Susanne, I blame you. I was just goofing around, and then a post of yours made me *think*.
Stop that!
Right, so...
I was looking up the passage I remembered about men being 'eunuchs' for God, and I try to remember to pull up the entire passage, not just the one verse, to get the context for what's being said. So, I pulled up Matthew 19:1-12 :
1When Jesus had finished these words, He departed from Galilee and came into the region of Judea beyond the Jordan; 2 and large crowds followed Him, and He healed them there. 3 Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?" 4 And He answered and said, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, 5 and said, 'FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH'? 6 "So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." 7 They said to Him, "Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY?" 8 He said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. 9 "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery." 10 The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." 11 But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. 12 "For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother's womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."
I bolded the relevant passage to my thought. So, I'd long thought that this verse was saying, 'If this is the way marriage works, it's better to *not* get married.' Buncha bachelors, saying, 'see! women are *trouble*!' Or the ancient equivalent thereof.
However, the thought occurred to me: What if, what if what they're saying is, if you're in a marriage LIKE THAT, that it'd have been better to never marry at all? Or, if a man divorces his wife because...oh...she's a redhead and he prefers blondes...that it's better to not remarry, as opposed to committing adultery, which is what Jesus just told them would be what's happening.
Any thoughts? Am I the last one to notice this, again? (Cause it's totally happened before...) Or am I reading the 'wrong' tone into the disciples?
That's happened before, too. For instance, when this hadith was pointed out, (for some argument I don't even recall at this point, or even what I was *supposed* to get out of this hadith being brought up) my thought was, 'Even Aisha thinks Allah's revelations to Mohammed are suspiciously timed. She's being *sarcastic* about it, and no one noticed...' but I was told I was reading too much of what *I'd* be doing, and not the 'real' reasoning. Which, again, I've forgotten what I was told that was...
Bukhari - Volume 6, Book 60, Number 311:
Narrated Aisha:
I used to look down upon those ladies who had given themselves to Allah's Apostle and I used to say, "Can a lady give herself (to a man)?" But when Allah revealed: "You (O Muhammad) can postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them (your wives), and you may receive any of them whom you will; and there is no blame on you if you invite one whose turn you have set aside (temporarily).' (33.51) I said (to the Prophet), "I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires."
Interesting thoughts. Your interpretation concurs with Islamic thought in that a man is not allowed to divorce his wife simply because he'd like to marry another one who may be prettier or younger etc.
ReplyDeleteI noticed that you drew in a couple of hadiths from Aisha. Shi'ites consider her a hypocrite and we do not accept any hadith from her as valid because of the over-abundance of hadith from herself that attest to the petty flaws in her character. Meaning hadith from herself are not trustworthy.
However, we know her hadith fairly well, because we must, in order to have intelligent discussions with Sunnis. Hope you don't mind me sharing my views on that?
Ha, ha! This made me laugh because I *just* finished telling you to please post something on your blog or write in my comments if you find out anything. And, what do you know, I come to visit your new post and see my name first thing! :-P
ReplyDeleteAh, but I like it when you think. Then you post good stuff and I learn!
Hmmm, I've heard before that Jewish men were able to *easily* divorce their wives. Like she burned the food, she was gone. So maybe the disciples hearing Jesus tell these things to the Pharisees were amazed and just reacting like anybody when their previously-held views were strongly challenged. I mean to go from I can divorce my wife if she's not a good cook to anyone who divorces his wife for ANY reason other than sexual immorality -- maybe the disciples thought, "Wow, this is a tough stance! It means we have to really make our marriages work." (which I think is a great attitude because marriage *is* work some days)
Oh, I answered before I read all of what you said and I think this that you said:
"Or, if a man divorces his wife because...oh...she's a redhead and he prefers blondes...that it's better to not remarry, as opposed to committing adultery, which is what Jesus just told them would be what's happening."
makes a lot of sense. Instead of committing adultery which was a HUGE sin, the disciples are saying, "Well, it's better not to remarry then" and I *totally* agree with that. Men don't need to ditch one wife for another one for stupid reasons like hair color.
I enjoyed your thoughts on Aisha. You need to put this post in my comments so Suroor can come over here and see what you've written. Enjoyed this. :)
*faking a bad Southern accent*
ReplyDeletewell, I tell ya'll, Suroor is here fa ya'll!
OK, enough. As soon as I left Susanne's blog I posted this passage on mine because this was the initial reason I fell in love with Jesus :)
Amber, I always understood the particular verse as you have understood it now :) I think I understand them differently because I don't come from a Christian background and don't have the solid knowledge about it like "ya'll." I first try to understand a verse and then read the commentary so I have time to form opinions on it for myself.
