By Muhammad Yunus, New Age Islam
12 May, 2015
(Co-author (Jointly with AshfaqueUllah Syed), Essential Message of Islam, Amana Publications, USA, 2009)
Indian Muslim Clerics Reduce Muslim Women To The Level Of Whore With Whom The Son, The Father, The Brother And The Friend Can Have Sex Within The Ambit Of Islamic Law – A Man-Made Law Given The Rubric Of Islam
A Replay of Imrana Case: 'Incest is not Rape,' says Mulla, 'Marry the Rapist'
Before any ignorant Muslim gets upset on the claim that the Indian Muslim Personal law or for that matter the so-called ‘Hanafi Law’ is man-made, he is advised to read the following article:
The above article lays down compelling arguments to demonstrate that the Classical Sharia Law of Islam is a system of law that the Muslim jurists belonging to different law schools evolved based on their own opinions as informed by their Islamic knowledge, worldview and historical realities of the era. Sure, the Muslim jurists draw on the limits set by the Qur’an, but, at the same time, they remain free to sidetrack or defy any clear Qur’anic dictate and claim that “any Qur’anic verse which contradicts the opinions of ‘our masters’ will be construed as having been abrogated, or the rule of preference will be applied thereto. It is better that the verse is interpreted in such a way that it conforms to their opinion.” 
As defined by Khaled Abou El Fadl, “Shari’a law refers to positive Islamic law or the Ahkam, the positive legal commandments deduced and expounded through centuries of cumulative legal practice.” In reality however, an opinion of any jurist of Islam, however outrageous or contradictory to the message of the Qur’an, by definition becomes a part of Islamic Juristic Tradition. Thus, if today, a man rapes his own daughter-in-law, such as June 2005 case of Imrana and September 2014 case of a Muzaffarnagar victim, and any jurist belonging to any school of thought at any time in the past had given a ruling asking the raped woman in such a case to divorce her husband and marry her father-in-law, this precedent becomes a part of the Islamic Law and the woman is asked to comply with it. If the argument is stretched further, if a man rapes his own young step-mother, a jurist may give a ruling that his father cannot have sex with his young wife anymore and must divorce her and then marry her off to his son. He can always find a precedent or introduce this ruling to serve as precedent for the posterity and this becomes a part of labyrinthine juristic tradition of Islam. This sounds very harsh indeed but as a Muslim we are asked bid to the good and restrain evil and this author is committed “to protest the demonization of their Holy book by some of their own theologians and jurists, who, in the name of implementing the Qur’anic ordinances, justify blatantly anti-Qur’anic heinous crimes, particularly against womenfolk” . Hence he is doing this article to lift the veil of piety from the faces of the so-called custodians of Islam and to show the ugliness behind it.
Now let us see how the Qur’anic verse abolishing incest is interpreted to accommodate incest.
The Qur’an declares:
“And do not marry (Tankihu) women whom your fathers had married (Nakaha), except what is already past. It is indeed abominable and abhorrent, and a sinful way (4:22). (Also) forbidden (Haram) to you (in marriage) are your mothers, your daughters, your sisters, your paternal aunts, your maternal aunts, your brother's daughters, your sister's daughters, your foster-mothers, your foster sisters, your wives' mothers, your stepdaughters under your guardianship, (born) of your wives with whom you consumed marriage; (but there is) no blame if you did not consume marriage with them; and the wives of your own begotten sons; and two sisters (in wedlock) at the same time - unless it was a thing of the past. (Remember,) God is Most Forgiving and Merciful (4:23)”
Any jurist in the past, not Imam Abu Hanifa for sure whose name was attached to the so-called Hanafi law some three hundred years after his death, interpreted the above verse by translating the root NKH (Tankihu, Nakaha) with sexual intercourse – as marriage is virtually a sanctification of sexual intercourse within a moral code. He then arrived at the following interpretation, conceivably to win a case for any wealthy rapist client:
“And do not have sex (Tankihu) with women with whom your fathers had sex (Nakaha), except what is already past. It is indeed abominable and abhorrent, and a sinful way (4:22). (Also) forbidden (Haram) to you (for sex) are your mothers, your daughters, your sisters, your paternal aunts, your maternal aunts, your brother's daughters, your sister's daughters, your foster-mothers, your foster sisters, your wives' mothers, your stepdaughters under your guardianship, (born) of your wives with whom you consumed marriage; (but there is) no blame if you did not consume marriage with them; and the wives of your own begotten sons; and two sisters (in wedlock) at the same time - unless it was a thing of the past. (Remember,) God is Most Forgiving and Merciful (4:23)”
Thus, when a man rapes his daughter-in-law – a rare crime that is not restricted to Muslims alone, the Ulema of Islam invoke the opening underlined distorted interpretation of the above passage to appropriate incest in Islam – though the second underlined statement declares such relation Haram or forbidden. They can use the above distorted interpretation to allow the son the same exceptional privilege if he rapes his young step mother and impregnates her. The Clerics can ask the father to divorce his young wife and marry her off to his rapist son.
