Had they instead declared that a woman already modestly wrapped in the obligatory jilbab (outer cloak) must cover her face when she fears harm from some lewd men because it is uncovered—that, in such a situation, she is required to veil it in order to avert injury and temptation—such a ruling would have a footing in the jurisprudence of the Qur’an and Sunnah. One could even argue that she should not leave her house at all if she fears that certain oppressive thugs, backed by a ruler who does not judge by what Allah has revealed, might tear the jilbab from her head, as sadly occurred in one of the Arab countries a few years ago.

But to convert that circumstance-based ruling into a universal religious obligation binding on every woman in every time and place—even where no one harms women who wear the jilbab—absolutely not, never! How true are the words of Allah: “Do they have partners who have legislated for them in religion what Allah has not authorised?” (Q 42:21).

These are the main errors of the over-zealous opponents that I felt bound to note here, as briefly as possible, because of their obvious connection to this book.

I then concluded the decisive rebuttal by reminding readers that excessive rigor in religion—though expressly prohibited by the Wise Lawgiver—brings no good. It can never produce a generation of Muslim young women who carry Islam in both knowledge and practice with moderation and balance, free from both excess and neglect. By contrast, I was informed of some devout young women in certain Arab countries who, when they heard the Prophet’s words, peace and blessings be upon him, “A woman in ihram must not veil her face, nor may she wear gloves,” would not comply and said, “We shall veil and pay the ransom!” Their reaction arose only because their ears have long been filled with relentless strictness regarding their faces.