************)

Baridah said that the Prophet told Ali, ‘O Ali! Do not look a second time after the first glance. The first glance will be forgiven, but the second will not be forgiven.’ —Abu Dawud

(Arabic*********************************************)

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: Whoever casts a lustful gaze at an unrelated woman will have molten, blazing iron poured into his eyes on the Day of Resurrection. —Fath al-Qadir

But one may encounter many situations in which it becomes necessary to look at an unrelated woman. For example, a woman may be under the care of a physician, testifying before a judge in a legal case, drowning in water, or facing danger to her chastity and honour. In such circumstances, it is permissible to look at her face and, if necessary, even at her satr. Her body may also be touched; indeed, if a woman is being burned by fire or submerged in water, lifting her and carrying her out is not merely permissible but becomes obligatory. The Lawgiver’s instruction is that, in such circumstances, one must keep one’s intention as pure as possible. But if even the slightest arousal arises because of human impulses, there will be no sin in it. Such a look was taken under the pressure of necessity, and it is not possible for a human being to suppress natural impulses.

Similarly, looking at an unrelated woman for the purpose of marriage—and looking at her carefully—is not merely permissible; there are also instructions concerning this in the Hadith. The Noble Prophet (peace be upon him) himself looked at a woman for this purpose.

(Arabic******************************************************)

It is narrated from al-Mughira ibn Shu‘ba that once he proposed marriage to a woman. The Prophet (peace be upon him) told him, “Look at her, for this is more likely to create love and harmony between you.” —Tirmidhi

(Arabic****************************************************)

It is narrated from Sahl ibn Sa‘d that once a woman came to the Noble Prophet (peace be upon him) and said, “O Messenger of Allah! I offer myself to you for marriage.” The Prophet (peace be upon him) then looked at her. —Bukhari

(Arabic****************************************)

Hazrat Abu Hurayra said, “I was sitting with the Prophet (peace be upon him) when a man came and said, ‘I intend to marry an Ansari woman.’ The Prophet (peace be upon him) asked, ‘Have you seen her?’ The man replied, ‘No.’ The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, ‘Look at her, for there is generally some defect in the eyes of the Ansar.’” —Muslim

(Arabic******************************************************************)

It is narrated from Jabir ibn Abdullah that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: If any of you proposes marriage to a woman, he should look at her as much as possible to see whether she possesses anything that would encourage him to marry her. —Abu Dawud

Reflecting on all these exceptions makes it clear that Allah’s purpose is not to prohibit looking at women altogether; rather, His purpose is truly to block the path to sedition and misconduct. Looking that is not needed, that brings no civilizational benefit, and that may cause sexual arousal has been prohibited.

These instructions have been given to men in the same way as they have been given to women.

It is narrated in the Hadith from Hazrat Umm Salama that once she and Hazrat Maymuna were sitting with the Prophet (peace be upon him). At that time the blind Hazrat Ibn Umm Maktum came there. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, “Observe hijab before him.” Hazrat Umm Salama said, “Is he not blind? He cannot see us or recognize us.” The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, “Are you also blind, that you cannot see him?”

But there is a slight psychological difference between a man looking at a woman and a woman looking at a man. Men have a tendency to act proactively. Once a man likes something, he strives to obtain it. But a woman’s nature contains a tendency to resist and withdraw. Until her nature changes, she cannot become so fearless and bold that, once someone pleases her, she will pursue him. Taking this difference into account, the Lawgiver has not declared as much strictness regarding women looking at men as He has regarding men looking at women. This is because the narration of Hazrat Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) is well known in the Hadith collections: “The Prophet (peace be upon him) showed her the Abyssinians’ performance on the occasion of Eid.” [This narration has been recorded in various forms in Bukhari, Muslim, al-Nasa’i, Musnad Ahmad, and other works. Some have explained that this event may have taken place when Hazrat Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) was still a minor and the command concerning hijab had not yet been revealed. But Ibn Huran states in a detailed discussion that this event occurred when a delegation from Abyssinia came to Madinah. History proves that this delegation came to Madinah in the seventh year after the Hijrah. Judging by this, Hazrat Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) was then fifteen or sixteen years old. Moreover, Bukhari’s narration says that the Prophet (peace be upon him) kept Hazrat Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) covered with a cloak. This proves that the commands concerning hijab had already been revealed.] This shows that it is not entirely prohibited for women to look at men. However, men and women are prohibited from sitting together in the same gathering and gazing at one another unblinkingly. A look that may lead to misconduct or harm is also impermissible. The same companion, Hazrat Ibn Umm Maktum, from whom the Prophet (peace be upon him) instructed Umm Salama to observe hijab, was also the one in whose house the Prophet (peace be upon him) instructed Fatimah bint Qays (may Allah be pleased with her) to observe her waiting period. Qadi Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabi described the incident in his Ahkam al-Qur’an as follows:

He says that Fatimah bint Qays wished to observe her waiting period in the house of Umm Sharik. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “People frequently visit that house. Stay in the house of Ibn Umm Maktum, for he is blind, and there you may remain without observing hijab.”

This shows that the purpose is to reduce the likelihood of misconduct and harm. She was forbidden to stay where the likelihood of misconduct was greater and told to stay where it was less. She had to stay somewhere, but where there was no necessity for her to remain, women were forbidden to gather in the same place with an unrelated man and meet him face to face.

Anyone capable of considering all these matters with dignity, sound judgment, and an understanding of the spirit of the Shariah can easily understand the rational reasons behind the commands to restrain the gaze, and why these commands are made stricter or more lenient in different circumstances. The Lawgiver’s real purpose is to stop the play of gazes; otherwise, He has no enmity toward anyone’s eyes. The eyes initially look innocently. The mind’s enjoyment of this is natural and God-given. Enjoy the other pleasures of natural beauty. Therefore, look once upon human beauty and derive a spiritual pleasure from it. But Satan gradually increases the enjoyment and relish. Eventually, the taste of beauty rises into a desire for union. Can anyone deny that the gaze of the eyes is the first and greatest cause of all the immorality that has occurred and continues to occur in the world? Can anyone claim that the state of mind produced by looking at a flower is exactly the same as that produced by looking at a handsome young man or woman? If there is a difference between the two states, and one is more sexually appealing than the other, how can it be said that the same freedom allowed in enjoying one kind of beauty should also be allowed in the case of the other? The Lawgiver does not wish to stop anyone from enjoying beauty. He says: Choose the partner you desire and satisfy through that person as much of your desire for the enjoyment of beauty as you possess. If, moving away from this center, you go about looking at the beauty and youth of others, you will become involved in misconduct and obscenity. Even if self-restraint and other prohibitions prevent you from actually engaging in debauchery, you will not be able to protect yourself from debauchery in the realm of thought. Much of your strength will be wasted through the stimulation of the eyes. Your mind will be polluted by many unfulfilled sinful desires. You will repeatedly be tormented by love and deception, and spend many nights awake, lost in dreams. Many beautiful serpents will bite you. Your life-force will be worn away by the beating of your heart and the agitation of your blood—is this a small loss? Keep these things under control. One should refrain from looking without cause and from looking in a way that may lead to misconduct and harm. If there is a genuine need to look and it produces some civilizational benefit, then it will be justified.

Restrictions on Displaying Beauty and Their Limits

The commands to restrain the gaze apply equally to men and women. Some commands, however, are specific to women. The first of these is that a woman may not display her beauty beyond a defined boundary.

Before considering the purpose and details of this command, it is necessary to recall the instructions described earlier in the chapter on clothing and satr. Apart from the face and hands, a woman’s entire body—the satr—may not be uncovered even before her father, paternal uncle, brother, or son. It is even makruh for one woman to uncover her satr before another woman. [For one woman to look at the parts of another woman’s body between the navel and the knees is just as haram as it is for one man to look at these parts of another man. Looking at other parts is makruh, not haram.] With this fact in mind, it is necessary to discuss the limits of displaying beauty.

1. A woman is permitted to display her beauty before her husband, father, father-in-law, son, stepson, brother, nephew, and sister’s son.

2. She is also permitted to display her beauty before her own male slave—not before anyone else’s slave.

3. She may also appear adorned before a man who is subordinate and dependent upon her and who has no interest or desire toward women. [In explaining this instruction, Hafiz Ibn Kathir says: (Arabic******************) This refers to those laborers, servants, and dependents who are not clever or worldly-wise, who are very simple-hearted, and who have no sexual desire for women. Sexual desire may be absent in two situations. First, they may have no sexual desire at all, such as the elderly, the mentally deficient, or those who are congenitally impotent. Second, they may possess masculine strength and a natural interest and desire toward women, but they cannot harbor sexual desire for the women of the household under which they serve obediently or the household to which they go as beggars to receive assistance. The above Qur’anic words refer to both categories. It must be remembered, however, that men before whom women are permitted to display their beauty must possess two qualities. First, they must not even think of harboring any sexual desire for the women of the household they serve. Furthermore, every head of a household should watch carefully to determine whether the servants permitted to enter the home have proved to be what they were initially believed to be. If any suspicion arises about them after permission has been granted, they must be prevented from entering the home. A vivid example in this regard is the eunuch whom the Prophet (peace be upon him) had permitted to enter the house.]

