Misyar marriages not just about sex

Misyar marriages not just about sex
Fauwaz Abdul Aziz
Jun 2, 06 3:43pm

A misyar marriage is not just about fulfilling the sexual desires of either or both spouses, said a Jemaah Islah Malaysia (JIM) leader.

Its women’s wing chief Dr Harlina Halizah Siraj (right) said a misyar marriage is one in which a woman waives or suspends one or more rights to which she is entitled in view of the particular circumstances of her potential husband.

It is not a license for any party to satisfy merely their sexual desires - as claimed by some quarters - as all the other rules, principles, and obligations of marriage remain as obligations, she said.

“We want to correct the impression that misyar marriage is just to fulfill the sexual desires (of one person). That is not correct at all,” said Harlina when contacted.

A financially independent woman, for example, may choose to forego the provision of a house, food and drink, or clothes from her husband which he is normally obligated to furnish, she explained.

This, she said, is not unusual as it happens in many marriages from time to time whereby a wife sometimes uses her own money for basic necessities in order to free her husband’s resources for use on other expenses.

“I guess we have misyar in (many) marriages ... even you and I might have gone through that. I’m not going to challenge it in any court of law,” she said.

Harlina was responding to the outcry that erupted, especially among women leaders, after religious scholar Prof Dr Mahmud Zuhdi Abdul Majid of Universiti Malaya reportedly claimed to have called for more misyar marriages.

Another wrong impression

They condemned the suggestion as one that would allegedly relieve men of their material responsibilities while giving them free rein to fulfilling merely their ‘sexual’ obligations.

In many media reports on the matter, Zuhdi’s use of the term ‘nafqah batin’, pertaining to non-material maintenance, had been translated as ‘providing for sexual needs’.

Harlina pointed out that this seemed a deliberate misrepresentation of the term which has led to yet another wrong impression of Islamic laws and teachings.

“Nafqah batin is not just sexual. It has to do with giving one’s love, companionship, intimacy, being fair in your dealings with your spouse, protecting your spouse’s social reputation,” she said.

In a previous report, Zuhdi has said that he had never called for men to be absolved of their responsibilities, but merely that the women who are financially stronger than their husbands can waive the right to certain provisions pertaining to her own needs.

It is still incumbent upon him, however, to provide companionship and family leadership while fulfilling his other responsibilities such as to his children, said Zuhdi.

“The husband’s role (in other areas) must continue, the children have to be taken care of. It’s just that the financial burden is lightened, and that only after the couple have mutually agreed,” said Zuhdi.

“That is all! He doesn’t have to support me, but he has to support my children and everything else,” said Harlina echoing Zuhdi on the matter.

“This tanazul, or exemption, I can take back any time. If I say, ‘Okay, now I want you to support me,’ then he would have to support me,” she added.

Record agreement

In order to avoid any one party from abusing or distorting such agreed exemptions later, Harlina recommended that these be recorded for further reference.

A wife, said Harlina, might suddenly claim to outside parties that her husband had been acting irresponsibly in not providing maintenance during the course of their marriage.

“There should be some sort of agreement documented in some way in order to safeguard everybody’s right,” she said.

While there were parties on opposite ends of the spectrum who either called for the proscription of misyar marriages or said it should be allowed without any limitations, Harlina said JIM advocated the middle ground.

Citing Egyptian scholar Yusuf Qaradhawi, Harlina said it is discouraged and should be allowed “only under strict circumstances,” as it involved the waiver of women’s rights.