Muhammad Asad's 70:30
-
early scholars translated the GF/partner relationship as slave, which is a poor defination of arabic word what gives a meanings of rightfully yours perfectly covers all that relationships which based on absence of marriage ceremony , like in africa jungles the couples who are not married but they have children together... and they love eachother ... same like that in europe one of my friend and his girl friend get married after 3 kids ... so its dosent mean before their wedding what they did was something wrong. becoz she was rightfully belong to him...
God knows best
Peace Man Of Faith.
You say,quote
The more you reflect on that common interpretation the stupider it seems, does it not?Let us then reflect on 235 and 7030 together.
235 and 7030 is saying one or the other...Altogether one. Your spouse( The one that comes with a ceremony and a marriage certificate as conformed by man s system) or your partner( The one that is rightfully/legally yours,you two have taken a contract to stay together as partners but not recognised/done the ceremony and certificate as so many couples are doing in many countries).
GOD recognises both and calls it right in both verses.
Does it seem so stupid now? Your spouse or what is rightfully/legally yours.
Oh and,that is my understanding brother.
GOD bless you.
Peace.Are you sure? I don't think this is the right interpretation given that premarital sex is impermissible.
"But let them who find not marriage abstain until Allah enriches them from His bounty."
Unless the verses about premarital sex are mistranslated. I don't know Arabic unfortunately.
I believe that marriage is not a ceremony, it's just signing a contract in the presence of a witness or more witnesses.
Also, the Qur'an says not to take secret lovers, so I don't think ma malakat aymanukum means girlfriend/boyfriend/partner.
But I don't know, I might wrong... -
marriage /partnership is not a license of doing sex legally..
its actually a journey to walk together... a starting of this journey can be open and prominent like traditional wedding.. in church, mosque , house, hall, registry office.. tribal tradition of wedding is also there...(husband & wife)
or who dnt afford to do a traditional ceremony they can also make an oath infront of God to walk together.. on this very same journey without doing any ceremony at all.... (ma malikat/gf/partner/rightfully yours)
-
Peace All.
GOD in 235 or 7030 is saying a "legally bound with a contract" partner. Whichever way you look at it. No contradiction. In fact God is aware of all the possibilities /traditions/ways in which any couples/partners can be contracted to live together as a unit.Zigazigha ,There are those who decide to live together once they agree to start a family/live in the same home and hence bind with a contract. I agree with you that intimacy should not happen .
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
I meant to say intimacy should not happen before that.
Peace -
Peace all,
I second everything huruf said in his/her last post.
I am strongly of the belief that the meaning of the text of the Arabic Quran can be rendered into many languages perfectly.
I use the word perfectly very intentionally for two reasons one is epistemological and the other is linguistic. I will not expound them here because I feel it would be beyond the remit of this thread.
However, the literary aspects of the Quran would almost certainly be lost in translation without affecting the meaning, such as rhyme, rhythm, register, metre, phoneme association, etc.
As regards Asad's translation of 7029-30, there is a grammatical possibility that in this verse bears the meaning of And, however, in all cases where multiple meanings for one word are possible, one's only guide is the context of the clause, or proposition, or sentence, or passage, etc.
I personally lean towards Or not And. However, to explain my reasoning for my interpretation, I would have to expound the subject of , which is, again, beyond the remit of this thread.
-
Peace,
The previous scriptures gave examples of marriage with servants, it's not some depraved sex slavery, it's in my understanding a legitamate relationship, though both scriptures encourage the freeing of servants.
And the primary purpose, in my understanding of servants, is that they serve, and as payment they are provided for with food and shelter, and opportunities.
It makes sense to me, so that those who otherwise would not be fed our housed are able to, and all marriage must be by free will, and following a contract regardless in my understanding.
Moses for example served for his father in law on the term that he was given a wife, home, food etc presumably.
Slavery is quite a degrading word, although it has understandably been degraded by those who abused what was otherwise a successful system of providing for those who could not provide for themselves
-
I think it has been undestood, but just in case we may be, once more misled in this question through old or fresh assumptions, I remind that both sexes can have mamalakat aymanuhum. A woman can have that and aman can have them.
If we take it that it would be licit for men to have a wive or wives and on top of it have also some mamalakat, then women could also... Nowhere in Qur'an such thing is encouraged on top of it without any warrant. One thing that the qur'a isists upon recurrently is that whoever a man marries, he should alsways pay what is due to the woman at the moment of marriage.
Reality also seconds that in the sense that only dirty rich people incurr into smething so antisocial. Common people usually do not get into that kind os choices simultaneously.
Salaam
-
Peace Man Of Faith.
You say,quote
The more you reflect on that common interpretation the stupider it seems, does it not?Let us then reflect on 235 and 7030 together.
235 and 7030 is saying one or the other...Altogether one. Your spouse( The one that comes with a ceremony and a marriage certificate as conformed by man s system) or your partner( The one that is rightfully/legally yours,you two have taken a contract to stay together as partners but not recognised/done the ceremony and certificate as so many couples are doing in many countries).
GOD recognises both and calls it right in both verses.
Does it seem so stupid now? Your spouse or what is rightfully/legally yours.
Oh and,that is my understanding brother.
GOD bless you.
Peace.It only makes it worse. Read such passages with an objective mind and it sounds horrible. "What your hands possess", how does one interpret that if not negatively? With a little more reading it is possible to extract such people are servants who are not free. On top of that, it does seem to approve of polygamy as long as the person can handle multiple wives.
I understand you use your wishful thinking into making the "or what your hands possess" into women you have not yet established an official marriage contract with, but this is clearly interpretation acrobatics due to how one wish for it to be. Unfortunately, you would have to neglect a big part of the sectarian interpretation for that to be consistent.
Furthermore, ayamankum indicates what you have in your possession basically saying you own the subject in question making this woman a trophy of yours.
So I stand my ground here. I could line up a multitude of points on why the common interpretation is primitive and retarded.
Be well
Qarael Amenuel -
Man of Faith
?Can you give straight and plain your interpretation of what the aya 70.30 says? That is a translation of the whole aya that you consider faithful to the original.Salaam
In fact I will not. I will get in trouble with the administration if I do, so it is better not to reveal anything here. All I can say is that my interpretation of the whole Quran is vastly different from the one you are accustomed to.
Here I only comment on the established interpretation and point out logical flaws with it. I will avoid any intricate analysis of Arabic words on this forum because this has led me to being banned while I did due to the interpretation of administrators. So in clarity, I will not read and comment on the original Arabic here.
Be well
Qarael Amenuel -
Peace Man Of Faith.
You say ,quote
In fact I will not. I will get in trouble with the administration if I do, so it is better not to reveal anything here. All I can say is that my interpretation of the whole Quran is vastly different from the one you are accustomed to.And there is no logical flaws with your statement?
Common brother, would you accept such "excuse" from others? How can you possibly justify your argument with such "excuse"?
Your argument will not be taken seriously if there is no evidence to back it up!Or may be your 7000+ posts means people will have to take your word for evidence. Well then, just keep saying...
GOD bless you.
Peace. -
In fact I will not. I will get in trouble with the administration if I do, so it is better not to reveal anything here. All I can say is that my interpretation of the whole Quran is vastly different from the one you are accustomed to.
Here I only comment on the established interpretation and point out logical flaws with it. I will avoid any intricate analysis of Arabic words on this forum because this has led me to being banned while I did due to the interpretation of administrators. So in clarity, I will not read and comment on the original Arabic here.
Be well
Qarael AmenuelI just wanted to understand what you are saying. I am afraid of what you said preiously on thismatter one cannot make head or tail, so that is why I asked somethat should clarify it. I you can't or will, then it is as if you have said nothing.
On the other hand, I am surprised that you are prevented from speaking clearly by moderation. I have seen all kind of things in this forum more shocking that anything you have said and I have never seen that they have deleted or punished for that reason.
So I don't know what to say.
Salaam
-
I a repeating myself, but just for the sake of objectivity regarding the self.serving interpretation this and other ayas as allowing having a spouse and besides some other sexual partners I restate and particularly such as this aya is formulated, that it addresses everybody, women and men alike. So if men can have spouse and side sexual partners so women can. It is clear from this aya and it is clear from other ayas that women can and did have possessions of their right hands. Therefore, traditional arrangements to suit male promiscuity are plainly eithe rwrong or by the same token women's promiscuity is equally allowed.
Salaam
-
women and men alike. So if men can have spouse and side sexual partners so women can
i m afraid i did not understand it... if you detail/describe it a bit further .. it would be helpful
salam
-
There are common instances in the Qur'an where you have to understand wa as "or" or it would not make sense. I do not remember now a particular case. On the other hand there are other very convinient translations where an "or" would be much fitter, but it would go against some convenient translation as and which suits the preference of certain establishments.
