Studying Islam

Post Reply

Username

Invalid Username or Password

Password

Format

Message Icon

Message

- Forum Code is ON
- HTML is OFF

Smilies

[quote]Hmmm. Good points anajee.

I'm inclined to agree somewhat with the idea that some concepts would become clearer with the passage of time(this is clearly the case with slavery). This, inspite of the fact that I fully agree with Mr. Hashmi and Mr. Hanifs' contention that we must be clear about how the words of the Quran were understood by the arabs of the prophet's(saws) time.

You're correct in pointing out that we are all aware that the prophet(saws) himself never hit his wives. I've posited this question to Mr. Hashmi earlier, namely "how are we to reconcile the fact that the prophet never hit his wives with a verse in Quran that purportedly encourages physical admonition as a last resort".... Could it be possible that although these men of the time were given this expiation, which after all was a big leap forward from the unqualified right of jahilliya men to do with their women as they pleased , in order to limit the damage they would do?

I just find it overwhelmingly plausible that the limit that was imposed on wife beating was to act as detterent and a sort of "setting the stage" for the eventual decline of this activity. In the same manner that slavery was initially "discouraged", is it not possible that wife beating has been given the same treatment in the Quran?

Also remember brothers that I am not arguing for a linguistic reformulation of the verse in question, only that Allah(swt) has in some instances(slavery for instance) made an expiation for the social conditions of the time.....and it seems to me there is a clear trajectory in Quran that endeavours to reform men(of the prophet's time) in their conduct with women.

Salaam

Edited by: locust on Wednesday, July 07, 2004 7:43 PM[/quote]

Mode

Check here to be notified by email whenever someone replies to your topic

Show Preview