What do you think?
Rate this book
Purdah and the Status of Woman in Islam
Maulana Maududi is the founder of one of the largest political parties in Pakistan and India, the Jamaat-e-Islami, a religious party. His teachings are read and believed in by millions of devoted followers in Pakistan, India and Afghanistan. Unfortunately, his teachings have been taken to their logical extreme and have been adopted by the Taliban who are fighting against the US Army in Afghanistan and against the military in Pakistan. Nevertheless, the group he founded, Jamaat-e-Islami, has continued to flourish and grow. During his lifetime, his ideas were recognized as radical and dangerous, even more-so because of his strong power of the pen and his writing ability. Maulana Maududi was imprisoned many times and even sentenced to death, but his death sentence was commuted and he got out of jail and continued to write. It is important to study this book to find out what they really think. What you will find is everything said by Maulana Maududi is perfectly logical, rational and reasonable.
- GenresIslamReligionNonfiction
Hardcover
First published January 1, 1939
12 people are currently reading
230 people want to read
About the author
Abul A'la Maududi
143 books419 followersSayyid Abul A’la Maududi [Abū 'l-Aʿlā Mawdūdī) (Urdu: ابو الاعلىٰ مودودی – alternative spellings of last name Maudoodi, Mawdudi, and Modudi) was a journalist, theologian, Muslim revivalist leader and political philosopher, and a controversial 20th century Islamist thinker in British India, and later Pakistan. He was also a political figure in Pakistan and was the first recipient of King Faisal International Award for his services 1979. He was also the founder of Jamaat-e-Islami, the Islamic revivalist party.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
Read
December 8, 2022I will preface this by stating that I mean no disrespect to the author. Indeed Maududi was a notable scholar, and his contribution to South Asian Muslim history, religious and otherwise, is renowned.
When I first planned to read this book, I had read enough about it already to know that I'd disagree with his general conservative opinion of women, which isn't shared by all scholars, not even the JIH. But let me break down why I think it's dated.
It begins by pointing out where various cultures have gone wrong, but one can immediately sense the running thread. According to the book, the blame for the downfall of these cultures and entire societies relies on the "undue freedom" the west gives women in contrast to viewing it as the inevitable and comprehensive breakdown of polytheistic society. The book links prostitution flourishing in Greek and Roman cultures to the emancipation of women with no references to the conditions that resulted in women ending up as sex workers. (Marriage was forbidden to them). Surely, no woman chooses sex work except out of necessity.
Simultaneously, it drills into readers the underlying theme that male adulterous behaviour is because of a natural weakness, whereas promiscuous female behaviour leads to the breakdown of society. (I will quote concerning that) Strangely, a book so aware of western failures does not see its flaws. It rightfully views prostitutes leading a society as abhorrent but does not view married men who frequented these prostitutes ruling as naturally wrong in the same way. The “free” woman taking too many divorces brings more contempt than male patrons of prostitutes. (Not contesting morality here, but it’s different shades of evil). One of these women was the 21st wife indicating that it wasn’t an oppressor/oppressed dynamic. This attitude is mirrored in his thoughts about Aphrodite, regarding her exclusively as wretched in opposition to viewing all Greek Gods as sexually promiscuous, which is typical of idolatry.
"When the Romans emerged from darkness on the bright horizon of history, their social traditions recognized man as the chief of the family unit, possessing full authority and power over the members of his family; so much so that he could take the life of his wife. "
“Equality between the sexes was taken to mean that the man and the woman were not only equal in moral status and human rights… and that moral restrictions on her needed to be slackened as they were for him. ”
“Those vicious and sinful acts which were once held shameful even for men, now do not bring any shame or disgrace on women.” (Untrue as throughout history, society has been critical of sexually promiscuous women while men are given free passes because men will be men.)
