A Possible Oversight of 4:34???
-
Dear Noon Dhe plume,
With all due respect, I think this explanation is hanging on to a false definition of Nisaa' and indeed the present traditional understanding of this verse depends on this false definition. Once it has been determined that Nisaa' DOES NOT mean women (and in my opinion this thread as well as the link that Eric Michael Torres posted have determined just that), then we are forced to re-evaluate our understanding of ALL of the verses with the word Nisaa' in them and have been traditionally understood to be talking about "women". I believe your present understanding of 4/11 is one such verse.
I for one will not continue to try to make the "Nisaa' means women" understanding fit. I am not going to try to force a square into a circle.
We have come this far. For centuries it has been taught that The Arabic word salat means prayer. After thorough research of The Quran we discovered that this is not true. For centuries we have been taught that the Arabic word Zakaa' means charity or alms giving. After further research of The Quran, we discovered that this too is untrue. For centuries we have been taught to not question hadith and tradition. After thorough research of The Quran we have learned that we should not only question hadith and tradition, but reject them outright. For centuries we have been taught the messenger of The Quran was illiterate. After much research of the Quran and the words ummiyy and ummiyyeen we found out that is complete nonsense. There are literally loads and loads of more fresh discoveries that have been uncovered in just this last decade alone.
WHY STOP THERE???!! If the above understandings were discovered to be untrue then doesn't that means that we have been tricked and lied to and that we need to take a fresh new look at the Quran and it's words and concepts, including the word Nisaa'?! If we've been fooled once, then we've been fooled twice. Why question and challenge all of the things that we have come to grips with so far but insist to hang on to the TRADITIONAL definition of Nisaa' which was given to us by The Same People who fooled us into believing the other things that we have eventually questioned, challenged and ultimately rejecting?
I agree 100@ with you shirley. Nisa does NOT mean women nor does rijaal means men. The quranic word for female is unsa and male is zakr. I dont know why its so hard for some people to understand, pethaps maybe because they are too influenced by the sectarians. All my research tells me that its imposdible that nisa are women and rijaal men. Woe to the sectarians who alter the meaning of the quranic words in order to fit their agenda .
-
My view on this is that not all the times rajul or rijal means human males, it may be both males and females, at other times it means males. The same with nisa'. Many times means human females and some times it means something else. I think it is a matter of context, but I do agree that "traditional" misunderstanding tends to use the ambivalence to promote their own preconceptions and interests and it is very important that the different possibilities be looked into without preconceptions, or with as few preconceptions as humanly possible.
Salaam
Salaam
-
I agree 100@ with you shirley. Nisa does NOT mean women nor does rijaal means men. The quranic word for female is unsa and male is zakr. I dont know why its so hard for some people to understand, pethaps maybe because they are too influenced by the sectarians. All my research tells me that its imposdible that nisa are women and rijaal men. Woe to the sectarians who alter the meaning of the quranic words in order to fit their agenda .
nisa always refers to over two or 3+ females NEVER to males
this is a clear definition given in 411So if nisa over two (feminine)
end of discussion
-
dhakarin = male
unth = femaleBut not specifically a man and a woman, it could be a donkey and she-donkey. This refers to sex of the species. Therefore it means masculine and feminine, not necessarily a man and woman. In 411 is first Aulaad which could comprise both genders, males and females and then females are described by the specific name Women.
-
http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=4&verse=11
dhakarin = male
unth = femaleReplacing Nisa, for the People, in 411 would make 411 more Generous.
poor people would like it.
read the verse work some cases before posting nonsense
411 addreses ditributions to children not people
it defines precisely
if 1 female
if 2 female
if 3+ female ie nisa -
"
read the verse work some cases before posting nonsense
411 addreses ditributions to children not people
it defines precisely
if 1 female
if 2 female
if 3+ female ie nisa"
Sorry. You too, please make more sense.
to proof Nisa = Women, not a nonsense, A Verse from Quran-Book that applied "Nisa" to a Description of Women. Ie, Breastfeed, Bearing-Child, Menstruation bleeding.
Like this for example;
2222
And they ask you about menstruation. Say, "It is harm, so keep away from wives/nisa during menstruation. And do not approach them until they are pure. And when they have purified themselves, then come to them from where Allah has ordained for you. Indeed, Allah loves those who are constantly repentant and loves those who purify themselves." -
But not specifically a man and a woman, it could be a donkey and she-donkey. This refers to sex of the species. Therefore it means masculine and feminine, not necessarily a man and woman. In 411 is first Aulaad which could comprise both genders, males and females and then females are described by the specific name Women.
You are correct. But since unsa is a gender like zakr it includes men and women as well
-
nisa always refers to over two or 3+ females NEVER to males
this is a clear definition given in 411So if nisa over two (feminine)
end of discussion
You misunderstood something. nisa is not a gendet hence both men and women can be nisa. So shirley is absolutely correct when she says that nisa does not mean women.
-
Quote from Mazhar on Today at 065750 AM
But not specifically a man and a woman, it could be a donkey and she-donkey. This refers to sex of the species. Therefore it means masculine and feminine, not necessarily a man and woman. In 411 is first Aulaad which could comprise both genders, males and females and then females are described by the specific name Women.You are correct. But since unsa is a gender like zakr it includes men and women as well
http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/003.%20Aale%20Imran/3.36b.gif
and the male is never like the female;
Just see the sign under your avator and compare it with that of some male member of the forum. Even they do not match. So how Unsa could include man.
-
http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/003.%20Aale%20Imran/3.36b.gif
and the male is never like the female;
Just see the sign under your avator and compare it with that of some male member of the forum. Even they do not match. So how Unsa could include man.
You misunderstood me. I ment to say that since unsa is a gender it includes women and since zakr is a gender it includes men.
-
Quran 2222 use the word nisa/
the female Human menstruates. unless the verse is not about menstruation, a description of a female.
This verse is NOT about menstruation . It would also be silly since men don't have menstruation and nisa are weak men and women among the people in contradiction to the elite rijaal and qawm
-
This verse is NOT about menstruation . It would also be silly since men don't have menstruation and nisa are weak men and women among the people in contradiction to the elite rijaal and qawm
Please, further explain why, Quran 2222 not about Menstruation. Peace and Thanks.
-
Quote from Mazhar on October 12, 2011, 020203 PM
and the male is never like the female;
Why "never"?
"Never" does not appear in the Arabic, and it does change the meaning.
Salaam
Hitherto have you ever seen a male who is like a female? If not, "never", from commonsense point of view, what to say of the grammatical structure of the sentence and peculiar choice of words to depict this fact, is correct. Would you need its analysis?
-
Hitherto have you ever seen a male who is like a female? If not, "never", from commonsense point of view, what to say of the grammatical structure of the sentence and peculiar choice of words to depict this fact, is correct. Would you need its analysis?
Your socalled commonsense and all your complicated theories have zero importance. The fact is that the quran does not use the word 'never'. You can argue with God about why he didnt used the word 'never' in another place.
And by the way, yes I have seen many males like females. In fact every male I have seen is like a female he has two eyes, one nose, one mouth, one heart, two legs and two arms just like the female isn't that amazing and a surprise for you ?? rotfl rotfl bravo bravo bravo -
Male and female are clearly defined boundaries.
Masculine and feminine exist on a continuum like the yin and yang.
The "man" referred to in quran is androgynous, so to speak. And you know exactly how I mean.
Peace
