Note on 4:34 and Sam Gerrans.
-
It still funny that only after your incident with him that you somehow woke up from your illusion. And he somehow turned into that terrible hypocrite bad guy.
Illussion of what? It was first time of me reading his work, after which I decided to contact him, since he was friended with me on Facebook. As the message suggests, it was quite surprising to find out his translation of 434, but honestly I also felt this way since no previous attempts at translating it in a liberal manner convinced me enough.
But his own interpretation is flawed, to say the least, it can be easily observed once you read my points. I bet anyone can easily make up some points against his interpretation (in case one reads it of course, and familiarizes himself with Sam's 434). So my point was I'd rather use reformist translation of 434 and I asked him to review this because his assumptions are based on dubious sources of research. Just because he made a huge work , does not mean he has to abandon any outside attempts at pointing out probable mistakes of his, in the same manner fascists and traditionalists abandon any attempts .
-
Peace Makaveli.
I get your point and you are right to highlight the injustice/ban.My aim /intend is not to criticise but advise that nobody should follow/rely on others.
Everyone should pick what is best from others or leave altogether.
Of course if anyone wants to follow/rely on anyone they are free to do so. This is in general,not intended for you.
GOD bless you.
Peace.That is exactly my point, thank you brother. Peace.
-
Irony is how he translated the beggining of the 434 - And those from whom you fear haughtiness.
Peace ? was he consistent?
434 ... thou fearing nushza-hunna/recalcitrant theirs (feminine pl.)
4128 and if woman fear she from husband hers nushz-an/recalcitrant ofLikewise ?in context? what do you think it means?
434 ? wa-arib-hunna/and ??? ye them (feminine pl.)
Arabic-English Lexicon by Edward William Lane
signifies, (S, Msb,) or signifies also, (TA,) and (Msb, TA) so does , (Msb, K, TA,) (assumed tropical) He turned away from, avoided, shunned, or left, him, or it; (S * Msb, K * TA; *) namely, a person, (TA,) or a thing.
(tropical) He disposed, or accommodated, and subjected, himself to such a thing, or such an affair.
signifies also (tropical) He was silent; he spoke not or he lowered his eyes, looking towards the ground
-
Explanation must be easy and sound, not a hundred pages long "interpretation" and a game with word-root play.
Just read the semantic components of English verb "strike" the meanings of Arabic verb will become explicit. I have already given the link which incorporates its usage in Qur'aan.
-
Are you the person who started this
https//www.reddit.com/r/Quraniyoon/comments/6lcaut/sam_gerrans_quran_translation_thoughts/?st=j5vr1uar&sh=c368561bI would be careful about accepting anything from someone who wrote for RT.
Negative. He is yes affiliated with RT , but he also lived in Russia, which itself is nothing bad or good, it's just a fact. But from personal perspective, it was my last time I'd ever interact with such a person. You either blindly accept his work and vision or write your own , without any possiblity of side discussions.
Just read the semantic components of English verb "strike" the meanings of Arabic verb will become explicit. I have already given the link which incorporates its usage in Qur'aan.
I am quite sure 'strike' in English means anything but leaving or abandoning, except in some rare cases where another word is provided besides a verb, such as 'hit the road, Jack'. It is also important to understand what is it men might fear in women in 434 - rebbelion or haughtiness? Because you know, the only way to cease rebbelion is by force, but with a haughty person I'd simply quit any contact.
-
I am quite sure 'strike' in English means anything but leaving or abandoning, except in some rare cases where another word is provided besides a verb, such as 'hit the road, Jack'. It is also important to understand what is it men might fear in women in 434 - rebbelion or haughtiness? Because you know, the only way to cease rebbelion is by force, but with a haughty person I'd simply quit any contact.
I think link given was not consulted. Relevant para is reproduced
The basic perception, meanings and signification infolded in this Root " " as stated in Lane Lexicon is,
"accord. to Er-R?ghib, signifies the making a thing to fall upon another thing;"The conceptual meanings of the Root evidently reveal that its meanings in the real-world experience will be reflected by the collocates or other words associated with it in the context.
