Domestic violence and spousal abuse violate the Islamic principle of respect for human dignity; if severe enough, they may even violate the principle of respect for life. According to classical Islamic law, spousal abuse is grounds for a Muslim woman to initiate divorce. The extant biographies of Muhammad record him as never having hit a woman or even a child and as condemning those who did.
Domestic violence and spousal abuse violate the Islamic principle of respect for human dignity; if severe enough, they may even violate the principle of respect for life. According to classical Islamic law, spousal abuse is grounds for a Muslim woman to initiate divorce. The extant biographies of Muhammad record him as never having hit a woman or even a child and as condemning those who did.
well said, but... will you elaborate this last part of the post.
Ironic how in the west, at least my state in the US, domestic abuse/violence is at an all time high yet, somehow people ignore that and claim that Islam is the one with the problem.
Domestic violence is definitely a terrible and sadly very underreported crime wherever you are in the world. I can't imagine how any man could think it is his right to physically or psychologically abuse and torture his wife.
And the problem why so many seem to assume that Islam condones and permits domestic violence is the massive misinterpretation of ayat 34 from surah an-Nisa, and certain hadiths, which have been taken way out of context.
And those Muslim men who want to justify their actions also use those misinterpretations to serve their own interests.
Islam isn't the source or cause of domestic violence. This problem comes from society and probably a lack of knowledge about religion, not because of it.
I am confused by the 34th verse of chapter 4 (sūrat l-nisāa) of the Quran. It states, in 7 interpretations of the verse, that it is permissible to strike, scourge, beat or beat them lightly. You say that Quran does not advocate violence towards women, but I have been unable to find an interpretation that does not include: beat, strike, scourge or beat(lightly) in 4:34.
Sahih International: Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance - [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.
Pickthall: Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.
Yusuf Ali: Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).
Shakir: Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.
Muhammad Sarwar: Men are the protectors of women because of the greater preference that God has given to some of them and because they financially support them. Among virtuous women are those who are steadfast in prayer and dependable in keeping the secrets that God has protected. Admonish women who disobey (God's laws), do not sleep with them and beat them. If they obey (the laws of God), do not try to find fault in them. God is High and Supreme.
Mohsin Khan: Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has made one of them to excel the other, and because they spend (to support them) from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient (to Allah and to their husbands), and guard in the husband's absence what Allah orders them to guard (e.g. their chastity, their husband's property, etc.). As to those women on whose part you see ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly, if it is useful), but if they return to obedience, seek not against them means (of annoyance). Surely, Allah is Ever Most High, Most Great.
Arberry: Men are the managers of the affairs of women for that God has preferred in bounty one of them over another, and for that they have expended of their property. Righteous women are therefore obedient, guarding the secret for God's guarding. And those you fear may be rebellious admonish; banish them to their couches, and beat them. If they then obey you, look not for any way against them; God is All-high, All-great.
Something the rolling pin reminded me of - domestic violence against men is less common but often overlooked and underreported.
A 1995 survey in the UK found around 4.2% of men suffered from domestic violence. And that's not hard to believe as there are some truly terrifying women out there.
So within Shariah law do the rules regarding domestic violence apply to both genders, vice versa?
A 1995 survey in the UK found around 4.2% of men suffered from domestic violence.
format_quote Originally Posted by noraina
domestic violence against men is less common but often overlooked and underreported.
The real figures are no doubt, a lot higher.
CSI been busy investigating rolling pins on the murder crime scenes lol They couldn;t understand what the bendy twigs were about though sorry, I find topics like this ironically quite funny nowadays hehe
There is no mention of using the miswak to beat, scourge or strike your spouse; which is supposed to be the last and most serious punishment.
1) admonish or advise them
2) refuse to share their beds
If above doesn't work, them, as a last resort:
3) Beat, strike, scourge or beat them (lightly)
Are you saying that a husband refusing to share his wife's bed is a lesser punishment than being struck, beaten or scourged with a miswak (again, not mentioned in this verse of the Quran)
Please don't laugh at my question. I know many sisters that have suffered severe physical violence whilst their husband quoted this verse; and one sister was hospitalised and lost her baby. I cannot lol...
