What's new

Triple talaq: India criminalises Muslim 'instant divorce' [Update Post #54]

jeetu

PPCL Hall of Famer
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Runs
9,885
Post of the Week
4
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-38528507

A practice in India that allows Muslim men to divorce their wives in an instant is facing fierce opposition.

"Triple talaq" - divorcing by saying the word talaq three times - is legal for Muslims in India but controversial. It is banned across much of the Islamic world.

India’s Supreme Court is deciding whether triple talaq is unconstitutional, a move that could help thousands of women.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was watching a debate on this where Barkha Dutt was the host. The Maulana who was the guest was arguing that it is in accordance to Quran and Govt should not interfere in personal affairs of Muslims.
 
This isn't just for Islam but a general comment ...

It's absurd to me that anyone can be forced to remain in something they don't want ...

It's incredible just how recent the concept of 'no fault' divorce is ...but its an important innovation ...

For a long time you had to prove your partner had done something wrong to be permitted the right to divorce ...

Divorce is getting easier which is a good thing ...

The issue with triple talaq isn't to do with the ease of which a man can get a divorce its the fact that equality does not exist here ...

It is significantly tougher for a woman to get a divorce in Islam than it is a male ...a woman has to show fault and even then she is often liable to be penalised for initiating the divorce ...issues such as dowry and custody come to mind ...

For men conditions render it fairly easy to get divorced both in terms of making it happen and the lack of consequences for doing it ...
 
I was watching a debate on this where Barkha Dutt was the host. The Maulana who was the guest was arguing that it is in accordance to Quran and Govt should not interfere in personal affairs of Muslims.

That's a fair enough logic but in that logic Maulana should remember that incase the VHPs or Hindu Mahasabhas start making laws in our country it would be a disaster to say the least not sure how hard is to understand that.

Its easier if India has one law,time for that has passed though.
 
The more we move away from religious laws like this...the better it is for our nation in the long run.
 
How does divorce for Hindu couples usually work in India? Has it moved on in the last few decades?

Divorce for Hindus pretty much follows the normal procedure. It comes under the Hindu marriage act. It applies to all Hindus and I think Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hindu_Marriage_Act,_1955

If you look at it from a religious point of view, Hinduism has no concept of divorce. So having a proper divorce system is a huge step in the right direction. Just that it happened a long time ago itself.
 
This isn't just for Islam but a general comment ...

It's absurd to me that anyone can be forced to remain in something they don't want ..

It's incredible just how recent the concept of 'no fault' divorce is ...but its an important innovation ...

For a long time you had to prove your partner had done something wrong to be permitted the right to divorce ...

Divorce is getting easier which is a good thing ...

The issue with triple talaq isn't to do with the ease of which a man can get a divorce its the fact that equality does not exist here ...

It is significantly tougher for a woman to get a divorce in Islam than it is a male ...a woman has to show fault and even then she is often liable to be penalised for initiating the divorce ...issues such as dowry and custody come to mind ...

For men conditions render it fairly easy to get divorced both in terms of making it happen and the lack of consequences for doing it ...



It is not about forcefully reconciling a marriage. This is not the case. It is about q due process whereby within few months time there are 3 steps to divorce.

This is because a person can divorce his wife in severe anger in the heat of the moment when he is mentally lost in the situation in hand. So Islam permits him a chance to reconcile provided he realises it before 2nd or before last 3rd call of Talaq. He can realise that he made a wrong call in anger and the argument or situation wasn't as big to warrant parting ways.


Even if the man made the call in anger he may move on and remarry again easily. Whereas for women it is a huge tabboo and they suffer bigtime. Entire muslim world is a witness of this.




As far as your 2nd argument is concerned well than the problem is not with Islam. The problem is with the version of Islam you are looking into. Islam allows a women complete right to divorce her husband and it is called
" Khulla "
 
It is not about forcefully reconciling a marriage. This is not the case. It is about q due process whereby within few months time there are 3 steps to divorce.

This is because a person can divorce his wife in severe anger in the heat of the moment when he is mentally lost in the situation in hand. So Islam permits him a chance to reconcile provided he realises it before 2nd or before last 3rd call of Talaq. He can realise that he made a wrong call in anger and the argument or situation wasn't as big to warrant parting ways.


Even if the man made the call in anger he may move on and remarry again easily. Whereas for women it is a huge tabboo and they suffer bigtime. Entire muslim world is a witness of this.




As far as your 2nd argument is concerned well than the problem is not with Islam. The problem is with the version of Islam you are looking into. Islam allows a women complete right to divorce her husband and it is called
" Khulla "

If I am correct in saying...the husband has to approve of his wife initiating khulla...ie there has to be mutual agreement...what happens if the husband says no?...to my understanding the judges only really intervene here if a fault can be proved...if the wife just wants to leave her husband because she doesn't love him anymore then can she?...

Most interpretations also state that a woman must pay back her dowry as I mentioned in my initial post...in Pakistan for instance a woman who initiates to divorce does so as long as she forfeits her financial rights which again goes to what I mentioned in my initial post...there are quite serious consequences for a woman who initiates divorce especially when it is a no fault divorce...

It certainly is a lot easier for a man to get a divorce no?...
 
If I am correct in saying...the husband has to approve of his wife initiating khulla...ie there has to be mutual agreement...what happens if the husband says no?...to my understanding the judges only really intervene here if a fault can be proved...if the wife just wants to leave her husband because she doesn't love him anymore then can she?...

Most interpretations also state that a woman must pay back her dowry as I mentioned in my initial post...in Pakistan for instance a woman who initiates to divorce does so as long as she forfeits her financial rights which again goes to what I mentioned in my initial post...there are quite serious consequences for a woman who initiates divorce especially when it is a no fault divorce...

It certainly is a lot easier for a man to get a divorce no?...





No she does not need the permission of her husband. It would be ill-logical and unfair.


