Quranic Incoherence? 2 Miracles Responded

Asalaam alaikum


Quranic Incoherence? 2 Miracles Responded

Just read this on and thought it was amazing.


One of the claims brought about against the Quran is the claim that it is incoherent, and the stories are scattered around. I wanted to share some notes on a few things that Nouman Ali Khan (one of the instructors at Bayyinah Institute) touched upon in this regards that I thought were absolutely beautiful. The first miracle is amazing, but the second one I mention here completely blew my mind.

Rhyming Scheme

The first miracle is regarding the rhyme scheme used in the Quran. In Surah Maryam the rhyming pattern is very distinct and consistent throughout the beginning of the Surah all the way up until the point that it begins to address Isa (alayhis Salam). After that part is finished and it starts talking about Ibrahim (alayhis Salam) it returns back to the original pattern.

Part of the characteristics of the Quran is that it is something meant to be recited and heard by the people. When someone is listening to this, and they notice an abrupt change they will automatically pay more attention. The rhyme scheme is not beautification only, but it serves a very real purpose in drawing attention to a very important point in the Surah.

Coherency between Surah Isra and Surah Kahf

Surah Isra and Surah Kahf are the 17th and 18th Surahs in the Quran. Isra has 111 ayaat, and Kahf has 110 ayaat.

Surah Isra begins with:

سبحان الذي أسرى بعبده

And Surah Kahf begins with:

الحمد لله الذي أنزل على عبده

Notice the similarities and differences here. Both are glorifying and praising Allah, and both are discussing revelation. In Surah Isra, the Prophet (sal-Allahu alayhi was-Sallam) is ascending up to receive the revelation, and in Surah Kahf the revelation is being sent down. Both of them have the word ‘abdihi.

In the middle of both surah’s is also an ayah talking about the story of Iblis refusing to prostrate to Adam (alayhis Salam).

In Surah Isra the ayah is as follows:

And (remember) when We said to the angels: “Prostrate unto Adam.” They prostrated except Iblis (Satan). He said: “Shall I prostrate to one whom You created from clay?”

In Surah Kahf it reads:

And (remember) when We said to the angels; “Prostrate to Adam.” So they prostrated except Iblis (Satan). He was one of the jinns; he disobeyed the Command of his Lord.

This is an example of something that some Non-Muslims may claim is an incoherency. Why is the same story split up into different places with different details? Good question.

Let’s take a quick step back. We know that Surah Isra is also sometimes called Surah Bani Israa’eel. It also contains a series of ayaat that Ibn Abbas(ra) mentioned were similar to the 10 commandments given to Musa (alayhis Salam). So this surah is primarily addressing Bani Isra’eel, who had knowledge but became arrogant.

Surah Kahf is addressing the Christians. We can see this from ayah 4, “And to warn those who say, ‘Allah has begotten a son (or offspring or children).’” The Christians disobeyed their Lord.

So when the surah is addressing those who were afflicted with arrogance, the part of the story mentioned is the one pertaining to them. When the surah is addressing a different audience, it uses the part of the story most pertinent to them. SubhanAllah!!

If that was not enough, there is still more (and this is only touching upon a small treasure of the many treasures of the Quran). The second to last ayah in each surah is,

Surah Isra:

Say (O Muhammad SAW): “Invoke Allah or invoke the Most Beneficent (Allah), by whatever name you invoke Him (it is the same), for to Him belong the Best Names...

Surah Kahf:

Say (O Muhammad SAW to mankind). “If the sea were ink for (writing) the Words of my Lord, surely, the sea would be exhausted before the Words of my Lord would be finished, even if we brought (another sea) like it for its aid.”

There are 2 primary ways in which we get to know Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta’ala). First is by His Names and Attributes, and this is mentioned in Surah Isra. The other way is by recognizing Allah by His creation, and this is what is mentioned in Surah Kahf. It is amazing the way that they line up together. These 2 sets of ayaat form a foundation of Tawheed. Knowing and recognizing the Oneness of Allah(swt).

Also His Words actually are manifested in two ways, and both of these meanings are indicated in the verse from Surah Kahf:

1. His Creation (as in how Allah says “kun fa yakoon” i.e. “be and it is”, so His Words are immediately apparent in Creation)
2. His Revelation (as in the Qur’an itself, the literal Word of Allah)

The last ayah in each surah takes it to the next step and gives a protection from shirk. The last ayaat of each surah are as follows,

Surah Isra:

And say: “All the praises and thanks be to Allah, Who has not begotten a son (nor an offspring), and Who has no partner in (His) Dominion, nor He is low to have a Wali (helper, protector or supporter). And magnify Him with all the magnificence, [Allahu-Akbar (Allah is the Most Great)].”

Surah Kahf:

Say (O Muhammad SAW): “I am only a man like you. It has been inspired to me that your Ilah (God) is One Ilah (God i.e. Allah). So whoever hopes for the Meeting with his Lord, let him work righteousness and associate none as a partner in the worship of his Lord.”

Lastly, the last ayah of Surah Isra begins with,

وَقُلِ الْحَمْدُ لِلّهِ الَّذِي

And this is exactly what Surah Kahf begins with. When one ponders on this, it is amazing that anyone could then come and make a claim against this book, and surely had it not been from Allah we would have found within it much discrepancy, not the uncovering of gem after gem, jewel after jewel, and miracle after miracle.

*Bonus Miracle

One other thing we discussed in the class was the use of the royal We (nahnu), and proving that it is really not the plural. In the Quran, Allah refers to Himself by using, Nahnu (We), Ana (I), and the pronoun meaning He. If it was truly meant in the sense of the plural, then the pronouns referring back to Allah would also have to be in the plural, but they are not, and are in the singular.

This is just a small point that never crossed my mind before, and I find it to be a much easier (and maybe stronger) answer than trying to always explain the historical etymology of the royal we.

Was Isaac or Ishmael to be sacrificed ?

Was Isaac or Ishmael to be sacrificed ?




As you know, Kedar is a descendent of Ishmael {Genesis 25:13}, and Ishmael is the the base for the Family Tree of Prophet Muhammad (sal Allahu alaihi wasalam) through Kedar.


An important Fact that I would like you to observe now is how the scribes switched names to illegitimize Ishmael.

The scribes and commentators say that Ishmael is not a legitimate son of Abraham and therefore the covenant was only with Isaac.



Now I will show you in the Scripture that it was Really Ishmael who was to be sacrificed and the covenant was first done with Ishmael and Ishmael was a legitimate son of Abraham even after Abraham's death.



1. The covenant was first made with Abraham and Ishmael;


Genesis 17:10 This [is] my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.


Genesis 17:13 He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.


Note:-

So it's basically mentioned that the covenant [contract] between Prophet Abraham and God will continue through his family tree. That the future male children through his family will be circumcised. And that the covenant will be in his flesh (through his blood lineage) forever till the end of time.


The covenant is so special because the Jews claim that the covenant is in their family lineage only, whereas we as Muslims believe that the covenant was with the Jews so long as they stuck with their side of it, however - they continuously rejected it and Allah replaced them with another people who would submit to Allah, and since Ishmael was part of the covenant as mentioned before - the covenant would be with the 'Arabs, and after Muhammad (peace be upon him) - with those who followed him.




2. It was really Ishmael and not Isaac who was going to be sacrificed and the Jewish scribes because of vanity, switched the names;


Genesis 16:16 "and Abram [is] a son of eighty and six years in Hagar's bearing Ishmael to Abram."

So Abram/Abraham is 86 when he had a son called Ishmael (Isma'il) through Hagar/Hajar.



Who's son? Abraham's "son". Now as far as the sacrifice is concerned,


Genesis 17:24 "Abraham was ninety-nine years old when he was circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin."

That makes Abraham's son Ishmael, 13, how old is Isaac at this time?

Genesis 21:5 "Abraham was a hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him."


Abraham circumcised himself at the age of 99 (when Ishmael was 13), but he was 100 years old when Isaac was born to him.






that means during the circumcision/sacrifice, Abraham's only "begotten" son is Ishmael (and not Isaac as the Bible says.)

KJV Hebrews 11:17 "By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac (???!): and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,"


Therefore we see that Isaac was not the only son (since Ishmael was older than Isaac), as a matter of fact, Isaac was not even born yet and Abraham's Only begotten son was Ishmael. Therefore further confirming that it was Ishmael who would be sacrificed by Abraham as a test from Allah (but he wasn't because Allah stopped it from occurring when Abraham passed the test in showing his sincerity to Allah.)

It also shows that the one who was going to be sacrificed (Ishmael) was special in the rank of Allah, he was the forefather of the Arabs, and Muhammad (peace be upon him, who is Arab.) Which further strengthens the Legitimacy of Prophet Muhammad which God says I will make great Nations from Ishmael.

Genesis 17:20 And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.

The Arabs are multiplied exceedingly compared to the Jewish population, they are plenty in number and are blessed to have the final revelation (Qur'an & Sunnah) in the Arabic language. They were also a great nation which spread Islam from Arabia to the different corners of the globe, to the extent that there are Muslims in every part of the world.





3. Ishmael was a legitimate son even after Abraham died;

Genesis 16:3 "And Sarai Abram's wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife."

Genesis 25:9 "Then his sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him (Abraham) in *the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, facing Mamre,"

Genesis 25:12 "Now these are the records of the generations of *Ishmael, Abraham's son, whom Hagar the Egyptian, Sarah's maid, bore to Abraham;"


This shows that Hagar/Hajar was truly the wife of Prophet Abraham and the true, legitimate wife (of Abraham) and mother of Ishmael.




And Allah knows best.

And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah (Qur'an 9:30) Refutation

And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!

(Qur'an Al-Tawba 9:30)


Muhammad Asad is a jew who converted to Islam and this is what he says about this verse:

This statement is connected with the preceding verse, which speaks of the erring followers of earlier revelation. The charge of shirk ("the ascribing of divinity [or "divine qualities"] to aught beside God") is levelled against both the Jews and the Christians in amplification, as it were, of the statement that they "do not follow the religion of truth [which God has enjoined upon them]".

As regards the belief attributed to the Jews that Ezra (or, in the Arabicized form of this name, `Uzayr) was "God's son", it is to be noted that almost all classical commentators of the Qur'an agree in that only the Jews of Arabia, and not all Jews, have been thus accused.

(According to a Tradition on the authority of Ibn `Abbas - quoted by Tabari in his commentary on this verse - some of the Jews of Medina once said to Muhammad, "How could we follow thee when thou hast forsaken our giblah* and dost not consider Ezra a son of God?")

(*[Qiblah in arabic] when the Muslims changed the direction of worship i.e. from Bayt Al Maqdis [in Jerusalem] to Masjid Al-Haraam in Makkah)



On the other hand, Ezra occupies a unique position in the esteem of all Jews, and has always been praised by them in the most extravagant terms. It was he who restored and codified the Torah after it had been lost during the Babylonian Exile, and "edited" it in more or less the form which it has today; and thus "he promoted the establishment of an exclusive, legalistic type of religion that became dominant in later Judaism" (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1963, vol. IX, p. 15).

Ever since then he has been venerated to such a degree that his verdicts on the Law of Moses have come to be regarded by the Talmudists as being practically equivalent to the Law itself: which, in Qur'anic ideology, amounts to the unforgivable sin of shirk, inasmuch as it implies the elevation of a human being to the status of a quasi-divine law-giver and the blasphemous attribution to him - albeit metaphorically - of the quality of "sonship" in relation to God. Cf. in this connection Exodus iv, 22-23 ("Israel is My son") or Jeremiah xxxi, 9 ("I am a father to Israel"): expressions to which, because of their idolatrous implications, the Qur'an takes strong exception. (Asad, Message of the Qur'an)

More info here:
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Qur...rnal/ezra.html




..the quote that I gave from Muhammad Asad, a former Jew himself, who pointed out that, as mentioned in At-Tabari's tafsir, some Jews came to the Prophet Muhammad pbuh and said, "How can we follow you when you do not believe Uzayr is the son of God?".

Notice that the Qur'an doesn't say that the Jews believe Uzayr is the son of God, but the Qur'an is very precise in saying that the Jews say Uzayr is the son of God. Thus, it cannot be a contradiction in any way since the Qur'an is only responding to the verbal proclamation of a group of Jews!



Also interesting is Dr. Muhammad Mohar Ali's comments on this issue:

Of course there is no evidence in the extant Old Testament about it; but the Qur'an was not referring to what is written in the Old Testament about 'Uzayr but to the belief and assertion of some of the Jews of the time who regarded 'Uzayr as the son of God. In fact the 'ayah in question, 9:30, starts with the expression: "And the Jews say". The commentator Al-Baydawi, to whome Watt refers a number of times in his book, (fn. Watt, Muhammad's Mecca, 108, note 2 to Chapter 1 and notes 2 and 10 to Chapter III) makes it clear with reference to this 'ayah that because the Old Testament was given its present form by 'Uzayr, many of the Jews of the time considered him a "son of God" and that specifically at Madina there was a group of Jews who held that belief. Al-Baydawi futher points out that the 'ayah in question was read out and recited as usual but no Madinan Jew came forward with a contradiction (fn.Al-Baydawi, Tafsir, I, second Egyptian impression, 1968, p. 412). It is to be noted that this 'ayah is unanimously regarded as Madinan. Hence the silence of the Jews of the place on the matter is suggestive enough, particularly as they were avowed critics of the Prophet.
Not only Al-Baydawi but also other commentators mention that the 'ayah refers to the views of a particular group of the Jews. For instance, Al-Tabari bives a number of reports together with their chains of narrators specifically mentioning the leading Jews of Madina who considered Uzayr a son of God. The most prominent of those Jews were Finhas, Sullam ibn Mishkam, Nu'man ibn Awfa, Sha's ibn Qays and Malik ibn al-Sayf (fn. Al-Tabari, Tafsir, XIV, 201-204). Similarly, Al-Qurtubi mentions the same fact and the same names adding that the expression "the Jews" occuring at the beginning of the 'ayah means "some particular Jews", just as the expression "people told them" (qala lahum al-nas) means not all the people of the world but some particular people. He further says that the Jewish sect who held that 'Uzayr was God's son had become extinct by his (Al-Qurtubi's) time (fn. Al-Qurtubi, Tafsir, Pt. VIII, 116-117). (Muhammad Mohar Ali, The Qur'an and the Orientalists, Jam'iyat 'Ihyaa' Minhaaj Al-Sunnah 2004, p. 66)

So as for what the questioner quotes,

Notice the words "proposed" and "assumption". There are no records from any Jewish community that believed Ezra was the Son of God!

First of all, this is the fallacy of argumentum ad ignorantium which we can refute with the expression, "absence of proof is not proof of absence". In other words, just because we don't have Judaic records that shows that Jews believed this, does not prove that no Jews ever believed this!


Secondly, as was previously mentioned, there are specific historical narrations related by Qur'anic commentators like Al-Baydawi and At-Tabari which state the names of specific Jewish leaders who came forward to the Muslims and said "We cannot believe you since you do not accept Uzayr as the son of God". And notice that the Qur'an doesn't say that the Jews believed Uzayr was the son of God, it says quite clearly that they said he was the son of God. So, the Qur'an was responding to an explicit proclamation of the Jews. Either the Jews were intentionally lying, or they actually believed what they said - but in any event the Qur'an can't be wrong since the Jews of Madinah actually said this. __________________

Did the Injeel (Gospel) - revealed to Jesus - exist until the time of Muhammad (peace be upon him)?

Asalaam alaikum warahmatulahi wabarakatuh


Did the Injeel (Gospel) - revealed to Jesus - exist until the time of Muhammad (peace be upon him)?


The majority of Christians had started believing in the trinity - because of the influence of the Byzantine Romans mixing the true religion revealed to Jesus with their polytheistic faith - after Jesus son of Mary (peace be upon him) had been raised up by Allah.


However, there was a hidden group which remained upon the true religion of worshiping Allah alone, and these were the true followers of Jesus (peace be upon him.)


This is proven through the life of the famous companion of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) - Salman Al-Farsi. He was born as a Persian fire worshiper, but left his homeland and went to Syria to search for the true religion. These bishops who were true pious men, on the true path - taught him the religion from the Injeel which was revealed to Jesus. This is how they Prophecised the coming of Allah's final Messenger, Muhammad (peace be upon him.)

After his death, Salman attached himself to various Christian religious figures, in Mosul, Nisibis and elsewhere.

The last one had told him about the appearance of a Prophet in the land of the Arabs who would have a reputation for strict honesty, one who would accept a gift but would never consume charity (sadaqah) for himself. Salman continues his story.)

Ibn Sa'd, al Tabaqat-ul-Kabir. Vol. 4:1, p.58. [translated by; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1912] and also Musnad Ahmad, no. 23737.

