| ----------- |
1. INTRODUCTION
Five years ago, I read in the Toronto Star issue
of July 3, 1990 an article titled "Islam is not alone in patriarchal doctrines",
by Gwynne Dyer. The article described the furious reactions of the participants
of a conference on women and power held in Montreal to the comments of the
famous Egyptian feminist Dr. Nawal Saadawi. Her "politically incorrect"
statements included : "the most restrictive elements towards women can be
found first in Judaism in the Old Testament then in Christianity and then
in the Quran"; "all religions are patriarchal because they stem from patriarchal
societies"; and "veiling of women is not a specifically Islamic practice
but an ancient cultural heritage with analogies in sister religions". The
participants could not bear sitting around while their faiths were being
equated with Islam. Thus, Dr. Saadawi received a barrage of criticism. "Dr.
Saadawi's comments are unacceptable. Her answers reveal a lack of understanding
about other people's faiths," declared Bernice Dubois of the World Movement
of Mothers. "I must protest" said panellist Alice Shalvi of Israel women's
network, "there is no conception of the veil in Judaism." The article attributed
these furious protests to the strong tendency in the West to scapegoat Islam
for practices that are just as much a part of the West's own cultural heritage.
"Christian and Jewish feminists were not going to sit around being discussed
in the same category as those wicked Muslims," wrote Gwynne Dyer.
I was not surprised that the conference participants
had held such a negative view of Islam, especially when women's issues were
involved. In the West, Islam is believed to be the symbol of the subordination
of women par excellence. In order to understand how firm this belief
is, it is enough to mention that the Minister of Education in France, the
land of Voltaire, has recently ordered the expulsion of all young Muslim
women wearing the veil from French schools!1 A young Muslim student wearing
a headscarf is denied her right of education in France, while a Catholic
student wearing a cross or a Jewish student wearing a skullcap is not. The
scene of French policemen preventing young Muslim women wearing headscarves
from entering their high school is unforgettable. It inspires the memories
of another equally disgraceful scene of Governor George Wallace of Alabama
in 1962 standing in front of a school gate trying to block the entrance of
black students in order to prevent the desegregation of Alabama's schools.
The difference between the two scenes is that the black students had the
sympathy of so many people in the U.S. and in the whole world. President
Kennedy sent the U.S. National Guard to force the entry of the black students.
The Muslim girls, on the other hand, received no help from any one. Their
cause seems to have very little sympathy either inside or outside France.
The reason is the widespread misunderstanding and fear of anything Islamic
in the world today.
What intrigued me the most about the Montreal
conference was one question : Were the statements made by Saadawi, or any
of her critics, factual ? In other words, do Judaism, Christianity, and Islam
have the same conception of women? Are they different in their conceptions
? Do Judaism and Christianity , truly, offer women a better treatment than
Islam does? What is the Truth?
It is not easy to search for and find answers
to these difficult questions. The first difficulty is that one has to be
fair and objective or, at least, do one's utmost to be so. This is what Islam
teaches. The Quran has instructed Muslims to say the truth even if those
who are very close to them do not like it: "Whenever you speak, speak justly,
even if a near relative is concerned" (6:152) "O you who believe stand out
firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even as against yourselves, or
your parents or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor"
(4:135).
The other great difficulty is the overwhelming
breadth of the subject. Therefore, during the last few years, I have spent
many hours reading the Bible, The Encyclopaedia of Religion, and the
Encyclopaedia Judaica searching for answers. I have also read several books
discussing the position of women in different religions written by scholars,
apologists, and critics. The material presented in the following chapters
represents the important findings of this humble research. I don't claim
to be absolutely objective. This is beyond my limited capacity. All I can
say is that I have been trying, throughout this research, to approach the
Quranic ideal of "speaking justly".
I would like to emphasize in this introduction
that my purpose for this study is not to denigrate Judaism or Christianity.
As Muslims, we believe in the divine origins of both. No one can be a Muslim
without believing in Moses and Jesus as great prophets of God. My goal is
only to vindicate Islam and pay a tribute, long overdue in the West, to the
final truthful Message from God to the human race. I would also like to emphasize
that I concerned myself only with Doctrine. That is, my concern is, mainly,
the position of women in the three religions as it appears in their original
sources not as practised by their millions of followers in the world today.
Therefore, most of the evidence cited comes from the Quran, the sayings of
Prophet Muhammad, the Bible, the Talmud, and the sayings of some of the most
influential Church Fathers whose views have contributed immeasurably to defining
and shaping Christianity. This interest in the sources relates to the fact
that understanding a certain religion from the attitudes and the behaviour
of some of its nominal followers is misleading. Many people confuse culture
with religion, many others do not know what their religious books are saying,
and many others do not even care.
2. EVE'S FAULT
?
The three religions agree on one basic fact:
Both women and men are created by God, The Creator of the whole universe.
However, disagreement starts soon after the creation of the first man, Adam,
and the first woman, Eve. The Judaeo-Christian conception of the creation
of Adam and Eve is narrated in detail in Genesis 2:4-3:24. God prohibited
both of them from eating the fruits of the forbidden tree. The serpent seduced
Eve to eat from it and Eve, in turn, seduced Adam to eat with her. When God
rebuked Adam for what he did, he put all the blame on Eve, "The woman you
put here with me --she gave me some fruit from the tree and I ate it."
Consequently, God said to Eve:
"I will greatly increase your pains in
childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will
be for your husband and he will rule over you."
To Adam He said:
"Because you listened to your wife and
ate from the tree .... Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful
toil you will eat of it all the days of your life..."
The Islamic conception of the first creation
is found in several places in the Quran, for example:
"[7:19]
"As for you, Adam, dwell with your wife in Paradise, and eat therefrom as
you please, but do not approach this one tree, lest you fall in sin."
[7:20] The devil whispered to them, in order to reveal their bodies, which
were invisible to them. He said, "Your Lord did not forbid you from this
tree, except to prevent you from becoming angels, and from attaining eternal
existence."
[7:21] He swore to them, "I am giving you good advice."
[7:22] He thus duped them with lies. As soon as they tasted the tree, their
bodies became visible to them, and they tried to cover themselves with the
leaves of Paradise. Their Lord called upon them: "Did I not enjoin you from
that tree, and warn you that the devil is your most ardent enemy?"
[7:23] They said, "Our Lord, we have wronged our souls, and unless You
forgive us and have mercy on us, we will be losers."
A careful look into the two accounts of the
story of the Creation reveals some essential differences. The Quran, contrary
to the Bible, places equal blame on both Adam and Eve for their mistake.
Nowhere in the Quran can one find even the slightest hint that Eve tempted
Adam to eat from the tree or even that she had eaten before him. Eve in the
Quran is no temptress, no seducer, and no deceiver. Moreover, Eve is not
to be blamed for the pains of childbearing. God, according to the Quran,
punishes no one for another's faults. Both Adam and Eve committed a sin and
then asked God for forgiveness and He forgave them both.
3. EVE'S
LEGACY
The image of Eve as temptress in the Bible has
resulted in an extremely negative impact on women throughout the Judaeo-Christian
tradition. All women were believed to have inherited from their mother, the
Biblical Eve, both her guilt and her guile. Consequently, they were all
untrustworthy, morally inferior, and wicked. Menstruation, pregnancy, and
childbearing were considered the just punishment for the eternal guilt of
the cursed female sex. In order to appreciate how negative the impact of
the Biblical Eve was on all her female descendants we have to look at the
writings of some of the most important Jews and Christians of all time. Let
us start with the Old Testament and look at excerpts from what is called
the Wisdom Literature in which we find:
"I find more bitter than death the woman
who is a snare, whose heart is a trap and whose hands are chains. The man
who pleases God will escape her, but the sinner she will ensnare....while
I was still searching but not finding, I found one upright man among a thousand
but not one upright woman among them all" (Ecclesiastes
7:26-28).
In another part of the Hebrew literature which
is found in the Catholic Bible we read:
"No wickedness comes anywhere near the
wickedness of a woman.....Sin began with a woman and thanks to her we all
must die" (Ecclesiasticus 25:19,24).
Jewish Rabbis listed nine curses inflicted on
women as a result of the Fall:
"To the woman He gave nine curses and
death: the burden of the blood of menstruation and the blood of virginity;
the burden of pregnancy; the burden of childbirth; the burden of bringing
up the children; her head is covered as one in mourning; she pierces her
ear like a permanent slave or slave girl who serves her master; she is not
to be believed as a witness; and after everything--death."