She just has to file for " Khulla " in court and She has to present her point of view infront of judge and say She does not want to continue this marriage. That's it. The END.

Yes she has to return the " Haq Meher ".



Jameela daughter of Salool RA visited He Pbuh's place and said that she did not have any complaint on the religosity, piety and good ethics of his husband Saabit Son of Qaiss but her personality does not match with him and because of this she hates him. So, in such a situation she won't be able to fulfil his rights and will be committing ingratitude so she wants separation from him.

He Pbuh said : Are you willing to return the orchard you took in Mehar ?

She said Prophet of Allah Yes infact more than this.

He Pbuh said return the orchard you took as Mehar and nothing more.


(Bukhari Kitab ul Talaq Chapter Khulla page 794) (Ibn e Maaja Chapter Mukhtallat page 149)
(Daar ul Qutni page 397) (Nasb ur Raaya PAGE 445)



Now the next question you will ask is why No share in property ? Well she was ok with it. All believing women agree that they don't need anything from their ex husband's property. He just has to fulfil the rights of their children as father. Any women than having a problem with this could leave Islam saying its unjust with women. Even today they can. (No worldly punishment in Islam for Apostasy)

So if a believing women feels this rule of Islam is fine and justified in her eyes than I don't see any problem in Islam.
 
If I am correct in saying...the husband has to approve of his wife initiating khulla...ie there has to be mutual agreement...what happens if the husband says no?...to my understanding the judges only really intervene here if a fault can be proved...if the wife just wants to leave her husband because she doesn't love him anymore then can she?...

Most interpretations also state that a woman must pay back her dowry as I mentioned in my initial post...in Pakistan for instance a woman who initiates to divorce does so as long as she forfeits her financial rights which again goes to what I mentioned in my initial post...there are quite serious consequences for a woman who initiates divorce especially when it is a no fault divorce...

It certainly is a lot easier for a man to get a divorce no?...

There is absolutely no concept of dowry in Islam.

In fact, the haq meher is given to the bride by the groom (or his family) after the nikkah and she should return it in the case of "Khulla".

So basically she doesn't lose any of her own money/property etc.
 
I hope this conundrum finds a satisfactory conclusion in India.

One of the prominent newspaper in the south has suggested that the court appoint a special committeee of Islamic scholars to solve this - best option IMHO given the religious sensitivities.
 
Divorce for Hindus pretty much follows the normal procedure. It comes under the Hindu marriage act. It applies to all Hindus and I think Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hindu_Marriage_Act,_1955

If you look at it from a religious point of view, Hinduism has no concept of divorce. So having a proper divorce system is a huge step in the right direction. Just that it happened a long time ago itself.

I had a quick look through the link provided and it's claimed that divorce is anathema to Hinduism in the strictly religious sense. There does seem to be a ring of truth about it if you look at the general mindset of Indians towards marriage and divorce which is often reflected in their entertainment media.

How has implementing change on a legal footing made a difference in modern India? It is quite relevant I would have thought because if it's been successful with the majority religion, then that would make it easier to push through changes for minority religions should that be the wish of the Indian people.
 
I had a quick look through the link provided and it's claimed that divorce is anathema to Hinduism in the strictly religious sense. There does seem to be a ring of truth about it if you look at the general mindset of Indians towards marriage and divorce which is often reflected in their entertainment media.

How has implementing change on a legal footing made a difference in modern India? It is quite relevant I would have thought because if it's been successful with the majority religion, then that would make it easier to push through changes for minority religions should that be the wish of the Indian people.

Divorce is India is more of a social taboo than a religious one. I think the rate is high among ones working in service sector read somewhere my state Tamil Nadu has the highest number of divorces,the reasons for recent divorces is highlighted in below article but imo its assumption at best.

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-tamilnadu/divorce-rate-going-up-among-newly-married/article5366366.ece
 
Not a fan of these religious laws in a secular country.Be it triple talaq,Polygamy,ban on cow slaughter or ban on drinking alcohol.
 
Divorce is India is more of a social taboo than a religious one. I think the rate is high among ones working in service sector read somewhere my state Tamil Nadu has the highest number of divorces,the reasons for recent divorces is highlighted in below article but imo its assumption at best.

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/tp-tamilnadu/divorce-rate-going-up-among-newly-married/article5366366.ece

I would have thought the social taboo might well be rooted to it's religious origin, but nevertheless let's take that at face value. If there's a social taboo regarding divorce in India generally, then it will probably be more difficult to enforce changes to laws regarding minorities divorce rulings. If there was social acceptance by the majority in India it would make it much easier to push through.
 
I would have thought the social taboo might well be rooted to it's religious origin, but nevertheless let's take that at face value. If there's a social taboo regarding divorce in India generally, then it will probably be more difficult to enforce changes to laws regarding minorities divorce rulings. If there was social acceptance by the majority in India it would make it much easier to push through.

It won't get pushed through unless the Muslim women demand it in much larger numbers, Shah Bano case is still in memory where there was a decent chance to set a law once and for all but Congress as seen in history messed up big time once again also don't think any party will commit a political blunder on their own now,Muslim Women have started the protests lets see how long they have to fight for it.
 
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-38528507

A practice in India that allows Muslim men to divorce their wives in an instant is facing fierce opposition.

"Triple talaq" - divorcing by saying the word talaq three times - is legal for Muslims in India but controversial. It is banned across much of the Islamic world.

India’s Supreme Court is deciding whether triple talaq is unconstitutional, a move that could help thousands of women.

it will never help thousands of women! at the end of the day, its the man who earns and if he's okay, everything's okay...
 
It won't get pushed through unless the Muslim women demand it in much larger numbers, Shah Bano case is still in memory where there was a decent chance to set a law once and for all but Congress as seen in history messed up big time once again also don't think any party will commit a political blunder on their own now,Muslim Women have started the protests lets see how long they have to fight for it.

You're missing the point, what I'm saying is that if there are social taboos regarding divorce for Hindus, Sikhs etc, then that is going to dilute the movement for change regarding Muslim divorce. It will just get swamped in the general malaise towards women's rights in India in general.
 
I would have thought the social taboo might well be rooted to it's religious origin, but nevertheless let's take that at face value. If there's a social taboo regarding divorce in India generally, then it will probably be more difficult to enforce changes to laws regarding minorities divorce rulings. If there was social acceptance by the majority in India it would make it much easier to push through.

There is.

In rural, acceptance isn't much (but that's natural).

But in urban areas (the area that creates all the perception), there is acceptance if the living situation is really bad.

Also one cannot discount the fact the humans love the "we don't have it so why should they have it" argument.
 
You're missing the point, what I'm saying is that if there are social taboos regarding divorce for Hindus, Sikhs etc, then that is going to dilute the movement for change regarding Muslim divorce. It will just get swamped in the general malaise towards women's rights in India in general.

Why? Divorce is an accepted norm in Indian cities ,when it was brought into other religious laws it wasn't cared about other's feelings and what not,Hindus were more polygamous than Muslims but secular liberal laws cannot be withheld just because society.
 
There is.

In rural, acceptance isn't much (but that's natural).

But in urban areas (the area that creates all the perception), there is acceptance if the living situation is really bad.

Also one cannot discount the fact the humans love the "we don't have it so why should they have it" argument.

5 Reasons Why Divorce is Still a Taboo In India

http://www.womensweb.in/2015/09/five-reasons-divorce-still-taboo-india/

Read the above. We can't really have a serious discussion on this subject if there isn't going to be honesty about how divorce is still looked upon in India. It's not my country I don't really care. But this pointing fingers at Muslim divorce seems to be a way of avoiding deeper questions which apply to the whole society.
 
Last edited:
5 Reasons Why Divorce is Still a Taboo In India

http://www.womensweb.in/2015/09/five-reasons-divorce-still-taboo-india/

Read the above. We can't really have a serious discussion on this subject if there isn't going to be honesty about how divorce is still looked upon in India. It's not my country I don't really care. But this pointing fingers at Muslim divorce seems to be a way of avoiding deeper questions which apply to the whole society.

lol ok.

Be convinced with that one random article.

The other guys who speak about it after looking at the ground reality aren't being honest.

After all triple talaq issue is a way of pointing fingers at Muslims instead of avoiding deeper questions that apply to whole society. What other reason could there be? :yk

Even if divorce is considered a taboo in Hindu circles, the laws are still there to protect both men and women in divorce (yes, it needs to be better when only one party wants divorce but atleast there is something in place). So that doesn't justify the support for triple talaq in anyway (not that I am saying you are supporting triple talaq but you sure are arguing for the sake of arguing).
 
Last edited:
Is divorce still considered a taboo by Indian society as a whole? Yes taking all things into account .

Is it considered taboo in urban areas to the point where women won't divorce husbands no matter what? No.

Is the situation changing in the urban landscape? Big time yes.

Is the situation changing in rural? Likely no.

Is all of this relevant to this discussion? In my opinion, no.

Moving on....
 
Is divorce still considered a taboo by Indian society as a whole? Yes taking all things into account .

Is it considered taboo in urban areas to the point where women won't divorce husbands no matter what? No.

Is the situation changing in the urban landscape? Big time yes.

Is the situation changing in rural? Likely no.

Is all of this relevant to this discussion? In my opinion, no.

Moving on....

So the situation is changing in the urban landscape - no real surprise there. I would imagine it is changing for people of all religions in the urban landscape, whether Hindu, Christian or Muslim. No surprise either that there is a big gap between modern India and rural India. That said, there is still a long way to go to change traditional mindsets even in the urban landscapes. Changing laws is one thing, changing a culture will take a lot longer.

My point is, that India voted in BJP, a party that was based on reaffirming old cultural values, not modern ones. That's what leads me to question the motives behind the furore over divorce law against Muslims.
 
So the situation is changing in the urban landscape - no real surprise there. I would imagine it is changing for people of all religions in the urban landscape, whether Hindu, Christian or Muslim. No surprise either that there is a big gap between modern India and rural India. That said, there is still a long way to go to change traditional mindsets even in the urban landscapes. Changing laws is one thing, changing a culture will take a lot longer.

My point is, that India voted in BJP, a party that was based on reaffirming old cultural values, not modern ones. That's what leads me to question the motives behind the furore over divorce law against Muslims.

I get your skepticism and it is valid.

A few points:

1. BJP (or shall I say RSS) is a bit of a hypocrite in these matters (not that other political parties aren't hypocrites). Many in RSS would sing a different tune depending upon the issues. But the thing is this issue has been taken up by the Supreme Court. Let's see what happens.

2. Yes, the urban population (from all religions) is becoming more open towards divorce in general. But general view of different urban communities towards divorce is not the same.

3. Change isn't brought about my changing mindsets first. It is brought about by bringing in laws which help shape people's views. You can't make a guy stop spitting paan on roads by engaging or convincing or negotiating with him however you can bring in strict laws and fines and implement them and within a decade or two, there would be a massive change in how people behave.

For example, 50 years back, how many Hindus (regardless of their status) were open about divorce? Hardly any. But the laws were set up and now situation atleast in the urban areas is very different. Even religious Hindus won't shy away from divorce if the situation is too bad (have seen divorcees in my family - females who divorced their husbands - done WAY WAY back like 30 years or 20 years).

4. In rural areas or any areas in India, divorces are not preferred for MORE reasons than just religious and social. One of the biggest reasons is economics. A wife who depends on her husband for all income cannot just divorce him and manage a household easily.

Another reason is safety. A female not living in a safe urban area, may find it very unsafe if she doesn't live with her husband. A sad fact of life in India. Some can live with their parents but if they aren't there, what then. Its complicated.

Now for a moment imagine you have a world where females have AMPLE job opportunities (to live a comfortable life and provide for their kids) and can live in safe areas where they don't have to fear for their safety even if they aren't without a male.....in this situation how many of the females would put up with their physically abusive, drunkard husbands? How many would say they have to face the torture cos "log kya kehenge"? How many would say they have to do it for their religion?

If the situation is right, they would ask their abusive husbands to get lost in a jiffy.

Right now, we don't have such opportunities in India but what we can do is create the right laws and let things take its own course. The laws by themselves aren't going to be game changers but they will go a long way in shaping the views of people down the road.
 
Last edited:
I get your skepticism and it is valid.

A few points:

1. BJP (or shall I say RSS) is a bit of a hypocrite in these matters (not that other political parties aren't hypocrites). Many in RSS would sing a different tune depending upon the issues. But the thing is this issue has been taken up by the Supreme Court. Let's see what happens.

2. Yes, the urban population (from all religions) is becoming more open towards divorce in general. But general view of different urban communities towards divorce is not the same.

3. Change isn't brought about my changing mindsets first. It is brought about by bringing in laws which help shape people's views. You can't make a guy stop spitting paan on roads by engaging or convincing or negotiating with him however you can bring in strict laws and fines and implement them and within a decade or two, there would be a massive change in how people behave.

For example, 50 years back, how many Hindus (regardless of their status) were open about divorce? Hardly any. But the laws were set up and now situation atleast in the urban areas is very different. Even religious Hindus won't shy away from divorce if the situation is too bad (have seen divorcees in my family - females who divorced their husbands - done WAY WAY back like 30 years or 20 years).

4. In rural areas or any areas in India, divorces are not preferred for MORE reasons than just religious and social. One of the biggest reasons is economics. A wife who depends on her husband for all income cannot just divorce him and manage a household easily.

Another reason is safety. A female not living in a safe urban area, may find it very unsafe if she doesn't live with her husband. A sad fact of life in India. Some can live with their parents but if they aren't there, what then. Its complicated.

Now for a moment imagine you have a world where females have AMPLE job opportunities (to live a comfortable life and provide for their kids) and can live in safe areas where they don't have to fear for their safety even if they aren't without a male.....in this situation how many of the females would put up with their physically abusive, drunkard husbands? How many would say they have to face the torture cos "log kya kehenge"? How many would say they have to do it for their religion?

If the situation is right, they would ask their abusive husbands to get lost in a jiffy.

Right now, we don't have such opportunities in India but what we can do is create the right laws and let things take its own course. The laws by themselves aren't going to be game changers but they will go a long way in shaping the views of people down the road.

I do remain sceptical about the motives behind this story, it would make more sense if divorce was accepted more readily in India by all communities...but you are right that at least the laws are in place whether people like them or not, and that is always the most important step.

But I get the impression that not much will come of all this fuss and it is probably being used as a political football for whatever reason. Anyway I guess time will tell. My concern would be that the BJP is more likely to roll the movement backward rather than forwards if their power base becomes entrenched.
 
2 Muslim Women In Hyderabad, Divorced Over WhatsApp, Are Fighting Back

Two Muslim women in Hyderabad divorced over WhatsApp and email by their husbands living in the US have lodged a police complaint against their in-laws who had thrown them out of the house. The women, Heena Fathima and Bahrain Noor - who were married to two brothers - have not received any documents and say this is not valid under Islamic law.

Everyday he would ask to see the video of the children, how they were doing. Then suddenly, he said talaq. He has to tell me what I did wrong. What is my mistake. This is not right," said Ms Fathima who was divorced by Syed Fayazuddin six months ago. She and her two young daughters were allegedly forced out of the house.

The case comes days after the Supreme Court decided to ask a larger bench of the court to examine the legal validity of triple talaq. One of the four points that the centre suggested the court should rule on is if the right to religion could override rights of women.

But cases of triple talaq have been coming in from various parts of the country. In Delhi last week, another woman moved court against her divorce over WhatsApp.

Syed Fayazuddin bother, Usman Qureishi married Bahrain Noor from Malakpet area in 2015. A few months ago, Mr Qureishi left for the US. In early February, came the message over WhatsApp: 'talaq, talaq, talaq'. It is when her in-laws threw her out last week that the women decided to do something about it.

The two women first sat on a protest in front of their house to demand they be allowed to live their along with Ms Fathima's two children.

Their father-in-law Abdul Hafeez said he had nothing to do with the decision of his son's who lives in New York. But he asserted: "My sons have sent the necessary documents to them."

The two women approached the police when the protest did not help.

Police said cases had been registered against the husband and also in-laws under sections relating to harassment of a married woman, attempt to outrage modesty of a woman and assault.

South Zone DCP V Satyanarayana said the police had told Abdul Hafeez that he could not push them out of the house and would support the women and children.

"They are saying they did not get any divorce papers and talaq over WhatsApp is not valid under Shariat. If they want divorce, they must do according to Islamic law valid in court,'' Satyanarayana said.

http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/2-mu...orced-over-whatsapp-are-fighting-back-1666149
 
Talaq, Talaq, Talaq is the method for divorce amongst the muslims in South Africa
 
2 Muslim Women In Hyderabad, Divorced Over WhatsApp, Are Fighting Back

Two Muslim women in Hyderabad divorced over WhatsApp and email by their husbands living in the US have lodged a police complaint against their in-laws who had thrown them out of the house. The women, Heena Fathima and Bahrain Noor - who were married to two brothers - have not received any documents and say this is not valid under Islamic law.

Everyday he would ask to see the video of the children, how they were doing. Then suddenly, he said talaq. He has to tell me what I did wrong. What is my mistake. This is not right," said Ms Fathima who was divorced by Syed Fayazuddin six months ago. She and her two young daughters were allegedly forced out of the house.