If in 99%* "wa" makes sense as "and" and just 1% it doesn't then I think it's better to search for why it does not make sense then just ignore or accept the "flaw".
I am sure the misunderstanding is because of our weak understanding of the surrounding words and not because of the "wa".
And statistically speaking it is also smarter to search there (the surrounding words) for the mistake instead of the "wa" as that is at least in 99% of the cases consistent.*99% is just a large number
-
I just wanted to understand what you are saying. I am afraid of what you said preiously on thismatter one cannot make head or tail, so that is why I asked somethat should clarify it. I you can't or will, then it is as if you have said nothing.
On the other hand, I am surprised that you are prevented from speaking clearly by moderation. I have seen all kind of things in this forum more shocking that anything you have said and I have never seen that they have deleted or punished for that reason.
So I don't know what to say.
Salaam
The point is I must be careful with everything I say or else the administration might interpret it once again that I post unsubstantiated claims. It complicates my participation on this forum.
There is not much obscurity with my concept of spirituality. People who think I am an extremist through my argument on Satan or instinct do misinterpret my sayings. While total abstention helps focusing maximally, it is possible to indulge a little and still grow spiritually. It is not about sin and sin is something fabricated by clergymen. Being obsessed with extreme abstention is falling victim to Satan or the instinct in itself, and such people have missed the point.
People may not agree with me and that are those who believe the world is a manifest gift to mankind, but they must logically obviously admit the instinct may cause clear problems with living. An example is jealousy, jealousy is stemming from the instinct and is part of the human drive and causes the species to overcome the grandeur of a neighbor.
I am aware that you asked me for 7030 and I went off-topic there.
I can by saying it is MY OPINION (if I am allowed to have one here freely?) and result of own work say 7030 talks of something quite different than the common interpretation, but I do not make any claim at all. As some of you know I find some linguistic elements to be fabricated and does always mean 'not', and means 'such be' and is part of the AL-word's finesses and by that logic means 'is such is'. So in my opinion, means "to be is to be being" and thus Allah means "Being". It could obviously be interpreted as "Like the Being", i.e. God. is quite simple Arabic grammar and it is the AL prefix connected to the third person singular. This is also why Allahem is not spelled but because the and are supposed to be interpreted as singular and plural pronouns.
It is possible to verify much of this by studying old records of Arabic grammar and its use. People may claim there are diacritical markers to show a word means something else than AL plus Heh as in "the who", i.e. a god, but this is just pure fabrication in my opinion.
My God is called Rabb in Arabic and other Semitic languages, and Allah is something else in linguistic meaning but twisted severely into seeming to refer to someone like God. So in my interpretation of Quran, Allah refers to anyone who successfully fulfills the mentioned attributes, obviously including God whom we should imitate in Sunnatullah. I see no reason to think I cannot function just as fine as God but with Him as master and teacher if I choose that path.
99% of all people misunderstand my concept of faith. But I can understand that people have issues believing in something like reincarnation and find it hard to see the good logic in it. In traditional interpretation, we would be doomed if not Adam would have been granted more evaluation when he was tested with the tree in Eden, so by that interpretation we are already reincarnated/reborn at least once and I would say it is illogical if you and I bear the burden of Adam's sin in Eden. Even if someone does choose not to believe in me on reincarnation, it is irrelevant when there is something to focus on that is at hand, i.e. the life you live right now.
What I started to show here is that in my understanding 7030 is speaking of something quite different than the traditional one. Both Ala and Ma have different meanings. "Such be unto accompanying them and do not control their ability/hands.. " is my short translation of 7030s first part and this was MY OPINION only. For more details I have to decipher the surrounding context. Briefly I would say it talks about the "private parts" and "which are accompanying them and do not control/master their doings" probably speaking about something which is necessary to further decipher by working on the ancient language.
Be well
Qarael Amenuel -
Man Of Faith, do you mean this?
Those who save/protect"their private parts" except to their spouse or those "legal folks" i.e a doctor,nurse...etc when they have to ( Like in case of illness)?
Brother, This also makes sense, however I will look at it in the context of many other verses in Qoran.
Yes indeed,it is better not to have "my mind is made up" attitude.
GOD bless you
Peace.