The incident was as follows: There was a eunuch in Madinah who used to come and go before the Prophet’s wives. Once he was sitting with Hazrat Umm Salama, conversing with her brother, Hazrat Abdullah. At that moment the Prophet (peace be upon him) arrived there, and as he entered the house he heard the eunuch saying these words to Hazrat Abdullah:

“If Ta’if is conquered tomorrow, I will show you Badiya bint Ghaylan al-Thaqafi. Her condition is such that when she comes from the front, four folds can be seen on her belly, and when she turns around, eight folds. He then praised her private parts in obscene language. Hearing this, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: ‘O enemy of Allah! You have looked at her very closely.’ Then he said to his wives: ‘I see that this man is well-informed about women’s condition. Therefore, he must not be allowed to come near you.’

The Prophet (peace be upon him) did not stop there. He expelled him from Madinah. When he heard the description the man had given of Bint Ghaylan’s private parts, the Prophet (peace be upon him) concluded that, because of his feminine manner and behavior, the women associated with him freely and without hesitation as they would with women of their own sex. Taking advantage of this opportunity, the man learned about the women’s intimate condition and described them to men. This could result in great harm and misconduct.]

4. She may also display her beauty before boys who have not yet developed sexual awareness. The Holy Qur’an says:

(Arabic*******************************************)

Such boys have not yet become acquainted with women’s private matters.

5. It is permissible to display women’s beauty before women with whom one normally associates. In the Holy Qur’an, the expression “your women” is used instead of “women in general.” This refers to respectable women, one’s own female relatives, or women of one’s own class. An ignorant and foolish woman, a woman whose conduct is questionable, or a woman whose character bears the mark of disgrace and licentiousness is not included; the woman under discussion is not permitted to display her beauty before any such women, because they too may become a cause of misconduct and harm. After Muslims went to Syria and Muslim women began associating with Jewish and Christian women, Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) wrote to the governor of Syria, Hazrat Abu Ubaydah ibn al-Jarrah (may Allah be pleased with him), instructing that Muslim women be forbidden to enter the public bathhouses with the People of the Book’s women. —Tafsir Ibn Jarir

Hazrat Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) explained that Muslim women may expose before unbelieving and dhimmi women only as much as they may expose before unrelated men. —Tafsir Kabir

The purpose of all this was not to preserve religious distinctiveness; rather, it was to protect Muslim women from the influence of women whose nature, character, and culture were unknown, or which, if known, were objectionable from the Islamic viewpoint. Among non-Muslim women, those who are respectable and modest are included among “your women” in the Qur’anic expression (Arabic********).

Reflecting on all these boundaries, two points can be understood:

1. The beauty that is permitted to be displayed within these restricted bounds consists of wearing ornaments and jewelry—parts outside the satr—adorning oneself in beautiful clothing, using kohl and perfume, arranging one’s hair, and other forms of adornment that women ordinarily wear in their homes according to feminine needs.

2. Such adornment has been permitted before men who are permanently forbidden to women, or before men who have no sexual desire, or before people who will not become a cause of misconduct or harm. For women, the condition “your women” has been stipulated; for dependents, “having no sexual desire”; and for boys, “being unacquainted with women’s private matters.” It is therefore clear that the Lawgiver’s purpose is to confine women’s display of beauty within boundaries such that their beauty and adornment cannot produce unlawful arousal or create a danger of sexual disorder.

Regarding all men outside these boundaries, the command has been given that beauty and adornment must not be displayed before them. Moreover, when walking, a woman must not step in such a way that her concealed beauty and adornment become apparent through the sound of her footsteps, thereby causing men’s gaze to settle upon her. The beauty that this command requires a woman to conceal from unrelated men is precisely the beauty that she has been permitted to display within the restricted boundaries mentioned above. The purpose is quite clear. If women appear adorned before men who possess sexual desire and whose desire, because they are not mahram, has not been transformed into a pure and innocent disposition, no one says that every woman will become immoral and every man will actually become sinful merely because of such a display of beauty. But no one can deny that women’s public movement in beautiful dress and participation in public gatherings are causing countless outward and hidden, psychological and material harms. Today women in Europe and America spend most of their own and their husbands’ earnings on adornment. This financial burden is increasing daily to such an extent that they no longer have the means to bear it. [Recently, an exhibition by manufacturers of chemical products was held. According to experts, it became known that the women of England spend twenty million pounds a year and the women of America one hundred twenty-five million pounds a year. Nearly ninety percent of women wish to use some kind of “makeup.” (Note: This was forty years ago, when this article was written. There is no doubt that women’s luxury has now increased many times beyond that. —Translator.) Is it not the lustful gazes that welcome women in markets, offices, and public gatherings that create this frenzy? Think again: what could be the reason for the creation and rapid growth of such a powerful desire for adornment among women? Is it not because they wish to gain men’s praise and appear attractive in their eyes? [The frenzy to become beautiful has grown so much among women that they are even sacrificing their lives for it. Their supreme effort is to remain thin and slender, without a single pound of excess flesh on their bodies. Experts have prescribed measurements for the calves, thighs, and breasts as standards of beauty, and every girl wants to keep her body within those measurements, as though these unfortunate women have no other aim in life than to look pleasing to others. To reach the goal, they starve themselves, deprive themselves of nourishing foods, and live on lemon juice, bitter coffee, and similarly poor fare. Without a physician’s advice—and indeed contrary to such advice—they use medicines that make them thin and weak. In the grip of this madness, many women have sacrificed and continue to sacrifice their lives. In 1937, the famous Budapest actress “Jusilabas” died suddenly when her heart stopped. An investigation later revealed that she had spent several years half-starved and had used patent medicines to reduce her weight. Then one day her life-force suddenly gave out. After that, three more such incidents occurred one after another in Budapest alone. Hungary’s exceptionally famous beauty, “Magda Varsili,” gave her life in order to remain lightly built. Then the singer “Louise Zabu” suddenly fainted and died on stage one night before thousands of spectators. She was distressed that her body did not conform to the standards of modern beauty. To remove this distress, the poor woman adopted artificial methods and lost sixty pounds of body weight in two months. As a result, her heart became extremely weak, and one day she sacrificed her life for the admirers of beauty.]

After this came the turn of an actress named “Imula.” She had made her body so light by artificial means that she eventually developed a permanent brain disorder. She then had to go to a mental hospital instead of the stage. The incidents involving famous people of this kind are published in newspapers. But who knows how much health and how many lives this frenzy for beauty and for appearing attractive, which has spread from house to house, is destroying every day? Can anyone say whether this is women’s freedom or women’s slavery? This so-called freedom has only imposed the domination of men’s sexual impulses over them even more heavily. It has made them such slaves that they have been deprived of freedom even in matters of eating, drinking, and preserving their health. The lives and deaths of these unfortunate women now exist only for men.] What is this for? Is it an entirely innocent desire? Is there not a sexual desire hidden within it that seeks to expand beyond its natural bounds, and for whose fulfillment a corresponding desire exists at the other end? If you deny this, perhaps tomorrow you will not hesitate to claim that the smoke seen in a volcano is not evidence that any lava within it is eager to emerge.

You are free to do your work and do as you wish. But do not deny the truth. This truth is no longer hidden either. Its consequences have become as evident as daylight. You are knowingly accepting these consequences. But Islam seeks to stop them at the very point from which their manifestation begins. Its attention is not focused on the outwardly innocent beginning of displaying beauty; rather, it is focused on the terrible consequences that spread throughout society like the darkness of the Day of Resurrection.

