Historical research indicates women have always been oppressed by male dominated religions. What Does Islam About This?
by Dr. Sherif Muhammad
Dr. Sherif Mohammad, an eminent writer-thinker with an academic background in electrical engineering. He currently lives in Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Since modern Western thought and paradigmas are based on Western cultural heritage, what is meant by religion has been the Judeo-Christian tradition. Both the Western thinkers and Orientalists and “Westernized” intellectuals in the Muslim world, in ignorance of Islam, have tended to criticize Islam from the perspective of the critics directed to the Judeo-Christian tradition. What follows is of great importance especially in correcting and clarifying this important matter from the viewpoint of the status of women in Islam.
Concept of Women in Religion
Do Judaism, Christianity, and Islam hold the same concepts about women?
How do their concepts of women differ?
Does either Judaism or Christianity offer women better treatment than Islam?
Let us explore the facts to find the Truth!
Research for answers to difficult questions is not simple nor easy. First, in order to find real truth, it is necessary to be completely fair and objective, or at least try your best. Islam teaches us this important characteristic - basic honesty in all things - even against your own desires.
The Quran orders Muslims to speak the truth - even if it is against yourself and those dear to you:
“Whenever you speak -- speak justly even if a near relative is concerned.” (6:152) “O you who believe, stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even as against yourselves, or your parents or your kin, and whether it be (against) rich or poor.” (4:135).
The other great difficulty is the overwhelming breadth of the subject. Therefore, during the last few years, I have spent many hours reading the Bible, The Encyclopedia of Religion, and the Encyclopedia Judaica searching for answers.
I have also read several books discussing the position of women in different religions written by scholars, apologists, and critics. The material presented in the following chapters represents the important findings of this humble research. I don’t claim to be absolutely objective. This is beyond my limited capacity. All I can say is that I have been trying, throughout this research, to approach the Quranic ideal of “speaking justly”.
I would like to emphasize in this introduction that my purpose for this study is not to denigrate Judaism or Christianity.
As Muslims, we believe in the divine origins of both. No one can be a Muslim without believing in Moses and Jesus as great prophets of God.
My goal is only to vindicate Islam and pay a tribute, long overdue in the West, to the final truthful Message from God to the human race.
I would also like to emphasize that I concerned myself only with Doctrine. That is, my concern is, mainly, the position of women in the three religions as it appears in their original sources not as practised by their millions of followers in the world today.
Therefore, most of the evidence cited comes from the Quran, the sayings of Prophet Muhammad, the Bible, the Talmud, and the sayings of some of the most influential Church Fathers whose views have contributed immeasurably to defining and shaping Christianity.
This interest in the sources relates to the fact that understanding a certain religion from the attitudes and the behaviour of some of its nominal followers is misleading.
Many people confuse culture with religion, many others do not know what their religious books are saying, and many others do not even care.
1. Eve’s fault?
The three religions agree on one basic fact: Both women and men are created by God, The Creator of the whole universe. However, disagreement starts soon after the creation of the first man, Adam, and the first woman, Eve.
The Judaeo-Christian conception of the creation of Adam and Eve is narrated in detail in Genesis 2:4-3:24. God prohibited both of them from eating the fruits of the forbidden tree.
The serpent seduced Eve to eat from it and Eve, in turn, seduced Adam to eat with her.
When God rebuked Adam for what he did, he put all the blame on Eve:
“The woman you put here with me -- she gave me some fruit from the tree and I ate it.”
Consequently, God said to Eve:
“I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband and he will rule over you.”
To Adam He said:
“Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree .... Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life...”
The Islamic conception of the first creation is found in several places in the Quran, for example:
“O Adam dwell with your wife in the Garden and enjoy as you wish but approach not this tree or you run into harm and transgression.
Then Satan whispered to them in order to reveal to them their shame that was hidden from them and he said: ‘Your Lord only forbade you this tree lest you become angels or such beings as live forever.’ And he swore to them both that he was their sincere adviser.
So by deceit he brought them to their fall: when they tasted the tree their shame became manifest to them and they began to sew together the leaves of the Garden over their bodies.
And their Lord called unto them: ‘Did I not forbid you that tree and tell you that Satan was your avowed enemy?’
They said: ‘Our Lord we have wronged our own souls and if You forgive us not and bestow not upon us Your Mercy, we shall certainly be lost’" (Quran chapter 7, verses 19-23).
A careful look into the two accounts of the story of the Creation reveals some essential differences.
The Quran, contrary to the Bible, places equal blame on both Adam and Eve for their mistake.
