This weekend was an interesting one, I was visiting my mother with my family, but also fighting a war of words on a Facebook post. Hasbun Allah. I was disheartened by the exchange, but not surprised, as it is a norm of many during disagreement.
The post started with this statement: Modern Muslimah feels entitled to a great husband without having to be an actual wife.
And our communities enable her entitlement.”
I was intrigued by this, honestly curious as to how he would describe an actual wife. So I asked. The response was this:
“By actual wife, I mean a wife who fulfills the most basic responsibilities. And our communities enable this entitlement by shying away from mention of her basic responsibilities and by even negating them, while making sure to always emphasize the responsibilities of the husband and even exaggerating them.
Those responsibilities start with two areas: (1) submissive dutifulness to the husband in recognition of his authority; (2) sexual availability to the husband. Without these, a woman has not even begun to be the most basic meaning of a wife…”
I don’t completely agree or disagree with everything here, I couldn’t respond to everything even if I wanted to (I was traveling and with family), but the thing that particularly bothered me was the usage of the word “submissive.” He could have said, “happily dutiful” or “lovingly” or…but he chose the word “submissive. So I had something to say about that.
Here’s the rest of the exchange:
Me:
jazakum Allahu khairan for your reply. Why “submissive”? Do they have to be meekly to be “actual wives”; being dutiful isn’t enough? The Mothers of the Believers were the greatest wives, oh so dutiful, but would you describe them as “submissive”? I can think of several ahadith where I wouldn’t. I recall Sh.Nuh Keller mentioning praising his wife on being a dutiful wife yet being far from a being a “mouse.” Nonetheless, it’s easy for a woman to be those things as long as her man is the Qawwaam in the way the Sayyidur rijaal showed us ﷺ. As opposed to some of traditional wife-coaching that puts the burden of marital happiness on the wife, I like to return to the Sunnah of the man being the Imam, the primary shepherd and therefore the one holding the most and greatest responsibility for the general well-being of everyone.
Response by Original author (A for short): [I have edited the post and paraphrased for brevity and privacy.]
Salla Llahu alayhi wa alihi wa s
Submissive does not mean weak or meek. It means a recognition of authority and conceding that authority. Despite modern Western programming, the husband has tremendous divinely granted authority, which is obligatory for a woman to concede. The best of all creation, salla Llahu alayhi wa alihi wa sahbihi wa sallam, whom you yourself referenced, is reported to have said to the Companions when they wanted to prostrate to him (in reverence, not worship, obviously) that had he commanded any of creation to prostrate to another, he would have commanded wives to prostrate to their husbands. If this is not submissiveness, I don’t know what is. We can’t just sweep such matters under the rug, no matter how uncomfortable they are, how contrary to our society’s values they are, and no matter how much some people may abuse them.
It actually takes a ton of strength to choose to be submissive. It requires overcoming a mighty opponent: oneself. There is nothing weak or meek about that.
Me:
Jazkaum Allahu khairan for your reply again. The hadith of sujud references the great fadl of the man upon the woman, and the respect he deserves therefrom when fulfilling his role properly. I don’t see this as submissiveness, as in this word is weak. Again, I’d like to see an example of this in the Ahl al-Bayt. As for the Prophet ﷺ, the strongest of people were meek and submissive before his greatness.
Yes, we must all follow the rules regardless what the other is doing, but the rules change when the other isn’t doing what they are supposed to. A man not giving basic nafaqah for his wife, she no longer has to obey him in bed. BarakAllahu feekum, I appreciate your time. May Allah bless us with true fiqh.
A:
Salla Llahu alayhi wa alihi wa sahbihi wa sallam.
When a man is not providing basic financial support, he is not fulfilling the basic duty required of a husband, and the ruling is that a woman is entitled to seek annulment of the marriage. But you seem to present the matter as if everything I said is somehow voided, because somehow no men provide basic financial support.
Amin to your prayers!
Thanks for your questions. Allah bless you.
Take care.
[You can see how he puts words into my comments that were never there! Frustrating!!!]
Me:
Is that what you understood? That I’m saying no men provide support? I’m sorry you understood that. I reread my post and nowhere do I say that no man is providing for a woman. I love a good discussion with integrity and the nasihah as its premise. Once argumentation sets in the barakah is lost. May Allah give us tawfeeq. (What I mention is the position in the Hanafi madhhab, you are welcome to check the Hashiyah if in doubt.)
A:
Not that you said it, but you seemed to me to present it as the heart of the matter, as if that is the default state of men. If I misunderstood, al-hamdu liLlah. I appreciate your referencing the fiqh. Are you referring to Hashiyat Ibn Abidin (Shami)? As for argumentation, al-hamdu liLlah, I have personally found our exchange respectful. Allah bless you.
[no apologies for the lack of integrity, just saying that the exchange was respectful. ie that’s what you would like everyone reading to feel, ie prompt them to feel like the exchange was completely respectful, even when you blatantly change my words. That’s why I referenced the lack of integrity, but perhaps I should have been more direct.
