Is it permitted to beat women per Quran? (challenge for one on one debate with anyone)

[Link]

Yet the Qur'an says, "And beat them". Which source are you going to follow?

Beat them with your dick as in continue to have intercourse with them and do not follow your doubts so long as they obey you in things you have the right they obey you in.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I wrote this 3 years ago on another site with respect to this question:

No, it’s a bad translation. It really means “Men regarding women are to be up lifters by what he has made some excel others and by what they spend their money, so the good women are obedient, guarding that which is hidden as God has guarded, and as for those you fear rebellion, admonish them while leaving them alone in their bed rooms (regarding this) and (continue to) have intercourse with them therefore if they obey you (by what you admonish them) don’t seek a way against them.”

As for why I translate as intercourse, the word literally for that is Nikah and God only uses that regarding marriage, as in he uses to term marriage which is ironically the same word, however, when God talks about else where, he says “touched women” and other expressions, and here to me it’s obviously not about beating women, but saying, if you fear rebellion - don’t act on your fears, but just admonish them and don’t even bring this up in the bed rooms and continue to have intercourse.

The one place where God is going to tell us about the role men play with respect to women is not going to be them as tyrants over them, that get to beat them as soon as they fear rebellion.

God the exalted, the great, has made men regarding women to be up lifters, suppose to morally support them, to the extent, if we fear rebellion, not to act on it, but just admonish them while leaving them alone in their bed rooms, and to continue to have intercourse with them.

The next verse shows really what should be done if there is a genuine breech between the two to be feared, which is to get one judge from one family and another judge from another.

The Quran else where says it’s not permitted to treat women harshly so let alone beat them!

-------


I would like someone who genuinely believes I am mistranslating or deceiving regarding the Arabic, to have one on one debate.

I say this because there are many expressions of intercourse in Quran (touching them, entering them, etc), and so to me this also a sign that dark magic prevents people from reflecting properly.

I argue this another verse that dark magic has blinded majority of Muslims, their scholars, and humans towards.

If someone really believes Quran should be translated in a way that permits beating of woman and not how I just said it, I would like a one on one debate about it.

Sounds like whoever wrote the passages that were so easy to misconstrue really screwed up.

 

[stevecanuck]

Beat them with your dick as in continue to have intercourse with them and do not follow your doubts so long as they obey you in things you have the right they obey you in.

Please provide a link to any translation that confirms this.

 

[stevecanuck]

Beat them with your dick as in continue to have intercourse with them and do not follow your doubts so long as they obey you in things you have the right they obey you in.

Sooooo, how do you "beat them with your dick" if you "forsake them in bed"? Which is it?

 

[Link]

Sooooo, how do you "beat them with your dick" if you "forsake them in bed"? Which is it?

Leave them alone in the bedrooms means not to mention your doubts even there. Don't mention you suspect them if you have no proof, and don't even talk to them about it.

 

[stevecanuck]

Leave them alone in the bedrooms means not to mention your doubts even there. Don't mention you suspect them if you have no proof, and don't even talk to them about it.

Wow. I'm at a loss for words.

 

[KWED]

This among the reasons Quran tells you to rely only on God and his chosen. Relying on God means to rely on what is from him from revelation and leaders appointed by him clarifying revelation.

The Quran is the ultimate source "from god" and Muhammad is his final and bestest messenger. So why do you if=gnore than and make stuff up yourself instead?

There are many ahadith that forbid beating women and children.

The Quran itself, and Muhammad himself said that beating wives for ill conduct was appropriate under certain circumstances. It is there in black and white. Why do you keep rejecting Allah and his Final Messenger?

Those without proof from God for authority are not to be taken as authorities.

Are the Quran and Muhammad legitimate authorities on Islam?
Obviously they are.
Yet you reject them in favour of your own made-up claims. What is your authority from god? You do not have any. Submit to his will and decree, before it is too late!

 

[KWED]

Prophet (s) reported to have said: I wonder from the man who beats his wife while he is more entitled to be beaten. (Biharul Anwaar, volume 103).

That merely confirms that beatings are considered acceptable.

Also, from Anwar "the Holy Prophet said: "Woe to the woman who makes her husband angry"
And from the Quran "If you fear ill-conduct from your wives...beat them".

So, still no evidence that Islam forbids domestic violence.

 

[KWED]

‘Ali, The Commander of the Faithful, says:

“The intelligent person gets guidance through politeness, it is only the animals that cannot be corrected without beatings."4

So Ali disagreed with Allah and Muhammad. Doesn't change what they said.

Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq says:

“Whoever whips another person once, Allah will shower the fiery whip against him."5

But the Quran prescribes 100 lashes for fornicators.
So Allah says "whip them", then Allah will whip the whipper for obeying his order to whip. Then I guess Allah must be whipped for whipping the whipper.

The Prophet of Islam said:
“Use love and affection in education and upbringing and don’t have access to cruelty because a wise mentor is better than a cruel one."6

This is a common mistake amongst apologists.
If Allah approves of and prescribes beating a disobedient wife under certain conditions, it is obviously not regarded as "cruel", but rather "reasonable punishment".
You might think it cruel, but Allah doesn't.
Who is the best judge, you or Allah?

 

[Link]

There is these verses about adultery:

Should any of your women commit an indecent act, produce against them four witnesses from yourselves, and if they testify, detain them in [their] houses until death finishes them, or Allah decrees a course for them.


This verse says they either kept in their houses till death comes to them or Allah's make a way for them. Why is their two options? Because when under house arrest they are supposed to repent. If they don't repent, they are continuously kept.

Now how long is the period of being kept in their houses per Quran if they repent. Each day, they are supposed to be bothered, the verse after shows:

And the two who commit it among you, bother them both. But if they repent and correct themselves, leave them alone. Indeed, Allah is ever Accepting of repentance and Merciful.

The word "adhee" means to annoy, bother, trouble them, or dishonor them. So we can see that indeed lashes was metaphoric of being scolded each day in house arrest and witnessed and dishonored by believers.

Whatever ritual was done to "annoy" "bother" or "dishonor" them has been lost in time. But Imam Jaffar (a) is right you aren't suppose to lash people physically and Imam Ali (a) is right, only animals have to be corrected by violence.

The two means homosexual acts, it means either two men or two women. But all these verses explain each other. And so when keeping in mind these verses it's obvious lashing was metaphoric.

Also, "cut of their hands" for stealing means house arrest as well, and they are said to be let go if they repent in the verse after, "leave them to their way" interprets it to cut them off their way of stealing, this is what expression "cut of their hands" means.

Imam Ali (a) who is said to be the one who fights for interpretation of Quran even in Sunni authentic sources, in his dying will, said not to amputate anyone, even a rabid dog. This interprets stealing punishment to be non-amputation. Now before you bring the verses about disbelievers being amputated, that happens in war. So this means if someone loses their limbs and can no longer fight in battle, you can spare him mercifully. It doesn't mean go around cutting of people's limbs because they are non-believers.

Anyways, you have a lot misconceptions and they aren't necessarily your fault. I can help you defeat the dark sorcery pertaining to the Quran.

 

[Link]

Who is the best judge, you or Allah?

In Quran, God says not to attribute you him what you don't know and says to seek proofs and insights in religion, and deeply understand before warning others. When it comes to the Euthyphro dilemma although we are to trust God and obey him in all circumstances, the fact is, God commands things because they are good.

Imam Ali (a) said "he has not forbidden you what you don't know to be evil and has not commanded you in what you don't know to be good". Quran is a reminder and provides insights to guiding in all affairs. Sunnah manifests the multidimension of Quran and removes the dark veils of sorcery upon it.

At the end, Imam Jaffar (a) says only to follow what we our tongues and hearts testify to and reason attests to, and are in unity in with regards to, and never give up certainty for doubtful matters.

There is a hadith that says each hadith has to be referred to Quran and reasoning, if they contradict them, they are to be left.

 

[Link]

That merely confirms that beatings are considered acceptable.

Also, from Anwar "the Holy Prophet said: "Woe to the woman who makes her husband angry"
And from the Quran "If you fear ill-conduct from your wives...beat them".

So, still no evidence that Islam forbids domestic violence.

There is hadiths that contradict each other on this issue. So since two interpretations of Quran are possible per hadiths, we have to resort to reasoning.

Also in context of divorce, there is a line in Quran "nor is it permitted for you to treat them harshly", which means even if they are very bad to you or there are reasons you are justified to hate them, you can divorce them, but never is ever allowed to treat them harshly. So let alone beat them.

 

[KWED]

In Quran, God says not to attribute you him what you don't know and says to seek proofs and insights in religion, and deeply understand before warning others. When it comes to the Euthyphro dilemma although we are to trust God and obey him in all circumstances, the fact is, God commands things because they are good.

Imam Ali (a) said "he has not forbidden you what you don't know to be evil and has not commanded you in what you don't know to be good". Quran is a reminder and provides insights to guiding in all affairs. Sunnah manifests the multidimension of Quran and removes the dark veils of sorcery upon it.

At the end, Imam Jaffar (a) says only to follow what we our tongues and hearts testify to and reason attests to, and are in unity in with regards to, and never give up certainty for doubtful matters.

There is a hadith that says each hadith has to be referred to Quran and reasoning, if they contradict them, they are to be left.

Sorry, was there an answer in there?
I'll try again - who is the best judge, you or Allah?

 

[KWED]

There is hadiths that contradict each other on this issue. So since two interpretations of Quran are possible per hadiths, we have to resort to reasoning.

Wrong. Where hadith conflict, we refer to the Quran for resolution.
If one hadith says "beat your wife but not too severely" and another says "do not treat your wives harshly", then this is not even a contradiction. The beating for ill-conduct is specifically laid down in the Quran, so by definition it cannot be "harsh treatment". It is "just treatment" because it is Allah's instruction for a just punishment.
However, if you believe such passages do constitute a contradiction, we refer back to the Quran, in which Allah, in his justice and mercy, instructs a husband to beat a wife for ill-conduct (under certain conditions).

Really can't see where you can go form here.

Also in context of divorce, there is a line in Quran "nor is it permitted for you to treat them harshly", which means even if they are very bad to you or there are reasons you are justified to hate them, you can divorce them, but never is ever allowed to treat them harshly. So let alone beat them.

But as a beating as punishment for ill-conduct is prescribed by Allah, it cannot be "harsh treatment". It is god's merciful justice.

 

[Link]

You are repeating same point as you initially brought.

 

[KWED]

You are repeating same point as you initially brought.

I was addressing your latest posts.
However, as my position is based on what the Quran says, and Muhammad and classical scholars' support for that, I will necessarily repeat those points to refute your various feeble defences.
For example, you claim that a hadith saying "do not treat your wives harshly" overrules the Quran saying "and beat your wives" (under certain conditions).
1. A hadith can never overrule the Quran.
2. If something is prescribed by Allah as just and reasonable punishment, it cannot be "harsh treatment", by definition.

Your position is based on Allah not meaning what he says, and Muhammad and classical scholars misunderstanding the Quran, and selected hadith overruling the Quran.
This kinda deserves repeating.

 

[Link]

I was addressing your latest posts.
However, as my position is based on what the Quran says, and Muhammad and classical scholars' support for that, I will necessarily repeat those points to refute your various feeble defences.
For example, you claim that a hadith saying "do not treat your wives harshly" overrules the Quran saying "and beat your wives" (under certain conditions).
1. A hadith can never overrule the Quran.
2. If something is prescribed by Allah as just and reasonable punishment, it cannot be "harsh treatment", by definition.

Your position is based on Allah not meaning what he says, and Muhammad and classical scholars misunderstanding the Quran, and selected hadith overruling the Quran.
This kinda deserves repeating.

This is not what I said. I said there is two possible interpretations and so we have to resort to reasoning and yes you repeated the same point you brought in the first place and did it again.

Also it's a line in Quran that says "nor is it permitted to impose upon them hardship" in context of divorce not just hadiths. So it's more reasonable with accord to reason, that hardship includes not beating them.

It's more reasonable to see that the one place Quran is going to define the relationship of men with respect to women, he is not going to tell them to beat them. He is not going to tell them if they fear disobedience to beat them. He is going to define a positive thing and so being moral uplifting support to the extent that if you fear rebellion (in terms of cheating) not to act on your doubt but assume the best of them and continue to have intercourse. It's reasonable interpretation. It's the beat one that has left everyone confused as it's unexpected.

Then there is emphasis so that if they are obeying you to not seek a way against them. The next verses however shows what to is if there is serious fear of breach which is to get a judge from one family and another judge from the other family.

 

[KWED]

It's more reasonable to see that the one place Quran is going to define the relationship of men with respect to women, he is not going to tell them to beat them. He is not going to tell them if they fear disobedience to beat them.

