The Triple Conspiracy

Hi Farzana, just wondering, would it be kind of socially correct to interpret the rapidly changing female/male ratio in some parts of the country as one reason for the change in the talaq rule? I mean, here we have districts where, regardless of religion, the female to male ratio is around 700 females per 1000 males.

Think about it?

Truth is, as I discovered after a rapid trip to some rather desolate/back in history parts of the countryside near Delhi, that it seems to be perfectly acceptable that if a man divorces or abandons his wife, then there seems to be no dearth of males willing to accept her. The parameters here are not about religion, they are about ``productivity``, across child-bearing, home-building and probably some forms of polyandry also.

More soon on this.

`For greater empowerment of Muslim women`

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/764378.cms

MUMBAI: The outcome of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board working committee`s meeting in Lucknow on Sunday is being eagerly awaited by the Muslim community.

The board will discuss and adopt a resolution dealing with marriage and divorce.

Hardliners have already warned of a nationwide agitation if the board declares `talaq` uttered thrice in a single sitting invalid. TNN spoke to Yusuf Muchhala (66), who is a leading member of the board since 1988 and is an advocate.

Q:Certain critics have stated that the AIMPLB has no right to take decisions on behalf of the entire Muslim community. Please comment.
--
The board was set up in the early 70s in the context of the demand for uniform civil code. It was set up primarily to protect Muslim personal laws within the framework of the shariat and at the same time usher in social reforms in the community.

The board has several achievements to its credit. For example, it took the initiative in doing away with the practice of dowry.

These reforms have been widely endorsed by the Muslim community which underlines the acceptability of the board. We are now working towards greater empowerment of Muslim women.

Q:A vocal section of Muslims has accused the board of interfering with the shariat vis-a-vis the `talaq` issue. It has even warned of a nationwide agitation against the board.
--
We will not be discussing any `talaqnama` in tomorrow`s meeting. What we are going to discuss is a nikahnama`. The draft of the nikahnama` has been in circulation within the community for quite some time.

Nikah is being perceived by some people as a mere civil contract between the husband and wife, but our contention is that it is both a contract and a sacrament. The new `nikahnama` enables women to stipulate certain conditions for marriage, which increases her bargaining power. But then what is this controversy over `talaq` about?

The shariat talks of several forms of `talaq` of which talaq-esunnat is one of them. Speaking about talaq-e-sunnat, it is further divided into talaq-e-hasan, talaqe-ahsan, and talaq-ul-bain. The first two forms of `talaq` are universially accepted by all schools of Islamic thought, while talaq-ulbain is mostly followed by Hanafi Sunni Muslims.

Under the first two forms, the word `talaq` should be uttered only once at a time and there should normally be a three-month period of `iddat`— which is broadly equal to three menstrual cycles. There is scope for reconciliation. But under talaq-ul-bain—in which `talaq` is uttered thrice in one sitting— the divorce is irrevocable.

A woman who divorces cannot remarry her husband unless she performs `halala` which requires her to marry another man, have the marriage consummated and then is divorced by her second husband.

The entire process is very humiliating for all the parties concerned. The board is not trying to render talaq-ul-bain invalid, but is only encouraging its disuse.

Q:Progressive organisations of Muslim women like the Awaz-e-Niswan of Mumbai are sceptical of the new proposal being implemented, given the patriarchal nature of Muslim society.
--
I appreciate the concerns of the Awaz-e-Niswan. What we need is dedicated grassroots level activism to ensure that the reform process is allowed to go through. Prominent Muslims like Maulana Quddus Kashmiri of the Ulema Council are saying that they are not opposed to efforts at reconciliation between an estranged husband and wife.

Their contention is that once `talaq` is uttered the three time, the divorce should be regarded as final. We have no disagreement this issue. But, our contention is that the practice of giving `talaq` in one sitting should be discouraged.

Instead, the process of divorce should be spread over a period of time and in the meantime effort should be made at bringing about a reconciliation between the husband and wife. This is fully in keeping with the shariat.

