İsrafiloğlu, Fahime. “The Qur’ān and Value Conflicts in Marriage in the Modern Era”. Diyanet İlmî Dergi 61/4 (2025), 1341-1376. https://doi.org/10.61304/did.1723044

The Qur’ān and Value Conflicts in Marriage in the Modern Era*

Research Article

Received: 19 June 2025 Accepted: 17 December 2025

Fahime İsrafiloğlu

Dr. / PhD.

Bir kuruma bağlı değildir.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5936-3039

faima_i@hotmail.com

Abstract

This article explores the growing phenomenon of value-based conflicts in modern marriages by examining the foundational ethical and legal principles of marriage articulated in the Qur’ān. Against the backdrop of rapidly changing social dynamics-industrialization, urbanization, the rise of individualism, and shifting gender roles-the study investigates how Qur’ānic guidance continues to provide timeless yet adaptable solutions to contemporary family challenges. The analysis centers on key Qur’ānic verses, notably ar-Rūm 21, an-Nisā 19 and 35, at-Tahrīm 10, and al-Baqara 228, which collectively emphasize virtues such as love (mawaddah), mercy (rahmah), justice (ʿadl), kind and fair treatment (ḥusn al-muʿāsharah), empathy, and the equitable sharing of responsibilities within the marital bond. Far from being mere moral ideals, these principles serve as practical tools for preventing and resolving marital conflicts. Employing both descriptive and analytical methods, the study integrates classical exegetical sources (tafsīr) with contemporary sociological perspectives. It demonstrates how Qur’ānic teachings transcend their historical context while remaining relevant for navigating complex interpersonal dynamics in modern family structures. The findings show that these principles strengthen marital communication and emotional stability and support the development of holistic models that can help reduce divorce rates. The article proposes a multidimensional approach to resolving value-based marital conflicts through Qur’ān-centered moral education, faith-sensitive counseling, structured mediation, and religiously informed family-policy reforms. Ultimately, it offers a holistic framework that harmonizes traditional Qur’ānic values with contemporary needs, thereby strengthening and preserving the modern family through ethically grounded and practically effective strategies.

Keywords: Tafsīr, Qur’ān, Marriage, Family, Value Conflict.

*  This article is published under the CC BY-NC 4.0 licence.

Kur’an ve Modern Dönemde Evlilikte Değer Çatışmaları*

Araştırma Makalesi

Geliş Tarihi: 19 Haziran 2025 Kabul Tarihi: 17 Aralık 2025

Öz

Bu makale, Kur’an’ın evlilik kurumuna ilişkin ortaya koyduğu temel ahlâkî ve hukûkî ilkeleri merkeze alarak, çağdaş toplumlarda artan değer çatışmalarını analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmada, Kur’an’daki Rûm 21., Nisâ 19. ve 35., Tahrîm 10. ve Bakara 228. âyetleri başta olmak üzere çeşitli âyetler bağlamında sevgi, merhamet, adalet, nezaket, empati ve görev paylaşımı gibi ilkelere dayalı ilâhî rehberlik ilkeleri incelenmektedir. Bu ilkelerin, modern dönemde sanayileşme, bireyselleşme ve toplumsal cinsiyet rollerindeki dönüşümler sonucunda evlilik yapısında ortaya çıkan duygusal ve işlevsel çözülmelere karşı nasıl bir çözüm perspektifi sunduğu tartışılmaktadır. Betimleyici ve analiz odaklı yöntemle hazırlanan çalışmada klasik tefsir literatürüyle birlikte güncel sosyolojik araştırmalardan da faydalanılmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular, Kur’anî ilkelerin bireysel düzeyde evlilik içi iletişimi güçlendirdiğini ve toplumsal düzeyde boşanma oranlarının düşürülmesine katkı sağlayabilecek modellerin inşasına temel oluşturduğunu göstermektedir. Makale, Kur’an merkezli çok boyutlu yaklaşımlarla değer çatışmalarını önlemeye ve sağlıklı aile yapısını yeniden inşa etmeye yönelik teorik ve pratik çözümler sunmaktadır. Ayrıca, bu ilkelerin günümüz ailelerinde empati ve görev paylaşımını teşvik ederek, bireysel mutluluğun yanı sıra toplumsal istikrarı da kalıcı bir şekilde pekiştirebileceği vurgulanmaktadır. Özetle, Kur’an’ın evlilikle ilgili rehberliği, modern toplumların karşılaştığı ahlâkî erozyona karşı kalıcı ve evrensel bir panzehir niteliği taşımakta ve bireylerin iç huzurunu toplumun uzun vadeli bütünlüğünü sağlamaya yönelik bir çerçeve sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Tefsir, Kur’an, Evlilik, Aile, Değer Çatışması.

*  Bu makale CC BY-NC 4.0 lisansı altında yayımlanmaktadır

Summary

This article examines the Qur’ān’s foundational moral and legal principles of marriage in light of contemporary value-based conflicts within the institution. It argues that the Qur’ān presents marriage not merely as a legal contract but as a profound emotional and spiritual bond grounded in love, mercy, mutual respect, and shared moral responsibility-as exemplified in verses such as ar-Rūm 21 and an-Nisā 19. The study highlights virtues like patience, empathy, and mutual understanding as essential for preventing conflict. Moreover, the Qur’ān addresses marital discord through preventive and restorative mechanisms rather than focusing solely on individual fault or reactive measures. Surah at-Tahrīm is particularly noteworthy for its gentle warnings that intervene before nushūz (marital rebellion or disloyalty) fully emerges. It encourages spouses to resolve issues through mutual empathy and sincere self-reflection without escalating tensions. In this framework, the ʿiddah (waiting period) after divorce serves not only as a technical requirement but also as a corridor of tranquillity-a divinely ordained space to calm emotional and spiritual turmoil and prevent hasty, irreversible decisions. This reflects the Qur’ānic vision of the family as an institution centred on peace and reconciliation, offering a genuine opportunity for amends even on the path to separation. The same surah also invites individuals to discipline their own egos, acknowledging the innate human tendency toward selfishness, and to pursue peace rather than blame. This approach rests on a principle of psychological equality and mutual self-sacrifice in marriage. The legal and social dimension of this preventive strategy is institutionalised in an-Nisā 4:35, which mandates the appointment of respected arbitrators-one from each spouse’s family-when a serious conflict arises. This divinely sanctioned mediation model resolves disputes within the family before resorting to courts, protecting privacy while drawing on the wisdom of experienced elders. It strikingly aligns with modern family councils and professional mediation practices. Thus, the Qur’ān addresses value conflicts in marriage through a balanced combination of individual virtues and institutional safeguards. At the same time, it structures the marital relationship on functional and equitable sharing of responsibilities. Al-Baqara 2:228 is central here. Although the phrase “men have a degree over them” has often been historically misinterpreted, when read within the broader Qur’ānic framework, this “degree” refers not to inherent superiority but to the responsibility of providing financial and moral protection for the family. The same verse explicitly affirms that women have rights similar to those exercised over them, thereby establishing a framework of reciprocal rights and responsibilities. It guarantees women’s fundamental entitlements-including mahr (dower), maintenance, kind and equitable treatment, and protection of their dignity-while rejecting any notion of unilateral male dominance. This balanced approach underscores that the Qur’ān promotes a system of justice, equity, and mutual accountability rather than hierarchical oppression or unchecked individualism. By clearly delineating the rights and obligations of each spouse, the Qur’ān fosters trust, cooperation, and emotional security in marriage, offering a profound corrective to the contemporary oscillation between patriarchal rigidity and excessive individualism. It neither endorses absolute male authority nor unrestricted personal freedom that disregards communal and familial harmony. Instead, it advocates for a healthy and sustainable union grounded in functional roles exercised with equality, fairness, and compassion. This reciprocal model safeguards individual dignity while fostering long-term marital stability and societal cohesion, serving as a timeless antidote to the value conflicts and relational breakdowns common in today’s rapidly changing world.These principles serve as universal keys for resolving family challenges, even in the face of the disruptive effects of modern social transformations. The article provides a detailed analysis of how industrialisation, urbanisation, individualism, and the rapid evolution of gender roles have reshaped the institution of the family. The transition from extended to nuclear family structures, combined with factors such as irresponsibility, infidelity, financial difficulties, and emotional disconnection, has created fertile ground for rising divorce rates. Against this sociological reality, the central question is how contemporary life’s challenges can be constructively aligned with Qur’ānic guidance harmoniously and productively. The study highlights the timeless relevance of Qur’ānic principles-compassion, justice, the sanctity of privacy, love, and shared responsibility-as a robust framework for preventing modern family crises, effectively addressing both emotional and legal dimensions at individual and societal levels. The article proposes a range of multidimensional solutions, including Qur’ān-centered moral education, faith-sensitive family counselling, gender justice initiatives, mandatory pre-divorce mediation, and programs to strengthen intra-family communication skills. When thoughtfully integrated with contemporary scientific and sociological insights, these Qur’ānic principles pave the way for building resilient, harmonious, and peaceful family structures that endure the challenges of modern life.

