Gender in Islam

Author: Farhat Naz Rahman

Equality is the term, which is hard to define. There is a sense in which all human beings are equal, but in actual life, we find that no two human beings are really equal in all respects. Inequality leads to injustice and oppression only where artificial impediments, whether in the shape of laws and customs or traditions, are super-added to natural inequalities so as to prevent men and women from developing their native capacities to full. (1)

Equality does not mean identicality: it means equity. Islam presents the roles of men and women as complementary roles and not contradictory or conflicting roles; the roles of partners with a common set of goals and objectives and not roles that conflict with each other, with each of them having the objective of the civilizations and societies that for centuries refused to consider women as human beings, or to give them any rights, have now gone from one extreme to another. Islam has never had anything to do with such nonsense. When women had no rights in the world it declared:
"And women shall have rights, similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable." (Al-Baqarah, 2:228)

That still remains Islam's command - today and forever. Similar rights, not same rights. Qualitative, not quantitative equality. Both men and women are equal in their humanity and in their dignity; in their accountability to perform their assigned tasks and be judged according to their performance.

However, their assigned tasks are not the same. Their Creator has given them different capabilities: the tasks are based on those capabilities. This distinction is not an error that needs to be corrected. It is the only basis for building a healthy and prosperous society. Islam liberates a woman from the modern tyranny of having to become a man in order to get a sense of self worth and achievement in striving for supremacy.

The egalitarian conception of gender inhering in the ethical vision of Islam existed in tension with the hierarchical relation between the sexes encoded into the marriage structure instituted by Islam. This egalitarianism is a consistent element of the ethical utterances of the Quran. Among the remarkable features of the Quran, particularly in comparison with the scriptural texts of other monotheistic traditions, is that women are explicitly addressed; one passage in which this occurs declares by the very structure of the utterances, as well as in overt statement, the absolute moral and spiritual equality of men and women. (2)

“For Muslim men and women,-for believing men and women, for devout men and women, for true [truthful] men and women, for men and women who are patient and constant, for men and women who humble themselves, for men and women who give in charity, for men and women who fast ( and deny themselves), for men and women who guard their chastity, and for men and women who engage much in God's praise,- for them has God prepared forgiveness and a great reward”. (Sûrah 33: 35) (3)

Women's position is determined not so much by the principles of Islam as by social practices. Any discrimination based on gender is a grave offense and against the teachings of the Qur'an. The Qur'an regards men and women as complementary to each other, one sex making up what the other lacks.  Islam does not consider a woman a mere shadow or an extension of a man, always following him or obeying him. She has her full individual freedom and responsibility to the belief in the message of Allah and in practicing its obligations.

Islam like other major religions of the world, which developed in patriarchal cultures, has been used traditionally to deprive women of their God-created, God-given fundamental human rights. (4) Somewhere in the dust of history, our Ulema adopted the Christian theory that women are the source of (original and) all evil.

Quranic consideration of women on earth centres on her relationship to the group, i.e. as a member of a social system. However, it is also important to understand how Quran focuses on women as an individual because the Quran treats the individual, whether male or female, in exactly the same manner: that is, whatever the Quran says about the relationship between Allah and individual is not in gender terms. With regard to spirituality, there are no rights of women distinct from rights of man. (5)

A number of elements in Sufism strongly suggest that the Sufi ethos countered that of the dominant society with respect also to their gender arrangements and their view of women. From early on, its proponents counted women among the important contributors to their tradition and almost the elect spiritual leaders, honoring, for example, Rabi`a al `Adawiyya. Moreover, Sufi tales and legends incorporate elements that also suggest that they engaged with and rejected the values of the dominant society with regard to women. (6) The narratives about Rabi`a al `Adwiyya, for instance, exemplify distinctly counter-cultural elements with respect to ideas about gender. Short narratives depict Rabi`a surpassing her male colleagues in intellectual forthrightness and percipience as well as in spiritual powers. One relates how Hasan al-Basri approached Rabi`a, who was meditating with some companions on a bank. Throwing his carpets on the water, Hasan sat on it and called to Rabi`a to come and converse with him. Understanding that he wanted to impress people with his spiritual powers, Rabi`a threw her prayer carpet into the air and flew up to it; sitting there she said, "O Hasan, come up here where people will see us better." Hasan was silent, for it was beyond his power to fly. "O Hasan. " Rabi`a then said, " that which you did a fish can do…and that which I did a fly can do. The real work (for the saints of God) lies beyond both of these." (7) Another narrative tells how the Ka`aba (the house Allah) rose up and came forward to meet Rabi`a when she was making her pilgrimage to Mecca. She commented: "What have I to do with the house, it is the Lord of the house I need." Meanwhile an eminent fellow Sufi, Ibrahim ibn Adham, was taking many years over his pilgrimage to Mecca, piously stopping to perform ritual prayers many times along the way. Arriving in Mecca and seeing no Ka`aba, he thought his eyes were at fault until a voice informed him that the Ka`aba had gone forth to meet a woman. When Rabi`a and the Ka’aba arrived together, Rabi`a informed Ibrahim, who was consumed with jealousy that the Ka`aba had so honored her, that whereas he crossed the desert making ritual prayers, she came in inward prayer.

The tale thus shows a woman not only surpassing a man but also gently undercutting the formalism and literalness of orthodox religion and the trappings of piety. Another remark attributed to Rabi`a, made about another Sufi, Sufyan al Thawri, shows the same thing. "Sufyan would be a [good man]," she said, "if only he did not love traditions."  (8)
Textual injunctions on gender equity and the prophetic model are sometimes disregarded by some if not most Muslims individually and collectively. Revision of practices (not divine injunctions) is needed. It is not the revelatory Qur'an and the Sunnah that need any editing or revision. What need to be reexamined are fallible human interpretations and practices. Diverse practices in Muslim countries often reflect cultural influences (local or foreign), more so than the letter or spirit of the Shariah. Fortunately, there is an emerging trend for the betterment of our understanding of gender equity, based on the Qur'an and Hadith, not on alien and imported un-Islamic or non-Islamic values and not on the basis of the existing oppressive and unjust status quo in many parts of the Muslim world. (9)

Theologically, Islam tends to assert the equality of the male and female principles, while in its practical social structures it establishes a distinction. To understand this paradox is to understand the essence of the Islamic philosophy of gender, which constructs roles from below, not from above. Women's functions vary widely in the Muslim world and in Muslim history.  In peasant communities, women work in the fields; in the desert; while among the urban elites, womanhood is more frequently celebrated in the home.  Recurrently, however, the public space is rigorously desexualized, and this is represented by the quasi-monastic garb of men and women, where frequently the color white is the color of the male, while black, significantly the sign of inferiority, of the Ka'ba and hence the celestial Layla, denotes femininity. In the private space of the home these signs are cast aside, and the home becomes as colourful as the public space is austere and polarized. Modernity, refusing to recognise gender as a sacred sign, and delighting in random erotic signaling, renders the public space 'domestic' by colouring it, and makes war on all remnants of gender separation, crudely construed as judgmental.

