A R C H I V E S
Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board
| How do you answer this??? |
|---|
| Fozia |
| 11/25/05 at 17:51:07 |
| [slm] OK you know the passage in Surah nissaa (I think), that many people take as advocatiing beating your wife. Well when a non-believer comes up to you and asks you to justify it how do you?? I'm not starting an argument, I'd like to know how one goes about persuading a non-beleiver that Allah is not saying a man may beat his wife up. If this is too contentious a topic I apologise and Sr. Jannah please remove the topic from this forum. Could those who answer please refrain from posting looong fatwahs, my attention span isn't what it used to be ;) Wassalaam |
| Re: How do you answer this??? |
|---|
| Kathy |
| 11/25/05 at 21:37:14 |
| [slm] www.jannah.org/sisters/end.html |
| Re: How do you answer this??? |
|---|
| Siham |
| 11/26/05 at 00:37:48 |
| [slm] Its really shocking how in thousands of Muslim households, this is justified due to the misinterpretation of this verse and thus have caused many people to deviate from the teaching of Islam, by simply taken things literally, without even understanding the spirit meaning behind this verse. Because the Prophet PBUH hated people who beat women and to demonstrate the pointlessness of doing so - was self explanatory when he actually mentioning the issue with the miswak. SubhanaAllah indeed a [i]real[/i] man would never think of laying his hands on a woman, let alone beating. wassalaam. |
| Re: How do you answer this??? |
|---|
| Siham |
| 11/26/05 at 00:44:39 |
| See the Big Picture: 4.34-35 Uzma Mazhar © 2003 Verse 4.34 seems to hang like a black cloud over the status of women in Islam. It has been misinterpreted, misunderstood, misused, twisted, distorted & abused to justify the misogynist attitudes that seem to pervade the issue of women, despite the unprecedented liberation and uplifting that Islam accorded women. To better understand this verse within the context of the message of the Quran and the philosophy of Islām, one needs to look at some critical principles and the overall philosophy of Islām, only from within that big picture can we get an understanding of what the verse means. For more detailed definitions of words that seem to cause some of this confusion, check Defining Critical Words 4.34 & Translations of 4.34-35 Points to consider: 1. The Prophet (saw) was not assigned the role of personal 'caretaker' or 'moral supervisor' of people's actions. He was not accountable for their deeds. He conveyed the message and encouraged them to follow according to their own level of faith and commitment; from a simple bedouin who was willing to follow only the minimum requirements of Islam to those who devoted every aspect of their being, their lives and their properties. 2. Consider the Qurānic ayāt that say that nobody will be held accountable for another's deeds/faith, etc. Sūrah al Ma'idah 5.105 O' you who have attained to faith, it is for your own selves that you are responsible... Sūrah al An'am 6.52 ... Thou art in no wise accountable for them - just as they are in no wise accountable for thee. How does one jump from this to making a husband responsible and accountable for his wife's faith and morality? Keeping in mind that if one is responsible for something, they will also be held accountable for it. The freedom to choose and a willingness to follow your religion and beliefs is upheld by the Qur'ān in every situation and condition, for each and every individual, male or female. 3. There is no compulsion in religion. If one is forced to follow a religion, it implies one is unwilling and when we are unwilling but do it to please someone else, ie: without sincerity; we are nothing but hypocrites. Since nobody is to be forced to comply to the dictates of religion, or for that matter, to any aspect of life... to think that men have been given the power and 'duty' to enforce piety or check the behaviors of women is a little too contrived for convenience. It is absolutely and totally against Islāmic teachings. Sūrah al Baqarah 2.256 There shall be no coercion in matters of faith. There are no if, ands or buts about this injunction, it is crystal clear... under no circumstances can one person coerce, force or impose their views, beliefs or opinions on another human being. Basic premise to understand here is that.. whenever something is enforced on a person it becomes 'zulm' or abuse, and oppression is forbidden in Islām. When Allāh has not taken away our choice, how can any human being even dare to assume that they can? 4. Since Islam allows men to marry women of other faiths without forcing or asking them to convert... and protects their right to practice their own religion would this mean the husband is not 'qawwamuna' (maintainer/disciplinarian/teacher) over them? If he is, and since she is under no obligation to follow Islamic laws, how does he fulfill this responsibility which is incumbent on him or does he no longer have to be her maintainer? Men are financially responsible for their wives regardless of the faith she follows. One has nothing to do with the other. 