Hadith:

(Arabic*****************************************)

A woman who moves about adorned before unrelated men is like the darkness of the Day of Resurrection, without light. —Tirmidhi

There is also an exception to the prohibition against displaying beauty before unrelated men mentioned in the Qur’an. Namely: (Arabic***********)—there is no blame in it. People have tried to derive some advantage from this exception. But the difficulty is that these words provide no scope for gaining much advantage. The Lawgiver says: Do not voluntarily display your beauty before others. But no one will be held responsible for clothing that becomes visible on its own or is compelled to become visible—this meaning is perfectly clear. Your intention must not be to display beauty and adornment. You should never have the impulse or desire to show your finery to others, or, even if nothing else, to attract another’s attention to you by letting him hear the concealed jingling of your ornaments. You must try your utmost to conceal your own beauty and adornment. Thereafter, if something becomes visible against your will, Allah will not hold you responsible for it. The clothing with which you cover your beauty will of course be visible. Your bodily build and height, physical grace, shape and form will naturally be discernible through it. For necessary work and activity, you will have to uncover your hands and part of your face. There is no blame in this. Your intention is not to display them; rather, you are compelled to do so. If an immoral person takes pleasure in it, let him do so. He will suffer the punishment for his immoral desire. You have fulfilled, to the best of your ability, the responsibility that civilization and morality placed upon you.

This is the true meaning of the aforementioned verse. If one studies and reflects upon the various differences of opinion among the exegetes regarding the meaning of this verse, it will be clear that, despite all their differences, the substance of their statements amounts to what has been explained above.

According to Ibn Mas‘ud, Ibrahim Nakha‘i and Hasan al-Basri, the meaning of visible beauty is those garments within which the inner beauty can be kept concealed, such as the burqa, shawl and so forth.

According to Ibn ‘Abbas, Mujahid, ‘Ata’, Ibn ‘Umar, Anas, Dahhak, Sa‘id ibn Jubayr, Awza‘i and the Hanafi imams, it means the face and hands, together with the adornments used on them, such as henna on the hands, rings, kohl on the eyes and so forth.

According to Sa‘id ibn al-Musayyib, the exception applies only to the face; and according to another narration, Hasan al-Basri also supported this view.

‘A’ishah, may Allah be pleased with her, was in favor of covering the face. According to her, visible beauty means the hands, bracelets, rings, bangles and so forth.

Miswar ibn Makhramah and Qatadah permit the hands to be uncovered, together with their ornaments; and from his statement it appears that he permits only the eyes to remain uncovered instead of the entire face. —Ibn Jarir and Ahkam al-Qur’an

Reflect upon the purpose behind all these differences of opinion. From the statements of all these exegetes (Arabic***********) it is understood that Allah Most High permits the display of such beauty as becomes visible unavoidably or must necessarily be exposed. None of them intends that the hands be displayed or made the object of anyone’s gaze.

Each of them, according to his own understanding, tried to consider women’s needs and determine which parts may be uncovered when necessary, whether they become exposed unavoidably or naturally. We say that (Arabic**********) should not be restricted to either of these alone. A believing woman who wishes to obey the commands of Allah and the Messenger and does not wish to become involved in immorality and evil may decide for herself, according to her circumstances and needs, whether or not to uncover her face and hands; if she wishes to do so, when she will do it, how much she will uncover and how much she will keep covered. The Lawgiver has given no explicit instruction in this regard. Nor does practical reason require that a definite instruction be prescribed while taking into account the varying circumstances and needs. A woman who is compelled by her needs to go outside and attend to her work will sometimes need to uncover her hands and sometimes her face. Such a woman has permission according to her need. But a woman whose circumstances are not like this may not voluntarily uncover her hands and face without a reason.

Thus, the intent of the Lawgiver is that if any part of the body is uncovered with the purpose of displaying one’s beauty, there will be sin in it. If something becomes visible naturally and unintentionally, there will be no sin in it. If genuine necessity compels one to uncover it, that will be permissible. Now the question is: setting aside the differing circumstances, what instruction exists specifically regarding the face? Does the Lawgiver prefer that it remain uncovered, or does He disapprove of that? May it be uncovered only in times of necessity, or is it not something that must be concealed from the gaze of others?

These questions are illuminated by the verses of Surah al-Ahzab.

The Instruction Regarding the Face

The verses of Surah al-Ahzab mentioned above are as follows:

(Arabic*********************************************)

O Prophet! Tell your wives, your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks over themselves. By this means, it may be hoped that they will be recognized and thereafter will not be harassed. —Surah al-Ahzab: 59

This verse was revealed specifically concerning covering the face. (Arabic***********) is the plural of (Arabic***********), which means a cloak. The word (Arabic***********) means to let hang down. The literal meaning of (Arabic*****************) is that she should let part of the cloak hang down over herself. This is also the meaning of drawing a veil. But the actual purpose of this verse is not the ordinary, commonly known ‘veil’; rather, its purpose is covering the face, whether by means of a veil, a screen or any other method. Its benefit is described as follows: when a Muslim woman leaves her home in this covered state, people will understand that she is a respectable woman—not shameless or immodest. For this reason, no one will obstruct her chastity.

All the exegetes of the Holy Qur’an have expressed this very meaning of the verse. Ibn ‘Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, says in its exegesis:

Allah Most High commanded the Muslim women that when they go outside their homes for any need, they should let the edge of their cloaks hang down from above their heads and cover their faces. —Tafsir Ibn Jarir

Imam Muhammad ibn Sirin asked ‘Ubaydah ibn Sufyan ibn al-Harith al-Hadrami how this command should be acted upon. In response, he demonstrated it himself. He covered his forehead, nose and one eye, leaving only one eye uncovered. —Tafsir Ibn Jarir

Allamah Ibn Jarir al-Tabari says in his exegesis of this verse:

O Prophet! Tell your wives, your daughters and the Muslim women that when they leave their homes for any need, they should not wear the clothing of slave women, leaving their heads and faces uncovered. Rather, they should draw the veils of their cloaks over themselves, so that wicked people do not violate their chastity and may recognize that they are respectable women. —Tafsir Ibn Jarir

Allamah Abu Bakr al-Jassas says:

This verse proves that young women have been commanded to cover their faces from unrelated men, and that when leaving the home they should display modesty and respectability, so that those who harbor evil intentions will not be tempted toward them. —Ahkam al-Qur’an, volume three

Allama Nayhsapuri says in his exegesis, Gharā’ib al-Qur’an:

In the early period of Islam, women would go outside wearing a kameez and dupatta, as in the Age of Ignorance. The clothing of respectable women was no different from that of women of the lower classes. Thereafter, the command was given that they should cast a cloak over themselves and thereby cover their faces, so that people might recognize them as respectable women, not immodest ones.

Imam Razi says:

In the Age of Ignorance, respectable women and slave women alike went about unveiled, and immoral men pursued them. Allah the Exalted commanded respectable women to cover themselves with cloaks. (Arabic********************) This may have two meanings. First, from this clothing it would be possible to recognize that she was a respectable woman, and they would not be followed. Second, it would be understood from it that they were not of bad character. For no one could expect a woman who kept her face covered [or, if the face is not counted among the ‘awrah’—the part of the body that must be kept covered from everyone except a husband or wife, which is called ‘awrah’ in Qur’anic terminology; the portion between a man’s navel and knees is also called ‘awrah’ in this sense—and therefore it would not be obligatory to cover it] to be willing to uncover her ‘awrah.’ Thus, this clothing would prove that she was a veiled woman, and it would be futile to expect any immoral conduct from her. —Tafsir Kabir

Qadi Baydawi says:

(Arabic******************************************)

This means that when they went outside for their needs, they would cover their bodies and faces with cloaks. Here, the word (Arabic********) has been used for (Arabic*******)—that is, it was to be wrapped over the cloak. (Arabic*********************) Through this, respectable women were distinguished from slave women and singing girls. (Arabic**********) That is, suspicious men would not dare to violate their modesty. —Tafsir Baydawi

All these statements establish that, from the sacred era of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) through the eighth century, the same meaning was assigned to this verse in every age, and that meaning is precisely what we have understood from its words. Furthermore, if we examine the hadiths, it becomes clear that after the revelation of this verse, during the era of the Noble Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), Muslim women in general began covering their faces, and the practice of moving about with uncovered faces came to an end. Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi, Muwatta and other hadith collections state that the Prophet (peace be upon him) prohibited women in a state of ihram from covering their faces and wearing gloves on their hands. This proves that, even in that sacred era, it was customary to use face coverings to cover the face and gloves to cover the hands. They were prohibited only while in ihram. However, the purpose was not to expose women’s faces to the public during Hajj; rather, it was that, in the distinctive dress of ihram, the face covering should not become a component of women’s clothing, as it ordinarily was at other times. Other hadiths state that even while in ihram, the wives of the Prophet and other ordinary Muslim women kept their uncovered faces hidden from the sight of unfamiliar men.

(Arabic************************************************)

Hazrat Ayesha (may Allah be pleased with her) says: “Riders would pass by us while we were in a state of ihram with the Prophet (peace be upon him). When people came in front of us, we would draw our cloaks down over our faces from our heads. When they had passed, we would uncover our faces again.”

