Mut'a is often referred to as a pleasure marriage and is compared to prostitution. The man pays the woman a dowry and they enjoy each other and then move on. But, in truth, Mut'a probably more often occurs without any sex than it does solely for the purpose of sexual gratification. Mut'a, unlike permanent marriage, may have conditions put on it, including the most common one, which is that no sex shall take place. Thus, its purpose is companionship and getting to know the other person and not just sexual pleasure. Mut'a is different than prostitution in that it is a union before God, and any children resulting will be legitimate. It is in all senses of the word a marriage. Just as in permanent marriage, the woman has a waiting period after the end of the marriage before she can take another spouse. The waiting period serves many purposes including making sure of any paternity, avoiding running into another relationship too soon, and giving the couple time to reconcile. A woman is unlikely to be able to make a living from Mut'a, because she could legally have less than half a dozen partners in a year. In this way, it is clearly unlike prostitution. Payment of a dowry does take place in Mut'a, but it is unlike prostitution because the payment is not for sex, but rather it is identical in purpose to the dowry given in permanent marriage. It is further unlike prostitution because a man is not supposed to marry one with loose morals and, according to Ayatollah Sistani, is forbidden to marry any non-Muslim woman in temporary marriage if he is already married to a Muslim woman. In Sayyid Muhammad Rizvi's book Marriage and Morals in Islam, the temporary and need-only aspects of Mut'a are strongly emphasized:
"I cannot overemphasize the temporary nature of Mut'a. The message of Islam is quite clear: marry on a permanent basis; if that is not possible, then adopt temporary abstinence; if that is not possible, only then use the Mut'a marriage.
The temporary nature of Mut'a can also be seen from the following saying of the Imams: Once 'Ali bin Yaqtin, a prominent Shi'ah who held a high post in Abbasid government, came to Imam 'Ali ar-Riza to ask about Mut'a. The Imam said, "What have you to do with it because Allah has made you free from its need." (Wasa'il, vol. 14, p. 449) He has also said, "It is permitted and absolutely allowed for the one whom Allah has not provided with the means of permanent marriage so that he may be chaste by performing Mut'a. (Wasa'il, vol. 14, p. 449-450)"
Personally, I have known a handful of women involved in temporary marriage, all of whom were converts. The rumors of blatant misuse of the marriage are not to be found with those I have known, but there were problems. I think, in each case these marriages were too long. What I mean is that temporary marriage is supposed to be just that --temporary. But in all cases that I have personal knowledge of, they extended for years, often in a series of repeated temporary marriages. Two-thirds of the time the wife was kept secret from family, friends, and/or community because of the stigma and judgment that would result. Thus, when someone unexpectedly came to the door, the wife had to hide in a back room or closet silently until the guest could be taken care of. The longer the relationship persisted, the more the woman became attached to the man and secretly hoped for permanent marriage, and some resented having to hide if they were one of the ones kept secret. Often the men provided just enough hope of a permanent marriage that the women stuck around, but years passed and no long term commitment was made, no permanent marriage plans arose -- but another temporary marriage was offered. In public, the women frequently had to say they were unmarried because the temporary marriage was unknown. For some, the end result was a happy permanent marriage or a happy parting but that was not always the case. Ultimately, being temporary rather than permanent spouses seemed to these women to indicate a partial rejection by their husbands even if there was no other reason to believe that to be the case. The women just wanted more.
I do not wish to paint the men who choose temporary marriage even for prolonged periods in a bad light. In nearly all cases they are trying to do right and love their wives. Their dilemma often stems from the rejection they find or anticipate from their family and society because of the race or nationality of their spouse, or because they found each other without the traditional arrangement done by the family. Or often, they were initially only able to pursue a temporary marriage and not a permanent one and had to hide their marriage because of the very negative reactions and rejection they would receive from people, especially family, if it were made public. I sympathize with the desire to want both your family and your wife. In the end, these men often have to choose one or the other.
