Does Quran prohibit ?
-
Yes, it is masculine. It is allathaani itself, just grammatical difference, like the difference between al kitaabu and al kitaaba (the book)
Sister Samia,
An honest question, then. If allathayn is masculine but which is meant to address both men and women, then is it possible that "allathaani" ("the two who" could stand to mean a man or a woman? or am I mistaken in someway? I apologize for being a bother.
Peace
-
Sister Samia,
An honest question, then. If allathayn is masculine but which is meant to address both men and women, then is it possible that "allathaani" ("the two who" could stand to mean a man or a woman? or am I mistaken in someway? I apologize for being a bother.
Peace
or rather both those of the invisible beings and humans as Muhammad Asad puts it? Please.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Sister Samia,
An honest question, then. If allathayn is masculine but which is meant to address both men and women, then is it possible that "allathaani" ("the two who" could stand to mean a man or a woman? or am I mistaken in someway? I apologize for being a bother.
Peace
An excellent observation and I do not know how it evaded me! Of course, it could, and maybe it is a man and a woman!!
or rather both those of the invisible beings and humans as Muhammad Asad puts it? Please.
Peace,
Hasan AkcayMost probably Asad based his translation on the only other occurence of the word which is in the context of humans and invisible beings. It is a probable understanding, but a man and a woman is more probable, especially that chapter 4 does not mention "the invisibles jinn" in any of its verses.
-
An excellent observation and I do not know how it evaded me! Of course, it could, and maybe it is a man and a woman!!
Sister Samia,
Thank you for clarifying your understanding in this regard. So, now we are left with the following questions
(1) What is the "Al-fahasha" that 415 is referring to, in relation to women?
(2) Can we reasonably consider that 416 also refers to the same "Al-fahasha", mentioned in 415, but in relation to a man and woman?
(3) In the Book, how is "Al-fahasha" different from "Fahasha"?With those questions in mind, I had begun with the premise that "Fahasha" pertains only to deeds which fall under the umbrella of sexual misconduct and anything shameful in that regard. So, keeping that in mind, I looked up all occurences of all the words which have the same root as "Fahasha", i.e. (Fa-Ha-Shin). Then, I came along the following verse
651 - "O you prophet, if any of you have divorced the women, then they should be divorced while ensuring that their required interim is fulfilled, and keep count of the interim. You shall reverence God your Lord, and do not evict the women from their homes, nor should they leave, unless they have committed a proven adultery ( - bifahisha). And these are God's limits. And anyone who transgresses God's limits has wronged his soul. You never know; perhaps God will make something come out of this." (Free minds Translation)
I went back to 415
415 - "And the women who commit lewdness ( - alfahisha), you shall bring four witnesses over them from amongst you; if they bear witness, then you shall restrict them in the homes until death takes them, or God makes for them a way out."
Now, this seemed strange to me, because, apparently, both are supposed to allude to "fahasha", but the treatment of the subject women is opposite. In 415, a guilty woman (regardless of her marriage status as I saw no specification) is to be restricted to the homes, but 651 gives the permission to let a woman who is guilty of lewdness, leave the home. I apologize if I am misunderstanding this in any way, but as I see it, both "fahasha" cannot be of the same nature, if that is the case. Please feel free to disagree with anything that follows from this point onward. I'm not sure, but I think that the Prefix "Al" before a word in the Book, make that word distinct and unique, among other occurences of that word, pertaining to the same context. So, I assume that "Al-Fahasha" (e.g. in 415) is distinct and unique against other "Fahasha" (e.g. 651) in the same context.
The question now is what is the context in which "Al-Fahasha" is mention in 415? All of the verse of this Chapter, before 415 (except the first one) address orphans and inheritance. In fact, 411 is a direction from God about children's inhertance (that a man leaves for them) & 412 continues along the same theme with what the wives leave. The next two verses are also important because they mention the consequences in the after-life. Two important words come out of them, the roots for which are as follows
(2) (HA-Dal)
(3) (Ayn-Dal-Waw)What I have gathered is the second word, more or less, means "limit" or "boundary" and the third word, in similar fashion, mean "against" or "oppose".
So, we know the "limits" and "boundaries" of God in 413 & 414 from His directions in 411 and 412, and we know the consequences in the afterlife in 413 & 414 for those who go "against" and "oppose" those "limits" and "boundaries".
But what about the worldly consequences of abusing the rights of inheritance? Are there any punishments for such mentioned in the Book? I am not implying that there should be, but there could be, right? Coming back to "Al-Fahash", I think it is too much of a coincidence that the context of the verse may be the "Inheritance" verses before, and its root word also alludes to going beyond the limits. Maybe if we look at the ground realities, it might shed some light on the possible applicability of this verse. At this point in time, I am not too sure about my assertions, but I would very much appreciate some feedback.
