There are two Hijab verses in the Quran:
- Verse 24:31 (which commands lowering the gaze) is considered the first verse of hijab,
- While Verse 33:59 (which commands covering the entire body with a jilbab, i.e., a large cloak) is considered the second verse of hijab.
However, upon investigating the first hijab verse (24:31), some strange and shocking facts emerged, leaving one both surprised and disheartened.
It turns out that, according to Muhammad’s Allah, modesty is not about covering a woman’s naked body but about covering her jewelry. According to Allah, this jewelry is what gives women adornment (Arabic: زِينَة), and this leads to immorality—but not their exposed bodies.
Yes, Muhammad and his Allah considered modesty to mean that a woman should cover the adornment of her necklace with her khimar (a headscarf similar to what Arab men wear today). However, they still left a woman’s chest uncovered (whether she was a free Muslim woman or a slave woman).
The first hijab verse was revealed in 5 AH (Hijri year), and until that time, Muslim women—both free and enslaved—remained bare-chested.
Not only in Islam but in many ancient civilisations and tribal societies, women’s chests were publicly exposed (and even today, some tribes continue this practice). Therefore, when Islam came, women—whether free or enslaved—did not cover their chests (as it was the custom of Arabia at that time).
After arriving in Medina, for the first time in the 5th hijri year, Muhammad claimed to have received the first hijab verse (24:31). (see Maududi’s details on the timeline of revelation).
In this verse, Muhammad and his Allah commanded men to lower their gaze and women to cover their adornment with a khimar (a headscarf similar to what Arab men wear today). However, the shocking part is that, according to Muhammad (and his Quran), adornment only referred to earrings and necklaces—not the bare chest.
In other words, Muhammad commanded women to cover their necklaces and earrings, but even in this verse, he left their chests exposed.
Later, in the same year (5 AH), Muhammad claimed the revelation of the second hijab verse, Surah Al-Ahzab (33:59). Following a shameful incident in which women were harassed by male companions, Muhammad, following an ancient Arab custom, commanded ONLY free women to cover their entire bodies with a jilbab, which also covered their chests. However, enslaved women were still left bare-chested in public.
The second issue that arose from the research was that the evidence found revealed that Islamic scholars had not been honest in translating this verse. What a great shame.
Quran 24:31:
وَقُل لِّلْمُؤْمِنَٰتِ يَغْضُضْنَ مِنْ أَبْصَٰرِهِنَّ وَيَحْفَظْنَ فُرُوجَهُنَّ وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ إِلَّا مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا ۖ وَلْيَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِهِنَّ عَلَىٰ جُيُوبِهِنَّ
The Scholars' Translation (Which Is Not Based on Honesty):
"And tell the believing women to lower their gazes and guard their private parts and not reveal their adornment except what appears thereof, and they should draw their veils over their chests/bosoms (to cover their chests)..." (Link where you can see multiple translations by Muslim scholars)
The Correct and Accurate Translation:
"Tell the believing women to lower their gazes and guard their private parts. They should not reveal their adornment except what (of it) becomes visible by itself. And they should cover with their khimar (i.e. Head Scarfs) their necklines (Arabic: جيوب , which is not chest, but above the chest area, where jewelry like necklace is placed) ... [In simple words, this verse is not commanding Muslim women to cover their naked chests]
The Arabic word خمار (khimār) in the verse is the plural of خمر (khumr), and "khumr" refers to a small Arabic scarf that covers the head, similar to the kufiyyah worn by Arab men today, with edges that hang down.
Meanwhile, the Arabic word جیوب (juyūb) in the verse is the plural of جيب (jayb), which means "neckline." However, Muslim scholars have translated it as "chests/bosoms," which is not an accurate translation, and an intentional Distortion (تحريف). In Arabic, the chest is called صدر (sadr).