5. Is the 'qawwamuna' limitless, or are there limitations to it? What if the husband refuses to act responsibly, or is abusive? What recourse do women have when men are not taking the financial responsibility of maintaining them and the children? What if the husband is taking the financial responsibility of providing for his family but is also abusive? There are enough incidences from hadith that allow women to take financial matters in their own hands when the men act irresponsibly or miserly, to the right of divorcing such men. As well as permission to leave and divorce a husband who is not responsible or abusive. 6. Does this not go against the Islamic teachings that the only superiority one human being has over the other is in their piety? Doesn't the extended role of teacher/disciplinarian imply that women are dingbats who don't have the sense to know right from wrong unless their husband beats them? Such an attitude toward women is absolutely uncalled for and does not fit the overall Islamic view of women. 7. Spouses are partners/cover for each other... Is it possible to be partners if the husband is the disciplinarian of the wife but the wife does not have the same liberty to correct him? 'Partners' implies equal relationship, not a ruler-ruled or parent-child relationship where one has to utilize disciplinary action to keep the other in line. Sūrah ar Rum 30.21 "And among His wonders is this: He creates for you mates out of your own kind, so that you might incline towards then, and He engenders love and tenderness between you: in this, behold, there are messages indeed for people who think! Sūrah al Baqarah 2.187 "... They are as a garment for you, and you are as a garment for them." Sūrah al Nisa 4.19 "... And consort with your wives in a goodly manner, for if you dislike them, it may well be that you dislike something which God might yet make a source of abundant good." Sūrah al Nisa 4.1 "O mankind! Be conscious of your Sustainer, who has created you out of one living entity (nafs), and out of it created its mate, and out of the two spread abroad a multitude of men and women. And remain conscious of God, in whose name you demand your rights from one another, and of these ties of kinship. Verily, God is ever watchful over you!" 8. The Prophet (saw) was the living Qurān he was the exemplar... he repeatedly told men to treat their wives with love, affection and respect; and told them that they could not hit their wives when cases of marital discord were brought to him... was he ignoring this verse or was he really telling us what it actually means? 9. When Islām allows divorce, and the wife is such a disgrace to the husband, why is he not exercising his right to divorce her? Granted divorce is the most hated act in the sight of God, accepting this verse as is implies that violence toward women is an acceptable alternative to divorce especially when God has repeatedly expressed dislike for violence and oppression; and has given women the right to divorce? If a man has to keep his wife in line by beating her, wouldn't it imply that she doesn't want to be with him.. and is he then not keeping her against her will? Sūrah Al-Baqarah 2. 230 And women have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable. Sūrah Al-Baqarah 2. 231 Do not retain them against their will in order to hurt Sūrah An Nisa 4:19 It is not lawful for you to try to hold your wives against their will, and neither shall you keep them under constraint with a view to taking away anything of what you may have given them, unless it be that they have become guilty of immoral conduct in an obvious manner. Consort with wives in goodly manner; for if you dislike them, it may well be that you dislike something which God might yet make a source of abundant good. 10. Does being a male automatically imply that he is an upright, moral being? Or is being a male enough to imply intelligence and wisdom, or that he will be fair and just. Does being a male automatically make him knowledgeable about Islam such that he can guide his wife? Verse 2.44 clearly admonishes one from correcting another if you are not on the right path yourself. The way verse 4.34 is often translated gives the impression that just because you are the husband you have the right to enforce compliance, regardless of your own moral character. Sūrah al Baqarah 2.44 Do you bid other people to be pious, the while you forget your own selves - and yet you recite the divine writ.? Will you not, then, use your reason? 11. What constitutes this preference? Sūrah al Baqarah 2.228 " . the rights of the wives (with regard to their husbands) are equal to the (husband's) rights with regard to them, although men have precedence over them (in this respect). And Allah is Almighty, Wise" The verse reads: "... men have a degree over women" (2:228). On the average, men do have an edge over women in terms of physical strength. Needless to say, this excludes a broad range of exceptions, and is true only in a statistical sense. The same verse notes that "some are better than others," AND does not assign gender to this latter expression. Indeed, there are untold numbers of women who are superior to men in knowledge, in work, and in physical strength. 