Geniş Özet

Bu makale, Kur’an’ın evlilik kurumuna dair ortaya koyduğu temel ilkelere dayalı bakış açısını, günümüzde evlilik müessesesinde yaşanan değer çatışmalarıyla ilişkilendirerek analiz etmektedir. Kur’an’ın evliliğe ilişkin sunduğu ahlâkî ve hukûkî ilkeler hem bireysel hem toplumsal düzlemde karşılaşılan sorunlara evrensel çözüm anahtarları sunmaktadır. Zira Kur’an, evliliği yalnızca hukukî bir sözleşme olarak değil, aynı zamanda derin bir duygusal, ahlâkî ve sosyal dayanışma zemini olarak ele alır. Bu yaklaşımın temelini, özellikle Rûm sûresi 21. âyeti oluşturmaktadır. Söz konusu âyette Allah Teâlâ, eşler arasında meveddet (sevgi) ve rahmet (merhamet) var etmesinin kendi kudretinin bir delili olduğunu ifade eder. Bu vurgu, evlilik ilişkisinin salt bir akit değil; kalplerde inşa edilen derin bir gönül bağı ve karşılıklı sorumluluğa dayalı bir ittifak olduğunu gösterir. Böylece merhamet, sadece anlık bir hissî refleks değil; eşlerin birbirine karşı süreklilik arz eden bir ilgi, şefkat ve anlayışla yaklaşmasını sağlayan bilinçli bir tutum olarak tasavvur edilir. Buna paralel olarak, Nisâ sûresi 19. âyeti evlilikteki ilişkisel düzene ahlâkî bir zemin daha ekler. “Ey iman edenler! Kadınlarınıza iyi davranın” hitabıyla başlayan bu âyet, evliliğin içinde bulunduğu toplumsal şartlar, bireysel beklentiler ya da ekonomik zorluklar ne olursa olsun, eşler arası ilişkinin temelini karşılıklı saygı, nezaket ve iyi muamele ilkelerinin oluşturması gerektiğini bildirir. Bu çerçevede Kur’an, evlilikte karşılıklı hak ve görevlerin ötesinde, bir ahlâkî sorumluluk bilinci inşa etmeyi hedeflemektedir. Sabır, anlayış ve empati gibi erdemler, bu bilinçli yaklaşımın ayrılmaz unsurlarıdır ve değer çatışmalarının önüne geçilmesinde vazgeçilmez bir rol oynar. Ayrıca Kur’an, evlilikte yaşanabilecek çatışmaları yalnızca bireysel kusurlar veya ani tepkiler üzerinden değerlendirmez; aksine bu durumları önleyici, yatıştırıcı ve onarıcı kurumsal mekanizmalarla çerçevelendirir. Özellikle Tahrîm sûresi, eşler arasında henüz nüşûz (geçimsizlik, itaatsizlik) ortaya çıkmadan önce sürece dahil olan yumuşak uyarı biçimleriyle dikkat çeker. Bu bağlamda, eşler arasındaki gerilimi tırmandırmadan, karşılıklı empati ve içsel muhasebeyle sorunun giderilmesini amaçlayan adımlar önerilir. Bu bağlamda, Kur’an’daki “iddet” süreci, sadece boşanma sonrası bekleme süresi değil; aynı zamanda duygusal ve ruhsal dalgalanmaların durulması, kararların aceleyle verilmemesi için tanınan bir sükûnet koridoru olarak işlev görür. Bu düzenleme, ayrılığa giden yolda telafi imkânı tanıyarak Kur’an’ın barış ve onarım odaklı aile anlayışını yansıtır. Aynı sûrede Allah Teâlâ’nın insan nefsine yerleştirdiği bencillik eğilimini hatırlatarak, bireyleri kendi egolarını terbiye etmeye, karşı tarafı suçlamak yerine barış için adım atmaya davet etmesi de dikkate değerdir. Bu yaklaşım, evlilikte eşitlikçi psikoloji ve karşılıklı özveri ilkesini temel alır. Bu önleyici yaklaşımın hukûkî ve sosyal boyutu, Nisâ sûresi 35. âyeti ile kurumsallaşır. Âyette, evlilikte bir uyuşmazlık çıktığında her iki aileden saygın kişilerin hakem olarak görevlendirilmesi emredilir. Bu, sorunun mahkemeye taşınmadan önce aile içinde çözüme kavuşturulmasına yönelik ilâhî temelli bir arabuluculuk modelidir. Hem mahremiyetin korunması hem de tecrübeli büyüklerin rehberliğinde sağduyulu çözümler üretme amacı taşıyan bu sistem, günümüzdeki aile meclisi uygulamaları ve profesyonel arabuluculuk mekanizmalarıyla birebir örtüşmektedir. Böylece Kur’an, sadece bireysel erdemleri değil, aynı zamanda kurumsal ve sosyal çözüm yollarını da önceleyerek evlilikte yaşanan değer çatışmalarının sağlıklı ve adaletli bir şekilde yönetilmesini hedefler. Aynı zamanda Kur’an, evlilik ilişkisini yalnızca duygusal ve ahlâkî değil, işlevsel ve dengeli bir sorumluluk paylaşımı esasına dayalı olarak da yapılandırır. Bu çerçevede Bakara sûresi 228. âyeti, evlilikteki görev ve yetki dağılımına dair önemli bir ilkeyi ortaya koyar. Âyette yer alan “erkeklerin kadınlar üzerinde bir derece fazlalığı vardır” ifadesi, tarihsel ve bağlamsal olarak çoğu zaman yanlış yorumlansa da Kur’an bütünlüğü içinde değerlendirildiğinde, bu fazlalığın keyfî bir üstünlük değil; sorumluluk yüklenme ve ailede mali-manevî güvenliğin sağlanması anlamında bir düzenleme olduğu anlaşılmaktadır. Aynı âyette, kadınların da erkekler kadar haklara sahip oldukları; özellikle mehir, nafaka ve iyi muamele görme gibi temel haklarının açıkça garanti altına alındığı belirtilmiştir. Bu yaklaşım, evlilikte adil ve dengeli bir sistem kurulmasını gerekli kılar. Tarafların hem yükümlülüklerinin hem de haklarının tanımlanması, evlilikte sürekliliği sağlayan güven ortamını pekiştirir. Böylece ne mutlak otorite ne de sınırsız özgürlük söz konusu olur; aksine, işlevsel rollerin eşitlik ve hakkaniyet içinde yürütülmesiyle sağlıklı bir birliktelik hedeflenir. Bu anayasal referanslar, modern toplumsal dönüşümlerin zorlayıcı etkileri altında kalmış ailelerde bile hükmünü koruyan evrensel çözüm anahtarları olarak değerlendirilebilir. Ardından modern toplumsal dönüşümlerin —sanayileşme, kentleşme, bireyselleşme ve toplumsal cinsiyet rollerindeki evrimler— aile kurumunu nasıl dönüştürdüğü ele alınır. Geleneksel geniş aile modelinden çekirdek aileye kayış, “sorumsuz davranma”, “aldatma” ve “ekonomik yetersizlik” gibi boşanma nedenlerinin artışını tetiklemiştir. Bu sosyolojik zemin, Kur’anî rehberlikle nasıl örtüştürülebilir sorusu, çalışmanın kilit noktasını oluşturur. Makale, Kur’an’ın merhamet, adalet ve mahremiyet ilkelerinin günümüz aile krizlerini önlemede önemini vurgular. Ahlâkî eğitim, dinî danışmanlık, toplumsal cinsiyet eşitliği kampanyaları ve zorunlu arabuluculuk gibi çok boyutlu yaklaşımlarla aile dayanışmasının güçlendirilmesi önerilir. Böylece çalışma, Kur’anî rehberliğin modern yaklaşımlarla bilinçli bir şekilde bütünleştirilmesi durumunda, kalıcı ve uyumlu aile yapılarının inşa edilebileceğini ve böylece günümüzün aile krizlerini ele almak için bütüncül bir model sunulabileceğini ortaya koymaktadır.

Introduction

In the contemporary era, the institution of marriage is undergoing significant transformations in both its structural composition and functional role, driven by wide-ranging global forces such as industrialisation, urbaNisātion, heightened individualism, and shifting gender paradigms. These extensive societal changes have precipitated a fundamental reconfiguration of marital ideals and expectations, whereby traditional commitments centred on duty, sacrifice, and collective responsibility are increasingly supplanted by aspirations toward emotional fulfilment, personal autonomy, and self-actualization. As a result, spouses frequently enter into marriage with differing and sometimes conflicting conceptions of its purpose and meaning, which in turn precipitates communication failures, unmet expectations, and ultimately the deterioration of marital cohesion.

This study advances the thesis that a primary locus of these familial tensions is the incongruity between the Qur’ānic conception of marriage-rooted in moral accountability, reciprocal obligations, and spiritual concord-and the prevailing value system of contemporary society, which is heavily influenced by processes of secularization, consumer culture, and individual liberty. The research endeavours to examine how this divergence manifests across two interrelated dimensions: firstly, through an analysis of classical Qur’ānic exegesis that elucidates the foundational ethical and relational principles underpinning marriage in Islamic thought; and secondly, through an empirical investigation of present-day sociological data addressing family dysfunction and crisis.

By embedding Qur’ānic perspectives within the wider socio-cultural context of modernity, the study seeks to develop a nuanced, integrative framework that explicates the underlying value conflicts destabilising contemporary marital life. This approach not only enriches the academic discourse by bridging theological and social scientific insights but also aims to inform practical interventions that can enhance family resilience in the face of evolving societal challenges.Although numerous previous studies have either focused on the ethical dimensions of family life as presented in the Qur’ān or examined sociological factors contributing to the weakening of marital relationships in modern societies, there remains a significant gap in the literature when it comes to integrative analyses that bring together both theological discourse and empirical social science perspectives. Most existing works tend to treat these domains in isolation, thereby overlooking the complex interplay between religious values and socio-cultural realities.

This study seeks to address a notable gap in the existing scholarship by employing an interdisciplinary and comparative methodology that bridges classical Islamic texts with contemporary sociological perspectives. Initially, the research undertakes a detailed examination of the core tenets of marriage as articulated in the Qur’ān, drawing upon authoritative tafsir literature alongside illustrative narrative case studies, such as the marital relations involving the wives of Prophets Lot and Noah, Pharaoh’s consort, and the spouses of Prophet Muhammad. These scriptural exemplars serve to highlight both the normative ideals and the complex challenges inherent in marital relationships within the Islamic tradition. Subsequently, these theological and exegetical findings are critically situated within the context of modern familial difficulties, encompassing issues such as economic instability, evolving gender roles, the tension between religious values and secular worldviews, and pervasive failures in spousal communication. Through this dual analytical lens, the study endeavours to produce a sophisticated and comprehensive understanding of how enduring Qur’ānic moral frameworks may contribute constructively to contemporary debates on marriage, while also identifying viable strategies for mitigating the crises that afflict today’s marital institutions.

Through a methodical comparison of Qur’ānic models concerning marital harmony, ethical duties, and mechanisms for conflict resolution with contemporary empirical findings in family sociology and psychology, this study aims to identify integrated approaches for mitigating the escalating challenges confronting modern families. The research highlights that the Qur’ānic framework, when understood beyond rigid legalistic interpretations and approached through a dynamic, context-sensitive approach, articulates enduring ethical principles and relational wisdom that continue to offer valuable guidance for spousal relationships. These include foundational concepts such as mutual respect, empathy, constructive and patient communication, as well as the facilitation of communal support structures, which collectively function as protective factors against the disintegration of familial bonds. Ultimately, this study contends that the Qur’ānic ethical paradigm, rooted in a harmonised interplay between personal accountability and communal welfare, provides a robust normative foundation for strengthening family cohesion amidst contemporary pressures arising from heightened individualism, consumerist tendencies, and evolving gender roles.

The principles presented by the Qur’ān regarding the institution of marriage have been examined from diverse disciplinary perspectives in both classical and contemporary periods. İn his 2004 article titled “Marriage Therapy in the Qur’an – A Comparison with Contemporary Psychological Data and Practices”, Abdurrahman Kasapoğlu explores the Qur’ānic approach to resolving marital conflicts by analyzing the mechanism of arbitration and comparing it with modern psychological counseling methods.[1] In his 2007 study, “Compatibility Problems Between Spouses in Islam - Faith and Moral Harmony”, he emphasizes the significance of moral and religious congruence-particularly the alignment in terms of faith and chastity-as key factors for spousal harmony within the Qur’ānic framework.[2] Similarly, in their 2022 article “A Psycho-Social Assessment on the Issues Discussed Today in Islam in the Context of Marriage and Family”, Ahmet Rifat Geçioğlu and Ertuğrul Döner assess early Islamic perspectives on marriage through the lens of contemporary psycho-social dynamics, addressing issues such as gender roles, patriarchal interpretations, and the impact of secularization on marital perceptions.[3]

In addition to these studies, Avcı (2023), in her article “An Evaluation on Verse 21 of Surah Rum in the Context of Spiritually Oriented Family Counseling”, provides an important analysis of Qur’ānic guidance on marital ethics within the framework of spirituality-oriented family counseling, highlighting practical strategies for promoting harmony based on the principles of love, compassion, and mutual respect.[4] Furthermore, Saffet Köse (2020), in their work “Genetiğiyle Oynanmış Kavramlar ve Aile Medeniyetinin Sonu”, discuss conceptual transformations in contemporary family structures and the erosion of traditional values, providing a critical lens to evaluate modern challenges in marital and familial life.[5] While existing scholarship generally focuses on Qur’ānic marriage principles in relation to counseling practices or socio-cultural transformations, the present study concentrates on value conflicts arising from concepts such as nushūz (discord), mahr (dower), witnessing, and inheritance, thereby integrating classical and modern perspectives in a comparative framework.

