Islam, Women and the Challenges of Today: Modernist Insights and Feminist Perspectives

Citation preview

ISLAM,

WOMEN, .

and the

Challenges .

4 TODAY

FARZANA

HASSAN

70

eor Dans Z

a ag

Fargano

Islam, Wee

and the Challenges of Today

forat

ae

cs

& ye

a

grigiad i bes |

a

Here’s more of what’s being said about this book: “The theme of the book is Islam’s perpetual reformation. It has been very ably discussed from the angle of total equality of the sexes, dispelling their age old conflict and the reasons for disparity. The Quranic injunctions are examined in light of the present times and many misnomers are very rationally dispelled. Tolerance and understanding of the innovative ideas makes it the foundation of the building of a modern Islamic culture.” — Ziauddin Ahmed, author of Thought Provoking Essays On Contemporary Philosophies.

“All religions need to go through reinterpretations throughout their histories. Islam is no exception. What is exceptional is that Farzana Hassan,

a Muslim woman,

attempts to do so while

keeping faith in the fundamental principles of Islam. In her attempts to interpret Islam, she follows, Ayesha, the wife of the Prophet and mother of believers who was among the first Muslim women to explain Islam based on her own observations and experience.” — Munir Pervaiz (Saami) Secretary: Writer’s Forum.

“Farzana Hassan is an accomplished author, a gifted artist and a tireless interfaith community worker The binding force among all these attributes is her deep devotion to Islam. This book is a faithful guide to her own struggle to reconcile her religious traditions with modern life and values.” — Rabbi Larry Englander, Solel Congregation, Mississauga, Ontario.

This is an exciting and thought-provoking book for thoughtful people of all faiths. Farzana courageously and respectfully explores the questions that most women want to ask, but are often afraid to, for fear of being criticized or marginalized in their own communities. She is an excellent role model for devout women as she struggles to understand the universal principles and specific historical context of her faith. Farzana then, argues persuasively that an enduring and inclusive faith needs to preserve its principles of justice, compassion, concern for the disadvantaged, etc, while adjusting its practices in light of new circumstances and challenges.” — Dr. Barbara Landau, Psychologist, Lawyer, Mediator

and Author, Co-Chair, Canadian Association of Jews and Muslims.

cal ie yea

uh a

tattle

—~/) _ _ “

Sat

Se

or

= ed

a)

Get

Va pamer sh

tot.

aa

nee

tpn Ks

eS

ye

e

ee

-

©

is a

_

POOH

AW

a

Lone

‘

rye

ila

a &

&

> Wome

es

é

ee |

hy

*

ri

. a

"

+

=i]

oa

Seal

Gale

1

< y

Ma

a4

eal |.Melo

an,

im “f uw

wre

gual

ves

a

ae

) (bee

Tes ey

& Wret

gm)

ir

Pye wi

68

MASH

Sie

¢

-_

wl)

ae

he

eb FEY

aaa

yal

ss ‘

Yiegi we iy » hier

aig

Rin]

« -Ogeras whe|7. VD Lore. a vieemyil

‘wad eéths oortp habe we ty

te Ag

B

wae

a

Tee

be ere Pra bw ote, WONG Pre, ia Cae ae pegs

-

@

Vas

gous

abir: iy, edivvia gee

sn ay! * wrviny why Vaniering Swutgyy

bia

itis 1

gen

Got vs"

we

ae

Pegi:

“SY ¥

a To

9

bitoe hee

jee Sas

th

a: "1sanh a eae_e —_

ee

.

aA

a

Islam, Women

and the Challenges of Today Modernist Insights and Feminist Perspectives

by Farzana Hassan

From the New White Knight Series:

A Better Way of Living

v White Knight Books Foronto,

Canada

Copyright ©2006 by Farzana Hassan All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission

in writing from the author. Published in 2006 by White Knight Books, a division of Bill Belfontaine Ltd. Suite 103, One Benvenuto Place, Toronto Ontario Canada M4V 2L1

Tel. 416-925-6458 ¢ Fax. 416-925-4165

E-mail: [email protected]

* www.whiteknightbooks.ca

Distributions Services

White Knight Book Distribution Services Ltd. c/o Georgetown Terminal Warehouses 84 Armstrong Avenue, Georgetown ON, L7G 4R9

Tel: 866-485-5556 © Fax: 866-485-6665

E-mail: [email protected]

Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Hassan, Farzana

Islam, women and the challenges of today : modernist insights & feminist perspectives / Farzana Hassan. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 0-9780570-2-3 1. Women in Islam. 2. Muslim women--Social conditions. 3. Koran--Criticism, interpretation, etc. I. Title. BP173.4.H48 2006 297'.082 C2006-903899-6

Cover and Text Design: Karen Thomas, Intuitive Design International Ltd.

Editing: Bill Belfontaine Printed and Bound in Canada

DEDICATION

To My Mother, Parveen, A loving mother and a pioneer women’s rights advocate, who was there for me before my beginnings, To My Sister, Irfana, My present, A paragon of beauty and virtue. To My Daughter, Maryam, My future, And my cherished hope for a better world.

‘niall a

a ih

PO

=

es

BES epi ah ye ayy’ > a marr j : j

:

rt he f > a

ax

bine

wat

7

ee

eal 5

¥.

oe

|

gumsy HON aS gidaF Pe

ORneoal i é

page Kone

:

=

7

ae _ -” ef

—

es ea

:

i

Ww

Ip

, j

¥

pi paciagh ae —_

ion

fae

dot tae

CONTENTS eed

PERM EO CCMOMA SE, ee, fot wean, ae plays eect xi WIN, COO LTS BOON re oar te) oO ae a ka xiii Foreword-by Rashid Murpial 2 cde esosace ao 5 oe: XV MELE ASICN CP MOE SS ni ai oe a3. aad hid Peel gee et react a, 1 Be Ay OD IIA JOURNEY ao ao Set Sas eh RGR etc ss =) ENN CONSOON i ie ara Ra he eR 10 Islam and Women’s Issues.......................-00053 Should Polygamy Be Allowed Today? .............. 4 Can A Musliny Woman Seek Divorce in Islam?....... 5 Women’s Rights to Inheritance. 54. es even ve @ The Ourati and Women’s. Testimony... . . nce edes 7 The Troubling Question of Concubinage in Islam .... SIs Wife Battery Pertnitted in Islan? 3 ci tinnie ss he 9 Can Muslim Women Lead Mixed-Gender Prayers? .. . 10 Adultery, Fornication, Rape and inet | eoAl WeONSECQUCNCES gcc 22 Bete we ally AS y hg 24

a4 23 34 45 53 64 76 85 90

A Call for Religious and Sectarian Tolerance ........... o7. 11 Does the Quran Endorse Anti-Semitism?............ 99 12

Jihad and Terrorism:

13.

Differences in Objectives and Modalities........... 106 The Lure of Religious Fundamentalism and Wy ay nase De (COUMIETE OCs os tk 5 aes es den ee 114

Islam, Women, and the Challenges of Today ® ix

j4 15

Religious and Sectanani lolerances. +. 4-2-2 eon. 118 Are Apostasy and Blasphemy Capital Obtences im islaniz, 7a: tn oe Oh eee nee 124

Religion\and’ Culture... pcic5 4.8. eee oe oe ee 16° ‘G@oncers'of Diaspora Music: °-. 2 42 oe 17; Does Islami, Proltibit; Music and Atl. 5) eeeewe Lo Aslam’s'Pohtical:@ulture. cs ssc ce eee

129 134 136 143

The Need for Fresh Interpretation.................... 151 19° ‘Islamié Reforms and Beyond.. :7494.205 nee ee 153 208 eoDowsblewible-is Shariati’ fossa ee teok ee ee 162 21 ~ What Classical Jurists'Never Wanted...

22

ae

7a

oder Attempts at ltinad.., eae. en eee

US

Conchssion eer os te. ee eee 181 steps Forward lowards Reform...) .. ses ee 185 PPDENUING Ugh cots ee nce oe he ee Relevant Articles Published by Farzana Hassan...... Concise Explanation of Common Islamic Terms ... . BUDO STAD a4 = seca nants Gy eee ee About tievAuthor Son te e. ee ee ee

x © FARZANA

HASSAN

191 193

203 205 209

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Although this book is primarily about women’s rights, it is to the men of my family I owe much gratitude for making this work possible. To my father “Lenny” for his candid advice on spiritual matters, my husband Shahid for his continued love and support, my brother Saleem who expressed unreserved confidence in my undertaking, my two sons: Aamir and Ali who read the proofs, and my brother- in-law, Basharat, who clarified many legal issues for me, I say “thank you.” I must thank my friends also: Alia Hogben, Tahira Abdullah and Hasan Mahmud for their wonderful insights, Pervaiz Sallahuddin for lending his computer expertise, Rashid Mughal for writing an incisive Foreword and Peter Robbins for editing the work in its early stage. A word of thanks to the senior women activists of my family: Zeenat, Riffat, Sabiha and Miriam who along with many others,

pioneered the women’s rights movement in Pakistan. I must also acknowledge

the suffering of my

cousins:

Mahnaz,

Nadira,

Amira, Amina and late Saadia, who became victims of a brutal

social system. A special “thank you” to Karen Thomas for a magnificent book cover design. Last but not least, “thank you” to my publisher and friend Bill Belfontaine, who expressed enough confidence in the book to

publish it.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today ®° xi

>

eee

;

ra

77

aria

ae ?

,

wT

=:

i

i

x

id

a.

hs

fe ay‘a

i.

:

’ .‘

q

il

‘

Bang? ns bell

a

py

ar |

_

ie

aaa

¥

i

>

ay

PS,

ee

Ma hs

Pha8 atigieensmiee

ae‘a

ao 4

i

rfmmag aesheen

ak wry pita

ove +; san

in®Bigs ienayeihach®Aes ey ik Bite weal ee ;*

dt

soba

pati fo! Shea

iheA Bioa

a

a

ee

Pige

see:

sowie:

a

ietsuh: fj es ig

a wpa

xo?

,

‘-

hes

manLB e

ys

veget) A oe

0 ‘om ¢

an veesare G3 Te eco Wy sly : boasmai

miish divest x somas—

Pin OA

“Hebe Pe ti aad a~ Meese \ Oe »

ri

Goh

A

Ro} bese : Nea

Wins; at oH iui

t ?

ef

$

Sie RAS

)

e a

ts

ema eae ail ci eae

bE arasi inneee se

Ve)

SSL

shah rete rae “aa ite Cen ea

Moeng. 2Pa

)—

RARE tel

wri tc

split

bd rt hea

—

ve A

Typo

‘

te a seala x — sa

ones@ ese

re

WHY I WROTE THIS BOOK

The main purpose of writing this book is to challenge young Muslim minds to debate some of the issues touched upon in this short treatise. The unstoppable need for change is being felt by many Muslims who believe that traditional interpretations of religious precepts no longer work for them. The intention however, is not to challenge the basic tenets of Islam, but to re-examine traditionally held views, often rooted in classical jurisprudence that have come to be part of the entrenched narrative of Islam. Islam, Women and the Challenges of Today, is not meant to offend the sentiments of Muslims, although it subjects certain attitudes and practices regarded as synonymous with Islam to scrutiny. The book also attempts to reach out to other faith communities in the hope of building bridges of tolerance and harmony among the diverse religious groups. It is hoped that the book will produce healthy dialogue and debate rather than mistrust and discord both within and outside the Muslim community. Farzana Hassan

February 21, 2006

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today e xiii

a

ree7

;

ee

=

i

;

et

ee)

.) 7

.

7

;

Boer et

~ '

=

ais

i

see lle

ne

—

a

toad is ing to asia aaa a

ni

)

7 os

=“alae sbi BF

ie

Meets - tis

yy Ai taMe! iy EMIT

¥

ee Se

a

nao ra:OttSe Ns cia Ley wl meh

* eae :

om ee

; REF Soek> ed :

in tito. ae sent ay,bo4s ate y

Aas steep

Tih

oe HY seesrritee 9 igh pagatay

cee

ee

eee

r

oe

iat

Whaisest

anor

hae Ghultte dood

qian

7

a

bay:

|

ga

ho

ia - sabe ‘

e te seen es diss Fo- oerabed %yei Past “al SF Thyyee iy me=a SL

Ee: e hits

bi a ta ac

gilt resi WA Ces AGTNSAPRS Niel ee het 4mos by esi hes, wit baa

t ere:eyeke ae= te Meats et ee Att Oke

ne

Me

pags

‘ci

:

SRG

JUTE

him

1 3

oa

iy

nodal

fips reir; i

Arie

ae

4

ae

ih roe ee,

|

elescenugteels

eval

eeu

;

FOREWORD

By Rashid Mughal If religion is a way of life, then Islam is a way of walking and leading by the practical example of the Prophet, not a way of talking and preaching by rote, as is the wont of parrots. It is indeed pathetic and disenchanting to witness so-called Muslim “scholars” going about preaching the Qur’an without any common sense to arrive at the truth of things in the Socratic tradition of Q&A. It is therefore remarkable that Farzana Hassan’s well researched and well reasoned book, Islam, Women and the Challenges of Today, is like a haridmaid out to clean up the seven-pillared house of faith by wiping away some antiquated inequities that have hindered the advancement of women throughout Muslimdom since the dawn of Islam in seventh-century Arabia. But Islam, Women and the Challenges of Today, is not just about injustices against women. It is also about religious tolerance in the multicultural, multi-faith milieu of the West, about belief and disbelief, about religion, cul-

ture and tradition, and about the need for ijtihad which the author expounds with gusto in this handy little book. She weaves a persuasive and forward-looking argument about the generic defini- | tion of a Muslim in keeping with the progressive winds of change now sweeping through the static world of Islam. The author has trained her feminist lamp on some modernist perspectives and insights to shed the light of reason on such touchy issues as polygamy and the role of women in society, the

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© xv

problems of divorce when a woman wishes to terminate an unfulfilling relationship, the high-minded edicts of the Qur'an vis-a-vis the corpus of hallowed stories called Hadith with all its wisdom and inherent contradictions of veracity and authenticity and the divergent schools of thought spawned by countless thousands of narratives from the life of the Prophet of Islam, and how these stories get translated into the mainstream culture of, say, a country like Pakistan. More generally, though, Islam, Women, and the Challenges of Today, will find a ready audience not only in Canada, the United States and Europe but in all Muslim countries—from Afghanistan to Zanzibar—where a new generation of Muslims is enjoying the benefit of a secular education as well. It is one thing to say that Islam gave women equal rights fourteen hundred years ago, and quite another to see women being stymied by some unfair and inequitable laws in Muslim societies governing inheritance for daughters, mothers, wives, and sisters. Deemed inferior to man, a woman is also likely to be presumed _an untrustworthy witness while testifying in court, even when she herself is the victim of a sex assault or rape. Indeed, Muslim women face many antiquated cultural and traditional hurdles. With utter restraint and persuasive logic, the author demonstrates beyond a doubt that the legal frameworks in Muslim lands do not provide any form of redress against the savagery that women continue to experience under the umbrella of Islam, from chauvinistic wife battery to misunderstandings and fantasies surrounding the idea of concubines, temporary marriage, and the practice of slavery, adultery and fornication. It is paradoxical, in fact, that the four schools of thought spawned by the idea of Islamic jurisprudence do not see eye to eye on many issues, thanks in part to the classical jurists of old who have carved their writ in stone as if it were the Will of God. It is therefore important for Muslim soci-

eties to strive to awaken jjtihad in the Socratic tradition of asking

xvi

© FARZANA

HASSAN

the impossible questions if we are to keep alive the spirit of inquiry, independent thinking, and progressive self-examination. Does Islam prohibit music and art? Have we forgotten that young women and girls were often sold and forced into prostitution in pre-Islamic Arabia amid a medley of singing in public? Excuse me, but does Islam really prohibit the value of the arts in the human pursuit of happiness? Then shame on all those ever-sopowerful radio stations in the Middle East that blast out megawatts and megawatts of music every day and night, I say. It is interesting to read what the author of Islam, Women and the Challenges of Today, herself an accomplished pianist and a teacher of music, has to say on the subject. What happens when there is a fusion of East and West, when two cultures meld into each other as their orthodoxies begin to evaporate in the heat of assimilation—when there is a blending and mixing of beliefs and practices to demonstrate acceptance of one another across the racial divide? What is the best course for a Muslim to take, one of isolation or interaction? Do we shun the Ehl-e-Kitab, those earlier People of the Book, Islam’s Jewish and

Christian cousins and people of other faiths, or do we embrace humanity with open arms, as we must, in this day and age, out

here in the West? Farzana Hassan offers the reader a plausible approach to understanding oneself by casting a furtive backward glance at the early history of Islam to see that Muslims have not moved one inch from the days when traditional rivalries and imperial enmities prevented a flowering of racial harmony and peace among people of different faiths. It is therefore commendable how the author makes a strong case for the preservation of one’s identity and culture while actively seeking ways and means to promote religious and sectarian tolerance both within Islam and with the world beyond its parochial veil, as she herself does in real life.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© xvii

Finally, how does Islam, Women, and the Challenges of Today deal with the touchy subject of apostasy which dangles over the head of every Muslim like the sword of Damocles even in a social milieu thriving on free speech and freedom of worship, in a society that leaves every person free to choose where he or she wishes to invest their individual faith without outside interference? “The Qur’an is very clear about this,” says the author. “The holy book reminds us, loud and clear, that there’s no coercion in religion.”

xvill

© FARZANA

HASSAN

Faith and Belief Is organized religion entirely logical? Does monotheistic belief create the paradox of evil? If God created all, did He also

create Evil? How does one resolve these philosophical dilemmas?

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© 1

nie

a & ldi ai ma '

OE

ny

aie Sy

aan) eat TP

tia

an!

ialat atte mi

Aiea

i

ange Baitsavon iar elie

n rt wi ant ted aj sont shoe 4 be cae mee

fi

si;“ee os

lg

Paeeeteh ie ae cilone 1a a Ret

eat

‘ 2ut

¥

uh

thr

}

ei a eae es

260

np

tie as

Gal aihoak ©t

i

a:Bd

hacen A

4

=

Sera

J

: aeit oeisin at ae a

:

ii snails

aes a

| Pek |

=

2 avenge rote ee'

EE,

24 al =

-ae: oe

has

+

erie Spc; a Sibel §a

tidy

“hig

' ae

OFF, oy

as

arholty ax ay a

:

’

’

wee

ae

'

4

ae *

7

ode

~~

a

ata

St

MY

we

Orhan

yO URINEY

A journey of faith may begin as a restless urge to unravel the mysteries of our existence, leading us to explore the farthest crevices of our beings, hearts and minds. My spiritual journey also began as a quest to explore the ineffable, and by doing so, attempt to arrive at an equilibrium whereby I could reconcile my human shortcomings with divine dictates. Acutely aware of my personal inadequacies in the matter, my search began with an enormous amount of questioning about my origins, where I was headed and what was my place in the universe. I also wondered why certain demands were being placed on my sensibilities or conduct during my earthly existence, particularly when I was a mere insignificant creature struggling to mete out an existence for myself that would at best be free of the tragedy I saw all around me. The search involved my desire to understand my place in the world, as well as the urge to explore the dimensions and parameters of the particular faith tradition in which I was born. There were times when I felt overwhelmed by the sheer volume and intensity of the

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

® 3

restlessness that prompted me to dissect each and every aspect of my spiritual existence, from the issue of being worshipful, to understanding why this was at all necessary. Not only would I embark on a philosophical journey to the “why” and “how” of things, but I would also explore the most banal expectations that my religion demanded of my co-religionists and me. Indeed the legal, societal, cosmological, humanistic, theistic, spiritual and cultural dimensions of my faith had to be woven into a coherent ideology, at least from a personal standpoint, in order to remedy the inner disintegration I had felt as an individual ever since my teenage

yeats. Some people are particularly responsive to visual, emotional or societal stimuli. Perhaps these evoke a level of empathy for others among such individuals that may not be present in people with more accepting attitudes. Even as a child of about eight or nine, I remember being torn emotionally at the sight of beggars and street children. The poverty, thus starkly contrasted with the opulence further highlighted the inequity that appeared to be the norm everywhere rather than the exception. Not only were there disparities in material resources among people and nations, there were those who were afflicted by sickness, and torn by death and treachery. Who or what was the source of this evil? Was it born of human greed, selfishness, or uncertainty? Was it a product of the paucity of earthly resources, the loyalty to one’s territory or an insistence on ideologies? Taking the argument a step further, was God the Creator of all, also then the originator of the evil that mankind so consistently displayed? The human propen-

4 e FARZANA

HASSAN

sity for evil must have an origin somewhere. Many religious people suggested that evil would have to exist alongside good, for the latter to emerge and be recognized. How else would we know the difference? Yet,

such reasoning posed many ethical challenges for me which would never be fully resolved. Why could God for example, in his omnipotence, not give human beings the faculty to recognize good and beauty on its own merit, rather than as a contrast to evil? Tragedy was all around me: the sight of starving

children begging for a pittance from callous landlords, the agony and destruction of war, human malice, tyranny, inequity in wealth and resources, the widespread oppression of women, the bickering over ideologies, and the daily human struggle to fight disease. Indeed we lived in a predatory world, which called me to question the very foundations of the ethical and moral principles on which all our societies existed, as well as the source of religious ideology and morality found in reli-

gious texts, religious power and control. Why would a perfect God create a world so imperfect? Why was humankind made to suffer in this world so as to be compensated in a life hereafter? The pain and suffering were too real, the inequities too glaring, and the remedies, the retribution and the reward promised by the “knowers” too glib. I vowed that if Icould, I would help remedy the situation to my best effort. Why would a God, who was All-Powerful and Compassionate, allow such misery to prevail in the world? Why would God create a system in which the existence of evil had to be a necessary component? Although this was a question most people

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 5

asked, I took the query a step further by probing the philosophical dilemma that the acknowledgment of evil as a force presented, particularly with respect to the belief in a Benevolent God.

The gravity of the issue at hand was further exacerbated through recognition of the randomness by which misfortune disrupted the lives of people. Secular or devotee, meek or arrogant, rich or poor, literate or illiterate, none were spared its trag-

ic onslaught and it appeared to show no positive correlation to adherence to faith or excelling in piety. And the pain and suffering were unrelenting. There seemed to be no escape from the abject poverty of famine-ridden Africa rendering it even more vulnerable to disease and crime. Where was the justice in any of this? How did the reality surrounding me square with divine commandments that I encountered in practically all the revealed scriptures of the world? My philosophical ramblings led me to explore the concept of the First Cause, which inevitably led to further quagmires and intellectual meanderings that reverted to the same question over and over again. There seemed to be no answer and I decided to turn my mind to more productive matters. As a woman perhaps, it became even harder for me to accept my secondary status as a Muslim. The Quran addressed only men, or so it seemed. Was this so because the Quran was inherently sexist or did it only appear so, since it was addressing a society with predominantly patriarchal and chauvinistic persuasions? Why were women to inherit only half that of men? Why were they barred from marrying four husbands? Why

6 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

were there no women Prophetesses? Why was a husband allowed to beat his wife if she chose not to listen to him, albeit gently? Why were women to be secluded and veiled? Was the Quran merely responding to the peculiar demands of seventh century Arabian society by enforcing certain regulations or were these to be construed as normative principles of Islam for eternity? Were its rulings, which often appeared so stringent in regulating gender relations or enforcing the highest levels of piety, mainly a reaction to the debauchery prevalent in seventh century pre-Islamic Arabia? Conversely, in a society that was able to govern itself through secular laws and ethics embodying built-in standards of morality, were the Shariah rulings in their most literalist application a religious necessity? I saw religious fanatics propagate their particular brand of religion as the truth, the whole truth and the only truth whether it was

Christian

Fundamentalists,

Hindutvas

or Muslim

Fundamentalists. The arrogance that came forth from the mouths of these people was beyond my tolerance, and again | wondered if such religious exclusivism was what was intended in Divine communication

to various communities

over cen-

turies and eras. For me, the definition of true faith would have

to include the bulk of humanity, not just a particular ethnic group, or those who adhered to a particular ideology or set of beliefs. If adherence to true faith was the key to salvation, then why was it clouded or enshrined in centuries of confusion, in the folds of conflicting ideologies, concepts, notions of the Divine, or ramblings of philosophers? If according to limited human reasoning, a faltering human being made the “wrong” choice, would that justify condemning such a person to eternal damnation as many of the religious exclusivists claimed? My spiritual ramblings also led me to explore the concept of free will and whether it was genuinely at work as a religious

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© 7

precept. In other words, how “free” was free will and how “free” was man to choose right over wrong? I concluded that human frailties did not really afford the human being a genuine choice in the matter. “Temptations” were all around and too easy a prey to fall into; the path of righteousness was daunting for most people, and the notion of “Satan’s whisperings” to dislodge even the most pious devotee from his or her path of righteousness an irksome idea. The entire notion of man being subjected to an endless trial here on earth seemed merciless and unnecessary. If God were truly Compassionate and Merciful, was the idea of suffering to attain redemption or atonement of sins consistent with his compassion and Mercy? I found inconsistencies in the theology that most religious people so zealously endorsed. Again, why were children dying of starvation everyday? What would they earn in a life hereafter? Why were mothers losing their daughters and sons to wars, famines and treachery? Was humankind as a whole meant to atone for some past sin it was not aware of in order to attain salvation? The Hindu Karmic law appeared to provide a partial answer to this dilemma. Human beings suffered injustices in their present life only because they had inflicted them on others in a past life. What criterion then, could be used to determine that the

human being received his due share of misfortune commensurate with the pain he or she had inflicted on others? If she received her due share only in accordance with the wrong committed, the idea of suffering would still be fair but again, misfortune from what I had witnessed, struck the good and bad alike. It is these and other questions that I have sought to answer in this book. I do not claim that my interpretation of my faith is the only correct one, nor do I claim to be a scholar of Islam.

8 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

However, as an inter-faith activist and an ordinary Muslim, I

have continued to struggle with certain tenets of my faith, for which I have attempted to find solutions from within its ideological framework. I have done so with the hope that others who are faced with similar quandaries will in some small way, benefit from this undertaking.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© 9

Prabha

We

Seer ©

What is the nature of Absolute Truth and Absolute Goodness often associated with Divinity? Can organized religion rise above its petty agenda and encompass all of humanity in its fold?

When the renowned French mathematician and philosopher announced to the world “cogito ergo sum” or “I think, therefore I am” he was identifying and acknowledging the existence of a consciousness residing both within us and around us, permeating the sentient world and guiding its course through much of its temporal existence. This consciousness enables us to be aware of the “self” as a distinct entity in the space-time continuum. Thus, each living thing is imbued with varying degrees of this self-same awareness or perception, not only of its uniqueness, but also of its connectedness to the unfolding universe. And it is this connectedness that we feel with other ‘conscious beings, which is of particular interest to me, as it provides me with a premise to believe in a Higher Collective Consciousness, or an Intelligent Force, whether one understands it as a Being, a Master

10

© FARZANA

HASSAN

Planner, a Deity, God or Tao. I also believe that religion and faith are endemic to man, so much so that homo sapiens has also been referred to as homo religiosus. Many theories have been advanced to explain the prevalence of the phenomenon of religion in human societies. Human beings believe in a Higher Power for several reasons. Some posit the Cosmological view, premised on the origins of the universe fifteen billion years ago out of void. Others expound the First Cause rationale, previously postulated by ancient masters of Greek thought such as Aristotle, who refined the notion and gave the First Cause the name: “Unmoved Mover” as an Intelligent and Powerful Being who created the universe and life on it. The Teleological argument, often propounded by men of faith, relies heavily on the evidence of design observable in nature and its functioning. The Moral argument may also point to the existence of a higher being, for it is through Him, that human beings derive their moral sense of right and wrong, although many exhibit an ethic vastly different, and some might say, superior to religious morality. As a believer I also take comfort in the preponderance of religion in human societies as an argument for the existence of God, giving credence to the view that God is an objective reality outside of the human intellect rather than a conceptual reality as some may suggest. While the above arguments tackle the question of our origins at the philosophical level, organized religion also strives to validate its particular understanding of transcendental mysteries, citing miraculous occurrences, prophecy and unexplained natural phenomena as proof of the existence of a Higher Power or Being. Christians affirm the veracity of the Bible as a book of prophecy, since it purports to contain foreknowledge of future events. Only a Higher Being could have such foreknowledge, they argue.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 11

The interpretation of Biblical prophecy hence, is a skill valued among Christian scholars as it enables them to establish the validity of the scripture as being one of divine origin. Similarly the Vedas of Hinduism, and the Avesta of the Zoroastrians, also con-

tain knowledge of future events. Religious people claim that many of the prophecies contained in scriptures have come true, and who could have had foreknowledge of these other than God? The Quran too, as is often asserted by Muslim scholars contains a different type of foreknowledge in that it boasts of scientific data not known to humanity at the time of its revelation. Proponents of this viewpoint also point out numerical concordances in the Quran as an indication of the work of a Higher Being or Consciousness. The almost continual flow of scientific discovery conforming to Quranic statements, they assert, validates the claim

of the Quran as a book of Divine origin and many believe in its view of God as a result. While most find such arguments and facts as evidence of the workings of a higher Being or Deity, others point to inherent absurdities in them. The First Cause argument for example, is in itself reduced to an absurdity when one ponders the absence of a cause responsible for the First Cause. If everything has a cause, then the First Cause too must have an origin and a cause. “Who created God?” is a valid question for which there appears to be no rational answer. If the universe and everything it contains has a beginning—-and scientific evidence supports the contention that the universe did have a beginning in time, then God or the First Cause too must have had a temporal beginning. Clearly there are problems in the First Cause argument. There are many who also point out the fundamental fallacy contained in the Intelligent Design argument. It is flawed they assert, because there is much chaos and irregularity in the functioning of nature as well. Why do cancer cells grow and metasta-

12 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

size causing death and disease for example? Why do meteorites collide with each other? Why is the earth under constant threat of environmental disasters? Why is nature so ruthless, killing hundreds of thousands in earthquakes, tsunamis and tornadoes? Thus, if there are arguments for belief, there are an equal number of arguments for disbelief. Many therefore contend that perhaps on the balance, the agnostic’s position is the most sensible and reasonable. The agnostic suggests that the existence of a God can neither be affirmed with certitude nor denied categorically. Religion, she feels is possibly born out of fear and addresses human insecurities but it also carries a promise to rectify injustices and imbalances in a hereafter. It also purports to prolong our much too fragile human existence, again in a hereafter. Since religion addresses some human fears in this fashion, agnostics concede that it may serve a purpose in life after all, but again feel that there is no way of knowing this and remain ambivalent towards it. When one considers the uncertainty of the agnostic, the categorical disbelief of the atheist, or the philosophical dilemmas faced by the believer, there would be little reason to nurture any faith or belief. This viewpoint has gained momentum because in recent times, the Theory of Evolution has also provided an alternative to religion as it strives to answer the puzzlement around

our origins.

But I often ask: does evolution provide an answer to why we are thinking, conscious, moral beings?

Does evolution answer why we consider certain behaviours reprehensible, why we feel the ecstasy of love, why we feel the pangs of separation, why we register emotions, or register any-

thing at all? Does evolution and its thrust on explaining our origins in strictly biological terms explain why we feel so inspired when

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© 13

we listen to Ravi Shankar create magic on the Sitaar? Does it explain why a Da Vinci painting lifts our spirits to higher planes of existence? Why a poetic work by Rabindranath Tagore takes us to elevated levels of consciousness? In my view, evolution thus far only provides a rather disjointed and as yet unauthenticated alternative to how we came about as biological beings. How these biological beings became aware of their own existence is until now a mystery, which at present seems beyond the purview of evolutionary theory. What is intriguing therefore to me is the conscious, thinking, feeling and emotive nature of living things, functioning individually and collectively. Indeed this multifaceted consciousness is something far more mysterious than a mere biological occurrence, and cannot in my view be fully explained through biological processes, grey matter, nerve cell activity or the like. In my opinion the answer lies in the following: This mysterious consciousness which makes us aware of ourselves and our surroundings, draws upon intuitive and acquired knowledge that is pre-existent. This knowledge from where the consciousness of living things emanates, is not being created by living things or human beings, but is simply being explored and discovered.

I believe that there is a pre-existent repository or reservoir of knowledge and information, which is only being tapped, discovered and applied by human beings and other living organism for their benefit. If human beings have “created” knowledge and information, it has only been in the form of imitating nature and its functioning. I find it intriguing for example, that a baby knows instinctively to turn towards its mother’s breast. Canada Geese head south each year with the coming of winter, without being guided by any maps or radars to navigate their paths. The honey bee knows exactly how to construct a honey

14 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

comb as a geometrically perfect design leaving enough space for it to crawl in and out of the combs. The ant works tirelessly to collect food for the entire winter, making provisions for its survival in an unfriendly world. The spider can build the sturdiest of structures with the flimsiest of material and no one has taught the spider how to do so. The behaviours displayed by insects and animals are therefore not learned behaviours but appear to be embedded in the minds of the conscious living organisms that roam the earth. Although higher mammals such as human beings display a much more sophisticated level of consciousness than the ant or the honey bee, even they rely heavily on instinct to guide them through life. These living, conscious beings, aware of their own place in their surroundings, display both a sense of uniqueness and a sense of belonging to a wider consciousness that pervades the universe. I believe that knowledge is pre-existent rather than being created also for the following reasons: The laws governing aerodynamics are only recently being applied by human beings for their benefit in the form of civil aviation and military aircraft. It is the same principles that birds have used to move about through the air for centuries. I suppose my view is somewhat akin to Newton’s stance regarding the universe being bound together by certain immutable laws and principles. Human beings have only now begun to imitate these laws for their own use. Means to conquer space and Newton’s “laws of nature” that have been discovered, adapted and applied by human beings to enable space travel, have always existed in the functioning of the universe but have only recently been exploited for the advancement of human civilization. Even the Quran alluded to space travel fourteen centuries ago when it said:

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 15

O society ofJinns and Men, cross the bounds of the heavens and the earth ifyou have the ability, then pass beyond them. (Quran Css)

Thus, if my contention about knowledge being primordial, rather than being periodically created by us humans is true, and I surmise that it is, then this primordial knowledge must have a source. That source for me is a Cosmic Intelligence that has created conscious life on earth, and perhaps elsewhere in the cosmos. Yet, I confess I do not know the answers to questions such as who made God or why there is so much suffering in the world. Perhaps God just is, and our preoccupation with His temporal beginnings is irrelevant and does not apply to God, because time as we know it, may only be a creation of God as a linear occurrence with a beginning, a middle and an end. If God created the universe, then He created time as a concomitant occurrence in the functioning of the universe. As to the latter of the two questions, I can only point to a religious ideal common to all faiths that strives to build just and equitable societies on earth, but that religious ideal has never been fully realized. It is up to believers to make these ideals a reality and to see to it that equity and justice prevail. Every religion exhorts its followers towards righteous action, to give in charity, to help the needy, to uphold fairness and justice. But it will require the commitment of all human beings to rise above their petty needs, selfishness, avarice, malice and exclusivism to achieve that just society. I also believe in an underlying unity of all faiths, with a common essence, ethics and morality. Communities of believers must discover and promote those universal truths shared by all faiths and build a just and compassionate world around them.

As one actively involved in the interfaith community, I am aware of a common goal for peace, tolerance and understanding

16 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

among the liberal segments of the various religious communities as a reaction to all the bigotry and bloodshed. We need to provide impetus to these movements towards building that her and peaceful world regardless of our differences. Last, I have not been able to escape belief in God due to my understanding of the observable world. When one explores the realm of human endeavour, one discovers that material things, commodities and contraptions, cannot possibly arise out of nowhere. In the area of human endeavour, they come into effect as a result of human intervention, ingenuity, craftsmanship and sagacity. In other words they come into existence through purposeful intervention derived from a consciousness to recognize and internalize our surroundings. It would for example be preposterous to think that a fully functioning aircraft came into effect all by itself. I therefore find it equally preposterous to conclude that the human body and brain with all its complexities, intricacies and as some would say, perfection, came into effect by chance or through evolution based on random mutations and uncontrolled processes. If human creations require intelligent intervention, than the functioning of nature which appears to be far more complex and intricate upon analysis, requires the intervention of a superior force or Intelligence that could both be immanent or transcendent. Belief in God therefore, after observing the complexity in nature, for me, becomes a self-evident truth. It has also become fashionable nowadays to reject and dismiss

the Teleological argument, popularly known as the “Intelligent Design” argument as a valid premise to prove the existence of God. As mentioned earlier, many believe the argument to be flawed, because there is chaos and destruction in the world and

things often go awry. Admittedly there is chaos and destruction as well, but presence of design can still not be ignored due to the sheer volume and prevalence of organisms, that according to even

Islam, Women, and the Challenges of Today

© 17

modern science function intelligently. It is not plausible that such preponderance of design could be a result of chance. An investigation into the functioning of the human brain can perhaps shed a little more light on my premise. As the organ that controls the function of the entire body, the brain receives and registers messages from its surroundings, from signals from within the body and therefore acts as the most sophisticated of computers and telegraph services, all in one. If the computer did not appear on its own, the human brain, in all likelihood did not appear on its own either. The grey matter and white matter in the brain cells contain a thousand million nerve cells, that carry messages to the body at seventy m.p.h. and we take all this for granted thinking this may have been a propitious accident of nature. But, I ask you, is this

reasonable? Similarly the ear, the human eye, the digestive system, the cir-

culatory system all function as a whole and although there are at times failures in the system, perhaps the failures and shortcomings are all there by design as well, because death, birth and rebirth are also part and parcel of the nature and design of things. There are many aspects of religion that even I as a believer find distasteful. Undoubtedly human history has witnessed the effects of the divisiveness, the bigotry, the militancy and the tyranny that is often associated with the major world faiths, particularly the Abrahamic faiths.’

Within Islam, Sunnis have fought Shias and excommunicated Ahmedis to preserve what they deem the doctrinal purity of the faith. Catholics have persecuted Protestants and the divisions within Christendom have been responsible for the bloodiest of civil wars in Ireland. Hitler targeted Europe’s Jews, creating one of the worst genocides in human history. But the exclusivity of the Abrahamic faiths can be tempered by incorporating elements of more pacifist and benign interpretations based on the forbearance,

18

¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

the message of love and tolerance which the Abrahamic faiths also entreat their believers to uphold. The injustice in the world also gives me another reason to believe in a future utopia, where there will be retribution and where all wrongs will be rectified. I want to believe there is retribution and justice out there somewhere, otherwise I am only left with the painful awareness of the world’s tragedy to live with. Some assert that religious dogma confines human thought as it puts limits on it by reducing it to a narrow set of rules, beliefs and rituals. But isn’t that true of most philosophies whether religious or secular? Even humanism and atheism have their defined set of rules, beliefs, principles and parameters which distinguish them from other philosophies. That is how any philosophy, whether it is religious or secular becomes identifiable. No one therefore, can be a free thinker in the absolute sense.

