Wife‑Beating isn’t based on eternal law based on eternal truth or Word of God, there’s no Divine Wrath, there’s Divine Will!
By Joe Fernandez
(http://bakrimusa.blogspot.com/2026/07/shahrours-reading-of-wife-beating-verse.html?m=1)
Commentary And Analysis . . . The law remains shield, and it must be held over every woman.
(https://jesseltontimes.com/2026/06/29/malaysia-neglects-english-language-foundation-in-law/)
The Word of God, when rightly read, isn’t sword for striking her but a light on guidance.
The eternal law remains love, not violence.
Divine Will, not Wrath, was the source of justice. The truth about the verse will be known by its fruits. Time will prove everything. Let there be justice even if the heavens fall (Fiat justitia ruat caelum).
Wife‑beating was crime under Malaysian law, and no interpretation of Qur’anic verse 4:34 that purports on authorising it can override the positive law.
Shahrour’s linguistic re‑reading, while not yet proven for the standard required for displacing the entire weight of classical Tafsir, was consistent with the Quranic spirit of progressive interpretation and provides a theological pathway for the complete rejection of domestic violence.
The proposition that wife‑beating isn’t based on eternal law was legally and philosophically sound. There’s no Divine Wrath commanding it; there’s only Divine Will, discerned through reason, compassion, and the spirit of the law.
The Qur’anic text — oral origins, fluid grammar, multiple recitation — offers rich resource for communities seeking on reconciling faith with the fundamental human right for freedom from violence.
The violent verse melting under the heat of progressive scholarship and the unwavering demands of the rule of law. The truth about 4:34 will not be found in a single word, but in the entire architecture of the Qur’an, read with the spirit of justice.
Visible: The verse that may sanction striking; a crime that’s heinous and unthinkable.
Beneath; The linguistics of seventh‑century Arabic; the politics of the mushaf; the alternative Qira’at; the classical Tafsir that already restricts the permission; the Domestic Violence Act 1994; the eternal law of cause and effect that renders violence self‑defeating.
Karma was neutral. It records every blow and every act of mercy. The eternal law isn’t permission for striking: it’s the law of consequence.
The Divine Will isn’t wrathful command; it’s the call for justice. Wife‑beating isn’t sacred; it’s a crime. Truth (Veritas), having life force all its own, will emerge in the courtroom, the home, and the quiet, courageous resistance of the victim. Time will prove everything. Fiat justitia ruat caelum.
ISSUES IN CONFLICT
Whether Qur’anic verse 4:34 mandates, permits, or merely describes marital discipline;
Whether the verb idribuhunna can bear a non‑violent meaning;
Whether the traditional reading of 4:34 was product of anachronistic grammar and the politics of the standardised mushaf;
Whether wife‑beating constitutes a crime under Malaysian law irrespective of any theological interpretation; and
Whether the concept of eternal law encompasses violence against a spouse.
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS
c. 610‑632 CE: Revelation of the Qur’an.
c. 650 CE: Standardisation of the mushaf under Caliph Othman.
8th‑10th centuries: Codification of Arabic grammar; compilation of classical Tafsir.
1994: Domestic Violence Act 1994 (Act 521) enacted in Malaysia.
2021: Bakri Musa publishes Qur’an, Hadith and Hikayat.
5 July 2026: The excerpt on Shahrour’s reading was published.
6 July 2026: The present jurist commentary was issued.
STATUTES AND CONSTITUTION
Domestic Violence Act 1994 (Act 521, Malaysia).
Penal Code (Act 574, Malaysia): sections 323, 324, 325.
Federal Constitution of Malaysia: Article 8(1) (equality).
Evidence Act 1950 (Act 56): sections 60, 101‑103 (by analogy).
CASE LAWS
Subramaniam v. Public Prosecutor [1956] 1 WLR 965 – hearsay rule.
R v. Exall (1866) 4 F. & F. 922 – circumstantial evidence must exclude other possibilities.
Sivarasa Rasiah v. Badan Peguam Malaysia [2010] 2 MLJ 333 – rule of law justiciable.
PRINCIPLES
Onus probandi (burden of proof on the proponent of a new interpretation); prima facie (at first sight); correlatio non est causatio (correlation is not causation); allegatio non probata (allegation not proven); factum probatum (proven fact); audi alteram partem (hear the other side); lex naturalis (natural law); veritas (truth).
IX. BUNDLE OF AUTHORITIES
Bakri Musa, “Shahrour’s Reading of the ‘Wife‑Beating’ Verse,” 5 July 2026.
The Qur’an, Surah An‑Nisa, 4:34.
Domestic Violence Act 1994 (Malaysia).
The philosophical meditations on law.
The proposition under scrutiny was that wife‑beating was an unthinkable, heinous crime, and that its alleged justification through Qur’anic verse 4:34 rests not on eternal divine law but on historically contingent and linguistically flawed interpretation.
The corollary was that there’s no Divine Wrath mandating such violence, but rather Divine Will that’s best discerned through the spirit of the law viz. progressive, compassionate, and protective of human dignity.
The jurist must determine whether this proposition was legally, theologically, and evidentially defensible, and whether the reinterpretation advanced by Muhammad Shahrour, as reported by Bakri Musa, provides sufficient linguistic and historical evidence for displacing the traditional reading that has, in some jurisdictions, been used for justifying, if not for mitigating domestic violence. — TJT
Longtime Borneo watcher Joe Fernandez has been writing for many years on both sides of the Southeast Asia Sea. He should not be mistaken for a namesake formerly with the Daily Express in Kota Kinabalu. JF keeps a Blog under FernzTheGreat, as jurist (legal scholar), on the nature of human relationships.
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Jesselton Times.