This is one verse, but there are others that husband use to abuse their wives. Please forgive me for being emotive; i have witnessed much suffering of women and girls.
There is no mention of using the miswak to beat, scourge or strike your spouse; which is supposed to be the last and most serious punishment.
1) admonish or advise them
2) refuse to share their beds
If above doesn't work, them, as a last resort:
3) Beat, strike, scourge or beat them (lightly)
(beat them) means, if advice and ignoring her in the bed do not produce the desired results, you are allowed to discipline the wife, without severe beating. Muslim recorded that Jabir said that during the Farewell Hajj, the Prophet said;
Fear Allah regarding women, for they are your assistants. You have the right on them that they do not allow any person whom you dislike to step on your mat. However, if they do that, you are allowed to discipline them lightly. They have a right on you that you provide them with their provision and clothes, in a reasonable manner. Ibn `Abbas and several others said that the Ayah refers to a beating that is not violent. Al-Hasan Al-Basri said that it means, a beating that is not severe.
Further commentaries explain that the Miswak - is to be used as a means of "light beating" and this to my knowledge is not even possible with a miswak, I've tried on occasion to hurt myself with it, all it did was tickle. Seriously.
format_quote Originally Posted by islamocurious
Are you saying that a husband refusing to share his wife's bed is a lesser punishment than being struck, beaten or scourged with a miswak (again, not mentioned in this verse of the Quran)
many things aren't mentioned in detail in the Qur'an, such as how many times a day a Muslim worships Allah with Salaat, or how to calculate zakaat tax, etc - the details are in the ahadeeth literature and the exegetes (tafsir) which flesh out the meat of the Qur'an for us.
Also, note that Arabic is a Semitic language with roots, so the Qur'an is only really the Qur'an in Arabic - the rest are only translations. they go someway to relaying the message, but the more that we attempt to translate a verse, the more we seem to take away from its meaning. The Qur'an is only really the Qur'an in Arabic.
format_quote Originally Posted by islamocurious
Please don't laugh at my question. I know many sisters that have suffered severe physical violence whilst their husband quoted this verse; and one sister was hospitalised and lost her baby. I cannot lol...
I'm not lolling, physical violence is abhorred by Muslims the world over. And isolated cases do not make for the norm of society - and if one was to compare the statistics of domestic violence in the West compared to the Middle East, one would have to seriously have to do U-turns in their ideas about Islam being a violent ideology towards women.
format_quote Originally Posted by islamocurious
This is one verse, but there are others that husband use to abuse their wives. Please forgive me for being emotive; i have witnessed much suffering of women and girls.
Well, now you know they cannot justify their beating their wives with Qur'an. They can with ignorance though - which is inexcusable.
(beat them) means, if advice and ignoring her in the bed do not produce the desired results, you are allowed to discipline the wife, without severe beating. Muslim recorded that Jabir said that during the Farewell Hajj, the Prophet said;
Fear Allah regarding women, for they are your assistants. You have the right on them that they do not allow any person whom you dislike to step on your mat. However, if they do that, you are allowed to discipline them lightly. They have a right on you that you provide them with their provision and clothes, in a reasonable manner. Ibn `Abbas and several others said that the Ayah refers to a beating that is not violent. Al-Hasan Al-Basri said that it means, a beating that is not severe.
Further commentaries explain that the Miswak - is to be used as a means of "light beating" and this to my knowledge is not even possible with a miswak, I've tried on occasion to hurt myself with it, all it did was tickle. Seriously.
many things aren't mentioned in detail in the Qur'an, such as how many times a day a Muslim worships Allah with Salaat, or how to calculate zakaat tax, etc - the details are in the ahadeeth literature and the exegetes (tafsir) which flesh out the meat of the Qur'an for us.
