question about reliance of the traveler

[Karim_sunni]

salaam brothers and sisters

i've had a question about the stance of the shafi Mahdab and Imam Nawawi's opinion about 'nushuz'


a christian missionary quotes the following from reliance of the traveler:





If she commits rebelliousness, he keeps from sleeping (and having sex) with her without words, and may hit her, but not in a way that injures her, meaning he may not (bruise her), break bones, wound her, or cause blood to flow. (It is unlawful to strike another’s face.) He may hit her whether she is rebellious only once or whether more than once, though a weaker opinion holds that he may hot hit her unless there is repeated rebelliousness.”

source:

“Reliance of the Traveller”., From the section m10.12, “Dealing with a Rebellious Wife”, page 540




my question is, is it true that in the shafi mahdab it's a weaker opinion to describe 'nushuz' as repeated rebelliousness, i thought it was the opposite, that repeated rebelliousness was te strongest opinion about 'nushuz' in shafi madhab, could somebody please check if the quote of the christian missionary from reliance of the traveler is correct, and wat imam nawawi really said about this issue (uf the translation of the above quote is not correct)

wa salaam

[IlyasLahoz]

:salam:
I know this may notaddress your sepcific query, but have you seen Shaykh Gibril's treatment of the subject? He ahs some particular insights into missionary tactics re: wife beating. (specifically the attachment but also the link below)
http://www.abc.se/~m9783/fiqhi/fiqha_e32.html

[Karim_sunni]

yes i know akhi, mash'allah articles, i use them alot,

i just need to check this quote of reliance, since in am writing a refutation to a specific christian article, i've almost refuted all their points, just need to give it a final touch and check some things and quotes they reger too, to strenghten my position and proof.

wa salaam and thx for ya help, i appreciate dear brother

[IlyasLahoz]

OK. The other suggestion of course is to email Sunnipath, if you haven't already.
Tawfiq inshaAllah

[Karim_sunni]

thx for the tip akhi

wa salaam

[abu_rashid]

could somebody please check if the quote of the christian missionary from reliance of the traveler is correct

Well (The english) it's exactly what's written in my copy. As for the translation, I don't know how correct it is, but my translation would be more like this for the last sentence:

"and it is said don't hit her except if she was rebellious repeatedly."

I cannot see anything about weaker opinion in the Arabic. Whether there's an implied meaning hidden in the text I'm not aware of, I don't know. But it's not explicitly stated.

[Karim_sunni]

abu rashid thats [erfect akhi,

do you have the shakyk nuh keller translation ? if yes, could you give me the page number of your quote, and could you please type for my only the last 3 sentences or something like that with the quote in it 'except if she is repeated rebellious' , and is it also imam nawawi's fatwa?

wa salaam

[abu_rashid]

do you have the shakyk nuh keller translation ?

Yes I have the Shaykh Nuh Ha Mim Keller translation.


if yes, could you give me the page number of your quote, and could you please type for my only the last 3 sentences or something like that with the quote in it 'except if she is repeated rebellious' , and is it also imam nawawi's fatwa?

The text as translated by Shaykh Nuh is exactly as you've quoted above, from the missionary. The page number and section designations are all correct.

The alternative translation I gave to you with "except if she is repeatedly rebellious" is my own personal translation, and is not from the Shaykh Nuh translation.

What I translated is literally exactly what it says in Arabic, perhaps Shaykh Nuh has taken his understanding of this statement from the fact that this statement is added at the end and is in contrast to the main body of this section, thereby indicating it's a less important and alternative opinion.

[Omar HH]

What is halal is halal because Allah made it halal. What is haram is haram because Allah made it haram. So it doesn't matter what the Christian missionary thinks.

Call to Tawhid and ignore the secondary issues. When they accept Tawhid and the Risalah of Sayyidina Muhammad :saw: they will accept Allah's standard of morality and when they reject Tawhid then they will continue to have western taboos.

