Islamic Law in Indonesia 2

The Compilation of Islamic Law chapters 79-84 states that in a marriage the husband has a role as the breadwinner and the wife as the housewife who is responsible for all kinds of domestic affairs. This law then justified the gender-biased view that has existed for ages, about dichotomy of public and private spheres. There are two main consequences of this law.

First, when a woman works outside the house, she will have double roles—as the breadwinner and as the homemaker. When she unluckily has a gender-biased husband, she will have to do all of the household chores without the husband’s help, merely because doing household chores is considered as the woman’s destiny. A woman is born and destined to be the homemaker and not as the breadwinner. The selfish man will (make) use of the unfair law for his egotism.

The second consequence is because a woman is not considered as being born as the breadwinner, she will be considered as single in the workplace. Consequently, she will not get any allowance a married man gets although she is already married. When the workplace is generous enough to give her the allowance, she has to pay tax as the single woman, which is higher than a married man does.

Some years ago, there was a dispute about this in my ex workplace. A female workmate of mine complained to the company why she was considered as single while in fact she was married and she had four children. Consequently, her tax was higher than the male workmate who was married and had four children too. Sadly, I explained to her that it was not the policy of the workplace where we worked together, however it was the policy of the Indonesian government.

This is just one example that Indonesia’s ratification of CEDAW (The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women) in 1984 doesn’t really help improve women’s lives yet. Twenty-two years after this ratification, women in Indonesia are still treated discriminatively.

PT56 22.05 160107

Islamic Law in Indonesia 1

The Compilation of Islamic Law produced by the New Regime Era under Soeharto is proven biased gender by Kelompok Kerja Pengarusutamaan Gender (The Teamwork on Gender Mainstream) coordinated by Siti Musdah Mulia. This article of mine will focus on two things:

1. A woman needs to be accompanied by a male relative legally responsible for a bride on her wedding ceremony. This male relative is mostly the father; if the father cannot attend it, he can be substituted by the brother, or the grandfather from the father, or uncles from the father; but not her mother, or any relative from the mother’s side. A woman is viewed as incapable to represent herself. She will always needs the presence of one male relative. (The Compilation of Islamic Law chapters 19-23, 25)
2. A Muslim woman cannot marry a non Muslim man, while a Muslim man can marry a non Muslim woman. (The Compilation of Islamic Law chapter 40).

The answer of these gender-biased chapters is simply that women are considered as the weaker sex. Women are considered as the weaker sex not only physically but also intellectually. And in this case, women are considered intellectually weaker than men so that they are not capable to represent themselves in the wedding ceremony. Marriage is one big decision to make in someone’s life and a woman as less intelligent creature is viewed as not able to make a good decision for it.

Many centuries ago when women were not allowed to pursue education to be knowledgeable, it was perhaps logical. At that time women were imprisoned in their homes, didn’t get chance to know life beyond their confines. Therefore, the fiqh writers made gender-biased Islamic Law. To protect (or to imprison?) women, the fiqh writers from the middle centuries interpreted Alquran using their point of view belittling women’s existence.

In this era where many women—especially in Indonesia, because I am talking about law in Indonesia—have good chances to pursue their education, to be knowledgeable in all disciplines, they are supposed to be able to make their own decision, to represent themselves so that they no longer need a male relative to represent them on their own wedding ceremony. Women are not less intelligent than men anymore now.

How about mixed marriage? I remember when I was little, my teacher gave a reason why a Muslim woman is not allowed by marry a non Muslim man is because men are considered superior to women. It is okay then if in one marriage the husband is a Muslim while the wife is a non Muslim. The husband is expected to be able to show the superiority by trying to make the wife convert to Muslim. If not, this superior man will not easily convert to the wife’s religion. NOTE: it is simply because hr is considered superior than the wife. On the contrary, people are worried if a Muslim wife will be forced by her (superior) non Muslim husband to convert.

Again in this era where women can pursue their education as high as possible, and become knowledgeable, women are supposed to be considered as equal to men, no longer inferior. The knowledgeable women will not easily give in to the (superior) non Muslim husband to convert religion.

Besides, in a marriage, men and women are supposed to have the same rights and position. They must respect each other, including respect the respective religion. No one is supposed to try intimidating the other party to convert the religion.

In conclusion, the Islamic Law stating that a woman needs a male relative to be responsible for her on her wedding ceremony and that a Muslim woman cannot marry a non Muslim man is no longer valid.

PT56 21.18 160107

Polygamy

In fact, I am already bored with this topic. Some months ago I got upset and annoyed when I found a message in Perempuan (women) mailing list I join saying the plan of PW, the owner of one grilled chicken restaurant in Indonesia, to launch a tabloid named ‘Polygamy. I could directly “read” that the tabloid would be used to blind society where the majority don’t know well about Islamic teaching. I wrote some posts in my blog about this (read => polygamy) and I believe the readers of my blog could easily conclude that I was mad. (This shows I completely agree with Aquarini Priyatna in her book Kajian Budaya Feminis /Feminist Cultural Studies that she writes coz she is angry.) The readers of my blog at http://afemaleguest.blog.co.uk where the most visitors are western people supported me to damn polygamy. The readers of my blog at http://afeministblog.blogspot.com where the most visitors are people from South East Asia were divided into two, one side agreed with my disapproval of polygamy; the other side scolded me for not reading Alquran comprehensively where it stated that a man can have two, three, or four wives (Surah Annisa: 3)

After looking for some ‘cracks’ of my own posts, that haven’t been discussed by me, I come to this idea to write as follows.

