Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

An ideal marriage in the Koran is where the wife obeys her husband.

When a wife does not obey her husband, she presumably becomes rebellious. The Koran instructs husbands to then beat rebellious wives.

Additionally, the Koran says suspecting rebellion from the wife warrants wife beatings:

Koran 4:34 - Men are the managers of the affairs of women for that God has preferred in bounty one of them over another, and for that they have expended of their property. Righteous women are therefore obedient, guarding the secret for God's guarding. And those you fear may be rebellious admonish; banish them to their couches, and beat them. If they then obey you, look not for any way against them; God is All-high, All-great.

So, the Koran says to beat wives husbands suspect of being rebellious.

However, what happens if the husband suspects his wife is having an affair? According to the Koran, he should be able to beat her. But what if she wasn't actually having an affair?

Her pleas of innocence would fall on deaf ears as the husband pummels his wife. Essentially, wives have no escape from a beating from any suspicious husband. An unconvinced husband guarantees beatings.

The onus is on wives to prove to their husbands they aren't having an affair or doing anything else the husband would consider disobedient.

What do wives need to do to ensure their husbands do not suspect rebellion?

What constitutes rebellion so husbands know when to beat their wives?

Nusho is normally associated with cheating. And the word used in that verse doesn't have to mean beat, it also means separate.

Thanks for your comment, but translating "nusho" as "to separate" doesn't make sense because the instructions in that verse are:

1) admonish your wife

2) banishment

3) beat

If "nasho" is interpreted as "to separate" that means the verse is redundant. The second clause in the verse already calls on husbands to separate ("banish") their wives.



Anyways, how is a wife to make sure her husband doesn't suspect her of adultery?

And why does the verse say the wife should no longer be beaten when she becomes obedient to her husband - not if she becomes faithful?

This is a very wise verse from God and has been discussed a few times in other threads relating to whether Islam allows wife beating or not.

eh participated in those threads and just needs to be reminded of what was discussed then.

philosophy-dubai/wife-beating-the-koran-split-from-politics-forum-t41127.html#p331942

philosophy-dubai/for-shafique-wife-beating-the-koran-t39000.html

philosophy-dubai/wife-beating-and-abuse-t41115.html

To name 3 threads on the subject.

But the salient point is that the verse shows that domestic violence/battery is not allowed in Islam. The only time corporal punishment is ever allowed is if a series of escalating punishments are meted out by the husband, and within a context of a judicial system that allows the woman to appeal and even ultimately divorce the husband.

The crimes that merit punishment are what eh is asking about in this thread - and nucleus above has addressed this. eh - you can also look up what commentators and shariah experts say on this too.

To my knowledge though - I know of no Muslim man who has applied the first two levels of punishment and then proceeded on the last level. Nucleus, do you know of anyone??

Cheers,
Shafique

(PS - there's no need to bring up what the Bible says about women - that too has been dealt with in numerous other threads, let's keep this thread on topic)

. The only time corporal punishment

Under the laws of most modern nations, "corporally punishing" your wife is just a euphemism for domestic abuse.

But you're free to check the books of Western nations if "beating" your wife is domestic abuse, regardless of how many times the husband castigated his spouse before landing hands or fists on her.

The crimes that merit punishment are what eh is asking about in this thread

So you're saying "rebelliousness" and "obedience" in this context means infidelity?

What do wives need to do to ensure their husbands do not suspect rebellion?

And please support your belief with what the Koran says - how does "rebelliousness" translate to infidelity and only infidelity?

And is beating your wife on suspicion fair and logical to you? We all know how you like to use the word "logic", even if you don't understand it.

Wife beating is not allowed in Islam.

The three step process explained by God is logical to me. In practice (which is really what matters), I don't know of anyone that has applied these punishments - I also know of no one who would accept that wife beating/battery would be excused by this verse (outside of your blogger friends that is).

As to what the word translated into rebellious means in practice - I'll let Nucleus and others look up what the commentators say. My point is that it isn't applied by Muslim men today and in any case it should only apply within a context where a woman has her full rights, which ultimately is the right to divorce the husband. That was pretty radical for 1500 years ago.

Cheers,

Shafique

Is a woman in tight jeans without head cover rebelious?

Wife beating is not allowed in Islam.

I'm sorry. I must have missed where the verse said "corporal punishment" rather than "beat [your wife]".

Some people believe that "beat your wife" means "wife beating".

In fact, I think that's how Western law and society view "beat your wife" to mean "wife beating".

But again, please correct me if I'm mistaken.

The three step process explained by God is logical to me.

So is that what the law in the UK says? If a husband takes two steps (verbal abuse and "grounding") before beating his wife he's not actually beating his wife and won't face legal consequences?

Sorry, I didn't know about that.

I also know of no one who would accept that wife beating/battery would be excused by this verse

Really? What about all the Muslim clerics in the youtube clips I've posted who seem to refer to "beating your wife" as "wife beating"?

That's something else you're apparently not aware of.

But seriously, what Western society believes that if you verbally abuse and then "ground" your wife, any beatings after won't be considered domestic abuse?

In fact, I imagine how most domestic abuse starts - with verbal abuse then beatings. So wife beaters are just minus a step from being good Muslim husbands.

That was pretty radical for 1500 years ago.

Actually it wasn't. Egyptian women had more rights under the pharaohs than Muslim women centuries later were granted.

And btw, what do wives need to do to ensure their husbands do not suspect rebellion?

Is it "logical" to beat your wife on suspicions? After all, if she pleads she's innocent she's only lying and further steps (beatings) need to be taken.

FD - A Muslim woman in tight jeans and without head covering - indeed wearing s.exy clothing in general - is not rebellious at all. It just depends on the particular circumstances, cultural norms and family values of her environment. There's no restriction in the marital home, for example, and in some cultures no head coverings are ok, as are tight jeans.

It other circumstances and in other communities, it will be seen as rebellious - eg an Amish woman in her community, or a Jewish lady in Beit Shemesh - to take two non-Muslim examples.

In any case, IF it was deemed rebellious - the lady has the ultimate sanction to get out of the relationship and leave.

As I said, I don't know of anyone applying this punishment in practice - banishing from the bed etc. Hypotheticals are all well and good, but if there isn't a problem in practice, one wonders why the likes of eh keep bringing up this strawman? There are more than the 3 threads I listed which explain the realities.

(Eh - enlighten me, when did Europe/Christians catch up with the Egyptians and Muslims in allowing women the right to divorce? Was it a few decades after Muhammad, a few centuries or over a 1000 years? It was certainly radical in Arabia and in most of the world.)

Cheers
Shafiqiue

In case you wanted to stay on topic:

What do wives need to do to ensure their husbands do not suspect rebellion?

Is it "logical" to beat your wife on suspicions? After all, if she pleads she's innocent she's only lying and further steps (beatings) need to be taken.

Hmm ok, some Muslim farthers giving 'corporal punishment' because of religious reasons to daughters going out in jeans without head cover must have misinterpreted the quran then.

I like the euphemisms shafique comees up with.



Beating your wife isn't "wife beating". It's "corporal punishment".



Really? According to whom?

The British Government? No.

The British people? No.

Any Western Nation? Probably not.



So, what laws and norms is shafique applying when he says smacking your wife around on suspicions isn't what the kafir call wife beating?



It's very strange for such a patriotic British citizen as shafique to not think through the prism of British law and convention.



Hmmmmm.............

You're going on one of your tangents again eh.

In previous threads I explained to you how relationships with women work - and how you would be enlightened when you entered into one. There's a thing called communication - and it's hard to explain how that works within a marriage or relationship (it has mysterious elements which men seem to find hard to fathom in words).

In any case, IF a husband resorts to punishment he HAS to communicate this to his wife and she has ample time during the time she is not to have s.ex with him to get help if the husband is being unreasonable. The man punishes himself first when he invokes the first level of punishment (no s.ex) - again something you'll understand in due course.

If the lady is innocent and the husband is still insistent - the lady has recourse to bring in other people. The man has to justify his suspicions. Ultimatley the lady has the right to divorce.

