Mohsannat? A new understanding(very imp)
-
Peace brother Tanveer,
According to Lane Lexicon, "fatayat" means "young women, concealed, or kept within, or behind the curtain, in the house or tent", which implies parent/family protected, and also means "female slaves", who would be guardian/master protected/dependent. Thus "fatayat" includes both female slaves and young women still dependent on their parents/family/guardians, and both meanings fit in 425.
I don't see the meaning of slaves here. The plural word "fatayat" (singular "fatat" simply means young females.
"Bigha" means to "seek to exceed the legal limits"/"prostitution and CANNOT mean marriage.
Please see all the occurrences of the word "BGhY" and its derivatives in the great reading. Prostitution is NEVER one of the meanings. So why is that meaning coming out of nowhere here?
I don't think that it is a coincidence that like "ma malakat aymanukum", it seems like this subject is full of forced meanings that encourage the exploitation of women.
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace bro Ayman,
I don't see the meaning of slaves here. The plural word "fatayat" (singular "fatat" simply means young females.
The implication of my post was that even if it can mean "female slaves" according to Classical Arabic dictionary in 425, it would not be applicable nowadays because there is no process described in al-qur'aan of enslaving people. There were some slaves at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan in the elite, as per your own admission, and AT THAT TIME the "female slave" meaning of "fatayat" would have been applicable to that situation.
Please see all the occurrences of the word "BGhY" and its derivatives in the great reading. Prostitution is NEVER one of the meanings. So why is that meaning coming out of nowhere here?
Can you please tell us what "bighaa" means in 2433 ? It cannot mean marriage as "marriage" is not "seeking to exceed lawful limits", but would actually be opposite of "bighaa" because it is remaining within lawful limits.
Peace
-
Peace brother Tanveer,
The implication of my post was that even if it can mean "female slaves" according to Classical Arabic dictionary in 425, it would not be applicable nowadays because there is no process described in al-qur'aan of enslaving people. There were some slaves at the time of revelation of al-qur'aan in the elite, as per your own admission, and AT THAT TIME the "female slave" meaning of "fatayat" would have been applicable to that situation.
My point is that it CANNOT mean slaves. For example, the people of the cave in chapter 18 are described as "fityat" (masculine equivalent of "fatayat" not because they can be slaves but because they were young men.
Can you please tell us what "bighaa" means in 2433 ? It cannot mean marriage as "marriage" is not "seeking to exceed lawful limits", but would actually be opposite of "bighaa" because it is remaining within lawful limits.
The law on marriage is that it should be consentual and not a forced marriage. Hence, a forced marriage indeed falls under "seeking to exceed the lawful limits".
Peace,
Ayman
-
Peace bro Ayman,
Thank you for your analysis. I agree with your point about "forced marriage", and your point about "fatayat" only meaning "young girls" makes sense according to usage in al-qur'aan.
I have two questions
Firstly, what would be the rules of marriage to the slaves then, according to al-qur'aan, at the time of its revelation, because there were a small minority of slaves at that time as evident from verses that tell us to free slaves as a recompense.
Secondly, does the preposition "aw" allow the meaning of "that is" as per its usage in al-qur'aan ?
-
Peace brother Tanveer,
Firstly, what would be the rules of marriage to the slaves then, according to al-qur'aan, at the time of its revelation, because there were a small minority of slaves at that time as evident from verses that tell us to free slaves as a recompense.
Brother, there are plenty of passages in the great reading that speak against injustice ("thulm" in any shape or form. Do you think that there is any justice in slavery? Isn't this like stealing the fruits of the work of someone? If this someone is also an orphan isn't this stealing from the orphans?
Clearly there is no issue of "marriage to slaves" in the first place because slavery is an injustice for which there is absolutely no place amongst those who are forethoughtful.
Secondly, does the preposition "aw" allow the meaning of "that is" as per its usage in al-qur'aan ?
Brother, I am not sure I understand your question. Please put it in context. As far as I know, "aw" means "or".
Peace,
Ayman
-
peace ayman, tanveer.