Nowhere in the Quran can one find even the slightest hint that Eve tempted Adam to eat from the tree or even that she had eaten before him.
Eve in the Quran is no temptress, no seducer, and no deceiver. Moreover, Eve is not to be blamed for the pains of childbearing.
God, according to the Quran, punishes no one for another’s faults. Both Adam and Eve committed a sin and then asked God for forgiveness and He forgave them both.
2. Eve’s legacy
The image of Eve as temptress in the Bible has resulted in an extremely negative impact on women throughout the Judaeo-Christian tradition. All women were believed to have inherited from their mother, the Biblical Eve, both her guilt and her guile.
Consequently, they were all untrustworthy, morally inferior, and wicked. Menstruation, pregnancy, and childbearing were considered the just punishment for the eternal guilt of the cursed female sex.
In order to appreciate how negative the impact of the Biblical Eve was on all her female descendants we have to look at the writings of some of the most important Jews and Christians of all time.
Let us start with the Old Testament and look at excerpts from what is called the Wisdom Literature in which we find:
“I find more bitter than death the woman who is a snare, whose heart is a trap and whose hands are chains. The man who pleases God will escape her, but the sinner she will ensnare....while I was still searching but not finding, I found one upright man among a thousand but not one upright woman among them all” (Ecclesiastes 7:26-28).
In another part of the Hebrew literature which is found in the Catholic Bible we read:
“No wickedness comes anywhere near the wickedness of a woman.....Sin began with a woman and thanks to her we all must die” (Ecclesiasticus 25:19,24).
Jewish Rabbis listed nine curses inflicted on women as a result of the Fall:
“To the woman He gave nine curses and death: 1. the burden of the blood of menstruation 2. the blood of virginity 3. the burden of pregnancy 4. the burden of childbirth 5. the burden of bringing up the children 6. her head is covered as one in mourning 7. she pierces her ear like a permanent slave girl who serves her master 8. she is not to be believed as a witness 9. and after everything eles -- death.”
To the present day, orthodox Jewish men in their daily morning prayer recite:
“Blessed be God King of the universe that Thou has not made me a woman.”
The women, on the other hand, thank God every morning for:
“making me according to Thy will.”
Another prayer found in many Jewish prayer books:
“Praised be God that he has not created me a gentile. Praised be God that he has not created me a woman. Praised be God that he has not created me an ignoramus.” 
The Eve of the Bible played a far bigger role in Christianity than in Judaism.
Her sin has been pivotal to the whole Christian faith because the Christian conception of the reason for the mission of Jesus Christ on Earth stems from Eve’s disobedience to God.
She had sinned and then seduced Adam to follow her suit. Consequently, God expelled both of them from Heaven to Earth, which had been cursed because of them.
They passed on their sin, which had not been forgiven by God, to all their descendants and, thus, all humans are born in sin.
In order to purify human beings from their ‘original sin’, God had to sacrifice Jesus, who is considered to be the Son of God, on the cross.
Therefore, Eve is responsible for her own mistake, her husband’s sin, the original sin of all humanity, and the death of the son of God.
In other words, one woman acting on her own caused the fall of humanity .
What about her daughters? They are sinners like her and have to be treated as such.
Listen to the severe tone of St. Paul in the New Testament:
“A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I don’t permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner” (I Timothy 2:11-14).
St. Tertullian was even more blunt than St. Paul, while he was talking to his ‘best beloved sisters’ in the faith, he said:
“Do you not know that you are each an Eve? The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too. You are the Devil’s gateway! You are the unsealer of the forbidden tree! You are the first deserter of the divine law! You are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack! You destroyed so easily God’s image, man! On account of your desert even the Son of God had to die.”
St. Augustine was faithful to the legacy of his predecessors, he wrote to a friend:
“What is the difference whether it is in a wife or a mother, it is still Eve the temptress that we must beware of in any woman ...... I fail to see what use woman can be to man, if one excludes the function of bearing children.”
Centuries later, St. Thomas Aquinas still considered women as defective:
“As regards the individual nature, woman is defective and misbegotten, for the active force in the male seed tends to the production of a perfect likeness in the masculine sex - while the production of woman comes from a defect in the active force or from some material indisposition, or even from some external influence.”
Finally, the renowned reformer Martin Luther could not see any benefit from a woman but bringing into the world as many children as possible regardless of any side effects:
“If they become tired or even die, that does not matter. Let them die in childbirth, that’s why they are there.”
Again and again all women are denigrated because of the image of Eve the temptress, thanks to the Genesis account.
