Discussion on 4:3 and meaning of nisa
-
Peace everyone!
Here comes another long post from Inq. As usual. )
I'll answer the first question "Why would you want to have a word look as though it relates to women and mean something different?"
I have to try and answer this without coming off as racist or anti Arab. But the fact of the matter is that the Arabic Culture has alwasy been and is now a male centric, woman oppressing and male chauvinist culture. This is all to evident today right before our very eyes. A pretty good book to read which is quite an eye opener is The Arab Mind by Raphael Patai. This book pretty much confirmed for me what I had already realized just by dealings with and observations of Arabs. Again, I have to emphasize that I am in no way or fashion taking a jab at Arabs or their culture. I am merely pointing out the culture of oppression that exists among Arabs and how that culture made its way into the Arab Ideology of Islam. So to answer your question WHY they do this is because Arab men have always traditonally dominated Arab society and they have always had this thing where a woman "has her own place in society" and that place is always relegated away from the public eye, in the house, the kitchen and the bedroom. That's it!! That's their lot in life. It's not a lot, but it's their life.
And, in fact, women are seen with a negative connotation in every culture in the world nowadays. Even in Matriarchal societies like Papua New Guinea, women are seen as aggressive and emotional. It's quite the predicament.
The Quran came to mandate EQUAL RIGHTS and OPPORTUNITY for ALL HUMAN BEINGS....white, non white, Arab, Indian, African, male, female, young and old. The Quran was threatening to to totally turn on it's back the male centric Arab culture. It was threatening to give women rights and opportunities Arab men are uncomfortable with. The Ideology of The Quran (NOT the Religion of Islam) had the potential of reaching the hearts and minds of the masses who were yearning for the dismantling of the system of injustice and replace it with a system that is based on complete justice...
This section of your post (well, your entire post) was very well explained. When things like this are brought up, people tend to point fingers and say "you're being racist!" but I think it's important to focus on the what that you're saying and whether it is true or not. If we analyze the actions of particular groups of people in the world, will their actions be proving you right? Well, you've honestly answered that question already
We can begin by asking some questions and exercising our common sense.
Absolutely!
Anyway, although I said that I am not one for doing translations I guess I have no choice but to honor your request to a certain extant.
You certainly did not have to at all. We all have a choice in our actions. ;D
Yet, I thank you anyway for the work that you've done as a favor to me. I appreciate it.Your translation made sense and actually got me closer to answering some questions I have about other verses. It definitely added a new perspective on my views of the Quran. Something to study. sun
And concerning the fact that the word Nisa' is translated as "Women" in The Arabic Dictionaries, please read these words very carefully. I Live in the United States of America and here there is a word that is used for Black People and they call this word The *N word. Those on this forum who live in the U.S. know exactly what I am talking about.
This word has made its way into many, many. many dictionaries of American English. The definition that is given in these dictionaries is "A Derogatory Term Used For African Americans". But how many people here realize that this word is a relatively NEW WORD in the American Dictionary? How many people realize that this word Originally described a person (ANY person) as being Ignorant and Uncivilized? (see definition number two). This word started to be used by White People in America as slang term for Black people because Black people were called "Negroes" and this word Negroe comes from the Spanish and Portuguese word "Negro which means Black. Since this word sounded so much Like the *N word as well as the word "Niggard" (stingy, miserly, scrooge, etc.) they started to used a "Slang Term" strictly for Black People in America.
BUT anyone can be Niggardly (regardless of so called color or race) and anyone can be a *igger (again regardless of so-called color or race). But look up the *N word in the American English Dictionaries and it would NOT give the ORIGINAL MEANING of this word. In fact, it doesn't give a definition at all. It only says HOW this word is used and that's as an offensive term for Black People in America.
What is the significance of this information? Black People in America are regarded by those in power (White People) as being the Social Other. Women in Arab culture always has been and continues to be regarded by those in power (Men) as being the Social Other. The *N word has made its way into The American English Dictionaries within the span of only a Century. The Arabic Dictionaries and Culture had much, much longer to do the same with the word Nisaa'. Let's not kid ourselves. The Arabic language is much older than American English. Centuries Older. Arab Culture is much, much older than American Culture. Again, centuries older. If the American Dictionaries can pull of what they have concerning the *N word in a matter of only 100 years, how much better can The Arabs pull off their own *N word in a matter of centuries? They've have much more time to establish their own *N word than America has with hers.