There are other aspects of the Shari’a that deserve mention as illustrations of our theme, not least those, which have been largely forgotten by Muslim societies. The Lawgiver sometimes designs the intersections between the two gender universes as rights of women, and sometimes as rights of men; and the former category is more frequently omitted from actualized Muslim communities. Frequently the jurists' exegesis of the texts is pluri-vocal. Domestic chores, for instance, appear as an aspect of interior sociality, but this is not identified with purely female space, since they are regarded by some madhhabs, including the Shafi'i, as the responsibility of the man rather than the wife. A'isha was asked, after the Blessed Prophet's death, what he used to do at home when he was not at prayer; and she replied: 'He served his family: he used to sweep the floor, and sew clothes.' (Bukhari, Adhan, 44.) On this basis, Shafi'i jurists defend the woman's right not to perform housework.'  (1)0

In the Hanafi madhhab, by contrast, these acts are regarded as the wife's obligations. Another sufficient reminder of the difficulty of generalising about Islamic law, which remains a diverse body of rules and approaches. Islam's theology of gender thus contends with a maze, a web of connections, which demand familiarity with a diverse legal code, regional heterogeneity and with the metaphysical no less than with the physical.

This complexity should warn us against offering facile generalisations about Islam's attitude to women. Journalists, feminists and cultivated people generally in the West have harboured deeply negative verdicts here. Often these verdicts are arrived at through the observation of actual Muslim societies; and it would be both futile and immoral to suggest that the modern Islamic world is always to be admired for its treatment of women. This imbalance will continue unless actualized religion learns to reincorporate the dimension of ihsân, which valorizes the feminine principle, and also obstructs and ultimately annihilates the ego, which underpins gender chauvinism. We need to distinguish, as many Muslim women thinkers are doing, between the expectations of the religion's ethos (as legible in scripture, classical exegesis, and spirituality), and the actual asymmetric structures of post-classical Muslim societies, which, like Christian, Jewish, Hindu and Chinese cultures, contain much that is in real need of reform.

Muslim women have for long periods of Islam's history left their homes to become scholars. A hundred years ago the orientalist Ignaz Goldziher showed that perhaps fifteen percent of medieval hadith scholars were women, teaching in the mosques and universally admired for their integrity. Colleges such as the Saqlatuniya Madrasa in Cairo were funded and staffed entirely by women.

Male and female are aspects of duality, whereas God is unique. Nothing else resembles Him. He has no counterpart. So why is the male pronoun used to refer to Him? First of all, Arabic has no gender-neutral pronoun.  Everything is either ‘he’ or ‘she,’ including inanimate objects. Even though English has the pronoun ‘it,’ to use ‘it’ to refer to God has a drawback, because ‘it’ is basically used for things and creatures that can’t think. Likewise, to refer to God as ‘she’ has certain connotations of weakness in a human context. Like it or not, men have dominated public life and human societies throughout history. Therefore, the Qur'an uses ‘He’ to refer to Allah, while making it clear that God transcends all dualistic traits. Descriptions of Allah abound in the Qur'an or the Sunnah, but none of them gives the slightest inkling that He is masculine or feminine.

When we turn to the Qur'an, we find an image of Godhead apophatically stripped of metaphor. God is simply Allah, the God; never Father. The divine is referred to by the masculine pronoun: Allah is He (huwa); but the grammarians and exegetes concur that this is not even allegoric: Arabic has no neuter, and the use of the masculine is normal in Arabic for genderless nouns. No male preponderance is implied, any more than femininity is implied by the grammatically female gender of neuter plurals. (11)

The modern Jordanian theologian Hasan al-Saqqaf emphasises the point that Muslim theology has consistently made down the ages: God is not gendered, really or metaphorically. The Quran continues Biblical assumptions on many levels, but here there is a striking discontinuity. The imaging of God has been shifted into a new and bipolar register, that of the Ninety-Nine Names. Muslim women who have reflected on the gender issue have seized, I think with good reason, on this striking point. For instance, one Muslim woman writer, Sartaz Aziz, writes:
“I am deeply grateful that my first ideas of God were formed by Islam because I was able to think of the Highest Power as one completely without sex or race, and thus completely unpatriarchal . . . We begin with the idea of a deity who is completely above sexual identity, and thus completely outside the value system created by patriarchy”. (12)

In fact, by far the most conspicuous of the Divine Names in the Koran is al-Rahman, the All Compassionate. And the explicitly feminine resonance of this name were remarked upon by the Prophet (s.w.s.) himself, who taught that rahma, loving compassion, is an attribute derived from the word rahm, meaning a womb. (Bukhari, Adab 13)
Further confirmation for this is supplied in a famous hadith:
'On the day that He created the heavens and the earth, God created a hundred rahmas, each of which is as great as the space which lies between heaven and earth. And He sent one rahma down to earth, by which a mother has rahma for her child.' (Muslim, Tawba, 21) Drawing on this explicit identification of rahma with the 'maternal' aspect of the phenomenal divine, the developed tradition of Sufism habitually identifies God's entire creative aspect as 'feminine', and as merciful. (13)

In her book “The Tao Of Islam” the Japanese scholar Sachiko Murata has drawn parallels with the attributes of God (proverbial 99 names of Allah) in the concept of Yin and Yang whereby the names of Majesty can be considered Yang/Masculine/Jalal as for example, The Avenger, The Destroyer, The Reckoner. Examples of Yin/Feminine/Jamal names are the Great Bestower, The Most Indulgent, The Beautiful, The Source of Peace. The vast majority of what are called “The Most Beautiful Names of God” (Al-Asma al Husna) – the proverbial 99 names of God – mostly fall into these categories.

In this context one can note the significance of the name, ‘Al-Rahman’ which means, The Gracious-Compassionate One, The All-Merciful. At a simple statistical level it is the most often repeated attribute in the Quran. Apart from its overwhelming presence in the text, every chapter, except one, begins with this name accompanied by its variant Al-Rahim. Etymologically they are inextricably tied to the roots of the word for ‘Womb’ in Arabic, making it a Yin/Feminine attribute par excellence. (14)

Fortunately, there is an emerging trend for the betterment of our understanding of gender equity, based on the Qur'an and Hadith, not on alien and imported un-Islamic or non-Islamic values and not on the basis of the existing oppressive and unjust status quo in many parts of the Muslim world. It is not the revelatory Qur'an and the Sunnah that need any editing or revision. What needs to be reexamined are fallible human interpretations and practices. (15)

The issues related to women generally cover four areas: 
(a) Status of women, 
(b) role of women, 
(c) participation and other rights of women, and 
(d) dress and conduct of women. 

Our approach is most commonly apologetic (defending or explaining the virtues of Islam, without recognizing and solving the problems, whenever appropriate or warranted). An example of such a well-articulated, apologetic approach:
"What then is all this uproar by the Muslim women of today about? Is there any right or facility that Islam has not already given her so that she should still feel constrained to launch a campaign to win them through means such as suffrage and representation in parliament? Let us see:
She demands an equal human status. But Islam has already given this to her in theory as well as in practice before law.
She wants economic independence and the right to participate in social life directly. Well, Islam was the first religion that gave her this right.
She wants the right to education? Islam not only recognizes it but makes the acquisition of it obligatory on her as well.
Does she want the right not to be given in marriage without her permission? Islam has given her this right as well as the right to arrange her own marriage.
Does she demand that she should be treated kindly and fairly while performing her functions within the house, and that she should have the right to ask for a separation from her husband if he should fail to treat her in a just and fair manner? Islam does give her all these rights and makes it incumbent upon men to safeguard them.
Also does she want the right to go and work outside? Islam recognizes this right of her too. (16)

One may notice from the above apologetic statement, there is a valid point made about what Islam says and suggests, but hardly anything about the contemporary problems in the society and the kind of concerns various segments of the society have in regard to gender issues. As we defend the message of Islam, we tend to gloss over the harsh realities of the gap that exists between the Qur'anic and Prophetic vision on one hand, and the existing conditions of the Ummah, on the other. We enthusiastically proclaim that Islam is the only Deen (way of life; religion) that has made seeking knowledge incumbent upon all Muslims, men and women. Yet, illiteracy is a wide-spread problem of the Ummah, with the rate of illiteracy being disproportionately higher among the Muslim women. Why? An examination of these issues is critical if we want to build a better Islamic future for ourselves in this world. Currently, rather probably as always, we have polarities in our thoughts, attitudes and conducts.