This argument might be reasonable apart from one major problem - in the Quran, Allah clearly and explicitly does tell husbands to beat their wives for ill-conduct (under certain circumstances). So your argument falls apart completely
Not only that, Muhammad confirms this, as do classical scholars.

I get that you might not like the idea of wife beating, but Allah approves of various forms of torture and execution for harmless behaviour, so a bit of a slap for a disobedient wife is hardly out or character, is it?

If you don't like the rules of Islam, maybe Islam isn't the religion for you?
Oh, that's right, it isn't. You invented your own, didn't you!

 

[stanberger]

I wrote this 3 years ago on another site with respect to this question:

No, it’s a bad translation. It really means “Men regarding women are to be up lifters by what he has made some excel others and by what they spend their money, so the good women are obedient, guarding that which is hidden as God has guarded, and as for those you fear rebellion, admonish them while leaving them alone in their bed rooms (regarding this) and (continue to) have intercourse with them therefore if they obey you (by what you admonish them) don’t seek a way against them.”

As for why I translate as intercourse, the word literally for that is Nikah and God only uses that regarding marriage, as in he uses to term marriage which is ironically the same word, however, when God talks about else where, he says “touched women” and other expressions, and here to me it’s obviously not about beating women, but saying, if you fear rebellion - don’t act on your fears, but just admonish them and don’t even bring this up in the bed rooms and continue to have intercourse.

The one place where God is going to tell us about the role men play with respect to women is not going to be them as tyrants over them, that get to beat them as soon as they fear rebellion.

God the exalted, the great, has made men regarding women to be up lifters, suppose to morally support them, to the extent, if we fear rebellion, not to act on it, but just admonish them while leaving them alone in their bed rooms, and to continue to have intercourse with them.

The next verse shows really what should be done if there is a genuine breech between the two to be feared, which is to get one judge from one family and another judge from another.

The Quran else where says it’s not permitted to treat women harshly so let alone beat them!

-------


I would like someone who genuinely believes I am mistranslating or deceiving regarding the Arabic, to have one on one debate.

I say this because there are many expressions of intercourse in Quran (touching them, entering them, etc), and so to me this also a sign that dark magic prevents people from reflecting properly.

I argue this another verse that dark magic has blinded majority of Muslims, their scholars, and humans towards.

If someone really believes Quran should be translated in a way that permits beating of woman and not how I just said it, I would like a one on one debate about it.

 

[stanberger]

I wrote this 3 years ago on another site with respect to this question:

No, it’s a bad translation. It really means “Men regarding women are to be up lifters by what he has made some excel others and by what they spend their money, so the good women are obedient, guarding that which is hidden as God has guarded, and as for those you fear rebellion, admonish them while leaving them alone in their bed rooms (regarding this) and (continue to) have intercourse with them therefore if they obey you (by what you admonish them) don’t seek a way against them.”

As for why I translate as intercourse, the word literally for that is Nikah and God only uses that regarding marriage, as in he uses to term marriage which is ironically the same word, however, when God talks about else where, he says “touched women” and other expressions, and here to me it’s obviously not about beating women, but saying, if you fear rebellion - don’t act on your fears, but just admonish them and don’t even bring this up in the bed rooms and continue to have intercourse.

The one place where God is going to tell us about the role men play with respect to women is not going to be them as tyrants over them, that get to beat them as soon as they fear rebellion.

God the exalted, the great, has made men regarding women to be up lifters, suppose to morally support them, to the extent, if we fear rebellion, not to act on it, but just admonish them while leaving them alone in their bed rooms, and to continue to have intercourse with them.

The next verse shows really what should be done if there is a genuine breech between the two to be feared, which is to get one judge from one family and another judge from another.

The Quran else where says it’s not permitted to treat women harshly so let alone beat them!

-------


I would like someone who genuinely believes I am mistranslating or deceiving regarding the Arabic, to have one on one debate.

I say this because there are many expressions of intercourse in Quran (touching them, entering them, etc), and so to me this also a sign that dark magic prevents people from reflecting properly.

I argue this another verse that dark magic has blinded majority of Muslims, their scholars, and humans towards.

If someone really believes Quran should be translated in a way that permits beating of woman and not how I just said it, I would like a one on one debate about it.