Wife Beating is a Therapy
-
peace,
Dear herbman, Qstudent, Samia, all,
You will find many people say a preposition can change the meaning of a verb, and that is true. You will also find people say DRB can only mean "turn away / separate / leave etc" with the preposition "3an" (as Qstudent implies) however, when you ask where is this apparent rule from? You will get silence. I have never seen anyone cite a source, other than to say this is its common usage, and some might even say no example saying otherwise exists.
When you then ask what is the pre-eminent source in Arabic prose that pretty much established most of Arabic grammar, they will say The Quran. When you then ask them and is there an example of this so-called unbreakable rule of DRB+3an usage in The Quran, they can only cite one verse which does not even prove or disprove their case (as sister Samia pointed out). When you then ask them is it solid to form an unbreakable rule from this one occurrence? You will get silence. When you then ask them is this apparent rule of DRB+3an usage pre-Quran or post-Quran (the book that most of Arabic grammar is based on), you will get dumbfounded looks. When you then ask can it theoretically mean "turn away / separate / leave / etc" without "3an" according to Arabic grammar, they will hesitantly admit yes.
When you then show them examples, as the one you did, they will say "but that doesn't imply to people" or similar. Again, they remain silent on citing a source for this alleged rule.Try it in forums, see what happens.
While you are there ask them to cite the meaning of "beat" from a Classical Arabic dictionary, or an example of "beat" usage in a Classical Arabic dictionary example, see what happens.
They are truly lost in a maze of their own making.
And that is not even bringing in the logical and word precision par excellence that is The Quran.
-
peace Scheherezade,
StudyQuran is a resource site, and contains about 30 different English translations, some of which translate it as "beat" and some which do not. No translation represents StudyQuran.
No. If all goes to plan, this issue will be better clarified in another project currently being worked on.
Thank you for your reply, Wakas, and good luck with your project. I certainly hope that you will be able to better clarify this issue, but for now, can you or anyone else here who is familiar with classical Arabic (Samia? Huruf?) correctly translate 434? And I don't mean words here and there but the entire verse.
-
If you understand idribuhunna as beat the problem is that it is an absurdity. What does daraba mean in this case? You go and beat the hell out of her? Is that going to save the marriage? How does that fit with the rest of the Qur'an? The fact that you have problems with her does it make out of her a sharika, a hypocrite, and idolater? Even in that case does the Qur'an make a case for beating shuraka', hypocrites or idolaters if you have personal problems with them? Aren'you rather advised no to take them as compannions? Or it doesn't mean that you beat the hell out her, but rather that you just go, stop in front of her and very seriously say "I hereby comply with the third level and smack you so?" and then smack her once on the buttocks? If you understand daraba as beat it lacks any precision, it is as good as not saying anything, and if you understand it as beating the hell out her, you certainly will solve the marriage problem with an immediate break. But that could also be done without beating. Psychollogically also it is bullshit. You keep them apart for a time and then go and smack them. My God? that should make her think? If being kept apart for some time hasn't made her think, then surely, the final smack will do the trick. Mind you it might do if she had sense of humour. And we are talking about smacking once, because we must bear in mind that daraba is not darrab you really cannot go and beat her at leasure, no way, that is outside the scope of daraba, which is a "once" verb. So in purity that is all a person is authorized to do according to this understanding of the word. Of course you can even kill her with that once hit if it is karatekalike dispensed. Even because of this imprecision the beat understanding is useless as and meaningless as an injunction.
Those tafsir people who have understood and explained daraba in this instance as beating usually have done so in the sense of beating lightly, as a symbolical deed and not as a means of physical compulsion, because general contents of the Qur'an do not warrant anything else. To start with, a husband is not a judge doubled of a an executor, therefore he may act unilateraly as an interested person in a conflict and as such do whatever he deems suitable, but never as an executor of any legal punishment. That is aboherrent and unwarranted in the Qur'an, it doesn't matter whether he is right or he has been wronged or not. Those who uphold the beating lightly version justify it in the events that purportedly brought about this revelation which were certain discussions between the Prophet and some people regarding disagreements in their marriages and wife-beatings. I do not think that that inference is right. If such a thing existed, they are two different things, those exchanges and the aya.
Be it as it may, we do not have a reason to believe without doubt that that was the reason and that the Qur'an has not cared to state that reason or circumstance. However, there are other readings of the daraba word, like for instance to impress something upon somebody. Make a firm statement of determination to somebody, like daraba mathal, putting the disjunctive before her, as she see he can live without her, so...
Farida wrote somewhere sometime on the merits of the daraba interpretion not to say that it was meant so, but to make psychollogically plain, the absurdity of wife-beating to men who would otherwise be prone to resort to that. That may be a possibility as a way to disuade of wife-beating. But it is out of the question that it is of any use to make a woman ply who hasn't plied to the two previous steps. And would automatically put the wrong on the husband.
Things must make sense in general and within the Qur'an as a whole.
Salaam
-
If you understand idribuhunna as beat the problem is that it is an absurdity. What does daraba mean in this case? You go and beat the hell out of her? Is that going to save the marriage? How does that fit with the rest of the Qur'an? The fact that you have problems with her does it make out of her a sharika, a hypocrite, and idolater? Even in that case does the Qur'an make a case for beating shuraka', hypocrites or idolaters if you have personal problems with them? Aren'you rather advised no to take them as compannions? Or it doesn't mean that you beat the hell out her, but rather that you just go, stop in front of her and very seriously say "I hereby comply with the third level and smack you so?" and then smack her once on the buttocks? If you understand daraba as beat it lacks any precision, it is as good as not saying anything, and if you understand it as beating the hell out her, you certainly will solve the marriage problem with an immediate break. But that could also be done without beating. Psychollogically also it is bullshit. You keep them apart for a time and then go and smack them. My God? that should make her think? If being kept apart for some time hasn't made her think, then surely, the final smack will do the trick. Mind you it might do if she had sense of humour. And we are talking about smacking once, because we must bear in mind that daraba is not darrab you really cannot go and beat her at leasure, no way, that is outside the scope of daraba, which is a "once" verb. So in purity that is all a person is authorized to do according to this understanding of the word. Of course you can even kill her with that once hit if it is karatekalike dispensed. Even because of this imprecision the beat understanding is useless as and meaningless as an injunction.
Those tafsir people who have understood and explained daraba in this instance as beating usually have done so in the sense of beating lightly, as a symbolical deed and not as a means of physical compulsion, because general contents of the Qur'an do not warrant anything else. To start with, a husband is not a judge doubled of a an executor, therefore he may act unilateraly as an interested person in a conflict and as such do whatever he deems suitable, but never as an executor of any legal punishment. That is aboherrent and unwarranted in the Qur'an, it doesn't matter whether he is right or he has been wronged or not. Those who uphold the beating lightly version justify it in the events that purportedly brought about this revelation which were certain discussions between the Prophet and some people regarding disagreements in their marriages and wife-beatings. I do not think that that inference is right. If such a thing existed, they are two different things, those exchanges and the aya.
Be it as it may, we do not have a reason to believe without doubt that that was the reason and that the Qur'an has not cared to state that reason or circumstance. However, there are other readings of the daraba word, like for instance to impress something upon somebody. Make a firm statement of determination to somebody, like daraba mathal, putting the disjunctive before her, as she see he can live without her, so...
Farida wrote somewhere sometime on the merits of the daraba interpretion not to say that it was meant so, but to make psychollogically plain, the absurdity of wife-beating to men who would otherwise be prone to resort to that. That may be a possibility as a way to disuade of wife-beating. But it is out of the question that it is of any use to make a woman ply who hasn't plied to the two previous steps. And would automatically put the wrong on the husband.
Things must make sense in general and within the Qur'an as a whole.
Salaam
This is great, Huruf; thank you. But it still does not answer my question. This verse has been discussed so many times in the past and although most people seem to agree that "beating" is not the correct translation, the verse remains unchanged and no one has offered a new and complete translation of it. So the question remains What does it really mean? Huruf, if you (or anyone else here with knowledge of Classical Arabic) were given authority to rewrite (correctly translate) 434, how would you write it?
