Discussion on 4:3 and meaning of nisa
-
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.
-
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).
I find it equally interesting that you seem to think that a document of social justice Must somehow discuss marriage as if it's a "Religious Book".
And I also got the answer to this
(emphasis mine)
In other words, zawj/zawja are not exclusively a husband/wife term.Good for you. I have my answer as well when I made that post on Zawj and Zawja because it was never approached or refuted and that is in the Arabic Language and among the Arabs the term used for Marriage is Zawaaj and not Nikah . And the related terms for husband and wife The Arabs use are Zawj and Zawja respectively as opposed to words related to Nikah or coming from the root word If you were to go back and read that particular post you would realize THAT was the point I was making.
====================================================
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 of 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."
-
Good for you. I have my answer as well when I made that post on Zawj and Zawja because it was never approached or refuted and that is in the Arabic Language and among the Arabs the term used for Marriage is Zawaaj and not Nikah . And the related terms for husband and wife The Arabs use are Zawj and Zawja respectively as opposed to words related to Nikah or coming from the root word If you were to go back and read that particular post you would realize THAT was the point I was making.
is no word in Qur'aan. will mean wife or husband when it is in Genitive construct-Possessive phrase, otherwise it will only denote a group, a pair.
Yousingular masculine-second person and the wife of you the word remains
Similarly husband will be
-
Mazhar,
You seem to not understand that there is a REASON that I ignore you and not bother with responding to anything you say to me. Read my last two posts (to Wakas) and read this post of yours and hopefully you'll figure it out.
Also, I can save you the time on one thing I DO NOT go by your rules for the case endings and the functions they supposedly serve in an Arabic sentence. I'm not going to waste my time trying to explain this to you or trying to get you to understand it as I do, it will be a waste of my time and energy. If you want to follow Sibawayh's and William Wright's rules for the case endings, then by all means knock yourself out.
Put two and two together so you can understand why I have been ignoring you and why I am going to continue to ignore you after this post. Also, I've seen your methodology of discussing things with people and have already been on the receiving end of that methodology as well. It only takes one time for me.
Peace!!
-
Mazhar,
You seem to not understand that there is a REASON that I ignore you and not bother with responding to anything you say to me. Read my last two posts (to Wakas) and read this post of yours and hopefully you'll figure it out.
Also, I can save you the time on one thing I DO NOT go by your rules for the case endings and the functions they supposedly serve in an Arabic sentence. I'm not going to waste my time trying to explain this to you or trying to get you to understand it as I do, it will be a waste of my time and energy. If you want to follow Sibawayh's and William Wright's rules for the case endings, then by all means knock yourself out.
Put two and two together so you can understand why I have been ignoring you and why I am going to continue to ignore you after this post. Also, I've seen your methodology of discussing things with people and have already been on the receiving end of that methodology as well. It only takes one time for me.
Peace!!
I just check you and rebut you when you attribute your stupid understanding to Arabs. You have naively ignored the evidence given to rebut your stupid assertion about Zaujatun. You had no option but to ignore it.
-
Peace,
Please cannot you please discuss things in a friendlier manner? Are you not muslims?
May God settle your disputes
-
Peace,
Please cannot you please discuss things in a friendlier manner? Are you not muslims?
May God settle your disputes
Man of Faith, you and I have never said anything to each other on this forum (as far as I know) but this is the second time you have interloped in a thread I was involved in and made statements that portrayed me as an actor of aggression in the situation at hand. As for me personally....I do not try to interlope or correct the behaviour of someone that I do not know. But that's just me. I do not try to play peace maker or try to portray myself as a "saint" of this forum. But look at my post and then look at his and please point out to me any aggression or harshness on my part towards him. I ignore him so I would not be pushed to be harsh or aggressive with him because that is eventually what happens when you deal with him. I know this from observation AND experience!!
Secondly, I am quite curious as to what your definition of a muslim is. Perhaps you can open a thread where this word and it's definition is explored. But based upon the context you have used it in (in your rhetorical styled question) I think I have an idea of what you perceive a muslim to be, in which case I must say that I most humbly disagree. Again, that can be discussed in it's own separate thread.
More importantly, I am humbly suggesting that you read this thread from the very beginning to understand that I do not have a dispute with this guy nor do I care to discuss anything with him. His last post should let you know exactly why I choose not to because that is what you will have to deal with when it comes to trying to discuss anything with him and that is not the first time that he has come at me like that. If you were to read this thread in it's entirety, you would see that.
If YOU have a contribution to make to the topic of this thread then I am all eyes and am willing to read whatever thoughts or views you have concerning the topic under discussion. But please...PLEASE stop trying to play Peace Maker so much especially when you do not understand the full scope of whatever dispute you feel you may perceive and you do not know at least one of the people whom you are attempting to "correct". I say this with all humility and cordiality.
-
Peace,
I do not know you, that is correct. I just thought the tone was really bad and lacking respect. Especially the last post calling thoughts stupid and naive.
I just wrote what I thought and you attack even my call for a friendly solution to the conflict.
Why I asked about if you are muslims was for you to yourselves to reflect on the actions and if they match one.
How do I perceive a muslim to be other than one following what is written in the believer's guide, the Quran?
What now? Are you going to divert attacks on me because I could not remain a passive bystander?
Good that you ignore him then and I hope he will stop making disrespectful remarks.
Anyway, I have no more to add to the topic other than what I already said. I will check on other threads.
May God bless us with peace
-
Good that you ignore him then and I hope he will stop making disrespectful remarks.
Islam says check and point out stupid things, it is specially needed when they are authoritatively asserted and attributed to others to bring in force and authenticity in that idiotic assertion. You also should not be passive to such stupid assertions.
-
Peace,
Why not object in a kinder way and explain why the ideas are wrong? You can respond to falsehood, but not in such a harsh way.
Anyway, I see that my attempt to care failed and I apologize for my interference. Please do not flame me for just trying to help.
May God bring us back in good mood
-
Peace,
I do not know you, that is correct. I just thought the tone was really bad and lacking respect. Especially the last post calling thoughts stupid and naive.
I just wrote what I thought and you attack even my call for a friendly solution to the conflict.
Why I asked about if you are muslims was for you to yourselves to reflect on the actions and if they match one.
How do I perceive a muslim to be other than one following what is written in the believer's guide, the Quran?
What now? Are you going to divert attacks on me because I could not remain a passive bystander?
Good that you ignore him then and I hope he will stop making disrespectful remarks.
Anyway, I have no more to add to the topic other than what I already said. I will check on other threads.
May God bless us with peace
Man of Faith, I made it very clear that what I had to say to you I was saying in as cordial a manner as possible. But instead of realizing and acknowledging this, you make the statements such as those that are in red. Please read my post directed towards you and read your response to that post and ask yourself if I would be in the wrong if I choose not to correspond with you just like I choose not to respond to the guy who only makes idiotic posts and spits stupidity whenever he touches a keyboard? And I have to wonder WHO you are directing your response to because I believe you are getting me and that guy's posts mixed up. He is the one with the retarded and very limited thinking process, not me. Click on his name, read his posts and activities on this forum and you will understand why no one on this forum takes him seriously. This is what I meant when I said that you should research a situation before making assumptions. And I see you still have not done so (but make posts towards me that are certainly unwarranted).
My activity on this forum is on a very limited basis...VERY limited. I'm not a fixture in this place (and definitely do not wish to be), so when I do come here I have to use that little bit of time wisely. Part of doing that is NOT corresponding with certain people. I'm sorry, but based on what I have seen from you I realize that you are also one such person. All I can say to you is Peace and that's it.
-
Peace,
Why not object in a kinder way and explain why the ideas are wrong? You can respond to falsehood, but not in such a harsh way.
Anyway, I see that my attempt to care failed and I apologize for my interference. Please do not flame me for just trying to help.
