THE recent release of the Women’s Affairs Reform Commission’s report has reignited the debate around women’s rights in Bangladesh. Several religious political parties have united in protest against the Commission’s proposal for gender-equal inheritance and other reforms, demanding its outright rejection. Ironically, the July uprising — once a platform for anti-discrimination — has seen some male comrades express solidarity with conservative forces opposed to gender equality. While religious conservatives take to the streets, secular patriarchy remains strategically silent. In this context, both religious and secular patriarchies appear aligned, even as the religious forces dominate the public discourse.
At the heart of the religious objection is the claim that equal inheritance rights for women contradict Islamic principles. Muslim feminist scholars across the globe strongly disagree. They argue that such opposition is rooted not in the Qur’an itself, but in patriarchal interpretations by religious authorities — or ulama — whose commentaries often serve to entrench male dominance.
Leading scholars such as African-American feminist Amina Wadud, Iranian anthropologist Ziba Mir-Hosseini, Pakistani scholar Asma Barlas, and theologians like Fazlur Rahman and Khaled Abou El Fadl distinguish between Sharia (divine law) and fiqh (human interpretation of that law). According to them, fiqh is a male-authored framework shaped by historical and social contexts that no longer apply in modern society.
They contend that while the Qur’an affirms the spiritual equality and dignity of women, traditional male-centric interpretations often misrepresent and distort its message. A Qur’anic verse (4:1) even states that men and women were created from a single soul, reinforcing the idea of inherent equality. The Qur’anic worldview, they argue, is grounded in tawhid — which implies the spiritual and moral equality of all human beings, regardless of gender.
Amina Wadud emphasises that the oft-cited verse on inheritance (4:11) and male authority (4:34) must be understood within their historical context. In 7th-century Arabia, women rarely owned property or earned income. These verses ensured their protection in a patriarchal society — not the enshrinement of inequality for all time.
Wadud critiques the term qawwamun in verse 4:34 — often translated as ‘men are in charge of women.’ She argues that its proper interpretation denotes financial responsibility, not superiority or divine mandate. The goal of the verse, she says, was household stability — not male dominance. Interpretations that justify control or subjugation conflict with the Qur’an’s ethical core.
Fazlur Rahman’s ‘Double Movement Theory’ supports this view, proposing that verses should first be read in their historical context and then applied ethically to contemporary realities. He and others argue that revisiting patriarchal interpretations is essential in a world where women now work, earn, and contribute equally to society.
Ziba Mir-Hosseini asserts that Sharia is an ethical and spiritual ideal rooted in justice, human dignity, and equality. Fiqh, on the other hand, is a product of human reasoning by male scholars and is thus open to revision. The current Islamic law, which gives men twice the inheritance of women, may have been relevant historically but no longer reflects today’s economic and social realities.
Mir-Hosseini and Barlas stress that the true message of Islam lies in justice — not in preserving male privilege. Barlas, in particular, asserts that the Qur’an is a liberatory text for women but has long been misrepresented through patriarchal exegesis.
Indeed, many Qur’anic verses affirm gender parity: ‘Covet not that by which God preferred some of you over others in bounty. Men have a share of what they earned, and women have a share of what they earned.’ (Tarif Khalidi, The Qur’an, 4:32); and again, ‘I disregard not the works of any who works among you. Be they male or female, The one is like the other.’ (Khalidi, The Qur’an, 3:195). These verses make no distinction in reward or spiritual merit based on gender.
A call for Ijtihad: Considering changing social conditions — where nearly 26 million women are active in various sectors — the argument that women must inherit less because they don’t earn is now obsolete. Islamic legal tradition includes the principle of ijtihad — independent reasoning to address new circumstances. It is time to invoke ijtihad to realign Islamic law with its foundational commitment to justice and equality.
The pressing question remains: will religious leaders continue to stand against half the population, or will they rise to the challenge of building a more equitable and harmonious society? If the spirit of the July uprising is to endure, its commitment to anti-discrimination must not be abandoned.
Ìý
ÌýDr Akhtar Sobhan Masroor is a writer and key student leader of the 1990 mass uprising in Bangladesh.