—Abu Dawud

(Arabic***************************************************)

Fatimah bint al-Mundhir says: “While in a state of ihram, we would cover our faces with cloth. Hazrat Asma, the daughter of Hazrat Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with her), was with us, and she did not forbid us from doing so.” Imam Malik: Muwatta

In Fath al-Bari, in the Book of Hajj, there is a narration from Hazrat Ayesha (may Allah be pleased with her):

(Arabic**********************************************_)

Women should let their cloaks hang over their faces from their heads while in a state of ihram.

Covering

Anyone who considers the words of the Holy Qur’an, their public acceptance, the unanimously accepted exegesis, and their implementation in the era of the Noble Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) will be unable to deny this truth: Islamic law contains an instruction for women to keep their faces covered before unfamiliar men, and this command was observed in the era of the Prophet (peace be upon him). Even if the word ‘niqab,’ or covering, is not used, it is a subject proposed by the Holy Qur’an in meaning and substance. In the presence of the sacred person upon whom the Qur’an was revealed, Muslim women adopted it as part of their outdoor clothing, and even in that era it was called ‘niqab,’ meaning veil or covering.

Regrettably, this is the very ‘niqab’ (veil) that Europe regards as extremely objectionable and detestable. Even the mere idea of it is unbearable to the Western conscience. They consider it a symbol of oppression, narrow-mindedness and barbarism. It is one of the things mentioned whenever the ignorance and backwardness of Eastern nations are discussed. Again, when it is said that an Eastern nation is progressing in culture and civilization, the first matter loudly emphasized is that the ‘niqab’ has departed from that nation. Now bow your head in shame upon learning that this is not an invention of a later age; rather, it was discovered by the Holy Qur’an itself, and the Noble Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) instituted its practice. But merely lowering your head will not suffice. When an ostrich sees a hunter and hides its head in the sand, the hunter does not cease to exist. You may likewise lower your head, but the verses of the Qur’an will not thereby be erased, nor will events established by history disappear. If you draw a curtain over this by means of complicated interpretations, this ‘stain of shame’ will become even more apparent. Having believed in the Western ‘divine revelation’ and accepted it as a ‘stain and disgrace,’ there is only one way to remove it. That is to declare your release from the Islam that commands such ‘detestable things’ as the ‘niqab,’ the face veil and covering. You desire ‘progress’; what you need is ‘civilization.’ How, then, can that religion be acceptable to you which prevents women from becoming the illuminations of assemblies and gatherings, teaches modesty, the veil, dignity and chastity, and forbids them from adorning themselves as objects of delight to the eyes of anyone other than the people of their household? Where is ‘progress’ in such a religion? What relationship can such a religion have with ‘civilization’? For ‘progress’ and ‘civilization,’ what is needed is that a woman—not a woman, but a memsahib—before going outside, remain free from all work for two hours and devote herself solely to perfecting her beauty and adorning herself; fill her entire body with perfume; dress in highly attractive clothing in terms of color and cut; paint her face and arms; make her lips blood-red with lipstick; and freshen her eyes so that the bow of her eyebrows may launch accurate and penetrating arrows. When she leaves the house adorned in all these charming fashions, the situation will be such that every gesture will seem to attract hearts and minds and say, ‘This is the proper place.’ Then, if even this does not satisfy her desire to display her adornments, mirrors and cosmetics will always be kept with her, so that if the slightest flaw appears in her adornment, it may be corrected from time to time.

We have repeatedly said that there is an immense difference between the aims of Islam and those of Western civilization, and that anyone who interprets Islamic injunctions from a Western perspective will make a grave error. Islam’s standard of the value and worth of things is entirely different from the Western standard. The things that the West considers extremely important and desirable in life have no importance in Islam’s view. Conversely, what Islam gives importance to is valueless to the West. Thus, to a person who believes in the Western standard, every aspect of Islam will seem in need of correction. When he undertakes to interpret Islamic injunctions, he will inevitably alter them, and even after altering them he will be unable to implement them in his own life, because the explanations of the Qur’an and Sunnah will obstruct him at every step. Before considering the details of the methods for implementing Allah’s commands, such a person should reflect on the purpose for which these methods were adopted and on how acceptable that purpose is. If he cannot agree even with those purposes, will he undertake the needless trouble of arguing about the means of achieving them and changing them? Why does he not abandon the religion whose aims and objectives he considers flawed? But if he agrees with its objectives, then the only remaining dispute is whether the effective methods proposed for achieving those objectives are sound or unsound. This dispute can easily be resolved. But only honorable people can adopt this approach. What remains are the hypocrites. They are the worst of Allah the Exalted’s creatures. It befits them to claim faith in something while in reality their faith lies in something else.

The controversy over the ‘niqab’ and ‘burqa’ is in fact based on hypocrisy. Every effort has been made to prove that this form of veiling was customary among the nations of the pre-Islamic era and that this legacy of the Age of Ignorance was distributed among Muslims long after the Prophetic era. Why this obsession with historical investigation in opposition to a clear verse of the Qur’an, established practice from the Prophetic era, and the explicit explanations of the Companions and Followers? The sole reason is that those objectives and aims were and remain before them—objectives accepted by Western society. They have implanted in their hearts the concepts of ‘progress’ and ‘civilization’ copied from Westerners. Since wearing the burqa and covering the face are contrary to those objectives and incompatible with those concepts, they have attempted, through historical investigation, to eliminate the matters recorded in Islamic jurisprudence. This is an obvious hypocrisy, as it has been in this issue just as in other issues. Its true cause is the lack of principles, intellectual deficiency and absence of moral courage described above. Had this not been so, despite claiming allegiance to Islam, the idea of presenting a history of the Qur’an would never have arisen in their minds. Either they should have reconciled their objectives with the objectives of Islam [if they wished to remain Muslims], or else they should have openly separated themselves from this religion, which they regard as an obstacle to progress according to their own standard of progress.

For one who understands the objectives of Islamic law and possesses some common sense, it is not difficult to understand that permitting women to move about outside with uncovered faces is contrary to those objectives to which Islam attaches such importance. The feature of another person that attracts one most is the face. The finest manifestation of the beauty inherent in human creation—in other words, the greatest display of human beauty—is the face. It attracts the most attention. It stirs emotions and feelings. It is the greatest agent of sexual emotion and arousal. No profound psychological knowledge is needed to understand this. Ask your own mind. Seek the verdict from your own eyes. Test and examine it through your own mental experience. Hypocrisy is another matter. If a hypocritical person sees even acknowledging the existence of the sun as contrary to his own interest, he will deny the existence of the sun in broad daylight. If you hold to the truth, you must acknowledge that, in terms of sexual attraction [Sex Appeal], Allah the Exalted has placed most of the body’s beauty in the face. If you were to marry a girl, what would you use to make your decision about her? One possibility is that she would stand before you with every part of her body covered except her face. The second is that she would show you her face through a window opening. Tell me now, which of these two would you choose? Honestly tell me: compared with the entire body, is the beauty of the face not more important to you?

Having acknowledged this truth, proceed further. If the aim is not to stop sexual licentiousness and uncontrolled sexual arousal in society, then why only the face? There should be freedom to leave everything exposed—the breasts, arms, thighs and calves—as in Western civilization. In that case, none of the boundaries and restrictions described above concerning Islamic veiling would be necessary. But if the aim is to prevent the storm of sexual arousal, what could be more contrary to sound judgment and more unscientific than to put chains on the small doors while leaving the great door completely open?

One may now ask: if this is the case, why did Islam permit the face to be uncovered in cases of unavoidable necessity? The answer is that Islamic law is neither unbalanced nor one-sided. Just as it considers moral consequences on the one hand, it also judges matters in view of human beings’ genuine needs on the other, maintaining the utmost harmony and balance between the two. It seeks to block the path to moral corruption, yet it does not wish to impose such restrictions upon anyone that they would be unable to meet their genuine needs. This is the sole reason why, with regard to covering the satr and displaying beauty, instructions as explicit as those concerning the face and hands were not given. Concealing the satr and beauty causes no difficulty in meeting life’s needs. But keeping both hands and the face covered at all times would create immense difficulty for women in meeting their needs. Therefore, the general arrangement made for women is that they should keep a veil and covering over the face; and, in accordance with the principle of (Arabic**********), this concession has been granted: if there truly is a need to uncover the face, it may be uncovered. The condition, however, is that the purpose must not be to display beauty; fulfilling the need must be the actual purpose. As for the corruption and harm feared from the other side, its path too has been blocked by instructing men to restrain their gaze. If a respectable woman uncovers her face for her own need, a man must lower his gaze and refrain from other use of it.

