Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people are using dowry wrong.

Dowry is property the bride brings to the husband upon marriage.

Mahr is property a groom settles on his wife at marriage in Islam, and a specified amount that is promised, but deferred, and which must be paid in the event the man divorces the woman. Both the amounts payable upon marriage and the amount payable in arrears can be quite minimal--they are set out in the marriage contract.

The cultural practice among Levantine and Gulf Arabs (don't know about others) regardless on religion is for the groom to buy jewelry for his bride, the cost of which varies by his means.

Mahr is closer to bride price than to dowry--except the bride price is given to the bride's family, not the bride herself. In Europe in the Middle Ages, bride price began to be given directly to the bride instead of her family. In that case, it is referred to as dower.

Is Mahr in the Quran or Hadith? My understanding is that, in the Quran, all a man owes his soon-to-be ex-wife is three months of support while they wait to see if she's pregnant with his child, then she returns to her family and they support her. Anything additional is contractual and dependent on the mores of that society.

Mahr is in the Quran and numerous ahadith. The amount of mahr is not. It's entirely up to the woman.

Anonymous wrote:I think people are using dowry wrong.

Dowry is property the bride brings to the husband upon marriage.

Mahr is property a groom settles on his wife at marriage in Islam, and a specified amount that is promised, but deferred, and which must be paid in the event the man divorces the woman. Both the amounts payable upon marriage and the amount payable in arrears can be quite minimal--they are set out in the marriage contract.

The cultural practice among Levantine and Gulf Arabs (don't know about others) regardless on religion is for the groom to buy jewelry for his bride, the cost of which varies by his means.

Mahr is closer to bride price than to dowry--except the bride price is given to the bride's family, not the bride herself. In Europe in the Middle Ages, bride price began to be given directly to the bride instead of her family. In that case, it is referred to as dower.

Is Mahr in the Quran or Hadith? My understanding is that, in the Quran, all a man owes his soon-to-be ex-wife is three months of support while they wait to see if she's pregnant with his child, then she returns to her family and they support her. Anything additional is contractual and dependent on the mores of that society.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Dowry is her right because she's unable to work to support herself. Allow women financial indepence and you not only eliminate the need for dowry, you eliminate arguments like the one PP just made, that divorce is harder for a woman because the man has invested in her dowry.

What makes you think she's unable to work to support herself?? You know women in Muslim-majority countries work, right? The purpose of the dowry is not to make her financially independent. It's to demonstrate that the man has serious intentions.

2:26 said the wife "may not be able to work" or earn equal wages." If 2:26 is the same midnight poster who's been here all along, s/he's emphasized repeatedly that men and women have very different but equal roles. S/he's articulated several times her argument that that inheritance, and now divorce, rules are not "linearly equal" (which is a vague and poor use of English IMO) precisely because the man bears all the financial responsibility.

I realize 2:26/the OP of those other threads doesn't speak for all Islam. But dowries (whoever pays them), together with other so-called "linearly unequal" financial laws like inheritance and her testimony being worth 1/2 that of the man's in financial cases, IMO feed into a view where these "different but equal roles" are based on a presumption that the man bears all the financial burden.

Just putting dowries on the same context.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Divorce laws, if not addressed as much for women in the Quran, or if they appear to be more rigid for women, is also to protect the woman as well as the man's interest. If divorce were made easy for women, it may be a right that is exercised too liberally, too frivolously and this may present a hardship to men. Remember the man must pay for the entire wedding, the mahr, the care of the woman, all his children, and he has many other financial obligations that the woman does not have in Islam. Thus, divorce is absolutely allowed for women, but not to be taken lightly.

What are you saying? The man paid for everything so he needs to get his money's worth before a woman is allowed to divorce him?

No. The man paid for everything so a woman's choice to divorce, if based on frivolous reasons, deeply affects him. That is why there may be a system of checks and balances in place to ensure divorce is not a decision made frivolously.

I think people are using dowry wrong.

Dowry is property the bride brings to the husband upon marriage.

Mahr is property a groom settles on his wife at marriage in Islam, and a specified amount that is promised, but deferred, and which must be paid in the event the man divorces the woman. Both the amounts payable upon marriage and the amount payable in arrears can be quite minimal--they are set out in the marriage contract.