Lisan al-Arab is a monumental Arabic dictionary compiled by Ibn Manzur (d. 711 AH/1311 CE), a 13th-century lexicographer. The entry in question falls under the root "ج-ي-ب" (j-y-b), which defines "jayb" (singular of "juyūb"). Under it, he writes: "ما بين الصدر والعنق" ("what is between the chest and the neck"), suggesting "jayb" encompasses the anatomical region around the neckline. This means "juyūb" in Quran 24:31 refers to the neckline or upper chest area where adornments (e.g., necklaces) are worn.
Thus, there is a difference between "neckline" (جيب) and "chest" (صدر). Nowhere in this verse are women commanded to cover their naked chests with the khimar (headscarf). However, Muslim scholars have distorted the translation and convinced the public that this verse instructs women to cover their chests.
In the tafsir Madarik al-Tanzil, under the explanation of verse 24:31, it is stated (link):
"كانت جيوبهن واسعة تبدو منها صدورهن وما حواليها وكن يسدلن الخمر من ورائهن فتبقى مكشوفة فأمرن بأن يسدلنها من أقدامهن حتى تغطيها."
"(In the customs of the pre-Islamic Arabs) Their necklines (juyūb) were wide, exposing their chests and what was around them. They used to let their khimars (head scarfs) hang behind them, leaving the front exposed. So, they were commanded to let them hang down from their fronts to cover it (i.e. to cover their adornments like earreings and necklaces in the neckline)."
The khimar worn by today’s Muslim women differs in design from the khimar of Muhammad’s time. In Muhammad’s era, men also wore the khimar, including Muhammad himself.
عَنْ بِلاَلٍ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم مَسَحَ عَلَى الْخُفَّيْنِ وَالْخِمَارِ
"The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, wiped over his socks and khimar (headscarf)."
Wearing a khimar on the head was an ancient Arab custom to protect the head from the sun’s heat and intensity. It was worn by free women, slave women, and men alike.
In contrast, the "jilbab جلبأب" was a large cloak/shawl that free Muslim women were commanded to wear in the second hijab verse, 33:59. They would drape it over their heads and then cover their entire bodies, including their chests, with it.
Abd al-Razzaq narrated in his book Al-Musannaf (link):
5058 عبد الرزاق ، عن ابن جريج قال : بلغني عن أشياخ ، من أهل المدينة " أن الخمر على الإماء إذا حضن ، وليس عليهن الجلابيب " .
"Abd al-Razzaq narrated from Ibn Jurayj, who said: It has reached me from the elders among the people of Medina that slave women (الإماء) wear khimars (headscarves) when they reach menstruation, but they do not wear jilbabs (big cloaks/shawls)."
Thus, the khimar was not the fundamental distinguishing factor between free women and slave women, as both groups covered their heads with it.
The real distinguishing mark between them was the jilbab, which was used by free Muslim women to cover their whole bodies, including their chest. However, slave women were not allowed to wear the jilbab, which kept their chests naked. Moreover, according to many authentic narrations, Umar ibn al-Khattab would take the jilbab away from slave women, causing their chests to become bare again.
In the narration below, you can see that before Islam (and even after Islam until 5 AH), free Muslim women and slave women all had bare chests.
Ibn Kathir al-Dimashqi narrated under the commentary of verse 24:31 (link):
أن جابر بن عبد الله الأنصاري حدث أن أسماء بنت مرشدة كانت في محل لها في بني حارثة، فجعل النساء يدخلن عليها غير متأزرات، فيبدو ما في أرجلهن من الخلاخل، وتبدو صدورهن وذوائبهن، فقالت أسماء ما أقبح هذا فأنزل الله تعالى الآية۔۔۔ وقوله تعالى { وَلْيَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِهِنَّ عَلَىٰ جُيُوبِهِنَّ } يعني المقانع يعمل لها صنفات ضاربات على صدورهن لتواري ما تحتها من صدرها وترائبها ليخالفن شعار نساء أهل الجاهلية فإنهن لم يكن يفعلن ذلك، بل كانت المرأة منهن تمر بين الرجال مسفحة بصدرها، لا يواريه شيء، وربما أظهرت عنقها وذوائب شعرها وأقرطة آذانها ... وقال أبو إسحاق السبيعي، عن أبي الأحوص، عن عبد الله قال في قوله: (وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ): الزينة القرط والدملج والخلخال والقلادة. وفي رواية عنه بهذا الإسناد قال: الزينة زينتان: فزينة لا يراها إلا الزوج: الخاتم والسوار، [وزينة يراها الأجانب، وهي] الظاهر من الثياب. ... وقال الزهري: في هذه الآية من ذكر من القرابة فلا بأس أن تبدو أمامهم السوار والقرط والخمار، ولكن أمام الغير لا يظهر إلا الخاتم فلا حرج فيه.
