The word "prison" in the qur'an

[Ju5]

@Wakas update on the plural thing, because i was in a bad mood so what i posted before wasn't very neutral.

You say : in other examples they have only one hand cut yet it is still plural. I am not an arabic expert, but i guess that arabic translators can do their job regarding to pronouns without being influenced by the sunna, and that by 1400 years non muslims who didn't try to spit on the qur'an did a correct job of translating this. Only those with knowledge of arabic should give their opinion about this, and the ones who say it is translated wrong while they have no arabic knowledge are simply conspirationists (and it is their right)

My guess is that the pronouns refers to the number of people concerned

Example  : - the male and female thieves are two so it is dual
                - the pharaoh s magicians are plural, so they must be 3+
                - those who wage war are plural

and as for the noun (hands), i guess it is according to the number of hands. Example : 4 magicians get their hands/feet cut from opposite sides = 4 hands = plural

I am sorry becaus ei have a hard time staying relaxed and neutral while i am debating, i am still a newbie.

[Ju5]

Hello good logic :

- If your employer said to you : "empty the bins" would you : - empty the bins ?
                                                                                         - be a smartass and say "how many bins? three, five, seven or all of them?" ?
                                                                                         - be a smartass again and say" how do i empty the bins? you didn't tell me how to do it?"

- Do you have any reliable source showing this idiom and it's meaning ?

- Why is this idiom used in verses where it clearly speaks about physical hand cutting ?

[Wakas]

@Ju5,

Re: 1)
2 out of 14 means cut off

Re: 2)
4 out of 17 (all 4 examples have same usage) means cut off

Note: I never once said the above probabilities prove anything. I am simply pointing them out to show you opt for minority usage.


Re: 3)
This statement of yours clearly shows your bias:

why would it matter?

It matters because the more intensive verb form 2 is used with hands (the only other usage in Quran), and you admit it doesn't mean cut off. But don't take my word for it, simply go ask anyone you consider competent "I am trying to work out the meaning of word X when used with Y in this book, and there is only one other usage in this book of these words together - should I bother studying this other occurrence or is it irrelevant?". Let me know what they say.

It is Allahs fault that people cut the hands of thieves because they wanted to obey him and picked the obvious (and probably real) interpretation? Does God engage in second degree? He would knew that it would cause people getting their hands lost for life right? By saying God did such a gross error, you are blasphemers.

Not necessarily. See the insight here: http://www.quran434.com/wife-beating-islam.html#part4

Beginning from "Lastly, if 4:34 meant to clearly mean "beat/strike" why does The Quran use one of the most multiple meaning words in the Arabic language? ...."

Re: 4)
Thank you for admitting the address is different in those other example, thus indirectly admitting you have no comparable example to 5:38 to backup your claim.

RE: 5)
You claim irrelevance. It's real simple: Quran says do not let pity deter you from carrying out lashes, but doesn't say anything for carrying out alleged hand cutting. Seems unusual.

Re: 6)
Thanks for clarifying, indirectly, that you consider cutting hands off for stealing slice of bread equivalent in terms of justice. I don't. Each to their own.

Re: 7)
We can conclude you cannot cite any corroborating evidence for the hand cutting off view.

Re: 8 )
In your haste to reply seems you cannot read Quran correctly. Re-read 12:79. You now come up with another baseless claim of "slave". Please tell us what is the Arabic word for "slave" in these verses...... if you speak the truth.

12:79 He (Joseph) said, "God forbid that we would take anyone except he whom we found our belongings with. Indeed, we would then be wrong doers."




Summary:

For those who cannot be bothered to read our exchange, here is a summary:

Ju5 makes the case that in 5:38 it means cutting off hands, yet:

1) admits its minority usage
2) admits in the only other comparable usage it doesn't mean cut off hands
3) admits there is no comparable address example to 5:38
4) admits Quran says do not let pity deter from lashing but not the worse punishment of hand-cutting
5) is forced to make equivalent (in his mind) paltry theft (e.g. slice of bread) with hand-cutting
6) admits no corroborating evidence
7) admits the only other mention of punishment for theft in Quran does not involve hand-cutting (and according to Joseph's reaction in 12:79, if Ju5 read carefully, non-cutting is in accordance with God's law)


And in case this is not blatantly obvious. I am not saying its impossible for it to mean physical cutting off hands, all I'm saying is based on the evidence presented thus far, this argument is weak.

[good logic]

Peace Ju5.
-If my employer asks me to empty the bins and he/she means empty the garbage from my head, then I would not empty any real bins. I will reflect on how I am doing my job instead.

- Qoran is the most reliable source and 5:38 screams it is an idiom. The only way the verse makes sense .(To me at least)

-On the contrary the verse is screaming " idiom" . No physical cutting of hand/s is implied.

GOD bless you.
Peace.

[The Sardar]

Salam/Peace dear brother Ju5

In 5:39 it says:

فمن تاب من بعد ظلمه واصلح فان الله يتوب عليه ان الله غفور رحيم

Faman taba min baAAdi thulmihiwaaslaha fa-inna Allaha yatoobu AAalayhiinna Allaha ghafoorun raheemun

Whoever repents after his wrongdoing and amends, then God will accept his repentance. God is Forgiving, Merciful.

If 5:38 really means hand cutting off then what is the point of cutting the hands off if they can't repent and amend for their crime since hands don't grow back.

Also there isn't a verse saying if they do it again, cut their feets off or something.

[huruf]

Apart from modern saudi Arabia, I have never seen any historical authentic record of anyc utting of hands as per 5.38. So those who claim such a things should at the very least bring some detail as to that.
And once they are at it, bring which modern cases of cutting of hands have occurred and where.

One things that deracts from the physical beauty of Qur'an haters is the size of their mouths. They are too big. Is this an idiom or what?

Salaam

[Wakas]

@Ju5,
Also you asked about grammar. The link about this was already given:
https://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9608169.msg382141#msg382141

Did you read it?

[Ju5]

@good logic

Peace Ju5.
-If my employer asks me to empty the bins and he/she means empty the garbage from my head, then I would not empty any real bins. I will reflect on how I am doing my job instead.

- Qoran is the most reliable source and 5:38 screams it is an idiom. The only way the verse makes sense .(To me at least)

-On the contrary the verse is screaming " idiom" . No physical cutting of hand/s is implied.

GOD bless you.
Peace.

-if your employer asks you to empty the bins and you reflect on your job you will get fired. The good answer was" i would empty the bins and put it to the trash outside. You don't need a manual to do this, nor to cut hands.

- The qur'an is not a source to show that it is an idiom as it is not clear, and i am asking for an external source. Do you have any source else than the qur'an showing cut the hands can be used as an idiom in old arabic

- i mean "cut the hands" is used as real cutting and not an idiom in other verses. So my question was : why is it used with the same terms as real physical cutting in other verses if it is a known idiom ?

[Ju5]

@Wakas

1) admits its minority usage
2) admits in the only other comparable usage it doesn't mean cut off hands
3) admits there is no comparable address example to 5:38
4) admits Quran says do not let pity deter from lashing but not the worse punishment of hand-cutting
5) is forced to make equivalent (in his mind) paltry theft (e.g. slice of bread) with hand-cutting
6) admits no corroborating evidence
7) admits the only other mention of punishment for theft in Quran does not involve hand-cutting (and according to Joseph's reaction in 12:79, if Ju5 read carefully, non-cutting is in accordance with God's law)

1) 

I never once said the above probabilities prove anything

Then why use

1) admits its minority usage

as a counter argument?

2) I never said there was only one comparable examples because all other example involving something else than hands do count as you admit they mean physical cutting. Your case is that you can cut anything but if it is hands it becomes an idiom. So do you have proof that these words can not mean cut hands? and let's quote you again :

Wakas :

I never once said the above probabilities prove anything

[/i]
So why would you need a another example ?

3) There is no other example indeed, but this is not an argument. Your case is "cut the resources " is more probable because there is an example in Yusuf story. but :

- a story doesn't make a commandmant. In those verses Allah doesn't say "when someone steals, punish him like this.
- Yusuf acted according to the law of the king of egypt. He also hid that he was the thief brother to not get problems.
- The proposal to offer as a recompense the thief himself came from yusuf brothers, who are not God, but kidnappers. You are taking the law of kidnappers as divine instead of Allah himself who tells you to "cut the hands".

So if "cut the hands" means something, yusuf story isn't an example of it. So there would be no other example of your interpretation either.

Qur'anists argue on problematic (to 21th century morals) verses to make it peaceful and a lots of people speculate because there is no examples too. If there was examples in the qur'an this forum wouldn't exist because everyone would understand it easily regardless of "poor translation".

again

Wakas :

I never once said the above probabilities prove anything

4) on one hand you claim it is better to have compassion if the punishment if worse, on the other hand you say :

admits Quran says do not let pity deter from lashing but not the worse punishment of hand-cutting

You should be happy that Allah doesn't tell you to be merciless when carrying such a heavy punishment as cutting hands? Why do you argue?

5) your point being?

6) I never said cutting hands for people who steal bread was justice. I am just saying that "cut the hands" means, what it means.

7) Wakas :

I never once said the above probabilities prove anything

12:79 He (Joseph) said, "God forbid that we would take anyone except he whom we found our belongings with. Indeed, we would then be wrong doers."

If it is not slavery what it is? It is even the same in the bible, from the same story. You could say its prison and not slavery. But you have no proof of that. In fact it is not even clear and you want to take that as a commandmant from allah while it is a story  of the past. While 5:38 is very clear : cut the hands. Just like in 5:33. So don't say "it can't mean cut the hands.

5:33 Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,

You may say "this is the more intense verb form". "The first verb form is used in 5:38, and not the second." Well the first verb form is also used in 69:46 :


Then We would have cut from him the aorta.

This is intense enough.

[Ju5]

@huruf

Arabic uses hands in the law today as it has used it in te past and as other languages use it.

source please. With c"cut the hands" used as something else than cut the hands. If ye are truthful.