Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Hindus in Sindh: Religious divide prevails at relief camp

Islam and Sectarianism
28 Sep 2010, NewAgeIslam.Com

Hindus in Sindh: Religious divide prevails at relief camp

By Saher Baloch, Karachi

Even after facing a natural calamity and being displaced from their home and hearth, people at a roadside camp near Makli are reluctant to give up their prejudices and will not even share water with members of the Hindu community while sharing the same camp.

Some 35 families are living at a camp in front of the district and sessions court near Makli, Thatta. Arranged side by side, these camps include members of a minority community as well. Despite a drinking water tank just a few steps away, arranged by an NGO a month ago, most of the people at the camp walk as far as six kilometers in search of water just because that tank is frequented by the Hindus.

"I cannot drink water from the same water tank as these people," said Khairoo, 45, who lost everything in the recent floods. Attempting to give a reason he said that the water got "impure" if a non-Muslim drank from it. Lighting a cigarette as he spoke, he candidly added: "My family and I have compromised with our life, home and everything that we had. But we cannot compromise with our belief."

Elderly people were of the same opinion as well. Sammo Ali, 75, is living at the camp since Ramazan and proudly says that he has not touched the food that was given to them and to the Hindus in the same dishes. Although all these people belong to the same village, yet there is a divide in the camps as those belonging to the lowest caste or minority are kept aside, as a medical camp set up by Pakistan Medical Association (PMA) is built in between.

The minorities living at the other side of the camp, oblivious to how they are treated, keep a vigilant eye for a van or a truck carrying food. Most of them admit that they get into a fray if "one of them hits us," but some of them silently take the beating when a fight breaks out during food distribution.

Soni, 16, left her goth with her parents when they heard the flood warnings from a nearby mosque. Being the eldest among her eight siblings, she said that women from the "other side" often beat her sisters up when they went ahead to get food. She said her family had just been waiting for the floods to subside so that they could go back to their home. "We are continuously suffering by the hands of these people and have to accept the fact that we have to stay with them until we are free to go to our homes."

Discrimination on the basis of caste and religion was a huge issue in Sindh, said Pirbhu Satyani, founder and an active member of the Pakistan Dalit Solidarity Network.

He said that for the past few weeks he had been receiving a lot of complaints where, merely on the basis of religious differences, many people belonging to the minority sect were not issued registration cards at the camps.

"A majority of the two million people belonging to the Dalits and Scheduled castes are settled in the province of Sindh. And even being one of the early settlers of Umerkot and Thatta district, they are silently suffering from the discriminatory treatment meted out to them from various quarters."

In the same vein he said that what he found to be most distressing was the fact that even in these times when a large portion of the country's population had been displaced with no clue about their future, some people were still bothered about such matters. "The fact is that as a nation we have let the differences, either they be of ethnic, sectarian or religious nature, grow inside us and they are now so deep-rooted that no matter what happens we think in the same terms."

The camp is being run by lawyers and doctors belonging to the Lawyers Bar Council and the Pakistan Medical Association respectively.

Source: The News, Islamabad

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamIslamAndSectarianism_1.aspx?ArticleID=3476



--
Asadullah Syed

Peace might upend wealth of Israelis

Peace might upend wealth of Israelis

by Jonathan Cook on September 28, 2010

Construction resume in Occupied West Bank. Expansion of Jewish settlement of Ariel September 27, 2010 on Palestinian occupied land. REUTERS/Nir Elias

With the resumption of settlement construction in the West Bank yesterday, Israel's powerful settler movement hopes that it has scuttled peace talks with the Palestinians, too.

It would be misleading, however, to assume that the major obstacle to the success of talks is the right-wing political ideology the settler movement represents. Equally important are deeply entrenched economic interests shared across Israeli society.

These interests took root more than six decades ago with Israel's establishment and have flourished at an ever-accelerating pace since Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip after the Arab-Israeli War in 1967.

Even many Israeli Jews living within the recognised borders of Israel privately acknowledge that they are the beneficiaries of the seizure of another people's lands, homes, businesses and bank accounts.

Most Israelis profit directly from the continuing dispossession of millions of Palestinian refugees.

Israeli officials assume that the international community will bear the burden of restitution for the refugees. The problem for Israel's Jewish population is that the refugees now living in exile were not the only ones dispossessed.

The fifth of Israel's citizens who are Palestinian but survived the upheaval of 1948 found themselves either transformed into internally displaced people or the victims of a land-nationalisation programme that stripped them of their ancestral property.

Even if Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, signed away the rights of the refugees, he would have no power to do the same for Israel's Palestinian citizens, also known as Israeli Arabs. Peace, as many Israelis understand, would open a Pandora's box of historic land claims from Palestinian citizens at the expense of Israel's Jewish citizens.

But the threat to the economic privileges of Israeli Jews would not end with a reckoning over the consequences caused by the state's creation. The occupation of the Palestinian territories after 1967 spawned many other powerful economic interests opposed to peace.

The most visible constituency are the settlers, who have benefited hugely from government subsidies and tax breaks designed to encourage Israelis to relocate to the West Bank. Peace Now estimates that such benefits alone are worth more than US$550 million (Dh2 billion) a year.

Hundreds of businesses serving the settlers are booming in the 60 per cent of the West Bank, the so-called Area C, which falls under Israel's full control. The real estate and construction industries, in particular, benefit from cut-price land – and increased profits – made available by theft from Palestinian owners.

Other businesses, meanwhile, have moved into Israel's West Bank industrial zones, benefiting from cheap Palestinian labour and from discounted land, tax perks and lax enforcement of environmental protections.

Much of the tourism industry also depends on Israel's hold over the holy sites located in East Jerusalem.

This web of interests depends on what Akiva Eldar, of the Haaretz newspaper, terms "land-laundering" overseen by government ministries, state institutions and Zionist organisations. These murky transactions create ample opportunities for corruption that have become a staple for Israel's rich and powerful.

But the benefits of occupation are not restricted to the civilian population. The most potent pressure group in Israel – the military – has much to lose from a peace agreement, too.

The ranks of Israel's career soldiers, and associated security services such as the Shin Bet intelligence service, have ballooned during the occupation.

The demands of controlling another people around the clock justifies huge budgets, the latest weaponry (much of it paid for by the United States) and the creation of a powerful class of military bureaucrat.

While teenage conscripts do the dangerous jobs, the army's senior ranks retire in their early forties on full pensions, with lengthy second careers ahead in business or politics.

Many also go on to profit from the burgeoning "homeland security" industries in which Israel excels. Small specialist companies led by former generals offer a home to retired soldiers drawing on years of experience running the occupation.

Those who spent their service in the West Bank and Gaza Strip quickly learn how to apply and refine new technologies for surveillance, crowd control and urban warfare that find ready markets overseas. In 2006 Israel's defence exports reached $3.4bn, making the country the fourth largest arms dealer in the world.

These groups are concerned that a peace agreement and Palestinian statehood would turn Israel overnight into an insignificant Middle Eastern state, one that would soon be starved of its enormous US subsidies. In addition, Israel would be forced to right a historic wrong and redirect the region's plundered resources, including its land and water, back to Palestinians, depriving Jews of their established entitlements.

A cost-benefit calculus suggests to most Israeli Jews – including the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu – that a real solution to their conflict with the Palestinians might come at too heavy a price to their own pockets.

* Jonathan Cook is a writer and journalist based in Nazareth, Israel. His latest books are "Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East" and "Disappearing Palestine: Israel's Experiments in Human Despair".

http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2010/09/28/peace-might-upend-wealth-of-israelis/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+SabbahsBlog+%28Sabbah+Report%29&utm_content=Gmail

--
Asadullah Syed

UN Fact-Finding Mission Says Israelis "Executed" US Citizen Furkan Dogan

UN Fact-Finding Mission Says Israelis "Executed" US Citizen Furkan Dogan

by Guest Post on September 28, 2010

Furkan Dogan, a 19-year-old US citizen of Turkish descent, was aboard the Mavi Marmara when he was killed by Israeli commandos. (Photo: freegazaorg)

The report of the fact-finding mission of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on the Israeli attack on the Gaza flotilla released last week shows conclusively, for the first time, that US citizen Furkan Dogan and five Turkish citizens were murdered execution-style by Israeli commandos.

The report reveals that Dogan, the 19-year-old US citizen of Turkish descent, was filming with a small video camera on the top deck of the Mavi Marmara when he was shot twice in the head, once in the back and in the left leg and foot and that he was shot in the face at point blank range while lying on the ground.

The report says Dogan had apparently been "lying on the deck in a conscious or semi-conscious, state for some time" before being shot in his face.

The forensic evidence that establishes that fact is "tattooing around the wound in his face," indicating that the shot was "delivered at point blank range." The report describes the forensic evidence as showing that "the trajectory of the wound, from bottom to top, together with a vital abrasion to the left shoulder that could be consistent with the bullet exit point, is compatible with the shot being received while he was lying on the ground on his back."

Based on both "forensic and firearm evidence," the fact-finding panel concluded that Dogan's killing and that of five Turkish citizens by the Israeli troops on the Mavi Marmari May 31 "can be characterized as extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions." (See Report [.pdf] Page 38, Section 170)

The report confirmed what the Obama administration already knew from the autopsy report on Dogan, but the administration has remained silent about the killing of Dogan, which could be an extremely difficult political problem for the administration in its relations with Israel.

The Turkish government gave the autopsy report on Dogan to the US Embassy in July and it was then passed on to the Department of Justice, according to a US government source who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the administration's policy of silence on the matter. The source said the purpose of obtaining the report was to determine whether an investigation of the killing by the Justice Department (DOJ) was appropriate.

Asked by this writer whether the DOJ had received the autopsy report on Dogan, DOJ spokesperson Laura Sweeney refused to comment.

