News & Updates

November 27, 2018


Path of Naam Simran – Concept of Sikh meditation explained as a true path of salvation.


May 17, 2018


Sri Guru Amardas Ji – A detailed biography of Guru Amardas Ji posted.


Check Past Updates

Find Us On...

Find Sikhism: Sikh Religion, Beliefs, Philosophy and Principles on FacebookFind Sikhism: Sikh Religion, Beliefs, Philosophy and Principles on Twitter

The Abusive Book

Bijla Singh

Quran is filled with verses that establish men’s superiority over women and degrade women to the level of personal property. While men have the complete authority to beat their wives in addition to treating them like a sex-toy and a field to be ploughed, women on the other hand are nothing more than sex servants of their husbands. Focus of this article is to examine the verse 4:34 which clearly not only insults and degrades women but deprives them of equality, freedom and basic human rights. Muslims have made many unsuccessful attempts to soften the tone of 4:34 by providing some “rational” interpretation and introducing “unwritten conditions” which must preexist before men could exercise their “right” of beating. One of such attempt is made by Muslims on “Sikhism-Islam Interfaith” site. They claim that verse 4:34 and the likes have been “misinterpreted” or taken out of context by anti-Islam scholars for the sake of “demonizing” Islam. Such claim is a pure speculation and far from the truth. We shall prove in this article that this verse of Quran is anything but civil and holy.

According to Yusuf Ali (a Muslim scholar) the translation of 4:34 is as follows:

Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them; but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means: For Allah is Most High, great (above you all). (Quran, 4:34)

Though the translation above is self-explanatory and very straight forward to be understood by any sane person, it is only the lunacy of brainwashed Muslims that the meanings are twisted, misconstrued and illogically explained for the purpose of defending the backward religion of an illiterate person and unholy abusive laws of Quran.

The Abusive Verse

First, let’s examine the verse a little bit and see how much inequality Mohammad has put forth in it.

1)   “Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means.”

The verse implies that women are weak, defenseless and dependent which is why Allah chose men to take care of them. Women have to look up to men of their household for protection, food and shelter. Why can’t women protect themselves by learning self-defense? Why can’t they earn an honest living just like men and support means of the family? It is because Quran considers women incapable of doing such things and requires them to stay at home covered from head to toe.

Women in today’s society have proved beyond the doubt that they are not any less capable then men. Women are enlisted in the military and fight to protect their country. Women make up significant part of the work force in many countries. There are many women in the world who live alone as single, divorced or widows. Who should they look upon for protection? Or are we to assume that Mohammad could care less about women and simply wanted to establish men’s superior authority? How about men who become disabled due to a fatal accident or an incurable disease? Why are they burdened with the responsibility of protecting the women when they are incapable of taking care of themselves? Clearly, if Quran is to be taken as “word of God” applicable to all times and places then this verse needs to be abrogated because society is not the same as it was 1400 years ago.

2) “Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard.”

Women who are obedient of their husbands are “righteous”. Those who do not obey their husbands even when they are wrong cannot be righteous while men are completely free from such an obligation.

3) “As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct…”

This part of the verse explicitly states that if a husband is suspicious of his wife’s behavior or is afraid that his wife may not be as loyal (obedient) then he can take proper course of action stated in Quran. Words “disloyalty and ill-conduct” refer to disobedience not cheating on the husband. In case of cheating, the husband would simply get a divorce and this verse would not be applicable. This verse was “revealed” for bringing wife in obedience and that is when the husband if merely suspicious of her behavior. Quran permits men to act merely on suspicion without any solid evidence and punish their wives by the following three methods.

4) “…admonish them (first)…”

a) Giving verbal warning. According to Muslims this means reminding her that the husband is head of the household and her status is lower than her husband as ordained by Allah and she should be “obedient”. In other words, instead of reminding a woman about the sanctity of marriage and that she is an equal partner and holds the family together she is reminded of her lower status in Islam and superiority of the husband. This will lead her to seek companionship of someone who treats her equally, respectfully, with love and does not resort to punishing her on mere suspicions. Therefore, the verse in fact serves as a mean for women to cheat on their husbands instead of keeping them in the fold of marriage.