Satire (#52):

[Next step, muslim women should be allowed to have upto 4 husbands, so long as the existing husbands consent, and they are treated equally. Also, a women prophet is needed that should be allowed by God to take as many husbands as she wants. Given the drop in female-to-male, ratio this is necessary as the women will give respectability to the many unmarried men (and prevent them being testostorone driven idiots).]

1. Women have enough trouble on their hands already.
2. Being a testosterone-driven idiot is not the prerogative of the unmarried male.
3. Unlike most men, women are capable of giving respectability to the male species without tagging a label on their lapels.
4. Would a woman prophet be discussing these issues with a male god or a female god?
5. Just in case women condescend to permit such a scenario, then would equal treatment mean letting four or more newspapers in the house or would each get turns to look at the sports page first, and turns to put the socks in their place, to put the toilet seat down, to talk big and think small, to treat a gadget in the house like precious china and to make the woman feel like a machine?

Really, women don’t care for much of all this and manage the others on their own quite well, so one well-behaved man would do…
- - -
godot:

Thank you... I think all of us our biased, and some biases suit me just fine!
- - -
temporal:

[ferzi -- refrain;)]

Surely you mean constant refrain ;)

Hi Faiza (#48):

[You wrote ``Islam on paper gives woman a right, but does it imbue her with the courage and wherewithal to exercise it?``
As far as the courage is concerned, doesn`t the responsibility lie with the society and not so much with religion when it comes to implementing those rights? It has become almost natural to blame things on the religion when in reality they should be blamed on the patriarchal guardians of our society.]

I have blamed the Ulemas categorically. But do you expect the patriarchal structure of society to empower women? Most societies use religion as their basis for structuring social norms. I am afraid women will have to make crucial decisions on their own and they need to have a strong foundation from which they can challenge male-dominated interpretations. To do so, they will need the confidence from their religion. How many times do we hear of women say they get peace, they feel fulfilled, they become more aware of life, they gain enlightenment due to their faith? Is it too far-fetched for them to be able to say that they now have the courage because of that faith to fight its misinterpretations and get what is their rightful due?

We are not talking here about some of us, but about the vast majority of women.

[Take care and regarding ``fly in the soup,`` shouldnt it be changed to ``poisoned fly in the soup`` considering how greatly you contribute to the disgust of chowkies with your articles;)]

Since this is a personal opinion, you may of course have it and keep it...besides, we might have to get into grammatical details...like who has poisoned the fly and why? And how can such an entity cause disgust? Does it cause irreparable damage?....the day I see corpses instead of venomous vipers on my boards, then I shall have reason to give your additional word another look:)
- - -

rahul_capri (#51):

[As for those who are saying rejection of Quran altogether, every change has to be gradual.]

I think it is foolhardy to take away something that is so important to so many. It is the very basis of society as most know it. The change has to be in the matter of perception and execution. And each society will have different needs...this must be borne in mind.

[Regarding Meher, it is a safeguard,but brides are tricked into withdrawing their claim to it as an emotional ploy.``Good muslim women dont care about meher...``]

This is the general attitude; women are anyway not expected to know much about money and their control over it is at best left to running the house...in our subcontinent, most working women, as opposed to those who have broken through the glass ceiling, work only to help run the household; others are told that this is good pocket money.

Re. literature in regional languages, you are so right. A while ago at a book exhibition I was pleasantly surprised to see a Sahitya Academy counter; of course it was badly-displayed and I had to sit on the dusty floor to browse and look for what turned out to be gems...I even found a copy of Iravati Karve`s interpretation of the `Mahabharata` translated into Gujarati. Have you read her?

Farzana,

I believe the article was veering equality and fairness.

Next step, muslim women should be allowed to have upto 4 husbands, so long as the existing husbands consent, and they are treated equally. Also, a women prophet is needed that should be allowed by God to take as many husbands as she wants. Given the drop in female-to-male, ratio this is necessary as the women will give respectability to the many unmarried men (and prevent them being testostorone driven idiots).