The case comes days after the Supreme Court decided to ask a larger bench of the court to examine the legal validity of triple talaq. One of the four points that the centre suggested the court should rule on is if the right to religion could override rights of women.

But cases of triple talaq have been coming in from various parts of the country. In Delhi last week, another woman moved court against her divorce over WhatsApp.

Syed Fayazuddin bother, Usman Qureishi married Bahrain Noor from Malakpet area in 2015. A few months ago, Mr Qureishi left for the US. In early February, came the message over WhatsApp: 'talaq, talaq, talaq'. It is when her in-laws threw her out last week that the women decided to do something about it.

The two women first sat on a protest in front of their house to demand they be allowed to live their along with Ms Fathima's two children.

Their father-in-law Abdul Hafeez said he had nothing to do with the decision of his son's who lives in New York. But he asserted: "My sons have sent the necessary documents to them."

The two women approached the police when the protest did not help.

Police said cases had been registered against the husband and also in-laws under sections relating to harassment of a married woman, attempt to outrage modesty of a woman and assault.

South Zone DCP V Satyanarayana said the police had told Abdul Hafeez that he could not push them out of the house and would support the women and children.

"They are saying they did not get any divorce papers and talaq over WhatsApp is not valid under Shariat. If they want divorce, they must do according to Islamic law valid in court,'' Satyanarayana said.

http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/2-mu...orced-over-whatsapp-are-fighting-back-1666149


This !. This abuse of the "Triple Talaq" system needs to be addressed. There are far too many cases of muslim marriage rules being abused by terrible men to serve their needs. The women victims are rendered powerless because of the provisions in the present India marriage acts..

Instead of constructive criticism of this issue , most muslim bodies in India are spinning this off as an Attack on Islam here. The Sangh /BJP idiots have played along and not denied it as well. This just takes focus away from the real issue and give more ammunition to communal forces.
 
The triple talaq being considered as one and three revolves behind a controversy that took place in the Islamic history during the Caliphate period where triple talaq was forced to consider as one to stop people from abusing the sharia law for talaq...

Actually speaking Talaq, Talaq, Talaq said at one sitting is only valid as one and the first talaq. This is what being followed in all Saudi Arabia courts of marriage and also heard that it is followed in Al-Azhar University.

The waiting-period of the married woman who menstruates is three monthly courses after the pronouncement of first divorce.

So the second talaq can be said only after the waiting period and the same goes for the third talaq.

It also demands that the woman should not be divorced in the period-of purity during which the husband may have had sexual intercourse with her. For in this case, at the time divorce is pronounced neither the husband nor the wife can know whether he has conceived in consequence of the intercourse or not. Because of this neither the waiting-period can begin on the hypothesis that this would be reckoned in view of the succeeding monthly courses, nor on the hypothesis that this would be the waiting-period of a pregnant woman.
 
Triple Talaq Illegal, Says Supreme Court In Landmark Judgement

New Delhi: The Supreme Court today banned the controversial Islamic practice that allows men to leave their wives immediately by stating " talaq " (divorce) three times. The verdict vindicates the stand of the government, which had said triple talaq violates fundamental rights of women. Several Muslim women who have been divorced because of it, including on Skype and on WhatsApp, had appealed to the top court to end the practice.

Here is your 10-point cheat-sheet to this big story:

1. Three of the five judges hearing the case said it is unconstitutional; the other two wanted it banned for six months till the government introduces new legislation. The majority opinion held that triple
talaq "is not integral to religious practice and violates constitutional morality".

2.The judges in favour of a new law wanted the government to take into account the concerns of some Muslim organisations who are critical of any attempts to meddle with religious laws, arguing it curtails their constitutional right to govern their affairs.

3.The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), a non-governmental body which oversees the application of Muslim personal law, opposes any ban on triple talaq and argues this is a religious matter and not for the courts.

4.The Supreme Court referred to the fact that several Islamic countries like Pakistan do not allow triple talaq ; judges questioned why it should not be abolished in India.

5.The Supreme Court has for the first time reviewed whether triple talaq is fundamental to Islam and therefore legally binding. Three of the five judges held that triple talaq violates the tenets of the Quran.

6.Critics say it leaves women destitute and robs them of basic rights. "We told the court that the practice has no basis in the law or in the Koran," said Balaji Srinivasan, a lawyer for Shayara Bano whose husband split from her by writing "talaq " three times on a piece of paper.

7.The verdict was delivered by a panel of five judges from different major faiths - Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Sikhism and Zoroastrianism. Arguments concluded in May.

8.India allows religious institutions to govern matters of personal law - marriage, divorce and property inheritance - through civil codes; so far, triple talaq has been considered a legal avenue for the country's nearly 180 million Muslims to end marriages.

9.But Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government has backed the petitioners in this landmark case, declaring triple talaq unconstitutional, and derogatory and discriminatory for women."Judgment of the Hon'ble SC on Triple Talaq is historic. It grants equality to Muslim women and is a powerful measure for women empowerment," PM Modi tweeted today.

10.The BJP has long pushed for a uniform civil code to be enforced which would end the reach of different religious laws in civil issues, sanctioned originally to protect the independence of different faiths.

http://m.ndtv.com/india-news/triple...rity-verdict-1740381?pfrom=home-lateststories
 
Landmark judgement from the Supreme Court, it is hilarious to see Congress Party doing a U-Turn now and welcoming the decision while for many years till now, they were calling BJP communal for trying to get rid of Triple Talak.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Welcome decision by Supreme Court to declare <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TripleTalaq?src=hash">#TripleTalaq</a> unconstitutional. Will give Muslim women security. Gender justice is much needed</p>— Mohammad Kaif (@MohammadKaif) <a href="https://twitter.com/MohammadKaif/status/899948655993511937">August 22, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
Former Pakistani opener Mohsin Khan wants universal law on Talaq

Mumbai: Former Pakistani opener Mohsin Khan, who married to an Indian actress Reena Roy, believes that there should be an universal law on Talaq.

Speaking exclusively over telephone from Karachi, the 62-year-old former right handed batsman Mohsinn Khan says, “the law in our country with every Muslim in the whole world should be according to our holy book “Quran” and it should be followed with full respect”.

Obviously, Mohsin was reacting on the recent judgement on Instant Talaq by the Supreme Court of India.

Incidentally, Mohsin’s marriage with Reena Roy did not last long and both separated.

“Our divorce was not on Instant Talaq but with the mutual understanding. The same was the case with the former Pakistani skipper Imran Khan”.

“We both respect our ex-wives”.

“God (Allah) hates Talaq. God teaches us to respect our partner. Only in case of miserable life or with the difference of opinion, the couple gets separated. And in the case of a divorce, the security of the woman must be ensured. She should not be left alone and “very well care” should be taken”, added Mohsin Khan.

“I am not in favor of Instant Talaq. There should be a gap of a few days between the three Talaqs. That (period) may bring peace together and the couple may start living together”.

“The decision of Talaq should not be unfair to anyone. God has given different strengths to both genders. If there is a problem in the life, the solution is there in all Hoily books, be it Bible, Quran or Bhagwad Geeta”, Khan, who says this statement is being made as a Muslim, though he is not an Islamic leader.

http://dailymailnews.com/2017/08/27...ner-mohsin-khan-wants-universal-law-on-talaq/
 
Excellent. Can women do the same to their husbands?

Women in Islam are equal but not identical. For example the property which was with women belongs to her , and on top of that she also gets a share from her husband. For men it is not the same. Husband is the one who has to provide the wife , not wife has to do for husband.
 
Women in Islam are equal but not identical. For example the property which was with women belongs to her , and on top of that she also gets a share from her husband. For men it is not the same. Husband is the one who has to provide the wife , not wife has to do for husband.

very true...
Muslim women just cannot pronounce the word talaq properly... its purely a physical limitation... nothing to do with gender discrimination.
 
very true...
Muslim women just cannot pronounce the word talaq properly... its purely a physical limitation... nothing to do with gender discrimination.

Women can separate from there Husbands , there is a process to that. It is not that she cannot come out of a marriage.
 
Court orders shouldn't work to break people's faith, Amit Shah says

I want to tell governments and courts, give orders that can be implemented: Amit Shah in Kannur

The BJP chief was speaking at Sivagiri Mutt in Varkala while inaugurating the 90th anniversary of Mahasamadhi of Sree Narayana Guru

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM/KANNUR: BJP chief Amit Shah on Saturday pledged his party's "rock-solid" support to devotees protesting against the Supreme Court order that the Sabarimala temple permit entry of women of all ages, claiming the Left Front government in the state was trying to destroy Kerala's traditions.

"I want to tell governments and courts, 'give orders that can be implemented'. They should not give orders that work to break the faith of people," Shah said in Kannur on Saturday.

Throwing his weight behind protests against the court order and the state government's arrest of over 2,000 agitators, Shah said, "BJP is ready to go to any extent to protest for the rights of Ayyappa devotees. Beliefs should be respected. Man-woman equality is must, but gender equality cannot be established by giving entry to men and women together. There are several temples that deny men entry," he said.

The BJP chief was speaking at Sivagiri Mutt in Varkala while inaugurating the 90th anniversary of Mahasamadhi of Sree Narayana Guru.

Hours earlier, Shah had landed in Kannur on a chartered flight (a Falcon 2000), becoming the first passenger to land at the airport even before its formal inauguration on December 9.

"Kerala now experiences an Emergency-like situation," Shah said, going on to accuse CM Pinarayi Vijayan of playing with fire in trying to "suppress protests" of Sabarimala devotees. "Using the court order as cover, the state is trying to turn Kerala into a battlefield," he said and that the state did not show the same enthusiasm in fighting floods.

"I hear people speak of article 14, but under the articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution, I also have the right to live by my religion. How can one fundamental right override another fundamental right," he asked. He said Hindu traditions honour women as during Dussehra and Navratri daughters are worshipped. "Women sit next to us for pujas...we have respected women but there are temples with different traditions," he said.

Kerala CM Pinarayi Vijayan shrugged off the BJP chief's accusations of an "Emergency-like situation in Kerala" as "ramblings" against his "democratically-elected government", saying it only "revealed the true colours of RSS and Sangh Parivar".

Shah said BJP and the Sree Narayana Dharma Paripalana (SNDP) Yogam, which has considerable clout in the politically significant Ezhava community, would jointly fight attempts to attack Hindu tradition and beliefs in the name of implementing the SC order that set aside the shrine's tradition barring females in the age 10 to 50 years on the ground that the deity is an eternal bachelor and does not welcome women of menstruating age.

Though he shared the dais with the BJP national president, SNDP Yogam general secretary Vellappally Natesan steered clear of the temple issue. He had earlier hit headlines for his contradictory views on the agitation. On Saturday, Natesan stressed the need for unity between SNDP Yogam and Sivagiri Mutt.

SNDP Yogam and Sivagiri Mutt should continue to work together for a better tomorrow, Shah said. He announced the Centre's decision to sanction Rs 20 crore for the Varkala Sivagiri railway station to help improve facilities for Sivagiri pilgrims.

Junior minister of tourism K J Alphons sanctioned works worth Rs 70 crore to the mutt, towards including Sivagiri in the national pilgrim tourism circuit.

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com...l&utm_campaign=TOI&utm_content=om-bm&from=mdr
 
Last edited by a moderator:
NEW DELHI: The revised bill to make instant Triple Talaq a punishable offence got stalled in Rajya Sabha today. After opposition demands for a select parliamentary committee for further scrutiny of the bill, the house was adjourned till January 2. The real challenge for the bill, passed by the Lok Sabha, is in the upper house, where the government lacks the numbers. Triple Talaq, the practice of Muslim men to instantly divorce their wives by uttering "Talaq" thrice, was declared "unconstitutional" by the Supreme Court in a landmark judgment last year.

Here are the Top Ten Points in this big story:

Rajya Sabha got adjourned till January 2 as the Congress demanded the formation of a select committee to scrutinise the bill. The government rejected the demand. The Trinamool Congress has moved a motion for reference of The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill 2018 to a Select Committee of Rajya Sabha.

Ahead of the session, the opposition party leaders met in the parliament building to finalise their strategy for the day and moved a resolution seeking that the bill be sent to a select committee for review.

The opposition is against the bill's provision for a three-year-jail term for the husband, arguing that a criminal angle cannot be introduced in a civil matter, especially when there is no punishment for desertion in any other religion. They also say there is no clarity on who would provide maintenance to the wife once the husband is in jail and argue that such hardline tactics cannot bring a family together.

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill 2017 was revised after it got stalled by the Rajya Sabha, but the government has not incorporated the changes demanded by the opposition, especially on the penal clause.

The revised bill makes "triple talaq" an offence with a jail term of up to three years and a fine for the husband, and makes the woman entitled to maintenance.

The government's argument that the Supreme Court made Triple Talaq illegal and wanted parliament to pass a bill, has not convinced the opposition, including Naveen Patnaik's BJD and the AIADMK, which have sided with the government earlier on certain issues.

The Congress has argued that the Supreme Court had not asked to make Triple Talaq a punishable offence. When the bill came up for passing in the Lok Sabha last week, the AIADMK had walked out along with the Congress.

Law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, who is piloting the bill, has said the issue involves the lives of thousands of women and should not be subject to politics. He also stressed that it was not against any particular community.

In September, the government made instant Triple Talaq punishable through an ordinance or executive order. The proposed law is expected to replace the ordinance.

In a landmark verdict in August last year, the Supreme Court found the practice of instant Triple Talaq un-Islamic and "arbitrary", and disagreed that it was an integral part of Islamic religious practice.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/tri...cial-rajya-sabha-test-today-10-points-1970302
 
Opposition playing into BJP hands. Bjp will now use this issue to tell people that opposition is basically doing muslim appeasement.
 
NEW DELHI: A fresh bill to make instant Muslim divorce or "triple talaq" illegal, which got stalled in the upper house of parliament and lapsed, was introduced in the Lok Sabha today. The government countered the opposition's claim that it was a "discriminatory" bill by pointing out that the Supreme Court's order banning the controversial Islamic practice needs to be followed up with a strong law. "...There have been triple talaqs since 2017 even after the judgement. What should the women do? Hang the judgement on the wall?" Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad said after introducing the bill in the Lok Sabha. The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2019 will replace an ordinance issued in February by the previous BJP-led National Democratic Alliance government. The bill had failed to clear the Rajya Sabha test earlier.

Here's your 10-point cheat sheet to this big story:

As discussion on the bill opened, Congress leader Shashi Tharoor said the government should bring a uniform law and not one that only targets Muslim men. "Men from other religions also desert their wives," Mr Tharoor said. "There is no procedural safeguards in the bill, refer it to a standing committee... it is a discriminatory bill," he said.

Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad said the triple talaq bill is "about justice and empowerment of women". "The rights of Muslim women will be protected. The matter is not of community, religion or anything but women's security," he said.

AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi criticised the bill over a provision that jails the husband for three years, and questioned the government how it intends to provide maintenance for the woman. "It's a discriminatory bill and does not meet the objective it claims to meet," Mr Owaisi said.

With the dissolution of the 16th Lok Sabha last month, the previous "triple talaq" bill had lapsed as it was pending in the Rajya Sabha. The bill, which provides for a three-year jail term for any Muslim man who divorces his wife instantly by uttering "talaq" thrice - was passed by the Lok Sabha in December last year.

But it failed to clear the Rajya Sabha test as the opposition parties who were in majority in the upper house, wanted it to be sent to a select committee of parliament for further vetting. The government rejected the demand.

Nitish Kumar's Janata Dal United, an ally of the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), has said the party will not back the "triple talaq" bill. Jagan Mohan Reddy's YSR Congress Party and Naveen Patnaik's Biju Janata Dal are also not keen on supporting the bill.

With four of the six parliamentarians in Chandrababu Naidu's Telugu Desam Party having joined the BJP on Thursday, the BJP's strength in the Rajya Sabha - where the NDA has only 102 members in the 245-seat house - will increase slightly.

Most opposition parties, including the Congress, were opposed to stringent provisions like jail term for the husband. They contended that a penal provision cannot be introduced in a domestic issue that's essentially civil in nature and that the bill, in its current form, would end up victimising the Muslims.

The government argued that the bill would stop victimisation of the women, and give them equal rights. The proposed law is based on gender equality and is part of the government's philosophy of "Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas, Sabka Vishwas," Union Minister Prakash Javadekar said last week.

In absence of legislation, the government had passed an executive order to make instant "triple talaq" illegal, which was renewed twice. The new bill is a copy of the ordinance in force. To address fears of misuse of the proposed law, the government had also introduced certain safeguards, such as adding a provision for bail for the accused during trial.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/fre...-today-10-points-2056816?pfrom=home-topscroll
 
unfortunately shria (islamic jurisdiction ) does not permit this.

India can take a lead and make the marriage contract fair for muslim women.

This is where Religion should take a back seat. Religion is okay as long as it keeps people in check. But this is just wrong. This is outdated for this modern era. You either give it to both or illegal.
 
Triple talaq: India criminalises Muslim 'instant divorce'

India's parliament has approved a bill that makes the Muslim practice of "instant divorce" a criminal offence.