To sum up, the Judaeo-Christian conception of women has been poisoned by the belief in the sinful nature of Eve and her female offspring.
If we now turn our attention to what the Quran has to say about women, we will soon realize that the Islamic conception of women is radically different from the Judaeo-Christian one.
Let the Quran speak for itself:
“For Muslim men and Muslim women, for believing men and believing women, -- for devout men and devout women, -- for true men and true women, -- for men who are patient and women who are patient, -- for men who humble themselves and women who humble themselves, -- for men who give charity and women who give charity, -- for fasting men and fasting women, -- for chaste men and chaste women, -- for men who praise Allah much and women who praise Allah much, -- For all of them, Allah has prepared forgiveness and great reward” (Quran chapter 33, verse 35). [note: most translators incorrectly combine both women & men together; Like - "For Muslim men and women, believing men and women, devout men and women..", etc. This takes away from the perfect balance, better meaning and the beauty of the Arabic language. Allah makes clear reference to both men & women in a shared, yet individual manner and attributes these lovely characteristics to each independently, yet together]
Notice in the chapter called "At-Taubah" (Repentence), how Allah Speaks about men and women in the same type of balance:
“The believing men and believing women are allies of one another. They enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and establish prayer and give zakah and obey Allah and His Messenger. Those – Allah will have mercy upon them. Indeed, Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.” (9:71). [note: again, most translators miss the opportunity to interpret the way Allah says it and perhaps, in an effort to save space or typing - they will translate by combining the genders as follows; "The belivers, men and women... etc."]
Here in the chapter called "Al Imran" (Family of Imran) we see, again both men and women are given the same treatment:
“And their Lord answered them: Truly I will never cause to be lost the work of any of you, Be you a male or female, you are members one of another” (3:195).
Whether good deeds or bad deeds, men and women have to answer equally in front of Almighty God Allah, as we see here:
“Whoever works evil will not be requited but by the like thereof, and whoever works a righteous deed -whether man or woman- and is a believer- such will enter the Garden of bliss” (40:40).
Men and women are treated with total equity and justice in the Hereafter, as Allah says:
“Whoever works righteousness, man or woman, and has faith, verily to him/her we will give a new life that is good and pure, and we will bestow on such their reward according to the best of their actions” (16:97).
It is clear that the Quranic view of women is no different than that of men. They, both, are God’s creatures whose sublime goal on earth is to worship their Lord, do righteous deeds, and avoid evil and they, both, will be assessed accordingly. The Quran never mentions that the woman is the devil’s gateway or that she is a deceiver by nature.
The Quran, also does not mention man is in God’s image; all men and all women are his creatures, that is all.
According to the Quran, a woman’s role on earth is not limited only to childbirth. She is required to do as many good deeds as any other man is required to do.
The Quran never says that no upright women have ever existed.
On the contrary, the Quran has instructed all the believers, women as well as men, to follow the example of those ideal women such as the Virgin Mary and the Pharoah’s wife:
11. And Allah sets forth, As an example to those who believe, the wife of Pharaoh: Behold she said: ‘O my lord build for me, in nearness to you, a mansion in the Garden, and save me from Pharaoh and his doings and save me from those who do wrong.’ 12. And Mary the daughter of Imran who guarded her chastity and Allah breathed into her body by way of His Spirit; and she testified to the truth of the words of her Lord and of His revelations and was one of the devout”. (66:11-12)
3. Shameful daughters?
In fact, the difference between the Biblical and the Quranic attitude towards the female sex starts as soon as a female is born. For example, the Bible states that the period of the mother’s ritual impurity is twice as long if a girl is born than if a boy is (Lev. 12:2-5). The Catholic Bible states explicitly that:
“The birth of a daughter is a loss” (Ecclesiasticus 22:3).
In contrast to this shocking statement, boys receive special praise:
“A man who educates his son will be the envy of his enemy.” (Ecclesiasticus 30:3)
Jewish Rabbis made it an obligation on Jewish men to produce offspring in order to propagate the race. At the same time, they did not hide their clear preference for male children:
“It is well for those whose children are male but ill for those whose are female” “At the birth of a boy, all are joyful...at the birth of a girl all are sorrowful” “When a boy comes into the world, peace comes into the world... When a girl comes, nothing comes.” 
A daughter is considered a painful burden, a potential source of shame to her father:
“Your daughter is headstrong? Keep a sharp look-out that she does not make you the laughing stock of your enemies, the talk of the town, the object of common gossip, and put you to public shame” (Ecclesiasticus 42:11).
