Compulsory hijab: Difference between revisions

====Criticism====

Arguing based on the enjoining the good and forbidding the evil reason has raised several criticisms that include the following:  

# None of the hadiths on the various levels of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil imply practical and physical intervention in all areas of religious duties so that obligation can be deduced from them.<ref>Husseinī-Faqīh, highest level jurisprudence course, 26th October 2020 and 28th October 2020</ref> According to Sayyid Muhammad Ali Ayāzī (born in 1954), lecturer of highest level courses at the seminary, hadiths on enjoining the good and forbidding the evil appear to be directed toward political protest and jihad against the oppressors, not compulsion to follow all rules of religion.<ref>Ayāzī, Naqd va Barrisī-yi Adilli-yi Fiqhī-yi Ilzām-i Hukūmatī-yi Hijāb, p. 208</ref>  

# According to Sayyid Ḍīyā’ Murtaḍavī, lecturer of highest level courses at the seminary, forbidding the evil is done after the commission of a forbidden act, not before it, and one of the conditions of its obligation is the person's insistence on the continuation of the act or its repetition; because, its primary meaning that is not supported with circumstantial evidence is that it is obligatory to remove [the evil acts], not to repel [them]. It means that it appears that the evil act has been committed, while laws are established to prevent the occurrence of sin and crime. Therefore, there is no common ground between these two, so that all reasons for forbidding the evil can be used as proofs of the claim.<ref>Murtaḍavī, Darāmadī bar Mabānī-yi Kullī-yi Fiqhī-yi Hijab va Mas’ūlīyyat-i Dulat-i Islāmī, p. 127</ref>  

====Criticism====

In critique of the view that accepts hijab as part of privacy, the following have been said:

# Clothing does not have only a personal aspect in covering the body; rather, it also possesses a social aspect. Therefore, the issue of mandating women’s social clothing is about social communications and contacts with non-mahram people in the society, not about private life.<ref>Malik Afḍalī Ardakānī, Taḥlīl va Naqd-i Adilli-yi Fardī Būdan-i Hijab, p. 187</ref> According to [[Sayyid Ali Khamenei]], the Shia Marja’ (legal authority), what is done in streets and in the public is actually public activity and education, and creates a duty for the system that has emerged from Islam, and what is made forbidden by the Sharia should not be openly performed in the country.<ref>Statements of the Iranian Supreme Leader in the meeting with maddahs (panegyrists) on 8th March 2018</ref>

# It has been said that even if not wearing hijab is part of privacy, believing in something is different from expressing that belief, and not believing in hijab does not necessarily enable the person to act according to that belief. Clear examples of this are religious minorities who live in Islamic countries, but one of the compulsory rules for them and also for other citizens is not to openly perform what is prohibited in Islam.<ref>Malik Afḍalī Ardakānī, Taḥlīl va Naqd-i Adilli-yi Fardī Būdan-i Hijab, p. 186</ref>