1. Basic Values of Marriage in the Qur’ān

The Qur’ān presents marriage as a divinely ordained institution that goes beyond mere biological or social necessity, emphasizing the cultivation of emotional, spiritual, and social harmony. Marriage is described as a natural sanctuary of peace and intimacy, where spouses are created from the same essence, as stated in Surah ar-Rūm (30:21)[6]. This verse underscores that the marital bond is designed to foster love, mercy, and mutual care. Classical scholars link this closeness to divine wisdom. az-Zajjāj (d. 311/923) explains that the creation of Eve from Adam’s rib signifies the origin of love and mercy between spouses, while discord may be associated with negative, satanic influence.[7] al-Bayzāwī (d. 685/1286) emphasizes that similarity and shared values between spouses encourage affection and harmony, whereas dissimilarity can lead to distance or conflict. Mawdūdī (1903–1979) expands this perspective by highlighting that emotional bonds in marriage are not solely for procreation but also serve social functions, contributing to family stability and the wellbeing of society.[8]

The Qur’ān also addresses marital challenges arising from religious differences. In Surah at-Tahrīm (66:10), the wives of Prophets Noah and Lot are cited as examples of spouses whose disbelief created spiritual and relational discord. Classical commentators interpret their “betrayal” not as moral failure, but as religious disloyalty. Ibn ʿAbbās (d. 68/687–88) viewed it as deliberate rejection of the prophets’ teachings, while Ikrimah (d. 13/634) and Dahhāq (d. 105/723) linked it to polytheism.[9] Muqātil b. Sulayman (d. 150/767) identifies them by name, highlighting the symbolic lesson of faith-based incompatibility in marriage.[10] al-Qurtubī (d. 671/1273) explains that the example in verse 10 of Surah at-Tahrīm[11] underscores the idea that worldly and familial bonds hold no significance when there is a fundamental difference in belief regarding the Hereafter. He notes that the majority of classical commentators agree that the term “betrayal” in this context refers not to moral misconduct but to religious disloyalty.[12] Fakhr al-Dīn ar-Rāzī (d. 606/1210) interprets the term “similitude” in verse 10 of Surah at-Tahrīm as a figurative expression indicating that the women mentioned were punished due to their disbelief and antagonism towards the believers. He underscores that, in Allah’s view, worldly ties aside from the bond of faith hold no true significance. Additionally, he discusses the example of Pharaoh’s wife, Asiyah, within the same surah, asserting that a believer’s spiritual status remains unaffected by having an unbelieving spouse, and she may attain high spiritual ranks-linking this interpretation to the admonitions directed at the Prophet’s wives at the beginning of the chapter.[13]

The Qur’ān establishes marriage on a foundation of justice, emphasising a balanced system of mutual rights and duties between spouses. al-Nasafî (d. 710/1310) highlights that women possess essential rights-such as mahr, maintenance, kind treatment, and protection from harm, as mandated by verse 228 of Surah al-Baqara[14], framing these as sharʿī obligations aimed at safeguarding the marital bond. Conversely, the man is tasked with promoting goodness and preventing harm within the family, a responsibility regulated by both customary practice and Islamic law. This role is reciprocated by the woman’s contributions to domestic life. The Qur’ānic notion of man’s “one-degree” superiority [15] is not viewed as an arbitrary privilege but as a responsibility grounded in justice and divine wisdom.[16] This hierarchical distinction is understood as part of a social order that upholds mutual duties based on equity rather than strict equality in marriage.

In summary, the Qur’ān identifies the following core values of marriage:

Love and Mercy: Emotional bonds that foster intimacy and compassion between spouses.

Peace and Security: Marriage as a safe, harmonious sanctuary for both partners.

Faith-Based Compatibility: Shared religious commitment as a foundation for marital harmony.

Justice and Equity: Balanced rights and duties for spouses, including financial and emotional responsibilities.

Mutual Respect and Responsibility: Recognition of each partner’s role in maintaining family wellbeing and social stability.

These foundational principles provide a framework to understand not only the ideal functioning of a marriage but also the potential sources of value conflicts that may arise when these principles are neglected or challenged.

2. Examples from the Qur’ān on Value Conflicts in Marriage

2.1. Conflicts Arising from a Lack of Unity in Belief

Building upon the Qur’ān’s delineation of core marital values, it becomes evident that deviations from these principles often generate conflicts. One notable source of tension stems from a lack of unity in belief. The Qur’ān conceptualizes the family not merely as a biological or social unit but as a spiritual alliance grounded in shared faith and values. Conflicts in belief, therefore, profoundly affect both worldly relationships and ultimate salvation. Surah at-Tahrīm, verse 10, exemplifies this by depicting the wives of Prophet Noah and Prophet Lot as disbelievers, underscoring that marital ties, even to prophets, do not exempt one from divine accountability. Ibn Kathīr (d. 774/1373) explains that despite their cohabitation with the prophets, these wives demonstrated spiritual discord through a lack of faith unity.[17] According to the narrations from Narrations attributed to Ibn ʿAbbās (d. 68/687-88) further illustrate that Prophet Lot’s wife betrayed her household by warning the immoral guests,[18] thereby acting in opposition to the prophetic mission and its ethical values.

Ibn Kathīr, evaluated, the statement in verses 59-60 of Surah al-Hijr that the angels were sent to Abraham to destroy the people of Lot, but Lot’s family was exempted from this decision, and that his wife had been predestined to be in the ranks of the unbelievers in eternity, emphasizing that the destruction of this woman along with her people was ‘predestined’ in advance. This determination shows that the statement “اðäñîÇ ÇåòÑîÇîÊîçï âîÏñîÑòæîٓÇۙ ÇðæñîçîÇ äîåðæî ÇäòÚîÇÈðÑ۪êæî۟” reveals the unbelieving position of his wife as a divine fate.[19]

The accounts in Surahs at-Tahrīm and al-Hijr, particularly regarding the wife of Prophet Lot, illustrate that the family institution transcends mere biological or social connections and is fundamentally rooted in a partnership of shared faith and values. The destruction of the wife, despite her cohabitation with the Prophet, underscores that religious and spiritual concordance is a crucial determinant of marital stability and success.

The call of Prophet Noah to his unbelieving son Yām in verses 42 and 46 of Surah al-Hūd in the Holy Qur’ān shows that family ties are not sufficient for spiritual salvation unless they are shaped based on faith. Ibn Kathīr, while executing these verses, emphasizes that the Prophet Nūh called his son to the ark not only for physical salvation[20] but also to invite him to the circle of faith, [21] however, his son’s thinking that he would be saved by relying on worldly measures rather than divine ones led to his destruction.[22] This parable reveals the moral and intellectual consequences of conflicting values within the family. The divine declaration in the 46th verse of Surah al-Hūd, stating that the son of Noah was not counted among his ‘family’, reveals that the concept of family is defined based on faith rather than biological ties.[23] In this context, as Ibn Kathīr points out, the bond of descent alone is not sufficient for eternal because, since true belonging is based on a commonality of values based on faith and righteous deeds.

Ibn Kathīr although he narrates the doubts of Mujāhid (d. 103/721), al-Ḥasan al-Basrī (d. 110/728), and Ubayd b. Umayr (d. 74/693), who discussed the descent of the son of Prophet Noah, approached this view cautiously and emphasized that the expression ‘betrayal’ in verse 10 of Surah at-Tahrīm refers to religious disloyalty, not adultery. In the same vein, Ibn ‘Abbās and most Salaf scholars stated that no prophet’s wife could be accused of adultery and that the betrayal here was based on religious disloyalty.[24]

The examples given in the Qur’ān about the wife and son of Prophet Noah show that the absence of a unity of values based on faith in the family can cause a deep rupture that goes beyond emotional ties. According to Ibn ‘Ashūr (d. 1393/1973), although Noah’s prayer may have been more than a last-ditch effort for his son’s earthly salvation and perhaps a hope for forgiveness in the hereafter, the divine will made it clear that faith-based belonging was decisive.[25] The disintegration in the family of Prophet Noah is an important example of the lack of common beliefs and values in marriage and family structures, which can lead to internal dissolution and ultimately spiritual ruptures.

The 11th verse of Surah at-Tahrîm of the Qur’ān emphasizes Pharaoh’s wife Âsiya’s conflict of values between faith and disbelief and shows that differences of belief in marriage can have both worldly and ethereal consequences. Tabari states that Âsiya’s will to separate from Pharaoh mentally and in her heart shows that the marriage bond is secondary to her faith preferences and that her request for ‘closeness’ in her prayer reveals the depth of a faith-based separation.[26]

al-Bayzāwī interpreted the expression “عðæòÏîãî” (‘in your presence’) in Āsiya’s prayer as a request not only for a house in heaven but also for stability in the closest station to Allah. Her turning to Allah despite Pharaoh’s oppression reveals that the meaning of marriage should be shaped based on faith and moral values, not just physical union.[27] 

Based on the example of Âsiya, ar-Rāzī argued that faith-based separation is stronger than the physical and legal bond of marriage. This parable shows that a believer can perform an internal emigration by turning to Allah after conflicting of values with a disbelieving spouse and interprets Âsiya’s prayer as a request for both geographical and spiritual closeness.[28] This highlights that fundamental value differences in marriage can lead a believer to form an independent moral identity by turning to Allah, serving as a warning to some of the Prophet’s wives, as conflicts can arise not only from disbelief versus belief but also from varying levels of faith.

az-Zamakhsharī (d. 538/1144) stated that Asiya’s prayer reflects her endeavor to live with a system of values that prioritized divine justice and mercy, despite being the wife of a tyrant like Pharaoh.[29] This verse states that the conflict between faith and disbelief is also manifested in marriage and that the trials of the Prophet with some of his wives provide social examples of value conflicts. az-Zamakhsharī emphasizes that the solution to these conflicts, which arose due to the different expectations of the Prophet’s wives, is possible with divine guidance and that arbitrary interpretations should be avoided.[30] Building upon the previous discussion on conflicts arising from a lack of unity in belief, these examples illustrate that marriages in the Qur’ān extend beyond the private sphere to reflect and shape broader social values. The narratives demonstrate that marital relationships are not only personal bonds but also arenas in which principles of justice, loyalty, and moral responsibility are enacted. Asiyah’s position, for instance, stands out as a symbol of justice, loyalty, and commitment to values, highlighting how individual conduct within marriage can serve as a moral exemplar for society at large.

2.2. Prophet Muhammad’s Wives and Domestic Communication

Extending this perspective to domestic dynamics, the Qur’ānic narratives concerning the Prophet’s family life, particularly in Surah at-Tahrīm, provide concrete examples of how human vulnerabilities within marriage are managed through divine guidance. Classical exegeses highlight the episode involving Māriyah al-Qibṭiyya and the emotional tensions it provoked among the Prophet’s wives, especially Hafsa bint ʿUmar.[31] Ibn ʿAtiyyah al-Andalusī (d. 541/1147) regarded the accounts related to Māriyah as the most reliable among these traditions.[32] According to these narrations, the Prophet’s union with Māriyah occurred on Hafsa’s day, triggering a jealous response that reveals the delicate nature of perceived marital value and emotional dynamics. The Prophet’s declaration of making Māriyah unlawful for himself and his request for Hafsa’s discretion aimed to contain the conflict; however,[33] Hafsa’s disclosure to ʿĀ’ishah expanded the dispute into a broader social and emotional crisis.

The incident referenced in the commentary on the third verse of Surah at-Tahrīm highlights significant psychosocial aspects, particularly the breach of family privacy and trust resulting from the Prophet’s (pbuh) confidential statement being disclosed by one of his wives. Ibn ʿAtiyya examines the Sharīʿah implications of the term tahrīm, noting divergent juristic opinions regarding whether the utterance constitutes a form of divorce (ṭalāq) or an oath (yamīn). While the Mālikī school categorised such declarations as divorce, the predominant view among the Ṣaḥābah and Tābiʿīn was to treat them as oaths, necessitating expiation for resolution.[34] Ibn ʿAtiyya’s analysis underscores that the Prophet’s response embodied not only juridical acumen but also profound ethical sensitivity: his empathetic recognition of Ḥafṣa’s emotional distress, his renunciation of personal preference to restore harmony, and his insistence on confidentiality reveal the paramount importance he placed on maintaining familial trust and safeguarding privacy within the domestic sphere.

The Qur’ānic narration of certain episodes from the Prophet’s (pbuh) private life offers not merely historical insight but also divine instruction on universal themes such as jealousy, privacy, emotional regulation, and communication within marital bonds. The pertinent passages in Surahs at-Tahrīm and al-Aḥzāb illustrate the Prophet’s value-driven and respectful conduct in family affairs.[35] This dynamic, notably influenced by ʿĀ’isha’s declaration “I desire Allah, His Messenger, and the abode of the Hereafter”,[36] embodies a collective ethical posture grounded in moral principles rather than impulsive familial decisions.[37] Consequently, the Qur’ān models a normative framework emphasising the imperative of aligning personal and relational choices with divine priorities amid value-based tensions in marriage.

Verses 30-31 of Surah al-Aḥzāb underscore the heightened responsibilities borne by the Prophet’s (pbuh) wives compared to other believing women, due to their exemplary status and proximity to the Prophet. This elevated accountability is reflected in the amplification of both the rewards for their virtues and the consequences of their faults on a divine scale. The term translated as “prostitute” within these verses has elicited varied interpretations among exegetes: Ibn ʿAbbās viewed it as indicative of moral failings and rebellion against the Prophet, whereas al-Ṭabarī understood it in a literal sense as referring to adultery.[38] These divergent interpretations highlight that familial conflicts can stem not only from material or circumstantial causes but also from ethical and value-based transgressions.

The phrase “Allah wants to remove dirt from you and make you pure” in verse 33 of Surah al-Aḥzāb conveys both a process of purification and a call to elevated moral responsibility for the Prophet’s family. Although the verse is explicitly addressed to the Prophet’s wives, the use of the masculine plural pronoun linguistically encompasses them within the concept of ‘Ahl al-Bayt.’ Considering the immediate context (sīq and sibāq), this divine address serves to reinforce their exemplary status within the Muslim community.[39] Hamdi Yazır (d. 1942) critiques the Shiʿite interpretation that restricts this verse’s scope to the Prophet, ʿAlī, Zaynab, Ḥasan, and Ḥusayn, arguing—citing the hadith “Salman is from us and the Ahl al-Bayt”-that excluding the Prophet’s wives contradicts both the linguistic and historical context.[40] Verses 28–35 of Surah al-Aḥzāb illustrate how divine guidance addresses human challenges such as jealousy, communication difficulties, breaches of privacy, and value conflicts within marriage. Accordingly, the Prophet’s family serves not only as a historical narrative but also as a universal paradigm for negotiating values, sharing responsibilities, and shaping a family framework aligned with both individual and collective ethics. By analyzing these examples, it becomes evident that the Qur’ān provides principles that remain relevant across time, offering guidance for resolving interpersonal tensions and maintaining moral balance within the household.

3. Value Conflicts in Marriage in the Modern World

3.1. Social Change and Family Institutions

Building upon the Qur’ānic paradigm of marital guidance, it is crucial to examine how these principles interact with contemporary societal dynamics. The modernization-driven shifts in social structure have significantly influenced the institution of the family, altering not only its formal composition but also its functional roles and value foundations. The family has transcended its traditional boundaries as a private domain, emerging as a multifaceted institution engaged with economic, cultural, and political spheres. Consequently, modern marriages often encounter value conflicts that stem from changing gender roles, evolving expectations, and the tension between traditional norms and contemporary lifestyles.[41] From a sociological standpoint, the family serves as a foundational mechanism for social integration; as articulated by Auguste Comte, it functions as a mediating bridge between the individual and the broader society.[42]

Institutional frameworks consist of recurring and internalised patterns of behaviour that enable individuals to share collective norms and values. Within this framework, the family should be seen not merely as a biological unit but as a pivotal institution responsible for transmitting societal norms across generations. As noted by Bozkurt, the modern family is a dynamic entity where interpersonal relationships transcend physical coexistence and are grounded in shared cultural and moral values.[43] However, moderNisātion processes such as individualisation, globalisation, and secularisation have significantly weakened the common value base between spouses, giving rise to divergent expectations, communication breakdowns, and functional disruptions within marriage. Ogburn highlights that as families gradually relinquish their biological, economic, educational, and emotional roles to external institutions, the relevance and function of the traditional family structure become increasingly subject to scrutiny.[44] The prioritisation of personal autonomy over collective norms, driven by modernity, has intensified value-based discord in contemporary marital life.

Historical shifts in the social structure have redefined the family from a basic site of socialisation to a core institution vital for maintaining social continuity.[45] While modernist perspectives regard the transition from extended to nuclear family models as a marker of societal progress, conservative views maintain that the extended family remains a crucial foundation for social cohesion.[46] Giddens, diverging from both, rejects a singular definition of family in modern contexts and instead highlights the coexistence of diverse familial forms. Industrialisation, urbaNisātion, and socio-economic transformations have significantly eroded the traditional extended family system, giving rise to more flexible and individualised nuclear family structures.[47] This transformation has facilitated a shift from a traditional marital framework, rooted in adherence to collective norms, to a modern understanding of marriage centred on personal autonomy, emotional fulfilment, and individual freedom. Consequently, this shift has intensified value-based tensions and disagreements between spouses.

Durkheim (1858–1917), Weber (1864-1920), and Marx (1818-1883) each conceptualised the transformation of the family within distinct theoretical frameworks-Durkheim through the division of labour, Weber via rationalisation processes, and Marx by analysing the shifts in modes of production. For Marx, the transition from pre-industrial to industrial economies fundamentally altered the family’s economic role, thereby necessitating a structural reconfiguration.[48] Parsons (1902-1979), in contrast, viewed the modern nuclear family as a key institution that fosters social cohesion through socialisation and the stabilisation of individual personality, thus underpinning the durability of marital relationships.[49] Contemporary marital value conflicts reflect not just individual preferences but are embedded in deep-seated historical, economic, and cultural transformations. Despite the shifting of some traditional roles to external institutions, the family remains a central pillar of the social order, necessitating a contextual analysis of such tensions within broader sociological frameworks.

From a structural-functionalist perspective, Talcott Parsons viewed the family as a stabilizing force in the social order,[50] while Marx’s conflict theory emphasized internal power asymmetries and their disruptive potential.[51] The modernization process, particularly through industrialization, urbanization, and the rising economic role of women,[52] has challenged the patriarchal family model and introduced new values-such as individual fulfillment, emotional intimacy, and personal freedom-alongside traditional notions of economic unity,[53] resulting in intensified value-based tensions within marriage.

Industrialisation and rural-to-urban migration catalysed the shift from extended to nuclear family models, reshaping gender and intergenerational dynamics within households. While thinkers like Plato (d. 348/347) and Engels ( 1820 -1895) critiqued the family as a source of inequality or a tool for preserving private property,[54] 20th-century state-centred experiments in the USSR and China revealed the limitations of institutionalising familial roles.[55] today’s technologically focused social organization and intensive working conditions have weakened family interactions and shifted children’s socialization to external areas such as schools, workplaces and nurseries; the spread of single-parent models has increased the state’s interventions to protect the traditional family structure, and conservative, liberal, and socialist perspectives have interpreted this transformation as sacred protection, a natural result of modernization or as part of the social movement, respectively.[56] Since the 19th century, women’s increasing economic autonomy has reoriented marriage from material interdependence to emotional fulfilment, giving rise to novel value-based tensions and transforming the family into a multidimensional psychosocial institution.[57]

The feminist movement, initially rooted in resistance to patriarchal subordination, institutionalized in the 1990s by asserting gender equality as a core sociopolitical imperative.[58] Feminist theory critiques the use of motherhood and fertility as mechanisms of control over women, with thinkers like Simone de Beauvoir advocating for emancipation through economic productivity and autonomy.[59] While first-wave feminism prioritised legal rights such as education and suffrage, second-wave feminism emphasised bodily autonomy and reproductive rights, and third-wave feminism addressed gender-based violence, sexuality, and empowerment. In contrast, conservative Islamic discourses in the 1980s promoted female domesticity, while the Western New Right emphasised the restoration of traditional family values.[60]

Building upon the sociological analysis of family transformation, it is evident that divergent social movements-particularly feminist paradigms advocating gender equality and individual autonomy-have reshaped both the functional and normative foundations of the family, generating new tensions between traditional and modern marital roles. Within this context, the Qur’ān presents a contrasting paradigm: the family is not merely a site of individual desire but the nucleus of social stability and collective identity, structured around justice, compassion (raḥmah), loyalty, and shared responsibility. In the modern era-especially following industrialization and urbanization—the family has largely lost its economic and communal functions, being increasingly redefined around personal autonomy, emotional fulfilment, and individual choice. This evolution transforms the family from a transmitter of collective values into a private sphere of negotiated interests. Accordingly, while Qur’ānic principles uphold social responsibility and solidarity, contemporary values often prioritize individual rights, creating structural tensions within marital life. Nonetheless, the Qur’ānic model, emphasizing mercy, justice, and mutual responsibility, provides a normative framework that can help balance these modern conflicts, offering guidance on role distribution and reconciling personal freedoms with collective duties.

3.2. Religious Beliefs and Family Values

Religious beliefs support relationship virtues such as love, respect, trust, loyalty and sacrifice in modern marriages, both as a moral reference and at the level of social norms,[61] thus strengthening value harmony within structural and functional closeness with the family institution and increasing the capacity to produce solutions in times of conflict. In modern marriages, religious beliefs shape family values ​​by creating moral norms and social prohibitions in many areas such as childrearing, sexuality, friendships and family roles; therefore, differences in belief levels can turn into fundamental areas of conflict in marriage.[62] In religious families, individuals’ spiritual responsibilities are reinforced by the internalization of religious values, and this process provides meaning to family virtues such as love, loyalty, and sacrifice.[63] In secular contexts, some scholars suggest that moral virtues have supplanted religion; however, prevailing thought emphasizes their inseparability from spiritual roots. Accordingly, religious frameworks remain essential in shaping familial bonds and managing value-based conflicts.

Religion plays a significant role in addressing value-based conflicts within contemporary marriages, particularly concerning child-rearing and spousal relations. As the primary context for social and religious socialisation, the family facilitates the transmission of religious identity alongside ethical principles such as love, obedience, and sacrifice across generations.[64] Empirical studies identify trust, honesty, love, respect, and religiosity as core values sustaining modern marital relationships.[65] Religious individuals tend to emphasise forgiveness, mutual respect, shared responsibilities, and common goals, with spiritual practices, such as prayer and engagement with sacred texts, fostering marital stability and cohesion.[66] Moreover, religion acts protectively by deterring behaviours detrimental to family unity, including substance abuse, infidelity, and gambling, thereby promoting individual accountability and mitigating conflicts through the cultivation of shared value systems.[67]

In contemporary societies, religious beliefs play a significant role in resolving marital value conflicts, particularly through frameworks centred on forgiveness, love, and compassion.[68] Forgiveness is regarded not merely as a personal virtue but as a sacred obligation, cultivated through spiritual emotions such as mercy and empathy. Religion thus functions as a reconciliatory force, promoting relational resilience and continuity. Love, in religious discourse, is conceptualised not only as emotional intimacy but also as a sacred bond rooted in divine reference, positioning the family as the locus where spiritual values are most profoundly embodied. Scholars like Dollahite and Marks argue that love directed toward God fosters altruistic behaviour and strengthens marital ties.[69] The centrality of similar values, such as loyalty, mercy, and compassion, across various religious traditions (e.g., “mawaddah” and “rahmah” in Islam) underscores the universal moral foundations of family life. Consequently, religion provides a shared ethical repertoire that supports the resolution of interpersonal conflicts within marriage.

In contemporary societies, religious beliefs play a crucial role in resolving marital value conflicts by emphasising forgiveness, love, and compassion as sacred duties. These values foster emotional resilience and relational stability, positioning the family as a space for the internalisation of spiritual and moral principles.[70] Religious love, oriented toward the divine, strengthens marital bonds and promotes altruistic behavior,[71] contributing to more constructive and enduring family relationships.[72] The convergence of values such as mawaddah, rahmah, loyalty, and empathy across religious traditions reflects a shared moral framework that supports harmony within the family unit.

Islam offers a comprehensive moral framework for addressing value-based conflicts within modern marriages by grounding familial relationships in both ethical and social responsibilities. The Qur’ān assigns the family a pivotal role not only in fostering marital harmony but also in sustaining intergenerational solidarity and societal balance, as seen in commands regarding parental loyalty,[73] kinship preservation,[74] and principles such as justice, benevolence, and kin support.[75] The Prophet’s linkage of ṣilat al-raḥim (maintaining kinship ties) with acts of worship further underscores its religious significance as a manifestation of faith. [76] Additionally, concepts like chastity (ʿiffah) and moral equivalence in marriage,[77] highlight[78] the importance of spiritual and ethical compatibility between spouses, positioning love and social responsibility as foundational to Islamic marital ethics and a safeguard against the erosion of values in modern contexts.

