Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Users
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Free Minds Forum Icon
  1. Home
  2. General Issues / Questions
  3. Questions/Comments on the Quran
  4. Discussion on 4:3 and meaning of nisa

Discussion on 4:3 and meaning of nisa

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Questions/Comments on the Quran
514 Posts 28 Posters 40.2k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • B Offline
    B Offline
    Borakk
    wrote on last edited by
    #401

    Nisa has been translated as 'woman'/wives according to ALL the translators http//www.islamawakened.com/quran/4/3/default.htm

    Even quranist translators such as Rashad and Edip translated it as woman/wives.

    While a feminist translation of the Quran may translate nisa as "weaker members of society", this is nothing but whimsical imagination to support their feminist agenda.

    Expecting a 7th century book to reflect ideas developed after a feminist revolution more than 1000 years later does no justice to the book.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • R Offline
      R Offline
      Released
      wrote on last edited by
      #402

      Peace Solomon,

      The book is for all time. Its interpretations HAVE evolved with time and this forum is living proof of that. Some people think that they can attach the infamous word 'feminism' to a debated topic, and thus write it off.

      This is an important topic regardless of what 'nisa' means. Women have the basic right to feel happy and secure within their marriages, and that has nothing to do with feminism, we're talking about basic human rights. The status quo WILL change. God willing.

      By the way, there will be other Quranist translators apart from Khalifa and Yuksel, in the future. God willing. Dr. Khalifa also translated 434 with the word "beat". Even he did that. Shall we take his word for it? I wouldn't do it if I were you.

      Imposing 7th century ideas on a Book that's meant for all time, does no justice to the Book.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • M Offline
        M Offline
        Man_of_Faith
        wrote on last edited by
        #403

        In the name of God.

        Peace,

        My understanding is that polygamy is discouraged but allowed, if the woman is a widow, to prevent her children to be without a father and caretaker and protector. With our modern civilization I doubt it is necessary, but may have been different in the 7th century.

        According to the book it is discouraged because it is difficult to satisfy more than one wife and treat them equally. Personally I feel one is hard enough!

        That is my understanding regarding polygamy.

        So conclusion is, polygamy is advocated to protect women, and children, thus not to please greedy men.

        May God settle our disputes

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • B Offline
          B Offline
          Borakk
          wrote on last edited by
          #404

          Peace Solomon,

          The book is for all time. Its interpretations HAVE evolved with time and this forum is living proof of that. Some people think that they can attach the infamous word 'feminism' to a debated topic, and thus write it off.

          In 7th Century, women would be perfectly happy and secure in a polygamous society. They would have no problem with sex slaves and accepting male superiority.

          By the way, there will be other Quranist translators apart from Khalifa and Yuksel, in the future. God willing. Dr. Khalifa also translated 434 with the word "beat". Even he did that. Shall we take his word for it? I wouldn't do it if I were you.

          If it means beating, it's natural he will translate it as "beat". http//www.islamawakened.com/quran/4/34/default.htm

          In the 7th century, wife beating would be a normal phenomenon.

          Today it may be considered an abuse in some societies. Still, in Saudi Arabia, middle east and south asia, it is perfectly acceptable to beat wives if something goes wrong. Just because it seems cruel to you, doesn't mean it's cruel to everybody

          Imposing 7th century ideas on a Book that's meant for all time, does no justice to the Book.

          After all this, you claim Quran is for all ages? And that there is no "feminism" involved?

          If you don't like polygamy and wife beating, just admit that the Quran doesn't make sense in these issues when 21st century matters are involved. Muslims need to face the reality that legislative matters in their holy book is not suited to 21st century rather than desperately trying to twist word meanings to suit modernity.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • B Offline
            B Offline
            Bender
            wrote on last edited by
            #405

            In 7th Century, women would be perfectly happy and secure in a polygamous society. They would have no problem with sex slaves and accepting male superiority.If it means beating, it's natural he will translate it as "beat". http//www.islamawakened.com/quran/4/34/default.htm

            In the 7th century, wife beating would be a normal phenomenon.

            Today it may be considered an abuse in some societies. Still, in Saudi Arabia, middle east and south asia, it is perfectly acceptable to beat wives if something goes wrong. Just because it seems cruel to you, doesn't mean it's cruel to everybody

            After all this, you claim Quran is for all ages? And that there is no "feminism" involved?

            If you don't like polygamy and wife beating, just admit that the Quran doesn't make sense in these issues when 21st century matters are involved. Muslims need to face the reality that legislative matters in their holy book is not suited to 21st century rather than desperately trying to twist word meanings to suit modernity.

            Salaam,

            RED How do you know? Are you a woman who got to share her husband with 3 other wives in the 7th Century?

            GREEN acceptable for who? For the one who beats or the one who gets a beating?

            BLUE yes

            BROWN You make no sense not The Quran. You mix The Quran with the hadiths and you conclude The Quran make no sense.

            ORANGE So you are not a muslim hmm
            And we are not searching for modern meanings but for THE ORIGINAL meanings of the words, that is because people like you twisted The Words of The Quran.

            Salaam,
            Bender

            ps I know your post was not adressed to me.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • B Offline
              B Offline
              Borakk
              wrote on last edited by
              #406

              ps I know your post was not adressed to me.

              Good that you know. Now learn basic manners, be civilized and don't interject rudely when other people are talking.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • B Offline
                B Offline
                Bender
                wrote on last edited by
                #407

                Good that you know. Now act on it, be civilized and don't interject rudely when other people are talking.

                Salaam,

                When other people are talking then I indeed don't interject but 1 of them was not talking but spouting nonsense, and then I act civilized by interjecting jedi

                Salaam,
                Bender

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • U Offline
                  U Offline
                  unknownuser
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #408

                  Woah, lemme get my popcorn

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • B Offline
                    B Offline
                    Borakk
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #409

                    When other people are talking then I indeed don't interject...

                    Good boy, if not anything, starting to get the hang of basic manners at least. Keep it up. police

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • M Offline
                      M Offline
                      Man_of_Faith
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #410

                      Peace,

                      I wonder if it is not right to interfere when someone seeks to spread corruption in the name of God. Do not twist the words of God.

                      May God have mercy upon us

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • D Offline
                        D Offline
                        dawngorgeous
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #411

                        Peace all,

                        Some interesting conclusions. We have a choice between a men marrying up to four wives or b looking after the less fortunate in society.

                        In the light of the whole Koran some of us are still happy to believe that men being allowed to have sexual relations with up to four women will help less fortunate women and their children. This is, in effect, prostitution. Some things do not change. Women from the 7 th century were capable of looking after themselves, just as in the 7th century there were folk in society who would need looking after. These are the people whom a just, peaceful, fair society would take care of.

                        A peaceful society does not ask one man to attempt to support several families and have intimate relations with several women. Nothing else in the Koran supports this, whereas throughout the Koran God concentrates on peaceful actions.

                        There is no point in anyone suggesting that polygamy works, because on an emotionl level, women almost always report hurt. Of course, as they benefit from it, men will report otherwise.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • E Offline
                          E Offline
                          es
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #412

                          Polite reminder Before posting comments can we please try to moderate our own selves by asking ourselves whether what we are about to write serves any productive purpose, or whether it is an exercise in massaging our own egoes. Let's please apply the same standard of behaviour to ourselves which we expect from others. Thank you.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • M Offline
                            M Offline
                            Man_of_Faith
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #413

                            Peace dawngorgeous,

                            Like I said, polygamy is discouraged and only under certain conditions. Most men cannot be fair to more than one wife (and sometimes not even that). And the polygamy in Quranic sense is not to fulfill a man's ego and lusts, but to protect and provide for a family and be a role-model for the children.

                            You are right, women can take care of themselves, but yet a helpful man can make it easier for her, especially if she has children.

                            7th century women were probably tough, but the world was way more primitive and life was harder, probably even more with children.

                            Getting a man who can provide for her is then somewhat logical.

                            Hope you get my point.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • D Offline
                              D Offline
                              dawngorgeous
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #414

                              Peace Man of Faith,

                              I do get your point and I appreciate it. I have heard others speak of polygamy being allowed under certain conditions. I have to say that I cannot find these conditions in the Koran anywhere. What I do see is God reminding us constantly to look after those less well- off than ourselves. God uses a lot of words to describe marriage as a very important institution. In my opinion then, He would not then switch direction and tell men they can have 4 wives. To me it would follow God's pattern more logically to tell society to look after those folk who are needy. A woman does not have to sleep with men to be looked after. Besides, the Koran tells us that your wife is your 'tilth' and that you 'keep each others secrets'. How does this fit with having four wives?

                              I feel we need to stand back from the traditional translation and look at the issue in the light of he whole Koran. We must remember the Koran has no contradictions.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • B Offline
                                B Offline
                                Borakk
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #415

                                Polygamy was the norm in ancient times. http//laitman.com/2008/07/polygamy-a-matter-of-culture/

                                Unsurprisingly, Quran allows polygamy, but restricts the number of wives to 4.

                                Does polygamy violates rights? That is the subject of another debate.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • M Offline
                                  M Offline
                                  Man_of_Faith
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #416

                                  Peace dawngorgeous,

                                  The Quran allows polygamy (43), but only because the woman's children become fatherless and men have their community's responsibility toward the women as providers.

                                  The thought is good from God, instead of feeling fatherless they get
                                  a father as the mother marries the man. It is to give the orphaned children a father the Quran accepts polygamy, nothing else.

                                  In the 21st century this thought feels distasteful to most, but I can understand the verse. It is not to sexually please the man and fulfil his ego, but to save the children from harm.

                                  Also during the period of Muhammad many men died because of wars and left many widows, which may have been the reason for this. It was not like they had a social security
                                  system back then.

                                  Trying to put myself into the discourse I think can justify this verse, even if polygamy feels a bit distasteful and strange these days.

                                  Who knows, maybe the world will come into a great collapse soon and situation is like I mentioned above, making this polygamy rule viable?

                                  May God enlighten us

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • H Offline
                                    H Offline
                                    huruf
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #417

                                    Polite reminder Before posting comments can we please try to moderate our own selves by asking ourselves whether what we are about to write serves any productive purpose, or whether it is an exercise in massaging our own egoes. Let's please apply the same standard of behaviour to ourselves which we expect from others. Thank you.

                                    I do not think it is a matter of egos, but a matter of trolls.

                                    Obviously, brother Bender has not attempted to let his ego take over, but to let the troll know that we know.

                                    Salaam

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • S Offline
                                      S Offline
                                      Shirley
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #418

                                      Salaam Guys,

                                      Please forgive me as I do not wish to sound condescending or rude but I think the ideas that Polygamy is "Allowed" in certain situations are not based upon reading the Arabic Text and I am wondering if the people espousing this idea have read this thread in it's entirety.

                                      Again, please forgive my forthright tone if one is detected.


                                      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."

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • B Offline
                                        B Offline
                                        Borakk
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #419

                                        "The Quran is NOT a Religious book geared towards men alone. It is a book of Social Justice geared towards women and men equally.

                                        Don't you think the Quran addresses men primarily?

                                        Let me quote an example.

                                        424 And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty (hath been done). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise.

                                        Notice how the Quran addresses MEN as to who is allowed or forbidden. There are numerous examples like this. This is normal because the receivers of Quran (Muhammad) was a man. And it was men who led the tribe and households back then.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • S Offline
                                          S Offline
                                          Shirley
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #420

                                          Don't you think the Quran addresses men primarily?

                                          No I do not. I think The Quran is addressing Women and Men equally.

                                          Let me quote an example.

                                          424 And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty (hath been done). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise.

                                          Notice how the Quran addresses MEN as to who is allowed or forbidden. There are numerous examples like this. This is normal because the receivers of Quran (Muhammad) was a man. And it was men who led the tribe and households back then.

                                          I DO NOT notice this verse addressing MEN at all nor do I recognize the subject/concept of marriage in that verse either. Please explore The Arabic of the text and point out to me WHEN and WHERE this verse addresses men or marriage/matrimony is mentioned.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Users