• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Islamaphobia

Shad

Veteran Member
Quran translation of Laleh Bakthiar.

Does not know Arabic fluently..... Has only 3 years of classical Arabic. Why should anyone pick her translation of native speakers that are certified scholars?

Have you even read the commentary? She changed the translation "using less divisive language toward people of other faiths, she will bridge the divide between Muslims and non-Muslims." Ergo she is conforming the translation to her own view point and agenda.
 
Last edited:

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
Right. Whose caravan did Muhammed as you say raided and why? Who told this story and when?

Let me give you the direct reference to one historian who wrote about this. Atthabari, foundation of the community, episode of alkaradah.

MOST of the the people in the world who are exposed to Islamic scripture ARE NOT SCHOLARS.

I'm happy to grant you all the scholarly analysis you want to provide. It doesn't matter.

People read the scripture while they're distracted. Or they hear it recited while they're bored. What gets into people's BRAINS is the simple messages, not the twisty-turny scholarly interpretations.
 

Wandering Monk

Well-Known Member
I dont know about "promotes".

But most traditional exegesis of Islamic jurisprudence do have the wife beating aspect of it although there is a lot of debate one it. The mainstream or predominant idea is that its a symbolic beating. Some linguistic scholars say very different things for e.g. Jamaal Badhwi. And some scholars who go to the most classical linguistic analysis say that it doesn't say beat at all. Have you done any analysis on this matter?

Of course some Muslims are wife beaters. So are all other kinds of people. There were over a million women who reported wife beating in the United States. India has one of the worst cases of wife beating. So it goes on like that.

Anyway, do you believe that statistically Muslims are the worst in wife beating?

The principle is found in Islamic religious texts and it is justified by them. Whether it is applied by some or not is irrelevant. The fact is that the texts promote it.
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
MOST of the the people in the world who are exposed to Islamic scripture ARE NOT SCHOLARS.

I'm happy to grant you all the scholarly analysis you want to provide. It doesn't matter.

People read the scripture while they're distracted. Or they hear it recited while they're bored. What gets into people's BRAINS is the simple messages, not the twisty-turny scholarly interpretations.
It seems to me that the facts do matter in this case; because, it's a historical event not scripture.
 

icehorse

......unaffiliated...... anti-dogmatist
Premium Member
It seems to me that the facts do matter in this case; because, it's a historical event not scripture.

My general understanding is that such events are - for the most part - captured in scripture (I count the Hadith as scripture), Was this event recorded outside of scripture?
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
Does not know Arabic fluently..... Has only 3 years of classical Arabic. Why should anyone pick her translation of native speakers that are certified scholars?

Have you even read the commentary? She changed the translation "using less divisive language toward people of other faiths, she will bridge the divide between Muslims and non-Muslims." Ergo she is conforming the translation to her own view point and agenda.

Only three years? And its not enough? Did you just find that from her critic on a website? Haha. Mate. tell me directly rather than making assumptions about a persons character saying "onforming the translation to her own view" because then you should point the same criticism to the translation you are in love with. Forgetting that you just committed the genetic fallacy, Im sure you agree with other translations right? So tell me, how do you say "counting pallets" in arabic?

Tell me. What does "Zahuba Haazaa wadhurabaauhoo" mean? It has the same word Laleh translates as leave or go away. Idhribuhunnna. So what does that sentence in arabic mean?

Make analysis of the subject and respond to the criticism from the merit of the data and evidence provided.

Cheers.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
MOST of the the people in the world who are exposed to Islamic scripture ARE NOT SCHOLARS.

I'm happy to grant you all the scholarly analysis you want to provide. It doesn't matter.

People read the scripture while they're distracted. Or they hear it recited while they're bored. What gets into people's BRAINS is the simple messages, not the twisty-turny scholarly interpretations.

You have some truth in what you said.

And what you said stands true to what you see in media all the time. So you get programmed to believe in the taglines with shallow surfing. Tagline after tagline. Those buzzwords you remember and start to like. It creates that "jolt" in people. That is what the writers who use Islamaphobia as a tool use to make money. Its an easy target market. You spoke of this phenomenon about the Quran, but its true to everything. Especially media. Very true.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Only three years? And its not enough?

Considering there are people that have decades of use and experience.. yes. Especially when she admits to having a biased translation.

Did you just find that from her critic on a website?

No in her own bio and interviews with her. You are grasping at straws

Haha. Mate. tell me directly rather than making assumptions about a persons character saying "onforming the translation to her own view" because then you should point the same criticism to the translation you are in love with. Forgetting that you just committed the genetic fallacy, Im sure you agree with other translations right? So tell me, how do you say "counting pallets" in arabic?

She actually said that in an interview.

Your questions about my knowledge of Arabic are irrelevant as my point is about expertise and experience. She admits her bias in her translation. Why should I accept her translations over other translations? Translation which in the major disagree with her own?

Tell me. What does "Zahuba Haazaa wadhurabaauhoo" mean? It has the same word Laleh translates as leave or go away. Idhribuhunnna. So what does that sentence in arabic mean?

Babble as you do not understand my point which is about expertise, experience and admitted bias. You have no argument to counter my point. Demanding I learn a language defeats the point about translations.... Try again son.

Make analysis of the subject and respond to the criticism from the merit of the data and evidence provided.

I did using her own words. My point went over your head.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
The principle is found in Islamic religious texts and it is justified by them. Whether it is applied by some or not is irrelevant. The fact is that the texts promote it.

Yes true. And some actually use it to justify their atrocities. But people all over the world will use anything to justify their atrocities.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member

Great argument. Good going.

Tell me. What does "Zahuba Haazaa wadhurabaauhoo" mean? It has the same word Laleh translates as leave or go away. Idhribuhunnna. So what does that sentence in arabic mean?

Make analysis of the subject and respond to the criticism from the merit of the data and evidence provided.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Great argument. Good going.

It was a good point. You just didn't understand my criticism thus babbled

Tell me. What does "Zahuba Haazaa wadhurabaauhoo" mean? It has the same word Laleh translates as leave or go away. Idhribuhunnna. So what does that sentence in arabic mean?

Irrelevant. Now I am going to walk you through this like a child.

What is translation?

Why do translations exist?

If I knew Arabic would I need a translation?

Make analysis of the subject and respond to the criticism from the merit of the data and evidence provided.

I already did. She admits she translated differently for a goal. You have yet to counter this at all. Hope bout I just link translations which have "Beat" instead of "Stay Away" After all she admits in she pick one option of "beat" or "stay away"

She is making a large claim that translations that disagree with her are due to an agenda while glossing over her admittance of her own.

Again you haven't answered my quest of "Why should I trust her view over other translations?"

Source: A new look at a holy text
About
 
Last edited:

firedragon

Veteran Member
If I knew Arabic would I need a translation?

Excellent. According to you you dont accept one translation because the author apparently has 3 years of Classical Arabic education right? So whats your criteria? 20 years?

Do you accept every translator because they have 20 years of training inn Classical Arabic?
 

England my lionheart

Rockerjahili Rebel
Premium Member
If someone took all your property including your house, would you mind taking their groceries before it reaches the people who already have everything that used to be yours when you're left with nothing?

One caravan maybe but there were many,I like how Islamic scholars like hazrat Bashir turn the caravan raids into a form of defense.
 

England my lionheart

Rockerjahili Rebel
Premium Member
Right. Whose caravan did Muhammed as you say raided and why? Who told this story and when?

Let me give you the direct reference to one historian who wrote about this. Atthabari, foundation of the community, episode of alkaradah.

I think hazrat Mirza Bashir makes a better job of turning caravan raids as a form of defense,pretty good,from caravans to cities to countries,all in the name of island defense.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
I think hazrat Mirza Bashir makes a better job of turning caravan raids as a form of defense,pretty good,from caravans to cities to countries,all in the name of island defense.

Irrelevant response. The question was

Right. Whose caravan did Muhammed as you say raided and why? Who told this story and when?

Let me give you the direct reference to one historian who wrote about this. Atthabari, foundation of the community, episode of alkaradah.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Excellent. According to you you dont accept one translation because the author apparently has 3 years of Classical Arabic education right? So whats your criteria? 20 years?

I asked you why I should accept her version when there a lot of other translations that disagree with her own. She admitted to a bias in her methodology which is admittance that accuracy is questionable. She has limited knowledge and experience with the language. There are critics which she dismissals with flashing her gender card (impressive. The card being a point she openly make on the website. She admits to selecting which words to use in order to "be inclusive".

Do you accept every translator because they have 20 years of training inn Classical Arabic?

