The Myth that Women have to "Obey" their Husbands
-
Out of an understanding that?? And do not coerce your immature/(family protected) women on the unlawful/non-consenting seeking (of non-consentual marriage), if they wanted self-protection (from arranged marriage), to seek the low life's vanities, and whomever coerces them, then God after they have been coerced is forgiving, merciful.? (2433)
Traditionally, the word ?BaGhA?a? has been interpreted to mean prostitution. However, the word?s literal meaning is to seek beyond what is lawful/consentual. Also, as opposed to prostitution which is a gross sin, there are some examples of women who later became happy with men that they were coerced into marrying, hence God?s forgiving statement at the end of the verse. "
http//free-minds.org/malakIf we approve that the word "Bagha
a" means prostitution,it would be as if God is stating that he later forgives the parents who coerce their daughters into prostitution!! or forgives the girls who have been forced into this practice.. My understanding is that God doesnt approve or state sins in any way...and the context of the verse and the whole issue of "ma malakat aymanukum" if put together doesn`t have anything to do with prostitution...Peace,
My best translation of the Qur'an on this is by M. Asad
And if any of those whom you rightfully possess desire a deed of freedom, write it out for them if you are aware of any good in them and give them of the wealth of God which He has given you.
And do not, in order to gain some of the fleeting pleasures of this worldly life, coerce your maidens into whoredom if they happen to be desirous of marriage; and if anyone should coerce them, then, verily, after they have been compelled , God will be much-forgiving, a dispenser of grace! 2433According to my translations of the Qur'an "Bagha'a" means concubinage (non-lawful marriage) or whoredom (forced sex for money/favors) and the girl/woman referred to is the property of another as a slave not a daughter. The immediately preceding statement of 2433 has been omitted from the prior post and refers to slaves directly. The word for girl or maiden "fatayat" means slave-girl by context. It seems obvious to me that it is the girl/woman who is the receiver of God's mercy and forgiveness since she is forced into this situation. The Qur'an is certainly describing a situation where the girl/woman is entering into non-lawful marriage or union against her own free will. Wherever men (or women) impose their wrongful will over the weak they will surely have to answer to God on Judgment Day. It is NOT obvious to me that the Qur'an is referring to the coercer; it is obvious (especially in light of the entirety of the Qur'an) that the passage refers to mercy for the coerced.
-
Out of an understanding that?? And do not coerce your immature/(family protected) women on the unlawful/non-consenting seeking (of non-consentual marriage), if they wanted self-protection (from arranged marriage), to seek the low life's vanities, and whomever coerces them, then God after they have been coerced is forgiving, merciful.? (2433)
Traditionally, the word ?BaGhA?a? has been interpreted to mean prostitution. However, the word?s literal meaning is to seek beyond what is lawful/consentual. Also, as opposed to prostitution which is a gross sin, there are some examples of women who later became happy with men that they were coerced into marrying, hence God?s forgiving statement at the end of the verse. "
http//free-minds.org/malakIf we approve that the word "Bagha
a" means prostitution,it would be as if God is stating that he later forgives the parents who coerce their daughters into prostitution!! or forgives the girls who have been forced into this practice.. My understanding is that God doesnt approve or state sins in any way...and the context of the verse and the whole issue of "ma malakat aymanukum" if put together doesn`t have anything to do with prostitution...Poor men have been advised to marry the female slave servants of rich people, and rich people having slaves/servants are directed/advised as under
Wa ankihul aya_ma_ minkum was sa_lihina min iba_dikum wa ima_ikum
And arrange marriage of those unmarried women and men of society with your virtuous male and female slave servants
iy yaku_nu_ fuqara_ a yugnihimul la_hu min fadlih wal la_hu wa_siun alim
if they are in poverty (so what) Allah will give them means out of His grace for Allah encompasseth all and He knoweth all things.{2432}
?Ankihu? Imperative, plural, present masculine.Wal yastafifil lazina la_ yajidu_na nika_han hat ta_ yugniyahumul la_hu min fadlih
And those who find not the wherewithal for marriage should keep themselves restrained/chaste until Allah gives them means out of His grace.
wal lazina yabtagu_nal kita_ba mim ma_ malakat aima_nukum faka_tibu_hum in alimtum fihim khairaw
And if any of your slaves ask for a deed in writing (to enable them to earn their freedom for a certain sum) give them such a deed if ye know any good in them;
wa a_tu_hum min ma_lil la_hil lazi a_ta_kum
And give them out of the wealth Allah has given to you.(to enable them start independent work)wa la_ tukrihu_ fataya_tikum alal biga_i in ARADDNA tahas suna
And do not force your female servants to prostitution, since they had desired/opted protection/fort/jail.
l litabtagu_ aradal haya_tid dun ya_
for making a gain in the worldly lifeIn traditional translations this prohibition is made conditional ?when they desire to chaste?. If a woman had opted to earn by selling herself (prostitution) she would seldom become a slave and house servant. By remaining a slave/servant she had opted to be in protection of Ahl of a house. Why should be taken as "if" and not as "since"?
