A critical analysis of the work and methodology of
Amina Wadud with specific regard to gender equality
in marriage
Siel Devos
616580
Modern Trends in Islam
Dr. H. Al-Mallik
Introduction
The question of whether Islam is compatible with gender equality and a full implementation of women’s rights has been one of the contentious issues in the field of Islamic Studies. Feminists and human rights activists have criticised gender inequalities in Muslim majority countries and countries that implement Sharia law (Al-Hibri 1997:2), directly linking these violations of ‘basic’ women’s rights to the Islamic traditions Sharia laws are based on. Discussions around the reconciliation of Islam with gender equality has led to two divergent Islamic responses. The first is to completely or partly reject human rights, - and feminism as advocacy of women’s rights - as a “colonialist project” that must be resisted (Mir-Hosseini 2006:639). The second came later in the form of Islamic feminism. Islamic feminists came to see no logical link between Islamic ideals and patriarchy. They started to examine and interpret Islam from within in order to recover women’s rights - granted to them in the Islamic sources - that have been abused or neglected through a patriarchal interpretation (Ibid). Professor and women’s rights activist Amina Wadud’s struggle to find meaning in more traditional
interpretations of the Qur'anic revelation has led her to reinterpret the Qur'an from a woman’s perspective, an interpretation that is relevant to modern Muslim women (Wadud 1999:1). In this essay I examine Wadud’s methodology of Qur'anic hermeneutics and assess the extent to which she succeeds in presenting a new interpretation that includes women’s rights and concepts of gender equality. I will analyse how Wadud attempts to find answers in the Qur'an to the particular question of one of the fundamental human rights1: equality in marriage. Although some issues of
inequality remain, I will demonstrate that through a reinterpretation of the Qur'an, the message of Islam can be relevant and adaptable to modern Muslim women.
Methodology
Firstly, Wadud focuses specifically on the Qur'an as the “original source”, which she believes should be the ultimate criteria for this assessment because of its ultimate authority as a religious and intellectual source, and the overall consensus among Muslims that it is the word of Allah (1999: ix). She consciously does not focus on the secondary sources (such as Hadith, interpretations and other literature) which she and other progressive scholars believe have led to a “disconnection from the original text and its intent” (1999:xx). She also places greater significance on the Qur'an than on Sunnah because of the generally accepted view of the infallibility of the Qur'an and its preservation as opposed to distortions, contradictions or errors that might occur in Hadith literature (1999: xvii). However, she also acknowledges that while “the Qur'an is the source, people are the resource (2006:208). That is why she emphasizes the distinction between text and interpretation or tafsir – a “human and therefore limited endeavour - which has traditionally been ignored or minimized (1999: xxii). Instead of an atomistic, ‘verse-by-verse’ approach, without paying attention to recurring themes or structures in the Qur'an, Wadud, proposes ‘tafsir al-Qur'an bi al-Qur'an’, the interpretation of the Qur'an by the Qur'an itself, which is the primary tool of Qur'anic exegesis (2004:327). Her exegesis is based on a hermeneutical model in order to analyse each verse in 1) its context, 2) in the context of discussions of similar topics in the Qur'an, 3) in the light of similar language and synthetic structures used in the Qur'an, 4) in the light of universal Qur'anic principles and 5) within the context of the Qur'anic worldview (1999:5).
Wadud’s (1999:2-3) work reveals a great influence from the work and methodology of Fazlur Rahman, from whom she borrows her method of Qur'anic interpretation. Rahman proposes a new hermeneutical method that is consists of a “double movement”: first from the present back to Qur'anic times, then back to the present (Rahman 1982:5). He stresses the importance of seeing the Qur'an as a Divine response, through the Prophet’s mind, to the moral-social and historical context of the Prophet’s time (Ibid). The double movement, as mentioned, consists of two steps. Firstly, the historical situation in which a verse or statement dealing with a specific problem was revealed must be understood and examined. This requires an understanding of the Qur'an in its entirety, with a concrete weltanschauung or worldview, as much as in terms of the specific principles, that are at the basis of responses to specific situations (Ibid, p.6). The second step is to generalize those specific responses into statements of moral-social objectives, distilled from specific texts in light of the socio-historical background (Ibid). This is how the “spirit” of the Qur'an can be discovered (Wadud 1999:4). This is the approach Wadud uses when she proposes a hermeneutics of tawhid, literally meaning the unity of God, and subsequently, the Qur'an, with the goal of addressing the dynamics of Qur'anic universals and particulars (1999:12).
