The Myth that Women have to "Obey" their Husbands
-
Ok, which was the more godly situation?
To marry a child off who hasn't even reached puberty without waiting until she's old enough to make her own decision on who she wants to marry? That is not Quranic. The Quran says women cannot be inherited. So an arranged marriage without the woman's consent is wrong. And to force a young girl who has not even reached puberty to be married is completley unquranic. So why didn't the wife go to the Quran to show that her husband was wrong? Why was her father trying to get rid of her? Obviously not for godly reasons. Again, I can only vouch for how a relationship between a godly couple who follows and studies the Quran should be. the Kafiroona among Muslims and non Muslims do not apply. They will do as they please, the women and the men. That's a great example of how the woman had a right to not obey her husband, becuz God's laws take precedence.
I'm sure we can find similar siutations where a husband tells his wife not to do something, she does it and OOOHH the consequences. So here's the thing. If it's against God, a woman has every right to object and disobey if that is what has to be done to obey God. If it's not she should listen. I think in this case, if the woman couldn't show her husband that he was Quranically or even Islamically wrong (or atleast find someone who could), then both of them were ignorant and unfortunately the child suffered. That happens more often than not. Children regularly suffer because of the ignorance of their parents. Intuition and hunches without foundation are not on the same level as knowledge. So let's let the woman intuition stuff go when it comes to this situation. That's all emotion and something concrete is needed. Unfortunately that is where the man could have done some good. Unfortunately he had his own satanic agenda already in motion. In my opinon according to traditional Islamic law, if a child cannot testify in court they shouldn't be allowed to marry either.
Godbless,
AnwarAre you providing the guillotine chop to the proof behind the above alleged husband and wife conversation?
-
...As for the choice of words, dutiful sounds good. My first instinct is to say tomay-toes, tomah-toes. But the Quran chose the word obedient. If that also entails being dutiful, sounds good. Again, tomay-toes, tomah-toes. You have issues with the word obedient. Those are your issues, and you should work that out on your own. If you disagree with what i'm saying . . .if the shoe fits . . .
Godbless,
AnwarGod did not choose that word. Men chose that word. That entire verse you refer to is completely mistranslated. I have already provided the true meaning of that verse but if you don't believe me, research it for yourself and you will learn the truth.
Progod, that comment of yours about the women in this thread was uncalled for; not very nice of you. These are very wise, intelligent and obviously, highly educated women who know that they stand equal in the sight of God and also know that God did not command women to ?obey? their husbands. Given that equality for all human beings is promoted, it doesn?t make sense that God would command any adult to ?obey? another. The Qur?an certainly does not promote slavery and this degrading and demeaning word conveys a master-slave relationship.
The Qur?an does not place men in charge of women. It does not create a hierarchy in which men are placed above women. Men--through fabricated hadith stories and the distortion of some Qur?anic verses pertaining to women--have done this. In particular, the incorrectly-translated verse 434 has traditionally been used to subordinate women to men. However, all throughout the Qur?an it is clear that men and women stand absolutely equal in the sight of God.
I don?t have much time right now but next time I will share with you MY observations regarding the nature of men and women, and work and roles and all that great stuff some of you guys I?m sure can?t wait to hear about...but until then, I will leave you with these verses
"One of His signs is that He created for you spouses like your selves so that you may live with them with affection and mercy - there are signs in this for people who reflect"
?The Believers, men and women, are protectors, one of another; they enjoin what is just, and forbid what is evil??
peace
-
Yes I would have married her to someone older. Most males who are three times older than a 10 year old menarchecal female are far too young to have passed through the andropausal stage.
Ah... the girl hadn't reached puberty, so said the judge.
http//articles.latimes.com/2008/jun/11/world/fg-childbride11
An example for all the other girls?
For you to say that there is nothing wrong with marrying a 10 year old child tells me that you're either joking or that there's something seriously wrong with you mentally. I certainly hope you were just joking.
As for what the parents said... do you have proof?
Well, not exactly, since I didn't record the conversation but I do have a great memory, so you will have to trust me when I say that that was exactly what they said.
-
I don?t have much time right now but next time I will share with you MY observations regarding the nature of men and women, and work and roles and all that great stuff some of you guys I?m sure can?t wait to hear about...but until then, I will leave you with these verses
"One of His signs is that He created for you spouses like your selves so that you may live with them with affection and mercy - there are signs in this for people who reflect"
?The Believers, men and women, are protectors, one of another; they enjoin what is just, and forbid what is evil??
peace
Hey nice posts shqipe, and what you doing prancing about showing both eyes in public, eh? ;D
mir? u pafshim
peace
-
Only for contemplation
Marriage
Then Almitra spoke again and said, "And what of Marriage, master?"
And he answered saying
You were born together, and together you shall be forevermore.
You shall be together when white wings of death scatter your days.
Aye, you shall be together even in the silent memory of God.
But let there be spaces in your togetherness,
And let the winds of the heavens dance between you.
Love one another but make not a bond of love
Let it rather be a moving sea between the shores of your souls.
Fill each other's cup but drink not from one cup.
Give one another of your bread but eat not from the same loaf.
Sing and dance together and be joyous, but let each one of you be alone,
Even as the strings of a lute are alone though they quiver with the same music.
Give your hearts, but not into each other's keeping.
For only the hand of Life can contain your hearts.
And stand together, yet not too near together
For the pillars of the temple stand apart,
And the oak tree and the cypress grow not in each other's shadow.
Gibran Khalil Gibran -A Lebanese poet and artist
-
Peace,
A warning to the believing single men here. Stay away from these women (if they are single)!! If they are not single, let me show some sympathy to the husbands if they act like they speak.
There is nothing wrong with obedience of a wife to her husband. Yes her husband is a human being and obedience to God takes precedence but a wife should obey her husband if he is godly and not exceeding the bounds of the Quran. That is how God says it should be and any believing woman who will rebel against her husband with her excuse being 'He's not the boss of me' should be fearful of the Hell-fire. That rebellion is not only in spite of her husband but also in spite of God, and is motivated by pure pride.
God gave the responsible believing man this privaledge for good reason. A I discussed some of that in my post above, that was quoted by Fahad. A woman who rejects this guidance from God should watch out in the hereafter, she might have a shock coming her way. A truly believing, humble woman would have not problem and would not be raising any objections to obeying her believing, responsible and reasonable husband. The same warning goes for the abusive, irresponsible husbands, whatever their excuses are they should fear the hell-fire just as much.
Godbless,
AnwarSalaam aleikum
You warn the men is this thread,against us woman that does not agree with obedience in a marrige Progod,and say that we may have a suprise coming in the hereafter.I think that men who taught they are the chiefs of women and their wifes,also have a surprise coming.
The womans situation in muslim countries,that have put your thoughts Progod,in system,is failing out,big time.Beliving muslim womens are living hell,here on earth,completly in hands of men.They can not travel,without husbands agreement,and without a mahram.They can not start divorce negotiation,without their husband agreement.They loose all parentship,over children,in a divorce,and if they are very unlucky,thay will never see their kids again,before the kids are grown up.
Obedience for a women is not only to her husband,in muslim countries.She really never have authority,on her self.And not reqognised as important,as men.
Allah say that humans shall not have any other master than Him,and you Progod,say that for womens,two masters is required,God and their husbands?
I think that what will bring harmony in a marrige,is equality,not obedience,as you belive.
Peace
-
Peace,
Sa'dah,
in my opinion men and women should NOT be put in these competitive environments with each other. It only leads to resentment and ill-will.
Peace,proGod..
From what I read,can I understand that you`re suggesting segregation between the sexes?
Now we all can adapt to situations we don't like if forced to. But we find ourselves ever increasingly in GENERALLY unnatural environments, and it can cause more problems than need be.
"O mankind, We created you from a male and female, and We made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Surely, the most honorable among you in the sight of God is the most righteous. God is Knowledgeable, Expert."
An unnatural environment to me is the one that segregates between men and women,that deprives the community of the valuable contributions of individuals,based on sexism..
Ive been trying to say that men and women are partners in life,and that each has a role to play,a persons personal abilities and character defines his role..
There is no strict separation or line that divides those roles,we should accept each other`s unique individualism,not to dictate each other who they are and what they are supposed to do..We all just need to act like good drones and work together like a Borg society accordin to mainstream society. But that is breaking up our society and our families frankly. It's creating women who are unsuitable for relationships with men and it is causing men to rebel against taking on manly responsibilities which can be undermined and competed for by the one he is trying to care for. Or sometimes these men do not learn them at all, because they grow up feeling undervalued and not needed as men.
