Wife beating in islam? The Quran strikes back
-
You said that you still adhere to Hadith and traditional teachings, so I'm not surprised to see this level of stubbornness. Anyone who can consider 'beat them' as a possible interpretation is either religiously brainwashed, mentally deficient, inspired by the Satan, or just lacking wisdom. It can be a combination of these factors. The interpretation is totally absurd and defies every type of logic (if you actually believe in logic). Attributing such crazy things to God will undoubtedly earn His anger.
You can call me Sunni, Shia, sectarian, Quranist etc whatever you want, but to me it means nothing
Yes I still use hadith, but don't take me as the same level with sectarian.
I didn't support beating nisaa', since it contradict with many verses.In this thread I agree with huruf if rijaal and nisaa' in 434 shouldn't be translated as husband-wives, but it's real meaning (men-women).
I assume 435 didn't talked bout marital problem and my opinion-
Subjects who involved in 434 is plural since the word nisaa' is plural ( in arabic plural = more than two).
-
But in 435 the subjects is dual by looking phrase baynihiima ( ا.
-
The word ahli (alif-ha'-lam) in 435 is not limited by means family, this word can also means citizen, people, inhabitant.
Peace
-
-
So what do you think it means. Forget examples, forget hypothesis. Simply what does the aya say according to you? Because obviously, whether we can come up with examples or brilliant ideas or whatever, if we reject something it is because we do read something else. How do you think reads the aya, because finally I have no idea of what you are upholding.
As to what they may think or say in other forums, why should I be concerned with that? I am not begging agreement from anybody. I do not feel disappointed or angry or anything if nobody agrees with me. I can live with that. But disagreement is no reason for me to say something I am convinced it is false, no matter how popular.
Salaam
Like I said in my previous posts in different places sis, I see couples fitting in the aya and others connected, I can't exclude them yet...because the evidence to reject it is not solid/coherent enough. I am very interested in knowing if there is another way of reading it with enough solidity to reject other interpretations. I have no horse in this race, I just want to know how much juice any interpretation has, is all. If an understanding is solid, accurate and truthful, it stands on its own and needs no one to hold it up in a manner of speaking, especially not on this forum where the vast majority of understandings are alternative. If people have issues with an alternative understanding in an alternative forum, then it's probably the fault of the understanding not having enough to it rather than an issue of perception/bias etc.
peace
-
Peace Wakas,
Separate, not divorce within the household or going to a relatives or friends house for time to think,
cool off or give space is definitive and understandable how to be done by most. Like "leave"is understood by most
people. But "beat" is much more vague with no parameters, also their are problems carrying out such a directive
like beat because severe injury may occur to one or both of the parties. How is the beating to be carried out?God bless
peace
-
peace hawk99,
Separate, not divorce within the household or going to a relatives or friends house for time to think,
cool off or give space is definitive and understandable how to be done by most. Like "leave"is understood by most
people.I agree that it can't mean "divorce", however I disagree that it is "definitive and understandable" as I mention here. Feel free to show several people the verse with "leave them" or "separate from them" in the verse and see if they all give the same answer in terms of what it means. This might give one a good indication if it is "definitive and understandable". Let us know what you find.
But "beat" is much more vague with no parameters, also their are problems carrying out such a directive
like beat because severe injury may occur to one or both of the parties. How is the beating to be carried out?I agree, but I'm not sure why you're asking me. This specific issue is discussed at length on Quran434.com
-
As I have often said, this is all about weighing up the options. If you or anyone else can produce a evidenced/logical alternative option, feel free. Thus far, I haven't seen anyone attempt to produce a detailed/credible work. Readers can then weigh up all options and decide for themselves.
I am working on a website similar to Quran434.com, on which I intend to summarise the views I have expressed in this thread. Verse 434 was the first verse I had difficulty understanding in my teenage years, and ultimately it was an article online which enlightened me on the more likely meaning. I think it's important for people to have access to such interpretations and to be aware of the level of misinterpretation the Qur'an has suffered. I don't have a date of completion, but I will post a link when it is complete (God-willing).
-
peace hawk99,
I agree that it can't mean "divorce", however I disagree that it is "definitive and understandable" as I mention here. Feel free to show several people the verse with "leave them" or "separate from them" in the verse and see if they all give the same answer in terms of what it means. This might give one a good indication if it is "definitive and understandable". Let us know what you find.