“Keep a headstrong daughter under firm control, or she will abuse any indulgence she receives. Keep a strict watch on her shameless eye, do not be surprised if she disgraces you” (Ecclesiasticus 26:10-11).
It was this very same idea of treating daughters as sources of shame that led the pagan Arabs to bury their new born daughters out in the burning sands and leave them to die, out of shame. Female infanticide was one of the very first prohibitions that came with Islam.
The Quran severely condemned this heinous practice. Read chapter 16 of the Quran, "An Nahl" (The Bee):
58. And when one of them is informed of the birth of a female, his face becomes dark, and he suppresses his grief. 59. He hides himself from the public because of the ill of which he was informed. Should he keep it in humiliation, or bury it in the ground? Unquestionably, evil is what they decide. (Quran 16, verses 58 -59)
It has to be mentioned that this sinister crime would have never stopped in Arabia were it not for the power of the scathing terms the Quran used to condemn this practice. Read Quran in chapter 81, At-Takwir (the Rolling), verses 8, 9:
8. And when the (baby) girl who was buried alive is asked -- 9. For what sin she was killed . .
Notice, the Quran does not make a distinction between boys and girls. In contrast to the Bible, the Quran considers the birth of a female as a gift and a blessing from God, the same as the birth of a male.
The Quran even mentions the gift of the female birthfirst:
“To Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth. He creates what He wills. He bestows female children to whomever He wills and bestows male children to whomever He wills” (42:49).
In order to wipe out all the traces of female infanticide in the nascent Muslim society, Prophet Muhammad promised those who were blessed with daughters of a great reward if they would bring them up kindly:
“He who is involved in bringing up daughters, and accords benevolent treatment towards them, they will be protection for him against Hell-Fire” (Bukhari and Muslim). “Whoever maintains two girls till they attain maturity, he and I will come on the Resurrection Day like this; and he joined his fingers (together)” (Sahih Muslim).
4. Female education
The difference between the Biblical and the Quranic conceptions of women is not limited to the newly born female, it extends far beyond that. Let us compare their attitudes towards a female trying to learn her religion.
The heart of Judaism is the Torah, the Law.
However, according to the Talmud, “women are exempt from the study of the Torah” Some Jewish Rabbis firmly declared:
“Let the words of Torah rather be destroyed by fire than imparted to women” And “Whoever teaches his daughter Torah is as though he taught her obscenity” 
The attitude of St. Paul in the New Testament is not brighter:
“As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission as the law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.” (I Corinthians 14:34-35)
How can a woman learn if she is not allowed to speak? How can a woman grow intellectually if she is obliged to be in a state of full submission? How can she broaden her horizons if her one and only source of information is her husband at home?
Now, to be fair, we should ask, "Does the Quran hold a any different position?" One short story narrated in the Quran sums its position up concisely.
Khawlah was a Muslim woman whose husband Aws pronounced this statement at a moment of anger: “You are to me like the back of my mother.”
This was held by pagan Arabs to be a statement of divorce which freed the husband from any conjugal responsibility - but did not the wife free to leave the husband’s home or to marry another man.
Having heard these words from her husband, Khawlah was in a miserable situation. She went straight to the Prophet of Islam to plead her case.
The Prophet opinion was, she should be patient since there seemed to be no way out. Khawla kept arguing with the Prophet in an attempt to save her suspended marriage.
Shortly after, Allah Revealed in the Quran His Divine intervention and Khawla’s plea was accepted.
The divine verdict abolished this iniquitous custom. One full chapter (Chapter 58) of the Quran whose title is “al-Mujadilah” or “The woman who is arguing” was named after this incident:
“Allah has heard and accepted the statement of the woman who pleads with you (the Prophet) concerning her husband and carries her complaint to Allah, and Allah hears the arguments between both of you for Allah Hears and Sees all....” (58:1).
The Quran's concept regarding a woman is, she does have the right to argue even against the prophet himself, peace be upon him.
No one has the right to instruct her to be silent. She is not under obligation to think of her husband as the one and only reference in regard to matters of law and religion.
5. Unclean, impure women?
Jewish laws and regulations concerning menstruating women are extremely restrictive. The Old Testament considers any menstruating woman as unclean and impure. Moreover, her impurity “infects” others as well.
Anyone or anything she touches becomes unclean for a day:
“When a woman has her regular flow of blood, the impurity of her monthly period will last seven days, and anyone who touches her will be unclean till evening. Anything she lies on during her period will be unclean, and anything she sits on will be unclean. Whoever touches her bed must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening. Whoever touches anything she sits on must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be unclean till evening. Whether it is the bed or anything she was sitting on, when anyone touches it, he will be unclean till evening” (Lev. 15:19-23).