Once an objective and fair assessment of Muslim practices is made, it should be compared with the normative teachings of Islam. There are enough indications to show that a gap does exist between the ideal and the real. Given the existence of such a gap, a wide gap at times, it follows that Muslim reformers and other international bodies and movements share at least one thing in common: an awareness of the need to close or at least narrow that gap. The problem arises, however, as to the most effective frame of reference and to the particulars of implementation.

International bodies and women's rights organizations tend to consider documents and resolutions passed in conferences as the ultimate basis and standard expected of all diverse peoples, cultures and religions. Committed Muslims, however, both men and women, believe in the ultimate supremacy of what they accept as God's divine revelation (the Qur'an and authentic hadith). To tell Muslims that one's religious convictions should be subservient to "superior" man-made (or woman-made) standards or to secular humanism is neither acceptable nor practical. Even if pressures, economic and otherwise, are used to bring about compliance with such resolutions or documents, the resulting changes are not likely to be deep-rooting and lasting. For Muslims, divine injunctions and guidance are not subject to a "voting" procedure or to a human election, editing or whimsical modifications. They constitute, rather, a complete way of living within Islam’s spiritual, moral, social, political and legal parameters. Imposed cultural imperialism is not the solution.

The Qur'an strongly guarantees all fundamental human rights, without reserving them to men alone. These rights are so deeply rooted in our humanness that their denial or violation is tantamount to a negation or degradation of that which makes us human. These rights came into existence with us, so that we might actualize our human potential. These rights not only provide us with the opportunity to develop all of our inner resources, but they also hold before us a vision of what God would like us to be, what God deems to be worth striving for. The renunciation of a God-given right would be no more virtuous than the refusal to utilize a God-given talent.

The first and most basic right emphasized by the Qur'an is the right to be regarded in a way that reflects the sanctity and absolute value of each human life. Each person has the right not only to life but also to respect, not by virtue of being a man or a woman, but by virtue of being a human being. "Verily," states the Qur'an, "we have honored every human being" [Sûrah 17:A1-Isra': 70]. Human beings are deemed worthy of esteem because, of all creation, they alone chose to accept the "trust" of freedom of the will (Sûrah 33:Al-Ahzab: 72). Human beings can exercise freedom of the will because they possess the rational faculty, which is what distinguishes them from all other creatures (Sûrah 2:Al Baqarah: 30-34). Although human beings can become "the lowest of the low," the Qur'an declares that they have been made "in the best of moulds" (Sûrah 95:At-Tin: 4-6), having the ability to think, to have knowledge of right and wrong, to do the good and to avoid the evil. Thus, on account of the promise which is contained in being human, namely, the potential to be God's vicegerent on earth, the humanness o fall human beings is to be respected and considered an end in itself.

Flowing from this primary right is the right to be treated with justice and equity. The Qur'an puts great emphasis on the right to seek justice and the duty to do justice. Justice encompasses both the concept that all are equal and recognition of the need to help equalize those suffering from a deficiency or loss.

Yet justice is not absolute equality of treatment, since human beings are not equal as far as their human potential or their human situation is concerned. While each person's humanness commands respect, the Qur'an also establishes the right to recognition of individual merit. Merit depends not on gender or any other characteristic, but only on righteousness. Righteousness consists of "just belief' plus "just action," including faith, prayer, wealth- sharing, equitable and compassionate behavior, and patience in the face of hardship or difficulty.

Of importance to women in the Muslim world today is the Qur'anic idea that justice takes into account the unequal conditions of different groups of people. This idea stems from the Quranic ideal of community, or "ummah," a word deriving from the root "umm," meaning mother. Like a good mother with her children, the good community cares about the well-being of all its members, offering particular support to the downtrodden, oppressed, and "weak" classes. This includes women, slaves, orphans, the poor and infirm, and minorities.

As discussed earlier, another fundamental right is the right to be free of traditionalism and authoritarianism. Instrumental here is the right to seek knowledge, which the Qur'an emphasizes perhaps more than any other right. Acquiring knowledge is a prerequisite for evaluating the conditions of life and working toward the creation of a just world. Denied knowledge, Muslim women are denied justice.

Additionally, with great implications for the status of Muslim women, human beings possess the right to work, to earn, and to own property. This right is not the monopoly of men. In Islam, everything belongs to God, not to any person, and so every human being has the right to a means of living. Given the Qur'an's recognition of women as persons in their own right and not as adjuncts to men, the right to earn a living is of great importance to women, and the Qur'an entitles both women and men to the fruits of their labors.

Human beings also have the right to develop their aesthetic sensibilities and the right to survive but to thrive, to enjoy "the good life." This requires self-actualization or development, which is not possible without social justice. Not only an end in themselves, women's rights are a basic component of social justice and a fundamental aspect of creating a just society, in which all people can actualize their God-given potential.

It is often said that rights entail responsibility, meaning the responsibility not to use rights to justify destructive behavior. Rights also entail another kind of responsibility: the duty not to neglect them. Rights given to us by God ought to be exercised, since everything that God does is for "a just purpose," as pointed out by a number of Qur'anic verses.

In short, as beings in a covenantal relationship with God, we must strive to secure and guard the rights that God has given us and which, therefore, cannot be revoked by any temporal authority. To me, being a Muslim means renewing the cry of the modernists, "Back to the Qur'an and forward with ijtihâd." In the same vein, it means acting on these words of Iqbal: "The teaching of the Qur'an that life is a process of progressive creation necessitates that each generation, guided but unhampered by the work of its predecessors, should be permitted to solve its own problems."  These are useful guidelines today for the liberation of all Muslims, especially women, from traditional authoritarianism.

The Hadith: Confusion and Distortion:
Muslims often confuse Hadith (what the Prophet did or said) with the Quran. But Hadith was not written down until well over a century after Mohammad's death. And, in spite of the precautions taken by Al-Bukhari or al-'Asqalani, many Hadith become part of Muslim folklore, and have been invested with meaning and consequence totally absent from the context in which they may or may not have occurred. Human memory is imperfect at best. And yet nobody dares question the plausibility of some of the Companions remembering verbatim the exact words spoken by Mohammad years after the event. Or that those same words, especially when concerning such a hot topic as sexual equality, can be passed down over a further four or five generations, without a single deviation of stress, punctuation or grammar, somehow exempt from all bias, conscious or unconscious, in the selection, omission and interpretation of such texts! This is surely to endow human beings with supra-human qualities?

