This question crops up so regularly that I feel that I have no choice but to discuss it every now and then. I am taking it up anew this time to reply to several readers who have raised it, giving only the two above examples, hoping that those of my readers who have no quarrels with me about it will understand that the nature of the question makes it imperative that I give it a full treatment every now and then.

The report of Lady Aisha speaks of her covering her face with her head cover. The term used in the Arabic text, "Jibab", means: "Shirt, a piece of clothing which a woman uses to cover her head and chest, a wide dress of a woman, or head-cover." It is indeed the same word which is used in the verse quoted in the second letter. That verse may be translated as follows: "Prophet, enjoin your wives, your daughters and women believers to draw their clothes around them. That is more proper, so that they may be recognized and not be molested." The point is that a Muslim woman will be recognized by the fact that she is totally dressed and people realize that they have to respect her and dare not molest her. The verse does not suggest in any way that her head-cover or shirt or clothing or whatever meaning we give to the word "Jibab", should be used to cover her face.

As for the Lady Aisha and the way she used her garment to cover her face, we must not forget that Lady Aisha was one of the Prophet's wives for whom certain exceptional rules apply. These rules do not apply to any other woman. For example, the Prophet's wives were not allowed to marry any person after the Prophet, not because they are described in the Qur'an as "Mothers of the Believers", but because they were married to the most noble of Allah's servants. They were indeed mothers of the believers, but that position did not allow them to appear in front of people in the same way as a mother appears before her sons. Another special rule is that their reward for their good deeds is doubled, and the punishment of any cardinal sin committed by any one of them -- Allah forbid that any of them should commit such a sin -- is also doubled. Another rule which applies to them alone is that they speak to people from behind a screen. That is the reason why Lady Aisha covered her face when the Prophet's companion, Safwan Ibn Al-Muattal, approached. We cannot conclude from this particular incident any rule which applies to all Muslim women.

My first questioner says that his wife subscribes to the view which is different from mine, requiring Muslim women to cover their faces. I realize that this is the view advocated by a number of scholars. I should explain that I have not invented this view. The majority of Muslim scholars, ever since the time of the Prophet, including leading authorities in the four major schools of thought, have recorded this view. Many of them comment on Verse 31 in Surah 24, which is incidentally the verse stating the nature of dress of Muslim women in public, and they explain that a Muslim woman may reveal her face and the lower part of her hands, up to the wrists. In translation this verse may read: "Enjoin believing women to turn their eyes away from temptation and to preserve their chastity; to cover their adornment (except such as is normally displayed); to draw their head-covering over their bosoms, etc." It is the meaning of the term "adornment" that needs explanation. Al Jassas, a leading authority in the Hanafi school of thought, says: 'Our scholars say that this denotes the woman's face and lower hands'. Al-Qurtobi, a leading Maliki scholar, says: "Since the normal case is that a woman's face and lower part of her hands are revealed by the force of habit and for worship, as this is the case in prayer and pilgrimage, then it is appropriate to say that the exemption here applies to them." Al Kharzin, a Shaf’ie commentator on the Qur'an quotes early authorities as saying that the exemption applies to a woman's face and hands. Ibn Qudhamah, a most prominent Hanbali authority says: The whole body of a woman must be covered except her face. With respect to her hands too, there are two views." Furthermore, Imam Ibn Hazm says: "The part of woman's body which must be covered is the whole of it except her face and the lower part of her hands."

Having quoted all these authorities from the four major schools of thought, as well as Imam Ibn Hazm, I have little to add except to say that this is not a personal view of mine. Far be it from me to advocate anything other than what I believe to be supported by the weightier evidence. I do respect scholars who maintain a different view because I believe that they also assert what they believe to be true. However, I feel that their argument is weaker and their evidence suspect. There are numerous Hadiths and reports from the time of the Prophet which confirm that women at that time did not cover their faces in normal situations. Before I quote any of these, however, let me refer to Verse 30 in Surah 24 which requires Muslim men to "lower their gaze", or to give it a clearer translation, to "turn away from temptation". Let me ask my first reader and his wife: If all Muslim women at the time of the Prophet covered all their bodies, including their faces, why should Muslim men be required to turn their faces away, or to lower their gaze? What would they be looking at if there was nothing to look at any way?

