WOMAN A CROSS CULTURE PERSPECTIVE

Islam hasachieved far more for women’s emancipation and equality than what manyof today’s feminists realize. Judging Islam by their own secularizedand often atheist standards, many members of the feminist’s movementdenounce the way of life chosen by Allah for woman and man, withoutknowing or deeply understanding what they are really criticizing. It isonly Islam that has lifted women from the abyss of oppression topreviously unknown levels of freedom and respectability, levels whichare unmatched even in today’s so called “civilized” world.

GREEK ANDROMAN CIVILIZATION

In the daysof ignorance, prior to the advent of Islam, women in many culturesthroughout the world were considered little more than commodities,objects of desire to be bought and sold like livestock. According toProf. Wil Durant, “In Rome, the man alone had any rights before the lawin the early republic; he alone could buy, hold or sell property, ormake contracts. Even his wife’s dowry in this period belonged to him;if his wife was accused of a crime she was committed to him forjudgement, and he could punish her by condemning her to death forinfidelity or for stealing the keys to his wine cellar. Over hischildren he had the power of life, death and sale into slavery… Birthitself was an adventure in Rome. If the child was deformed or female,the father was permitted by custom to expose it to death”.’

Neither didthe Greek philosophers show a great deal of concern for females.Aristotle stated: “… We may thus conclude that it is a natural lawthat there should be naturally ruling elements and elements naturallyruled … The rule of the freeman over the slave is one kind of rule;that of the male over the female another… The slave is entirelywithout the faculty of deliberation; the female indeed possesses it,but it is a form which remains inconclusive”.’

The Greeksconsidered women to belong to the third (lowest) rank of society. If awoman gave birth to a deformed child, it was common practice to killher. In Sparta, which was acknowledged as an elite society, a woman whocould no longer bear children was put to death. The Spartans also tookwomen away from their husbands to be inseminated by “brave and strongmen” of other communities. The Greeks in general considered women to beinsignificant creatures who could not be dear to the “gods”.

Hippolytus’invective against women, in the tragedy by Euripides, sums up the Greekview:

“O Zeus,whatever possessed you to put an ambiguous misfortune amongst men bybringing women to the light of day? If you really wanted to sow therace of mortals, why did it have to be born of women? How much betterit would be if men could buy the seed of sons, paying for it with gold,iron or bronze in your temples, and could live free, without women intheir houses”.2

JUDAISM

Orthodox Jewswho have held on to the classical teachings of Judaism have come undergreat strain from within as their practices are seen as sexuallyoppressive. The Talmud, a book pertaining to the Jewish civiland ceremonial law, states, ‘It is impossible for there to be a worldwithout males and females. Nevertheless happy is the man whose childrenare males and woe to the man whose children are females’.3

Superiorityof the male child is further emphasized by several customs. On thebirth of a male child the parents invite guests to a Kiddush, acelebratory meal after Sabbath, where there is no such custom after thebirth of a female child. In education, it is not considered appropriateto educate the females beyond what is necessary to learn regarding thepractices ordained in the Jewish scriptures to the women.’When a boy reaches adulthood a ritual called, her mitzvah, ‘son of thecommandment’ further celebrates his maturity. The boy who has nowbecome a man can be counted to make up a quorum, (minyan), whichis needed for certain prayers and for public worship in the synagogue,for which ten free male adults are required. Whereas women cannot becounted to make up a quorum (minyan).2 There are no parallelcelebration for women in Jewish custom. The inequality and injunctiontowards female oppression is further to be found in the law relating todivorce. A woman has no right of divorce. Even if her husbanddisappears without trace, without the evidence of his death, she cannot remarry3. A man has the only right of divorce, and many men haveabused this right by abandoning women but not divorcing them, therebyrestricting them to remarry.

According toLe Bonn the male Orthodox Jew solemnly recites, “Blessed art Thou, OLord our God, King of the Universe, that I was not born a female”.

Theinequalities in Jewish scriptures and traditions is experiencingpressure for change, from within, to be more equitable. The liberatingideologies have brought many changes to Judaism. There has been arecent introduction for the celebration of a girl attaining pubertycalled: bar mitzvah (compared with boys called barmitzvah). In education, despite the ruling of Zohar, that theTorah was meant only to be given over to males,4 the girls educationhas become an established feature. In divorce, today the law has beenchanged so that the couples first turn towards the state courts forseparation and then gain a religious divorce.

HINDUISM

Women faredlittle better in other belief-systems. In Hinduism, the perfect womanis the pativrata, the devoted wife whose entire existence isdedicated to her husband. The very word pativrata says it all:”she whose vow ( vista) is to her husband ( pati) “. Duringher lifetime, the good Hindu wife is expected to regard her husband asher own personal god, for the man ordained to be a woman’s husband isregarded as far more than a man: he is the incarnation of the supremelaw in her life, the definition and summation of her religious duty.After a blameless life, such a woman should ideally die before herhusband. If by some mischance she does not, then she may put that rightby taking her own life on her husband’s funeral pyre. This horrificrite, known as satee, was until very recently still beingpracticed in India, and the government has had to intervene to abolishit. Nevertheless, for devout Hindus a woman who is satee is worshippedas a goddess, the perfect example of the self-sacrificing wife.’

A book on theancient discipline of Sanskrit religious law, Draramasastra, includesa chapter on “the religious status and duties of women,” stridharmapaddhati.The author (or, more accurately, the compiler) of this work,Tryambaka, was an orthodox pandit living in Thanjavur, in what is nowthe southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu. The ruling on women generallyplaces them at the level of a subordinate citizen. For example: a wifehas no right over her husband’s property. Property owned jointly by thewife and husband may be distributed by the husband alone, but the wifeneeds his permission. Even with various kinds of ‘women’s property’,such as gifts from her husband or her own family, a woman still needsher husbands permission to exercise her rights of ownership.

Tryambaka’sstark message is defined in three ways. Firstly, a wife should have noregard for her own life. Secondly, she should even allow herself to besold, if her husband should wish it. Thirdly, obedience to her husbandtakes precedence over all other duties, including religious ones. Inessence, however, this law contains only one point: that a woman’shighest duty is to her husband.

ARABIA PREISLAM

Prior toIslam, in Arabia, the Arabs treated women with contempt: it wascustomary for infant gals to be buried alive at birth. Men could haveas many wives as they wished, and all were effectively enslaved, andwould be inherited as possessions when the husband died. Among thepre-Islamic Arabs, when a man died, his eldest son or other closerelative had the right to possess his widow or widows, marrying themhimself if he so desired.

Before andduring the time of the Prophet Muhammad Hi, Persia was ruled by theSassanids who practiced Zoroastrianism. Their faith demanded totalobedience of the wife to the husband. A wife was required to declare,”I will never cease, all my life, to obey my husband”. Failure to do sowould lead to divorce. A wife had no say in any matters and her husbandcould lend her, for a fee, to others. If a woman did not produce anychildren, she would be abandoned, if she was lucky; more often thannot, a barren wife would be killed.

EUROPE

Britain andmost of Europe, in the same period was just recovering from the lengthyRoman occupation, which was followed by the arrival of Christianity.European society was a highly fragmented one, in which tribal wars andkingly struggles to gain control over the land and people werecommonplace. With very few exceptions, women had little or no activerole to play in such affairs. As the dawn of Islam was starting toilluminate the long shadow of oppression on women, the French in thesame period (586 CE) were claiming compassion and civility by passing aresolution, after great deliberation and controversy, that woman can beclassified as a human being, however she is created for the solepurpose of serving man.’

CHRISTIANITY

The title ofthis section, by definition, is somewhat ambiguous, since the term’Christianity’ covers such a varied set of beliefs and practices. Asone commentator put it, “Christianity is always adapting itself intothat which is believable”. (Or not, as the case may be). The apparentflexibility of this religion creates immediate problems fordiscussions, since it is easy for anyone to counter what is said aboutChristianity with the latest amended pronouncements of the Vatican, orAnglican Synod, or of other Churches. It is very much like trying todescribe a desert landscape controlled by moving sand. The broad natureof Christian division must also be kept in mind: what holds true in onesect, such as the Church of England (Anglicanism), may not be true inanother, such as Roman Catholicism. Nevertheless, if we look to thesupposed sources of Christianity, the Old and New Testaments of theBible, and the scholarly work produced elsewhere, there is sufficientevidence to suggest that women have, over the centuries, received a rawdeal from the Mother (!) Church.

According tothe Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Christianity did not bring arevolutionary social change to the position of women”. Indeed, “in theworld of the early church, women were held in very low esteem, and thiswas the basis for divorce practices that put women practically at men’scomplete disposal”. This is in keeping with the “Old Testament view ofmarriage as an institution primarily concerned with the establishmentof a family, rather than sustaining the individual happiness of themarriage partners”, a view which has “strongly influenced” Christianity.

When the”Kingdom of God” is established, marriage which was understood to be apart of the old, passing, order will not exist. According to the Bibleas it exists today, the risen ones will “neither marry nor be given inmarriage; they will be like the angels in heaven”. (Mark 12:25).Similarly, St. Paul’s understanding of marriage in the light of thecoming kingdom of God was as follows: “… the time is short. From nowon those who have wives should live as if they had none… For theworld in its present form is passing away”. (1 Corinthians 7:29-30).The early Christians believed that the end of time was relatively near,so marriage was not deemed worthwhile, as it would involve what wereregarded as unnecessary troubles: “I would like you to be free fromconcern” (1 Corinthians 7:32). So it was felt that the unmarried,widowers and widows would fare better if they did not marry. Celibacywas demanded, not only of ascetics and monks, but of increasing numbersof the clergy, as a matter of duty.

The Bible, abook which conclusive evidence proves to have been written by men andto contain only fragments of the original revealed Books given toProphets over the centuries (including the Torah, Psalms and Gospel),contain many references to the position of women in society. Forexample:

“As in allthe congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in thechurches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, asthe Law says”. (1 Corinthians 14:33-34)

The ideology of the female beinginferior is indoctrinated from birth: “… A woman who becomes pregnantand gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days…If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will beunclean….”. (Leviticus 12:1,5)

“Wives,submit to your husbands… For the husband is the head of the wife asChrist is the head of the Church”. (Ephesians 5:22 23)

“Then theLord God said to the woman, ‘What is this you have done?’ The womansaid, ‘The serpent deceived me, and I ate.’ … To the woman he said,’I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain will yougive birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and hewill rule over you’.” (Genesis 3:13.16)

St. Paulsaid: “The head of the woman is the man … for a man … is the imageand glory of God. I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authorityover the man, but to be in silence”. ‘

Based on theBiblical image of Eve as a seductive temptress, Christian theologianshave historically associated women with sexuality and viewed her withdeep suspicion, loathing and fear. Throughout the history ofChristianity and the Roman Church, theologians, moralists and ethicistshave inveighed against women as corrupt, weak, lustful and evil”daughters of Eve”, who are to be shunned and avoided at all costs.2The post-Christian feminist Mary Daly insists that since the Genesisstories were written by men, and their conception of God is irrevocablyandrocentric, they cannot be applied to or by women.

Interestingly,in his 1988 Encyclical, Pope John Paul II stated his belief thatmothers are more important than fathers when it comes to raisingchildren. There is no connection between man’s procreative role inconception and their social role as fathers, and it is only I motherswho are socially defined by their procreative role.

BRITISH HISTORY

Englishcommon law stated that upon marriage, a woman lost the rights shepossessed when single. All of her property transferred to her husbandand both she and it fell under his complete control. He did not evenhave to account to her. She could not transfer her property, nor enterinto contracts in her own name, nor could she sue or be sued. Ineffect, marriage meant civil death.

A court casein 1840, quoted by O’Faolain and Martines, highlights howinsignificantly women were held in British society:

“Thequestion raised in this case is, singularly whether by common law thehusband, in order to prevent his wife from eloping, has a right toconfine her in his own dwellings and restrain her from liberty, for anindefinite time… There can be no doubt the husband has by law powerand dominion over his wife, and may keep her by force… and beat her,but not in a violent or cruel manner”.’

As late as1856, women in Britain were not allowed to keep their earnings, and hadno rights of inheritance. In that year, women petitioned parliament,which was composed solely of male members, to allow married women tokeep their own earnings and inherited property. In 1857, divorced womenwere granted the same rights as single women, but married women had towait until 1893 to receive the same rights.

Throughoutthe nineteenth century, women became more aware of their lack of basicrights in society, and towards the end of the century, a significantmovement for change developed, and the suffragettes campaigned forwomen’s right to vote. The political franchise had for centuries beenrestricted to property owners only, and had only recently (in the midnineteenth century) been extended to all males over the age of 21.Women had to wait until 1928 for this right to be granted to them.Equal pay for equal work took longer: This was not won until 1975. Itis clear, then, that Western Europe in general, and Britain inparticular, were very late in developing basic rights and equal statusfor women, contrary to what the moral high ground taken by critics ofIslam portray.

This is theglobal context into which the Prophet of Mercy, Muhammad brought hismessage, and liberated women from the oppression of men and offeredthem the shade, mercy and equality of Islam. At a time when the entireworld treated women with contempt, when women were unable even toquestion their status, let alone demand basic human and civic rights,Islam came like a beacon blazing forth in the darkness liberating andelevating them.

To discusshow Islam enhanced the role and status of women in seventh-centuryArabia, without addressing present day issues would be a greatdisservice to the readers. Islam (submission to the will of theCreator, Allah) which all the Prophets called to, is the religionfor all the people and for all times, equally applicable to all.

How many oftoday’s feminists supposedly, fighting against oppression andsubjugation of women, would disagree that women l should be viewed asthe equals of men? That female infanticide, for any reason, be itsocial or economic, is evil? Those in theological terms, women shouldbe viewed as equal with men in the sight of the Almighty, and berewarded equally for their virtues? That, as wives, they are entitledto mutual consultation in the affairs of their families? That theyshould be allowed to possess assets and have a right to their ownbusinesses and incomes? That they should be entitled to inherit fromtheir parents, husbands and other relatives? That they should beallowed to live freely without the fear of being molested or raped?That they should be free from the danger of sexual harassment andshould not be portrayed merely as sex objects or as objects of maledesires? That the honour of their bodies be protected from pornographicportrayals? That their suffering in childbirth should be recognized,appreciated and rewarded? For all of these basic rights and more, womenof all colours, creeds and social status have had to fight tooth andnail. It is only Islam that has promoted women’s rights from the veryoutset. Islam granted them liberation from the evils of inequality,hundreds of years, before the word “liberation” became fashionable.