In The Veil and the Male Elite, the Moroccan sociologist Fatima Mernissi  was nonplused and angered when a schoolteacher in Rabat puts her down, quoting a Hadith to the effect that Mohammad said Those who entrust their affairs to a woman will never know prosperity. Like so many Muslims, Mernissi realized she did not know the texts well enough to be able to refute the schoolteacher then and there. She decided to return to the original texts to find out why and in what context Mohammad could have said such a thing. And in the process discovered how Muslim historians had selectively written women out of early Islamic history. Mernissi found the Hadith in Al-Bukhari's collection Al-Salih (The Authentic), collected three hundred years after Mohammad's death. She next consulted al-Asqalani's Fath al-bari, a complete analysis of each Hadith, how it was passed down, who corroborated the saying and their reliability.  This particular Hadith was in fact attributed to Abu Bakra, an ex-slave and Companion, who claims to have heard Mohammad utter these words when Mohammad was informed that the rival Sassanids had chosen a woman to lead them in battle against the Muslims. Abu-Bakra conveniently remembered this quotation twenty five years after the event, just after the Battle of the Camel, in which A'isha commanded an army in battle against the fourth caliph Ali, her own brother-in-law, whom she felt was betraying the Muslim cause. Abu Bakra was a trimmer.  After A'isha's defeat he could have been executed, dismissed, banished by the victor, because he had not come out against A'isha and for Ali. Abu Bakra told Ali that he had reminded A'isha of this Hadith of her late husband, to warn her to surrender before the decisive battle. Abu Bakra's opportunistic memory should have been further discounted because he had once been flogged for bearing false witness in an adultery case. This should have been sufficient reason twice-over for Al-Bukhari to have rejected Abu Bakra as a reliable source. So how and why did this Hadith, and other examples cited by Mernissi, become accepted as authentic, and therefore binding on women? Mernissi and others argue that Islam came of age and was written down for future generations at a most unfortunate time, when matrilineal society was being replaced throughout the entire Middle East and Eastern Mediterranean worlds by patriarchal values and institutions. These scholars argue that the compilers of texts, whether consciously or unconsciously, selected texts that made sense for the times they lived in, that reflected prevailing cultural values. And in this way, much of the egalitarian ethos inherent in the Quran was downplayed or subordinated to partial and partisan Hadith.
If history belongs to the victors, then much of Islamic history belongs to men, to the obvious detriment of women. And the rapid geographic spread of Islam on the back of military conquest also turns out to be double-edged. Islam conquers, but it also absorbs, and is thereby transformed. The message of the Quran, often elliptical and allegorical, is heard and interpreted one way in Arabia, but in a much more restrictive way in Mesopotamia or Persia, more conservative societies. Islamic armies rely on local administrators to implement their rule and ideas. The genius of Islam - why it spreads so rapidly - is precisely because of its plasticity, its ability to adapt and take on the color and temperament of local cultures. Such a supple, accommodating faith literally sweeps North Africa and south Asia like proverbial wildfire.

But accommodation is a two-way process. Many of these new Islamic societies are a lot less egalitarian in their attitudes towards women. It is no accident that many of the restrictive institutions and attitudes in the West now popularly associate with Islam - concubines and harems, purdah and Mut'ah (temporary marriage, permitted in Shi'a and Persian culture) - come from cultures outside Arabia. Arab attitudes, in turn, became more restrictive as Arab Muslims began to adopt customs from recently conquered and converted Muslims.

Doubts and disagreements, which existed under Abu Bakr and Uthman, two of the first Four Caliphs, are glossed over and eventually forgotten.
Similarly, important differences within the four schools of Sunni jurisprudence or Shariah - regarding the right of a woman to initiate divorce, remarry or force a husband to sign a marriage contract forbidding polygamy - are progressively downplayed to the point where few if any Muslims are probably still aware that they existed. Egalitarianism, dissent, a general acceptance that the Quran only sets down principles - should not be taken literally. Indeed, they can and should be interpreted by each successive generation to fit circumstance and culture. But they often seem to have been progressively forgotten in favor of a traditional, andocentric Islam, based as much on self-interest as on myth, and on a partial and biased reading of what, nevertheless, remains potentially a radical document and tradition, precisely because of its egalitarian ethos. The same process of restrictive interpretation, of intellectual sclerosis, is sadly evident in much of the current debate about modernity, based once again on both a partial and partisan understanding of Islam's intellectual history, and a denial of much of its own past.

References:
1 M. Mazharuddin Siddiqi; ‘Women in Islam’
2 Leila Ahmed; ‘Women and Gender in Islam’
3 Al Quran Sûrah 33: 35
4 From Dr Riffat Hassan's open letter to General Perwaiz Musharraf written in 2001.
5 Amina Wadud-Muhsin; ‘Quran and Woman’ Kuala Lumpur 1992
6 Leila Ahmed; ‘Women and Gender in Islam’ Yale University Press 1992
7 Margaret Smith; ‘Rabi`a the Mystic and her Fellow-saints in Islam’ (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1928) 36
8  Ibid., 9, 16.
9 Badawi, J.1997. ‘Gender Equity in Islam’. WAMY Studies on Islam.
10 Abdal Hakim Murad;  ‘Islam, Iriguaray, and the Retrieval of Gender’ (April 1999)
11 ibid
12 ibid
13 ibid
14 ‘Perspective on Islam: Cultural Complications’ by Dr Durre S. Ahmed, A paper presented at Symposium on “Women and Religion, Debates on Search” held on March 1996at Chinag Mai, Thailand by Henrich Boll Foundation.
15 Badawi, J.1997. ‘Gender Equity in Islam’. WAMY Studies on Islam.
16 Muhammad Qutb; ‘Islam the Misunderstood Religion’, p. 124, IIFSO edition
                    
About the author: 
Farhat Naz Rahman BA; LLB resides in Karachi, Pakistan.  Farhat is a research scholar in Islamic Learning, M.A. in Islamic Studies and a candidate for PhD in the same subject. Her Topic of Research is "Women and the social laws of the Qur'an". She is also an activist and a freelance journalist and has presented papers on women's issues at several international forums.
rahmanfarhat@hotmail.com
 