2
To the present day, orthodox Jewish men in their
daily morning prayer recite "Blessed be God King of the universe that Thou
has not made me a woman." The women, on the other hand, thank God every morning
for "making me according to Thy will." 3 Another prayer found in many Jewish
prayer books: "Praised be God that he has not created me a gentile. Praised
be God that he has not created me a woman. Praised be God that he has not
created me an ignoramus." 4
The Biblical Eve has played a far bigger role
in Christianity than in Judaism. Her sin has been pivotal to the whole Christian
faith because the Christian conception of the reason for the mission of Jesus
Christ on Earth stems from Eve's disobedience to God. She had sinned and
then seduced Adam to follow her suit. Consequently, God expelled both of
them from Heaven to Earth, which had been cursed because of them. They bequeathed
their sin, which had not been forgiven by God, to all their descendants and,
thus, all humans are born in sin. In order to purify human beings from their
'original sin', God had to sacrifice Jesus, who is considered to be the Son
of God, on the cross. Therefore, Eve is responsible for her own mistake,
her husband's sin, the original sin of all humanity, and the death of the
Son of God. In other words, one woman acting on her own caused the fall of
humanity. 5 What about her daughters? They are sinners like her and have
to be treated as such. Listen to the severe tone of St. Paul in the New
Testament:
"A woman should learn in quietness and
full submission. I don't permit a woman to teach or to have authority over
a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam
was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a
sinner" (I Timothy 2:11-14).
St. Tertullian was even more blunt than St.
Paul, while he was talking to his 'best beloved sisters' in the faith, he
said: 6
"Do you not know that you are each an
Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt
must of necessity live too. You are the Devil's gateway: You are the unsealer
of the forbidden tree: You are the first deserter of the divine law: You
are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack.
You destroyed so easily God's image, man. On account of your desert even
the Son of God had to die."
St. Augustine was faithful to the legacy of
his predecessors, he wrote to a friend:
"What is the difference whether it is
in a wife or a mother, it is still Eve the temptress that we must beware
of in any woman......I fail to see what use woman can be to man, if one excludes
the function of bearing children."
Centuries later, St. Thomas Aquinas still considered
women as defective:
"As regards the individual nature, woman
is defective and misbegotten, for the active force in the male seed tends
to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex; while the
production of woman comes from a defect in the active force or from some
material indisposition, or even from some external
influence."
Finally, the renowned reformer Martin Luther
could not see any benefit from a woman but bringing into the world as many
children as possible regardless of any side effects:
"If they become tired or even die, that
does not matter. Let them die in childbirth, that's why they are
there"
Again and again all women are denigrated because
of the image of Eve the temptress, thanks to the Genesis account. To sum
up, the Judaeo-Christian conception of women has been poisoned by the belief
in the sinful nature of Eve and her female offspring.
If we now turn our attention to what the Quran
has to say about women, we will soon realize that the Islamic conception
of women is radically different from the Judaeo-Christian one. Let the Quran
speak for itself:
[33:35] The submitting men, the submitting women, the
believing men, the believing women, the obedient men, the obedient women,
the truthful men, the truthful women, the steadfast men, the steadfast
women, the reverent men, the reverent women, the charitable men, the
charitable women, the fasting men, the fasting women, the chaste men, the
chaste women, and the men who commemorate GOD frequently, and the
commemorating women; GOD has prepared for them forgiveness and a great
recompense.
[9:71] The believing men and
women are allies of one another. They advocate righteousness and forbid
evil, they observe the Contact Prayers (Salat) and give the obligatory
charity (Zakat), and they obey GOD and His messenger. These will be showered
by GOD's mercy. GOD is Almighty, Most Wise.
[3:195] Their Lord responded to them: "I never
fail to reward any worker among you for any work you do, be you male or
female - you are equal to one another....
[40:40] Whoever commits a sin is
requited for just that, and whoever works righteousness - male or female -
while believing, these will enter Paradise wherein they receive provisions
without any limits.
[16:97] Anyone who works righteousness, male or female, while believing, we
will surely grant them a happy life in this world, and we will surely pay
them their full recompense (on the Day of Judgment) for their righteous
works.
It is clear that the Quranic view of women is
no different than that of men. They, both, are God's creatures whose sublime
goal on earth is to worship their Lord, do righteous deeds, and avoid evil
and they, both, will be assessed accordingly. The Quran never mentions that
the woman is the devil's gateway or that she is a deceiver by nature. The
Quran, also, never mentions that man is God's image; all men and all women
are his creatures, that is all. According to the Quran, a woman's role on
earth is not limited only to childbirth. She is required to do as many good
deeds as any other man is required to do. The Quran never says that no upright
women have ever existed. To the contrary, the Quran has instructed all the
believers, women as well as men, to follow the example of those ideal women
such as the Virgin Mary and the Pharoah's wife:
[66:11] And GOD cites as an example of those who believed the wife of
Pharaoh. She said, "My Lord, build a home for me at You in Paradise, and
save me from Pharaoh and his works; save me from the transgressing people.
[66:12] Also Mary, the Amramite. She maintained her chastity, then we blew
into her from our spirit. She believed in the words of her Lord and His
scriptures; she was obedient.
4. SHAMEFUL DAUGHTERS
?
In fact, the difference between the Biblical
and the Quranic attitude towards the female sex starts as soon as a female
is born. For example, the Bible states that the period of the mother's ritual
impurity is twice as long if a girl is born than if a boy is (Lev. 12:2-5).
The Catholic Bible states explicitly that:
"The birth of a daughter is a loss"
(Ecclesiasticus 22:3).
In contrast to this shocking statement, boys
receive special praise:
"A man who educates his son will be the
envy of his enemy." (Ecclesiasticus 30:3)
Jewish Rabbis made it an obligation on Jewish
men to produce offspring in order to propagate the race. At the same time,
they did not hide their clear preference for male children : "It is well
for those whose children are male but ill for those whose are female", "At
the birth of a boy, all are joyful...at the birth of a girl all are sorrowful",
and "When a boy comes into the world, peace comes into the world... When
a girl comes, nothing comes."7
A daughter is considered a painful burden, a
potential source of shame to her father:
"Your daughter is headstrong? Keep a sharp
look-out that she does not make you the laughing stock of your enemies, the
talk of the town, the object of common gossip, and put you to public shame"
(Ecclesiasticus 42:11).
"Keep a headstrong daughter under firm
control, or she will abuse any indulgence she receives. Keep a strict watch
on her shameless eye, do not be surprised if she disgraces you" (Ecclesiasticus
26:10-11).
It was this very same idea of treating daughters
as sources of shame that led the pagan Arabs, before the advent of Islam,
to practice female infanticide. The Quran severely condemned this heinous
practice:
[16:58] When one of them gets a baby
girl, his face becomes darkened with overwhelming grief.
[16:59] Ashamed, he hides from the people, because of the bad news given to
him. He even ponders: should he keep the baby grudgingly, or bury her in the
dust. Miserable indeed is their judgment.
It has to be mentioned that this sinister crime
would have never stopped in Arabia were it not for the power of the scathing
terms the Quran used to condemn this practice (16:59, 43:17, 81:8-9). The
Quran, moreover, makes no distinction between boys and girls. In contrast
to the Bible, the Quran considers the birth of a female as a gift and a blessing
from God, the same as the birth of a male. The Quran even mentions the gift
of the female birth first:
[42:49] To GOD belongs the sovereignty
of the heavens and the earth. He creates whatever He wills, granting
daughters to whomever He wills, and granting sons to whomever He wills.
5. FEMALE EDUCATION
?
The difference between the Biblical and the
Quranic conceptions of women is not limited to the newly born female, it
extends far beyond that. Let us compare their attitudes towards a female
trying to learn her religion. The heart of Judaism is the Torah, the law.
However, according to the Talmud, "women are exempt from the study of the
Torah." Some Jewish Rabbis firmly declared "Let the words of Torah rather
be destroyed by fire than imparted to women", and "Whoever teaches his daughter
Torah is as though he taught her obscenity"8
The attitude of St. Paul in the New Testament
is not brighter:
"As in all the congregations of the saints,
women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak,
but must be in submission as the law says. If they want to inquire about
something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful
for a woman to speak in the church." (I Corinthians
14:34-35)
How can a woman learn if she is not allowed
to speak? How can a woman grow intellectually if she is obliged to be in
a state of full submission? How can she broaden her horizons if her one and
only source of information is her husband at home?
Now, to be fair, we should ask: is the Quranic
position any different? One short story narrated in the Quran sums its position
up concisely. Khawlah was a Muslim woman whose husband Aws pronounced this
statement at a moment of anger: "You are to me as the back of my mother."
