certifired_img

Books and Documents

Islam, Women and Feminism (22 Apr 2017 NewAgeIslam.Com)


AIMPLB Advocates Of Instant Triple Talaq Are Gender Terrorists And Traitors Of Islam And May Be Sued For Human Rights Violation Under Cover Of Religion

 

 

By Muhammad Yunus, New Age Islam

22 April 2017

( Co-author (Jointly with Ashfaque Ullah Syed), Essential Message of Islam, Amana Publications, USA, 2009)

This article is prompted by the ongoing debate on the Issue of instant triple Talaq that renders the Qur’anic tenets on marriage and divorce null and void.

From two of the recently posted articles referenced below, it is gathered that AIMPLB has put an affidavit to the Supreme Court of India stating that “if triple Talaq mode of divorce was declared illegal, it would amount to disregarding Allah's directions and rewriting of the Holy Quran [1] and if triple Talaq is abolished, “some Muslims may resort to illegal, criminal ways of murdering or burning her (estranged wife) alive to avoid the time consuming and costly way of processing a divorce through legal channels. [2]. If this indeed is true, I will able to defend the caption and suggestion of this article in the divine court. I am not concerned about what the members of AIMPLB or any other Muslim, ignorant of Qur’anic message, may think about this article because, as a Muslim, I am required to be a witness to truth (Qur’anic message) to humanity as the Prophet was a witness to truth to his audience (2:143).

Until the advent of Islam, women in all major civilization lived virtually at the mercy of men and suffered deep and oppressive misogyny. Beginning with the Arabs, they regarded the birth of a girl so shameful that they buried it alive (16:58/59, 43:17, 81:8). They could abandon their wives without giving them the freedom of divorce by simply saying “you are to me like my mother’s back’(58:2). When they left home on any mission, they often left no provision for their wives and expected them to co-habit with other men who would look after their needs. Barring exceptions, women had no legal rights and no way to separate from a cruel or unworthy husband. Above all, a married woman was expected to treat her husband like her Lord, whose biddings she must follow like the command of God.

The condition of women in the rival civilizations of the era was no better. The Zoroastrians (Persians) kept their women in confinement, guarded by eunuchs. The Greek followed their example and kept their women in gynaecium, often under lock and key. The Hindus burnt their widows alive on funeral pyres of their dead husband’s bodies - a practice continued until recent centuries. The Chinese bound their women’s feet in iron shoes as a cultural norm, obviously, to restrict their movement. The Christian Church placed women under eternal domination of men. (The Bible, Genesis 3.16). Roman male citizens could kill their women by law, if they found them committing adultery.

Islam changes all this. It abolishes female infanticide, and offers a plethora of concessions to women and places some restriction on men, as summarily pieced together below:

It puts no gender based restriction on a growing up girl. As she reaches a marriageable age (4:6), it allows her to choose her own spouse (2:221).It commands a man to give an agreed dower (saduqat) to his bride but permits her to voluntarily remit a part of it (4:4). It obligates a man to pay half the amount of the dower if it was already agreed, or a reasonable dower (if the amount was not agreed) in the event of his refusal to proceed with the marriage (2:236/237). It exhorts him to be considerate and humane in his conjugal relations by adding a spiritual dimension to marital sexuality (2:223) and dismisses any notion of marital rape by its general prohibition of not taxing anyone beyond his/ her capacity (2:233, 65:7). It entrusts a man with care, support and maintenance of his wife (4:34), permits a woman in wedlock to have an independent income and to share it with others (4:32).It abolishes the custom of a man’s abandoning his wife by simply taking an oath without releasing her (2:226).It lays down clear protocol of arbitration to reconcile estranged relations in wedlock (4:35) and sets out a three month time-frame or waiting period for a divorce (2:228/229) to become irrevocable. It commands a man to accommodate his wife under notice of divorce during the waiting period in the manner he lived and according to his circumstances (65:7), and mandates a reasonable alimony for the divorced woman (2:241). It permits a divorced woman to marry a person of her choice after the waiting period (2:230). It forbids her last husband from remarrying her, conceivably to allow her to enter into a fresh marriage, unhindered by any claim from his side (2:230), though it allows her remarriage with her previous husband if her new husband divorced her – regardless of the consummation of her fresh marriage (2:230). It also allows a woman in wedlock to terminate her marriage unilaterally after paying a reasonable compensation (2:229). It allows a widow to entertain marriage proposal from genuine suitors after a 4 month and ten days mourning period (2:234/235), and entitles her to live and avail all her necessary provisions in the household of her deceased husband for up to one year (2:240), and to inherit from him – one eighth of what he left if there were children and one-fourth if there was no off-spring (4:12). It also removes all taboos against a menstruating woman (2:222), sanctifies love and mercy between the spouses(30:21) and appoints men and women in wedlock as friends and protectors of one another (9:71),though acknowledging the relativity of God’s bounties on either sex (4:34). It censures men for their tendency to sexually exploit women (4:24), and restricts the prevalent unlimited polygamy to maximum four wives – subject to equal treatment of the wives (4:3). It, however, warns men that they cannot treat several wives equitably, however they may wish (4:129), and if they so fear they must take only one wife (4:3). Accordingly, its holistic message and inheritance tenets point to monogamy as its approved social norm. Far from vesting a man with a higher level of authority as popularly believed, it entrusts him with a higher degree of responsibility and obliges him to take back his wife under notice of divorce if found pregnant (2:228), and upon her refusal to reconcile, makes him responsible to bear the expenses of his child born to her divorced wife, including the cost of wet nursing if she solicits, for a period of two years (2:233).

It empowers a man to temporarily abandon his wife and even symbolically beat her – such as by gesture, if he suspects adulterous behaviour (4:34). However, it relented on the punishment for adultery from stoning to death to public flogging(24:3)and asked people to leave the partners of adultery alone (not to hold them in contempt) after they received the punishment, repented and reformed themselves (4:16). But it puts a strong defensive clause in favour of accused women: the accuser must bring four first-hand witnesses to establish the charge of adultery (4:15), failing which he will be liable to receive punishment (24:4). It also averts punishment from a woman accused of adultery by her husband who cannot produce any witness other than himself (which is the normal case), if she takes a solemn oath five times that she was innocent and her husband was a liar (24:9). Last but not the least, the Qur’an does not privilege the male gender in creation chronology or hierarchy and projects man and woman as co-equals – descending together from an integrated self (6:98, 16:72, 30:21, 49:13, 53:44), and furnishes no ground to accord a more privileged status to a man than a woman and venerates women after God for their procreative role (4:1):

“O Humankind! Heed your Lord who created you from a single self (nafs) and created from it its spouse (zauja), and scattered from the two countless men and women. Reverence God through whom you seek (your mutual rights) and (reverence) the wombs (arham). Indeed God is ever watchful over you” (4:1).

The Qur’an’s empowering tenets for women, among its other reforms, were obviously too far ahead of the era of its revelation – ultra-feminist in historical relativism. Not only its immediate Arab audience, but also people of other faiths who entered Islam must have been aghast at the Qur’an’s titanic concessions to women, and interpreted Qur’anic gender-centred verses in a manner that curtailed the rights of women and conformed to the prevalent misogyny. A Qur’anic verse, 2:237, that uses the word ‘touching’ (tamassu),figuratively for sexual intercourse was interpreted to regard the whole body of a freeborn woman – except her hand and face as her “awrah” (sexual part). This, along with a similarly literalist interpretation of the verse 24:31 was institutionalized into full veiling for women. A short passage appearing in two Suras(23:5/6, 70:29/30) that pre-dated the marriage laws by at least a decade was celebrated as a license for sex-slavery that the Qur’an sought to eradicate in a phased manner (2:177, 4:25, 4:92, 5:89, 9:60, 24:32, 24:33, 58:3, 90:13-16). Similarly restriction was imposed on their movement outside the house by requiring them to be accompanied by a male guardian (a close relative with whom marriage was prohibited). Some jurists attempted to bring the most sadistic pre-Islamic custom of stoning to death for adultery, while, by law this very day a married woman who is raped can be accused of adultery if she fails to produce four male witnesses - a virtual impossibility as no man would sexually assault a woman in presence of witnesses. Triple divorce is yet another deeply oppressive misogynistic custom that is retained in Indian Muslim Personal Law since the British era, and deprives Muslim women of all their matrimonial rights as encapsulated in the Qur’an and pieced together above.

