Qur'an Verse 4:34 - 'Beat the Wife'? quranverse434
-
In English, 'moving out' is probably a more suitable expression as one does move out when they go to fight in God's cause.
Firstly, one does not necessarily move out (if you meant moving out of one's home) when fighting in God's cause.
Secondly, you seem to imply "DRB fee God's path/cause" is about getting/moving out and fighting in God's cause. It isn't. "DRB fee God's path/cause" encompasses many things, e.g. spending (2195, 2262) and this can be done from one's home, no need to get/move out.
As I said "getting/moving out" is a stretch.
And as I have also said before, no equivalent Quranic example of your DRB rendition exists. That doesn't mean its impossible however.
-
Firstly, one does not necessarily move out (if you meant moving out of one's home) when fighting in God's cause.
Secondly, you seem to imply "DRB fee God's path/cause" is about getting/moving out and fighting in God's cause. It isn't. "DRB fee God's path/cause" encompasses many things, e.g. spending (2195, 2262) and this can be done from one's home, no need to get/move out.
As I said "getting/moving out" is a stretch.
And as I have also said before, no equivalent Quranic example of your DRB rendition exists. That doesn't mean its impossible however.
I understand you are taking '...in God's path' as a general statement (which may be inferred), however realistically in this context I believe the intended meaning is a reference to those who went out to fight in the cause of God. For this purpose, 'moving out', 'getting out', or 'going out' all serve the same meaning.
-
Interesting point added to the article about verse 2663. Prophet Moses casts the staff, here the same word Da-Ra-Ba is used, and the sea separates into two - causing a division and separation of two parts. It's an example of how the word can be used to create a parting or separation.
-
I can't believe what I'm reading on http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/09.%20Women/2.Erroneous%20belief%20of%20beating%20wife..htm
Are people seriously considering these are exclusive measures for women (not men) committing adultery? What a misogynistic interpretation.
In my understanding the context of adultery is simply not there. Yeah yeah I know fahisha but fahisha is not equal to sexual transgression.
If you stick to a narrow-minded sexually obsessed interpretation, the meaning of the verse will never reveal itself except for misogynistic misconceptions that picture women as the only gender who either commit adultery or should be punished for committing it.
If a man would commit adultery, not one of those measures mentioned will apply as a result from such an understanding. But of course we all know men are absolutely loyal beings, right?
This whole thing smells like ISIL bullshit to me. 2015 folks, wake up and smell the coffee and have some feminist homemade cake.
-
The following article provides a strong case for the meaning of 'separate' / 'leave' as put forward on www.quranverse434.com
https//issuu.com/islamophobiadebunked/docs/is_beating_women_permitted_in_islam
The link has also been added to the 'Further Reading' section of the website
http//www.quranverse434.com/#further-reading
-
Aya 4.34 is nto addressed to husbands. nor to wives, nor does it speak about husbands and wives. It is textually very clear. It is addressed, like previous ayas and following ayas, to the bilievers at large and it sets the tasks of men at large and of women at large. Therefore it is preposterous that it should be telling the believers to beat women. Preposterous.
There is a stubborn resistance to acknowledge tht the adresee in ths aya like in previous and follwoing are the believers and not "husbands" and that it does speak about both sexes regardless of their civil status.
But it seems that wherever the Qur'an speaks about women it should by all means disregrded and only understood of women as some appendage to men.
The text of this aya must be read without prejudice.
Salaam
-
The following article has also been linked to the website because it posits the view 'transit-move the wives from the bedroom to other area of house'
http//haqeeqat.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/09.%20Women/2.Erroneous%20belief%20of%20beating%20wife..htm
-
peace all,
The following article has also been linked to the website because it posits the view 'transit-move the wives from the bedroom to other area of house'
haqeeqat.pk/English Tafsir e Haqeeqat/09. Women/2.Erroneous belief of beating wife..htm
Did you actually read that article and consider it sound? I must say it really is quite poor. So many issues one doesn't know where to begin, but sticking to 434 only
it erroneously claims "And you husbands move them to separate bed within the bedrooms", not only misrepresenting the verb but also interpolates another bed. Can we assume this verse is only for those who have more than one bed in the house? What nonsense.
it then claims "transit them out of the bedrooms open in house making the suspended matrimonial relation apparent to entire family", note plural "bedrooms", the interpolations, and implies the husband MUST move them out of the bedroom (it is a command/imperative verb after all, so what if she refuses, does he pick her up and move her to comply with the command? does he cordon off his bedroom?) and make their marital relations/problems apparent to entire family, including children. Yes, that sounds very logical and healthy. Again, it's nonsense.
Ironically, linking to that article is likely to damage the credibility of your article not enhance it.
And with regard to the rest in your list, careful readers will note that according to the "leave them" theory, their inherent contradictory position, wherein the author of Quran is commanding the husband to "leave them" in 434, then promoting reconciliation in the next verse.
Did Noah beat his wife? How about Lot? The quran always give us examples and Noah and Lot both LEFT their wives! The only man given as example of someone who beat his wife is the pharaoh, Asiyas husband.
Quran verses?
-
Did you actually read that article and consider it sound? I must say it really is quite poor.
By linking to those articles, I am not necessarily endorsing their entire content or details, nor expecting to increase the credibility of my own writing. However, the articles provide support to the 'separate' theory as opposed to others, and are worth further reading.
And with regard to the rest in your list, careful readers will note that according to the "leave them" theory, their inherent contradictory position, wherein the author of Quran is commanding the husband to "leave them" in 434, then promoting reconciliation in the next verse.
In 434, separation is temporary, and reconciliation is encouraged ('if they heed you'
In 435, separation is permanent, and reconciliation is encouraged ('if they want reconciliation'
There is no contradiction.
-
Peace All.
We all need to be honest with ourselves. When we "take" from others,let us not claim it as ours,we might say I agree with such comments because,or even say I have similar understanding...etc.What is morally and spiritually wrong is to claim something is ours,when we took from others,then criticise/call the person/s we took ideas from and accept the "hamd"/thanks/praise to inflate our ego!!!!!.
What are the motives/aims of people who claim to believe in GOD and His message(Qoran)? Do they really believe GOD(and the message)?
What is wrong in saying about 434 that we do not really know exactly what is "Idribuhunna"!!! We need to keep investigating...However it cannot be "hit the wife/..." because of the context of other verses . GOD is just,GOD abhors violence and oppression...etc Also it cannot mean "hit" because there are no instructions on how to hit or with what!!!!!
If anything according to other "Darb" in Qoran the meaning can be leaned towards "So you can be warned/stay away/heed.." .Example
Daraba Allah Mathalan"...Be warned/stay away from /heed the message...No violence whatsoever intended or implied.
Anyway,Sorry guys for being stern for justice,to those who recognise GOD s justice keep calling/fighting for it.
GOD bless you all.
Peace. -
Lets think about it a few other ways.
(1)
What if 434 (or the last part of it) was not in the Quran.
Would the Quran then be incomplete? What is so important in that verse that God had to put it in the Quran. What is the "value-add" of 434?(2)
We know from Islamic history that 434 has been taken mean "beat" for 1400 years.
God knows the future, why would he put an ambiguous word in the Quran that would sanction abuse and deliberately impede the progress of women's right.(3) Can the verse be improved?
Yes, simply put a "wa la" before uddribuhunna .. so it reads "advise them, forsake then in bed, but don't beat them". -
Lets think about it a few other ways.
(1)
What if 434 (or the last part of it) was not in the Quran.
Would the Quran then be incomplete? What is so important in that verse that God had to put it in the Quran. What is the "value-add" of 434?(2)
We know from Islamic history that 434 has been taken mean "beat" for 1400 years.
God knows the future, why would he put an ambiguous word in the Quran that would sanction abuse and deliberately impede the progress of women's right.(3) Can the verse be improved?
Yes, simply put a "wa la" before uddribuhunna .. so it reads "advise them, forsake then in bed, but don't beat them".There is nothing abiguous about idribuhunna nor is there anything ambiguous about 4.34, but people do not like it. Do not like it at all. So very early started to arrange the aya to suit what they liked.
And it is wrong not always has daraba meant strike as you say. You are inventing that. Nowhere int he Qur'an it means that.
?Can you imagine Musa, beating up the stone sto make them give water? It is nonsense.In spanish there is such a word from the Arabi daraba "adarvar" which when it was in use meant "astonish". What did not the word if the meaning as you gratuitously say was inequivocal should turn into Spanish into a different thing. It would be a first into passing into Spanish with a different meaning of what it was in Arabic.
4.34 such s understood by most eople today is a travesty, and I guess it will contonue so for a long time, becuse the pain for those who cling to the old assumptiosn is too much to bear if they really take the aya for what it says. Male egocentrism can't coppe.
Salaam
-
Which ever way we think about 434 GOD has known about it.
GOD has put His words where they belong.His perfect knowledge dictates all the thoughts. Our thoughts are mostly experiments and guess work.To be honest, every time I think about something now,I fear the worse. Yes,we need guidance about our thoughts as well.
GOD bless.
Peace. -
It does not make sense contextually if we use beat. I have <a href="https//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9609716.0">outlined just several questions</a> which arise in case we use it. Leave or how someone suggested here 'cite' (which I too believe it is not) makes more sense contextually.
I also believe it is one of the most important verses in the Quran because the way we translate it forms our understanding on society as a whole. As someone who despises authority I believe that patriarchal mindset which allows to keep wives as slaves and beat them automatically creates a mindset which allows to control others and keep them as slaves or labour workers. That is how governments, states and wars and everything shitty we have is created. It all comes from the family and instincts.
-
-
I read your 434 explanation on your website and the way you presented evidences from the Quran was amazing. Sorry for my little understanding of English. What do you mean by "CITE THEM". Do you mean refer them to the court? or tell someone about their misbehavior?. Your argument is that (which i understood from your article) how would authority know that there is a rift in relation between husband and wife. The only way is if someone tell them. Husband or wife or any other close family member would inform the court. Am i correct?
Also, in your view "NUSHOOZ" mean cheating with husband?.
I know it is a very stupid question but to understand fully i need to ask you those type of questions.
Peace.
-
She certainly deserved this according to Sam 'Pro-Russian Eurasian Nutjob' Gerrans
https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=_g9RI0GgRIQ&feature=youtu.be&t=2m5s bravo