Islamic teachings offer a meaningful framework for analysing and resolving value-based conflicts in modern marital relationships by emphasising foundational virtues such as love, trust, and mutual sacrifice.[79] The tradition legitimises pre-marital acquaintance to promote informed and respectful unions, framing love not merely as emotion but as a stabilising force that nurtures both family integrity and societal cohesion.[80] Marital harmony is contingent upon the consistent practice of values like patience, understanding, tolerance, and commitment. The absence of these moral virtues may exacerbate familial tensions, ultimately threatening spousal bonds and the healthy development of children.[81] The Prophet Muhammad’s family life, grounded in loyalty, trust, chastity, and mutual love, serves as a religious and ethical paradigm in the Qur’ān. In contemporary times, however, the Islamic family structure faces erosion due to ideological shifts, rising individualism, and the influence of digital culture, leading to the weakening of its religious and moral foundations.[82]

Building on the discussion of value-based conflicts in modern marriages, a significant portion of these tensions can be traced to the neglect of religious principles and the failure to perceive the family as a source of moral and spiritual guidance. The Qur’ān, in contrast, defines the family not merely as a biological union but as an institution rooted in faith, piety, and ethical responsibility, exemplified in the verse portraying spouses as “garments” for one another.[83] Modern secularization, however, has diminished the influence of religious norms in family life, giving rise to conflicts between individual autonomy and collective moral identity. These tensions are particularly evident in disagreements over role allocation, child-rearing practices, and lifestyle choices between religiously observant and secular individuals. By presenting the family as a site of shared faith and ethical values, the Qur’ān offers a normative framework that can guide contemporary families in navigating these modern value-based conflicts, fostering moral cohesion and relational stability.

3.3. Divorce and Family Crises

In modern societies, divorce represents a multifaceted sociological phenomenon shaped by changing perceptions of marriage, now increasingly seen as a means of individual self-fulfilment rather than a lifelong obligation.[84] This shift has redefined traditional gender roles and fostered a voluntaristic approach to marital relationships, prioritising personal happiness and need satisfaction.[85] Educational attainment plays a significant role in divorce trends, with lower levels of education correlating with substantially higher divorce rates, which shows that lower-educated individuals experienced divorce in over 50% of marriages while only about 30% of marriages among university graduates ended in divorce, with university-educated men and women marrying later and at higher rates.[86] These patterns underscore the complex interplay between cultural transformations and structural determinants in shaping marital stability.[87] Contemporary debates on the division of domestic labour reflect two main paradigms: the Becker-Parsons model, which asserts that gender-based specialisation reinforces marital cohesion,[88] and Cooke’s egalitarian model, grounded in social exchange theory, which associates shared responsibilities with greater stability.[89] While the former links women’s employment to increased divorce risk due to reduced economic dependency, the latter emphasises the destabilising effects of role conflicts in households where gender roles are not renegotiated. Critics like Moffitt challenge both views by highlighting the importance of considering total household income, suggesting that financial stability-regardless of individual earnings-can enhance marital durability.[90]

In the contemporary context, divorce is shaped by the shift of marriage into a voluntary institution and the redefinition of traditional gender roles. Institutional theories suggest that changes such as female labour force participation or male unemployment contribute to marital instability due to decreased spousal satisfaction and insufficient societal support.[91] However, employment-based models offer only a partial explanation, as empirical findings show that women face significant economic decline post-divorce, while men often encounter minimal financial hardship and, in some cases, an improved standard of living.[92] The gender revolution aimed to expand women’s roles in public life and encourage men’s involvement in domestic and emotional labour,[93] yet this shift has not produced structural equality, leaving women with dual burdens.[94] In Turkey, divorce rates are significantly influenced by socioeconomic factors such as urba Nisātion, income levels, and regional demographics, with higher divorce frequencies observed in affluent, urban areas.[95] This suggests that divorce in modern marriages is not solely a matter of personal choice but is shaped by the interplay of gender expectations, economic autonomy, social support systems, and regional socioeconomic dynamics.

According to 2021 data, approximately 9.5% of the population aged 18 and over in Turkey have been divorced at least once, and the average age of divorcees is 48.1 years;[96] women’s income after divorce is lower than men’s, differences in education levels (12.5% of women; 3.7% of men do not have primary school education),[97] and gender differences in remarriage rates after divorce (52.0% of men, 32.8% of women) show that economic and social dynamics are determinant.[98] While the irresponsible and indifferent behavior of the spouse (32.2%), infidelity (14.1%) and lack of economic livelihood (9.8%) stand[99] out among the primary reasons for divorce, the fact that women report violence (14.6% vs. 8.2%),[100] and infidelity (19.3% vs. 8.2%) twice more than men reflects the gender-specific dimensions of domestic crises.[101]

The findings of the Turkey Family Structure Survey-2021 reveal that divorce decisions in Turkey are based on multilayered sociocultural dynamics intertwined with income, education level, and regional differences. While low-income and educated women in Eastern and Southeastern Anatolia mostly emphazise reasons such as economic dependency,[102] violence, and substance abuse, higher income and education levels in the West emphazise the argument of ‘economic incompatibility’; in general, ‘indifference of the spouse’ (32.2%), “infidelity” (14.1%) and ‘economic insufficiency’ (9.8%) are among the main reasons; women cite violence and unfaithfulness twice more than men, while men cite the intervention of family elders more frequently.[103]

The Qur’ān underscores the virtues of patience, tolerance, and respectful conduct in marital relationships, urging spouses to recognize potential hidden good even amid dissatisfaction.[104] Islamic teachings frame marriage as a mutual responsibility, emphasizing the protection of financial and personal rights, and promoting a stepwise conflict resolution process—beginning with dialogue, followed by separation, and as a last measure, restrained physical response within ethical boundaries,[105] while identifying divorce as a final recourse.[106] The aim here is neither punishment nor a show of strength but rather controlled and reversible measures taken as a last resort to save the marriage.[107] The following verse, “If they obey, then do not seek excuses against them”, ensures that no unjust practices are to be returned to after these methods have achieved their purpose. The Prophet (pbuh) never hurt his wives, who were close to him throughout his life, and never approved of behavior that was out of line.[108] The Qur’ānic guidelines for addressing nushūz outline a calibrated intervention process to preserve marital harmony while upholding justice and compassion. The conditional and limited permission granted to the husband is framed not as coercion but as a restorative mechanism to safeguard the marital bond.

Verses 35th and 128th of Surah an-Nisā’ present a balanced framework where marital discord is addressed through mutual dialogue and a justice-based reconciliation process, involving both spouses. The Qur’ān promotes compassionate mediation, initiated even by the wife and supported by impartial family arbitrators, as a dignified and emotionally safe path to preserve the integrity of the marriage.[109] In classical Islamic law, the arbitration institution was regulated in the context of divorce compensation and fault determination; modern legislation such as the Ottoman Family Decree (1917) and the Egyptian Ahwâl-i Shakhsiyyah Law (1929) aimed to integrate the family council model into judicial processes.[110] The Qur’ānic approach to marital dissolution embeds divorce within a gradual, protective framework that prioritises family preservation. While mediation by impartial family elders ensures a traditional form of conflict resolution, the iddah period serves as a reflective interval designed to prevent impulsive decisions and safeguard the stability of the marital institution.[111] The Messenger of Allah’s instruction regarding the divorce practice of ‘Umar during the menstrual period, “First, perform the talaq when the menstrual period ends, then when a period of purity has passed and without intercourse”, aims to prioritize common sense by moving the will to divorce beyond intense emotional and physiological periods.[112]

 In line with the discussion on family crises and value-based conflicts, the Qur’ān frames divorce as a last resort to marital discord, emphasizing a measured process[113] that includes patience, iddah, and mediation to preserve both social responsibility and family integrity.[114] While classical jurisprudence generally accepts the permissibility of divorce during iddah, debates persist regarding the legal and moral implications of divorces that bypass this process. In contrast, modern legal frameworks often prioritize individual rights and rapid resolution, which may undermine collective responsibilities such as family cohesion and the welfare of children. This juxtaposition underscores a fundamental paradigm difference: whereas the Qur’ānic model treats divorce as a responsible act embedded within societal stability and ethical oversight, modern approaches frequently frame it as an expedient, individual-centered decision. The Qur’ānic principles of staged interventions and restorative mediation thus offer valuable guidance for developing early conflict resolution and family-centered practices in contemporary marital contexts.

 Conclusion

Particularly in the aftermath of industrialization and urbanization, the active participation of women in the workforce has shifted the foundation of marriage from an economic partnership toward one centred on emotional compatibility and personal fulfilment. This transformation necessitates a redefinition of intra-marital roles, responsibilities, and mutual expectations. As a result, issues such as emotional neglect, infidelity, and financial inadequacy have become more prominent causes of marital discord and divorce. These developments indicate a fundamental reconfiguration of the values underpinning modern marital relationships, which in turn renders the ethical and legal principles outlined in the Qur’ān increasingly significant as reference points in addressing contemporary value-based tensions within marriage.

From a Qur’ānic perspective, marriage is a sacred nucleus of a society built on ‘ulfet’ (closeness), “mawaddah”, and ‘rahmah’, not just individual desires. In today’s family structure, Qur’ānic guidance, which is based on the principles of compassion and mutual respect, carries value conflicts between spouses and a restorative ground. The emphasis on building ‘love and compassion in hearts’ in the 21st verse of Surah Rum, and the command in the 19th verse of Surah an-Nisā: “O you who believe! Treat your wives well” in verse 19 of Surah an-Nisā makes it obligatory to meet imperfections with understanding and forgiveness; patience and tact are indispensable dynamics of marriage. The gentle warning before ‘nushûz’ described in verse 5 of Surah at-Tahrîm stands out as the first intervention before conflicts deepen; here it is essential to listen carefully and discover the real needs of the other party through empathetic questions before judgment. The model of family mediation suggested in verse 35 of Surah an-Nisā inspires today’s ‘family council’ or professional ‘mediator’ practices, where respected representatives chosen from both sides break emotional isolation and create an intimate yet solution-oriented space for dialog. The principle of justice and sharing of responsibilities stated in verse 228 of Surah al-Baqara underlines the ‘one-degree superiority’ of men as well as their financial and moral obligations; this functional equality reinforces trust and mutual respect within the family. The regulation of the waiting period (iddah), emphasized in the first verses of Surah at-Tahrīm, prevents the regret of sudden decisions; this process allows couples to evaluate the future of their marriage and make an informed choice in the tranquillity of their hearts. This holistic approach provides a universal solution map that enhances the resilience and well-being of modern families.

To strengthen the resilience and cohesion of the family institution in the modern world, a multidimensional construction model can be considered, inspired by the guidance of the Qur’ān. Within this framework, the development of moral education programs that emphasize Qur’ānic values such as compassion, justice, and tolerance may serve as a constructive means of addressing value-based conflicts in marriage. By nurturing these ethical principles within individuals and society at large, it becomes possible to strengthen the moral foundations of the marital institution and elevate collective social awareness regarding the ethical dimensions of familial relationships. On the other hand, mechanisms can be established to address early-stage family conflicts. The blending of Qur’ānic values with modern communication and empathy skills in workshops held in universities or non-governmental organizations can help spouses better understand their own and the other party’s needs. Likewise, the establishment of couple counseling centers consisting of psychological counselors working together with religiously referenced mediators can ensure that conflicts can be moved to a restorative ground without waiting for court processes. Awareness campaigns in the field of gender can help reduce the tension between ‘traditional roles’ and ‘individual rights’ and to the fair and harmonious division of marital duties. In addition, the introduction of regulations that reflect the Qur’ānic stages of intervention in divorce processes, such as mandatory mediation and the operation of waiting periods under the supervision of the court, can create a legal basis for the protection of family integrity. Such a model, by bringing together the Qur’ān’s basic value references in marriage and today’s sociological realities, can provide a framework that will support the family in times of crisis and facilitate its reconstruction on solid foundations.