This Brings Us To The Caption Of The Article.

Until a few decades ago, women grew up in joint or extended families that formed their ancestral home. When they got married, they left their homes and lived in their husband’s household, but sub-consciously regarded their ancestral home as their permanent base. So, in the event of an instant divorce they could always come back to their base and get full support from their extended family. But today, the joint family system has collapsed. Most Muslim women, particularly from lower middle income class and below (may be 50% of Indian Muslim families) come from small families comprising parents and one or more siblings – all living in a relatively small 2-3 room rented flat. If a married woman from this income class is instantly divorced, she faces enormously greater hardship than her counterpart two or three generations ago. She may have no place to go and at best be an unwelcome guest in the house of any of her next of kin or relative. She will have no money with her in most cases as married Muslim women of lower middle class and below are normally housewives. So for practically every necessity of life, she has to depend on others. And the ‘others’ can help her only for a very limited time. Besides, as a divorced woman, she also bears stigma and is vulnerable to lustful desires of the musclemen in her locality. Any attempt to capture the agony and trauma of such a women is beyond the capacity of this writer. The only parallel that comes to his mind is that of a woman whose home is blown up before her eyes, with her husband and children and all belongings and dreams inside at an instant notice – for an instantly divorced woman loses not only her husband but also her children and all her belongings and dreams. In other words, an instantly divorced woman of lower middle income group suffers no less agony and trauma than the victim of a terror attack. Thus instant triple Talaq can be paralleled with Gender Terrorism and those who insist on retaining it in the Indian Muslim Personal Law, fraudulently and shamelessly tracing it to the Qur’an must be oppressively misogynist or Gender Terrorist. Hence, the AIMPLB may be regarded as a Gender Terrorist outfit and may be sued for attempting to institutionalize gross human (women’s) rights violations under cover of religion.

The advocates of instant triple Talaq may still argue that the Qur’an was addressed to a specific audience of an ancient era and its rulings do not necessarily apply today. The Qur’an that claims to be a book of wisdom and guidance does not leave gaps to allow the ignorant to dismiss it as irrelevant for any era. It accordingly, asks humanity to seek its best meaning (39:18, 39:55), and probe its verses (38:29, 47:24) using intellect (‘aql) and declares:“Indeed the worst kind of all living creatures in God’s sight are the deaf and dumb, who do not use reason” (8:22).

In one word, universal Justice is the bedrock of Islamic message and gender justice is a subset of universal justice and the taproot of human (women’s) rights and those religiously educated Muslims, such as the learned members of the AIMPLB, who are adamantly persistent in negating it under cover of Islam are traitors of Islam, in addition to being Gender Terrorist as the caption claims. And I, Muhammad Yunus, hereby declare that I will stand a witness to their tyranny upon poor Muslim women and treason against the Qur’anic message in the divine court unless they voluntarily revoke the provision of triple divorce, and Halala that goes with it before I depart to my Final Destination.

Just for record, this article follows up on my last two articles dated Jan. 2012 [3], and Sept. 2015 [4], and is inspired by the indefatigable effort of Sultan Shahin Sahib, the Founding Editor of New Age Islam and members of his team in writing article after article to help remove the provision of triple Talaq from Indian Muslim Personal Law.

"Barring few minor exceptions, the crux of all the quoted verses pieced together to frame the article are consistent with the interpretations of Yusuf Ali and Muhammad Assad - albeit without any effect on the arguments supporting the claim of the caption, and the.article is fully backed by my duly approved and authenticated exegetic work, Essential Message of the Qur'an [5].