Also, note that Arabic is a Semitic language with roots, so the Qur'an is only really the Qur'an in Arabic - the rest are only translations. they go someway to relaying the message, but the more that we attempt to translate a verse, the more we seem to take away from its meaning. The Qur'an is only really the Qur'an in Arabic.
I'm not lolling, physical violence is abhorred by Muslims the world over. And isolated cases do not make for the norm of society - and if one was to compare the statistics of domestic violence in the West compared to the Middle East, one would have to seriously have to do U-turns in their ideas about Islam being a violent ideology towards women.
Well, now you know they cannot justify their beating their wives with Qur'an. They can with ignorance though - which is inexcusable.
Scimi
You did state earlier that:
(beat them) means, if advice and ignoring her in the bed do not produce the desired results, you are allowed to discipline the wife, without severe beating.
I cannot find any definition of the word beat, in this context, that is not violent. A beating is a beating, whether severe or not. Beating someone is a violent act. Men use the verse, you quoted above, to justify beating their wives.
You did state earlier that:
(beat them) means, if advice and ignoring her in the bed do not produce the desired results, you are allowed to discipline the wife, without severe beating.
I cannot find any definition of the word beat, in this context, that is not violent. A beating is a beating, whether severe or not. Beating someone is a violent act. Men use the verse, you quoted above, to justify beating their wives.
You claim you cannot find the word beat in the context defined.
Of course I've found the word beat in Islamic scripture, and its various interpretations or 'misinterpretations'
I meant any 'dictionary' definition of the word beat. Language existed before religion. The definition of the word beat, in the context of hitting someone, with any object, has not changed. Beating someone, with anything, is violent by definition.
The English language is not that easily misinterpreted. Most words have one universal meaning to ensure that we can communicate as human beings.
Beat, strike, scourge or beat 'lightly', in this context, and by definition are violent acts.
Of course I've found the word beat in Islamic scripture, and its various interpretations or 'misinterpretations'
I meant any 'dictionary' definition of the word beat. Language existed before religion. The definition of the word beat, in the context of hitting someone, with any object, has not changed. Beating someone, with anything, is violent by definition.
The English language is not that easily misinterpreted. Most words have one universal meaning to ensure that we can communicate as human beings.
Beat, strike, scourge or beat 'lightly', in this context, and by definition are violent acts.
Ah I see the problem now.
You are a linear speaker, only one language right? This makes it hard for you to understand concepts such as what follows:
In English, we only have on word for love. Love itself.
In Arabic there are over 60 variants for the word LOVE, depending on the context one is using the word. ONe can love chocolate, and one can love his wife - but the types of love are very different. In Arabic, there are over 60 variants for the word LOVE alone, depending on the contextual usage of the word, LOVE.
Same for many MANY words in Arabic, including beat.
And in English, we have the opposite, for example, one word can have many meanings - take the word "beat" itself. You can beat an egg in a bowl - you can dance to the beat, and you can beat someone up. Three very different uses for the word "beat", i'm sure there are more.
You cannot by any measure of logic, attempt to claim that the word "beat" as translated into English is adequate as translated, because English itself is very limited in expression. And nowhere near as expressive as Semitic languages like Aramaic and Arabic.
Not just this, but Arabic is an ancient language which hasn't had the morphological issues English suffered. Take for example, Chaucer, 14th century CE English literary giant of the past - try reading his work today, and tell me if you can make any sense of it? You won't be able to - and that - is English. Chaucer is still hotly debated in Literature circles.
Bare in mind, how Chaucer was 14th century (700 hundred years ago) and Islam was 7th century (1400 years ago) and still English is developing, while Arabic is mastered.
English is a language inadequate, and clumsy in translation.
For this reason, the explanations of the scholars who speak to English speaking folk regarding the linguistic nuances of the Qur'an, should be studied to avoid confusion.
WOW!... I said the definition of beat in the 'context' of striking someone as in 4:34. Not in the context of music, cooking, winning in a game, etc.