Brother ayman is right about Fatayat as YOUNG GIRLS, but in 4-24 , the word is fatayat out of MMA , that is why i consider it to be a slave girl.(because i take the MMA as slaves)
In the 24-33 where "bigha" is being used, i would tend to agree with brother Tanveer, he has a definition, which is more refined , and i think that can apply in both situations , But as the primary subject in ayah is MMA, and also ,the chance of " Bigha" taking place with Fatayat of MMA is much more likely. So we could say,,,
" Here in this ayah, stress is primarily for Fatayat of MMA but the divine wisdom covered the other option as well by using the Appropriate words".
peace
sikandar
-
Salaam all
Thanks warner for bringing out this verse
24 32
Marry those among you who are single or the virtuous ones among your slaves male or female if they are in poverty Allah will give them means out of His grace for Allah encompasseth all and He knoweth all things.It shows the reply of God in case of poverty,which is completely different from "go and marry the slaves if you can't afford to pay the dowery of mu7sanat"!
Therefore,in verse 425, the affordability is anything BUT financial. So, what else would make someone unable to marry?
Also think of verse 244 what would "mu7sanat" mean? Remember, every woman/man is innocent untill there are four witnesses.What woman/man would not be affected by accusation, and thus do not form part of mu7sans?
I think if we can answer these two questions, we may be able to understand these two problematic terms. They are in fact in opposition.
Brother Tanweer
The verb "naka7a" in the affirmative command would mean "marry off" only if it is followed by explicit masculin. In verse 2432, it would mean (marry the females and marry off the males), as I explained that Arabic usage is the opposite of English usage.
To those who might wonder why I mentioned only the affirmative command, the reason is that "yunki7" means marry off and "yanki7" means marry, in the imperfect tense. But both verbs have the same form in the affirmative command (anki7). As for the negative command, it is simply the imperfect (present tense) preceded by "la"=don't la tunki7 and la tanki7.
-
Peace bro Sikandar,
Brother ayman is right about Fatayat as YOUNG GIRLS, but in 4-24 , the word is fatayat out of MMA , that is why i consider it to be a slave girl.(because i take the MMA as slaves)
I think you need to correct this basic misunderstanding that is causing some conceptual problems for you in my opinion. Firstly, it is 425 and not 424 where fatayat are mentioned. Secondly, it is NOT fatayat out of MMA, but the other way around MMA FROM FATAYAT.
Look at the Arabic of 425 "ma malakat aymanukum MIN fatayatikum" i.e. MMA FROM FATAYAT. Thus in this verse MMA is the subset of fatayat.
That is why MMA CANNOT mean slaves because in 424 MMA being mentioned is the subset of mohsanat. MMA is simply those whom you possess by oath and what kind of oath and what kind of people being referred to depends on the context. That is why your line diagram is wrong. The arrow should be from fatayat to MMA and not from MMA to fatayat as you have drawn.
Peace,
Tanveer
-
Salaam warner
Thank you for inviting me to participate in the thread of "mamalakat aymanukum". To me, both terms (MMA and Mu7sanat) are linked by opposition, so I would discuss both on the same thread (in this case this one), or even only one, and the other will be solved when we reach an agreement on either.
-
Salaam brother siki
In verse 425
And whoever cannot marry the (mu7sanat), marry (MMA).....marry them with the permission of their family/folk..
According to you, the command is to marry YOUR slave (MMA), not someone else's. There is no mention of masters here. The Quraan uses the word (ahl) which is family, clan...but not masters. If God speaks of slaves, why not mention their masters?
-
Peace brother Ayman,
Brother, there are plenty of passages in the great reading that speak against injustice ("thulm" in any shape or form. Do you think that there is any justice in slavery? Isn't this like stealing the fruits of the work of someone? If this someone is also an orphan isn't this stealing from the orphans?
Clearly there is no issue of "marriage to slaves" in the first place because slavery is an injustice for which there is absolutely no place amongst those who are forethoughtful.
I agree that it is one of the biggest injustices to mankind to enslave a fellow human. What if a fellow human wanted to put an end to this injustice at the time of revelation of the great reading and marry someone else's female slave ? How would he have gone about it according to the great reading ?