“Obviously, the mere satisfaction of the sexual desires is not a thing that can tie the male and the female together for a lifelong companionship and compel them to live a family life with common interests. Why should a woman who wins her own bread, supports herself economically and does not depend on anyone for security and maintenance, remain faithfully attached to one man only for the sake of satisfying her sexual desires?” (Why should a man?)
“…the most can uncover her hands and face, if necessary, and can go out of her house for genuine needs.” (Untrue of Arab and Ottoman society itself) also (Stated as fact instead of fiqhi opinion)
“Thus if survival of the race and perpetuation and growth of civilization are important, the man who impregnates a woman must jointly shoulder the responsibility of the consequence with her. But selfish as he is by nature, he cannot be easily induced for the desired co-operation. In so far as the function of making the race survive is concerned, he accomplishes his part of it as soon as he has impregnated his female partner.”
“…the way of love, so that she may enchant the male by breaking down his selfish egoism.”
“The woman who passes a night with a view to evading the desire of her husband is cursed by the angels till she attends on him.” (The be-all, end-all hadith for South Asian men)
“To be the wife is disgraceful for hundreds of thousands of Western women, but to be the husband is not disgraceful for any man.” (That’s why cheating is most common when the wife is pregnant)
Furthermore, the book speaks for men’s fears of female economic independence. It states that women had much more rights after the French Revolution, which isn’t true. In part, feminism is a direct result because of the normative domestic abuse in the 50s and following years. It tries to make the point that if a woman becomes financially independent, she has no reason to stay with a man. But the reality of the world is that women pick up a job to ensure security against abuse (amongst other reasons) that is as rife in Muslim communities as anywhere else. It also states that it places an unnecessary burden on women, which is true in principle but translates to “stuck in abusive situations” in real life. (Housework can always be divided between spouses)
“Women feel honoured when engaged in manly jobs, whereas no man feels inclined for the rearing of children and housekeeping, which are purely womanly duties.” (The Prophet SAW always helped out)
The book also entirely dismisses “western women’s concerns”, which gave birth to their significant movements as “hoodwinking".
It also makes a case for what I believe is the complete disappearance of women from public life through Islamic jurisprudence. (Disagree with in its entirety) It says that western civilisation includes women in the workplace in pursuit of material progress even as it does so against its will. (After much struggle) It blames women in workplaces for intermingling leading to sin, except the sinner finds a way. (e.g. Saudi)
It speaks against Sex Ed, a western solution to child abuse and paedophilia. (The alternative is Islamic RSE) It speaks against contraception, talking of it in the same breath as abortion. (Worlds apart) It cites menstruation (“women lose their mental balance”) as a reason women are incapable of working day jobs.
“For the continuance of the race man’s only function is to impregnate the female. He is then free to have any pursuit in life. In contrast to this, the woman has to bear the whole burden of responsibility. It is to bear this burden that she is fashioned right from the time when she is a mere clot of blood in her mother’s womb.”
“Monthly courses which continue to recur throughout her youth render her unfit to undertake any task of major responsibility or one involving physical or mental exertion, for three to seven or ten days in every month.”
These were contradictory statements, one after the other. As nothing is more exerting and taxing than “the burden she is fashioned to undertake.” (Not contesting the primary responsibilities of men and women)
“Why is this craze for beautification among women becoming more and more catching every day? Most surely, it is due to the feminine urge to win the approbation of men and to fascinate them.”
Women dressing up for the male gaze is stated as a fact with zero nuance as to what indicators would differentiate that from merely wanting to look presentable. Women do not even dress up for the male gaze for the most part.
The sentiment that a man is aggressive and a woman’s nature epitomises inhibition and escape isn’t necessarily Islamic. “Unless her nature is totally corrupted, she can never become so aggressive, bold and fearless as to make the first advances towards the male who has attracted her.” (To be forward doesn’t signify moral turpitude either)
I will not furnish the "female education is inappropriate because of purdah concerns" argument with a rebuttal. (Work on separate institutions first)
I think of western failures as a reminder of how a Muslim's freedom is not uninhibited as it is constrained within the bounds of Islam vs the west's (men and women) definition of freedom. And I see feminism's aggressive behaviour as a reactionary response to Christianity's oppression that the book cites as well.