We are each prisoners of our environment, our experiences, as well as our prejudices. In matters of faith and religion though, we must be careful not to impose our personal views on others. | believe that religion can be interpreted and moulded to conform to more humanistic standards where diversity of viewpoints is prized, not shunned. Most religions need not be incompatible with certain aspects of humanism, although the latter is built entirely on secular ideals. These objectives however, will be achieved only by expunging the divisive and exclusionary elements of religion and philosophy. I don’t know who or what God is. Whether God is male or female or whether God is a Being or simply an Intelligent Force, whether God intervenes in human affairs or whether she remains unconcerned. But when I think of the consciousness within me and around me, the consciousness that enables me to recognize my place in the universe, the consciousness that makes me question the scheme of things, the consciousness that stays with me

Islam,.Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 19

through out my waking hours, the consciousness of other beings who are aware of my consciousness, I get the sense that there is a connectedness somewhere with a higher collective consciousness. In the living, loving, moralizing, breathing and thinking universe, I see many signs of that ubiquitous consciousness even though we have never seen it or touched it. I believe in it the same way I believe in the existence of gravity. No one has seen it but it is accepted as a reality. Even science acknowledges its presence in the functioning of material objects. And it is here that I disagree with the agnostic. I believe the existence of this All Pervasive Intelligence or Cosmic Consciousness can be known through its function within intelligent organisms. The conscious world for me is a tangible manifestation of a preexistent Intelligence, Knowledge or Repository, call it what you will. Coming back to Descartes and his declaration, “I think, therefore am” and extending the idea to the cosmic level, the universe is conscious and alive, therefore “God” must be. And even though as a believer in monotheism I have not been able to resolve the paradox of evil, I have come to the realization that the “truth” need not be perfect or absolute for it to qualify as the “truth”.

20 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

Islam and Women’s Issues Do the reasons allowing polygamy in seventh century Arabia still exist in modern

societies? If not, must polygamy be banned under Islamic law now?

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 21

Beh atemarrage: co raeppsvee a cpa ams = Mnileidanisikais

WP,

: | _

FWA!

sate

Pred Sito

oe

i

-0 ata. fee mee

;

ao eeson ps ad

aA

5 >

eat

>

ot a

i

ad Game

* pete

Steen

deta ;

ae

pap ete dT ee

ES, é

:

2

=~

tty Senet a

abt, epicies : Jive

bape hare

aie

Men ae Ss wee dines

ae

ae ;

2

=." Sie

se

“itpanywT viibhiiet3 xia

a)

p

¥y Pus, Fee

;

:

in

eet

¢

2aeGa

a ;

jens he+ aie eg

ve

y

oa

en eo‘

-T74

ee, ,

WN

, ‘

r

7

ee

SHOULD.

ae,

POLYGAMY BE ALLOWED Ie easy 2

Historically, polygamy was practised in many cultures and civilizations of the ancient world. While most modern societies have repudiated the practice because it places women at a disadvantage with respect to their husbands, Muslim societies continue to uphold it based on a rationale that sanctioned polygamy in the formative years of Islam—one that is no longer relevant. Polygamy in Islam begins with the example of Mohammad the Prophet, who had twelve wives as follows: Khadijah was 40 years old when she proposed to marry Mohammad who was 25 years old at the time. He received his call to prophethood 15 years after their marriage. She had been married twice before marrying Mohammad. She died the same year the Prophet is said to have ascended to heaven (Miraj).

Sawda bint Zam’a, who was 65 years old, and had no one to care for her. Aisha Siddiqga, who was previously engaged to a non-Muslim. ' Mohammad was betrothed to her for two years before marrying her or consummating the marriage. Hafsah bint Omar, daughter of Omar, the second Caliph. Omar asked

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 23

Othman to marry Hafsah but Othman refused because his wife had recently died and he did not wish to remarry. Omar then asked Abu Bakr but he also refused. Abu Bakr however informed Omar that the Prophet himself was contemplating marriage with Hafsah. Zainab bint Khuzayma, whose husband died in the Battle of Uhud,

leaving her poor and with several children. She died three months after marrying the Prophet. Umm Salamah, a widow with several children, who accepted Prophet Mohammad’s offer of marriage and care of her children. Zainab bint Jahsh, daughter of the Prophet’s aunt, The Prophet arranged for Zainab to marry his adopted son, Zaid. This marriage did not last and the Prophet received a verse in the Quran which stated that if the couple divorced, he himself must marry Zainab (Quran 33:37).

Juwertya bint al-Harith, who was a prisoner of war. Juweriya’s father offered a payment to Mohammad for her return but the Prophet asked the father to give her a choice. She said she accepted Islam and Prophet Mohammad as God’s Last Messenger. After the Prophet married Juweriya, her tribe converted to Islam as well. Safiya, from the tribe of Beni Nadir, who were from the children of Levi (Israel). She was married twice before marrying the Prophet. Habiba bint Sufiyan, widow of the son of the Prophet’s aunt. Maimuna bint al-Harith, 26 years old when she accepted Islam and

proposed to marry the Prophet. Mariya, who was sent to Mohammad as a gift from the Governor Mawkakis. Mariya had a son from the Prophet. His name was Ibrahim.

24 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

In his book Islam: Beliefs and Observances (4th edition, Barron’s, U.S. 1987, p. 69) Caesar E. Farah writes:

This was an age that looked upon plural marriages with favour and in a society that in pre-Biblical and post-Biblical days considered polygamy an essential feature of social existence. David had six wives and numerous concubines (2 Samuel 5:13; 4 Chronicles 3:1-9, 14:3) and Solomon was said to have had as

many as 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:3). Solomon’s son Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines (2

Chronicles 11:21). The New

Testament contains no specific

injunction against plural marriages. It was commonplace for the nobility among the Christians and Jews to contract plural marriages. Luther spoke of it with toleration. Farah further concludes that Mohammad’s plural marriages were due “partly to political reasons and partly to his concern for the wives of his companions who had fallen in battle defending the nascent Islamic community.”

Even today, in many parts of the Muslim world polygamy enjoys social, legal, moral and religious sanction, but a man may not marry more than four wives. The following discussion attempts to answer some of the antecedents of polygamy, why it was permitted, and whether or not there exists a basis to uphold it today within the modernist winds of change that support equal rights for women. Coming from a family of feminists, I remain faithful to the cause of elevating the status of women in society in general, and in Muslim settings in particular. However, unlike others in my family, I continually struggle with my feminist zeal because it often contradicts my innate spirituality.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© 25

I decided a long time ago that agnosticism was not the answer to my dilemma. My philosophical journey would eventually lead me to adopt belief over disbelief for reasons | discussed earlier. Yet there were many divergent paths and numerous challenges to overcome on the religious front. As a Muslim woman, I often questioned why Allah had allowed me only one husband whereas he was at liberty to suit his fancy

any time and marry up to four women concurrently. In that eventuality, I would be left with only a quarter of a husband, as his time, money and resources would have to be divided equally among the four of us! My questioning led me to examine the fundamentalist as well as the modernist viewpoints on this rather worrisome issue. Invariably, the traditionalists informed me that men had a more pronounced sexual urge than women. It was “only fair” they said, that men be given the chance to express their stronger libido “within legitimate bounds.” According to this line of reasoning, it was far more desirable for a man to enter into a legally binding matrimonial contract with another woman, than to pursue an affair on the sly. The offspring would be legitimate and the man would be duty-bound to provide for their livelihood. Everything

would work out just fine. The orthodox argument further stated that if men were denied this provision, they would still go philandering and no one would even know of their sexual escapades. In his book, Women’s Plight, Chaudhry Rehmat Ali, a Pakistani authority on traditional Islam, makes the following observation: Polygamy as permitted by Islam is optional and not obligatory. In the absence of such an option, situations arise, the consequences of which prove far more disastrous than polygamy. In other words polygamy, ifconsidered an evil, is meant to avert still bigger evils.

26 @ FARZANA

HASSAN

What are these bigger evils? These could be multifarious under different sets of circumstances.

Another Pakistani proponent of polygamy, Muhammad Zafar Ullah Khan, in a booklet titled Woman in Islam, justifies polygamy as follows:

The truth is that polygamy as defined and restricted by Islam is a device designed by the highest wisdom for the fostering of high moral values and the safeguarding of chastity of males and females. It may be described as a beneficent moral and cultural safety valve: For lack of such a safety valve, societies that have sought to enforce a rigid system of monogamy have been ripped apart by promiscuity, homosexuality, lesbianism, and bestiality. Unrestricted sexual indulgence has become the norm between them, and does not even attract moral disapprobation. Such reasoning often left me questioning even more. Why would a just God cater to the basest human instinct—in this case a man’s sexual lust—while completely ignoring the sentiments of women inspired by a desire for friendship, trust and devotion to one man? And what about love and loyalty to one person that can prove to be so fulfilling and rewarding in a relationship when given a chance? I was convinced there was another answer to my questions. Perhaps it lay in the now remote Islamic past clouded by a patriarchal understanding of those who had made a monop- _ oly of religion, theology and its interpretation. My quest led me to read a number of commentaries on the Quran including the acclaimed Tafhim-ul-Quran, The Message of the Quran and The Meaning of the Quran, written by reputable scholars and exegetes of Islam. Consistent with the above view, emphasis was placed on polygamy as the lesser evil compared to unbridled

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

° 27

sex outside of marriage. Numerous historical explanations and contexts justifying polygamy were cited in the commentaries. The verse enjoining polygamy, for example, was said to have been revealed to Prophet Mohammad after the Battle of Uhud which claimed the lives of countless Muslim men and left a large number of women and their daughters of marriageable age, destitute. Since women were deemed a financial and economic liability within the social ethos of seventh-century Arabia, they were at the mercy of their reluctant male relatives for food, shelter and clothing. Alternatively, they could be married to willing men who would support them and have a direct interest in them at the same time. The Quran supports the latter option, as follows: If ye fear that you may not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four, but if ye fear that you will not be able to deal justly (with them) then only one, or those that your right hands possess. That will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. (Quran 4:3) I knew then that the Quran was still mindful of women’s sentiments while sanctioning polygamy. Why else would it enjoin justice and fairness on men in their dealings with women? Another verse of the Quran confirmed my conclusion as follows:

You are never able to be fair and just as between women, even if it is your ardent desire: but turn not away from a woman altogether, so as to leave her (as it were) hanging (in the air). If ye come to a friendly understanding and practice self-restraint, Allah ts Oft Forgiving, Most Merciful. But ifthey disagree (and must part) Allah will provide abundance for all from His allreaching bounty: for Allah is He that careth for all and is Wise. (Quran 4:129-130)

28 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

Even so, I was not sure whether to be discouraged or heartened by the Quranic edict. The following verse contributed to the confusion: And women shall have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable, but men have a degree (ofadvantage) over them. And Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise (Quran

2:228) The provision allowing men “a degree of advantage above women”

contained,

at times, the potential of serious abuse

according to my understanding. What was one to make of these seemingly contradictory messages? Many scholars, both ancient and modern, had attempted to reconcile the conflict by experimenting with various explanations, including Abdullah Yusuf Ali, who, in his learned commentary of the Quran, assigned great importance to the strict condition of justice and fairness towards all wives. In his explanation of the above verse he concluded that polygamy was allowed only in exceptional circumstances such as in times of great gender imbalance and economic hardship for women. He insisted that Islam most definitely preferred monogamy. In one of his copious footnotes, he stated: The unrestricted number of wives of the “Times of Ignorance” was now strictly limited to a maximum of four, provided you could treat them with perfect equality, in material things as well as in affection and immaterial things. As this condition is most difficult to fulfill, Iunderstand the recommendation to be towards monogamy.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 29

I was still not satisfied. If the intention of the Quran was simply to protect the honour and financial interest of widowed and orphaned Muslim women in keeping with the social ethos of the time, Iwould understand polygamy as a solution to a time-specific circumstance. However, polygamy came to be eternalized and universalized based on precedents from the life of the Prophet of Islam. Prophet Mohammad, too, had married widows and destitute women in order to provide them protection from the harassment of the pagan Meccans. He also married women who were young and beautiful and not in need of financial support or protection. To me, Yusuf Ali’s explanations therefore appeared inad-

equate. Nonetheless, I was relieved to know that it was not Islam that

had introduced the institution of polygamy. The Bible told stories of the Prophets Solomon and David taking several wives each. Islam’s aforementioned injunctions on the other hand explicitly placed restrictions on the number of wives a man could contract at a given time to four. It also appeared Islam endorsed multiple marriages only under very special circumstances. Given the ethos of that bygone era, the marriage of one man to four women was the only means of providing livelihood to women. Islam was merely attempting to find the best possible solution to a problem within an existing social framework. To abolish the institution of polygamy was perhaps not in the best interest of women of that time, whose only other option would have been a life of despair, loneliness, poverty and subjection. At that point I reluctantly accepted polygamy as a response to conditions in seventh-century Arabia, mindful of the context of the relevant verse. According to this interpretation, polygamy would be seen by the Quran as an added financial responsibility on men rather than a license for them to indulge their lust. A man contracting polyg-

30 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

amous marriages would have to be responsible for his wives and any offspring born out of such unions. This rationale would also come to be endorsed by some Western writers favouring the institution of polygamy over the “moral latitude” of the West as evident in the following statement by the British theosophist, writer and political reformer in England and India, Dr. Annie Besant: There is pretended monogamy in the West but there is really a polygamy without responsibility, the mistress is cast off when the man 1s weary of her, and sinks gradually to be a woman of the street, for the first lover, has no responsibility for her future and she ts a hundred times worse off than the sheltered wife and mother of a polygamous home. When we see the thousands of miserable women who crowd the streets of Western towns, during the night, we must surely feel that it does not lie within the Western mouth to reproach Islam for polygamy. It is better for women, happier for women, more respectable for women to lie in polygamy united to one man only, with the legitimate child in her arms and surrounded with respect, than to be reduced, cast out in

the streets—perhaps with an illegitimate child. Thus was polygamy glorified by both Muslims and nonMuslims as the lesser of two evils. For me, however, the question still remained whether I could ever allow my husband to contract another marriage if faced with such a decision? Was my social conditioning different from the women who lived in seventh-century Arabia? I for one, would be horrified at the thought of my spouse sharing the same degree of physical intimacy with another woman. The answer for me therefore was an unequivocal “No.” Were there ways of circumventing the permission for polygamy altogether? I was soon to discover that there were, although these

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 31

were neither universally acknowledged, nor widely practised. Asma Barlas, Associate Professor of Political Science at New

York’s Ithaca College, sought to find such remedies in her book Believing Women in Islam, by suggesting that a woman could stipulate against her husband taking a second wife in the marriage contract. She explains: Marriage in Islam is based in a social contract that takes the legal equality of both spouses as a given. While Muslim patriarchies clearly do not treat women and men as legal equals, the very idea of making the marriage contractual was, at least in theory, to give women equality:

She further explains how this could apply to polygamy: As a prenuptial agreement, the contract also allows conditions not only for marriage but also for divorce. (These can extend from stipulations against polygamy, to right of divorce for the wife, to a determination in advance of the amount ofa divorce settlement, to agreements about child custody).

Thus, according to the above understanding, if a woman were educated enough, she could have all the equality stipulated in a prenuptial agreement. The main snag with this argument was its obvious disconnect with reality based on the fact that most Muslim women were usually not schooled in the subject of their basic Islamic rights. They would therefore not be aware of any such provision. Moreover, the idea of having equality stipulated as a prenuptial agreement only reinforced the notion that equality was not a given in a Muslim society. Why else would it have to be actively sought in this manner? And why shouldn’t it be a given in Muslim

382 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

societies or any other society? In my quest to unveil the truth, I began to question the entire issue of the applicability of Shariah in modern times, as I shall demonstrate in a subsequent chapter of _ this book. On the issue of polygamy, it can now be argued that it is no longer the only solution to the financial problems a woman may face during the course of her lifetime. Women are now productive members of society. They can fend for themselves and their children and the state machinery accords them the added protection with respect to their safety and security in most civilized societies. Moreover, the rationale demonstrated by Muslim orthodoxy acknowledges only male sexuality while ignoring the woman’s. There are times when women also desire relationships outside of marriage. Sometimes based on a need for romance rather than the mere gratification of the sexual urge, women also enter into extramarital relationships. As a religious institution, polygamy only takes into account the promiscuity factor of males without allowing the same concession for women. As a financial system offering support to women, polygamy is now obsolete and redundant as an institution. There is now no need to promote its use in modern societies by offering reasons that no longer exist. The rationale offered to justify the practice of polygamy is no longer applicable in the modern context. Moreover, what needs to be borne in mind foremost is that

the Ouran improved upon existing conditions by placing restrictions on the number of polygamous marriages. By doing so it set | a precedent for future reform. The same principle calling for reform applied today would necessitate repudiation of the practice in modern times. A reinstitution or continuation of polygamy would undoubtedly contradict the objective of the initial Quranic reforms on multiple marriages by depriving women of some measure of equality they enjoy in civilized societies.

Islam, Women, and the Challenges of Today

© 33

Saye

CAN SEEK

A MUSLIM WOMAN DIVORCE IN ISLAM? ease

It is often far more difficult for Muslim women to obtain divorce as they face procedural challenges. A man on the other hand need only pronounce the word “Talaq!” (*I divorce thee!”) three times and the divorce becomes effective. Why is there so much disparity between the rights of men and women in regard to divorce?

It is generally believed among Muslims and non-Muslims that women in Islam do not have the right to seek or pronounce a divorce. It is at best a restricted right subject to conditions—the absolute right of divorce resting exclusively with the husband. I first became aware of this inequality at the time of my own marriage to my husband. My brother-in-law, a lawyer of considerable repute insisted my husband “delegate” the right of divorce to me as a stipulation in the marriage contract known as the Nikah Nama, to enable me to terminate the marriage should I chose to do so at a future date. My husband, an open-minded individual with a generosity of heart and mind, agreed to the condition readily. Yet this is not

34 e FARZANA

HASSAN

a common

occurrence

in Pakistan or other

Muslim countries where a woman is at a considerable disadvantage when she desires divorce or wishes to terminate an abusive relationship. As I embarked on exploring the issue of divorce in Islam and the difficulty it posed for Muslim women, I discovered that though marriage is a contract between two free persons in Islam and can be dissolved by both parties, the procedure available to men and women is different for each. For a woman, the technicalities and legalities involved in the process greatly undermine her capability to obtain a divorce. Such a divorce is called a Khulla or Khul where the wife “divorces herself” by offering a material benefit to her husband. This concept of divorce is rooted in the following verse of the Quran: And it is not lawful for you that ye take from women out of that which ye have given them; except in the case when both fear that they may not be able to keep within the limits of Allah, in that case it is no sin for either of them if the woman ransom herself. (Quran 2:229)

The Prophet of Islam is known to have implemented such a divorce for a woman based on her dislike for her husband’s appearance. A well-known Hadith (story) reported by Ibn Abbas suggests the wife of Thabit Bin Qais Bin Shamas approached the Prophet and said, “O Messenger of Allah! As for him I do not blame him about his character and piety but I dislike him as much as I dislike infidelity over Islam.” The Apostle of Allah asked, “Can you not return his garden?” “Yes” she said. The Prophet said to the husband, “Accept the garden and give her divorce.” Thus in a Khul divorce, a woman must return the dower or Mahar in order to obtain her freedom since it is she who initiated divorce proceedings. If she had already spent her dower, she could buy her divorce in exchange for other material possessions. The

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 35

divorce would come into effect after the husband received the payment. Such provisions must again be understood in light of the cultural and social setting of seventh-century Arabia. According to the prevailing custom, women frequently offered themselves in marriage to men since Islam placed the responsibility to earn and provide on the man. It was therefore the man’s prerogative to decide if he could assume the financial obligation associated with marriage. Thus the Ijab (proposal) was often made by the woman and the Qubool (acceptance) was given by the man. Perhaps for this reason, the husband retained the unilateral right to terminate the marriage by pronouncing a divorce at any given time.

