The Triple Conspiracy

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

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

Hi Farzana:

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

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.

The western laws are more mature in this regard and such rituals or contracts are disregarded as being performed and executed under emotional duress. It is another thing that lawyers benefit, but that should be dealt as a different problem.

Your board presents classical examples where religious values and non-religious values of a society clash to defeat each other. Appeasement will never work, determined reforms from within needed.

Anil

I am pleasantly surprised that Farzana hasn`t blamed this on Gandhi.

It is encouraging to see that some people are coming forward to end this kind of stone age laws which are stil prevelant in our society. But the ulema council has already started making noises and we still dont know how things will shape up.

One thing that I want to emphasize is that the solution cannot be found if people keep on bragging about what the Islamic law allows and what it does not. If there is a need for change, one should be ready to accept the follies. There is no point in dragging with obolete ideas, more so when they tend to supress half of the society.

Society faces all kinds of pressure from the ``religious elites`` , the kind which proclaim to have a license to liasion with God. If you study how the sati system was eradiacted, you will find that there was tremendous opposition when the ban was erected. Nevertheless, the government persisted and we all know what a blessing it has been.

I think similar stand should be taken today. Following a religion is one thing. Having laws of the kind of ``triple talaq`` should not be acceptable in today`s world which is so much aware of human rights and gender equality.

Vertex:

``The tripple talaq has been a shame of us Indian muslims for the longest while``

You are Indian?? For real?

muslims doing pro-women reforms will be super for india. then the patels and reddys and khatris and aggarwals will be forced to follow suit..(their women will demand it) after all cant be more backward than the musalman, right?

Urstruly,

``The enforcement of a certain law is not an issue or responsibility of Fiqah (jurisprudence). The enforcement is an issue of Executive or for that matter it is the responsibility of people.``

This is not a matter of enforcement, but a matter of a legal weakness with the law that can easily be exploited. There is no recourse for those who are a victim of tripple talaq, nor is their any punishment for those who do the abuse. The weakness then isn`t with execution, but inherent given the socio-economic realities in which the law is being applied.


``I think it is the stupidest argument that I have ever come across that goes something like this `` since we are not able to enforce a law so lets make another law``;``

You must not argue alot. This is exactly why laws are amended/repealed. Indeed, if it is found that a law does more harm than good, it is striken from the books. I am not going to go so far with this, rather I am merely advocating the closing of a legal loop hole (that is actually fully in conformance with Islamic law) that invites abuse.


``where do we stop then if we again fail to enforce the new law?``

This is invariably an iterative process, not a cast-in-stone one. The latter is the problem, not the former which you think is a potential risk.

``Whether we like it or not, Mehr or a pre-nuptual agreement is THE safeguard that woman have.``

No, since they won`t be able to exercise their rights due to social circumstances. Try to mold society, fine and dandy. That could take several generations without, ta-da, legal sanction guiding us one way or the other. If you could somehow enforce a high-set meher, then that solution could be workable...however I don`t think it could be applied across the board, esp. among the poor.

``Now suppose if we take the right of three Talaqs from men and in return if man demands that women forego their right of Mehr or pre-nupt then wouldn`t we then be living in the law of jungle?``

Yes, but no one is doing such. No one is suggesting a general principle here. We have a particular problem, and indeed a particular solution to this particular problem. In principle, what we are saying is that no matter what the case, the comminity is going to step in and keep an eye on things, and slooooww things down a bit. For EVERYONE`s best interest.

``It will be the greatest injustice to the women. What we need to do is to educate woman and men about their pre-nuptual rights through education and then make sure that the law is enforced by the Executive to the letter.``

Agreed 100%, but if that takes 100 years, then what do we do? Esp. when the prevailing thought is against this kind of reasoning. Part of the solution is what you suggest, no doubt...but the complete solution? I don`t think so.

I wrote this in the afternoon, IST, and the evening news has already talked about the Ulema beginning its agitation, not only in Mumbai where the news originated but in most parts of the country.

Sadly, on a panel discussion, the representative of the Muslim Personal Law Board almost seemed to be retracting from what could be pathbreaking changes. All the panelists were men. Why are the women not being consulted?

---

The meh`r does not in any way compensate. It is invariably a small amount, as low as a few hundred rupees. While it is true that a woman can put down a few conditions in the nikaahnaama, she is either not aware or not encouraged to do so. And I doubt if there would be any follow-up after the divorce.

I would dearly like to see these laws executed.

harimau # 13

If the woman is not even literate, how is she expected to know and enforce her rights?