Rightfully, they should not have to choose. People should accept a man's choice in spouse regardless of her race or nationality, especially if she is a pious woman. And people should not allow stigma to exist upon those who find the need for temporary marriage. This stigma has no place on something that was made lawful by God and the Prophet (saw) and even encouraged or mandated when sin is the likely alternative. Mut'a has a place in society and the need for it is not altogether uncommon. It is a gross error to accept fornication and adultery more easily than Mut'a.
People suffer because of the stigmas that others hold. Just as in a monogamous permanent marriage, polygamous and temporary marriages can contain abuse and bad outcomes. It is the abuse that should be stigmatized, and not the marriages themselves. In fact, stigmatizing the marriages causes abuse within them to be more likely because it makes it more likely that the marriages will be done in secret. Therefore, if you are concerned about misuse of the temporary and polygamous marriages, then let them out of the closet and into the realm of the public. One can only remove a stigma through conscious and deliberate effort within oneself. Although past damage cannot be fully repaired, future damage can be prevented if more people, perhaps starting with the reader him/herself, would be active and audible in their support of polygamous and temporary marriage and those individuals who pursue them lawfully.
Just the other day I saw a promo for a TV show called "Battle of the Sexes". It caught my attention because it was filled with images of the Muslim world. Pictures of women wearing black garments that showed only their eyes went along with images of a woman being placed in a chastity belt, which also went along with images of Arab men shooting large guns. The accompanying words lead the viewer to imagine the large guns as phallic symbols. Having been Muslim for a few years now, I was disturbed by these images because they portrayed the relationship between Muslim men and Muslim women very negatively, and in my opinion, very incorrectly. Later, I watched the show to see exactly what it had to say about Islam and the sexes. As it turned out, ninety percent of the show was about the Modern West or Medieval Europe and only a small portion was about the Muslim world, although the promo certainly lead the viewer to expect otherwise.
Why was the promo so skewed? A likely answer is that those stereotype images of Islam are attractive to viewers and thus serve as ratings-boosters. People remember those images and the associations made with them and tend to believe them. Many people who see these images are led to believe they know a lot more about the Muslim world than they do. For example, if Saudi Arabia comes up in discussion, you can find someone who will say, "Oh, I know all about that place and how they hate Americans. Did you know that the women there have to walk ten feet behind the men?" And when you tell them that there is absolutely no truth to that claim, they do not want to believe you because you are not as authoritative as the media is. "No, I am right, I saw it on Nightline or CNN." "I read it in the New York Times."
It is no wonder that so few Americans ever think to pick up a translation of the Qur'an when the religion looks so bad to them. Yet, everyday, more men and women in America choose Islam. These men and women have concluded that the stereotype view of how Islam regards the sexes is inaccurate.
When you picture a Muslim, you are likely to picture an Arab. You may see a long-bearded man with a white robe and a checkered headdress and a woman covered from head to toe in black so that only her eyes, if that, are visible. The prospect of dressing like that is often quite frightening to the convert. Is that what Islam really requires? And if so, why is it required?
To the person investigating Islam, the answer is initially not that easy to find. When a convert reads a translation of Qur'an, he/she finds the verses on dress hard to understand. Further, the convert finds hadith and proponents of those hadith which say a multitude of different things on the subject. Personally, I think a reliable hadith is one in which the Prophet (saw) indicated that women should cover all but their hands and face. And I think the most telling Qur'anic verses are 24:30-31.
"And tell the believing men to lower their gaze and be modest. That is purer for them. Lo! Allah is Aware of what they do. And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands."
It is important that the men are first directed to lower their gaze and be modest. Men have a large responsibility in maintaining proper respect and treatment of women and to prevent wrongdoing. Women have a similar role, but they are further directed to display only certain parts of their bodies. Technically, even Muslim men have certain parts of their bodies they are supposed to cover, but those aren't mentioned in these verses. It is not totally clear to the average reader what part of a woman's adornment is "apparent" but a logical argument could be made that those are the parts that she has reason to uncover. It is logical to have her hands uncovered because she is always using her hands to hold things and carry things. It is possible to argue the same about the face because she uses it to talk, eat and see. But for any other body part there is not much reason that it would need to be uncovered.