The administration has not volunteered any comment on the fact-finding mission report and was not asked to do so by any news organization. In response to a query from Truthout, a State Department official, who could not speak on the record, read a statement that did not explicitly acknowledge the report's conclusion about the Israeli executions.

The statement said the fact-finding mission's report's "tone and conclusions are unbalanced." It went on to state, "We urge that this report not be used for actions that could disrupt direct negotiations between Israel and Palestine that are now underway or actions that would make it not possible for Israel and Turkey to move beyond the recent strains in their traditional strong relationship."

Although the report's revelations and conclusions about the killing of Dogan and the five other victims were widely reported in the Turkish media last week, not a single story on the report has appeared in US news media.

The administration has made it clear through its inaction and its explicit public posture that it has no intention of pressing the issue of the murder of a US citizen in cold blood by Israeli commandos.

On June 13, two weeks after the Mavi Marmara attack, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs issued a statement saying that Israel "should be allowed to undertake an investigation into events that involve its national security" and that Israel's military justice system "meets international standards and is capable of conducting a serious and credible investigation."

Another passenger whom forensic evidence shows was killed execution-style, according to the OHCHR report, is Ibrahim Bilgen, a 60-year-old Turkish citizen. Bilgen is believed by forensics experts to have been shot initially from the helicopter above the Mavi Marmara and then shot in the side of the head while lying seriously wounded.

The fact-finding mission was given forensic evidence that, after the initial shot in chest from above, Bilgen was shot in the head with a "soft baton round at such close proximity that an entire bean bag and its wadding penetrated the skull and lodged in the chest from above," the mission concluded.

"Soft baton rounds" are supposed to be fired for nonlethal purposes at a distance and aimed only at the stomach, but are lethal when fired at the head, especially from close range.

The forensic evidence cited by the fact-finding mission on the killing of Dogan and five other passengers came from both the autopsy reports and pathology reports done by forensic personnel in Turkey and from interviews with those who wrote the reports. Experts in forensic pathology and firearms assisted the mission in interpreting that forensic evidence.

The account, provided by the OHCHR of the events on board the Mavi Marmara on its way to help break the economic siege of Gaza May 31 of this year, refutes the version of events aggressively pushed by the Israeli military and supports the testimony of passengers on board.

The report suggests that, from the beginning, Israeli policy viewed the Gaza flotilla as an opportunity to use lethal force against pro-Hamas activists. It quotes testimony by Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak before the Israeli government's Turkel Committee that specific orders were given by the Israeli government "to continue intelligence tracking of the flotilla organizers with an emphasis on the possibility that amongst the passengers in the flotilla there were terror elements who would attempt to harm Israeli forces."

The idea that the passenger list would be seeded with terrorists determined to attack Israeli defense forces appears to have been a ploy to justify treating the operation as likely to require the use of military force against the passengers.

When details of the Israeli plan to forcibly take over the ships in the flotilla were published in the Israeli press on May 30, the passengers on board the Mavi Marmara realized that the Israelis might use deadly force against them. Some leaders of the IHH (the Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Aid), which had purchased the ships for the mission, were advocating defending the boat against the Israeli boarding attempt, whereas other passengers advocated nonviolence only.

That led to efforts to create improvised weapons from railings and other equipment on the Mavi Marmara. However, the commission concluded that there was no evidence of any firearms having being taken aboard the ship, as charged by Israel.

The report notes that the Israeli military never communicated a request by radio to inspect the cargo on board any of the ships, apparently contradicting the official justification given by the Israeli government for the military attack on the Mavi Marmara and other ships of preventing any military contraband from reaching Gaza.

According to the OHCHR report, Israeli Chief of General Staff Gabi Ashkenazi testified to the Turkel Committee August 11 that the initial rules of engagement for the operation prohibited live fire except in life-threatening situations, but that that they were later modified to target protesters "deemed to be violent" in response to the resistance by passengers.

That decision apparently followed the passengers' successful repulsion of an Israeli effort to board the ship from Zodiac boats.

The report confirms that, from the beginning of the operation, passengers were fired on by helicopters flying above the Mavi Marmara to drop commandos on the deck.

Contrary to Israeli claims that one or more Israeli troops were wounded by firearms, the report says no medical evidence of a gunshot wound to an Israeli soldier was found.

The OHCHR report confirms accounts from passengers on the Mavi Marmara that defenders subdued roughly ten Israeli commandos, took their weapons from them and threw them in the sea, except for one weapon hidden as evidence. The Israeli soldiers were briefly sequestered below and some were treated for wounds before being released by the defenders.

The OHCHR fact-finding mission will certainly be the most objective, thorough and in-depth inquiry into the events on board the Mavi Marmara and other ships in the flotilla of the four that have been announced.

The fact-finding mission was chaired by Judge Karl T. Hudson-Phillips, Q.C., retired judge of the International Criminal Court and former attorney general of Trinidad and Tobago, and included Sir Desmond de Silva, Q.C. of the United Kingdom, former chief prosecutor of the United Nations-backed Special Court for Sierra Leone and Ms. Mary Shanthi Dairiam of Malaysia, founding member of the board of directors of the International Women's Rights Action Watch Asia Pacific.

The mission interviewed 112 eyewitnesses to the Israeli attack in London, Geneva, Istanbul and Amman, Jordan. The Israeli government refused to cooperate with the fact-finding mission by making personnel involved in both planning and carrying out the attack available to be interviewed.

The Turkish governments announced its own investigation of the Israeli attack on August 10. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon announced the formation of a "Panel of Inquiry" on August 2, but its mandate was much more narrowly defined. It was given the mission to "receive and review the reports of the national investigations with the view to recommending ways of avoiding similar incidents in the future."

* Gareth Porter is an investigative historian and journalist specialising in US national security policy. The paperback edition of his latest book, "Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam," was published in 2006.

(truthout)



--
Asadullah Syed

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

The Mohammad Ke Dahshatgardon






--
Asadullah Syed

Peaceful Islam is genuine Islam, the mainstream Islam: Sultan Shahin tells the UNHRC

Islam and the West
25 Sep 2010, NewAgeIslam.Com

Peaceful Islam is genuine Islam, the mainstream Islam: Sultan Shahin tells the UNHRC

United Nations Human Rights Council, 15th session, Geneva 13 September - 1 October 2010

Agenda Item 8: General Debate on Follow-up and implementation of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action

 

Oral Statement by Sultan Shahin, Editor, New Age Islam

24 September 2010

On behalf of International Club for Peace Research

Mr. President,

The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action asks us to work against all kinds of intolerance and xenophobia.

The 9th anniversary of the horror of 9/11 was observed recently in the midst of bitter controversies sparked by the proposed mosque near the ground zero site and the threats to burn the Quran. The debate surrounding these issues has further intensified the religious intolerance, and xenophobia facing the Muslim minorities in some quarters in the West today.  But I think, we Muslims too have not helped our cause by reacting with a wild and generalised condemnation of the West, using expressions like "sanctimonious arrogance of the West," as the ambassador of an important Muslim country did in an informal meeting in this building a few days ago.

There is only one way to both protect world peace and defend Muslims' rights: let the silent majority of peaceful Muslims assert their choice. Peaceful Islam is genuine Islam, the mainstream Islam, as I shall demonstrate, and if we are to oppose the regrettable anti Muslim hysteria triggered in some Western circles, it is our prime task, as Muslims, not to fuel these fears further. This is the point I am going to develop here.

A phenomenal rise in Islamophobia now bordering on anti-Muslim frenzy in some quarters has alarmed the civil society in the West as much as in the Muslim communities around the world. From US President Barack Obama and other Western leader  to numerous social activists and media analysts have said repeatedly that the perpetrators of 9/11 were terrorists and the West is at war with the followers of Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda, not with Islam or Muslims in general. But the fear of Islam is nevertheless steadily growing, although the world has to fear not Islam, but those who distort Islam just to find something "holy" in their monstrous deeds.

The silencing of the mainstream Muslim community by a violent imperialist minority starts with the misappropriation of the scriptures to justify inhumane acts. As I shall demonstrate, the real "infidels" are not the peaceful majority of Muslims – themselves victims of terror acts – but the self proclaimed leaders of "Jihadism". It is no accident that most Jihadis belong to a tiny Muslim sect called Ahl-e-Hadith (people of the Hadith), the most fanatical section of what I am constrained to call "Petrodollar Islam", and the West needs to understand why.

The main reason behind growing Islamophobia and now even a Quranophobia obviously is that Al-Qaeda and its Wahhabi supporters seek justification for their nefarious acts in Islam and certain verses of the Holy Quran. On the other hand mainstream Muslims, the Sufi Muslims, too are not coming out to say clearly and repeatedly, as they should, that the war verses of the Quran are no longer applicable to us as they had been revealed to just provide guidance in a particular situation 14 centuries ago and that situation no longer prevails, nor it can. It is this stalemate that has put the focus on our holy scripture and is prompting some people in the West to protest against the holy Quran.

We Muslims must understand that and, instead of just showing our anger at the Western Islamophobes, we should come out with clear and unambiguous condemnation of the terrorists of al-Qaeda. It is a shame indeed that our ulema, the Islamic scholars, have not yet declared Osma bin Laden and his followers beyond the pale of Islam, while they routinely keep calling one or the other sect of Islam as Kafir, the infidel.

We Muslims can criticise the Western media for portraying Islam as a religion that encourages war. But we must also understand why they do so and through what processes they have developed such a notion.

How can we really blame the West for considering us warmongers if our own people, some of them with vast petrodollar resources, keep propagating an ideology that proclaims that Jihad, in the sense of Qital (war), is the sixth pillar of Islam?  So what the Prophet called lesser Jihad is now being propagated as the greater jihad and an essential pillar of Islam.

This ideological transition has not taken place by accident or by evolution. Less than half a century after the demise of the Prophet, Arab imperialist elements killed the entire family of the Prophet and hijacked the religion he had brought to the world and used it to establish an empire and then constantly sought to expand it. These elements had been inveterate enemies of Islam in its infancy and had accepted the religion only after their comprehensive defeat. They had clearly done so in order to subvert the religion from within. To justify their designs they made two fundamental changes in Islam: they created a parallel scripture called the Hadith (propagated as sayings of the Prophet) and an institution of ulema (religious scholars) for which there was no room in original Islam. Thus a simple religion that valued piety above everything else was transformed into a complex polity that sought to dominate the world. The battles that the Prophet had fought were battles for sheer survival. Now battles were fought to create, maintain and then expand an empire in the name of spreading the message of Islam.

Seeking justification for their imperialist adventures they went on to directly contravene some very precise injunctions of God in the Quran. God had, for instance, prohibited aggression but a new category of Jihad was created and was called "offensive" Jihad.

The Quran said: "God does not like the aggressors" (2:190), but a number of prominent Islamic scholars started professing the doctrine of offensive jihad.  Some are doing so even today. They claim that offensive Jihad is a necessary means to establish the supremacy of Islam and to destroy the power and influence of "kufr" (infidelity). Indeed some of them consider it not just lawful but even a farz-e kifayah or collective, obligatory duty for the entire Muslim community. Jihadis make use of such rulings to justify their killings of mainstream Muslims, even those who may be worshiping in mosques or praying at shrines, as in their view these people are not only not fulfilling their duty but by staying away from war are actually helping people they call the "infidel."

To pursue their goals these enemies of Islam distorted the religion in many ways. One of these was to transform situational assertions of the Quran into permanent injunctions of universal significance. This was done particularly with those verses that were revealed during the period when it had become imperative for the Prophet and his small band of followers to defend themselves with arms. It is these verses that present-day Jihadis too take out of context and use to justify their evil misdeeds. And it is these verses that many in the West find particularly distasteful because they are told by even mainstream Muslims that every verse in the Quran is of universal significance and it is obligatory on all Muslims to obey them. Despite the explosive situation this has created, our religious scholars, even those who are not involved in any Jihad, refuse to come out and explain these verses as being only of historical relevance now.

Another method these imperialists used to subvert Islam in a way that would justify their imperialist wars was to focus on the battles the Prophet had to fight. In this age of internet, it is not difficult for people in the West to find out how early Arab historians themselves painted the Prophet's life-time as a series of battles. The West is trying to understand Islam in the context of tragedies like 9/11, killings in Madrid and London, and a constant barrage of news stories detailing how Muslims are killing one another in acts of suicide bombing and so on. On top of this, if they come across books of Islam's early Arab historians like Ibn-e-Ishaq, Ibn Hisham and al-Tabari and see that Prophet Mohammad's biography (Sirat Rasul Allah) was actually just called a Maghazi, that is, an account of the battles he fought, how can we blame them for forming the impression that Islam is a religion of war-mongers?

We mainstream Muslims know the way Prophet's life is being described is far from the truth.  We know that Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) never actually wielded a sword in his life. We know that all the wars he is supposed to have fought had been imposed upon him and were purely defensive in nature. We know that the Quran does not allow aggression. We know that in Islam killing of one innocent person is equated with killing of all humanity and saving one person's life is equated with saving humanity. We know that the Prophet set an example of peaceableness, and forgiveness that is difficult to match in history.  But, I repeat, how we can blame the West for developing the notion of Islam being a religion that encourages war, particularly in the absence of any clarification on our part about all the distortions of Islamic ideology and how and why they came about.

We clearly need to explain all this repeatedly in order to help the leaders and peace activists in the West to put out the fires of Islamophobia. But we are actually aggravating the situation by allowing the growing influence of Petrodollar Islam to create a widespread confrontationist mindset in sections of the Muslim community and particularly in the Muslim media. The peace-maker is viewed by this section as a friend of the infidel and practically an apostate, hence wajibul qatal (deserving death).

I would like to take this opportunity to urge fellow Muslims around the world to:

a)      Declare repeatedly that Peaceful Islam is genuine Islam, the mainstream Islam. Denounce Osama bin Laden and A-Qaeda terrorists and ask our ulema (religious scholars) to declare these agents of Satan to be beyond the pale of Islam.

b)      Loudly and repeatedly reject the jihadist ideology of Islam-supremacism as incompatible with the teachings of Islam. The Holy Quran asks us repeatedly to respect all previous prophets of God, all 124,000 of them, equally as Prophet Mohammad.

c)      Stop blaming the entire West for provocations of a few right wingers who have a vested interest in fanning the fear of Islam, as they once had in promoting the fear of Catholicism or Judaism. Instead, appreciate those who are making admirable efforts to fight the growing Islamophobia and now even Quranophobia. 

d)     Promote debate within the community to establish the Quranic ideal that even the killing of one innocent person amounts to killing the entire humanity and that the so-called offensive Jihad being propagated by some ulema is just not a part of Islam.

e)      Declare repeatedly the situational nature of the verses that constitute the holy Quran and that instructions that came 1400 years ago for a specific situation are no longer relevant as injunctions from God to be followed in the here and now.

f)       Fight our own victim mentality. Start taking responsibility for our actions.

 

Thank you, Mr. President

URL: http://newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamIslamAndWest_1.aspx?ArticleID=3466

 



--
Asadullah Syed

Nicholas Kristof: America's shame as 'anti-Muslim frenzy' spreads

Islam and Sectarianism
27 Sep 2010, NewAgeIslam.Com

Nicholas Kristof: America's shame as 'anti-Muslim frenzy' spreads

By Nicholas D. Kristof

Sep 13 2010

For a glimpse of how venomous and debased the discourse about Islam has become, consider what Martin Peretz, The New Republic's editor in chief asserted: "Frankly, Muslim life is cheap, most notably to Muslims." Peretz added: "I wonder whether I need honour these people and pretend that they are worthy of the privileges of the First Amendment, which I have in my gut the sense that they will abuse."

Thus a prominent American commentator, in a magazine long associated with tolerance, ponders whether Muslims should be afforded constitutional freedoms. Is it possible to imagine the same kind of casual slur tossed off about blacks or Jews? How do America's nearly seven million American Muslims feel when their faith is denounced as barbaric?

This is one of those times that test our values, a bit like the shameful interning of Japanese-Americans during World War II, or the disgraceful refusal to accept Jewish refugees from Nazi Europe. It would have been natural for this test to have come right after 9/11, but it was forestalled because President George W. Bush pushed back at his conservative ranks and repeatedly warned Americans not to confuse Al Qaeda with Islam.

Now that Bush is no longer in the White House, nativists are back on the warpath. Some opponents of President Obama are circulating bald-faced lies. One e-mail bouncing around adds, "His Muslim faith says it's okay to lie." Or there's the e-mail I received the other day, declaring: "President Obama has directed the United States Postal Service to remember and honour the Muslim Id season with a new commemorative 44 cent first class holiday postage stamp." In fact, it was President Bush's administration that first issued the Id stamp in 2001.

Astonishingly, a Newsweek poll finds that 52 per cent of Republicans believe that it is "definitely true" or "probably true" that "Barack Obama sympathises with the goals of Islamic fundamentalists who want to impose Islamic law around the world." That kind of extremism undermines our democracy, risks violence and empowers jihadis.

In America, bigoted comments about Islam often seem to come from people who have never visited a mosque and know few if any Muslims. In their ignorance, they mirror the anti-Semitism that I hear in Muslim countries from people who have never met a Jew. One American professor wrote to me that "every Muslim in the world" believes that the proposed Manhattan Islamic centre would symbolise triumph over America. That reminded me of Pakistanis who used to tell me that "every Jew" knew of 9/11 in advance, so that none died in the World Trade Centre.

It is perfectly reasonable for critics to point to the shortcomings of Islam or any other religion. There should be more outrage, for example, about the mistreatment of women in many Islamic countries, or the oppression of religious minorities like Christians and Ahmadis in Pakistan. Europe is alarmed that Muslim immigrants have not assimilated well, resulting in tolerance of intolerance, and pockets of wife-beating, forced marriage, homophobia and female genital mutilation. Those are legitimate concerns, but sweeping denunciations of any religious group constitute dangerous bigotry.

If this is a testing time, then some have passed with flying colours. Hats off to a rabbinical student in Massachusetts, Rachel Barenblat, who raised money to replace prayer rugs that a drunken intruder had urinated on at a mosque. She told me that she quickly raised more than $1,100 from Jews and Christians alike.

Above all, bravo to those Christian, Jewish and Muslim leaders who jointly denounced what they called "the anti-Muslim frenzy." "We know what it is like when people have attacked us physically, have attacked us verbally, and others have remained silent," said Rabbi David Saperstein. "It cannot happen here in America in 2010." Cardinal Theodore McCarrick put it this way: "This is not America. America was not built on hate."

"Shame on you," the Rev. Richard Cizik, a leading evangelical Christian, said to those castigating Islam. "You bring dishonour to the name of Jesus Christ. You directly disobey his commandment to love your neighbour." Amen.

Source: New York Times

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamIslamAndSectarianism_1.aspx?ArticleID=3472



--
Asadullah Syed

Are Males Superior to Females in Islam?

Islam, Women and Feminism
27 Sep 2010, NewAgeIslam.Com

Are Males Superior to Females in Islam?

By V A Mohamad Ashrof

This paper argues that dominant norms and practices of gender relations of the Muslim community, far from being rooted in the divine commandments of the sacred text, are actually functions as well as strategies of both traditional and patriarchal interpretation of texts and cultural contexts. The issue of misogyny prevalent among Muslims is surfaced again and again in the Western media, as if everything is perfect among Christians, Jews, and Western civilization. Even though such criticisms are more often emotionally motivated, lacking logic and rationality, and, also, part of a cultural war, some areas of the general Muslim gender perception requires closer scrutiny and re-evaluation. This includes gender differentiation in witnessing and the permissibility of sexual slavery. The verse 2:282 is frequently used by many antagonists of Islâm to exemplify the clear sexism of the Qur'ân. Further, there is a general consensus among classical theologians that slavery and concubinage are allowed in Islâm.

 God, who speaks through the Qur'ân, is characterized by justice, and it is stated clearly in the Qur'ân, that God can never be guilty of "zulm" (unfairness, tyranny, oppression, or wrongdoing).1

Sexism is the dominance of one gender, usually male, over the other gender. Sexism, thus, in the contemporary world, is merely male chauvinism, which epitomizes misogyny, and is very similar to racism. Misogyny is a tool of hegemony, an indispensable one in the realm of ideology, for legitimizing patriarchy and the inherent privileges associated with it for the "stronger sex". There is no reason to single out Islâm or the "popular" version of the faith as misogynous, as every faith – based systems has been made to be sexist. Thanks to the subjective interpretation of the Qur'ân (which is almost exclusively are by men), the predominance of the misogynistic 'ulema', and the regressive Shari'ah law in most Muslim countries, Islâm per se is widely believed to be misogynistic.

Most Muslims-both men and women-consider it self-evident that men are superior to women. Most females, being born in a culturally biased society and having no opportunity for being educated and enlightened, blindly accept the prevailing assumption of superiority of males. Going further, many Muslims justify many manifestations of inequality as inherent in Islâm. Throughout the world, and especially in the Western hemisphere, there exists the notion that Islâm acts as a barrier to women's human rights as it places women into a type of second-class citizenry. The traditional teachings of Islâm, even while, do not advocate the subjugation of women, places her, to some extent, a lesser status. In recent years, largely due to the pressure of anti-women laws in some parts of the Muslim world, women with some degree of education and awareness are beginning to realize that religion is being used as an instrument of oppression rather than as a means of liberation.

Qur'ân:  A Manifesto of Woman's Rights

In pre-Islâmic Arabia, called Jahiliyyah, females were despised. There was preference for male births and hatred for females. 2 Parents were sad on birth of a daughter. 3 Infant daughters were considered a blemish 4 and were buried alive. 5 Women were inherited as goods (4:19) and were denied the good things of life (6:139). Qur'ân abolished all these sexist practices. Islâm allowed women to posses and exercise full control over their wealth and guaranteed women the right to inherit and bequeath property; strict limits were placed on polygamy, and women were allowed to keep their dower (Mehr). 6 Equal human dignity by birth was proclaimed as a Divine Decree. 7 Gender equity is a basic theme of the Scripture. 8 A woman is also under the same ethical obligations as men in respect of her social duties for society (16:97). Both will be equally rewarded for their works. 9 Superiority is determined by righteousness of character and not by gender, race, colour, lineage, wealth etc. (49:13). Security of faith, life, honour, and property of each individual are basic human rights which are inviolable. 10 Everybody has the right to choose a spouse. 11 Freedom of expression, 12 redress of grievances (4:148), right of privacy, 13 presumption of innocence until proved otherwise (49:6), sanctity of name and lineage, 14 right to residence, 15 rights to aesthetic choice, 16 protection of chastity 17 etc are the rights of both genders. Marriage is considered as a 'misaq', a sacred agreement, a sacred contract. 18  The Qur'ân is very clear that the basis of a marital relationship is love and affection between the spouses, not power or control. Marital rape is unacceptable in such a relationship. 19 The house-hold affairs should be conducted through on consultative process between the spouses, and not autocratically (2:233, 42:38).

There is striking difference between what can be safely inferred from the Qur'ân itself and what has frequently been ascribed to it. 20 God who rejects sex and gender as criteria for judgment cannot then teach the oppression of women. Thus, patriarchy is not inherent in the Qur'ân but rather has been read into it throughout the centuries of patriarchal dominance of Muslim societies.

It is morally and socially unacceptable to support a system whereby half of all the human beings that God has created are prevented from engaging in religious thought and leadership. If we understand our God as the Just (Adil) and the Compassionate (al-Rahman), it is morally repugnant and irrational to believe that God would have designated half of this human creation automatically subservient to the other half. The Qur'ânic concept of justice strongly negates any sense of injustice to be attributed to God. 21 All human beings are equal before God, except in the quality of 'taqwa', or God-consciousness. 22 In the Qur'ân, no difference whatever is made between the sexes in relation to God. 23 Religiously speaking, men and women have absolute parity: whoever does good deeds, whether male or female, while being believers, shall enter paradise. 24 It is mentioned in the Qur'ân that women not only expressed their opinions freely in the Prophet's presence but also argued and participated in serious discussions with him (58:1). The Qur'ân reproached those who believed woman to be inferior to men 25 and repeatedly gives expression to the need for treating men and women with equity. 26 If she commits any civil offence, her penalty is no less or no more than a man's in a similar case. 27 If she is wronged or harmed, she is entitled to compensation just like a man. 28 God created two different and distinct genders as a pair. 29 The male is different from the female (3:36) although ultimately both are from the same source. 30

Hermeneutical Principles

The Qur'ân is God's Final Testament to the world, and He has pledged to protect it from the slightest distortion (15:9). Qur'ân is the distinguisher of truth and falsehood. 31 However, it would be unreal to deny that the Qur'ân offer possibilities of intolerant interpretation. Usually individual verses are taken out of context, distorting the intended meaning. 32 Another misuse is by concealing other parts related to the subject in question. 33  The Qur'ân also admonishes those people who "change the words from their (right) times and places" (5:44), thereby altering the meaning of scriptures and it is equally sharp in criticizing those who dwell only on its allegorical verses as a means to sow discord among people while ignoring its clear verses (3:7). As God is supremely just, God's speech cannot teach injustice. The Qur'ân instructs believers to follow "the best" in the revelation; 34 'the best' is that which is just and fair.

The pre-existing misogyny was incorporated seamlessly into Islâmic interpretation during the Middle Ages, shaping Muslim discourses on women and gender for years to come. Ka`b al-Ahbar ((d. 652) and Wahb Ibn Munabbih (654-729 CE), two Jewish converts to Islâm, have transmitted many Isra'iliyyat narrations into Islâmic literature. Many of the early Tafsir such as those of al-Tabari, al-Zamakhshari, al-Razi, al-Baydawi, al-Qurtubi and others were predisposed by Isra'iliyyat to an extent that it became difficult to isolate them from the original norm and precedent. Some of the hadith are full of narrations against women, insulting them and looking down upon them: 'Women, house and horses are evil omens' (Bukhari). 'A prayer is annulled by a passing woman, dog and a monkey' (Bukhari).'The urine of a male baby is cleaner than that of a female baby.' (Ibn Majah). "Treat your women well, for they are captives with you" (Tirmidi). 'Even though her husband's body is smeared from head to foot with pus and the wife cleans it by licking him, yet her debt to him would still remain unsettled.' (Ahmad bin Hanbal: Musnad). 'A man will not be questioned about why he beats his wife' (Mishkat). 'Do not take counsel from women; oppose them, for opposition to womankind brings prosperity' (Suyuti). The continuing popularity of these Ahadith amongst Muslims in general also indicates that they articulate something deeply embedded in Muslim culture, namely, the belief that women are derivative and secondary in the context of human creation.

The presence of fabricated matter in the body of Ahadith is especially noteworthy on the subject of women, containing sometimes of statements that stand in total contrast with the Qur'ân and the dignified speech and conduct of the Prophet. Fabricated Ahadith, exaggerated interpretations, and indefensible conclusions in the Tafsir have in turn influenced the fiqh works on the subject of marriage, guardianship, dower, maintenance, polygamy and divorce, as well as women's dress, mannerism, and movement. The model of gender constructed by classical fiqh is beached in the patriarchal ideology of pre-Islâmic Arabia, which continued into the Muslim era, though in a tailored form. As Esposito notes, "(it) produced a situation in which a woman was subjugated by males, her father, brother or close male relatives...As a matter of custom, she came to be regarded as little more than a piece of property." 35

As in other monotheistic religions, the classical fiqh texts - that is, texts of early Islâmic legal jurisprudence - ignored gender equality as it was presented in the Qur'ân and introduced interpretations in line with the patriarchal social order. 36 As Islâm spread and came into contact with well-established, patriarchal cultures to its North - Judaism, Christianity, and Zoroastrianism - it assumed many of their values and assumptions. To quote an example, the Qur'ân says absolutely nothing about the Eve's Creation from the rib of Adam. There is no rib, no apple, no serpent, and no Original Sin. The Qur'ân is simply silent about such matters. 37 Yet, within a hundred years of Prophet Muhammad's death, Islâmic literature had made its own theory that Eve was created from Adam's rib! 

The practical role- models for women in Islâm could not be erased from historical memories: Prophet's first wife, Khadija was an economically independent, rich businesswoman; the greatest scholar-activist in the history of Islâm was A'isha, who became one of the major narrators of traditions and arguably the most influential person after Prophet Muhammad. However, within a century after the Prophet, Muslim society was noticeably more patriarchal. By the twelfth century, the noted scholar Al-Ghazali (d.1111 CE) could declare, without fear of contradiction, that women are indeed intellectually inferior to men. This idea is still widely-conceived by many Muslims (just like people at large). Women were relegated out of public life and back into the seclusion of the home. Women lost most of their rights to divorce or to remarry. Their testimony and their worth were literally devalued.

Every Tafsir (Qur'ânic commentary) is man-made and, therefore, subject to human nuances, peculiarities, and limitations. Divine will is always in the process of becoming; humankind can only hope to gain direction toward that will by likewise being in process, but never complete. By the third Islâmic century, even Qur'ânic exegesis showed that the egalitarianism once associated with the Qur'ân had lost its subversive connotation. 38

Shari'ah is a product of the intellectual, social, and political processes of Muslim history and was constructed by its founding jurists. 39 It was through a biased interpretation of the Shari'ah, along with the rigid cultural tendencies of male jurists, that women became confined to a secluded life and subordinate existence to men. Customs and traditions that were an integral part of society before the Prophet began to resurface after his death. These social norms were so deeply rooted that one generation could not eradicate the built-up injustices that had developed over the centuries. The behaviour and attitudes that the Prophet had tried to correct inevitably reappeared, imprinting themselves on the religion as Muslim scholars began to interpret the religion and apply its laws to suit their own circumstances. Societal impulses not only stopped the gradual progress of change but also reversed the trend, affecting the interpretation of Islâm in such a way as to reinforce the pre-existing customs and traditions. Further elaboration of the Shari'ah with regard to its contradictions with Qur'ânic teachings and principles portraying it as the source of a new theology, ethics and law in parallel with the Qur'ân and, some times, in total contravention of Islâm. I may cite two examples to prove the assertion: 1) While the Qur'ân prescribes 100 lashes as punishment for adultery (24:2), the Shari'ah sanctions stoning to death for both the adulterer and adulteress. 2) While there is no death penalty for apostasy in the Qur'ân for renouncing Islâm, 40 the Shari'ah is very strict about enforcing the death penalty for the apostate.

Most prominent contemporary interpreters of the Islâmic position on women accounts for the ideology that discriminates against women by pointing to the anatomical differences between men and women such as the size of the heart, the weight of the brain, and the size of the skull, the psychological differences etc. 41 The notion that the differences between the sexes is inherent in their nature and determined by their biological differences which in turn leads to psychological differences have been used both in the East and the West to justify the social inequalities of women. 42 Biological determinism and the emotion/reason dichotomy are not specifically Islâmic and in parts are in fact contradictory to the teachings of the Qur'ân. The biological differences, "inadequacies", of female biology are used to negate her spirituality and relationship to her Creator. As Wadud states: "There is no term in the Qur'ân, which indicates that childbearing is 'primary' to a woman. No indication is given that mothering is her exclusive role. The capacity is essential to the continuation of human existence. This function becomes the primary only with regard to women since they are the only ones capable of doing so." 43  The Qur'ân does not support a specific stereotype role for its characters, male or female. It does not strictly delineate the role of women and the role of men to such an extent as to propose only a single possible outcome for each gender.

The Word 'Daraja' in Verse 2:228

According to the Qur'ân, love, mercy, intimacy and mutual protection and modesty are the qualities expected from marriage. Even in Paradise marriage remains as one of the great joys. 44 According to God's law, women have the same rights as men (2:228). Women can divorce their husbands. 45 She cannot remarry until they have three menstrual periods but men have no such obligation and this is the only difference. According to the Qur'ân, divorce is a case that takes at least four months to be put into effect. 46 Those who do not menstruate due to old age or some physical disorder or those who do not habitually menstruate should also wait for three months (65:4); those whose marriage has not been consummated have no waiting period (33:49). If a woman is pregnant she must make this fact known. The waiting period for a pregnant woman is until the delivery (65:4).

If the dissolution of marriage was initiated by the husband and he wishes, of course with the consent of his wife, to resume the marital relationship, he may do so even within the waiting period. There is no waiting period for the husband for physiological reasons and this is the only advantage he has over the wife who has to wait for three months before remarriage. Men, however, do not have a waiting period for remarriage for obvious physiological reasons. That is where men are on a platform different from them. 47 Excepting this, the rights and responsibilities of men and women are the same in all spheres of life. A husband can pronounce divorce twice and can remarry, but after the third divorce he cannot remarry consecutively (Qur'ân 2:229-230).

A Qur'ânic passage which is cited to support the idea that men are superior to women is in the specific context of "'iddah" - a three-month waiting period prescribed for women between the pronouncement of divorce and remarriage. It would be contradictory to conclude from the statement: "li Rijaale alayhenaa darjah" "men are a degree above them" that men are superior to women, as at one hand the verse says that women and men have rights similar to each other, and the implication that men are superior, will contradict this impression. One gender cannot be superior to another if their rights and obligations are equal. The word used by the Qur'ân is "darajah" meaning "degree". This "degree" can be understood easily by reviewing the whole verse. The context of this verse informs us that it deals with the conditions attached to remarriage after divorce. The whole verse reads thus: "And the divorced women should keep themselves in waiting for three courses; and it is not lawful for them that they should conceal what God has created in their wombs, if they believe in God and the last day; and their husbands have a better right to take them back in the meanwhile if they wish for reconciliation; and they have rights similar to those against them in a just manner, and the men are a degree above them, and Allah is Mighty, Wise" (2:228).

Ibn Jarir al-Tabari (839-923 CE) wrote that the best explanation in this regard is that of Ibn Abbas: "The 'darajah' mentioned by Allah Most High here is the exemption, on the man's part, of some his wife's obligations towards him and his indulgence towards her, while he is fully obligated to fulfil all his obligations towards her, because the verse came right after [And they (women) have rights similar to those (of men) over them in kindness]. Hence Ibn Abbas (d.687) said: 'I would not like to obtain all (astanzif) of my right from her because Allah Most High said [and men are a degree above them].'" In other words, God: (1) gave men and women similar rights; then (2) He gave the men a greater degree of responsibility over the women than that of women over men. It follows that the rights owned to the wife are un-negotiable, whereas the husband has to give up certain rights. This is not a feminist reading but the actual explanation of Ibn Abbas (companion of the prophet) according to al-Tabari in his Tafsir. 48

Sayyid Qutb (1906-1966) explains the idea thus: 'This advantage ...is in no way absolute but is contingent, within the present context, upon the fact that it is the man who initiates the divorce and would, therefore, have the prerogative to take his wife back, a decision that could not be left to her to take. This advantage, indeed a useful and proper one, is by no means universal, as some have erroneously concluded, but is simply dictated by the nature and circumstances of the dispute.' 49

Interpretation of 4:34          

The majority of anti-women reasoning centres on the Qur'ânic verse 4:34: "Men are [qawwamuna ala] women [on the basis] of what God has [preferred] (faddala) some of them over others, and [on the basis] of what they spend of their property (for the support of women)" (4:34). 50

The word 'qawwammun' is often translated as 'managers'. As Amina Wadud, Azizah al-Hibri, and Riffat Hassan argue, linguistically 'qawwamun' means 'breadwinners' or 'those who provide a means of support or livelihood.' 51 Thus, 'qawwam' cannot be understood as to imply men's superiority or even being managers for women, as widely interpreted by conservative exegetes. As to gender relations, the Qur'ân has clearly appointed women and men each other's 'awliya', or mutual protectors, which it could not do if men were in fact more superior to women and become their 'managers'. The Divine sources mention "care" and "responsibility" within the family, but not superiority (9:71). Responsibility is not, and cannot be interpreted as, superiority. The material responsibility of men mentioned in the Qur'ân, that they are invested with the responsibility of spending for women's support, has corresponding advantages. Quoting Hibri, Barlas 52 argues that men as a class are not 'qawwamun' over women as a class. If a woman becomes economically sufficient, say by inheritance or by earning wealth, and contributes to the household expenditure, the male superiority would be to that extent reduced, since as a human he has no superiority over his wife. 'Qawwamun' over women in matters where God gave some of the men more than some of the women, and in what the men spend of their money. By this rule, Hibri 53 concludes that "no one has the right to counsel a self-supporting woman." In this context, Fazlur Rahman (1911-1988) also argues that a wife's economic self-sufficiency and contribution to the household, reduces the husband's superiority, "since as a human, he has no superiority over his wife." 54

Generally, Muslim scholars consider 'faddala', used in the verse 4:34, an unconditional preference of males over females and do not restrict 'qiwamah' to the family relationship but apply it to society at large. Further, the word 'qanitat' in 4:34 is most often referred to as obedience to husband. This view opposes any possibility of female leadership as it claims the Qur'ân prefers men as leaders both within the family and within society. On the other hand, Sayyid Qutb, a great exegete, restricts the applicability of the verses to the family. Wadud 55 and Siddique 56 point out that the Qur'ân uses the word 'qanitat' in other contexts to refer to human behaviour towards God; we cannot, therefore, assume that it refers to the wife's conduct alone. The Qur'ân classifies Mary as "one of the qanitin" (66:12) using the masculine plural form of the word that indicates one devout to God. 'Qunut' appears on many other occasions in the Qur'ân, where it is used exclusively in the sense of submissive obedience to God. 57

The marriage relationship should be based on mutual consultation, respect, and that obedience is only to God, and obedience even to the Prophet was only in righteousness (maruuf). Muslim marriage is a partnership based on consultation characterised by affection and mercy (2:233, 30:21).

