Inside the Gender Jihad: Women's Reform in Islam (40 page)

Men are [
qawwamuna ’ala
] women, [on the basis] of what Allah has

Qur’an, Gender, and Interpretive Possibilities
199

[preferred] (
faddala
) some of them over others, [and on the basis] of what they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are [
qanitat
], guarding in secret that which Allah has guarded. As for those (women) from whom you fear [
nushuz
], admonish them, banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then, if they obey you, seek not a way against them.
16

There is no getting around this one, even though I have tried through different methods for two decades. I simply do not and cannot condone permission for a man to “scourge” or apply
any kind
of blow to a woman. Because of the extensive time I have examined this verse, it is the best place for me to demonstrate the diverse interpretive and implementive possi- bilities as they have been applied through some historical examples and conditions, including my own attempts at interpretative manipulations. This leads me to clarify how I have finally come to say “no” outright to the literal implementation of this passage. This also has implications in implementing the
hudud
(penal code) ordinances. This verse, and the literal implementation of
hudud
, both imply an ethical standard of human actions that are archaic and barbaric at this time in history. They are unjust in the ways that human beings have come to experience and understand justice, and hence unacceptable to universal notions of human dignity.

I have had what Khaled Abou El-Fadl calls a “conscientious pause” regarding the application of the
hudud
ordinances and the verse on wife beating.

Every adult Muslim, man or woman, is obligated to understand and implement the
Shari‘ah
. Accountability is personal and individual, and
no single person or institution may or can represent the Divine Will
. Hence the individual is directly responsible for seeking and learning the way of God – the
shari‘ah
. . . or the truth.

Truth here relates to the object or purpose of the Divine Will. God, it is argued, does not seek an objective or singular truth, God wishes human beings to search and seek for the Divine Will. Truth adheres to search – the search itself is ultimate truth. Consequently, correctness is measured according to the sincerity of the individual’s search.

The mark of the search for the Divine Will is the dalil
(pl.
adillah
). A
dalil
is the indicator, pointer mark or evidence of the Divine Will.
God, for the purpose of edification, and in order to test human beings, and as a sign of His mercy and compassion, demanded that human beings exert an

200 inside the gender jihad

effort in seeking the evidence of His Will
(
badhl al-juhd fi talab al-dalil
or

talab al-‘ilm
).
17

(emphasis mine)

Then he elaborates further on those things that might “require a conscien- tious pause.” If by the standards of age and place, or the standards of human moral development, traditions lead to
wakhdh al-damir
(the unset- tling or disturbing of the conscience), the least a Muslim can do is to pause to reflect about the place and the implications of these traditions. “Can I, consistently with my faith and understanding of God and God’s message, believe that God . . . is primarily responsible for this . . . or that such and such can be true?” “Everyone . . . is functioning in the realm of the possible and probable while struggling with indicators (pl.
adillah
, sing.
dalil
). To claim full or perfect knowledge of God’s will is to challenge the singularity and uniqueness of the Divine perfection.”
18

However, if all determinations take account of the indicators and evi- dence, what do we make of morality, or a basic sense of right and wrong? Is all right and wrong only derived from the divine text and nothing but the text? The text is not the only representative of the divine.

A person develops knowledge of God,
not through textual indicators alone
, but through a complex matrix of relationships that are collateral to the text. A person develops a direct relationship perhaps through prayer and supplication, and might develop an understanding of the Creator by reflecting upon creation, or might observe the work of God and Satan through reflecting upon history. These various avenues to the knowledge of God exist apart from the indicators of the text, but they work in conjunction with the text to formulate a conviction about the nature and normativities of the divine. Although the text plays a role in forming these convictions one cannot exclude the possibility that the conviction which has been formulated might come into friction with certain determinations of the text. A person can read a text that seems to go against everything that he or she believes about God and will feel a sense of incredulous disbelief, and might even exclaim, “This cannot be from God, the God that I know!”
19

When such frictions occur between textual utterances and collateral evidences, one must assert a “diligent and comprehensive”
20
investigation of the text. I elaborate this through my investigation of verse 4:34 including a historical consideration of the possible means for both understanding and implementing the particular text toward fulfillment of the principles

Qur’an, Gender, and Interpretive Possibilities
201

or “spirit” of the whole of the text. There are four stages of this historical development.

STAGES IN TEXTUAL INTERPRETIVE DEVELOPMENT

One might say that the first stage of textual interpretive development would be at the time and in the context of its revelation. The simple response to this statement of authorization for a husband to strike his wife seems to be,
yes
. Despite this simple response, however, we also know that the Prophet’s response to this revelation was, “I wanted one thing and Allah wanted some- thing else.” He
never
implemented this text in his life. He never struck a woman or beat a slave. It would be easy to say that the reason for this is that every one of his marriages were without incident. After all, these were the “Mothers of the Faith,” exemplary companions to the time of revelation. On the con- trary, the Qur’anic
khass
descriptions of more than one conflict between the Prophet and one or more of his wives confirm this was not so. Not only did the Prophet retain severe doubts about the sexual fidelity of his wife ‘A’ishah when rumors were implying the contrary, but also those doubts were not alleviated by any direct exchange between him and ‘A’ishah. These doubts persisted until a
khass
verse testifying to her innocence was revealed. This passage goes on to provide an
‘
amm
, commandment to avoid slander and rumors, and even instates a
hadd
punishment for those guilty of speaking such rumors without corroborating their suspicions with reliable eye-witnesses or other evidence (24:4–25).

