A critical analysis of the work and meth
A critical analysis of the work and methodology of
Amina Wadud with specific regard to gender equality
in marriage
Siel Devos
616580
Modern Trends in Islam
Dr. H. Al-Mallik
20 April 2015
Word count: 2969
Introduction
The question of whether Islam is compatible with gender equality and a full implementation of
women’s rights has been one of the contentious issues in the field of Islamic Studies. Feminists and
human rights activists have criticised gender inequalities in Muslim majority countries and countries
that implement Sharia law (Al-Hibri 1997:2), directly linking these violations of ‘basic’ women’s rights
to the Islamic traditions Sharia laws are based on. Discussions around the reconciliation of Islam with
gender equality has led to two divergent Islamic responses. The first is to completely or partly reject
human rights, - and feminism as advocacy of women’s rights - as a “colonialist project” that must be
resisted (Mir-Hosseini 2006:639). The second came later in the form of Islamic feminism. Islamic
feminists came to see no logical link between Islamic ideals and patriarchy. They started to examine
and interpret Islam from within in order to recover women’s rights - granted to them in the Islamic
sources - that have been abused or neglected through a patriarchal interpretation (Ibid). Professor
and women’s rights activist Amina Wadud’s struggle to find meaning in more traditional
interpretations of the Qur'anic revelation has led her to reinterpret the Qur'an from a woman’s
perspective, an interpretation that is relevant to modern Muslim women (Wadud 1999:1).
In this essay I examine Wadud’s methodology of Qur'anic hermeneutics and assess the extent to
which she succeeds in presenting a new interpretation that includes women’s rights and concepts of
gender equality. I will analyse how Wadud attempts to find answers in the Qur'an to the particular
question of one of the fundamental human rights 1: equality in marriage. Although some issues of
inequality remain, I will demonstrate that through a reinterpretation of the Qur'an, the message of
Islam can be relevant and adaptable to modern Muslim women.
Methodology
Firstly, Wadud focuses specifically on the Qur'an as the “original source”, which she believes should
be the ultimate criteria for this assessment because of its ultimate authority as a religious and
intellectual source, and the overall consensus among Muslims that it is the word of Allah (1999: ix).
She consciously does not focus on the secondary sources (such as Hadith, interpretations and other
literature) which she and other progressive scholars believe have led to a “disconnection from the
original text and its intent” (1999:xx). She also places greater significance on the Qur'an than on
Sunnah because of the generally accepted view of the infallibility of the Qur'an and its preservation
as opposed to distortions, contradictions or errors that might occur in Hadith literature (1999: xvii).
However, she also acknowledges that while “the Qur'an is the source, people are the resource
(2006:208). That is why she emphasizes the distinction between text and interpretation or tafsir – a
“human and therefore limited endeavour - which has traditionally been ignored or minimized (1999:
xxii). Instead of an atomistic, ‘verse-by-verse’ approach, without paying attention to recurring themes
or structures in the Qur'an, Wadud, proposes ‘tafsir al-Qur'an bi al-Qur'an’, the interpretation of the
Qur'an by the Qur'an itself, which is the primary tool of Qur'anic exegesis (2004:327). Her exegesis is
based on a hermeneutical model in order to analyse each verse in 1) its context, 2) in the context of
discussions of similar topics in the Qur'an, 3) in the light of similar language and synthetic structures
used in the Qur'an, 4) in the light of universal Qur'anic principles and 5) within the context of the
Qur'anic worldview (1999:5).
1 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Article 16; Convention for Elimination of all forms of
Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), Article 16.
Wadud’s (1999:2-3) work reveals a great influence from the work and methodology of Fazlur
Rahman, from whom she borrows her method of Qur'anic interpretation. Rahman proposes a new
hermeneutical method that is consists of a “double movement”: first from the present back to
Qur'anic times, then back to the present (Rahman 1982:5). He stresses the importance of seeing the
Qur'an as a Divine response, through the Prophet’s mind, to the moral-social and historical context
of the Prophet’s time (Ibid). The double movement, as mentioned, consists of two steps. Firstly, the
historical situation in which a verse or statement dealing with a specific problem was revealed must
be understood and examined. This requires an understanding of the Qur'an in its entirety, with a
concrete weltanschauung or worldview, as much as in terms of the specific principles, that are at the
basis of responses to specific situations (Ibid, p.6). The second step is to generalize those specific
responses into statements of moral-social objectives, distilled from specific texts in light of the sociohistorical background (Ibid). This is how the “spirit” of the Qur'an can be discovered (Wadud 1999:4).
