Nushooz, in the legal sense, refers to marital discord. It is a term that applies to both husband and wife. Allah refers to it in the Qur’aan when he says,
34. Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because They support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard In (the husband’s) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly); but if They return to obedience, seek not against them means (of annoyance): for Allah is Most High, great (above you all).
Sayyid Yusuf ‘Ali (rahimahullah) translated Nushooz as, ‘disloyalty and ill-conduct’. In fact, in my view, such a translation is perfect. The usage of “ill-conduct” is so encompassing that he really didn’t even need to use the word ‘disloyalty’, as ill-conduct excompasses disloyalty. As stated above, Nushooz does not only apply to the wife, but also to the husband. The nushooz of the husband is general refusal of dispensing the Islamic rights a woman has upon him. That is not of my concern in this post however. In a recent debate I had, I was challenged to prove that nushooz included the wife’s refusal to answer the call to bed of her husband. My argument was that if refusal falls beneath nushooz, then the husband’s forcing of his wife to have intercourse with him is not protocol, and thus haraam (not restricted to this proof alone) as Allah has commanded the method of 4:34.
Years ago in Qur’aan class at the Madrasah we reviewed the different forms of tafseer (exegesis of the Qur’an). The method of tafseer that stood out most in my mind, even till this day, is that of tafseer bir-Ra’i, or the explanation of the Qur’an based upon the opinion of the exegete. Our professor stated that it was a permissible and established method of tafseer amongst the Mufassireen(exegetes). Obviously, there are conditions to this method of tafseer, mainly mastery of the language. As I was reading Reliance of the Traveller, translated by Sayyidnaa Shaykh N.H. Keller (May Allah always enlighten his heart) and published by Amana, I came across an interesting entry. The title stated, “Explaining the Koran By Personal Opinion (Tafsirul-Qur’an bir-ra’i)”1 .
The article begins with the hadith of the Nabi Muhammad,
قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من قال في كتاب الله عز وجل برأيه فقد أخطأ
“Whoever speaks of the Book of Allah from his own opinion is in error.” [And in the arabic, left untranslated, it states 'reported by Abu Dawud and At-Tirmithi]
My wife, Umm Layth informed me of this thread on a blog named “Unique Muslimah” that touches on a rather sensitive topic: Is there a such thing as “Marital Rape” in the Shari’ah?
Firstly, we must ask the question; ‘What is rape’? Legal Definition: “any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person. “ So, to reword the original question for clarification’s sake: “Can a husband physically force one’s wife to have sex with them?” Side note: Obviously this means while she is unwilling. I do not believe that the Shari’ah definition of rape is applicable to a husband’s forcing his wife to have intercourse with him. Generally, rape is defined as forced fornication, and marital relations, even if forced, can not be - legally - fornication. However, in the linguistic sense of the word, rape, if strictly defined as forced intercourse, is applicable to marriage. That is my take on using the titling, ‘Marital Rape’.
The very first legal maxim that occurs to me is: “There is no causing of harm, or reciprocation of it. This maxim is based upon the hadith of our beloved Sayyid Muhammad who said,
لا ضرر و لا ضرار
“There is not to be causing of harm, nor reciprocation of harm.1 ”
Al-Qadhi (The Judge) Muhammad ibn Abdur-Rahmaan As-Safadi Ash-Shaafi’i (died in 749 A.H.) once stated after examining the affair of Ibn ‘Arabi,
“I have observed that Ibn ‘Arabi’s ‘Aqidah, is from beginning to end, the ‘Aqidah of the Shaykh Abul Hasan Al-Asha’ri without the least difference.”1
Ibn ‘Arabi is probably one of the most controversial scholars of Islamic History. Many scholars have declared outright takfir of him and have thus damned him to Hell eternally. Imam ‘Alaa’ud-deen Al-Bukhaari Al Hanafi and Imam Ibn Al-Muqri’ declared him a kaafir. In fact ‘Alaa-ud-Deen went so far as to say, “Whoever does not declare Ibn ‘Arabi a Kaafir, is himself a Kaafir.” For those pseudo-salafis who like to run with ‘Alaa-ud-deen’s words, let them also run with his words, “Ibn Taymiyyah is a kaafir!” Indeed, he also made takfeer of Ibn Taymiyyah! Let us not get off topic however. Many other great A’immah did consider him a heretic or Zindiq (which is in fact borderline takfir). The famous Sa’ad-Ad-Din At-Taftazaani wrote a whole treatise in response to “Wahdatul-Wujud” demeaning Ibn ‘Arabi. Others, such as Ibn Taymiyyah, Abu Hayyan Al-Andalusi, Adh-Dhahabi also deemed him deviant. I have also read Ibn Hajr criticising him as well.
Lack of wisdom and knowledge as well as a high level of testosterone may be to blame for the emergence of the injudicious, ignorant, and rash youth that plague the Islamic world in our times. I was once part of the foolish minority that hurl takfeer upon everyone from Hamza Yusuf to Ibn ‘Arabi to anyone who refused to make takfeer of the two. For I strongly held on to the principle, ‘Whoever does not call a kaafir a kaafir, is himself a kaafir.’ Then by the grace and mercy of Allah , I started reading the “foolish deviants’”1 refutation or response to this principle as well as defense of many I used to attack. I have been asked by many, “What made you abandon your takfeeri manhaj?” It is in this article that I shall quote for those questioners statements from our noble forefathers illuminating this issue for the layman.
After much deliberation I have decided to compile examples from our vibrant and rich Islamic history of Sunni Orthodox Fuqaha’, Muhaddithin, Mufassireen, and Muhaqqiqeen taking knowledge from religious heretics and deviants (Ahlul-Bida’ah). Before delving into this issue let me first state my supposition. Based upon the material within this article, I have strong conviction that some of the earliest Imams of Islam were semi-tolerant of ikhtilaaf (legal disagreement), even in some issues of ‘Aqidah. It seems to me, and ultimate knowledge is with Allah , that some of the Salaf (earliest generations of the Islamic Nation) were not radically hostile towards deviants that they believed had the excuse of personal ijtihaad and ta’weel. As you will see, many of the erudite scholars of Islam took prophetic narrations (hadith) as well as other Islamic Sciences from men they believed to be deviant. There are, however, levels of deviance. For example, as mentioned by Imam Ibn Hajr in his personal gloss of Nukhbat-Al-Fikr, if the bida’ah (deviance) in the one imparting the narrations (or knowledge) is not Kufriyyah (that which removes one from the yolk of Islam), then his narrations are acceptable. This is, however, only one opinion. Some scholars argue that if the scholar called to his bida’ah it is not permitted to take from him. Yet others allowed that. The recent Imam and Haafith Shu’ayb Al Arnaa’ut stated that the opinion of taking from the deviant who does not call the people to his bida’ah is what is the just (or balanced) stance1. Though this may be the most “just” stance, Imam Shu’ayb Al Arnaa’ut states:
“…The two Shaykhs (i.e. Bukhaari and Muslim) reported from many who delved into Bida’ah, like the Khawaarij, the Shi’ah, the Qadariyyah, and their likes, and from them there were those who called to their madh-hab (guild).”2
The following is a fantastic lecture by Hamza Yusuf, May Allah forgive him Amin! I urge you all to keep an open-mind when listening to this. I know some of the viewers of this site hate Hamza Yusuf for his past actions. Overlook that for now and listen to what he has to say. There is wisdom and deep insight in much of what he says.
After watching this I think you should ask yourself, as I did, Are you worse than animals? Are they more aware than you are? Are you selfish and individualistic like most capitalists? Has the delusion of the west mesmorised you with its glamour and shahawaat?
May Allah make us steadfast upon tawheed and weary of the brief glamour this lowly world offers. Amin!
