Sigh.

My Arabic isn't that great, but those subtitles are real. If you actually pay attention, this is not a lesson in how to beat your wife according to Islam. This is how a Gulf Arab beats his wife so as to come in under the range of specifications that constitute a beating in traditional Islamic "fiqh". It may seem a subtle difference, but really, it's a huge one.

Also, your title and tags are deliberately inflammatory and misleading.

If the subtitles are real, and it looks like they are, I don't think the title and tags are misleading at all. In fact, they're exactly accurate.

He uses the word "should" a lot. So are these actual rules or simply suggestions?

Ok, to clarify, I actually debated whether or not to submit this video link.

My final decision came about from the need to find out if this understanding and explanation of the view on spousal treatment in the Islamic faith was a broad acceptance or just an extreme fundamentalist take on the writings, and teachings, of the Qur'ān.

From a Western (non-religious) view point I find the subject's explanation a bit on the harsh side. It comes across that even though he looks on abuse that leaves bruises and marks as barbaric (too strong a term?), that in the same vein he understands the need for husbands to punish(?) their wives in such a way that the evidence of doing so is not visible.

I know that I am out of my league in talking about anything Islamic, but that's why I posted this video to ask questions and ignite discussion that may offer answers.

For anyone from the Islamic faith out there, would it be a correct assumption that most Islamic wives act poorly as spouses and deserve to be disciplined in such a manner?

You may agree or disagree, but keeping communications going is the only way we will understand one another better.

In response to whether or not the translation is accurate or not, you can read up on memritv.org who takes credit for the subtitles.

hmmm...

one thing to mention, which burhan alluded to, is that Islam has all the many societal factions and separations that distinguish christians from one another in the western world. you could almost say that a large reason why Iraq is tearing itself apart is because of disagreement about how to properly honor Allah.

in other words, it may not be any more fair to generalize one guy talking about Islam in Syria as 'Islam's stance on a subject' than it is to listen to one Christian in, I don't know, Texas, or Nigeria, or Panama talking about 'Christianity's stance on a subject', and saying God-knows-what... maybe quoting some crazy old testament thing about women being subservient, or about bringing a stick to your kids.

Firstly - I think everyone finds the idea of a man being entitled to beat his wife cruel and wrong - me included. Unfortunately there are people who practice and advocate domestic violence and abuse in all societies and they are all scum.

Secondly - I object to the title of this video. This video has nothing to do with Allah or his message. The detestable views of the imam in question are a product of classical Islamic manuals of fiqh (Islamic law) which owe as much to general status of women in medieval societies dominated by men as they do to the Qur'an and Sunnah. Such objectionable views on the treatment of women are rejected by most modern Islamic scholars. Typically the scholars who advocate such views are literalists who are obsessed with the external observance of faith and enforcing a system of Islamic law which reflects the misogynist nature of their states. They ignore the higher goals of Islamic law (maqasid al-Shari'ah) in their desire to force people to submit to an inflexible and homogenous interpretation of the Qur'an and the Sunnah which has much more to do with preserving the status quo and the traditional paternalistic power hierarchy than trying to live according to the teachings of Allah.

Thirdly - In my daily trawl through YouTube I have encountered many videos from Memri TV. This website only shows the very worst of the Islamic world - radical fringe preachers with little or no public support, unobjective critics of America and Israel, anti-semites, holocaust deniers, misogynists, etc. However, it presents these opinions as if they are widely held, rarely questioned, and representative of the Islamic world. Further more - and this is particularly worrying - the site often mistranslates, or takes out of context, what major Islamic leaders are saying in order to make them seem more extreme and bigotted. The site uses an Arabic title and icon in order to try and disguise its real agenda.

Who are Memri? They send out their videos to all senators and congressmen, and all mainstream media, so we should really know something about them!

MEMRI was founded in 1998 by its president Yigal Carmon, a retired colonel from Israeli military intelligence, and the academic Dr. Meyrav Wurmser. Meyrav Wurmser and her husband David Wurmser were both co authors of A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm (Israel) which was the precursor for the Wolfowitz doctrine- which led to PNAC - Project for the New American Century. Dr. Meyrav Wurmser received her doctorate at George Washington University, by researching the life and works of Vladimir Jabotinsky, the founder of Revisionist Zionism. Her husband David Wurmser works directly under Vice President Dick Cheney and his chief of staff Lewis "Scooter" Libby. It was David Wurmser that told Dick Cheney that Wilson's wife Plame was the one that sent Wilson to Niger.