I was also thinking about "forced marriage" compared to "prostitution". In my opinion they are almost the same, just a matter of semantics, isn't it ?
Brother, I am not sure I understand your question. Please put it in context. As far as I know, "aw" means "or".
I am sorry, I thought you had already read brother Arnold's posts quoting Mohammad Asad's translation of 7029-30 and 235-6, in which he translates "aw" as "that is", thus making "azwajukum" the same as "ma malakat aymanukum" in those signs. Does Classical Arabic usage allow that interpretation ?
Please refer to the following posts
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=13789.msg118376#msg118376
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=13789.msg118468#msg118468
Peace,
Tanveer
-
Peace bro Sikandar,
I think you need to correct this basic misunderstanding that is causing some conceptual problems for you in my opinion. Firstly, it is 425 and not 424 where fatayat are mentioned. Secondly, it is NOT fatayat out of MMA, but the other way around MMA FROM FATAYAT.
Look at the Arabic of 425 "ma malakat aymanukum MIN fatayatikum" i.e. MMA FROM FATAYAT. Thus in this verse MMA is the subset of fatayat.
That is why MMA CANNOT mean slaves because in 424 MMA being mentioned is the subset of mohsanat. MMA is simply those whom you possess by oath and what kind of oath and what kind of people being referred to depends on the context. That is why your line diagram is wrong. The arrow should be from fatayat to MMA and not from MMA to fatayat as you have drawn.
Tanveer
Peace, Tanveer
peace Bro
I agree with you, actually i made a mistake when i considered Fatayat ,as Young female slaves only. But brother Ayman and your arguments steered us towards a more refined definition of Fatayat . which is Any young girl (maiden) ,and she could be belonging to any category . i guess we have to subdivide right after Mohsinnat in to two groups as Fatayat and rest of the category, or may be , even before Mohsinnat , because some of the prohibited ones could also be categorised as Fayayats (Maidens), i shall try and correct it in the line diagram.
In my judgment Shakir's translation of the ayat should be closer to reality.
4-25 And whoever among you has not within his power ampleness of means to marry free believing women, then (he may marry) of those whom your right hands possess from among your believing maidens; and Allah knows best your faith you are (sprung) the one from the other; so marry them with the permission of their masters, and give them their dowries justly, they being chaste, not fornicating, nor receiving paramours; and when they are taken in marriage, then if they are guilty of indecency, they shall suffer half the punishment which is (inflicted) upon free women. This is for him among you who fears falling into evil; and that you abstain is better for you, and Allah is Forgiving, Merciful
peace
sikandar
-
Peace Samia
Thanks for being in at least one thread but keep watching the other one as well since maybe we will find the clues in that.
425 ?.and give unto them their portions in kindness, they being honest, not debauched nor of loose conduct. And if when they are honorably married/MUHSANAT they commit lewdness they shall incur the half of the punishment (prescribed) for free women/MUHSANAT (in that case)
?wa a_tu_hunna uju_rahunna bil ma'ru_fi muhsana_tin gaira musa_fiha_tiw wa la_ muttakhiza_ti akhda_n(in), fa iza_ uhsinna fa in ataina bi fa_hisyatin fa 'alaihinna nisfu ma_ 'alal muhsana_ti minal 'aza_b(i),
According to 425 does the MMA become a Muhsanat when she is taken in marriage?
Also the MMA receives half the punishment of a Muhsanat if she commits fahisha after marriage. -
Salaam warner
According to the prevailing understanding, yes. However, my understanding finds this quite logical and necesary.
As I mentioned befoe, mu7san means immune. Immune of what? I believe it is immune of not wanting/unable to perform sex.Verse 424 starts addressing a different category of people. It is linked to the previous verse by theme only. It is not a continuation to it. This category is those who can't/wont have sex. This is why the following verse says "wa man lam yasta6i3 6awlan an yanki7 almu7Sanat..", wrongly translated as (cannot afford). The verb used is (unable) not (cannot). I also showed that poverty and richness are to be left to God as per verse 2432 and we should not worry about that.