This was held by pagan Arabs to be a statement of divorce which freed the
husband from any conjugal responsibility but did not leave the wife free
to leave the husband's home or to marry another man. Having heard these words
from her husband, Khawlah was in a miserable situation. She went straight
to the Prophet of Islam to plead her case. The Prophet was of the opinion
that she should be patient since there seemed to be no way out. Khawla kept
arguing with the Prophet in an attempt to save her suspended marriage. Shortly,
the Quran intervened; Khawla's plea was accepted. The divine verdict abolished
this iniquitous custom. One full chapter (Chapter 58) of the Quran whose
title is "Almujadilah" or "The woman who is arguing" was named after this
incident:
[58:1] GOD has heard the woman who
debated with you about her husband, and complained to GOD. GOD heard
everything the two of you discussed. GOD is Hearer, Seer.
A woman in the Quranic conception has the right
to argue even with the Prophet of Islam himself. No one has the right to
instruct her to be silent. She is under no obligation to consider her husband
the one and only reference in matters of law and religion.
6. UNCLEAN
IMPURE WOMAN ?
Jewish laws and regulations concerning menstruating
women are extremely restrictive. The Old Testament considers any menstruating
woman as unclean and impure. Moreover, her impurity "infects" others as well.
Anyone or anything she touches becomes unclean for a day:
"When a woman has her regular flow of
blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone
who touches her will be unclean till evening. Anything she lies on during
her period will be unclean, and anything she sits on will be unclean. Whoever
touches her bed must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be
unclean till evening. Whoever touches anything she sits on must wash his
clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening. Whether
it is the bed or anything she was sitting on, when anyone touches it, he
will be unclean till evening" (Lev. 15:19-23).
Due to her "contaminating" nature, a menstruating
woman was sometimes "banished" in order to avoid any possibility of any contact
with her. She was sent to a special house called "the house of uncleanness"
for the whole period of her impurity. 9 The Talmud considers a menstruating
woman "fatal" even without any physical contact:
"Our Rabbis taught:....if a menstruant
woman passes between two (men), if it is at the beginning of her menses she
will slay one of them, and if it is at the end of her menses she will cause
strife between them" (bPes. 111a.)
Furthermore, the husband of a menstruous woman
was forbidden to enter the synagogue if he had been made unclean by her even
by the dust under her feet. A priest whose wife, daughter, or mother was
menstruating could not recite priestly blessing in the synagogue. 10 No wonder
many Jewish women still refer to menstruation as "the curse." 11
Islam does not consider a menstruating woman
to possess any kind of "contagious uncleanness". She is neither "untouchable"
nor "cursed." She practises her normal life with only one restriction: A
married couple are not allowed to have sexual intercourse during the period
of menstruation. Any other physical contact between them is permissible.
7. BEARING
WITNESS
Another issue in which the Quran and the Bible
disagree is the issue of women bearing witness. It is true that the Quran
has instructed the believers dealing in financial transactions to get two
male witnesses or one male and two females (2:282). However, it is also true
that the Quran in other situations accepts the testimony of a woman as equal
to that of a man. In fact the woman's testimony can even invalidate the man's.
If a man accuses his wife of unchastity, he is required by the Quran to solemnly
swear five times as evidence of the wife's guilt. If the wife denies and
swears similarly five times, she is not considered guilty and in either case
the marriage is dissolved (24:6-11).
On the other hand, women were not allowed to
bear witness in early Jewish society. 12 The Rabbis counted women's not being
able to bear witness among the nine curses inflicted upon all women because
of the Fall (see the "Eve's Legacy" section). Women in today's Israel are
not allowed to give evidence in Rabbinical courts. 13 The Rabbis justify
why women cannot bear witness by citing Genesis 18:9-16, where it is stated
that Sara, Abraham's wife had lied. The Rabbis use this incident as evidence
that women are unqualified to bear witness. It should be noted here that
this story narrated in Genesis 18:9-16 has been mentioned more than once
in the Quran without any hint of any lies by Sara (11:69-74, 51:24-30). In
the Christian West, both ecclesiastical and civil law debarred women from
giving testimony until late last century. 14
If a man accuses his wife of unchastity, her
testimony will not be considered at all according to the Bible. The accused
wife has to be subjected to a trial by ordeal. In this trial, the wife faces
a complex and humiliating ritual which was supposed to prove her guilt or
innocence (Num. 5:11-31). If she is found guilty after this ordeal, she will
be sentenced to death. If she is found not guilty, her husband will be innocent
of any wrongdoing.
Besides, if a man takes a woman as a wife and
then accuses her of not being a virgin, her own testimony will not count.
Her parents had to bring evidence of her virginity before the elders of the
town. If the parents could not prove the innocence of their daughter, she
would be stoned to death on her father's doorsteps. If the parents were able
to prove her innocence, the husband would only be fined one hundred shekels
of silver and he could not divorce his wife as long as he lived:
"If a man takes a wife and, after lying
with her, dislikes her and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying,
'I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of
her virginity,' then the girl's father and mother shall bring proof that
she was a virgin to the town elders at the gate. The girl's father will say
to the elders, 'I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes
her. Now he has slandered her and said I did not find your daughter to be
a virgin. But here is the proof of my daughter's virginity.' Then her parents
shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, and the elders shall
take the man and punish him. They shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver
and give them to the girl's father, because this man has given an Israelite
virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce
her as long as he lives. If, however, the charge is true and no proof of
the girl's virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her
father's house and there the men of the town shall stone her to death. She
has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in
her father's house. You must purge the evil from among you." (Deuteronomy
22:13-21)
8. ADULTERY
Adultery is considered a sin in all religions.
The Bible decrees the death sentence for both the adulterer and the adulteress
(Lev. 20:10). Islam also equally punishes both the adulterer and the adulteress
(24:2). However, the Quranic definition of adultery is very different from
the Biblical definition. Adultery, according to the Quran, is the involvement
of a married man or a married woman in an extramarital affair. The Bible
only considers the extramarital affair of a married woman as adultery (Leviticus
20:10, Deuteronomy 22:22, Proverbs 6:20-7:27).
"If a man is found sleeping with another
man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must
purge the evil from Israel" (Deut. 22:22).
"If a man commits adultery with another
man's wife both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death" (Lev.
20:10).
According to the Biblical definition, if a married
man sleeps with an unmarried woman, this is not considered a crime at all.
The married man who has extramarital affairs with unmarried women is not
an adulterer and the unmarried women involved with him are not adulteresses.
The crime of adultery is committed only when a man, whether married or single,
sleeps with a married woman. In this case the man is considered adulterer,
even if he is not married, and the woman is considered adulteress. In short,
adultery is any illicit sexual intercourse involving a married woman. The
extramarital affair of a married man is not per se a crime in the Bible.
Why is the dual moral standard? According to Encyclopaedia Judaica, the wife
was considered to be the husband's possession and adultery constituted a
violation of the husband's exclusive right to her; the wife as the husband's
possession had no such right to him. 15 That is, if a man had sexual intercourse
with a married woman, he would be violating the property of another man and,
thus, he should be punished.
To the present day in Israel, if a married man
indulges in an extramarital affair with an unmarried woman, his children
by that woman are considered legitimate. But, if a married woman has an affair
with another man, whether married or not married, her children by that man
are not only illegitimate but they are considered bastards and are forbidden
to marry any other Jews except converts and other bastards. This ban is handed
down to the children's descendants for 10 generations until the taint of
adultery is presumably weakened. 16
The Quran, on the other hand, never considers
any woman to be the possession of any man. The Quran eloquently describes
the relationship between the spouses by saying:
[30:21] Among His proofs is that He
created for you spouses from among yourselves, in order to have tranquility
and contentment with each other, and He placed in your hearts love and care
towards your spouses. In this, there are sufficient proofs for people who
think.
This is the Quranic conception of marriage:
love, mercy, and tranquillity, not possession and double standards.
9. VOWS
According to the Bible, a man must fulfil any
vows he might make to God. He must not break his word. On the other hand,
a woman's vow is not necessarily binding on her. It has to be approved by
her father, if she is living in his house, or by her husband, if she is married.
If a father/husband does not endorse his daughter's/wife's vows, all pledges
made by her become null and void:
"But if her father forbids her when he
hears about it, none of her vows or the pledges by which she obligated herself
will stand ....Her husband may confirm or nullify any vow she makes or any
sworn pledge to deny herself" (Num. 30:2-15)
Why is it that a woman's word is not binding
per se ? The answer is simple: because she is owned by her father, before
marriage, or by her husband after marriage. The father's control over his
daughter was absolute to the extent that, should he wish, he could sell her!
