The Qur’an Sanctions Corrective Conjugal Violence (CCV), Not Punitive Torture (PT)

By Naseer Ahmed, New Age Islam 11 October 2025 This article is a companion to Qur’an 4:34: Strike — Plain, Bold, and Timeless and does not repeat aspects of the verse such as the preconditions on which it is premised, its advisory and non-binding nature, and the implicit agency of the woman to refuse to reform her behaviour and seek divorce. Also, 4:34 addressed a society in moral transition—from pre-Islamic norms where extramarital affairs were not criminalised to a community being reformed through moral discipline. Muslim women of later times, raised within an Islamic ethos of modesty and faith, would rarely have encountered such conflict, which explains why later scholars tried to euphemise it. Among the most misread verses of the Qur’an is 4:34, which addresses how to handle marital deadlock. Critics cite it as proof that Islam licenses wife-beating, while apologists bend over backwards to deny any physical dimension at all. Both miss the mark. The Qur’an, in its measured diction, draws a moral and psychological distinction — between Corrective Conjugal Violence (CCV) and Punitive Torture (PT) — that modern behavioural studies have only recently begun to articulate. The Context and the Sequence The verse lays out a three-step process for a husband facing persistent nushūz — defiance that threatens the very basis of conjugal cooperation: Admonish them (Waʿiẓūhunna) — appeal to moral reason and conscience. Abandon them in bed (Wahjurūhunna Fī L-Maḍājiʿ) — signal emotional and physical distance. Wa-Ḍribūhunna — a controlled, corrective act intended to restore order, not inflict harm. Each stage narrows the emotional and physical intensity, maintaining the principle of La Taʿtadū — “do not transgress” (2:190). The purpose is not punishment, but reconciliation and boundary-setting. If Separation Were Intended Had Allah intended separation, not a corrective gesture, there were several precise words available: Fa-Fāriqūhunna — separate from them (as in 65:2). Fa-Ṭalliqūhunna — divorce them (2:229–231, 65:1). Iʿtazilūhunna — keep away from them (19:48, 18:16, 37:99). Tark or Hijr in absolute form — abandon or forsake. Any of these would have made separation explicit. Yet the verse uses Wa-Ḍribūhunna — from Daraba, a word of vast semantic range: to set forth (14:24), to travel (3:156), to veil (24:31), to separate (43:5), and to strike (2:60). This deliberate ambiguity calls for interpretive responsibility — it is not license for violence but a test of moral discernment. If Punitive Striking Were Intended Conversely, had Allah intended punitive or violent striking, far clearer words existed in the Qur’anic lexicon: Jalada — to flog or lash (24:2). Bataša — to smite fiercely or strike with overwhelming force (7:136, 44:16). Qatala — to kill or wound (used over 170 times). ʿAdhdhab — to torture or torment (3:77, 8:50). Ḍaraba Bi-Shiddah — to strike severely, a construction used for divine retribution. Allah uses none of these. He chooses instead Daraba, which, in its mildest register, can connote a symbolic or corrective physical cue — an act that establishes seriousness, not pain. This deliberate avoidance of unambiguous “punitive” vocabulary shows that the Qur’an precludes PT categorically while allowing a restricted, situational CCV. The purpose of CCV is to set boundaries in the face of persistent marital insubordination, not to cause injury, humiliation, or coercion. The Moral Logic of Limitation The Qur’an, by advising a mild corrective strike only as the third stage in an escalatory process that otherwise leads to divorce, implicitly forbids it in any lesser situation. The verse’s very existence serves as a moral limiter. Had there been no verse 4:34, we would have been left without divine guidance on an issue prone to abuse — as patriarchal cultures across history have proven. By speaking, the Qur’an does not license violence; it outlaws it except in the most extreme, marriage-threatening scenario, and even then, it disallows naked violence by its deliberate choice of word and sequence. Thus, the Qur’an achieves by specification what silence could never have achieved by omission: it places moral and linguistic boundaries around physical action within marriage, closing every door to cruelty. The Qur’an’s Ethical Firewall Prophetic practice makes this moral boundary even clearer. The Prophet ﷺ is reported never to have struck any of his wives. When conflict arose, he practised the very steps prescribed by the verse: moral counsel, emotional withdrawal, and temporary separation — never brutality. He said, “The best among you are those who are best to their wives” (Tirmidhi), and, “Do not strike the face, do not cause pain, and do not insult” (Abu Dawud). These are not supplementary restrictions but the ethical firewall protecting CCV from devolving into PT. The Psychological Logic of 4:34 Modern family psychology confirms what the verse anticipates: that escalating conflict often requires boundary signals calibrated to the partner’s psychological response. When reasoning fails and emotional separation doesn’t suffice, a minimal symbolic act — such as a controlled gesture conveying seriousness — can sometimes reset the equilibrium without inflicting harm. This is Corrective Conjugal Violence (CCV) — a boundary-setting intervention meant to restore respect and self-control within the couple’s relational dynamic. Punitive Torture (PT), on the other hand, is intentional pain inflicted to dominate, humiliate, or avenge — the very evil the Qur’an everywhere forbids: “Allah does not love the aggressors” (2:190). The Qur’an, through its choice of words, thus prefigures what sociological studies now describe: that there exists a measurable difference between corrective boundary enforcement and abusive domination. The former can, in rare and tightly bounded circumstances, restore harmony; the latter corrodes dignity and destroys trust. The Precision of the Divine Word Every alternative term that could imply separation (Fa-Fāriqūhunna, Iʿtazilūhunna) or punishment (Jalada, Bataša, ʿadhdhab) is consciously avoided. Daraba is the only verb capable of carrying a neutral physical cue while leaving its moral evaluation