Everybody loves to feel that they
re needed..women will always need men,to love, protect and support them..and men will always need women to support,love them and take care of them.. "And from His signs is that He created for you mates from yourselves that you may reside with them, and He placed between you affection and mercy. In that are signs for a people who reflect." (3021) Love is necessary for ones spiritual growth..couples who share mutual love and understanding raise healthy and balanced children..
Mutuality is the key..and if we have worked our minds to find a merciful and human interpretation for the word"" =beat them to be "separate from them" because we believed that women arent mules.. Then we must believe that women arent children or stupid beings who should be living their lives doing what theyre told.. What should a woman do to make her man feel "needed" and "valued"? Pretend to be stupid and dependent?that shes got no skills,no ambitions,no vision,no different views for things?Couples should help each other to be strong and independent,nurture each other and help each other grow..
You can`t ask a pubertal,fully grown up and free-willed person to "obey",this will break their spirit and makes them feel limited and oppressed.. -
Peace,
Sounds good. But sounds good is not always is good. I disagree with your interpretation of that verse. I read ta'aarafa as 'to mutually honor' from 'arafa's meaning of 'to recongize' and it's use in the words 'urf and ma'roof. But to you your way and to me mine.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace,
Sounds good. But sounds good is not always is good. I disagree with your interpretation of that verse. I read ta'aarafa as 'to mutually honor' from 'arafa's meaning of 'to recongize' and it's use in the words 'urf and ma'roof. But to you your way and to me mine.
Godbless,
AnwarSo how do you think they get to know each other?and moreover,mutually honor each other?by segregating between themselves? or recognize each other and motivate each other to do goodness and recognize the benefit of their union..
If there wasnt a natural human urge for union and connection "taarof",we wouldnt have witnessed this world wide web,or ideas like "global mind" and "global peace".. The fact that we here-brothers and sisters-are communicating each other,debating and encouraging each others creativity..is a further proof..Don`t you think?
-
Peace,
As for the choice of words, dutiful sounds good. My first instinct is to say tomay-toes, tomah-toes. But the Quran chose the word obedient. If that also entails being dutiful, sounds good. Again, tomay-toes, tomah-toes. You have issues with the word obedient. Those are your issues, and you should work that out on your own. If you disagree with what i'm saying . . .if the shoe fits . . .
Godbless,
AnwarSalaam brother Anwar
I took dutiful from the opening post where its translated like this The righteous women are obedient/dutiful women ( even though I believe that obedience is to God only and those women who are obedient to God, as a result, are dutiful.Farida, I don't have to explain myself. What I said was crystal clear. The fact that you completely misinterpreted my last sentence is proof enough (husbands who are abusive and irresponsible should be divorced).
I took time to read your earlier post to understand your views and noticed that in reply 34 you say that
but most men have a problem with women weilding authority over them. ANd I think many women don't know how to handle that and (as with many men as well) handle the authority without being demeaning.
I think some men don?t know how to handle women and do not realise that grownup women too have problem with authority being wielded over them.
And in my opinion men and women should NOT be put in these competitive environments with each other
Do you mean that one should be inferior in her status of education so the question of competition does not arise, or are you talking of work places?
Women IN GENERAL seem to lash back and attack (rather illogically and over emotionally) whenever it seems that the integrity of their gender is critiqued in any way.
I only speak for myself and I honestly do not think in terms of gender . I am a mother of both daughters and sons and I would do all I can to ensure that the rights of all my children, irrespective of gender, are protected and that both are respected equally as stated in the Qur?an.
We all just need to act like good drones and work together like a Borg society accordin to mainstream society. But that is breaking up our society and our families frankly. It's creating women who are unsuitable for relationships with men and it is causing men to rebel against taking on manly responsibilities which can be undermined and competed for by the one he is trying to care for. Or sometimes these men do not learn them at all, because they grow up feeling undervalued and not needed as men.
I couldn?t agree with you more but sadly I have seen several women who, despite being educated and talented, decided to enjoy the role of a wife and a mother only to find out later in life that the husband ran away with the money leaving them at the mercy of the state. They were unable to find jobs due to a lack of experience in the working environment and age discrimination added to their disadvantage. Seeing their plight I would never encourage my daughters to remain dependant on their husband?s earning.
My observations have been that men are more principal/philosophy oriented and are more cool-headed in comparison, and women are more pratical- oriented (they want to see those earthly goods needed for survival) and will sacrifice all in order to survive, while also being more emotional and irrational in comparison.
I too have observed this pattern except that women may act irrationally due to hormone imbalance (PMT) but when men reach their middle age (MLC) they tend to outdo women in irrationality and end up undoing, in a short span of time, whatever they had built jointly.
Unfortunately the socieiteis we co-exist in are usually non Quranic (sometimes even our very families belong more to these societies than to the Quran), and ARE doing as they like..
Yes her husband is a human being and obedience to God takes precedence but a wife should obey her husband if he is godly and not exceeding the bounds of the Quran.This simplifies the whole argument that obedience is to God only and not all men qualify to be rijaal. Therefore it is important that we all find out who are the ones who qualify as rijjal, who have been give a degree of advantage over nisaa
A truly believing, humble woman would have not problem and would not be raising any objections to obeying her believing, responsible and reasonable husband. The same warning goes for the abusive, irresponsible husbands, whatever their excuses are they should fear the hell-fire just as much
As I understand it God created women as precious creatures who should not exhibit their beauty cheaply and so they are not required to go out to earn a living and face the harsh world. HE gave the responsibility to maintain them with love and affection to men. However modern men pay little attention to their obligations towards women and, instead find it manly to preach to women to cover themselves and obey men. As a result there is a reaction from women which may ultimately result in their denying God?s commandments. For the sake of future generations sincere efforts should be made by both sides to understand their obligations and responsibilities. peace
-
Ok, men are good and loving to their wife, life toghether is fine, woman is good, so from where womes the need for any of them to obey the other? Just so tht the dellusional one get his or her kicks? What does this obeying business mean besides a kick to the holy Quran which nowhere says or hints to such a thing except in selfdelusional translations? An translated into real life what does it mean besides nothing? Either he imposes hemself irrationally or he does not, if he does not, where does the need for obedience arise from? Might do if he had married a cow. But mrriage to cows is forbidden for the moment. This is so ridiculously delusional. Still I cannot fathom that some men do in fact want this delusion quranically certified. How can the y expect to be respected, let alone obeyed, if they have such a ridiculous craving after a token acknowledgment. The most they can hope for if they are good men is a little comedy played by their complacent, but not obedient, wife out of her own practical sense, if she is a good one, if not, you will know what the price of obedience is. You would waste less energy just praying that your children turn out to be obedient and forget about the wife.
Salaam
-
Men are men and all Men are rijaal, that's just Arabic. Now whether certain men are qawwaamoona (supporters NOT supervisors) of the women in their lives, especially their wives with what God has given them is another thing. I think it's up to the woman to listen to her husband as long as she sees that he is doing what he can to support her and is trying to live with her in kindness and is for the most part reasonable. I think women have a certain irrationality that makes this a better situation, where men being the head makes family life more livable. Men who show that irrationality have given up what they know to be their natural role because that role is not societally encouraged. That's why you have the phenomenon of man-children. That is something of this century and connected to this type completely gender-role-less society. Competition betweem genders and women thinking that their husbands have no right to tell them what to do is not appropriate for a godly women. Yes, the man is to be the pilot of the plane,(and the woman the second in command) and that's why the Quran says she should be dutiful and obey him when he asks of her. But it is clear that the Quran also sets a standard for the man to live up to. So if he is cruel, abusive, ungodly and not responsible, he is still is a man but he is not following the Quran. And in such a case a godly woman has a right to not have anything to do with him. As for the "segregation" that you said I was implying. I speak just for the preferred situation for any Quranic society. I believe Quranist women should have the right to and even be encouraged to fully educate themselves. But I don't believe that men and women in general but Quranic men and women in particular should be competing for the same jobs or competing against each other in the same schools, or freely having non-relative male friends whom they habitually visit and cofide in without any real need. I don't believe in any forced segregation but more like a preferred segregation of men and woman who are not family, unless it's public (business, coincidental or the like where there's no relationship there except a passing comment or a curiosity) conversation or official business where men and women need to sit at the same table to discuss issues that affect both of them. I think the Quran demands that men take women into consideration and respect them where respect is due. And it also says that women should listen to/obey their husbands in the relationship unless that man is cruel, abusive and ungodly. I think that is the way the Quran puts it and that is the way Quranists should live. It's not new, and that is for a reason. And I don't think it's going backwards, but rather returning to sanity. Women have certain capacities and natural limitations and men have certain capacities and natural limitations. We are not the same and we should not let our pride get in the way of what God tells us to do and how to live. I think our general modern, western standards of equality are overboard and do more harm than good. Men and woman are equal in being able to do good and bad and choose God or not choose God, but there is a pecking order in our societies in this dunyaa. Unfortunately we have had situations historically where just phrases like pecking order convey visions of tyrrany and abuse. And that is what I think most of the women here who have commented are envisionng when they have responded to me and Fahad for instance. But I'm not talking about societies in general. I'm talking about Quranic standards. If we go off of what PEOPLE do, and even Muslims, we will never be able to see the Quran in its correct light. The Quran says most people are dead wrong, and it offers the balance between the extremem chauvinism of some cultures and the extreme libertinism (often termed liberalism) of others.