It is unfair to squarely place the accountability on women's undue freedom and not on the oppression that started it all. The way women's status was conceptualised in the book is itself incorrect. Irrespective of the testaments of history, I refuse to see "women as maids" as natural societal norms. Most of the arguments in the book are based on western thoughts regarding ancient western civilisations and their ways of processing biological gender roles. (Quotations from many western thinkers to prove a point)
When I first planned to read this book, I had read enough about it already to know that I'd disagree with his general conservative opinion of women, which isn't shared by all scholars, not even the JIH. But let me break down why I think it's dated.
It begins by pointing out where various cultures have gone wrong, but one can immediately sense the running thread. According to the book, the blame for the downfall of these cultures and entire societies relies on the "undue freedom" the west gives women in contrast to viewing it as the inevitable and comprehensive breakdown of polytheistic society. The book links prostitution flourishing in Greek and Roman cultures to the emancipation of women with no references to the conditions that resulted in women ending up as sex workers. (Marriage was forbidden to them). Surely, no woman chooses sex work except out of necessity.
Simultaneously, it drills into readers the underlying theme that male adulterous behaviour is because of a natural weakness, whereas promiscuous female behaviour leads to the breakdown of society. (I will quote concerning that) Strangely, a book so aware of western failures does not see its flaws. It rightfully views prostitutes leading a society as abhorrent but does not view married men who frequented these prostitutes ruling as naturally wrong in the same way. The “free” woman taking too many divorces brings more contempt than male patrons of prostitutes. (Not contesting morality here, but it’s different shades of evil). One of these women was the 21st wife indicating that it wasn’t an oppressor/oppressed dynamic. This attitude is mirrored in his thoughts about Aphrodite, regarding her exclusively as wretched in opposition to viewing all Greek Gods as sexually promiscuous, which is typical of idolatry.
"When the Romans emerged from darkness on the bright horizon of history, their social traditions recognized man as the chief of the family unit, possessing full authority and power over the members of his family; so much so that he could take the life of his wife. "
“Equality between the sexes was taken to mean that the man and the woman were not only equal in moral status and human rights… and that moral restrictions on her needed to be slackened as they were for him. ”
“Those vicious and sinful acts which were once held shameful even for men, now do not bring any shame or disgrace on women.” (Untrue as throughout history, society has been critical of sexually promiscuous women while men are given free passes because men will be men.)
“Obviously, the mere satisfaction of the sexual desires is not a thing that can tie the male and the female together for a lifelong companionship and compel them to live a family life with common interests. Why should a woman who wins her own bread, supports herself economically and does not depend on anyone for security and maintenance, remain faithfully attached to one man only for the sake of satisfying her sexual desires?” (Why should a man?)
“…the most can uncover her hands and face, if necessary, and can go out of her house for genuine needs.” (Untrue of Arab and Ottoman society itself) also (Stated as fact instead of fiqhi opinion)
“Thus if survival of the race and perpetuation and growth of civilization are important, the man who impregnates a woman must jointly shoulder the responsibility of the consequence with her. But selfish as he is by nature, he cannot be easily induced for the desired co-operation. In so far as the function of making the race survive is concerned, he accomplishes his part of it as soon as he has impregnated his female partner.”
“…the way of love, so that she may enchant the male by breaking down his selfish egoism.”
