Welcome Friends: Ahlan wa sahlan!
Grab some caffeine before you join us!
Today’s Reading is tough, and had to be rethought and rewritten, again and again.
COMMENTS:
1. Verse 127 returns to the subject of orphans and their mothers with which this chapter started:
“And they seek instruction of you (O Muhammad) regarding the women, say God instructs you (m.pl.) in their regard and in what has been recounted to you (m.pl.) in the Compilation concerning the orphans of the women to whom you (m.pl.) do not give what was set up on their behalf, yet you (m.pl.) seek to marry them, and (He directs you concerning) the helpless children and (also concerning) your stance in equity to the orphans, and whatever good deeds you (m.pl.) do, indeed God is Knowing of it.”
I prefer Yusuf Ali’s interpretation to Muhammad Asad’s because Asad reads this verse about ‘yataamal nisaa’ (يتامى النساء) as if it is about actually marrying ‘the orphan-women,’ while Ali reads it to be regarding the status of the ‘orphans OF the women.’ These mothers were previously mentioned at the beginning of this Chapter as candidates for marriage, thereby having a father-figure care for their fatherless children.
Why it is problematic to understand this verse as relating to marrying ‘orphan-women,’ meaning women who happen to be orphans:
Firstly, orphans, by definition, are pre-pubescent (HQ4:6), fatherless children (HQ18:82).[1] To consider them ‘orphans’ even when they have grown into men and women is questionable (although there are those who read this verse to meet that end, after already having read HQ4:3 as an unconditional license to ‘polygyny’). Also, if grown women were to be called orphans, then grown men would be called orphans too, which would make ‘orphans’ of the majority of adults on this earth!
Secondly, when we join two nouns together in Arabic, as in saying in (4:119): to slit ‘aathanel an’aam (آذان الأنعام) we are not talking about slitting the ‘cattle who are ears’ but rather, slitting the ears OF cattle, and in (HQ24:31) in the term (عورات النساء) we are not talking about the ‘women who are privates/vulnerabilities,’ but the ‘privates/vulnerabilities of women.’ So Ali’s explanation of this verse is much better; this verse is discussing the status of the orphans of the women mentioned earlier. See his note 636: “Again and again is it impressed on the community of Islam to be just in their dealings with women, orphans, children, and all whose weakness requires special consideration….”
2. Verse 128 may have to be read several times, although our having discussed this earlier makes it easier to grasp.
“And if a woman fears from her ‘baعl’/ba’l/conjugal spouse[2] (either)‘nushooz/deviation,’ or ’iعraaDh/turning away,’ then there is no blame upon them to reconcile between both a reconciliation, and reconciliation is good, for ever-present is covetousness in the (human) Selves, but if you (all) perform ultimate goodness (beyond the call of duty) and are aware, then (know that) indeed God is, of all that you do, All-Knowing (and fully acquainted with the subtleties).”
This verse is about a woman fearing one of two extremes, either the ‘nushooz’ deviation of her “ba’l,” whom we understand to be her spouse, or his complete estrangement. As we said earlier, calling him “ba’l” has to be indicative of a conjugal relationship, fearing his ‘nushooz’ seems to indicate possible deviation related to the sanctity of her womb (intercourse during menses or a non-vaginal approach).
So, whereas the word ‘zawj’[3] and its derivatives appear frequently in the Qur’an, we find the word ba’l and its derivatives appearing in only 5 verses- four of which relate to women’s conjugal spouse and once as the name of a ‘lord-god’ of rain and fertility (HQ37:125). Also in topography, ba’l is high land. That may be why many think that it is about the ‘lordship’ of the husband over the wife, his being an owner, a chief or a master.
The Qur’an make a distinction between the two words which are not interchangeable. Each word in the Arabic language has its own meaning and illustrates a specific intent:
In the singular, the term ‘ba’l’ appears in today’s Reading and in HQ11:72, where it relates to Abraham’s wife, peace upon him:
Said she: “Oh, woe is me! Shall I give birth, now that I am an old woman and this ‘ba’l’ of mine is an old man? Verily, that would be a strange thing indeed!”[4]
A lot can be read into her choice of the word “ba’l,” but it is not for us to speculate.