Born 1320 A.H. and died 1380 A.H. He was born into the Qabeelah of Bani Sa’eed, and it is the kinsfolk of the Qabeelah of Ghimaarah. Two years after he was born his family moved to Tanjah (طنجة) and there, as a child he memorized the Qur’aan beneath Sidi Al Arabi ibn Ahmad Budrah. After memorizing the Qur’aan and reciting it, he memorized Al-Aajrumiyyah, Al Murshid Al-Ma’een, Buloogh Al Maraam, As-Sanoosiyyah, Alfiyyah ibn Maalik, Al Jawharah, Al Bayqooniyyah, and Mukhtasar Al Khaleel and many other works.
Tahqeeq (research) performed by: Yusuf Abdur Rahmaan Al-Mar’asheeli & ‘Adnaan ‘Ali Shallaaq
Al Hidayah is the takhreej, or the research of the narrations, of Bidayatul Mujtahid of the great Jurist of Islamic Spain (Al-Andalus) Ibn Rushd. It is 8 volumes of absolute ‘ilm. I was sitting with a close brother of mine discussing the benefit of Bidayatul Mujtahid when I mentioned that a takhreej (tahqeeq) needed to be done of it. The brother did some research and ended up purchasing this masterpiece for me.
At first I was a bit skeptical at how much benefit would truly be obtained from it. However, when I opened it and read the first 3 volumes, I was astonished at the ‘Ilm possessed by Al-Haafith Al Ghumaari. He argues against or for certain stances based upon deep insight into the sciences of hadith. Many times he saves the reader the research by simply releasing upon the reader his grading of the hadeeth. He leaves no stone unturned regarding the major books where the hadeeth may be found. I recommend it for all arabic speaking students.
The following is my personal review of Nayl Al-Awtaar.
One of my favorite resources regarding the deen of Allah ta’alaa is نيل الاوطار شرح منتقى الاخبار من سيد الاخيار
Translation of the Title: “The obtainment of the objective. The explanation of ‘The Chosen Reports from the Master of Good’ ”
Other Names: Generally it is referenced as “Nayl”, “Nayl Al Awtar” etc.
Authors: The author of this fantastic masterpiece is Sheikhul Islaam, Al-’Allaamah, Ar-Rabbani, Imaamul A’immah, Mufti Al Ummah, Qaadhi Al Qudhaah, Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Abdullah Ash-Shawkaani then As-Sana’ni. He was born in the year 1172 After Hijrah in the month of Thul Qa’dah in the city of Shawkaan, Yemen.
Walking down Michigan Avenue in Chicago, I stopped with a friend to look at watches in the Guess store. As I passed by the men’s section, entering the women’s, I overheard a woman saying to her male companion ‘I need this dress!’. The man responds, ‘Honey! We can’t afford it.’ The woman says, ‘Put it on the credit card!’ I could see the worry on the man’s face. The first thought striking in my innermost was that this woman did believe she needed this dress. It was in this thought that I had recalled a statement of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam),
تعس عبد الدينار والدرهم والقطيفة والخميصة إن أعطي رضي وإن لم يعط لم يرض
“Wretched is the Slaves to Dirhams, Dinars, and Lavish Clothing. If given, he is content; if not given, he is not.”
In Imam Thafar ‘Uthmaani’s treatise on Tasawwuf in his ‘Ilaa’ he states regarding this hadith,
The Prophet’s saying, “Wretched is the slave to dirhams and dinars,” is similar to Allah ’s saying, “And among mankind is he who worships Allah upon a narrow brink, so that if good befalls him he is content therewith, but if a trial befalls him, he falls away utterly. [He loses both the world and the Hereafter. That is the sheer loss]” (Qur’an, 22:II). By “the slave to dirhams and dinars,” the Prophet meant those whom the worldly life has imprisoned by its demands, until they become as slaves to it, and it deals with them as a master. And whoever is a slave to his whims is not honest when he says, “Thee (alone) we worship; Thee (alone) we ask for help” (Qur’an, I:4). Curbing whims, avarice, and greed is the first step of the people of renunciation [zahidin], and the noble Sufis are the most concerned of people regarding this. And whoever curbs his whims will “be in the world as a stranger,or a passer-by.”
refers to it in the Qur’aan when he says,
Muhammad,