Reflecting upon these instructions regarding observance of purdah makes it clear that Islamic purdah is not a practice of the Age of Ignorance; rather, it is a law founded upon knowledge and reason. A practice of the Age of Ignorance is rigid and unchanging. However a practice may have become established, it cannot be altered under any circumstances. Whatever has been kept hidden remains hidden forever; it cannot be disclosed even after death. By contrast, a law based on reason and conscience contains flexibility. According to circumstances, it allows for strictness and leniency. According to circumstances, it also provides means for exceptions within its rules and principles. Such a law cannot be followed blindly. It requires understanding and sound judgment. A conscientious person who observes the law can decide for himself when the general rules should be followed and when, from the legal standpoint, a genuine need exists for which an exception may be taken. He can then decide for himself how much benefit permission may provide in a given situation and how, while obtaining that benefit, the purpose of the law can be preserved intact. In all these matters, it is in fact a pure intention or desire that can make a believer’s heart a true mufti. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said:

(Arabic*************************************))

Ask your own heart for a fatwa, and abandon whatever causes uneasiness or doubt in your heart.

For this reason, obedience to Islam is not possible through ignorance and without understanding. It is a law founded upon conscience and reason, and following it requires feeling and understanding at every step.

Rules for Leaving the Home

After defining the limits of clothing and the satr, the final instruction given to women is this:

(Arabic**********************************)

Remain in your homes with dignity, and do not go about adorned as in the Age of Ignorance. —Surah al-Ahzab: 33

(Arabic***************************************************)

They should not stamp their feet upon the ground in such a manner that their concealed beauty becomes known. —Surah al-Nur: 31

(Arabic******************************************)

Do not speak in a soft voice, lest those in whose hearts is a disease become tempted. —Surah al-Ahzab: 32

There is a difference of opinion regarding the pronunciation of the word (Arabic******). The generality of the people of Madinah and some of the people of Kufah read it as (Arabic*******), with a fatḥah on the kaf. It is derived from the root word (Arabic********). With this reading, its meaning would be: Remain firmly in your homes. On the other hand, the generality of the people of Basrah and Kufah read it as (Arabic******), with a kasrah beneath the kaf. It is derived from the word (Arabic********). Its meaning would then be: Remain in your homes with dignity and tranquility.

The word (Arabic***********) has two meanings. The first is the display of beauty and adornment. The second is to show pomp and flourish while walking—to walk with a swaying gait and graceful manner. Both meanings are intended in the Qur’anic verse. In the first Age of Ignorance, women would go out in charming adornment, just as women in modern-day ignorance move about in public. Their manner of walking was also deliberately such that each step fell not upon the ground but upon the hearts of the spectators. The renowned Tabi‘i and Qur’an commentator Qatadah said:

(Arabic***************************************)

No historical account is needed to understand this state of affairs. Go to a society where girls appear in Western dress and adornment. You will see with your own eyes the conduct of the first Age of Ignorance. Islam instructs people to refrain from this. It says, first of all, that your proper place of residence is your home. You have been relieved of responsibility for affairs outside the home so that you may remain in your home with peace and dignity and fulfill the responsibilities of family life. Nevertheless, if there is a need, you are permitted to go outside the home. But when going out, maintain full regard for your chastity and honor. Your dress and adornment should not contain such splendor and brilliance as to attract others’ eyes toward you, nor should you have such an eagerness to display your beauty that, while walking, you sometimes show the glimmer of your face and at other times display your hands. Your manner should not contain such gracefulness as to cause others’ eyes to remain fixed upon you. Do not go out wearing ornaments whose jingling pours honey into the ears of others. Do not deliberately raise your voice for others to hear. Yes, if there is a need to speak, then speak, but do not try to speak in a honeyed voice. By observing all these rules and limits, you may go outside the home.

This is the teaching of the Holy Qur’an. Come, now let us look once at the Hadith. Let us see what course the Prophet (peace be upon him) prescribed for women in society according to this teaching, and how the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) and their womenfolk put it into practice.

Permission to Go Out for a Need

It is related in the Hadith that, before the instructions concerning purdah were revealed, Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) used to say, ‘O Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), place the women behind a veil.’ Once, when the Mother of the Believers, Hazrat Sawdah bint Kham‘ah (may Allah be pleased with her), went outside the house at night, Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) saw her. He called to her and said, ‘Sawdah! We have recognized you.’ By this he intended that women should be prohibited from going outside the home in any manner. Then, when the command regarding purdah was revealed, Hazrat Umar’s opportunity came. He began to strictly prevent women from going out. The earlier incident involving Hazrat Sawdah (may Allah be pleased with her) happened again. As soon as she left the house, Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) stopped her. Hazrat Sawdah (may Allah be pleased with her) complained about this to the Noble Prophet (peace be upon him). The Prophet said: (Arabic******************************************)

Allah Most High has permitted you to go out according to your needs. —Salim, Bukhari, and others.

From this it can be understood that the Qur’anic meaning of (Arabic******************) is not that women must never set foot outside the boundaries of the home; rather, they have full permission to go out to meet a need. But this permission is neither unconditional nor unlimited. It is not lawful for women to move about freely wherever they wish and mingle in men’s gatherings. In the terminology of the Shariah, a need means that going outside has become absolutely necessary for a woman. It should be noted that it is not possible to prescribe one method of going out or staying in for all women in every age. However, from the method established by the Lawgiver for women going out in the ordinary circumstances of life, and from the way He made adjustments within the limits of purdah, one can infer the spirit and tendency of Islamic law. By fully understanding this, each person can determine for himself how to adjust it in personal circumstances and minor matters, in light of the limits of purdah and the situation. To explain this, we mention several examples.

Permission to Attend the Mosque and Its Limits

It is universally known that the obligatory prayer is the most important. Great emphasis has been placed on attending the mosque for prayer and joining the congregation. But in the matter of congregational prayer, instructions entirely opposite to those given for men have been given for women. For a man, the best prayer is that performed at home in the greatest seclusion. Imam Ahmad and al-Tabarani relate the following Hadith from Umm Humayd al-Sa‘idiyyah:

(Arabic******************************************)

She said, ‘O Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), I wish to pray with you.’ The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, ‘I know. But your prayer in a secluded place is better than your prayer in your own room; your prayer in your room is better than your prayer in the veranda of your house; and your prayer in the mosque of your neighborhood is better than your prayer in the congregational mosque.’ [The women themselves can best understand why they have been instructed to pray in such seclusion. For several days each month they are compelled to abandon prayer. Thus something becomes apparent which no modest woman would wish to reveal even to her brothers and sisters. Because of this embarrassment, many women abandon prayer altogether. Sensing this, the Lawgiver advised them: ‘Pray quietly and privately so that no one may know when you pray and when you refrain.’ This is advice, not a command. Women may form a separate congregation within the home, and a woman may lead it. The Prophet (peace be upon him) permitted Umm Waraqah bint Nawfal to lead the women’s congregation (Abu Dawud). It is narrated by al-Daraqutni and al-Bayhaqi that Hazrat Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her) led women in prayer and stood in the middle of the row. From this it is learned that when a woman leads women in prayer, she should stand in the middle rather than at the front of the row, as a man does.]

On this subject, a Hadith from Hazrat Ibn Mas‘ud (may Allah be pleased with him) is narrated in Abu Dawud:

(Arabic*****************************)

For a woman, praying in a secluded chamber is better than praying in her own room.

Observe how the method in this matter has been made completely opposite. For men, praying alone in seclusion has been called the poorest form of prayer, while praying in a congregation, from the smaller to the larger, is the better prayer for them. In precisely the opposite manner, secluded prayer has been called better for women; it has not merely been given precedence over prayer in congregation, but has even been called better than the prayer for which no greater blessing a Muslim could have—namely, the congregational prayer in the Prophet’s Mosque, led by the Imam of the Prophets himself, Hazrat Muhammad (peace be upon him). What is the reason for this difference and disparity? The sole reason is that the Lawgiver did not favor women going outside and wished to prevent the mingling of men and women in congregations. Yet prayer is a sacred act of worship and the mosque is a sacred place. The Wise Lawgiver expressed His intention to prevent the mixing of men and women by explaining the relative virtue and lack of virtue. But He did not prohibit women from going to a sacred place for such a virtuous act. The words used in the Hadith to permit this are a manifestation of the Lawgiver’s incomparable wisdom.

