The Question of the Veil in Colonial Lebanon and Syria

Lebanon and Syria’s religious elite were shocked by the bombshell of a book released by a Muslim woman, Nazira Zain al-Din, one that called for the transudation of an imminent piece of clothing under Islamic authority: the veil. In an unprecedented case, a woman wrote a book in which she sparked much knowledge and judgment.

At the time, women were considered unable to assume responsibility. As such, paternalism saw such gendered figures as unable to form sound opinions and therefore could pollute politics and society if given the right to speak in a public manner.

Thus, scholars—or “ulama” in Arabic—stood on podiums and wrote books to address Zain al-Din, raising alarms that she had used help from her father, as it was assumed that no woman could hold such profound knowledge over religious matters. Nazira, instead of addressing the Islamic government—whom she knew would be of utmost disinterested in what she had to say—rather directed her book to the French administration, which ruled the region at the time.

Although she hadn’t received much response from High Commissioner Henri Ponsot other than a letter expressing that her book was read with much interest, much debate was sparked among society. The arguments expectantly unfolded in religious forms.

One vigorous opponent of Zain al-Din was Shaykh Ghalayini, a prominent religious figure at the time, who called it nonsense in a newly written book that a woman would challenge and disregard the knowledge of ulama and scholars, thus should not be procured a voice in public. Reciprocally, Zain al-Dine wrote another book to express how “un-noble” it was of someone to use his “opponent’s” disadvantage against them, as he could stand on a podium and address an audience with authority, while she couldn’t for being a woman.

The issue sparked a debate that lasted over two years, in which it unfolded in magazines, amongst other forms of press. The debate in question upon whether the woman is to veil or unveil herself in society turned to one that disregarded politics or paternalist values. Instead, it folded itself in a rather personal choice. As such, men at the time found themselves especially frustrated in visualizing a discourse upon which their opinions weren’t considered.

The dominant ideology at the time, believing that women lacked the judgment to make decisions about themselves, countered that the debate should centralize itself upon society and be regarded as a personal choice. They presumed that the order of the veil was of religious origin and significance, and whoever argued against divine rules and law was anti-religious, thus their argument was unfit.

Zain al-Dine countered such advancements, stating that the matter of the veil was not a matter of religious obligation, as no verse in the Quran perpetrated the compulsory use of the veil, urging the French administration to expunge the law obligating the veil.

Through this specific narrative, one could procure the dynamics of Arabian society during this time frame. It provides real insight into the arguments and firmness of consensual Arab beliefs held in that era of religious and familial matters. It is interesting, indeed, that the gendered views on the socio-economic and political aspects of Arab society, ones that were largely either directly influenced by religion, or the interpretation of the latter.

We can relatively consider a similar ideology perpetuating itself in modern-day Afghanistan, where the Taliban hold control over the current matters of the State, leading women to be put on the stand where varied questions unfolded on their fates in educational, social, and political affairs.

This article uses the following sources: Elizabeth Thomson, Colonial citizens: Republican rights, Paternal Privilege, and Gender in French Syria and Lebanon (Columbia University Press, 2013), pp. 127-40