It is indicated in the writings of the Rabbis that: "The man may sell his
daughter, but the woman may not sell her daughter; the man may betroth his
daughter, but the woman may not betroth her daughter." 17 The Rabbinic literature
also indicates that marriage represents the transfer of control from the
father to the husband: "betrothal, making a woman the sacrosanct possession--the
inviolable property-- of the husband..." Obviously, if the woman is considered
to be the property of someone else, she cannot make any pledges that her
owner does not approve of.
It is of interest to note that this Biblical
instruction concerning women's vows has had negative repercussions on
Judaeo-Christian women till early in this century. A married woman in the
Western world had no legal status. No act of hers was of any legal value.
Her husband could repudiate any contract, bargain, or deal she had made.
Women in the West (the largest heir of the Judaeo-Christian legacy) were
held unable to make a binding contract because they were practically owned
by someone else. Western women had suffered for almost two thousand years
because of the Biblical attitude towards women's position vis-à-vis
their fathers and husbands. 18
In Islam, the vow of every Muslim, male or female,
is binding on him/her. No one has the power to repudiate the pledges of anyone
else. Failure to keep a solemn oath, made by a man or a woman, has to be
expiated as indicated in the Quran:
[5:89] GOD does not hold you
responsible for the mere utterance of oaths; He holds you responsible for
your actual intentions. If you violate an oath, you shall atone by feeding
ten poor people from the same food you offer to your own family, or clothing
them, or by freeing a slave. If you cannot afford this, then you shall fast
three days. This is the atonement for violating the oaths that you swore to
keep. You shall fulfill your oaths. GOD thus explains His revelations to
you, that you may be appreciative.
Companions of the Prophet Muhammad, men and
women, used to present their oath of allegiance to him personally. Women,
as well as men, would independently come to him and pledge their oaths:
[60:12] O you prophet, when the
believing women (who abandoned the disbelievers) to seek asylum with you
pledge to you that they will not set up any idols besides GOD, nor steal,
nor commit adultery, nor kill their children, nor fabricate any falsehood,
nor disobey your righteous orders, you shall accept their pledge, and pray
to GOD to forgive them. GOD is Forgiver, Most Merciful.
A man could not swear the oath on behalf of
his daughter or his wife. Nor could a man repudiate the oath made by any
of his female relatives.
10. WIFE'S
PROPERTY ?
The three religions share an unshakeable belief
in the importance of marriage and family life. They also agree on the leadership
of the husband over the family. Nevertheless, blatant differences do exist
among the three religions with respect to the limits of this leadership.
The Judaeo-Christian tradition, unlike Islam, virtually extends the leadership
of the husband into ownership of his wife.
The Jewish tradition regarding the husband's
role towards his wife stems from the conception that he owns her as he owns
his slave. 19 This conception has been the reason behind the double standard
in the laws of adultery and behind the husband's ability to annul his wife's
vows. This conception has also been responsible for denying the wife any
control over her property or her earnings. As soon as a Jewish woman got
married, she completely lost any control over her property and earnings to
her husband. Jewish Rabbis asserted the husband's right to his wife's property
as a corollary of his possession of her: "Since one has come into the possession
of the woman does it not follow that he should come into the possession of
her property too?", and "Since he has acquired the woman should he not acquire
also her property?" 20 Thus, marriage caused the richest woman to become
practically penniless. The Talmud describes the financial situation of a
wife as follows:
"How can a woman have anything; whatever
is hers belongs to her husband? What is his is his and what is hers is also
his...... Her earnings and what she may find in the streets are also his.
The household articles, even the crumbs of bread on the table, are his. Should
she invite a guest to her house and feed him, she would be stealing from
her husband..." (San. 71a, Git. 62a)
The fact of the matter is that the property
of a Jewish female was meant to attract suitors. A Jewish family would assign
their daughter a share of her father's estate to be used as a dowry in case
of marriage. It was this dowry that made Jewish daughters an unwelcome burden
to their fathers. The father had to raise his daughter for years and then
prepare for her marriage by providing a large dowry. Thus, a girl in a Jewish
family was a liability and no asset. 21 This liability explains why the birth
of a daughter was not celebrated with joy in the old Jewish society (see
the "Shameful Daughters?" section). The dowry was the wedding gift presented
to the groom under terms of tenancy. The husband would act as the practical
owner of the dowry but he could not sell it. The bride would lose any control
over the dowry at the moment of marriage. Moreover, she was expected to work
after marriage and all her earnings had to go to her husband in return for
her maintenance which was his obligation. She could regain her property only
in two cases: divorce or her husband's death. Should she die first, he would
inherit her property. In the case of the husband's death, the wife could
regain her pre-marital property but she was not entitled to inherit any share
in her deceased husband's own property. It has to be added that the groom
also had to present a marriage gift to his bride, yet again he was the practical
owner of this gift as long as they were married. 22
Christianity, until recently, has followed the
same Jewish tradition. Both religious and civil authorities in the Christian
Roman Empire (after Constantine) required a property agreement as a condition
for recognizing the marriage. Families offered their daughters increasing
dowries and, as a result, men tended to marry earlier while families postponed
their daughters' marriages until later than had been customary. 23 Under
Canon law, a wife was entitled to restitution of her dowry if the marriage
was annulled unless she was guilty of adultery. In this case, she forfeited
her right to the dowry which remained in her husband's hands. 24 Under Canon
and civil law a married woman in Christian Europe and America had lost her
property rights until late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. For
example, women's rights under English law were compiled and published in
1632. These 'rights' included: "That which the husband hath is his own. That
which the wife hath is the husband's." 25 The wife not only lost her property
upon marriage, she lost her personality as well. No act of her was of legal
value. Her husband could repudiate any sale or gift made by her as being
of no binding legal value. The person with whom she had any contract was
held as a criminal for participating in a fraud. Moreover, she could not
sue or be sued in her own name, nor could she sue her own husband. 26 A married
woman was practically treated as an infant in the eyes of the law. The wife
simply belonged to her husband and therefore she lost her property, her legal
personality, and her family name. 27
Islam, since the seventh century C.E., has granted
married women the independent personality which the Judaeo-Christian West
had deprived them until very recently. In Islam, the bride and her family
are under no obligation whatsoever to present a gift to the groom. The girl
in a Muslim family is no liability. A woman is so dignified by Islam that
she does not need to present gifts in order to attract potential husbands.
It is the groom who must present the bride with a marriage gift. This gift
is considered her property and neither the groom nor the bride's family have
any share in or control over it. In some Muslim societies today, a marriage
gift of a hundred thousand dollars in diamonds is not unusual. 28 The bride
retains her marriage gifts even if she is later divorced. The husband is
not allowed any share in his wife's property except what she offers him with
her free consent. 29 The Quran has stated its position on this issue quite
clearly:
[4:4]
You shall give the women their due dowries, equitably. If they willingly
forfeit anything, then you may accept it; it is rightfully yours.
The wife's property and earnings are under her
full control and for her use alone since her, and the children's, maintenance
is her husband's responsibility. 30 No matter how rich the wife might be,
she is not obliged to act as a co-provider for the family unless she herself
voluntarily chooses to do so. Spouses do inherit from one another. Moreover,
a married woman in Islam retains her independent legal personality and her
family name. 31 An American judge once commented on the rights of Muslim
women saying: " A Muslim girl may marry ten times, but her individuality
is not absorbed by that of her various husbands. She is a solar planet with
a name and legal personality of her own." 32
11. DIVORCE
The three religions have remarkable differences
in their attitudes towards divorce. Christianity abhors divorce altogether.
The New Testament unequivocally advocates the indissolubility of marriage.
It is attributed to Jesus to have said, "But I tell you that anyone who divorces
his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become adulteress,
and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery" (Matthew 5:32).
This uncompromising ideal is, without a doubt, unrealistic. It assumes a
state of moral perfection that human societies have never achieved. When
a couple realizes that their married life is beyond repair, a ban on divorce
will not do them any good. Forcing ill-mated couples to remain together against
their wills is neither effective nor reasonable. No wonder the whole Christian
world has been obliged to sanction divorce.
Judaism, on the other hand, allows divorce even
without any cause. The Old Testament gives the husband the right to divorce
his wife even if he just dislikes her:
"If a man marries a woman who becomes
displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he
writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his
house, and if after she leaves his house she becomes the wife of another
man, and her second husband dislikes her and writes her a certificate of
divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house, or if he dies, then
her first husband, who divorced her, is not allowed to marry her again after
she has been defiled" (Deut. 24:1-4).
The above verses have caused some considerable
debate among Jewish scholars because of their disagreement over the
interpretation of the words "displeasing", "indecency", and "dislikes" mentioned
in the verses. The Talmud records their different opinions:
"The school of Shammai held that a man
should not divorce his wife unless he has found her guilty of some sexual
misconduct, while the school of Hillel say he may divorce her even if she
has merely spoiled a dish for him. Rabbi Akiba says he may divorce her even
if he simply finds another woman more beautiful than she" (Gittin
90a-b).
The New Testament follows the Shammaites opinion
while Jewish law has followed the opinion of the Hillelites and R. Akiba.
33 Since the Hillelites view prevailed, it became the unbroken tradition
of Jewish law to give the husband freedom to divorce his wife without any
cause at all. The Old Testament not only gives the husband the right to divorce
his "displeasing" wife, it considers divorcing a "bad wife" an
obligation:
"A bad wife brings humiliation, downcast
looks, and a wounded heart. Slack of hand and weak of knee is the man whose
wife fails to make him happy. Woman is the origin of sin, and it is through
her that we all die. Do not leave a leaky cistern to drip or allow a bad
wife to say what she likes. If she does not accept your control, divorce
her and send her away" (Ecclesiasticus 25:25).
The Talmud has recorded several specific actions
by wives which obliged their husbands to divorce them: "If she ate in the
street, if she drank greedily in the street, if she suckled in the street,
in every case Rabbi Meir says that she must leave her husband" (Git. 89a).
The Talmud has also made it mandatory to divorce a barren wife (who bore
no children in a period of ten years): "Our Rabbis taught: If a man took
a wife and lived with her for ten years and she bore no child, he shall divorce
her" (Yeb. 64a).
Wives, on the other hand, cannot initiate divorce
under Jewish law. A Jewish wife, however, could claim the right to a divorce
before a Jewish court provided that a strong reason exists. Very few grounds
are provided for the wife to make a claim for a divorce. These grounds include:
A husband with physical defects or skin disease, a husband not fulfilling
his conjugal responsibilities, etc. The Court might support the wife's
claim to a divorce but it cannot dissolve the marriage. Only the husband
can dissolve the marriage by giving his wife a bill of divorce. The Court
could scourge, fine, imprison, and excommunicate him to force him to deliver
the necessary bill of divorce to his wife. However, if the husband is stubborn
enough, he can refuse to grant his wife a divorce and keep her tied to him
indefinitely. Worse still, he can desert her without granting her a divorce
and leave her unmarried and undivorced. He can marry another woman or even
live with any single woman out of wedlock and have children from her (these
children are considered legitimate under Jewish law). The deserted wife,
on the other hand, cannot marry any other man since she is still legally
married and she cannot live with any other man because she will be considered
an adulteress and her children from this union will be illegitimate for ten
generations. A woman in such a position is called an agunah (chained woman).
34 In the United States today there are approximately 1000 to 1500 Jewish
women who are agunot (plural for agunah), while in Israel their number might
be as high as 16000. Husbands may extort thousands of dollars from their
trapped wives in exchange for a Jewish divorce. 35
Islam occupies the middle ground between
Christianity and Judaism with respect to divorce. Marriage in Islam is a
sanctified bond that should not be broken except for compelling reasons.
Couples are instructed to pursue all possible remedies whenever their marriages
are in danger. Divorce is not to be resorted to except when there is no other
way out. In a nutshell, Islam recognizes divorce, yet it discourages it by
all means. Let us focus on the recognition side first. Islam does recognize
the right of both partners to end their matrimonial relationship. Islam gives
the husband the right for Talaq (divorce). Moreover, Islam, unlike Judaism,
grants the wife the right to dissolve the marriage through what is known
as Khula'. 36 If the husband dissolves the marriage by divorcing his wife,
he cannot retrieve any of the marriage gifts he has given her. The Quran
explicitly prohibits the divorcing husbands from taking back their marriage
gifts no matter how expensive or valuable these gifts might be:
[4:20] If you wish to marry another wife, in
place of your present wife, and you had given any of them a great deal, you
shall not take back anything you had given her. Would you take it
fraudulently, maliciously, and sinfully?
In the case of the wife choosing to end the
marriage, she may return the marriage gifts to her husband. Returning the
marriage gifts in this case is a fair compensation for the husband who is
keen to keep his wife while she chooses to leave him. The Quran has instructed
Muslim men not to take back any of the gifts they have given to their wives
except in the case of the wife choosing to dissolve the marriage:
[2:229] Divorce may be retracted twice.
The divorced woman shall be allowed to live in the same home amicably, or
leave it amicably. It is not lawful for the husband to take back anything he
had given her. However, the couple may fear that they may transgress GOD's
law. If there is fear that they may transgress GOD's law, they commit no
error if the wife willingly gives back whatever she chooses. These are GOD's
laws; do not transgress them. Those who transgress GOD's laws are the
unjust.
In some cases, A Muslim wife might be willing
to keep her marriage but find herself obliged to claim for a divorce because
of some compelling reasons such as: Cruelty of the husband, desertion without
a reason, a husband not fulfilling his conjugal responsibilities, etc.
In these cases the Muslim court dissolves the marriage. 37
In short, Islam has offered the Muslim woman
some unequalled rights: she can end the marriage through Khula' and she can
sue for a divorce. A Muslim wife can never become chained by a recalcitrant
husband. It was these rights that enticed Jewish women who lived in the early
Islamic societies of the seventh century C.E. to seek to obtain bills of
divorce from their Jewish husbands in Muslim courts. The Rabbis declared
these bills null and void. In order to end this practice, the Rabbis gave
new rights and privileges to Jewish women in an attempt to weaken the appeal
of the Muslim courts. Jewish women living in Christian countries were not
offered any similar privileges since the Roman law of divorce practiced there
was no more attractive than the Jewish law. 38
Let us now focus our attention on how Islam
discourages divorce. A Muslim man should not divorce his wife just because
he dislikes her. The Quran instructs Muslim men to be kind to their wives
even in cases of lukewarm emotions or feelings of dislike:
[4:19] O you who
believe, it is not lawful for you to inherit what the women leave
behind, against their will. You shall not force them to give up anything
you had given them, unless they commit a proven adultery. You shall
treat them nicely. If you dislike them, you may dislike something
wherein GOD has placed a lot of good.
However, Islam is a practical religion and it
does recognize that there are circumstances in which a marriage becomes on
the verge of collapsing. In such cases, a mere advice of kindness or self
restraint is no viable solution. So, what to do in order to save a marriage
in these cases? The Quran offers some practical advice for the spouse (husband
or wife) whose partner (wife or husband) is the wrongdoer. For the husband
whose wife's ill-conduct is threatening the marriage, the Quran gives four
types of advice as detailed in the following verses:
[4:34] The men are made responsible for
the women,** and GOD has endowed them with certain qualities, and made them
the bread earners. The righteous women will cheerfully accept this
arrangement, since it is GOD's commandment, and honor their husbands during
their absence. If you experience rebellion from the women, you shall first
talk to them, then (you may use negative incentives like) deserting them in
bed, then you may (as a last alternative) beat them. If they obey you, you
are not permitted to transgress against them. GOD is Most High, Supreme.
Marriage Arbitration
[4:35] If a couple fears separation, you shall appoint an arbitrator from
his family and an arbitrator from her family; if they decide to reconcile,
GOD will help them get together. GOD is Omniscient, Cognizant.
The first three are to be tried first. If they
fail, then the help of the families concerned should be sought. It has to
be noted, in the light of the above verses, that beating the rebellious wife
is a temporary measure that is resorted to as third in line in cases of extreme
necessity in hopes that it might remedy the wrongdoing of the wife. If it
does, the husband is not allowed by any means to continue any annoyance to
the wife as explicitly mentioned in the verse. If it does not, the husband
is still not allowed to use this measure any longer and the final avenue
of the family-assisted reconciliation has to be explored.
It has to be noted that the Talmud sanctions
wife beating as chastisement for the purpose of discipline. 39 The husband
is not restricted to the extreme cases such as those of open lewdness. He
is allowed to beat his wife even if she just refuses to do her house work.
Moreover, he is not limited only to the use of light punishment. He is permitted
to break his wife's stubbornness by the lash or by starving her. 40
For the wife whose husband's ill-conduct is
the cause for the marriage's near collapse, the Quran offers the following
advice:
[4:128] If a woman senses oppression or
desertion from her husband, the couple shall try to reconcile their
differences, for conciliation is best for them. Selfishness is a human
trait, and if you do good and lead a righteous life, GOD is fully Cognizant
of everything you do.