Exegetical Violence: Nushuz in Quranic Gender Ideology

Author: Sa'diyya Shaikh  " The manipulation of sacred text has always been a structural characteristic of the practice of power in Muslim societies"  Fatima Mernissi. 1. Introduction Qur'anic scholarship over the past fourteen centuries has developed into a prolific and highly specialised field. Historically this discipline has primarily remained the domain of men and has chiefly represented their experiences and worldviews. This male bias has resulted in the systematic exclusion of women's perspectives from the dominant religious discourses. In this paper I will show how the practice of patriarchal power in medieval Muslim societies has been mediated through understandings of the Qur'an. I will examine and analyze medieval Qur'anic exegesis in order to focus on how the practice of religious power defined and reflected existing gender ideology and gender relations. I will argue that the ideological tenets embedded in a patriarchal understanding of the Qur'an and Islam foster a mode of gender relations which practically dis-empower Muslim women. My particular interest in this study is directed at the relationship between Islamic gender ideology and its implications for violence against women.  I begin with a preliminary outline of the significance of the Qur'an in Muslim societies and the related centrality of exegesis. Here I provide a rationale for my focus on the interpretations of particular exegetes. Secondly, I describe my methodology which is the application of feminist hermeneutics to the exegetical studies. Thirdly, I proceed with my own analysis of the exegesis. Here I focus on the interpretations of the verse Q.4:34 as the index of socio-religious gender constructions. 2. The Qur'an and its Interpretation "As God's own words Qur'anic statements are normative for the thought and behaviour of Muslims" Jane McAuliffe. The centrality of the Qur'an in a Muslim worldview has been well recorded. It is generally perceived by Muslims as the ultimate reference point, the distinguishing criterion (al-Furqan) for good and evil and as the transcendent authority which sets parameters and standards for human existence. Consequently it occupies centre-stage in the Muslim religious imaginaire. It thus influences social structure, ideas of normative human relations and boundaries for appropriate behaviour. Hence the Qur'an is not only a religious text but also a profoundly political text which shapes the understandings of Muslim societies. Due to this powerful position of the Qur'an in Muslim consciousness it is appropriate to examine its implications for gender relations. The Qur'an mediates itself into social and collective consciousness through human understanding. Therefore in analysing the application of the Qur'an to society and gender relations it is necessary to examine the authoritative mediations of the Qur'an. Qur'anic understandings do not enter socio-cultural vacuums but are presented into already symbolically and culturally meaningful contexts. Hence Qur'anic readers and interpreters bring to the texts their own "prior-texts", their own worldviews and their own traditions of meaning informed by particular socio-historical positioning. Thus the creation of meaning of and from the Qur'an fundamentally involves the human interpretive attribution. Qur'anic scholar Richard Martin asserts that: ‘getting at the meanings must focus on the interpretations of meaning, which means the interpreter and his\her historical\cultural horizon of understanding’. Historically the most powerful and authoritative interpretive body of Qur'anic scholarship is known as tafsîr (exegesis). Adams asserts that tafsîr is a critical index of Muslim self-understanding. According to Adams: there is probably no richer or more important key to the basic always evolving significance of the Qur'an in the Muslim religious consciousness than the tradition of Tafsîr writing. Given the above, it may be inferred that the exegetical texts reflect the dynamic interaction between sacred text, consciousness and social reality. I believe that it is at the nexus of these three critical junctures that the religious constructions of gender are most powerful and influential. I have chosen to focus on the exegetical writings of selected medieval Islamic scholars to analyse the historical scriptural world of gender within Islamic discourse. My aim is to elicit how gender is conceived, imagined, and created by these interpreters of the Qur'an. I will analyse the interpretations of three classical exegetes, namely, Abu Ja far Muhummad b. Jarir al-Tabari (839-922) and Abu al-Qasim Mahmud b. Umar al-Zamakshari (1075-1144) Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (1149-1210). Spanning the period from the ninth century to the thirteenth century, they represent classical medieval scholarship. Al-Tabari was a traditionist, al-Zamakshari a Mu'tazilite and al-Razi an Asharite. My rationale for selecting these scholars is based on the fact that they are viewed as leading exegetical authorities among Islamic orthodoxy. Their work represents the dominant evolving historical legacy of traditional Islamic interpretation. It also provides a window into the socio-cultural gender norms which informed their interpretations of the Qur'an. They represent historically significant schools of traditional Islamic thought spanning three centuries and their interpretations are taught and transmitted as authoritative understandings of the Qur'an in most traditional Islamic institutions. In South Africa, as elsewhere, most of the traditionally trained Muslim leaders have been schooled in these classical texts which then inform their own perspectives. These perspectives are transmitted into society by virtue of their roles as religious leaders, marriage counsellors and Islamic legal advisors. Hence their understandings impact upon notions of normative gender relations and consequently on the way in which religious discourses of violence against wives are conceptualised. 3. Methodology My approach to the study of tafsîr is informed by my own positioning as a Muslim feminist. In terms of intellectual foundations I am strongly influenced by the progressive perspectives of modernist scholar Fazlur Rahman (d.1988). I proceed from the premise that there are significant and relevant overlaps between Islam and certain feminist discourses. I am suggesting that there is a profound confluence between the pervasive Qur'anic ethos of social justice and feminism's appeal for human equality. I will summarize a working definition of feminism as follows: an ideology for social transformation which aims to resist the oppression of women and advances the ideals of justice, equality and anti-sexism. Furthermore there are a number of extremely valuable research tools developed in both secular and Christian feminist scholarship which may be utilized, albeit critically, in the examination of gender in Islam and Muslim societies. It is with these interdisciplinary assumptions that I embark on an examination of medieval Qur'anic tafsîr. Historically most tafsîr (exegeses) were written almost exclusively by men. In examining a historical narrative of gender from the tafsîr of these scholars, I will employ a particular mode of analysis, namely, feminist hermeneutics. Feminist hermeneutics is a "theory, method or perspective for understanding and interpretation" which is sensitive to and critical of sexism. I approach the tafsîr texts with a "hermeneutic of suspicion" which is alert to both explicit and implicit patriarchal bias. A hermeneutic of suspicion does "not trust or accept interpretive traditions as 'truth'" but rather adopts a stance of suspicion. The aim is to critically evaluate and expose patriarchal structures, values and male-centred concerns. This approach focuses on the text as an ideological androcentric product. Thus I approach the selected exegetical works as representative of a patriarchal historical cultural milieu. I will also use a particular mode of feminist hermeneutics derived from a model presented by biblical scholar Gerald West which involves "reading behind the text". This mode focuses on sociological and historical reconstructions of the society behind the text. Accordingly, I will excavate from tafsir texts, which are predominantly male records and understandings of reality, underlying images of the ordinary women. The aim is to redress the silences on women's lives, to lift out the marginalised voices, to reconstruct the absent female and to be vigilant of the patriarchal assumptions. According to Sakenfield: Our contemporary responsibility is to listen to past and present voices who have been heard least, including women, because hearing voices that have been ignored or silenced enables the community to question its own assumptions and thus to have a greater likelihood of encountering the God who seeks to encounter us. This article then examines the evolving, gendered worldviews of the authoritative Islamic legacy through an analysis of the historical interpretations of the Qur'an. Specifically the aim is to apply a critical feminist hermeneutic to the tafsir texts. In so doing I will subject some of the formative gender discourses in traditional Islamic exegesis to ideological examination and critique. The particular issue which constitutes the focal point of such an analysis is the relationship between gendered Islamic consciousness and discourses of violence against women by their husbands. 