"Triple talaq", as it's known, allows a husband to divorce his wife by repeating the word "talaq" (divorce) three times in any form, including email or text message.

The Supreme Court declared the practice unconstitutional in 2017.

Supporters say the new measure protects Muslim women. Opponents say the punishment is harsh and open to misuse.

Men found in breach of the new law can be jailed for up to three years.

The bill was first tabled in 2017 but stalled in the upper house of parliament, where some MPs called it unfair.

India's governing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) supports the bill, while the main opposition Congress party opposes it.

But the BJP doesn't have a majority in the upper house. On Tuesday, the bill was passed by 99 votes to 84 after a number of walkouts and abstentions.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi was quick to celebrate the vote as "a victory of gender justice".

But others accused his Hindu nationalist BJP of targeting Muslims.

Asaduddin Owaisi, an MP from the opposition All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen party, said the new law was another attack on Muslim identity under the BJP, which has been in power since 2014.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-49160818
 
When the practice was declared unconstitutional by court, on PP views were near unanimous that instant triple talaq is unislamic.

Now you see how leaders like Owaisi are targetting this as being attack on muslims, while the issue is gender justice.
 
So imagine a Muslim man abandons his wife, doesn't utter the magic word 3 times, what then? Will he get 3 years for being a dead beat or does he get away Scott free?
 
When the practice was declared unconstitutional by court, on PP views were near unanimous that instant triple talaq is unislamic.

Now you see how leaders like Owaisi are targetting this as being attack on muslims, while the issue is gender justice.

Very good of the Hindutva govt to show concern for gender justice in Muslim community.
 
So imagine a Muslim man abandons his wife, doesn't utter the magic word 3 times, what then? Will he get 3 years for being a dead beat or does he get away Scott free?

He can then be prosecuted under the Domestic violence act.
 
When the practice was declared unconstitutional by court, on PP views were near unanimous that instant triple talaq is unislamic.

Now you see how leaders like Owaisi are targetting this as being attack on muslims, while the issue is gender justice.

All of the sudden PP views matter. LOL.
 
Lol at the percentage you made out of thin air

It’s illegal in Pakistan

How it was done in India is how it was decided by All schools within Sunni islam, Ibn thamiyah was the first person who disagreed with the Ruling , due to the rise of the Salafi Dogma, many Muslim countries have adopted Ibn thamiya position, when in fact It is A minority position within the Hanbali school.
 
When the practice was declared unconstitutional by court, on PP views were near unanimous that instant triple talaq is unislamic.

Now you see how leaders like Owaisi are targetting this as being attack on muslims, while the issue is gender justice.

Ovaisi's criticism of this charade is valid.

1) The new law says that Instant triple talaq doesnt invalidate marriage.

2) Then it says if a man utters triple talaq then he will be sent to jail for 3 years.

For what? Why will he go to jail if the marriage is still valid? For uttering some words? Lol its stupid and unconstitutional.

Also, the law only applies to muslim men. Hypothetically speaking, what if a hindu man says these words to his wife? Why wont he go to jail?

There were already laws related to domestic violence etc. which could have taken care of triple talaq. This is all a big sham by BJP who just want to show their voter base that they are doing something against muslims.

Why not allow Women to enter temples like Sabrimala whenever they want? Come back here when BJP passes a bill for that.
 
Ovaisi's criticism of this charade is valid.

1) The new law says that Instant triple talaq doesnt invalidate marriage.

2) Then it says if a man utters triple talaq then he will be sent to jail for 3 years.

For what? Why will he go to jail if the marriage is still valid? For uttering some words? Lol its stupid and unconstitutional.

Also, the law only applies to muslim men. Hypothetically speaking, what if a hindu man says these words to his wife? Why wont he go to jail?

There were already laws related to domestic violence etc. which could have taken care of triple talaq. This is all a big sham by BJP who just want to show their voter base that they are doing something against muslims.

Why not allow Women to enter temples like Sabrimala whenever they want? Come back here when BJP passes a bill for that.



1) Triple Talaq doesnot invalidate marriage, but that hasnot stopped people from uttering it and turning out their wives. Now since this will send them to jail, they will think twice before doing this. As now giving TT and then marrying another one wont be possible.

2)Hindus cannot give divorce unless its granted by the court and till then they cant remarry. And TT has no place among hindus.

3)What has Sabarimala got to do here? Is bjp making a law on how to pray in islam or how to pray in a mosque?
 
1) Triple Talaq doesnot invalidate marriage, but that hasnot stopped people from uttering it and turning out their wives. Now since this will send them to jail, they will think twice before doing this. As now giving TT and then marrying another one wont be possible.

So you are saying marriage will not be invalidated, crime will not be committed but you will jail people for saying three words? Lol sounds logical.

2)Hindus cannot give divorce unless its granted by the court and till then they cant remarry. And TT has no place among hindus.
Same here. According to new law, muslims cannot give triple talaq too. So for what crime will they be sent to jail? For saying talaq 3 times? Any man can say these words irrespective of religion. If a hindu says talaqx3 just for kicks, why wont he be sent to jail?


3)What has Sabarimala got to do here? Is bjp making a law on how to pray in islam or how to pray in a mosque?

BJP is making a law to counter discrimination against women. Not allowing women into temples is discriminatory. They wont tell hindus how to pray inside the temple. Just remove this discrimination.
 
It's good. Divorce should be a formal process, if marriage doesn't work after n number of counselling sessions then couples can apply for divorce.

All these old and outdated rules should be scrapped, they don't belong in our society.
 
It's good. Divorce should be a formal process, if marriage doesn't work after n number of counselling sessions then couples can apply for divorce.

All these old and outdated rules should be scrapped, they don't belong in our society.

The ruling party which is enforcing the changes is itself old and outdated, maybe they should apply similar changes to their own practises - and actually ensure they get enforced by equally old fashioned judiciary.
 
Back
Top