In this case, the wife is advised to seek
reconciliation with her husband (with or without family assistance). It is
notable that the Quran is not advising the wife to resort to the two measures
of abstention from sex and beating. The reason for this disparity might be
to protect the wife from a violent physical reaction by her already misbehaving
husband. Such a violent physical reaction will do both the wife and the marriage
more harm than good. Some Muslim scholars have suggested that the court can
apply these measures against the husband on the wife's behalf. That is, the
court first admonishes the rebellious husband, then forbids him his wife's
bed, and finally executes a symbolic beating. 41
To sum up, Islam offers Muslim married couples
much viable advice to save their marriages in cases of trouble and tension.
If one of the partners is jeopardizing the matrimonial relationship, the
other partner is advised by the Quran to do whatever possible and effective
in order to save this sacred bond. If all the measures fail, Islam allows
the partners to separate peacefully and amicably.
12. MOTHERS
The Old Testament in several places commands
kind and considerate treatment of the parents and condemns those who dishonor
them. For example, "If anyone curses his father or mother, he must be put
to death" (Lev. 20:9) and "A wise man brings joy to his father but a foolish
man despises his mother" (Proverbs 15:20). Although honoring the father alone
is mentioned in some places, e.g. "A wise man heeds his father's instruction"
(Proverbs 13:1), the mother alone is never mentioned. Moreover, there is
no special emphasis on treating the mother kindly as a sign of appreciation
of her great suffering in childbearing and suckling. Besides, mothers do
not inherit at all from their children while fathers do. 42
It is difficult to speak of the New Testament
as a scripture that calls for honoring the mother. To the contrary, one gets
the impression that the New Testament considers kind treatment of mothers
as an impediment on the way to God. According to the New Testament, one cannot
become a good Christian worthy of becoming a disciple of Christ unless he
hates his mother. It is attributed to Jesus to have said:
"If anyone comes to me and does not hate
his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters--yes,
even his own life--he can not be my disciple" (Luke 14:26).
Furthermore, the New Testament depicts a picture
of Jesus as indifferent to, or even disrespectful of, his own mother. For
example, when she had come looking for him while he was preaching to a crowd,
he did not care to go out to see her:
"Then Jesus' mother and brothers arrived.
Standing outside, they sent someone to call him. A crowd was sitting around
him and they told him, 'Your mother and brothers are outside looking for
you.' 'Who are my mother and my brothers?' he asked. Then he looked at those
seated in a circle around him and said,' Here are my mother and my brothers!
Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother.' " (Mark
3:31-35)
One might argue that Jesus was trying to teach
his audience an important lesson that religious ties are no less important
than family ties. However, he could have taught his listeners the same lesson
without showing such absolute indifference to his mother. The same disrespectful
attitude is depicted when he refused to endorse a statement made by a member
of his audience blessing his mother's role in giving birth to him and nursing
him:
"As Jesus was saying these things, a woman
in the crowd called out, 'Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed
you.' He replied, 'Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and
obey it.' " (Luke 11:27-28)
If a mother with the stature of the virgin Mary
had been treated with such discourtesy, as depicted in the New Testament,
by a son of the stature of Jesus Christ, then how should an average Christian
mother be treated by her average Christian sons?
In Islam, the honor, respect, and esteem attached
to motherhood is unparalleled. The Quran places the importance of kindness
to parents as second only to worshipping God Almighty:
[17:23] Your Lord has decreed that you
shall not worship except Him, and your parents shall be honored. As long as
one or both of them live, you shall never say to them, "Uff" (the slightest
gesture of annoyance), nor shall you shout at them; you shall treat them
amicably.
[17:24] And lower for them the wings of humility, and kindness, and say, "My
Lord, have mercy on them, for they have raised me from infancy."
The Quran in several other places puts special
emphasis on the mother's great role in giving birth and nursing:
[31:14] We enjoined the human being to
honor his parents. His mother bore him, and the load got heavier and
heavier. It takes two years (of intensive care) until weaning. You shall be
appreciative of Me, and of your parents. To Me is the ultimate destiny.
Among the few precepts of Islam which Muslims
still faithfully observe to the present day is the considerate treatment
of mothers. The honor that Muslim mothers receive from their sons and daughters
is exemplary. The intensely warm relations between Muslim mothers and their
children and the deep respect with which Muslim men approach their mothers
usually amaze Westerners. 43
13. FEMALE
INHERITANCE ?
One of the most important differences between
the Quran and the Bible is their attitude towards female inheritance of the
property of a deceased relative. The Biblical attitude has been succinctly
described by Rabbi Epstein: "The continuous and unbroken tradition since
the Biblical days gives the female members of the household, wife and daughters,
no right of succession to the family estate. In the more primitive scheme
of succession, the female members of the family were considered part of the
estate and as remote from the legal personality of an heir as the slave.
Whereas by Mosaic enactment the daughters were admitted to succession in
the event of no male issue remained, the wife was not recognized as heir
even in such conditions." 44 Why were the female members of the family considered
part of the family estate? Rabbi Epstein has the answer: "They are owned
--before marriage, by the father; after marriage, by the husband." 45
The Biblical rules of inheritance are outlined
in Numbers 27:1-11. A wife is given no share in her husband's estate, while
he is her first heir, even before her sons. A daughter can inherit only if
no male heirs exist. A mother is not an heir at all while the father is.
Widows and daughters, in case male children remained, were at the mercy of
the male heirs for provision. That is why widows and orphan girls were among
the most destitute members of the Jewish society.
Christianity has followed suit for long time.
Both the ecclesiastical and civil laws of Christendom barred daughters from
sharing with their brothers in the father's patrimony. Besides, wives were
deprived of any inheritance rights. These iniquitous laws survived till late
in the last century46.
Among the pagan Arabs before Islam, inheritance
rights were confined exclusively to the male relatives. The Quran abolished
all these unjust customs and gave all the female relatives inheritance
shares: Women's Inheritance Rights
[4:7] The men get a share of what the parents
and the relatives leave behind. The women too shall get a share of what the
parents and relatives leave behind. Whether it is a small or a large
inheritance, (the women must get) a definite share.
Muslim mothers, wives, daughters, and sisters
had received inheritance rights thirteen hundred years before Europe recognized
that these rights even existed. The division of inheritance is a vast subject
with an enormous amount of details (4:7,11,12,176). The general rule is that
the female share is half the male's except the cases in which the mother
receives equal share to that of the father. This general rule if taken in
isolation from other legislations concerning men and women may seem unfair.
In order to understand the rationale behind this rule, one must take into
account the fact that the financial obligations of men in Islam far exceed
those of women (see the "Wife's property?" section). A bridegroom must provide
his bride with a marriage gift. This gift becomes her exclusive property
and remains so even if she is later divorced. The bride is under no obligation
to present any gifts to her groom. Moreover, the Muslim husband is charged
with the maintenance of his wife and children. The wife, on the other hand,
is not obliged to help him in this regard. Her property and earnings are
for her use alone except what she may voluntarily offer her husband. Besides,
one has to realize that Islam vehemently advocates family life. It strongly
encourages youth to get married, discourages divorce, and does not regard
celibacy as a virtue. Therefore, in a truly Islamic society, family life
is the norm and single life is the rare exception. That is, almost all
marriage-aged women and men are married in an Islamic society. In light of
these facts, one would appreciate that Muslim men, in general, have greater
financial burdens than Muslim women and thus inheritance rules are meant
to offset this imbalance so that the society lives free of all gender or
class wars. After a simple comparison between the financial rights and duties
of Muslim women, one British Muslim woman has concluded that Islam has treated
women not only fairly but generously. 47
14.PLIGHT
OF WIDOWS
Because of the fact that the Old Testament
recognized no inheritance rights to them, widows were among the most vulnerable
of the Jewish population. The male relatives who inherited all of a woman's
deceased husband's estate were to provide for her from that estate. However,
widows had no way to ensure this provision was carried out, and lived on
the mercy of others. Therefore, widows were among the lowest classes in ancient
Israel and widowhood was considered a symbol of great degradation (Isaiah
54:4). But the plight of a widow in the Biblical tradition extended even
beyond her exclusion from her husband's property. According to Genesis 38,
a childless widow must marry her husband's brother, even if he is already
married, so that he can produce offspring for his dead brother, thus ensuring
his brother's name will not die out.
"Then Judah said to Onan, 'Lie with your
brother's wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce
offspring for your brother' " (Genesis 38:8).
The widow's consent to this marriage is not
required. The widow is treated as part of her deceased husband's property
whose main function is to ensure her husband's posterity. This Biblical law
is still practiced in today's Israel. 48 A childless widow in Israel is
bequeathed to her husband's brother. If the brother is too young to marry,
she has to wait until he comes of age. Should the deceased husband's brother
refuse to marry her, she is set free and can then marry any man of her choice.
It is not an uncommon phenomenon in Israel that widows are subjected to blackmail
by their brothers-in-law in order to gain their freedom.