Peace
-
Two questions
(1)In 416 the word allathaine stands for only males but in 4129 it may refer to a man and a woman as Samia points out in her answer to Sharp001. Is it really the case when the jinne and inse are taken into account in 4129?
Wa qaala?llatheena kafaroo rabbana arenaa?llathaine adallanaa mina al-jinne wa?l-inse najAAal humaa tahta aqdaaminaa liyakoonaa mina al-asfaleenaa
And the unbelievers will say "Our Sustainer! Show us from among both of the invisible beings and humans that have led us astray we shall crush them under our feet, so that they shall be the lowest of all."
(2)When do the wives commit faahisha according to 651, before or after the decision of divorce?
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Salam Hasan,
I think there is a slight misunderstanding. When I asked sister about "aallathani" (written in Arabic as ) in 416, she replied that it is possible that it can mean "the two (a man and a woman) who". In 4129, the word is "allatheena" (written in Arabic as ), which I think addresses the populous, "those who", which would include both men and women.
As for question 2, I'd say, logically, before the divorce is finalised, because there is no sense for the lady to stay at the house or be restricted thereto after the final divorce.
Peace
-
Salam Hasan,
I think there is a slight misunderstanding. When I asked sister about "aallathani" (written in Arabic as ) in 416, she replied that it is possible that it can mean "the two (a man and a woman) who". In 4129, the word is "allatheena" (written in Arabic as ), which I think addresses the populous, "those who", which would include both men and women.
As for question 2, I'd say, logically, before the divorce is finalised, because there is no sense for the lady to stay at the house or be restricted thereto after the final divorce.
Peace
Salam Sharp. Please excuse me for insisting but I read the word in 4129 as allathaine rather than allatheena.
As for my other question, I ask it because I am cahecking to learn whether the crime mentioned in 651 is kind of nushuuz mentioned in 434 and 4128. If it is, it is different from the faahisha mentioned in 415 and 416; therefore the punishmet it deserves will naturally be different.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Salam Hasan,
I must be misunderstanding something here, but are you implying (or insisting) that it is the same word in both 416 and 4129? or do you agree with my previous post in relation to your first question?
As for the nushuuz, I would probably say, that if it were to be so, then "nushuuz" would have been the reference made in 651, rather than fahasha. Further, I think that "nushuuz" translates to disrespect in both 434 and 4128.
Peace
-
are you implying (or insisting) that it is the same word in both 416 and 4129?
Yes. That is actually what Samia said in her answer to you. She said You also find it in 4129 in the accusative form (as object) allathayn. "...Our Lord! show us those among both jinn and humans who led us astray..."
Your question is allathayn also a masculine form? Her answer Yes, it is masculine. It is allathaani itself, just grammatical difference, like the difference between al kitaabu and al kitaaba (the book)
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Ahh... Now I see... so basically you are saying that "those" and "them" are the same word, or at least, different forms of the same word. "Them" is the accusative form of "Those".
Ok, fair enough. So, back to your original question.
(1)In 416 the word allathaine stands for only males but in 4129 it may refer to a man and a woman as Samia points out in her answer to Sharp001. Is it really the case when the jinne and inse are taken into account in 4129?
Wa qaalallatheena kafaroo rabbana arenaallathaine adallanaa mina al-jinne wal-inse najAAal humaa tahta aqdaaminaa liyakoonaa mina al-asfaleenaa
And the unbelievers will say "Our Sustainer! Show us from among both of the invisible beings and humans that have led us astray we shall crush them under our feet, so that they shall be the lowest of all."
I suppose I am being unfair here, but I'll ask you this. In all of the instances in the Book, where "allatheena" (written in Arabic as ن is written, do you take them to be addressing "those (people and jinn) who"? I'm just trying to get your understanding here so that I may be able to answer your questions on the same platform.
Peace
-
-
Peace
Somehow , I had always taken Nissa o kum in 4-15 to be the women under your guardianship (daughters, sisters etc) minus the Azwaj, because it never made sense (to lockup your spouses for the life time). As this law would invariably be misused by the husband to abuse and subjugate his wife.
And here i find the answer in 65-1, we have an exception to the rule,for the wives who commit Fahishas.
If the husband is not an eye witness, or if he does not want to report, but is sure (4 reliable witnesses) he may divorce and kick her out of the house.
