In a time when we are observing the international campaign “16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence” and addressing femicide as one of the gravest forms of violence, even religious communities are joining in appeals against domestic violence. However, some religious authorities and influencers have made statements in the media suggesting that a Muslim man can beat his wife, but only after exhausting other methods to persuade her to obey him.
One such figure is Elvedin Pezić, a representative of the Wahhabi strain of Islam, known for its rigid and literal interpretations of the faith. Pezić has hundreds of thousands of followers, and unfortunately, a large number of people trust him. Like many other preachers, Pezić effectively uses social media to fill the void left by the Islamic community with simple, clearly articulated messages that resonate with many. His messages often provide straightforward recipes for a “successful” marriage, built on a foundation of the woman’s obedience to the man. There is no apologetics, no complex reasoning or excessive argumentation—just a simple, time-tested formula: the man is the head of the household, and the wife and children owe him obedience. When this hierarchy is in place, everything supposedly works smoothly—harmony reigns, and everyone is content, including God, who allegedly decreed that women should be subordinate to men.
Pezić frequently states on social media that violence against women should generally be avoided, but in his video lectures, he references a Quranic verse:
“And as for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them, then refuse to share their beds, and finally, strike them. But if they obey you, do not act unjustly towards them…” (Quran 4:34).
His interpretation of this verse is that a man must follow a three-step process for “educational” purposes: first, advise the woman; second, separate from her in bed, depriving her of intimacy; and only then, if necessary, strike her—but not in the face, so as not to leave marks.
A reasonable person would be shocked by this interpretation, which reflects a patriarchal view and provides men with instructions on how to “discipline” women. Believers may wonder how it is possible that a God who is Merciful and Compassionate, and who rewards and punishes each individual according to their deeds, could grant such control to men over women. How can one believe in a God who seems to value women less than men, decreeing that they must be obedient to men and placing men in control of their lives?
Unfortunately, many Muslims believe that this verse should be translated, understood, and applied literally. While some imams give sermons and lectures on the incompatibility of violence against women and children with the principles of Islamic justice and mercy, many still support the notion that a woman must be obedient to her husband, and that physical discipline is justified if she resists.
One example comes from Hafiz Senaida Zajimović, who asserts: “The husband is the head and master of the household and family—due to his natural abilities and his responsibility to provide for the family. He has the right to demand obedience and cooperation from his wife. Thus, she is not permitted to rebel against his authority, as this would cause discord. Without a captain, the ship of the household will flounder and sink.”
Zajimović goes on to explain that a wife’s disobedience gives a husband the right to discipline her. First, he should advise her; then, he may separate from her in bed; and finally, he may strike her—but, according to his understanding, not in a fit of anger. Though it is not explicitly stated in the Quran, he insists that discipline must be carried out calmly and without emotional outbursts.
However, if we know anything about human emotions and relationships, it is clear that most people react impulsively, especially in anger, and that violence is often committed in moments of emotional distress. It is rare to find individuals who can cool down, reflect, and then rationally decide to administer a “light” beating, purely as a warning. It is as though we are speaking of idealized beings who can always control their emotions and act justly. Given how few people possess such restraint, laws and sanctions exist to prevent individuals from taking justice into their own hands.
Moreover, who can seriously believe that a relationship between spouses can be improved through force or violence? One can be forced to comply or endure suffering, but such relationships are built on fear and manipulation, not respect.
Zajimović further explains: “Hitting a woman in the face is forbidden, as it insults her human dignity and endangers the most beautiful part of her body. However, one should not resort to using a whip or any other instrument that would cause pain or injury.”
It remains unclear on what basis this interpretation is derived, as it is not explicitly stated in the Quranic text. It is likely drawn from classical commentators who sought to limit the use of physical force. Some scholars, in an effort to soften the interpretation of Quran 4:34, have suggested varying degrees of the permissible “strike,” ranging from the use of a miswak (toothbrush) to a light blow that does not cause significant physical pain or injury.
