Wife beating in islam? The Quran strikes back

[Mazhar]

"strike/attack something of/the enemy"

These words give impression of imperative/command to do so, whereas there is no such imperative verb in the verse. The cognate adverb is restricted by the next imperative command that those enemies during the currency of war who have been overpowered/their weapons are dropped--they are not to be killed but are to be arrested/bind them firmly--here object of imperative verb [in accusative case] is Alwasaqa. And decision for their disposal is to be taken after the war has come to an end. [he verse is dictating the manners of war to be followed when Believers have to confront war]

[savage_carrot]

These words give impression of imperative/command to do so, whereas there is no such imperative verb in the verse. The cognate adverb is restricted by the next imperative command that those enemies during the currency of war who have been overpowered/their weapons are dropped--they are not to be killed but are to be arrested/bind them firmly--here object of imperative verb [in accusative case] is Alwasaqa. And decision for their disposal is to be taken after the war has come to an end. [he verse is dictating the manners of war to be followed when Believers have to confront war]

I won't pretend to understand where the next imperative command is coming from as next would imply there is a first? It would be clearer if you had written "is restricted by an imperative command that comes after" or something. Anyways, I think it's safe to say that there is to be no killing of any captives since we are specifically told what to do with them: grace/ransom/exchange. One can't do that if you've killed them (apparently Israel ransoms dead bodies for live prisoners which I think is insane!). Also, as the verse states, grace/ransom/exchange until the war lays down it's burdens, would mean you can do that during/until the war ends, thus you can't keep them around without doing any of the previously stated options after the war has ended or risk holding captives of war indefinitely? Are you saying the decision for their disposal can only be taken after the war lays down it's burdens? The verse says until, which would include during the war as well and after we have overcome the enemy and strengthened the bind in that particular encounter/battle. War and encounter/battle being different things...I don't understand?

[Mazhar]

thereat you people bind them/take them prisoners of war since the questions of releasing them as gesture of obliging favour or on ransom arises afterwards when the war may surrender/lay down the weapons [the enemy army has been defeated/have surrendered].

فَإِمَّا Particle Fa denotes the consequence/next step [after some warring soldiers have been taken into custody/arrested while war is on], added with Explanation particle, as for the question/issue concerned/regarding.....

بَعْدُ is time adverb. وَإِمَّا فِدَاءً conjunction related to previous posibility/course of action....

until the war has become over/concluded.

Exchange or release of prisoners of war and the demand for ransom/losses is made from the defeated party after the war is over.

[savage_carrot]

until the war has become over/concluded.

Okay, so you are saying the verse says we can't deal with them during the war but *only* after the war is over? Thus all the captives we may have from all/any of our battles/encounters will remain captive with us with no grace/ransom/exchange until after the war has ended? Yes?

[Mazhar]

War [of course not cold one] is one time affair, it may not be pluralized, that may range for couple of days. History of battles tells us that prisoners of war and ransome matters are settled after the cease fire.

[savage_carrot]

Thanks Mazhar.

[Wakas]

peace SC,

How are these captives/slaves being put forth/brought about before we have even subdued/overcome the enemy in battle?

Captives can easily be brought about during fighting, this would be quite common I'm sure. The preference would be to take captives, rather than kill them.

then why the emphasis on "strengthening the bind" of the captives after we've already subdued/overcome the enemy?

Once they are subdued/overcome, strengthen/tighten the bind (of the captives). This would be normal, as during more equal-footed fighting this would be more difficult. Since the word shuddoo refers to a pre-existing thing to tighten/strengthen, it can only refer to "DRB al RQB", nothing else, thus whatever you want to render this phrase as, it MUST involve making a bind somehow.

I do not know what you mean with (3), can you clarify, if its still an issue.

Would this mean the verse only applies in certain situations where we already have captives with us, and not all situations of encountering the enemy?

It is not about captives with us, it is about taking (i.e. bringing about, putting forth) captives from the opposing force.

In 47:4 it could mean to attack the vanguard according to lisannul 3arab. It maybe the plural of "raqeeb" which is still used as a rank in the army "sergeant

Can you clarify if you mean lisannul 3arab discusses "raqeeb" as "sergeant", thus YOU think it could mean "attack the vanguard"? Or do you mean lisannul 3arab specifically mentions 47:4? Thanks.
If "raqeeb/sergeant" is a theoretical possibility then yes it is possible, however AQ does not use RQB like that, nor would it fit 47:4, unless the pre-existing bind can be explained.

[savage_carrot]

Peace bro,

Captives can easily be brought about during fighting, this would be quite common I'm sure. The preference would be to take captives, rather than kill them.