MEMRI's headquarters are in Washington DC. It is a non-profit organization, exempt from taxation, that has private donors. MEMRI's largest donor is The Bradley Foundation. The Bradley Foundation has also provided funding for the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). PNAC brought together prominent members of the (George W) Bush Administration (Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz) in the late 1990s to articulate their neoconservative foreign policy.

I don't understand somehow we can all say there are Christians and fundamentalist Christians, yet when it comes to Islam we are so quick to paint everyone with one broad stroke. As if what this man says instantly validates what everyone else is doing.

Pat Robertson said we should kill Hugo Chavez and numerous other idiotic things, yet we don't question his status and sway over the Christian denomination. Yet if a obscure video of some nut appears we all pointy with our fingers especially when it comes from Memritv.

Hey, even Americans do not have perfect sex equality yet. We just hush up about it in the evening news. They're less 'politically correct', so they get to say these things out loud and on TV. Just because we don't 'admit' to some of our own Americans abusing their spouse doesn't mean it doesn't mean we'll be able to criticize others. Unless of course, it's on daytime soap operas on Spanish Channels.

From what I've just seen, he's trying to be as respectful to women as any muslim in a Muslim nation. This is a huge progress compared to what they've done before. Change doesn't happen in one night. This is a positive video. Kudos to that bearded man.

And shame on all of you for downgrading this Imam's noble efforts.

Is anyone really surprised by this?

I dunno, I saw this guy as a wingnut, and not necessarily representative of the Islamic faith (from little I know about it) in much the same way as I see the Westboro idiots as the lunatic fringe and not representative of christianity (from what little I know about that).

I'm not sure how this video, its tags, or its title are in any way different from the multitude of anti-christian-fundamentalist videos that fail to alert the audience of their depiction of a departure from prevailing moderate religious doctrines.

Regardless, the fact that this guy is saying "whoa there. Beating your wife is fine: just follow these simple rules", is bit disturbing, to say the least.

This dude.... I have never seen so much insolence in my life... This dude is freaking using a religion to rationalize his own behavior.. tsk tsk tsk to him those who agree with him.

Pat Robertson said we should kill Hugo Chavez

Robertson was right. Chavez is flushing Venezuela down the shitter, just like castro did cuba.

...I obviously find this somewhat revolting... but there are actually instructions on how to beat your wife in the bible as well.

stumblingjon, you´re right. it´s even described which hand you should use and how you should hold your hand.

people are so quick with throwing stones at the qur'an, but they often seem to forget the bible states excactly when to stone s/o to death etc. and regarding sex equality in christianity: the bible says the following: having sex with an animal -> kill the guy, having sex with another woman outside of your marriage -> ummm not so bad.

Both of those books are way to old to be taken literally, that´s all.

"Both of those books are way to old to be taken literally, that´s all. "

I think that's the million dollar answer right there Conan! Well said. Check's in the mail.

"Both of those books are way to old to be taken literally, that´s all."

Literalism is a problem that plagues all religions. Most Islamic scholars focus on the maqasid al-Shari'ah - the higher objectives of the Shari'ah - such as charity, selflessness, respect, modesty, fraternity, justice. Anyone who wishes to understand the classical theory of maqasid al-Shari'ah should read the works of Imam Shatibi - here is a link to a very good article on Shatibi's theory of the maqasid written by one of the greatest modern scholars of Islamic law - Mohammad Hashim Kamali.

Literalist interpretations of Islamic law have never been popular or widely held in the Islamic world. Until the foundation of Saudi Arabia the Hanbali school of law - the most literal of the four orthodox Sunni schools of law - had very few followers. Historically there was a fifth school of Sunni Islamic law - the Zahiris - but the school died out because its literalist views were unpopular and incapable of dealing with an ever changing world.

Unfortunately a vocal minority use a literal interpretation of Islamic texts to justify aggression against Muslims who don't share their views, and non-Muslims. Furthermore, idiots like quantumushroom use the same literalist interpretation of Islamic texts to justify American/British/Israeli imperialism and to foster hatred of the Islamic world.

Crass generalizations like yours do more harm than help, no matter how you rationalize them. The headline should read, "How to beat your wife, according to Abdullah Aal Mahmud." He is one man, and he is certainly not God.