This is the approach Wadud uses when she proposes a hermeneutics of tawhid, literally meaning the
unity of God, and subsequently, the Qur'an, with the goal of addressing the dynamics of Qur'anic
universals and particulars (1999:12).
Further, she argues that patriarchy can be seen as a violation of the unicity of God, as men’s
superiority over women goes against God’s status as highest conceptual aspect of all (2008:437). She
is confident that incorporating female experiences and the female voice into a Qur'anic
hermeneutics can “yield greater gender justice to Islamic thought and contribute toward the
achievement of that justice in Islamic praxis” (1999:x). Wadud examines the extent to which maledominated interpretations - shaped by patriarchal values - has affected the role and position of
women, and subsequently demonstrates that gender inequality in Muslim society has no roots in the
Qur'an and that Islam intended for men and women to be primordially, eschatologically, spiritually
and morally equal human beings (1999:x). She challenges the traditionally assigned roles of women
in society by examining the “roots of the problem, the representation of women and guidelines for
both men and women as revealed in the Qur'an, and evaluating whether women’s role in Muslim
society today verily presents Islam’s intention.
I fully agree with Wadud’s view that the full enjoyment of equal rights for women can only take place
by means of a “rereading of the Qur'an through a woman’s perspective” which bears in mind the
patriarchal-historical context of the revelation (1999:81), and which demonstrates the link between
the Islamic ideology and theology on one hand and women’s liberation on the other (1999:2-3).
However, I experience some issues with her methodology. Firstly, I question the extent to which she
can derive and apply principles from a non-Islamic worldview (such as her hermeneutical model)
onto the study of the Qur'an without diverting from the concepts and message of the Qur'an. If we
abrogate any verses “no longer relevant to today’s norms and values”, how much remains of the
message and values of Islam? Secondly, I don’t find Wadud’s methodology for understanding the
socio-historical context very clear. I question how she validates her distinction between universal
Islamic principles and the subjective interpretation and application of these principles in a specific
context. Moreover, I think this approach has a risk of becoming apologetic.
Furthermore, the major problem with Wadud’s methodology of hermeneutics is that it is very
selective. Progressive scholars like Wadud often refute traditional interpretations of the Qur'an for
selecting certain Qur'anic verses and favour them over taking them over others (2015:256). Yet, by
not examining the whole Qur'an but rather focusing on a selected number of verses that can be
interpreted as a woman-friendly, Wadud can, and has been accused of the same selectiveness.
Ibrahim Musa calls this approach “nothing short of hermeneutical acrobatics or a hermeneutics of
wishful thinking” (Musa 2003:125). However, it has to be acknowledged that Wadud uses Musa’s
proposed approach of “hearing the Qur'an in its patriarchal voice but understand it with the
sensibility of a reader immersed in the process of revelation”, and with our norms of gender justice in
mind (Ibid), when explaining Qur'anic verses in a patriarchal-historical context (1999:80-81).
Equality in marriage
Rather than examining the entirety of Wadud’s extensive work, I will focus on particular issues where
Islamic law has been consistently criticised for its incompatibility with women’s rights, and
specifically the equal right in marriage. CEDAW Article 16 (1) specifies that men and women should
not only have the same right to enter into marriage (para. a) with their free and full consent (para.
b), they should also have the same rights and responsibilities during marriage and at its dissolution
(para. c).
With regards to the same right to enter into marriage (para. a), the Qur'an (4:25) clearly encourages
men and women to marry (Wadud 1999:78) and considers the marriage tie as a protection for men
and women (Qur'an 2:187). However, the issue of polygamy - more specifically, polygyny (one man
with multiple wives) – contradicts the equal right of men and women to enter into marriage. The
specific Qur'anic verse allowing polygamy translates as follows:
“If you fear that you will not deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your
choice, two, three or four. But if you fear that you will not be able to do justly (with
them), then only one, [...] to prevent you from doing injustice.” (4:3)
Wadud firstly points out that this verse deals with the fair treatment of orphans (Ibid:83). The
purpose of polygyny would then be to prevent mismanagement of orphans’ wealth by their male
guardians by marrying the female orphans, in other words, protecting justice in terms of financial
support (Ibid). On the other hand, the Qur'an limited the number of wives to four, and further on
(Qur'an 4:129) states that it is impossible to treat all of these wives with justice. Under no
circumstances is polygyny allowed in case a woman is unable to have children, or as a solution for a
man’s “unbridled lust” (1999:84).