4. Qur'anic Exegesis, Gender Ideology and Violence In my analysis of the exegetical literature, Sûrah Nisa verse 34 (Q.4:34 - from now on also referred to as the nushuz verse) is used as a central hermeneutical key around which the debate on gender constructions and violence against women will unfold. The translation of this verse reads as follows: 'Men are (qawwamun) the Protectors and maintainers of women, because God has given the one more strength than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous (salihat) women are devoutly obedient (qanitat), and guard in their husbands absence what God would have them guard'. As to those women on whose part you fear (nushuz) disloyalty and ill conduct. Admonish them (first), refuse to share their beds (next) and (last) beat them But if they return again to obedience seek not means against them for God is the most high, Great above you The rationale for focusing on this verse is due to the fact that it has been understood to condone violence against wives. Interpreted to be espousing hierarchical gender relations, these verses are seen to create the space for the "legitimate" physical punishment of women by their husbands. 4.1. The Occasion of Revelation The occasion of revelation (sabab ul-nuzul) of this verse is presented by the exegetes as follows. A woman whose husband had slapped her left the marital home and complained to the Prophet. He condoned her departure from the home of her husband, advising her to maintain the separation until revelation provided guidance. It was at this point that the revelation of the Q.4:34 was reported to have occurred. Zamakashari adds that the Prophet, prior to revelation, permitted the wife and her father to demand compensation (qisas) from the husband. Thus revelation of these verses abrogated the Prophet's recommendation and he is reported to have responded by saying "we (meaning himself) wanted something and God wanted something else and what God wants is best". This context of revelation of the verse sets the scenario for the rest of its interpretation by these scholars. I have divided my analysis of their exegesis into four parts. Firstly, I present reflections on interpretations of qiwama, which provides the framework for the definition of gender. Secondly, I analyse the definitions of the qanitat which is the term used to describe righteous women. Thirdly, I examine constructions of the nashiza, the "disobedient" woman. Finally, I assess their notions of female repentance. This analysis follows the chronological arrangement of the verse in the exegetical style of the classical scholars. Simultaneously it makes holistic thematic connections between the interrelated exegetical narratives of gender. 4.2. Qiwama: The Framework of Gender Relations 'Men are the Protectors and maintainers (qawwamun) of women, because God has given the one more strength than the other...' In defining the relationship of qiwama the medieval commentators presented their framework for understanding gender relations. Al-Tabari stated that the relationship of qiwama is premised on the material preference that men had been granted. He suggested that this preference implied the financial responsibility of men to provide their wives with marriage dowers (mahr), and with financial maintenance (nafaqa). Thus al-Tabari conceptualised the relationship of qiwama as contingent on a socio-economic phenomenon rather than some inherent quality of man or woman per se. Two centuries later also during Abbassid rule, al-Zamakshari interprets qiwama as the unambiguous and categorical rulership (musaytirun) of men over women. He suggests that the male-female relationship parallels the relationship between sovereign political leader and a male citizen. In the same way that a political leader instructs his subjects to perform or abstain from particular acts, so do also men command and forbid their women. This comparison reflects prevalent socio-political images of autocratic political authorities over ordinary, male citizens. In this way state political power relations have a mimetic effect on domestic politics and this illustrates the fluidity between "private" and "public" discourses. Al-Zamakshari asserts that the relationship of qiwama is based on natural preferences which God has granted to men over women. Writing a generation after al-Zamakshari, al-Razi, the Asharite, concurs with this view. These exegetes' understandings of humanity is based on the premise of intrinsic natural differences between men and women. Both these exegetes, al-Zamakshari and al-Razi, regard men as naturally gifted with a number of superior attributes which range from intellect and determination to literacy and the ability to ride. Due to this notion of a qualitatively superior male constitution, they argue that men are natural leaders in the spheres of religion, politics, the judiciary, and marriage. Thus in presenting a set of criteria for difference between men and women, al-Zamakshari and al-Razi conflate "biological" and socially constructed potentials. This religious discourse of intrinsic gender difference pervades the rest of their interpretations and points to underlying anthropological assumptions. Such religious or theological anthropologies underpinning the exegesis will now be excavated, examined and interrogated. 4.2.1. Qiwama: Theological Anthropology and Difference The notion of a theological anthropology raises the question of what it means to be human within a religious framework. This involves an analysis of how religious discourses of values, beliefs and practices define human beings. It is therefore an implicit component of any religious discourse. The questions that arise from an inquiry into theological anthropology are as follows: What does it mean to be human? What is the vision of humanity? What goal for human life is proposed in religious scripture? These questions are integrally related to religious understandings of gender and gender relations. Al-Zamakshari and al-Razi's definition of male qiwama (rulership; musaytirun) as pointed out earlier, is premised on hierarchical and dualistic anthropological categories. Their framework positions men and women as polar opposites whose interactions reflect power relations of dominance and subjugation. Men and notions of masculinity are associated with rationality, intellect, and spirituality. In contrast, women and "femininity" are constructed as emotional, irrational, carnal and sexual. Thus patriarchal anthropologies posit a transcendence/immanence polarity, a body/mind dualism where the male pole is considered more powerful and more valuable than the female. This dichotomy translates into a hierarchical understanding of humanity which prioritises mind over body, reason over passion, spirituality over carnality, and male over female. Patriarchal anthropology is apparent in the interpretations of those exegetes who interpret qiwama as the God-given relationship of power and authority that men are granted over women. They consider male qiwama to be based on an inherent intellectual and spiritual superiority. Accordingly, they argue that all social roles that require intellectual or spiritual strength, such as political and religious leadership, be viewed as exclusively male. Zamakshari and al-Razi's interpretation of qiwama as the "natural" preference that men are granted may be seen to reflect the normative gender ideology and gender roles prevalent in these exegetes' socio-political and cultural realities. As described earlier a hermeneutic of suspicion involves reading behind the text since silences and omissions betray an ideological bias. These silences and omissions together with the statements of the exegetical text may be interpreted to reflect the socio-cultural realities behind the text. In terms of the exegetes' understandings of natural male intellectual superiority, I infer that the development and manifestation of women's intelligence (as defined by male discourses of knowledge) were absent or marginalised. Their exegeses therefore imply that the most visible arenas of knowledge discourse were unavailable and inaccessible to women. This also becomes apparent in the language of the exegetes who regularly address the male reader as "you" while women are referred to as "they", the third party or the 'other'. An example of this in al-Razi's writing: "If YOU [emphasis mine] fear something in your heart from your women...if there is something in THEIR [emphasis mine] behaviour...". This language also implies that the prevailing readership and scholarship was primarily male. What is evident from the exegesis is that the multi-dimensional differences between men and women in a specific historical context are indiscriminately clustered together as natural and eternal givens. Acquired skills or culturally determined roles are constructed as "facts", "truth" and inherent properties of maleness and femaleness. The anthropological paradigm of difference and dualism used by the exegetes in their interpretation of qiwama frames their understanding of women. This is explored further in their interpretation of the rest of the verse which discusses the qanitat, referring to the righteous or normative woman and then the nashiza, the "disobedient" or non-conforming woman. 4.3. The Normative Woman Q.4:34 describes the "righteous" women as: Therefore the righteous (salihat) women are devoutly obedient (qanitat), and guard in their husbands absence what God would have them guard. The verse links salihat, (meaning those women who do "good", are "pious" and "righteous") to qanitat. The word qanitat, meaning "devout" or "obedient" women, has provoked considerable controversy amongst the exegetes. Among the classical exegetes the disputed point related to whom the "object" or recipient of this female obedience was. Was it God?, her husband, or both? Al-Tabari's tafsir presents qanitat as a contested definition without committing himself to identifying the object of obedience. However, both al-Zamakshari and al-Razi combine and equally prioritise the importance of female obedience to both man and God. In fact, al-Razi states that obedience to God and obedience to one's husband are both DEMANDED of the righteous woman. He adds that "the woman is not pious who is not also obedient to her husband". Thus women's obedience to their husbands assume sacred proportions. al-Razi's association of a God-conscious woman as one who is also obedient to her husband introduces a discourse of religious and spiritual hierarchy. The relationship between husband and wife becomes instrumental in the relationship between female believer and God. By suggesting that a religious woman is necessarily an obedient wife, marital hierarchy is prescribed at a religious level. Thus sacralised male authority and marital hierarchy become foregrounded in the relationship between female-believer and God. In this spiritual hierarchy God occupies the pinnacle, men the centre, as mediators, and women (as well as children and male slaves), the bottom echelon. The final condition or description of righteous women in this verse is that they should "guard in their husbands absence what God would have them guard". All three exegetes interpret this to mean that a wife must guard her husband's wealth and her sexuality in his absence. The rationale that al-Razi provides for this female chastity is two-fold. Firstly female chastity is considered necessary so that the MAN'S honour is not violated and secondly so that she does not give birth to children from seed other than his. The control and ownership of women's sexuality is central to most male interpretations of the verse. Such readings implicitly evoke the sense that the sexual fidelity of wives form an integral part of their religious duty to God. The sacralising of female sexual fidelity can be construed as the elevation of patriarchal sexual politics to the divine realm. My critique of this part of the exegesis is based on the fact that the ban against female adultery is not premised on a moral imperative of the female believers' relationship with God. Rather, the motivation for her abstinence from adultery is based on the issue of MALE honour and maintaining a pure lineage. Hence, even in the depiction of female piety or spirituality, her sexuality and relationship to men is instrumental. This implies that in terms of women, the God-believer relationship becomes secondary and only accessible via a "correct" man-woman relationship. This inadvertently projects men as divine intermediaries if not demi-gods, as the objects and instruments of female accountability. A feminist critique which is pertinent in this regard is "it is idolatrous to make males more 'like God' than females". Finally, the textual neighboring of women's sexuality and men's wealth as 'objects' for protection continues the narrative of male possession. These are both depicted as the objects to which a husband has sole rights of possession and which are instrumental to his comfort and tranquility. Accordingly, women are constructed as the property of men, to be owned and possessed. Such discourses are premised on power relationships of control, male domination and female subjugation. They function to objectify and dehumanise women, leaving them significantly disempowered. Moreover, the discourse of male ownership allows for unfettered male power which in turn creates the space for the occurrence of legitimate and privatised violence against women. It is precisely this violent potential which is the focal point of the exegesis in relation to the rest of the verse: the issue of solutions or recourses against the "disobedient" woman (nashiza). 4.4. Nushuz as Female "Disobedience" Having defined the normative woman, the exegetes proceed to deal with the case of deviation from this norm i.e. the instance of aberrance (nushuz). Q.4:34: As to those women on whose part you fear (nushuz) disloyalty or ill-conduct Admonish them (first), refuse to share their beds (next) and (last) beat them But if they return again to obedience seek not means against them for God is the most high , Great above you. Literally "nushuz" means to protrude or project out from the ground or a hillock. However, it is metaphorically defined by al-Tabari as "isti la" which refers to the case where a woman is arrogant, refuses to have sexual relations with her husband or refuses to submit to his authority. The classical exegetes begin their discussion of nushuz by referring to the cases of suspected nushuz. In this case it may be purely subjective male suspicion of female infidelity which may lead a husband to label his wife as disobedient, a nashiza. This suspicion creates the space for irrational and often unjustified male jealousy, which is often among the primary reasons for men beating their wives. All three exegetes are unanimous that a woman who refuses to have sex with her husband is nashiza. The exegetes then proceed to interpret the Qur'anic response to female nushuz. 4.4.1. Male Response to Nushuz 4.4.1.1. "Verbally admonish them": Fa izuhunna In their interpretation of the Qur'anic term fa izuhunna, "verbally admonish them" (i.e. the women), all three exegetes suggest that the husband should threaten his recalcitrant wife with God's punishment. They suggest that she is to be reminded to fear God and hence refrain from disobedience. This invocation of the presence and fear of God operates as a means of wielding male disciplinary power. The construction of an omnipresent God watching over male interests operates as the means to instill female discipline. Male power, with its appeal to God's constant surveillance, creates self-policing female subjects. This process is underpinned by the assumption that ... it is more efficient and profitable to place people under surveillance than to subject them to some exemplary penalty. 4.4.1.2 "Separate them from your nuptial beds": Wahjuruhunna The next disciplinary measure for persistent female disobedience is that men leave the marital bed. Despite the obvious meaning of literally separating beds, the exegetes' interpretations range from confining the wife in the home, to "abandon" her during sex, that is, refusing to talk to her while having sex with her, to tying her up and forcing her to have sex . This illustrates how a simple recommendation to separate beds, when interpreted by patriarchal lenses, can be construed to mean have sex with a wife even against her will. This is tantamount to marital rape. Such an interpretation explicitly condones marital rape and epitomises oppressive and abusive gender relations. Male sexuality is depicted as unapologetically omnipotent. There is no male accountability or recognition of the woman as human. It is clear that such a framework which views women as utilitarian "objects" is inherently violent, and explicitly proposes extreme sexual violation and dehumanisation of women. 4.4.1.2.1 Nushuz and female sexuality As pointed out previously the exegetes interpret the nashiza as the sexually "rebellious" woman. She is either one who refuses to have sex with her husband or one who is suspected of sexual infidelity. In both cases her sexuality is beyond the control of her husband. This preoccupation with controlling a wanton female sexuality is a pervading undercurrent of the medieval Islamic worldview. Fatna Sabbah describes this construction as the "omnisexual women". Accordingly, womanhood is defined as a powerful sexual principle which is threatening, uncontrollable, and potentially anarchic to male order and stability. Moreover, her supposedly consuming sexuality is accompanied by an active intelligence or guile (kayd) which is solely directed at the maintenance and satisfaction of her libido.  Sabbah and Malti-Douglas illustrate how classical and contemporary Islamic discourse feared that women's sexual allurement would beguile and distract men from religious devotion. It is in reaction to this threat of the "omnisexual" woman that many discourses of male control are created, including the traditional Muslim ideal of a submissive, docile and obedient women. The preoccupation with the control of an overwhelming female sexuality once again demonstrates the existence of a dualistic anthropology. Women's existence is determined by biology. She incarnates the "lower" body or sexual principle which needs to be restrained and controlled by the "higher" spiritual and intellectual male principle. Hence the ideal female role is an obedient wife whose sexuality and womb are securely controlled by her husband. I suggest that the inability of classical exegetes to synthesise a unity between sexual, spiritual, emotional and intellectual facets of self has resulted in what Ruether terms "a case of projection". Accordingly the male exegetes "as monopolisers of theological self-definition, project onto women their rejection of their own 'lower' selves." This underlying ideology of hierarchical dualism is innately conflictual and when women do not acquiesce to meet their defined roles, the possibility of violence ensues. This is reflected in the interpretation of the final and controversial male Qur'anic recourse to female disobedience (nushuz), that of the darb, "to strike", or to "beat".   