The next phrase gives us further indication as to what is "apparent". It tells the women to draw their veils over their chests. So the reader must ask, what is the veil? It is something that begins above the chest area because it would otherwise not make sense to use the word "draw". The word "draw" in that phrase indicates that something beginning at least at her shoulders if not higher is to be closed over the chest so that the chest itself does not show.
If this verse were only requiring that the chest be covered, the mention of a specific garment to cover it is unnecessary because ordinary clothes could be adequate. Since a specific garment is mentioned, we are led to believe that that garment itself covers more than just the chest.
Thus we conclude that the word translated as "veil" means what we typically take the word "veil" to mean: Something which covers the head. Thus, this phrase of the verse is directing the women to take their head covers and make sure their neck and chest area is also covered.
This makes even greater sense when we consider the word "adornment". A woman's adornment clearly would indicate her bosom, but it even more likely indicates her hair. Without a doubt, a woman's hair is one of her greatest adornments. Women take pride and great effort in styling their hair and making it look appealing. This, along with the fact that there is no logical reason why she needs to have her hair uncovered, serves as a great indication that it is part of her adornment to be covered according to this verse.
What about the face? Numerous traditions can be found which indicate the face is to be covered, but numerous can be found to the contrary. Many of the modern scholars do not seem to think it is required, but many also say it is not a bad idea if the woman finds herself in a place where it is customary to do so or if not doing so would cause a hardship to her.
The question is "Why all this covering anyway?" The Bible makes reference to women covering their hair in church or in public and clearly indicates that the veiling is a mark of status for her. In the Bible, women cover as a sign of the male's superiority. But in Islam, this is absolutely not the case. Women cover simply to help ensure that they receive the respectful treatment they deserve and it has nothing to do with superiority or inferiority. Islam considers men and women as equal before God but acknowledges that being equal does not mean being the same. Men and women are different and to ignore those differences is oppressive to women. Although it is not often thought of this way, the modern world is oppressive to women in making them compete in the working world with men by acting just like men and neglecting their differences. Or, by acknowledging the differences, but using them to treat women as decorations and trophies in the workplace instead of equally deserving and capable employees.
Women in Islamic modest dress, (loose clothing that covers all but hand and face in any cultural style), are recognized as pious, business-minded women on sight. When I decided to wear the Islamic modest dress I was very surprised at what I experienced. I found people opening doors for me more than ever before, offering to help me carry parcels, and cleaning up their language around me. I realized that men talked to me differently. I never realized that even "good" guys had been looking at my body while talking to me until I put on the hijab and they suddenly were no longer doing it. They talked to me as if I were more intelligent, too. More importantly, I felt better about myself. I had been very worried about how people would react and I found that instead of being treated worse I was being treated better than before. Up to that point, I did not fully understand the reasons for hijab, but seeing the positive results first hand, I was instantly and utterly convinced that it truly is a good thing and not oppressive at all. I knew I was safer in hijab. If I were to walk down the worst street in New York with a friend wearing a T-shirt and jeans, my friend would be whistled at and harassed, even groped at and called names. But me, I get called "sister", and the men lower their gazes instead of staring, and step out of my way. Many women fret over dressing a little different than their non-Muslim counterparts, but they shouldn't. The negative reactions they anticipate are largely exaggerated and in fact, they will find increased respect from their counterparts when they are practicing as they believe.
A woman may find it unfair that she is asked to cover because some men can't control themselves, but this is analogous to saying that it is unfair that she has to lock her house and car because some thieves can't control themselves. Hijab in practice is not burdensome in my experience, but is rather a remover of burdens.
All Muslim scholars are unanimous that these verses refer to a covering that includes covering of hair. But if you want to find a verse that says "Women must cover the hair" you won't find it, perhaps because the covering of hair was something already in practice among some women so that when the word translated as "veils" was used, the meaning was obvious.
The hadith are more explicit and go into more detail by stating that a woman should cover all but hands and face. And if we look into the hadith referring to the Lady Fatimah (as), the daughter of the Prophet (saw) we find that she also covered all but hands and face, and may have on occasion covered her face also but did not all the time. She is certainly our best example of how to live and dress and act as women in this world.
Other verses in Qur'an about the woman's Islamic modest dress are 24:60 and 33:59.
"Such elderly women as are past the prospect of marriage, there is no blame on them if they lay aside their outer garments, provided they make not a wanton display of their beauty; but it is best for them to be modest and God is One who sees and knows all things."
"O Prophet! Tell thy wives and daughters and the believing women that they should cast their outer garments over their persons when abroad that is convenient that they should be known and as such not molested. And God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful."
So the believing women are being advised to wear an outer covering beyond what they would wear in the home when they go out, and this is the hijab.
Based on 24:60, the covering of those parts mandated to be covered in 24:30-31 is not to be relaxed except in age past possibility of marriage, and then it is still better not to do so.
A very close cousin to the subject of Islamic modest dress is the subject of casual mixing of the sexes. According to Islam, men and women should not interact socially, especially one-on-one. This concept seems very strict and extreme to many in the West. When I grew up, all my best friends were boys and I never had many girl friends. And now I am not supposed to have male friends? That is not entirely true. But interaction with males should be business-like. We've all seen the consequences of unbusiness-like behavior with friends of the opposite sex. Attraction at some level is a common result, and this leads to trouble in marriages. Maybe it will not always cause your spouse to be jealous or result in a fight, but it always does affect how you view your spouse or future mate. You find things in your friends that you like better than the way your spouse is. You imagine yourself with someone other than your spouse, and that is damaging even if you do not take it seriously. "Falling out of love" with your spouse is absolute nonsense. It only happens if you let it happen. Thus, if you have a class or job with members of the opposite sex, fine. You can greet them and participate in the appropriate work-related discussions or small talk but should avoid deep personal conversations.
The issue of mixing at the mosque is one that regularly comes up in the Muslim communities. Some of the men and women want to sit together rather than in different rooms or one in front of the other. In my opinion, if they want to have everyone in the same room with women on one side and men on the other, fine, but then someone should be at the door handing out Islamic dress so that everyone is properly attired. The mosque is a place for worship and not a place for absentmindedly admiring the opposite sex. And it is impossible to say truthfully that you can have men and women together in a place, without concern for proper dress, and not have at least some thoughts about the other sex result. Therefore, let them sit side-by-side if they must, but only if they all put on proper Islamic attire before entering the room. Then, when they leave the mosque, if they take it off and choose to mingle and interact, it is their own responsibility.
I do not see any oppression or unfairness in separating sexes at the mosque. However, I do have a problem with the many mosques that provide substandard facilities for women as if they were an afterthought. This usually results when the facilities are being converted from some previous structure such as a church or home. Women should be able to easily hear what is going on, and it is preferable that they can see, too. I have seen some communities install audiovisual systems so that the prayers and sermons were on speakers that all could hear; and they used closed circuit TV so that the women could also see the speakers. In question-and-answer sessions, properly attired women with questions could enter the back of the men's area so that they could be called on, or another reasonable system could be devised. Too many mosques have horrible or non-existent facilities for women and then wonder why some of their women are not knowledgeable or interested in the religion or are being misguided. Communities like the one I mentioned earlier in which the women couldn't see or hear and many could not understand the language being used are the ones which find their next generations rejecting practice of Islam and moving away.
Most Muslim communities struggle to even have a mosque let alone have good facilities for women, but I maintain that they should not build a mosque that does not serve their women well. Similarly, Muslim communities ideally should provide facilities for both the men and women to participate in community activities such as sports. It is not fair to the Muslim girl in the West who takes swimming lessons and gymnastics lessons every year from when she is three or four to be told on her ninth birthday that she can't do those things anymore. It is like punishing the girl for becoming baligh (Islamically of age to be responsible for dress, prayer, etc.), when instead it should be something she can be happy about. How nice it would be if more Muslim communities that are able should rent or build facilities and hire single-sex staff so that their men and women can enjoy swimming and other sports. Communities could develop single-sex sports leagues along with training for the many who did not have opportunities to learn the sports earlier. I cannot stress enough the need for the Muslim women and Muslim children to be an active part of their community and to have full access to learning and recreation. It is essential to the well being and survival of Islam in the West.
Treating
Women Differently in the Law
The last things I wish to discuss with regard to women in Islam are instances in which women are treated differently in Islamic law. Many of these may seem unfair at first glance but most really are not. Probably all of us have heard stories of women being punished for crimes differently than men or inheriting less and so on. There are cases when women and men alike are not treated fairly according to Islam even in countries with a predominantly Muslim population and whose laws are supposed to be based on Islam. The rest of the Muslim world owes it to the oppressed brothers and sisters and to themselves to combat these injustices when they become known.
Thankfully, most Muslim women do not face such oppression and experience an Islamic society closer to the ideal. All Muslim societies believe in the Holy Qur'an, and thus believe in the verses which talk about women inheriting less than men, not serving as equal witness with men, and being punished by their husbands. The Western reader finds these verses or hears about them and instantly thinks of oppression. But again, those men and women who choose Islam find the matters differently.
In the case of inheritance, it is actually a complex issue and there are cases in which women inherit more than men. As a general rule, the men do inherit more, but only because their financial burden is far greater than women's are. To not give men more would actually be oppressive to them because their duties with their money are more severe. Muslim men are required to financially provide for their wives, children, elderly parents and so on. This is regardless of whether the wife works or not. In addition he must provide his spouse with a marriage dowry. On the other hand, whatever money the wife has she can spend in any way she likes. She could spend it entirely on herself if she wanted and has no duty to spend it on anyone else. In comparison to Judeo-Christian law on inheritance and ownership of women, Islam is extremely generous.
As for women serving as witnesses, again the issue is more complex than it first seems. In some cases when witnesses are needed, either one man or two women is required. But in other cases, only the witness of a single woman will do. Since men are required to work and women are not, cases that involve business are more likely to require two women witnesses. This could be a matter of protection for the women, because in matters of money there is the temptation of coercing the witness. Having two female witnesses helps protect either woman from coercion. Men can be coerced, too, but it is undoubtedly, in most cases, easier for a man to threaten and intimidate a woman than another man. On the other hand, many times only a woman's witness is accepted, as may be the case when giving testimony about female anatomy. Or it may even override a man's testimony, as is the case when a man accuses a woman of lewd behavior and she denies it according to Qur'an 24:6-11.
Islam is a religion designed to serve all people in all times. Thus, many of its laws are built upon what is best for most people. Thus, it does not deny that some women may earn more than their husbands, or that some men may be coerced easier than some women. The laws still apply even in these cases, because applying them in these cases hurts no one. On the other hand, failure to apply the laws for those women who do not earn money or who might be coerced would be harmful.
A third case that is presented as oppressive to women is in 4:34 of the Holy Qur'an:
"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because God 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 their husband's absence what God 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."
This translation, by Yusuf Ali, is more clear than many in getting across that the man is not given free reign to abuse his wife. This verse actually tells a lot about the Islamic family arrangement. Men are duty-bound to protect and maintain their spouses. This duty falls on them because they are generally stronger and more suited to such work. Further, they do not have the circumstances of menstruation, pregnancy, birth, and breast-feeding that many women experience. In return for protection and maintenance, women are not required to bear children or cook or clean. They have not a single duty required of them in return, except two -- and those are simply to obey the husband in all that is reasonable and not contrary to Islam and to guard the husband's property and their own chastity when their husband is not present. That really is not a lot to ask and it is likely that the women have got the better deal.