Women’s free and full consent to enter into marriage (para. b) is another issue Wadud addresses
with regard to men’s authority over women. Qur'an 4:34 is traditionally interpreted as defining the
superiority of men over women:
“Men are qawwamuna 'ala women, [on the basis] of what Allah has [preferred]
(faddala) some of them over others, and [on the basis] of what they spend of their
property (for the support of women). […]”
Firstly, Wadud explains that the meaning and exact translation of qawwamuna ‘ala is unclear,
although the most common translation is “in charge of” (Ibid:.71). Wadud points out that although
this verse is the only mention of the concept of qiwamah –meaning male superiority/authority – in
the Qur'an (2015:256), it has come to be prioritized over Islamic concepts of reciprocity, harmony
and equality (e.g. Qur'an 30:21).
Furthermore, the meaning of “[on the basis] of what Allah has preferred some of them over others”
needs to be examined. The only preference to men over women specified in the Qur'an is with
regards to inheritance, where men receive twice the portion of women (1999:70).
Related to this materialistic preference is the condition “[on the basis] of what they spend of their
property (for the support of women)”, as this would imply a reciprocity: since men have the
responsibility to financially support women, they are granted twice as much in terms of inheritance
(1999:71). Finally, this verse specifies “some of them over others”, so Wadud argues that deriving the
unconditional superiority of all men over all women from this verse would be an erroneous
interpretation (Ibid).
The next issue that arises concerns the equality of rights and responsibilities during marriage. The
Qur'an does not define gender-specific roles in society or propose only one possible and eternal role
for women and men (1999:63). However, with regard to marriage there are a few differences in
responsibilities for men and women. The Qur'an recognizes women’s biological ability of bearing
children, yet it never limits a woman’s role to child-bearing and caring only (Ibid).
As mentioned before, Wadud does not consider the interpretation of Qur'an (4:34) as men’s
superiority over women to be valid. Therefore, a marriage relationship based on subjugation has no
basis in Islamic principles, but is a reflection of the patriarchal-historical context of the time of the
revelation (Ibid, p.77). The same is true for the duty of the husband to materially provide for his wife,
and her financial dependence and smaller share of inheritance (1999:71).
There is also discussion about the second part of Qur'an (4:34) that mentions women’s obedience to
their husband:
“So good women are qanitat, guarding in secret that which Allah has guarded. As
for those from whom you fear [nushuz], admonish them, banish them to beds
apart, and scourge them. Then, if they obey you, seek not a way against them.”
Firstly, Wadud argues that the translation of qanitat – to describe ‘good women’ - as ‘obedient’ is not
in line with the spirit of the Qur'an, as this word is used for both men and women throughout the
Qur'an (1999:74). As the same is true for the word nushuz, it cannot be translated as ‘disobedience
to the husband’ (1999:75). Rather, Wadud, following the reasoning of Sayyid Qutb, explains nushuz
as ‘disorder’ (Ibid). Wadud argues that these rulings are no longer relevant to today’s society, in
which men are no longer expected to be the main providers, women are allowed to have financial
security, and men and women seek marriage partners not for the sole purpose of maintenance and
subjugation (1999:77).
The problem remains that the Qur'an suggests ‘scourging’ as one of the solutions for regaining
marital harmony. Wadud has attempted to find an interpretation in consonance with her
understanding of justice and human dignity in Islam by seeking alternative translations for daraba,
the Arabic word for ‘strike’ or ‘scourge’ (1999:76). She points to the limitations the Qur'an imposes
on this practice, prohibiting unchecked violence against women – a common occurrence in preIslamic times (Ibid). She also raises the issue of some Muslim men who will skip the Qur'anic
suggestion to first admonish and banish their wives to beds apart, and immediately strike them, with
the goal of “harm, not harmony” (Ibid). The verse “if they obey (ta’a) you do not seek a way against
the,” does not command obedience from women, rather it is a conditional sentence (1999:77).
However, in her later work, Wadud has stated that, in a modern understanding of justice and human
dignity, she simply cannot accept “for a man to “scourge” or apply any kind of blow to a woman. […] I
have finally come to say “no” outright to the literal implementation of this passage” (2006:200).
Furthermore, with regards to the equal right to dissolution of marriage, Wadud argues that men’s
unilateral right to divorce - as opposed to women who need the intervention of the court to obtain
divorce – clearly reflects historical-bound practices (1999:80). She adds that the fact that the Qur'an
does not mention any women repudiating their husband, this does not indicate that women are not
allowed the power of repudiation (Ibid). Nevertheless, I believe she could have analysed women’s
limited means to obtain divorce into more detail.