to context. By choosing it, Allah legislates a moral middle path between two extremes: The extreme of total passivity, which allows defiance to rot the marriage from within, and The extreme of punitive violence, which replaces justice with tyranny. The Qur’an’s divine precision, therefore, protects the woman from harm and the man from moral excess — long before modern ethics developed the vocabulary of “constructive conflict resolution” and “non-punitive boundary enforcement.” A Precedent of Moral Psychology What we now call conflict resolution theory or behavioral correction models follow the same tripartite structure the Qur’an outlined fourteen centuries ago: moral persuasion → emotional distance → controlled boundary assertion. Each step limits escalation and leaves room for repentance and reconciliation. In this light, 4:34 is not a charter for male dominance but a revelatory model of psychological de-escalation. It aims to preserve the family unit while restraining both ego and impulse. A Note on My Method We have carried out a systematic analysis that addresses every doubt and every possible meaning, leaving us with the precise sense in which the word daraba is used. Clearly, if anything milder—such as “separate” or “withdraw”—had been intended, more suitable words were readily available. And if physical subjugation or punitive beating were meant, there were equally explicit verbs in Arabic that Allah could have chosen. The deliberate use of daraba—mild yet firm—signals neither cruelty nor passivity but a gesture of unmistakable communication: the setting of a moral red line that may not be crossed. Ashrof will call this hermeneutics—as though disciplined reasoning and moral coherence were mere interpretive choices among many. But what we have done is not “hermeneutics” in his loose, self-serving sense; it is a systematic process of linguistic precision, logical consistency, and empirical validation. Hermeneutics, as he deploys it, multiplies meanings until all meaning collapses. It points to five different senses of a word and then invites the reader to “take your pick,” destroying the very purpose of revelation on the altar of academic relativism. The Qur’an was not revealed to bewilder but to guide; its purpose is clarity, not confusion. The distinction we uncover between Common Couple Violence and Patriarchal Terrorism—between a controlled act of moral signalling and an act of domination—is born not of speculative freedom but of disciplined reasoning faithful to divine intent. The Qur’an’s precision of language is never accidental; every term is chosen with the measured care of divine wisdom. When it distinguishes between ضَرَبَ (to strike) and عَذَّبَ (to torment), or between نُشُوز (discord, rebellion) and ظُلْم (injustice, oppression), it is not merely offering lexical variation—it is laying down moral and psychological boundaries long before the vocabulary of “constructive conflict resolution” and “psychological torture” had even entered human thought. The Qur’an does not sanction cruelty, nor does it erase accountability by romanticising aggression as “discipline.” Instead, it frames ضَرَبَ within a moral context—a corrective act of controlled, situational firmness (constructive conflict virtue, or CCV), intended to halt a destructive relational spiral without crossing into harm or humiliation. The objective is restoration, not domination; moral repair, not physical punishment. By contrast, عَذَّبَ denotes pain for its own sake: sustained, punitive, boundaryless harm inflicted to subdue or coerce. It is pathological tyranny (PT)—the very essence of what the Qur’an condemns when describing the oppressors of every age. Thus, even in its briefest commands, the Qur’an delineates two radically different psychologies: One is constructive, born of empathy, self-restraint, and commitment to moral balance. The other is pathological, driven by ego, anger, and the lust for control. Where modern behavioural science only recently discovered the difference between “boundary-setting” and “abuse,” the Qur’an encoded it at the level of verb selection. By His choice of words, God establishes a timeless moral distinction: correction born of conscience versus cruelty born of pathology. The verse thus stands as an ethical model for every relationship: it restrains power even while recognising the reality of conflict. It dignifies firmness when anchored in justice, and criminalises cruelty even when cloaked as care. Conclusion The Qur’an’s language — Daraba — is theologically, linguistically, and morally deliberate. It sanctions CCV as a last resort in preserving marital order, while simultaneously forbidding PT as cruelty and transgression. Every alternative phrasing Allah could have used would have either removed the corrective element (as in “separate” or “divorce”) or legitimised punitive cruelty (as in “flog,” “beat,” “torture”). By choosing Daraba, Allah reveals a moral discernment finer than anything in human legislation: a single word balancing justice, mercy, and psychological realism. In preserving both moral authority and human dignity, the Qur’an achieves what no human code has: it disciplines power without dehumanising weakness. As scholars, our duty is to present what the Qur’an states clearly and unambiguously, supported by logic, reason, and empirical evidence. For those who read with both intellect and conscience, 4:34 stands not as an embarrassment, but as a testament to divine wisdom that distinguished between correction and cruelty long before sociology learned to name them. ----- A frequent contributor to NewAgeIslam.com, Naseer Ahmed is an independent researcher and Quran-centric thinker whose work bridges faith, reason, and contemporary knowledge systems. Through a method rooted in intra-Quranic analysis and scientific coherence, the author has offered ground-breaking interpretations that challenge traditional dogma while staying firmly within the Quran’s framework. His work represents a bold, reasoned, and deeply reverent attempt to revive the Quran’s message in a language the modern world can test and trust. URL: https://www.newageislam.com/debating-islam/quran-conjugal-violence-ccv-punitive-torture/d/137195 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism