Chastising Women:
A Means to Resolve Marital Problems?
AbdulHamid A. AbuSulayman1
I used to find in the declining
state of the Ummah vis-a-vis the surrounding world, the cultural and
intellectual attacks against it, and the deteriorating status of human rights
of Muslims, all together, as the dilemma which encounters the advocates of
Islam and human rights. A notable matter
is the “chastisement” of women as a prerogative of the husband and a way to
resolve problems of the nuptial association that result from the recalcitrance
and disobedience of women and their disaffection for and alienation from their
spouses. I was always aware of the reasons and implications of that dilemma, in
particular, due to its significance and relevance to the modern world.
Earlier in my career as a graduate
student in the West, an activist and educator with the “Muslim Student
Association” (M.S.A.) in the U. S. and Canada and the “World Association for
Muslim Youth” (W.A.M.Y.), I had to come across various controversies regarding
Islam. However, owing to certain intellectual and methodological reasons, I was
always able to reach the satisfactory reasoning and persuasive answers for such
issues. Since the early days of my secondary education, I have embraced strong
convictions regarding the truthfulness of the message revealed from God (The
Creator) to Muhammad (s). Such convictions espoused a vision based on rational
and methodological thinking; hence, I have had no doubts to bear with but
problems (and sometimes intricacies) to approach and sort out. I realized that
objective thinking is characterized by clarity, patience and persistence in
pursuing problems that need research, vision, and reasoning. Obviously, there is a clear distinction
between doubts and problems. Doubts precipitate obstruction, frustration and
discouragement, whereas problems render motivation, induction and diligence2.
I always encounter any argument about Islam as an intricacy to work out rather
than a suspicion to be haunted with. It is an opportunity to utilize the
Islamic epistemology which comprehensively integrates the verses of revelation
with the facts of the universe and the principles of reasoning. In order to
understand the guidance of the revelation, to grasp its significance and to
attain its objectives and purposes, we need to initially examine the nature of
the problem, to recognize its backgrounds and defining factors, to realize its
various temporal and spatial conditions and to consider the overall state of
affairs, circumstances, contexts, norms, and positions. This approach has never disappointed my
pursuit of thoughtful perception and has never rendered anything less than a
conviction that does not betray the high values and rational principles of
Shari'ah and human dignity.3
It has been apparent that the
advocates of human rights in Islam are inspired to reach a perception and/or
resolution that would revoke injustice, remove oppression against women and
defuse any chance of treating women unjustly in the name of Islam, considering
their inherently inequitable status in several cultures and places around the
world. Also, their relative physical weakness, their emotional and physical
attachment to their children, the state of poverty, illiteracy and the lack of
development which collectively affect women the most, and the common abuse of
human rights due to despotism are all important factors threatening their
rights and status. A lengthy and busy period of my life and career has passed
before I have got the time and the opportunity to tackle the issue of women
“chastisement” which requires a close look and a comprehensive review within
the Islamic context and the perspectives of the global village of Muslims and
the mankind. Lately, as I have come back to my intellectual career and I have
renewed my interest in studying the stumbling Islamic revival enterprise and
why it does not accomplish its objectives despite of the numerous and
consecutive endeavors which spanned the past millennium; precisely, since Imam
Abu-Hamid al-Ghazali (d. 505H/1111AD) issued his outcry for reform in his
monumental work: “The Revival of the Sciences of Religion.” Therefore, I have lately focused my research
interests on the subject of the childhood in the Islamic thought and its
enterprise for civilization because it is the missing dimension of that
enterprise and the root of change towards the reconstruction of the spiritual
and epistemic aspects of the Islamic identity. Such reconstruction is an
essential condition for the Ummah so as
to be at bar with the challenges that it encounters.
This focus on childhood has lead me
to emphasize the role of the family as the hotbed that shapes the identity of
the child and informs his morals and character; thus, the family can be the
medium through which the reconstruction process will take place. This process
relies on the innate motives of the parents who seek out nothing except the
best interests of their child according to their understanding and convictions.
Of course, today we cannot endeavor to propose an independent or secluded
hotbed where educators could prepare and train a new, free and faithful
generation which will replace the previous enslaved and feckless one, as Musa
(s) lead his generation to the wilderness where they spent forty years in the
Diaspora. The experience of the new generation is addressed in the Qur'an
(2:249-251) as follows:
“…But those who believe that they were to be convened before their Lord, said: Verily, a small group could overcome a mighty host, Deo volente! And Allah is with the perseverant. And when they advanced to encounter Goliath and his forces, they invoked: Our Lord! Pour forth on us patience and make us victorious over the disbelievers. So they routed them by Allah's leave and David killed Goliath, and Allah granted to him dominion and conferred wisdom upon him, and edified him with that which he willed. And if Allah does check one set of people by means of another, the earth would indeed be full of mischief. But Allah is full of bounty to all creatures.”
The emphasis of the educational role
of the family will necessarily guide us to research and review the family
structure, in addition to all its relationships and dimensions which shape such
role in the life of the children and their spiritual, psychological, moral and epistemic
constituents and experiences.
Consequently, I found myself face to face with the issue of women
“chastisement” and its reflections on marital life, paternity, maternity and
man-woman relationships, in general, as well as different human interactions
amongst adults, in particular.
To approach this issue, I have to
maintain a comprehensive style of research by examining various aspects,
circumstances and factors of the issue, besides its overall picture. I also
have to commit my work to such a methodological discipline that situates each
premise or motif in the right position, proportion or context; does not allow
the partial to preponderate the whole or the circumstantial to invalidate an
established principle; and pursues sound reasoning with impartiality and
epistemic integration between the verses and guidance of the glorious
revelation and the paragons of the universe and the epitomes of the human
experience. Accordingly, it is incumbent to start tackling this subject from
the deep- rooted Islamic principles of human dignity, liberty, and
responsibility, man's status as the chosen vicegerent (khalifah) of God, and the legitimate right of self
determination. By all means, any system of human relations that is inconsistent
with such foundations, does not represent the Islamic spirit, objectives or
purposes; and should be scrutinized to diagnose the flaws which contradict with
or infringe on the essential human rights and responsibilities. Moreover, no
arrangement should be allowed to breach the basis of the family relations in Islam which is, by
and large, founded upon the concepts of
“repose, affection and compassion.”
Any anomalous arrangements which militate against these concepts should
be probed to find out its flaws.
As a general methodological point of
view, it has been settled that the message of Islam was ultimately meant to
provide guidance and direction to the best interest and destination of the mankind in all times and places. Thus, in
order to achieve the purposes of that message, temporal and spatial factors and
conditions play an important role and should be recognized and deliberated in
the application of Islamic doctrine in different times and places on the
detailed level. These factors and
conditions always need to be addressed and identified as we study different
arrangements in the traditions of the Prophet (s), as-Sunnah, and the
cumulative and voluminous legacy of Islamic jurisprudence as for the
peculiarity of such arrangements that seek out to guide and organize a certain community
in a specific time and place with a particular set of situations, traditions,
customs, and resources. Without a
genuine perception of such conditions and appreciation of the significance of
these peculiar arrangements, there is a substantial likelihood to reach a
flawed cognition that might be based on wrong abstractions, extensions, or
emulations of certain arrangements that belong to different times and places.
The graduation of obligations and
prohibitions in the Qur'an; the diversity of the apostolic discourse to suit
different situations, times and places; and the plurality of decrees, rulings,
approaches and schools among the Muslim jurists in response to different times
and places, collectively, provide an evidence that socio-juridical dimensions
are deeply rooted in the Islamic tradition and experience. Pertinent to this principle, the founders and
scholars of juridical schools of thought differ in their juridical opinions, fatawa,
and decrees, ahkam, regarding family matters due to differences in
customs, traditions and resources. These variations might exist in the same
period but within two different environments. For instance, the Madina-based Maliki
madhab (school of jurisprudence), which was centered around
Arabia with its tribal traditions and clannish sensitivities, differs from the
Iraq-based Hanafi madhab which was centered around Mesopotamia the
cradle of ancient civilizations that engraved their cultural effects on social
relations and resulted in a more developed individualistic trend and
wherewithal. Such cultural and social differences are reflected on the choices
of each madhab regarding conditions and terms of the nuptial contract
and its prerequisites such as qualifications and guardianship.
Furthermore, variations in juridical
opinions and decrees due to the time and place factors can be traced not only
from one madhab to another, but also within the same madhab. Imam
Muhammad bin Idris al-Shafi'i (d. 204 H), a great jurist and the founder of a
main madhab in Iraq undertake major changes within his jurisprudential
choices when he left Iraq and resettled in Egypt, due to social and cultural
novelties. Yet, the perception and interpretation of some Qur'anic verses may
vary from time to time and from place to place, depending on the extent of
human knowledge which may enable scholars to grasp a new meaning that was
neither known nor thought of before realizing such knowledge. This is, in turn, an additional evidence for
the divinity, inimitability and miraculous character of the glorious revelation
whose guidance transcends time and place,4
“We will show them Our Signs in the universe, and in their own selves, until it becomes manifest that this (Revelation) is the truth. Is it not sufficient in regard to your Lord that he is a Witness over all things?” (Qur'an, 41:53)
Pertinent to the above, the various
scientific discoveries which have been revealing the miracles of the Qur'an,
its phenomenal accuracy of representation, and the subtlety of such
representations which are capable of providing guidance and exemplifying the
facts of the universe, without contravening the realities of creation or the
norms that have been progressively manifested with the expansion of human
cognition throughout various temporal and spatial changes.
Thus, owing to significant changes
which reflect on various aspects of life and society, it is flawed to limit the
scope of review to the historical interpretations and arrangements when we
examine the family legislations or any legislative matters, without heeding
such changes. By all means, that should
not be construed as to discard any
heritage, juridical experience or the historical records of legislations,
arrangements and applications. To the
contrary, this study aims to carefully consider that rich legacy and perceive
it well within its historical and social contexts so as to extract the
quintessence of that experience, to learn the relevant lessons, and to
re-realize the objectives and purposes sought by the holy revelation. In order
to objectively diagnose the state of affairs, emerging situations and potential
opportunities of the present reality of the Ummah, we have to render a critical
review vis-à-vis such reality which is characterized by its lack of viability,
initiative and dignity; its submission to despotism, repression, fecklessness,
ignorance and poverty; and the demise of
the defiant and positive spirit.
As we approach the issue of women
“chastisement” and the injury, pain and disgrace which it entails, we need to
bear in mind that suffering, fear and anxiety result in hate, isolation and
apathy. Meanwhile, love, deference and trust result in charity, dedication and
enthusiasm. For long time, the Ummah has been enduring severe infliction of
suppression and humiliation, and a culture of despotism and patronage. In so
many societies, such tyrannical practice is no longer a monopoly of the state
police or security apparatus. In fact, these abuses have become part and parcel
of the common culture, and they occur amongst different categories of the
society, in particular, between the “strong” and the “weak.” The implications
of this situation are significant since it is contrary to the Islamic spirit of
brotherhood and solidarity which depicts the Muslims, as in the Sunnah
traditions, as a “one structure whose parts prop up each other,” and sets “the
example of believers in their mutual sympathy and compassion as a one body that
collectively cares for any ailing organ until it recovers.” The Sunnah
also provides the foundations of such spirit: “each Muslim is a brother of his
fellow Muslim and should not oppress, disdain or abandon him; it is enough of
evil for a Muslim to demean his brother (in faith); a Muslim is all sanctuary,
his life, property and character;” “God does not bestow merci on some one who
does not have merci for others;” and “God but bestows merci on his merciful
servants;” “a believer can never be a slanderer, an imprecator, an obscene or a
vulgar;” “the most faithful amongst the believers are the ones with the best
morals and the best of you are also the best for their families.” The Sunnah
traditions report that a man who flapped his servant slave was compelled to
free that slave. In another occasion, the Messenger (s) furiously rebuked a
husband who beat his wife: “an individual of you continues to flap his wife as
a slave and is not ashamed to keep cuddling her;” “so many women who come by
Muhammad's family bemoan (the abuse of) their husbands, and those are not the
best of you.” The Prophet himself set the highest example of kindness,
compassion, grace, and benevolence. “He
has never extended his hand to strike a woman, or a servant or anything else
save if he is to struggle in the cause of God.”
In light of the above general
premises, we should examine the issue of “chastisement” and its place in the
familial, marital and paternal relations, so as to identify the real notion of
such “chastisement,” and what is the bona fide Islamic familial organization
which sustains the structure of the Muslim family, in general, and with regard
to the modern era, in particular. Such arrangement needs to realize the
relations of “repose, affection and compassion,” so as to render a strong and
solid family which makes a safe, spiritual, emotional and psychological hotbed
for the Muslim child to grow up strong, honest, competent, and responsive
vis-à-vis the challenges of the present era.
The issue of “chastisement” strongly
arises a propos the structures of the family and human relations and receives
exceptional interests because it is referred to in a Qur'anic text and because
its historical and traditional interpretations were purported by most people to
denote slap, flap, flog, beat, strike, punch, etc. This would definitely
involves a strong sense of pain and humiliation regardless of the extent of the
physical suffering itself which may vary, according to some fatawa,
around few strokes with a siwak (tooth cleansing) stick or the like,
i.e., a “tooth brush” or a “pencil,” as rendered by Abdullah b. ‘Abbas in
responding to an inquiry regarding the construal of the “mild chastisement,”
according to a narrative related by Ata'. Thus, this “chastisement” is more
like a reproach or an expression of discontent and annoyance rather than an
expression of humiliation and pain. On the other hand, we find some fatawa
regulate “chastisement” so that it must not exceed forty strokes, and “no
retribution between man and his wife (in regard to chastisement) except for
wounds and murder.”5
The Qur'anic text that refers to the
“chastisement” issue is (4: 34-35) and
proceeds as follows:
“Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, due to what God has given the one more (strength) than the other, and due to the sustenance they provide from their own means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what God would have them guard. As to those women on whose part you fear disobedience and recalcitrance, (first:) admonish them , (next:) refuse to share their beds, and (last:) “chastise” them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them any means of annoyance: for God is Most High, Great (above you all). If you fear a rift between them twain, appoint two arbiters: one from his family and another from hers; if they wish for peace, God will bring about their reconciliation: for God has full knowledge, and is (utterly) acquainted with all things.”
In order to correctly comprehend
this text, it is necessary to place it in the general framework of the family
structure and relations in Islam, so as to grasp its true implications within
the objectives and purposes of the revelation. The above text must be construed
in light of other related texts, such as:
“O mankind! Reverence your Guardian-Lord, Who created you from a single person, created (of a similar nature) his mate, and from them twain scattered countless men and women; reverence God through Whom you demand (your mutual rights), and reverence the wombs (that bore and delivered you): for God Ever watches over you.” (4:1)
“And among His signs is that He created for you mates from among yourselves, that you may dwell in repose with them, and He has rendered affection and compassion between your (hearts): verily in that are signs for those who ponder.” (30: 21)
“When you divorce women, and they fulfill the term of their ('Iddah), either take them back on equitable terms or set them free on equitable terms; but do not take them back to injure them, (and/or) to take undue advantage; if any one does that, he wrongs his own soul. Do not take God's signs as a mockery, but solemnly celebrate God's bounties on you, and that he sent down to you the Book (of revelation) and Wisdom (of the Messenger) for your instruction, and fear God, and know that God is all knowledgeable and (utterly) acquainted with all things.” (2:231)
“O you who attain to faith! When you marry believing women, and then divorce them before you have touched them (in a due intercourse), they owe you no ‘Iddah that you have to count in respect of them; so give them a present, and set them free in a graceful manner.” (33: 49)
“The divorce is (only
permissible) twice, (after that the parties) should either hold together
on equitable terms or separate with grace.
It is unlawful for you (men) to take back any of your gifts (from your
wives), save when both parties fear that they would be unable to maintain the
limits ordained by God (e.g., to treat each other fairly). If you (judges) do indeed fear that they
would be unable to maintain the limits ordained by God, there is no blame on
either of them if she gives up something in return for her freedom. These are
the limits ordained by God; so do not breach them. If any do breach the limits
ordained by God, such persons wrong (themselves as well as others).” (2:229)
If we read the above verses in the light of the collective
injunctions of Shari'ah and the overall Prophetic ideals and traditions, as-Sunnah,
we find that the real spirit of the matrimonial relations is shaped by the
sentiments of “affection” and “compassion” and the obligations of “patronage”,
so that the governing factors in such relations are “affection, compassion and
benevolence.”
Thus, we realize the motivation behind the inquiry for the
real denotation of “chastisement,” its implied consequences of humiliation and
pain, and the place of this issue in the concept of nuptial relations in Islam,
especially, with regard to the arrangements designated to promote acquaintance
and love amongst spouses and to solve their problems. This inquiry is highly significant,
considering the reality of social relations in the contemporary Muslim society
where women are exposed to practices of moral and physical cruelty which
attempt to find justifications in the misreading of certain antiquated fatawa
that grant the husband, as the head of the family, an expansive mandate in the
family matters. Such perception of family relations ignores the established
foundations of this institution, i.e., compassion, solidarity, cooperation and
integration. The significance of such
texts should not be misperceived, taken out of context, or exploited so as
women and family are not deemed as a mere property of men.
The perspectives and experience the of past periods
restricted the capacity and role of women within their family spheres, burdened
men with extra obligations, and relegated extra powers to them in managing
their family matters, especially in the urban centers, because muscular
capability was the major means in earning sustenance and securing the family,
whereas housekeeping and family needs used to exhaust the women's energy and
time, serving their houses, husbands and children. Such restrictions limit
their sophistication, reduce their interests, weaken their perception, isolate
them from the world beyond their family realms, and engulf them within a style
of undue naïveté. Although, the society
then did not question the man's excessive authority in the family structure,
the situation of today's world substantially differs in terms of means,
capabilities and opportunities. Today,
the educational, technological, cultural, and global perspectives offer women a
better productivity, economic independence opportunity, and an intellectual and
technical capability that transcends the small sphere of family matters of
yesterday. Hitherto, the historical portrait
of the family, with its structural limitations of the past, seems unable to
exemplify the aspirations of the family members or to represent their roles and
potentials today. Therefore, we have to re-examine our perception of the family
structure within the context of today's reality, so as to avoid tensions and
conflicts in the family relations and to re-establish the concepts and values
that enable each member of the family to pursue her/his prospective role and to
complement the roles of other members.
During the pursuit of this research, I was able to foresee an
inherent problem in the construal of the Arabic root verb daraba (to
chastise), in the Qur'anic text, as to imply: “suffering,” “humiliation” and
physical “pain,” as a means of interaction among adults, or to force the wife
to acquiesce to her husband's will, or to coerce her into obedience and
loyalty, regardless of the extent of that pain and suffering. The underlying
assumption of this situation stipulates that the Muslim wife, as in certain
religions and cultures, has no way out of the wedlock no matter what and will
never be able to obtain a graceful release or an equitable divorce without the
consent of her husband. Accordingly, she ought to be subjugated or compelled to
put up with her husband's acrimonious association and to comply with his
diktats. In this particular context,
“chastisement” as “suffering,” “humiliation” and physical “pain” seems to
become an effective means to resolve, or rather, to subdue marital problems!
However, we have definite and solid convictions that the
above representation does not subscribe to the principles of Shari'ah
which establish the family structure on “affection” and “compassion,” support
its solidarity and cohesion, maintain its identity, and enshrine the lineage
and background of its members. Thus, the
family membership in Islam is by choice; it does not tolerate coercion,
repression or abuse; and each spouse has the right to depart the familial
association and terminate the marital relationship, especially, when it becomes
adverse or hostile one. At least,
separation is less detrimental situation for all family members than a
relationship of hate, discord and acrimony.
In these circumstances, Shari'ah grants the husband the right to
seek talaq (divorce) and grants the wife the right to seek khul'
(discharge). In the latter case, the
wife has the choice to extricate herself from the marital relationship by
consensually returning back the dowry that she received from her husband
against the nuptials or part of it (as a limit), so that the husband's greed
for her personal wealth or her family wealth does not provide a motivation for
abuse or result in the break up of the family.6
Hence, compulsion or physical “chastisement” can never be a
means which is intended to maintain the spirit of affection among spouses, or
to gain their fidelity, or to promote intimacy and trust among them. Besides,
studying the arrangements rendered in the relevant Qur'anic verses (4:34-35)
which aim to resolve marital problems and to seek reconciliation, especially,
when the wife shows a tendency for rebellion, disobedience or rejection of the
nuptial association, will reveal two routes of remedy.
First is to resolve any marital dispute between spouses
without the intervention of or mediation from any third party. This route is to
be initiated and pursued by the husbands and should proceed through three
steps: (1) admonish them (the disobedient wives), (2) refuse to share their
beds, and (3) eventually “chastise” them.
Second, when the above route fails to bring about peace and reconciliation, both spouses should seek arbiters from their respective families in order to help them handle their rift, to advise them and to prescribe remedies for various problems, in accordance to verse (4:35):
“If you fear a rift between them twain, appoint two
arbiters: one from his family and another from hers; if they wish for peace,
God will bring about their reconciliation: for God has full knowledge, and is
(utterly) acquainted with all things.”
All in all, the Qur'anic arrangements seek to effect
reconciliation and to make peace between spouses based on the right
psychological facts, through positive initiatives, and in an effective manner.
So, when the wife shows the symptoms of disaffection and defiance, the Qur'an
ordains the husband to counsel, plead to, and perhaps admonish her. This will
give him an ample opportunity to communicate his concerns, to clarify
differences, to articulate issues, to explore possible solutions, to demonstrate
his keen interest in maintaining their matrimony on equitable terms, and
eventually to open her eyes for the acrid potential consequences. Thus, in
order to resolve any marital discord that she might exacerbate by overrating
her sexual appeal or his affection or desire for her, the initial effort
emphasizes dialogue, exchange and advice so as to bring her back to reason and
rationale. Yet, if she does not heed her
husband's counsel out of ignorance or arrogance, it is then deemed necessary
for the husband to proceed farther in this route, i.e., to act more potently,
rather than to merely counsel or admonish.
At this point, he should “refuse to share her bed,” which would confirm
that she cannot count on his weakness, impatience or desire for her. Taking note of his lack of interest in her,
she will realize by her intuitions the gravity of the situation and the
seriousness of the consequences. That would, in turn, offer her a window of
opportunity to abandon her tactics of “rejection” and “antagonism,” to rethink
the whole situation, to realize that she has hit a crossroads and to find a way
out of the discord so as to re-establish the state of “affection” and
“compassion” between both of them. On
the other hand, if the wife stubbornly maintains disobedience and rejection
despite the above attempts of remedy by the husband, there should be no doubt
that this marriage is in critical jeopardy, i.e., the threat to break up is
looming in the horizon of this family, and both parties should realize the that
their matrimonial association cannot indefinitely proceed in that direction.
At this critical point, the inevitable question is: what can
be done to make these spouses appreciate the real threats to their marriage and
assess the pernicious consequences, before the rift surpasses the private realm
of their nuptials, namely, before seeking mediation or arbitration of a third
party, such as the arbiters from their respective families?
Thus, the next step left in this route of remedy, within the
family and before seeking arbiters, is to “chastise,” (Arabic root verb: daraba)
in the above cited verse (4:34). The
construal, or the signification or the connotation of the idiom daraba
(to “chastise”) is what concern this study most, particularly, within the
context of seeking reconciliation between estranged spouses, after the husband
attempted to restore peace and accord, verbally by admonishing the wife and
virtually by refusing to share her bed, expressing his resentment. Is
“chastisement” here construed as: to slap, to flap, to flog, to strike or any
other related manner of corporal castigation (or discipline) which inflicts
suffering, pain and disgrace; seeks to subdue women; and force them to maintain
nuptial associations against their own will?
If this is true, what is the purpose of that subjugation? Does the subdual or subjugation of women with
the means of pain and disgrace help to reinstate the sentiments of affection,
compassion, affinity and fidelity; to promote the motivation for chastity and
sanctity; and to hedge the family structure from falling down or falling
apart? Is the physical pain or
humiliation an appropriate means to strengthen the tendency of women to
enshrine and cherish their families?
Could this “chastisement” subdue Muslim women who are well versed in
their rights and human dignity as manifested in today's world, coerce them to
linger in the repression of an abusive husband or to condone such resentful
association? Or are they entitled, in
Islam, to an exit through graceful discharge (khul‘)? And if it is so,
can there be any place for subdual or subjugation in the nuptial associations,
which is more likely to undermine the family structure and to expedite its
collapse?
As a result, if the idiom daraba (to “chastise”) does
not denote the infliction of physical injury or psychological pain, as this
Qur'anic idiom might be misperceived by some husbands to justify their cruelty
with their wives who are, in turn, obliged to endure such abuses due to their
insecurity or economic insufficiency, how then should this “idiom” be
construed?
This matter should be examined in its entirety and with
genuine insight of its various dimensions and connotations without any rush to
conclusions. The Qur'anic arrangements that refer to the idiom daraba is
focused on how to bring about reconciliation and peace between the spouses with
the means that would invoke affection, compassion and intimacy so as to bring
back the objective of marriage as an intimate “repose” for each spouse. These arrangements does not seek yet the last
resort, the arbitration of referees from the spouse families. Therefore, if the Qur'anic context, purpose
and arrangement does not afford any prospect for violence, injury or pain in
resolving problems of nuptial association, what is then the true construal of
this idiom which refers to some sort of “chastisement”? Does it mean pain in the allegorical or
metaphorical sense, as it is attested in the revelation to use daraba as
a transitive verb (e.g., 16:75, “God sets forth (another) parable …”) or
intransitive verb (e.g., 4:101 “When ye travel through the earth …”),
augmenting the verb with an auxiliary preposition.
