Idribuhunna & Adriba Anhunna-to pull the wool over non Arabic speakers
-
peace guest,
Yes, I will choose to comment, to expose your completely made-up view more clearly
You seems to suggest exposing bad acts (e.g. illegal sex, drugs etc) to children in the family, even though the verse says nothing about children, thus tell us what is the situation for when a family has no children?
And does your punishment of beating still apply when there is children but the wife does not expose such acts to them, hence the use of "al gayb/unseen/private"?
Once you answer these, then we can see if your view is even more problematic, or not )
Peace Wakas,
Children or no children the punishment is the same for performing a bad conduct (ill-conduct). The consequence of not punishing implies a serious blow to the family, neighbors, and society in general. And remember that the punishment is inflicted by a believer, therefore, it will be just, fair, and compliant with Allah?s law. Also know that the bad situation can last at most 4 months.
We don?t have a law to deal with unseen event. In this case the judgment rest with Allah.
-
When discussing verse 434 the following assumption and/or pre-condition must be met
- Allah is addressing the believers. Therefore, this law is for the believers only
- Believers are righteous and conform to will of Allah i.e. no free will
- This law does not apply to anyone other than the believers
Situation What is a believer to do when the wife has gone bad and causing havoc in the family? Please remember the family could have mature male and female children. Say the wife is doing drug, sex,?. in the presence of the children i.e. in the house when the husband is not there.
Say the husband decided to divorce her. Because he is a believer he has to comply with 2226 - Those who intend to divorce their wives shall wait four months (cooling off); if they change their minds and reconcile, then GOD is Forgiver, Merciful.
During this period the believing husband can beat the wife if she is exposing the children to drugs, illegal sex, etc. after other conditions in the verse are met. This makes sense.
The problem seems that without having properly read the verses, sense is being found on different hypothetical prepositions.
2226 has nothing to do with those husbands who have decided to divorce and wives shall wait for four months. It is for those married men who have taken an oath at their own not to have sex relations with their wives, their decision is being subjected to a time frame so that it is not left to their discretion not to have matrimonial relationship with wives for indefinite period. A conditionality of four months is imposed during which they have to either restore the relationship whereat he will find Allah forgiving, and if by imposition of time frame they have firmly decided to divorce their wives then in that case Allah is the listener and knower of even internal intentions and designs. Now the matter is to be adjudged on merit between two parties, without inclination of mercy for anyside.
-
peace guest,
Thanks for answering, but you contradict yourself, so we will have to clarify again
Children or no children the punishment is the same for performing a bad conduct (ill-conduct).
is not compatible with
We don?t have a law to deal with unseen event. In this case the judgment rest with Allah.
Which one is it punish or leave judgement to Allah?
-
peace guest,
Thanks for answering, but you contradict yourself, so we will have to clarify again
is not compatible with
Which one is it punish or leave judgement to Allah?
Peace Wakas,
If the husband walks in while she is committing ill-conduct or have eyewitness testimonies, then the punishment is imposed. Also, she could be committing the ill-conduct openly in front of her husband.
Otherwise the judgment rest with Allah.
-
During this period the believing husband can beat the wife if she is exposing the children to drugs, illegal sex, etc. after other conditions in the verse are met. This makes sense.
What if it's the husband exposing the children to drugs, illegal sex etc.? Can she also beat him in this case? Does this make sense?
-
peace guest,
If the husband walks in while she is committing ill-conduct or have eyewitness testimonies, then the punishment is imposed. Also, she could be committing the ill-conduct openly in front of her husband.
Otherwise the judgment rest with Allah.
Unfortunately your position contradicts The Quran. Firstly, it says "if you fear" NOT "if you see/prove" etc. It is a suspicion. Even though your view disregards the Arabic of Quran, we can also refute it another way
You seem to suggest the following
husband walks in and catches her in the act ---> administers punishment
has eyewitness testimonies ---> administers punishmentBUT the above would contradict The Quran's ruling. Taken from Quran434.com
If it is only the husband who fears disloyalty/uprising/infidelity, or even if he is sure of it, and if there are no witnesses/evidence, then he must follow the procedure in 246-9 and cannot take it upon himself to administer any punishment. Since a "fear/suspicion", as in 434, is certainly less than being sure, it also cannot warrant any punishment. Anything to the contrary would be an internal inconsistency in The Quran's ruling.
If we imagine a real life scenario in which a husband thinks his wife is guilty of disloyalty/infidelity and therefore undergoes the steps in 434, as traditionally understood, then before the wife is "hit/beat" she simply needs to say "let's go to court and apply 246-9 to your accusation" to which the husband would be dumbfounded as he is allegedly allowed to "beat" her yet according to 246-9 his accusation would be rejected by the court! Thus giving us the ridiculous situation of a wife being legally vindicated of her husband's accusation yet is still allowed to be punished by her husband! There is no escaping this obvious contradiction in the traditional understanding.Thus, are you arguing that even though the Islamic/Quranic court rejects the husband's claim, he is still allowed to punish her?
-
peace guest,
Unfortunately your position contradicts The Quran. Firstly, it says "if you fear" NOT "if you see/prove" etc. It is a suspicion. Even though your view disregards the Arabic of Quran, we can also refute it another wayYou seem to suggest the following
husband walks in and catches her in the act ---> administers punishment
has eyewitness testimonies ---> administers punishmentBUT the above would contradict The Quran's ruling. Taken from Quran434.com
Thus, are you arguing that even though the Islamic/Quranic court rejects the husband's claim, he is still allowed to punish her?
Peace Wakas,
A condition, say X is satisfied by the women which leads to admonishment
The condition X is repeated by the women which leads to not sharing her bed
The condition X is repeated the third time by the women which leads to beating
Are you implying that there exist no such condition X. If this is the case then Quranic statement is redundant and thus Allah is at err.
-
What if it's the husband exposing the children to drugs, illegal sex etc.? Can she also beat him in this case? Does this make sense?
Peace Leyna,
Please note that the husband is a believer and not just any husband.
Allah did not instruct women to beat her husband in this hypothetical case. The question is why such punishment does not exist in the Quran?
Maybe a male believer would never do such ill-conduct.
I believe a women believer would never do such ill-conduct either.
That leaves the case of a male believer married to non-believer women. I believe this is the case Allah is addressing in the verse.
A women believer is not authorized to marry a non-believer man. I haven't done extensive research on it but I think I am right. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thank you.
-
peace guest,
X is NOT satisfied by the women. She may be doing X, she may not be, it is a fear of the husband NOT proven.
The Quran covers all situations, when bad acts are provable, and also unproven (434), and how we should go about it to resolve such a situation.
Please just answer my questions and dont evade
-
Does it say "if you fear" yes or no?
-
Are you arguing that even though the Islamic/Quranic court would reject the husband's claim, he is still allowed to punish her? yes or no?
-
-
so he can beat her if he fears she may do whatever?
Her husband can beat her if he so much as fears she will commit whatever, lets say adultery, then that doesnt match the lashing for adultery or the 4 witnesses does it? Unless her husband can beat her for fearing she will do it, then 4 witnesses are needed if she did it and she gets a lashing too. They dont even bother with the witnesses these days so hubby gives her a pasting then she gets lashed and if shes in Iraq or any of the other 'oh so pious' countries she gets stoned to death as well?
I cant believe God hates women so much to be placing all this punishment on them for the husband/god just to do as he pleases, it doesnt match anything else in Quran.
-
peace Ayisha,
You may be interested to know that it is likely early commentators or hadith reporters realised this problem, as it says "fear", thus attempted to provide a solution. I discuss this at Quran434.com
For example, what is rarely mentioned is that the few hadith that allegedly refer to 434 discuss a "clear/evident indecency", which is a likely attempt to supplant AQ's scenario. Further, some early jurists (including the infamous Shafi, and the alleged ibn Abbas) took it as a symbolic hitting (i.e. no pain), which is a likely attempt to circumvent the problems you pointed out.
Thus, ironically, Traditional Muslims who uphold hit/beat actually not only go against The Quran, but some of the biggest "scholars" in Traditional Islam.
-
peace guest,
X is NOT satisfied by the women. She may be doing X, she may not be, it is a fear of the husband NOT proven.
The Quran covers all situations, when bad acts are provable, and also unproven (434), and how we should go about it to resolve such a situation.
Please just answer my questions and dont evade
-
Does it say "if you fear" yes or no?
-
Are you arguing that even though the Islamic/Quranic court would reject the husband's claim, he is still allowed to punish her? yes or no?
Peace Wakas,
Before you can ask someone to give a ?yes? or a ?no? answer YOU must define the problem i.e. you should have defined what fear is. For example
Definition 1 - a distressing emotion aroused by impending danger, evil, pain, etc., whether the threat is real or imagined;
Definition 2 - Fear is an unpleasant feeling of perceived risk or danger, real or not.
If you think it is an imagined threat then it does not make sense. And it would be wrong to imply that God meant that.
If you take the threat to be a real threat then the answer is yes because it make sense. Please note some people have translated it as ?experience? or ?see?.
There is no Quranic court involved here. It says if YOU and not some one else.
-
-
Peace Wakas,
Before you can ask someone to give a ?yes? or a ?no? answer YOU must define the problem i.e. you should have defined what fear is. For example
Definition 1 - a distressing emotion aroused by impending danger, evil, pain, etc., whether the threat is real or imagined;
Definition 2 - Fear is an unpleasant feeling of perceived risk or danger, real or not.
If you think it is an imagined threat then it does not make sense. And it would be wrong to imply that God meant that.
If you take the threat to be a real threat then the answer is yes because it make sense. Please note some people have translated it as ?experience? or ?see?.
The sentence of the Ayat does not relate a hypothetical proposition or imaginary fear but mentions instructions in a factual situation, ground reality.
Recommencing particle, conjunction
Relative Pronoun feminine; plural
Verb Imperfect; second person; masculine; plural; indicative mood visible by presence of ""; and "" subject pronoun of the verb; Verbal noun . And what is the cause/object of this ?
Object of verb that is the cause/likely cause of fear/apprehension. Theword is a possessive phrase; and the cause of fear is specific/definite not imaginary because of possessive pronoun being definite.
The imperfect indicative mood verb does not restrict itself to any idea of time, it indicates enduring existence, begun and incomplete, either in past, present or future time.
Hence here is for solid experienced reasons.
-
peace guest,
If you think it is an imagined threat then it does not make sense. And it would be wrong to imply that God meant that.
It is a pity you use your "logic" to negate what the Arabic Quran actually says, simply because YOU cannot understand it. Has it ever occurred to you that just because it doesn't make sense to you, it may be that your sense is lacking?
It has taken us several posts so far, and we still have not been able to pin down what your view is, let alone test it. Now you imply it may not mean "fear" but "see/experience" instead, so tell us, where else in the 120 occurrences of this word does it mean "see/experience"? Here, I will even help you
"fear" (Arabic root Kha-Waw-Fa) occurs about 120 times in The Quran
http//corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?root=xwfTell us, which occurrences does it mean experience/see, if you speak the truth?
Not that I actually expect you to answer the above question, but might as well ask it.
Both definitions of "fear" you gave were fine. The "real or imagined" part refers to the threat (the thing being feared) not the actual feeling of fear, the feeling of fear is real. It exists. But feeling fear does NOT tell us if the thing feared is real or imagined.
Not to mention the blatantly obvious fact in 434 it is about what the wife may do "in al ghayb/unseen/private", ghayb/unseen does not mean she is seen doing it.
However, for sake of argument, let's forget about all of the above, and pin down what YOU actually think 434 is on about, so we can actually test it. For example, what do you mean by
If you take the threat to be a real threat then the answer is yes because it make sense.
It seems to me you are suggesting 434 refers to a husband who knows his wife is doing a bad deed, e.g. illegal sex, and can therefore go through the steps in 434 and punish her if she does not change her ways. Is this correct yes or no?
IF you answer yes, then see
If it is only the husband who fears disloyalty/uprising/infidelity, or even if he is sure of it, and if there are no witnesses/evidence, then he must follow the procedure in 246-9 and cannot take it upon himself to administer any punishment. Since a "fear/suspicion", as in 434, is certainly less than being sure, it also cannot warrant any punishment. Anything to the contrary would be an internal inconsistency in The Quran's ruling.
If we imagine a real life scenario in which a husband thinks his wife is guilty of disloyalty/infidelity and therefore undergoes the steps in 434, as traditionally understood, then before the wife is "hit/beat" she simply needs to say "let's go to court and apply 246-9 to your accusation" to which the husband would be dumbfounded as he is allegedly allowed to "beat" her yet according to 246-9 his accusation would be rejected by the court! Thus giving us the ridiculous situation of a wife being legally vindicated of her husband's accusation yet is still allowed to be punished by her husband! There is no escaping this obvious contradiction in the traditional understanding.Ergo, even though the Islamic/Quranic court would reject the husband's claim, is he still allowed to punish her according to you? yes or no?
It is such a simple question.
-
Peace Wakas,
It is a pity you use your "logic" to negate what the Arabic Quran actually says, simply because YOU cannot understand it. Has it ever occurred to you that just because it doesn't make sense to you, it may be that your sense is lacking?
I have no intention of negating the Arabic Quran, on the contrary I intend to implement the Quranic value in my life. I believe everything in the Quran makes perfect sense.
Has it ever occurred to you that just because it doesn't make sense to you, it may be that your sense is lacking?
I never claimed that I am infallible. If you provide good justification for your claim (position), I will accept it. Thus far it hasn?t happened.
It has taken us several posts so far, and we still have not been able to pin down what your view is, let alone test it. Now you imply it may not mean "fear" but "see/experience" instead, so tell us, where else in the 120 occurrences of this word does it mean "see/experience"? Here, I will even help you
"fear" (Arabic root Kha-Waw-Fa) occurs about 120 times in The Quran
http//corpus.quran.com/qurandictionary.jsp?root=xwfI just said others have translated differently than you. And they are consistent with the definitions of fear which I provided.
Tell us, which occurrences does it mean experience/see, if you speak the truth?
Does Kha-Waw-Fa has only one meaning or does it have many meaning?
Both definitions of "fear" you gave were fine. The "real or imagined" part refers to the threat (the thing being feared) not the actual feeling of fear, the feeling of fear is real. It exists. But feeling fear does NOT tell us if the thing feared is real or imagined.
Definition 1 - a distressing emotion aroused by impending danger, evil, pain, etc., whether the threat is real or imagined; two cases are shown below
impending danger = real (consistent with experience or see)
impending danger = imagined (does not make sense)Not to mention the blatantly obvious fact in 434 it is about what the wife may do "in al ghayb/unseen/private", ghayb/unseen does not mean she is seen doing it.
The perpetrator thinks they are doing the violation in secret but we know they leave behind evidence.
It seems to me you are suggesting 434 refers to a husband who knows his wife is doing a bad deed, e.g. illegal sex, and can therefore go through the steps in 434 and punish her if she does not change her ways. Is this correct yes or no?
Yes.
IF you answer yes, then see
These are violation other than 246-9 violations. And there are many.
Ergo, even though the Islamic/Quranic court would reject the husband's claim, is he still allowed to punish her according to you? yes or no?
It is such a simple question.
Islamic/Quranic court is irrelevant to this discussion.
-
peace guest,
Thanks for evading my question and thus showing the strength of your position. It is irrelevant if Kha-Waw-Fa has several meanings or a billion meanings, what we are interested in is how The Quran uses this word. Can you not find even one out of 120 occurrences to legitimise your position?
The perpetrator thinks they are doing the violation in secret but we know they leave behind evidence.
Not necessarily, this is an insertion on your part.
These are violation other than 246-9 violations. And there are many.
Yet another insertion on your part. Are you forced to say this otherwise your position crumbles?
Perhaps I should have been clearer from the outset, I am basing my discussion on what The Quran actually says, not what it probably says after inserting a few things here and there.
-
Thanks for evading my question and thus showing the strength of your position. It is irrelevant if Kha-Waw-Fa has several meanings or a billion meanings, what we are interested in is how The Quran uses this word. Can you not find even one out of 120 occurrences to legitimise your position?
Peace Wakas,
Did God said something like this " Do you know what Kha-Waw-Fa is?" and then provided the meaning?
-
peace guest,
Did God said something like this " Do you know what Kha-Waw-Fa is?" and then provided the meaning?
The Quran defines how it uses its words, especially if it uses it over 120 times. I have provided a link to every occurrence for you. The evidence for my view is every occurrence of the word. If you have evidence to the contrary, then bring it forth.
-
peace guest,
The Quran defines how it uses its words, especially if it uses it over 120 times. I have provided a link to every occurrence for you. The evidence for my view is every occurrence of the word. If you have evidence to the contrary, then bring it forth.
Peace Wakas,
In this particular case, you can use the word fear with the meaning impending danger = real. That is my view.