Once she goes back to her father's house, and if he(father) is reasonably convinced about the instances(fahishas)/character, It becomes his responsibility to carry out the commandment in 4-15.
siki
-
Salaam siki
Peace
Somehow , I had always taken Nissa o kum in 4-15 to be the women under your guardianship (daughters, sisters etc) minus the Azwaj, because it never made sense (to lockup your spouses for the life time). As this law would invariably be misused by the husband to abuse and subjugate his wife.
And here i find the answer in 65-1, we have an exception to the rule,for the wives who commit Fahishas.
If the husband is not an eye witness, or if he does not want to report, but is sure (4 reliable witnesses) he may divorce and kick her out of the house.
Once she goes back to her father's house, and if he(father) is reasonably convinced about the instances(fahishas)/character, It becomes his responsibility to carry out the commandment in 4-15.
siki
Poor woman!
Husband, brother, father...No escape!(daughters, sisters etc)
The address would be "banaatukum". "Nisaa'u of X" has always been used to mean "wives of X", just like "imra'atu of X" is the wife of X (where X is either a proper name or a possessive pronoun)
If the husband/wife has a kind of knowledge about the cheating of his/her spouse (other than 4 witnesses), he/she only has the oath when reporting to the authorities. Maybe after that they are not allowed to divorce and she/he has to stay in the house (wedlock) forever or until one dies. Their other option is to not report and they divorce.
I think this is the meaning of "...do not inherit women by force, nor make it hard for them to get some of what you gave them unless they have committed a proven fahisha" 419 (some men make the wives life hell, and when she wants a divorce "which he wants, too", he asks her to forfeit her allowance and any moneys he ows her).
Any other sister/daughter/son/brother, it's nobody's business unless they are caught by four witnesses.
As this law would invariably be misused by the husband to abuse and subjugate his wife.
Brother and father can, and do abuse it, too Honour killing is always carried out by these relatives, plus cousins.
-
In all of the instances in the Book, where "allatheena" (written in Arabic as ) is written, do you take them to be addressing "those (people and jinn) who"?
Yes but only those who; that is, simply people; not necessarily people and jinn.
\ = Pronoun for two (Relative pronoun, literaly (who) Two men, or a man and a woman; but not two women)
Most of the time I understand the Arabic Quran without having to resorting to a translation I but don?t know Arabic. So, sister Samia, I depend on your explications. However, this time I am confused because you say that the pronoun in 416 may stand for a man and a woman.
I thought it stood for only men so that the fahisha the verse dealt with was male homosexuality.
Peace,
Hasan Akcay -
Salaam siki
Poor woman!
Husband, brother, father...No escape!Salam samia,
Indeed she is, she has to behave herself, otherwise , her men are suppose to take care of her. I have seen , even young sons to set right their faultering mothers at a certain points in their lives.
The address would be "banaatukum". "Nisaa'u of X" has always been used to mean "wives of X", just like "imra'atu of X" is the wife of X (where X is either a proper name or a possessive pronoun)
Yes generally, but Nissa o kum simply means "Their women ", that could include all the women that a man is responsible for/takes care off.
One incident of "Nissa i hinna" i can remember off hand , is 24-31. The women to relax their dress code, and "Nissa i hinna" is used , along with the rest of the list. I am sure these "Niss i hinna" are not their spouses. And there could be more if one makes a deliberate effort to search.
)
If the husband/wife has a kind of knowledge about the cheating of his/her spouse (other than 4 witnesses), he/she only has the oath when reporting to the authorities. Maybe after that they are not allowed to divorce and she/he has to stay in the house (wedlock) forever or until one dies. Their other option is to not report and they divorce.
If the husband is not an eye witness, and hence cannot testify under an oath, but he gets solid reports of certain incidents by 4 reliable witnesses , in the light of which he can suspect with a reasonable assurance , that her wife is most likely committing Fahishas, Then he may divorce her , and kick her immediately out of the house.
As per she being locked up in the house for ever by the husband ? This is one of the worst options , i am quite sure that no women would like to be in those shoes
I think this is the meaning of "...do not inherit women by force, nor make it hard for them to get some of what you gave them unless they have committed a proved fahisha" 419 (some men make the wives life hell, and when she wants a divorce "which he wants, too", he asks her to forfeit her allowance and any moneys he ows her).
.
Ya i agree , that generally happens.
Any other sister/daughter/son/brother, it's nobody's business unless they are caught by four witnesses
No samia , it is their business, it is every body's business to curb such things in the society , if a woman is on the loose, and is committing fahishas , it is anybody's/every body's business to do something , appropriate , like report the incident to her Father/brother, etc.
Brother and father can, and do abuse it, too Honour killing is always carried out by these relatives, plus cousins.
Ya, they can too, but a husband would most likely do it , whereas a father/brother are least likely to abuse such a power.