[Karim_sunni]

Omar, i'm writing an article to refute their lies, isn't it a good thing to refute lies of christians? if everone would think like that, then internet would be full of lies about our religion with statements like brutal beating is allowed and false translations of classic works of islam, i found out many christians falsely translate classic words and/or use orientalist translations, isn't it imporant to expost these things? instead of ignoring them and lay back and just watch them spreading lies about islam,


NO! i won't let someone else make my religion bad with lies, i take my pencil expose them and write something back




by the way akhi abu_rashid

but whats the opinion of the shafi mahdab about the light hit/spank, so it's only allowed after repeated rebelliousness?

and if understood your words well, it means that Imam Nawawi had the view that it was only permitted after repeated rebellion, and that the majority of the shafi mahdab that time had the opinion that after one-time rebellion it was allowed to lightly hit the wife, but Imam Nawawi was of the opinion that it should be allowed only after repeated rebellion , and therefore because Imam Nawawi's view was not the majority, sheikh nu translated the words different, by adressing that this view was the weaker one on the shafi mahdab, am i right?

wa salaam

[Omar HH]

Omar, i'm writing an article to refute their lies, isn't it a good thing to refute lies of christians? if everone would think like that, then internet would be full of lies about our religion with statements like brutal beating is allowed and false translations of classic works of islam, i found out many christians falsely translate classic words and/or use orientalist translations, isn't it imporant to expost these things? instead of ignoring them and lay back and just watch them spreading lies about islam,


NO! i won't let someone else make my religion bad with lies, i take my pencil expose them and write something back

Agreed. Ma Sha Allah.

....

But if what they said is in the Reliance then it is not a lie - if it is correctly quoted. Different `Ullema said different things.

Just tell them that their Christian scholars said crazy things (in modern standards) years ago. But this is not to say ours did "crazy things" just our modern culture won't accept certain stuff.

[Karim_sunni]

yeah i know , and i dont have a problem with reliance of the traveler (because it's all about a light hit/spank, not in the face) ,


but that dude only quotes Imam nawawi, to make his stance that hitting is allowed after just one-time disobedience/rebellion
where having a discussion about the meaning of ' nushuz' , it it is just one-time rebellion in the context of verse 4:34, or repeated rebellion. and then only the husbands is allowed to hit her.

you can help me Omar, if you know the Maliki opinion about this, what does the maliki mahdab say? do they say repeated rebellion and then only hit, or hitting is allowed after one-time rebellion.

i want to know the strongest opinion about this issue, and thats why want to know Imam nawawi's exact words, if he said repeated rebellion, and other scholar too, then i can use the quote of reliance the traveler against that christian missionary, be saying you see, even a renowned scholar like Imam Nawawi tells us that the light/hit spank is only allowed after repeated rebellion.

and the brother in this topic tells us that the litery translation indeed tells us that Nawawi said 'only after repeated rebellio' , and since nawawi is one of the highest scholars in islamic history, his view would strenght my proof that the strongest opinion in islam is that is only allowed after repeated rebellion etc. as a last resort

wa salaam

[Omar HH]

you can help me Omar, if you know the Maliki opinion about this, what does the maliki mahdab say? do they say repeated rebellion and then only hit, or hitting is allowed after one-time rebellion.
------------------

All I know is Shaykh Abu Qanit discusses this in the Notes of Sources (just use a search feature in your adobe or whatever) and on the website.

[abdul shafi'i]

salaam brothers and sisters

i've had a question about the stance of the shafi Mahdab and Imam Nawawi's opinion about 'nushuz'


a christian missionary quotes the following from reliance of the traveler:





my question is, is it true that in the shafi mahdab it's a weaker opinion to describe 'nushuz' as repeated rebelliousness, i thought it was the opposite, that repeated rebelliousness was te strongest opinion about 'nushuz' in shafi madhab, could somebody please check if the quote of the christian missionary from reliance of the traveler is correct, and wat imam nawawi really said about this issue (uf the translation of the above quote is not correct)

wa salaam





Imam Nawawi states in his Minhaj at-talibin page 318:at first indication of disobedience to martial authority a wife should be exhorted by her husband without his immediately breaking off relations with her.when she manifests her disobedience by an act which,though isolated,leaves no doubt as to her intentions,he should repeat his exhortations,and confine her to her chamber,but without striking her,[he may have recourse to blows,even where disobedience is manifested by an isolated act.]Only where there are repeated acts of disobedience may a husband inflict corporal chastisement,

hope this helps brother

[Karim_sunni]

thx brother,


the words between brackets are they from Imam Nawawi, or only from the translator, since the words between brackets seems to contradicts the words right after it, that it is only permissible after repeated acts of disobedience.

[abdul shafi'i]

thx brother,


the words between brackets are they from Imam Nawawi, or only from the translator, since the words between brackets seems to contradicts the words right after it, that it is only permissible after repeated acts of disobedience.




they are Imam Nawawi's personal opinion in brackets