              1.       Triple Talaq Controversy: Male Chauvinist Indian Ulema Are Subverting Islam to Mislead the Supreme Court

  http://www.newageislam.com/islam,-women-and-feminism/sultan-shahin,-     founding-editor,-new-age-islam/triple-talaq-controversy--male-chauvinist-indian-ulema-are-subverting-islam-to-mislead-the-supreme-court/d/110784

2.       From Pakistan to Egypt, The Muslim Countries That Have Moved Ahead From Triple Talaq

http://www.newageislam.com/islam,-women-and-feminism/from-pakistan-to-egypt,-the-muslim-countries-that-have-moved-ahead-from-triple-talaq/d/110824

3.      Qur’anic Sharia (Laws) On Divorce: Triple Divorce, Temporary Marriage, Halala Stand Forbidden (Haram)

 

http://newageislam.com/islamic-sharia-laws/the-qur’anic-sharia-(laws)-on-divorce.--triple-divorce,-temporary-marriage,-halala-stand-forbidden-(haram)/d/6391

4.      Indian Muslim Ulema Who Insist On Retaining the Anti-Qur’anic Triple Talaq (Instant Divorce) In Muslim Personal Law Are Sinners, Haters of Their Women-Folk and Criminals and Must Be Resisted

 

http://newageislam.com/islamic-sharia-laws/muhammad-yunus,-new-age-islam/indian-muslim-ulama-who-insist-on-retaining-the-anti-qur’anic-triple-talaq-(instant-divorce)-in-muslim-personal-law-are-sinners,-haters-of-their-women-folk-and-criminals-and-must-be-resisted/d/104483

 

5.       Essential Message of Islam (Full Text)

 

http://www.newageislam.com/books-and-documents/by-muhammad-yunus---ashfaque-ullah-syed/essential-message-of-islam-(full-text)/d/104768

------

Muhammad Yunus, a Chemical Engineering graduate from Indian Institute of Technology, and a retired corporate executive has been engaged in an in-depth study of the Qur’an since early 90’s, focusing on its core message. He has co-authored the referred exegetic work, which received the approval of al-Azhar al-Sharif, Cairo in 2002, and following restructuring and refinement was endorsed and authenticated by Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl of UCLA, and published by Amana Publications, Maryland, USA, 2009.

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/islam,-women-and-feminism/muhammad-yunus,-new-age-islam/aimplb-advocates-of-instant-triple-talaq-are-gender-terrorists-and-traitors-of-islam-and-may-be-sued-for-human-rights-violation-under-cover-of-religion/d/110871

New Age IslamIslam OnlineIslamic WebsiteAfrican Muslim NewsArab World NewsSouth Asia NewsIndian Muslim NewsWorld Muslim NewsWomen in IslamIslamic FeminismArab WomenWomen In ArabIslamophobia in AmericaMuslim Women in WestIslam Women and Feminism

 




TOTAL COMMENTS:-   33


  • Triple talaq is mentioned in the book of hadith below:
    'A'isha (Allah bjpl'eased with her) reported that Rifa'a al Qurazi divorced his wife and afterwards Abd al-Rahman b. al-Zubair married her. She came to Allah's Apostle (may peace he upon him) and said: Messenger of Allah, Rifa'a has divorced me by three pronoucements. (The rest of the hadith is the same.)  (Book #008, Hadith #3356)
    Despite triple talaq is mentioned in the book of hadith, I have mentioned in my previous comment that the book of hadith does not support instant triple talaq.  Besides, I also have quoted a verse from the book of hadith previously that wives might could oppose it even though their husbands might declare triple talaq to them.
    As both Quran and hadith support that women could have the right to oppose triple talaq when their husbands declare, it seems to be that men and women share equal right to object triple talaq.  As triple talaq could be opted out by husbands and wives, that could be the reason why Quran does not vividly deal with triple talaq since it is up to them to accept it in practice.
    By zuma - 6/2/2017 1:57:31 AM



