Skip to main content

Women and Islam: "Honor" Killings

In today's world, Islam is looked upon negatively when it comes to the issue of women's rights, usually with bias and ignorance on certain issues; in light of these misconceptions, I will conduct a series of posts to disspell such myths about women's status in Islam. This post will reflect on the issue of so-called "honor" killings.

Islamic society at its prime is a centrist society: it does not take conservative nor liberal values solely for a certain value or aspect. Islamic law tends to be strict on an issue and, at the same time, loose when it comes to certain circumstances surrounding that particular issue. However, it tends to be strict on the most severe of injustices. Among them is, of course, murder: a hateful crime punishable by death only when the killer is a sane adult who knows what he or she is doing.

A form of murder that has arised wrongly in Islamic countries is the centuries-old practice of "honor" killings, which happen to be crimes committed against women who engage in sexual activity outside marriage. Such crimes are more often than not committed by a relative of the woman (most likely to be her dad or brother) or the relative of her partner. "Honor" killings have, unfortunately, been spread by extremist teachings, disregarding all Islamic calls against murder, from the Quran and Hadith.

What sickens me further is that some secular Muslims have come out to say that "honor" killings are Islamic based on Islam's strict opposition to adultery. God has said in the Quran,
[24:2]woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.
However, it is often argued in certain cases that adulterers should be punished by death, especially when one or both are married.

However, these secular and radical Muslims have forgotten their Islamic roots: "honor" killings go back to pre-Islamic times. According to Wikipedia,
The killing of people for sexual crimes has been known since the times of Ancient Babylon (1700 BCE). The Codes of Hammurabi and Assura (some of the earliest sets of laws discovered), focus on the perception that a woman’s virginity belongs to her family. In Peru from 1200 BCE - 1532 CE, alleged adulterers were punished by having their hands and feet tied to a wall and being left to starve to death. A man was allowed to kill his wife if he caught or suspected her of having an extra-marital affair, while if a woman caught or suspected her husband of doing the same thing and killed him, she was given the death penalty. In the Valley of Mexico from 150 BCE - 1521 CE, the punishment for female adultery was death by stoning or strangulation, but only after the husband could prove the offence.
Belying all evidence, we can see that the practice of "honor" killing is far beyond Islamic.

Despite all the evidence, people argue that "honor" killings are condoned by Islam. If that were true, then how come God sanctioned all life-threatening acts of violence in the Quran? He has said,
[4:93] If a man kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell, to abide therein (For ever): And the wrath and the curse of Allah are upon him, and a dreadful penalty is prepared for him.
But then again, Islamophobes bring out this Hadith. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said,
"The blood of a Muslim may not be legally spilt other than in one of three [instances]: the married person who commits adultery; a life for a life; and one who forsakes his religion and abandons the community."
Note I bolded the word "legally". This means that if blood is to spilt, it should be done after a trial in the court of law. Therefore extrajudicial killings are forbidden in Islam. And this online fatwa only serves to confirm my point:
Focusing more on your question, Sheikh Ahmad Kutty, a senior lecturer and an Islamic scholar at the Islamic Institute of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, states:

There is no such concept in Islam that is called “honor killing”. Islam holds every soul in high esteem and does not allow any transgression upon it. It does not allow people to take the law in their own hands and administer justice, because doing so will be leading to chaos and lawlessness. Therefore, based on this, Islam does not permit such killings.

First of all, in order to sanction killing, it must be through a binding verdict issued by an authoritative law court. Individuals themselves have no authority either to judge cases or pass judgments. Therefore, a Muslim should not sanction such killing because doing so will be leading to the rule of the law of the jungle. A civilized society cannot be run by such laws.”

[...]

The so-called “honor killing” is based on ignorance and disregard of morals and laws, which cannot be abolished except by disciplinary punishments.

It goes without saying that people are not entitled to take the law in their own hands, for it’s the responsibility of the Muslim State and its concerned bodies to maintain peace, security, etc., and to prevent chaos and disorder from creeping into the Muslim society.
To say that "honor" killings are a part of Islam or its culture would be sheer lunacy. Islam is against such barbaric acts, and only through educating our fellow Muslims can we stop this practice altogether.

And God Knows Best.

Salaam, from
Saracen

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What "Culture Clash"?

I hear this all the time, and yet I still have yet to not only materialistically comprehend this prospect, but to philosophically grasp it. There are so many cultures and races that dot this earth, and yet we have seen them come and go as well. But how can cultures themselves clash? To answer this question, one should take a look at the definition of culture. The word culture , from the Latin colo, -ere, with its root meaning "to cultivate", generally refers to patterns of human activity and the symbolic structures that give such activity significance. Different definitions of "culture" reflect different theoretical bases for understanding, or criteria for evaluating, human activity. Note the definition: patterns of personal activity. Patterns by themselves are immeasurable and also immaterial. However, the only material object encountered in the definition is the set of "symbolic structures" that represent these patterns and give them significance. Cult

حول قرار حماس تشكيل قوة مشتركة من الفصائل

هذا النص يتحدث عن التشقق في الحكومة الفلسطينية, وكيف استغلوا القوات الصهيونية على التفرق بين حماس ومنظمة التخريب " فتح" التي خانت الفاسطينيون لخدمة نفسها ولخدمة "إسراءيل". تأليف د. إبراهيم علوش قرار وزير داخلية السلطة الفلسطينية، القائمة على مرجعية اتفاقية أوسلو، بتشكيل قوة مشتركة من الفصائل العسكرية الفلسطينية المقاومة، وقرار محمود عباس رئيس سلطة أوسلو بشطب قرار وزير الداخلية سعيد صيام بتشكيل تلك القوة المشتركة، أثار الكثير من التكهنات واللغط حول مغزى تلك الخطوة وأبعادها. ومثل كل قرار سياسي، هناك دائماً واجهة خارجية وأجندة خفية، خاصة عندما نتعامل مع قوى قررت أن تكون جزءاً من الواقع السائد بدلاً من الانقلاب عليه. فالانضمام لركب أوسلو، على أساس مشروع "تغييره من الداخل"، يترك المرء بالضرورة أسير مساومات لا يمكن إلا أن تمس بالثوابت وبالمرجعيات التاريخية لصراعنا مع الحركة الصهيونية منذ أكثر من قرن. وبالمقابل، فإن قرار محمود عباس بشطب قرار وزير الداخلية يرتبط بدوره بحسابات التنافس الداخلي، ليس فقط على الصلاحيات، بل على كل دوره التاريخي هو وفتح. المهم، يمكن أن ت

Book Review: "The Crusade through Arab Eyes" by Amin Maalouf

The bulk of modern history regarding the Crusades has an unashamedly Western slant to it. Even a cursory search of the word "crusade" on Amazon Books reveals a plethora of books written by authors from the U.K., the U.S., and elsewhere in the Western world, but a severe (emphasis) paucity of books from a more Arab perspective. One book that stands out is Amin Maalouf's "The Crusades through Arab Eyes", a book I believe is much-needed given the overall bias inherent in the gestalt of Western history books on this topic. The gold standard for history on the Crusades is currently the "The Oxford History of the Crusades", another book I will review in the not-so-distant future (and expect comparisons to this book given that I have completed reading it). The too-long-didn't-read version of this review is the following: if you're interested in history, buy it, read it, and keep it. Nevertheless, my full review follows. For those who are un