Finally, I found it remarkable that Wadud does not address one of the major issues of gender
inequality in marriage, which is the issue of interfaith marriage, specifically the marriage between a
Muslim woman and a non-Muslim man. She briefly touches upon this issue but dismisses it as a
consequence of the Qur'anic concept of female subjugation within marriage (2006:195). Whereas
other scholars (Leeman 2009; Aini 2008) have demonstrated the possibility for reinterpretation of
the restriction on interfaith marriage, Wadud choses not analyse these specific problematic verses
through her historical-context methodology.
Conclusion
In this essay, I have examined Amina Wadud’s methodology of female-inclusive exegesis of the
Qur'an, as a means of finding common ground between modern concepts of gender equality and
justice on one hand, and Islamic values laid out in the Qur'an on the other. Wadud’s methodology
provides a new perspective on the traditional patriarchal-influenced interpretation of the Qur'an. By
not adopting the traditional verse-by-verse strategy, but by seeing the Qur'an as a unity with its own
worldview, she attempts to distinguish between the universal values, or the “spirit” of the Qur'an
(1999:4) and the subjective, context-bound interpretations of these values, in order to come to a
reading of the Qur'an that is relevant to modern Muslims, women in particular. Moreover, she
asserts that through her female-inclusive reading of the Qur'an, women can be liberated from
centuries of male superiority, based on certain Qur'anic verses that have been interpreted from a
patriarchal viewpoint. This methodology, whereby it is not always clear how we can determine what
are universal Islamic principles and what are answers to a specific historical context, might be fraught
with issues. The problem with the selectiveness of this approach becomes clear with regard to the
issue of equality in marriage. Here, Wadud focuses deeply on the rights and responsibilities in
marriage and interprets these in their specific context, whereby I believe she should be wary of
applying “hermeneutic acrobatics. Moreover, she fails to address certain aspects of inequality
between men and women, specifically with regard to women’s limited right to divorce and the
restrictions on interfaith marriage.
I consider Wadud’s female-inclusive reading of the Qur'an a major step forward in the traditional
male-dominated area of Qur'anic hermeneutics, and I definitely think it sheds new light on the
traditional view on Muslim women’s role in society and in marriage. Nevertheless, I also question
whether it is as simple as saying that “the Muslim woman only have read the text – unconstrained by
exclusive and restrictive interpretations – to gain an undeniable liberation” (1999:xxii). I believe there
are many more factors playing a role in women’s liberation, a reinterpretation of the religious
sources being only one of them.
Bibliography
Aini, N. (2008). Inter-religious Marriage from Socio-historical Islamic Perspectives. Brigham Young
University Law Review, 669-706.
Al-Hibri, A. (1997). Islam, Law and Custom: Redefining Muslim Women's Rights. American University
Journal of International Law & Policy, 12 (1), 1-44.
Leeman, A. B. (2009). Interfaith Marriage in Islam: An Examination of the Legal Theory behind the
Traditional and Reformist Positions. Indiana Law Journal, 84, 743-771.
Mir‐Hosseini, Z. (2006). Muslim women’s Quest for Equality: Between Islamic law and
Feminism. Critical inquiry, 32 (4), 629-645.
Musa, E. (2003). The Debts and Burdens of Islam. In Safi, O. (Ed.). Progressive Muslims: on Justice,
Gender and Pluralism. Oxford: Oneworld. 111-127.
Rahman, F. (1982). Islam and Modernity: Transformation of an Intellectual Tradition. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
UN General Assembly, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women,
18 December 1979, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1249, p. 13, available
at: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/cedaw.pdf [Accessed 29 March 2015]
Wadud, A. (1995). Towards a Qur'anic Hermeneutics of Social Justice: Race, Class and Gender. The
Journal of Law and Religion, 12 (1), 37-50.
Wadud, A. (1999). Qur'an and Woman: Rereading the Sacred Text from a Woman's Perspective (2nd
edition). New York: Oxford University Press.
Wadud, A. (2004). Qur’an, Gender and Interpretive Possibilities. Hawwa, 2 (3), 316-336.
Wadud, A. (2006). Inside the Gender Jihad: Women's Reform in Islam. Oxford: Oneworld.
Wadud, A. (2008). Foreword: Engaging Tawhid in Islam and Feminisms. International Feminist Journal
of Politics, 10(4), 435-438.
Wadud, A. (2015). The Ethics of Tawhid over the Ethics of Qiwamah. In Mir-Hosseini, Z., Al-Sharmani,
M., & Rumminger, J. (Eds.). Men in Charge? Rethinking Authority in Muslim Legal Tradition. Oneworld
Publications, 256-274.
