To DoctorNo on [4:34]

TAJMAHA

** q_Ll l **

Salaamunn 3alaykumm, All

Peace DoctorNo,

I thought that what you asked me about does not go with the subject on the thread The Problem with this Movement. So I brought your query here! I hope you won't mind!

PART ONE

DoctorNo wrote Could you please tell us which of these 3 translations is the most correct regarding the emboldened 3rd diciplinary action for disloyal wives
434...
VERSION 1 Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance) For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).
VERSION 2 The men are to support the women by what God Has endowed them over one another and for what they spend of their money. The upright women who are attentive, and keep private the personal matters for what God keeps watch over. As for those women from whom you fear a disloyalty, then you shall advise them, then abandon them in the bedchamber, then separate from them; if they obey you, then do not seek a way over them; God is High, Great.
VERSION 3 Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great.

Ar-Rijlu Qawwmna Al? An-Nis' Bim Faala Allhu Baahum Al? Bain Wa Bim 'Anfaq Min 'Amwlihim Fllitu Qnittun fi?tun Lilghaybi Bim afi?a Allhu Wa Al-Lt Takhfna Nushzahunna Fai?hunna Wa Ahjurhunna F Al-Majii Wa Aribhunna Fa'in 'Aanakum Fal Tabgh Alayhinna Sablan 'Inna Allha Kna `Alyan Kabran (34).

From http//4bm.com/quraanLanguages/English/B&WPrintT_T/4TT.htm

YUSUFALI Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance) For Allah is Most High, great (above you all).

From http//www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/004.qmt.html

Regarding the whole Ayah verse, I would say, YUSUFALI has the best translation so far yet it is not close enough to the Arabic. There are some words that YUSUFALI had failed to provide the exact or even the close meaning for. It could have been much better.
For example
Nooshoozahunna, it is their disobedience rather than disloyalty and ill-conduct.

Ohjoroohonnan Fee Al Madhaje'e , it is desert them IN the beds , and not refuse to share their beds

Fal Tabgh `Alayhinna Sablan , it is don't transgress them., and not seek not against them Means (of annoyance)

Now regarding the word beat, it cannot possibly be right, however, I cannot fully blame YUSUFALI. It is primarily the mistake of those who had interpreted the Quran and decided to choose Beat, which is the common meaning for the word DHARABA, but definitely not the only one. There are many other meanings and possibilities! Beat cannot possibly fit in this situation. Why? Many reasons, one is that it had never been heard of that a Messenger or a Prophet or a Waaley or a Sahabey had ever used violence to discipline his wife, no matter how disobedient the wife might have been (and there are some famous cases in the Quran, like the wives of Noah and Lut PP&BBUT ), but it just never happened, there is absolutely no history to support this negative behavior.
If you want my opinion, I believe that the most appropriate meaning that I can think of for
Aribhunna is give them an ultimatum, not beat them!

I believe that that deliberate action of misinterpretation occurred because of the fact that the Quran was and still is under the dominion of some egocentric men, and so you know the rest. That misinterpretation, which is one of many by the way, is the reason behind the disgrace that had befallen the nation of Muslims.

Just tell me which version you think is the most faithful to the original

None of those versions, sadly!

P.S. In version 2 in your post, the part regarding Aribhunna is missing!

You are a rare gem here,

IKAW DIN!

PAALAM!!!

Peace It Is
Salaamunn He-Ya

wildguest1956

Daraba... Or Adriba ... ?

Here is another article on this topic

Words in Arabic are based primarily on three letter root words and derivations are changed somewhat by adding letters to them. Examples are sajada (derived from three letter 'sjd'), meaning to prostrate, and masjid, meaning the place where the prostration is done. Similarly daraba ('drb') means to beat and the word in the Quran which people have translated as beat is actually adriba ('adrb'). According to the dictionaries where I have been able to find the word adriba the meaning is to abandon, forsake, leave alone not beat.

http//www.iiie.net/Questions/ViolenceWomen.html

ichephren

Does anyone still care to discuss this thread?

wildguest1956

Does anyone still care to discuss this thread?

The most interesting articles I have read about this topic are the following
http//www.globalwebpost.com/farooqm/study_res/islam/gender/abusulayman_nowifebeating.html
http//www.islamicperspectives.com/Quran-4-34.htm

You can also have a look to
http//www.irfi.org/articles/articles_251_300/does_the_quran_allow_beating_of.htm
http//www.crescentlife.com/thisthat/feminist%20muslims/does_the_quran_sanction_the_beating_of_women.htm

ichephren

Thanks, those were very useful.

el-Aziz

DoctorNO!

Look again at the evidences....

In the Quran (those beside 434) Dharaba when used on a human object only implies a physical striking or a beating.

It is correct that all other contexts of "Darab" dealing with human beings means to strike or hit. This can be verified with this lecture in questions implication to think - meaning to use common sense. I think that the most important cue in this verse confimring that we are to leave our women is that the "previous step" encourages us to take one step in that direction, while "beating/striking" the women would be a step back...
In conclusion, try to use a little common sense to start with!

Dharaba was applied solely to the wife object. Therefore if you would translate it to separate then you have to separate just the wife. it is not the marriage you are separating but the wife only, whatever that implies.

The wife is indeed object in this clause, which proves absolutely nothing of your cause. "I left my women/girlfriend/lawyer/whatever". Please evolve!

The message of the verse is reconcillation, not divorce.

Does that say in the verse? However, it does not have much importance for the beating issue, does it?

Arab scholars that include Rashad Khalifa translated that to "beat".

I belive that the arab scholars that you refer to are the ones indoctrinated by the world religion of islam, which is disussed in another thread.
Second of all, those peoples comprehansion is not very representative for the majority of this forum's ditto.

/S