The Triple Conspiracy

``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.

# 1

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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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!``

I think you are a Genius :))

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 ***

Ferzi:

…all this brouhaha is so very understandable…we muslims may have one book and on prophet (sorry Sattar saheb;)…but we do subscribe to several Allahs…each small group of us has their own Allah….this is the only explanation one can proffer…otherwise if Allah was one…then how in Jam-the camel driver’s name would these various factions and off shoots would be killing each other and dispatching them to some hell in the name of the same Allah?…

khair…on talaaq!

(…all the following is from memory…don’t have my books or notes here…so if any one you wants to assign me a choice spot in hell…hopefully they will have the courtesy to afford me some good defense lawyers first)

Islam is a deen…the approache to practice this deen is called a madhab (or mazhab in urdu: plural madhaib/mazhaib)…

in the days of Muhammed (saw) there was only one deen and one madhab ..understandably…the various madhaibs…and splits came later…the sunnis with their hanafis, humbalis, shafii, malikis…and the shias with ithna asharis, ismailis, khojas, bohris….and then the minor offshoots….druzes, naziris and so on…each of these groups and sub groups practice Islam their own way…naturally!….:)

so back to utterances of three talaqs:

during the lifetime of Muhammed (saw)..the overwhelming occurrences of talaqs were ‘delayed’ talaq…in stages….the quickie divorce was tolerated but not kindly looked upon…

..this continued for about three years after his death…( am relying on memory again)…this continued through abu bakr’s caliphate and went on unchanged during omar’s first or second year…somewhere around that time hazrat omar seemed it fit to change the rules!….since then…the quickie divorce came into fashion over the delayed divorce…and is continuing to this day in the mostly sunni world…

..to be fair to omar…towards the end of his caliphate he broached this subject in one of his letters and wondered aloud if he had done the right thing and also speculated aloud about the misuses of the quickie divorce and expressed a desire or hope to revert things back to the older way…but he died shortly afterwards…

lve,

t

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.

I would have liked more women to participate in this discussion...

NHK, vertex, urstruly, warpster...your inputs are educative. Soysauce...huh? Harimau...!! Mahesh...glad you still read me, even though you have resolved not to talk with me:) Anil, temporal...will have more to say later.

stuka #26

``Interesting, And what about Zafar?``

That many Muslims continue to be model Indians shouldn`t blind us to the strange fact that very many Indian Muslims turn into active anti-nationals. These Muslims transfer their loyalties to unfriendly countries the moment they have a chance to leave India. That couldn`t be because Muslims have a terrible existence in India. A look at minorities in other countries will establish that.

In essence, we appear to be feeding enemy children. The game has been so rigged that nobody is supposed to be even talk about it. This is wilful self-destruction.

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

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

Vertex

Probably we do not understand each other`s point of view because we come from different backgrounds. My point is that ``procedure`` is an integral part of a law. A law is just a statement of a principle, however, it is the procedure that the enforcement agency and justice must follow to implement that law. That is the reason when a law is enacted, a whole procedure is written for court and police. This Procedure Code, as it is called, is a host of ``IF``, ``THEN`` scenarios. In addition it dictates the prosecution and defense (plaintiffs in case of Talaq) a protocol as to how to sum up their respective cases so that court (judge) is able to judge whether the principle (law) applies or not. This is a very intensive science.

Now lets come back to the main topic of this article – which is the ``three Talaqs``. It is a common conception that as a man utters the word Talaq three times the separation happens and it is irreversible. But what people don`t know is that it is only the ``law`` or the ``principle``. But in order to understand how this law applies or is implemented, we must look into the procedure.

Now there are two possibilities that the law is applicable. In the first case, let us suppose that we live in a society where institutions of law and justice do not exist. In that case the principle is applicable as it is. In such society when a husband utters three Talaqs the talaq happens immediately. The couple still have a choice to keep living together or get separated if the ignore the word of God. Either way they are answerable to Allah. In this case this principle is applied in its most basic form and it is totally voluntary. That was the situation in early days of Islam.

In the second case, let us suppose that we live in a society where institutions of law and justice are established and laws are enforced thru state apparatus. This is the actual life that we live in now. It is now a fact that whenever a Nikah i.e. a marriage contract is executed, it is executed by a state appointed Qazi, who registers this document as a legally binding document and Nikah is registered with state. Similarly, when this contract is annulled, in case of a talaq or a khulla, the state is also involved – the talaq has to be registered with state.