But as I said - it is moot if it is not used in practice.



God's wisdom in this verse is that He is actually in practice saying that wife beating is NOT ok - the standards are set so high that in practice a husband cannot beat his wife and use this verse as an explanation/excuse.

But don't take my word for it - just look for the Muslim men who have used this verse and gone through the stages of punishment laid out. I know of none myself.

Cheers,
Shafique

and she has ample time during the time she is not to have s.ex with him to get help if the husband is being unreasonable.

Nope, didn't see that in the verse I quoted.

Come again.

The man punishes himself first when he invokes the first level of punishment (no s.ex)

Actually, the first level is verbal abuse.

And it's not a punishment if the man is like Muhammad and has multiple wives.

Anyway, the verse only says to banish his wife. Nothing about s3x.

The man has to justify his suspicions.

Nope. The Koran just says to "castigate, banish and beat" your wife on suspicions. I didn't see anywhere on justifying his suspicions.

But please show me where the verse says what you're claiming it does.

the standards are set so high that in practice a husband cannot beat his wife and use this verse as an explanation/excuse.

What standard would that be? That the wife better become obedient by the time the husband gets to step three?

You obviously have a lot to learn. I'm glad you're taking the time to get enlightened - but given that all this was explained to you before, you seem to have an issue with comprehension.

May I ask you a simple question, eh?

Do you know of any Muslim man that has invoked this punishment and gone through all 3 stages? Perhaps we can look at that incident and see what the crime was etc.

Deal? (I know of no one, so can't help. Perhaps you're right - let's see what examples of people actually using this verse are.)

Cheers,
Shafique

First of all, it's only two stages before the beating starts.

And how is it a high standard if the wife is obstinate and doesn't become "obedient" by step three?

Anyways,back to my quesitons you're avoiding:



What do wives need to do to ensure their husbands do not suspect rebellion?

Is it "logical" to beat your wife on suspicions? After all, if she pleads she's innocent she's only lying and further steps (beatings) need to be taken.

Ok, let's test your interpretation with reality.

Can you find a real case we can discuss?

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Nucleus, do you know of anyone?

Nope, I don't know any.

event horizon wrote:1) admonish your wife

2) banishment

3) beat

If "nasho" is interpreted as "to separate" that means the verse is redundant. The second clause in the verse already calls on husbands to separate ("banish") their wives.

That is not correct. "banish them to their couches" is not separation, it means to avoid intimacy. For example, when prophet (pbuh) had disagreement with his wives, he left home and lived in separation for sometime. Separation whether in Islam or seculary means moving out.

Here is a good lecture on this issue

shafique wrote:There's a thing called communication - and it's hard to explain how that works within a marriage or relationship (it has mysterious elements which men seem to find hard to fathom in words).

Funny you should mention this. I remember a convo you wrote out with Mrs. Shafique on DHH about her buying shoes. Other posters were astonished and felt very sorry for Mrs. Shafique, which seems a common theme.

Are you sure you're not making this up? Your memory and interpretation skills have let you down many times in the past after all.

I presume that you too couldn't actually find a real incident we can discuss. I suggest that eh just watches the video above whilst he asks his blogger friends if they've heard of a real case. I trust they won't just make up a story.

Cheers,

Shafique

I saw a piece on Sky news last night about a rebellious wife in Afghanistan.

She was 15.

She was sold into marriage, aged 14, and then her husband and mother in law tried to force her into prostitution. She rebelled and was locked in the cellar of her 'home' for a year and endured numerous regular beatings from her husband.

She was finally released from her prison and admitted to hopspital. She had hardly any hair on the front of her head where her mother in law had pulled it out. She had also pulled out the girls finger nails.

Her face had extensive cuts and bruises and she had been tortured with lighted cigarettes.

The report said she would have to stay in the hospital for a month so that her physical wounds could heal.
I fear for her mental state.

Apparantly 9 out of 10 Afghani women are subjected to abuse from their husbands.

That's a lot of rebellious women.

Can you find a real case we can discuss?

I've posted one on this forum.

A husband was following the Koran's verse to beat his disobedient wife in Germany (?) and he ended up in jail.

