SURAH 4, VERSE 34

the rise of fundamentalism throughout the Muslim world, the most noteworthy examples being Khomenism and Ziaism, together with the existing model of Saudi Arabia, has in turn given rise to widespread awareness among women about their human condition. The decade of the 1980’s has witnessed a desire to find out for themselves the Quranic injunctions in particular. In Pakistan, under Zia, after a great deal of arbitrational activity, women seem to have settled down mainly to intellectual activity. This has taken the form of seminars and discussions and the establishment of research centers. On of the verses that boggles and preoccupies the mid most, is surah 4, Verse 34. in traditional translations its impact is primatitive and horrific, and totally unacceptable to the humanity and self-esteem of woman hood and the institution of the family itself.

It was in this mood which I shared with many of my compatriots that I approached Allam S. A. Parwez, the great Iqbalite, for further clarification of the above mentioned Quranic verse. I am glad I did, because he fell fatally y ill not very long after this I would have missed out on the details for what emerged out of our dialogue was for me an original rendering of the verse unknown to me in any other literature, including his own published works. No doubt the meaning and suggestion is implicit in his “Mafhumul—Quran”, which I shall follow phrase by phrase, but the comprehensive details given below are based on our dialogue. Since this verse is causing so much of ahead-ache and heart-ache among women of the Muslim world at large, I would like to share it with my readers. I write on Allama Parwez’s authority, and any lapse is entirely my responsibility.

Surah 4, Verse 34 asserts, to being with, as elsewhere that men and women are equal in the exercise of their human rights and duties. The difference lies in the biological functions of the two, there by complimenting each other. This “difference” des not mean inequality and the time-honored make chauvinism which is pathetically a victim of superiority complex. In facet both excel each other in their unique gender potentials bestowed on them by the creator. The uniqueness of the woman lies in her capacity to carry the baby in her womb, lactate and nurture it. this incapacitates her for w while which the men enjoined to perform the function of relieving her of the anxiety of this situation by giving her security and protection. This in no way implies that a woman is debarred from earning or that the man can strangulate her economically. ( In any case, the ultimate objective of the Quran is envisaging a people who have already gone though a metamorphosis, a change from infantile equation of dominance and subservience to human partnership.) after having said this, the Quran goes further to advise women to safeguard their biological function in the interest of the perpetuation of the human specie in accordance with the laws of nature., the next sentence in the verse refers to a possible “rebellion” (‘nashuza hunna’), translated as such by Marmaduke Pickthall, on the part of women. Parwez Sahid also uses the word”sarkashi” in his Mafhum-ul-Quran. the question arises as to rebellion against what and against whom. The traditional mind seems to immediately turn in the direction of sexual waywardness, followed by three stages of preventing it as laid down in the Quran (1) they should be counseled against it (2) the husbands should be separated from their wives (3) corporal punishment can be meted out to them by the husband, if the first and the second stages show no results. Seen with such reference, the woman’s mind naturally balks at it. why was not the sexual waywardness and immorality of the man included in this verse, I cried out in despair. Here two points must be understood at the very outset, explained Allama Parwez. Firstly, the Quran in this verse discusses the issue not between husband and wife, but between men and women in general. As such the matter is tackled by the society and the administration through its institutions, such as the court,. Secondly, the use at stake is not a womans sexual waywardness but her “rebellion” against the biological function of procreation.

In a male-dominated society it eventually comes home of a woman that what smothers and denigrates her is her uterus, so why not do away with it? as Carol Discroll points out: “it should not come as a shock to realize that women can never hop to be liberated in any sense if they are denied the right to control their bodies especially their reproductive organs.”.

This anti-uterus attitude may lead a woman to decide not to have baby. This kind of protest will never come from a man, for he never has to go through this process. He can never even appreciate what is entails both physically and emotionally. It may also be noticed that with more and more awareness and enlightenments the woman feels unfulfilled with her tradition role. If child bearing the ultimate? Vicki Pollard says; “Natural childbirth has been glorified as the most beautiful moment in a woman’s life. This is unfortunate because it leads to the idea the motherhood is the ultimate experience in life”. But a woman is a human being, and her head and heart are no less clamoring for artistic and intellectual creativity apart from sheer procreation. Such rumblings of dissatisfaction and rebellion are reflected even in ancient Greek literature where wives had no part to play in the cultural pursuits, when that country was passing through its most elevating and productive phase in this history.

In Euripides’ “Medea”, the rebel woman spoke out thus:

“Sooner would I stand
Three times to face their battles,
Shield in hand,
Than bear one child”.
Such individuals have existed perhaps on every phase of history and every society. A few individual do not matter but if this feeling becomes collectively articulated and gains momentum as a movement then the survival of the human specie is threatened.

At this stage of the dialogue my immediate report was “ On the contrary the world is threatened with the burden of overpopulation ; we are two billion too many ; in this context it is ridiculous to imagine that the human specie is threatened with extinction, or ever will be in the procreative sense. To this Allama Parwez referred to the liberation struggle waged by the women of Europe and north America. In the past two to three hundred tears. In time it has become more and more articulate and vocal. Already the copious anti-uterus literature is showing signs of dwindling population in those countries, and the omens liberation movement could lead those areas into a crisis. As the third countries (where the extra tow billions have been produced) develop and women gain awareness like the counterparts in the first world, similar literature and movements will blast the status quo. It will then become a world-wide crisis.

Now, the Quran is for all times. It visualizes the future possibilities and accordingly lays down guidelines. Surah 4, Verse 34 becomes applicable only in such a contingency. Otherwise it remains redundant. So, when the world is faced with such a crisis, women will be counseled against this attitude. Of course it if but natural that unless they are helped in eating the confidence and the certainty that marriage and mother hood is not the end of all experience, it will not show results. If this counseling fails and the anti0uterus movement shows no signed f abating, then sexual indulgence, by and large becomes irrelevant. Sex is not for pleasure alone. The administration and the court can then decide on separation, husbands abstaining from sex and thereby putting psychological pressure on the wives. If even this does not bring any punishment, not the husband. Indeed the very idea of the husband beating the wife dishonors and demeans the wife consequently the family life. Above all, it goes against the very values of the Quran. “Quranic Approach towards change” published in Talu-e-islan of January 1990, I’ve taken the position tat these are local and historical and the nature of the punishments can change from time to time and place to place. Regional and local historical continuity, provided the punishments are not too barbaric – makes it easier to implement ; secondly the change is inevitable when the cultural level of the human mind reaches heights of the refinement and beauty. Some psychologists in the meantime accept corporal punishment as part of treatment.)

The rest of the verse emphases that is women retract from their stand, there is no vendetta involved. It may be repeated relatedness between husband and wife, where husbands arrogant to themselves the prerogative of beating their wives black and clue and throwing them out of their bedrooms. It is this misreading of the verse because of which wife-beating if so rampant in almost all Muslim countries. Even so-called educated husbands claim this “Quranic” right to beat their wives, and if they do not beat it is to be seen as a favor in a spirit of magnanimity!

Talking of “rebellion”, the Quran chides men and husbands as well in their role as protectors. They can also be “rebellious” in the sense that they ill-treat and desert their wives. Again it is the administration through its courts that arbitrate understanding between them and settle the money-matters on conditions that are workable.

Such are the details communicated by Allama Parwez on this very sensitive issue. The details are definitely out of the rut of traditional translations and certainly more convincing. In any case, it is worth pondering over and taking up the challenge for further research. It is difficult to give up ideas that have the sanction of history and centuries of time to back it up, even when these ideas are negative and unproductive. Nevertheless the effort must go on, for anything positive said or written is never lost.