4.4.1.3. Wadribuhunna: The Beating The final recourse in the Qur'anic verse reads: "... wadribuhunna (and strike them)" Al-Tabari interprets this last resort as "to strike her without hurting her (gayr mubara)". Al-Razi appears the least prone to offer an endorsement of violence. He interprets this part of the verse by saying that while hitting is permissible, to desist from it is better. Here he quotes the hadith where the Prophet says that men who beat their wives are not "among the better men". Al-Razi suggests that this is a clear indication that it is preferable not to hit women. He suggests that the rationale for the three-step conflict resolution (first to admonish, then to separate beds and finally to strike) was not a license but rather a restriction on prevalent male violence. Al-Razi's interpretation should be understood in the context of a misogynist and machismo culture where men regularly beat their wives. It was considered an exhibition of strength and "manliness" or masculine virility (murruwa). In such a context a statement that men who hit their wives were not amongst the "better ones" undermined and countered the prevalent misogynistic values and norms. Even when al-Razi concedes that men may ultimately resort to the darb, he attempts to practically abrogate the violence by stating that only a folded handkerchief or miswak (a small twig used as a toothbrush) could be used for such purposes. This recommendation implies that the "darb" was a token or symbol of male authority, which al-Razi appears quite willing to maintain. However it was the substantively violent component of the ‘darb’ which he tried to reduce through interpretation. Al-Zamakshari, unlike al-Razi, is unapologetic about condoning violence in his interpretation of the ‘darb’. He quotes a hadith where the Prophet is reported to have told the husband to "Hang your whip in such a place that the family can see it". However he concedes that this hadith is weak (daif) since it has a weak chain of narration. The assertion and perpetual visibility of male power and control is evidently not only directed at the wife but at the broader family. This type of interpretation and narrative provides religious legitimacy for a worldview which sanctions violence against women. For example, even al-Razi who makes constant practical recommendations to men to be restrained and prudent still acknowledges the ideology of acceptable male violence against women. Within this mentality the female body becomes a political anatomy...where it enters a machinery of power that explores it, breaks it down and rearranges it...this mechanics of power defines how one may have a hold of another's body not only so that one may do as one wishes, but also that one may operate as one wishes, with the techniques and efficiency that one determines. This discipline produces subjected and...docile bodies. Thus I propose that the narrative and worldview of the exegetes aims at producing docile and subjugated female beings. The "disobedient" woman (nashiza) is seen as aberrant and the religious psychology inherent in the exegesis condones corporal punishment against her. Normativity demands that the female be docile and obedient and the non-conformist who contravenes this order of things needs to be disciplined even if such discipline includes violence. 4.5. The Repentant Woman The last part of the verse deals with the repentant nashiza: '...But if they return again to obedience seek not means against them for God is the most high, Great above you'. In urging men to forgive the repentant woman al-Zamakshari reminds men that while they may have power over their subordinates, Allah has power over men. He quotes a hadith where the Prophet saw a man about to hit a slave with a whip and said: "Oh, Abu Masud, Allah is more powerful over you than you are over the slave" and consequently Abu Masud threw the whip away and freed the slave. Equating the status of a woman to that of a slave appears to be a pervading notion in the medieval universe. The medieval Islamic scholar Abu Hamid al-Ghazzali (d.1111) stated thatmarriage is "a type of slavery" (naw min al-riqq) and that the wife is the slave of her husband (raqiqa lahu) and she is obligated to obey all his orders except for anything that entails sin. In this stratified and hierarchical worldview men are more human than both free women and slaves. In this context violence against subordinates, whether they are women or male slaves, appears to be acceptable. In fact the medieval Islamic world, as reflected in its general legislative culture, saw the punishment of the body as a normative disciplinary measure for all citizens. However free men were subject to such punishment only within the public sphere, whereas women and male slaves were also subject to such discipline in the home. Al-Razi's commentary on this final part of the verse reasserts a spiritual hierarchy by illustrating the inextricable association between man and God: Men are not to seek a path against women purely to demonstrate their physical superiority and power, because God is the most powerful. Despite God's exaltation he has not burdened you beyond your capacity of endurance. Therefore do not demand love from your wife when she is unable to do so. God does not continuously punish the repentant sinner once he has returned to obedience. Therefore, if a wife terminates her disobedience and repents, forgive her and do not harbour feelings of vengeance. Finally, despite God's omnipresence, he is content with judging you by your external behaviour and does not hold you accountable for the secrets within your heart. Therefore judge women by their overt behaviour and do not pursue them about their feelings concerning love and enmity. This is the most distinct parallel drawn between God and men. While on the surface it is a plea directed at men to be merciful towards women, again the implicit pattern of gender power relations is one premised on structural hierarchy and paternalism. There is an explicit and primary relationship between men and God and similarly there is an explicit and primary relationship between men and women. Implicitly, the human- God relationship only engages men. In this way al-Razi effectively silences and marginalises the direct relationship between women and God. Salient amongst the God-images of the classical exegetes are the divine qualities of omnipotence, omniscience, benevolence and absolute dominance. This is evidently paralleled in the positioning of man to woman. Given the above, I suggest that the relationship between men and women is dialectically fashioned on the relationship between men and God. This analogy was also evident in the exegetes definitions of the qanitat (righteous) women. However, a less cynical interpretation could understand al-Razi to be placing limitations on the husband. In terms of the context where violence was normative, the reminder to men that "God is above you" was effectively an attempt to instill in men a sense of accountability. In this way it was aimed at reducing the sense of unfettered power that men enjoyed both psychologically and practically and to deflate, albeit ironically, their 'God-complexes' in relation to women. It is within such a context that commentators interpreted this verse as a restriction on male power. It reflects the contextual realities of male power and female powerlessness. The relationship between meaning and context is thus primary and inextricable. 4.6 Conclusion In this paper I have analysed and critiqued a selection of authoritative medieval Qur'anic tafasir (exegeses). I began by examining the importance of the Qur'an in a Muslim worldview and the related significance of interpretation. I then provided a brief outline of the relevance of feminism and feminist hermeneutical methodology. This was followed by an analysis of the medieval exegeses of Q.4:34. It included an examination of firstly, the religious framework of normative gender relations (qiwama), secondly, the constructions of righteous women (qanitat), thirdly, the "disobedient" women (nashiza) and finally, the repentant women. The interpretive discourses of gender employed by classical exegetes provides a window into the gender relations of their socio-historical contexts. Their hermeneutical lenses are evidently created by a patriarchal worldview and thus their interpretations are the ideological products of a male-centred society. These texts constitute the religio-cultural legacy of Islam which provide the vehicle for the reception of the Qur'an in the minds of Muslims. They are instrumental in the transmission of a consciousness and worldview that implicitly and sometimes explicitly legitimates violence against women. The purpose of this paper was to examine the ideological assumptions embedded in the authoritative interpretations of the Qur'an. These exegetical studies are indicative of the structural complicity of religion in discourses of violence against women. However, even within such patriarchal discourses there persists a subversive element. It has been demonstrated how al-Razi consistently attempts to abrogate and minimise the violence inherent in darb ("beating"). Both al-Razi and al-Zamakshari state explicitly that the verse Q.4:34 functions to place a limitation on the power and authority of men and to restrict their retributive action against their wives. A verse which in contemporary understanding can be seen to create a space for the violation of women, in a medieval context may be arguing to limit the physical violation of women. There is thus a dynamic interplay between context and hermeneutics.  The hermeneutical lenses of the classical exegetes has and continue to inform authoritative Islamic discourses. However it is necessary to challenge and critically engage their gender ideology and interpretations of the Qur'an in the contemporary Muslim world. It is vital to provide alternative constructions of women and men if we believe in the dynamism of Islam and the continuing relevance of the Quran to people in their full humanity. Source: http://theothervoices.org.za/Religionsa/jotafs.htm In Shaikh, S. (1997). Exegetical Violence: Nushuz in Quranic Gender Ideology. Journal for Islamic Studies, 17, 49-73.