verse 4:29

[Hamzeh]

Salamu Alykum Brother Joseph

There seems to be different opinions of translations on verse 4:29

As I was reading Muhammad Asads rendition of the Quran I noted this:

4:29
O YOU who have attained to faith! Do not devour one another's possessions wrongfully - not even by way of trade based on mutual agreement 38 - and do not destroy one another: for, behold, God is indeed a dispenser of grace unto you! (4:30) And as for him who does this with malicious intent and a will to do wrong39 - him shall We, in time, cause to endure [suffering through] fire: for this is indeed easy for God.

The arabic word in question is "illa" which usually and mostly translates as "except, only, save"

He further implies in his explanation he translated the arabic word "illa" as "not even by way" instead of using the more 'usual' meaning "except or unless" from what I understand simply because "it would imply that wrongful profits from trading based on mutual agreement are excepted from the general prohibition, "Devour not one another's possessions wrongfully"-

He further goes on to explain why on page 165-166 of his book.

He also compares it to verse 27:10-11 which I can see why in verse 27:10-11 the word "illa" he is translating it as " and neither"

I would really like to know, because if Muhammad Asad translation is correct I would like to know what kind of transaction that can occur by mutual consent that can be made from one person to another falsely? bargaining a cheap price with a mutual agreement with someone while planning to sell for higher price maybe?

It would be assuming that trade buying and selling is in conflict of this verse while trade is made lawful by another verse 2:275

other translations I found was:

4:29 O ye who believe! Squander not your wealth among yourselves in vanity, except it be a trade by mutual consent, and kill not one another. Lo! Allah is ever Merciful unto you

4:29 O you who believe! Do not consume each other's wealth illicitly, but trade by mutual consent. And do not kill yourselves, for God is Merciful towards you.

Peace

[good logic]

Peace Hamzah.

Of course wait for brother Joseph s answer.
But if you do not mind ,I understand it as
 " The only acceptable way of trading/exchanging belongings is by mutual agreement.". In other words Do not force anyone to buy at inflated prices nor sell at "very low " prices. i.e do not monopolise the market like the Mafia  but agree the normal price for buying and selling property/items/belongings...What is fair and just.

The parties exchanging/buying/selling...will have to mutually agree. The buyer and seller( exchangers) have both the right to agree the buying/selling/exchanging...price.
That way, a fair price/exchange is more likely to be agreed.

Thank you.
GOD bless you.
Peace.

[Hamzeh]

Peace brother Good Logic

Thank you for your input. Its very appreciated 

I am leaning towards the mainstream translation of the arabic word "illa"  as "except or only" and not leaning towards brother Muhammad Asads translation as he noted "not even by way".

Now that I have given it more thought I would assume from the context of this verse(many verses before) that its related to inheritance and God is telling the Believers not to consume one another's possessions wrongfully. In my own words-do not divide the inheritance in the portions other than what God has ordained. However if one was to trade something from the inheritance with mutual agreement with one another then that may be fine. And also do not hurt or kill one another for entitlement of possessions or a larger portion of inheritance. Thats one thought that came to mind.

The other thought that came to mind when testing Muhammad Asads translation was forcing someone to sell. Like what you would see in movies by the mafia by making people sign over properties. But that would not make much sense as that really is not a mutual agreement based on free choice, rather than a force. So I can't support that much at this time

There is still a part of me that agrees with Muhammad Asads translation is because he related it to verse 27:10-11.

I am more interested in the arabic term "illa". Is it in the arabic language that "illa" can have almost a opposite meaning like 'except/only and neither/not' even when used in different sentences?.

When reading the term "illa" in verse  27:10-11 when God is speaking to Moses. Asad seems to thinks if we don't  translate the arabic word "illa" with "neither " then it won't make much sense.

27:10-11 "O Moses" (it was said) "Fear not: truly in My presence, those called as messengers have no fear― (10) "Except him who has done wrong and have thereafter substituted good to take the place of evil, truly I am Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Asad is of the thought that instead of reading it with "Except" he would read it as "Neither him who has done wrong...."

Both verses 4:29 and 27:10-11 can be viewed as using the word "except". In that instance it would be very well implying those messengers who have done wrong before and then repented and exchanged evil for good, they WOULD fear, However truly God is Forgiving and Merciful.

If you want to get a better understanding of his opinion which he has more more point that stands out read page 164-166 from this website below[1]

Asalamu Alykum


http://muhammad-asad.com/Message-of-Quran.pdf

[good logic]

Peace Hamzah.

Thank you for the link.

You are right about the context.

From my understanding , the Arabic word "illa" can mean :Except, Only or But. I am more inclined to the word "Only" in the verse 4:29.

GOD bless you.
Peace.