No as there are conflicting translations which is part of the issue here.
 

England my lionheart

Rockerjahili Rebel
Premium Member
Irrelevant response. The question was

Right. Whose caravan did Muhammed as you say raided and why? Who told this story and when?

Let me give you the direct reference to one historian who wrote about this. Atthabari, foundation of the community, episode of alkaradah.

I tried looking this up,you need to provide a link,I'm guessing it's pretty much the same as hazrat Mirza bashirs spin.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
I tried looking this up,you need to provide a link,I'm guessing it's pretty much the same as hazrat Mirza bashirs spin.

No. This is the second century Islamic historians this story is directly taken from. Its not an apologetic source, and helps you in your quest to demonise Muhammed. You will like it.

I dont know if there are any "links" to physical books.

Peace.
 

England my lionheart

Rockerjahili Rebel
Premium Member
No. This is the second century Islamic historians this story is directly taken from. Its not an apologetic source, and helps you in your quest to demonise Muhammed. You will like it.

I dont know if there are any "links" to physical books.

Peace.

"Demonise" is not my intention,i i find Islam interesting,Christianity too and how they affected history,don't believe in any but love history.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
I asked you why I should accept her version when there a lot of other translations that disagree with her own. She admitted to a bias in her methodology which is admittance that accuracy is questionable. She has limited knowledge and experience with the language. There are critics which she dismissals with flashing her gender card (impressive. The card being a point she openly make on the website. She admits to selecting which words to use in order to "be inclusive".



No as there are conflicting translations which is part of the issue here.

Great. Dont accept her version. But with reason, not genetic fallacy. Also, she is talking about putting a word so that non-muslims would not feel so offended is translating the word Kafir as unbeliever and/or infidel. Not when it comes to the wife beating verse. And she was not speaking about her whole translation in general.

You are just finding all kinds of reasons to reject her just like some others did because they wish to have the monopoly in what they call "scholar" which is in their mind a rite of passage, not an academic achievement. Also, I didnt only quote Laleh, I quoted others. You are focusing on this lady because your intention is not to analyse but to demonise the Quran. You just dont like what ever literature you think is trying to 'white wash' the Quran.

That is why I gave you the arabic information to analyse, which you will not do because you dont intend to. If you dont know the language its still fine, but be honest in your exploration.

So you still didnt answer me. You reject Laleh because her Classical Arabic training is 3 years. How about some who have 20 years. If 3 years is your rejection criteria, then do you accept all who have 20 years? I bet you still dont see your logical fallacy.

After reading the article you gave here I think I agree more with this lady in many aspects. She has taken a dictionary approach to the translation, not a tafsir based approach. So its all new. Its good and good academic study. thats how it should be. Respect different approaches. But analyse the substance.

I would recommend that you stop committing the genetic fallacy. Analyse the data and information, even if the person who told you this doesn't have any academic education. Maybe they have a point you have all your life. Maybe they are honest and have made a great point. If you dont analyse it you would not know.

Also, you still have not given your reasons to reject everyone else I have cited. You picked one person. And committed the genetic fallacy by rejecting what she says based purely on who she is. Whoever it is. Even if its a Christian, Atheist or alien. Do the analysis based on the merit on the work.

Anyway, read this analysis as well. though again, this is all irrelevant to the OP but a topic others keep bringing in to demonise a religion. Fine. Go ahead.

ARE WOMEN TO BE BEATEN?

It is common knowledge that Islam allows women to be beaten. Most traditional translators have interpreted this verse 4:34 to propagate the same. Some even go to the length of quoting a hadith that says beat her with a toothbrush. Picture a man beating a woman with a toothbrush. Traditionally, women were thought to have lesser intellect and the men had a much superior position in societies but the world has seen too many state leaders, authors, philosophers and intellectual women to consider them to be beaten with a toothbrush. These are all translators who were born way after Islamic practices have been established based on evolution of Hadith and other interpolations where the translators approach the Quran with preconceived notions, thus measuring the yardstick with the cloth.

The verse in concern and its analysis based on the Quran.

Let me furnish the Yusuf Ali translation that lets the respect of a woman down by enforcing a man’s right to beat her.

Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband’s) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct , admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all). - Quran 4:34
The word used here for beat is “Idribuhun”. This word has many meanings as Arabic usually is and the meaning changes depending on the context of what you are saying. Take a simple example of the English word beat.

e.g. I beat him and broke his nose
I beat him in the 100 meter race by .2 seconds

You could see the difference in the meaning of the same word when you take the word in context. Now, let’s explore the Arabic word “Idribuhunna” derived from the root “Daraba”.

The Quran is one book and understanding must be based on the context of the Quran. Islam establishes harmony and tranquility in the man and woman relationship. By showing Quranic evidence I will prove that it is very easy to understand that this verse simply tells you to “separate” and not to “beat”.

Other verses that have the same word “Idribuhunna”

The Quran has used this word in many other verses and the word has many meanings. It has been translated as give, move, cover, separate and to strike (as in strike their feet on the ground) over 40 times in the Quran as far as my research has found.

"So we sealed (Fadarabna – Same root word Daraba) their ears in the cave for many years" – Quran 18:11

When it comes to so many verses the word is never translatable as “Beat” but the egoistic, ignorant, male supremacy in the Muslim men who translated the verse, in combination with illogical and extremely questionable idea of measuring the yardstick with the and they want to translate the verse as Beat. There are two words used in this that need relooking at.

The word Idribuhunna simply means “Separate” or "leave" and Nushuz means disloyalty (e.g. extra marital affairs, unruly family bonds)

1. 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.

2. The upright females are dutiful; keeping private the personal matters for what God keeps watch over.
3. As for those females from whom you fear desertion (Nushuz),

a. then you shall advise them,
b. and abandon them in the bedchamber,
c. and leave (Idribuhunna) them.
4. If they respond to you, then do not seek a way over them; God is Most High, Great. – Quran 4:34

Analysis of 4:34
1. It is the man’s responsibility or duty to provide for the woman. That is not to say that women cannot seek employment or that she must stay at home but that it is the man’s responsibility and he must take it upon himself. The Quran preaches equity.
2. Women are to be bound by the duty of protecting the privacy and chastity of a man woman relationship. It is the man’s prerogative to expect the woman to be loyal as much as she expects from him. Is that not obvious?
3. If the woman desserts you or is being disloyal,
a. you must try advising them,
b. If that doesn’t work you must stop your sexual activities with her
c. Then separate from her.
4. If the woman responds to this process by changing her ways, then don’t let her down because God knows best.

Of course we can expect the usual arguments. Whitewashing accusation, quoting other translations and calling for authority and genetic fallacy etc. They are logical fallacies and generally those who do that have not made the analysis. It's quite normal.

This is the more logical and obvious interpretation of this verse. But if you are bizarre in mind and come from a women beating society or with a preconceived notion, you could interpret it as hit the woman. But from the Quranic point of view and context, you cannot hit your wife. Quran establishes the nature of the relationship between a man and a woman in the following verse.

"Among His signs is that He created for you spouses from among yourselves, in order to have tranquillity and contentment with each other. He places in your heart love and care towards your spouses. In this, there are signs for people who think." (30:21)

Other renditions of the word just too common in the Quran will show any explorer that in this case it simply means leave. Of course, many will adamantly argue because another tool goes down the drain.

These verses says travel, leave. Simple.

2:273, 4:101, 3:156, 38:44, 73:20


travel/leave/get out: 4:101, 73:20, 2:273, 5:106, 3:156, 38:44
ignore/take away: 43:5
Set forth: 14:25
give/Put forth: 14:24,14:45; 16:75, 16:76, 16:112; 18:32, 18:45; 24:35; 30:28, 30:58; 36:78; 39:27, 39:29; 43:17; 59:21; 66:10, 66:11, 17:48
seal/cover/draw over: 18:11
condemn: 2:61
cover: 24:31
strike: 2:60, 2:73, 7:160, 20:77, 24:31, 26:63, 37:93, 8:12, 47:4
set up: 43:58; 57:13
explain: 13:17


When you wish to say take a road to go somewhere, you say "dharaba". When you count coins you say "dharaba".

When you construct a sentence like "Zahuba Haazaa wadhurabaauhoo" it doesn't have a qualifying handler after the generic word Dharabaa and it naturally means "this and the likes of him went away (Left)". So if you say Wadhribuhunna it means go away or leave.

We must take note not to commit genetic the fallacy, and appealing to authority without analysing the actual argument.

Wa = And. Idhribuhunna = Leave.


Peace.
 
Top