May God bring us back in good mood
Salamun alaika,
Your intervention is with all the best intentions, and I do appreciate it. In debates such things quite often somehow occur. Response seemingly appeared harsh to you but it went because of deceptive technique of my colleague Shirley. He instead of accepting erroneousness of his observation tried to cover it in "ignoring" theory.
-
Peace,
Calm down, I yield, sorry that I said anything that arose even more anger. It is apparent that I failed to get across well here. I will leave you to what you were doing.
May God bless you
-
Peace Man of Faith,
I do have to agree with you in this regard. I may not agree with you as to what your understanding is, but you've made some very valid points. I had concerns with people being very rude to me, just because I tried to either challenge their assertions, or ask them for clarification.
The fact that I don't understand some people, makes them behave in a way that is very condescending and disrespectful. On the other hand, I've had accusations hurled at me, just because I don't agree with a certain logic. I'm not perfect, of course. I've made a lot of mistakes on the forum. If we continue to behave this way, then we're no different than those "mullahs" (as they say in my language- crazy radicals in english) who raise their fists and condemn everyone to hell.
Regardless of what nisa means, in the end, how will you interact with one another? How will you interact with your wives, your children? Those are the questions we need to ask, in my opinion. However it is that you look at it, what will this look like when its acted upon? One person talked about mandate, what will his life look like? The other person talked about prohibition, what will her life look like? Perhaps, I'm just getting too much into the hypothetical, but we're all very different and reality may hit sooner than later. We've got a mind of our own, regardless of how we perceive the terminology or verses on a whole. It's difficult to respect individual differences, when we're so set in our convictions. I suggest that we let our mind wander a little..let's see where it takes us.
I'll get off my soap box..for now...
-
Two points
-
As stated in another thread of a similarly contentious nature, I am strongly of the belief that if members of this forum were more grounded in the rules of the Classical Arabic language, this thread would not have run into 46 pages, and that our efforts would have been devoted elsewhere to more deserving issues.
-
There is not, and has never been, a signification of nis? in the Classical Arabic language other than "women."
There is not even a word of the same form and radicals with which one might mistake the two meanings.
The case for a Quran-specific meaning of nis? - other than "women" - does not exist.
This is due to the fact that the word is repeatedly treated as one which signifies a group of feminine sentient beings, as accords with the syntax of the Classical language.
For emphasis, there is not, and has never been, a signification of nis? in the Classical Arabic language other than "women."
-
-
There is not, and has never been, a signification of nis? in the Classical Arabic language other than "women."
That view has been addressed by me in This Post I made earlier in this thread.
There is not even a word of the same form and radicals with which one might mistake the two meanings.
This is incorrect. Please see page 1130 of Hans Wehr Arabic Dictionary and Volume 8, page 287 of Lane's Lexicon.
The case for a Quran-specific meaning of nis? - other than "women" - does not exist.
This is due to the fact that the word is repeatedly treated as one which signifies a group of feminine sentient beings, as accords with the syntax of the Classical language.
12/30 and 4/3 prove this to be grammatically incorrect while 3/14 and 24/31 prove this to be logically incorrect (that is, as long as a person is willing to use logic).
For emphasis, there is not, and has never been, a signification of nis? in the Classical Arabic language other than "women."
Unfortunately no one can prove this statement to be true or untrue just as no one can prove true or untrue the opposite point of view (that nisa meant something else other than women in 7th Century Arabic). The best any of us can do (and what I am attempting to do) is examine this so-called anomaly and ask logical questions and examine The Quran with a rational mind. As far as examining this anomaly and asking questions as well as critiquing it, again I point you in the direction of This Post I made earlier in this thread.
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 of 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."
-
Two points
- As stated in another thread of a similarly contentious nature, I am strongly of the belief that if members of this forum were more grounded in the rules of the Classical Arabic language, this thread would not have run into 46 pages, and that our efforts would have been devoted elsewhere to more deserving issues.
This is a deserving issue for women everywhere. I'm sorry you don't see it that way. However, we're not going to cease the discussion just because you deem that it's unnecessary for us to devote so much time to it. It matters to us. If you're no longer interested in it and have formed your own convictions, than perhaps you can devote your time somewhere else.
Thanks.
-
Released,
I can tell you from experience that this topic can really show a person's true colors. This thread alone is a testament to that considering how a few people who participated are not positive contributors but more like intentional discouragers (complete with rants and insults instead of tackling the issue). If you REALLY want to test the intellectual honesty of any male who claims to be a follower of The Quran, simply bring up this topic and the points that were raised against the beliefs that Nisaa=women and that 4/3 is mandating polygamy and watch the fireworks. I swear it is totally amazing.
A very small recap
*someone is being addressed and given in instructions in 4/3.
*We go BACKWARDS to 4/1 to find out WHO that someone is. It is An-Naas and An-Naas is People!! This includes men AND women.
*By going back to 4/1 we know that it is NOT men alone who are being addressed in 4/3, but it is men AND women being addressed (and commanded) in 4/3.
*4/3 has a masculine verb (Taaba) that is performed by An-Nisaa. How do we know? Here's how
A). It cannot be performed by the 2nd Person Addressee. Taaba is a 3rd Person Verb and I have yet to hear an explanation as to HOW a 3rd Person Verb can be performed by the 2nd Person Addressee.
B). The traditional Musafeer and translations say this verb (Taaba) means what is good or what seems good to you all, but I think this is incorrect as this would give the 3rd person masculine verb Taaba a PASSIVE meaning which is wrong. Tayyib means good. So something that would be or seem good to the 2nd person addressee would be Tayyib.
C). Another word that is overlooked is the word Lakum which means To/For You all. Having ascertained that Taaba is in it's 3rd Person basic form, we see that it cannot be done by the addressee since Lakum is pointing to the 2nd Person Addressee. Taaba is 3rd person and Lakum is 2nd person.
D). In spite of what some people may wish to think or how vehemently they wish to reject it, Ma Taaba Lakum Min An-Nisaa IS constructed in the Ma...Min Clause/Construct. I have yet to come across an Arabic grammar book that says this is bogus or does not exist. Studying the links to the grammar books I have given and carefully studying the sentence in question in 4/3 would reveal this in my humble opinion.
*To believe that the word Nisaa means women but DOES NOT have a singular form (even though the words WOMAN and WOMEN are two of the most COMMON EVERY DAY WORDS in EVERY LANGUAGE) would suggest that the species that this word is applied to were not always familiar to the 7th Century Arabs just like the Arctic Fox, the Arctic Hare and the Walrus. New words had to be made up and coined for these three Northern Climatic animals since the 7th Century Arabs were not always familiar with them and we see how the Singular and Plural of each word are using two different sets of roots. Since this anomaly supposedly exists for Woman (Imraa'a) and Women (Nisaa', this suggests to me that (just like the three aforementioned Arctic animals) that the 7th Century Arabs were not always aware of and familiar with Women and when they finally learned of the existence of women, they had to coin new terms for them in both their singular and plural form.
- Lastly, some questions were asked which were never answered. I'll repeat here ONLY ONE of them. Since the defenders of the status quo cannot even answer just this one question, logically I cannot expect them to answer any of the rest of them. BUT...WHY must I marry a woman in order to financially help her? What road block exists that would prevent me for helping her financially if I do not marry her? (sorry, that's actually two questions P ).
And if anyone here does wish to make an attempt at answering this question please keep this in mind The Monetary Contribution DOES NOT change at all. If I'm paying her rent or mortgage for her, groceries, utility bills, transportation, clothing, education and giving her spending money, the monetary output does not change if I marry her. So there's no change in the monetary contribution I am making if I marry her or not. The only thing I can think of as to WHY a man should marry a woman that he's assisting is to get something in return from her. Stop hiding behind your false sense of duty to justify your sexual lusts you creeps. >(
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 of 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."