But in the meantime…another brother responded: B
B:
What does submissive mean according to you? It seems to be really grinding against you such that you’re looking for any way possible to bring the focus back on submission and then reject it.
Submissiveness embodies both obedience and an attitude of obedience. We don’t just do what we’re told – that’s just following orders, even if begrudgingly. But if we harken to do it, then that characterizes a submissive attitude. It’s an adjective – a state of being, not just technical actions. Compare ‘Fine, I’ll do it’ with ‘Of course! As you say![🙂]()
‘ where in both cases the one obeying may not really agree but the latter readily overcomes it because of who wants it. There’s a difference in attitudes.
‘ where in both cases the one obeying may not really agree but the latter readily overcomes it because of who wants it. There’s a difference in attitudes.We are to be submissive to Allah, His Messenger ﷺ, our parents, and for women, their husbands or any other wali. These are basic manners in our Deen. We speak in a soft tone, adopt a submissive body language, and don’t use sharpness of our tongues. These are not technically mentioned as far as I know – since this is not even fiqh. These are aadaab. Scholars have mentioned how they were scared of eating a meal with their mothers from the same dish, in fear that they would pick a piece their mother was eyeing. There’s also mention of how a scholar would round his words when speaking with his mother, so as to not speak in a sharp and pointed manner. Others have mentioned how it is improper to walk in front of your father, or to directly correct one’s parents.
These are the rules that stem from the general prescription to honor one’s parents. We seem to be receptive of these things when it is applied towards parents, especially mothers, without ever asking for highly-specific ahadith or events from the life of the Prophet ﷺ or the Ahl-al-Bayt (a uniquely high minimum requirement for acceptability) as evidence that this is indeed a good and justified injunction. But we seem to have an allergic reaction when it comes to husbands. This is a patently unique trait in modern-day women. Husbands are owed even more rights and honor by their wives than what they owe their parents.
Moreover, the Hadith of sajdah never mentions a conditional of a man doing his role properly – it states the reason being the many rights she owes to him. If you must derive it, then at best we can say if he provides basic maintenance, then that is enough to be eligible, which most men already do. So again, what was the point of highlighting with a qualification if not to undercut the importance of it, since that is the only evident purpose it serves?
Me:
I mentioned several times the definition of submissiveness, I shouldn’t have to repeat it. I find your choice of words and tone disrespectful. This was a discussion I sincerely sought to learn about this perspective. Keep in mind that the closest to him are those with the best akhlaaq; there are some willing to jeopardize that for a mocking emoji and disrespectful tone that was amusing for a few moments. I just commented on a post that the bare minimum the Prophet ﷺ told the awliya of women to look for in men was Deen AND khuluq as it has come in hadith. It’s disheartening finding so many men in a space that is geared towards true masculinity, which i came looking to find his sublime Sunnah in ﷺ, even here, men can’t stick to respectful akhlaaq. I can bet at work we use our words much more carefully when it comes to dunya because when you’re disrespectful and not a team player you get fired.
Now, you seem to challenge me. Please answer: 1- what word are you using here in Arabic? Tasleem? Is that what you have in your fiqh books or hadith? Please enlighten me with references where it says a woman has “tasleem” to her husband. 2. Let’s do logic. You are saying “an actual wife” is one who is submissive. So if she’s not, she’s not an actual wife. Would you truly describe S.Aishah alayh assalaam as a submissive wife? I would have you reread the Seerah in that case. Even if a single interaction she wouldn’t be considered “submissive” your premise is gone. So how about when she breaks a plate in front of other guests – was that submissive?
3. It’s too much to ask for an example from Ahl alBayt? Were we not given the Book with the Light who is our Master Muhammadﷺ? A book cannot be read in darkness my dear brother. What’s the point if you can’t take him as your example? Men assuming that “modern women” can’t accept being “submissive” – brother did you read what incidents the Prophet ﷺ had to go through with his wives? And he was all man throughout ﷺ because he recognized their humanity and their femininity and didn’t demand “submissive” wives. I always say any “feminism” I have is only from the Seerah, the most empowering person to both men and women was and is the Prophet ﷺ, i don’t need to look to any other “ism” to feel empowered, thank you, very much. If you like to label me “modern muslimah” I’ll be happy if it’s modern Muslimah through him ﷺ
4. Fiqh is not the culmination of the Sunnah. It teaches the fard AND sunnah. The fard as my teachers explained, when comes to marrige fiqh is for the miserly. Sunnah of marriage is known through his example from hadith ﷺ.
5. Where is the condition in the hadith? Perhaps unbeknownst to you most ahadith have takhsees or are conditional. The ahadith and texts that are not are usually about Allah and His Attributes.
Will this hadith be valid for a husband who beats his wife to a pulp? You would say yes since it has no conditions according to you. Hasbun Allah. Yes, we must make a lot of dua for fiqh in the Deen that will ease our way to jannah.
6. All rulings are under the scrutiny of the qawaid or principles of the Deen. One of the most basic is that there is no harm nor reciprocating of harm. What do you do with this frowning woman who is sad from xyz or just pms who is your wife now turned nashizah, is the fatwa you give that she is allowed to be beaten because she is a nashizah? I know that’s the fiqh, is that how you teach it? To statements like that as though it’s all good without any context to say “but this isn’t the Prophetic example…” it is SO far from the Sunnah. Yes, you are right, that is the fiqh, and quoting my teachers, it’s fiqh for the miserly. Now have we studied these umbrella princples *qawaid) to know when and how to apply them? A woman doesn’t have to accept the “one cloth in the winter and one cloth in the summer” if she chooses not to and rather chooses she would prefer someone who can treat her with ‘maroof’ as Allah commands. If you want to stick to the fard fiqh and have this akhlaaq , i would surely give advice the Prophet ﷺ gave and tell the women to keep looking elsewhere for someone with Deen and khuluq.
Finally, I am going to say I have traditionally never accepted male friends on fb, because I don’t believe in having male friends, even if its just on fb it’s a label and everyone does it. This week was the first time I broke that rule, seeking thereby more understanding from the Muslim men perspective. This is not my job, I teach women what I was blessed to learn in my 10 years of study in Damascus, amongst them Sh.Adeeb al Kallas, Sh.Samer al Nass, Sh. Hassan al HIndi, Sh.Gibril al Haddad, and studying numerous books of hadith… nonetheless, this is a side hustle for me. I am a woman who needs to tend to her husband and 4 kids. I don’t have the luxury of responding to every disdainful assumption. This seems to me to be an indication to go back to my area where I will benefit, rather than fight, to return to my family and female only friends. May Allah forgive us our shortcomings and give us tawfeeq to have the best akhlaaq and the deepest understanding for His Sake and to make His Beloved ﷺ proud. Wassalaam.
B again:
This is an unstable rant, not a cogent response. It’s all over the place.
As for my tone, it was in response to your tone that I found disrespectful and low-key condescending to [Author A]. Read your comment again. You’ve been consistently passive-aggressive. You know it. [So after I was told I was making all men incapable of providing…my response to that was passive aggressive?! Wow.]
As for the response, I never said anything about “an actual wife” anywhere. My only point is that it is within Islam for Muslim women to be submissively obedient to their husbands and show them honor and respect more than that they show towards their own parents. Obedience and honoring someone is always accompanied with an attitude – the attitude is called submissive in English, and I explained amply what that entails, with specific examples. Do you have a problem with that, while talking about akhlaq? You seem to be set on a mission to somehow discredit that it is even remotely necessary for wives to be submissive to their husbands in the manner I described. Why is that? This has always been our tradition until this generation. That’s a fact.
The wife of great Tabi’ Said Bin Al Musayyib RH said:
“We did not speak to our husbands except how you would speak to your rulers.” Hilyatul Awliya.
The instances you read from the Seerah are recorded anomalies – breaking of the plate, having a severe disagreement, etc. By no rule of logic whatsoever can you claim that one or two instances effectively dismantle the overall rule and my assertion. How does that even work? Is there no such thing as exceptions? The personality of ‘Aisha RA was itself an exception, let alone her angry reactions. Existence of less than ideal attitudes are often tolerated when dealing with humans, but that toleration is by no means an express approval or condoning of such attitudes and actions. Please learn the difference. We are talking about the latter…. This should be self-evident, but I can’t believe I’m finding myself having to explain that wives breaking plates is not acceptable behavior and is out of character for submissive wives, but can obviously happen sometimes given our humanity. The point to note is that we *can* and *do* act out of character. But those exceptions mean absolutely nothing beyond that.
Nowhere did I or anyone else here ever claim, here or ever, that sticking to bare minimum fiqh is the way to go or push it as recommended actions. Please substantiate these baseless claims or else stop projecting by such huge magnitudes. Your entire tirade is characterized by grandstanding about akhlaq, how many years you studied, with whom you studied, and how you have much better things to do, and going in and out of irrelevant points like sticking to fiqh or aspiring to ideals – a new discussion altogether somehow smuggled in as some sort of response. It is entirely pointless and irrelevant to the whole discussion.
“Will this hadith be valid for a husband who beats his wife to a pulp? You would say yes since it has no conditions according to you. Hasbun Allah. Yes, we must make a lot of dua for fiqh in the Deen that will ease our way to jannah.”
First, I said that so long as the man is doing his basics (different from being great, which you suggested), the wife owes him the honor described in the Hadith.
Second, you need to apologize to me for associating me to condoning beating wives to a pulp and then expecting them to show honor that is just short of a prostration.
You are being highly erratic and emotional. You’re all over the place making insane assumptions and leaps to baseless conclusions. Please desist and settle down. I will not tolerate any more baseless accusations especially about gross violence.
———————-
I stopped responding after my initial long post, I stuck to what I said and unfriended and unfollowed. The problem here is not owning the consequences of one’s words. If you say, this hadith is unconditional, then you must accept the consequences of what that means.
InshaAllah I will go over all the points he made in his response…in my next blog 🙂
Look out for it soon!
Until then…may Allah forgive us our shortcomings and make all our actions only for His Pleasure.