In plural we find the term appearing twice ‘bu’ool’ بعول (HQ2:228; 24:31), relating first to divorced women whose ‘bu’ool’ (conjugal husbands; who might have impregnated them) would be justified in seeking their return before the divorce is final, and secondly to the husbands to whom women can show their ‘zeenah’ or ‘embellishments/adornments.’
Back to today’s Reading, verse 128, right after Verse 127.
I have read many explanations, but still feel that I do not fully grasp all the cases to which these two verses might apply.
Is the wife who now (Verse 128) fears her spouse’s nushooz or disregard feeling threatened by having the mother of orphans now part of their household (Verse 127)? Very possible, because she is asked to overcome a natural tendency for covetousness, but so is he. Or is this wife the new ‘spouse’ -the mother of orphans- who fears for her and her children’s position with him? Or does this verse cover all cases in general, mentioning both extremes (nushooz as well as disregard)? It does, after all (speaking to three or more) tell everyone listening -not just both spouses- to perform ultimate goodness beyond the call of duty and to be aware.
Verse 129 seems to validate such an interpretation in that it is about the women in verse 4:3; 4:127 as well as the woman in 4:128.
Verse 129 also happens to be the verse which many people quote in response to someone giving them the partial quote translated as saying, “.. …..marry any women you please, two or three or four……..!” HQ4:3. Verse 129 is seen to show that men cannot ensure fairness and justice among women, even if they tried.
I prefer Yusuf Ali’s interpretation her to Asad’s, who translates ‘al nisaa/the women’ here as ‘your wives,’ while Yusuf Ali gets it right. It is safer to stick to literal translations. Nevertheless, it is always better to read several interpretations and not rely on anyone’s views -not even on this study here, which is one person’s Reading, at one certain time: a work in progress. Nothing is ever definitive, and I do return to amend what I’d written earlier. The more we know the more we understand, and your readings are called for and appreciated.
Verse 130 addresses (m.pl) caretakers/elders/ mediators, similar to Verse 35, a few pages back. The worst thing we can do when interpreting something is to take it out of context. Kept in context, the intent of any verses becomes clearer.
3. Verses 131-132 state, once again, that to God belong all things in the heavens and on earth. Yusuf Ali tells us about this refrain in his note 640.
We should highlight here God’s ‘waSiyyah,’ His ‘communication/instruction to be passed on from one generation to the next,’ which was entrusted to BOTH Those Who Received (earlier) Compilation, as well as to recipients of the Qur’an: To be aware of God!
4. Verse 133 tells us that, had God so willed, He could cause us to disappear and bring forth others in our stead (I prefer M. Asad’s interpretation here). Verse 134 reminds us that there are plentiful rewards that lie beyond those of this immediate world.
5. Verse 135 is a call to Those Who Attained Faith, in that we should be ‘Qawwaameen’ قوامين (same word as ‘Qawwaamoon’ in Verse 4:34), standing fast, erect, and determined; steadfast in upholding equity, even when against our own Selves, or parents, or kin… and not to follow our plummeting desires ‘hawa’ هوى which would cause us to swerve from justice. The verse ends with a warning.
Verse 136 also calls upon Those Who Attained Faith to have faith and trust in God and His Messenger, and in the Compilation sent down to His Messenger, as well as the Compilation sent earlier, then stating how one would be in evident ‘Dhalaal/misguidance/astray’ by a denial of God, His Custodian-Angels, His Compilations, His Messengers, and the Final Day.
Some might wonder how it could be that Those Who Attained Faith are so being commanded, seeing that one expects them to already have faith and trust in what is being described. The answer probably lies in the fact that not only does faith fluctuate, but it is imperative to have faith in all the mentioned. Yusuf Ali explains in his note that it should be faith with INTENT, not simply in the everyday sense of believing or doing so by force of habit or as a birthright. Also, let’s not forget that the Hypocrites were among Those Who Attained Faith, as the next verse tells us.
Verse 137-139 discusses Hypocrites, who have on and off glimmers of faith, illustrated in HQ2:20. They take the Deniers as allies, seeking عزة عizzah/prevalence/strength[5] with them – while all Prevalence is God’s!
6. Verse 140 tells us NEVER to partake, even by simply listening or being present, in any Denial of God’s signs or any mockery thereof. This obviously does not refer to a debate or a serious discussion where people are seeking information, in which case we should debate/argue with them in the most kindly manner, as in HQ16:125). Verse 140 is about mockery, which would include jokes. What we should do in such case is simply leave and not return to sit with the mockers until the subject is changed.
This verse is quite clear in that we are never to put ourselves in a compromising position, even if it seems harmless -it’s only idle talk- right? Wrong:
If we do not leave, we would indeed be considered in their number, for the Deniers and the Hypocrites shall be joined together in Jahannam/Hell. This is indeed a serious matter, moral outrage that deserves a clear stance on our part.
Eloquence in this case is Boycott. We get up and leave, our action speaking louder than words.
More than enough said!
Our next Reading is from HQ4:141-153.
Peace unto all!
[1] In Sharia fatherless children are considered ‘orphans’ until puberty, according to a Hadeeth by Imam Ali: ‘There is no orphancy after puberty.’
اليتيمُ في الاصطلاح الشرعيّ: يُطلق لفظ اليتيم على مَن فَقَدَ أباه، بسِنٍّ صغيرةٍ؛ أي قبل سنّ البلوغ، استدلالاً بما ثبت عن عليّ بن أبي طالب -كرّم الله وجهه-: (لا يُتمَ بعدَ احتِلامٍ).
[2]المقاييس لابن فارس: بَعَلَ: أُصُولٌ ثَلَاثَةٌ: فَالْأَوَّلُ الصَّاحِبُ، يُقَالُ لِلزَّوْجِ بَعْلٌ…وَمِنْ ذَلِكَ الْبِعَالُ، وَهُوَ مُلَاعَبَةُ الرَّجُلِ أَهْلَهُ.
وَالْأَصْلُ الثَّانِي جِنْسٌ مِنَ الْحَيْرَةِ وَالدَّهَشِ، يُقَالُ: بَعِلَ الرَّجُلُ: إِذَا دَهِشَ.
وَالْأَصْلُ الثَّالِثُ الْبَعْلُ مِنَ الْأَرْضِ: الْمُرْتَفِعَةُ الَّتِي لَا يُصِيبُهَا الْمَطَرُ فِي السَّنَةِ إِلَّا مَرَّةً وَاحِدَةً.
وَمِمَّا يُحْمَلُ عَلَى هَذَا الْبَابِ الثَّالِثِ الْبَعْلُ، وَهُوَ مَا شَرِبَ بِعُرُوقِهِ مِنَ الْأَرْضِ مِنْ غَيْرِ سَقْيِ سَمَاءٍ..”
لسان العرب لابن منظور:“والأُنثى بَعْل وبَعْلة مثل زَوْج وزَوْجة .. وتَبَعَّلَت له: تزينتْ. وامرأَة حَسَنَة التَّبَعُّل إِذا كانت مُطاوِعة لزوجها مُحِبَّة له. والبَعْل والتَّبَعُّل: حُسْن العِشْرة من الزوجين. والبِعال: حديث العَرُوسَيْن. والتَّباعل والبِعال: ملاعبة المرءِ أَهلَه، وقيل: البِعال النكاح؛ ومنه الحديث في أَيام التشريق: إِنها أَيام أَكل وشرب وبِعال. والمُباعَلة: المُباشَرة. يقال للمرأَة: هي تُباعِل زَوْجَها بِعالاً ومُباعَلة أَي تُلاعبه..”
[3] ‘Zawj’ means ‘mate,’ or one of a pair-as lexicons tell us ‘a pair with no third’ لا ثالث لهما.
[4] قَالَتْ يَا وَيْلَتَىٰ أَأَلِدُ وَأَنَا عَجُوزٌ وَهَٰذَا بَعْلِي شَيْخًا ۖ إِنَّ هَٰذَا لَشَيْءٌ عَجِيبٌ (هود 72)
[5] عز: يدلُّ على شدّةٍ وقوّةٍ وما ضاهاهما، من غلبةٍ وَقهر. ويقال عزّ الرّجُل بعد ضعفٍ وأعزَزْتُه أنا: جعلتُه عزيزاً. واعتزَّ بِي وتعزَّزَ.