Discussion on 4:3 and meaning of nisa
-
Wakas,
I've washed my hands of you bro. You came back with this post and (as you've done throughout the entire thread) you've addressed NOTHING that I had to say in my last reply to you concerning the Arabic Grammar or exposition of 4/3. This last post of yours is nothing but "Damage Control", but it's too late for that. You had the opportunity to save face by just being honest and address the things that I had to say in the first place. An excellent example of the damage control I am talking about
If we are to understand An-Naas as being all males as Wakas wants to believe
Another FALSE statement. Here is what I said
"I personally take it as "people", however in classical arabic dictionaries it can and does mean "men" also. See Lane's lexicon
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume8/00000120.pdf
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume8/00000121.pdf"What a bunch of crap!!! YOU claimed that 4/1 was addressing only MEN!! You mentioned that Lane's said that An-Naas CAN MEAN only men and THAT was the basis of your argument that 4/1 is addressing all men. Don't try to clean it up now through your damage control campaign!! You said what you said in front of everyone watching this thread. You made a claim. That claim was 4/1 is addressing males only. I asked you what does Naas mean. You were compelled to say that you take it as People because you know THAT is the definition of Naas and to say otherwise would have made you look even more foolish. BUT you couldn't leave it at that because if you did your argument about 4/1 addressing only males would crumble. So what do you do? You threw in the comment that Lane's says Naas Sometimes mean MEN. You threw that in there as supporting material for your 4/1 is addressing only males claim and you know it Wakas. You should just leave it alone bro. The more you continue on with this desperate swim to shore of yours, the deeper in the water you go.
It's over bro. I was never discussing this with you to prove you wrong, to win an argument or look a certain way to other people. I ONLY wanted the truth of Nisaa to be looked at and for 4/3 to be re-examined with this newfound light that WE ALL HAVE!! You should have been overjoyed that a discovery was made concerning this word and the verse in question. This is for all of us. Me, you, Released, Mazhar, Savage Carrot, My wife, Your wife, etc. It's for all of us. But due to your selfishness and "stingy thinking" you immediately approached our conversation with guns blazing. When I made my opening post of this thread no one had anything to say but you. You immediately jumped all over it like flies on poop. You've tap danced the entire discussion. WHY? All for the sake of not having to say "My present understanding is wrong." Not to mention you are no different than any other traditional muslim who managed to convince himself that having more than one woman (cough, cough-Sex Partner-cough, cough) is his right as a man. And just like a lot of other traditional muslims you are TRYING to convince yourself and others that you view this Option as a "Sacred Duty". Baloney Wakas. Oh, and make no mistake about, you ARE a traditional muslim, just one with a sectarian stance just like the other traditional, sectarian muslims. Because you do not take a label in front of the word muslim for yourself means nothing because there are plenty of other traditional muslims who claim to be non sectarian and say that they are "Just Muslim".
Anyway, I'm done with you bro. This thing between you and me will drag on forever all because you will not take off your tap dancing shoes, sit down and actually DISCUSS THE ISSUES of Nisaa and 4/3 that need to be addressed so we can get to the bottom of things. It is actually your loss, not mine. You can continue to force yourself to hold on to an incorrect idea but understand that yours and the other traditional muslims views about Nisaa and 4/3 are coming apart. Your traditional views on these two issues are very, very barely hanging on by a really weak thread. And that thread is about to snap very soon. It's over. A new light has been shined on this issue and you, Mazhar, UQ and all the rest of the traditional muslim world can do nothing to stop it or slow down its progress. RATIONAL PEOPLE (those who have NOT abandoned their logic and common sense) have questioned, are questioning and will continue to question your traditional interpretations and the people of Aastana are shedding light on those questions. Take it and choke on it for all I care.
-
"Min" is ALWAYS a preposition and acts upon its object rendering it in genitive case. No grammar book suggests anything contrary to it.
Generally this particle denotes a beginning point related either to time or place. Also, it signifies the beginning point in matters unrelated to time and place, as used in sentence, "It is from Sulaiman".
This will be found in the grammar books about prepositions and about "Min".
The prepositions originally designate relations of place, i.e. local relations, but are transferred first, to relation of time, i.e. temporal relations, and next to various sorts of ideal relations conceived under the figure of local relations to which they correspond.
