The Monotheist Translation is NOT faithful to the original Arabic text!

anGel_OnE

Peace be upon you, and God's mercy and blessings.

The Qur'an A Monotheist Translation is NOT pure, accurate, literal and faithful to the original Arabic text!

Surat An-Nisa' (The Women)

Umm Muhammad (Sahih International)
Men are in charge of women1 by what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in absence what Allah would have them guard.2 But those from whom you fear arrogance ? advise them; , forsake them in bed; and , strike them.3 But if they obey you , seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand.

This applies primarily to the husband-wife relationship.
i.e., their husbands' property and their own chastity.
As a last resort. It is unlawful to strike the face or to cause bodily injury.

Muhammad Muhsin Khan & Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali
Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has made one of them to excel the other, and because they spend (to support them) from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient (to Allah and to their husbands), and guard in the husband's absence what Allah orders them to guard (e.g. their chastity, their husband's property, etc.). As to those women on whose part you see ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly, if it is useful), but if they return to obedience, seek not against them means (of annoyance). Surely, Allah is Ever Most High, Most Great.

Ali ?nal
Men (those who are able to carry out their responsibilities) are the protectors and maintainers of women inasmuch as God has endowed some of people (in some respects) with greater capacity than others, and inasmuch as they (the men) spend of their wealth (for the family's maintenance). Good, righteous women are the devoted ones (to God) and observant (of their husbands' rights), who guard the secrets (family honor and property, their chastity, and their husband's rights, especially where there is none to see them, and in the absence of men,) as God guards and keeps undisclosed (what should be guarded and private). As for those women from whose determined disobedience and breach of their marital obligations you have reason to fear, admonish them (to do what is right); then, (if that proves to be of no avail), remain apart from them in beds; then (if that too proves to be of no avail), beat them lightly (without beating them in their faces). Then, if they obey you (in your directing them to observe God's rights and their marital obligations), do not seek ways against them (to harm them). (Be ever mindful that) God is indeed All-Exalted, All-Great.

The Qur'an A Monotheist Translation
The men are to support the women with what God has bestowed upon them over one another and for what they spend of their money. The upright females are dutiful; keeping private the personal matters for what God keeps watch over. As for those females from whom you fear desertion, then you shall advise them, and abandon them in the bedchamber, and separate from them. If they respond to you, then do not seek a way over them; God is Most High, Great.

Surat Al-Mu'minun (The Believers)

Umm Muhammad (Sahih International)
Except from their wives or those their right hands possess,1 for indeed, they will not be blamed ?

Female slaves or captives under their ownership.

Muhammad Muhsin Khan & Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali
Except from their wives or (the captives and slaves) that their right hands possess, for then, they are free from blame;

Ali ?nal
Save from their spouses, or (as a permission for men) those (bondsmaids) whom their right hands possess, for with regard to them they are free from blame.

The Qur'an A Monotheist Translation
Except around their mates, or those who are maintained by their oaths, they are free from blame.

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9604178.0

PEACE!!!

diamantinehoneybunch

What's the point of this thread?

You don't have any valid argument at all.

You just copy and paste random translations.

You do not bring your Arabic lexical proves here.

Monotheist translation is a sectarian-free translation. Unlike stupid Mohsin Khan's translation, Sahih International's translation, Unal's translation, they are sectarians.

Because many say so, it is so? Because many say A, so it must be A? Please don't use the argument fallacy 'ad populum' to argue. It is invalid.

huruf

4.34 is a crucified aya. It makes no sense at all in traditional translations not even in non traditional. Nobody knows what it is talking about. But everybody decided what it should say for the comfort of "muslim" males absolute dominion over women and of islamophobes (who usually have own texts far more mysoginist). Males of course cannot be deprived of their superiority lollipop, no way. And the way they can cheat themselves that they have a special relationship with God (like USA and Israel) who provides for their little male egos to be pandered. What is their idea of God? A docile servant?

This magnificent aya has been turned into utter ridicule by the twisted minds of insecure, deluded males (and some or many women). It is an absolute shame.

Salaam

Azz

diamantinehoneybunch is correct, there is absolutely no explaination behind your claim. All you've done here is post some translations side-by-side.

Regarding 434, I'm pretty much convinced that in this case, the Monotheist Translation is better.
http//www.quran434.com/wife-beating-islam.html
http//www.amazon.com/Wife-Beating-Islam-Quran-Strikes/dp/1461028256/

General rule of thumb is that, if you're gonna take interpretation of the Quran seriously (as you should) it's important to not rely too heavily on one single english translation, everyone has different methodologies and all that.

Man_of_Faith

Salaam,

434 is properly interpreted. Wives are not subjects to domestic violence. This is a deliberate twisting of words. We have researched on that topic quite a lot.

Would you believe that God permitted the men to beat the wives into obedience?

God bless you

Mazhar

The Qur'an A Monotheist Translation is NOT pure, accurate, literal and faithful to the original Arabic text!

The so called sectarian and so called non sectarian translations of the Ayah are patently incorrect and target language text has distorted the perception conveyed in the original text.

Major defects in all translations

None has determined the reason and resultant meanings of prefixing definite article "Laam" to the subject http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/004.%20An%20Nisa/4.34p.gif of the sentence;
They have erroneously perceived the verb http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/001.%20Roots%20originating%20in%20Surat%20002/2.047/1.%20Fazzaltukum%20Fa%20Zuad%20Laam/9.gif as referring to comparison between men and women whereas it is restricted only to men; http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/121.%20Baoozatan%20Ba%20Ain%20Zuad/17.gif The suffixed pronoun of possessive phrase is the object of verb and the pronoun is third person plural masculine referring back to specified men and it is in relation to some other men http//www.haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Tabweeb%20Part%202/121.%20Baoozatan%20Ba%20Ain%20Zuad/13.gif It is also masculine and is not suffixed with feminine plural pronoun to relate it with women.
The sentence in Arabic text is compound by conjunction while all translators in the target language English have made it a simple sentence.

Generally, the men are preservers who firmly stand for protecting the honour-dignity-rights of certain women because Allah the Exalted has bestowed peculiarity in some respects to some of them over some other men.

And the husbands are preservers of honour-dignity-rights of their respective wives for which they had spent their wealth for taking them in protective fold.

Translation after grammatical defining of words and parsing of sentences 434

Wakas

peace angel_one,

I agree with you that the monotheist translation is incorrect on 434. Others also say it means "separate from them" but their is no "from" in the Arabic, and in a similar example in Quran shows one might expect it to be there

Afanadribu AAankumu al ththikra = Should We withdraw from you the reminder

However, the other translations you posted of 434 are also incorrect in my view. By far, the most coherent, logical and practical answer can be found here
http//www.quran434.com/wife-beating-islam.html

The men are supporters/maintainers of the women with what God bestowed on some of them over others and with what they spent of their money, so the righteous women are dutiful; guardians to the unseen with what God guarded. And as for those women you fear their disloyalty, then (first) you shall advise them, and (second) abandon them in the bed, and (lastly) cite them. If they obeyed you, then seek not against them a way; Truly, God is High, Great.
And if you (authority) feared a rift between them two, then appoint a judge from his family and a judge from hers. If they both want to reconcile, then God will bring agreement between them. God is Knowledgeable, Expert.

With regards to the "maintained by oaths" that is correct in my view.

Mazhar

peace angel_one,

I agree with you that the monotheist translation is incorrect on 434. Others also say it means "separate from them" but their is no "from" in the Arabic, and in a similar example in Quran shows one might expect it to be there

Afanadribu AAankumu al ththikra = Should We withdraw from you the reminder

However, the other translations you posted of 434 are also incorrect in my view. By far, the most coherent, logical and practical answer can be found here
http//www.quran434.com/wife-beating-islam.html

The men are supporters/maintainers of the women with what God bestowed on some of them over others and with what they spent of their money, so the righteous women are dutiful; guardians to the unseen with what God guarded. And as for those women you fear their disloyalty, then (first) you shall advise them, and (second) abandon them in the bed, and (lastly) cite them. If they obeyed you, then seek not against them a way; Truly, God is High, Great.
And if you (authority) feared a rift between them two, then appoint a judge from his family and a judge from hers. If they both want to reconcile, then God will bring agreement between them. God is Knowledgeable, Expert.

With regards to the "maintained by oaths" that is correct in my view.

The second red suffers the same thing as correctly pointed out in the first red.

Wakas

Dear Mazhar,

Please re-read what I write, carefully. Allow me to highlight it for you so it is really clear, note the red parts

I agree with you that the monotheist translation is incorrect on 434. Others also say it means "separate from them" but their is no "from" in the Arabic, and in a similar example in Quran shows one might expect it to be there

Afanadribu AAankumu al ththikra = Should We withdraw from you the reminder

However, the other translations you posted of 434 are also incorrect in my view. By far, the most coherent, logical and practical answer can be found here
http//www.quran434.com/wife-beating-islam.html

The men are supporters/maintainers of the women with what God bestowed on some of them over others and with what they spent of their money, so the righteous women are dutiful; guardians to the unseen with what God guarded. And as for those women you fear their disloyalty, then (first) you shall advise them, and (second) abandon them in the bed, and (lastly) cite them. If they obeyed you, then seek not against them a way; Truly, God is High, Great.
And if you (authority) feared a rift between them two, then appoint a judge from his family and a judge from hers. If they both want to reconcile, then God will bring agreement between them. God is Knowledgeable, Expert.

The word you highlighted in red is not the one I was referring to, and you cannot consider it wrong, as you have done the same thing. Thus, I can only assume you did not get what I meant, when I consider it rather obvious.

And the husbands are preservers of honour-dignity-rights of their respective wives for which they had spent their wealth for taking them in protective fold.

And it's ok, if you still don't understand, or still think there is an issue, that's up to you. Peace.

huruf

The addressee in the whole speech is the community, the believers, men and women. So everytime the second person plural is used , it is addressing the community, not the husbands, not the men, not the rijaal, but the community. The husbands are not the ones that fear al "nushuz", but the community.

On the other hand, regarding mazhars explanations, it is impossible to know what he is saying if he does not show side by side or above and below exactly which parts he puports are the arabic of the english version he is given. I for one, do not recognizar in the Arabic which is the original of this

"And the husbands are preservers of honour-dignity-rights of their respective wives for which they had spent their wealth for taking them in protective fold."

There is no mention int he Arabic Qur'an of any husband. There is mention of rijaal and then the third person plural pronouns are used, third person plural masculine for the men, third person plural feminine for the women, second person plural both sexes for the community of believers.

This aya seems to be a fair free for all.

I very much take exception with the gramar applied by Mazhar to this part

"They have erroneously perceived the verb as referring to comparison between men and women whereas it is restricted only to men; The suffixed pronoun of possessive phrase is the object of verb and the pronoun is third person plural masculine referring back to specified men and it is in relation to some other men It is also masculine and is not suffixed with feminine plural pronoun to relate it with women."

Ba3Duhum 3ala ba3Din is a reciprocal clause, very standard Arabic and widely used in the Qur'an. It certainly is referring to men and women, but it of course does not say that God favoured men over women, but that He favoured men over women in some things and women over men in some others., which in itself is not at all difficult to verify, God most certainly has not favoured men making them capable of getting pregnant and giving birth, so there is good reason to see that the reciprocal clause is quite justified.

It is on the other hand exactly the same clause as in 4.25 where it says in Yusuf Ali's translation

"If any of you have not the means wherewith to wed free believing women, they may wed believing girls from among those whom your right hands possess And Allah hath full knowledge about your faith. Ye are one from another Wed them with the leave of their owners, and give them their dowers, according to what is reasonable They should be chaste, not lustful, nor taking paramours when they are taken in wedlock, if they fall into shame, their punishment is half that for free women. This (permission) is for those among you who fear sin; but it is better for you that ye practise self-restraint. And Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. (25)"

Here it is not saying that some of the men are from some other men but that those other men are not from the first men cited, it is saying that men and women are from one another, which besides makes sense and ties with the first aya of this whole sura 4.

Salaam

Mazhar

Peace Wakas,

The pointation was only to draw attention towards the support argument in the first red which seemed immediately self refuted by second red part.

I also did not understand as to what is conveyed by "Cite them"

Reason for it

Cite
cite
transitive verb (past and past participle cit?ed, present participle cit?ing, 3rd person present singular cites)

quote something or somebody to mention something or somebody as an example to support an argument or help explain what is being said (formal)
law name somebody to name somebody officially in a court case
law order to appear in court to order somebody officially to appear in court
military officially praise somebody to praise the actions of a member of the armed services in an official document (often passive)

Microsoft? Encarta

Mazhar

On the other hand, regarding mazhars explanations, it is impossible to know what he is saying if he does not show side by side or above and below exactly which parts he puports are the arabic of the english version he is given. I for one, do not recognizar in the Arabic which is the original of this

"And the husbands are preservers of honour-dignity-rights of their respective wives for which they had spent their wealth for taking them in protective fold."

I hope you understand the difference between a simple sentence and a compound sentence according to English grammar. Knowing one's native language grammar makes it easy to understand Arabic grammar.

It is a compound sentence with conjunction Waw. A compound sentence is one which has two independent clauses; meaning each stands at its own as sentence. It also serves purpose of economy of words succintness.

Compound sentence when broken into two independent sentences by removal of waw will be

The reason for declaring the men as is different in both the sentences. In First sentence the reason is caused by Allah the Exalted.

In the second sentence the reason for them as is not because of Allah but because of their own action/act. And this act is mandatory for men to make a woman their wife.

Mazhar

Ba3Duhum 3ala ba3Din is a reciprocal clause, very standard Arabic and widely used in the Qur'an. It certainly is referring to men and women, but it of course does not say that God favoured men over women, but that He favoured men over women in some things and women over men in some others., which in itself is not at all difficult to verify, God most certainly has not favoured men making them capable of getting pregnant and giving birth, so there is good reason to see that the reciprocal clause is quite justified.

Sorry brother, nowhere in the world an explanatory/giving reason clause and a prepositional phrase clause can change the subject and predicate of a sentence. The subject of the sentence is and its predicate is Both are masculine plural and not a single women is included in this pair of words. Thereby, the later pronouns referring back to them have no women in them to refer.

huruf

Sorry brother, nowhere in the world an explanatory/giving reason clause and a prepositional phrase clause can change the subject and predicate of a sentence. The subject of the sentence is and its predicate is Both are masculine plural and not a single women is included in this pair of words. Thereby, the later pronouns referring back to them have no women in them to refer.

Nobody has changed anything. I stand by what I said and I will be happy if anybody makes anything out of your grammar discourses. Only once that I remember have I found any of your gibberish as helpful or right. grammar.

I stand by what I said unless somebody brings up a real refutation.

Salaam

anGel_OnE

What's the point of this thread?

You don't have any valid argument at all.

You just copy and paste random translations.

You do not bring your Arabic lexical proves here.

Monotheist translation is a sectarian-free translation. Unlike stupid Mohsin Khan's translation, Sahih International's translation, Unal's translation, they are sectarians.

Because many say so, it is so? Because many say A, so it must be A? Please don't use the argument fallacy 'ad populum' to argue. It is invalid.

Is wife beating allowed in Islam?
http//islamhaters.skyrock.com/3109058137-Women-in-Islam.html

PS I speak Arabic fluently, because I am Egyptian!

anGel_OnE

peace angel_one,

I agree with you that the monotheist translation is incorrect on 434. Others also say it means "separate from them" but their is no "from" in the Arabic, and in a similar example in Quran shows one might expect it to be there

Afanadribu AAankumu al ththikra = Should We withdraw from you the reminder

However, the other translations you posted of 434 are also incorrect in my view. By far, the most coherent, logical and practical answer can be found here
http//www.quran434.com/wife-beating-islam.html

The men are supporters/maintainers of the women with what God bestowed on some of them over others and with what they spent of their money, so the righteous women are dutiful; guardians to the unseen with what God guarded. And as for those women you fear their disloyalty, then (first) you shall advise them, and (second) abandon them in the bed, and (lastly) cite them. If they obeyed you, then seek not against them a way; Truly, God is High, Great.
And if you (authority) feared a rift between them two, then appoint a judge from his family and a judge from hers. If they both want to reconcile, then God will bring agreement between them. God is Knowledgeable, Expert.

With regards to the "maintained by oaths" that is correct in my view.

PLEASE NOTE No one can understand EVERYTHING in the Qur'an perfectly without their enlightened interpretations, even if the Arabic language is his native language! SOME words in the Qur'an are very difficult to understand without Tafsir (interpretation, explanation, exposition). Some words may also have multiple meanings and the context helps us determine the particular meaning of the word.

Tafsir al-Jalalayn translated by Feras Hamza
Men are in charge of, they have authority over, women, disciplining them and keeping them in check, because of that with which God has preferred the one over the other, that is, because God has given them the advantage over women, in knowledge, reason, authority and otherwise, and because of what they expend, on them , of their property. Therefore righteous women, among them, are obedient, to their husbands, guarding in the unseen, that is, their private parts and otherwise during their spouses? absence, because of what God has guarded, for them, when He enjoined their male spouses to look after them well. And those you fear may be rebellious, disobedient to you, when such signs appear, admonish them, make them fear God, and share not beds with them, retire to other beds if they manifest such disobedience, and strike them, but not violently, if they refuse to desist after leaving them . If they then obey you, in what is desired from them, do not seek a way against them, a reason to strike them unjustly. God is ever High, Great, so beware of Him, lest He punish you for treating them unjustly.

Tafsir ibn Kathir
http//quran.cc/4/34

It was narrated that
Sulaiman bin Amr bin Ahwas said ?My father told me that he was present on the Farewell pilgrimage with the Messenger of Allah. He praised and glorified Allah, and reminder and exhorted (the people). The he said 'I enjoin good treatment of women, for they are prisoners with you, and you have no right to treat them otherwise, unless they commit clear indecency. If they do that, then forsake them in their beds and hit them, but without causing injury or leaving a mark if they obey you, then do not seek means of annoyance against them. You have rights over your women and you women have rights over you. Your rights over you women are that they are not to allow anyone whom you dislike on treat on your bedding (furniture), not allow anyone whom you dislike to enter your houses. And their right over you are that should treat them kindly with regard to their clothing and food.' ? (Sahih)

http//sunnah.com/urn/1319250

'Amr bin Al-Ahwas Al-Jushami (May Allah be pleased with him) reported that he had heard the Prophet (PBUH) saying on his Farewell Pilgrimage, after praising and glorifying Allah and admonishing people, "Treat women kindly, they are like captives in your hands; you do not owe anything else from them. In case they are guilty of open indecency, then do not share their beds and beat them lightly but if they return to obedience, do not have recourse to anything else against them. You have rights over your wives and they have their rights over you. Your right is that they shall not permit anyone you dislike to enter your home, and their right is that you should treat them well in the matter of food and clothing".

.

http//sunnah.com/riyadussaliheen/1/276

Mazhar

Quote
Ba3Duhum 3ala ba3Din is a reciprocal clause, very standard Arabic and widely used in the Qur'an. It certainly is referring to men and women, but it of course does not say that God favoured men over women, but that He favoured men over women in some things and women over men in some others., which in itself is not at all difficult to verify, God most certainly has not favoured men making them capable of getting pregnant and giving birth, so there is good reason to see that the reciprocal clause is quite justified.

Sorry brother, nowhere in the world an explanatory/giving reason clause and a prepositional phrase clause can change the subject and predicate of a sentence. The subject of the sentence is and its predicate is Both are masculine plural and not a single women is included in this pair of words. Thereby, the later pronouns referring back to them have no women in them to refer.

Let me clarify it for you through another angle.

Perhaps you are not aware that appearing after is also a Possessive Phrase. You see in the text only headnoun- because its which is plural masculine pronoun "Arabic-him" is elided and instead tanween is placed.

See another example

Under discussion sentence is semantically the same as is this where the subject is First Person Plural pronoun referring to Allah the Exalted.

When the masculine third person plural pronoun would also include feminines

Also please analyse this clause

This is giving the reason why certain men are declared as
And this has abundantly clarified that does not signify everyman in the world.

huruf

Let me clarify it for you through another angle.

Perhaps you are not aware that appearing after is also a Possessive Phrase. You see in the text only headnoun- because its which is plural masculine pronoun "Arabic-him" is elided and instead tanween is placed.

See another example

Under discussion sentence is semantically the same as is this where the subject is First Person Plural pronoun referring to Allah the Exalted.

When the masculine third person plural pronoun would also include feminines

Also please analyse this clause

This is giving the reason why certain men are declared as
And this has abundantly clarified that does not signify everyman in the world.

Not at all, you are making the whole thing senseless, but it seems that in this aya senselessnes is the king you may get away with it.

It is not saying some men are qawwamun, it says men are qawwmun, not some men are qawwmun, but asl rijaal, men in general. it qwould make no sense whatsoever that since some men are favaoured over others that all men are qawwamun, it could be, but the reason for sure would nto be that some men are favvoured over others.

Th saya makes sense and is correctly understood gramatically as taking the rijaal sand the nisaa as the two terms in the recirocity which is ALWAYS ast work with this clause. To say what you say it says, as I have already explained there are other ways to say it. As it is, it is inevitably reciprocal, no matter how much grammar grandstanding you bring forth.

The whole aya is always a mess up and lacking sense, that is why islamophobes make hay day with it and muslims contort themselves to bring something logical out of it, which they don't because the refuse to understand the obvious that men are favvoured over women and women over men, in that the first have the capacity to bring offsppring to the world and the second in that they are not encumbered by the pregnancies and all the conditioning that giving life entails.

That by virtue of that lack of encumbrance and therefore disponibility , men must contribute to society also as much as women do, and therefore support and maintain them, since the role of the woman is much more demanding. That is the part of duty falling on the men because of the favour of God to them. The part of the women because of the favvour of God on them is clearly expressed in

and the virtuous, devout women are guardians of the ocult that God guarded. What is it that they guard and that only they can guard because of their being women. Obviously not intimacy nor the house nor the secret of the husbands nor any of those things that some tafsirs bring forth, because the men should also guard women secrets, and intimacy and the good name of their wives and so on. The only thing women can guard but men cannot is the future human being in their wombs. That is why God says to reverence the wombs in aya 4.1.

Those are the two parts of the reciproity, very clear, nothing straneous no ambiguity. No speculation. Logical, clear and understandable. And it is about men and women. Wives and husbands are a subset within the whole of men and women.

Salaam

Azz

PLEASE NOTE No one can understand EVERYTHING in the Qur'an perfectly without their enlightened interpretations, even if the Arabic language is his native language! SOME words in the Qur'an are very difficult to understand without Tafsir (interpretation, explanation, exposition). Some words may also have multiple meanings and the context helps us determine the particular meaning of the word.

What are your thoughts on the site that Wakas linked to then? because it doesn't disagree with your 'note'.
http//www.quran434.com/wife-beating-islam.html

anGel_OnE

What are your thoughts on the site that Wakas linked to then? because it doesn't disagree with your 'note'.
http//www.quran434.com/wife-beating-islam.html

I think you did not read my comment carefully enough. The Hadith of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) has explained it clearly, and made it intelligible!!!

Sulaiman bin Amr bin Al-Ahwas said
?My father narrated to me that he witnessed the farewell Hajj with the Messenger of Allah. So he thanked and praised Allah and he reminded and gave admonition. He mentioned a story in his narration and he (the Prophet) said ?And indeed I order you to be good to the women, for they are but captives with you over whom you have no power than that, except if they come with manifest Fahishah (evil behavior). If they do that, then abandon their beds and beat them with a beating that is not harmful. And if they obey you then you have no cause against them. Indeed you have rights over your women, and your women have rights over you. As for your rights over your women, then they must not allow anyone whom you dislike to treat on your bedding (furniture), nor to admit anyone in your home that you dislike. And their rights over you are that you treat them well in clothing them and feeding them.? (Sahih)

http//sunnah.com/urn/711950