4 witnesses or strong evidence?
-
Stunning or what?,
Why does Allah want 4 witnesses?
Well, He doesn?t!
It?s just the traditional followers who think that ? I doubt it though.
using lanes.
244
those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce any convincing/ concrete evidence reprimand them to substitute/compensate their harsh nature.What is biarbaAAati?
Example,
jaat ainaho biarbaAAatin = he came weeping most vehemently.
God Bless All.
-
Salaams All,
If the quran is from Allah ? then it must be applicable in any society and in any century and not just in the countries using lashes. So using other meanings from lanes we can come up with a better message applicable as above which I think is more real.
Using Lanes.
024.002
YUS The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication, - reprimand each one of them for a demise by way of a hard and strenuous community service Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day and let a party of the Believers be witness to their exemplary punishment.244
those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce any convincing/ concrete evidence reprimand them to substitute/compensate by way of a hard and strenuous community service.I do think the root of
Mi-at is the same as for Mat as in; (and isn?t the 100 ? lashes suggested by translators.)
Thumma amatahu faaqbarahu
Then He causeth him to die, and putteth him in his grave;
And demise is the causing of death of the evilness in the person (in this case by way of hard labour.)
Check Mata in QD p545.
God Bless All.
-
Salaam simple
So, you are against the lashes, but want to make it simpler to find evidence?
The example you gave of
aat ainaho biarbaAAatin = he came weeping most vehemently.
Your translation is not literal. It is (his eyes brought four). What do eyes bring? Tears. When someone weeps vehemently, they practically weep with four streams of tears. So, even here, it is four.
As for
Mi-at is the same as for Mat as in; (and isn?t the 100 ? lashes suggested by translators.)
Are you serious?
mi'a is noun. The "taa" in it is not even original Its root is MAY, whereas maat is verb, and the alif in it is not original. Its root is MWT
-
Hello Sis,
I don't doubt your Linguistics, but that isn't all one needs to understand the quran - I think.
I rely more on what lanes gives as to the meanings and examples, and they are good or rather very good.
I had another debate regarding this issue before with the Ausi Arab linguist a little while back, and learnt not to debate with traditional linguist, because most of them accept monkeys physically changing into Apes.
No disrespect meant though.
Salaams Sis.
-
Peace Simple
Making translations is not an easy thing especially if you have no clue about the phonetics, rules of grammar, etc of a language. I see alot of translations you try to make that look very shaky and often you confuse one word with another. I'm just warning you to take it easy with the translations, or to ask those who have a firm grasp of the language before making your own translations. Otherwise you can go and learn from a teacher or read some books on the rules of the language.
Joe
-
Salaams Samia, Nabi.
Actually what I tried to get across was that any linguist who proofs that people/ human beings actually physically changed to monkeys aren?t worth name - linguists.
And sorry from that point of view alone I personally value my self more - even though I may not be an Arab linguist - but using credible linguists like lanes and or qd suffices.
But this is only my view , who knows you may be right in all that you say ? but I think I am too.
No disrespects meant at all.
God Bless.