(The Woman in the Religion of Allah…)
Fifthly: Whoever says that the woman has been oppressed by a certain legislation/law [1], such as inheritance or testimony, he must clarify to us his balance and weight standard upon which he determines justice and oppression, and therefore, he decided and concluded that the woman must be equal with the man in everything, even though we all see that the woman is not equal to the man in everything [2].
And also whoever wishes to direct criticism to a certain legislation within a lawful and legislation system, it is upon him that he observes this legislation as a part of this system, and [does] not take this portion out and treat it [as] being isolated from the system as a whole.
It is supposed to be that he looks towards the rights of the woman and what is obligatory upon her in the Divine Law at the very least, not that he looks towards the rights only and says that the woman is given less rights than the man in the Divine Law. Why is it that he does not look towards what is obligatory [upon both the man and the woman] and say that the man carries more obligations than the woman in the Divine Law?
And as an example; [there are] two people, I assign one of them with building/constructing five stories, and the other ten stories, would it be fair if I gave them the same amount of building material and the same amount [of money] for building? And if I were to give the owner of the ten [story building] double the owner of the five [story building], would it be valid for a person to come and say, “You are unjust, because while they both work for you, you did not give to them equally”?
I believe that whoever says that the woman is oppressed by such legislation, his words and decision are impulsive and far from accurate scientific research.
* * *
___________________________
[1] – And the Legislations of the Jews and the Christians also do not make the two equal, such as the law of inheritance, [which] does not make equality between a man and woman, in the Old and the New Testament:
(1 Then the daughters of Zelophehad came forward. Zelophehad was son of Hepher son of Gilead son of Machir son of Manasseh son of Joseph, a member of the Manassite clans. The names of his daughters were: Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. 2 They stood before Moses, Eleazar the priest, the leaders, and all the congregation, at the entrance of the tent of meeting, and they said, 3 ‘Our father died in the wilderness; he was not among the company of those who gathered themselves together against the Lord in the company of Korah, but died for his own sin; and he had no sons. 4 Why should the name of our father be taken away from his clan because he had no son? Give to us a possession among our father’s brothers.’ 5 Moses brought their case before the Lord. 6 And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: 7 The daughters of Zelophehad are right in what they are saying; you shall indeed let them possess an inheritance among their father’s brothers and pass the inheritance of their father on to them. 8 You shall also say to the Israelites, ‘If a man dies, and has no son, then you shall pass his inheritance on to his daughter. 9 If he has no daughter, then you shall give his inheritance to his brothers. 10 If he has no brothers, then you shall give his inheritance to his father’s brothers.) The Old and New Testament – The Book of Numbers – Chapter 27.
And Priest Tadras Ya’qoub Malti said in the interpretation of the chapter:
(Law of inheritance and establishing Joshua: This chapter includes two matters which came at the end of the life of the Great one among the Prophet Moses (pbuh), and they are the story of the daughters of Zelophehad and appointing Joshua as a leader for the people. So Allah made the law of inheritance obligatory upon all the group, the son inherits his father. And if the dead man does not have a son then his daughter inherits him. And if he does not have a daughter then his siblings or his uncles, or whoever is closest to him from among his family, inherit him.
Law of Inheritance: Because of the case of the daughters of Zelophehad, the law of inheritance came to announce that the legal/lawful inheritors, like we said, are the son, then the daughter, then siblings, then uncles, or whoever is closest to him in the family.) Interpretation of the Holy Book – Old Testament – Priest Tadras Ya’qoub – Law of Inheritance and establishing Moses – Interpretation of Book of Numbers – chapter 27.
Also Priest Antonios Fikri, in his interpretation of the same chapter, he says:
(And it was a new law, and [that is] that if the dead person does not have a son then his daughter inherits him. And if he does not have a daughter then his siblings or his uncles, or whoever is closest to him from among his family, inherit him.) And we observe that:
……… 4 The result of the insistence of the daughter of Zelophehad to get their share, the blessing of that was their gaining a new law for inheritance.) Interpretation of the Holy Book – Old Testament – Priest Antonios Fikri – Interpretation of Book of Numbers – chapter 27.
So this is an example of a legislation which is believed by the Christians and the Jews to be a Divine legislation and law.
And this legislation does not make the inheritance between a man and a woman equal, so is this also considered oppression or is it enough to say – just as some people do now – that the Church does not obligate the applications of the Laws on the pretext that Jesus (pbuh) did not judge among the people?!
But the reality is that if Jesus (pbuh) had the chance to judge, he would have judged and adjudicated by the ruling/judgement of Allah, the Glorious, the Exalted. And it has been presented in the Gospels:
(17 ‘Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfil. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. 19 Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.) The New Testament – The Gospel of Matthew – Chapter 5.
So is this legislation and Divine Law which Moses (pbuh) came with, and Jesus (pbuh) approved it, because it is within the law, is it possible to describe it as being oppressive to a woman because it does not make her and the man equal?!
Then even if we accept that this legislation was not applied by Jesus (pbuh) due to Jesus’ (pbuh) inability to rule, so do the Christians today believe that this law was oppressive while it is from Allah, the Glorious, the Almighty?!
Therefore, every legislation which the previous Prophets (pbut) came with before Jesus (pbuh) is a Divine Law and shall never be violated. As for [the fact that] the people of the Successors of Allah (pbut), like Jesus (pbuh), did not enable them to rule, this does not violate/cancel these laws or make them oppressive for example. Rather, and even when the Divine legislation and judgments/rulings get replaced with another, then those abrogated Divine judgments/rulings remain just and truth from Allah, the Glorious, and all of them fall under the law of Allah, even if some of the details were changed due to the time and the people and the need of the Divine wisdom.
[2] – No sane person would see that the woman is equal to the man in everything, and for that there is nothing wrong with giving an example from these paragraphs, from the text of the message of Pope Shenouda the Third, about the opinion of the Coptic Orthodox church in regards to granting the women Priesthood. [This message] was presented by Bishop Bishoy in the conference of Lambeth for the Anglicans in England in year 1988.
Pope Shenouda the Third said: (…….So if we search in the Holy Book and the traditions of old Church we shall find the following:
1. Women do not teach in the church:
In this respect, Saint Paul the Apostle said, (Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.) (1 Tim. 2:11-15).
In the teachings of Saint Paul the Apostle on this subject, we recognize that he gave a justification for forbidding such a thing. This justification has nothing to do with the prevalent social circumstances at that time, nor with the circumstances of the church that his disciple Timothy pastored. However, he relied upon aspects concerning men and women since the beginning of the creation, even prior to the banishment of Adam and Eve from paradise due to sin.
If we have come to know that women should not teach in the church, then chiefly it is not permissible to grant her any priestly ranks, since the priest serves the holy sacraments besides teaching and leading the church within the limits of his responsibility…
10. The Results of exaggeration in offering rights to women outside the boundary of biblical teachings:
We observe that the world rushes rashly in modifying biblical teachings to an extent that those defenders of the rights of women are trying to imply femininity to the name of God Himself and forbidding words like our father or your heavenly Father. Thus, altering the Holy Bible in many subjects concerning the Divine hypostaseis and their relation to one another, i.e. the relation of the Son to the Heavenly Father. Some points affect the redemption and atonement of Christ, and His Spiritual Fatherhood as an archpriest.
11. Practical obstacles:
There are practical obstacles to women during intervals of pregnancy, giving birth and nursing, of which the female employees usually take extensive leave from their employment. Being occupied in priestly work may cause complete negligence in the role of a housewife and in rearing of children…) Pope Shenouda – The opinion of the Orthodox Church in regards to the Priesthood of women – Conference of Lambeth for the Anglicans in England in year 1988 – from the official website of Bishop Bishoy http://www.metroplit-bishoy.org/arabic/dialogues.htm
First Mahdi : Yamani : Ahmed Alhasan 