لطفا منتظر باشید ...
In the Name of Allah, the Most
Compassionate, the Most Merciful
Rewriting the history
of Women
Koran and the Liberation of Women
Muhammed Asadi
"O Humankind! We have created you male and female and have
divided you into nations and tribes that you recognize each other.
The
best of you in the sight of God is the one most socially aware (taqwa-
literally - "extremely careful")." Koran 49:13
The Liberated Woman: We see some common
characteristics in modern urban culture concerning what is required of men
and women: Open chest shirts for the female, a necktie for the male.
Belly
exposed shirts for the female, in-going shirts for the male.
Men's dress
patronizes opaque clothing where as feminine clothes are transparent.
Modern society labels a man as improperly dressed when not in full suit
but women are celebrated if they keep their legs uncovered, even on a cold
winter night.
The society that condemns the exhibition of male physical
curves and labels them as "perversion" provides "artificial
aides" to under developed areas of the female.
Everyone has heard the
term, 'unwed mother' but you hardly ever hear about the 'unwed father'.
The fashion world usually controlled by males, aims to create instability
in the female mind.
She is taught that "wearing the least" is
something that builds "status" and taking it all off is "liberation".
She is taught to hate her own body.
The form of her eyelashes
and brows, the style of her walking and speech, the color of her lips,
nails and cheek are all given an artificial look.
She also hates the
natural trend of her hair.
In such a society, "hair fashion designers"
and cosmetic manufacturers make big money.
Whereas men balance themselves on a three-inch base heel of the
shoes, the woman is expected to balance herself on a half a centimeter
heel.
This creates an abnormality called Lordosis in medical terminology.
Males make big money, displaying female nakedness through their
respectable trades like cabarets, strip bars, fashion shows, and
especially commercial advertising (Do I want the Mustang or the sexy
blonde in the advertisement?), nude paintings and magazines and now
Internet web pages.
The modern urban culture does not only show the above but it
also shows: Alarming statistics with manifold percentage increase through
time of single parents, children with no fathers, broken families, sex
crimes, divorce, suicide and drug use among teens, asylums for unclaimed
children, homes for unwanted parents, clinics for delinquent youth and
neurotic adults.
Recent estimates suggest that up to 80% of US society displays
some form of psychological symptoms, and that up to 22% have psychological
problems serious enough to interfere with their day to day living which
are diagnosable (Chicago Tribune 12/1999).
Data in the United States also shows that 25 to 35 percent of
girls are sexually abused, usually by men well known to them (Kilbourne
1999:253).
A high percentage of women so assaulted suffer from Post
Traumatic Stress Disorder (the same disorder that a large number of
Vietnam veterans suffer from) which leads to addiction and substance abuse
and eventually to poverty and homelessness.
Thus women in America live
in a "war zone" in thier own homes.
If they survive childhood,
their boyfriends or husbands eventually get them!
In such societies "liberation" of women has been
reduced to a slogan to sell products.
Such sellers of "liberation",
mostly men, offer women "liberation" via smoking, alcohol, food
and their natural longing for stable relationships [which have dwindled in
such a society].
This commercial "liberation" comes at a great
cost to women and serves to isolate them through addiction.
As addicts
make great consumers, the sellers of such "liberation" want to
keep it that way (Kilbourne 1999).
When such sellers of "liberation" are faced with true
demands for gender equality, like the ERA [Equal Rights Amendment in the
United States], they reject them outright and a government funded and
controlled by them makes it fail [ERA failed to pass in 1982].
Such powers
that be in these societies not only attack any genuine efforts towards
liberation of women in their own society [as they are commercially
disadvantageous to them], but also attack all other ideas presented as
truly liberating to women, by other societies [to which they export their
commercial culture] by labeling them, "harsh, barbaric, primitive".
They do this through their control of the media, which in most cases is
not only owned by them but depends on them, through their advertising
dollars, for its very survival.
This paper is an attempt to rewrite the History of Women's
Rights, taking note of things that have been widely ignored in popular
presentation of the subject.
The paper also serves to clarify the position
of a book, the Koran that has been distorted and misrepresented through
the ages, by those having vested interests.
WOMEN IN WESTERN RELIGION: Christianity, the
major religion that shaped western thought, presents women as subordinate
to men.
Men according to the Bible are the owners of women, just like an
animal is owned.
Exodus 20:17 which states the famous tenth commandment,
lumps a wife together with his servants, animals and house.
A man could
sell his daughter as a slave (Exodus 21:7-11) or give her in marriage to
whomsoever he chose.
This subordination of women to men in the Bible, which shaped
western thought on the issue, is made clear in Leviticus 12:1-8: After the
birth of a male child, a woman is ritually impure for seven days, however
after the birth of a female child she is ritually impure for fourteen days
according to the law of the Bible.
Corinthians 14:34-35 of the New Testament of the Bible states:
"As in all Churches of the saints, the woman should be
subordinate as even the law says...for it is shameful for a woman to
speak in church."
Timothy 2:11 states:
"Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness.
I permit
no woman to teach or have authority over men.
She is to keep silent,
for Adam was formed first then Eve, and Adam was not deceived but the
woman was deceived and became a transgressor."