12. Then there are numerous verses that directly command people to not be violent, to curb their anger, to not oppress anyone... and to assume that Allah allowed men to hit their wives is totally contradictory to this message. Islam goes as far as to admonish abuse of slaves and prisoners of war; so how is it possible that it allows abuse in such an intimate and close relationship? Sūrah ar Rum 30.21 "And among His wonders is this: He creates for you mates out of your own kind, so that you might incline towards then, and He engenders love and tenderness between you: in this, behold, there are messages indeed for people who think! There are numerous ahādīth that admonish men about hitting their wife and then later wanting to be intimate with her, not to mention those that direct men to be gentle, kind and considerate toward women. 13. Does a woman lose her right to self-determination after she gets married? If the husband is the 'maintainer of her affairs', does she lose her rights in those affairs? Considering that a woman keeps her birth name even after marriage, has the right to property, education and work; her right to being an independent being is never compromised by Islam. Misinterpreting the Limits of Responsibility: The 'responsibility' of men over women that is being referred to in this situation is about inheritance only.. there is no other instance in the Quran where men have been given superiority over women. Financial responsibility for women cannot automatically be extended to include all aspects of life. This advantage is understood as financial responsibility toward the maintenance of women/family. No other kind of superiority has been mentioned anywhere else either. Nowhere in the Quran does it say that men have been given more intelligence, aptitude, common sense, wisdom, faith, piety, morality or anything that would deem them superior to women in any way, shape or form. I believe that these words have been over-extended to imply 'control' which is misleading, as Islam does not give total power to any one person over another. Even the Prophet (saw) was told that his role was to convey the message of Islam and not to be the caretaker of the people's actions. So for men to be given this 'role' over their wives seems to be far-fetched. I believe that by extending this meaning to imply that husbands are the ones to 'monitor' their wife's morality goes against the message of the Qur'ān. Furthermore, Islam has systematically denounced the control of one man over another, specifically in abolishing slavery, in giving rights to women and children, permission to disobey parents if they ask one to do something that goes against the teaching of God, the permission to disobey the ruler if he is despotic and unfair, to escape from abusive and tyrannical regimes/conditions and most importantly the crystal clear message that the only one to be feared and submitted to is God alone. Misinterpreting the message: 4.34 Men shall take financial responsibility of women with the bounties which God has bestowed more abundantly on the former than on the latter, with what they spend out of their possessions. And the righteous women are the truly devout ones, who guard the intimacy which God has (ordained to be) guarded. As for those women whose ill-will you fear, talk to them, then leave them alone in bed, then separate from them; and if thereupon they pay you heed, do not seek to harm them. Behold, God is indeed most High, Great! 4.35 And if you have reason to fear that a breach might occur between a couple, appoint an arbiter from among his people and an arbiter from among her people;if they want to set things aright, God may bring about their reconciliation. Behold, God is indeed all-knowing, aware. How is it possible that it is being said that men can beat their wife and the message following right after it says don't harm them? Personally, I believe these verses are about checking the attitude of those men who become abusive when in conflict with their wives. To me, it seems to tell men to go through rational and sequential ways of dealing with a conflict and to curb their violent tendency.. it is literally outlining steps they need to take to resolve conflicts. Most rational men do not resort to violence, regardless of the nature of the conflict. If an abusive man can go through these steps to control his anger the problem would be resolved long before such men resort to violence. Can violent men do that? If you read the following verse, this premise makes the most sense. Verse 4.35 addresses the next step in the situation of marital discord. It clearly says to assign arbiters from both sides