Instead of prescribing the acceptable level of force, it might be more productive for scholars to re-examine the translation and interpretation of this text, leaving less room for misuse. Progressive Islamic scholars have proposed alternative translations and interpretations of this Quranic verse, offering more enlightened perspectives on the treatment of women. Here are a few examples:
| The author | Egalitarian translations of the Qur’an , 4.34 | Traditional translations of the Qur’an , 4.34 |
| Imam Ragib | And if you are afraid that women will feel aversion ( nushuz ) towards you, try to win them over by talking, then ( darabe ) leave them alone in bed (without doing violence to them), and then ( darabe ) go to bed with them (when they are ready). | “And those whose disobedience ( nushuz ) you fear, you advise, and then separate from them in bed, and then ( daraba ) strike them ; and when they become obedient to you, then do not wrong them!…” |
| Amina Wadud | … and then set an example or be an example | |
| Abu Sulayman | … and then separate or leave her | |
| Lale Bakhtiar | Get away from them |
Mainstream scholars not only find it unhelpful to engage with this text and offer new interpretations, but some also use certain hadiths (sayings attributed to the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him) to further cement their patriarchal understanding of gender relations. For example, the hadith: “If I were to order someone to prostrate before another, I would order a woman to prostrate before her husband,” is still cited in textbooks, taught in madrasahs, and repeated by some imams during Sharia weddings.
This past summer at the Emperor’s Mosque in Sarajevo, Hafiz Išerić began a wedding ceremony with this very hadith, as if there were no others to choose from, such as the following:
- “The most complete believer is the one with the best character, and the best among you are those who are best to their wives.”
- “Never be violent to women.”
Why do some imams continue to emphasize obedience rather than partnership and mutual cooperation? The Qur’an provides a platform for egalitarian action:
“Believing men and believing women are allies of one another. They enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong, and they establish prayer and give zakat, and they obey Allah and His Messenger. It is they upon whom Allah will have mercy. Indeed, Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.” (9:71)
Such texts do not serve the interests of the ruling elites who produce and control religious knowledge. It is more convenient for them to promote hierarchical and complementary relationships than to introduce egalitarian and partnership-based ones.
There are many reasons for this, among which are the following: outdated interpretations of the Qur’an; men’s unwillingness to seriously address issues that need to be resolved in light of modern times and civilizational progress; and women’s reluctance to demand partnership and fairness, instead continuing to uphold traditional lessons on family, marriage, and child-rearing.
While there are beautiful aspects of tradition, such as respect for women and the elderly and care for others, the tradition also includes the control of women and their sexuality, the exploitation of their capacities, all explained as a means to achieve God’s pleasure. It also involves enduring violence and injustice, and the inability to fully express one’s talents and abilities because a woman’s traditional role has been confined to raising children, serving her husband, and providing logistical support (washing, cooking, cleaning, etc.) for the welfare of the family.
Such traditions, which burden marital and familial relationships, must be reevaluated, and new ones established that emphasize the dignity of both men and women. These should promote a partnership where each person is free to reach their full potential without coercion, fear, or hiding behind religion.
It is also essential to reform current views on women and eliminate discriminatory practices of obedience, just as slavery, concubinage, and other practices mentioned in the Qur’an have been abolished and are no longer practiced by Muslims.
Muslims were willing to abandon many discriminatory practices, yet they remain unwilling to relinquish patriarchy, defending it by threatening women with the idea that disobedience will bar them from entering paradise. How pitiful it is for men to hide behind God, using divine punishment to coerce women into obedience. Has masculinity fallen so low that there are no more brave and courageous men, like the Prophet Muhammad—who was gentle and consistently emphasized good treatment of women, fostering respect and relationships within the family?
Unfortunately, religious communities in the Balkans have not embraced feminist or liberation theology, despite women studying theology since the 1970s. Gender stereotypes are perpetuated, and biological differences, which no one disputes, are emphasized to justify social differences. This confines women to the home and to child-rearing.
Some women are also hesitant to accept egalitarian models of gender relations, promoted by progressive commentators of the Qur’an, fearing they may lose their positions or be labeled feminists. Some lack awareness or education, while others are informed but remain silent out of fear or self-interest. For them, silence is golden until they experience violence, at which point they turn to feminists and seek refuge in safe houses.
Though people often fear change and resist a critical examination of their traditions and religion, it is crucial to deconstruct gender stereotypes, patriarchal interpretations, and norms that impose women’s obedience to men. God does not discriminate between people for any reason, but people, in the name of God, do so for their own goals and power.
Source: https://tacno.net
