The Husbands House, still a controversy? [Archives:2002/33/Focus]

BY DR ABDULRAHMAN BA FADHL
CHAIRMAN OF HUMAN DIALOGUE ASSOCIATION
There has been much talk about the procedure termed the Husbands House and many have talked and brought forward mistaken concepts particularly after it had been approved by the Committee of Islamic Law (Sharia) Codification. Many have ascribed quotes to that committee, which it did not state, and lashed out at it in an unjust campaign without bothering themselves to be certain about reality of the whole issue.
Legally, reasonably and logically, we are unanimous that it is absolutely incorrect to have the woman compelled to live with a man whom she does not want and vice versa a man is not forced to live with a woman who he does not like or want , as is the case now in the West, and Islam has approved that for more than 14 centuries. Although divorce is acknowledged in Islam, one of Prophet Mohammeds sayings is that , The divorce is the most detested to God., an indication how divorce is hated. The West had used to launch an unjust campaign on Islam for permitting divorce. But finally they followed suit of the Islamic Law and approved and acknowledged divorce in the West.
In Islam, both man and woman can exercise the right to divorce on the same footing because Islam adopts justice regarding entertaining rights by both men and women. Islam does not approve of forcing a woman to live with a man she does not want, nor does it accept forcing a man to live with a woman he does not like and is not in harmony with. The right of divorce is in hand of the husband, while seeking divorce on part of the woman Khul is in hand of woman. IN the latter form of divorce, the wife, seeking divorce, offers giving the divorced husband certain compensation or returning the dowry which he had given her.
The husband can announce the divorce decision even by pronounced words and thus becomes responsible and accountable for all consequences ensued upon that decision. He has thus to provide for expenses of feeding and lodging of his children and their divorced mother. He has no right whatsoever to take back anything he had given to the wife according to their marriage contract because all that belongs to her. To the opposite effect, when the wife declares her intention to divorce the husband before the Qadhi (Judge), she would have to give back to the divorced husband all the dowry she had received upon concluding the marriage.
Unfortunately, granting the right to divorce in the West through courts and lawyers can take ten-year time and may not get an act of divorce. She would spend very large amounts of money in order to get divorced. Also, she cannot marry again until procedure of divorce is terminated.
As regards the issue of Husbands House, the
Committee of Islamic Law Codification at the parliament, has proceeded from the principle of no coercion in religion in dealing with the question of the Husbands house and thus it perceived that coercion should not be applied to forcing a woman or a man to live with her/his spouse as long as she/he does not like. The legislation approved by the committee was for the interest of woman in particular.
In Yemen, and in most Islamic countries as well as in the West, parents of the wife and husband are used to intervene in their daughters affairs, sometimes by giving advice and at other times by giving orders, particularly when misunderstanding takes place with her husband, or when their relationship is strained. The Husbands House is in the hand of the court where the judge discusses it with the wife separately to be sure of her will and what exactly she wants. If the judge comes to know that the wife wants to live with her husband but her parents do not want that, he would interfere with the Husbands House arrangement and give his orders to her to go back to her husband. The decision is announced in presence of parents to maintain good relationship between both the wife and her husband and the parents. If the judge gets certain that the wife does not want to go back to live with her husband, he would not rule by ordering her to the Husbands House even though her parents wanted that. The West is still lagging behind in this regard as it does not grant the woman the right to divorce. In the West a woman has no right to get the same wages as man even if she has the same qualifications and experience, whereas in Yemen and other developing countries women get the same salary for the same job as men do. A woman, after her marriage, has not the right to keep her name but should carry her husbands name. she would then be unable to make transactions in her name as everything is in the name of her husband. If she is re-married she has to change her identity card and passport to the name of the new husband. Woman in Islam maintains her fathers name till death.
Western woman is deprived of heritage if she has a brother at any age. Western rights that Bush brags of and carries to the UN that a woman can marry another woman, to go naked to sea beaches or the right to free sex, are in fact against womens rights. They lead to exploitation and humiliation of women. The only argument the West repeats against Islam is that it allows polygamy, but speaker of the Belgian parliament put an end to that when he visited Yemen by saying that polygamy exists all over the world. The only difference is whether it is official or non-official.

——
[archive-e:33-v:2002-y:2002-d:2002-08-12-p:./2002/iss33/focus.htm]