If you're saying that beat has many meanings in the context of chapter 4 verse 34 of the Quran, it does seem that it renders "in the context of" redundant.
But I'm curious, what other meanings does beat have in 4:34?
WOW!... I said the definition of beat in the 'context' of striking someone as in 4:34. Not in the context of music, cooking, winning in a game, etc.
If you're saying that beat has many meanings in the context of chapter 4 verse 34 of the Quran, it does seem that it renders "in the context of" redundant.
But I'm curious, what other meanings does beat have in 4:34?
It seems clear when the imams explain it.
I was attempting to show you how "translations in English" are always problematic, because English is not a developed language, and has no roots, is actually what is termed as a "b-a-s-t-a-r-d language" by my first English teacher in London.
Compare to Qur'an, a Semitic language, ancient and with firmly established tri-lateral rooting system to boot and you find that no translation of Qur'an ever does the Qur'an justice - the Qur'an is only really he Qur'an in Arabic.
Unanimously the world over, this verse you have issues with, is understood to mean a light beating with a miswak, something that doesn't hurt at all.
In fact I asked a friend of mine to try and hurt himself with one, he had no idea why I asked him to do this btw - but he reported back, here check:
If the miswak can hurt a person, I'll eat my shoes
Miswak is not in the Quran. Interpretations of the word in 4:34 include:
1) beat 2) scourge 3) strike (all are violent, by definition, in this context, for eg.
Scourge with a miswak, really?? Some mental gymnastics required here.
If it was not meant to hurt, then words like tap gently with a miswak but this not what the Quran says nor how it's interpreted and put into practice by men. I've seen plenty of beatings with whips, belts, hands/fists, feet, etc. but one where a man is gently 'beating' a woman with a miswak?.....Nope!
At the end of the day,there is no Golden rule applied here. Strike her, never him; beat her, never him; scourge her, never him. Miswak or no miswak; and going by the Quran NO miswak.
It's worrying if you find this funny; earlier I thought you said you 'cannot lol...' at such a serious topic.
Then it makes no sense. You may as well say tap her with a feather, what's the point?
The point of the “striking” without pain is only a teaching mechanism intended to draw attention to the seriousness of major sins and reform bad behaviour. It is not intended to humiliate or degrade the dignity of a wife, nor is it meant to injure or harm her.
Besides, the Quran is the perfect word of God for all time, and it doesn't say miswak.
Taking an interpretation of a verse from the Qur'an in isolation, then (mis)interpreting the interpretation to support preconceived notions is a popular tactic of those who seek to discredit Islam. Instead, there is a methodology involved in how the Qur'an is to be understood, which includes having an understanding of the Arabic language, understanding a verse in light of other verses and teachings from the Sunnah, and so on. Once the correct approach is applied, one is better able to understand a verse correctly and in this case, what exactly is meant by 'beat/strike' is made clearer.
Here are some other verses and Prophetic commands in relation to this topic, which help provide some context:
O you who believe! You are forbidden to inherit women against their will; and you should not treat them with harshness, that you may take away part of the Mahr you have given them, unless they commit open illegal sexual intercourse; and live with them honourably. If you dislike them, it may be that you dislike a thing and Allah brings through it a great deal of good. [Qur'an 4:19]
Lodge them (the divorced women) where you dwell, according to your means, and do not harm them so as to straiten them...” [Qur'an 65:6]
The Prophet said: “The best of you are those who are the best to their wives, and I am the best of you to my wives.” Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 3895; Ibn Maajah, 1977; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi.
The Prophet said: “I urge you to treat women well.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 331; Muslim, 1468.
He also said, “You never spend anything but you will be rewarded for it, even the morsel of food that you lift to your wife’s mouth.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 6352; Muslim, 1628.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
LaSorcia liked this post
a getaway plan.
said: “The best of you are those who are the best to their wives, and I am the best of you to my wives.” Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 3895; Ibn Maajah, 1977; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi.
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks