You should understand that niqabs are not the most fashionable attribute of the season in Dagestan. They are worn, as a rule, by women whose husbands profess, to put it mildly, an unconventional Islam.
Photo: Vadim SHERSTENIKIN. Go to Photobank KP
The events surrounding the obstacle in Dagestan developed rapidly. On Monday, the mufti of the republic, at a meeting with the public, publicly and decisively announced that a local fatwa (Islamic court order) would soon be issued banning the niqab: “If a man wants his wife not to be looked at, he should keep her at home,” Ahmad stabbed Abdulaev.
The next day, the head of the department of those same fatwas, Akhmed Isaev, disavowed the words of his leader:
“After a thorough analysis of the textual Sharia fatwas, the Fatwa Department does not see sufficient grounds to take a decision on a general ban on the niqab. At the same time, in certain situations, for security reasons, a local ban on wearing the niqab may be introduced, which will be temporary.”
You must understand that niqabs are not the most fashionable attribute of the season in Dagestan. They are worn, as a rule, by women whose husbands profess, to put it mildly, an unconventional Islam. And a completely face-hiding outfit has never been a Muslim tradition, either in the Caucasus in general or in Dagestan in particular. It is rather an element of opposition to traditional Russian Muslim values, in which there is no place for either radicalism or caveman ideas about religion.
That is why the statement by the fatwa department sparked such heated discussion. On Wednesday, it issued a new statement in which it was quick to claim that the muftate had been misinterpreted.
“The Mufti announces a temporary ban on the wearing of the niqab until the identified threats are eliminated and a new theological conclusion is reached,” reads the latest “interpretation.”
But this solution seems to be far from complete. Here is the mufti of Chechnya, where the niqab is temporarily not banned, without any casuistry, at one point created a database on niqabs: “First, if you don’t want to show yourself like this, stay at home. Secondly, when you close yourself off like this from others, they start to consider those who are not so closed as infidels. What follows is that they put on a belt and go to kill innocent people. It is haram to wear clothes that are different from your people and to stand out.”
And in Dagestan there are half-measures again. After the anti-Semitic pogrom at Makhachkala airport, there were also half-measures. Understand and forgive, impose an administrative arrest, a fine, instead of filing a full criminal charge. As a result, one of the participants in the attack on churches and synagogues on June 23 shot people instead of going to prison.
The temporary ban is not a religious decision, but rather a fear of causing discontent among not the largest, but radically-minded part of Dagestani society. This, by the way, does not take into account the fatwas of the official Muslim clergy. Therefore, the question of a legislative (and not religious) ban on the niqab, which was advocated, for example, by the head of the Presidential Council for Human Rights, becomes even more relevant.
LISTEN ALSO
Before carrying out a terrorist attack in Dagestan, the attackers practiced airsoft (more details)
