Wife beating verse [4:34] - quick and simple reply

format_quote Originally Posted by Faye

You can cause major pain with a siwak, and serious bruises (leaving marks for up to a week), though breaking bones might be difficult. Take it from on who has experienced it.

But islam does not permit that he bruise her. So whoever did that, they did the wrong thing.

Besides, there is no law even in 'civilised' Europe, which forbids a man from touching or tapping a woman with a pen, and if she took it to court - i don't think she'd win the case. However, if he bruised her with a pen - then he may have gone past the limit [and he will have done so in Islam]. And he can be taken to court so the woman can get justice.

A question, do you think if reasoning with your wife, and leaving her bed doesn't work, tapping her with a pen will?

format_quote Originally Posted by ASeeker

So can we take it that it is permitted for a Muslim man to hit a woman?

My brothers have answered your question even prior to your post, brother in humanity.

As for the bible, it does not mention wife beating, but it does mention beating children and slaves to the point of beating them to near death.

Proverbs 23: 13-14
"Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with a rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with a rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell."

Exodus 21: 20-21
"When a man strikes his male or female slave with a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since the slave is his own property."

Hope my post was of some understanding.

format_quote Originally Posted by - Qatada -

It could be an implication for her that this is his last step, and that if she persists in wrong doing, then he may divorce her or separate with her. Why will she think that he's implying this by the tap of a stick? Because she will also know that this is the last step mentioned in the Qur'an.

Imagine traffic lights, red is the first step, amber is the second, and tapping with the siwak is the 3rd. If he reaches the third step, she'll be aware that if she doesn't stop - he will move forward (i.e. maybe in divorce.)

Hmm, it must be a serious fight, if it leads to the silent treatment/not sharing bed. I mean, if things really did escelate, would someone just go pick up a feather/thin stick to hit the woman with?

What I mean is, the siwak seems so minor, is it really like a last stage? Or, are people underplaying what is allowed, as the verse has stated? Like, lets take the tafsir of Al-Jalalayn.

Men are in charge of, they have authority over, women, disciplining them and keeping them in check, because of that with which God has preferred the one over the other, that is, because God has given them the advantage over women, in knowledge, reason, authority and otherwise, and because of what they expend, on them [the women], of their property. Therefore righteous women, among them, are obedient, to their husbands, guarding in the unseen, that is, [guarding] their private parts and otherwise during their spouses’ absence, because of what God has guarded, for them, when He enjoined their male spouses to look after them well. And those you fear may be rebellious, disobedient to you, when such signs appear, admonish them, make them fear God, and share not beds with them, retire to other beds if they manifest such disobedience, and strike them, but not violently, if they refuse to desist [from their rebellion] after leaving them [in separate beds]. If they then obey you, in what is desired from them, do not seek a way against them, a reason to strike them unjustly. God is ever High, Great, so beware of Him, lest He punish you for treating them unjustly.

It states strike, but not violently. I would have got the impression, as stated its not violent, but maybe that it is more severe then a tap with a siwak? I remember once a scholar using the analogy that why westerners complain, when nearly in all their drama's, it has the man somtimes slapping the woman across the face - in which they both succumb/say their sorries etc. In Ibn Abbas' version, it talks of scourging them, but not exaggeratedly.

So, are these just bad translations or - is something more than a tap of a siwak allowed, with the restriction that it should not go overboard/violent/exaggerated? Jazakallah Khair for replies.

When I first joined this forum I asked question about issues like this and commonly got replies along the lines of "not again, this has been discussed before;" I could almost hear the groans. Is it not he case that these issues continue to be raised because there is no concensus amongst scholars and if there is consensus should they not (for the good of Islam) make that consensus view absolutely clear to those who raise these questions?

format_quote Originally Posted by Thinker

When I first joined this forum I asked question about issues like this and commonly got replies along the lines of "not again, this has been discussed before;" I could almost hear the groans. Is it not he case that these issues continue to be raised because there is no concensus amongst scholars and if there is consensus should they not (for the good of Islam) make that consensus view absolutely clear to those who raise these questions?

The different opinions, usually have a consensus of their own - depending on their methodology/school, if you know what I mean. Hence, in a lot of issues, don't expect everyone to give the same opinion - as not everyone concludes in the same way.

format_quote Originally Posted by doorster

I will,only if you first read quoted text in this >> http://www.islamicboard.com/1025036-post37.html and comment on it

Yes I read it. However, I do not agree with its logic. You say, it has only ever been described as beat (be it strike/hit whatever) in this verse. But, tht is allowed, it need not be used in the same manner in other parts. I do not accept that the verse mens, getting arbritaries to reconcile the matter, simply because it contradicts what many scholars and many tafsirs state. None of them talk of anything as such, infact, can you give the source of your post? I doubt its an authentic viewpoint.

I would like to give a scholarly opinion on the issue, by Umm Saleh

I have found that the majority of scholars have interpreted this as permission for men to discipline their wives who have become "nashiz," which means rebellious, recalcitrant, or lewd. This permission is not a general permission to discipline the wife whenever the husband feels like it, but rather is meant for women who act out in very specific circumstances and threaten the harmony of the marriage. Furthermore, it is a permission granted by Allah to men. It is not a right or privilege. Scholars have also placed limits on what form this discipline takes. The husband is only allowed to use his hand or the equivalent of a miswak, a tooth-stick. Furthermore, he may not strike in anger, beat, bruise, or harm his wife. Rather, he gives her a symbolical tap with this very light object. He may not strike her face or any other delicate part of the body. And once again, this is permission, meaning he does not have to do this, but is merely allowed if circumstances warrant.


Before he disciplines his wife, he is required to take other measures. Note how the Qur'an commands men to first talk to their wives and persuade them with kind, wise words. Then if that fails, he is allowed to forsake marital intimacy, that is, sexual intercourse, as a way to make the wife understand the seriousness of her actions. Finally, he is allowed to physically discipline her, but only within the above-mentioned limits. Scholars also say that if he knows that physical discipline will not achieve anything, he should not pursue it. And scholars also caution men to look at the example of the Prophet, peace be upon him. It is a well known fact that the Best of all Creation, upon whom be peace, never hit his wives.


This permission for a man to discipline his wife is something which men should not take lightly. If this discipline results in any physical or emotional harm to the wife, it is unlawful for the husband to continue. Both husband and wife should be able to sit down and discuss the problem as adults. The fact that problems between husband and wife escalate into physical confrontations is something we as a community need to address.


The Islamic paradigm for marriage is one of love, mercy, and mutual respect, not violence, fighting, and hatred.

According to this opinion, you are not restricted to the use of a siwak/feather, but may use his hand too.