Please, help, accusative in 4.24
-
4.24
I see,, i the first sentences of 4.24
Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess Thus hath Allah ordained (Prohibitions) against you Except for these...
What bothers me is that I miss innn the translations the meaning of thhe word kitaab(a).
As can be seen by the mark fattha (a) it is an accusative, but the translations ignore the fact or translate a sentence including a verb which is not there in the original.
So, any one willing to deal with that and give a gramatical explanation of that accusative and the proper meaning that would be derivd from it?
I make it clear that I do not think the text contains a mistake. I do not have a reason to believe that there are any mistakes in the Qur'an. I think that to resort to such "explanation" is a way out to not have to go to the bottom of it.
Salaam
-
No, this is a start of new context..
this verse is about women we can marry not women we can't
-
No, this is a start of new context..
this verse is about women we can marry not women we can't
Peace SleeplessInCairo,
No, new context/sentence is incomplete nonsensical need context 423 urrimat/prohibited upon you ?
424 wal-mu'antu/and the chaste from the womenfolk except what possess right hands yours book (writ/injunction) the god upon you wa-uilla/and permitted to you what beyond such (i.e. the types previously mentioned) that seek ye of with wealth yours ?
-
Peace SleeplessInCairo,
No, new context/sentence is incomplete nonsensical need context 423 urrimat/prohibited upon you ?
424 wal-mu'antu/and the chaste from the womenfolk except what possess right hands yours book (writ/injunction) the god upon you wa-uilla/and permitted to you what beyond such (i.e. the types previously mentioned) that seek ye of with wealth yours ?
Actually no, translating the "" in this verse as "Also" is faulty, the word means women who have faith it doesn't mean married women
-
Actually no, translating the "" in this verse as "Also" is faulty, the word means women who have faith it doesn't mean married women
Peace,
Faulty is to read 424 without context of prior verse which makes it meaningless/nonsensical and incomplete sentence.
Of course it doesn't mean married women since it contradicts verse 55; complete translation cross-reference is here...
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9608144.msg382977#msg382977
Perhaps insert "believing women" in all occurrences see if it makes sense e.g. OK to accuse non believing women?
-
4.24
I see,, i the first sentences of 4.24
Also (prohibited are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess Thus hath Allah ordained (Prohibitions) against you Except for these...
What bothers me is that I miss innn the translations the meaning of thhe word kitaab(a).
As can be seen by the mark fattha (a) it is an accusative, but the translations ignore the fact or translate a sentence including a verb which is not there in the original.
So, any one willing to deal with that and give a gramatical explanation of that accusative and the proper meaning that would be derivd from it?
I make it clear that I do not think the text contains a mistake. I do not have a reason to believe that there are any mistakes in the Qur'an. I think that to resort to such "explanation" is a way out to not have to go to the bottom of it.
Salaam
Hi Huruf,
Nice introduction, welcome to the forum handshake I hope you will enjoy it here.
I do not know those grammar terms, but to me it looks the same as for example "rasulu Allah".
thus has to be read like this "kitaab of Allah is upon you" or something like that. -
Thank you for all the answers, all gave me work. I have gone through them, through some grammar and some talks and I have come provisionally (which usually turns out that it lasts forever) to the conclusion that it is and adverb, so it would be
4.24. As to the muHSAnaat from the women except those whom your right hand possess in accordance with God's provisions =kitaaba Allah (or rders, or prescription or dispositions) to you and...
kitaaba is an adverb, the verb is elided, which should not be a surprise since many verbs are elided in the qur'an and in Arabic in general and as regards the muHSanaat,f follow the instructions given by God in that respect.
I do not think that it is saying that the muHSanaat re prohibited (hurrimat), because in the next aya 4.25 starts saying that "And those of you who have not te means to marry believing muHSaanat..."
It could hardly say that if it had just prohibited the believers from marrying them.
Salaam
-
Thank you for all the answers, all gave me work. I have gone through them, through some grammar and some talks and I have come provisionally (which usually turns out that it lasts forever) to the conclusion that it is and adverb, so it would be
4.24. As to the muHSAnaat from the women except those whom your right hand possess in accordance with God's provisions =kitaaba Allah (or rders, or prescription or dispositions) to you and...
kitaaba is an adverb, the verb is elided, which should not be a surprise since many verbs are elided in the qur'an and in Arabic in general and as regards the muHSanaat,f follow the instructions given by God in that respect.
I do not think that it is saying that the muHSanaat re prohibited (hurrimat), because in the next aya 4.25 starts saying that "And those of you who have not te means to marry believing muHSaanat..."
It could hardly say that if it had just prohibited the believers from marrying them.
Salaam
Exactly.
Salaam
-
I do not think that it is saying that the muHSanaat re prohibited (hurrimat),
Hi Huruf,
Why are you thinking about prohibition?
Well I actually know (guess) why you made this statement.
Please take a closer look at the arabic of 423 (not translations because they all cheat) and I am sure you will also see what I am seeing yesI think if we want to understand the language of the quran we should always stay honest otherwise we will never learn a thing.
Salaam,
Bender@mods maybe this topic belongs in a other section.
-
Hi Bender,
Correct me if I'm wrong, do you believe that we can sleep with married slaves according to your understanding to 424?
-
Hi Bender,
Correct me if I'm wrong, do you believe that we can sleep with married slaves according to your understanding to 424?
Hi SleeplessInCairo,
I believe sleeping with a married or unmarried slave can never be a command of Allah.
I believe taking a slaves is and was never allowed by Allah.
I believe taking slaves is one of the biggest sins one can commit let alone sleeping with her.What I was hinting at is that all translators I've read so far are cheating in 423 with 1 specific word. And that's why I think Huruf used the word "prohibit".
-
Hi Bender,
Glad that you don't believe in such thing, I can read Qur'an in its original script, can you please tell me how do you understand verses 422 to 425?
-
I do not think that it is saying that the muHSanaat re prohibited (hurrimat), because in the next aya 4.25 starts saying that "And those of you who have not te means to marry believing muHSaanat..."
It could hardly say that if it had just prohibited the believers from marrying them.
Peace, what about "and permitted" part which follows?
424 ... book (injunction) the god upon you wa-uilla/and permitted to you what beyond such (i.e. the types previously mentioned) that seek ye of with wealth yours ?
-
Hi Bender,
Glad that you don't believe in such thing, I can read Qur'an in its original script, can you please tell me how do you understand verses 422 to 425?
Hi,
At the moment I am not at home so I can not write much.
Besides that, there are a lot of words in 422-425 which I am still clueless of.
I think I need some time to study all those words before I can say anything about it. -
Peace, what about "and permitted" part which follows?
424 ... book (injunction) the god upon you wa-uilla/and permitted to you what beyond such (i.e. the types previously mentioned) that seek ye of with wealth yours ?
Hi Noon,
Thank you for pointing out that word, that's the word I was searching for.
I wonder what happened with that word in 423?
-
Hi Huruf,
Why are you thinking about prohibition?
Well I actually know (guess) why you made this statement.
Please take a closer look at the arabic of 423 (not translations because they all cheat) and I am sure you will also see what I am seeing yesI think if we want to understand the language of the quran we should always stay honest otherwise we will never learn a thing.
Salaam,
Bender@mods maybe this topic belongs in a other section.
Not me I am thinking about prohibition but many iterpret 4.24 as carrying the hurrimat (prohibited) ocurring in 4.23 as comprising the muHSanat mentioned at the beeginning of 4.24.
In 4.24 what was bothering me was the kitaaba, which is not kitaabu, but kitaaba which turns the word into an adverb not a subject. No it cannot be kitaabu Allahi 3alaicum because it is an adverb. So one has to interpret that that is a sentence with an elided verb and that the kitaaba, is a circumstance describing what pertains to the muHSanaaat. What ppertains is that what ocncerns them is as per the kitaab (or disposition or whatever you choose to translate kitaab as) of God. So, in the stretch from the beginning of 4.23 to 3.24 and then up to 4.25 we are given different conditions regarding cohabitation or marriage. In 4.23 we have those prohibited, then in 4.24 we have the other cases where regrding the muHSanat we must find the dispositions regarding them an then all the others not included in the previous lots are permited and the conditions for them to be made licit to you are given.
In 4.25 it goes into more detail.
It is very interesting That in 5.5, as Noon pointed out there are also the muHSanat, therefore the word caannnnot mean married women. I do not think it means chaste women either because it would be very weird, the Qur'an in princile does not exact proof of chastity or anything like that and does not make chastity a bigger asset of women than of men.
Ihave to go through the whole thig yet and veryfy but I susect tht what it means are women to whom legal capacity of sexual consent is acknowledged.
It makes sense. MuHsSanat is passive participle so it is something that is done to women. Look up the other meanins of the same verb andn of other words of the same root not connected with sexual conntent. MuHSanaat are those thatif found in zina wuld be reponsible. Not the others, for instance very young girls or women under the power of other people or amen. They wuld not be indictable for answerig of any illegal sex, since they are not capable of consent.
Look where it says muHSineen active participle of the same word and how in 4.24 and 5.5 how pretenders ar ordered to pursue their intention of marrying the ladies muHSineen, active participle of the same verb muHSanaat is the passive participle. So pursue your aim acknowledging to them the capacity, nnd therfore the right, to consent or not consent. muHSineen and not musafiHeen, that is with their agreement and not overrumpling them. The verb has other ocurrences and they all match that set up.
Also bear in mind that never when it is a matter of chastity elsewhere the word comes up, what comes up is Hafadh farja...
The exception is Maryam where the active form is used as a verb aHSnat farjaha, that is, she made acknowldged to herself the capacity to consent to God and follow whatver he disposed for her.
Salaam
-
Not me I am thinking about prohibition but many iterpret 4.24 as carrying the hurrimat (prohibited) ocurring in 4.23 as comprising the muHSanat mentioned at the beeginning of 4.24.
RED Yes I know. You mentioned it because many interpret it that way.
I think many interpret it that way because 423 starts with "HURRIMAT" and 424 starts with "WA", so it's like a continuation of 423, thus many think that they are also "HURRIMAT".But let's take a closer look at 423
423
What happened with the blue word?
Please click here to see how corpus quran translate this word.
And please click here how they translate similar words.
hypnoSo in my opinion if 424 is a continuation 423 then it's not a continuation of what is "hurrimat" but of what is "alaa-ilu".
It's obvious what the problem is for translators why they have difficulty in translating this word in 423.
What follows after "alaa-ilu" in 423 makes then no sense but instead of reexamining the verse, and their understanding on the whole verse and the words in it, they persist in their interpretations.In 4.24 what was bothering me was the kitaaba, which is not kitaabu, but kitaaba which turns the word into an adverb not a subject.
I am not so sure about this.
I fully agree that there is a difference between kitaaba Allah and kitaabu Allah, but at the moment I have no clue.
What is the difference between rasula Allah in 961 " ..." and rasulu Allah in 9113 "... " ?
I don't see it, but I am very sure there is a nuance.Salaam,
Bender -
Salaam, Bender,
What is the difference between rasula Allah in 961 " ..." and rasulu Allah in 9113 "... " ?
I don't see it, but I am very sure there is a nuance.The rasul in the first sentence is the object of the verb as shown by the fatha (a)ending the word. That is the object of the verb or what gives to the word it is attached to the value of an adverb. Like if you have the word "hour" for example, if in English you add "ly" to it, it would be "hourly", it is turned into an adverb. So that is what happened in the "kitaaba" in 4.24. So in 9.61 you qquote, it is like saying "Those who annoy messengerly (that is, annoy the prophet)... the finaal a, fatha turns the word into a different element of grammar.
Inn te second sntence, in 9.13, it says rasulu, and that is a nominative, it is the rasul who does the action. So it is two different things.
RED Yes I know. You mentioned it because many interpret it that way.
I think many interpret it that way because 423 starts with "HURRIMAT" and 424 starts with "WA", so it's like a continuation of 423, thus many think that they are also "HURRIMAT".But let's take a closer look at 423
423
What happened with the blue word?
Please click here to see how corpus quran translate this word.
And please click here how they translate similar words.
hypnoSo in my opinion if 424 is a continuation 423 then it's not a continuation of what is "hurrimat" but of what is "alaa-ilu".
It's obvious what the problem is for translators why they have difficulty in translating this word in 423.
What follows after "alaa-ilu" in 423 makes then no sense but instead of reexamining the verse, and their understanding on the whole verse and the words in it, they persist in their interpretations.The word hala'il has the form of a broken plural. I see it is translated as "who have been wives". The word in singular does not appear n the Qur'an as wife. But then following from the meaing of the root I woud saay that that is means "those who were permitted to your sons", and I understand by logic that by permitted in this case it is not talking about the fact that could go into them or not go, but the fact that you did go into them within whatever civil category that might have happenned. That is born by the fact that in a previous item it is opposed "having entered into them" and not having done so. Hala'il is nominative, so it is the subjet of the passive hurrimat that seems to aply to the whole of 4.23 with the exceptions that are also mentionned in each case.
In that part I do not see anything that shocks me to the end of the aya. And although some ayas continue from anothers without a clear difference of subject, in this case as per my understanding, it is not so and that underlines the fact that from those prohibited we change to a different case, and in fact the aya, save for that musanaat, is undoubtedly speaking of non prohibited things. So aya 4.23 holds the prohibitions, with its exceptions or explanations, and aya 4.24 holds the other cases. It cannot be otherwise because they cannotbe prohibited in 4.24 and then allowed in 5.5. and in 4.25 tell us that if the believers cannot afford to marry the muhsanat... Obvioulsy the impediment is not any prohibition but the lack of possibles of whatever kind of the candidates. No family consent is required for the muhsanaat, therefore it is not chaste women, because those for whom the family consent is required may also be chaste, so it would be improper to characterise one category as chaste and leave that blank for others.
The penalties reduced to half for the non muhSanaaat before marriage bears the idea that they were not to be burdened in the same measure as women who had the capacity of consent for a longer time or at the time of their marriage and therfore more able to refuse such marriage if it was not to their taste.
Salaam
-
It cannot be otherwise because they cannotbe prohibited in 4.24 and then allowed in 5.5. and in 4.25 tell us that if the believers cannot afford to marry the muhsanat...
Yes and again the only way to resolve it's prohibited to simultaneously marry sisters and mu'antu.
urrimat/prohibited upon you ...and that cohabit between (i.e. simultaneously marry) sisters except what hence passed, surely the god be forgiver merciful, and the mu'antu from the womenfolk except what possess right hands yours ...
Really don't see how 424 can logically start a new context?
424 wal-mu'antu from the womenfolk except what possess right hands yours book/writ the god upon you wa-uilla/and permitted for you what beyond such (i.e. types previously mentioned) yours that seek ye of with wealth yours ...