Note on 4:34 and Sam Gerrans.
-
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.
-
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.
Hi,
I haven't reviewed much of his articles since my first 'encounter' with him on facebook, but in case these links are based solely on his own work , then try these, they are of his official textual and video blogs
https//www.quranite.com/salat-in-the-quran/
https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=98tk6uEkBF4
-
Can someone ask sam if Noah beat his wife or 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.
Red Who is Asiyas? Just curious.
-
Hi,
I haven't reviewed much of his articles since my first 'encounter' with him on facebook, but in case these links are based solely on his own work , then try these, they are of his official textual and video blogs
https//www.quranite.com/salat-in-the-quran/
https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=98tk6uEkBF4
Thank you so much for the link. First link seems quite strange when evaluated against Wakas' articles. Not that it is impossible for two people convey the same view. But not sure what to say when structures of the articles start to look same
Sam
The Traditionalist?s position, in summary, is that his non-Qur?anic literature tells him that the value for alt is equal to x (a certain number of daily rituals, at least five but sometimes more) and that since he does not find x in the Qur?an, he (and we) should understand that the Qur?an requires his non-Qur?anic literature to be understood or implemented.
Wakas
Amongst traditional Muslims, a commonly held belief is that the Arabic word "salat" exclusively means "prayer", and must be done with specific words in a set routine.
http//www.mypercept.co.uk/articles/disproved_traditional_salat.htm
-
Can someone ask sam if Noah beat his wife or 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.
Although thats the methodology to be used to understand the verses you presented it in a funny way.
rotfl
Sam also skipped 434.
Red Who is Asiyas? Just curious.
Let's just call her Mrs Pharaoh.
-
peace all,
Can someone ask sam if Noah beat his wife or 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?
reel, can you clarify what you mean? I'm not sure I get the comparison.
-
Thank you so much for the link. First link seems quite strange when evaluated against Wakas' articles. Not that it is impossible for two people convey the same view. But not sure what to say when structures of the articles start to look same
He was inspired from other sources since he became interested in the Quran. There is an article on his views on several major translations https//www.quranite.com/a-short-overview-of-translations-of-the-quran-in-english/
He is obviously aware of many outside of traditions views of various important Quranic verses, including salat. It is does not stop him from being a total snob he is though.
-
peace all,
Quran verses?
reel, can you clarify what you mean? I'm not sure I get the comparison.
I have a feeling that he used your articles.
1.
Sam
The Traditionalist claims aqma means establish (and synonyms) where it occurs with alt. However, the form IV verb aqma occurs 54 times (multiple instances of which are not connected with alt) and I looked at them all.Yours
This phrase is used many times (about 40) for believers in 'the reading', some of which are 2177, 2277, 7170, 1322, 2241, 3518, 3529, 4238. And in these occurrences it is taken, by some, to mean "prayer" thus clearly, it is very interesting then, when 'the reading' uses this same phrase for polytheists!Sam
It occurred to me that looking at the verb used with alt here (aqma) in other contexts might shed some light on its meaning, both in combination with alt in this formula, as well as on alt where it occurs with other verbs.Yours
The reason why these verses are important is because the wording used here for polytheists is the same as that used for believers in many other places in 'the reading', with respect to "salat". The wording I am referring to is as follows
"wa aqamoo al salat" = "and uphold/maintain the salat"
Sam's subheading suddenly is too similar to your article title you provided in that link.
His The treatment of alt in the Qur?an
Yours An understanding of salat from Al Quran (The Reading)
He wrote a lot, but strangely, he doesn't quote the important verses despite the fact he claims to have published a Quran translation of his own. He only gives the numbers and that is also in very small amount.
He was inspired from other sources since he became interested in the Quran. There is an article on his views on several major translations https//www.quranite.com/a-short-overview-of-translations-of-the-quran-in-english/
He is obviously aware of many outside of traditions views of various important Quranic verses, including salat. It is does not stop him from being a total snob he is though.
Of course, inspirations can be taken. But an enthusiast has his own way of explaining things or putting citations of the place which gave him that. I am not sure I can take him as genuine. He seems to have the principles of white supreamacists and ISIS. This is what I found under his about section
"He is driven by commitment to ultimate meaning, and focused on authentic approaches to revelation and Realpolitik. He is founder of Quranite.com and author of The Qur?an A Complete Revelation where his consistent, Qur?an-centric hermeneutical methodology is applied to the text of the Qur?an in its entirety.
His principle interests are
The meaning and application of languages
Strategies for authenticity and independence from conformist and authoritarian cults
Objective virtue and meaning within solipsistic and degrading mass culture
The Qur?an as the gateway to individual odyssey and freedom from tyranny"wow
After coming to Quran he takes a U turn to support realpolitik?
This is meaning
"Realpolitik, politics based on practical objectives rather than on ideals. The word does not mean ?real? in the English sense but rather connotes ?things??hence a politics of adaptation to things as they are. Realpolitik thus suggests a pragmatic, no-nonsense view and a disregard for ethical considerations. In diplomacy it is often associated with relentless, though realistic, pursuit of the national interest."
https//www.britannica.com/topic/realpolitikThat's Machiavellian, aka being fake for the sake of selfishness.
-
Let's just call her Mrs Pharaoh.
Wasn't she the one who bravely rebelled the Pharoah's evil tyranny. She has served The Almighty (SWTY) well for standing up against that satanic madman.
-
Of course, inspirations can be taken. But an enthusiast has his own way of explaining things or putting citations of the place which gave him that. I am not sure I can take him as genuine. He seems to have the principles of white supreamacists and ISIS. This is what I found under his about section
"He is driven by commitment to ultimate meaning, and focused on authentic approaches to revelation and Realpolitik. He is founder of Quranite.com and author of The Quran A Complete Revelation where his consistent, Quran-centric hermeneutical methodology is applied to the text of the Quran in its entirety.
His principle interests are
The meaning and application of languages
Strategies for authenticity and independence from conformist and authoritarian cults
Objective virtue and meaning within solipsistic and degrading mass culture
The Quran as the gateway to individual odyssey and freedom from tyranny"wow
After coming to Quran he takes a U turn to support realpolitik?
This is meaning
"Realpolitik, politics based on practical objectives rather than on ideals. The word does not mean real in the English sense but rather connotes thingshence a politics of adaptation to things as they are. Realpolitik thus suggests a pragmatic, no-nonsense view and a disregard for ethical considerations. In diplomacy it is often associated with relentless, though realistic, pursuit of the national interest."
https//www.britannica.com/topic/realpolitikThat's Machiavellian, aka being fake for the sake of selfishness.
I've read Machiavelli and I must say that I cannot but concede that he was the type of politician who openly wrote about how corrupt, dishonest and evil governments are, except he did not just critize such as apporach to tyranny, but rather he adviced the prince to rule by using these age old tactics of political deception and manipulations.
Realpolitik is often applied by the people who tend to use conspirological approaches to understanding politics and social processes, where Sam Gerrans is of prominent examples. He belives in chemtrails conspiracy, flat earth and many other opinions, which oppose official stances on some events. This is not to critisize Sam, but just to point out what kind of person he is.
Therefore, one can argue that realpolitik is a political view which, unlike academic political realism (which is the so-called school of thought or the theory dedicated to the more liberal apporach to viewing politics as a selfish competition between the states as opposite to liberal school views based on the idea of multinational organizational and NGO impact to politics), views social and political processes from conspirological standpoint, which they in fact are.
I do not believe the government either, but at the same time it is clear to me that mainsteam conspirology is mixed with a set of different theories, which range from more or less holistic to straight insane. There is too much of information out there these days, and this information is not blocked for a reason. I myself live in the post-Soviet country and during the Soviet times radio waves such as BBC or Radio Freedom were simply blocked by the government, it was a crime to view or listen to any sort of information which is not consistent with the view of the regime.
Nowadays, however, you can wath, listen to or read anything you want, but not because we live in a more liberal period of time, but simply because it creates a certain paradigm, in which it is nearly impossible for people to unite over some idea. There will be always two, three or more opinions regarding any subject, yet any approach to understanding events, which is assumed to be conspirological, i.e. it does not accept official statement and uses own interpretation regarding certain events, is automatically labeled as flawed or simply dull, which is a special type of passive agressive fascism as I would call it.
But while realpolitik, from what I feel at least, is mostly about a discussion club where people share opinions based on their ideological and ethical views, Sam Gerran's seems to move this on a whole new level, by acting as if his opinion is a supreme one and anyone who disagrees is automatically labaled as a talker rather than doer. How is it even an argument, I don't know. I don't know about his past, but from what I see now he is commenting on the news and making videos, which IS talking. He also used to write for RT, not sure about his contemporary job. That is, however, not only talking, but the process of forming opinions using the media. So who is Mr. Gerrans, a talker, a doer, or a manipulative snob who blocks people but necessarily preserves his 'right' of last word by sending a video about what a doer he is and these noisy talkers, who point out some of the things they do not agree with?
-
Everyone has his/her own views on hypocrisy. I expressed mine. And I believe people who consider themselves Quran alone believers should know about his true personality. If you do not consider him a hypocrite, that's fine with me. As I said in my post - in no way I am asking anybody to abandon his translation. I did so because I have reasons to do so based on Sam's personality and actions . I regret studying his work.
Irony is how he translated the beginning of the 434 - And those from whom you fear haughtiness. Well, that's he who is haughty towards others, based on his "responses" on social media. Such people will never deserve my attention let alone support.
Your issue was with him though? Years back I publicly outed what I considered a bigot, and tbh it didn't do any good, just made me look like a big headed plonker! In hindsight, I would have just given my understanding, with supporting evidence from the Qur'an.
No judgement! Just passing on some advice! jedi
-
Your issue was with him though? Years back I publicly outed what I considered a bigot, and tbh it didn't do any good, just made me look like a big headed plonker! In hindsight, I would have just given my understanding, with supporting evidence from the Qur'an.
No judgement! Just passing on some advice! jedi
First of all, I completely agree with you. In fact, I do not say everything in his translation is wrong and should be burned. And I also copied the message I sent him where I clearly described why I have problems with his interpretation, where my logic was based on the context of other Quranic verses. But I will still explain why I have personal problems with following people like Mr.Gerrans.
In case the author is gone what we are left with is his work/writings. We can agree with some of his views or disagree with the other, but the fact is, what we are left with is his intellectual heritage, that is, his works that the author has left for us to study. This does not necessary apply to scripture translation only. People may argue about views of Dostoyevsky, despite the fact that his novels are second to none, given how he described Russian society of the 19th century.
With Sam that is another story. If I read his work and I accept some of his views, I respect him for doing hard work, but I can still contact him in case I have questions. Perhaps I want him to elaborate something for me, he's the author afterall. This is just what I did. And I can see his is not open to any discussion of his work, let alone criticism, he is acting as someone of supreme origin compared to others. You either praise his work, in which case he calls you brother/sister, or, in case you question some of his position, you are automatically labeled as talker (many comments under his videos prove it, if you thank him and praise his work - you are a brther to him, if not, he tells you to read his book, period), even though I pointed out quite clearly why his view on 434 might be wrong, according to the Quran only. I did not attack him saying "wow dude, how can you possibly write that it is permissible to hit a woman!". That would be non-sense. In fact, I pointed out why his argumentation is flawed and based on the literature outside of the Quran. If you are a Quran follower and ahadith rejector then obviously your work should be 100% Quran only. If after that you refer to the Christian Orthodox Domostroi, that is hypocrisy.
The personality of the author whom I managed to contact played a dominant role in such a situation and eventually lead me to stop following him and his teaching. Quran followers respect Muhammad for being a messenger of God, yet they stopped following hadiths because of the actions he is described doing in these writings. Therefore, obviously in this case the decision to follow or abandon a particular doctrine is based on the attitude towards either the author or the writings which are attributed to the person. Of course other factors also play an important role, such as authenticity of those, but most people do not care about authenticity, otherwise they everybody would be a critical thinkers, yet most people are religious. And I am not just saying religious as Muslims or Christians, most atheists are religious too as they blindly accept their dogmas without critical thinking. If Sam talks about being a doer while talking and describing haughtiness in 434 as something men may fear from their wives, while being haughty himself , what is this other than hypocrisy?
-
Indeed Makaveli! I do understand your frustration and position. This man in my opinion has clearly insulted your intelligence, by stonewalling you. You could also be forgiven for thinking that by him pulling rank, he feels superior to you. Yes of course it is right to think of all those people who will be influenced by him. Unfortunately getting yourself upset will not change his views; however I do appreciate why you felt the need to express this important issue.
