Discussion on 4:3 and meaning of nisa
-
Salaam Sunnah Hero and Thanks For Your Posts. It's always a pleasure.
Actually, I don't take either one of those guys seriously. How can I? It always happens in a forum such as this where some people only function as Discouragers and Moles especially when they simply Cannot refute that which challenges their position. I have asked from PAGE 1 of this thread for the defenders of the status quo to answer and refute the points I had reiterated two posts back. They Didn't. They didn't even approach them. Neither did they attempt to answer the questions I asked concerning the logic behind marrying a woman to help her.
So what do we get? We have the Mullah of Free-Minds asking moderators to assist him in burying his head in the sand and we have another person who obviously posts verses from a word-for-word translation and wishes to pass that off as Arabic knowledge. So again, how can I take them seriously? This is the reason that I am not paying either one of them any attention. If what I am saying is absurd and erroneous then why don't they just PROVE IT and get it over with?? I have repeated those same summarized points on more than one occasion in this thread and Wakas and his crew simply WILL NOT touch them. nope
In case this noon guy didn't get it, I'm going to repeat something you said Sunnah Hero
with all sadness my nooniiiii friend your entire argument and logic is based on false assumptions
Which is Exactly why I don't bother with him or that Mazhar guy. I reject the traditional translation of the word Nisaa and they are presenting me that same traditional translation as if I'm supposed to accept it because They are presenting it.
whatever
==================================================================
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."
-
Which is Exactly why I don't bother with him or that Mazhar guy. I reject the traditional translation of the word Nisaa and they are presenting me that same traditional translation as if I'm supposed to accept it because They are presenting it.
Reject it, but give alternate translation so that the visitors realize who of all is stupid, irrational and mindless. First five occurrences are pasted there in the thread. Have courage and put your translation for this singular word in the Ayah.
-
I've done that more than once IDIOT!! Go back and read them. I'm not here to cater to you. I've done that already and I don't need to do it again just because you want me to. You use big words to try and make yourself look intellectual but EVERY TIME I have read something from you, I realize that you're not too bright actually. Continue to use your Harvard Facade to cover up what you lack.
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."
-
Salaam Sunnah Hero and Thanks For Your Posts. It's always a pleasure.
Actually, I don't take either one of those guys seriously. How can I? It always happens in a forum such as this where some people only function as Discouragers and Moles especially when they simply Cannot refute that which challenges their position. I have asked from PAGE 1 of this thread for the defenders of the status quo to answer and refute the points I had reiterated two posts back. They Didn't. They didn't even approach them. Neither did they attempt to answer the questions I asked concerning the logic behind marrying a woman to help her.
So what do we get? We have the Mullah of Free-Minds asking moderators to assist him in burying his head in the sand and we have another person who obviously posts verses from a word-for-word translation and wishes to pass that off as Arabic knowledge. So again, how can I take them seriously? This is the reason that I am not paying either one of them any attention. If what I am saying is absurd and erroneous then why don't they just PROVE IT and get it over with?? I have repeated those same summarized points on more than one occasion in this thread and Wakas and his crew simply WILL NOT touch them. nope
In case this noon guy didn't get it, I'm going to repeat something you said Sunnah Hero
Which is Exactly why I don't bother with him or that Mazhar guy. I reject the traditional translation of the word Nisaa and they are presenting me that same traditional translation as if I'm supposed to accept it because They are presenting it.
whatever
==================================================================
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."
I do understand your point dude..... However, You have made your point clear to them, so going in a circle wont help anybody... they can just check up your earlier post )
-
Reject it, but give alternate translation so that the visitors realize who of all is stupid, irrational and mindless. First five occurrences are pasted there in the thread. Have courage and put your translation for this singular word in the Ayah.
You cannot solve a problem if you don't recognize it................... So first recognize what a word can possibly not mean, then identify the flaws of the context and identify what sorrounding words may mean in another possible manner... in that way you would come across the true meaning of a word........... Shirley has taken the first step... he/she has recignized that Nesa cannot mean 'women' and now the next step would ber to identify the meaning of sorrounding words like abna2, rijaal, qowm and so on and then in the end when we have put it all in context we would know what Nesa means.
But dudes.. the discussion right now is what nisa cannot mean.. not what nisa means.. that would be discussed after an agreement to the first part...