5) “…(Next), refuse to share their beds…”

b) Not sharing beds with them (wives). According to Muslims this refers to a husband sleeping in the same bed with his wife but not having intercourse with her which would make her grieve and force her to make things right. In our opinion, the reasoning couldn’t be more absurd. Abstaining from bed clearly means not sharing the same bed with the wife. Even if we assume that a husband is allowed to share the bed but not have sex, how is it a good solution? Instead of suggesting communicating properly to resolve the issue, Quran’s impractical solution is to deprive the woman of intimate relationship with her only life companion while the husband can go have sex with rest of the three (or however many) wives and/or sex-slaves (if he has any).

On one hand, Muslims are screaming about wife’s sexual satisfaction in “The Expendable Wife” article and on the other hand openly supporting husband abstaining from sexual intercourse with his wife. How, then, will the wife be sexually satisfied during the time of abstinence? What if she is not being obedient because her husband is forcing her to do something unwillingly? What if she doesn’t grieve and finds herself another sex partner or engages in the “secret act” which is forbidden in Islam?

What if a wife is cheating on her husband due to ill-treatment and abuse from her husband? Depriving her of sex will not benefit the marriage or the family because she will suffer even more while the husband is free from any responsibility to make things right. If for the sake of argument we assume that the wife is cheating on her husband because of sexual displeasure then clearly abstaining from bed is the worst possible solution because she will continue to have illicit relationship with another person and not care about the second method of punishment. This solution is impractical from all angles. Muslims claim that an “obedient” wife will try to make things right but a true obedient wife who loves her husband and marriage will not engage in “ill-conduct” to begin with. And what would cause an “obedient” wife who will presumably grieve on her bed to cheat on her husband in the first place?

Quran presumes that it will be the wife who would put marriage in jeopardy and not the husband. Could it be that the thought of a man cheating on his wife never occurred to Mohammad’s mind because he had already offered them four wives and unlimited sex-slaves in this world and 72 virgins and rivers of wine in heaven? Impracticality of Islamic solution is beyond foolishness. How many people in the world used this method (abstaining from bed) and saved their marriages? We wait for Muslims to bring out some evidence.

6) “…(And last) beat them…”

c) And lastly, if nothing works then good thrashing of the wife is the final solution. According to Muslims the verse advises to “beat simply as a gesture and to not cause pain”. Then, we must ask, what kind of beating will it be if it is not to cause pain? Perhaps Muslims could bring forth some beating methods from Mohammad’s times that did not cause pain? What exactly is the purpose of beating if no pain must be caused? If no pain is to be caused then the point of beating is mute because the wife will not change her mind and the “final” solution is anything but.

Muslims have tried relentlessly to wash off the strong abusive tone of this verse by adding words like “lightly” which nowhere appears in the original Arabic text. Scholars like Yusuf Ali and others have tried to twist the implied meanings to have it accepted in the modern society but the verse is clear enough to be understood by any rational person. Even if we assume no pain is caused to the wife in beating, the argument still stands: beating IS permissible. The concern here is the physical abuse and woman’s right. Beating is wrong whether pain is caused or not. If Islam was all about equality then women would’ve been granted the same right to beat their husbands in the fear of ill conduct. After all, women are capable of contributing to the household as much as men and are equal partners in marriage. Why is such a right not granted to women so they too can have a chance to save their marriage in case they fear disloyalty of their husbands?

Many Muslims claim that beating is allowed in rare circumstance and as a final step to save the marriage. The verse, however, makes no implication and it is clear that beating is the third step in the series to bring wife in obedience.

7) “…but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means: For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).”

First half of the line means: if a wife becomes obedient and acts in good conduct, the husband should forsake hostile behavior and be with her i.e. not beat her or abstain from her bed. If a wife indeed cheated on her husband just for the sake of sexual pleasure and then became obedient after a verbal warning, why must a man take her back? What guarantee does he have that his wife will not resort to the same behavior again? What if this becomes her regular habit? Does Quran offer any solution other than saying “Talaq” three times? What if none of the three methods work and the husband does not want to go through a divorce as it will be devastating upon him and his young kids? Both are trapped in loveless marriage as the husband doesn’t want a divorce and the wife has no right to get one.

