Menstruating women praying and fasting
-
Quote Imamquranonly
"""This ayat is important to physical preparedness before As-Salaat because of it?s implication for women. This ayat tells men not to approach women during their menstrual cycles or post birth bleeding, ?Al-MaHeeD?; until they have cleansed or purified themselves thereof, ?yathurna?. And when they have cleansed or purified themselves, ?ta-Tah-harna?, then men can approach their wives in the ways approved of by Allah. This is very important because it connects the state of ?Al-MaHeeD?, or menstruation and post birth bleeding, as one necessitating ?tah-hara? or cleansing and purification. Allah has told us in the last ayat given, 56, that we should not approach As-Salaat in a state necessitating ?tah-hara?. So this establishes from the Qur?an that women are exempted from As-Salaat as long as they are in a state of ?Al-MaHeed? as a Mercy to them from Allah!
"""I am not satisfied with this explanation, because what it in fact says is that women purify themselves not for salaat but in order to have intercourse, which is absurd, since in order to make salaat after intercourse purification would be necessary. No need or obligation in the qur'an to bath before intercourse for it to be valid, therefore this tahhara here must mean get rid of the blood and possibly wash that part which might be soiled, but I don't think it is possible to assimilate to any tahhara previous to salaat. Intercourse sure may be godly but it is not salaat.
Salaam
-
As Salaamu Alaika Samia,
Salaam IQO
LIke the reverence He shows to the "sukaaraa" and those coming from nature's call? Come on! Instead of this lengthy post, you could have just added "or menustrating" to verse 443, because this is exactly what you are doing adding extra information, as if God forgot to say that when He told us when to wash before salaat, and again when He discussed the menses.
Im not comparing a woman menstruating to going to the bathroom, although both are natural processes and nothing to be ashamed of or seen as a defect.
The reason for the lengthy post is to show how Allah gives us "signs" so that those who "study" the message can "understand" many things given to us as guidance because Allah has told us that He has "detailed" it for us. So by paying attention to the details of things, i.e. usage of words by Allah and their "connections", we can ascertain guidance for matters in our life. Everything doesn't have to be spelled out in "black and white" in order for it to be guidance. This is why I believe Allah says the guidance is for those who earnestly study the book.
I am not adding any information to what Allah gave in Al Quran. I clearly quoted the ayaat in arabic with transliteration and translations for those that don't understand all the arabic completely. What I gave was my understanding of the implications of those ayaat, that is not adding to Allah's book. If you don't like the understanding I have, that is okay; but to accuse me of adding to what Allah has said when I clearly gave His ayaat and then my understanding....well I don't think that is a fair accusation to say the least!
Also I don't think, well actually I know that Allah didn't forget to tell us anything in Al Quran. I hope that you don't think that you understand ALL of it already and at this point in your life. Just because you don't understand something that is given, or the way that it is given, doesn't mean that Allah didn't give you guidance for the matter for those who study and understand.
Sister Samia, I think you need to be patient when you respond to issues regarding women in this forum. It is clear that you have a serious personal issue with the treatment of women and the understandings surrounding women's issues in Al Quran. I can understand that. Women have been oppressed for ages throughout history. But this position of yours has caused you to make many statements and conclusions on the forum that have clearly been proven erroneous and biased in an effort for you to try and "protect" women's rights, I guess. A lot of time, your sarcasm becomes apparent and you have continued to refuse to admit when you are wrong when others have proved it beyond reasonable doubt, in many of the previous threads that I have read. Sometimes it takes away from your credibility and the value that you actually have to offer to this forum when you are being more rational and less emotional; as others have also pointed out.
My sincere advice as a forum friend is to not take the issues so personal so that you feel that you are "defending" them, but rather to just discuss the logic or comprehensive understanding of what can be learned from the guidance given. All in all, take this with a grain of salt, so to speak.
As Salaamu Alaikum all, peace
-
Quote Imamquranonly
"""This ayat is important to physical preparedness before As-Salaat because of it?s implication for women. This ayat tells men not to approach women during their menstrual cycles or post birth bleeding, ?Al-MaHeeD?; until they have cleansed or purified themselves thereof, ?yathurna?. And when they have cleansed or purified themselves, ?ta-Tah-harna?, then men can approach their wives in the ways approved of by Allah. This is very important because it connects the state of ?Al-MaHeeD?, or menstruation and post birth bleeding, as one necessitating ?tah-hara? or cleansing and purification. Allah has told us in the last ayat given, 56, that we should not approach As-Salaat in a state necessitating ?tah-hara?. So this establishes from the Qur?an that women are exempted from As-Salaat as long as they are in a state of ?Al-MaHeed? as a Mercy to them from Allah!
