qn for the brothers

[Muezzin]

I would NEVER hit my husband......he would have to do something truly unforgiveable.........like....commit zina or something.Even then i would be more sad than angry.

Why be sad when you've got grounds for divorce?

Oh.

 

[Musaafirah]

I'm kinda confuzzled. I thought the question was: 'What if the woman had the authority to punish their husbands (hitting or otherwise) as opposed to the dudes?'
I mean, the responses here are on the occasion of the woman hitting the dude.
What are the responses on the women having the prerogative? Not actually carrying out punishment or what not..
How would y'all feel then?

 

[Muezzin]

I'm kinda confuzzled. I thought the question was: 'What if the woman had the authority to punish their husbands (hitting or otherwise) as opposed to the dudes?'
I mean, the responses here are on the occasion of the woman hitting the dude.
What are the responses on the women having the prerogative? Not actually carrying out punishment or what not..
How would y'all feel then?

The same as I feel in the current situation:

If Spouse A deliberately hits Spouse B in order to 'discipline' Spouse B, Spouse B should roundhouse kick Spouse A out of the nearest window (or better yet, kick Spouse A out of the house) and file for divorce.

 

[doorster]

I'm kinda confuzzled. I thought the question was: 'What if the woman had the authority to punish their husbands (hitting or otherwise) as opposed to the dudes?'
I mean, the responses here are on the occasion of the woman hitting the dude.
What are the responses on the women having the prerogative? Not actually carrying out punishment or what not..
How would y'all feel then?

I thought the question was: 'What if the woman had the authority to punish their husbands (hitting or otherwise) as opposed to the dudes?'

that op ,while being correctly understood on your part, is based on a lie i.e that man has the right to beat the woman

Therefore the question does not arise since whosoever hits the other is committing an assault which is both illegal in secular Law of UK and is against Islam according to the correct understanding of the Ayat and numerous Sahih Ahaadis

 

[chacha_jalebi]

one thing really interesting about the verses about beating in surah an nisa ... takhafoona, nushu zahunna ... all the way to... wadribuhunna, the actual word idribuhunna is translated as beat them, but in other places in the Quran the word is used and it is used to say explain, to expel like admonish, but anyway lol the word has multiple meanins and is translated accordin to the context, allah hu alim if its right or wrong translation, also last point then back on topic, is there any evidence that the Prophet (Saw) beat his wives? and what does the Quraan tell us in surah al ahzaab, "verily in the messenger do you have a excellent example to follow" so we should follow the Prophet (Saw) he never beat his wifes, why should we get me though innit wag1 minor

and back on topic, if my beat wife me lol, she does though but in the context i would obviously feel lower and like violated, its like losin a fight in the playground, you feel shamed up

 

[Güven]

and back on topic, if my beat wife me lol, she does though

Don't tell me you are married :uuh:

 

[Mysterious Uk]

I know that this thread is aimed at brothers but it is such an interesting subject i kinda have to chip in lol..

Maybe sisters can give opinions if their husbands slap you.

It really does depend on the context.. but i always had thought i would never let my future husband hit me, i would divorce him etc but i've heard and read alota case studies and it isn't that simple. In loads of incidents a guy was really caring and loving but then their anger appears almost suddenly, and before you know it, it turns into full blown domestic violence.. imsad There are a really stupid bunch of minority people out there who mix up culture with religion and assume hitting their wives is o.k, hope people who do it get educated and realise hhow wrong it is..

On a lighter note.. if it was just playful fighting then i would probs just hit them back; it's almost instinc to hit back when you have sisters and a brother.

 

[Ummu Sufyaan]

which verse? 4:34? wrong! Not this verse but a lie (and/or mistranslation which followed the lie) against Quran says it

edit: http://www.islamicboard.com/clarifications-about-islam/33209-wife-beating.html#post565869

that article interests me, because the following went through my mind as i read it.


Firstly: who is the author of it?

Secondly: how/why has he/she come to the conclusion that the word used in the verse actually means "Daraba (to have intercourse, not to beat),"- as was mentioned in the article, as opposed to “beating.”


I mean, isn’t possible that in the same way that they have concluded that it means "to have intercourse," then what/who is to say that the word in the ayah doesn’t in actual fact mean as was originally thought? Therefore I ask why he is/she’s conclusion any more correct than what was originally thought?

Thirdly: what further evidence has the author used that this meaning is correct? They have only explained from one point of view (i.e linguistically) without further reasoning i.e why have they gone against the well known tafseers of al-Baghawi/ibn Katheer/ibn Abbas? Why weren’t the views of the well-known mufassireen (interpreters) included in the author’s article?

Fourthly: I’m not sure that someone who doesn’t know that for the majority of Arabic verbs their root consists of short vowels. The root of the word fadhribohunna (the word in used in the verse) is ضَرَبَ (pronounced as: DhaRaBa) <---see, short vowels...but What the author has added are long vowels which is incorrect- ضا را با (pronounced as: DhaaRaabaa)<---see, long vowels.

My point: how is someone who has missed something so simple able to interpret a verse from a linguistic point of view?



Fifthly: let’s examine the author’s justification for his/her conclusion...

The ayah’s:

Let me highlight this one:

The words for (beat) as in [to hit] found in Surah Baqarah 2:275 ...
kama yaqoomu allathee yatakhabbatuhu ash-shaytanu mina almassi..
"..like the standing of someone beaten by the devil (Satan) leading him to insanity."

The beating referred to here means the following:

(Those who eat Riba will not stand (on the Day of Resurrection) except like the standing of a person beaten by Shaytan leading him to insanity.)

This Ayah means, on the Day of Resurrection, these people will get up from their graves just as the person afflicted by insanity or possesed by a demon would. Ibn `Abbas said, "On the Day of Resurrection, those who consume Riba will be resurrected while insane and suffering from seizures.'' Ibn Abi Hatim also recorded this and then commented, "This Tafsir was reported from `Awf bin Malik, Sa`id bin Jubayr, As-Suddi, Ar-Rabi` bin Anas, Qatadah and Muqatil bin Hayyan.'' Al-Bukhari recorded that Samurah bin Jundub said in the long Hadith about the dream that the Prophet had,

«فَأَتْينَا عَلَى نَهْرٍ حَسِبْتُ أَنَّهُ كَانَ يَقُولُ: أَحْمَرَ مِثْلَ الدَّمِ، وَإِذَا فِي النَّهْرِ رَجُلٌ سَابِحٌ يَسْبَحُ، وَإِذَا عَلَى شَطِّ النَّهْرِ رَجُلٌ قَدْ جَمَعَ عِنْدَهُ حِجَارَةً كَثِيرَةً،وَإِذَا ذَلِكَ السَّابِحُ يَسْبَحُ مَا يَسْبَحُ، ثُمَّ يَأْتِي ذَلِكَ الَّذِي قَدْ جَمَعَ الْحِجَارَةَ عِنْدَهُ، فَيَفْغَرُ لَهُ فَاهُ فَيُلْقِمُهُ حَجَرًا»

(We reached a river -the narrator said, "I thought he said that the river was as red as blood''- and found that a man was swimming in the river, and on its bank there was another man standing with a large collection of stones next to him. The man in the river would swim, then come to the man who had collected the stones and open his mouth, and the other man would throw a stone in his mouth.)

The explanation of this dream was that the person in the river was one who consumed Riba.

http://tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=2&tid=7242


But notice how we are not intending to beat her as to harm her, and certainly not beating her senseless...

And also the use of the hadith:

This view is strengthened by the Prophet's authentic hadith found in a number of authorities, including Bukhari and Muslim: "Could any of you beat your wife as he would a slave, and then lie with her in the evening?" There are other traditions in Abu Da'ud, Nasa'i, Ibn Majah, Ahmad bin Hanbal and others, to the effect that he forbade the beating of any woman, saying: "Never beat God's handmaidens."

How has the author come to the conclusion that the context of the hadith and verse are to be taken in the same breath? I only ask, because again, the “beating” is not intended to hurt her, whereas the hadith indicates a reprimand for beating her as to hurt her. So I don’t understand how the hadith really applies to this scenario?

 

[Tony]

many women hit thier husbands and because of stigma etc it is as if it is allowed, domestic violence can happen to anyone and in many different forms

 

[Rebel]

Depends where she hits me, I s'pose...

And I'd rather she hit me than use another weapon commonly known as "the silent treatment" <_<

I did get slapped by a girl before, though... back in my teens :X Wasn't the most pleasant experience...

 

[Clover]

I can't hit a girl, so it wouldn't matter either way, but if she chose to "abuse" me, I'd simply subdue her (without hitting her) then tell her it's over, and I will not put up with someone like her, who thinks she can hit me and then act like it's nothing.