and try to resolve the differences. The preceding verse (4.34) fits in.. it is addressing the men and outlining for THEM the steps THEY need to take when THEY fear discord. Step 1... Talk to your wife Step 2... Avoid intimacy Step 3... Separate Step 4... Involve arbiters Step 5... Reconcile differences The interesting thing is that if this verse is understood as permission for husbands to hit their wives, they seem to forget verse 4.128 directed at women who fear abuse by men that allows women to leave such men. If the woman is recalcitrant, what will stop her from using the husband's hitting as reason enough to leave him? So is one verse contradicting another? No... the only rational and logical way of understanding this verse is that it is actually admonishing men to control themselves, it is not giving them carte blanche to hit women when women don't 'obey' them. Sūrah al Nisa 4.128 "And if a woman has reason to fear ill-treatment from her husband, or that he might turn away from her, it shall not be wrong for the two to set things peacefully to rights between themselves, for peace is best, and selfishness is ever-present in human souls..." |
| NS |
| Re: How do you answer this??? |
|---|
| Fozia |
| 11/26/05 at 07:13:33 |
| [slm] Sr Siham could you post up a link to that article you have just posted, I wanna post it somewhere else. And many thanx to both you and Sr Kathy. If others have anything to say on the matter I welcome all knowledgeable replies. Wasslaam |
| Re: How do you answer this??? |
|---|
| Siham |
| 11/26/05 at 19:33:25 |
| Beating Women Or Beating Around the Bush, Or... Edip Yuksel "Verse 4:34 of the Quran orders believers to beat their wives; so, Islam is a male dominant religion." Many of us have heard this criticism from Christians, atheists, agnostics, etc. Personally, every time I read 4:34, I felt that something was wrong. How does God, the Most Wise order us to beat our women? What kind of solution is that? It is in contrast to the verses in which God describes marriage: "Among His signs is that He created for you spouses from among yourselves, in order to have tranquility and contentment with each other. He places in your heart love and care towards your spouses. In this, there are signs for people who think." (30:21) Obviously, this mixed messages have bothered many contemporary translators of the Quran. To avoid the moral and intellectual problems, they tried to soften the word "beat" when they translate the verse 4:34. For instance, Yusuf Ali uses a merciful parentheses after "beat" to save women: ". . . As to those women on whose part you fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly). . ." (4:34) Many tried to "beat" around the bush to "beat" the problem generated by the "beat" of 4:34. When I finished the Turkish translation (1991), this verse was on the top of my orange list to study carefully. Whenever I encounter a problem regarding the understanding of a Quranic verse, I remember 20:114 and pray accordingly: "Most Exalted is God, the only true King. Do not rush into (understanding) the Quran before it is revealed to you, and say, 'My Lord, increase my knowledge.'" Almost all of the translations have mistranslated the four key words or terms of this particular verse. These are: "Qawwamune," "Faddallallahu ba'dahum ala ba'd," "Nushuzehunne," and "Fadribuhunne." In our late book, "Errors in Turkish Translations" (Istanbul, 1992) we have discussed the real meaning of these words and the motivation and reasons for mistranslating them. Here, we will focus on the last word, "Fadribuhunne." A Famous Multi-Meaning Word The problem comes from the word "Idribuhunne" which we used to translate as "beat them". The root of this word is "DaRaBa". If you look at any Arabic dictionary you will find a long list of meanings ascribed to this word. That list is one of the longest list in whole Arabic dictionary. It can be said that "DaRaBa" is the number-one multi-meaning word in Arabic. It has so many different meanings, we can find numerous different meanings ascribed to it in the Quran. To travel, to get out: 3:156; 4:101; 38:44; 73:20; 2:273 To strike: 2:60,73; 7:160; 8:12; 20:77; 24:31; 26:63; 37:93; 47:4 To beat: 8:50; 47:27 To set up: 43:58; 57:13 To give (examples): 14:24,45; 16:75,76,112; 18:32,45; 24:35; 30:28,58; 36:78; 39:27,29; 43:17; 59:21; 66:10,11 To take away, to ignore: 43:5 To condemn: 2:61 To seal, to draw over: 18:11 To cover: 24:31 To explain: 13:17 As you see, in Quran alone we can witness the verb "DaRaBa" having at least ten different meanings. "DaRaBa" has also other meanings which are not mentioned in the Quran. For example, in the Arabic language, you do not print money--you "DaRaBa" money, you do not multiply numbers--you "DaRaBa" numbers, you do not cease the work--you "DaRaBa" the work. In Turkish we have many verbs similar to DaRaBa, such as "tutmak", "calmak", "vurmak" etc. In English we have two verbs which are almost equivalent to "DaRaBa". These are "strike" and "beat". Webster's Dictionary gives fourteen meanings to the verb "strike": hit (against); ignite; (of snake) bite; (of plants) (cause to) take root; attack; hook (fish); sound (time) as bell in clock etc.; affect; arrive at, come upon; enter mind of; discover (gold, oil etc.); dismantle, remove; make (coin); cease work as protest or to make demands. The same dictionary gives eight meanings to the verb "beat": strike repeatedly; overcome; surpass; stir vigorously with striking action; flap (wings); make, wear (path); throb; sail against wind. In the beginning of this article (underlined) I deliberately used "beat" in three different meanings in a single statement just to show the variety of meanings in a single word. In English, when we order someone to "beat it" we mean "get out". Similarly in Arabic, when we order someone with the command form of "DaRaBa", that is "iDRiB", we mean "get out". How Can We Find The Appropriate Meaning When we encounter a multi-meaning word, we select the proper meaning according to the context, forms, and common sense. For instance, if we had have translated "DaRaBa" in 13:17 as "beat" instead of "explain", the meaning would be ridiculous: . . . God thus beats the truth and falsehood." (13:17) Another example of mistranslation of "DaRaBa" can be found in the translation of 38:44. All the translations (except Dr. Khalifa's translation) inject a male-made story to justify their silly translation. Here is how Yusuf Ali translates the verse about Job: "And take in the hand a little grass, and strike therewith: and break not (the oath)." Yusuf Ali, in the footnote narrates the traditional story: "He (Job) must have said in his haste to the woman that he would beat her: he is asked now to correct her with only a wisp of grass, to show that he was gentle and humble as well as patient and constant." However, without injecting this story, we can translate it as the following: "Now, you shall travel the land to fulfill your pledge (that is to deliver the message)." We found him steadfast. What a good servant! He was a submitter. (38:44) Let's turn back to 4:34 Additionally, the word "Nushuz" which is generally translated as "opposition" has another meaning which can be translated as degrees of disloyalty ranging from flirtation to sexual liaison. If we study 4:34 carefully we will find a clue that leads us to translate that word as "flirting or cheating" or "extramarital affair" (Any word or words that reflect the range of disloyalty in marriage). The clue is the phrase before "Nushuz" as reads: ". . . and observe God's commandments, even when alone in their privacy." This phrase emphasizes the importance of loyalty in marriage life. Furthermore, the same word "Nushuz" is used in 4:128, but it is used to describe the misbehavior of husbands not wives as was in 4:34. So, the traditional translation of "Nushuz", that is, "opposition" will not fit here. In vertical relations, "opposition" cannot be a double-edged behavior. So, translators try to avoid this contradiction by ascribing just the opposite meaning of "opposition", i.e., "oppression" in verse 4:128. However, the meaning of "Nushuz" as "disloyalty" is appropriate for both cases described in 4:34 and 4:128. A Coherent Understanding When we read 4:34 we should not understand "idribuhunne" as "beat those women". We must remember that this word has many meanings. God gives us three ways of dealing with extra-marital-affair. In the beginning stage of such misbehavior husband should start from giving advice. If it does not work and she goes further and commits a proven adultery, that time husband has the right to strike them out (4:34 & 65:1). Let's present our suggestion for the translation of verse 4:34 "Men traditionally take care of women, since God has endowed each of them with certain qualities and men spend from their financial resources. The righteous women are obedient (to God) and during the absence (of their husband) they honor them according to God's commandment. As for those women whom you are experiencing a fear of disloyalty from, you shall first advice them, then (if they continue) you may desert them in bed, then you may strike them out. If they obey you then don't transgress against them. God is Most High, Supreme." (4:34). Beating women who are cheating is not an ultimate solution; but "striking them out" from your house is the best solution. And it is fair too. Source: http://www.yuksel.org/e/religion/unorthodox.htm |
| Re: How do you answer this??? |
|---|
| Siham |
| 11/27/05 at 21:07:34 |
| [quote author=Fozia link=board=masjid;num=1132955467;start=0#4 date=11/26/05 at 07:13:33] Sr Siham could you post up a link to that article you have just posted, I wanna post it somewhere else. And many thanx to both you and Sr Kathy.[/quote] [slm] Sure, here's the link dear: http://www.crescentlife.com/thisthat/feminist%20muslims/see%20the%20big%20picture4_34.htm wassalaam. |
| 11/27/05 at 21:09:18 |
| Siham |
Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board |