“The woman who passes a night with a view to evading the desire of her husband is cursed by the angels till she attends on him.” (The be-all, end-all hadith for South Asian men)
“To be the wife is disgraceful for hundreds of thousands of Western women, but to be the husband is not disgraceful for any man.” (That’s why cheating is most common when the wife is pregnant)
Furthermore, the book speaks for men’s fears of female economic independence. It states that women had much more rights after the French Revolution, which isn’t true. In part, feminism is a direct result because of the normative domestic abuse in the 50s and following years. It tries to make the point that if a woman becomes financially independent, she has no reason to stay with a man. But the reality of the world is that women pick up a job to ensure security against abuse (amongst other reasons) that is as rife in Muslim communities as anywhere else. It also states that it places an unnecessary burden on women, which is true in principle but translates to “stuck in abusive situations” in real life. (Housework can always be divided between spouses)
“Women feel honoured when engaged in manly jobs, whereas no man feels inclined for the rearing of children and housekeeping, which are purely womanly duties.” (The Prophet SAW always helped out)
The book also entirely dismisses “western women’s concerns”, which gave birth to their significant movements as “hoodwinking".
It also makes a case for what I believe is the complete disappearance of women from public life through Islamic jurisprudence. (Disagree with in its entirety) It says that western civilisation includes women in the workplace in pursuit of material progress even as it does so against its will. (After much struggle) It blames women in workplaces for intermingling leading to sin, except the sinner finds a way. (e.g. Saudi)
It speaks against Sex Ed, a western solution to child abuse and paedophilia. (The alternative is Islamic RSE) It speaks against contraception, talking of it in the same breath as abortion. (Worlds apart) It cites menstruation (“women lose their mental balance”) as a reason women are incapable of working day jobs.
“For the continuance of the race man’s only function is to impregnate the female. He is then free to have any pursuit in life. In contrast to this, the woman has to bear the whole burden of responsibility. It is to bear this burden that she is fashioned right from the time when she is a mere clot of blood in her mother’s womb.”
“Monthly courses which continue to recur throughout her youth render her unfit to undertake any task of major responsibility or one involving physical or mental exertion, for three to seven or ten days in every month.”
These were contradictory statements, one after the other. As nothing is more exerting and taxing than “the burden she is fashioned to undertake.” (Not contesting the primary responsibilities of men and women)
“Why is this craze for beautification among women becoming more and more catching every day? Most surely, it is due to the feminine urge to win the approbation of men and to fascinate them.”
Women dressing up for the male gaze is stated as a fact with zero nuance as to what indicators would differentiate that from merely wanting to look presentable. Women do not even dress up for the male gaze for the most part.
The sentiment that a man is aggressive and a woman’s nature epitomises inhibition and escape isn’t necessarily Islamic. “Unless her nature is totally corrupted, she can never become so aggressive, bold and fearless as to make the first advances towards the male who has attracted her.” (To be forward doesn’t signify moral turpitude either)
I will not furnish the "female education is inappropriate because of purdah concerns" argument with a rebuttal. (Work on separate institutions first)
I think of western failures as a reminder of how a Muslim's freedom is not uninhibited as it is constrained within the bounds of Islam vs the west's (men and women) definition of freedom. And I see feminism's aggressive behaviour as a reactionary response to Christianity's oppression that the book cites as well.
It is unfair to squarely place the accountability on women's undue freedom and not on the oppression that started it all. The way women's status was conceptualised in the book is itself incorrect. Irrespective of the testaments of history, I refuse to see "women as maids" as natural societal norms. Most of the arguments in the book are based on western thoughts regarding ancient western civilisations and their ways of processing biological gender roles. (Quotations from many western thinkers to prove a point)
April 14, 2020
Since the inception of time, philosophers and religions have tried to frame two primary issues of human civilization; the relationship between man and woman and the relationship between an individual and the society.
Written by the great Islamic Revivalist Maulana Abul A'la Maududi, the book "Pardah" deals with the first issue, declaring the question to be of utmost importance in defining the rise and fall of civilizations.
Maulana Maududi expertly analyzes the history of France and United States of America to illustrate the downfall of their societal structure in relation to their moral bankruptcy hidden in the guise of individual freedom. With absolute authority and grip over both modern and classical philosophies and historical literature, Maulana then describes the logic and reasoning behind the cardinal social principles of the Islamic society.