In light of this comparison, more concrete measures can be developed to address value-based conflicts in modern marriages. Practical workshops at universities and civil society organizations can teach interpersonal communication, empathy, and Qur’ānic ethical principles in combination, while family counseling centers staffed by psychological counselors alongside religiously referenced mediators can allow conflicts to be resolved in a restorative framework without waiting for court proceedings. Divorce procedures can be adapted to reflect the Qur’ānic staged intervention model, incorporating mandatory mediation and supervised iddah periods. In addition, initiatives promoting gender equality and equitable distribution of responsibilities can help reduce tensions between traditional roles and individual rights, and programs emphasizing Qur’ānic values such as compassion, justice, and patience can enable individuals and society to internalize family ethics. In conclusion, comparing the value-based approach of the Qur’ān with contemporary individual and social value conflicts demonstrates that both ethical and practical solutions can be proposed to strengthen the family institution. By integrating Qur’ānic guidance with present-day sociological and economic realities, it is possible to offer a framework that supports families in times of crisis and facilitates their reconstruction on solid foundations.

Bibliography

Abū Zahrah, Muhammad Abū. al-Aḥwāl al-Shakhṣiyyah. Cairo: Dār al-Fikr al-’Arabī, 1957.

Abū Zahrah, Muḥammad. Family and Society in Social Life. Translated by Nurettin Demir and M. Vesim Taylan. 2nd ed. Istanbul: Kayıhan Publishing, 2004.

Adak, Nurşen. “The Women Dilemma: Between Work and Fımily Life”. Sosyoloji Dergisi 17/1 (2007), 137-152.

Agacinski, Sylviane. Parity of the Sexes. Ankara: Dost Kitabevi, 1998.

Ahmadi, K., others. “The Influence of Religiosity on Marital Satisfaction”. Journal of Social Science 4/2 (2008), 103-110.

Aitan, Hamza. “Divorce Procedure According to the Quran”. Dini Araştırmalar 5/14 (Aralık 2002), 5-16.

Amato, Paul R. Alone Together: How Marriage in America Is Changing. Harvard University Press, 2007.

Arslanoğlu, İbrahim. General Sociology: Lecture Notes. Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi, 2015.

Arvas, Fatma Balcı. “Family, Values and Religion: A Theoretical Approach”. Türkiye İlahiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi 4/1 (2019), 199-233. https://doi.org/10.32711/tiad.674658.

Avcı, Hatice. “An Evaluation on Verse 21 of Surah Rum in the Context of Spiritually Oriented Family Counseling”. Türkiye İlahiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi 7/3 (Eylül 2023), 560-576. https://doi.org/10.32711/tiad.1287003.

Aughinbaugh, Alison; Robles, Omar; Sun, Hu gette. “Marriage and divorce: patterns by gender, race, and educational attainment”. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Erişim 12 Mayıs 2025. https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2013/article/marriage-and-divorce-patterns-by-gender-race-and-educational-attainment.htm

Aẓīmābādī, Abū al-Ṭayyib Muḥammad Shams al-Ḥaqq. ʿAwn al-Maʿbūd: Sharḥ Sunan Abī Dāwūd. Medina: al-Maktabah al-Salafiyyah, 1968.

Bahadır, A. Family Psychology and Religion. İdeal Usta Fot. Bas. Yay. Dağıtım, 2012.

Belen, F. Z. “Spiritual Psychologic Approach to Communication Between Spouses”. Toplum Bilimleri Dergisi 8/15 (2014), 177-194.

Bayzāwī, Nāṣir al-Dīn. Anwāru al-tanzīl wa-asrāru al-taʾwīl. Edited by Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Maʿrashlī. Beirut: Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-ʿArabī, 1418.

Bozkurt, Veysel. Sociology in a Changing World. Bursa: Ekin Yayınevi, 2017.

Breen, Richard - Cooke, Lynn P. “The Persistence of the Gendered Division of Domestic Labour”. European Sociological Review 21/1 (2005), 43-57.

Bukhārī, Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad Ibn Ismāʿīl. al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaḥīḥ. Edited by Muḥammad Zuhayr Ibn Naṣr. 2nd ed. Dār al-Tawqīʿ al-Najāh, 1422 AH / 2001 CE.

Bureau of Labor Statistics. Marriage and Divorce: Patterns by Gender, Race, and Educational Attainment: Monthly Labor Review. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Accessed August 16, 2025.

Call, V. R. A.- Heaton, T. B. “Religious Influence on Marital Stability”. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 36/3 (1997), 382-392.

Canan, İbrahim. Family Education. İzmir: Gülyurdu Yayınları, 7nd ed. 2012.

Canatan, Kadir - Yıldırım, Ergün. Family Sociology. Istanbul: Açılım Kitap, 2016.

Cooke, Lynn P. ‘Doing’ Gender in Context: Household Bargaining and Risk of Divorce in Germany and the United States, American Journal of Sociology 112/2 (2006), 442-472.

Coşar, Simten - Özkan Kerestecioğlu, İnci. “Feminism’s Challenge with Neoliberalism”. Doğu Batı Düşünce Dergisi: Toplumsal Cinsiyet 2/64 (2013), 21-36.

Çamdibi, Mahmut. Good Morality and Human Relations. İstanbul: Çamlıca Yayınları, 2012.

Dikeçligil, F. Beylü. Breaking the Convention on Family Acceptances. Istanbul: Açılım Kitap, 2014.

Dollahite, David C. - Marks, Loren D. “A Conceptual Model of Family and Religious Processes in Highly Religious Families”. Review of Religious Research 50/4 (2009), 373-391.

Duben, Alan. City, Family, History. Translated by Leyla Şimşek - Rathke. Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2012.

Durdu, Zafer. Modern Thought and Social Structure in Turkey. İstanbul: Doğu Kitabevi, 2018.

Elmas, Çağrı - Adak, Nurşen. “Post-Divorce Experiences in Türkiye and the Social Structures Behind the Reasons for Divorce”. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi 43/1 (30 Haziran 2023), 84-97. https://doi.org/10.26650/SJ.2023.43.1.0030B

Engels, Friedrich. The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State. Ankara: Eriş Yayıncılık, 2003.

England, Paula. “The Gender Revolution: Uneven and Stalled”. Gender & Society 24/2 (2010), 149-166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243210361475

England, Paula - Shafer, Erin. “Everyday Gender Conflicts in Low-Income Couples”. Unmarried Couples with Children. 55-83. Sage, 2007.

Gazali, İmam. Marriage and Family Life in Islam. Translated by Mehmet Ali Kayabağlar. Istanbul: Kahraman Yayınları, 1999.

Geçioğlu, Ahmet Rifat ve Ertuğrul Döner. “A Psycho-Social Assessment on the Issues Discussed Today in Islam in the Context of Marriage and Family” Çukurova Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi (ÇÜİFD) 19, no. 2 (Aralık 2019): 603–627. https://doi.org/10.30627/cuilah.621379.

Geyer, A. L. - Baumeister, R. F. “Religion, Morality, and Self-Control: Values, Virtues”. Translated by Metin Güven. Psychology of Religion and Spirituality: New Approaches and Areas of Applicat. ed. Raymond F. Paloutzian - Crystal L. Park. 241-291. Ankara: Phoenix Yayınları, 2013.

Giddens, Anthony. Sociology. Ankara: Ayraç Yayınevi, 2000.

Goody, Jack. The European Family. Istanbul: Literatür Yayıncılık, 2000.

Gülmez, Çiğdem. Violence Against Women, Moral Disengagement and Religiosit. Samsun: Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Felsefe ve Din Bilimleri Anabilim Dalı, Doktora Tezi, 2014.

Ibn ʿĀshūr, Muḥammad al-Ṭāhir Ibn Muḥammad Ibn Muḥammad al-Ṭāhir al-Tūnisī. al-Taḥrīr wa al-Tanwīr. 15 vols. Tunis: Dār al-Tūnisiyya li al-Nashr, 1984.

Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Abū Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq al-Andalusī. al-Muḥarrar al-Wajīz fī Tafsīr al-Kitāb al-ʿAzīz. Edited by ʿAbd al-Salām ʿAbd al-Shāfī Muḥammad. Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya, 1422 AH / 2001 CE.

Ibn Hishām, ʿAbd al-Malik Ibn Hishām. al-Sīra al-Nabawiyya. Edited by Jamāl Ṣābit et al. Cairo: Dār al-Ḥadīth, 2006.

Ibn Mājah, Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad Ibn Yazīd al-Qazwīnī. al-Sunan. Edited by Muḥammad Muṣṭafā al-Aʿẓamī. Riyadh: King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Qur’ān, 1983.

Jr, Everett L. Worthington et al.“Unforgiveness, Forgiveness, Religion, and Health”. Faith and Health: Psychological Perspectives. ed. Thomas G. Plante - Allen C. Sherman. 107-138. New York-London: The Guilford Press, 2001.

Karaman, Hayreddin. The Qur’an Path Turkish Translation and Commentary. Ankara: DİB Yayınları, 2020.

Kasapoğlu, Abdurrahman. “Marriage Therapy in the Qur’an - A Comparison with Contemporary Psychological Data and Practices” Dinbilimleri Akademik Araştırma Dergisi 4/3 (2004), 37-74.

Kasapoğlu, Abdurrahman. “The Problem of Harmony Between Spouses in Marriage According to Islam- Harmony of Faith and Morality”. Bilimname 5/12 (2007), 137-162.

Ibn Kathīr, Abū al-Fidāʾ ʿImād al-Dīn Ismāʿīl Ibn ʿUmar al-Dimashqī. Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAẓīm. Edited by Sāmī Ibn Muḥammad Salāmah. Beirut: Dār Ṭayyibah li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzīʿ, 1999.

Kongar, Emre. Social Change Theories and Türkiye’s Reality. Istanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 2012.

Kökalan Çımrın, Füsun. “Another Family Is Possible (?)”. International Social Sciences Studies Journal 8/87 (2021), 3890-3900.

Köse, Saffet. Genetiğiyle Oynanmış Kavramlar ve Aile Medeniyetinin Sonu. Konya: Mehir Vakfı Yayınları, Konya Büyükşehir Belediyesi, 2020.

Qurṭubī, Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad Ibn Aḥmad. al-Jāmiʿ li-Aḥkām al-Qurʾān. Edited by Aḥmad al-Bardūnī and Ibrāhīm Aṭfīsh. Cairo: Dār al-Kutub al-Miṣriyya, 1384 AH / 1964 CE.

Lambert, N. M. - Dollahite, D. C. “How Religiosity Helps Couples Prevent, Resolve and Overcome Marital Conflict”. Family Relations 55/4 (2006), 439-449. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2006.00414.x

Mahoney, Annette et al. “Religion in the Home in the 1980s and 1990s: A Meta-Analytic Review and Conceptual Analysis of Links Between Religion, Marriage, and Parenting”. Journal of Family Psychology 15/4 (2001), 559-596. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.15.4.559

McCullough, Michael E. et al. “Religion and Forgiveness”. Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality. ed. Raymond F. Paloutzian - Crystal L. Park. 394-411. New York: Guilford Press, 2005.

Mawdūdī, Abū al-Aʿlā. Tafhīm al-Qurʾān. Translated by Muḥammad Kayanī et al. Istanbul, 1987.

Muslim Ibn al-Ḥajjāj al-Qushayrī al-Naysābūrī. al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaḥīḥ. Edited by Muḥammad Fuʾād ʿAbd al-Bāqī. Cairo: [n.p.], 1374-75 AH / 1955–56 CE.

Nasafī, Abū al-Barakāt. Madārik al-Tanzīl wa Ḥaqāʾiq al-Taʾwīl. Edited by Yūsuf ʿAlī Badawī. Beirut: Dār al-Kalim al-Ṭayyib, 1419 AH.

Popenoe, David. Life without Father: Compelling New Evidence that Fatherhood and Marriage Are Indispensable for the Good of Children and Society. Simon & Schuster, 1996.

Rāzī, Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad Ibn ʿUmar Fakhr al-Dīn. Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb. Beirut: Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-ʿArabī, 1420 AH.

Sayer, Liana C. et al. “She Left, He Left: How Employment and Satisfaction Affect Women’s and Men’s Decisions to Leave Marriages”. American Journal of Sociology 116/6 (2011), 1982-2018.

Schoen, Robert et al. “Women’s Employment, Marital Happiness, and Divorce”. Social Forces 81/2 (2002), 643-662. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2003.0019

Smith, Anthony D. Understanding of Social Change. Ankara: Gündoğan Yayınları, 1995.

