Prophet Job/Aiyub beating his wife (38:44)

Started by MaHa, August 15, 2019, 10:03:56 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

MaHa

Dear Joseph,

Salam.

I am feeling that there is something wrong with the translation of Quran 38:44, in where prophet Job/Aiyub strike ("Idrib") a bunch of grass. Many translation says that, he actually struck his wife with it, mostly based on Ibne Kathir's Tafseer. Katheer describes a story that, prophet Job/Aiyub became angry with his wife for some reason and made an oath to lash her 100 times. So, Allah suggested her to tie 100 grasses together and strike her once (so that it becomes 100 lashes). In this way, his oath was fulfilled. I even didn't find this story in any authentic hadith book. My doubt about this translation is based on several facts.

1. This verse doesn't have the word "wife" in plain Arabic. It doesn't mention whom Job struck.
2. I think, there is also no feminine pronoun.
3. In your article where you wrote about "Daraba" in details, you said , whenever in Quran "idrib" means strike, it mentions both "(1)the object/body part to receive the strike" and/or the "(2)object, which is used to strike". You ruled out 4:34, according to this policy. I think, 38:44 should also be ruled out, if you consider that both (1) and (2) should be present. Hence, "idrib" means something else in 38:44 too.
4. I don't know Arabic well, so I used a translator app. I found that "idrib" also means "multiply" or "thresh" (removing grain by striking crop). According to both Quran (38:43) and Bible, Job used to own many cattle, servants and children before falling into distress and when these were given back to him, it was given by multiplying in number. Can "idrib" mean "multiply", in 38:44? Or can it mean "plant seed (by threshing the grain from the grass)" and thus starting a new farm-based life?

Thanks in advance.

MaHa

Dear Joseph,

I kept searching and have come with one more idea.

In 38:44, most translator translated "dightan" as bunch of grass/plants. By observing "dightan" in 12:44, 21:5, I assume, it means "A mixed group".

Another meaning of "idrib" is to "let out" or "finishing a lesson so that everybody becomes free from obligations" (synonyms: مكنه من الفرار, وسع الثوب, ضرب).

Can the translation of 38:44 be following, according to the context:
38:41 And remember Our servant Job, when he called to his Lord, "Indeed, Satan has touched me with hardship and torment."
38:42 [So he was told], "Strike [the ground] with your foot; this is a [spring for] a cool bath and drink."
38:43 And We granted him his family and a like [follower???] with them as mercy from Us and a reminder for those of understanding.
38: 44 [We said], "And take in your hand a mixed group of follower (or hand full of follower) and finish educating them and do not break your pledge." Indeed, We found him patient, an excellent servant. Indeed, he was one repeatedly turning back [to Allah].

I think, the pledge here is "preaching", which is a common pledge for all prophet, with God.

Waiting for your valuable opinion. Thank you.

Truth Seeker

Salaam MaHa,

As far as I am aware, there is no mention the previous scriptures of Prophet Job vowing to whip his wife. She is not mentioned by name and only 10 words of speech are allocated to her and many considered her to be a 'female foe'.

You will know that the forum members here are in the main Quran centric so that the hadith are not given a religious status so to speak.

That leaves us with only the scriptures to go with so according to the Quran prophet Job did indeed suffer in his life but his patience and enduring faith led to ultimately having children, health and wealth restored to him. The same is reflected in the previous scriptures but in a lot more detail.

I am not aware though that there is a mention of an oath in them unless anyone else here knows to the contrary.



MaHa

Walaikum Salam Truth Seeker, May Allah's blessing be you and your family. I am a great fan of this website/forum also of brother Joseph. I am well aware of Quran-centric approach. I apologise for not being  able to clarify my query.

I understood that, this verse have been mistranslated due to the over reliance of the translators, on Hadith (mentioned by Ibne Kathir). I didn't find any proper translation that can clarify the meaning according to context. 

I just wanted to know your opinion about the right translation or meaning of this verse (38:44) by avoiding that hadith.

Thanks for replying. 

Wakas

peace MaHa,

Are you familiar with the following? [source]

Quote (I recommend using the link above as it is better formatted):

14)
Wa khuth bi yadika dighthan fa idribbihi wala tahnath = And take with your hand a bundle, then strike with it, and do not break your oath
[38:44]

According to traditonal interpretations 38:44 was a symbolic strike by Job/Ayyub (upon his wife) with blades of grass, meaning a light/negligible strike was used.

M. Asad's note
In the words of the Bible (The Book of Job ii, 9), at the time of his seemingly hopeless suffering Job's wife reproached her husband for persevering in his faith: "Dost thou still retain thine integrity? Curse God, and die." According to the classical Qur'an-commentators, Job swore that, if God would restore him to health, he would punish her blasphemy with a hundred stripes. But when he did recover, he bitterly regretted his hasty oath, for he realized that his wife's "blasphemy" had been an outcome of her love and pity for him; and thereupon he was told in a revelation that he could fulfill his vow in a symbolic manner by striking her once with "a bunch of grass containing a hundred blades or more". (Cf. 5:89 - "God will not take you to task for oaths which you may have uttered without thought.")

Ibn Kathir (1301-1372 CE)
Reference: online article taken from this book
In this version, it is implied Job promises to strike his wife a hundred stripes simply for her asking why he doesn't call upon God to remove his affliction. This seems a natural question to ask and at most, perhaps shows lack of steadfastness/patience by her, as note, she does not disbelieve in God, and even acknowledges only God can remove the affliction. Interestingly, Job effectively asks this very thing in 21:83. Also, Job is described as a man of patience/sabr, but seemingly had no patience for his wife in this example. It should be noted that punishment for this type of alleged offence by his wife is nowhere to be found in The Quran, and it could be argued this would actually go against its principles. Lastly, when Job's family is returned to him it is described as a mercy in 21:84 and 38:43, i.e. implying it is a positive, making it even less likely that his wife played a negative role in his situation.

Tafsir Al-Qurtubi (1214-1273 CE)
Reference: Vol. 15, p. 212 of this book
In this version, it is said during the ailment of Job, his wife used to beg for him and Satan told her a word of disbelief to say and she told her husband Job, so he became angry with her and took an oath to strike her one hundred lashes, so God ordered Job to fulfil his oath by striking her with the bundle of thin grass.

Tafsir Al-Jalalayn (authors: 1459 & 1505 CE)
Reference: altafsir.com
In this version, it contradicts the above two accounts, and says it was when she was late in coming to him once. This seems an overly harsh punishment to administer for such an incident, and does not befit the character of Job as described in The Quran.

Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas (authors: 687 & 1414 CE)
Reference: altafsir.com
In this version, it says it was because she said something that displeased God, hence the punishment. It should be noted strongly, that punishment for allegedly saying something that displeases God is completely unheard of in The Quran, even though there are many examples in it of people ridiculing the prophets, God and The Quran. Therefore, this seems highly unlikely.

It should be noted that NONE of the above contradicting authors cite any Traditional narrations/ahadith to give weight to their interpretations. This could be because no such Traditional narrations/ahadith exist for this verse, and if they do not, then it is unclear where exactly these stories originated from. It is possible they were an embellishment or simply made up to explain the verse. This can be further confirmed by the Biblical account where there is no mention of this incident. It should also be noted that even though The Quran mentions Job briefly (4:163, 6:84, 21:83, 38:41-44), some aspects of his story are not mentioned in the Biblical version and vice versa.

The traditional interpretation is also problematic for another significant reason: if true, it would be the only example of an oath being expiated by way of symbolic gesture in The Quran. In 5:89 and 2:224-225 it clearly states that God will not hold us to account for thoughtless words in our oaths, or those not intended by the heart. And provides us ways to redeem if we break earnest/sincere oaths, e.g. by charity, abstinence/fasting.
Some commentators have used the traditional story of Job to rationalise the interpretation of "beat lightly" in 4:34 even though the circumstances are entirely different.

So, is there an alternative translation and understanding of 38:44? Since DRB and "dighthan (~bundle/handful)" have multiple meanings, there are several possibilities according to Classical Arabic dictionaries, however, upon closer examination of the story of Job in The Quran, the most probable answer is actually contained therein:

And Job when he called unto his Lord: "I have been afflicted with harm, and you are the most merciful of the merciful." [21:83]
So We responded to him, and We removed what was with him of the harm, and We brought him his family and like thereof with them as a mercy from Us and a reminder to those who serve. [21:84]

And recall Our servant Job, when he called upon his Lord: "The serpent/cobra* has afflicted/touched me with distress/difficulty and suffering/punishment." [38:41]
"Strike with your foot, this is a cool spring to wash with and drink." [38:42]
And We granted his family to him and like thereof with them as a mercy from Us; and a reminder for those who possess intelligence. [38:43]
"And take with your hand a handful, then put forth / fling with it**, and do not incline towards falsehood***". We found him patient. What an excellent servant! Indeed, he was oft returning. [38:44]
*Arabic: shaytan, root: Shiin-Tay-Nun, English: satan.
** Arabic: bihi (with it). "hi" refers to a masculine and the closest preceding masculine is the cool spring. Interestingly, "Dighthan" can also mean "wash without cleansing" as well as "handful", thus likely refers to rubbing/washing with the spring water. 38:44 is connected to previous context by "waw/and" and likely refers to the washing mentioned in 38:42, giving a perfect self-contained explanation. Also possible, but lesser likely, is that DRB could also mean "fashion or put a cover", i.e. a dressing or pressure bandage, with a handful of something.
***When researching the word "tahnath" (Root: Ha-Nun-Thaa) in Classical Arabic dictionaries, as this form of the word is only used once in The Quran, a common meaning was "incline towards falsehood", "say what is untrue", hence Maulana Ali's rendering for example: "And take in thy hand few worldly goods and earn goodness (i.e. traffic) therewith and incline not to falsehood".

"shaytan" is not often translated as serpent/cobra, but it is a well known Classical Arabic meaning. In the entire Quran, there are 88 occurrences of shaytan (loosely translated as 'opposing force' be it from oneself or elsewhere), but only two occurrences in which shaytan is the one doing the afflicting/touching (Root: Miim-Siin-Siin), and they are 38:41 and 2:275. In both occurrences, the meaning of shaytan strongly points to serpent/cobra:

Those who consume usury, they do not stand but as one might stand whom the serpent/cobra confounded* from its touch. That is because they have said: "Trade is the same as usury." While God has made trade lawful, and He has forbidden usury. Whoever has received understanding from His Lord and ceases, then he will be forgiven for what was before this and his case will be with God. But whoever returns, then they are the people of the Fire, in it they will abide eternally. [2:275]

i.e. their footing/position/mentality/reasoning is weak, in disorder, corrupted, they cannot think/speak sensibly etc.
*root: Kha-Ba-Tay, also has a meaning of "touch with a hurt so as to corrupt/disorder and render one insane".

Further, 38:41 is the only occurrence where shaytan is the cause of either distress/difficulty (Nun-Sad-Ba) and/or suffering/punishment (Ayn-Thal-Ba), implying this is a unique usage. If we also couple this with knowledge of the usual methodology applied by shaytan which is false promises, deceit, temptation, delusion etc we can see that 38:41 and 2:275 are different, i.e. shaytan is applying a different methodology here, so the obvious question is to ask why? The evidence points to because in these two occurrences it means serpent/cobra. The Quran also uses this meaning for shaytan in 37:64-65 ("It is a tree that grows in the midst of Hell. Its sheaths are like the heads of serpents/cobras").

However, the strongest evidence is the perfect sense it makes within the context of 38:41-44, and what Job was asked to do, all of which are commonly recommended after a snake bite:

1) wash - i.e. the wound and/or oneself, which helps calm oneself, lessen risk of infection and possibly reduce any symptoms of fever.
2) drink water - this may help slow down heart rate, rehydrate from exhaustion or lost fluids, help calm oneself, and possibly increase rate of venom washout from the body.
3) wash the wound with handfuls of water, or apply a pressure bandage to prevent venom spread or dressing to prevent infection.
4) do not incline towards falsehood - a snakebite victim may often become delusional or not think clearly afterwards, hence this advice. This is also shown by 2:275.

However, the last point may also mean "do not fail in your oath/duty" after recovered, because Job was likely travelling in the land when this happened to him, probably spreading God's message, thus God is effectively telling him to not be deterred from continuing in this once recovered.
Also, the words "patient" and "oft-returning" at the end of the verse do suggest a recovery period, and are thus appropriate for the context of a snakebite.

Another interesting discovery is that even in the story of Job in The Bible, "satan" is referenced as inflicting a physical harm, Chapter 2:7 " So Satan went forth from the presence of the Lord, and smote Job with sore boils from the sole of his foot even unto his crown." After this part, his friends came to him, and implies he was in pain/grief and in a recovery period and did not speak (perhaps on purpose, i.e. "do not incline towards falsehood"), after which he showed signs of despair, like giving up, but eventually his condition was restored, and became blessed again. Quite often, The Quran corrects myths, the story of Job is perhaps just another example.

To conclude, the understanding presented here for the story of Job fits the grammar, the Arabic, Classical Arabic meanings, logic, cross-referencing and is a self-contained explanation.


Verify for yourself. www.Misconceptions-About-Islam.com

MaHa

Salam Brother Wakas,

May Allah bless you for your time to reply my query. I went through your website and will keep following inshallah.

The explanation you gave is in concordance with 2 available translations, hence your translation must has credibility. You can check it in islamawakened.com.
38:41 (Shabbir Ahmed): "And remember Our servant Job, when he called upon his Lord, "Behold, the serpent has bitten me and I am in distress and suffering."  .
38:44 (Ahmed Ali's): "Take a handful of herbs," (We said to him),
and apply and rub them, and do not make a mistake." We found him patient in adversity, an excellent devotee, always turning in repentance."

I would like to know your valuable opinion about 2 things:
1. Your opinion about Rashed Khalif's translation of 38:44- "Now, you shall travel the land and preach the message, to fulfill your pledge." We found him steadfast. What a good servant! He was a submitter".
He used the word "travel" to translate "Idrib" and "breaking pledge" to translate the word "tahnath", but I am not sure which word represent "dightan" in his translation.
2. And your opinion, whether "dightan" could be translated as bundle of follower (companion/sahaba). Hence God grants family/follower in previous verse and now telling him to take bundle of them with him to travel to preach. The pledge/duty of a prophet of God is to preach, right?

Thanks again for your kind response.



Truth Seeker

Salaam MaHa,

I know you have some questions for Waqas, but I just wanted to mention that there are different words used for serpent/snake in the Quran and none of them are shaitaan, so maybe it is a push to interpret it thus.

Also I would steer well clear of Rashad Khalifa and his translations. I am not aware if you already know that he is considered as heretic by many due to his interpretation of the Quran plus his claim that there is a hidden numerical miracle contained therein.

MaHa

Walaikum Salam Truth Seeker,

I am well aware of all the controversies about Rashed Khalifa. I am looking for a proper understanding of a verse from all available translation (and haven't got any satisfactory answer yet), and this search is not biased to any person's other theories.

Jajakallahu khairan for replying. I understand your concern.   I am keen to hear opinions and be respectful to other's opinion, while seeking guidance to God to take the best meaning.     

Wakas

peace,

Re: 1)
i dont consider it credible due to it not fitting the Arabic.

Re: 2)If the masculine preposition "hi" in "bihi" can refer to ahl/people then I guess it is theoretically possible, however it would be an unusual application as it would imply a non-literal rendering of "and take in/with your hand a handful..."

As I said the rendering in my previous post has the following qualities:
"To conclude, the understanding presented here for the story of Job fits the grammar, the Arabic, Classical Arabic meanings, logic, cross-referencing and is a self-contained explanation. "

I personally have not come across an understanding more cogent than the above.
Verify for yourself. www.Misconceptions-About-Islam.com