We might not see the problems that this libertinism causes on the level of high governments or distinguished institutions but in the streets and in the home these libertine attitudes disguesed behind words like liberation or equality are wreaking havoc on relationships, marriages, families and men and women's perspectives of each other. Gender roles are good. Some can be exaggerated but moderate ones where there is still mutual respect is optimal for human society. That is how I see it. Take it or leave it, love it or hate it.
Godbless,
Anwar -
The most they can hope for if they are good men is a little comedy played by their complacent, but not obedient, wife out of her own practical sense
Yep, saw it all the time on 80's (thankfully) pakistani tv drama's aka soap operas and whenever I read shojo manga (don't laugh) I'm shockingly confronted sometimes by how seriously the role is taken and wanted...This "delusional want" however is cross cultural as you know so I'm not very surprised that men would want it "certified" as it were with whatever authority they tend to believe in/respect etc and women affected as a natural consequence whether or not the end result is the fair sex keeping mum and going about things indirectly (plently of fairy tales/fables, one russian one comes to mind about the good wife and how the good is actually her common sense when confronted with her stupid husband and how she makes him feel ten feet tall, takes care of business, runs the household etc etc while the idiot keeps messing up but never would she directly tell him exactly what a git he is) or whether she actually believes in it and writes "The Ladies' Etiquette Handbook" which includes the Arrr Aye Aye Capn' scenario and how it's the best thing ever.
Good posts btw, agree with you.
-
Peace,
Sounds good. But sounds good is not always is good. I disagree with your interpretation of that verse. I read ta'aarafa as 'to mutually honor' from 'arafa's meaning of 'to recongize' and it's use in the words 'urf and ma'roof. But to you your way and to me mine.
Godbless,
AnwarSalaam Anwar
The verse does not say "ta3arafaa" but "ta3aarafuu", meant for nations and tribes.
-
Men are men and all Men are rijaal, that's just Arabic.
But it is clear that the Quran also sets a standard for the man to live up to.
Godbless,
AnwarSalaam brother Anwar
I have taken those points from your post which I believe should be fully discussed as its not often we see men discussing what is expected of them and admit that the Quran also sets a standard for the man to live up to.
Next we can discuss each sex's strength and weakness.I think women have a certain irrationality that makes this a better situation, where men being the head makes family life more livable.
Men who show that irrationality have given up what they know to be their natural role because that role is not societally encouraged. That's why you have the phenomenon of man-children. That is something of this century and connected to this type completely gender-role-less society.There is clearly a misunderstanding here, I think most women long for a real man and it does not make them happy to see the phenomenon of man-children.
And I don't think it's going backwards, but rather returning to sanity. Women have certain capacities and natural limitations and men have certain capacities and natural limitations. We are not the same and we should not let our pride get in the way of what God tells us to do and how to live.
Agreed I do not at all believe in so called liberal values nor do I believe in manipulative tactics to boost male ego. We need to honestly and openly discuss what is it lacking which has created a vacuum between men and women?
