Ayesha Chaudhry

We present readings, by Jewish, Christian and Muslim women scholars, of `difficult' texts from three scriptural traditions, viz. Ephesians 5.21-33, Sura' 4.32-35 and Genesis 30.1-26. All three texts concern marriage and point in different ways to the erasure of women's significance or agency, and we ask what happens when women read such texts as scripture. Our readings were developed in conversation with one another, following the developing practice of `Scriptural Reasoning', and they suggest ways in which the texts and their feminist readers can `correct' and challenge each other. We propose that feminist biblical hermeneutics and inter-traditional scriptural reasoning can be mutually informative, with both practices seeking to take embodied difference seriously and to allow unresolved critical questions to arise in reading.

CONTEMPORARY MUSLIM SCHOLARS WHO SEEK TO RECONCILE GENDER egalitarian values with the premodern patriarchal Islamic tradition face a dilemma. Because the two values—gender egalitarianism and patriarchy—are fundamentally at odds with each other, scholars must choose one to privilege over the other. If the premodern Islamic tradition is privileged, then the ideal of gender egalitarianism is compromised. However, favoring gender egalitarian values at the expense of the premodern Islamic tradition leads to the loss of authority within the believing community. This essay explores the options available to Muslim scholars as they negotiate the egalitarian—authoritative dilemma in the context of the Qur'anic exegesis of the husbandly privilege to discipline wives in Qur'an 4:34.

ABSTRACT Chapter 4, verse 34 of the Qur'an permits husbands to physically discipline recalcitrant wives. Modern Muslims who find this husbandly privilege discomfiting often rely on Muhammad's prophetic practice to mitigate the meaning of this verse. In light of Muhammad's example of never hitting his own wives, as found in one prophetic report, they reinterpret the verse as restricting and/or voiding a husband's right to physically discipline his wife. This essay provides a critical and expository survey of prophetic reports related to the husbandly privilege to physically discipline wives. The essay argues that the modernists are correct in positing that Muhammad's prophetic practice was to morally censure husbands who hit their wives. However, taken as a whole, it is impossible to ignore that Muhammad's example also unilaterally upheld physical discipline as a husband's marital right.