Amina Wadud with specific regard to gender equality
in marriage
Siel Devos
616580
Modern Trends in Islam
Dr. H. Al-Mallik
20 April 2015
Word count: 2969
Introduction
The question of whether Islam is compatible with gender equality and a full implementation of
women’s rights has been one of the contentious issues in the field of Islamic Studies. Feminists and
human rights activists have criticised gender inequalities in Muslim majority countries and countries
that implement Sharia law (Al-Hibri 1997:2), directly linking these violations of ‘basic’ women’s rights
to the Islamic traditions Sharia laws are based on. Discussions around the reconciliation of Islam with
gender equality has led to two divergent Islamic responses. The first is to completely or partly reject
human rights, - and feminism as advocacy of women’s rights - as a “colonialist project” that must be
resisted (Mir-Hosseini 2006:639). The second came later in the form of Islamic feminism. Islamic
feminists came to see no logical link between Islamic ideals and patriarchy. They started to examine
and interpret Islam from within in order to recover women’s rights - granted to them in the Islamic
sources - that have been abused or neglected through a patriarchal interpretation (Ibid). Professor
and women’s rights activist Amina Wadud’s struggle to find meaning in more traditional
interpretations of the Qur'anic revelation has led her to reinterpret the Qur'an from a woman’s
perspective, an interpretation that is relevant to modern Muslim women (Wadud 1999:1).
In this essay I examine Wadud’s methodology of Qur'anic hermeneutics and assess the extent to
which she succeeds in presenting a new interpretation that includes women’s rights and concepts of
gender equality. I will analyse how Wadud attempts to find answers in the Qur'an to the particular
question of one of the fundamental human rights 1: equality in marriage. Although some issues of
inequality remain, I will demonstrate that through a reinterpretation of the Qur'an, the message of
Islam can be relevant and adaptable to modern Muslim women.
Methodology
Firstly, Wadud focuses specifically on the Qur'an as the “original source”, which she believes should
be the ultimate criteria for this assessment because of its ultimate authority as a religious and
intellectual source, and the overall consensus among Muslims that it is the word of Allah (1999: ix).
She consciously does not focus on the secondary sources (such as Hadith, interpretations and other
literature) which she and other progressive scholars believe have led to a “disconnection from the
original text and its intent” (1999:xx). She also places greater significance on the Qur'an than on
Sunnah because of the generally accepted view of the infallibility of the Qur'an and its preservation
as opposed to distortions, contradictions or errors that might occur in Hadith literature (1999: xvii).
However, she also acknowledges that while “the Qur'an is the source, people are the resource
(2006:208). That is why she emphasizes the distinction between text and interpretation or tafsir – a
“human and therefore limited endeavour - which has traditionally been ignored or minimized (1999:
xxii). Instead of an atomistic, ‘verse-by-verse’ approach, without paying attention to recurring themes
or structures in the Qur'an, Wadud, proposes ‘tafsir al-Qur'an bi al-Qur'an’, the interpretation of the
Qur'an by the Qur'an itself, which is the primary tool of Qur'anic exegesis (2004:327). Her exegesis is
based on a hermeneutical model in order to analyse each verse in 1) its context, 2) in the context of
discussions of similar topics in the Qur'an, 3) in the light of similar language and synthetic structures
used in the Qur'an, 4) in the light of universal Qur'anic principles and 5) within the context of the
Qur'anic worldview (1999:5).
1 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Article 16; Convention for Elimination of all forms of
Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), Article 16.
Wadud’s (1999:2-3) work reveals a great influence from the work and methodology of Fazlur
Rahman, from whom she borrows her method of Qur'anic interpretation. Rahman proposes a new
hermeneutical method that is consists of a “double movement”: first from the present back to
Qur'anic times, then back to the present (Rahman 1982:5). He stresses the importance of seeing the
Qur'an as a Divine response, through the Prophet’s mind, to the moral-social and historical context
of the Prophet’s time (Ibid). The double movement, as mentioned, consists of two steps. Firstly, the
historical situation in which a verse or statement dealing with a specific problem was revealed must
be understood and examined. This requires an understanding of the Qur'an in its entirety, with a
concrete weltanschauung or worldview, as much as in terms of the specific principles, that are at the
basis of responses to specific situations (Ibid, p.6). The second step is to generalize those specific
responses into statements of moral-social objectives, distilled from specific texts in light of the sociohistorical background (Ibid). This is how the “spirit” of the Qur'an can be discovered (Wadud 1999:4).
This is the approach Wadud uses when she proposes a hermeneutics of tawhid, literally meaning the
unity of God, and subsequently, the Qur'an, with the goal of addressing the dynamics of Qur'anic
universals and particulars (1999:12).
Further, she argues that patriarchy can be seen as a violation of the unicity of God, as men’s
superiority over women goes against God’s status as highest conceptual aspect of all (2008:437). She
is confident that incorporating female experiences and the female voice into a Qur'anic
hermeneutics can “yield greater gender justice to Islamic thought and contribute toward the
achievement of that justice in Islamic praxis” (1999:x). Wadud examines the extent to which maledominated interpretations - shaped by patriarchal values - has affected the role and position of
women, and subsequently demonstrates that gender inequality in Muslim society has no roots in the
Qur'an and that Islam intended for men and women to be primordially, eschatologically, spiritually
and morally equal human beings (1999:x). She challenges the traditionally assigned roles of women
in society by examining the “roots of the problem, the representation of women and guidelines for
both men and women as revealed in the Qur'an, and evaluating whether women’s role in Muslim
society today verily presents Islam’s intention.
I fully agree with Wadud’s view that the full enjoyment of equal rights for women can only take place
by means of a “rereading of the Qur'an through a woman’s perspective” which bears in mind the
patriarchal-historical context of the revelation (1999:81), and which demonstrates the link between
the Islamic ideology and theology on one hand and women’s liberation on the other (1999:2-3).
However, I experience some issues with her methodology. Firstly, I question the extent to which she
can derive and apply principles from a non-Islamic worldview (such as her hermeneutical model)
onto the study of the Qur'an without diverting from the concepts and message of the Qur'an. If we
abrogate any verses “no longer relevant to today’s norms and values”, how much remains of the
message and values of Islam? Secondly, I don’t find Wadud’s methodology for understanding the
socio-historical context very clear. I question how she validates her distinction between universal
Islamic principles and the subjective interpretation and application of these principles in a specific
context. Moreover, I think this approach has a risk of becoming apologetic.
Furthermore, the major problem with Wadud’s methodology of hermeneutics is that it is very
selective. Progressive scholars like Wadud often refute traditional interpretations of the Qur'an for
selecting certain Qur'anic verses and favour them over taking them over others (2015:256). Yet, by
not examining the whole Qur'an but rather focusing on a selected number of verses that can be
interpreted as a woman-friendly, Wadud can, and has been accused of the same selectiveness.
Ibrahim Musa calls this approach “nothing short of hermeneutical acrobatics or a hermeneutics of
wishful thinking” (Musa 2003:125). However, it has to be acknowledged that Wadud uses Musa’s
proposed approach of “hearing the Qur'an in its patriarchal voice but understand it with the
sensibility of a reader immersed in the process of revelation”, and with our norms of gender justice in
mind (Ibid), when explaining Qur'anic verses in a patriarchal-historical context (1999:80-81).
Equality in marriage
Rather than examining the entirety of Wadud’s extensive work, I will focus on particular issues where
Islamic law has been consistently criticised for its incompatibility with women’s rights, and
specifically the equal right in marriage. CEDAW Article 16 (1) specifies that men and women should
not only have the same right to enter into marriage (para. a) with their free and full consent (para.
b), they should also have the same rights and responsibilities during marriage and at its dissolution
(para. c).
With regards to the same right to enter into marriage (para. a), the Qur'an (4:25) clearly encourages
men and women to marry (Wadud 1999:78) and considers the marriage tie as a protection for men
and women (Qur'an 2:187). However, the issue of polygamy - more specifically, polygyny (one man
with multiple wives) – contradicts the equal right of men and women to enter into marriage. The
specific Qur'anic verse allowing polygamy translates as follows:
“If you fear that you will not deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your
choice, two, three or four. But if you fear that you will not be able to do justly (with
them), then only one, [...] to prevent you from doing injustice.” (4:3)
Wadud firstly points out that this verse deals with the fair treatment of orphans (Ibid:83). The
purpose of polygyny would then be to prevent mismanagement of orphans’ wealth by their male
guardians by marrying the female orphans, in other words, protecting justice in terms of financial
support (Ibid). On the other hand, the Qur'an limited the number of wives to four, and further on
(Qur'an 4:129) states that it is impossible to treat all of these wives with justice. Under no
circumstances is polygyny allowed in case a woman is unable to have children, or as a solution for a
man’s “unbridled lust” (1999:84).