Due to her “contaminating nature”, a menstruating woman was sometimes “banished” in order to avoid any possibility of any contact with her. She was sent to a special house called “the house of uncleanness” for the whole period of her impurity.
The Talmud considers a menstruating woman “fatal”, even without any physical contact:
“Our Rabbis taught:....if a menstruant woman passes between two (men), if it is at the beginning of her menses she will slay one of them, and if it is at the end of her menses she will cause strife between them.” (bPes. 111a.)
Furthermore, the husband of a menstruous woman was forbidden to enter the synagogue if he had been made unclean by her even by the dust under her feet.
A priest whose wife, daughter, or mother was menstruating could not recite priestly blessing in the synagogue.
No wonder many Jewish women still refer to menstruation as “the curse.”
Islam does not consider a menstruating woman to possess any kind of “contagious uncleanness”.
She is neither “untouchable” nor “cursed.”
She practices her normal life with only one restriction (on her husband):
A married couple are not allowed to have sexual intercourse during the period of menstruation. Any other physical contact between them is permissible.
And a special concession and Blessing for her from Almight Allah during her time of discomfort:
A menstruating woman is exempted from the daily prayers (and is recorded as though she made them all perfectly) and she is not to do any fasting even in the month of fasting (and these days she can make up later in the year). [Fiqh Us-Sunnah, volume 2]
6. Bearing witness?
Another issue in which the Quran and the Bible disagree is the issue of women bearing witness.
Quran instructs the believers dealing in financial transactions to get two male witnesses or one male and two females (2:282). This was for a particular reason. Women for the most part at the time, were not familiar with any types of financial dealings and as such, might not be accepted as a witness. However, if there were three witnesses, regardless of gender, it would be difficult to make false claims in the face of so many saying exactly the same thing.
However, in other matters not related to finance, it is also true the Quran does accept the testimony of a woman as equal to that of a man.
The fact is the Quran makes it clear, a woman’s testimony can even invalidate the man’s. If a man accuses his wife of unchastity, he is required by the Quran to solemnly swear five times as evidence of the wife’s guilt. If the wife denies and swears similarly five times, she is not considered guilty and in either case the marriage is dissolved (24:6-11).
On the other hand, women were not allowed to bear witness in early Jewish society . The Rabbis counted women’s not being able to bear witness among the nine curses inflicted upon all women because of the Fall (see the “Eve’s Legacy” section).
Women in today’s Israel are not allowed to give evidence in Rabbinical courts . The Rabbis justify why women cannot bear witness by citing Genesis 18:9-16, where it is stated that Sara, Abraham’s wife had lied.
The Rabbis use this incident as evidence that women are unqualified to bear witness. It should be noted here that this story narrated in Genesis 18:9-16 has been mentioned more than once in the Quran without any hint of any lies by Sara (11:69-74, 51:24-30). In the Christian West, both ecclesiastical and civil law debarred women from giving testimony until late last century .
If a man accuses his wife of unchastity, her testimony will not be considered at all according to the Bible. The accused wife has to be subjected to a trial by ordeal. In this trial, the wife faces a complex and humiliating ritual which was supposed to prove her guilt or innocence (Num. 5:11-31). If she is found guilty after this ordeal, she will be sentenced to death. If she is found not guilty, her husband will be innocent of any wrongdoing.
Besides, if a man takes a woman as a wife and then accuses her of not being a virgin, her own testimony will not count. Her parents had to bring evidence of her virginity before the elders of the town. If the parents could not prove the innocence of their daughter, she would be stoned to death on her father’s doorsteps. If the parents were able to prove her innocence, the husband would only be fined one hundred shekels of silver and he could not divorce his wife as long as he lived:
“If a man takes a wife and, after lying with her, dislikes her and slanders her and gives her a bad name, saying, ‘I married this woman, but when I approached her, I did not find proof of her virginity,’ then the girl’s father and mother shall bring proof that she was a virgin to the town elders at the gate. The girl’s father will say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter in marriage to this man, but he dislikes her. Now he has slandered her and said I did not find your daughter to be a virgin. But here is the proof of my daughter’s virginity.’ Then her parents shall display the cloth before the elders of the town, and the elders shall take the man and punish him. They shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver and give them to the girl’s father, because this man has given an Israelite virgin a bad name. She shall continue to be his wife; he must not divorce her as long as he lives. If, however, the charge is true and no proof of the girl’s virginity can be found, she shall be brought to the door of her father’s house and there the men of the town shall stone her to death. She has done a disgraceful thing in Israel by being promiscuous while still in her father’s house. You must purge the evil from among you.” (Deuteronomy 22:13-21)
Adultery and fornication are considered sins in all religions. The Bible decrees the death sentence for both the adulterer and the adulteress (Lev. 20:10). Islam also equally punishes both the adulterer and the adulteress (24:2).
