Sex, Marriage and Family in World Religions (43 page)

[Al-Ghazali (1058–1111),
Ihya’ ‘Ulum al-Din,
2:34–35 (11th century ce)]

Document 3–75

a b u b a k r m u h a m m a d i b n a b d i l l a h i b n a l - ‘ a r a b i a l m a l i k i Al-Tabari . . . Choose that the meaning of the verb
hajara
27 . . . is to tie wives with a rope
(hijar)
in their homes. . . .

Ibn al-‘Arabi then said, “What a huge slip from a great scholar! I cannot stop wondering about this view. . . . It is so surprising from him, for he is known to be a knowledgeable linguist, how far from the truth he is and how mistaken he is. Given the situation, it became necessary for us to look at these two matters carefully to uncover the truth. I looked into the Arabic language at the root verb
ha-ja-ra
. . . .

I looked into all these meanings and found out that they all evolve around the same basic episteme, that of keeping away from something. . . . If all this is true, and if all the meanings of this word refer to being far away from something, then the meaning of the verse would be to keep away from them in bed.

There is no need to that twisted argument from this scholar. . . . How could al-Tabari have chosen it? . . .

It is reported that the Prophet—peace be upon him—said, “O people, verily, you have rights against your wives and your wives have rights against you. As to your rights, they shall not allow in your conjugal beds someone you hate, they shall not commit clear and evident adultery
(fahishah)
; if they do, then God has allowed you to abandon them in bed and hit them lightly, and if they change their behavior they have the right to their maintenance and clothing in kindness.” . . .

Among the best things I heard in interpreting this verse was the interpretation of Sa’id Ibn Jubayr [665 or 6–713 or 714]. He said that the husband should admonish her first; if she does not accept he may then abandon her, if she persists he may then hit her. If she still persists he may send an arbiter from her relatives and one from his. They should find out whose fault it is, and then the
khul’
28 may proceed. . . .

‘Ata’[d. 732]29 said, “He should not hit her even if he orders her and she disobeys, he may only get angry with her.”

Al-Qadi30 said, “This is from ‘Ata’s extensive knowledge
(fiqh),
his understanding of Islamic law, and his comprehension of the paths of interpretation, for he understood that the Qur’an command for chastisement is merely a permission, and he realized that it is hateful to do so from other sources—namely, the
hadith
in which the Messenger of God says, “I do hate for a man to hit his woman in anger and he might sleep with her at the end of the day.”

. . . The Messenger of God—peace be upon him—was asked for a permission 196

a z i z a h a l - h i b r i a n d r a j a ’ m . e l h a b t i to hit women, he said, “You may do so. But the best of you will not chastise.”

So he allowed it but recommended against resorting to it.

[Ibn al-‘Arabi al-Maliki,
Ahkam al-Qur’an,
1:418–420 (12th century ce)]

Document 3–76

a b u b a k r m u h a m m a d i b n a b d i l l a h i b n a l - ‘ a r a b i a l m a l i k i God’s saying, “And live with them with kindness. . . . ” The real meaning . . .

is completeness and perfection. . . . God ordered men if they marry women to make their relationship and companionship with them based on completeness and perfection, for it provides peace of mind, serenity, and comfort. . . .

God says, “And if you hate them, then you may dislike a thing in which God may have placed abundant good.” Meaning: If a man finds himself hating his wife, turning away from her, and not having any desire for her even if she did not commit a sin or
nushuz,
then it is recommended that he be patient with her and tolerate her ill treatment and injustice, for it might be for his own good to stay with her. . . .

Sheikh Abu Muhammad Ibn Abi Zayd was a distinguished scholar and a devout worshipper. He had a wife who treated him very badly, failing to fulfill her duties toward him, while subjecting him to her bitter tongue all the time. People would often advise him to let her go, but he preferred patience toward her. He used to say, “I am a man who is blessed with good health and knowledge. . . .

Maybe she was sent to me because of some shortcomings in my faith. I do fear if I divorce her I might be subjected to worse punishment than her.”

