something new
12 years ago
"ONE of the objections raised against the Islamic Law of divorce or Talaq is that in empowering man to divorce, Islam has been harsh and unjust to the woman. While pondering over the issue, three alternative answers come to the query: who should be given the right to divorce? The first option is that both should have this right. The second is that the husband should be so empowered. And the third option could be that the wife should have this right. In the first instance, if both have the right to divorce, the multiplicity of divorces shall make family life uncertain and insecure. In the case of both exercising this right there will obviously be a much larger number of "casualties" than with only one armed with this weapon to sever relations. The second option is that adopted by Islam, which has vested this power in man for the reason that he enjoys a little more dignified position in the family. He is the supervisor of the family, maintainer of the wife and with that bears the heavy burden of children's upkeep, education and upbringing. Therefore, it is he who should decide whether it is possible to bear the burden of these responsibilities in collaboration with the wife or not? In the Qur'anic terminology "in his hands has been placed the power to tie the marriage knot (contract) or untie it." It would be harsh and unjust to compel him to go on maintaining a woman as the queen of the mini-realm, home, whom he does not like or whose cooperation has been denied to him. Taking the third option in which the wife will have the right to divorce, it is apparent that in this event the abuse of the right cannot be eliminated. In according the right to the wife, there are some evils associated with it also: · It would be grave injustice to man to make him bear all the responsibilities toward the woman (dower, gifts, maintenance and the like) and to grant the right to divorce to the woman. · Divorce is damaging to man entirely, whereas the woman remains immune from any harm. If the right is granted to her, a morally irresponsible wife, whenever she chooses, she shall divorce the husband, and handing over children to him, she will take leave of him with the "booty" of her dower and jewelery and gifts in full triumph, and at the first chance coming her way, she will marry another man getting fresh dower and other privileges. · It is an obvious fact that woman is much more sentimental than man and can at any time, under the impulse of the moment, sever relations with man. That will go a long way in increasing the rate of divorce under the normal conditions, thus confronting the society with a new crisis. The way Islam shapes the mind and temperament of man and educates and trains him, divorce can hardly find room in his life and the lurking fear that merely for sexual enjoyment and gratification of abnormal lust he will go on divorcing women most carelessly is only a remote possibility. – The author of this piece is currently President of India's Jamaat-e-Islami, and is an eminent theologian and scholar of Islamic jurisprudence."
This is the content of a forward mail which i recently received and i decided to share it with you. I agree with most of what it says, even with the second option that a man should have the right to divorce, which being a woman might be slightly disappointing in me for the other much "liberated"version of my species. The point which actually provoked my reaction was when the author is giving his slightly biased opinions as valid reasons as to why men should have the right. Out of all the opinions, he shares with us about the evils associated with handing over the right to divorce to women, the only legitimate one is the last one, where he states that women being the more emotional of the two would base her judgments on sentimentality rather than rationality. The earlier two reasons, I have to say, show a narrow-minded being behind a facade of empowering knowledge and education.
I'll first talk about the second point which i believe is wrong in both theory and application. He says that "Divorce is damaging to man entirely, whereas the woman remains immune from any harm. If the right is granted to her, a morally irresponsible wife, whenever she chooses, she shall divorce the husband, and handing over children to him, she will take leave of him with the "booty" of her dower and jewelery and gifts in full triumph, and at the first chance coming her way, she will marry another man getting fresh dower and other privileges." The very first statement shows how prejudiced he is against women. In his third opinion he states that it is an obvious fact that women are more sentimental than men. This being so, I wonder how he came upon his theory of divorce being "entirely damaging to a man whereas the women remains immune from harm".Then he goes on to paint a coal-black picture of the actions of a woman nicknaming her "a morally irresponsible wife" who shall divorce the husband, take her dowry, dump the children with him and marry another man for fresher privileges. I should like to ask him what are his biased views on the better-half of our species "the morally responsible wife". I would also like to point out that Allah has given women the right to ask for a divorce known as khula, in which case, the woman returns her mehr and asks for a divorce on the basis of valid reasons. In other words, a wife buys the right of khula by returning the mehr.
My arguments on his first opinion which states that "It would be grave injustice to man to make him bear all the responsibilities toward the woman (dower, gifts, maintenance and the like) and to grant the right to divorce to the woman", will be based on a social viewpoint. Considering that the author comes from a country where the tradition of dowry is even worse than here in Pakistan, it is hypocritical for him to state that it would be a "grave injustice" to a man when he doesn't even give a dowry to a woman in our society. It is the woman and her parents who have to go through the torture of greedy in-laws demanding a hefty dowry in return for the woman to live with her husband while the husband gets away with paying a measly mehr.
By giving all these arguments I'm not saying that it is wrong for a man to have the right to divorce because it is clearly not the case. Allah, although has given men the right to have the final word, but has also given women the right to seperate and ask for a divorce. The conditions placed on either are the same: there has to be a valid and rightful reason before any one of the two seeks independence from the other.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Welcome back. I thought you were going to miss the point you made in the very last part about a woman having the right to ask for divorce in Islam. Khula that is.
m.h.a said...
September 6, 2008 at 7:25 AM
agreed from start to the end.
interesting article
Talaq and Khula gives equal right to both men and women according to their roles in the society. but getting khula isnt easy esp when it comes to a society like ours. what happens when during the nikkah, the section of khula right is cancelled out without the knowledge of the woman?
Anonymous said...
September 6, 2008 at 10:02 AM
u know this was what started the whole thing in my mind that our so-called scholars view religion as a perfect utopian guideline and don't try to fit it to the scenarios that are present today. these so-called scholars or maulvis conduct nikahz and are aware of the right of both the man and the woman to know of the contents of the nikah but they still don't enlighten them. And then they have the guts to say that we don't follow the rules of nikah or our religion. for the love of God i wish someone wud slap them silly and explain to them that they are the ones who are supposed to tell us what we r to follow. and that includes not just quoting ayats from the Quran or Holy Prophets SAW ahadiths but how they can be employed in todays world as well.
Summer Cutee said...
September 7, 2008 at 9:24 AM
@ mubi
u know ur point has raised another question in my mind...
if the nikah is signed by the woman without any knowledge of the clauses it entails, is the contract authentic then?? isn't that a sign of wrongful dealing? when one party is not aware of wat they are signing on?
btw i wanted to know both of urs comments regarding the original article...
Summer Cutee said...
September 7, 2008 at 9:27 AM
I think the original article could've been written in a much better way, and the writer has missed out many important points that we're talking about right now, and has given us some strange arguments too, which were not needed. The point could've been proven easily otherwise.
The place where the writer says "Divorce is damaging to a man entirely, while the woman remains immune to any damage."
that is one of the biggest assumptions i've ever heard to say the least! Women, we all know, atleast in our society are the ones who are damaged more by divorce. Emotionally, socially and psychologically. The damage to men in our society cannot be compared to women and everyone knows that. I dont know how could the writer say that women are immune to the damage. Thats a perfect example of the bias of the patriarchal society we're in right now, its got nothing to do with any religion. Most people have that embedded in their natures.
I think the real reason that Islam gave Man the right to divorce and woman the right to ask for divorce is that men are much less emotional than women. And thats a proven fact. Therefore, in case such a scenario arises, Islam puts an emphasis on saving the family. Therefore, man is given the right to divorce to be used only in the severest of cases. And the system of 3 talaaks is there so that the couple get time for reconciliation (even this system is misinterpreted by most people in our society although as its meant to be, its a beautiful check Allah has placed to keep the family intact)
m.h.a said...
September 9, 2008 at 6:09 PM