Peace Wakas,
Stating "going to a relatives or friends house for time to think, cool off or give space even in the same house is
definitive and understandable by most". meaning that act of creating space is understood by most, not an attempt
to translate the verse, just the simple act of creating room between the two parties which is what most folks do.I agree, but I'm not sure why you're asking me. This specific issue is discussed at length on Quran434.com
Just for once I would like someone who thinks that the beat/separate discussion is complicated to consider the
actual beating part of the debate i.e., when to beat, how to beat, with what to beat, should children be present,
how long to beat, what bruises are acceptable etc., then many will see how barbaric the beat translation is and
conclude that it is not much of a debate at all!God bless
peace
-
Update
I recently noticed that "madaji3" is in the "maf3il" form, meaning it can theoretically mean "times of sleep" as well as "places of sleep" i.e. "beds/bedrooms".I have updated the website accordingly
"...and abandon them in the bed..." (Arabic hjuroo, root ha-Jiim-Ra), means forsake, leave off, desert, abandon .
It is important to note this verb applies to the husband, NOT the wife, thus translations such as "banish them to beds apart "(M. Pickthal), "send them to beds apart" (Dawood), are incorrect. This is further proven by the use of "fee" meaning "in". Lastly, "al madajiAA" (root Dad-Jiim-Ayn) is plural, and literally means "the times/places of rest/sleep/reclining", thus could mean 'the times of sleep' or 'the bed' or even 'the bedroom'. With regard to "al madajiAA" there is no half measures, it clearly means fully abandon/desert them in this. It seems to also imply no sexual relations. Also, this step reinforces the implication that it is unlikely to be a simultaneous series of steps, as "abandon them in the bed or times of sleep" would only be done at sleeping time, implying a time gap. This step should not be viewed as totally against the wife, as it would also result in the husband re-evaluating their relationship, and make him weigh up his fear against his desire to be with her, thus helping compromise/reconciliation.
As a side note, if a spouse is possibly having an affair, then not sharing beds (i.e. no sex) could also potentially reduce spread of sexually transmitted diseases, giving another benefit of this advice/step.And
Other examples of word form "maf3il" in AQ include "majalis", "mantiq", "mawazin", "mawatin", "mawadi3", "madaji3". There may be others. If the reader knows of any, please let me know. Their usage seems to indicate this form can indicate time/place/concept. Please read all occurrences.
The only forms that I came across of "maf3al" in AQ were "marqad", "mankab", "mash3ar", "mashrab" and "majma'a" and all seem to denote place. There may be others. If the reader knows of any, please let me know. Please read all occurrences.
To conclude, the word form "ma3fil" (same as "masjid" can indicate a noun of time/place (and perhaps concept). This is well established and accepted. Thus, to state "masjid" may mean a noun of time should not be seen as unusual.
-
peace hawk99,
It's all explained on the website www.Quran434.com with translation. Have you read it?
The men are supporters/maintainers of the women with what God bestowed on some of them over others and with what they spent of their money, so the righteous women are dutiful; guardians to the unseen with what God guarded. And as for those women you fear their disloyalty, then (first) you shall advise them, and (second) abandon them in the bed, and (lastly) cite them. If they obeyed you, then seek not against them a way; Truly, God is High, Great.
And if you (authority) feared a rift between them two, then appoint a judge from his family and a judge from hers. If they both want to reconcile, then God will bring agreement between them. God is Knowledgeable, Expert.cite them
An interesting example also appears in 581-4 in which a woman argues with the prophet complaining about her husband, and how the husband has estranged/alienated her by claiming her to be as his mother's back, which was a practice of the time, making the wife unlawful for himself but also not technically divorcing her allowing her to remarry, i.e. leaving her stuck/suspended.
This is an interesting example because if we suppose this could be classed as a case of iAAradan/alienation or shiqaqa/breach/rift, then the next step the wife took was to cite her husband's behaviour/actions to the authority, which would have been the prophet at the time. The correlation is specifically with 4129 which advises the husband not to leave her stuck/suspended and this is the EXACT situation described in 581-4, thus showing that in a situation of no resolution, the next step would be to cite the partner/situation to the authority. If we correlate this example to what the next step would be in 434, if the steps are followed and no resolution is forthcoming, the next step would be to cite the partner to the authority. This would explain how the court/authority knew of the situation between the couple in 435. Since 'idriboo them' is the only step in between "abandon them in bed" and the authority becoming aware of the situation, is there a Classical Arabic meaning of DRB that fits in the sequence? The answer is a resounding yes, as one of its primary and most common meanings is to cite/propound, declare/mention, put/show forth, point out or indicate. As we can see, it is a perfect fit. -
peace hawk99,
It's all explained on the website www.Quran434.com with translation. Have you read it?
cite them
Peace Wakas,
Thank you, I surmise in the context of 4/34 "cite" equals "report" (to authorities) which could include
family members also clerics and counselors yes/no?God bless
peace
-
The answer to your question is specifically addressed at www.Quran434.com
"...then appoint a judge..." (Arabic ibAAatho hakaman, roots Ba-Ayn-Thal, Ha-Kaf-Miim), literally means to put in motion or send/appoint a judge/arbiter. The Arabic confirms that the plural "you" can ONLY refer to someone/something in a position to put this in motion, so it cannot mean either side's family for example. Also, appointing an arbiter from each side is not a simple task as it would require representations from husband and wife or each side of the family, and suggests the process has become formalised, i.e. judicial. This clearly confirms the court/authority is involved at this stage.
Have you read it?
-
Peace Wakas,
Thanks for the reply, according the websites translation below "if they obey you" pertains to the husband
being obeyed, is this correct, if so please elaborate.The men are supporters/maintainers of the women with what God bestowed on some of them over others
and with what they spent of their money, so the righteous women are dutiful; guardians to the unseen with
what God guarded. And as for those women you fear their disloyalty, then (first) you shall advise them, and
(second) abandon them in the bed, and (lastly) cite them. If they obeyed you, then seek not against them a
way; Truly, God is High, Great.And if you (authority) feared a rift between them two, then appoint a judge from his family and a judge from
hers. If they both want to reconcile, then God will bring agreement between them. God is Knowledgeable,
Expert.God bless
peace
-
Again, the answer to your question is specifically addressed at www.Quran434.com
I recommend reading it.
-
I am working on a website similar to Quran434.com, on which I intend to summarise the views I have expressed in this thread. Verse 434 was the first verse I had difficulty understanding in my teenage years, and ultimately it was an article online which enlightened me on the more likely meaning. I think it's important for people to have access to such interpretations and to be aware of the level of misinterpretation the Qur'an has suffered. I don't have a date of completion, but I will post a link when it is complete (God-willing).
As promised, I have completed my article on verse 434 of the Qur'an and have published it on a dedicated website. The website is www.quranverse434.com . I have tried to keep the article concise by not being unnecessarily lengthy, yet thorough by covering all the relevant points. Let me know what you all think. You can click on the image below to be taken to the website.
http//www.quranverse434.com/images/quranverse434_screenshot.png
-
Peace aqua,
I commend you, my brother.
The article is thoroughly detailed, easy to read, well-laid out, well-written, rational, cohesive, articulate, accurate, and revealing.
It must have taken you some time to compose it, but your effort shines through.
I will share it on my Facebook profile.
I am of the opinion that God, the most merciful, would not possibly instruct the believers to beat their wives at a time when marital relations are already strained. However, the rules of Arabic grammar get in the way of this understanding.
The only way out of understanding the verse as "beat them" is ? as you point out ? to postulate that the early readers of the Quran misread for . This is not an unlikely case.
Thanks again for sharing.
Usamah
-
Peace aqua,
I commend you, my brother.
The article is thoroughly detailed, easy to read, well-laid out, well-written, rational, cohesive, articulate, accurate, and revealing.
It must have taken you some time to compose it, but your effort shines through.
I will share it on my Facebook profile.
I am of the opinion that God, the most merciful, would not possibly instruct the believers to beat their wives at a time when marital relations are already strained. However, the rules of Arabic grammar get in the way of this understanding.
The only way out of understanding the verse as "beat them" is ? as you point out ? to postulate that the early readers of the Quran misread for . This is not an unlikely case.
Thanks again for sharing.
Usamah
Thank you for the positive comments. Glad to hear that you agree.
-
In Jonathan Brown's new book he reviews Traditional Islamic understandings of 434 with some interesting insights, p268 onwards.
For those familiar with his previous book on Hadith, it is likely this work will be of similar standard. I personally found his book on Hadith to be excellent. In this work there seems to be many gems also, e.g. he cites a hadith in which the prophet requested a woman to lead a mixed gender congregation prayer. He also discusses the 'Quran Only' movement.