(Arabic**********************************************)

Do not prevent the female servants of Allah from coming to the mosques of Allah. If the wife of any one of you asks permission to go to the mosque, do not stop her. —Bukhari, Muslim

(Arabic*************************************************)

Do not prevent your wives from going to the mosque. But their homes are better for them. —Abu Dawud

These words clearly show that the Lawgiver did not prohibit women from going to the mosque. Going to the mosque for prayer is not an evil deed that it could be declared unlawful. But neither can it be claimed that there should be mixed gatherings of men and women in the mosque. They were permitted to go to the mosque, but it was not said that they must be sent there or taken along; rather, it was only said that if they wished to go to the mosque to perform the lesser prayer instead of the better prayer, and asked for permission to do so, they could not be prevented. Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) was an Islamic jurist, and he understood this significance of the Lawgiver. It is related in the Muwatta that he was continually at odds with his wife, Atikah bint Zayd, over this matter. Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) did not like his wife going to the mosque, but she insisted on going. When she asked permission, Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), faithfully observing the Prophet’s instruction, would remain silent. This meant that he neither stopped her nor expressly granted permission. His wife was also very resolute in this matter. She would say, ‘By Allah, I shall continue going until you expressly forbid me.’ [This was not limited to the wife of Umar (may Allah be pleased with him). Rather, during the Prophet’s time, many women went to the mosque for congregational prayer. Abu Dawud records that there were two rows of women in the Prophet’s Mosque.]

Conditions for Attending the Mosque

Along with granting permission to attend the mosque, some conditions were imposed. The first condition is that they should not go to the mosque during the daytime. They may attend the prayers held in darkness, namely Isha and Fajr.

(Arabic**********************************************)

It is narrated from Hazrat Ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: Allow women to come to the mosque at night. —Tirmidhi

(Arabic*************************************************)

Hazrat Nafi‘, the distinguished student of Hazrat Ibn Umar, said that night-time was specified for this purpose because proper purdah could be maintained in the darkness of night. —Tirmidhi

(Arabic*************************************************)

Hazrat Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her) said that the Prophet (peace be upon him) would perform the Fajr prayer at such a time that, after the prayer, when the women returned home wrapped in their shawls, they could not be recognized in the darkness. —Tirmidhi

The second condition is that they may not come to the mosque adorned or wearing perfume. Hazrat Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her) said: Once the Prophet (peace be upon him) was seated in the mosque. At that time, a woman from the Muzaynah tribe came there adorned and displaying herself with affected gait. The Prophet (peace be upon him) then said, ‘Do not allow your women to come to the mosque adorned and displaying themselves with affected gait.’ —Ibn Majah

Regarding perfume, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said, ‘On the night you come to prayer, do not use any kind of perfume. Come in completely simple clothing. The prayer of a woman who comes wearing perfume will not be accepted.’ —Muwatta, Imam Malik

The third condition is that they should not mingle with men in the same row or stand in the front row. They must stand in the rows behind the men.

(Arabic*****************************************)

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: For men, the best place is the front row and the worst place is the back row. For women, the best place is the back row and the worst place is the front row.

Regarding congregational prayer, the Prophet (peace be upon him) established that women and men should not stand side by side in prayer, whether they are husband and wife or mother and son.

Hazrat Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) said, ‘Once my grandmother, Mulaykah, invited the Prophet (peace be upon him). After he had eaten and stood for prayer, Yatim [probably Hazrat Anas’s brother] and I stood behind the Prophet, and Mulaykah stood behind us.’ —Tirmidhi

A second narration from Hazrat Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) states that he said, ‘Once the Prophet (peace be upon him) prayed in our home. Yatim and I stood behind him, and my mother, Umm Sulaym, stood behind us.’ —Bukhari

Hazrat Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) said, ‘Once, when the Prophet (peace be upon him) stood for prayer, I stood beside him, and Hazrat Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her) stood behind us.’ —Nasai

The fourth condition is that women should not raise their voices during prayer. The prescribed method is that if the imam needs to be alerted to something during prayer, a man says ‘Subhanallah,’ while a woman makes a sound with her hands. —Bukhari

Even after imposing all these limits and restrictions, Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) feared the mingling of men and women in the congregation. He therefore designated a separate door in the mosque for women and prohibited men from using that door. —Abu Dawud

The Procedure for Women during Hajj

Hajj is Islam’s second collective obligatory act. Like men, it is also obligatory for women. But they have been prohibited from mingling with men during tawaf. It is narrated from Ata in Sahih Bukhari that during the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him), women performed tawaf alongside men, but they did not mingle with one another. In the work Fath al-Bari, it is narrated from Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i that Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) prohibited the mingling of men and women during tawaf. Once he saw a man among a gathering of women, seized him, and beat him with a stick. —Fath al-Bari, vol. 3, p. 312

It is narrated in the Muwatta that Hazrat Abdullah ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) would send his family members from Muzdalifah to Mina before everyone else, so that they could complete their prayers and stone-throwing rites before the people arrived. Hazrat Asma (may Allah be pleased with her), the daughter of Hazrat Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him), would even go to Mina in the darkness before dawn. This was the practice for women during the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him). —Muwatta, Imam Malik

Women’s Participation in Jumu‘ah’and Eid

The gatherings of Jumu‘ah and Eid are so important in Islam that describing their importance is unnecessary. In view of their importance, the Lawgiver specifically waived for these gatherings the conditions imposed for ordinary prayer, namely, the prohibition against joining a congregation during the daytime. It has, of course, been explicitly stated regarding Jumu‘ah that it is not obligatory for women [Abu Dawud], and their attendance at the congregations of the two Eids is not necessary either. But if they wish, they may join these congregations while observing the other conditions. It is proven from the Hadith that the Prophet (peace be upon him) himself would take his womenfolk to the Eid prayer.

(Arabic*********************************************************)

It is narrated from Umm Atiyyah that the Prophet (peace be upon him) would take virgins, young women, married women, and menstruating women to the Eid ground. Those women who were not eligible to pray would remain apart from the congregation and participate only in the supplication. —Tirmidhi

(Arabic****************************************_)

Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) said that the Prophet (peace be upon him) would go to Eid accompanied by his wives and daughters. —Ibn Majah

Visiting graves and participating in funeral prayers

Participating in the funeral prayer of a Muslim has been declared fard kifayah in the Shariah. The learned are not unaware of the essential instructions concerning this. But all these instructions are only for men; women have been forbidden to participate in funeral prayers. Certainly, this prohibition has not been enforced strictly; rather, permission has also been given on certain occasions. But from the instructions of the Lawgiver it is clearly known that women’s participation in funeral prayers is not entirely free from error.

A hadith has been narrated from Umm Atiyyah in Sahih Bukhari:

(Arabic************************************************)

We were forbidden to participate in funeral prayers, but not strictly. —Bukhari

It is narrated in Ibn Majah and Nasa’i that the Prophet (peace be upon him) once attended a funeral. A woman was seen there. Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) reprimanded her. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, “Umar, leave her alone. It seems that the woman was a close relative of the deceased. Overcome with grief, she had come with the deceased.” Considering her mental state, the Prophet (peace be upon him) forbade Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) from reprimanding her.

The same applies to visiting graves. A woman’s heart is very tender. The remembrance of their deceased loved ones leaves a deep impression on their hearts. The Lawgiver did not consider it right to disregard this grief. But He clearly stated that women are forbidden from visiting graves frequently. A hadith has been narrated in Tirmidhi from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him):
(Arabic*******************************************)

The Prophet (peace be upon him) cursed women who frequently visit graves.

After visiting the grave of her brother, Abd al-Rahman ibn Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him), Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) said, “By Allah, if I had been present at the time of your death, I would not have come to visit your grave.” —Tirmidhi

Anas ibn Malik says that one day the Prophet (peace be upon him) saw a woman sitting beside a grave and weeping, but he did not forbid her. He merely said, “Fear Allah and be patient.”

Reflect on these instructions. Prayer is a sacred act of worship. A mosque is a blessed place. In Hajj, people present themselves before Allah with pure thoughts. At a funeral and beside a grave, thoughts of death arise in everyone’s mind, and the heart is overwhelmed with grief and sorrow. In all these circumstances, sexual desire disappears entirely, or, if it remains, is influenced by other sacred emotions. Yet even in these gatherings the Shariah has not approved the mixing of men and women. Considering the sanctity of the circumstances, the purity of the purpose, and women’s emotions, He has permitted women to go outside their homes and on some occasions has Himself taken them along; but He imposed such restrictions concerning purdah that not even the slightest possibility of immorality or misfortune remained. Thereafter, concerning matters other than Hajj, it was declared that it is better for women not to participate in such activities.

Can you expect a law with such a tendency to permit mixed gatherings of men and women in schools and colleges, offices and factories, parks and pleasure gardens, cinemas and theatres, coffeehouses and dance halls?

Women’s participation in war

You have observed the limits and strictness of purdah. Now see where and for what reason it has been relaxed. Muslims engage in war under circumstances of a general and perilous danger. The situation demands that the nation’s entire strength be expended in self-defense. In this situation Islam grants women general permission to participate in military service. But at the same time it emphasizes this truth: she who was created to become a mother was not created for beheading or shedding blood. Putting weapons of war into her hands means killing her nature. Therefore, Islam has permitted women to bear arms only to protect their lives, honor, and chastity. But generally, employing women as soldiers and enlisting them in the military is contrary to Islamic principles. In the field of battle, only such services may be taken from them as bandaging wounded soldiers, giving water to the thirsty, cooking for the soldiers, and maintaining their camps behind the soldiers. For all these tasks, the limits of purdah have been relaxed to the utmost degree. For these services, the clothing of Christian nuns, with slight modifications, would be permissible according to the Shariah.

It is established from the books of hadith that the wives of the Prophet and other Muslim women used to go with the Prophet (peace be upon him) to the battlefield. They would give water to the thirsty and bandage the wounded. This continued even after the command concerning purdah was revealed. —[Bukhari]

The Tirmidhi hadith collection states that Umm Sulaym and other women of the Ansar would often accompany the Prophet (peace be upon him) in war. Sahih Bukhari states that once a woman petitioned the Prophet (peace be upon him), “Pray that I may accompany the naval warriors.” The Prophet (peace be upon him) prayed (Arabic**********) “O Allah, make her one of them.”

When the Muslim fighters became weakened in the Battle of Uhud, Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) and Umm Sulaym carried water skins on their shoulders and gave water to the soldiers. Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) says that he saw them running back and forth, lifting their trousers, so that the lower parts of their legs could be seen uncovered. [Bukhari, Muslim

toward the end of page 265] Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) himself heard the Prophet (peace be upon him) say concerning another woman named Umm Sulayt, “In the Battle of Uhud, wherever I look to the right or left, I see Umm Sulayt engaged in battle to protect me.” In this same battle, Rubayyi‘ bint Mu‘awwidh and a group of women with her were engaged in bandaging the wounded. They were carrying the wounded soldiers to Medina. [Bukhari] In the Battle of Hunayn, Umm Sulaym was moving about with a dagger in her hand. The Prophet (peace be upon him) asked, “What are you doing?” She replied, “If any polytheist comes near me, I will slit open his belly.” [Muslim] Umm Atiyyah participated in seven battles. She was entrusted with maintaining the camp, preparing food for the soldiers, and caring for the wounded and sick. [Ibn Majah] Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) says that women who performed such services on the battlefield were given a share of the spoils. —Muslim

From this it may be inferred that the form of Islamic purdah was not like an ignorant custom in which no reduction or increase could be made according to circumstances and necessity. If necessary, its limits may be reduced. It is not only the face and hands that may be uncovered; rather, if necessary, some of the limbs included within the ‘awrah that must be covered may also be uncovered. But when the necessity ends, purdah must be restored within the limits prescribed for ordinary circumstances. Just as this purdah system is not an ignorant custom, its reduction is likewise not like ignorant permissiveness. For the needs of war, European women crossed their limits. But after the war they refused to return within those limits. The position of Muslim women is not like theirs.

Appendix

This is such a just viewpoint and moderate course that the world is dependent—deeply dependent—on it for its progress, comfort, and moral security. As I said at the very beginning, for hundreds and thousands of years the world has struggled to determine woman’s place in civilization [that is, the place of half of humanity]. At times it has moved toward extreme excess and at times toward extreme deficiency, and both extremes have proved harmful to it; experience and observation bear witness to this harm. Between these two extremes, the just and moderate course is the one Islam has presented. It accords with knowledge and nature and is completely suited to human needs. But regrettably, in the modern age such obstacles have arisen that it has become difficult for people to understand the Straight Path and give it its due honor.

Among all these obstacles, the chief one is that modern people have been afflicted with jaundice, and the Western-minded people of the East have suffered another severe attack of this jaundice, which may be called white jaundice. I apologize to my friends and brothers for this frank statement; but no bitterness should prevent the expression of truth. It is a real fact that there is no instruction or matter in Islam contrary to established philosophical facts. Indeed, the more accurate truth is that whatever is a philosophical fact is Islam. But seeing this requires an uncolored vision, so that every object may be seen in its true color. It requires an open mind and a sound nature, so that facts may be accepted exactly as they are, and instead of making them subject to one’s own inclinations, one’s inclinations may be made subject to them. Where this is absent, even knowledge will be fruitless. Whatever one sees through colored vision, one will see in one’s own color. Narrow vision can reach only that aspect of problems and matters which is presented and occurs before the angle from which one sees them. Moreover, even when philosophical facts reach the mind in their actual form, the mind’s narrowness and the distortion of its nature will act upon them. Their demand will be that the facts conform to the mind’s needs, emotions, feelings, and inclinations. If something does not suit the mind, it will continue to disregard it even after knowing it to be true, and will follow only its own inclinations. It is evident that when people are afflicted with this disease, knowledge, experience, and observation can no longer guide them. It is entirely impossible for such a patient to understand any instruction of Islam correctly. For Islam is the ‘natural religion’; indeed, it is nature itself. Islam is difficult for the Western world to understand because it is afflicted with this disease. Whatever knowledge it possesses is all ‘Islam,’ but its vision is colored. Thereafter, this jaundice has colored the vision of the newly educated class in the East. This disease obstructs them from drawing correct conclusions from philosophical facts and seeing the problems of life in their natural colors. Those among them who can be Muslims believe in the religion of Islam, acknowledge its truth, and are not deprived of the desire to obey the faith. But what can the unfortunate do about the jaundice in their eyes? Whatever they see through these eyes, they see as contrary to Allah’s color.

The second obstacle to correct understanding is that, generally, when people consider any matter of Islam, they do not view comprehensively the system with which that matter is connected; rather, they separate the matter from that system and discuss it independently. The result is that the matter appears contrary to all knowledge and reason, and various doubts arise concerning it. This is what has happened with interest: it has been viewed separately from Islam’s economic principles and economic system, which are in accordance with nature. As a result, a thousand maladies began to appear within it. Even great Islamic scholars felt the need for amendments contrary to the Shariah. The same fundamental error has been made concerning slavery, polygamy, the rights of husbands and wives, and many other matters. The problem of purdah too has become a victim of this. If, instead of viewing the entire building, you see only one of its pillars, you will remain perplexed as to why it was erected. Its construction will seem to you beyond all reason and judgment. You will never be able to understand with what elegance and suitability the engineer placed it to keep the building firm, or how the entire building would be damaged if it were demolished. Purdah is exactly like this. If it is separated from the system in which it was established as a pillar of the building when needed, it will become entirely beyond reason and judgment. It will be impossible to understand why this discriminatory boundary was set between the two classes of humanity. Therefore, to gain a correct understanding of the rationale of the pillar, one must view in its entirety the building in which it has been placed.

Now Islamic purdah is before you. The social system for whose maintenance the rules of purdah were established is also before you. The principal fundamental matters of this system are before you as well, and the principal matters of purdah were integrated with them while maintaining a particular balance. All the established philosophical facts on which this social system was constructed are before you. Having seen all this, say: is there any weakness anywhere within it? Is there the slightest trace of imbalance anywhere? Is there any place where, abandoning a particular partisan inclination, an amendment could be proposed solely on the basis of knowledge and reason? I say with profound insight that the same justice, order, equilibrium, and elegance upon which the earth and heavens are founded, the same complete balance and harmony that you see in the organization of the universe and in the structure of an atom and the bonds of the solar system, exist in this social system. Extreme excess, extreme deficiency, and one-sidedness are unavoidable weaknesses of human works. This system [the Islamic system] is completely free from all these weaknesses. Reforming or correcting it lies beyond human capacity. If, through his flawed knowledge, a person tries to make even the slightest change in it, instead of reforming it he will destroy its balance.

It is a matter of regret that I have no means by which I can convey my message to those brothers who live in Europe, America, Russia, and Japan. Because they have not found a sound and well-balanced civilizational system, they are destroying their own lives and becoming the cause of the destruction of the other nations of the world. Ah, if only I could deliver to them this life-restoring remedy for which they are truly thirsty! Perhaps they cannot feel this thirst. Be that as it may, the Hindus, Christians, and Parsis of my neighboring country are within my reach. Most of them can understand my language. I call upon them to cleanse their minds of the hostility toward Islam that has arisen because of historical and political conflicts with Muslims, and, as impartial seekers of truth, to study and understand this Islamic social system that I have described in this book. Then compare and test it against the Western social system toward which they are rapidly moving. Finally, decide—not for my sake or anyone else’s, but for your own welfare—which path leads to true well-being.