Smock, Pamela J. et al. “The Effect of Marriage and Divorce on Women’s Economic Well-Being”. American Sociological Review. 794-812.

Sulaymān, Muqātil. Tafsīr Muqātil Ibn Sulaymān. Edited by ʿAbd Allāh Maḥmūd Shaḥāta. Beirut: Muʾassasat al-Tārīkh al-ʿArabī, 2002.

Ṭabarī, Muḥammad Ibn Jarīr. Jāmiʿ al-Bayān ʿan Taʾwīl āy al-Qurʾān. Cairo: Markaz al-Buḥūth al-Islāmiyya wa al-ʿArabiyya, 2003.

Taş, Gün. “A General Evaluatıon of Femınısm: Its Conceptual Analysıs, Hıstorıcal Process and Changes”. Akademik Hassasiyetler 3/5 2016. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/269956

Tekin, M. “Family Institution from the Perspective of Religions”. Family Sociology. ed. Kadir Canatan - Ergün Yıldırım. Istanbul: Açılım Kitap Yayınları, 2nd ed, 2011.

Tirmidhī, Abū ʿĪsā Muḥammad Ibn ʿĪsā. al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaḥīḥ. Cairo: [s.n.], 1356 AH.

Turkish Statistical Institute. Family Structure Survey, 2021.

Türkkahraman, Mimar. Society and Social Institutions: An Introduction to the Sociology of Institutions. Ankara: Alp Yayınevi, 2006.

Wāqidī, Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad Ibn ʿUmar Ibn Wāqid al-Wāqidī al-Aslamī al-Madanī. Kitāb al-Maghāzī. Edited by Marsden Jones. Beirut: [s.n.], 1984.

West, Candace - Zimmerman, Don H. “Doing Gender”. Gender & Society 1/2 (1987), 125-151.

Yargıtay, Yargıtay 11. Hukuk Dairesi. K. 2019/1204 (Yargıtay 22 Ağustos 2019). http://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2019/08/ 20190822-4.pdf

Yazır, Elmalılı Hamdi. Hak Dini Kur’an Dili. ed. İsmail Karaçam. Istanbul: [s.n.], 1992.

Yörükoğlu, Atalay. Family and Child in a Changing Society. Istanbul: Özgür Yayınları, 2007.

Zajjāj, Abū Isḥāq Ibrāhīm Ibn al-Sarī al-Baghdādī. Maʿānī al-Qurʾān wa Iʿrābuhu. Beirut: [s.n.], 1988.

Zamakhsharī, Abū al-Qāsim Maḥmūd Ibn ʿUmar. al-Kashshāf ʿan Ḥaqāʾiq al-Tanzīl. Beirut: Dār al-Kitāb al-’Arabī, 1407 AH.

The Holy Bible. Istanbul: Kitabı Mukaddes Şirketi, 2nd ed, 2003.

^[1]   Abdurrahman Kasapoğlu, “Marriage Therapy in the Qur’an – A Comparison with Contemporary Psychological Data and Practices”, Dinbilimleri Akademik Araştırma Dergisi 4/3 (2004), 37-74.

^[2]   Abdurrahman Kasapoğlu, “The Problem of Harmony Between Spouses in Marriage According to Islam- Harmony of Faith and Morality”, Bilimname 5/12 (2007), 137-162.

^[3]   Ahmet Rifat Geçioğlu - Ertuğrul Döner, “A Psycho-Social Assessment on the Issues Discussed Today in Islam in the Context of Marriage and Family” Çukurova Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi (ÇÜİFD) 19/2 (Aralık 2019), 603-627.

^[4]   Hatice Avcı, “An Evaluation on Verse 21 of Surah Rum in the Context of Spiritually Oriented Family Counseling”, Türkiye İlahiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi 7/3 (2023), 560–576.

^[5]   Saffet Köse, Genetiğiyle Oynanmış Kavramlar ve Aile Medeniyetinin Sonu (Konya: Mehir Vakfı Yayınları - Konya Büyükşehir Belediyesi, 2020), 8.

^[6]   “èîåðæòÇٰêîÇÊðç۪ٓÇîæòÎîäîâîäîãïåòåðæòÇîæòáïÓðãïåòÇîÒòèîÇÌëÇäðÊîÓòãïæïٓèÇÇðäîêòçîÇèîÌîÙîäîÈîêòæîãïåòåîèîÏñîÉëèîÑîÍòåîÉëۜÇðæñîá۪êÐٰäðãîäîÇٰêîÇÊíäðâîèòåíêîÊîáîãñîÑïèæî”

^[7]   Abū Isḥāq Ibrāhīm ibn al-Sarī al-Baghdādī az-Zajjaj. Maʿānī al-Qurʾān wa Iʿrābuhu (Beirut: 1988), 4/182.

^[8]   Abu al-Ala Mawdūdī, Tafhīm al-Qurʾān, trns. Muḥammad Kayanī et al. (İstanbul: 1987), 4/293.

^[9]   Muḥammad Ibn Jarīr Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ al-Bayān ʿan Taʾwīl āy al-Qurʾān (Cairo: Markaz al-Buḥūth al-Islāmiyya wa al-ʿArabiyya, 2003), 23/498.

^[10] Muqātil Sulaymān, Tafsīr Muqātil ibn Sulaymān, ed. ʿAbd Allāh Maḥmūd Shaḥāta (Beirut: Muʾassasat al-Tārīkh al-ʿArabī, 2002), 4/4/380.

^[11]   ” ÖîÑîÈî Çääñٰçï åîËîäëÇ äðäñîÐêêٖٖêæî ãîáîÑïèÇ ÇåòÑîÇîÊî æïèÍí èîÇåòÑîÇîÊî äïè×íۜ ãîÇæîÊîÇ ÊîÍòÊî ÙîÈòÏîêòæð åðæò ÙðÈîÇÏðæîÇ ÕîÇäðÍîêòæð áîÎîÇæîÊîÇçïåîÇ áîäîåò êïÚòæðêîÇ ÙîæòçïåîÇ åðæî Çääñٰçð ÔîêòàٔëÇ èîâäٖêäî ÇÏòÎïäîÇ ÇäæñîÇÑî åîÙî ÇäÏñîÇÎðäٖêæî“

^[12] Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ-al-Bayān an Taʾwīl ây al-Qurʾān, 18/202.

^[13] Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad Ibn ʿUmar Fakhr al-Dīn ar-Rāzī, Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb (Beirut: Dār Iḥyāʾ al-Turāth al-ʿArabī, 1420 AH),

^[14] “ ”èîÇäòåï×îäñîâîÇÊï êîÊîÑîÈñîÕòæî ÈðÇîæòáïÓðçðæñî ËîäٰËîÉî âïÑïٓèÁíۜ èîäîÇ êîÍðäñï äîçïæñî Çîæò êîãòÊïåòæî åîÇ Îîäîâî Çääñٰçï á۪ٓê ÇîÑòÍîÇåðçðæñî Çðæò ãïæñî êïÄòåðæñî ÈðÇääñٰçð èîÇäòêîèòåð ÇäòÇٰÎðÑð

^[15]  al- Baqara, 2/228

^[16] Abū al-Barakāt al-Nasafī, Madārik al-Tanzīl wa Ḥaqāʾiq al-Taʾwīl, ed. Yūsuf ʿAlī Badawī (Beirut: Dār al-Kalim al-Ṭayyib, 1419 AH), 1/189-190.

^[17] Abū al-Fidāʾ ʿImād al-Dīn Ismāʿīl Ibn ʿUmar al-Dimashqī Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAẓīm, ed. Sāmī ibn Muḥammad Salāmah (Beirut: Dār Ṭayyibah li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzīʿ, 1999), 8/172.

^[18] Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ-al-Bayān an Taʾwīl ây al-Qurʾān, 28/110.

^[19] Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAẓīm, 4/541.

^[20]  Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAẓīm, 4/322.

^[21] Karaman Hayreddin v.dğr., Kur’an Yolu Türkçe Meâl ve Tefsir (Ankara: DİB Yayınları, 2020), 3/170.

^[22] Karaman, Kur’an Yolu Türkçe Meâl ve Tefsir, 3/170.

^[23] Karaman, Kur’an Yolu Türkçe Meâl ve Tefsir, 3/170.

^[24] Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAẓīm, 4/326.

^[25] Muḥammad al-Ṭāhir Ibn Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad al-Ṭāhir al-Tūnisī Ibn ʿĀshūr, al-Taḥrīr wa al-Tanwīr (Tunis: Dār al-Tūnisiyya li al-Nashr, 1984), 12/83-84; Karaman, Kur’an Yolu Türkçe Meâl ve Tefsir, 3/174.

^[26] Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ-al-Bayān an Taʾwīl ây al-Qurʾān, 23/499-500.

^[27] Nāṣir al-Dīn Bayzāwī, Anwāru al-tanzīl wa-asrāru al-taʾwīl, ed. Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Maʿrashlī (Beirut: Dâru İḥyâiʾt-Turâs̱i’l-ʿArabî, 1418), 5/226.

^[28] ar-Rāzī, Mafātīḥ al-Ghayb, 30/574-575.

^[29] Abū al-Qāsim Maḥmūd Ibn ʿUmar Zamakhsharī, al-Kashshāf ʿan Ḥaqāʾiq al-Tanzīl (Beirut: Dār al-Kitāb al-’Arabī, 1407), 4/571.

^[30] Zamakhsharī, al-Kashshāf ʿan Ḥaqāʾiq al-Tanzīl, 4/572-573.

^[31] Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ-al-Bayān an Taʾwīl ây al-Qurʾān, 23/476-478.

^[32] Abū Muḥammad ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq al-Andalusī Ibn ʿAṭiyya, al-Muḥarrar al-Wajīz fī Tafsīr al-Kitāb al-ʿAzīz, ed. ʿAbd al-Salām ʿAbd al-Shāfī Muḥammad (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmiyya 1422), 5/329.

^[33] Ibn al-Ḥajjāj al-Qushayrī al-Naysābūrī Muslim, al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaḥīḥ, ed. Muḥammad Fuʾād ʿAbd al-Bāqī (Cairo: 1374-75/1955-56), 31.

^[34] Ibn ʿAṭiyya, al-Muḥarrar al-Wajīz fī Tafsīr al-Kitāb al-ʿAzīz, 5/530-531.

^[35] Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ-al-Bayān an Taʾwīl ây al-Qurʾān, 20/252.

^[36] Abū ʿĪsā Muḥammad Ibn ʿĪsā Tirmidhī, al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaḥīḥ (Cairo, 1356), “Tefsir”, 65; Muslim, al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaḥīḥ, “Talak”, 27.

^[37] Elmalılı Hamdi Yazır, Hak Dini Kur’an Dili, ed. İsmail Karaçam (İstanbul: 1992), 4/553-554.

^[38] Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ-al-Bayān an Taʾwīl ây al-Qurʾān, 20/255.

^[39] Ṭabarī, Jāmiʿ-al-Bayān an Taʾwīl ây al-Qurʾān, 20/257.

^[40] Yazır, Hak Dini Kur’an Dili, 4/557.

^[41] Zafer Durdu, Türkiye’de Modern Düşünce ve Toplumsal Yapı (İstanbul: Doğu Kitabevi, 2018), 70.

^[42] Emre Kongar, Toplumsal Değişme Kuramları ve Türkiye Gerçeği (İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 2012), 95; Mimar Türkkahraman, Toplum ve Toplumsal Kurumlar: Kurumlar Sosyolojisine Giriş (Ankara: Alp Yayınevi, 2006), 45.

^[43] Veysel Bozkurt, Değişen Dünyada Sosyoloji (Bursa: Ekin Yayınevi, 2017), 270.

^[44] Durdu, Türkiye’de Modern Düşünce ve Toplumsal Yapı, 70.

^[45] Füsun Kökalan Çımrın, “Başka Bir Aile Mümkün (Mü?)”, International Social Sciences Studies Journal 8/87 (2021), 3892.

^[46] F. Beylü Dikeçligil, Aileye Dair Kabullerin Ezber Bozumu (İstanbul: Açılım Kitap, 2014), 14.