I think you are right. I do know that from the time of Moses until a few hundred years ago, castration was the best way to keep away from fornication. I *think* in this verse Jesus' disciples are actually saying:
"Well Rabbi, we are used to marrying frequently and if we can't do that it would be so hard so its better we castrate ourselves to keep away from fornicating/adultery." And so Jesus explains how and when castration is not a sin and that it is "not as easy done as said."
What do you think?
I think you posted that hadith to show how in Islam it is easier to divorce a wife like in Moses time? Well, according to the verse it does seem that the Quran is allowing Muhammad to divorce whenever and whomever he likes. But it should also be remembered that the rights Muhammad had, no other Muslim man had. There is a reference to one of his wives - Sauda - who was a rather big woman and very old and Muhammad was going to divorce her for this reason but she gave up her conjugal rights to Aisha so he kept her but didn't sleep with her after that. So if you compare it to this passage from Matthew, it is a lot different and more complex in Islam.
I think in Christianity one must really think hard before marriage so that a woman does not have to become so dispensable.
Suroor, LOL @ your fake southern accent! Not half bad for a lady who grew up in London. ;-) By the way, my Arab friend, Samer, loves my accent. He wanted me to teach him how to talk the southern way, but I think southern accents on Syrians sound *so* wrong! Ha, ha!
ReplyDeleteI'm wondering how many hours you are ahead of us? It must be awfully early in the morning where you are.
Anyway!
I liked reading your "take" on this passage. It's great getting the perspective of one who grew up in a different faith and really a different culture altogether. So interesting.
"who was a rather big woman and very old and Muhammad was going to divorce her for this reason"
That's so sad. :-( :-( :-( Honestly I find that not admirable about Muhammad at all. I think it sets a terrible precedent for Muslim men teaching them if your wife is big and/or old, you can divorce them. As if men only improve with age. *sigh!*
"I think in Christianity one must really think hard before marriage so that a woman does not have to become so dispensable."
And is that a good or bad thing? I think people often marry for those gushy romantic feelings thinking their passion will never die because they *feel* so good with their lover. Then once those feelings die and the passion cools they realize they want to move on to someone else who makes their hearts race and leaves them breathless.
But that's why I think marriage should be based on more than *feelings.* I see if we apply Jesus' teachings of loving and serving others our marriages will be strong. If the husband is doing his best to love his wife and serve her and meet her needs and likewise the wife is doing all this for her husband, how can you now have a successful marriage?
Unfortunately, we often live by those feelings and when they leave and things get tough, it's easy to say, "Ya know, I think we both would be happier if we found someone else" and thus the marriage ends.
Now y'all, I am going to bed. It's nearly 11 PM where I live. Good night. :)
Here is the Quranic verse I mentioned:
ReplyDelete033.052
YUSUFALI: It is not lawful for thee (to marry more) women after this, nor to change them for (other) wives, even though their beauty attract thee...
Yea, I wake up early, say my prayers, run for 30 min and check out blogs before going to work :) I wrote that comment at 6.30 AM.
ReplyDeleteIt did hurt me about Sauda. And you really have to look for Islamic sources to find it. I had first read it on a missionary site then looked for Islamic perspective on it and there have been some articles written on it but they explain that Muhammad didn’t divorce her and out of compassion kept him as his wife. Apparently Sauda pleaded him to let her stay as his wife so she would be raised as a “Mother of the Believers.” Plus, she was old and wouldn’t have found another husband so easily. If you look at it that way then there was compassion involved from Muhammad’s side, but then I also understand the argument that shouldn’t that have come naturally from a prophet rather than Sauda asking for it?
I think it is a good thing to think before you get married.
Hajar, this verse is very important. Thank you for sharing it.
The verse has a long history. Apparently, the wives of Muhammad had a row with him (some say he was found with Mary the Copt in Hafsa’s bed on her day (Ibn Sa'd maintains this in the Arabic commentary) and asked Hafsa not to tell anyone he was with slave in her bed but she told Aisha; others claim he spent more time with Zainab who fed him honey he liked which upset Hafsa and Aisha and they tricked him by saying his mouth stank from eating honey so he swore – either that he would never sleep with Mary again; or that he would never touch honey again). Then the first verse of Sura 66 absolved Muhammad of his oath and staying away from what was made halal to him - “Prophet, why do you prohibit that which God has made lawful for you, in seeking to please your wives? God is forgiving and merciful. God has given you absolution from such oaths.”
