• Women: Participation in public affairs
Just before the general elections that took place recently in a Muslim country, an Islamic group included in its manifesto a clear opposition to the candidacy of women and their standing for parliament. History tells us that Lady Aisha, the Prophet's wife, led battles against the enemies of Islam. How can we reconcile this with the view of that Muslim group?
Let me first correct you on the role of Lady Aisha and her command of a Muslim army. She was not the commander in any battle whatsoever, and she did not fight the enemies of Islam. She was in disagreement with Ali, the fourth Caliph, and she was in the opposing camp when the battle known as "the Battle of the Camel" took place. She was not the commander in that battle, nor did she fight. When the fighting was over, Ali sent her, with due respect and honor, back to Madinah.
I am not aware of the manifesto of that Islamic group you have mentioned. I find it very strange that any group should adopt such an attitude. I hope that you are certain of your information. Otherwise, you could be acting on hearsay, which is not appropriate for a Muslim.
If your information is correct, then that Islamic group is mistaken in their attitude. There is nothing wrong with Muslim women standing for parliament or being elected to parliament. It is wrong to deny women the right to vote. Women offered their pledge of loyalty to the Prophet, and that was an act which signified full participation in public affairs. Similarly, Muslim women gave their pledges to the early caliphs in the same way as men did. That was akin to exercising the right to vote. In recent history, whatever elections were contested by Islamic parties or groups in Muslim countries, they were ahead of other parties and groups in advocating full participation by women. Islam considers men and women to be equal. The Prophet says: "Women are the sisters of men." This signifies equality and the right to full participation in public affairs.
Islam provides equal rights to men and women, but it is a fact of life that men dominate women. A woman must obey some men in all matters and she is never free to act according to her will. In young age, she lives in her father's house, obeying him. She must also obey the man in whose house she finds herself, whether he is her brother, husband or son (in her old age). In some cases she has to share her husband with other wives which inevitably causes her mental torture. Moreover, why should a girl bring dowry to her husband. Is this fair?
May I begin by answering your question where it ended. I am with you. Why should a girl bring dowry for her husband? Why indeed, when it is totally unfair? Why when Islam has provided for the reverse type of action? Islam wants man to pay a mahr or a dower to his wife at the time when he gets married to her. This is something that she can claim by right, and she can determine its level. A woman can decide that her mahr, i.e. dower, is a large or small amount. When the man agrees to it, he must pay it at the time when the marriage contract is made. If she allows payment to be postponed, it remains due at any time she demands it. If the husband dies without paying it, it remains a preferred debt which must be paid out of the man's estate. She has full right to do with it what she likes. Her husband may not interfere in that. Why, then, should a woman pay her husband a dowry?
I can tell you that this practice is un-Islamic. It is found in certain Muslim communities, but it is borrowed from other traditions from the pre-Islamic days of those communities. You will find it, for example, among Muslims in India, and you find the same practice in the Hindu society. Therefore, it can be said to have been borrowed from Hinduism.
May I suggest that this practice is not only unfair to the woman, but it is unfair to the man, because what happens in practice is that a father of moderate means starts to think about his daughter's marriage from the time she is very young. He starts saving for her dowry. A brother who travels abroad for better employment considers saving for his sister's dowry one of his main priorities. Indeed, he often delays his own marriage in order to see that his sisters are suitably married. They cannot have decent marriages unless he is ready to pay their dowries. This is certainly unfair and this practice cannot be sanctioned by Islam.
You speak of a woman being dominated by her men folk. And you cite her supposed obedience as evidence, supporting your claim. I do not think that Islam built its social order on the basis of women's obedience in the way you have mentioned. Rather the opposite. The Prophet has repeatedly said: "Take good care of women." It is clear that this order is given to men who are required, by Islamic law, to look after their women. In return, a woman has to be respectful. And that respect does not mean slavish obedience. Indeed, the Prophet has encouraged mutual consultation in family affairs between men and women. He himself practiced that. Moreover, he has given the best example of the proper treatment of women.
In an authentic Hadith, the Prophet is reported to be "in the service of his household", whenever he was at home. Now the Prophet's household consisted of his wives and daughters. He did not have a brother or a father to look after and his sons died in infancy. He never went about ordering his wives or daughters when he was at home. On the contrary, he looked after them and served them. To follow his example is a duty required of all Muslims. There is in practical fact a difference between what people do and what Islam requires. Responsibility for that discrepancy should not be placed at the doorstep of Islam. It is people who either abide by what Islam requires of them or pay little regard to it. Hence, it is they who bear the responsibility. Equality between men and women is emphasized in numerous Qur'anic verses and Hadiths. To say that they are unequal because men want their women to obey them is to place responsibility for violating the law on the law itself, when that responsibility lies, fairly and squarely, on the person who perpetrates it.
You bring the question of polygamy. I have often explained that we have to look at the permission Islam grants to a man to marry up to four wives at the same time as a legislation to emergencies. The permission is granted in order to provide a solution to many social problems that may occur at the individual and social levels. If that solution involves some bitterness for individual members of the community, I can tell you that its absence will result in a much worse situation for individuals and the society as a whole.
If a young married woman cannot conceive because of a problem with her ovulation, is it permissible for her to receive an egg donated by her sister or some other women, which would be fertilized by the sperm of her husband and planted in her womb?
There are several new techniques which are used nowadays for the purpose of helping women to be pregnant. All communities are often discussing the ethical aspects of such techniques, because they involve a great deal of important moral and ethical issues. In the Western societies, where religion is no longer a major issue in social life, the problems that have arisen have prompted many far-sighted individuals and welfare organizations to call for legislation to organize such activities and prevent some of the problems to which they have given rise. In our societies, the problems have not been felt very keenly yet, for a number of reasons which include the fact that these techniques have not yet been widely used.
A conference was held several years ago which discussed many of the issues that are closely related to the inception and end of human life. It was convened by the Islamic Organization of Medical Sciences. The general trend of the arguments and rulings concerning the new techniques of reproduction was that when the technique involved only a married couple, without the intervention of a third party, then it is permissible in Islam. When a third party is involved, then the weightier opinion was against it, because of the confusion it may lead to in matters of parenthood and offspring. This approach has much to recommend it.
When we speak of the new methods and techniques, we find much that is unacceptable, while there are some aspects which are clearly beneficial and helpful to people. When they are in line with Islamic standards of morality, they are fine, but where they clash with these standards and values, they are forbidden.