Discussion on 4:3 and meaning of nisa
-
Damon,
Now you imply what you said about 43 has not been refuted/disproved, yet you ran away from responding to multiple points, some of which are here
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604721.msg315351#msg315351It is rather obvious what is going on, and you said it yourself that an alternative understanding such as yours requires significant research of Quran and this new research has largely not been done yet. This would explain your lack of answers.
My experience of discussing with those who have this alternative view has been the same. Not to worry, when you and your peeps finally come up with something solid and thorough, let us know. Until then, you can keep evading.
-
You are coming with more questions which means that you do not know as much of the grammar as you want people to believe.
Salamun alaika,
No dear, I wish not to make people believe that I know much about grammar. I am only emohasising that a non-native can never understand the perception conveyed in a text until and unless he knows the fundamentals of grammar of that language.
-
Salaam Mazhar,
I did not agree upon your grammar lessons Mazhar, it was sarcasm and I thought you knew that. At any rate, I am making it CLEAR that what YOU ARE DOING is making this conversation go into an endless circle!!! At this rate, if I keep answering YOUR QUESTIONS about grammar (which you obviously fall short on) then you'll keep coming back with MORE QUESTIONS!! But you have Yet, and I am emphasizing YET, to dismantle my explanations or interpretations of 4/1 through 4/3. I re-iterated my argument point by point to Nadia. I have given MY understanding and rendition of 4/1 through 4/3 for Sister Inq Trini. I have posted additional information on how The Arabs refer to marriage and I have publicly posted links to grammar references for all to freely investigate without interference from me. I have addressed and shut down the grammar information this UQ person had posted and he himself/herself has not responded to that. But YOU YOURSELF have not approached ANY OF THIS in an effort to shoot down my arguments and prove me wrong. The ONLY THING you have down by way of a response to my arguments is claim that Thackston coined a term that is causing confusion or that I am misunderstanding what he (and I guess Haywood) is explaining about that construct. You keep going in circles asking me what is the difference between what I said concerning prepositions and what you said. Please address my points to Nadia and my understanding of 4/1 - 4/3 that I have done for Inq Trini!!! PLEASE!!!
As far as WHAT a preposition is and HOW a word is used to make it a preposition...I have explained my case and you have explained yours. Let the others read our respective arguments and decide for themselves and move on.
As far as the use of the ... construct...I have posted where I get this understanding from which you are obviously rejecting (without explaining WHY). Telling a person that they are misunderstanding the intent of the authors of the grammar books in question is NOT an explanation. But again, you have posted your objection to it just as I had posted my sources of that understanding. Again, I would rather let the people read those sections of the grammar books, compare them to what is written in 4/3 and decide for themselves and we can move on.
One more thing Mazhar,
I wish not to make people believe that I know much about grammar. I am only emohasising that a non-native can never understand the perception conveyed in a text until and unless he knows the fundamentals of grammar of that language.
Statements such as this is what can cause you to put your foot in your mouth. You really need to be careful about this. You, me and everyone else involved in this thread can arrange a Live Session where we mutually agree upon Arabic Newspapers and Books (with or without the haraka or tanween) to read in a "Live" situation to find out which one of us (between you and me) is not grounded in the fundamentals of Arabic Grammar. While we are at it, we can also "Talk" to see which of us can actually SPEAK Arabic. It is your choice if you wish to speak in FuSshaa or a dialect or BOTH!! We can go on Skype if you wish or the quran connection thingy (I think there is a voice activation function on that). My point is if you wish to make these kinds of statements towards me then I am asking that we arrange a live meeting to ascertain this for sure.
Thank You Kind Sir and Salaam.
Basically what Dr. QZ and the Aastana members are doing is something I realized must be done even when I was still a sunni, and that is we are Starting All Over From Scratch!! The people who altered and defaced the message did so by starting from scratch and they were very methodical about it. WE have to do the same thing IF we want to perform the correct surgery in order to repair The Quran's message and image.
"The Quran is NOT a Religious book geared towards men alone. It is a book of Social Justice geared towards women and men equally.The Quran is a document outlining the implementation of JUSTICE. It is NOT only upon males to implement justice it is upon males and females alike. Because of this, a document concerned with JUSTICE FOR ALL must also ADDRESS ALL!! That is why you find 41 - 43 being addressed to ALL PEOPLE (An-Nas). It is addressing all people and the system of justice it recommends is for the benefit all people - 6/90, 12/104, 38/87, 43/44.
I hope I live long enough to see the day when The Quran is no longer viewed as a sexist, chauvinist, male centric religious book."
-
Salaam Mazhar,
Ultimately, it does not matter if you or Damon agree on what the grammar book says, so this may be a futile avenue to go down. You and I both know Quran has 3000+ examples of "min" being used. Damon simply needs to provide one to counter your claim.
We can leave it as an open challenge. The readers of the forum can make up their own minds etc.
-
Salaam Mazhar,
THIS Is The Post that I am referring to about Zawaaj.
Thank You
Basically what Dr. QZ and the Aastana members are doing is something I realized must be done even when I was still a sunni, and that is we are Starting All Over From Scratch!! The people who altered and defaced the message did so by starting from scratch and they were very methodical about it. WE have to do the same thing IF we want to perform the correct surgery in order to repair The Quran's message and image.
"The Quran is NOT a Religious book geared towards men alone. It is a book of Social Justice geared towards women and men equally.The Quran is a document outlining the implementation of JUSTICE. It is NOT only upon males to implement justice it is upon males and females alike. Because of this, a document concerned with JUSTICE FOR ALL must also ADDRESS ALL!! That is why you find 41 - 43 being addressed to ALL PEOPLE (An-Nas). It is addressing all people and the system of justice it recommends is for the benefit all people - 6/90, 12/104, 38/87, 43/44.
I hope I live long enough to see the day when The Quran is no longer viewed as a sexist, chauvinist, male centric religious book."
-
I will start with morphology
nisaa' if from root n-s-' would be a singular or a plural,
If singular, similar to kitaab,
If plural, similar to rajul.
So, can anybody say which is it. Is it a singular or a plural. If it does come from n-s-hamza, which is it, a singular or a plural?
If a singular, what is the logical explanation. If a plural, where is the singular. And I do not mean in the sense of women, I mean in any sense, any word which might be the singular from which to form the broken plural.
Salaam
We have a singular for rijaal, which is rajul, where is or what is the nasu' word for the root n-s-'
-
salaam released,
I forgot to reply to your mention of "marry-off" and "nikah".
"marry" V "marry-off" has been discussed on the forum before, a lot, e.g.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=13534.0
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=12031.0Hence I allowed for that possibility when discussing options.
Sure, "nikah" can mean other than "marriage", see classical arabic dictionaries, however the ultimate criterion will be the Quran. It is fairly easy to check its occurrences via concordance. The following is an excerpt from concordance of quran by hanna e kassis (note it is OCR, i.e. machine read, and traditional translation)
*N K H
NAKAHA vb. (I) -to marry. (n.vb.) marriage
a) perf act.
422 (26) do not marry women that your fathers married
3349 (4 when you marry believing women and then divorce them before.you touch themb) impf. act. (yankihu)
2221 (220) do not marry idolatresses, until they believe
2230 (230) she shall not be lawful to him after that, until she marries another husband
2232 (232) do not debar them from marrying their husbands
422 (26) do not marry women that your fathers married
425 (29) any one of you who has not the affluence to be able to marry believing freewomen
4127 (126) women to whom you give not what is prescribed for them, and yet desire to marry
them
243 (3) the fornicator shall marry none but a fornicatress or an idolatress
243 (3) and the fornicatress - none shall marry her but a fornicator or an idolator
3353 (53) it is not for you to hurt God's Messenger, neither to marry his wives after him
6010 (10) there is no fault in you to marry them when you have given them their wagesc) impv. (inkih)
43 (3) marry such Women as seem good to you" two, three, four
425 (29) so marry them, with their people's leave
f) n.vb. (nikah)
2235 (236) do not resolve on the knot of marriage until the book has reached its term
.2237 (23 they make iemission, or he makes remission in whose hand is the knot of marriage
46 (5) test well the orphans, until they. reach the age of marrying
2433 (33) let those who find not the means to marry be abstinent till God enriches them
2460 (59) such women as are past child-bearing and have no hope of marriageANKAHA vb. (IV)-to marry, to wed
b) impf. act. (yunkihu)
2221 (220) do not marry idolaters, until they believe
2827 (27) 1 desire to marry thee to one of these my two daughters
c) impv.' (ankih)
2432 (32) marry the spouseless among you, and your slaves and handmaidens that are righteousISTANKAHA vb. (X)-to take in marriage
b) impf. act. (yastankihu)
3350 (49) and if the Prophet desire to take her in marriageFeel free to insert "nikah" as something else in the above and aim for consistency, and see what results. You will note how Damon et al do not do such a thing, likely due to the major problems that will occur, yet claim "nikah" means something else.
-
Salaam huruf,
I forgot to mention that I wrote about the word "zwj" previously, on Quran434.com showing that it is NOT the more correct term for "husband/wife"
And when you (plural) divorced (perfect verb) the women/nisa, then they reached their term/time, then do not prevent/hinder/constrain/straiten (plural) them (F) that they marry (F) their azwaj (M), when they mutually agreed/accepted between them with the kindness/fairness...
Simply put, one does not marry/nkh their husbands. You can read my notes at Quran434.com
If you feel nkh does not mean marry, then feel free to prove that also, as well as zwj being the more correct term for husband/wife etc.
-
Salamun alaika, Shirley
The issue is about these six words and I wish we restrict to it for the time being.
As we all know reading the text means to identify and know; (1) word; (2) phrase, (3) sentence.
Words
.........
Phrases5 + 6 =
.......
Sentences- Its relationship with preceding sentennce needs determination because of particla Fa.
Firstly one has to agree or disagree whether above distribution is correct; then to put in front of each word as to what it is before moving to next phrases.
-
There was a mistake in the following message that I put, I rewrite it corrected underneath
I will start with morphology
nisaa' if from root n-s-' would be a singular or a plural?
If singular, it would have the same form as kitaab,
If plural, it would have the same form as rijaal, plural of rajul.
So, can anybody say which is it? Is it a singular or a plural? If it does come from n-s-', which is it, a singular or a plural?
If a singular, what is the logical explanation? If a plural, where is the singular? And I do not mean this in the sense of women, I mean it in any sense, any word which might be the singular from which to form the broken plural.
We have a singular for rijaal, which is rajul,
where is then or what is then the nasu' word for the root n-s-' which would be the equivalent of rajul as a singular.
rajul ----------- rijaal
nasu' (?)------ nisaa'
???
Salaam
-
Salaam,
Mazhar, I'm afraid that's the last straw. I've wasted enough time with you Sir. Let me know if/when you decide to discuss Damon's Grammatical Explanation of 4/3 and His Grammar Sources! Salaam to you. peace
To Huruf, Released, Dawngorgeous and Inquisitivetrini, My Sincerest Apologies. I have allowed myself to get distracted and the last 5 or so pages of this thread were not very productive. I'm not going to blame others, I will blame myself for taking the bate over the last couple of pages. I have decided that I have to concentrate on the actual purpose of this thread and get back on topic. No more bickering since it has taken a lot of life out of this thread.
I would like to begin with the concern that Dawngorgeous had brought up earlier.
DAWNGORGEOUS,
I would like to briefly touch up on This Post that you made in that other thread which you brought to my attention
Is there another understanding for marry? Perhaps we are thinking too literally? No one has explained to me exactly how it would be fair to the orphans to marry their mothers? For example, just supposing a friend of mine male has two separate sets of orphans to look after. He is a good fair man and does what he is supposed to do regarding the orphans. He clothes them well, feeds them, etc. how would marrying both their mothers make it more just.
Before anyone suggests I'm trying to disprove polygamy, I am not. Like all of you, I am looking for a fair, happy society, as per the Koran. Unfortunately, I cannot engage in this discussion on a linguistic level so I am engaging on an ideas/intellectual level, which I believe is halal as the Koran invites us to ponder?!
This is very useful Dawn. To add to your questions, what about the Men who have sole custody of their children (for whatever reason)? WHY do I have to marry a woman in order to help her and her children? The financial output DOES NOT CHANGE if I marry her, it would still be the same, so what benefit would it be for her to marry me? If I am able to pay for her living expenses (food, rent/mortgage, utilities, transportation, spending money) without strain while not married to her WHAT REASON would their be for me to marry that woman unless it is my way of saying I'll take care of you financially, but you'll have to give me something in return.?
Anyway, Dawn Are you willing to rethink and re-examine the concept of Nikah meaning marriage? The word "Nikah" in it's basic definition simply means "Contract". But based on this definition as well as its usage in The Quran, I see it as a "Social Contract" meaning not simply a private contract between two people but rather a contract that is agreed upon by many people within the society and the purpose of this contract is for the overall benefit and betterment of the society.
Though I wish for this thread to remain on topic of AN-Nisaa' and 4/3 I feel as though it can possibly help this thread to expand on my earlier post about Zawaaj being marriage/matrimony instead if Nikah. After dealing with this, I want to briefly look at the root word and some ayaat from The Quran and then we can get back on track of examining the morphology of the word /
I would like to re-examine 33/49 to illustrate my point
Here is the traditional translation of this verse
O you who believe, if you marry the believing females, then divorce them before having intercourse with them, then there is no interim required of them. You shall compensate them, and let them go in an amicable manner.
(Free-Minds Translation)The traditional translation would have you believe that this verse is talking about marriage and divorce in spite of of the fact that the word does not mean marriage in its original connotation and use just as does not mean divorce in its original connotation and use. Because a is a "Contract", the traditional Mufasireen took it upon themselves to give this word a new meaning which is Marriage Contract. But this is wrong because I know for an absolute certainty that the Arabic term for marriage contract (and what the Arabs use today) is 'aqd Al-Zawaaj] which they use for marriage contract and marriage certificate. I am aware of alternative terms such as 'Aqd Al-Quraan and 'Aqd Al-Nikaah but take note of how it is NOT the word Nikah on its own. Because "marriage contract" is a compound term then it would only make sense that it would be a joining of two words to signify it ('Aqd meaning a tying of a knot and Nikah for contract, hence a contract for "tying the knot" between a man and a woman).
I want to look at 33/49 word for word if I may. Please keep in mind my understanding of The Quran is that it is not a book of religion or rituals. It is not a book revealing yet another religion in which the man is superior over the woman. It is a book recommending and outlining a system and a constitution that will greatly better the society that implements its message. Like 4/3 I see 33/49 explaining a situation in which there is a "Social Contract" between people.
-
Oh You All, Those who
-
Those who have conviction and safeguard something (in our case, the Quranic Ideology and its establishment). It comes from the root word - AaMiNa
-
If
-
You have intermingled with or established relationships through contracts with. From the root word - NaKiHa which means to tie a knot, make a bond, connect one entity with another, establish a two way relationship.
-
The females who have conviction and seek security / safety (again, in this case The Quanic Ideology and its establishment). And again it comes from the root word - AaMiNa
-
Then
-
You RELEASE THEM / SET THEM FREE / SEND THEM OFF / SET LOOSE / LET GO / LEAVE / FORSAKE / DISCHARGE / REPUDIATE / UNDO / DISENGAGE / EMIT / DISPATCH THEM, ETC. THESE are the ORIGINAL definitions and connotation of the root word TtaLuQa. It doesn't originally mean "divorce". It means to set someone or something loose. It can mean to set some loose or send them away from your company or companionship. To release them in the sense of terminating your relationship with them. It can be applied to one spouse terminating the relationship with the other just as it can be applied to one man terminating his relationship or companionship with another man or his sister or his dog or his cousin or a co-worker at the job, etc.
-
Before (Literally "from before that"
-
You all had HURT or HARMED them. You all had TOUCHED THEM (their physical persons or their psyche) in a hurtful or harmful manner. Before you all INFRINGE upon them, do them wrong, handle them in an injurious or damaging manner. THIS is the real meaning of the word which comes from the root word MaSSa. One definition is to touch and this is the definition that the traditional translators use which is very, very senseless because one must know that it means to touch someone period. You can touch someone's hands. You can touch the top of their head. And it also means to "Be In Touch". To have mutual contact with another. It DOES NOT mean sexual touch or sexual contact. It is a simple touch, one as simple as a handshake or intertwining your fingers in a "pinky swear" manner or to even thumb wrestle with someone. So to go by the traditional translation of this verse, is saying if you married a woman and divorced her BEFORE you even so much as shook each others hand or sat next to each other with your shoulders touching or anything like that. Is this not just the most ridiculous thing? How many marriages have you ever heard of where two people married and divorced before having ANY skin to skin contact no matter how brief, slight and innocent? So, moving along...
-
So Not
-
For You All
-
Over Them (Them being )
-
Of
-
Numbered or Counted Period or Time. This word comes from the root 'Adda
-
That You Count Regarding Them. This comes from the same root as above.
-
So Supply Them Provisions or A Compensation or Grant Them That Which Will Make Them Happy and Enjoy Life. This comes from the root word MaTa3a
-
And Set Them At Liberty. The root of this word is SaRaHa which means To Move Away. To Roam Freely in the same manner that cattle freely graze. It also means to Freely Proceed. Please look up this word to understand it's difference from TaLuQa.
-
As A Graceful / Friendly / Courteous Discharge. is from the same root as the word above and - Jameelan ( from the root ) means beautiful and gracious, courteous, proper, appropriate, amiable and suitable.
So, putting it all together
"Oh You People Who Have Conviction and Safeguard. If you all establish Social Contracts with the females of Conviction who seek security / safety then let them go their own way before you have harmed them in some way, then it is not for you all that you all count or give a number to how long they have been safeguarded because of you. Supply them with the provisions that will allow them to enjoy their dignity intact and let them go in a gracious and friendly manner."
A couple of things I wish to explain about my rendition of this; It is my understanding that this verse is NOT about marriage but rather it is about situations in which females who have "Conviction" (Eemaan) in The Quranic Ideology/System AND are seeking safety and security from those who too have Firm Conviction (In the Quranic Ideology and System) and have been situated with people through a "Nikah". Sometimes certain people are not compatible with some other people and this Nikah would need to be rescinded or cancelled. This verse is telling those people who were at the "Giving" end of the contract to let the Momenaat go (and possibly find others with whom to establish this bond or contract OR to go out on her own) BEFORE doing or saying something that would be considered harmful. Harmful to , harmful to her self-esteem or dignity, harmful to him or herself and harmful to the overall Quranic Mission. This verse is setting the stage in the realization that sometimes these types of arrangements don't workout because we would have to intermingle the right people together. The Social Chemistry has to be conducive for this relationship and this verse is giving us fair notice that this may come about and if it does, relinquish the social bond BEFORE it gets so bad that you may end up doing something that would be considered harmful. AND... - DO NOT start counting how long or how many days, weeks, months or whatever that this arrangement was in place as a way of holding something over their heads or saying you want this back and you want that back, etc. Just provide them with whatever you can to make sure that the breakup is an amicable one and she has enough provisions to keep her from suffering after the ending of your arrangement with her.
Now, something that needs to be looked at is my rendering of as "Females who are seeking safety and security". Concerning the translation of "Females seeking Safety and Security" for I point everyone to 60/10 where the People Who have Attained Conviction are instructed to make room and provisions for those females who "MAKE A HIJRA TO THEM SEEKING ASYLUM". I add this to the fact that ONE OF THE DEFINTIONS of - AaMiNa (from which we get the word ) is to be SAFE and SECURE. It means to TRUST or HAVE CONFIDENCE in someone or something and to ASK FOR PROTECTION. Look at this definition and then look at the subject of in 60/10.
I will end this with a couple of logical, common sense questions. If this verse was about marriage and divorce as the traditionalists would have us believe, WHY is it only talking about marrying and divorcing women? Is this verse suggesting that women never want out of a marriage and seek a divorce? Or is it saying even if she does it doesn't matter because she has no say? Only the man can initiate a divorce if he wants one. She has no say, no rights, no voice. In that regard, please read the third paragraph (which is in bold print) below.
Salaam,
Damon.Basically what Dr. QZ and the Aastana members are doing is something I realized must be done even when I was still a sunni, and that is we are Starting All Over From Scratch!! The people who altered and defaced the message did so by starting from scratch and they were very methodical about it. WE have to do the same thing IF we want to perform the correct surgery in order to repair The Quran's message and image.
"The Quran is NOT a Religious book geared towards men alone. It is a book of Social Justice geared towards women and men equally.The Quran is a document outlining the implementation of JUSTICE. It is NOT only upon males to implement justice it is upon males and females alike. Because of this, a document concerned with JUSTICE FOR ALL must also ADDRESS ALL!! That is why you find 41 - 43 being addressed to ALL PEOPLE (An-Nas). It is addressing all people and the system of justice it recommends is for the benefit all people - 6/90, 12/104, 38/87, 43/44.
I hope I live long enough to see the day when The Quran is no longer viewed as a sexist, chauvinist, male centric religious book."
-
-
Salamun alaikum;
- If
Not knowing and just thinking it to be "In"-if, the whole perception is changed. It it a time adverb.
- You have intermingled with or established relationships through contracts with. From the root word - NaKiHa which means to tie a knot, make a bond, connect one entity with another, establish a two way relationship.
It is not about social contract.
Social contracts need to be fulfilled. Both parties to contract have obligations---whether both are men or men and women, are independent and enter into contract with will.
Qur'aan tells what a marriage bond-contract is called 2237
I reiterate that before arriving at "scholarly discoveries" the first step is to know individual words of the text; next identify phrases; then identify the sentence to know the relationship of all the words with each other.
-
Salaam, Damon,
This meaning of n-k-H as any kind of contract, can you give a source? It is a meaning that is given in the Project root, but I have looked in the Lane and in the Wehr, which are the ones within my reach now and I do not see anything.
Also, if there is in the honourable Qur'an an aya where this meaning of contract is manifest, it would be appreciated.
I take the opportunity to insist again in the aya (I can't remember the number) where we are enjoined to give the best meaning to the Qur'an and in this sense, I contemplate that many the Qur'an it is so drawn that it is dynamic and the best meaning at a time and place may be not the same best meaning at another time and place.
Also remind that in Arabic there are the words dhakar and untha to distinguish sexes without ambiguity, so when none of those terms are used or the regular feminine or masculine plural, there may be ambiguity or different possibilities and we should not ignore that.
Salaam
-
-
Of
-
Numbered or Counted Period or Time. This word comes from the root 'Adda
Simple and the most basic lesson about Arabic All to please remember that a Noun in Arabic is always in NOMINATIVE case unless it is influenced-governed by another word in the sentence. It is here in genitive case . . And a word is in genitive case only when it is Object Noun of a Preposition or is second noun of possessive construct=Possessive Phrase.
-
-
-
You have intermingled with or established relationships through contracts with.
-
You RELEASE THEM / SET THEM FREE / SEND THEM OFF
-
You all had HURT or HARMED them. You all had TOUCHED THEM (their physical persons or their psyche)
OK this is getting really bizarre?
2236 not blame upon you if you RELEASE al-nisaa/the WEAK OR FORGOTTEN what not you HURT them (f/p) ? nope
2237 and if you RELEASE them (f/p) from before that you HURT them (f/p) and truly you have specified for them obligation so half of it ?
422 and not you ESTABLISH SOCIAL CONTRACTS whom ESTABLISHED SOCIAL CONTRACTS your fathers from al-nisaa/the WEAK OR FORGOTTEN (includes both sexes according to you) except what hence passed indeed it it is immorality and abomination and an evil a way
Peace
-
-
rajul ----------- rijaal
nasu' (?)------ nisaa'
???
Salaam
Salaam huruf,
It can be deduced from inheritance that nisaa encompasses one to many females any age...
411 .. so if are (f) nisaa above two (f) falahunna/so for them (f) third dual (2/3) what left and if kanat/she is (f) widatan/one (f) so for her the half
4176 ... and if they were brethren/siblings rijal wanisaa so to the male like share the two (f) clarifies The God for you lest you stray and The God in every a thing Knowing
-
Mazhar, I'm afraid that's the last straw. I've wasted enough time with you Sir. Let me know if/when you decide to discuss Damon's Grammatical Explanation of 4/3 and His Grammar Sources! Salaam to you.
Salamun alaika,
Brother I sincerely wish to take you out of the erroneous shackles Astana has succeded placing them. That is why I am emhphasising the elementaries of Arabic grammar. In Taba case, AnNisa are not the subject since a subject has to be nominative. Now again see AnNisa acting as SUBJECT of a masculine verb, third person, singular, masculine
Verb is imperfect; third person; singular; masculine; indicative mood and its SUBJECT is . Please see case endings, it is nominative.
-
Salamun Alaykum people, I have two little questions, please don't ignore them
Is Shirley a guy or a girl?
And who is Damon?
