1
Women / Re: Does 2:230 condition Hilla marriage?
« on: July 31, 2012, 05:14:07 PM »
Yes I got it.
Thank you
Thank you
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1]
2
Women / Re: Does 2:230 condition Hilla marriage?
« on: July 31, 2012, 04:30:26 PM »
Perhaps it is so restricted, so that a couple does not turn the devorce into a play-thing. This gives two long chances.
In God's law of nature we notice such restriction what is unalterable. God's natural law and societal law are harmonious, but not zulm.
Peace
In God's law of nature we notice such restriction what is unalterable. God's natural law and societal law are harmonious, but not zulm.
Peace
3
Women / Re: Does 2:230 condition Hilla marriage?
« on: July 31, 2012, 02:40:02 PM »
Salamun alaikum,
Brother Joseph,
Thank you, now I am clear that there is no place for Hilla marriage since this is an intentional temporary marriage, and that one woman can never have more than one husband. So the violation of woman's right in name of Hilla is not warrented.
Now, suppose, I have devorced my wife thrice and she did not marry anyone else. Then we want to remarry. Does this requires that she must marry and then devorce one else and yes she must not intend that a temporary one?
Another question is, does each devorce (of the three devorces) means a nullification of marriage? Or a nullification of marriage occurs only when the three devorces are made?
Yes, I read various translations putting side by side and if I do not understand anything yet, I ask knowledgeable quran thinker.
Jazak Allahu khair.
Brother Joseph,
Thank you, now I am clear that there is no place for Hilla marriage since this is an intentional temporary marriage, and that one woman can never have more than one husband. So the violation of woman's right in name of Hilla is not warrented.
Now, suppose, I have devorced my wife thrice and she did not marry anyone else. Then we want to remarry. Does this requires that she must marry and then devorce one else and yes she must not intend that a temporary one?
Another question is, does each devorce (of the three devorces) means a nullification of marriage? Or a nullification of marriage occurs only when the three devorces are made?
Yes, I read various translations putting side by side and if I do not understand anything yet, I ask knowledgeable quran thinker.
Jazak Allahu khair.
4
Women / Does 2:230 condition Hilla marriage?
« on: July 31, 2012, 08:35:55 AM »
Salam
Dear brothers,
Does the quran give the condition of another devorce by another husband for woman before remarrying her old husband who devorced her thrice?
Shabbir ahmad's translation of the verse became descriptive and does not support such condition, as far I made out.
What is your rendering of the verse?
Dear brothers,
Does the quran give the condition of another devorce by another husband for woman before remarrying her old husband who devorced her thrice?
Shabbir ahmad's translation of the verse became descriptive and does not support such condition, as far I made out.
What is your rendering of the verse?
5
Women / Re: 'Yudnina' and Lengthening of Garments
« on: July 27, 2012, 06:15:30 AM »
The Monotheist Translation is not Reformist translation brother. It is wrotten by someone else, not Edip Yuksel.
I was talking of The monotheist translation. You can see here:
www.quranix.org/#?RTQ=1&TMG=1&MA=1&RK=1&SH=1&TE=1&A=1&L=en&NA=10&keywords=33%3A59&sinall=cur&slogic=and
As you think it is interpretational problem, not literal, that is, you mean there is plausibility for both, then we can conclude that it cant contradict 24:31's principles, therefore the head-scarf and face-veil are no way supported by Qur'an.
Jazak allahu khayran brother Joseph for the clarification
I was talking of The monotheist translation. You can see here:
www.quranix.org/#?RTQ=1&TMG=1&MA=1&RK=1&SH=1&TE=1&A=1&L=en&NA=10&keywords=33%3A59&sinall=cur&slogic=and
As you think it is interpretational problem, not literal, that is, you mean there is plausibility for both, then we can conclude that it cant contradict 24:31's principles, therefore the head-scarf and face-veil are no way supported by Qur'an.
Jazak allahu khayran brother Joseph for the clarification
6
Women / Re: 'Yudnina' and Lengthening of Garments
« on: July 26, 2012, 07:12:11 PM »
Dear sir Joseph Islam,
Salamun alaikum,
I wanted to know actually if the monotheist group's translation is correct when they say that Ayah33:59 tells, "...so that they can not be recognized and teased". Here this 'not' is a common negetion of both- 'recognized' and 'teased'.
But most of our translators refer this 'not' only to 'teased'.
So kindly clarify this.
Sorry my question was not what 'yudnina' means.
Thank you in advance.
Salamun alaikum,
I wanted to know actually if the monotheist group's translation is correct when they say that Ayah33:59 tells, "...so that they can not be recognized and teased". Here this 'not' is a common negetion of both- 'recognized' and 'teased'.
But most of our translators refer this 'not' only to 'teased'.
So kindly clarify this.
Sorry my question was not what 'yudnina' means.
Thank you in advance.
Pages: [1]