حاشیه‌های فمینیستی قرآن

by Aysha A. Hidayatullah

Aysha A. Hidayatullah offers the first comprehensive examination of contemporary feminist Qur'anic interpretation, exploring its dynamic challenges to Islamic tradition and contemporary Muslim views of the Qur'an. She analyzes major feminist readings of the Qur'an beginning in the late twentieth century, synthesizing their common concepts and methods and revealing their vital part in the development of the nascent field of Qur'anic tafsir (exegesis).
Hidayatullah contributes her own critical assessment of feminist ''impasses'' in the Qur'anic text and the field's appeals to the principles of equality and justice. She expands these observations into a radical critique of feminist approaches to the Qur'an, arguing that the feminist exegetical endeavor has reached a point of irresolvable contradiction by making claims about the Qur'an that are not fully supported by the text. Hidayatullah outlines major challenges to the authority of feminist interpretations of the Qur'an and interrogates the feminist premises on which they have relied, questioning the viability of current strands of feminist Qur'anic interpretation and proposing a major revision of its exegetical positions.
An innovative work of Muslim feminist theology, this volume offers an essential contribution to conversations about feminist tafsir and asking bold questions at the ''edge'' of Qur'anic interpretation.

Genres: Islam, Feminism, Nonfiction, Religion, Gender, Womens, Theology

Unknown Binding

First published March 7, 2014

About the author

Aysha Hidayatullah received her Ph.D. in Religious Studies from the University of Carolina in 2009.

Reviews

[Sara Salem · Rating 4 out of 5]

The timing of this book seems perfect in light of the somewhat stalled project of Islamic feminism. Since the first and second generation of Islamic feminist scholars, little has been written about how to move forward. This book mostly provides a recap of the various arguments made within Islamic feminism, but also usefully ties them together to show exactly what kind of argumentation is used and what forms of authority these scholars draw on (usually a combination of traditional Qur'anic exegesis and modern notions of gender equality).

It is precisely the fact, however, that they draw on modern notions of gender equality that explains why the Islamic feminist project can only go so far, according to the author. Because equality has already been pre-defined by these scholars, based on modern notions of not only equality but gender, the Islamic feminist project is already set up to fail. It is only by moving past these preconceptions and trying to understand gender at different historical periods that a more useful Islamic feminism can be constructed. In effect it seems that she too is calling for a form of historicizing.

Overall an interesting read that mirrors my own reservations with Islamic feminism and my ultimate rejection of many of the arguments that have been made by these scholars, particularly ones that seem more like attempts at linguistic gymnastics. It is to their credit that scholars like Amina Wadud and Kecia Ali have openly admitted that some verses cannot be "explained" and remain problematic and sexist, although Hidayatullah would probably reply: sexist by which standards?

[Tuscany Bernier · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this unusual work!

I would recommend this book for people of strong aqeedah willing to look at other opinions religiously. The author doesn't seem to push one idea over the other usually but rather she asks us what we value as believers in Islam? Are we trying to put gender equality in places it isn't? Are we overlooking areas that were assumed to be sexist, but really aren't?

'Feminist Edges of the Quran' helped me understand other opinions on translations, tafsir, etc. that are not as mainstream. Literally taking a look at the "edges" of Islamic thought and discerning different ideas. It's also generally well-written.

[Sofia · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book has some high ratings, and perhaps rightly so on account of its potential to rejuvenate discourse in the field of Islamic feminism, however I found it be disappointingly lacking.

Hidayatullah begins with a lengthy introduction that is almost self deprecating. Upset that her work should appear in any way to undermine the great works of Muslims feminists before her, she seems to spend the whole introduction apologising for bringing the whole edifice of Islamic feminist scholarship down with her work, but she assures us it's for the good of the cause. So I braced myself for what she had to say. And she said very little then for the next 130 odd pages, other than to summarise all that has gone before her in this field. In honesty this was actually very interesting to read,and for anyone who has little or no knowledge of the Muslims scholars in this field and their works, this section is very helpful in giving a brief overview and well presented introduction.

Then came the "critique". Feminists ignore hadith that don't suit them or aren't in line with their views. As if feminists are the only ones to do this and as if they do not have a criteria (tawhidic paradigm, belief in justice as the ultimate objective of revelation etc) by which they are assessing hadith. She conveniently ignores academics like Fatima Mernissi who relies heavily on the hadith literature in the formulation of her works.

She even questions why equality should be such a desirable thing, quoting Kecia Ali to ask whether it's just a concept we have been taught to demand! One merely has to read history and the obvious demands made my female companions of the Prophet Muhammad to see that this desire to be addressed equally by God, was something already present. It is not a 21st century objective being thrust backwards onto a 7th century text. I find some of her lines of questioning on how this "equality" would, manifest itself as immature even.

Then there is the singling out of Quranic verses that I also found problematic. That said she was honest in presenting the call by feminist exegetes towards a more holistic reading of the Quran which would remedy this.

There is some redemption in her final chapter Confronting Feminist Edges, and for this I'd bring the book back up to a three star rating rather than two. Perhaps it is due to the claims of her introduction in finding huge flaws in the islamic feminism, that I had great expectations and then felt rather let down when her huge flaws were in fact rather minor in my view. They are or issues that are not being addressed, so as such are not groundbreaking discoveries. The feminists she is critiquing are not unaware.

I have mixed feelings about this book. The introductory chapters are great for a summary of most that exists in this field. The critique is a little off pique and may have been better developed and presented not as a critique of Islamic feminism but as her own independent contribution to Qur'anic scholarship. Her issues seem to be much more with the Quran than with feminism as a discipline.

[Cara · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a very interesting book, and one that I hope provokes some much-needed discussion in some circles. It certainly gave me a lot to think about.

The first two thirds or so is essentially an excellent summary of feminist Islamic scholarship up to this point. I've read many, though not all, of the works the author cites in this part, but I still found the comprehensive overview to be a good read, especially as it is less technically challenging than some of the original works.

The last third is the author's critique of this scholarship, which is even more interesting. She was able to put into words some of the concerns I have had but were unable to articulate about Islamic feminism, and others besides. The author comes at this critique from the point of view of someone who is both a Muslim and a feminist, much like the other writers she cites, which made her assessments all the more engaging.

[Mohamad Ballan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Aysha Hidayatullah’s Feminist Edges of the Qur’an is a compelling read. It engages sincerely and deeply with the increasingly-significant field of feminist Qur’an scholarship. Heavily grounded in both the classical Islamic exegetical tradition and modern feminist theory, Dr. Hidayatullah does an excellent job in laying out her arguments. The prose is engaging and the book is generally well-organized. At its core, the work is a radical critique of not only of various aspects of modernist/feminist exegesis of the Qur’an, but also a critique of how modern Muslims have approached the Qur’an in general. It is nothing less than a systematic deconstruction of Muslim feminist approaches to the Qur’an over the past three decades. The book does not shy away from asking the tough questions nor from questioning many of the fundamental assumptions that have guided feminist Qur’an scholarship.

One of the main strengths of the book is the faithful and detailed reconstruction of many of the main methodologial approaches and conclusions of feminist exegesis of the Qur'an. Having reconstructed and described the various modes of feminist exegesis in considerable detail, Hidayatullah then moves on to deconstructing and systematically critiquing their arguments, while interjecting her own particular perspective into the discussion.

Hidayatullah takes serious issue with the underlying assumption of feminist exegetes that the Qur’an promotes both functional and ontological gender equality. She argues that these exegetes have not adequately taken account of the various places in the Qur’an where there is an emphasis on both sexual difference, as well as sexual differentiation. Hidayatullah’s main contention is that there is very little within the Qur’anic text that would support the notion put forth by the feminist exegetes that the Qur’an has, at its core, the promotion of absolute equality between men and women (in fact, she argues, that there is strong textual evidence in the Qur’an suggesting a fundamental inequality). More problematically for Hidayatullah is how feminist exegetes have “generally ignored theoretical issues around gender essentialisms, binaries, and social construction” (p. 129). She claims that “in neglecting an examination of gender, they do not deconstruct the process by which the male subject has been universalized in the first place and the kinds of masculinity and femininity (and their relational formations) that persistently inform the verses of the Qur’an they are responding to; rather, they seem to take them for granted” (p. 129). For any feminist exegesis to adequately address the issue of “gender justice,” Hidayatullah strongly argues that such a critical assessment and investigation of gender is imperative. Otherwise, our author argues, the discourse will remain vague and ineffective. Hidayatullah suggests that rather than being a problem specific to feminist exegetes of the Qur’an, this is a broader issue that has been inherited from unresolved debates on equality and difference in liberal approaches to feminism.

Another major critique that Hidayatullah puts forth is her questioning the legitimacy of feminist exegetes’ unquestioned imposition of values such as contemporaneous 21st-century conceptions of equality, as well as a very modern understanding of male-female relations, on a text that was revealed in the seventh century. She argues that one cannot treat equality as if it was a timeless, ahistorical idea. For Hidayatullah, the emphasis on equality is the product of modernity and derives from particular assumptions about the nature of society, which barely existed in the seventh century. It is thus illogical to impose this criterion with such rigidity upon the Qur’anic text. She suggests, as Kecia Ali has done, that feminist exegetes should explore the possible differences between contemporary conceptions of male-female equality and understandings of men and women in the Qur’an rather than demanding equality as a “self-evident, ahistorical measure of justice from one’s readings of the Qur’an.”

Hidayatullah also critiques feminist exegetes for not acknowledging the limitations of their argument which faults human language and interpretation, and not the Qur’an itself, for patriarchal readings of the text. She argues that many feminist exegetes are proceeding from the a priori assumption that the Qur’an is fundamentally anti-patriarchal and conforms to their notions of gender justice. Hidayatullah critiques this point quite thoroughly and points to verses in the Qur’an which militate against notions of female agency and male-female equality (in particular Q. 2:223 and 4:34). She argues that the best that many feminist exegetes have been able to produce with regard to these verses are apologetic readings or interpretations that distort the text. She asserts that, in the case of these two aforementioned verses, the Qur’an itself “must be held responsible for its sexist and harmful readings” (p. 137). Hidayatullah asserts, for example, that the mere existence of the term daraba in 4:34 “contravenes any interpretive possibility for ruling out the meaning of “to strike”; there is no act of interpretation that may eradicate this possibility” (p. 138).

So how should feminists go about interpreting the Qur’an in a manner consistent with their values and in a way that is neither apologetic nor distortive of the text? Here, Hidayatullah follows the lead of Kecia Ali in suggesting that exegetes should take “interpretive responsibility,” meaning that they should be conscious of their interpretive choices and acknowledge that they are in fact choices, rather than claiming that a particular interpretation is self-evident. It is imperative for Hidayatullah that feminist exegetes are aware of their own intervention in reading the Qur’an. It is important for the exegete to always disclose (or at least be aware) of their own personal, doctrinal and social assumptions which informs their approach to the Qur’anic text. A failure to do so, she argues, would constitute a form of textual authoritarianism since it would deny others the right to similarly interpret the Qur’an. By arguing so strongly that they are recovering the “true meaning” of the Qur’an or “rescuing” the essentially anti-patriarchal message of the Qur’an from sexist exegetes, Hidayatullah argues that feminist tafsir risks falling into the same category of textual authoritarianism that it accuses traditional tafsir as belonging to. According to Hidayatullah, this textual authoritarianism that characterizes feminist exegesis derives from the unquestioned premise that the “essence” of the Qur’an is fundamentally in favor of gender justice, and therefore it needs to be “recovered” or “reclaimed” by an interpretive process. The problem of textual authoritarianism can only be resolved, argues Hidayatullah, if exegetes take interpretive responsibility on one hand, and seek a new understanding of the nature of the Qur’anic text on the other.

At the core of Hidayatullah’s critique of feminist exegesis is her proclamation that “feminist exegetical conceptions of gender equality are historically specific to us and thus perhaps not in the end fully reconcilable with the Qur’anic text” (p. 147). She argues that it is a methodological rigidity within feminist exegesis that has prevented it from questioning and critically reassessing its fundamental premise that the notion of equality derives from the Qur’anic text itself. One of the problems this produces is, as mentioned above, textual authoritarianism. Another is essentializing the Qur’anic text itself and making normative statements about it. Hidayatullah stresses that feminist exegetes have argued themselves into a corner by making it appear that either the Qur’an must be absolutely and unfailingly egalitarian and can never oppress women, or else the struggle for gender equality within Islam is defeated. The answer to this interpretative dead-end (as far as Hidayatullah is concerned) is the notion of taking interpretive responsibility. It is essential that feminist readers of the Qur’an to not merely assert, but “defend and support the claim [that the Qur’an promotes equality] while taking responsibility for prioritizing our contemporary sensibilities in the course of our interpretations” (p. 149). Apologia and textual manipulation cannot and should not be the primary means through which feminist exegetes affirm their position.

Whatever one may think of these ideas put forth by Hidayatullah, it is nevertheless clear that they should be taken seriously and engaged with. It is critical that Muslim feminists attempt to provide adequate answers to these questions and critiques. Hidayatullah’s book, aside from being an important exposition and demonstration of the dynamics of feminist exegesis, is also an important contribution to our understanding of the underpinnings of modernist readings of the Qur’an in general. It provides students and scholars with important insights into the challenges and pitfalls faced by those who have chosen to approach the Qur’an as both academics and believing Muslims, and emphasizes the importance of methodological consistency and a sound approach to Qur’anic hermeneutics.

[Sedighe Vazehi · Rating 4 out of 5]

این کتاب درواقع نقدی بر دیدگاه‌های فمینیستهای مسلمانی چون آمنه ودود، اسماء بارلاس، رفعت حسن و... . نقدی بر خوانشها و تفاسیری از قرآن که تلاس میکنند برابری جنسیتی را از متن قرآن بیرون بیاورند.
هدایت‌الله هم در مقدمه و هم در پایان کتاب گوشزد میکنه که از انتشار این پژوهش ترس داشته و مطمئن نبوده، چون زنان بسیاری در کشورهای مسلمان دارن برای برابری در قالب دین تلاش میکنند و نگران بوده چنین آثار نظری و آکادمیکی در راستای کمک به بیشتر شدن سلطه‌ی اقتدارگرایانی باشه که به اسم اسلام بر زنان سلطه دارند. با این حال به این نتیجه رسیده که انتشار این کتاب و اعلام اینکه تفاسیر فمینیسیتی از قٰرآن به این نحو به بن‌بست رسیده‌اند افقی را پیش روی ما قرار میده که بتونیم نگاه جدید به قرآن و وحی داشته باشیم و درراه تلاش برای هنوز مسلمان و فمینیست ماندن در مسیر جدیدی قدم بگذاریم.
این کتاب سه فصل داره که در فصل اول نویسنده ریشه‌های تاریخی شکل‌گیری تفاسیر فمینیستی قٰرآن رو ذکر میکند، در فصل دوم به بیان اهم این تفاسیر و نظریات میپردازد و در فصل آخر نقد و دیدگاه خودش را نسبت به پیش‌فرضهای این تفاسیر و خود این تفاسیر مطرح و بررسی میکند.

[سیاووش · Rating 3 out of 5]

آیا قرآن از برابری جنسیتی حمایت می‌کنه؟ جواب این سوال، که می‌دونیم به احتمال زیاد «نه» است، برای زن‌های مسلمون چه معنایی داره؟

این کتاب جنبش تفسیرهای فمنیسیتی قرآن رو توضیح می‌ده، این که چطور زن‌های مسلمان آمریکایی تو چند دهه‌ی اخیر تلاش کرده‌ن یه جوری بعضی آیه‌های به طور خاص مشکل‌ساز قرآن رو توجیه کنن که با ایده‌ای که ما امروز از عدالت و برابری داریم جور دربیان. بعد هم نقدشون می‌کنه. من به عنوان کسی که سال‌ها خودم رو مذهبی می‌دونستم قدم به قدمِ این کتاب رو تجربه کرده‌م: مواجه شدن با آیه‌های زن‌ستیز، شوک، انکارشون، دلیل تراشیدن، خوندن و شنیدن دلیل‌تراشی‌های بقیه، و در نهایت قبول کردن این که شاید قرآن واقعاً اون چیزی نیست که من می‌خوام باشه.
در نهایت البته این کتاب نه کمکی بهم کرد و نه جوابی بهم داد. به خصوص که مسئله‌های مطرح‌شده توی این کتاب با مسئله‌های منی که فقط با اسلامِ شیعه سروکار دارم خیلی فرق دارن. آخرش هم داشت تقریباً بهم خوش می‌گذشت از این که نویسنده حین نقد کردن نظریه‌های تفسیر فمنیسیتی گفت یکی از ایرادهای این تفاسیر اینه که تعریفی از جنسیت ارائه نمی‌دن، با جنس یکی می‌دونندش و با «زن» و «مرد» به عنوان دو قطب مخالف و متقابل رفتار می‌کنن. ولی خب بعدش برگشت گفت «قصد ندارم با استدلال علیه تفاوت‌های ثابت، ذاتی و دقیقاً یکسان میان زن و مرد، از برخی شکل‌های دوجنسی بودن یا محو تفاوت بین زن و مرد طرفداری کنم. جنس را هم مفهومی خیالی تصور نمی‌کنم که هر ادعایی درباره‌ی عدالت برای زنان را غیرممکن می‌کند (وانگهی، اگر هیچ زن واقعی وجود نداشته باشد، چطور باید به دنبال برابری با مردان باشد)». چرا بعضیا این‌قدر اصرار دارن ترنسفوبیاشونو با جوهر قرمز رو پیشونی‌شون تتو کنن؟ =))
بگذریم. این کتاب به خودی خود برای من به‌دردبخور نبود. اما الان می‌دونم باید پژوهش‌های این شکلی بیشتر بخونم. تفسیرهای فمنیسیتی قرآن از دیدگاه شیعه، و تفسیرهایی که نگاه و نظر قرآن و حدیث رو به دگرباشی بررسی می‌کنن. فکر نمی‌کنم از چیزی که قراره بهش برسم خوشم بیاد ولی خوشبختانه دیگه چنین انتظاری هم ندارم، که همه چیز رو راحت‌تر می‌کنه.

پی‌نوشت: ترجمه‌ی کتاب شلخته است، و طرح جلدش واقعاً خیلی زشته. :>

[Marva · Rating 4 out of 5]

Its a compelling read, researched well, thought out incredibly and written comprehensively. Crticially reviewing the feminist quran exegesis, Hidayathullah points out the wrongs in the gender questions raised and the mistakes in the ways they were attempted to answer. She has undertaken a herculian task challenging as it is vulnerable in multiple ways one for shaking the ground of islamic feminism which is a fruit of the decades' painstaking labour and also because this could be easily used by Islamophobes and androcentrism seeking religious. Yet, she has managed to articulate nuancedly about the choices must be aware of and acknowledge not just while approaching to comprehend Quraan but what we mean as Islam and how we live as muslims.

[Nour · Rating 5 out of 5]

Hidayatullah’s critical analysis of feminist exegesis of the Quran is fundamental reading. It re-examines the crucial works that helped establish revolutionary women’s readings of the Quran, but at the same time provides a critical assessment of said works and how individuals can move forward as both Muslims and feminists.

[Omar Mohammad · Rating 5 out of 5]

I came across this book whilst taking a class on Islamic ethics at the university which briefly dealt with Islamic feminism. I was hoping to learn more and can definitely recommend this book as an introduction for anyone new to this field.

Hidayatullah – after discussing why the feminist label is used or avoided - does a great job of presenting the shared methodologies and interpretative strategies of many well-known feminist exegetes of the Qur’an. Not merely describing, she offers a critique and her own thoughts on how to move forward.

Much of the readings offered by the feminists came across as apologetic and unconvincing. I’ve recently read Khaled Abou El Fadl’s book, Reasoning with God: Reclaiming Shari’ah in the Modern Age, which I actually thought made a much better case for feminist readings, even though that wasn’t the focus of the book. I do have to admit that I see the interpretative gymnastics sometimes undertaken by the feminists as a sign of their dedication to their faith.

One of the failings of both modernists and feminists is that they are often opportunistic in their selection of hadith and use of the Sunnah. Of course, they both point out that citation is always subject to selection and authority always subject to choice, but one expects them to form a solid methodology to ensure a reading that is more true and sincere. The frameworks used by the feminists – the tawhid doctrine, historical contextualization, and the intratextual method- do not prevent a neglect or abuse of the tradition, in fact it is in service of these frameworks that the feminists have tended to force certain interpretations on the text.

Another interesting point of critique was that the feminists often in presenting their readings as the only true or final reading are guilty of the same fault of which they accuse traditional scholars: authoritarian readings that deny their own fallibility and thereby are guilty of offending the Divine.

Hidayatullah questions the very demand for equality by the feminists, which I think is necessary. Not to undermine it, but to establish it as an authentic Islamic demand. She asks in what way Muslim feminists’ conceptualization of gender, sex, equality, gender justice, differs from that of other feminists and how it is grounded in the Islamic experience and religion.

Regardless of your own thoughts on this subject, you should read this book to see just how beautiful and complicated understanding God can be.

[nova · Rating 4 out of 5]

a good review and critique of feminist tafsirs that i'd particularly recommend to progressive Muslim feminists convinced that they are the ones (and not classical exegetes) who truly understand the Quran's meaning: the author herself is, after all, a Muslim feminist with the integrity to challenge her own field and who realized that the Quran cannot align with her contemporary notions of gender equality and justice. as she writes in her preface:

if Muslim women are to come fully to terms with cases in which the Qur'anic text lends itself to meanings that are detrimental to them, we must begin to confront those meanings more honestly, without resorting to apologetic explanations for them, or engaging in interpretive manipulations to force egalitarian meanings from the text.

i agree with plenty of her critiques: that authors of feminist tafsirs (and Muslim feminists in general) often impose their own notions of gender equality onto the Quran instead of engaging with it honestly, that feminist methodology regarding their usage of hadith is inconsistent and indicative of a confirmation bias, and that ultimately many feminists engage in apologetic maneuvers when they come across quranic verses that don't align with their personal desires of gender equality: a clear-cut sign of trying to do away with cognitive dissonance. furthermore, feminists are too invested with portraying classical exegetes as undeniably misogynistic despite the fact that there are plenty of times where these exegetes demonstrated a concern for women's rights even if it came at the expense of male privilege. indeed, Hidayatullah herself is also guilty of this at times, despite her acknowledgement that traditional scholarship is not monolithic, since i feel a lot of her concerns regarding how to approach the quran in her last chapters could be simply addressed by consulting traditional scholarship.

for instance, she writes that the feminist interpretation of qiwamah as a responsibility rather than a privilege for men does not necessarily equate to women's justice since a power imbalance relationship can still be derived from such an interpretation. however, this interpretation not specific to feminist tafsirs: there are traditional scholars, some of which are contemporary but nevertheless trained in traditional scholarship, who also hold this view. in fact even classical exegetes who interpreted qiwamah as male privilege simultaneously wrote that this privilege translated to responsibility. also just by looking at hadith we can infer as to how qiwamah looks like practically. neither did all classical male exegetes interpret "men's degree over women" to mean "men's superiority over women": At-Tabari, following what companion Ibn Abbas said, wrote that this phrase means that men must fulfill their responsibilities towards their wives while simultaneously absolving their wives of any responsibility towards them. similarly, it seems that Hidayatullah agrees with Kecia Ali's interpretation of 2:223, finding the verse to be objectifying of women as it portrays them as "tilth" i.e. something to be acted upon rather than agent themselves. however, the historical context of this verse (as explained in Ibn Kathir's tafsir) was that the jews said that if a man has sex with his wife from behind (in the vagina) the offspring would become cross-eyed. the companions brought this up and then this verse was sent down, confirming that you may have sex with your wives from the vagina in any position. so its not like this verse was sent down randomly to objectify women, it was sent down in response to men who had a question regarding how to lawfully approach sexual intercourse. pretty much the same goes for 2:187 and the other verses she had a problem with: it was men who inquired and hence it was men the verse responded to, and women did not inquire and hence it was not women the verse responded to so why would the verse include how women should sexually approach men? if anything i would argue that its much more important for men to know how to lawfully approach women sexually than vice versa given their stronger sexual desires, so its actually good that men are targeted in regards to this.

indeed, one of the biggest weaknesses of feminist tafsir is the fact that they don't approach hadith (unless it conveniently aligns with their own views) even though every other Muslim knows that hadith is needed to supplement one's understanding of the Quran, and neither do they approach traditional scholarship. it's just ironic how many of the concerns Hidayatullah and other feminists bring up can easily be answered just by referring to traditional scholarship, and it's precisely why their generalization that traditional scholarship is misogynistic is dangerous. we don't need to come up with new feminist methods or whatever to come to accurately read the Quran as gender egalitarian or concerned with women's rights: traditional scholarship literally already has the methods and all the answers for you. they also approach the Quran holistically and they also recognize historical context and most importantly they also recognize that islam cares about women's rights, even if some of them regurgitate problematic notions of women while doing so. why go so far to reject centuries of scholarly knowledge instead of learning its nuance? if only feminists would approach it genuinely instead of rejecting it based on their own false assumptions.

by far the most problematic notion to come out of this book (which other feminists have unfortunately adopted) is to challenge the idea that the Quran is God's word, and to go so far to "say no" to the Quran and prioritize one's own values over the divine text. if the Quran isn't God's word then what is??? this is just nothing short of a last resort mental gymnastics that is pretty much a microcosm of the weakness of feminist tafsir as a whole: having to resort to borderline (if not straight up) kufr. the actual critique of feminist tafsirs in this book is solid but i definitely cannot agree with these ideas Hidayatullah suggests in order to pave a new way for feminist tafsirs. as i said before, just return to traditional scholarship. they've been in the game longer than feminism as a movement has and they're much more experienced than "feminist scholarship" will ever be.

[Lucas · Rating 5 out of 5]

Feminist edges of the Quran is an excellent book that provides the reader with the history of Quranic interpretation since it's revelation up to the present day. After a recap of the history Hidayatullah covers the thought of contemporary Muslim feminists and then poses challenges and critiques to their lines of thought. The author does a great job and not letting the book get stuck in one particular area and keeps a steady flow without sacrificing content. 5 out of 5.

[Merna · Rating 4 out of 5]

She is so organized in the way she summarizes the history of tafsir and developments of feminism. She was a bit unclear and confusing in some of her criticisms to islamic feminism, but overall, the book is a good insight into the whole area of feminist interpretation of the Qur'an, its limits and the approaches used.

[Hathoress · Rating 5 out of 5]

What a wonderful, groundbreaking work of scholarship and a breath of fresh air in the field of feminist exegesis and liberation theology in general!

The critiques of the methodologies employed by feminist exegesis is a particular highlight as I felt the author really hit the nail on the head and voiced a lot of my own concerns about the inconsistencies found in these works.

The first and second sections of the book deal with contextualizing and summarizing feminist exegesis and explaining its main methodologies, respectively, which is wonderful reading for both beginners to the field and those already well acquainted. Falling more into the latter, I was struck that I had only now come across a piece of scholarship that does this, and is a gap in the field which the author fills sufficiently. Even just in this manner, Hidayatulla has contributed significantly by being one of the first to analyze disparate works as a connected field of knowledge.

The third and final section is where Hidayatulla promises her goods, and I must say the structure of the book drags the reader on a bit while promising along the way to provide some groundbreaking critiques and re-imagination. Filled with lofty promises throughout, I was not surprised to have been slightly underwhelmed by the actual critiques and reassessment once I finally came to it.

The author notes in her introduction that this work came from her PhD thesis which initially only sought to categorize and analyze these works as a connected field, as mentioned before, but developed critiques and questions during this process. The result is this book, which combines her initial PhD research with the developing thoughts. The result is a feeling of disconnectedness between the first two sections and the last. While the first two sections are detailed, the last section feels undeveloped by contrast.

The ideas feel a bit half-baked. Hidayatulla doesn’t really engage with the Islamic tradition at all in her re-imagining of the field, in fact she argues that feminist exegesis cannot ever gain the authority needed by the tradition itself on the account of its daring methodologies, conclusions and the fact that the authors of such works are women and the tradition is so male-centric. This is a fascinating thought, but Hidayatulla fails to argue it successfully. Who and what, exactly, do we mean by authority in this context? It is an assumed being, one that is not defined nor explained despite its clear power and explicit existence in Hidayatulla’s mind. We have seen incredible shifts in methodologies and subversion of tradition only for it to become a force and a modern voice for such proclaimed tradition. Think Salafism and its unique fiqhi methodologies, to say the least. (This is not an endorsement of Salafism, in fact I am not a fan of it at all).

Another peculiar route Hidayatulla takes is to appeal to creation-ism of the Quran via Mu’tazilism. Hidayatulla seems to view this as a possible methodological or theological starting point in order to deal with difficult verses such as 4:34. However this idea is given but a couple paragraphs and is even more underdeveloped than the previously discussed argument.

*however* I give this book 5 stars because I do not expect its conclusions to be fully developed, simply because this work is groundbreaking and I don’t think is meant to have all the answers. The strength of this book lies in its fearless critiques of feminist exegesis. I believe the field had come to an impasse- the ideas summarized in this book have been argued to their natural conclusions and the gaps and errors now stand in the way of further development without a reassessment. I believe this is why we have not seen a major work of feminist exegesis in the last decade at least. Feminist Edges pushes the field to this tipping point and provides the groundwork for the future of feminist exegesis which will hopefully be fresh with new methodologies and even more daring conclusions. Hidayatulla had made it possible with this work.

There is much more to be said, but I would like to keep this review as brief as possible. I commend the author for her bravery in publishing her incredible scholarship, and I warn my Muslim feminist sisters that it is not for the faint of heart, but is absolutely worth the read for those willing to admit the faults of feminist exegesis today and is interested in doing the work to usher in a new era of exegesis.

[Zainab Bint Younus · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Feminist Edges of the Qur'an" by Aysha Hidayatullah was the June read for my #FaithAndFemininity book club.

Hidayatullah summarizes the views of prominent Muslim feminist academics - the likes of Amina Wadud, Asma Barlas, Aziza al-Hibri & others - on the topic of "feminist exegesis of the Qur'an" (essentially, feminist "tafseer"). She introduces us to the field, their views on various themes & subjects within tafseer, & in the end, provides critique of those views, along with her own conclusions.

Getting through the book was emotionally taxing, to say the least - many of the arguments put forward by these proggie academics are painfully far-fetched at times, & blatantly stupid at others. I have no idea why Barlas was quoted so extensively when she is an absolute quack (more on her later).