According to the Ijtehad done in 1962, when Mulim Family Law was being formulated in Pakistan, the state assumed the role of an arbiter while executing the Talaq or Khulla proceedings. This Ijtehad was based primarily on the Quranic injunction ``And if you fear a breach between the two, then appoint judge from his people and a judge from her people; if they both desire agreement, Allah will effect harmony between them, surely Allah is Knowing, Aware.`` The Women 4-35. The jurists argued that since the contract of Nikah is excuted by state, therefore state has the right to interfere in the proceedings of its annulment as well. The majority of Mujtahideen i.e. Jurists have a consensus (Ijma`a) over this Ijtehad. Thus it became the law of the land.

Now as far as procedure of implementation of this law is concerned there are two possibilities:

First possibility is that man uttered Talaq for three times. In this case court has no choice but to execute the annulment of marriage contract and man loses the right to mehr and also whatever was agreed in the pre-nuptial the man is liable to pay./

The second possibility is that man (or woman) seek separation thru court. In this case man informs judge that he is divorcing his wife; in this case regardless of how many times man has utterd Talaq the court assumes it as one Talaq. The court informs the women and since one Talaq is reversible, the court give man and wife a mandatory period of three months to reconcile. If reconciliation does not happen, at the end of the period court assumes that the second talaq has happened, which is also reversible. The court again give the couple a three month period for reconciliation and may appoint arbiters to make mends between them. At the end of this period if reconciliation does not happen, the court assumes that the third talaq has happened, which is irreversible. The same procedure applies when woman requests a Khulla i.e. certain mandatory period is given to couple to make mends etc.

This is basically the law based on Hanafi Fiqah which all Mulsims who follow the Ehl-e-Sunnat-wal-Jammat (non-Shia) follow and that includes both Deobandi and Brelvi school of thought as well. As far as Shia (Fiqah-e-Jafria) is concerned I plead my ignorance. Probably, what is happening in India is being demanded by Fiqah-e-Jafria, can someone confirm?

Urstruly # 38 - It was very eloquently put and added to my knowledge about this very important civic matter. Thanks.

By the way, while we are focusing on HOW MANY rights Islam gives to woman in asking for divorce, lets also remember that NO such rights exist as per Church. Marriage is indissolubile, especially in Roman Catholic Churches.

Here is what St. Paul says: ``To them that are married, not I but the Lord commandeth, that the wife depart not from her husband. And if she depart, she must remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband.`` (I Cor., vii, 10, 11).

Of course, this does not give a free license to Muslims to play havoc with the Islamic jurisprudence governing marriage/divorce issues. I simply brought up the above point for those who instead of productively engaging in this VERY important debate - simply look at it as an opportunity to bash Islam.

Farzana:

Howdy.

[Jameda, a sprightly young woman, had gone up to the Prophet and told him that she wanted to leave her husband. The Prophet, not one bit perturbed, had asked, “Why, is he not a good Muslim?” “Oh, he is a very good Muslim,” she replied. “Does he not love you?”“He gives me more than I need.” “Then what is it?” asked the Prophet. Jameda, without any hesitation, replied, “I don’t like him anymore.” The Prophet granted her the divorce.]

I think the above example is pretty self explanatory.

[On July 4, the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board, the highest body governing civil law for Muslims in India, is likely to adopt a resolution scrapping the ‘triple talaq’; it is set to adopt ‘phased talaq’, with the couple being given three months to think it over. According to a report, the AIMPLB believes this is in line with Shariat-approved procedure. Many Islamic countries, including Pakistan, do not follow the ‘triple talaq’ system. Even within India, there are differing opinions about its validity. But the system has persisted.]

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 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 `

``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.

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.

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

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.

Farzana,

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

Bye Bye.

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

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

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;)

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)

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 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

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?

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 ;)

`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.

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.

Farzana,
have been in bed with flu( winter Down Under!) so haven`t written earlier. I am so glad this is happening, because anything that happens to women in India affects all Indian women sooner or later, whether it be the Bhanwari rape case (what`s she doing now, btw) or Shah Bano. No woman is an island, etc. Whenever I talk about discriminatory customs-the laws are fine as far as I`m concerned-one male relative will invariably say, ``Be grateful you`re not Muslim.`` They`d still say that because of the political face of Islam being that cultured man so partial to naachne-gaanewalis Mr Bukhari, but at least it`s one step in making the law more fair.

Farzana #53
``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.``
Farzana, I have no problems with respect. I respect respect. I too respect Gita in a vague sort of way.But I would always place my better judgement and the sense of what I think is wrong or right ahead of Gita. I would place my better judgement ahead of what my parents or any other entity tht I respect says. And that is sacrilegious in Islam,which worries me.
Imade all the arguments I could in a long and winding discussion I had with tahmed on this topic on the Secularity of India board, if you are interested
``I even found a copy of Iravati Karve`s interpretation of the `Mahabharata` translated into Gujarati. Have you read her? ``
No I havent. I have read the Narendra Kohli version though which is quite engaging.

The promised ``more``.

A chance remark by an observant and intelligent Pakistani journalist, from the increasingly emancipated Urdu media there, sent me on a bit of a search last weekend.

This journalist told me that in India ``more Muslim girls are marrying Hindu boys lately``, and at that juncture, I chose to put it aside as a bit of whinging. He then put me in touch with some clerics who gave me some more details. I also did discuss this in Delhi with some people who know about such matters, and transpires that the female-male ratio skews in some parts of UP, Haryana and Rajasthan, are leading to situations where brides are being sought from far and brought into families.

Now obviously, if a typical rural/semi-rural family brings in a bride from an area where there are language and cooking differences, then there is a problem.

So, looking closer, and that means taking a drive to areas around Delhi where population demographics by religion did not change much after 1947, it seems that families of cast-away young Muslim girls, who have been divorced for a variety of reasons (shotgun marriages with visiting rich Muslims, triple talaq divorces for a variety of reasons, etc.) are not averse to the idea of getting such young women married into neighbourhood familes where language and food, as well as other traditions, are similar.

Obviously there is a lot of secrecy behind such marriages.

1) Is the MPLB reacting to such scenarios?

2) Is the MPLB even relevant in some parts of India?

I shall be back with more inputs.

The update:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/765003.cms

Triple Talaq to go out softly

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ MONDAY, JULY 05, 2004 05:25:53 AM ]

KANPUR/NEW DELHI: The All India Muslim Personal Law Board,
regarded as India`s most authoritative body on Muslim personal
law, has taken two significant steps forward. On Sunday, the
board decided to launch a time-bound campaign to discourage
`triple talaaq in one sitting` by asking Muslims all over the
country to adopt the Shariat-approved talaaq-e-ehsan (one
divorce in one sitting).


In another decision that could affect the lives of millions of
Muslim women, the board called for a revision of legal
provisions which exclude women from inheriting agricultural
property.

Expressing concern over the misuse of `triple talaaq in one
sitting`, a majority of the 41-member board`s executive
committee were of the view that the procedure should be
discouraged and the model Nikahnama drafted by the board
adopted instead.

Briefing mediapersons, the board`s general secretary, Maulana
Syed Nizamuddin, said, ``The executive committee, after
reviewing the work done for social reform, has decided to
launch an intensive campaign appealing and persuading the
community to follow the rules of the Shariat in matters of
marriage, termination of marriage by talaaq, rights and
obligations of husband and wife and inheritance.`` The board
would take stock of the situation at the general body meeting
to be held in Calicut in Kerala in December 2004, he added.

The model Nikahnama suggests that in case of any marital
dispute, the contesting parties should either appoint an
arbitrator (who may be an elder from either side) or should
approach the Darul Quza, who would settle the dispute as per
the marriage contract (Nikahnama) and Shariat laws, said Qasim
Rasool Ilyas, the Muslim personal law board spokesperson.

Yusuf Hatim Muchala, a board member, was of the opinion that
triple talaaq should be used only in emergency cases and
extreme circumstances when instant divorce became necessary.

Besides the triple talaaq and model Nikahnama, the board
reviewed the report of the Darul Quza committee.

Farzana (#54):

The issue isn`t whether you (or most girls) prefer monogamy or that most men prefer monogamy as well. The issue isn`t even monogamy Vs. polygamy, or instant Vs. prolonged divorce being better. The issue is that a girl should have the same opportunity as anyone else (equality and fairness). Given the opportunity, more girls will be daring to say ``hey why can`t I have more than one boyfriend/partner/husband`` should they prefer it that way.

Equal opportunity doesn`t make people equal. It simple gives people the ability to earn their inequality. We aren`t created equal except perhaps identical twins and even they don`t stay equal for long.

Islamic laws do favor men though they may be better than what existed before 600 AD. In this era, either we scrap them for secular ones, or change them radically to allow a woman to have 4 husbands (along with 4 newspapers).