Corinthians 11:6 says:
" For if a woman will not veil herself then she should cut off
her hair, but if it is disgraceful for a woman to be shorn or shaven,
let her wear a veil...for man was not created from woman but woman
from man.
Neither was man created for woman but woman for man."
Jesus' track record, based on the New Testament isn't much
better in his treatment of women, even his own mother.
According to the
Gospel of John, he is openly rude to his mother.
Having become famous
among the people, according to John or whoever wrote the Gospel of John,
he addresses his mother in this rude manner:
"Woman! What have I to do with you.
My time is not yet
(John 2:4)."
Imagine, if you're a woman [I am a man so correct me if I'm
wrong] and your son or daughter said, "Woman! What have I to do with
you" [and to top it off, it was said in public and not private], how
you would feel? Considering a mother's sacrifice and discomfort in bearing
and delivering a child, such behavior is unacceptable.
Hardly an exemplary
character that Christian evangelists depict the "Prince of peace"
had.
The Koran states: "Be careful of God and be careful
"Be careful of God and be careful of the wombs that bore
you" (Koran 4:1).
"We have enjoined on humankind, kindness to their parents.
In
discomfort did his/her mother bear them and in discomfort did she give
them birth (Koran 46:15)"
The Koran disputes the authenticity of the Gospels as being a
genuine account of the words of Jesus, as does the Jesus Seminar, based on
modern findings.
Contrary to what the Gospels present Jesus as saying to
his mother, the Koran quotes him as saying:
"And God has made me [Jesus] kind and dutiful towards my
mother and not arrogant or overbearing (Koran 19:32)."
Helen Ellerbe, in her book, The Dark Side of Christian History
(1995) elaborates on the Church's[both Catholic and Protestant] treatment
of women:
The second century St.
Clement of Alexandria wrote: "Every
woman should be filled with shame by the thought that she is a woman."
The Church father Tertullian explained why women deserve their status as
despised and inferior human beings:
You are the devil's gateway: you are the unsealer of the
tree: you are the first deserter of the divine law.
You destroyed so
easily God's image, man.
On account of your desert-that is, death-
even the Son of God had to die [Joan Smith, Misogynies: Reflections on
Myths and Malice (N.Y Fawcett Columbine, 1989:66)].Others
expressed the view more bluntly.
The sixth century Christian
philosopher, Boethius, wrote in The Consolation of Philosophy, "Woman
is a temple built upon a sewer." Bishops in the sixth century
council of Macon voted as to whether women had souls.
In the tenth
century, Odo of Cluny declared, " To embrace a woman is to embrace
a sack of manure."The thirteenth century St.
Thomas Aquinas
suggested that God had made a mistake in creating woman: "Nothing
deficient [or defective] should have been produced in the first
establishment of things; so women ought not to have been produced then."
And Lutherans at Wittenberg debated whether women were really human
beings at all.
Orthodox Christians held women responsible for all sin.
As the [Roman Catholic] Bible Apocrypha states, "Of woman came the
beginning of sin/ And thanks to her we all must die (Ecclesiasticus
25:13-26)." As 1 Corinthians 7:1 states, "It is a good thing
for man to have nothing to do with a woman."
The 1500s marked the beginning of "witchcraft
persecutions." By the 1700s over 100,000 people, 80-90 percent of
them women, had been put to death in Europe usually by burning at the
stake (Chicago Tribune Dec 29, 1999- A profile of women's history).
This
amounted to be a self-fulfilling prophecy as the religious King James I
estimated that the ratio of women to men who "succumbed" to
witchcraft was twenty to one (Ellerby 1995:116).
Witch persecution has its roots in the Bible as well:
"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
Whoever lieth
with a beast shall surely be put to death.
He that sacrificeth unto any
god, save to the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed." (Exodus
22:18-20)
Keeping a woman silent according to what St.
Paul had said was
widely practiced in Europe and the Christian world.
In 1833 when the first
coeducational college in The U.S, Oberlin College was established, women
were not allowed to speak in many classes.
In 1623 in England, a woman
sentenced by a court to be "too frank" was publicly displayed in
a "scold bridle", i.e.
a metal cage around her head with a
spiked plate which cut her tongue if she dared speak.
Contrary to this God, in the Koran, not only encourages women
to speak, but says that they are listened to and admonishes men to be fair
and just with them.
Consider this statement in the Koran and compare it to
what the Bible said:
"God hears the saying of her who argues with you
concerning her husband, and complains to God.
God hears your mutual
complaints.
(Koran 57:1)"
HINDUISM AND WOMEN: In Hindu religious
literature by far, the most effective weapon used by the Gods to corrupt
virtuous mortals is a woman.
Usually a seductive celestial nymph but
sometimes, just woman, the root of all evil in the ascetic oriented view
of the orthodox Hindu (Baldick, Radice, and Jones :36).
The Mahabharata states, " I will tell you my son, how
Brahma created wanton women and for what purpose, for there is nothing
more evil than women...
