Is a man allowed to beat his wife?
-
peace Nadia,
Your instincts are correct in my opinion.
Even if the root Dad-Ra-Ba can mean a sexual connection, it does not fit the context or logic of the sign/ayah, as shown by my post.
Not to mention, this meaning would be unique to this occurrence only (as far as I'm aware).
Of course, I am not married either, thus I may be mistaken about the workings of married life. lol
At the end of the day, even if the meaning of iDRiBoohunna in this sign has several options, one could see this sign as a test for the male/husband who follows 'al quran'. Which meaning will they choose?
It wouldn't be the first time, an in-built distinguishing mechanism has been used (e.g. see 37).
Wakas
-
Peace Wakas,
At the end of the day, even if the meaning of iDRiBoohunna in this sign has several options, one could see this sign as a test for the male/husband who follows 'al quran'. Which meaning will they choose?
let me show you my opinion against that option how could God "offer" that option at the expense of the woman?
-
Is a man allowed to beat his wife?
Is a woman allowed to beat her husband?Well that depends on their 'mutual agreeement', when the wife loved/enjoyed being beaten by her husband then its fine and vice versa.... (there are really some people/couples who are really into 'sadomasochism' D ). When its not then it is forbidden.
The rule are simple, and this one is from the "Hadiths of Jesus"
Mat 712
Whatever you shall be wanting that the people shall be doing to you, in the same manner also you be doing to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.My exegis
Whatever you shall be wanting other people shall be doing to you, treat them in the same manner, for this is one of the essence of the Torah and the Nevim and also the Quran which is Justice.PS
I've never beaten any women in my entire life and Insha Allah I never will..Just my 2 cents..
-
peace Elena,
how could God "offer" that option at the expense of the woman?
I said "At the end of the day, even if...", implying as a last resort. I personally dont think 'beat' is logical as I have written, but not everyone will agree with me. This will most likely leave several possible options (unless they think it can only mean 'beat')*.
Given these options, who has most to lose if they make the unjust decision? The husband or the wife?
*DRB is the most multiple-meaning root I have come across in reviewing 400+ roots, so for someone to say with certainty it can only mean 'beat' is unlikely.
If 'al quran' says "give the excess" , well this is another in-built distinguishing mechanism. One might think 1% of what they earn is the excess, whilst others may think 60% is the excess. If I can apply your questioning how could God "offer" that option at the expense of the needy?
Given this flexibility, who has most to lose if they make the unjust decision? The giver or the receiver?
Wakas
-
SaLaM idmkhizar
If that is not being a hypocryte, then i dont know what is. You are telling ME to try it before i come to a conclusion, when YOU YOURSELF havent tried it. Amazing!
Elena, you have an excellent point. Why would God put the woman at risk JUST for the man to go through some test. And what if it is the husband who is disobeying his wife. Should the wife also take a broom and start beating his husband , AS A LAST RESORT? roll
-
Peace Wakas,
Given these options, who has most to lose if they make the unjust decision? The husband or the wife?
If I can apply your questioning how could God "offer" that option at the expense of the needy?
Given this flexibility, who has most to lose if they make the unjust decision? The giver or the receiver?
do you mean the unjust will receive the punishment and the just wife/needy the reward?
If, it reminds me of what the untouchables are told endure the pain now and you will have a better life later.
If you meant another thing, please let me know.
Wakas, some topics are being always discussed, the hands of the thief, daraba, now I see that Lahab was also a point of disagreement before (The Message spells it as a proper noun, did you see it?), poligamy, etc.
There are some threads in the forum about a society based on the quran, but even in this forum a few people can't agree on the meanings of some of the verses.
Will I be wrong if I say that we'll never know?
I just see possible the metaphor/lessons approach.
-
peace Elena,
do you mean the unjust will receive the punishment
Yes.
and the just wife/needy the reward?
Not necessarily. It depends if they were good or not.
(The Message spells it as a proper noun, did you see it?)
Yes, I did see it. I was surprised, especially considering it did not originally say that. 'The Message' had it as "father of flames" for a long time. Lastly, I do not agree with everything in 'The Message'.
There are some threads in the forum about a society based on the quran, but even in this forum a few people can't agree on the meanings of some of the verses.
I do not expect everyone to agree.
Will I be wrong if I say that we'll never know?
Hmm, perhaps. Most of the time though, all it needs is to increase our knowledge, then we can be more certain of answers.
I just noticed, in 434 it is a pre-emptive action, the wife hasn't actually done anything bad yet, as it says "and those whom you fear" thus this makes it even more unlikely that a husabnd is given permission to beat his wife for fearing she may do something bad in the future. To prove this point, can anyone bring forth any example in which pre-emptive punishment is demonstrated in 'al quran'? Once again, if no evidence can be brought, the traditionalists want us to believe that this is the odd-one-out in 'al quran'.
Wakas
-
Salaam Br Burhan,
So are you a single guy?
I have a friend who longing to get married.
Peace
sis Majidah -
I have written an article on verse 434 of the Qur'an, a verse which has commonly been misinterpreted to justify violence against women. I have created a website to publish this article www.quranverse434.com
-
salaam aqua,
Your article suffers from multiple problems as highlighted here
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9599954.msg347142#msg347142"withdraw/turn away / go away from them"
Requires the tashkeel of present day Arabic Quran to be incorrect
This alleged usage in 434 occurs in 435 with the preposition "Aan", thus making Quran seems inconsistent IF it did mean that in 434
No identical example of this DRB usage in Quran
No explanation of how the authority are notified
It is unclear to what extent one separates, how they can do so without being unjust etc
No supporting marital example in Quran
My view Impractical result when inserted into 4128-130 and somehow requires iAAradan to be a positive thing and potentially makes Drb/3rD similar"cite them" www.Quran434.com
Works perfectly with the tashkeel in the present day Arabic Quran
Several identical examples of this DRB usage in Quran, including when humans are the direct object as in 434
Explains how the authority is notified by 435, and provides perfect logical/sequential coherence
DRB use is clear and simple to implement practically
581-4 provides perfect coherence in terms of marital example
When inserted into 4128-130 provides a complementary practical and coherent solutionIn fact there were more issues in your article. If you begin your own thread for your article I'd be happy to highlight them for you to respond to.
Interestingly, in your work you do not reference www.Quran434.com where you clearly got a lot of information from.