This is a very pertinent question. In order to overcome this obstacle and to retain the rights of woman, Islamic law prescribes the concept of Wali. A rough translation of word ``Wali`` can be `a guardian`, `a custodian`, `an attorny`, or `a solicitor` etc. However by default the father of a woman is her Wali. In case a woman does not have a father or if she does not want to appoint her father as her Wali she can appoint any other person that she trusts as her Wali. In case a woman cannot find a person to act as her Wali she may request the state to act on behalf of her as her Wali. A necessary condition in the Nikah Nama is that in addition to four witnesses the woman must appoint her Wali. The Qazi when starts proceedings of Nikah the first thing he asks the bride is that she has appointed Mr. X as her Wali to safeguard her interests and whether she agrees to this appointment or not. The woman must express her agreement in front of four witnesses so that the further proceedings must go thru.

vertex

It`s the height of absurdity to believe that mehr-which seems like a traditionally small amount for the divorced woman`s upkeep- in any way justifies or rationalizes this barbaric talaq-talaq-talaq business on the part of Islamic men. In any civilized society, the process of granting divorce should be evaluated on its own terms.

Ref Urstruly #1

[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.]

If the woman is not even literate, how is she expected to know and enforce her rights?

The first freedom required for women is the freedom to go to school.

Ref Sangilikaruppan #7

[As an outsider to the tradition, I don`t see anything wrong with triple talaq per se.]

You can chop off your foreskin but, since you live in the US, YOU still cannot use the triple talaq to get away from your wife.

She has got you castrated by now anyway and knowing the ways of Tamil Nadu, you ain`t getting away with any divorce; your in-laws will chop off your dick if you try anything funny.

So just sit there salivating at the possibility of triple talaq... so close yet so far away!

Vertex

The enforcement of a certain law is not an issue or responsibility of Fiqah (jurisprudence). The enforcement is an issue of Executive or for that matter it is the responsibility of people. I think it is the stupidest argument that I have ever come across that goes something like this `` since we are not able to enforce a law so lets make another law``; where do we stop then if we again fail to enforce the new law? Whether we like it or not, Mehr or a pre-nuptual agreement is THE safeguard that woman have. Now suppose if we take the right of three Talaqs from men and in return if man demands that women forego their right of Mehr or pre-nupt then wouldn`t we then be living in the law of jungle? Women have rights in Islam by law. We cannot take these rights away from her just because we want to copy white man. It will be the greatest injustice to the women. What we need to do is to educate woman and men about their pre-nuptual rights through education and then make sure that the law is enforced by the Executive to the letter. It is a continuing battle that we have to fight everyday of our lives. Having laws on the book, merely, amounts to nothing.

The tripple talaq has been a shame of us Indian muslims for the longest while. This is good news...now, what we need is the proper attitude to follow up.

---

Urstruly,

So, meher is to be the safeguard but religiously we are compelled to keep it low. Not much of a safeguard is it, then? There are social pressures to keep meher low, and to keep the threat of divorce over women to keep them in line. This has to be rectified, and the only way to do it is by imposing limits. No mindless axiomatic regergetations of fiqh will address the issue. The meher solution may have been adequete safeguard in the past, but we may well have a unique set of social conditions that make that solution non-applicable, at least not so in a timely manner (the kind of `education` you want could take generations). Thus, a novel solution is required.

The fact is, the time-spread talaq is to the spirit and letter of Islamic law. If you think the quick tripple-talaq is a misuse, then what punishment do you suggest for those who misuse it? And this is the problem with your line of reasoning...you admit to a misuse, you even suggest a (flawed) way to safeguard against the misuse, but yet suggest no punishment to those who are commiting a clear abuse. The tripple talaq is not a force of nature, it`s an interpretation. Not all interpretations are equal. In this case, the Muslims of India have adopted another legitimate ,relevant, and less harmful ruling. I see no problem with that.

---

Ralph,

Meher is not returned, it is owed. Meher originates from the grooms side, not the brides.

---

I`ve known a few Pakistani and Arab families who start the meher bidding at $500k and settle around 100-200k!!!! Meher is not limited...Urstruly is right on this, nazar.

---

soysauce,

Tripple talaq may be useful at times (why drag out a bad thing), however in general it`s prone to abuse. Just like legal loopholes, this possibility of abuse has to be hit on the head.

As for women getting the right to divorce, they can always shove it in the Marriage contract (essentially a pre-nup). The procedure is a bit more involved than the quick`n dirty tripple talaq, as the women needs to make a pettition to the Qazi. Alas, fat chance any Imam will insert this clause into the contract or any groom would accept it (although it is her God-given right). The buck stops with the people on this one...social pressures and gender political maneuverings is the real culprit here. Untill the institutions take the possible abuses into account, they will be prone to misuse.

I think you are a Genius :))