The cultural practice among Levantine and Gulf Arabs (don't know about others) regardless on religion is for the groom to buy jewelry for his bride, the cost of which varies by his means.

Mahr is closer to bride price than to dowry--except the bride price is given to the bride's family, not the bride herself. In Europe in the Middle Ages, bride price began to be given directly to the bride instead of her family. In that case, it is referred to as dower.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Divorce laws, if not addressed as much for women in the Quran, or if they appear to be more rigid for women, is also to protect the woman as well as the man's interest. If divorce were made easy for women, it may be a right that is exercised too liberally, too frivolously and this may present a hardship to men. Remember the man must pay for the entire wedding, the mahr, the care of the woman, all his children, and he has many other financial obligations that the woman does not have in Islam. Thus, divorce is absolutely allowed for women, but not to be taken lightly.

What are you saying? The man paid for everything so he needs to get his money's worth before a woman is allowed to divorce him?

Another solution: get rid of the dowry system. Don't solve one source of inequality by patching it with another inequality.

Does anybody else feel like this 2am poster is different from the other 2am poster?

Dowry is not a system. It's a woman's right. She can set it as high as she likes or she can waive it altogether. It has no bearing whatsoever on the divorce rights.

Dowry is her right because she's unable to work to support herself. Allow women financial indepence and you not only eliminate the need for dowry, you eliminate arguments like the one PP just made, that divorce is harder for a woman because the man has invested in her dowry.

What makes you think she's unable to work to support herself?? You know women in Muslim-majority countries work, right? The purpose of the dowry is not to make her financially independent. It's to demonstrate that the man has serious intentions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Divorce laws, if not addressed as much for women in the Quran, or if they appear to be more rigid for women, is also to protect the woman as well as the man's interest. If divorce were made easy for women, it may be a right that is exercised too liberally, too frivolously and this may present a hardship to men. Remember the man must pay for the entire wedding, the mahr, the care of the woman, all his children, and he has many other financial obligations that the woman does not have in Islam. Thus, divorce is absolutely allowed for women, but not to be taken lightly.

What are you saying? The man paid for everything so he needs to get his money's worth before a woman is allowed to divorce him?

Another solution: get rid of the dowry system. Don't solve one source of inequality by patching it with another inequality.

Does anybody else feel like this 2am poster is different from the other 2am poster?

Dowry is not a system. It's a woman's right. She can set it as high as she likes or she can waive it altogether. It has no bearing whatsoever on the divorce rights.

Dowry is her right because she's unable to work to support herself. Allow women financial indepence and you not only eliminate the need for dowry, you eliminate arguments like the one PP just made, that divorce is harder for a woman because the man has invested in her dowry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Divorce laws, if not addressed as much for women in the Quran, or if they appear to be more rigid for women, is also to protect the woman as well as the man's interest. If divorce were made easy for women, it may be a right that is exercised too liberally, too frivolously and this may present a hardship to men. Remember the man must pay for the entire wedding, the mahr, the care of the woman, all his children, and he has many other financial obligations that the woman does not have in Islam. Thus, divorce is absolutely allowed for women, but not to be taken lightly.

What are you saying? The man paid for everything so he needs to get his money's worth before a woman is allowed to divorce him?

Another solution: get rid of the dowry system. Don't solve one source of inequality by patching it with another inequality.

Does anybody else feel like this 2am poster is different from the other 2am poster?

Dowry is not a system. It's a woman's right. She can set it as high as she likes or she can waive it altogether. It has no bearing whatsoever on the divorce rights.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Divorce laws, if not addressed as much for women in the Quran, or if they appear to be more rigid for women, is also to protect the woman as well as the man's interest. If divorce were made easy for women, it may be a right that is exercised too liberally, too frivolously and this may present a hardship to men. Remember the man must pay for the entire wedding, the mahr, the care of the woman, all his children, and he has many other financial obligations that the woman does not have in Islam. Thus, divorce is absolutely allowed for women, but not to be taken lightly.

What are you saying? The man paid for everything so he needs to get his money's worth before a woman is allowed to divorce him?

Another solution: get rid of the dowry system. Don't solve one source of inequality by patching it with another inequality.

Does anybody else feel like this 2am poster is different from the other 2am poster?

Anonymous wrote:
Divorce laws, if not addressed as much for women in the Quran, or if they appear to be more rigid for women, is also to protect the woman as well as the man's interest. If divorce were made easy for women, it may be a right that is exercised too liberally, too frivolously and this may present a hardship to men. Remember the man must pay for the entire wedding, the mahr, the care of the woman, all his children, and he has many other financial obligations that the woman does not have in Islam. Thus, divorce is absolutely allowed for women, but not to be taken lightly.

What are you saying? The man paid for everything so he needs to get his money's worth before a woman is allowed to divorce him?

Also, who pays for what for a wedding varies very widely across countries--this is entirely cultural, not Islamic. Although it is amusing to see Muslims in the Indian subcontinent complaining about the high dowry the bride's family has to pay (but what can we do? it's our religion) while Arab men in the Gulf and Levant complaining about how much they have to pay for in order to get married (but what can they do? It's their religion). In these countries, at least those I am familiar with, the husband has to pay for all expenses related to the wedding, plus the cost of a house or apartment and all the furnishings. In Egypt, I understand the latter is the bride's responsibility.

Anonymous wrote:
If you are seeking that linear equality in divorce rules of Islam, which is a western mindset, you will not find it. I think Islam is not interested in promoting this kind of linear equality; it is interested in promoting justice. Justice is deemed to be far more important and fair than linear equality because linear equality does not take into account the differences between men and women and their experiences.

Justice is subjective. It is in the eye of the beholder. You may think that whoever spends more money should have more rights. Someone else may disagree. The differences between men and women and their experiences are not cut anywhere as clearly as you present. Likewise, the Islamic setup maybe very fair to one woman and completely unfair to another.

Anonymous wrote:
The guidelines for divorce for men are spelled out more in the interest and for the protection of women. Divorce on a woman may be particularly hard and in fact, more hard for her than for the man considering she may not be able to support herself, earn the same wages even if she did work, have difficulty caring for children. As such, God in the Quran has said divorce is detestable to Him, but if man still insists of getting divorced, He outlines very clear rules to abide by so as to ensure the woman is treated fairly.

That's subjective. The Islamic rules for husband-initiated divorces, in my opinion, are very liberal, and his financial obligations after the divorce are minimal with regard to the wife (not the children). Recall that there is no marital property in Islam, and a home-maker wife does not accrue any claim to the family assets accumulated during the marriage by the breadwinner husband. He owes her maintenance and shelter while married, and nothing else.

Anonymous wrote:
Divorce is not and should not be hard to get for a woman in Islam. Don't look to practice of Muslim countries as evidence of what Islam truly permits because so many people and countries have deviated far from Islam after Prophet Muhammad died.

I ask, in all honesty, what DO you look at? You know very well that the Quran is silent on the subject of women-initiated divorces. What exactly do you look at as evidence on how easy or hard divorce should be for women in Islam? What are your sources?

Anonymous wrote:
Divorce laws, if not addressed as much for women in the Quran, or if they appear to be more rigid for women, is also to protect the woman as well as the man's interest. If divorce were made easy for women, it may be a right that is exercised too liberally, too frivolously and this may present a hardship to men. Remember the man must pay for the entire wedding, the mahr, the care of the woman, all his children, and he has many other financial obligations that the woman does not have in Islam. Thus, divorce is absolutely allowed for women, but not to be taken lightly.

I find that to be a very paternalistic argument - divorces for women must not be too easy or they'll use this right frivolously. No one seems to be fearful of that for men. So it seems that you don't have as much faith in the woman's judgment as you do in man's.