The Lord Grandfather, learning what was in the
hearts of the Gods, created wanton women by a magic ritual in order to
delude mankind.." (13.40.3-10)
The complete subservience of wives to their husbands in Hindu
custom shows up in the practice of Sati, where the wife burns herself
alive on her dead husbands pyre.
In 1780 when the Raja of Marwar died in
India, his 64 wives burned themselves alive on his funeral pyre.
Even
though the secular government of India made this practice illegal it still
continues to be practiced because of religion.
CHINESE RELIGIOUS CONCEPTS AND WOMEN: The Yin
and the Yang is a concept quite familiar even in the west especially in
merchandise.
In their mythical theory of how the universe operates,
Chinese philosophers invented the concept of the Yin and Yang.
The
universe they concluded is understood to be a balance of the Yin (evil or
negative) and the Yang (good or positive).
When asked to further describe
Yin (evil), the explanation comes:
" The Yin is the negative force in nature.
It is seen in
darkness, coolness, FEMALENESS, dampness, the earth, moon and the
shadows.
The Yang (good) is the positive force in nature.
It is seen in
lightness, warmness, MALENESS, dryness and the sun (Hopfe :207)."
Max Weber, the German sociologist, recognized as the leading
person in the entire field of sociology and known for his work on the
Sociology of Religion, writes in his work on Confusianism and Taoism:
The doctrine held in common by ALL schools of philosophy [in
Chinese Religion] summarised the "good" spirits as the
[heavenly and masculine] Yang principle, the "evil" ones as
the [earthly and feminine] Yin principle, explaining the origin of the
world from their fusion ( Ed.
Gerth 1951:29)
Until 1901, the Chinese practiced "foot binding" for
girls which deformed girl's feet.
It had been practiced for around a
thousand years, based on tradition, till it was banned in 1901.
Even after
being banned, it was widely practiced until 1949.
Marie Vento (1998), in
her paper, One Thousand Years of Chinese Footbinding: Its Origins,
Popularity and Demise, writes:
In its most extreme form, footbinding was the act of wrapping
a three- to five-year old girl's feet with binding so as to bend the
toes under, break the bones and force the back of the foot together.
Its
purpose was to produce a tiny foot, the "golden lotus", which
was three inches long and thought to be both lovely and alluring...
One notable personality who aided in the spread of footbinding was the
famed writer and scholar Zhu Xi (1130-1200 A.D), whose commentaries on
the Confucian classics would form the canon of Neo-Confucianism that
would dominate Chinese intellectual and philosophical life for six
subsequent centuries.
An ardent advocate of footbinding, he introduced
the practice into southern Fuijan in order to spread Chinese culture and
teach proper relations between men and women, greatly influencing other
writers who mention the practice as if it were normal...
For men footbinding is troubling because it suggests not only that men
are capable of perceiving a gruesomely crippled foot as an object of
seductive pleasure, but that they are further capable of using their
superior social position to coerce women to conform to a standard of
beauty that is both deformed and grotesque.
For women, footbinding is
unsettling because it reveals a willingness to cripple their own
daughters to meet an aesthetic and criterion of social behavior defined
by men (retreived from the internet 01/15/'00)
FEMALE INFANTICIDE AND HINDU AND CHINESE TRADITION:
Not only did the Koran outlaw female infanticide, which was widely
practiced in Arabia at the time of the prophet Muhammed, it made it an
issue to be especially addressed on Judgment Day:
"And when the girl-child buried alive is asked for what
sin she was killed.
(Koran 81:8-9)"
The Koran places extreme importance on every human life, be it
male or female, of whatever color or nationality.
The statement of the
Koran reproduced below on the dignity of even one individual life is
unsurpassed in world literature.
The Koran states, without differentiating
between male and female:
"Whosoever kills even one human being, other than for
man slaughter or tyranny on earth, it would be as if they had killed all
of humanity.
And whosoever saves even one human life, it will be as if
they have saved all of humankind (Koran 5:32)"
Not only is female infanticide widely practiced in India based
on the traditional Hindu preference for male children compared to females
[resulting in over 10,000 confirmed cases every year- non reported cases
are many more], modern technology is being used to abort female fetuses
(Naft & Levine 1997:304-307).
Naft and Levine (1997) write in their International Report on
the Status of Women:
Yet since the mid 1970s, when parents found that modern
medical techniques could determine the sex of a fetus and enable them to
identify and abort female fetuses, the practice has become
commonplaceGovernment officials even suspect that the disproportionate
abortion of female fetuses may be a major underlying cause of the recent
decline in the nation's sex ratio (Naft & Levine 1997:304-305)
There is a strong preference among traditional Chinese for boys
instead of girls.
Until 1992 there was no law in China that outlawed
female infanticide.
Give the "one child law" and the traditional
preference for male children, female infanticide was commonly practiced
and resulted in the famous "missing girl" problem (Naft &
Levine 1997).
THE KORAN AND WOMEN:
"And among God's signs is this: He created for you mates
from amongst yourselves (males as mates for females and vice versa) that
you might find tranquillity and peace in them.
And he has put love and
kindness among you.
Herein surely are signs for those who reflect (Koran
30:21)."
