Discussion on 4:3 and meaning of nisa
-
So, to both you and Mazhar, if you could please try and break things down into layman's terms
ReleasedI have tried it and put it in seperate thread, each sentence of Ayah even if it apparently comprises a single word, is seperately discussed. Knowledge of Enlish grammar about Preposition, Prepositional Phrase and Relative Pronouns and its linkage clause would suffice. That can be applied for Arabic grammar.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604734.0
-
What I find more striking about this plural terminology and sometime the singular terminology is the relationship it keeps or does not keep with the meaning of the root from which it derives.
Concerning the word rajul, it derives, not from a word that entails a sex, a sexual caracterization. ?how or why did it come to mean a sex? As I pointed out already doesn't it have a sociological content more than a personal content?
The case of nisaa' I am more and more convinced that it is not derived from n-s-, but from -n-s, like "naas", and that would characterize it as a species meaning, and like ryjul or rijaal open to both sexes, even though sociologically it may be apportionned many times to one sex, basically also because of sociological considerations, and not fundamental, human considerations.
I have the feeling that this vocabulary of the Qur'an should be appreciated from that point of view, not excluding any other point of view, but not discard the sociological point of view, because however it is, the Qur'an is well thought out, it is not haphazard, and means things and we should not put a stop or a stopper at what it may say and say it is this and we should not go beyond. If it makes sense, if it means something constructive or entlightening for us, for anybody, I do not think we have a right to discard it or be dirisive.
Light is everywhere, alhamdulil-lah.
Salaam
-
Abounding on the morphology of "nisaa'".
Could some of the well versed in that part make a list or exposition of the morphological possibilities of the word according to each of the three possible roots from which it might be derived? Also of the any other factor that might be of interest.
Thanks and salaam
-
Peace Mazhar,
Okay, thank you. I will take a look at that thread as well.
Released
I have tried it and put it in seperate thread, each sentence of Ayah even if it apparently comprises a single word, is seperately discussed. Knowledge of Enlish grammar about Preposition, Prepositional Phrase and Relative Pronouns and its linkage clause would suffice. That can be applied for Arabic grammar.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604734.0
-
Peace Damon and UQ,
I recommend that both of you also write up something in a similar format to Mazhar, so that we can all take our time and read through it. I know that we're often pressed for time, so I am not demanding it or anything, but it's just a suggestion.
-
Damon,
...the history I speak of is not one of hatred or animosity. It is one where your tactics you love to employ in your debates were used in our discussion and you ended our discussion by telling me my arguments have Logical fallacies (a favorite tactic) and your arguments have NO logical fallacies (another favorite tactic) and you NEVER pointed out, explained, anaylized or otherwise dissected either one of our arguments to substantiate my logical fallacies and your lack of logical fallacies.
Pointing out logical fallacies is pertinent information in a discussion. You claim I did not highlight your specific logical fallacies, when I did. I have our emails right in front of me. If you meant you still did not understand or accept my claim of your logical fallacies, then that's fine, but that's a different matter.
In fact, even in this thread, I was specific when I stated your logical fallacies.Please EXPLAIN the grammar, context and logic of 4/3 and how you use them to determine WHO the masculine plurals are referring to. Which Grammar Rule are you using to ascertain this?
Is it a case of me answer your questions, and you not answer mine? I highlighted some potentially key points in my last post. Perhaps you will be humble enough to answer them.
I have already answered this question of yours, but if you want more detail
With regards to 43, if there was variance in view of this verse and/or I had some issues with it, I'd first begin by determining what is theoretically possible according to Arabic grammar, e.g. in our case, who the verb "taba" refers to. I'd consult corpus, others, grammar books, CAD, discuss on forums if need be etc etc. Once I had some options, I'd gather the evidence for each option then weigh them up, applying logic, consider practicality, along with usual method of study, see http//www.quran434.com/study-method.html
You ask which grammar rule, but it would not be a single rule I'm using, but principally determining the subject and object of a verb. Ideally, I'd also like to cross-reference this specific construction in Quran, but as yet, neither of us have cited any. They likely exist, i.e. then (verb) what (verb) lakum mina al-(any noun).This is what we are trying to determine here in our discussion, and we are still in the 'putting evidence on the table' phase. In order to put evidence, please answer what I requested in my last post.
uq, mazhar, I'd like to know if what Hoppean said is possible also, i.e. can two/three/four be linked to "taba" as a theoretical possibility? I'm still looking into this.
-
Wakas,
AGAIN, DOUBLE STANDARDS WAKAS!!! When I used the term "highly, HIGHLY Unlikely" I TOO used them to express my view just like you used the words "most likely" and "can" to express your view. You said "likely" and I said "UN-likely" which is the same you used but with opposite meaning due to the prefix "UN". So, this statement of yours is a contradiction all in itself. If you're going to claim it isn't a contradiction, I'll just have to call it what it really is, Double Standard!! You can use those words to express your view and it is not conjecture. BUT, when I also use words that are NOT definitive but express MY VIEW, then all of a sudden it is conjecture. This statement of yours is an attempt to justify your double standard and this is EXACTLY what I have been saying concerning certain tactics you like to pull when you're debating with others. Because Winning An Argument/Debate is your ultimate goal, certain tactics will have to be employed to give you a bigger chance of winning.
Just so you know, my words "highly unlikely" is a NON definitive statement and in your estimation that makes me guilty of conjecture. When you used your terms "can" and "most likely", you used NON definitive statements. So you conjectured AND set a double standard. Just saying
CAN and HAVE. Question is WHY am I using the verse itself that is under discussion to prove my grammatical analysis? Because, one, the grammatical analysis I gave is based on the rules of Arabic Language. The Quran is written in the Arabic Language. Secondly, I provided the definition of a 'key' preposition used in the verse under discussion and I told you how it means "from, among, etc." when this preposition precedes a noun. And just so you know, the noun it precedes can be definite or indefinite. Third of all, I have done what you have asked concerning cross referencing of an important word that is in the verse under question. I have done that by providing a minute sampling of verses (form among many by the way) in The Quran that definitively use this preposition according to the definition and usage I explained. This is what we do when we use what I call Tasreeful Ayaat. It is cross referencing. In your explanation on how to use Project Root List, under the heading of Which Root Meaning Is Correct you give the advice of checking the occurences of relevant words within the verse under discussion to make sure that they are used accurately
I consider this sound advice and I personally endorse it. No where in your article do you make reference that ONLY THE WORD being disuputed should be cross referenced because I think you know to make such a statement would be highly illogical. Also, for the record, the advice you give in this introductory article is advice that You Yourself are not following!!
1). Don't draw something out that is not there. Even though a certain here is using words such as "Can mean this" to draw something out in 4/3 that is not there.
2). Embellishing on a word. This advice comes from someone who is using the excuse that Lane's says the word Naas can "sometimes" be used for all men EVEN THOUGH this word is NEVER used in such a way in The Quran and NEITHER is it used in such a way in actual Arabic.
3). The connection should be clear. Again, coming from someone who wants to think that the audience addressed in 4/3 "can be" an all male audience. Someone who wants to make himself believe in shift in addressee WITHOUT the new addressee being announced and the connection made clear!!
4). Evidence has been placed before this same person to demonstrate that a word does not mean what HE and MANY OTHERS THINK it to mean. He has put up a brick wall defense because he made up his mind that he WANTS to believe something and he is not budging from that position.Not incorrect, CORRECT!! Do you know why? Because it is YOU who is claiming that the verb "Taaba" (which is a 3rd person verb) is somehow being performed by a 2nd Person Audience-The Addressees. The ONLY way The 2nd person can perform a 3rd person verb is if you somehow try to make the 3rd person verb to be INTERPRETED as being actually a verb in the 2nd person. You have made the CLAIM and the INTERPRETATION when you said that the 2nd Person Party being ADDRESSED (in this case of 4/3, the addresses are khiftoom, tuqsitoo, Ankihoo and lakum) are the people who are performing the 3rd Person Verb Taaba!! So to hold this claim and this view, you are officially interpreting "Taaba" as Somehow being a 2nd person perfect verb (or you may even be interpreting it to be a 2nd person IMPERFECT verb, either way it is false).
Secondly, I have to ask how many times I need to inform you that I am not interested in your corpus quran project. Please drill this into your gray matter. I AM NOT INTERESTED IN IT!!!!! If you want to send me to an actual Arabic Grammar Book then I WILL check it out. But I am not interested in a website that is not a Grammar book. It is very clear to me that this is ONE of your sources for Quran and Arabic, the other source being people whom you deem to be authorities.
Thirdly, please quote me where I said "Taaba" was anything but a 3rd person masculine verb. You claim I contradict myself. Quote Please.
Well, well, well. Exhibit "A" Ladies and Gentlemen!! Here you are AGAIN Wakas running to other people to help yo out with your "debate" against me. And, once again, it is someone whom you consider knowledgable of Arabic!! I don't know who this uq person is, but you said this person is a forum member. I did a search and I came up with NOTHING as far as a forum member with the name "uq". I can't help but to suspect that uq is the initials for Understand Quran. So I did another search on this term and again I got NOTHING as far as a member is concerned. I only got some posts to where the words understand quran are mentioned in context of understanding the book itself. Tell me Wakas, is this uq person the one who runs the site Understand Quran?? I would really, really, really like an answer to this question. At one point in time you and I were members of the now defunct Quran Institute forum that was run by Brother Liaquat Ali. The person from the Understand Quran website was a fellow forum member. His actual name is Abdulazeez Abdulraheem but as a forum member of quran institute forum he used the screen name Understand Quran!!
Please tell me Wakas if this is the person you are referring to as "uq"? If so, there are two problems with this. I'll tell you what those problems are if you confirm that he is indeed the person you are referring to.
Question Wakas. Have I referred to another person or sent you to another person at any point in our discussion? I don't recall ever doing so. Why are you putting people over the Language itself and the Grammar books outlining the rules and structure of this language? Why are you abandoning your Study Quran slogan of Why ask a student when you can learn from The Teacher? The Grammar books are available to TEACH us Arabic Grammar. Those books are the grammatical teachers. The Quran is attempting to TEACH its readers concepts that are to be grasped and implemented. The Quran is the socio-political TEACHER. But you keep referring to STUDENTS and not the teachers. From this point onwards I will ignore anything else you have to say about people you have consulted. It is amazing that you paint yourself to be this bright, heavy, intellectual scholarly type person but you have to keep consulting other people for help in your debate with me. All of this debating with people you do on this forum and telling other people about logical fallacies, lack of evidence, ad hominem, wikipedia links, blah, blah, blah and this same intellectual debater HAS to consult other people while debating me.
But I will address your consultant's views for the final time but I am making it clear that you would do a better and more appropriate job of you use the grammar books instead of people with traditionalist views. If you point something out to me in the grammar books and what is in the grammar book is definitively in The Quran I will gladly restructure my understandings.
Please go through the Books of Arabic Grammar and provide us with a reference. Thanks. And just to make myself clear, I DO NOT view An-Nisaa' is being a group of females. So I DO NOT see "Taaba" being performed by a group of females. I see An-Nisaa' as being a group of males and females and so I see the 3rd person masculine Verb "Taaba" being performed by a group of males and females. If you go to page 62 of the book Arabic Verbs and Essentials of Grammar you will see the authors reiterated what they had said earlier on page 15 and what Haywood said in his book A New Arabic Grammar and that is the masculine plural is used for a group of people that is mixed male and female and there is the reason why the verb "Taaba" is in the 3rd person MASCULINE because it is now Grammatically Obvious That the group of people who are designated with the Collective Group Title of An-Nisaa' are NOT a group of females. And I am emphasizing the terms Collective, Group and Collective Title for a reason which I will expound upon a bit later. It's important to keep this in mind.
But when a masculine plural OR a masculine verb is used for a group of people, that means the group of people can be ONLY ONE or the other
1). A group of males.
2). Mixed group of males AND females.But there is NEVER a third possibility of the group of people being an all female group. The masculine plural and masculine verbs ARE NOT USED for a group of people who are all females. If the group of people is entirely female then the FEMININE plural and FEMININE verb are applied to them, not the masculine.
You are still bugged over the question WHY the plural feminine in "sadaqatiheen" and the feminine word "waahidatan" are used in 4/4 and 4/3 respectively. I am telling you that you must first look at 4/3 AND 24/31 to see how the word Nisaa' is being used. It would be extremely illogical (and quite sick) to continue to translate Nisaa' to mean women once you understand all of the grammar rules that we have covered so far. Even without going over the grammar rules we just mentioned, COMMON SENSE should compel people to ask themselves HOW and WHY the MOMENAAAT (which IS an a group entirely of females) in 24/31 are asked to cover and relax their sexual ornamentation when they are around Nisaa'iheeb which the traditional translations of Nisaa' would make Nisaa'heen to mean Their Women or even THEIR WIVES!!; since this is another mistranslation they like to give to this word. So I am asking you to first acknowledge that An-Nisaa' IS NOT a group of females. Once that is acknowledged, we can then tackle this mystery of why "wahidatan" and "sadaqatiheen" are used in 4/3 and 4/4. If you wish NOT to acknowledge this and want to hold on to a belief that was just grammatically dismantled, then there is nothing more that I or anyone else can do for you. If a person so badly WANTS to believe something that isn't there, he will continue to formulate all sorts of concoctions to justify to himself this belief he cherishes. But if you wish not to acknowledge that the word Nisaa' is grammatically proven not to be females then go to William Wright's Arabic Grammar bookn and find the grammar rule yourself as to WHY those two feminine terms are employed for The Nisaa'.
And for the final time Wakas, Mazhar IS NOT an authority on Arabic Language or The Quran. I'm not interested in what any 3rd party says, rather it be mazhar, this uq person you mentioned, M.A.S. Abdel Haleem or whoever else. I am interested with seeing YOU prove your caims concerning 4/1 - 4/3. I am discussing this WITH YOU. YOU are making claims and statements about 4/3 so I am asking YOU to please grammatically and logically prove your claims. If you are going to continue to consult other people, perhaps it would be best that you don't mention them. Just mention the grammatical understanding they have and if you share the same understanding, present it to me as if it is yours. This way, if the understanding is grammatically proven to be incorrect, then YOURS as well as YOUR CONSULTANTS' views will be addressed at the same time. BUT THEN AGAIN.....by presenting them as Someone Else's Views/Understandings, if they are proven incorrect it would be those third parties who are proven wrong and not you. Am I right Wakas?
It is my personal understanding (based upon my own research into this word) that the word Nisaa' does not come from the Arabic word Niswatan because that word (just like Nisaa' appears to me to be the only word in the entire Arabic Dictionary to be the Sole Anomaly that we are discussing. Secondly, the letter Hamza (which is a letter in the word Nisaa' IS NOT in the word Niswatan. This is what I was trying to say to Huruf who jumped down my throat for whatever reason. But the word Niswatan has the letter Waw as the third root letter which make this word what they call a defective verb. From what I have ascertained in my Arabic studies, when a defective verb is used as a derivative the final letter waw does not drop out entirely but as characterized by either a long vowel (aa, oo and ee) or a dipthong (aaey or aaow). I have not come across where it is taught that a Hamza can be placed at the end of a derived form of a defective verb. I could be incorrect and if I am incorrect I am humbly asking you to correct me. I do accept correction especially when it is clear and concrete.
However, looking at the actual SPELLING of the word Nisaa', I DO FIND this word listed under the entry for Nasiya which means to be forgetful, to forget and to be OBLIVIOUS. This is the defintion Hans Wehr gives. I'm sure you are aware what it means to be oblivious. It is to be unmindful OR unaware of what is happening to you or around you. To be ignorant of your own social or personal condition. Under this same entry, Hans Wehr gives Nasiy, Nasyan and NISAA' to all mean oblivious.
We have to look at the context of 4/1 through 4/3 and we will see that the context is the address of people/mankind (An-Naas) being instructed on how to better the conditions of those who are left alone in society to fend for themselves and who can use a helping hand (Al Yatamaa). An-Naas are told in 4/3 if they have a fear among them or within them that THEY (AS A WHOLE) will not be able to uphold justice then here is what you can do instead. Notice how it just says JUSTICE/EQUITY but not justice for a certain group of people. It only mentions practicing JUSTICE/EQUITY and since no one in particular is named or pointed to after mentioning this it means justice and equity in general...or in other words JUSTICE FOR ALL!!
So An-Naas (the PEOPLE) are instructed (by way of the imperative 'Ankihoo) to BOND or MAKE A SOCIAL CONTRACT with those people FROM AMONG THE GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO ARE OBLIVIOUS/NOT AWARE of the social and political landscape and how they fit in it. I base THIS UNDERSTANDING on what is said in 4/2 when AN-NAAS are told to HAND OVER to Al-Yatamaa what is their due rights. AN-NAAS (the people) are told to NOT exchange what is just and correct for that which is unjust and incorrect and to not monopolize for themselves the wealth, resources and equal opportunities that should naturally be theirs (al yatamaa). And to exchange what is just and correct for that which is unjust and incorrect and to monopolize and take strictly for yourself and your social group the resources, wealth and basic life amenities that the Yatamaa also have just due rights to is a very gross travesty against the human being. ALL HUMAN BEINGS!! This is the understanding I get from 4/2
If YOU, Wakas, are socially placed among a group of people who are routinely denied equal employment opportunities, access to the natural resources that are available on this earth and are meant to be fairly distributed among ALL HUMAN BEINGS and denied a voice which can allow you and your social group to be granted these things, then you and your social group are left alone to somehow fend for yourselves. And the fact that this socio-economic condition even extists (and which is set up by human beings and used to suppress and oppres other human beings) is a great, great travesty pepretrated against humanity. If you don't see your condition as being a problem and are unaware of what is rightfully yours and that what IS rightfully yours is being denied to you then you are not only someone who has to somehow make his own way in this world )al yatamaa) but you are also OBLIVIOUS and TOTALLY UNAWARE of the socio-economic landscape that has been shaped by wicked people and where you fit in in this landscape.