"""I am not satisfied with this explanation, because what it in fact says is that women purify themselves not for salaat but in order to have intercourse, which is absurd, since in order to make salaat after intercourse purification would be necessary. No need or obligation in the qur'an to bath before intercourse for it to be valid, therefore this tahhara here must mean get rid of the blood and possibly wash that part which might be soiled, but I don't think it is possible to assimilate to any tahhara previous to salaat. Intercourse sure may be godly but it is not salaat.
Salaam
I don't think it is absurd at all to think that women need to make "tahara" before having intercourse after having their menses. Do you really that is absurd? You woudn't mind your woman not cleaning herself before having intercourse after bleeding for three to 7 days, or up to 45 days after giving birth? I also think that husbands and wives both expect their spouses to clean their private areas after going to the restroom to relieve themselves of nature. Menstruating is another "natural" process of relieving a woman's body of excess that is no longer needed. I see this as natural.
The fact that "tahara" is also needed to be performed after sexual intercourse is not the reason for my conclusion. The point is that ANY condition necessitating "tahara" would mean that until "tahara" is performed, Salaat is not recommended, as the ayaat (443 and 56) say if you read then carefully again and consider them together.
If you research "tahara" from Al Quran, you hopefully will get the fuller undestanding that this is not just "cleaning" the woman's vagina after bleeding, but you will get the understanding of more of a full body bathing such as would be given if you were out in a heavy rain to be purified by it, i.e. the whole of the body from head to toe being washed by pure water.
Im not sure where from this you got the perception that I was implicating that there was a need for a full bath before intercourse in order for it to be valid, in general. I am saying that a full bath is being told to be done after a woman experiences "al maHeed", before having intercourse; and also therefore before performing As Salaat because it is condition that necessitates "tahara". If Allah tells you to make "tahara" before performing As Salaat when necessary, then a condition such as "al maHeed" which He tells you necessitates "tahara", would preclude you from performing As Salaat until such time as you are able to fulfill "tahara". This is my current understanding from considering the signs in all the ayaat that I have mentioned regarding this subject.
Where you got the idea that I was making intercourse equal to Salaat is beyond my understanding! Making some type of connection, does not make something equal.
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
Salaam IQO
Im not comparing a woman menstruating to going to the bathroom, although both are natural processes and nothing to be ashamed of or seen as a defect.
Where did I say you are comparing? I am trying to make you understand the error you are making when you are trying to justify your conclusion with some sugar coating.
The reason for the lengthy post is to show how Allah gives us "signs"
God did not use signs or metaphore when He told us when to not perform salaat. He did not use signs to give answers about menses. You are the one who are seeing signs when there aren't any.
I am not adding any information to what Allah gave in Al Quran.
Here is the extra information
Allah shows us how He has reverenced the wombs of women and their importance by giving them a special permission to not have to perform As-Salaat because of this state.
Where's this permission? It's your own preconceived conclusion.
I hope that you don't think that you understand ALL of it already and at this point in your life.
So if I do not agree with your understanding, I have to have understood the whole quraan? What makes you think that I think so? So you understood it all and started to see signs that many haven't seen!!
It is clear that you have a serious personal issue with the treatment of women and the understandings surrounding women's issues in Al Quran.
I have no issues with the qur'aan. It's very fine with me, because I read it through the attributes of God. I have issues with people who think they got rid of the traditional humiliating teachings regarding women, and all they do is try to bend the qur'aan to accommodate this undertsanding. They got rid of the books, but it seems their brains are washed beyond repair.
My sincere advice as a forum friend is to not take the issues so personal
I think you need to be patient when you respond to issues regarding women in this forum
But this position of yours has caused you to make many statements and conclusions on the forum that have clearly been proven erroneous and biased in an effort for you to try and "protect" women's rights, I guess. A lot of time, your sarcasm becomes apparent and you have continued to refuse to admit when you are wrong when others have proved it beyond reasonable doubt, in many of the previous threads that I have read
Please keep your responses to what I wrote and revert from this tendency to analyse my personality.
-
I have no issues with the qur'aan. It's very fine with me, because I read it through the attributes of God. I have issues with people who think they got rid of the traditional humiliating teachings regarding women, and all they do is try to bend the qur'aan to accommodate this undertsanding. They got rid of the books, but it seems their brains are washed beyond repair.
;D
-
Salaam IQO
Where did I say you are comparing? I am trying to make you understand the error you are making when you are trying to justify your conclusion with some sugar coating.Where did I say that you said I was comparing? I simply said I was not comparing, not that "you" said I was comparing. You can't make me understand whatever error you think there is and that you think I "sugar coated"; basically because I believe what I have studied and you haven't presented any solid Quranic reasoning to refute in IMHO.
God did not use signs or metaphore when He told us when to not perform salaat. He did not use signs to give answers about menses. You are the one who are seeing signs when there aren't any.
So you don't believe that Allah uses signs and/or metaphors in Al Quran to teach and guide us? Is this your evidence about why my conclusions are wrong?
Here is the extra information
Where's this permission? It's your own preconceived conclusion.I admitted that the issue about women not praying are "my" conclusions based upon my understandings of Al Quran. If you take that statement you quoted out of context with the rest, then it is you making it seem as if I am trying to add to Al Quran. Saying Allah said something because of your understanding of certain ayaat is not adding to Al Quran, especially when you give the full ayaat itself to allow the reader to reach their own conclusions if they disagree with you. Adding to Al Quran would be adding new ayaat.
So if I do not agree with your understanding, I have to have understood the whole quraan? What makes you think that I think so? So you understood it all and started to see signs that many haven't seen!!
I didn't say that or imply it, only it is what you chose to understand. I simply said I hope that you don't believe...well you have the quote to read it exactly. I also never said that I understand it all, but yes...it is possible for many of us to see and understand signs that others don't see yet; that is one of the purposes and points of this forum, to share that information.
I have no issues with the qur'aan. It's very fine with me, because I read it through the attributes of God. I have issues with people who think they got rid of the traditional humiliating teachings regarding women, and all they do is try to bend the qur'aan to accommodate this undertsanding. They got rid of the books, but it seems their brains are washed beyond repair.
I don't think it is humiliating for Allah to say that women are not obligated to perform As Salaat during "al maHeed", I think that is a Mercy. If you feel it is humiliating, that is your own perception and whoever else feels the same as you. Regarding other humiliating teachings regarding women, Al Quran only humiliates those who oppose Allah and His guidance; that includes men and women, but not as a sex or group, but as individuals who act opposingly as such. Your perception of what is left in my brain, or anyone elses due to other books; is your own perception since you have no idea what other books I ever believed in to begin with. If you knew me personally, you wouldn't have made such an accusation since I have been against hadeeth from the first day I ever heard about them; I have been a Quran only scripture follower since before I even knew that is what I was (as people call it now).
Please keep your responses to what I wrote and revert from this tendency for analysing my personality.
The statements in question that you reference, if you read them carefully, are not so much as analysing your peronality as they are in giving sincere advice. It is more fact about what has happened here on the forum than it is an analysis.
Finally, if you don't like what I say or my conclusions, it's okay with me. Many will not agree with them. But just as you do, I have a right to post them here for those who do see it the same way as I do. You can ignore my posts if it makes you feel better. There are many others that are saying far worse than my understandings of Al Quran.
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
I don't think it is absurd at all to think that women need to make "tahara" before having intercourse after having their menses. Do you really that is absurd? You woudn't mind your woman not cleaning herself before having intercourse after bleeding for three to 7 days, or up to 45 days after giving birth? I also think that husbands and wives both expect their spouses to clean their private areas after going to the restroom to relieve themselves of nature. Menstruating is another "natural" process of relieving a woman's body of excess that is no longer needed. I see this as natural.
Precisely, precisely, Imamquranonly. You have got what I mean, but do not seem to draw what I see as the logical conclusion. You have to choose, whether tahhara here is either cleanliness or "ritual purity". It cannot be ritual purity, unless you think that sexual intercourse demands ritual purity. So it is cleanliness. What I understand you mean is that it is both. But it cannot be both, because it is about sexual intercourse it is talking, and only about it. There is nothing in this aya that hints at anything else because it is saying "go ahead with it and have intercourse", it doesn't say "let her do first salaat and then have intercourse", in which case I might see it as you see it. But such as it, I cannot see how you can get around the, for me, obvious impossibility of applying it to salaat, and that therefore it is "ritual purification" what is meant.
Salaam
-
And put a condition that husbands should not do intercourse with their wives till such time wives have made themselves ?tahar? after completion of menstruation. This evidently implies that during menstruation they were not ?tahar?.
