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.