Since the woman was not burdened with a financial obligation, she did not enjoy such a unilateral privilege. However, as we have seen, there were other options she could exercise, albeit

complicated, in order to obtain a divorce. Again, what needs to be understood is that in Islam marriage is not a sacrament but a social contract. When two parties decide to enter into a nuptial arrangement, they negotiate certain condi-

tions that must be fulfilled by the partner. In this respect Islam has given women tremendous leeway to negotiate whatever they wish, at least in theory. They can have any reasonable condition stipulated in the marriage contract including the provision that the husband will not contract a second marriage during the wife’s lifetime. She can also demand a specific amount of monthly allowance from her husband including the privilege of enjoying servants, along with a decent standard of living according to his means. In the marriage contract, she can also specify a delegated right of divorce which will enable her to leave a failed marriage at will. In the absence of a “delegated” right of divorce, the Quran stipulates that the Mahar (dower) be paid to the wife as a securi-

36 © FARZANA

HASSAN

ty to enable her to leave the marriage if she chooses to do so at some point. Hence, once the marriage was solemnized and consummated, the woman would be entitled to receive a mandatory dower from her husband as stated in the following verse of the Quran: There is no blame on you ifye divorce women tion or the fixation of their dower, but bestow gift, the wealthy according to his means, and to his means—a gift of a reasonable amount

before consummaon them a suitable the poor according is due from those

who wish to do the right thing (Quran 2:236)

It must be noted that the marriage gift was mandatory even if the wife was a woman of means. Other options available to a woman include the following explanation by Dr. Jamal Badawi, a highly respected Canadian scholar of Islam: Divorce is a last resort, permissible but not encouraged, for the Quran esteems the preservations of faith and the individual's right—male and female alilee—to felicity. Forms of marriage dissolution include an enactment based upon mutual agreement, the husband's initiative, the wife's initiative (if part of the marital contract), the court's decision on a wife’s initiative (fora legitimate reason), and the wife's initiative without a “cause” provided that she returns her marital gift to her husband (Khul, or divesture).

Again, it is obvious from this explanation that the husband and wife are not equal in status with respect to pronouncing or obtaining divorce. According to certain juristic rulings, only a husband has the right to issue a unilateral divorce along with the sole right of pronouncing it. He can do so according to three methods. He can pronounce an irrevocable divorce with a single pronounce-

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© 37

ment between a menstrual period (Tuhur) during which he has not had intercourse with her. She must then wait a period of three monthly courses and the divorce becomes final upon completion of the time frame. According to the second method, the husband pronounces the divorce during three separate menstrual cycles. The divorce comes into effect upon completion of the period. As the third method, the husband makes a single pronouncement of divorce and the wife is then required to observe the waiting period before she remarries. He can take her back at any time he wishes during the waiting period. The three-month period is prescribed to ensure that pregnancy has not occurred, as well as to prevent a hasty decision from becoming permanent. It is the arbitrariness of a divorce pronounced in anger that has been checked by the Quran so that women are not left at the perpetual whim and mercy of their husbands. But whereas the Quran prescribes that a divorce be pronounced in successive stages, the practice has fallen far short of the standard set by the injunction. In some cases three divorces have been pronounced together and women have been turned out of the home of their husbands,

thus violating the spirit of the Quranic reform which states: Revocable divorce can only be pronounced twice; where after there should be reconciliation in approved form, or final separation with beneficence. It is not lawful for you to take away anything of that which you have given your wives; unless it should be a case in which the wife insists upon separation without any default on the part of the husband and they are afraid that they would not be able to observe the limits prescribed by Allah, ifthey were to continue their association. In such cases there will be no sin on either of them in respect of that which the wife may sur-

38 © FARZANA

HASSAN

render by way of compromise. These are the limits prescribed by Allah, so transgress them not; whose transgresses the limits prescribed by Allah, it is they that are the wrong-doers. (Quran 2:229)

Another oral tradition attributed to the Prophet suggests that such single pronouncements of three divorces have been condemned by the Prophet because such a divorce becomes irrevocable immediately. One must therefore wonder why single pronouncements of divorce have been validated by the classical jurists, receiving further acknowledgement as being legitimate under the law in many Muslim countries from Indonesia to Morocco. This inequity has been explained by Murad (the former Wilfried) Hofman in his book, Religion on the Rise. He states: This leads to the last remaining particularities ofIslamic law in as much as it affects wornen: divorce, inheritance, and civil procedure. What comes across as most offensive here is the legal fact that a Muslim husband can unilaterally divorce his wife, by simply pronouncing the divorce formula (talaq) thrice, without involving any court of law (2:229). A married woman, however, normally has to go to court ifshe is the one seeking divorce (Khul), unless in their marriage contract her husband had delegated to her the right to unilateral divorce. However, any divorce—by him or by her— ought to be preceded by family arbitration (Quran 4:35) Hofman also touches upon a hitherto unexplored aspect of the debate on divorce. He explains: As a matter of fact, in Surah Al-Baqarah, Verse 2: 228 states: “But men have a degree over them (women).” However what is

intended here is not a general, negative definition of the status of women in marriage. It only means that the husband under

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

° 39

specific and thus limited circumstances may have the last word. (2:228) In fact it only deals with cases in which the husband unilaterally pronounced a divorce, the validity of which is still superseded since the three-month period for the discovery of a possible pregnancy has not yet passed. Within this period, according to the Qur'an, the husband may change his mind and

take the wife back. Even if she chooses to go through with the divorce, under these peculiar circumstances, then in that case, her

husband is to have the last word. The reason being that he, and he alone, would suffer financial loss, since divorced wives, as a matter of principle, keep their bridal gifts (Mahar). One has to read the Qur'an through distinctly male glasses in order to find that 2:28 places men “one cut above women”. Whereas the husband may unilaterally pronounce and issue a divorce, a wife may have to go through a complicated process if she desires a divorce. As mentioned earlier in the Hadith story, the wife was able to obtain a divorce by forfeiting the garden that the husband had given her as dower. In many Muslim countries the following procedures may apply when a woman wishes to seek a divorce:

Talaq Tafweez (Right of Delegated Divorce): The husband can delegate the right of divorce to the woman. She can then exercise it and pronounce a divorce any time and on any ground. She can have the delegated right of divorce stipulated in the marriage contract. Khul: This means redemption or “divesture” according to Jamal Badawi. If the woman is initiating the break up she can return the marriage dower or other material possessions and obtain the divorce in this manner. This is especially problematic when the woman has nothing to offer.

40 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

Mubarat (Mutual Release): The husband and wife can release each Lian:

other from the marriage bond through mutual consent. If the husband accuses the wife of adultery, she can sue him and seek a divorce.

Some of these procedures have been implemented in the following manner in some Muslim countries, including Pakistan: Under the Family Laws Ordinance (1961), a woman can seek

dissolution of marriage on the following grounds:

1) She is unaware of her husband’s whereabouts for a period of four years.

Her husband has failed to provide her with maintenance for a period of two years. He has taken another wife. He has been sentenced to imprisonment for seven years or more. He has failed to perform his conjugal obligations during three years. He was impotent at the time of marriage and continues to be so. 3 He is suffering from a venereal or other debilitating disease. She can dissolve the marriage if she was given in marriage as a minor without her consent. Her husband treats her with cruelty, assaults her, associ-

ates with women of bad repute, forces her to lead an immoral life, usurps her property rights, places impediments in her religious observances, or if he chooses a polygamous marriage, he does not treat his wives justly and fairly, as well as any other situation that may arise as a result of the union under Muslim law.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

e 41

According to the provisions described above, a wife may obtain her freedom provided she meets the above conditions. The husband, on the other hand, would still be able to pronounce a

divorce unilaterally, perhaps ina fit of rage and for no reason at all. According to some juristic rulings, the divorce would be deemed effective after three such pronouncements. The imbalance between the husband and wife is amplified due to the manner in which the Quranic laws have been applied in Muslim countries, as seen in the case of Pakistan. Associated with this imbalance is the issue of polygamy. Divorce for a woman is the only option ifa-woman does not wish to remain in a polygamous marriage. This certainly exacerbates the injustice, yet such provisions are often justified by Muslim scholars such as Jamal Badawi, who writes:

It is critically important to point out with regard to polygyny that all parties have options. Men may choose to remain monogamous. A proposed second wife may reject the marriage proposal ifshe does not wish to be a party to a polygamous marriage. A prospective first wife may include in her marriage contract a condition that her prospective husband shall practise monogamy. If this condition is mutually accepted, it becomes binding on the husband. Should he later violate this condition, his first wife will be entitled to seek divorce with all the financial rights connected with it. If such a condition was not included in the marriage contract, and ifthe husband marries a second wife, the first wife may seek Khul (divesture).

Thus if it were in the wife’s marriage contract, a woman could easily opt out of a polygamous marriage. Were this right not been delegated to her in the contract, she would have to resort to a

42

¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

longer and more arduous process of obtaining the divorce known as Khul. Also, if divorce was her only option in dealing with her husband’s polygamous marriage, it was no option at all. What if she still loved her husband and didn’t wish to leave him? Alternatively, she would have to endure the presence of another woman, who by virtue of being a legally wedded wife would be entitled to equal affection from her husband. Either way the woman would face painful choices—a fact that Dr. Badawi simply refuses to acknowledge.

Again many arguments have been offered to explain the inequity. It is often asserted that women are more emotional than men and therefore not capable of exercising rational judgment. They must therefore be denied the right to pronounce a divorce at will, as they would abuse it very often. In an attempt to discourage the initiation of divorce by women, Chaudri Rahmat Ali states:

The Holy Prophet is reported to have said that a woman who seeks Khula unnecessarily from her husband is debarred from entering heaven. In another place it is said that if a woman asks for Khula from her husband without good reason, the sweet odour of paradise will be forbidden to her. On another occasion it was said that a woman who frequently seeks Khula is an apostate.

Thus, while theoretically the provision exists for a woman to seek divorce, it is accompanied by profuse censure. It is essential to revisit juristic rulings and Muslim law on divorce. No longer arewomen financially incapable of supporting themselves. They do not need to “offer themselves in marriage to men.” Nor are there any hard and fast rules about who will put food on the table. Provisions on divorce which may have worked splendidly for seventh-century Arabia are no longer applicable in

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 43

this day and age. The law, religious or secular, must therefore be revised in order to accommodate the changed social conditions in the East and West. It must treat men and women with parity in this and other matters. The argument that women are more emotional than men is a mere truism. They are both subject to temperamental shortcomings, emotional pressures and social demands. If there are to be restrictions on pronouncing divorce, they must apply equally to both men and women. Conversely, the right to seek a divorce must be acknowledged for both equally. When the Quran offered Khul as a method by which a woman could obtain divorce, it was merely working with conditions and procedures available at the time. The solutions offered were also in conformity with existing inequities. Perhaps an ideal solution could not be imposed on imperfection. This however, should not mean that better and more equitable methods of divorce cannot be devised and implemented in Muslim countries within the contemporary social milieu. Now that society has evolved to a higher level of moral consciousness, more just and equitable responses with respect to divorce must be formulated in order to achieve gender equality in Muslim societies.

44 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

WOMEN’S

a

ga

RIGHT

TO

ed

INHERITANCE

eld

Question: Why do men inherit twice as much as women in Islam? Do the conditions justifying such inequality still exist? Are the laws of inheritance still fair in light of modern circumstances when women are sometimes the sole

breadwinners for their families? Does the argument about corresponding rights and responsibilities still hold?

Pre-Islamic Arabia was a heavily patriarchal and chauvinistic society, the dynamics of which were clearly reflected in its tribal laws of inheritance. Only male agnatic relations could inherit property to preserve the tribal wealth. Islam introduced a number of reforms to rectify some of these long-standing injustices. Nonetheless, the law of inheritance in Islam has come under much scrutiny and, censure within contemporary religious discourse. It has been pointed out, for example, that Islam discrimi-

nates against women because it does not give them an equal share in inheritance. | Traditional Muslims again offer arguments to explain the inequity in light of the social and cultural setting of seventh-cen-

Islam, Women, and the Challenges of Today

© 45

tury Arabia such as the following explanation taken from Murad Hofman’s aforementioned book, Religion on the Rise. He explains the inequity by invoking the principle of balancing responsibility with corresponding privileges when he states: Under Western scrutiny is also the alleged discrimination of Muslim women under the Islamic law of inheritance, because

according to Surah Al-Nisa (4:11), a daughter is entitled to only half of her brother's share. Nevertheless, she may yet have the better end of the bargain here since—in contrast to her brother(s)—she is under no obligation whatsoever for the upkeep of the family. Here, again, unequal rights correspond to unequal

obligations. The above disparity in inheritance rights must also be examined in light of other Quranic injunctions. The following verse states:

From what is left by parents and those nearest related there is a share for men and share for women, whether the property be small or large—a determinate share (Quran 4:7)

The Quran then proceeds to specify the distribution of this share among offspring and their relations as follows: Allah directs you as regards your children’s share to the male, a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance: ifonly one, her share is half. For parents, sixth share of the inheritance to each, ifthe deceased left children, ifno children and the parents are the only heirs the mother has a third. If the deceased left brothers or sisters the mother has a third, if the deceased the mother has a

46 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

sixth (the distribution in all cases is after the payment of legacies and debts). Ye know not whether your parents or your children are nearest to you in benefit. These are settled portions ordained by Allah and Allah is all knowing, Wise. (Quran 4:11) While the Quran clearly specifies shares for women, it stipulates double portions for male relations. One may then rightfully ask why the Quran had to fall short of the universal ideal predicated on gender equality by treating women differently from men, if indeed its intent was to bring about reform in inheritance laws— reforms that would be relevant for all times, not just a specific era? As seen earlier, traditional Muslims

such as the convert

Hofman address this concern by suggesting that in Islam each right has a responsibility that must accompany it. Islam clearly places the responsibility of maintenance and livelihood on the man. The woman, even though she is entitled to property and inheritance, is relieved of any financial obligation even towards her offspring. She can dispense her property, save it for a rainy day or do whatever else she wishes with it. The man, on the other

hand, must not only provide for his immediate family, he must also provide for any widowed sister, aunt or other female relation who may not have an independent source of income. There are therefore several claims on a man’s income whereas there are none on the women’s assets. The reality of course is vastly different from this contention, as women

in contemporary societies

often live below the poverty line, struggling to provide for them- _ selves and their children. Yet, in further defence of Islam’s inheritance laws, many

Muslims explain that women inherit and receive property in more ways than one, which amply compensate for any imbalances arising from the law of inheritance. These shares have been explained as follows:

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

e 47

The Daughter: In principle the daughter receives half the inheritance of a son. If the father leaves only a female heir, she is entitled to half the inheritance of the father. If he leaves behind, two female heirs, they both inherit two-thirds of the share and divide it equally between themselves. In other words, if a daughter is the sole survivor, she may not inherit all of her father’s estate, but if a son is the sole

survivor, he is entitled to all of it.

The Mother. Each parent of the deceased inherits the same amount whether the parent is the father or the mother. In this respect, men and women are equal under the Islamic law of inheritance. If the deceased has no children and only parents, the mother receives one-third and the father two-thirds of the inheritance. In the event the deceased leaves no child but only siblings and parents, the mother is still entitled to one-sixth of the share. The Wife: The wife is entitled to one-fourth of the inheritance of the husband if he leaves no offspring. If there are children from the marriage she is entitled to one-eighth of his inheritance. If there is more than one surviving wife, the share must be divided among the co-wives. This aspect of the law is often ignored when explaining the unequal shares of men and women. The Sister: The deceased person’s uterine brother and sister each get one-third in inheritance. In case there are more such siblings, they share one-third of the estate. A consanguine sister inherits one-half of the estate. If there is a consanguine brother, he would get double her share.

Clearly from the above the woman inherits half the share of the male as a general rule, although she may inherit the same as him on occasion. Additionally, she is entitled to maintenance from

48

¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

her father, brother or husband, howsoever the situation unfolds.

Also upon marriage, she receives a dower from the husband as part of the marriage contract whereas he receives nothing from her. The dower amount can be a mutually agreed upon material gift according to the husband’s means, and sometimes it is only a promissory note. Upon closer examination therefore, women receive from eight different sources whereas men receive property from only four. This is often cited as a balancing factor within the overall scheme of inheritance laws elucidated in the Quran. An examination of Hadith, Islam’s secondary source of guidance, also sheds light on the social backdrop supporting Islam’s laws of inheritance. An interesting precedent formed the basis for such lengthy and detailed Quranic explanations of property rights. This particular case involved the dispensation of tribal leader Sa’ad’s estate following his martyrdom in the Battle of Uhud. He was survived by his wife and two daughters. According to the tribal law-of pre-Islamic Arabia, their paternal uncle claimed the entire estate. The mother complained to the Prophet, who, as tradition goes, settled the matter according to verses of the Quran revealed specifically to address this particular circumstance. The intent of the Quran in this particular incident was to ensure that female relatives received at least some portion of the share. In the absence of this provision they would be denied any shares under the prevailing tribal custom. The Quran modified an existing tribal law which had sought to exclude women entirely from succession. Whereas the old tribal law was designed to consolidate the wealth of the agnatic male | relatives, the Quran chose women to receive some share in the

inheritance as well. As a precautionary measure it clearly spelled out the shares of each female relative according to what was deemed fair within that particular social regimen, again invoking the principle of corresponding rights and responsibilities. As part

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© 49

of the Divine Law, this entitlement would not be challenged; hence clear rules pertaining to inheritance in light of prevalent social conditions were formulated in the Quran to protect the property rights of women. Those who are categorized as “Quranic sharers” of inheritance belong to the marginalized groups of society such as women and uterine siblings. By appointing them as sharers in inheritance, the Quran introduced a revolution in inheritance laws, though the shares would remain unequal. The apparent overall disparity between the shares of men and women in Islam is also linked to the issue of Mahar, or dower, a

sum of money paid to the wife by the husband upon consummation of marriage. In pre-Islamic Arabia, the dower was paid to the bride’s parents as her purchase price. The wife hence became the property of the husband. In addition to the dower, the husband was also under the obligation to give the wife’s parents another gift called the Sadaq. Islam removed this distinction between the Mahar and the Sadaq by issuing an injunction that would render the Mahar a gift to the wife to be dispensed with freely. She would enter the marriage contract as a free person and would be entitled to receive a material gift from the husband upon consummation or, alternatively, at another time if she so chose. In other words, the wife would no longer be purchased and the Mahar was no longer her price. The philosophy behind the payment of Mahar was also to empower women economically. Furthermore, it could be viewed as a compensation for her unequal share in inheritance. Again, she enjoyed sole rights to the Mahar or any other property. No male or female relatives would have any control over it. Islam’s contribution in establishing property rights for women has been duly acknowledged by Western scholars. In 1911, Pierre Crabites, who attended the Mixed Tribunals of Cairo, remarked in his article entitled Things Muhammad did for Women:

50 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

When all is said and done, however, nothing Fee

me more

than to have the proof driven home to me that before AD 632, the Prophet of Islam had accomplished more to safeguard the property rights of the women in his land, than the legislature of Louisiana has yet done for her who bears my name. Laudable as they were fourteen hundred years ago, Islam’s laws of inheritance need to be scrutinized with the prospect of reconsideration. These laws must conform to the demands of modern times. Societies today are vastly different from the patriarchal chauvinism of Arabia at the dawn of Islam. Today, modern women are just as burdened with financial commitments and responsibilities as their male counterparts. Rights and responsibilities are now not as clearly demarcated as they were fourteen centuries ago as women are sometimes single-handedly providing for their children and families. The argument invoking corresponding rights and responsibilities of men and women therefore no longer holds. Women cannot hence continue to be discriminated against, based on anachronistic laws or rationale that may or may not have been fair in seventh-century Arabia. Today, they must be entitled to equal shares of inheritance as they carry financial obligations that are comparable to those of men. Also, as demonstrated amply from the precedent quoted from the Prophet’s time, the Quran addressed circumstances that were peculiar to the cultural milieu of Arabia in the seventh century of the Christian era. It therefore introduced laws that were tailored to the prevailing circumstances of the day. According to the prevalent social conditions, the Quran responded in a manner that was fair and mindful of the rights of women. Hypothetically, had the social conditions been different from what they were in the Arabia of those days, the Quran may have responded in a manner more suited to them, perhaps with greater equality for women.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 51

The legislative injunctions of the Quran cannot be interpreted literally in a contemporary setting. Such an approach would denude the scripture of its inherent flexibility and dynamism. It is the principle of fairness to women within a specific social framework that was applied in the Quranic injunctions pertaining to the laws of inheritance. The same Quranic principle can be expressed as equal shares of inheritance in accordance with what is fair in the modern social context. Also, once again the Quranic principle of improving existing social conditions must be invoked to ensure equal shares of inheritance for women in Muslim countries.

52 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

eae

THE

ee

QURAN

WOMENS

AND

CES TIMONY

Question: The very idea of women being barred from testifying in cases involving rape and murder is repugnant. Why then would some countries such as Pakistan enact laws that put women at such tremendous disadvantage in cases which impact them the most? Women are raped and murdered with impunity in Pakistan and the law provides little redress to rectify these wrongs.

Islam introduced numerous reforms to improve the lot of women. Indeed, a revolution of Islamic reforms was sweeping across Mohammadan Arabia to greatly ameliorate social conditions for women. It elevated their status in society so that they came to be regarded as persons in their own right. They were now entitled to initiate divorces, to own property, to keep their maiden name, to cast a vote and to participate in the socio-political affairs of the country. These changes were astounding, given the social conditions of Arabian society which had historically treated women as chattel, condoned female infanticide and encouraged unrestricted polygamy.

Islam, Women, and the Challenges of Today

¢ 53

Islam had changed all of that but Iwondered why the revolutionary zeal exhibited by the Prophet towards improving the lot of women came to be thwarted by successive generations of Muslims. They ought to have built on those earlier reforms keeping in view that the Quran too, had always sought to improve existing conditions. Instead, countries that boasted of being created in the name of Islam were enacting laws that would leave women vulnerable to rape, honour killings, wife battery, assault and countless other brutalities. What is worse, they would be barred from testifying in courts of law, and denied the opportunity to prove their innocence when falsely accused of adultery—-a gross miscarriage of justice!

The legal framework of these countries did not provide any form of redress against the savagery that women were experiencing. In fact, it promoted the brutality. I am referring to the laws that were enacted as a result of the so-called “Islamization” of the legal system in Pakistan. These laws systematically discriminated against women. The “Islamization” contradicted the intent and spirit even of the Quran, particularly with regard to the issue of women’s testimony. In a Muslim country where a woman’s honour and chastity were to be preserved at all costs, women were being raped, brutalized and murdered on mere suspicion of adultery. When they were not being murdered, they were serving sentences for crimes others had committed. For example, a significant percentage of women were now serving sentences for adultery whereas they had been physically assaulted and raped, even gang-raped. The law made no clear distinction between adultery (zina) and rape (zina bil jabar), correctly translated as “adultery without consent” or “adultery under duress”. Exacerbating this legal fallacy was the fact that under Article 8 of the Zina Ordinance, women would be barred from giving testimony in such “Hadood” cases. The exam-

54 © FARZANA

HASSAN

ples of Safia Bibi, Majida Abdullah and Ahmadi Begum are just a few to bring home the gross injustices committed in this regard. These women had been raped repeatedly but under the new laws, they were left with no recourse or redress when accused of adultery. They were initially left paralyzed by the Pakistani legal system when they tried to prove their innocence. In light of such horrific moral and social implications, I ventured to evaluate the Pakistani law of Testimony in light of the Quranic text and message from whence it was purportedly derived. The verse of the Quran reads: And call to witness from among your men two witnesses and if two men not be (at hand) then a man and two women, so that if

the one erreth (through forgetfulness) the other will remember (Qur'an 2 :282)

Indeed the verse quoted above clearly commands a two-toone ratio for witnessing mercantile contracts but it appears the law in Pakistan considered only this verse to the exclusion of all other Quranic verses pertaining to women and witnessing. Furthermore, even the purpose and scope of this particular verse has been misinterpreted. In order to fully understand its meaning, it is important to examine the historical and cultural context within which the verse was revealed. The important point to consider is that for the most part, women were completely marginalized in society before the advent of Islam, and hence their exposure in worldly matters was minimal. Nevertheless, the Quran treated women with parity regarding testimony except where mercantile contracts were involved. In all other matters, no gender was specified in the Arabic text of the Quran. The fact that women were excluded from giving testimony in a court of law was a juristic interpretation

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 55

of what Shariah law ought to be. I re-examined the above verse and discovered that during Prophet Mohammad’s time there was perhaps a greater likelihood of women faltering where reading and writing were involved. This verse by no means suggests that women were intellectually inferior to men, or that their intelligence was half that of a man’s. Mohammad Asad’s explanation of the apparent disparity in his commentary entitled The Message of the Quran also elaborates this observation as follows:

The stipulation that two women may be substituted for one male witness does not imply any reflection of women’s moral or intellectual capabilities. This is obviously due to the fact that as a rule women are less familiar with business procedures than men and therefore more liable to commit mistakes in this respect.

Asghar Ali Engineer, another noted Muslim scholar, makes two interesting observations about the above verse in his book The Rights of Women in Islam. He states: It should be noted that the clause is a recommendatory and not an obligatory one...the Qur'an wants to be fair to the creditor as well as the debtor and see that the contract is written properly and affirmed by duly qualified witnesses. If the contracting parties have mutual faith, they may even dispense with witnesses.

Secondly, he notes that “though two female witnesses in place of one male witness have been recommended, only one would bear witness, the other’s function being nothing more than reminding her in case she falters.” He further states:

56 © FARZANA

HASSAN

In those days there was always some possibility of female witnesses making mistakes in financial matters due to their inexperience and not due to any inferior intellectual ability. This verse should be categorized as a contextual and not a normative one. The Qur‘an is certainly not laying down any norm that in matters of witnessing two women would be treated as being equal to one man.

This interpretation of the relevant verse made ample sense. If the intent of the Quran was indeed to set a norm through the above verse, it would have specified the same ratio wherever the question of witnessing arose. However, this was not the case as

seen from an examination of other verses. In cases involving bequests for example, the Quran did not specify gender in matters of witnessing. The verse states: O Ye who believe! Let there be witnesses to what you do when death approaches you and you're about to make bequests. Two persons of probity from among your own people or ifpangs of death come upon you while you are travelling far from home, two other persons (from people other than your own) (Qur'an 5:106)

The above is perhaps the most noteworthy of translations because of its grammatical fidelity to the Arabic text. Unfortunately it has been translated in a number of other ways that reflect a certain degree of gender bias. The intent of the verse is therefore often misunderstood by non-Arabic speaking people. Examples of some of these translations are as follows: The famous novelist, journalist, Muslim leader and translator of the Holy Quran, Muhammad

Marmaduke William Pickthall,

wrote:

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 57

O you who believe let there be witnesses between you when death draweth nigh unto one of you at the time of bequests two witnesses, just men from among you, or two others from another tribe in case ye are campaigning in the land and the calamity of death befall you. (Quran 5:106) Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s rendition of the same verse reads as follows:

O ye who believe! When death approaches any of you, take witnesses among yourselves when making bequests, two just men of your own (brotherhood) or others from outside ifye are journeying through the earth and the chance of death befalls you (thus). (Quran 5:106)

Upon comparison of the three quoted translations it is obvious that the learned scholars simply assumed that the Quran meant “two men” when in fact no gender had been specified. It would be relevant to quote Justice Aftab Hussain’s opinion in this matter. Referring to the same verse he states:

In the above verse it is stated that ifit is afterwards ascertained that both of them merit the suspicion of sin, that offalsehood, two others from among the near relatives of the deceased take oath that their testimony is truer than that of these witnesses who were the testators. If women are excluded they will not be able to take oath and their rights will not be guarded in case there are no male heirs. Verse 106 of chapter 5 and the verse that follows it, apply to members of both sexes and women are competent witnesses according to them. One

must

therefore

conclude

that the Quran

maintains

neutral terminology in the above verse as well as other verses pertaining to testimony.

08

© FARZANA

HASSAN

In Chapter 4, Verse 15, the Quran states:

As for those of your women who are guilty of lewdness, call to witness four of you against them. (Quran 4:15)

Here, as in the previous verse, the Arabic word minkum instead of rijalukum has been used to include both male and female witnesses. The former means “from among you” whereas the latter means “men from among you.”

There is yet another verse dealing with witnessing where no gender has been specified. This verse deals with accusations of adultery against respectable women. The verse is particularly relevant to the controversy over the adjudication of rape and adultery cases under Pakistani law. The verse reads as follows: And those who accuse honourable women but bring not four witnesses, scourge them (with) eighty stripes and never afterwards accept their testimony, They indeed are evil doers. (Quran 24:4) Asghar Ali Engineer in his aforementioned book compares the terminology of the above verse with that of verse 2: 282 which deals exclusively with mercantile contracts. He arrives at the following analysis by concluding that the only verse clearly specifying gender is verse 2: 282. In this verse the word rijalukum has been used which specifies men as the preferred witnesses. The word imraatan has also been used specifically to mean women. In all other verses regarding testimony, the neutral word minkum, which according to the accepted rules of the Arabic language must include both genders, has been employed in preference to rijalukum. However, through erroneous interpretation, a mere grammatical technicality has given rise to the misconception that only men are competent witnesses in courts of law.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© 59

The manner in which Shariah has been interpreted and applied in Pakistan excludes women from acting as witnesses in Hadood cases altogether. A verdict of the Council of Islamic Ideology states that a woman’s testimony is not admissible in cases involving Zina (Adultery) or Zina Bil Jabr (Rape). Also,

according to Section 8 of the Zina Ordinance “proof of Zina or Zina bil Jabr liable to hadd, shall be in one of the following forms,

namely:

a) The accused makes before a court of competent jurisdiction a confession of the commission of the offence, or

b)

At least four Muslim adult male witnesses about whom

the Court is satisfied with regard to the requirements of Tazkiyah al Shuhood (observable piety) that they are truthful persons and abstain from major sins (kibr) give evidence as eye-witnesses to the act of penetration necessary to the offence.” Asghar Ali Engineer again points out the absurdity of this requirement by considering the following issues. He states that the acts of adultery or rape are likely to be performed in seclusion and the possibility of any witness, let alone adult witness of good repute, is remote. Secondly, all witnesses have to be sure that penetration occurred. Given that these two requirements are fulfilled, an act of adultery, rape or fornication may be established against the parties. But Engineer rightly asks if it is indeed plausible that four male witnesses of good repute would watch a rape in action and not attempt to stop it? Alternatively, if there are women who have witnessed such a crime, there is a greater possibility that they would be unsuccessful in stopping a rape in progress. They would serve as competent witnesses nonetheless, but under Pakistani law their testimony would

not be admissible.

60 © FARZANA

HASSAN

Such

exclusion

has resulted

in an

increase in the number of gang-rapes committed with impunity in Pakistan. The Pakistani law, while ignoring many Quranic injunctions on the issue of testimony also displays disregard for an important precedent established by the Prophet of Islam. According to the corpus called Hadith, a lady was raped by an unknown person while returning home from her morning prayer. After committing the crime the rapist fled. Another man while trying to pursue the culprit was apprehended instead and the woman wrongly identified the second man as the culprit. The Prophet reportedly sentenced the man on the sole testimony of the woman. Fortunately the real culprit appeared and confessed to the crime. In Pakistan, on the other hand, a woman dare not seek redress as the situation

can be very easily turned against her particularly if pregnancy has occurred—pregnancy being admitted as proof of adultery, though only under Maliki jurisprudence. Pakistarli women have been rendered powerless with respect to protecting their reputation, honour and chastity. Was this the intent of the Quran or have jurists and modern interpreters of Quranic injunctions missed the point somewhere?

The Quran is emphatic about protecting a woman’s honour and reputation. Anyone who casts an aspersion of immoral conduct against an honourable woman is indeed liable to a very severe punishment. In Pakistan however, women are being accused and murdered on the mere suspicion of adultery. What is worse is that to date such “honour killings” are not considered a crime. It is generally believed that murders committed in a fit of rage or passion must be forgiven or dealt with more leniently under the law. The Quran, on the other hand, empowers a woman to protect her honour and respectable position in society in the event she has been accused by her husband of adultery. In such a situation both

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 61

parties are required to take the Oath of Li’an, or the Oath of Mutual Imprecation. The Quranic verses read as follows: As for those who accuse their wives but have no witness except themselves; let the testimony of one of them be four testimonies (swearing) by Allah that he is of those who speak the truth, and yet a fifth, invoking the curse ofAllah on him ifhe is of those who lie. And it shall avert the punishment from her ifshe bear witness before Allah four times that the thing he saith is indeed false, and a fifth time that the wrath ofAllah be upon her ifhe speaketh the truth. (Quran 24:6-9)

Two interesting inferences must be drawn from these verses. Firstly, not only is the woman allowed to testify alongside her husband, she is also able to refute the charge. Thus the Quran awards the same degree of respect to both sexes in terms of reliability and competence, and one would be inclined to conclude that the woman is the preferred witness in this case since her testimony supersedes his, even when made with equal force. The second important point revolves around the fact that both the husband and the wife are to testify the same number of times. If the two-to-one ratio were meant to be applied everywhere, the woman should have been asked to testify at least eight times, invoking the wrath of Allah the ninth time. However, this is not the case and the Quran makes no distinction in this matter. If laws are to be derived from the Quran, then it is the above

verse that should have formed the basis of any law in Pakistan pertaining to rape, adultery and women’s testimony. Women should not have to wait in prison serving sentences for adultery— hopelessly trying to defend their honour and reputations. Also, if the Quran is to be taken as the source of Shariah law, one would have to conclude that the concept of imprisonment for adultery

62

© FARZANA

HASSAN

simply does not exist in the Quran. It is interesting to note that the classical jurists differed widely with respect to the admissibility of women’s evidence in such cases. Some were liberal while others quite rigid in the interpretations of Quranic verses. Commenting on the situation in Pakistan, Asghar Ali Engineer says: It would be wrong therefore to adopt one particular jurist’s view to enable modern enactments in such cases as was done by Zia-ulHaq of Pakistan. It betrayed either ignorance of the controversy among medieval jurists or a deliberate attempt to pass a conservative law for a particular reason. Gen. Muhammad Zia-ul-Hag was indeed informed about the various religious arguments against the enactment of discriminatory laws in Pakistan, but he capitulated to an overbearing feudal lobby historically engaged in manifest debauchery. Verses of the Quran have come to be interpreted out of context, ignoring all the above injunctions of the Quran that went in women’s favour. The validity of such laws is to be seriously questioned by any fair-minded individuals, both within and outside Pakistan. Social reform and progress in a society is achieved gradually. However, reforming the legal framework of a country is an important first step.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© 63

eee ee

THE

TROUBLING QUESTION CONCUBINAGE IN ISLAM

OF

Question: Does the Quran sanction sex-slavery? Why didn’t the Quran abolish slavery rather than regulate the practice? Is there a reason to believe it would sanction it today?

The traditional sanction for the institution of concubinage remains a problem for Islam to date. This was also an issue that worried me for a long time and answers were slow to come as explanations provided were strictly in conformity with the orthodox view. Why was it permitted at all? What was it about the social conditions of the time that allowed the continuation of such a morally repugnant custom? Was it regulated at all in any way? Were the female “slaves” entitled to any rights whatsoever? Could their relationship with their master be characterised as a marriage or one of a lover and beloved? Was it strictly a master-slave relationship where the master would have unrestricted access to the slave, rendering her powerless to repel undesired attention? Added to this was the evidence in Hadith conveying the distinct impression that Islam indeed condoned such a vulgar and morally reprehensible practice. Although I regarded most Hadith literature sus-

64 © FARZANA

HASSAN

pect, even the Muwatta of Imam Malik, a work closest to the time

of the Prophet and therefore perhaps more reliable, was replete with rules regulating and therefore legitimizing concubinage. Associated with the institution of concubinage is the definition of marriage as it has come to be understood and applied in various communities and cultures. The dictionary defines a marriage as “a socially sanctioned union” that allows the partners to have a sexual relationship. According to this definition of marriage, any couple that engages in sexual activity, as long as it is stable, consensual and entails financial and social obligation towards the partners, qualifies as a marriage. All types of marriages have existed in human history. There is polygamy, where a husband can take more than one wife concurrently. Presently, in liberal societies, “open marriages” are accepted socially and each partner is free to suit his or her fancy. Group unions of a similar nature have also existed in the past. The forms of marriage recognized in pre-Islamic Arabia were as follows:

Istibdal was a form of marriage where a wife was lent to another husband for enjoyment. The modern version of this would be the “wife-swapping” practices now in vogue in some segments of society. Mut’a marriages were legal marriages with a pre-planned expiry date. Such a marriage was outlawed under Sunni Jurisprudence but Shia jurisprudence continued to allow it. There is evidence in Hadith to suggest that the Prophet himself contracted such marriages. A Magt marriage was one where the son simply inherited his father’s widow.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© 65

In addition to these was concubinage such as the one practised by the Semites where childless wives often permitted their husbands to sleep with their slave-girls. An example of this would be Abraham marrying Hagar in the hope of having offspring. Polyandry also existed in pre Islamic Arabia, as did concubinage. And since concubinage was recognized as a form of marriage even in pre-Islamic times, Islam retained the institution for a specified time. It must be noted here that the institution of concubinage in Islam was linked directly to the issue of slavery. A cursory glance at the Quranic discourse reveals that several verses in the Quran exhorted Muslims to treat slaves with kindness and compassion, but there was nothing that clearly outlawed the custom. However, with Islam came restrictions and regulations with respect to its practice. A slave in the Quran was now referred to as one “possessed by the right hand”. How then was a slave different from a person who came to be possessed by the right hand? According to the dictionary meaning of slavery, it is “involuntary, enforced by violence or by other methods. It is sometimes an expectation associated with other relationships such as marriage, and other family relationship, military service or debt relationships.” A milk yameen in Islam was clearly a slave in the sense that he or she was a captive of some sort with no decision-making power, whose movements were strictly curtailed and monitored. Such a person would be entirely subject to the “fair treatment” of the master and only by the master’s leave. What an unfortunate situation to be in! However, it is also noted that slavery in Islam was a far more benign institution than some of its manifestations in other soci-

eties and cultures.

66 © FARZANA

HASSAN

For example, in the ancient world slavery was rampant. It flourished in Rome and Greece, as well as in the religious traditions of Hinduism, Judaism and Christianity as pretty much the norm of the day. In pre-Islamic Arabia as well, slaves were bought and sold freely as commodities. They could also be acquired through a number of different means as payment of a debt. Additionally people could sell their sons or daughters in exchange for material favours. Many were kidnapped or abducted only to be enslaved. Most Muslim historians agree that Islam regulated some of the above means of acquiring slaves. One could also compare the concept of slavery in Islam with the prevalent understanding of slavery, the worst example of which existed in the American South until 1865 when the emancipation declaration was signed. According to the latter, a slave was a thoroughly despised person who could be penalized over the slightest disobedience towards his or her master. Female slaves were habitually raped and sexually exploited by their masters with no chance of escape from the brutality. Their children were also considered slaves who could be bought and sold at will. Food, clothing and board were scanty and inadequate and again could be withheld as a form of punishment. Slavery in Islam was very different. Syed Amir Ali, a noted scholar of Islam makes the following observation on the practice among early Muslims. There is nothing in the provisions of Islamic law which may be defined by the English word slavery. Islam has curtailed the authority of the master over his slave so that the word ts really a misnomer in Islamic parlance

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

° 67

What then did Islam actually say about Istirqaaq or the enslaving of people? For one, I found no verse in the Quran that gave Muslims express instructions to enslave men and women. However, the scripture exhorted fair and equitable treatment towards male and female slaves a number of times which indicated a tacit approval of the practice. It also urged Muslims to free the slaves as an act of atonement. Furthermore, under Islam, the only

persons who could be “enslaved” were prisoners of war, who would come to be detained by Muslims based on a reciprocal arrangement with the pagans, as Muslims were also being enslaved by them during battle. There were no prisons as such at the time and “slaves” had to be accommodated in society in an equitable manner. Thus a slave was merely one who had lost his or her freedom on account of having participated in a war. Had the pagans continued enslaving Muslims with no reciprocal arrangement, the strength of the pagan army would have increased with no reciprocal treaty to release the Muslim prisoners-of-war. Hence at a time when slavery was more or less a universal practice, the Prophet of Islam allowed it to continue as a reciprocal arrangement until all parties had agreed to abolish the practice.

