I’m really getting sick and tired of all these so called “scholars” who interpret the “beating verse” in their own twisted way. I vehemently oppose them. We need more Laleh Bakhtiars:
Laleh Bakhtiar, whose English translation of the Qur’an (the first done by a woman) is due out in the spring, brings the session of ijtihad to a close by discussing what she learned about the Qur’an through personal study. Take the controversial verse 4:34. Conventional translation of it reads, “Husbands who fear adversity on the part of wives, admonish them, leave their bed, and beat them.”
But how could the Qur’an instruct men to beat their wives, Bakhtiar asks. After consulting numerous Muslim scholars and conducting her own in-depth study, she concluded that the Arabic root word “drb” (which has always been translated to “beat”) also means “to go away.”
So she translated the verse to be “Husbands who fear adversity on the part of wives, admonish them, leave their bed, and go away.” Now that’s major ijtihad. “We must deal with inconsistencies in the Qur’an,” she says, because the Qur’an is not wrong. The mistakes come, Bakhtiar says, in how we interpret it.
G. Willow Wilson also said the following:
…‘yidrab’ is almost always used in modern Arabic to mean ‘to beat’; but that doesn’t mean it was used this way 1,400 years ago. Part of the reason we have Wahhabis running about sporting the Abrahim Lincoln beard is because they are reading ‘yihla’ as ‘to cut off’ [one's mustache] (its colloquial modern meaning) when in classical Arabic it means ‘to trim’. Hilarity ensues.
For more on the issue check this video out.
SudaneseThinker
SudaneseThinker
{ 31 comments… read them below or add one }
Asma Barlas and Amina Wadud have been on the “drb” meaning go away for years now too. Barlas has a great book (if somewhat esoteric sometimes) and I was with her on a panel once in DC four years ago…I was actually hoping that she and her wonderful ideas would explode in the world but it shows you that people just don’t want to change the status quo.
Those that want to beat their wives will say she’s nothing but a stupid feminist who’s going to hell for her interpretation and those who want us to turn the Quran completely on its head insist that her and her ilk are nothing but apologists.
Part of the problem with the interpretation of sacred texts is that it is always easier (and usually more acceptable among those who are effected by the interpretations) to be stricter rather than more lenient. The problem, as Carmen put it, is that lenient views - of any sacred text, I might add - are usually viewed with suspicion.
Of course, the whole issue begs the question of why a perfect deity would write an imperfect text which requires, or is even open to interpretation in the first place. But I don’t want to make too many waves
The funny thing is that there could be a logical, reasonable, sensible explanation and interpretation to almost anything. It’s up to the people themselves to choose how to interpret, and that’s the beauty of the free will and expanding one’s knowledge and asking questions. You can interpret this arabic word as “beat”, you can choose NOT to interpret it as “beat”, but as “go away” instead. The burden, therefore, lies on the interpreter, to make the right decision. That’s how thousand years old texts CAN and SHOULD be interpreted (if they just HAVE to be followed) in modern times.
“darb” doesn’t exclusively mean beat in Arabic. For example, some verses of the Quran start with “darab Allah Mathalan…” which mean: “Allah makes an example of..” This by itself shows that the word darb doesn’t necessarily coincide with a physical act.
OK, then, the Arabic root word “drb” translates as “beat it” in the meaning
“get the heck outta there”
Last resort of a frustrated husband with an intolerable wife.
i would also urge the muslims to check the original meaning of the words ‘pig’ and ‘ape’ because i am absolutely sure that 1000 years ago their meaning was ‘bright’ and ‘virtuous’
An interesting and positive translation which would support various understandings of Islam as a high-road faith rather than a dark ages approach.
I bet what is meant is:
‘beat it, beat it….’
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kI1uMK_lKY4
And then along comes this guy again …
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3366266,00.html
Once again, he’s been smoking some potent stuff …
تبرىء الكلمات في القلوب
ثم همس الرب في قلوبنا…
الكلمات تصل حيث لا يقدر السلاح
سألنا حكيم قريتنا، كيف ينزل الدفء
على النفوس والشيطان
قد ألقى بسمومه المفضلة
خوفاً ويأساً وكراهية
على القلوب البريئة
كما الرماد من محرقة السعادة
كيف تنام عيون الايمان
وسرير الأمل
تفترشه ملاءة القنوط الشاحب
وعيون الحنث الفاسدة
تنتهك حرمة الكلمات المقدسة
وتسعد باغتيال هدايا السماء
وسألنا :كيف يبتسم الخير
ويصفع الكره الفضيلة من وجه الخجل
و أتباعه يشوهون ويحرفون فى نفوس ضحاياهم
حتى يصل الاعتقاد
بأن الإثم فضيلة والقتل عدالة والكره هو الحب
تحدث الحكيم
بصوته الخفيض وقال
أن للشيطان أتباع
يغتسلون في أنهار النبيذ في حادي*
وبعشق السخرية الفارغ
يحصدون نفوساً مغشوشة جنيت بمنجل الانتحار
مستحيل أن يكون الطريق إلى الفردوس مرصوفاً
بجثث الأبرياء - عبر نهرٍ من الدم
اعتنقوا مد الحق وجزره الرائع في قلوبكم
تقبّلوا الشك والعار أينما كانوا
لكي تدركوا أن النفس تسعد بالعطف وليس بالانتقام
سطع صوته كالضوء وقال:
ابحثوا بشجاعة في أعماق قلوبكم
بلا نفاق ولا خداع ولا إجحاف
وحين تلمسوا الايمان هناك
ستنزل الكلمات الالهيه دواءً للقلوب
مثل مطر أبدي يجذبه البحر دائماً
حتى يرتفع ليملأ حرم النفوس
بودٍ عميق هادىء ويغدو سلاماً
على شواطىء العزم الالهي.
[أرض الموتى في الأساطير الاغريقية*
أبريل 2006
“Of course, the whole issue begs the question of why a perfect deity would write an imperfect text which requires, or is even open to interpretation in the first place. But I don’t want to make too many waves :)”
“The funny thing is that there could be a logical, reasonable, sensible explanation and interpretation to almost anything. It’s up to the people themselves to choose how to interpret, and that’s the beauty of the free will and expanding one’s knowledge and asking questions. You can interpret this arabic word as “beat”, you can choose NOT to interpret it as “beat”, but as “go away” instead. The burden, therefore, lies on the interpreter, to make the right decision. That’s how thousand years old texts CAN and SHOULD be interpreted (if they just HAVE to be followed) in modern times.”
Kat and NC present “the” questions when it comes to our Holy Books. NC has a huge point…maybe the good Lord needed to be a whole lot clearer…
With Kat…all too much interpretation renders these books utterly meaningless…
I use the reference of billowey puffy clouds…look at them long enough and it can become so many different things…
If there is a God…then NOTHING is more important than understanding His will and intentions…and the only thing we got are a few books that nobody can agree upon…and our own mystical experiences…which Raccoon artificially induces anyhow.
It is one hell of a problem and NC makes an important point.
Howie,
Were the holy books clear, they would have taken away both from our free will and from our ability to think.
Were the goal both our spiritual and mental development, rather than our stagnation, then the holy books we have do a fairly good job. They can’t be perfect, mind. Because we’re not perfect. And thus anything we use is not perfect. All we can achieve is the best we can do, at any given time.
Roman,
Both free will and our ability (and indeed, duty) to think are eroded to a point of near non-existence by the interpreters of these texts, over the ages, specifically those in every religion who are later granted the status of sainthood (or equivalents). Their authority becomes unquestionable, and in many cases, unquestioned, and has the effect, quite often, of being more important than even the texts themselves.
When a word that could mean ‘go away’ is interpreted as meaning ‘beat’ (and I’m only taking this example because it’s the topic of this blog post - there are examples in all of the book-based religions), and this interpretation earns the status of an unquestionable and unquestioned interpretation, where then is free will? Does the believer really have the free will to choose a different interpretation? I’m talking about in the hard cases, not the easy ones. It then makes absolutely no difference what the original intention of the text was.
And you are correct, of course. The books cannot be perfect. That is because they are written texts that belong to the particular period in which they were written. Why is it, then, that the religions that are based on these books claim that the books themselves are perfect?
# Roman Kalik Says:
February 19th, 2007 at 8:14 am
Howie,
Were the holy books clear, they would have taken away both from our free will and from our ability to think.
Were the goal both our spiritual and mental development, rather than our stagnation, then the holy books we have do a fairly good job. They can’t be perfect, mind. Because we’re not perfect. And thus anything we use is not perfect. All we can achieve is the best we can do, at any given time.
the question of course is if the mess the holy books create is really worth it … because the downside of all misinterpretations, fanaticism and other shit seems to be enormous …
even if originally the books were meant to be good (which i am not sure about at all) they just seem to achieve the opposite effect …
finally should we be really hiring whole departments of professors of history, philosophy and linguistics and then shelter them from death threats and suicide bombers just to reach such a banal and unimpressive conclusion that it may be not a good idea at all to submit our wives to prolong and violent beating sessions?
very interesting..
i would love to read her translation once it comes out..
I don’t mind intepretation…and I understand each of your points and they are problems…
Me…it drives me nuts when we come across something that just makes on sense and the we “beat” on it until we like it.
Remember the story of Elisha? Some kids were teasing him and calling him baldy…so God sends bears to kill them…now this is the same Bible that tells us to have mercy on widows and orphans and not to subvert justice. How do you justify making those kids lunch for calling Elisha “baldy”? Well..it gets done…and there are many more like it.
This is where I lose respect for the process…but remain perplexed because books like the Torah also have revolutionary and the greatest of ideas…
em>This is where I lose respect for the process…but remain perplexed because books like the Torah also have revolutionary and the greatest of ideas…
maybe it is just what it appears to be ? no more than just a reflection of the moral and ethical standards of a given period.. hardly surprising then that we find so much stuff there plainly bizarre since it was written hundreds and thousands of years ago …
sorry for the mess .. another try
This is where I lose respect for the process…but remain perplexed because books like the Torah also have revolutionary and the greatest of ideas…
maybe it is just what it appears to be ? no more than just a reflection of the moral and ethical standards of a given period.. hardly surprising then that we find so much stuff there plainly bizarre since it was written hundreds and thousands of years ago …
Nobody…
“MAYBE”….that’s right Nobody…”maybe”
And the whole dilema….”maybe not”.
and if it’s not , then what ? we ll go to hell?
Nobody….
No…it is is all BS…then life is a good joke for a few people and a very bad joke for most people…
Potentially…then life is a cosmic accident…somehow from nothing all this around us came about…and then into nothing we will go…there is no design, no purpose, no meaning…there is only nothing…
If there is a Unifying Force…or a God or whatever…the Grand Pubah of Zintom…call “IT” what you will…then we don’t have a whole lot to go on in terms of what the Grand Pubah is about…just a few books that MAYBE (as you say) give us some direction…or the occasional mystical experience…and God has not spoken to me through burning bushes or light bulbs…so…this is what we have…
Written through Revelation…or the creation of a guys with beards on too much “old wine”…
Don’t know
But “going to hell”? I wish I knew…don’t want to go…but don’t want to delude myself into believing certain things that don’t add up…
This is not an easy topic…but an important one.
But “going to hell”? I wish I knew…don’t want to go…
yes.. i admit .. the idea sucks .. i also hate thinking about going to hell
but i actually do believe that we may have something inborn in terms of direction … i noticed for example that much of reading of the scared books for many people is more like seeking for confirmation of what they know already … they are more like searching for certainty - that good is fundamental … that ethics are more than just social conventions or by product of social evolution … the actual contents of the books, they just dont need them … anyway they reinterpret them the way they think it should be …
there is a harvard professor i read about in the new york times another day .. he claimed that the ethics is hardwired into the human brain much like the deep linguistic structures of chomsky … the theory was greeted with lots of skepticism but personally i have been thinking along these lines all the way …
funny how i mistyped sacred … scared !!
Nobody….
Maybe
Maybe not
Isn’t the 72 virgins a misinterpretation also?
Like the Jewish Talmud…Christian Canon’s…Islamic Hadith etc…there is “the” Holy Book and then there are the “divinely inspired interpretations” that become canonized…kind of…sort of…I don’t know about the virgin thing…
But take kosher…all the Bible says is that you “cannot boil a calf in its mother’s milk”. Then there is a list of animals, birds and bugs you can and cannot eat (many of the species being unclear in modern times)…from that….there are a million rules on keeping kosher and an entire industry.
This is part of the problem with religion and religous “leaders” telling us what God “really” says.
Nobody: “noticed for example that much of reading of the scared books for many people is more like seeking for confirmation of what they know already”
That, my friend, is more true than you might believe.
“Nobody” knows
halalhippie Says:
February 20th, 2007 at 11:17 pm
Nobody: “noticed for example that much of reading of the scared books for many people is more like seeking for confirmation of what they know already”
That, my friend, is more true than you might believe.
well .. if you want i can take it even further … this clinging to the sacred books is just a result of the inability of too many people to trust their intuition … we are living in the world where one is supposed to have rational explanations for everything he does … an argument that we may not still fully understand something does not count … so a person with religious or better ethical orientation is expected to know at least the main whys and hows of what he is doing… that it feels right or feels good does not count any longer ..
there was a kind of research recently as far as i understand which among others featured study of altruistic behaviour in two year old babies.. and in general it appears that the things are way more complicated than enlightened egoism and other rational theories of the ethics would suggest.. but most people either dont know about this or cannot connect it to their real life experiences
“the inability of too many people to trust their intuition ” Is more where I’m at: if there is something you KNOW deep inside, and then read it in a book (sacred or not) you get this aha-experience kinda thingy.
Then, some ppl decide to believe ALL there is in that particular book whether it make sense or not. I think you catch my drift.
i would compare it to the situation with psychosomatics at the beginning of the last century … it took the medical profession a disproportionately long time to catch up with a common knowledge obvious to any idiot who got eyes - that the human mind can impact the human body in an incredible number of ways …
the pseudo rational thinking has undermined intuition and common sense so much recently that people no longer can do something on faith or on intuition without trying to construct some kind of explanation for this … but i would say that people should dojust what feels right .. in my view they by far do much better when relying on the internal compass rather than on external books … as to the explanations they may come one day ..
or they may not …
Leave a Comment