Was the term "daraba" sneakily turned to "beating" by hypocrites?
-
Secondly, Nashaz is when someone deviates. So a Nashooz is someone who swerves from the path by doing unrighteous or socially unacceptable acts. I.e. basically not following what the Quran says about morality or conduct. E.g. husband or wife gossiping, flirting and so on.
Salaam peace4life, all
I agree with your post, except what I am quoting of it. This meaning is neither supported by known arabic dictionaries nor by the usage in the qur'aan of this word/derivatives.
There is another interesting, and more plausible meaning of "dharaba" which is cited in "lisanul3arab" to have intercourse with.
-
Salam,
hajirfm you said "If god wanted to say leave them, then He, being god, knew there was a better word for it 'utrokoohunna' or if he wanted to say 'divorce them' he would say 'telleqoohunna'." elektro
If God says utrokoohunna then many men would believe that they should leave (including leaving the financial responsibility, leaving the relationship). That's not what God wants because clearly God loves for couples to reconcile (especially if there are children).
He wouldn't say "talleqoohunna" because God doesn't like divorce (as seen in Quran) and gives people time apart and a chance to get back together.
So God provides a word which implies Temporality (temporarily leave). adhreb = strike (temporary break - stoppage in order to bargain or reach agreement)
Adhred alta3am (food) = strike against food (hunger strike)
Adhreb Al-shoghl = strike against work (go on strike)
Adhred Al-nisa / adrebhunna = strike against the woman (temporarily leave her) ----> hunna is just a pronoun = Them (femenine)God always wants people to have a TIME (break) before divorce (whether to give time to see if the woman is pregnant or to cool off). He even says that if you hate your woman, you could be hating something in which God has placed a lot of good.
God says that men and women are equal, that they have affection and mercy between them and other words like that. He doesn't give men a right to oppress or hit women in any way. As a matter of fact we know from the Quran that God doesn't like oppression or the aggressors.
Secondly, Nashaz is when someone deviates. So a Nashooz is someone who swerves from the path by doing unrighteous or socially unacceptable acts. I.e. basically not following what the Quran says about morality or conduct. E.g. husband or wife gossiping, flirting and so on.
Traditionally men (males) corrupted Hadith and religious guidelines so they can gain power in the home and society.
You're free to disagree. But God is also the best Sociologist and Social Worker, and He knows what's best. Look at Quran as a whole & the reason for it = peace.
Salam peace
Salam. I disagree. God could be more specefic about leaving them temporarily. Women have to wait a certain period before getting married again anyways (as you said to make sure they are not pregnant and also to see if they change their minds). So what would be the wisdom behind that verse? It will read like "Admonish them and leave them in their sleeping places and leave them (temporarily)". It simply doesn't make sense to me. Leave them for how long? Can we leave them for one year? Two years? As long as it takes? What are the rules regarding this? Did prophet elaborate on this? Did any case like this happen during his time?
In fact some men do leave their wives and refuse to divorce them. They go about their business and get married again but the poor woman can't get married unless the husband divorces her and he refuses to do so. Is this what you are advocating? You can't leave your wife for an undetermined period of time even if it is temporary. You see the period before the second marriage is a certain number of months (If I remember it's about 4 months but correct me if this is not so). If you are suggesting that the verse is saying leave your wives (and go find another house to live in) then somehow we should know how long this leave should be. You can't just say as long as it takes. That's not fair to anybody.
-
Salam Samia,
intercourse??? are you serious??? ???
peace
-
Salaam peace4life, all
I agree with your post, except what I am quoting of it. This meaning is neither supported by known arabic dictionaries nor by the usage of in the qur'aan of this word/derivatives.
There is another interesting, and more plausible meaning of "dharaba" which is cited in "lisanul3arab" to have intercourse with.
What a joke! Have intercourse with her when you are having an argument? I never tried that and I don't think I will because I will be beaten up real bad.
-
What a joke! Have intercourse with her when you are having an argument? I never tried that and I don't think I will because I will be beaten up real bad.
Have you tried, then beating her and found that it worked?
Lol, I am glad to hear that your wife could beat you, even when you are trying to be nice ;DWhere is this argument in the verse? (ad3u ela sabeeli rabbika bil7ikmati wal maw3ithatil 7asana) preach for the way of your God by wisdom and good advice. What's wrong with having an intimate relation with the spouse after a good advice? And why are you happy jumping in the wagon of desertation and beating, but not the good approach?
