Lessons from The Fall: Pre-Historic Indications of Qawwaama

Peace Be Unto Those Who Follow Right Guidance.

Yesterday, I delivered a talk entitled "The Battle of The Sexes" to a group of Muslims in East London. The objective of the talk was to explore gender dynamics in the dominant contemporary world order - White Supremacy (Racism) - as contrasted with gender dynamics in the Islamic - more specifically, Qur'anic - weltanschauung (worldview). My central point was that the phrase "battle of the sexes" can be understood in two ways, viz. as implying either a battle between the sexes (that is, between males and females) or a battle of the sexes taken as a single unit (or complementary pair) fighting against something else. I hold to the view that, unfortunately, both conflicts are indeed raging in the world, but that the former conflict should end and focus shift exclusively to the latter: In short, I'm proposing an endorsement of the view that "it's you and me, babe, against the world", with the proviso that it's not the world that is the thing to struggle against, but rather the New World (Dis)Order that is White Supremacy (Racism).

After the talk, one of the members of the audience, Aziza Fanselow, an Egyptian Muslim sister who I had previously been introduced to through a mutual friend, commented briefly on something I had said during my talk. I had said that, unlike Christianity, which laid the blame for "The Fall" of man at the feet of woman (specifically, Eve), the Islamic view appeared, at first glance, to hold men and women equally responsible for their initial "fall" from grace. However, I also made reference to a statement in a master's dissertation entitled "Examine the Prophet's Position on the Status of Women" that I had recently read in which it was (correctly) stated that it was 'Adam who disobeyed the command of his Sustainer/Cherisher (rabb) and followed the 'whisperings' of Ash-Shayth'aan (the alienated and alienating personality type), thereby leading both himself and his complementary opposite (zawj) astray. (Interestingly, The Qur'an nowhere mentions hawa=Eve by name.) The relevant signs/messages (ayaat) of The Qur'an in this connection are as follows:

(20:120) Fawaswasa ilayhi alshshaytanu qala ya adamu hal adulluka AAala shajarati alkhuldi wamulkin la yabla
But Satan whispered evil to him: he said, "O Adam! shall I lead thee to the Tree of Eternity and to a kingdom that never decays?"

(20:121) Faakala minha fabadat lahuma saw-atuhuma watafiqa yakhsifani AAalayhima min waraqi aljannati waAAasa adamu rabbahu faghawa
In the result, they both ate of the tree, and so their nakedness appeared to them: they began to sew together, for their covering, leaves from the Garden: thus did Adam disobey his Lord, and allow himself to be seduced.

(20:122) Thumma ijtabahu rabbuhu fataba AAalayhi wahada
But his Lord chose him (for His Grace): He turned to him, and gave him Guidance.

Sister Aziza's contribution was to share with me her tafseer (commentary) on the implications of these ayaat (signs/messages) for the issue of qawwaama (maintenance). According to her reading of these ayaat, the fact that it is 'Adam who is the one whispered to and yet 'Eve' appears to have gone along with - that is, accepted, concurred with, followed, or obeyed - his (that is, 'Adam's) decision to follow such errant, seductive advice implies that 'Adam stands to his complementary opposite (zawj) in the relation of qawwaam, that is, as one who is responsible for maintaining, looking after, taking care of (that is, care-taking) his complementary opposite, while she stands in a relation of ith'aat (voluntary obedience) to him. In this way, Sister Aziza established a connection between (20:120-122) and (4:34). I think this is a significant connection to have made because various '(post)-modernist' and so-called 'Muslim feminist' (or 'Islamic feminist') authors such as Amina Wadud Muhsin, author of Qur'an and Women: Rereading the Sacred Text from a Woman's Perspective have tried to argue that the male role of qawwaam is not an essential one, but rather a contingent, socially-constructed one. I think that the above argument calls this position into question and re-establishes the validity of the traditional, essentialist stance vis-a-vis gender complementarity and the relation of gender difference to functional difference.

I want to thank Sister Aziza for sharing this fiqh (understanding) with me and hope that you, my reader, derive benefit from it.

Peace