The Qur’an also elaborates on another occasion, when the Prophet vowed a month-long seclusion from all his wives after they schemed against him over something he had done with which they were displeased. The
khass
revelation even went so far as to offer to replace all his wives (66:3–5). This month-long separation can be viewed as a demonstration

of the second solution recommended in 4:34, to “remain in beds apart.”
21

If the Prophet remains the best exemplary of Qur’anic meaning, then he should have moved from the separation to beating his wives. The Qur’an instead speaks of the possibility of divorce (66:4), and the Prophet demonstrates the additional condition of interpretation and application, self-reflection.

The second stage of interpretive development is demonstrated contin- ually and in diverse ways during the two or three centuries following the revelation as
fiqh
developed and provided other interpretive responses. It was a practical
intervention
between literal textual application and
conditional

202 inside the gender jihad

application. Most significant of this intervention is that
fiqh
restricts such a “stroke” to “
ghayr mubah
” (without harm). Furthermore,
fiqh
interprets the blow as only “
ramsiyun
” (symbolic). This confirms a textual understanding against the use of it for unabashed spousal abuse or domestic violence. The jurists seem to be arguing within their existing sociological context and asserting an understanding of textual intent – perhaps also based on the precedent of the prophetic example. This is nevertheless
an intervention opposing literal application
. It could be seen as proposing
“yes,” “but”
with conditions. It is no reductionism to believe that the conditions also stem from interpreting the Qur’an on the basis of the Qur’an, with “justice” the overarching concern for human interaction of
mu‘amalat.

In
Qur’an and Woman
, I intentionally worked on a third potential stage of development inspired by reading in my own context. Multiple meanings can be deduced from the various uses and definitions for the word
daraba
(trans- lated on p. 200 as “scourge”) as in the Qur’an and elsewhere. This wide spec- trum of linguistic nuances, and the extensive lists of definitions supplied by the Arabic dictionary and lexicon
Lisan al-Arab
, indicate that there could be much more to meet the eye and subsequently apply in trying to understand this verse. It was plain to see how this multiplicity allows room to manipulate multiple meanings to determine multiple possibilities for application. I con- cluded with an alternative interpretation that the Qur’an meant to restrict unbridled violence. This intervention utilizes the linguistic space for manipu- lating meaning and promotes a “
perhaps not
”possibility. Perhaps the Qur’an did
not
intend to emphasize the narrowest reading, since violence against the innocent and oppressed is strongly discouraged elsewhere in the text. Perhaps the seventh-century application of this countered the practices of abuse and violence towards women, but twenty-first-century standards have shown us other possibilities as well as the clear negative consequences of violence in the family for all members: the abused, the abuser, and the witnessing members.

The last stage I consider here in the context of our current knowledge and explicit data regarding domestic violence takes into consideration information gathered from research on, and women’s experiences with, abuse – that is, using the “various avenues to the knowledge of God [that]

exist apart from the indicators of the text.”
22
Here I argue against any

notion that it is acceptable for a man to beat his wife. Any kind of a blow, or any intention to apply the verse in that manner, violates other principles of the text itself – most notably “justice” and human dignity, as Allah has led humankind to understand today.

Qur’an, Gender, and Interpretive Possibilities
203

Therefore the application of the verse as permission for a man to strike his wife must be rejected. To say “no” to this verse now simply exemplifies the process or trajectory throughout the history of textual interpretation and application. From the cultural context of the text, with the precedent of the Prophet – against such a practice – through the restriction of
fiqh
con- ditions, and the manipulation of interpretive multiplicity, we finally arrive at a place where we
acknowledge that we intervene
with the text. The next step is to admit that we are continuing the process of intervention between text and meaning, as believers in Allah and in revelation. It provides a means to reject literal application of this text and certain other textual particulars altogether.

What I am proposing is that the collective community has always manipulated the text in concert with civilizational, or, better still, human development. We must now simply acknowledge that it has always been done and accept the responsibility of agency in doing so openly and in consultation with the community. Since we live in the time when at least the conceptualization of women’s complete human agency and equality between women and men is conceivable, then we must dance the delicate dance between text and agency to assert a movement of complete gender justice. I have already argued significantly that the text
can
be interpreted with egalitarianism in mind; I now propose one step that some consider as beyond even that.
We are the makers of textual meaning
. The results of our meaning-making is the reality we establish from those meanings to human experiences and social justice. We need to make the text mean more for women’s full human dignity than it has been conceived to do or applied toward at any other time in Muslim history. Our motivation to do so, however, is fully within the framework of Islam as a meaning-making system of social justice with the text as the
dalil
, the primary indicator of that

meaning,

while acknowledging that no one text can ever completely

disclose the

full

nature of Allah

and therefore be the complete and

exclusive articulation of it.

As believers in the faith tradition of Islam,
we cannot rewrite the

Qur’an
.

As a historical record of the words

revealed by Allah to the

Prophet Muhammad, those words are unchangeable. In addition, those words have always been subject to multiple meanings and to various inter- pretations. The goal of interpretation is to unveil the meanings that reflect the spirit of the very idea that Allah, the Ultimate, Who is ultimately un- knowable, intends for human agents to
apply
. They must be able to unveil these meanings in a manner most reflective of the principles of the message.