So the actual word used you would say would be bring about rather than put forth? When you meet those who have rejected, "bring about" the captives, then when you have subdued/overcome them (the enemy), strengthen the bind (of the captives you "brought about")? I'm sorry, if you would have said "captives can easily be taken during fighting", it would make sense, like you say in addition: the preference would be to take captives...exactly. Because "bring about" doesn't make much sense so one has to clarify it. Why doesn't it say, when you meet those who have rejected, take captives, then when you have subdued/overcome them (the enemy), strengthen the bind (of the captives you took)? Especially since "bring about" is being equated to take, and take makes far more sense with no clarification needed!

Can you point me towards where DRB is used as "bring about" in the quran, also? I read through the link but couldn't find any such occurrence. I find concordance helpful.

Once they are subdued/overcome, strengthen/tighten the bind (of the captives). This would be normal, as during more equal-footed fighting this would be more difficult.

What do you mean more equal-footed fighting, just so I have a solid idea of what you mean here?

Since the word shuddoo refers to a pre-existing thing to tighten/strengthen, it can only refer to "DRB al RQB", nothing else, thus whatever you want to render this phrase as, it MUST involve making a bind somehow.

Given the concordance the word can mean to strengthen, harden or strongly (one can take different translations but they all come around to the same thing essentially). If we take the concordance for "bond" we have 47:4 and 89:26 :and none can bind with bonds like His. This can mean: then strongly bind the bond, bind the bond strongly, bind the bond firmly etc in reference to those we have overcome and taken captive in 47:4? Seriously, it doesn't make sense for captives x1 to be captives x2 after open/active fighting as I explained in my last post. Edip/Layths translation has "then bind them securely"...it makes sense.

(see its usage in 38:20, 76:28, 28:35, 10:88, 20:31)

-We strengthened his kingship, and We gave him the wisdom and the ability to make sound judgment.
-We have created them, and We have made them resolute. When we wished, We replaced their kind completely.
-He said, "We will strengthen you with your brother, and We will provide you both with authority. Thus, they will not be able to touch either one of you. With Our signs, the two of you, along with those who follow you, will be the victors."
-Moses said, "Our Lord, you have given Pharaoh and his chiefs adornments and wealth in this worldly life so that they will misguide from Your path. Our Lord, wipe-out their wealth and bring grief to their hearts so that they will not acknowledge until they see the painful retribution.
-"So that I may strengthen my resolve through him."
14:18 The example of those who reject their Lord is that their works are like ashes, on which the wind blows strongly on a stormy day; they cannot get anything of what they earned. Such is the farthest straying.

Shiin-Dal-Dal  = to bind tightly, strap, strengthen firmly, run, establish, make firm, hard, strong, be advanced (day), be intense. ushdud - harden, strengthen. shadiid (pl. shidaad & ashidda'u - great, firm, strict, vehement, strong, violent, severe, mighty, terrible, stern, grievous, miserly, niggardly. (adj. of the forms fa'iil and fiaal are used indifferently for both m. and f.): ashuddun: age of full strength, maturity. ishtadda (vb. - to act with violence, become hard.

shadda vb. (1)

perf. act. 38:20, 76:28
impf. act. 28:35
impv. 10:88, 20:31, 47:4

ashudd n.m. 6:152, 12:22, 17:34, 18:82, 22:5, 28:14, 40:67, 46:15

shadid n.m. (adj. pl. ashidda and shidad) 2:74, 2:85, 2:165, 2:165, 2:191, 2:196, 2:200, 2:211, 3:4, 3:11, 3:56, 4:66, 4:77, 4:84, 4:84, 5:2, 5:82, 5:98, 6:124, 7:164, 8:13, 8:25, 8:48, 8:52, 9:69, 9:81, 9:97, 10:70, 11:80, 11:102, 12:48, 13:6, 13:13, 14:2, 14:7, 17:5, 17:58, 18:2, 19:69, 20:71, 20:127, 22:2, 23:77, 27:21, 27:33, 28:78, 30:9, 33:11, 34:46, 35:7, 35:10, 35:44, 37:11, 38:26, 40:3, 40:21, 40:22, 40:46, 40:82, 41:15, 41:15, 41:27, 42:16, 42:26, 43:8, 47:13, 48:16, 48:29, 50:26, 50:36, 53:5, 57:20, 57:25, 58:15, 59:4, 59:7, 59:13, 59:14, 65:8, 65:10, 66:6, 72:8, 73:6, 78:12, 79:27, 85:12, 100:8

ishtadda vb. ( perf. act. 14:18

LL, V4, p: 241, 242, 243

It is not about captives with us, it is about taking (i.e. bringing about, putting forth) captives from the opposing force.

