I will make it short.
I was in the middle of reading Sam Gerran's Last Revelation, when I stumbled upon his 4:34, where just as the traditionalists he translates
ḍaraba as beat/spank. My .pdf version of the Last Revelation does not allow me to copy/paste text, so I will leave his video on the topic for you to review yourself:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQUsqdH_2Cs (you can also read his main points under the video title).
After careful examination of his explanation and reading what he had to say, I've sent him the following message on Facebook, depicting the critique of his own argument:
QuoteDear Sam,
I am reading your reformist translation of the Quran and just stumbled upon your interpretation of the 4:34. Tbh I am quite suprirsed that you actually translate it the way traditionalists do (spank or beat). I have read your explanation, but I do not agree with it for a number of reason:
1. Your primary focus of an argument here is historical/traditional one. Specifically you refer to the Orthodox Домострой as something, which established family conduct for Eastern Christians. This is all true and logical, but, at the same tome, how can you exclude hadiths or traditional approaches to the Quran if you yourself cite traditional sources in this emotional women-related subject? Yes, of course, even in '50's in America it was perfectly all right for husbands to beat their wives, until the 60;s - 70's liberal reforms. But who said that something, which was/is common and 'normal' is what is right?
2. Secondly, the verse 4:34 makes no sense, at least to me, if I use traditional (including yours) explanation, and this is something not taken from Edip Yuksel or other reformist translations, this is something I personally refer to. I can compare 4:34 with 47:4, which makes perfect sense in terms of wartime captives - once you have captured some, fight their side until subdued, then either release them or ransom. That perfectly makes sense, because you cannt release or ransom beheaded folk.
Now, how come the Qur'an is telling husbands to beat their wives AFTER they stopped sharing bed with them? It would perfectly make sense in case the verse would be as following: first admonish, then beat if they continue to disobey. But it says instead first admonish, leave them in beds apart, and then [ choose your interpretation ] . Personally choose 'leave' for three major sub-reasons:
1) It does not tell you the degree of what is 'spank' or 'beat', how strong one should spank her? Is it like Michaelle Corleone from Godfather 2 (Striking Kate Scene) or beat her to death? How one is supposed to know?
2) It does not tell you what will happen AFTER you beat her BUT she does not comply. It only says, if they obey you, seek nothing against them. But what if they contibue to disobey?
3) What is the point of beating her AFTER a man already made steps towards leaving her? I am not sure for all married couples out there, but for me personally ceasing to sleep with a wife means nothing but becoming [or simulating] being cold to her and eventually leave for good. How can I beat her once I already made steps towards naturally leaving her? It does not make sense.
3. In one of your videos where you explain why you did not 'accept Jesus as your Lord ad Savior' you mentioned dubious Bible interpretations by the Christians, who, as you said, do not understand the nature of semitic languages, which cannot be translated literally, but with 4:34 you seem to follow the very same path, by using the term ḍaraba in its literal explanation.
4. 4:34 may follow in the context of 4:29 (for ye who heed warning), which may not mean that other Qur'anic verses are automatically invalid outside of the specific context of 4:34. For instance, in 4:25 Qur'an states that in case one may not marry a free believing woman he may marry a maid, whose origins are not within monotheistic culture and in case she commits impurity then the punishment for her is but half of that for believing women. In the context of 4:34, what if a muslim man marries the non-,muslim [read outside of Quranic tradition] woman and she regularly disobeys him, can he punish her the same way one would expect him to punish a woman who [heeds warning]?
In conclusion, considering the above issues I fail to accept your (and the traditional) explanation of 4:34. I therefore kindly ask you to once again review this problem. I am certain that your own family atmosphere is harmonious enough that punishment described in 4:34 is seldom your personal private practice, but people who read your translation and choose the Last Revelation as the Qur'an they want to live by, may end up with wrong (in my opinion) view on solving marital problems.
After a few minutes, he bans me, then unbans and writes a short sentence of how he 'has no time for personal theories'. And after I reply he advises me to write a book, after which I am banned and cannot respond back.
While I was preparing given post he sent me a video of what a 'doer' is according to the Quran (more likely to his own interpretation), but again, I cannot respond:
Irony is that I have actually seen his videos and read some of his articles, including 'doers' topic, but this guy acts like a hypocrite. He hates the elite and calls them psychopaths ( see for example
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuisW7rSU98 ), yet is acting similarly to fascists and traditionalists who ban anyone who is of opposite opinion.
This is the day I
personally reject the Last Revelation by Sam Gerrans, not because of his translation but because of the personality of the author. If he was fair he would not ban people for sending him messages, considering no one bans his websites from spreading his books. And to myself such person is unfair and if he is unfair then I can fairly conclude that anything which comes from him, I consider such work as 'wrong' or unfair.
This is not about 'writing a book'. This is about the context of a specific verse within the Quranic context. It does not take a book to write, but a few pages perhaps. I can agree with him that there are 'doers' and 'theorists' and that they are not equal (there is also the Quranic statement which can be interpreted as such - 9:19), but this is not just my own points, I have included his own explanation of 4:34 as my focus, which left me questioning his primary argument regarding 4:34.
Just sharing
my own experience, if you believe the Last Revelation to be true translation - in no way I am asking you not to follow it.
P.S. If you want more authentic proof that such 'conversation' took place, please contact me via PM, so we may connect on Facebook.
