What is the difference between "Nissa, Amraat and Azwaj"
-
salam fahad. i should point out that a lot of the reason you are asking these questions, is because you have not rid yourself of a few beliefs. when you use pagan terms and concepts, then try and understan the quran, you immediately, will fail.
nikah is not marriage. when you make the mistake of saying marriage, then try to understand the quran, you end up in a mess. be very careful about the words you choose.
Marriage invloves man giving ajar(recompense/wage) to the woman. Doesn't that make marriage a transaction?
this is one example. i have not seen ajar given in a marriage. nor have i seen ajar made a requirement of a nikah. do you see how i separate the two? marriage may be a transaction depending on the laws of the jurisdiction. nikah is not a transaction, it is the creation of a legal entity.
Marriage also involves the exchange of consideration/ajar for going into a woman. So what is the difference between marriage and prostitution if not polyandry?
if the particular marriage in question involves the exchange of consideration for going into a woman, it is prostitution per se. in a nikah there is no exchange of consideration, there may be a mahr, a gift. a gift is not an exchange of consideration. again where are you brining this ajar issue from. i havent seen ajar in the quran as a nikah requirement.
Does the Quran tell us to charge people as criminals for having sex in exchange of money?
you know the answer to this question already. however, zina, prostitution, and the parties to zina, the zani and zanit, are condemned as engaging in fawahish, and there are tahrim, prohibitions, on whom they can nikah. if your defintion of those who violate the tahrim, things classified as haram, makes sin approximately equal to the term crime, then yes they are criminals.
Kalleela?
"ar rajal kaleela min an nisa"... "kalalat wa amrat"
kaleela is a term for which the closest english word is, greater. in other words, rajal kaleela min an nisa, translates approximately as, the guardian is greater than the women. or, the guardian has authority over the women. another use of this is, allah kaleela min al momineen."This is why"? You are implying that everything that goes on in saudi is Quranic.
you must keep your anti saudi prejudices out of the debate. when you remove your anti saudi prejudices, you will see the first word i used is "this" the term this is a singular word explicitly pointing to the single issue of why some saudi laws refer to the guardian of a woman. i did not use the plural terms, those or these. saudi usages, while far from perfect, do have relevance in the debate over the terms. after all mecca and medina are in the kingdom. the form of arabic spoken by the messenger of allah, was in fact hijazi arabic, and hijaz is part of the kingdom. the people of the kingdom who speak hijazi arabic as a mater of course have a beter understanding of the words of the quran, than those who dont speak hijazi arabic. when i see the members of this forum, some of whom use dictionaries and grammar books, mostly with catastrophically bad results, making claims that in all honesty are complete nonsense, you should credit the saudis for much kindness and grace, not jumping down their throat and jusitifiably berating them for the nonsense some of them come up with. then again i have berated some people, it had to be done, what they are claiming is outrageous.
What is so evil about prostitution other than polyandry? Sex for money is surely not evil, because thats what happens in a marriage.
i agree with you that marriage in most cases is sex for money, nikah is not marriage and is not sex for money. i agree that there is little difference between pagan marriages and prostitution. this despite the howls of pseudo offense i am going to hear on the subject. if you believe "sex for money is surely not evil" and this is your practice, then you fall under the tahrim, and could possibly be subject to the punishments, of your statement is construed to be an admission, an admission supersedes the four witness requirement, you would have witnessed yourself.
What is the consequence of sex for ajar?
please give me your defintion of ajar. then give me an example of the use of the term ajar in the quran. then tell me how you connected ajar with nikah.
allah is the lawgiver.
-
"ar rajal kaleela min an nisa"... "kalalat wa amrat"
kaleela is a term for which the closest english word is, greater. in other words, rajal kaleela min an nisa, translates approximately as, the guardian is greater than the women. or, the guardian has authority over the women. another use of this is, allah kaleela min al momineen.Please write this word in Arabic, because it seems fahad is mixing it with another word. I would have done the same, too, but knowing your ignorance I can guess what word you mean, and you are still wrongly transliterating it. (Maybe it's not even what I am guessing, or maybe it's a word that does not exist in the qur'aan or elsewhere..Who knows
? Your surprises are unlimited). So the only solution to save you from me is to start by writing it in Arabic.Then, before ranting in accusation of those who "do not speak hijazi arabic" or those who "use the dictionaries', and to complete saving yourself, bring all the usages of this word in the qur'aan in their `full context" and prove to the members of this forum that it means "greater'.
-
salam siki. because you do read the quran and are familiar with the ayats, i will paraphrase some verses to save time.
reading one ayat alone will not provide a full answer. putting together the ayats on the issue will reveal the existence of a complete legal entity, which resembles a guardianship. i say resembles, because the muslim guardianship has more legal powers than the pagan western guardianships.
the ayat say the rajal is established by allah over the women, because they are stronger than women and support them from their means, that righteous women guard. the rajal have the right and power to punish for disloyalty and ill conduct, and the range of punishment varies from admonishment to beating. the rajal has the right and power to issue the talaq or withhold the talaq as a discretionary decision.
this makes complete sense from a rational point of view. there is no need for police or government or court systems. the nikahs are self policing. if a rajal and woman are travelling in the desert, and she engages in ill conduct, the rajal has the power and right to punish her immediately for the conduct. the result is the women know their ill conduct will be exposed, they restrain themselves, and the families are stable raising children that arent subjected to the abuse of parents who have no restraint.
this is radically different from the pagan western law. under the pagan western law, if a woman is guilty of disloyalty of ill conduct, and she is travelling with her husband in the desert, the husband has no rights whatsoever to punish the woman. these idiotic cripples of western pagan laws have no provision for all circumstances. even if the couple live in a city, the women get the protection and support of the man, act abusively to their protector, and if he objects to being abused in this fashion, all she has to do is start screaming and crying accusing him of everything from child abuse to spousal abuse, and the innocent man is jailed. this is not only a crime to the husband, it is a crime to the children who suffer the abuse of unrestrained parents which result in a catastrophically wild and savage society. they believe in the incomprehensibly false idea that a judge and police who never viewed the incident are better judges of the wrongdoing than someone who was present and witnessed the conduct.
what is even more appaling is, in the instances where the woman is guilty of ill conduct, the person harmed is the husband. amazing the pagan western states deny and deprive the husband of his right to retribution. western pagan laws arbitrarily make the state a party, to an incident in which the state was never the party. the end result is the husband suffers the injury, and the state gets the retribution. there is no equity whatsoever in the pagan western system.
for those who think i use the term pagan lightly, you are mistaken. western laws are based on the logical fallacy of argumentum ad populum. if the majority of people agree to a law, this is their law. the majority of people is a godless ruler, and a godless law is a pagan law. many women prefer this pagan law to what allah has established, because they can get away with their crimes in the pagan western system.
allah is the truth.
-
if a rajal and woman are travelling in the desert, and she engages in ill conduct, the rajal has the power and right to punish her immediately for the conduct.
Ok can you explain how a rajal like yourself, would punish his wife immediately if the above incident occurs?
-
salam farida. the decision about timing of punishment is mubah. there is no guidance on when the punishment should be adminstered.
inshallah, allah's guidance is without error, and if allah leaves the timing to the discretion of the rajal, then there is great wisdom in that decision. there are times when the punishment must be carried out immediately and in front of others, because not to do so would encourage ill conduct in others. there are times when the punishment must be delayed and carried out in private, because there are other issues that would mitigate against a public punishment. each instance depends on the facts and circumstances of the incident.
allah is the best of those who teach.
-
salam farida. i have answered your question. there is nothing further to answer to you.
you are switching between what the rules are for a believer and my personal business. let me give you an example of immediate punishment.
you are admonished right now for attempting to violate the privacy of those in my right hand. dont do it again.allah is the best of those who teach.
-
salam farida. i have answered your question. there is nothing further to answer to you.
you are switching between what the rules are for a believer and my personal business.
Finally you admitted that there is a difference between you and a believer bravo
you are admonished right now for attempting to violate the privacy of those in my right hand. dont do it again.
You do have right hand personal possessions laugh yay elektro
-
salam siki. because you do read the quran and are familiar with the ayats, i will paraphrase some verses to save time.
reading one ayat alone will not provide a full answer. putting together the ayats on the issue will reveal the existence of a complete legal entity, which resembles a guardianship. i say resembles, because the muslim guardianship has more legal powers than the pagan western guardianships.
the ayat say the rajal is established by allah over the women, because they are stronger than women and support them from their means, that righteous women guard. the rajal have the right and power to punish for disloyalty and ill conduct, and the range of punishment varies from admonishment to beating. the rajal has the right and power to issue the talaq or withhold the talaq as a discretionary decision.
this makes complete sense from a rational point of view. there is no need for police or government or court systems. the nikahs are self policing. if a rajal and woman are travelling in the desert, and she engages in ill conduct, the rajal has the power and right to punish her immediately for the conduct. the result is the women know their ill conduct will be exposed, they restrain themselves, and the families are stable raising children that arent subjected to the abuse of parents who have no restraint.
this is radically different from the pagan western law. under the pagan western law, if a woman is guilty of disloyalty of ill conduct, and she is travelling with her husband in the desert, the husband has no rights whatsoever to punish the woman. these idiotic cripples of western pagan laws have no provision for all circumstances. even if the couple live in a city, the women get the protection and support of the man, act abusively to their protector, and if he objects to being abused in this fashion, all she has to do is start screaming and crying accusing him of everything from child abuse to spousal abuse, and the innocent man is jailed. this is not only a crime to the husband, it is a crime to the children who suffer the abuse of unrestrained parents which result in a catastrophically wild and savage society. they believe in the incomprehensibly false idea that a judge and police who never viewed the incident are better judges of the wrongdoing than someone who was present and witnessed the conduct.
what is even more appaling is, in the instances where the woman is guilty of ill conduct, the person harmed is the husband. amazing the pagan western states deny and deprive the husband of his right to retribution. western pagan laws arbitrarily make the state a party, to an incident in which the state was never the party. the end result is the husband suffers the injury, and the state gets the retribution. there is no equity whatsoever in the pagan western system.
for those who think i use the term pagan lightly, you are mistaken. western laws are based on the logical fallacy of argumentum ad populum. if the majority of people agree to a law, this is their law. the majority of people is a godless ruler, and a godless law is a pagan law. many women prefer this pagan law to what allah has established, because they can get away with their crimes in the pagan western system.
allah is the truth.
Sure, you have some valid points, and sense in what you have posted above, however , i would like you disect some relevent verses on nikah for education sake.
siki
-
salam fahad. i should point out that a lot of the reason you are asking these questions, is because you have not rid yourself of a few beliefs.
Wa salaam.
That?s just not true.
when you use pagan terms and concepts, then try and understan the quran, you immediately, will fail.
If.
nikah is not marriage. when you make the mistake of saying marriage, then try to understand the quran, you end up in a mess. be very careful about the words you choose.
I was only using the words already chosen by you.
Marriage invloves man giving ajar(recompense/wage) to the woman. Doesn't that make marriage a transaction?
this is one example. i have not seen ajar given in a marriage. nor have i seen ajar made a requirement of a nikah. do you see how i separate the two? marriage may be a transaction depending on the laws of the jurisdiction. nikah is not a transaction, it is the creation of a legal entity.
Please scroll down to the bottom to see ajar made a requirement for nikah.
Marriage also involves the exchange of consideration/ajar for going into a woman. So what is the difference between marriage and prostitution if not polyandry?
if the particular marriage in question involves the exchange of consideration for going into a woman, it is prostitution per se.
Ok, call it whatever you want to. But Kindly provide reference to where the Quran forbids exchange of consideration for going into a woman.
in a nikah there is no exchange of consideration, there may be a mahr, a gift. a gift is not an exchange of consideration. again where are you brining this ajar issue from. i havent seen ajar in the quran as a nikah requirement.
Where does the Quran mention ?mahr? for nikah?
Does the Quran tell us to charge people as criminals for having sex in exchange of money?
you know the answer to this question already.
I know the answer and the answer is no. Quran does not tell us to charge people as criminals for having sex in exchange of money.
however, zina, prostitution, and the parties to zina, the zani and zanit, are condemned as engaging in fawahish, and there are tahrim, prohibitions, on whom they can nikah. if your defintion of those who violate the tahrim, things classified as haram, makes sin approximately equal to the term crime, then yes they are criminals.
Where does the Quran define az-zina as sex for consideration?
Kalleela?
"ar rajal kaleela min an nisa"... "kalalat wa amrat"
kaleela is a term for which the closest english word is, greater. in other words, rajal kaleela min an nisa, translates approximately as, the guardian is greater than the women. or, the guardian has authority over the women. another use of this is, allah kaleela min al momineen.Is there any verse that says this kaleela thing for men? Or are you confusing it qawwamun in 4/34?
"This is why"? You are implying that everything that goes on in saudi is Quranic.
you must keep your anti saudi prejudices out of the debate.
I don?t have any anti-saudi prejudice nor any reason to have one. Maybe you have a pro-saudi prejudice, maybe also a reason to have one? You are from the Saudi, right?
when you remove your anti saudi prejudices, you will see the first word i used is "this" the term this is a singular word explicitly pointing to the single issue of why some saudi laws refer to the guardian of a woman. i did not use the plural terms, those or these.
Your saying ?this is why? implies that this is the rule in Saudi, that if the Quran says so, the Saudis do so. Whether you say "this is (the reason) why" or "those are (the reasons) why", it doesn't make any difference to what you are implying.
saudi usages, while far from perfect, do have relevance in the debate over the terms. after all mecca and medina are in the kingdom. the form of arabic spoken by the messenger of allah, was in fact hijazi arabic, and hijaz is part of the kingdom. the people of the kingdom who speak hijazi arabic as a mater of course have a beter understanding of the words of the quran, than those who dont speak hijazi arabic. when i see the members of this forum, some of whom use dictionaries and grammar books, mostly with catastrophically bad results, making claims that in all honesty are complete nonsense, you should credit the saudis for much kindness and grace, not jumping down their throat and jusitifiably berating them for the nonsense some of them come up with. then again i have berated some people, it had to be done, what they are claiming is outrageous.
Doesn?t matter whether the words are from hijazi Arabic or dictionary Arabic, they have to be confirmed by the Quranic usage(46/12).
What is so evil about prostitution other than polyandry? Sex for money is surely not evil, because thats what happens in a marriage.
i agree with you that marriage in most cases is sex for money, nikah is not marriage and is not sex for money. i agree that there is little difference between pagan marriages and prostitution. this despite the howls of pseudo offense i am going to hear on the subject. if you believe "sex for money is surely not evil" and this is your practice, then you fall under the tahrim, and could possibly be subject to the punishments, of your statement is construed to be an admission, an admission supersedes the four witness requirement, you would have witnessed yourself.
If only you could show me where sex for money is referred to as az-zina in the Quran.
What is the consequence of sex for ajar?
please give me your defintion of ajar.
The consideration/wage/recompense/reward in exchange of a service rendered is ?ajar?.
then give me an example of the use of the term ajar in the quran.
?Ajar? is the consideration/wage/recompense involved in a "tijaarat" (35/29-30).
then tell me how you connected ajar with nikah.
In context of nikah, 4/24 says ...And permitted for you are all beyond those(forbidden categories of women), that you seek with your amwaal/wealth/money, muhsineen without being musafiheen, therefore those that you have enjoyed with it(i.e. your wealth/money) from them, give them their ujoor/wages as a fareeza...
Alright? Now tell me the consequence of sex for ajar.
-
let me give you an example of immediate punishment.
you are admonished right now for attempting to violate the privacy of those in my right hand. dont do it again.Salaam Al Araf.
What makes you think that you can "punish" other people's women as well for disobeying you? i.e. women not related to you. Any reference you can provide for this?
-
salam fahad. the word you are referring to ajr, means reward. if allah rewards a momin with jannat this is not a wage. i see where the confusion is coming from, some translations are claiming ajr means wages. no akhi this is where arabic and english depart ways. english has vague usages for the term reward which is causing the confusion.
allah is the teacher.
-
salam fahad. with regards to the admonishment. you are mistaken when you claim
you can "punish" other people's women as well for disobeying you
i did not punish for disobeying, that is your mistake. i admonished for ill conduct, completely different issue.
read the verse 434 again. it says al rajal qawamun min al nisaa. it does not say al rajal qawamun min nisaakum.
allah is the teacher.
-
salam fahad. with regards to the admonishment. you are mistaken when you claim
i did not punish for disobeying, that is your mistake. i admonished for ill conduct, completely different issue.
read the verse 434 again. it says al rajal qawamun min al nisaa. it does not say al rajal qawamun min nisaakum.
allah is the teacher.
So you are al rajal qawamun min al nisaa and yet a Pakistani woman accused of shooting at U.S. officers extradited to U.S is abused daily. re fhttp//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9596881.0
Beside sitting most of the time on your bum in front of computer in a pagan country either paying no taxes to the pagan country or, if paying taxes then promoting a pagan country and having right hand possessions yet no worry if he cannot manage them. Trying to make laws of the Quran subservient to a rijal; What have you done Mister qawamun? yuck
-
Assalaam Alaikum
Did I read this correctly?....from the 'lead' uninformed individual....'paraphrasing' Al-Nisa'a 4.34
"......the rajal have the right and power to punish for disloyalty and ill conduct, and the range of punishment varies from admonishment to beating"
Again, this same individual does NOT have a clear or sincere understanding of the Quran and its language. Obviously this individual is another example of one who is 'posing' as knowledgeable of the language of the Quran, yet is quite uninformed and narrow minded.
Lets consider the language of the Quran regarding Al-Nisa'a 4.34
Takhafoona = If YOU Fear (imperfect, 2nd person, singular)
nushoozahunna fa AAithoohunna = treating someone cruel and UNMANLY
wa = and
ohjuroohunna = Avoid associating or acting irrational
fee = like those/among those
Al-MadajiAAi = A MAN WHO BEATS OR STRIKES PAINFULLY
wa = and
I?DRIBOOHUNNA = AVOID ANY CONFRONTATIONThe ayah is speaking to Men and instructing them NOT to abuse their Women and avoid being among those Males who abuse and oppress Women, Al-MadajiAAi /
These are the character traits of this type of individual, Al-MadajiAAi /
He cause others to suffer or experience pain from his speech, event or affair,
He cause's others to distress their hearts with grief,
He is a MAN WHO BEATS OR STRIKES Women PAINFULLY
He is INSENSITIVE TO THE WOMEN WHO CANNOT ENDURE OR BEAR WHAT DISPLEASES HER OR GRIEVES HER
He is INSENSITIVE TO THE WOMAN WHERE A SMALL WORD PAINS HER
He is INSENSITIVE TO THE WOMAN WHERE SMALL THINGS HURT OR ANNOY HERLanes Lexicon PAGE 2719 ? 2720 Part 7
-
salam. mention the khimar, and they reply to their name. mashallah not just one khimar, two.
farida did you think you were insulting me, claiming that the speaker of that verse is identifying himself? in other words because you think i said khimar, therefore i am khimar? shame on you, you insulted allah, the speaker was allah, that is a verse from the quran. if allah is the speaker you are saying that allah is calling himself khimar. you are a complete utter disgrace.
muslimtruthrevealed, all the books you read, did you not read that daraba yudaribu is to beat? either you are lying that you have dictionaries, or you wilfully forge lies against allah and the quran. may allah judge you for what your hands send forward.
allah exposes falsehood.