Now consider this report: "A woman came to the Prophet and said: 'Messenger of Allah, I have come to make of myself a gift to you'. The Prophet looked at her and sized her up then looked down, (i.e. he did not answer her). When she realized that he did not wish to say anything, she sat down." Another version of this report says that one of the Prophet's companions proposed to her but he had nothing to give her as dower, or mahr. The Prophet told him to give her anything, even an iron ring. He then married her". The point here is that Prophet looked at her and sized her up. If she was totally covered, why would he look at her in this way.

Jabir Ibn Abdullah quotes the Prophet as saying: "If any of you sees a woman and likes her, let him go to his wife, because that is enough to satisfy him. If he is unmarried let him remember what Allah says: "Let those who cannot afford to marry live in continence until Allah shall enrich them with his bounty." Again let me ask: Why did the Prophet give such instruction without warning Muslim men against looking at women in this way?

A young companion of the Prophet, Al Fadhl Ibn Abbas was riding behind him when a woman stopped the Prophet to put some questions to him. Al Fadhl looked at her and she looked at him. The Prophet turned Al Fadhl's face the other way..." Here we have a man looking at a woman and Prophet does not even tell him not to look at her. The fact that he turned his face away with his hand does not mean more than the gesture itself. It cannot be interpreted as requiring the woman to cover her face.

A Muslim woman should carry herself according to Islamic principles and values in all ages and centuries. It is not up to any individual or human authority to change Islamic laws or Islamic values. When Allah has made it clear that He wants Muslim women to cover their bodies, with the exception of their faces and their forearms. He made it clear that His rule applies to all Muslim women at all times and all places. No one can say that there may come a time when these requirements may be relaxed. Who can decide that? A ruler? A community? A society? An individual? No one has the authority to change what Allah has legislated.

Sometimes we tend to think that our age is totally different and far removed from other ages. If women have to work these days, we may think that they never had to work in previous Islamic periods. This is not correct. Even in the early Islamic periods, say, under the Abbasid caliphate, Muslim women were working. Some of them had shops which they ran themselves and some worked in the fields. If a community is Islamic in outlook, Muslim women can easily work and abide by Islamic rules.

The implementation of Allah's law must be based in the first instance on submission to Him. This is indeed the very meaning of Islam. When man has shown his obedience, he may use his mind to identify as much as he can, Allah's purpose behind his commandment or prohibition, whether this purpose is stated by Allah or not, understood by human intellect or not. It must be remembered however, that Allah, not man, is the final arbiter on whether something should be included in His law. Man becoming the final arbiter on Allah's legislation does not fit in with the Godhood of Allah or the submission of man.

I am not particularly happy with the question and the way it is phrased. It suggests that a woman's affairs are decided for her without reference to her own wishes or how she may feel about the different alternatives that may be available to her. This is not the way Islam treats women, although some Muslims may think otherwise.

It is true that Islam wants Muslim men to take good care of their women folk, but that does not mean a negation of the woman's own feelings and desires. Islam treats women as equal to men in every respect, and assigns to them the same type of duties in religious and worldly affairs, with a division of responsibilities that takes into consideration their biological, physiological and emotional differences. If we take the major Islamic duties like prayers, fasting, zakah and pilgrimage, we find that the woman has to meet the same requirements as man. She is accountable for any omission in the same way and she is rewarded or punished in exactly the same manner. Then, why should not she be assigned equal responsibilities in her life affairs?

The fact is that Islam gives women the chance to do so, even without interference by her men relatives. In Islam, a woman has the same rights of ownership and inheritance as a man, although her share of the latter may be less because her responsibilities are less. Many people acknowledge this but they soon forget what it entails in practical life. What is important to remember is that if we give women certain rights and privileges, we must accept that they may want to put these into effect. That places certain responsibilities on men generally, and in particular, on those of them who have women relatives wishing to benefit by these.

