Comments on: There’s Something About Aishah

By: Sobia

Sobia — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 17:35:46 +0000

@ Saira:

Jones has the right to write whatever she likes. Others can write rebuttals or critiques if they don’t like it. But the right to write this is hers, as it is others.

By: saira

saira — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:52:22 +0000

as we know about novels .material of novel is not truth.So this book based on lots of lies.We are badly hurt when we read this novel.Sherry jones has no right to write any kind of book which are based on religion.

By: TC

TC — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 03:11:56 +0000

That’s a good question Achelois.

If you read the translation of Aisha’s own record of this incident, she mentions that she had fell asleep waiting for somebody to come and get her. At that time her veil had uncovered her face while she was asleep, hence Safwan could recognize her when he came along. As a side note, she also added that the only words he spoke to her were when he saw her (including the journey as well) were “inna lillahi wa inna ilaihi raji’oon” – which is said when something is lost and it means we belong to Allah and to Him we shall return.

Hope that helps.

By: mj

mj — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 03:25:28 +0000

Bravo

By: Achelois

Achelois — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 18:24:28 +0000

Thanks for this brilliant analysis. I had similar concerns about “The Jewel of Medina”.

One thing that I have never understood is this: like you said

“…the historical Aishah points out that Safwan only recognized her because he had seen her in the days before the Prophet’s wives were told to cover their faces…”.

If the Prophet’s wives had indeed begun to cover their faces, wouldn’t Aisha had had her face covered in Safwan’s presence and if she did then how did he recognize her? Maybe it is off-topic but I never understood it. Anyone knows more on this?

By: Kathrin

Kathrin — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 17:28:01 +0000

I have always liked the story of Aisha, even more than that of Fatima or Kadija. Aisha’s legacy is stuck between an interesting tension: on the one hand, her role as hadith narrator and Islamic expert after Muhammad’s death, given she was the closest person to him – even compared to his male companions (thus meaning that women can be religious authorities), and her role in the first civil war in Islamic history (the Battle of the Camel) where she led a military campaign against Muhammad’s son-in-law and cousin, Ali (the implication being, can women lead in matters of politics without causing Islamic chaos, or “fitna”?). So while there are archetypes of purity, like Khadjia and Mary, Aisha simply doesn’t fit solely into that mold. That is what I like about her most, that she does not fit into the typical feminized molds established in scripture. One of my favorite scholars that examines the roles of women in Islamic scripture is Denise Spellberg in “Politics, Gender and the Islamic Past (1994). Spellberg is really out to understand how her legacy has been understood (interpreted) by Muslims throughout Islamic history and why.

It is a fantastic read

By: laila

laila — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 14:03:57 +0000

This is an AMAZING piece.

By: Jemima

Jemima — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 13:43:18 +0000

I am so relieved that I am not the only person making similar observations about the text of “The Jewel of Medina.” I have slogged through about 67 pages as of today and for a PhD Candidate in Islamic Studies, it is pretty excruciating to read.

The conflation of Western values and observations about the Islamic World, in particular concepts of gender, is really the element of the text so far that is making me squirm.

It’s a pretty story of make believe and Orientalist anachronisms so far, and I am on the fence still as to whether the book will be at all beneficial for dialogue. Right now it reads much like a painting by Delacroix or Lewis.