Theoretically then, war was the only justifiable pretext for acquiring slaves. Therefore, Islam in theory at least, outlawed other means of enslaving persons of non-Muslim affiliation including the buying and selling of women for sexual gratification. Once a prisoner of war had become a person “possessed by the right hand”, he or she was entitled to equal treatment from the “master” or more appropriately, the one who was in charge of his upkeep while he or she was a prisoner-of-war. Injunctions in the Quran on slavery were accompanied by profuse emotional assurances for the slaves, as manifest in the following verse:

68 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

O Prophet! Say to those of the captives who are in your hands, “If Allah determines any good in your hearts, He will give you better than that which has been taken from you and will forgive you your sins for God is much Forgiving, a Dispenser of Grace.” (Quran 8:70) Another verse reads:

Thereafter set them (slaves) free by grace or by ransom. (Quran

47:4) Hence “slaves” could be dealt with in two ways. They could be freed by grace or ransom as recommended above, or alternatively, they would have to be treated as family members entitled to the same quality and quantity of food, clothing, and kindness. If a master deliberately or accidentally inflicted injury on the slave, he or she would be freed automatically. And it was this standard of treatment towards “slaves” expected of early Muslims who had taken non-Muslims as prisoners of war. Women captured as slaves would be entitled to “respectability” and a chance to gain their freedom after giving birth to the child of their master. Also, if the master inflicted any injury on her based on the above principle, she would be entitled to her freedom immediately. According to Abdullah Ibn Abbas, the verse that exhorts Muslims to set slaves free by ransom or grace in reality supersedes all other verses, thereby implying that slavery was indeed abolished in Islam after the new faith came to be established firmly in Arabia. Also, since all other means of acquiring slaves had already been eradicated by Islam, slavery would become virtually nonexistent in Islam. The verse below from chapter four of the Quran must be analyzed to verify the validity of Abdullah Abbas’s view. It states:

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

@ 69

If ye fear that ye cannot deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four, but ifye fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly with them then only one, or a (captive) that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice. (Quran 4:3)

While the above verse deals primarily with the conditions and regulations governing the practice of polygamy, it also contains something of value to our current discussion. If one were to carefully analyze the command contained in this verse, the exhortation is to marry free, believing women, up to four. If that is not possible then the command is to marry captive women, not to have illicit sexual relations with them. This command is repeated in the following verse: And wed the spouseless among you, and the righteous ones among your male and female slaves. (Quran 24:32) The above injunction clearly indicates that the master and slave are to be united in the marital bond. Many scholars therefore hold the opinion that concubinage is not permitted in the sense that a master can freely or forcibly have sex with a female slave. It is also regarded as wayib (mandatory) for female and male slaves to be married. Abdullah Yusuf Ali further explains the issue by commenting on verse 6:23 as follows:

It will be seen there that the status ofa captive when raised to freedom by marriage is the same as that of a free woman as regards her rights but more lenient as regards to the punishment to be inflicted ifshe falls from virtue.

70 @© FARZANA

HASSAN

Thus, while the status of the slave was elevated to the extent

of enabling her to enjoy equal rights, there were also some privileges which only she was entitled to as cited above. The view that the Quran endorses marriage with slaves rather than concubinage is also supported by the following verse of the Quran: The verse reads: And those who guard their modesty except with their wives and the captives whom their right hands possess, for then they are not to be blamed. (Quran 23:5)

Commenting on this verse Abdullah Yusuf Ali states: Captives of war may be married as such but their status is inferior to that of free wives until they are free. The institution of the captives of war is now obsolete. Such inferiority of status as there was, was in the status of captivity, not in the status of marriage as such in which there are no degrees except by local customs, which Islam does not recognize.

In the above verse, the Quran spoke of two separate categories of women with whom sexual relations were permissible. Yusuf Ali’s explanation made it clear that captives were different from the wives only in their state of captivity warranting separate categorization, but their matrimonial status was the same as free wives.

It still remained to be seen whether the relationship between a master and slave was a consensual one. A well-known Hadith reported by Salamah Ibn Muhbbaq sheds light on this issue. He narrated the incident of the man who copulated with the female slave of his wife. When it was brought to the Prophet’s attention, he is reported to have said:

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 71

Ifthe man has had intercourse with the female slave forcibly then the slave is free and he will have to compensate the owner of the slave. But if the slave had agreed to the act then she belongs to him and he will have to compensate the owner of the slave.

From the above it appeared that concubinage in Islam, if at all such a nomenclature could be applied to the practice, was a consensual sexual relationship between a master and a slave. Furthermore, in accordance with the rule that a slave is to be freed

if she suffers injury inflicted by her master, a rape or forcible sexual assault would constitute such an injury and the female slave would be set free. Also, numerous precedents exist of female slaves marrying their masters or captors, hence opting to remain

in the relationship after being declared free of bondage. During his ministry as the Prophet of Islam, Mohammad freed many slaves as did his companions. He married a few female slaves such as Safiya and Jaweriya after offering them their freedom. It is not clear if he “married” Rayhana and Maria, the Copt. Reports suggest Rayhana chose to remain a concubine as she did not wish to be subjected to the stringent rules applicable to the wives of the Prophet or the “mothers of the faithful”. Maria the Copt gave birth to Ibrahim, the Prophet’s son who died in infancy, according to which she would have gained her freedom. According to Shariah, an Umm Walad, the female slave who gives birth to the child of her master is entitled to her freedom after the death of her master. Although it is generally believed that the sale of Umm Walad was allowed by the Prophet after her master’s death and only Omar bin Khattab, the second caliph of Islam prohibited it, the facts point to the contrary with ample evidence suggesting that the Prophet himself outlawed it according to the following Hadith:

72 © FARZANA

HASSAN

The messenger ofAllah disallowed the selling of Um Walad. He said “They must not be sold or gifted or inherited. As long as the master is alive he may enjoy her but when he dies, she will be free.” According to the above, the notion of owning female slaves exclusively for sexual gratification was at the very least, discouraged by Islam even in times when such practices were rampant. Some historical evidence based on Hadith however suggests the prospects of acquiring female slaves exclusively for the above purpose may have acted as an incentive for some early Muslim military excursions.

Once again, the following verse clearly spells out the terms and conditions stipulating marriage with various categories of women:

Also prohibited are women already married, except those whom your right hands possess. Thus had God ordained (prohibitions) against you, except for those all other are lawful, provided you seek them in marriage with gifts from your property. Declaring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers at least as prescribed, but ifafter a dower is prescribed ye agree mutually to vary it there is no blame on you and God is all knowing, All wise. (4:24)

Clearly the command here for the categories of women being discussed is to marry them in order to preserve their chastity, rather than lust after them, as has been suggested by those who understand verses of the Quran in a literal way. Verses 23 and 24 of Chapter Four speak of marriage with certain categories of women, and milk yameens (or captives of war) are discussed among these categories.

Islam,

Women,

and the Challenges

of Today

¢ 73

A closer scrutiny of the Quranic verses also raises another interesting point. If men were indeed allowed the option of enjoying sexual partners in the form of concubines, then the Quranic command exhorting them to marry would appear redundant, as there would be little incentive left for them to do so. It stands to reason then, that concubinage was permitted only within the framework of marriage, or if it was not a marriage or “nikah” in the technical sense, then it was a de facto marriage with all the rights and responsibilities associated with that relationship. While some may find the above discourse to be a series of apologetics on the subject of concubinage, suffice it to say that I favour this view above others simply because solutions to forms of modern sexslavery must be sought from within the framework of Islam. As mentioned earlier, the whole issue of concubinage in Islam is linked to the temporary permission and subsequent abolition of the institution. If slavery was eventually abolished by Islam (47:4),

then one must conclude that concubinage was also similarly outlawed. This is not to suggest that Quranic verses are above being interpreted in a manner that would legitimize harems in the past and a form of concubinage in modern times. Anecdotal accounts indicate that a form of sex-slavery still exists in countries such as Saudi Arabia involving the abuse of Filipino nannies and housekeepers. It is indeed a shame that Quranic verses are quoted to justify promiscuity and the exploitation of women who are disadvantaged economically. A small percentage of Muslim men justify their own illicit relations with Non-Muslim women based on the perceived permission for concubinage. They believe they can have a sexual relationship with non-Muslim women based on the historical sanction for concubinage, whereas they must only marry Muslim women.

74 @ FARZANA

HASSAN

The Taliban for example, were in the habit of taking concubines based on their perception of who was Muslim or otherwise. What an unfortunate view that ought to be discouraged wherever possible!

Islam,

Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© 75

Set: Woes

IS WIFE

BATTERY PERMITTED IN ISLAM?

Question: Even today, while many countries have outlawed domestic violence, the debate continues within Muslim

communities over whether the Quran permits a husband to use force to discipline his wife. It is generally agreed that he has this right although he must exercise it with restraint. This begs the question: Would he do so in a fit of rage and if there is even a slight chance of this privilege being abused, why would the Quran even hint at giving the husband such authority over the wife?

I grew up in a country where the abuse of women was a common if not an epidemic occurrence. More disturbing was the fact that such abuse was not confined to the impoverished rural classes where ignorance about religious precepts prevailed. The old patriarchal attitudes existed across all social and economic strata of Pakistani society. Honour killings, wife battery, marital rape and assault were committed with impunity—often in the name of Islam. Women suffered oppression and injustice on a daily basis. And yet the forces allowing a society to permit such wrong

76 ® FARZANA

HASSAN

seemed to be gathering momentum with the rise of religious fundamentalism. The horrific images of Zainab Noor’s burnt body, whose husband had stuck a burning rod through her genitalia leaving her abdominal walls and intestinal passages completely burnt and bruised, still haunts human rights activists everywhere. A local cleric of considerable repute, the husband had forbidden his wife to visit her family. She was duty-bound to obey him and if she refused, he had the right to inflict punishment on her, he had announced. I visited the unfortunate woman while she was still in hospital. Hardly a four-foot- ten-inch frame, she lay on the hospital bed shrivelled up, bracing for the next throbbing pain. She was unable to respond to me when | asked her how she was faring. Her poor mother sat beside her, barely able to hold back tears as she witnessed her daughter’s agony. I begged the mother not to send Zainab back to her barbarian husband, for only a barbarian could inflict such untold pain on another who was so much weaker and vulnerable than him. Was he apprehended, tried and convicted under Pakistani law? Yes, but his punishment certainly did not equal his crime. These beatings, assaults and honour killings were seen only as “crimes of passion perpetrated under extreme provocation.” In other words, the women deserved what they got. I wondered why our ethics and morality had become so skewed that we repeatedly turned a blind eye to such cruelty and iniquity. What had brought an entire nation to think this way and to condone such inhuman acts of violence towards the weak and downtrodden? Was it being condoned or excused in the name of Islam? Could this have any basis whatsoever in the Quran? Would the Quran even hint at approving violence against women and place the powerful in a position of authority over the meek? Keeping male anger and pugnacity in view, would the Quran permit wife

Islam, Women, and the Challenges of Today

© 77

battery and hence jeopardize the safety and rights of women? I pondered verse 4:34 of the Quran long and hard. According to one well known English translation, the Quran stated the following about the husband’s right to discipline his wife for misconduct or rebellion.

Men are the protectors and sustainers of women, because God has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because

they support them from their means, therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard themselves (in the husbands’ absence) what God would have them guard. As for those women from whom you fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), refuse to share their beds (next) (and last) beat them

(lightly). But if they return to obedience, seek not against them, means of annoyance, For God is most High, Great (above all). (Quran 4:34)

I asked scholars and clerics about the meaning of such verses. Beat them lightly? How would a man monitor his privilege to beat a woman lightly in a fit of rage? Could there be another meaning of the Arabic word—Arabic being such a contiguously rich language with several possible meanings for one word, and what could be more complex than the 1400-year-old Classical Arabic of the Quran in this day and age? Indeed, I discovered that the Arabic word for “beating” A/Zarb, derived from the root word zaraba—could have up to sixty meanings. Surely the Quran did not mean “beat your wives” when it could just as easily mean something else. I researched other translations and commentaries of the word and here is what I discovered.

Each translation acknowledged the right of the husband to discipline his wife for rebellious conduct. One translation ren-

78 © FARZANA

HASSAN

dered the words as “scourge them.” This rendition was obviously not as benign as “beat them (lightly).” Another well-known translation said: “Chastise them,” giving full authority to the husband to exercise his disciplinary powers. Zainab Noor’s plight had indeed found basis in the Quranic translation because chastising could encompass any manner of punishment as a means of disciplining a woman. Consistent with the above is the view of traditional scholars who argue that the husband enjoys a disciplinary right over the wife since he has been given responsibility for her overall wellbeing. Of lesser intelligence, as proponents of Islamic jurisprudence argue, she is incapable of making certain decisions for herself. Such readings of the Quran demand utter subservience from a woman to her husband. If she is to have her way about something, it is only by his leave. I searched for more answers in Hadith literature. While I found the literature to be misogynist, chauvinistic, and contradictory in its message, one Hadith stated that a woman could not be hit anywhere except on the back of her shoulder, and that too as a symbolic gesture to express extreme displeasure for a certain type of conduct. Based on that particular Hadith, some have suggested hitting the woman with a toothbrush (a muswag or dried acacia twig, really) because it is harmless and will not cause injury. Others formulated an entire methodology focused around wife-battery. The husband, for example, must not leave a mark on her tender skin,

must not break any bones, must not use anything sharp—in short, the husband must not administer any punishment with force. According to traditional exegetes, dharban ghayra mubarrih (or “a light tap that leaves no mark”) is the method prescribed by the Prophet to deal with a transgressing or rebellious wife. The Hadith, however, raised more questions for me than it answered.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 79

First, would a man remember to exercise the necessary restraint and employ his acacia-twig toothbrush in a kindly and just manner when in a fit of rage or would he simply dispense with it, opting for harsher measures? Secondly, if admonishing the wife gently, and then banishing her from his bed is not a tactic that worked in the first place, would beating her lightly with a toothbrush elicit the desired behaviour or response? Third, why was only the husband given the authority to discipline? If he committed an act of lewdness or transgression, would she have a reciprocal right to discipline him? Most importantly, what would constitute such transgression or rebellion? Would a mere academic dispute between spouses be construed as an act of rebellion? Would a difference over child rearing be construed as an act of rebellion? Rebellion from the wife could possibly constitute the entire gamut of married life. The Grand Mufti of Egypt fortunately narrowed such acts of rebellion down to a wife’s refusal to go to bed with her husband. He said the husband could then smack his wife to make her comply. Another noted scholar of Islam in Canada, the aforemen-

tioned Dr. Jamal Badawi of Queen Mary College, Nova Scotia, gives the following explanations or justifications for wife-beating: In extreme cases, or whenever greater harm such as divorce is a likely option, it allows for a husband to administer a gentle pat to his wife that causes no physical harm to the body, nor leaves any sort of mark. It may serve in some cases to bring to the wife's attention the seriousness of her continued unreasonable behaviour. He further suggests:

In some cases a husband may use some light disciplining action in order to correct the moral infraction of his wife but this is only

80 © FARZANA

HASSAN

applicable in extreme cases and it should be resorted to ifone is sure tt would improve the situation. “A light pat” in response to an “extreme moral infraction” was alas being suggested as a somewhat incongruous remedy. Husbands were allowed to beat their wives, albeit with a toothbrush, if they persisted in pursuing their extramarital adventures or other perceived infractions of fidelity. Maybe the rationale was to spare the wife public embarrassment in the event she was discovered—in which case she would be administered a hundred stripes of the whip, rod or cane—no less. If he were to beat her with a toothbrush she would think twice about committing adultery for which she would have to face prospects of public humiliation, much like an unruly child is disciplined by a parent to prevent him from acting irresponsibly in public and face the wrath of a far more uncharitable world. For months I revelled in the satisfaction that indeed Islam and the Quran were protecting women from the harsh public humiliation in case they committed adultery and were caught. But the toothbrush remained a problem, as I was not too convinced about its preventive or disciplinary powers. . As I continued my quest I came across an interpretation of verse 4:34 permitting wife battery that both intrigued and fascinated me. The tide was changing and Ijtihad was indeed being practised right here in the bustling multicultural, multi-faith city of Toronto. Shabir Ally, President of the Islamic Information and Da’wah Centre, Toronto, explained the verse based on Dr. Khalid Abul Fadhl’s interpretation of verse 4:34 on his weekly television program Let the Quran Speak. He introduced the hitherto unfamiliar notion that “perhaps” this verse was not addressed to the husband after all, and was instead addressed to the community whose

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 81

responsibility it would be to administer the punishment for adultery. The Quran prescribed a hundred stripes for the adulterer and the adulteress, and that too only if there was enough proof of the sexual offence. The proof, too, demanded the testimony of four

adult male witnesses of excellent repute who would have to be eye-witnesses to the act of penetration to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that adultery had in fact been committed. Quite apart from the fact that such an act would not be committed in the presence of four adult male witnesses of good repute, and hence evidence for such a crime would be virtually impossible to procure unless pregnancy or confession was forthcoming, the administering of the hundred stripes would be a rare occurrence if not entirely impossible to implement from a practical standpoint. Thus, according to the highly respected and erudite Shabir Ally, the husband had no entitlement to beat his wife lightly, with a toothbrush or in any other way, but if she was adamant about leading a promiscuous lifestyle and refused to heed her husband’s loving warnings and admonition, she would have to face the public humiliation of a hundred stripes after her guilt had been established through the testimony of four adult male witnesses of good repute. I grudgingly accepted this explanation on two counts. First, the rebellious wife would not be left vulnerable to the whims, fan-

cies or rage of the husband. And second, the beating or flogging would have to be administered to both the guilty parties, not just the woman. Why then did the Quran only speak of women in this verse? The answer lay in the fact that the entire chapter was devoted exclusively to addressing women’s issues and flogging for adultery as it applied to them, had to be included. The above interpretation was also consistent with the Hadith of the Prophet forbidding husbands to beat their wives: It reads:

82 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

Do not beat the female servants ofAllah.

The Prophet is also reported to have driven home the same point to his followers by asking them the following question: How does anyone of you beat his wife as he beats the stallion or camel and then embrace her?

A modern commentary of the Quran provides yet another alternative explanation of Verse 4:34, favouring the view that the Quran does not sanction the beating of women by their husbands: Ahmed Ali in his explanation of verse 4:34 states: “nushuz” apart from rising up, ill treatment, also means aversion to an act, and has been used in this sense here as in 4:128 for men’s aversion.

Ahmed Ali explains that in verse 4:34 the word “nushuz” often translated as women’s rebellion, actually means women’s aversion to sex. He further states that zaraba metaphorically means to have intercourse with women. The three stages described in the Quran, he says, suggest talking to women persuasively, leaving them alone if they are still averse to sex, and finally having intercourse with them when they are ready. This interpretation does not even acknowledge a hint for sanctioning wife-battery in the Quran. But even if one were to accept the most obvious meaning of verse 4:34 as “beating”, Hasan Mahmud of the Muslim Canadian Congress offers the following suggestion:

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 83

He sates:

For the Quran the real challenge was not establishing women rights magically overnight but to slowly develop the concept of human/women rights. In people’s psyche, including women’s. Once that is done the man-made systems are expected to be fair and just. But in such a society establishing total equity in a day would be unreal. So the intension was evolution, not revolution.

Domestic violence remains a problem even in Western countries; however the law offers redress and protection to women who may be affected by it. Islamic law must not fall short of this important provision by permitting assault, even in a benign form, not only because such permission entails the possibility of abuse, but also because such conduct is not conducive to relationships that are based on friendship, love and trust.

Islamic law must therefore “evolve” to a level of empathy for women as Mahmud suggests.

84 © FARZANA

HASSAN

Eee oe

CAN MUSLIM WOMEN LEAD MIXED-GENDER PRAYERS?

Many Muslims contend that there are no precedents of women leading mixed-gender prayers during the Prophet's lifetime. They therefore feel it is not permitted in Islam. Is there an express injunction in the Quran or Sunnah barring women

from leading such prayers?

It was a warm, sultry afternoon on Canada Day 2005, when a

diverse group of 218 Muslim women and men gathered behind a female Imam in the upper story of the first ever mosque to host the historic female-led Jumma prayer. The mosque, run by the courageous Imam Jabbar Ally and his colleagues from the United Muslims Association, was undoubtedly a fitting venue for the equally courageous Pamela Taylor, co-chair of the Progressive Muslims Union, to deliver her Jumma sermon. As the crowd’s excitement

subsided, the dignified and calm, yet determined

Muslim woman, began to share her unique insights and perspectives, followed by the prayer service and “dua” for Muslim and non-Muslim people of the world alike—a novel and commendable gesture, I thought.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 85

During her learned Khutha or sermon, Pamela Taylor reinforced the cherished Islamic ideals of equality, love for all, tolerance and universal brotherhood. Engrossed in the magic of her words, the crowd sat silently absorbing the wisdom they reflected. Only occasionally was the silence broken by barely audible whispers and mummers, commending this remarkable woman for both her courage and her wisdom. None of the sexist fear-mongering around women’s sensuality or its purported negative impact on prayer services ever materialized. While maintaining the utmost decorum, the Muslim men present at that auspicious gathering, faithfully accorded their learned “sister” in Islam, the utmost courtesy, listening to her words attentively and respectfully. While the men and women occupied both front and back rows of the prayer hall, there were no artificial or external barriers, such as walls or curtains to restrain “lusty” glances. There were none! What was prevalent instead among the men and women present was an innate sense of propriety towards each other, a powerful barrier in itself! Even more heart-warming to observe was the unity within the diverse crowd of Muslims. Ismailis, Ahmedis, Asna Asharis, Sunnis, Gays and Lesbians, all sat together under one roof, under

one leader, upholding only one message of peace and love for all. And here, equality was no longer just a cliché to be applauded at dinner parties and conveniently forgotten later; rather it was a reality reflected in the practice of Muslims on that warm sunny afternoon in Toronto. Respect for women was not just a matter of idle talk any more, but an accomplished goal made possible by the vision, efforts and bravery of men and women from the United Muslims Association, the Muslim Canadian Congress, the Progressive Muslims Union and all those, who in spite of the opposition, the vitriol, and dire warnings of impending hell fire,

86 © FARZANA

HASSAN

came out to support them. They came because of conviction, guided by the firm belief that the Quran does not discriminate on the basis of gender. Nowhere does the Quran prohibit the imamate of women. There is nothing supporting such a prohibition in authentic Hadith either. At best Hadith contains contradictory messages. For this reason alone, the entire corpus of Hadith literature must be re-evaluated as a source of true Islamic belief. Whereas one Hadith describes a precedent for a woman leading a mixed gender prayer, another contradicts it by suggesting women must not pray in the front rows of mosques thereby implying they must not lead prayers. The contradiction in Hadith is evident from the cited texts:

Narrated Umm Waraga, daughter of Nawfal:

When the Prophet proceeded for the battle ofBadr, I said to him: Apostle ofAllah allow me to accompany you in the battle. I shall act as a nurse for patients. It is possible that Allah might bestow martyrdom upon me. He said: stay at home, Allah the Almighty will bestow martyrdom upon you. The narrator said: hence she was called a martyr. She read the Quran. She sought permission from the Prophet to have a muaddhin in her house. He therefore permitted her to do so. She announced that her slave and slavegirl would be free after her death. One night they went to her and strangled her with a sheet of cloth until she died and they ran away. Next day Umar announced among the people. Anyone who has knowledge about them or has seen them should bring them to him. Umar (after their arrest) ordered (to crucify them) and they were crucified. This was the first crucifixion at Medina.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

® 87

The Hadith implying women cannot lead prayers is as follows:

Abu Hurriarah said the Prophet said ‘the best rows of men are the front rows and the worst rows are the back rows and the best rows of women are the back rows and the worst rows are the front rows.

Thus the contradictory messages from Hadith are interpreted to suit various agendas. Again one must cast doubts on the very authenticity of literature which is replete with conflicting messages. Clearly no single interpretation can be preferred over another, hence to suggest that women leading prayer is totally prohibited finds no basis whatsoever in the two primary sources of Shariah: i.e. Quran and Hadith. The case for the permissibility of women’s imamate on the other hand can be strengthened by examining a widely accepted rule for arriving at religious fatwas or opinions. According to the established “usul-ul-fiqgh”or principles of jurisprudence, if there is no explicit prohibition against an act or mode of conduct either in the Quran or Hadith, the act is to be deemed permissible. Indeed there is no clear prohibition against women leading mixed gender prayers in either of the two primary sources of Shariah. The “prohibition” against female-led prayers is merely an inference drawn from the terminology of the cited Hadith. Objections raised against women leading prayers stem largely from conditioning that is often sexist. Comments are made about menstruation occurring during prayers as an impediment against

women assuming such responsibilities. The prospect of women prostrating in front of men is also dreaded, as this might stir feelings of lust in men. Let it be said that men can and have been

88 ¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

trained to respond otherwise to the leadership of women. However, it will require the shedding of deeply entrenched sexist attitudes before the imamate of women achieves universal approval. Some have argued that if female imamate were indeed permissible, Islamic history would be replete with precedents of the Prophet’s wives or other well- known Muslim women leading men in prayer during his ministry. The example of Umm Waraqa leading her community in prayer is dismissed as an exceptional concession given to a woman who was exempt from going to war. However, exceptions prove the fact that there is nothing intrinsically wrong with a woman leading a mixed-gender prayer. One could also argue against the demand for any precedent at all of women leading prayer during the time of the Prophet. Why would any woman or man lead the congregation in prayer in the presence of the holy Prophet of Islam? Indeed Abu Bakr led the prayers when the Prophet took ill because he was his closest companion. But simply because the Prophet expressed a preference for his closest companion to substitute him, does not automatically preclude the imamate of women. There is a debate raging within the Catholic Church over the ordination of women priests as well. Orthodox Judaism also does not grant women the same religious privileges as men. However, I am not aware of any fatwas against reformed synagogues or liberal churches if they wished to accord women such a status. Conservative Muslims similarly must accommodate the position of those who wish te practice a more liberal understanding of Islam without threatening them constantly with fatwas of apostasy.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 89

te) Mea

ADULIERY«

7

+

i

a.

—

=

s]

“a »

oe ONS

.~

a

‘

en paste sly ander

ie

ss baat) 4h vanes thats eters

’

ne

aitshinei REO ene Veh y iw baat

_

ae

saitug hres:

argigils eeu 3: gAaatal atht IVINS “1K eatsanivorgange a tye! fas bras cel

;

ee

a

. ee

a fs sais + west ity; ait rie att

ere vant nt.

Mee

ea

“eye wad 1 vias arte nuciew ent

oa

ie

eae

aa rr: > yyiecnirest

Sona

. a

oe :

ae

p

"

am 5

Te ’

‘i

4

a

#e

-

ay x

%

2

*

i

ci ,

i

a :

i

te 16

CONCERNS

OF

"DIASPORA

MUSLIMS

When two cultures meet, a necessary outcome is the blending and mixing of beliefs and practices wherever the interaction leans towards assimilation. It is often noted that Muslims are particularly leery of such a consequence and therefore choose to remain insulated from mainstream society, be it Western, Hindu or other.

The preservation of the doctrinal purity of Islam is of paramount concern to Muslim communities living especially in the West. The infusion of Western moral standards and cultural mores into their own ideological framework is a possibility dreaded by traditional Muslims who often shun what they deem the moral laxity of the West. Because of this resistance to incorporate the moral standards of the West, Muslims face continual challenges in trying to preserve the viability of their own culture. Muslim children often avoid forming friendships with non-Muslims. Girls in particular are guarded from this influence as they must not marry outside their faith, or they could be excommunicated. As a Quranic provision, women of seventh-century Arabia being the economic responsibility of men were advised not to marry non-Muslims as they would be forced into accepting their disbelief. Their position in society was one of subservience to the husband. He could therefore demand that she renounce her faith

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 131

in favour of his beliefs. Men, on the other hand, could marry women who belonged to the Ehl-e-Kitab

(People of the Book), namely, Jews and

Christians. Read in conjunction with another verse of the Quran which prohibits marrying “those who join partners with Allah,” one could argue that Christians would fall under this category as they deify Jesus Christ. However, Muslims generally agree that Christian women are permissible for Muslim men to marry. While many Muslim parents might welcome a son’s marriage to a Christian, as this would open the door to her conversion to Islam, daughters are almost universally barred from even considering such a prospect. The reason is again the threat of excommunication.

Yet once again one must ask if the reasons for barring women from marrying outside the faith still exist. Women are no longer dependent on men and therefore no longer in a position of total submission to their husbands. Faith too is a matter of personal opinion. If one has faith, no amount of external control or influence can possibly dislodge it. Ijtihad is once again needed to revisit the restriction on young Muslim women to marry outside the faith. Their rights must be re-examined and brought at par with their male counterparts who enjoy the privilege of marrying women who are not Muslim. Many who marry Muslims often choose to adopt Islam as their religion although this is not the only reason for conversion to Islam. Many Westerners are attracted to the simplicity of the message, its uncomplicated theology and ascetic moral standards. Sometimes converts to Islam feel they must even adopt Arabic names to authenticate their transformation. Some adopt the Arab attire while those who marry among Pakistani Muslims begin to wear the Shalwar-Kameez as an expression of Muslim modesty. This is obviously motivated by a desire to conform to what has

132

¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

come to be regarded as a distinct Muslim identity. Distinctiveness in dress and attire is also recommended by traditionalists among Muslims based on an oral tradition attributed to the Prophet which suggests Muslims must behave and dress differently from non-Muslims. On the other hand, a strong case can be made for the preservation of one’s previous identity even after Islam is adopted as a faith. If Islam is truly universal as Muslims believe, its manifestations cannot be confined to a particular culture, language or dress. It must therefore reflect the names, the attire and the cultures of

communities where it begins to take root. When Islam was introduced to Arabia, Prophet Mohammad did not tamper with the existing culture, although he introduced certain modifications to it, particularly with respect to elevating the status of women. First and foremost it must be borne in mind that because of its professed universality, Islam can flourish in any culture and among any individuals without demanding change in their outward appearance or nomenclatures. There is therefore no religious requirement for converts to Islam either to change their names or what they are accustomed to wearing. Every dress and name is Islamic as long as it is modest and not offensive to anyone. Closely linked to the unwarranted “Arabization” of Islam, and therefore confining Islam to particular cultures, traditions, nomenclatures and dresses, is the recent prohibition against replacing the Deity’s name “Allah” by any other name. Again if Muslims believe Islam was preached to all nations, their ancient inhabitants must have called Allah by names that corresponded to the demands of their peculiar tongues and languages. Many Muslims shun the use of the term “God” or “Khuda” and insist on using “Allah” alone. While it should be a matter of individual choice to invoke the Deity only by its Arabic or Quranic name, those who are accustomed to other terms must not be reviled or rebuked. In

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© 133

recent times, the term Allah Hafiz has taken over the original Khuda Hafiz as a farewell wish among South Asian Muslims. Insistence on the former term again confines Islam to being a religion with strongly Arab overtones and influence whereas Islam is meant to be universal in its appeal to all peoples. Many Muslim parents insist their daughters begin to wear the hijab at a young age so they will get accustomed to wearing it when it becomes a religious obligation on them. Whether or not the hijab—in the sense of a piece of cloth tied around their head— is a religious obligation or not has been discussed in another chapter. A discussion on the practice’s societal implications is nonetheless warranted here. Many young Muslim girls leave their homes wearing the hijab simply to please their parents and shed the piece of cloth when they arrive at school. Like most adolescents, they wish to feel accepted in the school environment. In many instances, the hijab also invites ridicule towards the one wearing it. Muslims need to ask if this was the intent of the Quran. Having gone through the various verses of the Quran “enjoining hijab” it becomes obvious that it was initiated to protect women from aggression and derision. If in the contemporary setting, the hijab comes to have the opposite effect in some parts of the world, it must be revisited as a precept of the faith. Although of little relevance to the Canadian context, the hijab controversy in France seems to yet again be based on the notion that the hijab is a religious requirement whereas it can easily be argued that it is not. After living in Canada for over twenty years, I have come to admire the honesty and transparency of Canadian society with respect to gender roles. On the other hand, where such roles are more overtly defined through apparel and social hierarchy, there is greater risk of drawing attention to sexual identities. Wearing a Burka may in fact draw greater attention to being female. Greater openness with respect to dress and demeanour on the other hand

134

¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

is an equalizing factor, an added benefit of which is a greater acceptance and empathy for the opposite sex, as there is greater interaction.

Lastly, many Muslims are urging each other to get involved in the affairs of the larger Canadian family. They are re-examining some of their attitudes pertaining to the issues that bedevil Muslims both in the East and the West. Above all, as a concerned Muslim woman, I urge my co-religionists to stop treating Islam as

something so fragile that it will not withstand the test of time or the impact of multiculturalism and pluralism. Greater integration will also act as a potent force against growing Islamophobia.

Islam,

Women,

and the Challenges of Today

® 135

oe ey

DOES

TSLAM

PROHIBIT

MUSIC

AND

ART?

There is a range of opinions within Muslim discourse about the permissibility of music and art in Islam. What exactly does the Quran say about expression through the fine arts?

Years ago, I met a young boy who refused to attend music and art class in his school because he considered both activities “haram” or prohibited. Too young to form opinions of his own, he had obviously been indoctrinated into holding and professing the views of his elders and religious teachers. Since all aspects of Islam are under tremendous scrutiny nowadays, the issue of whether Islam permits expression through music and art has also appeared as the subject of debate and dialogue in newspapers, magazines and Internet forums. Opinions range from favouring the total prohibition of music, to allowing artistic expression in all its diverse forms and cultural manifestations. For one who has learnt to play and teach music, I was naturally curious to ascertain the accuracy of these opinions from a strictly Islamic perspective. As I embarked upon locating verses in the Quran prohibiting music, I was surprised to find none!

136

¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

My other option was to read certain opinions on the issue. Dr. Yusuf Al Qaradawi’s book, The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam, seemed like a logical choice for me to explore the orthodox rulings on music and art. Again, surprisingly, I found the otherwise fundamentalist and doctrinaire scholar of Islam endorsing some forms of music. He stated: Islam permits singing under the condition that it is not in any way harmful to Islamic morals. There is no harm in its being accompanied by music which is not exciting.

He further goes on to establish the permissibility of music by stating that most stories of Hadith supporting his contention are taken from Bukhari, whose compendium on Hadith is considered the most authentic. Those who wish to establish the general prohibition of music in Islam on the other hand, also rely on “authentic” Hadith. Abu Bilal Mustafa Al-Kanadi, in a booklet entitled The Islamic Ruling on Music and Singing, refutes Sheikh Qaradawi’s claims by stating the sheikh mistakenly views all Hadith prohibiting music as weak. He suggests Qaradawi’s opinion is not the result of “meticulous critical research” or that, indeed, the Hadith dismantled by Qaradawi are authentic with documented chains of narration. Al-Kanadi cites the following Hadith to support this contention: There will be a people of my ummah (nation) who will seek to make lawful: fornication, the wearing of silk, wine-drinking and the use of musical instruments. His interpretation of the Hadith is best explained in his own words:

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 137

The word of consequence here is the Arabic term “ma‘azif’. In order to discover what it implies, one must turn to Arabic dictionaries of Hadith terms and the scholarly works. According to Lisa’an-ul-Arab, ma’aazif is the plural of mi’za or azf, and indicates objects or instruments ofplay or leisure which are beat upon for their sound. If the singular form is used (“mi’zaf’), it specifically means a type of large wooden drum used mainly by the people of Yemen. The noun azf also stands for the art ofplaying with “ma’aazif’, i.e., hand drums or other instruments which are

struck upon.

Al-Kanadi further describes Ma’azif to include singing as well. He further explains: Such a detailed analysis of the meaning of the term ma‘azif, as mentioned in the most authoritative dictionaries of the Arabic language, is necessary to refute any other possible attempts to “explain away” or “interpret” it in a manner suiting their precon-

ceived notions or opinions. It clearly has been established that the word ma‘azif according to correct Arabic usage—indicates a specific number of things: (a) musical instruments, (b) the sounds of the instruments, and (c) singing to the instrumental accompantment.

Al-Kanadi also states that the wording of the Hadith which says “some members of the ummah will seek to make lawful” clearly indicates they will seek to make lawful only that which is unlawful. He acknowledges this as conclusive evidence for the prohibition of music in Islam. The problem with his interpretation arises when other Hadith allowing the use of the daf, which falls under the category of ma‘azif accompanied by singing, appear to hold equal if not

138

¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

greater authenticity than the Hadith cited above. If all “authentic” Hadith are to be treated at par, then a contradiction emerges with respect to the command about music and singing, if indeed there is one. As stated earlier, some orthodox scholars such as Qaradawi

have sanctioned a limited permissibility of music based on one such Hadith narrated by Aisha, the Prophet’s youngest and favourite wife, which reads:

Ayesha narrated that during the days ofMina, on the day ofEidul-Adha, two girls were with her, singing and playing on a hand drum. The Prophet was present, listening to them with his head under a shawl. Abu Bakr then entered and scolded the girls. The Prophet, uncovering his face, told him, “Let them be Abu Bakr. These are the days of Eid.” Based ona literal interpretation of the above Hadith, traditional scholars of Islam suggest that music, in a restricted way, is permissible on special occasions: Yet one must ask why the Prophet would allow something “repugnant” to Islamic morals even as an exception, when the doctrine of necessity which usually makes “halal” (permissible) that which is haram (prohibited) according to

Shariah, was not the issue here? This would be akin to suggesting that fornication, which is clearly prohibited in the Quran, would

become halal on special occasions! Alternatively, the controversy around music and singing generated by the contradictory messages in Hadith could be reconciled by considering the following arguments. Music is intrinsically not prohibited: Only some uses of it were deprecated by the Prophet, and that too only if the Hadith cited are indeed authentic. One must again re-examine the context in which these pronouncements may have been made by the Prophet.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 139

In pre-Islamic Arabia, women and young girls were often sold and forced into prostitution which involved singing in public. Presumably it was the association of music with such practice that was deprecated by the Prophet, not music per se. Where music and singing were not accompanied by such practice, the Prophet allowed and even encouraged its use. It is therefore essential to examine the social context of certain Hadith, even if taken as

authentic, in arriving at a valid ruling on music. Again, Al-Kanadi’s analysis creates a further problem. His interpretation would have to include the daf as prohibited, which was Clearly allowed by the Prophet in another Hadith. Also, there appears to be no hard and fast rule pertaining to the prohibition of music according to the message in the following Hadith as well, quoted by Ibn Hazam: The Messenger ofAllah said, “Deeds will be judged according to intentions, and everyone will get what he intended.”

Thus, if music results in the exploitation of women, certainly its use will have to be considered suspect. However, if it is sought as innocent entertainment, or as an art form linked to heightened intellectual activity, it cannot possibly be frowned upon. Let us also examine the rationale for allowing a restricted enjoyment of music as approved by Sheikh Qaradawi. For some years now, the Muslim community in the Greater Toronto Area has organized a festival called “Muslim Fest’” to display Muslim art forms such as calligraphy and Nasheed, the singing of religious and pious songs without accompaniment. Often the advertisements to these festivals state that music being performed is “strictly in line with the Shariah.” Frequently what this means is that women are not to sing in public. Singing, if there is any, will be a cappella (without accompaniment). Also, if there is any accompa-

140

¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

niment, it will only be the drum or its older version prevalent in the time of the Prophet known as the daf which, incidentally, has also been declared prohibited according to Al-Kanadi. The Hadith in question reads: Ayesha related that the Messenger ofAllah said, “Proclaim this marriage, solemnize it in the mosque and beat the daf upon its occasion.”

This Hadith clearly permits the daf whereas the Hadith quoted by Al-Kanadai would have to include the daf in the general prohibition against music. The contradiction only strengthens the view that the corpus of Hadith is not to be trusted in the same manner as the Quran. Whereas Hadith is full of contradictions on this issue and therefore must be discounted, the Quran itself con-

tains no prohibition against music. The basic rule here as everywhere else is that when something is not expressly prohibited, it is deemed permitted. Those who permit the limited use of music such as the organizers of the Muslim Fest must also consider the following: They base their decision only on the most literal and obvious dictates found in the Quran and Hadith. Here, what is obvious is the use

of the daf on special occasions. These Muslims must ask themselves the question: had the violin instead of the daf been in vogue during the Prophet’s lifetime, would he have banned the daf and permitted the violin? I recently met Taha Ghayyur, a very diligent and pleasant young man, who happens to be one of the organizers of Muslim Fest. He reassured me that he would seriously consider some of my critique discussed above and strive to be more inclusive of women, in future programs and events. One must also look at the issue of depicting physical objects

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

@ 141

on paper. The only visual art form that has enjoyed the universal sanction of Muslims is calligraphy, as it does not make use of human beings or other living things as its subject. Again, there is no prohibition against depicting physical objects on paper in the Quran. Hadith prohibits physical representations of objects simply to discourage idolatrous practices akin to the injunction in the Ten Commandments of God against “graven images.” If one were to acknowledge the importance of intention as the criterion for determining right from wrong, one could conclude that only the physical representation of God is discouraged, not a human flight of imagination that simply wishes to imitate life on paper. Items reproduced on paper are rarely if ever venerated as objects of worship. Art and music enrich our lives and brighten up our spirits. A world devoid of culture and refinement associated with the various art forms must only make life extremely dull.

142

e FARZANA

HASSAN

fost? yh

LAM S&S LOTIIICALAC

ULTURE

The world of Islam appears to be in a constant state of political turmoil. Thus far no viable democratic institutions have emerged on the political landscape of many Muslim countries. Is there an ideological clash between Islamic forms of governance and Western liberal democracies?

Fourteen centuries ago, around the year 623 of the Christian era, an Islamic state began to emerge in the city of Medina for the newly established Muslim community under the leadership of the Prophet Mohammed. While still in Mecca and still in the midst of extreme opposition to his message, the Prophet had received a delegation of tribal leaders from Medina, asking him to migrate to the city to act as mediator in their disputes. The Prophet readily accepted the offer and ordered Muslims to begin the migration two hundred miles north. Abu Bakr, the Prophet’s closest companion and the first caliph of Islam accompanied the Prophet on his journey, which although fraught with many dangers, ended successfully within a duration

Islam, Women, and the Challenges of Today

¢ 143

of three weeks by camel. Mohammed arrived in the midst of a jubilant crowd of followers who beat the drum as they sang the words:

“The white moon rose over us From the valley of Wada And we owe it to show gratefulness When the call is to Allah. O! you who were raised amongst us, Coming with a word to be obeyed, You have brought to this city nobleness, Welcome best Caller to God’s Way”

They all welcomed him, housed him, adored and obeyed him. Soon a charter enumerating the rights and responsibilities of the residents of Medina was drafted. A shrewd statesman, the

Prophet was cognizant of the needs of the many diverse groups living within Medina. Those differences would have to be accounted for and accommodated. Pluralism as a desired ideal of the Medina Charter was expressed by allowing freedom of faith to all the various communities. Kassem Ahmed, a contemporary writer on Islam describes the characteristics of the Medina Charter quite succinctly in the following words: Perhaps, in the light of present Muslim interest in an “Islamic state,” we should point out that this important constitutional document ofIslam does not anywhere use the term “Islamic state” or “Islamic society.” The major principles governing an Islamic society are, of course, present—principles like justice, brotherhood and unity of believers, unity and cooperation among citizens of the state, freedom of religion, strict adherence to pacts entered into

144

¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

between parties, cooperation to do good and to prevent evil, encouragement for high moral conduct, consultation as a method of government. It is also interesting to note that what has been called “Hudud laws,” being part ofIslamic Law, is also nowhere mentioned in the document.

As an example of the above described pluralism, Clause 25, allowing Medinan Jews the freedom to practice their faith reads as follows:

(25)

The Jews of the B. ‘Auf are one community with

the believers (the Jews have their religion and the Muslims have theirs), their freedmen and their

persons except those who behave unjustly and sinfully, for they hurt but themselves and their families.

Other clauses of the Medina Charter upheld God’s Divine Law as the arbiter in disputes, contrary to Kassem’s contention cited above.: Clause 42 states:

(42)

If any dispute or controversy likely to cause trouble should arise it must be referred to God and to Muhammad the apostle of God. God accepts what is nearest to piety and goodness in this document.

As one reads through other clauses of the Medina Charter however, one cannot help but conclude that many aspects of governance were omitted from its conceptual framework. The issue of transmission of power for example was never addressed, the implications of which remained a problem throughout Islamic history. Far from being a complete constitution, the document list-

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 145

edsome rights and responsibilities of the diverse Medina citizenry, but did not fully address all the needs of that nascent multifaith community. While some rudimentary democratic principles were evident in the charter such as pluralism and scholarly consultation discussed above, no comprehensive theory of Islamic democracy or governance could be extrapolated from it. This has led to two separate conclusions within the discourse on Islam, democracy and governance. Modernists and reformists argue that democracy modelled after Western Liberalism can be replicated in Islamic countries, as the Quran and Hadith are silent on the issue for the most part. Since there is no specific injunction in the Quran about establishing an “Islamic State”, it leaves the field wide open for any type of democratic rule to emerge in Muslim countries. Conservative Muslims on the other hand insist Islam established the very foundations of democracy by acknowledging the value of consultation and consensus in the governing of a state. The pristine Islamic model has been adopted by Islamist governments such as the one under the Taliban, with a carefully chosen, like-minded Shura or consultative body. Such models have also been duplicated in the constitutions of Islamic organizations such as the Islamic Society of North America commonly recognized by the acronym, ISNA. Needless to say, a reversal to the earliest Islamic political model is yet again symptomatic of the growing resurgence of orthodox Islam. It is therefore crucial to answer whether modern liberal democracies are indeed compatible with the ideology of Islam. While it is beyond the scope of this book to investigate reasons for the failure of democracy in Muslim countries, something must still be said about certain conceptual differences between Islamic governance and modern democratic principles.

146

© FARZANA

HASSAN

The key element of Western liberal democracies is secularism or the separation of church and state. Religious pluralism is accommodated in a private and communal capacity, but at least in theory, does not play a role in formulating the law of the land. As a democratic principle, secularism works as a great equalizing force in countries and societies with diverse populations. All citizens must therefore be treated the same under the law regardless of their ethnic, religious or cultural affiliations. Diversity gets a chance to be expressed in a harmonious environment, although social hierarchies still exist within Western societies. Multi-Party politics guaranteed in Western liberal democracies also affords minority opinions the chance to form the majority at some point. The machinery allowing the smooth transmission of power from one government to another is also carefully established. On the other hand, if Shariah law were to be recognized as the only acceptable law of a Muslim nation even if chosen by the will of the majority, the minority in a Muslim state would never be able to become the majority, an inherently undemocratic principle. And it is here that basic conceptual differences emerge between democratic governments and Islamic forms of government. With Shariah law already interpreted and applied in a comprehensive way, the role of the legislature in an Islamic country would be highly restricted—its main function being to oversee that any proposed laws remain consistent with the Quran and Sunnah. Although other faith communities would have some autonomy over their social and personal affairs by virtue of being nonMuslim, these communities would come to be treated as second class citizens if one were to take the provisions of the Medina charter as a model of Islamic democracy, literally. The Medina charter while guaranteeing certain rights to non-

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

e 147

Muslims, nonetheless upheld the supremacy of the believers as evident from the following clause: (15) | God’s protection is one, the least of them may give protection to a stranger on their behalf. Believers are friends one to the other to the exclusion of outsiders. The spiritual hierarchy created in an Islamic state thus goes against the very essence of Western liberal democracies. Still, many will argue that the Western model is not to be regarded as the only standard of civilization— other styles of governance being equally viable and perhaps more suited to the ethos of various cultures. The legitimacy or otherwise of such a view can only be established by examining the track record of the various forms of government currently in vogue in the world. India, for example, one billion people strong, with ethnic, religious, cultural and linguistic diversity, has nonetheless emerged as a success story due to its commitment to secularism. On the other hand, in countries where religious laws prevail or where one ethnic or religious group is regarded as supreme, serious human rights violations occur commonly.

Perhaps attempts ought to be made to reconcile the conceptual differences between Islam’s ideology and modem democratic principles. The main stumbling block would again be the insistence on upholding Shariah law in a Muslim state.

Elsewhere in the book I have argued that flexibility and progress are integral features of the Quranic discourse whether it applies to Shariah law or other aspects of the faith. The same principles applied towards political reform can certainly generate hope for genuine democracy to emerge in Muslim countries.

With no express political theory of Islam, it can be safely

148

¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

argued that democracy of the Western liberal variety cannot be ruled out as an option for all citizens of Muslim countries regardless of their religious adherence, provided the issue of holding Shariah law supreme is resolved. ‘Muslim nations must be able to accord all their citizens: men, women,

children, Muslims,

non-Muslims,

blacks, whites

and

Asians equal opportunity to feel safe, secure and respected within the state. The law must not discriminate among its citizens in

any way.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© 149

Rag

ian agi letare




‘

é5

‘:

:

ie

:

;

ree

-

v

(as ities

rc oe

fei vee)

;

7

od

7)

eee

=

:- a s

on, WD. Re i

‘eet witiocelal a

igre ek

ite ole

Conclusion Were Quranic social reforms meant to be static? When the Quran improved upon existing conditions,

did it not demonstrate a principle for continued progress for all times?

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 181

~

7

’ '

~

Py 0

ft

aiaiert Wi ah

STEPS

FORWARD

TOWARDS

REFORM

Thus far Muslims have adopted an apologetic and defensive approach towards explaining certain religious precepts that have recently come under much scrutiny, as they are now compared to modern standards of gender equality, pluralism and religious tolerance. Muslims often seek to explain Quranic doctrines by comparing them to other Scriptures that were revealed prior to the Quran. The line of reasoning is as follows: polygamy in the Quran is justified because the Bible sanctioned the practice without any regulations. Unequal shares in inheritance continue to be applauded because other scriptures did not spell them out clearly. Islam elevated the status of women in a society that treated them as chattel, hence it gave them “countless rights more than fourteen centuries ago.” Consequently religious dictates come to be justified by comparing them to circumstances which were clearly more oppressive than the changes Islam introduced. Indeed, given the social milieu of the time, the changes were

unquestionably laudable, but there is a need being felt now to proceed beyond those initial reforms. As mentioned earlier, the Quran due to its impromptu societal regulations, did not seek to establish a permanent, unique or

Islam, Women, and the Challenges of Today

© 183

comprehensive social order. It only offered certain modifications to existing circumstances and that too mostly when such advice was actively sought, such as to resolve conflicts over the inheritance shares for women. Apart from these sporadic recommendations that would by no means form a complete social or legal code, the revelation was largely preoccupied with issues of belief, spirituality, faith and ethical conduct. The last of these was expressed as moral truths common to all faiths such as charity, generosity, truthfulness, honesty and chastity. It is a fallacy to think that the intent of the Quran was to replace the existing social order with a uniquely Quranic one, which, by virtue of being perceived as such, could neither be questioned nor amended. The Quran’s moral and social code cannot be regarded as distinct from other ethical systems. Even the terminology used in the Quran for acts permissible and prohibited, suggest these were universally accepted by other faiths and communities as well. “Maruf” is a universally accepted mode of conduct whereas “Munkar” is one that is universally disapproved. Axiomatic truths such as the ones expounded in the Quran would of necessity have to be universal in their appeal if they were to reach out to humanity as a whole. The Quranic discourse could thus be divided into three parts, namely: spiritual, ethical and legal. While the spiritual and ethical doctrines of the Quran are eternal and universal and speak to all of humanity, the legalities were time-specific as they had to be tailored to the context of seventh century Arabian society. As discussed earlier for example, there were no prisons in the time of the Prophet of Islam, hence “slavery” was allowed to continue for some time as a reciprocal arrangement. Would this justify slavery for all times to come? It is this and other questions that this book has attempted to examine. Thus, as a first step forward, it is necessary to acknowledge

184

¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

that the legalities in the Quran such as the severing of hands for theft or the prescribed one hundred lashes for adultery were consistent with the social norms of the time, but may no longer be appropriate today. Effective laws dealing with such offences are available to modern societies and no Quranic principle is being violated, as theft and adultery are still recognized as offences. The science of scriptural interpretation known as hermeneutics, which takes into account social conditions

and _historical

antecedents behind certain religious edicts must be unearthed to determine if such injunctions are still necessary in modern settings. Each commandment was prompted by a specific problem faced by the nascent Muslim community. Would circumstances different from the ones existing in Mohammadan Arabia therefore require different solutions? In this respect, the aforementioned Dr. Asma Barlas’ contribution to the study of hermeneutics in her book entitled Believing Women in Islam, must be duly acknowledged. But the study of hermeneutics does not negate Quranic principles. On the contrary, the principles on which these injunctions were based exhorting chastity, honesty, tolerance and love for

humanity are both eternal and universal. They are expressed ina manner more suited to our contemporary world with its complexity and heightened social consciousness. This view can be supported through an analysis of the nature of the Quranic revelation itself. During the twenty-three years of the Prophet’s ministry, some verses of the Quran came to be “abrogated” while others were retained as part of the text of the Quran, with the command contained in them deemed abrogated by the jurists. The principle of abrogation was also introduced to address apparent “inconsistencies” in the Quran, though the “inconsistencies” may have simply showcased a range of possible outcomes in a particular circumstance.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 185

The above rationale was all in recognition of changing social conditions. Also, through an examination of the precedents set by the Pious Caliphate of Islam, one could conclude that Quranic injunctions were applied, suspended or modified as the situation demanded. Today, a return to dogma on the other hand tends to ignore the inherent flexibility of the Quranic revelation with respect to cultural differences. Reactionary Muslims regard the Quranic law as immutable. But it is necessary to ask if this notion ought to be understood in an absolute sense? In my opinion, it can be understood in an absolute sense only if one refuses to accept that societies evolve. But change is a reality that cannot be denied. Any law therefore that is regarded as static or immutable cannot possibly accommodate change and hence loses its relevance and legitimacy. One must conclude therefore, that it is the law that must change to meet the needs of a particular society, as social dynamics governing one society can never be fully duplicated in another. Some Muslims may consider such a stance tantamount to challenging Divine Wisdom. My response to such concerns is simple. I view the Quranic discourse primarily as an elucidation of the nature of God. Whereas its primary objective was to re-establish undiluted monotheism in Arabia and the rest of the world, its few

social injunctions were largely responses to conditions exclusive to Arabian society. Indeed Divine Wisdom worked splendidly to address the social conditions prevalent at the time. But once again, the same Divine Wisdom would require responses appropriate to social settings with completely different cultural dynamics. Thus, the basic tenet of Islam, centred on belief in One God

can be regarded as having permanent validity. The moral truths expounded by the Quran which exhort humility, generosity and justice are also universally recognized and therefore true for all

186

¢ FARZANA

HASSAN

times. But what about polygamy, concubinage, slavery and the seclusion of women as social institutions? Is it possible that these were merely allowed to continue after the advent of Islam because the Quran did not actively seek to disturb the existing social order? If such is the case, can these institutions be regarded as strictly Islamic and therefore must they be continually defended by Orthodoxy? The fact is indisputable that these institutions are merely vestiges of pre-Islamic culture. Again, as a principle worth adopting is the recognition that the Quran improved existing situations rather than setting the clock backwards towards decline. The Quran therefore set a precedent for continual progress for all times by demonstrating this principle in its various social reforms. It did not say “this far and no further” as if a line were drawn in the sand! When it introduced inheritance laws, or restricted the practice of polygamy, it established a precedent for social advancement rather than decay. It is thereforé the principle of social advancement and progress that must be upheld, not its specific seventh-century applications. The same principles of fairness and progress applied today would have to accommodate the changed conditions of modern societies and come to be expressed in a manner more suited to the contemporary world. This principle of progress, embedded in every injunction of the Quran must be recognized and adopted as a valid Quranic pretext for the betterment of society, with special regard to its downtrodden. On the other hand, when reactionary Muslims strive for Tajdid or renewal of the pristine Muslim society, they fail to acknowledge that they are violating the fundamental principle on which the Quran enacted certain laws, i.e. the amelioration of

social conditions for the underprivileged. Therefore, rather than stripping Muslim women and minorities of certain rights they enjoy in modern societies, Muslims must

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

¢ 187

champion the cause of improving their rights everywhere. The objective must always be to improve upon existing conditions. This principle is consistent with Quranic reforms. According to contemporary Islamic discourses there are three recognized approaches towards understanding the dictates of the faith namely: Tagqlid (blind following of juristic rulings), Tajdid (Renewal and re-establishment of the pristine society in Arabia) and Ijtihad (independent reasoning) . Taqlid or blind following carries the risk of forever remaining trapped within the medieval rulings thus perpetuating inequities. Tajdid, often cited as the ultimate objective of reform among Muslims would set the clock even further back towards seventh century social practices, resulting in a violation of the principle of progress evident in Quranic reforms. The only option left for Muslims is [jtihad, and that too unfettered by the Usul-ul-Figh or the theoretical framework of Muslim Jurisprudence. Ijtihad must be governed solely by the principle of istihsaan, which strives to deliver justice to the masses. It is only with an acknowledgment of this principle that Muslims can ever hope to achieve democracy, economic progress and social justice both in Muslim countries and Diaspora communities. Muslims therefore need to free Ijtihaad from the restriction of always having to conform to the Quran or Sunnah, as well as from the clutches of those who deem

themselves the custodians of the faith. It is about time Muslims acknowledged gender inequities and social injustices prevalent in Shariah and stopped justifying them based on seventh century paradigms. There is no need for example, to explain away unequal shares in inheritance now, based on conditions that existed fourteen centuries ago. Muslims constantly invoke medieval contexts and scenarios to justify stipulations that may have been fair at the time, but can no longer be regarded as just and equitable in the contemporary world. Such explana-

188

«©FARZANA

HASSAN

tions are valid only in theory. The arguments are no longer applicable as the circumstances supporting them no longer exist. The cultural and societal paradigms warranting certain Quranic injunctions are a thing of the past and therefore cannot be invoked to explain continuing inequities. The bar on women, for example, to testify in rape and adultery cases cannot be justified based on the belief that women in seventh century Arabia were not literate. Women are now vastly aware of their surroundings, rights and responsibilities and often excel men in various academic fields, including law. Similarly polygamy, concubinage, or unequal shares in inheritance can no longer be justified based on explanations that are true only in theory. The future of Muslim feminism depends on this recognition. Progress demands abandonment of medieval frames of reference discussed above, as these function as justifications for continuing inequities. More than anything else, [jtihad must be reintroduced, unrestrained by any outdated theories of jurisprudence that have thus far undermined its value as a religious principle for progress.

Islam, Women,

and the Challenges of Today

© 189

-pwitank eran bite: si 2) Sty: a aa so

pean

oh cinman eaeihe pillaos. eu«mca

Mase.

bewk pela

tose:

ites e D I vis

abl aga, eei e

On

iliantah 4 ranean seedslees Baarsrates tat et

ga:

ssa cts Napa itd, gabeting | pa pay: portaghn ‘ngshae SN vic pont

e

Lt

cen

eels —

, Cs.$ aei ws

RE

an pycethe: eerste SEj apre oY ie SRN. spattin dats

SINR seh apt. nna Ae

eh

) REEL

Pua it

eet 4ah

pre. inthe (ese

as es

Ae

fare. a

an neta 2

ite PRUE

a nama see AO WRG a digsbE: nae =

AGED Lg 30s eaeAa BS a

~—TAs

eu

abe

fevk egies h sion gt = Bap rag, fine asso plea wha sed — f

: ek #4

r

i

r

4

.

‘

7

.

"

aa

a

~~

‘vy’

ine