And boy, I thought the one god didn`t have a gender. That I leave to the ``manizing`` female prophet to decide.

Satire

PS,
Men (whether married/partnered/unattached) indeed have a lower average IQ than women but the lethal cocktail for them is stupidity mixed with sexual frustration.

Hi Veeresh:

Interesting inputs, but am not sure about some...
[#56...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.]

I think it is more likely to be a rethink on the part of some people given the international perception of Islam being a religion from the cave ages. There is a genuine attempt to distance IMs from other Islamic societies, and when we see ourselves against, say, Turkey or Malaysia, we do come out looking silly in certain contexts.

The fact that the MPLB has also made provisions for women inheriting agricultural land is a sort of indicator that the issue is not solely about talaq, but about giving some basic rights to women. How and when it will be implemented is another matter.

[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.]

This is historical in nature...since Islam has not looked down on divorced/widowed women (we can of course point out several cases of other sorts of exploitation), acceptance has not been a problem; in fact, it is deemed to be `sawaab`. Among the Bohras, at least that is what they said several years ago, after a period of mourning for four months, a widow would be asked by her grown-up son whether she would be interested in marrying again.

[#59...2) Is the MPLB even relevant in some parts of India?]

It is politically relevant as a representative of the IMs, but as I wrote in this article, there are several communities that have their own forms of talaq, and other laws.
- - -

#57 by nb:

Hope you are feeling better today...get well soon.

Nothing much heard about Bhanwari Devi anymore. Did you see `Bawander`? I hated it.

[Whenever I talk about discriminatory customs-the laws are fine as far as I`m concerned-one male relative will invariably say, ``Be grateful you`re not Muslim.``]

Lol...after reading some suggestions on this board, I too will say that to you, as you might be presented such unwanted `temptations` as a series of husbands :)
- - -

#58 by rahul_capri:

I was merely responding to your comment, ``As for those who are saying rejection of Quran altogether, every change has to be gradual``. I agree with you, which is why I said that each society`s perceptions differ.

[I would place my better judgement ahead of what my parents or any other entity tht I respect says. And that is sacrilegious in Islam,which worries me.]

There is no monolithic Islam, and re. the issue of talaq, I have brought that forth. Some groups do consider the Islamailis and Bohras and other sects not real Muslims, but when there are divisions even among the `purer` ones, being sacrilegious too is a matter of perception. Most Muslims do not give a hoot about Islam. It is a convenient ploy. If they did, there would not be so many fissures, as Islam and the Book would not permit it.

Farzana:

I have often wondered why someone from within Islam, not look at the subset of tenets and beliefs of Islam, and bring them out as the social contracts and bill of rights for modern Islamic society? I would assume that a subset would be acceptable to all civilized societies.

History tells us that external forces from societies whose economic well being is threatened, will continue to mount pressure until such a movement comes out from within. This was true in Brahmanic times and Buddhist and Jain reforms came out, I am certain during pre-Christian and pre-Islamic times similar situations must have prevailed. Certainly more recently even non-relgious forces (like Communist countries) triggered changes from within after a sustained external pressure. Within a society there will always be forces that will be the vanguard for such changes who will fight against the forces which refuse to accept a smaller subset. I refuse to believe that Islamic thoughts and socieites are incapable of producing such reformers, and can only produce Osama Bin Ladins. Come to think of it, Mohamad was born in pre-Islamic Arabia, however, great many scholars were born in Islamic times also. May be someone can tell me how many reformers (not enforcers / preachers) have come from within Islamic societies, and what kind of opposition they had to face. I have heard about one Turkish reformer, Ataturk.

Anil

Dear Farzana:
Thanks for an informative article, telling us about the various interpretation of muslim divorce law in different Indian communities; somehow I had assumed that the same law applied to all IMs. If there are different interpretations, to whom will the APMLB interpretation apply, or do the courts use different interpretations for different IM communities? Regarding registration, can either spouse register the marriage or do both parties have to agree to register it? Do you know how many women are there on the APMLB and who appoints/nominates/elects them? [sorry, I haven`t read most of the interacts and you may have already answered these questions.]

``Most Muslims do not give a hoot about Islam``
Or christians about christianity or hindus about hindu religion. Life is beautiful!

Finally, did you publish this article elsewhere too?

t bhai …

Agreed with everything you said … but must ask … why “maulana” me?

When did I ever argue against basic decency … or objected to someone worshipping a monkey or two lesbians exchanging love vows … ? I am all for civility and paying property taxes on time. On occasion I did condemn bad poetry … but does that make me a maulana? Huh??

