Modern Islam: Two Viewpoints

Towards Understanding the Qur'an: Sayyid Abu al-A'la Mawdudi

Mawdudi began each of his arguments with a single or multiple Surahs. The first Surah he interpreted was Surah 2:34. In this verse, because all the angels were told to prostrate before Adam, Mawdudi argued that Muslim governments were set up in a similar way because of this. In other words, all government workers appointed have power over those they govern, whether the actions they order are lawful or not. However, Mawdudi pointed out that this verse more plausibly was a mere sign of the relationship between angels and man, not necessarily a way for Muslims to set up their governments. He next interpreted Surah 2:35, in which Allah commanded Adam and Eve to eat from every tree but one. He believed that this Surah confirmed that the tree was placed in the garden purely as a test. He pointed out that it was unnecessary to interpret the effects of eating from the tree, since the Qur'an did not say it. Rather, the tree should be interpreted as a test given to the original humans in Paradise to see how they react in face of temptation from Iblis. In the verse, there was no mention of the name of the tree nor the contents of what it would cause, unlike the Genesis 2-3 story. Thus, Mawdudi argued that the tree was merely a test, not a cause of the attributes associated with human beings.

He next interpreted Surah 2: 222, in which the uncleanliness associated with menstruation. Here, he noted that menstruation was not just an impurity, but also a deterioration in health that women go through. He noted that when the Qur'an stated to not approach women during this time, it meant that no sexual intercourse was appropriate during this time period, not that women should be treated as "untouchables." He next interpreted Surah 2: 223, in which the Qur'an stated how men and women should interact with one another. Because their mutual relationship must be like that of a farmer and his tilth, this meant that the act of sex was meant for both pleasure and the act of procreation. However, the primary goal of intercourse, of course, was reproduction, as he pointed out.

Mawdudi next interpreted Surah 4:1, in which the Qur'an explained that mankind was created from a single being. There are two interpretations to this. One could state that a single human being (gender not specified) was the source of all mankind, while another could state that this individual was male (Adam). However, Mawdudi elucidated that it does not explicitly state the sex of the individual, and thus, the "ambiguity" of the Qur'an must be maintained. Thus, no one should specify that the original human was male, but rather an individual whose gender was unknown.

He next interpreted Surah 4:3, in which marriage and polygamy were discussed. Mawdudi explained the many different interpretations of this passage. One was that there was no limit to the amount of wives men could have, and could subject these women to any oppression or inequality as they wished. Another was that Allah restricted Muslims to the limit of four wives so that he could plausibly treat them all equally. Mawdudi explained further that the interpretation that the limit of wives was four was the accepted tradition. However, it was important to note that every wife must be treated equally. Thus, there was a limit, since over four wives seemed implausible to Mohammed. In other words, if men could only handle one women, then he would only have one.

Next, Mawdudi interpreted Surah 4:34, which further established the relationship between men and women. He explained that this meant that God endowed one sex with certain qualities that the other sex lacked. Since both men and women lack qualities that the other sex lack, this qualified men as head of the family and women under his protection. He also pointed out that a women's duty to Allah was more important than her duty to her husband. Thus, if her husband commanded her to commit a sinful action, then she could refuse. Furthermore, the three punishments a man could commit to a disobedient wife (admonish them, not have sex with them, beat them), according to Mawdudi, did not have to be done all at once, and the particular punishment had "correspondence" with the fault.

Lastly, Mawdudi interpreted Surah 4:116-119, in which the alteration of God's creation was discussed. In other words, any act that did not fulfill the purpose for which God created it was considered a sin. Thus, any sexual act not meant to procreate was considered an abomination towards God and his creation. Thus, sodomy, oral sex, celibacy, sterilization, etc, were all viewed by Muslims as acts that went against God's purpose, and thus, sinful.

"The Issue of Woman-Man Equality in the Islamic Tradition": Riffat Hassan

First, Hassan revealed her two sources of studies into her argument for the equality of man and woman. These included the impact of Hadith literature and Jewish and Christian feminist theologian attempts to tract the origins of anti-feminish views. She then noted the three theological assumptions in all three religions (Islam, Christianity, and Judaism) that contribute to the basic infrastructure of anti-feminism in religion. These included that: God's primary creation was man and woman was made from man's rib, woman was the direct cause of the Fall, and that woman was created for man, not just from him.

She first pointed out that the belief that Adam was God's primary creation was not derived from the Qur'an, but from the Bible. At no point in the Qur'an does it specify the gender of the original human. She even stated that there was "no categorical statement in the Qur'an to the effect that Adam was the first human being created by Allah." In other words, the use of the word Adam did not specify a specific gender or individual, but rather represented humanity as a whole. In fact, the term Adam was often replaced by generic terms for humanity.

Hassan further supported her arguments with more references to the language of the Qur'an. Because Adam was a generic term for humanity, Adam's mate could also be a generic term merely stating that the first human had a mate. The gender of the mate of the original human as unknown, and thus, this detail had no significance in the Qur'an and thus Allah did not view this as important. But rather, all humans originated from one human being. In fact, Hassan stated that if the term "Adam's zauj", which is often interpreted as Eve, was meant to be female, it would be zaujatun, rather than zauj. This was because zauj is the masculine form, while zaujatun is the feminine form. Thus, since the grammar of the Qur'an, when it does not specify gender usually was male, then the term zauj did not specify a woman. Because the details of gender were not revealed by the Qur'an, this should be interpreted merely that all human beings, rather than separate males and females, were created from a single source.

Hassan further used the Arabic language to argue for the equality of women when reflecting on the belief that women were created for man. She stated that in the Qur'an it stated that the term mate (ha) has been interpreted as female, since it has a feminine pronoun attached. However, Hassan pointed out that if it was meant to be female according to Allah, it would be written as hunna, not ha. The grammatical rules of the language merely make it required that ha was used. Thus, the gender of the mate was not specified, and is an insignificant detail. The use of the word kum, a masculine word in the language, often is interpreted as only referring to man. However, like she stated previously, this could be used to reference male and female together.

Another case of interpretation in which the language was translated incorrectly as "her", when it actually meant "his," makes Hassan question the motifs of Muslim leaders. If some aspects of the Qur'an were interpreted accordingly, women would be directly specified as having superiority to men because they would be the primary creature. Thus, it seemed that Muslim interpreters attempted to shy away from the idea that women are created superior to men.

Next, Hassan discussed how many Muslim traditions and beliefs originated from the Genesis 2 story, rather than the Qur'an. This of course referred to the creation of woman from Adam's rib, which was not stated in the Qur'an. Rather, Hassan believed, that this tradition resulted from the assimilation in Hadith literature. She then quoted two separate interpretations of the creation of woman, both of which differ, and even contradict the Genesis text. For instance, one stated that the woman was called Hawwa because she was created from a living thing, but rather, the Genesis 3 text actually stated that she was called this because she was the mother of all the living. This variation was clearly an attempt to distort the interpretations of the Genesis text in order to benefit the idea that men were superior to women. She then quoted Mawdudi, who believed that the discussion of women's creation was a waste of time. She, however, believed it was an issue, since society had interpreted the creation of woman as a demonstration of her inferiority. But it is obvious that the Qur'an showed that men and women were created from the same substance, in the same manner, at the same time, since all humanity had the same source.

Lastly, Hassan listed various collections from Sunni Islam. What she noted that all of the references were unreliable, and thus, had to be interpreted lightly and were weak arguments. She also noted that the mention of Adam's rib creating a women had no roots in the Qur'an but originated from Genesis 2. Thus, these interpretations had no valid source and lacked substance.