-
My rendition
The men are supporters/maintainers of the women with what God favoured on some of them over others and for what they spent of their money, so the righteous women are dutiful/obedient; guardians/protectors to the unseen with what God guarded/protected. And as for those women you fear their rising up /disloyalty, then you shall advise them, and abandon them in the bed, and idriboo them. If they obeyed you, then seek not against them a way; Truly, God is High, Great.
The above is the most accurate according to the Arabic as far as I'm aware. I have deliberately left the word in question untranslated. This will be explained in detail in an article I am working on, unless The God wills otherwise. I will also provide my rendition of 4128 below, since they have nushuz in common, albeit 434 is pre-emptive (i.e. fear), and 4128 is after the fact (i.e. feared)
And if a woman feared from her husband rising up /disloyalty or turning away /alienation, then there is no blame upon them that they reconcile between themselves a reconciliation; and the reconciliation is better. And miserliness/selfishness is present in the souls, and if you (masculine) do good and are conscientious/forethoughtful, then surely God is aware what you do.
-
Peace all,
This is great, Huruf; thank you. But it still does not answer my question. This verse has been discussed so many times in the past and although most people seem to agree that "beating" is not the correct translation, the verse remains unchanged and no one has offered a new and complete translation of it. So the question remains What does it really mean? Huruf, if you (or anyone else here with knowledge of Classical Arabic) were given authority to rewrite (correctly translate) 434, how would you write it?
434
The phrase (waidriboohunna) is not literal for ?and abandon or leave them (F)? ? the phrase prior (waohjuroohunna) ?and abandon them (F)? in the place of lying down (beds)? means to desert them in the literal sense.To give/show or hit you (idriboohu) with another non literal example
4358
And they said "Are our gods better or He?" They did not give it (the objection) to you {daraboohu} except arguing, but they are a people disputing.Thus my rendition
434...and those whom (F) you fear their (F) quarrel, so advise them (F) and abandon them (F) in the place of lying down, and ignore/show them (F), so if they obeyed you, so do not oppress on them (F) a way, that God is high, mighty/great.
Example scenario
Wife goes out on a wild shopping spree, uses foul language on husband or whatever.
Husband tells her this behavior has stop and if she continues, deserts her in bed and by doing so ignores/shows or ?hits her? with his displeasure ? it is one continuous action which may last a day or weeks or longer. If they change be good, else divorce them in a nice manner?
2231 And if you divorced the women, so they reached their term, so hold them (F) with kindness or divorce them (F) with kindness, and do not hold them (F) harming to transgress, and who does that, so he had caused injustice (to) himself. And do not take God's verses mockingly, and remember God's blessing on you, and what He descended on you from The Book and the wisdom, He advises you with it, and fear and obey God, and know that God (is) with every thing knowledgeable.
-
Peace all,
434
The phrase (waidriboohunna) is not literal for ?and abandon or leave them (F)? ? the phrase prior (waohjuroohunna) ?and abandon them (F)? in the place of lying down (beds)? means to desert them in the literal sense.To give/show or hit you (idriboohu) with another non literal example
4358
And they said "Are our gods better or He?" They did not give it (the objection) to you {daraboohu} except arguing, but they are a people disputing.Thus my rendition
434...and those whom (F) you fear their (F) quarrel, so advise them (F) and abandon them (F) in the place of lying down, and ignore/show them (F), so if they obeyed you, so do not oppress on them (F) a way, that God is high, mighty/great.
Example scenario
Wife goes out on a wild shopping spree, uses foul language on husband or whatever.
Husband tells her this behavior has stop and if she continues, deserts her in bed and by doing so ignores/shows or ?hits her? with his displeasure ? it is one continuous action which may last a day or weeks or longer. If they change be good, else divorce them in a nice manner?
2231 And if you divorced the women, so they reached their term, so hold them (F) with kindness or divorce them (F) with kindness, and do not hold them (F) harming to transgress, and who does that, so he had caused injustice (to) himself. And do not take God's verses mockingly, and remember God's blessing on you, and what He descended on you from The Book and the wisdom, He advises you with it, and fear and obey God, and know that God (is) with every thing knowledgeable.
Peace Eid
That is a good attempt.But your second example is not what you think.Look at one verse before.4357
(4357) And when the son of Mary was cited as an example, your people raised a clamour at it,4358 (435 saying, "Are our gods better, or is he?" *52 They have cited this example to you only in the spirit of dispute. The fact is that they are a quarrelsome people.
Regards
-
Peace everyone,
One of the meanings given for DRB in Project Root List is "prevent/hinder". How about
434 Those who go on foot are to support those left behind by what God has bestowed on them over one another and for what they spend of their money. The upright women are dutiful; keeping private the personal matters for what God keeps watch over. As for those women from whom you fear their uprising, then you shall advise them, and abandon them in the bedchamber, and prevent/hinder them. If they respond to you, then do not seek a way over them; God is High, Great.
Take measures to prevent them/hinder them from disloyalty/uprising, for example by taking steps to remove the source/cause of their potential uprising/disloyalty etc. Prevent/hinder would be more inline with being pre-emptive. Just an idea.
Example scenario
Wife goes out on a wild shopping spree, uses foul language on husband.
Husband tells her this behavior has to stop and if she continues, deserts her in bed and prevents/hinders her from the wild shopping spree by cutting the resources and stops talking to her until she stops using the foul language etc. If she changes be good, else divorce her in a nice manner?
-
That is a good attempt.But your second example is not what you think.Look at one verse before.
4357
(4357) And when the son of Mary was cited as an example, your people raised a clamour at it,4358 (435 saying, "Are our gods better, or is he?" *52 They have cited this example to you only in the spirit of dispute. The fact is that they are a quarrelsome people.
Regards
Peace Q_student,
Alright, so what's the difference in either example were sticks being used, slaps or punches being thrown?
434
Regards
-
My attempt
4.34. The men are supporters/maintainers of the women on the basis and by the means with which God has given more to each with respect to the other and by means of what they spent of their money; and virtuous women are obedient to God, guardians/protectors to the unseen with what God guarded/protected. And as for those women you fear their rising up /disloyalty, then you shall advise them, and abandon them in the bed, and idriboo them. If they pay heed, then seek not against them a way; Truly, God is High, Great.
Comment
On the basis of each other reciprocal advantages, men are maintainers, women are guardians of what God means to be guarded.
Salaam
-
My attempt
4.34. The men are supporters/maintainers of the women on the basis and by the means with which God has given more to each with respect to the other and by means of what they spent of their money; and virtuous women are obedient to God, guardians/protectors to the unseen with what God guarded/protected. And as for those women you fear their rising up /disloyalty, then you shall advise them, and abandon them in the bed, and idriboo them. If they pay heed, then seek not against them a way; Truly, God is High, Great.
Comment
On the basis of each other reciprocal advantages, men are maintainers, women are guardians of what God means to be guarded.
Salaam
so this is not about husband and/or wife?
and who is "YOU" in the verse?
-
peace q_s, all,
would the correct translation therefore IYO be the following?
434 Men are the protectors/supporters of women. They shall take full care of women with what they spend of their wealth. God has made men to excel in some areas and women to excel in some areas. So, righteous women are obedient to God's Ordinances and guard the moral values even in privacy, the values that God has commanded to be guarded. If you experience ill-treatment from them, apprise them of possible consequences. Next, leave them in their resting places, but keep admonishing them with examples. If they pay heed to you, do not seek a way against them. God is Most High, Great.
-
Up to that point I think the believers are being addressed.
It appears that the speech starts on general terms and then narrows to the married couple.
Please keep asking questions and even answering them. We need that.
Salaam
every single believer or believers with authority?
and exactly which part of the verse refers to the married couples?
-
peace q_s, all,
would the correct translation therefore IYO be the following?
434 Men are the protectors/supporters of women. They shall take full care of women with what they spend of their wealth. God has made men to excel in some areas and women to excel in some areas. So, righteous women are obedient to God's Ordinances and guard the moral values even in privacy, the values that God has commanded to be guarded. If you experience ill-treatment from them, apprise them of possible consequences. Next, leave them in their resting places, but keep admonishing them with examples. If they pay heed to you, do not seek a way against them. God is Most High, Great.
You know, I am a translator by profession and while I appreciate the text you have put I think it does opt for an interpretation, against which I have absolutely nothing, except that it may close doors to other interpretations. It doesn't keep cose enough to the posibilities kept open by the original.
Posted by RasulHamsa
Insert Quote
Quote from huruf on Yesterday at 105625 PM
Up to that point I think the believers are being addressed.It appears that the speech starts on general terms and then narrows to the married couple.
Please keep asking questions and even answering them. We need that.
Salaam
every single believer or believers with authority?
and exactly which part of the verse refers to the married couples?
I think all believers in general. Have you seen something that would indicate it addresses particularly those in authority?
It might be understood that it is referring to married couples when it says "leave thim in their beds" (or de equivalent) and then in the next aya it is I think clearly referring to a breach within a couple.
Salaam
-
Have you seen something that would indicate it addresses particularly those in authority?
yes if you read the next verse And if you fear a breach between the two then appoint judge from his people and a judge from her people; if they both desire agreement, Allah will effect harmony between them, surely Allah is Knowing, Aware.
who is that "YOU" again who fear a breach between the two and appoint the judges etc?
It might be understood that it is referring to married couples when it says "leave thim in their beds" (or de equivalent) and then in the next aya it is I think clearly referring to a breach within a couple.
yes if you read it with next verse that make sense.
-
Peace everyone,
One of the meanings given for DRB in Project Root List is "prevent/hinder". How about
434 Those who go on foot are to support those left behind by what God has bestowed on them over one another and for what they spend of their money. The upright women are dutiful; keeping private the personal matters for what God keeps watch over. As for those women from whom you fear their uprising, then you shall advise them, and abandon them in the bedchamber, and prevent/hinder them. If they respond to you, then do not seek a way over them; God is High, Great.
Take measures to prevent them/hinder them from disloyalty/uprising, for example by taking steps to remove the source/cause of their potential uprising/disloyalty etc. Prevent/hinder would be more inline with being pre-emptive. Just an idea.
Example scenario
Wife goes out on a wild shopping spree, uses foul language on husband.
Husband tells her this behavior has to stop and if she continues, deserts her in bed and prevents/hinders her from the wild shopping spree by cutting the resources and stops talking to her until she stops using the foul language etc. If she changes be good, else divorce her in a nice manner?
DEar TS
It is highly acceptable translation provided the classical arabic allows this meaning. PRL is not authority. If you quote some classical arabic source like Lane or Lisaan ,Tajul aroos ,Sihaah Fil lugha, Misbahul munir, Ibne Durayd, Qamoos ul Muhit ,Tahdheebul Lugha, then it will be ok. Websites carry their own thought process.Even GA Pervaiz could not get rid of this meaning.He used soft word in exposition
34 As stated earlier, women own what they earn but due to biological reasons, they are incapacitated for considerable periods of time, to earn a living. Due to this fact it is obvious and natural that the responsibility for maintaining the family is vested in men. When women are given such protection then they must fulfill their functions as women faithfully and safeguard their potentialities.
If notwithstanding all this, those in authority apprehend defiance on the part of women with regards to the performance of their natural functions, they should, in order to correct such a behaviour, first admonish the women, then, if required, separate them temporarily from their husbands, or intern them, and finally, if necessary, punish them otherwise. Allah?s Laws must prevail. If they submit to them then seek no occasion against them.
Regards
-
Even GA Pervaiz could not get rid of this meaning.He used soft word in exposition
Peace Q_student,
Parwez did manage to get rid of that meaning?
http//www.tolueislam.com/Parwez/expo/expo_043.htm
And whenever Jesus son of Mary is mentioned by you with respect, your people (O Rasool) raise an outcry;
And say "It is strange that you condemn 'Shirk', preach ?Tauheed? and strongly oppose our deities; but at the same time you praise the deities of Christians. Do you mean that he is better than our deities?"
Their objection, however, is for the sake of creating a dispute only; and not for clearly understanding the point. In fact these people are contentious by nature. (They know very well that you condemn the Shirk of Christians as much as theirs; and that you respect God?s Rasool Jesus, who propagated ?Tauheed?.)
4358
434
...so advise them (F) and abandon them (F) in the place of lying down, and raise an outcry/objection on them (F)
Regards