We take these three options as if they are only stages. They can be stages, but there is no reason why they are not seperate options. Desert her in bed could be just what she was already doing and earned her the title of "nashez". In this case deserting her is redundant.
-
Salam Samia,
intercourse??? are you serious??? ???
peace
If you do not believe me, look up the verb in any clasical Arabic dictionary (I use lisanul 3arab). What made me not see it was that I was not reading the whole entry, just doing fast reading, jumping lines.
-
Have you tried, then beating her and found that it worked?
Lol, I am glad to hear that your wife could beat you, even when you are trying to be nice ;DWhere is this argument in the verse? (ad3u ela sabeeli rabbika bil7ikmati wal maw3ithatil 7asana) preach for the way of your God by wisdom and good advice. What's wrong with having an intimate relation with the spouse after a good advice? And why are you happy jumping in the wagon of desertation and beating, but not the good approach?
We take these three options as if they are only stages. They can be stages, but there is no reason why they are not seperate options. Desert her in bed could be just what she was already doing and earned her the title of "nashez". In this case deserting her is redundant.
We have had little arguments but we can sort it out by talking. This is how many issues are resolved between spouses.
Yes you do give advice. That's the first step. But what if your beautiful preaching doesns't work? Then you separate your beds. What if that didn't work? Have intercourse with her? Where is the logic in that? Maybe it works for some couples at some situations but generally that will be disasterous and smells more like marital rape to me.
-
SALAM
Leave her Temporarily, as per Sura 65. (may lead to divorce).
3 months
wait till she gives birth if she's pregnant... No wife beating/striking! (what if the woman is you or your mother or sister?)
Refer to what Sura 65 explains about relationships.
Peace.
-
SALAM
Leave her Temporarily, as per Sura 65. (may lead to divorce).
3 months
wait till she gives birth if she's pregnant... No wife beating/striking! (what if the woman is you or your mother or sister?)
Refer to what Sura 65 explains about relationships.
Peace.
You're right.
Also What is the "nashez" wife is pregnant? Will the husband wait untill she gives birth and then beat her up?
-
Salam,
So in conclusion dharaba is Idhrab - strike against her/leave her temporarily. Connects perfectly with the concepts in the Quran and connects to Sura 65 and the values in it (The relationship by then would be at a bad stage anyway) - So it could or could not lead to divorce. God is just, merciful.
Peace
-
We have had little arguments but we can sort it out by talking. This is how many issues are resolved between spouses.
Yes you do give advice. That's the first step. But what if your beautiful preaching doesns't work? Then you separate your beds. What if that didn't work? Have intercourse with her? Where is the logic in that? Maybe it works for some couples at some situations but generally that will be disasterous and smells more like marital rape to me.
There are many different causes for dispute. Suppose the case is that she feels that her husband is not paying much attention to her. No advice will be useful, especially if she is the shy type. These advices are NOT to discipline the wife, but to find a solution. We have to take into consideration that the wife's (nushuz) may be a reaction to something. If advice does not work, the husband has to look into himself. Maybe she is "rebelling" because he is having too much sex (for her) or too little. Deserting in bed should not be seen as if it is a punishment to the wife. Men do not use it to punish women. It is the other way round.
-
Well you better open your eyes before you marry anybody. This verse doesn't give permission to men to be abusive.
I've been married for over 18 years and I will tell you that a man who decides that he can hit a woman for one good reason, can easily and likely find another 'good reason' to hit her. This is a fact of faulty human behavior. Not an assumption. I don't believe that god would ask those of us in a close relationship to set up a situation where one is forcefully over another. Once the cat gets out of the bag, it's hard to put it back in, as they say. If people are not careful, the man (or dominant one) will become more and more dominant and abusive, while the other person will shrink back to avoid trouble. It's not a pretty situation.
please keep the label of shirk out of the picture for now. Well what do I expect from this forum where some people here consider all muslims mushrik except their small group.
I will keep the shirk in the picture. If you fear and obey someone other than God (in my context here, meaning the subservient person in the relationship) then that, indeed, by definition is SHIRK. Can you tell me how it is not????
-
Hajirfm,
Let me ask you again
If 6.5 billion people on Earth exist
1.3 of these are Muslim, or claim to be
What about the 5.2 billion remaining? Are they mushrik?