If we are to uphold the interpretation of this idiom as few
strokes or pats with a siwak (tooth cleansing stick) or the like, such
as a “tooth brush” or a “pencil,” as rendered by Ibn ‘Abbas, then such
construal does not involve punishment, injury or pain. Rather, it connote a
corporeal expression of gravity, frustration or disinterest in the wife by a
husband who no longer shares her bed.
Such expression is the opposite of touching or cuddling which implies
geniality and intimacy. This construal is reasonable, graceful, and fairly
flawless since it does not entail any damage to the human dignity and due
respect between spouses who are virtually bound by ties of nuptial association.
The above perception does not associate “chastisement” with disgrace, injury or
pain. In contrast, the view of some jurists, as characterized in their fatawa,
does not necessarily follow that line of thinking; especially, when they
stipulate that “chastisement” should “not exceed twenty or forty strokes,”
regardless of the extent and details of these strokes, i.e., “whether they
scatter on different parts of her body or not, injure organs or not, cause a
bone fracture or not, and whether she'll survive them or not!”7
In spite of the mitigated interpretation of Ibn ‘Abbas, it
still offers a gap of misperception which was manipulated, in the past, to
justify abusive conduct and can be exploited time and again, at the present and
in the future, to perpetuate the infliction of injury and pain on women, under
the auspices of the fatawa of strokes. Therefore, both the perception
and resolution should leave no chance of misreading of the real concept of
“chastisement” and should allow no misconduct or abuse of that concept. Such precautions, by all means, fit the bona
fide purposes of Shari'ah in establishing the family on affection, compassion
and dignity.
As a result, I committed myself to rethink the whole matter
in terms of its methodological framework which I have presented earlier in this
study as to the eternity of the revelation and the message, the necessity to
grasp the relevant Divine norms, the peculiarity of time and place, and the
imperative of an objective and disciplined analysis of the matter under
consideration. Hence, I have endeavored
to examine the different connotations of the idiom daraba and its
various derivatives in the Qur'anic text, since it is a sound approach to
construe al-Qur'an with al-Qur'an. The best exegesis of the glorious script
shall be rendered by the revelation itself and fine-tuned by the general
principles and purposes of Shari'ah.
The compilation of the various connotations of the idiom daraba
and its derivatives in the Qur'an divulges, approximately, seventeen distinct
nuances or representations, as afforded by the following verses:
“And God sets forth (another) parable …” (16:76, 112; 66:11)
“When (Jesus) the son of Mary is held up as an example, behold, your people raise a clamor thereat (in ridicule)!” (43:57)
“See what similes they strike for thee: but they have gone astray; and never can they find a way.” (17:48)
“Invent not similitudes for God: for God knows, and you know not” (16:74)
“When ye travel through the earth …” (4:101)
“Then we draw (a veil) over their ears, for a number of years in the Cave, (So that they heard not).” (18:11)
“Shall We then take away the revelation from you and repel (you), for that ye are a people transgressing beyond bounds?” (43:5)
“…they should draw their veils over their bosoms … and that they should not strike their feet so as to draw attention to their hidden ornaments …” (24:31)
“… Travel by night with My servants, and strike a dry (solid) path for them …” (20:77)
“Then We told Moses: Strike the sea with your rod. So it divided, and each separate part became like the huge firm mass of a mountain” (26:64)
“God disdains not to use the similitude of things, lowest as well as highest …” (2:26)
“And remember Moses prayed for water for his people; We said: Strike the rock with your staff. Then gushed forth therefrom twelve springs ...” (2:60)
“… They were covered with humiliation and misery; they drew on themselves the wrath of God …” (2:61)
“Disgrace is pitched over them (like a tent) …” (3:112)
“But how (will it be) when the angels take their souls at death, and smite their faces and their backs?” (47:27)
“… I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: Smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them” (8:12)
“And take in your hand a raceme (bunch)8 of soft leaves and stroke therewith: and break not your oath …” (38:44)
“Therefore, when ye encounter the unbelievers (in hostility), Smite their necks; at length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly on them …” (47:4)
“O ye who attain to faith! When you go abroad in the cause of God, investigate carefully …” (4:94)
“… So a wall shall be erected between them, with a gate therein. Within it will be mercy throughout, and without it, all alongside, will be (wrath and) punishment!” (57:13)
“Then did he turn upon them (idols), striking them with the right hand.” (37:93:)
Should we examine the above citations,
we will note that the root verb (idiom) daraba (transitive and
intransitive) takes several figurative or allegorical connotations which
signify to isolate, to separate, to depart, to distance, to exclude, to move
away, etc. When a thing is subjected to
such case, that means it is to be extracted, distinguished and set forth as an
evident example. The idiom daraba in the land denotes to travel or to
depart. With respect to the ear, the verb daraba means to block or to
prevent hearing. And in regard to the
revelation, daraba means to stop, to halt, to abandon and to take
away. Obviously, for the truth and
false, daraba means to make both of them evident and to distinguish them
from each other; whereas, for veils, daraba connotes to draw them over and to
cover the bosom. In the seas or rivers, daraba is to strike a path
through the water and set the water aside.
But for humiliation and shame, daraba is to signify that both of
them are pitched over people; however, for a wall, daraba means to be
erected, that is, to indicate partition or separation. In regard to the finger tips, necks, faces and
backs, it means to cut, to slash and to strike; whereas, for the rest of
citations, it means to impel, to shock, to slap, or to damage so as to
precipitate the desired impact which is relevant to each respective situation,
action or interaction.
Thus, the general connotations of the
root verb daraba in the Qur'anic parlance signify to separate, to
distance, to depart, to abandon, and so forth.9 What should then be the appropriate construal
of this idiom when it is presented in the context of resolving marital problems
and restoring love and harmony between estranged spouses? The reference here is
to (4:34):
“… As to those women on whose part you fear disobedience and recalcitrance, (first:) admonish them , (next:) refuse to share their beds, and (last:) chastise (daraba) them; but if they return to obedience, seek not against them means of annoyance: for God is Most High, Great (above you all).”
Considering the above context and
situation, the purpose of reconciliation, the Islamic doctrine of human sanctity
and dignity, the right of self determination in Islam, the consensual nature of
the nuptial association, and the ability of nuptial partners to gracefully
dissolve such association without coercion or intimidation, the denotation of daraba
in this citation cannot imply the infliction of injury, pain or disgrace. The most candid construal is to imply
separation, departure, partition or seclusion, however. This type of
arrangement, where the estranged husband altogether desert his wife for some
time, would help to streamline the acrid relationship because it is a step that
goes farther than admonishing her and refusing to share her bed. Now, as the husband is away, the wife has an
ample opportunity to rethink the whole situation, to ponder the eventual
consequences, and to realize the inevitable conclusion of disobedience and
rejection, namely, divorce. At this
point, she will have a full chance to re-examine her intent and conduct and to
decide whether she wants this threshold of separation to be a lasting
state! It is the moment of truth and she
has the choice to go on with her stubborn ignorance or to restore rationality
and bring back her estranged husband before it is too late.
Therefore, to “chastise” a woman in her
home, in the context of streamlining a difficult marital relationship and
bringing the spouses back to harmony and responsibility, should be construed as
to “leave” the nuptial nest, to “move away”, or to “separate” from her as a
further step that aims to send an unequivocal message to the wife regarding the
consequences of disobedience which she should take note of. This is the last resort, if there still is a
place for compassion and affection, before seeking the mediation of arbiters
from their respective families. If this
attempt, in turn, does not manage to seal this rupture and to restore peace,
then both parties should face the eventual choice of “… (the parties) should
either hold together on equitable terms or separate with grace.” (2:229)
The above perception of the idiom daraba
(to “chastise”) is consistent and attuned with the actual Prophetic tradition
and practice as attested in the narrative which relates that the Prophet (s)
moved away from his wives when they rebelled after their demands of better
living were denied. The Prophet (s) resorted to al-mashrabah for a month
and offered them the choice to obey him, to accept his manner of living and to
hold together accordingly or to release them from the wedlock and to separate
gracefully. This incident is addressed in al-Qur'an (33:28-29):
“O Prophet! declare to your consorts: if it be that you desire the worldly life and its gleam, then come! I will provide for your delight and set you free in a handsome manner. But if you seek God and His Messenger, and the abode of the hereafter, verily God has set up for the well-doers amongst you a great reward.”
Throughout this experience, the Prophet
(s) had never inflicted any injury, pain or insult on anyone of them. Should there be a divine ordinance of
corporal or psychological discipline as a potent panacea, the Prophet (s) shall
be the first one to mind and to proceed with such cure. Hence, when the
consorts of the Prophet realized the gravity of the matters, sensed the wrath
of their own families, and missed the prophetic association and intimacy;
together, all that was enough to bring them back to rationale, to return them
to the grace of obedience, and to become content with the Prophet's lifestyle
as he favored.10
So, when his consorts rebelled and
disobey him, the messenger (s) moved away from their residences and secluded
himself for a month so as to help them realize the consequences of their
rebellion and disobedience, without inflicting any physical injury or
psychological pain. It took him (s) one
month of seclusion before advising their families about the matter and before
offering them to choose between compliance and separation. Only then, they
recognized their wrong standing, experienced a threshold of the potential
consequences, and returned to the grace of obedience. As a result, the construal of daraba
(to “chastise”) in the actual practice of the Prophet (s) is to seclude, to
move away and to distance himself from them. That is consistent, on one hand,
with the psychological nature of the matter; on the other hand, with the common
intuition of various Qur'anic usages of the root verb daraba (to
“chastise”) and its abstractions, derivatives and figuratives. Also, this
perception does not contradict with the exegesis of Ibn ‘Abbas (r) as he
cautions husbands that their expression of resentment should not exceed few
strokes with a siwak (tooth cleansing) stick, or the like. Evidently, this genre of “chastisement” could
be adequate to express the husband's discontent and anger. Yet, it is not evident how could few strokes,
in this latter stage of a nuptial discord, be sufficient to convey the true
gravity of the stand off and its consequences, or even to go further toward a
more decisive step than refusing to share the wife's bed, in order to reach
reconciliation or to seek separation!
