Wife beating in Islam
-
Salam sister Huruf why is there always advices given to the men in the quran about how to handle 'disobedient wives' . Can you point out to me just one verse of the quran telling a woman what she should do to a disobedient husband?
Peace
?Where are those advices? Haven't seen them. Honestly, put them up here, so we can deal with them. I can't remember any. Apart fromm this daraba party.
Salaam
-
?Where are those advices? Haven't seen them. Honestly, put them up here, so we can deal with them. I can't remember any. Apart fromm this daraba party.
Salaam
sister please look at this daraba verse. Telling men how to ''punish disobedient wives'' now can you show me somewhere in the quran how a wife punishes a disobedient husband?
-
Where is the punishment? Over the daraba as betaing I already wrote and it is clear for anybody not biased that there is not daraba as beating in the Qur'an. So, there is no punishment, but the husband who fears that may look for those to possibilities of withdrawing or warning, that is not a punishment that is the normal thing to do where anybody sees a relationship going down the drain. And next aya is quite clear
If ye fear a breach between them twain, appoint (two) arbiters, one from his family, and the other from hers; if they wish for peace, Allah will cause their reconciliation For Allah hath full knowledge, and is acquainted with all things. (35)
The daraba is a third way of saying let them know, make home to them your complaints.
If what you want is that the verb daraba was not there, it wouldn't help, any verb would have been iqually "managed" to arrive at the same result. In that aya or in any other one. And a text that could be changed would be far more dangerous than one which one can always look at and examine without it converting into something else.
Salaam
-
Where is the punishment? Over the daraba as betaing I already wrote and it is clear for anybody not biased that there is not daraba as beating in the Qur'an. So, there is no punishment, but the husband who fears that may look for those to possibilities of withdrawing or warning, that is not a punishment that is the normal thing to do where anybody sees a relationship going down the drain. And next aya is quite clear
If ye fear a breach between them twain, appoint (two) arbiters, one from his family, and the other from hers; if they wish for peace, Allah will cause their reconciliation For Allah hath full knowledge, and is acquainted with all things. (35)
The daraba is a third way of saying let them know, make home to them your complaints.
If what you want is that the verb daraba was not there, it wouldn't help, any verb would have been iqually "managed" to arrive at the same result. In that aya or in any other one. And a text that could be changed would be far more dangerous than one which one can always look at and examine without it converting into something else.
Salaam
Salam sister Huruf. Hope you are doing good. Something is really wrong here, let me clearify
look at this verse As for those females from whom you fear desertion, then you shall advise them, and abandon them in the bedchamber, and separate from them. If they respond to you, then do not seek a way over them; God is Most High, Great.(4.34)
So the verse is not talking about a husband who feels his wife is disobedient, its talking about ANY man who feels ANY woman is disobedient, he shall abondon them in the bedchamper etc.
- Do you really think a disobedient wife wants to have sex with her angry husband? if no then whats the reason behind abondon them in the bedchamper?
- So it means that any man who feels any woman is disobedient shall give a warning to her e.g a man on the street talking to a strange woman who refuses to talk to him, in this sense she is disobedient to the strange man, so he can now give her warning and seperate from her. Does that sounds logical?
And if a wife feels that his husband is disobedient she shall involve her and his family every time?? Does this sounds fair comparing to what a male can do with disobedient females?
I really think there is something wrong.
-
You are talking about disobedience, where is the disobedience? I don't see any.
On the other hand, do you or have you known couples where the wife has problems with her husband? If they can talk it over, as in 4.128, but if the situation is such that she cannot talk them over, what would you advice? Face the husband alone? If she is a kung-fu champion yes, that may work, if not, of course I would never advice such a thing, I would do precisely what the Qur'an does, family or friends or whatever, but involve others. Abusive husbands is what they do, isolate the woman, make her strange herself from family and friends and blackamail her to talk everything only with him. Play the disloyalty scene.
Abandon him in bed? What if he does not agree? Give him some warning? what if he does not like the warning to the point of making things worse for her?
No, no, no.
I am afraid most men can afford to warn and afford to disengage for a while from their wives, and some women may be can do that too, but most women with problematic husbands would be dead idiots if they didn't take their problems with the husband where he cannot force her alone to whatever he wants.
And in these ayas there is no talk about punishment, punishment would be something else if any of them behaved criminally. It is not talking about punishment, it is talking about sorting a situation of matrimonial conflict or where one partner feels cheated in their pact.
On the other hand, I think you should choose which meaning you want to give to the pronouns in the aya, if it is husbands and wives, or rijal and nisaa'. Next aya seems to clarify it.
Salaam
-
On the other hand, do you or have you known couples where the wife has problems with her husband? If they can talk it over, as in 4.128, but if the situation is such that she cannot talk them over, what would you advice? Face the husband alone? If she is a kung-fu champion yes, that may work, if not, of course I would never advice such a thing, I would do precisely what the Qur'an does, family or friends or whatever, but involve others. Abusive husbands is what they do, isolate the woman, make her strange herself from family and friends and blackamail her to talk everything only with him. Play the disloyalty scene.
salam sister. But why shall a husband not involve his family and her family when she is disobedient but instead face her alone then? The word used is desertion. almost the same.
Abandon him in bed? What if he does not agree? Give him some warning? what if he does not like the warning to the point of making things worse for her?
if he wants to make things worse for her he is a abusive and she shall divorce him. But you misunderstood me, my question was why a husband shall abondon his wife in his bed when the wife already doesnt want him in the bed.
I am afraid most men can afford to warn and afford to disengage for a while from their wives, and some women may be can do that too, but most women with problematic husbands would be dead idiots if they didn't take their problems with the husband where he cannot force her alone to whatever he wants
.I agree with you.
On the other hand, I think you should choose which meaning you want to give to the pronouns in the aya, if it is husbands and wives, or rijal and nisaa'. Next aya seems to clarify it.
you didnt replied to my question actually. The ayah say, 'As for those females(NISA) from whom you fear desertion, then you shall advise them, and abandon them in the bedchamber, and separate from them. If they respond to you, then do not seek a way over them; God is Most High, Great
it does NOT say 'as for those WIVES from whom you fear desertion'. So we are not talking about husband-wife issues in this verse.
So since we are not talking about husband wife issues then it means that any man if he feels any female does not obey him he has the right to abandon her from the bedchamper. How does that make sense if adultery is forbidden?
There is something wrong sister o
-
you didnt replied to my question actually. The ayah say, 'As for those females(NISA) from whom you fear desertion, then you shall advise them, and abandon them in the bedchamber, and separate from them. If they respond to you, then do not seek a way over them; God is Most High, Great
We can pick lots of verses on their own in the quran and say this contradicts the other verses and then pick and choose why which ones apply more, or...we could take verses on a subject together/the entire quran and see if it makes sense. The verse goes those from whom you fear nushooz... you automatically put in the category you CAN abandon in the boudoir (because we incorporate the understandings/restrictions etc given in the entire book, not just one verse). There is no issue here.So since we are not talking about husband wife issues then it means that any man if he feels any female does not obey him he has the right to abandon her from the bedchamper. How does that make sense if adultery is forbidden?
Your conclusions are creating contradictions where there are none. How did it get to any man when we know any man can't have sex with any woman unless they are married? Unless bedchamber means the kitchen (which incidentally would make this process of a trial divorce seem awesome to lots of men)...I just am boggled that one could make such inferences!peace
-
Maha, as I said, you have to pick which meaning you want to pick for "allati" if it is wives or if it is non contributing people or if it is any woman. Looking at what comes after and at the logic of it, I cannot explain anything at all neither for good nor for bad taking it as any woman or the non contributors. The garbage man or the shoeman are not going to leave whatever in her bedroom unless we are not in reality but in a Boccacio story. Or rather they withdraw form everywoman on earth and leave quitely in their bedrooms, their sitting rooms, their dinning rooms, bathrooms streets, everywhere... If you want to explain the aya from that basis, I don't have any explanation for it one way or the other.
As for dessertion, it says nushuz, which may mean any non-compliance witht he marriage pact. What pact have any men with whatever women to break or unfulfill? Nushuz does not come from the moon, it must be nushuz with something specific. The word is used only twice in the qur'an in this aya and in 4.128 which has already been mentioned speaking about if a woman fears nushuz from her husband.
I am sorry, maha, I think that you are not insisting for the sake of mere controversy, that you are after something specific that you want clarified or examined, andand which may be of great interest, but I just don't get what it is or what you are getting at. May be you can approach it some other way? I am curious and it may help to gain better knowledge of the whole.
Salaam
-
We can pick lots of verses on their own in the quran and say this contradicts the other verses and then pick and choose why which ones apply more, or...we could take verses on a subject together/the entire quran and see if it makes sense. The verse goes those from whom you fear nushooz... you automatically put in the category you CAN abandon in the boudoir (because we incorporate the understandings/restrictions etc given in the entire book, not just one verse). There is no issue here
.the thing is, that the verse doesnt say anything about wife and husband relationship. The verse is talking about how men generally deal with all the females from whom they fear Nushooz.
our conclusions are creating contradictions where there are none. How did it get to any man when we know any man can't have sex with any woman unless they are married? Unless bedchamber means the kitchen (which incidentally would make this process of a trial divorce seem awesome to lots of men)...I just am boggled that one could make such inferences
Then why doesnt the verse say from the WIVES you fear Nushooz? Why mention all women instead of the wife ?
As for those females from whom you fear desertion, then you shall advise them, and abandon them in the bedchamber, and separate from them. If they respond to you, then do not seek a way over them; God is Most High, Great.
Do you see the mention of 'wife' anywhere?
-
Maha, as I said, you have to pick which meaning you want to pick for "allati" if it is wives or if it is non contributing people or if it is any woman. Looking at what comes after and at the logic of it, I cannot explain anything at all neither for good nor for bad taking it as any woman or the non contributors. The garbage man or the shoeman are not going to leave whatever in her bedroom unless we are not in reality but in a Boccacio story. Or rather they withdraw form everywoman on earth and leave quitely in their bedrooms, their sitting rooms, their dinning rooms, bathrooms streets, everywhere... If you want to explain the aya from that basis, I don't have any explanation for it one way or the other.
As for dessertion, it says nushuz, which may mean any non-compliance witht he marriage pact. What pact have any men with whatever women to break or unfulfill? Nushuz does not come from the moon, it must be nushuz with something specific. The word is used only twice in the qur'an in this aya and in 4.128 which has already been mentioned speaking about if a woman fears nushuz from her husband.
I am sorry, maha, I think that you are not insisting for the sake of mere controversy, that you are after something specific that you want clarified or examined, andand which may be of great interest, but I just don't get what it is or what you are getting at. May be you can approach it some other way? I am curious and it may help to gain better knowledge of the whole.
Salaam
Thanks Huruf. I agree with your defination of Nushuuz. But as we know the word for 'wife' is 'zawjah' and not 'nisa' and the word mentioned is 'nisa' and not 'zawjah'.
So I think the verse is not talking about husband-wife relationship at all. The verse is obviously talking about something else, which has by the way nothing to do with marriage.
Peace
-
And what would that other relationship be?
In the context and with the "nushuz" part I do see what other relationship that would be.The closest antecedent to the allati pronoun would be the salihaat, qanitaat... but those do not seem as if they were perpetrating any nushuz, so it must refer to the nisaa of the beginning, and it must refer to something that is weighed in the aya, which must be then what hafidha Allah and what the salihaat qanitaat are hafithat of lil ghaib.
So, I as I have argued in the thread upheld in the thread
Is this verse applicable to todays women?
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=12037.0I think that al ghaib for whom they must hafidh something is the human to be, which they conceive and keep, they mast keep something for him, I understand their identity, their filiation, their true origin... who is the father.
If they do not do that, the men who are the fathers would be entitled to defend that right if they do their part on their side.
4.34 speaks of respective gifts given to each sex, and then spells out two commitments one for each which will make them honour those gifts.
Men have the gift of not asumming any physical burden in reproduction, and therefore have the possibilities that women may not have because of that burden, but because of it, women are capable of being mothers and having children and knowing them by themselves without much male involvement.
Men should not keep for themselves that extra disponibility which they have more than women, but with it, if they honour God's gifts, they must take care and support the women.
Women should not keep their gift for themselves and should look for the good of what they keep, hnour that gift and be hafithat of what God himself guards. Men may not know that they keep and for whom, but God knows.
That is my reasoning about the aya. But I am curious as to what other relationship you may have in mind.
Salaam
-
As for those females from whom you fear desertion, then you shall advise them, and abandon them in the bedchamber, and separate from them. If they respond to you, then do not seek a way over them; God is Most High, Great.
Do you see the mention of 'wife' anywhere?
Like I said before Maha, do you want to take the whole book or one verse? If the quran says you can't have any sex unless you're married repeatedly, and then there's a verse that says abandon them in the bedchamber...why on earth would you take it to mean anything other than someone you're married to? That would be inserting a contradiction into the text based on faulty analysis when there is none there. We don't take single verses to explain concepts, we take the whole book and we apply that big picture understanding to one verse, instead of the other way around.If you say the verse is generally talking about how men deal with all women (or how men should?) upon fearing nushooz from any female and if the bedchamber applies only then must we use it....it would be a very chaotic rendering given the context because it is stating a process, not a pick and choose what applies to any given situation where a man fears any woman's nushooz.
The quran uses words in particular ways that may or not be clear at times (at times to differentiate between categories, at times to bring to our attention something that ties something else together, at times as umbrella terms that are further distinguished by context etc), but we can't discard the logic/reasoning that goes along with understanding what is being said on the whole which makes it clear that the process is only dealing with a couple that has sex (bedchamber) thus have to be married, hence are husband and wife.
No, it isn't obvious that it's talking about something else but please explain how it ties into the other verses of the quran. How does the bedchamber fit in? I may seem obsessed with the bedchamber but I really want to know.
-
Like I said before Maha, do you want to take the whole book or one verse? If the quran says you can't have any sex unless you're married repeatedly, and then there's a verse that says abandon them in the bedchamber...why on earth would you take it to mean anything other than someone you're married to? That would be inserting a contradiction into the text based on faulty analysis when there is none there. We don't take single verses to explain concepts, we take the whole book and we apply that big picture understanding to one verse, instead of the other way around.
If you say the verse is generally talking about how men deal with all women (or how men should?) upon fearing nushooz from any female and if the bedchamber applies only then must we use it....it would be a very chaotic rendering given the context because it is stating a process, not a pick and choose what applies to any given situation where a man fears any woman's nushooz.
The quran uses words in particular ways that may or not be clear at times (at times to differentiate between categories, at times to bring to our attention something that ties something else together, at times as umbrella terms that are further distinguished by context etc), but we can't discard the logic/reasoning that goes along with understanding what is being said on the whole which makes it clear that the process is only dealing with a couple that has sex (bedchamber) thus have to be married, hence are husband and wife.
No, it isn't obvious that it's talking about something else but please explain how it ties into the other verses of the quran. How does the bedchamber fit in? I may seem obsessed with the bedchamber but I really want to know.
hi sister. Thanks for you comment. But my question remains unanswered. Then why did god said females in stead of wife? Why mentioning a gender in plural while talking about a wife?
Yes I have taken the quran as a whole.
Now if I tell you that you have to do this and this with your males would it be the same thing if i told you how you shall deal with your husband?
I dont think the verse actually says anything about a bedchamper, but even if it did for the sake of argument, how do you know its referring to something sexually? It could might also be that she is not allowed to sleep on a bed anymore. BY the way, remember that a rebellios wife doesnt want to sleep with her husband anyway, so there is actually no need for him to admonish her.
-
And what would that other relationship be?
In the context and with the "nushuz" part I do see what other relationship that would be.The closest antecedent to the allati pronoun would be the salihaat, qanitaat... but those do not seem as if they were perpetrating any nushuz, so it must refer to the nisaa of the beginning, and it must refer to something that is weighed in the aya, which must be then what hafidha Allah and what the salihaat qanitaat are hafithat of lil ghaib.
So, I as I have argued in the thread upheld in the thread
Is this verse applicable to todays women?
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=12037.0I think that al ghaib for whom they must hafidh something is the human to be, which they conceive and keep, they mast keep something for him, I understand their identity, their filiation, their true origin... who is the father.
If they do not do that, the men who are the fathers would be entitled to defend that right if they do their part on their side.
4.34 speaks of respective gifts given to each sex, and then spells out two commitments one for each which will make them honour those gifts.
Men have the gift of not asumming any physical burden in reproduction, and therefore have the possibilities that women may not have because of that burden, but because of it, women are capable of being mothers and having children and knowing them by themselves without much male involvement.
Men should not keep for themselves that extra disponibility which they have more than women, but with it, if they honour God's gifts, they must take care and support the women.
Women should not keep their gift for themselves and should look for the good of what they keep, hnour that gift and be hafithat of what God himself guards. Men may not know that they keep and for whom, but God knows.
That is my reasoning about the aya. But I am curious as to what other relationship you may have in mind.
Salaam
very intresting huruf. your reasoning makes sense to me. I would check your privious post in order to get a deeper understanding of your analyse. Thanks again.
-
hi sister. Thanks for you comment. But my question remains unanswered. Then why did god said females in stead of wife? Why mentioning a gender in plural while talking about a wife?
Yes I have taken the quran as a whole.
Now if I tell you that you have to do this and this with your males would it be the same thing if i told you how you shall deal with your husband?
I dont think the verse actually says anything about a bedchamper, but even if it did for the sake of argument, how do you know its referring to something sexually? It could might also be that she is not allowed to sleep on a bed anymore. BY the way, remember that a rebellios wife doesnt want to sleep with her husband anyway, so there is actually no need for him to admonish her.
The process being stated is not because either one wants or doesn't want to have sex with one another, it's to try to mend the differences by detaching themselves from whatever emotional or otherwise issues are present which makes it easier to focus on the essentials. With a certain amount of distance gradually. The closer we are, the harder it is to see straight etc. So talk about it, doesn't work... then no sex (more distance with less emotional entanglement, easier to think about the issue)...still doesn't work, separate for a bit from each others spheres (even more distance with even less emotional entanglement, even better for thinking about the issue)...how exactly is this bad? It's excellent advice geared towards problem solving than most other things we can think of.
It may benefit one party or both if the process is followed.
She may not be allowed to sleep on a bed? No offense but I find your reasoning a bit wonky for obvious reasons. Why don't we make this easier, and you tell us in your own opinion what the words used stand for and what it is telling us and how it fits with the other verses. Thanks.
-
sister Savage you make a lot of creative interpretations from your own mind. And I dont have a clue about from where you got all these interpretations, my dear.
She may not be allowed to sleep on a bed? No offense but I find your reasoning a bit wonky for obvious reasons. Why don't we make this easier, and you tell us in your own opinion what the words used stand for and what it is telling us and how it fits with the other verses. Thanks.
I ask you again, how do you know that admonishing from bedchamper has something to do with sex? And you didnt replied on my question. How can a husband admonish someone from his bedchamper when she doesnt want to sleep with him already? 3. question which you didnt answered is how do you know that we are talking about wife and husband relationship? Is the word 'wife' or 'husband' used in the verse?
What I wanna know is where you see your interpretations in the verse. cheers.
-
You're calling me creative? Whatever floats your boat I guess.
I don't think you quite realise how this works...you can't just casually drop a line coupled with cryptic comments saying the women don't include or even mean wives...the bedchamber may not actually be a bedchamber at all, and if it is, the women may not be allowed to sleep on beds! men can 'admonish' any woman they want on nushooz grounds and not give ANY evidence for your assertions all the while touting that you have come to this using the whole quran!
So be a dear and please answer since you are the one asserting things are very wrong sister; tell us why they are wrong. Please. Tell us what the words used mean and what they stand for, what the verse is saying and how it ties into the rest of the quran. My reasoning has been given and you haven't disproved it short of repeating the same and calling me creative. I suppose it could be worse.
-
yeah honestly sister I think you are creative. Not that its a negative thing.
you can't just casually drop a line coupled with cryptic comments saying the women don't include or even mean wives...the bedchamber may not actually be a bedchamber at all, and if it is, the women may not be allowed to sleep on beds! men can 'admonish' any woman they want on nushooz grounds and not give ANY evidence for your assertions all the while touting that you have come to this using the whole quran!
Yes indeed women can include wives.. but it does also include MANY other women.. And a wife who does nushuuz would most likely refuse to have sex with her husband before he can refuse her. How can a man deny sex to someone who also denies sex to him? so that can only mean that a man can force any woman not to sleep on the bed.
So if a man use to sleep beside his little daughter, if he fears she make nushuuz he can deny her the right to sleep on the bed. And same thing can he do with his wife, or any other woman who may sleep beside him or on a bed owned by him.So obviously there is something wrong, no?
Tell us what the words used mean and what they stand for, what the verse is saying and how it ties into the rest of the quran. My reasoning has been given and you haven't disproved it short of repeating the same and calling me creative. I suppose it could be worse
Well sister I recently, due to inconsistency in the verse, came to the conclusion that 'nisa' does not really mean women. I think the quran is talking about a whole different issue. But I still have to make a lot of researches on it. I would let you know, in order to hear your opinion and get some feedback from you, when I have reached that long.