However, the Quranic definition of adultery is very different from the Biblical definition.
Adultery, according to the Quran, is the involvement of a married man or a married woman in an extramarital affair.
The Bible only considers the extramarital affair of a married woman as adultery (Leviticus 20:10, Deuteronomy 22:22, Proverbs 6:20-7:27).
“If a man is found sleeping with another man’s wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die. You must purge the evil from Israel” (Deut. 22:22). “If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death” (Lev. 20:10).
According to the Biblical definition, if a married man sleeps with an unmarried woman, this is not considered a crime at all.
The married man who has extramarital affairs with unmarried women is not an adulterer and the unmarried women involved with him are not adulteresses. The crime of adultery is committed only when a man, whether married or single, sleeps with a married woman. In this case the man is considered adulterer, even if he is not married, and the woman is considered adulteress.
In short, adultery is any illicit sexual intercourse involving a married woman.
The extramarital affair of a married man is not per se a crime in the Bible.
Why is the dual moral standard?
According to Encyclopedia Judaica, the wife was considered to be the husband’s possession and adultery constituted a violation of the husband’s exclusive right to her; the wife as the husband’s possession had no such right to him .
That is, if a man had sexual intercourse with a married woman, he would be violating the property of another man and, thus, he should be punished.
To the present day in Israel, if a married man indulges in an extramarital affair with an unmarried woman, his children by that woman are considered legitimate. But, if a married woman has an affair with another man, whether married or not married, her children by that man are not only illegitimate but they are considered bastards and are forbidden to marry any other Jews except converts and other bastards.
This ban is handed down to the children’s descendants for 10 generations until the taint of adultery is presumably weakened .
The Quran, on the other hand, never considers any woman to be the possession of any man. The Quran eloquently describes the relationship between the spouses by saying:
“And among His signs is that He created for you mates from among yourselves, that you may dwell in tranquility with them and He has put love and mercy between your hearts: verily in that are signs for those who reflect” (30:21).
This is the Quranic conception of marriage: love, mercy, and tranquillity, not possession and double standards.
According to the Bible, a man must fulfil any vows he might make to God. He must not break his word. On the other hand, a woman’s vow is not necessarily binding on her.
It has to be approved by her father, if she is living in his house, or by her husband, if she is married. If a father/husband does not endorse his daughter’s/wife’s vows, all pledges made by her become null and void:
“But if her father forbids her when he hears about it, none of her vows or the pledges by which she obligated herself will stand ...Her husband may confirm or nullify any vow she makes or any sworn pledge to deny herself” (Num. 30:2-15)
Why is it that a woman’s word is not binding per se?
The answer is simple: because she is owned by her father, before marriage, or by her husband after marriage. The father’s control over his daughter was absolute to the extent that, should he wish, he could sell her!
It is indicated in the writings of the Rabbis that: “The man may sell his daughter, but the woman may not sell her daughter; the man may betroth his daughter, but the woman may not betroth her daughter.”
The Rabbinic literature also indicates that marriage represents the transfer of control from the father to the husband: “betrothal, making a woman the sacrosanct possession--the inviolable property-- of the husband...”
Obviously, if the woman is considered to be the property of someone else, she cannot make any pledges that her owner does not approve of.
It is of interest to note that this Biblical instruction concerning women’s vows has had negative repercussions on Judaeo-Christian women till early in this century.
A married woman in the Western world had no legal status. No act of hers was of any legal value.
Her husband could repudiate any contract, bargain, or deal she had made. Women in the West (the largest heir of the Judaeo-Christian legacy) were held unable to make a binding contract because they were practically owned by someone else.
Western women had suffered for almost two thousand years because of the Biblical attitude towards women’s position vis-a-vis their fathers and husbands .
In Islam, the vow of every Muslim, male or female, is binding on him/her. No one has the power to repudiate the pledges of anyone else. Failure to keep a solemn oath, made by a man or a woman, has to be expiated as indicated in the Quran:
“He [God] will call you to account for your deliberate oaths: for expiation, feed ten indigent persons, on a scale of the average for the food of your families; Or clothe them; or give a slave his freedom. If that is beyond your means, fast for three days. That is the expiation for the oaths you have sworn. But keep your oaths” (Chapter Al Mai'adah 5:89).
Companions of the Prophet Muhammad, men and women, used to present their oath of allegiance to him personally. Women, as well as men, would independently come to him and pledge their oaths:
“O Prophet, When believing women come to you to make a covenant with you that they will not associate in worship anything with God, nor steal, nor fornicate, nor kill their own children, nor slander anyone, nor disobey you in any just matter, then make a covenant with them and pray to God for the forgiveness of their sins. Indeed God is Forgiving and most Merciful” (60:12).
A man could not swear the oath on behalf of his daughter or his wife. Nor could a man repudiate the oath made by any of his female relatives.
9. Wife’s property?
The three religions share an unshakeable belief in the importance of marriage and family life. They also agree on the leadership of the husband over the family. Nevertheless, blatant differences do exist among the three religions with respect to the limits of this leadership. The Judaeo-Christian tradition, unlike Islam, virtually extends the headship of the husband into ownership of his wife.
The Jewish tradition regarding the husband’s role towards his wife stems from the conception that he owns her as he owns his slave.
This conception has been the reason behind the double standard in the laws of adultery and behind the husband’s ability to annul his wife’s vows.
This conception has also been responsible for denying the wife any control over her property or her earnings. As soon as a Jewish woman got married, she completely lost any control over her property and earnings to her husband.
Jewish Rabbis asserted the husband’s right to his wife’s property as a corollary of his possession of her: “Since one has come into the possession of the woman does it not follow that he should come into the possession of her property too?”, and “Since he has acquired the woman should he not acquire also her property?”
Thus, marriage caused the richest woman to become practically penniless. The Talmud describes the financial situation of a wife as follows:
“How can a woman have anything; whatever is hers belongs to her husband? What is his is his and what is hers is also his...... Her earnings and what she may find in the streets are also his. The household articles, even the crumbs of bread on the table, are his. Should she invite a guest to her house and feed him, she would be stealing from her husband...” (San. 71a, Git. 62a)
The fact of the matter is that the property of a Jewish female was meant to attract suitors. A Jewish family would assign their daughter a share of her father’s estate to be used as a dowry in case of marriage. It was this dowry that made Jewish daughters an unwelcome burden to their fathers. The father had to raise his daughter for years and then prepare for her marriage by providing a large dowry. Thus, a girl in a Jewish family was a liability and no asset .
This liability explains why the birth of a daughter was not celebrated with joy in the old Jewish society (see the “Shameful Daughters?” section). The dowry was the wedding gift presented to the groom under terms of tenancy. The husband would act as the practical owner of the dowry but he could not sell it. The bride would lose any control over the dowry at the moment of marriage.
Moreover, she was expected to work after marriage and all her earnings had to go to her husband in return for her maintenance which was his obligation. She could regain her property only in two cases: divorce or her husband’s death.
Should she die first, he would inherit her property. In the case of the husband’s death, the wife could regain her pre-marital property but she was not entitled to inherit any share in her deceased husband’s own property. It has to be added that the groom also had to present a marriage gift to his bride, yet again he was the practical owner of this gift as long as they were married .
Christianity, until recently, has followed the same Jewish tradition. Both religious and civil authorities in the Christian Roman Empire (after Constantine) required a property agreement as a condition for recognizing the marriage.
Families offered their daughters increasing dowries and, as a result, men tended to marry earlier while families postponed their daughters’ marriages until later than had been customary .
Under Canon law, a wife was entitled to restitution of her dowry if the marriage was annulled unless she was guilty of adultery. In this case, she forfeited her right to the dowry which remained in her husband’s hands . Under Canon and civil law a married woman in Christian Europe and America had lost her property rights until late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
For example, women’s rights under English law were compiled and published in 1632. These ‘rights’ included: “That which the husband hath is his own. That which the wife hath is the husband’s.” The wife not only lost her property upon marriage, she lost her personality as well.
No act of her was of legal value. Her husband could repudiate any sale or gift made by her as being of no binding legal value. The person with whom she had any contract was held as a criminal for participating in a fraud.
Moreover, she could not sue or be sued in her own name, nor could she sue her own husband . A married woman was practically treated as an infant in the eyes of the law. The wife simply belonged to her husband and therefore she lost her property, her legal personality, and her family name .
Islam, since the seventh century C.E., has granted married women the independent personality which the Judaeo-Christian West had deprived them until very recently.
In Islam, the bride and her family are under no obligation whatsoever to present a gift to the groom. The girl in a Muslim family is no liability.
A woman is so dignified by Islam that she does not need to present gifts in order to attract potential husbands.
It is the groom who must present the bride with a marriage gift. This gift is considered her property and neither the groom nor the bride’s family have any share in or control over it. In some Muslim societies today, a marriage gift of a hundred thousand dollars in diamonds is not unusual .
The bride retains her marriage gifts even if she is later divorced. The husband is not allowed any share in his wife’s property except what she offers him with her free consent .
The Quran has stated its position on this issue quite clearly:
“And give the women (on marriage) their dower as a free gift; but if they, Of their own good pleasure, remit any part of it to you, take it and enjoy it with right good cheer” (Chapter An-Nisaa' 4:4)
The wife’s property and earnings are under her full control and for her use alone since her, and the children’s, maintenance is her husband’s responsibility .
No matter how rich the wife might be, she is not obliged to act as a co-provider for the family unless she herself voluntarily chooses to do so. Spouses do inherit from one another. Moreover, a married woman in Islam retains her independent legal personality and her family name .
An American judge once commented on the rights of Muslim women saying:
“A Muslim girl may marry ten times, but her individuality is not absorbed by that of her various husbands. She is a solar planet with a name and legal personality of her own.”
2. Leonard J. Swidler, Women in Judaism: the Status of Women in Formative Judaism (Metuchen, N.J: Scarecrow Press, 1976) p. 115.
3. Thena Kendath, “Memories of an Orthodox youth” in Susannah Heschel, ed. On being a Jewish Feminist (New York: Schocken Books, 1983), pp. 96-97.
4. Swidler, op. cit., pp. 80-81.
5. Rosemary R. Ruether, “Christianity”, in Arvind Sharma, ed., Women in World Religions (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1987) p. 209.
6. For all the sayings of the prominent Saints, see Karen Armstrong, The Gospel According to Woman (London: Elm Tree Books, 1986) pp. 52-62. See also Nancy van Vuuren, The Subversion of Women as Practiced by Churches, Witch-Hunters, and Other Sexists (Philadelphia: Westminister Press) pp. 28-30.
7. Swidler, op. cit., p. 140.
8. Denise L. Carmody, “Judaism”, in Arvind Sharma, ed., op. cit., p. 197.
9. Swidler, op. cit., p. 137.
10. Ibid., p. 138.
11. Sally Priesand, Judaism and the New Woman (New York: Behrman House, Inc., 1975) p. 24.
12. Swidler, op. cit., p. 115.
13. Lesley Hazleton, Israeli Women The Reality Behind the Myths (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1977) p. 41.
14. Matilda J. Gage, Woman, Church, and State (New York: Truth Seeker Company, 1893) p. 142.
15. Jeffrey H. Togay, “Adultery,” Encyclopaedia Judaica, Vol. II, col. 313. Also, see Judith Plaskow, Standing Again at Sinai: Judaism from a Feminist Perspective (New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1990) pp. 170-177.
16. Hazleton, op. cit., pp. 41-42.
17. Swidler, op. cit., p. 141.
18. Gage, op. cit. p. 141.
19. Louis M. Epstein, The Jewish Marriage Contract (New York: Arno Press, 1973) p. 149.
20. Swidler, op. cit., p. 142.
21. Epstein, op. cit., pp. 164-165.
22. Ibid., pp. 112-113. See also Priesand, op. cit., p. 15.
23. James A. Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe ( Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987) p. 88.
24. Ibid., p. 480.
25. R. Thompson, Women in Stuart England and America (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1974) p. 162.
26. Mary Murray, The Law of the Father (London: Routledge, 1995) p. 67.
27. Gage, op. cit., p. 143.
28. For example, see Jeffrey Lang, Struggling to Surrender, (Beltsville, MD: Amana Publications, 1994) p. 167.
29. Elsayyed Sabiq, Fiqh al Sunnah (Cairo: Darul Fatah lile’lam Al-Arabi, 11th edition, 1994), vol. 2, pp. 218-229.
30. Abdel-Haleem Abu Shuqqa, Tahreer al Mar’aa fi Asr al Risala (Kuwait: Dar al Qalam, 1990) pp. 109-112.
31. Leila Badawi, “Islam”, in Jean Holm and John Bowker, ed., Women in Religion (London: Pinter Publishers, 1994) p. 102.
32. Amir H. Siddiqi, Studies in Islamic History (Karachi: Jamiyatul Falah Publications, 3rd edition, 1967) p. 138.