Surprisingly egalitarian in its approach, the Koran doesn't
agree with the Bible's claim of men being owners of women, neither does it
agree with women being created for or from men [as the Bible claims], nor
does it say that women cannot teach nor have authority over men.
The Koran
also dispels the common myth among other religions in general that; a
woman is evil by nature and has been created to deceive mankind.
The
purpose, says that Koran, of mates is that tranquillity and peace emerges
through the natural instinct of love and kindness among mates.
People who analyze the Koran however sometimes feel different
about many of its verses, which to them suggest that the Koran is in some
way putting down women.
These verses are a handful and given the nature of
this paper we can go in detail with them.
The verse in the Koran that causes trouble to most liberals and
is misused by evangelical Christians is:
"Men are the protectors (Qawamoon) of women, because God
has given preference to some over others.
And because men spend of their
property on women.
So good women are obedient, guarding even unnoticed
that what Allah (God) has asked them to guard.
As for those from whom
you fear rebellion in this (i.e.
guarding their chastity in your
absence), i) talk to them, ii) leave them alone in their beds, iii) hit
them.
If they then obey you, look not for any way against them..
(Koran
4:34)."
The verse in question is quite clear if we don't jump to hasty
conclusions.
Men have been given the duty to protect and support women.
God has given preference to one gender over another in certain duties.
Men
have been given preference in being the providers of women and women are
given preference in caring for a child.
Even if divorce separates a man
from his wife, he has to seek her help in caring for the child or another
female if the mother agrees (Koran 2:233).
Men are told to spend of their
property on women and not ask the woman for anything even if she happens
to be rich.
Now to the controversial part: The verse asks women to guard
even when unnoticed, that which God has asked them to guard.
If we have
read the Koran carefully, we won't have trouble in determining that God
specifically asks women and men to "guard" their chastity (Koran
24:30-31).
To the women who cheat on their husbands, the Koran gives a
three step, braking mechanism to hasty divorce or worse still capital
punishment for adultery.
Step one, the husband should talk to the wife and try
to resolve it.
Usually, given men's image in popular culture, step one
would normally be shouting and cursing and maybe even hitting.
Around four
million women in the US are severally battered each year.
Two to four
thousand of them die.
Rather unfortunate and avoidable if a braking
mechanism exists for people exercising their emotions.
Contrary to this,
the Koran suggests that talk be the first option.
Step two, the Koran recommends that marital relations
be temporarily stopped between the couple, if cheating persists even after
a talk.
This would give the woman further opportunity to consider if she'd
rather separate from the man and provide for herself after divorce or if
she'd rather stay in the current marriage.
If however the couple want to
separate, which most people would if there was cheating going on, the
Koran states in the next verse:
"And if you fear a breach between the two (husband and
wife), appoint an arbiter from his family and an arbiter from her
family.
If they(husband and wife) desire amendment, God will make them
of one mind.
For God is Knowing and is Aware (Koran 4:35)."
If however, the woman wants to stay with the man but doesn't
quit cheating, i.e.
break up the extra marital relationship then the Koran
says resort to Step three, which is implicitly for the woman's own benefit
especially in an economically harsh environment.
In step three,
the Koran says hit them.
The word used signifies a single symbolic hit.
The word hit in the verse does not represent beating up in any way.
It is
not supposed to injure the woman but is meant to be symbolic.
Thus the
same word Darab,is used in the Koran to "strike or hit" someone
with an example, Darab al imsal (Koran 66:11).
If it injures the woman
than the woman according to law can have the authorities retaliate against
the man as he would have broken the law, as for injury there is equal
retribution according to the Koran [Koran 5:45].
Here is the situation that warrants step three: the woman
doesn't want to end the current marriage and also doesn't want to put an
end to her cheating episodes, the Koran suggests that the husband strike
her, for her own benefit.
This is very liberal.
The woman on her own would
be under financial hardship and so she wants to use the current marriage
relationship.
However she also doesn't want to quit cheating on her
husband.
People, men or women normally aren't so forgiving as to keep the
marriage and accept that the other party remains cheating.
Something has
to be done to make the relationship compatible, after both talking and
temporarily halting marital relationship hasn't worked.
However, in all
sincerity, I can state confidently that step 3 will never arise since both
the man and the woman are free to end the relationship during the course
of step 1 and step 2.
The Koran by making the symbolic hit step 3 is actually
controlling human emotions of hitting, which usually come before talking
and reasoning.
It makes it virtually impossible that a man going through 1
and 2 will resort to 3 also and not break the marriage before.
Where there
are difficulties that need to be settled, the Koran provides a very modern
and just arbitration system (see above Koran 4:35).
The Koran is concerned
to the utmost about women's rights.
Human society has usually not given
equal opportunity to women, even today in the west.
The Koran wants to
protect women in a harsh society and at the same time change men's "control-oriented"
minds to one that is more reasonable.
The method the Koran uses is more
result oriented than dogmatic, where both parties are dealt with equitably
and with justice.
By making hitting step 3 the Koran effectively controls the
anger emotion that is often spontaneous in such situations.
Good reasoning
and communication, arbitration to settle differences and short suspension
of marital relations should effectively do away with any tendency to hit.
The Koran is thus not just putting a count of ten between a man and his
anger but days and weeks between it.
It thus gives anger and mistrusts a
long time and a systematic procedure to get reasonable resolved.
Contrary to being discriminatory towards women, this law
can be seen as discriminating against men [if everything else were equal,
ceteris paribus] as it asks them to hold on to women that cheat in
marriage with them, in order to protect the woman.
However since it
compensates for the "advantage" that men initially have in
society, it is very egalitarian and not discriminatory towards either
side.
Compare the Koran's breaking mechanism for controlling anger to
the fact that wife beating was not outlawed in the United States until
1871 [over 13 centuries after the Koran].
Even after being outlawed, in
the absence of such procedures contained in the Koran, domestic violence
affects at least a third of all women in the United States over four
million annually [this figure is over 80% under represented as most cases
go unreported] (Newman 1998).
According to the FBI Uniform Crime Report of
1991, it is the leading cause of injury to women 15 to 44.
Over a third of
women who die in the United States die at the hands of husbands or
boyfriends (Kilbourne 1999).
I can confidently state that if such a
procedure as the Koran presented was internalized and implemented, not
only would women not get injured, there would be more talking and
communication and little or no violence in the home, and poverty and the
fall in the standard of living of a woman due to divorce would be reduced.
The system prescribed by the Koran works where just saying, "Don't do
it" would not and has not.
This attitude of the Koran to protect women in an economically
harsh environment is seen in many places throughout the book.
For example,
men married to women who then become guilty of lesbianism or bisexuality
are told not to throw the women out of their homes but to keep them there
till some way is found (Koran 24:3).
The Koran has given some duty preference to men over women and
some to women over men.
This was mentioned briefly before.
However, this
doesn't mean that the Koran forbids women from earning their livelihood if
they have no man to support them.
Koran 4:22 for example states that for
men is what they earn and for women what they earn and that both men and
women should seek God's bounty collectively.
PROPERTY LAWS: Around two hundred years back,
women had no property rights in Europe.
Islam has given them such since
the start.
Before the 1840s women had no property rights in America.
Property rights in Islam, given the nature of the various relationships
that man and women fit under, are surprisingly egalitarian.
When a man
marries a woman, he has to give a substantial part of his property
(according to his means) to the woman as a "marriage gift (Mahar),"
stated as a man's duty unto God (Koran 4:24).
A woman doesn't have to give anything to a man even if she is
rich.
It is for this reason primarily that the Koran asks that out of a
parents property the son get twice that of the daughter (Koran 4:11).
It
is expected that the daughter would marry and get a man's property as
marriage gift and not have to worry about providing for herself, as it's
the man's duty to provide for her.
The son on the other hand would
Islamically be expected not only to provide for his potential wife but
also give a major part of his property to her as marriage gift.
This however, is not discrimination among the genders.
There
are specific reasons why the son gets twice that of the daughter.
When the
conditions are different, the Koran suggests that both male and female get
the same amount.
For example out of a son's wealth both the father (male)
and the mother (female) get equal shares if the deceased had a son.
LEGAL BATTLES:
" O believers.
When you contract a debt for a given
fixed term, record it in writing...and call to witnesses from among your
men, two witnesses.
And if two men be not present then one man and two
women of such as you approve as witnesses, so that if one of them errs,
the other admonishes her (Koran 2:82)."
Both faithful believers and attackers from all camps have
abused this particular statement in the Koran.
It is presented by them in
a generalized form with a concluding statement that Islam considers
women's testimony to be half that of men.
The above verse does not talk about testimony in general but
only presents one case basically involving financial transactions.
It
doesn't state any generalization of women's testimony being half that of
men, or that two women will equal one man.
If interpretation is sought,
then a positive one would be that the Koran wants to protect women from
being unfairly influenced or pressurized by men.
As support for the woman
another woman is supplemented, so that if one errs the other reminds her.
Not to put down women in any way, but statistics show that
women are more difficult as witnesses in courts of law.
The Koran
recognizes this difference in men and women, be it social or biological
and corrects for it to support the woman from being manipulated by men.
The end purpose is justice, which shouldn't offend any reasonable person.
In different circumstances however, one woman's testimony is given more
weight, where it concerns herself than one man's testimony in the Koran,
as it can override it.
This case would be when a man (husband) accuses a
woman (his wife) of cheating in a relationship but has no witness except
his own testimony, which is against her testimony (Koran 24:6-9).
The
Koran gives women's testimony more weight than a man's does!
Before the 1920s, women had no political voice in the United
States and weren't allowed to vote.
Women have always had a voice based on
the authority of the Koran.
There is a famous story where a ordinary woman
based on the authority of the Koran challenged Omar the Caliph and
confronted him in an open forum.
Omar acknowledged that he was wrong and
the woman was correct as she acted on the authority of the Koran! This was
over fourteen hundred years back.
A cigarette ad says to women, "You've
come a long way baby".
Yes, a long way indeed [in the opposite
direction] from 1400 years.
Women have the freedom to smoke and kill
themselves but not to change and challenge laws that govern their lives!