An-Naas (mankind/people/human beings) are invited to establish their society based upon the SYSTEM which The Quran outlines. This will be a process. In order to start the process of alleviating this situation, human beings are told in 4/3 to take up under their wing some people who are fit in a "Sub Group" of the overall group of Yatamaa. The Nisaa' are oblivious to the fact that they have been socio-economically manuevered into being left as sheep in a world of wolves. Notice how 4/3 mentions nothing about money or finances. It is my understanding that to establish this 'Bond' , this 'Contract' is to give assistance to them not only economically (if you are able to do so), but socially, intellectually, morally, educationally and most important politically. 4/3 says mathnaa, thulaatha and rubaa'a which the traditonalists translate as two, three or four (meaning up to for women to marry...aka polygamy). I think someone else here already mentioned that these words ARE NOT the cardinal numbers of 2, 3 and 4. The Cardinal numbers of two, three and four are athnaan (2), thalathat (3) and arba'a (4). These cardinal numbers ARE NOT what is written in 4/3. These numbers are made into a derived form that is meant to convey a Plural context. Because of this, some people who believe this verse is talking about polygamy translate mathnaa, thulaatha and rubaa'a to mean two's, three's and four's and this means (to them) to marry or marry off two at a time or three at a time or four at a time. I agree with the two at a time, three at a time or four at a time but I don't agree that it is talking about marriage because the word that definitively means marriage in a male to female bond of love and attraction is Zawaaj ( as I pointed out earlier ). But the word that is used in 4/3 is Nikaah (fa'ankihoo) and that word does not definitevly mean marriage and neither is the word used among the rabs for marriage. But I do know that Arabs who are TRADITIONAL MUSLIMS use this term for marriage. But the problem with this is that Traditional Muslims aren't the only Arabs in the world. What about other Muslims in Arab lands who seem to be just fine with the word Zawaaj for matrimony? What about the Arabs who are NOT muslim who too use the term Zawaaj?
Anyway, because it is a NIKAAH (which means it IS a social contract) the people are expected to fullfil the agreed upon terms of this social contract. If you feel as though you are able to divide up your time, your persons and your resources then by all means make a social contract with two people or three people or even four people. But if you feel as though that you will not be able to EVENLY and FAIRLY divide your time, energy, resources and personal attention among all four or all three or both of the two, then it would be best to have this bonding contract with just one person from this group of people who are CALLED/COLLECTIVELY TITLED An-Nisaa'. In this way you yourself will not be practicing an unintentional injustice by giving more of yourself to someone than you give to others in the group.
THIS is how I UNDERSTAND 4/3. I am not giving you a word for word translation or breakdown because you already know how I am against what you would call a word for word Literal translation of The Quran because it is not the words that are what's important but the CONCEPTS that these words are giving us. I prefer to share how I understand the concepts of the Quranic vocabulary and in this way any person here can read, understand and absorb these concepts and put it into their own words in a way that they would better understand the concepts. This is one of the problems that come with translations of The Quran. At the end of the day, even if the translator correctly understands the concepts of the Arabic words they still have to somehow convey those concepts to the readers of their translation and if they do not choose the right words to convey the concepts, the translation will fail to reach the reader in the way that is hoped by the translator. So PLEASE look at my UNDERSTANDING of 4/3 and keep in mind the grammatical exercises we have already been through and you will see why I am against your understanding of polygamy and why I understand in the way that I do.
One of the basic meanings of the root word "Taaba" is to be AGREEABLE. You can find this word "agreeable" Hans Wehr, Abdul Mannan Omar, John Penrice and Lane's under the entry for "Taaba". So, there's the WORD agreeable, but what is more important is the CONCEPT. The concept is that of a person who willingly agrees to something or does not object to a possible agreement. So yes, a nikaah is a social contract and the terms of a contract have to be mutually agreed upon by all parties involved, but I want you to keep in mind that the Nisaa' are the ones who are at the Receiving End of this contract while the other person from among An-Naas are the ones who are in the position to be at the Giving or Extending End. The Nisaa' are a group from among a larger group of Yatamaa and as a part of this larger, overall group they are left alone in society to fend for themselves and have no one to help them. How many people DO YOU KNOW who will willingly turn away the help of a philanthropist? I should could use some help right now and if a philanthropist comes along and offers me a helping hand through a mutual contract, I want to know the terms of this contract and I have to be AGREEABLE to the terms of the contract before it is signed by me. It is amost the same scenario when applying for a job. The applicant is at the receiving end and the potential employer is the one at the lending or giving end. If you want this entity to be your employer and pay you money for services rendered, you are going to have to AGREE to the terms of your employment and you will have to sign documents stating your agreement to your terms of employment. if you are NOT agreeable to the terms, look elsewhere OR face the possibility of continuing to be left to fend for yourself if you cannot make yourself to be agreeable to whoever comes along and wishes to provide help for your well being.
I have given you this lenghty reply inspite of the fact that you didn't answer my question to you in the last post I made. I'm repeating it again because I would like for you to answer it.
when you use the masculine plural yourself OR you come across the masculine plural through reading a text How Do You Know which group of people the masculine plural is referring to? If it is used for PEOPLE/HUMAN BEINGS it will be referring to one of those two groups. So how DO YOU ascertain WHICH GROUP the masculine plural is referring to?
Peace Damon,
What struck me about this particular post, was your mentioning of the possibility that 'fainkihoo' may not pertain exclusively to marriage? Perhaps, 4.3 could be speaking of a different kind of social contract where a pledge pertaining to protection and support is given? What's everyone's take on that? Could this be a possibility? Damon, perhaps you could also elaborate on this?
-
Pointing out logical fallacies is pertinent information in a discussion. You claim I did not highlight your specific logical fallacies, when I did. I have our emails right in front of me. If you meant you still did not understand or accept my claim of your logical fallacies, then that's fine, but that's a different matter.
In fact, even in this thread, I was specific when I stated your logical fallacies.I too still have that e-mail exchanged saved in my inbox and I just finished reading through it again. NO, you DID NOT prove any logical fallacies. You did what you always do bro, you stated that what I am saying (or defending in the case of Dr. Qamar) has logical fallacies. Your exact words. Your favorite words. AND you presented a Link to this logical fallacy and strawman argument stuff you also like to quote. Now, PLEASE read my last post again where I said that in that e-mail exchange
you NEVER pointed out, explained, anaylized or otherwise dissected either one of our arguments to substantiate my logical fallacies and your lack of logical fallacies
And I stand by this. You brought me ony theoretics and try to give me what you thought was a scientific example. I informed you that your argument is riddled with logical fallacies and you literally said that your arguments have no logical fallacies. Never explained why or how what I said had logical fallacies, and never explained why or how your arguments did not have logical fallacies.
Wakas, don't you think it's about time that you just stick with discussions and stop using that slogan and the links you give to educate people about your slogan? Don't you think it's about time that you stop blaming others for having these logical fallacies you speak of but will not accept this same blame for yourself? In the course of our discussion, instead of using the words logical fallacy at me, I would much appreciate it if you would just dissect my arguments point by point, go to the grammar books, the dictionaries and The Quran and display for all to see WHAT the logical fallacy is, WHY it is and HOW it is. Don't you think it would be much better in your favor if you would actually prove the logical fallacies without making an empty statement?
NOW, I HAVE A PROBLEM!!! Here it is
Is it a case of me answer your questions, and you not answer mine?
NO IT IS NOT!! BUT.....I would like for you to answer the question that I asked instead of you continuing to do what you've done in your last two responses to this question. Look at this
With regards to 43, if there was variance in view of this verse and/or I had some issues with it, I'd first begin by determining what is theoretically possible according to Arabic grammar, e.g. in our case, who the verb "taba" refers to. I'd consult corpus, others, grammar books, CAD,
This is EXACTLY what I am talking about. You still REFUSE to answer the question that is asked. This is why I am not going forward with you because I told you more than once this is a tactic I find distasteful. I DID NOT ASK YOU anything about the verb TAABA in 4/3. I asked you about the PLURAL FORMS that are used in 4/3 and I asked you which rule of Arabic Grammar is used to determine WHO the plural forms of 4/3 are referring to. I think you realize what an honest answer to this question would do to your argument of who is actually being addressed and ordered in 4/3. And for the record, I'm tired of you bringing up this corpus quran thing man, seriously. Corpus quran is not William Wright's book or Haywood's, or Thackston's or Professor Jones' or Nasif, Diyab, Tammum and Salih.
Everyone else reading this thread, you may think that we have reached a stalemate of some sort or I do not wish to go forward. I DO want to go forward and I DO want to address every point Wakas made in his last post to me. BUT, I am simply not going to participate in a game where a person refuses to give a direct answer to a very specific question especially when we all know (Wakas included) what the Grammatical answer to THAT QUESTION would do to his argument.
We have NOT reached a stalemate. A stalemate (politically) is when one or both parties involved are not budging from whatever stance they have taken up and the talks cannot go forward. I am not refusing to go forward. I am refusing to allow Wakas to move past a key question without answering that question. Wakas, when have you ever known me to go back on my word? If you are willing to be serious and honest and address the question I had asked you, you have my word that I will address everything you said in your last post and we can continue the discussion.
The ball is in your court. I'm here and I'm still waiting
-
Peace Bob,
No offense, but neither of those sites look like reputable dictionaries. The second one looked really shady. Who created these dictionaries?
Also, I disagree that God would have had to used the ha-ya-dad for menstruation. ha-ya-dad is the root for mahid. I undertand it as how "sajada" is the root word for masjid. So, mahid is the actual word for menstruation, while ha-ya-dad is only the root, which means "to menstruate". Of course, "to menstruate" would not fit in here. As a result, God has chosen mahid.
Your other interpretations make little sense to me. I feel like I'm reading something that does not even relate to anything of relevance.
Another thing, are you saying that the word "al" before a word makes it very special? I don't agree with this approach either. Again, not sure if I understood you correctly. Please clarify further if I haven't understood you.
Can you refer to grammar books where they explain why MA is added to khz and why the proper word for menstruation KHAIZ is not used? Can you show us authentic dictionary which is showing us the accurate word for menstruation?
-
Shirley, don't get upset , Mazhar and Wakas never answered anything earlier when I asked them questions, in one thread, Mazhar even contradicted himself.
Mazha is talking about 49 11, and i asked him why Qoum was translated as Men,
Quote from Mazhar on Today at 033641 PM
After this post, what word should I coin except "stupid" to make you understand that words used are indefinite. And a Qaum comprises of subsets, and each subset has in it women who can do it against other women of their own subset. And unless women are identified as an entity with reference to a man/men for indicating relationship, it means women in the general sense.But why you think Yusuf Ali is the last word? Why not you see others? And perhaps you do not know that in "Old English" 'men" generally meant "human being, person".
No group of people should indulge in mocking/ridiculing another people, it is possible that they may be better than them;
and nor group of women should indulge mocking/ridiculing other women, it is possible that they may be better than them;
And QZ conveniently also forgets that verbs are different, for Masculine Noun the verb is masculine, and for women the verb is feminine apart from pronouns. That is why I say he needs a refresher course, though he knows Arabic and is deliberately and purposely cheating by ignoring basics of Arabic.
..My reply
I?m not saying Yusuf Ali is the final word; far from it, however I will use his translation (as it is traditional) to explain.
?Let not some men (Qoum) among you laugh at others?
?Nor let some women (Nisa) laugh at others?It is clear that Qoum and Nisa are antonyms. Now let?s take a look at your translation
?No group of people should indulge in mocking/ridiculing another people?
?nor group of women should indulge mocking/ridiculing other women?If we look at the first section, the word ?people? constitutes of men and women, so there is no need to create a second section specifically related to ?women?
?Yaskhar? the ?masculine singular imperfect verb? has been used once, for both parties i.e. it has been used for ?Qoam? and for ?Nisa?
If Qoum and Nisa are antonyms, then we firstly need to understand what Qoum is in order to establish the meaning of ?Nisa?
Qoum is from the root Qaf ? Waw ? Miim = stand still or firm, rose/stand up, managed/conducted/ordered/regulated/superintended, established, made it straight/right, maintain/erect/observe/perform, set up, people/community/company, abode, stature/dignity/rank. aqama - to keep a thing or an affair in a right state.
From the above, we can clearly see that ?Qoum? is positive, with high rank, which is in a right state.
To understand what Nisa is, we do need to have a ?refresher? and go back to basics in order to understand what the conditions are of nouns in relation to gender.
As we are well aware, there are two forms of gender in Arabic; masculine and feminine ? there is no neuter. Effectively this means each noun must be either masculine (true or figurative) or feminine (true or figurative). There are certain figurative nouns that are deemed feminine as standard ? i.e. human body parts (hand, eye), natural entities such as wind, geographical names such as towns, countries and so on.
If Nisa is the antonym of Qoum, then it is suggestive that Nisa is negative, with low rank, in a bad state. If Qoum is a country / nation / a people in a good state, of high stature and rank, then clearly Nisa is a weaker nation / people.
I rest my case!
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9601323.90
THEY HAVE TO DEFEND THEIR POSITION, ITS THEIR BELIEF THROUGHT LIFE, AND NOW IT IS SHAKEN. THEY WON'T GIVE IT UP AND YOU SHOULD NOT SPEND TIME IN CONVINCING THEM. LET THEM HAVE THE THRILL OF BEING "KNOWLEDGABLE" ILL TRY TO FIND THE OTHER THREAD WHERE WAKAS ADMIT HE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DR QAMAR ZAMAN SAID ON ONE PAGE, BUT HE WROTE A "CRITIQUE" o
-
What is the evidence for Nisa being "women" ?
why is the prope word KHAIZ not used for menstuation?
Was this not posted with countless verses and examples of feminine especially inheritance?
411... so if are (feminine, plural) nisaa/feminine/women above two (feminine) falahunna/so to them (feminine, plural) third dual (2/3) what left and if kanat/she is (feminine) whidatan one/single (feminine) so for her (feminine) the half
Click above to view more evidence...
An Arabic-English Lexicon. London. Williams and Norgate. 1863. Edward William Lane.
Where is evidence it's war and weak people or people who forget which make no sense?
This discussion should've ended long time ago; cannot believe Wakas et al are wasting time.
Peace
-
Was this not posted with countless verses and examples of feminine especially inheritance?
411... so if are (feminine, plural) nisaa/feminine/women above two (feminine) falahunna/so to them (feminine, plural) third dual (2/3) what left and if kanat/she is (feminine) whidatan one/single (feminine) so for her (feminine) the half
Where is evidence it's war and weak people or people who forget which make no sense?
This discussion should've ended long time ago; cannot believe Wakas et al are wasting time.
Peace
Sorry your not answering the question. Is ayat women too, because it is feminine?
-
I personally can't believe some people seem to lack logic and common sense (and basic Arabic grammar) all for the sake of holding on to a cherished religious belief.
They must survive somehow,belief is everything they got, they must protect it from evidence and logic;D
-
Peace Bob,
As you've seen from my posts, I am not an expert in Arabic grammar. I'm looking to see a plausible translation that makes sense. Dr. Zaman's translations usually make very little sense to me, and there is the issue with all of those verses that Noon pointed out. Now, perhaps, if you could provide a sound translation for each of those verses, then perhaps it would make sense in my head. Do you see what I am saying? If you use an alternative meaning for nisa, then it needs to fit everywhere, correct? It needs to make sense.
Can you refer to grammar books where they explain why MA is added to khz and why the proper word for menstruation KHAIZ is not used? Can you show us authentic dictionary which is showing us the accurate word for menstruation?
-
Peace Bob,
As you've seen from my posts, I am not an expert in Arabic grammar. I'm looking to see a plausible translation that makes sense. Dr. Zaman's translations usually make very little sense to me, and there is the issue with all of those verses that Noon pointed out. Now, perhaps, if you could provide a sound translation for each of those verses, then perhaps it would make sense in my head. Do you see what I am saying? If you use an alternative meaning for nisa, then it needs to fit everywhere, correct? It needs to make sense.
Dear friend I don't know your sense and I do't think Dr Qamar Zaman knows it either, but the approach is linguistic so that's why the proofs will define the facts,
For a shia and sunni it makes sense to have 4 wives, sex with slaves, halala mutah and even marriage with a 6 year old. This is why I don't use anyone's SENSE or LOGIC as a judge between false or true.
The proofs will speak for themselves, whether it makes sense to us or not.
thank you
-
I personally can't believe some people seem to lack logic and common sense (and basic Arabic grammar) all for the sake of holding on to a cherished religious belief.
You assumed nisaa means something posted ZERO evidence thus far, run away refuse to translate.
In addition, by your same logic 41-3 is talking about asking men to marry other men with orphans.Sorry your not answering the question. Is ayat women too, because it is feminine?
Context is your friend; words before point to feminine/women as do the words following and math.
You, Shirley or anyone cannot distribute inheritance make sense using other than feminine (nisaa).They must survive somehow,belief is everything they got, they must protect it from evidence and logic;D
If you think yourself smart then use logic to solve the simple distribution on $90,000 inheritance?
A. 3 daughters, 3 sons ? requires basic 3rd grade math
B. 3 sisters, 3 brothers ? requires basic common sense
C. 3 daughters, mother, father, husband ? extra bonus411 directs you The God in your children
to the male like share the two (f)
so if kunna/are (f) nisa (insert translation?) above two (f) falahunna/so for them (f) third dual (2/3) what left and if kanat/she is (f) widatan one/single (f) so to her (f) the half4176 they seek your ruling say The God gives you a ruling in al-kalalah ?
and if they are ikh'watun rijal wanisa (insert translation?)
so to the male like share the two (f)The proofs will speak for themselves, whether it makes sense to us or not.
thank you
Then simply post your proof and translate the verses posted not beat around a mysterious bush.
Peace
-
Peace all,
Peace Damon,
Yup, I'm still reading through the discussion. Though, some of the heavy grammar rules and terminology, are very difficult to follow. I wish I had more time on my hands for some intense reading, but it's impossible at this point.
So, to both you and Mazhar, if you could please try and break things down into layman's terms, I know that I will appreciate it greatly. I also think that it will help if we stay away from personal attacks, and focus exclusively on the issue on hand. I do understand that the topic is emotionally charged (trust me, I'm a woman), but it takes away from all the hard work you've all put into your analysis.
I have no issue with rethinking my stance on 4.3, but I want to ensure that I have fully understood the alternative, before I choose to even consider it.
My thoughts exactly. )
Released
I have tried it and put it in seperate thread, each sentence of Ayah even if it apparently comprises a single word, is seperately discussed. Knowledge of Enlish grammar about Preposition, Prepositional Phrase and Relative Pronouns and its linkage clause would suffice. That can be applied for Arabic grammar.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604734.0
Mazhar, thank you very much for that breakdown. It helped me quite a bit.
Peace.