The simple prepositions are divisible into three clauses, indicating respectively, motion proceeding from or away from a place; motion to or towards it; and rest in it. The prepositions which indicate motion proceeding from or away from a place are "Min" and "an".(a) The local point of departure, departure from a place; hence it is connected with verbs which convey the idea of separation, departure, holding oneself or another aloof from any person or thing, liberating, preserving, fleeing, frightening away, forbidding and the like. Hence is used to signify, on the one hand, by or through, and on the other hand, in place of, instead of.
(b) The temporal point of departure, the point at which an act or state has commenced. When used in this signification, Arab Grammarians call it "denotes the commencement of the limits in place and time" or simply "lil ibteda" to denote the commencement.
(c) The casual point of departure, the origin and source of a thing; Grammarians say that in this case is used for assigning the reason.
(d) The distance from a place, person or thing, particularly after words which signify proximity, such as or , to be near, near etc.(e) The difference between two persons or things which are contrasted or compared with one another. Hence the use of after comparative adjectives; as "he is better than me ". The definition or explanation/clarification of a general or universal by a special or particular term, the later being one of several objects that go to make up the former, "therefore avoid the abomination of idols". Its sign is that it is proper to place in its place.
(h) The specifying a general term.Prepositional Phrases are the most weak area of almost all the translators who have hitherto translated the text of Qur'aan. They just overlooked or casually passed on without determining to which part of the text Prepositional Phrase relates.
Leeds 'Varsity were trying taking care of Prepositional Phrases while preparing depenency graphs. Hopefully they will keep working on the project.Advice Readers may even take a look on grammar of English about Prepositional Phrases and can apply the same to Arabic language, not much difference.
laugh laugh laugh Blah, Blah, Blah, - the hip bone is connected to the thigh bone - Blah, Blah, Blah and you take this reciprocal rendering of the guiness outlining circumfrence of a circle, Blah, Blah, Blah laugh laugh laugh
More self made razzle dazzle. If ANYONE here can prove An-Nisaa is a PLACE or LOCATION then by default that would make the word "MIN" a Preposition of Place in 4/3!! IF An-Nisaa is NOT a place or location (which I know it is not) then that would mean the word "MIN" is not a Preposition of Place in 4/3. It is something else. That's the bottom line. Again, try using some Common Sense!!
Save all of the Grammar Razzle Dazzle and PROVE An-Nisaa' is a place or location. If not, I'm done with this silliness. A person who was really interested in helping his fellow forum posters understand issues of the language would simplify it for them and walk them through the language step by step (as I have attempted to do in my post with the 10 point summation). using Razzle Dazzle and fancy terminologies are the tactics of people who want others to see him as a grammarian of some sort and also do not want them to know the aspects of the language to find things out for themselves.
Mazhar and Wakas are just alike. Their traditionalist views of Nisaa and 4/3 are coming apart and as a result They Are Coming Apart Themselves. ;D
How much does it irk them that they have websites with all of these "scholarly" articles that they have written and that they pump themselves up to be wise experts on this forum only for their views and teachings to be picked apart?
-
laugh laugh laugh Blah, Blah, Blah, - the hip bone is connected to the thigh bone - Blah, Blah, Blah and you take this reciprocal rendering of the guiness outlining circumfrence of a circle, Blah, Blah, Blah laugh laugh laugh
More self made razzle dazzle. If ANYONE here can prove An-Nisaa is a PLACE or LOCATION then by default that would make the word "MIN" a Preposition of Place in 4/3!! IF An-Nisaa is NOT a place or location (which I know it is not) then that would mean the word "MIN" is not a Preposition of Place in 4/3. It is something else. That's the bottom line. Again, try using some Common Sense!!
Save all of the Grammar Razzle Dazzle and PROVE An-Nisaa' is a place or location. If not, I'm done with this silliness. A person who was really interested in helping his fellow forum posters understand issues of the language would simplify it for them and walk them through the language step by step (as I have attempted to do in my post with the 10 point summation). using Razzle Dazzle and fancy terminologies are the tactics of people who want others to see him as a grammarian of some sort and also do not want them to know the aspects of the language to find things out for themselves.
Mazhar and Wakas are just alike. Their traditionalist views of Nisaa and 4/3 are coming apart and as a result They Are Coming Apart Themselves. ;D
How much does it irk them that they have websites with all of these "scholarly" articles that they have written and that they pump themselves up to be wise experts on this forum only for their views and teachings to be picked apart?
It is common that self acquired stupidity has no ending point, one keeps it stretching. And it not only makes people deaf but also blind that they neither hear anything other than their own orchestra, but also fail to see when portrayed before them. It was portrayed
(f) The relation which subsists between the part and whole, the species and the genus; [Rem When precedes a definite noun, especially in the plural, it often indicates an indefinite quantity or number. Accordingly "Min" with an indefinite genitive may be subject of a sentence. In such cases of nominal origin of Min we see it clearly a substantive, meaning a part or portion. [Rem After negative particles, and interrogatives put in a negative sense Min prefixed to an indefinite noun means "none at all" and not "not one". [Rem When indicates a part of a whole it is said to be used "lil tabeez" to indicate division into parts; when it indicates the parts of which a whole is composed "lil-tarkeebe" to indicate composition.
-
Hey Idiot, did you even bother to READ my post? Try READING WHAT I SAID!!!
I already established that Min is a word which consists of parts from a whole. I already beat you to that when I made This Post. I also pointed out that it is NOT used as a preposition of place or location because An-Nisaa is NOT a place or location!! I asked you to establish that "min" is a PREPOSITION OF PLACE in 4/3. The ONLY way you can do that is if you can somehow establish that An-Nisaa is a PLACE or LOCATION!!!!!! Did you get it that time???? Do you not know how to read??? And neither YOU nor WAKAS made an attempt to either disprove the Ma..Min Clause or that MA taaba lakum MIN An-Nisaa is written in the Ma...Min Clause.
If you can't do either one of those three things, I'm wasting my time with you. A COMPLETE waste of time.
I'm letting you know ahead of time, if you don't bring some sort of evidence that An-Nisaa' is a PLACE or LOCATION or GEOGRAPHICAL DIRECTION and somehow disprove the Ma...Min Clause I pointed out in your next post, I will not bother to reply. That's it. You are now in the same basket that I had placed Wakas in. I have better things to do than to keep tossing a stick and telling you to go fetch it.
-
Salaam all,
Summary of some of the key points in the thread thus far
Claim 1) "nisa" is the only example in which a plural is formed NOT from the corresponding singular
Damon quote "In the Arabic Language ALL WORDS have the same roots in the plural form as they do their singular form."Countered
Examples of plural nouns being derived from other forms or roots than their corresponding singular form
- from (a mole)
- from (a goat)
- from (water)
- from (a woman)
These are but a few examples.
Besides, Damon admits Arabic language is imperfect. Ergo, an imperfect plural formation is possible, regardless of above examples.
Claim 2) Whenever a certain group of people are being addressed directly in The Quran they are specified and not changed without declaring the change. Damon gave references to works wherein he claimed the above is stated.
I, nor others (e.g. Hoppean) were able to identify where such was stated in his references. Nor did anyone else I dont think.
Claim 3) The use of masculine singular 3rd person verb "taba" shows "an-nisa" contains males.
Countered
-
The pronoun "" is very occasionally used in the Classical language to refer to sentient beings, thus, being used in this manner, it has the equivalent signification to "". In 43, "" is the pronoun of "" (the women).
-
It then follows that "" should reflect the gender of "" (which is a neuter), and so we read "" and not "" in description of "" (the women).
-
So we end up with
"And if you fear(ed) that you will not be just with the orphans, then marry, of women, what please you two each, and three each, and four each..."
I then asked uq a clarifying question, as to whom was doing the doing verb "taba" and he said "the women".
So, he seems to agree with you that the ones doing the doing verb are "an-nisa" HOWEVER he explains why the use of masculine verb "taba" without having "an-nisa" to contain males, which seems to be the case you are wishing to make. Of course, I am aware that he did not provide a reference for "ma" very occasionally referring to sentient beings in Classical Arabic and/or Quran, so this needs to be looked into.
Earlier, Mazhar did not agree with you that "an-nisa" are the ones doing the doing verb.
Since you haven't provided your translation of this part of 43 it is hard to determine the validity of your proposal, not only grammatically, but I also mean logically/practically. Thus, at this stage I am inclined to agree with uq.
- In 43, (to be, or appear, pleasant) serves a stative function (i.e. it expresses a state, not an act). And indicates to whom that pleasantness appears (i.e. the men). The agents of are (the women).
In the Classical language, the pronoun is usually reserved for non-sentient beings, however, it can very occasionally be used for sentient beings also; a prominent example being its use in the phrase , which is equivalent to stating .
In 43, is the pronoun pertinent to , and is the coupled verb to that same pronoun. As such, must agree with its pronoun in gender, therefore we read in the Quran " ". However, if the pronoun was used in 43, instead of , we would have read in the Quran " " or even " ".
Damon gives no response to the above.
Claim 4) Damon states that "iltifaat"(a sudden shift in the pronoun of the speaker or the person spoken about) does not exist in Quran
Countered http//www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Grammar/iltifaat.html
And with the example of 1087 - "'We revealed to Moses and his brother "Settle (dual) for your (dual) people/qawm in Egypt/misr houses; and make your (plural) houses a qiblah and uphold (plural) the salat; and do thou (singular) give good tidings to the believers (plural)."
To which Damon replies, paraphrased God is the speaker (even though I never once asked about the speaker) and and the spoken to is "the one who is commissioned to PROCLAIM the message of the narration to other people.". He is silent about whom the "spoken of/about" is in 1087, which is what I asked him.Claim 5) Damon said "If you can somehow prove that the Arabic word An-Naas translates into men, males or a group of men, then I have not proven my case."
Countered
I personally take it as "people", however in classical arabic dictionaries it can and does mean "men" also. See Lane's lexicon
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume8/00000120.pdf
http//www.studyquran.org/LaneLexicon/Volume8/00000121.pdfUnanswered questions
-
"And there is absolutely nothing hard for The Quran to use the appropriate pronoun. For example, IF, as you seemingly claim, "nisa" is not "women" then please explain why Quran in 43 uses "fawidatan" or in 44 uses "aduqtihinna" etc etc."
Damon claimed in reply #10 of this thread "You obviously do not know the answer to this BUT I DO." - yet we are still waiting for him to attempt an answer. -
Potential problems based on Damon's understanding of 43. Note this is only problems resulting from this verse, there are other verses as pointed out by member Noon.
You say "al-yataam" are "those who are left alone in society to fend for themselves and who can use a helping hand (Al Yatamaa)" but the verses clearly talk about their wealth, as in they have some. You never explained that. You also set a dangerous precedent if you imply when Quran uses "their" X, it may not actually be "theirs" as such but it means what they are entitled to justly speaking. This would require further investigation.
Also, you never explained how people are meant to practically determine whom falls under the category of "...a "Sub Group" of the overall group of Yatamaa. The Nisaa' are oblivious to the fact that they have been socio-economically manuevered into being left as sheep in a world of wolves. "
You never explained why leave out the non-nisa from al yataam when making bond/contract etc, i.e. why only help those who are oblivious/forgetful from those who could use a helping hand. So they need a helping hand, but dont help them?
Your understanding also causes issues in the verses which follow, e.g. those who are oblivious/forgetful can tibna part of saduqat, implying they can think/discern/determine this.
You also talk about mutual agreement, but having this from people who are deemed "oblivious/forgetful" seems odd.-
can you find another example wherein "an-nisa" are doing a masculine verb. Since "nisa" is used 59 times in Quran, finding an example shouldn't be too difficult.
The Subject of Verb is never in genitive case as in 4/3 is .
Preposition "Min" is used in Qur'aan perhaps more than 1500 times, just search, one will never find its object noun as subject of a verb.
The reason I cite the above is because there are over a thousand examples in Quran of 'subject of a verb' and use of "min" prior to noun, thus to disprove what Mazhar said with one or two examples from Quran should be relatively simple, IF Damon is correct.
Damon et al to respond WITH evidence?
-
Hey Idiot, did you even bother to READ my post? Try READING WHAT I SAID!!!
I already established that Min is a word which consists of parts from a whole. I already beat you to that when I made This Post. I also pointed out that it is NOT used as a preposition of place or location because An-Nisaa is NOT a place or location!! I asked you to establish that "min" is a PREPOSITION OF PLACE in 4/3. The ONLY way you can do that is if you can somehow establish that An-Nisaa is a PLACE or LOCATION!!!!!! Did you get it that time???? Do you not know how to read??? And neither YOU nor WAKAS made an attempt to either disprove the Ma..Min Clause or that MA taaba lakum MIN An-Nisaa is written in the Ma...Min Clause.
If you can't do either one of those three things, I'm wasting my time with you. A COMPLETE waste of time.
I'm letting you know ahead of time, if you don't bring some sort of evidence that An-Nisaa' is a PLACE or LOCATION or GEOGRAPHICAL DIRECTION and somehow disprove the Ma...Min Clause I pointed out in your next post, I will not bother to reply. That's it. You are now in the same basket that I had placed Wakas in. I have better things to do than to keep tossing a stick and telling you to go fetch it.
Sorry, shirley, you play games and I am Master of taking much superior gamers than you like RK to the corner to expose their foul play, and then they keep mum. 19er Section is an evidence that all 19er and his right hand has no ground to defend their "messenger".
Now let the Members know what you understand by "Min", forget about Nisa at the moment.
-
Is it a word, if yes, which part of the speech
(a) Particle, if so what type---Preposition- , conjunction, interjection etc.
(b) Noun, or
(c) Verb. -
If Preposition , what will be its governance and upon whom?
-
If Preposition, what will it denote when used with locative noun, time adverb, generic noun, collective noun, singular noun, plural noun either regular or broken?
-
If Preposition, how would you determine as to whom-which word in the sentence it relates?
And by the way what you understand as to what type of Noun An-Nisa is?
What is the "Al" doing in it, who those women are whom this definite Article "Al" is referring to, making them known and defined women? Mind it common noun in Arabic in default state is always indefinite.
Is it the noun of abundance or paucity?This will take us to proper understanding. Waiting reply. Thanks.
-
-
- Potential problems based on Damon's understanding of 43. Note this is only problems resulting from this verse, there are other verses as pointed out by member Noon.
Peace Wakas, actually all the verses especially when read in context...
2222 and they ask you about the menstruation say it ailment so abandon al-nisaa the feminine/women in the menstruation and not approach them (f) until they are clean so when they are purified (f) so come to them (f) from wherever directive The God indeed The God loves the ones who turn in repentance and loves the ones who purify themselves 2223 nisukum feminine/women yours (m) a tillage for you so bring your tilt how you like?
2226 to those who forswear from feminine/women theirs (m) waiting four cycles so if they return so indeed The God Forgiving Merciful 2227 and if determine the divorce so indeed The God Hearing Knowing 2228 and the divorced (f) should wait by themselves three menstrual periods and not lawful for them that conceal what created The God in their wombs if they believing in The God and the day the last and husbands theirs (f) more right to take them back in that if desired reconciliation and to them like the one onto them (f) in the fair manner and to the men onto them (f) a degree and The God Mighty Wise 2229 the divorce twice so to retain in fair manner or let go with kindness and not lawful for you that you take from what you have given them whatsoever only/except that fear both that not they keep limits The God so if you fear that not they keep limits The God so not blame on them in what she ransoms in it that limits The God so not transgress them and from transgresses limits The God so those they the wrongdoers 2230 so if he divorces her so not lawful to him from after until she marries zawjan spouse other than him so if he divorces her so not blame on them that they return back if they think that they keep limits The God and those are limits The God He makes clear for a clan/people who know 2231 and when you divorce the feminine/women so they reached their term so retain them (f) in fair manner or release them (f) in fair manner and not retain them (f) harmful to transgress and from will be done that so surely wrongs himself and not you take verses The God mocking and remember favor The God upon you and what descended upon you from the book and the wisdom He admonishes you with it and fear The God and know that The God in every a thing Knowing 2232 and when you divorce the feminine/women so they reached their term so not hinder them (f) that they marry azwjahunna husbands theirs (f) when they agree among them in the fair manner that admonished with it from he is from among you believing in The God and the day the last that virtuous for you and purer and The God He knows and you not you know
2235 and not blame upon you in what you bring with it from proposal the feminine/women or conceal it in yourselves knowledge The God that you will mention them and nonetheless not promise them secretly only/except that you say a word honorable and not resolve knot the marriage until reaches the book its end and know that The God he knows what in yourselves so be aware of Him and know that The God Forgiving Forbearing 2236 not blame upon you if you divorce the feminine/women what not you touched them or you specified for them obligation and make provision for them on the wealthy estimate his and on the scant estimate his provision in the fair manner duty on the good doers 2237 and if you divorce them from before that you touched them and truly you have specified for them obligation so half of it what you have specified only/except that they forgo or forgoes the one in his hand knot the marriage and that you forgo closer to piety and not forget the virtue between you indeed The God in what you do Seer
41 O you al-nas/the humankind fear your Lord The One created you from soul one/single (f) and created from it its spouse and dispersed from them both two rijalan/men much wanisan/and feminine/women and fear The God The One you ask with it and the wombs indeed The God He is over you Watchful 42 and give the orphans their wealth and not exchange the bad with the good and not eat/consume their wealth to your wealth indeed it it is sin great 43 and if you fear that not do justice in/concerning the orphans so marry what aba/agreeable to you from the feminine/women paired/twos and three and four so if you fear that not do justice so one/single (f) or what possess your right hands/trust (m) that minimum that not you oppress 44 and give the feminine/women their handouts graciously so if ib'na remit for you about a thing from it of soul/their own so eat/consume it satisfaction ease 45 and not give the foolish your wealth the one made The God for you standing/support and provide them in it and clothe them and speak to them a word nice/appropriate 46 and test the orphans until when attained the marriage so if you perceive from them rational so deliver to them their wealth and not eat/consume it wastefully and hastily lest/that they grow up and from he is rich so should refrain and from he is in need for so let eat/consume in the fair manner so when you deliver to them their wealth so take witnesses on/over them and sufficient in The God Reckoner 47 lilrrijal/to the men a share from what left the parents and the close relatives and for the feminine/women a share from what left the parents and the close relatives from what small from it or large portion obligatory
411 directs you The God in your children to the male like share the two (f) so if kunna/they are (f) feminine/women above two (f) falahunna/so for them (f) third dual (2/3) what left and if kanat/she is (f) widatan one/single (f) so for her the half
422 and not you marry whom marry your fathers from the feminine/women only/except what hence passed indeed it it is immorality and abomination and an evil a way 423 prohibited over you mothers yours (m) and daughters yours (m) and your sisters and your father?s sisters and your mother?s sisters and daughters the brother and daughters the sister and mothers the ones who nursed you and your sisters from the nursing and mothers nisakum/feminine/women yours (m) and your step daughters the ones who in your guardianship from nisakum/feminine/women yours (m) the ones who entered in them so if not you were entered in them so not blame upon you w-layl and cohabitants sons yours the ones who from your loins and that you gathered between the two sisters only/except what hence passed indeed The God He is Forgiving Merciful 424 and the guarded from the feminine/women only/except what possess your right hands/trust (m) scripture The God over you and permitted for you what behind those that you seek with your wealth chaste (m) not unchaste (m; Siin-Fa-Ha = musafihun - one who commits fornication or adultery) so what enjoyment to you in it from them so give them their rewards obligation and not blame over you in what you agree with them with it from after the obligation indeed The God He is Knowing Wise
4127 and they seek your ruling in the feminine/women say The God gives you a ruling in them and what is recited upon you in the book in/concerning orphans the feminine/women the ones who not you give them what prescribed for them and you desire that you marry them (f) and the oppressed from the children and that you stand up for the orphans in justice and what you do from better so indeed The God He is in it Knowing 4128 and if a woman fears from her husband ill-conduct or reluctance so not blame on them that they reconcile between them two reconciliation and reconciliation better and brought the selves the selfishness and if improved and piety so indeed The God He is in what you do Aware 4129 and never you will be able that do justice between the feminine/women and if/had ardent desire so not inclined each the tendency so leave her like the suspended one and if you reconcile and piety so indeed The God He is Forgiving Merciful 4130 and if they separate will enrich The God each from His abundance and He is The God Encompassing Wise
3328 O you the prophet say to your spouse?s if you desire the life the world and its adornment so come I will provide for you and release you release beautiful 3329 and if you desire The God and His messenger and the home the afterlife so indeed The God has prepared for the good-doers from you reward enormous 3330 O feminine/women the prophet from commits from you in immorality clear doubled to her the punishment two fold and it is that on The God easy 3331 and from obedient from you to God and His messenger and works righteous will give her her reward twice and prepare for her provision noble 3332 O feminine/women the prophet you are not as one from the feminine/women if you fear so not be soft in speech so be moved with desire the one in his heart disease and speak a word appropriate
582 the ones who yuhirna who say ?be as my mother's back? from among you from nisihim feminine/women theirs (m) not they their mothers indeed their mothers only the ones (f) gave them birth?583 and the ones who yuhirna who say ?be as my mother's back? from feminine/women theirs (m) furthermore go back to what they said so freeing a neck (i.e. slave) from before that they touch each other that you are admonished in it and The God in what you do Aware 584 so from not find so a fast shryn/two cycles successive from before that they touch each other?
-
I have been following this thread a bit and finally want to comment.
Bro Damon, you said
Hey Idiot, did you even bother to READ my post? Try READING WHAT I SAID!!!
I already established that Min is a word which consists of parts from a whole. I already beat you to that when I made This Post. I also pointed out that it is NOT used as a preposition of place or location because An-Nisaa is NOT a place or location!! I asked you to establish that "min" is a PREPOSITION OF PLACE in 4/3. The ONLY way you can do that is if you can somehow establish that An-Nisaa is a PLACE or LOCATION!!!!!! Did you get it that time???? Do you not know how to read??? And neither YOU nor WAKAS made an attempt to either disprove the Ma..Min Clause or that MA taaba lakum MIN An-Nisaa is written in the Ma...Min Clause.
If you can't do either one of those three things, I'm wasting my time with you. A COMPLETE waste of time.
I'm letting you know ahead of time, if you don't bring some sort of evidence that An-Nisaa' is a PLACE or LOCATION or GEOGRAPHICAL DIRECTION and somehow disprove the Ma...Min Clause I pointed out in your next post, I will not bother to reply. That's it. You are now in the same basket that I had placed Wakas in. I have better things to do than to keep tossing a stick and telling you to go fetch it.
First, you seem to have a good bit to offer to the forum, but honestly a lot of what you have to say is getting lost to me because you seem to be angry or some other emotion that I don't understand about how you are approaching it. I understand from reading your comments that you have history with Wakas, but if you want your studies and conclusions to benefit others, you should also think of how you deliver your message to all of us since we are reading everything that you say here. Maybe a little less personal attacks and just more focus on the subject matter of the ayat and it's understanding would help in doing that, just my 2 cents.
In regards to the subject matter, are you saying that "min" can ONLY be a "preposition of place or location"? and that no other form of preposition exists as Mazhar stated in letter "f" of his explanation?
And bro Mazhar, can you please address directly the issue of the Ma...Min clause that bro Damon is making reference to and why you think it does or does not apply in this ayat of discussion?
On another note regarding this topic in general, I have a few simple questions that hopefully anyone would be kind enough to answer in an unbiased way
- Does the quran clearly state or indicate the Muhammad had more than one wife at the same time during his life?
- If yes, does the quran state or give any indication as to why Muhammad was allowed to have more than one wife at the same time during his life and what the rules for that were?
- Does the quran forbid or indicated in any way that men or women can not have more than one spouse at the same time, directly or indirectly?
Whether or not 43 gives permission to men or women to marry more than one is one issue, but I have heard "muslims" clearly agree that Muhammad had more than one wife at the same time and yet still fight over this issue of whether other men/women can do so.
I am curious if the translations are wrong and if the quran never proves that Muhammad had more than one wife at the same time at all?
-
I have been following this thread a bit and finally want to comment.
Bro Damon, you said
First, you seem to have a good bit to offer to the forum, but honestly a lot of what you have to say is getting lost to me because you seem to be angry or some other emotion that I don't understand about how you are approaching it. I understand from reading your comments that you have history with Wakas, but if you want your studies and conclusions to benefit others, you should also think of how you deliver your message to all of us since we are reading everything that you say here. Maybe a little less personal attacks and just more focus on the subject matter of the ayat and it's understanding would help in doing that, just my 2 cents.
In regards to the subject matter, are you saying that "min" can ONLY be a "preposition of place or location"? and that no other form of preposition exists as Mazhar stated in letter "f" of his explanation?
And bro Mazhar, can you please address directly the issue of the Ma...Min clause that bro Damon is making reference to and why you think it does or does not apply in this ayat of discussion?
On another note regarding this topic in general, I have a few simple questions that hopefully anyone would be kind enough to answer in an unbiased way
- Does the quran clearly state or indicate the Muhammad had more than one wife at the same time during his life?
- If yes, does the quran state or give any indication as to why Muhammad was allowed to have more than one wife at the same time during his life and what the rules for that were?
- Does the quran forbid or indicated in any way that men or women can not have more than one spouse at the same time, directly or indirectly?
Whether or not 43 gives permission to men or women to marry more than one is one issue, but I have heard "muslims" clearly agree that Muhammad had more than one wife at the same time and yet still fight over this issue of whether other men/women can do so.
I am curious if the translations are wrong and if the quran never proves that Muhammad had more than one wife at the same time at all?
I checked andfound this in his post
I am stating it again for all to see. The word Taaba in 4/3 is referring to An-Nisaa'. How? Because the construction follows the Ma...Min Clause. Evidence? Page 132 of Introduction To Koranic and Classical Arabic which clearly explains the Ma - Min Clause and shows example Arabic sentences. Please read it.
Evidence # 1 established.
But I could not find at page132 of his link anything except that it is about passive voice verbs. I do not know if reference is incorrectly quoted.
-
So, in order to understand the Koran, I need to understand the Passive Voice and indeed, what the Passive Voice actually means. Surely God didn't have this in mind?
Dawn.
-
answerseeker
Whether or not 43 gives permission to men or women to marry more than one is one issue, but I have heard "muslims" clearly agree that Muhammad had more than one wife at the same time and yet still fight over this issue of whether other men/women can do so
.first of all, there is no quranic evidence that it was a man named Muhammad who came with the quran.
Secondly, I think the prophet had multiple spouses before he got the quran, and when he got the quran he was ordered not to take any further spouse, as there is a verse in the quran ordering him to stop his polygyny activities.
Peace
-
Peace Maher,
Which verse orders Mohammad to stop his polygynous activities?
Thanks,
Dawn
-
I checked andfound this in his post
But I could not find at page132 of his link anything except that it is about passive voice verbs. I do not know if reference is incorrectly quoted.
Peace Mazhar,
Thank you sincerely for your response.
Bro. Damon, can you please point us again to the reference and grammar information that you are speaking of about the ma....min clause?
-
answerseeker
.first of all, there is no quranic evidence that it was a man named Muhammad who came with the quran.
Secondly, I think the prophet had multiple spouses before he got the quran, and when he got the quran he was ordered not to take any further spouse, as there is a verse in the quran ordering him to stop his polygyny activities.
Peace
Peace Maha,
My apologies, I just assumed that the quran mentioned that the prophet was named Muhammad. If that was wrong, I stand corrected.
Do you have any evidence from the quran that states that the prophet married his wives before he got the quran? Or how many wives he had?
Also, could you point out which verse asks him to stop his polygyny activities? And if so, was he ordered to divorce all his wives except one?
-
Peace Damon,
You seem to have studied this verse in depth, and have provided us with a lot of new insight. Could you please continue with this thread and answer Noon, Mazhar, and Wakas's questions even if you've already addressed them prior? Also, if you've addressed them prior to this, then can you please tell us where in the thread we can find these answers?
We'd like for you to continue, please.
-
Peace Damon,
Could you atleast provide us with your translation or exposition of 4.3? I don't think it's fair to leave us in the dust after providing such an insightful argument. I know that you also promised to answer some of our prior questions. I was hoping you could answer them here, so that everyone could read and try to understand.
-
peace Released,
Re summary post http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604721.msg315351#msg315351
You said Arabic, but I assume you mean write it in English?It's only claim 3 that may require some Arabic. Some of the content discusses Arabic words in 43 which you can use corpus.quran.com to view http//corpus.quran.com/wordbyword.jsp?chapter=4&verse=3#(431)
I personally, use my browser to magnify the Arabic in forum posts, as its quite small. If you do this, and know Arabic letters, it's fairly straight-forward to follow.
The following may require a little explanation however
being its use in the phrase , which is equivalent to stating .
ma malak aymanukum (which is also used in 43, and many other places in Quran)
Explanation added
In 43, is the pronoun pertinent to , and is the coupled verb to that same pronoun. As such, must agree with its pronoun in gender, therefore we read in the Quran " ". However, if the pronoun (i.e. pronoun man, as in HERE) was used in 43, instead of , we would have read in the Quran " " or even " ". (i.e. "taba" has changed to the corresponding feminine)
The rest of the claims and counterclaims, and unanswered questions are fairly easy to follow.