Let us take the example of the question of education. Islam encourages all Muslims to provide their daughter with good education in the same way as it encourages the education of male offspring. A wise and practically oriented education authority will work out some suitable differences between the education of boys and girls in order to equip each for the type of job they will be doing in practical life. But the importance of education is highly emphasized for both boys and girls.

At the time of the Prophet, peace be upon him, his wife, Aisha, was the best educated woman in the Muslim community and in the whole of Arabia. Moreover, she put her education to very good use and she argued her point of view in a highly scholarly manner. She did not hesitate to express her opinion when she differed with the most learned people among the Prophet's companions. She was keenly interested in the welfare of the Muslim community during the lifetime of the Prophet, peace be upon him, and after he passed away. No one ever thought that she was overstepping the woman's role of looking after the house and the family. It is only in later generations, when ignorance and illiteracy was common in the Muslim world, that the notion of women's subservience came to acquire common acceptance. Otherwise, Islam has a high opinion of women and the role they can play in society.

What worried me in this question is that it is phrased in a way which gives the impression that there is a continuing dispute within the family as to who has the authority to dictate to the poor woman. Her own wishes or the general circumstances of the family are not even mentioned. I am not given any idea of the nature of the work the woman does, or why her husband wants her to stop working and stay at home. He mentions, however, that she lives with her father who allows her a significant measure of freedom to go about her work, while her two young daughters are looked after in a nursery.

Let us assume, then, that the girls' father wants his wife to stay at home to look after the two girls. There is no doubt that this is a very legitimate desire. Nobody can give young children the type of care their own mother provides. However, it is not difficult to make arrangements to provide good care for their children if their mother needs to be away. In this case where the mother is staying with her own parents, it may be that good care in the home is provided for the girls, possibly by their grandmother. If so, and since they go to a nursery, then there is not much wrong with the arrangement. Indeed it may be beneficial for the girls themselves.

There are particularly two important points which I would like to stress. The first is that when a man proposes to a family to marry their daughter, knowing that the girl actually goes to work, if he does not make it clear at the time that he objects to the woman's going out to work, then the girl and her family are well justified to assume that he agrees that she should continue working after the marriage. He may not turn round in the future and arbitrarily tell his wife that he does not want her to work.

There is a rule in Islamic law which equates what is socially well-known and established with what is stipulated as a binding condition. If we apply this rule to the situation the reader is asking about, we say that the husband has always known that his wife goes out to work and he has accepted that by mere fact that he did not object to it at the time when he came forward with his marriage proposal. He may say that now he has two daughters who need to be looked after by their mother. This is true, but his wife is providing the girls with adequate care, then that is all that he can expect from her.

My second point relates to women's education generally and the role the women play in society. It is well known that Islam encourages the education of both boys and girls. In an Islamic community, if parents neglect the education of their children, whether boys or girls, they are accountable to God for that omission. On the other hand, society must provide the changes and the facilities for the education of both boys and girls to the highest possible standard so that the Muslim community could have all trained personnel it needs without relying on any outside experts or expertise. This means, in practical terms, that women will be educated and some of them will attain university degrees. Needless to say, the community invests much of its resources in the education of any individual. When we have educated women, it follows that they will need to put their education to good use. This means that many of them will have to go to work. The community certainly needs that some jobs are filled by women, not men. This is not merely natural but also beneficial.

There will always be men who say that they prefer their wives to stay at home and to look after their children. There is nothing wrong with that. But if all people will say so, then how wise is the community which invests so much in educating its women, then allows them to stay at home, making little benefit of the education it gave them? Besides, how are we to fill up those jobs which need to be done by women professionals? If we, for example, train a woman to be a doctor and provide her with the facilities to become a gynecologist, then her husband forces her to stay at home, we will not only have wasted those resources which went into giving her that specialization, but also we will be forcing Muslim women to go to men gynecologists.

These are general points on the question of women's education and work, which my reader has given me the opportunity to tackle. He needs to consider them carefully as he reflects over his personal problem. However, I would like to give him a word of advice: He should look into his personal situation in a totally different way. He should try to understand his wife's point of view and ask himself whether it would not be better for both of them that she puts her education to good use. When he does so, he may discover that his wife's work may benefit his two daughters as well.