-
Salam,
I just want to add that when the man's ego reaches a stage where he doesn't let his wife do anything freely or make decisions for herself then yes, she might shrink to the point that she is practically worshipping the husband (not God) and that's a form of oppression. Many muslim women are oppressed. They think they must follow exactly what the husband wants even if the husband is completely wrong.
The other issue is possession. Some men own their wives as if she's a piece of furniture. If she tries to do anything out of freewill she will be verbally or physically abused. If this goes on for a long time the woman will rebel or deviate, and so the best solution would be to take that 'strike out' period, after having tried discussing the situation and avoiding sexual contact.
There is no logical proof that hitting a woman will solve any problems. In fact, this goes against the values of the Quran and sura 65. In addition, it is not the man's job to judge a woman or shape her thoughts or personality (that's between her and God).
It is obvious that too many people don't see the Quran as a whole and don't understand the general values implicated in it.
These issues are very important in modern day society, as many women are becoming very critical of everything and may think why can't I drive a car? why can't I have a job? why can't I speak to family or friends or go out?
Even the prophet's wife was a successful business woman / trader, and the women from the prophet's family travelled and spread Islam. So what the hell happened??????
Salam. peace
-
I've been married for over 18 years and I will tell you that a man who decides that he can hit a woman for one good reason, can easily and likely find another 'good reason' to hit her. This is a fact of faulty human behavior. Not an assumption. I don't believe that god would ask those of us in a close relationship to set up a situation where one is forcefully over another. Once the cat gets out of the bag, it's hard to put it back in, as they say. If people are not careful, the man (or dominant one) will become more and more dominant and abusive, while the other person will shrink back to avoid trouble. It's not a pretty situation.
I will keep the shirk in the picture. If you fear and obey someone other than God (in my context here, meaning the subservient person in the relationship) then that, indeed, by definition is SHIRK. Can you tell me how it is not????
God asks us to obey our parents. Does that make us mushrik? God asks us to obey the messenger and 'ulul amr' and does that make us mushrik? We obey the laws of the country we live in. Does that make us mushrik? NO! Shirk exists but it is not in obeying other people. Every soldier on a battlefield has to obey the commands of his commander. Every player has to obey the commands of his coach. These don't make you a mushrik. But if you obey a person that is inviting you to evil and you follow him then you have sinned. Even that is not shirk. Shirk is to associate partners to Allah or worship others besides Allah or give one of the attributions of Allah to someone other than him.
-
Hajirfm,
Let me ask you again
If 6.5 billion people on Earth exist
1.3 of these are Muslim, or claim to be
What about the 5.2 billion remaining? Are they mushrik?
Peace OPF. The other 5.2 billion are non-muslim. Among them are the people of the book, atheists, agnostics, etc. Not every non-muslim is a mushrik. When I mentioned 1.3 billion muslims, I didn't mean to say that their quantity proves anything. But it's absurd to believe that only a small group called aloners (what a name) are true muslims and everyone else is a mushrik. This is an extremist opinion. Islam is the middle way. Come back to Islam. We have a name that god has chosen for us i.e. 'muslim' not 'quran aloner'. Where did that name come from? Is there anything in the Quran that refers to such a term? Do we have a term called 'quranioon' in the Quran? No. We only read 'mu'minoon, muslimoon' those who pray, fast and give charity, etc. Satan is smart and is turning your intelligence against you. But you should act smarter than him and believe like the rest of us.
Why would god deny his guidance to so many generations of muslims and then lead only a very few people led by a man that we don't know and have never seen. He is not brave enough to make his call public. He hides behind websites and e-articles. Why isn't he out there calling people to the truth if he claims he has the truth in his posession? Why isn't he out there breaking the idols like Abraham and Mohammad did? This only proves that he is not sincere in his call to tawheed and he has other agendas unknown to us.
-
God asks us to obey our parents. Does that make us mushrik? God asks us to obey the messenger and 'ulul amr' and does that make us mushrik? We obey the laws of the country we live in. Does that make us mushrik? NO! Shirk exists but it is not in obeying other people. Shirk is to associate partners to Allah or worship others besides Allah or give one of the attributions of Allah to someone other than him.
I see what you're saying, but your inexperience in life is showing through the content of your post. You seem to not know or understand what happens to a wife's spirit and soul once she gets into this state we have been talking about. If there's something she longs to do that is allowed by God's law, but her husband/brothers/father/etc. tell her she can't and she doesn't do it despite it being perfectly halal, then who's authority is she taking over the authority of God? The authority of that husband/brother/father/ etc. I do not see the health and well-being in blindly following the popular adage 'obey your husband' . hail hypno
We must obviously at this point agree to disagree.
-
Salam,
The Quran DOES say that if your parents are Mushriks - DO NOT FOLLOW THEM.
If you're in trouble and you look up and say "Oh Mohammad! or Dear Ali or Angels" or something like that! there's a big problem! THERE'S ONLY ALLAH who can help us. If you pray and you think that you're praying for Prophet or Angels or Prophet's family and they're sitting there in heaven with God, then oops! there's a problem! THERE'S ONLY ONE ALLAH to love and worship. That's what Quran teaches us (Not parents or hadith or the way we've been brought up!). These habits are extremely hard for some people to change. But you just have to ask yourself how much do you actually love God? and does it bother you to mention him alone? or follow His book only, when he tells us that his hadith is the best hadith and that his Quran is complete and perfect. bravo
Some idiots run along to marry more than one wife and they say "the prophet did it!", they don't understand that the prophet did it for humanitarian reasons as some women were orphans and many men died in wars. People don't know the prophet but imagine his personality from fabricated hadith unfortunately. The Quran doesn't say things like if someone changes their religion KILL them. or a woman must ask husband's permission before she fasts. or if you die a martyr you get 72 vergins in heaven? brickwall READ QURAN AS A WHOLE (for values) & COMPLETE BOOK of everything from laws to guidelines to examples to things we don't even know about yet.
Always respect your parents, but you don't have to follow what they believe. Prophet Abraham is an example.
Following the prophet is following the same example of Abraham (worship ONE God, be Muslim to God, be righteous etc.) NOT COPY the prophet's personal life or how he lived in that century. We've discussed this in another thread!!!
Peace. peace
-
Peace OPF. The other 5.2 billion are non-muslim. Among them are the people of the book, atheists, agnostics, etc. Not every non-muslim is a mushrik. When I mentioned 1.3 billion muslims, I didn't mean to say that their quantity proves anything. But it's absurd to believe that only a small group called aloners (what a name) are true muslims and everyone else is a mushrik. This is an extremist opinion. Islam is the middle way. Come back to Islam. We have a name that god has chosen for us i.e. 'muslim' not 'quran aloner'. Where did that name come from? Is there anything in the Quran that refers to such a term? Do we have a term called 'quranioon' in the Quran? No. We only read 'mu'minoon, muslimoon' those who pray, fast and give charity, etc. Satan is smart and is turning your intelligence against you. But you should act smarter than him and believe like the rest of us.
Why would god deny his guidance to so many generations of muslims and then lead only a very few people led by a man that we don't know and have never seen. He is not brave enough to make his call public. He hides behind websites and e-articles. Why isn't he out there calling people to the truth if he claims he has the truth in his posession? Why isn't he out there breaking the idols like Abraham and Mohammad did? This only proves that he is not sincere in his call to tawheed and he has other agendas unknown to us.
Peace, Hajirfm
Good to see you're being reasonable.
But it's absurd to believe that only a small group called aloners (what a name) are true muslims and everyone else is a mushrik.
I see no problem with either the label "God aloners" or "Quran aloners". I would be very, very, very proud if someone called me that )
Now, I don't really think anyone can say such a thing, that only a small group of people are the only people that are not mushriks. That would, as you say, be an extremist opinion, and of course, Islam is the moderate view. As for the latter, the label is simply a language device that carries specific meaning - that someone rejects every other form of text/communication as "religious guidance" but the Quran. This does not mean that one must reject everything - because as we know, God sends messengers and scripture to every civilisation. From that, we can infer that many texts that contain much wisdom but do not seem "islamic" may still contain divine guidance. The term Muslim, by definition, i.e. those who submit to one God, would encompass some 1.3 billion "Muslims" + 2.1 billion "Christians" + 14.6 million "Jews", because they are all monotheistic and claim to follow the religion of Abraham (with the exception of nutty trinitarian Christians). If we include pantheists and other monotheists, this figure is substantial. Now, "mu'minoon" would still define a large majority of people - though they may not be well-versed, they still uphold what they percieve to be prayer, fasting, charity, and so on, while being monotheistic. The term "aloners", is just a linguistic device that we can use to differentiate between groups of Muslims (broad sense), much like the terms "Sunni", "Shi'ite", "Christian", "Jew", etc. There is nothing in God's texts that say we should label ourselves with ANY of those terms I labelled, yet people do so - for ease of use. Of course, with all this, there is a rejection of ideals by each group, but that is where they all go wrong.