That's why this wedlock is called (milkul-yameen) i.e. it is a special covenant/oath between two, one of whom is at least unable/cannot have sex. The other is their milkul-yameen. So, this other accepted this relation and promise to not want sex (promised to be a voluntary MMA). But suppose in a moment of weakness they commit adultry (because they are not having sex with their partner), then God considers their condition as extenuation circumstances, and hence the punishment is lightened (half of the mu7San).
-
Peace Samia
Thanks for being in at least one thread but keep watching the other one as well since maybe we will find the clues in that.
425 .and give unto them their portions in kindness, they being honest, not debauched nor of loose conduct. And if when they are honorably married/MUHSANAT they commit lewdness they shall incur the half of the punishment (prescribed) for free women/MUHSANAT (in that case)
wa a_tu_hunna uju_rahunna bil ma'ru_fi muhsana_tin gaira musa_fiha_tiw wa la_ muttakhiza_ti akhda_n(in), fa iza_ uhsinna fa in ataina bi fa_hisyatin fa 'alaihinna nisfu ma_ 'alal muhsana_ti minal 'aza_b(i),
According to 425 does the MMA become a Muhsanat when she is taken in marriage?
Also the MMA receives half the punishment of a Muhsanat if she commits fahisha after marriage.peace brother warner
ya you are right, she will enter into the category of mohsinnat ,what i think , Not because she has Married, but because she has been upgraded, Now at this stage if she is divorced , do you think that she will stay in the Mohsinnat cateory? or would drop back?peace
siki
-
Salaam siki, warner and all
According to 425 does the MMA become a Muhsanat when she is taken in marriage?
Also the MMA receives half the punishment of a Muhsanat if she commits fahisha after marriage.Remember, she/he is already married! But if she/he change their stance from not-wanting sex to wanting it (become mu7san), then their punishment is half, since they can't have it with the husband/wife (who are the unable to marry a mu7san)
Look at verse 6612 And Mariam, daughter of Imran, who "a7sanat farajaha"...i.e who immuned it from "should not have sex or marriage because she was given to the monastry". The translation (guarded her chastity) is wrong, because in this meaning the Quraan uses the verb (7afatha) as in verses 24 30; 2431; 3335; 235; 7029.
-
Peace be with you
I have told my self not to post on Mohsanat unless there is something new to add or question.
I think one major problem in analyzing Mohasanat is we have been analyzing the word Mohsanat independently. Whereas we should analyze the following terms in which the word ?Mohsanat? is used in different connections and contexts.
1 Al Muhsanati ( 244 and 425)
2 Al Muhsanatu min al Nisa ( 424 )
3 Al Muhsanati al Muminati (425 )
4 Al Muhsanati min al Muminati ( 55 )
5 Al Muhsanatu min Allatheena utoo al kitaba (55)
For instance although the word Mohsanat is used in both 424 and 425 we can see two different words ?Nisa? and ?Muminati? are used after ?Mohsanat? in the terms which should give two different meanings to the 2 terms . The two different meanings should justify the very obvious contradiction.
I am not forcing any theories and like to hear your opinion on this.
-
Peace Warner , all
Peace Almarhom
Thanks for indicating the verse.
What do you think is the difference between ?Al Muhsanatu min al Nisa? and ?Al Muhsanati al Muminati??
-
The Chaste One from the Women in General . ( Why changed Chaste into Self Protected ? Any reasonable person would know that a Woman is the Sole Protector of her Body or Genitalia . No amount of guarding by her Parents/Guardians could prevent her from engaging in an Illicit sexual act if she really wanted to. So Imo , the appropriate word is Chaste Woman rather than Self Protected Nonsense ).
-
The Chaste of the Believing Women . ( Please do not assume that believing Women are Free from Sexual Needs and not All of them can control their Desire , after all , they are human and Allah in His Infinite Wisdom knew that before He gave us these Verses ) .
This is my opinion only of course but I do sincerely believe We do not have to Re-Translate every Word that earlier Translators of The Quran have done .
Wassalamu' alaa manittaba'al hudaa
almarh0m
-