This shows that the Injeel (Gospel) revealed to Jesus son of Mary (peace be upon him) from Allah - was preserved uptill the time of Muhammad (peace be upon him) and was not needed after Allah's final Messenger. Since the final message would abrogate all the previous revelations.

Say (O Muhammad): O mankind! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah to you all... (Qur'an 7: 158)

Therefore, the last person to know the Injeel was probably Salman Al-Faarsi - who became Muslim, and believed in Allah's Messengers'.



If someone was to claim that Salman was a liar, then they should know that Allah would have revealed this to His Messenger, Muhammad (peace be upon him.) And Salman was a sincere man, so Allah guided him to be the companion of the greatest man to ever walk the earth.




And Allah knows best.

__________________

Wife beating verse [4:34] - quick and simple reply

I disagree with using the word "beating" for this ayah ( 4:34 ).

The word "idribuhuna" does not mean to beat up the wife.
It means to hit her lightly (avoiding the face because hitting the face is forbeddin in Islam) a hitting that is ghayr mubarrih, which does not cause harm to the body, like bruising or breaking a bone.


Ata' said: "I asked Ibn Abbas: 'What is the hitting that is ghayr al-mubarrih?' He replied: '[With] the siwak and the like'." Narrated by al-Tabari in his Tafsir.



http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/...9c5b8ddf3_o.jpg

And this is the last resort for the husband.


You argue that if tafsir and understanding of Qur'an [according to the understanding of the companions is required for all other rules such as salah, hajj, and even fighting fi sabilillah, then so is it equally important to follow their interpretation of these matters - since they are also part of the Qur'an]



Some people may be confused over this hadith;

Look at the following narration...

Saheeh Muslim
Book 004, Number 2127:

Muhammad b. Qais said (to the people): Should I not narrate to you (a hadith of the Holy Prophet) on my authority and on the authority of my mother? We thought that he meant the mother who had given him birth. He (Muhammad b. Qais) then reported that it was 'A'isha who had narrated this: Should I not narrate to you about myself and about the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him)? We said: Yes. She said: When it was my turn for Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) to spend the night with me, he turned his side, put on his mantle and took off his shoes and placed them near his feet, and spread the corner of his shawl on his bed and then lay down till he thought that I had gone to sleep. He took hold of his mantle slowly and put on the shoes slowly, and opened the door and went out and then closed it lightly. I covered my head, put on my veil and tightened my waist wrapper, and then went out following his steps till he reached Baqi'. He stood there and he stood for a long time. He then lifted his hands three times, and then returned and I also returned. He hastened his steps and I also hastened my steps. He ran and I too ran. He came (to the house) and I also came (to the house). I, however, preceded him and I entered (the house), and as I lay down in the bed, he (the Holy Prophet) entered the (house), and said: Why is it, O 'A'isha, that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He said: Tell me or the Subtle and the Aware would inform me. I said: Messenger of Allah, may my father and mother be ransom for you, and then I told him (the whole story). He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you? She said: Whatsoever the people conceal, Allah will know it. He said: Gabriel came to me when you saw me. He called me and he concealed it from you. I responded to his call, but I too concealed it from you (for he did not come to you), as you were not fully dressed. I thought that you had gone to sleep, and I did not like to awaken you, fearing that you may be frightened. He (Gabriel) said: Your Lord has commanded you to go to the inhabitants of Baqi' (to those lying in the graves) and beg pardon for them. I said: Messenger of Allah, how should I pray for them (How should I beg forgiveness for them)? He said: Say, Peace be upon the inhabitants of this city (graveyard) from among the Believers and the Muslims, and may Allah have mercy on those who have gone ahead of us, and those who come later on, and we shall, God willing, join you.

Can someone explain this to me please?

The arabic word, which has been used in the hadith is " لهدني ". this is a word which means pushing with a full hand.

(broken down in single letters " له د ن ي " ) [lahdany?]


keep in mind, this is a type of teaching not harming so it is not considered as hitting as it is precieved in accordance with nowadays people understanding.

wallahu A'lam




The following hadith comes directly from Aisha herself when she refutes those who say that the Messenger of Allah hit her (in the above mentioned hadith):


`A'ishah said,"The Messenger of Allah never struck a servant of his with his hand, nor did he ever hit a woman. He never hit anything with his hand, except for when he was fighting Jihad in the cause of Allah. And he was never given the option between two things except that the most beloved of the two to him was the easiest of them, as long as it did not involve sin. If it did involve sin, then he stayed farther away from sin than any of the people. He would not avenge himself concerning anything that was done to him, except if the limits of Allah were transgressed. Then, in that case he would avenge for the sake of Allah.'' Imam Ahmad also recorded from Abu Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allah said,

«إِنَّمَا بُعِثْتُ لِأُتَمِّمَ صَالِحَ الْأَخْلَاق»

(I have only been sent to perfect righteous behavior.)


Tafsir ibn Kathir - Surah Qalam (68)
http://tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=68&tid=54734





It is also important to note that the woman that is hit lightly is not just a woman who does not cook or clean etc. It is concerning a wife who is lewd or doing unislamic acts (wearing halter top showing some cleavage infront of stranger guys) etc.. And it goes in steps. First admonishing her (advising her) second forsake her in bed (dontsleep with her so she knows that you are serious and that she needs Islah or reformation) and then a final stop to hit her lightly in a way that doesnt leave a mark! [i.e. with a tiny stick]


might wna put this in support of womens' rights aswell:

It is reported that a man came to 'Umar ibn Al-Khattab raa to complain about his wife's ill-temper. While he was waiting for 'Umar to come out of his house, he heard 'Umar's wife scolding him and 'Umar quietly listening to her, and not answering her back. The man turned around and started walking away, muttering to himself: "If that is the case with 'Umar, the leader of the believers, who is famous for his uprighteness and toughness, then what about poor me?!" At that moment, 'Umar came out of his house and saw the man walking away. He called him and said, "What is it you want of me, O man?" The man replied: "O leader of the believers, I came to complain to you about my wife's bad-temper and how she nags me. Then I heard your wife doing the same to you, so I turned around, muttering to myself, 'If that is the situation of the leader of the believers, then what about me?'" 'Umar replied, "O my brother, I bear with her because of her rights over me. She cooks my food, bakes my bread, washes my clothes, breast-feeds my child...and yet none of these are her duty;* and then she is a comfort to my heart and keeps me away from forbidden deeds. Consequently, I bear with her." The man said, "It is the same with me, O leader of the believers." 'Umar said: "Then, O my brother, be patient with her, indeed this life is short. (Adh-Dhahabi, Al-Kabâ'ir 194)

The last hadith about 'Umar is a beautiful example of the lofty status that Islam has given women. The Khalifa himself used to listen patiently while his wife scolded him and he instructed his followers to likewise be patient and grateful for all the favours their wives gave them. Dr. M. Moinuddin Siddiqui, who has translated Al-Kabâ'ir into english, includes the following footnote in the place I have marked above with an asterisk

[*]:According to the Shari'ah, a Muslim wife has no obligation to do all this; rather, it is the husband's obligation to take care of it [either himself or] by hiring a servant (or even, in the case of breast-feeding, a wet-nurse). Therefore, if a woman does this, it is out of good-will and compliance on her part, not because it is obligatory on her, and consequently it is a cause for appreciation and helpfulness on the part of her husband. (Translator)

__________________


Someone may Question;

You can cause major pain with a siwak, and serious bruises (leaving marks for up to a week), though breaking bones might be difficult.

Answer;

But islam does not permit that he bruise her. So whoever did that, they did the wrong thing.

Besides, there is no law even in 'civilised' Europe, which forbids a man from touching or tapping a woman with a pen, and if she took it to court - i don't think she'd win the case. However, if he bruised her with a pen - then he may have gone past the limit [and he will have done so in Islam]. And he can be taken to court so the woman can get justice.( i.e. similar recompense for any harm done.)


By him using the miswak;

It could be an implication for her that this is his last step, and that if she persists in wrong doing, then he may divorce her or separate with her. Why will she think that he's implying this by the use of a stick? Because she will also know that this is the last step mentioned in the Qur'an.

Imagine traffic lights, red is the first step, amber is the second, and tapping with the siwak is the 3rd. If he reaches the third step, she'll be aware that if she doesn't stop - he will move forward (i.e. maybe in divorce.)



----

alsadi;

Ok, it's on tafseer al-tabari for aya V4:34

(I like to put reference by aya not by page because there could be different copies)
you can read it on
������ ������ - ����� ������

[the official site of ministry of Awqaf in Arabia]

and in

����� ������

[the tafseer of the aya starts at volume 8 page 290, but that portion could be few pages after that]

Quote:

And also give a word by word translation on the main parts you believe are relevant.

حدثني المثنى قال حدثنا حبان بن موسى قال حدثنا ابن المبارك قال أخبرنا شريك عن عطاء بن السائب عن سعيد بن جبير عن ابن عباس : { واضربوهن } قال : ضربا غير مبرح

Muthanna told us saying Haiian told us saying ibn al-Mubarak saying Shareek told us [narrating] from Ata' ibn Alsaib from sai'd ibn jubair from ibn Abbas that he said And beat them without harming.


حدثنا إبراهيم بن سعيد الجوهري قال حدثنا ابن عيينة عن ابن جريج عن عطاء قال قلت لابن عباس : ما الضرب غير المبرح ؟ قال : بالسواك ونحوه

[sanad/chain of transmission ommited] ata' asked ibn abbas
how can a beating be without harming?

he replied with a Siwak or alike



حدثنا المثنى قال حدثنا حبان بن موسى قال أخبرنا ابن المبارك قال أخبرنا ابن عيينة عن ابن جريج عن عطاء قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في خطبته : ضربا غير مبرح قال : السواك ونحوه

the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم
said in a khutba [public speech/address]
the beating is without harming
and said by Siwak and the like



حدثنا القاسم قال حدثنا الحسين قال حدثني حجاج قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم : لا تهجروا النساء إلا في المضاجع واضربوهن ضربا غير مبرح يقول : غير مؤثر

the messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم
said do not abandon women except in bed [don't leave them without support] and beating is a non-harming beating and said that is can't be felt/sensed


حدثني المثنى قال حدثنا حبان قال حدثنا ابن المبارك قال أخبرنا عبد الوارث بن سعيد عن رجل عن الحسن قال : ضربا غير مبرح غير مؤثر

same thing, except al Hassan (probably the grandson of the Prophet) said it.



Allah knows best.

http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/quran-hadith-prophet-muhammad/wife-beating-verse-4-34-quick-simple-reply-1314/page2/

My call to Tawheed - what Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab said about himself

My call to Tawheed - what Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab said about himself


My call to Tawheed

by Shaykh Muhammed ibn Abd al Wahhab

Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab said, describing himself, was: “I tell you that– praise be to Allah – my belief and my religion, according to which I worship Allah, is the way of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah, which was the way of the imams of the Muslims, such as the four Imams and their followers until the Day of Resurrection. But I explain to people that they must devote their worship sincerely to Allah (ikhlas). I forbid them to call upon the Prophets and the dead among the righteous and others, and from associating them with Allah in any act of worship that should be done for Allah alone, such as offering sacrifices, making vows, putting one’s trust, prostrating and other actions which are due to Allah and in which no one should be associated with Him, not any angel who is close to Him or any Prophet who was sent. This is the Message which was proclaimed by all the Messengers, from the first of them to the last of them, and this is the way of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa’ah. I hold a high position in my village and people listen to me. Some of the leaders denounced that because it goes against the customs they grew up with. I also obliged those who are under me to perform regular prayer, pay zakaah and fulfil other Islamic duties, and I forbade them to deal with ribaa, drink intoxicants and other kinds of forbidden things. The leaders could not criticize that or find fault with it, because it is something that is liked by the common folk, so they directed their criticism and enmity against that which I enjoin of Tawheed and that which I forbid of shirk, and they confused the common folk by saying that this goes against what everyone is doing, and they caused a great deal of fitnah…” (al-Durar al-Sanniyyah, 1/64-65, 79-80)

The covenant with the Jews wasn't eternal [According to the OT!]

The Jews will deceive people and say that Allah made an eternal covenant with them and said He would never abandon them. This is false, because the covenant which Allah Taala made with them was conditional, and if they fulfilled the conditions than He would continue to bless them, but if they didn't than He would abandon them and raise up a new ummah. This fact is mentioned in their own book

"The time is coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a NEW COVENANT with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah." (Jeremiah* 31:31)

The new covenant which is binding upon not only the nation of Israel, but in fact all the nations of the world is the covenant which Nabi Muhammad (sallallahu alaihi wa salam) has been brought with, namely Islam.


*Jeremiah is from the Old Testament - which Jews accept.