The financial hardship you speak of can be mitigated very easily by making divorces for women who repay the dowry back to the husband available on demand (as in fact Muhammad Asad proposes in "This Law of Ours"), but the fact of the matter is that even khul can be very difficult to obtain for women, and is in fact not available on demand. Plus mahrs aren't always high, weddings aren't always elaborate, and there is no law that they should be. A man's right to divorce at will is not dependent upon having spent X for the dowry and the wedding. They stand regardless of how much or how little he spends, or how much the wife has contributed financially to the household.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I think previous posters have said this but I'll say it again: what people do, how hard a time they had in getting a divorce in other countries has no bearing on and is not a reflection of the religion itself. You keep confusing practice with the religion. Two entirely separate things. You can't rely on google stories and anecdotal evidence as your research for understanding the religion of Islam. If your goal is to find sad stories about Muslims, you can find it anywhere. However if your goal is to learn about Islam, you should stop relying on how it is practiced and learn the principles of Islam.

Keeping aside the discussion of how the community can veer SO far away from what the religion prescribes, you must admit that there is precious little in the Islamic scriptures themselves that cover wife-initiated divorces. Surah at-Talaq is directed exclusively at men and deals with husband-initiated divorces in very great detail, but there is nothing there, nothing at all about women-initiated divorces. The right of divorce belongs to the "one holding the calf", i.e. the husband.

So if you want to talk about what the religion itself prescribes for women-initiated divorces, what exactly are your scriptural sources? The hadith about "give him back his garden?" The very general verses on "be nice to women?" Not very much, don't you think?

If you are seeking that linear equality in divorce rules of Islam, which is a western mindset, you will not find it. I think Islam is not interested in promoting this kind of linear equality; it is interested in promoting justice. Justice is deemed to be far more important and fair than linear equality because linear equality does not take into account the differences between men and women and their experiences.

The guidelines for divorce for men are spelled out more in the interest and for the protection of women. Divorce on a woman may be particularly hard and in fact, more hard for her than for the man considering she may not be able to support herself, earn the same wages even if she did work, have difficulty caring for children. As such, God in the Quran has said divorce is detestable to Him, but if man still insists of getting divorced, He outlines very clear rules to abide by so as to ensure the woman is treated fairly.

Divorce is not and should not be hard to get for a woman in Islam. Don't look to practice of Muslim countries as evidence of what Islam truly permits because so many people and countries have deviated far from Islam after Prophet Muhammad died.

Divorce laws, if not addressed as much for women in the Quran, or if they appear to be more rigid for women, is also to protect the woman as well as the man's interest. If divorce were made easy for women, it may be a right that is exercised too liberally, too frivolously and this may present a hardship to men. Remember the man must pay for the entire wedding, the mahr, the care of the woman, all his children, and he has many other financial obligations that the woman does not have in Islam. Thus, divorce is absolutely allowed for women, but not to be taken lightly.

A Moderate Muslim

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdo?an has said equality between men and women is “against nature” at a summit in Istanbul. He sparked outrage with the speech made at a convention organised by women’s groups campaigning to eliminate gender discrimination in all its forms. “You cannot make women and men equal; this is against nature,” Mr Erdo?an told the meeting full of women including his own daughter, Today’s Zaman reported.

Mr Erdogan has been criticised for his recent statements declaring that every Turkish women should have three children and proposing to limit abortion rights, access to the morning-after pill and caesarean sections.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/turkish-president-equality-between-men-and-women-is-against-nature-9879993.html

Anonymous wrote:
I think previous posters have said this but I'll say it again: what people do, how hard a time they had in getting a divorce in other countries has no bearing on and is not a reflection of the religion itself. You keep confusing practice with the religion. Two entirely separate things. You can't rely on google stories and anecdotal evidence as your research for understanding the religion of Islam. If your goal is to find sad stories about Muslims, you can find it anywhere. However if your goal is to learn about Islam, you should stop relying on how it is practiced and learn the principles of Islam.

Keeping aside the discussion of how the community can veer SO far away from what the religion prescribes, you must admit that there is precious little in the Islamic scriptures themselves that cover wife-initiated divorces. Surah at-Talaq is directed exclusively at men and deals with husband-initiated divorces in very great detail, but there is nothing there, nothing at all about women-initiated divorces. The right of divorce belongs to the "one holding the calf", i.e. the husband.

So if you want to talk about what the religion itself prescribes for women-initiated divorces, what exactly are your scriptural sources? The hadith about "give him back his garden?" The very general verses on "be nice to women?" Not very much, don't you think?