Jabir bin Abdullah al-Ansari reported that Asma bint Murshida was in a place of hers in Banu Haritha, and women would enter upon her without wearing waist wraps, so what (jewelry) was on their legs from anklets would be visible, as well as their chests (صدورهن) and braids (were also visible). So Asma said: "How ugly this is!" Then Allah revealed the verse: "{ وَلْيَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِهِنَّ عَلَىٰ جُيُوبِهِنَّ }" It means: the veils (al-maqāni‘ المقانع); they should make them into types that fall over their chests (صدورهن) to conceal what is beneath their chest (صدرها) and collarbones, so that they may differ from the attire of the women of the pre-Islamic era (Jahiliyyah), for they did not do that; rather, a woman among them would walk among men with her chest exposed (مسفحة بصدرها), uncovered by anything, and sometimes she would reveal her neck, her braids, and the earrings of her ears (أقرطة آذانها) ... Abu Ishaq as-Subay‘i narrated from Abu al-Ahwas, from Abdullah, regarding His saying: ‘and not expose their adornment,’ that the adornment is the earring (al-qurt), bracelet (ad-dumluj), anklet (al-khalkhal), and necklace (al-qilada) ... Az-Zuhri said: Regarding those (Mahram) relatives (like father, brother, son etc.) mentioned in this verse, there is no harm if bracelets (as-sawar), earrings (al-qurt), and headscarves (al-khimar) are visible in front of them, but with others, only the ring (al-khatam) may appear, and there is no blame in that."
Note:
1. Firstly, Ibn Kathir cofirms here that even Free Muslim women were wearing no clothes to cover their NAKED chests till 5th Hijri year, but they followed the custom of women of pre-Islamic era till that time. It is evident when he wrote:
.... in contrast to the custom of the women of the pre-Islamic era (جاهلية). For they did not do that; rather, a woman among them would walk among men with her chest exposed (مسفحة بصدرها), uncovered by anything, and sometimes she would reveal her neck, the ends of her hair (ذوائب شعرها), and the earrings of her ears (أقرطة آذانها).
2. However, Ibn Kathir showed DISHONESTY here, when he wrote in his commentary:
"{ وَلْيَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِهِنَّ عَلَىٰ جُيُوبِهِنَّ }" It means: the veils (al-maqāni‘ المقانع); they should make them into types that fall over their chests (صدورهن) to conceal what is beneath their chest (صدرها) and collarbones (ترائبها)
Firstly, in this verse, the Arabic word "خمر" (headscarf) is used, but Ibn Kathir replaced it with the word مقانع (veil)
The singular of المقانع (al-maqāniʿ) is المقنع (al-maqnaʿ).
المقنع (al-maqnaʿ) is similar to a jilbāb. It typically drapes over the head and shoulders, providing coverage without necessarily extending down to the feet.
Al-Qurtabi, under the commentary of verse 33:59, noted that maqna was similiar to jilbab (link):
الجلابيب جمع جلباب، وهو ثوب أكبر من الخمار. وروي عن ابن عباس وابن مسعود أنه الرداء. وقد قيل: إنه القناع.
"Jilbābs" (جَلابِيب) is the plural of "jilbāb" (جلباب), and it is a garment larger than the khimār (headcover). It is narrated from Ibn ʿAbbās and Ibn Masʿūd that it means the cloak (ridāʾ). And it has been said: It (i.e. jilbab) is the veil (qunāʿ).
Muqna is not a خمر Khumr (as has been used in the verse). We can also see it from traditions, where 'Umar Ibn Khattab removed Muqna from slave girls, as he wanted to keep the difference between free Muslim women and slave women:
حدثنا وكيع قال : حدثنا شعبة عن قتادة عن أنس قال : " رأى عمر أمة لنا مقنعة فضربها وقال : لا تشبهين بالحرائر " . قلت : وهذا إسناد صحيح
Companion Anas reported: "Umar saw one of our slave girls covering herself with Muqna مقنعة (which was similar to Jilbab and was used to cover the upper body parts), so he struck her and said, 'Do not resemble the free women.
I (i.e. Sheikh Albani) say: 'And this chain of narration is authentic. (link)'
This proves that Muqna was similar to Jilbab (i.e. used to cover the body), and not to Khumr (headscarf). That is why Umar blamed usage of Muqna to resemble free Muslim women.
Although some Muslim scholars considered the muqnaʿ (مقنع) to be a headcovering rather than a jilbāb, Ibn Manẓūr, in his renowned dictionary Lisān al-ʿArab, defines it as:
"القِناع: ما تُغَطِّي به المرأة رأسَها" —
"Al-qināʿ is what a woman uses to cover her head."
In the end, regardless of the interpretation, the verse explicitly uses the word khimār (خمار), not muqnaʿ or jilbāb, and it does not command the covering of the breasts — as Ibn Kathīr is incorrectly suggesting.
Secondly, in this verse, the Arabic word "جیوب" (juyūb, plural of jayb, meaning neckline) is used, but Ibn Kathir dishonestly replaced it with "chests" (Arabic: صدورهن). And he then claimed that the verse means that women should hide their chests with their veils.
In simple words, the verse says, "Cover the adornments in your necklines جيوب with your headscarfs (خمر)", but Ibn Kathir altered it to "Cover your chests صدورھن with veils (مقأنع)."
Ibn Kathir did this distortion to hide the truth that at the time of this verse’s revelation, the chests of Muslim women (both free and slave) were naked, and this verse only commanded the covering of adornments (like necklaces in their necklines) or earrings etc, while leaving their chests bare as they were. And this is a huge contradiction with the concept of Hijab and covering whole female body as a sign of Modesty in Islam.
This verse (24:31) itself serves as evidence that its primary focus is on concealing adornments (زينة, zinah)—such as jewelry and other enhancements—rather than mandating the coverage of a specific body part like the chest (صدر, sadr). Had the intent been to emphasize chest coverage, the verse would have explicitly mentioned 'sudūr' (chests) or at least given it precedence over the mention of adornments.
Lowering of Gazes is an Unnatural Restriction:
Moreover, "Lowering the gaze" is by no means modesty; rather, it is an unnatural restriction that causes "sexual frustration" in society.
Islamic preachers claim:
Allah has commanded lowering the gaze in the Quran, and this is also a part of modesty. Men generally look at women with lustful eyes (even unintentionally, without any intent), but the hijab protects women from unwanted gazes.
However, we completely disagree with this so-called Islamic concept of "modesty" because:
- Lowering the gaze is by no means modesty; rather, it is merely an unnatural restriction on men and women, the result of which manifests as extreme sexual frustration in every Islamic society. To see this extreme sexual frustration in Islamic societies, please read our article: Unnatural Islamic hijab and modesty lead only to sexual frustration
- Secondly, Muslims were given this command to lower their gaze only in front of free Muslim women, whereas, in the case of slave women, Muslim men were not required to do so—they could look at them (stare at them) while they could not wear hijab, and their chests remained bare too.
Thus, boasting about 'lowering the gaze' as modesty is nothing but double standards. Fundamentally, this was not modesty; rather, it was merely about not looking at another Muslim man’s property (his woman) to give respect to that Muslim man."