It reflects that its effect may necessarily not be of causing hurt. It reflects an instance; an illustration or an occurrence. The most equivalent word in English vocabulary to describe the basic perception and its various uses in different semantic fields is verb "strike". "Strike" denotes; to fall or shine on something; to make something noticed; make something to be perceived or become audible-understandable for someone; to make some idea enter somebody's mind or occur to somebody; to penetrate or seem to go right through something; make something by stamping; and to remove something away-displace. And taking support and help of other words, its use signifies to hit somebody or something with a hand, tool, weapon, or other object. Obvious intention in such strike is to hurt, damage, dislocate, dislodge, deform, shape or stamp the target with force. Moreover, support words will be required if the intention of the speaker is to indicate the instance as involving repeated strikes to reflect what is denoted by English word "beating"; punishment in which somebody is repeatedly hit.
We will firstly study all the 57 occurrences, other than one in 434, to see that Root " " is as if it is synonymous with English word "strike" as defined above.
-
Which 'support word' is needed when the direction is made in the combination of 'strike' and 'them'? This is yet another diatribe I wrote about earlier. And yes, I have briefly seen this link but again, if one has to be an Arabic-English linguist to understand the Qur'an, then how is one going to understand it without falling into the trap of somebody's else interpretation? I believe my initial questions on Sam's 'interpretation' make more sense than this whole linguistic work, which I barely view as authentic, due to the lack of understanding of author's methodology.
If strike means beat in 99% of cases what is the chance of the final punishment in 434 to be anything else, except in cases if we look for context in other verses, namely 435 and 425 (a possibility to marry a woman who is not initially a believer thus her punishment is only half of that for a believing woman and the following divorce procedure after the 'events' of 434.
Also, the person in authority in 435 - who is he? A village elder? A trusted person? A friend of the family? What if a woman is an orphan and does not have a protector or other members of the family to represent her? Traditionalist would say it is a local imam, if you understand where I am going with this...
-
I think ,according to the context of the verse,there are choices of solving the matter. "Darb" should not even be considered,regardless of what it means.
Now let us assume for a moment that there is "darb" ,what are the clear instruction on how to carry it? Has there been an agreement on its usage?There are too many interpretations and assumptions that is all .Let us now go back to our society and how common sense and awareness is leading to better laws/way of living... Now say the law of the land has forbidden violence or even threatening violence,does one go against the just laws of the land? One can argue that we can break the law if it is unjust,but surely we should welcome just laws according to GOD s message.
For me GOD is very consistent .GOD does not order fahisha /injustice. I will go and look at the interpretations that go with the truthfulness of the message.
GOD bless.
Peace. -
Strike and beat are different semantically. First is just one instance while beat is repeated action.
The Verbal Sentence is conjunct to the preceding clause with Appositive Particle Waw which is evidently showing a sequence. This coordinating conjunction functions as an additive term within sentences to link clauses, phrases, and words.
It refers to affirming for the the same meaning that is affirmed for the , which is here . The suspension of Protocol of Matrimony happened within the bed room of respective couple. It is in seclusion, hidden and not occurring to others.
Action appositive to it is described by Verbal sentence comprising of Verb-Subject-Object. Verb is Imperative; second person; masculine; Subject Pronoun in nominative state refers to the respective husbands. Suffixed feminine plural third person pronoun refers to respective wives. Action denoted by the verb is to strike once; and since it is associated with a location; the bed rooms of respective couples, with no other words linked with it that could add connotation of physical hitting with hand or an object and target part of body; the only meanings are to transit-move the wives from the bed room to other area of house. This will reflect the basic perception infolded in the Root of Verb; that is to make things manifest, become understandable for someone; to make it occur to others.Wife is now out of the bed room. It is a non-verbal, but louder than verbal, conveniently understood by all others that this couple is neither respecting nor maintaining the Protocol of Matrimony. It is a dangerous and alarming state causing concern for others. Therefore, Allah the Exalted immediately gives in its continuation a course of action to the concerned relatives of husband and wife to try avert the situation before it worsens and ends in permanent break-alienation of the couple.
-
Now let us assume for a moment that there is "darb" ,what are the clear instruction on how to carry it? Has there been an agreement on its usage?There are too many interpretations and assumptions that is all .
Peace,
This is in fact something I have initially considered, if you look at my message to Gerrans. It does not state the severity of beating or the degree of it. What stops a husband from beating his wife to half-dead? And I am sure many of you have heard about respective cases from many Middle-Eastern families out there...
In contrary, Qur'an explains on how to carry out other punishments, such as 100 lashes for adulterers or half of the punishment (50 lashes I guess?) of that of a free believing woman for a woman who is not from monotheistic background (425).
That is why 'beat' in the context of 434 sounds too vague in the context of the following and previous verses.
I know about common sense, the problem of 434 is far more wide than domestic violence... As I said earlier I do not care about what happes in other families, I believe family to be an autonomous institution where no man should be allowed to interfer. However, in case 434 means that men control women, and not simply provide for (a), some women might be rebellious and not anything else, i.e. trying to become the head of the family themselves (b) (which suggests using force as the last resort) then this is something, which kind of establishes the very social paradigm which can be viewed everywhere. Look what happens during social strikes - the government uses force so that people would go home instead, and no constitution does protect people from expressing their own right over their land.
That is why I asked Gerrans to review 434 because this is not about women, I frankly don't care. I would not beat my wife because I am smart enough not to marry a woman who can't be trusted in the first place. But it is a wider social concept, and it is one of the most controversial verses of the Qur'an, again, not because it is about women, but because for most people this is the verse which first comes to mind. What is important for person? To marry, start the family, work and live. That's it. That's what people do. Of course once a person learns about the Qur'anic Revelation , first thing (or one of the first things in a row) he or she is interested in, is how to get married and maintain the household in accordance with that tradition. What happens in case a person feels that he is the Don (head of the family) who controls his children, wife(-s) and his wealth (resources), he would believe he has the right to control or influence other people in a way which suits him. This is how clergy and the government are formed. This is how capitalism and the concept of free market (i.e. the system where a few people exploit others in exchange for labor) is formed. This is the way feudalism worked in the past. This is something which starts all the wars in the world. Don't blame Hitler or Stalin or the U.S. government for killing millions of people, logic of people which allows them to opress others is what is the core reason.
And if it was not for several verses of the Qur'an I would not even doubt the 'beat' verb in the context of 434
(2190)Fight in the cause of God against those who fight you, but do not transgress, God does not like the aggressors (2191), Kill them wherever you find them, and expel them from where they expelled you, and know that persecution is worse than being killed. Do not fight them at the Restricted Temple unless they fight you in it; if they fight you then kill them. Thus is the reward of those who do not appreciate (2192), If they cease, then God is Forgiving, Compassionate.
(6123) As such, We have permitted in every town the influential from its criminals, to scheme in it. They only scheme their own selves without perceiving.
Anybody else thinks 434 is not that important?
-
Strike and beat are different semantically. First is just one instance while beat is repeated action.
The Verbal Sentence is conjunct to the preceding clause with Appositive Particle Waw which is evidently showing a sequence. This coordinating conjunction functions as an additive term within sentences to link clauses, phrases, and words.
It refers to affirming for the the same meaning that is affirmed for the , which is here . The suspension of Protocol of Matrimony happened within the bed room of respective couple. It is in seclusion, hidden and not occurring to others.
Action appositive to it is described by Verbal sentence comprising of Verb-Subject-Object. Verb is Imperative; second person; masculine; Subject Pronoun in nominative state refers to the respective husbands. Suffixed feminine plural third person pronoun refers to respective wives. Action denoted by the verb is to strike once; and since it is associated with a location; the bed rooms of respective couples, with no other words linked with it that could add connotation of physical hitting with hand or an object and target part of body; the only meanings are to transit-move the wives from the bed room to other area of house. This will reflect the basic perception infolded in the Root of Verb; that is to make things manifest, become understandable for someone; to make it occur to others.Wife is now out of the bed room. It is a non-verbal, but louder than verbal, conveniently understood by all others that this couple is neither respecting nor maintaining the Protocol of Matrimony. It is a dangerous and alarming state causing concern for others. Therefore, Allah the Exalted immediately gives in its continuation a course of action to the concerned relatives of husband and wife to try avert the situation before it worsens and ends in permanent break-alienation of the couple.
This way it makes sense, yet, as I said, it takes certain semantic knowledge in order to come to that conclusion. After reading your message, I personally have to believe rather than make sure myself.
-
This way it makes sense, yet, as I said, it takes certain semantic knowledge in order to come to that conclusion. After reading your message, I personally have to believe rather than make sure myself.
The semantics of Arabic is like "semantics" of DNA?triplet schema. To ascertain the accurate meanings one has to know the perception enfolded in the Root, morphology of the word and third syntax.
For translation in target language text these three elements are like anti-codon in human genome.
Semantics of Qur'aan is like "semantics" of DNA?triplet schema
-
Negative. He is yes affiliated with RT , but he also lived in Russia, which itself is nothing bad or good, it's just a fact. But from personal perspective, it was my last time I'd ever interact with such a person. You either blindly accept his work and vision or write your own , without any possiblity of side discussions.
I wasn't very educated about Gerrans. I just found out that in that video of his he contradicted what he told you in that message. That's
"I have no time for personal theories" v the 26 min video full of his personal theories.This guy seems to be attempting to reverse what we already understand and how we approach the Quran. The comments under that video are quite weird.
-
I wasn't very educated about Gerrans. I just found out that in that video of his he contradicted what he told you in that message. That's
"I have no time for personal theories" v the 26 min video full of his personal theories.This guy seems to be attempting to reverse what we already understand and how we approach the Quran. The comments under that video are quite weird.
That is why I asked once again to review 434, provided he told in one of his videos that he does not consider his work to be the last resort and he is ready to accept he was wrong. I am not saying he was wrong, I just stated that his argumentation for 434 is based on additional literature, such as Orthodox Christian Domostroi, which is the traditional book. From my point of view, such an apporach lacks any Quranic methodology as I elaborated in the message I have sent him. Result? He first blocked me, then unblocked and wrote he has no time for 'personal theories' (even though I seldom proposed anything, just asked him to once again review his own work because his methodology on this one seemed flawed to me, I only wanted his argumentation to be Quran only) and then muted me and continued by sending me one of his videos, without giving me a chance for any response.
snob
Spell Syllables
Examples Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
a person who imitates, cultivates, or slavishly admires social superiors and is condescending or overbearing to others.
2.
a person who believes himself or herself an expert or connoisseur in a given field and is condescending toward or disdainful of those who hold other opinions or have different tastes regarding this field.5723 In order that you not despair over what has eluded you and not exult over what He has given you. And Allah does not like everyone self-deluded and boastful - 5724 who are stingy and enjoin upon people stinginess. And whoever turns away - then indeed, Allah is the Free of need, the Praiseworthy.
-
That is why I asked once again to review 434, provided he told in one of his videos that he does not consider his work to be the last resort and he is ready to accept he was wrong. I am not saying he was wrong, I just stated that his argumentation for 434 is based on additional literature, such as Orthodox Christian Domostroi, which is the traditional book. From my point of view, such an apporach lacks any Quranic methodology as I elaborated in the message I have sent him. Result? He first blocked me, then unblocked and wrote he has no time for 'personal theories' (even though I seldom proposed anything, just asked him to once again review his own work because his methodology on this one seemed flawed to me, I only wanted his argumentation to be Quran only) and then muted me and continued by sending me one of his videos, without giving me a chance for any response.
snob
Spell Syllables
Examples Word Origin
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
a person who imitates, cultivates, or slavishly admires social superiors and is condescending or overbearing to others.
2.
a person who believes himself or herself an expert or connoisseur in a given field and is condescending toward or disdainful of those who hold other opinions or have different tastes regarding this field.5723 In order that you not despair over what has eluded you and not exult over what He has given you. And Allah does not like everyone self-deluded and boastful - 5724 who are stingy and enjoin upon people stinginess. And whoever turns away - then indeed, Allah is the Free of need, the Praiseworthy.
I find that behavior of his odd. It is just more than being a snob and hypocrite.
Sure any Quran follower is open to reviewing what he understands of the verses. That doesn't excuse attacking the one who is telling him or her to do so.
One does not need to write a book to explain the simple fact you told him. He is too sensitive and impulsive to be a Quran follower. Where is the patience?
Do you know any place where I can find "his work" on salat? Someone on reddit was saying it has similarity with the salat article written by Wakas.