Part 1

Whenever the topic of women’s rights in Islam was talked about, it seemed that Surah An-Nisa would
always be brought up. I have personally always viewed it as a point of contention. I’ve not been entirely
sure what to make of it, so I always chalked it down to coming down to one’s personal interpretation of
it.
If someone claimed this verse as evidence that men are superior to women, I would respond by saying
that first of all, this would not imply that men are superior to women in any way, nor could this be used
to justify physical abuse against one’s spouse. It would only imply that men are allowed to discipline
their wives in the case of an extreme situation: for example, a severely dysfunctional marriage.
Moreover, I would say that the Prophet’s life is seen as the ideal one we should all aspire towards, and
his life serves as a perfect example of how the teachings of the Quran should be incorporated into one’s
life. I would point out that the Prophet never hit a woman, so any situations in which a husband might
be justified in disciplining his wife would be few and far between.

Part 2
I had always known that Quranic translations often gave way to slightly varying interpretations of certain
ideas, but the readings really made me see just how extensive this can be, and how much care needs to
be taken to not view anything in isolation, but rather within the appropriate contexts. The additional
translations given by Kecia Ali also illustrated the range of perspectives scholars have had on this issue.

Taqi Usmani’s article further served to hammer this point home, as he elaborated on Quranic exegesis in
great detail. I thought it was interesting when he mentioned that the Prophet’s life was a practical tafsir
of Quran. This further strengthens my aforementioned opinion that if the Prophet did not ever raise his
hand towards his wives, ideally, neither should anyone else.

Taqi Usmani (and the Study Quran, as well) also stressed on the linguistic context on the verse, which I
think I had personally not given as much importance to, but which I now realize is equally important to
consider when trying to dissect its meaning.

I really liked the extract from the Study Quran, because the author did not give a conclusion as to what
the meaning of the verse could be, but instead presented a range of opinions on it. I think this would
play a part in my response to the claim as I would advise the person to actually do some in-depth
research on it and educate themselves on several opinions from respected scholars before deciding for
themselves what it could truly mean.

Ayesha S. Chaudhry’s article was probably the best in providing scriptural and historical context to the
verse in question, and it has probably shaped my own interpretation to be that men possess an intrinsic
advantage in the hierarchy of marriage, and that, to an extent, justifies them disciplining their wives.
However, I really strongly agree with the opinions given in the Study Quran; that is, this sort of discipline
has to be used either as a last resort, or preferably not at all. It’s a far cry from the claim that Islam
preaches domestic violence or even the blanket statement that Islam allows men to beat their wives. I
would also reiterate my point that this hierarchal privilege in no way suggests that men are superior to
women. Instead, I would look at this as a distribution of duties or responsibilities between men and
women, with men having the upper hand in this case, but it still does not mean that this privilege can be
abused.

To conclude, I would say the readings really impressed upon me how extensive and detailed the relevant
context can be. In this case, I believe that instead of finding a concrete answer, what’s more important is
to expose yourself to a variety of knowledge and opinions on the subject before formulating your own
personal opinion of it.