If you're a Muslim confused about your social identity and responsibility within the confines of the global structure, a father/mother concerned about a nourishing upbringing of theur children or just anyone who wishes to learn more about the true essence of Islam, you must read this book.
Written by the great Islamic Revivalist Maulana Abul A'la Maududi, the book "Pardah" deals with the first issue, declaring the question to be of utmost importance in defining the rise and fall of civilizations.
Maulana Maududi expertly analyzes the history of France and United States of America to illustrate the downfall of their societal structure in relation to their moral bankruptcy hidden in the guise of individual freedom. With absolute authority and grip over both modern and classical philosophies and historical literature, Maulana then describes the logic and reasoning behind the cardinal social principles of the Islamic society.
If you're a Muslim confused about your social identity and responsibility within the confines of the global structure, a father/mother concerned about a nourishing upbringing of theur children or just anyone who wishes to learn more about the true essence of Islam, you must read this book.
January 13, 2021
Read like to know a view of Purdah System in Islam from the writer's point of view. Once read do your own research and get to an honest conclusion. A well researched written book by the bright Muslim Scholar of the 20th century.
July 14, 2022
Brilliant, and way ahead of its time! A must read for young Muslim men and women to understand the concept of purdah, the vicious agendas against purdah and so on. This was my second read and I still plan to read it once again in some time, in sha Allah.
October 28, 2017
Most logical and clear explanation about the topic..
October 4, 2021
A must read...
March 9, 2024
Must read! Status of Women and Islam's Social System defined really well
January 23, 2012
buku ini bisa jadi rujukan untuk menjawab tudingan orientalis bahwa islam mendiskreditkan muslimah.. sebenarnya buku yg terlalu berat untuk dijadikan acuan bagi mereka yang memutuskan untuk mengenakan jilbab. jadi jangan dijadikan hadiah untuk yang lagi mencari hidayah. karena:
1. in English, never found it in Indonesia Book Store.
2. it's not casual English, lebih tepatnya banyak sekali istilah arab yang agak susah dicarikan padanannya..
tapi buku ini tetap keren, dari awal sampai akhir, walaupun jujur banyak yang saya lompati saking lieur nya.
tahukah kamu apa sebenarnya penyebab utama peradaban Yunani runtuh? bukan karena diserang romawi lho, sementara penyebab utama romawi runtuh juga bukan karena perang saudara, kuda troya dan sebagainya..
dan bagaimana posisi terhormat wanita dalam Islam..
agak kaku memang penuturannya tapi tetap memberi gambaran utamanya.
P.S Thanks to my dad, yang sudah membiarkan anaknya ini mengacak-acak koleksi bukunya :D
1. in English, never found it in Indonesia Book Store.
2. it's not casual English, lebih tepatnya banyak sekali istilah arab yang agak susah dicarikan padanannya..
tapi buku ini tetap keren, dari awal sampai akhir, walaupun jujur banyak yang saya lompati saking lieur nya.
tahukah kamu apa sebenarnya penyebab utama peradaban Yunani runtuh? bukan karena diserang romawi lho, sementara penyebab utama romawi runtuh juga bukan karena perang saudara, kuda troya dan sebagainya..
dan bagaimana posisi terhormat wanita dalam Islam..
agak kaku memang penuturannya tapi tetap memberi gambaran utamanya.
P.S Thanks to my dad, yang sudah membiarkan anaknya ini mengacak-acak koleksi bukunya :D
September 30, 2022
This book was written in 20th century and even now in 2022 it is as relatable as it was prior. The condition of the world in terms of deciding the status of women is still unreliable and disastrous. This book make just analysis of past civilizations and go towards the solution.
February 25, 2013
Well written in simple Urdu,& clearly explains concept of Hijab in Islam .
April 5, 2013
excellent book on pardha.
Currently reading
May 15, 2016Well explanation of the contradictory status of women within civilization, Realizing the very nature of women.
March 17, 2015
AWESOME BOOK ON PURDAH.
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews