Male and female, with little difference, share the same genetic program. The creation of the female from Adam's ribs found in Genesis 2:21-22 does not fit the Quranic description of creation. There is most likely a misunderstanding or deliberate distortion of an original word. On the Biblical account of the creation of Eve, the commentator Matthew Henry makes a beautiful comment, which might give us insight into the original meaning of the text: "This companion was taken from his side to signify that she was to be dear unto him as his own flesh. Not from his head, lest she should rule over him; nor from his feet, lest he should tyrannize over her; but from his side, to denote that species of equality which is to subsist in the marriage state." Ironically, many misogynistic Christian scholars interpreted the Biblical account of Eve's creation to belittle and condemn women. For instance, the 19th century Scottish Presbyterian scholar Easton provides the following information on the verse: "Through the subtle temptation of the serpent she violated the commandment of God by taking of the forbidden fruit, which she gave also unto her husband (1Timothy 2:13-15 ; 2Corinthians 11:3). When she gave birth to her first son, she said, "I have gotten a man from the Lord" (R.V., "I have gotten a man with the help of the Lord," Genesis 4:1 ). Thus she welcomed Cain, as some think, as if he had been the Promised One the 'Seed of the woman.'" See 2:36; 49:13.

Polygamy is allowed only to provide psychological, social and economic support for widows with orphans (See 4:127). Muhammed's practice of polygamy must have been in accordance with the condition to serve an important social service. Sure, physical attraction of widows might be one of the factors for marriage and there is nothing wrong with that. Those who could afford practicing polygamy, mentally and financially, should try hard to treat them equally, though 4:129 expresses the practical impossibly of attaining that ideal. Additionally, the consent of the first wife is necessary; otherwise, she can always seek divorce. It is clear that polygamy is not an ideal form of marriage and an unusual practice allowed for difficult times, such as a dramatic reduction in the male population during wartime. The age gap between marrying men and women creates a surplus of women who will never be able to find a monogamous partner. By a strict prohibition on polygamy, millions of young women are deprived from having a legitimate relationship with men. The only hope for millions of young girls is to get married with already divorced men, perhaps with kids, or to have a relationship born out of promiscuous sexual practices. The Western world does not prohibit polygamy since many males have sexual relationships with more than one woman at the same time. The only thing that modern societies do is deprive those women from the protection of law; they are there to be used, disposed of and recycled by men! The hypocrisy in the modern attitude becomes clear when homosexuality is defended on the pretext of "consenting adults," but the same standards are not afforded to the polygamists. The conditional permission for polygamy is for the psychological and financial protection of children and their widow mothers, in cases of war or natural disaster.

Polygamy, according to the Old Testament, started with the seventh generation after Cain and continued as a common practice in the patriarchal age together with having concubines (Genesis 4:19 ; 6:2; 16:1; 22:21; 28:8; 29:23, etc.). However, the Old Testament also disapproves of polygamy (Deuteronomy 17:17 ).

The Old Testament contains numerous exaggerated stories. One is about the number of Solomon's wives. The roundness of the numbers of wives and concubines and their total, the three numbers being perfectly round, indicate an intentional exaggeration. "And he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart” (1 Kings 11:3 ). It is highly plausible that the word "hundred" was inserted in the text by later scribes to damage the reputation of Solomon for some political agenda. The following verses depict Solomon as an evil person and idolater. The Quran neither accuses Solomon of indulging in a hedonistic sexual life nor of associating partners with God. Ironically, modern Christians are now bashing Solomon for not sticking to monogamy. To be politically correct, modern Christians do not hesitate to condemn the common practice of polygamy among Jews and their prophets.

Contrary to the Quran, which exhorts muslims to help widows, the misogynistic Rabbinical teachings inserted into the Old Testament put them in the category of harlots, and finds them unworthy of marriage by the privileged class: priests (Leviticus 21:14 ).

The expression Ma malakat aymanukum has been translated by most translations as "whom your right hands posses" or "captives" or "concubines." (See the note 23:6). We translated this and similar expressions found in 4:3; 16:71; 23:6; 24:31; 30:28; 33:50; and 70:30, as "those with whom you have contractual rights." These were the wives of the enemy combatants who were persecuted because they acknowledged the message of Islam and sought asylum at the Muslim community (60:10). Since they did not get through a normal divorce process, an exceptional contract allows them to marry muslims as free women. Marrying them could create some social, economic and personal complications for the husband. They have nothing to do with IBaD (slaves), as sectarian translations and commentaries state. As we will learn, the Quran categorically rejects slavery and considers it to be the greatest sin (See 3:79; 4:25; 5:89; 8:67; 24:32; 58:3; 90:13; 2:286; 12:39; 79:24). The practice of slavery was justified and resurrected to a certain extent via the influence of Jewish and Christian scholars, as well as fabricated hadith and sharia laws, decades after Muhammed's departure.

It is ironic that Jews who suffered the most from slavery and were saved by God through the leadership of Moses (Exodus 1:13-14 ), later justified enslaving other people, including selling one's own daughter, and inserted that practice into their holy books (Exodus 21:7-8 ; 21:21; 26-27; Leviticus 25:44-46 ; Joshua 9:6-27 ).

Though Jesus never condoned slavery, St. Paul, the founder of modern Christianity, once asked the masters to treat their slaves nicely (Colossians 3:22 ), and asked the slaves to be "submissive to your masters with all fear" (1 Peter 2:18 ; Ephesians 6:5 ; 1 Timothy 6:2 ; Colossians 3:22 ; Titus 2:9 ) justifying the Marxist maxim, "Religion is the opium of masses." The use of religion by the privileged class to enslave or exploit people is vividly depicted by the South African archbishop Desmond Tutu: "When the missionaries came to Africa, they had the Bible and we had the land. They said 'let us close our eyes and pray'. When we opened them, we had the Bible, and they had the land."

The word YaMYN means "right hand" or metaphorically "right," "power" or "control." However, its plural form aYMaN is consistently mentioned in the Quran to mean not "right hands" but to mean "oaths" or "promises," implying the mutual nature of the relationship (See 4:33 5:89; 9:12; 16:91; 2:224; 30:28; 66:2; 5:53; 6:109). This unique Quranic usage is similar to the semantic difference between the singular and plural forms of the word Ayat (signs) (see 2:106).

The expression in question, thus could be translated as "those whom your oaths/contracts have rights over" or "those whom you hold rights through your contracts," or by reading aYMaN (oaths/contracts) as an object rather than a subject, "those who hold/possess your contracts."

The marriage declaration is a mutual partnership between two sexes and is formed by participation of family members. A married woman cannot marry another man without getting divorced from her husband. However, if a woman escapes and joins muslims while her husband stayed behind participating in a war against muslims, she may marry a Muslim man without actually getting divorced from her combatant husband; she will legally be considered a divorcee (60:10). Since this contract is different from the normal marriage contract, this special relationship is described in different words. The same is valid for a man whose wife allies with the hostile enemy. See 24:31 and 33:55. Those who work for another person according to employment contracts are also referred to with the same expression. See 16:71; 30:28. Also, see 4:25; 23:6; 24:58; 33:50; 33:52; 70:30.

The Quran does not demand those who lived together based on a mutual promise (AYMaN) during the days of ignorance, without a marriage contract, to get divorced. Similarly, it does not want those who married two sisters before accepting islam to be a way of life (4:23). This tolerance does not encourage living together without marriage. It only does not want to incur further damage to the family structure and does not want to create hurdles for those who wish to live according to the principles of islam.

Compare this verse to the Old Testament, Numbers 27:8-11 .

In this and following verses and from 2:180 we learn that priority is given to the will in the distribution of inheritance. According to these verses, first the debt is paid and the distribution according to the will is fulfilled. This Quranic rule allows the testator and the testatrix to adjust their will depending on specific conditions and needs of the inheritors or other personal issues. For instance, one may leave more inheritance to a daughter whom might be more in need than the others might. The testator or the testatrix might leave more to someone who is sick or handicapped. The Quran, by giving precedence to the will over the default distribution provides flexibility and thus accommodates special circumstances. Unfortunately, unable to comprehend the wisdom behind this divine arrangement, the followers of hadith and sunna have abrogated these verses via hadith fabrications and sectarian rules and thereby have deprived the so-called Muslims from God's mercy.

After paying the debt and distributing the shares according to the will, the inheritance will be distributed if the diseased had a mother, father, or wife, and the rest will be distributed to men and women according to the instructed ratio. It is important to remember that the ratio of shares instructed by the Quran to each other is as important as their ratio to the whole. In brief, the fractions are compared both to the whole and to each other. A deceased person might leave behind hundreds of combinations of relatives, father or no father, mother or no mother, son or no son, one son or more sons, daughter or no daughter, one daughter or more daughters, brother or no brother, one brother or more brothers, sister or no sister, one sister or more sisters, and numerous combinations among them. If the Quran suggested the fractions as merely their ratio compared to the whole inheritance, since for each combination of inheritors the ratios too would need to be changed, we would need hundreds of verses detailing the ratio for each combination. However, when we comprehend that the ratio in suggested distributions also reflect the amount of inheritance in proportion to each other, the verses about inheritance can easily be understood and implemented.

For instance, let us assume that after deducting the debt and other shares, a man left a 50 thousand dollar inheritance to his wife and father without specially allocating the shares. Their shares should be 1/4th and 1/6th, respectively. Thus, the formula would be (1/4)+(1/6)=50,000. If we find the common denominator, then we see the ratio of inheritance as much clearer. When we take the common denominator, the numerator start to make sense in comparison to the share of each inheritor and to the inheritance: (3/12)+(2/12)=50,000. That means, the wife receives $30,000 and the father receives $20,000 of the inheritance. In sum, to learn the default shares of inheritors the fractions indicating the shares are added up and equated to the inheritance. Let's assume that we are asked to distribute 19 gold pieces among two people; one will receive 1/5th and the other 1/3rd.

(k1 + k2 + ... + kn) * x = t

pn = kn * x

k1 = 1/5

k2 = 1/3

(1/3 + 1/5) * x = 19  x = 19 * 15 / 8

p1 = (1/5) * 19 * 15 / 8  p1= 7 + 1/8

p2 = (1/3) * 19 * 15 / 8  p2= 11 + 7/8

The Old Testament does deprive daughters of inheritance from their parents and favors the first born against other children. Under the patriarchs, the property of a diseased father was divided among the sons of his legal wives and their concubines would not get a share (Genesis 21:10 ; 24:36; 25:5). The Mosaic law made specific regulations regarding the distribution of real property, giving the eldest son a larger portion than the rest. Deuteronomy 21:17 ; Numbers 27:8 ; 36:6; 27:9.

The relative pronoun in this verse is allati, which refers to a group of women. It indicates an organized prostitution, which might pose a grave health problem for the society. In a society that accepted the jurisdiction of the Quran, if a woman is proven four times to be involved in promiscuous sexual activity, she is considered a hazard to the society and should be quarantined. Perhaps there is also an implication for our time, where genetic identification helps us to find the real father of a child. Our genes are made of various combinations of four acid molecules: Adenine, Guanine, Cytosine, and Thiamine. These four molecules, which are made of four different elements, function as witnesses for the identity of individuals to which they belong. The Quran does not necessarily require the witness to be an eyewitness. For instance, we bear witness to the oneness of God via our intelligence. The witness mentioned in 12:26 is not considered a witness because he was present during the alleged incident. That witness did not say, "I saw with my eyes." The human witness mentioned in that story is proposing the testimony of circumstantial evidence, and logical conclusions based on both inductive and deductive reasoning. In other words, the Quran accepts the testimony of reliable circumstantial evidence just as it accepts the testimony of a reliable eyewitness.

The relative pronoun is not marked; the male dual form allazani (both) includes the female partner. In this case, it appears that the illegal or extramarital sexual affair is monogamous. For the punishment of the adulterers, see 24:1.

See 3:90; 10:90; 24:31; 25:71; 42:25.

Verse 4:19 clearly recognizes the right of women to divorce. According to the Old Testament, a rapist should be forced to marry the girl he violated. This rule punishes the victim and forces her to share the rest of her life with the violent and shameless man who violated her (Deuteronomy 22:28-30 ). How can this and many other unjust laws be imposed by a Just God? The Bible also forces the widow to marry another brother (Deuteronomy 25:5 ).

For a discussion regarding the expression Ma malakat aymanukum, see the note for verse 4:3.

After listing 14 classes of relatives, our Lord expressly informs us that marrying others is permitted. However, the followers of hadith and sunna, challenge this divine enumeration and rule. They prohibit marrying, at the same time, an aunt from one’s mother side and an aunt from one’s father side, and thereby imply that God forgot to add it to the list, and additionally attribute this blasphemy to Muhammed (6:19; 12:111; 19:64; 25:30).

Slavery as an evil practice of Pharaoh and other polytheists is abolished by the Quran (3:79; 4:3; 5:89; 8:67; 24:32; 58:3; 90:13; 2:286; 12:39; 79:24). No wonder, this verse emphasizes the equality between men and women, between the free and those who were unjustly enslaved by polytheists. See 60:10.

God issues a lighter penalty for formerly slave women who commit adultery because of their past. Their tragic history and experience is considered a mitigating factor. This rule, at the same time, rejects the Sunni and Shiite punishment for adultery (death), since there cannot be half of a capital punishment. See 24:2.

God created humans in an excellent design (32:7; 64:3; 82:7; 95:4), yet we humans may lower ourselves to the lowest level by following the teachings of devil (95:5). It is interesting to see the passive voice when degeneration of human nature is mentioned. The Quran does not say "we made humans weak," but it says, "humans were made weak." Thus, whenever our weakness, impatience, or pessimism is mentioned the passive voice is used (4:28; 21:37; 70:19). Through this peculiar language, the Best Designer and the Ultimate Creator who created is in best design with freedom of choice, reminds us the negative impact of wrong choices on our excellent design. See 57:22.

As I discussed extensively, in Turkçe Kuran Çevirilerindeki Hatalar (Errors in Turkish Translation of the Quran, Istanbul, 1992-1998) and in English article, Beating Women or Beating Around the Bush (Unorthodox Articles, Internet, 1998), four key words or phrases have been mistranslated by traditional translators. To justify the misogynistic and patriarchal practices, deliberately or unknowingly, a majority of translators render the phrase kawamuna ala al-nisa as "in charge of women" rather than "providers for women" or "observant of women." Interestingly, the same translators translate the same verb mentioned in 4:135; 5:8; 4:127; 2:229; 20:14; 55:9 as "observe/maintain." When the same verb is used to depict a relationship between man and woman, it somehow magically transforms into a prescription of hierarchy and authority.

The second key word that is commonly mistranslated is iDRiBuhunna. In almost all translations, you will see it translated as "scourge," or "beat" or "beat (lightly)". The verb DaRaBa is a multiple-meaning verb akin to English ‘strike’ or ‘get.’ The Quran uses the same verb with various meanings, such as, to travel, to get out (3:156; 4:101; 38:44; 73:20; 2:273), to strike (2:60; 7:160; 8:12; 20:77; 24:31; 26:63; 37:93; 47:4), to beat (8:50), to beat or regret (47:27), to set up (43:58; 57:13), to give (examples) (14:24; 16:75; 18:32; 24:35; 30:28; 36:78; 39:27; 43:17; 59:21; 66:10), to take away, to ignore (43:5), to condemn (2:61), to seal, to draw over (18:11), to cover (24:31), and to explain (13:17). It is again interesting that the scholars pick the meaning BEAT, among the many other alternatives, when the relationship between man and woman is involved, a relationship that is defined by the Quran with mutual love and care (30:21).

The third word that has been traditionally mistranslated is the word NuSHuZ as "rebellion" or "disobedience" or "opposition" to men. If we study 4:34 carefully we will find a clue that leads us to translate that word as embracing a range of related ideas, from "flirting" to "engaging in an extramarital affair" – indeed, any word or words that reflects the range of disloyalty in marriage. The clue is the phrase before nushuz, which reads: ". . . they honor them according to God's commandments, even when alone in their privacy." This phrase emphasizes the importance of loyalty in marital life, and helps us to make better sense of what follows. Interestingly, the same word, nushuz, is used later in the same chapter, in 4:128 – but it is used to describe the misbehavior of husbands, not wives, as it was in 4:34. In our view, the traditional translation of nushuz, that is, "opposition," will not fit in both contexts. However, the understanding of nushuz as marital disloyalty, in a variety of forms, is clearly appropriate for both 4:34 and 4:128.

The fourth word is the word QaNiTat, which means "devoted to God," and in some verses it describes both man and woman (2:116; 3:17; 16:120; 30:26; 33:31; 39:9; 66:5). Though this word is mostly translated correctly as "obedient," when read in the context of the above-mentioned distortion it conveys a false message as if to imply that women must be "obedient" to their husbands as their inferior, while the word refers to obedience to God's law. The word is mentioned as a general description of Muslim women (66:12), and more interestingly the description of Mary who, according to the Quran, did not even have a husband! (66:12).

The traditional distortion of this verse was first questioned by Edip Yuksel in his book, "Kuran Çevirilerindeki Hatalar" (Errors in Turkish Translations) (1992, Istanbul). For a detailed discussion on verse 4:34, see the Sample Comparisons section in the Introduction.

After the revelation of the Quran, Muslim scholars turned back to the days of ignorance and they were supported by some Jewish and Christian scholars who apparently converted to Islam yet did not experience a paradigm change. These semi-converts and those Arabs who longed for the old culture of ignorance combined their forces together to take back the rights of women recognized and promoted by the Quran. The rights of women in the West have been recognized through the separation of church and state; however the culture is still basically a male dominant one and thus western women are objectified and exploited tremendously in the business world. The western culture is deeply influenced by the teaching of Christianity originating from the misogynistic authors of Old Testament and St. Paul (not Jesus) who subordinates women to men. For instance, see Ephesians 5:22-33 ; Colossians 3:18-19 ; 1 Peter 3:1-7 .

"Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says" (I Corinthians 14: 34). "For a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. For man is not from woman, but woman from man. Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man" (I Corinthians 11:6-9 ). "Let a women learn in silence with all submission. And do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. Nevertheless, she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love and holiness, with self-control" (I Timothy 2:11-15 ).

St. Paul's misogynistic teaching is a reflection and extension of a historical trend. The Old Testament contains many man-made misogynist teachings. For instance, a woman is considered unclean for one week if she gives birth to a son, but unclean for two weeks if she gives birth to a daughter (Leviticus 12:1-5 ).

The Quran prohibits a sexual relationship with a menstruating woman, not because she is dirty, but because menstruation is painful (2:222). The purpose is to protect women's health from being burdened by the sexual desires of their husbands. However, the male authors of the Old Testament, exaggerated and generalized this divine prohibition so much so that they turned menstruation into a reason for a woman’s humiliation, isolation, and punishment (Leviticus 15:19-33 ).

Christianity puts all the blame on the shoulders of women for the troubles in this world. Yet, according to the Quran, we are created from one person (nafs), not one man (4:1). Furthermore, it was not Eve, but it was both Adam and his spouse who were deceived in the Paradise (2:30; 7:19).

The Old Testament contains hyperbolic exaggerations and bizarre practices. For some examples, See the footnote of 4:119.

It is clear that divorce does not occur by some magic words uttered by the husband. Furthermore, woman is mentioned as one of the parties whose wish is equally important in case of divorce. See 2:226. Verse 4:19 clearly recognizes the right of women to divorce.

Keeping the family ties, cooperation, and humbleness are among the traits recommended by God (2:83; 3:92; 17:22).

For Muhammed's testimony, see 25:30.

The followers of hadith and sunna reject this statement by claiming the presence of a contradiction between this verse and other verses prohibiting the intoxicants. Their rejection of God's verse and their allegation of contradiction in God's book are due to their ignorance of the fact that there could be individuals among muslims who consume alcoholic beverages just as there could be those who steal, commit adultery, or commit false accusation. Acknowledgement of the imperfect nature of a Muslim community does not mean that God justifies sins and crimes. Our Lord informs a Muslim who is doing wrong to himself or herself by consuming alcohol not to commit additional disrespect to God by addressing God in a drunken state of mind. Additionally, this verse indirectly gives permission to the community to not to allow their intoxicated brothers and sisters into the places of prostration. Another lesson derived from this commandment is that we should know what we are saying or reciting during our prayers. Reciting Arabic words without knowing their meanings is like praying while intoxicated. See 2:106; 4:82.

Bleeding, passing gas, or shaking hands with women and other reasons mentioned in hadith and sectarian books, do not void the ablution. Despite this clear verse, Sunni and Shiite sects contain many contradictory rules about ablution. The relationship between washing hands or faces with water and mental readiness to speak to God is not scientifically obvious, but, according to a recent study conducted at the University of Toronto, washing hands may clean of a guilty conscience. See 5:6.