Very, very, very good example! I always cringe when people say "This language is 1400 centuries old! Meanings don't change like that!" Obviously, a quick look at linguistics for many languages throughout history will show that, in fact, words can and do change. Rapidly. One cannot simply trust in a translation and believe that it means exactly what it's supposed to mean. That's the same thing as blind belief in my opinion.
Those who are defending the status quo of Nisaa' meaning women will completely dismiss everything I have said in this post. Those who are honest and willing to look at what I have said in this post and go "HHmmmmmmmm... hmm " will not immediately dismiss what I said and ponder on this situation.
Something we can witness clearly.
Peace all,
Inquisitivetrini, Dawn, Stop, anyone want to share their thoughts?
Peace Released,
I took so long to respond because I need to take things in slowly. Lol. I am learning new things about myself right now. I used to say that I am someone who learns quickly. But now that it incorrect. Looking back, I understand well and catch on well, but that does not mean that I have learned. All I've done throughout my life is listen to what someone has to say and either accept or reject it. If I reject it, I've never really pondered on why.
So when I read this post initially, and then read Damon's response to my question, I decided not to accept so readily as I usually would with many things pertaining to this topic. I decided to really think about why I was so ready to accept this idea - that verses containing "Nisa" could have been mistranslated. Well, in reality, this topic has been brought up before and I did reject it before, but that's because no one gave an explanation as to why a different translation is correct.
Now we have a very intelligent brother explaining himself and his thoughts pertaining to why "nisa=women" cannot be true. I needed to take some time to think about why it could be true and I needed to analyze some things for myself. When I started doing this these past couple of days, I realized I've never done this before! Lol. And I saw how much real time it took me to truly analyze things. So sorry I took so long to respond. I'm learning how to learn in my own way. School didn't teach me jack! Haha.
Peace to everyone and I apologize, once again, for an extremely long post. I hope I don't end up with a nickname or idiom. "Inq never runs out of ink! Argh!" brickwall
peace
-
The Wife of the Minister heard about what these ladies were talking about her and she invited them for a dinner.
Does it leave an iota of confusion as to who said the preceeding words about this host lady?
Those scratched their hands.What does denote?
They were talked about once again
Pl note it is here definite with definite Article making it refer back to those .
Salaam -- thank you for clarification and of course when read in context it can only refer to women.
Now we have a very intelligent brother explaining himself and his thoughts pertaining to why "nisa=women" cannot be true. I needed to take some time to think about why it could be true and I needed to analyze some things for myself.
Peace -- have you analysed thoroughly each usage of the word within context and also cross-referenced all other words surrounding and their usage in the entire Qur'an to come to this conclusion?
http//corpus.quran.com/search.jsp?q=lem%3AnisaA%5E%27+pos%3An
Take your time it's only 50+ verses and not like translating the whole Qur'an.
-
Peace inq
Peace everyone!
Here comes another long post from Inq. As usual.
And, in fact, women are seen with a negative connotation in every culture in the world nowadays. Even in Matriarchal societies like Papua New Guinea, women are seen as aggressive and emotional. It's quite the predicament.
This section of your post (well, your entire post) was very well explained. When things like this are brought up, people tend to point fingers and say "you're being racist!" but I think it's important to focus on the what that you're saying and whether it is true or not. If we analyze the actions of particular groups of people in the world, will their actions be proving you right? Well, you've honestly answered that question already
Absolutely!
You certainly did not have to at all. We all have a choice in our actions. ;D
Yet, I thank you anyway for the work that you've done as a favor to me. I appreciate it.Your translation made sense and actually got me closer to answering some questions I have about other verses. It definitely added a new perspective on my views of the Quran. Something to study. sun
Very, very, very good example! I always cringe when people say "This language is 1400 centuries old! Meanings don't change like that!" Obviously, a quick look at linguistics for many languages throughout history will show that, in fact, words can and do change. Rapidly. One cannot simply trust in a translation and believe that it means exactly what it's supposed to mean. That's the same thing as blind belief in my opinion.
Something we can witness clearly.
Peace Released,
I took so long to respond because I need to take things in slowly. Lol. I am learning new things about myself right now. I used to say that I am someone who learns quickly. But now that it incorrect. Looking back, I understand well and catch on well, but that does not mean that I have learned. All I've done throughout my life is listen to what someone has to say and either accept or reject it. If I reject it, I've never really pondered on why.
No worries
So when I read this post initially, and then read Damon's response to my question, I decided not to accept so readily as I usually would with many things pertaining to this topic. I decided to really think about why I was so ready to accept this idea - that verses containing "Nisa" could have been mistranslated. Well, in reality, this topic has been brought up before and I did reject it before, but that's because no one gave an explanation as to why a different translation is correct.
Now we have a very intelligent brother explaining himself and his thoughts pertaining to why "nisa=women" cannot be true. I needed to take some time to think about why it could be true and I needed to analyze some things for myself. When I started doing this these past couple of days, I realized I've never done this before! Lol. And I saw how much real time it took me to truly analyze things. So sorry I took so long to respond. I'm learning how to learn in my own way. School didn't teach me jack! Haha.
Sometimes I feel the same about school. I think I learned the most through work experience and life in general.
Peace to everyone and I apologize, once again, for an extremely long post. I hope I don't end up with a nickname or idiom. "Inq never runs out of ink! Argh!" brickwall
That inq never runs out of ink! haha. jk.
peace
-
Damon,
The words Nisaa/Niswatun are Collective Nouns and in Arabic collective nouns are treated as feminine gender. So a proper collective noun will take on the feminine plurals even when the collective noun itself is NOT inherently or intrisically feminine. They are treated as Grammatically feminine.
Firstly, it would be nice to have a reference for the above.
Secondly, your statement seems to contradict what you argued for earlier and that was the doer of the singular masculine verb taaba in 43 is an-nisa. Which is it treated as masculine or feminine? Why is it masculine in 43 (according to you) and feminine everywhere else?
Lastly, in terms of collective nouns in Quran, are they all treated as feminine grammatically? e.g. qawm, ahli bayt, etc. I haven't researched it.
-
Peace Damon,
Salaam Released,
That is correct. Also keep in mind that sound plurals will be masculine or feminine just like the broken plurals will be either masculine or feminine.
Did You Notice??!! Did you notice how the KINDS of plurals and their Method Of Development are spoken of and detailed through your search? Now did you come across any information saying that there is a another way plurals are formed other than sound and broken plurals? Did you come across any such information explaining that plurals are formed in another manner with different root words than the singular?
No, I have not found any other plural formation apart from the sound and broken that you mentioned. It would be a real anomoly if a plural was to be formed from a completely different singular...though it seems highly unlikely for words as commonplace as woman/women -\
-
Peace Noon,
Salaam -- thank you for clarification and of course when read in context it can only refer to women.
Peace -- have you analysed thoroughly each usage of the word within context and also cross-referenced all other words surrounding and their usage in the entire Qur'an to come to this conclusion?
http//corpus.quran.com/search.jsp?q=lem%3AnisaA%5E%27+pos%3An
Take your time it's only 50+ verses and not like translating the whole Qur'an.
50 + is quite a bit. Plus, it's not just about fitting the word nisa in, the other words within the verses (and the surrounding verses) also need to be taken into consideration. It takes a really long time for one to even translate the Quran with the traditional understanding, imagine having to translate these verses with a completely different approach and mindset? I believe it's going to be a massive project that will take some time. I think these types of discussions are meant to get the wheels turning.
-
Peace Noon,
50 + is quite a bit. Plus, it's not just about fitting the word nisa in, the other words within the verses (and the surrounding verses) also need to be taken into consideration. It takes a really long time for one to even translate the Quran with the traditional understanding, imagine having to translate these verses with a completely different approach and mindset? I believe it's going to be a massive project that will take some time. I think these types of discussions are meant to get the wheels turning.
Peace Released, then as with any problem simplify and start with this verse only 7 words which 6 are easy...
422 and not you marry whom married (polite translation) your fathers from al-nisaa/the women...
Lastly if one hasn't done an in depth study or in process of translating entire Qur'an and taking each word and checking for cross-reference and consistency they shouldn't state it cannot mean this or that and at same time offer no alternative meaning or a woman's bleeding menses are "war" or touching/marrying "weak/poor people" which in context are ridiculous.
-
No, I have not found any other plural formation apart from the sound and broken that you mentioned. It would be a real anomoly if a plural was to be formed from a completely different singular...though it seems highly unlikely for words as commonplace as woman/women -\
My thoughts EXACTLY. D This is what I meant when I said earlier that the grammar books I have read lead me to the conclusion that sound and broken plurals (and the rules concerning how they are formed) are the only plurals and plural system in Arabic. Please read page 233 from William Wright's Grammar Book again. Notice that there are two important items missing. An explanation of a rule governing when, why and how this anomaly may occur and an explanation of which types of root words or which particular root words are subject to this anomaly. The grammar books explain what the deal is when it comes to irregular verbs so why not explain what the deal is with this so-called anomaly?
50 + is quite a bit. Plus, it's not just about fitting the word nisa in, the other words within the verses (and the surrounding verses) also need to be taken into consideration. It takes a really long time for one to even translate the Quran with the traditional understanding, imagine having to translate these verses with a completely different approach and mindset? I believe it's going to be a massive project that will take some time. I think these types of discussions are meant to get the wheels turning.
BINGO!!! D That was the best answer that could have been given. I think it is really sad that some people can make themselves believe that the verses with Nisaa in them are feminine context verses or have anything to do with wives or women. This is what we were fed by the traditionalists and some people obviously have a long way to go to purge themselves of Traditional Islamic teachings and beliefs. I suspect that most people are not willing to sweat and do the hard work of re-evaluating and re-examining all of the other words that are also included in the verses along with Nisaa. It is easier and less work to hold on to the traditional understanding.
-
Wakas,
I thought I had made it clear to you earlier, but if I did not then I am making it clear now. The conversation between you and me is terminated. You have your way of viewing this topic and I have my way of viewing it. You're going to use what you use to believe what you believe and I am using what I use to bring me to my understanding. It is what it is. If you are that curious about what I said concerning the feminine use with Collective Nouns then go back to the beginning of this thread and read everything that I said very carefully. Take note of what I said and did not say and then go to the grammar books to research this topic yourself. And believe me when I tell you that I have absolutely no hard feelings about this at all. Like the Tupac Shakur song "I Ain't Mad At You". Continue with your program and I am continuing with mine.
-
First, the word Nisaa'. This word does not, indeed it CANNOT, mean women. The reason being that the claim is this word is PLURAL for woman. But this is completely false. In the Arabic Language ALL WORDS have the same roots in the plural form as they do their singular form. For example, you have the singular word Masjid from Sa-Ja-Da and the plural form of this word is Masaajid. The root letters are there intact. We also have the root letters Ka-Ta-Ba from which we get the singular word kitab and its plural form is kutub. Again, the root letters are intact. I can go on and on with this. Bayt (house) and Buyut (houses), Wajh (face) and Wujuh, etc. Now, here's the issue at hand. ALL OF THE ARABIC DICTIONARIES that I have ever read give for the singular word woman as IMRAA'A. I also know for certain that their is a DUAL form of this word which is IMRAA'ATAYN. HOWEVER, when it comes to the PLURAL form of this word they give the Arabic word Nisaa' and I am sure this has to do with the sexist, male chauvinism that Arab men are known for.
The claim is that all plurals have the same Root as do their singular form. So what is An-Nisa? Singular or plural? If singular what is its dual and plural? If plural what is its singular and dual from the same Root it belongs to?
If the question is addressed earlier, would some member kindly point it for me.
-
Peace Released, then as with any problem simplify and start with this verse only 7 words which 6 are easy...
422 and not you marry whom married (polite translation) your fathers from al-nisaa/the women...
Come to think of it, is it really necessary to state that any man marry from the women? Is it contemplated at any time in the Qur'an that men might marry a cow or a tree, something else than a woman?
It is the same thing with "ma taba lakum min an-nisaa'. If it is addressing men, what could they possibly marry beside the women. In fact, I am starting to see the possibility that here nisaa' in fact are unprotected people, needing the support of the community. And the nisaa' orphans (the unpprotected who are orphans), are to be married one or more at a time under the patronage of the community, as many of them at a time as the community may afford, helping them with setting up home, moneywise or otherwise. As to the use in the feminine, if it is a group word why should it not be used in the feminine? Is it prohibited that those individuals comprised under a group word be spoken of as feminine or masculine. I can't remember my grammar now, but I think that it is done in fact. The group is a singular, but it concords in the feminine. If their componentes are spoken of as a whole, why should they not be handled as feminine plural? Is there a rule against that?
In fact what has transpired of this whole exercise is that we know zilch about the morphology or meaning or extraction of the word nisaa'. Something has been said about niswat, but comletely insufficient.
Mazhar has asked some questions the nisaa' word, I have been asking those questions, for a complete and thourough analysis of the roots and morphology of those words for quite a while. Nobody has come forward with that. The fact that there is no answer up till now, does not mean that the answer does not exist.
As I said, I do think that in some cases, nisaa' meaning women is warranted, particularly when rijaal and nisaa' are exposed as counterparts. I do not exclude that even in those cases it could not mean something else as well. There may be other instances, where nisaa' may fit or fit better with a different meaning. Like males marrying what? ?Big surprise! women. Isn't it a great idea? If I were a man I wouldn't mind either marrying a woman. Just for a change. I might be tired of marrying sea-lionesses, which are also cute, but nevertheless...
Salaam
-
The claim is that all plurals have the same Root as do their singular form. So what is An-Nisa? Singular or plural? If singular what is its dual and plural? If plural what is its singular and dual from the same Root it belongs to?
If the question is addressed earlier, would some member kindly point it for me.
Salaam -- yes and what word is the plural for woman or how to say women in Arabic?
Come to think of it, is it really necessary to state that any man marry from the women? Is it contemplated at any time in the Qur'an that men might marry a cow or a tree, something else than a woman?
Salaam -- exactly it can only mean women!
How else to say not marry who "shagged" your fathers? Thus other women permitted exceptions next verse.
423 prohibited upon you mothers yours and daughters yours and your sisters... and mothers nisakum/women yours and your step daughters the ones whom in your guardianship from nisakum/women yours the ones whom entered in them so if not you were entered in them so not blame upon you...
-
Peace Released, then as with any problem simplify and start with this verse only 7 words which 6 are easy...
422 and not you marry whom married (polite translation) your fathers from al-nisaa/the women...
Lastly if one hasn't done an in depth study or in process of translating entire Qur'an and taking each word and checking for cross-reference and consistency they shouldn't state it cannot mean this or that and at same time offer no alternative meaning or a woman's bleeding menses are "war" or touching/marrying "weak/poor people" which in context are ridiculous.
Peace Noon,
Of course it looks ridiculous right now, but let's give everyone a fair chance ( time as well). However, nisa interpretated as 'women' in the few verses that Damon pointed out, looks ridiculous to me too. If it doesn't make sense to me, then I obviously will be curious about it. I have yet to come across anyone from your group (Mazhar, Wakas, etc) explain things to me in a way in which I can understand. I would be lying to you if I told you that I understand what you are saying, and then reject your analysis. I just want to explore the possibilities of what 'nisa' can mean, and decide for myself. It make take years or even decades for an alternative meaning to those 50+ verses to surface, and after that, there may be more questions. This is what keeps us going to back to the text.
-
Of course it looks ridiculous right now, but let's give everyone a fair chance ( time as well). However, nisa interpretated as 'women' in the few verses that Damon pointed out, looks ridiculous to me too. If it doesn't make sense to me, then I obviously will be curious about it. I have yet to come across anyone from your group (Mazhar, Wakas, etc) explain things to me in a way in which I can understand.
Peace,
Things seem to have become somewhat simpler.
- You have agreed with Noon that interpreting Nisa other than women looks ridiculous at some places.
- And in some verses it looks ridiculous to you to interpret An Nisa as women.
I think that "explain things to me in a way in which I can understand" can satisfactorily be done by explaining occurrences in category 2 above. Please quote exactly the Ayah Nos where it seems ridiculous to interpret AnNisa as women.
-
Peace Mazhar,
Nevermind, I've got them here
Here is what Damon wrote
Salaam Brother Badar,
I know certain people here are stuck in there N2I ways of thinking. My efforts in this thread are not for their benefit. It's for the benefit of the honest and sincere people who are willing to question the religious status quo and exercise logic and basic common sense.
Part of the problem is these people rush to rejection because they are assuming that all of the verses mentioning Nisaa are speaking of women and that they all have some sort of feminine context. I think the simplest thing to do (which is what I am trying to do here) is look at a couple of ayaat with Nisaa as the subject and see how it DOES NOT and CANNOT mean women. 4/3, 3/14 and 24/31 are just three such verses. Once We Ascertain That Nisaa Does Not Mean Women we are then forced to re-examine and reinterpret every verse that mentions this word. We are also forced to re-examine and re-interpret every word that is included in those same verses. It has become all too apparent that some people are strictly averse to doing any of this. I can only feel sorry for them. They were all born with brains but forsake using them. Honesty and the willingness to question things can carry us a long way.
No worries brother, you are doing very hard work in correcting the N2I nonsense that has been heaped on top of The Quran. You and I and our Quranic circles are planting the seeds right now. Due to dishonesty and stupidity it is only logical that some weeds will be present in the garden that you and I will eventually grow for humanity.
Now, with 4.3 there is the grammatical issue. With 3.14 and 2431 there is the issue of homosexuality? love the desire of women in 3.14? or the part of "their women" in 2431..I don't understand that either. I'm not sure if I fit into that boat at all..or ever for that matter. No offense, of course, to any woman here that does. group
Modify
There is also the issue of 4911 and what qawm actually mean..whether contexual or specific to one precise meaning.All I'm saying is that I'm open to other explanations to this stuff other than random anomalies and traditional understanding.
-
Now, with 4.3 there is the grammatical issue. With 3.14 and 2431 there is the issue of homosexuality? love the desire of women in 3.14? or the part of "their women" in 2431..I don't understand that either. I'm not sure if I fit into that boat at all..or ever for that matter. No offense, of course, to any woman here that does. group
Modify
There is also the issue of 4911 and what qawm actually mean..whether contexual or specific to one precise meaning.All I'm saying is that I'm open to other explanations to this stuff other than random anomalies and traditional understanding.
Peace Released,
OK one at a time starting with 2431 and 3355 nisahinna (i.e. female relations)/women theirs (f) as explained earlier as to who can drop by visit without asking permission first etc., does that make sense to you or do you think any woman can drop by unannounced or for example they can expose parts of their breasts (e.g. breastfeed their children) or they can walk about in a loose night gown in the presence of any stranger women unrelated to them?
3353 O you those who believe not you enter houses the prophet only/except that permission has been given to you ...
3355 not blame onto them (f/p) in fathers theirs (f/p) and not sons theirs (f/p) and not brothers theirs (f/p) and not sons brothers theirs (f/p) and not sons sisters theirs (f/p) and not nisahinna/(i.e. female relatives)/women theirs (f/p) and not what possess right hands/trust theirs (f/p) and be mindful The God indeed The God He is over each a thing Witness
2431 and say to the believers (f/p) they should lower from their gaze and they should guard their chastity and not display adornment theirs (f/p) except what apparent from it and let them draw their covering over bosoms theirs (f/p) and not display adornment theirs (f/p) except to husbands theirs (f/p) or fathers theirs (f/p) or fathers husbands theirs (f/p) or sons theirs (f/p) or sons husbands theirs (f/p) or brothers theirs (f/p) or children brothers theirs (f/p) or children sisters theirs (f/p) or nisahinna (i.e. female relatives)/women theirs (f/p) or what possess right hands/trust theirs (f/p) or al-tabAyn/the walkers behind not the ones the desire from al-rijal/the men or the young those who not aware on private the women and not beat with feet theirs (f/p) to know what they conceal from adornment theirs (f/p) and turn to The God all you the believers that you may prosper
-
Peace Noon,
However, this verse seems something to do with possession. "their women". Lactation consultants are those who perform a service to women who have just delivered. Ordinarily, I don't think it's okay for women to be relaxing their dresscode to that extent, around other women. I do think that it's important for women to be chaste with one another as well, unless, there is a medical reason. It's the same reason why women don't mind relaxing their garments for male gyncologists and nurses. Even if it was someone of the same sex, how do you know that the person is not of the homosexual orientation?
The verse definitely comes across to me as describing a sense of belonging or ownership, but people in the medical profession cannot belong to us, rather we could be a patient or client belonging to them. I'm not sure if it can go the other way.
-
salaam all,
I thought I had made it clear to you earlier, but if I did not then I am making it clear now. The conversation between you and me is terminated.
You were clear, however that isn't going to stop me replying to what you write if I feel the need etc. The questions remain.
Come to think of it, is it really necessary to state that any man marry from the women? Is it contemplated at any time in the Qur'an that men might marry a cow or a tree, something else than a woman?
If you feel a man can marry ANY woman, without restriction, then yes you may think the above. Others may not feel the same way, and not think the above.
Having said that, I do know that people around the world allegedly marry other than humans. Of course it is not widespread however.However, this verse seems something to do with possession. "their women".
Are you implying by the use of "their" in 2431 it implies possession/ownership? If so, are you applying that to all the categories named with "their" attached to them?