This wife robbing by way of rape is not the only sexual perversion in the so-called Islamic Sharia or Muslims Personal Law of India. The other example is the custom of Halala that empowers a man to give triple divorce to his wife and then force her to marry a friend, or his own brother, let him retain her and have sex with her for a day or a few days and then get him to divorce her by pronouncing Talaq thrice and marry her back – and all within the framework of the so-called Islamic Sharia
All these customs under the ambit of the so-called Islamic Law – each of which blatantly contradicts the Qur’anic message, reduces a Muslims women to virtually to the position of a whore who can within the framework of the so-called Islamic Sharia can be a wife and a daughter today, or a mother today and a wife tomorrow and so forth – in gross defiance of the Qur’anic passage on abolition of incest (4:22/23) and putting the global Muslim community to shame.
Those who want to know more about the custom of Halala and temporary marriage may read the following article:
In one word, the institutional degradation of married Muslim women in the Indian Muslim Personal Law and actual practice can best be described in the following words of the great Indian poet Sahir Ludhyanwi : –
“Ye Biwi Bhi Hai Aur Beti Bhi Ma Bhi – Kahan Hain Kahan Hain Muhafiz Mazhab Ke Sanaa Khane Taqdeese Muslim Kahan Hain”
The Crux of the Issue Inserted On 13.05 after Detailed Discussions With The Commentators Over The Past Two Days:
The crux of the article lies in monstrosity of the Sharia ruling under discussion which entails the legitimization of the breaches of Qur’anic commandments relating to punishment for adultery, rape, prohibition of incest, time-frame for divorce, compensation to a divorced woman, her willingness to enter into a wedlock or choose her spouse. It exempts a rapist from the punishment for a major crime, dehumanizes the rape victim by forcing her to swap the father-in-law for the son in wedlock, thereby becoming the mother of her erstwhile husband, and thus causes her enduring trauma and agony that simply cannot be captured in words. It also gives an unlimited power to a father-in-law who can, if he wishes, treat his daughter-in-law like a bondmaid slave or a mistress, having the power to break her marriage at will and take her into his own wedlock simply by raping her. It is socially most humiliating to the victim woman as in her society she will be singled out as an odd and condemned woman once a wife of a man and later of his father. The most grievous thing of all is the distortion of the meaning of a key Qur’anic verse for which the Hand of God may seize the advocates of this heinous ruling and its tacit supporters if any by their neck and cut their aorta off. Above all, in the backdrop of sexual mores of this era, appropriation of incestual rape in its present form grievously demonizes Islam As one committed to protest any demonization of Islam, the author has done this article and removed a subsidiary argument re Muta marriage as it is unlawful in Sunni Islam – though in the article, the reference to this custom was in general terms only and its omission does not alter the flow and force of the arguments in any way. 
1. Doctrine of Ijma in Islam, by Ahmad Hussain, New Delhi, 1992, p.16.
2. Essential Message of Islam, Amana Publications, USA 2009, Afterword, Final Note of Appeal to Muslims.
3. The following statement has been removed from the original article two days after its posting: “Yet another example is the Muta marriage, whereby a woman can marry a son for a week, his father for the next week and his grandfather for the following week.”
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. KhaledAbou El Fadl of UCLA, and published by Amana Publications, Maryland, USA, 2009.