Satire

Farzana..Nice Article.Just wondering how the AIMPLB members are selected?
I would like to see a democratic process of selection.
As I have mentioned in other board,the mullahs are not really interested in divinty of the Quran, but the power they wield as the sole interpreters.This happenned in the Shah Bano case and is happening again.
As for those who are saying rejection of Quran altogether, every change has to be gradual.
If the power of interpretation is taken away from the mullahs, more than half the battle is won.The laws are not that unequitable as they are made out to be.
Regarding Meher, it is a safeguard,but brides are tricked into withdrawing their claim to it as an emotional ploy.``Good muslim women dont care about meher...``
I will refer a wonderful collection of short stories by Nasira Sharma-``Khuda ki waapsi``.The title story is about meher.Interesting the heroine of that story is called farzana.As an aside,though this is not what people like Rushdie will have us believe,IMHO our finest literature is still written in the so called vernacular languages.

Farzana -

I haven`t read this article of yours yet, so can`t really comment on it yet...but I just saw ``your week`` at the TFT. Congratulations! You`re an excellent addition to that excellent newspaper (but I could be biased...I think you are one of the best writers anywhere)

Maulana Sattar Sahib:

...However, if you want to expand the circle .... am deliberately quoting just this part:)

bhai saheb...this is what i have learned and what i believe in...as far as i am concerned every individual is free to pursue his/her path to(wards) becoming a better insaan

...insaan is the key word...you may follow mirza saheb...i may follow ganesh, peter, jesus, bahaullah, the crow outside this window, or simply my conscience…remember the key word…I think that is what any god can ask of us;)...baaqi sub khairiyat hay!

rgds,

t

ps:

ferzi -- refrain;)

Hello Farzana Sahiba
Hope you are doing well. You wrote

``Islam on paper gives woman a right, but does it imbue her with the courage and wherewithal to exercise it?``
As far as the courage is concerned, doesn`t the responsibility lie with the society and not so much with religion when it comes to implementing those rights? It has become almost natural to blame things on the religion when in reality they should be blamed on the patriarchal guardians of our society.
Women do have the right of tafweed given that its proclaimed at the time of contracting the marriage.
Take care and regarding ``fly in the soup,`` shouldnt it be changed to ``poisoned fly in the soup`` considering how greatly you contribute to the disgust of chowkies with your articles;)
Faiza Hussain

Anil:

You have brought in another dimension altogether.

[Why should religious thoughts / laws govern relationship between man and woman?]

Why should any laws, ideally speaking, govern a relationship? Even in today`s liberal times, there are very few people who would not want to legalise/legitimise their relationship. It has to do with security and commitment. And in the Indian subcontinent, I am well aware of many couples who do not feel `completely married` unless they go through some religious ceremony.

[The questions about Dowry or Mehr are economic in nature. A separation is important. Important decisions about Dowry or Mehr during the emotional moment, like wedding, are plainly silly and wrong. The economic well being is not in anyone`s mind at that time. The intentions behind such ritual or contract may be good. Results are horrendous, because these are performed or executed during the emotional time.]

In India, the emotionalism is very well channelised by the families to sit and bargain. As you know, in Islam marriage itself is seen as a contract, and Meh`r is a part of it. The couple does not decide; the families do. In situations where many marriages are arranged even today, the silliness is inherent in the very nature of the `transaction`. Our society is such that a woman is `taken over` by the other family and an important way for her to feel a part of it, is to know that she is not entirely dependent, therefore streedhan and meh`r act more in the nature of emotional security. They do not empower women.(The pre-nuptial agreements in the West do because the women are taking the initiative.)

If you say a wedding is an emotional moment, then a divorce is even more so. Imagine the plight of someone like Asma who I interviewed.
- - -
Zahra:

[I am not sure if it is good or bad. What`s the end result ? I guess you will know that on July 04th. I ask this since you have mentioned the likelihood vs. a definite move. The worst part is that these ulema(duffers) make every little aspect of life so convoluted that it`s simply silly to consult them on any matter. The simplest thing is to opt for a civil marriage. Kick out all the entitities that add ``any`` confusion to life! My two cents.]

A civil marriage is the best option, but as I have elaborated above, for the majority in our subcontinent there are several issues attached. I had once interviewed the writer Salim Khan and his wife (now he has a second wife, actress Helen) and he had a civil marriage, then to appease his family they went through a nikaah. He told me that Salma felt a vacuum even after all this, so they went through a Hindu ceremony! And this was a cosmopolitan, cross-cultural alliance between two educated people.