Further, she argues that patriarchy can be seen as a violation of the unicity of God, as men’s
superiority over women goes against God’s status as highest conceptual aspect of all (2008:437). She is confident that incorporating female experiences and the female voice into a Qur'anic
hermeneutics can “yield greater gender justice to Islamic thought and contribute toward the achievement of that justice in Islamic praxis” (1999:x). Wadud examines the extent to which male-dominated interpretations - shaped by patriarchal values - has affected the role and position of women, and subsequently demonstrates that gender inequality in Muslim society has no roots in the Qur'an and that Islam intended for men and women to be primordially, eschatologically, spiritually and morally equal human beings (1999:x). She challenges the traditionally assigned roles of women in society by examining the “roots of the problem, the representation of women and guidelines for both men and women as revealed in the Qur'an, and evaluating whether women’s role in Muslim society today verily presents Islam’s intention.
I fully agree with Wadud’s view that the full enjoyment of equal rights for women can only take place by means of a “rereading of the Qur'an through a woman’s perspective” which bears in mind the patriarchal-historical context of the revelation (1999:81), and which demonstrates the link between the Islamic ideology and theology on one hand and women’s liberation on the other (1999:2-3). However, I experience some issues with her methodology. Firstly, I question the extent to which she can derive and apply principles from a non-Islamic worldview (such as her hermeneutical model) onto the study of the Qur'an without diverting from the concepts and message of the Qur'an. If we abrogate any verses “no longer relevant to today’s norms and values”, how much remains of the message and values of Islam? Secondly, I don’t find Wadud’s methodology for understanding the socio-historical context very clear. I question how she validates her distinction between universal Islamic principles and the subjective interpretation and application of these principles in a specific context. Moreover, I think this approach has a risk of becoming apologetic.
proposed approach of “hearing the Qur'an in its patriarchal voice but understand it with the
sensibility of a reader immersed in the process of revelation”, and with our norms of gender justice in mind (Ibid), when explaining Qur'anic verses in a patriarchal-historical context (1999:80-81).
Equality in marriage
Rather than examining the entirety of Wadud’s extensive work, I will focus on particular issues where Islamic law has been consistently criticised for its incompatibility with women’s rights, and
specifically the equal right in marriage. CEDAW Article 16 (1) specifies that men and women should not only have the same right to enter into marriage (para. a) with their free and full consent (para. b), they should also have the same rights and responsibilities during marriage and at its dissolution (para. c).
With regards to the same right to enter into marriage (para. a), the Qur'an (4:25) clearly encourages men and women to marry (Wadud 1999:78) and considers the marriage tie as a protection for men and women (Qur'an 2:187). However, the issue of polygamy - more specifically, polygyny (one man with multiple wives) – contradicts the equal right of men and women to enter into marriage. The specific Qur'anic verse allowing polygamy translates as follows:
“If you fear that you will not deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two, three or four. But if you fear that you will not be able to do justly (with them), then only one, [...] to prevent you from doing injustice.” (4:3)
Wadud firstly points out that this verse deals with the fair treatment of orphans (Ibid:83). The purpose of polygyny would then be to prevent mismanagement of orphans’ wealth by their male guardians by marrying the female orphans, in other words, protecting justice in terms of financial support (Ibid). On the other hand, the Qur'an limited the number of wives to four, and further on (Qur'an 4:129) states that it is impossible to treat all of these wives with justice. Under no
circumstances is polygyny allowed in case a woman is unable to have children, or as a solution for a man’s “unbridled lust” (1999:84).