DRESS: We read above that the Bible recommends
that women veil themselves or shave off their hair.
Contrary to what
Muslim practice has been for many centuries, the Koran doesn't ask women
to cover themselves from head to toe.
The Koran states:
"Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and guard
their chastity; that is purer for them.
And tell the believing women to
lower their gaze and guard their chastity, and not to make a display of
their beauty except what is apparent, and let them cast a cover over
their bosoms....
And turn to Allah (God) altogether, O believers, in
order that you might succeed (Koran 24: 30-31)."
The Koran suggests that both men and women dress modestly and
guard their chastity.
Other than this the Koran suggests that women put a
covering on their chest (bosom) over the regular clothing they wear and
not make a wanton display of their beauty (Koran 24:30-31).
This does not
fit in any way the picture of a woman wearing a chador or burka [veil]
covered from head to toe.
It would more closely resemble a picture of a
woman wearing a shirt and pants, which do not deliberately reveal her
body, with a scarf over her chest (bosom).
Tradition and not the Koran made "tradition based"
Muslims bring the veil into Islam from Christian custom (see Paul's saying
on the veil).
The Koran did not sanction it.
The statement in the Koran
that talks about dress talks about both men and women dressing modestly,
guarding their chastity and lowering their gaze.
It does not discriminate
between the sexes except in the case of women it asks them to take a extra
covering over their bosoms [chest] only.
POLYGAMY AND THE KORAN: Two things that come to
mind whenever Islam or the Koran is mentioned in the West (in relation to
women) are Islamic polygamy and the restrictive Islamic dress for women
(the infamous veil).
A third thing also commonly crops up when talking
about Islam in general and that is terrorism [Jihad or so-called holy
war].
These three effectively describe the stereotype of Islam held by the
West.
Like most stereotypes they are based either on ignorance or describe
the practice of those that base their actions on tradition more than the
Koran.
Instead of attacking tradition and custom, those with vested
interests attack Islam and the Koran even though it is evident that these
stereotypes aren't rooted in the Koran.
There is nothing in Christianity or Judaism against polygamy
(polygyny- one man taking more than one wife).
Indeed the Old Testament
assumes that marriages will be polygamous and laws are constructed based
on that assumption.
For example, Exodus 21:10 in the Bible states:
"If he take to him another wife, her food, her raiment,
and her duty of marriage shall he not diminish." (The Bible, Exodus
21:10)
There is not a word attributed to Jesus in the New Testament
which disallows polygamy.
Paul forbade bishops and deacons from marrying
more than one wife (1 Timothy 3:2), this implicitly suggests that other
were allowed polygamy (polygyny).
The insistence on monogamy was an
invention introduced by the Roman Catholic Church as late as AD 600 just
as the invention of the celibacy of the clergy [the Church being against
marriage in general and not only polygamy] (Cairncross 1974:70).
The early
Lutheran Church in Munster, Germany proclaimed polygamy (polygyny) the "ideal
form of marriage" (Cairncross 1974:1)
Any mention of polygamy in the West today, among feminists and
non-feminists alike, evokes feeling of hate.
This hate is rooted in
Western culture and not religion as we have seen above.
The culture that
hates polygamy however allows all sexual intercourse between a man and a
woman in plurality [as long as it is pre or non marital].
However the same
intercourse made "responsible" by marriage in the plural is
outlawed and hated.
The Koran severely restricted the open practice of polygamy.
The statement in the Koran that deals with polygamy is just one yet it is
misused and abused by both Muslims and Non-Muslims.
It states:
"And if you fear that you will not be able to deal
justly with the oppressed women [Yatama- literally, the Orphans among
women-see the context], then marry from among them two or three or four,
but if you fear you wont be just [even then], then marry only one (Koran
4:3)."
The Koran states explicitly above that polygyny is allowed only
if the women you marry:
belong among oppressed (orphan) women.
Men cannot pick and choose
from "any" women who they want as a second wife
Polygamy is to be practiced only if marriage would bring social
justice to such women, justice that they are otherwise denied.
If marrying more than one cannot bring such justice then polygamy
is not allowed.
Thus the Koran severely restricts the open practice of
polygamy in society.
The Koran does not, like the early Lutheran Church, term
polygamy the "ideal" form.
According to the Koran, polygamy is a
good option only when it brings social justice to the oppressed classes of
women.
According to poverty expert William Julius Wilson (1996), 31%
of the continually poor in America comprise of "non-elderly"
African American women.
Now these are among the oppressed classes of
women.
If polygamy by well established men could bring social justice to
them by removing their children and hence future generations from this "cycle
of poverty," it is good.
It is also recognized by many sociologists
and by Dr.
Wilson himself that "non-marriage" and the "lack
of marriage" is a viable reason in their poverty and status.
"Lack
or marriage" or a "broken household" is recognized
universally by sociologists as contributing to such poverty.
It is
recognized that divorce and out of wedlock childbearing has resulted in
the "feminization of poverty ." In Iraq, after the Gulf War when
hundreds of thousands of women became widows, restricted polygamy by just
individuals would similarly have been very functional.
In many countries where the population of women is a few
million more than the population of men, some women can statistically
never find husbands if everyone practiced monogamy.