I appreciated that Hidayatullah did demonstrate intellectual honesty in general, identifying several glaring weaknesses in proggie arguments, but her own weaknesses are evident as well: on the topic of inconsistent application of ahadith, she writes only briefly; elsewhere, she floats some ideas without ever coming to a solid conclusion. Worst still, perhaps, is that her final conclusion is nothing more than clear kufr: that self-identifying feminist Muslims must no longer hold the Qur’an to be the source of divine authority, but to hold one's own ideas of justice and equality as sources of authority instead.

I value this book as an academic reference that provides a neat summary of popular proggie feminist academic arguments, & for Hidayatullah's own critiques. For any reader with a background in (traditional) Islamic studies, it becomes even easier to identify the flaws that the author tends to gloss over.

I do NOT recommend this book for religious knowledge - the author's conclusion is, as I said, nothing more than pure kufr, and necessary to be recognized as such.

My academic rating for this is 4.3/5 🌟
My religious rating: Iblees-level kufr

[Shantia · Rating 4 out of 5]

اثر تحقيقي عالي.
كتاب از سه فصل و نه بخش تشكيل شده است. كار تاليفي نويسنده در فصل آخر و جايي است كه از كل آنچه در دو فصل قبل گفته و نوشته، نتيجه گيري مي كند. به نظر نويسنده از ابتدا فكر ديگه اي داشته و مدت ها بعد از تماس با ايراداتي كه به روش شناسي فمنيست هاي مسلمان و استدلال هاي منتقدان اونها در نظرات خودش تغيير مي دهد و مي گويد:
ما به عنوان طرفداران يك مفهوم خاص از برابري و عدالت شايد در قرآن آن را نيابيم و قرآن به هيچ شكل با معيارهاي امروزي عدالت سازگار نيست و بايد عدالت را فراتر از متن محدود قرآن كه در چارچوب تاريخي زمان نزول وحي گرفتار است جستجو كنيم و فراتر از متن قرآن رويم.
و البته اين مفهوم را با ايماني صادقانه به اسلام عنوان مي كند.
در نهايت اينكه به نظر من آيه ٣٤ سوره نسا مثل اسب تراوايي هست كه به داخل قلعه فمنيست هاي مسلمان وارد و باعث شكست اونها و نظراتي بسيار متفاوت از قبل(فراتر رفتن از متن قرآن و نگشتن دنبال مفهوم عدالت و برابري زن و مرد در قرآن) شده است.

[saeed · Rating 4 out of 5]

کتاب هم به زبان انگلیسی و هم ترجمه فارسی را خواندم. رساله دکتری عایشه هدایت الله به صورت این کتاب منتشر شده است.در این کتاب نویسنده به بررسی آراء فیمینیست های مسلمان مانند آمنه ودود ،اسما بالاس و ....می پردازد.
این دسته از متفکران به دنبال تفسیری از آیات قرآنی مربوط به زنان هستند که با برداشت امروزین از حقوق زنان سازگار باشد.
اما عایشه این تلاش را رد کرده و مدعی است ،این متفکران برای این سازگاری ،مفاهیم مد نظر خود را به متن قرآن تحمیل می کنند.
در نهایت این ابهام در رویکرد هدایت الله پررنگ است که اساسا چه راه حلی پس از بیان این ناسازگاری پیشنهاد می کند؟
وانهادن دین یا حقوق زنان یا راه حلی دیگر؟!

[Mahdia · Rating 3 out of 5]

دوست دارم دست های آمنه ودود رو بگیرم، تو چشماش نگاه کنم و بهش بگم کافر بودن اونقدرها هم سخت نیست؛ یا حداقل از فمینیست مسلمان بودن سخت‌تر نیست.
I sincerely hope feminist muslim women find the answers they're looking for.
And hey, even if they don't, I'm sure after spending so much time being apologists, they will have a successful career in mental gymnastics!

[Hanie Alizade · Rating 4 out of 5]

نویسنده اول خلاصه‌ای از تفسیرهای اصطلاحا فمینیستی زنان نوگرای مفسر قرآن مثل آمنه ودود، رفعت حسن و اسما بارلاس و روش‌های تفسیری اونها رو ارائه میکنه. ولی در ادامه این این روش‌های تفسیری رو نقد میکنه و معتقده که اینطور نفسیر کردن به متن قرآن آسیب میزنه.

[Arshad · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent work! The book covers almost all important aspects of Islamic Feminism. This book is being used by one of my students for her doctoral research.

[Joko · Rating 3 out of 5]

Meta.

[waha siddiqui · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5, was looking for answers that I didn't particularly find in it.

[Maryam Sabbaghi]

Definitely assigning this book to students some day.