Women’s free and full consent to enter into marriage (para. b) is another issue Wadud addresses with regard to men’s authority over women. Qur'an 4:34 is traditionally interpreted as defining the superiority of men over women:
“Men are qawwamuna 'ala women, [on the basis] of what Allah has [preferred] (faddala) some of them over others, and [on the basis] of what they spend of their property (for the support of women). […]”
Firstly, Wadud explains that the meaning and exact translation of qawwamuna ‘ala is unclear, although the most common translation is “in charge of” (Ibid:.71). Wadud points out that although this verse is the only mention of the concept of qiwamah –meaning male superiority/authority – in the Qur'an (2015:256), it has come to be prioritized over Islamic concepts of reciprocity, harmony and equality (e.g. Qur'an 30:21).
Furthermore, the meaning of “[on the basis] of what Allah has preferred some of them over others” needs to be examined. The only preference to men over women specified in the Qur'an is with regards to inheritance, where men receive twice the portion of women (1999:70).
Related to this materialistic preference is the condition “[on the basis] of what they spend of their property (for the support of women)”, as this would imply a reciprocity: since men have the
unconditional superiority of all men over all women from this verse would be an erroneous interpretation (Ibid).
The next issue that arises concerns the equality of rights and responsibilities during marriage. The Qur'an does not define gender-specific roles in society or propose only one possible and eternal role for women and men (1999:63). However, with regard to marriage there are a few differences in responsibilities for men and women. The Qur'an recognizes women’s biological ability of bearing children, yet it never limits a woman’s role to child-bearing and caring only (Ibid).
As mentioned before, Wadud does not consider the interpretation of Qur'an (4:34) as men’s superiority over women to be valid. Therefore, a marriage relationship based on subjugation has no basis in Islamic principles, but is a reflection of the patriarchal-historical context of the time of the revelation (Ibid, p.77). The same is true for the duty of the husband to materially provide for his wife, and her financial dependence and smaller share of inheritance (1999:71).
There is also discussion about the second part of Qur'an (4:34) that mentions women’s obedience to their husband:
“So good women are qanitat, guarding in secret that which Allah has guarded. As for those from whom you fear [nushuz], admonish them, banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then, if they obey you, seek not a way against them.”
Firstly, Wadud argues that the translation of qanitat – to describe ‘good women’ - as ‘obedient’ is not in line with the spirit of the Qur'an, as this word is used for both men and women throughout the Qur'an (1999:74). As the same is true for the word nushuz, it cannot be translated as ‘disobedience to the husband’ (1999:75). Rather, Wadud, following the reasoning of Sayyid Qutb, explains nushuz as ‘disorder’ (Ibid). Wadud argues that these rulings are no longer relevant to today’s society, in which men are no longer expected to be the main providers, women are allowed to have financial security, and men and women seek marriage partners not for the sole purpose of maintenance and subjugation (1999:77).
The problem remains that the Qur'an suggests ‘scourging’ as one of the solutions for regaining marital harmony. Wadud has attempted to find an interpretation in consonance with her
understanding of justice and human dignity in Islam by seeking alternative translations for daraba, the Arabic word for ‘strike’ or ‘scourge’ (1999:76). She points to the limitations the Qur'an imposes on this practice, prohibiting unchecked violence against women – a common occurrence in pre-Islamic times (Ibid). She also raises the issue of some Muslim men who will skip the Qur'anic
suggestion to first admonish and banish their wives to beds apart, and immediately strike them, with the goal of “harm, not harmony” (Ibid). The verse “if they obey (ta’a) you do not seek a way against the,” does not command obedience from women, rather it is a conditional sentence (1999:77). However, in her later work, Wadud has stated that, in a modern understanding of justice and human dignity, she simply cannot accept “for a man to “scourge” or apply any kind of blow to a woman. […] I have finally come to say “no” outright to the literal implementation of this passage” (2006:200). Furthermore, with regards to the equal right to dissolution of marriage, Wadud argues that men’s unilateral right to divorce - as opposed to women who need the intervention of the court to obtain divorce – clearly reflects historical-bound practices (1999:80). She adds that the fact that the Qur'an does not mention any women repudiating their husband, this does not indicate that women are not allowed the power of repudiation (Ibid). Nevertheless, I believe she could have analysed women’s limited means to obtain divorce into more detail.
Muslim woman and a non-Muslim man. She briefly touches upon this issue but dismisses it as a consequence of the Qur'anic concept of female subjugation within marriage (2006:195). Whereas other scholars (Leeman 2009; Aini 2008) have demonstrated the possibility for reinterpretation of the restriction on interfaith marriage, Wadud choses not analyse these specific problematic verses through her historical-context methodology.
Conclusion
In this essay, I have examined Amina Wadud’s methodology of female-inclusive exegesis of the Qur'an, as a means of finding common ground between modern concepts of gender equality and justice on one hand, and Islamic values laid out in the Qur'an on the other. Wadud’s methodology provides a new perspective on the traditional patriarchal-influenced interpretation of the Qur'an. By not adopting the traditional verse-by-verse strategy, but by seeing the Qur'an as a unity with its own worldview, she attempts to distinguish between the universal values, or the “spirit” of the Qur'an (1999:4) and the subjective, context-bound interpretations of these values, in order to come to a reading of the Qur'an that is relevant to modern Muslims, women in particular. Moreover, she asserts that through her female-inclusive reading of the Qur'an, women can be liberated from centuries of male superiority, based on certain Qur'anic verses that have been interpreted from a patriarchal viewpoint. This methodology, whereby it is not always clear how we can determine what are universal Islamic principles and what are answers to a specific historical context, might be fraught with issues. The problem with the selectiveness of this approach becomes clear with regard to the issue of equality in marriage. Here, Wadud focuses deeply on the rights and responsibilities in marriage and interprets these in their specific context, whereby I believe she should be wary of applying “hermeneutic acrobatics. Moreover, she fails to address certain aspects of inequality between men and women, specifically with regard to women’s limited right to divorce and the restrictions on interfaith marriage.
Bibliography
Aini, N. (2008). Inter-religious Marriage from Socio-historical Islamic Perspectives. Brigham Young University Law Review, 669-706.
Al-Hibri, A. (1997). Islam, Law and Custom: Redefining Muslim Women's Rights. American University Journal of International Law & Policy, 12 (1), 1-44.
Leeman, A. B. (2009). Interfaith Marriage in Islam: An Examination of the Legal Theory behind the Traditional and Reformist Positions. Indiana Law Journal,84, 743-771.
Mir‐Hosseini, Z. (2006). Muslim women’s Quest for Equality: Between Islamic law and Feminism. Critical inquiry, 32 (4), 629-645.
Musa, E. (2003). The Debts and Burdens of Islam. In Safi, O. (Ed.). Progressive Muslims: on Justice, Gender and Pluralism. Oxford: Oneworld. 111-127.
Rahman, F. (1982). Islam and Modernity: Transformation of an Intellectual Tradition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
UN General Assembly, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, 18 December 1979, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1249, p. 13, available
at: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/cedaw.pdf [Accessed 29 March 2015] Wadud, A. (1995). Towards a Qur'anic Hermeneutics of Social Justice: Race, Class and Gender. The Journal of Law and Religion, 12 (1), 37-50.
Wadud, A. (1999). Qur'an and Woman: Rereading the Sacred Text from a Woman's Perspective (2nd edition). New York: Oxford University Press.
Wadud, A. (2004). Qur’an, Gender and Interpretive Possibilities. Hawwa, 2 (3), 316-336. Wadud, A. (2006). Inside the Gender Jihad: Women's Reform in Islam. Oxford: Oneworld.
Wadud, A. (2008). Foreword: Engaging Tawhid in Islam and Feminisms. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 10(4), 435-438.