We also invite readers to reflect on the Incident of Ifk to see the real harms of this unnatural restriction.
When people placed Aisha’s howdah on the camel, they assumed Aisha was inside it, even though she was not there. All this happened because Islam prohibits interaction between men and women, and due to this, no one even greeted Aisha to confirm whether she was in the howdah or not.
As a result of this incident, two Muslim tribes were ready to kill each other, Muhammad came close to divorcing Aisha, and this dangerous controversy lasted for an entire month. The sole reason for this drama was these unnatural Islamic commands like "lowering the gaze."
You can read all these details in this article:
What was the use of lowering gazes for fully covered free women, when Muslim men were free to see slave women with naked breasts?
Please also note that:
- Lowering gazes was only limited to free Muslim women, who were already covered in full Hijab.
- However, as far as slave women were concerned, then Muslim men were free to see them, even when they were made half naked by Islam in public, with their chests exposed.
If the purpose of lowering the gaze was to prevent lustful thoughts, then why was this restriction only applied to free Muslim women. This contradiction raises serious questions about the logic behind the ruling. Islamic jurisprudence openly acknowledges this disparity.
In the Hanafi fiqh book Fatawa Alamgiri, it is written:
"It is permissible to look at the entire body of another person’s slave woman, except from the navel to the knees… and the parts that are permissible to look at are also permissible to touch." (link)
In the Maliki fiqh book Al-Sharh al-Saghir, it is written:
"A man can look at most of a slave woman’s body, just as much as she can look at a man. She can only see his hands and feet, while a man is permitted to see her entire body bare, except from the navel to the knees." (link)
Muslim men were not only allowed to see half naked slave women, but they were also allowed to touch their body parts before buying them.
Musanaf Ibn Abi Shayba, Volume 4, page 289 Tradition 20241 (link):
نا علي بن مسهر عن عبيدالله عن نافع عن ابن عمر أنه إذا أراد أن يشتري الجارية وضع يده على أليتيها وبين فخذيها وربما كشف عن ساقها
‘Naf’e reported: Ibn Umar, when intending to buy a slave girl, would place his hand on her breasts, between her thighs, and sometimes even expose her leg.
This clear inconsistency makes it illogical to claim that the command to lower the gaze was about preserving modesty, when in practice, it only applied to fully covered free women while leaving half naked slave women to unrestricted viewing and even physical examination.
What was the use of lowering gazes when Muhammad was even holding hands of non-Mahram slave girls?
Prophet Muhammad himself used to walk in public while holding the hands of the non-mahram slave girls.
Anas bin Malik said, "Any of the female slaves of Medina could take hold of the hand of Allah's Apostle and take him wherever she wished."
Please remember that this slave girl was there with naked breasts too, which makes things even more complicated.
Why did prophet Muhammad need to take her hand in his hand? Why were they not able to move in the city without taking each other’s hands? Slave girls were not sick that Muhammad had to give then hand as support.
This same tradition is also present in Sunan Ibn Majah too.
Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith 4177:“If a female slave among the people of Al-Medinah were to take the hand of the Messenger of Allah, he would not take his hand away from hers until she had taken him wherever she wanted in Al-Medinah so that her needs may be met.” Grade: Sahih (Darussalam) and Sahih (Albani)
So, what was the use of lowering gazes for free Muslim women only, who were already fully covered, while seeing half naked slave women, and even walking with those non-mahram slave girls in publich while holding their hands?
Islamists use "lowering the gaze" as a tool to control women's dress and behavior, yet they completely ignore the historical reality that their own texts justify treating slave women as objects for public display and physical inspection. If Islam was truly about modesty, these contradictions would not exist.
True MODESTY is to RESPECT the CHOICES which women make for themselves
Remember:
- True modesty is respecting women, their freedom, and their choices.
- And the Western world is truly modest because women there are given protection, and men are required to respect women and their decisions.
Hassan Radwan