Similarly those husbands and wives who have indulged in intercourse are not considered ?tahar? until they have taken bath.And they are prohibited to go near the ?salat/prayer? in the state of body which is not ?tahar?.
And Lut alaihissalam had said that only the wives are ?tahar? for sex.
And there is a condition that only those who are in ?tahar? state shall touch the Quran.
-
As Salaamu Alaika huruf,
Precisely, precisely, Imamquranonly. You have got what I mean, but do not seem to draw what I see as the logical conclusion. You have to choose, whether tahhara here is either cleanliness or "ritual purity". It cannot be ritual purity, unless you think that sexual intercourse demands ritual purity. So it is cleanliness. What I understand you mean is that it is both. But it cannot be both, because it is about sexual intercourse it is talking, and only about it. There is nothing in this aya that hints at anything else because it is saying "go ahead with it and have intercourse", it doesn't say "let her do first salaat and then have intercourse", in which case I might see it as you see it. But such as it, I cannot see how you can get around the, for me, obvious impossibility of applying it to salaat, and that therefore it is "ritual purification" what is meant.
Salaam
I think your confusions about my conclusions and understanding stem from not seeing the word "As Salaat" in the ayat used, as well as not being able to connect the word "tahara" used in the ayat to the ayat of 56 in which the same word is used. You seem to not make any connections about different subject matter in which the same words are used to describe something, but the main subject matter is not mentioned again. I can understand that, because not all instances where a word is used means that it connects it to another ayat where that same word is used.
But in this instance, I clearly see a connection because of the "way" that the word "tahara" is used in both. I would not call it a "ritual purification", as a ritual denotes certain exact actions to be taken as a whole. I think that "tahara" in these ayaat simply mean a "full bath", denoting washing yourself from head to toe with clean water; and I would add in any specific order or manner that you like as long as you clean the whole body. So the two ayaat are saying to take a full bath, plain and simple. Taking a full bath is necessary before performing As Salaat in certain conditions. Women finishing "al maHeed" is a condition that warrants taking a full bath afterwards because Allah gave us an example in that they should do it before having intercourse again with their husband. So the connection is simply that "al maheed" is a state where "tahara", or taking a full bath is necessitated; meaning that it can not be done until "al maheed" is finished. Because it necessitates "tahara", taking a full bath upon completion, the condition itself gives a prohibition (by comprehension of the ayaat together), or exemption if you will, of not performing As Salaat since you are necessitating "tahara" (full bath), but can not fulfill the requirement until after "al maheed" is completed.
By the way, the ritual purity that I think you are referring to is described in both 443 and 56; it is called "ghusl". This is different than "tahara", although "tahara" is also used to prepare for As Salaat when a condition requires it. But would you say that "tahara", (taking a full bath) can only be performed as a ritual purification before As Salaat? Can washing the hands, arms, head, feet, etc. only be performed as a ritual purification before As Salaat? Or can you also wash your hands and arms before eating also? (get my point?)
Maybe this helps you to see my point of view, or maybe not. Either way, no one has presented anything that could contradict this connection of understanding. You continue to only say that Allah didn't say women don't have to perform As Salaat when they are menstruating. It is clear that it is not written in that exact language. But if you think that because the Quran is detailed and clear, that this means that everything is "plain" to see, then maybe you are misunderstanding what is meant by "detailed and clear". If it were that simple, this forum would have been finished and all the answers posted to all questions a couple of years or so ago. We have to study earnestly to try to understand these details and the clearness of Al Quran in order to ascertain as much of it's guidance as possible. One way to do this is by making connections of words and how Allah uses them as guidance in particular issues.
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
As Salaamu alaika Mazhar,
And put a condition that husbands should not do intercourse with their wives till such time wives have made themselves ?tahar? after completion of menstruation. This evidently implies that during menstruation they were not ?tahar?.
Similarly those husbands and wives who have indulged in intercourse are not considered ?tahar? until they have taken bath.And they are prohibited to go near the ?salat/prayer? in the state of body which is not ?tahar?.
And Lut alaihissalam had said that only the wives are ?tahar? for sex.
And there is a condition that only those who are in ?tahar? state shall touch the Quran.
Agreed here Mazhar. This sums up what I am saying. Thanks.
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
And put a condition that husbands should not do intercourse with their wives till such time wives have made themselves ?tahar? after completion of menstruation. This evidently implies that during menstruation they were not ?tahar?.
Similarly those husbands and wives who have indulged in intercourse are not considered ?tahar? until they have taken bath.And they are prohibited to go near the ?salat/prayer? in the state of body which is not ?tahar?.