The root-word "daraba" which has been generally translated as "beating" is one of the commonest root-words in the Arabic language with a large number of possible meanings. That the vast majority of translators -- that happen to be men -- have chosen to translate this word as "beating" clearly indicates a bias in favour of a male-controlled, male-oriented society. 'Daraba' does not necessarily indicate force or violence. The term can be used when someone leaves or "strikes out" on a journey. 58 In light of the Qur'ânic world-view that endorses equity, justice, harmony and compassion, the meaning "to strike" cannot possibly fulfil the objective of protecting the institution of marriage and securing the physical and emotional integrity of women. In marriage there should be harmony (4:128), love, and mercy (30:21), and husbands and wives should protect each other (2:187). The word "beat" as it is used in this context is the mistranslation of the Arabic word "daraba" which in the Qur'ân alone is used in six different ways, Arabic being a much more faceted language than English, other verses in which this word is used are many. 59 Further, the nature of the Arabic language must also be taken into account: each word in Arabic is designated masculine or feminine and it does not follow that use of a male or a female noun necessarily restricts the application to the mentioned gender. 60

In the light of these evidences, the translation of verse 4:34 may be read as: "Men are the maintainers (qawwamuna) of women, [on the basis] of what God has [preferred (faddala)] some of them over others and [on the basis] of what they spend of their property (for the support of women); so good women are devoutly obedient (to God), guarding the unseen as God has guarded. And (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion (nusyuz), admonish them (first), leave them alone in bed, (and last), separate from them; if they obey you, then do not seek a way over them; God is High, Great" (4:34).

Witnessing

In verse 24:6-9, it is clear that the testimony of a woman is equated exactly with that of a man in case of adultery: where one spouse accuses the other of infidelity, the accusation by one spouse is held to be just as valid as the denial by the other. In other six verses on witnessing also the Qur'ân does not specify whether witnesses should be men, women or a combination of them. 61

Witnessing is mentioned seven times in the Qur'ân, and on matters related to financial dealings is there a requirement that if two men are not present, a man and two women will suffice (2:282). 'Dhall' in the verse means 'to get distracted 'or'losing focuses. The interference of the second woman as a partner in testimony is conditional to the first one getting perplexed. If the first woman is able to express herself eloquently then the second woman will not be required, as is evident from the following portion of the verse under discussion: "if one of them gets confused or perplexed then the other can remind her." If the first one gets confused, it is only then, that the other one is required to remind her. If the first one does not get perplexed then the other will not be required to interfere. Thus, Fazlur Rahman argues that 'when women became conversant with such matters…their evidence can equal that of men.' 62  The whole idea of not accepting women's evidence to be equal to that of men's, is a patriarchal interpretation of the Qur'ân.

In 1979, Zia ul-Haq, the Pakistan military ruler (R.1977-1988), introduced 'Islâmic' laws that discriminated against women. The most notorious of these laws were the Zina and Hudood Ordinances that called for the punishments of the amputation of hands for stealing and stoning to death for married people found guilty of illicit sex. In practice, these laws protect rapists, for a woman who has been raped often finds herself charged with adultery or fornication. To prove 'zina' (adultery), four Muslim adult males of good repute must be present to testify that sexual penetration has taken place. The combined effect of these laws is that it is impossible for a woman to bring a successful charge of rape against a man; instead, she herself, the victim, finds herself charged with illicit sexual intercourse, while the rapist goes free. If the rape results in a pregnancy, this is automatically taken as an admission that adultery or fornication has taken place with the woman's consent rather than that rape has occurred.

Qur'ânic 'zina' verse setting forth the original four-witness requirement is not exclusive to men: "Those who defame chaste women and do not bring four witnesses ('shuhada') should be punished" (24:4). This verse refers to these four witnesses with the Arabic masculine plural, "shuhada" ("witnesses"), which grammatically includes both men and women, unless otherwise indicated. In applying the exclusively male evidence rule of traditional 'zina' law to the crime of 'zina-bil-jabr,' Pakistan has transformed what was merely an unfair obsolete male bias into a direct violation of the human rights of women. That it is a direct contradiction to the Qur'ânic injunctions to stand up firmly for justice is obvious. 63 Moreover, depriving women as an entire gender of the right to testify in a 'zina' case - where a woman's honour is generally at issue-has serious societal ramifications. The Law doesn't even differentiate between adultery and rape. In a rape case, just like any criminal offence, circumstantial or medical evidence such as blood, sperm or DNA test are permitted (see: Qur'ân 12:75). The inclusion of the word "male" in the 'Zina Ordinance' is a dangerous play of misogyny. What is articulated in the Hudood Law of Pakistan had deeper roots. Despite the Qur'ânic use of the plural noun inclusive to both men and women, many Muslim jurists and scholars have traditionally limited the four witnesses in a 'zina' case to men. 64 In fact, all major schools of thought have adopted restrictive interpretations of women's ability to testify as witnesses in general, although some (significantly including the famous jurists, al-Tabari, Ibn Taymiyya (d.1328 CE), and Ibn al-Qayyim (1291-1351)  have disagreed. 65 Generally speaking, Muslim jurists were reluctant to rely on the testimony of women. Most jurists agreed that the testimony of women is excluded entirely not only from all criminal (hudud) and capital (uqubat) cases, but also from claims of marriage and divorce. Ajijola, a modern Nigerian Muslim scholar, is merely reflecting the medieval Muslim attitude while he wrote: 'In the case of [Zina] the testimony of four male witnesses is required as a female is weak in character." 66

In 1982, fifteen-year-old Jehan Mina became pregnant as a result of a reported rape. Lacking the testimony of four eye-witnesses that the intercourse was in fact rape, Jehan was convicted of 'zina' on the evidence of her illegitimate pregnancy. Her child was born in prison. 67 Thousands of women are suffering in the jails of Pakistan under discriminatory and unjust laws. Should Muslims support these injustices, just because they are glossed in 'Islâmic' garb?

The Problem of Patriarchal Interpretation

Those who argue that there is nothing inherently wrong in the mainstream orthodox Islâmic interpretation of gender issues, may kindly consider the following enigmas:

• Why in the Muslim world there is a general conception that women are inferior to men, having lesser rights and privileges than men? If justice and fairness are inherent in Islam, should they not be reflected in laws regulating relations between men and women and their respective rights? Why have women been treated as second-class citizens in the fiqh books that came to define the terms of the Shari'ah? 

• In the Qur'ân, polygyny is not prescribed for satisfaction of lust of male but linked with a special situation of society and that being to provide assistance to the widowed, orphaned and destitute women (4:3). Why in many part of the Muslim world, men enjoy absolute freedom to keep more than one wife without observing the Qur'ânic norms of equity? How come one half of the verse 4:3 that said a man can have up to four wives becomes codified into law, but the other half of the very same verse ("if you fear you cannot deal justly with women, then marry only one") that promotes monogamy is unheard of? How could jurists ignore the fact that the verse (4:3) goes on to say that "this will be best for you to prevent you from doing injustice."?

• Why Muslim men may divorce their wives at will, as a 'Triple Talaq', while women may only disengage themselves from their husbands by returning the dower to them with the tedious judicial process? While one finds universal condemnation of the practice of 'Triple Talaq' as reprehensible, and, even, anti-Qur'ânic, all Sunni schools of law consider it legally effective. Only the Ja'fari Shi'ite School considers a triple divorce pronounced at once to be invalid and non-binding. How can this phenomenon be explained?

• Why in the Shi'ite world Mut'ah marriage is still defended, while the Sunni world denies it?

• Why there is wide-spread prevalence of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) among African Muslims and why their scholars can selectively use unauthenticated Ahadith in support of a cultural ritualism?

• Why it is that, except for the Hanafi, the Schools (Madhab) agree that a father who acts as a 'wali' may force his virgin daughter to enter into marriage? No agreement, including marriage (see Qur'ân 4:21) may be valid without the consent of both parties. The principle of seeking a woman's consent to her own marriage is reiterated in a large number of authentic Ahadith. How could these Schools have avoided the dictates of the Qur'ân (4:19, 2:232) in this instance?

• While the Qur'ân says absolutely nothing about Eve and does not talk about the creation of woman from man and it talks about human creation in absolutely egalitarian terms; the majority of Muslims believe the Genesis story. What might be the reason?

• Why the Muslim world is dragging behind in the acceptance of women's electoral participation?

• Why it is that in a certain Arab State, women are not allowed to drive cars and why their clerics can justify it in religious terms?

• Why many Muslim scholars object to the holding of leadership as improper for woman, despite the fact that the Qur'ân uses no terms to imply that leadership is inappropriate for her? The Qur'ânic story of Bilqis, the Queen of Sheba, celebrates both for her political and religious practices and extols her leadership for her capacity to fulfil the requirements of the office, the purity of her faith and independent judgment (27:23-44). Why in the Muslim world a general perception is prevailing that women are defective, not intelligent enough to run government and lead nation, in spite of the fact that Qur'ân contradicts it?

• Why in the Muslim world blood-money is fixed as half for woman than that of male, despite the absence of any clear scriptural authority?

• Why there is a general conception prevailing in the Muslim world that testimony of one man is equivalent to that of two women, contrary to the evidence of the Qur'ân? Why don't Muslim scholars take a firm stand on those discriminatory laws implemented in the name of Islâm? Would the problems be solved merely by repeating the slogan that Islâm has elevated the status of woman? Why Muslim media is generally silent in raising the conscience of the people on the human rights abuses happening in the name of Islâm?

It is easy for power to get corrupted and become a source of injustice, oppression, and stagnation. 68 With the rise of patriarchy, many customs and traditions were developed. Of these customs and traditions, many have disappeared or were gradually abandoned, while some still remain. The Muslim world's stagnation and backwardness, nourished by Sufism and scholasticism, have also contributed to the subjection of Muslim women.

The authenticity of different Ahadith should be judged in accordance with the letter and spirit of the Qur'ânic verses. Where there is any dispute or apparent inconsistency between the two, the Qur'ânic directive must prevail. Muslims should read the Qur'ân as an "open," rather than a "closed" text and strove continually to understand its deeper meaning. It means acting on these words of Iqbal (d.1938): "The teaching of the Qur'ân that life is a process of progressive creation necessitates that each generation, guided but unhampered by the work of its predecessors, should be permitted to solve its own problems." 69

The negative ideas about women that prevail in Muslim societies are rooted in certain theological ideas. Until we demolish these theological foundations of Muslim culture's misogynistic and andocentric tendencies, Muslim women will suffer discrimination despite statistical improvements in education, employment, and political rights. Religious endorsements of patriarchal social institutions are not an inherent part of the tradition, but represent a later addition to and distortion of its fundamental core. Indeed closer examination of the religious traditions reveals that their egalitarian cores also provide resources to undermine patriarchal family structures. Moreover, in Islâm sexual equality is ontological in that the Qur'ân teaches that God created humans from a single self (nafs). It does not privilege the man's creation or endow him with attributes or faculties not given to the woman. Rather, humans "manifest the whole." 70

The primary meaning of 'zulm' is that of putting in a wrong place. In the moral sphere it means primarily to act in such a way as to transgress the proper limit and encroach upon the right of some other person. Generally speaking 'zulm' is to do injustice in the sense of going beyond one's bounds and doing what one has no right to. 71 Readings that project 'zulm' (injustice resulting from transgressing against a person's rights) into divine discourse violate the Qur'ânic teaching that God never does any 'zulm' to people. 72 We have take verification as to how much the creation of an Arabized Shari'ah and Muslim cultures, have eroded and disfigured the fundamentally democratic and egalitarian ethos of Islam. Islâmisation, in its true sense, may be interpreted as a strategy of dismissing misogynist and other hegemonic traditions and introducing Qur'ânic values of equity and compassion.

In order for Muslim men and women to establish a just and moral social order, Muslim women's full human dignity needs to be realized, as echoed in the Qur'ân, by removing whatever impediments there are in the way for them to actualize their surrender to Allah as a vicegerent (khalifah). The participation of Muslim women as full and equal partners in the community's socio-economic development and progress is the need of the hour. We have to fight for women's right to equality, justice, freedom and dignity within the religious framework. Our strength comes from our conviction and faith in an Islâm that is just, liberating and empowering to woman.

End Notes

1. Qur'ân 50:29, 3:182, 8:51, 9:70, 10:44, 16:33, 16:118, 18:49, 22:10, 24:50, 29:40, 30:9

2. Qur'ân 6:137, 6:140, 6:151, 17:31, 60:12, 81:8-9, 16:58-59

3. Qur'ân 16:58-59, 43:17

4. Qur'ân 16:58-59, 43:175. Qur'ân 6:137, 6:140, 6:151, 16:58-59, 17:31, 60:12, 81:8-9; "In Arabia, as among other primitive people, child-murder was carried out in such a way that no blood was shed, the infant was buried alive. Often the grave was ready by the side of the bed on which the daughter was born." (Robertson Smith W, Kinship & Marriage in Early Arabia, Adam and Charles Black: London, 1903, p. 293). 'Infanticide has been practiced for various reasons ranging from population control to maintenance of the social structure. It has been so common that an anthropologist has called it "the most widely used method of population control during much of human history."' (Glen Hausfater et al (ed.), Infanticide, Aldine Publishing Company: New York, 1984, p. 440)

6. Qur'ân 4:32, 4:11-12, 4:4, 2:236                

7. Qur'ân 17:70, 95:4

8. Qur'ân 4:32, 33:35, 3:195, 4:124, 16:97, 40:40, 6:139-140, 2:232

9. Qur'ân 4:124, 16:97

10. Qur'ân 2:256, 6:109, 6:152, 2:269, 17:36, 24:2, 22:40, 6:152, 5:90, 2:195, 5:32, 17:32, 17:35, 17:29, 83:1

11. Qur'ân 4:3, 4:19

12. Qur'ân 2:42, 3:71

13. Qur'ân 33:53, 24:27

14. Qur'ân 49:11, 33:4

15. Qur'ân 4:100, 2:85, 6:41

16. Qur'ân 18:31, 76:13-15

17 Qur'ân 17:32, 24:2

18. Qur'ân 4:21

19. Qur'ân 2.223, 30:21, 2:187, 4:19

20. Neal Robinson, Discovering the Qur'ân, SCM Press: London, 1996, p.29

21. Qur'ân 2:57, 3:117, 7:91, 9:36, 70; 10:44, 16:33, 118; 18:49, 29:40

22. Qur'ân 33:35, 9:71, 3:195, 16:97, 40:40, 49:13

23. Qur'ân 33:35, 16:97, 2:195, 4:124, 32; 9:71-72

24. Qur'ân 4:128, 40:40, 16:97

25. Qur'ân 16:57-59

26. Qur'ân 2:228, 231; 4:19

27. Qur'ân 5:83, 24:2

28. Qur'ân 4:92-93

29. Qur'ân 75:39, 53:45, 92:3

30. Qur'ân 4:1, 7:189, 16:72, 39:6, 6:98, 31:28

31. Qur'ân 25:1, 8:25

32. Qur'ân 15: 91-93

33. Qur'ân 6:91, 15:90-93. To Asad, all of the "Qur'ânic statements and ordinances are mutually complementary and cannot therefore be correctly understood unless they are considered as parts of one integral whole." Muhammad Asad, The Message of the Qur'an, Dar Al-Andalus: Gibraltar, 1980, p.261.

34. Qur'ân 7:145, 39:18

35. John L. Esposito, Women in Muslim Family Law, Syracuse University Press: New York, 1982, p.4-15

36. Al-Ghazali, the great twelfth-century Muslim philosopher, in his monumental work Ihya 'Ulum al-Din devoted a book to marriage, reflects the customary view of his time: "It is enough to say that marriage is a kind of slavery, for a wife is a slave to her husband. She owes her husband absolute obedience in whatever he may demand of her, where she herself is concerned, as long as no sin is involved." (Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, The Proper Conduct of Marriage in Islam, Book Twelve of 'Ihya 'Ulum al-Din', (Translation: Muhtar Holland), Al-Baz: Hollywood, 1998, p.89). The Qur'ânic emphasize of mutuality, complimentarity, and reciprocity  (4:1, 30:21, 2:187) has been, indeed, subverted by the medieval theologians, and replaced in its stead the subservience of one gender for another!

37. There are lots of basic differences between Biblical and Qur'ânic depictions of the Adam incident in the Paradise. The following are, indeed, very striking:

A).St. Paul extrapolated his theology based on the primordiality of the creation of Adam over Eve. (See for example: I Timothy 2:13). Eve was specifically blamed by name as the one responsible for leading mankind astray (2Corinthians 11:3, 1Timothy 2:14). The Bible excluded Eve; she was not created until after God realized that Adam needed a helper. The Lord God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him." (Genesis 2:18). Eve, according to the Qur'ân, is not a delayed product of Adam's rib, as in the Christian and Jewish traditions; instead, the two were born from a single soul (4:1). A similar verse points to this interpretation: 'It is God who has made from your species your mates' (16:72). Actually the word 'minha' (from the soul) in the verse does imply that both were human. Literal translation of the words 'ja'ala lakum min anfusikum azwaja' would mean 'it is God Who has created your mates from you.' It does not imply that every wife is made from her husband as Eve was! The word 'anfus' (plural of 'nafs') in this verse means 'species' or 'kind' and not 'physical being'. `A single soul' ('nafs'), used in 4:1, is neither male nor female. In fact `soul' is feminine and `mate' is masculine! The argument is not that woman came first as in other parts of the Qur'ân, the creation of Adam is described; and thus the gender relationship here is ambivalent. It is absolutely sure that the mate was created from the `soul' and not the humble `rib'. As Hibri writes: "Nowhere does the Qur'ân say that Eve was crafted out of Adam. Instead it states that males and females are created by God from the same soul or spirit (nafs). The founding myths as such are not inherently patriarchal when read in this way." Azizah Y. Al-Hibri, "Is Western Patriarchal Feminism Good for Third World/Minority Women?" in Susan Moller Okin (ed.), Is Multiculturalism Bad For Women?  Princeton University Press: Princeton, l999, p.42.

B) The Qur'ân makes it clear that both Adam and Eve were misled (2:36, 7:22, 20:121). They both sought forgiveness from God and were forgiven (7:23). Further, Qur'ân delineates the fact that Iblis, who was attached to the hierarchical principle based on original stuff (see Qur'ân 7:12), was incurred God's eternal wrath.

C) The term used in the Qur'ân to denote "mate" is 'Zawj'- a word that is neutral and can be used to denote both male and female. Hence there is no indication in the Qur'ân as to who came first, Adam or Eve. The Qur'ân also taught that man is neither created for woman, nor woman for man, but sexes complement one another (Qur'ân 3:195, 9:71, 66:19-21, 33:35-36). The word 'Adam' occurs twenty five times in the Qur'ân but it is used in twenty-one cases as a symbol for self-conscious humanity (Qur'ân 3:33, 20:121-2, 7:23, 3:59, 5:27, 2:31, 2:34, 7:11, 17:61, 18:50, 15:28-33, 20:116-117, 38:71-75, 7:172). In verse 2:31, "Adam" refers to the whole human race as is clear from the preceding verse 2:30, where Adam is referred to as "one who shall inherit the earth" and as one "who will spread corruption on earth and will shed blood." Adam, in the Qur'ân, thus, symbolizes the whole human race. So when the Qur'ân says that He taught Adam the Names (asma'), all of them (2:31), it is actually connoting that all human beings have been taught all the Names.

D) In Genesis 3:16, Eve is told that because of her sin Adam shall rule over her. The verse further says that all women must suffer great pains during child birth due to Eve eating the fruit of knowledge. Genesis 3:16, thus, made motherhood a God-inflicted curse degrading her status in the world. On the other hand, Qur'ân exalts pregnancy and child birth as an upliftment of the status of woman (31:14, 46:15, 4:1)!

38. Louise Marlow, Hierarchy and Egalitarianism in Islâmic Thought, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1977, p.93

39. Abdullahi An-Naim, Toward an Islâmic Reformation: Civil Liberties, Human Rights, and International Law, Syracuse University Press: New York, 1990, p.xiv

40. Killing of a person just for leaving Islam would directly contradict the Qur'ânic dictum, "Let there be no compulsion in religion" (2:256). See also: 2:273, 6:108, 9:6, 10:99, 11:28, 109:6, 60:8, 50:45

41. The misogynous notions about women are expressed by the popular Egyptian Islâmic writer Abbas Mahmud al-Aqqad, in 'Woman in the Qur'an' (1959): "Men are the sole source of every accepted definition of good conduct whether for men or women. Woman has never been a true source of anything to do with ethics or good character even though she brings up the children. The guidelines are provided by the male." (Cited in Yvonne Haddad, Contemporary Islâm and the Challenge of History, State University of New York: Albany, NY., 1982, p. 63). Today, many Muslim women around the world continue to be denied their basic human rights in the name of Islam. Taliban restricted women's education despite the fact that the Qur'ân advocates the pursuit of knowledge for both sexes (20:114, 39:9, 58:11). Taliban is not an isolated phenomenon in the Muslim world; their type of interpretation has deeper theological roots. Women are abused by their husbands despite the Qur'ânic assertion on the contrary (30:21). They are denied the right to vote or work, also in the name of Islam.

42. Ashley Montagu provides evidence from biology and social anthropology not only for woman's equality but also for her superiority. In the prologue to his book, Montagu states: 'In the present book the mythology of female inferiority is challenged and dismantled on the basis of the scientific facts. My many years of work and research as a biological and social anthropologist have made it abundantly clear to me that from an evolutionary standpoint, the female is more advanced and constitutionally more richly endowed than the male. It seemed to me important to make that first claim. That is the scientific fact. Women, as biological organisms, are superior to men. If anyone has any evidence to the contrary let him or her state it. The scientific attitude of the mind is not one of either belief or disbelief, but of a desire to discover what is and to state it, no matter what traditional beliefs may be challenged or outraged in the process.' (Ashley Montagu, The Natural Superiority of Women, Macmillan Publishing Co: New York, 1992, p.2) Biologically, women inherit two X chromosomes, many recessive lethal chromosomes on one X chromosome would likely be masked by the dominant non- lethal chromosome on her other X. Males would not have this advantage: many traits which would be masked for a female are expressed because the Y or male chromosome does not contain many X alleles. Being much shorter than the X, it has far fewer genes compared to the X chromosome. This makes a case for the genetic superiority of women and is why many genetic diseases such as color blindness and hemophilia are far higher among males than females. These traits, though, are often inherited by males through their mother and expressed only through sons. Some biologists have even argued for a gynaecocentric theory of evolution, concluding that woman is the trunk of evolution history, and man is but a branch on the tree, a grafted scion. (See for example: Mary A. Hill, Charlotte Perkins Gilman, The Making of a Radical Feminist 1860-1896, Temple University Press: Philadelphia, 1980; Sarah Blaffer Hardy, The Woman That Never Evolved, Harvard University Press: Cambridge, 1981) Hapgood even concludes that the evolutionary purpose of males is to serve females, arguing that "masculinity did not evolve in a vacuum but because it was selected." He notes that there are many species that live without males, and the fact that they do not live genderlessly or sexlessly shows that "males are unnecessary" in certain environments. (Fred Hapgood, Why Males Exist: An Inquiry Into the Evolution of Sex, William Morrow and Company, Inc: New York, 1979, p.24)

43. Charles Kurzman (ed.), Liberal Islâm: A Sourcebook, Oxford University Press, Inc: New York, 1998, p.133

44. Qur'ân 30:21, 2:187, 36:55-57

45. Qur'ân 2:230, 233, 228; 4:35

46. Qur'ân 2:226, 4:35, 65:6

47. The husband and the wife have the right to reconcile during this waiting period of the wife. Women, in all equity, have rights similar to men. But men have one advantage over them. Men do not have a waiting period for remarriage for obvious physiological reasons. And this is where men have an advantage over women (See Qur'ân: 2:228-234, 4:3, 4:19, 4:35, 4:128, 33:49, 58:1, 65:1-4). The primary purpose of waiting-period is the ascertainment of possible pregnancy, and thus of the parentage of the as yet unborn child. In addition, the couple are to be given an opportunity to reconsider their decision and possibly to resume the marriage. A divorced wife has the right to refuse a resumption of marital relations even if the husband expresses, before the expiry of the waiting-period, his willingness to have the provisional divorce rescinded; but since it is the husband who is responsible for the maintenance of the family, the first option to rescind a provisional divorce rests with him during the waiting-period. During that period the husband is fully responsible for the maintenance of the wife whom he is divorcing in accordance with the standard of living observed during their married life. Islam tries to maintain the married state as far as possible, especially where children are concerned, but it is against the restriction of the liberty of men and women in such crucially significant matters as love and family life. It will check hasty action as far as possible, and leave the door to reconciliation open at many stages. Even after divorce a suggestion of reconciliation is made, subject to certain precautions against thoughtless action. Barbara Freyer Stowasser, points out that some male interpreters of the Qur'ân have claimed that men are preferred by God over women with respect to intelligence, physical constitution, determination, and physical strength without ever citing any place in the Qur'ân text that says this. (Barbara Freyer Stowasser, Women in the Qur'ân, Traditions, and Interpretation, Oxford University Press: New York, 1994, p. 35). It is clear that the Qur'ân assigns 'daraja', or the notion that one is a step, degree, or level over another person, to some individuals over other individuals. Numerous verses point to the various ways in which 'daraja' may be obtained, that is, through striving in the way of God with one's wealth, one's person, through migrating in the path of God, and through doing good deeds (4.95, 9.20, 20.75, 6.132, 46.19, 58.11, 43.32). 

48. Fatwa by Sheikh G.F. Haddad at: www.livingislam.org/fiqhi/fiqha_e22.html - 20k

49. Sayyid Qutb, In the Shade of the Qur'ân, Volume 1, Islâmic Foundation: Leicester, 1999, p.279

50. See for an exegetically interesting discussion of Qur'ân 4:34: Khaled M Abou El Fadl, The Search for Beauty in Islâm, University Press of America: Lanham, MD, 2001, p.167-188

51. Asma Barlas, Believing Women in Islâm: Unreading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Qur'ân, University of Texas Press: Austin, TX, 2002, p.186

52. Asma Barlas, Ibid, p.187

53. Asma Barlas, Ibid, p.187

54. Asma Barlas, Ibid, p.187

55. Amina Wadud, Quran and Woman: Rereading the Sacred Text from a Woman's Perspective. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 1999, p.70

56. Asma Barlas, Op.cit, p.187

57. See Qur'ânic verses 2:116, 238; 3:17, 43; 30:26; 33:31, 33:35, 39:9

58. Amina Wadud, Op.cit, p.15.

59. See for example Qur'ân 47:27, 18:11, 43:5, 14:24, 2:273. Instead of singling out a particular verse to interpret the Scripture, the message has to be taken in light of the whole Qur'ânic text (3:7, 2:85, 13:6, 3:72, 3:119). In the Qur'ân, depending on the context, one can ascribe different meanings to the word 'daraba': to travel to get out: 3:156, 4:101; to set up: 43:58, 57:13; to give (examples): 14:24-45, 16:75, 76, 112; to cover: 24:31; to explain: 13:17

60. Amina Wadud, Op cit, p.6-7.

61. Qur'ân 4:6, 4:15, 5:106-107, 24:4, 24:13, 65:2. The second woman would not be a witness in the court of law. She is there only to support the first woman if she gets distracted, for example, by her baby.

62. Fazlur Rahman, Major Themes of the Qur'ân, Bibliotheca Islâmica: Chicago, 1980, p.48-49

63. Qur'ân 4:135, 57:25, 5:8

64. Mohamed S. El-Awa, Punishment in Islâmic Law, American Trust Publications: Indianapolis, 1982, p.34

65. Ma'amoun M. Salama, "General Principles of Criminal Evidence In Islâmic Jurisprudence," In 'The Islâmic Criminal Justice System', (edited by M. Cherif Bassiouni), Oceana Publications: London, 1982, p.118. Many Muslims insist that the whole system of jurisprudence is God-ordained and therefore immutable. The fact is that there are immutable principles in the Qur'ân but the interpretations of these has led to the formation of the jurisprudence. Besides the laws were interpreted by male jurists at least 100 years after the death of the Prophet Muhammad, and developed in different parts of the world. These interpretations vary and are even now applied very differentially in Muslim countries.

66. A.D. Ajijola, Introduction to Islâmic Law, International Islâmic Publishers: Karachi, 1981, p.134

67. Rubya Mehdi, "The Offence of Rape in the Islâmic Law of Pakistan", International Journal of Society and Law, 1990, Vol. 18, p.25

68. Qur'ân 6:123, 20:24, 27:34, 33:67, 34:34, 43:23-24

69. Muhammad Iqbal, The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islâm, Shaikh Muhammad Ashraf: Lahore, 1962, p.168

70. Sachiko Murata, The Tao of Islâm: A Sourcebook on Gender Relationships in Islâmic Thought, SUNY: Albany, 1992, p.43

71. Toshihiko Izutsu, The Structure of Ethical Terms in the Koran, Keio Institute of Philosophical Studies: Tokyo, 1959, p.152-153

72. Qur'ân 18:49, 22:10, 24:50, 29:40, 30:9, 50:29, 9:70

V A Mohamad Ashrof is sub-editor of 'Al-Harmony' journal, Kochi, Kerala. Email: vamashrof@yahoo.com

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamIslamWomenAndFeminism_1.aspx?ArticleID=3473



--
Asadullah Syed