[Ibn al-‘Arabi al-Maliki,
Ahkam al-Qur’an,
1:13 (9th century ce)]

Document 3–77

m u h a m m a d f a k h r a l - d i n a l - r a z i And God said, “And among His Signs is this that He created for you mates from among yourselves, that you may dwell in tranquillity with them, and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts). Verily in that are Signs for those who reflect.” . . .

Some scholars said that His saying “from among yourselves” means that Eve was created from the body of Adam. But the truth of the matter is that she was created from the same kind as men, in the same way God said, “Came unto you a Messenger from among yourselves.” This meaning is further reinforced by the phrase “so that you may dwell in tranquillity with them,” for two different kinds of being cannot find tranquillity in each other, which means that they would not feel secure one with the other or love each other. . . .

There are many views about His saying: “and put love and mercy between you.” Some suggested that
love
comes from sexual pleasure while
mercy
comes
Islam
197

through having children. . . . Some, on the other hand, suggested that the term
love
refers to a person’s need for his/her mate while the term
mercy
refers to how this same person acts when his/her mate needs him/her. . . . God mentioned two things here, one leads to the other. First, love occurs then it leads to mercy. Therefore, a wife may no more be the subject of sexual desire once she falls sick or grows old, but her husband would still take care of her and vice versa. . . .

Indeed, human beings might find in terms of mutual mercy from their mates what they might not find from close relatives, and this is not due to mere desire, for sexual desires might fade away as time goes by, but mercy lasts, for it is from God. If desire were all that unites spouses, then when anger occurs it kills desire.

Desire is not eternal in itself, and therefore there would be separation and divorce each time a quarrel between spouses occurs. Mercy that makes humans protect their families from all harm is from God and this cannot be understood without meditation.

[Al-Razi,
Tafsir al-Fakhr al-Razi,
25:111 (12th century ce)]

Document 3–78

m u h a m m a d f a k h r a l - d i n a l - r a z i Al-Shafi’i said that chastisement is permissible but to refrain from it is better.

It is narrated that ‘Umar said, “We, people of Quraysh, were in command of our women. When we arrived in Madinah we found that Madinan women were in command of their men. Then, our women started mixing with theirs and they started rebelling against their husbands. I then went to the Prophet and told him that our women have become rebellious toward their men. He allowed chastising them. Soon after that, a large crowd of women besieged the Prophet’s residence complaining about their husbands. He—peace be upon him—then said, “seventy women came to Muhammad’s family tonight all complaining about their husbands; those husbands are not the best of you.” Meaning that those who chastised their wives are not better than those who didn’t.

Al-Shafi’i said, “This
hadith
is clear evidence that it is preferred to refrain from chastising.”

[Al-Razi,
Tafsir al-Fakhr al-Razi,
10:92–93]

Document 3–79

i b n h a j a r a l - ‘ a s q a l a n i

There has been an absolute ban on beating women. According to Ahmad, Abu Dawud, and al-Nasa’i . . . the Prophet said, “Do not beat God’s female subjects.”

‘Umar then came and said, “Women are rebelling against their men.” Men were then allowed to chastise their wives. Following that, more that seventy 198

a z i z a h a l - h i b r i a n d r a j a ’ m . e l h a b t i women surrounded the Prophet’s residence protesting against this practice, so the Prophet said, “I have been besieged by seventy women, all complaining from their husbands, those husbands are not the best of you.” . . .

Al-Shafi’i said, “There is a possibility that the prophetic ban was optional . . . or that it was said before the revelation of the Qur’anic verse, he then allowed for it after the revelation.” The Prophet’s saying, “The best among you will not beat their wives” is evidence that chastising is overall permissible, which means that he can beat her to discipline her if she does something he hates in matters where she is required to obey him. . . . Al-Nasa’i reported in this regard À’ishah’s
hadith,
“The messenger of God never chastised a woman or a slave and never raised his hand on anybody except to enforce God’s law.”