  • Hadith mentions that women have the right to oppose if husbands divorce.  The following is the extract:
    Narrated Aisha: Regarding the explanation of the following verse:-- "If a wife fears Cruelty or desertion On her husband's part." (4.128) A man may dislike his wife and intend to divorce her, so she says to him, "I give up my rights, so do not divorce me." The above verse was revealed concerning such a case.  (Book #43, Hadith #630)
    As the phrase, she says…do not divorce me, is mentioned in the book #43, hadith #630, it implies that women have the right to oppose triple talaq that is unfair to them.
    The hadith verse below supports that women have the right to choose men to be their own husbands:
    Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle forbade the selling of things by a town dweller on behalf of a desert dweller; and similarly Najsh was forbidden. And one should not urge somebody to return the goods to the seller so as to sell him his own goods; nor should one demand the hand of a girl who has already been engaged to someone else; and a woman should not try to cause some other woman to be divorced in order to take her place.  (Book #34, Hadith #350)
    As the phrase, a woman should not try to cause some other woman to be divorced in order to take her place, is mentioned in the book #34, hadith #350, it implies that women could have the choice to choose men to be their husbands.  However, they are forbidden to seduce other men who have wives to be their future husbands.
    By zuma - 6/2/2017 12:51:05 AM



  • Quran 16:58/59 condemns Muslims to bury female infants alive. The following is the extract: Quran 16:58/59, Mohsin Khan translation: “(58) And when the news of (the birth of) a female (child) is brought to any of them, his face becomes dark, and he is filled with inward grief! (59) He hides himself from the people because of the evil of that whereof he has been informed. Shall he keep her with dishonour or bury her in the earth ? Certainly, evil is their decision.” As the phrase, keep her with dishonor or burry her in the earth, is mentioned in Quran 16:59 with the phrase, evil is their decision, it implies that Quran condemns the act of burying female infants alive.
    By zuma - 6/1/2017 6:07:43 PM



  • Quran 81:8 does not encourage Muslims to burry female infant alive.  The following is the extract:
    Quran 81:8 (Mohsin Khan translation), “And when the female (infant) buried alive (as the pagan Arabs used to do) is questioned:”
    As the phrase, female (infant) buried alive, is mentioned in Quran 81:8 with the phrase, as the pagan used to do, it implies that this practice was exercised by pagan, non-Muslims, in the past instead of Muslims.
    The subsequent verse of Quran 81:9 even questions the reasonableness in burying female infant alive.
    Quran 81:9 (Mohsin Khan translation), “For what sin, was she killed?”
    As the phrase, For what sin was she killed, is mentioned in Quran 81:9, Quran forbids Muslims to kill female infants.
    By zuma - 6/1/2017 5:45:21 PM



  • The answer for the hathdharmi is simple. They are Muqallids by their madhab. What you are asking them is to change their madhab and you know how difficult that is even for the animists. 

    Try convincing Ghulam Ghaus sb on this issue before trying to convince others.



    By Naseer Ahmed - 5/13/2017 9:43:30 PM



  • Dear Manzurul Haq Sahab,

     You have asked in your comment:Is hathdharmi ka matlab koi mujhe samjha de!”

    I have explained this in my jt. exegetic work, Essential Message of Islam in the concluding sentence under Enc. 4, evaluating Sunnah and Hadith in these words:

    “Since the literary style, setting, paradigms, and dialectical constructions of the Hadith literature date back to the early medieval era, their continued teaching and propagation, such as in traditional religious schools (madrassas), can adversely impact the mental development of the students, shackling their power of reasoning and virtually freezing their intellect into the early medieval era.”

    So, with their reasoning power shackled, the AIMPLB activits fail to see the sufferngs of an instantly divorced Indian Muslim woman from a poor family. She loses her husband, her chidren (that she cannot support and wouldn’t be allowed to take with her), her home and hearh, all her furniture and belongings that the husband may have bought for her – except whatever alimony she gets when the husband choses to give, her livelihood (in most cases such women are housewives and the husband is the primary source of livelihood), her reputation as married lady and all her hopes and aspirations – all in one moment like a terror attack, and going from pillar to post past the instant divrce, she either stands with a begging bowl before a mosque or temple gate or is manipulated by a agent for a less dignified work.