Then, turning my attention from the general readers, I wish to say something to those misguided brothers who are called Muslims.

Some of our newly educated Muslim brothers accept everything stated above. But they say:

There is undoubtedly considerable scope for relaxing the strictness of Islamic laws in view of circumstances and the age. Therefore, all we wish is to take some advantage of this opportunity. Present circumstances demand a relaxation of purdah. Muslim women need to attend schools and colleges so that they may receive higher education. They need to receive an education through which they can understand civilizational, social, economic, and political problems and acquire the ability to solve them. Without this, Muslims will fall behind neighboring nations in the struggle for life. There is fear of even greater losses in the future. If Muslim women do not acquire the ability to benefit from the rights being granted to women in the country’s political life, and if they cannot enjoy those opportunities because of the restrictions of purdah, then the weight of Muslims in the country’s political scales will be greatly reduced. Considering the conditions of the Islamic age, Islamic purdah was relaxed to a considerable extent. —[For the sake of argument it is called only “relaxation”; otherwise, they did not relax purdah but abolished it.] Within a few years they achieved considerable progress. What harm is there if we follow in their footsteps?

However many dangers are described, we acknowledge every one of them; indeed, it would make no difference even if the danger were ten times greater. In reality, no such danger can make any amendment or relaxation of Islamic laws permissible. In fact, because of this kind of foolishness, or because you are compelled by your weakness, you live in a filthy and unhealthy place. There, observing the rules of health is not merely difficult for you; rather, in the settlement of unclean people it will become difficult for you not to be unclean. In such circumstances, the question of amending or relaxing the rules of health cannot arise. If you consider those rules correct, it is your duty to strive and struggle to make your surroundings clean. If you lack the strength and courage to struggle and are overcome by your surroundings because of your weakness, then let yourself be immersed in whatever filth is thrown upon you. Why should the rules of health be changed for your sake? But if you truly consider those rules erroneous and have grown accustomed to this uncleanliness, then set whatever policy you wish for yourself. Those who are attached to uncleanliness have no say, according to their wishes, in the rules of purity and cleanliness.

There is no doubt that, like every law, Islamic law too allows for strictness and relaxation in view of circumstances. But Islamic law, like every law, also demands that circumstances be viewed with such a perspective and spirit that they are the perspective and spirit of Islam itself, in order to decide on strictness or relaxation. Viewing circumstances from a different perspective and then attacking the provisions of the law with the scissors of relaxation is not called relaxation; it is called clear alteration. If the circumstances for which relaxation of Islamic law is being demanded are viewed from an Islamic perspective, one must reach the conclusion that in such circumstances greater strictness, rather than relaxation, is necessary. Relaxation may be adopted only when the purpose of the law is easily fulfilled by other means and greater strictness in preserving it is unnecessary. But when the purpose of the law cannot be fulfilled by other means, when all other forces are engaged in destroying it, and its fulfillment depends precisely on its preservation, only someone unfamiliar with the spirit of the law could consider relaxation in such circumstances.

It has been discussed in detail above that the purpose of the laws of the Islamic social system is to preserve the norms of married life, prevent sexual licentiousness, and restrain excessive sexual excitement. For this purpose, the Lawgiver adopted three means. First, reforming character; second, penal law; and third, preventive measures—that is, covering the ‘awrah and purdah. These are like three pillars upon which this palace stands. Its strength depends on their strength, and its destruction depends on their destruction. Come, observe once the present condition of your country and see what has happened to these three pillars.

First, consider the moral environment. You live in a country [India before Partition] in which seventy-five percent of the population is governed by a non-Muslim nation, and a non-Muslim civilization has overwhelmed it like a violent storm. Like the germs of plague and cholera, the principles of non-Islamic character and the ideas of non-Islamic civilization have infected the environment. The atmosphere has been poisoned by them. Their poisonous effects have surrounded you on every side. The obscene and indecent words that made your body shudder some time ago have now become such common things that you regard them as everyday matters. Your children see obscene pictures every day in newspapers, magazines, and advertisements, and are becoming accustomed to shamelessness. People of every age in your society watch films in which nothing is more enjoyable than nudity, obscenity, and sexually frenzied love scenes. Fathers and sons, brothers, and mothers and daughters sit side by side and watch scenes of public kissing and embracing, the union of lovers, and declarations of love without feeling the slightest shame. Extremely obscene and sexually stimulating songs are being sung in every home and every shop. No one’s ears are free from them. Upper-class local and English women roam about in semi-nude clothing, and people’s eyes have become so accustomed to it that no one feels any shame at it. Thanks to the concept of morality spreading through Western education, marriage is regarded as a worn-out ancient custom, adultery as entertainment, the mixing of men and women as unobjectionable—indeed praiseworthy—divorce as a game, fulfilling marital responsibilities as an intolerable bond, bearing children and extending the lineage as folly, obedience to one’s husband as a kind of slavery, becoming a wife as a danger, and acting as lovers as an imaginary paradise.

Now observe what kind of effect this environment is having upon your nation. Is there anywhere in your society any existence of restraint of the gaze? Among millions, can even one person be found who is afraid of the display of an unfamiliar woman’s beauty? Are the eyes and the tongue not openly committing adultery? Do your women too refrain from the pomp and show and display of beauty of the Age of Ignorance? Are garments still not worn in your homes concerning which the Noble Prophet (peace be upon him) said, “Cursed are those women who, although wearing clothes, remain naked”? Do you not see your mothers, sisters, and daughters in such clothing as a Muslim woman may not wear before anyone other than her husband? Are obscene tales and stories, and the unspeakable and unmentionable incidents of love, not narrated and heard without hesitation in your society? Do people at gatherings feel any shame in describing the misdeeds they have committed? If this is the state of affairs, then tell me: where remains that first and strongest pillar of moral purity, upon which the edifice of the Islamic social order has been built? The sense of Islamic honour has been so completely effaced that a Muslim woman is becoming not merely the bed-companion of a Muslim, but also that of a non-Muslim! Not only in the British dominions, but even in Muslim states, Muslims’ blood is not stirred despite witnessing such incidents. There have even been Muslims so devoid of honour that, when their own sister became the wife of a non-Muslim, the man proudly announced that he was the brother-in-law of such-and-such a wealthy infidel.—[This is an incident from South India. A friend of mine has related an incident even more heart-rending than this. In eastern India, a Muslim woman openly maintained a relationship with a wealthy non-Muslim. As a result, she became the possessor of great wealth. My friend saw the local so-called Muslims take pride in this matter.] After this, does anything of shamelessness and moral degeneration still remain?

Now observe once the condition of the second pillar. Throughout India, the punitive laws of Islam have been abolished. In neither the British nor the Muslim states is the punishment for adultery in force anywhere. Not only this, but the law currently in force does not regard adultery as a crime at all. If someone wishes to entice a young woman of a respectable family into vice, there is no law by which her chastity and honour can be protected. If anyone engages in illicit sexual intercourse with an adult woman with her consent, he cannot be punished under any law. If a woman engages openly in the act of adultery, there is no power by which she can be restrained. The law of the country regards only forced adultery as a crime. But ask a legal practitioner how difficult it is to prove forced adultery! Abducting a married woman is also a crime. But ask British lawyers what remedy exists in the rulers’ courts when a married woman voluntarily goes and takes up residence in someone else’s home.

Consider that both these pillars have collapsed. Now the entire edifice of your social order stands upon only a single pillar. Do you wish to destroy this one as well? Examine and compare, on the one hand, the harms of the purdah system that you have described and, on the other, the complete destruction of moral character and the social order if purdah is abolished. Both are dangers, and one of them must be accepted. Now ask your own conscience which danger is the lesser.

If a decision is to be made solely on the condition of the age, then I would say that the circumstances of India do not favour relaxing purdah; rather, they demand that it be enforced more strictly. For both pillars supporting the maintenance of the social order have collapsed, and now everything depends upon only one pillar. Sit down with a composed mind and think about how to solve the problems of civilisation, economics, and politics. Another means of solving them may be found within the limits of Islam. But do not weaken further this sole remaining pillar, which has already become weak. Before relaxing it, you must gather such strength that, if a Muslim woman appears unveiled and two eyes are found anywhere to look at her, fifty hands will be ready to pluck out those two eyes.

The End

1. In rural areas, women refer to menstruation as “monthly illness.” —Translator

1. It should be noted that the original work entitled “Purdah” was written approximately sixty-one years ago, and it can readily be inferred that, along with the advancement of so-called progress or modernity, the tendency toward crime has also been increasing steadily.

2. Blue Book of Crime Statistics for 1934, see

1. Wester Marck expressed precisely this view in his work The History of Human Marriage.