The Triple Conspiracy

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 This is exactly why laws are amended/repealed.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.

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?

Vertex:

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

You are Indian?? For real?

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

#26

Interesting, And what about Zafar?

This book review from 1995 sounds relevant.

---

Looking In From The Out

J.N. DIXIT

THE WORLD OF FATWA OR THE SHARIA IN ACTION
by Arun Shourie
ASA PUBLICATIONS
RS:450;PAGES:685

THE World of Fatwas or The Sharia In Action is a meticulously researched work on the application of Islamic precepts to practically every aspect of the existence of the ``faithful``.

It is a somewhat daunting book in volume; 669 pages of writings by the author, and the remaining pages containing basic texts and index. In terms of intensity and detail of research it is in the genre of two previous books by Shourie, namely Mrs Gandhi`s Second Reign and Missionaries in India. Going through the book, one comes to the conclusion that the premise Shourie wants to prove is the quotation from the Quran reproduced on the back cover—"Moham-mad is the messenger of Allah. Those who follow him are firm and unyielding towards unbelievers, yet full of mercy towards one another.`` (Quran XL VIII 29).

The book has 12 chapters. The first two chapters, ``Their Ways, Their Power,`` and ``All of Life``, highlight an almost irrational interfering influence which the Muslim clergy exercises and is capable of exercising on the Muslim community. These chapters also describe in examples and by analysis the manner in which the Quran, Hadis and, more importantly the fatwa, permeate every aspect of a Muslim`s life from cradle to death; from sexuality to philosophy; from rituals to spiritual experience.

Chapters three, four, and five dealing with the manner in which the fatwas fashion the Muslims` identity and the manner in which they contrast this identity with the persona and existence of non-believers and lastly political and ideological contrariness which characterised the Muslim leaders of the Khilafat Movement, are an insightful and relevant discovery of the perspective in which Islam is practised, and should be viewed.

Shourie`s recounting the relations between the Ali Brothers and Mahatma Gandhi is a revelation of the Ali brothers` communal contrariness. The Muslim clergy harassing Maulana Abul Kalam Azad and Dr Zakir Husain, the aggressiveness with which the Ulema questioned the Islamic integrity of the Jamia Millia University as mentioned in the book, are a pertinent exercise in rediscovering Muslim theocratic perceptions of the rules of existence of the Muslim community in India. What is even more interesting is Shourie`s assessment that even men of eminence like Abul Kalam Azad and Zakir Husain had to succumb to the narrow, pernicious religious bigotry of the Muslim clergy in India. I would not go as far as Shourie inbeing critical about these nationalistic Muslim leaders. If they succumbed, reconciled or compromised, it must have been for the larger tactical purpose of carrying the Muslim community that they belonged to with them, instead of subjecting the community to the emotional trauma of confronting the Ulema, specially when the majority of Muslims were ambiguous about its political identity, and subject to religious superstitions.

Chapter six is entirely devoted to women and the Sharia, and concentrates on proving that the Islamic claim of ensuring justice, equality and dignity to women when compared to other religions of the world, is not just inaccurate, but false.

This chapter titled ``Moon ki naak, balkiraal ki pudiya, balki baarood ki dibiya``, is a most thorough description of the methods by which Islamic scripture, Islamic tradition and convention and religious ``obiter-dicta`` relegate women to a secondary status, even an enslaved status of existence subject to unqualified exploitation.

While all this may be so, the point to ponder is whether all the conventions described, all the fatwas narrated, really transmute themselves to the daily life of Muslims. If they do, then the Muslim community all over the world must have had a traumatic and unstable existence through-out the 14 centuries since the establishment of Islam by the Holy Prophet.

Chapters 7 to 10 dealing with the power of the Sharia are relevant in understanding the socio-cultural and politico-economic ethos of the Muslims. They are also a summation of conclusions derived from the previous chapters. Chapter 10 is a polemical exercise to show that the inequities and rigidities of the fatwa are not just interpretive aberrations of the Ulema, but that they are based on the teachings of fundamental Islamic scriptures and conventions.

Arun Shourie`s desire is to prove that: ``It is the very essence of a totalitarian ideology, that it enforces its right to regulate the totality of life. The Quran, the Hadis, the fatwas, represent one continuous endeavour in this respect. They aim at controlling every aspect of life (page 629).``

Arun Shourie has proved this point not by logic but extensive research. Apart from the Quran, Hadith and the books on Sharia, he has gone through 38 volumes of fatwas (page 5). The book is timely. It is relevant in reinforcing the point of view that religion, when it moves away from the norms of harmony, eclectic and catholic faith and reasonableness, is a destructive force.

My complaint about the book is its hectoring tone. While nobody can question the veracity of the texts quoted, or the authenticity of the interpretations given by the author, I wish he had pondered over why Islam survives today in about 51 to 55 countries, and how is it that nearly 700 million to one billion human beings believe in Islam, which is nearly one-fifth or one-sixth of the population of the world.

The only possible answer is that while in terms of quoting texts and analysing them the book could be accurate, it does not reflect the objective human predicament in Islamic communities. Islam is and must be having a rational and more human application in daily life. Even if the faithful approach the Ulema for fat-was on which to show their posteriors when performing their ablutions. Why is it that Arun Shourie completely omits the impact of the Persian and Indian civilisations on Islam? Why has he chosen to ignore the elements of universal brotherhood and tolerance, scepticism about religious orthodoxy enunciated by the great Sufi teachers of Islam beginning from Jalaluddin Roomi, Nizamuddin Aulia and Sheikh Salim Chishti? Why has he not chosen to adjust his microscope at a wider angle so that he could have seen redeemable elements in Islam?

Having said all this I must take note of the introductory para where he says that the book might help in freeing Muslims from the thrall of the Ulema. If the book serves that purpose it would be laudable. It certainly serves the purpose of educating the secularists who believe in secularism as a mantra rather than as a conviction based on knowledge. The book has only strengthened my conviction in the validity of the Hindu scriptural saying: ``The truth is one, but the wise articulate it in many ways.`` I only hope that Arun Shourie does not insist that only his way of articulating the truth is valid. The World of Fatwas provides a new prism to non-Muslims for observing Islam, and holds up a mirror to Muslims challenging them to necessary introspection for adjusting to a changing world.

stuka,

Oh, I think I just got it...no, I don`t currently reside in India. Guju`s assesment is 2/3`s right. Some sort of brain block has no doubt inserted the final 1/3.

But then, me being Muslim neccessarily means I can`t have any association with India to old Gujuman there...

stuka,

That difficult to believe? :-)

Let us hope the resolution will pass. It should, given the advance declaration.

*** Removed for violating InterAct Guidelines ***