Why would god deny his guidance to so many generations of muslims and then lead only a very few people led by a man that we don't know and have never seen.
Actually, that is incorrect. We have had God's guidance for the past 3000 years+. Prior to 1400 years, humanity had the Tawrat, the Injiyl, etc. We had the Quran for the last 1400 years. This is God's guidance, is it not? Take into account this verse
002.142
SHAKIR The fools among the people will say What has turned them from their qiblah which they had? Say The East and the West belong only to Allah; He guides whom He likes to the right path.There is no reason to appeal to the majority, because that verse nullifies everything. The truth is, we have had God's guidance for all human history, but we collectively have rejected his signs in favour of shortcuts - the hadith, talmud, the ways of the leaders who demand blind faith in their bastardised version of events. Had anybody wished to do so, they could pick up a Quran, and take heed, they could apply their reasoning, sight and hearing (1736) to discern what is God's guidance and not. But do the majority? As again, they rely on shortcut interpretations, static interpretations rooted firmly in the 7th century or 3000BC.
He hides behind websites and e-articles. Why isn't he out there calling people to the truth if he claims he has the truth in his posession? Why isn't he out there breaking the idols like Abraham and Mohammad did? This only proves that he is not sincere in his call to tawheed and he has other agendas unknown to us.
Incorrect. This is a logical fallacy - argument against the messenger. In this day and age, where Muslims, Christians and Jews, and even atheists are thirsty for the blood of the righteous, he could not possibly do so. Look at the examples of "Muslims" when their divine God, "Muhammad" was simply drawn in those Danish cartoons. What did they do? They blew up several embassies, boycotted arbitrary Danish products, they burnt down churches, they killed nuns, they burnt American flags (?!?!?!?), and they rioted, pilfered, and pillaged the land. Look at the death threats towards those who challenge the majority view deeply entrenched in blind faith - what of the liberal Iranian who has people calling for his death? Of the Egyptian blogger, declared an apostate by some idiotic fools who think they have better authority to judge than God himself, simply because he criticized the pinnacle of blind faith and evil that is Al-Azhar?
In light of this, and in light of the ridiculous disinformation tactics used by those who wish to uphold paganistic Islam, do you think this anonymous should reveal himself? Why? So that he can be labelled a "blasphemer" and a "heretic" by the Gods on Earth? The so-called Gods who themselves will die and answer to the real God who will question their idiotic polytheism?
No. He does not even have to reveal himself, regardless of this - the message is what counts.The call is very, very public. A google search for "Quran study" pulls this site up as the first link - in other words, those who wish to be guided will find this link first. Which is, one of the ways in which I found this place (aside from being referred to derogatorily in another Sunni forum). You simply do not get more public than the internet. If you wish to know his identity, it's very simple. Reverse DNS lookup. Even WHOIS.
This site does not claim to have "THE TRUTH" but "a way to the truth". Of course, it must be tested in its claims. So far, I haven't found much discrepancy in the core articles.
"Why isn't he out there breaking the idols like Abraham and Mohammad did?" - The idols can be broken in two ways. One is physically taking a hammer to them - another, is taking them out mentally. Clearly, this is a case of the latter. Do you think that in modern times, it is feasible to walk to the Ka'ba and smash the black stone to pieces, and the purported footsteps of Ibrahim? No, the Saudis will have your head in pieces for that. Maybe such an attempt would thereby prove whether or not the Ka'ba is indeed "bayt-al-haram", a place of safety where nobody can harm he who is within. But is someone going to pit years of educated life for such a simplistic test? There is more potential in living hidden and spreading knowledge than dying for a cause in which the odds are 1/2 (anthropically) that you may live or die.
"This only proves that he is not sincere in his call to tawheed and he has other agendas unknown to us."
That is high slander. Proof, or don't bother.