Discussion on 4:3 and meaning of nisa
-
"The Quran is NOT a Religious book geared towards men alone. It is a book of Social Justice geared towards women and men equally.
Don't you think the Quran addresses men primarily?
Let me quote an example.
424 And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty (hath been done). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise.
Notice how the Quran addresses MEN as to who is allowed or forbidden. There are numerous examples like this. This is normal because the receivers of Quran (Muhammad) was a man. And it was men who led the tribe and households back then.
-
Don't you think the Quran addresses men primarily?
No I do not. I think The Quran is addressing Women and Men equally.
Let me quote an example.
424 And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty (hath been done). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise.
Notice how the Quran addresses MEN as to who is allowed or forbidden. There are numerous examples like this. This is normal because the receivers of Quran (Muhammad) was a man. And it was men who led the tribe and households back then.
I DO NOT notice this verse addressing MEN at all nor do I recognize the subject/concept of marriage in that verse either. Please explore The Arabic of the text and point out to me WHEN and WHERE this verse addresses men or marriage/matrimony is mentioned.
-
Peace Solomon,
In 7th Century, women would be perfectly happy and secure in a polygamous society. They would have no problem with sex slaves and accepting male superiority.
Where's your proof of that? Upper class women didn't tolerate a lot of what they deemed nonsense through their wealth and lineage within the community. Accepting male superiority may have been a given, but sex slaves weren't owned by most people. Many of the people in these societies were dirt poor with little power. The Quran highlights this economic disparity and the plight of orphans along with other societal problems. From classical literature and those gosh darn hadith stories, it is conveyed that it was Khadija's position within the society that afforded Muhammed protection and political power. Marriage contracts were also used within Jewish and Christian communities, and there may have been women who stipulated all sorts of things. So, to say that women were PERFECTLY happy and secure within polygamous society is a gross assumption on your part.
If it means beating, it's natural he will translate it as "beat". http//www.islamawakened.com/quran/4/34/default.htm
In the 7th century, wife beating would be a normal phenomenon.
Today it may be considered an abuse in some societies. Still, in Saudi Arabia, middle east and south asia, it is perfectly acceptable to beat wives if something goes wrong. Just because it seems cruel to you, doesn't mean it's cruel to everybody
Well, of course. That logic could be applied to anything. There is a verse in the text that is as follows
18109 Say, "If the sea were an inkwell for the words of my Lord, then the sea would run out before the words of my Lord run out;" even if We were to bring another like it for its aid.
What does this mean to me when I read it? It means that the message never runs out. Time will change, place will change, people will change, but the text will remain relevant and travel with them through each evolution. The words are rich in multiple meanings for a reason. Many of the verses serve multiple purposes and speak to different people in different ways. This is a concept I have derived and have become extremely tolerant towards.
This is why I could care less what Saudi or anyone else thinks. Apart from that, nobody's interpretation is 100% accurate. We're all just doing our very best. The true wisdom behind the Quran lies with its creator. So, perhaps the word meaning that past generations found most favorable (due to the male chauvinism that was so blatant in their culture---and still is), were the meanings they decided to choose and utilize. Today, we're diving into the text again, and deriving something very different yet totally relevant and applicable. It's also removed the cruelty factor. All it takes is for a bunch of people to be critical and inquisitive, and reject b.s when they hear it. That doesn't happen very often though.
Quranic study within traditional circles is similar to Bible Study in that it is often conducted in a very "one way or the highway approach", and does not leave much room for critical thought let alone reform in the present era. There is the facade of free thinking, but apart from the forum and internet forums, I have yet to find such an outlet. I hope you understand what I'm saying.
I don't claim to have a monopoly over the truth. I don't claim perfection, nor do I suffer from the chosen people syndrome and think that I am going to automatically receive the truth on a silver platter just people I professed belief.
After all this, you claim Quran is for all ages? And that there is no "feminism" involved?
If you don't like polygamy and wife beating, just admit that the Quran doesn't make sense in these issues when 21st century matters are involved. Muslims need to face the reality that legislative matters in their holy book is not suited to 21st century rather than desperately trying to twist word meanings to suit modernity.
There's nothing to "admit". We're not twisting anything. We're using proper resources to derive meaning. We're using the text in itself to CROSS REFERENCE. Look at the verses in and around 434, and you'll see how "beat" just doesn't make any sense. Read the entire text, and you'll see how "beat" looks absolutely out of place.
Have you seen the analysis that is done by some of our free thinking members? They bring forth arguments that could shut up any random traditional "scholar" out there, IF people finally decide that enough is enough and decide to broaden their scope. Some of the stuff I read is absolutely brilliant. So, where are the lies? Who exactly is lying?
It's not about feminism or male chauvinism. It's about finding the best possible meanings so that we can be good role models and productive citizens of this world.
5679 None can grasp it except those pure.
The verse above refers to people who are pure or of sincere intentions. It's all about grasping the best possible meaning. The test is in its implementation. If the interpretation leads to counter productiveness, injustice, and chaos, then perhaps we need to revisit the text.
Dr. Khalifa has and Edip continues to do a lot of good work. However, they aren't our only sources. I read what everyone has to say and I'm open.
-
I think the purpose of this thread, started by brother damon was to determine the meaning of the words nisaa' and rijaal'. It was not to discuss poligamy or otherwise, since there are already a few threads and some very recent to deal with that.
I hope sincerely that the thread is not derailed. And particularly not derailed in order to help trolls along in their mission.
Salaam
-
Salaam Huruf,
I do not think it is a matter of egos, but a matter of trolls.
Obviously, brother Bender has not attempted to let his ego take over, but to let the troll know that we know.
Salaam
No, I don't think "Bender" did either. I think it is apparent for all to see who allows their ego to take control apart from those who wilfully choose to be ignorant.
I see this term "troll" and "trolling" et cetera a great deal these days. What does it refer to?
Thanks.
-
FYI Brother Damon did talk about polygamy and otherwise. While engaging in Fallen Angel's thread, Brother Damon notified us of the existence of this particular thread, which is relevant to our discussion. We've all showed up here, only to be told later that this thread has nothing to do with polygamy? This does not appear to be accurate.
-
I think the purpose of this thread, started by brother damon was to determine the meaning of the words nisaa' and rijaal'. It was not to discuss poligamy or otherwise, since there are already a few threads and some very recent to deal with that.
I hope sincerely that the thread is not derailed. And particularly not derailed in order to help trolls along in their mission.
Salaam
Salaam Huruf,
I too see this thread being derailed. But I started this thread to show two things
1). Nisaa' does not (and cannot) mean women.
2). 4/3 DOES NOT offer polygamy as a solution to a social problem.
I wanted to examine this word (Nisaa' in just this ONE VERSE alone because I feel if it can be demonstrated that it does not mean women in this verse, then it does not mean women at all in any of the other verses. But by demonstrating that this word does not mean women, I think I have also successfully pointed out that the understanding of Polygamy in 4/3 is terribly incorrect.
Something else I need to mention is that NO ONE involved in this thread who defend the Nisaa=Women and 4/3=Polygamy Status Quo have attempted to answer any of the questions I asked about HOW or WHY polygamy would be a solution or necessity to the social problem 4/2 and 4/3 speak of. Common Sense questions such as WHY I would need to marry a woman just to give her a helping hand??????
-
Thanks Damon for setting right your purpose. I worte from memory and the memory wasn't that good. I hope though that the course can be set anew though.
Going back to 4.3,as I pointed out repeatedly in another thread or threads it does not dela with poligamy at all neither to commend it nor to prohibit it.
I think that the word nisaa' and rajul, which in their roots have absolutely nothing to do with sex, and as has previously suggested by many people, Samia amongst them, could be something along the line, person who takes responsiblity for him or herself and for others, and persons who cannot or are unable or choose not to take responsibility for themselves nor for anybody else and fro whom other are responsible.
Salaam
-
Peace Damon,
Peace Released.
Do you think polygamy in itself (let's forget 4.3 for a moment) is permissible? Or do you think there is something in the Quran that may forbid it?
I personally do not believe (according to my present understanding) that The Quran does not address at all the issue of polygamy. I don't see where it makes polygamy permissible or forbids it. I just don't think polygamy is a subject at all in The Quran.
-
Peace,
So technically, polygamy and polyandry are both neither encouraged or discouraged in the Quran, that's what you're implying right? Also, if you don't mind, can you point out based on this new understanding of Nisa', Nikah etc., which verses DO deal with marriage?
-
Peace Damon,
I also believe that polygamy is not an issue in the Koran. I believe it is a subject that was inserted into the Koran. The Koran on the whole does not support polygamy and as I have said on numerous occasions, there are no contradictions in the Koran and, in effect, the Koran will explain itself.
We have to use our intelligence and be brave enough to accept the obvious.
-
Peace Damon,
I also believe that polygamy is not an issue in the Koran. I believe it is a subject that was inserted into the Koran. The Koran on the whole does not support polygamy and as I have said on numerous occasions, there are no contradictions in the Koran and, in effect, the Koran will explain itself.
We have to use our intelligence and be brave enough to accept the obvious.
Peace Dawngorgeous,
I agree with you.
==========================================
Basically what Dr. QZ and the Aastana members are doing is something I realized must be done even when I was still a sunni, and that is we are Starting All Over From Scratch!! The people who altered and defaced the message did so by starting from scratch and they were very methodical about it. WE have to do the same thing IF we want to perform the correct surgery in order to repair The Quran's message and image.
"The Quran is NOT a Religious book geared towards men alone. It is a book of Social Justice geared towards women and men equally.The Quran is a document outlining the implementation of JUSTICE. It is NOT only upon males to implement justice it is upon males and females alike. Because of this, a document concerned with JUSTICE FOR ALL must also ADDRESS ALL!! That is why you find 41 - 43 being addressed to ALL PEOPLE (An-Nas). It is addressing all people and the system of justice it recommends is for the benefit all people - 6/90, 12/104, 38/87, 43/44.
I hope I live long enough to see the day when The Quran is no longer viewed as a sexist, chauvinist, male centric religious book."
-
Peace,
So technically, polygamy and polyandry are both neither encouraged or discouraged in the Quran, that's what you're implying right?
Yes Sister, this is the understanding that I presently have. I do not see The Quran as a book revealing yet another religion with rites and rituals and the prying into human beings private lives. I see The Quran as a document mandating and outlining the process towards dismantling a system of injustice and replacing it with a system that is based on justice. I cannot see how telling it's target audience whom to marry and not marry, when to marry, when not to marry, etc. fits in this total discussion of ridding ourselves of corrupt and unjust regimes and replacing them a system of justice. Marriage is a private matter that fits outside of the scope of social justice for all.
Also, if you don't mind, can you point out based on this new understanding of Nisa', Nikah etc., which verses DO deal with marriage?
Based on my present understandings of Nikah and Nisaa' I don't think any of the verses in The Quran do deal with marriage.
===========================================
Basically what Dr. QZ and the Aastana members are doing is something I realized must be done even when I was still a sunni, and that is we are Starting All Over From Scratch!! The people who altered and defaced the message did so by starting from scratch and they were very methodical about it. WE have to do the same thing IF we want to perform the correct surgery in order to repair The Quran's message and image.
"The Quran is NOT a Religious book geared towards men alone. It is a book of Social Justice geared towards women and men equally.The Quran is a document outlining the implementation of JUSTICE. It is NOT only upon males to implement justice it is upon males and females alike. Because of this, a document concerned with JUSTICE FOR ALL must also ADDRESS ALL!! That is why you find 41 - 43 being addressed to ALL PEOPLE (An-Nas). It is addressing all people and the system of justice it recommends is for the benefit all people - 6/90, 12/104, 38/87, 43/44.
I hope I live long enough to see the day when The Quran is no longer viewed as a sexist, chauvinist, male centric religious book."
-
Based on my present understandings of Nikah and Nisaa' I don't think any of the verses in The Quran do deal with marriage.
The Arabic word for marriage is ZAWAAJ .The Arabic word for husband is ZAWJ and the Arabic word for WIFE IS ZAWJA !!! The plural for Zawj (husband) is Al-Azwaaj and the PLURAL FOR ZAWJA (WIFE) is ZAWJAAT !! In Arabic when someone is married the terms that are used are Matazawj and Watazawwajat . This is in spoken AND written Arabic. Some spoken dialects use the Arabic word Imraa'a for wife, others use Zawja and a few of them use both words interchangeably. But just so you guys know, the Arabic word Imraa'a LITERALLY means WOMAN. This information you can get from the dictionaries and grammar books of Classical, Modern Standard and Spoken Arabic.
We should know that these words are all derivatives of the root word Za-Wa-Ja and the definitions of this word are to pair, to double, to connect two things as a pair, to make one of a pair, to connect two species or type as a pair or AS A SPOUSE!!
44/54, 33/37 and 39/6 in The Quran speak unquestionably on the subject of marriage or male-to-female companionship.
A couple of other related tid bits just to help further drive home the point of Zawj, Zawja and Zawaaj;
In Arabic a married couple is referred to as Az-Zawjayn and The plural word for the term married people is mutazawwijiin .
The reason I strongly feel that this verse is NOT discussing husband and wife relations is because the Arabic word for Husband (male mate/companion) is Zauwj and the Arabic word for wife (female mate/companion) is Zauwja. Neither of these words are mentioned in this verse, yet both of these words are mentioned elsewhere in The Quran when it is clear that it is talking about husband and wife or companions/mates.
A husband is not the same thing as a male companion.
A wife is not the same thing as a female companion.Does Quran discuss marriage?
yes/no - if yes, cite the verses.Does an exclusive Quranic term for "husband" and "wife" exist?
yes/no - if yes, what are they?Please make up your mind.
-
My mind IS made up. I understand Zawj and Zawja to be used in Arabic as husband and wife and used in The Quran to also denote husband and wife OR male-female companions and companionship. If you're attempting to come at me with your typical silliness, AT LEAST read my last post carefully. I clearly started my response to Fallen Angel's question with Based on my present understandings. I DO NOT believe any verses of the Quran discuss MARRIAGE!! By this I mean MATRIMONY or discussing who should and should not marry who, when to get married, the outlines of the marriage contract, etc. If The Quran does so happen to mention the words for Husband/Intimate Male Companion or Wife/Intimate Female Companion, that is not the same as bringing up the topic of Marriage/Matrimony/Wedding/Marriage Ceremony. Knowing what I know now, 44/54 and 39/6 may mention Zawj and/or Zawja but by no means does that equate to bringing up the topic of marriage (this person marrying that person, etc.). And I have a different understanding today concerning 33/37 than what I did two weeks ago.
Re-read my post on Zawj and Zawja and remind yourself what I said in that post and the reasons I said what I said in that post.
If you're going to attempt to discuss anything with me, you already know my criteria for fair and rational debate. If that is not your criteria then I will not waste my time with you.
-
It's quite simple really. In order to evaluate someone's position, one must know what their position is.
Simplified, you said
In these verses Quran unquestionably talks about A or B.
Then said, Quran never discusses A.Thus, unless you've changed your mind, the above two statements are not compatible. But it's ok, you have now clarified.
I find it interesting on the one hand you say Quran is about social justice, but on the other hand say it never discusses marriage (in terms of how to go about it, criteria, safeguards, divorce procedure etc etc).And I also got the answer to this
Does an exclusive Quranic term for "husband" and "wife" exist?
yes/no - if yes, what are they?(emphasis mine)
I understand Zawj and Zawja to be used in Arabic as husband and wife and used in The Quran to also denote husband and wife OR male-female companions and companionship.
In other words, zawj/zawja are not exclusively a husband/wife term.