If you read the complete chapter it is quite evident the matter was much more serious than eating honey to have made it into the Quran (http://www.al-kitab.org/al-kitab/quran/SURAH066.htm). Muhammad then gave his wives the choice to leave him if they wanted, but of course no one left.
He kept away from them for a month. When no one wanted a divorce from him it pleased him a lot and that is when after a month he went to see Aisha first. That is when he recited this verse to Aisha to tell him how pleased Allah is with their decision to stay with him:
033.052
YUSUFALI: It is not lawful for thee (to marry more) women after this, nor to change them for (other) wives, even though their beauty attract thee...
(Reference to evidence: http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=33&tid=42015)
But historical facts prove that Muhammad in fact married at least two more times after this verse – note that the verse still allowed him slave women; the ban was only on free women as the link above explains. Some claim that this verse was replaced by the permission to marry again but that replacement verse is nowhere to be found in the Quran. He had a wife with whom he could not consummate a marriage as he died and there was one more who sought refuge from him upon Aisha’s instigation so he divorced her before consummation of the marriage.
So what was I saying. Yea, IMHO I don’t think this verse can be compared to the passage from Mathew since polygamy is allowed in Islam and this verse was not even addressing Muslim men in general.
Phew!
Hajar,
ReplyDeleteBut that does, in fact, happen, doesn't it? I sort of recall hearing about men who 'upgrade' in Muslim countries. Not saying that's Islamic, but that it does happen. Of course it happens other places too... Of course, no matter where it happens, it's not right.
Hmmm...interesting. I did not know that. She's such a beloved figure in Sunni Islam, I never really thought she wouldn't be the same across the board.
And please, always feel free to share your views. It's how I learn. :)
Susanne,
ReplyDeleteI anticipated your command! ;)
'Ah, but I like it when you think. Then you post good stuff and I learn!'
Oh, I like to think too, but I was *trying* to goof around. ;p
I think it was a part of the equality theme that Jesus was teaching. Men and women are of equal value, unlike the attitude that prevailed back then, where men were worth more, and the women were basically property. Jesus was teaching that the men *owed* their wives respect. Which would have been a hard pill to swallow, back then. And now, for some men. :(
Achelois,
ReplyDeleteWell, sugah, yuh've come to the rhight place fuh Suthun ahcents. :)
It is an exceptionally excellent passage, isn't it?
I sometimes think I come to Christianity and the Bible and a disadvantage, because I have 'preprogramed' conceptions of what it all means that I (sometimes) don't even realize I have. It's interesting, when I run up on one of those issues and have to sort out what makes sense. :)
'I think you are right. I do know that from the time of Moses until a few hundred years ago, castration was the best way to keep away from fornication. I *think* in this verse Jesus' disciples are actually saying:
"Well Rabbi, we are used to marrying frequently and if we can't do that it would be so hard so its better we castrate ourselves to keep away from fornicating/adultery." And so Jesus explains how and when castration is not a sin and that it is "not as easy done as said."'
Hmm...a distinct possibility. The admission that, if their behavior is a sin (the divorce and remarriage at the drop of a hat), then keeping themselves from that sin is too hard, so it'd be better if they just made it impossible to commit.
I do understand that Mohammed had special privileges, but can't a man, in Islam, divorce his wife just by saying 'I divorce you' three times? I'm not aware of any restrictions on the reasons for him wanting a divorce, just that he can basically turn around and divorce. But I don't pretend to know a great deal about Islam, this is just what I've been taught by Muslims I talk to on the internet.
See, in the story about Sauda, Mohammed was going to divorce her because he didn't want to sleep with her anymore, and only kept her because she gave up her rights, so he didn't have to ever deal with her again. But he could have done it - and since Muslims look to Mohammed as the perfect example...men think that they can do that too.
'I think in Christianity one must really think hard before marriage so that a woman does not have to become so dispensable.'
In Christianity it's never meant to be like that. Neither party in the marriage is supposed to be disposable - we're meant to make choices on who we marry with the understanding that it is until death, and be cautious about it that way, and so to work through issues, rather than throw up our hands and say, 'oh, it's not working. I'm leaving.'
Not that it always works that way, I know, but that's how I think it's *meant* to be.
I was in the company of half a dozen Catholics yesterday and we were talking about the same thing. It is actually very easy to divorce in Islam. Of course there are laws in place to explain the reasons for divorce but it is quite simple in practice.
ReplyDelete"In Christianity it's never meant to be like that. Neither party in the marriage is supposed to be disposable"
That is what I like so much about Christianity.