ARADDNA-Past tense-Plural-Feminine ?those women had desired/decided?
Tahas sunan ?Masdar? Remain protected, get into a fort, remain in jail, remain chaste
Yousaf a.s. had also opted to go to jail (Tahas sunan) to avoid meeting the sex desire of wife of Aziz-e-Misr {Refer1233}But ground reality is that certain men do force unprotected women to become prostitute. But Allah is all-merciful. If any women are forced to indulge in sex against their will, Allah will forgive them. Punishment is only for willful acts.
wa may yukrih huna fa in nal la_ha mim badi ikra_hin na gafu_rur rahim
And anyone compels his female servants, therefore Allah is Oft-Forgiving Most Merciful (to them) after their disliking/hatred for what they have been forced to do.Except very few , majority of the women the world over are brought/forced into prositution bussiness by men and almost all of them are those women who did not have the protection/strentgth of family. A destitue woman who opts to become a domestic servant/slave, that shows her resolve to remain chaste.
For other injustices with daughters/sisters etc instructions have seperately been given in 419
-
Peace,Siki...How are you?I would have replied earlier if I had good access to the internet..
I am sorry if I misinterpreted your words,thank you for your good post sun
As for the translation of 24-33, free minds translation is totally wrong, I just happened to dig through this aya due to a discussion with Ayman, let me clarify it for you by copying one of my previous posts down below,
I`d be thankful if you send me a link to this debate so I can see how it went on both sides,yourself and Ayman.
"Bagha", in general means wrong and i am in agreement with you on this. But the meanings become "specific" in relation to the subject of a sentense.
You could have been right if this sentense had finished at,---- "And do not compel your Young females to commit wrong.......... it would have opened its application in "general "to all aspects of "wrongs" in life.
But Brother! what follows after this sentense is, ----"If they are desirous of being chaste" this particular phrase , puts precision back into the first sentense, of "wrong" and locks the meanings of Bagha in specific to sexuality.
confused I don
t know,must it be sexuality?verses 32-33 are addressing the issue of marriage,besides,Gods good words to the guardians of those girls"and give them from the wealth of God which He has bestowed upon you." implies that those guardians are financially stable at the least,and they were doing a good deed by taking those girls under their protection,why would they coerce them into prostitution?prostitution is linked with poverty mainly..
Maybe they would do that out of greed? but the verse is addressing believing and responsible men and women..prostitution is very gross and seems unfitting for the situation..This subject needs more research,it poises a lot of questions
1- who are "ma malakat aymanukum"?-are they the servants of the house? if so,then who are addressed in 2432"And marry off those among you that are *single, and the good from among your male and female servants. ?
*"" here is a plural of "" , "Aym"- traditionally- means "widow",where did "single"come from?Are "ma malakt aymanukum" adopted children? whom we made an oath to take them under our protection?
2- what is the meaning of "Kitab" in " " ? is it a written admission of freedom?or is it marriage?
3-what is the meaning of "protected women"?who are they in "Forbidden for you are your mothers, and your daughters, and your sisters, and your fathers sisters, and your mothers sisters...And the already protected from the women.."(424)? and who are they in "And whoever of you cannot afford to marry the believing protected women,then from those committed to you by oath of the believing young women.."?(425)
I don
t have a satisfying answer for these questions,I hope you enlighten me,Siki,and the people of the forum.. I might have pointed the wrong verse to point to the wrongness of coercing girls,but its still wrong to coerce them into marriage,so young,and without experience,into such marriage,the consequences might very well be bad,and those girls might never forgive their parents for doing that to them..Peace,
-
Peace,Dayaan...and welcome to the forum..
According to my translations of the Qur'an "Bagha'a" means concubinage (non-lawful marriage) or whoredom (forced sex for money/favors) and the girl/woman referred to is the property of another as a slave not a daughter. The immediately preceding statement of 2433 has been omitted from the prior post and refers to slaves directly.
It has not been omitted..I think there`s difference between "servants" and "ma malakt aymanukum"..
I think believers-I hope to be one of them-have one of other social responsibilities towards "servants",that is to help marrying them,just like our responsibility towards "widows""" to help them getting married.
Besides,God states not to them-servants-a share of money,he says "If they are poor, then God will grant them from His grace. And God is Encompassing, Knowledgeable."(2432)
Besides,no body owns slaves any more,and servants choose to work in houses,they do not need a written deed of freedom to get out,do they?
While "ma malakat aymanukum" or "whom you rightfully possess" do have share of money,and that would mean that we are guardians to them and financially responsible to them and not "possessing"them..
I think the Quran is making a literal distinction between "servants","war captures" and "those whom your right hand "possess"",I think "right hand" refers to an oath of some sort made towards these people,hence,I prefer the term"those who are committed to you by oath"..That`s my own understanding at this moment..and I hope we enlighten each other with our different views..
Peace, -
peace be upon you,
is it true that only men may work, and earn a salary?
-
No it is not true. The Quran seems to imply that a woman can earn money just as a man can. However, it is preferable for the man to do this with the main goal being supporting his wife and his family. Of course because they are married it must be based on an agreement between them. If the woman is not married she is free to work as she pleases according to her needs and her situation.
Godbless,
Anwar -
No it is not true. The Quran seems to imply that a woman can earn money just as a man can. However, it is preferable for the man to do this with the main goal being supporting his wife and his family. Of course because they are married it must be based on an agreement between them. If the woman is not married she is free to work as she pleases according to her needs and her situation.
Godbless,
Anwaroh, thnx for the response bro ;D
-
Peace All
I have not read the entire thread, so someone may have already brought this up, but I'll post this in case nobody else has.
Why do people assume the words "rijalu" & "nisaa" in 434 refers to husbands & wives. The words, if I am not mistaken mean men & women respectively. Furthermore if this verse had to do with a one on one relationship such as husband & wife, I don't think the plural would have been used.
It seems to me that it would make more sense to view this verse in the sense of the community at large.
My arabic knowledge is very limited & I would appreciate any input from those on the forum who have a better command of the language.
Imraan
-
"and desert/abandon them (F) in the place of lying down"
Does the community at large sleep together?
This is a rather narrow view of the wording. Is it not possible that it could mean something else?
I am not saying that it definitely does mean something else, but is there really no possibility.
The interpretations I have seen thus far on this forum as well as elsewhere are far too discriminatory towards women. Therefore I feel we should be open to another interpretation as this discrimination is not Quranic in my opinion.
Imraan
-
Salaam to all and specially to Mr. Layth
I am not complaining to any one it is Just to put my grevience on the record and make the record straight.
So, I was banned from the forum once again as at various times am banned from Sunni Christian and Shia forums, Ahmedi's and Atheists forums being an exceptions. The ban took place on 16th of January 2009 after my following commentsRajah
Ignorance is tolerable but arrogance is not, you are an ignorant arrogant, dangerous for your husband and family, I am sure my sixth sense tells me if you were married you are divorced now and if you are not married yet may Allah help you!
but as usual before my ban I had some hard talk with one of the Moderators "Samia", the last time I got banned was after a conversation with "savage-carrot" a Moderator too and by chance both happen to be women.
Before I explain what I meant in my paragraph above, let me quote what Farida to whom the above paragraph was addressed wrote
Farida
Jaa!!! and ask your Javed Ahmed Ghamidi sahib to help you prepare a reply for your next post.NO! I have no desire to debate with those who do not have even have the manners to address women properly. Ok
May Allah help you to increase your knowledge for your own benefit.The words i colored Red are extremly insulting and degrading if one understands Urdu and English. But astonishingly none of the Moderators found these words insulting, and Farida kept on posting after the Ban was enforced on Me.
Sikander may be a Urdu speaker got the insult and advised Ms. Farida
farida,
This was very arrogant and rude, Not expected of you
Secondly her aide and friend Elke also admitted that this was rude and show of arrogance, however she said it in taunting way (taunt towards all the men)
Elke
Yes farida, only men are allowed to be arrogant and rude !
Surprisingly none of the moderators noticed this. Well I am not bothered with this at all.
Instead I see that some real Intellectual minds post on this forum like "Arnold Yasin", "Edip Yuksel", though I strongly disagree with this person "Ayman" but he is genius, and some thoughts of Layth himself, and few others they are the only reasons to be here.I have some suggestions Mr. Layth
- The Moderator should be a person who is not short tempered.
- Moderator should act as a Moderator.
- Moderator should not so frequently indulge in the debates. I rarely see Nadeem, Nabi, or Tay posting, even if they, it is precise, others should follow this. May be they use some other Nicks.
- Before you Ban some one give him a chance to explain, that is Islamic and democratic, autocratic type of behavior will just harm the site.
Now please read my quoted paragraph once again and judge weather it was a retaliation or an offence.
Thanks.
-
My remark was taunting only to arrogant and rude man, especially those with no sense of humor.
also, may i make another suggestion
- no woman moderator please
a question though does farida speak urdu ?
signed
faridas 'aide'(may be i should be insulted too ? confused
-
peace Raj-ah, all,
The words i colored Red are extremly insulting and degrading
Interestingly for a comment you found "extremely insulting and degrading" you never reported it to moderators.
As an aside, no moderator has the power to ban anyone by themselves unless it is a blatant forum rules breach. Thus, the vast majority of decisions are done by group/vote.
Bottom line keep it constructive, not destructive.
-
Ra-jah,
I am not complaining to any one it is Just to put my grevience on the record and make the record straight.
This is contradictory as one can see after reading your post. You obviously are complaining. Send these types of letters to Layth himself directly, the mods or the people with who you have grievances instead of raising these issues on a public thread. Not only is this OT but it is also a breach of Rule 1. Anything else posted in response to this now will be either deleted, moved to the trash and/or disciplinary action taken.
So, I was banned from the forum once again as at various times am banned from Sunni Christian and Shia forums, Ahmedi's and Atheists forums being an exceptions.
So? Is that supposed to prove something? Someone just posted comments merely generalising about women on a game forum and they were banned let alone anything even resembling the insulting comments posted about another poster here.
The words i colored Red are extremly insulting and degrading if one understands Urdu and English. But astonishingly none of the Moderators found these words insulting, and Farida kept on posting after the Ban was enforced on Me.
Read the Forum Rules if you are unclear and posting assumptions what the mods found or not. And while you're at it, also take a look at your own history and how the process spans from a step 1 to 2 and so on.
Sikander may be a Urdu speaker got the insult and advised Ms. Farida
Surprisingly, he isn't the only Urdu speaker on the forum, so it is just one person's opinion...needless to say the complaints about your insult (which you refuse to admit is one, or even apologise for as if it's a paltry little off hand remark about the weather as factual as you like) were far more and apparently not just from women.
Secondly her aide and friend Elke also admitted that this was rude and show of arrogance, however she said it in taunting way (taunt towards all the men)
And somehow this justifies your insults and makes it all okay...a poster you think was taunting you (a man as you seem to insist)? It doesn't make it okay and a lot is taken into consideration before banning someone, inclusive of the weight of the insults and the past history.
Surprisingly none of the moderators noticed this. Well I am not bothered with this at all.
And somehow surprisingly you are mysteriously privy to the mods discussions. Interesting, can you also make predictions with your second sight? Wait...this is deja-vu since I've mentioned second sight before and that was when I was responding to...gasp you...weird but true. And no, you are bothered, thus this anguished post.
Instead I see that some real Intellectual minds post on this forum like "Arnold Yasin", "Edip Yuksel", though I strongly disagree with this person "Ayman" but he is genius, and some thoughts of Layth himself, and few others they are the only reasons to be here.
Chance is a fickle mistress. Somehow all these intellectual minds are men! (no reason, I just thought I'd link it with the "chance" occurence of you being banned whenever you talked to a "woman" and assumed it "must be" because of the biological differences rather than anything else) Maybe you should just soak up the wisdom that permeates these boards then coming from the men, and just talk to those you assume are men and thus this way it will be safe, an all men's club with cigars and intellect and stuff. May I suggest a signature? "I stop only for men"...it might be misconstrued but hey, you shouldn't mind...you've been misconstruing plenty of stuff here with a liberal sprinkling of insults towards myself and others but if you ever get called on it...it's just because we're women and men would understand or towards myself it's because I'm a woman and autocratic and arrogant and god knows what else. So I too, would like this to be a record (minus the complaints and the whines though who thinks anyone ever keeps to that eh?). I must admit though, it feels good to throw a pity party (you should only invite men though).
- The Moderator should be a person who is not short tempered.
I too have suggestions Layth. The posters should not be men. Only women should join our forum and if they are men, they must know their place and act appropriately.
- Moderator should act as a Moderator.
The posters should act like women even if they are men. No wait, they should just act in the way I like them too, meaning like I think women should act.
- Moderator should not so frequently indulge in the debates. I rarely see Nadeem, Nabi, or Tay posting, even if they, it is precise, others should follow this. May be they use some other Nicks.
Women may sometimes use male nicks just for variety even if it's a breach of the rules, since I will only whine if the rules affect me otherwise I don't mind encouraging people to break the rules. I will also only list a couple of women who I know haven't been active in eons and ignore the others who I think are men and have had arguments and grievances with.
- Before you Ban some one give him a chance to explain, that is Islamic and democratic, autocratic type of behavior will just harm the site.
Before any women are banned, we must let them explain that they are not men...however this can just be assumed to be a front and insincere because seriously, how can we ever know unless we check? But what about the words? Yes, words can be subjective and if I say you are a danger to all women, ignorant and arrogant and my second sight tells me if you were married you are now divorced (because no woman would ever want to stay married to you) and if you are not (my second sight failed me here but no matter) God help you (as no woman would even spit in your general direction)...it's not an insult and can be explained away. This type of behaviour will truly harm the site. I agree.
The topic is locked. If you wish to discuss this post or the others which are OT to the thread, PM the mods or email Layth. If you wish to discuss the actual topic, start a new thread dealing with it.