Last half of the line is interpreted as: "Surely Allaah is Ever Most High, Most Great," Allaah is the Guardian of women if men treat their wives unjustly without reason, and will mete out punishment upon those who have committed this (Tafseer ibn Kather). So if the woman is unjust the man has the right to take action right then right away but if the man is unjust, woman has to wait for Allah to deliver justice. Will be it on judgment day or right after death? Even if Allah decides to do it the next day it will be too late considering the Islamic fact that 1 day of Allah is 50,000 human years. Justice at its best!

After scrutinizing the verse closely following points can be concluded:

  1. Men are superior to women physically and emotionally.
  2. Women who follow their husbands’ orders (willingly or unwillingly) even when they are wrong are the true obedient ones. Freedom of thought and speech is not granted to women because such would lead to disobedience.
  3. Quran considers men as faithful and honest beings and holds women responsible for the marriage trouble.
  4. If a husband is suspicious of misbehavior of his wife he can give her punishment.
  5. Quran offers three methods of punishment to be used to bring wife in obedience: verbal warning, separating the beds and beating. Each one is followed by a stronger course of action. If the verbal warning fails then separating the beds is the next step. If that fails the next one is beating. Hence, it cannot be a simple tap or striking the wife with a stick as large as a toothbrush as many Muslim apologists claim but a full scale beating which causes pain.
  6. Even after allowing men to deter women and instill fear in their minds, Allah remains “merciful” and “forgiving” in Quran. Hypocrisy at its best. To whom is Allah merciful and forgiving? Clearly to men because in the eyes of Allah women are simply unintelligent, dirty, inferior and personal property.

The readers must keep in mind that the word “beat” was chosen by Muslim scholars as the most accurate translation of the Arabic text. Had there been a better word, surely Muslims would have used it. Hence, the word “beat” is the instruction for the action to be taken and not used metaphorically or symbolically as many Muslims claim. Therefore, wife beating is allowed in Islam. One can clearly see how ridiculous the Quranic message is. Accusation of “misinterpretation” applies to Muslims for distorting the Quranic message for the purpose of seeking acceptance from the western society.

Proofs from Islamic Texts

The following quotes from some of many Muslim scholars prove that physically beating the wife is permissible in Islam by verse 4:34. Emphasis added by us.

"God established the superiority of men over women by the above verse (the Qur'an 4:34) which prevents the equating of men and women. For here man is above the woman due to his intellectual superiority and his ability to administer and spend on the woman." (Tuffaha, Ahmad Zaky, Al-Mar'ah wal- Islam, Dar al-Kitab al-Lubnani, Beirut, first edition, 1985, p.36)

"A woman complained to Muhammad that her husband slapped her on the face, (which was still marked by the slap).  At first the prophet said to her:  "Get even with him", but then added:  "Wait until I think about it".  Later on, Allah supposedly revealed 4:34 to Muhammad, after which the prophet said:  "We wanted one thing but Allah wanted another, and what Allah wanted is best".(At-Tafsir al-Kabir, Ar-Razi on 4:34)

Narrated Umar ibn al-Khattab:  The Prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) said:  “A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife.” (Sunan Abu Dawud,Book 11, Number 2142)

Narrated Zam'a, The prophet said, “None of you should flog his wife as he flogs a slave and then have sexual intercourse with her in the last part of the day.” (Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 7, 132)

In the above verse, Mohammad did not forbid beating the wife. He only made it less severe than a slave beating so that men could have sex with their beaten wives the same day.

“Those of you, who are afraid of their disobedience which symptoms become evident to you, threaten them with the fear of God and banish them to beds apart and scourge them.” (Jalalan, Page 69)

“God preferred man over woman, and the reason for the bestowing of this verse (4:34) is a well-known episode which says that a man from the helpers beat his wife, whose name was Habiba, the daughter of Zayd. Her father took her to the apostle of God (to complain). Mohammad said: "Let us punish him." But God sent down this verse 4:34. The woman returned home without having her husband punished. Mohammad said: ‘I intended to do something (that is, to punish the man), but God willed otherwise, and what God wills is better.’”(Al-Baydawi, Page 111)