Btw, re. the July 4 verdict, no one asked the Ulema Council to intervene; they got into the act of their own accord.

Thanks for `The Stepford Wives` recommendation. Need a comedy:)
- - -
temporal:

Thanks for the succinct explanation. Okay, so we have one book and one Prophet, and several Allahs...agree not...we have several books (how many interpretatiosn are there?), and even re. the Prophet is there any consistency of approach? But we probably have only one Allah -- as in Allah maalik hai, Allah ki dein hai, Allah ka shuk`r hai...get the drift?! Allah is an invisible, non-controversial entity, therefore there is no problem agreeing in principle to have one. We can play around with words and the harbinger of those words, though, which is where the problems arise.

What has surprised me even more is that the Raza Academy, that comes out in the streets to prove its secular credentials, dragging even children in, has protested the Muslim Personal Law Board`s initiative.

(On another note entirely...I should imagine people would have fewer problems dealing with triple T than they do with one T :)

F

Farzana,

You may like to look into ``The Stepford Wives.`` An ironic comedy with an interesting story!

Bye Bye.

Temporal bhai …

If you (and other Muslims) are going to believe in one prophet … why count me out? I am all for him …

However, if you want to expand the circle of prophets … you’ll include Moses, Jesus, Ibrahim, etc. In addition to these, I would include … Buddha, Krishna, Mirza Sahib. So as far as Islam goes … we’re on the same page … I think!

+++++++++++

Coming back to the talaq issue … I am of the view that Quran supports three declarations over a few months … in order for a divorce to be complete. This is a safeguard against having the husband get carried away momentarily … and uttering something in anger … that he and the family may regret forever.

A divorce can potentially ruin lives … especially those of the children, who are likely to suffer psychological consequences. There is nothing worse for a man and wife than to see their children suffer. Every couple has problems at some point or another in their lives. When this happens, emotions run high … harsh words are exchanged … and it seems that all is lost.

During such times, a time-out is needed. Couple should separate, seek counseling, think things over … all in somewhat dispassionate manner. Sometimes things get back on track … in some cases the couple gets back together and manages to get by … and in some cases it is better to go ahead and divorce. It is for this reason that Quran insists that divroce must by finalized over several months.

Of course, keeping up with the age-old tradition of jihalat, our enlightened ullema insist that three declarations … in one breath … constitute a divorce. Nonsense. This is yet another example of exploitation of people by the custodians of faith … this time to suppress women.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Nice piece, I really liked Rukaiya Hussein`s story. I think triple talaq is an anachronism that should be repealed... here`s hoping that it is.

``The primary aim here, besides lauding the move being initiated, was to highlight the fact that the triple talaq is not followed across the board even among all Indian Muslims. ``

Ferzana, your aim is very clear. Its part embarassment, part attempt to white-wash. I suspect that in future posts (as soon as some of our favorites indulge in muslim bashing) you will say things like law itself is not a sufficient thing, look how poorly the indu married girls are doing etc. A more nuanced debate of womens plight in india blah blah. The somone will soon come up with beauties like muslim law is actually really very egalitarian, but in india its implementation got corrupted due to age-old hindu practices.

No need to explain, the aim is always clear, message comes thru loud and clear.

Happy weekend folks.

A very intresting article and topic to discuss about , I was just today having a heated discussion with my work mates about `divorce and marriage system in Islam and same system in Christanity) ;
to my limited knowledge of Islam ( I assume) and I know lot of normal Pakistanis think of `talaq and marriages and re-marriages as follows`
a) husband / wife could go for divorce ( with a good reason ; in Pakistan in most cases family members are a bridge to save marriages in most cases)
b) a husband after divorce could always marry a woman so does women could marry (though its still thaught as ` awkward ` ...
c) husband could marry another woman or women only after ` a permission ` from his wife and that too if he`s economically stable !

( yes, I believe at times that Islam gives `less rights` to women then men but I assume, that is because of Arabic Traditions at that time inplaced `