-
a continuous absurd and hatred assuming a reversal of the party's opinions do not yield fertile ground for intervention by the moderator side nonetheless is the conviction that you learn skills in terms of appreciation for people's opinions. Furthermore, your skills in Arabic are at a minimal level, further confirmed by your Pakistani background.
rotfl rotfl rotfl
Sunnah Hero, I Salute You. handshake
-
I do understand your point dude..... However, You have made your point clear to them, so going in a circle wont help anybody... they can just check up your earlier post
Yeah, you're right. I can't argue with you there. I think this thread started off good but eventually took a turn for the worst as certain unproductive elements started to creep in with the hopes of derailing this thread.
For those who do not agree with my understanding, refuse to try and refute the points that I summarized and wish for this thread to be closed, I have to ask WHY even come to this thread then? If you're not going to show me where in my exposition I am wrong and correct it, then WHY are you here other than to be a distraction for those who are interested in this thread? This is what professional discouragers do. This is the Only Thread on free-minds that I am participating in because I am not interested in any of the other threads. If you're not interested in this thread and my understanding of this topic then why bother to even visit this thread at all? Just stay away and leave be those who really are interested in this topic and what I understand about it.
Now, FOR THE RECORD, YES I AM ignoring certain people here and there is a reason for that. What nerve do they have to NOT go through my linguistic and grammatical breakdown of 4/1 through 4/3 but insist that I answer their questions???? How much nerve does that take??? I refuse to dance to anyone's tune here. If you're NOT going to address and attempt to refute how I had broke it down point by point then don't ask me to answer anything you would like to ask me. Another thing is I have made it quite clear that my intentions behind this thread is to show how this word DOES NOT and CANNOT mean women in 4/3. If I could prove that it does not mean women here, then it does not mean women at all. Only one or two verses are needed to prove this. If it is proven in that one verse or two then obviously the understanding of this word is incorrect in those other 50 or so verses where this word is used. And if this word is incorrectly understood in those 50 or so verses that means all of the other words in those same 50 or so verses are also incorrect and need re-interpretation. My ignoring you is not a way of getting under your skin or a demonstration that I Can't answer whatever questions or verses you are presenting, it is that you are presenting the traditional translations which have the very interpretation that I am rejecting. This is a use of circular logic, completely flawed assumptions and a complete waste of my time!! This is the very reason I had to terminate my discussion with Wakas. He tapped dance the entire time and expected me to play according to the rules of his agenda. This is what people do when they cannot defend their own position or refute someone else's.
So now you know WHY I am ignoring you and will continue to ignore you UNLESS you are willing to address the things that I have brought up. That is the reason for starting this thread; to raise certain issues I would like to talk about and I'm not going to allow you to come and dictate your own terms of this thread upon me.
So to make it clear (again), I reject the traditional interpretation of the word Nisaa' and I reject the traditional translations of the ayaat that certain people are routinely posting as if that makes a difference on what I am saying in this thread.
To the ignorant ones who have nothing better to do than to be deliberate distractions and discouragers, I have to keep 25/63 in mind and just say peace
=================================================
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."
-
41
I am going to give break down of the translation very slowly. So that both nay sayers have enough time to bring their linguistic argument, as well rational minds have time to do some work and verify the data presented.
The part highlighted in red of this verse is a complete sentence; although, traditionalists do not translate this part of the verse as a complete sentence. As part of this write up, I will also point out the fallacies of traditional translation.
this is the object of the sentence, the traditional translation is ?fear?. Now let us discuss why this is wrong to translate this word just as ?fear?, as well what is the real meaning of this word and why?
Like any other word let us decide the root and waazan. Please remember formula of the language ?root meaning + waazan meaning ?= ?real meaning of the word?.
The root of the word is ?Ta Qaf Ya? ?he was on guard against it, or prepared himself against it?
Its wazaan is an imperative verb of 8th form of the verb, it is second person plural imperfect. What is the 8th form of the verb? It is
. What meanings does this form of verb adds to the root that it contains. In case of it being an indirect object, which is the case here it adds meanings of ?for oneself, for one?s own advantage?. Furthermore, it is imperative of 8th form, which is written as written as same as word under discussion. Now let us apply the formula of the language.Prepare to guard against it + for your own advantage = ?You prepare to guard against it for your own advantage?.
This is the subject of the sentence. It is a definite noun from root Noon Siin Waw. Its root meaning is ?he went to and fro or he was in state of commotion?. The meanings of noun from this verbal root would ?the state of commotion?.
Finally, traditionalists have made it one vocative particle meaning ?O?. They are wrong again, why? If it were one particle, why three words here instead of just which also means ?O? ?
I submit these are three words. a vocative particle meaning ?O? followed by noun from root Alif Ya Ya, meaning here ?thou? or ?you?. Finally, is which could also mean a female pronoun which will not make any sense here due to the context. Other use of is as vocative particle , in order to raise attention? and ?to wake up someone from sleep?.
Now let us put together a translation of this part of the verse.
?O you sleepy inattentive, prepare yourself to guard against the state of commotion, for your own advantage.?
-
with all sadness my nooniiiii friend your entire argument and logic is based on false assumptions (
All 4 are wrong ... the verse begins with 4.1 AL NAS... (humankind).........so the 5 and correct answer is
- Homo sapiens to marry homo sapiens
do I have a valid point or not Adi?s amigos
If address mixed crowd saying "marry from the women" it's a no brainier who is being told.
Therefore you have no valid point! Likewise, why be a coward like Shirley and not finish it?41 O you al-nas/the humankind fear your Lord the One who created you from soul one (f) and created from it its spouse and dispersed from them two rijalan/men much wanisan/and Homo sapiens?
43 and if you fear that not do justice in the orphans so marry what aba (lawful or agree) to you from the Homo sapiens paired/twos and three and quadruplet/group of four so if you fear that not do justice so one (feminine)?
47 lilrrijal/to the men a share from what left the parents and the close relatives and for the Homo sapiens a share from what left the parents and the close relatives from what small from it or large portion obligatory
422 and not you marry whom married fathers yours from the Homo sapiens?
423 prohibited upon you mothers yours and daughters yours and your sisters... and mothers nisakum/Homo sapiens yours? and your step daughters the ones whom in your guardianship from nisakum/Homo sapiens yours the ones whom entered in them so if not you were entered in them so not blame upon you...
4176 ... and if were siblings rijlan/men wanisan/and Homo sapiens?
falildhakari/so to the male like share al-unthayayni the two (feminine)I am going to give break down of the translation very slowly. So that both nay sayers have enough time to bring their linguistic argument, as well rational minds have time to do some work and verify the data presented.
Peace -- the topic is nisaa, so get to the word in question and make sure it fits in verses above.
-
Finally, traditionalists have made it one vocative particle meaning ?O?. They are wrong again, why? If it were one particle, why three words here instead of just which also means ?O? ?
I submit these are three words. a vocative particle meaning ?O? followed by noun from root Alif Ya Ya, meaning here ?thou? or ?you?. Finally, is which could also mean a female pronoun which will not make any sense here due to the context. Other use of is as vocative particle , in order to raise attention? and ?to wake up someone from sleep?.
Now let us put together a translation of this part of the verse.
?O you sleepy inattentive, prepare yourself to guard against the state of commotion, for your own advantage.?
That is a very interesting look at "Yaa Ayyuha" Brother Badar. I salute and applaud you for your work.
I would say keep up the good work and keep posting your breakdown and exposition. Only the smart people will get it. The stupid people (cough, cough, Noon and Mazhar, cough, cough) will not be able to approach this subject at all. It is obvious that they are not on our level so they should just sit in their little corners, fold their hands and learn something since they are obviously out of their league here.
-
That is a very interesting look at "Yaa Ayyuha" Brother Badar. I salute and applaud you for your work.
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.%20Tabweeb/0001.%20Pronouns%20and%20Prepositions/Vocative%20Particles/01.%20Ya%20ayuha/1.gif
This is a compound word. Vocative Particle- , to call and address a person + Noun in nominative case but in accusative state, peculiar persons who are being called-attention is being sought-confronted. + Attention particle .Word by word Analysis 2104
Why it is different here, Noun is in accusative case?
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.%20Tabweeb/0001.%20Pronouns%20and%20Prepositions/Vocative%20Particles/01.%20Ya%20ayuha/3.gif
-
Salam all
Once again, I realized that I can so easily fall into traditional thinking - I just read the title of the thread before and thought oh again so a renewal (BIDA ;D) and never even checked to see what it was about.
Subhanallah- today I stumbled over it- after I asked Allah for knowledge and I spent the whole day here and have followed the battle between Damon and the other members.
Once again, I thank Allah who led me to come here, so that I can learn so much, I never thought I could pull the meaning of Nisaa in doubt. But the arguments teaching me something better. Thanks for all the clever co-writers in this discussion and I hope that Allah will help us to understand the real meaning of the word Nisaa and its implement .
Thank you all and peace peace -
Peace All,
In fairness, surah 4 actually has not much to do with women. It seems to be about Justice, Care and Peace.
I notice, out of interest, that verse 135 of this surah is posted at the front of the Law Faculty at Yale.
Dawn
-
If address mixed crowd saying "marry from the women" it's a no brainier who is being told.
Therefore you have no valid point! Likewise, why be a coward like Shirley and not finish it?41 O you al-nas/the humankind fear your Lord the One who created you from soul one (f) and created from it its spouse and dispersed from them two rijalan/men much wanisan/and Homo sapiens?
43 and if you fear that not do justice in the orphans so marry what aba (lawful or agree) to you from the Homo sapiens paired/twos and three and quadruplet/group of four so if you fear that not do justice so one (feminine)?
47 lilrrijal/to the men a share from what left the parents and the close relatives and for the Homo sapiens a share from what left the parents and the close relatives from what small from it or large portion obligatory
422 and not you marry whom married fathers yours from the Homo sapiens?
423 prohibited upon you mothers yours and daughters yours and your sisters... and mothers nisakum/Homo sapiens yours? and your step daughters the ones whom in your guardianship from nisakum/Homo sapiens yours the ones whom entered in them so if not you were entered in them so not blame upon you...
4176 ... and if were siblings rijlan/men wanisan/and Homo sapiens?
falildhakari/so to the male like share al-unthayayni the two (feminine)Peace -- the topic is nisaa, so get to the word in question and make sure it fits in verses above.
A Classical example of someone deliberately missing the point..................................
-
Peace Noon,
I think what aastana members mean to say is, that they're not replacing an alternative rendition "nisa" within the blanks to see if it fits. They are actually revisiting each and every word in the Quran. So, in actuality, every word within every verse would be revisited, reanalyzed, and then a conclusion would be reached. As I've said before, that's a huge project, but still worthwhile. The fill in the blank approach won't work here.
Until an English translation gets finalized by their research group, I cannot formulate any firm conclusions on my end. I still have very firm convictions, but these convictions can easily be challenged if I feel what's introduced to me makes good, logical sense. I am your classical example of the laysman (woman), but I'll only accept an understanding given that it makes good enough sense to me, and resonates with me on some level.
Anyway, one doesn't need to agree with the other on everything. You read everything and then form your own conclusions. We'll never get consensus on much of anything, but maybe that's just how it is meant to be.
-
Peace Released,
Or perhaps there is something wrong with our selves. Maybe things are not meant to be this way, but we are constantly committing a common mistake in all our discussions that leads things to be the way the are.
-
Peace FallenAngel,
You are absolutely correct. We are ALL making errors. No one here has a perfect understanding of anything. However, the question remains Is there a way we can collect all of the "correct" information, and then ensure that everyone agrees with us?
The way I see it is, the ultimate Truth in all matters belongs with God. He even tell us in 551 that He will decide in regard to what we disputed on. He is aware of the fact that we will dispute without a doubt. Perhaps, we didn't think that we would dispute on 20 different issues, but He knows of it.
We're all so different in that we come from different walks of life, different experiences, and then we've taken different approaches to the Quran. So, I would find it very surprising, if ever came to a consensus.
We ALL have our personal biases (though, some may deny such a thing), and this mainly stems from our environment, upbringing, and just overall mentality. However, to try and break away from all of that, is difficult enough. On top of that, now we're coming from different angles toward the Quran.
While I feel saddened over the fact that we may NEVER have a real proper community of our own, I've actually come to terms with it. Well, I'm beginning to find some peace with this. A good part of me appreciates the diverse thinking and freedom of speech and expression within our little group here. A part of me regrets it.
If I want uniform thought, unfaltering submission to "the scholars" and their fallacies, and law and order maintained by threats and coercion, then I know where to return. They'll say that I have repented, and they'll take me back. I'd rather not do that. Without those obstacles, we're all free to argue and debate till the Day of Judgment. Then, He will judge.
So, here we are. We've all got something of relevance to say and we're strong in our convictions, trying to convince the other.
In my opinion, I think that there are some people in this thread, who are overlooking the overall human factor in this.
-
Peace,
I think we make the religion more complicated than it needs to be.
I understand people do not like that this verse does seem talk about polygamy. If it does it should be interpreted in the best possible way, for God must have meant something good with it. Personally I thought it was to save the children from being fatherless and without a provider.
Polygamy is still, according to my understanding, very discouraged and is not forced upon anyone nor a sacred privilege for men.
Not sure this verse needs to be applied to these modern days at all with our social security systems and this practice is also against the law in most developed countries.
We do not have to aggressively argue over this verse and I refuse to believe God is sexist or unfair to women. In other verses He says we have different qualities and that we are equal. Still God created us with different attributes and there must be a meaning with that.
Can the alternative interpretation you have come up with suit the context?
I am open-minded and I would like to hear the suggestion why nisa should be differently interpreted.
I am afraid that to me it sounds quite wrong in the context with something other than women. But I am not narrow-minded and impossible. And to be honest, I would be just as happy if it did not speak of polygamy.
I am not a polygamy supporter, quite far from it, I just want a logical conclusion.
May we solve our differences peacefully
-
Peace Man of Faith,
I liked what you had to say. I apologize for the long post ahead.
Well, there are different opinions in regard to this issue.
There are those who believe that polygamy is meant to help the fatherless orphans through marrying their mothers. I can see the wisdom in this, but it's not really my cup of tea. I love helping people, but I couldn't do it in this manner.
There is also the opinion of the word meaning "marry off" as opposed to "marry". Logically, "marry off" also makes sense to me, though there are debates in regard to the grammar (prior threads). My grandmother and her sister were married off at the same time (to two different men, of course), so my great grandfather could save on wedding costs and what not. I think he had 9 daughters under his care, so he needed to multi-task, for lack of a better word. Back then, women in the old country didn't go on to university or hold down high paying jobs. I suggested that prior to marrying off these widows, they could remain as ma malakat aymanukum--or those under an oath.
I don't want to believe that God would be unjust. However, I also don't believe that God would ignore the psychology of women. Women are just as possessive over their spouses, as men are to their spouses. In that respect, we're the same really. So, this is what really bothers me as a woman. Polygamy is something I just couldn't accept! I think that there are many women out there who feel the same. It's so difficult to even wrap my mind around the idea of my husband sleeping with another woman. However, there are some men in this thread, who are unable to understand this very important aspect.
There is also that burning question, that I've been unable to answer truthfully to myself What has sex got to do with it? On one hand, we're helping the orphans and their mother. This sounds great to me. Then, enters the component of marriage and sex. This is where the word 'divorce' pops up in my head, because I don't think anyone can convince me that this arrangement will work out for the best.
I wish the men would just try and put their selves in our shoes, and then perhaps they can understand where the issue lies for us females. Why is this thread so long? It's because it's an issue that women would naturally be up in arms about. Naturally so though, right? I see very few men thrilled with the prospect of polyandry. So, why are there double standards with us women? We're human too, and feel just as strongly.
Though, I am not speaking for all women, but perhaps a good number of us.
I think what frightens many women is the prospect of polygyny being coerced or forced onto them. It's isn't the actual institution of polygamy in itself that's the real issue(in my opinion), but rather polygyny becoming an institutionalized "right" or "entitlement" of a husband.
Yes, the chapter appears to focus on the welfare and rights of the orphans, though even within that context; many married women may not want to partake in polygyny.
-
For me, the real issue is as to whether we're willing to protect the rights of those women who do not wish to partake in polygyny?
-
If we're willing to do this, then what steps are we willing to take in ensuring that females do not become coerced into practicing polygyny?
If we're able to work this protection into our legal system (very hypothetical), then we may have dealt with a part of the issue.
-