Badges mark quoted or attributed material (Qur'an, hadith, another author, an opposing view). Unbadged passages are Maulana Wahiduddin Khan's own words.
THE ISSUE OF DIVORCE p. 202
When a man and a woman bind themselves together by tying the knot of marriage, they cherish the hope of living together for the rest of their lives. Then, when nature blesses their union with a child, it strengthens the marriage bond, guaranteeing its greater depth and stability. Based on data collected in Western countries, the Encyclopaedia Britannica of 1984 confirms this with the statement that “childless couples tend to have a higher divorce rate than couples with children.” (Encyclopaedia Britannica [1984], Vol. 7, pp. 163-164) p. 202original + quote
A divorce court judge in the West holds that “every little youngster born to a couple is an added assurance that their marriage will never be dissolved in a divorce court.” (Encyclopaedia Britannica [1984], Vol. 7, pp. 163-164) p. 202other source
Despite these favourable psychological factors and natural, traditional attachments of parents and children, the rising incidence of divorce is a new and observable phenomenon in the modern world. One of the most important contributing factors is the ease with which women can make a living. The Encyclopaedia Britannica says: “Industrialization has made it easier for women to support themselves, whether single, married, divorced, or widowed. In this connection, it is interesting to note that the Great Depression of the 1930s stopped the rise in divorces in the United States for a time.” (Encyclopaedia Britannica [1984], Vol. 7, pp. 163-164) p. 203original + quote
In the modern age, Western civilization has been beset by many problems, many of which are more artificial than real. Western society has adopted unnatural ways in many things, thus giving rise to unnatural issues. The matter has further been worsened by attempts to solve them unnaturally. Problems have, therefore, gone on increasing instead of decreasing. The problem of divorce is one of them. The initial stimulus of the women’s liberation movement in the West was not wrong, but its leaders did not care to define its limits. In a bid to make a free society, their efforts culminated in the creation of a permissive society. Affairs between men and women knew no limits, and this had the effect of weakening the marriage bond. Men and women were no longer husbands and wives. In the words of the Prophet, they became sensual, pleasure-seeking people. This state of affairs was boosted by industrialization, as a woman could easily procure an independent livelihood. This had never before been possible. Because of this, she has frequently refused to live under the guardianship of men, which, in consequence, has created a large number of social problems, leading to significantly increased rates of divorce. p. 203original + quote
The Western philosophers who wanted to check divorce advocated legal curbs upon men, which would legally bind them to provide maintenance to the wife after the divorce. This maintenance sum was fixed according to Western living standards so that, in most cases, divorce meant that the man had to part with a fair amount of his hard-earned money for the rest of his life. p. 204
Lord Bertrand Russell, one of the most intelligent and outstanding intellectuals of his time, was a victim of this unnatural state of affairs. Soon after his marriage, he discovered that his wife no longer inspired any feelings of love in him. Although realizing this incompatibility, he did not seek an immediate separation. Despite severe mental torture, he tried to bear with this situation for ten years. He refers to this period as one of “darkest despair.” Finally, he had to separate and remarry, but he was not satisfied even with the second match, and he married for a third time. Two divorces were a costly bargain. According to English law, the amount of alimony and maintenance he had to pay his wives upset him greatly. He writes in his Autobiography: p. 204original + quote
“…the financial burden was heavy and rather disturbing: I had given Pounds 10,000 of my Nobel Prize cheque for a little more than Pounds 11,000 to my third wife, and I was now paying alimony to her and to my second wife as well as paying for the education of my younger son. Added to this, there were heavy expenses in connection with my elder son’s illness, and the income taxes, which for many years he had neglected to pay, now fell to me to settle.” (Bertrand Russell, Autobiography, [London, 1978], pp. 563-564). p. 204other source
Such a law had been passed to ensure justice for women who had to resort to divorce. But when people began to realize that divorce inevitably led one into financial straits, the marriage bond began to be dispensed with altogether. Men and women started to live together without going through the formality of the marriage ceremony. Now, more than fifty percent of the younger generation prefer to live unmarried. p. 205
It was only natural that a reaction should have set in against a law that so patently disfavoured men and brought corruption, perversion, and all kinds of misery in its wake. Children—even newborn babies—were the greatest sufferers. p. 205
Now, take the situation prevailing in Hindu society, in which the extreme difficulty of divorce acts as a deterrent. This was a bid to reform, but this has only aggravated the matter. The ancient Indian religious reformers held that separation was illegal: they even prohibited women from remarrying so that they would be left with no incentive to seek divorce. The laws were made so that once marriage ceremonies were finalized, a man could not divorce his wife, nor could a woman remarry after leaving her former husband. p. 205original + quote
However, such reformations were unnatural and have been generally detrimental to individuals in Hindu society. When a man and a woman cannot satisfy one another, their lives are passed in great bitterness because there is no provision for remarriage. They are doomed to continue to live a tormented life alongside partners with whom they have nothing in common. I shall cite here only one of the hundreds and thousands of such instances reported in newspapers almost every day, leaving aside those unreported cases. Manu, 25, was a cousin of Khushwant Singh. He has written in detail about her tragedy in his “Malice” column. (The Hindustan Times, New Delhi, October 12, 1985.) p. 206original + quote
Manu had a flourishing business selling ready-made garments in Los Angeles. As she did not want to marry a foreigner, she decided to come to India to find a husband and return to the States with him. She found her husband in a tall, handsome, powerfully built Hindu boy who was anxious to go abroad. The marriage took place with all pomp and splendour in a five-star hotel. It took her some months to arrange for her husband’s visa, during which time she maintained him and paid for his passage. The marriage was a disaster. The boy turned out to be an alcoholic, prone to violence, and averse to doing any work. Manu sought her parents’ consent to wind up her business, divorce her husband, and return to India. Her parents travelled to America and tried to persuade her not to be hasty. A few days after her mother returned to Delhi, Manu’s husband strangled her and dumped her body in a deserted spot. He collected all he could in the house and was planning to flee the United States when the police caught up with him. He was taken to jail on a charge of murder. p. 206
Manu was not careless in selecting her partner. She travelled from America to find a suitable match in her birthplace. But all that glitters is not gold. Our human limitations make it impossible to understand every facet of a person’s character before entering into a relationship with him. The question arises whether, after such revelations, one should feel forced to respect a marriage bond even at the cost of one’s life. When society considers separation taboo, or the laws on this show no human leniency, the only alternative left for such incompatible couples is either to commit suicide or waste away the whole of their lives in the “darkest despair.” Even when one dares to surmount the hurdle of divorce, it is challenging to get remarried in societies where divorcees are looked down upon. One can, at best, marry someone beneath one’s social status. But in Islam, remarriage is not a taboo: the Prophet himself married a widow. The provisions of Islam are, thus, a great blessing to couples who realize only too late that they have erred in choosing a partner. Islam provides them with a way to separate amicably in a spirit of goodwill. p. 207original + quote