The pagan Arabs before Islam had similar practices.
A widow was considered a part of her husband's property to be inherited by
his male heirs and she was, usually, given in marriage to the deceased man's
eldest son from another wife. The Quran scathingly attacked and abolished
this degrading custom:
[4:22] Do not marry the women who were
previously married to your fathers - existing marriages are exempted and
shall not be broken - for it is a gross offense, and an abominable act.
Widows and divorced women were so looked down
upon in the Biblical tradition that the high priest could not marry a widow,
a divorced woman, or a prostitute:
[21:13] Do not run, and come back to
your luxuries and your mansions, for you must be held accountable.
[21:14] They said, "Woe to us. We were really wicked."
[21:15] This continued to be their proclamation, until we completely wiped
them out.
In Israel today, a descendant of the Cohen caste
(the high priests of the days of the Temple) cannot marry a divorcee, a widow,
or a prostitute. 49 In the Jewish legislation, a woman who has been widowed
three times with all the three husbands dying of natural causes is considered
'fatal' and forbidden to marry again. 50 The Quran, on the other hand, recognizes
neither castes nor fatal persons. Widows and divorcees have the freedom to
marry whomever they choose. There is no stigma attached to divorce or widowhood
in the Quran:
[2:231] If you divorce the women, once they
fulfill their interim (three menstruations), you shall allow them to live in
the same home amicably, or let them leave amicably. Do not force them to
stay against their will, as a revenge. Anyone who does this wrongs his own
soul. Do not take GOD's revelations in vain. Remember GOD's blessings upon
you, and that He sent down to you the scripture and wisdom to enlighten you.
You shall observe GOD, and know that GOD is aware of all things.
[2:234] Those who die and leave wives,
their widows shall wait four months and ten days (before they remarry). Once
they fulfill their interim, you commit no error by letting them do whatever
righteous matters they wish to do. GOD is fully Cognizant of everything you
do.
[2:240] Those who die and leave wives, a will
shall provide their wives with support for a year, provided they stay within
the same household. If they leave, you commit no sin by letting them do
whatever they wish, so long as righteousness is maintained. GOD is Almighty,
Most Wise.
15. POLYGAMY
Let us now tackle the important question of
polygamy. Polygamy is a very ancient practice found in many human societies.
The Bible did not condemn polygamy. To the contrary, the Old Testament and
Rabbinic writings frequently attest to the legality of polygamy. King Solomon
is said to have had 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:3) Also, king
David is said to have had many wives and concubines (2 Samuel 5:13). The
Old Testament does have some injunctions on how to distribute the property
of a man among his sons from different wives (Deut. 22:7). The only restriction
on polygamy is a ban on taking a wife's sister as a rival wife (Lev. 18:18).
The Talmud advises a maximum of four wives. 51 European Jews continued to
practice polygamy until the sixteenth century. Oriental Jews regularly practiced
polygamy until they arrived in Israel where it is forbidden under civil law.
However, under religious law which overrides civil law in such cases, it
is permissible. 52
What about the New Testament? According to Father
Eugene Hillman in his insightful book, Polygamy reconsidered, "Nowhere in
the New Testament is there any explicit commandment that marriage should
be monogamous or any explicit commandment forbidding polygamy." 53 Moreover,
Jesus has not spoken against polygamy though it was practiced by the Jews
of his society. Father Hillman stresses the fact that the Church in Rome
banned polygamy in order to conform to the Greco-Roman culture (which prescribed
only one legal wife while tolerating concubinage and prostitution). He cited
St. Augustine, "Now indeed in our time, and in keeping with Roman custom,
it is no longer allowed to take another wife." 54 African churches and African
Christians often remind their European brothers that the Church's ban on
polygamy is a cultural tradition and not an authentic Christian
injunction.
The Quran, too, allowed polygamy, but not without
restrictions:
[4:3] If you deem it best for the
orphans, you may marry their mothers - you may marry two, three, or four. If
you fear lest you become unfair, then you shall be content with only one, or
with what you already have. Additionally, you are thus more likely to avoid
financial hardship.
The Quran, contrary to the Bible, limited the
maximum number of wives to four under the strict condition of treating the
wives equally and justly. It should not be understood that the Quran is exhorting
the believers to practice polygamy, or that polygamy is considered as an
ideal. In other words, the Quran has "tolerated" or "allowed" polygamy, and
no more, but why? Why is polygamy permissible ? The answer is simple: there
are places and times in which there are compelling social and moral reasons
for polygamy. As the above Quranic verse indicates, the issue of polygamy
in Islam cannot be understood apart from community obligations towards orphans
and widows. Islam as a universal religion suitable for all places and all
times could not ignore these compelling obligations.
In most human societies, females outnumber males.
In the U.S. there are, at least, eight million more women than men. In a
country like Guinea there are 122 females for every 100 males. In Tanzania,
there are 95.1 males per 100 females. 55 What should a society do towards
such unbalanced sex ratios? There are various solutions, some might suggest
celibacy, others would prefer female infanticide (which does happen in some
societies in the world today !). Others may think the only outlet is that
the society should tolerate all manners of sexual permissiveness: prostitution,
sex out of wedlock, homosexuality, etc. For other societies , like
most African societies today, the most honorable outlet is to allow polygamous
marriage as a culturally accepted and socially respected institution. The
point that is often misunderstood in the West is that women in other cultures
do not necessarily look at polygamy as a sign of women's degradation. For
example, many young African brides , whether Christians or Muslims or otherwise,
would prefer to marry a married man who has already proved himself to be
a responsible husband. Many African wives urge their husbands to get a second
wife so that they do not feel lonely. 56 A survey of over six thousand women,
ranging in age from 15 to 59, conducted in the second largest city in Nigeria
showed that 60 percent of these women would be pleased if their husbands
took another wife. Only 23 percent expressed anger at the idea of sharing
with another wife. Seventy-six percent of the women in a survey conducted
in Kenya viewed polygamy positively. In a survey undertaken in rural Kenya,
25 out of 27 women considered polygamy to be better than monogamy. These
women felt polygamy can be a happy and beneficial experience if the co-wives
cooperate with each other. 57 Polygamy in most African societies is such
a respectable institution that some Protestant churches are becoming more
tolerant of it. A bishop of the Anglican Church in Kenya declared that, "Although
monogamy may be ideal for the expression of love between husband and wife,
the church should consider that in certain cultures polygyny is socially
acceptable and that the belief that polygyny is contrary to Christianity
is no longer tenable." 58 After a careful study of African polygamy, Reverend
David Gitari of the Anglican Church has concluded that polygamy, as ideally
practiced, is more Christian than divorce and remarriage as far as the abandoned
wives and children are concerned. 59 I personally know of some highly educated
African wives who, despite having lived in the West for many years, do not
have any objections against polygamy. One of them, who lives in the U.S.,
solemnly exhorts her husband to get a second wife to help her in raising
the kids.
The problem of the unbalanced sex ratios becomes
truly problematic at times of war. Native American Indian tribes used to
suffer highly unbalanced sex ratios after wartime losses. Women in these
tribes, who in fact enjoyed a fairly high status, accepted polygamy as the
best protection against indulgence in indecent activities. European settlers,
without offering any other alternative, condemned this Indian polygamy as
'uncivilised'. 60 After the second world war, there were 7,300,000 more women
than men in Germany (3.3 million of them were widows). There were 100 men
aged 20 to 30 for every 167 women in that age group. 61 Many of these women
needed a man not only as a companion but also as a provider for the household
in a time of unprecedented misery and hardship. The soldiers of the victorious
Allied Armies exploited these women's vulnerability. Many young girls and
widows had liaisons with members of the occupying forces. Many American and
British soldiers paid for their pleasures in cigarettes, chocolate, and bread.
Children were overjoyed at the gifts these strangers brought. A 10 year old
boy on hearing of such gifts from other children wished from all his heart
for an 'Englishman' for his mother so that she need not go hungry any longer.
62 We have to ask our own conscience at this point: What is more dignifying
to a woman? An accepted and respected second wife as in the native Indians'
approach, or a virtual prostitute as in the 'civilised' Allies approach?
In other words, what is more dignifying to a woman, the Quranic prescription
or the theology based on the culture of the Roman Empire?