Such oppressed women
[I say oppressed because a lack of maritally intimate relationship is to
me deprivation and oppression of a sort] could be given family life and
hence social justice by "restricted" Koranic polygamy.
The Koran is well aware that men misuse polygamy as they are "swayed
by the greed of their hearts" and thus puts severe restrictions on
the practice of polygamy to protect the rights of women and wives.
As a
result the only "religious" book that states explicitly, "then
marry only ONE (Koran 4:3)" is the Koran.
Monogamy is prescribed
for society in general with "restricted" polygamy being allowed
when special circumstances warrant it.
DIVORCE: The Koran by giving women a right to
initiate divorce is truly revolutionary.
The New Testament, in the
supposed words of Jesus, makes divorce an offense similar to adultery,
permissible only when the woman has cheated on the husband (Matthew 5:32).
The Old Testament states that only a man can initiate divorce (Deuteronomy
24:1).
The Koran, contrary to that states:
"...If you both fear that you wont be able to keep
within the boundaries of God in marriage, there is no harm if SHE ransom
herself..."
The ransom would of course be the return of the initial
property that the man gave her when she got married to him (the Mahar).
It is a common misconception that Islam offers a quick divorce.
If the man says: "I divorce you," three times to the woman the
marriage is nullified, according to popular rumor.
This is not true.
The
Koran offers an elaborate braking system for divorce.
A system which is so
advanced for its time that it is now being suggested in England to stop
careless "quick" divorce which creates a burden on both the
adults and children in question.
The Koran's method of divorce is simple yet very functional.
If
mind is set on divorce, a divorce statement is written and pronounced in
the presence of witnesses (Koran 65:2).
Then there is a three month break
in which both parties stay together as husband and wife, so that time be
given to reconsider (Koran 2:228).
After the three-month period, if the
man initiated the divorce, he can either take the wife back, if she wants
to remain in the marriage, or part.
If he takes her back he can initiate
divorce only once more in his life with the same woman.
If he takes her back the second time, then he has lost his
rights to initiate divorce in the same relationship ever again (Koran
2:229).
A woman can buyout her divorce by surrendering the property that
was given her by the husband whenever she thinks the marriage wont work
out.
All through this process, the Koran suggest that help be sought by
arbitration (Koran 4:35), one person from the man's side and one from the
woman's.
Very modern concepts given the history of the Koran.
Does it not
surprise you that people refer to the followers of this book as
barbarians? Yet, the same culture that points fingers at these "barbarians"
has a divorce rate of over 50 percent.
Out of every hundred new marriages
in the United States over fifty [old or new] will end in divorce.
Concerning divorce, since the man has been providing for the
woman, regardless of who initiated the divorce proceedings, the Koran
states:
"..And for women are rights equal to the rights against
them but men have a degree over them (in the context of divorce only) in
what is just (2:228)."
It is very clear that this verse is stating that there can be
no absolute equal laws when conditions on both sides differ.
Giving equal
laws under unequal circumstances would be injustice.
The Koran wants
equality with justice.
Thus women are allowed to divorce a man once [by
surrendering the property the man gave her] and the husband can initiate
the divorce twice.
Not only is the Koran the only "religious" book that
explicitly states, "and for women are rights equal to the rights
against them in justice (2:228)", it is more egalitarian than
modern laws.
As late as 1982 in the United States for example, the Equal
Rights Amendment that called for equal rights for men and women in the
law, failed.
The Koran truly liberated women over fourteen hundred years
back declaring that for women will be rights equal to those against them
in justice!
THE LIBERATION OF WOMEN:
Koran; A Defender of Women's Rights:
"And when you men have divorced women, ...then either
retain them in kindness if you reconcile, or part with them in kindness.
Do not retain them to harm them so that you transgress limits.
He who
does this has wronged himself (Koran 2:231)."
"O believers! It is not lawful for you to inherit women against
their will, nor that you should put restrictions on them, that you might
take what you had given them...Consort with them in kindness, for if you
hate them, it might happen that you hate something in which God has put
much good (Koran 4:19)."
Men and Women Together:
"Women impure for men impure.
And men impure for women
impure.
Women of purity for men of purity, and men of purity for women
of purity.
These are not affected by what people say.
For them is
forgiveness and an honorable provision (Koran 24:26)."
"And their Lord has heard them and says: 'I don't let the work of
any worker be lost be they male or female.
You both proceed one from the
other..(Koran 3:195)."
" Indeed, men who submit and women who submit, believing men and
believing women, and men who obey and women who obey, and truthful men
and truthful women, and men who persevere and women who persevere, and
men who are humble and women who are humble, and men who give alms and
women who give alms, and men who fast and women who fast, and men who
guard their chastity and women who guard their chastity, and men who
remember God much and women who remember God much.
God has prepared for
them forgiveness and a great reward (Koran 33:35)."
"And the believers men and women are friends one of the other,
they enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong, and they establish
worship and pay the poor due, and they obey God and his messenger.
As
for these, God will have mercy on them...(Koran 9:71)."