So lets put our pride aside and work together for the benefit of the whole community and start with this question
What is the exact meaning of rijaal and what is expected of a man according to the Quranic standard ?
peace -
Peace,
Samia, I know what the verse says. I was pointing to the form of the verb. Form 5, not the exact conjugation there. For those who may not know, ta'aarafa would refer to he/it and ta'aarafoo is 'they.' Thanks Samia, that was some real knit-picking, but I'll assume you had the best of intentions. I read the verse and I know what it is referring to. Thanks.
Godbless,
Anwar -
For you to say that there is nothing wrong with marrying a 10 year old child tells me that you're either joking or that there's something seriously wrong with you mentally. I certainly hope you were just joking.
So you'd be against other animals getting pregnant, would you put a limit on the animal kingdom? Or are you just against human evolution?
As for saying that there may be something wrong with me. Please do describe this error on my part.
Well, not exactly, since I didn't record the conversation but I do have a great memory, so you will have to trust me when I say that that was exactly what they said.
Is that a lie? Or do you want me to believe your hadeeth?
-
Peace,
Farida. Rijaal means men. Any adult human male. What are the Quran's standards for a man to live by (this doesn't make or break his being a rajl)? To support women, to encourage an environment of rahmah (mercy), and to not be abusive. Whereas the Quran does give the man the upperhand in the Quran (in wordly affairs only), and I do believe that when the Quran says that a man can hit his wife, that does not mean hit her to hurt her (we all can hit someone in a way that does not hurt the person we hit), but hit her to admonish her after he has already spoken to her and has even not slept with her to protest her rebellious behavior and attitude. I personally also think that as the Quran says, men will never be able to be 100 percent just with women. I think that is because women are just way too subjective. And there are serious differences between men attitudes and women attitudes. But instead of trying to create some idealistic, almost idol-like standard for men and give women a reason not to respect them because they don't live up to their exxagerated standards, let's just be reasonable here. If a man is reasonably just, reasonably responsible, reasonable responsive and supportive and over all shows that he fully believes in keeping his commitments to God then a woman should listen to her man and give him the leading role in the familiy that was meant for an able bodied man. Let's not assume that all men are abusive from the start, cuz that is wrong. And if your man does not believe in and honor his commitments to God overall then you need to watch out, and probably get out of that situation. I'm not going to create the vision of some perfect man and down every man that doesn't fit that mold. I'm talking about reasonability. But a woman should not be rebellioius or disrespectful of her husband (and they should avoid men they don't respect) and shouldn't question him unless she sees a contradiction with what her husband tells her and what God asks of her. God asks no-one to destroy themselves for anyone else, nor to stay quiet when they can help the ones they love by offering a word of advice. But pride should not factor into this. Women have very big egos as well, and have a harder time realizing it than men, as far as I've seen. I think some of the most egotistical people I have met have been women and not men. Men can be generally stubborn and stupid (Like most people.) But ego goes beyond just stubborn. Ego is an over-assertion of one's personality and ideas and an excessive idea of superiority justified in anyway. And when that bubble is bursted, watch out! From what I have seen women's egos are a whole lot easier to offend than men's, usually provoking erratic, and illogical reactions. I think our societal ways these days are catered to assuaging the egos of women and that's not right either.
Godbless,
Anwar -
Peace,
Samia, I know what the verse says. I was pointing to the form of the verb. Form 5, not the exact conjugation there. For those who may not know, ta'aarafa would refer to he/it and ta'aarafoo is 'they.' Thanks Samia, that was some real knit-picking, but I'll assume you had the best of intentions. I read the verse and I know what it is referring to. Thanks.
Godbless,
AnwarSalaam Anwar
I really do not understand the reason for this paranoia. If you know what the verse says, why do you pick the wrong conjugation so that you build on it a disagreement with sa'adah's interpretation? That was my reason for drawing your attention to the correct conjugation and hence the correct interpretation. Why should "tribes and nations" be expected to "mutually honour" each other? You definitely meant man and woman (not that I am against this understading, but it is nevertheless an understanding and has nothing to do with the real meaning of the verb), and put a far fetched, almost not correct, interpretation just to wash down the correct interpretation given by sa'adah.
And BTW, the verb is form six, not five, and serves a mutuality meaning; so if the verb 3arafa means to know, taarafuu/ta3arafaa means to know each other, and hence we cannt conjugate it to the singular. (five would be ta3arrafa linked to the preposition 3ala, and means to recognize, ),