    And Muslims in India are so proud of their heritage. I write article upon article protesting it and hardly any educated Muslim responds. So thank you for your response.
    By muhammd yunus - 5/12/2017 8:02:24 PM



  • I am not afraid of the abusers of Islam, almost all of whom (who happened to cross my path) have been trashed by me in a right royal way. I dare say most Muslim maulanas are not comptent enough to answer the present breed of Islam-bashers who are intelligent, well educated, quite knowledgeable about Islamic literature, and can think scinitifically. I am also similarly placed, but I also have instinctive understanding of the ideology of Islam and of its practical application in Muslim muashra which informs me, which elements come from Islam and which from non-Islam or even anti-Islam, in the Muslim muashra. 
    But I find myself fully handicapped while talking to Muslim brothers. I have failed to understand why, Muslims can't even listen to an appeal which asks them to see what our holiest scripture has to say on a subject. Are their minds and hearts sealed in the quranic sense? What is the point in issue? Why can't Teen talaq as laid down by Privy Council in 1934 be reviewed by us Muslims in the light of the holy Quran? Is hathdharmi ka matlab koi mujhe samjha de!

    By Manzurul Haque - 5/9/2017 7:45:52 PM



  • Manusmriti is an anti-women and anti-people document written by casteist, racist and misogynist preachers. They did not believe in the equality of human beings. The good thing is that this anti-people document does not dictate the Hindu life any more. 
    However, there are some sections of society which still subscribe to it. Its major portions have already been banned by Indian laws. Those interested may read some comments of Manu about women on : 

    nirmukta.com/2011/08/27/the-status-of-women-as-depicted-by-manu-in-the-manusmriti/    : 
    Themain achievement to be noted is that nobody dares to defend Manusmriti in public. Nobody claims that Manusmriti was final for all times to come. Even if some of its tenets are still in practice among many Hindus, these are withering away with rapid changes in technology and society. Several laws have been enacted about it over the years. In contrast, Sharia is defended by majority of Muslims who claim it to be a divine law for all times. 
    Islamicscholars and Ulema should study this problem without prejudice and see whether Muslim society could also accept secular and more rational laws in socio-cultural domain. Educated and elite Muslims have already moved forward. Larger sections of society also need transformation.

    By Ashok Sharma - 4/30/2017 3:08:37 AM



  • Who is Jadodaben. Please introduce her.
    By Mohammad Mahboob Alam - 4/30/2017 12:32:45 AM



  • Mr Medhi as per hindu mythology a divorce or widowed women is a curse on society.... if not then why there is widhwa ashrams... and world biggest widhwa ashram is in Banaras up....
    By Md Shamim Siddiqui - 4/30/2017 12:32:22 AM



  • I think Mr.Shamim has made a Valid Point. #JusticeforJasoda
    By Md Kashif Jawaid - 4/30/2017 12:30:02 AM



  • @Md Shamim Siddiqui Who told you? Before any stupid comment, learn the tradition and culture of Hinduism first. And bringing a lady in a controversy, better ask her views first.
    By Chidananda Medhi - 4/30/2017 12:20:01 AM



  • women who got divorces through triple talak have full freedom to marry anyone of her choice... where as deserted and abandoned women like jashoda ben don't have any right to choose right man of her choice....
    By Md Shamim Siddiqui - 4/30/2017 12:18:53 AM



  • Bastab Biswas ji , According to you not the Islam. Stop spreading false Propaganda before saying anything about any Religion give the references from authentic book. You are very well now about practice of child marriage in Hindu society specially lower caste but you people not consider them as a Hindu. You now what about there Age?? You come to my home town I will show you. You now nearly 12 million Indian children were married before the age of 10 years, 84% of them Hindu and 11% Muslim, reveals India Spend analysis of recently released census data.
    By Rizwanullah Khan - 4/30/2017 12:16:13 AM



  • Marriageable age in islam is 9 years.!
    By Bastab Biswas - 4/30/2017 12:15:18 AM



Compose Your Comments here:
Name
Email (Not to be published)
Comments
Fill the text
 
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the articles and comments are the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect that of NewAgeIslam.com.

Content