And Lut alaihissalam had said that only the wives are ?tahar? for sex.
And there is a condition that only those who are in ?tahar? state shall touch the Quran.
Salaam Mazhar
Why do you add lines to the translation of the verse without explaining their origine? This can be confusing.
-
By the way, the ritual purity that I think you are referring to is described in both 443 and 56; it is called "ghusl". This is different than "tahara", although "tahara" is also used to prepare for As Salaat when a condition requires it. But would you say that "tahara", (taking a full bath) can only be performed as a ritual purification before As Salaat? Can washing the hands, arms, head, feet, etc. only be performed as a ritual purification before As Salaat? Or can you also wash your hands and arms before eating also? (get my point?)
IQO. salam
I do not agree with the above red statement of yours, Taharoo, in 5-6 means that one must cleans himself, or if you can understand Urdu, it means (purification) "PAk Honna,"
But how to become clean ? That was not explained in 5-6, that was why probably it was added in 4-43, telling us precisely what to do , which is Faghasilloo. (take a full body bath)
If you put the Arabic of two ayahs side by side and ponder , above will become very apparent to you.
5-6 ,,,,"Wa in kuntum junabaa, Fa taharroo". if you are in a state of junnnaba , purify yourself.
The above created a bit of ambiguity as to how one purifies? so this was probably later clarified in 4-43.
4-43....Wa la junnabann ,( illa Abri sabellin ), hatta taghtasilloo....
See above, same thing, same state , junnaba, but now the procedure for purification has been precisely told, which is (replacement/subsitution of the word ) "Taharoo" with "Taghtasillo" (the full body wash).
siki
Note;
(Not only that , a further sub clause exception has been granted to Abri sabellin , which is a traveller, meaning that if one is travelling , and if he puts himself in a state of junnaba , and if he does not find water, he/she can do tayyamam and pray)
-
Mazhar and iqo, salaam,
You complicate things to an extent where I am nearly tempted to go to some scholar to knock me down with a few hawadith. I see what you mean from the very beginning, no need to take me around ghusl and so on, because that is not the point I tried to make. The point is whether the T-HH-r in this aya justifies your assumptions. For me it does not. I think that you assume too much. What I called in the message "ritual purification" is to distinguish what you consider to be necessary for salaat in whatever circumstance according to the qur'an and that in some translations is given as "ritual purification", to distinguish it from any other "impurity" which might not be ritual.
Other than that there are many occurrences of t-hh-r in the Qur'an where it is not a question of your "tahhar", that is, that are not translatable as ritual impurity.
Summing up, the reasons you give to consider that the t-hh-r in this aya is "ritual impurity" are not convincing. And again, you seem to give no weight to the fact that in both places in the qur'an where, if what you say were true, would have been to the point a clear diosallowance for salaat during menses, God in fact talks about intercourse, and it is for anybody to guess that He is talking about something else, whereas, when for instance, He wants us not to eat pork, He doesn't beat around the bush, and states it so several times.
I am happy for you that you are so sure, but I myself can't see that the connection between the two facts you want to join has a foundation.
Salaam
-
As Salaamu Alaika siki,
IQO. salam
I do not agree with the above red statement of yours, Taharoo, in 5-6 means that one must cleans himself, or if you can understand Urdu, it means (purification) "PAk Honna,"
I am african-american siki brother, so I don't understand any urdu because I have not studied it. But if you read my previous post, you will know that I understand "tahara" as to take a full bath.
But how to become clean ? That was not explained in 5-6, that was why probably it was added in 4-43, telling us precisely what to do , which is Faghasilloo. (take a full body bath)
You become clean when taking a whole bath and washing yourself from head to toe using pure water just as if you were in a heavy rain. That is explain, through a parable in another ayat in Al Quran of which the Suran and ayat number slip my mind right now. You can find it by searching for all the ayaat in which words from the root of tahara are used. 443 does not explain "tahara", but explains "ghusl", which does not mean to take a full bath, but it means precisely what Allah has said it does in those two ayaat. The sunnis and shias call it "wudu", Al Quran calls it "ghusl".
If you put the Arabic of two ayahs side by side and ponder , above will become very apparent to you.
5-6 ,,,,"Wa in kuntum junabaa, Fa taharroo". if you are in a state of junnnaba , purify yourself.
The above created a bit of ambiguity as to how ones purifies? so this was probably later clarified in 4-43.
4-43....Wa la junnabann ,( illa Abri sabelling ), hatta taghtasilloo....