Quran does not advise honor killing, if someone does it , he/they are wrong.
peace
siki
-
Salaam siki
Salam samia,
Indeed she is, she has to behave herself, otherwise , her men are suppose to take care of her.
And "he"? Doesn't "he" have to behave himself?
Is it your own opinion or you have supporting evidence? What happened to the verse 242? The existence of this verse is what makes me think in another way, not because I am a "woman" .Yes generally, but Nissa o kum simply means "Their women ", that could include all the women that a man is responsible for/takes care off.
If you scan the quraan, you will find this expression, when related to males, always means "wives".
One incident of "Nissa i hinna" i can remember off hand , is 24-31. The women to relax their dress code, and "Nissa i hinna" is used , along with the rest of the list. I am sure these "Niss i hinna" are not their spouses. And there could be more if one makes a delibrate effort to search.
I am glad you brought this up! I once argued against this very expression being "women" and the person I was arguing against was very angry.
Here, apply another meaning of "nisaa' males she is their guardien, supporting them financially, therefore they are either too young (already mentioned) or with disabilities (plus of course parents, brothers, husband..who are all mentioned already).If the husband is not an eye witness, and hence cannot testify under an oath, but he gets solid reports of certain incidents by 4 reliable witnesses , in the light of which he can suspect with a reasonable assurance , that her wife is most likely committing Fahishas, Then he may divorce her , and kick her immidiately out of the house.
Says who? <snetence in bold>
Please note that we have verse 419 which indicates just the opposite.Also verse 247. Why can't he testify under an oath? Either he blieves them and is ready to testify under an oath, or he inclines towards not believing them. No one is forcing him to do anything. If he wants to divorce her he has to go to authorities and make the oath. Otherwise, no divorce on these premises.
As per she being locked up in the house for ever by the husband ? This is one of the worst options , i am quite sure that no women would like to be in those shoes
Being locked up is bad, and I think we are missing something in this verse. How can we lock up somebody for a crime when we have another verse giving us a different punishment (242), and another verse telling the spouse what to do in this case if the stated evidence is not available(247).
Quran does not advise honor killing, if someone does it , he/they are wrong.
You are missing my point. What I want to say is that fathers and brothers can go as far as killing, locking up is their "mercy".
-
Salaam Hasan
you say that the pronoun in 416 may stand for a man and a woman.
I thought it stood for only men so that the fahisha the verse dealt with was male homosexuality.
Peace,
Hasan AkcayYes, it could be two men or a man and a woman. You definitely have to say "allathaani" in (my brother and sister who "allathaani" live in Cairo). There is no other pronoun for that. There's, however, a different pronoun if they are both females allataani.
-
Salaam siki
And "he"? Doesn't "he" have to behave himself?
Is it your own opinion or you have supporting evidence? What happened to the verse 242? The existence of this verse is what makes me think in another way, not because I am a "woman" .off course everyone is ordered to behave himself, but quran stresses upon controlling a lewd women , because if there is one such a woman on the loose , she is likely to find plenty of men, more than willing to go along , where as if there is no such availability, the men may be able to handle the surging testosterone in their blood.
Moreover this is not my opinion but , is suggested in 4-15 , and i think is very logical, God knows his creation the best.
What about 24-2? ???
it is self explanatory, why are you confusing the two issues, zina and committing Fahisha? i don't think we have any problem with 24-2 and what to do in case of ZinaZina is that one in a million chance when they are caught red handed performing the act by 4 people , and God's commandments are very clear what to do in such a scenario.
peace
siki
-
Salaam siki
If you scan the quraan, you will find this expression, when related to males, always means "wives".
I am glad you brought this up! I once argued against this very expression being "women" and the person I was arguing against was very angry.
Here, apply another meaning of "nisaa' males she is their guardien, supporting them financially, therefore they are either too young (already mentioned) or with disabilities (plus of course parents, brothers, husband..who are all mentioned already).I will check the occurrences and get back to you.
however , the expression "Your women" in any language, would never lock the expression to the meaning of Azwaj only. and we have a clear proof in 24-31.
24-31And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof, and let them wear their head-coverings over their bosoms, and not display their ornaments except to their husbands or their fathers, or the fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or their brothers' sons, or their sisters' sons, or their women(Nissa i hinna), or those whom their right hands possess, or the male servants not having need (of women), or the children who have not attained knowledge of what is hidden of women; and let them not strike their feet so that what they hide of their ornaments may be known; and turn to Allah all of you, O believers! so that you may be successful
This is very clear in the above verse what does nissai hinna mean , if you have some new theory, we can open a new thread and discuss the nissa i hinna separately.
siki