In conclusion, within the Qur'anic
arrangement to remedy the marital relationship after the eruption of
disobedience and conflict, I have found out that the true reading of the
Qur'anic idiom daraba (to “chastise”) directs the husband to “move away”
from the wife, to “distance” himself from her and to “depart” the nuptial
residence as a last attempt to bring her back to rationale and to help her
realize the gravity of recalcitrance and its potential consequences for her and
her children. The connotations of
departure and seclusion is more readily and more compatible with the Qur'anic
parlance than the associations of physical injury, psychological pain and
disgrace. The latter ones do not result in a graceful nuptial relationship, do
not promote the human dignity and do not provide “affection” and “compassion”
which are the foundations of a lasting matrimony; especially, in the light of
the values, prospects and outlooks of the present era. This insight, as I have
furnished above, is well informed by the actual practice of the Prophet (s) as
an effective emotional remedy to accomplish the purposes and objectives of
Islam in establishing the family structure on affection, compassion, chastity
and confidence, in order to maintain the family as the trustful hotbed which
nurtures the youngsters spiritually, morally, emotionally and intellectually to
the best levels, so that they can accomplish success and carry out the message
of the revelation.
I invoke God Almighty to bestow
righteousness and guidance to the best of probity and benevolence; and our
ultimate avowal is that all praise and gratitude be to God, The Lord of the
Worlds.
Notes
1. The author, Dr. AbdulHamid A. AbuSulayman is the President of the International Institute of Islamic Thought (I.I.I.T.) at Herndon, Virginia, the Chairman of the Child Development Foundation, U.S.A., and the former rector of the International Islamic University of Malaysia. The English version of the original Arabic text was rendered by Dr. Mazen A. Al-Najjar.
2. AbuSulayman, AbdulHamid A., “Zahiriyyat Ibn Hazm wa I'jazz ar-Risalah al-Muhammadiyyah,” in Arabic, (The Prima Facie Textualism of Ibn Hazm and the Inimitability of the Muhammadan Message), at-Tajdeed, a quarterly research journal published by the International Islamic University, Malaysia, Vol. 2, No. 3 (February, 1998).
3. See, e.g., AbuSulayman, AbdulHamid A., Toward an Islamic Theory of International Relations: New Directions for Methodology and Thought, (Herndon, V.A.: The International Institute of Islamic Thought, 2nd Revised Edition, 1993).
4. For the interpretation of “O Messenger! Incite the believers to the fight. If there are twenty amongst you patient and steadfast, they will vanquish two hundred; if a hundred (believers), they will vanquish a thousand of the disbelievers: for these are a people without (truthful) perception,” see: AbuSulayman, AbdulHamid A., Toward an Islamic Theory of International Relations: New Directions for Methodology and Thought, Ibid, 69-75.
5. For the interpretation of “… and chastise them; but if they return to obedience, seek not against them any means of annoyance” (4:34), see: at-Tabarri, Abu-Ja'afer Muhammad Ibn Jarir (d. 310 A.H.), Jami' al-Bayan fi Tafseer al-Qur'an, (The Exegesis of Qur'an by at-Tabarri), (Beirut: Dar Lubnan), 4, no. 5, 40-44; al-Qummi an-Nisabouri, Muhammad Ibn Hussayn, Tafseer Ghara'ib al-Qur'an wa Raghai'b al-Furqan, (The Exegesis of the Qur'anic Prodigies and Oddities), provided in the footnotes of at-Tabarri's.
6. Noteworthy, the verse of Khul' (discharge), “… there is no blame on either of them if she gives up something in return for her freedom ...” (2:229), does not specify the value of such redemption grant. However, the Prophetic traditions impose a limit, in order that it doesn't exceed the value of the dowry she has received from her husband against the marriage: “would you return his garden back to him (her husband)?…,” but nothing more. For that allowing any additional value may motivate a greedy husband, for his wife's wealth, to mistreat her so as to impel her into seeking extrication from his labyrinth of misery in return for her or her family's wealth. Such a loophole could cause the family to fall down or fall apart; therefore, it has to be closed up, indefinitely.
7. at-Tabarri; an-Nisabouri, Ibid, 4, no. 5, 40-44.
8. In fact, the literal Qur'anic expression is dighth which is construed as a raceme of numerous soft palm leaves. Precisely, God (Almighty) who bestows grace and sanctity upon the mankind, instructs his Prophet Ayyoub (s), whose wife annoyed him while he was enduring a prolonged and severe ailment and adversity, to make good of his oath to chastise her with a hundred strokes by touching her with a raceme of a hundred palm leaves, as a figurative manifestation of his vow, without inflicting any injury, pain or disgrace on her. This evokes another attested parable of the young and subservient believer Isma'il (s), the son of the acquiescent believer Ibrahim (s) who confirmed and validated the vision (of revelation), but God redeemed Isma'il with a “great sacrifice”.
9. It is remarkable that the Qur'anic text does not provide the idiom daraba to denote the physical or corporal punishment; rather, it uses the idiom jalada (to lash, to whip, to flog, etc.), as in the verse (24:2) which reads: “The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication, flog each of them with a hundred stripes; let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by God, if you believe in God and the last day; and let a party of the believers witness their punishment.”
10. For the complete details of this incident in as-Sunnah, see, for instance: Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 5395; Sahih Muslim, no. 2704; Sunann at-Tarmidhi, no. 3240; Musnadd al-Imam Ahmad, no. 24588.