[Al-‘Asqalani,
Fath Al-Bari Sharh Sahih Al-Bukhari,
9:379]

Document 3–80

m u h a m m a d a l - t a h e r i b n ‘ a s h u r God’s saying, “As to those on whose part you fear disloyalty . . . ” refers to some states that are opposite to righteousness. . . . The majority of scholars have said disloyalty
(nushuz)
is when the wife disobeys her husband, despises him and shows dislike to him. . . . They linked the permission to admonish, leave, and hit her to this disobedience, and they cited the
hadiths
that allow the husband to hit his disobedient wife. . . . However, I believe that in giving such a permission, those narrations and traditions took into consideration the customs of particular social classes and tribes; for people are different, and rural people do not consider hitting women a form of violence, nor do their women consider it violence against them. . . .

Hitting is grave, and regulating it is very hard; it was only allowed in cases of flagrant corruption, when the woman violated the law. Limits, however, have to be established and explained in jurisprudence; for if we leave it to the husbands’ discretion as a way to relieve their anger, this would lead to transgression of limits . . . And the principles of the Shari’a do not allow people to take justice by themselves except in emergency cases. . . . We, therefore, say: if governing powers know that husbands fail to keep the legal punishments in context and to observe the required limitations, then it is possible for them to prohibit husbands from using this permission and to state that whoever hits his wife will be punished so that the situation between spouses does not deteriorate especially knowing that the morality of husbands has weakened.

[Ibn ‘Ashur (d. 1867/8),
Tafsir al-Tahrir wa al-Tanwir,
pp. 41–44 (19th century ce)]

Document 3–81

If we look into the nature of the Qur’anic measures that relates to “beating” or “chastisement,” we find that it aims at motivating the reconciliation efforts of
Islam
199

the couple. It is another step toward the eradication of discord, using the best available means that would help recover the feelings of love, affection, and intimate communication between the spouses. . . .

If violence, harm, and oppression have no place in a marital relationship and in solving its problems, what is the meaning of “beating”
(darb)
here in the context of resolving conflicts between spouses? Is it a concrete meaning implying the infliction of physical pain, or is it a figurative one? . . .

If we take the interpretation of Ibn Abbas into consideration, chastisement or beating will mean nothing but a slight tap with a
miswak,
31 and this surely does not constitute a punishment or harm that would inflict physical or psy-chological pain. It means, rather, a concrete expression by a movement or a tap of the
miswak
so as to denote seriousness and discontent, a state of anger and disappointment toward the wife that keeps her away from the soul of the abandoning husband. It is the opposite of the caress that expresses love and affection. This interpretation is rather acceptable, for it does not destroy the relationship of dignity and due respect between the spouses, who are united by bonds of tenderness and companionship. This understanding leaves no room for a beating that inflicts pain, suffering, humiliation, and oppression—to the contrary of what some jurists said! . . .

Despite this mild interpretation, there remain shadows, insinuations, excuses, and loopholes that were exploited, misunderstood, and used as an excuse in the past. And a lot of men will not abstain from doing the same in the future, leading to physical violence in the name of religion. . . . Therefore, it is crucial that our understanding and solution leave no room for misuse and leave no open doors for mistreatment and ill judgment; an understanding that would be in line with the objectives of Islamic Shari’ah, which aims to build families on principles of love, mercy, and dignity. . . .

If we look at the previously mentioned verses of the Qur’an,32 we find that, whether used in a transitive or intransitive way, the term
darb
was mostly used in a figurative sense that implies separating, abandoning, withdrawing, and leaving. . . . Hence, the general meaning of the term
darb
in the context of different Qur’anic texts refers to separating, abandoning, withdrawing, and leaving. Therefore, what is the most relevant meaning of the term
darb,
in the context of conflict resolution between the spouses, and in the hope of recovering their love and communication, in the verse? . . .

If we take into consideration both the nature of the context of the verse and the nature of the situation and the objectives of the stated measures of reconciliation and appeasement; and if we consider also the Islamic values of giving dignity to all humans and preserving their self-respect and their right to self-determination; and, finally considering the consensual nature of the marital relationship and the ability of both parties to end it whenever they are not satisfied or if one party does not respect the other party’s rights within it, and the fact that nobody can force or coerce a person to stay in it; it becomes clear to us that the meaning of the word
darb
cannot involve inflicting pain or hu-200