The most recent shocking polygamy news was between one public figure in Islamic teachings in Indonesia popularly nicknamed as AA Gym with a widow having one child, in her middle thirties. I must say that many people in Indonesia idolize him while I myself see him only as one ulema, not different from others who had been popular before AA Gym made a name for himself. In my eyes, all (religious) people who are well-read always have chance to (mis)lead their followers by using (or abusing) the verses in their holy books. It, then, depends on their personal character.

Because I am from literary discipline, now I want to see these polygamy things from literary theories.
First, structuralism theory. This theory focuses on what is stated in one work, without involving any other aspects, such as the writer of the work (using expressive approach must be very impossible coz as a Muslim, I do believe that Alquran was passed down to Prophet Muhammad from God), the society when the verses of Alquran were passed down to Muhammad, and the readers of Alquran. One verse mostly quoted by people who approve polygamy is:

"If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four;”(Alquran, 4:3)

But apparently they forget to quote the continuation of this verse, that is:

“… but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with them, then only one" (4:3).

Again, in the same Surah Annisa verse 129 Alquran states:

“although you want to deal justly, you will not be able to do that.”

Forgetting the continuation of this verse must clearly show the egotism of the polygamy doers, and those ulemas who approve polygamy. Isn’t it already VERY CLEAR that men as human beings WILL NOT BE ABLE to do things justly, although only a slight, people will always have this tendency. Therefore, isn’t it possible to interpret that practicing polygamy is HARAM? And we all know that those ulemas are very sensitive with this HARAM thing? Why don’t they apply it in polygamy?

Don’t read one work (read => Alquran in this case) only part per part, and then not read them as a whole.

Second theory is sociohistorical theory. We relate one work with the social and historical event when the work is written. In this case, when this particular verse was passed down to Prophet Muhammad. The verse was passed down after Muslim troops were beaten by their enemies. Uhud war killed many Muslim men so that many women suddenly became widows. Remembering that at that time women didn’t have access in public spheres, not having rights for their own properties either, to save these, this verse was passed down, to give green light to Prophet Muhammad, and some other Muslim men in that era to save those women to take care of their own properties left by their husbands. Prophet Muhammad and some other Muslim men then took care of the survival of those women and their children using their own heritage. If they hadn’t got married, it was worried that their heritage would be given to some other people—such as uncles—who then would just rob those unfortunate women.
Viewing polygamy using this context, we can clearly see that in this era, practicing polygamy is no longer acceptable coz now women already have access in public spheres, in Indonesia (especially) women can become the owner of the properties their husbands left and take care of their own life.
What else, then, is this polygamy for done in this era? Only to celebrate libido, stated M. Hilaly Basya the chief of Youth Islamic Study Club Al-Azhar (Jurnal Perempuan number 31 “Menimbang Polygamy” published in September 2003.)

To end this article, well, AA Gym is just a human being. I must say that it is not his full mistake when many people in Indonesia idolize him (as if they forget that AA Gym is JUST A HUMAN BEING. Prophet Muhammad, the most chosen person in this world for Muslim people couldn’t avoid making his wife jealous with his polygamy, moreover some other people.) It just shows that AA Gym has been beaten by his egotism, and his libido.

PT56 10.19 041206

One Case of a Friend

I wrote this conversation still in my disturbed mood of relating to Alquran and Alhadith. This conversation happened in my workplace around two weeks ago.

AN: How could HR get divorced?

Me: Well, I suppose it was triggered by his conventional way of thinking to see the relationship between husband and wife. I remember about six years ago, at one of our workmate’s house, he told me that he would find a wife who dedicates all of her life to him; staying all night at home, cooking, washing clothes, serving him in bed, even he said including putting of his shoes when he got home from work. And at that time I saw with my very own eyes, his ex wife who was his girlfriend at that time putting of his shoes and socks in front of my eyes. God, it really hurt me as a woman. How could he degrade woman’s position like that? Well, if he really deserved to get such a wife, I don’t mind, and as long as the wife doesn’t mind either. None of my business anyway. But you know, his business got bankrupt. I imagine if he still behaved bossy like that in front of his wife and he didn’t have any money, no wonder if his wife divorced him. I know his life principle is husband earns money, supports his family financially, and in return his wife treats him like a king.

RY: However, if HR is really capable of supporting his wife financially, and his wife treats him like a king, she will go to heaven. Isn’t it stated in Alhadith, that a woman must treat her husband like that so that she will go to heaven?

Me: Huh? What hadith is that? A misogynist one, I believe. Why on earth do people believe in Alhadith more than in Alquran? Don’t you know that those books containing Alhadith were written more than two hundred years after Prophet Muhammad passed away?

Fortunately, or unfortunately then RY went away from the teachers’ room.I continued talking to my workmates who still stayed there.

Me: Well, I know RY is included into those conventional ones too. I remember at that time when HR said that his wife had to welcome him when he went home from work by putting off his shoes and socks, RY supported him very much.I realize it is not as easy as turning down our palm hand when wanting to change people’s way of thinking. This misogynist way of thinking toward women has happened for centuries, moreover when it is wrapped in the name of religion, it is very difficult. People’s tendency to get privileges for themselves makes it more difficult.

To end this writing, I want to quote what Sir James Dewar said:

MINDS ARE LIKE PARACHUTES, THEY ONLY FUNCTION WHEN THEY ARE OPEN.

When people’s minds are close, what can we expect? As some time ago I wrote in one blog of mine, it is just the same as we talk to a wall!

PT56 10.42 090606