I guess the authorities didn't agree that beating his wife was corporal punishment rather than wife beating.



As for your other comment that wives only need to divorce their husbands...well, divorce is allowed in the West. Do you think laws against domestic abuse are superfluous since any wife being beaten by her husband can simply leave the marriage?

Apparently that's the only mechanism you have in mind in Islam that protects women. Hmmm....


Btw, the questions you seem to be avoiding:

What do wives need to do to ensure their husbands do not suspect rebellion?

Is it "logical" to beat your wife on suspicions? After all, if she pleads she's innocent she's only lying and further steps (beatings) need to be taken.

A 'real' man would never hit a woman! Anyone twisted enough to think this entitles them to commit domestic violence against their partners/daughters, needs their head read. It's just another excuse for weak minded, pathetic little men to belittle women. Anyone who thinks this is ok needs a good kicking!

As for the man ending up in prison - er Germany is not an Islamic state, so he would be punished for domestic abuse, assault and GBH, the same as he would in any other western nation that does not subscribe to Islam or sharia law. These 'people' have to understand that they will be punished as per the law of the land, not their own cuckoo beliefs.

Anyone twisted enough to think this entitles them to commit domestic violence against their partners/daughters

Hitting a woman for disobedience isn't abuse as long as its done in step-wise fashion.

A husband must first yell at his wife then banish her.

If she's still disobedient - perhaps he suspects infidelity and she refuses to tell him "The Truth" - then he is instructed to beat her.

But a husband cannot beat his wife once she becomes obedient and the husband does not suspect rebellion.

Merciful and logical.

Actually, here's the link to German wife beater: dubai-politics-talk/wife-beating-misunderstander-under-arrest-germany-t44406.html

A Muslim imam who lectures on non-violence and advises the German government on interfaith issues has been arrested in Germany for beating up his wife.

Sheikh Abu Adam, 40, is now on remand in Munich while his wife, 31, is being guarded by police.

She was allegedly assaulted so badly that she suffered a broken nose and shoulder and numerous cuts and bruises.

Media reports claimed the woman, who has borne one of his ten children, wanted to live a more 'western' lifestyle and was allegedly attacked after telling her husband.

...

Adam is alleged to have shouted a verse from the Koran at his wife as he beat her.

The line said: 'Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them.

'As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them.'

Anyways, I'm just curious what society/law system shafique had in mind when he claimed beating your wife is not wife beating.

Of course the wife never would have been beaten if she complied to her husband's demands before the situation reached stage 3.

event horizon , Oh shhh EH - it's stupid! It's another excuse for weak men to instill power over women. And what punishment do men get? No man should EVER raise his hand to a woman - END OF> If you think that's ok in any circumstance, you're a fool. If any guy ever raised a hand to me, he'd be getting it straight back!

It's backward, stoneage thinking. Please come into the 21st century - oh wait I forgot, you guys are 700 years behind the rest of us!

Well, we disagree.

I think husbands have a right to discipline disobedient wives as parents have with children.

event horizon , And you still didn't answer my question! What about disobedient husbands? You can't liken wives to disciplining a child? Seriously what planet are you on?

TS, your post title is misleading , you are a free man to worship whatever you want , so just chillax

Chocoholic ,

A command for wives to beat their husbands wouldn't make sense. Women are generally weaker than men so men should be the ones to beat their weaker wives.

As for children and parents and wives and husbands, Islam teaches that wives should obey their husbands and children their parents. So I liken a husband disciplining his wife to parents their children.

In the end of the day, there is no difference between an obedient wife and obedient child. Both have a role in Islam to obey either their husband or parent. That's why Islam allows for disciplining both a wife and child if they become disobedient.

uaehop wrote:TS, your post title is misleading , you are a free man to worship whatever you want , so just chillax

Who's TS?

--- Mon Jan 02, 2012 11:15 pm ---

event horizon wrote:Well, we disagree.

I think husbands have a right to discipline disobedient wives as parents have with children.

It's just as well you aren't married to Chocs, EH! She's well and truely kick your head in

Chocs, calm down. EH is winding you up.