Women as Examples for Men and Women:
" God cites an example for those who believe: the wife
of Pharaoh when she said: My Lord! Build for me a home with you in the
Garden, and deliver me from Pharaoh and his work and save me from a
tyrannous people.
And Mary the daughter of Emran, who guarded her
chastity, and we inspired in her of our spirit.
She confirmed the words
of her God and his books and was of the steadfast (Koran 66: 11-12)."
While reading the above statements in the Koran take note of
the fact that men and women are mentioned together as "equals"
in status.
This concept is repeated time and again in the Koran based on
the common origin of humankind (4:1).
Unlike the Bible the Koran does not
accept woman being created from man or for man.
As a result a common
notion that is repeated in the Koran is, "You (men and women)
proceed one from the other (3:195 etc)."
CONCLUSION: Most people may not have any idea
on what Islam is or what it stands for but they are all "experts"
on the oppressed woman in Islam.
After reading the contents of this paper,
it should be evident that:
Islam is the only religion that gives equal rights to everyone
regardless of race or sex.
There is no religious book, not even the
constitution of the US, which states explicitly like the Koran, "And
for women are rights equal to the rights against them in justice."
The Koran does not ask women to veil themselves completely from
head to toe.
Such may be Muslim practice in many parts of the world,
but it is not sanctioned by the Koran.
The Koran merely asks both men
and women to dress modestly and not to flout their nakedness.
On the
other hand, the Bible which many claim western civilization was based
on, demands that women wear the veil (1 Corinthians11: 6) or risk
having their head shaven.
Men and women are of equal human status in the Koran (Koran 3:195),
however Christian doctrine on which the early American societies were
based, had Biblical norms which hold that a woman is subordinate to a
man (1 Corinthians 14:34) and are created for man (1 Timothy 2:11)
Islam based on the Koran, which is very different to the Islam that
Muslim masses believe in, gave women the right to property ownership
and a voice in legal testimony centuries before such "revolutionary"
ideas were even dreamed of by Europe [the word "feminism"
was coined in 1882 in France and voting rights and property ownership
rights followed many years thereafter].
The Koran prescribes polygamy only among the oppressed classes of
women IF marriage can better their status in society and is just and
equitable.
If marriage cannot provide justice to the woman then the
Koran prescribes monogamy as the only option.
The only "religious"
book that explicitly states, "then marry only one (Koran 4:3)",
is the Koran.
Within the text of the Koran the ignorant practice of female
circumcision, which many people believe is the norm in Islam, is not
even mentioned.
It is an innovation that entered "tradition based"
Islam, not something that the Koran suggested or prescribed.
It is not
a part of Islam or the Koran.
Islam has never had a problem with women in authority.
Even in
modern days, Muslim lands have seen female heads of states.
We have
yet to see a woman president in the US.
Note: This paper does not at all validate Sunni or Shia
Islam.
The "Islam" believed in by the masses of Muslims [which I
refer to as "tradition based" Islam], includes with the Koran
other authorities in their "religion".
These authorities are
Hadith [sayings falsely attributed to the prophet] and fiqh [so called
Islamic jurisprudence].
These sources are not warranted by the Koran and
entered Islam centuries after the death of the prophet, in the form that
we have today.
They were based on oral traditions unlike the Koran which
was written down from day one.
In these "extra-Koranic" sources
we find many statements that are derogatory of women and give them a lower
status compared to men.
Some statements in the hadith for example compare
women to monkeys and dogs and call them bad luck. They even suggest that
the woman serve her husband like a "lesser-god" stopping a
little short of worshipping them. Not only is this outrageous, it goes
against the strict monotheism of the Koran. The Koran is the only book of
authority in Islam.
Bibliography: 1.The Koran: translated from the Arabic. References to the Koran, e.g.
Koran 24:5 signify, chapter (Sura) 24, Statement (aya) 5. 2. The Bible. Revised Standard Version (1971) and Good News Bible. 3. Hopfe, Lewis M. Religions of the World, fifth edition. Mc Millan
Publishing C 1991. 4. Jones, Baldick, Radice. Hindu Myths. The Penguin Classics 1975. 5. Wilson, William Julius. 1996. When Work Disappears. New York. Alfred A.
Knopf. 6. Naomi, Neft and Levine, Ann.D. 1997. Where Women Stand: An
International Report on the Status of Women in 140 Countries. New York.
Random House. 7.
Brotman, Barbara.
1000 Years.
The Chicago Tribune.
December 29, 1999
(Page 1, Section 8).
8.Cairncross, John.
1974.
After Polygamy was made a sin.
London.
Routledge & K.Paul.
9.
Ellerby, Helen.
1995.
The Dark Side of Christian History.
San Rafael.
CA.
Morningstar Books.
10. Kamal, Omar.
1989.
Deep Into the Qur'an.
Karachi.
Pakistan 11.
Kilbourne, Jean.
1999.
Deadly Persuasion.
New York.
The Free Press.
12.
Newman, David M.
1998.
Sociology.Thousand Oaks California.
Pine Forge
Press.
13.
Weber, Max.
Edited by Gerth, Hans.
The Religion of China: Confusianism
and Taoism.1964.
New York.
The Free Press.