See above, same thing, same state , junnaba, but now the procedure for purification has been precisely told, which is Taghtasillo, (the full body wash).
443 tells you to not come to As Salaat until you have made "ghusl", as you have quoted in "hatta taghtasilloo". But it didn't tell you how to make "ghusl". Then 56 tells you how to make "ghusl" (faaghsiloo) by washing your face, hands to the arm, etc.; the details of "ghusl", not "tahara". If you are going by the translations and not the arabic, only then will you think that it is the other way around. There is no need to tell one exactly how to bath your whole body, just use clean water from head to toe. The rest will work itself out even if we all do it differently.
If you put the two ayaat side by side and ponder, you will see that 443 in all probability came before 56 and that it was further expounded upon by 56. 443 tells you to make "ghusl", 56 tells you to make "ghusl" and also HOW to do it; and then further tells you to make "tahara" when necessary.
Not only that , a further sub clause exception has been granted to Abri sabellin , which is a traveller, meaning that if one is travelling , and if he puts himself in a state of junnaba , and if he does not find water, he/she can do tayyamam and pray.
siki
Exactly siki. 56 is a furthering or more complete explanation of 443, meaning that it probably came later and further expounds upon 443 and not the other way around.
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
As Salaamu Alaika huruf,
Mazhar and iqo, salaam,
You complicate things to an extent where I am nearly tempted to go to some scholar to knock me down with a few hawadith. I see what you mean from the very beginning, no need to take me around ghusl and so on, because that is not the point I tried to make. The point is whether the T-HH-r in this aya justifies your assumptions. For me it does not. I think that you assume too much. What I called in the message "ritual purification" is to distinguish what you consider to be necessary for salaat in whatever circumstance according to the qur'an and that in some translations is given as "ritual purification", to distinguish it from any other "impurity" which might not be ritual.
I don't think we are complicating things by pointing out connections that we believe Allah has given in Al Quran as a sign. No need though to get frustrated enough to go to get some hadeeth to make or not make a point. The difference between ghusl and tahara I have spelled out as I understand them in the last few previous posts by me.
Again, I think "ghusl" is a ritual purification to prepare for As Salaat in general (from Al Quran, ghusl is what sunnis and shias call "wudu", and that "tahara" is taking a full bath for the occasions that necessisate it before performing As Salaat.
Other than that there are many occurrences of t-hh-r in the Qur'an where it is not a question of your "tahhar", that is, that are not translatable as ritual impurity.
Exactly why I think that "tahara" is not "ritual purification" or as you have said here for whatever reason, "ritual impurity". Maybe you can read what I think a ritual is in the "what is salaat" thread.
Summing up, the reasons you give to consider that the t-hh-r in this aya is "ritual impurity" are not convincing. And again, you seem to give no weight to the fact that in both places in the qur'an where, if what you say were true, would have been to the point a clear diosallowance for salaat during menses, God in fact talks about intercourse, and it is for anybody to guess that He is talking about something else, whereas, when for instance, He wants us not to eat pork, He doesn't beat around the bush, and states it so several times.
Maybe this is a mis-statement, but I don't think that "tahara" is "ritual impurity" or "ritual purification"; I think it means to take a full bath using clean water to wash yourself from head to toe. I have already given the reasons for my other conclusions enough. You are free to agree or disagree with them. There is no compulsion in Al Islam.
I am happy for you that you are so sure, but I myself can't see that the connection between the two facts you want to join has a foundation.
Salaam
No one is obligated to accept the understanding of another huruf brother. If you can't see the connections, only one or two things are true 1) The connection doesn't exist and therefore you dont see something that doesn't exist which makes perfect sense; or 2) The connection exists and is true and you are not meant to see it yet.
Either way, Allah knows best.
As Salaamu Alaikum, peace
-
And Lut alaihissalam had said that only the wives are ?tahar? for sex.
And there is a condition that only those who are in ?tahar? state shall touch the Quran.
could you elobrate where did you get the above info from?{siki}
Assalmo Alaikum,
Brother siki I was referring
{Refer 1178}
{Refer 5679}
-
Why do you add lines to the translation of the verse without explaining their origin? This can be confusing.{SisterSamia}
Assalamo alaikum,
Sister the portion you have highlighted as red is built in
i.e till that point of time they were not in the state described after . If we presume that while menstruating they were in "tahr" state then may seem redundant. Again it is confirmed by , ?Fa? and ?Idha {iza}? are quite reflective.