It is interesting to note that in an international
youth conference held in Munich in 1948 the problem of the highly unbalanced
sex ratio in Germany was discussed. When it became clear that no solution
could be agreed upon, some participants suggested polygamy. The initial reaction
of the gathering was a mixture of shock and disgust. However, after a careful
study of the proposal, the participants agreed that it was the only possible
solution. Consequently, polygamy was included among the conference final
recommendations. 63
The world today possesses more weapons of mass
destruction than ever before and the European churches might, sooner or later,
be obliged to accept polygamy as the only way out. Father Hillman has
thoughtfully recognized this fact, "It is quite conceivable that these genocidal
techniques (nuclear, biological, chemical..) could produce so drastic an
imbalance among the sexes that plural marriage would become a necessary means
of survival....Then contrary to previous custom and law, an overriding natural
and moral inclination might arise in favour of polygamy. In such a situation,
theologians and church leaders would quickly produce weighty reasons and
biblical texts to justify a new conception of marriage." 64
To the present day, polygamy continues to be
a viable solution to some of the social ills of modern societies. The communal
obligations that the Quran mentions in association with the permission of
polygamy are more visible at present in some Western societies than in Africa.
For example, In the United States today, there is a severe gender crisis
in the black community. One out of every twenty young black males may die
before reaching the age of 21. For those between 20 and 35 years of age,
homicide is the leading cause of death. 65 Besides, many young black males
are unemployed, in jail, or on dope. 66 As a result, one in four black women,
at age 40, has never married, as compared with one in ten white women. 67
Moreover, many young black females become single mothers before the age of
20 and find themselves in need of providers. The end result of these tragic
circumstances is that an increasing number of black women are engaged in
what is called 'man-sharing'. 68 That is, many of these hapless single black
women are involved in affairs with married men. The wives are often unaware
of the fact that other women are 'sharing' their husbands with them. Some
observers of the crisis of man-sharing in the African American community
strongly recommend consensual polygamy as a temporary answer to the shortage
of black males until more comprehensive reforms in the American society at
large are undertaken. 69 By consensual polygamy they mean a polygamy that
is sanctioned by the community and to which all the parties involved have
agreed, as opposed to the usually secret man-sharing which is detrimental
both to the wife and to the community in general. The problem of man-sharing
in the African American community was the topic of a panel discussion held
at Temple University in Philadelphia on January 27, 1993. 70 Some of the
speakers recommended polygamy as one potential remedy for the crisis. They
also suggested that polygamy should not be banned by law, particularly in
a society that tolerates prostitution and mistresses. The comment of one
woman from the audience that African Americans needed to learn from Africa
where polygamy was responsibly practiced elicited enthusiastic applause.
Philip Kilbride, an American anthropologist
of Roman Catholic heritage, in his provocative book, Plural marriage for
our time, proposes polygamy as a solution to some of the ills of the American
society at large. He argues that plural marriage may serve as a potential
alternative for divorce in many cases in order to obviate the damaging impact
of divorce on many children. He maintains that many divorces are caused by
the rampant extramarital affairs in the American society. According to Kilbride,
ending an extramarital affair in a polygamous marriage, rather than in a
divorce, is better for the children, "Children would be better served if
family augmentation rather than only separation and dissolution were seen
as options." Moreover, he suggests that other groups will also benefit from
plural marriage such as: elderly women who face a chronic shortage of men
and the African Americans who are involved in man-sharing. 71
In 1987, a poll conducted by the student newspaper
at the university of California at Berkeley asked the students whether they
agreed that men should be allowed by law to have more than one wife in response
to a perceived shortage of male marriage candidates in California. Almost
all of the students polled approved of the idea. One female student even
stated that a polyganous marriage would fulfil her emotional and physical
needs while giving her greater freedom than a monogamous union. 72 In fact,
this same argument is also used by the few remaining fundamentalist Mormon
women who still practice polygamy in the U.S. They believe that polygamy
is an ideal way for a woman to have both a career and children since the
wives help each other care for the children. 73
It has to be added that polygamy in Islam is
a matter of mutual consent. No one can force a woman to marry a married man.
Besides, the wife has the right to stipulate that her husband must not marry
any other woman as a second wife. 74 The Bible, on the other hand, sometimes
resorts to forcible polygamy. A childless widow must marry her husband's
brother, even if he is already married (see the "Plight of Widows"
section),regardless of her consent (Genesis 38:8-10).
It should be noted that in many Muslim societies
today the practice of polygamy is rare since the gap between the numbers
of both sexes is not huge. One can, safely, say that the rate of polygamous
marriages in the Muslim world is much less than the rate of extramarital
affairs in the West. In other words, men in the Muslim world today are far
more strictly monogamous than men in the Western world.
Billy Graham, the eminent Christian evangelist
has recognized this fact: "Christianity cannot compromise on the question
of polygamy. If present-day Christianity cannot do so, it is to its own
detriment. Islam has permitted polygamy as a solution to social ills and
has allowed a certain degree of latitude to human nature but only within
the strictly defined framework of the law. Christian countries make a great
show of monogamy, but actually they practice polygamy. No one is unaware
of the part mistresses play in Western society. In this respect Islam is
a fundamentally honest religion, and permits a Muslim to marry a second wife
if he must, but strictly forbids all clandestine amatory associations in
order to safeguard the moral probity of the community." 75
It is of interest to note that many, non-Muslim
as well as Muslim, countries in the world today have outlawed polygamy. Taking
a second wife, even with the free consent of the first wife, is a violation
of the law. On the other hand, cheating on the wife, without her knowledge
or consent, is perfectly legitimate as far as the law is concerned! What
is the legal wisdom behind such a contradiction? Is the law designed to reward
deception and punish honesty? It is one of the unfathomable paradoxes of
our modern 'civilised' world.
16. THE
VEIL
Finally, let us shed some light on what is
considered in the West as the greatest symbol of women's oppression and
servitude, the veil or the head cover. Is it true that there is no such thing
as the veil in the Judaeo-Christian tradition? Let us set the record straight.
According to Rabbi Dr. Menachem M. Brayer (Professor of Biblical Literature
at Yeshiva University) in his book, The Jewish woman in Rabbinic literature,
it was the custom of Jewish women to go out in public with a head covering
which, sometimes, even covered the whole face leaving one eye free. 76 He
quotes some famous ancient Rabbis saying," It is not like the daughters of
Israel to walk out with heads uncovered" and "Cursed be the man who lets
the hair of his wife be seen....a woman who exposes her hair for self-adornment
brings poverty." Rabbinic law forbids the recitation of blessings or prayers
in the presence of a bareheaded married woman since uncovering the woman's
hair is considered "nudity".77 Dr. Brayer also mentions that "During the
Tannaitic period the Jewish woman's failure to cover her head was considered
an affront to her modesty. When her head was uncovered she might be fined
four hundred zuzim for this offense." Dr. Brayer also explains that veil
of the Jewish woman was not always considered a sign of modesty. Sometimes,
the veil symbolized a state of distinction and luxury rather than modesty.
The veil personified the dignity and superiority of noble women. It also
represented a woman's inaccessibility as a sanctified possession of her husband.
78
The veil signified a woman's self-respect and
social status. Women of lower classes would often wear the veil to give the
impression of a higher standing. The fact that the veil was the sign of nobility
was the reason why prostitutes were not permitted to cover their hair in
the old Jewish society. However, prostitutes often wore a special headscarf
in order to look respectable. 79 Jewish women in Europe continued to wear
veils until the nineteenth century when their lives became more intermingled
with the surrounding secular culture. The external pressures of the European
life in the nineteenth century forced many of them to go out bare-headed.
Some Jewish women found it more convenient to replace their traditional veil
with a wig as another form of hair covering. Today, most pious Jewish women
do not cover their hair except in the synagogue. 80 Some of them, such as
the Hasidic sects, still use the wig. 81
What about the Christian tradition? It is well
known that Catholic Nuns have been covering their heads for hundreds of years,
but that is not all. St. Paul in the New Testament made some very interesting
statements about the veil:
"Now I want you to realize that the head
of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of
Christ is God. Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonours
his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered
dishonours her head - it is just as though her head were shaved. If a woman
does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a
disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or shaved off, she should cover
her head. A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory
of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man did not come from woman,
but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.
For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign
of authority on her head" (I Corinthians 11:3-10).
St. Paul's rationale for veiling women is that
the veil represents a sign of the authority of the man, who is the image
and glory of God, over the woman who was created from and for man. St. Tertullian
in his famous treatise 'On The Veiling Of Virgins' wrote, "Young women, you
wear your veils out on the streets, so you should wear them in the church,
you wear them when you are among strangers, then wear them among your
brothers..." Among the Canon laws of the Catholic church today, there is
a law that requires women to cover their heads in church. 82 Some Christian
denominations, such as the Amish and the Mennonites for example, keep their
women veiled to the present day. The reason for the veil, as offered by their
Church leaders, is that "The head covering is a symbol of woman's subjection
to the man and to God", which is the same logic introduced by St. Paul in
the New Testament. 83
17- Epiloque: Click
here |
|
----------- |