Women’s free and full consent to enter into marriage (para. b) is another issue Wadud addresses
with regard to men’s authority over women. Qur'an 4:34 is traditionally interpreted as defining the
superiority of men over women:
“Men are qawwamuna 'ala women, [on the basis] of what Allah has [preferred]
(faddala) some of them over others, and [on the basis] of what they spend of their
property (for the support of women). […]”
Firstly, Wadud explains that the meaning and exact translation of qawwamuna ‘ala is unclear,
although the most common translation is “in charge of” (Ibid:.71). Wadud points out that although
this verse is the only mention of the concept of qiwamah –meaning male superiority/authority – in
the Qur'an (2015:256), it has come to be prioritized over Islamic concepts of reciprocity, harmony
and equality (e.g. Qur'an 30:21).
Furthermore, the meaning of “[on the basis] of what Allah has preferred some of them over others”
needs to be examined. The only preference to men over women specified in the Qur'an is with
regards to inheritance, where men receive twice the portion of women (1999:70).
Related to this materialistic preference is the condition “[on the basis] of what they spend of their
property (for the support of women)”, as this would imply a reciprocity: since men have the
responsibility to financially support women, they are granted twice as much in terms of inheritance
(1999:71). Finally, this verse specifies “some of them over others”, so Wadud argues that deriving the
unconditional superiority of all men over all women from this verse would be an erroneous
interpretation (Ibid).
The next issue that arises concerns the equality of rights and responsibilities during marriage. The
Qur'an does not define gender-specific roles in society or propose only one possible and eternal role
for women and men (1999:63). However, with regard to marriage there are a few differences in
responsibilities for men and women. The Qur'an recognizes women’s biological ability of bearing
children, yet it never limits a woman’s role to child-bearing and caring only (Ibid).
As mentioned before, Wadud does not consider the interpretation of Qur'an (4:34) as men’s
superiority over women to be valid. Therefore, a marriage relationship based on subjugation has no
basis in Islamic principles, but is a reflection of the patriarchal-historical context of the time of the
revelation (Ibid, p.77). The same is true for the duty of the husband to materially provide for his wife,
and her financial dependence and smaller share of inheritance (1999:71).
There is also discussion about the second part of Qur'an (4:34) that mentions women’s obedience to
their husband:
“So good women are qanitat, guarding in secret that which Allah has guarded. As
for those from whom you fear [nushuz], admonish them, banish them to beds
apart, and scourge them. Then, if they obey you, seek not a way against them.”
Firstly, Wadud argues that the translation of qanitat – to describe ‘good women’ - as ‘obedient’ is not
in line with the spirit of the Qur'an, as this word is used for both men and women throughout the
Qur'an (1999:74). As the same is true for the word nushuz, it cannot be translated as ‘disobedience
to the husband’ (1999:75). Rather, Wadud, following the reasoning of Sayyid Qutb, explains nushuz
as ‘disorder’ (Ibid). Wadud argues that these rulings are no longer relevant to today’s society, in
which men are no longer expected to be the main providers, women are allowed to have financial
security, and men and women seek marriage partners not for the sole purpose of maintenance and
subjugation (1999:77).
The problem remains that the Qur'an suggests ‘scourging’ as one of the solutions for regaining
marital harmony. Wadud has attempted to find an interpretation in consonance with her
understanding of justice and human dignity in Islam by seeking alternative translations for daraba,
the Arabic word for ‘strike’ or ‘scourge’ (1999:76). She points to the limitations the Qur'an imposes
on this practice, prohibiting unchecked violence against women – a common occurrence in preIslamic times (Ibid). She also raises the issue of some Muslim men who will skip the Qur'anic
suggestion to first admonish and banish their wives to beds apart, and immediately strike them, with
the goal of “harm, not harmony” (Ibid). The verse “if they obey (ta’a) you do not seek a way against
the,” does not command obedience from women, rather it is a conditional sentence (1999:77).
However, in her later work, Wadud has stated that, in a modern understanding of justice and human
dignity, she simply cannot accept “for a man to “scourge” or apply any kind of blow to a woman. […] I
have finally come to say “no” outright to the literal implementation of this passage” (2006:200).
Furthermore, with regards to the equal right to dissolution of marriage, Wadud argues that men’s
unilateral right to divorce - as opposed to women who need the intervention of the court to obtain
divorce – clearly reflects historical-bound practices (1999:80). She adds that the fact that the Qur'an
does not mention any women repudiating their husband, this does not indicate that women are not
allowed the power of repudiation (Ibid). Nevertheless, I believe she could have analysed women’s
limited means to obtain divorce into more detail.
Finally, I found it remarkable that Wadud does not address one of the major issues of gender
inequality in marriage, which is the issue of interfaith marriage, specifically the marriage between a
Muslim woman and a non-Muslim man. She briefly touches upon this issue but dismisses it as a
consequence of the Qur'anic concept of female subjugation within marriage (2006:195). Whereas
other scholars (Leeman 2009; Aini 2008) have demonstrated the possibility for reinterpretation of
the restriction on interfaith marriage, Wadud choses not analyse these specific problematic verses
through her historical-context methodology.
Conclusion
In this essay, I have examined Amina Wadud’s methodology of female-inclusive exegesis of the
Qur'an, as a means of finding common ground between modern concepts of gender equality and
justice on one hand, and Islamic values laid out in the Qur'an on the other. Wadud’s methodology
provides a new perspective on the traditional patriarchal-influenced interpretation of the Qur'an. By
not adopting the traditional verse-by-verse strategy, but by seeing the Qur'an as a unity with its own
worldview, she attempts to distinguish between the universal values, or the “spirit” of the Qur'an
(1999:4) and the subjective, context-bound interpretations of these values, in order to come to a
reading of the Qur'an that is relevant to modern Muslims, women in particular. Moreover, she
asserts that through her female-inclusive reading of the Qur'an, women can be liberated from
centuries of male superiority, based on certain Qur'anic verses that have been interpreted from a
patriarchal viewpoint. This methodology, whereby it is not always clear how we can determine what
are universal Islamic principles and what are answers to a specific historical context, might be fraught
with issues. The problem with the selectiveness of this approach becomes clear with regard to the
issue of equality in marriage. Here, Wadud focuses deeply on the rights and responsibilities in
marriage and interprets these in their specific context, whereby I believe she should be wary of
applying “hermeneutic acrobatics. Moreover, she fails to address certain aspects of inequality
between men and women, specifically with regard to women’s limited right to divorce and the
restrictions on interfaith marriage.
I consider Wadud’s female-inclusive reading of the Qur'an a major step forward in the traditional
male-dominated area of Qur'anic hermeneutics, and I definitely think it sheds new light on the
traditional view on Muslim women’s role in society and in marriage. Nevertheless, I also question
whether it is as simple as saying that “the Muslim woman only have read the text – unconstrained by
exclusive and restrictive interpretations – to gain an undeniable liberation” (1999:xxii). I believe there
are many more factors playing a role in women’s liberation, a reinterpretation of the religious
sources being only one of them.
Bibliography
Aini, N. (2008). Inter-religious Marriage from Socio-historical Islamic Perspectives. Brigham Young
University Law Review, 669-706.
Al-Hibri, A. (1997). Islam, Law and Custom: Redefining Muslim Women's Rights. American University
Journal of International Law & Policy, 12 (1), 1-44.
Leeman, A. B. (2009). Interfaith Marriage in Islam: An Examination of the Legal Theory behind the
Traditional and Reformist Positions. Indiana Law Journal, 84, 743-771.
Mir‐Hosseini, Z. (2006). Muslim women’s Quest for Equality: Between Islamic law and
Feminism. Critical inquiry, 32 (4), 629-645.
Musa, E. (2003). The Debts and Burdens of Islam. In Safi, O. (Ed.). Progressive Muslims: on Justice,
Gender and Pluralism. Oxford: Oneworld. 111-127.
Rahman, F. (1982). Islam and Modernity: Transformation of an Intellectual Tradition. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
UN General Assembly, Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women,
18 December 1979, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1249, p. 13, available
at: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/cedaw.pdf [Accessed 29 March 2015]
Wadud, A. (1995). Towards a Qur'anic Hermeneutics of Social Justice: Race, Class and Gender. The
Journal of Law and Religion, 12 (1), 37-50.
Wadud, A. (1999). Qur'an and Woman: Rereading the Sacred Text from a Woman's Perspective (2nd
edition). New York: Oxford University Press.
Wadud, A. (2004). Qur’an, Gender and Interpretive Possibilities. Hawwa, 2 (3), 316-336.
Wadud, A. (2006). Inside the Gender Jihad: Women's Reform in Islam. Oxford: Oneworld.
Wadud, A. (2008). Foreword: Engaging Tawhid in Islam and Feminisms. International Feminist Journal
of Politics, 10(4), 435-438.
Wadud, A. (2015). The Ethics of Tawhid over the Ethics of Qiwamah. In Mir-Hosseini, Z., Al-Sharmani,
M., & Rumminger, J. (Eds.). Men in Charge? Rethinking Authority in Muslim Legal Tradition. Oneworld
Publications, 256-274.