The Triple Conspiracy

Whatever is done in Nikah Naama is equivalent to what whiteman calls Pre-Nuptual Agreement. You people must check how your own perception changes while using different terminology for same thing. When we use the terminology Nikah Naama you say ``aaakh! thui! thui! what an outdated concept - give me a barf bag``. And when we use the terminology `Pre-Nuptual Agreement` you say ``wah kia baat hay goray sahib ki - qanoon qaida to koi un se seekhay wah!``

Way to go. I especially like the ``jokers in disguise`` bit, never mind what happened to Mohinder Amarnath with BCCI, for the masses he will always be a hero. If perception is bigger than fact, then this one single step of rationalising the marriage contract for Muslims in India, is likely to be worth acres of shallow debate by the so-called scholars.

Democracy must prevail.

1) An overwhelming majority of Muslims in India (women as well as many sects of Islam) already follow more progressive systems than the Fiqah-e-Hanafi.

2) The Ulema Council in India can agitate all it wants, on behalf of its shadowy paymasters. An overwhelming majority of Indians are of the democratically assimilated and ensured opinion that this triple talaq law has been viciously misused.

As an outsider to the tradition, I don`t see anything wrong with triple talaq per se. If the relationship is broken, then dragging it out over a period of time where the second and third talaqs hang over the woman`s head and act as an emotional blackmail may actually be more damaging to the woman. The question I have is whether the woman has a similar right to end the marriage. If not, then the system is not keeping up with the times. That`s perhaps where reform needs to be. The system of mehr that would act as a check against frivolous divorce is brilliant but once again, the gender inequity must be addressed.

NHK

Shariat does not prescribe a `ridiculously low` figure for mehr. As a matter of fact the second caliph Omar (Ra) did try to fix the amount of mehr on prorated basis as the Qazi (justice) deemed fit but as per tradition a women protested his dicision right in Masjid-e-Nabawi saying that if apostle of allah (pbuh) did not fix mehr then what authority he (Omar) has to forefiet the right of woman that Allah has given to her. Since that time the amount of mehr is not a fixed amount. However, people following the footsteps of Holy Prophet try to fix the amount of mehr in the prorated amount equivalent to that which he (prophet) set for his own daughter. (I think in present day money this amount somewhere falls below Rs. 1500). This is all out of respect and faith whereas sharia (as per Quranic injunction) gives this right to the woman to set the whatever amount she wants fixed.

As far as striking out the column is concerned it is not the Mehr column that is strikken out but Qazi strikes one of the two columns - One column is for Mehr-e-Mo`ajjal i.e. mehr is required to be paid to the bride by groom as the Nikah Naama is signed and before the marriage is consumated; the other column is for Mehr-e-Mojal i.e. bride reserves the right to demand the amount of mehr anytime during the marriage. This is her right and she can demand it even if she is not requesting a divorce. The man as per Islamic law is required to pay her on her demand. It is one of the two choices that Qazi writes in the Nikah naama after asking bride. Even if woman is illiterate he asks bride three times whether she accepts Mr. X as her husband in exchange for a Mehr of xxxx, or not and if she does she must say ``Qabool Hay``. The four witnesses must sign the Nakah Naama then, attesting that they heard bride say ``Qabool Hay``. The same procedure is repeated with groom in the presence of hundereds of guests and four appointed witnesses.

Farzana

When the maulvis bring the Nikah Nama form and register, they themselves mostly strike out the column, beforehand, which gives the woman the right for ``Khula`` (divorce). (I do not know the procedure in India)

Most families are not even aware that such a Right has to be recorded on the Nikah Nama to avoid long hassels in the court. And why should this right not be printed on the FORM for all cases as such. Now the media is putting up this aspect to the public.

Also the amount of Meher (bride money) is kept ``as per shariet`` - a ridiculously low figure.

And even now the parents advise their daughters that now ``that`` is your home - and only your coffin should come out of ``that`` house.

Long way to go yet!

NHK

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

# 1

How wonderfully enlightened and current Islam is! Only if Muslim women excercised their `Islamic` rights like demanding the return of the Mehr :)

``Maulana Abdul Quddus Kashmiri, vice president of the council, said, “When talaq is uttered the first time it is called ‘talaq-e-rajie’ and it is followed by ‘talaq-e-baien’ and the final one is called ‘talaq-e-mugalazza’. If talaq is uttered the third time, the divorce is final. Those misusing this provision deserve to be condemned since they are acting against the spirit of Islam. But that does not give the right to anyone to declare a divorce invalid just because the word talaq was uttered thrice in quick succession.”

This is the correct position of Fiqah-e-Hanafi, which is followed by overwhelming majority of Muslims in sub-continent.

There is a built in safeguard to protect women from men running amock and uttering three talaqs in quick succession whenever they feel like it, and that is called ``Mehr``. Mehr is an amount in the form of currency, asset, or property that is compulsory to be paid by groom to her bride according to the contractual agreement called Nikah Nama. This is a legally binding document. The amount of Mehr is set by bride and she may demand it to be paid before the marraige is consumated. However, she may deffer this request if she like. A man who divorces her wife with three talaqs in in quick succession automatically loses his right on this mehr as well as all the gifts and property (assets, gold, land etc) he gifted to his wife before talaq. In case women requests a divorce through khula`a she loses her right over mehr and possibly all the gifts etc. I think this forces men to act more responsibly. However, as a cultural norm marriage in subcontinent is considered an act of faith rather than a contractual agreement. Sometimes women even forego her right to demand mehr and thus lose an effective leverage. Women can still have the control if they start exercising their right effectively and intelligently.