Most everyone who reads the Qur’an for the first time is bewildered, struck by its opaqueness. The stories of biblical and other characters are told in truncated form, as if the narrator expected that his listeners already knew the full stories and simply needed to be reminded of some important details. Likewise, many of Allah’s commands through Muhammad are difficult to understand without knowing the context in which they were delivered. These contexts are missing from the Qur’an, and must be supplied by later Islamic traditions.

Consequently, it’s not surprising that non-Muslims find the Qur’an befuddling. What is more surprising is that most Muslims find it baffling as well, and as a result rely on specially trained Qur’anic scholars to explain to them the contexts and meanings of Qur’anic texts. Over the centuries various interpretive “sciences” have developed around the study of the Qur’an. One of these is known as asbab al-nuzul (“the occasions of the revelation,” literally). Searching the Hadith (reports of Muhammad’s words and actions in particular, recorded situations) and the earliest biographical compositions (all done by Muslims), scholars connect specific revelations in the Qur’an with historical settings (occasions) in Muhammad’s life which elucidate the reason(s) Allah sent down that particular revelation at that particular time.

It is important that you know this in order to understand the Muslim mindset behind the 34th verse in Surat al-Nisaa (the 4th chapter of the Qur’an), which reads: “Men are in charge of women.” Why did Allah reveal this “truth” to Muhammad? The earliest and most respected scholar (who helped launch the “science” of asbab al-nuzul), Alī ibn Ahmad al-Wāhidī, in his authoritative work lists the “occasion” behind the revealing of this verse. I quote it below, but you can see read a .pdf of the whole book in translation here:

(Men are in charge of women…) [4:34]. Said Muqatil: “This verse (Men are in charge of women…) was revealed about Sa‘d ibn al-Rabi‘, who was one of the leaders of the Helpers (nuqaba’), and his wife Habibah bint Zayd ibn Abi Zuhayr, both of whom from the Helpers [Muslims of Medina]. It happened Sa‘d hit his wife on the face because she rebelled against him. Then her father went with her to see the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace. He said to him: ‘I gave him my daughter in marriage and he slapped her’. The Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, said: ‘Let her have retaliation against her husband’. As she was leaving with her father to execute retaliation, the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, called them and said: ‘Come back; Gabriel has come to me’, and Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse. The Messenger of Allah, Allah bless him and give him peace, said: ‘We wanted something while Allah wanted something else, and that which Allah wants is good’. Retaliation was then suspended.” …

[Another report cam through] Yunus ibn al-Hasan who reported that a man slapped his wife and she complained about him to the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace. Her family who went with her said: “O Messenger of Allah! So-and-so has slapped our girl.” The Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, kept saying: “Retaliation! Retaliation! And there is no other judgement to be held.” But then this verse (Men are in charge of women…) was revealed and the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, said: “We wanted something and Allah wanted something else.” …

[A third report came through] al-Hasan who said: “Around the time when the verse on retaliation was revealed amongst the Muslims, a man had slapped his wife. She went to the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace and said: ‘My husband has slapped me and I want retaliation’. So he said: ‘Let there be retaliation’. As he was still dealing with her, Allah, exalted is He, revealed (Men are in charge of women,

because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other…). Upon which the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace, said: ‘We wanted something and my Lord wanted something different. O man, take your wife by the hand.’“

(Emphases above are mine.)

Many Muslim apologists, when seeking to defend this verse from the charge of male chauvinist sexism, often argue that this text actually honors women because Allah is commanding the man to be the protector of the woman — he has the responsibility to care for her because “Allah has made the one [i.e., the man] to excel the other [i.e., the woman].

However, when we turn to the occasions of the revelation of this passage found in orthodox Muslim sources, we learn something different. This revelation comes on the heels of a previous revelation where Allah teaches Muhammad and his followers the law of retaliation (known as lex talionis in the Judeo-Christian tradition). That text is found in 5:45 — “And We ordained therein for them: Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth and wounds equal for equal. But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it shall be for him an expiation. And whosoever does not judge by that which Allah has revealed, such are the Zalimun (polytheists and wrongdoers)….”

When this physically accosted wife goes with her parents to seek justice from Muhammad, he quickly responds with the judgment, “Let her have retaliation against her husband,” or even more vehemently, “Retaliation, retaliation!” Muhammad is fully prepared to see equal justice meted out, whether the guilty party is a man or a woman. Retaliation is the overarching law of Islam.

Allah, on the other hand, even though he commanded the law of retaliation, is about to reveal to Muhammad that the ground is not level between males and females when it comes to retaliation. In this case, when rebelled against her husband (we’re not told exactly what this entailed, except by implication that she refused the will of her husband), he responded by slapping her face. Muhammad wishes to apply the law of retaliation when asked, in accordance with the prior revelation Allah had given. Now, however, after he gives his verdict, Allah overrides his decision with a new revelation. When it comes to male-female relations (husband-wife, father-daughter, brother-sister), the law of retaliation does not apply because Allah has made the male superior to the female. He is in charge of her; i.e., she must submit to him, and if he punishes her for “rebellion,” she must bear that punishment quietly. So Muhammad is forced to correct his initial ruling, and to tell the woman and her parents that the husband is blameless in this act of domestic violence. In fact, he speaks to the husband and says, “O man, take your wife by the hand.” In other words, “Take your property and go; Allah has absolved you of any guilt.”

The correctness of this interpretation is bolstered by what follows in the text of 4:34 —

So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded [i.e., their private parts, which of course belong to their husbands]. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge [beat] them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.

Men are in charge of women, so good/virtuous women will obey their husbands in all things. Allah makes clear that if husbands fear rebellion or insolence from their wives (whether or not that fear is justified), they are to first warn the wives of impending punishment, next to banish them from the bedroom (our equivalent to being sent to the doghouse), and if that doesn’t bring them around, then to scourge or beat them, until they submit. If at some point in this escalating punishment, the wives submit and obey, then the husband is to relent and allow things to return to normalcy.

It is not surprising then to see in the Western media increasing accounts of attacks perpetrated on Muslim women by Muslim men when those women seek to exercise personal freedoms accorded to them by Western culture and law. For example:

In March of this year a Swedish court, applying Islamic law, acquitted an Iraqi Muslim man of spousal abuse involving pushing his wife against furniture, pulling her hair and beating her face with a shoe. Part of the rationale was that the man was from a respectable family while the woman was not, so that her testimony was not believable.

Also this March in Germany, a 41 year old Syrian refugee named Abu Marwan fatally stabbed his 37-year-old wife multiple times in the neck. Soon after the murder, he livestreamed a message on his Facebook page as a warning to all women who irritate their husbands, declaring, “This is how you’ll end.”

a 41 year old Syrian refugee named Abu Marwan fatally stabbed his 37-year-old wife multiple times in the neck. Soon after the murder, he livestreamed a message on his Facebook page as a warning to all women who irritate their husbands, declaring, “This is how you’ll end.” On April 2nd of this year, Abdul Rahman Sweidan, a 47-year-old Syrian refugee now living in Kennewick, WA, appeared in court for the attempted murder of his wife last August. He stabbed his wife 23 times for threatening to leave or divorce him, exclaiming as her body still moved, “Aren’t you dead yet?” Fortunately, she survived. Prosecutors plan to highlight “…pattern of power and control that [the husband] exercises over the victim.”

He stabbed his wife 23 times for threatening to leave or divorce him, exclaiming as her body still moved, “Aren’t you dead yet?” Fortunately, she survived. Prosecutors plan to highlight “…pattern of power and control that [the husband] exercises over the victim.” Mohamad Rafia was convicted in Canadian court last June of beating his wife for half an hour with a hockey stick, pulling her hair, hitting her in the face and threatening to kill her. In his defense, he said that he didn’t know it was illegal in Canada to do such things. The official police statement read, “Being assaulted by her spouse is culturally accepted (in) the country they are from.” How revealing! So apparently it was the fault of Canadian immigration officials for not explaining basic human rights to a Muslim man schooled in the male supremacism of the Qur’an.

As bad as these mounting spousal crimes are among Muslims immigrating to the West (and I could list dozens more incidents from the recent past), such domestic violence is not limited to husbands against wives. The same attitude appears in Muslim men who feel they have the right to the attention of their intended affections. So, for example:

Last week in Gujrat, Pakistan, three female university students were injured in a drive-by acid attack, ordered by the uncle of one of the girls — she had refused his “offer” of marriage. The other two victims were just collateral damage.

In Calgary, 22 year old Nadia el-Dib was murdered on March 25th by her ex-boyfriend, Abderrahmane Bettahar. They were out together at a shisha bar where he was apparently trying unsuccessfully to restore their romance, and left at 3 AM. After arguing over Bettahar’s refusal to drive her back to her own car, Bettahar drove behind a house in a residential district and then proceeded to stab Nadia over 40 times, slit her throat and then shoot her twice when she escaped from the car. According to Nadia’s sister, Racha, “[he] believed he had the right to murder her because she exercised her right of taking ownership of her life, body and soul, by saying no to a man who was persistent on being with her….My sister Nadia made it clear she would not give herself to him in any way….We know that because she fought until her last breath to get away.”

Now, of course, such violence and male privilege do not characterize all Muslim men by any means. But the doctrine of male superiority over women and of the approved use of violence when women refuse to obey their “protectors” is undeniably anchored in the Qur’an, Allah’s inimitable revelation, which must not be disobeyed by true followers.

So while we non-Muslims in the West decry all domestic violence against women, we increasingly recognize the need to fight against an encroaching god who orders and enshrines it among his people, according to Sura 4:34. Oddly, we may find ourselves quoting Muhammad’s words, “We wanted something while Allah wanted something else.”

However, Muhammad went on to say, “And that which Allah wants is good.” May we not make that same mistake in judgment.

As calls for the implementation of Shari’a law increase in Western countries, let us remember that to allow Shari’a is to allow domestic violence against women, based upon Allah’s claim that “men are in charge of women.” May the true God protect us from such immorality justified in the name of religion.