Putting forth makes no sense, unless you're to put forward your own before the battle (go forth my captives, I'm putting you forth as human shields or I'll catch up to you in a few hours or so, here I'm leaving a contingent of my armed guards to make sure you don't do anything stupid) or putting forth their captives from their clutches i.e. a battle against slavers with captives abounding all about them, run forth you captive fools...I'm putting you forth! I'm here to save you from the bad guys! Putting forth is putting forward, I'm not sure how this can also mean "bringing about" or "taking captives". It's not even similar. Put forth your best foot, put forth the captives...don't get it. Bringing about is also not the best choice as discussed above.

Can you clarify if you mean lisannul 3arab discusses "raqeeb" as "sergeant", thus YOU think it could mean "attack the vanguard"? Or do you mean lisannul 3arab specifically mentions 47:4? Thanks.

"rigaab" here could mean the vanguard according to lisannul 3arab. It maybe the plural of "raqeeb" which is still used as a rank in the army "sergeant".

This is in reference to 47:4.

If "raqeeb/sergeant" is a theoretical possibility then yes it is possible, however AQ does not use RQB like that, nor would it fit 47:4, unless the pre-existing bind can be explained.

I'm not sure if AQ uses DRB as "bring about", I tried searching but couldn't find where it uses it as such. I've touched on the rest above. I have nothing against your translation bro,I respect your hard work immensely, I just want it to make sense to me...you know that I'm not coming up with any bias in this,  it doesn't even affect what I'm working on currently...I just don't think it's making sense here in my opinion. I look forward to your explanation on how to make it work.

[Mazhar]

Captives can easily be brought about during fighting, this would be quite common I'm sure. The preference would be to take captives, rather than kill them.

No Commander of an Army would ever make such blunder of suggesting this preference to its Troops which will endanger their own lives and increase chances of defeat. War means and its loud slogan is to kill and/or get killed.

They confront war in the cause of Allah and resultantly they kill the enemy and they get killed by the enemy in the battlefield. [Refer 9:111]

Since the word shuddoo refers to a pre-existing thing to tighten/strengthen, it can only refer to "DRB al RQB", nothing else, thus whatever you want to render this phrase as, it MUST involve making a bind somehow.

فَشُدُّوا الْوَثَاقَ imperative command is subject to the conditionality إِذَا أَثْخَنتُمُوهُمْ and not to "DRB al RQB". When the imperative command is related to the happening of a conditionality, unless it is there the imperative command shall be treated as redundant. The verb is Perfect, second person, masculine, with Waw subject pronoun and "Hum" the  Object pronoun; Form IV having causitive meanings. In the heat of war, it is most difficult thing to hold back the sword from killing the combating enemy when his weapon has dropped or has become overpowered, exhausted to stand further. That seems to be the basic cause and purpose of this injumction and also to clarify and elaborate the earlier instruction.

[you people should know that] This is not for the Elevated and Chosen Servant of Allah that for him be the prisoners of war till such time that he has subdued/taken full dominance in the land.

Chapter 8

[Wakas]

peace Mazhar,

You seem to assume it is only deadly combat, i.e. fighting/killing. When actually, 47:4 discusses a situation, THEN mentions when the enemy is overcome/subdued, but states even after this, the war may not be over. So it may be in reference to a smaller battle, an ambush, or even hostility/scuffles etc. Interestingly, there is no mention of deadly combat in the context or actively going on in this chapter, although I only briefly read it. It only mentions being killed in 47:4 after it mentions war. Since 47:4 begins with "fa" it likely refers to the people mentioned previously and those people are repelling from the path of God. This does imply the equivalent harshness would not be killing them. Thus is more evidence for my rendition.

9:111 does not say what you say, it literally says "...they fight in the cause of God so they kill and are killed...". So, your point is only valid for fighting/killing, not to mention all battles are not about kill or be killed.

فَشُدُّوا الْوَثَاقَ imperative command is subject to the conditionality إِذَا أَثْخَنتُمُوهُمْ and not to "DRB al RQB".

I understand the conditionality you refer to, this is obvious, however I am referring to the overall sequential and logical link between shuddoo and it referring to a pre-existing thing to tighten/strengthen, thus one simply needs to ask: what can it refer to? There is only one possibility in the context and that is "DRB al RQB".

Thanks for bringing up 8:67, as this seems to imply ASR (~prisoners of war) are officially/properly bound/kept captives. Since they can only be taken after subdued/overcome in the land as per 8:67, and the same word is used in 47:4 and here the sequence is when the bind is strengthened it is only then can they be ransomed or released/grace (implying in this case they go from RQB to ASR when the bind is strengthened). Thus, by default, RQB are not bound firmly in this manner. This is further proven by AQ cross-reference (e.g. 8:70 refers to ASR in one's hands/power/control) and Lane's Lexicon.

As we can see, the evidence so far is weighted in favour of my rendition.