“In case of a husband’s ill-treatment [of his spouse], the Qur’an permits reconciliation of the spouses and arbitration, but in the case of the wife it allows scourging her.”(Ahkamal-Qur’an, Imam Shafi’I, Vol. 1, p.211)

“If admonishing and sexual desertion fail to bring forth results and the woman is of a cold and stubborn type, the Qur’an bestows on man the right to straighten her out by way of punishment and beating provided he does not break her bones nor shed blood. Many a wife belongs to this querulous type and requires this sort of punishment to bring her to her senses!”(You Ask and Islam Answers, Abdul–latif Mushtahiri, Page 94)

“If a woman is afraid that her husband may turn away from her or detest her, she will hasten to bring understanding and reconciliation. But if the husband is afraid that his wife may rebel against him, he hastens to bring mutual understanding by means of exhortation, then by abandonment of the bed, then by the scourging which deters.”(The Individual Guarantee in the Islamic Law, Ahmad Ahmad, Page 63)

Narrated 'Ikrima: Rifa'a divorced his wife whereupon 'AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. 'Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating). It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, 'Aisha said, "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" When 'AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, "By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but he is impotent and is as useless to me as this," holding and showing the fringe of her garment, 'Abdur-Rahman said, "By Allah, O Allah's Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient and wants to go back to Rifa'a." Allah's Apostle said, to her, "If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa'a unless Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you." Then the Prophet saw two boys with 'Abdur-Rahman and asked (him), "Are these your sons?" On that 'AbdurRahman said, "Yes." The Prophet said, "You claim what you claim (i.e.. that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow." (Sahih Bukhari,Volume 7, Book 72, Number 715)

Note that Muslims used to beat their wives severely during Mohammad’s times and Muslims women suffered more physical abuse than pagan women. The following quote from the Hadith shows that Mohammad himself beat his wife which caused pain.

…….He stood there and he stood for a long time. He then lifted his hands three times, and then returned and I also returned. He hastened his steps and I also hastened my steps. He ran and I too ran. He came (to the house) and I also came (to the house). I, however, preceded him and I entered (the house), and as I lay down in the bed, he (the Holy Prophet) entered the (house), and said: Why is it, O 'A'isha, that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He said: Tell me or the Subtle and the Aware would inform me. I said: Messenger of Allah, may my father and mother be ransom for you, and then I told him (the whole story). He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you? She said: Whatsoever the people conceal, Allah will know it…..(Sahih Muslim, Book 4, Number 2127)

Looking at the Quranic message and practices of Mohammad and his companions one does not need to wonder why Muslim women continue to suffer physical abuse at the hands of their husbands in many Islamic countries. According to Sandra Mackay in her book “The Saudis”, “The man's absolute authority over the women in his family is maintained through fear - the fear of physical brutality, the fear of economic insecurity.... My translator lowered her head and quietly said that if the men found out about the women's disobedience, they would be beaten.”(Page 138-139)

Illogical Logics

In this section we respond to Abu Adeeba’s statements (in red), from Sikhism-Islam Interfaith, defending the verse 4:34.

If one were to assert that the Sri Guru Granth Sahib verse "I am not a Hindu, nor am I a Muslim," means that Sikhs are encouraged to kill Muslims and Hindus, but in response Sikhs post a plethora of references to show that the absolute majority of Sikhism throughout history never shared such a view, yet that person remained intransigent and obstinate insisting that that is what it meant and nothing else, then that person would be truly a close-minded bigot.

This is true but the translation is loud and clear: “I am neither a Hindu, nor Muslim” and is self-explanatory. Neither does it imply anything else nor does it establish Sikh’s superiority over a Hindu or a Muslim. Verse 4:34, although self-explanatory, however is interpreted differently by Muslims. They think “beating” is a last resort and not to cause pain while the general acceptance is that beating causes pain and if no pain is caused it is not a beating. The translation means exactly what is written by Muslim scholars.

It must also be immediately noted that there is no warrant here in this verse for wife battering. The suggestion to use beating is made specifically to deal with Nushooz on the part of the wife, that is, to deal with her deliberate nasty behaviour that poses a threat to the marriage.

The problem here is not of the situation but the beating itself. A religion must stand on the pillars of equality and justice and prosperity. Islam lacks all three qualities because it allows husbands to beat their wives regardless of the situation. It deprives women of equal rights. Beating is unjust which does not allow any prosperity in married life. Is there any verse in Quran that allows women to act the same to deal with Nushooz on the part of husbands?

Beating (in the prescribed way) is to be done after due admonition and suspension of sexual relations and, therefore, by husbands who have some moral standards and have sufficient control over their sexual passions. Moreover, this beating is not to go on and on, but is to be tried as a last step to save the marriage.

A moral human being would never even think about physically abusing his wife let alone engaging in such behavior. It is clear that beating is done as a last resort which has to cause pain otherwise a painless beating after admonition and depriving of sexual intercourse makes no sense. It is a well known fact that beating doesn’t save marriages it destroys them. Beating is a sign of degradation and humiliation. In how many cases would a woman feel grateful for the humiliation and degradation of beating?

The meaning and application of dharb - "beating", as the commentators have mentioned, should be effective in its purpose of shaking the wife out of her Nushooz and demonstrate to her that the marriage has reached a critical stage. In other words, it should not cause bruising or anything worse nor reduce it to a set of meaningless motions devoid of emotions, but as a means of conveying intense displeasure.

We pity the Muslims who are desperately trying to defend the abusive verse. First the beating has to be painless but now they say it must be so effective that it must shake the wife and bring her to sense. We ask again about what beating methods are suggested in Quran that do not cause pain and still do the job of saving marriages. Even a little pinch is not free of pain then how can an effective beating for the purpose of knocking senses in someone not cause pain?

Moreover, it is not necessary for the husband to adopt all three approaches. He has the option to seek family arbitration if he believes this to be more appropriate.

The verse does not state anywhere that one has options to pick and choose methods. The instructions are given in the order to be followed. First admonish then separating the beds and then beating. Can a husband skip first two and go straight to the beating to save time and marriage quickly? If options are allowed then clearly Muslims are suggesting that they have the option of not following the “word of Allah”. Then Quran must be a book of options in life rather than a way of life.

The wife has no religious obligation to take the beating. She can ask for and seek a divorce at any time.

Not a single verse in Quran establishes the right of a woman to divorce her husband. She can only “ask” (as stated by Muslims) for a divorce which may not be granted forcing the wife to take regular abuse and live with someone she doesn’t love. Where is it stated in Quran that the wife doesn’t have to take the beating? Or is Allah suggesting that husbands can exercise the right to beat only if their wives desire to take it happily? No sane wife in the world would ever wish to be happily abused by her husband. Muslims also failed to mention that a woman must return the entire dowry she received from her husband (at the wedding) after divorce which she will not have and therefore will not be able to get a divorce.

If the husband beats a wife without respecting the limits set down by the Qur'an and Hadith, then she can take him to court and if ruled in favour has the right to compensation.

Little do Muslims know that beating and respect do not go together. Can a son beat his father and still claim to respect him? Which Quranic law establishes a special court where cases of abusing wives for the sake of saving marriages are heard? Can a wife present only women as witnesses? Does she have an equal say and same rights as that of her abusive husband? The fact is that Muslims are simply banging their heads to come up with ways to “protect” the wives and trying to console them but it is all fruitless. Once the wife is beaten, the damage is already done and nothing can heal the mental and emotional wounds. Muslims keep forgetting that the issue here is the husband’s superiority and right to beat his wife not what judicial system is allegedly established by Allah to stop the further abuse.

The point, however, is that verses 4:34-36 should not be a concern for any good Muslim woman. This is because a good woman would not intentionally disobey her husband in what leads to obedience of Allaah…

This is laughable. Try telling this to a woman on her wedding day and wait for her response. Will she happily marry someone she knows has a degree above her and the right to beat her? The verse clearly makes no distinction between intentional or unintentional ill-conduct so the right to determine whether the wife was disloyal or not rests upon the husband’s understanding of the situation which may not be free of poor judgment and human fallacy. Foolish Muslims keep ignoring the immorality and absurdity of the verse which is granting the husbands right to beat their wives. Matter of concern here is not who gets the beating but the beating itself. The same right can be granted to a woman and a man can be consoled by stating “being a good man you shouldn’t be concerned because you would not intentionally disobey your wife”. This would represent equality even though it would still be wrong to physically abuse the spouse whatever the reason may be.


It has been proven unequivocally that the verse 4:34 allows men to beat their wives and establishes their superiority over women which is unjust, uncivil and humiliating to women. We must keep in mind that Mohammad lived in a male dominant society (which was common in other parts of the world) where drinking wine, having sex, polygamy, mistreating and abusing women and owning sex-slaves were common practices. Mohammad designed Islam on the same cultural practices instead of trying to civilize the society on moral principles. He offered men rivers of wine and 72 virgins in heaven and put them in control of their women to attract more followers. It seems as if quantity was important to him than quality. The effect is apparent to us. Where many of the cultures have improved, made progress and granted many rights to women, Muslims are stuck in old barbaric practices because Mohammad declared them to be “Allah’s holy laws”. Many of the Muslim countries are classified as third world and run on Shari’ah laws where rationality is non-existent. Progress of human society on the lines of equality and justice is alien in Islam.

Women are the victims of Quran’s unjust message. Women have to cover themselves in veil to protect them from lustful eyes of men. On one hand, they are asked to avoid lustful eyes of men (implying that men are lustful beasts) and on the other hand they are blamed for ill-conduct, disloyalty and misbehavior (meaning that men remain faithful in marriage). Such contradictions leave women in confused positions. If a woman is raped she is punished for not covering herself properly. If she is innocent, she must produce two witnesses and one must be a male. It is a woman who is forced to share her loving husband with another woman. If she is unhappy she has no right to get a divorce and gets trapped in a loveless marriage. If the husband is unhappy she is reminded of her lower status, deprived of intimate relationship and gets a good beating. If she wants to marry her ex-husband she must spend the night with another man. This leaves no doubt that the Quran is the abusive book. Only women suffer in pure Islam and men enjoy all the luxuries. Quran is disgrace to womanhood and civilized society. While domestic abuse is illegal in many countries and is regarded as inhumane, it is regarded as the “holy law” of Allah by Muslims. This impractical, absurd and backward method has no place in modern society. It may have had its run when women were perceived as nothing more than sexual objects but as humans have progressed, so have the ethical behavior, rationality and better understanding of each other. Thus, there is no need for Quran and its 1400 years old methods in modern society.

On the contrary, Sikhi takes a different approach. Sikhi goes beyond the physical realm. Instead of differentiating between men and women due to physical appearances, the souls are considered the bride of Lord Husband. (Status of a woman has been discussed in details in The True Savior).

She who becomes Gurmukh, turns away from corruption and adorns herself, attuned to the Love of the Lord.She enjoys her celestial Husband Lord, and enshrines the Lord's Name within her heart.She is humble and obedient; she is His virtuous bride forever; the Creator unites her with Himself.O Nanak, she who has obtained the True Lord as her husband, is a happy soul-bride forever. ||1|| (Ang 785)

Men and women both are taught to serve and obey Waheguru (God). No Sikh is taught to blindly obey a fallible human. Both husband and wife bear an equal responsibility of listening to each other and fulfilling their obligations with mutual understanding. Obeying the perfect and infallible Waheguru makes perfect sense. This way the same message is given to both as well as the instructions to live a married life.

Guru Sahib gave equal rights to women, taught them self-defense and enlisted them in the Sikh army alongside with men. Women like Bhaag Kaur, Sada Kaur, Ranjeet Kaur, Deep Kaur and Harsharan Kaur gave sacrifices defending their faith and honor. It must be kept in mind that at the time women were subjugated by Hindus and Muslims alike and were thought of incapable of intelligence and self-defense. Had Mohammad had a slightest bit of clue about equality he would have elevated women at a respected level in the society.

It is time for Muslims (especially women) to let go of the abusive book and adopt Sikh way of life and seek shelter in the Shabad Guru, the only light of truth and path of liberation.

Without the Guru, there is utter darkness; without the Guru, understanding does not come.Without the Guru, there is no intuitive awareness or success; without the Guru, there is no liberation. (Ang 1399)