Urstruly,

Sorry for the late reply. Was out of town for the long week-end...

Some clarification: are you implying that the recourse for women is to try to pre-empt the triple talaq by going to the courts first? Also, I am confused as to why the first procedure (i.e. the triple talaq without court involvement) is a viable option. Since the court has executed the marriage contract, and is necessarily involved when the divorce takes place…how can the man get away with uttering triple talaq. Wouldn’t the courts be justified in treating it as one?

Thanks…

Vertex # 66

You ask ``Since the court has executed the marriage contract, and is necessarily involved when the divorce takes place…how can the man get away with uttering triple talaq. ``

Good question. In Pakistan, in 1962 when Muslim Family Law was enacted - prior to that there was no formal procedure to register the Nikah i.e. pre-Nuptial agreement. Most of the nikah, especially in villages were done verbally in front of four witnesses. or even if a nikahnama was written down, it was written by qazi so qazi and not the state were the executors. This evil was handed down to us by british who abolished the centuries-old institution of Qazi-ul-Qazat in just one instance. So after 1962 state of Pakitan had no jurisdiction over a pre-nuptial contract that was not executed by itself in the first place. Threfore, that is the reason there are both provisions in law. In law abiding societies such -necessary evils have a sunset clause - but pakistan is a banana republic where rulers are the one who gang rape all laws including constitution, what to expect a law that protects a lowly creature like woman.

In addition, even though there is this law of progressive talaqs in the books, state has no interest in it to enforce it. People have no confidence in courts either and they try to settle outside. The judges take bribes sitting right in their courtrooms. Even if you want a court date you have to bribe judge through his registrar otherwise you wont get a date in years. Now since men are financially stronger than woman they can bribe judges to not give dates to the women who is seeking a khulla. Usally such cases drag on for years and by that time childrens are old enough and woman loses the right to their custody any way. So this is the situation with law and its enforcement in real world. That is the reason I am against enacting new laws because it just opens up new avenues for judges and enforcvement officials to take bribes and make the life of human beings miserable. I will favor new laws when I will be sure that laws will be enfored as well.

Dear dost-mittarji:

Let me answer some of your queries...
``If there are different interpretations, to whom will the APMLB interpretation apply, or do the courts use different interpretations for different IM communities?``

The MPLB`s interpretation would not apply to Ismailis, Bohras and certain other communities; the courts come into the picture only when both the parties resort to legal separation.

``Regarding registration, can either spouse register the marriage or do both parties have to agree to register it?``

Both the parties have to be present at the registration together with their respective witnesses.

``Do you know how many women are there on the APMLB and who appoints/nominates/elects them?``

I am sorry, but am not certain; trying to get info on this.

``Finally, did you publish this article elsewhere too?``

Not this version. Although I had written about the Khatoonisa case a few years ago and was usd in some Gulf newspaper as well! I have also written about different forms of talaq earlier...

PS: It is difficult for some people to digest it when I do in fact question certain practices of the Muslim community. I have chosen not to respond to the few cynics who seem to know about an agenda even here. My silence has left this board free of an inter-religious battle, which I most certainly did not want, and the reason why I have refused to discuss other laws.

- - -
Satire:
What is this about allowing women to have four husbands? Does this amount to equal opportunity? I think not...

Anil:

You asked whether there have been any attempts in the past to bring about social reformation. I had written about it elsewhere and had in fact reproduced it a while ago...re-posting a large excerpt for you...

Rediff On The Net, Life/Style: Farzana Versey traces the Islamic pilgrim`s progress

The Islamic Pilgrim`s Progress

It`s such a funny situation. Some years ago, people found me terribly
liberal whenever I made a critical appraisal of Islam. Today, if I say
something in its favour, they brand me regressive or a closet fanatic!
There is a mistaken notion that every believer in Islam is blind to its
flaws. Way back in 1948, Sheikh Muhammad Ashraf published a journal called
The Islamic Literature, which listed, among its objectives, a need to find
a new interpretation of Islam to fit the changed conditions prevailing
then. The social conditions and mores the prophet had to deal with then
were primitive.

Tied as the religion is to a single source -- the holy book -- it is an
easy target. Every time it is sought to be evaluated, its authority gets
diminished for it is invariably evaluated on the basis of the Shariat.
However, in 1951, Jordan brought in a legislation ostensibly based on the
Ottoman Law of Family Rights which set down many changes, especially
reg