^[47] Atalay Yörükoğlu, Değişen Toplumda Aile ve Çocuk (İstanbul: Özgür Yayınları, 2007), 41; Alan Duben, Kent, Aile, Tarih, çev. Leyla Şimşek - Rathke (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2012), 23; Türkkahraman, Toplum ve Toplumsal Kurumlar: Kurumlar Sosyolojisine Giriş, 46.

^[48] Anthony D. Smith, Toplumsal Değişme Anlayışı (Ankara: Gündoğan Yayınları, 1995), 14-15.

^[49] Anthony Giddens, Sosyoloji (Ankara: Ayraç Yayınevi, 2000), 174-175.

^[50] Kadir Canatan - Ergün Yıldırım, Aile Sosyolojisi (İstanbul: Açılım Kitap, 2016), 38.

^[51] Canatan - Yıldırım, Aile Sosyolojisi, 40.

^[52] Sylviane Agacinski, Cinsiyetler Siyaseti (Ankara: Dost Kitabevi, 1998), 69; İbrahim Arslanoğlu, Genel Sosyoloji: Ders Notları (Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi, 2015), 126-127.

^[53] Jack Goody, Avrupa’da Aile: Bir Tarihsel ve Antropolojik Deneme (İstanbul: Literatür Yayıncılık, 2000), 5; Giddens, Sosyoloji, 178-179.

^[54] Friedrich Engels, Ailenin, Özel Mülkiyetin ve Devletin Kökeni (Ankara: Eriş Yayıncılık, 2003), 15-25; Türkkahraman, Toplum ve Toplumsal Kurumlar: Kurumlar Sosyolojisine Giriş, 50.

^[55] Türkkahraman, Toplum ve Toplumsal Kurumlar: Kurumlar Sosyolojisine Giriş, 151.

^[56] Canatan - Yıldırım, Aile Sosyolojisi, 17.

^[57] Agacinski, Cinsiyetler Siyaseti, 69; Arslanoğlu, Genel Sosyoloji: Ders Notları, 126-127.

^[58] Simten Coşar - İnci Özkan Kerestecioğlu, “Feminizmin Neoliberalizmle İmtihanı”, Doğu Batı Düşünce Dergisi: Toplumsal Cinsiyet II 64 (2013), 26.

^[59] Agacinski, Cinsiyetler Siyaseti, 57-61.

^[60] Gün Taş, “Feminizm Üzerine Genel Bir Değerlendirme: Kavramsal Analizi, Tarihsel Süreçleri ve Dönüşümleri”, Akademik Hassasiyetler 3/5 (2016), 170.

^[61] V. R. A. Call - T. B. Heaton, “Religious Influence on Marital Stability”, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 36/3 (1997), 382; K. Ahmadi, others, “The Influence of Religiosity on Marital Satisfaction”, Journal of Social Science 4/2 (2008), 104; N. M. Lambert - D. C. Dollahite, “How Religiosity Helps Couples Prevent, Resolve and Overcome Marital Conflict”, Family Relations 55/4 (2006), 443; Fatma Balcı Arvas, “Aile, Değerler ve Din: Teorik Bir Yaklaşım”, Türkiye İlahiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi 4/1 (Haziran 2019), 220.

^[62] Call - Heaton, “Religious Influence on Marital Stability”, 383.

^[63]  David C. Dollahite - Loren D. Marks, “A Conceptual Model of Family and Religious Processes in Highly Religious Families”, Review of Religious Research 50/4 (2009), 384.

^[64] A. Bahadır, Aile Psikolojisi ve Din (İdeal Usta Fot. Bas. Yay. Dağıtım, 2012), 105.

^[65] F. Z. Belen, “Eşlerarası İletişime Manevi Psikolojik Yaklaşım”, Toplum Bilimleri Dergisi 8/15 (2014), 187.

^[66] Lambert- Dollahite, “How Religiosity Helps Couples Prevent, Resolve and Overcome Marital Conflict”, 448; Dollahite- Marks, “A Conceptual Model of Family and Religious Processes in Highly Religious Families”, 387; Mahoney et al., “Religion in the Home in the 1980s and 1990s: A Meta-Analytic Review and Conceptual Analysis of Links Between Religion, Marriage, and Parenting”, 587.

^[67] Dollahite - Marks, “A Conceptual Model of Family and Religious Processes in Highly Religious Families”, 383.

^[68] Call - Heaton, “Religious Influence on Marital Stability”, 383; Arvas, “Family, Values and Religion: A Theoretical Approach”, 222.

^[69] A. L. Geyer - R. F. Baumeister, “Din, Ahlak ve Öz-Denetim: Değerler, Erdemler ve Kötü Alışkanlıklar”, çev. Metin Güven, Din ve Maneviyat Psikolojisi: Yeni Yaklaşımlar ve Uygulama Alanları, ed. Raymond F. Paloutzian - Crystal L. Park (Ankara: Phoenix Yayınları, 2013), 242.

^[70] Michael E. McCullough v.dğr., “Religion and Forgiveness”, Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, ed. Raymond F. Paloutzian - Crystal L. Park (New York: Guilford Press, 2005), 397.

^[71] Yargıtay 11. Hukuk Dairesi (Yargıtay), K. 2019/1204 (Yargıtay 22 Ağustos 2019), 75.

^[72] Dollahite - Marks, “A Conceptual Model of Family and Religious Processes in Highly Religious Families”, 382.

^[73]  al-Baqara, 2/83.

^[74]  an-Nisā, 4/1.

^[75] an-Nahl 16/90.

^[76] Kasapoğlu, “The Problem of Harmony Between Spouses in Marriage According to Islam- Harmony of Faith and Morality”, 150.

^[77] al-Nūr 24/3.

^[78] Çiğdem Gülmez, Kadına Yönelik Aile İçi Şiddet, Ahlaki Çözülme ve Dindarlık (Samsun: Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Felsefe ve Din Bilimleri Anabilim Dalı, Doktora Tezi, 2014), 154.

^[79]  İmam Gazali, İslam’da Evlilik ve Aile Hayatı, çev. Mehmet Ali Kayabağlar (İstanbul: Kahraman Yayınları, 1999), 70.

^[80] Mahmut Çamdibi, Güzel Ahlak ve İnsan İlişkileri (İstanbul: Çamlıca Yayınları, 2012), 134.

^[81] İbrahim Canan, Aile İçi Eğitim (İzmir: Gülyurdu Yayınları, 2012), 182.

^[82] M. Tekin, “Dinlerin Perspektifinden Aile Kurumu”, Aile Sosyolojisi, ed. Kadir Canatan - Ergün Yıldırım (İstanbul: Açılım Kitap Yayınları, 2011), 256.

^[83] al-Baqara 2/187.

^[84] Paul R. Amato vd., Alone Together: How Marriage in America Is Changing (Harvard University Press, 2007), 5; David Popenoe, Life without Father: Compelling New Evidence that Fatherhood and Marriage Are Indispensable for the Good of Children and Society (Simon & Schuster, 1996), 533.

^[85] Liana C. Sayer v.dğr., “She Left, He Left: How Employment and Satisfaction Affect Women’s and Men’s Decisions to Leave Marriages”, American Journal of Sociology 116/6 (2011), 1985.

^[86] Bureau of Labor Statistics, Marriage and Divorce: Patterns by Gender, Race, and Educational Attainment: Monthly Labor Review, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, accessed August 16, 2025, p. 1.

^[87] Aughinbaugh, Alison; Robles, Omar; Sun, Hugette, “Marriage and divorce: patterns by gender, race, and educational attainment”, Bureau of Labor Statistics (Erişim 12 Mayıs 2025), 15.

^[88] Richard Breen - Lynn P. Cooke, “The Persistence of the Gendered Division of Domestic Labour”, European Sociological Review 21/1 (2005), 44.

^[89] Lynn P. Cooke, “Cinsiyet Bağlamında ‘Yapmak’: Almanya ve Amerika Birleşik Devletleri’nde Hane Halkı Pazarlığı ve Boşanma Riski”, Amerikan Sosyoloji Dergisi 112/2 (2006), 442.

^[90] Robert Schoen et al., “Women’s Employment, Marital Happiness, and Divorce”, Social Forces 81/2 (2002), 644.

^[91] Candace West - Don H. Zimmerman, “Doing Gender”, Gender & Society 1/2 (1987), 126.

^[92] Pamela J. Smock et al., “The Effect of Marriage and Divorce on Women’s Economic Well-Being”, American Sociological Review, (1999), 794.

^[93] Paula England, “The Gender Revolution: Uneven and Stalled”, Gender & Society 24/2 (2010), 150-151; Paula England- Erin Shafer, “Everyday Gender Conflicts in Low-Income Couples”, Unmarried Couples with Children (Sage: 2007), 62-64.

^[94] Nurşen Adak, “The Women Dilemma: Between Work and Fımily Life”, Sosyoloji Dergisi 17/1 (2007), 143-149.

^[95] Çağrı Elmas - Nurşen Adak, “Post-Divorce Experiences in Türkiye and the Social Structures Behind the Reasons for Divorce”, İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyoloji Dergisi 43/1 (30 Haziran 2023), 88.

^[96] Turkish Statistical Institute, Family Structure Survey, 2021, 12.

^[97] Turkish Statistical Institute, Family Structure Survey, 17-18.

^[98] Turkish Statistical Institute, Family Structure Survey, 20.

^[99] Turkish Statistical Institute, Family Structure Survey, 25.

^[100] Turkish Statistical Institute, Family Structure Survey, 26.

^[101] Turkish Statistical Institute, Family Structure Survey, 30; Elmas- Adak, “Post-Divorce Experiences in Türkiye and the Social Structures Behind the Reasons for Divorce”, 89-90.

^[102] Turkish Statistical Institute, Family Structure Survey, 45-52; Elmas- Adak, “Post-Divorce Experiences in Türkiye and the Social Structures Behind the Reasons for Divorce”, 90.

^[103] Turkish Statistical Institute, Family Structure Survey, 25-30; Elmas- Adak, “Türkiye’de Boşanma Nedenlerinin Toplumsal Kökenleri ve Boşanma Sonrası Deneyimler”, 91.

^[104] al-Nisāʾ 4/19.

^[105] al-Nisāʾ 4/34.

^[106] Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad Ibn Aḥmad Qurṭubī, al-Jāmiʿ li-Aḥkām al-Qurʾān, ed. Aḥmad al-Bardūnī and Ibrāhīm Aṭfīsh (Cairo: Dār al-Kutub al-Miṣriyya, 1384), 5/170-171; Yazır, Hak Dini Kur’an Dili, 2/558.

^[107] Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad Ibn Yazīd al-Qazwīnī Ibn Mājah, al-Sunan, ed. Muḥammad Muṣṭafā al-Aʿẓamī (Riyadh: King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Qur’ān, 1983), “Nikah” 50.

^[108] Abū ʿAbd Allāh Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl Bukhārī, al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaḥīḥ. ed. Muḥammad Zuhayr Ibn Naṣr (Dār al-Tawqīʿ al-Najāh, 1422/2001), “Nikah” 93; el-Câmiʿu’ṣ-ṣaḥîḥ, “Tefsir” 3340.

^[109] Muhammad Abū Zahrah, al-Aḥwāl al-Shakhṣiyyah (Cairo: Dār al-Fikr al-’Arabī, 1957), 423.

^[110] Abū Zahrah, al-Aḥwāl al-Shakhṣiyyah, 421-427.

^[111] at-Talaq 65/1.

^[112] Abu al-Tayyib Muḥammad Shams al-Ḥaqq al-Aẓimabādī, Avnü’l-Mabūd: Şerh-i Sünen-i Ebî Dâvûd (Medine, 1968), 6/227-228; Hamza Aitan, “Kur’ân’a Göre Boşanma Prosedürü”, Dini Araştırmalar 5/14 (Aralık 2002), 5-16.

^[113] Qurṭubī, al-Jāmiʿ li-Aḥkām al-Qurʾān, 18/152.

^[114] al-Nisāʾ 4/35; al-Ṭalāq 65/1-2.