Reply to Tell me about Islam

Forum Index » Religion

Reply to "Tell me about Islam"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]
Ms. Bano had an islamic marriage apparently. Yet when her husband kicked her out, she wanted Indian divorce law to apply. Can't have it both ways. If you choose to have an islamic marriage, then you've essentially signed a contract, similar to a prenup, and your divorce will also be under Islamic law. Ms. Begum should have collected her dowry and her male relatives should have supported her. That would have been the proper thing to do. 
You brought up this case because it triggers a lot of negative emotions about the way the husband treated his wife and you hoped this would reflect badly on Islam. It doesn't. It reflects badly on the husband. He was a cad. He took a second wife, which he claims he was permissible to do under Islam, and then kicked his first wife out along with their five children. He was a monster who did grave injustice to his wife. He, in no way, behaved islamically. [b]First of all, a husband may not arbitrarily take a second wife simply on a whim[/b]. Secondly, the husband may not kick his wife out without providing accommodations for her (at minimum the dowry and any gifts he bestowed to her). Thirdly, he cut off his relations with his five children, several of them who were adult males and would have received inheritance from him to help support their mother. And lastly, the wife was opting out and trying to receive support via Indian nonIslamic law rather than Islamic law even though her marriage contract was under Islamic law.

This case was a classic example of what happens when islamic law doesn't apply. Ms. Bano should simply have been supported by her male relatives. If that happened, there would have been no need for her to seek support from her husband.[/quote]

On the contrary, I don't see how the husband behaved un-Islamically.  Let's unpack:

Firstly, there is no limitation in Shariah on the reasons to take a second wife.  It is sufficient that a man decides to marry again, and as long as the total number of wives is under four, and all are treated equally, it doesn't matter if he married on a whim or upon serious deliberation.  Marrying on a whim doesn't invalidate the marriage.   If you are aware of limitations on "arbitrary" taking of second wives, please post evidence.

[b]I said many pages ago that I do NOT base my answers or defense of Islam on the Sharia, as Sharia is MAN MADE law. I base my answers on primarily on the Quran. The Sharia is flawed and does not accurate reflect what God intended. You can not google research Islam or read one or two books to understand it completely. There are huge loopholes in your understanding of the rationale of Islam. You must speak with a few scholars or reputable imams to clarify your questions. Here is one article that provides a couple of passages which explain under what terms more than one wife is permitted: http://www.quran-islam.org/articles/part_3/polygamy_in_quran_(P1411).html It may NOT be permitted on a whim. It is an extremely serious decision with very narrow boundaries. 
[/b]

Secondly, there is nothing un-Islamic about kicking out the wife you divorced. As long as the man maintained her for three months after the divorce, he is within his rights to kick her out once the three months are over. He is not responsible for her living expenses once three months are over.

[b]This previous statement is what leads me to believe you have never spoken to any reputable scholar or Imam about divorce in Islam. You have never read scholarly work either. Stop relying on the Sharia! It is not the word of God, it is merely man's interpretation of God's law! Here is a better article that explains post divorce support requirement in Islam: http://iiit.org/Research/ScholarsSummerInstitute/TableofContents2008/PostDivorceFinancialSupport/tabid/254/Default.aspx
[/b]

Thirdly, yes, the wife retains her dowry and any gifts she received. In this case, there is no evidence that she didn't.  There is, however, no requirement that the dowry should be of substantial size, in fact, the scripture encourages modest dowries, and there is no law against NOT giving your wife gifts.

[b]Again, you must be parsing through the cliff notes version of the Sharia somewhere on the web. This article explains it well and will correct your misunderstanding:
http://iiit.org/Research/ScholarsSummerInstitute/TableofContents2008/PostDivorceFinancialSupport/tabid/254/Default.aspx
[/b]

Fourthly, there is no inheritance without death of parent.   That he cut off adult male children is undesirable but it has nothing to do with inheritance. The act that triggers inheritance is death. Do you have evidence that the adult, male children did not receive inheritance after the husband's death?

[b]Do I have evidence that the adult male children did not receive their inheritance? No. I have the testimony of the adult children, however, that the father severed his relationship with them, which is a strong indication that the father may have disinherited them in his will also. Therefore, the adult male children may never have been compensated for supporting their mother. [/b]

So yes, this case was in complete compliance with Islamic law.  And it still left an old woman without means.  She protested because she realized Islamic law left her with a very raw deal.  You may think it is preferable for the woman to always depend on her male relatives for support. I prefer to think that the husband and wife own the wealth built during the marriage together, and the dissolution of marriage means it should be split between the divorcing parties. A woman who invested thirty years into home-making, supporting her husband and bearing his children deserves more than three months of maintenance. So I personally find the Islamic marital laws on that particular subject lacking with regard to rights of the homemaker spouse. [/quote]

Bano Begum protested because the Sharia is not effective nor does it provide an adequate and lawful remedy for divorced women. This doesn't reflect poorly on Islam or the Quran. It reflects poorly on the men who developed the Sharia. In true Islam, Bano Begum would have received a handsome entitlement because she and her husband were wealthy.

Btw, I see no dignity in divorcing women fighting like animals for every penny they can get from the men who cheated or dumped them. Even Bano Begum said she felt humiliated by the long, seven year process. I see greater dignity in receiving support from loved ones and family members.

In the Bano case, the Sharia was ineffective to provide adequate support for Ms. Bano. The Sharia doesn't necessarily interpret the Quran well. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics